Dr. Mason has the greatest attitude in academia. Wish more academics would get off their high horses and be as open to analysis and value the research instead of the degree. I love this interview and both people.
Steve Mason continuously counsels caution in jumping to conclusions. He says conclusions are always provisional. He backs up this quote from Arnaldo Momigliano ----- "Historians must be prepared to admit in any given case that they are unable to reach safe conclusions because the evidence is insufficient; like judges, historians must be ready to say 'not proven'. Another excellent educational interview. Well done Derek and Steve.
Dr. Steve Mason is simply remarkable. He knows his world and makes compelling arguments about Josephus and the connections and lack thereof to Jewish Christian works. Absolutely appreciate this man. Thanks for having him on Derek
The good: A great scholar with seemingly unlimited patience and eagerness to teach. The bad: That scholar being constantly interrupted and distracted. I'm fast forwarding like crazy trying to find the topic in the title rather than some random question from the chat. Can't imagine watching this live, what an exercise in frustration if you want to hear about the topic Dr Mason came to talk about. It gets interesting, then oh shit another "superchat." Ever heard of holding the questions till the end?
I'm getting a bit frustrated by the continued hustle for superchat and 'likes'. It does interfere with the flow and cheapens the discussion, for me, somewhat. The "My Mythvision" in the slow, dramatic voice-over style is very cheesy too.
This was fantastic - so much to learn from history but also from ways of thinking! I loved the comment How do historians think and work. History is not looking at all for reliable sources. It is understanding where does the author come from, what is the angle and perspective and what story they are trying to tell. Everyone has some agenda. It is building the ”theory of case” which you construct as ’investigator’ from various stories. If everyone thought like historians world would be so much better place 😍
I've never understood any of the commotion over "lost tribes." It's not like the inhabitants of the Northern Kingdom of Israel were all either killed or deported. And it wasn't an overnight event. The war took over a decade. And during that time we can see the population and urban development in the Southern Kingdom of Judah SKYROCKET. Jerusalem grows in size like 5X at the end of the 8th century BC. Most Israelites just moved into Judah. Some stayed in Israel. And some were deported. Surely not all or even a majority.
The lost tribes ended up north of the black sea and were known as the Scythians and then moved westward and created the modern nations of northern Europe.
Josephus wrote that the Roman Emperor was the Messiah... a traitor turncoat through and through.... and just like Paul he was an appeaser who pretended to be all things to all people... but unlike Paul who did it to better hawk Jesus... Josephus peddled himself.
Professor Mason is a nice guy and a first rate scholar. I had occasion to hear many of his lectures in Toronto; his work on Josephus and first century Judaea is fascinating. His comparison of the atmosphere that prevailed in the aftermath of the Jewish War and the Iraqi invasion (23:40ff) is very apt.
The five survivors at Masada had hidden in a cistern so they avoided the group self-destruction and they could not have told the story of what had happened because they were in hiding when it happened. Once again, Josephus invented the speeches that he was reporting as history. His literary creation of these speeches pass muster as credible speeches such as might have been said but nevertheless they are in fact completely from Josephus' imagination. Just like Jesus' prayers in Gethsemane, no one knew exactly what was said (because there were no witnesses), but the writers created a believable script.
Aretas IV controlled Damascus "because Paul said so"? I found that part unconvincing, but the rest of the interview was all very solid. I especially liked what he said about the historian's mindset.
Answer to the comment below: because he wrote the story, as a story, for Romans to continue the Essene philosophy throughout the empire. And guess what! It worked. Christianity is a constructed philosophy.
is great that there is this medium for these retired academics to share their life long quest of seeking knowledge and understanding per their professional careers
He is Flavius Josephus. The worlds most interesting man in the history of 'er..., of history. "I don't always drink Jesus Juice, but when I do, I drink Jesus brand Jesus Juice."
Watch the video caesars messiah- all about the flavian creation of the new testament and basis of jesus christ- based off titus flavius warpath w jerusalem. This is joseph atwill he is onto something
For those who don't know about the Testimonium Flavianum, it reads as follows: "And there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if we really must call him a man, for he was a doer of incredible deeds, a teacher of men who receive the truth gladly, and he won over many Jews, and also many of the Greeks. This man was the Christ. And when, on the accusation of the leading men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first loved him did not cease to. For he appeared to them on the third day, alive again, the divine prophets having spoken these and countless other marvels about him. And even until now the tribe of the Christians, so named from this man, has not failed." If that's not a Christian interpolation, what else?
Do you read Greek and know what the Greek manuscripts say? Because that's just one example. What about the other mentions of Jesus known as the Christ and his brother James and then also a separate mention of John the Baptist, are they also interpolation? Because they link back to the original. It doesn't make sense for Josephus to mention James, the brother of Jesus known as the christ - i.e the one who he refers to earlier in the text in the testamonium. There's nothing wrong with the testamonium other than slight changes to the wording by later copyists, but even then the wording doesn't sound very Christian because Christians never said Jesus was the Christ, they said he is the christ. Additionally the earliest mention of the passage is by Eusebius who tells his readers to go and read the passage themselves in Josephus, so if he interpolated it, why is he telling everyone to go and read the original passage in Josephus work? Doesn't make sense and there's nothing wrong with Josephus mentioning Jesus known as the christ in Greek. Christ just is a nickname for him and a roman audience, it means the smeared one. That's very different from saying Messiah and there's no indication Josephus cared or believed in a coming Messiah as not all Judeans of the time held to the same beliefs, it was moreso Christians that later emphasised the concept of the messiah to give legitimacy to Jesus. No credible scholar agrees with you and the Greek of the testamonium is no different from the surrounding chapters or Josephus' works as a whole.
@@nutyyyy I'm not an expert, but I've read a lot of books by honest, non-biased experts. From your reply it's clear that your expertise leaves a lot to be desired, as well. So, I would recommend the peer reviewed book "On the Historicity of Jesus" by Dr. Richard Carrier, to begin with. Best regards. Be safe.
Maat Justicia - I’m an Egyptologist, archaeologist, and classical philologist. I have taught Greek and Latin, Ancient Egyptian, Akkadian, Hebrew and Aramaic. I assure you: the Flavian Testimony is most certainly a Christian interpolation (not a very good one, of course). Anyone who says otherwise clearly has no idea of what they’re talking about.
Jewish scholars are pretty unbiased about Josephus. Just like any other scholar in the western tradition, they study and use Josephus as a historical source, because that is exactly what it is, historical texts containing information on a period in time that we can never access otherwise.
Josephus wrote that the Roman Emperor was the Messiah... a traitor turncoat through and through.... and just like Paul he was an appeaser who pretended to be all things to all people... but unlike Paul who did it to better hawk Jesus... Josephus peddled himself.
@@davidburroughs2244 Look up the fine works of Ralph Ellis, which you can find here on youtube. Josephus and Paul have way too many similarities to be different people. I have also heard that both are merely literary creations, and neither is a real man. Although Ralph believes Josephus was the real man.
Saul/Paul is Germanicus ( matthan ben matthan, zacharias-barachias, nathana-el, Elias-Helios, Matthias/matthew). Joseph (named Justus) is Claudius (Germanicus brother) of Ari-mathea (the just, right or high place). After Simon Cephalos commits suicide they cast lots between Matthias and Joseph, the fate stands out on Matthias to be the instant new disciple/apostle. Josephus ben Matthias or Claudius successor (not son) of Germanicus. It seems the name is composed about the twin-brother's names. The same with the name Simon bar Jonah, meaning Chephalos successor (not son) of John (Nero Julius Ceasar). Justus did not realy lost the casting because he was already secretly a disciple of Nerones (Princeps). Luke is winking, signalling at the reader of Acts about the lots casting thing of Josephus. It's just 2 versions, as is often the case by F.J. Josephus reacting to, using Mark's gospel (he knows of), Luke reacting to, using Josephus work (he knows of). J. is born after G. died, no way the same man. P. is based on G. but the 'lifespan' of the character is shifted what makes Paul 'untimely born' , late not premature ! Paul is the extension of Germanicus lifetime. Germanicus (Nathanael) is the one premature, he can only see in the future by visions. (Luke is doing that for him in retro-perspective) ; - ) btw Ralph is less reliable then J. imo.
Josephus also repeated false mythology, so we shouldn’t assume everything he wrote had good evidence. For example, he wrote that the Book of Dani-El was shown to Alexander the Great in Jerusalem and Alexander claimed that he was the one prophesied. The Book of Dani-El, in its form as of Josephus’ writing, almost certainly did not exist until 165 BCE. Alexander had entered Jerusalem about 150 years earlier. See J quote in jimhamilton.info/2010/11/26/josephus-on-alexander-the-great-and-the-book-of-daniel/
I will suggest that the Book of Acts was written (by Paul) as a response to Josephus’ first writings. I think Paul was angry at his representation and tried to write an alternative history when questions were raised in his congregation. Furthermore, I suggest that Paul’s invention of “Stephen” is a mangling of “Josephus” and it is Paul’s way of metaphorically killing Josephus for telling the truth about Saulus of the Herodians.
Derek, I think the prodigal son story may pose Israel as the prodigal son. How many times do we read that Israel is “playing the harlot?” I am going to do some re-reading and see if it could be something different entirely.
I looked into them and they preach this we are based in Israel and ran from there in reality its a white guy named chuck in texas. That is the chief operating officer
I truly have no clue as to what happened to the unfortunate people caught up in Masada . But ? Desperate people who know that if they surrender, their family units will be broken up, they will be enslaved,killed, or worse then what josephus describes may well have happened.
Here’s a little tutorial on the numerology of the Bible. First of all, all the numerology, astrology and Astronomy from Persia, west, originates in Samaria, as far as I cn tell, The numerology and astrology of Asia is unavailable to me, I can’t figure it out. As a consequence, I have recently come to the opinion that Zoroaster is the source and is imported into the Bibical narrative by Enoch. His 7000 year Epoch, which I have just become aware of, is a useful template for the Biblical Narrative The BCE/CE nexus occurs in the 6th 700 years week of the Epoch and we are currently in about the 223 year of the 8th Veek. The elegant India-Arabic symbols we use were not universally adopted until the 13 century due to the promotion by Leonardo of Pisa. Anyone who has seen Arabic calligraphy written in sand would realize that the Arabic influence is the critical factor in its development. 19 is the Alpha and omega of divine number. The symbol for nothing, the null set, Zero, 0, does not exist in classic numerology. I don’t believe we could have computers without these two moral innovations; I couldn’t do numerology with the Hebrew Gematria or Roman Numerals. And, just for the record, I believe that the Hebrew alphabet began as the Gematria. 123 Mental 456 Material 789 spiritual//Moral (as in Geist = Mind/Spirit) this is a format I employ for certain analysis. In this commentary, iI want to illustrate how the number 5 touches all numbers. It has a number of connotations, including the senses and sex and man like Leonardo’s sketch but, in particular, the interior line in a miliary context. The Pentagon is designed around the interior line: you can get to any point in the Pentagon in ten minutes as a consequence. A strategic advantage of the rebellion of the Southern slave owners was the interior line. Sherman’s march to the sea, which began at Chattanooga, fatally penetrated the Southern interior line. In this regard, the feeding of the 5000 has a deliberate military significance: Jesus transformed a lynch mob determined to avenge the execution of John the Baptist to a Galilian milia the same sine and organization of a Roman legion. This military formation participated in the destruction of the XII legion in 66 and is the military formation Josephus was given command of and betrayed. As an ideogram, the number 15 represents a man with a purpose, such as the centurion in Mark 15:39 who speared Jesus on the cross. The 1 represents his spear and the 5 represents the centurion. Peter’s reference to Acts 15:7 is the Holy Spirit pointing at the unilateral covenant cutting ceremony betwen God and the centurions of the Italian Cohort in the Gospel of Peter, the 15 refrs to the centurion in charge and the nmuber 7, points the way. 7 has many functions, including as a lightening rod in Daniel 7:13, 13 being the Finger of God. Just to illustrate the sense of humor of the Holy Spirit, the introduction of Cornelius in Acts 10 is a reference to the X Legion that occupied the Mount of Olives during the reduction of Jerusaem. The Leg X was one part of the permanent garrison of Caesarea that Cornelius commanded, . ’ You miss so much with the Post Modern Historical Deconstruction of dialectical Marxism. You never bet beyond broken pottery. The Parable of the Prodigal son is a recasting of the Odyssey: the Prodigal Son is Odysseus and the contrast between his homecoming to Ithica and the homecoming of the Prodigal Son is the contrast between the gods of the Total Depravity Gospel of the Old Testament and the New Wine of Jesus is the point, The Prodigal Son is the essence of the Gospel of Luke that he intends to convey to Theophilus. In literature, the Prodigal Sonis considered the perfect short story. O'Henry’s The Gift of the Magi is often compared favorable to the Prodigal Son. If Paul had employed the Parable of the Prodigal Son on Mars Hill instead of his lame legalistic argument of the Unknow God, he might have converted Athens. The Gospel of Mark was written by Cornelius as an intelligence report to Theophilus. He expected this report to be taken as literally as a Presidential Daily Briefing by the CIA. As Dr. Tabor intuits. The Gospel of Mark and the Gospel of John are intended to be an entwined narrative. The Gospel of Mark is a Greco-Roman play by pay commentary of Jesus's ministry and the Gospel of John is a Hellenistic Jewish color commentary that adds the horse radish of Pssover missing from the Synoptic Gospels The Gospel of Matthew is a polemic that connects all the Jewish theological dots that Cornelius is unaware of and was composed to support Peter's Judaizing agenda. The Gospel of Luke is a research project to support the compilation of the Letters to the Hebrews by Theophilus which is a manifest that was creating the New Wine Skin to hld the New Wine of Jesus. It is totally derived of the Septuagint and, except for Ramans 13:1 - 7 Theophilus didn't give a fuck about Judaism, Rbbi Tavia Singer notwithstanding.
99% of the time I watch your podcasts on my TV and I can't hit the "Like" button because there is none. Maybe this is the case for many other people too.
Jewish tradition holds that Jews, Judeans, are descended from all 12 tribes for a number of reasons. First of which, all tribes intermarried. Automatically, all Israelites are descended from all tribes over time. Just like today, all modern Jews are descended from all Judeans 2,000+ years ago who had children, who had children and so on. Just like all Western/Central Europeans are probably descended from Charlamagne at this point. Probably numerous times over. It's just statistically impossible for that not to be the case given the size of these ancient populations, time passed and population size today. Anyway, second, there would have been those of all tribes living and working in Judah and those of all tribes living and working in Samaria. Remember, the Kingdom of Samaria was no more. Judah still had a proxy head and remained somewhat intact. So what we have in reality are tribal territory and tribal entity absorbed into these two Kingdoms at first in the pre exilic, Samaria and Judah. Ephraim, the symbol of Samaria really. So those of Samaria are often represented simply as Ephraim. But they mean Samaria by that, so not just those from the tribe of Ephraim. Ephraim was just to main territory of the previous Kingdom of Samaria or the Kingdom of Northern Israel, under Omri and such. But even at that point, when the Kingdoms split, there would have been those of northern tribes living and working in Judah and vice versa. Merchants, sailors, tradesmen etc... And when someone marries someone from another place, or in this case tribe, one of the partners will often move their extended family to the place of the new partner. So if tribes intermarried, this would have been taking place. If say a Benjaminite married a woman from Dan, that woman might bring her parents, grandparents and let's say younger brother with her. Well, now we have this whole family from Dan in Judah, and maybe 2-3 young kids even, who will eventually grow up as Judeans. Third, we also know it was Assyrian practice to take only like 20% of a population into exile. And not any specific tribe, but the wealthy and elite, the aristocracy. And Tanach also says only a portion of the northern Israelites were exiled. So in reality, NO entire tribes were exiled and scattered. None. Only individual Israelites and families, from all variety of tribes. And since Tanach has stories from both Northern and Southern Kingdoms, we also know many from the North must have fled to the south. Immigrating to Judah and becoming Judeans. And they would have been from all of the Northern tribes. And the literature itself certainly suggests this. Now Jews asserted that Samarians were sullied by Assyrians basically. And this eventually turned into the myth that Samaritans were Assyrian fakers. Which is the myth that made it into the bible. But in reality, Assyria only sent a portion of Assyrians to mix with the Samarians. They would have likely married an Assyrian aristocrat to a Samarian family and installed them as King or whatever. So Samaritans in reality are Israelites mixed with Assyrians. And Jews obviously are mixed with Greeks, Persians, Romans , Egyptians...... so this was always a really bigoted and ridiculous myth. The fact that it perpetuates in modern Orthodox Judaism and in Israel is pretty terrible honestly from a social perspective. Especially for the 1,000 or so Samaritans who still live in Israel. Samaritans by the way, who still perpetuate the tribes of EPhraim and Manasseh, the 2 biggest in the north. And Levi. But in Samaritan culture these are families, extended of course. So its hard to say when this tradition actually goes back to or how accurate the tribal identities are. Jews on the other hand, today, only have TWO tribal identities really. The first is Levi of course, and here we have family traditions of being Levite or Kohen. We can't know of course how far these family traditions go back, since the earliest records really go back to middle age Europe. And we know that Kohen for instance come from over 21 different, mostly unrelated male lineages. Levites from like 30. So we know these are only traditions and that these tribal identities do not actually show a patrilineal line going back to Aaron or Levi. As there probably was no Aaron or Levi, in this sense. As in Israelites were likely never from the 12 sons of one man. The tribes existed before the unifying myths were written. Which is why we get so much variation also. But anyway, so Jews still use Levi as a tribal identity for Levites and Kohen, and all non Levi are simply tribe "Yisrael", meaning all 12 sons of Jacob. Since all other Jews, by tradition, from all tribes, mixed, became Judeans and don't really have sub tribal identity any more. Of course, even in the 1st century, Jews were still claiming Benjamin, Judah mostly, and then Samarians Ephraim and Manasseh mostly. Well, it's likely this even in the 1st century, was just family tradition. Like each house had their patron tribe so to speak. The tribe they identified with. So it's not surprising most would identify with Judah, Benjamin, Ephraim and Manasseh. These were the 4 most prominent tribes in the myths. Benjamin I believe is where Jerusalem is I believe, and the Kingship started with Benjamin really. This probably represents a reasoning to why Judah sits on a throne of Benjamin so to speak. But even today there are Jews claiming to be from Benjamin or "House of David" and there is absolutely no way to know either. Just like there is no way to determine Kohen or Levite in reality. And the Cohen Model Haplo has been greatly misunderstood by the general public. It does NOT prove the biblical narrative but the complete opposite, as I've stated. Again, modern Kohen descend from over 21 male lineages, mostly unrelated. And just because a cluster is more closely related, doesn't mean that's the genuine one and that these go back to Aaron. It could mean a number of things, like this family just had way more children and survived to a higher degree. Or if Kohen began with 20 men, if 5 of them were brothers or cousins with the same male lineage, and the other 15 were all unrelated men, then over time, this one lineage would multiply exponentially, and we would see the genetic situation we see today. So yea, the CMH proves that no, Kohen and Levite are not descended from Aaron and Levi and it would be impossible to figure out otherwise. And the same for those claiming "House of David", meaning direct patrilineal descent from David through Solomon. Again, it appears at some point, families took on these traditions of claiming a tribe. But Levite and Kohen were definitely a social caste. A real one. That likely began as a priestly caste of mostly unrelated men who installed themselves as the upper caste in society. Which likely occurred with the Josian reforms or sometime around then. But we can possibly determine if those claiming Levite and Kohen today all actually go back to this social caste. Some certainly do as we see a caste pattern, but there's no way to know for sure. Anyway, from the Jewish perspective, Jews are descended from all 12 tribes. They still symbolically use Ephraim, as a symbol for all the exiled and scattered Israelites who weren't Judean. It doesn't mean the tribes themselves are lost and have no descendants though. So yes the view of the gospels would be more representative of the Jewish view. Which is probably why they call Samaritans frauds, because Jews have to be the only representatives of the tribes in order for this tradition to work. What the Christians and Josephus believed, which I would argue is more the Christian view, is more of just an allegory. There was never a time when Jews thought actual entire tribes were exiled and scattered.
This suicide pact among the resisters. They weren't allowed to kill themselves, so they killed each other. Must have been some fancy maths and talking to be the only survivor.
You are right about the complicated math problem (watch the video I link). Josephus says that they were locked in a pit. All that seems an invention to me, nothing of it hapened. I can not imagine the romans slaughtering the jews on the streets and negociating pleasantly with some men down on a cistern. I think he or one of his men were the ones who facilitate the entering of the romans in Jotapata. th-cam.com/video/uCsD3ZGzMgE/w-d-xo.html
Simon is Cephalos (the most high, his highness) thus a (high) priest. (Jair) Simon of Cyrene is a Landman, Gardener, Courtier thus a levite. (replaced the corpse) Simon is a Judean, Canaanite, Cypriote, Galilean and ... a Samaritan. (the woman at the well; his wife) In the parable he is all 3 (wink, wink, wink).
Josephus was their commander and he ordered these men to kill each other till there were two left. Then he surrenders to the Romans. This something he admits. Which is why he is considered a traitor. By the way he was a nasi in other words a prince.
Isn't it rather suspicious when the MC is the only one left standing when everyone enters a group suicide pact. The charade of a Roman general falling on his sword is somewhat beside the point. At the count of three everyone slashes his own jugular. My version, voluntary decimation after queuing up, the one who gets assigned an even number dispatches the one who is assigned an uneven one and so on. Some minor skill with numbers will give you the edge. Also, 40 POWs or so, there is always graft, lets sell them at the nearest emporium, two survivors, we can afford to be magnanimous, no great loss. Musical chairs details, Josephus convinces the last survivor, besides himself, to surrender. Things will look better that way. As for prophetic vision, anybody who lived through the year of the four emperors could pull that off. By shrewd inside, we know what kind of ambition every Roman general harbors in his heart.
There goes that "need" to believe in the historicity of a god man. The ancients were practicing cultural norms while "Christians" were using Theology. I also noticed that it was the only religion he mentioned: They were Iraquis, not "Muslims" okay, not all Iraquis are Muslims, but he didn't call the people Jews but exclusively "Judean"? Maybe he meant nothing by this.....but maybe he did??
37:36 So would it be plausible to say that, the story told by Josephus about of his comrades committing suicide and him only not doing so, is probably made up to suit his narrative of "he was there" on both sides?
Paul names himself of the tribe of Benjamin, Cornelius is a rightious gentile , Zacharias and Elisabeth are from the 'lineage' of Aaron. Moses and Aaron themselves were twins from the Levi-tribe. Wasn't the tribe of Benjamin assimilated a 1000 years earlier by Judah-tribe ? aren't this not contradictions ?
Hardly anyone praises Josephus for his actions at Jotopata because Josephus was a slime. He got trapped in a cave with other rebels. He talked them into killing themselves and carefully arranged to be the final holder of the blade. At last he surrendered to the Romans. Josephus slanted his reporting on the rebels to make them look like "brigands" ("lestai") the same derogatory word that was used to describe the two men who were crucified beside Jesus in the NT. In fact, the rebels were devout Jews who were offended by Roman transgressions against the rules of Torah. Just as Dr. Mason says we should not deride Josephus "just because he was a survivor", we should not praise him either "just because he was a survivor". Dr. Mason must wear both of those shoes, not just one. Josephus applied the Balaam prophecy to Vespasian. Josephus was a craven sycophant. When Vespasian actually became emperor, he treated Josephus as if he was a prophet and assigned him to be the governor of Judaea. Josephus resigned his own Jewishness and he became such a Roman lackey that he considered himself to be more Roman than Jewish. How do I know this? Because Josephus spoke about Jewish writings and Jewish Torah and refers to these as "THEIR law" "THEIR writings". In the very way he spoke, he distanced himself from his own people. He never formally renounced Judaism, he just treated it the same way Paul did, as if it was passe. Josephus was a Hellenist and he would have been considered "an enemy" by the Dead Sea scroll sect because they had a zero tolerance policy for "collaborators" like Josephus.
I did not read all his work but it seems to me, and the Doctor talked about that, Josephus was really a modern man, a realist, and a proud jew. He wrote his books to redeem his people from the bad wrap they got at the time; all those “sicarii”. We do have a good parallel of those days in our own times. He simply did not go along the wahhabists at the temple. His histories are about his people and here I think he inflated his accounts to impress the romans.
Veracity: we should be careful about downgrading ancient documents, as opposed to modern sources. In our own period, we have fanciful interpretations of events put out by the Right, and other “useful” interpretations put out by the Left, including the New York Times reporters themselves (which took them forever to finally realize Hunter’s laptop was legit-- 12 months after 5 million truck drivers had already listened to it on audiobook).
I think there's very good reason to assume that A) either Josephus is a wholly made up character, or B) his work was so heavily coopted by the notorious Hegesippus figure as to be entirely worthless. I'm sorry but I do not have the same reverence for Josephus as Mr. Mason does.
3 ปีที่แล้ว +3
I never heard of this Hegesipius character, I must investigate him. Thanks.
3 ปีที่แล้ว
Sorry I don't get it with your notorious Hegesipius. Wikipedia relates him to Eusebius but what was your point, please?
@Pesudo-Hegissipus, a coopted version of Josephus that dates to the fourth century. Isn't strange how Hegesippus-Josephus is the first to relate the so called family of Jesus, and it matches Josephus? Ever wonder how Luke-Acts can have material from Josephus in them? Because Hegesippus is the bridge between Christianity and Josephus. Hegesippus is just a Greek corruption of Josephus. Hegesippus was probably Phlegon.
Since when were the gentiles called Israel, which is what the 10 northern tribes were referred to in 732BCE before their expulsion? The tinfoil behatted club is to the right, down the hall next to the ladies room. Your friends are there waiting for you!
@@mouthpiece200 ...Josephus wrote that the Roman Emperor was the Messiah... a traitor turncoat through and through.... and just like Paul he was an appeaser who pretended to be all things to all people... but unlike Paul who did it to better hawk Jesus... Josephus peddled himself.
I suppose if I saw Paul getting on a ship I was on, I would leave the ship. With regard for him as a traitor. The Sadducees were a minority in Israel, and yet a leader of ill temper lead the rebellion against Rome.
There were there or more factions leading the revolt in the city of Jerusalem and they divied up the city in to zones they each took control of during it's defense.
Josephus is a literary device, that parallels the Saul/Paul literary device linking Imperial Rome (Flavians) Josephus History, Luke and Acts at a minimum. Josephus and Paul are too perfect and put in the center or the story being told - Just literary devices, very effective ones.
Dr. Mason has the greatest attitude in academia. Wish more academics would get off their high horses and be as open to analysis and value the research instead of the degree. I love this interview and both people.
Steve Mason continuously counsels caution in jumping to conclusions. He says conclusions are always provisional. He backs up this quote from Arnaldo Momigliano ----- "Historians must be prepared to admit in any given case that they are unable to reach safe conclusions because the evidence is insufficient; like judges, historians must be ready to say 'not proven'. Another excellent educational interview. Well done Derek and Steve.
Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm9mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm9mm
M
M9mmmmmm9kķķkkkkkķkkmmk
Kkkkkkkkkm
K9kkkkkmkkkkkkmmkkkķkkķkkkkkķķk
Dr. Steve Mason is simply remarkable. He knows his world and makes compelling arguments about Josephus and the connections and lack thereof to Jewish Christian works. Absolutely appreciate this man. Thanks for having him on Derek
Everyday there's a new fascinating subject!
Cheers Derek! 👍🍺
The best historian i ever heard...
Please bring us much, much more of Steve Mason. Very informative.
Great guest and great conversation! Can't wait for more!
The good: A great scholar with seemingly unlimited patience and eagerness to teach. The bad: That scholar being constantly interrupted and distracted. I'm fast forwarding like crazy trying to find the topic in the title rather than some random question from the chat. Can't imagine watching this live, what an exercise in frustration if you want to hear about the topic Dr Mason came to talk about. It gets interesting, then oh shit another "superchat." Ever heard of holding the questions till the end?
I'm getting a bit frustrated by the continued hustle for superchat and 'likes'. It does interfere with the flow and cheapens the discussion, for me, somewhat. The "My Mythvision" in the slow, dramatic voice-over style is very cheesy too.
This was fantastic - so much to learn from history but also from ways of thinking!
I loved the comment How do historians think and work.
History is not looking at all for reliable sources. It is understanding where does the author come from, what is the angle and perspective and what story they are trying to tell. Everyone has some agenda. It is building the ”theory of case” which you construct as ’investigator’ from various stories.
If everyone thought like historians world would be so much better place 😍
Another excellent and fascinating interview! Thank you.
Dr. Mason's laptop must be on his lap. Literally using it as intended.
Derek, one of the best interviews I have seen someone do with my brother. Really enjoyed it!
Where else do you see such brilliant guests day after day. Dr. Mason, absolutely fantastic.
I've never understood any of the commotion over "lost tribes." It's not like the inhabitants of the Northern Kingdom of Israel were all either killed or deported. And it wasn't an overnight event. The war took over a decade. And during that time we can see the population and urban development in the Southern Kingdom of Judah SKYROCKET. Jerusalem grows in size like 5X at the end of the 8th century BC.
Most Israelites just moved into Judah. Some stayed in Israel. And some were deported. Surely not all or even a majority.
I've been saying that for years.
Less than 40000 we deported
The only 'lost' tribe is probably Reuben but for different reasons
The lost tribes ended up north of the black sea and were known as the Scythians and then moved westward and created the modern nations of northern Europe.
They obviously would only want to deport the people that could benefit their society. Which like you point out isnt everyone.
Deux heures et plus de pur délice. Dereck you rock!
Dr. Mason is awesome!
❤ I am in owe to the level of knowledge of these gentlemen!!! Thank you ❤
What a great show! I love his historical philosophy as similar to a crime.
Great discussion n I really love listening to Dr. Steve Mason.
Dr Steve Mason, love his attitude, really open and non-affected chap. Love it.
Wow, you guys were really jamming.
Another great class of knowledge
Thank you! I enjoyed your talk with Dr. Mason. I’m looking forward to the Testimonium interpolation / forgery discussion.
What a fine scholar. What a great history lesson! Thank you.
Really enjoy this man I am out of the Jewish faith and always been told Josephus was aturncoat
Indeed he was
Josephus wrote that the Roman Emperor was the Messiah... a traitor turncoat through and through.... and just like Paul he was an appeaser who pretended to be all things to all people... but unlike Paul who did it to better hawk Jesus... Josephus peddled himself.
I am Christian, disagree with your theological conclusions, but still enjoyed this video. Thank you.
Keep watching you may be a Gnostic Christian which is now a separate church.
Big Jo .Love it .
Awesome interview!!
Great show! Love Derek, such a generous guy ❤️
Professor Mason is a nice guy and a first rate scholar. I had occasion to hear many of his lectures in Toronto; his work on Josephus and first century Judaea is fascinating. His comparison of the atmosphere that prevailed in the aftermath of the Jewish War and the Iraqi invasion (23:40ff) is very apt.
The five survivors at Masada had hidden in a cistern so they avoided the group self-destruction and they could not have told the story of what had happened because they were in hiding when it happened. Once again, Josephus invented the speeches that he was reporting as history. His literary creation of these speeches pass muster as credible speeches such as might have been said but nevertheless they are in fact completely from Josephus' imagination. Just like Jesus' prayers in Gethsemane, no one knew exactly what was said (because there were no witnesses), but the writers created a believable script.
Well said ... similar to the story of Lots wife turning to a pillar of salt but whom ever turned to see this happening somehow was not effected !
Love this stuff!! How long before Dr. Mason makes his own channel lmao. I would listen to this guy every day . Thank you so much for this content.
Aretas IV controlled Damascus "because Paul said so"? I found that part unconvincing, but the rest of the interview was all very solid. I especially liked what he said about the historian's mindset.
Answer to the comment below: because he wrote the story, as a story, for Romans to continue the Essene philosophy throughout the empire. And guess what! It worked. Christianity is a constructed philosophy.
is great that there is this medium for these retired academics to share their life long quest of seeking knowledge and understanding per their professional careers
Excellent!!!
I think Josephus Flavius was Josephus from Arimateea
I wish these shows would give the specific date a show was livestreamed, not "streamed five months ago".
Thanks
He is Flavius Josephus.
The worlds most interesting man in the history of 'er..., of history.
"I don't always drink Jesus Juice, but when I do, I drink Jesus brand Jesus Juice."
Hand made from pure Gallilean well water.
If I ever meet you, Dr. Mason, I will have all the time for you :)
Watch the video caesars messiah- all about the flavian creation of the new testament and basis of jesus christ- based off titus flavius warpath w jerusalem. This is joseph atwill he is onto something
I second this.
What the point of this conversation when we don’t even have any original texts or writings from Josephus
Please do a session on John the Baptist (he's my saint patron)
Josephus was a traitor. He begins as a leader of the revolution and ends up as Josephus Flavius,
Seems he betrayed Judaism worse than Judea, by making up the Jesus.
For those who don't know about the Testimonium Flavianum, it reads as follows:
"And there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if we really must call him a man, for he was a doer of incredible deeds, a teacher of men who receive the truth gladly, and he won over many Jews, and also many of the Greeks. This man was the Christ. And when, on the accusation of the leading men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first loved him did not cease to. For he appeared to them on the third day, alive again, the divine prophets having spoken these and countless other marvels about him. And even until now the tribe of the Christians, so named from this man, has not failed."
If that's not a Christian interpolation, what else?
Do you read Greek and know what the Greek manuscripts say? Because that's just one example. What about the other mentions of Jesus known as the Christ and his brother James and then also a separate mention of John the Baptist, are they also interpolation? Because they link back to the original. It doesn't make sense for Josephus to mention James, the brother of Jesus known as the christ - i.e the one who he refers to earlier in the text in the testamonium. There's nothing wrong with the testamonium other than slight changes to the wording by later copyists, but even then the wording doesn't sound very Christian because Christians never said Jesus was the Christ, they said he is the christ. Additionally the earliest mention of the passage is by Eusebius who tells his readers to go and read the passage themselves in Josephus, so if he interpolated it, why is he telling everyone to go and read the original passage in Josephus work? Doesn't make sense and there's nothing wrong with Josephus mentioning Jesus known as the christ in Greek. Christ just is a nickname for him and a roman audience, it means the smeared one. That's very different from saying Messiah and there's no indication Josephus cared or believed in a coming Messiah as not all Judeans of the time held to the same beliefs, it was moreso Christians that later emphasised the concept of the messiah to give legitimacy to Jesus. No credible scholar agrees with you and the Greek of the testamonium is no different from the surrounding chapters or Josephus' works as a whole.
@@nutyyyy I'm not an expert, but I've read a lot of books by honest, non-biased experts. From your reply it's clear that your expertise leaves a lot to be desired, as well. So, I would recommend the peer reviewed book "On the Historicity of Jesus" by Dr. Richard Carrier, to begin with. Best regards. Be safe.
@@nutyyyy that's all nonsense , any "credible scholar" knows that if they added one sentence they added a lot and took things out.
Maat Justicia - I’m an Egyptologist, archaeologist, and classical philologist. I have taught Greek and Latin, Ancient Egyptian, Akkadian, Hebrew and Aramaic. I assure you: the Flavian Testimony is most certainly a Christian interpolation (not a very good one, of course). Anyone who says otherwise clearly has no idea of what they’re talking about.
@@dorianphilotheates3769 Yep. Thanks for your confirmation. It seems so obvious. :-)
Jewish scholars are pretty unbiased about Josephus. Just like any other scholar in the western tradition, they study and use Josephus as a historical source, because that is exactly what it is, historical texts containing information on a period in time that we can never access otherwise.
Josephus. Is. Paul! They are the same man. Josephus is also Joseph of Arimathea.
Josephus wrote that the Roman Emperor was the Messiah... a traitor turncoat through and through.... and just like Paul he was an appeaser who pretended to be all things to all people... but unlike Paul who did it to better hawk Jesus... Josephus peddled himself.
Interesting. Sources?
@@davidburroughs2244 Look up the fine works of Ralph Ellis, which you can find here on youtube. Josephus and Paul have way too many similarities to be different people. I have also heard that both are merely literary creations, and neither is a real man. Although Ralph believes Josephus was the real man.
Saul/Paul is Germanicus ( matthan ben matthan, zacharias-barachias, nathana-el, Elias-Helios, Matthias/matthew).
Joseph (named Justus) is Claudius (Germanicus brother) of Ari-mathea (the just, right or high place).
After Simon Cephalos commits suicide they cast lots between Matthias and Joseph, the fate stands out on Matthias to be the instant new disciple/apostle. Josephus ben Matthias or Claudius successor (not son) of Germanicus. It seems the name is composed about the twin-brother's names. The same with the name Simon bar Jonah, meaning Chephalos successor (not son) of John (Nero Julius Ceasar). Justus did not realy lost the casting because he was already secretly a disciple of Nerones (Princeps).
Luke is winking, signalling at the reader of Acts about the lots casting thing of Josephus. It's just 2 versions, as is often the case by F.J. Josephus reacting to, using Mark's gospel (he knows of), Luke reacting to, using Josephus work (he knows of). J. is born after G. died, no way the same man. P. is based on G. but the 'lifespan' of the character is shifted what makes Paul 'untimely born' , late not premature ! Paul is the extension of Germanicus lifetime. Germanicus (Nathanael) is the one premature, he can only see in the future by visions. (Luke is doing that for him in retro-perspective) ; - )
btw Ralph is less reliable then J. imo.
@@willempasterkamp862 Sounds interesting, to the extend that I can understand it. Recommend any further reading on it? (or videos?)
Josephus also repeated false mythology, so we shouldn’t assume everything he wrote had good evidence. For example, he wrote that the Book of Dani-El was shown to Alexander the Great in Jerusalem and Alexander claimed that he was the one prophesied.
The Book of Dani-El, in its form as of Josephus’ writing, almost certainly did not exist until 165 BCE. Alexander had entered Jerusalem about 150 years earlier.
See J quote in jimhamilton.info/2010/11/26/josephus-on-alexander-the-great-and-the-book-of-daniel/
PAUL IS JOSEPHUS
I think that if you come at josephus from the opposite perspective you can cancel out some of the falsehoods then you look at what you have left.
I will suggest that the Book of Acts was written (by Paul) as a response to Josephus’ first writings. I think Paul was angry at his representation and tried to write an alternative history when questions were raised in his congregation. Furthermore, I suggest that Paul’s invention of “Stephen” is a mangling of “Josephus” and it is Paul’s way of metaphorically killing Josephus for telling the truth about Saulus of the Herodians.
Derek, I think the prodigal son story may pose Israel as the prodigal son. How many times do we read that Israel is “playing the harlot?” I am going to do some re-reading and see if it could be something different entirely.
I agree
I must have missed all those quotes from Josephus that any expert would have ready. Must have been at the cafe, enjoying my coffee...
Let's talk about the real archeological place of the temple in Jerusalem !
In the City of David well below the so called Temple Mount which is where a later Emperor proposed to rebuild it.
The Jews for Jesus ads are killer!
Preach it.
🤣🤣🤣 they target us I think
Theyre hilarious
I looked into them and they preach this we are based in Israel and ran from there in reality its a white guy named chuck in texas. That is the chief operating officer
It is in wiki. Little of it is Jewish in origin. Mostly targets, supposedly, Jews, but most members were previously, apparently, christians.
I truly have no clue as to what happened to the unfortunate people caught up in Masada . But ? Desperate people who know that if they surrender, their family units will be broken up, they will be enslaved,killed, or worse then what josephus describes may well have happened.
Here’s a little tutorial on the numerology of the Bible.
First of all, all the numerology, astrology and Astronomy from Persia, west, originates in Samaria, as far as I cn tell, The numerology and astrology of Asia is unavailable to me, I can’t figure it out. As a consequence, I have recently come to the opinion that Zoroaster is the source and is imported into the Bibical narrative by Enoch. His 7000 year Epoch, which I have just become aware of, is a useful template for the Biblical Narrative The BCE/CE nexus occurs in the 6th 700 years week of the Epoch and we are currently in about the 223 year of the 8th Veek.
The elegant India-Arabic symbols we use were not universally adopted until the 13 century due to the promotion by Leonardo of Pisa. Anyone who has seen Arabic calligraphy written in sand would realize that the Arabic influence is the critical factor in its development.
19 is the Alpha and omega of divine number. The symbol for nothing, the null set, Zero, 0, does not exist in classic numerology. I don’t believe we could have computers without these two moral innovations; I couldn’t do numerology with the Hebrew Gematria or Roman Numerals. And, just for the record, I believe that the Hebrew alphabet began as the Gematria.
123 Mental
456 Material
789 spiritual//Moral (as in Geist = Mind/Spirit)
this is a format I employ for certain analysis. In this commentary, iI want to illustrate how the number 5 touches all numbers. It has a number of connotations, including the senses and sex and man like Leonardo’s sketch but, in particular, the interior line in a miliary context. The Pentagon is designed around the interior line: you can get to any point in the Pentagon in ten minutes as a consequence. A strategic advantage of the rebellion of the Southern slave owners was the interior line. Sherman’s march to the sea, which began at Chattanooga, fatally penetrated the Southern interior line.
In this regard, the feeding of the 5000 has a deliberate military significance: Jesus transformed a lynch mob determined to avenge the execution of John the Baptist to a Galilian milia the same sine and organization of a Roman legion. This military formation participated in the destruction of the XII legion in 66 and is the military formation Josephus was given command of and betrayed.
As an ideogram, the number 15 represents a man with a purpose, such as the centurion in Mark 15:39 who speared Jesus on the cross. The 1 represents his spear and the 5 represents the centurion. Peter’s reference to Acts 15:7 is the Holy Spirit pointing at the unilateral covenant cutting ceremony betwen God and the centurions of the Italian Cohort in the Gospel of Peter, the 15 refrs to the centurion in charge and the nmuber 7, points the way. 7 has many functions, including as a lightening rod in Daniel 7:13, 13 being the Finger of God.
Just to illustrate the sense of humor of the Holy Spirit, the introduction of Cornelius in Acts 10 is a reference to the X Legion that occupied the Mount of Olives during the reduction of Jerusaem. The Leg X was one part of the permanent garrison of Caesarea that Cornelius commanded, . ’
You miss so much with the Post Modern Historical Deconstruction of dialectical Marxism. You never bet beyond broken pottery.
The Parable of the Prodigal son is a recasting of the Odyssey: the Prodigal Son is Odysseus and the contrast between his homecoming to Ithica and the homecoming of the Prodigal Son is the contrast between the gods of the Total Depravity Gospel of the Old Testament and the New Wine of Jesus is the point, The Prodigal Son is the essence of the Gospel of Luke that he intends to convey to Theophilus.
In literature, the Prodigal Sonis considered the perfect short story. O'Henry’s The Gift of the Magi is often compared favorable to the Prodigal Son.
If Paul had employed the Parable of the Prodigal Son on Mars Hill instead of his lame legalistic argument of the Unknow God, he might have converted Athens.
The Gospel of Mark was written by Cornelius as an intelligence report to Theophilus. He expected this report to be taken as literally as a Presidential Daily Briefing by the CIA.
As Dr. Tabor intuits. The Gospel of Mark and the Gospel of John are intended to be an entwined narrative. The Gospel of Mark is a Greco-Roman play by pay commentary of Jesus's ministry and the Gospel of John is a Hellenistic Jewish color commentary that adds the horse radish of Pssover missing from the Synoptic Gospels
The Gospel of Matthew is a polemic that connects all the Jewish theological dots that Cornelius is unaware of and was composed to support Peter's Judaizing agenda.
The Gospel of Luke is a research project to support the compilation of the Letters to the Hebrews by Theophilus which is a manifest that was creating the New Wine Skin to hld the New Wine of Jesus. It is totally derived of the Septuagint and, except for Ramans 13:1 - 7 Theophilus didn't give a fuck about Judaism, Rbbi Tavia Singer notwithstanding.
Shipwrecked three times sounds to me like someone is bragging.Like it’s not impossible but it’s improbable.
99% of the time I watch your podcasts on my TV and I can't hit the "Like" button because there is none. Maybe this is the case for many other people too.
Jewish tradition holds that Jews, Judeans, are descended from all 12 tribes for a number of reasons. First of which, all tribes intermarried. Automatically, all Israelites are descended from all tribes over time. Just like today, all modern Jews are descended from all Judeans 2,000+ years ago who had children, who had children and so on. Just like all Western/Central Europeans are probably descended from Charlamagne at this point. Probably numerous times over. It's just statistically impossible for that not to be the case given the size of these ancient populations, time passed and population size today.
Anyway, second, there would have been those of all tribes living and working in Judah and those of all tribes living and working in Samaria. Remember, the Kingdom of Samaria was no more. Judah still had a proxy head and remained somewhat intact. So what we have in reality are tribal territory and tribal entity absorbed into these two Kingdoms at first in the pre exilic, Samaria and Judah. Ephraim, the symbol of Samaria really. So those of Samaria are often represented simply as Ephraim. But they mean Samaria by that, so not just those from the tribe of Ephraim. Ephraim was just to main territory of the previous Kingdom of Samaria or the Kingdom of Northern Israel, under Omri and such. But even at that point, when the Kingdoms split, there would have been those of northern tribes living and working in Judah and vice versa. Merchants, sailors, tradesmen etc... And when someone marries someone from another place, or in this case tribe, one of the partners will often move their extended family to the place of the new partner. So if tribes intermarried, this would have been taking place. If say a Benjaminite married a woman from Dan, that woman might bring her parents, grandparents and let's say younger brother with her. Well, now we have this whole family from Dan in Judah, and maybe 2-3 young kids even, who will eventually grow up as Judeans.
Third, we also know it was Assyrian practice to take only like 20% of a population into exile. And not any specific tribe, but the wealthy and elite, the aristocracy. And Tanach also says only a portion of the northern Israelites were exiled. So in reality, NO entire tribes were exiled and scattered. None. Only individual Israelites and families, from all variety of tribes. And since Tanach has stories from both Northern and Southern Kingdoms, we also know many from the North must have fled to the south. Immigrating to Judah and becoming Judeans. And they would have been from all of the Northern tribes. And the literature itself certainly suggests this.
Now Jews asserted that Samarians were sullied by Assyrians basically. And this eventually turned into the myth that Samaritans were Assyrian fakers. Which is the myth that made it into the bible. But in reality, Assyria only sent a portion of Assyrians to mix with the Samarians. They would have likely married an Assyrian aristocrat to a Samarian family and installed them as King or whatever. So Samaritans in reality are Israelites mixed with Assyrians. And Jews obviously are mixed with Greeks, Persians, Romans , Egyptians...... so this was always a really bigoted and ridiculous myth. The fact that it perpetuates in modern Orthodox Judaism and in Israel is pretty terrible honestly from a social perspective. Especially for the 1,000 or so Samaritans who still live in Israel. Samaritans by the way, who still perpetuate the tribes of EPhraim and Manasseh, the 2 biggest in the north. And Levi. But in Samaritan culture these are families, extended of course. So its hard to say when this tradition actually goes back to or how accurate the tribal identities are.
Jews on the other hand, today, only have TWO tribal identities really. The first is Levi of course, and here we have family traditions of being Levite or Kohen. We can't know of course how far these family traditions go back, since the earliest records really go back to middle age Europe. And we know that Kohen for instance come from over 21 different, mostly unrelated male lineages. Levites from like 30. So we know these are only traditions and that these tribal identities do not actually show a patrilineal line going back to Aaron or Levi. As there probably was no Aaron or Levi, in this sense. As in Israelites were likely never from the 12 sons of one man. The tribes existed before the unifying myths were written. Which is why we get so much variation also.
But anyway, so Jews still use Levi as a tribal identity for Levites and Kohen, and all non Levi are simply tribe "Yisrael", meaning all 12 sons of Jacob. Since all other Jews, by tradition, from all tribes, mixed, became Judeans and don't really have sub tribal identity any more. Of course, even in the 1st century, Jews were still claiming Benjamin, Judah mostly, and then Samarians Ephraim and Manasseh mostly. Well, it's likely this even in the 1st century, was just family tradition. Like each house had their patron tribe so to speak. The tribe they identified with. So it's not surprising most would identify with Judah, Benjamin, Ephraim and Manasseh. These were the 4 most prominent tribes in the myths. Benjamin I believe is where Jerusalem is I believe, and the Kingship started with Benjamin really. This probably represents a reasoning to why Judah sits on a throne of Benjamin so to speak.
But even today there are Jews claiming to be from Benjamin or "House of David" and there is absolutely no way to know either. Just like there is no way to determine Kohen or Levite in reality. And the Cohen Model Haplo has been greatly misunderstood by the general public. It does NOT prove the biblical narrative but the complete opposite, as I've stated. Again, modern Kohen descend from over 21 male lineages, mostly unrelated. And just because a cluster is more closely related, doesn't mean that's the genuine one and that these go back to Aaron. It could mean a number of things, like this family just had way more children and survived to a higher degree. Or if Kohen began with 20 men, if 5 of them were brothers or cousins with the same male lineage, and the other 15 were all unrelated men, then over time, this one lineage would multiply exponentially, and we would see the genetic situation we see today. So yea, the CMH proves that no, Kohen and Levite are not descended from Aaron and Levi and it would be impossible to figure out otherwise. And the same for those claiming "House of David", meaning direct patrilineal descent from David through Solomon.
Again, it appears at some point, families took on these traditions of claiming a tribe. But Levite and Kohen were definitely a social caste. A real one. That likely began as a priestly caste of mostly unrelated men who installed themselves as the upper caste in society. Which likely occurred with the Josian reforms or sometime around then. But we can possibly determine if those claiming Levite and Kohen today all actually go back to this social caste. Some certainly do as we see a caste pattern, but there's no way to know for sure.
Anyway, from the Jewish perspective, Jews are descended from all 12 tribes. They still symbolically use Ephraim, as a symbol for all the exiled and scattered Israelites who weren't Judean. It doesn't mean the tribes themselves are lost and have no descendants though. So yes the view of the gospels would be more representative of the Jewish view. Which is probably why they call Samaritans frauds, because Jews have to be the only representatives of the tribes in order for this tradition to work. What the Christians and Josephus believed, which I would argue is more the Christian view, is more of just an allegory. There was never a time when Jews thought actual entire tribes were exiled and scattered.
I thought Joe Sefus was Gomer Pyle's cousin.
This suicide pact among the resisters. They weren't allowed to kill themselves, so they killed each other.
Must have been some fancy maths and talking to be the only survivor.
And Josephus wrote that the Roman Emperor was the Messiah... a traitor turncoat through and through.
You are right about the complicated math problem (watch the video I link). Josephus says that they were locked in a pit. All that seems an invention to me, nothing of it hapened. I can not imagine the romans slaughtering the jews on the streets and negociating pleasantly with some men down on a cistern. I think he or one of his men were the ones who facilitate the entering of the romans in Jotapata.
th-cam.com/video/uCsD3ZGzMgE/w-d-xo.html
@@petmark287 They were locked in a pit means they were surrounded by a seige with a wall around them and no escape.
Simon is Cephalos (the most high, his highness) thus a (high) priest. (Jair)
Simon of Cyrene is a Landman, Gardener, Courtier thus a levite. (replaced the corpse)
Simon is a Judean, Canaanite, Cypriote, Galilean and ... a Samaritan. (the woman at the well; his wife)
In the parable he is all 3 (wink, wink, wink).
Little bid confused;was Flavius Josephus a military leader or not,Dr,Steve Mason makes no commend on this,just wondering,
USED TO WATCH HIM ON SIMCHA JACOBOVICI'S NAKED ARCHEOLOGIST PROGRAM ON THE HISTORY CHANNEL MANY YEARS AGO
God destrroyed Jerusalem... oh you mean Titus.
Titus did presume to be a god.
His dying words, "Alas, I am becoming a God."
Old video, but it has to be said. Groningen is in the Netherlands, not in Holland.
Who is Josephus and why is he interesting?
Who is this Joe Sifas? /jk
@@HistoryandReviews Indeed.
You make me laugh thanks.
1:26:42 An epic NO to the question of an IO obsessed bloke. So fun.
Josephus was their commander and he ordered these men to kill each other till there were two left. Then he surrenders to the Romans. This something he admits. Which is why he is considered a traitor. By the way he was a nasi in other words a prince.
I could be wrong but I don't think you mentioned Caesar's Messiah. I'm sure you have heard of it and yet not a word
It's generally not cited because Atwill's thesis is so specific.
Isn't it rather suspicious when the MC is the only one left standing when everyone enters a group suicide pact. The charade of a Roman general falling on his sword is somewhat beside the point. At the count of three everyone slashes his own jugular. My version, voluntary decimation after queuing up, the one who gets assigned an even number dispatches the one who is assigned an uneven one and so on. Some minor skill with numbers will give you the edge. Also, 40 POWs or so, there is always graft, lets sell them at the nearest emporium, two survivors, we can afford to be magnanimous, no great loss. Musical chairs details, Josephus convinces the last survivor, besides himself, to surrender. Things will look better that way. As for prophetic vision, anybody who lived through the year of the four emperors could pull that off. By shrewd inside, we know what kind of ambition every Roman general harbors in his heart.
I believe what Ralph ellis says that the Jesus story was not from the 1st century but much later 66/70
Hasmonean Pharisee
How did Josephus die? only says of the approximate date of 100 AD
We don't know.
There goes that "need" to believe in the historicity of a god man. The ancients were practicing cultural norms while "Christians" were using Theology. I also noticed that it was the only religion he mentioned: They were Iraquis, not "Muslims" okay, not all Iraquis are Muslims, but he didn't call the people Jews but exclusively "Judean"? Maybe he meant nothing by this.....but maybe he did??
37:36 So would it be plausible to say that, the story told by Josephus about of his comrades committing suicide and him only not doing so, is probably made up to suit his narrative of "he was there" on both sides?
This is a great interview but DOWNVOTED for Derek constantly spamming "hit like".
This was a live video. My asking people to like is what helps this channel grow. Your down vote is literally just going against the content itself.
👏🙂
Paul names himself of the tribe of Benjamin, Cornelius is a rightious gentile , Zacharias and Elisabeth are from the 'lineage' of Aaron. Moses and Aaron themselves were twins from the Levi-tribe. Wasn't the tribe of Benjamin assimilated a 1000 years earlier by Judah-tribe ? aren't this not contradictions ?
Hardly anyone praises Josephus for his actions at Jotopata because Josephus was a slime. He got trapped in a cave with other rebels. He talked them into killing themselves and carefully arranged to be the final holder of the blade. At last he surrendered to the Romans. Josephus slanted his reporting on the rebels to make them look like "brigands" ("lestai") the same derogatory word that was used to describe the two men who were crucified beside Jesus in the NT. In fact, the rebels were devout Jews who were offended by Roman transgressions against the rules of Torah. Just as Dr. Mason says we should not deride Josephus "just because he was a survivor", we should not praise him either "just because he was a survivor". Dr. Mason must wear both of those shoes, not just one. Josephus applied the Balaam prophecy to Vespasian. Josephus was a craven sycophant. When Vespasian actually became emperor, he treated Josephus as if he was a prophet and assigned him to be the governor of Judaea. Josephus resigned his own Jewishness and he became such a Roman lackey that he considered himself to be more Roman than Jewish. How do I know this? Because Josephus spoke about Jewish writings and Jewish Torah and refers to these as "THEIR law" "THEIR writings". In the very way he spoke, he distanced himself from his own people. He never formally renounced Judaism, he just treated it the same way Paul did, as if it was passe. Josephus was a Hellenist and he would have been considered "an enemy" by the Dead Sea scroll sect because they had a zero tolerance policy for "collaborators" like Josephus.
I did not read all his work but it seems to me, and the Doctor talked about that, Josephus was really a modern man, a realist, and a proud jew. He wrote his books to redeem his people from the bad wrap they got at the time; all those “sicarii”. We do have a good parallel of those days in our own times. He simply did not go along the wahhabists at the temple. His histories are about his people and here I think he inflated his accounts to impress the romans.
45:20 the symbol is euro currency
18:08, Coffee had not reached Palestine at that time.
Paul is josephus
Ah, someone else sees it.
Yes
They are the same literary device.
Gotta wonder what makes this guy any more “expert” than the numerous experts who’ve accepted Josephus as legit through the centuries?
Veracity: we should be careful about downgrading ancient documents, as opposed to modern sources. In our own period, we have fanciful interpretations of events put out by the Right, and other “useful” interpretations put out by the Left, including the New York Times reporters themselves (which took them forever to finally realize Hunter’s laptop was legit-- 12 months after 5 million truck drivers had already listened to it on audiobook).
you don't say things by name like Ralph Ellis
Ananus/Ananias = Simon Cephas = Lucius Anneus husband of Pompeia Paulina
So he wrote 27 books of cope, and is still believed!!!😂😂😂😂😂
I think there's very good reason to assume that A) either Josephus is a wholly made up character, or B) his work was so heavily coopted by the notorious Hegesippus figure as to be entirely worthless. I'm sorry but I do not have the same reverence for Josephus as Mr. Mason does.
I never heard of this Hegesipius character, I must investigate him. Thanks.
Sorry I don't get it with your notorious Hegesipius. Wikipedia relates him to Eusebius but what was your point, please?
@Pesudo-Hegissipus, a coopted version of Josephus that dates to the fourth century. Isn't strange how Hegesippus-Josephus is the first to relate the so called family of Jesus, and it matches Josephus? Ever wonder how Luke-Acts can have material from Josephus in them? Because Hegesippus is the bridge between Christianity and Josephus. Hegesippus is just a Greek corruption of Josephus. Hegesippus was probably Phlegon.
@@HistoryandReviews How indeed!
The Gentiles are the northern 10 tribes, with all your brain power you guys can easily figure that out but you don’t want to.
Since when were the gentiles called Israel, which is what the 10 northern tribes were referred to in 732BCE before their expulsion?
The tinfoil behatted club is to the right, down the hall next to the ladies room. Your friends are there waiting for you!
Any thoughts on the theory that Josephus was actually Arrius Calpurnius Piso (writing as 'Josephus')?
Whoever he was, he also wrote some of the New Testament.
@@mouthpiece200 ...Josephus wrote that the Roman Emperor was the Messiah... a traitor turncoat through and through.... and just like Paul he was an appeaser who pretended to be all things to all people... but unlike Paul who did it to better hawk Jesus... Josephus peddled himself.
I suppose if I saw Paul getting on a ship I was on, I would leave the ship.
With regard for him as a traitor. The Sadducees were a minority in Israel, and yet a leader of ill temper lead the rebellion against Rome.
There were there or more factions leading the revolt in the city of Jerusalem and they divied up the city in to zones they each took control of during it's defense.
Copy and paste paste paste paste
C'mon lets face FJ is full of it. A spoilt rich kid bigging up the Jews.
joshepus sounds like a "propagandist"
JOSEPHUS was an effing con man. Maybe one of the best ever...yes. Josephus, Flavius is a pen name. Who is the real man behind the
(S)word...???
Josephus is a literary device, that parallels the Saul/Paul literary device linking Imperial Rome (Flavians) Josephus History, Luke and Acts at a minimum. Josephus and Paul are too perfect and put in the center or the story being told - Just literary devices, very effective ones.
I think Ralph Ellis is better expert then him.
Than
Josephus. Ha! Fake guy, not real! He’s a myth.
Josephus was just a pen name of Arrius Carlpurnius Piso..the true author of some of the books of the New Testament.