Current State of Samaritan Studies (Hexateuch)

[Secret Alias]

An example of the Samaritan understanding of Jubilees in the prehistory. Again Marqe:

By my goodness, I established a covenant with their fathers and I shall not forget it as long as the world lasts. Their children are pledged to Egypt for a long time, on account of the matter regarding which Abraham erred in “Ur Chasdim”, and I covenanted with him that this (will last) up to a certain limit. The time comes quickly to deliver (them) from distress. I can give you now its term for deliverance, for the time of the jubilee is near. He (Israel) has been in great and severe torment, ever since the day I have pledged him, and his outcry reached me with a sigh. For he has three great covenants (communicated) through those Righteous who passed away.”

Notice the reference here to covenants being established in Jubilee years. It has been noted that only the Samaritan Pentateuch agrees with Jubilees with respect to the flood occurring in 1307 AM (Anno Mundi) https://books.google.com/books?id=mO_H2 ... od&f=false. The covenant that Noah gave his sons was thus established in 1324 AM in both Jubilees and the Samaritan system. Do you now get why Genesis 1 - 11 is necessary for the overall functioning of the Pentateuch as it was used in antiquity?

Clearly Abraham's covenant was understood by the Samaritans to be similarly established in a Jubilee and of course God is talking here in Marqe to the Israelites as the third covenant is established in another Jubilee year. Interesting Irenaeus speaks of four covenants also:

For this reason were four principal (kaqolikai) covenants given to the human race: one, prior to the deluge, under Adam; the second, that after the deluge, under Noah; the third, the giving of the law, under Moses; the fourth, that which renovates man, and sums up all things in itself by means of the Gospel, raising and bearing men upon its wings into the heavenly kingdom.

In other words, I have always argued that the 'gospel' derives from the Hebrew term for the announcement of the Jubilee. Thank you for having this discussion. I wouldn't have realized that this is another argument of Christianity knowing the original tradition. Really appreciate it. Marqe speaks of 3 covenants occurring in the Jubilee (or at least knowing it) = Noah, Abraham, Moses. Irenaeus four covenants = Noah, Abraham, Moses + Jesus.

For those who are interested Irenaeus goes on to make the argument that because the gospel is the fourth of four "dispensations" of covenants the heretics have to accept that the gospel is of four:

These things being so, all who destroy the form of the Gospel are vain, unlearned, and also audacious; those, [I mean,] who represent the aspects of the Gospel as being either more in number than as aforesaid, or, on the other hand, fewer. The former class [do so], that they may seem to have discovered more than is of the truth; the latter, that they may set the dispensations of God aside.

No less an authority than the Catholic Church understand the gospel to be a Jubilee year announcement https://www.vatican.va/jubilee_2000/mag ... 22_en.html

We see in the Samaritan Arabic commentary on the Torah, on Leviticus 25:9. Slightly condensed and slightly re-arranged translation from my life long friend it seems Ruaridh Boid formerly of Monash University:

The High Priest and the King acting together are to send heralds out on the Day of Atonement (i.e. the tenth of the seventh month) to go into all countries over the next six months blowing the shofar in every land and region [not just Canaan] with the announcement [= bashâ’ir, plural of bashîrah] of the information of the approach of the Jubilee Year and the release of captives so that it reaches the whole nation”.

This is absolutely key to understand why the gospel is called 'the gospel.' The Arabic bashîrah = the Hebrew bassorah = Greek euangelion. The person doing the announcing of the Jubilee is the evangelist (= Arabic mubashshir = Hebrew mevasser or the bashîr). Notice carefully that the bashîrah is not the information, but the announcement of it. This is the connotation of the Greek euangelion. The meaning of only becomes clear and sharp in the context of the Samaritan halachah.

[Secret Alias]

Some more from Bowman:

Since the covenant of perpetual priesthood had been made with Phinehas and his descendants after him , it was good policy to maintain that he was responsible for fixing the Samaritan calendar . The Samaritans doubtless believed that it would have been one of the earliest concerns of the Israelite priests on entering the Land to fix the calendar and thereby make sure that the feasts were celebrated at the proper times

In case there is any doubt that the material in Genesis 1 - 11 was used to anchor the entire system of observing sabbatical years, Bowman again:

The figure seven hundred and seven is the sum of the Gen. figures opposite the names of the antediluvian patriarchs antediluvian patriarchs . 7 : 6 gives Noah's age at the Flood as six hundred years . Apparently the Tolidah adds this to the previous seven hundred and seven to arrive at the figure thirteen seven hundred and seven to arrive at the figure thirteen hundred and seven as the number of the years from Adam to the Flood .

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that 707 is a multiple of seven. 1324, the age Noah gave the first covenant, is 1324. 1 + 1323 (49 x 27).

[Secret Alias]

And from Adam to Abraham's birth there are 2247 years . ( 74 ) Abraham 100 years ( 75 ) Isaac 60 years ( 76 ) Jacob 87 years ( 77 ) Levi 52 years ( 78 ) Kohath 71 years ( 79 ) Amram 52 years ( 80 ) Aaron the Priest 40 Moses peace be upon him was a prophet for 40 years. The total number of years to the death of the prophet moses are two thousand seven hundred and ninety-four years.

2794 divided by 49 = 57

The Assumption of Moses has Moses die in the year 2500 and calculates that this is the fiftieth Jubilee (of 50 year jubilees) https://books.google.com/books?id=qaJDA ... ee&f=false

[neilgodfrey]

The Samaritans maintained the same priesthood until 1634 so they retained the original traditions of their ancestors, Sabbatical years being one aspect, the original sanctity of Gerizim and the proper interpretation of the Pentateuch being the other.

This assertion breaks every rule of historical research. I don't think you would accept the statement: The Church of Rome has maintained the papacy since the first century so they retain the original teachings and practices of the apostle Peter.

Neither archaeological finds nor textual analysis support the assertion that Samaritans have preserved the practices and teachings of the original priesthood at Gerizim.

[Secret Alias]

I am not asking people to believe all the claims of the Samaritans with regards to the high priesthood (that it went back to Phineas for instance). But clearly (a) there are genetic markers that prove that the kohenim generally were distinct and (b) the Samaritans had a hereditary high priesthood. Surely there may have been individual breaks but they would have been noteworthy as it was in 1634 when the community was dying. The purpose of citing the hereditary high priesthood was to demonstrate the continuous transmission of knowledge and the resistance to innovation. Surely you can't be arguing that THERE WAS NO CONTINUITY IN THE HIGH PRIESTHOOD or that it was democratic. Given that Jewish and Samaritan kohenim have genetic markers which distinguish them from the rest of the population AND THE SAMARITAN COMMUNITY NEVER LOST ITS PRIESTHOOD it's logical to assume that the priesthood of the Samaritans preserved a continuous message with very little innovation possible.

I would love to hear a comprehensive proposal for how the Samaritan high priesthood was NOT resistant to change and prone to innovation, new ideas and novelty. From another Australian:

The supreme power of the high priests finds its justification in the understanding that "the Judge" in Deut. xvii, 9 and 12 is a reference to him, and hence the final verdict in all religious and juridical matters must necessarily be within his sole competence. The authority of the High Priest however is not guaranteed by any supernatural or prophetic faculties by the temporary incumbent of this office but ratherby the direct chain formed by his lineage and succession and by his function as custodian of the ' truth of the Torah . Thus the High Priest is in no way expected to cultivate such prophetic gifts as may lead him to utter new revelations. On the contrary , his authority is established precisely for the purpose of preserving the traditions in their original form . As opposed to the ' illuminational and ' progressive ' interpretations of the Zadokite priesthood , for the Samaritans the rulings of the High Priest must by their nature be pressed into the service of an extreme conservatism . Since his office and his personality are intended to represent for them the ' true ' tradition , which he inherently possesses by his direct lineage and his spiritual inheritance , he is expected to be in full and intact possession of possession of all the learning transmitted to him through his ancestors and his immediate predecessors .

We do indeed hear of a ' mystery ' adhering to the personality of the High Priest ; such a concept , however , always has reference to his special learning in a field in which the knowledge of the layman or even of the ordinary priest could not safely be entrusted. It is possible that for polemical reasons this ' mystery ' is in some degree emphasized , yet it never becomes an attribute in virtue of which the High Priest can introduce innovations by claiming to have acquired special ' mystical faculties.' https://books.google.com/books?id=DpJwE ... 22&f=false

On the surface at least and with no evidence to the contrary it would seem that the high priesthood of Samaritanism up until 1634 was stable and resistant enough to change that it could have preserved a consistent understanding of the proper exegesis of the Pentateuch based on the writings of Marqe (albeit only a few books now remain). As old as Marqe, as old the Samaritan tradition remained basically stable and intact, at least until 1634. The dates for Marqe have been proposed from the 1st to the 4th century.

Also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-chromosomal_Aaron "recent studies have provided further support for the model of descent from a common ancestor who lived in the First Temple period by demonstrating that Kohanim from different Jewish communities form a "tight cluster" which is "specific to the Jewish Cohens"" With regards to Samaritan genetics:

Cazes and Bonné-Tamir (1984) detailed pedigrees among the Samaritans. There are four lineages: the Tsedaka, who claim descent from the tribe of Manasseh; the Joshua-Marhiv and DanÀ lineages, who claim descent from the tribe of Ephraim; and the priestly Cohen lineages from the tribe of Levi (Ben Zvi 1957; Schur 2002). Interestingly the studies of Samaritan DNA reveals "It is clear from Table 5 that the Samaritan Y chromosomes [generally] are closest to those of the [Jewish] Cohanim for most distance estimates." https://rosenberglab.stanford.edu/paper ... umBiol.pdf

And the conclusion of the paper Genetics and the History of the Samaritans: Y-Chromosomal Microsatellites and Genetic Affinity between Samaritans and Cohanim:

This result supports the position of the Samaritans that they are descendants from the tribes of Israel dating to before the Assyrian exile in 722–720 BCE. In concordance with previously published single-nucleotide polymorphism haplotypes, each Samaritan family, with the exception of the Samaritan Cohen lineage, was observed to carry a distinctive Y-chromosome short tandem repeat haplotype that was not more than one mutation removed from the six-marker Cohen modal haplotype.

Sounds just like a 'random' heresy with 'new innovations' every generation. Atheists want everything to be random to agree with their 'random universe.' Religious people want everything to be determined by God. The truth is somewhere in the middle.

[Secret Alias]

And since we seem to be arguing that Gerizim was a 'late innovation' of the Samaritans, how old is the oldest reference to the Samaritan interest in Gerizim? Josephus mentions the Samaritan devotion to Gerizim. His first notice in Antiquities:

But now the Cutheans, who removed into Samaria, (for that is the name they have been called by to this time: because they were brought out of the countrey called Cuthah, which is a countrey of Persia, and there is a river of the same name in it:) each of them, according to their nations, which were in number five, brought their own gods into Samaria: and by worshipping them, as was the custom of their own countries, they provoked Almighty God to be angry and displeased at them. For a plague (29) seized upon them; by which they were destroyed. And when they found no cure for their miseries, they learned by the oracle, that they ought to worship Almighty God; as the method for their deliverance. So they sent Ambassadors to the King of Assyria; and desired him to send them some of those Priests of the Israelites whom he had taken captive. And when he thereupon sent them, and the people were by them taught the laws, and the holy worship of God, they worshipped him in a respectful manner: and the plague ceased immediately. And indeed they continue to make use of the very same customs to this very time: and are called in the Hebrew tongue Cutheans, but in the Greek tongue Samaritans. And when they see the Jews in prosperity, they pretend that they are changed, and allied to them; and call them kinsmen: as though they were derived from Joseph, and had by that means an original alliance with them. But when they see them falling into a low condition, they say they are no way related to them: and that the Jews have no right to expect any kindness or marks of kindred from them: but they declare that they are sojourners, that come from other countries. But of these we shall have a more seasonable opportunity to discourse hereafter

He follows this up in chapter 11 with the idea that the Samaritans were jealous of Jewish attempts to rebuild the temple of Jerusalem under Persian rulers:

But when the Samaritans, who were still enemies to the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, heard the sound of the trumpets, they came running together; and desired to know what was the occasion of this tumult? And when they perceived that it was from the Jews, who had been carried captive to Babylon, and were rebuilding their temple; they came to Zorobabel, and to Jeshua, and to the heads of the families; and desired that they would give them leave to build the temple with them, and to be partners with them in building it. For they said, “We worship their God, and especially pray to him, and are desirous of their religious settlement; and this ever since Shalmanezer, the King of Assyria, transplanted us out of Cuthah and Media to this place.” When they said thus, Zorobabel, and Jeshua, the High Priest, and the heads of the families of the Israelites replyed to them, that “It was impossible for them to permit them to be their partners, whilst they [only] had been appointed to build that temple at first by Cyrus, and now by Darius: although it was indeed lawful for them to come and worship there, if they pleased; and that they could allow them nothing but that in common with them: which was common to them, with all other men, to come to their temple, and worship God there.”

4. When the Cutheans heard this; for the Samaritans have that appellation; they had indignation at it; and persuaded the nations of Syria to desire of the governours, in the same manner as they had done formerly in the days of Cyrus, and again in the days of Cambyses afterwards, to put a stop to the building of the temple; and to endeavour to delay and protract the Jews in their zeal about it.

and then:

So when Alexander had thus settled matters at Jerusalem, he led his army into the neighbouring cities. And when all the inhabitants, to whom he came, received him with great kindness, the Samaritans, who had then Shechem for their metropolis, (a city situate at mount Gerizzim; and inhabited by apostates of the Jewish nation;) seeing that Alexander had so greatly honoured the Jews, determined to profess themselves Jews. For such is the disposition of the Samaritans, as we have already elsewhere declared,15 that when the Jews are in adversity, they deny that they are of kin to them; and then they confess the truth. But when they perceive that some good fortune hath befallen them, they immediately pretend to have communion with them, saying, that they belong to them, and derive their genealogy from the posterity of Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh. Accordingly they made their address to the King with splendour; and shewed great alacrity in meeting him, at a little distance from Jerusalem. And when Alexander had commended them, the Shechemites approached to him; taking along with them the troops that Sanballat had sent him: and they desired that he would come to their city, and do honour to their temple also. To whom he promised, that when he returned he would come to them. And when they petitioned that he would remit the tribute of the seventh year to them, because they did not sow thereon; he asked who they were that made such a petition; and when they said, that they were Hebrews; but had the name of Sidonians, living at Shechem; he asked them again whether they were Jews? and when they said they were not Jews, “It was to the Jews, said he, that I granted that privilege: however, when I return, and am thoroughly informed by you of this matter, I will do what I shall think proper.” And in this manner he took leave of the Shechemites: but ordered that the troops of Sanballat should follow him into Egypt, because there he designed to give them lands: which he did a little after in Thebais, when he ordered them to guard that countrey.

Oh wait what have we here! A proof that the Samaritans had a copy of the Pentateuch before Gmirkin's proposed date of composition of the document (had he studied the Samaritans or cared enough to learn about them he would have come across this). The Jews were commanded not only to cease from all agricultural labours on this year, but to hold as forbidden the very reaping or gathering of thal which grew wild, and of its own accord, (Levit 25 1 to 7.) as well as to release all their purchased Hebrew slaves who might desire their freedom, (Exod. 21. 2.) and to remit or release all debts owing from one Israelite to another (Deut 15. 1.); so that the payment of tribute to a foreign power in such a year would have pressed hard on them indeed. Would certainly imply the Samaritans had the Pentateuch in the Persian period. Indeed the whole account of wanting to build a temple at Gerizim confirms that (when viewed objectively). But let's stick with the Sabbatical laws.

[Secret Alias]

As I have demonstrated throughout this discussion with Mr Price you can't have Sabbatical years without a written chronology. You have to know how many years passed from Anno Mundi. So the Pentateuch must have already been in the possession of Samaritans in order for them to calculate cycles of seven and seven x seven, and seven x seven + 1 year. There is just no other way. Yes you can count and group "seven year" cycles. But in order for these to have had religious significance of 'redemption' and 'release from debt' you'd have to know when 'year 1' was, what Jubilee Noah established the first covenant, Abraham the second covenant, Israel was 'redeemed' from Egypt, Moses died, Joshua entered the land. You need to have EXAMPLES of the redeeming power of the cycle of sabbatical years in order for THIS PARTICULAR sabbatical year to have that power and authority. Sorry Russell, the theory doesn't work. The Samaritans had the Torah at least seven years before Alexander arrived.

[neilgodfrey]

And since we seem to be arguing that Gerizim was a 'late innovation' of the Samaritans,

No one has argued that. No-one. You are off the wall with remarks like that.

You are clearly ignoring the substance of the points others have made in this thread and at most using them as springboards to launch more hundreds, even thousands, of words to somehow get your point across -- I'm reminded of people with dementia who can only hear trigger words from others and repeat and repeat their own views incessantly.

[Secret Alias]

Of course you ignore the proof that the Samaritans were employing the Pentateuch at least seven years before Alexander's arrival into Palestine (whatever you want to call it). Interesting the Book of Daniel seems to have been already created before Alexander's arrival into Jerusalem:

When he went up into the temple, he offered sacrifice to God, according to the high priest's direction and treated both the high priest and the priests handsomely. 337 When he was shown the Book of Daniel which declares that one of the Greeks would destroy the empire of the Persians, he thought it applied himself and in his joy he dismissed the people, but the next day he called them and told them to ask him for whatever favours they pleased. 338 When the high priest asked that they should follow their ancestral laws and pay no tax on the seventh year, he granted all they wanted; and when they implored him to let the Jews in Babylon and Media enjoy their own laws also, he willingly promised to do later what they wanted.

So the Book of Daniel was created apparently before the Torah. Interesting. But now in the context of showing Alexander a 'book' - in this case Daniel - Josephus makes reference to "follow(ing) their ancestral laws and pay no tax on the seventh year" this is some sort of extra-canonical 'sabbatical law.' Really? And then when Alexander goes to Samaria:

Such is the nature of the Samaritans, as already said elsewhere, that when the Jews are in difficulties, they deny that they are related to them (acknowledging the truth,) but when they notice good fortune coming to them, they immediately want to share it, by claiming descent from Joseph's children, Ephraim and Manasses. 342 They greeted the king in festive eagerness, meeting him at a short distance from Jerusalem. When Alexander praised them, the Sikimites approached him, bringing the troops that Sanballat had sent him and asking him to come to their city and show honour to their temple too. 343 He promised, to come to them on his return journey, and when they implored him to absolve them of the tax each seventh year, since on it they only sowed, he asked who they were to make such a petition.

So the Samaritans not only celebrated the same "ancestral law" as the Jews with regard to "the tribute each seventh year" BUT SOMEHOW MANAGED TO COORDINATE THEIR SABBATICAL YEARS EXACTLY WITH THEIR RIVALS THE JEWS? How do you estimate they did this without a common written record? And the reference to "descent from Joseph's children Ephraim and Manasses." Of course they knew they characters from oral accounts only. Such nonsense. This is getting silly.

And of course Josephus's reference to Jews celebrating Passover in the Persian period "according to their ancestral law (singular = τῷ πατρίῳ νόμῳ)." Of course this is also another law that wasn't written down.

As the feast of unleavened bread was at hand, in the first month, which the Macedonians call Xanthicus, but we call Nisan, all the people hurried in from the villages to the city and celebrated the festival, having purified themselves and their wives and children, according to their ancestral law (τῷ πατρίῳ νόμῳ). 110 Then they offered the sacrifice called the Passover, on the fourteenth day of the same month and feasted seven days and spared no expense but offered entire holocausts to God and thank-offerings, for He had led them back to the land of their fathers and to its laws to it and had caused the king of Persia to be favourable to them.

The references to Ezra sacrificing animals according to the law of Moses:

When in the seventh month they held the festival of tents and almost all the people had gathered for it, they went up to the open part of the temple, to the eastern gate, and asked Esdras to read to them the laws of Moses (Ἔζδρα τοὺς νόμους αὐτοῖς ἀναγνῶναι τοὺς Μωυσέως).

Of course that's part of the conspiracy.

Sabbatical years are generally known (we know the years which were Sabbatical) and the conquest of Judea by Alexander is acknowledged as a sabbatical year by scholars? The difficulty for Gmirkin's theory is that Josephus demonstrates that both Jews and Samaritans shared the same understanding of when "τὸν φόρον αὐτοῖς τοῦ ἑβδοματικοῦ ἔτους (their tribute every seventh year) occurred. It was the same for Jews and Samaritans. How was this accomplished? They were synchronized because they both had a written account - the Book of Genesis - which I have already demonstrated in another thread which counted the years from the Anno Mundi down to Moses and then down to contemporary history.

Philo employs similar language I think:

'The same thing you may see conducing to strength in our bodies; since it is not with a view to health only that physicians prescribe intervals of rest and certain relaxations from work: for what is always continuous and monotonous, especially in the case of labour, seems to be hurtful.

'And this is a proof of it: for if any one were to promise to cultivate the land itself for them much more this seventh year than before, and to yield up all the fruits entirely to them, they would by no means accept it. For they think that they not only themselves need to rest from their labours (though even if they did so, it would be nothing strange), but that their land needs to get some relaxation and repose for a fresh beginning of care and cultivation afterwards.

'Else what was there, on God's part, to hinder them in the past year from letting the land beforehand, and collecting from those who cultivated it their tribute of the (seventh) year's produce? ἐπεὶ τί ἐκώλυε πρὸς θεοῦ ἐπὶ τοῦ παρελθόντος ἔτους αὐτὴν προεκδοῦναι καὶ παρὰ τῶν ἐργαζομένων τὸν ἐκείνου φόρον τοῦ ἔτους ἐκλέγειν

So Josephus is referencing a non-written Sabbatical year law and Philo a written Sabbatical year law? And Josephus a non-written Samaritan association with Joseph and his sons and only Philo knows the Biblical narrative? And the Jews sacrifice of Passover in the Persian period? Another non-written Passover? Come on. This is silly.

[neilgodfrey]

Of course you ignore the proof that the Samaritans were employing the Pentateuch at least seven years before Alexander's arrival into Palestine

Others here have tried to engage with you on the basics of how historians assess evidence but you have ridiculed and insulted them for their well-intentioned efforts.

Josephus is not evidence for practices centuries before his time. He is evidence for what he and others believed in his own time.