JoeWallack

JW:
Yea, that's what I thought. If you wonder why I don't respond much to you any more, just re-read your last two posts. I don't believe in ignoring anyone. Almost everyone has good points eventually. So I'll still skim your posts. But demonstrating that the TF is not original is important to me. Demonstrating that you are wrong is not.



Joseph

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

andrewcriddle

Eusebius is in the Eastern Roman Empire. The somewhat anti-Christian Licinius is in charge in the East until his defeat in the early 320's. If Licinius objected, I don't think Constantine would have provided much protection. (On the other hand I doubt if Licinius cared one way or the other about the integrity of the text of Josephus.)

Andrew Criddle

andrewcriddle

See Justin Martyr Andrew Criddle

JoeWallack

JW:
This is why I said

"at this point Eusebius does not require Constantine to be omnipotent, he only needs his protection."

No problem for Eusebius. His version of Josephus is in his library and he is loyal to the Roman Church and Emperor. By c. 325 he is Constantine's man. 312 - 322 is a small window for an Eastern critic, assuming Eusebius made/publicized the change before 322. It would be a relatively small favor for Constantine to ask Licinius to leave Eusebius alone ($) if necessary.

The timing is reMarkable that the TF goes unnoticed for hundreds of years and than within a few years of the first Christian emperor, it first gets noticed. Solid evidence that Eusebius either forged or legitimized it.



Joseph

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

the_cave

Wrong about what? I said you asked a great question: why isn't Justin Martyr familiar with Josephus? And I would honestly like to know your answer about it. Do you have one?

Why the need to get snarky about it?

But there is an important difference between forging and legitimizing. That is my only point.

aa5874

When I read that link, some critical information is missing from your post

Then the passages dealt with other writings, not with "Hortatory Address to the Greeks". The spurious works are other writings not mentioned by Eusebius but those works mentioned by Arethas, Photius and others.

Then it goes on to say that a single person attributes "Hortatory Adress to the Greeks" to other unknown writers, including Apollonaris.



On what basis has Hortatory Address to the Greeks been attributed to Apollinaris of Hierapolis and others?

Did these unknown others and Apollinaris ever claim that they wrote "Hortatory Address to the Greeks?"

I understand that there are no extant writings of Aopollinaris of Hierapolis.

mountainman

You might want to note at this point
that Goldberg argues that the language is from Luke.
Specifically the Emmaus narrative of Luke,
verses 24:19-21 and 24:25-27.

www.josephus.org/GoldbergJosephusLuke1995.pdf

He concludes that either the TF was based on a common
text known to Josephus and Luke, or that the later interpolator
of the TF into Josephus was quite familiar with Luke.

JoeWallack

Wars. Hist. What Is It Good For

JW:

CIRCUMSTANTIAL

1) Discovery

1 - No evidence for the TF before Eusebius

1) General silence - expectation that if the
TF existed it would have been used due to its importance
to Christianity.

2) Specific silence - http://vridar.wordpress.com/2009/03/06/josephus/

ca.140’s CE Justin Martyr

Philosopher in Rome and his interests were:

1) Jesus

2) 1st century Israel

3) Arguing with Pagan and Jewish philosophers

The related question should be:

Why wouldn't Justin be familiar with Josephus?

ca.170’s CE Theophilus - uses Josephus

http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...lus-book3.html

Quote:

CHAP. XXIII.--PROPHETS MORE ANCIENT THAN GREEK WRITERS. So then let what has been said suffice for the testimony of the Phoenicians and Egyptians, and for the account of our chronology given by the writers Manetho the Egyptian, and Menander the Ephesian, and also Josephus, who wrote the Jewish war, which they waged with the Romans. For from these very old records it is proved that the writings of the rest are more recent than the writings given to us through Moses, yes, and than the subsequent prophets. For the last of the prophets, who was called Zechariah, was contemporary with the reign of Darius. But even the lawgivers themselves are all found to have legislated subsequently to that period. For if one were to mention Solon the Athenian, he lived in the days of the kings Cyrus and Darius, in the time of the prophet Zechariah first mentioned, who was by many years the last of the prophets. Or if you mention the lawgivers Lycurgus, or Draco, or Minos, Josephus tells us in his writings that the sacred books take precedence of them in antiquity, since even before the reign of Jupiter over the Cretans, and before the Trojan war, the writings of the divine law which has been given to us through Moses were in existence. And that we may give a more accurate exhibition of eras and dates, we will, God helping us, now give an account not only of the dates after the deluge, but also of those before it, so as to reckon the whole number of all the years, as far as possible; tracing up to the very beginning of the creation of the world, which Moses the servant of God recorded through the Holy Spirit. For having first spoken of what concerned the creation and genesis of the world, and of the first man, and all that happened after in the order of events, he signified also the years that elapsed before the deluge. And I pray for favour from the only God, that I may accurately speak the whole truth according to His will, that you and every one who reads this work may be guided by His truth and favour. I will then begin first with the recorded genealogies, and I begin my narration with the first man. CHAP. XXIV.--CHRONOLOGY FROM ADAM. Adam lived till he begat a son, 230 years. And his son Seth, 205. And his son Enos, 190. And his son Cainan, 170. And his son Mahaleel, 165. And his son Jared, 162. And his son Enoch, 165. And his son Methuselah, 167. And his son Lamech, 188. And Lamech's son was Noah, of whom we have spoken above, who begat Shem when 500 years old. During Noah's life, in his 600th year, the flood came. The total number of years, therefore, till the flood, was 2242. And immediately after the flood, Shem, who was 100 years old, begat Arphaxad. And Arphaxad, when 135 years old, begat Salah. And Salah begat a son when 130. And his son Eber, when 134. And from him the Hebrews name their race. And his son Phaleg begat a son when 130. And his son Reu, when 132 And his son Serug, when 130. And his son Nahor, when 75. And his son Terah, when 70. And his son Abraham, our patriarch, begat Isaac when he was 100 years old. Until Abraham, therefore, there are 3278 years. The fore-mentioned Isaac lived until he begat a son, 60 years, and begat Jacob. Jacob, till the migration into Egypt, of which we have spoken above, lived 130 years. And the sojourning of the Hebrews in Egypt lasted 430 years; and after their departure from the land of Egypt they spent 40 years in the wilderness, as it is called. All these years, therefore, amount to 3,938. And at that time, Moses having died, Jesus the sun of Nun succeeded to his rule, and governed them 27 years. And after Jesus, when the people had transgressed the commandments of God, they served the king of Mesopotamia, by name Chusarathon, 8 years. Then, on the repentance of the people, they had judges: Gothonoel, 40 years; Eglon, 18 years; Aoth, 8 years. Then having sinned, they were subdued by strangers for 20 years. Then Deborah judged them 40 years. Then they served the Midianites 7 years. Then Gideon judged them 40 years; Abimelech, 3 years; Thola, 22 years; Jair, 22 years. Then the Philistines and Ammonites ruled them 18 years. After that Jephthah judged them 6 years; Esbon, 7 years; Ailon, 10 years; Abdon, 8 years. Then strangers ruled them 40 years. Then Samson judged them 20 years. Then there was peace among them for 40 years. Then Samera judged them one year; Eli, 20 years; Samuel, 12 years. CHAP. XXV.--FROM SAUL TO THE CAPTIVITY. And after the judges they had kings, the first named Saul, who reigned 20 years; then David, our forefather, who reigned 40 years. Accordingly, there are to the reign of David [from Isaac] 496 years. And after these kings Solomon reigned, who also, by the will of God, was the first to build the temple in Jerusalem; he reigned 40 years. And after him Rehoboam, 17 years; and after him Abias, 7 years; and after him Asa, 41 years; and after him Jehoshaphat, 25 years; and after him Joram, 8 years; and after him Ahaziah, 1 year; and after him Athaliah, 6 years; and after her Josiah, 40 years; and after him Amaziah, 39 years; and after him Uzziah, 52 years; and after him Jotham, 16 years; and after him Ahaz, 17 years; and after him Hezekiah, 29 years; and after him Manasseh, 55 years; and after him Amon, 2 years; and after him Josiah, 31 years; and after him Jehoahaz, 3 months; and after him Jehoiakim, 11 years. Then another Jehoiakim, 3 months 10 days; and after him Zedekiah, 11 years. And after these kings, the people, continuing in their sins, and not repenting, the king of Babylon, named Nebuchadnezzar, came up into Judaea, according to the prophecy of Jeremiah. He transferred the people of the Jews to Babylon, and destroyed the temple which Solomon had built. And in the Babylonian banishment the people passed 70 years. Until the sojourning in the land of Babylon, there are therefore, in all, 4954 years 6 months and 10 days. And according as God had, by the prophet Jeremiah, foretold that the people should be led captive to Babylon, in like manner He signified beforehand that they should also return into their own land after 70 years. These 70 years then being accomplished, Cyrus becomes king of the Persians, who, according to the prophecy of Jeremiah, issued a decree in the second year of his reign, enjoining by his edict that all Jews who were in his kingdom should return to their own country, and rebuild their temple to God, which the fore-mentioned king of Babylon had demolished. Moreover, Cyrus, in compliance with the instructions of God, gave orders to his own bodyguards, Sabessar and Mithridates, that the vessels which had been taken out of the temple of Judaea by Nebuchadnezzar should be restored, and placed again in the temple. In the second year, therefore, of Darius are fulfilled the 70 years which were foretold by Jeremiah.

JW:
Note that after the key "Josephus tells us in his writings that the sacred books take precedence of them in antiquity" Theophilus' likely source is Antiquities of the Jews:

http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/t...phus/ant1.html

Quote:

4. For indeed Seth was born when Adam was in his two hundred and thirtieth year, who lived :nine hundred and thirty years. Seth begat Enos in his two hundred and fifth year; who, when he had lived nine hundred and twelve years, delivered the government to Cainan his son, whom he had in his hundred and ninetieth year. He lived nine hundred and five years. Cainan, when he had lived nine hundred and ten years, had his son Malaleel, who was born in his hundred and seventieth year. This Malaleel, having lived eight hundred and ninety-five years, died, leaving his son Jared, whom he begat when he was in his hundred and sixty-fifth year. He lived nine hundred and sixty-two years; and then his son Enoch succeeded him, who was born when his father was one hundred and sixty-two years old. Now he, when he had lived three hundred and sixty-five years, departed and went to God; whence it is that they have not written down his death. Now Mathusela, the son of Enoch, who was born to him when he was one hundred and sixty-five years old, had Lamech for his son when he was one hundred and eighty-seven years of age; to whom he delivered the government, when he had retained it nine hundred and sixty-nine years. Now Lamech, when he had governed seven hundred and seventy-seven years, appointed Noah, his son, to be ruler of the people, who was born to Lamech when he was one hundred and eighty-two years old, and retained the government nine hundred and fifty years. These years collected together make up the sum before set down. But let no one inquire into the deaths of these men; for they extended their lives along together with their children and grandchildren; but let him have regard to their births only.

It's clear that Antiquities of the Jews is Theophilus' source here. Thus we have confirmed our general conclusion going into the specifics of this Father, that your average Father was probably familiar with Josephus.

Someone named Alice Whealey asserts that Theophilus is referring to Josephus' Against Apion and not Antiquities of the Jews. Most of the above from Theophilus is found in Antiquities of the Jews and most is not found in Against Apion. Antiquities of the Jews deals precisely with what Theophilus is presenting, a supposed detailed chronology of the Jews. Against Apion is a relatively short offensive work that deals primarily with Pagan assertions. Additionally, Theophilus' reference refers to part of the title of Antiquities of the Jews, "the sacred books take precedence of them in antiquity" and no reference to Against Apion. Whealey has impeached her credibility and is useless as a source because everyone she says needs to be checked.

More importantly, Theophilus is a relatively early Patristic reference to Josephus in general and specifically Antiquities of the Jews. Thus the potential sources of awareness of the TF have increased exponentially for Church Fathers as either Josephus or Theophilus would be guides to it. No mention of the TF or TBOTL. Point Doherty!

ca.180’s CE Irenaeus - uses Josephus

ca.190’s CE Clement of Alexandria - uses Josephus

ca.200’s CE Tertullian - uses Josephus

ca.200’s CE Minucius Felix - uses Josephus

ca.210’s CE Hippolytus - uses Josephus

ca.220’s CE Sextus Julius Africanus - uses Josephus

ca.230’s CE Origen - uses Josephus

ca.240’s CE Cyprian

ca.270’s CE Anatolius - uses Josephus

ca.290’s CE Arnobius

ca.300’s CE Methodius - uses Josephus

ca.300’s CE Lactantius

Of the 14 Fathers here who show no awareness of the TF
10 show use of Josephus. Comically, Roger Pearse started this
list in order to demonstrate that the Fathers in general would
have no interest in Josephus and ends up demonstrating that
the conclusion he disputes is correct.

2 - Evidence that the TF was created during the career of Eusebius

Joseph

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

Ben C Smith

Josephus, Against Apion 1.4:

They themselves say that the laws of Draco concerning murders, which are now extant in writing, are the most ancient of their public records; this Draco yet lived but a little before the tyrant Pisistratus.

Josephus, Against Apion 2.16:

Now I venture to say that our legislator is the most ancient of all the legislators whom we have heard of; for as for men like Lycurgus, and Solon, and Zaleucus Locrensis, and all those legislators who are so admired by the Greeks, they seem to be of yesterday if compared with our legislator....

Josephus, Against Apion 2.17:

And this is the character of our legislator; he was no impostor, no deceiver as his revilers say, though unjustly, but such a one as they brag Minos to have been among the Greeks, and other legislators after him; for some of them suppose that they had their laws from Jupiter, while Minos said that the revelation of his laws was to be referred to Apollo and his oracle at Delphi, whether they really thought they were so derived or supposed, however, that they could persuade the people easily that so it was.

Genesis 5.3, 6, 9 LXX (not Masoretic):

When Adam had lived two hundred and thirty years, he became the father of a son in his own likeness, according to his image, and named him Seth.

....

Seth lived two hundred and five years, and became the father of Enosh.

....

Enosh lived one hundred ninety years, and became the father of Cainan.

Theophilus, To Autolycus 3.23:

...Josephus tells us in his writings that the sacred books take precedence of them in ancientness [αρχαιοτητι]....

Origen, Against Celsus 1.16:

For the one who wishes to do so can read the writings of Flavius Josephus concerning the ancientness [αρχαιοτητος] of the Jews, in two books [Against Apion has two books, the Antiquities twenty], where he produces a great collection of historians who testify to the ancientness of the Jews.

Origen, Against Celsus 4.11:

And let the one who wishes to do so read the two books of Flavius Josephus concerning the ancientness [αρχαιοτητος] of the Jews, in order that he might know in what way Moses was more ancient than those who say that over long periods of time cataclysms and conflagrations happen in the world.

Origen, On Matthew 10.17:

Flavius Josephus... wrote the Judaic Antiquities [αρχαιολογιαν; note that this is a different Greek word] in twenty books....

Theophilus, To Autolycus 3.23:

Or if you mention the lawgivers Lycurgus, or Draco, or Minos, Josephus tells us in his writings that the sacred books take precedence of them in ancientness [αρχαιοτητι]....

Greek title of Against Apion: Φλαιου Ιωσηπου, περι αρχαιοτητος Ιουδαιων, Flavius Josephus, concerning the ancientness of the Jews.

Josephus, Against Apion 1.1:

I therefore have thought myself under an obligation to write somewhat briefly about these subjects, in order to convict those that reproach us of spite and voluntary falsehood, and to correct the ignorance of others, and withal to instruct all those who are desirous of knowing the truth of what great antiquity [αρχαιοτητος] we really are.

Josephus, Against Apion 2.1:

In the former book [book 1 of Against Apion], most honored Epaphroditus, I have demonstrated our antiquity [αρχαιοτητος]....

Summary:

1. Theophilus refers to a work by Josephus in which Josephus demonstrates the antiquity of the (sacred books or Mosaic law of the) Jews; Josephus tells us that this is his very purpose in writing Against Apion, and this is the way fathers like Origen refer to Against Apion.
2. Theophilus uses the word αρχαιοτητι (as in the Greek title of Against Apion), not the word αρχαιολογιαν (as in the Greek title of the Antiquities).
3. Theophilus says that Josephus refers in this work to Lycurgus, Minos, and Draco, all three of which appear in Against Apion, but not (AFAICT) in the Antiquities.

Ben.

JoeWallack

JW:
Oh Ben:

JW:
Theophilus would have been familiar with all of Josephus. That's my point. It's the Liars for Jesus who special plead that the Fathers are only familiar with what they directly quote. Do I really need to show everything from Antiquities of the Jews that's in Theophilus compared to what's in
Against Apion? Hell, there's more from Antiquities of the Jews than all of Against Apion.

Theophilus refers to Josephus' writing of the ancientness of the Jews and than gives the guts of Antiquities of the Jews. You think it likely that this is just a coincidence and Theophilus' source is only the LXX?

Since you think of Bauckham as a real scholar I'm not surprised you try and defend Whealey but an even bigger hoot is she apologizes that for Fathers who are familiar with Antiquities of the Jews they were not familiar with the later books. Apparently they went into hiding with Jesus and "Mark" 16:9-20.

The issue here Ben is whether Theophilus is familiar with Antiquities of the Jews. Not whether Theophilus is familiar with Against Apion. Thanks for providing another reason for Theophilus to be familiar with Antiquities of the Jews:

http://www.gutenberg.org/catalog/wor..._files=1051531

JW:
Kind of hard to miss, huh Ben. God, I wouldn't want to sound like you though. Was "ancientness" in the original title of Against Apion?



Josephus

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page