Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Bernard Muller wrote: Nothing to do about Hellenization of the temple or the chief priests were Hellenized.


Cordially, Bernard

Bernard if you think the temple was not Hellenistic and that the required silver temple coins in gods house that had a pagan deity Melqart and Greek writing is not evidence of Hellenization in the temple. then provide a source, your opinion is worthlless


You also ignored the Greek inscribed burial boxes.


Here is clue, conversation is over berny, if you have anything else to say YOU PROVIDE SOURCES that state the temple was not Hellenistic. I have provided many, you none.

Bernard Muller wrote: - few Palestinian Jews of his day could speak Greek well:

Cordially, Bernard

This shows how dishonest you are POE. Naughty little quote miner like a creationist


he also gives the impression - few Palestinian Jews of his day could speak Greek well:

Children ... children! Behave in church!

https://diglotting.com/2014/12/20/book- ... ry-judaea/

It is a common notion in New Testament scholarship–one that is practically accepted as an axiomatic truth–that in first century Palestine there were two languages in common use, Aramaic and Greek, with the Hebrew language being limited to the learned religious teachers. This volume challenges this common assumption, drawing upon the increasing linguistic data, such as from those working in the field of Mishnaic Hebrew, that points towards the conclusion that Hebrew was also in common use in the first century.


But not to berny


You will notice it only argues the extent of Hebrew, not Greek

— Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Sukkah chapter 5[41]

Jerusalem was at once a grand pagan city and the center of Jewish life at its peak. Temple ritual continued unabated in the new and lavish building. Huge number of pilgrims, perhaps as many as a million,[42] filled the city streets during Passover, supposedly in an atmosphere described by the Talmud as :

to outhouse,

You are an idiot Bernard if you think the temple was not Hellenistic and that the required silver temple coins in gods house that had a pagan deity Melqart and Greek writing is not evidence of Hellenization in the temple.

Melqart was a Tyrian god, not a Hellenist god, but later assimilated with Herakles. The Tyrian Shekel with Greek writing had been in use as the official currency in the temple for a long period and started probably before Herod the Great. I do not see how that would be something which Hellenized the temple. It is an oddity for sure, and contrary to the Jewish religion.
Herod did not change the currency even when it got discontinued in Tyre. Probably not to break a tradition.

You also ignored the Greek inscribed burial boxes.

No, I did not. Learn how to read.

It is a common notion in New Testament scholarship–one that is practically accepted as an axiomatic truth–that in first century Palestine there were two languages in common use, Aramaic and Greek, with the Hebrew language being limited to the learned religious teachers. This volume challenges this common assumption, drawing upon the increasing linguistic data, such as from those working in the field of Mishnaic Hebrew, that points towards the conclusion that Hebrew was also in common use in the first century.

This is stupid. It is assumed Aramaic and Greek were languages in common use, but this is not true according to Josephus' testimony, at least not in Jewish Palestine, certainly not in the upper class.
Furthermore Josephus wrote there was only one language for his nation, and that was Aramaic. However, sometimes 'Hebrew' is used for 'Aramaic' (Acts 26:14, Wars VI, II, 1), probably because Hebrews is more of a noble language than Aramaic and fairly similar with Aramaic.

The "List of the Fast-Days" (Megillat Ta'anit), edited before the destruction of the Temple, was written in Aramaic. Josephus considers Aramaic so thoroughly identical with Hebrew that he quotes Aramaic words as Hebrew ("Ant." iii. 10, § 6), and describes the language in which Titus' proposals to the Jerusalemites were made (which certainly were in Aramaic) as Hebrew ("B. J." vi. 2, § 1).

(http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/artic ... g-the-jews)
The Megillat Ta'anit was written by Eleazar ben Hananiah, governor of the temple and son of a high priest.

— Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Sukkah chapter 5[41]
Jerusalem was at once a grand pagan city and the center of Jewish life at its peak. Temple ritual continued unabated in the new and lavish building. Huge number of pilgrims, perhaps as many as a million,[42] filled the city streets during Passover, supposedly in an atmosphere described by the Talmud as :

What you quoted is a modern opinion, not something in the Talmud.
And that's at least the second time you quoted that: are you running out of material, that is unevidenced modern opinions?

Cordially, Bernard

Here is clue, conversation is over berny, if you have anything else to say YOU PROVIDE SOURCES that state the temple was not Hellenistic. I have provided many, you none

Bernard Muller wrote:This is stupid.
Cordially, Bernard

Yes it is.

Anyone who argues with all modern sources on the subject that state during the Hellenistic second temple period, that the temple was not Hellenistic and Greek was not being used because of a known biased traitors literal interpretation, well that is stupid.


Randall Buth and R. Steven Notley are accredited scholars and professors, you are none of that, and no one to discount their studies.

In 1987 on a home leave he earned a PhD in Semitic languages from UCLA where he studied under Stanislav Segert
Then in 1996 Randall and Margret moved to Israel to begin developing new curriculum and classroom methodologies for teaching biblical languages

You are a nobody.

R. Steven Notley is Distinguished Professor of New Testament and Christian Origins on the New York City campus of Nyack College and director of its graduate programs in Ancient Judaism and Christian Origins.

You nothing at all.

to outhouse,

Here is clue, conversation is over berny, if you have anything else to say YOU PROVIDE SOURCES that state the temple was not Hellenistic. I have provided many, you none

On this article, notice Sepphoris, Tiberias and Jerusalem are not among the list of Hellenized centers:
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/artic ... -hellenism

Anyone who argues with all modern sources on the subject that state during the Hellenistic second temple period, that the temple was not Hellenistic and Greek was not being used because of a known biased traitors literal interpretation, well that is stupid.

So Josephus is not to be trusted because he would be a traitor? Again a way to destroy the primary evidence.

Randall Buth and R. Steven Notley are accredited scholars and professors, you are none of that, and no one to discount their studies.

Scholars in this field are always looking to justify new ideas which goes against a consensus or near consensus. That's how they make a name for themselves. There is nothing to gain about supporting a consensus. They have to write something new, even if controversial.
I do not think Buth and Notley theories are supported by many other scholars.
As far as the importance of Greek in (greater) Palestine, they probably included the littoral plain of today Israel and territories east of the Jordan, some places in Samaria, and Scythopolis (Beth-Shean), the only city of the Decapolis west of the Jordan River.
The littoral plains were never under Jewish culture and were populated by mostly Gentiles. That's why I always specified "Jewish Palestine", that is the hilly parts between the Mediterranean sea and the Jordan & dead sea with the exception of Samaria, that Josephus did not consider as part of his "nation".
However the cities of this littoral plain, occupied by mostly Greek-peaking & Syrians early in the 1st century, were more and more populated by Jews. In 66 AD, some of these cities had a majority of Jews, or 50/50 (as in Ceasarea). It is not known what language these Jews were speaking, but I assume they had to learn Greek, as other Aramaic Jews settling in Hellenized cities of the Diaspora farther away.

Cordially, Bernard

Here is clue, conversation is over berny, if you have anything else to say YOU PROVIDE SOURCES that state the temple was not Hellenistic. I have provided many, you none