Re: Debunking Christian Apologetics: Josephus

[thybigballs]

The first mention of the Josephus passage wasn't until the 4th century by a man with a reputation of deceit, called Eusebius. The passage was not known to Origen (along with all the other patristic writers prior to Eusebius) who would have grabbed on to it like a crackhead going after a rock and used it in his apologetic writings.

[hitobedut]

Depends on which version of Josephus you read. The Slavonic makes no mention to Jesus, at all. Add to the fact the gospels are a admitted lie according to the Catholic Encyclopedia (Farleys Edition). That is how it is centred, not why many of the writtings pre existed xianity. And the important truths they contain. Really to be a honest Christian one must be truthful, not a liar and admit to the many biblical errors that are obvious. Until then you arent a Christian

[uFlubber]

keep trying to square that Jesus circle...you are not convincing in this video.

[melbourneopera]

why don't you strictly point out: Trinity is a wrong concept for christian? that's all

[cyxgun]

So your argument here is the ONLY extra biblical evidence for Jesus' resurrection is only PARTLY fabricated?

As John said in his video, the early Christians had the MEANS MOTIVE AND OPPORTUNITY to forge this so called 'golden paragraph'.

As far as your argument about scientific hoaxes... Science is self correcting, religion's flaws get fossilized into the meme.

[AnonEyeMouse]

Piltdown man was a forgery. Proven to be so and disregarded. No biologist of any worth in any field of study is going to use it as evidence to prove man evolved from an ape (and is technically still one).

The passage by Josephus is a forgery. Yet still christian apologists use it as proof of a flesh and blood Jesus christ. Even you made some attempt by trying to say that the paragraph begins like Josephus would have done it.

But not in that context... he would not have put it where it appears.

[pctopgs]

But scientists completely disregard piltdown man. If you ask a scientist for evidence for a transitional fossil of gorilla to man, they wont say "Piltdown man is a transitional, but all scientist conclude that it's fraud". If you ask a Christian for evidence for Jesus' existence, they would say "Josephus is proof." If Josephus has been proven false, then why do Christians still use his account for Jesus resurrection?

[TheHonestTheist]

/watch?v=fFH0khjgA0U

[DoctorX101]

Though one thing migkillertwo has over JLA:

He does not throw a tantrum and start blocking users when his political delusions get exposed. I would exPECT such behavior from a fundamentalist trying to protect a faith against discussion.

But a self-described skeptic? A "free-thinker?" I am finding this all terribly educational.

We return you to your regularly scheduled commentary . . . already in progress.

[dropspin5678]

EXACTLY: Parallels that existed BEFORE the story of Jesus. Why else would he try to sway them from believing the SAME stories of THEIR gods and follow HIS NEW god because there wouldn't be any differences except in names.

Bottomline, if your religion gives you such peace of mind why then try to convert so many others to your belief system? Why have such a dominant attitude? Is it working for you? Your apprehension and agitation prove otherwise.

[poolerboy0077]

Josephus' birth was in 37 C.E. well after the alleged crucifixion of Jesus which puts him out of range of an eyewitness account. Moreover, he wrote Antiquities in 93 C.E. after the first gospels got written! Therefore, even if his accounts about Jesus came from his hand, his information could only serve as hearsay.

[migkillertwo]

poolerboy0077, all history besides first hand accounts are hearsay. Are you aware of just how little history before Gutenberg has genuine first-hand accounts corroborating it?

[poolerboy0077]

Compare Jesus to any other historical figure of antiquity and you can establish more than hearsay for the latter than you can for the former. Alexander the Great, for example, left a wake of destroyed and created cities behind. We have buildings, libraries and cities, like Alexandria, left in his name. We have treaties and even a letter from Alexander to the people of Chios engraved in stone dated at 332 B.C.E.  Historial people leave us with contemporary evidence, but for Jesus we have nothing.

[migkillertwo]

1: Why would Jesus' existence leave the same amount of evidence as Alexander the Great?

2: What is your source for any of those claims regarding Alexander the Great?

[poolerboy0077]

1: It was an example, I never said he had to have left the same amount of evidence. I said, "Historial people leave us with contemporary evidence." If we wanted to present a fair comparison of the type of information about Jesus to another example of equal historical value, we could do no better than to compare Jesus with the mythical figure of Hercules.

2: Briant, Pierre, "Alexander the Great: Man of Action Man of Spirit," Harry N. Abrams, 1996 [available in fine bookstores everywhere ;-) ].

[dropspin5678]

How funny that you are requesting sources but have none to support your position. There is NO contemporary evidence, NONE. There isn't even archaelogical implication that there MIGHT have been a guy named Jesus back then. NONE. So much so that Biblical Archaeology is now called Sir-Palestinian Archaeology. Sorry, you're not winning the arguement.

[IaintNoGood]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. With that said, there are scholars who DO question many of the accounts of Alexander's life & times, just as there are Christian theologians who question the claims made in the bible. Not all Christians believe the bible is the inerrant word of "god". Not all Christians believe Jesus was divine. Not all Christians believe in the holy trinity, so your straw man is dead.

[IaintNoGood]

Also note that Josephus wrote more on Zeus' existence than he did about Jesus. By your line of reasoning, Zeus is also a historical figure who walked the earth because Josephus wrote of him. Can you not now recognize the ridiculousness of your assertions & reasoning? If Josephus is to be used as evidence for Jesus, then he also must be used as evidence of Zeus. This is not rocket science.

[DoctorX101]

Indeed.

[dropspin5678]

By the way, regarding the refutation of the Zeitgeist inferrence earlier in these posts, you said that Jesus has nothing in common with these other gods and goddesses...so, since you like using your so called historical documents...how's about one that WAS on your side!!?? Justyn Martyr's First Apology CLEARLY shows that he KNEW that there were similarities of OTHER gods and goddesses. ZOINKS! That's RIGHT! He KNEW that this story was not unique. And we KNOW that his words were his own.

[migkillertwo]

I thought these claims were stopped being made nearly a year ago.

Justin wasn't trying to explain away similarities, he was trying to prove that there were similarities in an effort to stop the persecution of Christians.

[dropspin5678]

Justing said: we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter.

He knew damned good and well that this story had been around longer than his NEW RELIGION, and makes the statement "nothing different". That means that the birth, life, crucifixion, death and resurrection were not new or unique. Why would they be persecuted? For using someone else's story, I would think.

Nothing different...that's what it says!

[migkillertwo]

dropspin, once again, Justin was trying to CONVINCE his audience of the facticity of these parallels, not offering an explanation for them.

[4IDHero]

@dropspin5678

Alexander the Great was a great leader and he probably was feared and praised so we would expect a multitude of evidence for him. But Jesus was just a "marginal Jew" and He had very few people who praises Him as a great Leader, and even some of His disciples were skeptical of Him, and culturally, oral tradition was superior at the time of Christ until the Gospel writers felt that it was necessary to write down these traditions for preservation of their accounts.

[HairyHu]

@4IDHero Alexander was a man, Jesus is the SON of God on whom everyone's salvation hangs! Why God let to remain more evidence from Alexander existence than Jesus?????

Looks like God does not want hell to be empty! After all He carefully designed it and made it.

But, if you read the Bible you will find that He made some for glory and some for distraction. That is why Jesus talked to people in parables, so they could not understand and get saved.

[dropspin5678]

Could be, if you like that. But, with intellects like ours, we should spend the time with fewer distractions to one another! LOL

[DoctorX101]

You bring the leather, I will bring the whipped cream.

[dropspin5678]

You're on!! How about bread and wine?

[DoctorX101]

Will there also be a movie?

[dropspin5678]

Forgery: the production of a spurious work that is claimed to be genuine, as a coin, a painting, or the like.

Now, the 127 word paragraph in contention has been proven to not be that of Josephus. So, the interpolation IS ALSO a forgery, because it attempts to use Josephus' reputation as a good historian as validity.

Think about it, if that paragraphy had actually come fromt he heart/mind of Josephus, he'd have more than just 127 words to say about it.

[DoctorX101]

Indeed. It is mind boggling to think Josephus would be declare the existence of a god-man and then . . . just . . . drop him.

[dropspin5678]

Thank you! Hello!

[DoctorX101]

Thank you! I mean, it is almost comical.  As if Josephus comes home: "High honey, how was your day."

"I met a man-if man he may be called--who is a son of god."

"Really? What was he like?"

"I don't know, I didn't pay attention. The Schwartzes have a new chariot, I noticed."

[dropspin5678]

OMG (G NOT standing for "god") I am SO craving you right now! That is SO funny, and quite a practical application of that assumption! LOL

[DoctorX101]

You have to buy me dinner first, though. :D

[dropspin5678]

Everything ELSE in life you use logic, linear processing and even call Intelligent Design in to prove your feelings. But intelligent design uses order, logic and is repeatable through experimentation. I do not dispute the possibility of there being a "higher power", a nonlocalized consciousness of which we are a part...but I dispute that your Yahweh or your Jesus are the final authority. They are clearly distressed beings, they suffer just like we do.

[dropspin5678]

in that manner. Those feelings you have for Jesus and this story are simply neurological processes that deceive you. You simply can't PHYSICALLY think a logical thought. The number of contradictions in the bible is astounding, and crippling to anyone wishing to think in higher terms.

I'm not going on to that site because it is clearly a christian website, and there is NO amount of argument for someone whose subcortical processes are in charge...ie, faith without evidence is foolish.

[dropspin5678]

The simple fact is that if it requires any "faith" (evidence of things unseen) then it is a form of deception. When you look at a tree, there is no leap of faith. You trust your senses. The fact is, those of "faith" are simply victims of their own neocortical subprocesses regurgitating the same information, unable to process better logic in their frontal lobes, so they are not being used to see "novel" information. The repetition of those beliefs have wired neural networks to compose reality...

[dropspin5678]

and since we are moving beings, their mind MUST be changing in order to perceive. If it does not, then we can have no relationship with them. If it does, then they are ordinary beings...or more likely, the renderings of MAN, a fallible creature that created this story.

If you say that you feel Jesus in your heart and do not need logic, then you have justified and validated the gods of every other religion. If you use logic, then yours is yet to be realized - keep working.

[dropspin5678]

Because Jesus/God so often misapprehend their objects of cognition throughout the bible, it stands that their mind(s) are not perfect. If God/Jesus' mind moves from a state of grace at one point to a state of anger at another, then their mind simply is misapprehending the ultimate nature of the object of cognition. A mind that has a "fresh and unerring perception" of the true nature of something cannot be moved to be angry. Their mind MUST move as it observes a phenomena...

[dropspin5678]

Desipite the fact that you refute the other gods that may or may not have shared those characteristics with Jesus, the facts remain that the CELESTIAL EVENTS share those in common with Jesus, and hence proves that this is an anthropomorphization of those events than those of the "real" Jesus. Since there is NO extrabiblical evidence to support that he lived, it stands to reason that the simplest answer must be the one: he didn't live, and it was a story created to explain the seasons and stars.

[Deliratio]

Please, come to TheologyWeb and share you evidence for jesus being based on a celestial event with us in the Tektonics-forum.

[dropspin5678]

Debunked by Christians, who are clearly not objective in their search for proof.

Now, "forgery": it remains the proper label for it is something written and placed in that text AS IF it were written by Josephus.

Secondly, you assert yourself that Josephus was born AFTER the crucifixion, which in itself DENIES him as a reliable historian/contemporary of Christ. Are you out to be on your side or mine, this is child's play.

[dropspin5678]

Why do all these seemingly intelligent people keep arguing over this fictional book. Start at the beginning...God told Adam and Eve to NOT eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. If they did they would die in that very day.

But the serpent comes along and tells Eve that if she eats it she will have the knowledge of good and evil and will live a long, long time. They ate the fruit, learned the difference of good and evil and lived hundreds of years. God lied, the SERPENT didn't!!!

[cisco19]

it means that they would become mortal.

[dropspin5678]

Josephus COULD NOT have written that, because he lived during the time of Christ and said that Christ's followers take his name to identify themselves "even to this day." Those four words are more telling than anything else. This is more evidence than anything else that a later day Christian added this.

[Deliratio]

"Josephus COULD NOT have written that, because he lived during the time of Christ "

lolwut?

he was born after the crucifixion

[dropspin5678]

Um, YAH. One, if he truly believed Christ was the Messiah, why would he remain a jew after stating that.

And look at the debates that rage on the issue of whether God/Jesus exists or not. To leave such margin for this debate by the Creator that wants us to love and worship his is even SLIGHTLY deceitful. And I thought that Satan was the lord of deceit? Maybe the fact that the snake didn't lie in the garden of Eden is proof positive enough. Adam and Eve lived long lives...God lied.

[Deliratio]

Dud, because the Messiah-part was interpolated.

"And look at the debates that rage on the issue of whether God/Jesus exists or not. "

In scholarly circles, no one thinks Jesus never existed.

[dropspin5678]

You are incorrect. In scholarly circles, the story is being looked at again with more scrutiny because the major characteristics of Jesus' life are shared in common with other savior gods; so much so that it warrants the likelihood that he never existed at all. Horus, Attis, Dionysis, Mythra and Jesus all share: born on Dec. 25 of a virgin, 12 disciples/brothers, performed miracles, crucified, dead for three days, resurrected. I know you feel it in your heart, but a good fiction does that to ya.

[Deliratio]

Ah Zeitgeist. Unfortunately, those parallels are almost completely made up (no one was dead for 3 days or crucified, not even Jesus was born on 12/25, etc.)

You can watch the ZeitgeistDebunked-channel for this, but I would prefer to discuss it with you.

Please go to TheologyWeb and post in the Tektonics-subforum.

[Deliratio]

have you read Wallace's "The gospel according to Bart"?

[highwind8124]

You're arguing for "partial authenticity". So you're saying it MIGHT be. Therefore it isn't evidence. All you're throwing at us is an unlikely maybe.

You're basically saying "we assume that this passage was only editted by a Christian rather than created one, and here's what we imagine what it was". So great. You're submitting imaginary evidence, and you even managed to do it with a straight face.

Used car salesmen aren't even this sleazy.

[Deliratio]

Most scholars agree that the passage is mostly genuine.

[highwind8124]

Why do "most scholars" agree that the passage is mostly genuine? Also, prove that they do, or else you're just imagining they do and lying to us.

[Deliratio]

Just read the article linked in the video-description.

In John's words: Even atheist-apologists admit it's not a forgery.

[highwind8124]

Read the video descriptions. And which atheist apologists admit the Testimonium Flavianum is not a forgery, because even Christians admit which is why they put for what they imagine the passage to have looked like before the forgery.

I asked you a question. You couldn't answer it. I asked you to prove your claim. You couldn't.

You're a liar.

[Deliratio]

Peter Kirby and Jeff Lowder admit it's not a forgery. I can give you the sources if you want.

Now you list christian apologists who say it's a forgery.

I asked you to click on the link in the video description and read it. You would have found the informations there.

You're a moron.

[highwind8124]

Josh McDowell, most Christian apologist on this very subject says:

"After assessing the evidence for myself, I find myself agreeing with those scholars who see that while SOME CHRISTIAN ADDITIONS have been made to the text that are probably foreign to it, the Testimonium contains a good deal of truth to it that Josephus could have easily affirmed."

EVEN LEADING Christian apologists recognize it's a forgery. So get over yourself. You're the moron. Learn how to read.

[Deliratio]

Lol. You don't even know what a forgery is.

watch?v=E6cQgqbXYN0

[highwind8124]

Don't fucking waste my time. I watched the first 30 seconds. I know there's a difference in the definition between interpolation and forgery.

I KNOW you're arguing for partial authenticity, and you hope it's not an interpolation, but your hope isn't evidence at all, you crazy fuck.

DON'T TALK TO ME. Holy shit.  I can't stand retarded liars. It's contaminated evidence. Get over yourself.

[Deliratio]

So McDowell says "it has interpolations", you say there's a difference between "it has interpolation" and "it's forgery" and you say that McDowell admits it's a forgery and you call me a retarded liar? wtf?

[highwind8124]

The forgery in Josephus is self evident since the Testiomium Flavianum is phrased in a way that a follower of Judaism cannot say.

WHICH IS WHY Christians offer a possible alternative to the one there. That's why that exist, you stupid liar.

If heaven exists, you sure can't get in because you'd just annoy everyone else with lies. Be on your way to hell already.

[migkillertwo]

No, but I read his "The Text of the New Testament", which is pretty much the next best thing (and its much more scholarly and balanced)

[lipoicacid]

its not a 'forgery', its 'partially authentic'= its not a lie,its partially true lol!!! you kill me son!

[Maximara]

There is the fact both Chrysostom (4th century) and Photius (9th century) do not use Josephus to support the Existence of Jesus. According to Remsberg, Photius laments how "Josephus has made **no mention** of Christ." If this summation is correct then BOTH passages are forgeries.

[chuckawobbly]

It's also interesting that Origen was open that Josephus, who had mentioned John the Baptist, did not acknowledge Christ.

Also, I said this in a private PM to mig a while ago, the bede website is about as reliable as Wikipedia, and it just happens to be a Christian-fan website. Go figure, your sources are from other, Christian Apologists who can't get their facts right. No wonder your sense of evidence is insanely obscured.

Zero credentials mig, zero.

[Maximara]

This is why I use Jesus Police--it shows that not all historical Jesus supporters put the Gospels in the 1st century. When even the supporters of a historical Jesus admit that true evidence of the Gospels as 1st century documents is basically nil then the whole US vs Them mentality fall apart like a bad suit.

[migkillertwo]

the Jesus police is useful just because they support a historical Jesus. use actual scholars maximara, not some group of morons that just happen to own a computer.

[Maximara]

They site real scholars and I see we are still engaging in attacking the messager not the message.

[migkillertwo]

Bart Ehrman is the only real scholar they ever cite maximara.

[Maximara]

Snicker. Schonfield is well known pro historical Jesus scholar.

[migkillertwo]

dude, seriously, cite real scholarship, not the Jesus police LOL

[migkillertwo]

how about actually trying to address the arguments chuckawobbly? you never once attempted to refute the argument presented by Christopher Price

BTW, Christopher price has a minor in historical studies.

[Maximara]

A *minor* in historical studies doesn't really mean anything other than they have enough credits. I on the other have a MASTERS in Anthropology and can tell you most of this is nonsense. In fact you could sit down with Cole's article on Cult Archeology and show how many pro Jesus "scholars" use "Cult" methods in their work--that is why you see this work in popular books rather than peer reviews journals.

[migkillertwo]

"X say that josephus never mentioned Christ" references please

[jimsartor]

Even if Josephus wrote about Jesus . . . even if Josephus believed Jesus to be the Christ, what kind of a world did Josephus live in and what kind of historian was he if he only mentioned Jesus once, never mentioned the dead walking the streets, the temple curtain ripping and thousand being healed? If nothing else, Josephus wrote about all the wrong things and obviously must have purposefully avoided writing about Christianity. By the way your science logic is bunk (see next).

[nailo1]

good video you and kabane seem to be the best apologists on here

[migkillertwo]

nailo, I would have to say that title belongs to either kabane or Veritas48

[facilisdescenus]

You forgot to mention Heckel's drawings.

Mr Armstrong has a serious case of J.D.S.(Jesus Denial Syndrome)

[migkillertwo]

if I was reading from a script I might have mentioned haeckel's embryos.

[facilisdescenus]

Were you always an evolutionist or did Kabane convert you? Just curious

[migkillertwo]

LOL, kabane along with a whole lot of others converted me.