Editing Josephus on Jesus (section)

=== Arguments for complete forgery ===

==== Textual similarities to Eusebian works ====
In addition to the arguments listed above, a minority of scholars have put forward arguments to the effect that the entire ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' is a Christian interpolation. For example, Kenneth Olson has argued that the entire ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' must have been forged by Eusebius himself, basing his argument on textual similarities between the ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' and Eusebius' writings in the ''Demonstrations of the Gospels''.{{sfn|Olson|1999}}

==== Three Eusebian phrases ====
In 2012, Josephus scholar [[Louis Feldman]] reversed his prior support for the partial authenticity of the ''Testimonium'', proposing that the passage was interpolated in its entirety by Eusebius. In support of this view, Feldman points out, following Olson, that the ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' features three phrases ("one who wrought surprising feats", "the tribe of the Christians", and "still to this day") which are used nowhere else in the whole of Greek literature except Eusebius.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |last=Feldman |first=Louis H. |author-link=Louis Feldman |title=On the Authenticity of the ''Testimonium Flavianum'' Attributed to Josephus |encyclopedia=New Perspectives on Jewish-Christian Relations |series=The Brill Reference Library of Judaism |volume=33 |publisher=Brill |location=Leiden |editor1-last=Carlebach |editor1-first=Elisheva |editor2-last=Schacter |editor2-first=Jacob J. |year=2012 |pages=11–30 |isbn=978-90-04-22118-5 |doi=10.1163/9789004221185_003 |chapter=On the Authenticity of the Testimonium Flavianum Attributed to Josephus}}</ref> Feldman's new theory was criticized by [[James Carleton Paget]], who accused Feldman of misreading the data and of using anachronistic criteria.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Paget |first=James Carleton |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=AFLJ682D9QUC&q=Jews,+Christians+and+Jewish+Christians+in+Antiquity |title=Jews, Christians and Jewish Christians in Antiquity |date=2010 |publisher=Mohr Siebeck |isbn=978-3-16-150312-2 |page=602}}</ref>

Both Carleton Paget and Alice Whealey had already responded to Olson's argument, rejecting its arguments and conclusion.<ref>J. Carleton Paget, "Some Observations on Josephus and Christianity," Journal of Theological Studies 52, no. 2 (2001): 539–624</ref><ref>Alice Whealey, "Josephus, Eusebius of Caesarea, and the Testimonium Flavianum," in Josephus und das Neue Testament, ed. Christfried Böttrich and Jens Herzer (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007), 73–116.</ref> In his 2000 book Van Voorst had also argued that the word "tribe" is actually used by Josephus to describe other Jewish groups, while Géza Vermes argued in 2009 that the expression "surprising feats" ({{tlit|grc|paradoxon ergon}}) is repeatedly used by Josephus in his works to describe many miracles associated with the Old Testament (such as the [[burning bush]] and the miracles of [[Moses]] and [[Elisha]]).<ref>{{Cite book |last=Voorst |first=Robert Van |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=lwzliMSRGGkC |title=Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence |date=2000 |publisher=Wm. B. Eerdmans |isbn=978-0-8028-4368-5}}</ref><ref>{{Cite magazine |date=2009-12-14 |title=Jesus in the Eyes of Josephus |url=https://standpointmag.co.uk/jesus-in-the-eyes-of-josephus-features-jan-10-geza-vermes/ |access-date=2021-07-10 |magazine=Standpoint |archive-date=2021-09-18 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210918163503/https://standpointmag.co.uk/jesus-in-the-eyes-of-josephus-features-jan-10-geza-vermes/}}</ref>

==== Fourth-century Christian credal statements ====
In 2014, [[Paul J. Hopper]] wrote a book chapter in which he argued that the style and narrative structure of the ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' is sharply in contrast with the rest of Josephus' work. According to Hopper, the language of the ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' has more in common with fourth-century Christian credal statements than the [[historiographical]] work of first-century authors, including Josephus. He concluded that the most likely explanation is that the passage was simply interpolated in its entirety by a Christian scribe.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |last=Hopper |first=Paul J. |author-link=Paul J. Hopper |editor1-last=Fludernik |editor1-first=Monika |editor2-last=Jacob |editor2-first=Daniel |encyclopedia=Linguistics and Literary Studies: Interfaces, Encounters, Transfers |publisher=Walter de Gruyter |location=Berlin/Boston |year=2014 |title=A Narrative Anomaly in Josephus: Jewish Antiquities xviii:63 |pages=147–171 |isbn=978-3-11-030756-6 |url=https://www.academia.edu/37321029}}{{dead link|date=December 2024 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>

The concordance of the language used in the ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'', its flow within the text, and its length have formed components of the internal arguments against its authenticity, e.g. that the brief and compact character of the ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'' stands in marked contrast to Josephus' more extensive accounts presented elsewhere in his works.<ref name=Wells49 /> For example, Josephus' description of the death of [[John the Baptist]] includes consideration of his virtues, the theology associated with his baptismal practices, his oratorical skills, his influence, the circumstances of his death, and the belief that the destruction of Herod's army was a divine punishment for Herod's slaughter of John.<ref>{{cite journal |title=John the Baptist in Josephus: philology and exegesis |journal=Journal of Biblical Literature |first=John P. |last=Meier |volume=111 |issue=2 |pages=225–237 |jstor=3267541 |year=1992}}</ref> [[G. A. Wells]] has argued against the authenticity of the ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}'', stating that the passage is noticeably shorter and more cursory than such notices generally used by Josephus in the ''Antiquities'', and that had it been authentic, it would have included more details and a longer introduction.<ref name=Wells49 />

==== Intrusion that breaks the narrative ====
A further internal argument against the ''{{lang|la|Testimonium}}''{{'s}} authenticity is the context of the passage in the ''Antiquities of the Jews''.{{sfn|Van Voorst|2003|p=509}} Some scholars argue that the passage is an intrusion into the progression of Josephus' text at the point in which it appears in the ''Antiquities'' and breaks the thread of the narrative.<ref name=Wells49>''The Jesus Legend'' by George Albert Wells and R. Joseph Hoffman 1996 {{ISBN|0-8126-9334-5}} pp. 49–56</ref>