No abstract

No abstract

The question of whether Joseph and Aseneth is “Jewish or Christian?” is the central frame in which the provenance of this tale has traditionally been sought. Yet, such a formulation assumes that “Judaism” and “Christianity” were distinct entities without overlap, when it is now widely acknowledged that they were not easily separable in antiquity for quite some time. I suggest that the question of whether Joseph and Aseneth is Jewish or gentile is more profitable for contextualizing Aseneth’s tale. This article offers fresh evidence for historicizing its origins in Judaism of Greco-Roman Egypt. Placing the narrative’s concerns for boundary-regulation alongside the discursive projects of other ancient writers (both Jewish and gentile Christian) who engaged the story of Joseph suggests that the author of Joseph and Aseneth was likely a participant in a Hellenistic Jewish interpretive tradition in Egypt that used Joseph’s tale as a platform for marking and maintaining boundaries.

Chapter 1 addresses the disputed date and provenance of Joseph and Aseneth. The question of whether the tale is “Jewish or Christian?” is the central frame in which its provenance has traditionally been sought. Yet, this formulation assumes that “Judaism” and “Christianity” were distinct entities without overlap, when it is now widely acknowledged that they were not easily separable in antiquity. This chapter suggests that the question of whether Joseph and Aseneth is Jewish or gentile is more profitable for contextualizing Aseneth’s tale and offers fresh evidence for historicizing its origins in Judaism of Greco-Roman Egypt. Placing the narrative’s concerns for boundary-regulation alongside the discursive projects of other ancient writers who engaged the story of the patriarch Joseph suggests that the author of Joseph and Aseneth was a participant in an ongoing Hellenistic Jewish interpretive tradition in Egypt that used Joseph’s tale as a platform for marking and maintaining boundaries.

Chapter 5 sets Joseph and Aseneth’s intervention in ancient debates about gentile inclusion alongside that of Jubilees and that of the apostle Paul—both of whom also play with the epithet “living God” as they wrestle with questions of gentile access to Israel and Israel’s God. Like Joseph and Aseneth, Jubilees depicts Israel’s “living God” as the creator God, but whereas Joseph and Aseneth exploits the theme of universal creator to universalize (potential) inclusion, Jubilees employs creation imagery to underscore the exclusivity of the relationship between God and (gentile-free) Israel. By contrast, Paul employs the epithet as scriptural warrant for gentile inclusion. Joseph and Aseneth and Paul share a discursive project: to construct a “myth of origins” for gentile inclusion. A comparison of the two myths proves productive for articulating the radical definition of insider identity that Joseph and Aseneth espouses.