Question 10

Moshe Bernstein, '"Rewritten Bible': A Generic Category Which Has Outlived its Usefulness?" (2005)

Supports a Vermes-like narrow definition of 'Rewritten Bible', thinks that such a definition can be used to classify a genre; criticizes 'process' definitions as being too broad to be of any use; seems to think that AJ fits the narrow definition

Étienne Nodet, "Flavius Josèphe: Création et histoire" (1993)

AJ is apologetic, tries to reconcile monotheism with Jewish particularity by making Mosaic Law a reflection of natural law; has a profoundly pessimistic view of history that comes out in his use of Golden Age and subsequent decline myths

Harold Attridge, 'The Interpretation of Biblical History in the Antiquitates Judaicae of Flavius Josephus' (1976)

Approaches AJ as "a serious theological endeavor"; work is an 'adaptive apologetic' modelled on Dionysius of Halicarnassus (DH), making tradition relevant and attractive; major theme is God's providential justice, arguing that Israel's relationship to God fits with this general truth

Tessa Rajak, "Josephus and the 'Archaeology' of the Jews" (1982)

Argues that AJ is only superficially similar to Greek historiography and the work of DH; J considers his task fundamentally different, since it involves the transmission of texts, is based on older traditions, and comes with divine authority; states that J does not incorporate Bible into Greek myth

Steve Mason, "'Should Any Wish to Enquire Further' (Ant. 1.25): The Aim and Audience of Josephus's Judean Antiquities/Life" (1998)

Critiques standard approach of labelling AJ as an 'apologetic'; argues that no hostile reader would plough through such a large, moralizing work; sees J as rather peripheral to Roman power circles, and describes AJ as "a primer in Judean law and culture for interested outsiders"

Arthur Droge, 'Homer or Moses? Early Christian Interpretations of the History of Culture' (1989)

Follows Feldman, sees J as extensively using of Hesiodic schema; thinks that J did so to make Genesis' prehistory intelligible to Greek readers, but that this left him open to charge that Jews

Louis Feldman, introduction to and commentary on 'Judaean Antiquities 1-4' (2004)

Introduction (apparently by Mason?) repeats much of Mason (1998), and commentary adds little new to Feldman (1968) with respect to use of the Golden Age and decline myths

John Levison, 'Portraits of Adam in Early Judaism: From Sirach to 2 Baruch' (1988)

Looks at J's portrayal of Adam; sees AJ as consciously imitating DH; finds that J modifies story to express his retributive theme; J includes many G-R notions, including GA styling

Thomas Franxman, 'Genesis and the "Jewish Antiquities" of Flavius Josephus' (1979)

Proceeds systematically through Genesis and AJ, noting differences; does not note any parallels with Greek thought in J's portrayal of Eden or man's decline; often offers no explanation for why J changed the biblical text; Feldman strongly criticizes for this and missing many changes

Per Bilde, 'Flavius Josephus, between Jerusalem and Rome' (1988)

Sees AJ as addressed to two different groups for two different purposes: written to neutral Greeks for apologetic purpose, and written to Greeks favorably disposed toward Judaism for missionary reasons

Marton Ribary, "Josephus' 'Rewritten Bible' as a Non-Apologetic Work" (2014)

Adopts and repeats (with minor elaboration) Mason's non-apologetic interpretation of AJ, seeing it as primarily informative and aimed at an already favorable non-Jewish audience; attributes elements that appear apologetic as generic characteristics of 'Rewritten Bible'

Gregory Sterling, 'Historiography and Self-Definition: Josephos, Luke-Acts, and Apologetic Historiography' (1991)

Sees AJ as part of genre of 'apologetic historiography', in the tradition of Berossus and Manetho; J sees task as prophetic retelling of scripture for three ends: 1) to give Greeks a favorable impression of Judaism; 2) to encourage Romans to continue favorable status of Judaism; to present a form of Judaism to Jews that J thought would best serve as a basis for reconstructed Judaism

Philip Alexander, "Retelling the Old Testament" (1988)

Tries to establish generic characteristics of the 'genre' 'Rewritten Bible' based on 4 works, including AJ; sees AJ as fitting well with other 3 works, little tension between its Greek form and Jewish content; derives nine general characteristics of the 'genre', none that helpful for understanding AJ

Louis Feldman, "Hellenizations in Josephus' Portrayal of Man's Decline" (1968)

Goes through J's portrayal of man's original bliss and decline and points out 'Hellenizations'; much of attention is on parallels to Golden Age and Myth of the Ages accounts; offers no analysis other than proposing that J was clothing Bible in terms familiar to Greek audience

Anders Petersen, "Textual Fidelity, Elaboration, Supersession or Encroachment? Typological Reflections on the Phenomenon of Rewritten Scripture" (2014)

Supports a broader, process-based definition of 'Rewritten Scripture' that embraces a variety of texts beyond 2T Judaism as well; sees a wide spectrum of stances toward replacement or non-replacement among rewritten Scriptures, with AJ standing on the 'loyal embracement' end