Freethought & Rationalism Archive

tanya · 10-03-2012, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

10. The 2nd century Irenaeus mentioned the contents of Antiquities of the Jews 2 when arguing about Moses.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philosopher Jay

As for 10, please tells me the name of the work where Irenaeus says this and we know this is by Irenaeus. Show me the work that this occurs in and we can discuss it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Origen, Against Celsus, book 1, chapter 16

And any one who likes may peruse the two books of Flavius Josephus on the antiquities of the Jews, in order that he may see in what way Moses was more ancient than those who asserted that floods and conflagrations take place in the world after long intervals of time; which statement Celsus alleges the Jews and Christians to have misunderstood, and, not comprehending what was said about a conflagration, to have declared that "God will descend, bringing fire like a torturer."

I failed to locate anything in Irenaeus, citing Josephus: "Antiquities of the Jews".

aa5874 · 10-03-2012, 02:08 PM

Your claim that Antiquities of the Jews was not well known is highly illogical and unsubstantiated.

The very Gospels destroy you. It cannot be sheer coincidence that Virtually all the main characters in the Gospels are found in the 18th-20th books of Antiquities of the Jews.

1. John the Baptist.

2. Pilate

3. Caiaphas the High Priest.

4. Ananus the High Priest.

5. Herodias

6. The story of the "head on the Platter".

7. Philip the tetrarch.

8. The Taxiing of Cyrenius.

9. Herod the Tetrarch.

10. The execution of John the Baptist.

11. The marriage of Herod to his brother wife.

12. The claim that Jesus had a brother called James.

13. The death of Herod.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

Hi aa5874,

Thanks for the orderliness and neatness of your list. It makes things easier.

Regarding 1, it is hard to see how the author of Luke got the idea that a world-wide census was being taken by Cyrenius from reading Josephus. Josephus doesn't mention such a thing.

Quote:

Now Cyrenius, a Roman senator, and one who had gone through other magistracies, and had passed through them till he had been consul, and one who, on other accounts, was of great dignity, came at this time into Syria, with a few others, being sent by Caesar to be a judge of that nation, and to take an account of their substance. Coponius also, a man of the equestrian order, was sent together with him, to have the supreme power over the Jews. Moreover, Cyrenius came himself into Judea, which was now added to the province of Syria, to take an account of their substance, and to dispose of Archelaus's money;

In those days a decree went out from Emperor Augustus that all the world should be registered. This was the first registration and was taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. All went to their own towns to be registered.

We cannot count out that Cyrenius being a governor of Syria and Judea was common knowledge throughout Judea at the time that the gospel was written. For example, I know that Andrew Jackson was president of the United States and that he had something to do with a Mexican-American war. I never specifically read any book about Andrew Jackson, but probably remembered it from grade school American History courses.

The relationship between the two texts is an open question and cannot be used to prove that the writer of the Gospel of Luke or anybody else knew Josephus.

2-3 can better be explained, I think, by Eusebius interpolating into "Antiquities," rather than NT writers taking from "Antiquities"

4, like 1, gives us a problem again because the texts tell such different stories. In Antiquities, Herod Antipas is at the second day of a festival in Caesar's honor when he becomes ill. Five days later he dies. In Acts, he is sitting on his throne when God strikes him dead for blasphemy. There is the parallel that people talk of him being a God in both cases. However, the differences in the two stories suggest both are being derived from earlier source material.

5-7 are from Origen. Eusebius inherited the library of Origen which included all of Origen's works. Since we know Eusebius was familiar with "Antiquities," we may suggest that he forged passages in Origen that refer to the work. There are logical problems with each reference Origen makes to Antiquities, I have pointed them out in the past and we can discuss them if you like.

8,9 and 11 simply provide evidence that people knew that Josephus had written a history of the Jews, not that it circulated or was read by anyone.

As for 10, please tells me the name of the work where Irenaeus says this and we know this is by Irenaeus. Show me the work that this occurs in and we can discuss it.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

Hi aa5874,

Nobody quoted for over 220 years from "Antiquities." This is evidence that the book was not in wide circulation...

Your claim is highly illogical. Please, you seem not to even understand that the very Jesus story is based on information found ONLY in the 18th Book of Antiquities of the Jews.

Even all the Gospels, especially gLuke and Acts of the Apostles appear to have used Antiquities of the Jews.

1. The Taxing of Cyrenius in the NT is found Only in Antiquities of the Jews 18

2. John the Baptist in the NT is found Only in Antiquities of the Jews 18.

3. The execution of John the Baptist in the NT is found ONLY in Antiquities of the Jews. 18

4. The death of Herod in the Gospels is found ONLY in Antiquities of the Jews 19.

5. Origen claimed Josephus mentioned Jesus, James and John the Baptist in Antiquities of the Jews.

6. The contents of the 18th book of Antiquities of the Jews was known by Origen a Church writer in the 3rd century.

7. The number of books on Antiquities of the Jews was known in the 3rd century by Origen a 3rd century writer.

8. Antiquities of the Jews was used by Church writers when arguing about the History of the Jews.

9. The 2nd-3rd century Tertullian acknowledged Josephus wrote the history of the Jews.

10. The 2nd century Irenaeus mentioned the contents of Antiquities of the Jews 2 when arguing about Moses.

11.The 2nd century Justin Martyr acknowledged Antiquities of the Jews by Josephus when arguing about the History of the Jews.

aa5874 · 10-03-2012, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanya

I failed to locate anything in Irenaeus, citing Josephus: "Antiquities of the Jews".

The fragments of Irenaeus mentions Josephus.

See http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine...s/advhaer5.txt

DCHindley · 10-03-2012, 02:27 PM

Tanya,

This is not a reference to the 20 book Antiquities of the Jews, but to the two books Against Apion, in which Josephus defends the ancient and noble origin of Judaism.

DCH

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanya

Quote:

Originally Posted by Origen, Against Celsus, book 1, chapter 16

And any one who likes may peruse the two books of Flavius Josephus on the antiquities of the Jews, in order that he may see in what way Moses was more ancient than those who asserted that floods and conflagrations take place in the world after long intervals of time; which statement Celsus alleges the Jews and Christians to have misunderstood, and, not comprehending what was said about a conflagration, to have declared that "God will descend, bringing fire like a torturer."

anethema · 10-03-2012, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

Hi aa5874,

Thanks for the orderliness and neatness of your list. It makes things easier.

Regarding 1, it is hard to see how the author of Luke got the idea that a world-wide census was being taken by Cyrenius from reading Josephus. Josephus doesn't mention such a thing.

Quote:

Now Cyrenius, a Roman senator, and one who had gone through other magistracies, and had passed through them till he had been consul, and one who, on other accounts, was of great dignity, came at this time into Syria, with a few others, being sent by Caesar to be a judge of that nation, and to take an account of their substance. Coponius also, a man of the equestrian order, was sent together with him, to have the supreme power over the Jews. Moreover, Cyrenius came himself into Judea, which was now added to the province of Syria, to take an account of their substance, and to dispose of Archelaus's money;

In those days a decree went out from Emperor Augustus that all the world should be registered. This was the first registration and was taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. All went to their own towns to be registered.

We cannot count out that Cyrenius being a governor of Syria and Judea was common knowledge throughout Judea at the time that the gospel was written. For example, I know that Andrew Jackson was president of the United States and that he had something to do with a Mexican-American war. I never specifically read any book about Andrew Jackson, but probably remembered it from grade school American History courses.

The relationship between the two texts is an open question and cannot be used to prove that the writer of the Gospel of Luke or anybody else knew Josephus.

2-3 can better be explained, I think, by Eusebius interpolating into "Antiquities," rather than NT writers taking from "Antiquities"

4, like 1, gives us a problem again because the texts tell such different stories. In Antiquities, Herod Antipas is at the second day of a festival in Caesar's honor when he becomes ill. Five days later he dies. In Acts, he is sitting on his throne when God strikes him dead for blasphemy. There is the parallel that people talk of him being a God in both cases. However, the differences in the two stories suggest both are being derived from earlier source material.

5-7 are from Origen. Eusebius inherited the library of Origen which included all of Origen's works. Since we know Eusebius was familiar with "Antiquities," we may suggest that he forged passages in Origen that refer to the work. There are logical problems with each reference Origen makes to Antiquities, I have pointed them out in the past and we can discuss them if you like.

8,9 and 11 simply provide evidence that people knew that Josephus had written a history of the Jews, not that it circulated or was read by anyone.

As for 10, please tells me the name of the work where Irenaeus says this and we know this is by Irenaeus. Show me the work that this occurs in and we can discuss it.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

Hi aa5874,

Nobody quoted for over 220 years from "Antiquities." This is evidence that the book was not in wide circulation...

Your claim is highly illogical. Please, you seem not to even understand that the very Jesus story is based on information found ONLY in the 18th Book of Antiquities of the Jews.

Even all the Gospels, especially gLuke and Acts of the Apostles appear to have used Antiquities of the Jews.

1. The Taxing of Cyrenius in the NT is found Only in Antiquities of the Jews 18

2. John the Baptist in the NT is found Only in Antiquities of the Jews 18.

3. The execution of John the Baptist in the NT is found ONLY in Antiquities of the Jews. 18

4. The death of Herod in the Gospels is found ONLY in Antiquities of the Jews 19.

5. Origen claimed Josephus mentioned Jesus, James and John the Baptist in Antiquities of the Jews.

6. The contents of the 18th book of Antiquities of the Jews was known by Origen a Church writer in the 3rd century.

7. The number of books on Antiquities of the Jews was known in the 3rd century by Origen a 3rd century writer.

8. Antiquities of the Jews was used by Church writers when arguing about the History of the Jews.

9. The 2nd-3rd century Tertullian acknowledged Josephus wrote the history of the Jews.

10. The 2nd century Irenaeus mentioned the contents of Antiquities of the Jews 2 when arguing about Moses.

11.The 2nd century Justin Martyr acknowledged Antiquities of the Jews by Josephus when arguing about the History of the Jews.

The funny thing is Andrew Jackson had nothing to do with the Mexican War. This is why the whole enterprise is fallacious. The president was Polk. The people writing about ca. 30-70 CE woulld have been prone to make the same mistake. Please dont confuse the facts, even though I have the utmost respect for you Jay.

aa5874 · 10-03-2012, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

Tanya,

This is not a reference to the 20 book Antiquities of the Jews, but to the two books Against Apion, in which Josephus defends the ancient and noble origin of Judaism...

The 18th book of Antiquities of the Jews is mentioned in "Against Celsus".

Against Celsus 2.47

Quote:

....For in the 18th book of his Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus bears witness to John as having been a Baptist, and as promising purification to those who underwent the rite.

In the same "Against Celsus" 2.47 it is also claimed James was put to death by the Jews and this is only found in Antiquities of the Jews 20.9.1.

The mere fact that Josephus wrote Against Apion is because Apion had criticised Antiquities of the Jews by Josephus.

If Origen was aware of Apion who mentioned Josephus then we have COMPLETE attestation that Antiquities of the Jews was known by Apion, the contemporary of Josephus, the authors of the Gospels, Acts of the Apostles, the Galatians writer, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen and Eusebius.

PhilosopherJay · 10-03-2012, 05:17 PM

Hi Anethema,

Thanks for the correction.

Damn, it was the war of 1812 that Jackson was associated with. Well, I knew it was some damn war.

I can imagine someone pointing out to Luke that Cyrenius' census was only a local one and him responding, "Damn, I knew it was some damn census.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Quote:

Originally Posted by anethema

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

Hi aa5874,

{snip}

.
We cannot count out that Cyrenius being a governor of Syria and Judea was common knowledge throughout Judea at the time that the gospel was written. For example, I know that Andrew Jackson was president of the United States and that he had something to do with a Mexican-American war. I never specifically read any book about Andrew Jackson, but probably remembered it from grade school American History courses.

The relationship between the two texts is an open question and cannot be used to prove that the writer of the Gospel of Luke or anybody else knew Josephus.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

The funny thing is Andrew Jackson had nothing to do with the Mexican War. This is why the whole enterprise is fallacious. The president was Polk. The people writing about ca. 30-70 CE woulld have been prone to make the same mistake. Please dont confuse the facts, even though I have the utmost respect for you Jay.

aa5874 · 10-03-2012, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

Hi Anethema,

Thanks for the correction.

Damn, it was the war of 1812 that Jackson was associated with. Well, I knew it was some damn war.

I can imagine someone pointing out to Luke that Cyrenius' census was only a local one and him responding, "Damn, I knew it was some damn census...

Isn't that amusing!!! Can you imagine some illiterate in the 2nd century, at least 100 after the the Taxiing of Cyrenius, who tells the author of gLuke that his Jesus story is historically accurate except for the Census??

PhilosopherJay · 10-04-2012, 09:29 AM

Hi aa5874,

I think you may have confused Apion with Justtin of Tiberius. Apion died before Josephus was born. Justin wrote his version of the Wars, 20 years after Josephus wrote his in 75 CE. Justin wrote in response to Josephus' "Wars." It is unknown if he knew Josephus' "Antiquities."

Regarding Origen's "Against Celsus," in book 2.13, we have:

Quote:

Titus destroyed Jerusalem, on account, as Josephus says, of James the Just, the brother of Jesus who was called Christ, but in reality, as the truth makes dear, on account of Jesus Christ the Son of God.

This is not found in Josephus as we now have it. Rather we have this in Wars 4.5.2 318

Quote:

I should not be wrong in saying that the capture of the city began with the death of Ananus; and that the overthrow of the walls and the downfall of the Jewish state dated from the day on which the Jews beheld their high priest, the captain of their salvation, butchered in the heart of Jerusalem.

It is difficult to understand how the statement currently in "Against Celsus" got there. It is quite possibly an interpolation.

We also have in book 1.16

Quote:

For any one who chooses may read what Flavius Josephus has recorded in his two books, On the Antiquity of the Jews, where he brings together a great collection of writers, who bear witness to the antiquity of the Jewish people;

Origen is actually describing "Against Apion." It seems possible that Origen has made a simple mistake in title, or that an interpolator wants us to believe that Origen knew about "Antiquities" when he did not.

In regards to 1.47, I have maintained for ten years that it is a Eusebean interpolation, containing ideas that Eusebius repeats over and over again, but otherwise are unknown in Origen's works. Here is the full interpolation in red, which begins in the previous paragraph by Eusebius cancelling an ambiguity left by Origin regarding whether God and the Holy Spirit sent Jesus or God sent both the Holy Spirit and Jesus. Eusebius corrects this by saying it was God who sent both. He then goes on to add all his stock points about James the brother of Jesus and there being lots of churches as witnesses to Jesus (the whole point of his Church History) which Origen could not care less about. Note how much smoother the work reads when we eliminate the red Eusebean material:

Quote:

And as it is a Jew who is perplexed about the account of the Holy Spirit having descended upon Jesus in the form of a dove, we would say to him, "Sir, who is it that says in Isaiah, 'And now the Lord has sent me and His Spirit.'" In which sentence, as the meaning is doubtful— viz., whether the Father and the Holy Spirit sent Jesus, or the Father sent both Christ and the Holy Spirit— the latter is correct. For, because the Saviour was sent, afterwards the Holy Spirit was sent also, that the prediction of the prophet might be fulfilled; and as it was necessary that the fulfilment of the prophecy should be known to posterity, the disciples of Jesus for that reason committed the result to writing.
Chapter 47

I would like to say to Celsus, who represents the Jew as accepting somehow John as a Baptist, who baptized Jesus, that the existence of John the Baptist, baptizing for the remission of sins, is related by one who lived no great length of time after John and Jesus. For in the 18th book of his Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus bears witness to John as having been a Baptist, and as promising purification to those who underwent the rite. Now this writer, although not believing in Jesus as the Christ, in seeking after the cause of the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple, whereas he ought to have said that the conspiracy against Jesus was the cause of these calamities befalling the people, since they put to death Christ, who was a prophet, says nevertheless— being, although against his will, not far from the truth— that these disasters happened to the Jews as a punishment for the death of James the Just, who was a brother of Jesus (called Christ),— the Jews having put him to death, although he was a man most distinguished for his justice. Paul, a genuine disciple of Jesus, says that he regarded this James as a brother of the Lord, not so much on account of their relationship by blood, or of their being brought up together, as because of his virtue and doctrine. If, then, he says that it was on account of James that the desolation of Jerusalem was made to overtake the Jews, how should it not be more in accordance with reason to say that it happened on account (of the death) of Jesus Christ, of whose divinity so many Churches are witnesses, composed of those who have been convened from a flood of sins, and who have joined themselves to the Creator, and who refer all their actions to His good pleasure.

Chapter 48

Although the Jew, then, may offer no defence for himself in the instances of Ezekiel and Isaiah, when we compare the opening of the heavens to Jesus, and the voice that was heard by Him, to the similar cases which we find recorded in Ezekiel and Isaiah, or any other of the prophets, we nevertheless, so far as we can, shall support our position, maintaining that, as it is a matter of belief that in a dream impressions have been brought before the minds of many, some relating to divine things, and others to future events of this life, and this either with clearness or in an enigmatic manner—a fact which is manifest to all who accept the doctrine of providence; so how is it absurd to say that the mind which could receive impressions in a dream should be impressed also in a waking vision, for the benefit either of him on whom the impressions are made, or of those who are to hear the account of them from him? And as in a dream we fancy that we hear, and that the organs of hearing are actually impressed, and that we see with our eyes— although neither the bodily organs of sight nor hearing are affected, but it is the mind alone which has these sensations— so there is no absurdity in believing that similar things occurred to the prophets, when it is recorded that they witnessed occurrences of a rather wonderful kind, as when they either heard the words of the Lord or beheld the heavens opened.

Eusebius' forgeries into Origin is simply not evidence to me that Josephus' "Antiquities" was known and circulated before Eusebius.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

Tanya,

This is not a reference to the 20 book Antiquities of the Jews, but to the two books Against Apion, in which Josephus defends the ancient and noble origin of Judaism...

The 18th book of Antiquities of the Jews is mentioned in "Against Celsus".

Against Celsus 2.47

Quote:

....For in the 18th book of his Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus bears witness to John as having been a Baptist, and as promising purification to those who underwent the rite.

In the same "Against Celsus" 2.47 it is also claimed James was put to death by the Jews and this is only found in Antiquities of the Jews 20.9.1.

The mere fact that Josephus wrote Against Apion is because Apion had criticised Antiquities of the Jews by Josephus.

If Origen was aware of Apion who mentioned Josephus then we have COMPLETE attestation that Antiquities of the Jews was known by Apion, the contemporary of Josephus, the authors of the Gospels, Acts of the Apostles, the Galatians writer, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen and Eusebius.

andrewcriddle · 10-04-2012, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

The "Lost Fragment of Irenaeus" which talks about Moses and Jesus was apparently assigned to Irenaeus in the 19th Century. I have no idea on what basis it was assigned to Irenaeus. Perhaps you know. It does not name any work of Irenaeus, so we have to assume that the attribution to Irenaeus is shaky at best.

IIUC the passage is attributed to Irenaeus in a catena an ancient collection of passages from Christian writers.

such attributions are not always accurate.

Andrew Criddle

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.