In my research I have come across a volume of writings of Josephus Flavius, and am wondering what the Orthodox view of these writings are. Any suggestions are welcome. Anyone who has read these writings is also welcome to comment.
Juvenaly
The Writings of Josephus Flavius
I dont know if it is the same person, but in the second volume of the english Philokalia, I think it is somewhere within Saint Maximus the Confessor's centuries on love, mention is made of josephus. In the notes at the bottom, this character is identified as a jewish historian.
Does this sound right? Does this even matter?
I will find the full quote because it is quite interesting.
It took me a while to realise the Philokalia has an index of sources.
From Saint Maximus, second century on love number 31,
"The passions lying hidden in the soul provide the demons with the means of arousing impassioned thoughts in us. Then, fighting the intellect through these thoughts, they force it to give its assent to sin. When it has been overcome, they lead it to sin in the mind; and when this has been done they induce it, captive as it is, to commit the sin in action. Having thus desolated the soul by means of these thoughts, the demons then retreat, taking the thoughts with them, and only the spectre or idol of sin remains in the intellect. Reffering to this our Lord says, "When you see the abominable idol of desolation standing in the holy place (let him who reads understand)..."(Matt. 24 : 15). For man's intellect is a holy place and a temple of God in which the demons, having desolated the soul by means of impassioned thoughts, set up the idol of sin. That these things have already taken place in history no one, I think, who has read Josephus will doubt: though some say that they will also come to pass in the time of the Antichrist."
Isnt this a very interesting and sobering text? This might be worth discussing.
That is the only reference I have ever seen to Josephus, but if you get his works and read them and you can throw any more light on what the Saint is saying here, I would be interested in your thoughts on it.
In Rome, in the year 93, Josephus published his lengthy history of the Jews. While discussing the period in which the Jews of Judaea were governed by the Roman procurator Pontius Pilate, Josephus included the following account:
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 Messiah. 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.
- Jewish Antiquities, 18.3.3 §63
(Based on the translation of Louis H. Feldman, The Loeb Classical Library.)
For an entire account of the writings of Josephus, I have found the following link. I will post it here but am still reading it so I cannot give a final analysis of the work.
-
Justin Kissel
Greetings Juvenaly,
Josephus always seemed to me as good as any other ancient historian (such as herodotus and so forth), so long as it's kept in mind that "history" as done back then wasn't done in the same way that it is today. This isn't to say that our way of doing things is "superior" (who am I to criticize Saint Luke's methodology, for instance?), but only that, if not guided by God, ancient historians are liable to different kinds of mistakes than modern ones. Though I guess even modern historians often make mistakes 
The only thing you have to be careful about with Josephus is that a number of works have been attributed to him at times that weren't actually written by him. Also, there is some dispute over a number of passages in his works, which some scholars believe were additions by Christian authors who were attempting to support their claims about Christ. I believe (and I'm going from memory here) that the passage you quoted is one of the disputed passages. I think they've found MSS without that part. I think they've also found MSS in a different language (Syriac maybe?), though, that has something akin to that passage (thereby lending credibility to it's authenticity).
Paradosis.
I thank you for your response. I have seen this in many instances of historical researchrs claiming this. This had led me to stray from much of his witings and look more towards the Fathers and such. I can notr be sure in all cases but I believe that hidtorical revisionism plays a part in this but I can not guage as to the ammount.
Again thanks.
Juvenaly