Testimonium Flavianum

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Testimonium Flavianum , "Flavian testimony", is a name for the section Ant 18, 63-64 in the work " Jüdische Antiquities " ( Antiqitates Iudaicae , abbreviated Ant ) by the ancient Jewish historian Flavius ​​Josephus . In the text as it is now available, Jesus of Nazareth is positively appreciated. The coining of the term Testimonium Flavianum already expresses that such a “testimony” (Latin testimonium ) of the Jew Josephus has been of great importance in Christian theology since patristicism .

Josephus published his historical work as early as 93 AD, but it has only survived in medieval Christian manuscripts. In view of the generally poor text quality of these manuscripts, quotes from late antiquity by Christian authors should also be used when reconstructing the original Josephus text, as well as translations. Section Ant 18, 63–64 is the focus of an intensive scientific discussion.

There is broad consensus that the text at hand has been subsequently expanded (interpolated) with Christian additions. Origen read an older text, while Eusebius of Caesarea read the Christian text. What Josephus originally wrote at this point is still very controversial.

The text Ant 18, 63-64

Greek text and translation

In the three surviving old manuscripts of the 18th book of antiquities, the text reads as follows:

"Γίνεται δὲ κατὰ τοῦτον τὸν χρόνον Ἰησοῦς σοφὸς ἀνήρ, εἴγε ἄνδρα αὐτὸν λέγειν χρή · ἦν γὰρ παραδόξων ἔργων ποιητής, διδάσκαλος ἀνθρώπων τῶν ἡδονῇ τἀληθῆ δεχομένων, καὶ πολλοὺς μὲν Ἰουδαίους, πολλοὺς δὲ καὶ τοῦ Ἑλληνικοῦ ἐπηγάγετο · ὁ χριστὸς οὗτος ἦν. καὶ αὐτὸν ἐνδείξει τῶν πρώτων ἀνδρῶν παρ ἡμῖν σταυρῷ ἐπιτετιμηκότος Πιλάτου οὐκ ἐπαύσαντο οἱ τὸ πρῶτον ἀγαπήσαντες · ἐφάνη γὰρ αὐτοῖς τρίτην ἔχων ἡμέραν πάλιν ζῶν τῶν θείων προφητῶν ταῦτά τε καὶ ἄλλα μυρία περὶ αὐτοῦ θαυμάσια εἰρηκότων. εἰς ἔτι τε νῦν τῶν Χριστιανῶν ἀπὸ τοῦδε ὠνομασμένον οὐκ ἐπέλιπε τὸ φῦλον ”

“At that time, Jesus lived, a wise man, if he can even be called a man. For he was the achiever of incredible deeds and the teacher of all people who joyfully received the truth. So he attracted many Jews and also many Gentiles. This was the Christ. And although Pilate condemned him to death on the cross at the instigation of the nobles of our people, his former followers were not unfaithful to him. For on the third day he appeared to them alive again, as prophets sent by God had foretold this and a thousand other wonderful things about him. And the people of Christians who call themselves after him continue to exist to this day. "

context

The 18th book of Antiquities contains a representation of the term of office of Pontius Pilate :

  • 18.35 Arrival of Pontius Pilate in Judea;
  • 18.55 to 59 Pilate orders his troops, their ensigns to Jerusalem to bring in. Among other things, the emperor was depicted on it. serious unrest was the result.
  • 18.60–62 Pilate has an aqueduct built using money from the Jerusalem temple treasure ;
  • 63-64 Testimonium Flavianum ;
  • 65–80 Crucifixion of Egyptian priests, destruction of the Temple of Isis in Rome (this statement by Josephus apparently does not apply, the temple still stood in AD 70);
  • 81–84 Expulsion of the Jews from Rome.

comment

Since the 17th century the passage has often been considered a forgery, which was added to the "antiquities" by a Christian at the latest in the 3rd century, many historians today take the view that Josephus not only had John in his work the Baptist but also Jesus mentioned. Even then, many believe that some sentences of its mention have been rephrased or added by Christian copyists of the text. For this purpose, the assumed original version is reconstructed in different ways.

Friedrich Wilhelm Horn presented the four most important interpretation models represented by research according to John P. Meier as follows:

  1. the Testimonium Flavianum is altogether a Christian insertion;
  2. the Testimonium Flavianum has been revised in a Christian way, but an older model is still recognizable;
  3. the Testimonium Flavianum comes from Josephus with a few insertions;
  4. the Testimonium Flavianum can be traced back entirely to Josephus.

1 and 4 represent minority positions, with Kenneth A. Olson representing the first interpretation model.

The following are mostly seen as insertions from the hand of a Christian editor:

  • εἴγε ἄνδρα αὐτὸν λέγειν χρή eíge ándra autòn légein chrḗ ("if you can even call him a person")
  • ὁ χριστὸς οὗτος ἦν ho christòs hoũtos ễn ("This was the Christ.")
  • ἐφάνη γὰρ αὐτοῖς τρίτην ἔχων ἡμέραν πάλιν ζῶν ephánē gàr autoĩs tríten échōn heméran pálin zỗn ("For he appeared to them alive again on the third day")

These passages interrupt the flow of the text and can therefore be recognized as added later. According to Horn, the rest of the text can be "easily imagined in the mouth of a Jew who is not hostile to Jesus."

The word χριστὸς, "Christ", is problematic because Josephus only uses it in two places in his works, both times in combination with the name Jesus. If he used the term so seldom, one would assume that Josephus explains the term. The Septuagint translated the Hebrew word משׁיח Maschiach ("anointed one") with χριστός, e.g. B 2 Sam 23.1  EU . It is striking, however, that the Septuagint translators of the books of the prophets did not use χριστὸς as a translation of משׁיח Messiah . These texts deal with a Messiah in the sense of a future Jewish leader from a Davidic family. One must therefore assume that a non-Jewish reader was not familiar with the word χριστὸς, at least not in connection with משׁיח. Josephus uses the word χριω, “anoint”, often, but never in connection with Jewish resistors or Jewish prophets. He calls the Messiah pretenders προφήτης "prophets", or γόης "magicians".

Another mention of Jesus in Ant 20,200

In connection with the change of the procurator Festus to Albinus in the year 62 Josephus writes about Ananos :

“Now Ananos, who was wild and reckless and of that harshness in judicial matters peculiar to the Sadducees , thought the time was appropriate - Festus had just died and Albinus was still on his way. He therefore called the high council to the judgment and had the brother of Jesus, the so-called Christ, James by name, as well as some others whom he accused of breaking the law, led to stoning. "

Although the great majority of scientists here assume that the site is genuine, a minority of scientists have doubts about its authenticity: Origen (c. Cels. I 47; II 13; Comm. In Mt. X 17) reports, Josephus attributed the destruction of Jerusalem to the murder of James, a statement that does not appear in the works available to us. Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. II 23, 22), on the other hand, knew this note. It is therefore difficult to reconstruct the history of their tradition.

Quotes from Christian authors in late antiquity and the Middle Ages

Before Eusebius

Origen (185-254) specifically wrote that Josephus did not take Jesus to be the Christ. Whether he knew this place has not been proven, but it can be assumed.

Eusebius of Caesarea

Eusebius of Caesarea was the first Christian author to mention the Testimonium Flavianum in his work, three times with minor differences:

  • Church history 1, 11, 7–8;
  • Demonstratio evangelica 3,5,105;
  • Theophania Σ 202.2-203.5.

Each time he referred to Josephus, thereby indicating that he was quoting a copy of the Antiquities that was available to him.

Since the 18th century it has been suspected that Eusebius forged the Testimonium Flavianum. Eusebius was also the first Christian writer to deal extensively with the works of Josephus. It therefore seemed logical for science to compare the writings of Josephus with the Testimonium Flavianum and with the works of Eusebius. Such a comparison is difficult, however, because in contrast to Josephus' works, the works of Eusebius are only available in fragments. Still, it is possible to make some comparisons. Ken Olsen of Duke University was particularly interested in the question. Olsen's conclusion: Josephus never uses the word φῦλον (tribe, people) in connection with religious communities. Other authors did not either. Only Eusebius uses the combination Χριστιανῶν [...] τὸ φῦλον ("tribe of Christians") παραδόξων ἔργων ποιητής "performers of very unbelievable deeds" is typical for Eusebius, but not typical for Josephus. This uses the word ποιητής only in connection with "poet", but never with "doer, accomplisher", while Eusebius uses the combination παραδόξων and ποιητής more than a hundred times. The same would apply to διδάσκαλος ἀνθρώπων “teacher of all people”. The theologian Neville Birdsall also claims that the word διδάσκαλος is used very rarely by Josephus and only in a different context. But often from Eusebius. But these conclusions do not establish that Eusebius forged the Testimonium Flavianum. There are also lines in the Testimonium Flavianum that correspond to his style. It is conceivable that Josephus consciously used words from the environment of the Roman Christian community.

After Eusebius

The Church History of Eusebius was a widely read work from late antiquity and the Middle Ages, also in Latin and Syrian translation (both 5th century). The following authors cited the Testimonium Flavianum from the church history of Eusebius and not from an edition of the Antiquities of Josephus (after Alice Whealey) available to them:

On the other hand, there are a number of Christian authors who dealt with the writings of Josephus but did not mention the Testimonium Flavianum: Basil of Caesarea , Cyril of Alexandria , Ambrose of Milan , Augustine and Thomas Aquinas . This may be because the content of the Testimonium Flavianum was considered irrelevant, as it did not correspond to the Christology of late antiquity.

Jerome

In addition to Eusebius 'Church History, Hieronymus ' work “Famous Men” ( De viris illustribus ) is the second work that was important in the history of the reception of the Testimonium Flavianum. Jerome translated the passage very literally from Greek to Latin around 392, but with one deviation. In De viris illustribus 13,16,15 he wrote instead of hic erat Christ (“This was the Christ”) credebatur esse Christus (“one believed that he was the Christ”). De viris illustribus is preserved in manuscripts from the 6th and 7th centuries, manuscripts that are significantly older than those available for Josephus 'Antiquitates or Eusebius' church history. The Syrian World Chronicle of Michael the Syrian also offers this formulation: “It was believed that he was the Christ”. Since Latin and Syrian theologians did not read each other's works because of the denominational divisions of late antiquity, there seems to have been a Greek version of the Testimonium Flavianum that contained this formulation.

Pseudo-Hegesippus

Pseudo-Hegesippus writing "The Fall of Jerusalem" De excidio Hierosolymitano (4th century) is a free Latin paraphrase of Josephus 'writing on the Jewish war with an anti-Jewish tendency, enriched by sections from Josephus' Antiquitates, including the Testimonium Flavianum. Pseudo-Hegesippus leaves out the phrase “This was the Christ”. This is important because it is clear from the context that the author has a copy of the antiquities and not Eusebius or another church writer.

The Sefer Josippon , a medieval Jewish retelling of the Jewish War based on the pseudo-Hegesippus, tacitly omitted the Testimonium Flavianum; some later versions of this text contain a brief hostile comment on Jesus at this point. Now the Sefer Josippon was not recognized in the early modern period as an adaptation of the pseudo-Hegesippus, but was considered the authentic version of Josephus' work (since Hebrew). In this context, because it was not included in "the Hebrew Josephus", doubts about the Testimonium Flavianum first appeared in the early modern period.

Old translations

Arabic and Syriac

In 1971 Shlomo Pines advocated the thesis that the Christian-Arab bishop and historian Agapios of Hierapolis had handed down an earlier or even the original version of Josephus. Because he cites him in his Kitab al-Unwan from the 10th century (quoted from Schneemelcher in the translation by Johannes Maier):

“... that at the time there was a man called Yeshua, who had a good lifestyle and was known to be virtuous [learned] , and had disciples from many Jews and from other peoples . Pilate condemned him to the crucifixion and to death, but those who became his disciples did not give up his disciples [doctrine], telling that he appeared and lived to them three days after the crucifixion and therefore may be the Messiah in Reference to whom the prophets said wonderful things. "

This version is also supported by the similarity in style with the other section, which is regarded as genuine, in which Josephus takes a neutral and distant, but not negative, position on Christianity.

Another version is handed down in the world chronicle of Michael the Syrian . Against Pines' thesis, Alice Whealey considers the version of the world chronicle to be more authentic than the testimony of Agapios. She traces both variants back to Syrian translations of the Historia Ecclesiastica by Eusebius of Caesarea . The version of the World Chronicle is linguistically closer to the traditional standard version ( textus receptus ), but, as with Agapios, only identifies Jesus indirectly with the Messiah.

Old Russian

At the end of the 19th century, a version of the Jewish War in Old Russian was discovered in Moscow , Russia . This version contains extensive Christian additions and comments. It also contains the Testimonium Flavianum. Robert Eisler believed that from this text he could reconstruct the Aramaic first version of the book on the Jewish War, which Josephus once mentioned, but which has not been preserved and is nowhere else mentioned or cited. The vast majority of scientists do not attach any importance to this version in the discussion about the Testimonium Flavianum. Most scholars believe that the Slavic version of the Jewish War did not emerge until the 11th century. It is not an exact translation, but a translation with comments and quotations from the world chronicle of Johannes Malalas, among others . Few scholars are of the opinion that the Slavic version represents the original version of the Jewish war. B. Ilaria Ramelli in his book “Gesu e il tempio. La attestazioni de Flavio Giuseppe, Giovanni, Egesippo e Origene ”.

Research history

Lucas Osiander the Elder declared the Testimonium Flavianum in his Church History, printed in 1592, to be spurious, arguing that if Josephus had written this, he would have become a Christian, but nothing of this can be seen in the rest of his work.

Critical concerns about the text were raised against the Testimonium Flavianum only in the 17th century: Louis Cappel noted that the passage did not fit smoothly into the context. Tanaquilius Faber argued that the statement "he was the Christ" contradicted Origen's judgment that Josephus did not believe in Christ. He declared Eusebius of Caesarea to be an interpolator, but could not justify this suspicion.

swell

literature

  • Alice Whealey: The Testimonium Flavianum . In: Honora Howell Chapman, Zuleika Rodgers (eds.): A Companion to Josephus . Wiley & Sons, Chichester 2015, pp. 345ff. ISBN 1444335332 .
  • Ulrich Victor: The Testimonium Flavianum - An authentic text by Josephus. In: Novum Testamentum 52 (2010), pp. 72–82.
  • Christoph Nobody: The Testimonium Flavianum: Findings, Status of Discussion, Perspectives . In: Protocols to the Bible 17/1 (2008), pp. 45–71.
  • Alice Whealey: Josephus, Eusebius of Caesarea and the Testimonium Flavianum. In: Christfried Böttrich, Jens Herzer, Torsten Reiprich (eds.): Josephus and the New Testament: mutual perceptions (= II. International Symposium on the Corpus Judaeo-Hellenisticum, May 25-28, 2006, Greifswald). Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2007, pp. 73–116. ISBN 978-3-16-149368-3 .
  • Friedrich Wilhelm Horn: The Testimonium Flavianum from a New Testament perspective . In: Christfried Böttrich, Jens Herzer, Torsten Reiprich (eds.): Josephus and the New Testament: mutual perceptions (= II. International Symposium on the Corpus Judaeo-Hellenisticum, May 25-28, 2006, Greifswald). Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2007, pp. 117-136. ISBN 978-3-16-149368-3 .
  • Alice Whealey: Josephus on Jesus. The Testimonium Flavianum Controversy from Late Antiquity to Modern Times. Published by Peter Lang, New York 2003.
  • Steve Mason: Flavius ​​Josephus and the New Testament. Tübingen-Basel 2000, pp. 245-259.
  • Kenneth A. Olson: Eusebius and the Testimonium Flavianum. In: The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 61 (2) 305, 1999.
  • Ernst Bammel: A New Variant Form of the Testimonium Flavianum. In: Judaica. Tübingen 1986, pp. 190-193.
  • Ernst Bammel : On the Testimonium Flavianum. In: Otto Betz u. a. (Ed.): Josephus Studies. Göttingen 1974, pp. 9-22.
  • Eduard Norden : Josephus and Tacitus on Jesus Christ and a messianic prophecy. In: Abraham Schalit: Josephus research. Darmstadt 1973, pp. 27-69.
  • Shlomo Pines: An Arabic Version of the Testimonium Flavianum and its Implications. Jerusalem 1971.

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ From the 11th century or later. Cf. Friedrich Wilhelm Horn: Das Testimonium Flavianum from a New Testament perspective , Tübingen 2007, p. 119.
  2. ↑ Original and translation by Gerd Theißen, Annette Merz: The historical Jesus. A textbook. 4th edition, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 2001, pp. 75-82
  3. ↑ Cf. Alice Whealey: Josephus on Jesus: The Testimonium Flavianum Controversy from Late Antiquity to Modern Times. New York 2003, pp. 129-132
  4. ↑ Cf. Friedrich Wilhelm Horn: The Testimonium Flavianum from a New Testament perspective. In: Christfried Böttrich (Ed.): Josephus and the New Testament. Tübingen 2007, p. 117
  5. ^ Friedrich Wilhelm Horn: The Testimonium Flavianum from a New Testament perspective. In: Christfried Böttrich (Ed.): Josephus and the New Testament. Tübingen 2007, p. 125.
  6. ^ Friedrich Wilhelm Horn: The Testimonium Flavianum from a New Testament perspective. In: Christfried Böttrich (Ed.): Josephus and the New Testament. Tübingen 2007, p. 126f.
  7. ↑ Matthew V. Novenson: The Grammar of Messianism: An Ancient Jewish Political Idiom and Its Users, Oxford University Press, page 135 (Josephus uses the word χριστὸς PRECISELY twice)
  8. ↑ bibelwissenschaft.de Septuagint (AT)
  9. ↑ Christina Oefele: Gospel exegesis as reading a score, an interpretation (= Scientific studies on the New Testament . Volume 2), p. 81ff.
  10. ↑ Matthew V. Novenson: The Grammar of Messianism: An Ancient Jewish Political Idiom and Its Users , Oxford University Press, p. 141
  11. ↑ See Louis H. Feldman, Gōhei Hata (ed.): Josephus, Judaism and Christianity. Brill, 1987, ISBN 978-90-04-08554-1 , pp. 55-57
  12. ↑ Origen: Contra Celsum , I, 47
  13. ↑ Ken Olson: A Eusebian Reading of the Testimonium Flavianum 2013
  14. ↑ Ken Olsen: Eusebius and the Testimonium Flavianum, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 61/2, 1999 pp. 305–322
  15. ↑ Christfried Böttrich, Jens Herzer, Torsten Reiprich: Josephus and the New Testament, Mohr Siebeck 2006, page 118
  16. ↑ https://chs.harvard.edu/CHS/article/display/5871.5-a-eusebian-reading-of-the-testimonium-flavianum-ken-olson Center for Hellenic Studies Harvard Univercity Ken Olsen A Eusebian Reading of the Testimonium Flavianum
  17. ↑ Wiktionary φῦλον
  18. ↑ Wiktionary ποιητής
  19. ^ Independent Professor J. Neville Birdsall
  20. ↑ Christfried Böttrich, Jens Herzer, Torsten Reiprich: Josephus and the New Testament, Mohr Siebeck 2006, page 135
  21. ↑ a b Alice Whealey: The Testimonium Flavianum , Chichester 2015, p. 346.
  22. ↑ Alice Whealey: The Testimonium Flavianum , Chichester 2015, pp. 346f.
  23. ^ Pseudo-Hegesippus: De excidio Hierosolymitano 2.12.
  24. ↑ Alice Whealey: The Testimonium Flavianum , Chichester 2015, pp. 347f.
  25. ^ Shlomo Pines: An Arabic Version of the Testimonium Flavianum and its Implications. Israel Academy of Arts and Humanities, Jerusalem 1971.
  26. ^ Andreas J. Kostenberger, L. Scott Kellum, Charles L. Quarles: The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown. An Introduction to the New Testament. 2009, ISBN 0-8054-4365-7 , pp. 104-108.
  27. ↑ Alice Whealey: The Testimonium Flavianum in Syriac and Arabic. New Testament Studies 54 (2008) 573-590, doi: 10.1017 / S0028688508000301
  28. ↑ Cf. Friedrich Wilhelm Horn: The Testimonium Flavianum from a New Testament perspective. In: Christfried Böttrich (Ed.): Josephus and the New Testament. Tübingen 2007, p. 122 f.
  29. ↑ Heinz Schreckenberg: The Flavius ​​Jeosephus Tradition in Antiquity and the Middle Ages, page 63
  30. ↑ Johannes Nussbaum: Das Testaimonium Flavianum A classic example of a genuine Heists discussion on page 28
  31. ↑ Alice Whealey: The Testimonium Flavianum , Chichester 2015, pp. 346f.
  32. ↑ Alice Whealey: The Testimonium Flavianum , Chichester 2015, pp. 348f.