steve_bnk

The 'state' religion today in the west is Christianity. There remains signifigant anti-semitism in the west, yet there are both poor and rich Jrews, and Jews in governemnt in most democratic countries.

I read that the diaspora Jews had some form of dsipensation form the state religion.

The Romans supported anyone who worked to increase wealth. That is why JC's 'Give to Ceasar what is Ceasar's..' would not have caused any alarm for the Romans, it would have put his life at risk from the Judaen Jewish nationalists who hated the Romans. To me the whole story of JC viewed in the context of the politics and theology he lived in makes perfect sense.

Romans political intrigue and hash polical puishment was hardly limited to cases of a Jewish convert, and the aristocracy was far from immune for any number of reasons.

There was no CNN to report cases of polical abuse....plolitical power abuse was the norm.

matthijs

This is all true in a way, but analagies to modern society will always be fundamentally misleading. Fergus Millar says it better than I:
They were also quite weary of threats to stability. The reason why Jesus is asked if Jews should pay taxes to Rome, is because this was something many Jews had been refusing to do. The story overlays some serious tension between the Jews and the Romans. Let's bare in mind that a war broke out between them in 66 CE.

steve_bnk

Ageed it is a loose analogy that can break down at a number of points.

A decent show on the Discovey Channel recently focused on a poilitcal analysis of JC. It is clear he was speaking to the Jews and not the whole of humanity. What he was likley prohesizing was the fall of the Jewish state due to its own internal failings. Perhaps that was his message, return to Jewish traditional spirituality and forget about Roman occupation.

It then makes sense then that by the time Paul is writing to dispersed congregations none of which ever heard or saw JC that the message morphed into the end of the Earth.

matthijs

What's strange is I can form an opinion on the message of each pericope, but I just feel lost trying to figure out what the overall message of Jesus is. He's more than a bit incoherent as a whole.

He seems not to have been asking for the overthrow of the Romans, who were overbearing and occupied the holy land. But he doesn't seem to have shared the fatalism that had kept the Jews relatively docile for so long. I wonder what he made of Jeremiah, who would probably have argued that resistance against Rome is resistance against God's wrath. Why didn't the Pharisees ask him that question? Damn them.

Elske.

mountainman

But one our best Jewish ancient historians writes that
Philo was not strictly "Jewish" ....
Belief is very cheap. Next someone will cite the Roman Emperor
Philip the Arab's conversion to christianity at the time Rome
celebrated it's Millenial Year.

steve_bnk

Vey true. In one of the gospels when JC is arrested by the Romans his party seems to have been armed and JC always seems to be on the move. The Jewish establishment was cerainly out for Pauls's head so I don't think his being militant is out of the question.

On the Discovery Channel show it was pointed out that JC having 12 diciples would have certainly meant to imply the 12 tribes, a point the Jews would not have missed.

He seemed to be doing everything he could to provoke a resposne from the relgious establishment against his person. Not unlike Christianity in the USA today Judaism in Jeruslalam back then was big business. Today big religion is in bed with big politics, back then the Jewish establishment was in bed with the Roamsn. a sweet economic deal.

Then consider JC loosing his cool and throwing those conduting business in the temple out on their asses. Dramatic stuff. It would be like some wandering Christian walking into a wealthy mega-church and throwing Billy Gram out on the street. It would casue an uproar.

Who knows what his real message was. I believe there was an historical Jesus, but as has been pointed out the gospels as written could be easily composits of several people who were part of the early following.

Scholars do not consder the authors of the gospels to be as the names infer. They were not written by the original disciples.

storytime

So, the Jews today are still divided on this issue? What has that to do with my speculating on the bible story? I don't think Jews care one way or another about my speculating on Pauls conspiracy to protect Jerusalem and Jews. He certainly wasn't conspiring to protect Rome and Romans. :Cheeky:

You say my speculation is confusing. I think it makes perfect sense in light of Paul's association with Romans and his dual citizenship in Judea and Rome. Did I mention that Paul was given his own hired house, meaning Paul had servants that he paid? I think his loyalty to Judaism in his being "a Pharisee among Pharisees" is not to be overlooked.

So, why don't you tell me why this speculation on Paul's reason for taking his gospel to the Gentiles upsets you so?

storytime

Don't you know? Its impossible to prove a "theory" false. Or true for that matter.

How can you say "the conspiracy of Paul" is a dead theory? I'm still speculating on it here. :Cheeky: You should try and follow my storyline instead of the same ol dead horse you've been beating in stagnate myths of church fathers.

Romans were not always "haters" of Jewish people. Jewish people lived in peace among Romans at times and just as they lived among Egyptians and Syrians. Why do you want to present Jews as a forever persecuted people? Do you think Rome persecuted other groups at times also? I think there was numerous groups and numerous uprisings among people in those days.

Why do you think Jews in their laws ever accepted Christianity at any time? When did Judaism ever include Gentilism[Pauls gospel]? Jesus and Paul were Jews, on the bad side of their laws, but they were Jews nonetheless. Gentiles were not.

sugarhitman

...."that Claudius had commanded ALL Jews to depart from Rome..." Acts 18:2

arnoldo

Just as the movement to hellenize judaism eventually led to the Greeks attacking the Jews so the movement to placate Rome failed and the led to Israel's destruction. Currently there is a process in Israel to appease certain "radical elements" however history has shown the results of such appeasment. History also shows that the Romans were not friends of the orthodox jews. Note the following passage from: Jewish Literacy: The Most Important Things to Know About the Jewish Religion, It's People, and Its History (Rabbi Joseph Telushkin); (or via: amazon.co.uk)


Myles Kantor sums up this relation between Jewish History and the Romans rather succiently in the following article when he asks;
What lesson should Jews draw from this chapter in their history? The State isn’t our friend.