Which quasi credible source did Talmage cite in Jesus the Christ?

[Archaea]

It should be easy for AA, Chapel Hill and Solon, and probably Adam, Pelagius and SEIQ. Dan if he were here.

[Archaea]

Edersheim, brother, learn your German.

You're probably referring to this book. http://www.amazon.com/Life-Christ-Ch.../dp/0340513586

Wrong answer though.

[All-American]

Answer: God. Cuz he wrote it in the temple. Duh.

It's been years since I read Talmage. Last thing I can recall about it was a BYU professor trying very hard to avoid specifically citing Jesus the Christ as a work that was particularly out of date, and which had relied on even more out of date information.

[ute4ever]

Josephus?
Adam Clarke?

[JohnnyLingo]

I love the bashing on Elder Talmage that occurs here. The earliest example of which came from everyone's favorite poster, fusnik.

I love Jesus the Christ. For those who think it is a substandard work, do you ever account for the fact that it was written in the early 20th century? I say give Arch or SIEQ all the resources available to Elder Talmage in 1910, including a typewriter, and say have at it.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by Adam

All he did was take Farrar and Endersheim and rewrite them in his own words adding the appropriate scriptures from Joseph Smith in the appropriate places. It really is a fine book, but not rocket science. Any educated Mormon could have put it together.

Are you insinuating plagiarism, or simply saying the end product is effectively the same?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by ute4ever

Josephus?
Adam Clarke?

We have a winner.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

I love the bashing on Elder Talmage that occurs here. The earliest example of which came from everyone's favorite poster, fusnik.

I love Jesus the Christ. For those who think it is a substandard work, do you ever account for the fact that it was written in the early 20th century? I say give Arch or SIEQ all the resources available to Elder Talmage in 1910, including a typewriter, and say have at it.

The book was interesting and as Adam points out, a rewrite of Farrar and Edersheim.

In fact, I reread it in German on the mission and in French. If you're not going to read Farrar, you should read Talmage, though some of the assumptions are out of date.

And for his time period, lots of people cite Josephus, but with caution. His measurements are quite questionable. I don't remember Talmage quoting Josephus too often, and for me in high school, Talmage was my introduction to Farrar and Josephus.

[All-American]

1. Lingo: that was precisely the point that was being made. Latter-Day saints rely on the book as though it were the definitive work on the life and times of Christ, when the fact of the matter is, it is sadly out of date. The professor I mentioned was actually very careful not to mention Talmage until a student point blank asked him about Jesus the Christ.

I think it is a good read, and a monumental work. It's just out of date.

2. Arch: Josephus? Quasi-credible?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by All-American

1. Lingo: that was precisely the point that was being made. Latter-Day saints rely on the book as though it were the definitive work on the life and times of Christ, when the fact of the matter is, it is sadly out of date. The professor I mentioned was actually very careful not to mention Talmage until a student point blank asked him about Jesus the Christ.

I think it is a good read, and a monumental work. It's just out of date.

2. Arch: Josephus? Quasi-credible?

Questionable credibility. I was just reading some of the critiques of Flavius Joesphus when I started thinking about a few citations by Talmage from Josephus.