Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aa5874 · 10-05-2009, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by renassault

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

And there is a big difference between a claim of authenticity and identification of James in Antiquities of the Jews 20.9.1 once the TF AJ 18.3.3 is rejected.

Why did not Josephus write any thing about this Messiah but only that his brother was stoned to death?

Probably for the same reason he almost would have never written anything about John the Baptist if it wasn't for a supplement regarding the war in 37 between Herod and Aretas IV; it has nothing political in it, with which Josephus' history seems intertwined as the most important aspect of that time period.

Josephus almost did not write anything.

Almost does not count, Josephus wrote about John the Baptist and he was not even a messianic figure.

Josephus gave critical information about John the Baptist so that it could be reasonable assumed when John the Baptist lived and where he died.

If you consider that AJ 20.9.1 authentic then nothing was written about Jesus called Christ except he had a brother. Nothing is known about the time Jesus called Christ lived or died.

Josephus claimed John the Baptist was imprisoned and executed in a castle in Macherus during the reign of Herod and Aretas.

There is nothing in Josephus on Jesus called Christ except forgeries.

bacht · 10-06-2009, 10:21 AM

Off-topic but, why is John the Baptist ignored in the canonical epistles?

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by renassault

Probably for the same reason he almost would have never written anything about John the Baptist if it wasn't for a supplement regarding the war in 37 between Herod and Aretas IV; it has nothing political in it, with which Josephus' history seems intertwined as the most important aspect of that time period.

...Josephus wrote about John the Baptist and he was not even a messianic figure.

Josephus gave critical information about John the Baptist so that it could be reasonable assumed when John the Baptist lived and where he died...

Josephus claimed John the Baptist was imprisoned and executed in a castle in Macherus during the reign of Herod and Aretas.

dog-on · 10-07-2009, 04:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bacht

Off-topic but, why is John the Baptist ignored in the canonical epistles?

Because unlike the gospels, the epistle writers did not use Josephus as a source???

Minimalist · 10-08-2009, 05:21 PM

I've run into people who insist that the John the B reference in Josephus is a forgery, too.
I don't buy that one.

I still maintain that even the watered down TF which is the fallback position for xtians is ludicrous. If there was anything there in Book XVIII that remotely referred to some "Jesus" who was crucified by Pilate then Origen would have to be the stupidest bastard who ever lived to have failed to mention it as he tells us that he read book 18 of Antiquities and proves it by correctly referring to the JtheB reference.

renassault · 10-09-2009, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Josephus almost did not write anything.

Almost does not count, Josephus wrote about John the Baptist and he was not even a messianic figure.

Josephus gave critical information about John the Baptist so that it could be reasonable assumed when John the Baptist lived and where he died.

It certainly does count, because if John the Baptist didn't have any connection in politics, he would have been passed over, even though as Josephus, and the Gospels, admit, he was one of the most famous and celebrated people in Judea at the time.

Quote:

If you consider that AJ 20.9.1 authentic then nothing was written about Jesus called Christ except he had a brother. Nothing is known about the time Jesus called Christ lived or died.

Doesn't bring weight to the mythicist case as to why Josephus never wrote anything about him.

Quote:

Josephus claimed John the Baptist was imprisoned and executed in a castle in Macherus during the reign of Herod and Aretas.

It was a flashback, doesn't imply he claimed John the Baptist was killed in 37 AD.

Quote:

There is nothing in Josephus on Jesus called Christ except forgeries.

Your opinion, and doesn't matter in any case.

andrewcriddle · 10-10-2009, 02:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minimalist

I've run into people who insist that the John the B reference in Josephus is a forgery, too.
I don't buy that one.

I still maintain that even the watered down TF which is the fallback position for xtians is ludicrous. If there was anything there in Book XVIII that remotely referred to some "Jesus" who was crucified by Pilate then Origen would have to be the stupidest bastard who ever lived to have failed to mention it as he tells us that he read book 18 of Antiquities and proves it by correctly referring to the JtheB reference.

One possibility is that the original version of the TF was not just a cut-down version of the present text but positively hostile to Jesus .

Andrew Criddle

Roger Pearse · 10-10-2009, 03:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minimalist

I've run into people who insist that the John the B reference in Josephus is a forgery, too.
I don't buy that one.

I still maintain that even the watered down TF which is the fallback position for xtians is ludicrous. If there was anything there in Book XVIII that remotely referred to some "Jesus" who was crucified by Pilate then Origen would have to be the stupidest bastard who ever lived to have failed to mention it as he tells us that he read book 18 of Antiquities and proves it by correctly referring to the JtheB reference.

One possibility is that the original version of the TF was not just a cut-down version of the present text but positively hostile to Jesus .

I've always tended to think the text was damaged in transmission, perhaps by physical loss of portions, and "restored" badly in the exemplar of our texts.

Johnny Skeptic · 10-10-2009, 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 5874

There is nothing in Josephus on Jesus called Christ except forgeries.

Quote:

Originally Posted by renessault

Your opinion, and doesn't matter in any case.

Are you implying that any of Josephus' writings are helpful for verifying the Gospels? If so, which writings?

If Jesus performed all of the miracles that the Gospels say that he performed, how do you account for the scarcity of first century, non-biblical writings that mention the miracles?

How many firsthand, eyewitness claims of the miracles that Jesus performed are you aware of in the Gospels?

Chaucer · 10-10-2009, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Between the Enlightenment and prior to 1937 the following series of scholars examined the TF (both quotes - the major and the minor)

Now that distinction is indeed important. I'd like to see, please, where you get that all the post-Feldman names you cite are uniformly referencing both Josephus passages as a single unit? Thanks.

Chaucer

aa5874 · 10-10-2009, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by renassault

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Josephus almost did not write anything.

Almost does not count, Josephus wrote about John the Baptist and he was not even a messianic figure.

Josephus gave critical information about John the Baptist so that it could be reasonable assumed when John the Baptist lived and where he died.

It certainly does count, because if John the Baptist didn't have any connection in politics, he would have been passed over, even though as Josephus, and the Gospels, admit, he was one of the most famous and celebrated people in Judea at the time.

What are you really saying? Please review your statement. Almost does not ever count.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

If you consider that AJ 20.9.1 authentic then nothing was written about Jesus called Christ except he had a brother. Nothing is known about the time Jesus called Christ lived or died.

Quote:

Originally Posted by renassualt

Doesn't bring weight to the mythicist case as to why Josephus never wrote anything about him.

Are you implying that since Josephus gave no details about the brother of James, then the historicity of Jesus called Christ is confirmed?

You almost made sense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

There is nothing in Josephus on Jesus called Christ except forgeries.

Quote:

Originally Posted by renassualt

Your opinion, and doesn't matter in any case.

Please tell me why did you give me your opinion? It almost mattered.

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

10-08-2009, 05:21 PM	#14
Minimalist Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,808	I've run into people who insist that the John the B reference in Josephus is a forgery, too. I don't buy that one. I still maintain that even the watered down TF which is the fallback position for xtians is ludicrous. If there was anything there in Book XVIII that remotely referred to some "Jesus" who was crucified by Pilate then Origen would have to be the stupidest bastard who ever lived to have failed to mention it as he tells us that he read book 18 of Antiquities and proves it by correctly referring to the JtheB reference.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.