Freethought & Rationalism Archive

andrewcriddle · 09-24-2012, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by James The Least

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Feldman again on the subject of Josephus's Bible text:

As to the likelihood that Josephus would use a Greek text of the Bible, there would naturally be an attraction in doing so because he is writing in Greek; but one would expect, a priori, that Josephus would shy away from employing the Septuagint because, despite Pseudo-Longinus’ compliment in his On the Sublime (9:9), it is stylistically inferior to the classical authors whom Josephus quite obviously preferred and because it would be readily understood only by those who already were acquainted with the Bible in its original language. Indeed, Kennedy has remarked that Josephus is more persisent that any other writer of Hellenistic Greek in his use of classical Greek words, particularly from Herodotus, the tragedians, Plato, Xenophon, Aristotle, and, above all, Thucydides, even to the extent of using rare words employed by these authors. The very fact, we may add, that Josephus sought assistants (Ag.Ap. 1:50) to help him with his Greek style and that he declares (Ant. 20:263) that he laboured strenuously to partake of the realm of Greek prose and poetry, would make him hesitant to use the Septuagint as a source, especially since he was trying, quite obviously, in his Antiquities to reach a cultured Greek audience and to render the biblical narrative respectable in their eyes.

It's continually stunning that this level of credulity passes for scholarship. Only in Bible studies. In the same paragraph, the author can note that Josephus displays a broad knowledge of classical Greek, drawn from an intimate knowledge of the great Greek authors, then note that he required assistants just to help him write in Greek, because, after all he's a Palestinian Jew -- a direct contradiction of the previous observation, but no worries.

This isn't a contradiction but it may need spelling out.

I'll try and paraphrase.

The text of Josephus shows an unusually high use of classical Greek words and phrases. Josephus used assistants to help him achieve this effect, demonstrating how committed he was to avoiding the sort of koine Greek found in the Septuagint.

(I don't necessarily entirely agree but there is no contradiction.)

Andrew Criddle

stephan huller · 09-24-2012, 12:30 PM

The problem in my mind is that (a) Against Apion assumes that Josephus was a native Aramaic speaker (b) native Aramaic speakers would likely use a Hebrew or Aramaic version of the OT (c) if Josephus was sufficiently skilled in Greek he would have been able to paraphrase or summarize his native Semitic text (which in the case of 1 Samuel references David and Jonathan's souls uniting) rather than relying upon the LXX (Josephus references 1 Samuel as '1 Kings' for instance. This leaves open the possibility or even likelihood that the 'assistants' had a similar role to the 'assistants' of Paul in the Catholic tradition - i.e. that they were separate from the original author and injecting new ideas, theological concepts into the original works - or in the case of the Pastorals and Jewish antiquities recreating new works perhaps from fragmentary original (and authentic) references from the original author.

The Marcionites are proof that there was a tradition which denied the authenticity of the 'synergoi' in the Pauline tradition. There would likely also be witnesses to an original Josephan text, written in Aramaic - a hypomnema perhaps. One more thing - what about the likelihood that Against Apion isn't by Josephus at all but modified by the synergoi to appear as a Josephan text. This would explain why the concept of synergoi is so prevalent in the text. There are examples of renaming texts and the role of synergoi in that process - i.e. Letter to the Hebrews (Clement cites the role of Paul's 'assistant' Luke). Also the Pastorals, Revelations (= Cerinthus), Eisler's work on the tradition that Marcion was a secretary of John etc.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-24-2012, 12:30 PM	#82
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	The problem in my mind is that (a) Against Apion assumes that Josephus was a native Aramaic speaker (b) native Aramaic speakers would likely use a Hebrew or Aramaic version of the OT (c) if Josephus was sufficiently skilled in Greek he would have been able to paraphrase or summarize his native Semitic text (which in the case of 1 Samuel references David and Jonathan's souls uniting) rather than relying upon the LXX (Josephus references 1 Samuel as '1 Kings' for instance. This leaves open the possibility or even likelihood that the 'assistants' had a similar role to the 'assistants' of Paul in the Catholic tradition - i.e. that they were separate from the original author and injecting new ideas, theological concepts into the original works - or in the case of the Pastorals and Jewish antiquities recreating new works perhaps from fragmentary original (and authentic) references from the original author. The Marcionites are proof that there was a tradition which denied the authenticity of the 'synergoi' in the Pauline tradition. There would likely also be witnesses to an original Josephan text, written in Aramaic - a hypomnema perhaps. One more thing - what about the likelihood that Against Apion isn't by Josephus at all but modified by the synergoi to appear as a Josephan text. This would explain why the concept of synergoi is so prevalent in the text. There are examples of renaming texts and the role of synergoi in that process - i.e. Letter to the Hebrews (Clement cites the role of Paul's 'assistant' Luke). Also the Pastorals, Revelations (= Cerinthus), Eisler's work on the tradition that Marcion was a secretary of John etc.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.