Editing Josephus on Jesus (section)

=== Arguments from silence ===
A different set of external arguments against the authenticity of the ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' (either partial or total) are [[arguments from silence]], e.g. that although twelve Christian authors refer to Josephus before Eusebius in AD&nbsp;324, none mentions the ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}''.<ref name=Rothchild274>"Echo of a whisper" by Clare Rothchild in ''Ablution, Initiation, and Baptism: Late Antiquity, Early Judaism, and Early Christianity'' by David Hellholm 2010 {{ISBN|3-11-024751-8}} p. 274</ref>{{sfn|Feldman|Hata|1987|p=57}}

Even after Eusebius' AD&nbsp;324 reference, it is not until [[Jerome]]'s ''{{lang|la|[[De Viris Illustribus (Jerome)|De Viris Illustribus]]}}'' ({{circa|AD&nbsp;392}}) that the passage from Josephus is referenced again, even though the ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}''{{'}}s reference to Jesus would seem appropriate in the works of many intervening [[patristic]] authors.<ref name=Rothchild274 />{{sfn|Feldman|Hata|1987|p=57}} However, [[Bart D. Ehrman]] and [[John P. Meier]] have argued that this silence is mainly due to the fact that the original ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' probably had a neutral tone toward Jesus and did not contain elements that would have been useful to Christian apologetics, since it did not recognize him as the Messiah, nor did it speak about his resurrection; it was, therefore, not a useful instrument in their polemics with pagan writers.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Meier |first=John P. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=zODYAAAAMAAJ |title=A Marginal Jew: The roots of the problem and the person |date=1991 |publisher=Doubleday |isbn=978-0-385-26425-9 |pages=71–85}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Ehrman |first=Bart D. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=hf5Rj8EtsPkC |title=Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth |date=2012-03-20 |publisher=Harper Collins |isbn=978-0-06-208994-6 |pages=64, 350}}</ref>

Some scholars also point to the silence of [[Photios]] as late as the ninth century, and the fact that he does not mention the ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' at all in his broad review of Josephus.{{sfn|Schreckenberg|Schubert|1992b|p=39}} However, Photios argues in his ''{{lang|la|[[Bibliotheca (Photius)|Bibliotheca]]}}'' that Josephus's works mention the [[Massacre of the Innocents]] and the [[virgin birth of Jesus]] (which no works of Josephus make any reference to), leading many scholars to think that he actually had a scant knowledge of the writings he was reviewing or that the documents he was working on were grossly interpolated. Also, Photios had clearly read Eusebius's ''Ecclesiastical History'' and Jerome's ''{{lang|la|De Viris Illustribus}}'', since he lists them both in his ''{{lang|la|Bibliotheca}}''.<ref>[[Photios]], ''Bibliotheca'', Chapter 33</ref>

==== Table of Josephus excludes the ''<span lang="la">Testimonium</span>'' ====
A separate argument from silence against the total or partial authenticity of the ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' is that a fifth- or sixth-century table of contents of Josephus (albeit selective) makes no mention of it.{{sfn|Feldman|Hata|1987|p=57}}

==== Arabic ''<span lang="la">Testimonium</span>'' lacks Christian terminology ====
[[Andreas J. Köstenberger]] argues that the fact that the tenth-century Arabic version of the ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' (discovered in the 1970s) lacks distinct Christian terminology while sharing the essential elements of the passage indicates that the Greek ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' has been subject to interpolation.{{sfn|Kostenberger|Kellum|Quarles|2009|pp=104–108}}

==== No parallel in other works ====
A final argument from silence relates to Josephus' own writings and questions the authenticity of ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' based on the fact that it has no parallel in the ''[[The Wars of the Jews|Jewish War]]'', which includes a discussion of Pontius Pilate at about the same level of detail.{{sfn|Van Voorst|2000|p=88}}{{sfn|Feldman|1984|p=826}}

==== Timing of the interpolations ====
Zvi Baras believes that the ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' was subject to interpolation before Eusebius wrote.{{sfn|Baras|1987|p=340}} Baras believes that Origen had seen the original ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' but that the ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' seen by Origen had no negative reference to Jesus, else Origen would have reacted against it.{{sfn|Baras|1987|p=340}} Baras states that the interpolation in the ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' took place between Origen and Eusebius.{{sfn|Baras|1987|p=340}}

[[Paul L. Maier]] states that a comparison of Eusebius' reference with the tenth-century Arabic version of the ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' due to [[Agapius of Hierapolis]] indicates that the Christian interpolation present in the ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' must have come early, before Eusebius.{{sfn|Maier|2007|pp=336–337}} Robert E. Van Voorst also states that the interpolation likely took place some time between Origen and Eusebius.{{sfn|Van Voorst|2000|p=97}}