FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-27-2013, 01:54 PM   #51
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Auburn ca
Posts: 4,269
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephan huller View Post
Quote:
We already know the star in the birth narrative is Augustus coin, and the event in the sky when he proclaimed his dad Caesar resurrected.
But would it be natural to identify the year where:

a) a messianic 'star' appeared in the sky
b) the temple was built

and which

c) was a forty-ninth year/Jubilee

with the birth of a child who was the messiah or the appearance of a messiah/supernatural figure? The Qumran texts make clear that the expectation that God or a supernatural being would come in the Jubilee already existed. My difficulty is squaring the gospel account with the anti-Temple subplot in the gospel and Acts.

Which is more believable or - perhaps better - which is more likely to be original, the idea that Jesus was born on the Jubilee year that was the completion of the temple or that this was the year 'he appeared' (i.e. a supernatural being) who stood in front of Herod the Great and accused the Jews telling them they had sinned by going beyond what the Pentateuch allowed (i.e. building a permanent building as opposed to a mere flimsy tabernacle)? My difficulty is that the subplot that Herod wanted to see Jesus and that Jesus was preaching 'in a year of favor' and wanted the temple destroyed makes more sense in the fifteenth year of Augustus than the fifteenth year of Tiberius. Why would God have assigned a non-Jubilee year when the temple had long been standing to be 'the year of favor'? It doesn't make sense. The only defense is that 'Jesus was just a guy' and the rest of the idiocy that evangelicals spew.


Quote:
a) a messianic 'star' appeared in the sky
Never happened.

Quote:
temple destroyed
Not sure that has historicity either, dont think that was ever a real prediction by he Jesus charactor.

Quote:
The only defense is that 'Jesus was just a guy' and the rest of the idiocy that evangelicals spew

I agree. We have the swords at his arrest, the possibility for insurrection is there. Later glossed over to avoid being persecuted by Romans the exact way the books were written for a Roman audience in mind.


Quote:
My difficulty is that the subplot that Herod wanted to see Jesus and that Jesus was preaching 'in a year of favor' and wanted the temple destroyed makes more sense in the fifteenth year of Augustus than the fifteenth year of Tiberius.

The way Gluke and Gmatthew parrallel Moses and Herod, it is evangelicals spew as you say.
outhouse is offline  
Old 02-27-2013, 01:58 PM   #52
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
Default

For me at least, you see the majesty of the Pentateuch - a narrative all about 'the entry into the Land' in a Jubilee or its presage - and then this idea of a 'reality show' type narrative that the evangelicals claim the gospel is. It doesn't make sense. The gospel had its work cut out overtaking the authority of the Pentateuch. It's like writing the sequel to Star Wars or the Godfather. You can't do it with just a hand-held camera and a microphone. The narrative had to be bigger, better with more 'special effects' and magic. It had to be set in a Jubilee. It just had to be.
stephan huller is offline  
Old 02-27-2013, 02:19 PM   #53
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Auburn ca
Posts: 4,269
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephan huller View Post
For me at least, you see the majesty of the Pentateuch - a narrative all about 'the entry into the Land' in a Jubilee or its presage - and then this idea of a 'reality show' type narrative that the evangelicals claim the gospel is It doesn't make sense. The gospel had its work cut out overtaking the authority of the Pentateuch. It's like writing the sequel to Star Wars or the Godfather. You can't do it with just a hand-held camera and a microphone. The narrative had to be bigger, better with more 'special effects' and magic. It had to be set in a Jubilee. It just had to be.

The OT held great importance to these Proselytes who found a way to keep the one monotheistic god and their foreskin.

OT influnece while paralleling the Emporers divinity, Its just the extreme Hellenizing of Judaism for those not from Israel.


Judaism grew to big and diverse in the first century, and more or less was perverted by Hellenist.
outhouse is offline  
Old 02-27-2013, 02:51 PM   #54
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
Default

The gospel is the ultimate expression of the party which objected to permanent houses of God (read Stephen's speech in Acts). In Samaritan culture this group was described as Dosithean. I don't know what their Jewish name was. But surely some Jews objected to a permanent house of God.
stephan huller is offline  
Old 02-27-2013, 02:56 PM   #55
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
Default

Is there not a huge discussion throughout the Hebrew Bible about this? God with us for example? The whole discussion about should they actually have kings?

The Battle of Marathon was primarily between a people who thought they could talk to their gods themselves - priesthood of all believers. and those who thought there should be anointed priests.

This goes back to nomadic andcity dwellers.

Judaism must have had similar tensions. Did Judaism turn from a shamanistic type religion to a formal priest one after Cyrus,where the gods are put into buildings with attendants?
Clivedurdle is offline  
Old 02-27-2013, 02:57 PM   #56
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: On the path of knowledge
Posts: 8,889
Default

Quote:
But surely some Jews objected to..
No matter what the subject is, there are always some Jews that will object.
Show one verse to five Jews and you will likely get eight differing interpretations.
Sheshbazzar is offline  
Old 02-27-2013, 04:59 PM   #57
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Orlando
Posts: 2,014
Default

Hi Stephan huller,

I'm really enjoying this thread.

We should remember that Lucas wanted to remake the Flash Gordon serial called "Space Soldiers," but he could not get the rights to it, and so he did the more original "Star Wars" instead.

I like the idea of placing the narrative in 12 BCE, in the 15th year of Augustus and deducing its origin in Macedonia. We can go further and say that the only place that would have had a large Jewish community interested in this stuff would have been the City of Thessaloniki (Salonika). We can suggest that as the birthplace of Christian narrative.

I have suggested in the past the Jesus story is a retcon (retroactive continuity - alteration of the facts of a fictional story) of the John story, so perhaps it was the John Story that was originally set in the year of the Jubilee 12 BCE. That would be the year that John came out of the wilderness and was executed by Herod.

The John-Jesus switch can be compared with the two Green Lantern characters.

The first Green Lantern, Alan Scott, was introduced in 1940 (He was an engineer who became a broadcaster and then a radio mogul). His comic was cancelled in 1948 and his last appearance was in 1951.

The second Green Lantern, Hal Jordan, was a test pilot. He began in 1959.

The original Green Lantern, Alan Scott, often appeared in the second Green Lantern's comic book in the 1960's, but in a parallel universe which could interact with the GL. Hal Jordan's universe. In 1986, GL. Alan Scott became part of the same universe as GL. Hal Jordan.

In 2011, GL.Alan Scott was again relegated to a parallel universe, this time with no interaction with GL Hal Jordan. In 2012, it was revealed that this Green Lantern is actually gay, although originally he had been a married, father of two children.

The permutations of the Green Lantern character is probably no stranger than the permutation of the John character.



Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephan huller View Post
For me at least, you see the majesty of the Pentateuch - a narrative all about 'the entry into the Land' in a Jubilee or its presage - and then this idea of a 'reality show' type narrative that the evangelicals claim the gospel is. It doesn't make sense. The gospel had its work cut out overtaking the authority of the Pentateuch. It's like writing the sequel to Star Wars or the Godfather. You can't do it with just a hand-held camera and a microphone. The narrative had to be bigger, better with more 'special effects' and magic. It had to be set in a Jubilee. It just had to be.
PhilosopherJay is offline  
Old 02-27-2013, 07:37 PM   #58
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
Default

Thanks Jay. There is a consistent mix up between Herod the Great and Herod Antipas which I don't think is entirely accidental. Look at the Gospel of Nicodemus 9:

Quote:
And having thus spoken, Pilate rose up from the throne with anger, wishing to flee from them. The Jews therefore cried out, saying: We wish Cæsar to be king over us, not Jesus, because Jesus received gifts from the Magi. And Herod also heard this—that there was going to be a king—and wished to put him to death, and for this purpose sent and put to death all the infants that were in Bethlehem. And on this account also his father Joseph and his mother fled from fear of him into Egypt.
And doesn't the Jewish refrain 'we wish Caesar to be king over us not Jesus' take on a different sense if the Jews had just been freshly conquered by the Romans (= at the time of Herod the Great).
stephan huller is offline  
Old 02-27-2013, 07:41 PM   #59
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mondcivitan Republic
Posts: 2,550
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephan huller View Post
Sabbatical year/Jubilee

12 BCE/11 BCE
37 CE/38 CE
86 CE/87 CE
135 CE/136 CE = bar Kochba revolt (identified as falling in a Jubilee)
184 CE/185 CE
233 CE/234 CE
282 CE/283 CE
331 CE/332 CE etc.
Isn't the Jubilee year supposed to be the "50th" year? It is the year that follows the 7th sabbatical year. The formula is 7*7+1.

And then there is the pesky issue of whether Sabbatical years were reckoned from Spring to Spring, or Fall to Fall, among Jews or Samaritans. The Mishna knows nothing about a fall epoch for "7th years" but in the Gemera of the Talmud, the Rabbis concluded they should be reconed according to Fall epoch, but this may have arisen be because they were ruled by foreigners, not a prince of Israel.

The following table assumes a Fall epoch. If a Spring epoch is meant, I'm not sure whether to consider it in the Spring following the Fall of the year indicated. If a Jubilee year, it would be a year later than the sabbatical year, regardless of the epoch used.

701.2 700.2 700.3 2 Kings 18:32 & Isa 36:17
596.2 595.2    
589.2 588.2 588.0 A year of release was "recently" Jer 34:15
582.2 581.2    
526.2 525.2    
519.2 518.2   Hag 2:15-19 tenuous
512.2 511.2    
176.2 175.2    
169.2 168.2    
162.2 161.2 162.2 1 Macc 6:49,53 Antioches IV lifts siege
43.2 42.2    
36.2 35.2 36.4 Herod takes Jerusalem
27.8 28.8    
34.8 35.8    
41.8 42.8 40.9 Caligula's statue affair
69.8 70.8    
111.8 112.8    
118.8 119.8    
125.8 126.8    
132.8 133.8    

DCH
DCHindley is offline  
Old 02-27-2013, 07:50 PM   #60
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
Default

Some apparently could be mistaken into thinking there was one Herod throughout the gospel. From the Catena Aurea:

Quote:
Perhaps some one may ask how it can be here said, “At that time Herod heard,” seeing that we have long before read that Herod was dead, and that on that the Lord returned out of Egypt. This question is answered, if we remember that there were two Herods. On the death of the first Herod, his son Archelaus succeeded him, and after ten years was524 sent into exile to Vienne in Gaul. Then Caesar Augustus gave command that the kingdom should be divided into tetrarchies, and gave three parts to the sons of Herod. This Herod then who beheaded John is the son of that greater Herod under whom the Lord was born; and this is confirmed by the Evangelist adding “the tetrarch.”
stephan huller is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:16 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.