（按上圖或按此免費下載）

撮要

作者就史學家約瑟夫對參孫出生之記述（Ant. 5.275-285），詳細比較相關之聖經文本（參士十三），以及偽斐羅（L.A.B. 41.3-43.1）與猶太拉比經學傳統對有關技術的處理手法。比較士師記十三章時，約瑟夫言簡意賅地舖陳故事，同時凸顯相關故事的心理與肉慾層面。而就偽斐羅的處理手法，約瑟夫同樣插入對士師記六章二十一節所載事件（耶和華的使者伸杖觸及基甸所獻的食物）的憶述；但另一方面，約瑟夫也沒有提說瑪挪亞妻子與來訪的耶和華使者的名字，也不交代瑪挪亞夫婦爭論沒有後嗣責任誰屬的問題。而偽斐羅的記述卻在這方面大加着墨。最後，儘管約瑟夫也同樣闡明瑪挪亞透過獻上「禮物」，而向耶和華的使者「表達敬意」的立心（參士十三17），可是，無論在形式與內容上，約瑟夫對參孫出生的記述，與猶太拉比經學傳統處理士師記故事之手法特色，雷同之處卻微乎其微。

ABSTRACT

This article offers a detailed comparative study of Josephus’s version (Ant. 5.275-285) of Samson’s birth in relation both to its biblical Vorlage (Judg 13) and the treatment of this by Pseudo-Philo (L.A.B. 41.3-43.1) and rabbinic-midrashic tradition. In comparison with Judges 13, Josephus, e.g., “streamlines” its presentation, while also accentuating the story’s psychological and erotic dimensions. With Pseudo-Philo Josephus has in common his interjected reminiscence of Judges 6:21 (the angel’s touching Gideon’s sacrifice with his staff-tip), while he diverges from his fellow historian in, e.g., leaving both Manoah’s wife and the angelic visitor nameless and not mentioning the quarrel between the couple as to which of them is responsible for their childlessness that figures so prominently in the Pseudo-Philonic account. Finally, Josephus has little in common, either in form or content, with the peculiarities of the rabbinic-midrashic tradition’s handling of the Judges story (although he does share its elucidation of Manoah’s declaration about wishing to “honor” the angel [Judg 13:17] in terms of his intention of giving him a “present”).

原載於《建道學刊》28期（2007年7月），頁1-32。