Table Of ContentDemonstrative 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.
