Flavius Josephus About Jesus?

[logician]

SInce true prophets cannot exist in a chaotic universe, I think the whole point is moot.

 

[dogsgod]

Another possibility for an historical Jesus, as Wells notes, I have treated both the Galilean and the Cynic elements less skeptically in The Jesus Myth, allowing that they may contain a core of reminiscences of an itinerant Cynic-type Galilean preacher (who, however, is certainly not to be identified with the Jesus of the earliest Christian documents).

 

[ericoh2]

Everyone here can see how frustrated you have become to be attacking my ability to write in English because you cannot answer my questions.



No one is certain about anything written. Only Oberon. Relevant texts of human opinions!



All opinions being built up from other opinions. There is nothing new under the sun. What we find today, it has been before. Then, you build your opinion on other people's opinions.



NT! Look at him! The NT was written by Hellenistic Gentiles with a very poor knowledge of Jewish culture and customs. What kind of opinion you can build on such dunghill?



What you have read is only the rumination of other people, who perhaps knew even less than you do.



And what is all that you have mentioned above if not the opinons of other people? Stop the cop-out man! There is nothing original.



Here, more insults and attacks from someone who is too frustrated for not knowing how to answer questions put to him.

Oberon, why have you ignored this post? Don't you think what Ben has to say is important?

 

[Oberon]

Don't you think what Ben has to say is important?

No. He has no idea what he's talking about, knows virtually nothing about the subject, and thinks that all opinions, whether informed or not, are equal. Hence, nothing he says is at all important.

 

[Oberon]

Some examples...

Online Companion: Marriage

Funerary altar in marble dedicated to Primigenia and Diogenes, probably freedpersons, who had lived together 47 years, by their freedpersons and slaves (inscription). The opulent reliefs echo Augustan monuments: garlands, birds, ram's heads, eagle (side 1 with traditional jug for libations; side 2 with patera). Julio-Claudian period (14-68 CE). New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art.

Funeral Stele for Dasumia Soteris whose long and harmonious life of 35 years with her husband Lucius Dasumius Callistus, the dedicator, is inscribed on the stone, along with his regret to have outlived her. The upper figured relief, probably of the couple, has been broken off and is lost; the space at the bottom was probably intended for his epitaph. (CIL VI.16753). Rome, 2nd century CE. London: British Museum.

Funerary tablet for Severa Seleuciane and her husband Aurelius Sabutius who had lived together for 17 years before the death 10 years earlier of one of them. In the upper corner is a drawing of a shuttle and upright loom, symbols of her traditional virtue as a materfamilias or a sign of their trade as weavers. The inscription in irregular letters rather confusingly dates their deaths by the consulships of the emperors Probus Augustus and Nonius Paternus. The first words of the troubled inscription (cum cumvixit) are redundant. The dedicator of the marble tablet is unnamed. 279 CE (Gordon III.302). Rome, Capitoline Museums.

There is a big difference between ideas such as concordia in rome and banning divorce. Yes, previously there was emphasis placed on especially the duty of a woman to remain with her husband for life. And there are restrictions found in ancient history on divorce. But the banning of divorce is unique to Jesus. Philo and Jospheus both agree that the husband may divorce his wife for any reason. Divorce is taken as a given in Deut. 24:1-4, and hardly mentioned elsewhere in Jewish literature. It exists all throughout greek and roman law.

 

[Oberon]

Of course he did, we'll just pretend that we never read that.

Mark, Q (Matt 5:32/Lk 16:18), and Paul all record Jesus' teachings on divorce. Yet Matthew is alone in adding parektos logou parneias/on the grounds of unchastity.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

There is a big difference between ideas such as concordia in rome and banning divorce. Yes, previously there was emphasis placed on especially the duty of a woman to remain with her husband for life. And there are restrictions found in ancient history on divorce. But the banning of divorce is unique to Jesus. Philo and Jospheus both agree that the husband may divorce his wife for any reason. Divorce is taken as a given in Deut. 24:1-4, and hardly mentioned elsewhere in Jewish literature. It exists all throughout greek and roman law.

Jesus did Not ban divorce. Clearly at Matthew (5:32; 19:9) Jesus allowed for divorce on the grounds of 'fornication'. The reason Jesus did not use the word adultery is because the meaning of fornication is more comprehensive to include all unnatural sex acts. Fornication is from the Greek word 'Porneia' which is where we also get the English word for pornography.

Since the Bible is not written ABC as a dictionary we need to look at the Bible by subject or topic arrangement. Thus by looking up all of the scriptures on one subject at a time we can get a more complete or rounded out picture of what is being presented such as Jesus allowing for divorce for Porneia.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

There is a big difference between ideas such as concordia in rome and banning divorce. Yes, previously there was emphasis placed on especially the duty of a woman to remain with her husband for life. And there are restrictions found in ancient history on divorce. But the banning of divorce is unique to Jesus. Philo and Jospheus both agree that the husband may divorce his wife for any reason. Divorce is taken as a given in Deut. 24:1-4, and hardly mentioned elsewhere in Jewish literature. It exists all throughout greek and roman law.

Yes, and we recognize that Jesus is not a Roman juror, but a preacher, and his preaching reflects the first century papyri and monuments that have from people that may well reflect experiences in his audiences.

 

[dogsgod]

Mark, Matthew, and Luke, all have Jesus coming to a conclusion after Jesus quotes ancient scripture. We can see that Matthew and Luke copied Mark, but Paul's own language points to a heavenly source for his "words of the Lord." Paul tells us that he receives messages directly from revelations of Christ and/or from reading ancient scripture. Notice Paul does not quote from this supposed oral tradition on divorce privy to all the Gospel writers, of which Q is supposedly based on and traced back to Jesus.


In 1 Thessalonians 4:9, Paul claims "you are taught by God to love one another."


Ouch!


The central core of Jesus' teaching, and Paul doesn't even recognize this teaching as coming from Jesus.





.

 

[Joe Bloe]

According to the bible, Jesus was involved in about 40 different miracles:

* He was born to a virgin.
* Walked on water.
* Raised Lazarus from the dead.
* Fed 5,000 with a few loaves and fishes.
* Cured blindness with spit.
* Chased demons into pigs.
* Rose from the dead.
* Ascended into heaven
* etcetera

Clearly we are dealing with a mythical character here, and it doesn't matter whether or not Flavius Josephus (or any other historian) believed that Jesus existed...he is still a myth.

 

[Ben Masada]

According to the bible, Jesus was involved in about 40 different miracles:

*[quote He was born to a virgin.

Not true. Isaiah 7:14 has nothing to do with Jesus. Amos 5:2 says that the virgin was Israel. And Isaiah 7:15,22; 8:8 says that the one born of the virgin was Judah. And he identifies it by name, so that you that have to assume that he could have been Jesus.
*

Walked on water.

David Coperfield did better by walking through the China Wall.

* Raised Lazarus from the dead.

No, he did not. That was a parable. No one can be literally raised from the dead. It is against the Scriptures.

*

Fed 5,000 with a few loaves and fishes.

Baruch de Spinoza said that miracles is a sign of weakness.

*

Cured blindness with spit.

Israeli Doctors do the same throughout Africa and also for free.

*

Chased demons into pigs.

First of all Jews don't believe in demons. Jesus was Jewish. Therefore, it never happened.

*

Rose from the dead.

Now, I am all ears for an eyewitness. Open your NT and show me who was an eyewitness to Jesus' resurrection, and I will believe.

*

Ascended into heaven

That's Pauline rhetoric. It never happened. When Jesus started appearing to his disciples, he gave some instruction for about 40 days and left. His disciples kept the secret as he had asked. Nobody knows where he headed to with his wife Mary Magdalene and Joseph of Arimathea.

 

[Joe Bloe]

I think you've misunderstood my point.

I'm saying the Jesus story is a myth and it doesn't matter how many historians report that such a creature existed, the fact remains; he did not exist.

It doesn't matter if the NT stories are interpreted as miracles, parables, or events with logical explanations...they never ever happened. There was no Jesus. He is a myth.

 

[Oberon]

Clearly we are dealing with a mythical character here, and it doesn't matter whether or not Flavius Josephus (or any other historian) believed that Jesus existed...he is still a myth.

Clearly we are dealy with someone who has never studied ancient history. Do you believe Augustus Caesar was a myth? He was said to be born of a god via a virgin birth too. Socrates was visited by a spiritual advisor. Pythagoras was credited with miracles. Plenty of historical people throughout history have been credited with miracles, and myths have grown around them and others. The presence of clearly ahistorical data in the historical record does not make it worthless. Prior to the modern era, history was written and understood differently.

 

[dogsgod]

Using Augustus Caesar as an example goes to show how little Oberon understands historical context. In the case of Augustus, the myth associated with him is a side show, in the case of Jesus, the myth is the show, it's all we have.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Using Augustus Caesar as an example goes to show how little Oberon understands historical context. In the case of Augustus, the myth associated with him is a side show, in the case of Jesus, the myth is the show, it's all we have.

Yea, I agree...I mean the man's "history" can be traced back to him including his own writings...Which is a little more I can say for the allusive Yeshua (IMO).

 

[Joe Bloe]

Clearly we are dealy with someone who has never studied ancient history. Do you believe Augustus Caesar was a myth? He was said to be born of a god via a virgin birth too. Socrates was visited by a spiritual advisor. Pythagoras was credited with miracles. Plenty of historical people throughout history have been credited with miracles, and myths have grown around them and others. The presence of clearly ahistorical data in the historical record does not make it worthless. Prior to the modern era, history was written and understood differently.

Julius Caesar was an ordinary human being. He fought a few battles, gained control of an Empire and then got stabbed in the back. No reason to assume that such a character didn't exist. Indeed, some people did say he was god, but some people are gullible arent they? And, unlike Jesus (in Mark 16:16 KJV) Caesar didn't say believe or be damned.

Jesus Christ is a whole different story - Son of God and miracles galore. Totally unbelievable.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Joe-

It has been shown that originally Mark's gospel ended at verse 8.
There are No corresponding reference verses as with the rest of the Scriptures.
The style of writing changes after verse 8.
Jerome, Eusebius, Sinaitic Manuscript, Vatican 1209, Sinaitic Syriac Codex omit after 8.

The ones that have committed the unforgivable sin (Matthew 12:32;Hebrews 6:4-6) have the punishment of everlasting destruction (2 Thess. 1:9). The rest of the dead according to Romans (6:7) are freed or acquitted from their sins. That does not mean innocent but as a governor can pardon a person that would mean that the charges no longer stick. Acts (24:15) says there will be a resurrection of both the just and unjust.
After they are resurrected they will still have the free will to choose to obey God's righteous ways.

As for the ones living, the ones alive, at the time Jesus takes action, those sheep-like ones of Matthew chapter 25 will be rewarded with continued life or keep on living into Jesus thousand-year reign over earth. Whereas the goat-like ones will be destroyed with everlasting destruction as 2nd Thess (1:9) says.

 

[logician]

According to the bible, Jesus was involved in about 40 different miracles:

* He was born to a virgin.
* Walked on water.
* Raised Lazarus from the dead.
* Fed 5,000 with a few loaves and fishes.
* Cured blindness with spit.
* Chased demons into pigs.
* Rose from the dead.
* Ascended into heaven
* etcetera

Clearly we are dealing with a mythical character here, and it doesn't matter whether or not Flavius Josephus (or any other historian) believed that Jesus existed...he is still a myth.

Certainly one of the strongest arguments that the entire NT is a work of fiction.

Simply put, miracles like these are either scientifically impossible, or absurd.

 

[dogsgod]

There may have been a Galilean ministry in the seventies or 80's of the first century. The Jewish portion of the sayings in Q sound preachy and gives clues of nonbelievers, but there's no way of connecting Q with a crucifixion. Burton Mack places these sayings in the mid 80's.

 

[Oberon]

Julius Caesar was an ordinary human being.

You know that Augustus Caesar is a different person, right? Obviously not.

He fought a few battles, gained control of an Empire and then got stabbed in the back. No reason to assume that such a character didn't exist.

Yet he was deified. Moreover, Augustus Caesar was said to be born of a virgin and from a god. And plenty of other historical figures were said to perform miracles, possess magical abilities, etc.

Jesus Christ is a whole different story - Son of God and miracles galore. Totally unbelievable.

Augustus Caesar was said to be the son of God, and other historical figures, including those I previously mentioned, were said to perform lots of miracles. Obviously, your criterion for historicity is fatally flawed. Ancient historical sources almost always included legends, rumor, myth, miracles, and magic. So do the gospels. If we write off all sources including the above, then obviously even historical figures such as Augustus Caesar are "totally unbelievable."