No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 30 July 2018
In the growing canon consciousness of the fourth century, Christians debated what should constitute the official reading list for the church. Epiphanius of Salamis was part of this conversation. His massive Panarion described eighty heresies, and, for Epiphanius, wrong books were a marker of wrong belief. However, although Epiphanius was a stringent supporter of Nicene orthodoxy, he, too, referred to books outside the canon. In the Panarion, he frequently referenced Jubilees, an expanded, rewritten Genesis found among the Dead Sea Scrolls and which also circulated among early Christian readers. The Decree of Gelasius later declared the text anathema. This paper explores the significance of a vocal heresiographer reading Jubilees, particularly when he defined heretics based on similar reading practices. It suggests that Epiphanius saw close kinship between Jubilees and his own Panarion. The citations of Jubilees in the Panarion also indicate that Epiphanius defined the text as a part of a larger Christian tradition. In doing so, Epiphanius transformed Jubilees from Jewish apocrypha to Christian tradition. Thus, the citations of Jubilees in Epiphanius's Panarion show the complicated dynamics of canon consciousness in the shaping of Christian Orthodoxy.
Versions of this paper were presented at the 2008 Junior Enoch Seminar and the Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphical Writings in Early Judaism and Early Christianity session of the 2009 Society of Biblical Literature meeting. I wish to thank the participants of these panels, the anonymous reviewers for their helpful suggestions, and Ellen Muehlberger for her thoughtful critique.
1 Jerome, Epistle 78: “Hoc uerbum, quantum memoria suggerit, nusquam alibi in scripturis sanctis apud Hebraeos inuenisse me noui absque libro apocrypho, qui a Graecis λεπτἠ, id est parua, Genesis appellatur,” Hilberg, Isidor, Sancti Hieronymi Epistuae Pars II: Epistulae LXXI–CXX, Corpus Scriptroum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum 55, 2nd ed. (Vienna: Verlag der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1996)Google Scholar (series hereafter cited as CSEL). This is one of the two extant letters of Jerome to Fabiola. See also Epistle 64.
2 Before the Dead Sea discovery, Jubilees was known to scholars in Ethiopic and became the subject of critical study in the nineteenth century with the first German translation: Dillmann, August, “Das Buch der Jubiläen oder die kleine Genesis, aus dem Äthiopischen übersetzt,” Jahrbücher der biblischen Wissenschaft 2 (1850), 230–256Google Scholar. The secondary literature on Jubilees is vast. For a comprehensive history of research on Jubilees, see Oliver, Isaac and Bachmann, Veronika, “The Book of Jubilees: An Annotated Bibliography from the First German Translation of 1850 to the Enoch Seminar of 2007,” Henoch 31, no. 1 (2009): 123–164Google Scholar.
3 Collections of citations of Jubilees in Christian authors can be found in Dillman, August and Rönsch, Herman, Das Buch der Jubiläen; oder, Die Kleine Genesis (Leipzig: Fues, 1874), 251–382Google Scholar; and Denis, A., Fragmenta pseudepigraphorum quae supersunt graeca, Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti Graece 3 (Leiden: Brill, 1970), 70–102Google Scholar. For the earliest efforts to collect citations of what scholars refer to as “Old Testament Pseudepigrapha,” see Reed, Annette, “Retelling Biblical Retellings: Epiphanius, the Pseudo-Clementines, and the Reception-History of Jubilees,” in Proceedings from the 13th International Orion Symposium: Tradition, Transmission, and Transformation, from Second Temple Literature through Judaism and Christianity in Late Antiquity, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, February 23, 2011, ed. Kister, Menahem, Newman, Hillel, Segal, Michael, and Clements, Ruth (Leiden: Brill, 2015), 303Google Scholar.
4 On Jerome and Epiphanius sharing their fourth-century social network, see Clark, Elizabeth, The Origenist Controversy: The Cultural Construction of an Early Christian Debate (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993), 11–42Google Scholar.
5 References to Jubilees in the Panarion include: Proem 3.1–2 1.1.3; 2.2.1; 2.2.8; 3.3.4; 3.3.9; 26.1.3; 39.6.1; 66.22.9.
6 It is possible that geographical information from Jubilees found in the writings of Christian chronographers circulated as independent sources. See Adler, William, “The Origins of the Proto-Heresies: Fragments from a Chronicle in the First Book of Epiphanius’ Panarion,” Journal of Theological Studies 41, no. 2 (1990): 498CrossRefGoogle Scholar. By the sixth century, the Byzantine chronographers knew the details of Jubilees through an intermediary source as well. On this, see Lipscomb, W. Lowndes, “A Tradition from the Book of Jubilees in Armenian,” Journal of Jewish Studies 29, no. 2 (1978): 149–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Nevertheless, Epiphanius did refer to Jubilees as a “book.” See Panarion 39.6.1. On Christian engagement with Jubilees, see Adler, William, Time Immemorial: Archaic History and its Sources in Christian Chronography from Julius Africanus to George Syncellus, Dumbarton Oaks Studies 26 (Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 1989)Google Scholar.
7 Greek: παραδόσις. See Panarion 3.3.4; cf. Jubilees 10:19.
8 Jubilees 1:1–29.
9 See Jubilees 11:9–12:31. References and translations follow Wintermute, O. S., “Jubilees,” in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, ed. Charlesworth, James (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1983), 2:35–142Google Scholar. Although it has also been observed that these details have ideological aims in their Second Temple context as well. See, for example, Rook, John, “The Names of the Wives from Adam to Abraham in the Book of Jubilees,” Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 4, no. 7 (1990): 105–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
10 For a masterful analysis of this issue, especially as it applies to Jubilees, see Mroczek, Eva, The Literary Imagination in Jewish Antiquity (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016), 6–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 118–155.
11 Three recent studies have focuses on the importance of this geography for early Christian writers: Scott, James M., Geography in Early Judaism and Christianity: The Book of Jubilees (Cambridge: University Press, 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Young Richard Kim, “The Imagined Worlds of Epiphanius of Cyprus,” (PhD diss., University of Michigan, 2006); and Kim, Young Richard, “Epiphanius of Cyrus and the Geography of Heresy,” in Violence in Late Antiquity: Perceptions and Practices, ed. Drake, H. A. (Burlington: Ashgate, 2006), 235–251Google Scholar.
12 On Eusebius and the Christian chronographical tradition, see Kim, Young Richard, Epiphanius of Cyrus: Imagining an Orthodox World (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2015), 48–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Schott, Jeremy, Christianity, Empire, and the Making of Religion in Late Antiquity (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008), 141–150Google Scholar.
13 Panarion 26.1.3.
14 As Emile Schürer remarked, Jubilees is called “Little Genesis not because it is shorter (on the contrary it is longer), but because it does not enjoy the same authority as the canonical book”: Schürer, E., The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.–A.D. 135), ed. Vermes, G., Millar, F., and Goodman, M. (Edinburgh: Clark, 1986), 309Google Scholar. More recently, VanderKam, James, “The Book of Jubilees,” in Outside the Old Testament, ed. De, M. Jonge (Cambridge: University Press, 1986), 111Google Scholar. This seems to be confirmed by the fact that later Christian chronographers only knew the details of Jubilees through intermediary sources: Milik, Józef, “Recherches sur la version grecque du livre des Jubilés,” Revue Biblique 78, no. 4 (1971): 545–557Google Scholar; and Lipscomb, W. Lowndes, “A Tradition from the Book of Jubilees in Armenian,” Journal of Jewish Studies 29, no. 2 (1978), 149–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The standard English translation of Jubilees in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha is listed under “expansions of the ‘Old Testament’ and legends,” further pigeonholing the text into the category of “rewritten Bible.”
15 In the last year, three important monographs have appeared that treat the Panarion as a text in its own right and not simply a source for the history of Gnosticism. These include: Jacobs, Andrew S., Epiphanius of Cyprus: A Cultural Biography of Late Antiquity (Oakland: University of California Press, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kim, Epiphanius of Cyrus: Imagining an Orthodox World; and Manor, T. Scott, Epiphanius’ Alogi and the Johnannine Controversy (Leiden: Brill, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
16 See, for example, Williams, Frank, ed., The Panarion of Epiphanius, Book 1 (Sects 1–46), 2nd Revised Edition, Nag Hammadi and Manichaean studies 63 (Leiden: Brill, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, xxxi. As cited and discussed in Jacobs, Andrew, “Epiphanius of Salamis and the Antiquarian's Bible,” Journal of Early Christian Studies 21, no. 3 (2013): 440–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
17 Jacobs, “Epiphanius of Salamis and the Antiquarian's Bible,” 441.
18 As argues Stefaniw, Blossom, “Straight Reading: Shame and the Normal in Epiphanius’ Polemic against Origen,” Journal of Early Christian Studies 21, no. 3 (2013): 413–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
19 Jacobs, “Epiphanius of Salamis and the Antiquarian's Bible,” 439.
20 On this point, see VanderKam, James C., “1 Enoch and Enochic Motifs and Enoch in Early Christian Literature,” in The Jewish Apocalyptic Heritage in Early Christianity, ed. VanderKam, James C. and Adler, William (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1996), 47–59Google Scholar.
21 In two places in the Panarion, Epiphanius lists the books he considers part of the Old Testament (Panarion 8.6) and New Testament canon (Panarion 76.5). As Annette Reed has noticed, despite Epiphanius's reliance on Jubilees, his polemics sound more like his contemporary Athanasius, who “had presented pseudepigraphy as virtually coterminous with ‘heresy.’” See Annette Reed, “Retelling Biblical Retellings,” 305.
22 See VanderKam, James C. and Adler, William, The Jewish Apocalyptic Heritage in Early Christianity (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993)Google Scholar; and Reeves, John C., ed., Tracing the Threads: Studies in the Vitality of Jewish Pseudepigrapha (Atlanta: Scholars, 1994)Google Scholar.
23 Himmelfarb, Martha, “Some Echoes of Jubilees in Medieval Hebrew Literature,” in Tracing the Threads: Studies in the Vitality of the Jewish Pseduepigrapha, ed. Reeves, John C. (Atlanta: Scholars, 1994), 115–141Google Scholar.
24 As suggests Stroumsa, Guy, Hidden Wisdom: Esoteric Traditions and the Roots of Christian Mysticism, Studies in the History of Religions 70 (Leiden: Brill, 1996), 63–64Google Scholar.
25 Jaffee, Martin, Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200bce–400ce (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 7CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
26 Adler, William, “The Pseudepigrapha in the Early Church,” in The Canon Debate, ed. McDonald, Lee Martin and Sanders, James A. (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2002), 226Google Scholar. For counterarguments, see Gallagher, Edmond, “The Old Testament ‘Apocrypha’ in Jerome's Canonical Theory,” Journal of Early Christian Studies 20, no. 2 (2012): 213–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar. This article provides a useful history of research and argues that Jerome regarded apocryphal writings as non-canonical throughout his entire career. However, it treats “apocrypha” as a fixed collection of books, excluding the cases of Jubilees or 4 Ezra, which Jerome regarded highly. He included 4 Ezra in his Vulgate and, as mentioned above, referred to Jubilees for edification. Also, see Against Rufinus 11:33.
27 Jerome, Praef. lib. Sal. Iuxta Hebraeos, 19–21.
28 See Schott, Christianity, Empire, and the Making of Religion in Late Antiquity, 15–51.
29 Williams, Megan, The Monk and the Book: Jerome and the Making of Christian Scholarship (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2006), 60CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
30 Ibid., 81–95.
31 Jerome, Epistle 107:12.
32 Origen, Contra Celsum 1:3.
33 Origen, fragment preserved in the Catena Nicephori as provided by Rönsch, Das Buch der Jubiläen, 332.
34 On this point, see van Ruiten, Jacques, Abraham in the Book of Jubilees: The Rewriting of Genesis 11:26–25:10 in the Book of Jubilees 11:14–23:8, Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 161 (Leiden: Brill, 2012), 11Google Scholar.
35 Jubilees 1:4.
36 Ibid., 1:5.
37 Ibid., 1:12.
38 Ibid., 1:26.
39 Ibid., 1:6.
40 Florentino García Martínez argued that the heavenly tablets in Jubilees functioned in a way similar to the concept of Oral Torah for the rabbis. The tablets permitted instruction that had no foundation in the biblical texts: Martinez, Florentino Garcia, “The Heavenly Tablets in the Book of Jubilees,” in Studies in the Book of Jubilees, ed. Albani, Matthias, Frey, Jörg, and Lange, Armin, Texte und Studien zem Atiken Judentum 65 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1997), 243–259Google Scholar. More recent research has demonstrated that the contents of the heavenly tablets in Jubilees were not meant to supplement Mosaic Torah but to downgrade its importance: Himmelfarb, Martha, “Torah, Testimony and the Heavenly Tablets: The Claims of Authority of the Book of Jubilees,” in A Multiform Heritage (Festschrift Robert A. Kraft), ed. Wright, B. G. (Atlanta: Scholars, 1999), 19–29Google Scholar; Najman, Hindy, “Interpretation as Primordial Writing: Jubilees and its Authority Conferring Strategies,” Journal for the Study of Judaism 30, no. 4 (1999): 379–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and VanderKam, James, “Moses Trumping Moses: Making the Book of Jubilees,” in The Dead Sea Scrolls: Transmission of Traditions and Production of Texts, ed. Metso, Sarianna, Najman, Hindy, and Schuller, Eileen (Leiden: Brill, 2003), 25–44Google Scholar.
41 Jubilees 1:1–9.
42 Ibid., 1:26–29. B. Z. Wacholder has suggested that the role of the heavenly tablets asserts Jubilees as a “super-canonical” text that surpasses the authority of the Mosaic Torah: B. Z. Wacholder, “Jubilees as the Super Canon: Torah Admonition versus Torah-Commandment,” in Legal Texts and Legal Issues: Proceedings of the Second Meeting of the International Organization for Qumran Studies, Cambridge, 1995, Published in Honor of Joseph M. Baumgarten, ed. M. Bernstein, F. García Martínez, and J. Kampen, Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 23 (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 195–211. Martha Himmelfarb has argued that the heavenly tablets in Jubilees, an innovative combination of history and law, served to give Jubilees and the Torah equal status, subordinate to the heavenly tablets themselves. See Himmelfarb, “Torah, Testimony, and the Heavenly Tablets,” 27.
43 In addition to the articles by Wacholder, Himmelfarb, and Najman cited above, see Najman, Hindy, Seconding Sinai (Leiden: Brill, 2003)Google Scholar.
44 Numbers 33:28.
45 Jerome, Epistle 78.26: “Hoc eodem uocabulo et isdem litteris scriptum inuenio patrem Abraham, qui in supra dicto apocrypho Geneseos uolumine abactis coruis, qui hominum frumenta uastabant, abactoria uel depulsoris est nomen” [CSEL 55:70]. Jubilees 11:9 introduces Terah as Abraham's father.
46 On this point, see Himmelfarb, “Torah, Testimony, and the Heavenly Tablets,” 27; van Ruiten, Abraham in the Book of Jubilees, 11–16; Najman, “Interpretation as Primordial Writing: Jubilees and its Authority Conferring Strategies,” 379–410; and Wacholder, “Jubilees as the Super Canon: Torah Admonition versus Torah–Commandment,” 195–211.
47 Jubilees 1:27–28.
48 For instance, Jubilees 4:17–19; 10:10–14.
49 Najman, Seconding Sinai, 117–136.
50 Jubilees 10:7–14. On Jubilees's books given to Noah as a model for Jubilees’s own textual presentation, see van Ruiten, Abraham in the Book of Jubilees, 53.
51 Jubilees 10:12. Scholars have hypothesized that a Book of Noah did circulate in antiquity, and this passage of Jubilees has been cited as evidence of its existence. Najman, “Interpretation as Primordial Writing: Jubilees and its Authority Conferring Strategies,” 382. For a history of the Book of Noah theory, see Stone, Michael, “The Books Attributed to Noah,” Dead Sea Discoveries 13, no. 1 (2006): 4–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
52 Jubilees 4:17–19.
53 Ibid., 45:15.
54 Josephus, Bellum Judaicum 2.8.7.
55 4 Ezra 14:5–6.
56 Ibid., 14:45–47.
57 See Scott, Geography in Early Judaism and Christianity, 134.
58 The petition is published as P. Oxy 4364.
59 P. Oxy. 4365: “τῇ κυρίᾳ μου φιλτάτῃ ἀδελφῇ ἐν κ(υρί)ῳ χαίρειν. χ̣ρ̣ῆσον τὸν̣ Ἔσδραν, ἐ̣π̣εὶ ἔχρη̣σά σοι τὴν λεπτὴν Γένεσιν. ἔρρωσο ἡμεῖν ἐν θ(ε)ῷ.” J. R. Rea, The Oxyrhynchus Papyri: Volume LXIII, Greco-Roman Memoirs (London: Egypt Exploration Society for the British Academy, 1996), 44.
60 Anne Marie Luijendijk has suggested the “farewell from us” is familial and possibly ecclesiastical. See Luijendijk, Greetings in the Lord: Early Christians and the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Harvard Theological Studies 60 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2008), 71.
61 For support for “little Genesis” as a designation for Jubilees from a papyrological perspective, see Hilhorst, A., “Erwähnt P. Oxy. LXIII 4365 das Jubiläenbuch?” Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 130 (2002): 192Google Scholar.
62 Rea, P. Oxy. LXIII, 44.
63 As suggests Rea, ibid. Eldon Jay Epp has made a convincing case for a Christian context for this papyrus: Epp, “The Oxyrhynchus New Testament Papyri: ‘Not without Honor except in their own Hometown’?” Journal of Biblical Literature 123, no. 1 (2004): 21–27Google Scholar.
64 On the first possibility: Franklin, Simon, “A Note on a Pseudepigraphical Allusion in Oxyrhynchus Papyrus No 4365,” Vetus Testamentum 48, no. 1 (1998): 95–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For the hurried note theory: Luijendijk, Greetings in the Lord, 74.
65 Guy Stroumsa, Hidden Wisdom, 65–66.
66 As Andrew Jacobs has observed, the Panarion is typically investigated for source criticism. Only recently has interest been taken in Epiphanius's own rhetorical aims. See Jacobs, , “Matters (Un-)Becoming: Conversions in Epiphanius of Salamis,” Church History 81, no. 1 (2012): 32CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
67 Adler, “The Origins of the Proto-Heresies,” 498.
68 K. Holl, Epiphanius I: Ancoratus und Panarion haer. 1–33, ed. Karl Holl, Marc Bergermann, and Christian-Friedrich Collatz, Griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten [drei] Jahrhunderte n.F. 10.1 (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2013) (series hereafter cited as GCS); Holl, Epiphanius II: Panarion haer. 34–64, ed. Holl, Karl and Dummer, Jurgen, GCS 31 (Berlin: Akademie, 1980)Google Scholar; and Holl, Epiphanius III: Panarion haer. 65–80; De fide, ed. Holl, Karl and Dummer, Jurgen, GCS 37 (Berlin: Akademie, 1985)Google Scholar. Epiphanius mentions a “Jubilees or Little Genesis” in Panarion 39.6.1 and refers to its contents as παραδόσις in Panarion 1.1.3.
69 While it is true that Epiphanius knew details without consulting Jubilees and that much of its contents became disassociated with the work—William Adler, “Abraham and the Burning of the Temple of Idols: Jubilees Traditions in Christian Chronography,” Jewish Quarterly Review 77, no. 2/3 (1986–1987): 117— Epiphanius also exhibits awareness of the text as a written document.
70 Jacobs, “Epiphanius of Salamis and the Antiquarian's Bible,” 444.
71 See, for instance Panarion 66.23.4.
72 Adler, “The Origins of the Proto-Heresies,” 481–482. For an illuminating discussion on Epiphanius's place in the Christian chronographical tradition, see Kim, Epiphanius of Cyprus, 45–81.
73 On Epiphanius's ideology behind these heresiological classifications, see Kim, Epiphanius of Cyprus, 56–79.
74 Panarion 1.9 [GCS n.F. 10:173].
75 Judges 21:25.
76 Kim, Epiphanius of Cyprus, 56.
77 See Panarion 2.4; cf. Kim, 60–61.
78 Panarion 2.3 [GCS n.F. 10:174–175].
79 Kim, Epiphanius of Cyprus, 59–60.
80 Panarion 3.11 [GCS n.F. 10:179].
81 Ibid., 8.2.1 [GCS n.F. 10:188].
82 Ibid., 8.6.1–4 [GCS n.F. 10:190–191].
83 Ibid., 9.1.1 [GCS n.F. 10:197].
84 Ibid., 15.2.1.
85 Ibid., 18.1.3.
86 Ibid., 19.3–4.
87 Ibid., 63.3.2 [GCS 31:401]. Epiphanius's list of books “inspired by the Holy Spirit” can be found in Panarion 76.22.5.
88 Ibid., 55.3.8 [GCS 31:328]. Epiphanius is remarkably consistent in his description of Jubilees as paradosis. In addition to these two attestations in his discussion of the “Melchizedekians,” Epiphanius refers to information contained in Jubilees as paradosis in Panarion 1.3 and possibly Panarion 47.7.6. In this latter reference, Epiphanius claimed to have found references to Abraham's father and mother in the “traditions” and subsequently argued that Abraham was a descendent of “Sidonians and Canaanites.” Jubilees notes that Abraham's mother was “daughter of Nestag of the Chaldees,” which is not entirely consistent with Epiphanius's claim.
89 Panarion 55.3.8 [GCS 31:328].
90 The term paradosis maintains some semantic fluidity in the ancient sources. Azzan Yadin-Israel has provided a history of the term in early Christian sources, arguing that it designates an unwritten tradition passed down through the elders in a manner similar to the way Josephus and the Gospels described Pharisaic paradosis. Yadin-Israel, Azzan, “Tradition and Transmission in Papias and the Early Rabbis,” Journal of early Christian Studies 23, no. 3 (2015): 338–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar. As Baumgarten notes, it has several different meanings in Josephus alone. See Baumgarten, “The Pharisaic Paradosis,” 64–65. Also, Mason, Steve, Flavius Josephus on the Pharisees: A Composition-Critical Study (Leiden: Brill, 1991), 233–235Google Scholar. Cf. Yadin-Israel, “Tradition and Transmission,” 339. For the development of the Hebrew terms for tradition in rabbinic literature, see Baumgarten, Albert I. and Rustow, Marina, “Judaism and Tradition: Continuity, Change, and Innovation,” in Jewish Studies at the Crossroads of Anthropology and History, ed. Boustan, Ra'anan, Kosansky, Oren, and Rustow, Marina (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011), 213–237Google Scholar. In the same volume, Sylvie Anne Goldberg, “In the Path of Our Fathers: On Tradition and Time from Jerusalem to Babylonia and Beyond,” 238–249. On the comparison between Christian tradition and rabbinic Oral Torah, see Guy Stroumsa, Hidden Wisdom, 27–45; and Hanson, R. P. C., Origen's Doctrine of Tradition (London: SPCK, 1954)Google Scholar.
91 Panarion 33.9.2 [GCS n.F. 10:459].
92 Epiphanius describes the four Jewish “repetitions” in two other places in his text: Panarion 15.2.1 and Panarion 42.11.15. In these instances, he only calls them “tradition” and not “repetition.”
93 Avot de-Rabbi Natan A, 15; bShab 31a.
94 Baumgarten, “The Pharisaic Paradosis,” 63–77. For examples of masoret, mSheq 6:1 refers to a tradition about the secret location of the lost ark, and tBekh 1:12 outlines a tradition about eating birds. Cf. Bautgatern and Rustow, “Judaism and Tradition,” 212.
95 Galatians 1:14.
96 John Chrysostom, Homilies on 2 Thessalonian 4:2.
97 Eusebius, Historia ecclessiastica 7.3.
98 Gregory of Nyssa, Contra Eunomium 11.
99 Le Boulleuc, Alain, La Notion d'hérésie dans da littérature Grecque, IIe–IIIe siècles (Paris: Etudes augustiniennes, 1985), 397Google Scholar.
100 Panarion 18.1.3.
101 In this respect, despite initial impressions, Epiphanius's polemics are not gratuitously nasty but an intellectual endeavor. He composed with audience actively in mind and with knowledge of the persuasive mechanisms of rhetoric. For other examples, see Kim, Epiphanius of Cyprus, 173–203.
102 Panarion 18.3.1.
103 See, for example, Panarion 64.70.7. Here, Epiphanius preserved an otherwise unknown fragment of the Apocryphon of Ezekiel. Furthermore, in his discussion of the Alogoi, Christians who rejected the authority of the Gospel of John and Revelation, Epiphanius entertained the argument that they rejected these texts “out of scrupulousness” because, like apocryphal books, John and Revelation contained “deep and difficult” sayings. See Panarion 51.3.4
104 The Archontics, for instance, in addition to consulting “certain apocrypha,” forged apocryphal books of their own. See Panarion 40.2.1. That Epiphanius distinguished between apocryphal books and forged apocryphal books further demonstrates that he did not wholly reject their textual authority.
105 Evodius to Augustine, Epistle 158: Al. Goldbacher, Sancti Aureli Augustini Operum Section II, CSEL 44 (Vienna: F. Tempsky, 1904).
106 Panarion 9.3.6 [GCS n.F. 10:201].
107 Ibid., 9.4.12 [GCS n.F. 10:203].
108 Ibid., 9.4.13 [GCS n.F. 10:203].
109 Jude 1:9.
110 On the rabbinic citations of this tradition, see Andrei Orlov, The Enoch/Metatron Tradition, Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 107 (Tubingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 2005), 299–304. The rabbinic sources include: Midrash Gedullat Moshe, Targum of Pseudo-Jonathan, and Midrash Petirat Moshe. Patristic references to Moses's angelic burial can be seen as early as Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis 4.15.
111 On the Apocryphon of Ezekiel, see Bregman, Marc, “The Parable of the Lame and the Blind: Epiphanius’ Quotation from an Apocryphon of Ezekiel,” Journal of Theological Studies 42, no. 1 (1991): 125–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
112 See Jacobs, “Epiphanius of Salamis and the Antiquarian's Bible,” 447–448.
113 Clark, Origenist Controversy, 86–104. On Epiphanius and the problem of allegorical interpretation, see Dechow, Jon, Dogma and Mysticism in Early Christianity: Epiphanius of Cyprus and the Legacy of Origen, Patrisitic Monograph Series 13 (Macon, Ga.: Mercer University Press, 1988), 333–347Google Scholar.
114 Dechow, Dogma and Mysticism in Early Christianity, 95.
115 Panarion 41.6.5 [GCS 31:393].
116 Ibid., 66.23.1–5. See Jubilees 2.10.
117 Ibid., 66.23.4 [GCS 37:51].
118 On primitivism and Epiphanius's view of history, see Schott, Jeremy, “Heresiography as Universal History in Epiphanius’ Panarion,” Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum 10, no. 3 (2007): 546–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Young Richard Kim has observed that both Jubilees and the Panarion share the aim of “reimagining Genesis.” Kim, Epiphanius of Cyprus, 46.
119 Schott, “Heresiography as Universal History,” 563.
120 Jubilees 1:4.
121 Panarion Proem 1.1 [GSC 1:153].
122 Ibid., 31.1.3.
123 Jubilees 2:21–22. As van Ruiten noted, the author of Jubilees was quite deliberate in this shift in timeline and wanted to demonstrate that a chosen people existed in the first week of creation, before Moses was given the law. It fits with Jubilees’s program to demote Moses. See van Ruiten, Abraham in the Book of Jubilees, 16.
124 Jubilees 1:9–13.
125 Ibid., 1:5–6.
126 Ibid., 8:2.
127 Ibid., 8:2–4 (Wintermute, 70).
128 Ibid., 8:2.
129 Mroczek, Jewish Literary Imagination, 149.
130 In some instances, Epiphanius classified certain books as heretical precisely because they were “hidden books” (apocrypha). See Panarion 40.2.1; 51.3.4; 56.2.2; 62.2.1; 63.2.1.
131 Jubilees 10:12–13.
132 As demonstrated by Young Richard Kim, Epiphanius of Cyprus, 173–203. Also Flower, Richard, “Genealogies of Unbelief: Epiphanius of Salamis and Heresiological Authority,” in Unclassical Traditions, Volume 2: Perspectives from East and West in Late Antiquity, ed. Kelly, C., Flower, R., and Williams, M., Classical Journal Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society, Supplementary 35 (Cambridge: Cambridge Philosophical Society, 2011), 84–85Google Scholar.
133 The opening of the Panarion indicates as much. Epiphanius began by comparing his writing project to the creation of the world but assured his audience that he was writing as the Holy Spirit compelled him and not for his own authorial glory. Panarion Proem II, 1.1.
134 Jerome, Epistle 78.
135 Against Celsus 1.7.
136 George Syncellus would insist that he knew the contents of Jubilees through the writings of Flavius Josephus, even though Josephus never references the text. Adler, Time Immemorial, 191.
137 Sinaita, Anastasius, Hexameron, ed. Migne, J. P., Patrologia Cursus Completus, Series Graeca 89 (Paris: 1928–1936), 785Google Scholar.
138 Zonaras, Annales 1.18.
139 Himmelfarb, “Some Echoes of Jubilees in Medieval Hebrew Literature,” 115–141.