Dave31

Does Josephus prove a historical Jesus?

Another response to Dr. Bart Ehrman and his new book Did Jesus Exist? by Acharya S.

Duvduv

Some people just "worship" Josephus for various reasons. It makes no sense, any more than it does to worship Ibn Ishaq or Eusebius. Josephus has many problems in it, whether or not it has anything to do with interpolations.
Whoever handled Josephus forgot to give more space to Jesus himself than to the Baptist or James. My goodness, telling his readers all about the great James who happened to be the brother of another guy called the Christ who was revered as the savior......
Or the Baptist who would not even be worthy to tie the laces of the Savior.
Or the confusion about Miriam, the wife of Herod.
Or the fictitious story about Massada........
Josephus was sponsored by the Empire just as Eusebius was, and just as Ibn Ishaq was sponsored by the Caliphate. And now, a word from our *sponsor*.....

tanya

Hi Dave!

Thanks for the link, very interesting. I think you know that I am, in general, a supporter of D.Murdoch, I think she has done a very credible job of repudiating the claim of an historical Jesus.

I offer this comment, not for the purpose of denigration, but simply to highlight something, which I have observed, remains contentious, both in society at large, and especially, here on our forum.

I am referring to her sentence, below, in bold text:

Almost everyone on the forum here, Dave, disagrees with me, so, D.Murdoch will have to join a long queue!! Sheshbazzar, in particular, has written an elegant refutation of my point of view, which, however, in my opinion, is nevertheless incorrect.

You may wish to consult with his learned discourse, using the search feature, if you find this topic of interest.

First: the Greek word for "messiah", contrary to what your colleague has written, is NOT "christos". The Greek word for "messiah" is μεσιαν. In my opinion, (strongly opposed by Sheshbazzar, and most other folks on the planet earth), the Greek word, μεσιαν, as seen for example, in John 1:41, is derived from the Hebrew word, Moshiah (saviour), NOT the Hebrew word Mashiakh (anoint). I attribute this bit of confusion, to the arrival of a genuine Messiah, (as D.Murdoch has explained!!!) namely, Alexander of Macedonia--she mentioned Cyrus of Persia, same idea.

The English word, Messiah, does NOT correspond, to "anointed", in my opinion, (and no one else's), but rather to "saviour". Thus Alexander was the Messiah, NOT BECAUSE he had been deloused by pouring expensive olive oil on his head, by the throngs of happy Jews in Egypt, but because he had led his army against the Persian invaders, liberating the Jews from the detested Persians. Anointment is not restricted to military genius', it is practiced DAILY in all kinds of religious ceremonies. A true Messiah is like the 500 year flood--a devastating influx of water that destroys everything in its path, but only in rare circumstances. For people without fresh water, for weeks at a time, and no ability to bathe, pouring precious olive oil on one's head was an ultimate status symbol.

The Greek word, Χριστός, means "anointed", not saviour, and not Messiah. I would have expected Ehrman to misunderstand these words, but not D.Murdoch. Apart from this quibble, I find her essay very well done.

Dave31

The Greek word "Christos" means "anointed." What was said above is that "christos" is used "for" the word "messiah" in the Old Testament. That's correct.

Strong's g5447:

Christ = "anointed"

1) Christ was the Messiah, the Son of God

2) anointed

And it's also correct that "christos" is used in the Old Testament about 40 times.

You can see an example at Leviticus 4:5:

ὁ ἱερεὺς ὁ χριστὸς

The corresponding Hebrew to the word "christos" there is:

משיח mashiyach

The definition of משיח mashiyach (Strong's H4899) is:

1) anointed, anointed one

a) of the Messiah, Messianic prince

b) of the king of Israel

c) of the high priest of Israel

d) of Cyrus

e) of the patriarchs as anointed kings

I have no idea where the quibble is here, but it seems irrelevant to me.