I previously commented on the context of the statement regarding "many of the Greeks."
viewtopic.php?t=8537
It started with an observation that this emphasis of the TF on the induction or leading (epêgageto) of many of the Greeks as the followers of Jesus goes beyond what is shown in the New Testament. Among those who regard this part of the passage as Josephan, it's usually considered a blunder made by observing contemporaries. But drawing on the scholarship of Ken Olson, it can be more specifically contextualized as part of a Christian apologetic that was relevant after the criticisms of Hellenistic elites (such as Porphyry) who looked down on the social status and implied credulity of the followers that Jesus is shown as having in the gospels. This fits into a similar apologetic context that motivated other parts of the TF. For example, "he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him" fits into an apologetic mold of attempting to find non-Christian witnesses to the resurrection and thus the truth of Christian claims.
The TF has the phrase "people who accept the truth with pleasure" (anthrôpôn tôn hêdonêi talêthê dechomenôn), followed by "many of the Jews and many of the Greeks," so that Jesus is presented as the teacher of the many people who accept the truth.
Another theme of Christian apologetic, found in the literature attributed to prominent individuals who were not otherwise known to be Christian (such as Pilate), is the idea of the many who accepted the truth, as contrasted with the few who are liars and try to suppress the truth.
The thematic element of those capable of accepting truth and rejecting falsehood is found similarly:
https://sacred-texts.com/bib/lbob/lbob13.htm
The theme of the many accepting the truth, contrasted against the few with falsehoods:
https://www.earlychristianwritings.com/ ... ilate.html
The phrase "a teacher of people who accept the truth with pleasure" is a text that has often puzzled those who take the passage as being by Josephus. Some try to explain why Josephus would choose this particular phrase to describe Jesus. It has sometimes motivated conjectures that a different wording lies behind the current text.
Yet the idea that there were many "people who accept the truth with pleasure" has an evident apologetic intent, also found in other Christian literature, such as the pseudepigraphic letter of Pontius Pilate unto Claudius or the correspondence of Paul and Seneca. It provides an attestation that those who received Jesus as a teacher, those who would not cease to love him and would become known as Christians, were receptive to the truth taught by Jesus, to which they held fast after his death. It provides an attestation that it was the "many" who were on the side of the "truth" taught by Jesus, in spite of the principal men of Jerusalem wanting him dead.
From a redaction criticism perspective, it agrees with the apologetic intent in favor of Christianity that is also evident elsewhere in the TF passage. This brings the list of phrases in the TF that evidently have such intent up to a minimum of five (up from the three widely recognized):
Another two phrases fit into an apologetic argument as well:
For a total of nine phrases in the TF, a very remarkable density of such phrases in one passage, that are written in such a way that they support a Christian apologetic argument being made in the fourth century.
Indeed only two of the phrases remain possibly untouched in this analysis by apologetic interests (i.e., "Now there was about this time Jesus" and "Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross"). This all makes the TF quite incredible unless we recognize the most obvious and plausible conclusion here, which is that the TF is a passage that was originally written with Christian apologetic concerns in mind, which is why they suffuse this short little text about Jesus from start to finish.
viewtopic.php?t=8537
It started with an observation that this emphasis of the TF on the induction or leading (epêgageto) of many of the Greeks as the followers of Jesus goes beyond what is shown in the New Testament. Among those who regard this part of the passage as Josephan, it's usually considered a blunder made by observing contemporaries. But drawing on the scholarship of Ken Olson, it can be more specifically contextualized as part of a Christian apologetic that was relevant after the criticisms of Hellenistic elites (such as Porphyry) who looked down on the social status and implied credulity of the followers that Jesus is shown as having in the gospels. This fits into a similar apologetic context that motivated other parts of the TF. For example, "he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him" fits into an apologetic mold of attempting to find non-Christian witnesses to the resurrection and thus the truth of Christian claims.
The TF has the phrase "people who accept the truth with pleasure" (anthrôpôn tôn hêdonêi talêthê dechomenôn), followed by "many of the Jews and many of the Greeks," so that Jesus is presented as the teacher of the many people who accept the truth.
Another theme of Christian apologetic, found in the literature attributed to prominent individuals who were not otherwise known to be Christian (such as Pilate), is the idea of the many who accepted the truth, as contrasted with the few who are liars and try to suppress the truth.
The thematic element of those capable of accepting truth and rejecting falsehood is found similarly:
https://sacred-texts.com/bib/lbob/lbob13.htm
4 And if we show a submissive temper, we shall overcome effectually in all points, if so be they are, who are capable of seeing and acknowledging themselves to have been in the wrong. Farewell.
The theme of the many accepting the truth, contrasted against the few with falsehoods:
https://www.earlychristianwritings.com/ ... ilate.html
Pontius Pilate unto Claudius, greeting.
... doing many other wonders, and all the people of the Jews calling him the Son of God: the chief priests therefore, moved with envy against him, took him and delivered him unto me and brought against him one false accusation after another, saying that he was a sorcerer and did things contrary to law.
... But they, though they took the money, were not able to keep silence concerning that which had come to pass, for they also have testified that they saw him arisen and that they received money from the Jews. And these things have I reported (unto thy mightiness) for this cause, lest some other should lie unto thee (Lat. lest any lie otherwise) and though shouldest deem right to believe the false tales of the Jews.
... doing many other wonders, and all the people of the Jews calling him the Son of God: the chief priests therefore, moved with envy against him, took him and delivered him unto me and brought against him one false accusation after another, saying that he was a sorcerer and did things contrary to law.
... But they, though they took the money, were not able to keep silence concerning that which had come to pass, for they also have testified that they saw him arisen and that they received money from the Jews. And these things have I reported (unto thy mightiness) for this cause, lest some other should lie unto thee (Lat. lest any lie otherwise) and though shouldest deem right to believe the false tales of the Jews.
The phrase "a teacher of people who accept the truth with pleasure" is a text that has often puzzled those who take the passage as being by Josephus. Some try to explain why Josephus would choose this particular phrase to describe Jesus. It has sometimes motivated conjectures that a different wording lies behind the current text.
Yet the idea that there were many "people who accept the truth with pleasure" has an evident apologetic intent, also found in other Christian literature, such as the pseudepigraphic letter of Pontius Pilate unto Claudius or the correspondence of Paul and Seneca. It provides an attestation that those who received Jesus as a teacher, those who would not cease to love him and would become known as Christians, were receptive to the truth taught by Jesus, to which they held fast after his death. It provides an attestation that it was the "many" who were on the side of the "truth" taught by Jesus, in spite of the principal men of Jerusalem wanting him dead.
From a redaction criticism perspective, it agrees with the apologetic intent in favor of Christianity that is also evident elsewhere in the TF passage. This brings the list of phrases in the TF that evidently have such intent up to a minimum of five (up from the three widely recognized):
- if it be lawful to call him a man
- a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure
- He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles.
- He was the Christ.
- he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him
- a wise man
- he was a doer of wonderful works
In Adversus Hieroclem Eusebius argued that if he had to accept the supernatural feats attributed to Apollonius, he must regard him as a GOHS [wizard] rather than a wise man (A.H. 5); here he has Josephus call Jesus a 'wise man' and thus, implicitly, not a GOHS.
Another two phrases fit into an apologetic argument as well:
- those that loved him at the first did not forsake him
- the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct to this day
Eusebius' opponents were not denying that Jesus was crucified by the Roman and Jewish authorities; this was probably a main part of their argument that Jesus was a GOHS. Eusebius, however, cleverly inverts this argument. If Jesus had been a deceiver, and his followers had been deceivers, would not self-interest have compelled them to abandon his teachings after they had witnessed the manner of his death at the hands of the authorities? The fact that they did not abandon Jesus after witnessing the punishments he had brought upon himself can only mean that the disciples had recognized some greater than normal virtue in their teacher. This argument is developed at great length in D.E. 3.5, but I shall quote only a part of it here, "Perhaps you will say that the rest were wizards no less than their guide. Yes - but surely they had all seen the end of their teacher, and the death to which He came. Why then after seeing his miserable end did they stand their ground?" (D.E. 111).
For a total of nine phrases in the TF, a very remarkable density of such phrases in one passage, that are written in such a way that they support a Christian apologetic argument being made in the fourth century.
Indeed only two of the phrases remain possibly untouched in this analysis by apologetic interests (i.e., "Now there was about this time Jesus" and "Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross"). This all makes the TF quite incredible unless we recognize the most obvious and plausible conclusion here, which is that the TF is a passage that was originally written with Christian apologetic concerns in mind, which is why they suffuse this short little text about Jesus from start to finish.
But the whole tone of the passage suggests a Christian hand. It is the eulogy of a devotee masquerading under the mantle of the Jewish historian, rather than what we should expect, the bare chronicle, if not the bitter invective, of the priestly historian himself. ... The theory of partial interpolation, held by those who reject the obviously Christian phrases but believe that Josephus made some statement about Christ, is unsatisfactory. ... But the elimination of all that is suggestive of Christian origin leaves practically nothing behind. We may well follow Norden in declining to discuss what he calls the 'transcendental' question whether the interpolation may have ousted a genuine statement of the historian about Christ, now lost beyond recovery; merely adding that the argument that the paragraph interrupts the sequence of the narrative is an argument for its spuriousness as a whole. - Thackeray (1919)
Statistics: Posted by Peter Kirby — Mon Nov 11, 2024 8:37 pm