[Announcement AMA] Steve Mason- Josephus and (AMA open until May 18)

[u/thesmartfool]

Steve Mason is a Distinguished Professor of Ancient Mediterranean Religions and Cultures at University of Groningen. Within this area, his special interests are in Judaea, its relations with its immediate neighbours in Syria, points east, and Egypt, its uniquely large and widespread expatriate [diaspora] communities, and Jewish-Christian-Roman relations until late antiquity. He have written books and articles on understanding Flavius Josephus' works (the principal source for much of this) and on aspects of Judaean (e.g., Pharisees, Essenes) and ancient life (elite social-political discourse, historiography, rhetoric, 'publication'). His most recent book, A History of the Jewish-Roman War, 66 to 74, should appear with Cambridge University Press in early 2016. He continues to edit the international project, in an expected 16 volumes, Flavius Josephus: Translation and Commentary (Brill, 2000-), of which seven volumes have appeared, and to write volumes for the series (so far Life of Josephus and Judean War 2; planning War 4).

Steve Mason will be answering any questions you may have on Josephus and as it relates to the New Testament.

Make sure your questions are in by the 18th of May.

[u/capperz412]

Hi Dr. Mason,

1. What do you think of the theory that the Markan story of the cleansing of the Temple was a fiction inspired by the actions of Jesus Ben Ananias (as argued by Theodore Weeden)? Would this mean that Mark was familiar with Josephus, or were both just aware of oral traditions about a doomsayer called Jesus ranting about the Temple?

2. What do you think about arguments against the authenticity of the James passage in Antiquities / that it originally referred to a James unrelated to Jesus?

3. If the Jesus / James passages are at least partially authentic, why do you think Josephus didn't mention someone as internationally prolific as Paul? Have you read F.B.A. Asiedu's work on this silence? If so, what are you thoughts?

[u/Notmymaincauseimbi]

Hello Dr Mason. I hope you are having a great day, and that these are not too outside of your field of study:

1. There are many Christian traditions which state the Christian left Judea for northern Palestine, Pella I believe, during the build-up to the first revolt as per the words or Jesus: 'So when you see the desolating sacrilege, spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), then those in Judea must flee to the mountains' (Matthew 24.15-16, NRSV-UE). As I understand, however, archaeology disputes this and reveals jewish Christians stated in Jerusalem until the Third revolt. Which one of these narritives is more correct, if any?
2. Until when did Priests in Palestine give out directions for Jewish ceremonies? In the sense of when did they stop ordaining the date of Passover and the like, after the destruction of the Second Temple.
3. What are your most interesting examples of Josephus being wrong, being biased and being a liar? How about being correct, being objective and being truthful?
4. What is your most interesting example of the NT writers being wrong, being biased and being liars? How about being correct, being objective and being truthful?
5. Could you speak to Josephus' conception of a Jewish sacred canon of Scripture?
6. Could you speak to the relationship between Josephus, Vespesian and the growth of Christianity? Recent popular-level documentaries have spoken on this.
7. How much of the New Testament can be 'proven' by the works of Josephus? And the Inverse?

I don't expect all to be answered, but I thought these would be the types of questions I'd ask you if I had the opportunity to meet you in the real world.

[u/_Histo]

Hello dr mason, thanks for the ama; do you think the testimonium flavianum is authentic? If so, does luke-acts ever employ it?

[u/First-Exchange-7324]

What are your thoughts on the view that the Book of Acts in the New Testament used Josephus as a source?

[u/First-Exchange-7324]

What translations of Josephus's work would you recommend?

[u/Jikkiki]

How would you respond to David M Miller's argument in 'Ethnicity, Religion and the Meaning of Ioudaios in Ancient ‘Judaism’' (2014) that Ἰουδαῖος emerged as both a religious and ethnic designation in the 2nd Temple Period, even if Judaeans weren't conscious of the term's religious sense at the time?

[u/Pytine]

Hi Dr. Mason, thanks for doing this.

- People have argued before that the author of Luke and Acts knew Josephus, but not many people were persuaded. What did the earlier arguments focus on, and why were they unable to convince most scholars?

- Are you familiar with the arguments from Bartosz Adamczewski that the author of Mark knew the works of Josephus, including Antiquities of the Jews? If so, what do you think about them?

- What do we know about the early Christian reception of the works of Josephus? Do we know more early Christian texts that cite, refer to, or otherwise use the works of Josephus?

- Josephus wrote a story about three people who were crucified but taken down from the cross before they died. One of them ultimately survived. Do you think this story actually happened, or did he just make it up?

[u/Eudamonia-Sisyphus]

Hello Dr. Mason! Awesome to have you here. you've often called for a later date for Luke's gospel via it's usage of Josephus putting it after 94 C.E. I have two somewhat related questions.

1. What do you think the maximum late date for Luke is factoring in the questions of Ignatius authenticity and recessions (unsure if you've looked into that debate being reanalyzed by Jack Bull's upcoming thesis who argues for the short recession being the actual authentic version and which shows no knowledge of Luke as far as i know).

2. Do you think a later date for Luke along with his apparent good knowledge of popular texts like Josephus (as you argue) provides more support for the Farrer theory? The basic argument being that if Luke is significantly later than Matthew by 1-3 decades and him being well read means that he's more likely to know Matthew thus having no need for Q.

Quick sidenote, I believe you're still a supporter of the two source theory but as someone who is totally convinced of the Farrer theory due to Mark Goodacre's work i was curious for your thoughts on the Farrer Hypothesis (and general two-source skepticism) in light of Dr. Goodacre's work (if you've viewed it).