Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

7182Re: [GTh] Gospel of Judas

Expand Messages
  • pmcvflag
    May 28, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Hey Jack

      Sorry I left your post hanging there for so long. I know the
      conversation has kind of moved on, but I thought now that I can I
      would still jump back there and answer your point.

      >>>I don't agree. Eusebius appears to have had much more common
      sense and he did have the resources of Pamphilus' Library in
      Carsarea. Eusebius was sympathetic to Arius and, post Nicaea I,
      charged Alexander for misrepresenting Arius..which took a lot of
      testicular fortitude, IMO.<<<

      Understood. However, I would point out that the evidence you give
      for believing Eusebius is based essentially on personal impression
      and anecdote. I concede that generally that is all we have to go on
      in most cases like this. My own observations about Eusebius are
      generally based on equally questionable evidence ;)

      For instance, I believe that Eusebius made up the whole Constantine
      conversion story for political gain. I also don't write out the
      possibility that he was directly involved in the Testimonium
      Flavianum hoax.

      Of course, it would be unfair to attack Eusebius in order to
      question the Abgar letters, so I don't mean to do so. Just because
      he may have forged other documents doesn't mean he forged these. I
      have heard the theory that it was Abgar iv who forged them (obvious
      motive), but again that is speculation.

      I would be more interested to hear in more detail your textual
      criticism of this situation. More directly Jesus' response is
      obviously dependant on John, and indirectly against Thomas. The
      theology it presents is obviously late (just as "churchy" as the
      supposed Abgar letter). Since I have never actually seen a serious
      academic critical analysis that placed any part of these letters
      (whether Abgar's or Jesus' side) to a little before Eusebius (if not
      by Eusebius), I am willing to hear a case for earlier dates...
      though I still can't take an argument for an actual origin in Jesus
      himself seriously.

      Karl Nygren
    • Show all 47 messages in this topic