Rick Sumner

Rabbinic Judaism didn't become the "standard" until the mid-second century. Its nature fairly demands that it started before that. Probably shortly after the fall of the temple. The temple's absence is what started it, after all.

Regards,
Rick Sumner

spamandham

Even after 70 CE, Jerusalem was still the center of Judaism, and the rituals were still being observed there - the temple was in ruin, but not yet razed. Coins minted during the Bar Kochba revolt depict the Temple Facade. Clearly, the temple still existed in the minds of Jews.

The actions of Hadrian are what necessitated Rabbinic Judaism, and the earliest known Rabbinic text (the Mishnah) wasn't even written until ~200 CE.

show_no_mercy

Ok.

Which words out of this list do you think are Hebrew in origin and which ones are Greek in origin:

Deuteronomy
Exodus
Moses
Pharisee
Genesis
Joshua
Psalm
Zadokim

Kapyong

Gday,

Really?

Celsus, in late 2nd century, attacked the Gospels as fiction based on myths :

"Clearly the christians have used...myths... in fabricating the story of Jesus' birth...It is clear to me that the writings of the christians are a lie and that your fables are not well-enough constructed to conceal this monstrous fiction"


Porphyry, in late 3rd century, claimed the Gospels were invented :

"... the evangelists were inventors – not historians”



Julian, in the 4th century, claimed Jesus was spurious, counterfeit, invented :

"why do you worship this spurious son...a counterfeit son", "you have invented your new kind of sacrifice ".

Julian was “convinced that the fabrication of the Galilaeans is a fiction of men composed by wickedness.. ”



K.

spin

Now a thinking deficiency... Did you look at the Ostian inscription which isn't open to question? Naa.


spin

IamJoseph

Yes, I appreciate your quotes. However, I am referring to the general European people, which have displayed a history of accepting what has been proven blatant and treacherous falsehoods, like the blood libel and Protocols. Those quotes only make this premise all the more relevant. Today, the largest two religions are making totally contradicting claims, namely the Gospels and Quran, with beliefs held by some 3.5 Billion humans.

This is not a job for spiderman - only the figure of Moses can make any sense here - and this is the only figure they have never entertained to return!

IamJoseph

Most of them are greek. When the Septuagint was translated, the greeks applied these names for the five books, and also made intelligent indexed chapter and verse numbers. Previous to this, the name for Genesis in the Hebrew constituted the opening word of the book, namely IN THE BEGINNING. By the time the Greeks invaded Persian Babylon, the Jews exiled there since 586 BCE had already adapted to other languages, while still retaining their Hebrew language and writings amongst themselves.

My point is, Jesus would not have been called by this latin name in Judea 1st C. One sees this in all tombstone relics of this space-time.

IamJoseph

I don't think so. In 70 CE Titus left on a token wall [today's wailing wall] remaining as a reminder to anyone challenging Rome. And the only time Jews were not in Jerusalem in the past 4000 years was the first 50 years after the temple was destroyed to the ground and its wealth and artifacts looted: the Jews were forbidden entry.

show_no_mercy

My point is that the LXX was being used by Jews until the beginning of the 2nd century CE - therefore Greek speaking Jews themselves chose these names (besides Joshua and Zadokim). The LXX never once writes the name "Joshua", it renders it as "Jesus".

You're still trying to defend the absurd position that diaspora Jews didn't exist in the 1st century (and that Jesus was from Judea).

Roger Pearse

Ah, I think this merges the events of 70 when the temple was burned with those of 135 when Hadrian demolished the city, built a new one called Aelia, and banned all Jews from living there. (Not that this should affect the argument either way)