James the br of Jesus Christ, the TF, and everything

[John T]

DCH posted: "Josephus actually does say who it was whose death foretold the destruction of the city. It was the very same Ananus, in War 4.318. That is an inconvertible fact that cannot be easily dispensed with. Sorry to disappoint the romanticists."

***************

Foretold first by who, Ananus, (War 4.320) as the Romans were about to storm the city or James the Just who for decades prior, prayed at the temple everyday for the Son of Man to appear?

Jerome writes in “On Illustrious Men", chapter two: 'This same Josephus records the tradition that this James was of so great sanctity and reputation among the people that the downfall of Jerusalem was believed to be on account of his death.'

A growing sect of the population was still waiting for the Son of Man to appear and were still outraged over the fact that Ananus had James the Just murdered (62 A.D.) in an attempt to tamp down the growing movement of the sicarii, zealots, or as I would rather call them sons of Zadok, (Community Rule) of which James the Just was considered high preist. Ananus, owed his wealth and power to the Romans and rightly understood the sons of Zadok wanted to overthrow the Romans but more importantly the false priesthood of Ananus. So, naturally, Ananus would preach to the people that going to war against the Romans would result in the destruction of the city.

Why would Josephus who stood to lose much which his Roman masters, give a fair hearing to the ideology of James the Just?

So, everything needed to work out the entire problem of the James reference of Ant 20:200, has not been worked out, not even close.

Respectfully,

John T

[DCHindley]

"Josephus actually does say who it was whose death foretold the destruction of the city. It was the very same Ananus, in War 4.318. That is an inconvertible fact that cannot be easily dispensed with. Sorry to disappoint the romanticists."

Foretold first by who, Ananus, (War 4.320) as the Romans were about to storm the city or James the Just who for decades prior, prayed at the temple everyday for the Son of Man to appear? ...

So, everything needed to work out the entire problem of the James reference of Ant 20:200, has not been worked out, not even close.

The text of absolutely no work of Josephus says that the destruction of Jerusalem was due to the death of James the just. The text of book four of Jewish war does, in fact, say he believed that the death of righteous Ananus at the hand of the Idumeans who were allied with the Zealot rebels was what triggered God's decision to allow the city to be destroyed.

Origen also says that Josephus should have attributed the destruction to Jesus "since they put Christ to death, who was a prophet."

Origen, Against Celsus 1.47b-d
b) Now he [Josephus] himself,
although not believing in Jesus as the Christ,
in seeking the cause of the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple,
whereas he ought to have said that the conspiracy against Jesus was the cause of these calamities befalling the people, since they put Christ to death, who was a prophet,
but that one was unwittingly not far from the truth when
he says that these disasters happened to the Jews as a punishment for the death of James the just, who was a brother of Jesus called Christ,
the Jews having put him to death, although he was a man most distinguished for his justice.
c) …
d) If, then, he says that it was on account of James that the desolation of Jerusalem was made to overtake the Jews,
how should it not be more in accordance with reason to say that it happened on account of Jesus Christ?

Origin, Against Celsus 2.13
But at that time there were no armies around Jerusalem, encompassing and enclosing and besieging it;
for the siege began in the reign of Nero and lasted till the government of Vespasian, whose son Titus destroyed Jerusalem on account, as Josephus says, of James the just, the brother of Jesus who was called Christ,
but, as the truth makes dear, really on account of Jesus the Christ of God.

Origen, On Matthew 13.55
b) And to so great a reputation among the people for righteousness did this James rise
that Flavius Josephus, who wrote the Antiquities of the Jews in twenty books,
when wishing to exhibit the cause why the people suffered so great misfortunes that even the temple was razed to the ground,
said that these things happened to them in accordance with the wrath of God
in consequence of the things which they had dared to do against James the brother of Jesus who is called Christ.
c) And the wonderful thing is that, though he did not accept Jesus as Christ,
he yet gave testimony that the righteousness of James was so great;
d) and he says that the people thought that they had suffered these things because of James.

Josephus, War, book 4:238-270
238 Accordingly, Jesus, the oldest of the high priests next to Ananus, stood upon the tower that was opposite them [i.e., the Idumeans], and said thus: "Many troubles, indeed, and those of various kinds, have fallen upon this city, yet in none of them have I so much wondered at her fortune as now, when you are come to assist wicked men, and this after a manner very extraordinary ... [239 - 269] ... 270 Thus spoke Jesus, yet did not the multitude of the Idumeans give any attention to what he said, but were in a rage, because they did not meet with a ready entrance into the city. The generals also had indignation at the offer of laying down their arms, and looked upon it as equal to a captivity, to throw them away at any man's injunction whomever. [271 - 282 The Idumean response]

Josephus, War, book 4:283-288
283 ... but Jesus went away sorrowful, as seeing that the Idumeans were against all moderate counsels, and that the city was besieged on both sides; 284 nor indeed were the minds of the Idumeans at rest; for they were in a rage at the injury that had been offered them by their exclusion from the city; and when they thought the Zealots had been strong, but saw nothing of theirs to support them, they were in doubt about the matter, and many of them repented that they had come there. 285 But the shame that would attend them in case they returned without doing anything at all, so far overcame their repentance, that they lay all night before the wall, although in a very bad encampment; 286 for there broke out a prodigious storm in the night, with the utmost violence, and very strong winds, with the largest showers of rain, with continued lightnings, terrible thunderings, and amazing concussions and bellowing of the earth, that was in an earthquake. 287 These things were a manifest indication that some destruction was coming upon men, when the system of the world was put into this disorder; and anyone would guess that these wonders predicted some grand calamities that were coming. 288 Now the opinion of the Idumeans and of the citizens was one and the same.
The Idumeans thought that God was angry at their taking arms, and that they would not escape punishment for their making war upon their metropolis.

[John T]

@DCH,

It is my understanding that The Jewish War against Roman occupation was 66–70 A.D. and that Josephus surrendered to Roman forces led by Vespasian in 67 A.D.

Help me out with the approximate date for when Festus died and Nero appointed Albinus as procurator, (Antiquites of the Jews, Book 20, 197). Another clue is what year did king Agrippa remove Ananus from the high priesthood and replaced him with Jesus, the son of Damneus for the murder of James the Just (Antiquites, bk20 203).
Would 62 A.D. be about right?

After that, tell me what year it is believed that Ananus and Jesus were killed by the Idumeans?
Would 68 A.D. be about right?

If so, Ananus cannot be James the Just because their deaths took place several years apart.

Ananus death coincided with the 'beginning of the destruction of the city, and that from this very day may be dated the overthrow of her wall', but certainly not the cause for the Jewish rebellion.

Respectfully,
John T

[Hawthorne]

@DCH,

It is my understanding that The Jewish War against Roman occupation was 66–70 A.D. and that Josephus surrendered to Roman forces led by Vespasian in 67 A.D.

Help me out with the approximate date for when Festus died and Nero appointed Albinus as procurator, (Antiquites of the Jews, Book 20, 197). Another clue is what year did king Agrippa remove Ananus from the high priesthood and replaced him with Jesus, the son of Damneus for the murder of James the Just (Antiquites, bk20 203).
Would 62 A.D. be about right?

After that, tell me what year it is believed that Ananus and Jesus were killed by the Idumeans?
Would 68 A.D. be about right?

If so, Ananus cannot be James the Just because their deaths took place several years apart.

Ananus death coincided with the 'beginning of the destruction of the city, and that from this very day may be dated the overthrow of her wall', but certainly not the cause for the Jewish rebellion.

Respectfully,
John T

I think you missed the point. It isn't that James and Ananus are the same person. The point here is that Josephus never says this;

'This same Josephus records the tradition that this James was of so great sanctity and reputation among the people that the downfall of Jerusalem was believed to be on account of his death.'

Whatever source is being referred to here, it is not found in any extant writing of Josephus. Josephus does make this point in reference to Ananus, though.

You can prove DCH wrong. Find where Josephus refers to the passage that you attribute to him. Where does Josephus say that people believed the fall of Jerusalem was due to the death of James the Just?

[maryhelena]

@DCH,

It is my understanding that The Jewish War against Roman occupation was 66–70 A.D. and that Josephus surrendered to Roman forces led by Vespasian in 67 A.D.

Help me out with the approximate date for when Festus died and Nero appointed Albinus as procurator, (Antiquites of the Jews, Book 20, 197). Another clue is what year did king Agrippa remove Ananus from the high priesthood and replaced him with Jesus, the son of Damneus for the murder of James the Just (Antiquites, bk20 203).
Would 62 A.D. be about right?

After that, tell me what year it is believed that Ananus and Jesus were killed by the Idumeans?
Would 68 A.D. be about right?

If so, Ananus cannot be James the Just because their deaths took place several years apart.

Ananus death coincided with the 'beginning of the destruction of the city, and that from this very day may be dated the overthrow of her wall', but certainly not the cause for the Jewish rebellion.

Respectfully,
John T

The problem for DCH is how to get from the killing of Ananus and Jesus, some date close to 70 c.e., and back to around 62/63 c.e. for the stoning of James. That Hegesippus et all have drawn on War book 4 for their creative James story is one thing - it's another thing all together to justify that connection, ie if one wants to make such a connection as the solution to the Antiquities problems of 'James' and the TF. That is what DCH wants to do. OK, fine - just lets have that connection spelled out in regard to the two very different Josephan time-frames.

DCH: Everything needed to work out the entire problem of the James reference of Ant 20:200, the accounts of James in Hegesippus & Origen, and the TF of 18:63-64 recounted by Eusebius, can be found in War book 4:

Suggesting that there were two marginal, scribal, notes to the effect that this connection should be made - a connection between the events of shortly before the fall of Jerusalem in 70 c.e.and the events that the Josephan writer places around 62/63 c.e. - i.e. in direct contradiction to the two different time-frames - requires much more than assuming marginal notes in manuscripts. Or are we to argue that Josephus, once again, got his chronology messed up - and the events of 62/63 c.e. should be re-dated to close to the 70 c.e. fall of Jerusalem?

[Charles Wilson]

Turton on Atwill on the TF:

http://michaelturton2.blogspot.com/2005 ... on-tf.html

CW

[John T]

Hawthrone posted: 'I think you [John T] missed the point. It isn't that James and Ananus are the same person. The point here is that Josephus never says this;'...'This same Josephus records the tradition that this James was of so great sanctity and reputation among the people that the downfall of Jerusalem was believed to be on account of his death.'

Actually, DCH had many different points, one of which implied the writings about James the Just were really about Ananus or Jesus the high priest. Another one that I would like to address is found in this statement by DCH: ‘Josephus actually does say who it was whose death foretold the destruction of the city. It was the very same Ananus, in War 4.318. That is an inconvertible fact that cannot be easily dispensed with. Sorry to disappoint the romanticists.’

I'm sorry to disappoint DCH but Josephus lists many different causes for the Jewish War. It was under the tyranny of Albinus that seeds were sown which brought the 'city to destruction', War 2.276. Josephus also writes that it was Eleazar, the sons of Ananias the high priest, who convinced people to stop performing sacrifices to Caesar; ‘And this was the true beginning of our war with the Romans; for they rejected the sacrifices.' War 2.409.

Now to Hawthornes point that I missed the point. Well not at all.

Jerome claims that Josephus wrote that the murder of James the Just was the downfall of Jerusalem. The question from Hawthrone is, where in the TF can that be found? My answer is, I can't find it, probably because it is no longer there. However, that does not mean it wasn't there when Hegesippus, Clement or Jerome wrote about James the Just. I suggest it has been removed. If DCH can suggest that the writings about James were added to the TF why can't I be on equal footing to say perhaps the writings that Jerome referred to were removed?

Can you suggest why Josephus would write about James the Just in The Antiquities of the Jews but not include him in The War of the Jews?

Respectfully,
John T

[John2]

John T wrote:

"Jerome claims that Josephus wrote that the murder of James the Just was the downfall of Jerusalem. The question from Hawthrone is, where in the TF can that be found? My answer is, I can't find it, probably because it is no longer there. However, that does not mean it wasn't there when Hegesippus, Clement or Jerome wrote about James the Just."

I think Jerome more likely got the idea that Josephus said that James' murder caused the downfall of Jerusalem from Eusebius (along with his quote of Hegesippus), because Jerome did generally use Eusebius as a source, and everything he says about James is also said by Eusebius (or Clement).

I don't see any evidence that Hegesippus knew of a TF (or any of Josephus' James passages, assuming he wrote them). Eusebius mentions a couple of sources that Hegesippus used that could well enough explain his account of James (and why it differs from Josephus' James passages):

"From the Syriac Gospel according to the Hebrews he quotes some passages in the Hebrew tongue, showing that he was a convert from the Hebrews, and he mentions other matters as taken from the unwritten tradition of the Jews" (EH 4.22).

As for why Josephus doesn't mention James in the Jewish War, if I recall correctly, Mason points out (in Josephus and the New Testament) that there are other people Josephus mentions in the Antiquities that aren't mentioned in the War (such as John the Baptist), perhaps due to his having sources at that time that weren't available at the time of the War.

[John2]

I fixed my post myself (I hope). I'm still new to this forum and getting used to the available user options. But my, how mortifying that was. I apologize to anyone who was offended by those crude remarks (I certainly was), and I've thoroughly scolded the person who tampered with the post.

[steve43]

@DCH,

It is my understanding that The Jewish War against Roman occupation was 66–70 A.D. and that Josephus surrendered to Roman forces led by Vespasian in 67 A.D.

Help me out with the approximate date for when Festus died and Nero appointed Albinus as procurator, (Antiquites of the Jews, Book 20, 197). Another clue is what year did king Agrippa remove Ananus from the high priesthood and replaced him with Jesus, the son of Damneus for the murder of James the Just (Antiquites, bk20 203).
Would 62 A.D. be about right?

After that, tell me what year it is believed that Ananus and Jesus were killed by the Idumeans?
Would 68 A.D. be about right?

If so, Ananus cannot be James the Just because their deaths took place several years apart.

Ananus death coincided with the 'beginning of the destruction of the city, and that from this very day may be dated the overthrow of her wall', but certainly not the cause for the Jewish rebellion.

Respectfully,
John T

I would recommend that you read Hagan's "Fires of Rome" for the historical dates and time line. A lot of it in freebie on Kindle.

Just to comment- Josephus is very clear that the Jews were a race abandoned by God when the ex-High Priest Jonathan was assassinated by the Jewish Sicarii on the grounds of the Second Temple in A.D. 56.

The die had been cast.

He did say that the elder Ananus, the same man who interrogated Jesus on his last day (according to John), tried to rally the besieged people in Jerusalem to throw out the Zealots, but was himself killed in A.D. 69 along with his son. If had lived to run things, Josephus suggests that the outcome could have been different.

As far as the execution of James the Just goes, it was this act that outraged the common Jews to the point that Agrippa II had to remove Ananus, the son of Ananus, as High Priest in late A.D. 62 (possibly early A.D. 63). Josephus does NOT say that the Jews were all turning Christian because of James. Certainly, James wore the Miter on occasion and followed the rules of the Priestly class as much as he could- as well as being leader of the Christian Church.

There are two spins you can put on his execution by the Sanhedrin. Either he was an outlaw Jewish Priest who could no longer be tolerated, or it was, in fact, a direct attack on the crypto-hierarchy of the fledgling Christian religion.

Hagan links the execution of the Jerusalem Christian leadership in A.D. 62 with the supposedly Nero-inspired persecution of Christians in Rome two years later in A.D. 64. There, Paul the Apostle and Peter were eliminated.

At any rate, the common Jews seemed to like James the Just. Possibly, they were becoming used to the fact that the Christian communion ceremony was symbolic, and the Christians themselves seemed to be decent enough people. Certainly, not ones who needed to be put to death by a hastily and illegally convened Sanhedrin.