"Zeitgeist" Online Movie: Part One

Refuted©

Posted: August 23, 2007

Did Josephus Mention Jesus?

The narrator also claims that the first century C.E. Jewish historian Flavius Josephus's testimony to Jesus “has been proven to be a forgery for hundreds of years.” This is completely false. The vast majority of scholars believe that Josephus did mention Jesus. Josephus provides two references to Jesus: one focuses on Jesus specifically, and the other identifies “Jesus, the so-called Christ,” as being the brother of James. Although the authenticity of the passage devoted strictly to discussing Jesus has been disputed over time, scholars generally agree that the passage preserves an original record about Jesus.

Historical Jesus scholar Dr. Paula Fredriksen writes:

“In Jewish Antiquities 18.63-64, Josephus gives a short summary statement on Jesus. Scholars have debated the historical merits of this passage, some (few, now) maintaining that the whole is authentic, others (another minority), that the whole is a Christian interpolation, that is, a passage written into the manuscript by a later Christian scribe. Most scholars currently incline to see the passage as basically authentic, with a few later insertions by a Christian scribe.” 1

Also, virtually no scholar disputes the authenticity of the second reference to Jesus.

Predictably, Acharya S (D.M. Murdock) also claims that all scholars and even Christian apologists believe all references to Jesus in Josephus’ writings to be forgeries. 2 Michael Licona writes the following in response to Acharya S’s charges of forgery in Josephus’ writings:

“What about Josephus' comments on James, the brother of Jesus in a separate passage?(79) Is this the work of an ancient Christian editor who added them? Have these likewise "been dismissed by scholars and Christian apologists alike as forgeries" as Murdock claims?

Among the reasons for accepting the passage as authentic by Josephus are:

(a) a Christian editor would have used complimentary language to describe James and more laudatory language referring to Jesus.(80) (b) The main point Josephus is attempting to make is that Ananus was deposed because of his illegal executions of several that included James. However, James is mentioned simply in passing. (c) Josephus' account differs from other Christian accounts of the death of James.

Feldman writes, "The passage about James [Antiquities Book 20, Sections 197-200] has generally been accepted as authentic."(81) Elsewhere he mentions this text and "the authenticity of which has been almost universally acknowledged."(82) Another Jewish scholar, Zvi Baras, states that this passage "is considered authentic by most scholars."(83) Yamauchi comments, "Few scholars have questioned the genuineness of this passage."(84) Van Voorst writes, "The overwhelming majority of scholars holds that the words 'the brother of Jesus called Christ' are authentic, as is the entire passage in which it is found."(85) Again, Murdock's claim is false and reveals that she is either unfamiliar with scholarship on the subject or simply ignores it, since it fails to support her peculiar views.

Only one passage about Jesus in Josephus is disputed seriously by scholars. This passage is found in Book 18, Section 3 of Antiquities and is often referred to as the Testimonium Flavianum. A lot has been written on this passage within scholarship. In his book, Josephus and Modern Scholarship, 1937-1980, Feldman lists 87 scholarly discussions on this passage during that time period.(86) This passage typically reads as follows:

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. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.




Most scholars reject a wholesale acceptance of this passage. Origin was an early Church father and indicated that Josephus was not a Christian.(87) Therefore, it would be odd that a non-Christian Jew would make statements like Jesus was "a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man", "He was the Christ", and "he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him."

While debate continues on this fascinating passage, most scholars believe that a majority of the passage is Josephus, because (a) the term, "wise man" is typical for Josephus and less than we would expect from a Christian editor,(88) (b) the style belongs to Josephus,(89) (c) the Greek word for tribe is not a typical Christian expression.(90) Many scholars today accept that this passage was included originally by Josephus with the exceptions of the three additions that appear to be the result of a subsequent Christian editor sometime during the second and early fourth centuries. Van Voorst writes, "In sum, Josephus has given us in two passages something unique among all ancient non-Christian witnesses to Jesus: a carefully neutral, highly accurate and perhaps independent witness to Jesus, a wise man whom his persistent followers called ‘the Christ.’"(91) Yamauchi comments, "Josephus knew that Jesus was the brother of James, the martyred leader of the church in Jerusalem, and that he was a wise teacher who had established a wide and lasting following, despite the fact that he had been crucified under Pilate at the instigation of some of the Jewish leaders."(92) Feldman comments, "I believe that the Josephus passage about Jesus was partly interpolated by Christians. I agree with John P.Meier, A Marginal Jew, vol. 1 (New York: Doubleday, 1991) 60-61 that three passages have been interpolated: if indeed one should call him a man; he was the Messiah; and 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."(93) Zvi Baras writes that the "more plausible" position is "accepting parts of the passage and rejecting others."(94) Morton Smith, professor emeritus of ancient history at Columbia University, concludes that Josephus certainly mentions Jesus in this passage but is pessimistic that the original can be reconstructed.(95)”

Endnotes:

1. Paula Fredriksen, Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews: A Jewish Life and the Emergence of Christianity (New York: Vintage Books, a Division of Random House, Inc., 1999), 249.

2. Acharya S, The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold (Kempton, IL: Adventures Unlimited, 1999), 50.

Continue to: Was Jesus a Solar Deity of “the Gnostic Christian” Sect?