forty2oz

Are there any history buffs around that could speculate as to the percentage of the population that was actually literate around the time the original scriptures of the bible were scribed?

The reasoning behind the question is this - if the vast majority of the populus couldn't read when the stories assimilated into what we now refer to as the bible were composed, why did god choose such a lousy medium of communication?

I could be way off base here because history is not one of my strong subjects. I have heard, however, that in the not so distant past reading and writing was a discipline enjoyed only by a priviledged few. This forces me to raise an eyebrow at god's selected medium of divine communication with the general population.

Thanks in advance for your input.

Toto

The forum does not assume that the scriptures were any particular god's method of communicating with people.

The vast majority of the people could not read, but enough of them could. As long as a few priests could read the holy scriptures to the assembled masses, the entire society can have access to the writings.

Chili

He didn't really but God inspired some people to write down what he normally communicates to the heart of man and that would only be at some time during their life and not necessarilty to every person. So really, the written word is a reproduction of true story by someone who felt inspired to tell us about it. Kind of like: I'll show you mine if you show me your interactive participation in the living word.

IOW, it is not a flat-earth-two-by-four kind of language.

Oops, did I just call bible students 'flat earthers'?

forty2oz

Okay, nevermind.

Amaleq13

You might want to read through this earlier thread:

literacy rates in the classical periods of the empire

forty2oz

Good stuff - thank you.

mountainman

There are likely to be a variety of answers
due the range of the chronolgies most often
put forward as hypothetical timetables for the
original scribing of the new testament, and the
Hebrew bible. These two sections of the "bible"
have separate histories.

Perhaps the telling statistic is the onset of the
dark ages and almost total illiteracy as those in power
of the new and strange "christian scriptures"
commenced a systematic destruction of the
patristic literature, and of the great libraries
which defined the literacy of the empire up
until the fourth century.

Additionally, more directly related to your question,
it is known that the Oath signed by the attendees
summoned to Nicaea by Constantine indicated that
slavery was prevalent amongst "christians" of
that time. The Roman empire had a number of
"classes" over their "slaves": the "freed slaves"
and the plebian, the landholder - equestrian class
and the patrician-senatorial-administrative upper
class. Literacy levels varied across the classes.






Best wishes,



Pete Brown

mountainman

A more thorough answer to your question would
need to specify whether your after new testament
or Hebrew bible history. The following applies to
the NT history:

1) Prior to the first century BCE, the Greek civilisation
flourished alongside the ancient Egyptian and Hebrew.
When Julius Caesar bribed his way to the position of
Pontifex Maximus and the dictatorship of the Roman
Empire began its pillage of the regions, the dominant
ancient languange was Greek.

2) The anwer to your question needs to examine both
literacy in Greek and in Latin, for a start. And the
relationship between the two langauages. We are
reasonably sure that the inventors of the NT texts
would have us believe that they were originally
written in the "ancient language of the empire",
ie: the Greek.

3) There is a period of revival during the centuries
of antiquity in question called "The Second Sophistic".
It indicated that literacy was not on the decline.
Notably, the author who first coined the phrase
"the second sophistic", Philostratus, wrote a biography
of the 1st century author, sage and philosopher
Apollonius of Tyana.

4) The great libraries of the empire were reported
to contain vast amounts of ancient texts. In the
sphere of learning, IMO, a collegiate structure
predominated, which was above all things tolerant.
It was not until the intolerance of christianity
emerged, in the fourth century, that these libraries
and their learning were destroyed and burnt, the
temples destroyed, and the priests and philosophers
who had assumed custodianship of these ancient
roles, were executed and persecuted.

The malevolent and despotic orders came from
the top down, and commenced with Constantine,
and with effect from the "Council" of Antioch, which
followed his final military supremacy in the more
ancient and rich and affluent eastern empire, and
preluded the "council" of Nicaea.

I think it is imperative to not only gauge the effects of the
preservation of literacy, but also the history of
its destruction. For both are part of the process.

As a final comment, I have recently been stumbling
around amidst the translations of fragments of papyrii
from these centuries which seem to indicate
that the literacy of the populace was assisted by a collegiate
system of learning which supported lassistance with egal
representation when required, and that women in some
instances had just as highly developed level of literacy
as did the men, and would represent themselves in
the written records.

PhilosopherJay

Hi forty2oz,

This is an interesting point. We may recall that God previously chose stone tablets to get his message across. Here he chooses certain literary styles written on papyrus: action-adventure stories (Gospels and Acts), bickering/fatherly advice letters, and a rousing prophetic-apocalyptic tale, to get his message across. Obviously, God was interested in making his message popular as he chose these popular genres to communicate in, as opposed to less popular intellectual-biased genres such as philosophical treatises or histories.

We should consider that God may once again consider similarly popular genres in the postmodern age to get his message across to a similarly wide audience. These include movies starring Eddie Murphy, CSI spinoffs, porn and youtube videos.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

Joan of Bark

Why God doesn't just communicate directly to our brains is a mystery the Bible-thumpers will never be able to answer.