aa5874

Again, why don't you read the abundance of evidence from antiquity? The answers are practically in front of your nose.

It was Non-Jewish people that destroyed their Temple so it must be blatantly obvious that the destruction of the Temple had some major significant interest to Non-Jews.

This is so basic.

It is most disturbing to me that you seem not to understand that the Romans were Gentiles.

TedM

The only significance to the Gentiles would have been that it was competition to their own beliefs and thus needed to be destroyed by THEM. There was no need to appeal to Jewish beliefs/prophecies to find an explanation. The reason it was destroyed was because they wanted to in order to show their dominance of the Jews. There is no need to create an entire religion to explain it! Do you really believe that Gentiles had to created a religion to explain why they destroyed the Jewish Temple!? It makes little sense. That's why your theory will never gain any traction. This is basic.


As for what the actual Jews thought was the reason for the destruction, we have the record of Jerome, from Josephus:

This is embarrassing to Christians to some extent because it doesn't even mention the prophecy of destruction by Jesus! There is no need to appeal to 'invention'. It makes sense, unlike your theory, but note that it has nothing to do with an invented Gentile need to explain their own behavior!

aa5874

You don't seem to know what you are talking about. Your presumptions are completely unsubstantiated.

It was Gentiles that used the Septuagint to fabricate their stories of Jesus. You Do not understand that Christians were Gentiles.

It was Gentiles that BOLTED the OT to the NT.

There is NO Jew that is known as a Christian of the Jesus cult in antiquity by non-apologetic sources.

This is a partial list of the Gentiles that used the Septuagint when referring to the story of Jesus or the Fall of the Temple.

Ignatius, Aristides, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Clement of Rome, Irenaeus, Origen, Celsus, Arnobius, Hippolytus, Tertullian, Eusebius, Chrysostom, Augustine of Hippo, Ephraim the Syrian, Optatus, Jerome, Severus and other Gentiles.

You have exposed your lack of knowledge of the writings of Josephus. Your passage is NOWHERE in the writings of Josephus.

You have identified a passage that was FALSELY attributed to Josephus.

We know what Josephus wrote about the reason for the Fall of the Temple.

Please read "Wars of the Jews" 6.5.4 The Jews had the REASON written in the Sacred Oracles that the city and the Temple would be taken if their Temple was made four-square.

Josephus wrote nothing of the blasphemous stories of Jesus of Nazareth or James the son of Alphaeus.

You really have no idea what you are talking about. You should first read the works of Josephus to find out what he wrote instead of appealing to false attribution.

aa5874

Philo is not talking about Jesus of Nazareth but Joshua Son of Jehozadak who supposedly DIED long before Philo.

You cannot just claim any person named Joshua is Jesus. That is completely unacceptable.

There were many persons called Jesus in antiquity so it is IMPERATIVE that you identify EXACTLY which Jesus you refer to.

Joshua the Son of Jehozadak the high Priest is NOT the Logos of Nazareth, God the Creator.

Jesus of Nazareth created heaven and earth, was Equal to God and resurrected. Please read the Pauline Corpus.

J-D

So exactly which Jesus are you referring to?

TedM

Your response is totally inadequate. And you are making wrong assumptions about what I know, as you always do, aa. I know that Gentile Christians wrote about Christianity. But, that doesn't help your case in the slightest. As to my argument -- try again. I'll help:

Gentiles had no good reason to concoct a story to explain to themselves or the Jews why the Gentiles destroyed their temple. Do you need to concoct a religion to explain why you cross the street? You do it for reasons that you already know. In the same way, Gentiles destroyed the temple for obvious reasons that they knew.


I know that it may or may not have been there. Who would have motivation to make it up? If it was Jewish Christians who venerated James, doesn't that destroy your argument?



This is Josephus' take on it. You haven't shown that the Jews accepted it. In any case, if you persist in saying that Gentiles needed to explain to Jews why they destroyed their Temple (laughable), then wouldn't it have been a hell of a lot easier to just point to this above quote, instead of creating dozens and dozens of letters in order to concoct an entirely new religion based on a Jewish Messiah when there is no good motivation to even do so in the first place? It's mind-boggling to me that anyone can take such an idea seriously.

aa5874

Day after day you just make wild presumptions without a shred of support from antiquity.

Again, Gentiles used the Septuagint to concoct a story about a character called Jesus the Messiah and Son of God.

We know EXACTLY which passages the Gentiles used. It is documented in the Codices and writings of the Jesus cult.

They used passages from the book of Daniel, Isaiah, Zechariah, Jeremiah, Micah, Genesis, Jonah, Ezekiel, Exodus, Kings, Job, Psalms, Proverbs and other books.

ALL the known writers of the Jesus cult outside the Canon were Gentiles at least up to the 4th century.


You have exposed your own fallacy. In your previous post you claimed, ["As for what the actual Jews thought was the reason for the destruction, we have the record of Jerome, from Josephus......

You have now established that you really did not know what you were talking about.

You actually identified a passage FALSELY attributed to Josephus concocted by a Gentile called Jerome and now openly contradict yourself.

Please, what absurdities you post. You presented a passage that was FALSELY attributed to Josephus by a Gentile called Jerome and now refuse to accept the words of Josephus a JEW that the JEWS had it WRITTEN in their ORACLES that the Temple and the city would be taken if it was made four square.

TedM

aa, I get angry at your pigheadedness and false accusations, so I'll leave it at this:

Yes, the Gentiles supported their claims with OT scriptures. That isn't the same as concocting. You claim they concocted in order to explain WHY the Temple was destroyed. You seem to equate 'claims' with 'concoctions' but can't answer the motivation question with anything even resembling an intelligent answer.


SO you say. You can't prove that at all. I am reminded of the phrase 'hardness of heart' every time I read your bs.

Grog

The references to James being the brother of Jesus found in Josephus makes no sense. In context, we can see that the "brother of Jesus" in this passage is the brother of Jesus ben Damneus. Carrier's argument against this being authentic to Josephus is persuasive. He argues that this interpolation was an accidental inclusion of a scribal notation. Note for one thing that this reference depends on the authenticity of Josephus referring earlier to Jesus as "the Christ" or "Messiah," which is almost universally rejected, even by those who wish to salvage a partial authentic reference to Jesus in Book 18.

TedM

You are grossly mis-informed. The scholars almost universally believe Josephus wrote a passage about Jesus, including some very striking and positive information, although with some words or a few sentences added/modified. THIS is the view of scholars, and not amateur skeptics. The James phrase is even moreso believed by scholars to be authentic.

The skeptical websites would have people believe the opposite. It's a lie. If you want to get a realistic perspective as to what the scholarly viewpoint is, take a look at what wiki says here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

Have you read Carrier's argument? I couldn't get it because it isn't available on the web. There are significant problems with the Jesus ben Damneus argument, just as there are with the 'TF is wholly interpolated' argument.

I'm not inclined to discuss them now, but I wanted to correct your mis-perception.