The Jesus Myth, and it's failures

[IanS]

Gday,



Indeed, I haven't found any evidence that anyone ever doubted Pilate's existence.

What I HAVE seen is many CLAIMS they did before the Pilate stone was found - but no such sceptic is ever quoted or named. The claim is always attached to comments about the Pilate stone.

It seems to just be apologists saying :
"see? Pilate did exist, all you sceptics were wrong about him, you are wrong to be sceptical about other things in the bible too".

I searched through all the old writings and some modern ones, and no-one ever doubted Pilate that I could find :

http://five-essences.blogspot.com.au/2013/09/did-any-sceptics-ever-consider-pilate.html

Meanwhile, I must admit am now starting to be sceptical about the Pilate stone too.

K.

Well there are clearly issues with the Pilate Stone if no independent checks have been made. The only surprise is that anyone would think otherwise.

As far as Pilate himself is concerned - whether or not we can now find any critics who ever expressed doubt over his existence, if prior to 1961 the evidence is supposed to be only those very late copies of writing under such names as Philo, Josephus and Tacitus, then it's obvious that many people might question how reliable that is.

It would hardly be a surprise if people thought the evidence for Pilate was rather scant. And biblical characters supported by scant evidence is not exactly a very convincing state of affairs (imho).

 

[maximara]

Well there are clearly issues with the Pilate Stone if no independent checks have been made. The only surprise is that anyone would think otherwise.

As far as Pilate himself is concerned - whether or not we can now find any critics who ever expressed doubt over his existence, if prior to 1961 the evidence is supposed to be only those very late copies of writing under such names as Philo, Josephus and Tacitus, then it's obvious that many people might question how reliable that is.

It would hardly be a surprise if people thought the evidence for Pilate was rather scant. And biblical characters supported by scant evidence is not exactly a very convincing state of affairs (imho).

But step back and look at what at best the stone would do: prove Pilate existed and THAT IS IT.

Take the movie Birth of a Nation for example. Now the Civil War and Abraham Lincoln are historical...but that doesn't mean Speaker of the House Austin Stoneman in the movie is.

In fact it can been shown that Austin Stoneman is totally fictional as the Speakers of the House 1865 to 1877 are well documented: Schuyler Colfax (1863-1869); Theodore M. Pomeroy (1869); James G. Blaine (1869-1875); Michael C. Kerr (1875-1876); and Samuel J. Randall (1876-1881).

Furthermore the argument Austin Stoneman is based on Thaddeus Stevens falls on its face because Stevens was NEVER Speaker of the House and died August 11, 1868 while BOAN's Stoneman is not only Speaker of the House but is alive and in that role in 1871.

If Jesus is the equivalent of Austin Stoneman then Pilate being historical is meaningless. In fact, if you look at his role Pilate's only function is to exonerate the Romans from being the ones to order Jesus' crucifixion.