The Integrity of the Testimonium
Flavianum
Despite the weight of
negative opinion about its integrity, there are several reasons to accept the
whole Testimonium Flavianum as genuine.
Among these is the practical
issue of emending texts in antiquity. Unlike in the age of computers, when cut
and paste occurs with ease, in the years between Josephus writing in the 90s
and Eusebius writing from 324, emending a text meant rewriting the whole
scroll. It is noted that all the extant Greek manuscripts of Jewish
Antiquities—Ambrosianus in the eleventh century, Vaticanus in the
fourteenth century, and Marcianus in the fifteenth century—have identical, full
version of the Testimonium.
Furthermore, the manner of
the writing of the whole passage is coherent and hangs together as a complete
statement, with its internal logic intact.
|
Provocative
Statement |
Jesus, a wise man,
if indeed one ought to call him a man |
|
Substantiation |
For [gar]
(a) he was one who wrought surprising feats, and |
|
Amplification |
He won over many
Jews and many of the Greeks [Hellēnikoi]. |
|
Conclusion |
He was the Messiah [Christos] |
|
His triumph |
When Pilate condemned
him to be a crucified, those who loved him did not give up their affection
for him. |
|
His vindication |
On the third day he
appeared to them restored to life. |
|
Verification |
And the tribe of
Christians [Christianoi], so called after him, has still to this day not
disappeared. |
Furthermore, the passage is
a semi-inclusio:
“he was the Christ.”
“And the tribe of Christians, so called after him,
has still to this day not disappeared.
The Testimonium is a
complete statement. The assertion that an interpolator has taken a minimalist
statement and added in “Christian” items fails to recognize that the Testimonium
as cited by Josephus is a complete, grammatically logical whole.
This, however, is not to say
that Josephus the Pharisee personally believed what he wrote about Jesus. This
would explain Origen’s comment that Josephus did not believe Jesus was the Messiah,
that is, he was not a dedicated disciple of Jesus. Rather, Josephus was merely accurately
reporting what “the tribe of Christians” believed about Jesus. Given his
disdain of insurgents and prophets, it is understandable that he writes positively
about the nonviolent Jesus (as he also had regarding John the Baptist). (Paul
Barnett, The Trails of Jesus: Evidence, Conclusions, and Aftermath [Grand
Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2024], 156-58)
To Support this Blog:
