Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Notsri · 02-04-2005, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anat

Nostri, the fact that Nahmani was quoted last doesn't mean his opinion is considered 'more true'. Historicity of Job isn't a matter of Halakha, as it does not influence how Jews should run their lives. Therefore there was no need to establish who was right. In matters of Halakha, if conflicting views are mentioned, it is also mentioned which opinion rules - "and halakha is according to <insert name>"

The clarification is duly noted. Thanks.

Eldarion Lathria · 02-04-2005, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

Even if we assume Davidic lineage could be established, the notion that the Romans would base a census on it is idiotic and not at all supported by the Egyptian census reference.

The idea of every Jew who could trace their lineage to David descending upon tiny Bethlehem to be counted is just too absurd. :rolling:

In fact, if there were Jews who could claim descent from David, and other Jews accepted their claim, would not the Romans want to exterminate them, so as to eliminate a possible rallying point for a rebellion?

Eldarion Lathria

Diogenes the Cynic · 02-04-2005, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Notsri

Diogenes, it does not necessarily follow from the current paucity of historical evidence for David that the Jewish people never had documented Davidic genealogies.

Sure it does. If David never existed then it's impossible for him to have had descendants.

In any case, it's ridiculous to think there were any real geneologies in the 1st century, especially for illiterate peasant families that nobody cared about. I'm sure there were spurious ones faked up ocassion but there was really no technical ability to keep those records for 1000 years even for royal families, much less peasants.

Quote:

To illustrate that there were apparently such genealogical scrolls in Israel at one time, perhaps it would be best just to quote a relevant passage:

- Bereshit Rabbah 98:8

4th century hearsay about an implausible scroll written in a collection of Midrashic commentaries on Genesis? Ok, i'm convinced.

Quote:

Well again, reliability of the genealogy aside, yes, I can: it's found in Seder Olam Zutta.

- Strack & Stemberger's Introduction to the Talmud and Midrash, p. 327

Since Abraham was a patently fictional character any purported geneology stemming from his is patently spurious.

Quote:

edited to add: Of course, we also have two extant, post exilic genealogies that extend back to David in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke.

Unfortunately, they contradict each other. Which one of them do you think is the real one and which one is bogus?

Notsri · 02-05-2005, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

Sure it does. If David never existed then it's impossible for him to have had descendants.

In any case, it's ridiculous to think there were any real geneologies in the 1st century, especially for illiterate peasant families that nobody cared about. I'm sure there were spurious ones faked up ocassion but there was really no technical ability to keep those records for 1000 years even for royal families, much less peasants.

4th century hearsay about an implausible scroll written in a collection of Midrashic commentaries on Genesis? Ok, i'm convinced.

Since Abraham was a patently fictional character any purported geneology stemming from his is patently spurious.

Unfortunately, they contradict each other. Which one of them do you think is the real one and which one is bogus?

Diogenes, I think I may to have to bow out of this discussion. I don't know if I've been too vague in these last few posts (perhaps so), but whatever the case, you've missed the points I've been trying to make; namely, a) that the Jews (some of them, at least) of late antiquity, and even of the middle ages, were still keeping genealogical records, and b) in some of those records descent was traced back to David (authenticity aside!). I have not at any time tried to openly argue, nor meant to imply, that those records contained authentic genealogies. And yet somehow you've continually been distracted by that issue - whether the Gospel's genealogies, or the genealogy of Hillel, or the one's found in Seder Olam Zuta, etc. are authentic. But that is another topic, and something, again, I have never meant to address. If you'd like to maybe show me how the evidence I provided fails to support points a) & b), then that's fine; otherwise I don't think I can continue this.

Regards,
Notsri

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.