Josephus Antiquities 20.200 on James: The scholars who doubt

[Ken Olson]

there probably was persecution of Christians during Domitian's reign.

what would be such evidence?

It's an inference from (1) when I would date Mark and (2) the fact that I think Mark was written to encourage Christians not to apostasize in a time of trouble and persecution (Mark 4.16, 8.48 13.14, 14.53-66) some time after the destruction of the temple (i.e., the temple had been destroyed and the end times had clearly not arrived then, but would Mark assures his audience they would arrive real soon now).

Also, I take Pliny's letter to be authentic, and while he disclaims specific knowledge of the official policy, he knows that trials of Christians have taken place in the past and asks whether membership in the sect (the name) itself is to be punished or only specific crimes that members of the sect were commonly believed to have committed. Some of those he questioned claimed to have apostasized already, one as many as twenty years ago. His method of asking those who denied being Christians to deny or curse Christ and sacrifice or burn incense to the statues of the emperor or the gods looks suspiciously like what Mark may be talking about in 8.48 and 14.53-66 (one can avoid this by fleeing to the hills as in 13.14). It would be possible to suppose that Pliny invented these procedures himself. but I suspect he had some knowledge of the procedures used in previous trials even if he disclaimed exact knowledge of the extent to which he should investigate (i.e, make an effort to hunt down) Christians or to which they should be punished and whether this differed by the degree of the offense (which both he and the emperor seem to have felt it did).

My previous note on how I would date Mark:

viewtopic.php?p=113680#p113680

Best,

Ken

[Giuseppe]

what would be such evidence?

It's an inference from (1) when I would date Mark and (2) the fact that I think Mark was written to encourage Christians not to apostasize in a time of trouble and persecution

strange, I would do exactly the vice versa:

given before the external evidence of persecution in Pliny the Younger, only as second step I would date Mark to Pliny the Younger's time.

At contrary, it seems that you have before dated Mark by using 'internal reasons' and the presumed dating of Ignatius, and only after you go to consider Pliny the Younger's witness.

We agree surely on this point:

His method of asking those who denied being Christians to deny or curse Christ and sacrifice or burn incense to the statues of the emperor or the gods looks suspiciously like what Mark may be talking about in 8.48 and 14.53-66 (one can avoid this by fleeing to the hills as in 13.14). I

[ABuddhist]

I doubt the Christian tradition that Domitian himself took an interest in persecuting Christians and put out an effort eradicate them. That said, there probably was persecution of Christians during Domitian's reign.

Yeah, I thought that John2 was being too credulous. But do you have any opinion about the claim that Flavia Domitilla personally was involved in the foundation of the catacomb? Because that strikes me as pious legend rather than fact.

[Sinouhe]

It seems to me that Pliny discovered the very existence of the Christians and their practices and that he described this sect to the emperor, implying that he did not know them either.

I therefore do not know what offenses it is the practice to punish or investigate, and to what extent.
They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so.

But I rather think that this letter come from the pen of a Christian who writes anachronistically about the Christian situation in Bithynia in the first century.

For the contagion of this superstition has spread not only to the cities but also to the villages and farms. But it seems possible to check and cure it. It is certain only quite clear that the temples, which had been almost deserted, have begun to be frequented, that the established religious rites, long neglected, are being resumed, and that from everywhere sacrificial animals are coming, for which until now very few purchasers could be found. Hence it is easy to imagine what a multitude of people can be reformed if an opportunity for repentance is afforded.

Relying on the testimonies of St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Basil, who were natives of the region, Tillemont says: "The city of Neocaesarea, also sometimes called Andrinople, was included in the part of Pontus called Polémoniaque. It was the capital or one of the main cities of the province of the province when St. Gregory was made bishop, and it was as populous as the whole as well as all the surrounding country. But all the inhabitants of the city and its surroundings were in the darkness of paganism. At that time, there were only 17 Christians".
(Mém. ecclésiastiques, t. IV, saint Grégoire Thaum., VI.)

And such an ignorance of the subject seems to me very suspicious coming from Pliny. We learn from Pliny himself that Trajan had recourse to his lights of jurisconsult in the judicial questions and that in such matter he had nothing to learn from the prince.

All these elements and many others, as well as the circumstances of the discovery of Pliny's book X and its mysterious disappearance after its publication, make me think that we are dealing here with a forgery of poor quality composed with Tertullian's book.

[Ken Olson]

I doubt the Christian tradition that Domitian himself took an interest in persecuting Christians and put out an effort eradicate them. That said, there probably was persecution of Christians during Domitian's reign.

Yeah, I thought that John2 was being too credulous. But do you have any opinion about the claim that Flavia Domitilla personally was involved in the foundation of the catacomb? Because that strikes me as pious legend rather than fact.

I haven't researched the claim connecting Flavia Domitilla with the Roman catacombs, but I'm a bit dubious about the link. The claims come from the institution that runs the site (which is to them a holy place). Is there a body of scholarship that has examined these claims? And are they asserting the historicity of St. Petronilla, daughter of St. Peter?) I'd probably start with looking for what (and when) the earliest source documenting the connection between Flavia Domitilla and the catacombs was.

Best,

Ken

[Ken Olson]

It seems to me that Pliny discovered the very existence of the Christians and their practices and that he described this sect to the emperor, implying that he did not know them either.

That is a very forced reading of the text. In the opening paragraph of the letter, which I quoted in the post to which you are replying, Pliny writes: 'I have never attended hearings concerning Christians," not, 'I've never heard of Christians.' Then he continues, ' so I am unaware what is usually punished or investigated, and to what extent,' which implies he knows there have been hearings concerning Christians and presumes that there is some usual way of dealing with them. In the rest of the letter, he lays out the procedure he followed for the emperor' approval, including 'those who are truly Christian cannot, it is said, be forced to do any of these things,' which implies he has previously heard about Christians, though it's plausible that he may never have had occasion to talk to one about Christianity before.

But I rather think that this letter come from the pen of a Christian who writes anachronistically about the Christian situation in Bithynia in the first century.

For the contagion of this superstition has spread not only to the cities but also to the villages and farms. But it seems possible to check and cure it. It is certain only quite clear that the temples, which had been almost deserted, have begun to be frequented, that the established religious rites, long neglected, are being resumed, and that from everywhere sacrificial animals are coming, for which until now very few purchasers could be found. Hence it is easy to imagine what a multitude of people can be reformed if an opportunity for repentance is afforded.

Relying on the testimonies of St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Basil, who were natives of the region, Tillemont says: "The city of Neocaesarea, also sometimes called Andrinople, was included in the part of Pontus called Polémoniaque. It was the capital or one of the main cities of the province of the province when St. Gregory was made bishop, and it was as populous as the whole as well as all the surrounding country. But all the inhabitants of the city and its surroundings were in the darkness of paganism. At that time, there were only 17 Christians".
(Mém. ecclésiastiques, t. IV, saint Grégoire Thaum., VI.)

The claim about there being only 17 Christians when Gregory became bishop is part of a rhetorical exaggeration from an unreliable source.

Stephen Mitchell - The Life & Lives of Gregory Thaumaturgus.png (180.9 KiB) Viewed 1394 times

And such an ignorance of the subject seems to me very suspicious coming from Pliny. We learn from Pliny himself that Trajan had recourse to his lights of jurisconsult in the judicial questions and that in such matter he had nothing to learn from the prince.

Many authors of the period claim to have received patronage from or had their expertise recognized by the imperial family. Josephus certainly did, and so did Philostratus. Such claims are usually not untrue (or not necessarily untrue), but exaggerated. It's a rhetorical device used to claim status for one's work (and one's self). Can you quote Pliny saying he had nothing to learn from the prince? (Such a claim would surprise me).

All these elements and many others, as well as the circumstances of the discovery of Pliny's book X and its mysterious disappearance after its publication, make me think that we are dealing here with a forgery of poor quality composed with Tertullian's book.

Are you saying Christians forged all of Book X just to slip in letters 96 and 97? How do those letters serve some Christian's larger aims? It seems to me the author has concealed his Christian sympathies awfully well (e.g., Christianity is lunacy, error, and infection, and those who stubbornly cling to professing their Christianity deserve to be punished with execution.

Best,

Ken

[Sinouhe]

That is a very forced reading of the text. In the opening paragraph of the letter, which I quoted in the post to which you are replying, Pliny writes: 'I have never attended hearings concerning Christians," not, 'I've never heard of Christians.' Then he continues, ' so I am unaware what is usually punished or investigated, and to what extent,' which implies he knows there have been hearings concerning Christians and presumes that there is some usual way of dealing with them.

If he knew of the existence of Christians, Pliny seems to knew little more than their names.

In the rest of the letter, he lays out the procedure he followed for the emperor' approval, including 'those who are truly Christian cannot, it is said, be forced to do any of these things,' which implies he has previously heard about Christians, though it's plausible that he may never have had occasion to talk to one about Christianity before.

That is a forced reading of the text.
His sentence implies above all that he was told this when he took charge of the Christians. Moreover, he does not specify that the emperor must already know this.

The claim about there being only 17 Christians when Gregory became bishop is part of a rhetorical exaggeration from an unreliable source.

Yes, you are right to point out that the source is not very sure (either). On the other hand, it is doubtful that a region like Bythinia could have converted en masse to Christianity like Pliny describes for us at the very beginning of the 2nd century when Christianity was still an obscure little sect. If I imagine that both sources are written by Christians and that they contradict each other, I would still give more credence to a 4th century source that explains that Christianity was finally beginning to take hold in the empire at the end of the third century rather than a source that would have made Christianity a majority religion in Bythinia in 110 AD.

By the way, it is funny how the author of this letter starts by talking about the fact that he does not know how to treat Christians, implying that NOBODY around him knows how to do it either. Was there no one before him in his position? Did the Christians magically appear when Pliny took office? What about Maximus, a close friend of Pliny who was a former quaestor of Bythinia (VIII:24) and who could have informed him about the religious situation in the region even before he went there
All this is inconsistent with what the author tells us a little further on and which presents Christianity as a religion already very well established in the region and which is in the majority:

"For the contagion of this superstition has spread not only to the cities but also to the villages and farms. But it seems possible to check and cure it. It is certain only quite clear that the temples, which had been almost deserted..."

This passage is inconsistent with the beginning of the letter and betrays in my opinion the pen of a Christian apologist anxious to present Christianity as a successful religion in the region.

Can you quote Pliny saying he had nothing to learn from the prince? (Such a claim would surprise me).

It should be kept in mind who is Pline :

(From Polydor Hochart - Sur la persécution des chrétiens)

• he studied rhetoric with Quintulien (II:14, VI:6)

• He studies philosophy with Euphrates and Nicetas (I:10, VI:6)

• At 19 years old he was already pleading before the high court of the centumvirs

• In his youth he was a military tribune, then quaestor, tribune of the plebs and then magistratus of Rome.

• At 40 years old he was consul nd had completed the cursus honorum (V:13, VII:16) (the sequential order of public offices held by aspiring politicians in the Roman Republic and the early Roman Empire).

• He had a distinguished rank in the senate (III:4, II:11, IX:23)

• He was one of the most famous men in the city (IX:23)

• But it is especially as a jurisconsult that Pliny was held in high regard (V:8)

• it is to him that the provinces wanted to entrust the care to plead their causes before the senate(III:4, VI:18)

• Pliny was more often a judge than a lawyer (I:10, 20,22 - II:1,16 - VI:2,22)

• the magistrates turned to him in difficult cases (VI:11)

• Trajan made him his quaestor

• [Trajan called upon him in the councils and he consulted him on the sentences that he had to pronounce (IV:22, VI:31).

• by the friendly advices which he gives to his friends Tiron (VI:1,22) and Maximus (VIII:24) at the beginning of two provinces which they were going to administer, one sees that the proconsuls were careful to surround themselves with precautions and information and that they had at heart to deserve the praise of the populations by practising a fair justice (IX:5)

• There is thus strong chance that he knew the situation in Bythinia before administering it, especially if the Christians were a religion in full expansion as he claims in his letter

• He had for friend, Maximus, a former quaestor of Bythinia (VIII:24). Maximus had no knowledge of the religious situation of the province he had administered?

• It should therefore be concluded that during his stay in Syria where he performed his military service as a tribune, he never heard of the troubles related to the Christians, although he was dealing with philosophical questions with Euphrates (I:10)

• It should also be agreed that, although he was an intimate friend and confidant of the works of Tacitus, he had never heard of the fate of the Christians in Rome under Nero and Domitian.

• He had no knowledge either of the persecutions under Trajan, if one believes Tillemont (Mémoires pour servir à l'histoire ecclésiastique TV, persécution sous trajan article 2)

• It is astonishing moreover that a magistrate so concerned and respectful of the law (I:22, VI:2), so human (VIII:24, IX:5), did not wait for the answer of Trajan to act considering that he had already put into practice a jurisprudence even before the answer of Trajan. It is about men being put to death, not just imprisonment : "those who confessed I interrogated a second and a third time, threatening them with punishment; those who persisted I ordered executed"

This correspondence reflects from one end to the other the apology of the Christian religion:

- The wickedness of the Roman powers that persecute the Christians
- The Christians are virtuous men of whom one cannot reproach anything if it is not their belief in Christ
- The religion spread miraculously in the empire

Are you saying Christians forged all of Book X just to slip in letters 96 and 97?

Not necessarily. It can be just an insertion of the letters 97 and 98. But Book X may also have been entirely forged for economic reasons while still supporting the legend of the Christian martyrs. Forgeries were common at that time, I'm not going to tell you that

How do those letters serve some Christian's larger aims? It seems to me the author has concealed his Christian sympathies awfully well (e.g., Christianity is lunacy, error, and infection, and those who stubbornly cling to professing their Christianity deserve to be punished with execution.

If the text is a forgery, then it is based on the book of Tertullian which mentions and describes a letter from Pliny to Trajan. Its author is therefore subordinate to the text of Tertullian. And if he wants to pass himself off as a persecutor of Christians, he is not going to openly say good things about Christians. It is clear that he has nothing to reproach them while he is making a discreet apology in the same time :

"they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of food--but ordinary and innocent food".

[John2]

I haven't researched the claim connecting Flavia Domitilla with the Roman catacombs, but I'm a bit dubious about the link. The claims come from the institution that runs the site (which is to them a holy place). Is there a body of scholarship that has examined these claims? And are they asserting the historicity of St. Petronilla, daughter of St. Peter?) I'd probably start with looking for what (and when) the earliest source documenting the connection between Flavia Domitilla and the catacombs was.

There are other links I could have given but I thought the one I gave had nice pictures, is all. I don't hang my hat on it, and there's certainly room for skepticism about whether the Christian parts pertain to Domitilla, as Lampe notes here:


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

[GakuseiDon]

By the way, it is funny how the author of this letter starts by talking about the fact that he does not know how to treat Christians, implying that NOBODY around him knows how to do it either. Was there no one before him in his position?

How should Pliny the Younger have treated the Christians of his time? For what crimes? Later Christians writing to pagans like Justin Martyr and Tertullian made a point of stressing that the pagans don't seem to charge Christians for any crime other than being Christians. They asked for fairness from the emperors of their time to stop persecution based on rumours.

[andrewcriddle]

It seems to me that Pliny discovered the very existence of the Christians and their practices and that he described this sect to the emperor, implying that he did not know them either.

I therefore do not know what offenses it is the practice to punish or investigate, and to what extent.
They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so.

But I rather think that this letter come from the pen of a Christian who writes anachronistically about the Christian situation in Bithynia in the first century.

For the contagion of this superstition has spread not only to the cities but also to the villages and farms. But it seems possible to check and cure it. It is certain only quite clear that the temples, which had been almost deserted, have begun to be frequented, that the established religious rites, long neglected, are being resumed, and that from everywhere sacrificial animals are coming, for which until now very few purchasers could be found. Hence it is easy to imagine what a multitude of people can be reformed if an opportunity for repentance is afforded.

Relying on the testimonies of St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Basil, who were natives of the region, Tillemont says: "The city of Neocaesarea, also sometimes called Andrinople, was included in the part of Pontus called Polémoniaque. It was the capital or one of the main cities of the province of the province when St. Gregory was made bishop, and it was as populous as the whole as well as all the surrounding country. But all the inhabitants of the city and its surroundings were in the darkness of paganism. At that time, there were only 17 Christians".
(Mém. ecclésiastiques, t. IV, saint Grégoire Thaum., VI.)

And such an ignorance of the subject seems to me very suspicious coming from Pliny. We learn from Pliny himself that Trajan had recourse to his lights of jurisconsult in the judicial questions and that in such matter he had nothing to learn from the prince.

All these elements and many others, as well as the circumstances of the discovery of Pliny's book X and its mysterious disappearance after its publication, make me think that we are dealing here with a forgery of poor quality composed with Tertullian's book.

I suggested here that although the letter is basically genuine it may have been interpolated, if so, the idea that so many people had become Christian as to endanger the business model of the local temples would not be part of the original letter.

Andrew Criddle