On the hypothesis that the Gospel Jesus == Jesus ben Saphat

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
maryhelena
Posts: 1817
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: On the hypothesis that the Gospel Jesus == Jesus ben Saphat

Post by maryhelena » Wed Apr 07, 2021 12:45 am

Another Josephan figure held to be the historical Jesus.


Simon son of Man

Riegel, John Ira, 1871-; Jordan, John H., joint author
Published 1917

Conclusion

page 265,266

We believe our readers will agree that we have
amply proven the thesis with which we set out,
namely, that the Son of Man was a real human being of
flesh and blood, and not a myth; that he
was the real, historical personage who essayed to
be the political Savior of his people and to fulfill
the dream of all the prophets of his race.

He was a man of intense faith in God, and with
an undisciplined army, in spite of factional dissensions
among its leaders and the treason of a
trusted officer jealous of his supreme command, he
wrought the military miracle of holding the Holy
City for three and a half years against the greatest army
that ever arose in the ancient world

Had Alfred, king of the Belgians, been able to
hold his capital city for three and a half years
against a Hindenberg, his feat would have been the
equal of the miracle which was wrought in
Jerusalem by Simon Bar Gi'ora, the Son of Man, the
Jesus of the New Testament.

The Son of Man believed himself the Liberator
of his nation, the Messiah, in the military meaning
of the word. He was proclaimed king of the Jews.
He assumed the role and the prerogatives of a
sovereign. He coined money.
......
page 268

The Joseph of Arimathaias who, the Gospels
say, provided the Son of Man with a tomb, was
Joseph Bara-matthias, that is to say, Joseph Son
of Matthias, the Flavins Josephus of profane history.
This traitor to the great cause the Gospels
have treated far kindlier than he deserves


Free download pdf available.
https://archive.org/details/simonsonofm ... 9/mode/2up

(thanks to Peter Kirby referencing this book)

What can one say - whatever the intention of the gospel writers their story has intrigued the minds of countless writers and researchers. A picture, it is said, is worth a thousand words. And it is that picture, the gospel picture of a crucified man, a man hung on a cross, a symbol that is worn around the necks of the faithful, and adorns every nook and cranny of the christian faith, that needs reassessing. Taken literally, as the faithful do, this picture, this symbol, is fraught with danger - danger both politically and personally. To counteract the inherent danger of the cross - our view of the picture needs change. Finding value in a human sacrifice, as the faithful do, is immoral, it is anti-humanitarian. The picture needs cleaning, it needs some modern cleaning agents to dissolve the centuries of ingrained grime and mishandling it has endured...... ;)

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 8814
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: On the hypothesis that the Gospel Jesus == Jesus ben Saphat

Post by Giuseppe » Wed Apr 07, 2021 4:05 am

maryhelena wrote:
Tue Apr 06, 2021 12:48 am
Look what I found online.....

. In addition to the simile of names with Jesus of Shaphat, This Jesus's description and geography are very close to Jesus of Gamala and Jesus -Shaphat and Jesus ben Sapphias- they may all be the same person.


http://www.geocities.ws/nephilimnot/his ... hrist.html

my formatting

Interesting perspective on some of Josephus's Jesus figures...may all be the same person......
thank you, Maryhelena. The great notice here is that Jesus of Gamala could be the same Jesus b. Sapphat.

Note where precisely I had found Jesus of Gamala.
Giuseppe wrote:
Wed Jan 06, 2021 11:48 am
I read this:

Revelation 11:3-14, The Two Witnesses, IV of V
Posted on April 29th
And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days … Their bodies will lie in the street of the great city, which is figuratively called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified. For three and a half days men from every people, tribe, language and nation will gaze on their bodies and refuse them burial. The inhabitants of the earth will gloat over them and will celebrate by sending each other gifts, because these two prophets had tormented those who live on the earth … At that very hour there was a severe earthquake and a tenth of the city collapsed. Seven thousand people were killed in the earthquake, and the survivors were terrified and gave glory to the God of heaven.

//So far, we’ve met Moses & Elijah, and Peter & Paul, as two pairs of candidates for the Two Witnesses of Revelation. But there are a few events in the story that just don’t add up. If later tradition is any indication, the early Christians may have considered Peter and Paul the two witnesses, but who was John really writing about?

A study of the writings of the Jewish historian Josephus provides either the answer or an eerie coincidence. In The War of the Jews, published just before the book of Revelation, Josephus heaps praise upon two priests in Jerusalem, Ananus and Jesus the son of Gamala. He narrates long, grand speeches for both men to their enemies: Ananus to the Zealots and Jesus to the Idumeans. This all occurs during the war, which lasted about three and a half years (1,260 days). Then the two priests are killed, and the Idumeans, standing upon their dead bodies, ridicule them. Eventually they cast away the bodies without burial, the ultimate way to disgrace or shame someone. “And this at last was the end of Ananus and Jesus,” Josephus wrote. Here’s how it happened.

As the Zealots of Jerusalem were fighting amongst themselves, a storm brewed and the earth rumbled. Josephus describes a great earthquake like this:

During the night a terrific storm arose; the wind blew with tempestuous violence, and the rain fell in torrents; the lightnings flashed without intermission, accompanied by fearful peals of thunder, and the quaking earth resounded with mighty bellowings. The universe, convulsed to its very base, appeared fraught with the destruction of mankind, and it was easy to conjecture that these were portents of no trivial calamity.

Taking advantage of the panic caused by the earthquake, the Idumeans, in league with the Zealots, succeeded in entering Jerusalem, and a massacre began. Says Josephus, The outer court of the Temple was inundated with blood, and the day dawned upon eight thousand five hundred dead. Close enough to Revelation’s number.

Curiously, just as Revelation says, this great earthquake did occur the “very hour” the Idumeans murdered, ridiculed, and left the two great priests, Ananus and Jesus, unburied in the streets of Jerusalem. Oops! Now what should we believe about the identity of Revelation’s two witnesses? Can this possibly be a coincidence?

http://www.dubiousdisciple.com/2011/04/ ... -of-v.html

The reader knows that there is a curious omission.

The Christian interpolator found the Jewish original text saying:

Their bodies were hanged/crucified in the public square of the great city—which is figuratively called Sodom and Egypt—

…and since he knew about only a crucified (the Lord Jesus Christ), he destroyed "were hanged/crucified" in the original text and then he added the interpolation, meant to explain who was "really" the only crucified victim:

Their bodies ... in the public square of the great city—which is figuratively called Sodom and Egypt—where also their Lord was crucified

But naturally he has left the traces of the his corruption + interpolation of the text.

Hence a question arises: were Ananus and Jesus stoned and hanged/"crucified" ?

This would make that Jesus son of Gamala the historical Jesus.
A strong objection may be that Jesus of Gamala was anti-Zealot. Whereas Jesus b. Sapphat wasn't.

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 8814
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: On the hypothesis that the Gospel Jesus == Jesus ben Saphat

Post by Giuseppe » Wed Apr 07, 2021 11:51 am

There is a curious episode reported by Josephus about Jesus b. Sapphat that, I suspect, ended in the Gospel of Mark under a different form.


Josephus' Vita 57 Mark 12:13-17Commentary

Now Jesus, who was the ruler, commanded that they should exclude all that came with me: for he kept the door himself, and suffered none but his friends to go in.

And while we were engaged in the duties of the day, and had betaken our selves to our prayers, Jesus got up, and enquired of me what was become of the vessels that were taken out of the King’s palace, when it was burnt down; [and] of that uncoined silver; and in whose possession they now were? This he said, in order to drive away time, till John should come.

I said that Capellus, and the ten principal men of Tiberias, had them all: and I told him that they might ask them whether I told a lie or not.

And when they said they had them, he asked me, what is become of those twenty pieces of gold which thou didst receive upon the sale of a certain weight of uncoined money? I replyed, that I had given them to those ambassadors of theirs, as a maintenance for them, when they were sent by them to Jerusalem. So Jonathan, and his colleagues, said, that I had not done well to pay the ambassadors out of the publick money.


Later they sent some of the Pharisees and Herodians to Jesus to catch him in his words. 14 They came to him and said, “Teacher, we know that you are a man of integrity. You aren’t swayed by others, because you pay no attention to who they are; but you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth

in both the episodes, a group of pharisees/a pharisee (=Josephus) know that a Jesus preaches a form of absolute theocracy.


And when the multitude were very angry at them for this; for they perceived the wickednes of the men; I understood that a tumult was going to arise: and being desirous to provoke the people to a greater rage against the men, I said, “But if I have not done well in paying our ambassadors out of the publick stock, leave off your anger at me; for I will repay the twenty pieces of gold my self.”

58. When I had said this, Jonathan, and his colleagues, held their peace: but the people were still more irritated against them, upon their openly shewing their unjust ill will to me.


Is it right to pay the imperial tax to Caesar or not? 15 Should we pay or shouldn’t we?” But Jesus knew their hypocrisy. “Why are you trying to trap me?”

in both the episodes, the pharisees/a pharisee (=Josephus) want to provoke someone with greater power against a Jesus, by trying to use his desire of a theocracy as act of accusation against him.


When Jesus saw this change in the people, he ordered them to depart; but desired the senate to stay: for that they could not examine things of such a nature in a tumult.
And as the people were crying out, that they would not leave me alone, there came one, and told Jesus, and his friends, privately, that John, and his armed men were at hand


he asked. “Bring me a denarius and let me look at it.” 16 They brought the coin, and he asked them, “Whose image is this? And whose inscription?”

“Caesar’s,” they replied.

17 Then Jesus said to them, “Give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.”

And they were amazed at him.

in both the episodes, a Jesus saves himself by a temporary compromise.


maryhelena
Posts: 1817
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: On the hypothesis that the Gospel Jesus == Jesus ben Saphat

Post by maryhelena » Thu Apr 08, 2021 1:49 am

Giuseppe wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 4:05 am
maryhelena wrote:
Tue Apr 06, 2021 12:48 am
Look what I found online.....

. In addition to the simile of names with Jesus of Shaphat, This Jesus's description and geography are very close to Jesus of Gamala and Jesus -Shaphat and Jesus ben Sapphias- they may all be the same person.


http://www.geocities.ws/nephilimnot/his ... hrist.html

my formatting

Interesting perspective on some of Josephus's Jesus figures...may all be the same person......

thank you, Maryhelena. The great notice here is that Jesus of Gamala could be the same Jesus b. Sapphat.
Goodness - so many Jesus choices.....that's three down and how many to go? Take another looks at David Hindley's list:

Jesuses, Jesuses, everywhere. Here are all the Jesuses there found in Josephus' works, in no particular order:

01. Jesus, son of Phabes – High priest. Ant 15.322
02. Jesus, son of Ananus – Common man prophesied destruction of the temple. War 6.300
03. Jesus, or Jason – High priest. Ant 12.239
04. Jesus, son of Sapphias – Governor of Tiberias. War 2.566, War 2.599; Life 1.066, Life 1.134
05. Jesus, brother of Onias – High priest. Ant 12.237, Ant 12.238, Ant 12.239
06. Jesus, son of Gamaliel – High priest. Ant 20.213, Ant 20.223
07. Jesus, no patronym – Eldest high priest after Ananus. War 4.238, War 4.316, War 4.325
08. Jesus, son of Damneus – High priest. Ant 20.203
09. Jesus, son of Gamala – High priest & Josephus’ friend. War 4.160; Life 1.193, Life 1.204
10. Jesus, [or Joshua] son of Nun – Successor to Moses. Ant 03.049, Ant 03.308; Ant 4.459
11. Jesus, son of Shapat – Principal head of a band of robbers controlling Tiberias, sallies against Vespasian's messenger Valerian. War 3.450
16. Jesus, no patronym – Captain of those robbers who were in the confines of Ptolemais, allies with Josephus. Life 1.105
12. Jesus, son of Thebuthus – One of the priests, delivers to Titus precious things deposited in the temple. War 6.387
13. Jesus, son of Josadek – High priest. Ant 20.231, Ant 20.234
14. Jesus, no patronym – Galilean at head of a band of 600 followers, sent by Ananus & Jesus to depose Josephus. Life 1.200
15. Jesus, no patronym – Condemned to cross by Pilate. He was [the] Christ. Ant 18.063
17. Jesus, brother of Jacob – Called the Christ. Ant 20.200

DCH
viewtopic.php?p=94342#p94342


User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 8814
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: On the hypothesis that the Gospel Jesus == Jesus ben Saphat

Post by Giuseppe » Thu Apr 08, 2021 4:41 am

maryhelena wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 1:49 am
Goodness - so many Jesus choices.....that's three down and how many to go?
Hakeem said it even better than DCH as to implications:
hakeem wrote:
Tue Mar 02, 2021 6:57 pm
Before we get lost in these bizarre speculation about "who invented the name Jesus" it must be made clear that the name Jesus or the NT Jesus character's name was derived from the works of Josephus.

There are multiple persons identified by the name of Jesus in Josephus---Jesus the son of Sapphias, Jesus the son of Sie, Jesus the son of Gamala, Jesus the son of Phabet, Jesus the son of Ananus, Jesus the son of Damneus, Jesus the high priest and others.

It cannot be a coincidence that virtually every name of characters in the NT Gospels are also found in the writings attributed Josephus and not only names but also events.

John the Baptist, Jesus, Peter, James, John, Judas, Philip, Joseph, Mary and others are all in Josephus.

Josephus lived in Galilee--NT Jesus lived in Galilee.

Jesus the son of Ananus went on trial under a Governor of Judea-- NT Jesus was also on trial under a Governor of Judea.

Jesus the son of Sapphias was the leader of mariners--NT Jesus was the leader of fishermen.

Josephus saw three men crucified who were taken down and one survived--NT Jesus was crucified with two persons and he alone resurrected.
In essentia:

Josephus's 60s (historical) Jesus(es?) --> Gospels' Jesus.

Charles Wilson
Posts: 1647
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: On the hypothesis that the Gospel Jesus == Jesus ben Saphat

Post by Charles Wilson » Thu Apr 08, 2021 5:17 am

Joseph Atwill, Caesar's Messiah:

"If you consult the Dictionary of Scripture Proper Names in Web-
ster's Unabridged, you will find hundreds of Hebrew first names.
Notably, in both Josephus and the New Testament the same few Jew-
ish names proliferate. In War of the Jews there are nine Eleazars,
three Jacobs (Jameses), six Jesuses, five Matthiases (Matthew), one
Mary, four Mariammes, eight Johns, seven Josephs, ten Judases, and
thirteen Simons. In the New Testament the same pattern occurs:
there are seven Marys, nine Simons, two Johns, two Josephs, four
Judases, two Lazaruses (Eleazar), two Matthiases (Matthews), two
Jameses, and, at the minimum, three Jesuses. From the standpoint
of probability, it is unlikely that this set of names would even over-
lap in two works that have so few named characters, let alone with
this many duplications.

"I suspected that the authors of the New Testament and the
works of Josephus had deliberately used these particular names over
and over. But if these particular names were used deliberately, what
was the intent?

"The answer lies in the fact that this same set of names was
known to have been used by a third group, the Maccabees, the fam-
ily that ruled Israel during the first and second centuries B.C.E.,
until they were replaced by the Romans with Herod. Within that
family are found the same names that are so overused by Josephus
and the New Testament. The founder of the dynasty was Mattathias
(Matthew), who had five sons named Simon, Judas, John, Eleazar
(Lazarus), and Jonathan..."

maryhelena
Posts: 1817
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: On the hypothesis that the Gospel Jesus == Jesus ben Saphat

Post by maryhelena » Thu Apr 08, 2021 5:36 am

Giuseppe wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 4:41 am
maryhelena wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 1:49 am
Goodness - so many Jesus choices.....that's three down and how many to go?
Hakeem said it even better than DCH as to implications:
hakeem wrote:
Tue Mar 02, 2021 6:57 pm
Before we get lost in these bizarre speculation about "who invented the name Jesus" it must be made clear that the name Jesus or the NT Jesus character's name was derived from the works of Josephus.

There are multiple persons identified by the name of Jesus in Josephus---Jesus the son of Sapphias, Jesus the son of Sie, Jesus the son of Gamala, Jesus the son of Phabet, Jesus the son of Ananus, Jesus the son of Damneus, Jesus the high priest and others.

It cannot be a coincidence that virtually every name of characters in the NT Gospels are also found in the writings attributed Josephus and not only names but also events.

John the Baptist, Jesus, Peter, James, John, Judas, Philip, Joseph, Mary and others are all in Josephus.

Josephus lived in Galilee--NT Jesus lived in Galilee.

Jesus the son of Ananus went on trial under a Governor of Judea-- NT Jesus was also on trial under a Governor of Judea.

Jesus the son of Sapphias was the leader of mariners--NT Jesus was the leader of fishermen.

Josephus saw three men crucified who were taken down and one survived--NT Jesus was crucified with two persons and he alone resurrected.
In essentia:

Josephus's 60s (historical) Jesus(es?) --> Gospels' Jesus.
So - basically, you have two choices here:

1. the gospel writers used the writings of Josephus to write their Jesus gospel story.

2. the Josephan writer and whatever group of writers, thinkers, philosophers, were involved with him, were involved in the writing of the New Testament.

Option 1. is a dead end - it infers that the writers of the New Testament were copycats, plagiarists.

Option 2. is open ended. It allows a forward movement that can take New Testament scholarship out of the cul-de-sac it is presently languishing in.

Counting the number of Jesus figures Josephus has inserted in his writing amounts to not seeing the forest for the trees. Similar with the grammar of Greek or Hebrew words. All indications that the 'trees' have grown so tall that darkness prevents the forest been observed. ;)

Charles Wilson
Posts: 1647
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: On the hypothesis that the Gospel Jesus == Jesus ben Saphat

Post by Charles Wilson » Thu Apr 08, 2021 6:00 am

maryhelena wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 5:36 am
So - basically, you have two choices here:

1. the gospel writers used the writings of Josephus to write their Jesus gospel story.

2. the Josephan writer and whatever group of writers, thinkers, philosophers, were involved with him, were involved in the writing of the New Testament.

Option 1. is a dead end - it infers that the writers of the New Testament were copycats, plagiarists.

Option 2. is open ended. It allows a forward movement that can take New Testament scholarship out of the cul-de-sac it is presently languishing in.
Option 1 also ignores the fact that Josephus himself was a copycat and plagiarist. He apparently used a text from Nicholas of Damascus that told the History through the end of Archelaus' ill-fated reign. This also changes the trajectory of Option 2.

CW

maryhelena
Posts: 1817
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: On the hypothesis that the Gospel Jesus == Jesus ben Saphat

Post by maryhelena » Thu Apr 08, 2021 6:10 am

Charles Wilson wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 6:00 am
maryhelena wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 5:36 am
So - basically, you have two choices here:

1. the gospel writers used the writings of Josephus to write their Jesus gospel story.

2. the Josephan writer and whatever group of writers, thinkers, philosophers, were involved with him, were involved in the writing of the New Testament.

Option 1. is a dead end - it infers that the writers of the New Testament were copycats, plagiarists.

Option 2. is open ended. It allows a forward movement that can take New Testament scholarship out of the cul-de-sac it is presently languishing in.
Option 1 also ignores the fact that Josephus himself was a copycat and plagiarist. He apparently used a text from Nicholas of Damascus that told the History through the end of Archelaus' ill-fated reign. This also changes the trajectory of Option 2.

CW
Indeed - what Josephus did or did not do with his sources is up for discussion. Unfortunately, what we have in large measure is the writing of Josephus - and what relevance his writing had on the writing of the New Testament is the very big question.....

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 8814
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: On the hypothesis that the Gospel Jesus == Jesus ben Saphat

Post by Giuseppe » Thu Apr 08, 2021 7:06 am

maryhelena wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 5:36 am
So - basically, you have two choices here:

1. the gospel writers used the writings of Josephus to write their Jesus gospel story.

2. the Josephan writer and whatever group of writers, thinkers, philosophers, were involved with him, were involved in the writing of the New Testament.

Option 1. is a dead end - it infers that the writers of the New Testament were copycats, plagiarists.
Forgive me if I opt for (1). precisely the view held about them by various Porphyry, Hierocles, etc. I note that also George Solomon has not a high praise (to use an euphemism) of the "four Greek writers".

Post Reply