Carrier presented on Josephus at SBL MidWest Feb 2017

[MrMacSon]

Christopher Price reviews the TF issue (and notes authors that Carrier cites)

Bottom left of that webapage -

• © Christopher Price 2004.
  Last revised: 08 December, 2009

There is no reference to Feldman 2012; Olson; or Hopper.

[MrMacSon]

John2 wrote:

Christopher Price reviews the TF issue (and notes authors that Carrier cites)

See http://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/12071

While I think that Carrier gets it wrong with the title of his blog-post; he does seem to address the key publications in that blog-post.

He links to a 3 page document here - http://www.richardcarrier.info/testimonium.pdf?x23333

I have taken page 2 of that document and re-ordered the references chronologically here: -

Carrier's "New Essential Bibliography" re-ordered chronologically

G.J. Goldberg. 1995. “The Coincidences of the Testimonium of Josephus and the Emmaus Narrative of Luke.” Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 13: 59–77.

Ken Olson. 1999. “Eusebius and the Testimonium Flavianum.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 61:305–22.

Alice Whealey. 2008. “The Testimonium Flavianum in Syriac and Arabic.” New TestamentStudies 54.4: 573–90.

Louis Feldman. 2012. “On the Authenticity of the ‘Testimonium Flavianum’ Attributed toJosephus.”

• in New Perspectives on Jewish Christian Relations, eds. E Carlebach & J Schacter (Brill), pp. 13–30.

Richard Carrier. 2012. “Origen, Eusebius, and the Accidental Interpolation in Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 20.200.” Journal of Early Christian Studies 20.4: 489–514

• [Reproduced in 'Hitler Homer Bible Christ: The Historical Papers of Richard Carrier' 1995-2013 (Philosophy Press, 2014), pp. 337–68.]

Ken Olson. 2013. “A Eusebian Reading of the Testimonium Flavianum.” in Eusebius of Caesarea:Tradition and Innovations, eds. A Johnson & J Schott (Harvard University Press), pp. 97–114.

• link in post by Ken Olson here viewtopic.php?p=64784#p64784

Ken Olson. 2013. “The Testimonium Flavianum, Eusebius, and Consensus.” The Jesus Blog (August 13):

• http://historicaljesusresearch.blogspot ... s-and.html

Paul Hopper. 2014. “A Narrative Anomaly in Josephus: Jewish Antiquities xviii:63.”

• in Linguistics and Literary Studies: Interfaces, Encounters, Transfers, eds. M Fludernik & D Jacob (de Gruyter), pp. 147–169.

Richard Carrier. 2014. “Josephus and the Testimonia Flaviana.” in On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt (Sheffield-Phoenix), pp. 332–342.


Alice Whealey. 2016. “The Testimonium Flavianum.” A Companion to Josephus in His World, eds. HHChapman Z Rodgers (John Wiley & Sons), pp. 345–55.

• [Which fails to take into account any of the [above] (except Whealey 2008 and Olson 1999), which is reflective of the problem that needs correcting.]

[John2]

MrMacSon wrote:

There is no reference to Feldman 2012; Olson; or Hopper.

Feldman is noted (up to 2000 anyway) in Price's bibliography.

Feldman, Louis H., "The Testimonium Flavianum: The State of the Question," Christological Perspectives, Eds. Robert F. Berkley and Sarah Edwards, New York, 1982

Feldman, Louis H. Josephus and Modern Scholarship New York, 1984

Feldman, Louis H., "Josephus," Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 3, Doubleday, 1992

Feldman, Louis H., "Josephus: Interpretative Methods and Tendencies," in Dictionary of New Testament Background Downer's Grove, 2000

As are Whealey and Van Voorst, and Olson is mentioned there too in Price's response to him.

Price, Christopher "Response to Ken Olson on the Testamonium Flavianum" http://www.geocities.com/christiancadre ... ephus.html (accessed 9/1/04)

[MrMacSon]

Feldman is noted (up to 2000 anyway) in Price's bibliography.

As Neil Godfrey has recently noted in another thread, Feldman has markedly changed his position [from before 2000 to recently].

Louis Feldman. 2012. “On the Authenticity of the ‘Testimonium Flavianum’ Attributed toJosephus.”

• in New Perspectives on Jewish Christian Relations, eds. E Carlebach & J Schacter (Brill), pp. 13–30.
  
  “In conclusion, there is reason to think that a Christian such as Eusebius would have sought to portray Josephus as more favorably disposed toward Jesus and may well have interpolated such a statement as that which is found in the Testimonium Flavianum.” (p. 28)

... Olson is mentioned there too in Price's response to him.

Olson's more substantive commentary is

Ken Olson. 2013. “A Eusebian Reading of the Testimonium Flavianum.” in Eusebius of Caesarea:Tradition and Innovations, eds. A Johnson & J Schott (Harvard University Press), pp. 97–114.

• link in post by Ken Olson here viewtopic.php?p=64784#p64784

and Ken Olson. 2013. “The Testimonium Flavianum, Eusebius, and Consensus.” The Jesus Blog (August 13):

• http://historicaljesusresearch.blogspot ... s-and.html

Hopper's 2014 commentary is very pertinent, too (a copy of that paper is available on this site).

[John2]

That's cool. Just noting that he mentions some of the same people that Carrier does.

[John2]

Ben sent me a link to an article he wrote regarding Goldberg, Carlson, Tacitus and the TF (which Ben says he no longer agrees with, but I think it's worth putting up here for consideration).

http://www.textexcavation.com/goldbergc ... onium.html