Fall of Jerusalem not so foreseeable?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
John T
Posts: 1567
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Fall of Jerusalem not so foreseeable?

Post by John T »

Not that Neil or his useful idiot troll friends would want you to consider the other side but there is an excellent book on this topic called: Partings; How Judaism and Christianity became Two. By Hershel Shanks, Editor.
It even has a section written by Geza Vermes and Eric Meyers.

I'm not sure if you can find it on Neil's blog but then again, why would you?

Neil, how about repeating that beautiful troll cartoon again?

It sure beats you having to engage in a respectful debate. :facepalm:
User avatar
John T
Posts: 1567
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: The Christian Flight to Pella

Post by John T »

"[T]he people of the Church in Jerusalem were commanded by an oracle given by revelation before the war to those in the city who were worthy of it to depart and dwell in one of the cities of Perea which they called Pella. To it those who believed in Christ migrated from Jerusalem, that when holy men had altogether deserted the royal capital of the Jews and the whole land of Judea, the judgment of God might at last overtake them for all their crimes against Christ and his Apostles and all that generation of the wicked be utterly blotted out from among them."
(
Eusebius, Ecclesiatical History 3.5.3).

According to Pamela Watson in Partings pg. 75, it is also said that this story was told by the second-century Christian apologist Aristo, from Pella. Of course the retort to that would be no archeological evidence has been found for a Christian community in Pella during the fall of Jerusalem.
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Fall of Jerusalem not so foreseeable?

Post by andrewcriddle »

One of the issues here is whether Jesus in Mark unambiguously predicts the destruction of the Temple itself (as distinct from the surrounding buildings on the Temple mount). There is no doubt that Jesus in Matthew and Luke predicts the destruction of the Temple but Mark may be less clear cut.
See http://hypotyposeis.org/weblog/2014/01/ ... emple.html

Andrew Criddle
dbz
Posts: 509
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2021 9:48 am

Re: Fall of Jerusalem not so foreseeable?

Post by dbz »

neilgodfrey wrote: Tue Oct 04, 2022 12:21 am Does anyone know if Martin Goodman's surmise that the fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the Temple came as a sudden surprise to Jews, both in Judea and in the diaspora, has been discussed anywhere?

If it did, then that would surely have implications for those who suggest that the prophecy of Jesus about the temple's fall was foreseeable. I suspect other implications follow, too.
Prior to 70CE, there existed counter-culture sects that were anti "Temple Cult"!

I see a Religious syncretism of Middle Platonism, Mystery religions, and Hellenistic Judaism in Paul.

Per Paul, the poured Human blood of Lord IS XS made all the blood poured on the Temple Cult altar redundant. And the “All Father” was now affecting the covenant where Christ followers (already dead or otherwise still living) would get new bodies on Earth 2.0.

Paul was deprecating the Temple Cult and declaring a new covenant for Christ followers. Of course the temple was going to be destroyed along with Earth 1.1 (ver. 1.0 prior to the Noah deluge)

The religion itself began long before it was known that the Romans would actually destroy Jerusalem (early Christian thinking was then more in line with Daniel, which never mentions this, but only the temple’s “desecration,” after which God and his angels would destroy everything).

I find the other side of the 70CE coin to be worth mentioning also. Neil has previously observed that in the Markan text, the destruction of Jerusalem is not traumatic, it is not a raison d’etre.

Others see: “…access to heaven was possible, signified by the veil in the Temple being torn in two.”

I see this as deprecating the Temple Cult. Proclaiming that first-god has left and is not coming back. There is no longer any need to pour out blood at the temple—first-god is not there anymore—the temple cult will be withered as was a certain fig tree.


N.B.
Godfrey, Neil (16 August 2016). "How the Roman World Received the News of Jerusalem's Destruction". Vridar.
Gurevich’s take is somewhat different in that he argues that Vespasian deliberately chose to destroy Jerusalem and its Temple to give himself and his son a display of power — images of brutal conquest — that could be exploited for its propaganda value back in Rome and throughout the empire.

Mason, on the other hand, suggests that we cannot know the inner motives of such actors and the nature of the evidence is most economically explained by Vespasian making the most of the opportunity that the destruction of Jerusalem presented to him.
User avatar
John T
Posts: 1567
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Fall of Jerusalem not so foreseeable?

Post by John T »

andrewcriddle wrote: Thu Oct 06, 2022 8:09 am One of the issues here is whether Jesus in Mark unambiguously predicts the destruction of the Temple itself (as distinct from the surrounding buildings on the Temple mount). There is no doubt that Jesus in Matthew and Luke predicts the destruction of the Temple but Mark may be less clear cut.
See http://hypotyposeis.org/weblog/2014/01/ ... emple.html

Andrew Criddle
Thanks for the link from 2014. I noticed the exchange included Ken Olson who gave a thoughtful, detailed, logical, and cogent explanation of gMark regarding the destruction of the Temple.

The only point glossed over was, even so, in no way does it give support to the notion that the prediction of the destruction of Temple by Jesus was back dated in order to make Jesus look like a prophet.

Just because gMark happens to be the oldest known surviving account of such a prediction that does not mean it was the first time anyone heard of it. Yaron Z. Eliav's argument that Mark 13:1-2, proves gMark was written after 70 CE, is not advanced by Eliav's wishful interpretation.
Post Reply