Was Paul Josephus?

[DCHindley]

That's why people insist on talking about Josephus when talking about the supposed historical background of Paul. But that means that for all practical purposes Paul is Josephus. The abrupt ending of Acts is because of Nero's damnatio. That's the simplest assumption.

People insist on talking about Hittite treaties when talking about the supposed covenant between Israel and God. That means for all practical purposes Israel was the Hittite Kingdom. People insist on talking about Philo when talking about the theology of John. That means for all practical purposes John the beloved disciple was Philo. The abrupt ending of Acts is because the author died of lead poisoning. (Being with Paul two years in Rome he was drinking water conveyed through lead-lined aqueducts and lead pipes.) That's the simplest assumption.

neil,

Thank you for taking up, along with me, the burden of exaggerating mushy thinking "ad absurdo."

DCH

[ghost]

If Paul were Josephus what would we expect to find in the letters attributed to Paul and in the writings of Josephus about early Christianity? Would we expect similar agendas in their writings?

I would expect them to have similar theologies and those theologies to have similar changes throughout time. But admittedly that's just a vague idea.

[ghost]

Argument from ignorance
Argumentum ad ignorantiam

There are lots of stories of shipwrecks in ancient literature. It would be almost impossible for any literate person not to have some knowledge of the common formula they use.

Agreed.

Add the rhetorical prose they were al trained to wrote in, there really is no mystery here.

Aristotle's influence was far and wide

Please name one concrete counterexample of a shipwreck with a combination of all these 12 coincidences mentioned by Gnuse:

http://vridar.org/2007/04/25/the-shipwr ... ul-part-3/

1. A Roman procurator, Felix, is involved in both accounts (cf Acts 24.1-27)
2. Jewish religious leaders are involved in both accounts (priests in Vita and Paul in Acts)
3. Felix causes Jewish religious leaders to be imprisoned (cf Acts 24.1-27)
4. Felix’s actions result in prisoners going to Rome (cf Acts 25.10-11)
5. The Jewish religious leaders are unjustly accused (cf Acts 24-26)
6. Journey to Rome is by ship (cf Acts 27.1-44)
7. The sea journey to Rome seeks to effect justice at the imperial level to undo injustice done at the provincial level (cf Acts 24-27)
8. The ship not only sinks (cf Acts 27.41-44)
9. But chooses to sink in the Adriatic Sea (cf Acts 27.27)
10. The heroes, Josephus or Paul, act with courage and provide leadership (cf Acts 27.31-38)
11. All passengers survive (presumably in Josephus’s account) (cf Acts 27.44)
12. Both heroes pass through Puteoli (cf Acts 28.13-14)

[steve43]

How many shipwrecks a year happened in the Eastern Mediterranean in those years- especially going against the prevailing winds heading to Rome? While we think of the Roman Empire as being built on roads and marching legions of infantry, it was far more a Naval Empire. Roads endure, while ships rot away. The Romans had tens of thousands plying the Inner Sea, and even venturing out beyond the pillars of Heracles. People argue that the Romans had mining operations in the New World. The Vikings adapted their Long boats from Roman design.
Passengers were usually a side business of a commercial ship- they would hitch a ride depending on the whim of the captain. And they had hundreds if not thousands of REALLY BAD SHIPS then. Also, the captains would routinely overload them with cargo (and people), the nature of man not changing much in 2,000 years.
So shipwrecks were not that unusual.
And how many ships could the harbor at Caesarea hold? One hundred at least. Probably closer to 200.
Paul would have been shipped off in the cheapest boat available. Josephus had money. But he was, well, Jewish, so he might have skimped a bit. And the weather could have been unusually stormy in those years A.D. 61-62.
Not much of a stretch at all that these two shipwrecks were completely independent events.
Nice try, though.

[neilgodfrey]

Please name one concrete counterexample of a shipwreck with a combination of all these 12 coincidences mentioned by Gnuse

According to your argument, if I did find such an example, then it would only prove to you that the three people were really the one and the same.

Many years ago I studied the details of my horoscope and found dozens of concrete coincidences between my life and what was mapped out in the chart. I guess that proved astrology is true.

You write your question rhetorically suggesting that there can be only one conclusion to be drawn.

I think you ignored my challenge to respond to the logical fallacy of your argument. You are falling into the same logical error as Robert Tulip with his astrotheology. You begin with your conclusion then look for supporting evidence -- all these coincidences -- without stopping for a moment to consider alternative explanations for that same evidence. It's called "confirmation bias" among other various fallacies.

I can see in photos a feature on Mars that looks very much like a human face. Now what a coincidence! Now do we conclude that that feature has been consciously sculptured to look like that for a reason? Some people do -- they consider no other explanation could be plausible. That is the same logical error you are making here.

I believe the far simpler and more likely explanation for those coincidences is the one that Robert Gnuse himself draws.

How likely is it that when we see two different pieces of literature with many correspondences between them yet in other ways obviously very different that we must conclude an identity between persons in each of them? Compare that conclusion with literary influence or borrowing?

If Josephus and Paul were one and the same then what would we expect to find in their respective writings? You have not yet answered that, yet that is the very sort of question that puts your hypothesis to the test. That's how serious argument works.

[neilgodfrey]

One day will someone will look back and argue that Presidents Kennedy and Lincoln were really one and the same person?

• Both presidents were elected to the House of Representatives in '46.
• Both presidents were elected to the presidency in '60.
• Lincoln defeated incumbent Vice President John C. Breckenridge for the presidency in 1860;
• Kennedy defeated incumbent Vice President Richard M. Nixon for the presidency in 1960.
• Both their predecessors left office in their seventies and retired to Pennsylvania. James Buchanan, whom Lincoln succeeded, retired to Lancaster Township; Dwight D. Eisenhower, whom Kennedy succeeded, retired to Gettysburg.
• Both their Vice Presidents and successors were Southern Democrats named Johnson (Andrew Johnson and Lyndon Johnson) who were born in '08.
• Both presidents were concerned with the problems of black Americans and made their views strongly known in '63. Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation in 1862, which became law in 1863. In 1963, Kennedy presented his reports to Congress on Civil Rights, and the same year was the famous March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom.
• Both presidents were shot on a Friday in the presence of their wives. Both Fridays preceded a major holiday observed within the week.
• Both presidents were accompanied by another couple.
• The male companion of the other couple was wounded by the assassin.
• Both presidents had a son die during their presidency.
• Lincoln was shot by John Wilkes Booth at Ford's Theatre; Kennedy was shot by Lee Harvey Oswald in a Lincoln automobile, made by Ford.
• Lincoln had a bodyguard who told him not to go to the theatre; Kennedy had a secretary who warned him not to go to Dallas.
• Both presidents' last names have 7 letters.
• There are 6 letters in each Johnson's first name.
• After shooting Lincoln, Booth ran from a theatre to a warehouse; after shooting Kennedy, Oswald ran from a warehouse to a theatre.
• Both Johnsons were succeeded as President in '69 by Republicans whose mothers were named Hannah.
• Both assassins died in the same month as their victim in a state adjacent to the state of their birth.
• Both assassins were Southern white males born in the late '30s, who were in their mid-20s.
• Both assassins were killed before being tried, by men who were reared in the North, changed their name as adults, and were bachelors.
• Both assassins had 15 letters in their name
• Both were shot in the head

[DCHindley]

IIRC, Aren't you forgetting that Lincoln's personal secretary was named Kennedy, and Kennedy's personal secretary was named Lincoln?

[neilgodfrey]

IIRC, Aren't you forgetting that Lincoln's personal secretary was named Kennedy, and Kennedy's personal secretary was named Lincoln?

The wikipedia article said that detail was debunked. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln%E2 ... ban_legend

[MrMacSon]

mention of Kennedy & Lincoln is a red herring to ancient ship-wreck stories.

[neilgodfrey]

.