Questioning the Historicity of Early 1C Popular Messianism

[neilgodfrey]

Wow. I was told that Judaism 'changed' between the ancient period and modern times. I replied that that was unlikely. I was told I was playing the 'race' or 'religious card' and a lot of nonsense. Now I am 'wasting my time' attempting to demonstrate that Judaism didn't change. Apparently we've 'moved on' - moved on to a discussion where you can't demonstrate you really don't know anything about Judaism. Fine move along. Doesn't change your that your knowledge of Judaism is limited to kooky books.

As I said, Stephan, same methods as Robert Tulip and Acharya S. Confirmation bias run riot. Ignore the scholarly studies -- I know, you don't have the time. Even ignore the OP and subsequent comments -- I know, you don't have the time. Tribal historicism.

[Stephan Huller]

Oh I see. So you yourself don't have to have any acquaintance with 'modern Judaism' to know that it must have changed from what it was like in antiquity. Fine that makes perfect sense. Of course. But I still haven't heard an explanation for how Judaism and Samaritanism split over 2000 years ago and were basically forbidden to speak to one another for the ensuing centuries yet nevertheless look remarkably similar on the surface. I apologize that I actually know how Jews and Samaritans live. I know that handicaps me from all the kooky book knowledge that you love to spread around. What is it that anthropologists do when they want to learn about a culture? Hmmm. Could it be that they actually live among the people they study? No, no, no. That can't be. Perish the thought ... They prefer to examine kooky books.

[Stephan Huller]

As I said, Stephan, same methods as Robert Tulip and Acharya S. Confirmation bias run riot. Ignore the scholarly studies

So my greater familiarity with how Jews and Samaritans live, my greater familiarity with their language and traditions of these people affords me no advantage against you - a person who knows little or nothing about any of these things - when it comes to determining the degree to which variation is possible in these traditions? Really?

[MrMacSon]

As I said, Stephan, same methods as Robert Tulip and Acharya S.

It's inappropriate to criticize one poster and their approach by criticizing others.

[Stephan Huller]

So how is it you explain that Samaritans and Jews resemble one another so much? Let's bring more cultures into the discussion. What about Beta Israel? This community preserves a form of Judaism from before the development of the Mishnah https://books.google.com/books?id=wFrAO ... ah&f=false We find them tucked away in far away Ethiopia. Why do they still resemble Jews and Samaritans in the basic shape of their religion? The answer is because the same Torah regulates all aspects of their lives and those of the Samaritans and Jews.

[Stephan Huller]

The messianic concept in Beta Israel was basically similar to that of their mainstream Jewish relatives with some pronounced differences. The Messiah's name was Tewodros (Theodore), a direct descendent from the House of David, but they believed he would not arrive for another 10,000 years. It was said that during a cataclysmic war that would engulf the universe, Tewodros would arise and lead their community back to the Holy Land.

[Stephan Huller]

So the Torah so regulates Jews, Samaritans and various early schismatic groups that they generally resemble one another. The Torah does not explicitly reference the concept of 'the Messiah.' Nevertheless all these communities have the same basic notion of the one who is to come. As Meeks notes regarding the Samaritan Ta'eb - "The sources which mention the Taheb generally agree in making him the "prophet like Moses" promised in Deuteronomy 18, and on the basis of Numbers 24.5-7 and 17 he was also expected to reign as king" (The Prophet King Moses p. 252)

[Stephan Huller]

It's astounding that you could have three different traditions - one separated before the Common Era (Jews and Samaritans), the other two Jewish traditions split before the Mishnah (Jews and the Falashas) all of whom agree that the central document of the Jewish religion predicts the emergence of a royal figure appointed by god, but you neil godfrey still want to believe there might have been 'great variation' possible with regards to the adherence to this ideal in the first century CE. Based on what? Your selective reading of kooky books? I've met actual adherents from all of these religions. Dined with them. Went to weddings and social events with them. In short I am intimately familiar with these traditions and I can tell you that you will have to do more than selective cite from kooky books to get around the idea that (a) the Israelite religions were slavishly devoted to a book called the Torah which (b) they believed was centrally focused on the arrival of a divine king who demanded their complete devotion and faithfulness. We shouldn't expect that modern religious believers from these traditions had a stronger attachment to these ideas than their ancestors but the other way around simply because the ancient regimes were more repressive and more deserving of uprising, rebellion and insurrection.

[Peter Kirby]

All the people with first hand experience of anything before the year 1800 are dead.

This is why history quickly becomes a field focused on records and artifacts, instead of personal experience.

And it should really be common sense. I'm a "Californian," but does your personal experience with me that tell you anything about "Californians" before the year 1800? NOT REALLY.

Any hypothesis even of the connection of the present with the past would, logically, have to be supported and not assumed. The clearest and best support will come from records and artifacts from the relevant past.

And yes in some respects we're out of luck because we don't have nearly as much data as we'd like. In some cases we try to leap over that with assumptions, but that unfortunate level of ignorance doesn't turn them into non-assumptions.

[Stephan Huller]

So the fact that Jews, Samaritans and Bet Israel - very much resemble one another separated as they have been for an average of 2000 years - does not point to a basic paradigm reinforced by the Torah? It's just coincidence that they all resemble one another. It just a bunch of otherwise unrelated communities with a common, but wholly unconnected desire to eat bland food. dress atrociously and act the same way? Maybe they are being secretly controlled by an alien culture living on the far side of the moon.