bacht

Deuteronomy was the "second Law", a revision of the pre-existing Torah. We can speculate about Moses or whoever created the first four books of the Tanak, but there seems little doubt that polytheism in some form existed in early Israelite history.

From Genesis to Judges there were altars and shrines all over the place, like Mt Gerizim in Samaria. Moving the ark from place to place is not unlike the processions of idols in other countries. Josiah's scribes would have us believe that this was stopped by David, who allegedly centralized Yahweh worship in the capital, but this could just be royal propaganda.

Toto

The BBC series is now on youtube:

Bible's Secrets (BBC) Ep.2: Did God have a wife? (1/4)

Part 2

avi

In my opinion, this is something of a "chicken and egg" question, isn't it?

Let's replace the word "sex", with the proper term: copulation.

The idea is simple: one can achieve sexual gratification without copulation, but, in general, (i.e. apart from in vitro fertilization), one cannot achieve zygote formation absent ejaculation, and subsequent implantation of the fertilized embryo in the uterus.

Since JC was born "according to the law", we know that Mary possessed a placenta, and ergo, someone, or something, fertilized an ovum in Mary.

Mary bore a child, derived from a fetus, developed after penetration of the ovum by the sperm, with the consequent joining of two haploid cells, into a single diploid zygote.

That is what "according to the law" means.

Then, the question arises: WHO or WHAT, furnished the sperm?
When Doug or anyone else writes "sex with ...", they mean, "furnish the sperm"....


avi

John Kesler

As anticipated, for those of us who have read John Day (see my post above), Mark S. Smith, et al, there is not much, if anything, new presented. Still, this is a very good documentary introduction for the layman, and much more substantive than most U.S. "specials" about the Bible. The fact that Francesca is also easy on the eyes is an added bonus.

spin

This "second law" stuff of a century ago is strange then when Deuteronomy is now seen as holding older traditions than the other "Mosaic" books.

Was it the scribes of Josiah or those of John Hyrcanus, the Hasmonean, the king who actually centralized Yahweh worship in Jerusalem?

Doug Shaver

It was Paul who said he was born "according to the law." Now, could I trouble you to provide some evidence that the particular law to which he was referring implied what you say it implied?

avi

It was Paul who said he was born "according to the law." Now, could I trouble you to provide some evidence that the particular law to which he was referring implied what you say it implied?

1. Jewish law
2. Do you intend, Doug, to imply that the four gospels imply gestation out of wedlock, i.e. contrary to Jewish law?

avi

Doug Shaver

No, of course not. I think the gospels imply that Jesus' conception was miraculous. The last time I checked, Jewish law did not prohibit miracles.

avi

No, Doug, you are certainly correct, here.

But, then, how does one reconcile, "according to the law", with "miraculous conception". How does the latter correspond to "seed of David"?

In my view, it is much easier to understand the myth of JC, as a simple distortion of reality, i.e. a delusion. There were no miraculous conceptions.

If the conception had been "miraculous", why, then, bother invoking "seed of David", or "according to the law"?

avi

Iskander

Jesus and his family were well known to the Arabs. Miracles are not forbidden in the Quran.