Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 02-11-2013, 01:33 PM

If this were a well known story, we wouldn't have to worry about Jewish sources specifically.

Pliny 30:7 does not mention Jannes or Jambros. That chapter merely comments on magicians and moles.

Quote:

Let the following stand as a remarkable proof of the frivolous nature of the magic art. Of all animals it is the mole that the magicians admire most!

Origen claims that

Quote:

I know, moreover, that Numenius the Pythagorean— a surpassingly excellent expounder of Plato, and who held a foremost place as a teacher of the doctrines of Pythagoras— in many of his works quotes from the writings of Moses and the prophets, and applies to the passages in question a not improbable allegorical meaning, as in his work called Epops, and in those which treat of "Numbers" and of "Place." And in the third book of his dissertation on The Good, he quotes also a narrative regarding Jesus— without, however, mentioning His name— and gives it an allegorical signification, whether successfully or the reverse I may state on another occasion. He relates also the account respecting Moses, and Jannes, and Jambres. But we are not elated on account of this instance, though we express our approval of Numenius, rather than of Celsus and other Greeks, because he was willing to investigate our histories from a desire to acquire knowledge, and was (duly) affected by them as narratives which were to be allegorically understood, and which did not belong to the category of foolish compositions.

I am unable to track down the other references.

semiopen · 02-11-2013, 01:59 PM

Penitence_of_Jamnes_and_Mambres

Quote:

The Penitence of Jamnes and Mambres is a text from the Old Testament pseudepigrapha concerning Jamnes and Mambres, the traditional names for the two sorcerers who challenged Moses when he met the pharaoh to ask for the release of the Israelites. The book is mentioned in the Decretum Gelasianum[1] in the list of Apocryphal Books under apocryphus. The book may be identical to the Apocryphon of Jannes and Jambres. In the Decretum Gelasium it is called the Repentance of Jannes and Jambres. The text is currently lost. In the text the magicians are called Jamnes and Mambres as opposed to Jannes and Jambres.

This makes me doubt the DSS claim also... remarkable.

You'd figure anybody could figure out that there was more than one magician, but determining that there were exactly two seems totally Jewish.

Duvduv · 02-11-2013, 03:47 PM

The Pentanteuch set called Mikraot Gedolot contains the Five Books of Moses, the Targum Onkelos, the Targum Yonatan ben Uziel and the Targum Yerushalmi. It also contains a host of surrounding commentaries: Rashi, Nachmanides, Ibn Ezra, Metzudat David, and the commentary known as Ohr Hachayim, written by Rabbi Chaim Ibn Attar of Morocco in the mid 18th century.

I am still interested in the fact that of all possible villains used in a metaphor vis a vis "Paul" in 2 Timothy, it is these two people whose names do not appear in the Torah as enemies of Moses, unlike Datan and Aviram, Pharoah, Bilaam himself, Korach, etc. The metaphor employed would not be easily known to the average gentile reader nor even to the writer himself. THIS is what I am trying to delve into.

semiopen · 02-12-2013, 05:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

The Pentanteuch set called Mikraot Gedolot contains the Five Books of Moses, the Targum Onkelos, the Targum Yonatan ben Uziel and the Targum Yerushalmi. It also contains a host of surrounding commentaries: Rashi, Nachmanides, Ibn Ezra, Metzudat David, and the commentary known as Ohr Hachayim, written by Rabbi Chaim Ibn Attar of Morocco in the mid 18th century.

I am still interested in the fact that of all possible villains used in a metaphor vis a vis "Paul" in 2 Timothy, it is these two people whose names do not appear in the Torah as enemies of Moses, unlike Datan and Aviram, Pharoah, Bilaam himself, Korach, etc. The metaphor employed would not be easily known to the average gentile reader nor even to the writer himself. THIS is what I am trying to delve into.

Mikraot_Gedolot

Quote:

In addition to Targum Onkelos and Rashi's commentary – the standard Jewish commentaries on the Hebrew Bible – the Mikraot Gedolot typically includes the commentaries of:

Targum Jonathan (For the Torah, Pseudo-Jonathan)...

Granted Targum Yonatan ben Uziel sounds more impressive than Targum Jonathon (not to mention Pseudo-Jonathan) but that doesn't make it older or improve it's quality.

Personally I'm amazed that the commentary on the web about these names is completely wrong. Even the misunderstanding about Pseudo-Jonathan, although that might be due to Rabbinic confusion. Since, I don't look at the Yoshke threads very often, it makes me wonder about their overall quality.

It seems that everyone agrees that there is a Jewish link to these names but nobody seems to know exactly what that was.

Duvduv · 02-12-2013, 06:43 AM

The question would be what this targum was called in any manuscripts. In any case it is more than a targum. It's a commentary, whenever written.
But the mystery is why the author of Titus assumed that his readers knew these villains and to consider "Paul" to be like Moses, even in passing, something that is out of line with his role as an apostle who came after others.

semiopen · 02-12-2013, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

The question would be what this targum was called in any manuscripts. In any case it is more than a targum. It's a commentary, whenever written.
But the mystery is why the author of Titus assumed that his readers knew these villains and to consider "Paul" to be like Moses, even in passing, something that is out of line with his role as an apostle who came after others.

I came upon the link below yesterday but didn't understand it. Perhaps it is relevant to your question.

Extra-Biblical Oral Tradition Arguments Refuted:

Quote:

"Paul got the names 'Jannes and Jambres' in 2 Timothy 3:8-9, from oral tradition."

Jannes and Jambres: "Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men of depraved mind, rejected in regard to the faith. But they will not make further progress; for their folly will be obvious to all, just as Jannes's and Jambres's folly was also." 2 Timothy 3:8-9
"That Paul is not asserting the sole sufficiency of the Scriptures (in 2 Timothy 3:16) is confirmed by verse 8 of the same chapter: Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith (2 Tim 3:8). Paul is referring here to the court magicians of Pharaoh. (Ex. 7:11-12). Notice, however, that the Book of Exodus does not provide the name of the magicians. Where, then, does Paul get the names Jannes and Jambres? From Jewish tradition. In the very same chapter in which Paul extols the value of the Scriptures, he himself quotes non-scriptural tradition. If he believed that the Scriptures are self-sufficient, then he was not very consistent." (THE WAY: What Every Protestant Should Know About the Orthodox Church, Clark Carlton, 1997, p 123)

There is a little devil before the quote above. The quote below has St. George and a dragon.

Quote:

Refutation of the false Catholic & Orthodox tradition argument:

Quote:

5. We do not deny that Jannes and Jambres were universally known by name among the Jews. But we are in utter shock that Clark Carlton would say that Paul "himself quotes non-scriptural tradition". Where, then, does Paul get the names Jannes and Jambres? From direct revelation of the Holy Spirit!

I had no idea this argument existed.

From the evidence, I don't see how we can say that the Jews knew these guys before 2 Timothy. If it appeared in Pliny, the DSS, the Talmud (before the 4th century), etc that would be one thing; but apparently it doesn't. It is possible that whatever is in Psuedo-Jonathan is before 2 Timothy but I think that argument would have to be more substantial than whatever tap dance you are doing. The reference in Psuedo-Jomathan could just as well have come from 2 Timothy.

Duvduv · 02-12-2013, 08:12 AM

Now you want to hypothesize that the targum relied on a passing mention of them in Timothy to place into several places in the targum of the Jewish Torah. So show me this strange pattern of behavior. I mean, there were plenty of other villains without relying on a Christian source. And of course it could never have been the other way around.
What is that supposed to mean?

Then remember that the Pirkei Rabbi Eliezer midrash on Ishmael in Genesis mentions that he had a wife called Aisa or Aifa, and another Fatuma, which Muslim legends says were two wives of Mohammed, Ayisha and his daughter Fatima (not in the Quran). Targum pseudo-yonatan calls her Adisha.

But why would Titus assume his readers knew about the villains Jambros and Yannos?

semiopen · 02-12-2013, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

Now you want to hypothesize that the targum relied on a passing mention of them in Timothy to place into several places in the targum of the Jewish Torah. So show me this strange pattern of behavior. I mean, there were plenty of other villains without relying on a Christian source. And of course it could never have been the other way around.
What is that supposed to mean?

Then remember that the Pirkei Rabbi Eliezer midrash on Ishmael in Genesis mentions that he had a wife called Aisa or Aifa, and another Fatuma, which Muslim legends says were two wives of Mohammed, Ayisha and his daughter Fatima (not in the Quran). Targum pseudo-yonatan calls her Adisha.

But why would Titus assume his readers knew about the villains Jambros and Yannos?

Call me old fashioned, but I'm a fan of the normal time continuum.

Pirke_De-Rabbi_Eliezer

Quote:

Traditionally, PRE has been understood to be a tannaitic composition which originated with the tanna Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus (80-118 C.E.), - a disciple of Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakai and teacher of Rabbi Akiva - and his disciples. But

Leopold_Zunz has demonstrated that the book was actually composed some time around the eighth century in a region under Islamic rule.

Now maybe Zunz got it all wrong, but like I told my friend in Shul, I didn't want to ask someone's opinion on technical matters like this who believes that the Tower of Babel actually happened.

Regarding Titus, I suppose everybody else here understands what he has to do with the villains Jambros and Yannos, but I have no idea what you refer to.

Regarding the two guys, maybe it is a Jewish Story, but we don't know for sure where their names (like those were actually their names) are mentioned.

List_of_names_for_the_biblical_nameless#Pharaoh.27 s_magicians

Quote:

Names: Jannes and Jambres
Source: 2 Timothy 3:8,[8] Book of Jasher chapter 79[9] Antiquities of the Jews Book 2[10] Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ Chapter 109 [11] Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. VIII[12] Easton's Bible Dictionary[13] The Book of the Bee Chapter 30[14] Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Vol. XIII[15] Legends of the Jews Volume 2 Chapter 4,[16] Chronicles of Jerahmeel, Papyrus Chester Beatty XVI: The Apocryphon of Jannes and Jambres
Appears in the Bible at: Exodus 7
The names of Jannes and Jambres, or Jannes and Mambres, were well known through the ancient world as magicians. In this instance, nameless characters from the Hebrew Bible are given names in the New Testament. Their names also appear in numerous Jewish texts.

The problem is that we don't know an existing Jewish text which mentions the names before 2 Timothy.

Duvduv · 02-12-2013, 11:37 AM

I forgot about good old Pope Leopold Zunz upon whom the "Holy Spirit" rested and revealed so many truths of when Jewish texts were written.

Why don't you just say that you dismiss any claims of Jewish sources to dating anything. Then there is nothing relevant to discuss on any matter for which a Jewish source has anything to say.

If relevant you can add the silly claims of Gershon Scholem about the dating of the huge literature of the Zohar based on interpretations of several words.

I already said that the mention of the rather obscure Jambros and Yannos in Timothy had to have come from some source, and the author of Timothy is knowledgeable about them in a Jewish context and assumes his audience of Greek gentiles is as well.

JoeWallack · 02-12-2013, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeWallack

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

and since both the writer and recipients knew what the reference was, then the information must have been in Jewish tradition before Timothy was written.

JW:
The "must" here is a false statement.

Joseph

JW:
The "must" conclusion is dependent on what precedes being facts. Neither:

1) "the writer knew what the reference was"

or

2) "the recipients knew what the reference was"

has been established as a fact. Neither one has any direct evidence. In fact, only literary criticism has been offered as evidence and the claim is especially amazing as the author and "recipients" are unknown not to mention the Thread's thus far Epic Fail of even being able to find a literary parallel to the names. And don't get me started on the different languages.

To avoid being a false statement it needs to borrow one of Andrew's IFs (a big one).

Joseph

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

02-11-2013, 03:47 PM	#13
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	The Pentanteuch set called Mikraot Gedolot contains the Five Books of Moses, the Targum Onkelos, the Targum Yonatan ben Uziel and the Targum Yerushalmi. It also contains a host of surrounding commentaries: Rashi, Nachmanides, Ibn Ezra, Metzudat David, and the commentary known as Ohr Hachayim, written by Rabbi Chaim Ibn Attar of Morocco in the mid 18th century. I am still interested in the fact that of all possible villains used in a metaphor vis a vis "Paul" in 2 Timothy, it is these two people whose names do not appear in the Torah as enemies of Moses, unlike Datan and Aviram, Pharoah, Bilaam himself, Korach, etc. The metaphor employed would not be easily known to the average gentile reader nor even to the writer himself. THIS is what I am trying to delve into.

02-12-2013, 06:43 AM	#15
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	The question would be what this targum was called in any manuscripts. In any case it is more than a targum. It's a commentary, whenever written. But the mystery is why the author of Titus assumed that his readers knew these villains and to consider "Paul" to be like Moses, even in passing, something that is out of line with his role as an apostle who came after others.

02-12-2013, 08:12 AM	#17
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	Now you want to hypothesize that the targum relied on a passing mention of them in Timothy to place into several places in the targum of the Jewish Torah. So show me this strange pattern of behavior. I mean, there were plenty of other villains without relying on a Christian source. And of course it could never have been the other way around. What is that supposed to mean? Then remember that the Pirkei Rabbi Eliezer midrash on Ishmael in Genesis mentions that he had a wife called Aisa or Aifa, and another Fatuma, which Muslim legends says were two wives of Mohammed, Ayisha and his daughter Fatima (not in the Quran). Targum pseudo-yonatan calls her Adisha. But why would Titus assume his readers knew about the villains Jambros and Yannos?

02-12-2013, 11:37 AM	#19
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	I forgot about good old Pope Leopold Zunz upon whom the "Holy Spirit" rested and revealed so many truths of when Jewish texts were written. Why don't you just say that you dismiss any claims of Jewish sources to dating anything. Then there is nothing relevant to discuss on any matter for which a Jewish source has anything to say. If relevant you can add the silly claims of Gershon Scholem about the dating of the huge literature of the Zohar based on interpretations of several words. I already said that the mention of the rather obscure Jambros and Yannos in Timothy had to have come from some source, and the author of Timothy is knowledgeable about them in a Jewish context and assumes his audience of Greek gentiles is as well.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.