Freethought & Rationalism Archive

stephan huller · 03-01-2013, 09:02 PM

Strangest of all, 5 Maccabees does not even know that Herod built the temple. Not even referenced at all.

maryhelena · 03-01-2013, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

And then I discovered the mother load. This is the best evidence yet that Jesus's appearance on earth was originally understood to have coincided with the Jubilee in 12 BCE. In the Slavonic Josephus tradition this very same account is preceded by the slaughter of the infants mentioned in Matthew:

Quote:

He established him [as ruler] over the governors of Syria and as senior over all [their] commanders [instructing them] to do nothing without his bidding. And Caesar (held] Herod in his affection foremost after Agnppa. And Agrippa [held him] in his affection after Caesar. And so wealth untold came in to him day by day [and] he distributed it for his good works. .." [ Lacuna ]

Having so spoken" [Herod] sent them off to the innkeepers, escorting them with guards who knew the Persian tongue to listen to what they said. When they were closeted with a Persian who was [there] they began to grieve, saying: "Our fathers and our children [manuscript A has marginal note 'How Herod released the Persian seers, the astronomers] have been excellent astrologers and, watching the stars, never lied. And we too. taught by them, have never distorted the message of the stars. What can this be? Deceit or error? The star image appeared to us signifying the birth of a king by whom the whole world would be preserved. And gazing on that star, we have been making our way for a year and a half to this city; and we have not found the son of [a] king. And the star is [now] hidden from us. We have indeed been deceived! But we shall send the gifts we had prepared For the infant to the king and ask him to let us (return] to our fatherland." And while they were thus speaking, the guards came to the king and told him everything. And he sent for the Persians. But while they were on their way, that remarkable star appeared to them [again]. And they were filled with joy. And they went by night to Herod with boldness. And he said to them [confidentially], away from everybody (else]: "Why do you sadden my heart and distress my soul by not speaking the truth? Why have you come here? " They told him: "King, we have no double-talk. But we are sons of Persia. Astronomy. which is our science and our craft, our ancestors took over from the Chajdaeans. As we gazed on the stars we have never been wrong. And a star [of] ineffable [beauty] appeared to us, separated from all [the other] stars. For it was not one of the seven planets, not one of the spearmen, not one of the swordsmen, not one of the archers, not one of the comets, but it was exceedingly brilliant like the sun, and it was joyful. And by observing it we have reached you. And while we were here, the star disappeared right up to the present [moment]. But now, as we were coming to you. it appeared [again]." And Herod said: "Can you show it to me?" And they said: "We reckon the whole world sees it." And they said: "We reckon the whole world sees it." And they stepped out on to an open porch and they showed him the star. And when Herod saw it. he marvelled greatly. And he worshipped God for he was a devout man. And he gave them an escort [composed of] his brother and [some] nobles, to go and see the one born. But as they were on their way the star disappeared once more, and they came back again. And the Persians begged him to let them go on [promising] that having sought out, they would come back and tell him. And they swore him an oath, believing that the star would tell them to return by that road. And they followed the star.

And after waiting a year for them they did not even come to [see] him. And he was furious and summoned the priests (who were his] advisers and asked if any of them understood [the meaning of] that star. And they answered him: "It is written: 'A star shall shine forth from Jacob and a man shall arise from Judah'. "And Daniel writes that a priest is to come, but we do not know who this is. We reckon that he will be born without a father.? Herod said: "How can we discover him? And Levi said: "Send throughout the whole land of Judaea: 'how many male infants have been born since the Persians saw the star right up to the present day,' kill them all, and that one will also be killed. And your kingdom will be secure for you and your sons and even for your great-grandsons?

And immediately he sent forth heralds throughout the whole land that all the male sex born from now and to the third year are to be honoured and to receive gold. Enquiring whether any had been born without a father, they were to pretend that [Herod] would adopt him as his son and make him king. And since they did not discover a single such, he gave orders to kill all 6 myriad and 3000 infants.

When all were weeping and wailing at the shedding of blood, the priests came and begged him to release the innocents; but he threatened them all the more to keep silent. And they fell prostrate and lay to the sixth hour at his feet. And the king's rage prevailed. Later, they rose and told him: "Listen to your servants, so that the Most High may favor you. It is written that the Anointed One is born in Bethlehem. Even if you have no mercy on your servants, kill those infants of Bethlehem and let the others go.? And he gave the order and they killed all the infants of Bethlehem.

In the »fifteenth« year of his reign he [re-]built the temple and renovated its walls, enclosing double the ground and spending wealth untold. embellishing it with beauties ineffable: The great monuments, the porticoes and fortress which stands towards the north side • all of them he gilded and called Antonia in honour of Antony. In his own court he built palaces and erected two buildings, beautiful and gilded. calling one of them Caesareum and the other Agrippeum. Not only did he give their names and memory to buildings but his munificence extended to all cities. [Slav. Jos., 1.20.4] http://books.google.com/books?id=gu5...ces%22&f=false

It is now impossible to argue that my thesis does not have merit. According to at least the editor of the text behind Slavonic Josephus, the gospel started in 12 BCE. End of story.

Slavonic Josephus has the birth narrative prior to or around the 15th year of Herod the Great.

That becomes, working from either 40 b.c. (when Herod was made King while in Rome) to around 25/24 b.c., or working from 37 b.c. (when Jerusalem fell to Herod the Great and he sent Antigonus to Marc Antony in Antioch, where he was hung on a cross, scourged and beheaded) to around 22/21 c.e.

Attempting to date the Jesus birth narratives throws up many possibilities. One way to get to 12 b.c. from the Slavonic Josephus birth narrative is to use the story in gLuke: Jesus being 12 years of age when his family visit Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles. Jesus stays behind in the Temple - and says: 'Didn't you know I had to be in my Father's house?"

The dating of the Slavonic Josephus birth narrative works with the crucifixion dating in the Acts of Pilate, ie the 7th year of Tiberius. This 7th year either being 19 or 21 c.e. (Tiberius being co-ruler from about 12 c.e.) In this scenario, Jesus, the anointed one of Slavonic Josephus, would be around 44 or 46 years old. (the Jews, in gJohn, saying the temple took 46 years to build...an ongoing process.....)

Yes, as I've been maintaining for some time - the Slavonic Josephus birth narrative story, sometime around the 15th year of Herod the Great, and it's wonder-doer crucifixion under Pilate, is the oldest gospel related story. Why the 15th year of Herod the Great? One reason could be that 25 b.c. is 490 years from 515 b.c. The year the temple rebuilding was completed.

Temple in Jerusalem

Quote:

According to the Book of Ezra, construction of the Second Temple was authorized by Cyrus the Great and began in 538 BCE, after the fall of the Babylonian Empire the year before. It was completed 23 years later, on the third day of Adar, in the sixth year of the reign of Darius the Great (12 March 515 BCE),dedicated by the Jewish governor Zerubbabel.

The gospel JC story is one thing. Hasmonean and Jewish history something else. The Jewish King executed in the time of Herod the Great, executed via Roman hands - is Antigonus. That Jewish history is the backdrop to the gospel crucifixion story. A gospel story that has used that history for it's own prophetic interpretations. A gospel story that could not 'sell' without a foothold in historical reality. Why the pseudo-historical JC story if the history was known? One obvious reason is Roman occupation. Another would be the very Jewish idea that anyone hung on a tree/cross is accursed. (Yes, christian writers were able to turn that around - but only by developing a theology/philosophy of a heavenly man and not a flesh and blood man.....)

Why the later attempts to move away from the Slavonic Josephus storyline?
That storyline is close to it's historical source. By the time gLuke is written and 6/7 c.e. and the 15th year of Tiberius enter the picture - it would appear that Luke is closing the door to past Hasmonean/Jewish history. But appearances can be deceptive...That 15th year of Tiberious can be stretched back 70 years to around 40 b.c. and 6/7 c.e. stretches back 70 years to around 63 b.c. Both b.c. dates related to Antigonus and Hasmonean/Jewish history. ie Luke's timetable is a prophetic timetable - his historical reconstructions, his pseudo-history, his prophetic history, is placed within 70 year periods.

Quote:

Slavonic Josephus: "....they urged him that he should enter the city and cut down the Roman soldiers and Pilate and rule over us".

Quote:

gLuke: "but we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel".

Yes, of course, more to the gospel story than it's crucifixion story - a crucifixion story that reflects the Roman execution of a Hasmonean King and High Priest of the Jews. After all, history stops for no man - time moves on.....

stephan huller · 03-01-2013, 09:38 PM

Herod was not of Ashkelon but the rabbinic tradition (= Moses ha-Kohen) got the idea from Yosippon. Where did the idea come from? Justin (Dialogue 52) says Herod was from Ashkelon - "For though you affirm that Herod, after whose[reign] He suffered, was an Ashkelonite, nevertheless you admit that there was a high priest in your nation; so that you then had one who presented offerings according to the law of Moses, and observed the other legal ceremonies." Julius Africanus is said by Eusebius to have reported that Herod's father was born in Ashkelon - "As Josephus relates, he was an Idumean on his father's side and an Arabian on his mother's. But Africanus, who was also no common writer, says that they who were more accurately informed about him report that he was a son of Antipater, and that the latter was the son of a certain Herod of Ascalon, one of the so-called servants of the temple of Apollo." (HE 1.6). But how did these details get into the Yosippon?

stephan huller · 03-01-2013, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Slavonic Josephus has the birth narrative prior to or around the 15th year of Herod the Great.

It is obvious that the birth narrative was inserted within a pre-existent narrative which read:

Quote:

But from all these things the king considered most important that above all he was loved, by Caesar below Agrippa only, by Agrippa below Caesar only. And so in the fifteenth year of his reign, that he should respond to his blessed condition and favor, having been lifted up by such a great success of favorable things, he strained for goodness and so that he might demonstrate himself grateful to the heavenly gods for the favors flowing to him without limit, he adorned the temple, and he surrounded with a wall all that circuit of space about the temple and the space having been doubled he enclosed it at great expense of building and with exquisite beauty.

One can argue that the 'he' in the passage could be either individual (Augustus or Herod). But the key is that >> << symbol in Leeming's translation. There were also sorts of divergent readings - p xxi "here other Slavonic manuscripts have divergent reading(s)." I don't have access to all the manuscripts but it is generally acknowledged the temple was built 12 BCE.

stephan huller · 03-01-2013, 10:06 PM

On the impossibility of the date "fifteenth year of Herod" http://books.google.com/books?id=ktU...temple&f=false

stephan huller · 03-01-2013, 11:26 PM

The argument which has convinced most people as to the absolute dating of the temple:

Quote:

As for the beginning of the work on the Temple Mount reconstruction, we have used the date of 23/22, and supposed that the construction of the Temple itself began in 20/19 bce (Preface and section 1.2 above). As noted, the date for the dedication of the Temple building is given by some scholars as 18 bce. Assuming a synchronism of the dedication with Herod's annual coronation festival, we place this late in that year. After 18 bce, construction work probably continued only in the precinct surrounding the Temple (the largest temenos in the ancient world), in which—Josephus reported (Ant. xv.420)—Herod took a personal interest. That precinct was completed by 12 bce, as is made clear by the following: when, in 13 bce, Herod returned from his journey to Ionia and Pontus, he called an assembly (in which, among other things, he remitted a quarter of the past year's taxes). Josephus only noted that this occurred “in Jerusalem” (Ant. xvi.62). In the following year, however, Herod assembled the people in the Temple to speak to them (Ant. xvi.132). This anecdote from 12 bce could only refer to the Temple precinct. http://books.google.com/books?id=mNN...red%22&f=false

maryhelena · 03-01-2013, 11:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Quote:

Slavonic Josephus has the birth narrative prior to or around the 15th year of Herod the Great.

It is obvious that the birth narrative was inserted within a pre-existent narrative which read:

Quote:

But from all these things the king considered most important that above all he was loved, by Caesar below Agrippa only, by Agrippa below Caesar only. And so in the fifteenth year of his reign, that he should respond to his blessed condition and favor, having been lifted up by such a great success of favorable things, he strained for goodness and so that he might demonstrate himself grateful to the heavenly gods for the favors flowing to him without limit, he adorned the temple, and he surrounded with a wall all that circuit of space about the temple and the space having been doubled he enclosed it at great expense of building and with exquisite beauty.

One can argue that the 'he' in the passage could be either individual (Augustus or Herod). But the key is that >> << symbol in Leeming's translation. There were also sorts of divergent readings - p xxi "here other Slavonic manuscripts have divergent reading(s)." I don't have access to all the manuscripts but it is generally acknowledged the temple was built 12 BCE.

The problem here is not the year in which the temple building started but the year in which it was completed - at least the temple itself. Josephus gives the 15th and the 18th year of the rule of Herod the Great for the start of building.

War: Book 1, ch.21

Quote:

ACCORDINGLY, in the fifteenth year of his reign, Herod rebuilt the temple,

Ant: 15: ch.11

Quote:

AND now Herod, in the eighteenth year of his reign, and after the acts already mentioned, undertook a very great work, that is, to build of himself the temple of God,..............But the temple itself was built by the priests in a year and six months;

1) these two dates, the 15th and the 18th year of Herod the Great can be viewed as counting either from 40 b.c. (when Herod was made King while in Rome) or from 37 b.c. when Herod took Jerusalem.

2) the idea that the massive temple rebuilding only took 18 months to complete - the temple itself - is illogical.

3) using the 40 b.c. date and the 18th year of HG gets one to around 22 b.c. Using the 37 b.c. date and the 15th year of HG also gets one to around 22 b.c. for the start of Herod's temple building.

4) the 1 year and 6 months Josephus story, being illogical, needs to be viewed as something other than a linear timeline. For example: it could be interpreted not as 1 and a half years - but as something like a 1 and a half weeks of years. ie. around 10 years. 10 years from 22 b.c. and one is at 12 b.c. for the completion of the initial temple rebuilding program.

5) keeping in mind that the temple building under Darius, a temple building that had earlier been started and then stopped, took from his 2nd year to his 6th year to complete. Thus, the Josephan 1 year and 6 months story is not a realistic time-frame for the building of Herod's temple.

stephan huller · 03-02-2013, 12:05 AM

Reference 1 (13 BCE):

but the king determined to sail from Samos to his own country; and when he had taken his leave of Agrippa, he pursued his voyage, and landed at Cesarea in a few days' time, as having favorable winds; from whence he went to Jerusalem, and there gathered all the people together to an assembly, not a few being there out of the country also. So he came to them, and gave them a particular account of all his journey, and of the affairs of all the Jews in Asia, how by his means they would live without injurious treatment for the time to come. He also told them of the entire good fortune he had met with and how he had administered the government, and had not neglected any thing which was for their advantage; and as he was very joyful, he now remitted to them the fourth part of their taxes for the last year. Accordingly, they were so pleased with his favor and speech to them, that they went their ways with great gladness, and wished the king all manner of happiness.[Ant 16.2.4]

Reference 2 (12 BCE):

They also made one another such presents as it became kings to make, From thence Herod came to Judea and to the temple, where he made a speech to the people concerning what had been done in this his journey. He also discoursed to them about Caesar's kindness to him, and about as many of the particulars he had done as he thought it for his advantage other people should be acquainted with. [Ant 16.4.6]

stephan huller · 03-02-2013, 12:29 AM

It is also worth noting that the narrative which tells the story of Herod's killing of his own firstborn - an account almost universally acknowledged to be at the core of the slaughter of the gospel's slaughter of the firstborn narrative - begins immediately following the last words. Indeed if we read carefully we will see in 13 BCE again (= 49th year) we see the theme of redemption and release associated with the sabbatical cycle:

Quote:

He also told them of the entire good fortune he had met with and how he had administered the government, and had not neglected any thing which was for their advantage; and as he was very joyful, he now remitted to them the fourth part of their taxes for the last year.

Between the account of his visit to the Jerusalem but not the temple in 13 BCE and his visit to the newly completed temple in 12 BCE there is the beginning of the account of the eventual slaughter of his firstborn:

Quote:

BUT now the affairs in Herod's family were in more and more disorder, and became more severe upon him, by the hatred of Salome to the young men [Alexander and Aristobulus], which descended as it were by inheritance [from their mother Mariamne]; and as she had fully succeeded against their mother, so she proceeded to that degree of madness and insolence, as to endeavor that none of her posterity might be left alive, who might have it in their power to revenge her death. The young men had also somewhat of a bold and uneasy disposition towards their father occasioned by the remembrance of what their mother had unjustly suffered, and by their own affectation of dominion. The old grudge was also renewed; and they east reproaches on Salome and Pheroras, who requited the young men with malicious designs, and actually laid treacherous snares for them. Now as for this hatred, it was equal on both sides, but the manner of exerting that hatred was different; for as for the young men, they were rash, reproaching and affronting the others openly, and were inexperienced enough to think it the most generous to declare their minds in that undaunted manner; but the others did not take that method, but made use of calumnies after a subtle and a spiteful manner, still provoking the young men, and imagining that their boldness might in time turn to the offering violence to their father; for inasmuch as they were not ashamed of the pretended crimes of their mother, nor thought she suffered justly, these supposed that might at length exceed all bounds, and induce them to think they ought to be avenged on their father, though it were by despatching him with their own hands.

The beginning of the end of his firstborn consumes the entire section in between the two accounts. It spawned the creation of the firstborn slaughter story in Matthew.

stephan huller · 03-02-2013, 12:53 AM

Fascinating list of errors in Josephus

http://www.johnthebaptist.us/jbw_eng...f_josephus.pdf

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

03-01-2013, 09:02 PM	#81
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Strangest of all, 5 Maccabees does not even know that Herod built the temple. Not even referenced at all.

03-01-2013, 09:38 PM	#83
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Herod was not of Ashkelon but the rabbinic tradition (= Moses ha-Kohen) got the idea from Yosippon. Where did the idea come from? Justin (Dialogue 52) says Herod was from Ashkelon - "For though you affirm that Herod, after whose[reign] He suffered, was an Ashkelonite, nevertheless you admit that there was a high priest in your nation; so that you then had one who presented offerings according to the law of Moses, and observed the other legal ceremonies." Julius Africanus is said by Eusebius to have reported that Herod's father was born in Ashkelon - "As Josephus relates, he was an Idumean on his father's side and an Arabian on his mother's. But Africanus, who was also no common writer, says that they who were more accurately informed about him report that he was a son of Antipater, and that the latter was the son of a certain Herod of Ascalon, one of the so-called servants of the temple of Apollo." (HE 1.6). But how did these details get into the Yosippon?

03-01-2013, 10:06 PM	#85
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	On the impossibility of the date "fifteenth year of Herod" http://books.google.com/books?id=ktU...temple&f=false

03-02-2013, 12:05 AM	#88
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Reference 1 (13 BCE): but the king determined to sail from Samos to his own country; and when he had taken his leave of Agrippa, he pursued his voyage, and landed at Cesarea in a few days' time, as having favorable winds; from whence he went to Jerusalem, and there gathered all the people together to an assembly, not a few being there out of the country also. So he came to them, and gave them a particular account of all his journey, and of the affairs of all the Jews in Asia, how by his means they would live without injurious treatment for the time to come. He also told them of the entire good fortune he had met with and how he had administered the government, and had not neglected any thing which was for their advantage; and as he was very joyful, he now remitted to them the fourth part of their taxes for the last year. Accordingly, they were so pleased with his favor and speech to them, that they went their ways with great gladness, and wished the king all manner of happiness.[Ant 16.2.4] Reference 2 (12 BCE): They also made one another such presents as it became kings to make, From thence Herod came to Judea and to the temple, where he made a speech to the people concerning what had been done in this his journey. He also discoursed to them about Caesar's kindness to him, and about as many of the particulars he had done as he thought it for his advantage other people should be acquainted with. [Ant 16.4.6]

03-02-2013, 12:53 AM	#90
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Fascinating list of errors in Josephus http://www.johnthebaptist.us/jbw_eng...f_josephus.pdf

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.