Julian denies the authenticity of both Testimonium Flavianum and Taciteum

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 2296
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: Julian denies the authenticity of both Testimonium Flavianum and Taciteum

Post by GakuseiDon »

Giuseppe wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 1:48 am
GakuseiDon wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 12:44 am Not Arnoldo, but Julian was a 'historicist'. It's important to note because we shouldn't try to read Julian's writings as though he was involved in the "did Jesus exist" debate. He seems to have thought Jesus existed but that many of the stories in the Gospels were made up.
I disagree strongly here. Saying that Jesus was unknown, a mr. Nobody, means to be involved at least partially in a "did Jesus exist" debate.
Not in the same terms as we discuss it here.

Julian's point indeed seems to be that Jesus was a "Mr Nobody". All he did at best was heal the sick and exorcise those possessed by demons, hardly "mighty achievements" in his eyes. To quote Julian from Ken's post:

"... during his [Jesus'] lifetime he accomplished nothing worth hearing of, unless anyone thinks that to heal crooked and blind men and to exorcise those who were possessed by evil demons in the villages of Bethsaida and Bethany can be classed as a mighty achievement."

That seems to be the context: "no mighty achievements; prove me wrong by showing me writers contemporary to Tiberius and Claudius that mentioned those mighty achievements."
Giuseppe wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 1:48 amAt any case, this thread is a debate about the survival of a copy of Josephus without the Testimonium Flavianum.
Even assuming Julian had read the TF: are there "mighty achievements" in the TF that might have satisfied Julian? Julian accuses Jesus and Paul of being "content if they could delude maidservants and slaves, and through them the women, and men like Cornelius and Sergius." The TF lists "wonderful works" which arguably Julian might have taken to refer to healing crooked and blind men and exorcising possessed men, thus not impressive enough for Julian.

Magical healings might sound impressive to us today, but in ancient times not so much. When Jesus did some healing while the Pharisees watched, they didn't go "Holy Crap, look at that!" They said "Hey, you can't do that on the Sabbath!"

I'd argue that even if Julian knew about the TF in Josephus, it wouldn't have been important to him. It didn't provide the "mighy achievements" he was looking for. Then again, I'm a contrarian S.O.B.
Last edited by GakuseiDon on Sun Nov 20, 2022 2:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Julian denies the authenticity of both Testimonium Flavianum and Taciteum

Post by Giuseppe »

GakuseiDon wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 2:43 am Julian's point indeed seems to be that Jesus was a "Mr Nobody".
possibly the same identical point raised by Tryphon:

But Christ, if he exists somewhere, is unknown

GakuseiDon wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 2:43 am Even assuming Julian had read the TF: are there "mighty achievements" in the TF that might have satisfied Julian?
are you joking? :consternation: The Testimonium Flavianum isn't selling the marginal Jew of John P. Meyer. It is selling the Jesus Christ god-man of the Christians. More "mighty achievements" than what is described in the TF are impossible for a man!
User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 2296
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: Julian denies the authenticity of both Testimonium Flavianum and Taciteum

Post by GakuseiDon »

Giuseppe wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 2:49 am
GakuseiDon wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 2:43 am Julian's point indeed seems to be that Jesus was a "Mr Nobody".
possibly the same identical point raised by Tryphon:

But Christ, if he exists somewhere, is unknown

No, that's a different point. Justin's Trypho's point was that Christ hadn't come, or was unknown even to himself, since Elijah hadn't come to announce him. Julian's point was that Christ and Paul didn't do any mighty achievements. They just deluded simple people.
Giuseppe wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 2:49 am
GakuseiDon wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 2:43 am Even assuming Julian had read the TF: are there "mighty achievements" in the TF that might have satisfied Julian?
are you joking? :consternation: The Testimonium Flavianum isn't selling the marginal Jew of John P. Meyer. It is selling the Jesus Christ god-man of the Christians. More "mighty achievements" than what is described in the TF are impossible for a man!
What mighty achievements given in the TF would have impressed Julian, in your view? That is, things that Julian hadn't already chalked up to delusions and lies.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Julian denies the authenticity of both Testimonium Flavianum and Taciteum

Post by Giuseppe »

GakuseiDon wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 2:56 am No, that's a different point. Justin's Trypho's point was that Christ hadn't come, or was unknown even to himself, since Elijah hadn't come to announce him.
do you think that the Trypho's point was so different from Julian's point that the former didn't require, as answer by Justin, the mention of the Testimonium Flavianum, while the latter required a such mention of it, by Cyril?

Note that, according to Feldman, Justin had to reply by quoting the Testimonium Flavianum if only he had known it:

The fact, if it is a fact, that no ante-Nicene Christian is known to have used Josephus’ works in apologies directed to the Jews is certainly surprising in view of the charge, as seen in The Dialogue with Trypho, that Jesus never lived and in view of the eagerness of Christians to convert Jews.

(Feldman, “On the Authenticity of the Testimonium Flavianum Attributed to Josephus”, in New Perspectives on Jewish-Christian Relations, Elisheva Carlebach and Jacob J. Schacter (ed.s), Brill, 2011, pp. 13-30, p. 15)

My point is that also Cyrill had to reply against Julian by quoting the Testimonium Flavianum, to dispel the false accusation that Jesus was ignored by all the writers of the time. Contra factum that Cyril didn't.
GakuseiDon wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 2:56 am What mighty achievements given in the TF would have impressed Julian, in your view? That is, things that Julian hadn't already chalked up to delusions and lies.
for an example, the confession by Josephus (known by Julian as the Pharisee such he was) that Jesus "was the Christ". Julian received a Christian education and he knew the high meaning of a such title.
User avatar
maryhelena
Posts: 2900
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: Julian denies the authenticity of both Testimonium Flavianum and Taciteum

Post by maryhelena »

Giuseppe wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 2:39 am
maryhelena wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 2:06 amThat such a TF existed - the Slavonic Josephus - indicates that the name Jesus was not necessarily a part of a core TF.
Are you saying that you believe that the Slavonic Testimonium Flavianum is genuine ?
Is it genuine? It's a story - as is the gospel story. Variations on a theme. Which story is older? Well, I would take a guess and say the older story does not name the wonder-worker. I can't see Christian leaving out the name Jesus from the wise man story - hence the Slavonic Josephus wonder worker story has a better prospect of being an older story than the Christian interpolated Antiquities TF.

As Dave Allen pointed out, in the above quote, Josephus does not name the Egyptian nor the Samaritan - hence not naming the wise man of the TF would not be outside of his methods of writing.

It is the Lukan writer that has taken elements of the Slavonic Josephus wonder worker story - in his Emmaus story.

Slavonic Josephus: 'But when they saw his power, that he accomplished everything that he would by word, they urged him that he should enter the city and cut down the Roman soldiers and Pilate and rule over us. But that one scorned it.'

Luke: 24. 19 .....'The things about Jesus of Nazareth, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people, 20 and how our chief priests and leaders handed him over to be condemned to death and crucified him. 21 But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel'.

Undoubtedly the Slavonic Josephus has undergone it's own interpolations - but, so it seems, no interpolator has named the wonder-worker as Jesus.

The consensus on the TF is that it's core is Josephan - and later Christians interpolated it. Perhaps what the consensus now needs to do - in relation to your interesting quote from Julian - is to acknowledge that naming the wise man as Jesus is also an interpolation into a core Josephan TF. Doing so would take the debate to Josephus instead of Eusebius interpolations - which of course are interesting in and off themselves. But far more important is a core Josephan TF - and questions that can then be raised as to what the story is about and why Josephus chose to place it where he did.
User avatar
Ken Olson
Posts: 1280
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 9:26 am

Re: Julian denies the authenticity of both Testimonium Flavianum and Taciteum

Post by Ken Olson »

Giuseppe wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 3:29 am
GakuseiDon wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 2:56 am No, that's a different point. Justin's Trypho's point was that Christ hadn't come, or was unknown even to himself, since Elijah hadn't come to announce him.
do you think that the Trypho's point was so different from Julian's point that the former didn't require, as answer by Justin, the mention of the Testimonium Flavianum, while the latter required a such mention of it, by Cyril?

Note that, according to Feldman, Justin had to reply by quoting the Testimonium Flavianum if only he had known it:

The fact, if it is a fact, that no ante-Nicene Christian is known to have used Josephus’ works in apologies directed to the Jews is certainly surprising in view of the charge, as seen in The Dialogue with Trypho, that Jesus never lived and in view of the eagerness of Christians to convert Jews.

(Feldman, “On the Authenticity of the Testimonium Flavianum Attributed to Josephus”, in New Perspectives on Jewish-Christian Relations, Elisheva Carlebach and Jacob J. Schacter (ed.s), Brill, 2011, pp. 13-30, p. 15)

My point is that also Cyrill had to reply against Julian by quoting the Testimonium Flavianum, to dispel the false accusation that Jesus was ignored by all the writers of the time. Contra factum that Cyril didn't.
GakuseiDon wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 2:56 am What mighty achievements given in the TF would have impressed Julian, in your view? That is, things that Julian hadn't already chalked up to delusions and lies.
for an example, the confession by Josephus (known by Julian as the Pharisee such he was) that Jesus "was the Christ". Julian received a Christian education and he knew the high meaning of a such title.
The claim about what Cyril *had* to do (especially when we have not yet located the text of Cyril's response to Julian in book six of Against Julian) goes a bit beyond what reasonable historical inference can provide.

Cyril seems to have known Eusebius' Chronicle:

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals ... B4B79D7A8E

It would seem odd to deny his knowledge of Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History, which contains the Testimonium Flavianum. Unless of course you want to claim that the TF is a later interpolation into the HE (and DE and Theophany). Cyril could have quoted it from the HE. Unless he didn't believe Eusebius when he said that Josephus wrote it.

PS About to go on holiday for Thanksgiving, not sure when I'll check in again
User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 2296
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: Julian denies the authenticity of both Testimonium Flavianum and Taciteum

Post by GakuseiDon »

Giuseppe wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 3:29 amMy point is that also Cyrill had to reply against Julian by quoting the Testimonium Flavianum, to dispel the false accusation that Jesus was ignored by all the writers of the time. Contra factum that Cyril didn't.
Again, the accusation seems to be that Jesus "accomplished nothing worth hearing of" except for healing miracles, etc, and that Jesus and Paul deluded simple people; in other words, nothing reaching the level of a "mighty achievement". My point is to suggest that there is nothing in the TF that would have changed Julian's mind, assuming that he'd read the TF.
Giuseppe wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 3:29 am
GakuseiDon wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 2:56 am What mighty achievements given in the TF would have impressed Julian, in your view? That is, things that Julian hadn't already chalked up to delusions and lies.
for an example, the confession by Josephus (known by Julian as the Pharisee such he was) that Jesus "was the Christ". Julian received a Christian education and he knew the high meaning of a such title.
Do you think that Josephus's claim that Jesus was Christ would have met Julian's criterion of a "mighty achievement"? I suggest he would have put the same amount of weight on it as he did with the apostles' claim that Jesus was "Christ".
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Julian denies the authenticity of both Testimonium Flavianum and Taciteum

Post by Giuseppe »

Ken Olson wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 3:51 amCyril could have quoted it from the HE. Unless he didn't believe Eusebius when he said that Josephus wrote it.
or: unless he (=Cyril) conceded that he couldn't persuade Julian by quoting the Testimonium Flavianum, because he knew (by logical inference from the same Julian's assertion) that Julian didn't have the Testimonium Flavianum in his copy of Josephus's Jewish Antiquities.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Julian denies the authenticity of both Testimonium Flavianum and Taciteum

Post by Giuseppe »

GakuseiDon wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 3:53 am I suggest he would have put the same amount of weight on it as he did with the apostles' claim that Jesus was "Christ".
obviously no. We are talking about Julian, who was educated as a Christian, ergo he knew very probably the Christian apologetical use of a not-Christian (= Josephus) as independent witness of the truth of the Christ's prophecy about the destruction of the Temple. Even more he would have known the enormous importance of an anti-Christian Pharisee confessing that Jesus was the Christ, if only he had read the Testimonium Flavianum.
User avatar
Ken Olson
Posts: 1280
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 9:26 am

Re: Julian denies the authenticity of both Testimonium Flavianum and Taciteum

Post by Ken Olson »

Giuseppe wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 3:56 am
Ken Olson wrote: Sun Nov 20, 2022 3:51 amCyril could have quoted it from the HE. Unless he didn't believe Eusebius when he said that Josephus wrote it.
or: unless he (=Cyril) conceded that he couldn't persuade Julian by quoting the Testimonium Flavianum, because he knew (by logical inference from the same Julian's assertion) that Julian didn't have the Testimonium Flavianum in his copy of Josephus's Jewish Antiquities.
Cyril is writing Against Julian for a Christian audience, not for the actual Julian (who died perhaps a decade before he was born). You're backing up an unnecessary inference by an unlikely one. Cyril would hardly have felt the need to play by Julian's rules, let alone infer what those rules are and then play by them.
Post Reply