What do you think?
Rate this book
Josephus and New Testament
Updated text and new maps bring this standard introduction up to date . . . Throughout Christian history, the works of Josephus have been mined for the light they shed on the world of the New Testament. Josephus tells us about the Herodian family, the temple, the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Essenes. He mentions James the brother of Jesus, John the Baptist, and even Jesus himself. In Josephus and the New Testament, an internationally acknowledged authority on Josephus introduces this first-century Jewish historian to readers who want to begin to explore his witness to environment in which early Judaism and Christianity took shape.
256 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1992
5 people are currently reading
111 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
August 2, 2013
A great overview of Josephus' content and of the overlap with the NT, especially Luke-Acts. However, I'm not a fan of his historical skepticism or his often thin suppositions guided by his "literary analysis." But, in the end, you can be sure that he has read Josephus and is acquainted with the literature.
December 26, 2020
Josephus and the New Testament
by Steve Mason
Reviewed by Pastor Marc.
Steve Mason is a native born Canadian New Testament scholar who now teaches in the United Kingdom. He is an expert on the first century Jewish historian Josephus.
Josephus is important because he is one of the First century non-biblical historians who mentions Jesus, James the brother of Jesus, John the Baptist, Pontius Pilate, and a number of other people that show up on the pages of the New Testament.
He says that Josephus’ works on the Jewish Wars and the Antiquities are longer than the Old Testament, and they are not always easy to read, so he writes this book so that we can have a better understanding of how Josephus’ writings shed light on the historicity of the New Testament.
The first chapter shows how Christians have sometimes misinterpreted and misappropriated Josephus’ writings.
The second chapter gives a thumbnail sketch of Josephus’ biography, that he was a priest, that he was a commander in the Jewish army, that he surrendered to the Romans and became a writer for the Roman government, and that many Jews considered him a traitor.
The third chapter mentions that Josephus was interested in vigorously defending Jewish traditions while also presenting a sympathetic view of the Roman emperors, while giving a not so sympathetic portrayal of local governors like Pontius Pilate.
The fourth chapter discusses how Josephus understands groups like the Pharisees and the Sadducees and Caiaphas the high priest.
The fifth chapter is of particular interest to Christians because he discusses the two places Jesus has mentioned, and has a long discussion of John the Baptist and James the brother of Jesus.
Long story short, he thinks that Christians touched up the longer reference to Jesus Christ, a reference that is known as the Testimonium. Nevertheless, he sees that it is historical evidence for at least the existence of Jesus and that he was called Christ.
I liked the book a lot. He does acknowledge that there are a number of places where Josephus and Luke (The author of the Gospel of Luke and the book of Acts ) agree.
My main issue of disagreement is that Mason thinks Luke and Matthew seem to write with Josephus in mind, when I think it is extremely unlikely that Josephus wrote before Luke and Mark. He also acknowledges the places where Josephus and the gospels agree, but tends to side with Josephus when they disagree, and he doesn’t give an explanation as to why, especially when he had already pointed out the number of times Josephus either contradicts himself or changes his view, or writes with an agenda.
But Mason rights with a zesty style, and I enjoyed reading the book very much.
Rev Dr Marc Axelrod
by Steve Mason
Reviewed by Pastor Marc.
Steve Mason is a native born Canadian New Testament scholar who now teaches in the United Kingdom. He is an expert on the first century Jewish historian Josephus.
Josephus is important because he is one of the First century non-biblical historians who mentions Jesus, James the brother of Jesus, John the Baptist, Pontius Pilate, and a number of other people that show up on the pages of the New Testament.
He says that Josephus’ works on the Jewish Wars and the Antiquities are longer than the Old Testament, and they are not always easy to read, so he writes this book so that we can have a better understanding of how Josephus’ writings shed light on the historicity of the New Testament.
The first chapter shows how Christians have sometimes misinterpreted and misappropriated Josephus’ writings.
The second chapter gives a thumbnail sketch of Josephus’ biography, that he was a priest, that he was a commander in the Jewish army, that he surrendered to the Romans and became a writer for the Roman government, and that many Jews considered him a traitor.
The third chapter mentions that Josephus was interested in vigorously defending Jewish traditions while also presenting a sympathetic view of the Roman emperors, while giving a not so sympathetic portrayal of local governors like Pontius Pilate.
The fourth chapter discusses how Josephus understands groups like the Pharisees and the Sadducees and Caiaphas the high priest.
The fifth chapter is of particular interest to Christians because he discusses the two places Jesus has mentioned, and has a long discussion of John the Baptist and James the brother of Jesus.
Long story short, he thinks that Christians touched up the longer reference to Jesus Christ, a reference that is known as the Testimonium. Nevertheless, he sees that it is historical evidence for at least the existence of Jesus and that he was called Christ.
I liked the book a lot. He does acknowledge that there are a number of places where Josephus and Luke (The author of the Gospel of Luke and the book of Acts ) agree.
My main issue of disagreement is that Mason thinks Luke and Matthew seem to write with Josephus in mind, when I think it is extremely unlikely that Josephus wrote before Luke and Mark. He also acknowledges the places where Josephus and the gospels agree, but tends to side with Josephus when they disagree, and he doesn’t give an explanation as to why, especially when he had already pointed out the number of times Josephus either contradicts himself or changes his view, or writes with an agenda.
But Mason rights with a zesty style, and I enjoyed reading the book very much.
Rev Dr Marc Axelrod
June 25, 2015
I found this book rather challenging. The author is definitely NOT a supporter of Biblical inerrancy. I'm okay with that (since I personally consider Scripture to be "infallible" rather than "inerrant"), but it certainly is a lot "messier" to work through the ramifications of a more robust (= "liberal?") doctrine of inspiration that can engage unabashedly with modern textual criticism.
October 28, 2024
2024 reads: 36
Rating: 3.5 stars
Really helpful introduction to Josephus here. Mason steers novices away from mistakes and misreadings, particularly those from church history. I thought the portrait of Josephus was very compelling and Mason brings out the complexities and nuances. However, Mason seems unwilling to afford the NT writers the same privileges: while able to construct informed, careful, and complex readings of Josephus's—at times duplicitous—presentations of Jewish history, Mason's reading of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are simple, underdeveloped, and unpersuasive. For example, the author is at a loss as to how Luke could have written about certain historical events without having a knowledge of Josephus (or a similar source). How about the fact that both lived and wrote within 20 years of each other and knew the events around them independently? A literary dependence seems an unnecessary bridge to cross. Mason's view also (in parts) betrays an overreliance (IMO) on Josephus, even though Mason admits to Josephus's own contradictions and self-conscious use of rhetoric. By comparison, Lawrence Schiffman's Qumran and Jerusalem (Eerdmans, 2010) is an excellent example of a more nuanced and objective approach to properly reading and interpreting an ancient text. These issues aside, Mason's material on reading Josephus and understanding his works was excellent and should be required reading.
[Read for the NT Backgrounds seminar with Dr Jarvis Williams at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary]
Rating: 3.5 stars
Really helpful introduction to Josephus here. Mason steers novices away from mistakes and misreadings, particularly those from church history. I thought the portrait of Josephus was very compelling and Mason brings out the complexities and nuances. However, Mason seems unwilling to afford the NT writers the same privileges: while able to construct informed, careful, and complex readings of Josephus's—at times duplicitous—presentations of Jewish history, Mason's reading of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are simple, underdeveloped, and unpersuasive. For example, the author is at a loss as to how Luke could have written about certain historical events without having a knowledge of Josephus (or a similar source). How about the fact that both lived and wrote within 20 years of each other and knew the events around them independently? A literary dependence seems an unnecessary bridge to cross. Mason's view also (in parts) betrays an overreliance (IMO) on Josephus, even though Mason admits to Josephus's own contradictions and self-conscious use of rhetoric. By comparison, Lawrence Schiffman's Qumran and Jerusalem (Eerdmans, 2010) is an excellent example of a more nuanced and objective approach to properly reading and interpreting an ancient text. These issues aside, Mason's material on reading Josephus and understanding his works was excellent and should be required reading.
[Read for the NT Backgrounds seminar with Dr Jarvis Williams at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary]
April 19, 2018
This was a good introduction to Josephus and his works. The author is critical of how past generations have used Josephus, specifically how they ignored his own context. But the author's own bias is shown in his defense of Josephus and rejecting orthodox interpretations of what Josephus said for one that makes Josephus seem smarter and more loyal than he appears to be at first.
There is a lot of information in this book and the author is a well known Josephus scholar so this is not a bad place to start.
There is a lot of information in this book and the author is a well known Josephus scholar so this is not a bad place to start.
May 9, 2019
I found this book to be helpful--it lays out just how much our reading of Scripture is impacted by Josephus' writings. Interesting, if nothing else.
September 16, 2012
This is a careful, readable, and scholarly interpretation of Josephus. Mason persuasively demonstrates that Josephus did not interpret Jerusalem's destruction as God's judgment for the Jews' rejection of the Messiah. This was Eusebius' and others' interpolation. Josephus was an apologist for the Jewish people.
May 16, 2013
His chapter comparing Acts with Josephus and possible knowledge of the latter by the former is nothing short of fascinating. One does have to late date Acts for it to work. But still....
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews