Evidence for God from Science

The link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus claims:
"The general scholarly view is that while the Testimonium Flavianum is most likely not authentic in its entirety, it is broadly agreed upon that it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus with a reference to the execution of Jesus by Pilate which was then subject to Christian interpolation"

The original text is suppoused to be something like this:
"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man. For he was a doer of startling deeds, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. And he gained a following both among many Jews and many of Greek origin. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day."

The interpolated version (really?) is claimed to be:
"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 at this day."

Comments?

I agree that it was most probably a later extrpolation of a Christian scribe.
Not uncommon by the way, for copyists to add some "flavour" to the text they were copying and I don't mean JUST in relation to religious works, but ALL works that have been passed down to us, such as Homer's Iliad, the historical accounts of Alexander, Caesar and so many others.
That is why it is important to focus on WHAT is being said and not HOW it was being said.

When I clicked on the Czech link on wikipedia, in the not interpolated version there is not mentioned that he was doing startling deeds. They say:
"V té době žil moudrý muž jménem Ježíš. Jeho způsob života byl dobrý a byl znám jako ctnostný. A mnoho lidí z Židů i z jiných národů se stalo jeho učedníky. Pilát ho odsoudil k ukřižování a ke smrti. Říkali, že se jim zjevil třetí den po ukřižování a že byl živ; podle toho byl pokládán za Mesiáše, o němž proroci předpovídali zázraky.“["

My translation is something like the following:
In that time, there lived a wise man named Jesus. His way of life was good and was known as virtuous. And many people among Jews and from other nations became his disciples. Pilat condemned him to death by crucifixion. They were saying that he appeared to them on the third day after the crucifixion and that he was alive; according to that people had him for Messiah of whom prophets had prophesized miracles.

Hmmm. In the Czech uninterpolated version they say that he raised up on the third day whereas in the English uninterpolated version they do not mention this.

So, discrepancy in startling deeds and in the ressurection.

Depends on which translation the Czech was based on I would think.
I don't recall which is the oldest manuscript we have from Joe.

The translation I have in my home - in a book - reads like this:

At this time there was a wise man called Jesus, and his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. Many people among the Jews and among other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that they had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive. Accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have reported wonders. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day. - A XVIII, 63

FL

At this time there was a wise man called Jesus, and his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. Many people among the Jews and among other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that they had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive. Accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have reported wonders. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day. - A XVIII, 63

I agree with this. Joe's record is not a very authentic proof of what exactly happened, whether Christ did miracles or he was raised from the dead on the third day. But Joe's record is a good support for the argument for a real Jesus (and some even question this). But anything beyond that will get into problems.

neo-x wrote:

At this time there was a wise man called Jesus, and his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. Many people among the Jews and among other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that they had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive. Accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have reported wonders. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day. - A XVIII, 63

I agree with this. Joe's record is not a very authentic proof of what exactly happened, whether Christ did miracles or he was raised from the dead on the third day. But Joe's record is a good support for the argument for a real Jesus (and some even question this). But anything beyond that will get into problems.

Joe's record is to be accepted as historical evidence that a man called Jesus existed and that he was crucifed by Rome ( Under the local authority of Pontius pilate) and that his followers believed he was resurrected and that they continue to preach His teachings and resurrection to the time of Joe's writings.

Most people when researching Josephus's references of Jesus almost always talk about the first passage referring to Jesus which most historians agree is an interpolation (and even when the interpolations are taken out, it still refers to Jesus Christ), but few bring up the second passage in which Josephus mentions Jesus which all new testament schars agree is wholly written by Josephus.
Here it is
http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG ... ources.htm
This James, says Josephus, was "the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ."{14} F.F. Bruce points out how this agrees with Paul's description of James in Galatians 1:19 as "the Lord's brother."{15} And Edwin Yamauchi informs us that "few scholars have questioned" that Josephus actually penned this passage.{16}