Plato’s Timaeus and the Biblical Creation Accounts [Gmirkin]

Discussion about the Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, pseudepigrapha, Philo, Josephus, Talmud, Dead Sea Scrolls, archaeology, etc.
Thor
Posts: 105
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:09 pm

Re: Plato’s Timaeus and the Biblical Creation Accounts [Gmirkin]

Post by Thor »

...because he considered that nothing of a human shape was applicable to God; but that heaven, which surrounds the earth, was the only God
:facepalm:
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: Plato’s Timaeus and the Biblical Creation Accounts [Gmirkin]

Post by Leucius Charinus »

StephenGoranson wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 7:29 am I haven't read it. I hope it gets reviewed.

Fwiw, I was not persuaded by some of his previous work, including Berossus and Genesis, Manetho and Exodus: Hellenistic Histories and the Date of the Pentateuch (2006).
I found "Plato and the Creation of the Hebrew Bible" interesting.

BLURB=

Plato and the Creation of the Hebrew Bible for the first time compares the ancient law collections of the Ancient Near East, the Greeks and the Pentateuch to determine the legal antecedents for the biblical laws. Following on from his 2006 work, Berossus and Genesis, Manetho and Exodus, Gmirkin takes up his theory that the Pentateuch was written around 270 BCE using Greek sources found at the Great Library of Alexandria, and applies this to an examination of the biblical law codes. A striking number of legal parallels are found between the Pentateuch and Athenian laws, and specifically with those found in Plato's Laws of ca. 350 BCE. Constitutional features in biblical law, Athenian law, and Plato's Laws also contain close correspondences. Several genres of biblical law, including the Decalogue, are shown to have striking parallels with Greek legal collections, and the synthesis of narrative and legal content is shown to be compatible with Greek literature.

All this evidence points to direct influence from Greek writings, especially Plato's Laws, on the biblical legal tradition. Finally, it is argued that the creation of the Hebrew Bible took place according to the program found in Plato's Laws for creating a legally authorized national ethical literature, reinforcing the importance of this specific Greek text to the authors of the Torah and Hebrew Bible in the early Hellenistic Era. This study offers a fascinating analysis of the background to the Pentateuch, and will be of interest not only to biblical scholars, but also to students of Plato, ancient law, and Hellenistic literary traditions.

I found this to be quite convincing and supportive of his earlier book.

Also the argument involving Plato providing a program on how a ruler could create an authoritative "National Literature" for a new colony from scratch is interesting. Change the education system to "Approved Literature" and wait a few generations.
User avatar
billd89
Posts: 1347
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:27 pm
Location: New England, USA

Re: Gmirkin's Thesis + My Two Cents

Post by billd89 »

I accept the gist of Gmirkin's 2006 thesis: basically, the 'Hebrew Bible' (Pentateuch +) is an Alexandrian production, a gift to their satrap in Judea/Jerusalem AND the 'Israelites' of the Sethrum c.272 BC. It built upon some older material, but much was also novel, newly fabricated by genius mind(s). Judaism c.300 BC is young, new - the by-product of Alexandrinism in many ways. It reads like a deliberate and conscious attempt to manufacture a national ideology out of a hodge-podge of Phoenician-Semite (Canaanite + No. Israelite) myth/folklore and Judeo-Egyptian morality.

The Alexandrian Jews (the richest and most powerful clans) spread their Bible across the Mediterranean - in time, by 150-50 BC, their literature campaign wins absolutely.

The next stage: I want to see what AI discerns in the oldest mss. What would AI determine, from the maximum number of inputs and the highest probability of scoring? Let's dismiss all the silly 'pet theories' now.

Random musings: I suppose a lead writer - a Kasaph/Asaph who had been a (converted) priest of Seth-Baal, and Thoth. The Songs/Psalms strongly suggest an incantation-focused storyteller, rather than a numerologically-oriented Chartom. How 'Chaldaean' is it, I still wonder. Again, by the place names I presume the lead Author - a Librarian - originally came from the Sethrum/Siriad of Egypt, that trade-network & local elite culture was most significant.

Image
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: Gmirkin's Thesis + My Two Cents

Post by Leucius Charinus »

billd89 wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 5:33 am I accept the gist of Gmirkin's 2006 thesis: basically, the 'Hebrew Bible' (Pentateuch +) is an Alexandrian production, a gift to their satrap in Judea/Jerusalem AND the 'Israelites' of the Sethrum c.272 BC. It built upon some older material, but much was also novel, newly fabricated by genius mind(s). Judaism c.300 BC is young, new - the by-product of Alexandrinism in many ways. It reads like a deliberate and conscious attempt to manufacture a national ideology out of a hodge-podge of Phoenician-Semite (Canaanite + No. Israelite) myth/folklore and Judeo-Egyptian morality.

The Alexandrian Jews (the richest and most powerful clans) spread their Bible across the Mediterranean - in time, by 150-50 BC, their literature campaign wins absolutely.
There is a missing element in the above and that is the Samaritans whom Gmirkin thinks were involved with this "Alexandrian production". The Samaritans viewed themselves to be "Guardians/Keepers [of the Torah]". Samaria is described as a largely autonomous state nominally dependent on the Seleucid Empire. Not the Ptolemaic empire. Tensions between the two empires are unavoidable. They did not admit further books other than the original five of "Moses". But further books were later written and added. Perhaps the Samaritans resisted these further books? IDK.

Around 113 BCE the Samaritan temple on Mount Gerizim was destroyed by the Hasmonean dynasty, and the Samaritans are scattered. So the victory was both a "military campaign" and "literary campaign", probably (IMO) in that order.
User avatar
billd89
Posts: 1347
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:27 pm
Location: New England, USA

Re: Gmirkin's Samaritans

Post by billd89 »

There's evidence "Samaritans" had communities in Egypt. Who those "Samaritans" were remains poorly understood, highly debatable. In Late Antiquity, a group of "Melchizedekians" for one observer might have appeared as "Samaritans" to another outsider; the category "Samaritan" is suspect.

I suppose they were basically 'Proto-Jews', something like 'Old Jews' or Canaanite descendants who, for varied & complex reasons, remained largely unassimiliated ('primitive' as we used to say: relic clans/tribes) to the dominant Alexandrian Judaism. Even this definition, however, is too vague and simplistic to describe an unfathomable diversity which still existed c.50-600 AD across Egypt.

I'm well aware how politically-incorrect that sounds, but 'traditional' is a useless term, and I'm not current on Anthropology (the racist science). I was surprised to read on Wiki: "As of 2022, the total Samaritan population stands at less than 1,000 people. "
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Plato’s Timaeus and the Biblical Creation Accounts [Gmirkin]

Post by Secret Alias »

An Israelite community living in Egypt would have a unique perspective. The situation would lend itself to proto-Christianity insofar as the (a second) Exodus had yet to occur. Similar to early American proto-Rastafarian communities in New York etc.
User avatar
billd89
Posts: 1347
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:27 pm
Location: New England, USA

Re: Exodus, Movement of Jah People

Post by billd89 »

The Exodus Myth was useful for bolstering an Alexandrian-oriented satrap in Jerusalem. Win-Win: Anti-Egyptian rhetoric wasn't anti-Greek; for Alexandrians, pro-Jewish rhetoric would entice any radicals/internal opponents to Judea.

I'm unaware that political migration bid had many takers, c.272 BC. Why? Because 'Jews' (more or less) owned and farmed the richest land in the known world: the Sethrum. Why would Sethians willingly depart their beloved Siriad -- the Garden of Eden? -- for some new myth? Sethians de-emphasized Moses and accepted Exodus as an allegory for self-restraint, rather than a foreign national Goal (their exile from the Siriad). They considered themselves the "Sons of God" - those banished otoh were "Sons of Cain."

They were not looking forward to that particular "yet."

History is written by the winners -- Sethians lost, repeatedly, to other Jewish factions.
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: Gmirkin's Samaritans

Post by Leucius Charinus »

billd89 wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 6:12 am There's evidence "Samaritans" had communities in Egypt. Who those "Samaritans" were remains poorly understood, highly debatable. In Late Antiquity, a group of "Melchizedekians" for one observer might have appeared as "Samaritans" to another outsider; the category "Samaritan" is suspect.

I suppose they were basically 'Proto-Jews', something like 'Old Jews' or Canaanite descendants who, for varied & complex reasons, remained largely unassimiliated ('primitive' as we used to say: relic clans/tribes) to the dominant Alexandrian Judaism. Even this definition, however, is too vague and simplistic to describe an unfathomable diversity which still existed c.50-600 AD across Egypt.

I'm well aware how politically-incorrect that sounds, but 'traditional' is a useless term, and I'm not current on Anthropology (the racist science). I was surprised to read on Wiki: "As of 2022, the total Samaritan population stands at less than 1,000 people. "
So how do you factor in the history of the existence and destruction of the "Samaritan Temple" on Mt. Gerizim? At one stage it seems that the Samaritans were numerous. It seems reasonably clear there was a civil war between the "Samaritans" and the "Jews" and the latter were the victors. The former (and their history) faded away.

Religious rivalry between Samaritans and Jews led to Mount Gerizim being destroyed by the latter in 112-111 BCE, on orders of John Hyrcanus.[25][26] The date of the Samaritan temple destruction, the 21st of Kislev, became a holiday for the Jews during which it is forbidden to eulogize the dead.[27]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Gerizim#History

At the time of the creation c.272 BCE of the books of Moses according to Gmirkin the notional 70 Hebrew scribes (and researchers), who prepared the creation, included Samaritans as well as Jews. Over 100 years later it would appear that the Samaritans wanted to continue the admittance only of these 5 books. However further books of the Hebrew Bible were authored and then added to the Hebrew Bible - presumably by the Jewish contingent - sometime in the 2nd century BCE.
User avatar
billd89
Posts: 1347
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:27 pm
Location: New England, USA

Re: so-called "Samaritans" (in Egypt)

Post by billd89 »

Leucius Charinus wrote: Wed Jul 13, 2022 8:35 pmSo how do you factor in the history of the existence and destruction of the "Samaritan Temple" on Mt. Gerizim? At one stage it seems that the Samaritans were numerous. It seems reasonably clear there was a civil war between the "Samaritans" and the "Jews" and the latter were the victors. The former (and their history) faded away.
"how do you factor in the history of the existence and destruction of the "Samaritan Temple" on Mt. Gerizim?"
Just another temple destroyed, probably with greater bloodshed, in some drawn-out power-struggle w/ actual consequences we can only guess at. 'Samaritans' lost but did not disappear.
At one stage it seems that the Samaritans were numerous.

They were probably a supermajority in Samaria and certain elsewheres, if by 'Samaritan' you include all heterodox Semites in said area. Who were they? People of Samaria who resisted the Jerusalem Temple/authorities? An imagined ethnicity projected back 2000 years? The category is dubious.
Over 100 years later it would appear that the Samaritans wanted to continue the admittance only of these 5 books. However further books of the Hebrew Bible were authored and then added to the Hebrew Bible - presumably by the Jewish contingent - sometime in the 2nd century BCE.
I'm interested in "Samaritans" of Egypt. For example: How were they distinct from the Sethians of the Sethrum? Apparently, they were identified as 'something different' from 'Jews' in the 1st and 2nd C. AD in Egypt. Two distinct Judaic peoples in Egypt ... among how many others? And what happened to the (Seth-Baal?) Chaldaeans?

In Egypt, Sons of God = Sethians = 'heretic Israelites' = heterodox Judeo-Egyptians = ... so-called "Samaritans" (in some cases)? Or were they a separate, distinct people: how many species of Sethians existed c.25 AD? I assume the broadest umbrella for what must have been a dizzying variety of local forms of Proto-/quasi- 'Judaism'.

This is a VERY complex topic, highly unsettled, and I haven't sorted through the opinions and possibilities myself.

The imagery of Yahweh fighting the sea and the ‘twisting serpent’ Leviathan (Psalm 29, Psalm 74, and Isa. 27.1) is exquisitely suited to Egyptian Seth. I think Yaho was merged with Seth-Baal c.350 BC, but the Phoenician Hauron = Egyptian Harmakhis "Lord of the Desert" like both Seth and Yahweh. The syncretism 'Judaism' in the Pentateuch was multiple cults - and some didn't accept the 'new myth'!
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Plato’s Timaeus and the Biblical Creation Accounts [Gmirkin]

Post by Secret Alias »

For once I agree with mountainman. The Pentateuch was CLEARLY written from a northern Israelite POV. The name 'Jerusalem' doesn't appear once in the five books. It's all about the area around Gerizim/Shechem. This is the silliest part of the theory. The Pentateuch is clearly or likely a northern Israelite text. The Jews came later. The community which first revered the written text did so at around around Gerizim.
Post Reply