I don't believe there are interpolations into Eusebius here. That may not be what you intended to argue, but the passage has the entire TF quoted before Eusebius goes on to comment.The topic of that whole chapter 5 is to prove that Jesus was a miracle worker.
So what would I expect from Eusebius after he cited TF?
That he would say: "See? Even Josephus said that Jesus was a doer of no common works."
However, Eusebius didn't say that.
Instead, he made a deduction, that Jesus must have done wonderful miracles because he had attracted many Jews and Greeks.
I think that's weird. It is as if the original TF had no words about Jesus being a doer of no common works.
However, I do have an understanding regarding the 'weird' tactic of emphasizing attracting many of the Jews and Greeks. This was an apologetic tactic that makes sense as a counter to the rhetoric of Porphyry.
Thus it could make sense coming from Eusebius (who wrote against Porphyry) or someone else who was interested in countering pagan rhetoric against Christians, who may have been after Origen (who didn't know the TF) and before Eusebius (who quotes the TF), if not Eusebius himself.
I have quoted just some of the fragments of Porphyry that emphasize the superiority of the Greeks and the gullibility of those who followed Jesus:
https://www.tertullian.org/fathers/porp ... gments.htmPorphyry attacked the apostles as lacking credibility. He also viewed Greeks as superior, as seen from his criticism of Origen:Porphyry and the emperor Julian argue in this place that (this shows) either the inexperience of the lying historians or the stupidity of those who immediately followed the saviour, as if they had followed irrationally any man calling.And Porphyry believed that Greeks were less likely to believe the kinds of stories in the Gospels:"As an example of this absurdity take a man whom I met when I was young, and who was then greatly celebrated and still is, on account of the writings which he has left. I refer to Origen, who is highly honored by the teachers of these doctrines. For this man, having been a hearer of Ammonius, who had attained the greatest proficiency in philosophy of any in our day, derived much benefit from his teacher in the knowledge of the sciences; but as to the correct choice of life, he pursued a course opposite to his. For Ammonius, being a Christian, and brought up by Christian parents, when he gave himself to study and to philosophy straightway conformed to the life required by the laws. But Origen, having been educated as a Greek in Greek literature, went over to the barbarian recklessness. And carrying over the learning which he had obtained, he hawked it about, in his life conducting himself as a Christian and contrary to the laws, but in his opinions of material things and of the Deity being like a Greek, and mingling Grecian teachings with foreign fables. For he was continually studying Plato, and he busied himself with the writings of Numenius and Cronius, Apollophanes, Longinus, Moderatus, and Nicomachus, and those famous among the Pythagoreans. And he used the books of Chaeremon the Stoic, and of Cornutus. Becoming acquainted through them with the figurative interpretation of the Grecian mysteries, he applied it to the Jewish Scriptures."But even supposing any one of the Greeks were so light-minded as to think that the gods dwell within the statues, his idea would be a much purer one than that of the man who believes that the Divine entered into the womb of the Virgin Mary, and became her unborn child, before being born and swaddled in due course, for it is a place full of blood and gall, and things more unseemly still.
Statistics: Posted by Peter Kirby — Tue Sep 03, 2024 7:27 am
