The Origins of Christianity

[neilgodfrey]

Bar Kosiba, IIRC, was spoken of as if a Davidic messiah, but as far as I know, he was not of Davidic (= "royal") lineage.

DCH

Correct. Which just goes to show.... ummm.... that it is possible for a Davidic messiah to be not a real Davidic messiah.... for the term to have been used figuratively from the very first.

[Secret Alias]

I love these shitty arguments that develop only from connecting the dots to your desired conclusions. We don't know pretty much anything about the last revolt. The fact among all the crap we don't know includes whether or not he claimed to have David lineage we can't use that ignorance to refute a consistent David interest elsewhere. Sheesh

[outhouse]

Bar Kosiba, IIRC, was spoken of as if a Davidic messiah, but as far as I know, he was not of Davidic (= "royal") lineage.

DCH

Correct. Which just goes to show.... ummm.... that it is possible for a Davidic messiah to be not a real Davidic messiah.... for the term to have been used figuratively from the very first.

Could it not be people at different times viewed these different messianic types as Davidic based on their steeped foundation in OT text?

You did say "possible" making your statement well qualified.

One thing I have been learning more of, is how often these authors used authoritative names in rhetorical prose to build authority in the context of the message itself.


I wonder if Figuratively is not the correct word here. I almost prefer literal because they may have believed it. If it was metaphorically/figuratively I would prefer authority building rhetoric/blatant dishonesty over figuratively.


Sorry did not mean to nitpic, my first question was my context here.

[neilgodfrey]

we can't use that ignorance to refute a consistent David interest elsewhere. Sheesh

Good point -- which is why no-one is using that ignorance to refute a consistent David interest elsewhere. Whatever gave you that idea? Sheesh

[Secret Alias]

What gave me the idea that you were using our lack of knowledge of Bar Kosiba's David lineage to argue that a Davidic messiah didn't have to be of Davidic lineage:

DCHindley wrote:
Bar Kosiba, IIRC, was spoken of as if a Davidic messiah, but as far as I know, he was not of Davidic (= "royal") lineage.

DCH


Correct. Which just goes to show.... ummm.... that it is possible for a Davidic messiah to be not a real Davidic messiah.... for the term to have been used figuratively from the very first.

[Secret Alias]

Can we just admit that we can't use our lack of information about the last Jewish revolt to help further other arguments ?

[neilgodfrey]

Bar Kosiba, IIRC, was spoken of as if a Davidic messiah, but as far as I know, he was not of Davidic (= "royal") lineage.

DCH

Correct. Which just goes to show.... ummm.... that it is possible for a Davidic messiah to be not a real Davidic messiah.... for the term to have been used figuratively from the very first.

Could it not be people at different times viewed these different messianic types as Davidic based on their steeped foundation in OT text?

That's quite possible. And likely -- if by "people" we don't mean everybody. Confine our selection to subsections of scribes -- such as some in the later period of the sectarian Qumran community. (I don't recall the details of these DSS references off hand.) There were other types of "anointed ones", too. But if we stick with what became the canonical literature then here are all the references containing the word for "messiah":

Leviticus 4:3, 5, 16; 6:15
1 Samuel 2:10, 35; 12:3, 5; 16:6; 24:7, 11; 26:9, 11, 16, 23
2 Samuel 1:14, 16; 19:22; 22:51; 23:1
Isaiah 45:1
Habbakuk 3:13
Psalms 2:2; 18:51; 20:7; 28:8; 84:10; 89:39, 52; 105:15; 132:10, 17
Lamentations 4:20
Daniel 9:25, 26
1 Chronicles 16:22
2 Chronicles 6:42

It's not limited to David. Some scribes (whether mainstream establishment or counter-cultural ones) may have had something like our idea of a Davidic messiah prior to the war(s) with Rome. Paul's writings do not point to any concern about them, however, since none of his polemics are directed towards them.

To deepen the plot, here are the only passages used as references to an eschatological messiah between 200 BCE and 200 CE. and not one of them contains the word "messiah". The list is from Gerben Oegema.

Genesis 49:10

The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the commander’s staff from between his feet, until that which is his comes; and the obedience of the peoples is his.

Numbers 24:17

A star will go forth from Jacob; and a scepter will rise from Israel; it will shatter the borders of Moab and tear down all the sons of Sheth.

2 Samuel 7:12-13

I will raise up your seed after you, who will come forth from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. He will build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever.

Isaiah 11:1-2

A shoot will come forth from the stump of Jesse, and a branch will grow from his roots. The spirit of YHWH will rest upon him.

Amos 9:11

On that day I will raise up the fallen booth of David, and repair its breached walls, and raise up its ruins, and build it as in the days of old.

Daniel 7:13-14

I saw in the night visions, and behold, one like a son of man was coming with the clouds of heaven. And he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him. To him was given dominion and honor and kingship.

The Davidic ones above are from the late Herodian period of the DSS.

Philo does not have any concept of a worldly political liberating messiah figure and relies entirely on appeals to Rome to sort out injustices. The rebels and movements Josephus speaks about show no evidence of acting in a Davidic manner or with Davidic expectations or of anyone thinking they were Davidic messiahs.

I think after the hopes expressed in some of the DSS the first Davidic messiah in the record (whether literary, historical, whatever the author or person himself believed, etc etc) is Bar Kochba.

I wonder if Figuratively is not the correct word here. I almost prefer literal because they may have believed it. If it was metaphorically/figuratively I would prefer authority building rhetoric/blatant dishonesty over figuratively.

He may have believed it. I can't recall the details, sorry. Who knows, people may have believed he came or was sent or raised up to go in "the spirit and power of David".

[neilgodfrey]

What gave me the idea that you were using our lack of knowledge of Bar Kosiba's David lineage to argue that a Davidic messiah didn't have to be of Davidic lineage:

DCHindley wrote:
Bar Kosiba, IIRC, was spoken of as if a Davidic messiah, but as far as I know, he was not of Davidic (= "royal") lineage.

DCH


Correct. Which just goes to show.... ummm.... that it is possible for a Davidic messiah to be not a real Davidic messiah.... for the term to have been used figuratively from the very first.

Well be fair and concede that I was not responding to what you are now saying you said -- that I was using our lack of knowledge of BK's David lineage to argue that a Davidic messiah didn't have to be of Davidic lineage. That's called goal-post shifting.

You're correct, though. I'm sure if there ever were a real King David then probably every Jew by the time of the second century could, if the records were kept, have been able to trace their family lineage back to him in some way. But we know genealogical lists were political documents that could be changed to suit new situations so even if David were a myth it would be no problem for serious minded scribes to trace anyone's ancestry to him.

It's a question of probabilities, isn't it. The rabbinic lit leads us to believe he was not of Davidic descent even though Aqiba proclaimed him to be the messiah, and the context suggests a Davidic messiah; and he did use the star of David on coins, I think. I confess I have meekly followed certain "kooky scholars" in interpreting all of this as indicating that though BK was proclaimed a Davidic messiah he was not literally from David.

If you interpret the evidence differently, fine.

[neilgodfrey]

My earlier reference to Oegema was second hand, via Novenson's "Christ Among the Messiahs" -- copied from an earlier post. Oegema's book is The Anointed and His People, but it costs an arm and a third leg to buy, and I've reached my interlibrary loan limit, and the nearest copy is about 3000 kilometers from where I live. So l rely on what Novenson and others say about it. Reviewers point out its faults but on balance are positive. Here is the guts of what Oegema has to say about the messianic idea prior to the first Jewish war with Rome. . . .

But first, what he means by "messiah":

A Messiah is a priestly, royal or otherwise characterized figure, who will play a liberating role at the end of time. (p. 26)

For the period from Pompey to Titus the source texts he uses as evidence for the understanding of a messiah figure are:

• Psalms of Solomon
• Qumran texts
• Philo
• Josephus
• Enoch 37-41
• the Q source
• Synoptic Gospels
• Paul
• Pseudo-Philo

For this period the reviewer Robert Gnuse sums up Oegema's argument:

Authors of these texts generally saw the messiah as a latter-day liberator in spiritual and nonmilitary ways. Many sources combined the image of judge, king, and Son of Man into one personage. Some, like the later Philo, Josephus, Paul, and Pseudo-Philo (with the figure of Phineas), steered away from the image of a political messiah. . . . (p. 758, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 61, 1999)

Then for the period from Titus to Bar Kochba:

Texts of this period moved in two different directions mirroring the future expectations of diverse social and religious groups. Some (NT Epistles after Paul, Revelation, Hellenistic redaction of the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs) portrayed a nonpolitical messiah, in order to declare how believers ought to behave toward Rome without revolution. Others (Apocalypse of Abraham, 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, Sibylline Oracle 5, and documents associated with Bar Kochba) demonstrated an acute apocalyptic expectation of the end of time, with the message of how to survive after the destruction of Jerusalem. Herein the messiah is a heavenly judge, warrior, king, and even "man from the sky" who will deliver the people to punish Rome. (p. 759)

Prior to the above periods, from the Maccabees to Pompey, O uses

• Urform of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs
• Sibylline Oracle 3
• Various Qumran texts

Texts of this period often inspired either a combined royal and priestly messiah or separate royal and priestly messiahs opposed to Hasmonean rule. Sibylline Oracle 3 envisioned no liberating messiah, because Ptolemaic rule was perceived as good. (p. 758)

[iskander]

Can we just admit that we can't use our lack of information about the last Jewish revolt to help further other arguments ?

You have discovered the purpose of the internet forums. I apologise to you for my unkind earlier comment on the quality of your contribution. I withdraw that comment as it was an unfortunate mistake.