Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria
View Post
I have never contended that these alleged prophecies were in fact prophecies. I therefore have no need to catch on.
You keep confusing the two terms as you do "forecast" and "prophecy".
You keep confusing the two terms as you do "forecast" and "prophecy".
As history has shown, self-evidently it does not.
Why? Recording [post-eventum] someone making an allusion to that event is hardly unknown.
Evidence that Paul does not mention them exists.
It was conducted and demonstrates cultural affinity.
I was being facetious.
Given the general tenor of John's gospel I suspect that is an allegory.
Your speculation is duly noted.
As Inowlocki notes in her conclusion:
Although she continues:
It may indeed be considered plausible but without any evidence it has to remain questionable.
In sum, if it cannot be proved irrefutably that Josephus’ alleged passage on James and Jerusalem is authentic
Although she continues:
, it can nevertheless be argued that it is plausible.
It may indeed be considered plausible but without any evidence it has to remain questionable.
Comment