I think we have all seen that one passage by Josephus that Atheists and "modern scholars" love to claim is a forgery, this one:
7. After relating these things concerning John, he makes mention of our Saviour in the same work, in the following words: And there lived at that time Jesus, a wise man, if indeed it be proper to call him a man. For he was a doer of wonderful works, and a teacher of such men as receive the truth in gladness. And he attached to himself many of the Jews, and many also of the Greeks. He was the Christ.
8. When Pilate, on the accusation of our principal men, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him in the beginning did not cease loving him. For he appeared unto them again alive on the third day, the divine prophets having told these and countless other wonderful things concerning him. Moreover, the race of Christians, named after him, continues down to the present day.
- Church History, Book 1 11:7-8
Now we usually read that the entire passage is interpolated or that there are only certain portions of it that don't work and are clearly forgery.
Here is the problem with that however. Eusebius is the earliest copy we have of this passage. Eusebius quotes Josephus over 15 times in just the first book of his Church History alone, and he goes to Josephus many, many times. The ONLY time "scholars" claim that Eusebius interpolated and lied about Josephus when quoting him are his quotes regarding Jesus and St. James the Just, because both of these call Jesus the Christ. So why is it that none of the other quotes are interpolated and fake? Why would Eusebius need to fake these 2 quotes?
It is important to note, and no atheist will ever admit this to you, the earliest in-tact copies we have of this passage in their original context, that being Josephus' Antiquity of the Jews, goes back to the 11th century AD. Over 800 years after Eusebius quoted from it. However, what is our earliest copy of Eusebius' Church History? The one currently housed in Russia, dating back to the 5th century. a nearly 700 year difference.
So essentially, atheists want to say that Eusebius simply interpolated on the passage or faked it entirely, yet the earliest copy we have of these quotes are from Eusebius himself. Literally what leg do they have to stand on in calling Eusebius' quotes fake, especially when all of his quotes line up with the 11th century copies, even the one relating to Jesus?
More importantly, let us focus on the wordplay here a moment to see why this quote from Josephus is authentic. Now, it is commonly believed Josephus did not convert to Christianity, so why would he say these things about Jesus? Well, note where it says the following:
>He WAS the Christ.
No Christian would ever say Jesus WAS the Christ, they would say He IS the Christ. So what is going on here? During Josephus' time, the Jews believed in 2 Messiahs, 1 who was Spiritual, and the others which Jews are still pining for to this day, that being the War Messiah who would conquer all the world and bring it under Jerusalem. Josephus from his writings clearly believed Jesus Christ was the spiritual Messiah. He never said Jesus was the Son of God, only the Messiah, the Christ. I think this is another important reason to believe that the quote is legit, because nowhere does Josephus claim Jesus was God. He only claims Jesus was the Messiah foretold by the prophets, which is a big difference.
So whenever atheists try to tell you that Josephus was interpolated upon and falsified, I hope you will remember this post and the great work of that most wonderful Church Father Eusebius. Everyone should read "Church History," it is a magnificent work full of historical knowledge, and the only argument people can muster up against it, it seems, is that Eusebius supported Saint Constantine the Great. Not exactly much of a reason to think Eusebius is lying and making things up.