Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

The term "messiah" properly designates someone officially sanctioned to do something by an authority. Priests and kings were symbolically anointed with oil as a sign of this. In Isaiah, Cyrus is called God's "anointed" for overthrowing the Babylonians and hopefully allowing the Judean captives to resettle their former homeland, but as I doubt any priest anointed him in reality the sense has to be taken metaphorically.

While technically this metaphorical use of "anointed (one)" is a step above a first order meaning signification, it is not quite at the level of "myth" unless one counts the romantic myths that come to be associated with an "anointed one" that was hoped would change an untenable set of circumstances. Then the term can signify the future hopes of peoples. This is perhaps the sense that Bar Kosiba used the term: "You look for a man anointed by God to change the present difficulties, then look no further than right here. Rally about me."

Now Christians, on the other hand, had taken these 2nd order significations to new levels, by turning that title associated with future hopes into a formal title, then almost a mystical name, for the man they pinned their hopes upon. At first it was a bit like Cyrus or Bar Kosiba, but the Christian anointed one, "Jesus Christ," became much much more, a mystical redeemer. Jesus was "Christ" (anointed) all right, but all the salvific symbolism was imported from other ideas present in Judean, and even in pagan, society of that time.

DCH

iskander wrote:Gibbon is good in that he is asking the right question that would provide the answer to this riddle : " how do you measure the desire of people for the Messiah at a certain time in history ".

It has already been observed, that the religious concord of the world was principally supported by the implicit assent and reverence which the nations of antiquity expressed for their respective traditions and ceremonies. It might therefore be expected, that they would unite with indignation against any sect or people which should separate itself from the communion of mankind, and claiming the exclusive possession of divine knowledge, should disdain every form of worship, except its own, as impious and idolatrous.

What strength of feeling could persuade any community to consistently behave so recklessly?

Without repeating what has already been mentioned of the reverence of the Roman princes and governors for the temple of Jerusalem, we shall only observe, that the destruction of the temple and city was accompanied and followed by every circumstance that could exasperate the minds of the conquerors, and authorize religious persecution by the most specious arguments of political justice and the public safety. From the reign of Nero to that of Antoninus Pius, the Jews discovered a fierce impatience of the dominion of Rome, which repeatedly broke out in the most furious massacres and insurrections. Humanity is shocked at the recital of the horrid cruelties which they committed in the cities of Egypt, of Cyprus, and of Cyrene, where they dwelt in treacherous friendship with the unsuspecting natives; 1 and we are tempted to applaud the severe retaliation which was exercised by the arms of the legions against a race of fanatics, whose dire and credulous superstition seemed to render them the implacable enemies not only of the Roman government, but of human kind. 2 The enthusiasm of the Jews was supported by the opinion, that it was unlawful for them to pay taxes to an idolatrous master; and by the flattering promise which they derived from their ancient oracles, that a conquering Messiah would soon arise, destined to break their fetters, and to invest the favorites of heaven with the empire of the earth. It was by announcing himself as their long-expected deliverer, and by calling on all the descendants of Abraham to assert the hope of Israel, that the famous Barchochebas collected a formidable army, with which he resisted during two years the power of the emperor Hadrian. 3

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/732/732- ... k2H_4_0001

Gibbon is not primary evidence. But setting aside that detail for now, notice he is speaking of a time post 70 CE. That's not early first century or the time of Jesus.

We cannot take evidence from the late first century or early second century (ignoring all the problems associated with that evidence for now) and simply assume it speaks of "widespread popular beliefs" in an earlier generation.

There are many problems related to the claims that the late first century and early second century saw a wave of popular messianic hopes, but I mention just one here: the prophecy of a king to arise from the east.

There is no evidence to suggest that that prophecy was part and parcel of any popular messianic anticipation 40 years earlier or even in 70 CE. Rather, we need to read the prophecy in the broader context of imperial propaganda and Josephus's own self-interest. Vespasian's family status meant he needed all the support he could get to legitimise his position as "emperor" and the prophecy was heavily utilised for that purpose. Josephus's status in the imperial court was also buttressed by presenting himself as one who declared Vespasian to be the fulfilment of that prophecy. We have opportunities and motivations for the prophecy to be magnified in significance and public awareness in the persons of Vespasian and Josephus. We have no evidence that the same prophecy related to any particular messianic beliefs extant prior to 70 CE. Josephus is very willing to speak of false prophets and false kings but never indicates any awareness of false messiahs. Had their been messianic hopes leading to the war then we would surely expect Josephus to excoriate them as he did other pretenders leading the nation to disaster.

All this happened during the second temple period. It never stopped after that as Gibbon shows .
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2823&start=10#p63774
by iskander » Fri Jan 20, 2017 3:03 am
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Judaism-Histor ... 0415236614
Pages 450-51
Jesus was a Jewish believer and his reforming activity was a form of Judaism. Messianic dreams began during the Second Temple Period and continued after its destruction and went on for many many years and is still continuing. The messiah was created in the mind of Hashem before the world was completed .The redeemer is a Jewish invention central to the faith...
Why are you arguing ?
Attached file

iskander wrote:All this happened during the second temple period. It never stopped after that as Gibbon shows .
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2823&start=10#p63774
by iskander » Fri Jan 20, 2017 3:03 am
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Judaism-Histor ... 0415236614
Pages 450-51
Jesus was a Jewish believer and his reforming activity was a form of Judaism. Messianic dreams began during the Second Temple Period and continued after its destruction and went on for many many years and is still continuing. The messiah was created in the mind of Hashem before the world was completed .The redeemer is a Jewish invention central to the faith...
Why are you arguing ?
Attached file

+1

Yes I don't see the point in arguing that in 50 bc to 130 ad there were no heightened messianic expectations by Judeans who were oppressed under Roman rule and wanted liberation from it, national liberation being a usual messianic theme in Judaism.

neilgodfrey wrote:
Gibbon is not primary evidence. But setting aside that detail for now, notice he is speaking of a time post 70 CE. That's not early first century or the time of Jesus.

We cannot take evidence from the late first century or early second century (ignoring all the problems associated with that evidence for now) and simply assume it speaks of "widespread popular beliefs" in an earlier generation.

There are many problems related to the claims that the late first century and early second century saw a wave of popular messianic hopes, but I mention just one here: the prophecy of a king to arise from the east.

There is no evidence to suggest that that prophecy was part and parcel of any popular messianic anticipation 40 years earlier or even in 70 CE. Rather, we need to read the prophecy in the broader context of imperial propaganda and Josephus's own self-interest. Vespasian's family status meant he needed all the support he could get to legitimise his position as "emperor" and the prophecy was heavily utilised for that purpose. Josephus's status in the imperial court was also buttressed by presenting himself as one who declared Vespasian to be the fulfilment of that prophecy. We have opportunities and motivations for the prophecy to be magnified in significance and public awareness in the persons of Vespasian and Josephus. We have no evidence that the same prophecy related to any particular messianic beliefs extant prior to 70 CE. Josephus is very willing to speak of false prophets and false kings but never indicates any awareness of false messiahs. Had their been messianic hopes leading to the war then we would surely expect Josephus to excoriate them as he did other pretenders leading the nation to disaster.

then we also have Essenes and qumranites who were super apocalyptic. Messianic was part of the apocalyptic Jewish concept. This was all in jesus' time. Plus even something messianic in 75 ad is still reasonably tapping into preexisting messianic expectations.

DCHindley wrote:The term "messiah" properly designates someone officially sanctioned to do something by an authority. Priests and kings were symbolically anointed with oil as a sign of this. In Isaiah, Cyrus is called God's "anointed" for overthrowing the Babylonians and hopefully allowing the Judean captives to resettle their former homeland, but as I doubt any priest anointed him in reality the sense has to be taken metaphorically.

While technically this metaphorical use of "anointed (one)" is a step above a first order meaning signification, it is not quite at the level of "myth" unless one counts the romantic myths that come to be associated with an "anointed one" that was hoped would change an untenable set of circumstances. Then the term can signify the future hopes of peoples. This is perhaps the sense that Bar Kosiba used the term: "You look for a man anointed by God to change the present difficulties, then look no further than right here. Rally about me."

Now Christians, on the other hand, had taken these 2nd order significations to new levels, by turning that title associated with future hopes into a formal title, then almost a mystical name, for the man they pinned their hopes upon. At first it was a bit like Cyrus or Bar Kosiba, but the Christian anointed one, "Jesus Christ," became much much more, a mystical redeemer. Jesus was "Christ" (anointed) all right, but all the salvific symbolism was imported from other ideas present in Judean, and even in pagan, society of that time.

DCH

If you go to the Psalms and the davidic tales in chronicles etc there are these super important allegorical promises of an "Anointed One" descended from David who is to do fantastic works like global yahweist domination.

It's kind of like the analogy today in popular fiction like THE MATRIX about a messiah who is supposed to come and do all this apocalyptic stuff.

The messiah ben david concept keeps popping up in Tanakh too like Isaiah 11, ezek 34 and 37, hosea, jeremiah.

andrewcriddle wrote:
His title Bar Kochba (son of a star) which is a pun on his original name ben Kosiba is almost certainly messianic see Numbers 24:17

I see him, but not now;
I behold him, but not near.
A star will come out of Jacob;
a scepter will rise out of Israel.
He will crush the foreheads of Moab,
the skulls of all the people of Sheth

Andrew Criddle

Yeah good point.

Also THE SCEPTER WILL NOT DEPART UNTIL SHILOH COME.

The scepter departed from Judah probably after the Assyrian conquest or up to about the time bar kohba got crushed, right?

rakovsky wrote:

iskander wrote:All this happened during the second temple period. It never stopped after that as Gibbon shows .
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2823&start=10#p63774
by iskander » Fri Jan 20, 2017 3:03 am
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Judaism-Histor ... 0415236614
Pages 450-51
Jesus was a Jewish believer and his reforming activity was a form of Judaism. Messianic dreams began during the Second Temple Period and continued after its destruction and went on for many many years and is still continuing. The messiah was created in the mind of Hashem before the world was completed .The redeemer is a Jewish invention central to the faith...
Why are you arguing ?
Attached file

+1

Yes I don't see the point in arguing that in 50 bc to 130 ad there were no heightened messianic expectations by Judeans who were oppressed under Roman rule and wanted liberation from it, national liberation being a usual messianic theme in Judaism.

This was extracted from the Messiah Texts Raphael Patai Wayne State University.


Certain themes in Judaism have been treated by Jewish authors and sages as pre-existent in the sense that they were created in the sixth day of Genesis. Among them they mentioned the Torah, Repentance, the Garden of Eden and Gehenna, God’s Throne of Glory, the Fathers, Israel, the Temple and the Messiah.

The Messiah first appears as pre-existent in the First Book of Enoch which was originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic about 150 B.C.E From that period on, the concept of the Messiah who was created in the six days of creation, or even prior to them or who was born at variously stated subsequent dates and was then hidden to await his time, became a standard feature of Jewish messianic eschatology.


The concept of the pre-existence of the Messiah accords with the general Talmudic view which holds that “The Holy One, blessed be He, prepares the remedy before the wound” ( B.Meg. 13b) .

The names by which the Messiah is called are revealing. In the first book of Enoch he is called, first of all, “Head of Days”, an epithet alluding to his pre-existence. In the same source he is also called “Son of Man, an old biblical appellation heavy with theosophical symbolism... In any case this multiplicity of names indicates one thing very clearly: The image of the Messiah was very much in the forefront of rabbinical- and undoubtedly also popular- thought from the second century BCE on.

The earliest Biblical figure who in later literature was endowed with a superman Messianic character is Enoch, about whom it is said in Genesis (5:24) “that he walked with God, and he was no more, for God took him.” This brief enigmatic statement sufficed to turn Enoch into a superhuman figure: after his translation he became Metatron, the chief of all angels, and according to the book of Enoch (which was preserved in Ethiopic), he became the Messiah.


The Messiah Texts Raphael Patai Wayne State University Press, Detroit. 1979 ISBN 9780814318508
Chapters 2 and 3

The story we read in the Gospels is as Jewish as it can be.
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=78&start=10

iskander wrote:Gibbon is good in that he is asking the right question that would provide the answer to this riddle : " how do you measure the desire of people for the Messiah at a certain time in history ".

It has already been observed, that the religious concord of the world was principally supported by the implicit assent and reverence which the nations of antiquity expressed for their respective traditions and ceremonies. It might therefore be expected, that they would unite with indignation against any sect or people which should separate itself from the communion of mankind, and claiming the exclusive possession of divine knowledge, should disdain every form of worship, except its own, as impious and idolatrous.

What strength of feeling could persuade any community to consistently behave so recklessly?

Without repeating what has already been mentioned of the reverence of the Roman princes and governors for the temple of Jerusalem, we shall only observe, that the destruction of the temple and city was accompanied and followed by every circumstance that could exasperate the minds of the conquerors, and authorize religious persecution by the most specious arguments of political justice and the public safety. From the reign of Nero to that of Antoninus Pius, the Jews discovered a fierce impatience of the dominion of Rome, which repeatedly broke out in the most furious massacres and insurrections. Humanity is shocked at the recital of the horrid cruelties which they committed in the cities of Egypt, of Cyprus, and of Cyrene, where they dwelt in treacherous friendship with the unsuspecting natives; 1 and we are tempted to applaud the severe retaliation which was exercised by the arms of the legions against a race of fanatics, whose dire and credulous superstition seemed to render them the implacable enemies not only of the Roman government, but of human kind. 2 The enthusiasm of the Jews was supported by the opinion, that it was unlawful for them to pay taxes to an idolatrous master; and by the flattering promise which they derived from their ancient oracles, that a conquering Messiah would soon arise, destined to break their fetters, and to invest the favorites of heaven with the empire of the earth. It was by announcing himself as their long-expected deliverer, and by calling on all the descendants of Abraham to assert the hope of Israel, that the famous Barchochebas collected a formidable army, with which he resisted during two years the power of the emperor Hadrian. 3

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/732/732- ... k2H_4_0001

Good info and logic here.

neilgodfrey wrote:

rakovsky wrote:Neil, I am not sure you have already read the info I already posted in this thread, but I don't have any major doubt that there was widespread Jewish expectation of a Messiah coming in the 1st c. AD and around that time. There is just so much evidence and reasons for it.

1. Roman and Jewish commentors historically from that time noted it.

For early first century CE?? No.
]

HI Neil,
I get the sense that this is going to be a discussion where you and I don't come to a conclusive agreement, since we share the same evidence already.

Good example- Josephus and others who lived in the first c. Described the messianic expectations of the period. He was writing c. 93 and named Vespasian from years before and IMO maybe Jesus as a Messianic candidate.

Since the Christian movement started with Jesus in c. 30 ad and anyway Christ refers to anointed, ie messiah, it looks like Christ was part of that messianic idea among Jews josephus mentioned.

Now if you want to say, "NO WAY, IT IS DEFINITELY A COINCIDENCE!", I think there is no way I can prove to you something like this that to me is perfectly reasonable, because unfortunately for me I have no time machine. Same thing for all the other 10+ reasons I have for thinking that the 1st c. In general had heightened expectations. Someone can always come in and make some argument and say "NO WAY", and with no time machine I think it's hard to prove otherwise because the person seems pretty hard set on the topic, although Iskander has some good stuff.

Thing is, unlike Jesus' corpse reenlivening, I don't see anything odd about religious observant Jews living under Roman rule praying for and wanting some Messiah to awaken the nation to Redemption at a greater rate than they had , say, when they had Maccabean independence or semi independence before the Romans took over.

Looks actually like the normal thing a savy political realist would anticipate to happen in people's minds.