Josephus, Jesus, & Lies

The old fallback in explaining the absence of any mention of the supposed Jesus of christianity is to refer to the writings of Josephus. But it is wise to look into all writers of the time and ask why was the supposed Jesus never mentioned by these historians when the impact of Jesus was supposed to be phenomenal, drawing multitudes, doing miracles?
The writers contemporary to the supposed jesus yet made no mention of any Jesus ~
Seneca, 4BCE - 65CE
Pliny the Elder, 23-79 CE
Quintilian 39-96CE
Epictetus 55-135CE
Martial 38-103CE
Juvenal, 55 - 127
Plutarch, 46 - 119
Philo-Judaeus, 15 BCE - 50 CE
Philo-Judaeus is of particular importance because, being a Greek speaking Jewish theologian-philosopher, personally knew Jerusalem because of family living there. He wrote extensively on Jewish history and religion from a Greek perspective and taught the following concepts all prominent in John’s Gospel and Paul’s epistles: God and His Word are one; the Word is the first-begotten Son of God; God created the world thru His Word; God holds all things together thru His Word; the Word is the fountain of eternal life; the Word dwells in and among us; all judgment is committed to God’s Word; and the Word never changes. Philo also taught on God as Spirit, the Trinity, the virgin birth, Jews who sin will go to hell, Gentiles who come to God will be saved and go to heaven, and God is love and forgives. Yet, Philo, a Jew in nearby Alexandria, who would have been a contemporary of Jesus never once mentions anybody named Jesus nor any miracle worker being crucified and resurrected in Jerusalem, let alone an eclipse, an earthquake, or graves opening and resurrected Jewish saints walking the streets of Jerusalem. Why? Philo’s total silence about a Jesus is deafening!

Then theres Josephus 37 - 103CE ~
His Jesus Testimony is found in Josephus’, Antiquities of the Jews. Contrary to those Christian apologists, the Jesus testimony is considered by many scholars including the Encyclopedia Britannica’s scholars as "an insertion by later Christian copyists." This Jesus testimony states "Jesus is the Christ, a doer of wonderful works, was crucified, and appeared the third day as the divine prophets foretold".
Why is this Jesus testimony considered a later insertion?

1. Josephus was a Pharisee. Only a Christian would call Jesus the Christ. Josephus would have had to renounce his pharisaical beliefs to say Jesus was the Christ. Josephus died a pharisee.

2. Josephus writing style is to write chapter upon chapter about the most insignificant people and events. The Jesus testimony consists of four sentences. Why would Josephus’ Christ (the Jewish Messiah) deserve only four sentences?

3. The paragraphs before and after the Jesus testimony describe Romans killing Jews. The paragraph following the Jesus testimony begins "About the same time another sad calamity put the Jews in disorder". Would the "sad calamity" refer to the appearing of the "doer of wonderful works" or Romans killing Jews? The Jesus Testimony clearly does not follow the preceding paragraph and characteristic of later insertions is out of context.

4. Finally, and most convincing had Josephus actually written the Jesus testimony, church fathers in the following 200 years would surely refer to it in fending off critics of Jesus’ being just another myth. But, not once does Justin, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, or Origen ever refer to Josephus’ Jesus testimony. We know Origen read Josephus because Origen’s writings criticize Josephus for attributing the destruction of Jerusalem to the killing of James. The church fathers made no reference to Josephus’ alleged Jesus testimony because it was not in Josephus’ writing.

Not only does the Jesus Testimony appear fraudulent, but Josephus’ historical accounts both contradict and omit other New Testament bible stories:

1. According to the bible John the Baptist was killed about 30 CE at the beginning of Jesus ministry. In Josephus, John the Baptist is killed by Herod when Herod is at war with King Aertus of Arabia in 34 - 37 CE.

2. Josephus makes no reference to the celebration of Pentecost in Jerusalem when allegedly devote Jews of every nation gathered and all received the Holy Spirit evidenced by speaking in new tongues; a Jewish fisherman Peter is head apostle of the new church; a fellow pharisee named Saul of Tarsus becomes the apostle Paul, or of the church’s explosive growth throughout Palestine, Alexandria, Greece, or Josephus’ city of residence Rome. Peter and Paul’s alleged martyrdoms in Rome about 60 CE is unknown to Josephus. It bears noting that Christian apologists so determined to rely on the veracity of Josephus’ Jesus testimony excuse his later oversights.

Is it probable, as the Encyclopedia Britannica asserts that Christian copyists distorted truth by inserting the Jesus testimony? Eusebius (265-339 CE), acknowledged as "Father of Church History" and known to be the emperor Constantine’s overseer of doctrine writes in his The Preparation of the Gospel published by Baker House (a Christian company)on page 619 "it will be necessary sometimes to use falsehood as a remedy for the benefit of those who require such treatment". Eusebius, one of the most influential Christians in church history, condoned fraud as a tool to promote Christianity!
The probability of Constantine’s Christianity being a product of fraud is directly related to the desperate need of evidence to support the historicity of Jesus. Without Josephus’ alleged Jesus testimony there is no credible first century non-Christian evidence of a historical Jesus.

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Oct04/Salisbury1012.htm

 

That was fascinating!

But it does not stop me from believing that Jesus existed because I trust the experts on that issue. The expert historians know better than you or me (or anyone else) about this stuff.

Sure, I could make speculations on the workings of many complex studies of which I know very little (including history), but my speculation would be worthless since I am not qualified. I'm guessing you're not either. I know that experts can be wrong, but when all the world's leading historians agree strongly on something (like the existence of Jesus) then it's not likely to be in error. And even if they are in error, the error would be something you or I would not know about.

 

Interesting. Im reading a book about the dead sea scrolls and the Essenes, the jewish sect in Qumran that wrote them. Its very much seems like Jesus was part of that sect and wasnt so much a savior for all mankind, but more a political fighter against the Romans and those who didnt live according to the Law. His teachings are practically the same as the teachings of the Essenes (which explains why parts of the New Testament are almost identical to the older scriptures found in Qumran).

 

That's where you're seriously wrong, Dizzy. The world's leading historians can find no history of any supposed Jesus! But believe what you want, most christians have no idea what the truth of the matter is, believing what they're told to believe rather than what is factually correct.
BTW ~ this aint my speculation ~link as provided in initial post ~ http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Oct04/Salisbury1012.htm

 

All I can say is I've read and seen many things that have declared Jesus' existence "globally accepted by historians". None of these things were biased, as far as I can tell. Most of the historians themselves are not religious, so they would have no reason to lie. And the things I've read/watched weren't suggested to me by anyone, I just saw them at random. If I'd seen anything similar proclaiming the opposite, I would have remembered it.

 

I too have read many things which declared Jesus to be. Funny thing is when I tested such writings, I, like all who do the same, can find no data to corroborate them. You might give it a try, rather than rely on any other person who may have a hidden agenda. Prove the existence of jesus yourself.
Are you ready to be famous, or even a millionaire Dizzyman? ~ just publish that "historical proof" cited by "globally accepted by historians". NB ~ "proof" is not belief, it is fact substantiated by historically correct data. See post #1

 

Hi myrtje ~ you may well be interested in "The Bible Fraud" trilogy by Tony Bushby http://www.joshuabooks.com/bushby/biblefraud/internalgif/fraud.htm
There's evidence that the original "jesus" was a twin, which explains the "man of peace" "man of the sword" biblical conttradiction.

 

that was really interesting, barry, thank you. i'm going to take notes.




love,
sophia

 

The book im reading now also has an explaination for that one, but it doesnt talk about a twin. It made sense to me, although i cant explain what it was exactly right now, id have to look it up. Thanks for the tip though, ill read the book if i can find it somewhere (english books on the bible are not the most common thing in the library here...)

 

First, the factual existence for Jesus is generally taken for granted, for there is no reliable evidence for it. Historians just assume he lived, but don't have historacal records/reasons for that belief

Second, Myrtje, many of Jesus teachings disagree with Essene teachings. Check this out: http://essenes.net/m79.htm

 

Know the truth and the truth will set you free

 

Some of those things completely disagree with the book im reading, and some things in the book explain things that are called differences on that site.Makes me wonder who's right. Anyway, thanks for the link, its very much appreciated

 

Its so fecking hard to find though

 

Yes, but as long as you stay open to it then your chances are better.

 

mertje, just a quick question. Are you a Christian? Because your link is a bible quote and sometimes you sound like a christian, but then other times you sound like you aren't.

 

It's like anything else in life, you have to dig through alot of dirt to find a little bit of gold.

Alot of people get tired and just grab a handful of dirt and pretend it's gold.

 

It's easier than you think, and Sera Michele is right on the money!!
Here's how it began for me - I meditated (prayed if you like) on aphorism 108 of the Gospel of Thomas and the quote from Matt 7:7 ~
Jesus said, "Whoever drinks from my mouth will become like me, I myself shall become that person, and the hidden things will be revealed to that person."
Now link this to the "Jesus" promise ~ "ask and it shall be given, seek and ye shall find, Knock and it will be opened unto you."
Open your mind to accept the "truth that will set you free" in the way that truth designs that you should see it. The "Divine Essence" (whatever it may be called) will bring to you that which you need and are able to accept.
It took about 3 years for the fulness of truth to be revealed to me, beginning with my shattering discovery that the entire New Testament hinges upon an unwitnessed, unauthenticated, message (that is refuted by the Apostles in Acts), delivered by Saul (the persecutor of christians and Roman spy) who becomes "saint" Paul. 80% of the NT and hence christian doctrine, comes from Saul. All of the supposed jesus "miracles" were done in the presence of many or multitudes, but Saul has no one to verify his claims while christianity accepts them totally and without question. How very odd!!!

 

what claims, specifically, are you talking about? Or do you mean anything to do with Saul/Paul?

 

That Jesus appeared to him on the road to Damascus and revealed information to him. All of which is totally unsubstantiated other than for Saul's say-so.
Highly questionable.

 

Even more questionable is the story itself in book form. The greater issue that the fundies use as their rock from which to preach is that the bible is the "word of God". It cannot be, as it is incomplete. The councils of Nicaea reshaped, rewrote and reorganized the bible and WERE it factual, at the very least it would be complete, not something edited to the whims of Constantine and a group of 4th century ecumenical scholars. This is not the fictional writings of Dan Brown, this is historical fact.

"Christian history" edited by man lends very little creedence (pun intended) to the bible being "the word of God".