Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Clivedurdle · 10-04-2008, 01:36 PM

There are clear propaganda statements put into the mouth of Jesus by the gospel writers, especially about the Pharisees who in complete contrast to what Jesus is said to have said were very interested in the spirit of the law.

The stuff about not one jot in fact puts Jesus in the heavy heavy camp unless we are looking at the equivalent of post modern irony.

Judaism was not monolithic - in fact the vast majority of Jews lived outside the Eastern Coast of the Mediterranean - in Turkey, Greece and Egypt. Diaspora as an idea is misleading. Many chose to live elsewhere, like in Alexandria. There had been a big settlement in Egypt from 600BCE.

Arguably the Judea lot were the backwoods lot! The Jerusalem Temple may not have been that important - its importance may also have been the propaganda idea of one group.

So what do we have? The records of specific groups who for various reasons made themselves look more important than they were and invented a godman as part of their narrative?

Quote:

The history of Judaism » Hellenistic Judaism (4th century bce–2nd century ce) » The Greek period (332–63 bce) » Social, political, and religious divisions

During the Hellenistic period the priests were both the wealthiest class and the strongest political group among the Jews of Jerusalem. The wealthiest of the priests were the members of the Oniad family, who held the hereditary office of high priest until they were replaced by the Hasmoneans; the Temple that they supervised also functioned as a bank, where the wealth of the Temple was stored and where private individuals also deposited their money. From a social and economic point of view, therefore, Josephus is justified in calling the government of Judaea a theocracy. Opposition to the priests’ oppressive rule arose among an urban middle-class group known as scribes (soferim), who based their interpretation of and instruction in the Torah on an oral tradition probably going back to the time of the return from the Babylonian Exile (538 bce and after). A special group of scribes known as Hasidim, or “Pietists,” became the forerunners of the Pharisees, or “Separatists”—middle-class Jewish scholars who reinterpreted the Torah and the prophetic writings to meet the needs of their times. The Hasidim joined the Hasmoneans in the struggle against the Hellenizers, though on religious rather than political grounds.
Josephus held that the Pharisees and the other Jewish parties were philosophical schools, and some modern scholars have argued that the groupings were primarily along economic and social lines; but the chief distinctions among them were religious and go back well before the Maccabean revolt. Some modern scholars have sought to interpret the Pharisees’ opposition to the Sadducees—wealthy, conservative Jews who accepted the Torah alone as authoritative—as based on an urban-rural dichotomy, but a very large share of Pharisaic concern was with agricultural matters. To associate the rabbis with urbanization seems a distortion. The chief support for the Pharisees came from the lower classes, whether in the country or in the city.
The equation of Pharisaic with “normative” Judaism can no longer be supported, at any rate not before the destruction of the Temple in 70 ce. According to the Palestinian Talmud (the annotations and interpretations of the Oral Law compiled by Palestinian Jewish scholars in the 3rd and 4th centuries ce), there were 24 types of “heretics” in Palestine in 70 ce, thus indicating much divergence among Jews; this picture is confirmed by Josephus, who notes numerous instances of religious leaders who claimed to be prophets and who obtained considerable followings.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...#ref=ref299213

skepticalbip · 10-04-2008, 03:48 PM

My understanding is that Jesus was an Essene. So his teachings would lean toward the gnostic and mystical rather than Jewish law and tradition.

But then given that history is written by people with their own beliefs and agenda, who knows what his teachings were - if he did actually exist as a historical character.

aa5874 · 10-04-2008, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skepticalbip

My understanding is that Jesus was an Essene. So his teachings would lean toward the gnostic and mystical rather than Jewish law and tradition.

But then given that history is written by people with their own beliefs and agenda, who knows what his teachings were - if he did actually exist as a historical character.

From what source did you learn that Jesus of the NT was an Essene?

No early Church writer ever claimed Jesus of the NT was an Essene.

boneyard bill · 10-06-2008, 02:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by skepticalbip

My understanding is that Jesus was an Essene. So his teachings would lean toward the gnostic and mystical rather than Jewish law and tradition.

But then given that history is written by people with their own beliefs and agenda, who knows what his teachings were - if he did actually exist as a historical character.

From what source did you learn that Jesus of the NT was an Essene?

No early Church writer ever claimed Jesus of the NT was an Essene.

Did the Essenes call themselves Essenes? That is what Josephus calls them, but do we know what they called themselves? There seem to be some similarities between early Christians and the Essenes, but that depends on what you want to accept as authoritative especially with regard to the Book of Acts.

But Josephus mentions four "philosophies" in ancient Judea: the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Zealots, and the Essenes. Three of these are represented in the Passion story but there is no mention of the Essenes anywhere.

Could the Essenes be represented by Jesus? That's not much to go on. It's really very speculative. The problem is that we not only don't know much about early Christianity, but we don't know much about the Essenes either.

dog-on · 10-06-2008, 04:53 AM

The imaginary one...

bacht · 10-06-2008, 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

The imaginary one...

yes, the Christ was not in this world yet - but his followers seem close enough to the Pharisee's ideas: following the Torah and temple worship, belief in angels, demons, resurrection, day of judgment - the Qumran group was apocalyptic and supernaturalist but separated themselves from the temple and mainstream Judaism, seeking a higher righteousness like the Maccabbean hasidim

John the baptizer seems to have been an ascetic like the Qumranites, whereas the gospel writers depict Christ's followers as ordinary Jews - once Paul forced the issue of gentile Christian behaviour there was a real conflict between the early Jewish believers and non-Jews who didn't see the need to follow the Torah - the Gospels and Acts contain references to this split (Paul's version is in Galatians)

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

10-04-2008, 03:48 PM	#2
skepticalbip Contributor Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Searching for reality on the long and winding road Posts: 12,976	My understanding is that Jesus was an Essene. So his teachings would lean toward the gnostic and mystical rather than Jewish law and tradition. But then given that history is written by people with their own beliefs and agenda, who knows what his teachings were - if he did actually exist as a historical character.

10-06-2008, 04:53 AM	#5
dog-on Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 3,397	The imaginary one...

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.