Sheshbazzar

What I wish to be discussed in this thread is; What is Jewish? .

That is to be clear, regarding the 1st century CE, what documented information has been recovered that indicates how Jewish people identified, and differentiated themselves from their gentile neighbors that lived among them, and attended their synagogues.

But more specifically, what differentiated an officially recognized Jew from those gentiles that (we are told in various sources) also read the Scriptures, attended synagogues, and observed the Sabbaths and Feasts along with these Jews.

I have read countless articles and references to the subject of proselytes. I have attempted to steer this thread into actual discussion of what credible information can be presented on the subject of Jewish proselytes in the 1st century CE.

Do not bring 'De Vita Contemplativa' into this discussion. It has already been discussed at length and it does NOT supply us with any information on the subject at hand.

Where and what was the 'breaking point' or 'transition point' when a gentile was officially declared by the authorities of a synagogue to be a Jew, rather than just a well treated guest, or a loved 'stranger' among them ?

Now of course, given how this thread has thus far progressed, the thought has came to me to post quotes from Jewish sources on the subject of proselytes.
But after having quoted various Bible texts only to have them totally ignored, and my arguments replied to with disparaging dismissals, insults and contempt, I now believe this also would prove futile and be unacceptable to our resident experts on ancient Judaism, as they reject and mock anything on these subjects that does not originate from their own keyboards.

So I'm going to make a request, and somewhat step back from initiating any further statements regarding the subject, although I may ask a few questions or request further clarifications.
If discussion of this does not proceed, or stalls, I will resort to keeping the thread moving with selected quotations from various Jewish sources.

So lets have it from the expertise of our most educated scholars.
What is your knowledge on the subject of proselytes within 1st century CE Judaism?
Explain (and document) to us the process or processes employed among the various sects of Judaism for the accepting of new members from among the gentiles.
Where and how did a believing gentile move from accounted as being a 'gentile', into being an officially recognized Jew?
And what were the indicators in this change of allegiances and of religious identity?

stephan huller

Shouldn't this thread be renamed 'what Shesh thinks is Jewish' or 'Shesh's concerns about Jewish proselytes.' I have never seen anyone else make themselves, their faith and their concerns front and center in a thread before. That Shesh can't see why this is laughable makes it even more so. The forum is not supposed to be used to get posters to proselytize or discuss their religious beliefs. What the thread does underscore is that Shesh can't even pretend to be objective about any of these matters. It's got to be about him which is sad, really. It's nice to take a break from selfishness and egocentric behavior and just let the evidence speak for itself. I never would have believed that so many people find it difficult to just suspend their personal will and their personal needs until I came to the forum. Now I see how rare the mental constitution for carrying out good scholarship really is. Thanks Shesh.

Sheshbazzar

Here is your opportunity stephan to show that you actually have some knowledge on the subject at hand;

"What is your knowledge on the subject of proselytes within 1st century CE Judaism?

Explain (and document) for us the process or processes employed among the various sects of Judaism for the accepting of new members from among the gentiles.

Where and how did a believing gentile move from accounted as being a 'gentile', into being an officially recognized Jew?

And what were the indicators in this change of allegiances and of religious identity?"

stephan huller

But I don't feel like presenting this knowledge within the context of your beliefs and your religion. It's like I am at the court and you are sitting on a throne judging what you like and don't like about what I am saying. The purpose of the forum is not to make you king, not to make one member the ultimate arbiter of what is acceptable or desirable but to have reasonable people engage in a constructive dialogue. You haven't demonstrated yourself to be reasonable or to be capable of engaging in a constructive dialogue.

It's your faith that is the problem.

Sheshbazzar

Then do feel welcome to open a thread and present your knowledge on the subject in the context of your own scholarship and opinions.

aa5874

You promote logical fallacies. One cannot assume that a group is Jewish just because they used Hebrew Scripture and rested on the seventh day when it is actually stated the the group MODELED their sect after Non-Jewish writings.

It is CLEARLY stated that the Group MODELED and IMITATED Non-Jewish cult writings and that they lived in EVERY district in Egypt and from many places.

Even today, we have the SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST who are NON-JEWS and Christians who worship on the Seventh day and refrain from Meats based on Hebrew Scripture.

It is wholly absurd that Non-Jews in the 1st century could NOT have emulated the Jews.

stephan huller

but why can't you curb your need to inject your personal faith into the discussion?

outhouse

The Jewish encycopedia states there is a large gray area and that little is known for the definition of Judaism during the first century due to its wide multicultural diversity.

Yet you wont addresss this in any sense, for you it is cut and dry.

spin

If you really and truly want to talk about what Jewish is in the 1st c. CE, then why is the o.p., fill with so much superfluous rubbish like material from Constantine, from the council of Laodicea, Socrates Scholasticus, 7th c. "popery" or what your congregation accepts?

When I complained about your going off about your congregation as being irrelevant to the topic, you went off on a rant that had nothing to do with my complaint. What your congregation hold is in itself as irrelevant now as when you posted the o.p.

And why did you spread "therapeutae" from one end of the o.p. to the other? When you kept saying that Philo didn't call them Jews, you were giving the impression that Philo had to call them Jews if they were in fact Jews, which implied that they weren't.

Next time you write an o.p. I'm sure you will be more communicative in your intentions and not include problems in it that you don't want to have to deal with.

The problem you'll face in your inquiry regards useful sources from the appropriate era. What your congregation holds has no bearing on the question. You'll know the legal texts, but they'll give little insight into contemporary actualities. The conversion of Izates in AJ 20.34-48 (20.2.3-4) is a starting point. A Jewish merchant, Ananias, first converted his wives!? And he later got involved. He was led to believe that he should be circumcised to fully become a Jew, but his mother talked him out of it. John Hyrcanus's forced conversion of the Idumeans involved both circumcision and an apparent pledge to observe the law (AJ 13.257 - 13.9.1). Circumcision was again the sign in AJ 13.319 (13.11.3). Well, that's Josephus's idea.

aa5874

One does NOT have to be a Jew or of Jewish origin to study or emulate the Jewish religion.

Antiquities of the Jews 20 Josephus has proven the fact that Non-Jews studied the Jewish religion and emulated some of their teachings in the 1st century--even the Persian Queen and her Son Izates.

The matter is now resolved.

Josephus has destroyed all claims that ONLY Jews or people of Jewish origin emulated the Jewish religion.