Who was Flavius Josephus? Can the writings of Flavius Josephus be trusted? What are the writings of Flavius Josephus? Flavius Josephus was a 1st century historian mainly of Jewish history, including Jesus' teaching. How important is his work?

OLAADEGBU:
Who was Flavius Josephus? Can the writings of Flavius Josephus be trusted? What are the writings of Flavius Josephus? Flavius Josephus was a 1st century historian mainly of Jewish history, including Jesus' teaching. How important is his work?

Josephus' writings about Christ as non biblical source add more credibility to the fact that Christ existed here on earth .

KingEbukasBlog:


Josephus' writings about Christ as non biblical source add more credibility to the fact that Christ existed here on earth .

excellent bro. and also the bible say God exist and Jesus has made Him known to us. the fact that there are non biblical source the prove that Jesus exist, this also prove that God exist.

KingEbukasBlog:


Josephus' writings about Christ as non biblical source add more credibility to the fact that Christ existed here on earth .

Good job.

malvisguy212:


excellent bro. and also the bible say God exist and Jesus has made Him known to us. the fact that there are non biblical source the prove that Jesus exist, this also prove that God exist.

Way to go.

OLAADEGBU:
Who was Flavius Josephus? Can the writings of Flavius Josephus be trusted? What are the writings of Flavius Josephus? Flavius Josephus was a 1st century historian mainly of Jewish history, including Jesus' teaching. How important is his work?

Flavius Josephus, Turncoat, brown-nose . The writings of Josephus are in fact priceless, his writings spanned some of the momentous events of first century Christendom, through Josephus we learn of the exact year that Publius Quirinus arrives at Judea thereby providing a more reliable time stamp for the birth of Jesus of Nazareth in stark contrast to the garbled accounts of the Synoptics.

His accounts of socio-political events of his time are invaluable, his treatment and attestation of John the Baptist and the events leading up to his death shed better light on the life of the Immerser and his beliefs. It is quite clear that the Book of Acts is essentially a fictionalized/romanticized account of Josephus’ work, we are better able to understand the actions of Saulus, latterly to become known as “Apostle Paul” the Herodian prince and Sadducee henchman, who was later to become the progenitor of Christianity to the gentiles and whom we now know was responsible for the death of James, the brother of Jesus …as opposed to Stephen. Interestingly there does not seem to exist one contemporary documentation attesting the life of the Apostle Paul outside the scriptures …Paul himself wrote!

We should not forget the Testimonium Flavium, beloved of Christians for its mention of the “Christ”, but largely embellished probably by Eusebius. The attestation of James the brother of Jesus is in my view more reliable.

KingEbukasBlog:


Josephus' writings about Christ as non biblical source add more credibility to the fact that Christ existed here on earth .

Many historians say the reference to Jesus was an interpolation and a fraud carried out by Eusebius.

dalaman:


Many historians say the reference to Jesus was an interpolation and a fraud carried out by Eusebius.

What if I told you that the story of Eusebius interpolating the Josephus' reference to Jesus is an act of fraud carried out by those historians ?

KingEbukasBlog:


What if I told you that the story of Eusebius interpolating the Josephus' reference to Jesus is an act of fraud carried out by those historians ?

The guy doesnt even know that there are other contemporary historians who wtote about Christ.

felixomor:


The guy doesnt even know that there are other contemporary historians who wtote about Christ.

Don't mind Dalaman . He is used to telling and quickly embracing lies

felixomor:


The guy doesnt even know that there are other contemporary historians who wtote about Christ.

Contemporary?
Every Historian that wrote about Jesus from Josephus to Tacitus to Pliny the young to the Talmunds all wrote about him at least 50 years after he was supposed to have died.
If you don't know the meaning of contemporary, here it is.

felixomor:


The guy doesnt even know that there are other contemporary historians who wtote about Christ.

The is NO contemporary historian during the time of Jesus that wrote anything about him. There is non, stop lying . If you claim there is, drop their names and what they wrote about him.

CatfishBilly:

Contemporary?
Every Historian that wrote about Jesus from Josephus to Tacitus to Pliny the young to the Talmunds all wrote about him at least 50 years after he was supposed to have died.
If you don't know the meaning of contemporary, here it is.

No secular historian wrote anything about Jesus. This is just a false claim by the christian apologist. Non of them wrote anything about any Jesus or his life. The Talmud was not even talking about the Yeshua of the bible. That much is very clear.

KingEbukasBlog:


Don't mind Dalaman . He is used to telling and quickly embracing lies

The person telling lies is felixomor. He lied that secular contemporaries of Jesus wrote about his life. That is a big lie. The only place where contemporary secular historians wrote about Jesus are in his imaginations.

KingEbukasBlog:


What if I told you that the story of Eusebius interpolating the Josephus' reference to Jesus is an act of fraud carried out by those historians ?

Those that have stated that it is an interpolation include christians and non christians alike. Even the Catholic encyclopedia agrees that some part of it is an interpolation. They have provided their persuasive reasons in the link below.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Josephus#Passage_1:_the_.22Testimonium_Flavianum.22

Provide your own reasons why those that disagree with it (including christians ) are fraudulent.

dalaman:


Those that have stated that it is an interpolation include christians and non christians alike. Even the Catholic encyclopedia agrees that some part of it is an interpolation. They have provided their persuasive reasons in the link below.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Josephus#Passage_1:_the_.22Testimonium_Flavianum.22

Provide your own reasons why those that disagree with it (including christians ) are fraudulent.

those Christians are not "True Christians"

CatfishBilly:

Contemporary?
Every Historian that wrote about Jesus from Josephus to Tacitus to Pliny the young to the Talmunds all wrote about him at least 50 years after he was supposed to have died.
If you don't know the meaning of contemporary, here it is.

So after the definition what changed?
There are contemporary historians who wrote about Jesus..
Educate yourself with google.
I doubt if u ever knew such. Before coming tp Nairaland to take up the job of anti - religious rants.


If you like lie down on gutters.
Your definition doesn't change the claim.
Besides u seem to have forgotten your claim of "MUSLIM ATHEISTS" so soon.

dalaman:


The person telling lies is felixomor. He lied that secular contemporaries of Jesus wrote about his life. That is a big lie. The only place where contemporary secular historians wrote about Jesus are in his imaginations.

.

dalaman:


No secular historian wrote anything about Jesus. This is just a false claim by the christian apologist. Non of them wrote anything about any Jesus or his life. The Talmud was not even talking about the Yeshua of the bible. That much is very clear.

Hehehehe,
Oga Joker
You have come again

The scholarly consensus is that the testimonium flavianum core message goes back to Josephus. For instance this is what skeptic Bart Ehrman says regarding this :

"The big question is whether a Christian scribe (or scribes) simply added a few choice Christian additions to the passage or whether the entire thing was produced by a Christian and inserted in an appropriate place in Josephus’s Antiquities.The majority of scholars of early Judaism, and experts on Josephus, think that it was the former—that one or more Christian scribes “touched up” the passage a bit. If one takes out the obviously Christian comments, the passage may have been rather innocuous, reading something like this:

"At this time there appeared Jesus, a wise man. He was a doer of startling deeds, a teacher of people who receive the truth with pleasure. And he gained a following both among many Jews and among many of Greek origin. When Pilate, because of an accusation made by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him previously did not cease to do so. And up until this very day the tribe of Christians, named after him, has not died out." (Did Jesus Exist : The Historical Case For Jesus of Nazareth)

I think there might even be a Arabic ~10th century manuscript that reads similar to the above. Can't remember right now, will have to check.

Ehrman also finds the idea that Eusebius forged the passage nonsense:

"Olson has made an intriguing case in his article, but I am afraid—as impressed by him as I am—that it has not held up under critical scrutiny. The responses to it by such scholars of Josephus and of early Christianity as J. Carleton Paget and Alice Whealey have been compelling. There is in fact little in the Testimonium that is more like Eusebius than Josephus, and a good deal of the passage does indeed read like it was written by Josephus. It is far more likely that the core of the passage actually does go back to Josephus himself."

Honestly we don't even need Josephus to prove Jesus existed or even died.

felixomor:


.

Hehehehe,
Oga Joker
You have come again

Just state what the secular historians wrote about Jesus during his time and prove that am a joker. You are the joker as long as you can't prove that contemporary secular historians wrote anything about Jesus.

felixomor:


So after the definition what changed?
There are contemporary historians who wrote about Jesus..
Educate yourself with google.
I doubt if u ever knew such. Before coming tp Nairaland to take up the job of anti - religious rants.


If you like lie down on gutters.
Your definition doesn't change the claim.
Besides u seem to have forgotten your claim of "MUSLIM ATHEISTS" so soon.

There are NO contemporary historians during the time of Jesus that wrote anything about him. Name them or else accept that you just lied.

dalaman:


There are NO contemporary historians during the time of Jesus that wrote anything about him. Name them or else accept that you just lied.

Sorry, u have no evidence....
And you are not to be taken seriously

LMAO

felixomor:


Sorry, u have no evidence....
And you are not to be taken seriously

LMAO

You made a false claim and failed to back it up with evidence because there is non. You lied.

dalaman:


You made a claim and failed to back it up with evidence. You lied.

Sorry
I no longer provide evidence for jokers and game players.

Richirich713:
The scholarly consensus is that the testimonium flavianum core message goes back to Josephus....

"Olson has made an intriguing case in his article, but I am afraid—as impressed by him as I am—that it has not held up under critical scrutiny. The responses to it by such scholars of Josephus and of early Christianity as J. Carleton Paget and Alice Whealey have been compelling. There is in fact little in the Testimonium that is more like Eusebius than Josephus, and a good deal of the passage does indeed read like it was written by Josephus. It is far more likely that the core of the passage actually does go back to Josephus himself."

Honestly we don't even need Josephus to prove Jesus existed or even died.

I agree with you that Christians do not need Josephus to prove that Jesus existed. In the very best rendering of the "testimonium" it still remains anecdotal, i.e it is not an eyewitness account. In my view there are more compelling histography about the life of Jesus out there if that is what is being sought. Where Josephus excels is in providing the social and political background to events that served as a backdrop to many of the first century biblical accounts.

Of course a good deal of the passage does read like it was written by Josephus, they are mainly his words after-all, but we do know that second century early church fathers saw to it that virtually no copies of Josephus' early works remained un-edited and at the forefront of all of this was none other than the ubiquitous Eusebius.

Lest we forget, it was Eusebius who reputedly discovered the putative "letters of Jesus" to the king of Edessas (Abgar) and reputedly carried out the translation from Syriac to Greek, look how that turned out.

felixomor:

Sorry
I no longer provide evidence for jokers and game players.

Its not that you don't. It's just because you have non.

dalaman:


Its not that you don't. It's just because you have non.

Awww,
I hear u mr game player

felixomor:


Awww,
I hear u mr game player

I also hear you Mr make.claims without evidence.

dalaman:


I also hear you Mr make.claims without evidence.

Also,
And thank u for the evidence u just provided
Hehehehe

Josephus was an historian who was not biased in his writing, I downloaded some of his works on PDF format, mhen, very detailed but bulky, what I think is Josephus never was a Christian, he just was an historian

felixomor:


So after the definition what changed?
There are contemporary historians who wrote about Jesus..
Educate yourself with google.
I doubt if u ever knew such. Before coming tp Nairaland to take up the job of anti - religious rants.


If you like lie down on gutters.
Your definition doesn't change the claim.
Besides u seem to have forgotten your claim of "MUSLIM ATHEISTS" so soon.

I have listed all the reputable historians that wrote about Jesus, none were his contemporaries.
If you have any name, provide it.
Some Bible historians even go as far as discarding Josephus' account.
Of course I know you won't drop any names, you don't have any.

CatfishBilly:

I have listed all the reputable historians that wrote about Jesus, none were his contemporaries.
If you have any name, provide it.
Some Bible historians even go as far as discarding Josephus' account.
Of course I know you won't drop any names, you don't have any.

Wow for real?
Sorry ignorant one, u didnt list all.
Just use your google and get contemporary historians who lived in Jesus era.

Besides, i thought your dictionary definition of "contemporary" had multiple meanings??
Anyway, its you so I am not surprised.

Get educated.