The Rabbi, the note and the messiah

[TheGreenHornet]

Josephus - Wikipedia

The Ancient Jewish Historian Josephus on John the Baptizer, Jesus, and James

The above links were banned in the post above....................'Content contains banned words: 12 matched Hebrew characters'

Greenhorn, I have a combined copy of The Wars of the Jews, and the Antiquities of the Jews, old and yellowed and now dusty. I haven't read it in years. But if I recall correctly, the Antiquities begins much like Genesis. What struck me, and I cannot quote after all this time, but what I remember is that after the creation story and the casting out from the Garden of Eden and the Ark, Josephus says that (paraphrased) 'up to this time, Moses was speaking allegorically'. That told me that even the ancients knew the story was a story, an allegory of millennia of formation of life as we know it.

Josephus said, ‘Genesis means what it says!’
by Frank Luke

An engraving of Flavius Josephus.
Many people who compromise on the plain meaning of Genesis claim that the literal interpretation is a modern invention. Instead, they claim that most commentators in the past took a long-age view.

On the contrary, the vast majority interpreted the days of Genesis 1 as ordinary days. Furthermore, even those who did not, such as Origen and Augustine, vigorously attacked long-age ideas and affirmed that the world was only thousands of years old.Refuting Compromise, ch. 3, Master Books, Arkansas, USA, 2004, which includes sections on Josephus. " style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; color: rgb(34, 139, 246); border-bottom: none; margin-bottom: 4px; cursor: pointer;">1 Among the Jewish commentators, the first-century historian Flavius Josephus (AD 37–ca. 100) stands out from the rest.

Josephus says, Genesis means what it says! - creation.com

 

[irosie91]

Josephus - Wikipedia

The Ancient Jewish Historian Josephus on John the Baptizer, Jesus, and James

The above links were banned in the post above....................'Content contains banned words: 12 matched Hebrew characters'

Horn-----regarding Josephus and jesus----your
catechism whore lied. HOWEVER John was
likely an historic character who rejected Herod and his perverse family------possibly not only on their perversities but also on their edomite origin. The murder of John by Herod might
have reasonable historic basis------baptism by water dunking as a well-entrenched jewish "thing" that has nothing historically to do with
the Jesus cult

 

[TheGreenHornet]

Evidence of Jesus

The historical evidence for Jesus of Nazareth is both long-established and widespread. Within a few decades of his supposed lifetime, he is mentioned by Jewish and Roman historians, as well as by dozens of Christian writings. Compare that with, for example, King Arthur, who supposedly lived around AD500. The major historical source for events of that time does not even mention Arthur, and he is first referred to 300 or 400 years after he is supposed to have lived. The evidence for Jesus is not limited to later folklore, as are accounts of Arthur.

The value of this evidence is that it is both early and detailed. The first Christian writings to talk about Jesus are the epistles of St Paul, and scholars agree that the earliest of these letters were written within 25 years of Jesus’s death at the very latest, while the detailed biographical accounts of Jesus in the New Testament gospels date from around 40 years after he died. These all appeared within the lifetimes of numerous eyewitnesses, and provide descriptions that comport with the culture and geography of first-century Palestine. It is also difficult to imagine why Christian writers would invent such a thoroughly Jewish saviour figure in a time and place – under the aegis of the Roman empire – where there was strong suspicion of Judaism.

As far as we know, the first author outside the church to mention Jesus is the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, who wrote a history of Judaism around AD93.

About 20 years after Josephus we have the Roman politicians Pliny and Tacitus, who held some of the highest offices of state at the beginning of the second century AD. From Tacitus we learn that Jesus was executed while Pontius Pilate was the Roman prefect in charge of Judaea (AD26-36) and Tiberius was emperor (AD14-37) – reports that fit with the timeframe of the gospels. Pliny contributes the information that, where he was governor in northern Turkey, Christians worshipped Christ as a god. Neither of them liked Christians – Pliny writes of their “pig-headed obstinacy” and Tacitus calls their religion a destructive superstition.

Strikingly, there was never any debate in the ancient world about whether Jesus of Nazareth was a historical figure. In the earliest literature of the Jewish Rabbis, Jesus was denounced as the illegitimate child of Mary and a sorcerer. Among pagans, the satirist Lucian and philosopher Celsus dismissed Jesus as a scoundrel, but we know of no one in the ancient world who questioned whether Jesus lived.

Also.......there is still interest in the Shroud of Turin, supposedly Jesus’s burial shroud. Pope Benedict XVI stated that it was something that “no human artistry was capable of producing” and an “icon of Holy Saturday”. by....... Simon Gathercole

Did Jesus Exist? Searching for Evidence Beyond the Bible - Biblical Archaeology Society

'Did Jesus Exist?' A Historian Makes His Case

 

[irosie91]

try again------at no point did I dispute the evidence of the existence of a JESUS------however it is also a fact that JOSEPHUS makes no mention of him.
The one paragraph describing a JESUS----has been very credibly determined to be a LATER INSERT------keep in mind-----the VATICAN OWNS THE ORIGINAL BOOKS. ----a few somewhat non-specific lines-------almost silly in their
triviality

 

[TheGreenHornet]

try again------at no point did I dispute the evidence of the existence of a JESUS------however it is also a fact that JOSEPHUS makes no mention of him.
The one paragraph describing a JESUS----has been very credibly determined to be a LATER INSERT------keep in mind-----the VATICAN OWNS THE ORIGINAL BOOKS. ----a few somewhat non-specific lines-------almost silly in their
triviality

That is a well known theory and the Jews certainly would like to believe that....but it cannot be proven.

'The Josephus account has been embroiled in controversy since the 17th century. It could not have been written by a Jewish man, say the critics, because it sounds too Christian: it even claims that Jesus was the Messiah' (ho christos, the Christ)! (Sounds like bias to me...aka sounding too Christian? Really?)

The critics (Who are these critics? Jews and athiests?)say: this paragraph is not authentic. It was inserted into Josephus' book by a later Christian copyist, probably in the Third or Fourth Century. (Oh yes-- 'probably?) great proof you have there....not)

'The opinion was controversial. A vast literature was produced over the centuries debating the authenticity of the "Testimonium Flavianum", the Testimony of Flavius Josephus.

A view that has been prominent among American scholars was summarized in John Meier's 1991 book, A Marginal Jew.

This opinion held that the paragraph was formed by a mixture of writers. It parsed the text into two categories: nything that seemed too Christian was added by a later Christian writer, while anything else was originally written by Josephus.

By this view, the paragraph was taken as essentially authentic, and so supported the objective historicity of Jesus.'

http://www.josephus.org/testimonium.htm

'An explosive question that lurks in the shadows of historical Jesus studies: Might it be possible that Jesus Christ never even existed, that the whole stained glass story is pure invention? It’s an assertion that’s championed by some outspoken skeptics—but not, I discovered, by scholars, particularly archaeologists, whose work tends to bring flights of fancy down to literal earth.

“I don’t know any mainstream scholar who doubts the historicity of Jesus,” said Eric Meyers, an archaeologist and emeritus professor in Judaic studies at Duke University. “The details have been debated for centuries, but no one who is serious doubts that he’s a historical figure.”

I heard much the same from Byron McCane, an archaeologist and history professor at Florida Atlantic University. “I can think of no other example who fits into their time and place so well but people say doesn’t exist,” he said.

Even John Dominic Crossan, a former priest and co-chair of the Jesus Seminar, a controversial scholarly forum, believes the radical skeptics go too far. Granted, stories of Christ’s miraculous deeds—healing the sick with his words, feeding a multitude with a few morsels of bread and fish, even restoring life to a corpse four days dead—are hard for modern minds to embrace. But that’s no reason to conclude that Jesus of Nazareth was a religious fable.

“Now, you can say he walks on water and nobody can do that, so therefore he doesn’t exist. Well, that’s something else,” Crossan told me when we spoke by phone. “The general fact that he did certain things in Galilee, that he did certain things in Jerusalem, that he got himself executed—all of that, I think, fits perfectly into a certain scenario.”

What Archaeology Is Telling Us About the Real Jesus

 

[irosie91]

try again------at no point did I dispute the evidence of the existence of a JESUS------however it is also a fact that JOSEPHUS makes no mention of him.
The one paragraph describing a JESUS----has been very credibly determined to be a LATER INSERT------keep in mind-----the VATICAN OWNS THE ORIGINAL BOOKS. ----a few somewhat non-specific lines-------almost silly in their
triviality

That is a well known theory and the Jews certainly would like to believe that....but it cannot be proven.

The Josephus account has been embroiled in controversy since the 17th century. It could not have been written by a Jewish man, say the critics, because it sounds too Christian: it even claims that Jesus was the Messiah (ho christos, the Christ)! (Sounds like bias to me...aka sounding too Christian? Really?)

The critics (Who are these critics? Jews and athiests?)say: this paragraph is not authentic. It was inserted into Josephus' book by a later Christian copyist, probably in the Third or Fourth Century. (Oh yes 'probablyl' great proof you have there....not)

The opinion was controversial. A vast literature was produced over the centuries debating the authenticity of the "Testimonium Flavianum", the Testimony of Flavius Josephus.

A view that has been prominent among American scholars was summarized in John Meier's 1991 book, A Marginal Jew.

This opinion held that the paragraph was formed by a mixture of writers. It parsed the text into two categories: nything that seemed too Christian was added by a later Christian writer, while anything else was originally written by Josephus.

By this view, the paragraph was taken as essentially authentic, and so supported the objective historicity of Jesus.

http://www.josephus.org/testimonium.htm

you are an HYSTERIC-----some sunday school teacher told you that DA JOOOOOS deny that a JESUS ever existed. I got news for you-----
NOPE. A debate on the issue "did a jesus exist" is an utter NON-ISSUE in Judaism. You got a citation for anyone saying "NO JEW
COULD HAVE SAID THAT"? ----sorry---the most you might find is "who gives a damn" HOWEVER---the very first time I picked up the
"wars" book by Josephus-----I got it as a "left behind" by a man in the hospital in which I worked who read it AVIDLY------his crucifix on his neck and his rosary tied to his bed rails. ----
there was a forward in which a Christian clergyman as HYSTERICAL as are you DECLARED that the high esteem in which
Josephus held PHARISEES ------was a
"big mistake" "a serious flaw". Nope again---
the HISTORIC JOSEPHUS----remained a Pharisee jew----never took up the Jesus cult-----
and continued writings in his very scholarly manner for the rest of his life. The lines to which Christians "cling" so desperately are something like "there was a man some called the messiah who did miracles" ---------as in
"BIG DEAL" There have been such men by the hundreds since----and, it really is an insert

 

[shimon]

So humorous these Josephus accounts of Jesus have been debunked many times over the years esp on these forums...Everyone should keep in mind that the original writers never mention that passage in Josephus because obviously they would have been quoted it if it exsisted to push their side of things... No just like a GREEN HORNET is a Fictional character created in the 1930’s So is The Jesus found in the gospels ... Just in case any don’t know what Fictional is it is just a good embellished story with very little facts or backing... No green hornets exsist in the real world but are given life in make believe movies and books... Course the other hornets would have to be convinced that the little green guys are not figments of their imaginations because they have been told that they really really exsist... honest........ Wink wink...

 

[ding]

try again------at no point did I dispute the evidence of the existence of a JESUS------however it is also a fact that JOSEPHUS makes no mention of him.
The one paragraph describing a JESUS----has been very credibly determined to be a LATER INSERT------keep in mind-----the VATICAN OWNS THE ORIGINAL BOOKS. ----a few somewhat non-specific lines-------almost silly in their
triviality

That is a well known theory and the Jews certainly would like to believe that....but it cannot be proven.

The Josephus account has been embroiled in controversy since the 17th century. It could not have been written by a Jewish man, say the critics, because it sounds too Christian: it even claims that Jesus was the Messiah (ho christos, the Christ)! (Sounds like bias to me...aka sounding too Christian? Really?)

The critics (Who are these critics? Jews and athiests?)say: this paragraph is not authentic. It was inserted into Josephus' book by a later Christian copyist, probably in the Third or Fourth Century. (Oh yes 'probablyl' great proof you have there....not)

The opinion was controversial. A vast literature was produced over the centuries debating the authenticity of the "Testimonium Flavianum", the Testimony of Flavius Josephus.

A view that has been prominent among American scholars was summarized in John Meier's 1991 book, A Marginal Jew.

This opinion held that the paragraph was formed by a mixture of writers. It parsed the text into two categories: nything that seemed too Christian was added by a later Christian writer, while anything else was originally written by Josephus.

By this view, the paragraph was taken as essentially authentic, and so supported the objective historicity of Jesus.

http://www.josephus.org/testimonium.htm

you are an HYSTERIC-----some sunday school teacher told you that DA JOOOOOS deny that a JESUS ever existed. I got news for you-----
NOPE. A debate on the issue "did a jesus exist" is an utter NON-ISSUE in Judaism. You got a citation for anyone saying "NO JEW
COULD HAVE SAID THAT"? ----sorry---the most you might find is "who gives a damn" HOWEVER---the very first time I picked up the
"wars" book by Josephus-----I got it as a "left behind" by a man in the hospital in which I worked who read it AVIDLY------his crucifix on his neck and his rosary tied to his bed rails. ----
there was a forward in which a Christian clergyman as HYSTERICAL as are you DECLARED that the high esteem in which
Josephus held PHARISEES ------was a
"big mistake" "a serious flaw". Nope again---
the HISTORIC JOSEPHUS----remained a Pharisee jew----never took up the Jesus cult-----
and continued writings in his very scholarly manner for the rest of his life. The lines to which Christians "cling" so desperately are something like "there was a man some called the messiah who did miracles" ---------as in
"BIG DEAL" There have been such men by the hundreds since----and, it really is an insert

There are at least two Jews posting in USMB who argue that the Jesus we know never existed. That the Jesus we know is a conglomerate of several different persons. In fact, the post directly below yours - by one of your fellow Joooooos - calls it fiction. I'm pretty sure you have implied that too.

The GreenHornet has kicked all of your butts in this debate. I will be his Kato any day.

 

[irosie91]

try again------at no point did I dispute the evidence of the existence of a JESUS------however it is also a fact that JOSEPHUS makes no mention of him.
The one paragraph describing a JESUS----has been very credibly determined to be a LATER INSERT------keep in mind-----the VATICAN OWNS THE ORIGINAL BOOKS. ----a few somewhat non-specific lines-------almost silly in their
triviality

That is a well known theory and the Jews certainly would like to believe that....but it cannot be proven.

The Josephus account has been embroiled in controversy since the 17th century. It could not have been written by a Jewish man, say the critics, because it sounds too Christian: it even claims that Jesus was the Messiah (ho christos, the Christ)! (Sounds like bias to me...aka sounding too Christian? Really?)

The critics (Who are these critics? Jews and athiests?)say: this paragraph is not authentic. It was inserted into Josephus' book by a later Christian copyist, probably in the Third or Fourth Century. (Oh yes 'probablyl' great proof you have there....not)

The opinion was controversial. A vast literature was produced over the centuries debating the authenticity of the "Testimonium Flavianum", the Testimony of Flavius Josephus.

A view that has been prominent among American scholars was summarized in John Meier's 1991 book, A Marginal Jew.

This opinion held that the paragraph was formed by a mixture of writers. It parsed the text into two categories: nything that seemed too Christian was added by a later Christian writer, while anything else was originally written by Josephus.

By this view, the paragraph was taken as essentially authentic, and so supported the objective historicity of Jesus.

http://www.josephus.org/testimonium.htm

you are an HYSTERIC-----some sunday school teacher told you that DA JOOOOOS deny that a JESUS ever existed. I got news for you-----
NOPE. A debate on the issue "did a jesus exist" is an utter NON-ISSUE in Judaism. You got a citation for anyone saying "NO JEW
COULD HAVE SAID THAT"? ----sorry---the most you might find is "who gives a damn" HOWEVER---the very first time I picked up the
"wars" book by Josephus-----I got it as a "left behind" by a man in the hospital in which I worked who read it AVIDLY------his crucifix on his neck and his rosary tied to his bed rails. ----
there was a forward in which a Christian clergyman as HYSTERICAL as are you DECLARED that the high esteem in which
Josephus held PHARISEES ------was a
"big mistake" "a serious flaw". Nope again---
the HISTORIC JOSEPHUS----remained a Pharisee jew----never took up the Jesus cult-----
and continued writings in his very scholarly manner for the rest of his life. The lines to which Christians "cling" so desperately are something like "there was a man some called the messiah who did miracles" ---------as in
"BIG DEAL" There have been such men by the hundreds since----and, it really is an insert

There are at least two Jews posting in USMB who argue that the Jesus we know never existed. That the Jesus we know is a conglomerate of several different persons. In fact, the post directly below yours - by one of your fellow Joooooos - calls it fiction. I'm pretty sure you have implied that too.

The GreenHornet has kicked all of your butts in this debate. I will be his Kato any day.

wrong again----stink ass pig, At no point did I state that a person "jesus" did not exist as the person you idiotically worship. As to 'greenshit' he is a typical islamo Nazi pig----I recognize the shitty lingo. It is obvious to me that the REAL person would not recognize your perverted version of him

 

[ding]

try again------at no point did I dispute the evidence of the existence of a JESUS------however it is also a fact that JOSEPHUS makes no mention of him.
The one paragraph describing a JESUS----has been very credibly determined to be a LATER INSERT------keep in mind-----the VATICAN OWNS THE ORIGINAL BOOKS. ----a few somewhat non-specific lines-------almost silly in their
triviality

That is a well known theory and the Jews certainly would like to believe that....but it cannot be proven.

The Josephus account has been embroiled in controversy since the 17th century. It could not have been written by a Jewish man, say the critics, because it sounds too Christian: it even claims that Jesus was the Messiah (ho christos, the Christ)! (Sounds like bias to me...aka sounding too Christian? Really?)

The critics (Who are these critics? Jews and athiests?)say: this paragraph is not authentic. It was inserted into Josephus' book by a later Christian copyist, probably in the Third or Fourth Century. (Oh yes 'probablyl' great proof you have there....not)

The opinion was controversial. A vast literature was produced over the centuries debating the authenticity of the "Testimonium Flavianum", the Testimony of Flavius Josephus.

A view that has been prominent among American scholars was summarized in John Meier's 1991 book, A Marginal Jew.

This opinion held that the paragraph was formed by a mixture of writers. It parsed the text into two categories: nything that seemed too Christian was added by a later Christian writer, while anything else was originally written by Josephus.

By this view, the paragraph was taken as essentially authentic, and so supported the objective historicity of Jesus.

http://www.josephus.org/testimonium.htm

you are an HYSTERIC-----some sunday school teacher told you that DA JOOOOOS deny that a JESUS ever existed. I got news for you-----
NOPE. A debate on the issue "did a jesus exist" is an utter NON-ISSUE in Judaism. You got a citation for anyone saying "NO JEW
COULD HAVE SAID THAT"? ----sorry---the most you might find is "who gives a damn" HOWEVER---the very first time I picked up the
"wars" book by Josephus-----I got it as a "left behind" by a man in the hospital in which I worked who read it AVIDLY------his crucifix on his neck and his rosary tied to his bed rails. ----
there was a forward in which a Christian clergyman as HYSTERICAL as are you DECLARED that the high esteem in which
Josephus held PHARISEES ------was a
"big mistake" "a serious flaw". Nope again---
the HISTORIC JOSEPHUS----remained a Pharisee jew----never took up the Jesus cult-----
and continued writings in his very scholarly manner for the rest of his life. The lines to which Christians "cling" so desperately are something like "there was a man some called the messiah who did miracles" ---------as in
"BIG DEAL" There have been such men by the hundreds since----and, it really is an insert

There are at least two Jews posting in USMB who argue that the Jesus we know never existed. That the Jesus we know is a conglomerate of several different persons. In fact, the post directly below yours - by one of your fellow Joooooos - calls it fiction. I'm pretty sure you have implied that too.

The GreenHornet has kicked all of your butts in this debate. I will be his Kato any day.

wrong again----stink ass pig, At no point did I state that a person "jesus" did not exist as the person you idiotically worship. As to 'greenshit' he is a typical islamo Nazi pig----I recognize the shitty lingo. It is obvious to me that the REAL person would not recognize your perverted version of him

You really need to consider how you speak to people. Do you kiss your mother with that mouth?

 

[irosie91]

try again------at no point did I dispute the evidence of the existence of a JESUS------however it is also a fact that JOSEPHUS makes no mention of him.
The one paragraph describing a JESUS----has been very credibly determined to be a LATER INSERT------keep in mind-----the VATICAN OWNS THE ORIGINAL BOOKS. ----a few somewhat non-specific lines-------almost silly in their
triviality

That is a well known theory and the Jews certainly would like to believe that....but it cannot be proven.

The Josephus account has been embroiled in controversy since the 17th century. It could not have been written by a Jewish man, say the critics, because it sounds too Christian: it even claims that Jesus was the Messiah (ho christos, the Christ)! (Sounds like bias to me...aka sounding too Christian? Really?)

The critics (Who are these critics? Jews and athiests?)say: this paragraph is not authentic. It was inserted into Josephus' book by a later Christian copyist, probably in the Third or Fourth Century. (Oh yes 'probablyl' great proof you have there....not)

The opinion was controversial. A vast literature was produced over the centuries debating the authenticity of the "Testimonium Flavianum", the Testimony of Flavius Josephus.

A view that has been prominent among American scholars was summarized in John Meier's 1991 book, A Marginal Jew.

This opinion held that the paragraph was formed by a mixture of writers. It parsed the text into two categories: nything that seemed too Christian was added by a later Christian writer, while anything else was originally written by Josephus.

By this view, the paragraph was taken as essentially authentic, and so supported the objective historicity of Jesus.

http://www.josephus.org/testimonium.htm

you are an HYSTERIC-----some sunday school teacher told you that DA JOOOOOS deny that a JESUS ever existed. I got news for you-----
NOPE. A debate on the issue "did a jesus exist" is an utter NON-ISSUE in Judaism. You got a citation for anyone saying "NO JEW
COULD HAVE SAID THAT"? ----sorry---the most you might find is "who gives a damn" HOWEVER---the very first time I picked up the
"wars" book by Josephus-----I got it as a "left behind" by a man in the hospital in which I worked who read it AVIDLY------his crucifix on his neck and his rosary tied to his bed rails. ----
there was a forward in which a Christian clergyman as HYSTERICAL as are you DECLARED that the high esteem in which
Josephus held PHARISEES ------was a
"big mistake" "a serious flaw". Nope again---
the HISTORIC JOSEPHUS----remained a Pharisee jew----never took up the Jesus cult-----
and continued writings in his very scholarly manner for the rest of his life. The lines to which Christians "cling" so desperately are something like "there was a man some called the messiah who did miracles" ---------as in
"BIG DEAL" There have been such men by the hundreds since----and, it really is an insert

There are at least two Jews posting in USMB who argue that the Jesus we know never existed. That the Jesus we know is a conglomerate of several different persons. In fact, the post directly below yours - by one of your fellow Joooooos - calls it fiction. I'm pretty sure you have implied that too.

The GreenHornet has kicked all of your butts in this debate. I will be his Kato any day.

wrong again----stink ass pig, At no point did I state that a person "jesus" did not exist as the person you idiotically worship. As to 'greenshit' he is a typical islamo Nazi pig----I recognize the shitty lingo. It is obvious to me that the REAL person would not recognize your perverted version of him

You really need to consider how you speak to people. Do you kiss your mother with that mouth?

regularly

 

[ding]

That is a well known theory and the Jews certainly would like to believe that....but it cannot be proven.

The Josephus account has been embroiled in controversy since the 17th century. It could not have been written by a Jewish man, say the critics, because it sounds too Christian: it even claims that Jesus was the Messiah (ho christos, the Christ)! (Sounds like bias to me...aka sounding too Christian? Really?)

The critics (Who are these critics? Jews and athiests?)say: this paragraph is not authentic. It was inserted into Josephus' book by a later Christian copyist, probably in the Third or Fourth Century. (Oh yes 'probablyl' great proof you have there....not)

The opinion was controversial. A vast literature was produced over the centuries debating the authenticity of the "Testimonium Flavianum", the Testimony of Flavius Josephus.

A view that has been prominent among American scholars was summarized in John Meier's 1991 book, A Marginal Jew.

This opinion held that the paragraph was formed by a mixture of writers. It parsed the text into two categories: nything that seemed too Christian was added by a later Christian writer, while anything else was originally written by Josephus.

By this view, the paragraph was taken as essentially authentic, and so supported the objective historicity of Jesus.

http://www.josephus.org/testimonium.htm

you are an HYSTERIC-----some sunday school teacher told you that DA JOOOOOS deny that a JESUS ever existed. I got news for you-----
NOPE. A debate on the issue "did a jesus exist" is an utter NON-ISSUE in Judaism. You got a citation for anyone saying "NO JEW
COULD HAVE SAID THAT"? ----sorry---the most you might find is "who gives a damn" HOWEVER---the very first time I picked up the
"wars" book by Josephus-----I got it as a "left behind" by a man in the hospital in which I worked who read it AVIDLY------his crucifix on his neck and his rosary tied to his bed rails. ----
there was a forward in which a Christian clergyman as HYSTERICAL as are you DECLARED that the high esteem in which
Josephus held PHARISEES ------was a
"big mistake" "a serious flaw". Nope again---
the HISTORIC JOSEPHUS----remained a Pharisee jew----never took up the Jesus cult-----
and continued writings in his very scholarly manner for the rest of his life. The lines to which Christians "cling" so desperately are something like "there was a man some called the messiah who did miracles" ---------as in
"BIG DEAL" There have been such men by the hundreds since----and, it really is an insert

There are at least two Jews posting in USMB who argue that the Jesus we know never existed. That the Jesus we know is a conglomerate of several different persons. In fact, the post directly below yours - by one of your fellow Joooooos - calls it fiction. I'm pretty sure you have implied that too.

The GreenHornet has kicked all of your butts in this debate. I will be his Kato any day.

wrong again----stink ass pig, At no point did I state that a person "jesus" did not exist as the person you idiotically worship. As to 'greenshit' he is a typical islamo Nazi pig----I recognize the shitty lingo. It is obvious to me that the REAL person would not recognize your perverted version of him

You really need to consider how you speak to people. Do you kiss your mother with that mouth?

regularly

You probably came by your disrespectful and rude disposition honestly.

 

[irosie91]

you are an HYSTERIC-----some sunday school teacher told you that DA JOOOOOS deny that a JESUS ever existed. I got news for you-----
NOPE. A debate on the issue "did a jesus exist" is an utter NON-ISSUE in Judaism. You got a citation for anyone saying "NO JEW
COULD HAVE SAID THAT"? ----sorry---the most you might find is "who gives a damn" HOWEVER---the very first time I picked up the
"wars" book by Josephus-----I got it as a "left behind" by a man in the hospital in which I worked who read it AVIDLY------his crucifix on his neck and his rosary tied to his bed rails. ----
there was a forward in which a Christian clergyman as HYSTERICAL as are you DECLARED that the high esteem in which
Josephus held PHARISEES ------was a
"big mistake" "a serious flaw". Nope again---
the HISTORIC JOSEPHUS----remained a Pharisee jew----never took up the Jesus cult-----
and continued writings in his very scholarly manner for the rest of his life. The lines to which Christians "cling" so desperately are something like "there was a man some called the messiah who did miracles" ---------as in
"BIG DEAL" There have been such men by the hundreds since----and, it really is an insert

There are at least two Jews posting in USMB who argue that the Jesus we know never existed. That the Jesus we know is a conglomerate of several different persons. In fact, the post directly below yours - by one of your fellow Joooooos - calls it fiction. I'm pretty sure you have implied that too.

The GreenHornet has kicked all of your butts in this debate. I will be his Kato any day.

wrong again----stink ass pig, At no point did I state that a person "jesus" did not exist as the person you idiotically worship. As to 'greenshit' he is a typical islamo Nazi pig----I recognize the shitty lingo. It is obvious to me that the REAL person would not recognize your perverted version of him

You really need to consider how you speak to people. Do you kiss your mother with that mouth?

regularly

You probably came by your disrespectful and rude disposition honestly.

I grew up in a very Christian town----and spent far more time in Sunday school as a child than in any synagogue

 

[ding]

There are at least two Jews posting in USMB who argue that the Jesus we know never existed. That the Jesus we know is a conglomerate of several different persons. In fact, the post directly below yours - by one of your fellow Joooooos - calls it fiction. I'm pretty sure you have implied that too.

The GreenHornet has kicked all of your butts in this debate. I will be his Kato any day.

wrong again----stink ass pig, At no point did I state that a person "jesus" did not exist as the person you idiotically worship. As to 'greenshit' he is a typical islamo Nazi pig----I recognize the shitty lingo. It is obvious to me that the REAL person would not recognize your perverted version of him

You really need to consider how you speak to people. Do you kiss your mother with that mouth?

regularly

You probably came by your disrespectful and rude disposition honestly.

I grew up in a very Christian town----and spent far more time in Sunday school as a child than in any synagogue

Apples don't fall far from trees.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

try again------at no point did I dispute the evidence of the existence of a JESUS------however it is also a fact that JOSEPHUS makes no mention of him.
The one paragraph describing a JESUS----has been very credibly determined to be a LATER INSERT------keep in mind-----the VATICAN OWNS THE ORIGINAL BOOKS. ----a few somewhat non-specific lines-------almost silly in their
triviality

That is a well known theory and the Jews certainly would like to believe that....but it cannot be proven.

The Josephus account has been embroiled in controversy since the 17th century. It could not have been written by a Jewish man, say the critics, because it sounds too Christian: it even claims that Jesus was the Messiah (ho christos, the Christ)! (Sounds like bias to me...aka sounding too Christian? Really?)

The critics (Who are these critics? Jews and athiests?)say: this paragraph is not authentic. It was inserted into Josephus' book by a later Christian copyist, probably in the Third or Fourth Century. (Oh yes 'probablyl' great proof you have there....not)

The opinion was controversial. A vast literature was produced over the centuries debating the authenticity of the "Testimonium Flavianum", the Testimony of Flavius Josephus.

A view that has been prominent among American scholars was summarized in John Meier's 1991 book, A Marginal Jew.

This opinion held that the paragraph was formed by a mixture of writers. It parsed the text into two categories: nything that seemed too Christian was added by a later Christian writer, while anything else was originally written by Josephus.

By this view, the paragraph was taken as essentially authentic, and so supported the objective historicity of Jesus.

http://www.josephus.org/testimonium.htm

you are an HYSTERIC-----some sunday school teacher told you that DA JOOOOOS deny that a JESUS ever existed. I got news for you-----
NOPE. A debate on the issue "did a jesus exist" is an utter NON-ISSUE in Judaism. You got a citation for anyone saying "NO JEW
COULD HAVE SAID THAT"? ----sorry---the most you might find is "who gives a damn" HOWEVER---the very first time I picked up the
"wars" book by Josephus-----I got it as a "left behind" by a man in the hospital in which I worked who read it AVIDLY------his crucifix on his neck and his rosary tied to his bed rails. ----
there was a forward in which a Christian clergyman as HYSTERICAL as are you DECLARED that the high esteem in which
Josephus held PHARISEES ------was a
"big mistake" "a serious flaw". Nope again---
the HISTORIC JOSEPHUS----remained a Pharisee jew----never took up the Jesus cult-----
and continued writings in his very scholarly manner for the rest of his life. The lines to which Christians "cling" so desperately are something like "there was a man some called the messiah who did miracles" ---------as in
"BIG DEAL" There have been such men by the hundreds since----and, it really is an insert

and you accuse me of hysteria??? bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Anyhow ..........you are entitled to your opinion.

Irregardless...........


A page from a 1466 copy of Antiquities of the Jews
Part of a series on

Jesus in Christianity[show]
Jesus in Islam[show]
Background[show]
Jesus in history[show]
Perspectives on Jesus[hide]

• Biblical
• Christian (Lutheran)
• Jewish
• Talmud
• Islamic (Ahmadi)
• Scientology
• Tacitus
• Bar-Serapion

Jesus in culture[show]

• Christianity portal
• Islam portal
• 
  Book:Jesus

• v
• t
• e

The extant manuscripts of the writings of the first-century Romano-Jewish historian Flavius Josephus include references to Jesus and the origins of Christianity.[1][2] Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews, written around 93–94 AD, includes two references to the biblical Jesus Christ in Books 18 and 20 and a reference to John the Baptist in Book 18.[1][3] Scholarly opinion varies on the total or partial authenticity of the reference in Book 18, Chapter 3, 3 of the Antiquities, a passage that states that Jesus the Messiah was a wise teacher who was crucified by Pilate, usually called the Testimonium Flavianum.[4][5][1] The general scholarly view is that while the Testimonium Flavianum is most likely not authentic in its entirety, it is broadly agreed upon that it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus, which was then subject to Christian interpolation and/or alteration.[5][6][7][8][9][10] Although the exact nature and extent of the Christian redaction remains unclear,[11] broad consensus exists as to what the original text of the Testimonium by Josephus would have looked like.[9]

Modern scholarship has largely acknowledged the authenticity of the reference in Book 20, Chapter 9, 1 of the Antiquities to "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James"[12] and considers it as having the highest level of authenticity among the references of Josephus to Christianity.[13][1][2][14][15][16] Almost all modern scholars consider the reference in Book 18, Chapter 5, 2 of the Antiquities to the imprisonment and death of John the Baptist also to be authentic and not a Christian interpolation.[17][18][19] The references found in Antiquities have no parallel texts in the other work by Josephus such as The Jewish War, written 20 years earlier, but some scholars have provided explanations for their absence.[20] A number of variations exist between the statements by Josephus regarding the deaths of James and John the Baptist and the New Testament accounts.[17][21] Scholars generally view these variations as indications that the Josephus passages are not interpolations, for a Christian interpolator would have made them correspond to the New Testament accounts, not differ from them.

Josephus on Jesus - Wikipedia

 

[IsaacNewton]

The Rabbi, the Note and the Messiah

Given that the Ultra-Orthodox are the Jewish equivalent of Nazis re 'Racial Purity' and 'Racial Superiority' it's obvious why even his son denies the story.

Don't know what to make of it myself. Is there an Israeli version of April Fools Day, where the media has fun posting fake stories?

Yeah, they once circulated a fantastical story about a dead fish suddenly coming to life and speaking at a market astonishing everyone there...Probably just some inside joke about a follower of Jesus suddenly making sense. A miracle!

BBC NEWS | Americas | 'Talking fish' stuns New York

If you took that fish back 2,000 years, put 'a message from god' in it, and went from town to town playing it people now would be hailing The Fish Prophet.

Where do people get this idea that there are humans just like them that have some supernatural knowledge? When you're a kid you believe shit like that but not once you get past 20 years old? Come the fuck on people.

 

[irosie91]

[QUOTE="TheGreenHornet,


A page from a 1466 copy of Antiquities of the Jews
Part of a series on

Jesus in Christianity[show]
Jesus in Islam[show]
Background[show]
Jesus in history[show]
Perspectives on Jesus[hide]

• Biblical
• Christian (Lutheran)
• Jewish
• Talmud
• Islamic (Ahmadi)
• Scientology
• Tacitus
• Bar-Serapion

Jesus in culture[show]

• Christianity portal
• Islam portal
• 
  Book:Jesus

• v
• t
• e

The extant manuscripts of the writings of the first-century Romano-Jewish historian Flavius Josephus include references to Jesus and the origins of Christianity.[1][2] Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews, written around 93–94 AD, includes two references to the biblical Jesus Christ in Books 18 and 20 and a reference to John the Baptist in Book 18.[1][3] Scholarly opinion varies on the total or partial authenticity of the reference in Book 18, Chapter 3, 3 of the Antiquities, a passage that states that Jesus the Messiah was a wise teacher who was crucified by Pilate, usually called the Testimonium Flavianum.[4][5][1] The general scholarly view is that while the Testimonium Flavianum is most likely not authentic in its entirety, it is broadly agreed upon that it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus, which was then subject to Christian interpolation and/or alteration.[5][6][7][8][9][10] Although the exact nature and extent of the Christian redaction remains unclear,[11] broad consensus exists as to what the original text of the Testimonium by Josephus would have looked like.[9]

Modern scholarship has largely acknowledged the authenticity of the reference in Book 20, Chapter 9, 1 of the Antiquities to "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James"[12] and considers it as having the highest level of authenticity among the references of Josephus to Christianity.[13][1][2][14][15][16] Almost all modern scholars consider the reference in Book 18, Chapter 5, 2 of the Antiquities to the imprisonment and death of John the Baptist also to be authentic and not a Christian interpolation.[17][18][19] The references found in Antiquities have no parallel texts in the other work by Josephus such as The Jewish War, written 20 years earlier, but some scholars have provided explanations for their absence.[20] A number of variations exist between the statements by Josephus regarding the deaths of James and John the Baptist and the New Testament accounts.[17][21] Scholars generally view these variations as indications that the Josephus passages are not interpolations, for a Christian interpolator would have made them correspond to the New Testament accounts, not differ from them.

Josephus on Jesus - Wikipedia[/QUOTE]


pathetic----from top to bottom

 

[shimon]

Lol... Me thinks the Kato/ Ding has taken one to many blows to the head to fall for the Green Hornets Malarky... Funny though as the guy who played Kato in the green hornet tv series was Bruce Lee’s whose great grandfather was Jewish on his mother’s side I believe..At least he exsisted even though he played a fictional character. Now that cool cat would never have fallen for the crap the green hornet is trying to pull on this board... Winking again...

 

[HaShev]

josephus scam.....yada yada yada

THERE IS NO HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF JESUS, only the few figures used to make his image are accounted in historical references. Example: Historically
THE PILATE era figure was Theudas by the Jordan.
Josephus accounts of Jesus are proven placed in at a later date probably by Eusebius who was known as the great liar who often forged books. I say this because early copies have no mention of Jesus and it's not until the time of Constantine and Eusebius that it magically appears out of context as if placed in and forced in.
Have some common sense Josephus being a Jew writing about a Jewish Rabbi to a Jewish audience does not use the non Hebrew name Jesus- only a LATER Christian would use the IESUS NAME. Also Josephus being Jewish not Christian nor follower would ever call him "the christ".
Other evidence include out of sequence accounts as if placed in text.
And Josephus says a peculiar statement that you need a keen eye to notice: something to the affect: "Jesus was a man, if the law would allow us to call him that"
Why would he question whether we'd be allowed to call him a man unless that was taboo by law?
See Christians will lie and say it's because he was a god however this predates that notion Constantine decades later created and Josephus was a Jew not a Christian to make that correlation. So what was Taboo?
Josephus mentions the many figures used for the Jesus image (as does the book of acts mention the other christs) but actually never mentions Jesus at all, which is odd being I did a lineage search on Josephus and I was the only one to connect the dots that he was related distant wise to KING Jannaeus lineage who's wife Salome (friend /follower) of Yeshu son of Mary of 100bc was supposed to be related to Yeshu. ODD since Josephus doesn't even mention Yeshu who the RCC favors in it's trinity of christs used to make the Jesus character.

 

[ding]

It is really too bad that the Jews on this board don't have a theology that leads to a personal relationship with the Living God. Christians do. No wonder they attack us for our beliefs.