Demonstrative Proof in Defence of God Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Studies Editors Stephen Emmel & Johannes van Oort Editorial Board H.W. Attridge, R. Cameron, W.-P. Funk, I. Gardner, C.W. Hedrick, H. Jackson, S.N.C. Lieu, P. Nagel, D.M. Parrott, B.A. Pearson, S. Richter, J.M. Robinson, K. Rudolph, W. Sundermann, G. Wurst VOLUME LVI Demonstrative Proof in Defence of God A Study of Titus of Bostra’s Contra Manichaeos—The Work’s Sources, Aims and Relation to its Contemporary Theology by Nils Arne Pedersen A E GI B D U E S . .. PP AA A LL T .. LL UT. .SSAA BRILL LEIDEN•BOSTON 2004 This book is printed on acid-free paper. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Pedersen, Nils Arne, 1959- Demonstrative proof in defence of God: a study of Titus of Bostra’s Contra Manichaeos: the work’s sources, aims, and relation to its contemporary theology/by Nils Arne Pedersen. p. cm.—(nag Hammadi and Manichaean studies, ISSN 0929–2470; 56) Includes bibliographical references and indexes. ISBN 90–04–13883–8 (alk. paper) 1. Titus, of Bostra, Bishop of Bostra, fl. ca. 362–378. Against the Manichees. 2. Manichaeism—Controversial literature—History and criticism. I. Title II. Series. BR65.T853A347 2004 229'.1—dc22 2004045862 ISSN 0929–2470 ISBN 90 04 13883 8 © Copyright 2004 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. printed in the netherlands CONTENTS Preface ........................................................................................ ix Abbreviations .............................................................................. xii I. Introduction ........................................................................ 1 1. The main interpretation .............................................. 1 Excursion: Manichaeism as Christian Gnosis .............. 6 2. Overview of the study’s structure .............................. 13 II. Summary of Contents ...................................................... 17 1. Summary of Book I .................................................... 17 2. Summary of Book II .................................................... 23 3. Summary of Book III .................................................. 34 4. Summary of Book IV .................................................. 50 III. Receptions, editions and scholarship history of Contra Manichaeos ............................................................................ 66 1. Knowledge of Titus in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages .................................................................. 66 2. Reception of and scholarship on Contra Manichaeos from the end of the 16th century to De Lagarde’s editions of the text in 1859 ........................................ 69 3. Contra Manichaeos as a source of knowledge on Manichaeism ................................................................ 78 4. Titus as a theological and philosophical writer ........ 89 5. Text transmission and history of editions .................. 109 IV. The historical and literary context for Titus of Bostra’s Contra Manichaeos ................................................................ 120 1. Introductory remarks .................................................... 120 2. The province of Arabia, conflicts between pagans and Catholics and the dating of Contra Manichaeos .... 120 Excursion: Other works by Titus .................................. 128 3. Heresiology and anti-Manichaeism ............................ 129 Excursion: Possible use of various patristic sources in Titus .......................................................................... 146 vi contents V. The audience for Contra Manichaeos and the portrayal of Manichaeism that Titus wished to present to them .............................................................................. 158 1. The two audiences ...................................................... 158 2. Titus’s portrayal of Manichaeism as barbarism, irrationalism and as a philosophy .............................. 166 3. Titus’s portrayal of Manichaeism as determinism and immorality .................................................................... 171 VI. The Manichaean texts used by Titus of Bostra ............ 177 1 The relevance of the problem for this study .......... 177 2. Heraclianus’s information and Adda’s works .......... 178 3. The Manichaean source in Contra Manichaeos I + III.4–5 .................................................................. 186 4. Other Manichaean sources in Contra Manichaeos Books III–IV .............................................................. 199 5. The Manichaean criticism of the Creator God in Contra Manichaeos III.7 ............................................ 206 a. Introduction .......................................................... 206 b. Discussion of the non-Catholic polemical interpretations of the OT .................................... 209 c. The philosophical and Marcionite background for the idea of the Creator’s ignorance ............ 216 d. The philosophical and Gnostic background for the idea of the Creator’s fyÒnow ........................ 225 e. The positive evaluation of man’s acquisition of knowledge in Gnostic texts ................................ 234 f. Comparison with the original Manichaean literature ................................................................ 237 g. Comparison with Augustine’s portrayal of Manichaeism ........................................................ 243 h. Comparison with Emperor Julian’s treatise: Contra Galilaeos ...................................................... 249 i. Problems and different solutions ........................ 251 VII. Titus of Bostra’s philosophical position .......................... 255 1. Titus’s knowledge of philosophers and philosophical texts .............................................................................. 255 2. Titus’s concept of God and his basic philosophical position ........................................................................ 259 contents vii 3. The “common concepts” .......................................... 280 4. Titus’s philosophical psychology .............................. 297 VIII. Titus of Bostra’s interpretation of the Paradise narrative .......................................................................... 320 1. Introductory remark .................................................. 320 2. The image of God in man ...................................... 321 3. God’s foreknowledge and man’s disobedience ........ 326 4. Comparison with earlier writers .............................. 331 5. Death as a benefit .................................................... 343 a. Titus’s view of death in Book II and Book IV 343 b. Death did not harm man .................................... 349 c. The background to these ideas in the earlier tradition ................................................................ 353 6. Summarising remarks ................................................ 363 IX. Comparison between the exegesis of Genesis in Titus of Bostra and in a number of writers in “the Antiochene School” ........................................................ 366 1. Plan for the following comparison ............................ 366 2. Outline of the interpretation of the Paradise narrative in Eusebius of Caesarea ............................ 369 3. Comparison with Eusebius of Emesa’s interpretation of the Paradise narrative .......................................... 371 4. Comparison with Diodore of Tarsus’s interpretation of the Paradise narrative .......................................... 379 5. Problems concerning Coisliniana, fragment no. 115 ........................................................................ 382 6. Comparison with Theodore of Mopsuestia’s interpretation of the Paradise narrative in his commentary on Genesis, illustrated by other Theodore fragments .................................................. 392 7. Comparison with Theodore of Mopsuestia’s work: Against those who say that men sin by nature and not by intention .................................................................... 407 8. Comparison with the Constitutiones Apostolorum .......... 414 9. Hypotheses to explain similarities between interpretations of the Paradise narrative .................. 415 viii contents X. Summary of the study’s most important conclusions .... 420 XI. Critical examinations of the text ...................................... 424 Bibliography .............................................................................. 475 Indices 1. General Index .................................................................. 517 2. Index of Sources .............................................................. 528 3. Index of Persons .............................................................. 565 a. Index of Ancient Persons ............................................ 565 b. Index of Modern Persons (after 1500) ...................... 569 PREFACE Few scholars have been willing to take up the challenge of Titus of Bostra’s lengthy refutation of Manichaeism. On being informed that I was working on Titus of Bostra a colleague declared, “He doesn’t exist. He’s just someone you made up!”—But Titus was actually the author of important works that require repeated engagement from scholars, as I hope to prove within these covers. The book contextualises Titus and simultaneously includes many modern studies on his context, though it should be noted that for practical reasons I have been unable to include any contributions published after 2001.1 The study would not have come into being without major inspir- ation and support from many sides. I wish to thank all those per- sons, institutions and foundations who have helped and supported me in various ways: Peter Nagel, then in Halle, now in Bonn, suggested during his stay in Copenhagen in 1992 that I should work on the Church fathers’ criticism of Manichaeism. His view was that by and large scholars of Manichaeism knew relatively little about patristics, and scholars of patristics knew relatively little about Manichaeism. The idea of providing new knowledge and perspectives by linking areas of scholarship usually examined in isolation has been a guiding prin- ciple in the composition of this book. Paul-Hubert Poirier (Université Laval) granted me access to his and Catherine Sensal’s (unpublished) French translation of the first two books of the Syriac version of Contra Manichaeos, as well as to the 100-year-old German translation (also unpublished) of parts of 1 A practical note is necessary for readers. I refer throughout to the Greek text of Titus and to the Syriac translation through the abbreviations Gr. and Sy; after- wards I give the number of the pages and lines in Paul A. de Lagarde’s editions of these texts from 1859. The form of the Greek and Syriac texts is also the one found in De Lagarde except where I have revised this text on the basis of my examinations in Ch. XI. Thus although I refer to pages and lines in De Lagarde, my text may here and there be different; in which case an explanation is given in Ch. XI.