James and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.

[davidmartin]

I think people overdo the "influences" argument. If Jesus was a historical person he belonged to a sect and that sect defined the Jesus movement. If Jesus never existed then Paul or Mark wrote to appeal to a segment of the Israelite population.

That might be true right at the start if Jesus existed, but fast forward 5, 10, 20 years and the situation could be totally different
Like how originally Fleetwood Mac was a blues band, then the female singers joined and it went more pop, then the members went on their own solo careers. The later incarnation was unrecognisable from the original band which wasn't even famous to begin with just played in pubs

As to the Testament of the 12 Patriarchs - that's interesting
Whats the background of that text? Could you draw a straight line from it to the opponents of Paul? Any parallels with the Clementines/Ebionites?

[John2]

I wonder how much of the Testaments could likewise be reflected in Paul. I've been excited about the possibility that his "no eye" citation came from the Testament of Jacob, and perhaps then he and James regarded the Testaments as Scripture.

[John2]

I need to look into this subject more, but the Wikipedia page for the Testaments says:

RH Charles called attention to the frequent use of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs by Paul and other writers of the New Testament. In particular:

I Thess. ii. 16 is a quotation of Test. Patr., Levi, 6:10-11;
Rom. 12:19 is taken from Gad, 6:10;
Rom. 12:21 is taken from Benjamin, 4:3;
II Cor. 7:10 is a quote from Gad, 5:7;
Ephes. 5:6 appeared first in Naphtali, 3:1.

Later scholarship has highly debated this issue.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testament ... Patriarchs

[Ben C. Smith]

I wonder how much of the Testaments could likewise be reflected in Paul. I've been excited about the possibility that his "no eye" citation came from the Testament of Jacob, and perhaps then he and James regarded the Testaments as Scripture.

Okay, but the Testament of Jacob is not related to the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.

[John2]

I wonder how much of the Testaments could likewise be reflected in Paul. I've been excited about the possibility that his "no eye" citation came from the Testament of Jacob, and perhaps then he and James regarded the Testaments as Scripture.

Okay, but the Testament of Jacob is not related to the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.

Oh, I assumed that it was. Never mind then.

[Ben C. Smith]

I wonder how much of the Testaments could likewise be reflected in Paul. I've been excited about the possibility that his "no eye" citation came from the Testament of Jacob, and perhaps then he and James regarded the Testaments as Scripture.

Okay, but the Testament of Jacob is not related to the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.

Oh, I assumed that it was. Never mind then.

The Testament of Jacob comes as the third part of the so called Testaments of the Three Patriarchs (those of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob) in one of the translations, but I think most researchers suppose that the Testament of Abraham was written first and the other two were added later, either independently or deliberately in order to round out the set. The dates for these three texts are notoriously difficult to pin down.

[John2]

Not having heard of the Testament of Jacob until recently, I'm wondering if it is the same as 4Q537. As noted here:

Another Dead Sea text perhaps describing the New Jerusalem, but in Aramaic, is 4Q537, called the Testament of Jacob.


https://www.google.com/books/edition/Th ... frontcover

I can't find a good translation online of the "other" Testament of Jacob (if it is different), but Puech's 4Q537 is viewable here:


http://jewishchristianlit.com/Texts/StudTxts/4Q537.html


Footnore 68 in the above book says:

This genre is questioned by R.A. Kugler ... and D. Dimont ... Dimont also questions whether this text should be ascribed to Jacob at all.

If this is the same writing as the "other" TJ, then maybe Paul did get his "no eye" citation from it. The only translation of the "other" one I've found so far is this crazy looking one, which makes it difficult to compare the translation of 4Q537 with it.


https://archive.org/stream/TheTestament ... b_djvu.txt


But if it's not the same writing, then fine, whatever.

I used to have Charlesworth's Old Testament Pseudepigrapha but I don't recall noticing anything about the Testament of Jacob in it at the time, and I can't find anything about it there (as far as 4Q537 goes) on Google Books, so perhaps someone here could enlighten me about this.

[Ben C. Smith]

Not having heard of the Testament of Jacob until recently, I'm wondering if it is the same as 4Q537. As noted here:

Another Dead Sea text perhaps describing the New Jerusalem, but in Aramaic, is 4Q537, called the Testament of Jacob.

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Th ... frontcover

4Q537 looks unrelated to the Testament of Jacob in which the "eye and ear" saying is found, which survives in Bohairic Coptic and is, in its current form, explicitly Christian.

I used to have Charlesworth's Old Testament Pseudepigrapha but I don't recall noticing anything about the Testament of Jacob in it at the time, and I can't find anything about it there (as far as 4Q537 goes) on Google Books, so perhaps someone here could enlighten me about this.

The Testament of Jacob in which I found the "eye and ear" saying is translated on pages 441-452 of The Apocryphal Old Testament, by H. F. D. Sparks. I have not been able to locate it anywhere else.