Myth of widespread messianic expectations early first C

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
maryhelena
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: Myth of widespread messianic expectations early first C

Post by maryhelena »

MrMacSon wrote:
  • Bottom of p. 372 -

372 . . . . . Journal of Biblical Literature 128, no. 2 (2009)

.....

60 Of course, the question of precisely in what Paul understands the ὑπακοὴ τῶν ἐθνῶν to consist is a matter for further investigation. Paul’s own expansion of the phrase, ὑπακοὴνπίστεως ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, “the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles” (Rom 1:5; cf.16:26) undoubtedly points toward an answer. It is possible that Paul’s conception of the ὑπακοὴτῶν ἐθνῶν has been influenced by what he knows of [Christ] and of the [Christ] movement prior to his (viz., Paul’s) initiation thereto. In any case, a facile classification of Paul under “spiritual” rather than “political” messianic traditions is certainly not a helpful way forward.

my bolding

Interestingly, the title of Matthew Novenson's forthcoming book is using 'political' in it's title:

The Grammar of Messianism

An Ancient Jewish Political Idiom and Its Users


Contents:

Acknowledgements
Abbreviations
1. After the Messianic Idea
2. Oil and Power in Ancient Israel
3. Messiahs Born and Made
4. Messiahs Present and Absent
5. The Quest for the First Messiah
6. The Jewish Messiah-Christian Messiah Distinction
7. The Fate of Messiah Christology in Early Christianity
8. The Grammar of Messianism
Bibliography
Index of Subjects
Index of Ancient Sources
Index of Modern Authors

Description:

Messianism is one of the great themes in intellectual history. But for precisely this reason, because it has done so much important ideological work for the people who have written about it, the historical roots of the discourse itself have been obscured from view. What did it mean to talk about "messiahs" in the ancient world, before the idea of messianism became a philosophical juggernaut, dictating the terms for all subsequent discussion of the topic? In this book, Matthew V. Novenson gives a revisionist account of messianism in antiquity. He shows that, for the ancient Jews and Christians who used the term, a messiah was not an article of faith but a manner of speaking. It was a scriptural figure of speech, one among numerous others, useful for thinking kinds of political order: present or future, real or ideal, monarchic or theocratic, dynastic or charismatic, and other variations beside. The early Christians famously seized upon the title "messiah" (in Greek, "Christ") for their founding hero and thus molded the sense of the term in certain ways, but, Novenson shows, this is nothing other than what all ancient messiah texts do, each in its own way. If we hope to understand the ancient texts about messiahs (from Deutero-Isaiah to the Parables of Enoch, from the Qumran Community Rule to the Gospel of John, from the Pseudo-Clementines to Sefer Zerubbabel), then we must learn to think in terms not of a world-historical idea but of a language game, of so many creative reuses of an archaic Israelite idiom. In The Grammar of Messianism, Novenson demonstrates the possibility and the benefit of thinking of messianism in this way.

https://global.oup.com/academic/product ... gb&lang=en&#

my bolding

Interesting - Jewish messianism as a 'language game'....'useful for thinking kinds of political order'

Political order - how to live on terra-firma is central to messianic language....messianism as a Jewish political idiom....
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
W.B. Yeats
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Myth of widespread messianic expectations early first C

Post by neilgodfrey »

I've found the words in Novenson, thanks. I see he is taking that "ambiguous oracle" in Josephus and as referenced in Tacitus and Suetonius as the evidence for his belief in an early first century belief among Jews that a Jewish king, a messiah, was to come out of Israel and command the service of all nations.

I think this is an uncertain long shot. It's possible, but I think there are other more cogent explanations of those accounts of the prophecy. Firstly the prophecy does not specify a Jewish king and secondly it makes no mention of a messiah.

At least Novenson acknowledges (and tells us he joins others in acknowledging) that we don't know the scriptural source of the prophecy. My understanding of "sacred scripture" among Second Temple Jews is that the idea extended beyond those books as we know them in our canon today.

The fact remains that the prophecy only appears in the record in the late first and early second century in reference to Vespasian. The details of the history of Vespasian and his need for special propaganda to establish his legitimacy present us with circumstances and motivations for the invention and promotion of that prophecy. Perhaps if I get time I can discuss what Steve Mason(?) has to say about this -- his newest book is one of the best I have encountered in terms of understanding the guts of how historical method and reading of our source texts should work -- and does work among the better historians elsewhere.
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Myth of widespread messianic expectations early first C

Post by MrMacSon »

neilgodfrey wrote: ... I see he [Novenson] is taking that "ambiguous oracle" in Josephus and as referenced in Tacitus and Suetonius as the evidence for his belief in an early first century belief among Jews that a Jewish king, a messiah, was to come out of Israel and command the service of all nations.

... I think there are other more cogent explanations of those accounts of the prophecy. Firstly the prophecy does not specify a Jewish king and secondly it makes no mention of a messiah.

At least Novenson acknowledges (and tells us he joins others in acknowledging) that we don't know the scriptural source of the prophecy. My understanding of "sacred scripture" among Second Temple Jews is that the idea extended beyond those books as we know them in our canon today.

The fact remains that the prophecy only appears in the record in the late first and early second century in reference to Vespasian. The details of the history of Vespasian and his need for special propaganda to establish his legitimacy present us with circumstances and motivations for the invention and promotion of that prophecy ...
Novenson says early in that article -

... as Alan Segal and Daniel Boyarin have insisted, Paul ranks alongside the Qumran covenanters, Philo, and Josephus as a first-order literary witness to the varieties of Judaism in the first century c.e.4 For another, as John Gager has pointed out, messianic movements are as dependent on their followers as they are on their messiahs, and Paul must be counted among the most influential early followers of the messianic movement surrounding Jesus.5
Later -

Not only ... does Paul belong to the conceptual universe of apocalyptic Judaism;7 it is also the case that Paul’s particular brand of apocalypticism is marked throughout by the agency of a messiah figure.
and
II. Messiah Traditions and the Gentile Question

Contrary to ancient charges of misanthropy and modern generalizations about Roman-era ethnography, it is now generally recognized that many, perhaps most,Jews in antiquity had extensive interaction with their pagan (and, [supposedly] later, Christian) neighbors both in the Diaspora and in the land of Israel.25
then
Louis Feldman’s magisterial 1993 study is a happy exception. Among other things, Feldman shows how messianic strains in Roman-era Judaism probably contributed to the attraction of Gentiles to Judaism during that period.28

28 See Feldman, Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World, 326–27: “This period, beginning at least as early as the second century b.c.e., also saw the heightening of Jewish messianic expectations; and a connection between messianic-eschatological hopes and Gentile interest in Judaism developed. . . . It may well be that the spectacle of Gentiles flocking to join the Jewish nation helped to spur such expectations and in turn further aroused missionary activity to bring about the eschatological age in which all people would acknowledge the G-d of Israel.
What if Gentiles didn't flock to join the Jewish nation, but began interacting with the Jews after the 2nd Revolt?


What if Paul and Jesus were 2nd century entities; or if the narratives about them were written in the 2nd century?

That would also fit with what Novenson says pp. 363 to 364 --

In the early second century c.e., too, Tacitus witnesses to the perception that Jewish messianic convictions are universal in scope.
  • “The majority firmly believed that their ancient priestly writings [antiquis sacerdotum litteris] contained the prophecy that this was the very time when the East should grow strong and that men starting from Judea should possess the world [profectique Iudaea rerum poterentur]” (Tacitus, Hist. 5.13).32
At about the same time Suetonius, who probably shares a source with Tacitus, reports,
  • “There had spread all over the Orient an old and established belief [vetus et constans opinio], that it was fated at that time for men coming from Judea to rule the world [Iudaea profecti rerum potirentur]. This prediction, referring to the emperor of Rome, as afterwards appeared from the event, the people of Judea took to themselves; accordingly they revolted” (Suetonius, Vesp. 4.5).33
These passages are of course well known among students of the First Revolt, but their particular relevance to the Gentile question has not been adequately recognized. According to this exegetical tradition, which is known not only to Josephus but also to pagan historians, the messiah not only restores the fortunes of Israel but brings the whole οἰκουμένη under his rule. This constitutes one possible answer to the Gentile question in the context of Roman rule, a particularly messianic answer.

32 Following the text and translation of Clifford H. Moore and John Jackson (LCL; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1931).

33 Following the text and translation of J. C. Rolfe (LCL; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1914; repr., 1979). It seems most likely that Tacitus and Suetonius had in common a source who was not Josephus; see the discussion of Eduard Norden, “Josephus und Tacitus über Jesus Christus und eine messianische Prophetie,” Neue Jahrbücher für klassische Altertum 31(1913): 636–66.

User avatar
maryhelena
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: Myth of widespread messianic expectations early first C

Post by maryhelena »


BANDITS, PROPHETS,
AND MESSIAHS


Richard A. Horsley
and
John S. Hanson

page 109/110
  • Just how concentrated and intense the messianic expectations were under the Roman governers is difficult to determine. The Eighteen Benedictions, prayers spoken by the people, may reflect (and may have helped to focus) popular hopes during the first century C E . The actual text that we have of the Shemone Esre did not reach its final form until after the fall of Jerusalem in 70, but it is thought to contain prayers from earlier times. Thus it is possible, and even likely, that in pre-Christian times devout Jews prayed (three times a day) for the shooting up of the branch of David and the raising up of his horn, as in the fourteenth and fifteenth benedictions:

    In thy great mercy, O Yahweh our God, have pity on Israel thy people. . . .and on thy Temple. . . .and on the kingdom of the house of David, the Messiah of thy righteousness. Let the shoot of David sprout quickly and raise up his horn with thy help. Blessed be thou, Yahweh, that thou dost cause a horn of help to grow.

    Such prayers, centered on the hope of a new independence, would have given expression to popular messianic hopes during the early first century C E . As events began accelerating toward the outbreak of the great revolt of 66-70, popular hopes for an anointed king were apparently strong and widespread. There is no reason to question Josephus' straightforward claim that "what incited them to war more than anything else was an ambiguous oracle, also found in their sacred writings, to the effect that at that time someone from their country would rule the whole world" (J.W. 6.312)
my bolding
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
W.B. Yeats
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Myth of widespread messianic expectations early first C

Post by neilgodfrey »

maryhelena wrote:
BANDITS, PROPHETS,
AND MESSIAHS


Richard A. Horsley
and
John S. Hanson

page 109/110
  • Just how concentrated and intense the messianic expectations were under the Roman governers is difficult to determine. The Eighteen Benedictions, prayers spoken by the people, may reflect (and may have helped to focus) popular hopes during the first century C E . The actual text that we have of the Shemone Esre did not reach its final form until after the fall of Jerusalem in 70, but it is thought to contain prayers from earlier times. Thus it is possible, and even likely, that in pre-Christian times devout Jews prayed (three times a day) for the shooting up of the branch of David and the raising up of his horn, as in the fourteenth and fifteenth benedictions:

    In thy great mercy, O Yahweh our God, have pity on Israel thy people. . . .and on thy Temple. . . .and on the kingdom of the house of David, the Messiah of thy righteousness. Let the shoot of David sprout quickly and raise up his horn with thy help. Blessed be thou, Yahweh, that thou dost cause a horn of help to grow.

    Such prayers, centered on the hope of a new independence, would have given expression to popular messianic hopes during the early first century C E . As events began accelerating toward the outbreak of the great revolt of 66-70, popular hopes for an anointed king were apparently strong and widespread. There is no reason to question Josephus' straightforward claim that "what incited them to war more than anything else was an ambiguous oracle, also found in their sacred writings, to the effect that at that time someone from their country would rule the whole world" (J.W. 6.312)
my bolding
BANDITS, PROPHETS, AND MESSIAHS

my reviews and comments
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Myth of widespread messianic expectations early first C

Post by neilgodfrey »

MrMacSon wrote: What if Gentiles didn't flock to join the Jewish nation, but began interacting with the Jews after the 2nd Revolt?


What if Paul and Jesus were 2nd century entities; or if the narratives about them were written in the 2nd century?

That would also fit with what Novenson says pp. 363 to 364 --

In the early second century c.e., too, Tacitus witnesses to the perception that Jewish messianic convictions are universal in scope.
  • “The majority firmly believed that their ancient priestly writings [antiquis sacerdotum litteris] contained the prophecy that this was the very time when the East should grow strong and that men starting from Judea should possess the world [profectique Iudaea rerum poterentur]” (Tacitus, Hist. 5.13).32
At about the same time Suetonius, who probably shares a source with Tacitus, reports,
  • “There had spread all over the Orient an old and established belief [vetus et constans opinio], that it was fated at that time for men coming from Judea to rule the world [Iudaea profecti rerum potirentur]. This prediction, referring to the emperor of Rome, as afterwards appeared from the event, the people of Judea took to themselves; accordingly they revolted” (Suetonius, Vesp. 4.5).33
These passages are of course well known among students of the First Revolt, but their particular relevance to the Gentile question has not been adequately recognized. According to this exegetical tradition, which is known not only to Josephus but also to pagan historians, the messiah not only restores the fortunes of Israel but brings the whole οἰκουμένη under his rule. This constitutes one possible answer to the Gentile question in the context of Roman rule, a particularly messianic answer.
Tacitus and Suetonius were pointing to first century prophecies that pertained to Vespasian in the late 60s CE.

There are other grounds for questioning the role of that prophecy in the thinking of Paul. No need to place him in the second century -- too many problems arise. We can place writings attributed to him in the second century perhaps but much harder to put Paul himself there. The interest in Paul in the second century is best understood, I think, with the reputation of Paul already well established by that time.
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Myth of widespread messianic expectations early first C

Post by Giuseppe »


Tacitus and Suetonius were pointing to first century prophecies that pertained to Vespasian in the late 60s CE.
I see forward to know what are your positive arguments to claim so. I confess my interest in your case insofar the possibility is raised that the Josephus's prophecies contributed to humanize the Messiah figure ("men coming from Judea"...) and therefore to give a context/pretext for "Mark" inventing a story...
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 3412
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Myth of widespread messianic expectations early first C

Post by DCHindley »

Hello Neil,

Yes, I too became perplexed when reading Horsley's book that you review in the link above.

It seemed to me he was making a conscious effort to arrange things so that Jesus fit the model of a biblical prophet interested in reform of the religious thinking of the Judean people. The rest of it is his attempt to make everyone else distinct as possible from the model he applies to Jesus.

Of course, Jesus never commanded either bandits or evildoers, but at least one of his closest disciples was armed, according to the gospels. This does sound a bit like Jesus needed a bodyguard, although Josephus elsewhere says that even the upward-contemplating Essenes carried swords when traveling, so I have to assume that sword carrying was normal, at least when traveling.

The word for sword (μάχαιρα) is described variously in the lexicons as "sword, saber," "a short sword or dagger," and "originally a large knife for killing and cutting up," it sounds like a "Bowie" or "Mick Dundee" type sportsman knife. Anyone who knows anybody who hunts for sport knows modern ones can be rather large, and sharp, to accommodate the gutting of kill and cutting it up into transportable pieces. Since it would be unacceptable for most Judeans of the 1st century CE to eat animals killed this way, unless the throat was cut to allow the blood to drain out onto the ground (this is before Rabbinic kosher rules were laid down, which would require that a Rabbi do the slaughtering), I'd suspect that they laid traps to snare the animals before slaughtering and cutting up the ones caught, right there in the field.

But anyways, regardless of origins, it seems as though having such a knife or sword was not at all uncommon. So just having a sword does not necessarily mean one has a "messianic" orientation.

When a rebel leader breaks into a royal palace, where apparently weapons were stored for emergencies, and arm their own forces or make them available to certain groups who will help the rebel leader achieve his aims, this indicates that perhaps the dagger type swords many had were not considered effective enough in serious military actions. Those being combat weapons, they undoubtedly were of higher quality or utility than the kinds of swords available to common folks. So when someone captures a weapons cache, he can arm his rebel forces like a real army, increasing his effectiveness significantly.

I'll give an example of here in the USA that might shock you Aussies. I've seen the gun racks of some locals and they are filled with manual or semi-automatic shotguns and long rifles including AR-15 and AK-47 type (for hunting, skeet/target shooting, "plinking" and self defense). For those who really crave the thrill of full auto, you can buy a fully automatic gun or auto-sear of any type manufactured before 1986 by paying a US $200 tax and registering it with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, but the price rises from say US $1,500 retail for a new semi-automatic knock-off AR-15 rifle to about $25,000 retail for a genuine fully automatic Colt M-16A1 (we know, we inherited one seven years ago and had to sell it for $17,000 to a dealer due to a ruling of a probate court magistrate). If I wanted to, I could probably afford the $1,500 but I could not afford $25,000.

When you're at war, though (and I have never been a soldier), you want sheer firepower, so soldiers no longer go into battle with bolt action or even semi auto rifles like a US M-1 Garand or carbine, but weapons that can fire single shots semi-automatically or selectively in full auto mode (may shoot them in bursts of 3 rounds at a trigger pull in the M-16A2 and its variants).

But even in the Hasmonean civil war, one time Aristobulus II started a new rebellion in Roman times and had way more volunteers show up at a designated rallying point than he could utilize, forcing him to send most home. Why? I think he could only find professional warrior quality arms for the number he retained. The others may have had daggers, but it would be like sending sheep to the slaughter to put them against Roman soldiers or even Auxiliaries.

Where all those swords came from I don't know. There may have been "government" stocks of them in various fortresses throughout the region. We learn from the case of Sepphoris or Masada, and other fortresses established by Herod, they were not strongly garrisoned in Roman times. Aristobulus II did not need help finding weapons when he rebelled against Hyrcanus II, as he was on excellent terms with the Sadducees, and this party controlled most of the strongholds even in the time of Queen Alexandra, at least in the time of his rebellion against Hyrcanus II after Alexandra died. By the time of Aristobulus II's rebellion against Hyrcanus II after the Romans demoted him to HP with a Roman Procurator (Antipater) I guess his influence with garrison commanders was not as good.

Maybe the weapons were of older design and considered "reserve only" (like the fully auto capable US M-14 from Korean "War" and early days of our involvement in Vietnam conflict). The M-14 may have had full auto capability (we were influenced I think by the German Sturmgewehr from WW2 which inspired the Soviet AK-47) but was very difficult to control accuracy in that mode. The mechanism was basically the same as the M-1, so it was basically an M-1 on steroids. The US military has never sold the M-14s they held after converting to the M-16, but holds them in storage. I think these are mainly used now only for training and ceremonial use).

I think that during the Caligula crisis, employees of arms manufacturers in Judea and elsewhere were purposefully making weapons that would not meet Roman standards and were rejected. The rejected arms ended up being diverted to those who were planning open rebellion should Caligula actually try to bring his status to Jerusalem. That there were others who practiced passive resistance is clear from the case of the sit-ins before Pilate when he brought military standards into Jerusalem and before Petronius. I doubt they were carrying daggers.

Sorry to ramble so ...

DCH
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Myth of widespread messianic expectations early first C

Post by Giuseppe »

Usually, I listen this argument about Josephus:

that he assumed implicitly that the failed leaders of the anti-Roman rebels had messianic claims, but he didn't write it.

If this is the ''argument'', then how can someone reject the claim that the following Jew mentioned by Josephus:
There was a certain Jew, a complete scoundrel, who had fled his own country because he was accused of transgressing certain laws and feared punishment on this account. Just at this time he was a resident of Rome and played the part of an interpreter of the Mosaic law and its wisdom.
...was follower of the Messiah Jesus ?

Josephus could see even behind that anonymous heretic Jew a dangerous messianist (Paul?).
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Myth of widespread messianic expectations early first C

Post by MrMacSon »

neilgodfrey wrote: Tacitus and Suetonius were pointing to first century prophecies that pertained to Vespasian in the late 60s CE.
  • Sure. But when and where they heard about those prophecies would be interesting to know.
neilgodfrey wrote: There are other grounds for questioning the role of that prophecy in the thinking of Paul. No need to place him in the second century -- too many problems arise. We can place writings attributed to him in the second century perhaps, but much harder to put Paul himself there ...
  • Why is it harder to place Paul in the 2nd century? What problems arise?
Post Reply