Thank you. It’s good to see my findings on that corroborated.

Though it’s not clear if that’s the final accepted (i.e. actually published) version.

So if you see a link to that in NECJ, definitely let me know (or better yet, if you can get a PDF of that version to me!)

Looks like she just published another article. She refutes Whealey, Allen, and others and shows there is no independent, non-Eusebius quotation of the TF.

https://www.academia.edu/122365804/_Forthcoming_Reception_of_the_Testimonium_Flavianum_An_Evaluation_of_the_Independent_Witnesses_to_Josephus_Testimonium_Flavianum

That’s to be expected. She has already published agreement with those testimonies being dubious. I look forward to her others.

Not really, though it would further validate your position that he is a hack. You may want to note that Hanson did write her own response to Dave Allen:

http://jgrchj.net/volume19/JGRChJ19Hansen94-103.pdf

She also has a paper debunking Fernando Bermejo-Rubio’s negative TF coming out in New Testament Studies according to her Academia profile: https://unk.academia.edu/ChrissyHansen

On stream with Jacob Berman today too, she said she had three other papers in submission debunking Josephus’ testimonies of Jesus. So she is going to town on those apparently.

Thanks for the heads up. Useful to know and unsurprising. But does that affect anything in my article?

https://medium.com/@cmehans2020/dave-allen-is-a-serial-plagiarist-and-does-not-give-proper-attribution-92e5d5aed4b8

None of that even replies to what I said or evinces anything you said.

You demonstrate to be completely ignorant of even the basics of nomina sacra, and in addition to that decide to willfully ignore (our earliest) extant evidence.

Nomina sacra (I suggest you read Traube, Paap, even Hurtado) come in various groups, with the alleged Christian top 4 being very, very consistent. Only the NHL manages to mix short and full forms of XS and Xrhstos, by the dozens. When we take for instance Codex Sinaiticus we find only 5 verses that have a full form of Xrestos or Xreistos, one of which is in the NT, in Revelation: these are rare exceptions that aren’t mirrored in e.g. Alexandrinus or Vaticanus.

The NHL, the Greek Christian tradition and the Latin Christian tradition are all intricately linked to one another by textual scribal habits that demonstrate a very clearly discernable evolution and order, with the NHL starting them all. And while those mix long, short and full forms of XS, the Christian Greek tradition exclusively uses XS (Bezae and very early fragments being exceptions) while the Latin exclusively uses XPS, thereby introducing the Greek Pi into its alphabet.

Yet Josephus using both forms, and even a full form of IHSOUS? An anomaly of anomalies if there ever was one: even the Eusebian versions that we have of all these employ only the short forms.

And note, even if Josephus wrote the entire TF as we have it: Goldberg proved he slavishly just aped the Gospel of Luke.

Which eliminates the TF as an independent text. So it’s not independent testimony even if authentic.

That it obviously isn’t authentic is just one more layer of unreliability. The supermajority of experts agree it’s a compromised text. Therefore none of it can be trusted, even if any of it were ever authentic (because we now cannot know what was actually here otherwise; conjectures do not constitute evidence).

That it’s worse than that, that the whole thing is obviously a forgery (the evidence for this stacks mighty), is just yet one more layer of unreliability.

They really need to drop this. It’s making them look bad.

I don’t know what you mean by (1) or what it has to do with the discussion here.

But as to (2), this is non-significant. All medieval manuscripts have been preserved by Christians, who often (but not always) alter texts to fit the nomina sacra. They often were inconsistent (abbreviating some but not all sacred words; some classifying more words as sacred than usual; and so on). So manuscripts of Josephus converted to that abbreviation scheme do not signify they ever started that way. That was a medieval technique. In fact, medieval manuscripts often heavily abbreviate, even non-sacred words.