Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

Very honourable to Jesus and his followers! But would Josephus say this of them? And would he call the Christian religion the truth?'

[ocr errors]

He drew over to him many Jews and Gentiles.'

That is not true of the Lord Jesus, if intended of his own personal preaching, before his crucifixion. It was done indeed afterwards. But this manner of speaking is more suitable to a writer of the second or third century than to Josephus.

This was the Christ.'

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

b

Jerom in his article of Josephus, in his book of Illustrious Men, quoting this passage, puts it thus: And he was believed to be the Christ.' Which is a qualifying expression for which there is no ground. Nor did Sophronius, Jerom's Greek interpreter, follow that translation, but puts it as it is in Eusebius, and other Greek writers: This was the Christ.' But it cannot be supposed that Josephus either thought or said that Jesus was the Christ.

с

It follows: And when Pilate, at the instigation of the chief men among us, had condemned him to the cross, they who before had conceived an affection for him did not cease to adhere to him: for on the third day he appeared to them alive again, the divine prophets having fore 'told these and many other wonderful things concerning him.'

All must be sensible that this could not be said by any man but a professed Christian, which Josephus was not; therefore he could not write this.

And the sect of the Christians, so called from him, subsists to this day.'

Which Mr. Whiston translates in this manner: And the tribe of Christians, so named from • him, are not extinct at this day.' But Mr. W―, who thinks this passage to be Josephus's, should not have rendered a tribe; because Quan is the word always used by Josephus for tribe; and λov, which we have here, always signifies nation in Josephus: nor were the Christians a nation or political society in the first three centuries.

d

Here it is put for sect: it cannot signify any thing else in this place. Jesus is called a 'wise man,' and is said to have been a teacher of such as received the truth with pleasure.' And though he had been crucified, they who had before conceived an affection for him did not 'cease to adhere to him, because he appeared to them alive again.'

с

[ocr errors]

Here the word denotes sect. But aperis heresy, is the word generally used by Josephus in speaking of the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes, the three prevailing sects, or different ways: of philosophizing among the Jews.

The phrase 51vwv Quλov, here used, resembles the phrase xpigiava evos, which was in use in the time of Eusebius, at the beginning of the fourth century, and denotes the sect of the • Christians.'

[ocr errors]

Moreover, the expression subsists to this time,' or is not extinct at this day,' imports a considerable space of time since the crucifixion of Jesus; and does very reasonably lead us to think that the composer of this paragraph lived later than Josephus.

These considerations, as seems to me, are sufficient to determine the point in question, and to satisfy all men that Josephus was not the author of this paragraph. However, I shall add one consideration more.

5. If Josephus were the author of this paragraph, it would be reasonable to expect in him frequent mention of Christ's miracles, whereas he is every where silent about them.

Josephus was a Pharisee: he believed the miracles of Moses and the Jewish prophets: he believed a divine providence superintending human affairs, the immortality of the soul, and the rewards of a future state. And he is willing enough to relate extraordinary things, or such things as had an appearance of being so.

Therefore he tells a story of Eleazar's dispossessing a dæmon by virtue of some incantations, and the use of a certain root called Baanas.

h

Therefore he relates a dream of Archelaus, and then another of Glaphyra, as very extraor dinary, as 1 confirming the doctrine of the immortality of souls, and the belief of a divine provi

a Et credebatur esse Christus.

* Ο Χρισος έτος ην.

See particularly Sozomen, 1. 1. cap. i. p. 399.

d Είπε και Παρθοι, το πολεμικώτατον φύλον. De B. J.

1. 2. c. 16. sect. 4. p. 189. Hav. Iar pwr to quλov. Ib. p. 191. et passim.

Vid. De B. J. 1. 2. c. viii. Ant. Jud. 1. 13. c. v. sect. 9. c. x. sect. 5. 1. 14, c. ì. Et passim.

f

τῳ εθνει των Χρισιανων ἑαυτές συμμεμιχοτας. Maximin. ap. Euseb. H. E. 1. 9. c. ix. p. 360. C.—ad Christianorum sectam se applicuisse cernerent. Vales.

Vid de B. J. 1. 7. c. vi. Ant. 1. 8. c. ii. sect. 5.

h Antiq. I. 17. c. xiii. sect. 3, 4, 5. De B. Jud. 1. 2. c. vii. τοτε αμφι τας ψυχας αθανασιας εμφερες, και το θεια προμήθεια τα ανθρωπινα παρειληφότος τη αυτό, καλως έχειν EXQUIσa EITTELY. Ant. 1. 17. xvii. 5.

dence concerning itself about human affairs. Those dreams are related by him both in the History of the Jewish War, and in his Antiquities: and yet that dream of Glaphyra is now considered by divers learned men as a mere fiction.

a

I might refer to another silly story of the fulfilment of a prediction of Judas, an Essene: which is related by him also in both those works, the War and the Antiquities.

b

Would any man please himself with such poor things as these, and relate them to the world as matters of importance, if he had any respect for the doctrines and miracles of Jesus Christ? No. He was either unacquainted with them, or resolutely silent about them; and never can be supposed author of the honourable testimony here borne to Jesus as the Christ.

Supposing these arguments to be of great weight some may ask how this paragraph came to be in the works of Josephus? In that case I should answer, that probably some learned Christian, who had read the works of Josephus, thinking it strange that this Jewish historian should say nothing of Jesus Christ, wrote this paragraph in the margin of his copy, and thence it came to be afterwards inserted into many copies of the works of Josephus: but for a good while it was not in all and therefore Photius did not see it in that copy which he made use of.

Who was the first author of this interpolation cannot be said. Tanaquil Faber suspected Eusebius. I do not charge it upon him; but I think it was first made about his time; for, if I am not mistaken, we have seen sufficient reason to believe that this paragraph was not quoted by Origen, nor by any ancient Christian writer before Eusebius, that we have any knowledge of. Though many learned men have maintained the genuineness of this paragraph, others have rejected it. And for avoiding the charge of singularity, and for giving satisfaction to some scrupulous persons, I shall, beside the authors before referred to, transcribe at the bottom of the page the observations of Vitringa. And I add the judgment of Dr. Warburton, now bishop of Gloucester, who has expressed himself upon the subject in very clear and strong terms.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

f

• If

a Jew,' says his Lordship, owned the truth of Christianity, he must needs embrace it. We, therefore, certainly conclude that the passage where Josephus, who was as much a Jew as the religion of Moses could make him, is made to acknowledge that Jesus is the Christ, in as strong • terms as words could do it, is a rank forgery, and a very stupid one too.'

[ocr errors]

III. There is yet one passage more in the works of Josephus, which ought to be here taken notice of it is in the twentieth book of his Antiquities, and to this purpose.

h

The emperor having been informed of the death of Festus, sent Albinus to be præfect in Judea. And the king [meaning Agrippa the younger] took away the high-priesthood from Joseph, and bestowed that dignity upon the son of Ananus, who also was named AnanusThis younger Ananus, who, as we said just now, was made high-priest, was haughty in his behaviour, and very enterprising: and moreover he was of the sect of the Sadducees, who, as "we have also observed before, are above all other Jews severe in their judicial sentences. This then being the temper of Ananus, and he thinking he had a fit opportunity because Festus was dead, and Albinus was yet upon the road, calls a council of judges: and, bringing before them James the brother of him who is called Christ, and some others, he accused them as transgressors of the laws, and had them stoned to death. But the most moderate men of the city, who also were reckoned most skilful in the laws, were offended at this proceeding. They therefore sent privately to the king, [Agrippa before mentioned,] entreating him to send orders

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

i

de cohærentiâ horum verborum Josephi, quibus Christo tes-
timonium perhibet cum sequentibus: Circa eadem tempora
' aliud etiam Judæos turbavit incommodum, &c.' Quæ tamen
verba, si testimonium de Christo e contextu Josephi sustuleris,
egregie cum præcedentibus conspirabunt. Ad quam difficul-
tatem removendam nuper nihil aliud a doctissimo Tillemontio
produci potuit, quam verba Josephi, quæ de Christo agunt,
contextui TapevlεTIxws inserta esse. In quo tamen dubito, an
docti acquieturi sint. Vitring. Observ. Sacr. 1. 4. cap. 7. sect.
xi.
P. 971.

fSee Divine Legation of Moses, B. 2. Sect. 6, p. 295,
Vol. i.
5 L. 20, cap. viii. sect. 1.

i

Η θρασυς ην τον τρόπον, και τολμητης διαφερόντως.

καθίζει συνεδριον κριτων και παραγαγων εις αυτό τον αδελφον Ιησε το λεγόμενο Χρισ8, Ιακωβός όνομα αυτώ, και τινας ἑτερες, ὡς παρανομησαντων κατηγορίαν ποιησάμενος, παρέδωκε λευσθησομένες.

to Ananus no more to attempt such things: and some went away to meet Albinus, who was coming from Alexandria, and put him in mind that Ananus had no right to call a council without his leave. Albinus approving of what they said, wrote to Ananus in much anger, threatening to punish him for what he had done: and king Agrippa took away from him the high-priesthood, after he had enjoyed it three months, and put in Jesus the son of Damnæus.' This passage is cited from Josephus by Eusebius, and from the twentieth book of his Antiquities. It is also quoted by Jerom, but very inaccurately. We perceive likewise that it was in the copies of Josephus in the time of Photius.

b

a

d

[ocr errors]

Nevertheless there are learned men, of good judgment, who think that the words which we now have in Josephus, concerning James, are an interpolation.

They were in Josephus in the time of Eusebius, and afterwards; but it does not follow they were always there: indeed, there is a good deal of reason to believe that they were not originally in Josephus.

с

I have elsewhere carefully examined the most ancient accounts of the death of James, called the just, and the brother of Jesus: those disquisitions will be of use here. The persons of whom Josephus speaks, who were tried and condemned by the Jewish council at the instigation of Ananus, were put to death by stoning, and probably without the city. But, according to the history of the death of James, given by Hegesippus, a learned Jewish believer and writer in the second century, the death of James was effected in a tumultuous manner: the disturbance began at the temple, and he died there, or near it. Some flung him down and threw stones at him : but his death was completed by a blow on the head with a long pole, such as fullers make use of in beating wet clothes. This is said by Clement of Alexandria in his Institutions, as cited by Eusebius, and by Hegesippus, as cited also by him. That therefore is the true and ancient account of the death of James, the Lord's brother: and the Christians of the second century knew nothing of that account of his death which we now have in Josephus: therefore, probably there was then nothing in him about it; for if there had, they would not have been ignorant of it.

g

f

Moreover, it is very observable that, according to the long and particular history of the death and martyrdom of James, which we have in Hegesippus, that apostle suffered alone: there was no attempt made upon any others, as the passage now in Josephus intimates. And it is inconsistent with the whole narrative that any others should be joined with him.

And that James suffered martyrdom, not by order of council, as now in Josephus, but in a tumultuous manner at the temple, or near it, and by a blow on the head with a fuller's pole, appears to have been the general and prevailing opinion of Christians in the fourth century, as well as before: for it is mentioned by Jerom, and Epiphanius, very agreeably to Hegesippus. In this place therefore Josephus gave an account of some who were accused by Ananus, and condemned by his council as transgressors of the Jewish laws: and what Ananus did was upon

a H. E. 1. 2. cap. 23, p. 65, 66.

De V. I. cap. ii. De Jacobo fratre Domini.

ο αυθεντισας καθίζει συνεδριον, και Ιακωβον τον αδελφον το κύριο, συν ἑτεροις, παρανομίαν αιτιασάμενος, λίθοις αναιρεθῆναι παρασκευάζει. κ. λ. Phot. cod. 238, p. 977.

Facile quidem crediderim, Jerosolymitanos proceres graviter tulisse, quod synedrium suâ auctoritate instituisset, cum dudum jus gladii a Romanis esset Judæis ademtum; quod iterum inconsulto Cæsare ab Anano usurpatum timebant, ne genti suæ gravi fortasse pœnâ luendum esset. Sed quæ de Jacobo, Jesu, qui Christus dicebatur, fratre, habentur, merum adsumentum male feriati Christiani esse videntur. Cleric. H. E. ann. 62, n. ii. p. 415.

Sunt quoque rationes sat graves, quæ persuadeant hæc fuisse interpolata, et scripsisse duntaxat Josephum: xaι Tapaγαγων εις αυτό τινας, και ὡς παρανομησάντων κατηγορίαν Tomoaμevos. x. A. Statutosque coram eo nonnullos, et accusatos perfractæ legis, tradidit lapidibus obruendos. Id. Ars Crit. P. 3, cap. 14, sect. 12. Vol. 2, p. 289.

Illa de Jacobo, Jesu, qui Christus dicebatur, fratre, (licet agnita ab Eusebio, aliisque eum sequutis, disertimque a Photio,) pro mero adsumento male feriati Christiani habentur a

i

nonnullis; quam recte, xpiтixwтspwv esto judicium. Hudson. annot, ad Antiq. 1. 20, c. ix. sect. 1.

e See this Vol. Ch. xvi. Sect. iii. v. vi.

* Δυο δε γεγονασιν Ιακωβοι· εἷς ὁ δικαιος, ὁ κατα το πτερογια βληθείς, και ὑπὸ κναφεως ξυλῳ πληγεις εις θανατον. Clem. A. ap. Euseb. H.E. 1. 2. c. i. p. 38. D. Conf. ib. cap. 23. p. 63. C. et 65. C. And see in this work, the present Vol. ch. xvi. num. iii.

5 Και λαβων τις απ' αυτών, είς των γναφέων, το ξυλον εν ὡ απεπίεζε τα ίματία, ηνεγκε κατα της κεφαλής το δίκαιο. Και ¿TWS &μаρTUρYσε. Hegesipp. ap. Euseb. H. E. 1. 2, cap. 23, p. 65. B.

Qui cum præcipitatus de pinnâ templi, confractis cru-ribus, adhuc semivivus — fullonis fuste quo uda vestimenta extorqueri solent, in cerebro percussus interiit-et juxta templum, ubi et præcipitatus fuerat, sepultus est. Hier. de V. I. cap. 2.

Qui et ipse postea de Templo a Judæis præcipitatus successorem habuit Simonem, quem et ipsum tradunt pro Domino crucifixum. Id. Comm. in ep. ad Gal. cap. i. T. 4, p. 237.

Hær. 78. num. xiv. p. 1046.

several accounts disliked by many discreet and moderate men's but there is not sufficient reason to believe that James was particularly mentioned by him as one of them.

It is certain we ought to be very cautious in admitting quotations from Josephus by later Christian writers; for they had a great regard for him, and were fond of having his testimony, whether there was ground for it or not. Theophylact, upon John xiii. 33, and referring also to John vii. 34, says, The Jews sought him when their city was taken, and the wrath of God fell upon them on all sides: as also Josephus testifies, that those things happened to them upon ' account of the death of Jesus.'

a

[ocr errors]

b

So says Theophylact. But from Origen, as before seen, we have good reason to believe that there was no such account in the works of Josephus, and that he never said any such thing. In Suidas is a long article at the word JESUS, where it is said that Josephus, who is often quoted by Eusebius Pamphili in his Ecclesiastical History, expressly says, in his History of the • Jewish War, that Jesus sacrificed with the priests at the temple.'

с

There is no such thing there now; and probably never was in any good copies of the works of Josephus: but as he was an author in great repute with Christians, and he was often appealed to, and too often quoted inaccurately, (of which Jerom, in his article of St. James, is a remarkable instance,) his works were as likely to suffer some interpolations as any writer's whatever.

Blondel supposed, that to this desire of making an advantage from Josephus we owe the insertion of the remarkable testimony to Jesus which we have above so largely considered. What Blondel says appears to me so judicious, and so apposite to the purpose, that I shall transcribe him below in his own words: and let his judgment be added to those of Vitringa, and the bishop of Gloucester above quoted.

d

IV. Supposing Josephus not to have said any thing of Jesus Christ, some may ask: What could be the reason of it; and how can it be accounted for?

To which I might answer, that such a question is rather more curious than judicious and important; and it may be difficult to propose a solution that shall be generally approved of. However, I shall hazard a few observations upon the point.

с

It is easy to believe that all Jews who were contemporary with Christ or his apostles, and did not receive Jesus as the Christ, must have been filled with much enmity against him and his followers. We are assured by early Christian writers of good credit, such as Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and others, that the ruling part of the Jewish nation industriously spread abroad false and injurious reports among the nations concerning the followers of Jesus. But the polite and learned writers, such as Justus of Tiberias, and Josephus, might think it expedient to be silent. They had nothing to say against Jesus or the Christians, with any appearance of truth and credibility; they therefore thought it better to be silent, and thereby, if possible, bury them in utter oblivion.

It is not easy to account for the silence of Josephus any other way. Many things are ὡς και Ιώσηπος μαρτυρεί, δια τον θανατον το Ιησε Dial. cum Tryph. p. 234. D. Par. sect. 18. p. 102, ταυτα αυτοίς γενεσθαι. In Ev. p. 762. Α. Bened. 'Ad Nat. 1. i. cap. 13, p. 59, D. et adv. Marcion. 1. 3, cap. 23, p. 498.

• Εύρομεν εν Ιωσήπον, τον συγγραφεα της άλώσεως Ἱερεσολύμων, (ε μνήμην πολλην Ευσέβιος ὁ Παμφίλε εν τη εκκλησ σιασική αυτό ίσορία ποιειται) φανερως λεγοντα εν τοις της αιχμαλωσίας αυτὰ ὑπομνήμασιν, ότι Ιησες εν τῷ ἱερῷ μετα των πέρεων ήγιαζε. Suid. V. Ιησες.

De V. I. cap. ii. To Jerom might have been added Eusebius, and divers other Christian writers. Concerning Eusebius's inaccurate quotations of Josephus somewhat was said formerly. Vol. ii. p. 361. And they have been observed and censured by Scaliger, and other learned moderns.

d A même dessein, de tirer avantage de Josephe, quelque main hardie a inséré dans ses Antiquités, lib. 18, c 4. des paroles qui lui sont d'autant moins convenables, qu'elles contiennent un témoignage honorable, tant de la personne de notre Seigneur, que de la sainteté et vérité du Christianisme, de la profession duquel cet auteur a toujours été très éloigné: et d'ailleurs qu'elles sont notoirement une pièce d'attache, sans liaison avec le reste de son discours, tant précédant que suivant, et placée à l'endroit qu'elle occupe par affection de parti plutôt que par raison. Blondel Des Sibylles. p. 28.

Le Cardinal Noris se fâche avec raison contre Joseph, de ce qu'il expédie en dix lignes les neuf années du règne d' Archélaüs pour raconter au long les deux songes, dont on a parlé cidessus. Mais on a encore plus de sujet de se plaindre de la négligence, ou plutôt du silence affecté de cet Historien, touchant le dénombrement, dont S. Luc parle, et touchant le meurtre des enfans de Bethléhem, du temns de la naissance de notre Seigneur: pour ne pas parler de sa vie, et de sa mort, dont il ne dit rien non plus: car on ne peut guère douter, que le passage, où il en est parlé, ne soit fourré, par un Chrêtien malhabile, dans Joseph. S'il eut dit seulement un mot du dénombrement, et du massacre de Bethlehem, on n'auroit point la peine de chercher le tems de la naissance de Notre Seigneur. Mais ce Juif malicieux a voulu, autant qu'il étoit en lui, ensevelir cette histoire dans un éternel oubli, en haine des Chrêtiens. Le Clerc. Bib. Ch. T. 4, Art. i. p. 74, 75.

omitted by him of which he could not be ignorant: he must have known of the massacre of the infants at Bethlehem soon after the birth of Jesus. The arrival of the wise men from the East, who were conducted by a star, gave concern not only to Herod, but to all Jerusalem; Matt. ii. 8. Josephus was a priest: he could not but have heard of the vision of Zacharias the father of John the Baptist at the temple, Luke i. and it was a thing very proper to have had a place in his History. The prophecies of Simeon and Anna at the temple, and other things that happened there about that time, as we may think, must have been well known to him: then the preaching and miracles of our Saviour and his apostles at Jerusalem, and in Galilee, and all over Judea; the crucifixion of Jesus at Jerusalem at the time of a passover; the darkness for three hours at Jerusalem, and all over Judea; the death of James the brother of John at Jerusalem, by Herod Agrippa: all these things must have been well known to him.

Moreover, before Josephus had finished his work of the Jewish Antiquities, or even the History of the Jewish War, Christianity had spread very much in Asia and in other parts, and at Rome itself, where also many had suffered, and that several years before the final ruin of Jerusalem and the Jewish nation. The progress of the Christian religion was a very considerable event; and it had its rise in Judea.

2

The sect of the Christians, which had its rise in Judea, and consisted partly of Jews, partly of men of other nations, was as numerous, or more numerous, in the time of Josephus, than any of the three Jewish sects, the Sadducees, Pharisees, and Essenes, whose principles are particularly described by him in the War, and in the Antiquities; and therefore, as we may think, were deserving of notice: but they were not Jewish enough; they were not entirely Jewish; and they were followers of a leader whom our author did not, and could not, esteem, consistently with his prevailing views and sentiments.

Josephus was well acquainted with affairs at Rome, and in all the settlements of the Jewish people in Asia, and parts adjacent. He is as exact in the account of the several successions in the Roman empire as any Roman historian whatever. What a long and particular account has he given of the conspiracy against Caligula, and his death, and the succession of Claudius?

с

I do not say that Josephus had read the books of the New Testament: he might have come to the knowledge of most of the things just mentioned another way: they are great and remarkable events, about which a contemporary, and a man of good intelligence, engaged in public life, could not be ignorant: his silence therefore about Christian affairs is wilful and affected. It cannot be owing to ignorance, and must therefore be ascribed to some other cause, whatever it may be.

His profound silence, however, concerning the affairs of the Christians in his time is no objection to their truth and reality. The history of the New Testament has in it all the marks of credibility that any history can have. Heathen historians of the best credit have borne witness to the time of the rise of the Christian religion, the country in which it had its origin, and who was the author of it, and its swift and early progress in the world.

Of all those things which are recorded in the gospels, and of the progress of Christianity afterwards, we have uncontested evidence from the evangelical writers themselves, and from ancient Christian authors still extant, and from heathen writers concurring with them in many particulars.

e

And Josephus, the Jewish historian, who believed not in Jesus, has recorded the history of the Jewish people in Judea, and elsewhere: and particularly the state of things in Judea, with the names of the Jewish princes and Roman governors, during the ministry of our Saviour and his apostles. Whereby, as formerly shewn at large, he has wonderfully confirmed, though without intending it, the veracity and the ability of the evangelical writers, and the truth of their history. He has also, as we have now seen in this volume, borne testimony to the fulfilment of . our Lord's predictions concerning the coming troubles and afflictions of that people; which is more credible, and more valuable, than if given by a believer in Jesus, and a friend and favourer

a De B. J. I. 2, cap. viii.

Antiq. 1. 13, cap. v. et l. 18, cap. i.

Antiq. 1. 19, cap. i. ii. iii.

quos vulgus Christianos appellabat. Auctor hujus nominis Christus, qui, Tiberio imperante, per procuratorem

VOL. III.

Pontium Pilatum supplicio affectus erat. Repressaque in
præsens exitiabilis superstitio rursus erumpebat, non modo
per Judæam originem ejus mali, sed per Urbem etiam, &e.
Tacit. Ann. 1. 15, cap. 44.
• See Vol. i.

4 A

« AnteriorContinuar »