No Christian Author Mentions The Testimonium Flavianum Until The Fourth Century. What’s Up With That?

Eusebius of Caesarea: Liar, Liar, pants on fire?

[Attention Readers: In the original version of this post I falsely alleged that no Christian author prior to Eusebius mentioned Josephus. What I should have said is that no Christian author prior to Eusebius quoted Josephus’ Testimonium Flavianum. I apologize for not being more careful.]

It is critical to highlight that Josephus wrote his account [Jewish Antiquities] almost sixty years after Jesus had died. The value of this passage [Testimonium Flavianum] is only as great as the likelihood of its being authentic—a matter of dispute. [Other than two brief passages], Jesus nor Christians appear elsewhere in Josephus’ works.

—Michael Alter, Jewish counter-missionary, in his new book, The Resurrection and Its Apologetics: Jesus’ Death and Burial, Volume I, p. 32

Gary: Ask any modern Christian apologist what evidence Christians have that Jesus was the great miracle worker and healer that the Gospels make him out to be, and you will receive a one word response:

Josephus!!!

Josephus is the ONLY first century, non-Christian source who explicitly mentions the deeds and existence of a Jesus Christ. Without Josephus, Christians are left with a couple of very short, vague, cryptic possible references about Jesus the Christ from second century (pagan) sources. Josephus’ statements about Jesus confirm the general historical outline of the four Gospels, the keystone evidence for the Christian belief system.

Christian apologists desperately need Josephus! Without him, the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth is on very shaky ground. Did Eusebius interpolate [totally or in part] Jesus into the writings of the great first century Jewish general, Flavius Josephus, better known as just “Josephus”?

“Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct to this day.” —Antiquities 18.3.3.

And this paragraph:

“But this younger Ananus, who, as we have told you already, took the high priesthood, was a bold man in his temper, and very insolent; he was also of the sect of the Sadducees, ¹ who are very rigid in judging offenders, above all the rest of the Jews, as we have already observed; when, therefore, Ananus was of this disposition, he thought he had now a proper opportunity [to exercise his authority]. Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned:” —Antiquities 20.9.1

The majority of experts believe that at least part of the Testimonium Flavianum is a Christian interpolation (forgery). A minority believe the entire TF is a Christian interpolation. Was Eusebius the interpolator? Many skeptics suspect he was. If so, this famous fourth century Christian apologist forged another author’s work [totally or in part] to promote his agenda. He lied to promote his agenda. He forged and lied to propagate and defend his Christian superstitions.

Despicable.

When we turn to the question whether Eusebius wrote the passage [the TF], the situation is very different. No author cites the Testimonium before Eusebius, nor does any author cite it for more than a century after Eusebius. Eusebius himself cites it three times, always to refute pagan attacks on Jesus’ character, and we know from other examples that Eusebius incorrectly attributes to Josephus views that support his own. The passage is made up of vocabulary and concepts paralleled in Eusebius’ works Contra Hieroclem, Demonstratio evangelica, and Historia ecclesiastica. Complete certainty is unattainable, but we have very good reasons to suppose that Eusebius wrote the Testimonium.

–Ken Olson, Duke University

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

End of post.