Lord Larehip

You DO realize that's a known forgery foisted off history by a guy named Eusebius who was known to posterity as "the biggest liar in Christendom." First of all, NO writer before the fourth century ever quoted this passage when looking for extra-biblical sources of the life of Christ and that includes Origen whom, as I said earlier, grew up in the same area Jesus supposedly did and was an authority on the writings of Josephus.

The passage falls between two paragraphs that are obviously connected to each other. So it is completely out of place.

Since Josephus was a Jew it is extremely out of character for him to have written this passage because no Jew would have talked like that about a man. Moreover, Josephus dedicated several dozen chapters to Herod--a man he hated--and yet writes one little passage about this great godlike man "if it be lawful to call him a man" and then never mentions him again.

But don't take my word:

Josephus on Jesus | Forgery and Fraud? | Flavius Testimonium

Wiki says this:

The writings of Origen make no reference to the Testimonium. However, summarizing speculative arguments from two other writers, Louis Feldman claimed that "The most likely assumption is, then, that the 'Testimonium' as read by Origen contained historical data in a neutral form."[139]

Zvi Baras, in a book edited by Feldman, also assumes that Origen had seen a version of the Testimonium that included no interpolations.[140] Baras asserts that a Testimonium seen by Origen must have had a neutral tone, and included no derogatory references towards Christians, and hence required no reaction from Origen.[140] Baras claims that the neutral tone of the Testimonium was then modified between the time of Origen and Eusebius, though Baras gives no arguments why this should be more likely than the hypothesis that the Testimonium originated in the Eusebius passage where it first appears.[140]

Josephus on Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In short, it's a forgery passed off by Eusebius--the same guy who gave us that malarkey about Constantine seeing Christian crosses in the sky bearing the phrase "By this sign you shall conquer" just prior to the Battle of the Milvian Bridge in 312 which set Constantine up as emperor and gave the Christians tremendous power in Rome.

Here's some more:

Non-Christian Testimony for Jesus? – From the authentic pen of lying Christian scribes !!

I'll even throw in a link of a guy who believes the passage is partially Josephan but even he admits some of the phrasing ("he was the Christ") cannot be true Josephus.

Did Josephus Refer to Jesus

And it isn't like Josephus didn't write about many men named Jesus who bear a striking resemblance to Jesus Christ but cannot be him. For example, he mentions a madman named Jesus who walked around Jerusalem saying, "Woe, woe to you, Jerusalem." Finally, he was brought before the authorities and questioned but he would not answer their questions but only say, "Woe, woe to you, Jerusalem." So they took him and whipped him until his bones were laid bare and with each stroke of the whip he moaned, "Woe, woe to you, Jerusalem." They turned him loose as a simpleton and he went about the streets moaning his warning until the Romans laid siege to the city and he was killed by a stone from a siege engine.

Another Jesus that Josephus mentions was a robber from Galilee who led a band of cut-throats composed of "mariners and poor people." Sound familiar?

I have the entire works of Josephus and read them over 20 years ago and find them quite fascinating. I recommend the Loeb Classical Library--excellent, scholarly works.