When I was 17 my mother wanted to tame her daughter's wild ways by getting me a job at "LDS Book and Supply" in Mesa, AZ. Well, in the end, it worked, because I went on to marry in the Temple and stayed a good Mormon girl for another 10 years.

While working in the book store, I unloaded, counted, and sorted books and supplies from boxes on shelves for customers to buy. In a town where Mormons were in the majority, it was the only place to buy Temple garments, and people loved to share testimonies. This was where I "gained my testimony" because others believed it, and when the store was slow, I read books. One of the books was this:
http://books.google.com/books?id=e0dAAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA622&lpg=PA622&dq=Flavius+Josephus+History+of+Rome&source=bl&ots=oUSuJuMym5&sig=2KX9JF4XT1fcgA6H8xvRlr-R188&hl=en&ei=pse5TcawFqXciAKvxrU1&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&sqi=2&ved=0CFIQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=Flavius%20Josephus%20History%20of%20Rome&f=false

It was hard to read and didn't make much sense for a 17 year old girl, but this I will tell you: If Christians or Mormons want to gain a testimony of Jesus from reading Josephus, they won't. I gained my testimony of Mormonism inspite of Josephus, and not because of him. Looking back, I should have payed more attention to him. The truth of Josephus as a historian is he wrote about the history of Jerusalum with regards to Rome and he became a Roman. Josephus accepted Roman legend. He wrote about Jesus and he wrote about Hercules! He wrote about his sons. Romulus and his twin brother Remus, orphans who were suckled and raised by a she-wolf, grew up and decided to build Rome.

Now, using logic and reason as ExMormons we should ask ourselves if we believe in Hercules because Josephus wrote about him and his children.

....that most christians have never heard of Josephus let alone rely on him for a "testimony".

most 17 year old Mormon girls have never heard of Josephus either, but there is a reason "LDS Book and Supply" carried his books. Just like a store that carries Mormon books, I wouldn't be surprised if they also carried his books. I have read Christian books, and talked to Christians about why they believe in Jesus. Josephus is often used as proof that Jesus was a real person among Christians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

I have never heard a Mormon say the shroud of Turin was proof of Jesus, but Christians use it as proof that Jesus was real and was resurrected.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shroud_of_Turin

I think the reason that Mormons don't know much about it is because the science doesn't support the shroud came from Jesus. Mormons like to think they have more faith and don't need proof. This is just my theory.

kentish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ....that most christians have never heard of
> Josephus let alone rely on him for a "testimony".


And he never said that Jesus was anything but a man. Unless you are implying that Christians base thir belief in the doctored paragraph of Josephus, which they don't, this is ridiculous. Joesephus was a Jew and Jews don't believe in pagan gods, although he might have mentioned them as just that-pagan gods. Besides even assuming that he believed in Hercules, Hercules 'existed' in the far distant past. Josephus was writing within a few years of Jesus' death. Very bad analogy.The sons of Hercules, BTW, were not Romulus and Remus.Their father was the war god, Mars. You may want to review your Josephus.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2011 06:50PM by bona dea.

In BOTH cases, Jesus and Hercules, Josephus had no first hand knowledge, he only relied on stories. One story may be older than the other but the ages of the story do not prove in any way if one is fiction or one is non-fiction.

So, bona, your claims about the age of the stories is meaningless to the discussion.

Other than you, bona, I see no one assuming anything about Hercules other than Josephus wrote about Hercules. If people want us to accept Jesus as a historical figure because of Josephus' writing and If Josephus wrote about Hercules as a historical figure (be it pegan god or man) then we would need to accept Hercules for the same reason. You can not cherry pick among the evidence.

So, we either accept that the people Josephes writes about are historical figures, in which case both Jesus and Hercules would have to be considered historical figures or acknowledge that just because Josephus writes about a person it does not mean that person is a historical person, that would included his writing about Jesus.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2011 06:56PM by MJ.

MJ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In BOTH cases, Jesus and Hercules, Josephus had no
> first hand knowledge, he only relied on stories.
> One story may be older than the other but the ages
> of the story do not prove in any if one is fiction
> or one is non-fiction.
>
> So, bona, your claims about the age of the stories
> is meaningless to the discussion.
>
> Other than you, bona, I see no one assuming
> anything about Hercules other than Josephus wrote
> about Hercules. If people want us to accept Jesus
> as a historical figure because of Josephus'
> writing and If Josephus wrote about Hercules as a
> historical figure (be it pegan god or man) then we
> would need to accept Hercules for the same reason.
> You can not cherry pick among the evidence.
>
> So, we either accept that the people Josephes
> writes about are historical figures, in which case
> both Jesus and Hercules would have to be
> considered historical figures or acknowledge that
> just because Josephus writes about a person it
> does not mean that person is a historical person,
> that would included his writing about Jesus.


The difference between two people who lived 50 or so years apart in the same country and two supposed people who lived several thousand years apart in different countries seems relevant to me. You go right ahead and believe what you like. Bye. I'm not up to another marathon with you.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2011 07:24PM by bona dea.

A true story is true if it is 50 years old or it is 2000 years old.

A false story is false if it is 50 years old or it is 2000 years old.

Sorry, bona, Josephus heard stories about both Jesus and Hercules. If anything the Hercules writing shows that Josephus will believe stories without verifying them as true, which means he may not have verified any story he heard regarding ANY historical figure, even Jesus.

And again, Bona, just because the Jesus story was only 50 years old does not mean it was TRUE, even to Josephus.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2011 07:06PM by MJ.

MJ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A true story is true if it is 50 years old or it
> is 2000 years old.
>
> A false story is false if it is 50 years old or it
> is 2000 years old.
>
> Sorry, bona, Josephus heard stories. If anything
> the Hercules writing shows that Josephus will
> believe stories without verifying them, which
> means he may not have verified anything story he
> heard regarding ANY historical figure, even Jesus.
>
>
> And again, Bona, just because the Jesus story was
> only 50 years old does not mean it was TRUE, even> to Josephus.J

Whatever, btw, he wasn't talking about Hercules. He was talking about Mars who was father to Romulus and Remus and he was relating a legend that went way, way back. He didn't say he believed it. He was relating the history of Rome from the Roman view. Not that you are capable of understanding that. BTW, the OP had Hercules mixed up with Mars which shows how much she knowsabout mythology.

The fact that Josephus talks about Mars does NOT negate the fact that Josephus talks about Hercules. Seriously, you would try to make such a point? REALLY?

http://books.google.com/books?id=1AMVAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA586&lpg=PA586&dq=Babylonians+was+superior+to+Hercules&source=bl&ots=BTW29m8dsF&sig=uEzwBUBqXF_F6p3MFQX5NCWcKbw&hl=en&ei=gPS5TeyTIcLZiAKNub0w&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Babylonians%20was%20superior%20to%20Hercules&f=false



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2011 07:16PM by MJ.

MJ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The fact that Josephus takes about Mars does NOT
> negate the fact that Josephus talks about
> Hercules. Seriously, you would try to make such a
> point? REALLY?
>
> http://books.google.com/books?id=1AMVAAAAYAAJ&pg=P
> A586&lpg=PA586&dq=Babylonians+was+superior+to+Herc
> ules&source=bl&ots=BTW29m8dsF&sig=uEzwBUBqXF_F6p3M
> FQX5NCWcKbw&hl=en&ei=gPS5TeyTIcLZiAKNub0w&sa=X&oi=
> book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBkQ6AEwAA#v=o
> nepage&q=Babylonians%20was%20superior%20to%20Hercu
> les&f=false
The point, for the learning impaired, is that the OP said Hercules was the father of Romulus and Remus. That makes me wonder how much she knows. Probably about as much as you.

for the truly learning impaired, The fundamental claim that Josephus talked about Hercules IS TRUE.

Yeah, you can try to divert attention away for the REAL FACTS and whine about something the OP was confused about, but it does not change the REAL FACTS for those of us that are actually trying to get at the TRUTH.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2011 07:21PM by MJ.

MJ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> for the truly learning impaired, The fundamental
> claim that Josephus talked about Hercules, Mars,
> Romulus etc. IS TRUE.
>
> Yeah, you can try to divert attention away for the
> REAL FACTS and whine about something the OP was
> confused about, but it does not change the REAL
> FACTS for those of us that are actually trying to
> get at the TRUTH.


MJ, you wouldn't know the truth if it bit you on the ass. Just saying. I'm not responding any more sinceI have other things to do. So get in the last word. The more you talk, the more ridiculous and dogmatic you sound.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2011 07:29PM by MJ.

bona dea Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> kentish Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ....that most christians have never heard of
> > Josephus let alone rely on him for a
> "testimony".
>
>
> And he never said that Jesus was anything but a
> man. Unless you are implying that Christians base
> thir belief in the doctored paragraph of Josephus,
> which they don't, this is ridiculous. Joesephus
> was a Jew and Jews don't believe in pagan gods,
> although he might have mentioned them as just
> that-pagan gods. Besides even assuming that he
> believed in Hercules, Hercules 'existed' in the
> far distant past. Josephus was writing within a
> few years of Jesus' death. Very bad analogy.The
> sons of Hercules, BTW, were not Romulus and
> Remus.Their father was the war god, Mars. You may
> want to review your Josephus.

I will give you that Hercules wasn't the father of the founders of Rome. However this does not give you the leeway to put words in other people's mouths. I didn't write that Josephus worshiped Jesus or Hercules as you imply. Very bad analogy.

It is not ridiculous that Christians have based their testimony on a doctored paragraph of Josephus. You need to review "Evidence That Demands A Verdict".

McDowell quotes two lines of evidence for the historicity of Jesus from Jewish sources:

1. Josephus provides independent confirmation to the life of Jesus. The most important non-Christian witness to the historical Jesus is Josephus, who wrote five works in Greek: Life, his autobiography; Contra Apion, a defense of Judaism; The Jewish War, an eyewitness account of the revolt against Rome (66-74 CE); Discourse to the Greeks Concerning Hades; and The Jewish Antiquities, a history of the Jews from Adam to his generation. McDowell cites two references to Jesus in The Jewish Antiquities; I will discuss them in reverse order.

(a) The reference to James as the brother of Jesus. Josephus described how the high priest Ananus took advantage of the death of the Roman governor Festus in 62 CE to organize a mob to stone James. McDowell mentions this passage because Josephus identifies James as "the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ:"

Arguements against McDowell's reference to Josephus by Jeffery Lowder:
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/jury/chap5.html

Mrs. Estzerhaus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> bona dea Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > kentish Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > ....that most christians have never heard of
> > > Josephus let alone rely on him for a
> > "testimony".
> >
> >
> > And he never said that Jesus was anything but a
> > man. Unless you are implying that Christians
> base
> > thir belief in the doctored paragraph of
> Josephus,
> > which they don't, this is ridiculous. Joesephus
> > was a Jew and Jews don't believe in pagan gods,
> > although he might have mentioned them as just
> > that-pagan gods. Besides even assuming that he
> > believed in Hercules, Hercules 'existed' in the
> > far distant past. Josephus was writing within a
> > few years of Jesus' death. Very bad analogy.The
> > sons of Hercules, BTW, were not Romulus and
> > Remus.Their father was the war god, Mars. You
> may
> > want to review your Josephus.
>
> I will give you that Hercules wasn't the father of
> the founders of Rome. However this does not give
> you the leeway to put words in other people's
> mouths. I didn't write that Josephus worshiped
> Jesus or Hercules as you imply. Very bad analogy.
>
>
> It is not ridiculous that Christians have based
> their testimony on a doctored paragraph of
> Josephus. You need to review "Evidence That
> Demands A Verdict".
>
> McDowell quotes two lines of evidence for the
> historicity of Jesus from Jewish sources:
>
> 1. Josephus provides independent confirmation to
> the life of Jesus. The most important
> non-Christian witness to the historical Jesus is
> Josephus, who wrote five works in Greek: Life, his
> autobiography; Contra Apion, a defense of Judaism;
> The Jewish War, an eyewitness account of the
> revolt against Rome (66-74 CE); Discourse to the
> Greeks Concerning Hades; and The Jewish
> Antiquities, a history of the Jews from Adam to
> his generation. McDowell cites two references to
> Jesus in The Jewish Antiquities; I will discuss
> them in reverse order.
>
> (a) The reference to James as the brother of
> Jesus. Josephus described how the high priest
> Ananus took advantage of the death of the Roman
> governor Festus in 62 CE to organize a mob to
> stone James. McDowell mentions this passage
> because Josephus identifies James as "the brother
> of Jesus the so-called Christ:"
>
> Arguements against McDowell's reference to
> Josephus by Jeffery Lowder:
> http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder
> /jury/chap5.html

I have read your references and the idea that Jesus didn't exist is not accepted by mainstream scholars and I agree with them. If you prefer conspiracy theories be my guest. I apologize if you didn't mean that Josephus believed in Hercules, however that is only one of many reasons why it is a bad analogy. Jesus died when Josephus was a small child and they both lived in the same small country. Even if they never met, they were close in time and geography.Hercules is an extremely old myth, probably dating to the stone age and he lived in Greece and then on Mt. Olympus. There is a big difference in time and geography. Besides Josephus mentioned Heracles as a legend.He mentioned Jesus as a local leader who lived in roughly the same time. That too is a big difference.I'm sorry you and MJ find it so amazing that the story of Jesus was fairly well known in Palestine in Josephus time.He mentions other preachers of the time and no one doubts their existence. There may be reason to doubt that Jesus did miracles and was the son of God, but the fact that he existed isn't remarkable and there is really no reason to doubt it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/29/2011 12:28AM by bona dea.

Source information (i.e. POLL DATA)

>
> I have read your references and the idea that
> Jesus didn't exist is not accepted by mainstream
> scholars and I agree with them. If you prefer
> conspiracy theories be my guest. I apologize if
> you didn't mean that Josephus believed in
> Hercules, however that is only one of many reasons
> why it is a bad analogy. Jesus died when Josephus
> was a small child and they both lived in the same
> small country. Even if they never met, they were
> close in time and geography.Hercules is an
> extremely old myth probably dating to the stone
> age and he lived in Greece and then on Mt.
> Olympus. There is a big difference in time and
> geography. Besides Josephus mentioned Heracles as
> a legend.He mentioned Jesus as a local leader who
> lived in roughly the same time. That too is a big
> difference.I'm sorry you and MJ find it so amazing
> that the story of Jesus was fairly well known in
> Palestine in Josephus time.He mantions other
> preachers of the time and no one doubts their
> existence. There may be reason to doubt that Jesus
> did miracles and was the son of God, but the fact
> that he existed isn't remarkable and there is
> really no reason to doubt it.

There are scholars on both sides. I trust using my own mind to reason this out, and my mind tells me there is no reason to think Jesus existed. The Christian Jesus has become indestinguishable from other Pagan godmen who ancient people worshiped. To a Christian, Jesus is NOT a preacher, and you know that.

Josephus wrote, "some claim he was the Christ". This is widely believed to have been doctored by Christians. It brings his existance into question, and disproves a conspiracy of scholarly reconstructions of a questionable existance.

Mrs. Estzerhaus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > I have read your references and the idea that
> > Jesus didn't exist is not accepted by
> mainstream
> > scholars and I agree with them. If you prefer
> > conspiracy theories be my guest. I apologize if
> > you didn't mean that Josephus believed in
> > Hercules, however that is only one of many
> reasons
> > why it is a bad analogy. Jesus died when
> Josephus
> > was a small child and they both lived in the
> same
> > small country. Even if they never met, they
> were
> > close in time and geography.Hercules is an
> > extremely old myth probably dating to the stone
> > age and he lived in Greece and then on Mt.
> > Olympus. There is a big difference in time and
> > geography. Besides Josephus mentioned Heracles
> as
> > a legend.He mentioned Jesus as a local leader
> who
> > lived in roughly the same time. That too is a
> big
> > difference.I'm sorry you and MJ find it so
> amazing
> > that the story of Jesus was fairly well known
> in
> > Palestine in Josephus time.He mantions other
> > preachers of the time and no one doubts their
> > existence. There may be reason to doubt that
> Jesus
> > did miracles and was the son of God, but the
> fact
> > that he existed isn't remarkable and there is
> > really no reason to doubt it.
>
> There are scholars on both sides. I trust using my
> own mind to reason this out, and my mind tells me
> there is no reason to think Jesus existed. The
> Christian Jesus has become indestinguishable from
> other Pagan godmen who ancient people worshiped.
> To a Christian, Jesus is NOT a preacher, and you
> know that.
>
> Josephus wrote, "some claim he was the Christ".
> This is widely believed to have been doctored by
> Christians. It brings his existance into question,
> and disproves a conspiracy of scholarly
> reconstructions of a questionable existance.
There are almost no scholars,at last ones in any relevant fields who buy your view. The ones who believe that either have no credentials or they have degrees in completely unrelated fields. I'm not going to argue this with you because it is pointless, but you are wrong about the scholars.People like Freke a, Gandy, Achyra S and her ilk have no credentials.Some of them are self published which should tell you something. Others have degrees in areas like geology or German.Using your mind is good, but you need correct information and I haven't see any from you. We have done this before and you seem to take these 'scholars'' word even when they totally misrepresent the myths and make up information out of whole cloth.Your own knowledge of mythology seems lacking too since you had Hercules mixed up with Ares.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/29/2011 12:39AM by bona dea.

That will never fly with Bona. Notice how she will make all sorts of "claims" about how many scholars believe this or that, but NEVER shows how she derives these numbers. Any LEGITIMATE scholar would reject the sort of tactic Bona used as the "appeal to authority" logical fallacy BS that it is.

Yes, Mrs Eszeraus, continue to use your own mind, but realize that Bona expects to be able to say "Scholars agree..." and have everyone nod in agreement and stop debating. If you do not, well this is an example of what you get:


http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,180334,180484#msg-180484

I invite you to read the thread up to that comment and decide for yourself if I have been "ridiculous and dogmatic" or if it was Bona.

Click below and feel the mighty rush of the Holy Ghost!:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PrLVgR6J84&feature=related
_____


Now, sing along with Jesus here, then ask yourself, "Which one is the more inspiring?":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVseBfMq_Dc



Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2011 05:51PM by steve benson.

It doesn't lend to his credibility that the earliest manuscript we have of Josephus' dates to the 10th or 11 century A.D. and the majority of scholars (even biblical scholars) attribute the so-called testimonium flavinium - the short paragraph that talks about jesus - as a fraud inserted by Eusibius in the 4th century.

Plus he was born 4 years after the supposed "crucifixion" so anything he may or may not have written down would at best be hearsay.

Lets not forget that the legendary Hercules was a half man, half god......just like the legendary Jesus.

I always wondered why I was expected to believe in the man/god Jesus, but not the man/god Hercules.

I always knew he was a real guy. Cool.

/TJ

I know this is an old thread but to me there is a better contrast to draw to show that Christians (or Muslims, etc) are deeply and profoundly hypocritical when it comes to accepting claims & evidence.

Śri Sathya Sai Baba of India claimed to be God until his death only in 2011, tens of thousands of miracles are attributed to him (including raising the dead, appearing to his followers after his death, appearing in distant locations instantly, producing objects including their holy ash, vibhuti). There are literally millions of living eye-witnesses to these "miracles". So we have the benefit of knowing with unquestionable certainty that this individual actually existed and claimed to be God and what the claims of his followers are.

If you reject that evidence and accept anything lesser then you are an intellectual hypocrite - there is no way around that that I can see.

You can say you feel emotionally that the 1 god out of thousands you've decided to believe in is the real one, but that is all you have at the end of the day.


We know for a fact that human testimony and subjective experience can be extremely unreliable, especially under altered states of consciousness in which "personal experiences" happen (see cognitive biases, memory biases, logical fallacies, etc).

And you would think that a God would know better than to rely on such extremely unreliable testimony.


And unless you believe that EVERY religion is completely true in its foundation then you must understand, on some level, that just because a group of people start believing something does NOT make it true -- especially when it comes to deeply superstitious and supernatural claims.

The human brain is WIRED by evolution to accept false positive detection of intention and agency.

The 'skeptic' who waited around to see if the rustle in the bushes was REALLY a predator/enemy didn't tend to fair very well. And when there was a rustle and you figured out there was no animal you attributed it to ancestors or spirits and eventually gods -- precisely because we FALSELY attribute agency where there is none.

That works out fine for our hunter-gatherer ancestors (more or less) but it is inexcusable to KNOW these things and ignore them and fail to account for them in your epistemology and claim about reality.


A couple of more quick points and then I will go

I ask Christians to read 1 Kings 18 and ask themselves if they *really* believe they could set bull meat on fire with prayer and if they failed to do so, should THEY be slaughtered as their holy book claims was done to others?

And before you come back with any moral arguments you'll need to account for why the Bible clearly endorses slavery and never once condemns the practice and why the Bible never speaks on the age of consent and indeed, has numerous relationships we would today label as pedophilia.

Then ask yourself, since it is lacking in the Bible, how is it that you come to know that an adult having sex with a child is wrong? Is it possible that you ARE able to make moral determinations even when you are lacking a directive from on high?

What we do know is that our sense of empathy for others is absolutely critical for the advancement of our ability to live in larger groups (and we can see in those lacking empathy, usually a product of emotional damage inflicted on them at a young age, is that they are sociopathic or psychopathic).

People often incorrectly view 'natural selection' as cutthroat -- but if you actually look at nature you'll find EVERYWHERE evidence of symbiosis (your cells only work because of a symbiotic relationship with mitocondria), cooperation, and interdependence because these traits allow the whole to be greater than the mere sum of the parts.

Josephus was a political tool who created stories and written materials for a price. He used myth and legend where he could and just made up stuff if he needed to.

He patterned the character Paul after himself and supplied the same outline to whomever "wrote" the four gospels.

Christianity for the most part is the result of men's imagination. We can speculate, but almost everything we read and study about the time of Christ is the version given to us by a author or editor from the 15th and 16th century.

I like the writings of Ralph ellis and Joseph Atwell, again with no hard evidence, but when you think about how a news story today can't be reported correctly for even one day, why should we think history is accurate in any way?

An interesting little tidbit about Josephus....
Many christians credit him as a relevant authority b/c he was a Jew, therefore they say that he must have some type of insiders information which they suppose lends his story credence.

That couldn't be farther from the truth.
Born a Jew, yes, however during the Jewish war (decades after Jesus was born by the way) he was captured by a Roman officer, who would eventually be the Roman Emperor. This Roman officer spared Josephus life and they became besties. Josephus met his father, another soon-to-be emperor and during this time conveyed the Jewish belief in the Messiah (NO MENTION OF JESUS TO HIM AT THAT TIME BY THE WAY). I repeat, during the war of Jerusalem, as Josephus stood by the soon-to-be emperors side, Josephus never mentioned ANYTHING about Jesus and the soon-to-be emperor, Flavius, knew NOTHING about this man Jesus the Messiah!! Flavius and Titus, father and son soon became emperors, and were fascinated with the Jewish Messiah concept which Josephus shared with them. Other emperors prior also had fascinations with the Jewish messiah concept, like Caligula.
Both Caligula and Flavius expressed a desire to take on the title of the Jewish Messiah.
ooops, the Jews didn't like that idea, most specifically Philo was not on board with a non-Jewish Messiah.... and voila, a previously unknown Jewish man Jesus the messiah was created decades later and supported heavily by Josephus with his Jewish credential and Roman connection, however Jesus was owned by Rome right from the beginning, which beginning was decades after 33ce, just as Josephus was owned by Rome.


Josephus went to Rome with his besties, the emperors, and decades later began writing about storylines that we have come to refer to as the Jesus storylines origin. From all I've read I'd say Josephus appears to have suffered from Stockholm Syndrome. The jews had no storyline in place about a man named Jesus who was considered a Messiah, which was interesting considering the Judea jews had knowledge of other men before and after Jesus.

Josephus' besties, emperor Falvius and Emperor Titus, were related to Clement1, the alleged first bishop/pope of Rome. Coincidental? hmmm.

There was a long prior history of a goal to Hellenize the Jews (with no real success) and Rome got on the band-wagon to Romanize the Jews. (this didn't prove successful either), but Rome did get a religion out of it which soon replaced Greece as the world power/world religion and put Rome in world religion power for millenia. Written documentation states that specific writers in league with this small group, Pliny or Tacitus, I can't recall which specifically, wrote about the disgruntled position of being inferior to Greece's world religion and power. History shows that was remedied as Rome still is known as a leading world religion. (Pliny1&2, Suetonius and Tacitus all had connections with each other, Josephus and with the emperors.)

Researchable documentation supports the above, yet there is no documentation other than Josphus decades later, and a few others who were in this group, that supports the Jesus Messiah stuff.



Edited 9 time(s). Last edit at 07/18/2012 03:52PM by dec.

Thank you dec for the info. I once heard that the New T. and the works of Josephus were published at the same time by the same fianacial backing ?

As far as Hercules goes, I think he was my YM leader back in the day.

Original n.t. drafts may have been written around the same time as Josephus work, but that's supposing the writers (Roman clergy backed) who are speaking of such original work are actually telling the truth. Documentation proves that many of them were rabid liars on the most part. I can't see any credible authorities dating it earlier than the Josephus era. The timeline would certainly make sense in light of the documentation we do have. That's why historians like Bart Ehrman like to claim that there "had to have been" verbal stories passed on, except that these verbal stories eluded the Jewish masses, and people like that would try to convince us to believe that the Jews kept the secret. Thousands of people who heard of Jesus (who didn't even convert to his belief) were keeping secret? Again, there is no timeline for any Jewish Man Messiah in Jesus era.


I have seen fanatic christians try to date the n.t. to 33ce. As I analyzed it I couldn't agree with the dating (nor have countless other non-christian sociologists/theology historians- and I was as impartial as I could get as I had no horse in the race).
From theologians and non-christian historians I seen that the only justifiction for dating the n.t. to 33ce is simply to support their belief in a man Jesus; otherwise logic based on data fails to make the jump and bridge that gulf.

Some of the n.t. can be dated more to the era of the Jewish Kitos war of 115 era and the war of 132, which makes more sense as to why the n.t. info seems disjointed and incomplete in connection with the 33ce era and looks more like the wars from the eras which certain books are dated.
That's why the writing of the n.t. seems all over the place.

The writers of the Jesus info were Grecian trained and some of them had political and military background. These were not uneducated people by any means. Most of the n.t. writers all claim connections with the early apostles but as you match timelines with info the early apostles are supposed to be sent out from Judea to do missionary work after Jesus and Stephans crucifions, yet Paul goes back to Judea to talk to these apostles of Jesus. Try tracking and dating these apostles to info in lands they may have arrived in. It doesn't work. The earliest timeline for some of the christian development in line with apostles might be stretched to the late 1st century, as in the case of Antioch, which happens to be in alignment with the Josephus/Rome work. Nothing can be located that supports the apostles preaching from 33ce to the time period of Josephus and his Roman colleagues. Everything pops us AFTER Josephus book and his Roman alignment.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/18/2012 04:26PM by dec.

Hate to break it to you, but Josephus didn't write a word about Jesus. Those were all put into his works, hundreds of years later, by Catholic Monks, in order to bring his writings in line with the teachings of the Mother Church.

dec or anyone else --- what are some good recomedations for reading about 1st century palestine from a non-christain perspective ?

Hwo does Josephus fit into the recent discoveries of many books that did not make it in the NEW T.?

Did the families that Josephus worked for get a return on their investment?