Was Josephus a Christian?

[Ken Olson]

I think what the rabbis did was tone down the meaning of something they knew was being interpreted messianically by anti-Roman Jews ("mighty one"), in order to save Judaism in the face of reality. But "mighty one" still can have that sense, as the rabbis surely knew (as per Jer. 30:21).

I'm a bit confused at this point. Are you arguing that Yoḥanan ben Zakkai acknowledged Vespasian as the Messiah according to Gittin 56b?

If not, what are you arguing?

Best,

Ken

[John2]

I think what the rabbis did was tone down the meaning of something they knew was being interpreted messianically by anti-Roman Jews ("mighty one"), in order to save Judaism in the face of reality. But "mighty one" still can have that sense, as the rabbis surely knew (as per Jer. 30:21).

I'm a bit confused at this point. Are you arguing that Yoḥanan ben Zakkai acknowledged Vespasian as the Messiah according to Gittin 56b?

If not, what are you arguing?

Best,

Ken

I'm arguing that ben Zakkai (and by extension Josephus, whatever prophecy he had in mind) was surely aware that the verse he applied to Vespasian was "messianic" but that he and other rabbis toned down the meaning of "mighty one" (given that this interpretation existed in his time, his contact with Jews who applied the ambiguous oracle to themselves, and the way "mighty one" is used in Jer. 30:21).

[Ken Olson]

I think what the rabbis did was tone down the meaning of something they knew was being interpreted messianically by anti-Roman Jews ("mighty one"), in order to save Judaism in the face of reality. But "mighty one" still can have that sense, as the rabbis surely knew (as per Jer. 30:21).

I'm a bit confused at this point. Are you arguing that Yoḥanan ben Zakkai acknowledged Vespasian as the Messiah according to Gittin 56b?

If not, what are you arguing?

Best,

Ken

I'm arguing that ben Zakkai (and by extension Josephus, whatever prophecy he had in mind) was surely aware that the verse he applied to Vespasian was "messianic" but that he and other rabbis toned down the meaning of "mighty one" (given that this interpretation existed in his time, his contact with Jews who applied the ambiguous oracle to themselves, and the way "mighty one" is used in Jer. 30:21).

So Rabbi Yoḥanan knew the verse he applied to Vespasian was interpreted as messianic by other Jews, but that does not mean that he himself acknowledged Vespasian as the Messiah?

[John2]

So Rabbi Yoḥanan knew the verse he applied to Vespasian was interpreted as messianic by other Jews, but that does not mean that he himself acknowledged Vespasian as the Messiah?

I think he (and Josephus) did what they had to do, by tweaking verses they knew were "messianic" and applying them to Vespasian. Does that mean they thought he was the Messiah? No, but that's what it amounts to in essence and I think they knew what they were doing.

So, did they think Vespasian was "the Messiah"? Maybe not, but they applied verses they knew were "messianic" to him, as a way to save Judaism (and I don't blame them for it).

[GakuseiDon]

I think it is a mistake to confuse "a Messiah figure" with "the Messiah". I think that Jews and some Christians believed that God might appoint anyone who is useful or good for His purpose. Cyrus the Great was one. Another was Alexander the Great, as per Josephus' Antiquities, 8.5:

... for Alexander, when he saw the multitude at a distance, in white garments, while the priests stood clothed with fine linen, and the high priest in purple and scarlet clothing, with his mitre on his head, having the golden plate whereon the name of God was engraved, he approached by himself, and adored that name, and first saluted the high priest. The Jews also did all together, with one voice, salute Alexander, and encompass him about...

...And when he went up into the temple, he offered sacrifice to God, according to the high priest's direction, and magnificently treated both the high priest and the priests. And when the Book of Daniel was showed him (23) wherein Daniel declared that one of the Greeks should destroy the empire of the Persians, he supposed that himself was the person intended. And as he was then glad, he dismissed the multitude for the present; but the next day he called them to him, and bid them ask what favors they pleased of him; whereupon the high priest desired that they might enjoy the laws of their forefathers, and might pay no tribute on the seventh year. He granted all they desired. And when they entreared him that he would permit the Jews in Babylon and Media to enjoy their own laws also, he willingly promised to do hereafter what they desired...

I speculate that Josephus was trying to convince Vespasian and Titus that they also were the topics of Jewish prophecy so that he might obtain favors for the Jews from them. So Vespasian wasn't the Messiah, but, like Alexander the Great, he was prophecised in the Hebrew Scriptures, at least according to Josephus.

[maryhelena]

I think it is a mistake to confuse "a Messiah figure" with "the Messiah". I think that Jews and some Christians believed that God might appoint anyone who is useful or good for His purpose. Cyrus the Great was one. Another was Alexander the Great, as per Josephus' Antiquities, 8.5:

... for Alexander, when he saw the multitude at a distance, in white garments, while the priests stood clothed with fine linen, and the high priest in purple and scarlet clothing, with his mitre on his head, having the golden plate whereon the name of God was engraved, he approached by himself, and adored that name, and first saluted the high priest. The Jews also did all together, with one voice, salute Alexander, and encompass him about...

...And when he went up into the temple, he offered sacrifice to God, according to the high priest's direction, and magnificently treated both the high priest and the priests. And when the Book of Daniel was showed him (23) wherein Daniel declared that one of the Greeks should destroy the empire of the Persians, he supposed that himself was the person intended. And as he was then glad, he dismissed the multitude for the present; but the next day he called them to him, and bid them ask what favors they pleased of him; whereupon the high priest desired that they might enjoy the laws of their forefathers, and might pay no tribute on the seventh year. He granted all they desired. And when they entreared him that he would permit the Jews in Babylon and Media to enjoy their own laws also, he willingly promised to do hereafter what they desired...

I speculate that Josephus was trying to convince Vespasian and Titus that they also were the topics of Jewish prophecy so that he might obtain favors from them. So Vespasian wasn't the (Davidic) Messiah, but, like Alexander the Great, he was prophecised.

Good point re interpreting/applying Daniel to Alexander. It seems that an anointed figure, a messiah figure, was a flexible idea that could be used, and reused, to fit any situation deemed relevant.

It's interesting to consider what Josephus has done re Agrippa I.

Genesis 41: 41-46
So Pharaoh said to Joseph, ‘I hereby put you in charge of the whole land of Egypt.” Then pharaoh took his signet ring from his finger and put it on Joseph’s finger. He dressed him in robes of fine linen and put a gold chain around his neck……Joseph was 30 years old when he entered the service of Pharaoh king of Egypt.

Antiquities book 18 ch.6

“I think it fit to declare to thee the prediction of the gods. It cannot be that thou shouldst long continue in these bonds; but thou wilt soon be delivered from them, and wilt be promoted to the highest dignity and power, and thou wilt be envied by all……”
“However, there did not many days pass ere he sent for him to his house, and had him shaved, and made him change his raiment; after which he put a diadem upon his head, and appointed him to be king of the tetrarchy of Philip. He also gave him the tetrarchy of Lysanias, and changed his iron chain for a golden one of equal weight.”

Daniel 9: 25
..to restore and rebuild Jerusalem….

Antiquities book 19 ch.7
“As for the walls of Jerusalem, that were adjoining to the new city [Bezetha], he repaired them at the expense of the public, and built them wider in breadth, and higher in altitude; and he had made them too strong for all human power to demolish,

Numbers 24:17

I behold him, but not near;
A star shall come forth from Jacob,
A sceptre shall rise from Israel,

Antiquities book 19 ch.8

…”he put on a garment made wholly of silver, and of a contexture truly wonderful, and came into the theatre early in the morning; at which time the silver of his garment being illuminated by the fresh reflection of the sun’s rays upon it, shone out after a surprising manner, and was so resplendent as to spread a horror over those that looked intently upon him; and presently his flatterers cried out, one from one place, and another from another, (though not for his good,) that he was a god; and they added, “Be thou merciful to us; for although we have hitherto reverenced thee only as a man, yet shall we henceforth own thee as superior to mortal nature”.

Agrippa I died around 44/45 ce (re Josephus dating - although Tacitus indicates Agrippa I died around 49 c.e.)Interestingly, 44/45 ce is around 490 years from the 20th year of Artaxerxes in 446/445 bc – the year in which Nehemiah goes to Jerusalem to rebuild it’s walls….Nehemiah 1:1-3, 2:1).

Not forgetting that, re Josephus, Agrippa was made King in 37 c.e. A King with Hasmonean ancestry. 100 years since the events of 63 b.c.

Josephus also finds relevance in 63 c.e. - that year being 100 years from 37 b.c. In 63 c.e. Josephus places Jesus ben Ananias (7 year prior to the fall of Jerusalem) He also places the James passage around the same time.

If Josephus was using a 100 year time frame in which to place his Hasmonean/Jewish history - did he do the same with Roman history i.e. his prediction regarding Vespasian ?

Vespasian became Roman Emperor in 69 c.e. - that is 100 years from the Battle of Actium in 31 b.c. Josephus gave his Vespasian prediction following the fall of Jotapata in 67 c.e. In other words - in the middle of the 7 year period from 63 c.e.

Battle of Actium

The Battle of Actium was a naval battle fought between Octavian's maritime fleet, led by Marcus Agrippa, and the combined fleets of both Mark Antony and Cleopatra VII Philopator. The battle took place on 2 September 31 BC in the Ionian Sea, near the former Roman colony of Actium, Greece,....

Octavian's victory enabled him to consolidate his power over Rome and its dominions. He adopted the title of Princeps ("first citizen"), and in 27 BC was awarded the title of Augustus ("revered") by the Roman Senate. This became the name by which he was known in later times. As Augustus, he retained the trappings of a restored Republican leader, but historians generally view his consolidation of power and the adoption of these honorifics as the end of the Roman Republic and the beginning of the Roman Empire.[7]

Whatever the 'ambiguous oracle' Josephus had in mind, whether specific or a composite of ideas, he also needed an element of timing in which to apply it. The historical event that seems to have played a part in his applying the ambiguous oracle to Vespasian might well have been his own experience at Jotapata - combined with a long view of history.....

Agrippa I, re Josephus and Philo, was made a new King, a king with Hasmonean ancestry, by Gaius in 37 c.e. (100 years after Roman rule in Judaea in 63 b.c.)

Vespasian, re Roman history, was made the new Emperor in 69 c.e. (100 years after the Battle of Actium in 31 b.c.)

[Ken Olson]

I think it is a mistake to confuse "a Messiah figure" with "the Messiah". I think that Jews and some Christians believed that God might appoint anyone who is useful or good for His purpose. Cyrus the Great was one. Another was Alexander the Great, as per Josephus' Antiquities, 8.5:

... for Alexander, when he saw the multitude at a distance, in white garments, while the priests stood clothed with fine linen, and the high priest in purple and scarlet clothing, with his mitre on his head, having the golden plate whereon the name of God was engraved, he approached by himself, and adored that name, and first saluted the high priest. The Jews also did all together, with one voice, salute Alexander, and encompass him about...

...And when he went up into the temple, he offered sacrifice to God, according to the high priest's direction, and magnificently treated both the high priest and the priests. And when the Book of Daniel was showed him (23) wherein Daniel declared that one of the Greeks should destroy the empire of the Persians, he supposed that himself was the person intended. And as he was then glad, he dismissed the multitude for the present; but the next day he called them to him, and bid them ask what favors they pleased of him; whereupon the high priest desired that they might enjoy the laws of their forefathers, and might pay no tribute on the seventh year. He granted all they desired. And when they entreared him that he would permit the Jews in Babylon and Media to enjoy their own laws also, he willingly promised to do hereafter what they desired...

I speculate that Josephus was trying to convince Vespasian and Titus that they also were the topics of Jewish prophecy so that he might obtain favors for the Jews from them. So Vespasian wasn't the Messiah, but, like Alexander the Great, he was prophecised in the Hebrew Scriptures, at least according to Josephus.

Good catch. There are two passages in Josephus Antiquities about Alexander being foretold in Daniel, Ant. 11.8.5/11.336-337, which you quoted and Ant. 10.11.7 / 10.73, where Josephus wrote (interpreting book 8 of Daniel):

Daniel wrote that he saw these visions in the plain of Susa; and he hath informed us, that God interpreted the appearance of this vision after the following manner. “He said, that the ram signified the Kingdoms of the Medes and Persians; and the horns those Kings that were to reign in them: and that the last horn signified the last King; and that he should exceed all the Kings in riches and glory, that the he-goat signified, that one should come, and reign from the Greeks, who should twice fight with the Persian, and overcome him in battle; and should receive his entire dominion: that by the great horn, which sprang out of the forehead of the he-goat was meant the first King; and that the springing up of four horns upon its falling off, and the conversion of every one of them to the four quarters of the earth, signified the successors that should arise after the death of the first King; and the partition of the Kingdom among them; and that they should be neither his children, nor of his kindred that should reign over the habitable earth for many years

Josephus takes this to have been a prophecy made by Daniel at the time of the captivity of the Jews in Babylon in the sixth century BCE, but most scholars now think that Daniel was composed in the 160's BCE. The passage is about Alexander the Great, but Alexander could not have read it because it was not yet written. In his commentary on Daniel, John Collins writes of Daniel 8.3. ('the great horn was broken'): ''The transparent reference to the death of Alexander has been recognized from Josephus on' (Collins, Daniel, Hermeneia 1993, 331).

But I would advise caution on interpreting every prophecy concerning a king in the scriptures to be 'messianic'.

Best,

Ken

[Ken Olson]

I think what the rabbis did was tone down the meaning of something they knew was being interpreted messianically by anti-Roman Jews ("mighty one"), in order to save Judaism in the face of reality. But "mighty one" still can have that sense, as the rabbis surely knew (as per Jer. 30:21).

I'm a bit confused at this point. Are you arguing that Yoḥanan ben Zakkai acknowledged Vespasian as the Messiah according to Gittin 56b?

If not, what are you arguing?

Best,

Ken

I'm arguing that ben Zakkai (and by extension Josephus, whatever prophecy he had in mind) was surely aware that the verse he applied to Vespasian was "messianic" but that he and other rabbis toned down the meaning of "mighty one" (given that this interpretation existed in his time, his contact with Jews who applied the ambiguous oracle to themselves, and the way "mighty one" is used in Jer. 30:21).

We may not be all that far apart then, but I would nuance both cases a bit.

I am not confident that the passage from Gittin 56b reports and actual conversation between Yoḥanan ben Zakkai and Vespasian - though I am confident that the person who reported the story in Gittin was early (c. 200 CE or earlier) and Jewish and that it gives us an example of Jewish exegesis of scripture.

In the case of Josephus, I do not think he was the person who originally formulated the report about ambiguous oracle which foretold the accession of Vespasian (or Vespasian and Titus). I think that was a bit of Flavian propaganda written by a Roman, which probably circulated at the time Vespasian launched his bid for the throne. The Roman author probably knew about Jewish messianic expectations second hand and was likely not basing it on the exegesis of any particular biblical passage(s).

When Josephus wrote the Jewish War in the late 70's AD as a prisoner in Rome, he included the oracle. But all it he admits to is that Vespasian's rise to the purple was foretold in the Jewish scriptures, which he had already said anyway. We do not know what scriptures he had in mind. They did not by any means have to be messianic prophecies.

Best,

Ken

[Secret Alias]

I am not confident that the passage from Gittin 56b reports and actual conversation between Yoḥanan ben Zakkai and Vespasian

I am confident it didn't. Last I checked people don't continously cite verses from scripture to non-Jews in everyday discussions. These terse accounts are just broad poetic encapsulation of historical trends. Nero wasn't a proselyte.

[Peter Kirby]

In the case of Josephus, I do not think he was the person who originally formulated the report about ambiguous oracle which foretold the accession of Vespasian (or Vespasian and Titus). I think that was a bit of Flavian propaganda written by a Roman, which probably circulated at the time Vespasian launched his bid for the throne. The Roman author probably knew about Jewish messianic expectations second hand and was likely not basing it on the exegesis of any particular biblical passage(s).

This is also the impression that I get.

I wouldn't know how close our opinions were just from the limited yes/no question of whether to use "messianic" regarding what Josephus says about Vespasian.

I agree that Josephus need not genuinely consider Vespasian to be the Messiah and that Josephus may have had his own private interpretations of how Vespasian was prophesied.

At the same time, Josephus was obliged to give respect to the Flavian propaganda that Vespasian fulfilled the oracles otherwise interpreted as messianic, and indeed this is what the passage from Josephus that we've been discussing is about.

To quote it again here:

But now what did the most elevate them in undertaking this war, was an ambiguous oracle, that was also found in their sacred writings; how “About that time one, from their country, should become governor of the habitable earth.” The Jews took this prediction to belong to themselves in particular: and many of the wise men were thereby deceived in their determination. Now this oracle certainly denoted the government of Vespasian: who was appointed emperor in Judea. However, it is not possible for men to avoid fate: although they see it beforehand. But these men interpreted some of these signals according to their own pleasure; and some of them they utterly despised: until their madness was demonstrated, both by the taking of their city, and their own destruction.

The reference to "an ambiguous oracle" and how "many of the wise men were thereby deceived in their determination" supports the reading that Josephus here is referring to something that controverts the messianic interpretations that were employed during the war.

The reference that "the Jews took this prediction to belong to themselves in particular" and "one, from their country" shows that this passage is about what we would call messianic expectations.

That this messianic expectation that ran high during the war is in mind here is further shown when "their madness" is proven from the destruction of Jerusalem.

Josephus said it did "elevate them in undertaking this war," again showing that messianic expectations are in view in this passage.

The reference to Vespasian being "appointed emperor in Judea" (note: in Judea, not a Judean/Jew, get it?) once again makes it plain to see what this is written about.

Something about the word messianic causes dissension however, possibly because some attempt to say 'Josephus believed....' But I wouldn't claim that Josephus genuinely believes, as I wrote above. Josephus may indeed have played up the consistency of his personal beliefs with what was the propaganda about Vespasian.