Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

dbz wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 8:22 am
<SNIP>

[O]ne can even argue—if we didn’t have the Gospels and Acts imagining a 30s AD date for the religion’s origin, or if we decided to reject that as fiction—that Paul’s letters are more or at least as congruous with the Hasmonean date for the origins of Christianity rather than the Roman, i.e. Paul wrote in the 50s BC, not AD.
[...]
one argument for it is that it would make more sense of Paul’s telling us Aretas had a governor occupying or embargoing Damascus he had to flee from (2 Cor. 11:32-33). In the AD scenario, that requires supposing that incident happened during the Aretas-Judean conflict in 36-37 AD. No other date fits. Though we have no explicit account of Aretas occupying or embargoing Damascus in that war (it’s plausible given what we know, but not directly attested). However, some scholars suggest Paul means by ethnarch in that passage a diplomatic prefect, i.e. the marshal of a “Nabataean Quarter” of Damascus. Though we have no evidence for that being a thing either (though again it is nevertheless also plausible). By contrast, if Paul meant an incident in the 70s or 60s BC, he would have meant Aretas III rather than Aretas IV, who did in fact rule Damascus from 85 to 72 BC.

That this would perfectly align Paul’s entire chronology and ministry with the Talmudic Jesus executed in the 70s BC is indeed intriguing. But alas, this can only be speculated. There isn’t enough evidence to argue it’s probable. Meanwhile the same remarkable coincidence exists between Paul having had to dodge Aretas’s officials in 36, and the date our Gospels and Acts imply for the origin of the religion. The agreement is equally apposite.

---

--Richard Carrier comment-26307—10 July 2018—per "Then He Appeared to Over Five Hundred Brethren at Once!". Richard Carrier Blogs. 28 June 2018.

rgprice wrote: ↑Wed Mar 01, 2023 4:52 am I guess the pertinent questions is: What manuscripts do we have that clearly spell out the name Jesus Christ? Who wrote the actual name "Jesus"?

Do we even know?

Since many works come down to us only from later manuscripts, can we definitively know how the name Jesus was written?

Did Irenaeus write the words "Jesus Christ" or did Irenaeus use nomina sacra? Clement of Alexandria? Clement of Rome? Justin Martyr? Polycarp? Ignatius? etc.

Who actually wrote the words out in long form and who used nomina sacra? Does anyone even know?

andrewcriddle wrote: ↑Wed Mar 01, 2023 4:28 am

dbz wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 8:22 am
<SNIP>

[O]ne can even argue—if we didn’t have the Gospels and Acts imagining a 30s AD date for the religion’s origin, or if we decided to reject that as fiction—that Paul’s letters are more or at least as congruous with the Hasmonean date for the origins of Christianity rather than the Roman, i.e. Paul wrote in the 50s BC, not AD.
[...]
one argument for it is that it would make more sense of Paul’s telling us Aretas had a governor occupying or embargoing Damascus he had to flee from (2 Cor. 11:32-33). In the AD scenario, that requires supposing that incident happened during the Aretas-Judean conflict in 36-37 AD. No other date fits. Though we have no explicit account of Aretas occupying or embargoing Damascus in that war (it’s plausible given what we know, but not directly attested). However, some scholars suggest Paul means by ethnarch in that passage a diplomatic prefect, i.e. the marshal of a “Nabataean Quarter” of Damascus. Though we have no evidence for that being a thing either (though again it is nevertheless also plausible). By contrast, if Paul meant an incident in the 70s or 60s BC, he would have meant Aretas III rather than Aretas IV, who did in fact rule Damascus from 85 to 72 BC.

That this would perfectly align Paul’s entire chronology and ministry with the Talmudic Jesus executed in the 70s BC is indeed intriguing. But alas, this can only be speculated. There isn’t enough evidence to argue it’s probable. Meanwhile the same remarkable coincidence exists between Paul having had to dodge Aretas’s officials in 36, and the date our Gospels and Acts imply for the origin of the religion. The agreement is equally apposite.

---

--Richard Carrier comment-26307—10 July 2018—per "Then He Appeared to Over Five Hundred Brethren at Once!". Richard Carrier Blogs. 28 June 2018.

Paul did not write to Corinth during the 50's BC. It was a ruin. (Refounded after 44 BC.)

Andrew Criddle

rgprice wrote: ↑Wed Mar 01, 2023 9:13 am So it looks to me that right here in Irenaeus' manuscript from the 2nd-3rd century I see nomina sacra.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Against_H ... arcionites.

If that is indeed the case, and this isn't just a quote from scripture, then it shows Irenaeus was using nomina sacra to refer to the name of the Lord.

So again this raises the question, did these writers even know of the name of the savior as being "Jesus"?

rgprice wrote: ↑Wed Mar 01, 2023 11:22 am Well this says that the name was written out by some early writers: https://www.hebrew4christians.com/Names ... ticus.html

However, it's not clear that this is in an actual manuscript from prior to the 5th century or if this is based on more recent manuscripts.

Also, do you have a citation for where Justin says that IC = Jesus Man?

rgprice wrote: ↑Wed Mar 01, 2023 9:13 am So it looks to me that right here in Irenaeus' manuscript from the 2nd-3rd century I see nomina sacra.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Against_H ... arcionites.

If that is indeed the case, and this isn't just a quote from scripture, then it shows Irenaeus was using nomina sacra to refer to the name of the Lord.