At 07:20 PM 3/17/96 -0800, Steve wrote:
> I don't think the issue of manuscript dates is all that important in
>assessing what we know about either Jesus or Socrates. With one
>exception, the texts that we have about Jesus are not generally thought
>to have suffered significant corruption since their composition (the
>one exception is the account of Jesus in Josephus). I don't think there's
>much worry about changes to the texts about Socrates during their
>transmission either. Where the sources do differ is in how close their
>are to their subject. For Jesus, the closest clearly identifiable
>source is Paul, who reports second-hand information. For Socrates,
>the closest sources are Plato and Xenophon, both of whom knew him
>first-hand, and both of whom we can place independently. There's
>also a caricature (probably not a particularly fair one) of Socrates
>in one of Aristophanes' plays (_The Clouds_), written during Socrates'
>lifetime.
>
>As for whose teachings are more faithfully recorded, I think you'll
>get different answers from different people.
I don't understand the statement: "For Jesus, the closest clearly identifiable
source is Paul, who reports second-hand information."
What about John? He represents first-hand information (e.g. John
21:24-25).
Mark and Matthew probably include first-hand information.
Luke also includes second-hand information.
I'm suspicious of the phrase "clearly identifiable" in the above quote. If
it is used to rule out the four gospels then I have to disagree, and (at the
same time) point out that there have been challenges to the legitimacy of
Plato's writings.
I'm in danger of opening up quite a thread, I'm afraid... Should this topic
be taken elsewhere? (Shut me up before I began explaining why it is
*critical* we know the historical Jesus...)
Ken
-------------------------------- Past dialogue: -------------
>> Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 09:28:59 -0500
>> From: Ken W Smith <ken.w.smith@cmich.edu>
>> Hi John,
>>
>> At 09:21 PM 3/15/96 EST, you wrote:
>> >Question has arisn on a Compuserve forum -- is more known
>> >about Socrates than Jesus -- or vice versa. Has anyone a book reference?
>[...]
>> McDowell's book does discuss exactly this problem and claims the
>> oldest copy of the writings of Plato date to about 900 AD. Most of what we
>> know about Socrates comes through the writings of Plato.
>[...]
>> But if we try to restrict, say, to the century after the death of
>> the individual then it is an interesting problem. The next question is
>> still "What do we count?" Do we count just fragments from that time period
>> or do we allow later copies of things written from that time period? The
>> Beatty papyrus of John has been dated (by some) to about 125 AD and it was
>> believed that a fragment in the Dead Sea scrolls was of Mark, about 50-60
>> AD! I don't believe *anyone* claims there is a fragment on the writings of
>> Plato which date to within a century of Socrates' death.
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken W. Smith, Professor of Mathematics
Interim Director, Office of Institutional Research "In the future
Central Michigan University, Mt. Pleasant, MI 48859 computers may weigh
Work phone: 517-774-7222, fax: 517-774-4250 as little as 1.5 tons."
Home phone & FAX: 517-772-5042 Popular Mechanics, 1949