MedLawPlus.com®
|
Comments Upon
Josephus Ancestry
The son of high priest Mattathias ben Theophilus?
- From: Jared
State of residence: Not Given
Subject: Josephus Ancestry
Date: 9-11-2008
The Gospel of Luke and Acts are Paul's Trial Documents, that's why Acts ends while he's awaiting Trial.
It is actualy perfectly acceptable in Jewish Genealogies to skip Generations, that said we also know it's not as odd back then as you'd think for people to have kids at that age.
- From: JJR
Subject: Josephus
Date: 9-11-2008
Thanks for the comment Jared. A few points in rebuttal. The Gospel of Luke is a document related to Paul's trial? Paul is not mentioned by name in this document. It's addressed to "Theophilus". Trials of Roman citizens occurred before Roman officials. Find me a high Roman official from this time period by this name. I am unaware of any. On the other hand, we know of two high priests post Caiaphas with Theophilus as part of their name.
"It is actually perfectly acceptable in Jewish Genealogies to skip generations." I'm not sure upon what authority this statement is made. I've never seen a Jewish scholar make such a statement. Opinion? When speaking of Jewish priests who are kohen (a direct male descendant of Aaron), it most definitely was NOT acceptable to skip generations. To be high priest, one had to be kohen. Josephus claimed to descend from high priests. The status of kohen is only passed from father to son. To be a kohen priest, one had to produce a genealogy showing father to son descent all the way back to Aaron. A break in the chain invalidated the claim.
As far as 70 year olds fathering children in the 1st century AD, it is unusual for any particular individual to even live that long. Then living that long with a functioning phallus is yet another issue (in pre-viagra days). Also, as kohen priests did not practice polygamy to my knowledge, it would also require the priest's wife to predecease him and then he marries a young woman. Would agree these are not impossible conditions but a fair view has to be that it would be very rare for a first century kohen priest. Josephus has two such instances within a few generations of his genealogy.
Reasonable minds may differ but it looks to me much more likely Josephus intentionally left off names from his genealogy list than two of his close ancestors fathering children at ages 72 and 67, respectively. I say intentionally because a male from a kohen family of the 1st century AD certainly knew who his ancestors were.
- From: Jared
State of residence: Not Given
Subject: Josephus Ancestry
Date: 9-11-2008
Theophilus is actualy a Greek name, and I'm pretty sure Paul's Trial Happened Before Nero Started Persecuting Christians since Paul got Acquitted so it was likely before that Theophilus was High Priest.
Luke and Acts together provide the Background on the unlinderlying Issue, the Origin of Christianity.
Study all the Genealogies in the Old Testaments, especially ones that overlap each other, and you'll find all to of Skipping, also Matthew we know Skips some, and I suspect allot to get only 14 Generations from the Captivity to Christ.
Just look at John The Baptists Father.
- From: JJR
Subject: Josephus
Date: 9-11-2008
"Theophilus is actually a Greek name." And this means what? A Jew cannot have a Greek name? The Greeks ruled Palestine for several hundred years prior to the Hasmonean dynasty and, during this period, Greek names and culture became part of the Jewish world. Look at the list of Hasmonean kings--Antigonus, Alexander, Jannaeus, Aristobulus. These are all Greek names. Here is the list of Jewish high priests. The name Theophilus appears three times on the list. The Old Testament genealogies are screwed up. But I stand by the point that a kohen priest would never make such mistakes with their personal genealogy and Josephus claims to come from a kohen family. You might have an argument about Acts being written in connection with Paul in some form (i.e., propaganda) but it's a much tougher augment relative to the Gospel of Luke. Paul is not mentioned by name in the gospel so how exactly one argues it is a trial document for Paul is beyond me.
- From: Jared
State of residence: Not Given
Subject: Josephus Ancestry
Date: 9-12-2008
No it just means it's not a Uniquely Jewish names, and like most names Back then it was very common, and there where Jews in Rome at the time anyways, some even Become friends with Nero.
It wouldn't be a Mistake, it's simply skipping a Generation or 2. He probably choose to Highlight the ones who where the most significant, not the other way around.
Luke and Acts are for all intends and purposes just 2 Volumes of the same work, the Trial was ultimately about mroe then just Paul, but about the whole Controversy surrounding Paul's' Religion, so Roman Law would have required a full Background on the relevant History, since it's a Religion that revolves around Jesus a Biography of him would have been necessary.
- From: Dan
State of residence: (unknown)
Subject: Josephus Ancestry
Date: 9-15-2010
You rest too much the absence of evidence, and unsubstantiated assumption.
The absence of evidence is not proof.
The probability of some of your speculations, which are very well argued, is not the issue I have, it is your assumption and skewing the gaps in your data, the absences of data, in support of your theories, and ignoring simple commonsense that refutes most of those assumptions, that is at issue for me.
e.g. It is unlikely for a 71 year old to father children, especially having a limp 70 year old member, and not having Viagra?
That is your argument?
It doesn’t appear to be tongue and cheek…if it is.
I could offer numerous counter arguments for why an Aristocrat (in any age, regardless of culture, many of which lived well into their 60s and older), who as a male was married repeatedly throughout their lives, who didn't necessarily have to practice polygamy to father many children, and well into their twilight years.
Even, by tradition, Jesus' father was supposed to have been much older than Mary, who was reportedly, by tradition, to have been a teen-ager.
And Abraham is reported to have been 100 years old when he fathered his last child.
It appears that if there is a question as to whether a tradition was, or not (e.g. whether or not Priests practiced Polygamy or not, etc.) you don't seek out an expert as to validate or refute that tradition to fill the gap in your own knowledge, it appears as you just take that absence of clarification or any information and assume the data will support your theories, I notice you do this often.
I don't disagree with all of your conclusions, a few are argued quiet solidly IMO, but it appears as though you have tunnel vision on some of your data, and have been lazy in other parts (the reason why I haven’t bought your book).
You can't rest on the absence of evidence, or assume the lack of information and or clarification leans in your favor.
Just because a puzzle piece appears to fit a gap, doesn't mean the puzzle piece fits the picture.
Just something to consider.
- From: JJR
State of residence: MO
Subject: Reply to Dan
Date: 9-15-2010
Well Dan, thanks for the comment. You have taken swings at me so I hope you don't mind a few counter punches.
"The absence of evidence is not proof."
In the legal profession and the discipline of logic, the word "proof" simply means the sum of all evidence supporting an argument. So your sentence says, "absence of evidence is not evidence". Note further that the term "conclusive proof" has a different meaning than the word proof. I make several arguments in the article on the ancestry of Josephus. The point you appear to be attacking is the argument that Josephus left out two ancestors in his list given in Vita. So your argument is what? The age gaps are not evidence? Perhaps your use of the word "evidence" significantly differs from the way it is used in the American legal profession. There are two types of evidence, direct and circumstantial. An example of direct evidence is eyewitness testimony. Circumstantial evidence is evidence "not based on actual personal knowledge or observation of the facts in controversy, but of other facts from which deductions are drawn, showing indirectly the facts sought to proved." Blacks Law Dictionary (5th Ed.).
If a body is found on a parking lot with a bullet in the skull but there is little or no blood at the crime scene, that is evidence that the victim was killed elsewhere and the body dumped on the parking lot. If body is found at the bottom of a backyard pool but there is no water in the lungs, that is evidence the person died before the body entered the water. If an individual is caught attempting to bribe a public official with $50,000 but leads a modest lifestyle and banking records show he had little in the way of spendable cash, that is evidence that the individual arrested had a co-conspirator.
These are basic concepts so I'm a bit surprised by your line of argumentation. If I left the impression in my article that my evidence for the argument that Josephus omitted ancestors is conclusive, I apologize. That was not the intention of the article. The augment is that the theory that Josephus omitted ancestors is more probable than the veracity of the stated ancestor list given to us in Vita. Is it more likely that (a) both Joseph fathered Matthias at age 73 and Matthias Curtis father Joseph at age 67 or (b) Josephus (for reasons only known to him) omitted two of his ancestors? In the first century BCE, the average mortality age was in the 40s. Further, Kohanim priests of this period married only one wife. I submit the probabilities of two close ancestors of Josephus fathering children at ages 73 and 67, respectively, is extremely low. First, they would have to live to this advanced age (decades past the norm for this time period). Second, their wives would have to predecease them. And thirdly, they would need to marry a wife of child bearing years while in advanced age and physically be capable of procreation.
Your counterargument is that I am stupid for even attempting the argument? Nice. Your only counterpoint is that these were members of an elite class, therefore, it is theoretically possible it occurred as reported by Josephus. True. But its theoretically possible I'll marry Halle Berry. Very slim probability does not destroy an argument when the test is merely more likely than not. Let's take your two examples. The NT does not directly say Joseph fathered children by Mary. The Roman Catholic Church along with all mainline Protestant faiths maintain that Mary had no children by Joseph the carpenter and that the brothers and sisters of Jesus were fathered by Joseph the carpenter by a previous wife. The RCC's position on this point goes back over 1000 years. There is no direct evidence in the NT that Mary had children by Joseph (although Prof. Tabor makes a fine circumstantial argument for this). The NT nor even the texts of the Nag Hammadi library say Joseph was substantially older than Mary. Not even the infancy apocrypha such as The First Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus or the Infancy Gospel of Thomas say Joseph was older than Mary. It's very difficult to present evidence for that case (although my intuition agrees it was true). This begs an even larger stretch in citing the case of Mary and Joseph as evidence that Jewish males of the first century BCE commonly fathered children in their 60s or 70s. Saying Joseph was substantially older than Mary (even if one finds a cite for that point) does not substantiate a claim Joseph was 60 or 70 years of age when fathering children. So the first example is very weak. Abraham fathering Isaac was said to be a miracle, meaning its occurrence was beyond reason and therefore the work of God. Josephus apparently has outdone Abraham having two miracles occur in his near family tree.
There is quite a bit of speculation in my Josephus article on other points but, in my view, a reasonable argument can be made that Josephus omitted two ancestors from his list. If you don't agree with it, fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion but I take exception to the dismissive nature of your comment reprinted above.
- From: Steefen
URL: www.waterbearingfish.com
State of residence: Not Given
Subject: Matthias son of Boethus
Date: 5-25-2011
"Josephus' Ancestry: The Son of High Priest Mattathias ben Theophilus?" by J.J. Raymond. "Can we connect any of the known high priests to ancestors of Josephus?" 2. Matthias son of Boethus was one of the high priests (at the time of the revolt).
My question: Why don't I see Matthias son of Boethus on the list of high priests at the time of the revolt? www.ask.com/wiki/List_of_High_Priests_of_Israel.
Index to Reader Comments
|
|
|
|
