THE TESTIMONY OF FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS

LITERARY CRIMES AGAINST A BRILLIANT HISTORIAN

The Roman-Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, was born in the
year 785 Rome (A.D. 32), shortly before the cruci-fixion of
the Christ under Pontius Pilate, and was thus the contemporary
of the events that marked Jewish history in its relations with
the Romans during the first century. He had a role of first
importance, whether as ambassador at Rome, or as military leader
during the tragic hours when Vespasian and Titus put down the
uprising which followed the revolt of Menahem. He was therefore
fully cognizant of these events, and also of those which
immediately preceded them, which formed their prelude and their
origin. Josephus wrote two large works devoted respectively to
the ancient history of the Jews (The Antiquities of the Jews)
and to contemporary history (The Wars of the Jews).

The Antiquities of the Jews begins, like the Bible, with the
creation, and then, following the course of events, deals with
the Herods and takes us up to the time of the last Roman
proconsul, Decius Florus, in the twelfth year of the reign of
Nero, 819 of Rome, or A.D. 66.

In The Wars of the Jews Flavius Josephus first briefly reviews
the events of the one hundred and sixty-seven years between the
reign of Antiochus Epiphanes and the death of Herod the Great in
the year of Rome 750. Book II covers the sixty years or so from
Herod's death to the retreat of Cestius Gallus and the arrival
of Vespasian to take command of the Roman armies in Syria, that
is, from 750 to 810. He continues the historical narrative, less
dryly than in the outline of the first book, but giving the
facts so incoherently and in so desultory a manner that the
presentation of the chain of events leaves much to be desired.
There is only one explanation. The original text has undergone
severe adulteration; suppressions, additions, tamperings are
very evident. This state of affairs becomes all the more compre-
hensible when one observes that Book II is the history of the
period covering the life and deeds of the Christ, and almost the
whole of the apostolic age.

The last five books form a striking contrast to the medio-crity
of Book II, so far as regards their composition and from all
other points of view. They are written in a lively style and are
interspersed with pages which are no whit inferior to the works
of Thucydides, Quintus Curtius, Sallust or Livy. These books
contain a detailed account of Menahem's revolt and of the war of
Vespasian and Titus against the other Messianic leaders, which
culminated in the capture of Jerusalem and the destruction of
the Temple. Without any doubt the finest pages are those in
which Josephus describes the end of the Jewish resistance, the
heroism of the last defenders of Jerusalem and of the Temple.

The chapter in which Josephus's political sagacity develops the
causes of Roman greatness contains the germs in more than one
passage of Machiavelli and Montesquieu. He depicts in powerful
strokes and with a great depth and delicacy of perception the
gradual conquest of the globe by the force of human discipline.

Born of a priestly family and the possessor of the most profound
education that his age could offer, to which must be added his
own innate capacities, Flavius Josephus was perfectly equipped
for writing and analyzing the history of his period.

When we read magnificent passages, full of life and color,
vigorous in touch and warm in tone, how comes it that we should
meet (sometimes even in the middle of these purple passages)
incomprehensible defects, blemishes, puerililties, foolish
rhetoric, worthy of a petty sophist?

There can only be one reason. The text has been purposely
falsified. The most surprising points are these:

1. We find versions of the same event, which differ considerably
in their treatment, in the two works, leading to irreconcilable
contradictions.
2.
2. Flavius Josephus tells us that he wrote The Antiquities of
the Jews-describing the same events as the ancient Hebrew books
adopted by the Christians in their Old Testament, in Aramaic
(Syro-Chaldean), and that he afterwards translated them into
Greek. But he had a thorough knowledge of Hebrew since the age
of fourteen. In fact, he knew it so well that he was on several
occasions consulted by the sacrificers on certain ancient laws.
Numerous passages in his works prove, and he is made to sa~
himsel{ with the emphasis of repetition, that he consulted and
reproduced exactly, with nothing added or removed~ various
Hebrew documents, when he composed his Antiquities. It is clear
he had before him the original texts of the Old Testament,
untouched and untouchable since Esdras.

However, there are innumerable variants which show that
sometimes he gave up the Jewish sources for no particular
reason, and followed the version of the Septuagint, written in
Greek, a language which he did not pronounce properly, as he is
made to admit, and with which he was only half familiar.

Among the sentences in Greek there are a number where the
translator from. the original Hebrew could have chosen one of
several different formulae to render it. But Josephus always
reproduces the very expression used in the Septuagint. And he
even gives the Septuagint text, when the latter is in
disagreement with the Hebrew text on the facts.

The Greek version of the Septuagint was, we know, and "corrected"
constantly. In particular, St. Jerome Made a fresh "revision" on
the instructions of Pope Damasus, a revision which earned him
the reputation of forger with his friend Rufinus of Aquileia,
and we can be certain that the corrections” of the texts of
Flavius Josephus must have followed immediately, as they are in
harmony wjth the Septuagint as revised by St. Jerome in the
fourth century. We cannot escape the conclusion that the works
of Flavius Josephus were originally written by a Jew with
perfect know-ledge of Jewish affairs, and that they were later
completely rewritten and time and again retouched by a series of
forgers whose operations, thanks to their patent ignorance of
Judaism, have left traces as flagrant as if they were criminals
caught in the act. The works of Flavius Josephus have
been “dejudaized” as far as possible, like the Gospels. Jewish
ideas, Jewish names, and often Jewish geography have been
replaced by ideas, names and geography with a Greek and Roman
flavor.

What a revolution there would be in the history of the origins
of Christianity if an unaltered manuscript of the works of
Flavius Josephus were to be found! The Church was for long
afraid that one might be discovered. There is today in the
library at Freiburg, Germany a manuscript of Flavius Josephus
which, in the fifteenth century, was in the po-session of Rieux,
the archbishop of Toulouse, but was at that time unknown to the
Church. When she came to hear of it, the Church haled both
archbishop and manuscript before the parliament of Paris, so
that the latter might be examined, and, if need be, seized. The
Church was afraid that the manuscript, having evaded her
censorship, might not agree with the texts which the scribes had
falsified.

There is not a word, or, better, there is no longer a word in
the works of Flavius Josephus about the Messiah, the Christ
crucified by Pontius Pilate, except for a crude interpolation,
quite obviously false, which we shall deal with presently, as
there are still some lay critics who maintain that it is genuine.

The silence of Flavius Josephus is not due to disdain or studied
neutrality. It is certain that he spoke in detail of the
historical character concealed by the transfiguration.

Certain fragments dealing with anonymous persons-impostors,
magicians, etc., seem to be the remains of passages concerning
the Christ. The passage about John the Baptist
(The Antiquities of the Jews, Book XVIII), though much. tampered
with as it stands today, belongs to the career of the Christ.
Other unfortunate suppressions have evidently been made. The
purpose of them was to sever all connection between the Jesus of
the Gospels and his original in history. The books of Josephus
in general give the most circumstantial details of the period he
covers, and throw a clear light upon it. We get information of
the highest value from his writings. Thanks to him, Herod,
Herodias, Antipas, Philip, Annas, Caiaphas and Pilate are
personages whom we can touch with a finger, and whom we see
living before us with a striking reality. (Renan: Life of
Jesus, Introduction, p.30, Modern Library edition.)

The Gospels inform us that Pilate and Herod who thitherto had
been enemies became reconciled on the occasion of the Christ's
capture. Yet it seems that Flavius Josephus knew nothing about
it! The Jesus of the Gospels is always having to do with the
personages of the Temple. His historic original must have had an
even closer relationship between them. How are we to accept that
an historian as well informed as was Flavius Josephus knew and
said nothing about it?

How is it that the scholars and exegetes have not suspected,
examined and discussed this point? If they had, they would have
reached the same conclusion as ourselves, for no other
conclusion is possible.

In conclusion, we can say that despite all the alterations which
the works of Flavius Josephus have undergone, his fidelity to
the truth has been proved as against later writers, such as
Eusebius, pseudo-Philo, pseudo-Hegesippus, and the author of
Josippon, and also as against a number of other anonymous
writers, Roman and Greco-Roman.

The silences of Flavius Josephus are above all eloquent when
suppression of the text has made him hold his tongue. And even
if the events in Palestine which he records have been confused
and entangled, there is still enough clarity and 9~rcasion in
his writings to make their reading profitable, that is to say,
to enable us to discover the historical truth that we seek in
them.

The celebrated passage on Jesus is found in the Antiquities
(Book XVIII, Ch. iii, 3). There is no other mention of him. It
runs as follows:

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 among 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 Christists, so named
from him, are not extinct at this day.

All the manuscripts of Flavius Josephus that have come down to
us contain this passage. And it has appeared in the works of the
historian and in translations of his works since printing began.
As far as its matter is concerned it appears authentic, as if it
had emanated from the pen of Flavius Josephus.

Nevertheless, doubts have assailed the exegetes, though one
should read their ambiguous phrases on the subject. They
certainly have made very heavy weather of regarding this passage
as an interpolation.
END****************************************************************************