As a Roman Historian are the writings of Titus Flavius Josephus valid as he also recounts some works of Jesus?

Question

"Josephus's two most important works are - Jewish War - and - Antiquities of the Jews -."

- Jewish Antiquities [18.63-64] - 'Testimonium Flavianum':

==> At this time there appeared Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one should call him a man. For he was a doer of startling deeds, a teacher of the people who receive the truth with pleasure. And he gained a following both among many Jews and among many of Greek origin. He was the Messiah. And when Pilate, because of an accusation made by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him previously did not cease to do so. For he appeared to them on the third day, living again, just as the divine prophets had spoken of these and countless other wondrous things about him. And up until this very day the tribe of Christians, named after him, has not died out.

-
Flavius Josephus died around 100 (AD)
-

-
A Roman citizen, as Titus Flavius Josephus, was a 1st-century => Jewish historian <= who survived and recorded the Destruction of Jerusalem in 70. His works give an important insight into first-century Judaism.
-

Answer 1

Interesting how Josephus is considered an accurate historian EXCEPT when it comes to the parts about Jesus.

Either they say that Josephus didn't write that part, or else he was obviously a Christian. If you think of that second part, I wonder how it was possible for him to have read the gospels when he died in 100 AD and so many atheists have been quick to point out the gospels weren't collected together until 300+ AD at the Council of Nicea. Interesting, eh?

Answer 2

Somehow, this won't come out sounding like an answer, but thank you, thank you, thank you, for studying, reading and sharing with us all.
Blessings :) I look forward to what others have to say.

I'm taking your Q to mean you are the Roman Historian and study writings of that period. However I could be reading this wrong and you could mean that Ttius Flavius Josephus was a Roman Historian. Either way, why would the inclusion of Jesus invalidate the writings? Seems more likely to do just the opposite. History validating history. Pieces of the puzzle so many are concerned about.

I just find it refreshing to have some info I've not come across before. Thanks. You've given me some new reading material.
:)

Answer 3

I think you should go look again. Those words have been proven to be "insertions" into Josephus's Testimonium. Proven. Think about it. With the volumes upon volumes that Josephus wrote, had he known anything at all of Jesus would not he have said more in describing such a miracle worker? There were insertions into the works of Pliny the Younger, Tacitus and Suetonius. But between them all, there were only 56 words supposedly supporting the existence of Jesus. All 56 words between the four were insertions.

Answer 4

It would be great to be able to say without doubt that he wrote the truth. But I believe that the disciples of Jesus wrote the truth back in those days. So if Josephus was telling the truth, or the text wasn't written in at some point in time later, then I think that this little part of history may be authentic and therefor believable.

Answer 5

I'm not stating an opinion one way or the other - I haven't made a study of Josephus and despite being in the AM I'm happy to accept that JC might have existed - but there is some doubt about the authenticity of the writings of which you speak, as the asker of this question says:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AtYi3w8_jA.zCQo74kYJy7Dty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071225100001AA5xM05&show=7#profile-info-y8bFL2xiaa

Answer 6

I know there are those who discount that passage about Jesus. But let's just assume it's valid for a moment.

So Josephus' mention of Jesus does not validate Jesus' existence? Instead Josephus' mention of Jesus invalidates Josephus' entire body of work? Based on the prejudice of the reader?

Answer 7

The text regarding Jesus is considered a later addition. Josephus himself is still considered a valid historian, as the additions are in a different writing style and can be picked out.

Answer 8

Here are some commentaries on how Josephus reported about Christ:

*** w03 6/15 p. 5 Jesus Christ—Evidence That He Walked the Earth

Testimony of Historians

For instance, consider the testimony of Flavius Josephus, a first-century Jewish historian who was a Pharisee. He referred to Jesus Christ in the book Jewish Antiquities. Although some doubt the authenticity of the first reference where Josephus mentioned Jesus as the Messiah, Professor Louis H. Feldman of Yeshiva University says that few have doubted the genuineness of the second reference. There Josephus said: “[Ananus the high priest] convened the judges of the Sanhedrin and brought before them a man named James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ.” (Jewish Antiquities, XX, 200) Yes, a Pharisee, a member of the sect many of whose adherents were avowed enemies of Jesus, acknowledged the existence of “James, the brother of Jesus.”

*** rs p. 209 par. 2 Jesus Christ
>>The first-century Jewish historian Josephus referred to the stoning of “James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ.” (The Jewish Antiquities, Josephus, Book XX, sec. 200) A direct and very favorable reference to Jesus, found in Book XVIII, sections 63, 64, has been challenged by some who claim that it must have been either added later or embellished by Christians; but it is acknowledged that the vocabulary and the style are basically those of Josephus, and the passage is found in all available manuscripts.

*** g82 4/8 p. 5 What Makes a Person Great? ***
>> “Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles.”—Antiquities of the Jews (Book XVIII, chap. 3, par. 3).

*** w75 4/15 p. 249 Jesus Christ—A Historical Personage ***
>>There are also two references to Jesus in the works of Josephus, a first-century Jewish historian. One of these is often questioned because it makes Josephus sound like a Christian. (Antiquities of the Jews, Book XVIII, Chap. III, par. 3) But, as Klausner and other scholars point out, it is unreasonable to conclude that Josephus would have made no reference to Jesus’ ministry when he dealt at length with that of John the Baptist. Besides, in a later reference, Josephus tells that “the sanhedri[n] of judges [had] brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James.” (Antiquities of the Jews, Book XX, Chap. IX, par. 1) Rightly, these scholars hold that this quotation intimates that something had been previously said about Jesus, otherwise why identify an unknown James as being his brother? They therefore hold that Josephus did tell about Jesus’ ministry but that some other, later hand embellished the account.

COMMENTARY from allexperts.com Encyclopedia:


http://en.allexperts.com/e/h/hi/historicity_of_jesus.htm

Flavius Josephus (c. 37–c.100) is quoted by many scholars as providing evidence concerning Jesus. In Antiquities of the Jews, written in 93, Jesus is mentioned twice, most notably in the Testimonium Flavianum. However, John Dominic Crossan and K. H. Rengstorff have noted that the passage has many internal indicators that seem to be inconsistent with the rest of Josephus' writing and with what is known about Josephus, leading them to think that part or all of the passage may have been an interpolation. This passage known as the Testimonium Flavianum, comes from Antiquities 18.63-64
>>About this time came Jesus, a wise man, if indeed it is appropriate to call him a man. For he was a performer of paradoxical feats, a teacher of people who accept the unusual with pleasure, and he won over many of the Jews and also many Greeks. He was the Christ. When Pilate, upon the accusation of the first men amongst us, condemned him to be crucified, those who had formerly loved him did not cease [to follow him], for he appeared to them on the third day, living again, as the divine prophets foretold, along with a myriad of other marvelous things concerning him. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day. According to Professor Michael L. White from Yale Josephus' passage has been drastically altered:
>>"Josephus wrote the Antiquities in the mid-90s CE; however, the passage above is widely considered to be a Christian forgery, either whole or in part, inserted centuries later (See Louis H Feldman, Josephus, Anchor Bible Dictionary 3:990-92). The parts in bold above almost all scholars agree are Christian interpolations; the remainder is doubted by some but accepted by others. There are several reasons. The parallel sections of Josephus's Jewish War make no mention of Jesus, and Christian writers as late as the third century CE who made extensive use of Josephus's Antiquities show no awareness of it. Had it been there, they would have gladly used it for proof of Christian claims. Instead, these same writers, notably Origen, admit that Josephus did not believe in Jesus (Origin Commentary on Matthew 10.17;Against Celsus 1.47) Michael L. White, From Jesus to Christianity. HarperCollinsPublishers, 2004. P. 97-8
>>Nonetheless, Josephus later refers to the trial of Christian James, "the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ." This is considered by the majority of scholars to be authentic.Louis H. Feldman, "Josephus" Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 3, pp. 990-1 White remarks, "Since few scholars doubt that this passage is authentic, it indicates that Josephus knew about Jesus, or at least heard Christian claims about him... Even so, it may be read as a disparaging statement, especially the second sentence: "For he was a performer of paradoxical feats, a teacher of people who accept the unusual with pleasure, and he won over many of the Jews and also many of the Greeks." Each part clearly reflects some of the early traditions about Jesus, yet each one does so in a way that has a negative tone (See Feldman, Josephus, 3:991). Michael L. White, From Jesus to Christianity. HarperCollinsPublishers, 2004. P. 97-8

Answer 9

i don't be attentive to the place you discovered this crap approximately James. It does not qualify as information of something. You stated your self it grow to be an act of an anus. I in no way doubted the existence of Jesus. I do have reason to doubt that he had a brother Jim Christ. although if it could make for a humorous movie. Jesus lived and died. i do no longer think they made him up. He in no way claimed to be God. that determination grow to be made after his dying. without his enter.

Answer 10

This has been completely debunked. In the Middle Ages, Christians inserted this information into the text. There is no independent historical record of Jesus existing.