Josephus' my name, but what's my game?

[Guest]

"Hi, there. I am Flavius Josephus, yes I am. Oh, I'm sorry, some of you may not remember me by my Roman name. I was really born in 37AD with my real birth name given by my Jewish parents as Joseph Ben Mattathias, the son of Matthias, an ethnic Hebrew, a priest from Jerusalem. In know, I know, names given by Jewish parents for their children had real significance, but it wasn't that big a deal for me to change it. What's in a name, right?. Yes, of course I know all about my great Jewish heritage that the name of Abram (father/exalted ancestor) was changed to Abraham (father/exalted ancestor of nations-multitude), Jacob (held by the heel, supplanted, protected) was changed to Israel (who prevails w/God, prince of God), Saul (Hb, borrowed) was changed Paul (Lt-small), Sarai (original Biblical form....my princess) was changed to Sarah (noble or princess) and Simon (wavering) was changed to Peter (rock). Oh please don't remind me about that Jesus guy either. Yes, yes, I know his name Jesus means Messiah (Heb) & Christos (Gk) (Anointed One). I also know that some of you actually believe Isaiah 7:14 in the Greek Septuagint scriptures (hee hee, what fools) as the truth describing Immanuel (God is with you) as a pre-figuration of Jesus' coming. Don't you know the Hebrew scriptures are true and there is no virgin birth. That's Greek mythology."

So who is or was this "Josephus". Josephus was a priest, a soldier, and a scholar. As to how good of any one of those three is questionable. Non-Catholic Christians hold Josephus up as a proof-text for the validity of the Old Testament Scriptures. Josephus wrote several books. They were 1. Antiquities of the Jews (Glorification of Jewish history), 2. Wars of the Jews (against Roman Empire), 3. Against Apion (reply to Alexandrian schoolmaster) and 4. Vita (his autobiography).

It was within the Vita that Josephus replies to charges brought by Josephus by Justus of Galilee relating to Josephus' account of the Jewish revolt. Justus' writing have been lost/destroyed or never found, but were apparently were present because Josephus relates to them.

Against Apion was a work written by Flavius Josephus as a defense of Judaism as a classical religion and philosophy, stressing its antiquity against the relatively more recent traditions of the Greek Jews. It is with Josephus' book "Against Apion" that Josephus mentions the Jewish scriptures containing only 39 books. An important item to remember is the politics of the times. Does everyone remember Acts 6:1... "In those days when the number of disciples was increasing, the Grecian [Hellenist] Jews among them complained against the Hebraic [Hebrews] Jews because their widows were being overlooked in the daily distribution of food. "(NIV)? This was written regarding the times of about 70AD. Here we have scripture already documenting the problems between Greek and Hebrew Jews. We know that the Greek Jews held the Greek Septuagint as sacred and the Hebrews held their Hebrew text as sacred....again, a difference of 7 books in the OT.

Josephus also makes some anti-Semitic allegations regarding Apion so we know we have an on-going problem with a Hebrew/Pharisee Jew (Josephus) and a Greek Jew (Apion). Against Apion was written approx 95AD about 25 years after Acts but also substantiates problems between these two denominational Jews. Is it any wonder that Josephus would side with his pharisaical background/teaching against the Greek Jews which it appears he did not get along with? What else do we know about Josephus?

Well, he fought the Romans in the First Jewish-Roman War of 66-73 as a Jewish military leader (general) in Galilee. After the Jewish garrison of Yodfat was taken under siege, the Romans invaded, killed thousands, and the remaining survivors (including Josephus) who had managed to elude the forces committed suicide. However, in circumstances that are somewhat unclear (faking suicide?), Josephus and one of his soldiers surrendered to the Roman forces.

He became a prisoner and provided the Romans with intelligence on the ongoing revolt. The Roman forces were led by Flavius Vespasian and his son Titus, both subsequently Roman emperors. In 69 AD Josephus was released and according to Josephus' own account, he appears to have played some role as a negotiator with the defenders in the Siege of Jerusalem in 70AD.
In 71AD he arrived in Rome in the entourage of Titus, becoming a Roman citizen and Flavian dynasty client. Although he only ever calls himself "Josephus", he is often referred to as Flavius Josephus appearing to have taken the Roman name Flavius of his patrons. This was standard for new citizens. In addition to Roman citizenship he was granted accommodations and a decent, if not extravagant, pension. It was while in Rome, and under Flavian patronage, that Josephus wrote all of his known works.

Josephus' life is beset with ambiguity. For his critics, he never satisfactorily explained his actions during the Jewish war ...... why he failed to commit suicide in Galilee in 67AD with some of his compatriots, and why, after his capture, he cooperated with the Roman invaders?

There were only three ways you could become a Roman citizen. You either were 1. Born into it, 2. Bought citizenship with high price or 3. Performed a great deed for the Roman Empire. Josephus was not born into the Roman Empire and he did not pay for it, but he did perform a great act for the Roman Empire. He helped bring down the Jewish rebellion for the Romans. actually making accusations portraying the Jews as weak and unorganized. The most blatant possibility of bias in his writings is Josephus' implication that the Jews were the cause of the war. Maybe this is why Justus disliked Josephus. So Josephus gave up his birth name and his birth country of which he was a priest and a soldier.

He was given a home by the Roman Emperor Vespasian and was paid by this emperor to do nothing else but write the accounts that Vespasian requested. The neutrality and integrity behind his writings must be questioned. Josephus never returned to Jerusalem but stayed within Roman territory.

It almost sounds as if Josephus was a traitor to his country, right? Well, why say that? Let's see.....he faked suicide to avoid death by his Roman captures, took on a Roman name, took on Roman citizenship, wrote books under the request of the Roman Emperor, took his wages from the Roman emperor, accepted a home from the Roman Emperor and never returned to Jerusalem. Oh, did I tell you that Eusebius wrote that a statue of Josephus was erected in Rome in his honor? Well, maybe your assumption that he was a traitor may have validation.

Why is this so important? Well, it is actually quite simple. Flavius Josephus is one of the very few historical personalities or related documents that non-Catholic Christians will cite when they wish to prove/validate their Bible use of the 39 books of the Old Testament rather than the Catholic Christian 46 books. Non-Catholic Christians will say "See, see. Josephus who lived in the 1st Century knew very well what Jews considered as sacred scripture. You Catholics added Apocryphal books to substantiate non-Christian beliefs....so, ha ha" (OK, I added the ha ha for a little levity). The real levity is thinking that Josephus is/was a credible witness to Jewish history, especially his Jewish faith.

Does anyone remember WWII? In Berlin working for the Nazi's was an Englishman "Lord Ha Ha" (named so by his countrymen fighting the Nazi's). In Tokyo there was an American born citizen of Japanese ancestry who worked for the Japanese Empire much like Lord Ha Ha. Both became radio broadcasters telling the worst stories to the Allied Forces....about their losing the war, how families back home wanted them back, how wives/girlfriends did not back up the war, how it was futile to fight and die for a useless cause..etc. Basically, lie upon lie to undermine the moral. If either of these individuals wrote a book about the United States do you think it would be a true reflection of America's history, traditions and beliefs? I would assume any rational thinker would state emphatically "NO". Well, this is basically what we have in Flavius Josephus.

Josephus was a Lord Ha Ha, a Tokyo Rose of the 1st Century. To date, many consider his documented history as questionable, skewed with a Roman slant/perspective. When Josephus became a Roman citizen and had freedom to travel he never returned to Jerusalem to clear his name, but merely kept taking everything the Romans would give him. In his writings he often called the Jews hypocrites and called the authors of the Christian scriptures as "pagans". Still a final problem lies here for non-Catholic Christians Jewish scriptures ..... Isiah 7:14.

The Hebraic [Hebrews] Jews did not believe in a Virgin Birth of the Immanuel (Jesus' prefiguration), what Christians accept as a dogmatic truth of their faith. That is a huge problem for non-Catholic Christians .... they state they follow a Hebrew text, as Josephus holds, yet the non-Christians take parts of the Grecian [Hellenist] OT text that Josephus states is non-sacred apocryphal. JW changed the Bible to support their beliefs and it appears that so have the non-Catholic Christians to support their beliefs and not even Flavius Josephus can save them from that discrepancy.

Christ's Peace, Catholic Steve

[Guest]

Wow, you've gone to incredible lengths to cast poor old Josephus in the worst light possible; even comparing him to a Nazi propagandist. Amazing! All this in order to taint his enumeration of the Jewish canon? Are these the lengths you're required to go to in order to try and legitimize the Apocrypha?

Do you really think anyone here will buy it?

I can't wait to hear what you have to say about the Bryennius List, the canon of Epiphanus, the list of 24 books in 4 Ezra, the reference to 22 accepted books in the Book of Jubilees, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Council of Jamnia, Jerome (who coined the term "apocrypha"), etc.

Why not just accept the fact that the status of the Apocrypha was ambiguous up until the Council of Trent? Is the basis for so much RCC doctrine that weak without the apocrypha that you have to try and shore up their canonicity by committing character assassination on the likes of Josephus?

[Guest]

I always love first person accounts like this. They make it all so real and believeable. How could we all be so wrong? But, put us up against the real deal like this, well, we just don't have a chance.

[Guest]

First century Jews -- variously members of the: at least 12 sects within Judaism of the era -- accepted a whole lot more books as "inspired" than the post 70AD "rabbinic" Judaism did. At the Council of Jamnia (89AD) and ff., many books were banned by the new rabbinic (now Orthodox) Judaism. Most especially, Apocalyptic books.

Some Jewish and Jewish-Christian books were accepted as "inspired" by certain Early Fathers; probably most notably, the Book of 1 Enoch, which was effectively banned at the Council of Laodicea (363-364AD).

If that's what you guys are talking about?

Question: Does anyone know when the Jewish Canon was actually established? I'm thinking it was like about the same time the Christian one was. Keeping in mind that post 70AD Judaism was the newer and much more "singular" version of Judaism; the one which we basically now have and have come to know...Anyways....Oh, I just found this:
Biblical Canon which has the Jewish Canon getting established between 200BC-200AD, more or less. Kinda close to the Christian one, huh?

Sorry if I'm off-topic.