what Domitian came to know «concerning Christ and his kingdom»

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 13928
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

what Domitian came to know «concerning Christ and his kingdom»

Post by Giuseppe »


But when this same Domitian had commanded that the descendants of David should be slain, an ancient tradition says that some of the heretics brought accusation against the descendants of Jude (said to have been a brother of the Saviour according to the flesh), on the ground that they were of the lineage of David and were related to Christ himself. Hegesippus relates these facts in the following words.

1. Of the family of the Lord there were still living the grandchildren of Jude, who is said to have been the Lord's brother according to the flesh.
2. Information was given that they belonged to the family of David, and they were brought to the Emperor Domitian by the Evocatus. For Domitian feared the coming of Christ as Herod also had feared it. And he asked them if they were descendants of David, and they confessed that they were. Then he asked them how much property they had, or how much money they owned. And both of them answered that they had only nine thousand denarii, half of which belonged to each of them.
4. And this property did not consist of silver, but of a piece of land which contained only thirty-nine acres, and from which they raised their taxes and supported themselves by their own labor.
5. Then they showed their hands, exhibiting the hardness of their bodies and the callousness produced upon their hands by continuous toil as evidence of their own labor.
6. And when they were asked concerning Christ and his kingdom, of what sort it was and where and when it was to appear, they answered that it was not a temporal nor an earthly kingdom, but a heavenly and angelic one, which would appear at the end of the world, when he should come in glory to judge the quick and the dead, and to give unto every one according to his works.
7. Upon hearing this, Domitian did not pass judgment against them, but, despising them as of no account, he let them go, and by a decree put a stop to the persecution of the Church.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/250103.htm

There is some historical nucleus behind this story. Eusebius is moved to admit that the Christians who claimed special relation with Christ in virtue of their greater Jewishness than other Christians, could only give as "evidence" their apocalypticism. No trace of a historical Jesus. Hence stll no gospel under Domitian.

Now, the story is clearly mere invention. But what is curious is that the accusations brought «by some heretics» moved the not-Christians to inquiry about the presumed historicity of Jesus. The position of these heretics is in the middle between the not-Christians and the presumed "brothers of the Lord". On one side they are explicitly against Christians connected someway with proto-historicist belief, on the other side they continue to be Christians. Are they these particular Christians who argued a form of radical docetism as compromise between Pagan skepticism and early historicist belief?
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 3443
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: what Domitian came to know «concerning Christ and his kingdom»

Post by DCHindley »

I believe that one or more of the several volumes of Emil Schürer's A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ* cover many of the related issues. "End Times" expectations ranged from a Judean King or Prince the practical control of a region, to a special someone able to Inaugurate a new Empire to replace the Roman one, to being set in place directly by God by means of his angelic armies. The fate of gentiles in these scenarios varied considerable, from acceptance extended to subjected peoples or even mutually respectful neighbors, to "you all can live over there in your own communities and we'll live over here in ours, but don't try to mix us too much," to evil vermin to be ruled "with a rod of iron," scapegoats for all the Judean people's rage at past injustices real or perceived.

You might also look up Adolf Deissmann's Light from the Ancient East (German 1908, 4th ed. 1922, Strachan's ET 1927) for examples of Judeans living in the midst of pagans, and vice versa, including military contexts (e.g., the grave marker of Tiberius Julius Abdes Pantera, the long serving Auxiliary archer originally from Sidon, who may have been Judean).

DCH

*Div 1, 2 vol., 1890, Div 2, 3 vols. 1885, 2nd ed. 1910, and the revised English edition of G. Vermes, F. Millar, et. al. 4 vols. 1973, 1975, 1986, 1987.
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 13928
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: what Domitian came to know «concerning Christ and his kingdom»

Post by Giuseppe »

Note that Eisebius is forced to admit implicitly that there was not still a gospel during the time of Domitianus.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
John2
Posts: 4315
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: what Domitian came to know «concerning Christ and his kingdom»

Post by John2 »

Giuseppe wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 7:05 am Note that Eisebius is forced to admit implicitly that there was not still a gospel during the time of Domitianus.

Maybe Jesus' relatives didn't show Domitian a written gospel because he had asked them about "Christ's kingdom" (and maybe they also used a Hebrew Matthew, which Jewish Christians are said to have used and which Domitian might not have been able to understand), and their answer (and relationship to Jesus) is in keeping with what Peter says in 1 Peter 4:1-7:

Therefore, since Christ suffered in his body, arm yourselves also with the same attitude, because whoever suffers in the body is done with sin. As a result, they do not live the rest of their earthly lives for evil human desires, but rather for the will of God ... But they will have to give account to him who is ready to judge the living and the dead. For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to human standards in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit. The end of all things is near.

It's also in keeping with what Paul says in 1 Cor. 15:21-25 and 42-46:

For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet ...

So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body ...The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 13928
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: what Domitian came to know «concerning Christ and his kingdom»

Post by Giuseppe »

John2 wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 1:51 pm
Giuseppe wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 7:05 am Note that Eisebius is forced to admit implicitly that there was not still a gospel during the time of Domitianus.

Maybe Jesus' relatives didn't show Domitian a written gospel because he had asked them about "Christ's kingdom"
more precisely, "about Christ and his kingdom" as two distinct things.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: what Domitian came to know «concerning Christ and his kingdom»

Post by neilgodfrey »

Don't you think we ought to pause and grasp the implications of Eusebius writing in the fourth century about an event set in the first. Compare someone today declaring an episode set in 1800 and without any reference to any sources. With no hint of how the information was acquired is it not wise to treat it as something less than a definite historical fact?
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 13928
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: what Domitian came to know «concerning Christ and his kingdom»

Post by Giuseppe »

neilgodfrey wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 8:50 pm Don't you think we ought to pause and grasp the implications of Eusebius writing in the fourth century about an event set in the first. Compare someone today declaring an episode set in 1800 and without any reference to any sources. With no hint of how the information was acquired is it not wise to treat it as something less than a definite historical fact?
the Eusebius's story is surely invented since there was not need by Domitianus to have the brothers in Rome to inquiry about the Christians. But the my focus is on the implicit assumption betrayed by Eusebius: he takes for granted the fact that the Jewish Christians were without a gospel under Domitianus.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8892
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: what Domitian came to know «concerning Christ and his kingdom»

Post by MrMacSon »

Giuseppe wrote: Mon Sep 23, 2019 11:40 pm
.
But when this same Domitian1 had commanded that the descendants of David should be slain, an ancient tradition says that some of the heretics brought accusation against the descendants of Jude (said to have been a brother of the Saviour according to the flesh), on the ground that they were of the lineage of David and were related to Christ himself. Hegesippus relates these facts in the following words ...

Eusebius Church History III, 19
.

1 Preceding C.H. III, 19 is 18.5: in part, -

... in the fifteenth year of Domitian Flavia Domitilla, daughter of a sister of Flavius Clement, who at that time was one of the consuls of Rome, was exiled with many others to the island of Pontia in consequence of testimony borne to Christ.

ie. not Titus Flavius Caesar Domitianus Augustus (24 October 51 – 18 September 96 AD), the Roman emperor from 81 to 96; younger brother of Titus and the son of Vespasian, and the last member of the Flavian dynasty.

Would Domitian Flavia Domitilla, merely daughter of a sister of Flavius Clement, one of the consuls of Rome, & "exiled with many others to the island of Pontia in consequence of testimony borne to Christ" have had the authority to be able to "commanded that the descendants of David should be slain" ???
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8892
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: what Domitian came to know «concerning Christ and his kingdom»

Post by MrMacSon »

neilgodfrey wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 8:50 pm Don't you think we ought to pause and grasp the implications of Eusebius writing in the fourth century about an event set in the first. Compare someone today declaring an episode set in 1800 and without any reference to any sources. With no hint of how the information was acquired is it not wise to treat it as something less than a definite historical fact?
Giuseppe wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:48 pm the Eusebius's story is surely invented since there was not need by Domitianus to have the brothers in Rome to inquiry about the Christians. But the my focus is on the implicit assumption betrayed by Eusebius: he takes for granted the fact that the Jewish Christians were without a gospel under Domitianus.
Note Eccl Hist III, 19 says at the end "Hegesippus relates these facts in the following words."

ie. Eusebius is claiming to be relating facts as related, in turn, by Hegesippus.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: what Domitian came to know «concerning Christ and his kingdom»

Post by neilgodfrey »

Giuseppe wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:48 pmBut the my focus is on the implicit assumption betrayed by Eusebius: he takes for granted the fact that the Jewish Christians were without a gospel under Domitianus.
250 years after the narrated event. What he takes for granted is what he assumes to be the situation over 200 years later. That is not credible evidence for events 5 generations earlier, is it?
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
Post Reply