The crucifixion: alternate times and places.

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: The crucifixion: alternate times and places.

Post by MrMacSon »

Eusebius writing, in Ecclesiastical History 1.11,
  • "After relating these things concerning John, he makes mention of our Saviour in the same work, in the following words..."
also suggests the possibility that 'the Testimonium' may have been inserted in some manuscripts after the passage concerning John.

ie. after Ant. 18.5.1-2.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/testimonium.html
User avatar
maryhelena
Posts: 2902
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: The crucifixion: alternate times and places.

Post by maryhelena »

John2 wrote:Maryhelena wrote (in response to DC Hindley):

"... would you suggest that there was no TF at the time Eusebius wrote his history and that he therefore had no knowledge of it's placement of the Jesus crucifixion prior to or around 19 c.e.?"

Regarding the placement of the TF (according to Eusebius), EH 1.11.7 says that, "after relating these things concerning John [the Baptist], he makes mention of our Savior in the same work," but the TF as we have it now (Ant. 18.3.3) comes before the John the Baptist passage (Ant. 18.5.1-2).

Though he does say in Demonstration 3.5, "In his [Josephus'] record of the times of Pilate [he] mentions our Savior in these words."

(I just edited out the reference to Ant. 18.2.2. I'm at work and didn't process that it doesn't mean anything.)
Since the gospel story links it's Jesus figure with John the Baptist it would seem logical for any Josephan interpolator to move or insert the TF to follow the time frame Josephus gives for the death of John the Baptist. (This late date, 36/37 c.e., makes sense also regarding a marriage of Herodias and Antipas - a marriage that in the gospel story John the Baptist condemns.)

However, for some reason the TF is where it is - prior to the execution of John the Baptist.

Perhaps Josephus got his info regarding the crucifixion of a' wise man' not from our canonical gospels but from an early copy, or knowledge of such a copy, of a version of Acts of Pilate......Perhaps that copy spelled out 7th year of Tiberius and did not mention any 4th consulate of Tiberius.....thereby giving Josephus reason to place the TF (the core 'wise man' story re crucifixion under Pilate) in his record of around the year 19 c.e.

A 19 c.e. crucifixion date, by the way, that works well with the Slavonic Josephus birth narrative of an anointed one born prior to the 15th year of Herod I. Such an anointed one would be well into his late 50s or early 60s for a crucifixion story set in 36/37 c.e. - thus outside gJohn's not yet fifty years old.

It seems far more likely, to me, that Eusebius was stuck with a 7th year of Tiberius in his version of the Acts of Pilate. That he read this 7th year, from the Acts of Pilate, as being from the sole rule of Tiberius, 21 c.e.,thus a consular year for Tiberius - is simple maths and historical info re Tiberius. But since Tiberius also had a co-regency a different 7th year could also be interpreted from an Acts of Pilate that referenced a 7th year. Particular so as Josephus, who Eusebius is referencing, has placed the TF (the core 'wise man' crucifixion story) in or around 19 c.e.

Yep, I'm sure Eusebius, or any other Christian interpolator, would have loved to move the TF away from the 19 c.e. Josephan placement. The only argument Eusebius has against the Acts of Pilate and a 7th year of Tiberius crucifixion story is connected with how Josephus dates Pilate - and even then he adds 'if Josephus is to be believed'....Not being able to move the TF from it's 19 c.e. placing in Antiquities - Christian interpolators in Josephus sought to 'christianize' it.....thus attempting to move it away from any association with Slavonic Josephus. A 'wonder-doer' story and birth narrative that works well with an Acts of Pilate crucifixion story set in the 7th year of Tiberius...

The gospel of Luke had already done the groundwork in christianizing the TF 'wise man' story. While updating the gospel timeline for the Jesus birth narrative and crucifixion story the Lukan writer also updated the 'wise man' story in his Emmanus Road story. The 'wise man' of the TF is now named Jesus of Nazareth and set within a timeline running from the 15th year of Tiberius. With the Acts of Pilate 7th year of Tiberius crucifixion story still causing problems in the time of Eusebius he possibly took the next step: christianizing the TF itself.....thereby linking the TF to the new timeline of gLuke - and crossing fingers that the Acts of Pilate and it's 7th year of Tiberius crucifixion forgery would be put to rest..... ;)
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
W.B. Yeats
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2818
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: The crucifixion: alternate times and places.

Post by andrewcriddle »

There is a puzzling claim by Epiphanius of Salamis that seems to date the life of Christ in the 1st centuery BCE
The priesthood in the holy church is David's throne and kingly seat, for the Lord joined together and gave to his holy church both the kingly and the high-priestly dignity, transferring to it the never-failing throne of David. For David's throne endured in line of succession until the time of Christ himself, rulers from Judah not failing until he came 'to whom the things kept in reserve belonged, and he was the expectation of the gentiles'. With the advent of the Christ the rulers in line of succession from Judah, reigning until the time of the Christ himself, ceased. For the line fell away and stopped from the time when he was born in Bethlehem of Judea under Alexander, who was of priestly and royal race. From Alexander onward this office ceased--from the days of Alexander and Salina, who is also called Alexandra, to the days of Herod the king and Augustus the Roman emperor. (Epiphanius, Panarion 29.3)
There is a confused and confusing discussion at http://bcharchive.org/2/thearchives/sho ... l?t=165230

Andrew Criddle

EDITED TO ADD

See also viewtopic.php?f=3&t=872
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The crucifixion: alternate times and places.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

andrewcriddle wrote:There is a puzzling claim by Epiphanius of Salamis that seems to date the life of Christ in the 1st centuery BCE
Thanks, Andrew. I have added it to the OP.

Ben.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Post Reply