There is a SECOND JOSEPHUS QUOTE about Jesus Christ which is virtually ignored.
There's another Josephus reference to Jesus Christ which usually goes unmentioned:
The younger Ananus, who, as we have said, had been appointed to the high priesthood, was rash in his temper and unusually daring. He followed the school of the Sadducees, who are indeed more heartless than any of the other Jews, as I have already explained, when they sit in judgement. Possessed of such a character, Ananus thought that he had a favourable opportunity because Festus was dead and Albinus was still on the way. And so he convened the judges of the Sanhedrin and brought before them a man named James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ, and certain others. He accused them of having transgressed the law and delivered them up to be stoned. Those of the inhabitants of the city who were considered the most fair-minded and who were strict in observance of the law were offended at this. They therefore secretly sent to King Agrippa urging him, for Ananus had not even been correct in his first step, to order him to desist from any further such actions.
Josephus Antiquities 20.9.1 -- Loeb Edition
Loeb includes the following footnote on this reference, comparing it with the more infamous reference with its "He was the Christ" declaration:
Unlike the passage on Jesus (Ant. xviii, 63-64), few have doubted the genuineness of this passage on James (on which see Schürer, i. 546). If it had been a Christian interpolation it would, in all probability, have been more laudatory of James. Hegesippus (quoted by Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. ii, 23, 11-18) says that James was thrown down from the "pinnacle" of the temple, stoned, and finally killed by a fuller's club (cited by Thackeray, Selections from Josephus, p. 95).
In the above Schürer reference, there is mention of the possibility of an "interpolation" here. However, the explanation given is obscure: there is another Josephus passage, excluded from most editions, which connects the death of James to the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD. And this less-known Josephus passage, omitted from the Loeb and other editions, might be incompatible with our quote here which mentions "the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ."
The supposed incompatibility might be due to the time gap between this incident, 62 AD, and the temple destruction 8 years later, since the latter calamity for the Jews is said, in the less-known reference, to be a punishment on them for the murder of James. Maybe it is thought that the killing of James story, if genuine, should also include something about the later destruction of the temple. And the date of 62 AD might be too early, and so the death of James perhaps could not have happened at the hand of Ananus as this Josephus reference relates.
But there is no clear explanation given why this Josephus text must be an "interpolation," and it's quite plausible that both Josephus passages are genuine, one connecting the 70 AD destruction to the James murder, as divine judgment for this, and the other one focusing on the evil actions of Ananus in 62 and not on the later events.
Josephus offered many explanations for the destruction of the temple (
http://www.josephus.org/causeofDestruct.htm ). This obscure reference which connects it to the murder of James could easily be just one more effort on his part to offer some rationale for why God allowed their great temple to be destroyed, because Jews were demanding an explanation for this. This reference, not in the standard editions, is known because it is quoted in some other writings, especially of Origen, and so must be from an alternate version of Josephus. It's not clear why either reference has to be an "interpolation" rather than the two of them simply being two different references in Josephus to the murder of James.
The point is that Schürer implies that this Josephus text is an "interpolation" but gives no good reason. The "interpolation" mention is from I.ii page 186 of the Hendrickson 5-volume set of the Schürer (
A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ):
There is considerable ground, however, for suspicion of Christian interpolation, especially as Origen read in Josephus another passage regarding the death of James, in which the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple is described as a divine judgment in consequence of the execution of James. This passage occurs in some of our manuscripts of Josephus, and ought therefore certainly to be regarded as a Christian interpolation which has been excluded from our common text. Also in the account given by Hegesippus of the execution of James it is brought into close connection with the destruction of Jerusalem. The year 62 cannot by any means be accepted as the date of his death.
This follows the "brother of Jesus who was called the Christ" quote, implying that this quote is an "interpolation." And yet, the above explanation actually says it's the
other version, quoted by Origen, which is the "interpolation." So it's not clear what Schürer's "interpolation" point is or why either Josephus text has to be an "interpolation." Nor why the year 62 or thereabouts could not be when James was killed.
So I think respectfully that Schürer misses the boat here.
So this Josephus quote, probably authentic, as the Loeb footnote concludes, is good evidence for the historicity of Jesus, regardless of the other more famous quote which is mostly rejected as an interpolation.
