Historical Jesus, Biblical Jesus

[Free]

"James, the brother Jesus called Christ, and some others ..." 

Is not what they are talking about at all.

Not sure I've quite caught what you mean here, so correct me if I'm responding incorrectly...but yes.    "They" are, in fact, calling into doubt the mentions in josephus as textually derivative or forgeries as an entire unit.

To posit that they're textually derivative but josephan, requires that we turn josephus into a bible thumping christian nut.  That's a hard sell for historicity.  Acknowledging later interpolation by nutty christian scribes deprives us of that first century date.

No, what they are talking about is only the first mention of Jesus, not the second one. The second one is universally accepted as authentic. The first one shows a Christian slant in the extant version, but virtually all scholars agree that something about Jesus was written there as they have slightly different versions of the Testimonium Flavium in Arabic, Syriac, and from St. Jerome which do not show a strong, if any, Christian slant indicating interpolation.

More on the scholarly consensus regarding James here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_o...22_passage