to offer your comments click here >> Discussion Forum

Josephus' Historical Record of Christ

"At face value, Josephus appears to be the answer to the Christian apologist's dreams. He was a messianic Jew, not a Christian, so he could not be accused of bias. He did not spend a lot of time or space on his report of Jesus, showing that he was merely reporting facts, not spouting propaganda like the Gospel writers. Although he was born in 37 AD and could not have been a contemporary of Jesus, he lived close enough to the time to be considered a valuable second-hand source. Josephus was a highly respected and much-quoted Roman historian. He died sometime after the year 100. His two major tomes were The Antiquities of the Jews and The Wars of the jews. Antiquities was written sometime around the year 90 AD. It begins, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth," and arduously parallels the Old Testament up to the time when Josephus is able to add equally arduous historical details of Jewish life during the early Roman period. In Book 18, Chapter 3, this paragraph is encountered (Whiston's translation):

FORGERY IN THE HISTORY BOOKS TO GIVE CHRIST AUTHENTICITY (see more)
see Jewish - Christian Gods.

"Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderfulworks, (check link) a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day." (check the link) This truly appears to give historical confirmation for the existence of Jesus. But is it authentic? Most scholars, including most fundamentalist scholars, admit that at least some parts of this paragraph cannot be authentic. Many are convinced that the entire paragraph is a forgery, an interpolation inserted by Christians at a later time. There are many reasons for this:

"why is a whole paragraph about a "Jesus" totally absent from the original historical printed records?"

1.The paragraph is absent from early copies of the works of Josephus. For example, it does not appear in Origen's second-century version of Josephus, contained in Origen Contra Celsum where Origen fiercely defended Christianity against the heretical views of Celsus. Origen quoted freely from Josephus to prove his points, but never once used this paragraph, which would have been the ultimate ace up his sleeve. In fact, the Josephus paragraph about Jesus does not appear until the beginning of the fourth century, at the time of Constantine. Bishop Eusebius, a close ally of Emperor Constantine, was instrumental in crystallizing and defining the version of Christianity which was to become orthodox, and he is the first person known to have quoted this paragraph of Josephus. Eusebius said that it was permissible for Christians to tell lies if it furthered the kingdom of God. The fact that the Josephus-Jesus paragraph shows up at this time of history, at a time when interpolations and revisions were quite common, makes the passage quite dubious.
Many scholars beheve that Eusebius was the forger.

2.The passage is out of context. In Book 18, which contains the paragraph about Jesus, Josephus starts with the Roman taxation under Cyrenius in 6 AD, talks about various Jewish sects at the time, including the Essenes, and a sect of Judas the Galilean. He discusses Herod's building of various cities, the succession of priests and procurators, and so on. Chapter 3 starts with a sedition against Pilate who planned to slaughter all the Jews but changed his mind. Pilate then used sacred money to supply water to Jerusalem, and the Jews protested. Pilate sent spies into the Jewish ranks with concealed weapons, and there was a great massacre. Then comes the paragraph about Jesus, and immediately after it, Josephus continues: "And about the same time another terrible misfortune confounded the Jews . .." Josephus, an orthodox Jew, would not have thought the Christian story to be "another terrible misfortune." It is only a Christian (someone like Eusebius) who would have considered this to be a Jewish tragedy. Paragraph 3 can be lifted out of the text with no damage to the chapter. It flows better without it.

3.Josephus would not have called Jesus "the Christ" or "the truth." Whoever wrote these phrases was a Christian.

Josephus was a messianic Jew and never converted to Christianity.

Origen reported that Josephus was "not believing in Jesus as the Christ."

4.The phrase "to this day" shows that this is a later interpolation. There was no "tribe of Christians" during Josephus's time.

Christianity did not get off the ground until the second century.
Last Days Report showing that the original manuscripts of Josephus have been corrupted
by the Catholic Church to maintain support for their spurious mythical jesus story.

5.Josephus appears not to know anything else about Jesus outside of this tiny paragraph and a reference to James, the "brother of Jesus" (see below). He is silent about the miracles of Jesus, although he reports the antics of other prophets in great detail. He adds nothing to the Gospel narratives, and says nothing that would not have been known by Christians already, whether in the first or fourth century. In all of Josephus's voluminous works, there is not a single reference to Christianity anywhere outside of this tiny paragraph. He relates much more about John the Baptist than about Jesus. He lists the activities of many other self-proclaimed Messiahs, including Judas of Galilee, Theudas the magician, and the Egyptian Jew Messiah, but is mute about the life of one whom he claims is the answer to his messianic hopes.

6.The paragraph mentions that the life of Jesus was foretold by the divine prophets, but Josephus neglects to mention who these prophets were or what they said. In no other place does Josephus connect any Hebrew prediction with the life of Jesus. If Jesus truly had been the fulfillment of divine prophecy, Josephus would have been the one learned enough to confirm it. The hyperbolic language is uncharacteristic of a careful historian: " . . . as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him . . ." This sounds more like the stuff of sectarian propaganda.

Christians should be careful when they refer to Josephus as historical confirmation for Jesus. It turns around and bites them. If we remove the forged paragraph, the works of Josephus become evidence against historicity.

If the life of Jesus was historical, why did Josephus know nothing of it? And why did the Catholic fathers corrupt the original writings of Josephus by adding a clause to describe jesus?"

NO READER OF THIS TEXT HAS CLAIMED THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OFFERED ON THE INTERNET BY MANY SITES WITH AUTHENTIC HISTORICAL PROOF WITH INDEPENDENT HISTORICAL RECORDS OF THE EXISTANCE OF A REAL PERSON CALLED JESUS CHRIST WHO DID ALL THE THINGS ACCREDITED TO HIM.

Last Days Report showing that the original manuscripts of Josephus have been corrupted
by the Catholic Church to maintain support for their spurious mythical jesus story.  see Jewish - Christian Gods.

to offer your comments click here >> Discussion Forum

For more details on this issue refer to the author:"
http://www.users.bigpond.com/pmurray/Rants/doc/lfif-51.html