Testimonium Flavianum

Template:Da tradurre Nel 93 d.C., lo storico ebreo Giuseppe Flavio pubblicò un lavoro chiamato Antichità Giudaiche. Le copie esistenti di questa opera, tutte derivanti da fonti cristiane, anche la versione araba recentemente scoperta, contengono due passaggi che fanno riferimento a Gesù. Sull'autenticità del primo, meglio conosciuto come il Testimonium Flavianum, direttamente riguardante Gesù, si sono accese delle dispute sin dal XVII secolo. Il secondo passaggio menziona Gesù come fratello di Giacomo.

«Ci fu verso questo tempo Gesù, uomo saggio, se pure bisogna chiamarlo uomo: era infatti autore di opere straordinarie, maestro di uomini che accolgono con piacere la verità, ed attirò a sé molti Giudei, e anche molti dei greci. Questi era il Cristo. E quando Pilato, per denunzia degli uomini notabili fra noi, lo punì di croce, non cessarono coloro che da principio lo avevano amato. Egli infatti apparve loro al terzo giorno nuovamente vivo, avendo già annunziato i divini profeti queste e migliaia d’altre meraviglie riguardo a lui. Ancor oggi non è venuta meno la tribù di quelli che, da costui, sono chiamati Cristiani»

John Dominic Crossan e K. H. Rengstorff hanno fatto notare che il passaggio contiene molti indicatori intrinsechi che lo rendono inconsistente sia nei confronti dello stile di scrittura di Giuseppe Flavio, sia nei fatti di lui conosciuti, cosicché è probabile che una parte se non la totalità di tali passi sia stata falsificata o contenga delle interpolazioni cristiane. Testo con eliminate le possibili interpolazioni:

«Ci fu verso questo tempo Gesù, uomo saggio; era infatti autore di opere straordinarie,(o nuove) maestro di uomini che accolgono con piacere la verità,(o le nuove dottrine) ed attirò a sé molti Giudei, e anche molti dei greci. E quando Pilato, per denunzia degli uomini notabili fra noi, lo punì di croce, non cessarono coloro che da principio lo avevano amato. Ancor oggi non è venuta meno la tribù di quelli che, da costui, sono chiamati Cristiani»

È stato scoperto un manoscritto arabo del X secolo di Agapio di Hierapolis che riporta una versione alternativa del passaggio. Non si conosce una spiegazione del perché questo manoscritto differisca dagli altri e quale sia la sua storia; alcuni studiosi ritengono che l'autore abbia riportato il passo citandolo a memoria Il testo in questo manoscritto recita:

«Similmente dice Giuseppe l’ebreo, poiché egli racconta nei trattati che ha scritto sul governo dei Giudei: Ci fu verso quel tempo un uomo saggio che era chiamato Gesù, che dimostrava una buona condotta di vita ed era considerato virtuoso (o: dotto), e aveva come allievi molta gente dei Giudei e degli altri popoli. Pilato lo condannò alla crocifissione e alla morte, ma coloro che erano stati suoi discepoli non rinunciarono alla sua dottrina e raccontarono che egli era loro apparso tre giorni dopo la crocifissione ed era vivo, ed era probabilmente il Cristo del quale i profeti hanno detto meraviglie»

L'analisi linguistica più recente ha sminuito l'importanza del testo arabo. La maggioranza degli studiosi ritiene che il "Testimonium Flavianum" non sia completamente falso, ma è difficile stabilire con certezza l'originale.

Judging from Alice Whealey's 2003 survey of the historiography, it seems that the majority of modern scholars consider that Josephus really did write something here about Jesus, but that the text that has reached us is corrupt to a perhaps quite substantial extent. In the words of the Catholic Encyclopedia entry for Flavius Josephus, "The passage seems to suffer from repeated interpolations." There has been no consensus on which portions are corrupt, or to what degree.

Alice Whealey writes:

Twentieth century controversy over the Testimonium Flavianum can be distinguished from controversy over the text in the early modern period insofar as it seems generally more academic and less sectarian. While the challenge to the authenticity of the Testimonium in the early modern period was orchestrated almost entirely by Protestant scholars and while in the same period Jews outside the church uniformly denounced the text’s authenticity, the twentieth century controversies over the text have been marked by the presence of Jewish scholars for the first time as prominent participants on both sides of the question. In general, the attitudes of Protestant, Roman Catholic, Jewish and secular scholars towards the text have drawn closer together, with a greater tendency among scholars of all religious backgrounds to see the text as largely authentic. On the one hand this can be interpreted as the result of an increasing trend towards secularism, which is usually seen as product of modernity. On the other hand it can be interpreted as a sort of post-modern disillusionment with the verities of modern skepticism, and an attempt to recapture the sensibility of the ancient world, when it apparently was still possible for a first-century Jew to have written a text as favorable towards Jesus of Nazareth as the Testimonium Flavianum.

It seems clear that, whatever the current fashion of scholarship, no conclusive evidence exists to allow a final closure of this question.

Reference to Jesus as brother of James

The other reference in the works of Josephus often cited to support the historicity of Jesus is also in the Antiquities, in the first paragraph of book 20, chapter 9. It concerns the execution of a man whom traditional scholarship identifies as James the Just.

"And now Caesar, upon hearing the death of Festus, sent Albinus into Judea, as procurator. But the king deprived Joseph of the high priesthood, and bestowed the succession to that dignity on the son of Ananus, who was also himself called Ananus. Now the report goes that this eldest Ananus proved a most fortunate man; for he had five sons who had all performed the office of a high priest to God, and who had himself enjoyed that dignity a long time formerly, which had never happened to any other of our high priests. But this younger Ananus, who, as we have told you already, took the high priesthood, was a bold man in his temper, and very insolent; he was also of the sect of the Sadducees, who are very rigid in judging offenders, above all the rest of the Jews, as we have already observed; when, therefore, Ananus was of this disposition, he thought he had now a proper opportunity. Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done; they also sent to the king, desiring him to send to Ananus that he should act so no more, for that what he had already done was not to be justified; nay, some of them went also to meet Albinus, as he was upon his journey from Alexandria, and informed him that it was not lawful for Ananus to assemble a sanhedrim without his consent. Whereupon Albinus complied with what they said, and wrote in anger to Ananus, and threatened that he would bring him to punishment for what he had done; on which king Agrippa took the high priesthood from him, when he had ruled but three months, and made Jesus, the son of Damneus, high priest."

This paragraph is generally accepted as authentic by scholars, although there is debate as to whether the words who was called Christ were in the original passage, or were a later interpolation. Even most scholars who hold that the Testimonium is inauthentic regard the xx 9.1. reference as original to Josephus. Unlike the Testimonium, the xx 9.1. reference was mentioned in several places by Origen. A small minority, including Zindler, challenge the passage in its entirety, noting contradictions in both the characterization of Ananus and the chronology of his tenure between the passages in the Antiquities and the Jewish Wars.

The heart of the debate is over whether the "Jesus" in question is the same person as the main character of the Christian Bible or, as the passage states at the end, merely "the son of Damneus" (which would make the James whom Ananus had executed the son of Damneus, as well.) Some assert that the paragraph discusses two different people named "Jesus." Others assert that Jesus the brother of James and Jesus the son of Damneus are the same person, and see King Agrippa's action as a particularly pointed snub of Ananus (by making the new high priest be the brother of the man Ananus had wrongfully executed). Those who hold to the latter view note that, if one assumes that "who was called Christ" is a later interpolation by a Christian scribe, the reference to Christ may well have replaced "the son of Damneus" at that ___location in the original text.

If one makes such an assumption, additional problems with the text as it stands are resolved. First, it would have been quite unusual, bordering upon unheard-of, to identify a man as somebody's brother rather than as his father's son. On the other hand, introducing men as brothers and identifying their father at the same time would have been pro forma.

Furthermore, it is highly unlikely that Josephus, a first century Jew, could have called another man the Messiah. "Christ", from the Greek Χριστος or Khristos, and "Messiah", from the Hebrew מָשִׁיחַ or Mašíaḥ both literally mean "anointed". If one assumes that "who was called Christ" is original to Josephus, there are two possible explanations: that Josephus was merely reporting the title ascribed to Jesus, or that he really did believe that Jesus was the Messiah. The former is a remote possibility, though it is most unlikely that Josephus would use such a title without accompanying it with editorializing on the blasphemy such a title would represent to him. The latter can be ruled out, as detailed above, because it would contradict Origen's repeated admissions that Josephus did not believe in nor accept Jesus as the Christ.

It is worth noting that both "Jesus" and "James" were popular names in first-century Judea. There are at least five characters named "James" in the New Testament. Josephus mentions at least nineteen people named "Jesus," a number of them living in the first third of the first century.

Also, just as it is customary to refer to people today by their first and last names, it was customary then to refer to a man by his one-and-only name and his father's name. While "the son of" sounds awkward in English, the original Greek is not so stilted, using a formula similar to that found in Gaelic languages with "Mac." "Jesus who was called Christ" is "Ἰησοῦ τοῦ λεγομένου Χριστοῦ" ("Iêsou tou legomenou Christou"), and "Jesus the son of Damneus" is "Ἰησοῦν τὸν τοῦ Δαμναίου" ("Iêsoun ton tou Damnaiou").

References

James Carleton Paget, Some Observations on Josephus and Christianity, Journal of Theological Studies 52.2 (2001) pp. 539-624. A monster review of all the theories, all the scholars and all the evidence.
Robert Eisenman, James the Brother of Jesus (Viking Penguin) 1997
Shlomo Pines, An Arabic Version of the Testimonium Flavianum and its Implications, (Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1971)
Alice Whealey, Josephus on Jesus: The Testimonium Flavianum Controversy from Late Antiquity to Modern Times,Peter Lang Publishing (2003). How the TF has been seen down the centuries.
Frank R. Zindler, The Jesus The Jews Never Knew, Sepher Toldoth Yeshu and the Quest of the historical Jesus in Jewish Sources (AAP), 2003

External links

-->

^ ^a ^b ^c testo tratto da [1]

[crist03-1] testo tratto da [1]

[1]