Josephus on Jesus: Was There a Real Jesus Christ?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 ก.ย. 2024
- Did Jesus exist? In this video clip, Mikel Del Rosario examines ancient Jewish evidence for Jesus outside the Bible, focusing on the discussion surrounding Josephus' Antiquities. Watch the full-length presentation: "Did Jesus Exist? A Doubter's Guide to Historical Evidence Outside the Bible" • Did Jesus Exist? A Dou...
Related resources:
A Doubter's Guide to Jesus: An Introduction to the Man from Nazareth for Believers and Skeptics
amzn.to/3rp8hzu
Is Jesus History?
amzn.to/2KA88Zg
Who Is Jesus?: Linking the Historical Jesus with the Christ of Faith
amzn.to/3phTzIG
This presentation was part of the Reasons to Believe series including speakers like Craig Evans, Sean McDowell, and Greg Koukl. It was recorded live at Sun Valley Community Church in Gilroy, CA. Invite Mikel Del Rosario to speak at your church:
apologeticsguy....
#christian #apologetics #apologeticsguy
----------
Disclaimer: Amazon affiliate links above (I may receive a commission at no additional cost to you).
Comments Policy: This is a safe space for Christians and truth seekers looking for clear answers to tough questions about God, Jesus, or the Bible. By posting in the comments section of any video on this channel, you agree to engage in civil discourse about the topic of the video itself, keeping your comments kind, charitable, respectful, and free from ad hominem attacks, name-calling, hate speech, or bullying. Any comments which do not abide by the spirit of the comments policy will be hidden or deleted. See my rationale for this policy here: • Video
I love how this clips ends, “everyone knew Jesus is for real.” THAT’S how that clip should end. Would like to have heard the entire presentation.
Thanks again for engaging with me here. BTW, I wanted to let you know that I just posted the full presentation. th-cam.com/video/ZXePxjPgF9Y/w-d-xo.html
@@apologeticsguy Sweet! I’ll check it out today.
@@CarolinaChristian Great. I'll "see you" in the front row. 😂 You'll be joining me virtually at Sun Valley Community Church in Gilroy, CA! 👍
How the passage in Josephus ends: …….. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day. About the same time also another sad calamity put the Jews into disorder, ....so that apparently was Josephus's opinion of Jesus.
Yes, another confirmation that he wasn't a follower of Jesus. Thanks for watching, Mike!
Thank you so much for sharing this. It is so interesting. God bless you.
You are so welcome. Thanks for watching.
BTW, I wanted to let you know that I just posted the full presentation! th-cam.com/video/ZXePxjPgF9Y/w-d-xo.html
Mr. Rosario is making statements that he possibly could not have known. For example, he says, no Jew would have made a statement like that? How does he know that? Does not the Bible say that many believe in him? He is just following the train wreck of other skeptics.
I love hearing of the historical accounts from Josephus... do you kno of any other reliable biblical historians..all of this makes me want to dig deeper..
Yes! I just posted the full presentation! th-cam.com/video/ZXePxjPgF9Y/w-d-xo.html
Josephus, did not, use the name, Jesus. Josephus, was not, a Jew. LIE, Lie!
As I say in the video, he names Jesus in book 18 and book 20, where he is merely clarifying who James is by referring to the more famous brother. Why do you doubt that Josephus was a Jew?
@@apologeticsguy
Josephus hebrew name; Josef ben Matthias is a word-play
Claudius divius = Joseph of Arimathea, the skilled 'carpenter'
Claudius brother Germanicus = Nathhanael, nathan, mathan, matthew, mattthias
Heil, helios, elias, elymas the egyptian, exlai, klopas, zebedeus and Cornelius.
Josef ben matthias = Joseph son of Mathan (as in the gospel gyneaologies) but
it means Joseph successor of his brother Mathan in the same way Simon bar Jonas means ; Peter (seneca) successor of the baptizer (nero julius ceasar ) . Josephus possible a jew becuz he wrote very detailed on the jewish case, a roman-sided propagator from unknown origin .
I'm fascinated by the writings of Josephus. Thanks for the video!
Glad you got some value here, Kevin. Thanks for watching and dropping a comment!
BTW, I wanted to let you know that I just posted the full presentation! th-cam.com/video/ZXePxjPgF9Y/w-d-xo.html
I find Josephus' writings so remarkable! It was interesting to learn a little bit more about him and a greater context of the life of Jesus!
Yes, he is an interesting figure to study for sure. Thanks for watching and commenting!
The Christ means enlightened one
Ive been studying some of Josephus, and decided to order some of his writings
Thanks again for engaging with me here. BTW, I wanted to let you know that I just posted the full presentation. th-cam.com/video/ZXePxjPgF9Y/w-d-xo.html
Why didn’t Jesus write down anything he said or thought? Was it because he was illiterate like most people of that time. I am not saying there wasn’t a man named Jesus but I just don’t believe in the supernatural part of his story.
I appreciate you watching, Paul. I understand how people are hesitant to consider the possibility of a supernatural world in general-even apart from the Judeo-Christian worldview. Still, I believe Jesus was literate. Luke records him reading from the Hebrew Scriptures in the temple and there is also a story which was not original to the Gospel of John that notes Jesus wrote something down.
he should strengthen the witness of Josephus from the arabic transcription of Josephus which was not contaminated by editing
Interesting thought. Thanks for watching!
Jesus was Nerones (chrestos)
Ananus was Seneca (simon magus)
James the just was Germanicus ( Zacherias barachai )
Jesus ben Pandera was Nero JC ( Joses the baptizer)
Jesus ben Kamtza was Jochonan ben Zakkai ( Jonas, Junias, Ufus )
James the less was Drusus JC (andrew, andronicus, Stephanos, Rufus )
Thanks for watching and sharing your ideas here. What are you trying to say about the Jewish evidence for Jesus?
"but other parts actually do" (...do belong to Josephus). Well, that is the point to be demonstrated, not an a priori conclusion.
We can tell what was likely original because we see what the obvious additions look like. Even the agnostic scholar Bart Ehrman says "the most prominent Jewish historian of the first century knew at least something about Jesus-specifically that he was a teacher who allegedly did wonderful deeds, had a large following, and was condemned to be crucified by Pontius Pilate. This account confirms some of the most important aspects of Jesus’ life and death as recounted in the Gospels (Jesus Interrupted, p. 150)." amzn.to/3oPH9be. See also John Meier's discussion in A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus. amzn.to/3ikhaWX
well done, beloved!
Thanks, brother!
I’m an atheist who definitely believes Jesus existed but I don’t think that proves his Inherancy just as We don’t believe in zeus existed because real people in the past cared enough to write about it . Just as when Paul called their God ( the Christian god )the missing idol statue in Athens . ( I might be incorrect in the exact wording of that )
As an atheist who believes Jesus existed, you are in good company with agnostics like Bart Ehrman who defend the historicity of Jesus against popular mythicists. But don't understand what you mean by "I don’t think that proves his Inherancy." Could you clarify?
@@apologeticsguy I just mean we can write anything on paper and that doesn’t mean it exactly happened that way . I’m willing to grant the idea that these people saw impressive leadership skills from Jesus . However to me that just acknowledges historical presence and that’s obvious to me because I’m a honest person but not his spiritual significance. There are plenty of other things that get off the ground and worshiped .
@@shanechavarria9532 I hear you and appreciate your honesty. While this data supports Jesus' existence, the evidence for and significance of his claims and resurrection need to come into play when you consider why a movement of Jews began to worship him as a divine figure.
@@shanechavarria9532 Thanks again for engaging with me here. I wanted to let you know that I just posted the full presentation. th-cam.com/video/ZXePxjPgF9Y/w-d-xo.html
Let's not forget these passages didn't appear in any of Joseph's writings until the 4th century. Eusebius first mentioned this passage in the 4th century. There wasn't any mention of it until then... hmm sounds like the church fathers forging again o try and back up this rediculous story. Jesus was a jew. Jews don't believe in heaven or hell, the devil, demons, or zombies, yet the gospels say he talked the devil, cast out demons, and bodies rose from the grave when Jesus died. See Matthew 27 vs 52. How can we take this story seriously.
I explain the issues with the text in my video. The Pharisees were 1st century Jews who believed in angels and demons. In fact, they accused Jesus of being in league with the devil! How can you say they rejected belief in these things?
@@apologeticsguy when having conversations with Jewish friends of mine both orthodox and secular, they find these passages about heaven and hell and demons not realistic for a Jewish to believe. The only reason Jesus would have believed in these "" is if he was a gentile "" is their response.
@@paullkaplan4140 Interesting. Still, the Hebrew Scriptures, along with the Apocrypha, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and even the Pseudepigrapha show that many ancient Jews held to the reality of these things.
Read isaiah 43 vs 10,11,and twelve for God's opinion on the Jesus story.
How could you be sure which statement has not been changed?
At minimum, Book 20 makes it more likely that he mentions Jesus in Book 18. The passage in the video makes good sense without the additions I noted. We can tell what was likely original because we see what the obvious additions look like. Even the agnostic scholar Bart Ehrman says "the most prominent Jewish historian of the first century knew at least something about Jesus-specifically that he was a teacher who allegedly did wonderful deeds, had a large following, and was condemned to be crucified by Pontius Pilate. This account confirms some of the most important aspects of Jesus’ life and death as recounted in the Gospels (Jesus Interrupted, p. 150)." amzn.to/3oPH9be. See also John Meier's discussion in A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus. amzn.to/3ikhaWX
@@apologeticsguy check the youtube video josephus on jesus, some interesting points there
Didn't realize that----there was no debate whether Jesus did the miracles----it was a matter of where the power came from. Mikel---I would consider pulling some shorts from either this video or the "Did Jesus Exist" video. This is clearly your expertise, and more people need to hear it.
Great idea! Thank you!!!
"Son" of God doesn't mean He is a "real Son" of God. "Son" means that He DERIVES from God, in other terms He WAS in a remote past the almighty God. He differs in that He hasn't his power any more, He is like a normal man now. When Jesus talks to the Father, He talks thus to a "different Himself" (the Father talks from that remote past). God is thus more than One and less than Two in number.
Thanks for engaging with me on here. I'm not sure how this is relevant to the content of my presentation but I'm curious to know why this view of Jesus is convincing to you. Where did you read this?
@@apologeticsguy Nowhere, that's the result of my work on the topic over some years (I have a youtube channel). The existence of the nonsensical Trinity doctrine has been blocking any work on this topic for two millenniums by the use of violence, but now is losing power.... For logical reason, the almighty God CANNOT make his work (relationships with us...) in REAL TIME NOW. He COULD and He HAD to do it BEFORE THE START of the world. This means that when the world started, ALL God's word was already COMPLETED. He could get rid of his omnipotence - no longer necessary - to become like a normal man (the Son of God) and join the mankind.
Was there a real Josephus?
I believe the atheist New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman says Josephus is the only 1st century Jew who is historically better-attested than Jesus!
Maybe they wrote & inserted the entire thing.
Anything's possible, but historians weigh the data to suggest what is more probable than not. And it seems more probable that Josephus actually mentioned Jesus twice in his 20-volume set. For example, the second mention in James is a passing reference and doesn't include any pious additions like the very obvious parts in book 18.
@@apologeticsguy all data that there is points to a complete forgery for the TF. Your argument for the veracity of 20.200 alluding to a James is weak tea. The real reason this James is only mentioned in passing is because the story is NOT about him, it's about how his real brother, Jesus ben Damneus came to be appointed High Priest at the expense of his predecessor. Due to a complete lack of attestation for Jesus in any contemporary or near contemporary pagan or Jewish 1st century writing, the mere mention of A James & Jesus in the same paragraph sent some Christian scribe into a frenzy. More levelled headed historians, who don't labour under the assumption of a historical Jesus are at least prepared to admit that this is most probably a marginal gloss, mistaken for a correction and imported into the text. After all Josephus doesn't say this James was a christian people like yourself just assume that he is. More damning than all of this is that there is not the slightest reference to this incident in 62CE, the death of God’s brother, in any epistle or early church history. So we have the laughable situation of a hostile Jewish historian, based in Rome who apparently knows more about the death of Jesus's brother than any Christian does!!!! No wonder mythicism has made such progress since the publication of Doherty's The Jesus Puzzle.
@@ghostriders_1 >"all data that there is points to a complete forgery for the TF" -- And yet the vast majority of scholars in the field believe it was interpolated. Both claims have a virtually insurmountable problem: if that is what happened then who ever did it would have to know, with virtual certainty, that no one else would know what the original said.
>"Your argument for the veracity of 20.200 alluding to a James is weak tea." -- No scholar in the field says such a thing.
>"Doherty's The Jesus Puzzle" -- LOL! Great (NOT!) source!
@@davidconklin9552 you haven't said much of any interest. Forgery/interpolation, you seem to think they mean different things. Your second comment, even if true, which it is not, is an appeal to authority (a logical fallacy). If every modern scholar has inherited, uncritically the Christian assumption that Josephus is referring to a brother of Jesus that doesn't make it a fact! Fact is it's a story about 2 High Priests not Christians. One of these two is elevated to the priest hood because the previous HP killed his brother. If this story involved Jesus Josephus would have back referenced the TF in Volume 18....assuming it was even there! You seem to be implying that there is no evidence that Christians didn't deliberately or accidentally change or tamper with texts that they were the sole custodians of. The evidence does not support you.
Josephus was writing about titus flavius alias Jesus Christ...
Hey, thanks for watching and engaging me here. What historical evidence did you weigh and how were you persuaded to adopt this view?
No scholar in the field, that I have read so far, makes such a suggestion.
Nerones Chrestos son of Ananus ( albinus ) grandson of Heli os ( festus )
( Huqoq Elephant Mosaic ) it's not titus
Baloney - you need to read Dr. Richard Carrier’s book on the historicity of Jesus. He gives him a 1:3 chance of existence.
Carrier is virtually alone in his views when it comes to PhDs in relevant fields like classics and ancient history. Have you looked into the primary sources for yourself, or have you let Carrier form your view? Hope this presentation at least gives you the rest of the story!
@@apologeticsguy I was a dedicated Christian for 50 years. My views have been primarily formed by the Bible, which I have read multiple times. The Bible is pure mythology, the timeline is completely off, the history of mystery cults clearly places Christianity among those, there is no archaeological evidence to support the claims made in the Bible, the authors of the Bible are questionable, the supposed crucifiction of the mythological Jesus would be just like every other human sacrifice, there is no historical evidence to back up the “stories” in the Bible, science completely debunks the young earth theory besides which I have never had one single prayer answered in my life. Having taught Sunday School, VBS and being in a family of pastors I have given Christianity more than ample opportunity to prove itself. Critical though, science and history convince me it is all mythology just like Thor, Zeus, Venus...I never have enjoyed mythology. I would rather live in reality and appreciate the life I have right now. BTW only 43% of Americans consider themselves affiliated with any religion. Truth matters.
@@Beegee1952 you were never a christian
@@stephenlynass8170 So you can see into my heart and read my mind? You could make a living as a psychic! Wow, impressive.
@Coobest 64 Read the book, you’ll find them. Why should I be the only one willing to invest the time and effort into education?