bacht

Would there have been any reason for Rabbinic Judaism to want to deny the existence of late 2nd temple Essenes? Was there something embarassing or offensive about these ascetics to later Jewish orthodoxy?

Clivedurdle

More likely that they were wiped out in Jewish Wars and forgotten about. But yes they would have ben seen as nutters,

maryhelena

Was Josephus a historical person?

What proof is there that would establish beyond reasonable doubt that Josephus was a historical person?

I ask this question simply because the more I think about the connection between Josephus and the gospels - and the Essenes, my mental antenna starts to pick up some odd signals.....The following material outlines my present thinking on this issue.

Josephus has long been used as a historical reference to a historical Jesus. Although the TF has been discredited - at least open to question. (Neil Godfrey’ website being a good source here..) the passage regarding Jesus, brother of James, is still problematic. My point here is how much the historical Jesus position - hence much of Christian history - has relied upon Josephus as historical proof.

The history that Josephus wrote regarding the Jewish war against the Romans has been challenged - by Justus, whose history is now lost. (Justus was at one time a secretary to Agrippa 11 but later dismissed as being unreliable....)

Modern day historians also question the reliability of Josephus. One account of Josephus being of particular interest:

Rachel Elior’ position regarding Josephus and the Essenes, that Josephus invented them, also questions the reliability of Josephus. When Josephus places his Essene prophets in relationship to 70 year time frames, and does so within an overall time frame of 170 years - placing his own prophecy regarding Vespasian at the end of such a time frame..- then questions of intent raise their head.

Josephus seems to be slotted into a prophetic or symbolic time frame. Josephus’ birth in 37 CE is 70 years from where he places his Essene prophet, Menahem, in 34/33 BC. (i.e. Menahem’ 30 year prophecy regarding Herod the Great). Josephus’ own prophecy after the siege of Jotapata in 67 CE being 70 years from the death of Herod the Great and 100 years from Menahem’ prophecy in 33/34 BC. Either Josephus was the historical man of the moment - or else he was part of a story line.... (70 x 2 +30, or 100 +70).

Josephus predicts that Vespasian would be the Roman ruler - and hence was rewarded by Vespasian when his prophecy was fulfilled - gaining lifelong patronage, Roman citizenship and a pension. A Jewish prophet honoured by the Romans. A traitor to his own people who sought to kill him - and did not succeed - given lifelong protection by the Romans.....Elements of a tall story or an actual historical event?

Is there any other record of a Jewish prophet who became a traitor? Jeremiah, although offered a trip and protection in Babylon, choose to stay put in the land of Israel.

It has been observed that the gospel of Luke has drawn on the writings of Josephus; the crucifixion of the three friends of Josephus; the census of Quirinius. Luke has Jesus at 12, Josephus is 14, when the learned men of the day are amazed at their knowledge. Jesus was about 30 years old at his baptism. Josephus was 30 years old at the time he gave his prophecy regarding Vespasian, in 67 CE.

Luke places the birth of Jesus in 6 CE - the end of a 70 year period from 63 BC when Pompey entered the Holy of Holies of the Jerusalem Temple. Josephus places his Essene prophet, Simon, in 6 CE. The birth date for Josephus in 37 CE is placed 100 years from the events of 63 BC.
Luke places the gospel’ mythological Jesus at the end of a 70 year period; a period of time running from the 40 BC rule of Lysanias of Abilene to the 15th year of Tiberius in 29 CE. (a mythicist position has no need to look for two periods of rule by Lysanias...) Josephus uses 70 year time periods in which he places his Esssene prophets.

Jesus was betrayed, crucified and resurrected around 33 CE, at which time he is around 33 years of age. (the usual date given for his death). Josephus is 33 years of age in 70 CE at the fall of Jerusalem, goes to Rome and becomes Flavius Josephus. Pure coincidence - or a replay of a 33 year story line in which prophecy and numbers play a part?

Luke places the birth of Jesus in 6 CE - 23 years prior to the 15th year of Tiberius in 29 CE. Josephus is born in the 23rd year of Tiberius in 37 CE.
One could simply accept all this on face value, that Josephus was indeed a historical person; that the gospel story just happens to reflect elements from the life and writings of Josephus - or that the life story of Josephus has gospel elements or parallels. Pure coincidence - or actual correspondence......?

In that controversial passage in Antiquities ( book 20, ch.9, par.1) Josephus has placed the stoning of James, the brother of Jesus who is called Christ, during the short rule of the Roman Governor Lucceius Albinus, 62/64 CE - 100 years from the 37 BC siege of Jerusalem by Herod the Great - with its notorious slaughter of the innocents.

Luke dates Paul with the proconsul Gallio, around 51-53 CE. Paul’s death, in Rome, is given (Wikipedia) as between 60-65 CE - which would link this event to a 170 year frame from 104 BC and the prophecy of the Judas the Essene regarding the death of Antigonus.

Was Josephus simply a source of information for Luke? Or was the story of Josephus a piece of historical fiction? A piece of historical fiction that could be seen as a counterpart to the gospel’ mythological Jesus: Not one messiah, but two. The spiritual son of god, the mythological Jesus - and the Jewish, non-historical, end time prophet/priest - the Jewish prophet who betrayed his own people.

The gospel writers, whoever they were, used pen names, a pseudonym. First on the list of suspects of someone writing under the name of Josephus would be Agrippa 11, and his sister Berenice. Josephus reports that Agrippa 11 sanctioned his work. It is believed that Agrippa 11 died before Josephus - but, by any account, no more writings by Josephus after 93/94 CE. After the fall of Jerusalem, Agrippa 11 went to live in Rome - and his sister, Berenice, lived there on and off (her affair with Titus becoming an issue....). Agrippa 11 died childless, last of the Herodian rulers. There seems to be no record of what happened to Berenice in her later years. (she was at one time married to a nephew of Philo).

The writings of Josephus puts Agrippa 11 at the siege of Gamla - a claimed historical event that seems to have no evidence re finding human remains. Whatever the role of Agrippa 11 in the Roman/Jewish war, if not an eye witness himself, he most probably had first hand information. Hence, his role in the writings of Josephus seems a high probability - not just as advisor or approver - but as a more fundamental component in the construction of those writings. Certainly, it was Agrippa 11 that had the wherewithal, in Rome, to insure that the history of the Roman/Jewish war was going to be a history that met with his approval. Why not write a history of the Jewish people under his own name? He was not in favour with the Jews, having been expelled from Jerusalem in 66 CE. And of course, Jewish history, leading up to 70 CE, needed to have, in a repeat of 586 BC, a Jewish prophet at its center.

A Herodian behind the writing of a history of the Jewish people? Agrippa was a Herodian through his great grandfather, Herod the Great - but also a Hasmonean through Mariamne the Hasmonean, second wife of Herod the Great - the great grandmother of Agrippa 11. (a Hasmonean bloodline accredited likewise to Josephus,). Josephus finishes/publishes his history in 93 CE – at which time he says he is 56 years old. Interestingly, apart from this announcement indicating a date for his birth, it is also a significant date for Herod Agrippa 11. 93 CE is 100 years from the murder of his grandfather Aristobulus IV in 7 BC.

(Herod the Great had his son, Aristobulus, murdered in 7 BC. 40 years later, in 33 CE, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of god, was, likewise, executed.....)

Whatever the actual ‘truth’ behind the story line of Josephus and the gospel Jesus, the fact that both of them have been placed, have been slotted in, to either OT prophecy or number symbolism, should alert one to the possibility that things are not as obvious as they might seem.

A mythological Jesus is fitted into OT prophecy - and a non-historical Josephus fitted into a number symbolism that has its roots in the Pythagorean, mythical, Essenes.

Footnote:

mountainman

Its integrity is problematic because it is most likely simply another late interpolation, or margin gloss incorporated into the text by the pious christian preservers. Both the major and the minor testimonies to Jesus in Josephus have been suspected as forgeries since the enlightenment, over three centuries ago.

rlogan

How do you leap from Josephus not being as reliable as you would wish to Josephus not existing at all?

He was commanding General of Jerusalem forces during the seige. A prolific writer, an enormous amount of contemporary confirmation. He interacted with more than one Emperor - its beyond question he existed.

maryhelena

My use of the word 'problematic', in my post regarding the James passage in Josephus, was purely to acknowledge that this particular passage is generally regarded as being more authentic than an interpolation.

From Neil Godfrey' webpage:

Being a mythicist myself, I'm certainly not trying to use this passage as somehow indicating a historical Jesus.....

maryhelena

How did I 'leap' from an unreliable Josephus to an unhistorical Josephus?
Well, I did try and outline my reasoning in the above post......

The historical existence of Josephus being something 'beyond question'??
Why should Josephus be granted some sort of sacred ground?

maryhelena

http://jwest.wordpress.com/2009/04/2...w-controversy/


New article in The Jerusalem Post re Rachel Elior and the Essenes.

The article is in three PDF files on Jim West's website. Although it seems to contain nothing that Elior has not said previously, it does indicate that her viewpoint continues to get publicity....

Toto

links to further debate

Elior writes that Philo invented the Essenes, and Josephus copied him. For the full argument, one must read her book, but she reemphasizes that no Hebrew or Aramaic source refers to a communistic community of celibate men; besides, the proposal that the Essenes were referred to as "Osei-haTorah" cannot withstand scruntiny. Geza Vermes, Stephenson Gorenson, and JFHobbins reply. The claim is made that John the Baptist is proof that there were ascetic, celibate Jews.

Ancient Hebrew Poetry blog notes:

maryhelena

An opportunity in disguise? So, in order to debunk Rachel Elior' debunking of the assumption that the Dead Seas Scrolls were the work of the Essenes - one needs to prove that early Judaism of the relevant period included groups that practiced 'ascetic ideals'.....i.e. one needs to prove that thousands of people lived under common ownership and were an all male celibate community......Meanwhile, ............it looks like Rachel Elior has got the proponents of the Dead Sea Scrolls = Essenes with their backs to the wall.

And, of course, its not just the Dead Sea Scroll academics that have problems ....If Rachel Elior' argument does hold the day - the implications for Christianaity are huge. And no, not the simple seperation of the Essenes from the Dead Sea Scrolls - its the fallout that would question the historical reliability of Josephus that could well be disasterous for Christianity. For if Josephus can be found 'guilty' of compromising his history with his imaginary historical Essenes - compromising history with prophetic interpretations or imaginations - then his references to Jesus and his brother James need also to be viewed from a non-historical perspective. And John the Baptist? Another invention by Josephus?

The real issue is not that Josephus has let his prophetic intepretations run alongside his recording of histoical events - the real issue is that Josephus has not been taken to be what his own words clearly state he was. It is not Josephus who has failed us - it is us who have failed to take the full measure of the man. Perhaps what is needed is something along the lines of The Jesus Project - The Josephus Project.