• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Testimonium Flavianum

Michelle

We are all related
Ginetai de kata touton ton chronon Iêsous sophos anêr, eige andra auton legein chrê: ên gar paradoxôn ergôn poiêtês, didaskalos anthrôpôn tôn hêdonêi talêthê dechomenôn, kai pollous men Ioudaious, pollous de kai tou Hellênikou epêgageto: ho christos houtos ên. kai auton endeixei tôn prôtôn andrôn par' hêmin staurôi epitetimêkotos Pilatou ouk epausanto hoi to prôton agapêsantes: ephanê gar autois tritên echôn hêmeran palin zôn tôn theiôn prophêtôn tauta te kai alla muria peri autou thaumasia eirêkotôn. eis eti te nun tôn Christianôn apo toude ônomasmenon ouk epelipe to phulon.
"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 to this day.



From the Antiquities of the Jews

by Flavius Josephus in 93 AD
That appears to be written by a man that believed Jesus was the Son of God and had resurrected from the dead. However Josephus was Jewish and left us his autobiography.

[font=Times New Roman, serif]The words in “quotes” are direct quotes.[/font]​

[font=Times New Roman, serif]He was born (37 CE) "in the first year of the reign of Caius Caesar" into " I am derived is not an ignoble one, but hath descended all along from the priests; and as nobility among several people is of a different origin, so with us to be of the sacerdotal dignity, is an indication of the splendor of a family" [/font]

[font=Times New Roman, serif]His Father was highly respected in Jerusalem . It appears he was gifted intellectually and, by the age of 14, the high priest were consulting him. At the age of 19 he wrote " I began to conduct myself according to the rules of the sect of the Pharisees, which is of kin to the sect of the Stoics, as the Greeks call them"[/font]
[font=Times New Roman, serif]At the age of 26 he sailed to Rome to negotiate the release of some Jewish Priest."I was desirous to procure deliverance for, and that especially because I was informed that they were not unmindful of piety towards God, even under their afflictions, but supported themselves with figs and nuts" He sailed in a ship that held "about six hundred in number". It sank in the Adriatic Sea and they swam all night. As dawn was breaking they saw a ship and he wrote "I and some others, eighty in all, by God's providence, prevented the rest, and were taken up into the other ship. And when I had thus escaped, and was come to Dieearchia, which the Italians call Puteoli". And then he met "Aliturius, an actor of plays, and much beloved by Nero, but a Jew by birth; and through his interest became known to Poppea, Caesar's wife" and was able to secure the release of the Jewish Priest. He then returned to Jerusalem.



[font=Times New Roman, serif]Josephus was Jewish and seemed to be proud of his father and of his roots. I find it hard to believe that a historian of his reputation would have written a short paragraph if he had believed that Jesus was the Son of God. I believe he would have left us an Essay describing in detail when and how he had been converted to Christianity. Origen, an early Christian, stated that Josephus did not believe that Jesus was the Son Of God. Origen also pointed his readers to the Antiquities in a statement about James, Jesus's brother . Why would an Early Christian that had read the Antiquities not mention the testimony of the Son of God?[/font]

[font=Times New Roman, serif]Eusebius, considered the father of the history of the church, quoted the Testimonium Flavianum [font=Times New Roman, serif]in 324. A Lot of Christian scholars point to Eusebius quotation as proof . But Josephus was Jewish and would not have written, “He was the Christ,” unless he believed it. Some scholars think that Eusebius added the entire phrase or at the very least added the words I have below in caps.[/font][/font]




[font=Times New Roman, serif]
[font=Times New Roman, serif]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 wonders, A TEACHER OF SUCH MEN AS RECEIVE THE TRUTH WITH PLEASURE. He drew many after him BOTH OF THE JEWS AND THE GENTILES. HE WAS THE CHRIST. When Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among 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 THEN THOUSAND OTHER WONDERFUL THINGS ABOUT HIM, and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day .[/font]
[font=Times New Roman, serif]There is also an Arabic version that reads like this found in the tenth century.[/font]






At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus, and his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon their loyalty to him. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion, and that he was alive. Accordingly they believed that he was the Messiah, concerning whom the Prophets have recounted wonders.
Which supports the theory that the text has been tampered with. How many other documents have been or at the very least could have been tampered with?









[font=Verdana, sans-serif]http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Testimonium%[/font]






http://members.aol.com/fljosephus/home.htm









Edited to move the links up ..it was wasting space and removed the Published in the by Flavius Josephus in 93 AD.. haha
[/font]​
[/font]​
[/font]
 

robtex

Veteran Member
So are theorizing that Jesus was a virtous man as opposed to a divine savior of mankind?
 

Michelle

We are all related
I guess I sorta just throught it out there as a thought starter and I do believe it is a forged document by the Father of the Christian Church. That is why it seems to have other implications to me.
 

robtex

Veteran Member
Michelle said:
I guess I sorta just throught it out there as a thought starter and I do believe it is a forged document by the Father of the Christian Church. That is why it seems to have other implications to me.


hard call here are some thoughts though:

what makes a document forged or authentic in the Bible?

Here are some things I would say to the affect that the book neither authentic or forged but just a collection of scriptures put into a book

1) It was written by many men over and extended period of time
2) 1/2 of it is taken from another religion--the first part is Jewish
3) many of the major concpts seemed to be borrowed from other religions---Christ/Krishna/mirtha/osiris
4) many books that were written were left out of the NT including the book of Mary, and the infancy gospel of thomas
5) There is some descripancy on who Jesus is with some versus saying it is Joseph (john 1:45luke 3:23) some saying it is David (matt 1:1, Matt 9:27,romans 1:3) as well as the son of God
6) well over 300 secs exist in Christianty mainly do to the fact that they cannot decide what is authentic or not in their holy book.

2nd thing who really is the father of the Christian Church.

1) Paul who wrote the first 2 books (maybe more) of the NT?
2) James the brother of Jesus?
3) John the Baptist who baptized Jesus himself?
 

Michelle

We are all related
all are valid points and I think people should be willing to question the bible and their religious believes. Many of us are raised to think it is the literal word of God. But I think the message that Jesus taught proves you should be willing to listen to your heart.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
robtex said:
So are theorizing that Jesus was a virtous man as opposed to a divine savior of mankind?
TF is widely held to be an interpolation, though the 'evidence' against Eusebius is tenuous at best.

At issue is not "virtuous man" versus "divine savior" but, rather, mythic (or, perhaps, conflated) man versus "divine savior".
 

robtex

Veteran Member
Michelle said:
all are valid points and I think people should be willing to question the bible and their religious believes. Many of us are raised to think it is the literal word of God. But I think the message that Jesus taught proves you should be willing to listen to your heart.



Michelle what if Jesus never said anything in the Bible? What if people following the Christian religon wrote down what they think the archtype for good (Jesus) probably said when presented with various senerios? I ask you this because the NT was written after the man's death. Actually wheather or not he was executed isn't even material because the net result is that the writers of the NT never met him. Unless one has conviction that God spoke to certain men, instead of to all of them, of what Jesus did how do those indivduals know? They don't would be the answer. Instead they used Jesus as their archtype and wrote down what a man perfect in virture and pure of heart would have done in various senserios. If you see the NT as a book of of virtues it makes more sense. If you see it as a book of historical fact is makes less sense.

Ever try to argue dogma with a buddist or a hindu? I have seen an athiest try to argue hindu dogma with a hindu I got to admit it was pretty funny. The hindu online said something to the effect " I don't believe that really happened anymore than you do." "I read those stories to grow spirtuality and use those writings to help me navigate a moral and spirtual life." That left that particular athiests nowhere to go. But it did bring up a solid point. The hindu religion is real to the Hindu's not because of the "real" happenings in their collection of texts but in the collection of texts philosphy, which includeds their Gods, way to live life.

If you buy into the accepting that the message of the NT and Jesus holds a higher esteem than the reality and particulars of his life let me present you with the 2nd part. The NT and those who wrote about it pulled from history and philosphies before them. They may not have made the stories the same all the time but they didn't just start from scratch and build a religion from nothing. The one inspiration they give credit to is Judism but other religious researches have linked them to Egypian and Hindu beliefs.

When you present Christanity as a book of morals as opposed to historical fact it puts it on equal ground with the other big religions of the world. A book from which to draw inspiration from. If one were to believe that this is so than their personal spirtual journey would be very lacking having centered their entire life on just one book. All of the religions have something of value to offer and by looking at each of the ones that interest you, instead of going back to the same single book over and over and over is to grow in your spirtual knowledge.

Following your heart is noble. Studying other's hearts is wise.
 

Michelle

We are all related
oh we are at the same place in more ways then you know. Some of your points are a little different. I cannot be sure that Jesus said any of those things since it is a he said, she said, he said story . The canon of the bible has many horror stories like this one. Then I could touch on the whole inspired thingie..which really is meaningless to me. It is mute that Paul said "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Timothy 3:16,17). Since the Canon of the Bible happened years later and other religions had inspired authors. But I can still like the message of love and forgiveness without having to think it is the word of God.
 

Michelle

We are all related
Deut. 32.8 said:
BTW: 2 Timothy is widely considered pseudepigraphic.
Interesting I hadn't heard that before but did a web search and found an interesting essay on the matter.Now you have given me something to learn *smiles* well I guess learning another spin isn't that bad
 
Top