Freethought & Rationalism Archive

MrMacSon · 06-11-2013, 03:45 PM

Josephus's writings on "Jesus son of Ananias: A Voice from the East" - in his War 6.5.3 (288-309) - has parallels with some passages in the synoptic gospel attributed to Matthew

Quote:

" ... one wonders if the tales of the two Jesuses became intertwined by their tellers, with elements of one story creeping into the narrative of the other. For this hypothesis one notes several parallels.

Woe to the people - Matt. 23 "Woe to you, scribes and pharisees!" (The Greek word translated as "woe" is "aiai" in Josephus, "ouai" in Matthew.)
Prediction of the Temple Destruction - Matt. 24:2, which is associated with the "woes".
The leaders of Jerusalem bring the doomsayer to the Roman governor - Matt. 27:2. As an aside -- Whiston mistranslates this section to refer to "our rulers," not "the rulers." Readers who have studied my article on Josephus' account of Jesus will recognize this important point. Josephus does not use the first person here, despite Whiston (why did he do this?); see rather the Loeb edition for the Greek "hoi archontes" and Thackeray's correct translation.
The governor interrogates him, but the accused says nothing to defend himself. (Matt. 27:13-14)
The accusation as unclear in Josephus' story as in the New Testament. The grounds here are simply said to be " supernatural impulse." What crime is that for the leaders?"

http://www.josephus.org/causeofDestruct.htm#voice

What is the significance of this?

Duvduv · 06-11-2013, 05:24 PM

A connection would stand to reason since there is no evidence that the writings of Josephus son of Mattathias existed among the Jews as opposed to........(you guess it).....the Church.....

Toto · 06-11-2013, 05:32 PM

A number of people have noticed these parallels. Ted Weedon gave a talk to the Jesus Seminar about it - you can find some previous threads in the archives.

Toto · 06-11-2013, 05:36 PM

See this post on XTalk2 for a summary of Weedon's theories:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crosstalk2/message/12940

maryhelena · 06-11-2013, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

See this post on XTalk2 for a summary of Weedon's theories:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crosstalk2/message/12940

Thanks for that link, Toto.

I've no time right now to get into a discussion re this link, and the OP - will take a rain-check......

(I've got a big move underway - and my mind is on a hundred and one other matters....)

ApostateAbe · 06-11-2013, 08:53 PM

I think "parallels" are very often more convincing than they should be, which may explain the popularity of that style of argument among conspiracy theorists and mystics (not that this argument is that). It is easy to neglect the points that there are a large set of points in the Bible, there are a large set of points in the writings of Josephus, they are both narratives of a common society, and some things are likely to match between them even with no other connection. Those points don't necessarily make an argument from parallels a bad argument, but they do raise the bar for the strength of the parallels. More specifics and more unlikelihood in each pair of parallels makes for greater strength.

aa5874 · 06-11-2013, 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

I think "parallels" are very often more convincing than they should be, which may explain the popularity of that style of argument among conspiracy theorists and mystics (not that this argument is that). It is easy to neglect the points that there are a large set of points in the Bible, there are a large set of points in the writings of Josephus, they are both narratives of a common society, and some things are likely to match between them even with no other connection. Those points don't necessarily make an argument from parallels a bad argument, but they do raise the bar for the strength of the parallels. More specifics and more unlikelihood in each pair of parallels makes for greater strength.

You yourself use parallels for your Historical Jesus. You actively claim there are parallels of the Jesus cult and other cults leaders.

All of a sudden, you now have problems with parallels in Josephus.

Again, you are promoting double standards.

HJers must rely on parallels because there is no evidence from antiquity for HJ of Nazareth.

There are many events in the works of Josephus that were used in the NT to fabricate the Jesus story.

Galatians 1.19 was lifted from Antiquities of the Jews 20.9.1 where some character called James had a brother called Jesus.

The author of Galatians 1.19 claimed the Lord Jesus Christ had a brother who was James an Apostle.

No such Apostle James can be found in ALL the Canonised Gospels and Apologetic sources like Papias and Jerome.

Toto · 06-12-2013, 12:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

I think "parallels" are very often more convincing than they should be, which may explain the popularity of that style of argument among conspiracy theorists and mystics (not that this argument is that). It is easy to neglect the points that there are a large set of points in the Bible, there are a large set of points in the writings of Josephus, they are both narratives of a common society, and some things are likely to match between them even with no other connection. Those points don't necessarily make an argument from parallels a bad argument, but they do raise the bar for the strength of the parallels. More specifics and more unlikelihood in each pair of parallels makes for greater strength.

Weeden is not a mythicist or a conspiracy theorist. He is a highly credentialed academic.

ApostateAbe · 06-12-2013, 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

I think "parallels" are very often more convincing than they should be, which may explain the popularity of that style of argument among conspiracy theorists and mystics (not that this argument is that). It is easy to neglect the points that there are a large set of points in the Bible, there are a large set of points in the writings of Josephus, they are both narratives of a common society, and some things are likely to match between them even with no other connection. Those points don't necessarily make an argument from parallels a bad argument, but they do raise the bar for the strength of the parallels. More specifics and more unlikelihood in each pair of parallels makes for greater strength.

Weeden is not a mythicist or a conspiracy theorist. He is a highly credentialed academic.

Right. Didn't say he was anything, not even a mystic, and it actually does not make a difference what he is or isn't. I think it is best to interpret my statements literally, not metaphorically.

MrMacSon · 06-12-2013, 03:26 AM

ergh, title should be 'Is some of the NT based on some writings of Josephus?'

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-11-2013, 05:24 PM	#2
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	A connection would stand to reason since there is no evidence that the writings of Josephus son of Mattathias existed among the Jews as opposed to........(you guess it).....the Church.....

06-11-2013, 05:32 PM	#3
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	A number of people have noticed these parallels. Ted Weedon gave a talk to the Jesus Seminar about it - you can find some previous threads in the archives.

06-11-2013, 05:36 PM	#4
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	See this post on XTalk2 for a summary of Weedon's theories: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crosstalk2/message/12940

06-11-2013, 08:53 PM	#6
ApostateAbe Contributor Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: MT Posts: 10,656	I think "parallels" are very often more convincing than they should be, which may explain the popularity of that style of argument among conspiracy theorists and mystics (not that this argument is that). It is easy to neglect the points that there are a large set of points in the Bible, there are a large set of points in the writings of Josephus, they are both narratives of a common society, and some things are likely to match between them even with no other connection. Those points don't necessarily make an argument from parallels a bad argument, but they do raise the bar for the strength of the parallels. More specifics and more unlikelihood in each pair of parallels makes for greater strength.

06-12-2013, 03:26 AM	#10
MrMacSon Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: South Pacific Posts: 559	ergh, title should be 'Is some of the NT based on some writings of Josephus?'

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.