Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 04-30-2004, 12:38 PM

Josephus was Paul? Well I bet no one every saw them in the same room at the same time.

The usual dates for Josephus' life are 37—100 CE, which has him being born after Paul is presumed to have started preaching. He would have been 13 at the time Paul was interacting with the Jerusalem Church, making him quite precocious.

This abstract looks interesting:

Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Vol. 13 No. 2 (October 2002): 151-169 "Vita Apologetica: The Lives of Josephus and Paul in Apologetic Historiography"

Quote:

Paul and Josephus both were apologists for their religious communities and thus shared many attributes in common. Since the book of Acts, crafted in the late first century, was contemporary with Josephus’s writings, some critical scholars have suggested dependence by one of these authors upon the other. This article suggests that the author of Acts may have been inspired by Josephan texts when crafting biographical narratives about Paul. The article evaluates possible connections between Acts and Josephan texts in regard to: (1) their references to the same political events in Palestine, (2) the broad educational experiences of both men, (3) shipwreck experiences of both men and (4) visions of dream images, which communicated life-altering messages to both men.

Al Kafirun · 04-30-2004, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I assume you are talking about Josephus astounding the elders in the Temple with his knowledge at the age of about 14, and Jesus doing the same thing in the gospel according to Luke? Both are probably mythic boasting, and Luke probably had a copy of Josephus in front of him.

Are there any other parallels? Josephus was not born of a virgin, was not a carpenter, did not wander around Galilee speaking in cryptic parables, was not tried before the Sanhedrin or Roman authorities.

Yeah, that's what I was going for. Thanks. I need a post delay to remind me to revise my replies about twenty times. Forgive me, I'm an illiterate carpenter.

Also, there was Paul's somewhat dubious account of being a Pharisee that sounds lifted from Josephus. My point being that one could sit with Josephus in front of them and fashion a romance out of the outline.

shunyadragon · 04-30-2004, 07:14 PM

The importance of Josepheus is overstated. It is only important because it is the only vague undocumented reference to Jesus close to his lifetime.

The most important writers alive and writing at the time Jesus said absolutely nothing about him or many key events in the Bible like the devastating earthquake. The first century references after Jesus died are just as vague and barren. After Christians get there act together and started proseltyzing, most of the major reputable historians of the time called it a sham and openly said there are no known records or evidence that Jesus existed. This is important because many Christians promote that historical evidence and records were readily available at this time, but lost due to destruction by opponents of Christianity and events like the great fire in Rome.

Mr. Otis · 05-01-2004, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johann_Kaspar

How is that Josephus did not know about the gospels? Nor about Paul or Paul's "congregation" or literature? How is that his notice about the Essenes is not complete, the most interesting part concerning the different parties or groups within the Essenes being missing?

How do you know Josephus didn't know about the gospels? And why would you assume that a Pharisee would want to call attention to them?

Toto · 05-01-2004, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Otis

How do you know Josephus didn't know about the gospels? And why would you assume that a Pharisee would want to call attention to them?

In Contra Apion, Josephus refutes the anti-Semitism of his time. If he had known about the Gospels with their claims that "the Jews" had an innocent man crucified, he probably would have included a refutation of them.

Johann_Kaspar · 05-02-2004, 04:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Otis

How do you know Josephus didn't know about the gospels? And why would you assume that a Pharisee would want to call attention to them?

Correct, I did not interview him!

Well, otherwise it is clear that he does not know about the resurrection and I doubt very much that he was a pharisee...

Johann_Kaspar · 05-02-2004, 04:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

In Contra Apion, Josephus refutes the anti-Semitism of his time. If he had known about the Gospels with their claims that "the Jews" had an innocent man crucified, he probably would have included a refutation of them.

This is a posterior xian lie. According to the gospels he was not innocent at all.

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

04-30-2004, 07:14 PM	#23
shunyadragon Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Shenyang, RP China Posts: 37	The importance of Josepheus is overstated. It is only important because it is the only vague undocumented reference to Jesus close to his lifetime. The most important writers alive and writing at the time Jesus said absolutely nothing about him or many key events in the Bible like the devastating earthquake. The first century references after Jesus died are just as vague and barren. After Christians get there act together and started proseltyzing, most of the major reputable historians of the time called it a sham and openly said there are no known records or evidence that Jesus existed. This is important because many Christians promote that historical evidence and records were readily available at this time, but lost due to destruction by opponents of Christianity and events like the great fire in Rome.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.