Duvduv

It would appear that this all assumes unproven assertions that someone named Josephus actually wrote the book or even parts thereof. And this is a great leap of faith.

spin

Which of course assumes the unproven assertion that someone named Duvduv actually wrote the post I'm responding to or even parts thereof.... oh gosh. Whether the person who wrote the information is called Josephus or Duvduv is ultimately inconsequential. The information was, in fact, written. If you must, call him him "Jewish apologist historian X". You could do the same for Herodotus as well, if you were so inclined: call him "Greek antiquarian P". You still have to confront the content of the work, which involves providing a context for what is being analyzed. That the writer is commenting on the actions of a specific Jewish high priest, who in himself doesn't stir any notions of ulterior motivation, doesn't point to any particular tendency which would call into question the ostensible context. This suggests that we treat the passage functionally for what it says. Of course, unless you have evidence to indicate that we shouldn't do so.

tanya

That is not his point.

His point, if I have correctly understood him, is that we have no evidence to convince us that ANY person living at the end of the first century, wrote the two texts we associate with "Josephus". In other words, it seems more likely that someone, of any name, wrote these texts in the second, or third century.

In Catch 22 we have an excellent description of wartime Italy, including details about aircraft, commerce, and military regulations, but, those details do not support a theory that the novel itself was written in 1944.

spin

You have no criterion for "likely". It's just the usual bullshit factor we see from the non-skeptical brigade.

Of course, Heller was writing from personal experience, having served in a bomber stationed in Italy. Egg. Face. Better tangent next time, huh?

BJ provides knowledge of the time, for example regarding the siege of Masada and Roman encampments, knowledge that loses currency through later events.

aa5874

There is no evidence that Antiquities 20.9.1 refers to Jesus of Nazareth.

There is no evidence that Josephus could not have written the Greek word "Χριστοῦ" in the 1st century. It can mean "the anointed".

The very same word "Χριστοῦ" meaning "anointed", is found many times in the Septuagint which predates Josephus by hundreds of years..

Why could not Josephus write the Greek word for the anointed if Jesus the high priest the Son of Damneus was called "the anointed"???

Jesus the brother of James certainly was NOT a Messianic ruler of Jews in the 1st century. No stories about Jesus Christ have been found and dated to the 1st century and before the writings of Josephus.

Examine the Greek Septuagint.

1 Samuel/1 Kings. 26.1 Samuel/1 Kings 26

Duvduv

Yes, Tanya. You are correct.
There is no proof that he existed or that the text was written by someone in the first century, which makes discussion about the interpolations rather moot.

tanya

Shakespeare, Henry V

Your suggestion is not invalid, (one can deduce date of authorship, based on details embedded within the text), but I find the argument unpersuasive. Do the details revealed in Iliad convince you that Homer lived in Troy? Did he know Agamemnon personally? How could Homer have described with such detail, the encampments of the Greek army, laying seige to Troy, if he had not been an eyewitness?

not buying it, not today, not tomorrow. Your bj, "Josephus", to the rest of us, is a fraud, top to bottom, in my opinion.

spin

Another crap analogy. We still don't know what Schliemann's excavation was. However, Josephus's description of the Masada episode was thought to have been fanciful until the site and the area around it were excavated. You need to check things out before you switch into auto-reject.

I'm not asking you to buy anything. My only hope is that you may eventually realize that your desires are not evidence.

angelo

Even if Josephus was the author, he was just reporting hearsay nothing more. It may prove at most that a small cult [of xtians if you like] were established by the end of the century.
Another much more closer to the time, in fact a contemporary of Jesus is completely silent on the matter. I speak of Philo of Alexandria.

Sheshbazzar

Nobody that ever met and personally knew 'Jebus of Nazareth', if there ever was any such person, ever wrote anything about it. Or if they did it has never been found.

Not that there aren't plenty of latter fabricated accounts. Just like today, when it comes to 'witnessing' for their Gob myth. Christ-insanity has always been the domain of inveterate liars and false witnesses.
This I know from long experience, having endured a lifetime of the lying and manipulative mumbo jumbo horse shit 'testimonies' of the sleaze-bag christers among my own family and circle of personal acquaintances.
They are taught this horse shit, they believe and repeat the horse shit they have heard, and whenever that isn't enough to persuade, having became trained liars for Jebus, and pressured by their mentors to 'testify', they will make up additional horse shit. Nothing new under the sun.




.