Stephan Huller wrote:The usual enlightened discourse from steve43. By the same token then BECAUSE Josephus betrays no personal interest in the messiah THEREFORE Jews as such in the age had no interest in the messiah.
As is always true throughout all ages Jews speak and write differently inter pares than they do to outsiders
Another preposterous analogy.
For those interested in early Christianity, the Jubilee year is completely meaningless. All we know about first century Judaism comes from Josephus, and maybe a little for Philo.
Really. Do you realize how stupid the implication of what you are saying is? By your standards rabbinic Judaism and Qumran aren't Judaism. Samaritanism and Karaism aren't applicable. Just Josephus. At least you are consistent. Consistently fucking imbecilic.
There is a difference between what Jews say to outsiders and what they say inter pares. Hence the greatest experts on kabbalah in the medieval period end up being the greatest critics of the system in front of the Gentiles. What do you know? Nothing.
Do you have any Jewish friends? Have you ever heard what they say about Jesus to white people vs what they say to other Jews. Yeshu is an acronym. Just about any knowledgeable Jew not only knows it by heart but smiles when he thinks about it. Grow up and stop living in comic books.
Last edited by Stephan Huller on Sun Aug 24, 2014 7:21 pm, edited 2 times in total.
steve43 wrote:All we know about first century Judaism comes from Josephus, and maybe a little for Philo.
There are some first century apocryphal texts but since their characters and settings are set back in pre-flood and patriarchal times I guess they are really only evidence for pre-flood and patriarchal times.
vridar.orgMusings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
Benny my Samaritan friend will be staying over at my house in a few months. But according to your standards his tradition isn't indicative of Jewish belief. Only Josephus is. Strange that Gerizim is identified as a holy mountain in the literature from Qumran. And the Samaritan and Qumranic interest in the sabbatical cycles and Jubilees. But neither of them are Jewish. Only Josephus. And the Book of Jubilees. It's not Jewish. Only Josephus is. steve43 is hands down the stupidest poster at the forum. Have you ever thought of testing your IQ? You know to see if you should be entitled to have any of these stupid opinions you take such pride in.
And let's turn around and ask the question you failed to ask - is there evidence that Josephus venerated Jubilees? How would we prove that? Well here's a start - Josephus used the Book of Jubilees. http://books.google.com/books?id=S349d- ... us&f=false
Josephus makes reference to sabbatical years. I thought at first your point was just that because Josephus doesn't mention the Jubilee or sabbatical years in conjunction with the Jewish war and destruction. That was almost reasonable. But this:
For those interested in early Christianity, the Jubilee year is completely meaningless. All we know about first century Judaism comes from Josephus, and maybe a little for Philo.
Examples that the sabbatical years were used in Roman times:
Josephus reports a sabbatical year came under Hyrcanus. Hyrcanus apparently lifted the siege under these circumstances, despite his mother's brave protests, but Ptolemy executed his mother and brothers anyway (Jewish War 1.2, 4 [§§57-60] Antiquities 13.8.1 230 - 235)
And as the siege was drawn out into length by this means, that year on which the Jews used to rest came on; for the Jews observe this rest every seventh year, as they do every seventh day; (Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus, Book 13, Chapter 8, Section 1)
And as the siege was delayed by this means, the year of rest came on, upon which the Jews rest every seventh year as they do on every seventh day. (Wars of the Jews, Book 1, Chapter 2, Section 4)
Julius Caesar had decreed, that the Jews of Jerusalem should pay an annual tribute to the Romans, excepting; the city of Joppa, and for the Sabbatical year. (Antiquities 14)
Stephan Huller wrote:With the Samaritans it is based on an overlapping system of (a) Anno Mundi i.e. from the date of creation and (b) 'entry' i.e. when the Israelites came into the Promised Land. Not surprisingly Joshua enters Canaan in a Jubilee. The Samaritans link the concept to that of 'divine Favor.'
Of course the Anno Mundi must have changed over time. How come there are so many groups that thought that the year 6000 was about to come upon them? Why are there so many chronological differences between the LXX and the Masoretic text? But the Jews identify 69 CE as 3829 a sabbatical year but not a 49th year.
Stephan Huller wrote:Examples that the sabbatical years were used in Roman times:
Josephus reports a sabbatical year came under Hyrcanus. Hyrcanus apparently lifted the siege under these circumstances, despite his mother's brave protests, but Ptolemy executed his mother and brothers anyway (Jewish War 1.2, 4 [§§57-60] Antiquities 13.8.1 230 - 235)
And as the siege was drawn out into length by this means, that year on which the Jews used to rest came on; for the Jews observe this rest every seventh year, as they do every seventh day; (Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus, Book 13, Chapter 8, Section 1)
And as the siege was delayed by this means, the year of rest came on, upon which the Jews rest every seventh year as they do on every seventh day. (Wars of the Jews, Book 1, Chapter 2, Section 4)
Julius Caesar had decreed, that the Jews of Jerusalem should pay an annual tribute to the Romans, excepting; the city of Joppa, and for the Sabbatical year. (Antiquities 14)
In the midst of your ad hominem attacks, you switch the discussion over from Jubilee to Sabbatical.
Nice try.
Hey, very impressed that you have a Samaritan friend.
Stephan Huller wrote:With the Samaritans it is based on an overlapping system of (a) Anno Mundi i.e. from the date of creation and (b) 'entry' i.e. when the Israelites came into the Promised Land. Not surprisingly Joshua enters Canaan in a Jubilee. The Samaritans link the concept to that of 'divine Favor.'
Why do not the (Judaic?) rabbis get accused of legend and self interest? It might be in their interests to abolish Jubilee!
Only Jeroboam I and Ahab are given relatively large shares of text, but, needless to repeat, the tone of this text is negative. For example, Jeroboam I, the founder of the northern kingdom, is described as the original apos- tate, the individual whose sins doomed the north from the outset (Cross 1973, 274–88). The reign of other north Israelite kings is summarized in a few sentences. Only six verses are given to Omri, the founder of the most celebrated dynasty of the north, the king by whose name Israel is known in Assyrian records. Only one of these verses is informative, that is, nonfor- mulative in nature. Seven verses are given to Jeroboam II, one of the most important kings in the history of the two Hebrew kingdoms, who ruled for approximately 40 years (788–747 b.c.e.) and conquered vast territories. Very little is told about the capital Samaria, and relatively little is known about the countryside towns and villages.
