Add new comment

Submitted by Paul Anderson on Wed, 04/10/2019 - 22:32

Permalink

This view reflects some of the skepticism of late 19th century Continental thought, but most historical Jesus scholars have abandoned such views since the "New Quest" was launched by Ernst Kaesemann in 1954. Since then, the distancing of the canonical gospels from hellenistic "bioi" (biographical narratives) has effectively been overturned by the award-winning work of Richard Burridge, 26 years ago, now in its third printing. It was reviewed at the national Society of Biblical Literature meetings last year, and it has carried the day among Greco-Roman and Second-Temple historians.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1481308742/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vpp…

Josephus does mention Jesus, and it is the only paragraph critical scholars question within his voluminous writings, so the claim that Josephus does not mention Jesus is fallacious. As there is no edition of his works that does not contain that reference, it would be more accurate to say that Josephus does indeed mention John the Baptist and Jesus, but due to the reverential description of Jesus, historical-critical scholars have questioned whether that paragraph was added by Christian editors later, although there is no text-critical evidence to support such an inference.

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.