Flavius Josephus wrote Against Apion in Rome during the late Flavian era, around A.D. 94 to 96, and dedicated it to Epaphroditus, a Greek patron of letters and an imperial freedman. Titus had destroyed the Second Temple a generation earlier. Diaspora Jews now faced Roman suspicion, civic disenfranchisement, and the insult of the Fiscus Judaicus. Josephus answered with a defense that refuted Greco-Egyptian slander and established the antiquity of Judaism, and he argued that the Law of Moses produced civic virtue and order alongside genuine piety.
Book 2 meets the accusers directly. Alexandrian Greeks and Jews had clashed under Caligula and Claudius, and writers such as Apion, Lysimachus, Chaeremon, and Apollonius Molon carried the quarrel into print. They claimed the Jews left Egypt because of leprosy. They claimed worshipers in the Holy of Holies bowed to a donkey’s head, a charge the Greeks called ὀνολατρεία, and that Jews sacrificed Greek captives in ritual murder. They added that Jews swore oaths against Gentiles and never produced a philosopher or inventor worth naming. Behind each charge stood the accusation of ἀμιξία, a settled refusal to mix with other peoples. Christians who read this book watch a believing community answer public slander with evidence and moral clarity, a task the church has never outgrown.
Literary Backgrounds: Greek and ANE Connections
Josephus builds the book as a courtroom drama. Greek forensic rhetoric supplies the categories of κατηγορία, accusation, and ἀπολογία, defense, and the second half of the work swings into encomium, a speech of praise. He adapts Hellenistic conventions to defend a legal tradition born in the ancient Near East. After a short opening that recaps his answers to Manetho and Chaeremon (2.1–14), he takes on Apion across 2.15–144. He covers Alexandrian citizenship and Jewish legal standing, loyalty to the Ptolemies and the Roman emperors, the golden ass-head and the supposed Greek sacrifice, and the charge that Jews produced no notable men. A brief rebuttal of Apollonius Molon and Lysimachus follows (2.145–150). Then comes the positive defense of the Jewish constitution, the πολιτεία, in 2.151–286, and an epilogue in 2.287–296 that asserts the divine origin and moral superiority of Mosaic law.
Characterization carries much of the argument. Apion comes across as a bombastic charlatan and an immoral slanderer, while Moses stands as the oldest lawgiver in the world, wise, humble, and guided by God. In 2.220–286 Josephus sets Moses beside Plato, Aristotle, Zeno, Sparta, and Athens. Plato’s Republic and Laws sketched an ideal city that stayed on paper for a few philosophers, and Moses gave an entire nation a lived legal order. Lycurgan Sparta collapsed under rigid isolationism and moral flaws, and the Mosaic law endures through exile across the world. Josephus also prefers physical evidence to speculation, so royal decrees, bronze tablets, and the stones of the Temple carry his case. His voice stays commanding from first page to last, and he ridicules Apion’s inconsistencies with open moral indignation.
Theological and Ethical Analysis
The pivot of the book sits at 2.165, where Josephus coins the word Θεοκρατία. He draws the reader’s whole attention to it because it places every part of Jewish government under the sovereignty of God. God governs the universe as its active Ruler, and Moses serves as his faithful administrator, transmitting a divine order. From there Josephus surveys the Mosaic precepts in 2.190–219: the unity of God, worship at the one Temple, the high priesthood, family life, burial, charity, and fairness in the courts. He speaks to Roman ideals of pietas, justice, and courage, and he argues that Jewish practice surpasses them.
Josephus defends the invisibility and uncreated nature of God against the rumor of hidden idols in the Temple. He cites Mosaic provisions for strangers, charity, and fair trial to refute the charge of μισανθρωπία, and he presents the purity and dietary laws as training in self-control, σωφροσύνη. He stresses that every Jewish child receives instruction in the Law. Scripture affirms the goodness of that Law, and these ethical claims deserve a Christian’s respect. The weak point comes in 2.170–183, where Josephus presents full obedience to the Mosaic code as the path to personal righteousness, national unity, and divine favor.
Old Testament Analysis and Critique
Josephus roots Θεοκρατία in the Old Testament itself. At Sinai Yahweh called Israel a מַמְלֶכֶת כֹּהֲנִים, a kingdom of priests (Exod 19:5–6), and Scripture names him King over his people (1 Sam 8:7). The Decalogue (Exod 20:1–17) grounds ethics in redemption, since the God who brought Israel out of Egypt speaks first and obligation follows his rescue. Josephus translates this covenant language into a political structure that Roman theorists could grasp. He also echoes the prohibition of images (Exod 20:4–5) and the confession of Deuteronomy 6:4, שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל, with its command to teach children at home and in the community (Deut 6:4–9). His insistence on universal legal education grows straight from that passage.
Deuteronomy 4:5–8 supplies the verse behind his whole apologetic. Moses told Israel that the statutes themselves would testify to the nations of God’s nearness and righteous judgment. Josephus lifts up the universal moral wisdom of Deuteronomy 4:6 for his Gentile audience in Rome and supports it with the Law’s provisions for the stranger (Exod 22:21; Lev 19:33–34). He leaves the covenant blessings and curses in the background. The Old Testament presents the Law as a holy covenant bound to Yahweh’s election and redemptive history, and that fuller voice carries a weight civic virtue can’t bear. A nation can admire a code of conduct and still miss the Lord who gave it.
