“Joseph
of Arimathea stands as a pivotal figure in the Gospel accounts.
He
emerges as a wealthy and respected member of the Sanhedrin, righteous …
and
a follower of Jesus. By providing his rock-hewn tomb, he played a crucial role
in ensuring Jesus’s burial was both dignified and verifiable”.
Bible Hub
Introductory
https://biblehub.com/q/who_is_joseph_of_arimathea.htm
Who was Joseph of Arimathea in the
Bible?
Biblical References and Key Traits
All four Gospels mention Joseph of Arimathea, with each
providing insight:
“As evening approached, there came a rich man from Arimathea
named Joseph, who himself had also become a disciple of Jesus. He went to
Pilate to ask for the body of Jesus, and Pilate ordered that it be released. So
Joseph took the body, wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and placed it in his
own new tomb, which he had cut out of the rock. Then he rolled a great stone
across the entrance of the tomb and went away.”
Matthew highlights Joseph’s wealth and his discipleship of
Jesus - albeit it appears less public until the moment he requests the Savior’s
body. Matthew also points out that Joseph was generous and resourceful, having
a tomb prepared in advance.
“Now it was already evening. Since it was Preparation Day
(that is, the day before the Sabbath), Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent Council
member who also himself was waiting for the kingdom of God, boldly went in to
Pilate to ask for the body of Jesus.”
Mark draws attention to Joseph’s status as a “prominent
Council member,” meaning he was part of the Sanhedrin-the Jewish ruling council
in Jerusalem. The text refers to his hope in God’s coming kingdom, which stands
out as a statement about his devout faith. Mark underscores the courage
required for Joseph to approach the Roman governor to claim the body of a
crucified man.
“Now there was a Council member named Joseph, a good and
righteous man who had not consented to their decision or action. He was from
the Judean town of Arimathea, and he was waiting for the kingdom of God.”
Luke portrays Joseph as “good and righteous,” clarifying for
readers that although he sat among those who condemned Jesus, he personally
dissented from the council’s verdict. Luke also reiterates Joseph’s commitment
to God’s purposes and the anticipation of His kingdom.
“Afterward, Joseph of Arimathea, who was a disciple of Jesus
(but secretly for fear of the Jews), asked Pilate to let him remove the body of
Jesus. Pilate gave him permission; so he came and removed His body. Nicodemus,
who had previously come to Jesus at night, also brought a mixture of myrrh and
aloes, about seventy-five pounds.”
John identifies Joseph as a disciple, though secretly, and
partners him with Nicodemus - another council member who privately engaged with
Jesus. Together, they give Jesus a burial that, under normal circumstances, was
reserved for those honored in Jewish tradition.
Background and Possible Role in the
Sanhedrin
As a “prominent Council member,” Joseph of Arimathea almost
certainly possessed both social status and influence. Evidence within the
Gospels indicates he disagreed with the council’s condemnation of Jesus (Luke 23:51).
From a historical standpoint, it would have been unusual for the early
Christian movement to invent such a figure-especially one tied to the very
council that pursued charges against Jesus. Many scholars, Christian and
otherwise, view this fact as strong internal evidence of authenticity.
Joseph’s Tomb and the Burial of Jesus
Central to Joseph’s legacy is that he offered his own tomb
for Jesus’s burial (Matthew
27:60). First-century tombs carved out of
limestone rock were a mark of wealth, and Joseph’s readiness to place Jesus in
a freshly hewn tomb set the stage for the clear identification of the empty
tomb. The early Christian proclamation of the Resurrection hinges upon the
factual claim that Jesus was placed in a specific tomb, making Joseph’s role
foundational in establishing the location of the burial site.
Archaeological and historical studies of Second Temple - era
tombs around Jerusalem show that tombs were hewn in rock faces, often sealed
with rolling stones. Excavations in present-day Israel corroborate such
practices (cf. several ancient rock-cut tombs discovered around Jerusalem).
These findings, while not specifically labeled “Joseph’s
tomb,” confirm the plausibility of the Gospel description. The existence of a
verifiable tomb used for Jesus’s burial underlines the historical platform on
which the Resurrection claim was announced.
Why Joseph’s Actions Matter
Joseph’s boldness in asking Pilate for Jesus’s body was
significant. Crucifixion victims sometimes were left unburied or disposed of in
common graves, yet Joseph intervened, allowing a dignified burial. This burial
fact aligns with the Old Testament practice of honoring the dead (cf. Deuteronomy
21:22-23) and paved the way for the
attestations of Jesus’s bodily resurrection.
Furthermore, from an apologetic viewpoint, the specifics
around Joseph’s involvement help dispel claims of Jesus’s body being lost or
left to decay. Instead, the Gospels uniformly proclaim that Jesus was laid in a
secure, accessible site - one that was easily identifiable when the women
visited the tomb (Mark
16:1-4; Luke 24:1-3).
Historical and Apologetic
Considerations
Historically, Joseph’s presence in the scriptural records
presents a figure deeply woven into Judaism’s leadership structure, yet
sympathetic to Jesus. Most modern textual critics acknowledge the references to
Joseph in the earliest Greek manuscripts of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John as
consistent and well-attested.
Joseph’s actions address critical elements within Christian
apologetics:
1. Integrity
of the Text: References to Joseph of
Arimathea appear in manuscripts across diverse geographic locations and textual
families, suggesting a shared tradition of Joseph’s role in Jesus’s burial.
2. Elevated
Historical Plausibility: Joseph would not
have been an obvious choice for a fabricated character, considering his status.
The Gospels’ consistent mention of this historically respectable Jewish leader
underscores credibility.
3. Fulfillment
of Prophecy: Joseph’s providing a “rich
man’s” tomb resonates with passages like Isaiah 53:9,
traditionally interpreted to point to the suffering servant’s honorable burial.
Spiritual and Theological Significance
Joseph, as a disciple of Jesus who emerged from a powerful
council, illustrates both humility and quiet boldness. In a spiritual sense,
his example testifies that one can seek God’s kingdom from within the highest
ranks of society. It also proves that no level of worldly status impedes the
recognition of Jesus as the Messiah.
Additionally, Joseph’s involvement exemplifies how
individuals within Judaism could accept the claims of Jesus, even when the
popular religious sentiment was oppositional. The cohesive narrative of Joseph
stepping forward with Nicodemus continues to underscore that those who
genuinely seek truth can find common cause in affirming Christ.
Summary
Joseph of Arimathea stands as a pivotal figure in the Gospel
accounts.
He emerges as a wealthy and respected member of the
Sanhedrin, righteous in character, and a follower of Jesus. By providing his
rock-hewn tomb, he played a crucial role in ensuring Jesus’s burial was both
dignified and verifiable.
His story, presented across all four Gospels, resonates
within Christian teaching on discipleship, courage, and generosity. The
historical plausibility of Joseph’s involvement contributes to the
trustworthiness of the scriptural record. Archaeological insights into
first-century Jewish burial customs further validate the gospel narrative,
reinforcing the reliability of the biblical account.
In the panorama of Scripture, Joseph of Arimathea highlights
that, despite prevailing skepticism or opposition, genuine conviction in the
truth of Christ can lead to actions that resonate forever in faith history.
[End of quotes]
1.
Joseph of Arimathea biblically enlarged
Biblical evolution of Joseph
Fairly seamlessly, so do I think, may one progress from a
recognition of the rich young man of the Gospels, a ruler, as being the same as
the Cypriot Levite, Joseph Barnabas:
Was
Apostle Barnabas the Gospels’ ‘rich young man’?
(7) Was Apostle
Barnabas the Gospels' 'rich young man'?
and then from there on to:
Joseph
of Arimathea a perfect match for Apostle Barnabas as the Gospels’ ‘rich young
man’
(7) Joseph of
Arimathea a perfect match for Apostle Barnabas as the Gospels' 'rich young man'
followed – albeit somewhat more tentatively – by:
Can
Joseph Barnabas be extended to incorporate Joseph Barsabbas?
(8) Can Joseph
Barnabas be extended to incorporate Joseph Barsabbas?
In 2. a couple of points will be raised possibly supporting
this last tentative connection.
Initially, though, for me, there appeared to be a serious geographical
hitch.
While the God-fearing rich young man of the Gospels, a man
of some status, seems to segue nicely on to becoming Joseph Barnabas (and
possibly also Joseph Barsabbas), can that same wealthy Levite from Cyprus, a
good man, have been, geographically, Joseph of Arimathea - likewise a wealthy ruler
(of the Sanhedrin) and a good man?
In answer to this complicating factor to my otherwise smooth
identifications, I wrote in my article:
Luke
calls Arimathea “a city of the Jews”
(7) Luke calls
Arimathea "a city of the Jews"
While
most of all of this seemed to tie up very well indeed, a geographical
challenge did arise inasmuch as our man, Joseph, a Cypriot (from Cyprus),
hailed from a town, Arimathea, generally thought to have been somewhere in
Judah or Israel.
Though
its true location is very uncertain: Bible Map:
Arimathea
“Its
identity is the subject of much conjecture. The Onomasticon of Eusebius and
Jerome identifies it with Ramathaim-Zophim in the hill-country of Ephraim (1 Samuel 11),
which is Ramah the birthplace and burial-place of Samuel (1 Samuel
1:19; 1 Samuel
25:1), and places it near Timnah on the
borders of Judah and Dan.
G.
A. Smith thinks it may be the modern Beit Rima, a village on an eminence 2
miles North of Timnah. Others incline to Ramallah, 8 miles North of Jerusalem
and 3 miles from Bethel (Matthew
27:57 Mark 15:43 Luke 23:51 John 19:38)”.
My
proposed solution to this difficulty, given that there is so much uncertainty
about the location of Arimathea (“Its identity is the subject of much
conjecture”), was to suggest for Joseph’s Arimathea the highly important
Cypriot town, the like-named, Amathus (Amathea).
“A
City of the Jews”
While
I was initially happy with this identification, I later read that Luke the
Evangelist had, in his reference to Arimathea, called it “a city of the Jews”
(Luke 23:51): (… Ἁριμαθαίας πόλεως τῶν Ἰουδαίων …).
My
immediate reaction to this was to think that Arimathea must, therefore, have
been located somewhere in Judah.
But,
then, why would Saint Luke make the obvious qualification that a city in Judah
was “a city of the Jews”?
As
far as I am aware, Luke does not qualify any other cities or towns in this way.
May
be, Saint Luke was referring to an Arimathea in a foreign land, say Cyprus,
which had a large Jewish population, or perhaps was even dominated by
Jews.
Was
Amathus in Cyprus just such a city?
Jews
were prominent in Cyprus. Joseph Barnabas, a Levite, hailed from Cyprus.
And:
“There is
evidence of Jewish settlers at Amathus” (2024 article below):
A View of Cyprus: A
History of the Jewish Community in Cyprus
A History of the Jewish Community in Cyprus
Jewish
presence in Cyprus begins in the ancient times. There is evidence of Jewish
settlers at Amathus. In the 2nd BCE there were a considerable number of Jewish
people recorded on the island. They had a close relationship with the locals
and the Roman rulers at that time, liked them.
When
St Paul and Barnabas arrived on the island, to convert people to Christianity,
they caused problems, by attempting to convert the Jewish to Christianity.
According
to the history books of the time, the Jews supported the war against the Romans
and sacked Salamis and annihilated the Greek population. Apparently, they
massacred 240,000 Greek Cypriots. This led to the Jews being punished. ….
[End of quote]
Summing
it all up: Saint Joseph of Arimathea, as Joseph Barnabas,
may thus have hailed from Amathus (Amathea), a city of the Jews in Cyprus.
2. Can
Joseph also be Flavius Josephus ?
To develop this further connection - Joseph
of Arimathea as Flavius Josephus - may be a challenge rather more difficult than
were our previous (in 1.) identifications.
Still, there may be some points immediately
in favour of it.
·
Certain
scholars, like Robert Eisler, have already proposed this identification.
·
The
name Joseph is common in both cases, as so may be, broadly speaking, Arimathea
(see below).
·
A young man at the time of the ministry of
Jesus would be chronologically feasible for Josephus, during the reign of the emperor
Vespasian.
·
Common also are wealth, education, Pharisaïsm
(see below), leadership.
·
A searcher after truth. “Luke
also reiterates Joseph’s commitment to God’s purposes and the anticipation of
His kingdom”.
·
Knowledge (connection with) of Pontius
Pilate.
·
Proclamation of Jesus as the Christ.
·
The death (martyrdom) of the Apostle James.
Elaborating
on some of these points:
RiaanBoysen.com
Robert
Eisler has already suggested an identification of Joseph of Arimathea, spelled Arimathaias
in Greek, with Josephus bar-Matthias (son of Matthias, or Mattathias).
We
shall be reading further on (World History Encyclopedia):
[Josephus] was a member of a priestly
household in Jerusalem through his
father’s side (the house and order of Jehoiarib), and his mother was of royal
descent (Hasmonean). He was educated in Jerusalem and most likely shared
ideology and sympathy with the party of the Pharisees.
We
shall be reading further on (World History Encyclopedia):
Not only did Josephus defend Judaism for its antiquity but also
pointed to a consistent tradition that was the polar opposite of the Greeks
with their many contradictory myths and the bad behavior of the gods in Greek mythology. He utilized the
teachings and precepts of philosophy to claim that
Judaism provided the most rational way of life. Josephus emphasized the ethics
and morals of Judaism against (typical) Jewish charges of immorality among
non-Jews.
We
shall be reading further on (World History Encyclopedia):
For scholars of early Christianity, Josephus looms
large in his descriptions of the death of John the Baptist (d. c. 30 CE)
by Herod Agrippa and his
details concerning the governorship of Pontius Pilate (26-36 CE).
His litany of Pilates’ abuses of Roman law and order in
the province belies the description of a sympathetic [sic] Pilate at the trial and crucifixion of
Jesus of Nazareth in the gospels.
We
shall be reading further on (World History Encyclopedia):
About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if
indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising
deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over
many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Christ. And when, upon the
accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross,
those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them
spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold
these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the
Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared. (18.3.,
transl. by Louis H. Feldman)
We
shall be reading further on (World History Encyclopedia):
…. Ananus was of this thought he had now a proper opportunity
(to exercise his authority). Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the
road; so he assembled the Sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the
brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others,
and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he
delivered them to be stoned. (Antiquities, 20.9)
A connection of Flavius Josephus with Joseph of Arimathea might go a long way
towards explaining certain seeming irregularities regarding Josephus. For
instance:
His aligning with the Gentile emperor would accord with the prophet
Jeremiah’s favouring of the pagan Nebuchednezzar as an instrument of God’s
wrath.
Jesus had bade his followers to flee at the approach of the pagan armies
(Luke 21:20-21).
That generation of Jews was wicked (Josephus: “that wretched people”),
just as Jesus had said (e.g. Matthew 12:39), and was to receive its deserved
Apocalypse. Josephus appears to agree with (and certainly describes) this.
We
shall be reading further on (World History Encyclopedia):
Josephus claimed that he had a vision that explained the tide of
the war: God (as in the past in the conquests of the Jews by the
Assyrians and Babylonians) used the Romans to punish Israel for its sins.
Fortune (fate) was now on the side of the Romans with God’s help, and Josephus’
role was to announce what had happened to the rebelling Jews.
And again:
Added to the end of Antiquities was Josephus’s biography. This
was not a true autobiography, but an explanation for why he took the side of
Rome during the revolt. It was most likely written as a response to a polemical
tract against Josephus by another Jewish writer, Justus of Tiberias. Justus had
written his own history of the war in Galilee and blamed its loss on Josephus.
Josephus described Justus as a devote Zealot, and thus a traitor to Rome. He
accused Justus of attacking the mixed cities of the Decapolis (across the Jordan) and instigating further rebellion. In this version of the
events in the Galilee, Josephus claimed that he was against the revolt from the
very beginning.
Flavius Josephus was an
eyewitness to this foolhardy revolt of the Jews and to all of its fatal
consequences.
His writings are like
another Torah and Gospels, though there are also some glaring inaccuracies as
critics attest. His writings sometimes appear to intertwine quite separate
traditions, leading to certain rather bizarre outcomes.
One instance of this that
I have noted is his quadrupling, under different guises, of the great Judas
Maccabeus:
Josephus has four versions of Judas Maccabeus
thinking they were all different persons
(2)
Josephus has four versions of Judas Maccabeus thinking they were all different
persons
See also the case of
Joseph Barsabbas further on.
No doubt, Josephus was a
careful and painstaking historian, having before him the example of Luke the
Evangelist, a fellow partner of Paul’s. Sadly, however, much of his writings
have come own to us in a garbled and inaccurate form.
Historian Josephus tells of
“the plain warnings of God”,
when Jerusalem was destroyed
This situation has been well presented by Keith Giles
in his article (February 9, 2018):
The
7 Signs of Josephus Reveal End Times Destruction | Keith Giles (patheos.com)
The 7
Signs of Josephus Reveal
End
Times Destruction
Our only first-hand account of
the Roman assault on the Temple comes from the Jewish historian Josephus
Flavius who was a former leader of the Jewish Revolt who had surrendered to the
Romans and had won favor from Vespasian.
In gratitude, Josephus took on
Vespasian’s family name – Flavius – as his own.
As an eyewitness to the
destruction of Jerusalem, Josephus gives us a startling window into a series of
seven signs which God sent to the people of Jerusalem prior to their ultimate
destruction in AD 70.
The Seven Signs of Josephus
Josephus prefaces these signs
by saying in his book “The Jewish War“:
“Thus it was that the wretched
people were deluded at that time by charlatans and pretended messengers of the
deity; while they neither heeded nor believed in the manifest portents that
foretold the coming desolation, but, as if thunderstruck and bereft of eyes and
mind, disregarded the plain warnings of God.”
Damien Mackey’s comment: This perfectly accords with
the warning of Jesus; ‘See that no one deceives you. For many will come in my
name claiming, ‘I am the Christ’ …” (Mattthew 24:4-5).
1) A SWORD IN THE SKY
“So it was when a star
resembling a sword, stood over the city [Jerusalem] and a comet which continued
for a year.” [In 66 AD]
Keep in mind what the shape of
a sword is and how closely a sword appears to a cross. If swords and crosses
are similarly shaped, then perhaps this statement by Jesus in the Olivet
Discourse was fulfilled by the sign of the sword in the sky:
“Then will appear the
sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the
earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of
heaven, with power and great glory.” (Matt. 24:30)
The “Son of Man coming on the
clouds of heaven” is a reference to the judgment of Jerusalem which was
physically manifested in the Roman Army which surrounded the city and destroyed
it.
2) A BRIGHT LIGHT
“So again when, before the
revolt and the commotion that led to war [i.e., before the war], at the time
when the people were assembling for the feast of unleavened bread, on the
eighth of the month Xanthieus [Nisan], at the ninth hour of the night [3 a.m.]
… so brilliant a light shown round the [holy] altar and the sanctuary [of the
temple] that it seemed to be broad daylight; and this continued for half an
hour. By the inexperienced, this was regarded as a good omen, but by the sacred
scribes it was at once interpreted in accordance with after [later] events.”
Damien Mackey’s comment: OK, now 3), it gets a bit
silly.
3) A COW GIVES BIRTH TO A LAMB
“At that same feast [just
after the 2nd sign, the great light over the altar] a cow that had been brought
by someone for sacrifice gave birth [just before it was to be killed] to a lamb
in the midst in the court of the Temple.”
4) THE EASTERN GATE OPENS BY
ITSELF
“The eastern gate of the inner
court — it was of brass and very massive, and, when closed towards evening,
could scarcely be moved by 20 men; fastened with iron-bound bars [on each
side], it had bolts which were sunk to a great depth into a threshold consisting
of a solid block of stone —
this gate was observed at the
sixth hour of the night [midnight] to have opened of its own accord. The
watchmen of the temple ran and reported the matter to the captain, and he came
up and with difficulty succeeded in shutting it.”
“This again to the uninitiated
seemed the best of omens, as they supposed that God had opened to them the gate
of blessings.” “But the learned understood that the security of the Temple was
dissolving of its own accord and that the opening of the gate meant a present
to the enemy, interpreting the portent [sign, the same word as in the gospel]
in their own minds as indicative of coming desolation.”
Damien Mackey’s comment: The next one, 5) is
precisely what happened also at the time of the Maccabean wars.
Cf. 2 Maccabees 5:2-3.
5) ARMIES IN THE SKY
“Again, not many days after that festival on the twenty-first of Artemisium
[the Jewish month of Iyyar which is in the late springtime], there appeared a
miraculous phenomenon, passing belief.
Indeed, what I am about to
relate would, I imagine, have been deemed a fable, were it not for the
narratives of eyewitnesses and for the subsequent calamities which deserved to
be so signalized [so “sign-ized,” a great sign]. …. “For before sunset
throughout all parts of the country [of Judea] chariots were seen in the air
and armed battalions hurtling through the clouds and encompassing the cities.”
6) VOICES SPEAKING
“Moreover, at the feast which
is called Pentecost the priests [all 24 of them] on entering the inner court of
the Temple by night as their custom was in the discharge of their
ministrations, reported that they were conscious, first of a commotion and a din
[a great noise], and after that of a voice as of a host [an army], ‘We are
departing hence [from here].”
Is it interesting that on the
day of Pentecost exactly 33 years from the time that the Gospel started in
Jerusalem — to the very day — this announcement and sign occurred.
Damien Mackey’s comment: The next one, 7) is too much
like the situation with Jesus and Pilate not to be a recollection, albeit much
garbled, of that cosmic encounter, probably as filtered through John’s
Revelation (8:13): ‘Woe, Woe, Woe!’
7) THE LAST PROPHET:
JESUS/JOSHUA
“But a further portent was
even more alarming. Four years before the war [in Tabernacles time in 62 C.E.]
when the city was enjoying profound peace and prosperity, there came to the
feast at which it was the custom of all Jews to erect tabernacles to God, one
Joshua, [Another way of saying “Jesus” or “Y’Shua”] son of Ananias, a rude
peasant, who, standing in the Temple, suddenly began to cry out, ‘A voice from
the east, a voice from the west, a voice from the four winds; a
voice against Jerusalem and the sanctuary, a voice against the bridegroom
and the bride, a voice against all the people.’
“Day and night he went about
all the alleys with this cry on his lips. Some of the leading citizens,
incensed at these ill-omened words, arrested the fellow and severely chastised
him. But he without a word on his own behalf or for the private ear of those
who smote him only continued his cries as before.
“Thereupon, the magistrates,
supposing, as was indeed the case that the man was under some supernatural
impulse, brought him before the Roman governor; there, although flayed to the
bone with scourges, he neither sued for mercy nor shed a tear, but, merely
introducing the most mournful of variations into his ejaculation [words from
his mouth], responded to each stroke with ‘Woe to Jerusalem!’
“When Albinus, the [Roman]
governor asked him who [he was] and whence he was [where he came from] and why
he uttered these cries, he answered him never a word, but unceasingly
reiterated his dirge over the city, until Albinus pronounced him a maniac and let
him go.
“During the whole period up to
the outbreak of the war he neither approached nor was seen talking to any of
the citizens, but daily, like a prayer … repeated his lament, ‘Woe to
Jerusalem!’ He neither cursed any of those who beat him from day to day, nor
blessed those who offered him food: to all men that melancholy presage was his
one reply. His cries were loudest at the festivals.
“So for seven years and five
months he continued his wail, his voice never flagging nor his strength
exhausted, until the siege, having seen his presage verified, he found his
rest. For, while going his round and shouting in piercing tones from the wall,
‘Woe once more to the city and to the people and to the Temple,’ as he added a
last word, ‘and woe to me also,’ a stone hurled from the ballista struck and
killed him on the spot. So with those ominous words still on his lips he passed
away.”
How fascinating! One final
“Jesus” is sent to the people to pronounce daily, unending “woe” upon them
right up until the armies are actually surrounding the city.
ROMAN HISTORIAN TACITUS ALSO
CONFIRMS:
“There were many prodigies
presignifying their ruin which was not averted by all the sacrifices and vows
of that people. Armies were seen fighting in the air with brandished weapons. A
fire fell upon the Temple from the clouds. The doors of the Temple were
suddenly opened. At the same time there was a loud voice saying that the gods
were removing, which was accompanied with a sound as of a multitude going out.
All which things were supposed, by some to portend great calamities.” [Tacitus Historiae
V: The Roman
Earthworks at Jerusalem] ….
Flavius Josephus - World History
Encyclopedia
Flavius Josephus
….
by Rebecca Denova
published on 11 October 2021
….
Titus Flavius
Josephus (36-100 CE) … became a 1st-century CE Jewish historian. He was a
member of a priestly household in Jerusalem through his
father’s side (the house and order of Jehoiarib), and his mother was of royal
descent (Hasmonean). He was educated in Jerusalem and most likely shared
ideology and sympathy with the party of the Pharisees.
The writings of Josephus are crucially important for several
disciplines:
Second Temple Judaism in the 1st
century CE, background sources for the early history of Christianity, historical
details of the client kings of the Roman Empire in the East,
and the line of the Julio-Claudian emperors in Rome. In the last decades of the 1st century CE, he wrote The Jewish War (c. 75 CE), Antiquities of the Jews (c. 95
CE), Against Apion (c. 97 CE), and The Life of Flavius Josephus (c. 99 CE).
Josephus & the Great Jewish Revolt of
66 CE
…. the party of the Zealots had convinced
the majority of the Jews to revolt against Rome. Josephus was appointed the
military governor of Galilee. In relation to the revolt, the cities of Galilee were divided, some adhering to the authority of
the Roman government while others
had joined the forces of the rebel John of Gischala.
….
Josephus was under siege in the hill town of Jotapata (Yodfat).
He and 40 others were trapped in a cave. According to his version of the story,
he suggested that they commit collective suicide, rather than be slaves of
Rome. They drew lots to help kill each other. Josephus and one other man were
left.
Damien Mackey’s comment: If he were Joseph
Barsabbas, on the other hand, the drawing of lots was for the purpose of
electing a replacement for Judas (Acts 1:15-26). “Josephus and one
other man were left”. Joseph and Matthias were left.
There may be more to this. Joseph
Barsabbas, we are told was “also known as Justus” (v. 23), the name of the supposed
opponent of Josephus. Thus we read earlier:
Added to the end of Antiquities was Josephus’s biography. This
was not a true autobiography, but an explanation for why he took the side of
Rome during the revolt. It was most likely written as a response to a polemical
tract against Josephus by another Jewish writer, Justus of Tiberias. Justus had
written his own history of the war in Galilee and blamed its loss on Josephus.
Josephus described Justus as a devote Zealot …..
Adding even further to the
intrigue, the presumed name of the father of Josephus was the very same name, “Matthias”,
as that of the person chosen by lot to replace Judas (Acts 1:26).
One wonders why Barnabas was
not chosen instead. In Acts 14:14 he is, in fact, called an apostle.
Rebecca Denova continues:
This is when Josephus changed his mind and surrendered. While
awaiting execution, he reminded Vespasian that all Jews had the gift of
prophecy and predicted that Vespasian would become the next emperor of Rome.
Josephus claimed that he had a vision that explained the tide of
the war: God (as in the past in the conquests of the Jews by the
Assyrians and Babylonians) used the Romans to punish Israel for its sins.
Fortune (fate) was now on the side of the Romans with God’s help, and Josephus’
role was to announce what had happened to the rebelling Jews.
From this point on, Josephus served as a consultant to the Roman forces. When
Vespasian left to successfully challenge other contenders …his son Titus (r.
79-81 CE) took over the siege of Jerusalem. Josephus and Titus developed a
close relationship. During the siege, Josephus pleaded with the Zealots who had
taken over the Temple complex and the city to surrender.
In 70 CE, the Roman army broke
through, and the Temple complex was destroyed as well as the main parts of the
city. Josephus claimed that Titus never intended to destroy the Temple, but
that it was the result of a fire started by accident by one of the soldiers.
After the war, he was rewarded for his service by moving to a
former house of Vespasian (Titus Flavius Vespasianus) in Rome and adopted his
name along with his patronage. While in Rome, he had access to Roman records
and archives from which to gather his sources for his histories.
The Jewish War (Bellum Judaicum)
Opening with a brief history of events from the middle of the
2nd century BCE to the revolt, this book remains the only contemporary,
eyewitness account of the revolt.
He described the horrific siege conditions and the suffering of
the Jerusalemites through starvation.
The work is also noteworthy for our only detailed description of
the setting up of a Roman legionary camp (Book
III). Similar to modern histories, he catalogued the reasons that led to the
war. These included both details of corrupt Roman governors during the 50s and
the 60s CE, as well as the fanatical views of the Zealot party. In Josephus’
view, the Zealots carried most of the blame for the disaster.
The book served two purposes:
- It detailed the
invincibility of the might of Rome, perhaps to discourage other Jewish
communities in the Empire from rebellion.
- It provided an apologia (an explanation)
to a Roman audience that despite the fanatical Zealots, most Jews were
loyal subjects of Rome.
….
The Antiquities of the Jews
Perhaps his greatest work in 20 volumes, Josephus provided a
history of Jews and Judaism from creation to the outbreak of the war. The
source for the earlier years was taken from the Jewish Scriptures, but he also
repeated the problems of Roman rule as it led to the revolt. It is noteworthy
for the absence of details on most of the Prophets of Israel. The Prophets
predicted a future kingdom of God, which would destroy the current overlords.
This would have been a politically incorrect issue to emphasize to a Roman
audience.
Instead, Josephus highlighted the culture and civilized
rationality of the Law of Moses, presenting Judaism in its best light.
The work is invaluable for the section that describes various
sects of Jews in the 1st century CE: Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, and those who eventually became the Zealots. During the
centuries leading to the revolt, he described several messianic contenders and
their efforts to stir up the people at the festivals at the Temple to motivate
God to usher in the kingdom. This provides important historical context for
ideas that were in the air during the ministry of Jesus of Nazareth.
Josephus was not
averse to reporting gossip & scandal.
The Antiquities is also important for the details of the client kingdoms of the
Roman Empire, particularly that of Herod the Great (c. 75-4 BCE)
and the Herodian Dynasty. Herod the Great had a court scribe, Nicholas of
Damascus, who kept the details of his reign. The work is no longer extant but
survived in Josephus’ utilizing it for many of the details. As such, we know
more about Herod the Great than any other ancient person ….
For scholars of early Christianity, Josephus looms
large in his descriptions of the death of John the Baptist (d. c. 30 CE)
by Herod Agrippa and his
details concerning the governorship of Pontius Pilate (26-36 CE).
His litany of Pilates’ abuses of Roman law and order in
the province belies the description of a sympathetic Pilate at the trial and crucifixion of
Jesus of Nazareth in the gospels.
One of the most controversial passages occurs in Book 18 and is
presented as a digression in his description of Pontius Pilate:
Josephus and the New Testament
published by Baker Academic (2002)
About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if
indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising
deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over
many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Christ. And when, upon the
accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross,
those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them
spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold
these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the
Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared. (18.3.,
transl. by Louis H. Feldman)
….
In describing the rule of the procurator Albinus (62 CE),
Josephus included the story of the stoning of James, the brother of Jesus:
And now Caesar, upon hearing the
death of Festus, sent Albinus into Judea, as procurator. But the king deprived
Joseph of the high priesthood and bestowed the succession to that dignity on
the son of Ananus, who was also himself called Ananus ... But this younger Ananus
was a bold man in his temper, and very insolent; he was also of the sect of the
Sadducees, who are very rigid in judging offenders, above all the rest of the
Jews ... Ananus was of this thought he had now a proper opportunity (to
exercise his authority). Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the
road; so he assembled the Sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the
brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others,
and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he
delivered them to be stoned. (Antiquities, 20.9)
Against Apion (Contra Apionem)
Josephus emphasized
the ethics & morals of Judaism against (typical) Jewish charges of
immorality among non-Jews.
An earlier title of this work was Concerning the Antiquity of
the Jews Against the Greeks, written as a response to criticism leveled against the Jews.
Beginning with the Greek conquests
under Alexander the Great in 330 BCE,
we have evidence of both Jewish and Greek literature that
critiqued each other’s culture and practices.
Apion (30 BCE - 48 CE) was a Hellenized Egyptian grammarian
who wrote commentaries on Homer, and he was just
one of the latest to critique Judaism.
Non-Jews (Gentiles) respected Jews for their antiquity but
considered them to be eccentric and antisocial as they did not join in the many
religious festivals of the Empire.
Not only did Josephus defend Judaism for its antiquity but also
pointed to a consistent tradition that was the polar opposite of the Greeks'
with their many contradictory myths and the bad behavior of the gods in Greek mythology. He utilized the
teachings and precepts of philosophy to claim that
Judaism provided the most rational way of life. Josephus emphasized the ethics
and morals of Judaism against (typical) Jewish charges of immorality among
non-Jews.
The Legacy of Josephus
Beginning in the 19th century and beyond, Josephus became
central to the movement that became known as the quest for the historical
Jesus. As the main source for the history and culture of Judaism in the 1st
century CE, archaeologists reference the information in Josephus in their
reconstructions of towns and villages in the region. In 2013, the Israeli
archaeologist Ehud Netzer claimed to have discovered the tomb of Herod the Great at Herodium through a careful reading
of Josephus’ description of the surrounding territory.
….
