Malachi151

Okay, I see the passage about the myth:

I think the whole interpretation is completely unconvincing.

Josephus isn't writing that the killing and eating of her son is to "be a myth for the world", he has the women saying that she hopes the rest of the world will not believe that it happened, something that they WON'T believe.

Joe Atwill

Your interpretation ignores the fact that Josephus deliberately links the “myth for the world” (mythos) to the belief by the Romans in the atrocity (mysos) which then produces great hatred of the Jews (misos). In other words the author is making the point with his witty homophonic wordplay that the mythos was ‘believed’. Mary is a fictional character, of course, and how Josephus is using her words within his overall composition concerning the ‘son of Mary how was a human Passover lamb’ is key to understanding his meaning.

Joe

spin

No, these are not homophones/ They don't sound the same. The form "Bar Matthias", which Josephus never uses regarding himself in his literature, starts with a /b/, a sound missing from the other supposed homophone. But then one needs to explain the presence of the vowel between the /r/ and the /m/ in the second. Yet again, Matthias has a tau/theta combination missing from Arimathea (arimaQaia).

In fact, the name Arimathea comes from the Hebrew toponym Ramoth (meaning "heights"), which can be found transliterated in LXX Jos 20:8 as Aremoth (arhmwQ), a translator's transliteration, ie simply using the Hebrew as its source. This is without local Greek influence adding a toponymic suffix, as we find with Cyrene, found in Strabo 17.5 as Cyrenaea.

It is far more transparent to see Arimathea as a Greek version of Ramoth than as a "homophone" of "bar Matthias" -- which it certainly isn't.

While I'm here, I note you are using the same word file as one I have for your source, along with the same scanner spelling mistake here: "Cerealins".

It's worth noting that the specific word for "crucify" here, anestaurow, is never used in the gospels (they prefer [e]staurow). Strange, isn't it?


spin

Joe Atwill

Copernic:

The parallels between the twin fates of Simon and John are actually two sets pf parallels – one for ‘Simon’ and one for ‘John’ - which are given in the same order in the Gospels and Josephus – John 21 and Wars of the Jews 7. 9. (434) The parallel encounters with the demoniac are also two sets – the first depicting someone whose unleashes a ‘legion’ of demons and the second concerning the unleashed demons infecting another group that rushes into the water.

Spin:

Obviously the words are not actual homophones. I simply used the term to draw attention to their similarity, which is part of a clear pattern.
Group of three being crucified.
Joseph takes down from cross
Roman commander begged
One survives
Similar job description – counselor
Similar last name
As I noted, this similarity is sufficient for typological mapping. The typology between Jesus and Titus is built upon that which links Jesus to Moses. In other words, the life of the first savior of Israel – Moses - foresaw that of the second – Jesus - whose life foresaw that of the final savior – Titus. If one works through the Moses/ Jesus typology it is easy to see that the same system links Jesus to Titus; parallel concepts, names and locations that occur in the same sequence.
Gen 45-50 Joseph to Egypt - Matt 2.13 Joseph to Egypt

Ex. 1 Pharaoh massacres boys – Matt 2.16 Herod massacres
boys

Ex. 4 "All the men are dead…" Matt 2.20 `They are dead…"

Ex. 12 From Egypt to Israel- Matt 2.21 From Egypt to Israel

Ex. 14 Passing through water (Baptism) – Matt 3.13 Baptism

Ex. 16 Tempted by bread- Matt 4.4 Tempted by bread

Ex. 17 Do not tempt God – Matt 4.7 Do not tempt God

Ex. 32 Worship only God- Matt 4.10 Worship only God
Joe

Johann_Kaspar

It is a pity for you, but the War was written in Hebrew not in Greek. So no wordplay. Only your imagination.

Yeshua "sacrifice" is seen as positive, while the child killing (nowhere it is stated it is a sacrifice, only extreme necessity) is seen as an absolute abomination without further meaning. Yeshua is saying to eat bread, not to eat the flesh of a killed child. And of course you don't know the meaning of the bread. Too bad.

No myth in this story by Josephus, your "fact", "links", "mythos", "fictional Mary" are not in the text. And the story does not happen during passover. Too bad really.

Toto

War was written in Hebrew? But the only early copies we have are in Greek.

Johann_Kaspar

In War 3.9, it is Vespasien, not Titus. Too bad.

Zealots were never called a legion. Pigs cannot be Zealots but only Romans. Too bad.


This is the most stupid "parallel". See previous post.


It is easy to predict something that has already happened. But which Yeshua? He predicted that he will be resurrected. What about Titus?


So the naked man is Yeshua. Very glad to learn that he escaped that night and someone else was arrested. That is a scoop!


And Titus is captured too on that mount, or wounded, right? Or is he doing "something" or suffering "something" on that mount? No?! Too bad.


3 times? And one outright lie, the second Shimon does not deny. Too bad.


3 crucified and none survives versus several hundred crucified. There is no "Joseph of Arimathea", no "Arimathea".


No Shimon is not found "under rocks". No rock.


Yeshua sends Shimon to Jerusalem to be executed... Iochanan was not "spared", he was condemned for life. Now you have information about the first one also "spared", haven't you? No?! Too bad.

In summary all what there is in those so called parallels is fiction, weird imagination, wordplays, fantasy if not fantasms. And someone will fall for it

That is the funniest part.

Johann_Kaspar

Yep, somewhere in Josephus works. And then translated into Greek, because he was not able to do it alone. We have only very late copies.

Joe Atwill

Johann:

I feel your pain. To cheer you up let me point out that your criticism is inaccurate. It doesn’t matter what language Wars was written in originally. It is self evident that one can write typological maps or sarcasm between different languages. As far as the wordplay on ‘mythos’ being a figment of only my imagination, please read Professor Chapman’s analysis of it. The Web address is given above.

Jesus does state eat flesh – John 6, 56. Notice that it is given as a direct question concerning cannibalism.

Mary’s child is a ‘Passover lamb’, which has been understood since the beginning of Christianity – see Melito, Peri Pascha. This is clear in that the child is said to be the ‘roasted sacrifice of the house of hyssop’. Like the Gospels Josephus has designated a son of Mary as a human Passover by combing the concept of ‘hyssop’ with one of the instructions concerning preparing the sacrifice. Josephus does not give the date of the ‘feast’ because he doesn’t need to. Everyone knows when the Passover lamb is eaten.

Hope this is clarifying.

Joe

Joe Atwill

Johann:

I am right that you haven't read Caesar's Messiah? Your statements suggest this. Let me know if this is the case so I can adjust my replys.

Joe