Featured Does Josephus mention Jesus?

[AgnosticBoy]

Here's one perspective that claims Josephus never mentioned Jesus:

There are two passages that suggest Josephus mentions Jesus of the bible, but neither honestly references Jesus.

The first reference to discuss is the so called Testimonium Flavianum. Completely out of place in the chapter it appears in, this is where Josephus appears to randomly gush over Jesus insisting that "He[Jesus] was the christ!" We know that this passage is an outright forgery. How do we know this? The evidence is the church father Origen. The writings of Origen make numerous references to Josephus' works but never mention the Testimonium. Origen trash talks Josephus a bit for NOT believing in Jesus and not mentioning him! This is the same Origen who quotes several times from The Antiquities of the Jews to try to establish the existence of John the Baptist. Origen died in 253 CE. So as of his death, this passage wasn't in Josephus' works.

The first person to mention it is Eusebius who's not even born until circa 260 ce. We know that Eusebius was kind of a jerk as we still have surviving records complaining about his other forged writings.

The second part of Josephus that Christians harp on is where Josephus mentions "James brother of Jesus". Christians insist that this part is not a forgery and that it should refer to the Jesus of the bible. It doesn't.

To make a long story short, the bit of text where it refers to him as "the christ" is easily explained away as a later interpolation. Again, remember that we have Origen complaining that Josephus doesn't believe in Jesus so insisting that Origen just "missed" where Josephus referred to him as the Christ is silly.

The context of the passage is what makes all the difference. Historian and author David Fitzgerald explains:

Josephus describes the antics of Ananus, a very unpopular high priest in Jerusalem who assembled the Sanhedrin council, and brought charges against a “the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was Jacob,” (James and Jacob are cognates, like Peter and Pedro) and his companions, and condemned them all to be stoned to death. This caused an uproar, and citizens complained to King Agrippa, who took the high priesthood from Ananus and made Jesus, the son of Damneus, high priest.

Historian Richard Carrier goes on to explain that Josephus couldn't have been writing about the Jesus of the bible:

...imagine you are an ancient reader of the text. What would you conclude? You would ask yourself, ‘Who's this Jesus guy?’ (even if “the one called Christ” was tacked on, most readers would not know what that meant, or why it had anything to do with Ananus going after his brother, etc.). Then you would read on, and see, ‘Ah, that's the Jesus.’ That is, since Josephus doesn't tell you who this Jesus is, there is only one Jesus he leaves his reader to infer that it is: Jesus, son of Damneus.”

So you have one passage that didn't exist and another passage that was both doctored and taken completely out of context. We have people as late as the 3rd century mentioning Josephus and lamenting that he didn't believe in Jesus or mention him. And we have 21st century Christians who are (somehow) "sure" that Josephus helps prove the existence of Jesus.

Source: Reddit

There is debate on this reddit post so you can find people addressing the above perspective.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

an early church father named Origen informs us Josephus was not a Christian. If Origen is correct, it is very unlikely that Josephus would have made such remarks as calling Jesus a “wise man, if one could even call him a man,” “he was the Messiah,” . . ‘

This is not evidence. This is opinion. People are entitled to their own opinions, but that does not make their views correct. We have an ancient, non-biblical writing by Josephus which mentions Jesus Christ. What is the evidence that he did not pen that section about Jesus? What is the evidence that someone added it later? Stating that it is “unlikely”, hardly passes muster as evidence.

For now, my view is that Josephus does make some reference to Jesus. The Testimonium Flavianum reference, which is where Josephus refers to Jesus as the Christ is not likely a valid reference. OR it could just be that some parts are not part of what Josephus said, while other parts are. But if Josephus believed Jesus was Christ, as stated in TF, then that would make him a Christian. But we know that doesn't fit his profile since he was associated with the Pharisees - the group that opposed Jesus.

On Josephus beliefs:

Flavius Josephus, orig. Joseph Ben Matthias, (born ad 37/38, Jerusalem—died c. 100, Rome), Jewish priest, scholar, and historian. Born of a priestly family, Josephus
joined the Pharisees.
While on a diplomatic mission he was impressed by the culture and sophistication of Rome, and in the Jewish revolt of ad 66–70 he eventually attached himself to the Roman cause. Favoured in the courts of emperors Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian, he wrote valuable historical works.

Source: https://www.britannica.com/summary/Flavius-Josephus

 

[Scooter]

But if Josephus believed Jesus was Christ, as stated in TF, then that would make him a Christian. But we know that doesn't fit his profile since he was associated with the Pharisees - the group that opposed Jesus.

Not all Pharisees opposed Jesus. Nicodemus was a Pharisee and so was Paul. Acts 15:5 states several Pharisees believed Jesus was the Christ. So claiming Josephus rejected Jesus as the Messiah because he was a Pharisee is not a valid argument.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

We have an ancient, non-biblical writing by Josephus which mentions Jesus Christ. What is the evidence that he did not pen that section about Jesus?

That Origen did not use the juicy quote — “ . . Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man . . “ As if it wasn’t there at the time Origen lived and wrote.

No, this isn’t a slam dunk. But it’s more than just nothing.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

Origen - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Origen of Alexandria (c.185 – c. 253), also known as Origen Adamantius, was an early Christian scholar, . . . . . He was a prolific writer who wrote roughly 2,000 treatises in multiple branches of theology, . . . “

=====

Wow, this guy could write!

Maybe it was his primary, preferred way to make sense of the world.

 

[Scooter]

That Origen did not use the juicy quote — “ . . Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man . . “ As if it wasn’t there at the time Origen lived and wrote.

No, this isn’t a slam dunk. But it’s more than just nothing.

This is equivalent of saying the phrase "all men are created equal" wasn't originally in the Declaration of Independence because Abraham Lincoln never quoted it or wrote about it. That isn't evidence. We must remember that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

For now, my view is that Josephus does make some reference to Jesus. The Testimonium Flavianum reference, which is where Josephus refers to Jesus as the Christ is not likely a valid reference. OR it could just be that some parts are not part of what Josephus said, while other parts are.

And I remember reading a book which took this position.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

This is equivalent of saying the phrase "all men are created equal" wasn't originally in the Declaration of Independence because Abraham Lincoln never quoted it or wrote about it. That isn't evidence. We must remember that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

But Origen was using Josephus as one line of evidence for the Christian faith. And he leaves out the best part.

People notice and think, Weird . . .

And then it’s just too juicy.

supposedly Josephus said — “Jesus . . . . . a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly . . . . . He was the Christ. . . . . . He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him.”

If Josephus had believed such things, he would have become a full-on Christian preacher. Not simply writing one paragraph and going on his merry way.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

This is equivalent of saying the phrase "all men are created equal" wasn't originally in the Declaration of Independence because Abraham Lincoln never quoted it or wrote about it

But if he was talking about the equality of human beings and quoting another part of the Declaration, it would make you wonder. [ to the best of my knowledge, Abe Lincoln never did this ]

And with the United States Declaration of Independence, we have the original copy.

 

[Scooter]

If Josephus had believed such things, he would have become a full-on Christian preacher. Not simply writing one paragraph and going on his merry way.

Not necessarily. Joseph of Arimathea was a believer but he was not a full on Christian preacher. Neither was Nicodemus, but he too was a believer. I honestly don’t know if Josephus wrote both portions that mention Jesus or not. But to claim he didn’t requires more than just saying “I don’t think he did because it is unlikely.”