Judith 3 text
Judith 4 text
Judith 5 text
Highlights
- Nebuchadnezzar's revenge
- but is he stronger than the Lord.
Summary
Chaoter 3
- the cities that Holofernes was approaching were afraid and sued for peace - take whatever you want.
- Holofernes occupied the cities demolished their shrines so that everyone would worship only Nebuchadnezzar
- then he got to the outskirts of Judea.
Chapter 4
- the Israelites in Judea were alarmed when the heard that Holofernes was destroying the temples. They had only just rebuilt the temple.
- They prepared for war and fortified their defences.
- The Israelites cried out to God in repentance and prayed to God not to let their children and wives to be carried off or the temple to be profaned and desecrated.
- The Lord heard their prayers
Chapter 5
- Holofernes heard that the Israelites were preparing their defenses. He was angry and called a council so he could find out about these people that were the only ones to stand up to him.
- Achior the Ammonite gives him a brief history of the Israelites from when Abraham left Mesopotamia, to the exile in Egypt, the exodus, the covenant, conquering Canaan, their defeat, exile again and subsequent return.
- Achior attributes their success to obeying The Lord and their losses to disobeying The Lord.
- Achior says that if they have sinned agains God then Holofernes will be able to defeat them. But if not The Lord will defend them and we will lose.
- Everyone at the meeting laughed.
Questions and Observations
1) So far Judith is much better than Tobit imho - more "bible-like"
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 01, 2016, 09:51PM - Holofernes occupied the cities demolished their shrines so that everyone would worship only Nebuchadnezzar
This is bit peculiar - this idea that Nebuchadnezzar was out to be worshipped as a god has turned up more than once in this book. But that god-king thing was an Egyptian conceit, in Middle Eastern terms - the Babylonians had their own pantheon, headed by Marduk (from whose name, we ironically noted in Ezra-Nehemiah and will undoubtedly do so again in Esther, the commonish Jewish name Mordecai is derived). On the contrary, Nebuchadnezzar is on record as giving honour to Marduk. So far as I can see, this notion that he requires to be worshipped as a good is only found here, in Judith. A bit suspicious on accuracy grounds, no?
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 01, 2016, 09:51PM - the Israelites in Judea were alarmed when the heard that Holofernes was destroying the temples. They had only just rebuilt the temple.
Ah, now this is a big historical boo-boo... The Israelites returned under Cyrus in 538 BC, a quarter of a century after Nebuchadnezzar's death, in his old age. At the time described there were Israelites in Judaea (or rather Judah) - they hadn't been exiled yet! Or rather, given the implied dates - Nebuchadnezzar was just about to shatter utterly and exile them, within a year or two, correlating the given regnal dates. But I don't think that is how the story of Judith plays out, is it?
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 01, 2016, 09:51PM - Achior attributes their success to obeying The Lord and their losses to disobeying The Lord.
- Achior says that if they have sinned agains God then Holofernes will be able to defeat them. But if not The Lord will defend them and we will lose.
The Ammonites are longstanding enemies of the Judahites, no? And have their own gods. The speech of Achior seems most implausible to me.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 01, 2016, 09:51PM1) So far Judith is much better than Tobit imho - more "bible-like"
The tone is more in keeping with the historical narratives than was the slightly fabulous air of Tobit, but there are big problems with Judith as history - perhaps the biggest of which we've seen so far is the first point I've raised in this post: Nebuchadnezzar was long dead when the temple was rebuilt, and was in fact the reason the temple needed rebuilding in the first place. The point that the existence of Nebuchadnezzar's campaign in Media seems to tally badly with the historical record is also concerning, as is the continued insistence that Nebuchadnezzar was Assyrian, when he was Babylonian and Assyria had fallen, and Nineveh in particular was ruined. I had been wondering if that faux-historical construction of his Median campaign might have been inserted to provide a more flattering explanation for his subjugation of Judah than the rebelliousness of its kings, but I'm starting to think that in fact there is actually no recognition on the part of Judith's author that they've managed to set their story slap in the middle of the Judaean exiles. That would be rather remarkable if so.
This is bit peculiar - this idea that Nebuchadnezzar was out to be worshipped as a god has turned up more than once in this book. But that god-king thing was an Egyptian conceit, in Middle Eastern terms - the Babylonians had their own pantheon, headed by Marduk (from whose name, we ironically noted in Ezra-Nehemiah and will undoubtedly do so again in Esther, the commonish Jewish name Mordecai is derived). On the contrary, Nebuchadnezzar is on record as giving honour to Marduk. So far as I can see, this notion that he requires to be worshipped as a good is only found here, in Judith. A bit suspicious on accuracy grounds, no?
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 01, 2016, 09:51PM - the Israelites in Judea were alarmed when the heard that Holofernes was destroying the temples. They had only just rebuilt the temple.
Ah, now this is a big historical boo-boo... The Israelites returned under Cyrus in 538 BC, a quarter of a century after Nebuchadnezzar's death, in his old age. At the time described there were Israelites in Judaea (or rather Judah) - they hadn't been exiled yet! Or rather, given the implied dates - Nebuchadnezzar was just about to shatter utterly and exile them, within a year or two, correlating the given regnal dates. But I don't think that is how the story of Judith plays out, is it?
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 01, 2016, 09:51PM - Achior attributes their success to obeying The Lord and their losses to disobeying The Lord.
- Achior says that if they have sinned agains God then Holofernes will be able to defeat them. But if not The Lord will defend them and we will lose.
The Ammonites are longstanding enemies of the Judahites, no? And have their own gods. The speech of Achior seems most implausible to me.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 01, 2016, 09:51PM1) So far Judith is much better than Tobit imho - more "bible-like"
The tone is more in keeping with the historical narratives than was the slightly fabulous air of Tobit, but there are big problems with Judith as history - perhaps the biggest of which we've seen so far is the first point I've raised in this post: Nebuchadnezzar was long dead when the temple was rebuilt, and was in fact the reason the temple needed rebuilding in the first place. The point that the existence of Nebuchadnezzar's campaign in Media seems to tally badly with the historical record is also concerning, as is the continued insistence that Nebuchadnezzar was Assyrian, when he was Babylonian and Assyria had fallen, and Nineveh in particular was ruined. I had been wondering if that faux-historical construction of his Median campaign might have been inserted to provide a more flattering explanation for his subjugation of Judah than the rebelliousness of its kings, but I'm starting to think that in fact there is actually no recognition on the part of Judith's author that they've managed to set their story slap in the middle of the Judaean exiles. That would be rather remarkable if so.
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Judith 6 text
Judith 7 text
Highlights
- Achior reports to the Israelites about Holofernes
- Holofernes moves against Israel
Summary
Ch. 6
- Holofernes scoffs at Achior and gives him to the Israelites.
- They send him to Bethulia in Israel
- The town elders quiz him about Holofernes' intentions
- They laud him as a hero
Ch. 7
- Holofernes spreads out in the valley below the hill country, readying to launch an invasion at the hill passes into Israel
- The Edomites and the Moabites counsel Holofernes on hill-fighting tactics, and advise him to seize Bethulia's water supply
- Holofernes does this, and soon Bethulia is reeling with thirst
- The people of Bethulia rebuke Uzziah, their leader, for opposing the Assyrians, and he urges them to stay strong
Questions and Observations
1) Again Nebuchadnezzar as a god - not history, so far as I can tell.
2) Lucky Achior - Holofernes spares him for now, but sends him into the hands of his great historical enemies in Israel...
3) ...But what's this? Achior is highly popular among his enemies. Again, not history, so far as I can tell.
4) The author keeps talking about "Israelites". But if they actually mean this, then yet another anachronism is placed in the ledger - Israel was exiled 134 years before the apparent date of this story. I'm confusedly reading "Israelite" as "Judahite" for now.
5) Bethulia is hard to identify geographically. As with much of the Book of Judith, it seems to exist mostly as metaphor. But what the central metaphors are, I'm still not very clear... Various people have attempted to match up its contents with events from the later (intertestamental) time in which the book was apparently written, but none of the results look entirely satisfactory. The official RC view on whether Judith is fact or fiction seems to be an awkward fudge of a thing - they insist that of course it all happened, but then their scholars cannot help in good conscience but point out all the things noted above that chip great big dents into its reliability. It's pretty clear to me that this is not a historical narrative in the sense of say Ezra-Nehemiah, or Samuel/Kings. The description from the Wikipedia article as "perhaps the first historical novel" seems pretty spot on to me. What do you think?
6) Dothan though was apparently near modern Nablus, well into formerly Israelite territory. So presumably "Israelite" is in fact what is meant - but then Nebuchadnezzar long postdates the fall of the Israelite kingdom. I think I may ease up on noting these anachronistic problems now - the point has been hammered home over and over.
7) Our heroine has been impressively absent from events thus far! 7 chapters in to a book of 16 chapters, and not a mention of her yet. But that's about to change...
Judith 7 text
Highlights
- Achior reports to the Israelites about Holofernes
- Holofernes moves against Israel
Summary
Ch. 6
- Holofernes scoffs at Achior and gives him to the Israelites.
- They send him to Bethulia in Israel
- The town elders quiz him about Holofernes' intentions
- They laud him as a hero
Ch. 7
- Holofernes spreads out in the valley below the hill country, readying to launch an invasion at the hill passes into Israel
- The Edomites and the Moabites counsel Holofernes on hill-fighting tactics, and advise him to seize Bethulia's water supply
- Holofernes does this, and soon Bethulia is reeling with thirst
- The people of Bethulia rebuke Uzziah, their leader, for opposing the Assyrians, and he urges them to stay strong
Questions and Observations
1) Again Nebuchadnezzar as a god - not history, so far as I can tell.
2) Lucky Achior - Holofernes spares him for now, but sends him into the hands of his great historical enemies in Israel...
3) ...But what's this? Achior is highly popular among his enemies. Again, not history, so far as I can tell.
4) The author keeps talking about "Israelites". But if they actually mean this, then yet another anachronism is placed in the ledger - Israel was exiled 134 years before the apparent date of this story. I'm confusedly reading "Israelite" as "Judahite" for now.
5) Bethulia is hard to identify geographically. As with much of the Book of Judith, it seems to exist mostly as metaphor. But what the central metaphors are, I'm still not very clear... Various people have attempted to match up its contents with events from the later (intertestamental) time in which the book was apparently written, but none of the results look entirely satisfactory. The official RC view on whether Judith is fact or fiction seems to be an awkward fudge of a thing - they insist that of course it all happened, but then their scholars cannot help in good conscience but point out all the things noted above that chip great big dents into its reliability. It's pretty clear to me that this is not a historical narrative in the sense of say Ezra-Nehemiah, or Samuel/Kings. The description from the Wikipedia article as "perhaps the first historical novel" seems pretty spot on to me. What do you think?
6) Dothan though was apparently near modern Nablus, well into formerly Israelite territory. So presumably "Israelite" is in fact what is meant - but then Nebuchadnezzar long postdates the fall of the Israelite kingdom. I think I may ease up on noting these anachronistic problems now - the point has been hammered home over and over.
7) Our heroine has been impressively absent from events thus far! 7 chapters in to a book of 16 chapters, and not a mention of her yet. But that's about to change...
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Judith 8 text
Judith 9 text
Highlights
- Introducing our heroine
Summary
Ch. 8
- Judith is a widow of Bethulia; her husband died of heat-stroke after working in the field
- She has acted in the societally approved fashion for a widow for more than three years now
- She is beautiful, rich, and devout
- Judith rebukes the elders for their attitude and asserts that she has a solution, but will not tell Uzziah what it is
Ch. 9
- Judith prays to Yahweh for success
Questions and Observations
1) Regardless of historicity, it's nice to see a woman leading a bible story.
Judith 9 text
Highlights
- Introducing our heroine
Summary
Ch. 8
- Judith is a widow of Bethulia; her husband died of heat-stroke after working in the field
- She has acted in the societally approved fashion for a widow for more than three years now
- She is beautiful, rich, and devout
- Judith rebukes the elders for their attitude and asserts that she has a solution, but will not tell Uzziah what it is
Ch. 9
- Judith prays to Yahweh for success
Questions and Observations
1) Regardless of historicity, it's nice to see a woman leading a bible story.
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Judith 10 text
Judith 11 text
Highlights
- Judith gussies herself up and achieves her purpose of getting taken to see Holofernes, buying Bethulia some time
Summary
Ch. 10
- Judith takes off her widow's sackcloth, and arrays herself beguilingly
- The elders are taken aback, most impressed by the effect, and at her request let her and her maid out of the town gate
- Soon they are captured by an Assyrian patrol, and Judith claims to be deserting the Israelites, asking to be given the opportunity to tell Holofernes how to invade successfully
- Liking her words, and dazzled by her beauty, the patrol agree to take her
- As she arrives at the tent of Holofernes, quite a crowd gathers - beauty is a powerful thing
- Holofernes receives her into his tent; everyone marvels at her beauty once again <yawn>
Ch. 11
- Holofernes gives her words of encouragement
- Judith talks about how Bethulia is desperate, out of water and food, and ready to consume reserved temple supplies in contravention of their religion, an event that she nominates as being the point at which divine favour will be withdrawn, allowing Holofernes to defeat them
- She asks Holofernes for permission to go out into the valley to pray each evening, in order that she will know when this occurs; Holofernes, still beauty-dazzled, agrees readily
Questions and Observations
1) The men of the town watched her until she was out of sight? I bet they did!
2) This is a small settlement, if it has only one gate.
3) It's still nice to see a woman leading a bible story, but when so much hinges explicitly on her looks, it's uncomfortable too. Standard caveat: different times, different people.
Judith 11 text
Highlights
- Judith gussies herself up and achieves her purpose of getting taken to see Holofernes, buying Bethulia some time
Summary
Ch. 10
- Judith takes off her widow's sackcloth, and arrays herself beguilingly
- The elders are taken aback, most impressed by the effect, and at her request let her and her maid out of the town gate
- Soon they are captured by an Assyrian patrol, and Judith claims to be deserting the Israelites, asking to be given the opportunity to tell Holofernes how to invade successfully
- Liking her words, and dazzled by her beauty, the patrol agree to take her
- As she arrives at the tent of Holofernes, quite a crowd gathers - beauty is a powerful thing
- Holofernes receives her into his tent; everyone marvels at her beauty once again <yawn>
Ch. 11
- Holofernes gives her words of encouragement
- Judith talks about how Bethulia is desperate, out of water and food, and ready to consume reserved temple supplies in contravention of their religion, an event that she nominates as being the point at which divine favour will be withdrawn, allowing Holofernes to defeat them
- She asks Holofernes for permission to go out into the valley to pray each evening, in order that she will know when this occurs; Holofernes, still beauty-dazzled, agrees readily
Questions and Observations
1) The men of the town watched her until she was out of sight? I bet they did!
2) This is a small settlement, if it has only one gate.
3) It's still nice to see a woman leading a bible story, but when so much hinges explicitly on her looks, it's uncomfortable too. Standard caveat: different times, different people.
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Judith 12 text
Judith 13 text
Highlights
- Judith seduces and kills Holofernes
Summary
Chapter 12
- Holofernes asks Judith to share his delicacies. Judith declines on religious grounds and says she will eat her own food.
- Judith is allowed to bathe and pray every night in privacy.
- after 3 days Holofernes announces that he wants to seduce Judith (she would laugh at us if he didnt of course) and invites her over for dinner.
- Judith accepts the invitation saying it will be best thing to happen to her for the rest of her life.
- Judith "gussies" herself up again and reclines on her lambskins before Holofernes.
- Judith eats and drinks her own food.
- Holofernes drinks more wine than he ever had before
Chapter 13
- When evening fell, everyone left them alone. Holofernes was dead drunk
- Judith prays, cuts off his head and gives it too her maid, who hides it in her bag.
- Judith and her maid return to Bethulia
- Judith shows everyone the head, and announces that The Lord has stuck down their enemies, and that she only showed Holofernes her face (and not anything naughty).
- Uzziah blesses Judith and all the people say "Amen"
Questions and Observations
1) Remember Ehud and Eglon? Jael and Sisera? Now we have Judith and Holofernes.
2) Gussied is a bit derogatory isn't it? Did you mean that?
Judith 13 text
Highlights
- Judith seduces and kills Holofernes
Summary
Chapter 12
- Holofernes asks Judith to share his delicacies. Judith declines on religious grounds and says she will eat her own food.
- Judith is allowed to bathe and pray every night in privacy.
- after 3 days Holofernes announces that he wants to seduce Judith (she would laugh at us if he didnt of course) and invites her over for dinner.
- Judith accepts the invitation saying it will be best thing to happen to her for the rest of her life.
- Judith "gussies" herself up again and reclines on her lambskins before Holofernes.
- Judith eats and drinks her own food.
- Holofernes drinks more wine than he ever had before
Chapter 13
- When evening fell, everyone left them alone. Holofernes was dead drunk
- Judith prays, cuts off his head and gives it too her maid, who hides it in her bag.
- Judith and her maid return to Bethulia
- Judith shows everyone the head, and announces that The Lord has stuck down their enemies, and that she only showed Holofernes her face (and not anything naughty).
- Uzziah blesses Judith and all the people say "Amen"
Questions and Observations
1) Remember Ehud and Eglon? Jael and Sisera? Now we have Judith and Holofernes.
2) Gussied is a bit derogatory isn't it? Did you mean that?
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 03, 2016, 08:44PM 1) Remember Ehud and Eglon? Jael and Sisera? Now we have Judith and Holofernes.
I'd forgotten Jael and Sisera - good spot. Some strong parallels, strong enough that one wonders whether there might be some common root in the two stories. But also many strong differences.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 03, 2016, 08:44PM 2) Gussied is a bit derogatory isn't it? Did you mean that?
I wasn't intending it that way... I thought it just meant to take pride in enhancing by artifice one's appearance...
I'd forgotten Jael and Sisera - good spot. Some strong parallels, strong enough that one wonders whether there might be some common root in the two stories. But also many strong differences.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 03, 2016, 08:44PM 2) Gussied is a bit derogatory isn't it? Did you mean that?
I wasn't intending it that way... I thought it just meant to take pride in enhancing by artifice one's appearance...
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Judith 14 text
Judith 15 text
Judith 16 text
Highlights
- The Assyrians flee in panic
- And they all lived happily ever after (unless you're Assyrian)
Summary
Chapter 14
- Judith advises Bethulia to hang the head of Holofernes from their wall, and then to rouse all the fighting men as if they were attacking the Assyrian camp
- But not to actually attack, only to provoke the Assyrians into trying to respond, at which point they will notice the death of Holofernes
- Then they will flee, at which point the disciplined Israelite troops can pick them off
- They summon Achior the Ammonite to recognise Holofernes by his head
- He is very impressed and converts to their religion
- Judith's plan is put into action, and the Assyrians, dismayed, quickly realise what has happened
Chapter 15
- The Assyrians flee in a rout, and the Israelites summon their fellows from other towns, cutting them to pieces and raiding much booty from their camp
- Judith is blessed by a visit from the high priest from Jerusalem,
- There really is a *lot* of plunder to be had, and Judith is gifted items that formerly belonged to Holofernes
- Judith is honoured by the women of Israel and leads everyone in a celebratory dance
Chapter 16
- Judith sings a song of praise
- Which is mostly a recap of the narrative, bookended by religious sentiments
- Judith lives happily ever after, choosing not to marry anyone despite many offers
- She lives to 105, and Israel is safe during that time
Questions and Observations
1) So that completes Judith - a second successive neatly-packaged story where it all turns out nicely. I'm liking these compact little books in terms of moving us along; it feels easy to make progress. Next book up is the canonical/non-apocryphal Esther, before (I think?) a return to historical narration with the two deuterocanonical books of Maccabees, which are probably the books in this category that interest me most. I suggest that we continue with the RC text for this book, as there are a number of deuterocanonical additions to it, which are clearly marked on the biblegateway website that we are using.
2) I suspect this book was intended by the (much later) author simply as an inspiring story, given the problems tying the given historical and geographical reference points to the record - what do you think?
3) Judith doesn't need another man to justify her existence - from the rather patriarchal earlier belabouring of how her looks were important to the story, we've reached an unexpectedly feminist happily-ever-after. Go Bible!
4) Do we infer from "she set her maid free" that her maid was previously a slave? Judith as an abolitionist hero too...
5) Again an inflated age in a (fictionalised) historical setting.
6) Random personal connection - apparently the name picked out by my parents if I'd been born a girl was going to be Judith...
Judith 15 text
Judith 16 text
Highlights
- The Assyrians flee in panic
- And they all lived happily ever after (unless you're Assyrian)
Summary
Chapter 14
- Judith advises Bethulia to hang the head of Holofernes from their wall, and then to rouse all the fighting men as if they were attacking the Assyrian camp
- But not to actually attack, only to provoke the Assyrians into trying to respond, at which point they will notice the death of Holofernes
- Then they will flee, at which point the disciplined Israelite troops can pick them off
- They summon Achior the Ammonite to recognise Holofernes by his head
- He is very impressed and converts to their religion
- Judith's plan is put into action, and the Assyrians, dismayed, quickly realise what has happened
Chapter 15
- The Assyrians flee in a rout, and the Israelites summon their fellows from other towns, cutting them to pieces and raiding much booty from their camp
- Judith is blessed by a visit from the high priest from Jerusalem,
- There really is a *lot* of plunder to be had, and Judith is gifted items that formerly belonged to Holofernes
- Judith is honoured by the women of Israel and leads everyone in a celebratory dance
Chapter 16
- Judith sings a song of praise
- Which is mostly a recap of the narrative, bookended by religious sentiments
- Judith lives happily ever after, choosing not to marry anyone despite many offers
- She lives to 105, and Israel is safe during that time
Questions and Observations
1) So that completes Judith - a second successive neatly-packaged story where it all turns out nicely. I'm liking these compact little books in terms of moving us along; it feels easy to make progress. Next book up is the canonical/non-apocryphal Esther, before (I think?) a return to historical narration with the two deuterocanonical books of Maccabees, which are probably the books in this category that interest me most. I suggest that we continue with the RC text for this book, as there are a number of deuterocanonical additions to it, which are clearly marked on the biblegateway website that we are using.
2) I suspect this book was intended by the (much later) author simply as an inspiring story, given the problems tying the given historical and geographical reference points to the record - what do you think?
3) Judith doesn't need another man to justify her existence - from the rather patriarchal earlier belabouring of how her looks were important to the story, we've reached an unexpectedly feminist happily-ever-after. Go Bible!
4) Do we infer from "she set her maid free" that her maid was previously a slave? Judith as an abolitionist hero too...
5) Again an inflated age in a (fictionalised) historical setting.
6) Random personal connection - apparently the name picked out by my parents if I'd been born a girl was going to be Judith...
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: MoominDave on Apr 06, 2016, 02:58PMPart I - The Tetrateuch
Genesis
Deuteronomy
1 Chronicles
Genesis
- [li]Big picture stuff
- [li]Creation; Adam & Eve[/li][li]Humans, take 1; Cain & Abel, Noah[/li][li]The Flood; Wash everything away, start again[/li][li]Humans, take 2[/li]
- [li]New scene, three generations on - Israelites now of low status in Egypt[/li][li]Moses grows up, fights battle of wills with Pharoah over plagues, leads Israelites to depart[/li][li]Wandering, take 1; through the desert to Mt. Sinai, where they make a long camp and...[/li]
- [li]...many laws are given[/li]
- [li]Wandering, take 2; they reach their destination, but are too weak to attempt the task, and so...[/li][li]Wandering, take 3; more pootling around, building up military prowess over the years in the preparation for invasion; new leaders emerge, and they finish on the brink of their destination again[/li]
Deuteronomy
- [li]Moses orates; recap of terms and conditions, forward planning[/li][li]Moses dies[/li]
- [li]Conquest of Canaan under Joshua[/li][li]Division of conquered land between the tribes, East and West banks of the Jordan[/li]
- [li]Prologue: Messy details of attempted not-always-successful conquest, compare with previous book[/li][li]An intermittent sequence of Judges leads: Othniel, Ehud, Shamgar, Deborah, Gideon, Tola, Jair, Jephthah, Ibzan, Elon, Abdon, Samson[/li][li]The Dan tribe take territory in the North and the Benjamin tribe are defeated by the other tribes[/li]
- [li]Intermezzo: Heartwarming tale of a family coming through hard times in the era of the Judges[/li]
- [li]Samuel is a priestly leader in a time of Philistine conflicts who needs a worthy successor[/li][li]Saul is appointed to the new role of king and with his son Jonathan defeats the Ammonites, Philistines, Amalekites, but he falls out with Samuel, who anoints David as a replacement king secretly[/li][li]David (a military hero) and Saul vie for superiority over a long period, eventually brought to an end when the Philistines kill Saul in battle[/li]
- [li]The kingdom nearly splits, but David unites it, doing many heroic deeds[/li][li]But in time he becomes morally suspect and manipulated by schemers[/li]
- [li]David dies, succeeded by Solomon, who consolidates his power base brutally but gains great wealth and a reputation for great wisdom, building the "first temple" and a palace; however, like David he becomes morally suspect in time[/li][li]After he dies, the kingdom is split into Israel (larger Northern portion) and Judah (smaller Southern portion), and the continual inference is that Judah is the legitimate one of the two[/li][li]Kings succeed in both Israel and Judah; Elijah gains prominence as a prophet[/li]
- [li]Long successions of kings of both Israel and Judah are described, and the prophet Elisha comes to prominence[/li][li]Most kings do not prioritise Yahweh-worship - none in Israel, but some in Judah.
[/li][li]First Israel then Judah are unable to tread the difficult path of negotiation between stronger powers on either side, with both populations destroyed and exiled by 586 BC[/li]
1 Chronicles
- [li]Recap of genealogy to the beginning[/li][li]Return of some exiles to Judah
[/li][li]Recap of Samuel written to favour David more highly- [li]David secures the AotC[/li][li]David breeds[/li][li]David defeats enemies[/li][li]David arranges for Solomon to build the temple[/li]
- [li]Recap of Kings with only the Judah parts and a focus on relations with Yahweh
- [li]Solomon builds the temple and is great[/li][li]Kingdom splits[/li][li]Long succession of kings, some good, some bad[/li][li]Judah squashed between Babylon and Egypt, falls to Babylon; population deported to exile[/li]
- [li]Cyrus of Persia commands Judah to return home and rebuild their temple[/li][li]Decades later Artaxerxes of Persia commands Ezra to lead a second wave of returnees[/li]
- [li]Nehemiah, a Judahite official of Artaxerxes of Persia, is appointed governor of Judah, rebuilding Jerusalem's wall[/li][li]He and Ezra organise Judah, mixing enlightened social reform with brutally dogmatic interpretations of Mosaic law[/li]
- [li]Tobit and his son Tobias are exiled in Nineveh when Israel falls[/li][li]Sarah lives in Media; a demon has killed seven of her husbands[/li][li]With an angel's help, Tobias rescues her, and everyone lives happily ever after[/li]
- [li]Nebuchadnezzar is enraged by the Israelites' failure to answer a military summons, and despatches his general Holofernes with his army to suppress them[/li][li]Judith, a beautiful Israelite widow, uses feminine wiles to distract Holofernes, killing him, sending his army into flight[/li]
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: MoominDave on Oct 04, 2016, 04:06AM3) Judith doesn't need another man to justify her existence - from the rather patriarchal earlier belabouring of how her looks were important to the story, we've reached an unexpectedly feminist happily-ever-after. Go Bible!
4) Do we infer from "she set her maid free" that her maid was previously a slave? Judith as an abolitionist hero too...
Those old Israelites must have been pretty enlightened.
4) Do we infer from "she set her maid free" that her maid was previously a slave? Judith as an abolitionist hero too...
Those old Israelites must have been pretty enlightened.
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Esther 1 text
Highlights
- Ahasuerus the king of Persia throws a big party
- Queen Vashti disobeys the king. Her action threatens chaos in the land.
Summary
Chapter 11 and 12 - I wasn't going to include these here because 11 and 12 should go later, but apparently some translations have them here. ??
- In the second year of Ahasuerus, Mordecai a Jew had a dream:
- there was noise and 2 dragons and all was gloom and doom : all the nations to prepare for war.
- the righteous nation was worried so they cried out to God and a great river came from a small spring, and the sun rose and the lowly were exalted and devoured those held in honor
- then Mordecai overheard 2 eunuchs plotting to overthrow Ahasuerus. Mordecai dobbed on them.
- Ahasuerus honoured Mordecai. Haman (the kings favourite) was jealous and planned to harm for Mordecai and his people
Chapter 1
- Ahasuerus the king of Persia, who reigned from India to Ethiopia threw a big party for all his officials and servants. It lasted for 180 days.
- Drinking was not compulsory!
- Queen Vashti also gave a party for the women in the palace.
- At the end of the party Ahasuerus commanded that Queen Vashti appear at his party to show everyone how beautiful she was.
- She declined. Ahasuerus was angry.
- Ahasuerus' advisers said that this behaviour would incite disobedience by all women to their husbands.
- Ahasuerus sent out an official decree to all his provinces, declaring "that every man should be master in his own house"
Questions and Observations
0) chapters 11 and 12 seem to be an intro to the story so I'll talk about them now.
- Mordecai's dream is an example of "Apocalyptic" literature.
- Apocalyptic means Revelation - hence the name of the last book of the Bible.
- So apocalypse doesn't mean world wide fiery disaster or something like that.
- Story's in this genre often contain fantastical dreams that are symbolic and are not meant to be taken literally. IMO
- The symbols in the dream have to be correctly interpreted to understand the meaning of the dream. Generally this is done via divine revelation or you need to ask someone who understands how to interpret the dreams to explain them to you.
Chapter 1
1) Ahasuerus is the same as Xerxes - the difference seems to be whether the translation of the Persian name comes via Greek or Hebrew.
2) I wonder if the mention that drinking was not compulsory was to indicate that Ahasuerus was considerate of local cultures that forbade it? There were a lot of different cultures there.
3) These Persians aren't nearly as enlightened as the Israelites from Judith were they.
4) Queen Vashti's reluctance to appear suggests that she was expected to do more than just show everyone her dazzling crown.
5) Once a law was written down it couldn't be altered. This will be significant in Daniel too.
Highlights
- Ahasuerus the king of Persia throws a big party
- Queen Vashti disobeys the king. Her action threatens chaos in the land.
Summary
Chapter 11 and 12 - I wasn't going to include these here because 11 and 12 should go later, but apparently some translations have them here. ??
- In the second year of Ahasuerus, Mordecai a Jew had a dream:
- there was noise and 2 dragons and all was gloom and doom : all the nations to prepare for war.
- the righteous nation was worried so they cried out to God and a great river came from a small spring, and the sun rose and the lowly were exalted and devoured those held in honor
- then Mordecai overheard 2 eunuchs plotting to overthrow Ahasuerus. Mordecai dobbed on them.
- Ahasuerus honoured Mordecai. Haman (the kings favourite) was jealous and planned to harm for Mordecai and his people
Chapter 1
- Ahasuerus the king of Persia, who reigned from India to Ethiopia threw a big party for all his officials and servants. It lasted for 180 days.
- Drinking was not compulsory!
- Queen Vashti also gave a party for the women in the palace.
- At the end of the party Ahasuerus commanded that Queen Vashti appear at his party to show everyone how beautiful she was.
- She declined. Ahasuerus was angry.
- Ahasuerus' advisers said that this behaviour would incite disobedience by all women to their husbands.
- Ahasuerus sent out an official decree to all his provinces, declaring "that every man should be master in his own house"
Questions and Observations
0) chapters 11 and 12 seem to be an intro to the story so I'll talk about them now.
- Mordecai's dream is an example of "Apocalyptic" literature.
- Apocalyptic means Revelation - hence the name of the last book of the Bible.
- So apocalypse doesn't mean world wide fiery disaster or something like that.
- Story's in this genre often contain fantastical dreams that are symbolic and are not meant to be taken literally. IMO
- The symbols in the dream have to be correctly interpreted to understand the meaning of the dream. Generally this is done via divine revelation or you need to ask someone who understands how to interpret the dreams to explain them to you.
Chapter 1
1) Ahasuerus is the same as Xerxes - the difference seems to be whether the translation of the Persian name comes via Greek or Hebrew.
2) I wonder if the mention that drinking was not compulsory was to indicate that Ahasuerus was considerate of local cultures that forbade it? There were a lot of different cultures there.
3) These Persians aren't nearly as enlightened as the Israelites from Judith were they.
4) Queen Vashti's reluctance to appear suggests that she was expected to do more than just show everyone her dazzling crown.
5) Once a law was written down it couldn't be altered. This will be significant in Daniel too.
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 04, 2016, 06:11PM0) chapters 11 and 12 seem to be an intro to the story so I'll talk about them now.
This is the first deuterocanonical insertion to this book. The Protestant version has 10 chapters, the RC version 16, with them interspersed in this fashion.
There is a chronological challenge in this passage - it seems to tell us that Mordecai was exiled along with King Jeconiah (Jehoiachin) of Judah, which event took place in or around 597 BC. The Persian king Ahasuerus as Xerxes I dates the story to around 485 BC, over a century later. Alternative identifications of Ahasuerus (e.g. Artaxerxes II, reigned 404-358 BC) create an even greater problem. We can wriggle tortuously around this by trying to make verse 4 refer to Mordecai's great-grandfather Kish instead (112 years would be enough to make Mordecai an old or middle-aged man from his great-grandfather's youth), but it isn't a very natural reading. These added passages apparently are first found in the Septuagint - so perhaps the simplest solution is to consider them non-binding.
As noted before, it is an irony that such a Jewish name as "Mordecai" is associated with the Babylonian god Marduk.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 04, 2016, 06:11PMChapter 1
1) Ahasuerus is the same as Xerxes - the difference seems to be whether the translation of the Persian name comes via Greek or Hebrew.
Ahasuerus appears also in Ezra 4:6, but there was chronological difficulty matching it to a king in that setting (apologies for linking to a post of mine - seems easier than writing it all out again...).
There's a lot of room for confusion regarding these Persian names as recorded in these Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek manuscripts, later transliterated into English. The Wiktionary page for the name Xerxes gives us all the variants we know (I think you've been here already from what you've written, but I'm just getting it straight in my own mind). Relevant versions:
Derivative 0: Old Persian: 𐎧𐏁𐎹𐎠𐎼𐏁𐎠 (Xayārā)
This was the original version - and we can see from this that the modern English way of approaching it - "Zerk-Zeez" is pretty far off.
Derivative A1: Hebrew: אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ (Akhashverósh)
This is what the writer of Esther made of it - already quite a mangling of the original Old Persian, with that added initial vowel, loss of the final vowel, and additional 'v' sound in the middle.
Derivative A2: Latin: Ahasuerus, Ahasverus
This is the Hebrew-derived Latin version, and we see that actually it isn't the English translators that are at fault here - in the Latin version of Esther we have already reached the same spelling. Note though that the Vulgate Esther 1:1 uses the version "Asueri"...
Derivative B1: Ancient Greek: Ξέρξης (Xérxēs)
And here we see the same spelling as the standard English version. As Martin noted above.
We take a moment to look up this passage in the Septuagint text. Quite surprisingly, it doesn't seem to be available on the otherwise comprehensive Bible Gateway website that we are using. Did I miss it somehow? No matter - one can view the Greek Septuagint text here.
However! The Septuagint text gives us not the above, but instead "Αρταξέρξου" - Artaxerxes, the son of Xerxes... Oh dear... There seems no highly satisfactory answer to this online, but rather simply the assertion that the work of identifying the king has been done, and Xerxes is the favoured candidate.
Assuming that it is Xerxes I, this puts the date of the action at 485 BC.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 04, 2016, 06:11PM4) Queen Vashti's reluctance to appear suggests that she was expected to do more than just show everyone her dazzling crown.
Vashti is a figure that has proven difficult for historians to pin down. The wife of Xerxes I, Amestris, was a major figure of power through the whole length of his reign.
This is the first deuterocanonical insertion to this book. The Protestant version has 10 chapters, the RC version 16, with them interspersed in this fashion.
There is a chronological challenge in this passage - it seems to tell us that Mordecai was exiled along with King Jeconiah (Jehoiachin) of Judah, which event took place in or around 597 BC. The Persian king Ahasuerus as Xerxes I dates the story to around 485 BC, over a century later. Alternative identifications of Ahasuerus (e.g. Artaxerxes II, reigned 404-358 BC) create an even greater problem. We can wriggle tortuously around this by trying to make verse 4 refer to Mordecai's great-grandfather Kish instead (112 years would be enough to make Mordecai an old or middle-aged man from his great-grandfather's youth), but it isn't a very natural reading. These added passages apparently are first found in the Septuagint - so perhaps the simplest solution is to consider them non-binding.
As noted before, it is an irony that such a Jewish name as "Mordecai" is associated with the Babylonian god Marduk.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 04, 2016, 06:11PMChapter 1
1) Ahasuerus is the same as Xerxes - the difference seems to be whether the translation of the Persian name comes via Greek or Hebrew.
Ahasuerus appears also in Ezra 4:6, but there was chronological difficulty matching it to a king in that setting (apologies for linking to a post of mine - seems easier than writing it all out again...).
There's a lot of room for confusion regarding these Persian names as recorded in these Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek manuscripts, later transliterated into English. The Wiktionary page for the name Xerxes gives us all the variants we know (I think you've been here already from what you've written, but I'm just getting it straight in my own mind). Relevant versions:
Derivative 0: Old Persian: 𐎧𐏁𐎹𐎠𐎼𐏁𐎠 (Xayārā)
This was the original version - and we can see from this that the modern English way of approaching it - "Zerk-Zeez" is pretty far off.
Derivative A1: Hebrew: אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ (Akhashverósh)
This is what the writer of Esther made of it - already quite a mangling of the original Old Persian, with that added initial vowel, loss of the final vowel, and additional 'v' sound in the middle.
Derivative A2: Latin: Ahasuerus, Ahasverus
This is the Hebrew-derived Latin version, and we see that actually it isn't the English translators that are at fault here - in the Latin version of Esther we have already reached the same spelling. Note though that the Vulgate Esther 1:1 uses the version "Asueri"...
Derivative B1: Ancient Greek: Ξέρξης (Xérxēs)
And here we see the same spelling as the standard English version. As Martin noted above.
We take a moment to look up this passage in the Septuagint text. Quite surprisingly, it doesn't seem to be available on the otherwise comprehensive Bible Gateway website that we are using. Did I miss it somehow? No matter - one can view the Greek Septuagint text here.
However! The Septuagint text gives us not the above, but instead "Αρταξέρξου" - Artaxerxes, the son of Xerxes... Oh dear... There seems no highly satisfactory answer to this online, but rather simply the assertion that the work of identifying the king has been done, and Xerxes is the favoured candidate.
Assuming that it is Xerxes I, this puts the date of the action at 485 BC.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 04, 2016, 06:11PM4) Queen Vashti's reluctance to appear suggests that she was expected to do more than just show everyone her dazzling crown.
Vashti is a figure that has proven difficult for historians to pin down. The wife of Xerxes I, Amestris, was a major figure of power through the whole length of his reign.
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Esther 2 text
Highlights
- Esther becomes queen of Persia
Summary
- Ahasuerus decides to audition "beautiful young virgins" to become his queen
- Mordecai is a Judahite living in Susa, descended from an exile
- He has been looking after his cousin Esther (aka Hadassah), who he adopted after she was orphaned
- Esther is taken in to be auditioned, and her comeliness pleases the official of the king, who grants her a place in his harem
- Esther keeps quiet about her ethnicity, on Mordecai's strong suggestion, who stays in touch with her
- After some time, it is her turn to go to see the king, and he is very impressed, making her queen
- Mordecai discovers a plot by two eunuchs to kill Ahasuerus and warns Esther, who warns the king
- The eunuchs are tried and executed
Questions and Observations
1) Things have picked up a bit on the salaciousness front recently, haven't they?
2) The chronological confusion with Mordecai is resolved in verse 6 - it was his great-grandfather that was exiled by Nebuchadnezzar. Odd that it is phrased so badly in the addition to chapter 1.
3) Esther is taken in to Ahasuerus in 479 BC or so.
4) There is duplication of material from the 1st chapter addition here; the addition seems rather unnecessary.
5) It is distinctly odd that Esther has risen to such a lofty position without history seeming to know about it. I'm reserving judgment on the historicity of this book for now.
Highlights
- Esther becomes queen of Persia
Summary
- Ahasuerus decides to audition "beautiful young virgins" to become his queen
- Mordecai is a Judahite living in Susa, descended from an exile
- He has been looking after his cousin Esther (aka Hadassah), who he adopted after she was orphaned
- Esther is taken in to be auditioned, and her comeliness pleases the official of the king, who grants her a place in his harem
- Esther keeps quiet about her ethnicity, on Mordecai's strong suggestion, who stays in touch with her
- After some time, it is her turn to go to see the king, and he is very impressed, making her queen
- Mordecai discovers a plot by two eunuchs to kill Ahasuerus and warns Esther, who warns the king
- The eunuchs are tried and executed
Questions and Observations
1) Things have picked up a bit on the salaciousness front recently, haven't they?
2) The chronological confusion with Mordecai is resolved in verse 6 - it was his great-grandfather that was exiled by Nebuchadnezzar. Odd that it is phrased so badly in the addition to chapter 1.
3) Esther is taken in to Ahasuerus in 479 BC or so.
4) There is duplication of material from the 1st chapter addition here; the addition seems rather unnecessary.
5) It is distinctly odd that Esther has risen to such a lofty position without history seeming to know about it. I'm reserving judgment on the historicity of this book for now.
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: MoominDave on Oct 05, 2016, 03:35AMAs noted before, it is an irony that such a Jewish name as "Mordecai" is associated with the Babylonian god Marduk.
Did you find evidence that Mordecai was Jewish? I thought it was a Persian name. There are a few examples of Jews being given Persian names and I thought that this would have been what happened here. eg Hadassah was named Esther. Daniel's three friends in Daniel were also given Persian names.
Did you find evidence that Mordecai was Jewish? I thought it was a Persian name. There are a few examples of Jews being given Persian names and I thought that this would have been what happened here. eg Hadassah was named Esther. Daniel's three friends in Daniel were also given Persian names.
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Esther 3 text
Highlights
- Haman plots to destroy the Jews.
Summary
Chapter 3
- Haman is promoted to the highest official and all the other officials were supposed to bow to him.
- Mordecai didn't: Haman was infuriated. Haman thought that he was too important for this slight to result in the punishment of just one man: so he planned to destroy all the Jews in the kingdon.
- Haman convinces Ahsuerus to decree the destruction of the Jews on the 12th day of the 12th month.
Chapter 13 - aka the next deutero-cannonical addition
- Ahasuerus decree says:
- that he is kind and wants all his subjects to live in peace and tranquility
- there is one people in the kingdom that have different laws to everyone else, they refuse to obey the kings laws, and they deliberately destabilise the kingdom
- therefore they shall be destroyed on the 14th of the 12th so our government will be secure and untroubled.
- Haman is wonderful
Chapter 3 - we now return to our normal programming
- the decree was sent out to every province.
- Ahasuerus and Haman sat down to drink but the city was thrown into confusion.
Highlights
- Haman plots to destroy the Jews.
Summary
Chapter 3
- Haman is promoted to the highest official and all the other officials were supposed to bow to him.
- Mordecai didn't: Haman was infuriated. Haman thought that he was too important for this slight to result in the punishment of just one man: so he planned to destroy all the Jews in the kingdon.
- Haman convinces Ahsuerus to decree the destruction of the Jews on the 12th day of the 12th month.
Chapter 13 - aka the next deutero-cannonical addition
- Ahasuerus decree says:
- that he is kind and wants all his subjects to live in peace and tranquility
- there is one people in the kingdom that have different laws to everyone else, they refuse to obey the kings laws, and they deliberately destabilise the kingdom
- therefore they shall be destroyed on the 14th of the 12th so our government will be secure and untroubled.
- Haman is wonderful
Chapter 3 - we now return to our normal programming
- the decree was sent out to every province.
- Ahasuerus and Haman sat down to drink but the city was thrown into confusion.
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 05, 2016, 08:49PMDid you find evidence that Mordecai was Jewish? I thought it was a Persian name. There are a few examples of Jews being given Persian names and I thought that this would have been what happened here. eg Hadassah was named Esther. Daniel's three friends in Daniel were also given Persian names.
Esther 2:5 - "Now there was a Jew in the citadel of Susa whose name was Mordecai son of Jair son of Shimei son of Kish, a Benjaminite."
In the context of the narrative, maybe it was a name given in the fashion you describe - why would a (we assume) Yahweh-worshipping Jewish family call their son after Marduk?
But then - some contend that the whole is a story about Marduk and Ishtar, whose names aren't even disguised. The idea is raised that the Jews of Susa were not Yahweh-worshippers at this point in history; which is far from unbelievable, given that it was only post-exile that the returnees focussed in on him, and that pre-exilic Judahite culture was, as we've seen, given to regular changes of faith direction. This is no fringe opinion - it isn't hard to find respectable-sounding Jewish back-up on the subject.
But maybe this shouldn't worry Christians too much - after all, one of their major festivals is also named for Ishtar...
At root though, for me the irony lies not in the fact that this person had a name that's a tribute to the head deity of another pantheon, but in the fact that the name became and is still somewhat common in Jewish culture. A tribute to a long-vanished god lives on dormant in a culture that's notably exclusively keen on another god entirely.
Esther 2:5 - "Now there was a Jew in the citadel of Susa whose name was Mordecai son of Jair son of Shimei son of Kish, a Benjaminite."
In the context of the narrative, maybe it was a name given in the fashion you describe - why would a (we assume) Yahweh-worshipping Jewish family call their son after Marduk?
But then - some contend that the whole is a story about Marduk and Ishtar, whose names aren't even disguised. The idea is raised that the Jews of Susa were not Yahweh-worshippers at this point in history; which is far from unbelievable, given that it was only post-exile that the returnees focussed in on him, and that pre-exilic Judahite culture was, as we've seen, given to regular changes of faith direction. This is no fringe opinion - it isn't hard to find respectable-sounding Jewish back-up on the subject.
But maybe this shouldn't worry Christians too much - after all, one of their major festivals is also named for Ishtar...
At root though, for me the irony lies not in the fact that this person had a name that's a tribute to the head deity of another pantheon, but in the fact that the name became and is still somewhat common in Jewish culture. A tribute to a long-vanished god lives on dormant in a culture that's notably exclusively keen on another god entirely.
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: MoominDave on Oct 05, 2016, 11:52PMBut maybe this shouldn't worry Christians too much - after all, one of their major festivals is also named for Ishtar...
Shhh. Don't tell anyone. You'll ruin the sale of chocolate eggs and hot cross buns.
QuoteAt root though, for me the irony lies not in the fact that this person had a name that's a tribute to the head deity of another pantheon, but in the fact that the name became and is still somewhat common in Jewish culture. A tribute to a long-vanished god lives on dormant in a culture that's notably exclusively keen on another god entirely.
aren't ironies fun
Shhh. Don't tell anyone. You'll ruin the sale of chocolate eggs and hot cross buns.
QuoteAt root though, for me the irony lies not in the fact that this person had a name that's a tribute to the head deity of another pantheon, but in the fact that the name became and is still somewhat common in Jewish culture. A tribute to a long-vanished god lives on dormant in a culture that's notably exclusively keen on another god entirely.
aren't ironies fun
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Esther 4 text
Esther 5 text
Highlights
- Mordecai and Esther manoeuvre to gain favour with Ahasuerus and outwit Haman
Summary
Chapter 4
- Mordecai, along with all the Jews in the empire, don sackcloth and undertake mourning practices
- Mordecai tells Esther what Haman is doing, and asks her to intercede with Ahasuerus for the Jews
- But Esther sees a problem - no-one (including her) may enter the king's presence in his inner court (on penalty of death) without being summoned by Ahasuerus holding out a golden sceptre to them
- Mordecai underlines how important this is, and she asks him to organise a Jewish fast in Susa for three days, after which she will talk to the king and bear the risk
Addition C
Chapter 13
- Mordecai prays for a solution
Chapter 14
- Esther prays for a solution
Addition D
Chapter 15
- Esther, very nervous, arrays herself beautifully and goes in to see Ahasuerus
- Ahasuerus looks fiercely at her, but she faints, and his heart melts with pity
- Oh Esther! The rule didn't apply to her in the first place. All that fasting to no purpose.
Chapter 5
- Ahasuerus promises to give Esther any request she makes
- Esther asks him to come to a banquet she has prepared that day, and to bring Haman; he enthusiastically agrees
- At the banquet, he asks her what her petition is; she asks the two of them to come to another banquet the next day
- Haman departs in a good mood, but this sours when he sees Mordecai at the King's Gate
- He returns how and seeks his family and friend circle's advice on what to do about Mordecai
- They advise to make a giant gallows and hang Mordecai from it, which advice he relishes, setting about gallows construction immediately
Questions and Observations
1) What purpose was the fast supposed to serve?
2) Mordecai and Esther pray apparently to Yahweh in the deuterocanonical additions. Do they acknowledge him in the protocanonical part of the text?
Esther 5 text
Highlights
- Mordecai and Esther manoeuvre to gain favour with Ahasuerus and outwit Haman
Summary
Chapter 4
- Mordecai, along with all the Jews in the empire, don sackcloth and undertake mourning practices
- Mordecai tells Esther what Haman is doing, and asks her to intercede with Ahasuerus for the Jews
- But Esther sees a problem - no-one (including her) may enter the king's presence in his inner court (on penalty of death) without being summoned by Ahasuerus holding out a golden sceptre to them
- Mordecai underlines how important this is, and she asks him to organise a Jewish fast in Susa for three days, after which she will talk to the king and bear the risk
Addition C
Chapter 13
- Mordecai prays for a solution
Chapter 14
- Esther prays for a solution
Addition D
Chapter 15
- Esther, very nervous, arrays herself beautifully and goes in to see Ahasuerus
- Ahasuerus looks fiercely at her, but she faints, and his heart melts with pity
- Oh Esther! The rule didn't apply to her in the first place. All that fasting to no purpose.
Chapter 5
- Ahasuerus promises to give Esther any request she makes
- Esther asks him to come to a banquet she has prepared that day, and to bring Haman; he enthusiastically agrees
- At the banquet, he asks her what her petition is; she asks the two of them to come to another banquet the next day
- Haman departs in a good mood, but this sours when he sees Mordecai at the King's Gate
- He returns how and seeks his family and friend circle's advice on what to do about Mordecai
- They advise to make a giant gallows and hang Mordecai from it, which advice he relishes, setting about gallows construction immediately
Questions and Observations
1) What purpose was the fast supposed to serve?
2) Mordecai and Esther pray apparently to Yahweh in the deuterocanonical additions. Do they acknowledge him in the protocanonical part of the text?
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: MoominDave on Oct 06, 2016, 08:07AM1) What purpose was the fast supposed to serve?
I don't think there are any specifications about why and when to fast. it just seems something to do when you are sad, or repentant.
Quote2) Mordecai and Esther pray apparently to Yahweh in the deuterocanonical additions. Do they acknowledge him in the protocanonical part of the text?
I don't think so.
I read somewhere that Esther was the only book that didn't explicitly reference God. This obviously referred to the proto-canonical text. This apparently caused many to think that it shouldn't be included in the canon.
I don't think there are any specifications about why and when to fast. it just seems something to do when you are sad, or repentant.
Quote2) Mordecai and Esther pray apparently to Yahweh in the deuterocanonical additions. Do they acknowledge him in the protocanonical part of the text?
I don't think so.
I read somewhere that Esther was the only book that didn't explicitly reference God. This obviously referred to the proto-canonical text. This apparently caused many to think that it shouldn't be included in the canon.
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Esther 6 text
Esther 7 text
Highlights
- Mordecai is honoured
- Haman is executed on his own gallows.
Summary
Chapter 6
- the king was idly reading the records and noticed that Mordecai hadn't been honoured for saving the kings life.
- Haman was waiting nearby to get the kings permission to hang Mordecai
- The king asked Haman how he should honour a man.
- Haman thinking that the king was referring to him describes how he would like to be honoured.
- The king tells Haman to honour Mordecai like that. Haman does so but is mortified.
- Hamans wife and friends warn him that he will fall before Mordecai
- Haman is taken to Esther's banquet
Chapter 7
- At the feast the king asks Esther what she wanted.
- Esther tells him that she wants her and her peoples life saved because they have been sold to be killed.
- The king wants to know who it was that presumed to do this and Esther points the finger at Haman.
- The king goes into the garden to consider his response, haman stayed to beg for his life and threw himself onto Esther's couch.
- When the king returned he thought that Haman was attacking the queen.
- One of the eunuchs mentioned that Haman had just built a gallows at his house, so the king said to hang him there.
Questions and Observations
1) Haman was hoist with his own petard as they say.
Esther 7 text
Highlights
- Mordecai is honoured
- Haman is executed on his own gallows.
Summary
Chapter 6
- the king was idly reading the records and noticed that Mordecai hadn't been honoured for saving the kings life.
- Haman was waiting nearby to get the kings permission to hang Mordecai
- The king asked Haman how he should honour a man.
- Haman thinking that the king was referring to him describes how he would like to be honoured.
- The king tells Haman to honour Mordecai like that. Haman does so but is mortified.
- Hamans wife and friends warn him that he will fall before Mordecai
- Haman is taken to Esther's banquet
Chapter 7
- At the feast the king asks Esther what she wanted.
- Esther tells him that she wants her and her peoples life saved because they have been sold to be killed.
- The king wants to know who it was that presumed to do this and Esther points the finger at Haman.
- The king goes into the garden to consider his response, haman stayed to beg for his life and threw himself onto Esther's couch.
- When the king returned he thought that Haman was attacking the queen.
- One of the eunuchs mentioned that Haman had just built a gallows at his house, so the king said to hang him there.
Questions and Observations
1) Haman was hoist with his own petard as they say.
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Esther 8 text
Highlights
- Ahasuerus makes a new decree, honouring instead of persecuting the Jews
Summary
Chapter 8
- Ahasuerus honours Esther and Mordecai, whose relationship with Esther has now been explained to him
- Haman's property is given to Esther, who gives it to Mordecai
- Now, at last Esther makes her petition - she asks for Haman's letter regarding the Jews to be revoked
- Ahasuerus distributed a letter cancelling the earlier letter to all his provinces
Addition E
Chapter 16
- The letter of Ahasuerus
Chapter 8 resumed
- The letter is received in the provinces, and the Jews overnight move from being oppressed to being prestigious
Questions and Observations
1) I had been wondering whether Haman's malevolent family might be hanging around to cause further trouble, but Addition E clears it up - they were executed too.
2) The decree is powerful stuff: "Permit the Jews to live under their own laws". A question of relative cultures within a single state that countries and cultures grapple with to this day.
3) The final verse is rather dark: "Furthermore, many of the peoples of the country professed to be Jews, because the fear of the Jews had fallen upon them." Why would this happen? Had the oppressed overnight taken to oppressing others? Verse 13 gives a hint: "the Jews were to be ready on that day to take revenge on their enemies." This seems to be describing the nasty settling of scores. Hmm, bit of a bad taste in the mouth left from this chapter. Looking ahead, the next chapter describes this distasteful process in some detail.
Highlights
- Ahasuerus makes a new decree, honouring instead of persecuting the Jews
Summary
Chapter 8
- Ahasuerus honours Esther and Mordecai, whose relationship with Esther has now been explained to him
- Haman's property is given to Esther, who gives it to Mordecai
- Now, at last Esther makes her petition - she asks for Haman's letter regarding the Jews to be revoked
- Ahasuerus distributed a letter cancelling the earlier letter to all his provinces
Addition E
Chapter 16
- The letter of Ahasuerus
Chapter 8 resumed
- The letter is received in the provinces, and the Jews overnight move from being oppressed to being prestigious
Questions and Observations
1) I had been wondering whether Haman's malevolent family might be hanging around to cause further trouble, but Addition E clears it up - they were executed too.
2) The decree is powerful stuff: "Permit the Jews to live under their own laws". A question of relative cultures within a single state that countries and cultures grapple with to this day.
3) The final verse is rather dark: "Furthermore, many of the peoples of the country professed to be Jews, because the fear of the Jews had fallen upon them." Why would this happen? Had the oppressed overnight taken to oppressing others? Verse 13 gives a hint: "the Jews were to be ready on that day to take revenge on their enemies." This seems to be describing the nasty settling of scores. Hmm, bit of a bad taste in the mouth left from this chapter. Looking ahead, the next chapter describes this distasteful process in some detail.
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Esther 9 text
Highlights
- The Jews massacre fellow citizens as enemies and set up a day of annual celebration to remember the event
Summary
- On the previously appointed day for destruction of the Jews, the Jews gather in cities across the Persian empire and kill all their enemies
- In Susa, they kill 800 people, including the 10 sons of Haman; Ahasuerus looks on with blank approval
- Overall, they kill 75,000 people across the empire
- These days of the year are set aside as a Jewish festival of joyful remembrance, called "Purim" (meaning "lots" - as in "drawing lots")
Questions and Observations
1) So this has all gone a bit wrong, hasn't it? A tale of rescue of the persecuted has morphed suddenly into a savage tale of massacres on the part of the liberated formerly persecuted.
2) 75,000 is a large number of people. If we needed any more evidence to put in the scale against treating this book as history, this is quite a whopping piece.
3) The explanation of the origin of the word "Purim" doesn't feel very intuitive.
4) This is all a pretty strange and unpalatable back-story to a festival that is still keenly celebrated. I note that online accounts seem to make the Purim rituals seem rather pantomime-like - hissing at the baddies, etc. Not sure that if I were Jewish, I'd be especially comfortable with it all.
Highlights
- The Jews massacre fellow citizens as enemies and set up a day of annual celebration to remember the event
Summary
- On the previously appointed day for destruction of the Jews, the Jews gather in cities across the Persian empire and kill all their enemies
- In Susa, they kill 800 people, including the 10 sons of Haman; Ahasuerus looks on with blank approval
- Overall, they kill 75,000 people across the empire
- These days of the year are set aside as a Jewish festival of joyful remembrance, called "Purim" (meaning "lots" - as in "drawing lots")
Questions and Observations
1) So this has all gone a bit wrong, hasn't it? A tale of rescue of the persecuted has morphed suddenly into a savage tale of massacres on the part of the liberated formerly persecuted.
2) 75,000 is a large number of people. If we needed any more evidence to put in the scale against treating this book as history, this is quite a whopping piece.
3) The explanation of the origin of the word "Purim" doesn't feel very intuitive.
4) This is all a pretty strange and unpalatable back-story to a festival that is still keenly celebrated. I note that online accounts seem to make the Purim rituals seem rather pantomime-like - hissing at the baddies, etc. Not sure that if I were Jewish, I'd be especially comfortable with it all.
-
ttf_timothy42b
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:57 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: MoominDave on Oct 07, 2016, 03:25AM Why would this happen? Had the oppressed overnight taken to oppressing others? Verse 13 gives a hint: "the Jews were to be ready on that day to take revenge on their enemies." This seems to be describing the nasty settling of scores. Hmm, bit of a bad taste in the mouth left from this chapter. Looking ahead, the next chapter describes this distasteful process in some detail.
Might be the basis for the movie Purge.
Might be the basis for the movie Purge.
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Completely incidentally Tim - did this thread turn out at all like the thread you mentioned that inspired it?
-
ttf_timothy42b
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:57 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: MoominDave on Oct 07, 2016, 06:26AMCompletely incidentally Tim - did this thread turn out at all like the thread you mentioned that inspired it?
Yes, very much so.
Stylistically there are differences - in the Army version there were more participants with more diverse viewpoints including some radical ones, and there was a more fictional paraphrase attempt rather than the straightforward recounting mostly done here.
From a content presentation viewpoint I think the conclusion is made equally in both - it is very hard to see the OT as historical given the difficulties with time and place, names, order, numbers of people, etc. Extreme mental gymnastics would be required.
I really wish the old version were still available but that system has been replaced.
While I was active in it this happened:
http://www.stripes.com/news/online-christian-soldiers-1.80024
However that is unrelated to the forum having died - technology moved on and left it behind.
Yes, very much so.
Stylistically there are differences - in the Army version there were more participants with more diverse viewpoints including some radical ones, and there was a more fictional paraphrase attempt rather than the straightforward recounting mostly done here.
From a content presentation viewpoint I think the conclusion is made equally in both - it is very hard to see the OT as historical given the difficulties with time and place, names, order, numbers of people, etc. Extreme mental gymnastics would be required.
I really wish the old version were still available but that system has been replaced.
While I was active in it this happened:
http://www.stripes.com/news/online-christian-soldiers-1.80024
However that is unrelated to the forum having died - technology moved on and left it behind.
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
That's interesting. My personal conclusion on the historicity of what we've been through so far is that there are reasonably clear delineations between varying levels of realism in sections of writing, often down book lines. We've seen a grand historical narrative presented that started in mythology, that then over the long stretch between Joshua and Rehoboam gradually transitioned into a decent attempt to present real history. Now we seem to be seeing (Tobit, Judith, Esther) a series of historical mini-novellas, books not intended to be read as literal history. It's an interesting development, and not one I was entirely expecting. Ruth I would likely place in the same category too, and I suspect there will be more (Job? Daniel?).
There's plenty of real history in the Bible, but it does need careful attention to separate out from the mythology, distortions, and novelisations in which it's entwined. I'm interested in what a "fictional paraphrase attempt" would be - I'm not sure I quite understand what you mean by that.
The end of your AKO subforum has me frowning on your behalf! Some tinpot wannabe-dictator decided that they didn't like the tone of a whole community of conversation, so took it upon themselves to spend a year talking someone into giving them control of it, whereupon they shut it all down unilaterally. Such an action strikes me as rude and disrespectful in the extreme, not to mention weirdly mentally unbalanced in an authoritarian kind of way, and one that a civilised internet ought to be able to prevent. A classic example of how those that seek power are usually those that should be most stringently denied it...
There's plenty of real history in the Bible, but it does need careful attention to separate out from the mythology, distortions, and novelisations in which it's entwined. I'm interested in what a "fictional paraphrase attempt" would be - I'm not sure I quite understand what you mean by that.
The end of your AKO subforum has me frowning on your behalf! Some tinpot wannabe-dictator decided that they didn't like the tone of a whole community of conversation, so took it upon themselves to spend a year talking someone into giving them control of it, whereupon they shut it all down unilaterally. Such an action strikes me as rude and disrespectful in the extreme, not to mention weirdly mentally unbalanced in an authoritarian kind of way, and one that a civilised internet ought to be able to prevent. A classic example of how those that seek power are usually those that should be most stringently denied it...
-
ttf_timothy42b
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:57 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: MoominDave on Oct 07, 2016, 07:34AM
Some tinpot wannabe-dictator decided that they didn't like the tone of a whole community of conversation, so took it upon themselves to spend a year talking someone into giving them control of it, whereupon they shut it all down unilaterally.
That happened, but it didn't end there. It reappeared with a slightly different name and no administrative control to that person, and the conversations continued. These communities are fairly robust. At one point they even asked me to become an administrator.
Some tinpot wannabe-dictator decided that they didn't like the tone of a whole community of conversation, so took it upon themselves to spend a year talking someone into giving them control of it, whereupon they shut it all down unilaterally.
That happened, but it didn't end there. It reappeared with a slightly different name and no administrative control to that person, and the conversations continued. These communities are fairly robust. At one point they even asked me to become an administrator.
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: MoominDave on Oct 07, 2016, 03:25AM - Ahasuerus distributed a letter cancelling the earlier letter to all his provinces
- v8 says that " an edict written in the name of the king and sealed with the kings ring cannot be revoked" so the edict to kill the Jew's wasn't cancelled, it was still in force. So the Jew's were still able to be legally attacked. The second edict allowed the Jew's to defend themselves.
Quote3) The final verse is rather dark: "Furthermore, many of the peoples of the country professed to be Jews, because the fear of the Jews had fallen upon them." Why would this happen? Had the oppressed overnight taken to oppressing others? Verse 13 gives a hint: "the Jews were to be ready on that day to take revenge on their enemies." This seems to be describing the nasty settling of scores. Hmm, bit of a bad taste in the mouth left from this chapter. Looking ahead, the next chapter describes this distasteful process in some detail.
While I agree that they episode is distasteful, the events were not out of character with how civilisation was run in those days. The Jew's were under threat if being killed and they had been given permission to defend themselves in kind.
But I agree that human nature does often like to take revenge. Its still the same.
- v8 says that " an edict written in the name of the king and sealed with the kings ring cannot be revoked" so the edict to kill the Jew's wasn't cancelled, it was still in force. So the Jew's were still able to be legally attacked. The second edict allowed the Jew's to defend themselves.
Quote3) The final verse is rather dark: "Furthermore, many of the peoples of the country professed to be Jews, because the fear of the Jews had fallen upon them." Why would this happen? Had the oppressed overnight taken to oppressing others? Verse 13 gives a hint: "the Jews were to be ready on that day to take revenge on their enemies." This seems to be describing the nasty settling of scores. Hmm, bit of a bad taste in the mouth left from this chapter. Looking ahead, the next chapter describes this distasteful process in some detail.
While I agree that they episode is distasteful, the events were not out of character with how civilisation was run in those days. The Jew's were under threat if being killed and they had been given permission to defend themselves in kind.
But I agree that human nature does often like to take revenge. Its still the same.
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: MoominDave on Oct 07, 2016, 03:40AM - The Jews massacre fellow citizens as enemies and set up a day of annual celebration to remember the event
Morality. If what the Jews did was to defend themselves against attack then I would argue that typifying their actions as
by "massacre fellow citizens" is unfair. But the description of sounds like their was some pre-emptive defence involved so, as usual in human conflict there is usually no total blacks and whites.
Quote4) This is all a pretty strange and unpalatable back-story to a festival that is still keenly celebrated. I note that online accounts seem to make the Purim rituals seem rather pantomime-like - hissing at the baddies, etc. Not sure that if I were Jewish, I'd be especially comfortable with it all.
I don't know if Jewishness would have much to do with it. I expect that you're not comfortable with it because you're British and it "wouldn't be cricket" to behave like that. Actually it sounds more like how football fans behave. I guess you're not one of them. Are band supporters like football or cricket fans?
Morality. If what the Jews did was to defend themselves against attack then I would argue that typifying their actions as
by "massacre fellow citizens" is unfair. But the description of sounds like their was some pre-emptive defence involved so, as usual in human conflict there is usually no total blacks and whites.
Quote4) This is all a pretty strange and unpalatable back-story to a festival that is still keenly celebrated. I note that online accounts seem to make the Purim rituals seem rather pantomime-like - hissing at the baddies, etc. Not sure that if I were Jewish, I'd be especially comfortable with it all.
I don't know if Jewishness would have much to do with it. I expect that you're not comfortable with it because you're British and it "wouldn't be cricket" to behave like that. Actually it sounds more like how football fans behave. I guess you're not one of them. Are band supporters like football or cricket fans?
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Esther 10 text
Highlights
- Mordecai was a great guy
Summary
- King Ahasuerus taxed all the land and Mordecai was second in charge and you can read about it in the histories.
- Mordecai looked after the Jews and was popular with them
- Mordecai explains his dream:
- the river was Esther
- the 2 dragons were Haman and Mordecai
- and the nations were Israels enemies and the nation that God saved was Israel
- and the letter about Purim was bought to Egypt (Ptolemy and Cleopatra) by a priest.
Highlights
- Mordecai was a great guy
Summary
- King Ahasuerus taxed all the land and Mordecai was second in charge and you can read about it in the histories.
- Mordecai looked after the Jews and was popular with them
- Mordecai explains his dream:
- the river was Esther
- the 2 dragons were Haman and Mordecai
- and the nations were Israels enemies and the nation that God saved was Israel
- and the letter about Purim was bought to Egypt (Ptolemy and Cleopatra) by a priest.
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
1 Maccabees 1 text
Highlights
- The background to the Maccabees rebellion
Summary
- Alexander the Great: conquered the Persian and Medes and ruled over many nations
- He handed over rule to a number of his most honoured officers before he died: and they caused many evils
- Antiochus Epiphanes began to reign in the 137th year of the kingdom of the Greeks (175 BC)
- He allowed renegade Jews to take power in Israel. They forgot about the covenant with God and adopted Gentile customs: they were bad
- Antiochus Epiphanes conquered Egypt and then came to Jerusalm and desecrated the temple
- 2 years later the king sent someone to collect tribute from Israel but he plundered Jerusalem, took captives, and took control of the city. (169 BC)
- the king issued an edict that everyone should give up their own customs and become one people: this meant the people had to desecrate themselves, or be subject to the death penalty of they didn't
- He sent people to make sure the new law was followed. Many from Israel followed it.
- An "desecrating" altar was erected on the altar in the temple and altars were built in surrounding towns (167 BC)
- Then a sacrifice was made on the desecrating altar.
- Many Israelites stayed true to the covenant and were killed because of it.
Questions and Observations
1) This seems intended to be taken as a serious historical report. The writing is vivid but realistic.
2) There were Israelites that were keen to adopt the new practices and those not.
3) I like the way the writer includes what look like quotes to his report. It adds interest.
Highlights
- The background to the Maccabees rebellion
Summary
- Alexander the Great: conquered the Persian and Medes and ruled over many nations
- He handed over rule to a number of his most honoured officers before he died: and they caused many evils
- Antiochus Epiphanes began to reign in the 137th year of the kingdom of the Greeks (175 BC)
- He allowed renegade Jews to take power in Israel. They forgot about the covenant with God and adopted Gentile customs: they were bad
- Antiochus Epiphanes conquered Egypt and then came to Jerusalm and desecrated the temple
- 2 years later the king sent someone to collect tribute from Israel but he plundered Jerusalem, took captives, and took control of the city. (169 BC)
- the king issued an edict that everyone should give up their own customs and become one people: this meant the people had to desecrate themselves, or be subject to the death penalty of they didn't
- He sent people to make sure the new law was followed. Many from Israel followed it.
- An "desecrating" altar was erected on the altar in the temple and altars were built in surrounding towns (167 BC)
- Then a sacrifice was made on the desecrating altar.
- Many Israelites stayed true to the covenant and were killed because of it.
Questions and Observations
1) This seems intended to be taken as a serious historical report. The writing is vivid but realistic.
2) There were Israelites that were keen to adopt the new practices and those not.
3) I like the way the writer includes what look like quotes to his report. It adds interest.
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Been away for the weekend, just catching up...
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 09, 2016, 01:15AMMorality. If what the Jews did was to defend themselves against attack then I would argue that typifying their actions as
by "massacre fellow citizens" is unfair. But the description of sounds like their was some pre-emptive defence involved so, as usual in human conflict there is usually no total blacks and whites.
So within the context of the narrative it is made to seem that there is little choice. Kill or be killed. That doesn't change the fact that killing people is wrong. One can understand it, but it strikes me as a matter for shame rather than celebration.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 09, 2016, 01:15AMI don't know if Jewishness would have much to do with it. I expect that you're not comfortable with it because you're British and it "wouldn't be cricket" to behave like that. Actually it sounds more like how football fans behave. I guess you're not one of them. Are band supporters like football or cricket fans?
I'm not comfortable with it because I'm a person, one with a sense of morals that doesn't stretch to finding anything to celebrate in violence, no matter how justified it might be. Not because I have some particular nationality. Incidentally, I find dividing people up on the basis of their nationalities very problematic - part of why all this Brexit referendum fallout is quite so disheartening to see in the UK. Our government flirts openly with old-fashioned fascism as we speak. But that's a different topic.
What I was trying to say was that if I'd been raised in a cultural context where I was expected to once a year enthusiastically celebrate a historical slaughter, I would like to think that I would have the strength of character to opt out of it. And it would make me internally question what those that celebrated enthusiastically were thinking. It would be nice to hear the perspective of someone raised in a Jewish setting on this.
Just as well Esther seems to be intended as fiction, eh?
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 09, 2016, 01:15AMMorality. If what the Jews did was to defend themselves against attack then I would argue that typifying their actions as
by "massacre fellow citizens" is unfair. But the description of sounds like their was some pre-emptive defence involved so, as usual in human conflict there is usually no total blacks and whites.
So within the context of the narrative it is made to seem that there is little choice. Kill or be killed. That doesn't change the fact that killing people is wrong. One can understand it, but it strikes me as a matter for shame rather than celebration.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 09, 2016, 01:15AMI don't know if Jewishness would have much to do with it. I expect that you're not comfortable with it because you're British and it "wouldn't be cricket" to behave like that. Actually it sounds more like how football fans behave. I guess you're not one of them. Are band supporters like football or cricket fans?
I'm not comfortable with it because I'm a person, one with a sense of morals that doesn't stretch to finding anything to celebrate in violence, no matter how justified it might be. Not because I have some particular nationality. Incidentally, I find dividing people up on the basis of their nationalities very problematic - part of why all this Brexit referendum fallout is quite so disheartening to see in the UK. Our government flirts openly with old-fashioned fascism as we speak. But that's a different topic.
What I was trying to say was that if I'd been raised in a cultural context where I was expected to once a year enthusiastically celebrate a historical slaughter, I would like to think that I would have the strength of character to opt out of it. And it would make me internally question what those that celebrated enthusiastically were thinking. It would be nice to hear the perspective of someone raised in a Jewish setting on this.
Just as well Esther seems to be intended as fiction, eh?
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 09, 2016, 01:28AM - King Ahasuerus taxed all the land and Mordecai was second in charge and you can read about it in the histories.
It's a shame that we can't. "The Annals of the Kings of Media and Persia" that refer to this are not extant, although there are various decrees and records still in existence. However, given that it has been impossible for historians to accurately pin Esther onto any particular Median or Persian king, contexts which are decently well documented considering their extreme cultural antiquities, I think that we must strongly doubt the veracity of Esther. To me it seems of a piece with Tobit and Judith - a story intended to illuminate, but not one that can ever have been intended as literal truth. What do you think?
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 09, 2016, 01:28AM - and the letter about Purim was bought to Egypt (Ptolemy and Cleopatra) by a priest.
Here's a timestamp by which we can set a latest possible composition date. But which Ptolemy and which Cleopatra? There were quite a few of both. Here's a list of the rulers of Egypt's Ptolemaic (and final) dynasty - one can immediate develop a headache peering at all the repeated names, political rivalries, and incestuous marriages...
From this list, we have the following periods where joint rule (rather than just marriage) between a Ptolemy and a Cleopatra is specified in Egypt:
Cleopatra III & Ptolemy IX: 116-107 BC
Cleopatra III & Ptolemy X: 107-101 BC
Cleopatra VII & Ptolemy XIII: 51-47 BC
Cleopatra VII & Ptolemy XIV: 47-44 BC
Cleopatra VII & Ptolemy XV: 44-30 BC
For what it's worth, the famous Cleopatra is the latter of these two: Cleopatra VII Philopator
It isn't clear to me (and nor it seems, is it clear to the internet) which Cleopatra and Ptolemy is meant. So we can perhaps pin this transmission of the text to either the mid 1st century BC or the late 2nd century BC, but no more.
It's a shame that we can't. "The Annals of the Kings of Media and Persia" that refer to this are not extant, although there are various decrees and records still in existence. However, given that it has been impossible for historians to accurately pin Esther onto any particular Median or Persian king, contexts which are decently well documented considering their extreme cultural antiquities, I think that we must strongly doubt the veracity of Esther. To me it seems of a piece with Tobit and Judith - a story intended to illuminate, but not one that can ever have been intended as literal truth. What do you think?
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 09, 2016, 01:28AM - and the letter about Purim was bought to Egypt (Ptolemy and Cleopatra) by a priest.
Here's a timestamp by which we can set a latest possible composition date. But which Ptolemy and which Cleopatra? There were quite a few of both. Here's a list of the rulers of Egypt's Ptolemaic (and final) dynasty - one can immediate develop a headache peering at all the repeated names, political rivalries, and incestuous marriages...
From this list, we have the following periods where joint rule (rather than just marriage) between a Ptolemy and a Cleopatra is specified in Egypt:
Cleopatra III & Ptolemy IX: 116-107 BC
Cleopatra III & Ptolemy X: 107-101 BC
Cleopatra VII & Ptolemy XIII: 51-47 BC
Cleopatra VII & Ptolemy XIV: 47-44 BC
Cleopatra VII & Ptolemy XV: 44-30 BC
For what it's worth, the famous Cleopatra is the latter of these two: Cleopatra VII Philopator
It isn't clear to me (and nor it seems, is it clear to the internet) which Cleopatra and Ptolemy is meant. So we can perhaps pin this transmission of the text to either the mid 1st century BC or the late 2nd century BC, but no more.
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: MoominDave on Apr 06, 2016, 02:58PMPart I - The Tetrateuch
Genesis
Deuteronomy
1 Chronicles
Genesis
- [li]Big picture stuff
- [li]Creation; Adam & Eve[/li][li]Humans, take 1; Cain & Abel, Noah[/li][li]The Flood; Wash everything away, start again[/li][li]Humans, take 2[/li]
- [li]New scene, three generations on - Israelites now of low status in Egypt[/li][li]Moses grows up, fights battle of wills with Pharoah over plagues, leads Israelites to depart[/li][li]Wandering, take 1; through the desert to Mt. Sinai, where they make a long camp and...[/li]
- [li]...many laws are given[/li]
- [li]Wandering, take 2; they reach their destination, but are too weak to attempt the task, and so...[/li][li]Wandering, take 3; more pootling around, building up military prowess over the years in the preparation for invasion; new leaders emerge, and they finish on the brink of their destination again[/li]
Deuteronomy
- [li]Moses orates; recap of terms and conditions, forward planning[/li][li]Moses dies[/li]
- [li]Conquest of Canaan under Joshua[/li][li]Division of conquered land between the tribes, East and West banks of the Jordan[/li]
- [li]Prologue: Messy details of attempted not-always-successful conquest, compare with previous book[/li][li]An intermittent sequence of Judges leads: Othniel, Ehud, Shamgar, Deborah, Gideon, Tola, Jair, Jephthah, Ibzan, Elon, Abdon, Samson[/li][li]The Dan tribe take territory in the North and the Benjamin tribe are defeated by the other tribes[/li]
- [li]Intermezzo: Heartwarming tale of a family coming through hard times in the era of the Judges[/li]
- [li]Samuel is a priestly leader in a time of Philistine conflicts who needs a worthy successor[/li][li]Saul is appointed to the new role of king and with his son Jonathan defeats the Ammonites, Philistines, Amalekites, but he falls out with Samuel, who anoints David as a replacement king secretly[/li][li]David (a military hero) and Saul vie for superiority over a long period, eventually brought to an end when the Philistines kill Saul in battle[/li]
- [li]The kingdom nearly splits, but David unites it, doing many heroic deeds[/li][li]But in time he becomes morally suspect and manipulated by schemers[/li]
- [li]David dies, succeeded by Solomon, who consolidates his power base brutally but gains great wealth and a reputation for great wisdom, building the "first temple" and a palace; however, like David he becomes morally suspect in time[/li][li]After he dies, the kingdom is split into Israel (larger Northern portion) and Judah (smaller Southern portion), and the continual inference is that Judah is the legitimate one of the two[/li][li]Kings succeed in both Israel and Judah; Elijah gains prominence as a prophet[/li]
- [li]Long successions of kings of both Israel and Judah are described, and the prophet Elisha comes to prominence[/li][li]Most kings do not prioritise Yahweh-worship - none in Israel, but some in Judah.
[/li][li]First Israel then Judah are unable to tread the difficult path of negotiation between stronger powers on either side, with both populations destroyed and exiled by 586 BC[/li]
1 Chronicles
- [li]Recap of genealogy to the beginning[/li][li]Return of some exiles to Judah
[/li][li]Recap of Samuel written to favour David more highly- [li]David secures the AotC[/li][li]David breeds[/li][li]David defeats enemies[/li][li]David arranges for Solomon to build the temple[/li]
- [li]Recap of Kings with only the Judah parts and a focus on relations with Yahweh
- [li]Solomon builds the temple and is great[/li][li]Kingdom splits[/li][li]Long succession of kings, some good, some bad[/li][li]Judah squashed between Babylon and Egypt, falls to Babylon; population deported to exile[/li]
- [li]Cyrus of Persia commands Judah to return home and rebuild their temple[/li][li]Decades later Artaxerxes of Persia commands Ezra to lead a second wave of returnees[/li]
- [li]Nehemiah, a Judahite official of Artaxerxes of Persia, is appointed governor of Judah, rebuilding Jerusalem's wall[/li][li]He and Ezra organise Judah, mixing enlightened social reform with brutally dogmatic interpretations of Mosaic law[/li]
- [li]Tobit and his son Tobias are exiled in Nineveh when Israel falls[/li][li]Sarah lives in Media; a demon has killed seven of her husbands[/li][li]With an angel's help, Tobias rescues her, and everyone lives happily ever after[/li]
- [li]Nebuchadnezzar is enraged by the Israelites' failure to answer a military summons, and despatches his general Holofernes with his army to suppress them[/li][li]Judith, a beautiful Israelite widow, uses feminine wiles to distract Holofernes, killing him, sending his army into flight[/li]
- [li]Jewish exile in Susa Esther wins a beauty contest to become queen of Persia[/li][li]Factions vie to destroy the Jews in Persia, but the influence of her and her uncle Mordecai carries the day[/li][li]The Jews slaughter those that plotted to slaughter them, and this is celebrated as today's festival of Purim[/li]
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Back to history! Excellent, much more to be learned from this than from historical fiction.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 09, 2016, 07:04PM1 Maccabees 1 text
- Alexander the Great: conquered the Persian and Medes and ruled over many nations
We've skipped a long way here. The last instalment of the history ended with Nehemiah's departure as Governor of Judaea in 433 BC. Alexander's extraordinary empire-building adventure incredibly took place over less than a decade - from 334 BC, when he invaded Persia, to 326 BC, when he invaded NW India. His accession to the Achaemenid throne is usually dated at 330 BC.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 09, 2016, 07:04PM - He handed over rule to a number of his most honoured officers before he died: and they caused many evils
Alexander was only 32 when he died without being previously ill in 323 BC. Imagine - to have conquered the whole known world and more by then... Even Jesus lived longer. And Mozart.
But his astounding campaign success had overextended what he'd built. His last years were spent nearer home trying to keep things stable from his adopted capital of Babylon, and his sudden death was (is still) rumoured to be an assassination. It doesn't seem to me from the descriptions that he had handed over rule before he died - rather that such a large and unwieldy empire in those days of slow communications inherently required large amounts of basically independent delegation to maintain, and when Alexander unexpectedly died, the natural process was for those already in charge of various bits to hang on to them. The division was laid out explicitly in the Partition of Babylon in 323 BC. Things began with the Diadochi (basically those left in charge holding things together, so far as I can tell) maintaining satrapies on behalf of the Hellenistic empire, but the too-large empire that Alexander built fragmented into independent states in quick time, historically speaking, though not so quick as the lightning rate at which it was built. The one-sentence description in the text is a considerable simplification of the facts.
After years of upheaval and negotiation, Seleucus, former general of Alexander, who had been appointed Satrap of Babylon in the partition, established a stable empire entity, known to history as the Seleucid empire. After being driven out of his satrapy earlier, he returned to Babylon in 312 BC, and expanded his lands thereafter greatly, with his empire ultimately taking in much of Alexander's. In this reconstituted arrangement, Judaea found itself in the Antigonid kingdom, that took in much of modern Turkey, Syria, and Israel.
At some point(s) between this time and the time narrated by 1 Maccabees 1 (I daresay one could trace it out online if one tried...), Judaea passed from Antigonid control to Seleucid control...
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 09, 2016, 07:04PM - Antiochus Epiphanes began to reign in the 137th year of the kingdom of the Greeks (175 BC)
Given that Antiochus IV Epiphanes began to reign in 175 BC, we see that the author is dating "The Kingdom of the Greeks" by Seleucus's re-accession in Babylon in 312 BC.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 09, 2016, 07:04PM1) This seems intended to be taken as a serious historical report. The writing is vivid but realistic.
I think so too. Quite a different character of book from those we've been considering recently.
It seems that the authorship of 2 Maccabees is attributed to an abridgement of the work of one Jason of Cyrene, though the author of 1 Maccabees (and presumably also abridger of 2 Maccabees) is not identified.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 09, 2016, 07:04PM2) There were Israelites that were keen to adopt the new practices and those not.
The old story!
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 09, 2016, 07:04PM3) I like the way the writer includes what look like quotes to his report. It adds interest.
I read them as poems? We see that layout elsewhere in the Bible.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 09, 2016, 07:04PM1 Maccabees 1 text
- Alexander the Great: conquered the Persian and Medes and ruled over many nations
We've skipped a long way here. The last instalment of the history ended with Nehemiah's departure as Governor of Judaea in 433 BC. Alexander's extraordinary empire-building adventure incredibly took place over less than a decade - from 334 BC, when he invaded Persia, to 326 BC, when he invaded NW India. His accession to the Achaemenid throne is usually dated at 330 BC.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 09, 2016, 07:04PM - He handed over rule to a number of his most honoured officers before he died: and they caused many evils
Alexander was only 32 when he died without being previously ill in 323 BC. Imagine - to have conquered the whole known world and more by then... Even Jesus lived longer. And Mozart.
But his astounding campaign success had overextended what he'd built. His last years were spent nearer home trying to keep things stable from his adopted capital of Babylon, and his sudden death was (is still) rumoured to be an assassination. It doesn't seem to me from the descriptions that he had handed over rule before he died - rather that such a large and unwieldy empire in those days of slow communications inherently required large amounts of basically independent delegation to maintain, and when Alexander unexpectedly died, the natural process was for those already in charge of various bits to hang on to them. The division was laid out explicitly in the Partition of Babylon in 323 BC. Things began with the Diadochi (basically those left in charge holding things together, so far as I can tell) maintaining satrapies on behalf of the Hellenistic empire, but the too-large empire that Alexander built fragmented into independent states in quick time, historically speaking, though not so quick as the lightning rate at which it was built. The one-sentence description in the text is a considerable simplification of the facts.
After years of upheaval and negotiation, Seleucus, former general of Alexander, who had been appointed Satrap of Babylon in the partition, established a stable empire entity, known to history as the Seleucid empire. After being driven out of his satrapy earlier, he returned to Babylon in 312 BC, and expanded his lands thereafter greatly, with his empire ultimately taking in much of Alexander's. In this reconstituted arrangement, Judaea found itself in the Antigonid kingdom, that took in much of modern Turkey, Syria, and Israel.
At some point(s) between this time and the time narrated by 1 Maccabees 1 (I daresay one could trace it out online if one tried...), Judaea passed from Antigonid control to Seleucid control...
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 09, 2016, 07:04PM - Antiochus Epiphanes began to reign in the 137th year of the kingdom of the Greeks (175 BC)
Given that Antiochus IV Epiphanes began to reign in 175 BC, we see that the author is dating "The Kingdom of the Greeks" by Seleucus's re-accession in Babylon in 312 BC.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 09, 2016, 07:04PM1) This seems intended to be taken as a serious historical report. The writing is vivid but realistic.
I think so too. Quite a different character of book from those we've been considering recently.
It seems that the authorship of 2 Maccabees is attributed to an abridgement of the work of one Jason of Cyrene, though the author of 1 Maccabees (and presumably also abridger of 2 Maccabees) is not identified.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 09, 2016, 07:04PM2) There were Israelites that were keen to adopt the new practices and those not.
The old story!
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 09, 2016, 07:04PM3) I like the way the writer includes what look like quotes to his report. It adds interest.
I read them as poems? We see that layout elsewhere in the Bible.
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
By the way, an observation that popped into my head on this subject...
Are these things a coincidence?
Are these things a coincidence?
- [li]Freed by the Persians, the Jews came back from Babylonian exile newly enthused with the idea of monotheism, in contrast to their earlier tendency to worship all sorts of gods[/li][li]The Persians were keen Zoroastrians, an interesting religion that, among other ideals, was rather unique in promoting monotheism (of their god Ahura Mazda)[/li]
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
1 Maccabees 2 text
Highlights
- Revolt is sparked
Summary
- Mattathias is a priest who has moved from Jerusalem to Modein; he has 5 sons, one of whom is Judas Maccabeus
- They weep for the degradation suffered by their land
- The officers of Antiochus come to the town, to enforce replacement of Jewish worship with non-Jewish worship
- They call Mattathias as a community leader to be the first to submit and offer worship in the way they desire
- Mattathias refuses - more, he kills a man who complies, and then kills the officer of the king
- Sensing the likely consequences, Mattathias flees the town for the wilderness, taking like-minded people with him
- Official forces attack the group on the Sabbath; they refuse to defend themselves on the holy day, and so they are massacred; Mattathias does not seem to have been present
- Mattathias hears of this and resolves that defense on the Sabbath is something that cannot be left undone
- A mighty company of warriors joins Mattathias, and they counter-attack
- They take territory and forcibly circumcise anyone not circumcised
- Mattathias's death approaches; he calls his sons near and urges them to stay true to the cause, citing historical figures who were rewarded in the physical world for keeping the faith in difficult circumstances
- Mattathias dies (166 BC), placing his son Simon Thassi in charge of strategy and his son Judas Maccabeus in charge of the military
Questions and Observations
1) Modein can be seen on this map. Find Joppa on the coast near the left-hand side of the picture, then trace inland three towns. It's about a day's walking from Jerusalem.
2) We remember from Numbers the referenced zeal of Phinehas.
3) Imagine refusing to defend oneself because of the day of the week...
4) Forced circumcision = highly not cool...
5) So here we have religion as a tool for directing people militarily - worldly reward is promised. Dangerous stuff.
6) Mattathias's death, seemingly without obvious cause, suggests to me that this chapter contains the events of several years?
Highlights
- Revolt is sparked
Summary
- Mattathias is a priest who has moved from Jerusalem to Modein; he has 5 sons, one of whom is Judas Maccabeus
- They weep for the degradation suffered by their land
- The officers of Antiochus come to the town, to enforce replacement of Jewish worship with non-Jewish worship
- They call Mattathias as a community leader to be the first to submit and offer worship in the way they desire
- Mattathias refuses - more, he kills a man who complies, and then kills the officer of the king
- Sensing the likely consequences, Mattathias flees the town for the wilderness, taking like-minded people with him
- Official forces attack the group on the Sabbath; they refuse to defend themselves on the holy day, and so they are massacred; Mattathias does not seem to have been present
- Mattathias hears of this and resolves that defense on the Sabbath is something that cannot be left undone
- A mighty company of warriors joins Mattathias, and they counter-attack
- They take territory and forcibly circumcise anyone not circumcised
- Mattathias's death approaches; he calls his sons near and urges them to stay true to the cause, citing historical figures who were rewarded in the physical world for keeping the faith in difficult circumstances
- Mattathias dies (166 BC), placing his son Simon Thassi in charge of strategy and his son Judas Maccabeus in charge of the military
Questions and Observations
1) Modein can be seen on this map. Find Joppa on the coast near the left-hand side of the picture, then trace inland three towns. It's about a day's walking from Jerusalem.
2) We remember from Numbers the referenced zeal of Phinehas.
3) Imagine refusing to defend oneself because of the day of the week...
4) Forced circumcision = highly not cool...
5) So here we have religion as a tool for directing people militarily - worldly reward is promised. Dangerous stuff.
6) Mattathias's death, seemingly without obvious cause, suggests to me that this chapter contains the events of several years?
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: MoominDave on Oct 10, 2016, 07:08AMBy the way, an observation that popped into my head on this subject...
Are these things a coincidence?
I've noticed you at times observing that Judaism was not monotheistic and I disagree.
I think that we're thinking about different things though.
On the one hand we've got religions that Jew's follow: that includes the worhip of the God of the Old Testament aka The Lord (this came to be called Judaism); and other religions, that worshipped "pretend" gods.
The bible has always claimed that there is only one true God, eg:
- Gen 1:1 has God creating everything.
- Deut 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one which in the Hebrew includes the assertion that the is only one God.
so I take it that Judaism was always monotheistic. References to other gods are to pretend gods, like golden calves.
So I think we've got different sets of Jew's
- those who followed The Lord were monotheistic
- and the rest, who were not necessarily monotheistic
The people that came back to Israel from the Babylon exile were in the first set and did so because the believed what God has said. They were monotheists already, no need for influence by the Persians to make them that way. Although it may have strengthened their resolve.
I too, thought that Jews stopped showing their apostasy by following after other God's, but Maccabees reports that many Jews gladly adopted Antiochus' religion.
Are these things a coincidence?
- [li]Freed by the Persians, the Jews came back from Babylonian exile newly enthused with the idea of monotheism, in contrast to their earlier tendency to worship all sorts of gods[/li][li]The Persians were keen Zoroastrians, an interesting religion that, among other ideals, was rather unique in promoting monotheism (of their god Ahura Mazda)[/li]
I've noticed you at times observing that Judaism was not monotheistic and I disagree.
I think that we're thinking about different things though.
On the one hand we've got religions that Jew's follow: that includes the worhip of the God of the Old Testament aka The Lord (this came to be called Judaism); and other religions, that worshipped "pretend" gods.
The bible has always claimed that there is only one true God, eg:
- Gen 1:1 has God creating everything.
- Deut 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one which in the Hebrew includes the assertion that the is only one God.
so I take it that Judaism was always monotheistic. References to other gods are to pretend gods, like golden calves.
So I think we've got different sets of Jew's
- those who followed The Lord were monotheistic
- and the rest, who were not necessarily monotheistic
The people that came back to Israel from the Babylon exile were in the first set and did so because the believed what God has said. They were monotheists already, no need for influence by the Persians to make them that way. Although it may have strengthened their resolve.
I too, thought that Jews stopped showing their apostasy by following after other God's, but Maccabees reports that many Jews gladly adopted Antiochus' religion.
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 10, 2016, 04:24PMI've noticed you at times observing that Judaism was not monotheistic and I disagree.
I think that we're thinking about different things though.
On the one hand we've got religions that Jew's follow: that includes the worhip of the God of the Old Testament aka The Lord (this came to be called Judaism); and other religions, that worshipped "pretend" gods.
"Pretend" according to who? The Old Testament is stuffed full of references to other gods, presented in the text not as imaginary entities, but placed in a category of being with Yahweh. The standard differentiation made between Yahweh and the competition in the Bible is not a change of category, it's to say 'Yeah, these are similar objects, but this one is bigger than all the rest'.
There's an interesting little passage on Yahweh's Wikipedia page about Yahweh-focussed worship eventually winning out after the exile following centuries of struggle beforehand. Note that Asherah was in the earlier centuries of this changeover venerated as Yahweh's consort, the very definition of polytheism - we've seen many Asherah references while going through these texts.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 10, 2016, 04:24PMThe bible has always claimed that there is only one true God, eg:
- Gen 1:1 has God creating everything.
- Deut 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one which in the Hebrew includes the assertion that the is only one God.
so I take it that Judaism was always monotheistic. References to other gods are to pretend gods, like golden calves.
The trouble with using Bible texts to deduce how Yahweh-worship was approached in earlier times is that none of them come direct from the earlier times. What we have is all heavily redacted down to not many years BC, and is a classic "History as written by the winners" narrative. People like Ezra were desperately keen to have people see monotheistic Yahweh-worship as the only possible situation, and these texts come to us from them, writers with a very obvious angle to promote in their works. If Genesis and Deuteronomy, asserting to be tales of much earlier times, tell us something on the subject, it behooves us to ask when and why the words were actually written. Deuteronomy is, in our best opinions, thought to date largely to the court of Josiah of Judah, a Judahite documenting of incoming Israelite ideas following the dispersion of Israel by the Assyrians. Genesis is less clear, but it is clear that it was written an awful long time after the events described - and likely at the same period as Deuteronomy.
The passages you mention present a view on Yahweh-worship that was committed to paper once it was clear what the project was - to install Yahweh as unopposed top-dog god for Judah/Judaea. They claim to speak on behalf of people a millennium dead at that point, but it isn't at all obvious that their motives in doing so can be trusted, or that they had the slightest idea what was actually said any more than one could reliably quote figures of Dark Ages legend today.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 10, 2016, 04:24PMSo I think we've got different sets of Jew's
- those who followed The Lord were monotheistic
- and the rest, who were not necessarily monotheistic
The people that came back to Israel from the Babylon exile were in the first set and did so because the believed what God has said. They were monotheists already, no need for influence by the Persians to make them that way. Although it may have strengthened their resolve.
Well, I don't think it's that simple (surprise!). Note that Cyrus is presented as giving permission to return in terms of his Yahweh-worship - when he quite clearly did no such thing, being a keen Zoroastrian. I could imagine that exiled Yahweh-worshippers might construe Zoroastrianism's monotheistic god Ahura Mazda as being the same thing as their Yahweh - I have observed a similar benevolently-minded conflation in some religious people in the present day, seeking to promote unity between differing religions.
Those that returned were not models of lawful behaviour either. We were told that they were quick to do things like marry forbidden people from outside the tribe.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 10, 2016, 04:24PMI too, thought that Jews stopped showing their apostasy by following after other God's, but Maccabees reports that many Jews gladly adopted Antiochus' religion.
It's interesting - showing that even at this late date Yahweh's cult could not count on unconditional support.
I think that we're thinking about different things though.
On the one hand we've got religions that Jew's follow: that includes the worhip of the God of the Old Testament aka The Lord (this came to be called Judaism); and other religions, that worshipped "pretend" gods.
"Pretend" according to who? The Old Testament is stuffed full of references to other gods, presented in the text not as imaginary entities, but placed in a category of being with Yahweh. The standard differentiation made between Yahweh and the competition in the Bible is not a change of category, it's to say 'Yeah, these are similar objects, but this one is bigger than all the rest'.
There's an interesting little passage on Yahweh's Wikipedia page about Yahweh-focussed worship eventually winning out after the exile following centuries of struggle beforehand. Note that Asherah was in the earlier centuries of this changeover venerated as Yahweh's consort, the very definition of polytheism - we've seen many Asherah references while going through these texts.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 10, 2016, 04:24PMThe bible has always claimed that there is only one true God, eg:
- Gen 1:1 has God creating everything.
- Deut 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one which in the Hebrew includes the assertion that the is only one God.
so I take it that Judaism was always monotheistic. References to other gods are to pretend gods, like golden calves.
The trouble with using Bible texts to deduce how Yahweh-worship was approached in earlier times is that none of them come direct from the earlier times. What we have is all heavily redacted down to not many years BC, and is a classic "History as written by the winners" narrative. People like Ezra were desperately keen to have people see monotheistic Yahweh-worship as the only possible situation, and these texts come to us from them, writers with a very obvious angle to promote in their works. If Genesis and Deuteronomy, asserting to be tales of much earlier times, tell us something on the subject, it behooves us to ask when and why the words were actually written. Deuteronomy is, in our best opinions, thought to date largely to the court of Josiah of Judah, a Judahite documenting of incoming Israelite ideas following the dispersion of Israel by the Assyrians. Genesis is less clear, but it is clear that it was written an awful long time after the events described - and likely at the same period as Deuteronomy.
The passages you mention present a view on Yahweh-worship that was committed to paper once it was clear what the project was - to install Yahweh as unopposed top-dog god for Judah/Judaea. They claim to speak on behalf of people a millennium dead at that point, but it isn't at all obvious that their motives in doing so can be trusted, or that they had the slightest idea what was actually said any more than one could reliably quote figures of Dark Ages legend today.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 10, 2016, 04:24PMSo I think we've got different sets of Jew's
- those who followed The Lord were monotheistic
- and the rest, who were not necessarily monotheistic
The people that came back to Israel from the Babylon exile were in the first set and did so because the believed what God has said. They were monotheists already, no need for influence by the Persians to make them that way. Although it may have strengthened their resolve.
Well, I don't think it's that simple (surprise!). Note that Cyrus is presented as giving permission to return in terms of his Yahweh-worship - when he quite clearly did no such thing, being a keen Zoroastrian. I could imagine that exiled Yahweh-worshippers might construe Zoroastrianism's monotheistic god Ahura Mazda as being the same thing as their Yahweh - I have observed a similar benevolently-minded conflation in some religious people in the present day, seeking to promote unity between differing religions.
Those that returned were not models of lawful behaviour either. We were told that they were quick to do things like marry forbidden people from outside the tribe.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 10, 2016, 04:24PMI too, thought that Jews stopped showing their apostasy by following after other God's, but Maccabees reports that many Jews gladly adopted Antiochus' religion.
It's interesting - showing that even at this late date Yahweh's cult could not count on unconditional support.
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
1 Maccabees 3 text
Highlights
- The rebellion gathers pace and territory, but faces its first serious challenge
Summary
- Judas Maccabeus takes command of the armed forces of the rebellion, and defeats various Judaean cities
- He defeats Samarian forces that oppose him
- He defeats Syrian forces against large odds
- Antiochus isn't pleased; he wishes to fund his army more highly in order to oppose Judas, but has no money
- He travels to Persia to collect taxes (165 BC), leaving one Lysias in charge, with the king's son Antiochus.
- Lysias raises a mighty army, and takes it to meet Judas
- Judas prays for a good outcome, and prepares for battle
Questions and Observations
1) "Maccabeus" means hammer, thought to be a reference to the military prowess of Judas. If this is so, he wouldn't have been surnamed "Maccabeus" at the start of this tale.
2) Another reason for the Bible-documented enmity between Jews and Samaritans at the time of Jesus.
Highlights
- The rebellion gathers pace and territory, but faces its first serious challenge
Summary
- Judas Maccabeus takes command of the armed forces of the rebellion, and defeats various Judaean cities
- He defeats Samarian forces that oppose him
- He defeats Syrian forces against large odds
- Antiochus isn't pleased; he wishes to fund his army more highly in order to oppose Judas, but has no money
- He travels to Persia to collect taxes (165 BC), leaving one Lysias in charge, with the king's son Antiochus.
- Lysias raises a mighty army, and takes it to meet Judas
- Judas prays for a good outcome, and prepares for battle
Questions and Observations
1) "Maccabeus" means hammer, thought to be a reference to the military prowess of Judas. If this is so, he wouldn't have been surnamed "Maccabeus" at the start of this tale.
2) Another reason for the Bible-documented enmity between Jews and Samaritans at the time of Jesus.
-
ttf_timothy42b
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:57 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 10, 2016, 04:24PMI too, thought that Jews stopped showing their apostasy by following after other God's, but Maccabees reports that many Jews gladly adopted Antiochus' religion.
As Dave points out much of this is written long after the events. The OT can easily be read to show Yahweh as the Top God and special protector but not necessarily the only one - witness Joshua and the long day, e.g.
But in terms of the covenant (we will obey and Yahweh will win our battles) there needed to be an explanation for losing battles, which happened distressingly frequently. The easy explanation is the people's failure to properly worship and obey.
As Dave points out much of this is written long after the events. The OT can easily be read to show Yahweh as the Top God and special protector but not necessarily the only one - witness Joshua and the long day, e.g.
But in terms of the covenant (we will obey and Yahweh will win our battles) there needed to be an explanation for losing battles, which happened distressingly frequently. The easy explanation is the people's failure to properly worship and obey.
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: MoominDave on Oct 11, 2016, 07:03AM"Pretend" according to who? The Old Testament is stuffed full of references to other gods, presented in the text not as imaginary entities, but placed in a category of being with Yahweh. The standard differentiation made between Yahweh and the competition in the Bible is not a change of category, it's to say 'Yeah, these are similar objects, but this one is bigger than all the rest'.
...
I put "pretend" in quotes cause I knew it would be controversial. My take on it is that 'god/el' can refer to entities that people think are gods even if they aren't real. I noticed in some of the references you quoted, angels were referred to as god's so semantic range of the word in the bible seems wider that we're using it in.
Is that the way you would use the word god? "an entity that people think is a god even if it isn't real"
I know this is a point we disagree on, but don't want to get into a "Religious" debate.
...
I put "pretend" in quotes cause I knew it would be controversial. My take on it is that 'god/el' can refer to entities that people think are gods even if they aren't real. I noticed in some of the references you quoted, angels were referred to as god's so semantic range of the word in the bible seems wider that we're using it in.
Is that the way you would use the word god? "an entity that people think is a god even if it isn't real"
I know this is a point we disagree on, but don't want to get into a "Religious" debate.
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 11, 2016, 09:46PMIs that the way you would use the word god? "an entity that people think is a god even if it isn't real"
Sounds about right to me! Though it has a certain circularity of definition - i.e. what would a 'real god' be? But it's a useful circularity here - all we're establishing is that the category contains both types, not what the types are.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 11, 2016, 09:46PMI know this is a point we disagree on, but don't want to get into a "Religious" debate.
There's fruitful ground there, but I rather think that we've already trodden it several times over between us in the course of this and previous threads...
Sounds about right to me! Though it has a certain circularity of definition - i.e. what would a 'real god' be? But it's a useful circularity here - all we're establishing is that the category contains both types, not what the types are.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 11, 2016, 09:46PMI know this is a point we disagree on, but don't want to get into a "Religious" debate.
There's fruitful ground there, but I rather think that we've already trodden it several times over between us in the course of this and previous threads...
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
1 Maccabees 4 text
Highlights
- More victories for the rebellion, and the festival of Hanukkah is inaugurated
Summary
- Gorgias effects a night attack on Judas with his army, but Judas hears of it and instead attacks Gorgias's undefended camp at Emmaus
- It is a rout, one observed by Gorgias's returning men, who also flee
- Lysias musters a huge army the next year, but Judas defeats them too
- Judas and his men go up to Mount Zion, finding the sanctuary in ruins and overgrown, and the altar having been used for non-Yahweh rituals
- They destroy and replace (164 BC) the altar, judging it spoiled
- Judas fortifies the area
Questions and Observations
1) These are long chapters by Bible standards!
2) Given that this seems to be a theologically uncontroversial narration of the triumph of the Yahweh-keen parts of Jewish society, we have an interesting question: Why isn't Maccabees canonic? It seems a perfect candidate thus far.
3) Judas has a good intelligence service...
4) The rededication of the altar is celebrated today as the festival of Hanukkah.
Highlights
- More victories for the rebellion, and the festival of Hanukkah is inaugurated
Summary
- Gorgias effects a night attack on Judas with his army, but Judas hears of it and instead attacks Gorgias's undefended camp at Emmaus
- It is a rout, one observed by Gorgias's returning men, who also flee
- Lysias musters a huge army the next year, but Judas defeats them too
- Judas and his men go up to Mount Zion, finding the sanctuary in ruins and overgrown, and the altar having been used for non-Yahweh rituals
- They destroy and replace (164 BC) the altar, judging it spoiled
- Judas fortifies the area
Questions and Observations
1) These are long chapters by Bible standards!
2) Given that this seems to be a theologically uncontroversial narration of the triumph of the Yahweh-keen parts of Jewish society, we have an interesting question: Why isn't Maccabees canonic? It seems a perfect candidate thus far.
3) Judas has a good intelligence service...
4) The rededication of the altar is celebrated today as the festival of Hanukkah.
-
ttf_timothy42b
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:57 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 11, 2016, 09:46PMI put "pretend" in quotes cause I knew it would be controversial. My take on it is that 'god/el' can refer to entities that people think are gods even if they aren't real. I noticed in some of the references you quoted, angels were referred to as god's so semantic range of the word in the bible seems wider that we're using it in.
Is that the way you would use the word god? "an entity that people think is a god even if it isn't real"
I know this is a point we disagree on, but don't want to get into a "Religious" debate.
QuoteIs that the way you would use the word god? "an entity that people think is a god even if it isn't real"
In 2016 we make a clear distinction between God (all powerful) and human (purely mortal, limited by laws of science.) Human and divine are two completely different categories.
I do not think that has been the case historically. Human to divine was a continuum, and men could move along it. Roman emperors for example moved to the right, as did rulers of other nations. Men of righteousness and holiness also moved to the right. In Jesus's day there were movements who believed anyone could become divine.
So I'm not sure that "even if it isn't real" is really the correct way to refer to it. "Even if it wouldn't be fully supernatural by the standards of 2016" might be better.
Is that the way you would use the word god? "an entity that people think is a god even if it isn't real"
I know this is a point we disagree on, but don't want to get into a "Religious" debate.
QuoteIs that the way you would use the word god? "an entity that people think is a god even if it isn't real"
In 2016 we make a clear distinction between God (all powerful) and human (purely mortal, limited by laws of science.) Human and divine are two completely different categories.
I do not think that has been the case historically. Human to divine was a continuum, and men could move along it. Roman emperors for example moved to the right, as did rulers of other nations. Men of righteousness and holiness also moved to the right. In Jesus's day there were movements who believed anyone could become divine.
So I'm not sure that "even if it isn't real" is really the correct way to refer to it. "Even if it wouldn't be fully supernatural by the standards of 2016" might be better.
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: MoominDave on Oct 11, 2016, 07:23AM1) "Maccabeus" means hammer, thought to be a reference to the military prowess of Judas. If this is so, he wouldn't have been surnamed "Maccabeus" at the start of this tale.
you mean like the way he's introduced in 2:2?
you mean like the way he's introduced in 2:2?
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: MoominDave on Oct 10, 2016, 07:28AM3) Imagine refusing to defend oneself because of the day of the week...
True believers do strange things. Even try and follow rules like "If a bad guy hits you then turn the other cheek so he can hit that too"
Quote4) Forced circumcision = highly not cool...
I agree.
True believers do strange things. Even try and follow rules like "If a bad guy hits you then turn the other cheek so he can hit that too"
Quote4) Forced circumcision = highly not cool...
I agree.
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: MoominDave on Oct 12, 2016, 03:38AM1) These are long chapters by Bible standards!
2) Given that this seems to be a theologically uncontroversial narration of the triumph of the Yahweh-keen parts of Jewish society, we have an interesting question: Why isn't Maccabees canonic? It seems a perfect candidate thus far.
cause it exceed the word/chapter limit and it was submitted after the due date.
Just kidding about the word limit.
It was written after the time that the Jew's considered inspired prophecy was given. Some also think that Ezra and his mates decided the canon and it was written after that decision, so that's why it didn't make the Tanakh. https://www.reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/1rop9a/why_is_maccabees_i_and_ii_not_in_the_tanakh/
And the christian proto-canon relied on the Tanakh for the Old Testament.
2) Given that this seems to be a theologically uncontroversial narration of the triumph of the Yahweh-keen parts of Jewish society, we have an interesting question: Why isn't Maccabees canonic? It seems a perfect candidate thus far.
cause it exceed the word/chapter limit and it was submitted after the due date.
Just kidding about the word limit.
It was written after the time that the Jew's considered inspired prophecy was given. Some also think that Ezra and his mates decided the canon and it was written after that decision, so that's why it didn't make the Tanakh. https://www.reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/1rop9a/why_is_maccabees_i_and_ii_not_in_the_tanakh/
And the christian proto-canon relied on the Tanakh for the Old Testament.
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 12, 2016, 02:12PMTrue believers do strange things. Even try and follow rules like "If a bad guy hits you then turn the other cheek so he can hit that too"
Ain't that the truth! It is often pretty alarming for those of us that do not subordinate ourselves to such belief systems to see the strange things that are done. We've been through that numerous times in various threads too...
'Turning the other cheek' is an example of a religious precept lighting on a concept that is very easy to approve of in general. Setting a good example, and obtaining moral power through refusing to play the game of violence. It worked for Gandhi too.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 12, 2016, 02:12PMyou mean like the way he's introduced in 2:2?
Precisely. It's a natural way for the author to introduce him, but I'm just flagging up that he couldn't have had that surname at that time if the generally accepted reasoning for his acquiring that name is correct.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 12, 2016, 02:28PMIt was written after the time that the Jew's considered inspired prophecy was given. Some also think that Ezra and his mates decided the canon and it was written after that, so that's why it didn't make the Tanakh. https://www.reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/1rop9a/why_is_maccabees_i_and_ii_not_in_the_tanakh/
And the christian proto-canon relied on the Tanakh for the Old Testament.
What went into the early Christian canon was the Septuagint, which included it. I read that without the Christian efforts, this important documenting of a crucial part of Jewish history would likely have been lost. Ironic.
I read also that the Jewish canon was formalised in the Roman era, and that it may have been considered tactless to include a not-long-past tale of the Jews driving off the occupying invaders...
Ain't that the truth! It is often pretty alarming for those of us that do not subordinate ourselves to such belief systems to see the strange things that are done. We've been through that numerous times in various threads too...
'Turning the other cheek' is an example of a religious precept lighting on a concept that is very easy to approve of in general. Setting a good example, and obtaining moral power through refusing to play the game of violence. It worked for Gandhi too.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 12, 2016, 02:12PMyou mean like the way he's introduced in 2:2?
Precisely. It's a natural way for the author to introduce him, but I'm just flagging up that he couldn't have had that surname at that time if the generally accepted reasoning for his acquiring that name is correct.
Quote from: drizabone on Oct 12, 2016, 02:28PMIt was written after the time that the Jew's considered inspired prophecy was given. Some also think that Ezra and his mates decided the canon and it was written after that, so that's why it didn't make the Tanakh. https://www.reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/1rop9a/why_is_maccabees_i_and_ii_not_in_the_tanakh/
And the christian proto-canon relied on the Tanakh for the Old Testament.
What went into the early Christian canon was the Septuagint, which included it. I read that without the Christian efforts, this important documenting of a crucial part of Jewish history would likely have been lost. Ironic.
I read also that the Jewish canon was formalised in the Roman era, and that it may have been considered tactless to include a not-long-past tale of the Jews driving off the occupying invaders...
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Quote from: timothy42b on Oct 12, 2016, 04:37AMI do not think that has been the case historically. Human to divine was a continuum, and men could move along it. Roman emperors for example moved to the right, as did rulers of other nations. Men of righteousness and holiness also moved to the right. In Jesus's day there were movements who believed anyone could become divine.
That may have been that case for some religions but it didn't seem to be the case for Judaism, at any stage. There seemed to be a clear distinction between God and non-God. We've seen a few cases where people have declined worship because they were just men, or even just angels. What do you think?
And I think that was a consideration for Jesus too. People denied he could be a god, because everyone new he was a person.
That may have been that case for some religions but it didn't seem to be the case for Judaism, at any stage. There seemed to be a clear distinction between God and non-God. We've seen a few cases where people have declined worship because they were just men, or even just angels. What do you think?
And I think that was a consideration for Jesus too. People denied he could be a god, because everyone new he was a person.