Under the later Hasmoneans the leading circles in Jerusalem again came more strongly under the influence of Hellenistic culture. Hellenistic education and style of life once again gained ground in Jerusalem even before Herod. Herod himself seems to have been to the Greek elementary school in Jerusalem, in which the sons of the Jewish aristocracy were probably instructed. At an advanced age he then pursued philosophical, rhetorical and historical studies under the direction of Nicolaus of Damascus; he also had his sons brought up completely in the Greek style.
That Homer was recognized as the canonical book of Greek education in Jewish Palestinian circles even later is shown by the criticism made by the Sadduccees, reported in Jad. 4.6 and coming from the first century AD - ‘We object against you Pharisees that you say that the holy scriptures make the hands unclean whereas the books of Homer (ספרי המירם) do not make the hands unclean.’ Here the term ‘books of Homer’ is probably already a stereotyped description of Greek literature in general, and we may see here a sign that it had found a way into the everyday language of Palestinian Jews a long time before.
I think it is obvious that you don’t know what you’re talking about.
The fact is that the Temple Taliban lost and Hellenistic-influenced Christianity won. This may be inconvenient to anti-Christian activists, but there is absolutely nothing you can do about it. Get over it. — Apollodorus
There is no doubt that fundamentalist rabbis were opposed to such developments, but the political leadership was fully aware that it could not afford to isolate the country or risk being perceived as anti-Roman by Rome. — Apollodorus
He got killed by the Temple Taliban precisely because of his unorthodox teachings like being the Son of God and equal with God — Apollodorus
(2.1)Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews?
Herod himself seems to have been to the Greek elementary school in Jerusalem, in which the sons of the Jewish aristocracy were probably instructed. At an advanced age he then pursued philosophical, rhetorical and historical studies under the direction of Nicolaus of Damascus; he also had his sons brought up completely in the Greek style.
(19:12)If you let this man go, you are no friend of Caesar. Anyone who claims to be a king opposes Caesar.
In any case, key NT teachings — Apollodorus
Let's look more closely. — Fooloso4
During the period of David and Solomon (tenth century B.C.), the most formative period for Israel’s monarchy, close ties existed between Tanis, the 21st Dynasty capital, and Jerusalem […] These seals suggest that Israel looked to Egypt for inspiration regarding kingship. Israel’s fledgling monarchy had no royal archetypes of its own to draw on, and Egypt was its closest and most influential neighbor. It seems natural that Israel would appropriate language and motifs of kingship that were compatible with its monotheistic worldview.
I have set my king upon my holy mountain of Zion. I will declare the decree: The LORD has said to Me [King David], ‘You are My Son, Today I have begotten [i.e., created or appointed] You
The Lord Himself shall give you a sign, Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel (Isaiah 7: 14).
I said "he got killed by the Temple Taliban", — Apollodorus
I never said "he got killed by Herod". — Apollodorus
Herod simply feared a potential challenger to the throne. — Apollodorus
Also, Pilate didn't sentence Jesus for his own religious reasons, but for the religious reasons of the Temple Taliban who objected to Jesus' claiming to be the Son of God. — Apollodorus
As far as Pilate was concerned, he wanted to avoid civil unrest instigated by the Temple Taliban. — Apollodorus
And yes, the fact is that ultimately, the Temple Taliban lost and Hellenistic-influenced Christianity won.
Which shows why fanaticism isn't a good idea and why Jesus' more inclusive views were right. — Apollodorus
Nope, I'm not "avoiding" anything at all. YOU are denying the fact that NT teachings like “son of God”, “moral and spiritual perfection”, “resurrection and immortality”, etc., were already extant in Hellenistic tradition at the time of Jesus ... — Apollodorus
there is no logical necessity to assume that they must have been retroactively superimposed on Jesus' teachings by later “Hellenized” Christians. — Apollodorus
The Greek origin of most of these teachings is precisely why they were rejected by fundamentalist rabbis, even though some of them — Apollodorus
"Son of God" do occur in the writings of the Essenes and even in the Hebrew Bible — Apollodorus
In ancient Israel, kings were also called sons of God. The Bible quotes Yahweh, Israel’s one God, saying of David, “I will be his father, and he shall be my son” (2 Samuel 7:14) and, more generally, “I have set my king on Zion, my holy hill…You are my son; today I have begotten you” (Psalm 2:6–7).
It seems natural that Israel would appropriate language and motifs of kingship that were compatible with its monotheistic worldview
So, if Jesus was a descendant of King David as stated in Matthew 1:1-16, then he was correctly following tradition! — Apollodorus
So, arguably, the NT does have a point in some key respects. — Apollodorus
If we wish to understand what lies behind this version of the story, we have to remind ourselves once again that Mark—the oldest Gospel, though the second in the Canon—was written in Rome at a time (around the year 70 of the current era) when the small community of Christians living there was in constant danger of persecution. Already in the 40's, Christian missionary preaching had provoked the Emperor Claudius to expel all Jews from the capital city, those who believed that the Messiah had appeared and those who did not share such a belief (the Romans were as yet unable to distinguish between messianist Jews—that is, Christians—and other Jews), and in Nero's reign the persecution of the Christians took an even grimmer form. Since Mark was composed either at the end of Nero's reign or shortly afterward, the evangelist had every reason to try to ingratiate himself and his co-religionists with the Romans. The fact that Jesus had been sentenced to the cross by Pilate—a death penalty which carried opprobrium in Roman eyes, as being reserved for the most heinous crimes, and for slaves and despised foreigners—could not be concealed. But the evangelist could portray Pilate as having been unwilling to pass a death sentence and as having recognized the innocence of the man whom Christians now worshipped. For this purpose Pilate had to be presented as acting under Jewish pressure against his own better conviction. The evangelist's tendency was not “anti-Semitic,” as some might say; it was defensive and apologetic. He was concerned with promoting the fortunes of his little group, and was anxious to avoid suspicion and counter hostility on the part of the authorities. Accordingly, he presented the Roman authority of Jesus's own day, Pontius Pilate, as professing that he had found “no fault in this man.” The writer of the Second Gospel and those who came after him never realized what results this shift in the responsibility for Jesus's crucifixion would have in future generations.
.. will say that the political accusation was a “trumped-up charge,” invented by the Jewish authorities of the day who had found Jesus “worthy of death” for religious reasons, but who could not act on their own authority because while the Sanhedrin had the right to pass sentences of death, it had no right to carry out such sentences. This argument is faulty. At the time when Judaea was under procuratorial rule, from the year 6 to the year 66 C.E., Jewish law courts did pass death sentences upon Jewish inhabitants of Israel, and did carry out such sentences on their own authority, without referring the cases to the Roman political administrator of the country.
... Even in later centuries, several Fathers of the Church preserved knowledge of the fact that in the time of Jesus Jewish law courts in Judaea exercised unlimited jurisdiction over Jews who were being tried for capital offenses. Origen describes the condition of the Jewish judiciary after the year 70, and explains that it lost its capital jurisdiction as a result of the victory of Roman arms in that year. In another passage, Origen mentions that Jewish law courts continued to administer the death penalty even after the year 70, but were now compelled to do so clandestinely in order not to risk a conflict with the Roman rulers whom they were defying.
... Still later, Augustine of Hippo, when commenting on the passage of the Fourth Gospel which denies the Jewish leaders any right to carry out sentences of death, offers the following explanation: “This is to be understood in the sense that the Jews could not carry out an execution because they were celebrating a festival.” Thus according to Augustine, the Jews of Jesus's time were not deprived of the right to put sentences of death into effect; they voluntarily refrained from exercising it on a holy day. John Chrysostom of Antioch has the same explanation.
What makes no sense is your claim. It is not as if Christians went in search of someone whose teachings they could falsify and paganize. The Jewish followers of Jesus believed he was the Messiah. It was largely gentiles, under the influence of Paul, who brought their pagan beliefs to bear on their understanding of the messiah and God. It was these pagan beliefs that informed and so deformed the Jewish notion of a 'son of God'. — Fooloso4
It should be noted that Paul himself readily admits the differences between a resurrected savior and the expectations of the Messiah as was hoped for by the first witnesses. — Paine
I am not sure if the middle paragraph does. The focus on suffering is clear in Paul's testimony. He did not claim it made sense. — Paine
There is no God but one.” For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live. — Corinthians 8:4-6
And Elohim spoke to Moses and said: I am Yahweh. I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as El Shaddai but by my name, Yahweh, I was not known to them. And I also established my covenant with them (Exodus 6:2-4).
To recap, it is beyond dispute that all or most of Jesus’ teachings are consistent with Hellenistic tradition which was on the rise at the time. — Apollodorus
Why would Jesus be called “Emmanuel”? — Apollodorus
the whole narrative from Jesus’ sojourn in Egypt — Apollodorus
“You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven. — Sermon on the Mount
...focusing on the claim that Paul's encounter with the resurrected Jesus was with the one said to be the fulfillment of the prophecies. — Paine
That participation in the change is why Augustine condemned Athens but praised the 'city' of the Israelites. The City of God is the vanguard of the change. — Paine
When you look to the heavens and see the sun and moon and stars—all the host of heaven—do not be enticed to bow down and worship what the LORD your God has apportioned to all the nations under heaven (Deuteronomy 4:19).
Do not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons, because they will turn your sons away from following Me to serve other gods. Then the anger of the LORD will burn against you, and He will swiftly destroy you. Instead, this is what you are to do to them: tear down their altars, smash their sacred pillars, cut down their Asherah poles, and burn their idols in the fire. For you are a people holy to the LORD your God. The LORD your God has chosen you to be a people for His prized possession out of all peoples on the face of the earth (Deuteronomy 7:3-6)
If a man or woman among you in one of the towns that the LORD your God gives you is found doing evil in the sight of the LORD your God by transgressing His covenant and going to worship other gods, bowing down to them or to the sun or moon or any of the host of heaven—which I have forbidden— and if it is reported and you hear about it, you must investigate it thoroughly, and you must bring out to your gates the man or woman who has done this evil thing, and you must stone that person to death (Deuteronomy 17:2-5).
And when the forbidden months have passed, kill the idolaters wherever you find them and take them prisoners, and beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush (Al-Tauba (9), 5)
Strikingly, some biblical manuscripts feature differences from the standard Masoretic biblical language and spelling. Additions and deletions in certain texts imply that the writers felt free to modify texts they were copying.
It is now becoming increasingly clear that the Old Testament scripture was extremely fluid until its canonization around A.D. 100.
How can you say, “We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD,” when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely? (Jeremiah 8:8).
The book as a whole has been heavily edited and added to by followers (including perhaps the prophet's companion, the scribe Baruch) and later generations of Deuteronomists (M. D. Coogan, A Brief Introduction to the Old Testament, p. 300).
Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables: That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand (Mark 4:11-12)
But we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought: But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom (he apokekrymmene sophia), which God ordained before the world unto our glory: Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory (1 Corinth 2:6-8).
But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord (2 Corinthians 3:18)
Then there is the doctrine that the scriptures were composed through the Spirit of God and that they have not only that meaning which is obvious, but also another which is hidden from the majority of readers. For the contents of scripture are the outward forms of certain mysteries and the images of divine things. On this point the entire Church is unanimous, that while the whole law is spiritual, the inspired meaning is not recognised by all, but only by those who are gifted with the grace of the Holy spirit in the word of wisdom and knowledge (On First Principles I 8).
And, speaking generally, we have, in accordance with the apostolic promise, to seek after ‘the wisdom in a mystery’ …. (On First Principles IV, II.6)
The perfect shall behold the glory of the Lord ‘face to face’ by revelations of mysteries” (I IV, 1).
Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect (Matthew 5:48).
This organ of knowledge [inner eye] must be turned around from the world of becoming together with the entire soul, like the scene-shifting periact in the theater, until the soul is able to endure the contemplation of essence and the brightest region of being (Rep. 518c).
Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and the news about Him spread throughout the surrounding region. He taught in their synagogues and was glorified by everyone (4:14-15).
They found Him in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. And all who heard Him were astounded at His understanding and His answers (Luke 2:46-47).
The anti-Christian position seems to be that Christianity is a criminal perversion of Judaism that shouldn’t have existed and must not be allowed to exist. — Apollodorus
This subsequently resulted in the Temple Taliban’s demand that Jesus be executed for his “blasphemous” teachings — Apollodorus
And in the same way the OT authors and later editors felt free to modify the true history of Judaism — Apollodorus
...attempts were also made to suppress the history of Christianity. — Apollodorus
Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God
While in the OT, the emphasis is on the perfection of God and his actions, in the NT the emphasis is on human perfection. This is one of the key distinctions that sets Christianity apart from Temple Judaism. — Apollodorus
In the Hebrew text, the word perfect is tamîm (Strong's #8549), and its basic meaning is "complete" or "entire." It does not mean "perfect" as we think of it today, as "without fault, flaw, or defect." Other English words that translate tamîm better than "perfect" are "whole," "full," "finished," "well-rounded," "balanced," "sound," "healthful," "sincere," "innocent," or "wholehearted." In the main, however, modern translators have rendered it as "blameless" in Genesis 6:9.
This does not mean that Noah never sinned, but that he was spiritually mature and that he had a wholehearted, healthy relationship with God, who had forgiven him of his sins, rendering him guiltless. The thought in Genesis 6:9 extends to the fact that Noah was head-and-shoulders above his contemporaries in spiritual maturity. In fact, the text suggests that he was God's only logical choice to do His work.
The New Testament concept of perfection, found in the Greek word téleios (Strong's #5056), is similar to tamîm. Perhaps the best-known occurrence of téleios occurs in Matthew 5:48: "Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect." Certainly, Jesus desires that we become as flawless as we can humanly be, using the utter perfection of the Father as our model, but His use of téleios suggests something else. His aim is that a Christian be completely committed to living God's way of life, maturing in it until he can perform the duties God entrusts to him both now and in His Kingdom. In harmony with this idea of spiritual growth toward completion, téleios is well translated as "mature" in I Corinthians 2:6, and in Hebrews 5:14, itis rendered as "of full age." — Perfection
In contrast, the Hebrew Bible has no clear reference to life after death and it is not known whether Moses, the founder of Mosaic Judaism, even believed in afterlife at all. If he did, the OT does not say. — Apollodorus
“But your dead will live; their bodies will rise.
Those who live in the dust will wake up and shout for joy! — Isaiah 26:19
And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. — Daniel 12:2
The messiah is for him the people rather than one person. In this sense he reverses Paul. It is not the hope that the passive, helpless individual will be saved but that the actions of the people will save the world. — Fooloso4
I wouldn't say that this redemptive action is completely missing in Paul. — Paine
... works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up — Ephesians 4:12
And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. — Ephesians 4:30
The mind governed by the flesh is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace. — Romans 8:6
What I mean, brothers and sisters, is that the time is short.
For this world in its present form is passing away. — 1 Corinthians 7:29 and 31
The overwhelming consensus among scholars is that the story in the Book of Exodus is best understood as a myth and cannot be treated as history in any verifiable sense.[4] Archaeologists Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman say that archaeology has not found any evidence for even a small band of wandering Israelites living in the Sinai: "The conclusion – that Exodus did not happen at the time and in the manner described in the Bible – seems irrefutable [...] repeated excavations and surveys throughout the entire area have not provided even the slightest evidence" – Exodus - Wikipedia
The heroic figure of Moses confronting the tyrannical pharaoh, the ten plagues, and the massive Israelite Exodus from Egypt have endured over the centuries as the central, unforgettable images of biblical history. But is it history? Can archaeology help us pinpoint the era when a leader named Moses mobilized his people for the great act of liberation? Can we even determine if the Exodus – as described in the Bible – ever occurred?
As we will argue in later chapters, the Israelites emerged only gradually as a distinct group in Canaan, beginning at the end of the thirteenth century BCE. There is no recognizable archaeological evidence of Israelite presence in Egypt immediately before that time … The earliest mention of Israel in an extrabiblical text was found in Egypt in the stele describing the campaign of Pharaoh Merneptah – the son of Rameses II – in Canaan at the very end of the thirteenth century BCE … The Merneptah stele refers to a group of people already living in Canaan. But we have no clue, not even a single word, about Israelites in Egypt …
From the time of the New Kingdom onward, beginning after the expulsion of the Hyksos, the Egyptians tightened their control over the flow of immigrants from Canaan into the delta. They established a system of forts along the delta’s eastern border and manned them with garrison troops and administrators … The border between Canaan and Egypt was thus closely controlled …
The possibility of a large group of people wandering in the Sinai peninsula is also contradicted by archaeology … One may argue that a relatively small band of wandering Israelites cannot be expected to leave material remains behind. But modern archaeological techniques are quite capable of tracing even the very meagre remains of hunter-gatherers and pastoral nomads all over the world. Indeed, the archaeological record from the Sinai peninsula discloses evidence for pastoral activity in such eras as the third millennium BCE and the Hellenistic and Byzantine periods. There is simply no such evidence at the supposed time of the Exodus in the thirteenth century BCE.
The conclusion – that the Exodus did not happen at the time and in the manner described in the Bible – seems irrefutable when we examine the evidence at specific sites where the children of Israel were said to have camped for extended periods during their wandering in the desert (Numbers 33) … (The Bible Unearthed, pp. 48-63).
If, as we have seen, the Israelite Exodus did not take place in the manner described in the Bible, what of the conquest itself? The problems are even greater. How could an army in rags, traveling with women, children, and the aged, emerging after decades from the deset, possibly mount an effective invasion? How could such a disorganized rabble overcome the great fortresses of Canaan, with their professional armies and well-trained corps of chariots? … As with the Exodus story, archaeology has uncovered a dramatic discrepancy between the Bible and the situation within Canaan at the suggested date of conquest, between 1230 and 1220 BCE. Although we know that a group named Israel was already present somewhere in Canaan by 1207 BCE, the evidence on the general political and military landscape of Canaan suggests that a lightning invasion by this group would have been impractical and unlikely in the extreme … (pp. 72, 76).
And Solomon made affinity with Pharaoh king of Egypt, and took Pharaoh's daughter, and brought her into the city of David, until he had made an end of building his own house, and the house of the LORD, and the wall of Jerusalem round about (1 Kings 3:1).
The material culture of the highlands in the time of David remained simple. The land was overwhelmingly rural – with no trace of written documents, inscriptions, or even signs of the kind of widespread literacy that would be necessary for the functioning of a proper monarchy. From a demographic point of view, the area of the Israelite settlement was hardly homogenous. It is hard to see any evidence of a unified culture or centrally administered state.
The area from Jerusalem to the north was quite densely settled, while the area from Jerusalem to the south – the hub of the future kingdom of Judah – was still very sparsely settled. Jerusalem itself was, at best, no more than a typical highland village …
The fascination of the Deuteronomistic historian of the seventh century BCE with the memories of David and Solomon may be the best if not the only evidence for the existence of some sort of an early Israelite unified state …
The historical reality of the kingdom of David and Solomon was quite different from the tale. It was part of a great demographic transformation that would lead to the emergence of the kingdoms of Judah and Israel – in a dramatically different historical sequence than the one the Bible describes …. (pp. 142-145).
The overwhelming evidence is (a) that the OT narrative is largely mythical and (b) that even its true teachings have been misinterpreted and misunderstood. — Apollodorus
And in the same way the OT authors and later editors felt free to modify the true history of Judaism — Apollodorus
the Hebrew Bible is not a history book — Fooloso4
From the least to the greatest,
all are greedy for gain;
prophets and priests alike,
all practice deceit. — 8:10
The total lack of evidence is not the only problem of the Exodus narrative. — Apollodorus
Why would God hide in a bush? And why would he “appear” and “hide” at the same time? — Apollodorus
But,” he said, “you cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live.” — Exodus 33:20
So, to a rational person, the story is not credible. This is why it is imperative to get to the bottom of it and see what the whole mythology is actually trying to hide and why. — Apollodorus
As no kingdom of Israel (or Judah) existed at the supposed time of Solomon, this takes us right back to the possibility, or probability, that the biblical “King Solomon” was himself an Egyptian king. — Apollodorus
As an Egyptian prince or pharaoh, “Moses” was naturally initiated into the highest teachings or mysteries — Apollodorus
Moreover, if the founder of the new religion was a member of the royal family or even a pharaoh — Apollodorus
In Egypt itself, the secret of the true God — Apollodorus
Jesus himself represented the same tradition based on truth, justice, and ethical conduct. — Apollodorus
... it becomes clear that its true origins can no longer be suppressed — Apollodorus
truth eventually comes to light — Apollodorus
What did Paul say about the Greek understanding of the universal nature of truth? — Fooloso4
How does this relate to the Covenant? Is this part of the problem of Christian self understanding? — Fooloso4
This movement requires more than a universal good of a person to be recognized because that life is happening within a process where there is an interaction with the Creator who can change the cosmos and the creatures within it. — Paine
Centuries later, Kierkegaard says that once one has left the cosmos of the world as being what it already is, it is a departure, whether one follows Paul or not. — Paine
If the condition for experiencing truth is outside of one's innate package, then one cannot use that package as a testimony for it. — Paine
the proponents of a 'nothing but Greek' thesis has the author of much of what is commonly understood to be Christian standing in the way. — Paine
If I understand this correctly, I see two points. First, the truth is not accessible by our own efforts. Second, without experiencing truth anything we think or imagine it to be will not only fall short of it but will lead us astray. — Fooloso4
One of those proponents here also includes the Egyptians in his efforts to bypass and exclude Judaism from our understanding of Jesus. In his case it is him more than anything else that stands in his way. — Fooloso4
Kierkegaard did not say that it leads one astray, necessarily. It is more of a kind of horizon where the past and present is related to what has been created can be seen as something given to us whereas a relationship to the future cannot be approached that way. — Paine
the desire to rip out Judaism, root and branch. — Paine
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.