That is a rather simplistic attitude to take; I’ve been far, far, far too self-interested for most of my life, but here I am. The Apostle Paul was a Christ-killer, then he got a moment of clarity. So I’m afraid that reasoning still doesn’t disprove valid possibilities.
We could also get into the whole Piso question, the repentant and successful line of King Herod and all that, and also ask why forgers would choose to insert Jesus into the writings of someone so questionable. At this point though, until we have more evidence, rejecting or accepting Josephus as an outside source relies largely on your rejection or acceptance of Christianity itself.
If you cannot accept Josephus as an outside source, you cannot accept Christianity? That is going to come as a complete shock to quite a few Christians on this board, I’m afraid.
I don’t know that I would represent Josephus as “someone so questionable”, but it’s ridiculous to believe that everything he wrote was 100% accurate. In one of his books, he waxes poetic for pages on end about Alexander the Great and how he had a dream of conquering Jerusalem, in which he stood at the top of Mount Scopus (I remember this, because my school was on Mt. Scopus) and looked down at the city and thought about how great it would be once he’d captured the city. Pages. In great detail.
As I mentioned previously, my Development of Judaism and Early Christianity professor adored Josephus and went on at length about the importance of his writings. (We took a class photo while on a field trip with my professor holding up her copy of Josephus’ Complete Writings in the middle.) They are, really, invaluable. But a lot of what he wrote should be taken with a grain of salt - he was a Jewish general moving in a Roman world. He had turned coat against his people and was not in a terribly safe situation. Moreover, this particular passage is very suspect. It has nothing to do with the surrounding passages and seems out of place, and oddly formulated, even to the half-trained eye (mine).
Live.org, I really think you’re using a specious academic source for backing up something you already believe, instead of seriously considering the veracity of that source. If you are as strong a Christian as you claim, the possibilty that the passages in Josephus are interpolation couldn’t shake your faith. To refuse to investigate this possibilty because you don’t want to admit that you could be wrong is extremely poor form. If you are going to use non-religious sources as the basis of your argument, you are going to have to investigate them in a non-religious light, if you want to have any credibilty.
Like I said, I will try to get to the library and do some research, but I haven’t had the opportunity yet.
Czarcasm: That’s not what I said. If you don’t accept Christianity, you will likely not accept what Josephus wrote about it, or at least it will seem highly suspect.
Kyla: I’m open to any source that might help us get closer to the truth, there is no right or wrong, only belief at this point. The URL I provided gave arguments for and against the passages, there are good reasons to lean either way. If you find something showing that Josephus absolutely would never have written about Jesus, I’ll consider it, but remember that this has been debated for centuries and I’m not confident that we’ll find that kind of evidence soon. So, it comes down to a matter of belief, more than anything else.
Monty: Yes, on the Road to Damascus, Jesus asked Paul why he was persecuting him by planning the slaughter of Christians, look it up. He had a murderous heart against Jesus and his followers. I don’t know what you mean about an earlier question.
Czarcasm: You can keep trying to drag me down to your level but it’s not going to work. My experiences are there for closed minds to mock and open minds to consider. You are behaving exactly as expected. Proceed…
zev_steinhardt: Sure “buddy” see my last post. I already answered you, those among Jews and Romans mentioned in the Gospels. Names? You know Pilate and Caiaphas, I don’t have the names of all participants in the crowds before Pilate, Roman soldiers, and so on. Do you? I have my suspicions about who among Pharisees led the plot against Jesus but I’m not prepared to discuss that without further research.
You answered neither zev nor me with that, ahem, interesting comment about Paul. Again, Paul did not kill Christ. Please avail yourself of any decent calendar.
Be serious, do you really think I meant that Paul physically killed Jesus? Jesus told Paul that persecuting Christians was persecuting him. Jesus was killed in order to silence his message. Pharisees were even at his tomb to make sure that he stayed quiet. Those who persecute Christians as Paul did in order to silence the message of Jesus are also Christ-killers. If that label seems offensive, then don’t persecute Christians, it’s that simple.
ThunderBug: Jesus taught the Good News of the Kingdom of Heaven through parables and his own actions. How it would be under God, how we should prepare for it, and so on. He also brought a message of religious freedom, and the question of responsibility has been answered earlier.
OK, then. So, what if someone disagrees with that message? Since they are denying Jesus’ message, are they then a) responsible for Jesus’ death and/or b) “Christ-killers” as Paul was?
What, the religious leaders of the day didn’t know about all this? Heaven and the afterlife was a new concept to them? There were plenty of varying opinions in Judaism at the time, why would the want to silence this particular one?
I must have missed that, could you be a dear and quote that one for me.
zev_steinhardt: If you jail, murder, and otherwise persecute Christians based on differences of belief, as still happens in many parts of the non-western world, then you would also seem to be such a Christ-killer. By the way, that’s your term from the report, I am merely borrowing it since it seems to drive the point home for some of you. So of course, the answer to your question is no, not all Jews and non-Christians are Christ-killers. But some of them are.
ThunderBug: Jesus taught that what is in your heart will be judged, not the works of your traditions. I’ve stated many times that I believe in the Gospels regarding his death. What did you miss?
Absolutely wrong. The phrase used in the report was the phrase with which many Christians labeled all Jews as an epithet to justify horrendous persecutions. The clear meaning was that all Jewish people bore the blame for the killing of Jesus.
For you to co-opt that word and apply it to Paul because he persecuted some Christians (by “outing” them and banning them from synagogues, not by murdering them) shows an abysmal lack of understanding both of the particular story of Paul and the broader history of Jewish-Christian relations throughout the last 1900 years.
You know, that’s quite offensive that you would say that particular term from a report co-authored by CK Dext is the term of the authors of that report.
In response to
Here’s a hint: If you didn’t really mean it then why’d you type it?
tomndebb (and Monty): you should know that according to Jesus, murder in the heart the same as murder by hand. You focus so much on the letter of the Law that you don’t seem to know how to read between the lines or even what Jesus really taught. If the Christ-killer shoe fits, then no amount of scholarly-sounding justification is going to change that. What’s next, apologizing for the guy who held the nails just because he didn’t pound them in? Amazing.
Acts 9:1 And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest,
Matthew 5:21-22 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.