Josephus, Paul, and the Fate of Early Christianity: History and Silence in the First Century

by F. B. A. Asiedu

Overview

Flavius Josephus, the priest from Jerusalem who was affiliated with the Pharisees, is our most important source for Jewish life in the first century. His notice about the death of James the brother of Jesus suggests that Josephus knew about the followers of Jesus in Jerusalem and in Judaea. In Rome, where he lived for the remainder of his life after the Jewish War, a group of Christians appear to have flourished, if 1 Clement is any indication. Josephus, however, says extremely little about the Christians in Judaea and nothing about those in Rome. He also does not reference Paul the apostle, a former Pharisee, who was a contemporary of Josephus’s father in Jerusalem, even though, according to Acts, Paul and his activities were known to two successive Roman governors (procurators) of Judaea, Marcus Antonius Felix and Porcius Festus, and to King Herod Agrippa II and his sisters Berenice and Drusilla. The knowledge of the Herodians, in particular, puts Josephus’s silence about Paul in an interesting light, suggesting that it may have been deliberate.


In addition, Josephus’s writings bear very little witness to other contemporaries in Rome, so much so that if we were dependent on Josephus alone we might conclude that many of those historical characters either did not exist or had little or no impact in the first century. Asiedu comments on the state of life in Rome during the reign of the Emperor Domitian and how both Josephus and the Christians who produced 1 Clement coped with the regime as other contemporaries, among whom he considers Martial, Tacitus, Pliny the Younger, and others, did. He argues that most of Josephus’s contemporaries practiced different kinds of silences in bearing witness to the world around them. Consequently, the absence of references to Jews or Christians in Roman writers of the last three decades of the first century, including Josephus, should not be taken as proof of their non-existence in Flavian Rome.

Product Details

ISBN-13:	9781978701342
Publisher:	Lexington Books
Publication date:	07/06/2021
Pages:	404
Sales rank:	543,160
Product dimensions:	6.07(w) x 8.57(h) x 1.05(d)

About the Author

F. B. A. Asiedu is a visiting scholar at Duke University.

Table of Contents

1. Josephus, Paul, and the Early Christians: Before and After 62 CE

2. Reading Josephus’s Silences: Writing Paul Out of the Jewish Archives of the First Century

3. Josephus and Martial in Flavian Rome: The Rhetoric of Silence and the Language of Derision

4. Martial, Tacitus, Pliny, and Friends: Fear, Silence, Exile, and Death in Domitian’s Rome

5. Paul, the Jewish Past, and the Roman Contexts of First Clement

Interviews

From The Desk.org interview with author F.B.A. Asiedu https://www.fromthedesk.org/10-questions-asiedu/

Editorial Reviews

F. B. A. Asiedu.. . is an expert on Josephus and helps explain the reason why Josephus remains silent about some personages (e.g., Paul the apostle) and significant events such as the fire in Rome in 64 C.E. of which he most certainly must have been aware. Many of these gaps, Asiedu believes, were deliberate and strategic omissions on Josephus's part because he did not want to draw attention to such subjects. The reader of Asiedu's work will gain new appreciation for Josephus and his valuable, if selective, historical information.

The Bible Today

In Josephus, Paul, and the Fate of Early Christianity, F.B.A. Asiedu undertakes a challenging task: probing the silences in historian Josephus’ extensive body of written work from the 1st century, in particular his neglect of Paul in Jerusalem and later Christians in Rome. The analysis argues that Josephus’ silences are intentional strategies and that they result from how he wanted to depict Judaism in his day.... Such a study is exceptional in its handling such an enormous body of literature and thinking thoughtfully and creatively about the gaps in an author’s narrative.

Reading Religion

Asiedu makes a credible case and along the way supplies the reader with a lot of information about Joesphus himself.

-- "The Bible Today"

Asiedu proposes the bold thesis that Josephus's notable silences about Jesus, Paul, and the early Christian movement--with rare exceptions such as the judicial execution of James, the brother of Jesus--cannot be explained as the result of a relatively small and inconsequential movement that escaped his attention, but was instead an intentional strategy he employed aimed at excluding Christians from Jewish history. Asiedu uses Josephus's own works, the works of his contemporaries (e.g., Marital, Tacitus, Pliny), and the early Christian letter of 1 Clement as support for this thesis. He contends that Josephus's familial, social, and political connections in Jerusalem make it improbable that he was ignorant of Paul, his connection to Pharisaism, and the role he played in the bourgeoning Christian movement. His silence about the great fire in Rome, the supposed culpability of the Christians, and their subsequent persecution by Nero are also suspicious, especially in light of the evidence provided by contemporary, secular historians who bear witness to these events. Finally, Josephus's silence about the existence of a thriving Christian community in Rome, whose self-identification was deeply rooted in Judaism, its Scriptures, and its forefathers, as is evidenced in 1 Clement, is further confirmation of Asiedu's thesis. Although impossible to prove his thesis due to the absence of tangible evidence, Asiedu's investigation into Josephus's silences about the Christian movement, and the probability that it was by design is worthy of consideration[.]

-- "Religious Studies Review"

In Josephus, Paul, and the Fate of Early Christianity, F.B.A. Asiedu undertakes a challenging task: probing the silences in historian Josephus' extensive body of written work from the 1st century, in particular his neglect of Paul in Jerusalem and later Christians in Rome. The analysis argues that Josephus' silences are intentional strategies and that they result from how he wanted to depict Judaism in his day.... Such a study is exceptional in its handling such an enormous body of literature and thinking thoughtfully and creatively about the gaps in an author's narrative.

-- "Reading Religion"

This is a stimulating book about which much more could be said. It is necessarily speculative, as are many arguments about silence, but it explores Josephus' silence in sometimes arresting ways. Few will agree with all its conclusions but all should profit from it.

-- "Journal of Ecclesiastical History"

F. B. A. Asiedu. . . is an expert on Josephus and helps explain the reason why Josephus remains silent about some personages (e.g., Paul the apostle) and significant events such as the fire in Rome in 64 C.E. of which he most certainly must have been aware. Many of these gaps, Asiedu believes, were deliberate and strategic omissions on Josephus's part because he did not want to draw attention to such subjects. The reader of Asiedu's work will gain new appreciation for Josephus and his valuable, if selective, historical information.-- "The Bible Today"

From the Publisher

This is a stimulating book about which much more could be said. It is necessarily speculative, as are many arguments about silence, but it explores Josephus' silence in sometimes arresting ways. Few will agree with all its conclusions but all should profit from it.

Journal of Ecclesiastical History

Asiedu proposes the bold thesis that Josephus’s notable silences about Jesus, Paul, and the early Christian movement—with rare exceptions such as the judicial execution of James, the brother of Jesus—cannot be explained as the result of a relatively small and inconsequential movement that escaped his attention, but was instead an intentional strategy he employed aimed at excluding Christians from Jewish history. Asiedu uses Josephus’s own works, the works of his contemporaries (e.g., Marital, Tacitus, Pliny), and the early Christian letter of 1 Clement as support for this thesis. He contends that Josephus’s familial, social, and political connections in Jerusalem make it improbable that he was ignorant of Paul, his connection to Pharisaism, and the role he played in the bourgeoning Christian movement. His silence about the great fire in Rome, the supposed culpability of the Christians, and their subsequent persecution by Nero are also suspicious, especially in light of the evidence provided by contemporary, secular historians who bear witness to these events. Finally, Josephus’s silence about the existence of a thriving Christian community in Rome, whose self-identification was deeply rooted in Judaism, its Scriptures, and its forefathers, as is evidenced in 1 Clement, is further confirmation of Asiedu’s thesis. Although impossible to prove his thesis due to the absence of tangible evidence, Asiedu’s investigation into Josephus’s silences about the Christian movement, and the probability that it was by design is worthy of consideration[.]

Religious Studies Review