Metro State Atheists

Promoting Science, Reason, and Secular Values

“The Jesus Fraud” Blog Series-Pro Argument #1 (Flavius Josephus)

Please read “The Jesus Fraud” Blog Series before reading this

The first “pro” argument for the existence of Jesus Christ that will be discussed in this series is the writings of Flavius Josephus.  I will presented the argument by using quotes from those who support the claim, which is, that Flavius Josephus clearly and definitively refers to Jesus as a historical figure in the Antiquities of the Jews, Book 20 Paragraph 9.

From krissmith777: “there is the second mention of Jesus made by Josephus. You can argue that this is a forgery as well, but that argument falls when a word study is done on the passage.” (here is referring to the claim above)

krissmith777: “The second mention of Jesus made by Josephus is believed almost universally to be authentic and written by Josephus himself.”

krissmith777: “It’s in the 20th book of the Antiquities of the Jews in the ninth chapter. Depending on which system you prefer to cite Josephus you’d find it in “Antiquities of the Jews 20: 9, 1″ which is entire paragraph system.”

The argument is that since this passage is authentic, written by Josephus himself, and he mentions Jesus in passing along with his brother James, then this implies and proves Jesus Christ was a historical figure and existed.

Please let me know if there is anything wrong with this presentation of the Flavius Josehpus argument.  I will not accept anything about the Testimonium Flavium as krissmith777 said “Personally I would not appeal to the Testimonium Flavianum to show that Jesus existed” because we have agreed that it is most likely an interpolation and thus not written by Flavius Josephus himself and, consequently, not evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ.

Proponents will have one week to suggest corrections.  If you disagree with this argument, please hold your comments.

The Con Argument is here.

Joel

President

Metro State Atheists

Advertisements

January 12, 2009 - Posted by | atheism, Bible, Center For Inquiry, Christianity, creationism, First Century, god, Jesus, Jesus Christ, Jesus is Lord, Metro State Atheists, New Testament, philosophy, Pseudoscience, religion, Rome, The Holy Bible, Uncategorized | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

4 Comments »

  1. Question:

    I realize this is your blog and you can do whatever you want with it, but why did you erase my answer to this post?

    Comment by krissmith777 | January 15, 2009

  2. Honestly, I went back and forth on whether or not to. I asked an objective friend of mine (objective in the sense they are a believer such as yourself) and it was concluded that in my blog I specifically ask for additions to the argument. Although your comment was informative and interesting it was determined it didn’t meet the aforementioned criteria. I enjoy your comments and would like to thank you because you’ve made work hard and investigate more than I have and I wholeheartedly appreciate that. In fairness, you quote about the TF was in an effort to let others know that because there is too much of a dispute about the specific passage in TF, I will not consider it.

    Joel

    Comment by Metro State Atheists | January 15, 2009

  3. Okay. I accept that. 🙂

    Cheers.

    Comment by krissmith777 | January 15, 2009

  4. Good argument! I think the wikipedia page “Josephus on Jesus” needs some cleaning up.

    Comment by Anthony | October 21, 2010


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: