Rabbi Wise and Antigonus II Mattathias

[StephenGoranson]

maryhelena: "There is only one Jewish King executed by the Romans...." Circular reasoning?
Charles Wilson, thanks for your reply but "This Section was originally written in 8/9 CE. Count back...." --special pleading?

[maryhelena]

maryhelena: "There is only one Jewish King executed by the Romans...." Circular reasoning?

History

Antigonus_II_Mattathias

Josephus states that Mark Antony beheaded Antigonus (Antiquities, XV 1:2 (8–9). Roman historian Cassius Dio says that he was crucified and records in his Roman History: "These people [the Jews] Antony entrusted to a certain Herod to govern; but Antigonus he bound to a cross and scourged, a punishment no other king had suffered at the hands of the Romans, and so slew him."[6] In his Life of Antony, Plutarch claims that Antony had Antigonus beheaded, "the first example of that punishment being inflicted on a king."[7]

The single cornucopia and weight indicate this type was valued at half of Antigonus double cornucopia type. Even so, it is a large bronze compared with the usual Judaean prutah denomination.

JD55103. Bronze AE 20, Hendin 1163, Meshorer TJC 37, Sofaer Collection 427, SNG ANS 189, SNG Cop 65, HGC 10 647 (S), VF, flan flaw on obverse, Jerusalem mint, weight 7.145g, maximum diameter 20.4mm, die axis 135o, obverse Paleo-Hebrew inscription: Mattatayah the High Priest and Council of the Jews, single cornucopia tied with ribbons, grapes and grape vine hang; reverse BACIΛEΩC ANTIΓONOY (of King Antigonus), legend within wreath and border of dots; ex Amphora Coins (David Hendin); scarce; SOLD

https://www.forumancientcoins.com/catal ... om/Coins2/

[Charles Wilson]

Charles Wilson, thanks for your reply but "This Section was originally written in 8/9 CE. Count back...." --special pleading?

Not special pleading at all. You can verify this yourself.

Eisenman and Wise, Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered, ISBN-10: 0140232508, ISBN-13: ‎978-0140232509, states that the Mishmarot Rotations are completed in six years. Two Rotations move from 4 BCE to 9CE (No Year Zero!). Why 4 BCE? That's the year of the Coup against Herod as the enfeebled ruler finds himself in Jericho, isolated from Jerusalem. Herod dies a week-ish too soon and there is barely time for a Counter-Revolution, with Archelaus as the ostensible Head of State. 3000+ are murdered around the Temple and Passover is cancelled.

12 years later, "Jairus" asks a Priest who was saved from this Death by a "Miracle" to make one more try to evict the Herodians and Romans with God's Help. The Priest is captured and crucified. This Story was dismembered and rewritten for the glory of the Romans, especially the Flavians.

Mark telescopes the two "crucifixion stories" into one (See: "The woman with the 12 Year Issue of Blood" and "Jairus' Daughter") and John provides evidence of the second crucifixion, different from Mark's.

Again, you can verify this. Who was on Duty for Passover in 4 BCE? Bilgah and Immer:

Mark 1: 7 (RSV):

[7] And he preached, saying, "After me comes he who is mightier than I, the thong of whose sandals I am not worthy to stoop down and untie.

John 1: 15 (RSV):

[15] (John bore witness to him, and cried, "This was he of whom I said, `He who comes after me ranks before me, for he was before me.'")

Immer rotates into Jerusalem the week after Bilgah for Temple Service. Bilgah has committed an Offense against the Priesthood. So Immer comes after Bilgah but is ranked higher than Bilgah.

There is SOOOOOO much more here.
It is most certainly not "Special Pleading". The Transvaluation of the Stories insured that no one would look here for answers since the Priesthood was "Done-Away-With" "Existence is not a Predicate", except with "Jesus", the Son of God by whom all was created.

As a spectacular instance of Theft Over Honest Toil, the Roman Rewrite accomplished its Goal.

Not Special Pleading at all..

CW

[StephenGoranson]

imo:
Charles Wilson, your comments on John 2:18-20 do not demonstrate that “This Section was originally written in 8/9 CE.”
maryhelena, your picture of a coin—I’m somewhat familiar with coins having dug up and cleaned coins in Sepphoris excavations—does not demonstrate what you and your source I. M. W. claim.

[maryhelena]

imo:

maryhelena, your picture of a coin—I’m somewhat familiar with coins having dug up and cleaned coins in Sepphoris excavations—does not demonstrate what you and your source I. M. W. claim.

The coins establish the historicity of Antigonus II Mattathias. A historical figure executed by Rome. There is no other King of the Jews executed by Rome.

I deal with history - as far as it is known.

In sharp contrast to the Jesus historicists who seek to turn a figure, a figure found in a story, into a historical figure.

PS. Maybe I should say thanks for keeping this thread going and thus keeping the name of Antigonus II Mattathias high on the thread list.....

The sympathies of the masses for the crucified king of Judah, the heroic son of so many heroic ancestors, and the legends growing, in time, out of this historical nucleus, became, perhaps, the source from which Paul and the evangelists preached Jesus as the crucified king of Judea.'' (History of the Hebrew's Second Commonwealth, 1880, Cincinnati, page 206)

Rabbi Isaac Mayer Wise (1819-1900), scholar and novelist

[StephenGoranson]

Come to think of it, mh, I have never seen a coin of Isaac Mayer Wise,
so by *your logic*....

[maryhelena]

Come to think of it, mh, I have never seen a coin of Isaac Mayer Wise,
so by *your logic*....

[StephenGoranson]

When not avoiding with popcorn, mh claimed: "I deal with history - as far as it is known."
Known by, say, historians?
For example
The history of the Jewish people in the age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.-A.D. 135)

by Emil Schürer ; [translated by T. A. Burkill ... and others] ; revised and edited by Geza Vermes & Fergus Millar.
Schürer, Emil, 1844-1910
Edinburgh : Clark, 1973-<c1987 > Rev. English ed 3 vols (v.3 in 2 parts).
No worries: what's his name is covered too.

[neilgodfrey]

Ah yes, speaking of that Vermes-Millar "translated, revised and edited" volume 1 of Schurer's book -- an interesting exercise I can sugggest:

Compare what Schurer wrote about how scholars ought to approach the Testimonium Flavianum with the way Vermes and Millar have Schurer stating the exact opposite of what he wrote.

Always good to check originals against purported translations and revisions. Naturally there is always a place for revisions as new information comes to light and old works are demonstrated to be defunct, but I do think the least professional scholars can and ought to do is to inform readers when they are "translating" the very opposite of what the original author argued.

[StephenGoranson]

They make no secret; revised and edited; no conspiracy.