# Halo and Trumpets over Jerusalem



## Lowjack (Nov 22, 2016)

This would be the second time it has been witnessed and Heard over Jerusalem .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEIkI4_L-rM


----------



## hobbs27 (Nov 22, 2016)

Josephus (A.D. 75) - Jewish Historian
"Besides these [signs], a few days after that feast, on the one- and-twentieth day of the month Artemisius, [Jyar,] a certain prodigious and incredible phenomenon appeared; I suppose the account of it would seem to be a fable, were it not related by those that saw it, and were not the events that followed it of so considerable a nature as to deserve such signals; for, before sun-setting, chariots and troops of soldiers in their armour were seen running about among the clouds, and surrounding of cities. Moreover, at that feast which we call Pentecost, as the priests were going by night into the inner [court of the] temple, as their custom was, to perform their sacred ministrations, they said that, in the first place, they felt a quaking, and heard a great noise, and after that they heard a sound as of a great multitude, saying, "Let us remove hence" (Jewish Wars, VI-V-3).


----------



## welderguy (Nov 26, 2016)

A light study of the life of Josephus will reveal to you how very unreliable his "historical" account is.
To put it bluntly, the Roman government owned him, giving him lavish gifts and favors for his work. Although calling himself a Jewish historian, he was hardly unbiased toward Jews, but rather sought to please his good friend Titus Vespasian.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Nov 26, 2016)

funny.  I have always felt Josephus to be fairly reliable.  Where do you feel he was unreliable?


----------



## hobbs27 (Nov 26, 2016)

ne ga pappy said:


> funny.  I have always felt josephus to be fairly reliable.  Where do you feel he was unreliable?



x2!


----------



## welderguy (Nov 26, 2016)

NE GA Pappy said:


> funny.  I have always felt Josephus to be fairly reliable.  Where do you feel he was unreliable?



A big tip off is his relationship with the Roman emperor and government. While the Romans were burning and destroying most of the other manuscripts of the period, Josephus' works are esteemed and preserved nicely by them. Why? Because they had Josephus in their back pocket. 
This is not to say there are not many truths mixed in with his account, but I do not trust it all to be unbiased fact.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Nov 26, 2016)

welderguy said:


> A big tip off is his relationship with the Roman emperor and government. While the Romans were burning and destroying most of the other manuscripts of the period, Josephus' works are esteemed and preserved nicely by them. Why? Because they had Josephus in their back pocket.
> This is not to say there are not many truths mixed in with his account, but I do not trust it all to be unbiased fact.



so, you are saying you don't have any proof that he was unreliable, it is just a gut feeling because his writings were preserved?


----------



## welderguy (Nov 26, 2016)

NE GA Pappy said:


> so, you are saying you don't have any proof that he was unreliable, it is just a gut feeling because his writings were preserved?



I don't know how much proof you need to distrust something, but from what I have researched about the man, I cannot trust everything he writes. I am simply stating my opinion based on confirmed events in history.The fact that the same people that embraced Jocephus' writings were also destroying other writings that could possibly have proven them false is a big red flag for me.

I recommend you research it yourself and form your own opinion.


----------



## hobbs27 (Nov 26, 2016)

welderguy said:


> A big tip off is his relationship with the Roman emperor and government. While the Romans were burning and destroying most of the other manuscripts of the period, Josephus' works are esteemed and preserved nicely by them. Why? Because they had Josephus in their back pocket.
> This is not to say there are not many truths mixed in with his account, but I do not trust it all to be unbiased fact.



Josephus was captured by the Roman's..I can't remember the name of the city, but he fought them hard.  Once captured and of course known by the Roman's he tried to broker a deal between the zealots and the Roman's to save Jerusalem. The zealots would have none of that. Josephus' parents and family were behind the wall. He knew what was coming to them...He was trying to save them and the Great City.


----------



## welderguy (Nov 26, 2016)

hobbs27 said:


> Josephus was captured by the Roman's..I can't remember the name of the city, but he fought them hard.  Once captured and of course known by the Roman's he tried to broker a deal between the zealots and the Roman's to save Jerusalem. The zealots would have none of that. Josephus' parents and family were behind the wall. He knew what was coming to them...He was trying to save them and the Great City.



Josephus was captured at Jotapata and was made a slave.But after correctly predicting the emporor's future reign, he claimed to be a prophet.As a result, the emporor made him his advisor, and granted his freedom. After two divorces, Jocephus married into the emporor's family and even became a Roman citizen. 

Josephus, despite having his people and family and country destroyed and plundered, remained loyal to the Romans. His writings, in my opinion,reflect a two-faced bias, catering to both the Jews and Rome.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Nov 26, 2016)

welderguy said:


> in my opinion,reflect a two-faced bias, catering to both the Jews and Rome.



Ain't that a lot like saying " I voted republican and democrat for president"?


----------



## welderguy (Nov 26, 2016)

NE GA Pappy said:


> Ain't that a lot like saying " I voted republican and democrat for president"?



I think it has far greater implications. People are relying on his words as an unbiased historian, which he was not.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Nov 26, 2016)

Everyone is biased.  Period.  

But the things that Josephus reports have proven to be true the majority of the time. Like the location of Herod's grave, and he does report the Temple siege and destruction with accuracy.  

He reports his captivity and his marriages.

Do you feel Daniels reports while in Babylonian captivity reliable?  After all, he fought against them, and was taken into slavery. He was raised in the kings court and became the 2nd most powerful man in the kingdom.  Surely you view his writings as biased too?


----------



## welderguy (Nov 26, 2016)

NE GA Pappy said:


> Everyone is biased.  Period.
> 
> But the things that Josephus reports have proven to be true the majority of the time. Like the location of Herod's grave, and he does report the Temple siege and destruction with accuracy.
> 
> ...



Daniel refused to compromise his convictions, even when facing death.He was biased to the truth of God's word.He did not let fear of man sway his faith....unlike Josephus.


----------



## hobbs27 (Nov 27, 2016)

welderguy said:


> Daniel refused to compromise his convictions, even when facing death.He was biased to the truth of God's word.He did not let fear of man sway his faith....unlike Josephus.



I think it's important for you to reexamine your thought here.

 I've read the same argument you're making by Jews before, many are not fond of the history that Josephus recorded so they attack the messenger.

 Josephus was in need of swaying in his faith, all non believers in Christ were in need of swaying.


----------



## welderguy (Nov 27, 2016)

hobbs27 said:


> I think it's important for you to reexamine your thought here.
> 
> I've read the same argument you're making by Jews before, many are not fond of the history that Josephus recorded so they attack the messenger.
> 
> Josephus was in need of swaying in his faith, all non believers in Christ were in need of swaying.



Tell me one good reason why I should reexamine my thought on this. What is the great importance of having Josephus' account to support your biblical views?

All I can see is how cozy he was with the Roman emperor, and actually being paid for his work. For that reason, I can not and do not trust everything he said.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Nov 27, 2016)

Wasn't Luke paid to report back to Theophilus ?

Maybe his reports were tainted too?


----------



## welderguy (Nov 27, 2016)

NE GA Pappy said:


> Wasn't Luke paid to report back to Theophilus ?
> 
> Maybe his reports were tainted too?



Its not that Josephus was being paid(historians generally do get paid), but its WHO was paying him. See my point?
Titus Vespasian, the one who was trying to wipe out the Jews and persecute the Christians.


----------

