Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Sheshbazzar · 02-14-2013, 09:30 PM

The number of threads I have personally opened in my ten years of participation on this Forum may still be counted on the fingers of one hand.
I therefore think it not unreasonable that I be permitted to open one more, in response to a request I posed and to whose answer I was not permitted to reply.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

But that doesn't in any way change the fact that those therapeutae referred to by Philo in DVC were Jewish for the obvious reasons I've already stated--

Philo indicates that they are in fact Jewish

Philo says not one single word about these 'theraputae' being 'Jewish'.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

...and accept very Jewish notions of Philo's god, the prophets, the escape from Egypt across the Red Sea, Moses and Miriam, singing "hymns of thanksgiving to God the Saviour, Moses the prophet leading the men, and Miriam the prophetess leading the women" (DVC 87), "being citizens of heaven and of the world, and very acceptable to the Father and Creator of the universe because of their virtue" (90).

My congregation also accepts, holds, and teaches all of these things;
The observing the Seventh Day SABBATH rest, the keeping all of the Scripturally commanded Annual Festivals, High SABBATHS, and Fasts of The Torah.
Also diligently teaching the observing of the kosher food laws, as well as the many other injunctions of THE LAW of YHWH,
-yet we are not 'Jewish', nor are we any 'christians'.

Many gentiles who read The Holy Scriptures endeavored to -KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS-, along with the 'Jewish' people, to the extent of their abilities, pleading the mercy of Ha'Shem in whatever matter beyond their control, or knowledge, in which they might fall short of perfection, Not just the Jews.

The Catholic church had a long time problem with these gentile worshipers ('theraputae') that continued to KEEP THE LAWS and to observe THE HOLY SABBATHS and Festivals that were commanded in their Bibles, along with those known as the 'Jews'

Quote:

First Sunday Law enacted by Emperor Constantine -
March, 321 A.D.

'On the venerable Day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed. In the country, however, persons engaged in agriculture may freely and lawfully continue their pursuits; because it often happens that another day is not so suitable for grain-sowing or for vine-planting; lest by neglecting the proper moment for such operations the bounty of heaven should be lost.'
(Given the 7th day of March, Crispus and Constantine being consuls each of them for the second time [A.D. 321].)

Quote:

Around 364 AD, the Roman Catholic Church outlawed resting on THE SABBATH in the Council of Laodicea when they decreed 59 Canon laws. Here is the final law.

Canon XXIX:

“Christians must not judaize by resting on THE SABBATH, but must work on that day,
rather honouring the Lord’s Day; and, if they can, resting then as 'Christians'.
But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ.”

While resting on THE SABBATH was outlawed in favour of resting on Sunday as per Constantine’s Sunday Law, Cannon law 16 was also issued by the Bishops in the Council of Laodicea (A.D. 363-364) that confirms that Christians were in fact still worshiping on THE SABBATH.

The change of THE SABBATH to Sunday was totally completed by the seventh century as the Popes consolidating their enormous power persecuted all who resisted their innovations.
Those found keeping the Seventh day SABBATH were tortured and burnt at the stake.

Quote:

Church historian Socrates Scholasticus (5th century) observed this also and wrote:
“For although almost all churches throughout the world celebrate the sacred mysteries [of the Lord's Supper] on THE SABBATH of every week, yet the Christians of Alexandria and at Rome, on account of some ancient tradition, have ceased to do this.”
– Socrates Scholasticus, Ecclesiastical History, Book 5, ch. 22.

"If as many suppose, Christians as a whole observed Sunday in place of the "Jewish" SABBATH from resurrection Sunday forward, then why was it necessary for the church to enact ecclesiastical laws to enforce Sunday worship as a day of rest?"

__Clear up into the 7th century and beyond. Inforcing their Popery man made Decrees with terror, torture, and murder.

Now certainly the objection will be raised, this is all about 'Christians'.

To this I will point out, just like many of the GENTILES refused and resisted onto death the change in THE Scriptural SABBATH DAY of rest, there were also many SABBATH keeping -GENTILES- who resisted having the invented catholic name of 'Christian' stuffed down their throats, and would chose rather to die being called 'Judaizers' than bending their knees to vile Papal Decrees, threats, and the tortures and murder carried out by the minions of that succession of despotic and murderously evil Roman Pope's.

Just because some GENTILES observe all of the the Scripturally mandated SABBATHS and SCRIPTURALLY ordained Festivals -along with the Jewish people, that does not make them 'Jewish'.

Even in the Law of Moses, the ger toshavim 'stranger of the gate' ('stranger within thy gates') had NO requirement to be circumcised, to be able love the Elohim of Israel, to thank Him for life's blessings, and to look forward to the fulfillment of His Promises, and to keep THE SABBATHS of YHWH - and praise His Holy Name, -along with- his chosen people Israel.

It was a mixed multitude that was 'passed over' and was delivered into The Promised Land. The Jew and the Gentile together, So it was, and so it is that the Scriptures Promise to both Jew and GENTILE alike that call upon His Holy Name.

Thus there is nothing that entails that the 'theraputae' of old Alexandria, -or of any other place- ever had to be exclusively 'Jewish'.

If Philo knew the Law and the Promises, he would have known what a 'stranger within the gates' was, and of The Law's open accommodation of all such persons.

And if he were a learned Jew indeed, in subjection to The Laws of Moses, he would certainly have accepted the presence of any such Gentiles among the 'theraputae' -worshipers.

Why, with all conscious deliberation, Philo never once used the word 'Jew' or 'Jewish' when writing of these theraputae 'worshipers'.

outhouse · 02-14-2013, 09:43 PM

What is Jewish?

Well that is a excellent question and understudied.

When is the real question. Judaism has evolved into its current state.

I found pre fall of the temple Judaism to be very interesting because of how diverse and multicultural it had become with Hellenization.

Its diversity is why we have Christians.

Remember, the names we have for different early sects really depends on "who" is using what term.

There is a thin line during these hellenistic times between Proselytes and Jewish, Ive found in the Jewsih encylopedia that Hellenism was accepted with open arms. The line between Proselyte and Jew was very vague depending on geographic location.

Im sure real some Israelite Jewish elite circles looked down on Hellenistic Proselytes, where others not only were the norm, they ran the new governement and temple.

Wide diversity doesnt even begin to explain what was going on then.

stephan huller · 02-14-2013, 09:43 PM

The Samaritans did not traditionally regard themselves as a race separated from their southern brothers. The Jerusalem altar was an abomination, one which the Samaritans were only too happy to see demolished. Yet at the same time, it is was traditional to assume that if the various sectarians just abandoned their heretical practices and came to the holy mountain of Gerizim as commanded by God himself in the Ten Commandments they would be restored to members in good standing.

The Samaritans referred to themselves Bnei Israel (Sons of Israel). The term 'Jew' and 'Judaism' is inherently problematic.

Will Wiley · 02-14-2013, 09:52 PM

Sometimes a race, sometimes a religion.

stephan huller · 02-14-2013, 10:06 PM

A better question is what does the name Judah (Yehudah) mean. Judah does not come from the root YOD-DALET-HE either. Historically, the root is HE-VAV-DALET. It must be admitted that popular etymology could have connected it with the root YOD-DALET-HE, and it must also be conceded that a speaker of Hebrew in the first c. CE. would have FELT it as having a connection with this root. But the verb is never used in the Qal. It is always in the Hif’il when it means to thank or acknowledge. These forms are not similar enough to Yehudah to make a Hebrew-speaker feel a compelling connection even if historical considerations are left out. That means past tense hodah, future tense yodeh, and participle modeh. The name Yehudah is too far from the hif’il participle for the feeling of connection to be strong. The hitpa’el is used to express the concept of admitting or acknowledging something outside but of personal concern. This means past tense hitvaddah, future tense yitvaddeh, participle mitvaddeh, but these forms aren’t strongly enough connected either. No forms other than the Hif’il and Hitpa’el are used.

Clement claims the name means 'power'. I can't see the connection. Even Philo sees the name means 'confession':

Quote:

Accordingly Judah is the symbol of a man who makes this confession "in respect of whom Leah ceased from child-Bearing."{17}{#ge 29:35.} But Issachar is the symbol of the man who does good actions, "For he put Forth{18}{#ge 49:15.} his shoulder to labour and became a man tilling the earth." With respect to whom Moses says, hire is in his soul after he has been sown and planted, so that his labour is not imperfect, but is rather crowned and honoured with a reward by God. (81) And that he is making mention of these things, he shows when speaking on other subjects; when describing the garment, which reached to the feet he says, "And thou shalt weave in it sets of stones in four rows. The row of stones shall be the sardine stone, the topaz, and the emerald are the first row." Reuben, Simeon, and Levi are here meant. "And the second row," he says, "are the carbuncle and the Sapphire."{19}{#ex 28:17.} And the sapphire is the same as the green stone. And in the carbuncle was inscribed the name of Judah, for he was the fourth son: and in the sapphire the name of Issachar. (82) Why then as he had called the sapphire the green stone, did he not also speak of the red stone? Because Judah, as the type of a disposition inclined to confession, is a being immaterial and incorporeal. For the very name of confession (exomologeæseoæs) shows that it is a thing external to (ektos) himself. For when the mind is beside itself, and bears itself upward to God, as the laughter of Isaac did, then it makes a confession to him who alone has a real being. But as long as it considers itself as the cause of something, it is a long way from yielding to God, and confession to him. For this very act of confessing ought to be considered as being the work not of the soul, but of God who teaches it this feeling of gratitude. Accordingly Judah, who practises confession, is an immaterial being. (Allegorical Interpretation 1)

Quote:

Or the two stones are, perhaps, Judah and Issachar, representing, the one, thankfulness, the other, noble deeds. So in the High-priestly robes, the ruby must, from its position, have borne the name of Judah, and the sapphire that of Issachar. "Stone" is not added after "ruby," because praise and thanksgiving lift a man out of himself and all that is of earth. Red befits Judah, green Issachar. (ibid)

Quote:

on this account she ceased to bring forth, after she had borne Judah, the emblem of the disposition of confessing--(96) and now she begins to form the mortal race--now the mortal race subsists by imbibing; for, like a foundation, the sense of taste is the cause of the duration of animals; but the name Billah, being interpreted, means imbibing. From her was born Dan, which name being interpreted means judgment, for this kind distinguishes between the separates immortal from mortal things, therefore he prays that he may become a workman of temperance. But he will not pray for Judah, for Judah already has the capacity of praying to and pleasing God (Allegorical Interpretation 2)

Quote:

as an especial portion beyond the rest of his brethren, meaning thereby the bodily things which are the objects of the outward senses, since he had gone through labour in respect of them; but to Judah the confessor he gave not presents but praise, and hymns and divine songs, in which he should be celebrated by his brethren (Allegorical Interpretation 3)

Quote:

and his name was called Judah, which, being interpreted, is "confession to the Lord," Therefore Judas, the mind which blesses God, and which is without ceasing, devoted to pouring forth hymns of praise and gratitude to him, is himself in truth "the holy and praiseworthy Fruit,"{29}{#le 19:24.} being produced not by the trees of the earth but by a rational and virtuous nature. In reference to which, the nature which brought him forth is said to have desisted from bringing forth, since she knew not which way to turn, when she had come to the limit of perfection; for of all successful actions which are brought forth, the best and most perfect production is a hymn to the Father of the universe; (136) and the fifth son is in no respect different from the enjoyment of the trees planted in the fifth year; for the tiller of the earth after a fashion takes his reward from the trees in the fifth year, and he takes the offspring of the soul, Issachar, who was called the "reward," and very naturally, being brought forth after the grateful Judah; for to a grateful person gratitude is a most sufficient reward. (On Noah the Planter)

Quote:

for she found, I conceive, all her generative power dry and barren, after she had brought forth Judah, that is to say, "confession," the perfect fruit (Dreams are Sent from God)

outhouse · 02-14-2013, 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will Wiley

Sometimes a race, sometimes a religion.

You forgot "place" as well.

stephan huller · 02-14-2013, 11:21 PM

Romans 2:29 seems to use the etymology of the name to define what a Jew is:

Quote:

No, a man is a Jew (Ioudaios) if he is one inwardly ... such a man's praise (epainos) is not from men, but from God.

stephan huller · 02-14-2013, 11:45 PM

Philo's identification of the name Judas with the LXX terms 'exomologeisthai' and 'exomologesis', (from the verb exomologeo) reinforces that the name was applied to mean one who makes public admission, or 'confessor.' Thus one can make a strong case that the original meaning of 'Jew' or 'Jewish' was 'he who openly confesses God.' In other words, being a Jew was tied to praising God. A related Aramaic word means 'monotheism.'

stephan huller · 02-14-2013, 11:52 PM

Even the Blessing of Judah the name is so defined - “Hear, O Lord, the voice of Judah. Thou wilt bring him to his people” (Deut 33.7) The Samaritan Asatir similarly defines the Jews as those who confess God and claim that once their temple was established they had no right to the name any longer:

Quote:

Sectarianism is started up within the Congregation, a system of "apostasy" and wickedness. The Acropolis of Benjamin will be built amongst their people. Those of the house of Judah, by flouting of the commandments, will nullify the verse "Hear O Lord, the voice of Judah."

stephan huller · 02-14-2013, 11:57 PM

The first commandment reinforces the importance of confessing God and every berakhah, blessing, begins with the traditional formula praising God as ruler of the universe. So it is not surprising that 'being Jewish' or a Jew is universally understood to start with the confession of the true God. It is also what distinguishes Jews from non-Jews.

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

02-14-2013, 09:43 PM	#2
outhouse Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Auburn ca Posts: 4,269	What is Jewish? Well that is a excellent question and understudied. When is the real question. Judaism has evolved into its current state. I found pre fall of the temple Judaism to be very interesting because of how diverse and multicultural it had become with Hellenization. Its diversity is why we have Christians. Remember, the names we have for different early sects really depends on "who" is using what term. There is a thin line during these hellenistic times between Proselytes and Jewish, Ive found in the Jewsih encylopedia that Hellenism was accepted with open arms. The line between Proselyte and Jew was very vague depending on geographic location. Im sure real some Israelite Jewish elite circles looked down on Hellenistic Proselytes, where others not only were the norm, they ran the new governement and temple. Wide diversity doesnt even begin to explain what was going on then.

02-14-2013, 09:43 PM	#3
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	The Samaritans did not traditionally regard themselves as a race separated from their southern brothers. The Jerusalem altar was an abomination, one which the Samaritans were only too happy to see demolished. Yet at the same time, it is was traditional to assume that if the various sectarians just abandoned their heretical practices and came to the holy mountain of Gerizim as commanded by God himself in the Ten Commandments they would be restored to members in good standing. The Samaritans referred to themselves Bnei Israel (Sons of Israel). The term 'Jew' and 'Judaism' is inherently problematic.

02-14-2013, 09:52 PM	#4
Will Wiley Senior Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Wanganui Posts: 697	Sometimes a race, sometimes a religion.

02-14-2013, 11:45 PM	#8
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Philo's identification of the name Judas with the LXX terms 'exomologeisthai' and 'exomologesis', (from the verb exomologeo) reinforces that the name was applied to mean one who makes public admission, or 'confessor.' Thus one can make a strong case that the original meaning of 'Jew' or 'Jewish' was 'he who openly confesses God.' In other words, being a Jew was tied to praising God. A related Aramaic word means 'monotheism.'

02-14-2013, 11:57 PM	#10
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	The first commandment reinforces the importance of confessing God and every berakhah, blessing, begins with the traditional formula praising God as ruler of the universe. So it is not surprising that 'being Jewish' or a Jew is universally understood to start with the confession of the true God. It is also what distinguishes Jews from non-Jews.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.