Carrie

Remember, the questions at the end are intended for Christians, but anyone can go ahead and answer them if you want.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 2

Since so much of the Bible is story, it’s hard to tell what is real. What was really going on in Israel way back then? To find out, we have to look at the archaeological evidence, clues from the Bible, and historical documents from other nations. From that information, scholars can give us an idea of what reality was for the Jews:

It has been shown that the Jews had always lived in Israel since pre-history. There had always been two different kingdoms, or tribes, Israel and Judah. They were divided by geography. The landscape of their territory was different in the north and south. In the north it was hilly and green and the valleys were fertile land. In the south it was more of a flat desert. The north was more populated, with more villages, while the south was more rural and remote. These geographical differences led to a natural division between the Jews. They were separated by distance and had different agricultural practices and somewhat different customs and culture. The north was Israel and the south was Judah. It would be kind of like Afghanistan today, where there is one ethnic group split up into different, often warring, tribes.

King David ruled in the south, in Judah, in the city of Jerusalem. We know King David did exist, because he is mentioned in some historical documents. However, these documents do not show Judah as a great and mighty nation, but instead tell of it’s defeats. The archaeological evidence doesn’t support the stories about the kingdoms of David and Solomon. There is no evidence that David and his army conquered anything, and no evidence of the great building projects of Solomon. The remains of ruined cities have been attributed to destruction by other nations, and great building projects attributed to a later time. It is likely that the kingdoms of David and Solomon were actually relatively small, weak, and primitive. During the time of David, around 1050 BC, the people were illiterate. There is no evidence of any written documents; no political correspondence or official seals. Such evidence has been found for other more developed nations. It is unlikely that this undeveloped nation would have been able to produce extensive texts,
such as the Bible. And if the Bible had been written by that time, the people would not have been able to read it. The stories of King David in the Bible were written much later, as legends, and were based on a real, however glorified, King.

During the time of King David and Solomon it was actually Israel in the north that was more powerful. It was more advanced since it had greater resources, larger villages, and a bigger population. But due to Israel’s many resources, it was a target for envious nations to conquer. It was more vulnerable than Judah.

The kingdom of Israel was conquered by Assyria in the year 732 BC. Many people of Israel were taken captive as slaves, while many others fled south into Judah. But many surviving Israelites remained. And the Assyrian authorities brought in new population groups from Babylon and other places. The defeat of Israel meant the success of Judah. There was suddenly a great increase in population in Judah. The capital city of Jerusalem became a much bigger city and a national religious center. And a new social elite emerged, along with a religious reform movement that focused on the exclusive worship of the God Yaweh. For the first time there were professional priests and scribes. Literacy spread throughout the country. Judah became a full fledged state. During that century the archeological evidence of mature state formation appear in Judah including: monumental
inscriptions, seals, masonry and stone used for public buildings, mass production of pottery and other crafts in central workshops, and their distribution throughout the country, and large scale state run production of oil and wine. Judah was able to achieve this level of sudden sophistication by cooperating and integrating itself into the economy of the Assyrian empire.

But King Hezekiah of Judah decided to rebel against the Assyrians, in 705 BC. He wanted to take over Israel in the north. This was a bold move, and it was risky. Hezekiah believed that the only way to ensure victory was to turn to the God Yaweh, who had become the central deity in Jerusalem at the time. The Judahites looked at what had happened to their Israeli neighbors and figured that their destruction was brought on by Yaweh who was angered by their idolatry. Though Israel had been no more idolatrous than Judah, who also had many altars to idol gods. The archeological evidence shows that the people of Judah and Israel had always worshipped many gods, as shown by their religious artifacts. Hundreds of figurines of naked fertility goddesses were found all over. And inscriptions were found that showed Yaweh was worshipped as well, but was usually portrayed as having a heavenly entourage of women, with the goddess Asherah being one of his women.

The new religious movement in Jerusalem was centered on Yaweh, and the king figured they had better get rid of their other gods and just worship Yaweh in order to be safe. They didn’t want what happened to Israel to happen to them. So Hezekiah removed the altars to other gods that were set up in the countryside of Judah where there was less loyalty to Yaweh. During this new religious movement in Jerusalem is probably when the Old Testament started to be written. An organized religious doctrine needed to be established for the nation. They needed a motivating text to unify, control, guide, and give courage the Jewish people. They would need inspiration and courage in order to succeed in wars.

Unfortunately, Hezekiah did not succeed, and the Assyrians crushed the rebellion. Many people in Judah were deported to Assyria. And many rural villages were destroyed, but Jerusalem was spared. The book of 2 Kings tries to put a brave face on the situation, but for all of the Bible’s talk of Yaweh’s saving intervention, Assyria was the only victor.

Under Assyrian occupation, the Jewish nation still had their own kings. Hezekiah’s son Manasseh was the next king. During his reign, the people of Judah went back to mostly worshipping other gods. They didn’t see any benefit in worshipping Yaweh. Especially the people in the countryside who suffered the most damage from the war. They preferred their own gods. Manesseh needed their cooperation to rebuild all that had been destroyed, so he let the altars to Baal and Asherah return. Because of this, Manesseh is
described in the Bible as being very evil, because to the religious elite in Jerusalem who worshipped Yaweh, this return to idolatry was evil.

After a while Assyria became weaker and was not able to defend their far away territories. Meanwhile Egypt, who had once controlled the territories of Canaan, sought to regain their former land. Egypt had gained a lot of power and was able to take over the land from the Assyrians, who retreated peacefully from Israel and Judah. Egypt had conquered many lands during this time, and the kingdom of Judah was isolated and relatively unimportant to them, so they were largely left to themselves. This seemed like a long
awaited miracle to the Jews. Finally it seemed possible for Judah to expand to the north and establish a great unified state.

Josiah was king at this time. He is described in the Bible as the most righteous king. He became king in 640 BC at the age of eight. Josiah was raised to believe in Yaweh, and since there was no such thing as separation of church and state, Josiah and the other religious and political leaders in Jerusalem wanted the entire kingdom to be united under one religion and one God, the one they favored in Jerusalem, Yaweh. The worship of multiple gods was not good for establishing a unified kingdom because it led to chaotic
social diversity, with each clan having its own system of economics and politics. The Jewish priests wanted to convert everyone in the nation, but they needed a way to do it. The priests and scribes in Jerusalem had been busy with their sacred writings for many many years. They had been writing the stories of the Bible.

In the 18th year of Josiah’s reign, a divine book was iraculously “discovered� in the Temple in Jerusalem during renovation. This book they “found� was the Bible. See 2 Kings 23. Josiah gathered all the people of Judah to hear the words of this book, and he had them swear on solemn oath to devote themselves entirely to the divine commandments detailed in the newly discovered book. The people were supposed to believe that it was an
ancient book that had been lost and forgotten, written back in the glory days of the Jews, back when God did great things for his people because they were
worshipping him only, and obeying his laws. But it also warned that if they did not worship Yaweh only, he would strike them with disaster.

The Bible up to this point, would have been Genesis through Deuteronomy at least. And the books of Joshua through 2 Kings were probably written shortly thereafter. The Book of the Law, discovered in the Temple, included the stories of Noah, Abraham, Issac, Jacob, Joseph and his brothers, and Moses, all of whom were fictional characters. It is unlikely that these men ever existed at all. They may have been characters from common mythical legends. The story of Noah for example was probably based on the much older myth of the story of Gilgamesh, which was not Jewish in origin. Mythical
stories would have been passed down by word of mouth, because most people did not know how to read or write.

There may have been a legend about a man named Moses who brought the Jews up out of Egypt, but that doesn’t mean there really was man named Moses who brought the Jews up out of Egypt. Although they probably believed that the legend was true. As I wrote in part one, there is no record of the Jews ever having lived in Egypt, and no evidence that they wandered in the Sinai desert for 40 years, where Moses is said to have given the Ten
Commandments. How could he have given the Ten Commandments to millions of Jews in the desert, if they were never there? The Ten Commandments and the rest of the laws written in Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, were not the kind of stuff that would have been passed down by word of mouth in legend. People may have sat around the campfire telling stories of Moses, but they didn’t sit there and go over all the rules and regulations. Those rules and regulations did not exist prior to the time of the discovery of
the Book in the Temple.

The book of the law was written by the priests in King Josiah’s time. The story of Moses was added to give credibility to the story. The people were to believe that all of the laws written in the book came directly from God and were given to Moses. Obviously, the laws did not come from God, but were made up by man. And that is why the law allowed for things like slavery (Exodus 21:1-21), the stoning of a woman who could not show proof of her virginity (Deut. 22:13-21), and for a rapist to marry the woman he raped
(Deut. 22: 23-29). These laws could not possibly have come from a good and perfect God, but certainly from man.

So why would the people believe that a book from God had been found? Well, look at the Mormons. They believed Joseph Smith when he said he found golden plates with the words of God for the new world. And now there are millions of Mormons who still believe that and follow the teachings of Joseph Smith.

This newly discovered Book of the Law sparked a revolution in religious thought and ritual, and created a complete new identity for the Jewish people. Preaching became a medium for advancing a set of quite revolutionary political, religious, and social ideas. The Book contained ethical laws and provisions for social welfare, and called for the defense of human rights. Even the function of government was addressed. Judges and
officers were to be appointed in each town to settle disputes and enforce the law. And the king himself was to be subject to the laws of the covenant. This is exactly what the religious elite in Jerusalem wanted to happen. The political, social, and religious changes they wanted were now a reality.

Certainly resistance to these reforms was to be expected, especially in the north in Israel. There was a strong religious cult devoted to idols located in the Israelite city of Bethel. It was seen as a threat to the political, territorial, and theological ambitions of Judah. So naturally the Bible stresses the inevitability of Israel’s defeat, and Josiah’s triumph. You will notice in the Bible that it always emphasizes Judah’s dominance over all of Israel. This was to legitimize Josiah’s claim to be the only legitimate heir to the conquered
territories of Israel. The Bible supports Josiah’s ambition by explaining that Israel used to be part of a united kingdom that was ruled from Jerusalem by King David whose throne was established by God and was to endure forever. Josiah was David’s heir and was to rule all of the promised land. Israel was said to be a sister state, part of the 12 tribes, a people descended from the patriarchs. On his deathbed, the patriarch Jacob blessed his sons, and of all the honors, Judah received the royal birthright. In Genesis 49:8-10 Jacob says, “Judah, your brothers shall praise you...The scepter shall not depart
from Judah...To him shall be the obedience of the peoples.� (I always wondered why Judah got this blessing. Now it makes sense to me why that’s in the Bible. I figured that since Joseph was Jacob’s favorite son and the most righteous that he would have gotten this blessing). In the Bible it is written that after Jabob died he was buried in Judah, with his fathers the patriarchs, giving even more reason for the people to worship in Jerusalem
in Judah.

The Bible stressed that the people living in Israel must turn their eyes to Jerusalem, and give their allegiance to Yaweh and King Josiah whom God appointed. On the other hand, the authors of the Bible needed to delegitimize the religious cult of idol worship in the north, especially the shrine in Bethel, and to show that the religious practices of Israel were all evil and should be wiped out and replaced by centralized worship at the Temple
of Jerusalem.

King Josiah eventually destroyed the Bethel shrine and took over the land of Israel. He was ultimately successful in unifying Israel and Judah. He wasn’t able to eliminate idol worship entirely, at least not at the individual household level, as archeological findings suggest. (Figurines of the naked goddess Asherah were found all over, and they dated to time of King Josiah. The people were supposed to have destroyed such figurines). But finally the kingdom was united under one main religion at least. Because of the Bible, and its stories of the historical saga of Israel, the people now had a shared perception of nationhood and faith.

So that’s how the Bible came to be, and the Jewish religion as we know it. Things were looking good for a while. But as the Bible tells it, bad times were ahead. The united kingdom of Israel and Judah, now prosperous and desirable for conquer once again, was a target. And after the death of Josiah, the great reform movement apparently crumbled. The last four kings are negatively judged in the Bible. This time was described as a period of continuous decline, leading to the destruction of the kingdom. The Babylonians conquered Israel in 597 BC (taking it from the Egyptians) and the Jews went into exile for 150 years. (This is something in the Bible we know happened for sure because it is also documented by the Babylonians).

The Jerusalem aristocracy and priesthood, who were the most passionate about the Biblical ideology, were the first to be taken off into exile. And the Temple of Jerusalem was destroyed. The kingdom of Judah was devastated, it’s economy ruined, and it’s society ripped apart. The religion and national existence of the people of Israel could have ended in this great disaster also, but it was able to survive.

From 586 - 440 BC the people of Israel were in exile. They were taken to Babylonia and settled in there. Hebrew self-image reached a historical low. The exile was unexplainable; they believed in the promise of Yahweh, but their defeat and the loss of the land promised to them by Yahweh seemed to imply that their faith in this promise was misplaced. But during this time the priests, prophets, and scribes continued to write the stories of the Bible. They creatively remade themselves and their world view. In particular, they blamed the disaster of the Exile on their own impurity. They had betrayed
Yahweh and allowed the Mosaic laws and practices to become corrupt; the Babylonian Exile was 'proof' of Yahweh's displeasure. During this period, Jewish leaders no longer spoke about a theology of judgment, but a theology of salvation (though they were speaking in terms of communal salvation rather than the individual personal salvation of the NT). Exile-era prophets, such as Ezekiel, Isaiah and Daniel, envision how the Israelites would be gathered together once more, their society and religion purified, and the unified Davidic kingdom be re-established under a righteous and mighty king.

Some of the exiles returned to Jerusalem earlier than others, as you can read in the books of Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah. The exiles that returned built a second temple in Jerusalem by 516 BC. Remember the Biblical story of the rebuilding of the temple and how they didn’t want any help in building it from foreigners? That’s because there were new religious rulings laid out by Ezra and Nehemiah that set clear boundaries between the Jewish people and their neighbors, and there was strict enforcement of the law again. The book of Psalms was used as the hymn book of the second temple.

The efforts of the Jewish priests, prophets, and scribes over 150 years of exile, soul searching, and suffering, led to the Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament) in it’s final form. The Protestant Bible ends in 400 BC.

The Protestant Bible leaves out all the writing that took place between 400 BC and the New Testament. And there were many writings during this time. It’s not as if suddenly the writings of the Jews were no good. Many Christians believe the writings during this time were not divinely inspired and not good enough for the Bible, but it’s not as if God would suddenly just stop talking to his people. What happened was that the writings seemed too mythical, even by Biblical standards. So these writings were left out of the
Protestant Bible, but are included in Jewish teachings and are in the Catholic Bible. These writings are called the Apocrypha.

During these four centuries, the Hebrews were conquered successively by the Greeks, Persians, and finally the Romans. Because Jews were now living all across Asia Minor, many were exposed to other religions and ideas, and were to varying degrees influenced. This process is generally referred to today as Hellenization, and it progressed quite unevenly, as subsequently did their concept of the nature of the promised Savior. Generally speaking, the farther they lived from Jerusalem and the closer they lived to a Greek or Persian town or city, the more divergence from the orthodox line was likely.
It was during the time between 400 BC and the New Testament that early Christian ideas started developing.

Questions:

1. The archaeological evidence, clues from the Bible, and historical documents, all seem to show what the real historical reality was for the Jews. Does it seem to you like this historical scenario is probably pretty
accurate?

2. I found all of this information very surprising and interesting. I was glad to know what the reality probably was, and what really happened to the Jews. How do you feel after reading this information?

3. Who do you think wrote the Psalms, and under what kind of circumstances?

4. Why do you think the Jews started to hope for and expect a savior?

5. Do you think the Protestant Bible should have included the books written after 400 B.C., the Apocrypha?

6. Do you think the Jews were influenced by the beliefs of other nations somewhat?

7. Almost all other ancient religions (even in nations across the ocean, like Peru) sacrificed animals to appease the gods. Were the Jews just following the same instinct to please their god, or do you think God really demanded it from them?

8. How do you think people in your church would feel about reading this kind of information?

Bede

Nope. You are actually reasonably conservative although you need to give 2 Sam rather more credit (cf. Robin Lane Fox). If you read 12 Sam and 12 Kings you'll find they bear out most of what you say (bar some standard ancient exaggerations of numbers).

Shrugs. But I find your tone pretty patronising.

Lots of people under many circumstances as the Bible says. Many could go back to David but we only have the taxt to tell us that.

They were being shat on.

Protestants decided the OT would only be those texts written in Hebrew which the Apocrypha is not, so they were right to exclude them by their rules.

That's what the Bible says, and who am I to argue .

You'd better ask him.

They'd say, hey that's just what we learned at seminary.

Yours

Bede

Bede's Library - faith and reason

dado

from one Jewish perspective...

i have no way of judging accuracy per se, but i'll happily agree that the outline you gave seems to be in agreement with - or at least not in violent opposition to - my understanding of the current state of the archeological and historical record.

i'm grateful you took the time to write up a cogent summary like that. i've taken the liberty of saving a copy for future reference.

unlikely we'll ever know. they were almost certainly written by a wide group of individuals spread across several generations (at least). the attribution of many to David is a convenient tradition and generally understood as such.

whenever Jewry has been in crisis, there has been resurgence in HaMashiak expectancy - and individuals have happily obliged by popping out of the woodwork and claiming the mantle. needless to say, they all failed (well, technically the jury is still out on the latest claimant since he only recently died). same in any society, even america: read the language of Reagan in 1979 or Bush the Junior post 9-11 - classic messiahnic "follow me to the promised land" rhetoric offered in times of national crisis.

i'm not protestant, so i'll have to skip this one. if there wasn't such a strong Midrashic tradition in Judaism i would be agitating for the addition of new books to the Jewish canon - but only on days when i wasn't feeling the very idea of a canon was antithetical to the nature of Judaism.

of course! only a fool refuses to learn from other's experiences.

Judaism has been on a long-term arc away from blood sacrifice starting with Abraham: the point of Abraham's story wasn't that he was going to roast his son - that was normal for the time and place - but that Abraham heard G-d say "Stop!" - that was the new wrinkle. the instructions on how to make blood offerings weren't there to encourage the practice, they are there to limit it by restricting time, place, etc. the texts - especially those in Nevi'im - are clear that G-d neither demands nor even wants blood sacrifice. there was indisputably backsliding amongst the population itself.

in summary - no, blood sacrifice is absolutely not what G-d demands, it is strictly a deeply rooted human desire.

mostly they would shrug and ask how our daughter's potty training is coming along.

Celsus

I'm in agreement with Bede. Your views are quite conservative, and are shared by much of critical Christian and Jewish scholarship (Charlesworth, Sarna, etc.). Needless to say, you haven't tasted the deep, dark pits of minimalism yet (much fun!).

Joel

Magdlyn

I for one found it very enjoyable and educational. I have not been to seminary, and am merely self taught. I would like those who are quick to criticize and call your essays conservative, to educate us on a less "conservative" Hebrew history. Please?

Or rec a book that goes into it as clearly and elegantly as the above.

Celsus

I've written some stuff here, but it only relates to archaeology. I haven't written anything much on the Bible (e.g. when it was written), but that's planned for the near future.

Joel

Magdlyn

Well, that was a fast response! Thank you, Celsus.

Carrie

Well I'm not sure what you mean by "conservative," so I'll have to take the time to read what you've posted on the web Celsus. Heh, I've never been accused of being conservative! I'm all for being more radical But I doubt that this theory would be considered conservative by your average fundamentalist Christian.

dado

fortunately, the average x'ian isn't a fundie.

Celsus

True, but there often seems to be a 30-40 year lag in archaeology and biblical scholarship reaching the public. For example, a recent favourite of some people here, Richard Elliot Friedman, basically rehashes the Documentary Hypothesis as it existed in the 1960s, and is "radical" because he dates J and E to after Solomon (hardy ha!). Yet in fact, the DH has long been falling apart of its own weight, primarily due to the unnecessariness of E, but people don't know that (though I have had fundamentalists tell me triumphantly that the DH is dead and long live Moses, etc.). Bill Dever's arguments aren't much different from Mendenhall and Gottwald (circa 1940s-70s) with the Marxist terminology cleaned up. Stuff like Finkelstein actually seems new, but even he may be read as a sophisticated retreatment of Albrecht Alt (circa 1920). It's the minimalists who are actually bringing new things into the field, and I predict that while the debate may be acrimonious now, we're going to see significant synthesis in the next decade.

Joel

Edit: refering to their theories of Israelite origins, that is. Finkelstein's revised chronology is a separate matter.