HelmetWB

I want to stress that I am in no sense a biblical 'scholar.' However, I've read the bible, and many books on religion. I have a strong prejudice in favor of the 'minimalist camp' viewpoint, at least in some sense. However, I was previously unfamiliar with this 'Judaism courtesy of Persia,' more specifically, of Zoroastrianism, idea. I am posting the following information (originally included in a letter to a friend) here to get feedback from the many people on this forum whose opinions I have grown to respect.

I’ve discovered that within the Department of Art & Archaeology, School of Oriental & African Studies (SOAS), University of London is a stronghold, firmly ensconced, of the so-called ‘minimalist’ camp in the raging Bible-as-history (or not) controversy. The SOAS website explains it all:

http://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/Religi.../book1/pt1.htm

There are around 600 single-space typewritten pages of material at this website, divided into 6 ‘books.’ It is a very interesting site, and I found the minimalist case made is very convincing!

According to the material provided at the site:

Jerusalem, it seems, was never more than a regional center (achieving a population of around 25,000) before the notorious 6th century exile. After the Babylonians sent the city’s educated upper classes into exile the place fell into disrepair. However, when Persia, under Cyrus the Great, conquered the region it was repopulated. But Cyrus did not return the people home that were originally exiled (as the bible claims). Instead, as was then the usual practice of conquerors, new people were moved into the area. They were moved in against their will, but it paid to cooperate. Also as custom dictated, they were encouraged to worship the local gods. Thus, Jehovah got a whole new group of worshipers, from Persia. But these ‘new’ Jews brought along Zoroastrian beliefs and practices; and thus was born the beginnings of Judaism as we know it! The website stresses the point that this marked the beginnings of Judaism in all ways, including monotheism. The indigenous population of this area before the exile were the same in their religious beliefs (polytheistic), and ethnicity as everyone else. Oh, by the way, the Wailing Wall was not part of Solomon’s Temple, instead, it was part of a temple dedicated to the Roman emperor Hadrian, which was built after the Romans’ destroyed the second temple. This temple was actually the only temple, since there never was a first temple. Solomon’s temple was a myth, as was King David, as was King Solomon. The bible was written in two periods. The first was started under Persian influence (in the 5th century BCE) and the 2nd was under Ptolemaic Greek influence, from the third century BCE and continuing into Roman times in the first century BCE.

I enjoyed perusing the material at the website, though there is a good deal of site-clutter to overlook. If you bother to visit the site, and read any of the available material, you will find that the authors toss about insults with considerable glee directed at their opponents in this new religious war. Since my view of religion is hardly positive, I don’t have a problem with this. And, no, I don’t think that the minimalists (at least as a group) are anti-Semitic, as has been charged by some. It’s true that the minimalist’s view of Jewish history will hardly make most Jews happy, but if I were Jewish I would be thrilled to lay aside my ‘special’ status.

Overall, this theory, offering up a Judaism courtesy of Persia, has the virtue of making sense. Certainly, it makes better sense than the main alternative involving a desert god with an attitude problem.