Duvduv

Well, if Jacob Neusner is the be all and end all of Jewish historiography then there is nothing to discuss anyway, is there??

aa5874

Again, you are simply presuming and speculating that your source is credible. That is all.

You have utterly failed to show any corroboration for the Talmud story of R. Yochanan ben Zakkai when it is already known that the Talmud is a source of fiction and implausibilities.

semiopen

The Talmudic story appears to have the confirmation of Vespasian's promotion at virtually the same instant as Yohanan addresses him as Emperor (King).

Neusner appears neutral but thinks the only practical possibility of meeting was 68 CE, or a year before Vespasian's promotion. He also gives the possibility of meeting in Ceasaria after that, but that seems to also contradict the story.

The story just doesn't seem to be historically feasible.

To go back to Vespasian

Therefore, if the Talmud story is true, we know almost the exact day that Yohanan made his prediction. However, note that Vespasian's own army declared him emperor. It seems likely that Vespasian then would have known about the decision before it happened.

The inescapable conclusion is that the story in the Talmud with the prediction and the three wishes, etc is at least partially fictitious.

Duvduv

This discussion seems rather confusing. R. Yochanan did not appoint Vespasian as emperor. He merely predicted he would become emperor. In any case, the points of my original posting vis a vis Josephus have been totally lost in this preoccupation with the Talmud.

Duvduv

Cut it out. You are trying to establish an assumption that ipso facto anything coming out of ancient Jewish texts about Jews is false while not ascribing the same approach to your beloved Justin or other ancient texts.

semiopen

The story in the Talmud has a messenger coming in just after Yohanan made the prediction (which wasn't so much a prediction as him just calling him Emperor) and said that Vespasian was the new Emperor. That's why he got the three wishes because he made such a cool and correct prediction.

I think the confusion you feel, is the fact that you must admit to losing an argument.

Duvduv

So what? By calling him Emperor it was his prediction.
The point I was making which you choose to ignore is that unlike R. Yochanan Ben Zakkai, Josephus did not have the necessary qualifications among the Jews to even warrant any mention at all, neither has a historian, a rabbi, a priest, a general, a leader, writer or anything else. But the author of the Josephus story figured he could adopt certain tales such as those of the prediction and invent the events of Yodfata to establish a reputation for this person who the writer knew was unknown to the Jews.

aa5874

You claim is a known fallacy. I have never claimed that all ancient Jewish texts are false. Please, do not derail your own thread with your absurdities and fallacies.

You introduced the Talmud as evidence against the credibility of Josephus who himself was a Jew although it is well known the Talmud is a source of fiction and implausibility.


Please, refer to the Talmud [Gittin 56]

These events are implausible and are fiction.

Please, refer to the Talmud [Gittin 56b]

Duvduv

There is no point going over this again and again, especially since you are not interested in discussing Josephus, rather the texts attributed to someone of that name, and pretend to relate to the Talmud when you cannot even read it or its commentaries.

aa5874

I have addressed your OP. Did you not mention the Talmud [gittin 56] in your OP? Did you not claim Josephus copied events in the Talmud?

I have shown that the Talmud [gittin 56a & 56b] are sources of open blatant inventions, fiction and implausibilities.

The story about R. Yochanan ben Zakkai may have been fabricated and composed after Josephus was already dead.