The ambition to marry Flavius Josephus with Christianity isn’t anything new – but unfortunately the Gospels cannot be dated before 150 AD, although it is normal for Theologians and Historians to date the Gospels to during the First Century. This is purely wishful thinking on their part and nothing else. The Historians are breaking their own rules of objective research and it looks very much like special pleading on their part.

The German Protestant sceptical theologians of the 19th century generally pointed out this fact. In order for Cleta M. Flynn to prove her hypothesis you would need a First Edition of the works by Flavius Josephus. But the sheer difference between first and second Christianity is monumental in the extreme. The very first reference to Christianity is fixated about supernatural experience and not about historical reminiscences about a human being who existed during the first century.

The writings of the pro-Roman Paul demonstrate that Christianity was originally anti-Roman Occupation – which made Paul later turn into a turncoat – but Christianity itself later turned pro-Roman Occupation, its motive being anti-Semitic in nature – because Judaism rejected Christianity during the crucial period of resistance against Rome. Had Judaism kicked the Romans out of Judea it would simultaneously kick out the Christians. By the fate of history, because Rome was successful in meeting the challenge of several Jewish Revolts – it successfully kicked the Jews out of their country – and Christianity placed their capital in Italy called The Vatican; although this process took centuries to achieve. But the central fact remains – the Vatican was not based in Jerusalem but in Rome. Rome had eventually absorbed Christianity as its main religion.

It is within this historical context that the (far fetched) theories of Cleta Flynn need to be judged. It is also within what has just been described that the very poor conclusions reached by the Theologians and Historians need to be judged.

It is not from the earliest writings that Jesus Christ and Christianity took hold and gathered such a large following – but rather from the much later Gospel material that originated from 150 AD. Josephus died around 100 AD; he probably never even heard of the New Testament Gospels. (This was the origin of “Romantic Christianity” as we all know it today.) The whole story of Jesus Christ was pre-empted by the religious idea of the Atonement through Resurrection. The idea came first, afterwards put into the form of a story where the historical Jesus was later invented to fulfil the idea.

The connection between Josephus and Christianity is a subject matter that has been debated for centuries between Jews and Christians, and both camps have produced mixed conclusions. In modern times, for every Cleta Flynn there is the very opposite, like for example Professor Nicholas Allen, author of “Christian Forgery In Jewish Antiquities. Josephus Interrupted” (Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2020).

Originally, Jesus Christ was just a Crucified Saviour God serving as an atoning sacrifice, later resurrected – originally not historical – but later put into a form of a story for people to worship. It was this that became the driving force for the triumph of Christianity.

The following question needs to be asked: why do people want to believe in 2025 the existence of, not only a demythologised Jesus Christ, but a Jesus Christ who produced direct lineal descendants that have survived to the present day? To date, no logical explanation has been provided to justify this position! We can assume that Cleta Flynn does not subscribe to such a hypothesis!

There are people who know how to build websites, how to be company directors, also been University Graduates, but that does not necessarily mean that they have basic common sense. This is one thing that the Internet has shown beyond any doubt!

There’s much more to History than the hilarious “The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail.” Here’s a Book Review from 2004 by Ken Mondschein of the American reprint.