Confirmations of the New Testament

[Teallaura]

The references cited indicate far more than you would be willing to admit.

No, not really - just hyping the heck out of the few there are.

[shunyadragon]

Precisely. I could now write a book about WWII over 70 years later that relies on eyewitness testimony like from my father and a couples of uncles as well as neighbors I knew growing up.

No references were made for eyewitnesses.

[shunyadragon]

And this isn't news - also the answer is 'not very much'.

The references cited indicate far more than you would be willing to admit.

[lee_merrill]

And as I have heard, most of the differences are minor, spelling variations, etc.

Source: carm.org

The internal consistency of the New Testament documents is about 99.5% textually pure.

Source

© Copyright Original Source

And hundreds of thousands of variations sounds like a lot, until you consider the number of manuscripts:

Source: Wikipedia

If you spread those 400,000 variations over 5,600 manuscripts, that comes out to only about 71 variations per manuscript, (400,000 divided by 5,600). And some of these manuscripts are the equivalent of several hundred pages of text, hand-written...

Source

© Copyright Original Source

Blessings,
Lee

[lee_merrill]

Again as discussed before. nothing here refers to first hand references.

Sure it does! "We were eyewitnesses", "We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard".

Blessings,
Lee

[One Bad Pig]

While Josephus' reference to Jesus being crucified by Pilate, the so-called Testimonium Flavianum, is almost certainly a later interpolation or at least been modified, the offhand reference to him wrt to being the brother of James is regarded as authentic. Extremely few scholars question its authenticity, most notably (surprise, surprise) Richard Carrier.

The irony of all this is shunya is ostensibly Baha'i, and those writings have been massively edited over the less than two centuries since the Bab. He seems to have no problem with that.

[rogue06]

While Josephus' reference to Jesus being crucified by Pilate, the so-called Testimonium Flavianum, is almost certainly a later interpolation or at least been modified, the offhand reference to him wrt to being the brother of James is regarded as authentic. Extremely few scholars question its authenticity, most notably (surprise, surprise) Richard Carrier.

[rogue06]

True, and I could also write a book about unicorns or ufo's 70 years later that relies on eyewitness testimony from people that lived at that time. I'll bet you wouldn't believe it though.

It's good to stay with the things that you know about.

[Teallaura]

There is documented evidence of Christian interpolation of texts. The only question that is open is how much.

And this isn't news - also the answer is 'not very much'.

[shunyadragon]

There is documented evidence of Christian interpolation of texts. The only question that is open is how much.

[shunyadragon]

From a Christina source: This supports the simpler version, where other scholars consider all of it an interpolation. Please not the existing reference remains the Agapius, an Arab Christian in 9th century version is quite late jn the 9th century.

[shunyadragon]

There is more in this reference.

[shunyadragon]

Source: https://brill.com/view/journals/vc/68/3/article-p264_2.xml?lang=en

The Prospect of a Christian Interpolation in Tacitus, Annals 15.44
in Vigiliae Christianae
Author: Richard Carrier 1
View More
Online Publication Date: 02 Jul 2014
Volume/Issue: Volume 68: Issue 3
Article Type: Research Article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/15700720-12341171

© Copyright Original Source

[shunyadragon]

References, please?


Examples of historians?

Alterations of scripture, such as the End of Mark, and secular scripture such as the writings of Josephus are called Christian interpolations.

Source: https://www.revolvy.com/page/Christian-interpolation

Christian interpolation is a subsidiary category of scribal interpolation in manuscript transmission. In textual criticism the term generally refers to the specific phenomena of textual insertion and textual damage to Jewish sources text during Christian scribal transmission, but may also refer to possible interpolation in secular Roman texts, such as the case of Tacitus on Christ.

Josephus

Notable disputed examples in the works of Josephus include Josephus' sections on John the Baptist, which is widely accepted,[1] and on Jesus of Nazareth, which is widely regarded as at best damaged.[2]

Old Testament pseudepigrapha

Notable examples among the body of texts known as Old Testament pseudepigrapha include the disputed authenticity of Similitudes of Enoch and 4 Ezra which in the form transmitted by Christian scribal traditions contain arguably later Christian understanding of terms such as Son of Man.[3][4] Other texts suffering significant Christian interpolation include the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,[5] the Sibylline Oracles and so on.

References

John the Baptizer and Prophet: A Sociohistorical Study - Page 39 1597529869 Robert L. Webb - 2006 "2.3 The Authenticity of Ant. 18.116-19 The authenticity of Josephus' narrative concerning John the Baptist has often been critically examined. While a few have rejected it as a Christian interpolation, most schoLars have accepted it."

© Copyright Original Source

More to follow . . .

Suetonius: 69-122 AD
Tacitus: 56-120 AD

I wouldn't call these late! Later than Josephus, and none specifically referenced testimony of first hand witnesses.

Again as discussed before. nothing here refers to first hand references.

Yes, which makes it seem more likely that these claims of miracles are fabrications.

[rossum]

Not written by eyewitnesses does not mean they didn't have access to eyewitness testimony however. And, no, the Gospels themselves most certainly do not tell us that the parts of the gospels that describe Jesus' birth and early life is third hand information. You're just unable (or unwilling) to conceive that there are ways that the gospel writers could have incorporated eyewitness testimony for the early parts of Jesus' life even if they themselves weren't present to experience it.

Thank you for pointing out my error. The Gospels are certainly second hand in parts. Whether or not they are third hand is more debatable, depending on who wrote them and when they were written. Those topics are still matters for debate.