Por Richard Carrier,
Now that the world has ended, my peer reviewed article on Josephus just came out: “Origen, Eusebius, and the Accidental Interpolation in Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 20.200” in the Journal of Early Christian Studies
(vol. 20, no. 4, Winter 2012),
pp. 489-514.
The official description is:
Analysis of the evidence from the works of Origen, Eusebius, and Hegesippus concludes that the reference to “Christ” in Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 20.200 is probably an accidental interpolation or scribal emendation and that the passage was never originally about Christ or Christians. It referred not to James the brother of Jesus Christ, but probably to James the brother of the Jewish high priest Jesus ben Damneus.
My proof of that is pretty conclusive. But this article also summarizes a sufficient case to reject the Testimonium Flavianum as well (the other, longer reference to Jesus in Josephus), in that case as a deliberate
fabrication (see note 1, pp. 489-90, and discussion of the Arabic
quotation on pp. 493-94). And I cite the leading scholarship on both. So
it’s really a complete article on both references to Jesus in Josephus.
Further evidence that the longer reference is a Christian fabrication lies in an article I didn’t cite, however, but that is nevertheless required reading on the matter: G.J. Goldberg, “The Coincidences of the Testimonium of Josephus and the Emmaus Narrative of Luke,” in the Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha
(vol. 13, 1995), pp. 59-77. Goldberg demonstrates nineteen unique
correspondences between Luke’s Emmaus account and the Testimonium
Flavianum, all nineteen in exactly the same order (with some order and
word variations only within each item). There are some narrative
differences (which are expected due to the contexts being different and
as a result of common kinds of authorial embellishment), and there is a
twentieth correspondence out of order (identifying Jesus as “the
Christ”). But otherwise, the coincidences here are very improbable on
any other hypothesis than dependence.
Goldberg also shows that the Testimonium contains vocabulary and
phrasing that is particularly Christian (indeed, Lukan) and un-Josephan.
He concludes that this means either a Christian wrote it or Josephus
slavishly copied a Christian source, and contrary to what Goldberg
concludes, the latter is wholly implausible (Josephus would treat such a
source more critically, creatively, and informedly).
That, combined with the arguments I assemble in my article for JECS,
spells the final death knell for any hope of restoring any part of the
Testimonium Flavianum. It is 100% Christian fabrication.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário
1. Seja polido;
2. Preze pela ortografia e gramática da sua língua-mãe.