Ken Olson wrote: ↑Wed Apr 14, 2021 11:46 am
[ If "who is called Christ" were authentic to Josephus (which I'm not conceding), I think it would have to mean: "who is called Christ" by his Greco-Roman audience, not by the Jews whom he is writing about in the Antiquities of the Jews.
Best,
Ken
Even if, for the sake of argument, ''who is called Christ'' in the James passage, and ''who was the Christ'' in the TF, were both interpolations, the reflection, the allusions, to figures in the gospel story remain. (one reason, one could argue that the interpolations were made). But to reason from reflection and allusion to historical Josephan support for a historical gospel Jesus is unwarranted. Yes, obviously, if one upholds a historical gospel Jesus figure then par for the course. Bingo......historical support for the gospel Jesus figure. Simple, game set and match.....
However, the other side of the gospel debate - that the gospel Jesus is a literary figure - removes this simple historicist equation from it's supposed relevance. Yes, the reflection and illusions to gospel figures remains in the writing of Josephus - thus requiring a rethink as to their relevance to the gospel story. If these Josephan reflections are not support for a historical Jesus then what is their relevance ? Support for the gospel story is indicated. Support for the gospel story not support for the historicity of gospel figures within that story.
So, it's back to the drawing board. What is the gospel Jesus story about? History of the figures it tells stories about - or history reflected through the gospel figures in the story.
Josephus can be a help here. What is he doing with his two gospel reflections? One way to consider is where he has placed his two reflections.
1. The TF is placed around the expulsion of Jews from Rome - around 19 c.e. That year is 49 years from 30 b.c. - the year in which Josephus places the execution of Hyrancus by Herod. (49 being 7x7)
2. The James passage is placed around 62/63 c.e. That is 100 years from the Roman execution of Antigonus in 37 b.c.
Josephus is placing his gospel reflections in time slots that reflect Hasmonean history. Indicating that it is that history, Hasmonean history, that is reflected within the gospel story.
As to the controversy over the 'who is called Christ' and 'who was the Christ'..........both Hyrancus and Antigonus were Kings and High Priests - both in effect, anointed to their respective positions.
For all the ink that has been spilled over the Greek wording of these two Josephan passages controversy still remains. Perhaps it's time for a very different approach.
--------------
From another thread.
Hasmonean history | Chronology | Josephus |
37 b.c. Antigonus executed | 100 years | 63 c.e. James stoned |
30 b.c. Hyrancus executed | * | 70 c.e. unnamed man crucified |
7 year end of Hasmoneans | * | 7 year time frame to 70 c.e. |
I would suggest that this is what Josephus is doing in his story about having the unnamed man taken down from the cross : remembering past history; remembering the last 7 years of Hasmonean history. Replaying the historical tape as an undercurrent for the stories he writes in regard to the war of 70 c.e. No need whatsoever to time-shift the crucified man of 70 c.e. back to the time of Pilate. - that gospel man is a literary creation. Josephus has already, by his use of a seven year parallel - indicated what Roman execution he is remembering from 37 b.c. A real historical Roman execution of the last King and High Priest of the Jews.
(Historically, two Hasmoneans were executed. No, not brothers, an uncle and a nephew, but from the family of Hasmonean Kings. )