Duvduv

I NEVER SAID it was copied from the Talmud because I don't know which was written up first. BUT THE STORY known among Jews would easily fall into the hands of a writer living and working among Jews as it concerns one of their most important rabbinical leaders of the 1st century.

Duvduv

Do I hear an echo?????

aa5874

That is precisely the point. You don't really know what you are talking about.

You have no idea if the story was known among the Jews in the 1st century because you have no written sources attributed to 1st century Jewish writers that mention your Talmud story of "Yochanan Ben Zakkai".

Essentially, the very Talmud is without corroboration by Jewish writers.

Philo the Jew and Josephus the Jew ,did NOT mention "Yochanan Ben Zakkai".

Tacitus and Suetonius, non-Jewish writers, also mentioned nothing of "Yochanan Ben Zakkai" but mentioned Vespasian.

mountainman

The point I was making concerned the statistical distribution of the name Jesus in the writings of Josephus as compared to the statistical distribution of the name Jesus in any other writings of that epoch.

According to this source:

Please correct me if I am mistaken, but AFAIK there are no other sources in antiquity that exhibit such a large statistical distribution of the name Jesus. If this is indeed the case, then it seems quite suspicious that this source called "Josephus" floods the market with so many Jesus people.






εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia

aa5874

You seem to have not read the works of Josephus because all the characters called Jesus in Josephus are not the Jesus Christ of Nazareth in the Jesus cult Canon.

You very well claim and argue that it was Eusebius who invented the fake Jesus in the "TF".

There is absolutely nothing suspicious about the characters called Jesus in Josephus because they do NOT support the Jesus cult Canon.

It would have been completely idiotic for someone from your forgery mill to have fabricated about 19 characters called Jesus and forget to claim that they were from Nazareth and was God the Creator.

The mere fact that there were multiple characters in Josephus called Jesus, from murderers, madmen, robbers to high priests, shows that any Tom, Dick or Harry was called Jesus in antiquity.

The claim in the NT that a character called Jesus was the Son of God and the Creator may be equivalent to claiming that someone called DICK is a God and the Creator.

It would have been completely stupid for Eusebius to mention 19 characters called Jesus in Josephus but mentioned ONLY the Fake Jesus in Church History.

The writings of Josephus [and indeed Philo] completely destroy "Church History"
by Eusebius with respect to the Jesus cult and the Pauline Corpus.

The writings of Josephus are compatible WITH the recovered manuscripts of the Jesus cult.

All manuscripts of the Jesus cult that have been dated are all AFTER Josephus was dead.

Josephus wrote NOTHING of Jesus of Naxzareth and that he was worshiped as a God by the Jews and people of the Roman Empire since 37-100 CE.

Those things happen after Josephus was DEAD.

mountainman

Take a deep breath aa5874 and look up the meaning of "statistical distribution". My question has absolutely nothing to do with the Bilbo Jesus Baggins of the Canonical Hobbit cult. Rather it has to do with the statistical mentions of ANYONE called Jesus. The point being made here is that Josephus mentions a whole stack of people called Jesus. The question is whether anyone else in antiquity mentions a whole stack of people called Jesus. And if not, why does Josephus?





εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia

aa5874

Your "statistical distribution" has nothing whatsoever to do with the OP. Josephus mentioned many called Jesus and once those persons did exist then your "statistical distribution" is of no real value.

You very well know that Josephus mentioned similar names of probably all the characters in the Gospels yet do not corroborate a single event in the Canon about Jesus, his mother Mary and his disciples.

Josephus lived in Galilee and did not even write about rumors of Jesus and the Galileans.

Duvduv

It is truly bizarre that you do not follow your ownrequirement for proving the existence of a Josephus or a Philo.
Especially when you know that neither gentleman is mentioned in a single place anywhere in any ancient Jewish source. Whereas R. Yochanan is widely known in thatJewish context.

aa5874

Please, identify a non-Jewish source that wrote about the story of R. Yochanan found in Talmud gittin 56.

You claim Josephus is not mentioned by Jewish writings but fail to admit that the R Yochanan story is not found in non-Jewish sources and fail to admit the Talmud is a source of fiction.

Duvduv

The great body of ancient Jewish writings after the Tanach comprises the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds, and all themidrashic literature followed later by Gaonic writings. None of any of these writings, which comprise the CONTEXT of the period mentions the questionable events attributed to the Jew Josephus in all his glory, or to the man himself. That is the point, and not whether outside texts mention any of theseveral thousand Talmudic rabbis, or the leading Jews of any particular period.