Re: Why Are Historicists So Certain That Jesus Existed?
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 1:44 pm
Investigating the roots of western civilization (ye olde BC&H forum of IIDB lives on...)
https://earlywritings.com/forum/
And one of them, who was a fuller, took the club with which he beat out clothes and struck the just man on the head. And thus he suffered martyrdom. And they buried him on the spot, by the temple, and his monument still remains by the temple. He became a true witness, both to Jews and Greeks, that Jesus is the Christ.
And immediately Vespasian besieged them.
19. These things are related at length by Hegesippus, who is in agreement with Clement...........this was the cause of the siege of Jerusalem, which happened to them immediately after his martyrdom for no other reason than their daring act against him.
James the Just is not James called the anointed [Christos] by Josephus.The epistle in which the same Clement, writing to James the Lord's brother, informs him of the death of Peter , and that he had left him his successor in his chair and teaching......
The word that Hegesippus uses for "immediately" (eutheos) can mean "after this" and not necessarily only "right after this," and broadly speaking this is true for what Hegesippus says above because Vespasian did besiege them after James was killed.The siege of Jerusalem under Vespasian happened c 70 CE and it is claimed this event was immediately after the death of James the Just.
I get the impression that Hegesippus is just being succinct, which is in keeping with his account of James generally, which covers multiple years in a fairly brief account, especially considering that Hegesippus wrote five books on church history.Looking at the Louw-Nida Lexicon, it describes the words eutheos and euthus as describing "a point of time immediately subsequent to the previous point of time (the actual interval of time differs appreciably, depending on the nature of the events and the manner in which the sequence is interpreted by the writer)."
https://books.google.com/books?id=e-m0A ... ly&f=false
My god, John T, you don't even read what Eusebius wrote (that I was referencing!), not even when I quoted it for you, which I will do so again:John T wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2017 11:36 amToe stub number 7.neilgodfrey wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:27 pmEusebius wrote that Josephus said that the death of James was the cause of the siege of Jerusalem; (not "one of the main causes of the war" itself).
Actually you still got it wrong. It was Hegesippus not Josephus that said the immediate siege of Jerusalem was due to the murder of James the Just. Book 2 chapter 23 (19).
John T
Stop stubbing your toe all the time. You're embarrassing yourself.19. These things are related at length by Hegesippus, who is in agreement with Clement.515 James was so admirable a man and so celebrated among all for his justice, that the more sensible even of the Jews were of the opinion that this was the cause of the siege of Jerusalem, which happened to them immediately after his martyrdom for no other reason than their daring act against him.
20. Josephus, at least, has not hesitated to testify this in his writings, where he says,516 “These things happened to the Jews to avenge James the Just, who was a brother of Jesus, that is called the Christ. For the Jews slew him, although he was a most just man.”
There is too much to quote so I'll quote these 2 paragraphs because I can:Secret Alias wrote: ↑Fri Nov 17, 2017 1:44 pm I guess that's a yes
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Masada
You forget that Christian writings claim Peter was killed in the 14th year of Nero.John2 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 17, 2017 4:16 pm hakeem wrote:
The word that Hegesippus uses for "immediately" (eutheos) can mean "after this" and not necessarily only "right after this," and broadly speaking this is true for what Hegesippus says above because Vespasian did besiege them after James was killed.The siege of Jerusalem under Vespasian happened c 70 CE and it is claimed this event was immediately after the death of James the Just.
As Hoogterp, for example, notes:
I get the impression that Hegesippus is just being succinct, which is in keeping with his account of James generally, which covers multiple years in a fairly brief account, especially considering that Hegesippus wrote five books on church history.Looking at the Louw-Nida Lexicon, it describes the words eutheos and euthus as describing "a point of time immediately subsequent to the previous point of time (the actual interval of time differs appreciably, depending on the nature of the events and the manner in which the sequence is interpreted by the writer)."
https://books.google.com/books?id=e-m0A ... ly&f=false
Preface to the RecognitionsSimon Peter...... pushed on to Rome in the second year of Claudius to overthrow Simon Magus, and held the sacerdotal chair there for twenty-five years until the last, that is the fourteenth, year of Nero. At his hands he received the crown of martyrdom being nailed to the cross with his head towards the ground and his feet raised on high, asserting that he was unworthy to be crucified in the same manner as his Lord....
In Christian writings James must have died after or around c 67-68 CE which would imply that the siege of Jerusalem at c 70 CE would be considered an immediate event.The epistle in which the same Clement, writing to James the Lord's brother, informs him of the death of Peter, and that he had left him his successor in his chair and teaching...
Now you are just being obstinate.neilgodfrey wrote: ↑Fri Nov 17, 2017 4:43 pm
My god, John T, you don't even read what Eusebius wrote (that I was referencing!), not even when I quoted it for you, which I will do so again:
Eusebius, chapter 23:Stop stubbing your toe all the time. You're embarrassing yourself.19. These things are related at length by Hegesippus, who is in agreement with Clement.515 James was so admirable a man and so celebrated among all for his justice, that the more sensible even of the Jews were of the opinion that this was the cause of the siege of Jerusalem, which happened to them immediately after his martyrdom for no other reason than their daring act against him.
20. Josephus, at least, has not hesitated to testify this in his writings, where he says,516 “These things happened to the Jews to avenge James the Just, who was a brother of Jesus, that is called the Christ. For the Jews slew him, although he was a most just man.”
Huh?
Respected enough for his works to be redacted? or be trashed? or be manipulated?
Plural? Really? It is probably a mistake on my part even to speak up here, but to be forced to stand by and witness such a spectacle of arrogance is a truly painful experience.John T wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2017 3:36 amNow you are just being obstinate.
It is you who has not read what you claimed to have read. Please have someone read it to you out loud and slowly, perhaps you will catch it then.
"These things" = causes for the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple.
"his writings" = Plural.
Josephus is being cited from more than once source and not just Antiquities.
Your error is due probably to the reasoning (if you can call it that) of the buffoon.Your error is due probably to the reasoning (if you can call it that) of the mythicist.