Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Steven Carr · 08-23-2010, 01:40 PM

http://cscoedinburgh.wordpress.com/2...the-sanhedrin/

'The time seems long overdue to relegate the idea of ‘the Sanhedrin’ finally to the mythic land where it belongs.'

Who would have dreamed that something in the New Testament could be a myth?

Toto · 08-23-2010, 02:11 PM

Quote:

several eminent scholars (E. P. Sanders, M. Goodman, J. S. McLaren, L. Levine, D. Goodblatt) have shown over the last few decades that the Great Council of 71 was simply wishful thinking on the part of the rabbis, and that government in Judaea operated principally through the high priest who – like other rulers in the ancient world – gathered an ad hoc group of friends and advisers around him to discuss the matter at hand.

Someone needs to tell Wikipedia

Sanhedrin

Quote:

The Great Sanhedrin was the supreme court of ancient Israel made of 71 members. The Great Sanhedrin was made up of a Chief/Prince/Leader called Nasi (at some times this position may have been held by the Kohen Gadol or the High Priest), a vice chief justice (Av Beit Din), and sixty-nine general members.[3] In the Second Temple period, the Great Sanhedrin met in the Hall of Hewn Stones in the Temple in Jerusalem. The court convened every day except festivals and Shabbat. In the late 3rd century, to avoid persecution, its authoritative decisions were issued under the name of Beth HaMidrash.

The last binding decision of the Sanhedrin was in 358, when the Hebrew Calendar was adopted. ...

It was in the year 191 BC that the sanhedrin was established. It was not until sometime after the destruction of the Second Temple the Sanhedrin dissolved.

Also the jewishvirtuallibrary

Quote:

The earliest record of a Sanhedrin is by Josephus who wrote of a political Sanhedrin convened by the Romans in 57 B.C.E. Hellenistic sources generally depict the Sanhedrin as a political and judicial council headed by the country’s ruler.

Tannaitic sources describe the Great Sanhedrin as a religious assembly of 71 sages who met in the Chamber of Hewn Stones in the Temple in Jerusalem. The Great Sanhedrin met daily during the daytime, and did not meet on the Sabbath, festivals or festival eves.

I think we need more information on this charge. Is it that the group of sages did not number 71, or was ad hoc, or what exactly?

Solo · 08-23-2010, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

several eminent scholars (E. P. Sanders, M. Goodman, J. S. McLaren, L. Levine, D. Goodblatt) have shown over the last few decades that the Great Council of 71 was simply wishful thinking on the part of the rabbis, and that government in Judaea operated principally through the high priest who – like other rulers in the ancient world – gathered an ad hoc group of friends and advisers around him to discuss the matter at hand.

Opinions, shmopinions.

Quote:

I think we need more information on this charge. Is it that the group of sages did not number 71, or was ad hoc, or what exactly?

It comes from Numbers 11:16 (with Moses included).

Jiri

andrewcriddle · 08-24-2010, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I think we need more information on this charge. Is it that the group of sages did not number 71, or was ad hoc, or what exactly?

The Mishnah describes a Sanhedrin acting as a supreme court during the 2nd Temple period. Although an advisory group for the high priest almost certainly existed during this period, the Mishnah's description is probably an anachronistic attempt to give rabbis and 'teachers of the law' an authority in the pre-70 CE period which they only really achieved sometime later.

Andrew Criddle

arnoldo · 08-27-2010, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

several eminent scholars (E. P. Sanders, M. Goodman, J. S. McLaren, L. Levine, D. Goodblatt) have shown over the last few decades that the Great Council of 71 was simply wishful thinking on the part of the rabbis, and that government in Judaea operated principally through the high priest who – like other rulers in the ancient world – gathered an ad hoc group of friends and advisers around him to discuss the matter at hand.

. . .

I think we need more information on this charge. Is it that the group of sages did not number 71, or was ad hoc, or what exactly?

Jim Bishop, in his book entitled The Day Christ Died (or via: amazon.co.uk), writes that the Sanhedrin in the early first century was an instrument in the hands of the high priest.

Quote:

Normally, the Great Sanhedrin consisted of seventy-one members, including its chief member, who was always the high priest. . The membership fell into three classes. The most important were the priestly families; they were apt to be sadducees-men who denied the authority of oral tradition. . . The second group of members was the Ancients. These were as the term implies, the elderly men who had attained success as laymen and who were appointed to the high court as a mark of respect. . The third group was the Scribes. . Some of the scribes were Sadducees, but for the most part were Pharisees, that is to say, men who interpreted and reinterpreted the oral law and tried hard to find an inner meaning of the ancient written law. . . The priests, Ancients and scribes who made up the Great Sanhedrin worked under the high priest, who could call a session at any time. If the current high priest was weak, the Sanhedrin was strong; if the high priest was strong, the Sanhedrin became and instrument in his hands. Caiphas was strong, and had the backing of his father-in-law, Annas; the Sanhedrin of his time followed rather than led him.

DCHindley · 08-27-2010, 09:39 PM

Toto,

And just how does the author of the Wiki article come to this precise date of 191 BC?

Per the revised edition of Schuerer's Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ, there is no independent trace of the council of seventy elders mentioned in Num 11:16 until the Persian period. The "elders" mentioned in places like 1 Kings 8:1 & 20:7; 2 Kings 23:1; Ezekiel 14:1 & 20:1, "were not organized as a court [of law]." The supreme tribunal supposed by Deuteronomy 17:8ff & 19:16ff, which the author of 2 Chronicles 19:8 attributes to the period of king Jehosaphat, is juridical only, not a governing council.

"Elders" exercising some sort of governing function start to be mentioned in Persian times ("elders" in Ezra 5:5,9; 6:7,14; 10:8, and "nobles/dignitaries" in Nehemiah 2:16; 4:8,13; 5:7; 7:5). Ezra 2:2 = Nehemiah 7:7 mentions 12 leaders of the exiles, suggesting tribal representation in Jerusalem. Nehemiah
5:17, though, mentions 150 "dignitaries". The Persian king appointed a "governor" who exercised absolute rule over the satrapy. It was top down management, not bottom up. Any dignitaries or elders were being told what they had to do by the governor.

Hecataeus of Adbera, a contemporary of Alexander the Great (died 323 BCE) and Ptolemy I Lagus (a general of Alexander who ruled Egypt ca 324-284 BCE), describes the Jewish people as ruled by priests, to be "judges in all major disputes" and guardians of the laws and customs. A high priest (archierea) being "regularly vested" with authority to rule over the people on the basis of his wisdom and virtue.

In Josephus, the first mention of a ruling council in Jerusalem is Antiquities of the Jews 12:138

"King Antiochus [the Great, ruled 223-187 BC] to Ptolemy [his general in charge of the region], sends greetings:--Since the Jews, upon our first entrance on their country, demonstrated their friendship toward us; and when we came to their city of [Jerusalem], received us in a splendid manner, and came to meet us with their elders (tEs gerousias) ..."

That term indicates an aristocratic council.

The Seleucid kings initially appointed the high priest who governed through his council, and the title was hereditary until the time Alexander IV who broke with tradition and appointed Jason and Menelaus as high priests based on political reasons. The Maccabean uprising ended up replacing the traditional (and relatively Hellenized) Onaid family with Hasmonean dynasty, who were also Hellenized but also ready to rekindle national passion by redefining the Jewish religion and government.

A complete history and analysis of its various forms of composition, competence, time & place of sessions, and judicial procedure, is in revised Schuerer volume 2, pages 199-226. Amen.

DCH

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

several eminent scholars (E. P. Sanders, M. Goodman, J. S. McLaren, L. Levine, D. Goodblatt) have shown over the last few decades that the Great Council of 71 was simply wishful thinking on the part of the rabbis, and that government in Judaea operated principally through the high priest who – like other rulers in the ancient world – gathered an ad hoc group of friends and advisers around him to discuss the matter at hand.

Someone needs to tell Wikipedia

Sanhedrin

Quote:

The Great Sanhedrin was the supreme court of ancient Israel made of 71 members. The Great Sanhedrin was made up of a Chief/Prince/Leader called Nasi (at some times this position may have been held by the Kohen Gadol or the High Priest), a vice chief justice (Av Beit Din), and sixty-nine general members.[3] In the Second Temple period, the Great Sanhedrin met in the Hall of Hewn Stones in the Temple in Jerusalem. The court convened every day except festivals and Shabbat. In the late 3rd century, to avoid persecution, its authoritative decisions were issued under the name of Beth HaMidrash.

The last binding decision of the Sanhedrin was in 358, when the Hebrew Calendar was adopted. ...

It was in the year 191 BC that the sanhedrin was established. It was not until sometime after the destruction of the Second Temple the Sanhedrin dissolved.

Also the jewishvirtuallibrary

Quote:

The earliest record of a Sanhedrin is by Josephus who wrote of a political Sanhedrin convened by the Romans in 57 B.C.E. Hellenistic sources generally depict the Sanhedrin as a political and judicial council headed by the country’s ruler.

Tannaitic sources describe the Great Sanhedrin as a religious assembly of 71 sages who met in the Chamber of Hewn Stones in the Temple in Jerusalem. The Great Sanhedrin met daily during the daytime, and did not meet on the Sabbath, festivals or festival eves.

I think we need more information on this charge. Is it that the group of sages did not number 71, or was ad hoc, or what exactly?

Anat · 08-28-2010, 10:13 AM

Quote:

And just how does the author of the Wiki article come to this precise date of 191 BC?

I don't know about the exact date, but the traditional path of transmission of Torah is given in Pirkei Avot. Shimon ben Shetach, mentioned in Avot 1:8-9 was the brother-in-law of Alexander Jannaeus. There are 4 generations of transmission before his times back to Shimon the Righteous, of the last survivors of the Great Assembly, whatever that was supposed to have been. 191 BCE sounds reasonable for 4 generations before Jannaeus.

08-23-2010, 01:40 PM	#1
Steven Carr Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: England Posts: 5,629	At last people concede that it's a myth [the Sanhedrin] http://cscoedinburgh.wordpress.com/2...the-sanhedrin/ 'The time seems long overdue to relegate the idea of ‘the Sanhedrin’ finally to the mythic land where it belongs.' Who would have dreamed that something in the New Testament could be a myth?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.