There are 4 items that invite to question the hypothesis of a total interpolation of the Slavonic passage on Jesus:
The point 1 would be expected by Christian interpolators with the inclination for riddles of the kind: guess who is the guy.
The point 2 would be expected by a reading of Luke 24:21 where the Christian interpolator would have read: "But we hoped that it was he who should free Israel" and not: "But we hoped that it was he who should redeem Israel".
The point 3 would be expected by the readers of the Gospel of Peter.
The point 4 would be a mere coincidence.
It is only me to see them as objections too much ad hoc?
ADDENDA: the point 3 is particularly strong when one remembers that a lot of scholars argue for the authenticity of the Baptist Passage in Josephus in virtue of the discordance with the Gospel portrait of John the Baptist.
- 1) Jesus is unnamed: where is the Christian irony here?
- 2) it is said that the action of Jesus raised anti-Roman hopes;
- 3) Jesus is betrayed by Pilate and not by Judas: where is the Christian coherence here?
- 4) an inscription about Jesus in the temple resembles the episode of the "gate of Jesus" in Hegesippus.
The point 1 would be expected by Christian interpolators with the inclination for riddles of the kind: guess who is the guy.
The point 2 would be expected by a reading of Luke 24:21 where the Christian interpolator would have read: "But we hoped that it was he who should free Israel" and not: "But we hoped that it was he who should redeem Israel".
The point 3 would be expected by the readers of the Gospel of Peter.
The point 4 would be a mere coincidence.
It is only me to see them as objections too much ad hoc?
ADDENDA: the point 3 is particularly strong when one remembers that a lot of scholars argue for the authenticity of the Baptist Passage in Josephus in virtue of the discordance with the Gospel portrait of John the Baptist.
Statistics: Posted by Giuseppe — Mon Jan 08, 2024 12:06 pm