'Silence' of Other Writers – An Inadequate Argument (Part 2)
Although “Remsberg’s List” has already been shown to be fallacious, it is profitable to look at a few examples of the authors cited by Remsberg, in order to see how his use of them is fallacious. Let’s look at just a few.
Philo – the Jewish historian/philosopher. This is Remsberg’s strongest example, for Philo would have been a contemporary of Jesus. But there are several qualifications necessary. Philo probably died around 50 AD, and would not have lived long enough to see Christianity make a mark, thus warranting a mention of Jesus. His silence may also have been an oblique insult to the Christian movement; Philo believed in a sort of Platonic doctrine which would have regarded the idea of the incarnation as offensive. In addition, Philo noticeably fails to mention other important Jewish figures of that period such as the great Jewish rabbi Gamaliel. Therefore, his silence about Jesus is not peculiar.
Arrian -- this author lived in the second century, and wrote works concerned with Alexander the Great. That's 300 years before Jesus, quite a stretch for a mention.
Paterculus -- Authored an amateurish history of Rome. Paterculus was a retired army officer of Tiberius. He published in 30 A.D., just when Jesus was getting started in His ministry. Jesus never set foot in Rome, so it is hard to see where he would fit in his works.
Theon of Smyrna -- a mathematician and astronomer who wrote a "handbook for philosophy students to show how prime numbers, geometrical numbers such as squares, progressions, music and astronomy are interrelated."
Quintillian -- this fellow was a writer on oratory and rhetoric. Again, where is there room for mentioning Jesus, in what was essentially a how-to manual of public speaking?
Lucanus -- Seneca's nephew, all we have by him is one poem and some books recording the civil war between Pompey and Caesar. Where should Jesus have been worked into it?
Silius Italicus -- this author was a poet who wrote a big poem about the second Punic War. Jesus obviously would not have been there.
Pausanias -- a Greek traveler and geographer of the second century who wrote a ten-volume work called Descriptions of Greece. We would hardly expect mention of Jewish miracle workers in a different country.
Columella -- this fellow wrote about agriculture and trees.
These samples indicate that Remsberg’s List fails on account of lack of established relevance.
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
Basically, what Holding says is true. There were no contemporary historians who wrote about Jesus other than Christians because no contemporary histories from this time period survive. There is no extant Roman historian who lived from 27 to 30 AD. Period.
Nero was one of the most important and longest reigning Roman Emperors. We don't have a single contemporary history of Nero. All wrote after Nero died. Yet this is the charge the Jesus mythists make about the Gospels. They are not "on-the-spot" reports published soon after the events as given in today's newspapers , but were written many years afterward.
They fail to mention that nearly ALL ancient history is like this.
In fact, there are only FOUR "contemporary" Roman historians who wrote about the history of first century Rome or Palestine.
Three of the four -- Tacitus, Suetonius, Josephus -- all mention Jesus at least once.
The fourth, Plutarch, wrote only about Roman and Greek civil rulers.
As few other historians who COULD HAVE mentioned Jesus, such as Philo of Alexandria, did not write a history of the first century.
The fact is NOT that we have so few references to Jesus. On the contrary, it's amazing that in the few histories we have of the first century, there are so many refernces to Jesus.