PhilosopherJay

Hi Ynquirer,

Note this from Solomn Zeitlin, "The Christ Passage in Josephus," in The Jewish Quarterly Review, New Series, Volume XVIII [1928],

Josephus quote from B. J. II, 13.

I agree with Solomon Zeitlin, Josephus was a Jewish High Priest who hated people he saw as innovators in the Jewish religion. He would have hated Jesus if he existed, at least the Jesus as portrayed in the gospels.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

ynquirer

Hi PhilosopherJay,

Let’s see what we have so far. On the one hand, your assertion that Josephus implied the Jews to be such “poor, unfairly persecuted people” against all the argument of War of the Jews. On the other, Solomon Zeitlin’s assertion - on account of a single quotation - that Josephus could neither have condoned Jesus and his followers’ behavior, nor made use of it for his (Josephus’) own political ends. This reductionist, one-sided view of Josephus’ thinking is too weak to assess the man’s complex ideas on theocracy, mostly based, as those of the Christians, on the Book of Daniel.

And as regards religious innovation, perhaps Josephus thought Jesus was not an innovator, but that the Jews' hatred cornered the Christians into innovation. More important, Josephus saw Vespasian and Titus as tools in God's hands. He saw the crucified man, whether or not he was an innovator, in the same manner.

Johnny Skeptic

Spin mentioned an article about the Testimonium Flavinium at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crosstalk2/message/4869. I am far from an expert, but it seems to me that the article provides sufficient evidence that Eusebius was involved regarding interpolations.

Roger Pearse

...the man who said the Dead Sea Scrolls were a medieval forgery?

Zeitlin was a real scholar, and his objections to some of the interpretations of the Slavonic Josephus were sound. But the trouble with becoming a debunker is that these same methods to dispose of nonsense also dispose of things which are really true, and he fell into that trap.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Johnny Skeptic

Perhaps you will tell us why it is unreasonable for skeptics to try to debunk all biblical claims of supernatural events. You do have a specific, detailed method of evaluating supernatural events of antiquity, don't you? Perhaps not. I suspect that you don't, and that if you do, you will refuse to state what it is. After all, it is much easier for you to attack skeptic claims than it is for you to provide evidence.

show_no_mercy

If this is the case, then Josephus was a Christian.

Roger Pearse

This demand has nothing to do with my comment, tho.

If you have a need for knowledge in this area, I could doubtless write you some notes, but of course I would charge for this, and heavily, as my time is not endless and there is always someone who wants me to do things for them. You would do better, I think, to work out the answers for yourself.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

PhilosopherJay

Hi Roger,

Yes, I agree that debunkers can make mistakes as anyone can, indeed, as people who are bunkers (or bonkers) can occasionally get things right.

Naturally, I was not agreeing with Zeitlin on all his theories and propositions, I was simply agreeing on his observation that Josephus did not like people who brought what he considered innovations to his beloved religion.

I think it is important to note that Josephus spends some two and a half books, 30 chapters, writing about Moses in the Antiquities. Perhaps most relevant to a discussion of the TF is this statement (Ant 3:15:300):

For Josephus the essence of being a Hebrew is obedience to Moses' law. Assuming the TF to be written by him, we might ask why he did not realize that the followers of Jesus were opposed to those very laws he felt was necessary to be a Hebrew?

Later, in this paragraph, Josephus praises the honesty of the Jewish priests in the temple, the same priests whom the gospels tell us put the Christ to death:

Josephus is giving high praise to the priests of the temple for their obedience to Mosaic law. It is difficult to imagine that he would praise someone trying to undermine the authority of these same priests.

Whoever wrote the TF was possibly trying to copy the style of this paragraph and did not recognize any contradiction in having Josephus praise Jesus in the same way he praised Moses (a virtuous man used by God to do divine things).

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

Johnny Skeptic

I already have worked out some answers for myself regarding the miracles that Jesus allegedly performed, many of which I stated in a past thread at this forum at http://www.freeratio.org/showthread.php?t=270530, a thread that you were probably aware of and chose not to participate in.

Your convenient reluctance to discuss your methodogy regarding supernatural claims of antiquity is not surprising since you realize the difficulties in doing so. You apparently believe that there is no difference between evaluating a thousands of years old secular claim that a chicken crossed the road, a claim that has beening occuring every day all over the world for thousands of years, and a supernatural claim that a man walked on water, a claim for which no reasonable evidence has ever been provided, but there is a difference, and a very big difference.

Regarding the miracles that Jesus performed, the great scarcity of corroborative non-biblical, first century evidence is quite embarrassing for Christians, and it ought to be since no rational person would believe that Jesus could perform many miracles in many places right under the noses of the Roman government in Palestine, and thoughout all of Syria, and have no credible resulting non-biblical, first century corroborative evidence. If New Testament accounts of Jesus' numerous and widespread miracles are true, it is a virtual certainty that Pontius Pilate would have heard about the miracles, would have conducted investigations, would have discovered that the miracles occured, would have notified the emperor in Rome, and the stories of the miracles would have become the biggest news events in the Middle East and beyond. Now surely you do not believe that anyone else was allegedly doing anything close to the miracles that Jesus performed.

Johnny Skeptic

Does that include if Eusebius had a part in interpolations, as is claimed in an article at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crosstalk2/message/4869 that spin mentioned? Obviously, interpolations written hundreds of years after the supposed facts are not testimonies from Josephus, which greatly reduces the already very scare non-bibilical, first century evidence that Jesus performed miracles.

Since you are guessing and speculating, I will guess and speculate that perhaps the writers of Matthew and Luke copied extensively from Mark without the availability of first hand or second hand evidence, and wrote their evidence over 50 years after the events.