Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aa5874 · 08-27-2013, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grog

For the purposes of aa's argument it doesn't really matter if Josephus was strictly accurate on this count. What matters is whether or not Josephus interprets events in such a way that he can state that Vespasian was the predicted messiah and, in fact, he does. Again, we have a case that if there had been a significant movement worshiping a would-be messiah in the 60's, a period of time in which Josephus was intensely interested, we would expect him to make mention of it. After all, Josephus claims to have thoroughly investigated the various branches of Judaism at the time. Where we expect to find clear evidence, we find likely forgeries. Everywhere we look for something concrete that establishes the fact that Jesus existed in the early first century, we find only questionable and paradoxical evidence.

It is also of great significance that Josephus mentioned a 'multitude' of characters called Jesus yet failed to mention a Jesus of Nazareth who was supposedly the resurrected Messianic ruler and Saviour of the Jews.

Paul the Jew and former Pharisee supposedly preached and documented his teachings about the crucified and resurrected Jesus the Christ, God's Son and the seed of David in Rome, Corinth, Ephesus, Galatia, Philippi, Collosse, and Thessalonica.

There should have been stories propagated orally and in writing by Jews that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messianic ruler of the Roman Empire and the habitable earth by c 75 CE when Wars of the Jews was composed.

Based on the Jesus cult writers the Gospels and Epistles should have been composed long before c 75 CE.

Jesus of Nazareth and his followers should have been well known in the Roman Empire by c 75 CE because it is claimed that there were Thousands of Jewish Jesus cult Believes and that Nero executed Peter, the supposed first Bishop of Rome and Paul who supposedly evangelised the Roman Empire.

Josephus and the Jews fought against the Romans expecting a Jewish Messianic ruler would emerge from among them---Not just a ruler of the Jews but of the WHOLE habitable earth.

By about 33-37 CE, Jesus the resurrected Messianic ruler should already have been worshiped as the Son of God by Jews in the NT but in "Wars of the Jews" the Messianic ruler was believed to be on EARTH c 66-70 CE but was unknown who he was.

Josephus "Wars of the Jews" severely contradicts the NT Canon stories of Jesus.

It is documented and corroborated that the Jews believed the Predicted Jewish Messianic ruler was alive up to c 66-70 CE.

It is documented that the JEWS actually fought AGAINST the Romans c 66-70 CE because of the very Belief that their Jewish Messianic ruler would rule the whole habitable earth at that time.

aa5874 · 08-27-2013, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grog

Sure, Josephus could be lying, making things up. It seems that he, at least, considered, or wanted to be seen as considering,Vespasian to be the messiah.

I don't share aa's faith that this is a smoking gun.

I am extremely happy that you admit Josephus could be lying but on the other hand you seem quite reluctant to admit the Pauline Corpus could be a Pack of Lies or fallacies.

We will see that Josephus' claims about the Predicted Jewish Messianic ruler at the time of the War of the Jews [c 66-70 CE] IS CORROBORATED by multiple contemporary writers.

We will also see that the Pauline Corpus claims about Jesus, God's own Son made of a woman of the seed of David, the resurrected Messianic ruler and Savior is NOT, NOT corroborated at all by non-apologetics.

It is FAR MORE PROBABLE that the Pauline Corpus is a pack of lies or monstrous fables of a resurrected Jesus than Josephus.

Josephus himself FOUGHT AGANST the ROMANS expecting a Jewish Messianic ruler based on Hebrew Scripture c 66-70 CE.

The Jewish Messianic ruler was believed to be ON EARTH and still on EARTH up to c 66-70 CE

semiopen · 08-28-2013, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

I am sorry but I don't normally read these things but this jumped out at me:

Quote:

It was ESTABLISHED in Hebrew Scripture by Jews that the Messianic ruler would appear c 66-70 CE.

Pray tell where this document can be FOUND.

As usual, the accursed Jewish Yoshke lovers come to our rescue.

Josephus on the Messiah Concept

Quote:

What oracle from the Hebrew Bible did Josephus likely mean? N.T. Wright thinks it was Daniel 2, in which Daniel explains a vision of four successive empires and then a fifth kingdom which breaks all others “in those days,” a kingdom which will never end (Wright, The New Testament and the People of God, pg. 304). In another passage (Antiquities 10.203-210), Josephus alters the vision of Daniel to hide the fact that it might refer to Rome being destroyed. He points out that iron is stronger than gold, silver, or bronze (a compliment to Rome) and says he will not bother to interpret the meaning of the stone that breaks all the kingdoms since that deals with the future and not the present.

spin · 08-28-2013, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grog

I don't share aa's faith that this is a smoking gun.

How about smoking gums?

stephan huller · 08-28-2013, 04:00 PM

Quote:

What oracle from the Hebrew Bible did Josephus likely mean? N.T. Wright thinks it was Daniel 2, in which Daniel explains a vision of four successive empires and then a fifth kingdom which breaks all others “in those days,” a kingdom which will never end (Wright, The New Testament and the People of God, pg. 304). In another passage (Antiquities 10.203-210), Josephus alters the vision of Daniel to hide the fact that it might refer to Rome being destroyed. He points out that iron is stronger than gold, silver, or bronze (a compliment to Rome) and says he will not bother to interpret the meaning of the stone that breaks all the kingdoms since that deals with the future and not the present.

I am sure aa meant Daniel 9:24 - 27. But my point is still the same. The 'Bible' doesn't 'say' that 'the Messianic ruler would appear c 66-70 CE.' This is all interpretation. There are Christians today who say that 'the Bible foretells' this or that. There are no references to the messiah outside of Daniel and even then the meaning is debatable.

aa5874 · 08-28-2013, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

I am sure aa meant Daniel 9:24 - 27. But my point is still the same. The 'Bible' doesn't 'say' that 'the Messianic ruler would appear c 66-70 CE.' This is all interpretation. There are Christians today who say that 'the Bible foretells' this or that. There are no references to the messiah outside of Daniel and even then the meaning is debatable.

Josephus tell us of the interpretation of the Jews up to c 66-70 CE.

Tacitus CORROBORATED the very same claim by Josephus.

Josephus a Jew himself was a WITNESS of the interpretation and actively FOUGHT AGAINST the Romans expecting a Jewish Messianic ruler of the whole HABITABLE EARTH.

Josephus' Wars of the Jews

Quote:

But now, what did the most elevate them in undertaking this war, was an ambiguous oracle that was also found in their sacred writings, how," about that time, one from their country should become governor of the habitable earth."

The Jews took this prediction to belong to themselves in particular, and many of the wise men were thereby deceived in their determination.

Tacitus corroborates the INTERPRETATION by Jews that a Jewish Messianic ruler would emerge around the time of the War of the Jews c 66-70 CE.

Tacitus' Histories 5

Quote:

Some few put a fearful meaning on these events, but in most there was a firm persuasion, that in the ancient records of their priests was contained a prediction of how at this very time the East was to grow powerful, and rulers, coming from Judaea, were to acquire universal empire.

These mysterious prophecies had pointed to Vespasian and Titus, but the common people, with the usual blindness of ambition, had interpreted these mighty destinies of themselves, and could not be brought even by disasters to believe the truth.

There was NO known interpretation by Jews of a Messianic ruler called Jesus of Nazareth, or Jesus the Logos and Creator, or Jesus the resurrected Messianic ruler, Son of God and Savior, or the heavenly crucified Jesus c 1-33 CE

Jesus of Nazareth the resurrected Messianic ruler, Savior, Son of God, the Logos and God Creator was fabricated AFTER the writings of Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius.

semiopen · 08-29-2013, 05:34 AM

Prophecy_of_Seventy_Weeks

The ancient nut cases who were looking at this probably were still tied down to the 490 year notion. So to have it end with Vespasian in 66-70 CE it had to start in 420 BCE or so.

Quote:

The discovery in 1907 among the Elephantine papyri of the “Passover letter”[41] provided the basis for an alternative 490-year timeline beginning with the Passover of 418 BC and ending with the fall of Masada to the Romans in 73 CE. The observance of Passover may have been in part, commanded by Darius II to commemorate the rebuilding of the walls of Jerusalem.[42]

Unfortunately they didn't know about the Passover letter.

It's possible that they were using the wacky Jewish dates for the fall of Jerusalem to Babylon...

http://www.chabad.org/library/articl...rst-Temple.htm

Quote:

In 434 BCE, the Kingdom of Judah tried to form an alliance with Egypt.

Quote:

Thirty months later, in the month of Tammuz, after a long siege during which hunger and epidemics ravaged the city, the city walls were breached.

I've posted this before, and it looks like 432 - maybe Chabad doesn't like to print such a sad year even if it is a totally historically absurd one. Still more like 500 some years.

However if they had the tradition of the 70 year exile (which seems reasonable) the 420 year temple is also reasonable to derive (assuming one is not spending countless hours watching football).

420 years is the traditional length of the first temple's existence.

Using this logic however, one would also expect a widespread expectation that the second temple was going to fall. This might help explain Yoshke's prophecy about the temple's destruction.

aa5874 · 08-29-2013, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by semiopen

Prophecy_of_Seventy_Weeks

The ancient nut cases who were looking at this probably were still tied down to the 490 year notion. So to have it end with Vespasian in 66-70 CE it had to start in 420 BCE or so.

Whether or not the Jews were 'nut cases' we know that they did use the book of Daniel as prophecies concerning their expected Jewish Messianic ruler and the desolation of Jerusalem.

Examine the words of Josephus in 'Antiquities of the Jews' 10.11.7

Quote:

[u]Josephus In the very same manner Daniel also wrote concerning the Roman government, and that our country should be made desolate by them.

All these things did this man leave in writing, as God had showed them to him, insomuch that such as read his prophecies, and see how they have been fulfilled.......

It is clear and CORROBORATED by Tacitus that the Jews expected a Jewish Messianic ruler of the WHOLE earth c 66-70.

The Jews used the book of Daniel.

The expected Jewish Messianic ruler was BELIEVED to be ALIVE c 66-70 CE.

There was NO Jesus of Nazareth who was already known by Jews as the expected Messianic ruler since 1-33 CE.

The HJ of Nazareth argument has been killed and shredded to bits by Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius.

Suetonius, a contemporary of Josephus, Tacitus and Vespasian the supposed predicted Messianic ruler, will also VERIFY the death and shredding of the argument for HJ of Nazareth.

Suetonius will state that there was an OLD ESTABLISHED belief that around c 66-70 CE there would be Jewish Messianic rulers to RULE the WORLD.

This OLD Established belief was known ALL OVER the ORIENT.

The time of the Emergence of the expected Jewish Messianic ruler was established to c 66-70 CE by JEWS.

Vespasian' Life of Vespasian

Quote:

There had spread over all the Orient an old and established belief, that it was fated at that time for men coming from Judaea to rule the world.

This prediction, referring to the emperor of Rome, as afterwards appeared from the event, the people of Judaea took to themselves...

The expected Jewish Messianic ruler was NOT dead and buried since 33 CE as stated in the NT but was believed to be ALIVE up to at least c 66-70 CE based on the interpretation of Jews of the book of Daniel when Josephus and the very Jews themselves FOUGHT AGAINST the Romans.

The HJ of Nazareth argument is dead.

The ENTIRE NT, including the Pauline Corpus, was fabricated AFTER the writings of Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius or after at least 121 CE.

Tommy · 08-31-2013, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

But even more fascinating is that Josephus claimed it was Jesus, the son of Ananas, who PREDICTED calamities in Jerusalem.

Jesus, the son of Ananus, predicted calamities in Jerusalem, c 62-64 CE, when Albinus was procurator of Judea. This Jesus son of Ananus was beaten to a pulp and declared a madman.

Do you think this "ben Ananus" character who predicted calamities in Jerusalem might have been the inspiration for the Jesus of the gMark olivet discourse?

aa5874 · 08-31-2013, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tommy

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

But even more fascinating is that Josephus claimed it was Jesus, the son of Ananas, who PREDICTED calamities in Jerusalem.

Jesus, the son of Ananus, predicted calamities in Jerusalem, c 62-64 CE, when Albinus was procurator of Judea. This Jesus son of Ananus was beaten to a pulp and declared a madman.

Do you think this "ben Ananus" character who predicted calamities in Jerusalem might have been the inspiration for the Jesus of the gMark olivet discourse?

The Jesus character in gMark is fundamentally a product of the Septuagint [Jewish Mythology], Greek/Roman myth fables and the writings of Josephus.

Jesus of Nazareth was a Myth [a Son of a God] who would walk on the sea in the night and transfigured before he was raised from the dead.

The Jesus character was one LIKE the Son of man in the Mythological fables of Daniel. See Daniel 7.

It was documented and publicly circulated in Rome and throughout the Roman Empire that Jesus of Nazareth had NO human father.

By the WAY, Jesus son of Ananus was not worshiped as a God and did NOT start a new religion in the writings of Josephus.

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.