Bi-Weekly Apologetics Report: Josephus

By Anonymous -
A few days ago on You Tube, I found an interesting comment in Brain Outy’s discussion page (here is a link to her main page):

Brain Outy's You Tube Page

This lady also has a website:

Brainout's Lord Pages

First, I will start with some background about her: She goes (or used to go) to the Berachah Church in Houston. R.B. Thieme II used to be the pastor there until he passed away several years ago. According to some things I have heard and read about this guy and this church, I am glad I never went there:

Internet Monk: Whatever Happened to R.B. Thieme II

Thiemite Blog

This pastor believed in some un-biblical things, like Super Grace, Ultra Super Grace, and the Privacy of the Priesthood to name a few.

As for this Brain Outy lady, I have read through her site, and I think that she said something about how the Devil can eventually beat God (or something). If she believes that, then she is a little messed-up.

Now, on to the comment. It had to do with a video that she did about a You Tuber named Zoroaster and his video:

Zoroaster's Fake Scholarship

She refutes a claim by this guy that the Bible is based on Josephus’ account.

In Brain Outy’s discussion section, someone named danieljliversLXXXIX had this to say at the end of a rant against her (based on her critique of Zoroaster's video):

Of course, we can simply write this off, along with the TF, and just say that Josephus never heard of Christ or Christians and call it a day. Either way is fine by me.
Did I read this right? Is he totally writing off the Testimonium Flavium as an extra-biblical source that talks about Jesus?

If that’s his intent, then his thinking doesn’t jive with many scholars. According to this entry on DOXA, there is a list of over 30 scholars that accept at least a core passage:

DOXA: Josephus

Also, on top of that, this link confirms the authenticity of the James-Jesus passage:

The leading Josephus scholars, Prof. Louis Feldman (Yeshiva University) and Steve Mason (York University) state:

“That indeed, Josephus did say something about Jesus is indicated, above all, by the passage - the authenticity of which has been almost universally acknowledge - about James, who is termed (A, XX, 200) the brother of “the aforementioned Christ” (Feldman, Louis H, Introduction in Feldman, Louis H. and Hata, Gohey “Josephus, Judaism, and Christianity”, Page 56)

“Nevertheless, since most of those who know the evidence that he said something about Jesus, one is probably entitled to cite him as independent evidence that Jesus actually lived, if such evidence were needed. But that much is already given in Josephus’ reference to James (Ant. 20.200), and most historians agree that Jesus’ existence is the only adequate explanation of the many traditions among the NT writings (Steve Mason, Josephus and the New Testament, page 174ff)”

“The authenticity of the James passage “has been almost universally acknowledged” by Josephan scholars. So, J.L. Hinman is right to appeal to Ant. 200 as independent confirmation of the historicity of Jesus.
 I also went to Tektonics to find more info on the TF, and I found this link:

Tektonics: Josephus

Here are a few quotes from this link:

The early church, Schreckenburg writes, saw Josephus as kind of a “fifth gospel” and a “little Bible” [Feld. JosJes, 317] because his works “appeared to Christian theologians to be a commentary or a historic appendix to the New Testament (ibid., 319).”Quote

“Quote Elsewhere, Meier [Meie.MarJ2, 59] notes that the “total interpolation” position has it’s respectable defenders, but it’s not a majority view. Among those he cites are Conzelmann, who sees the passage as totally an expression of Christian kerygma (though without substantiation), and Hermann, who regards the Testimonium, the short passage, AND the passage in Josephus about John the Baptist as Christian interpolations.
Holding goes on to answer various objections as to why the passage wouldn’t be at least partially authentic, and he ends this writing with a discussion on what we have learned about Christianity and/or Jesus from this writer.

Those two links give sufficient info to show that the TF and the James passage are sufficient sources of extra-biblical info about Jesus Christ. 






















Comments

Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) said…
very interesting JB. keep the reports coming.
5/10/2016 01:07:00 AM
Anonymous said…
Thanks!!
5/10/2016 09:52:00 PM
Don McIntosh said…
I love it. The process gets to be downright predictable: First some skeptic asks for extrabiblical evidence for Jesus (because the various Gospels and epistles in the New Testament are just one source, "the Bible"). When said evidence is provided, the skeptic then proceeds to hold it to a standard no historical-documentary evidence could possibly meet in principle (that it be demonstrably free of any possible corruption).
5/11/2016 07:34:00 AM
Anonymous said…
Don, I think that You Tube is a haven for this type of skepticism and ignorance. I watched a video on extra-biblical sources five years ago, and there were people who claimed that they were all forgeries without any facts to back that assertion up.
5/11/2016 09:05:00 AM
Don McIntosh said…
You're right, JB. As much as I appreciate (and take advantage of) the vast opportunities for communication provided by the Internet, the downside is that anyone can say anything, claim to know anything, and claim to be anyone. The claims you mentioned are right in there with the rhetorically powerful but demonstrably false assertion, "There isn't a shred of evidence for the existence of a God."
5/13/2016 01:43:00 PM
Joseph D. L. said…
You know where I'm from it's considered bad form to talk about someone behind their backs.

Okay, first thing's first: Xoroaster's video did not in any way infer that Christians were relying on Josephus's account. While people like Richard Pervo, Bob Price, and Richard Carrier do think that, X., as far as I am aware, does not. Secondly, the passage in question (regarding Jesus ben Ananus), to Xoroaster, was Josephus's interpretation of Christianity. Basically Josephus didn't know what Christians were on about with this Jesus schmuck, and likened him to ben Ananus, because he had no record of Jesus Christ.

Yet her video "exposing" X. completely missed that point and instead trailed off about him calling Jesus by his Greek name, which is absolutely irrelevant to X.'s point and just proves that she was pulling stuff out of her hat. What's more, when confronted on this, she had no ideal who Xoroarster was, even though she has made several videos on him. That's not too bright.

Now, in regards to the Testimonium Flavionum: really? This is still a thing? To argue for partial authenticity is only denying the obvious reality that lies before us. Had Josephus knew of Christ he would have gone into much further detail about him than he does, and would have lambasted him and his followers for being deceivers as he does with other wannabe messiahs. Never mind the fact that even if it is authentic, it's still only hearsay; and Jews who were actually alive to write about this wonder worker and the true Son of God, completely miss him or disregarded him. It doesn't look good for you either way.
7/15/2016 08:14:00 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How Many Children in Bethlehem Did Herod Kill?

By -
A couple of months ago, I wrote a post about the Gospel of Matthew’s account of the slaughter of the innocents. Therein, I argued that some of the skepticism about the account was unjustified. One argument I made was that the number of children killed in Bethlehem would likely have been no more than 20. Though obviously an act of great evil, the killing of 20 children would be much less likely to be noticed by historians of the time than the slaughter of thousands as later traditions speculated. In response to the post, Peter Kirby asked a few questions. He has patiently waited my response, continuously delayed by work, family, and the completion of my Acts article . Two of the questions had to do with how the amount of 20 was determined. Others with the omission of the account by Luke and the reliability of the tradition recounted by Macrobius. Peter also mentioned that there were other reasons to doubt the story's historicity beyond just the silence of other sources. I ...
Read more

The Bogus Gandhi Quote

By J. P Holding -
Image
I first made this post in 2012, and since then I've made a sort of mini-career out of tracking down bogus quotes like this one (including a video version below). It's a sort of fun microcosm of the way information is mishandled in the Information Age. ** I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ. – Mahatma Gandhi A Christian can probably expect to get this quote thrown at them at least once in their lifetime, and waved in their face many more. I had it put to me recently, but my experience with this sort of thing immediately led me to wonder -- is it real? The evidence at this point seems to be no. The first signal of a problem was that anywhere I found it, no source was given. That's often a sign that something is being passed around uncritically. Whether online sources or books, no one seemed to have a source for this quote. A second warning was that the quote has been given more than one context. As ...
Read more

Where did Jesus say "It is better to give than receive?"

By -
A visitor to the CADRE site recently sent a question about Paul's statement in Acts 20:35 which records Paul as saying, "And remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He said, 'It is better to give than to receive'." The reader wanted to know where Jesus said this. This was my answer: You are correct in noting that this saying of Jesus quoted by Paul is not found anywhere in the four Gospels. My own study Bible says "This is a rare instance of a saying of Jesus not found in the canonical Gospels." Does the fact that it isn't stated in the Gospels mean that it isn't reliably from the lips of Jesus? I don't think so. The Apolstle John said at the end of his Gospel (John 21:25): "Jesus did many other things as well.If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written." Obviously, this is exaggeration for the sake of making a point, but it means that Jesus ...
Read more

Discussing Embryonic Stem Cell Research

By -
Stand to Reason has published a list of "talking points" that can be used as a quick reference sheet for answering questions about embryonic stem cell research and why people ought to oppose this procedure. The piece, entitled "Are you against stem cell research and cloning?" give good, concise answers to some of the questions that arise concerning why Christians would oppose this procedure when it supposedly holds such great promise. For example, consider the following from the "talking points": Where do we get human embryonic stem cells? We can only derive human embryonic stem cells by killing a human embryo. Removing its stem cells leaves it with no cells from which to build the organs of its body. What is the embryo? An embryo is a living, whole, human organism (a human being) in the embryonic stage. All the embryo needs to live is a proper environment and adequate nutrition, the very same thing all infants, toddlers, adolescents, and adults need. ...
Read more

Tillich, part 2: What does it mean to say "God is Being Itself?"

By -
 In this essay, which is a chapter from the new book I'm now working on, I'm moving toward defining what I think Tillich means exactly by being itself. It's a long journey but an important one. What does Tillich actually mean by “being itself?” Does he mean the same things as other theologians who use the phrase? It’s a mysterious sounding phrase and Tillich never actually comes out and says what he means by it. As I will show there is a reason for this, and I will show what I think that reason in is. In the mean time the task of this chapter is to deduce exactly what Tillich actually means by this phrase. There are three basic possibilities: Three alternatives as to meaning (1) The basic fact that things exist is all that the concept of “God” amounts to. (2) There is a special quality to being, an impersonal aspect” ground of being” or “being itself” and that quality constitutes ‘the divine.’ This possibility excludes God as “king of the universe.” (3) God is b...
Read more

Revamping and New Articles at the CADRE Site

By -
We have changed the Christian History page at the CADRE site from the old design to the new one. The focus of the revamped page has expanded, with many new articles: This page provides links to websites and articles relating to Christian history, including theological development, notable figures, contributions of Christianity to society and culture, and the archaeological evidence for the facts of the Bible. We have also added four new articles by Darin Wood, PhD: John Chrysostum: His Life, Legacy, and Influence Dr. Wood provides an informative sketch of Chrysostum's life, as well as an exploration into his writings and impact on church evangelism. The Righteousness of God in the Pauline Corpus Dr. Wood examines the crucial role that righteousness plays in understanding Paul's perspectives on justification, propitiation, expiation, and covenant. The Structure of the Apocalypse Dr. Wood provides an in-depth analysis of the structure (or structures) behind the Book o...
Read more

The Folded Napkin Legend

By J. P Holding -
I wrote about t his "urban legend" a few years ago, but it's typical of the silly urban legends we hear about now and then, such as the idea that the head of Proctor and Gamble went on Oprah to pledge his allegiance to Satanism. Christians are no less gullible for this sort of nonsense than anyone else, and frankly, some seem more gullible to believe anything that they consider "edifying". It's no wonder we're mesmerized by self-comfort tunes like "I Can Only Imagine" that contain about as much useful theology as a thimble. ** The Gospel of John (20:7) tells us that the napkin, which was placed over the face of Jesus, was not just thrown aside like the grave clothes. The Bible takes an entire verse to tell us that the napkin was neatly folded, and was placed at the head of that stony coffin.... In order to understand the significance of the folded napkin, you have to understand a little bit about Hebrew tradition of that day. The fol...
Read more

A Botched Abortion Shows the Lies of Pro-Choice Proponents

By -
One of the classes I teach at the university is a course on Ethics, and I am using a book by Ralph Dolgoff, Donna Harrington and Frank M. Lowenberg entitled " Ethical Decisions for Social Work Practice " as the text. Overall, I think that it is a good Ethics textbook largely because it provides a balanced viewpoint on the need for values in social work. For example, the book makes the argument (without committing to it) that those engaged in social work cannot avoid making value judgments in ethical decisions because trying to do what is right necessarily involves making an value choice. Also, I book notes that some (including me) think it is ethically wrong for a social worker to cover-up her own values when counseling another person because it creates a false (and ultimately unproductive) relationship with the person being counseled. Still, one of the exemplars in the book gave me pause – not because I thought it raised a deep ethical quandary, but because I wondered how ...
Read more

Do you say this of your own accord? (John 18:34, ESV)

By -
Image
One of the most well-known events in Scriptures is Jesus' exchange with Pontius Pilate at his trial as described in John 18. In verse 38 of that chapter, Pilate asks the question that may be the most ironic in the history of the world, "What is truth?" A less known but equally intriguing saying of Jesus from an apologetics viewpoint can be found in Jesus' response to an earlier question in the same trial. It is a question that is not often quoted, but on those rare occasions when it is quoted, Jesus' response is often overlooked as not particularly important or relevant to today's world. However, it is my experience (as well as the experience of many people who have truly spent time studying the Scriptures) that little, if any, of what Jesus said in the Bible lacks significance across time. To best understand the response, it's important to see the response in context. The situation is this: Jesus has been arrested following His betrayal by Judas I...
Read more

A Non-Biblical Historian Accepts the Key "Minimum Facts" Supporting Jesus' Resurrection

By -
In their book, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus , Gary R. Habermas and Michael R. Licona argue for the historical reality of Jesus' bodily resurrection using the "minimum facts" approach. Rather than get bogged down in inerrancy and other debates, they focus on the key facts demonstrating Jesus' resurrection. For them, the key facts are: *Jesus' death by crucifixion. *Disciples' Beliefs that Jesus Appeared. *Conversion of Paul. *Conversion of James. *Empty Tomb. William L. Craig, another significant apologist for the historical bodily resurrection of Jesus likewise focuses, in his accessible The Son Rises , on the empty tomb and Jesus' resurrection appearance. Craig gives special emphasis to Jesus' honorable burial by Joseph of Arimathea and Jesus' appearances to James and Paul and their subsequent commitment to the Christian cause. Craig, Licona, and Habermas argue that these basic facts are generally supported by most of the relevant sc...
Read more