After an investigation of the question, Charlesworth explains his view that Josephus’ original version is “both an interpolation and a redaction.”^22 But he provides three reasons why Josephus still wrote most of the passage: some of the words are very difficult to assign to a Christian writer, the passage fits both grammatically and historically, and the brief reference to Jesus in Antiquities20 seems to presuppose an earlier mention.^23
Charlesworth concludes that the Arabic rescension is basically accurate, even if there are still a few subtle Christian alterations. He concludes about this passage with some strong words: “We can now be as certain as historical research will presently allow that Josephus did refer to Jesus,” providing “corroboration of the gospel account.”^24
We conclude that Josephus did write about Jesus, not only in the brief statement concerning James, but also in this longer account. The evidence points to his composition of this latter passage with the deletion and modification of a number of key phrases which were probably interpolated by Christian sources.
What historical facts can be ascertained from the deleted and altered portions of Josephus’ statement such as those changes made in the Arabic version? (1)Jesus was known as a wise and virtuous man, one recognized for his good conduct. (2)He had many disciples, both Jews and Gentiles. (3)Pilate condemned him to die, (4) with crucifixion explicitly being mentioned as the mode. (5)The disciples reported that Jesus had risen from the dead and (6)that he had appeared to them on the third day after his crucifixion. (7)Consequently, the disciples continued to proclaim his teachings. (8)Perhaps Jesus was the Messiah concerning whom the Old Testament prophets spoke and predicted wonders. We would add here two facts from Josephus’ earlier quotation as well. (9)Jesus was the brother of James and (10)was called the messiah by some.^25
There is nothing really sensational in such a list of facts from a Jewish historian. Jesus’ ethical conduct, his following, and his crucifixion by the command of Pilate are what we would expect a historian to mention. Even the account of the disciples reporting Jesus’ resurrection appearances (if it is allowed), has an especially authentic ring to it. Josephus, like many historians today, would simply be repeating the claims, which were probably fairly well known in first century Palestine. That the disciples would then spread his teachings would be a natural consequence.
21 “New Evidence on Jesus’ Life Reported,” The New York Times, February 12, 1972, pp. 1, 24.
22 Charlesworth, ibid., p. 93.
23 Ibid., pp. 93–94.
24 Ibid., pp. 96–97.
25 Bruce presents a somewhat similar list of facts. See The New Testament Documents, p. 112.
Josephus presented an important account of several major facts about Jesus and the origins of Christianity. In spite of some question as to the exact wording, we can view his statements as providing probable attestation, in particular, of some items in Jesus’ public ministry, his death by crucifixion, the disciples’ report of his resurrection appearances, and their subsequent teaching of Jesus’ message. Thallus
The death of Jesus may have been mentioned in an ancient history composed many years before Tacitus, Suetonius, or Josephus ever wrote and probably even prior to the Gospels. Circa AD 52, Thallus wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean world from the Trojan War to his own time.^26 This work itself has been lost and only fragments of it exist in the citations of others. One such scholar who knew and spoke of it was Julius Africanus, who wrote about AD 221. It is debated whether Thallus was the same person referred to by Josephus as a wealthy Samaritan, who was made a freedman by Emperor Tiberius and who loaned money to Herod Agrippa I.^27
Page 12345678910111213141516171819202122
