[Antiquities, Book XVIII, Chapter III:63-64]

As I have already stated, the original manuscripts of Josephus do not exist. More importantly, we do not have a single extant copy that was not written by Christian scribes many centuries later. The importance of this point should not be underestimated. If the history of Christian Europe shows us anything it is that the Christian church was willing to do just about anything to promote the prosperity and growth of their religion. People were murdered, books were burned, temples were sacked, and manuscripts were forged. These are the historical facts, and they are indisputable. What does this mean? First, it means that the Christians had ample opportunity to commit the forgery; all of the existing copies of Josephus were written by Christian scribes. Second, it means that the Christian church had a very clear motive to commit such forgery; the movement lacked a solid foundation in the historical record that could be used to rebut arguments presented against it by the many detractors of the day. Forging an account and attributing it to Josephus, the major Jewish historian for that time period, would lend enough credibility to the historicity of Jesus Christ to transform Christianity from a movement into a full blown religious phenomenon. Last and perhaps most important, the historical record shows us that the Christians were engaged in forgery and the suppression of rival literature during this time period. So it is certainly not unreasonable to assume that they might very well have utilized these same tactics to create the now famous Testimonium Flavianum. Motive, opportunity, and a prior record; now all we need is to find Christian fingerprints on the Testimonium Flavianum.

A cursory analysis of the Testimonium Flavianum is now in order. Josephus was an orthodox Jewish Pharisee; he never converted to Christianity. This fact is even acknowledged in the 2nd century writings of the early Christian apologist Origin. But after reading the Testimonium Flavianum, one can hardly imagine Josephus to have been a Jew. He quite unequivocally refers to Jesus as the Messiah, and that he taught the truth. It seems absurd to think that a Jewish Pharisee could be responsible for such remarks. But let us pretend for a moment that he did write them. If Jesus was the Messiah, if he was a doer of wonderful works, if he had truly risen from the grave on the third day, and if his religion was the truth as Josephus describes, why in the Hell did he remain an orthodox Jew? It simply doesn’t make sense. The language is entirely Christian; the most fitting explanation is that the account was written or interpolated by a Christian.

Another issue is that the Testimonium Flavianum does not fit in context with the passages preceding or following it. Josephus was dealing with problems regarding the Roman occupation of Jerusalem and the catastrophes that had befallen the Jews because of it. From a Jewish perspective the death of Christ was not a catastrophe, indeed if you believe the gospel accounts they saw him as a blasphemer of the lord and as such justly put to death according to the laws set forth by God in the Torah. However, if you are a Christian trying to insert this forged passage into Josephus' work many centuries later you would probably consider the death of Christ a Jewish catastrophe. In this context the passage again appears to be written not by a Jew but by a Christian.

The next problem with the Testimonium Flavianum is that NONE of the early Christian apologists quote from it. They quote from Josephus' other works regarding Jewish history, but not from the Testimonium Flavianum. Origin in particular should have quoted from this account were it available during his lifetime. He wrote the book Contra Celsum circa 225 C.E. and multiple apologies, quoting very heavily from the works of Josephus, including a very short passage in Book XX of the Antiquities:

[Antiquities, Book XX, Chapter IX:200]

Why would Origin, who was desperate to prove the historicity of Jesus Christ to potential converts and to the detractors of the Christian religion, quote this extremely minor account that makes only a passing reference to Jesus and not quote the Testimonium Flavianum? What’s even more compelling is that Origin expressly stated that Josephus never accepted Jesus as the Christ. But very clearly in the Testimonium Flavianum, Josephus (allegedly) proclaims Jesus to be the Christ. It doesn’t take a PhD in astrophysics to deduce that Origin (and all of the other Christian apologists) had never seen this Testimonium Flavianum that was allegedly written by Josephus. But Origin was extremely familiar with the works of Josephus, quoting from several books of the Antiquities. How could Origin and the other early Christian apologists be entirely ignorant of the most important historical reference to Jesus Christ ever recorded, especially when they were quite familiar with the author and the very work that it was supposedly recorded in?

The first person to quote the Testimonium Flavianum was the Christian Bishop of Caesarea, Eusebius in the 4th century. Eusebius is considered by some academics, Catholic and otherwise, as the father of "pious fraud". The first Catholic authority to condemn the Eusebius reference to the Testimonium Flavianum as a forgery was Bishop Warburton of Gloucester (circa 1770). He said:

It is extremely important to recall that the original manuscripts of the Josephus account do not exist. This is a critical point to consider because there was rampant forgery perpetrated by some of the original church fathers and later by the Catholic Church during the period. The Catholic Encyclopedia readily admits this today; they refer to it as "pious fraud".

To demonstrate this I will provide an example with a quote from the early Church father, Bishop of Corinth Dionysius (as recorded by Eusebius in the 4th century):

The text surrounding the "Jesus testimony" describes Romans killing Jews. The paragraph following the "testimony" speaks about "another sad calamity" that "put the Jews into disorder." If there was "another sad calamity" then there must have been a "sad calamity" that happened previously. So, would this "sad calamity" be Jesus the "doer of wonderful works" or the Romans killing Jews?

Me too. Along with the Tacitus, Thallus, Suetonius stuff, etc.

I think we also should make "apologists" demonstrate the existence of EVERY alleged individual in the "genealogy" of the alleged "god-man" from the alleged "word" of biblegod. After all, one can't very well have existed without a demonstrable lineage, and the alleged "lineage" IS right there in the book....trying to prove the existence of "Abraham", "David", "Solomon", etc will of course prove equally futile.

Forgery has been a mainstay of the Xtian religionists for centuries. The recent "James Ossuary" was yet another vain attempt to validate the non-existent "god-man".

The gospels tell of "Jesus'" alleged fantastic works, including healing the sick, raising the dead, putting an ear back on, turning water into wine, food multiplication, etc. The greatest indication that it's all a fraud comes from the believers themselves. We read:

and then there's this:

According to the aforementioned verses, doctors should just about be extinct. There shouldn't be any starvation in the world anywhere...just send over a couple of cod and some Wonderbread and people should be able to survive indefinitely. (providing you have refrigeration for the multiplied cod) Undertakers should be long gone. That is of course, not what we see believers doing.

We're waiting for you to begin your refutatory presentation. Although judging from the disappearances of the likes of CIL, Reformed, etc. we certainly won't hold our breath.

I have a very good explanation (in my opinion) for why the Arabic text doesn't have the rabidly Christian language of the European texts. Unfortunately, as I said before, there are some cats I am not willing to let out of the bag before publication. I will give you a small hint however; expect a theory that utilizes my Arabic language skills as well as my ethnographic studies of Islamic culture.

(by non-believer)

Yes the section previous to the Jesus entry speaks of Pilate setting a trap for a large group of Jews, and killing many of them. Then the section after the Jesus entry begins with "about the same time also another sad calamity but the Jews into disorder..." This is the contextual evidence I alluded to when I said:

When I put together the formal format that will be presented in my book, obviously I will make this point more clear. From a Jewish perspective, would Josephus have been referring to the death of Jesus as a "sad calamity" that put the Jews into disorder, or would he have been referring to the mass entrapment and slaughter of Jews by Pontius Pilate? Clearly a Jewish Pharisee isn't going to consider the death of Jesus a sad calamity; and even more clearly it certainly wouldn't have put the Jewish population into disorder. When I do my formal contextual analysis of the Josephus passage, I will go into much more detail so as to better demonstrate just how out of place the Jesus passage really is.

(by ChefRanden)

I have enjoyed reading your posts over the last 6 months Karl; I will send you an autographed copy of the book.

When you are finished reading it, you can return it to the bookstore, declare the book a raging piece of heinous shit, and demand your money back. On a serious note; my goal is not only to publish a book that will help people open their eyes to the religious madness of the world, but also to be used as the reference work of reference works for freethinkers everywhere. I am relying almost entirely on primary source material, and I will provide these references in an easy to access format so that everyone has the critical data right at their fingertips to make debating easier and more effective. The reality is, it’s not the author who is going to change the world; it’s the people who find the message compelling enough to actively fight against Christianity, Judaism, and Islam by spreading the word and educating their fellow human beings.

(by Karl)

The Rapture is taking too long. Perhaps they will get sick of waiting and drink the cult cook aid?

(by Karl)

His age is not at all unrealistic for the time period. If he were allegedly in his 90's then perhaps you would have a point.

(by Willa)

(by jpholding)

(by jpholding)

(by jpholding)

This man is my kind of ape.

(by jpholding)

(by jpholding)

(by jpholding)

(by jpholding)

(by jpholding)