Freethought & Rationalism Archive

andrewcriddle · 02-13-2013, 01:02 PM

The Apocryphon of Jannes and Jambres (or via: amazon.co.uk) may be of interest.

Andrew Criddle

Toto · 02-13-2013, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

The Apocryphon of Jannes and Jambres (or via: amazon.co.uk) may be of interest.

Andrew Criddle

Thanks. There is an extensive google books preview.

Quote:

More than a century ago Jacob Freudenthal suggested, in his famous book Alexander Polyhistor und die von ihm erhaltenen Reste jüdischer und samaritantisher Geschichtsverke, that the Jannes and Jambres legend derives from the Hellenistic Jewish writer Artapanus who, as it is well known from the fragments of his work preserved through Polyhistor, had great interest in the story of Moses and his experiences at the Pharaonic court. ...

Artapanus_of_Alexandria

Quote:

Artapanus of Alexandria (Gk. Ἀρτάπανος ὁ Ἀλεξανδρεύς) was a historian, of Jewish origin, who is believed to have lived in Alexandria, during the later half of the 3rd or 2nd century BCE. Although most scholars assume Artapanus lived in Alexandria, others argue he resided in the countryside. Regardless, Artapanus was of Egyptian origin.

Artapanus wrote Concerning The Jews, a history of the Jews, in Greek between 250 and 100 BCE, ...

semiopen · 02-14-2013, 06:48 AM

Artapanus is a strange turn, as the guy was not what we'd call a traditional Jew.

He might be a possible source although it seems a lot of stuff is around about his view of the plagues and the

Staff_of_Moses. If he believed there was exactly two magicians and assigned them names, why wouldn't at least some of that be known?

Of course, Pharoaoh's magicians is hardly that important a subject. It seems more interesting that apparently Artapanus did not have a recent copy of Exodus.

Mat · 02-19-2013, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv;7393408[B

]If Pirkei de Rabbi Eliezer on Ishmael came after the emergence of Islam then the author would have known that Fatima was Mohammed's daughter, so giving the name based on Islamic hadith to Ishmael's wife was unnecessary since Mohammed had several wives according to legend, none of whom was Fatima.
[/B]But this doesn't matter to the school of thought that holds that historical Judaism, unlike historical Christianity or Islam, has had absolutely nothing original to contribute at all anywhere, and has merely been the recipient from everyone else.

However, major sources for Quran biblical stories can be traced directly to Pirkei de Rabbi Eliezer and Midrash Rabba on Genesis.
Now can we return to the CONTEXT of the original issue of this thread please?

It is possible that the author may have been mistaken that Fatima was Muhammad's wife instead of daughter and anyway despite the author's error in regards to that matter. The work is clearly a post-islamic as it pretty much alludes to the Islamic Dome of the Rock which was built by the Caliph Abd- Al Malik in 699 CE in the chapter which talks about five things that the Ishmaelites/Arabs will do when they enter in the Holy land.

Moreover the author seems to be aware of the islamic interpreation that it was Yishmael and not Yitzchak that was supposed to be the one sacrificed in the Akedia and in the chapter which mentions the Akeida has Avraham before he does the sacrifice asking Yishamel whether he sees anything regarding the Shekinah if memory serves me correctly and Yishamel says nothing and also the work mentions that Eliezer and Yishamel bicker over who gets inheritance rights to which a malach(angel) not this or this will inherit.

Clearly the work is post islamic.

Duvduv · 02-19-2013, 05:11 PM

Well, the Jewish sources simply bring the name of FATIMA as a wife of Ishmael, but Islamic stories refer to FATIMA as a daughter, along with the wife Ayisha (Ishmael's other wife in Jewish sources being Adisha).

However, this points to the fact that virtually all secular scholarship itself - no matter how it dissects Jewish material and denies that Moses or David existed - simply repeats the traditional Islamic narrative about the origin of the man named Mohammed despite the fact that there is no corroborative information about such a man, whose name is only mentioned 3 or 4 times in the entire book allegedly revealed to him by the angel Gabriel over a 20 year period, whereas Moses is mentioned over 100 times.

I think it is increasingly clear that the Quran is a cut and paste job of assorted writings circulating among the Arabs, including ones rooted in Jewish midrashic material (such as Pirkei Rabbi Eliezer and Midrash Rabba) that got thrown together at the dawn of the Baghdad ABBASID caliphate, some 200 years AFTER the alleged death of Mohammed, which was conveniently also the time of the emergence of biographical material about Mohammed in the name of one Ibn Ishaq but in works attributed to Ibn Hisham and Al Tabari?

Has anyone bothered to wonder how the Islamic forces of Ali and Hussein down in Kufa Iraq were engaged in a conflict with an *Islamic* caliphate far off in Damascus under Muwiyya ONLY TWO DECADES after the death of Mohammed?

semiopen · 02-20-2013, 06:11 AM

The Fatima issue is interesting.

The Targums
Author: George H. Schodde
Source: The Old Testament Student, Vol. 8, No. 7 (Mar., 1889)

Should display the pdf from the link.

Quote:

Altogether different in character and in every particular much inferior in value to the new classical Targums already mentioned is a second Targum covering the whole of the Pentateuch, which is sometimes claimed to have been prepared by Jonathan ben Uzziel (Pseudo-Jonathan) but is now generally designated by the better term of Jerusalem Targum. All critics acknowledge it is a Palestinian product, its language, too, being that of the Jerusalem Talmud. It is further agreed, that it cannot possibly be younger than the close of the seventh century. In Num. 24:19 it mentions the sinful city of Constantinople and in v. 24 the land of Lombardy; in Gen. 21:21 it mentions the two wives of Mohammed Chadidja and Fatima. Compare especially the solid article of Volck, in Herzog. Real Encycl., 2d. Ed. Vol. XV. The version can scarcely be called a translation; the text is for the writer only a pretext for introducing all possible midrashic notions. In Deutsch's article already mentioned (to be found also in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible) the English reader can find specimen verses in translation not only from this, but also from the older Targums. Pseudo-Jonathan is full of myths and fables, ideas and representations common to late Jewish literature. The language is full of foreign words and barbarisms. But that it contains also portions of older Targums is evident from the contents (cf. especially Noldeke, 1. c.)

The dating to the seventh century was already well established in 1889, so it's stood the test of time.

Quote:

In Num. 24:19 it mentions the sinful city of Constantinople and in v. 24 the land of Lombardy; in Gen. 21:21 it mentions the two wives of Mohammed Chadidja and Fatima.

I don't understand Duvi's bizarre logic, but if it has any merit it should also address the other issues mentioned above.

I think the question of why the relationship was fucked up deserves to be looked at.

I don't know what this link means exactly but

On Judaism and Islam – Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael and Fatima – Covenant and Conversation

Quote:

There is an extraordinary midrash (Pirkei deRabbi Eliezer, 30) that tells the story of how Ishmael was twice visited by Abraham. On both occasions, Ishmael was not at home. On the first, his wife, not knowing Abraham’s identity, refused the stranger bread and water. Ishmael divorced her and married a woman named Fatimah. This time when Abraham visited, again not disclosing his identity, the woman gave him food and drink. The midrash then says, “Abraham stood and prayed before the Holy One, blessed be He, and Ishmael’s house became filled with all good things. When Ishmael returned, his wife told him about it, and Ishmael knew that his father still loved him.”

There is a story here of immense consequence for our time. Jews and Muslims both trace their descent from Abraham: Jews though Isaac, Muslims through Ishmael. Fatimah is an important figure in Islam. She is the daughter of the prophet.

Without going through the work of actually finding a copy and reading the midrash, maybe the author just transposed Ishmael's wife with Mo's.

Duvduv · 02-20-2013, 07:34 AM

I am pleased that the Magesterium of academia has ruled on the authenticity of the Targum Jonathan.....
However, replacing analysis with terms like "myths and fables" may be good rhetoric, but it isn't scholarly. What is scholarly would be to argue that the Targum has a specific pattern rather than a random pattern of inserting anachronisms which any reader could have immediately noticed.

The question to ask would be why the Targum would randomly insert references to "Constantina" or "Lombardy" and not other equally or even stronger anachronisms in its translation/commentary. As we say in Hebrew, "eyn ledavar sof" ("there is no end to it"). After all, what is good for some unproveable random reference to one city could apply equally to the city of ROME or a host of other anachronisms, and if the writer wanted to DISGUISE his little ditty, he could have done a much better job.

Note also that the same verse in Targum Yerushalmi mentions Constania.

For that matter, whether "Lombarnia" or "Constantina" refer to LOMBARDY or CONSTANTINOPLE I don't know, but in any case, the dismissive argument is mostly polemical and does not clarify anything. Similarly, the use of the names of the wives of Ishmael could certainly have been indicative of a pattern elsewhere but it isn't. And Fatima was not the wife of Mohammed but his daughter, so both Pirkei and Targum J got their anachronisms wrong, as they did with the name "Adisha" which is neither directly Khadija or Ayisha.

The midrashim have proven to be a rich source of information in the Quran and in legends about Mohammed.

semiopen · 02-20-2013, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

I am pleased that the Magesterium of academia has ruled on the authenticity of the Targum Jonathan.....
However, replacing analysis with terms like "myths and fables" may be good rhetoric, but it isn't scholarly. What is scholarly would be to argue that the Targum has a specific pattern rather than a random pattern of inserting anachronisms which any reader could have immediately noticed.

The question to ask would be why the Targum would randomly insert references to "Constantina" or "Lombardy" and not other equally or even stronger anachronisms in its translation/commentary. As we say in Hebrew, "eyn ledavar sof" ("there is no end to it"). After all, what is good for some unproveable random reference to one city could apply equally to the city of ROME or a host of other anachronisms, and if the writer wanted to DISGUISE his little ditty, he could have done a much better job.

Note also that the same verse in Targum Yerushalmi mentions Constania.

For that matter, whether "Lombarnia" or "Constantina" refer to LOMBARDY or CONSTANTINOPLE I don't know, but in any case, the dismissive argument is mostly polemical and does not clarify anything. Similarly, the use of the names of the wives of Ishmael could certainly have been indicative of a pattern elsewhere but it isn't. And Fatima was not the wife of Mohammed but his daughter, so both Pirkei and Targum J got their anachronisms wrong, as they did with the name "Adisha" which is neither directly Khadija or Ayisha.

The midrashim have proven to be a rich source of information in the Quran and in legends about Mohammed.

You should read the quote more carefully about Jonathon

Quote:

... which is sometimes claimed to have been prepared by Jonathan ben Uzziel (Pseudo-Jonathan) but is now generally designated by the better term of Jerusalem Targum. All critics acknowledge it is a Palestinian product, its language, too, being that of the Jerusalem Talmud.

I don't think anything different has been claimed in this discussion by anyone other than you. You are claiming it was written by Jonathan ben Uzziel which is not correct.

I can't follow the rest of your argument.

Duvduv · 02-20-2013, 09:33 AM

There are THREE targums contained in the Mikraot Gedolot of the Pentateuch. ONE of the targums is called Targum Onkelos, a second is called Targum Yerushalmi and the third one is labeled Targum Yonatan ben Uziel. I am not asking you to agree that it was written by him, I am simply pointing out that naming of the text.
The verse in Yonatan referring to Constantina and Lombarnia also refers to Constantina in Yerushalmi targum.

Duvduv · 02-20-2013, 05:19 PM

Here is a link to the Targum Jonathan in English:
http://targum.info/targumic-texts/pe...chal-targumim/

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

02-13-2013, 01:02 PM	#31
andrewcriddle Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Birmingham UK Posts: 4,876	The Apocryphon of Jannes and Jambres (or via: amazon.co.uk) may be of interest. Andrew Criddle

02-14-2013, 06:48 AM	#33
semiopen Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Hillsborough, NJ Posts: 3,551	Artapanus is a strange turn, as the guy was not what we'd call a traditional Jew. He might be a possible source although it seems a lot of stuff is around about his view of the plagues and the Staff_of_Moses. If he believed there was exactly two magicians and assigned them names, why wouldn't at least some of that be known? Of course, Pharoaoh's magicians is hardly that important a subject. It seems more interesting that apparently Artapanus did not have a recent copy of Exodus.

02-19-2013, 05:11 PM	#35
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	Well, the Jewish sources simply bring the name of FATIMA as a wife of Ishmael, but Islamic stories refer to FATIMA as a daughter, along with the wife Ayisha (Ishmael's other wife in Jewish sources being Adisha). However, this points to the fact that virtually all secular scholarship itself - no matter how it dissects Jewish material and denies that Moses or David existed - simply repeats the traditional Islamic narrative about the origin of the man named Mohammed despite the fact that there is no corroborative information about such a man, whose name is only mentioned 3 or 4 times in the entire book allegedly revealed to him by the angel Gabriel over a 20 year period, whereas Moses is mentioned over 100 times. I think it is increasingly clear that the Quran is a cut and paste job of assorted writings circulating among the Arabs, including ones rooted in Jewish midrashic material (such as Pirkei Rabbi Eliezer and Midrash Rabba) that got thrown together at the dawn of the Baghdad ABBASID caliphate, some 200 years AFTER the alleged death of Mohammed, which was conveniently also the time of the emergence of biographical material about Mohammed in the name of one Ibn Ishaq but in works attributed to Ibn Hisham and Al Tabari? Has anyone bothered to wonder how the Islamic forces of Ali and Hussein down in Kufa Iraq were engaged in a conflict with an Islamic caliphate far off in Damascus under Muwiyya ONLY TWO DECADES after the death of Mohammed?

02-20-2013, 07:34 AM	#37
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	I am pleased that the Magesterium of academia has ruled on the authenticity of the Targum Jonathan..... However, replacing analysis with terms like "myths and fables" may be good rhetoric, but it isn't scholarly. What is scholarly would be to argue that the Targum has a specific pattern rather than a random pattern of inserting anachronisms which any reader could have immediately noticed. The question to ask would be why the Targum would randomly insert references to "Constantina" or "Lombardy" and not other equally or even stronger anachronisms in its translation/commentary. As we say in Hebrew, "eyn ledavar sof" ("there is no end to it"). After all, what is good for some unproveable random reference to one city could apply equally to the city of ROME or a host of other anachronisms, and if the writer wanted to DISGUISE his little ditty, he could have done a much better job. Note also that the same verse in Targum Yerushalmi mentions Constania. For that matter, whether "Lombarnia" or "Constantina" refer to LOMBARDY or CONSTANTINOPLE I don't know, but in any case, the dismissive argument is mostly polemical and does not clarify anything. Similarly, the use of the names of the wives of Ishmael could certainly have been indicative of a pattern elsewhere but it isn't. And Fatima was not the wife of Mohammed but his daughter, so both Pirkei and Targum J got their anachronisms wrong, as they did with the name "Adisha" which is neither directly Khadija or Ayisha. The midrashim have proven to be a rich source of information in the Quran and in legends about Mohammed.

02-20-2013, 09:33 AM	#39
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	There are THREE targums contained in the Mikraot Gedolot of the Pentateuch. ONE of the targums is called Targum Onkelos, a second is called Targum Yerushalmi and the third one is labeled Targum Yonatan ben Uziel. I am not asking you to agree that it was written by him, I am simply pointing out that naming of the text. The verse in Yonatan referring to Constantina and Lombarnia also refers to Constantina in Yerushalmi targum.

02-20-2013, 05:19 PM	#40
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	Here is a link to the Targum Jonathan in English: http://targum.info/targumic-texts/pe...chal-targumim/

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.