Most of you have probably heard of Josephus. An enormous amount of what we know about the history and culture of the Jewish people in and around the time of Jesus comes from Josephus. But Josephus only wrote one paragraph about Jesus. That paragraph is famous. It is so famous that the paragraph has its own name (in Latin): Testimonium Flavianum (TF). As famous as it is, it is also famously disputed. Until the publication of T. C. Schmidts new academic monograph, , the consensus among most modern historians has been that this famous paragraph was partially (or fully) interpolated by Christians scribes who placed nice words about Jesus on the lips of Josephus (impacting the later manuscript tradition).

Let me paste in this paragraph as its normally translated/interpreted so you can see why modern historians have typically viewed this as too positively Christian for a non-Christian Jew like Josephus to have written. This section is from Josephuss Antiquities of the Jews 18.63-4, according to how it has most often been interpreted by modern scholars:

And in this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man, for he was a doer of miraculous deeds, a teacher of men who receive truth with pleasure. And he led many from among the Jews and many from among the Greeks. He was the Christ. And, when Pilate had condemned him to the cross at the accusation of the first men among us, those who at first loved him did not cease to do so, for he appeared to them alive again on the third day given that the divine prophets had spoken such things and thousands of other wonderful things about him. And up till now the tribe of the Christians, who were named from him, has not disappeared.

Most historians have viewed this paragraph as too Christian to have been written by Josephus. But Schmidt has methodically (and convincingly, in my opinion) dismantled the consensus that views significant parts of this paragraph as having been forged by Christian scribes. The paragraph is not positive (as modern scholars have assumed) but should be viewed as a relatively ambiguous TF that can be plausibly interpreted negatively or neutrally. It was in fact viewed negatively or neutrally (and only occasionally positively) by early Christians who quoted the TF. Accordingly (after thousands of details), Schmidt suggests the following translation/interpretation (differences he has marked in bold):

And in this time there was a certain Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man, for he was a doer of incredible deeds, a teacher of men who receive truisms with pleasure. And he brought over many from among the Jews and many from among the Greeks. He was [thought to be] the Christ. And, when Pilate had condemned him to the cross at the accusation of the first men among us, those who at first were devoted to him did not cease to be so, for on the third day it seemed to them that he was alive again given that the divine prophets had spoken such things and thousands of other wonderful things about him. And up till now the tribe of the Christians, who were named from him, has not disappeared.

In other words, Josephus was simply recording what he had heard about Jesus, not agreeing that the followers of Jesus were correct about their beliefs. But how could Josephus know this information? What were his sources?

Schmidts answer is that Josephus was only one step removed from Jesus himself. He personally knew many (Rome-appointed rulers, Jewish high priests, and other high-ranking citizenssome of whom are mentioned in the Bible or were close to people mentioned in the Bible) who with high likelihood would have had personal knowledge of Jesus, including details about his trial and execution. Schmidt meticulously connects the historical dots and highlights more than a dozen first men among us (see TF above) whom Josephus personally knew, detailing their connection to Jesus. As far as I know, no one has gone as far down this rabbit trail as has Schmidt. It was a delightful and exhilarating read (well地s much as is possible for an academic book filled with linguistic, historical and reception-history minutiae). Josephus knew what to write about Jesus because he was personally acquainted with many people who likely had encountered Jesus (not to mention his followers), and some of whom likely attended parts of his trial in Jerusalem, and from whom he could have received his information.

So the testimony of our earliest known non-Christian witness to Jesus closely correlates with what the writers of the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) believed and wrote about Jesus: that Jesus performed miracles, was accepted as the Christ by his followers, was condemned to death by Pilate at the instigation of Jewish leaders, crucified on a cross and viewed as risen from the dead by his devotees all in fulfillment of prophetic Scripture.

Secular news outlets love to tout spectacular claims of ancient fragments that call into question the veracity of assertions found in the biblical Gospels. But no such documents are as early or well-respected as the writings of the ancient Jewish historian Josephus. If Josephuss words about Jesus are genuine and came to Josephus from credible eyewitnesses which because of T. C. Schmidts academic labor we now have every reason to believe this testimony is a highly valuable non-Christian verification of what Christians have always believed.

This and other resources are available at .

Notes

In English Testimonium Flavianum means: The Testimony of [Josephus] Flavius. Antiquities of the Jews, where the TF is found,is a massive work published in nine volumes in the Loeb Classical Library. Josephus only wrote one paragraph about Jesus. Antiquities was completed in A.D. 93 or 94.

T. C. Schmidt, Josephus and Jesus: New Evidence for the One Called Christ (Oxford University Press, 2025), 1-2.

Schmidt, Josephus and Jesus, 5.

Schmidt, Josephus and Jesus, 6.

I received this book as a free PDF download at via the generous gift of an anonymous donor. So grateful!