by Tiresias 74 Replies latest watchtower bible
Hello Kalk,
Thank you! Your points are well-taken.
For me, the content of the Revelation is like the difference between a Greek temple and a Jewish temple with its dimensions of worship.
GREEK TEMPLE
JEWISH TEMPLE
JEWISH HIGH PRIEST
MOLTEN SEA
All the above symbols abound in the Book of Revelation, which would be odd if the temple, the very navel of the Jewish nation, had been destroyed.
T
Sttirred: The time period you mention is not part of the inspired writings.
Kaik: The discussion is not about whether or not the Bible is "inspired". In this discussion it is assumed that it is. In other words: GIVEN: Rev is inspired, then what does the prophecy mentioned in verse x mean?.
Here is how some people view it's prophetic aspect: They see the Bible in its many parts as pieces of a puzzle. When you put all the pieces together, you solve the puzzle, all the pieces fit together completely, no mssing pieces, no left over pieces and you see the whole picture, Inspired can be viewed as: you are not wasting your time examining nonsense, but this is off topic.
(I wish there was a spell checker)
Fisherman, I do not debate if Revelation and any part of the Bible is inspired in this thread. I only pointed out as did others that Revelation speaks on Rome not Jerusalem. And I agree with it, and there are tons of scholary topic on it including the best researchers like Pagels from Princeton University. I studied as well in Europe 20+ years ago. Generally, the identification of Revelation with Jewish Jerusalem of the 1st century is much modern invention, which often was rooted in deep antisemitism that attempts to prove that ancient Judaism was rejected thus punished by God, versus Christianity as a choosen new religion. This also reason why poster like designs said that ideas like this are partially anti-semitic. From point of authror of Revelation who was Jew (probably) and Christian as was the case in the 1st century, it would not make a sense to be concerned anymore with Jewish faith. He did not write on Jewish religion or its religious structure, but various churches that spread out after Pauls' ministry. Jerusalem was not free city before 70AD and certainly not afterward. It did not rule even over its own population, it was a part of much larger state. Any case, for almost 2000 years Christians tries to interpret Revelation with poor result.
Tiresias, welcome. Jews do not have centralized religion and they have not for 2500 years. There is no universal acceptance on all ideas from OT among them. There were various rabbinic schools that often had contradicting ideas. The ancient Jewish temple was idealized as long lost glorious past that would be restored by Messiah. Judaism survived the destruction of temple, but the events of 70-113-135 transformed it. Many contemporary religious figures of Judaism were actually worried of assimiliation into much sophisticated Greco-Roman culture. This was biggest threat to the national identity which was by the events of Jewish revolts reaffirmed.
KiKe: When you say authorship, if you mean that you challenge the date that most authorities accept that the book was written, ok, I suppose that everything is debatable and anyone can believe what they want, but if you mean that you also challenge that John is the author of the book and concurrently accept that the book is inspired as you purport to interpret the contained prophecies, then that is a very interesting position.
Fisherman, there is a huge doubt that Apostle John is the same person as John of Patmos. This is not my invention, this was already debated during Late Antiquity and later under German's Reformation onward. Even there is not agreement when Revelation was written. I do not have opinion on it, because some points of the debate a valid for various interpretations. There are individuals who claim that it was written before 70AD, others who put it between 86-110AD and some who say that it was written in two parts, one before 70 and one much later. Anyone is free to choose. However, for 1700 years there was always feeling that doubt the inspiration and authorship of it. If people who lived 100 years after the death of the author doubted authenticity like Dionysius of Alexandria (https://www.umass.edu/wsp/philology/gallery/dionysius.html) among many others.
Fisherman: "The time period you mention is not part of the inspired writings". I hope you're not suggesting that that history should then be ignored or disqualified. It is failrly well recognized and accepted that the apocryphal books of 1 & 2 Maccabees is fairly, historically accurate. There are other instances where we must rely on history to have justification for our conclusions. Since there are no dates in the Bible, secular history must be relied upon. This subject is well covered in several posts here when deciding the destruction of Jerusalem of Nebuadnezzars day. The evidence exposes 1914 C.E. as a false conclusion, because the destruction of Jerusalem is not 607 B.C.E., but rather 587/586. Depending how you look at that, it will either destroy your faith or strengthen it.
The immediate predecessors of Mary and Joseph must come from sources other than inspired writings as they are traced after the last OT book.
Couple of questions: When do the Pharisees, Sadducees, or Essenes and Synogogues first appear in Jewish history? From where or from what did they originate? What of the ancestry of the Herods and party of Herod? What impact did any of this have on early Christians, the majority of whom were previously of one of those influences. Jesus and the Apostles had to deal with all of it. How were priests such as Ananias and Caiaphus appointed, and which sect did they represent? Did HS appoint them? If it's important to you, how would you be able to sort out who the King of the North or King of the South was or is? To name but a few.
I think we're going to need the help of some uninspired resources, that is if we're trying to acquire truth and well being, especially after having been misled, willingly or not.
When do the Pharisees, Sadducees.....first appear in Jewish history?
A partial answer:
The priesthood in Israel was hereditary, being restricted to the male descendants of the Levite Aaron. Later, a monarchy was instituted, also on hereditary lines, with kingship restricted to descendants of David of the tribe of Judah. After the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians, Cyrus allowed the Israelites to return to their homeland and resume their religion, but he did not allow the restoration of the monarchy.
During the Hasmonean period, when Israel became independent once more, a new monarchy was instituted. It was during the rule of the Hasmoneans, and largely in reaction to it, that these two sects emerged. The Hasmoneans ruled as "priest-kings", claiming both the titles of high priest and king simultaneously and for obvious reasons, the legitimacy of this dynasty was questioned by some of the Jews. The Sadducees emerged as Hellenized supporters of the Hasmonean dynasty and the Pharisees emerged as a party of separatists. These movements were largely political, but during the Roman period, they both lost power and in the view of many scholars, essentially became sects. However that qualification is primarily for the benefit of the modern reader. The whole concept of a difference between politics and religion was likely alien to the time period and at no point did either of these groups regard themselves as sects.
,I would like to add,that big obstacles for Jewish culture and identity was fear of assimilation. It is estimated that in Roman Empire up to 1/4 of Jews were hellenized, and assimilated into mainstream, worked in the bureaocracy, went to theaters, baths, and area to enjoy spectacles. Some Jews even worked in Rome for imperial family. It was the fear of losing faith in the cosmopolitian world that drove various section of the Jewish population into religious and political frontation within Judea, but also abroad like revolt in Cyrenica and Cyprus. Religious Jews wanted preserve a purity of their faith. Second issue was economic. While Jews paid their dues and taxes to the temple, and temple was indeed loaded with wealth, they also had to pay money toward Roman administration. Even leftover of grain and grapes for the poor was taxed, Jewish population did not want these money to go abroad into Rome while they already paid their dues. They hope for their own independent state to end these taxes. These two issues were also reason why there were many sections and parties within Judea.
Stirred
you think it is important.
Required :"important" = "Too many cooks spoil the broth."
Hello Kalk,
You make an excellent point about Jerusalem's wealth when you say, "the temple was indeed loaded with wealth…even leftover grain and grapes for the poor was taxed."
This is why I believe the Revelation records "mariners and merchants standing at a distance" from the Royal City (Jerusalem:Yahweh's bride) and declaring "What city is like this great city," "Your huge riches are all destroyed within a single hour" (Rev.18:27). "Edersheim cites ancient Jewish writings which identify no fewer than 118 different articles of import from foreign lands.”
Concerning Jerusalem's extensive commerce, Edersheim reports:
“In [Jerusalem's] streets and lanes everything might be purchased: the production of Palestine, or imported from foreign lands – the rarest articles from the remotest parts. Exquisitely shaped, curiously designed and jeweled cups, rings, and other workmanship of precious metals; glass, silks, fine linen, woolen stuffs, purple, and costly hangings; essences, ointments, and perfumes, as precious as gold; articles of food and drink from foreign lands – in short, what India, Persia, Arabia, Media, Egypt, Italy, Greece, and even the far-off lands of the Gentiles yielded, might be had in these bazaars" (Quoted in Chilton, p.182). (Parentheses mine).
TD,
I enjoyed your post about the history of the Jewish Priesthood.
Bye for now!
T
