Yahweh, Satan, Moses and other Wikipedia pages

Adam and Eve

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

For other uses, see Adam and Eve (disambiguation).





The Creation of Adam



The Creation of Eve

from the Sistine Chapel
Adam and Eve, according to the creation myths of the Abrahamic religions,[1] were the first man and woman. The story of Adam and Eve is central to the belief that God created human beings to live in a Paradise on earth, although they fell away from that state and formed the present world full of suffering and injustice. It provides the basis for the belief that humanity is in essence a single family, with everyone descended from a single pair of original ancestors.[2] It also provides much of the scriptural basis for the doctrines of the Fall of man and Original Sin, important beliefs in Christianity, although not generally shared by Judaism or Islam.[3][4]
In the Book of Genesis of the Hebrew Bible, chapters one through five, there are two creation narratives with two distinct perspectives. In the first, Adam and Eve (though not referenced by name) were created together in God's image and jointly given instructions to multiply and to be stewards over everything else that God had made. In the second narrative, God fashions Adam from dust and places him in the Garden of Eden where he is to have dominion over the plants and animals. God places a tree in the garden which he prohibits Adam from eating. Eve is later created from one of Adam's ribs to be Adam's companion. However, the serpent tricks Eve into eating fruit from the forbidden tree. God curses only the serpent and the ground. He prophetically tells the woman and the man what will be the consequences of their sin of disobeying God. Then he banishes 'the man' from the Garden of Eden.
The story underwent extensive elaboration in later Abrahamic traditions, and has been extensively analyzed by modern biblical scholars. Interpretations and beliefs regarding Adam and Eve and the story revolving around them vary across religions and sects.


Contents  [hide]
1 Adam and Eve in Genesis 1.1 Creation of man
1.2 Expulsion from Eden
1.3 Offspring
2 Adam and Eve in other works
3 Abrahamic traditions 3.1 Judaism
3.2 Christianity
3.3 Gnostic and Manichaean traditions
3.4 Islam
3.5 Bahá'í Faith
4 Scientific criticism
5 Y-chromosomal Adam and Mitochondrial Eve
6 Arts and literature
7 See also
8 References 8.1 Footnotes
8.2 Bibliography
8.3 Further reading
9 External links

Adam and Eve in Genesis[edit]
Creation of man[edit]
Main articles: Genesis creation narrative, Adam and Eve
In the Book of Genesis, the Genesis creation narrative tells of the creation of the first humans, humankind, in Genesis 1:26-30 as male and female. According to the Documentary hypothesis of the Genesis creation narrative, there are two stories that derive from original independent sources: a Priestly source (P) (sixth-fifth centuries BC) in Gen. 1:1-2:4a and in Genesis 5; and an older Jahwist (J) or Jahwist-Elohist (J-E) (tenth-ninth centuries BC) in Genesis 2:4b-25. Claus Westermann finds the recognition of two separate creation accounts to be "one of the most important and most assured results of the literary-critical examination of the Old Testament".[5] In the Priestly narrative (Genesis 1:1 to Genesis 2:4a), Elohim creates the world in six days, culminating in the creation of humanity, then rests on the seventh day.
In an older Jahwist or Jahwist-Elohist sources (tenth-ninth centuries BC) in Genesis 2:4b-25, also known as the "subordinating (of woman) account", Yahweh fashions a man (Heb. adam, "man" or "mankind") from the dust (Heb. adamah) and blows the breath of life into his nostrils.[6]
In this version of the story, God brings the animals to the man for him to name. None of them are found to be a suitable companion for the man, so God causes the man to sleep and creates a woman from a part of his body (English-language tradition describes the part as a rib, but the Hebrew word tsela, from which this interpretation is derived, having multiple meanings, could also mean "side"). Describing her in Gen. 2:23a as "bone of my bones, flesh of my flesh", the man calls his new partner "woman" (Heb. ishshah), "for this one was taken from a man" (Heb. ish). The chapter ends by establishing the state of primeval innocence, noting that the man and woman were "naked and not ashamed", and so provides the departure point for the subsequent narrative in which wisdom is gained through disobedience at severe cost.
Adam named his wife Eve (Heb. hawwah) "because she was the mother of all living" and Adam receives his name "the man", changing from "eth-ha'adham", before the fall to "ha'Adham" (with article/command), to Adam after the fall (disobedience). Eve/woman is also established as subordinate to Adam/man, as the impetus for her creation is to serve the needs of Adam by being his "helpmate" to man and to ensure that he not "be alone."[Gen. 2:18] However, others argue for a translation of the Hebrew ezer as "companion," in which manner it is used elsewhere in the Bible; under that reading, the hierarchical relationship is not manifest in the original text but rather a result of mis-translation.[7]
Expulsion from Eden[edit]



William Blake's color printing of God Judging Adam (1795). This print is currently held by the Tate Collection.[8] In the Biblical story, God's judgement is expulsion from the Garden of Eden.


James Tissot, Adam and Eve Driven From Paradise
For the Christian doctrines, see Fall of man and Original sin.
Genesis 3 continues the Adam and Eve story into the expulsion from Eden narrative. A form analysis of Genesis 3 reveals that this portion of the Adam and Eve story is characterized as a parable or wisdom tale in the wisdom tradition. Genesis 3's poetic addresses belong to the speculative type of wisdom that questions the paradoxes and harsh realities of life. This characterization is determined by the narrative's format, settings, and the plot. Genesis 3's form is also shaped by its vocabulary technique, which makes use of various puns and double entendres.[9] The dating of Chapter 3 is said to be around 900s BCE during the reigns of King David or Solomon.[10] The Documentary hypothesis for this narrative portion is attributed to Yahwist (J), due to the use of YHWH.[11]
The expulsion from Eden narrative begins with a dialogue that is exchanged between the serpent and the woman (3:1-5).[12] The serpent is identified in 2:19 as an animal that was made by Yahweh among the beasts of the field.[13] The woman is willing to talk to the serpent and respond to the creature's cynicism by rehearsing Yahweh's prohibition from 2:17.[14] The woman is lured into dialogue on the serpent's terms which directly disputes Yahweh's command.[15] Adam and the woman sin (3:6-8).[16]
In the next narrative dialogue, Yahweh questions Adam and the woman (3:9-13).[12] Yahweh initiates dialogue by calling out to Adam with a rhetorical question designed to consider his wrongdoing. Adam explains that he hid out of fear because he realized his nakedness.[17] This is followed by two more rhetorical questions designed to show awareness of a defiance of Yahweh's command. Adam then points to the woman as the real offender, then accuses Yahweh for the tragedy.[18] Yahweh challenges the woman to explain herself, whereby she shifts the blame to the serpent.[19]
Divine pronouncement of three judgments are then laid against all culprits (3:14-19).[12] A judgement oracle and the nature of the crime is first laid upon the serpent, then the woman, and finally Adam. To the serpent, Yahweh places a divine curse.[20] To the woman, she receives a penalty that impacts two primary roles: childbearing and her relationship to her husband.[21] Adam's penalty results in Yahweh cursing the ground from which he came, and then receives a death oracle.[22] The reaction of Adam, the naming of Eve, and Yahweh making skin garments are described in a concise narrative (3:20-21). The garden account ends with an intradivine monologue, determining the couple's expulsion, and the execution of that deliberation (3:22-24).[12] The reason given for the expulsion was not as retribution for eating the fruit, but to prevent a challenge to Yahweh: "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever".[Gen. 3:22][23] Thus, Yahweh removed the threat to His power by exiling Adam and Eve from the Garden and installing cherubs (human-headed winged lions) and the "ever-turning sword" to guard the entrance.[Gen. 3:24][24]
Offspring[edit]
Genesis 4 tells of the birth of Cain and Abel, Adam and Eve's first children, while Genesis 5 gives Adam's genealogy past that. Adam and Eve are listed as having three children, Cain, Abel and Seth, then "other sons and daughters".[Gen 5:4] According to the Book of Jubilees, Cain married his sister Awan, a daughter of Adam and Eve.[25]
Adam and Eve in other works[edit]
Certain concepts such as the serpent being identified as Satan, Eve being a sexual temptation, or Adam's first wife being Lilith, come from literary works found in various Jewish apocrypha, but not found anywhere in the Book of Genesis or the Torah itself. Writings dealing with these subjects are extant literature in Greek, Latin, Slavonic, Syriac, Armenian and Arabic, going back to ancient Jewish thought. Their influential concepts were then adopted into Christian theology, but not into modern Judaism. This marked a radical split between the two religions. Some of the oldest Jewish portions of apocrypha are called Primary Adam Literature where some works became Christianized. Examples of Christianized works are Life of Adam and Eve, Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan, (translated from the Ethiopic by Solomon Caesar Malan, 1882)[26] and an original Syriac work entitled Cave of Treasures[27] which has close affinities to the Conflict as noted by August Dillmann.
Abrahamic traditions[edit]
Judaism[edit]
For the Jewish Weekly Torah portion, see Bereshit (parsha)#Third reading and Bereshit (parsha)#Fourth reading.
It was also recognized in ancient Judaism, that there are two distinct accounts for the creation of man. The first account says "male and female [God] created them", implying simultaneous creation, whereas the second account states that God created Eve subsequent to the creation of Adam. The Midrash Rabbah – Genesis VIII:1 reconciled the two by stating that Genesis one, "male and female He created them", indicates that God originally created Adam as a hermaphrodite,[28] bodily and spiritually both male and female, before creating the separate beings of Adam and Eve. Other rabbis suggested that Eve and the woman of the first account were two separate individuals, the first being identified as Lilith, a figure elsewhere described as a night demon.
According to traditional Jewish belief, Adam and Eve are buried in the Cave of Machpelah, in Hebron.
In Reform Judaism, Harry Orlinsky analyzes the Hebrew word nefesh in Gen. 2:7 where "God breathes into the man's nostrils and he becomes nefesh hayya." Orlinksy argues that the earlier translation of the phrase "living soul" is incorrect. He points out that "nefesh" signifies something like the English word "being", in the sense of a corporeal body capable of life; the concept of a "soul" in the modern sense, did not exist in Hebrew thought until around the 2nd century B.C., when the idea of a bodily resurrection gained popularity.[29]
Christianity[edit]



 Adam, Eve, and the (female) Serpent (often identified as Lilith) at the entrance to Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris.
Main articles: Fall of man and Original sin
Some early Fathers of the Church took the view that because Eve tempted Adam to eat of the fatal fruit, they held her responsible for the Fall of man, and all subsequent women to be the first sinners. "You are the devil's gateway" Tertullian told his female listeners in the early 2nd century, and went on to explain that they were responsible for the death of Christ: "On account of your desert [i.e., punishment for sin, that is, death], even the Son of God had to die."[30] In 1486, the Dominicans Kramer and Sprengler used similar tracts in Malleus Maleficarum ("Hammer of Witches") to justify the persecution of "witches".
Medieval Christian art often depicted the Edenic Serpent as a woman (often identified as Lilith), thus both emphasizing the Serpent's seductiveness as well as its relationship to Eve. Several early Church Fathers, including Clement of Alexandria and Eusebius of Caesarea, interpreted the Hebrew "Heva" as not only the name of Eve, but in its aspirated form as "female serpent."
Based on the Christian doctrine of the Fall of man, came the doctrine of original sin. St Augustine of Hippo (354–430), working with a Latin translation of the Epistle to the Romans, interpreted the Apostle Paul as having said that Adam's sin was hereditary: "Death passed upon [i.e., spread to] all men because of Adam, [in whom] all sinned".[Romans 5:12] [31] Original sin became a concept that man is born into a condition of sinfulness and must await redemption. This doctrine became a cornerstone of Western Christian theological tradition, however, not shared by Judaism or the Orthodox churches.
Over the centuries, a system of unique Christian beliefs had developed from these doctrines. Baptism became understood as a washing away of the stain of hereditary sin in many churches, although its original symbolism was apparently rebirth. Additionally, the serpent that tempted Eve was interpreted to have been Satan, or that Satan was using a serpent as a mouthpiece, although there is no mention of this identification in the Torah and it is not held in Judaism.
Conservative Protestants typically interpret Genesis 3 as defining humanity's original parents as Adam and Eve who disobeyed God's prime directive that they were not to eat "the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" (NIV). When they disobeyed, they committed a major transgression against God and were immediately punished, which led to "the fall" of humanity. Thus, sin and death entered the universe for the first time. Adam and Eve were ejected from the Garden of Eden, never to return.[32]
Gnostic and Manichaean traditions[edit]
See also: Gnostics and Manichaeans
Gnostic Christianity discussed Adam and Eve in two known surviving texts, namely the "Apocalypse of Adam" found in the Nag Hammadi documents and the "Testament of Adam". The creation of Adam as Protoanthropos, the original man, is the focal concept of these writings.
The Manichaean conception of Adam and Eve is pessimistic. According to them, the copulative action of two demons, Adam and Eve were born to further imprison the soul in the material universe.
"Mani said, 'Then Jesus came and spoke to the one who had been born, who was Adam, and … made him fear Eve, showing him how to suppress (desire) for her, and he forbade him to approach her… Then that (male) Archon came back to his daughter, who was Eve, and lustfully had intercourse with her. He engendered with her a son, deformed in shape and possessing a red complexion, and his name was Cain, the Red Man.'"[33]
Another Gnostic tradition held that Adam and Eve were created to help defeat Satan. The serpent, instead of being identified with Satan, is seen as a hero by the Ophites. Still other Gnostics believed that Satan's fall, however, came after the creation of humanity. As in Islamic tradition, this story says that Satan refused to bow to Adam due to pride. Satan said that Adam was inferior to him as he was made of fire, whereas Adam was made of clay. This refusal led to the fall of Satan recorded in works such as the Book of Enoch.
Islam[edit]
Main article: Biblical narratives and the Quran § Adam and Eve (آدم Adam and حواء Hawwaa)



 Painting from Manafi al-Hayawan (The Useful Animals), depicting Adam and Eve. From Maragheh in Iran, 1294–99
In Islam, Adam (Ādam; Arabic: آدم‎), whose role is being the father of humanity, is looked upon by Muslims with reverence. Eve (Ḥawwāʼ; Arabic: حواء ) is the "mother of humanity."[34] The creation of Adam and Eve is referred to in the Qurʼān, although different Qurʼanic interpreters give different views on the actual creation story (Qurʼan, Surat al-Nisaʼ, verse 1).[35]
In al-Qummi's tafsir on the Garden of Eden, such place was not entirely earthly. According to the Qurʼān, both Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit in a Heavenly Eden (See also Jannah). As a result, they were both sent down to Earth as God's representatives. Each person was sent to a mountain peak: Adam on al-Safa, and Eve on al-Marwah. In this Islamic tradition, Adam wept 40 days until he repented, after which God sent down the Black Stone, teaching him the Hajj. According to a prophetic hadith, Adam and Eve reunited in the plain of ʻArafat, near Mecca.[36] They had two sons together, Qabil and Habil. There is also a legend of a younger son, named Rocail, who created a palace and sepulcher containing autonomous statues that lived out the lives of men so realistically they were mistaken for having souls.[37]
The concept of original sin does not exist in Islam, because Adam and Eve were forgiven by God. When God orders the angels to bow to Adam, Iblīs questioned, "Why should I bow to man? I am made of pure fire and he is made of soil." The liberal movements within Islam have viewed God's commanding the angels to bow before Adam as an exaltation of humanity, and as a means of supporting human rights; others view it as an act of showing Adam that the biggest enemy of humans on earth will be their ego.[38]
Bahá'í Faith[edit]
In the Bahá'í Faith, Adam is seen as a Manifestation of God. The Adam and Eve narratives are seen as symbolic, but are also seen as having mythical features. In Some Answered Questions, 'Abdu'l-Bahá rejects a literal reading and states that the story contains "divine mysteries and universal meanings" and that one of these meanings[39] is that Adam symbolizes Adam's heavenly spirit, Eve his human soul, the tree of good and evil symbolizes the human world and the serpent worldly attachment.[40][41] After the 'fall' of Adam, humanity has been conscious of good and evil.[42]
Scientific criticism[edit]
See also: Relationship between religion and science
The story of Adam and Eve contradicts the scientific consensus that humans evolved from earlier species of hominids.[43] It is also incompatible with the current understanding of human genetics. In particular, if all humans descended from two individuals that lived several thousand years ago, the observed variation would require an impossibly high mutation rate.[44] These incompatibilities have caused many Christians to move away from a literal interpretation and belief in the Genesis creation narrative, while others continue to believe in what they see as a fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith.[44]
Y-chromosomal Adam and Mitochondrial Eve[edit]
The names Adam and Eve are used metaphorically in a scientific context to designate the patrilineal and matrilineal most recent common ancestors, the Y-chromosomal Adam and the Mitochondrial Eve. Those are not fixed individuals, nor is there any reason to assume that they lived at the same time, let alone that they met or formed a couple.[45][46] A recent study on the subject estimates that the Y-chromosomal Adam lived 120 to 156 thousand years ago, while the Mitochondrial Eve lived 99 to 148 thousand years ago. [47] Another recent study places the Y-chromosomal Adam 180 to 200 thousand years ago.[48]
Arts and literature[edit]
Adam and Eve were used by early Renaissance artists as a theme to represent female and male nudes. Later, the nudity was objected to by more modest elements, and fig leaves were added to the older pictures and sculptures, covering their genitals. The choice of the fig was a result of Mediterranean traditions identifying the unnamed Tree of knowledge as a fig tree, and since fig leaves were actually mentioned in Genesis as being used to cover Adam and Eve's nudity.
Treating the concept of Adam and Eve as the historical truth introduces some logical dilemmas. One such dilemma is whether they should be depicted with navels (the Omphalos theory). Since they did not develop in a uterus, they would not have been connected to an umbilical cord like all other humans. Paintings without navels looked unnatural and some artists obscure that area of their bodies, sometimes by depicting them covering up that area of their body with their hand or some other intervening object.
John Milton's Paradise Lost, a famous 17th-century epic poem written in blank verse, explores the story of Adam and Eve in great detail. As opposed to the Biblical Adam, Milton's Adam is given a glimpse of the future of mankind, by the archangel Michael, before he has to leave Paradise.
American painter Thomas Cole painted The Garden of Eden (1828), with lavish detail of the first couple living amid waterfalls, vivid plants, and attractive deer.[49]
Mark Twain wrote humorous and satirical diaries for Adam and Eve in both Eve's Diary (1906) and The Private Life of Adam and Eve (1931), posthumously published.
C.L. Moore's 1940 story Fruit of Knowledge is a re-telling of the Fall of Man as a love triangle between Lilith, Adam and Eve - with Eve's eating the forbidden fruit being in this version the result of misguided manipulations by the jealous Lilith, who had hoped to get her rival discredited and destroyed by God and thus regain Adam's love.
In Stephen Schwartz's musical Children of Eden, "Father" (God) creates Adam and Eve at the same time and considers them His children. They even assist Him in naming the animals. When Eve is tempted by the serpent and eats the forbidden fruit, Father makes Adam choose between Him and Eden, or Eve. Adam chooses Eve and eats the fruit, causing Father to banish them into the wilderness and destroying the Tree of Knowledge, from which Adam carves a staff. Eve gives birth to Cain and Abel, and Adam forbids his children from going beyond the waterfall in hopes Father will forgive them and bring them back to Eden. When Cain and Abel grow up, Cain breaks his promise and goes beyond the waterfall, finding the giant stones made by other humans, which he brings the family to see, and Adam reveals his discovery from the past: during their infancy, he discovered these humans, but had kept it secret. He tries to forbid Cain from seeking them out, which causes Cain to become enraged and he tries to attack Adam, but instead turns his rage to Abel when he tries to stop him and kills him. Later, when an elderly Eve tries to speak to Father, she tells how Adam continually looked for Cain, and after many years, he dies and is buried underneath the waterfall. Eve also gave birth to Seth, which expanded hers and Adam's generations. Finally, Father speaks to her to bring her home. Before she dies, she gives her blessings to all her future generations, and passes Adam's staff to Seth. Father embraces Eve and she also reunited with Adam and Abel. Smaller casts of the American version usually have the actors cast as Adam and Eve double as Noah and Mama Noah.
John William "Uncle Jack" Dey painted "Adam and Eve Leave Eden" (1973), using stripes and dabs of pure color to evoke Eden's lush surroundings.[50]




Adam and Eve depicted in a mural in Abreha wa Atsbeha Church, Ethiopia.




Adam and Eve by Titian.




Depiction of the Fall in Kunsthalle Hamburg, by Master Bertram




Adam and Eve by Albrecht Dürer




Eve giving Adam the forbidden fruit, by Lucas Cranach the Elder




Adam and Eve from a copy of the Falnama (Book of Omens) ascribed to Ja´far al-Sadiq, ca. 1550, Safavid dynasty, Iran.




Detail of a stained glass window (XIIth century) in Saint-Julien cathedral - Le Mans, France.




Adam & Eve, illuminated manuscript circa 950, Escorial Beatus




Adam and Eve by Maarten van Heemskerck




Early Christian depiction of Adam and Eve in the Catacombs of Marcellinus and Peter

See also[edit]
Adam and Eve (LDS Church)
Ask and Embla the first two humans created by Norse gods
Balbira & Kalmana
Biblical narratives and the Qur'an
Christian naturism
Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan
Generations of Adam
Líf and Lífþrasir
Manu (Hinduism)
Mashya and Mashyana, the first two humans in Zoroastrian cosmogony
Pre-Adamite
Tree of Jiva and Atman
References[edit]
Footnotes[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Womack, Mari (2005). Symbols and meaning : a concise introduction. Walnut Creek ... [et al.]: Altamira Press. p. 81. ISBN 0759103224. Retrieved 16 August 2013. "Creation myths are symbolic stories describing how the universe and its inhabitants came to be. Creation myths develop through oral traditions and therefore typically have multiple versions."
2.Jump up ^ Azyumardi. Azra. "TRIALOGUE OF ABRAHAMIC FAITHS; Towards the Alliance of Civilizations". Paper presented at Conference. "Children of Abraham: Trialogue of Civilizations" Weatherhead Center for International Affairs & Divinity School, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., 22–23 October 2007 [1][dead link]
3.Jump up ^ Judaism’s Rejection Of Original Sin – Kolatch, Alfred J. The Jewish Book of Why/The Second Jewish Book of Why. NY: Jonathan David Publishers, 1989.
4.Jump up ^ Judaism's Rejection Of Original Sin[dead link] While there were some Jewish teachers in Talmudic times who believed that death was a punishment brought upon humanity on account of Adam's sin, the dominant view was that man sins because he is not a perfect being, and not, as Christianity teaches, because he is inherently sinful.
5.Jump up ^ Westermann, Claus. Creation. Fortress Press; First English Edition (1974) ISBN 978-0800610722, p.6
6.Jump up ^ Genesis 2:4-23
7.Jump up ^ De La Torre, Miguel (2007). A Lily Among the Thorns: Imagining a New Christian Sexuality. John Wiley & Sons. p. 19. ISBN 9780787997977.
8.Jump up ^ Morris Eaves, Robert N. Essick, and Joseph Viscomi (ed.). "God Judging Adam, object 1 (Butlin 294) "God Judging Adam"". William Blake Archive. Retrieved October 27, 2013.
9.Jump up ^ Freedman, Meyers, Patrick (1983). Carol L. Meyers, Michael Patrick O'Connor, David Noel Freedman, ed. The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth: Essays in Honor of David Noel Freedman. Eisenbrauns. pp. 343–344. ISBN 9780931464195.
10.Jump up ^ Schearing, ed. by Kristen E. Kvam; Linda S.; Ziegler, Valarie H. (1999). Kristen E. Kvam, Linda S. Schearing, Valarie H. Ziegler, ed. Eve and Adam : Jewish, Christian, and Muslim readings on Genesis and gender. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. p. 16. ISBN 9780253212719.
11.Jump up ^ Reed, A. Y. (September 20, 2004). "Source Criticism, the Documentary Hypothesis, and Genesis 1-3" (PDF). RS 2DD3 – Five Books of Moses.
12.^ Jump up to: a b c d Mathews 1996, p. 226
13.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 232
14.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 235
15.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 236
16.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 237
17.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 240
18.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 241
19.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 242
20.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 243
21.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 248
22.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 252
23.Jump up ^ Addis, Edward (1893). The Documents of the Hexateuch, Volume 1. Putnam. pp. 4–7.
24.Jump up ^ Weinstein, Brian (2010). 54 Torah Talks: From Layperson to Layperson. iUniverse. p. 4. ISBN 9781440192555.
25.Jump up ^ The Empowerment of Women in the Book of Jubilees - Page 17, Betsy Halpern Amaru - 1999
26.Jump up ^ First translated by August Dillmann (Das christl. Adambuch des Morgenlandes, 1853), and the Ethiopic book first edited by Trump (Abh. d. Münch. Akad. xv., 1870-1881).
27.Jump up ^ Die Schatzhöhle translated by Carl Bezold from three Syriac MSS (1883), edited in Syriac (1888).
28.Jump up ^ Howard Schwartz Professor of English University of Missouri (September 2004). "173". Tree of Souls : The Mythology of Judaism: The Mythology of Judaism. p. 138. ISBN 0195086791. Retrieved 27 December 2014. "The myth of Adam the Hermaphrodite grows out of three biblical verses"
29.Jump up ^ Harry Orlinsky's Notes to the NJPS Torah
30.Jump up ^ "Tertullian, "De Cultu Feminarum", Book I Chapter I, ''Modesty in Apparel Becoming to Women in Memory of the Introduction of Sin Through a Woman'' (in "The Ante-Nicene Fathers")". Tertullian.org. Retrieved 2014-02-17.
31.Jump up ^ Fox, Robin Lane (2006) [1991]. The Unauthorized Version: Truth and Fiction in the Bible. Penguin Books Limited. pp. 15–27. ISBN 9780141925752.
32.Jump up ^ Robinson, B.A. "Salvation: Teachings by Southern Baptists and other conservative Protestant denominations". Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance, 2010. Accessed 2 Feb 2013
33.Jump up ^ Manichaean beliefs[dead link]
34.Jump up ^ Historical Dictionary of Prophets in Islam and Judaism, Wheeler, Adam and Eve
35.Jump up ^ Quran 4:1:O mankind! Be dutiful to your Lord, Who created you from a single person (Adam), and from him (Adam) He created his wife Hawwa (Eve), and from them both He created many men and women;
36.Jump up ^ Mecca and Eden: Ritual, Relics, and Territory in Islam - Brannon M. Wheeler - Google Books. Books.google.com.qa. Retrieved 2014-02-17.
37.Jump up ^ William Godwin (1876). "Lives of the Necromancers".
38.Jump up ^ Javed Ahmed Ghamidi, Mizan. Lahore: Dar al-Ishraq, 2001
39.Jump up ^ Sours, Michael (2001). The Tablet of the Holy Mariner: An Illustrated Guide to Baha'u'llah's Mystical Work in the Sufi Tradition. Los Angeles: Kalimát Press. p. 86. ISBN 1-890688-19-3.
40.Jump up ^ Momen, Wendy (1989). A Basic Bahá'í Dictionary. Oxford, UK: George Ronald. p. 8. ISBN 0-85398-231-7.
41.Jump up ^ McLean, Jack (1997). Revisioning the Sacred: New Perspectives on a Bahá'í Theology - Volume 8. p. 215.
42.Jump up ^ Smith, Peter (2000). "Adam". A concise encyclopedia of the Bahá'í Faith. Oxford: Oneworld Publications. p. 23. ISBN 1-85168-184-1.
43.Jump up ^ Dilley, Stephen C. (2013). Darwinian Evolution and Classical Liberalism: Theories in Tension. Lexington Books. pp. 224–225. ISBN 0739181068.
44.^ Jump up to: a b Barbara Bradley Hagerty (August 9, 2011). "Evangelicals Question The Existence Of Adam And Eve". All Things Considered. Transcript
45.Jump up ^ Takahata, N (January 1993), "Allelic genealogy and human evolution", Mol. Biol. Evol. 10 (1): 2–22, PMID 8450756""
46.Jump up ^ Cruciani, F; Trombetta, B; Massaia, A; Destro-Bisol, G; Sellitto, D; Scozzari, R (June 10, 2011), "A Revised Root for the Human Y Chromosomal Phylogenetic Tree: The Origin of Patrilineal Diversity in Africa", The American Journal of Human Genetics 88 (6): 814–818, doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2011.05.002, PMC 3113241, PMID 21601174
47.Jump up ^ Poznik, G. David; Henn, Brenna M.; Yee, Muh-Ching; Sliwerska, Elzbieta; Euskirchen, Ghia M.; Lin, Alice A.; Snyder, Michael; Quintana-Murci,, Lluis; Kidd first10= Peter A., Jeffrey M.; Underhill; Bustamante, Carlos D. (2 August 2013). "Sequencing Y Chromosomes Resolves Discrepancy in Time to Common Ancestor of Males Versus Females". Science 341 (6145): 562–565. doi:10.1126/science.1237619. PMID 23908239.
48.Jump up ^ Francalacci, Paolo; Morelli, Laura; Angius, Andrea; Berutti, Riccardo; Reinier, Frederic; Atzeni, Rossano; Pilu, Rosella; Busonero, Fabio; Maschio, Andrea; Zara, Ilenia; Sanna, Daria; Useli, Antonella; Urru, Maria Francesca; Marcelli, Marco; Cusano, Roberto; Oppo, Manuela; Zoledziewska, Magdalena; Pitzalis, Maristella; Deidda, Francesca; Porcu, Eleonora; Poddie, Fausto; Kang, Hyun Min; Lyons, Robert; Tarrier, Brendan; Gresham, Jennifer Bragg; Li, Bingshan; Tofanelli, Sergio; Alonso, Santos; Dei, Mariano; Lai, Sandra; Mulas, Antonella; Whalen, Michael B.; Uzzau, Sergio; Jones, Chris; Schlessinger, David; Abecasis, Gonçalo R.; Sanna, Serena; Sidore, Carlo; Cucca, Francesco (2 August 2013). "Low-Pass DNA Sequencing of 1200 Sardinians Reconstructs European Y-Chromosome Phylogeny". Science 341 (6145): 565–569. doi:10.1126/science.1237947. PMID 23908240.
49.Jump up ^ Exhibit at the Amon Carter Museum in Fort Worth, Texas
50.Jump up ^ "Adam and Eve Leave Eden". Smithsonian American Art Museum. Retrieved 11 February 2014.
Bibliography[edit]
Mathews, K. A. (1996). Genesis 1-11:26. B&H Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0805401011.
Kissling, Paul (2004). Genesis, Volume 1. College Press. ISBN 978-0899008752.
Further reading[edit]
Almond, Philip C. 'Adam and Eve in Seventeenth-Century Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999, 2008)
Alter, Robert (2004). The Five Books of Moses. W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 0-393-33393-0.
Ayoub, Mahmoud. The Qur'an and its Interpreters, SUNY: Albany, 1984
Lewis, C.S. The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe"
Mackie, Adam. The Importance of being Adam - Alexo 1997 (only 2000 copies published)
Murdoch, Brian O. The Apocryphal Adam and Eve in Medieval Europe: Vernacular Translations and Adaptations of the Vita Adae et Evae. Oxford University Press, 2009. ISBN 978-0-19-956414-9
Patai, R. The Jewish Alchemists, Princeton University Press, 1994.
Rana & Hugh. Fazale Rana and Ross, Hugh, Who Was Adam: A Creation Model Approach to the Origin of Man, 2005, ISBN 1-57683-577-4
Rohl, David. Legend: The Genesis of Civilisation, 1998
Sibylline Oracles, III; 24–6. This Greek acrostic also appears in 2 Enoch 30:13.
Sykes, Bryan. The Seven Daughters of Eve
External links[edit]
 Wikiquote has quotations related to: Adam and Eve
 Look up adam and eve in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
 Wikimedia Commons has media related to Adam and Eve.
Bible Genealogy
First Human Beings (Library of Congress)
The Story of Lilith in The Alphabet of Ben Sira
Islamic view of the fall of Adam (audio)
98 classical images of Adam and Eve
The Book of Jubilees
Adam and Eve in Medieval Reliefs, Capitals, Frescoes, Roof Bosses and Mosaics Cynistory and Phantamangas of Finceland
"Adam and Eve" at the Christian Iconography website
Translation of Grimm's Fairy Tale No. 180, Eve's Unequal Children, a German Fairy Tale about Adam and Eve
Jewish Encyclopedia
Original Sin
Biblical parallels in Sumerian mythology


Michelangelo, Creation of Adam 04.jpgCreationism portal
 P christianity.svgChristianity portal
 Star of David.svgJudaism portal
 Allah-green.svgIslam portal
 Portal-puzzle.svgBaha'i Faith portal
 

  


Categories: Adam and Eve
Biblical phrases
Creation myths
Hebrew Bible topics
Abrahamic mythology
Myth of origins
Duos
Book of Genesis
Bereshit (parsha)







Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Afrikaans
Беларуская
Čeština
Deutsch
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Frysk
Galego
ગુજરાતી
한국어
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
Кыргызча
Lietuvių
Magyar
Македонски
മലയാളം
Bahasa Melayu
Nederlands
日本語
Нохчийн
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Shqip
Simple English
Slovenčina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Svenska
Tagalog
Türkçe
Українська
اردو
Tiếng Việt
Walon
文言
Winaray
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 24 April 2015, at 08:36.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_and_Eve#Christianity















Adam and Eve

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

For other uses, see Adam and Eve (disambiguation).





The Creation of Adam



The Creation of Eve

from the Sistine Chapel
Adam and Eve, according to the creation myths of the Abrahamic religions,[1] were the first man and woman. The story of Adam and Eve is central to the belief that God created human beings to live in a Paradise on earth, although they fell away from that state and formed the present world full of suffering and injustice. It provides the basis for the belief that humanity is in essence a single family, with everyone descended from a single pair of original ancestors.[2] It also provides much of the scriptural basis for the doctrines of the Fall of man and Original Sin, important beliefs in Christianity, although not generally shared by Judaism or Islam.[3][4]
In the Book of Genesis of the Hebrew Bible, chapters one through five, there are two creation narratives with two distinct perspectives. In the first, Adam and Eve (though not referenced by name) were created together in God's image and jointly given instructions to multiply and to be stewards over everything else that God had made. In the second narrative, God fashions Adam from dust and places him in the Garden of Eden where he is to have dominion over the plants and animals. God places a tree in the garden which he prohibits Adam from eating. Eve is later created from one of Adam's ribs to be Adam's companion. However, the serpent tricks Eve into eating fruit from the forbidden tree. God curses only the serpent and the ground. He prophetically tells the woman and the man what will be the consequences of their sin of disobeying God. Then he banishes 'the man' from the Garden of Eden.
The story underwent extensive elaboration in later Abrahamic traditions, and has been extensively analyzed by modern biblical scholars. Interpretations and beliefs regarding Adam and Eve and the story revolving around them vary across religions and sects.


Contents  [hide]
1 Adam and Eve in Genesis 1.1 Creation of man
1.2 Expulsion from Eden
1.3 Offspring
2 Adam and Eve in other works
3 Abrahamic traditions 3.1 Judaism
3.2 Christianity
3.3 Gnostic and Manichaean traditions
3.4 Islam
3.5 Bahá'í Faith
4 Scientific criticism
5 Y-chromosomal Adam and Mitochondrial Eve
6 Arts and literature
7 See also
8 References 8.1 Footnotes
8.2 Bibliography
8.3 Further reading
9 External links

Adam and Eve in Genesis[edit]
Creation of man[edit]
Main articles: Genesis creation narrative, Adam and Eve
In the Book of Genesis, the Genesis creation narrative tells of the creation of the first humans, humankind, in Genesis 1:26-30 as male and female. According to the Documentary hypothesis of the Genesis creation narrative, there are two stories that derive from original independent sources: a Priestly source (P) (sixth-fifth centuries BC) in Gen. 1:1-2:4a and in Genesis 5; and an older Jahwist (J) or Jahwist-Elohist (J-E) (tenth-ninth centuries BC) in Genesis 2:4b-25. Claus Westermann finds the recognition of two separate creation accounts to be "one of the most important and most assured results of the literary-critical examination of the Old Testament".[5] In the Priestly narrative (Genesis 1:1 to Genesis 2:4a), Elohim creates the world in six days, culminating in the creation of humanity, then rests on the seventh day.
In an older Jahwist or Jahwist-Elohist sources (tenth-ninth centuries BC) in Genesis 2:4b-25, also known as the "subordinating (of woman) account", Yahweh fashions a man (Heb. adam, "man" or "mankind") from the dust (Heb. adamah) and blows the breath of life into his nostrils.[6]
In this version of the story, God brings the animals to the man for him to name. None of them are found to be a suitable companion for the man, so God causes the man to sleep and creates a woman from a part of his body (English-language tradition describes the part as a rib, but the Hebrew word tsela, from which this interpretation is derived, having multiple meanings, could also mean "side"). Describing her in Gen. 2:23a as "bone of my bones, flesh of my flesh", the man calls his new partner "woman" (Heb. ishshah), "for this one was taken from a man" (Heb. ish). The chapter ends by establishing the state of primeval innocence, noting that the man and woman were "naked and not ashamed", and so provides the departure point for the subsequent narrative in which wisdom is gained through disobedience at severe cost.
Adam named his wife Eve (Heb. hawwah) "because she was the mother of all living" and Adam receives his name "the man", changing from "eth-ha'adham", before the fall to "ha'Adham" (with article/command), to Adam after the fall (disobedience). Eve/woman is also established as subordinate to Adam/man, as the impetus for her creation is to serve the needs of Adam by being his "helpmate" to man and to ensure that he not "be alone."[Gen. 2:18] However, others argue for a translation of the Hebrew ezer as "companion," in which manner it is used elsewhere in the Bible; under that reading, the hierarchical relationship is not manifest in the original text but rather a result of mis-translation.[7]
Expulsion from Eden[edit]



William Blake's color printing of God Judging Adam (1795). This print is currently held by the Tate Collection.[8] In the Biblical story, God's judgement is expulsion from the Garden of Eden.


James Tissot, Adam and Eve Driven From Paradise
For the Christian doctrines, see Fall of man and Original sin.
Genesis 3 continues the Adam and Eve story into the expulsion from Eden narrative. A form analysis of Genesis 3 reveals that this portion of the Adam and Eve story is characterized as a parable or wisdom tale in the wisdom tradition. Genesis 3's poetic addresses belong to the speculative type of wisdom that questions the paradoxes and harsh realities of life. This characterization is determined by the narrative's format, settings, and the plot. Genesis 3's form is also shaped by its vocabulary technique, which makes use of various puns and double entendres.[9] The dating of Chapter 3 is said to be around 900s BCE during the reigns of King David or Solomon.[10] The Documentary hypothesis for this narrative portion is attributed to Yahwist (J), due to the use of YHWH.[11]
The expulsion from Eden narrative begins with a dialogue that is exchanged between the serpent and the woman (3:1-5).[12] The serpent is identified in 2:19 as an animal that was made by Yahweh among the beasts of the field.[13] The woman is willing to talk to the serpent and respond to the creature's cynicism by rehearsing Yahweh's prohibition from 2:17.[14] The woman is lured into dialogue on the serpent's terms which directly disputes Yahweh's command.[15] Adam and the woman sin (3:6-8).[16]
In the next narrative dialogue, Yahweh questions Adam and the woman (3:9-13).[12] Yahweh initiates dialogue by calling out to Adam with a rhetorical question designed to consider his wrongdoing. Adam explains that he hid out of fear because he realized his nakedness.[17] This is followed by two more rhetorical questions designed to show awareness of a defiance of Yahweh's command. Adam then points to the woman as the real offender, then accuses Yahweh for the tragedy.[18] Yahweh challenges the woman to explain herself, whereby she shifts the blame to the serpent.[19]
Divine pronouncement of three judgments are then laid against all culprits (3:14-19).[12] A judgement oracle and the nature of the crime is first laid upon the serpent, then the woman, and finally Adam. To the serpent, Yahweh places a divine curse.[20] To the woman, she receives a penalty that impacts two primary roles: childbearing and her relationship to her husband.[21] Adam's penalty results in Yahweh cursing the ground from which he came, and then receives a death oracle.[22] The reaction of Adam, the naming of Eve, and Yahweh making skin garments are described in a concise narrative (3:20-21). The garden account ends with an intradivine monologue, determining the couple's expulsion, and the execution of that deliberation (3:22-24).[12] The reason given for the expulsion was not as retribution for eating the fruit, but to prevent a challenge to Yahweh: "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever".[Gen. 3:22][23] Thus, Yahweh removed the threat to His power by exiling Adam and Eve from the Garden and installing cherubs (human-headed winged lions) and the "ever-turning sword" to guard the entrance.[Gen. 3:24][24]
Offspring[edit]
Genesis 4 tells of the birth of Cain and Abel, Adam and Eve's first children, while Genesis 5 gives Adam's genealogy past that. Adam and Eve are listed as having three children, Cain, Abel and Seth, then "other sons and daughters".[Gen 5:4] According to the Book of Jubilees, Cain married his sister Awan, a daughter of Adam and Eve.[25]
Adam and Eve in other works[edit]
Certain concepts such as the serpent being identified as Satan, Eve being a sexual temptation, or Adam's first wife being Lilith, come from literary works found in various Jewish apocrypha, but not found anywhere in the Book of Genesis or the Torah itself. Writings dealing with these subjects are extant literature in Greek, Latin, Slavonic, Syriac, Armenian and Arabic, going back to ancient Jewish thought. Their influential concepts were then adopted into Christian theology, but not into modern Judaism. This marked a radical split between the two religions. Some of the oldest Jewish portions of apocrypha are called Primary Adam Literature where some works became Christianized. Examples of Christianized works are Life of Adam and Eve, Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan, (translated from the Ethiopic by Solomon Caesar Malan, 1882)[26] and an original Syriac work entitled Cave of Treasures[27] which has close affinities to the Conflict as noted by August Dillmann.
Abrahamic traditions[edit]
Judaism[edit]
For the Jewish Weekly Torah portion, see Bereshit (parsha)#Third reading and Bereshit (parsha)#Fourth reading.
It was also recognized in ancient Judaism, that there are two distinct accounts for the creation of man. The first account says "male and female [God] created them", implying simultaneous creation, whereas the second account states that God created Eve subsequent to the creation of Adam. The Midrash Rabbah – Genesis VIII:1 reconciled the two by stating that Genesis one, "male and female He created them", indicates that God originally created Adam as a hermaphrodite,[28] bodily and spiritually both male and female, before creating the separate beings of Adam and Eve. Other rabbis suggested that Eve and the woman of the first account were two separate individuals, the first being identified as Lilith, a figure elsewhere described as a night demon.
According to traditional Jewish belief, Adam and Eve are buried in the Cave of Machpelah, in Hebron.
In Reform Judaism, Harry Orlinsky analyzes the Hebrew word nefesh in Gen. 2:7 where "God breathes into the man's nostrils and he becomes nefesh hayya." Orlinksy argues that the earlier translation of the phrase "living soul" is incorrect. He points out that "nefesh" signifies something like the English word "being", in the sense of a corporeal body capable of life; the concept of a "soul" in the modern sense, did not exist in Hebrew thought until around the 2nd century B.C., when the idea of a bodily resurrection gained popularity.[29]
Christianity[edit]



 Adam, Eve, and the (female) Serpent (often identified as Lilith) at the entrance to Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris.
Main articles: Fall of man and Original sin
Some early Fathers of the Church took the view that because Eve tempted Adam to eat of the fatal fruit, they held her responsible for the Fall of man, and all subsequent women to be the first sinners. "You are the devil's gateway" Tertullian told his female listeners in the early 2nd century, and went on to explain that they were responsible for the death of Christ: "On account of your desert [i.e., punishment for sin, that is, death], even the Son of God had to die."[30] In 1486, the Dominicans Kramer and Sprengler used similar tracts in Malleus Maleficarum ("Hammer of Witches") to justify the persecution of "witches".
Medieval Christian art often depicted the Edenic Serpent as a woman (often identified as Lilith), thus both emphasizing the Serpent's seductiveness as well as its relationship to Eve. Several early Church Fathers, including Clement of Alexandria and Eusebius of Caesarea, interpreted the Hebrew "Heva" as not only the name of Eve, but in its aspirated form as "female serpent."
Based on the Christian doctrine of the Fall of man, came the doctrine of original sin. St Augustine of Hippo (354–430), working with a Latin translation of the Epistle to the Romans, interpreted the Apostle Paul as having said that Adam's sin was hereditary: "Death passed upon [i.e., spread to] all men because of Adam, [in whom] all sinned".[Romans 5:12] [31] Original sin became a concept that man is born into a condition of sinfulness and must await redemption. This doctrine became a cornerstone of Western Christian theological tradition, however, not shared by Judaism or the Orthodox churches.
Over the centuries, a system of unique Christian beliefs had developed from these doctrines. Baptism became understood as a washing away of the stain of hereditary sin in many churches, although its original symbolism was apparently rebirth. Additionally, the serpent that tempted Eve was interpreted to have been Satan, or that Satan was using a serpent as a mouthpiece, although there is no mention of this identification in the Torah and it is not held in Judaism.
Conservative Protestants typically interpret Genesis 3 as defining humanity's original parents as Adam and Eve who disobeyed God's prime directive that they were not to eat "the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" (NIV). When they disobeyed, they committed a major transgression against God and were immediately punished, which led to "the fall" of humanity. Thus, sin and death entered the universe for the first time. Adam and Eve were ejected from the Garden of Eden, never to return.[32]
Gnostic and Manichaean traditions[edit]
See also: Gnostics and Manichaeans
Gnostic Christianity discussed Adam and Eve in two known surviving texts, namely the "Apocalypse of Adam" found in the Nag Hammadi documents and the "Testament of Adam". The creation of Adam as Protoanthropos, the original man, is the focal concept of these writings.
The Manichaean conception of Adam and Eve is pessimistic. According to them, the copulative action of two demons, Adam and Eve were born to further imprison the soul in the material universe.
"Mani said, 'Then Jesus came and spoke to the one who had been born, who was Adam, and … made him fear Eve, showing him how to suppress (desire) for her, and he forbade him to approach her… Then that (male) Archon came back to his daughter, who was Eve, and lustfully had intercourse with her. He engendered with her a son, deformed in shape and possessing a red complexion, and his name was Cain, the Red Man.'"[33]
Another Gnostic tradition held that Adam and Eve were created to help defeat Satan. The serpent, instead of being identified with Satan, is seen as a hero by the Ophites. Still other Gnostics believed that Satan's fall, however, came after the creation of humanity. As in Islamic tradition, this story says that Satan refused to bow to Adam due to pride. Satan said that Adam was inferior to him as he was made of fire, whereas Adam was made of clay. This refusal led to the fall of Satan recorded in works such as the Book of Enoch.
Islam[edit]
Main article: Biblical narratives and the Quran § Adam and Eve (آدم Adam and حواء Hawwaa)



 Painting from Manafi al-Hayawan (The Useful Animals), depicting Adam and Eve. From Maragheh in Iran, 1294–99
In Islam, Adam (Ādam; Arabic: آدم‎), whose role is being the father of humanity, is looked upon by Muslims with reverence. Eve (Ḥawwāʼ; Arabic: حواء ) is the "mother of humanity."[34] The creation of Adam and Eve is referred to in the Qurʼān, although different Qurʼanic interpreters give different views on the actual creation story (Qurʼan, Surat al-Nisaʼ, verse 1).[35]
In al-Qummi's tafsir on the Garden of Eden, such place was not entirely earthly. According to the Qurʼān, both Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit in a Heavenly Eden (See also Jannah). As a result, they were both sent down to Earth as God's representatives. Each person was sent to a mountain peak: Adam on al-Safa, and Eve on al-Marwah. In this Islamic tradition, Adam wept 40 days until he repented, after which God sent down the Black Stone, teaching him the Hajj. According to a prophetic hadith, Adam and Eve reunited in the plain of ʻArafat, near Mecca.[36] They had two sons together, Qabil and Habil. There is also a legend of a younger son, named Rocail, who created a palace and sepulcher containing autonomous statues that lived out the lives of men so realistically they were mistaken for having souls.[37]
The concept of original sin does not exist in Islam, because Adam and Eve were forgiven by God. When God orders the angels to bow to Adam, Iblīs questioned, "Why should I bow to man? I am made of pure fire and he is made of soil." The liberal movements within Islam have viewed God's commanding the angels to bow before Adam as an exaltation of humanity, and as a means of supporting human rights; others view it as an act of showing Adam that the biggest enemy of humans on earth will be their ego.[38]
Bahá'í Faith[edit]
In the Bahá'í Faith, Adam is seen as a Manifestation of God. The Adam and Eve narratives are seen as symbolic, but are also seen as having mythical features. In Some Answered Questions, 'Abdu'l-Bahá rejects a literal reading and states that the story contains "divine mysteries and universal meanings" and that one of these meanings[39] is that Adam symbolizes Adam's heavenly spirit, Eve his human soul, the tree of good and evil symbolizes the human world and the serpent worldly attachment.[40][41] After the 'fall' of Adam, humanity has been conscious of good and evil.[42]
Scientific criticism[edit]
See also: Relationship between religion and science
The story of Adam and Eve contradicts the scientific consensus that humans evolved from earlier species of hominids.[43] It is also incompatible with the current understanding of human genetics. In particular, if all humans descended from two individuals that lived several thousand years ago, the observed variation would require an impossibly high mutation rate.[44] These incompatibilities have caused many Christians to move away from a literal interpretation and belief in the Genesis creation narrative, while others continue to believe in what they see as a fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith.[44]
Y-chromosomal Adam and Mitochondrial Eve[edit]
The names Adam and Eve are used metaphorically in a scientific context to designate the patrilineal and matrilineal most recent common ancestors, the Y-chromosomal Adam and the Mitochondrial Eve. Those are not fixed individuals, nor is there any reason to assume that they lived at the same time, let alone that they met or formed a couple.[45][46] A recent study on the subject estimates that the Y-chromosomal Adam lived 120 to 156 thousand years ago, while the Mitochondrial Eve lived 99 to 148 thousand years ago. [47] Another recent study places the Y-chromosomal Adam 180 to 200 thousand years ago.[48]
Arts and literature[edit]
Adam and Eve were used by early Renaissance artists as a theme to represent female and male nudes. Later, the nudity was objected to by more modest elements, and fig leaves were added to the older pictures and sculptures, covering their genitals. The choice of the fig was a result of Mediterranean traditions identifying the unnamed Tree of knowledge as a fig tree, and since fig leaves were actually mentioned in Genesis as being used to cover Adam and Eve's nudity.
Treating the concept of Adam and Eve as the historical truth introduces some logical dilemmas. One such dilemma is whether they should be depicted with navels (the Omphalos theory). Since they did not develop in a uterus, they would not have been connected to an umbilical cord like all other humans. Paintings without navels looked unnatural and some artists obscure that area of their bodies, sometimes by depicting them covering up that area of their body with their hand or some other intervening object.
John Milton's Paradise Lost, a famous 17th-century epic poem written in blank verse, explores the story of Adam and Eve in great detail. As opposed to the Biblical Adam, Milton's Adam is given a glimpse of the future of mankind, by the archangel Michael, before he has to leave Paradise.
American painter Thomas Cole painted The Garden of Eden (1828), with lavish detail of the first couple living amid waterfalls, vivid plants, and attractive deer.[49]
Mark Twain wrote humorous and satirical diaries for Adam and Eve in both Eve's Diary (1906) and The Private Life of Adam and Eve (1931), posthumously published.
C.L. Moore's 1940 story Fruit of Knowledge is a re-telling of the Fall of Man as a love triangle between Lilith, Adam and Eve - with Eve's eating the forbidden fruit being in this version the result of misguided manipulations by the jealous Lilith, who had hoped to get her rival discredited and destroyed by God and thus regain Adam's love.
In Stephen Schwartz's musical Children of Eden, "Father" (God) creates Adam and Eve at the same time and considers them His children. They even assist Him in naming the animals. When Eve is tempted by the serpent and eats the forbidden fruit, Father makes Adam choose between Him and Eden, or Eve. Adam chooses Eve and eats the fruit, causing Father to banish them into the wilderness and destroying the Tree of Knowledge, from which Adam carves a staff. Eve gives birth to Cain and Abel, and Adam forbids his children from going beyond the waterfall in hopes Father will forgive them and bring them back to Eden. When Cain and Abel grow up, Cain breaks his promise and goes beyond the waterfall, finding the giant stones made by other humans, which he brings the family to see, and Adam reveals his discovery from the past: during their infancy, he discovered these humans, but had kept it secret. He tries to forbid Cain from seeking them out, which causes Cain to become enraged and he tries to attack Adam, but instead turns his rage to Abel when he tries to stop him and kills him. Later, when an elderly Eve tries to speak to Father, she tells how Adam continually looked for Cain, and after many years, he dies and is buried underneath the waterfall. Eve also gave birth to Seth, which expanded hers and Adam's generations. Finally, Father speaks to her to bring her home. Before she dies, she gives her blessings to all her future generations, and passes Adam's staff to Seth. Father embraces Eve and she also reunited with Adam and Abel. Smaller casts of the American version usually have the actors cast as Adam and Eve double as Noah and Mama Noah.
John William "Uncle Jack" Dey painted "Adam and Eve Leave Eden" (1973), using stripes and dabs of pure color to evoke Eden's lush surroundings.[50]




Adam and Eve depicted in a mural in Abreha wa Atsbeha Church, Ethiopia.




Adam and Eve by Titian.




Depiction of the Fall in Kunsthalle Hamburg, by Master Bertram




Adam and Eve by Albrecht Dürer




Eve giving Adam the forbidden fruit, by Lucas Cranach the Elder




Adam and Eve from a copy of the Falnama (Book of Omens) ascribed to Ja´far al-Sadiq, ca. 1550, Safavid dynasty, Iran.




Detail of a stained glass window (XIIth century) in Saint-Julien cathedral - Le Mans, France.




Adam & Eve, illuminated manuscript circa 950, Escorial Beatus




Adam and Eve by Maarten van Heemskerck




Early Christian depiction of Adam and Eve in the Catacombs of Marcellinus and Peter

See also[edit]
Adam and Eve (LDS Church)
Ask and Embla the first two humans created by Norse gods
Balbira & Kalmana
Biblical narratives and the Qur'an
Christian naturism
Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan
Generations of Adam
Líf and Lífþrasir
Manu (Hinduism)
Mashya and Mashyana, the first two humans in Zoroastrian cosmogony
Pre-Adamite
Tree of Jiva and Atman
References[edit]
Footnotes[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Womack, Mari (2005). Symbols and meaning : a concise introduction. Walnut Creek ... [et al.]: Altamira Press. p. 81. ISBN 0759103224. Retrieved 16 August 2013. "Creation myths are symbolic stories describing how the universe and its inhabitants came to be. Creation myths develop through oral traditions and therefore typically have multiple versions."
2.Jump up ^ Azyumardi. Azra. "TRIALOGUE OF ABRAHAMIC FAITHS; Towards the Alliance of Civilizations". Paper presented at Conference. "Children of Abraham: Trialogue of Civilizations" Weatherhead Center for International Affairs & Divinity School, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., 22–23 October 2007 [1][dead link]
3.Jump up ^ Judaism’s Rejection Of Original Sin – Kolatch, Alfred J. The Jewish Book of Why/The Second Jewish Book of Why. NY: Jonathan David Publishers, 1989.
4.Jump up ^ Judaism's Rejection Of Original Sin[dead link] While there were some Jewish teachers in Talmudic times who believed that death was a punishment brought upon humanity on account of Adam's sin, the dominant view was that man sins because he is not a perfect being, and not, as Christianity teaches, because he is inherently sinful.
5.Jump up ^ Westermann, Claus. Creation. Fortress Press; First English Edition (1974) ISBN 978-0800610722, p.6
6.Jump up ^ Genesis 2:4-23
7.Jump up ^ De La Torre, Miguel (2007). A Lily Among the Thorns: Imagining a New Christian Sexuality. John Wiley & Sons. p. 19. ISBN 9780787997977.
8.Jump up ^ Morris Eaves, Robert N. Essick, and Joseph Viscomi (ed.). "God Judging Adam, object 1 (Butlin 294) "God Judging Adam"". William Blake Archive. Retrieved October 27, 2013.
9.Jump up ^ Freedman, Meyers, Patrick (1983). Carol L. Meyers, Michael Patrick O'Connor, David Noel Freedman, ed. The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth: Essays in Honor of David Noel Freedman. Eisenbrauns. pp. 343–344. ISBN 9780931464195.
10.Jump up ^ Schearing, ed. by Kristen E. Kvam; Linda S.; Ziegler, Valarie H. (1999). Kristen E. Kvam, Linda S. Schearing, Valarie H. Ziegler, ed. Eve and Adam : Jewish, Christian, and Muslim readings on Genesis and gender. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. p. 16. ISBN 9780253212719.
11.Jump up ^ Reed, A. Y. (September 20, 2004). "Source Criticism, the Documentary Hypothesis, and Genesis 1-3" (PDF). RS 2DD3 – Five Books of Moses.
12.^ Jump up to: a b c d Mathews 1996, p. 226
13.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 232
14.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 235
15.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 236
16.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 237
17.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 240
18.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 241
19.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 242
20.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 243
21.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 248
22.Jump up ^ Mathews 1996, p. 252
23.Jump up ^ Addis, Edward (1893). The Documents of the Hexateuch, Volume 1. Putnam. pp. 4–7.
24.Jump up ^ Weinstein, Brian (2010). 54 Torah Talks: From Layperson to Layperson. iUniverse. p. 4. ISBN 9781440192555.
25.Jump up ^ The Empowerment of Women in the Book of Jubilees - Page 17, Betsy Halpern Amaru - 1999
26.Jump up ^ First translated by August Dillmann (Das christl. Adambuch des Morgenlandes, 1853), and the Ethiopic book first edited by Trump (Abh. d. Münch. Akad. xv., 1870-1881).
27.Jump up ^ Die Schatzhöhle translated by Carl Bezold from three Syriac MSS (1883), edited in Syriac (1888).
28.Jump up ^ Howard Schwartz Professor of English University of Missouri (September 2004). "173". Tree of Souls : The Mythology of Judaism: The Mythology of Judaism. p. 138. ISBN 0195086791. Retrieved 27 December 2014. "The myth of Adam the Hermaphrodite grows out of three biblical verses"
29.Jump up ^ Harry Orlinsky's Notes to the NJPS Torah
30.Jump up ^ "Tertullian, "De Cultu Feminarum", Book I Chapter I, ''Modesty in Apparel Becoming to Women in Memory of the Introduction of Sin Through a Woman'' (in "The Ante-Nicene Fathers")". Tertullian.org. Retrieved 2014-02-17.
31.Jump up ^ Fox, Robin Lane (2006) [1991]. The Unauthorized Version: Truth and Fiction in the Bible. Penguin Books Limited. pp. 15–27. ISBN 9780141925752.
32.Jump up ^ Robinson, B.A. "Salvation: Teachings by Southern Baptists and other conservative Protestant denominations". Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance, 2010. Accessed 2 Feb 2013
33.Jump up ^ Manichaean beliefs[dead link]
34.Jump up ^ Historical Dictionary of Prophets in Islam and Judaism, Wheeler, Adam and Eve
35.Jump up ^ Quran 4:1:O mankind! Be dutiful to your Lord, Who created you from a single person (Adam), and from him (Adam) He created his wife Hawwa (Eve), and from them both He created many men and women;
36.Jump up ^ Mecca and Eden: Ritual, Relics, and Territory in Islam - Brannon M. Wheeler - Google Books. Books.google.com.qa. Retrieved 2014-02-17.
37.Jump up ^ William Godwin (1876). "Lives of the Necromancers".
38.Jump up ^ Javed Ahmed Ghamidi, Mizan. Lahore: Dar al-Ishraq, 2001
39.Jump up ^ Sours, Michael (2001). The Tablet of the Holy Mariner: An Illustrated Guide to Baha'u'llah's Mystical Work in the Sufi Tradition. Los Angeles: Kalimát Press. p. 86. ISBN 1-890688-19-3.
40.Jump up ^ Momen, Wendy (1989). A Basic Bahá'í Dictionary. Oxford, UK: George Ronald. p. 8. ISBN 0-85398-231-7.
41.Jump up ^ McLean, Jack (1997). Revisioning the Sacred: New Perspectives on a Bahá'í Theology - Volume 8. p. 215.
42.Jump up ^ Smith, Peter (2000). "Adam". A concise encyclopedia of the Bahá'í Faith. Oxford: Oneworld Publications. p. 23. ISBN 1-85168-184-1.
43.Jump up ^ Dilley, Stephen C. (2013). Darwinian Evolution and Classical Liberalism: Theories in Tension. Lexington Books. pp. 224–225. ISBN 0739181068.
44.^ Jump up to: a b Barbara Bradley Hagerty (August 9, 2011). "Evangelicals Question The Existence Of Adam And Eve". All Things Considered. Transcript
45.Jump up ^ Takahata, N (January 1993), "Allelic genealogy and human evolution", Mol. Biol. Evol. 10 (1): 2–22, PMID 8450756""
46.Jump up ^ Cruciani, F; Trombetta, B; Massaia, A; Destro-Bisol, G; Sellitto, D; Scozzari, R (June 10, 2011), "A Revised Root for the Human Y Chromosomal Phylogenetic Tree: The Origin of Patrilineal Diversity in Africa", The American Journal of Human Genetics 88 (6): 814–818, doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2011.05.002, PMC 3113241, PMID 21601174
47.Jump up ^ Poznik, G. David; Henn, Brenna M.; Yee, Muh-Ching; Sliwerska, Elzbieta; Euskirchen, Ghia M.; Lin, Alice A.; Snyder, Michael; Quintana-Murci,, Lluis; Kidd first10= Peter A., Jeffrey M.; Underhill; Bustamante, Carlos D. (2 August 2013). "Sequencing Y Chromosomes Resolves Discrepancy in Time to Common Ancestor of Males Versus Females". Science 341 (6145): 562–565. doi:10.1126/science.1237619. PMID 23908239.
48.Jump up ^ Francalacci, Paolo; Morelli, Laura; Angius, Andrea; Berutti, Riccardo; Reinier, Frederic; Atzeni, Rossano; Pilu, Rosella; Busonero, Fabio; Maschio, Andrea; Zara, Ilenia; Sanna, Daria; Useli, Antonella; Urru, Maria Francesca; Marcelli, Marco; Cusano, Roberto; Oppo, Manuela; Zoledziewska, Magdalena; Pitzalis, Maristella; Deidda, Francesca; Porcu, Eleonora; Poddie, Fausto; Kang, Hyun Min; Lyons, Robert; Tarrier, Brendan; Gresham, Jennifer Bragg; Li, Bingshan; Tofanelli, Sergio; Alonso, Santos; Dei, Mariano; Lai, Sandra; Mulas, Antonella; Whalen, Michael B.; Uzzau, Sergio; Jones, Chris; Schlessinger, David; Abecasis, Gonçalo R.; Sanna, Serena; Sidore, Carlo; Cucca, Francesco (2 August 2013). "Low-Pass DNA Sequencing of 1200 Sardinians Reconstructs European Y-Chromosome Phylogeny". Science 341 (6145): 565–569. doi:10.1126/science.1237947. PMID 23908240.
49.Jump up ^ Exhibit at the Amon Carter Museum in Fort Worth, Texas
50.Jump up ^ "Adam and Eve Leave Eden". Smithsonian American Art Museum. Retrieved 11 February 2014.
Bibliography[edit]
Mathews, K. A. (1996). Genesis 1-11:26. B&H Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0805401011.
Kissling, Paul (2004). Genesis, Volume 1. College Press. ISBN 978-0899008752.
Further reading[edit]
Almond, Philip C. 'Adam and Eve in Seventeenth-Century Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999, 2008)
Alter, Robert (2004). The Five Books of Moses. W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 0-393-33393-0.
Ayoub, Mahmoud. The Qur'an and its Interpreters, SUNY: Albany, 1984
Lewis, C.S. The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe"
Mackie, Adam. The Importance of being Adam - Alexo 1997 (only 2000 copies published)
Murdoch, Brian O. The Apocryphal Adam and Eve in Medieval Europe: Vernacular Translations and Adaptations of the Vita Adae et Evae. Oxford University Press, 2009. ISBN 978-0-19-956414-9
Patai, R. The Jewish Alchemists, Princeton University Press, 1994.
Rana & Hugh. Fazale Rana and Ross, Hugh, Who Was Adam: A Creation Model Approach to the Origin of Man, 2005, ISBN 1-57683-577-4
Rohl, David. Legend: The Genesis of Civilisation, 1998
Sibylline Oracles, III; 24–6. This Greek acrostic also appears in 2 Enoch 30:13.
Sykes, Bryan. The Seven Daughters of Eve
External links[edit]
 Wikiquote has quotations related to: Adam and Eve
 Look up adam and eve in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
 Wikimedia Commons has media related to Adam and Eve.
Bible Genealogy
First Human Beings (Library of Congress)
The Story of Lilith in The Alphabet of Ben Sira
Islamic view of the fall of Adam (audio)
98 classical images of Adam and Eve
The Book of Jubilees
Adam and Eve in Medieval Reliefs, Capitals, Frescoes, Roof Bosses and Mosaics Cynistory and Phantamangas of Finceland
"Adam and Eve" at the Christian Iconography website
Translation of Grimm's Fairy Tale No. 180, Eve's Unequal Children, a German Fairy Tale about Adam and Eve
Jewish Encyclopedia
Original Sin
Biblical parallels in Sumerian mythology


Michelangelo, Creation of Adam 04.jpgCreationism portal
 P christianity.svgChristianity portal
 Star of David.svgJudaism portal
 Allah-green.svgIslam portal
 Portal-puzzle.svgBaha'i Faith portal
 

  


Categories: Adam and Eve
Biblical phrases
Creation myths
Hebrew Bible topics
Abrahamic mythology
Myth of origins
Duos
Book of Genesis
Bereshit (parsha)







Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Afrikaans
Беларуская
Čeština
Deutsch
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Frysk
Galego
ગુજરાતી
한국어
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
Кыргызча
Lietuvių
Magyar
Македонски
മലയാളം
Bahasa Melayu
Nederlands
日本語
Нохчийн
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Shqip
Simple English
Slovenčina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Svenska
Tagalog
Türkçe
Українська
اردو
Tiếng Việt
Walon
文言
Winaray
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 24 April 2015, at 08:36.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_and_Eve#Christianity


























Page semi-protected

Satan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is about the concept of Satan. For the concept of "devil", see Devil. For other uses, see Satan (disambiguation).



William Blake's illustration of Satan as presented in John Milton's Paradise Lost


Gustave Doré, Depiction of Satan, the central figure in John Milton's Paradise Lost c. 1866
Satan (Hebrew: שָּׂטָן satan, meaning "adversary";[1] Arabic: شيطان shaitan, meaning "astray" or "distant", sometimes "devil") is a figure appearing in the texts of the Abrahamic religions[2][3] who brings evil and temptation, and is known as the deceiver who leads humanity astray. Some religious groups teach that he originated as an angel who fell out of favor with God, seducing humanity into the ways of sin, and who has power in the fallen world. In the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament, Satan is primarily an accuser and adversary, a decidedly malevolent entity, also called the devil, who possesses demonic qualities.
In Theistic Satanism, Satan is considered a positive force and deity who is either worshipped or revered. In LaVeyan Satanism, Satan is regarded as holding virtuous characteristics.[4][5]


Contents  [hide]
1 Judaism 1.1 Hebrew Bible 1.1.1 Thirteen occurrences
1.1.2 Book of Job
1.2 Second Temple period 1.2.1 Septuagint
1.2.2 Dead Sea scrolls and Pseudepigrapha
1.3 Rabbinical Judaism
2 Dualism and Zoroastrianism
3 Christianity 3.1 Terminology
4 Islam
5 Yazidism
6 Bahá'í Faith
7 Satanism 7.1 Theistic Satanism
7.2 Atheistic Satanism
8 Notes
9 References
10 External links

Judaism
Hebrew Bible
The original Hebrew term satan is a noun from a verb meaning primarily "to obstruct, oppose", as it is found in Numbers 22:22, 1 Samuel 29:4, Psalms 109:6.[6] Ha-Satan is traditionally translated as "the accuser" or "the adversary". The definite article ha- (English: "the") is used to show that this is a title bestowed on a being, versus the name of a being. Thus, this being would be referred to as "the satan".[7]
Thirteen occurrences
Ha-Satan with the definite article occurs 13 times in the Masoretic Text, in two books of the Hebrew Bible: Job ch.1–2 (10x)[8] and Zechariah 3:1–2 (3x).[9]
Satan without the definite article is used in 10 instances, of which two are translated diabolos in the Septuagint and "Satan" in the King James Version:
1 Chronicles 21:1, "Satan stood up against Israel" (KJV) or "And there standeth up an adversary against Israel" (Young's Literal Translation)[10]
Psalm 109:6b "and let Satan stand at his right hand" (KJV)[11] or "let an accuser stand at his right hand." (ESV, etc.)
The other eight instances of satan without the definite article are traditionally translated (in Greek, Latin and English) as "an adversary", etc., and taken to be humans or obedient angels:
Numbers 22:22,32 "and the angel of the LORD stood in the way for an adversary against him."
32 "behold, I went out to withstand thee,"
1 Samuel 29:4 The Philistines say: "lest he [David] be an adversary against us"
2 Samuel 19:22 David says: "[you sons of Zeruaiah] should this day be adversaries (plural) unto me?"
1 Kings 5:4 Solomon writes to Hiram: "there is neither adversary nor evil occurrent."
1 Kings 11:14 "And the LORD stirred up an adversary unto Solomon, Hadad the Edomite"[12]
1 Kings 11:23 "And God stirred him up an adversary, Rezon the son of Eliadah"
25 "And he [Rezon] was an adversary to Israel all the days of Solomon"
Book of Job



The examination of Job, Satan pours on the plagues of Job, by William Blake
At the beginning of the book, Job is a good person "who revered God and turned away from evil" (Job 1:1), and has therefore been rewarded by God. When the angels present themselves to God, Satan comes as well. God informs Satan about Job's blameless, morally upright character. Between Job 1:9–10 and 2:4–5, Satan points out that God has given Job everything that a man could want, so of course Job would be loyal to God; Satan suggests that Job's faith would collapse if all he has been given (even his health) were to be taken away from him. God therefore gives Satan permission to test Job.[13] In the end, Job remains faithful and righteous, and there is the implication that Satan is shamed in his defeat.[14]
Second Temple period
Septuagint
In the Septuagint, the Hebrew ha-Satan in Job and Zechariah is translated by the Greek word diabolos (slanderer), the same word in the Greek New Testament from which the English word devil is derived. Where satan is used of human enemies in the Hebrew Bible, such as Hadad the Edomite and Rezon the Syrian, the word is left untranslated but transliterated in the Greek as satan, a neologism in Greek.[15] In Zechariah 3, this changes the vision of the conflict over Joshua the High Priest in the Septuagint into a conflict between "Jesus and the devil", identical with the Greek text of Matthew.
Dead Sea scrolls and Pseudepigrapha
In Enochic Judaism, the concept of Satan being an opponent of God and a chief evil figure in among demons seems to have taken root in Jewish pseudepigrapha during the Second Temple period,[16] particularly in the apocalypses.[17] The Book of Enoch contains references to Satariel, thought also to be Sataniel and Satan'el (etymology dating back to Babylonian origins). The similar spellings mirror that of his angelic brethren Michael, Raphael, Uriel, and Gabriel, previous to the fall from Heaven.
The Second Book of Enoch, also called the Slavonic Book of Enoch, contains references to a Watcher (Grigori) called Satanael.[18] It is a pseudepigraphic text of an uncertain date and unknown authorship. The text describes Satanael as being the prince of the Grigori who was cast out of heaven[19] and an evil spirit who knew the difference between what was "righteous" and "sinful".[20] A similar story is found in the book of 1 Enoch; however, in that book, the leader of the Grigori is called Semjâzâ.
In the Book of Wisdom, the devil is represented as the being who brought death into the world.[21]
In the Book of Jubilees, Mastema induces God to test Abraham through the sacrifice of Isaac. He is identical to Satan in both name and nature.[22]
Rabbinical Judaism
In Judaism, Satan is a term used since its earliest biblical contexts to refer to a human opponent.[23] Occasionally, the term has been used to suggest evil influence opposing human beings, as in the Jewish exegesis of the Yetzer hara ("evil inclination" Genesis 6:5). Micaiah's "lying spirit" in 1 Kings 22:22 is sometimes related. Thus, Satan is personified as a character in three different places of the Tenakh, serving as an accuser (Zechariah 3:1–2), a seducer (1 Chronicles 21:1), or as a heavenly persecutor who is "among the sons of God" (Job 2:1). In any case, Satan is always subordinate to the power of God, having a role in the divine plan. Satan is rarely mentioned in Tannaitic literature, but is found in Babylonian aggadah.[17]
In medieval Judaism, the Rabbis rejected these Enochic literary works into the Biblical canon, making every attempt to root them out.[16] Traditionalists and philosophers in medieval Judaism adhered to rational theology, rejecting any belief in rebel or fallen angels, and viewing evil as abstract.[24] The Yetzer hara ("evil inclination" Genesis 6:5) is a more common motif for evil in rabbinical texts. Rabbinical scholarship on the Book of Job generally follows the Talmud and Maimonides as identifying the "Adversary" in the prologue of Job as a metaphor.[25]
In Hasidic Judaism, the Kabbalah presents Satan as an agent of God whose function is to tempt one into sin, then turn around and accuse the sinner on high.[vague] The Chasidic Jews of the 18th century associated ha-Satan with Baal Davar.[26]
Dualism and Zoroastrianism
See also: Angra Mainyu
Some scholars see contact with religious dualism in Babylon, and early Zoroastrianism in particular, as being influenced by Second Temple period Judaism, and consequently early Christianity.[27][28] Subsequent development of Satan as a "deceiver" has parallels with the evil spirit in Zoroastrianism, known as the Lie, who directs forces of darkness.[29]
Christianity



 The Devil depicted in The Temptation of Christ, by Ary Scheffer, 1854
Main article: Devil in Christianity
See also: War in Heaven
Satan is traditionally identified as the serpent who tempted Eve to eat the forbidden fruit, as he was in Judaism.[30] Thus Satan has often been depicted as a serpent. Christian agreement with this can be found in the works of Justin Martyr, in Chapters 45 and 79 of Dialogue with Trypho, where Justin identifies Satan and the serpent.[31] Other early church fathers to mention this identification include Theophilus and Tertullian.[32]
From the fourth century, Lucifer is sometimes used in Christian theology to refer to Satan, as a result of identifying the fallen "son of the dawn" of Isaiah 14:12 with the "accuser" of other passages in the Old Testament.[citation needed]



 Satan as depicted in the Ninth Circle of Hell in Dante Alighieri's Inferno, illustrated by Gustave Doré
For most Christians, Satan is believed to be an angel who rebelled against God. His goal is to lead people away from the love of God; i.e., to lead them to evil.[citation needed]
In the New Testament he is called "the ruler of the demons" (Matthew 12:24), "the ruler of the world", and "the god of this world" (2 Cor. 4:4). The Book of Revelation describes how Satan was cast out of Heaven, having "great anger" and waging war against "those who obey God's commandments". Ultimately, Satan will be thrown into the lake of fire.[33]
The early Christian church encountered opposition from pagans such as Celsus, who claimed that "it is blasphemy...to say that the greatest God...has an adversary who constrains his capacity to do good" and said that Christians "impiously divide the kingdom of God, creating a rebellion in it, as if there were opposing factions within the divine, including one that is hostile to God".[34]
Terminology
In Christianity, there are many synonyms for Satan. The most common English synonym for "Satan" is "Devil", which descends from Middle English devel, from Old English dēofol, that in turn represents an early Germanic borrowing of Latin diabolus (also the source of "diabolical"). This in turn was borrowed from Greek diabolos "slanderer", from diaballein "to slander": dia- "across, through" + ballein "to hurl".[35] In the New Testament, "Satan" occurs more than 30 times in passages alongside Diabolos (Greek for "the devil"), referring to the same person or thing as Satan.[36]
Beelzebub, meaning "Lord of Flies", is the contemptuous name given in the Hebrew Bible and New Testament to a Philistine god whose original name has been reconstructed as most probably "Ba'al Zabul", meaning "Baal the Prince".[37] This pun was later used to refer to Satan as well.
The Book of Revelation twice refers to "the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan" (12:9, 20:2). The Book of Revelation also refers to "the deceiver", from which is derived the common epithet "the great deceiver".[38]
Islam
Main article: Devil (Islam)
See also: Azazel § Azazel in Islam
Shaitan (شيطان) is the equivalent of Satan in Islam. While Shaitan (شيطان, from the root šṭn شطن) is an adjective (meaning "astray" or "distant", sometimes translated as "devil") that can be applied to both man ("al-ins", الإنس) and Jinn, Iblis (Arabic pronunciation: [ˈibliːs]) is the personal name of the Devil who is mentioned in the Qur'anic account of Genesis.[39] According to the Qur'an, Iblis (the Arabic name used) disobeyed an order from Allah to bow to Adam, and as a result Iblis was forced out of heaven. However, he was given respite from further punishment until the day of judgment.
When Allah commanded all of the angels to bow down before Adam (the first Human), Iblis, full of hubris and jealousy, refused to obey God's command (he could do so because he had free will), seeing Adam as being inferior in creation due to his being created from clay as compared to him (created of fire).[40]

It is We Who created you and gave you shape; then We bade the angels prostrate to Adam, and they prostrate; not so Iblis (Lucifer); He refused to be of those who prostrate. (Allah) said: "What prevented thee from prostrating when I commanded thee?" He said: "I am better than he: Thou didst create me from fire, and him from clay."
—Qur'an 7:11–12
It was after this that the title of "Shaitan" was given, which can be roughly translated as "Enemy", "Rebel", "Evil", or "Devil". Shaitan then claims that, if the punishment for his act of disobedience is to be delayed until the Day of Judgment, then he will divert many of Adam's own descendants from the straight path during his period of respite.[41] God accepts the claims of Iblis and guarantees recompense to Iblis and his followers in the form of Hellfire. In order to test mankind and jinn alike, Allah allowed Iblis to roam the earth to attempt to convert others away from his path.[42] He was sent to earth along with Adam and Eve, after eventually luring them into eating the fruit from the forbidden tree.[43]
Yazidism
An alternative name for the main deity in the tentatively Indo-European pantheon of the Yazidi, Malek Taus, is Shaitan.[44] However, rather than being Satanic, Yazidism is better understood as a remnant of a pre-Islamic Middle Eastern Indo-European religion, and/or a ghulat Sufi movement founded by Shaykh Adi. The connection with Satan, originally made by Muslim outsiders, attracted the interest of 19th century European travelers and esoteric writers.
Bahá'í Faith
In the Bahá'í Faith, Satan is not regarded as an independent evil power as he is in some faiths, but signifies the lower nature of humans. `Abdu'l-Bahá explains: "This lower nature in man is symbolized as Satan — the evil ego within us, not an evil personality outside."[45][46] All other evil spirits described in various faith traditions—such as fallen angels, demons, and jinns—are also metaphors for the base character traits a human being may acquire and manifest when he turns away from God.[47]
Satanism
Main article: Satanism
Within Satanism, two major trends exists, theistic Satanism and atheistic Satanism, both having different views regarding the essence of Satan.
Theistic Satanism
Theistic Satanism, commonly referred to as 'devil-worship',[48] holds that Satan is an actual deity or force to revere or worship that individuals may contact and supplicate to,[49][50] and represents loosely affiliated or independent groups and cabals which hold the belief that Satan is a real entity[51] rather than an archetype.
Among non-Satanists, much modern Satanic folklore does not originate with the beliefs or practices of theistic or atheistic Satanists, but a mixture of medieval Christian folk beliefs, political or sociological conspiracy theories, and contemporary urban legends.[52][53][54][55] An example is the Satanic ritual abuse scare of the 1980s—beginning with the memoir Michelle Remembers—which depicted Satanism as a vast conspiracy of elites with a predilection for child abuse and human sacrifice.[53][54] This genre frequently describes Satan as physically incarnating in order to receive worship.[55]
Atheistic Satanism
Atheistic Satanism, most commonly referred to as LaVeyan Satanism, holds that Satan does not exist as a literal anthropomorphic entity, but rather a symbol of pride, carnality, liberty, enlightenment, undefiled wisdom, and of a cosmos which Satanists perceive to be permeated and motivated by a force that has been given many names by humans over the course of time. To adherents, he also serves as a conceptual framework and an external metaphorical projection of [the Satanists] highest personal potential.[56][57][58][59][60][61]
In his essay, "Satanism: The Feared Religion", the current High Priest of the Church of Satan, Peter H. Gilmore, further expounds that "...Satan is a symbol of Man living as his prideful, carnal nature dictates. The reality behind Satan is simply the dark evolutionary force of entropy that permeates all of nature and provides the drive for survival and propagation inherent in all living things. Satan is not a conscious entity to be worshiped, rather a reservoir of power inside each human to be tapped at will."[62]
Notes
1.Jump up ^ http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13219-satan "Term used in the Bible with the general connotation of "adversary," being applied (1) to an enemy in war (I Kings v. 18 [A. V. 4]; xi. 14, 23, 25), from which use is developed the concept of a traitor in battle (I Sam. xxix. 4); (2) to an accuser before the judgment-seat (Ps. cix. 6); and (3) to any opponent (II Sam. xix. 23 [A. V. 22]). The word is likewise used to denote an antagonist who puts obstacles in the way, as in Num. xxii. 32, where the angel of God is described as opposing Balaam in the guise of a satan or adversary; so that the concept of Satan as a distinct being was not then known."
2.Jump up ^ Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia of World Religions, page 290, Wendy Doniger
3.Jump up ^ Leeming, David Adams (2005). The Oxford Companion to World Mythology. Oxford University Press. p. 347. ISBN 978-0-19-515669-0.
4.Jump up ^ Contemporary Religious Satanisim: A Critical Reader, Jesper Aagaard Petersen – 2009
5.Jump up ^ Who's ? Right: Mankind, Religions and the End Times, page 35, Kelly Warman-Stallings – 2012
6.Jump up ^ ed. Buttrick, George Arthur; The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, An illustrated Encyclopedia
7.Jump up ^ Crenshaw, James L. Harper Collins Study Bible (NRSV), 1989
8.Jump up ^ Stephen M. Hooks – 2007 "As in Zechariah 3:1–2 the term here carries the definite article (has'satan="the satan") and functions not as a ... the only place in the Hebrew Bible where the term "Satan" is unquestionably used as a proper name is 1 Chronicles 21:1."
9.Jump up ^ Coogan, Michael D.; A Brief Introduction to the Old Testament: The Hebrew Bible in its context, Oxford University Press, 2009
10.Jump up ^ Rachel Adelman The Return of the Repressed: Pirqe De-Rabbi Eliezer p65 "However, in the parallel versions of the story in Chronicles, it is Satan (without the definite article),"
11.Jump up ^ Septuagint 108:6 κατάστησον ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν ἁμαρτωλόν καὶ διάβολος στήτω ἐκ δεξιῶν αὐτοῦ
12.Jump up ^ Ruth R. Brand Adam and Eve p88 – 2005 "Later, however, King Hadad 1 Kings 11:14) and King Rezon (verses 23, ... Numbers 22:22, 23 does not use the definite article but identifies the angel of YHWH as "a satan."
13.Jump up ^ HarperCollins Study Bible (NRSV)
14.Jump up ^ Steinmann, AE. "The structure and message of the Book of Job". Vetus testamentum.
15.Jump up ^ Henry Ansgar Kelly Satan: a biography 2006 "However, for Hadad and Rezon they left the Hebrew term untranslated and simply said satan.. in the three passages in which a supra-Human satan appears: namely, Numbers, Job, Zechariah
16.^ Jump up to: a b Jackson, David R. (2004). Enochic Judaism. London: T&T Clark International. pp. 2–4. ISBN 0826470890.
17.^ Jump up to: a b Berlin, editor in chief, Adele (2011). The Oxford dictionary of the Jewish religion (2nd ed. ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. p. 651. ISBN 0199730040.
18.Jump up ^ 2 Enoch 18:3. On this tradition, see A. Orlov, "The Watchers of Satanael: The Fallen Angels Traditions in 2 (Slavonic) Enoch," in: A. Orlov, Dark Mirrors: Azazel and Satanael in Early Jewish Demonology (Albany: SUNY, 2011) 85–106.
19.Jump up ^ "And I threw him out from the height with his angels, and he was flying in the air continuously above the bottomless" – 2 Enoch 29:4
20.Jump up ^ "The devil is the evil spirit of the lower places, as a fugitive he made Sotona from the heavens as his name was Satanail, thus he became different from the angels, but his nature did not change his intelligence as far as his understanding of righteous and sinful things" – 2 Enoch 31:4
21.Jump up ^ See The Book of Wisdom: With Introduction and Notes, p. 27, Object of the book, by A. T. S. Goodrick.
22.Jump up ^ [ Introduction to the Book of Jubilees, 15. Theology. Some of our Author's Views: Demonology, by R.H. Charles.
23.Jump up ^ Based on the Jewish exegesis of 1 Samuel 29:4 and 1 Kings 5:18 – Oxford dictionary of the Jewish religion, 2011, p. 651 "Satan is rarely mentioned in tannaitic literature; later, chiefly Babylonian, aggadah enlarges the scope of his influence and activities. Perhaps because of the influential presence of Satan as a name or character in the New Testament and the"
24.Jump up ^ Bamberger, Bernard J. (2006). Fallen angels : soldiers of satan's realm (1. paperback ed. ed.). Philadelphia, Pa.: Jewish Publ. Soc. of America. p. 148,149. ISBN 0827607970.
25.Jump up ^ Robert Eisen Associate Professor of Religious Studies George Washington University The Book of Job in Medieval Jewish Philosophy 2004 p120 "Moreover, Zerahfiiah gives us insight into the parallel between the Garden of Eden story and the Job story alluded to ... both Satan and Job's wife are metaphors for the evil inclination, a motif Zerahfiiah seems to identify with the imagination."
26.Jump up ^ The Dictionary of Angels" by Gustav Davidson, © 1967
27.Jump up ^ Jeffrey Burton Russell, The Devil: Perceptions of Evil from Antiquity to Primitive ...1977, page 102 "This conflict between truth and the lie was one of the main sources of Zarathushtra's dualism: the prophet perceived Angra Mainyu, the lord of evil, as the personification of the lie. For Zoroastrians (as for the Egyptians), the lie was the essence ... "
28.Jump up ^ Peter Clark, Zoroastrianism: An Introduction to Ancient Faith 1998, page 152 "There are so many features that Zoroastrianism seems to share with the Judeo-Christian tradition that it would be difficult to ... Historically the first point of contact that we can determine is when the Achaemenian Cyrus conquered Babylon ..539 BC"
29.Jump up ^ Winn, Shan M.M. (1995). Heaven, heroes, and happiness : the Indo-European roots of Western ideology. Lanham, Md.: University press of America. p. 203. ISBN 0819198609.
30.Jump up ^ http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13219-satan. Missing or empty |title= (help)
31.Jump up ^ Kelly, Harry Ansgar (2007). Satan: a Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 176. ISBN 978-0-521-84339-3.
32.Jump up ^ Kelly, Harry Ansgar (2007). Satan: a Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 177. ISBN 978-0-521-84339-3.
33.Jump up ^ Revelation 20:10
34.Jump up ^ Origen. Contra Celsum. Book 6. Ch 42.
35.Jump up ^ "American Heritage Dictionary: Devil". Retrieved 2006-05-31.
36.Jump up ^ Revelation 12:9
37.Jump up ^ K. van der Toorn, Bob Becking, Pieter Willem van der Horst, Baalzebub, "Dictionary of deities and demons in the Bible", p. 155
38.Jump up ^ B. W. Johnson (1891). "The Revelation of John. Chapter XX. The Millennium.". The People's New Testament. Memorial University of Newfoundland. Retrieved November 30, 2009.
39.Jump up ^ Iblis
40.Jump up ^ [Quran 17:61]; [Quran 2:34]
41.Jump up ^ [Quran 17:62]
42.Jump up ^ [Quran 17:63–64]
43.Jump up ^ [Quran 7:20–22]
44.Jump up ^ Drower, E.S. The Peacock Angel. Being Some Account of Votaries of a Secret Cult and their Sanctuaries. London: John Murray, 1941. [1]
45.Jump up ^ ʻAbduʾl-Bahá (1982) [1912]. The Promulgation of Universal Peace. Wilmette, Illinois, USA: Bahá'í Publishing Trust. pp. 294–295. ISBN 0-87743-172-8.
46.Jump up ^ Smith, Peter (2000). A Concise Encyclopedia of the Bahá'í Faith. Oxford, UK: Oneworld. pp. 135–136, 304. ISBN 1-85168-184-1.
47.Jump up ^ Smith, Peter (2008). An Introduction to the Baha'i Faith. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 112. ISBN 0-521-86251-5.
48.Jump up ^ http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-29448079
49.Jump up ^ Partridge, Christopher Hugh (2004). The Re-enchantment of the West. p. 82. Retrieved 2008-05-12.
50.Jump up ^ Satanism and Demonology, by Lionel & Patricia Fanthorpe, Dundurn Press, 8 Mar 2011, p. 74, "If, as theistic Satanists believe, the devil is an intelligent, self-aware entity..." "Theistic Satanism then becomes explicable in terms of Lucifer's ambition to be the supreme god and his rebellion against Yahweh. [...] This simplistic, controntational view is modified by other theistic Satanists who do not regard their hero as evil: far from it. For them he is a freedom fighter..."
51.Jump up ^ "Interview_MLO". Angelfire.com. Retrieved 2011-11-30.
52.Jump up ^ Cinema of the Occult: New Age, Satanism, Wicca, and Spiritualism in Film, Carrol Lee Fry, Associated University Presse, 2008, pp. 92–98
53.^ Jump up to: a b Encyclopedia of Urban Legends, Updated and Expanded Edition, by Jan Harold Brunvand, ABC-CLIO, 31 Jul 2012 pp. 694–695
54.^ Jump up to: a b Raising the Devil: Satanism, New Religions, and the Media, by Bill Ellis, University Press of Kentucky p. 125 In discussing myths about groups accused of Satanism, "...such myths are already pervasive in Western culture, and the development of the modern "Satanic Scare" would be impossible to explain without showing how these myths helped organize concerns and beliefs." Accusations of Satanism are traced from the witch hunts, to the Illuminati, to the Satanic Ritual Abuse panic in the 1980s, with a distinction made between what modern Satanists believe and what is believed about Satanists.
55.^ Jump up to: a b Satan in America: The Devil We Know, by W. Scott Poole, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 16 Nov 2009, pp. 42–43
56.Jump up ^ name="altreligion.about.com">http://altreligion.about.com/od/alternativereligionsaz/a/satanism.htm
57.Jump up ^ http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/WhatTheDevil.html
58.Jump up ^ http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/_FAQ03.html
59.Jump up ^ [2][dead link]
60.Jump up ^ http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/ChaplainsHandbook.html
61.Jump up ^ Contemporary religious Satanism: a critical anthology, page 45, Jesper Aagaard Petersen, 2009
62.Jump up ^ http://churchofsatan.com/satanism-the-feared-religion.php
References
Bamberger, Bernard J. (2006). Fallen Angels: Soldiers of Satan's Realm. Jewish Publication Society of America. ISBN 0-8276-0797-0.
Caldwell, William. "The Doctrine of Satan: I. In the Old Testament", The Biblical World, Vol. 41, No. 1 (Jan., 1913), pp. 29–33 in JSTOR
Caldwell, William. "The Doctrine of Satan: II. Satan in Extra-Biblical Apocalyptical Literature", The Biblical World, Vol. 41, No. 2 (Feb., 1913), pp. 98–102 in JSTOR
Caldwell, William. "The Doctrine of Satan: III. In the New Testament", The Biblical World, Vol. 41, No. 3 (Mar., 1913), pp. 167–172 in JSTOR
Empson, William. Milton's God (1966)
Forsyth, Neil (1987). The Old Enemy: Satan & the Combat Myth. Princeton University Press; Reprint edition. ISBN 0-691-01474-4.
Forsyth, Neil (1987). The Satanic Epic. Princeton University Press; Reprint edition. ISBN 0-691-11339-4.
Gentry, Kenneth L. Jr (2002). The Beast of Revelation. American Vision. ISBN 0-915815-41-9.
Graves, Kersey (1995). Biography of Satan: Exposing the Origins of the Devil. Book Tree. ISBN 1-885395-11-6.
‘’The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, An illustrated Encyclopedia’’;ed. Buttrick, George Arthur; Abingdon Press 1962
Jacobs, Joseph, and Ludwig Blau. "Satan," The Jewish Encyclopedia (1906) online pp 68–71
Kelly, Henry Ansgar. Satan: A Biography. (2006). 360 pp. excerpt and text search ISBN 0-521-60402-8, a study of the Bible and Western literature
Kent, William. "Devil." The Catholic Encyclopedia (1908) Vol. 4. online older article
Osborne, B. A. E. "Peter: Stumbling-Block and Satan," Novum Testamentum, Vol. 15, Fasc. 3 (Jul., 1973), pp. 187–190 in JSTOR on "Get thee behind me, Satan!"
Pagels, Elaine (1995). The Origin of Satan. Vintage; Reprint edition. ISBN 0-679-72232-7.
Rebhorn Wayne A. "The Humanist Tradition and Milton's Satan: The Conservative as Revolutionary," Studies in English Literature, 1500–1900, Vol. 13, No. 1, The English Renaissance (Winter, 1973), pp. 81–93 in JSTOR
Rudwin, Maximilian (1970). The Devil in Legend and Literature. Open Court. ISBN 0-87548-248-1.
Russell, Jeffrey Burton. The Devil: Perceptions of Evil from Antiquity to Primitive Christianity (1987) excerpt and text search
Russell, Jeffrey Burton. Satan: The Early Christian Tradition (1987) excerpt and text search
Russell, Jeffrey Burton. Lucifer: The Devil in the Middle Ages (1986) excerpt and text search
Russell, Jeffrey Burton. Mephistopheles: The Devil in the Modern World (1990) excerpt and text search
Russell, Jeffrey Burton. The Prince of Darkness: Radical Evil and the Power of Good in History (1992) excerpt and text search
Schaff, D. S. "Devil" in New Schaff–Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge (1911), Mainline Protestant; vol 3 pp 414–417 online
Scott, Miriam Van. The Encyclopedia of Hell (1999) excerpt and text search comparative religions; also popular culture
Wray, T. J. and Gregory Mobley. The Birth of Satan: Tracing the Devil's Biblical Roots (2005) excerpt and text search
External links
 Look up Satan in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
 Wikiquote has quotations related to: Satan
 Wikimedia Commons has media related to Satan.
Catholic Encyclopedia — "Devil"
Jewish Encyclopedia — "Satan"
The Internet Sacred Texts Archive hosts texts—scriptures, literature and scholarly works—on Satan, Satanism and related religious matters
The Brotherhood of Satan’s perspective on Satan and Lucifer.


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
People and things in the Quran























































































































































































































































































































































































































































  


Categories: Abrahamic mythology
Christian mythology
Demons in Christianity
Fallen angels
Hell
Individual angels
Satan
Satanism
People in the canonical gospels
Horned deities














Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

View source

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Afrikaans
Ænglisc
العربية
Azərbaycanca
Беларуская
Български
Català
Чӑвашла
Čeština
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
Furlan
Gaeilge
Galego
𐌲𐌿𐍄𐌹𐍃𐌺
한국어
Հայերեն
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Ido
Bahasa Indonesia
IsiXhosa
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
ქართული
Қазақша
Kiswahili
Latina
Latviešu
Lietuvių
Magyar
Bahasa Melayu
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
Nouormand
Occitan
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
Polski
Português
Română
Runa Simi
Русский
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Словѣньскъ / ⰔⰎⰑⰂⰡⰐⰠⰔⰍⰟ
Ślůnski
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
Татарча/tatarça
తెలుగు
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
Vepsän kel’
Tiếng Việt
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 13 April 2015, at 02:55.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satan












Page semi-protected

Satan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is about the concept of Satan. For the concept of "devil", see Devil. For other uses, see Satan (disambiguation).



William Blake's illustration of Satan as presented in John Milton's Paradise Lost


Gustave Doré, Depiction of Satan, the central figure in John Milton's Paradise Lost c. 1866
Satan (Hebrew: שָּׂטָן satan, meaning "adversary";[1] Arabic: شيطان shaitan, meaning "astray" or "distant", sometimes "devil") is a figure appearing in the texts of the Abrahamic religions[2][3] who brings evil and temptation, and is known as the deceiver who leads humanity astray. Some religious groups teach that he originated as an angel who fell out of favor with God, seducing humanity into the ways of sin, and who has power in the fallen world. In the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament, Satan is primarily an accuser and adversary, a decidedly malevolent entity, also called the devil, who possesses demonic qualities.
In Theistic Satanism, Satan is considered a positive force and deity who is either worshipped or revered. In LaVeyan Satanism, Satan is regarded as holding virtuous characteristics.[4][5]


Contents  [hide]
1 Judaism 1.1 Hebrew Bible 1.1.1 Thirteen occurrences
1.1.2 Book of Job
1.2 Second Temple period 1.2.1 Septuagint
1.2.2 Dead Sea scrolls and Pseudepigrapha
1.3 Rabbinical Judaism
2 Dualism and Zoroastrianism
3 Christianity 3.1 Terminology
4 Islam
5 Yazidism
6 Bahá'í Faith
7 Satanism 7.1 Theistic Satanism
7.2 Atheistic Satanism
8 Notes
9 References
10 External links

Judaism
Hebrew Bible
The original Hebrew term satan is a noun from a verb meaning primarily "to obstruct, oppose", as it is found in Numbers 22:22, 1 Samuel 29:4, Psalms 109:6.[6] Ha-Satan is traditionally translated as "the accuser" or "the adversary". The definite article ha- (English: "the") is used to show that this is a title bestowed on a being, versus the name of a being. Thus, this being would be referred to as "the satan".[7]
Thirteen occurrences
Ha-Satan with the definite article occurs 13 times in the Masoretic Text, in two books of the Hebrew Bible: Job ch.1–2 (10x)[8] and Zechariah 3:1–2 (3x).[9]
Satan without the definite article is used in 10 instances, of which two are translated diabolos in the Septuagint and "Satan" in the King James Version:
1 Chronicles 21:1, "Satan stood up against Israel" (KJV) or "And there standeth up an adversary against Israel" (Young's Literal Translation)[10]
Psalm 109:6b "and let Satan stand at his right hand" (KJV)[11] or "let an accuser stand at his right hand." (ESV, etc.)
The other eight instances of satan without the definite article are traditionally translated (in Greek, Latin and English) as "an adversary", etc., and taken to be humans or obedient angels:
Numbers 22:22,32 "and the angel of the LORD stood in the way for an adversary against him."
32 "behold, I went out to withstand thee,"
1 Samuel 29:4 The Philistines say: "lest he [David] be an adversary against us"
2 Samuel 19:22 David says: "[you sons of Zeruaiah] should this day be adversaries (plural) unto me?"
1 Kings 5:4 Solomon writes to Hiram: "there is neither adversary nor evil occurrent."
1 Kings 11:14 "And the LORD stirred up an adversary unto Solomon, Hadad the Edomite"[12]
1 Kings 11:23 "And God stirred him up an adversary, Rezon the son of Eliadah"
25 "And he [Rezon] was an adversary to Israel all the days of Solomon"
Book of Job



The examination of Job, Satan pours on the plagues of Job, by William Blake
At the beginning of the book, Job is a good person "who revered God and turned away from evil" (Job 1:1), and has therefore been rewarded by God. When the angels present themselves to God, Satan comes as well. God informs Satan about Job's blameless, morally upright character. Between Job 1:9–10 and 2:4–5, Satan points out that God has given Job everything that a man could want, so of course Job would be loyal to God; Satan suggests that Job's faith would collapse if all he has been given (even his health) were to be taken away from him. God therefore gives Satan permission to test Job.[13] In the end, Job remains faithful and righteous, and there is the implication that Satan is shamed in his defeat.[14]
Second Temple period
Septuagint
In the Septuagint, the Hebrew ha-Satan in Job and Zechariah is translated by the Greek word diabolos (slanderer), the same word in the Greek New Testament from which the English word devil is derived. Where satan is used of human enemies in the Hebrew Bible, such as Hadad the Edomite and Rezon the Syrian, the word is left untranslated but transliterated in the Greek as satan, a neologism in Greek.[15] In Zechariah 3, this changes the vision of the conflict over Joshua the High Priest in the Septuagint into a conflict between "Jesus and the devil", identical with the Greek text of Matthew.
Dead Sea scrolls and Pseudepigrapha
In Enochic Judaism, the concept of Satan being an opponent of God and a chief evil figure in among demons seems to have taken root in Jewish pseudepigrapha during the Second Temple period,[16] particularly in the apocalypses.[17] The Book of Enoch contains references to Satariel, thought also to be Sataniel and Satan'el (etymology dating back to Babylonian origins). The similar spellings mirror that of his angelic brethren Michael, Raphael, Uriel, and Gabriel, previous to the fall from Heaven.
The Second Book of Enoch, also called the Slavonic Book of Enoch, contains references to a Watcher (Grigori) called Satanael.[18] It is a pseudepigraphic text of an uncertain date and unknown authorship. The text describes Satanael as being the prince of the Grigori who was cast out of heaven[19] and an evil spirit who knew the difference between what was "righteous" and "sinful".[20] A similar story is found in the book of 1 Enoch; however, in that book, the leader of the Grigori is called Semjâzâ.
In the Book of Wisdom, the devil is represented as the being who brought death into the world.[21]
In the Book of Jubilees, Mastema induces God to test Abraham through the sacrifice of Isaac. He is identical to Satan in both name and nature.[22]
Rabbinical Judaism
In Judaism, Satan is a term used since its earliest biblical contexts to refer to a human opponent.[23] Occasionally, the term has been used to suggest evil influence opposing human beings, as in the Jewish exegesis of the Yetzer hara ("evil inclination" Genesis 6:5). Micaiah's "lying spirit" in 1 Kings 22:22 is sometimes related. Thus, Satan is personified as a character in three different places of the Tenakh, serving as an accuser (Zechariah 3:1–2), a seducer (1 Chronicles 21:1), or as a heavenly persecutor who is "among the sons of God" (Job 2:1). In any case, Satan is always subordinate to the power of God, having a role in the divine plan. Satan is rarely mentioned in Tannaitic literature, but is found in Babylonian aggadah.[17]
In medieval Judaism, the Rabbis rejected these Enochic literary works into the Biblical canon, making every attempt to root them out.[16] Traditionalists and philosophers in medieval Judaism adhered to rational theology, rejecting any belief in rebel or fallen angels, and viewing evil as abstract.[24] The Yetzer hara ("evil inclination" Genesis 6:5) is a more common motif for evil in rabbinical texts. Rabbinical scholarship on the Book of Job generally follows the Talmud and Maimonides as identifying the "Adversary" in the prologue of Job as a metaphor.[25]
In Hasidic Judaism, the Kabbalah presents Satan as an agent of God whose function is to tempt one into sin, then turn around and accuse the sinner on high.[vague] The Chasidic Jews of the 18th century associated ha-Satan with Baal Davar.[26]
Dualism and Zoroastrianism
See also: Angra Mainyu
Some scholars see contact with religious dualism in Babylon, and early Zoroastrianism in particular, as being influenced by Second Temple period Judaism, and consequently early Christianity.[27][28] Subsequent development of Satan as a "deceiver" has parallels with the evil spirit in Zoroastrianism, known as the Lie, who directs forces of darkness.[29]
Christianity



 The Devil depicted in The Temptation of Christ, by Ary Scheffer, 1854
Main article: Devil in Christianity
See also: War in Heaven
Satan is traditionally identified as the serpent who tempted Eve to eat the forbidden fruit, as he was in Judaism.[30] Thus Satan has often been depicted as a serpent. Christian agreement with this can be found in the works of Justin Martyr, in Chapters 45 and 79 of Dialogue with Trypho, where Justin identifies Satan and the serpent.[31] Other early church fathers to mention this identification include Theophilus and Tertullian.[32]
From the fourth century, Lucifer is sometimes used in Christian theology to refer to Satan, as a result of identifying the fallen "son of the dawn" of Isaiah 14:12 with the "accuser" of other passages in the Old Testament.[citation needed]



 Satan as depicted in the Ninth Circle of Hell in Dante Alighieri's Inferno, illustrated by Gustave Doré
For most Christians, Satan is believed to be an angel who rebelled against God. His goal is to lead people away from the love of God; i.e., to lead them to evil.[citation needed]
In the New Testament he is called "the ruler of the demons" (Matthew 12:24), "the ruler of the world", and "the god of this world" (2 Cor. 4:4). The Book of Revelation describes how Satan was cast out of Heaven, having "great anger" and waging war against "those who obey God's commandments". Ultimately, Satan will be thrown into the lake of fire.[33]
The early Christian church encountered opposition from pagans such as Celsus, who claimed that "it is blasphemy...to say that the greatest God...has an adversary who constrains his capacity to do good" and said that Christians "impiously divide the kingdom of God, creating a rebellion in it, as if there were opposing factions within the divine, including one that is hostile to God".[34]
Terminology
In Christianity, there are many synonyms for Satan. The most common English synonym for "Satan" is "Devil", which descends from Middle English devel, from Old English dēofol, that in turn represents an early Germanic borrowing of Latin diabolus (also the source of "diabolical"). This in turn was borrowed from Greek diabolos "slanderer", from diaballein "to slander": dia- "across, through" + ballein "to hurl".[35] In the New Testament, "Satan" occurs more than 30 times in passages alongside Diabolos (Greek for "the devil"), referring to the same person or thing as Satan.[36]
Beelzebub, meaning "Lord of Flies", is the contemptuous name given in the Hebrew Bible and New Testament to a Philistine god whose original name has been reconstructed as most probably "Ba'al Zabul", meaning "Baal the Prince".[37] This pun was later used to refer to Satan as well.
The Book of Revelation twice refers to "the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan" (12:9, 20:2). The Book of Revelation also refers to "the deceiver", from which is derived the common epithet "the great deceiver".[38]
Islam
Main article: Devil (Islam)
See also: Azazel § Azazel in Islam
Shaitan (شيطان) is the equivalent of Satan in Islam. While Shaitan (شيطان, from the root šṭn شطن) is an adjective (meaning "astray" or "distant", sometimes translated as "devil") that can be applied to both man ("al-ins", الإنس) and Jinn, Iblis (Arabic pronunciation: [ˈibliːs]) is the personal name of the Devil who is mentioned in the Qur'anic account of Genesis.[39] According to the Qur'an, Iblis (the Arabic name used) disobeyed an order from Allah to bow to Adam, and as a result Iblis was forced out of heaven. However, he was given respite from further punishment until the day of judgment.
When Allah commanded all of the angels to bow down before Adam (the first Human), Iblis, full of hubris and jealousy, refused to obey God's command (he could do so because he had free will), seeing Adam as being inferior in creation due to his being created from clay as compared to him (created of fire).[40]

It is We Who created you and gave you shape; then We bade the angels prostrate to Adam, and they prostrate; not so Iblis (Lucifer); He refused to be of those who prostrate. (Allah) said: "What prevented thee from prostrating when I commanded thee?" He said: "I am better than he: Thou didst create me from fire, and him from clay."
—Qur'an 7:11–12
It was after this that the title of "Shaitan" was given, which can be roughly translated as "Enemy", "Rebel", "Evil", or "Devil". Shaitan then claims that, if the punishment for his act of disobedience is to be delayed until the Day of Judgment, then he will divert many of Adam's own descendants from the straight path during his period of respite.[41] God accepts the claims of Iblis and guarantees recompense to Iblis and his followers in the form of Hellfire. In order to test mankind and jinn alike, Allah allowed Iblis to roam the earth to attempt to convert others away from his path.[42] He was sent to earth along with Adam and Eve, after eventually luring them into eating the fruit from the forbidden tree.[43]
Yazidism
An alternative name for the main deity in the tentatively Indo-European pantheon of the Yazidi, Malek Taus, is Shaitan.[44] However, rather than being Satanic, Yazidism is better understood as a remnant of a pre-Islamic Middle Eastern Indo-European religion, and/or a ghulat Sufi movement founded by Shaykh Adi. The connection with Satan, originally made by Muslim outsiders, attracted the interest of 19th century European travelers and esoteric writers.
Bahá'í Faith
In the Bahá'í Faith, Satan is not regarded as an independent evil power as he is in some faiths, but signifies the lower nature of humans. `Abdu'l-Bahá explains: "This lower nature in man is symbolized as Satan — the evil ego within us, not an evil personality outside."[45][46] All other evil spirits described in various faith traditions—such as fallen angels, demons, and jinns—are also metaphors for the base character traits a human being may acquire and manifest when he turns away from God.[47]
Satanism
Main article: Satanism
Within Satanism, two major trends exists, theistic Satanism and atheistic Satanism, both having different views regarding the essence of Satan.
Theistic Satanism
Theistic Satanism, commonly referred to as 'devil-worship',[48] holds that Satan is an actual deity or force to revere or worship that individuals may contact and supplicate to,[49][50] and represents loosely affiliated or independent groups and cabals which hold the belief that Satan is a real entity[51] rather than an archetype.
Among non-Satanists, much modern Satanic folklore does not originate with the beliefs or practices of theistic or atheistic Satanists, but a mixture of medieval Christian folk beliefs, political or sociological conspiracy theories, and contemporary urban legends.[52][53][54][55] An example is the Satanic ritual abuse scare of the 1980s—beginning with the memoir Michelle Remembers—which depicted Satanism as a vast conspiracy of elites with a predilection for child abuse and human sacrifice.[53][54] This genre frequently describes Satan as physically incarnating in order to receive worship.[55]
Atheistic Satanism
Atheistic Satanism, most commonly referred to as LaVeyan Satanism, holds that Satan does not exist as a literal anthropomorphic entity, but rather a symbol of pride, carnality, liberty, enlightenment, undefiled wisdom, and of a cosmos which Satanists perceive to be permeated and motivated by a force that has been given many names by humans over the course of time. To adherents, he also serves as a conceptual framework and an external metaphorical projection of [the Satanists] highest personal potential.[56][57][58][59][60][61]
In his essay, "Satanism: The Feared Religion", the current High Priest of the Church of Satan, Peter H. Gilmore, further expounds that "...Satan is a symbol of Man living as his prideful, carnal nature dictates. The reality behind Satan is simply the dark evolutionary force of entropy that permeates all of nature and provides the drive for survival and propagation inherent in all living things. Satan is not a conscious entity to be worshiped, rather a reservoir of power inside each human to be tapped at will."[62]
Notes
1.Jump up ^ http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13219-satan "Term used in the Bible with the general connotation of "adversary," being applied (1) to an enemy in war (I Kings v. 18 [A. V. 4]; xi. 14, 23, 25), from which use is developed the concept of a traitor in battle (I Sam. xxix. 4); (2) to an accuser before the judgment-seat (Ps. cix. 6); and (3) to any opponent (II Sam. xix. 23 [A. V. 22]). The word is likewise used to denote an antagonist who puts obstacles in the way, as in Num. xxii. 32, where the angel of God is described as opposing Balaam in the guise of a satan or adversary; so that the concept of Satan as a distinct being was not then known."
2.Jump up ^ Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia of World Religions, page 290, Wendy Doniger
3.Jump up ^ Leeming, David Adams (2005). The Oxford Companion to World Mythology. Oxford University Press. p. 347. ISBN 978-0-19-515669-0.
4.Jump up ^ Contemporary Religious Satanisim: A Critical Reader, Jesper Aagaard Petersen – 2009
5.Jump up ^ Who's ? Right: Mankind, Religions and the End Times, page 35, Kelly Warman-Stallings – 2012
6.Jump up ^ ed. Buttrick, George Arthur; The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, An illustrated Encyclopedia
7.Jump up ^ Crenshaw, James L. Harper Collins Study Bible (NRSV), 1989
8.Jump up ^ Stephen M. Hooks – 2007 "As in Zechariah 3:1–2 the term here carries the definite article (has'satan="the satan") and functions not as a ... the only place in the Hebrew Bible where the term "Satan" is unquestionably used as a proper name is 1 Chronicles 21:1."
9.Jump up ^ Coogan, Michael D.; A Brief Introduction to the Old Testament: The Hebrew Bible in its context, Oxford University Press, 2009
10.Jump up ^ Rachel Adelman The Return of the Repressed: Pirqe De-Rabbi Eliezer p65 "However, in the parallel versions of the story in Chronicles, it is Satan (without the definite article),"
11.Jump up ^ Septuagint 108:6 κατάστησον ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν ἁμαρτωλόν καὶ διάβολος στήτω ἐκ δεξιῶν αὐτοῦ
12.Jump up ^ Ruth R. Brand Adam and Eve p88 – 2005 "Later, however, King Hadad 1 Kings 11:14) and King Rezon (verses 23, ... Numbers 22:22, 23 does not use the definite article but identifies the angel of YHWH as "a satan."
13.Jump up ^ HarperCollins Study Bible (NRSV)
14.Jump up ^ Steinmann, AE. "The structure and message of the Book of Job". Vetus testamentum.
15.Jump up ^ Henry Ansgar Kelly Satan: a biography 2006 "However, for Hadad and Rezon they left the Hebrew term untranslated and simply said satan.. in the three passages in which a supra-Human satan appears: namely, Numbers, Job, Zechariah
16.^ Jump up to: a b Jackson, David R. (2004). Enochic Judaism. London: T&T Clark International. pp. 2–4. ISBN 0826470890.
17.^ Jump up to: a b Berlin, editor in chief, Adele (2011). The Oxford dictionary of the Jewish religion (2nd ed. ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. p. 651. ISBN 0199730040.
18.Jump up ^ 2 Enoch 18:3. On this tradition, see A. Orlov, "The Watchers of Satanael: The Fallen Angels Traditions in 2 (Slavonic) Enoch," in: A. Orlov, Dark Mirrors: Azazel and Satanael in Early Jewish Demonology (Albany: SUNY, 2011) 85–106.
19.Jump up ^ "And I threw him out from the height with his angels, and he was flying in the air continuously above the bottomless" – 2 Enoch 29:4
20.Jump up ^ "The devil is the evil spirit of the lower places, as a fugitive he made Sotona from the heavens as his name was Satanail, thus he became different from the angels, but his nature did not change his intelligence as far as his understanding of righteous and sinful things" – 2 Enoch 31:4
21.Jump up ^ See The Book of Wisdom: With Introduction and Notes, p. 27, Object of the book, by A. T. S. Goodrick.
22.Jump up ^ [ Introduction to the Book of Jubilees, 15. Theology. Some of our Author's Views: Demonology, by R.H. Charles.
23.Jump up ^ Based on the Jewish exegesis of 1 Samuel 29:4 and 1 Kings 5:18 – Oxford dictionary of the Jewish religion, 2011, p. 651 "Satan is rarely mentioned in tannaitic literature; later, chiefly Babylonian, aggadah enlarges the scope of his influence and activities. Perhaps because of the influential presence of Satan as a name or character in the New Testament and the"
24.Jump up ^ Bamberger, Bernard J. (2006). Fallen angels : soldiers of satan's realm (1. paperback ed. ed.). Philadelphia, Pa.: Jewish Publ. Soc. of America. p. 148,149. ISBN 0827607970.
25.Jump up ^ Robert Eisen Associate Professor of Religious Studies George Washington University The Book of Job in Medieval Jewish Philosophy 2004 p120 "Moreover, Zerahfiiah gives us insight into the parallel between the Garden of Eden story and the Job story alluded to ... both Satan and Job's wife are metaphors for the evil inclination, a motif Zerahfiiah seems to identify with the imagination."
26.Jump up ^ The Dictionary of Angels" by Gustav Davidson, © 1967
27.Jump up ^ Jeffrey Burton Russell, The Devil: Perceptions of Evil from Antiquity to Primitive ...1977, page 102 "This conflict between truth and the lie was one of the main sources of Zarathushtra's dualism: the prophet perceived Angra Mainyu, the lord of evil, as the personification of the lie. For Zoroastrians (as for the Egyptians), the lie was the essence ... "
28.Jump up ^ Peter Clark, Zoroastrianism: An Introduction to Ancient Faith 1998, page 152 "There are so many features that Zoroastrianism seems to share with the Judeo-Christian tradition that it would be difficult to ... Historically the first point of contact that we can determine is when the Achaemenian Cyrus conquered Babylon ..539 BC"
29.Jump up ^ Winn, Shan M.M. (1995). Heaven, heroes, and happiness : the Indo-European roots of Western ideology. Lanham, Md.: University press of America. p. 203. ISBN 0819198609.
30.Jump up ^ http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13219-satan. Missing or empty |title= (help)
31.Jump up ^ Kelly, Harry Ansgar (2007). Satan: a Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 176. ISBN 978-0-521-84339-3.
32.Jump up ^ Kelly, Harry Ansgar (2007). Satan: a Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 177. ISBN 978-0-521-84339-3.
33.Jump up ^ Revelation 20:10
34.Jump up ^ Origen. Contra Celsum. Book 6. Ch 42.
35.Jump up ^ "American Heritage Dictionary: Devil". Retrieved 2006-05-31.
36.Jump up ^ Revelation 12:9
37.Jump up ^ K. van der Toorn, Bob Becking, Pieter Willem van der Horst, Baalzebub, "Dictionary of deities and demons in the Bible", p. 155
38.Jump up ^ B. W. Johnson (1891). "The Revelation of John. Chapter XX. The Millennium.". The People's New Testament. Memorial University of Newfoundland. Retrieved November 30, 2009.
39.Jump up ^ Iblis
40.Jump up ^ [Quran 17:61]; [Quran 2:34]
41.Jump up ^ [Quran 17:62]
42.Jump up ^ [Quran 17:63–64]
43.Jump up ^ [Quran 7:20–22]
44.Jump up ^ Drower, E.S. The Peacock Angel. Being Some Account of Votaries of a Secret Cult and their Sanctuaries. London: John Murray, 1941. [1]
45.Jump up ^ ʻAbduʾl-Bahá (1982) [1912]. The Promulgation of Universal Peace. Wilmette, Illinois, USA: Bahá'í Publishing Trust. pp. 294–295. ISBN 0-87743-172-8.
46.Jump up ^ Smith, Peter (2000). A Concise Encyclopedia of the Bahá'í Faith. Oxford, UK: Oneworld. pp. 135–136, 304. ISBN 1-85168-184-1.
47.Jump up ^ Smith, Peter (2008). An Introduction to the Baha'i Faith. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 112. ISBN 0-521-86251-5.
48.Jump up ^ http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-29448079
49.Jump up ^ Partridge, Christopher Hugh (2004). The Re-enchantment of the West. p. 82. Retrieved 2008-05-12.
50.Jump up ^ Satanism and Demonology, by Lionel & Patricia Fanthorpe, Dundurn Press, 8 Mar 2011, p. 74, "If, as theistic Satanists believe, the devil is an intelligent, self-aware entity..." "Theistic Satanism then becomes explicable in terms of Lucifer's ambition to be the supreme god and his rebellion against Yahweh. [...] This simplistic, controntational view is modified by other theistic Satanists who do not regard their hero as evil: far from it. For them he is a freedom fighter..."
51.Jump up ^ "Interview_MLO". Angelfire.com. Retrieved 2011-11-30.
52.Jump up ^ Cinema of the Occult: New Age, Satanism, Wicca, and Spiritualism in Film, Carrol Lee Fry, Associated University Presse, 2008, pp. 92–98
53.^ Jump up to: a b Encyclopedia of Urban Legends, Updated and Expanded Edition, by Jan Harold Brunvand, ABC-CLIO, 31 Jul 2012 pp. 694–695
54.^ Jump up to: a b Raising the Devil: Satanism, New Religions, and the Media, by Bill Ellis, University Press of Kentucky p. 125 In discussing myths about groups accused of Satanism, "...such myths are already pervasive in Western culture, and the development of the modern "Satanic Scare" would be impossible to explain without showing how these myths helped organize concerns and beliefs." Accusations of Satanism are traced from the witch hunts, to the Illuminati, to the Satanic Ritual Abuse panic in the 1980s, with a distinction made between what modern Satanists believe and what is believed about Satanists.
55.^ Jump up to: a b Satan in America: The Devil We Know, by W. Scott Poole, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 16 Nov 2009, pp. 42–43
56.Jump up ^ name="altreligion.about.com">http://altreligion.about.com/od/alternativereligionsaz/a/satanism.htm
57.Jump up ^ http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/WhatTheDevil.html
58.Jump up ^ http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/_FAQ03.html
59.Jump up ^ [2][dead link]
60.Jump up ^ http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/ChaplainsHandbook.html
61.Jump up ^ Contemporary religious Satanism: a critical anthology, page 45, Jesper Aagaard Petersen, 2009
62.Jump up ^ http://churchofsatan.com/satanism-the-feared-religion.php
References
Bamberger, Bernard J. (2006). Fallen Angels: Soldiers of Satan's Realm. Jewish Publication Society of America. ISBN 0-8276-0797-0.
Caldwell, William. "The Doctrine of Satan: I. In the Old Testament", The Biblical World, Vol. 41, No. 1 (Jan., 1913), pp. 29–33 in JSTOR
Caldwell, William. "The Doctrine of Satan: II. Satan in Extra-Biblical Apocalyptical Literature", The Biblical World, Vol. 41, No. 2 (Feb., 1913), pp. 98–102 in JSTOR
Caldwell, William. "The Doctrine of Satan: III. In the New Testament", The Biblical World, Vol. 41, No. 3 (Mar., 1913), pp. 167–172 in JSTOR
Empson, William. Milton's God (1966)
Forsyth, Neil (1987). The Old Enemy: Satan & the Combat Myth. Princeton University Press; Reprint edition. ISBN 0-691-01474-4.
Forsyth, Neil (1987). The Satanic Epic. Princeton University Press; Reprint edition. ISBN 0-691-11339-4.
Gentry, Kenneth L. Jr (2002). The Beast of Revelation. American Vision. ISBN 0-915815-41-9.
Graves, Kersey (1995). Biography of Satan: Exposing the Origins of the Devil. Book Tree. ISBN 1-885395-11-6.
‘’The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, An illustrated Encyclopedia’’;ed. Buttrick, George Arthur; Abingdon Press 1962
Jacobs, Joseph, and Ludwig Blau. "Satan," The Jewish Encyclopedia (1906) online pp 68–71
Kelly, Henry Ansgar. Satan: A Biography. (2006). 360 pp. excerpt and text search ISBN 0-521-60402-8, a study of the Bible and Western literature
Kent, William. "Devil." The Catholic Encyclopedia (1908) Vol. 4. online older article
Osborne, B. A. E. "Peter: Stumbling-Block and Satan," Novum Testamentum, Vol. 15, Fasc. 3 (Jul., 1973), pp. 187–190 in JSTOR on "Get thee behind me, Satan!"
Pagels, Elaine (1995). The Origin of Satan. Vintage; Reprint edition. ISBN 0-679-72232-7.
Rebhorn Wayne A. "The Humanist Tradition and Milton's Satan: The Conservative as Revolutionary," Studies in English Literature, 1500–1900, Vol. 13, No. 1, The English Renaissance (Winter, 1973), pp. 81–93 in JSTOR
Rudwin, Maximilian (1970). The Devil in Legend and Literature. Open Court. ISBN 0-87548-248-1.
Russell, Jeffrey Burton. The Devil: Perceptions of Evil from Antiquity to Primitive Christianity (1987) excerpt and text search
Russell, Jeffrey Burton. Satan: The Early Christian Tradition (1987) excerpt and text search
Russell, Jeffrey Burton. Lucifer: The Devil in the Middle Ages (1986) excerpt and text search
Russell, Jeffrey Burton. Mephistopheles: The Devil in the Modern World (1990) excerpt and text search
Russell, Jeffrey Burton. The Prince of Darkness: Radical Evil and the Power of Good in History (1992) excerpt and text search
Schaff, D. S. "Devil" in New Schaff–Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge (1911), Mainline Protestant; vol 3 pp 414–417 online
Scott, Miriam Van. The Encyclopedia of Hell (1999) excerpt and text search comparative religions; also popular culture
Wray, T. J. and Gregory Mobley. The Birth of Satan: Tracing the Devil's Biblical Roots (2005) excerpt and text search
External links
 Look up Satan in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
 Wikiquote has quotations related to: Satan
 Wikimedia Commons has media related to Satan.
Catholic Encyclopedia — "Devil"
Jewish Encyclopedia — "Satan"
The Internet Sacred Texts Archive hosts texts—scriptures, literature and scholarly works—on Satan, Satanism and related religious matters
The Brotherhood of Satan’s perspective on Satan and Lucifer.


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
People and things in the Quran























































































































































































































































































































































































































































  


Categories: Abrahamic mythology
Christian mythology
Demons in Christianity
Fallen angels
Hell
Individual angels
Satan
Satanism
People in the canonical gospels
Horned deities














Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

View source

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Afrikaans
Ænglisc
العربية
Azərbaycanca
Беларуская
Български
Català
Чӑвашла
Čeština
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
Furlan
Gaeilge
Galego
𐌲𐌿𐍄𐌹𐍃𐌺
한국어
Հայերեն
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Ido
Bahasa Indonesia
IsiXhosa
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
ქართული
Қазақша
Kiswahili
Latina
Latviešu
Lietuvių
Magyar
Bahasa Melayu
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
Nouormand
Occitan
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
Polski
Português
Română
Runa Simi
Русский
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Словѣньскъ / ⰔⰎⰑⰂⰡⰐⰠⰔⰍⰟ
Ślůnski
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
Татарча/tatarça
తెలుగు
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
Vepsän kel’
Tiếng Việt
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 13 April 2015, at 02:55.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satan















Yahweh

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search




 A drachm (quarter shekel) coin from the Persian province of Yehud, apparently showing the god YHW (Yahweh) as a bearded man seated on a winged and wheeled throne.[1]This article is about the national god of the Iron Age kingdoms of Israel and Judah. For other uses, see Yahweh (disambiguation). See also: Tetragrammaton, Jehovah, and God in Abrahamic religions
Deities of the ancient Near East


Levantine (Canaanite)[hide]
Adonis ·
 Anat ·
 Asherah ·
 Ashima ·
 Astarte ·
 Atargatis ·
 Attar ·
 Baal ·
 Berith ·
 Chemosh ·
 Dagon ·
 El ·
 Elyon ·
 Eshmun ·
 Hadad ·
 Kothar-wa-Khasis ·
 Melqart ·
 Moloch ·
 Mot ·
 Nikkal ·
 Qetesh ·
 Resheph ·
 Shahar ·
 Shalim ·
 Shapash ·
 Yahweh ·
 Yam ·
 Yarikh
 

Mesopotamian[hide]
Abzu/Apsu ·
 Adad ·
 Amurru ·
 An/Anu ·
 Anshar ·
 Ashur ·
 Enki/Ea ·
 Enlil ·
 Ereshkigal ·
 Inanna/Ishtar ·
 Kingu ·
 Kishar ·
 Lahmu/Lahamu ·
 Marduk ·
 Mummu ·
 Nabu ·
 Nammu ·
 Nanna/Sin ·
 Nergal ·
 Ningishzida ·
 Ninhursag ·
 Ninlil ·
 Tiamat ·
 Utu/Shamash
 

Egyptian[hide]
Amun ·
 Apis ·
 Atum ·
 Buchis ·
 Geb ·
 Horus ·
 Isis ·
 Montu ·
 Nephthys ·
 Nut ·
 Osiris ·
 Ptah ·
 Ra ·
 Set ·
 Shu ·
 Tefnut ·
 Thoth
 

Elamite[hide]
Inshushinak ·
 Jabru ·
 Khumban ·
 Kiririsha ·
 Lahurati ·
 Nahundi ·
 Napir ·
 Ninsusinak ·
 Pinikir
 
Religions of the ancient Near East
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Part of a series on
Judaism
Star of David Ten Commandments Menorah

Movements[show]

















Philosophy[show]










Texts[show]



















Law[show]













Holy cities / places[show]
















Important figures[show]



























Religious roles[show]











Culture and education[show]













Ritual objects[show]



















Prayers[show]















Other religions[show]













Related topics[show]









Portal icon Judaism portal

v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Yahweh[Notes 1] (/ˈjɑːhweɪ/, or often /ˈjɑːweɪ/ in English; Hebrew: יהוה‎), was the national god of the Kingdom of Israel and the Kingdom of Judah,[2] and appears to have been unique to those two kingdoms.[3] His origins are debated but there is widespread acceptance that he did not originate with Israel.[4] His name may have begun as an epithet of El, head of the Bronze Age Canaanite pantheon,[5] but the earliest plausible references to it place him among the nomads of the southern Transjordan.[6]
In the oldest biblical literature Yahweh is a typical ancient Near Eastern "divine warrior" who leads the heavenly army against Israel's enemies.[7] He became the main god of the northern Kingdom of Israel and patron of its royal dynasty.[8] Over time, Yahwism became increasingly intolerant of rivals, and the royal court and temple promoted Yahweh as the god of the entire cosmos, possessing all the positive qualities previously attributed to the other gods and goddesses.[9][10] With the work of Second Isaiah (the theoretical author of the second part of the Book of Isaiah) towards the end of the Babylonian exile (6th century BC), the very existence of foreign gods was denied, and Yahweh was proclaimed as the creator of the cosmos and the true god of all the world.[10]


Contents  [hide]
1 Origins
2 Yahweh and the gods of Canaan
3 Yahwism in Israel (Samaria) and Judah, c.930–580 BCE 3.1 Yahweh as national god (God of Israel)
3.2 Worship (temples, sacrifice, etc)
3.3 Relationship to other gods and goddesses
3.4 Yahweh and monotheism
4 See also
5 Notes
6 References 6.1 Citations
6.2 Bibliography


Origins[edit]
See also: Tetragrammaton, Jehovah and Names of God in Judaism


The Tetragrammaton in Phoenician alphabet (10th century BC to 135 AD), Paleo-Hebrew (10th century BC to 4th century AD) and square Hebrew (3rd century BC to present) scripts. NOTE: Hebrew is written from right to left.
Two theories have been proposed to explain the origin of Yahweh: the first is that his name was at first a title for El, the head of the Canaanite pantheon (el dū yahwī ṣaba’ôt, "El who creates the hosts", meaning the heavenly army accompanying El as he marched beside the earthly armies of Israel); the alternative is that El and Yahweh were originally separate gods who merged gradually.[11] Support for the first hypothesis comes from the fact that Yahweh and El share many features; evidence for the second includes, among many other points, the fact that although El and Yahweh have much in common they also have many differences, and that while El's home was in the north, Yahweh's is always described as being in the south.[11]
Further support for the southern hypothesis comes from Egyptian inscriptions that mention a "land of the Shasu Yahu", the Shasu being nomads from the region of Midian and Edom and Yahu (or more accurately, YHW) a place name; there is considerable acceptance among scholars that this refers to the name Yahweh and that the god's worship did not originate with Israel.[12] If Yahweh originated in regions south of Israel, the question that arises is how he made his way to the north.[13] A widely accepted hypothesis (called the Kenite hypothesis, after one of the groups involved, along with Rechabites, Gibeonites—related to the Edomites—and Midianites) is that traders brought Yahweh to Israel along the caravan routes between Egypt and Palestine.[14] The strength of this hypothesis is the way it ties together various points of data, such as the absence of Yahweh from Canaan, his links with Edom and Midian in the biblical stories, and the Kenite or Midianite ties of Moses.[15]
Yahweh and the gods of Canaan[edit]
Scholars agree that the Israelite community arose peacefully and internally in the highlands of Canaan[16]–in the words of archaeologist William Dever, "most of those who came to call themselves Israelites … were or had been indigenous Canaanites".[17][Notes 2] Israelite religion accordingly emerged gradually from a Canaanite milieu.[18] The chief of the gods was El, described as "the kind, the compassionate," "the creator of creatures"; he lived in a tent on a mountain, from whose base originated all the fresh waters of the world, and there he presided over the Assembly of the Gods.[19] The goddess Asherah was his consort, and the two made up the top tier of the pantheon.[20] The second tier was made up of their children, the divine assembly of the "seventy sons of Athirat" (another name of Asherah).[21] Prominent in this group was Baal, with his home on Mount Zaphon; he gradually became the dominant deity, so that El became the executive power and Baal the military power in the cosmos.[22] His sphere was the thunderstorm with its life-giving rains, so that he was also a fertility god, although not quite the fertility god.[23] The third tier was made up of comparatively minor craftsman and trader deities, and the fourth and final tier of divine messengers and the like.[21]
El, not Yahweh, was the original "God of Israel"–the word "Israel" is based on the name El rather than Yahweh, the names of the oldest characters in the Torah show reverence towards El rather than Yahweh, and when Yahweh reveals his name to Moses in the episode of the burning bush he also reveals that he has been El all along.[24] Israel emerges into the historical record in the last decades of the 13th century BCE, at the very end of the Late Bronze Age, as the Cannanite city-state system was ending.[25] By the 9th century BCE a new system of nation-states was forming (Israel, Judah, Moab, Ammon and others), marked by, among other things, the emergence of national gods.[26] What distinguished Israel from other emerging Iron Age Canaanite societies was its elevation of Yahweh as the national god, rather than, for example, Chemosh, the god of Moab, or Milcom, the god of the Ammonites.[27]
A significant biblical text in this regard is Deuteronomy 32:8–9, in which the sons of El, including Yahweh, each receives his own nation:[24]
When the Most High (Elyon, i.e., El) gave the nations their inheritanceWhen he separated humanityHe fixed the boundaries of the peoplesaccording to the number of divine beings;For Yahweh's portion is his peopleJacob his allotted heritage.[Notes 3]
This suggests a memory of Yahweh, the southern warrior-god, joining the Canaanite pantheon headed by El; in time El and Yahweh were identified (there are no biblical polemics against El, whose name became a generic term for "god"), while Yahweh and Baal initially co-existed and later competed with each other.[20]
Yahwism in Israel (Samaria) and Judah, c.930–580 BCE[edit]
Yahweh as national god (God of Israel)[edit]
According to the Hebrew Bible Israel began in the 10th century as a united kingdom ruled by David and his son Solomon before splitting into the two separate states of Judah and Israel.[28] Since the 1980s scholars have reassessed this picture and now believe that a significant northern kingdom emerged only in the 9th century BCE, while Judah emerged as a state only in the 8th.[29][30]
Israel was as one of a number of regional kingdoms which crystallised along the trade route between Egypt and Mesopotamia at the close of the Bronze Age, all of which seem to have adopted a national god.[31] The gods came to represent their nations, and stood more or less equal to each other–Chemosh, for example, represented Moab just as Yahweh represented Israel.[32] The idea that the worship of Yahweh as national god played a key role in the formation of the monarchic state remains common among scholars, but the evidence is in fact slender—for example, none of the patriarchs, tribes, or early kings has a name based on Yahweh.[33] We do not know what god the earliest kings worshiped, but from the mid-9th century the court cult in Israel (meaning the northern kingdom) was definitely linked to Yahweh, and same applied to Judah from the time of king Jehoshaphat, a close ally of the king of Israel.[34]
It was in Samaria that Yahweh had the title "God of Israel"–no "God of Judah" is mentioned anywhere in the Bible–[35] and the name "Israel" appears to have taken on an ideological role in Judah after the fall of Samaria to the Assyrians in c.720 BCE, with Judah cast as the "true" Israel.[36]
The emergence of the monarchic state involved the concentration of power through kingship.[37] The king used national religion to exert his authority,[10] and as head of the state was also the head of the national religion and God's viceroy on Earth.[38]
Worship (temples, sacrifice, etc)[edit]
The Hebrew Bible gives the impression that the temple in Jerusalem was the most important or even sole temple of Yahweh, but this was not the case.[39] The earliest known Israelite place of worship is a 12th-century open-air altar in the hills of Samaria featuring a bronze bull reminiscent of Canaanite Bull El. The archaeological remains of further temples have been found at Dan on Israel's northern border, at Arad in the Negev, and at Beersheba (both in the territory of Judah),[40] and the evidence of the Biblical texts indicates that Shiloh, Bethel, Gilgal, Mizpah, Ramah and Dan were major sites for festivals, sacrifices, making of vows, private rituals and the adjudication of legal disputes.[41]
The centre of Yahweh's worship lay in three great annual festivals, all coinciding with major events in rural life: Passover with the birthing of lambs, Shavuot with the cereal harvest, and Sukkot with the fruit harvest.[42] These probably pre-dated the arrival of the Yahweh religion,[42] but became linked to the invented national history of Israel: Passover to the exodus from Egypt, Shavuot to the law-giving at Sinai, and Sukkot to the wilderness wanderings.[39] In the reworked religious calendar the festivals celebrated Yahweh's salvation of Israel and Israel's status as his holy people, although the earlier agricultural meaning was not entirely lost.[43]
There was also an annual ceremony–probably at the New Year–during which Yahweh was enthroned in the Temple.[44]
Yahweh's worship presumably involved sacrifice, but many scholars have concluded that the rituals detailed in Leviticus 1-16, with their stress on purity and atonement, were introduced only after the Babylonian exile, and that in reality any head of a family was able to offer sacrifice as occasion demanded.[45] (A number of scholars have also drawn the conclusion that infant sacrifice, whether to the underworld deity Molech or to Yahweh himself, was a part of Israelite/Judahite religion until the reforms of King Josiah in the late 7th century BCE).[46] Sacrifice was presumably complemented by the singing or recital of psalms on occasions varying from royal and public to communal and personal, but again the details are scant.[47] Prayer played little role in official worship.[48]
Relationship to other gods and goddesses[edit]
The Hebrew Bible provides evidence that many gods other than Yahweh were worshiped in Israel and Judah–for example, when King Josiah reformed Jerusalem's religious practice in the late 7th century, places of worship for other gods around Jerusalem had to be destroyed, priests had to be stopped from burning incense to Baal and the sun and moon and the "host of heaven," and Yahweh's own temple had to be purged of Baal, Asherah, the Host of Heaven, the chariots of the sun, and more.[49]
Yahweh and El merged at religious centres such as Shechem, Shiloh and Jerusalem, and the priesthood of Yahweh inherited the religious lore of El.[50] Yahweh appropriated many of the older supreme god's titles such as El Shaddai (El of the Mountains) and El Elyon (El Almighty), but Yahwism did not absorb the bull cult associated with El, and the rejection of the golden calf of Aaron and the bulls of Jeroboam was fundamental to the Israelite self-understanding as expressed in the biblical scriptures.
Yahweh's appearances as a storm god owe much to Canaanite depictions of Baal.[51] Baal and Yahweh coexisted in the early period of Israel's history, but from the 9th century they were considered irreconcilable, probably as a result of the attempts of King Ahab and Jezebel, his Phoenician queen, to elevate him in the northern kingdom.[52]
Goddesses worshiped in Israel and Judah included Asherah, Astarte, and a deity called the Queen of Heaven, who was probably a fusion of Astarte and the Mesopotamian goddess Ishtar.[53] Evidence increasingly suggests Asherah, formerly the wife of El, was worshiped as Yahweh's consort, and various biblical passages indicate that her statues were kept in his temples in Jerusalem, Bethel, and Samaria.[53] Yahweh may also have appropriated Anat, the wife of Baal, as his consort, as Anat-Yahu ("Anat of Yahu," i.e., Yahweh) is mentioned in 5th century records from the Jewish colony at Elephantine in Egypt.[54]
There is evidence also of the worship of further gods and goddesses from the Canaanite pantheon, such as the "Queen of Heaven" mentioned in Jeremiah who might be Astarte (also known as Ishtar,[55] Both the archaeological evidence and the biblical texts document tensions between groups comfortable with the worship of Yahweh alongside local deities such as Asherah and Baal and those insistent on worship of Yahweh alone during the monarchical period (1 Kings 18, Jeremiah 2)[56][57] The Deuteronomistic source gives evidence of a strong monotheistic party during the reign of king Josiah during the late 7th century BCE, but the strength and prevalence of earlier monotheistic worship of Yahweh is widely debated based on interpretations of how much of the Deuteronomistic history is accurately based on earlier sources, and how much Deuteronomistic redactors have re-worked that history to bolster their own theological views.[58] The archaeological record documents widespread polytheism in and around Israel during the period of the monarchy.[56]
Traditional scholarship distinguished "orthodox Yahwism"–the worship of Yahweh alone by the elite–from heterodox popular and family religion,[59][60] but there was in fact no authority deciding what was orthodox and what was not, and Yahweh was probably only one among many objects of veneration.[61] Orthodox or "normative" Yahwism did not exist in either Israel or Judah for most of the monarchical period.[62]
Yahweh and monotheism[edit]
Scholars agree that monotheism was not inevitable, but was the culmination of a unique set of historical circumstances that arose in Israel.[63]
The religious ideas put forward through most of the Hebrew Bible represent the beliefs of a small minority of Jerusalem-centred Judeans who worshipped the god Yahweh exclusively.[64] Long before then, Canaanite (meaning pre-Iron Age) belief had been built around the concept of the "divine family", while Iron Age Israelite belief stressed instead the "divine council"; when Yahweh absorbed El the other deities were de-emphasised, Yahweh's supremacy over the pantheon was stressed, and the imagery switched to "divine council".[65] The biblical rhetoric which emerged from this process was not "pure" monotheism in the modern sense but a statement of Israel's special relationship with Yahweh.[65]
Since the late 1980s there has been a major shift in the scholarly consensus on when and how the tradition of aniconism (the prohibition on images of God) arose in Israel.[66]
Everything in the moral realm was understood in relation to Yahweh as a manifestation of holiness. Divine law protected family relationships and the welfare of the weaker members of society; purity of conduct, dress, food, etc. were regulated. Religious leadership resided in priests who were associated with sanctuaries, and also in prophets, who were bearers of divine oracles. In the political sphere the king was understood as the appointee and agent of Yahweh.[67]
Following the destruction of the monarchy and loss of the land at the beginning of the 6th century (the period of the Babylonian exile), a search for a new identity led to a re-examination of Israel's traditions. Yahweh now became the only god in the cosmos.[68]
The fifth century Elephantine papyri were written by a group of Egyptian Jews living at Elephantine near the Nubian border, and witness a religion that has been described as "nearly identical to Iron Age II Judahite religion".[69] The papyri describe these Jews as worshiping Anat-Yahu (or AnatYahu), either the wife of Yahweh or as a hypostatized aspect of the god.[54][70][71] "Even in exile and beyond, the veneration of a female deity endured."[72]
See also[edit]
Adonai
Ancient Semitic religion
Canaanite religion
God
God in Abrahamic religions
Jehovah
Kyrios
Sacred Name Movement
the seven names of God
Notes[edit]
1.Jump up ^ In the Hebrew Bible this is written as יהוה (YHWH), without vowels; the original pronunciation was lost many centuries ago, but it was probably "Yahweh" – Miller, 2000, p.2
2.Jump up ^ Canaanites in this article means the indigenous Bronze Age and early Iron Age inhabitants of southern Syria, the coast of Lebanon, Israel, the West Bank and Jordan. – Dever, 2002, p.219
3.Jump up ^ For the varying mss of this verse, see Smith, 2002, p.32 fn. 43.
References[edit]
Citations[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Edelman 1995, p. 190.
2.Jump up ^ Miller 1986, p. 110.
3.Jump up ^ Grabbe 2010, p. 184.
4.Jump up ^ Grabbe 2007, p. 153.
5.Jump up ^ Dijkstra 2001, p. 92.
6.Jump up ^ Dever 2003, p. 128.
7.Jump up ^ Hackett 2001, p. 158–159.
8.Jump up ^ Smith 2002, p. 72.
9.Jump up ^ Wyatt 2010, p. 69–70.
10.^ Jump up to: a b c Betz 2000, p. 917.
11.^ Jump up to: a b Chalmers 2012, p. no pagination.
12.Jump up ^ Grabbe 2007, p. 151,153.
13.Jump up ^ Van Der Toorn 1999, p. 912.
14.Jump up ^ Van Der Toorn 1999, p. 912-913.
15.Jump up ^ Van Der Toorn 2010, p. 247-248.
16.Jump up ^ Gnuse 1997, p. 31.
17.Jump up ^ Dever 2003, p. 228.
18.Jump up ^ Cook 2004, p. 7.
19.Jump up ^ Coogan & Smith 2012, p. 8.
20.^ Jump up to: a b Smith 2002, p. 33.
21.^ Jump up to: a b Hess 2007, p. 103.
22.Jump up ^ Coogan & Smith 2012, p. 7–8.
23.Jump up ^ Handy 1994, p. 101.
24.^ Jump up to: a b Smith 2002, p. 32.
25.Jump up ^ Noll 2001, p. 124–126.
26.Jump up ^ Schniedewind 2013, p. 93.
27.Jump up ^ Hackett 2001, p. 156.
28.Jump up ^ Moore & Kelle 2011, p. 266.
29.Jump up ^ Niehr 1995, p. 53.
30.Jump up ^ Moore & Kelle 2011, p. 268.
31.Jump up ^ Halpern & Adams 2009, p. 26.
32.Jump up ^ Smith 2010, p. 119–120.
33.Jump up ^ Moore & Kelle 2011, p. 126–127.
34.Jump up ^ Levin 2013, p. 247.
35.Jump up ^ Davies 2010, p. 107.
36.Jump up ^ Wyatt 2010, p. 61, footnote 1.
37.Jump up ^ Meyers 2001, p. 166–168.
38.Jump up ^ Miller 2000, p. 90.
39.^ Jump up to: a b Davies 2012, p. 112.
40.Jump up ^ Dever 2003a, p. 388.
41.Jump up ^ Bennett 2002, p. 83.
42.^ Jump up to: a b Albertz 1994, p. 89.
43.Jump up ^ Gorman 2000, p. 458.
44.Jump up ^ Petersen 1998, p. 23.
45.Jump up ^ Davies & Rogerson 2005, p. 151-152.
46.Jump up ^ Gnuse 1997, p. 118.
47.Jump up ^ Davies & Rogerson 2005, p. 158-165.
48.Jump up ^ Cohen 1999, p. 302.
49.Jump up ^ Collins 2005, p. 101–102.
50.Jump up ^ Smith 2001, p. 140.
51.Jump up ^ Collins 2005, p. 101-102.
52.Jump up ^ Smith 2002, p. 47.
53.^ Jump up to: a b Ackerman 2003, p. 395.
54.^ Jump up to: a b Day 2002, p. 143.
55.Jump up ^ Dever 2005, p. 234.
56.^ Jump up to: a b & Keel 1998, p. not defined.
57.Jump up ^ Smith 2001, p. not defined.
58.Jump up ^ Smith 2001, p. 151–154.
59.Jump up ^ Collins 2005, p. 122-123.
60.Jump up ^ Darby 2014, p. 50.
61.Jump up ^ Bennett 2002, p. 84.
62.Jump up ^ Ahlstrom 1991, p. 140.
63.Jump up ^ Gnuse 2006, p. 129.
64.Jump up ^ Wright 1999, p. 52.
65.^ Jump up to: a b Gnuse 2006, p. 656.
66.Jump up ^ McDonald 2007, p. 20-28.
67.Jump up ^ Miller 2000, p. 50–51.
68.Jump up ^ Smith 2001, p. 193.
69.Jump up ^ Noll 2001, p. 248.
70.Jump up ^ Niehr 1995, p. 58.
71.Jump up ^ Ackerman 2003, p. 394.
72.Jump up ^ Gnuse 1997, p. 185.
Bibliography[edit]
Ackerman, Susan (2003). "Goddesses". In Richard, Suzanne. Near Eastern Archaeology:A Reader. Eisenbrauns. ISBN 978-1-57506-083-5.
Ahlstrom, Gosta W. (1991). "The Role of Archaeological and Literary Remains in Reconstructing Israel's History". In Edelman, Diana Vikander. The Fabric of History: Text, Artifact and Israel's Past. A&C Black.
Albertz, Rainer (1994). A History of Israelite Religion, Volume I: From the Beginnings to the End of the Monarchy. Westminster John Knox.
Bennett, Harold V. (2002). Injustice Made Legal: Deuteronomic Law and the Plight of Widows, Strangers, and Orphans in Ancient Israel. Eerdmans.
Betz, Arnold Gottfried (2000). "Monotheism". In Freedman, David Noel; Myer, Allen C. Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible. Eerdmans. ISBN 9053565035.
Chalmers, Aaron (2012). Exploring the Religion of Ancient Israel: Prophet, Priest, Sage and People. SPCK.
Cohen, Shaye J.D. (1999). "The Temple and the Synagogue". In Finkelstein, Louis; Davies, W. D.; Horbury, William. The Cambridge History of Judaism: Volume 3, The Early Roman Period. Cambridge University Press.
Cohn, Norman (2001). Cosmos, Chaos, and the World to Come: The Ancient Roots of Apocalyptic Faith. Yale University Press.
Collins, John J. (2005). The Bible After Babel: Historical Criticism in a Postmodern Age. Eerdmans.
Coogan, Michael D.; Smith, Mark S. (2012). Stories from Ancient Canaan (2nd Edition). Presbyterian Publishing Corp. ISBN 9053565035.
Cook, Stephen L. (2004). The Social Roots of Biblical Yahwism. Society of Biblical Literature.
Darby, Erin (2014). Interpreting Judean Pillar Figurines: Gender and Empire in Judean Apotropaic Ritual. Mohr Siebeck.
Davies, Philip R.; Rogerson, John (2005). The Old Testament World. Westminster John Knox.
Davies, Philip R. (2010). "Urban Religion and Rural Religion". In Stavrakopoulou, Francesca; Barton, John. Religious Diversity in Ancient Israel and Judah. Continuum International Publishing Group.
Day, John (2002). Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan. Continuum.
Dever, William G. (2003a). "Religion and Cult in the Levant". In Richard, Suzanne. Near Eastern Archaeology:A Reader. Eisenbrauns. ISBN 978-1-57506-083-5.
Dever, William G. (2003b). Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come From. Eerdmans.
Dever, William G. (2005). Did God Have A Wife?: Archaeology And Folk Religion In Ancient Israel. Eerdmans. ISBN 978-0-8028-2852-1.
Dijkstra, Meindert (2001). "El the God of Israel-Israel the People of YHWH: On the Origins of Ancient Israelite Yahwism". In Becking, Bob; Dijkstra, Meindert; Korpel, Marjo C.A. et al. Only One God?: Monotheism in Ancient Israel and the Veneration of the Goddess Asherah. A&C Black.
Edelman, Diana V. (1995). "Tracking Observance of the Aniconic Tradition". In Edelman, Diana Vikander. The Triumph of Elohim: From Yahwisms to Judaisms. Peeters Publishers. ISBN 9053565035.
Elior, Rachel (2006). "Early Forms of Jewish Mysticism". In Katz, Steven T. The Cambridge History of Judaism: The Late Roman-Rabbinic Period. Cambridge University Press.
Gnuse, Robert Karl (1997). No Other Gods: Emergent Monotheism in Israel. Continuum.
Gorman, Frank H., Jr. (2000). "Feasts, Festivals". In Freedman, David Noel; Myers, Allen C. Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible. Amsterdam University Press. ISBN 978-1-57506-083-5.
Finkelstein, Israel; Silberman, Neil Asher (2002). The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Sacred Texts. Simon and Schuster.
Frerichs, Ernest S. (1998). The Bible and Bibles in America. Scholars Press.
Gnuse, Robert (1999). "The Emergence of Monotheism in Ancient Israel: A Survey of Recent Scholarship". Religion 29: 315–336.
Grabbe, Lester (2010). "'Many nations will be joined to YHWH in that day': The question of YHWH outside Judah". In Stavrakopoulou, Francesca; Barton, John. Religious diversity in Ancient Israel and Judah. Continuum International Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-567-03216-4.
Grabbe, Lester (2007). Ancient Israel: What Do We Know and How Do We Know It?. A&C Black.
Hackett, Jo Ann (2001). "'There Was No King In Israel': The Era of the Judges". In Coogan, Michael David. The Oxford History of the Biblical World. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-513937-2.
Halpern, Baruch; Adams, Matthew J. (2009). From Gods to God: The Dynamics of Iron Age Cosmologies. Mohr Siebeck.
Handy, Lowell K. (1995). Among the Host of Heaven: The Syro-Palestinian Pantheon as Bureaucracy. Eisenbrauns.
Hess, Richard S. (2007). Israelite Religions: An Archaeological and Biblical Survey. Baker Academic.
Humphries, W. Lee (1990). "God, Names of". In Bullard, Roger Aubrey. Mercer Dictionary of the Bible. Mercer University Press.
Keel, Othmar (1997). The Symbolism of the Biblical World: Ancient Near Eastern Iconography and the Book of Psalms. Eisenbrauns.
Levin, Christoph (2013). Re-Reading the Scriptures: Essays on the Literary History of the Old Testament. Mohr Siebeck.
Liverani, Mario (2014). Israel's History and the History of Israel. Routledge. ISBN 978-1317488934.
Mafico, Temba L.J. (1992). "The Divine Name Yahweh Alohim from an African Perspective". In Segovia, Fernando F.; Tolbert, Mary Ann. Reading from this Place: Social Location and Biblical Interpretation in Global Perspective 2. Fortress Press.
Mastin, B.A. (2005). "Yahweh's Asherah, Inclusive Monotheism and the Question of Dating". In Day, John. In Search of Pre-Exilic Israel. Bloomsbury.
Meyers, Carol (2001). "Kinship and Kingship: The early Monarchy". In Coogan, Michael David. The Oxford History of the Biblical World. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-513937-2.
McDonald, Nathan (2007). "Aniconism in the Old Testament". In Gordon, R.P. The God of Israel. Cambridge University Press.
Miller, Patrick D (2000). The Religion of Ancient Israel. Westminster John Knox Press. ISBN 978-0-664-22145-4.
Miller, Patrick D (1986). A History of Ancient Israel and Judah. Westminster John Knox Press.
Moore, Megan Bishop; Kelle, Brad E. (2011). Biblical History and Israel's Past: The Changing Study of the Bible and History. Eerdmans.
Niehr, Herbert (1995). "The Rise of YHWH in Judahite and Israelite Religion". In Edelman, Diana Vikander. The Triumph of Elohim: From Yahwisms to Judaisms. Peeters Publishers. ISBN 9053565035.
Noll, K.L. (2001). Canaan and Israel in Antiquity: An Introduction. A&C Black.
Petersen, Allan Rosengren (1998). The Royal God: Enthronement Festivals in Ancient Israel and Ugarit?. A&C Black.
Schniedewind, William M. (2013). A Social History of Hebrew: Its Origins Through the Rabbinic Period. Yale University Press.
Smith, Mark S. (2010). God in Translation: Deities in Cross-Cultural Discourse in the Biblical World. Eerdmans.
Smith, Mark S. (2001). The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel's Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts. Oxford University Press.
Smith, Mark S. (2002). The Early History of God: Yahweh and the Other Deities in Ancient Israel. Eerdmans.
Smith, Morton (1984). "Jewish Religious Life in the Persian Period". In Finkelstein, Louis. The Cambridge History of Judaism: Volume 1, Introduction: The Persian Period. Cambridge University Press.
Sommer, Benjamin D. (2011). "God, names of". In Berlin, Adele; Grossman, Maxine L. The Oxford Dictionary of the Jewish Religion. Oxford University Press.
Van Der Toorn, Karel (1995). "Ritual Resistance and Self-Assertion". In Platvoet, Jan. G.; Van Der Toorn, Karel. Pluralism and Identity: Studies in Ritual Behaviour. BRILL.
Van Der Toorn, Karel (1999). "Yahweh". In Van Der Toorn, Karel; Becking, Bob; van der Horst, Pieter Willem. Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible. Eerdmans.
Van Der Toorn, Karel (1996). Family Religion in Babylonia, Ugarit and Israel: Continuity and Changes in the Forms of Religious Life. BRILL.
Wright, J. Edward (2002). The Early History of Heaven. Oxford University Press.
Wyatt, Nicolas (2010). "Royal Religion in Ancient Judah". In Stavrakopoulou, Francesca; Barton, John. Religious Diversity in Ancient Israel and Judah. Continuum International Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-567-03216-4.


[hide]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Names of God


in China ·
 in Christianity ·
 in Hinduism ·
 in Islam ·
 in Judaism ·
 in Zoroastrianism
 
"God", "Allah", in Arabic.
"God", "Khuda", in Persian and Urdu.
"God", "YHWH", in Hebrew.


Adonai ·
 Ahura Mazda ·
 Allah ·
 Brahman ·
 Elohim ·
 El Shaddai ·
 Haneullim ·
 Hu ·
 I Am that I Am ·
 Ik Onkar ·
 Ishvara ·
 Jah ·
 Jehovah ·
 Khuda ·
 The Lord ·
 Ngai ·
 Olodumare ·
 The One ·
 Parvardigar ·
 Shangdi ·
 Svayam Bhagavan ·
 Tetragrammaton (YHWH) ·
 Yahweh
 

  


Categories: Yahweh
Ancient Semitic religions
Creator gods
Deities in the Hebrew Bible
Judeo-Christian topics
Names of God
Sky and weather gods
Tetragrammaton
War gods







Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Беларуская
Български
Eesti
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
한국어
Հայերեն
Interlingua
Italiano
עברית
ქართული
Latina
მარგალური
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Polski
Português
Русский
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
ไทย
Türkçe
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 18 April 2015, at 19:31.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahweh














Yahweh

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search




 A drachm (quarter shekel) coin from the Persian province of Yehud, apparently showing the god YHW (Yahweh) as a bearded man seated on a winged and wheeled throne.[1]This article is about the national god of the Iron Age kingdoms of Israel and Judah. For other uses, see Yahweh (disambiguation). See also: Tetragrammaton, Jehovah, and God in Abrahamic religions
Deities of the ancient Near East


Levantine (Canaanite)[hide]
Adonis ·
 Anat ·
 Asherah ·
 Ashima ·
 Astarte ·
 Atargatis ·
 Attar ·
 Baal ·
 Berith ·
 Chemosh ·
 Dagon ·
 El ·
 Elyon ·
 Eshmun ·
 Hadad ·
 Kothar-wa-Khasis ·
 Melqart ·
 Moloch ·
 Mot ·
 Nikkal ·
 Qetesh ·
 Resheph ·
 Shahar ·
 Shalim ·
 Shapash ·
 Yahweh ·
 Yam ·
 Yarikh
 

Mesopotamian[hide]
Abzu/Apsu ·
 Adad ·
 Amurru ·
 An/Anu ·
 Anshar ·
 Ashur ·
 Enki/Ea ·
 Enlil ·
 Ereshkigal ·
 Inanna/Ishtar ·
 Kingu ·
 Kishar ·
 Lahmu/Lahamu ·
 Marduk ·
 Mummu ·
 Nabu ·
 Nammu ·
 Nanna/Sin ·
 Nergal ·
 Ningishzida ·
 Ninhursag ·
 Ninlil ·
 Tiamat ·
 Utu/Shamash
 

Egyptian[hide]
Amun ·
 Apis ·
 Atum ·
 Buchis ·
 Geb ·
 Horus ·
 Isis ·
 Montu ·
 Nephthys ·
 Nut ·
 Osiris ·
 Ptah ·
 Ra ·
 Set ·
 Shu ·
 Tefnut ·
 Thoth
 

Elamite[hide]
Inshushinak ·
 Jabru ·
 Khumban ·
 Kiririsha ·
 Lahurati ·
 Nahundi ·
 Napir ·
 Ninsusinak ·
 Pinikir
 
Religions of the ancient Near East
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Part of a series on
Judaism
Star of David Ten Commandments Menorah

Movements[show]

















Philosophy[show]










Texts[show]



















Law[show]













Holy cities / places[show]
















Important figures[show]



























Religious roles[show]











Culture and education[show]













Ritual objects[show]



















Prayers[show]















Other religions[show]













Related topics[show]









Portal icon Judaism portal

v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Yahweh[Notes 1] (/ˈjɑːhweɪ/, or often /ˈjɑːweɪ/ in English; Hebrew: יהוה‎), was the national god of the Kingdom of Israel and the Kingdom of Judah,[2] and appears to have been unique to those two kingdoms.[3] His origins are debated but there is widespread acceptance that he did not originate with Israel.[4] His name may have begun as an epithet of El, head of the Bronze Age Canaanite pantheon,[5] but the earliest plausible references to it place him among the nomads of the southern Transjordan.[6]
In the oldest biblical literature Yahweh is a typical ancient Near Eastern "divine warrior" who leads the heavenly army against Israel's enemies.[7] He became the main god of the northern Kingdom of Israel and patron of its royal dynasty.[8] Over time, Yahwism became increasingly intolerant of rivals, and the royal court and temple promoted Yahweh as the god of the entire cosmos, possessing all the positive qualities previously attributed to the other gods and goddesses.[9][10] With the work of Second Isaiah (the theoretical author of the second part of the Book of Isaiah) towards the end of the Babylonian exile (6th century BC), the very existence of foreign gods was denied, and Yahweh was proclaimed as the creator of the cosmos and the true god of all the world.[10]


Contents  [hide]
1 Origins
2 Yahweh and the gods of Canaan
3 Yahwism in Israel (Samaria) and Judah, c.930–580 BCE 3.1 Yahweh as national god (God of Israel)
3.2 Worship (temples, sacrifice, etc)
3.3 Relationship to other gods and goddesses
3.4 Yahweh and monotheism
4 See also
5 Notes
6 References 6.1 Citations
6.2 Bibliography


Origins[edit]
See also: Tetragrammaton, Jehovah and Names of God in Judaism


The Tetragrammaton in Phoenician alphabet (10th century BC to 135 AD), Paleo-Hebrew (10th century BC to 4th century AD) and square Hebrew (3rd century BC to present) scripts. NOTE: Hebrew is written from right to left.
Two theories have been proposed to explain the origin of Yahweh: the first is that his name was at first a title for El, the head of the Canaanite pantheon (el dū yahwī ṣaba’ôt, "El who creates the hosts", meaning the heavenly army accompanying El as he marched beside the earthly armies of Israel); the alternative is that El and Yahweh were originally separate gods who merged gradually.[11] Support for the first hypothesis comes from the fact that Yahweh and El share many features; evidence for the second includes, among many other points, the fact that although El and Yahweh have much in common they also have many differences, and that while El's home was in the north, Yahweh's is always described as being in the south.[11]
Further support for the southern hypothesis comes from Egyptian inscriptions that mention a "land of the Shasu Yahu", the Shasu being nomads from the region of Midian and Edom and Yahu (or more accurately, YHW) a place name; there is considerable acceptance among scholars that this refers to the name Yahweh and that the god's worship did not originate with Israel.[12] If Yahweh originated in regions south of Israel, the question that arises is how he made his way to the north.[13] A widely accepted hypothesis (called the Kenite hypothesis, after one of the groups involved, along with Rechabites, Gibeonites—related to the Edomites—and Midianites) is that traders brought Yahweh to Israel along the caravan routes between Egypt and Palestine.[14] The strength of this hypothesis is the way it ties together various points of data, such as the absence of Yahweh from Canaan, his links with Edom and Midian in the biblical stories, and the Kenite or Midianite ties of Moses.[15]
Yahweh and the gods of Canaan[edit]
Scholars agree that the Israelite community arose peacefully and internally in the highlands of Canaan[16]–in the words of archaeologist William Dever, "most of those who came to call themselves Israelites … were or had been indigenous Canaanites".[17][Notes 2] Israelite religion accordingly emerged gradually from a Canaanite milieu.[18] The chief of the gods was El, described as "the kind, the compassionate," "the creator of creatures"; he lived in a tent on a mountain, from whose base originated all the fresh waters of the world, and there he presided over the Assembly of the Gods.[19] The goddess Asherah was his consort, and the two made up the top tier of the pantheon.[20] The second tier was made up of their children, the divine assembly of the "seventy sons of Athirat" (another name of Asherah).[21] Prominent in this group was Baal, with his home on Mount Zaphon; he gradually became the dominant deity, so that El became the executive power and Baal the military power in the cosmos.[22] His sphere was the thunderstorm with its life-giving rains, so that he was also a fertility god, although not quite the fertility god.[23] The third tier was made up of comparatively minor craftsman and trader deities, and the fourth and final tier of divine messengers and the like.[21]
El, not Yahweh, was the original "God of Israel"–the word "Israel" is based on the name El rather than Yahweh, the names of the oldest characters in the Torah show reverence towards El rather than Yahweh, and when Yahweh reveals his name to Moses in the episode of the burning bush he also reveals that he has been El all along.[24] Israel emerges into the historical record in the last decades of the 13th century BCE, at the very end of the Late Bronze Age, as the Cannanite city-state system was ending.[25] By the 9th century BCE a new system of nation-states was forming (Israel, Judah, Moab, Ammon and others), marked by, among other things, the emergence of national gods.[26] What distinguished Israel from other emerging Iron Age Canaanite societies was its elevation of Yahweh as the national god, rather than, for example, Chemosh, the god of Moab, or Milcom, the god of the Ammonites.[27]
A significant biblical text in this regard is Deuteronomy 32:8–9, in which the sons of El, including Yahweh, each receives his own nation:[24]
When the Most High (Elyon, i.e., El) gave the nations their inheritanceWhen he separated humanityHe fixed the boundaries of the peoplesaccording to the number of divine beings;For Yahweh's portion is his peopleJacob his allotted heritage.[Notes 3]
This suggests a memory of Yahweh, the southern warrior-god, joining the Canaanite pantheon headed by El; in time El and Yahweh were identified (there are no biblical polemics against El, whose name became a generic term for "god"), while Yahweh and Baal initially co-existed and later competed with each other.[20]
Yahwism in Israel (Samaria) and Judah, c.930–580 BCE[edit]
Yahweh as national god (God of Israel)[edit]
According to the Hebrew Bible Israel began in the 10th century as a united kingdom ruled by David and his son Solomon before splitting into the two separate states of Judah and Israel.[28] Since the 1980s scholars have reassessed this picture and now believe that a significant northern kingdom emerged only in the 9th century BCE, while Judah emerged as a state only in the 8th.[29][30]
Israel was as one of a number of regional kingdoms which crystallised along the trade route between Egypt and Mesopotamia at the close of the Bronze Age, all of which seem to have adopted a national god.[31] The gods came to represent their nations, and stood more or less equal to each other–Chemosh, for example, represented Moab just as Yahweh represented Israel.[32] The idea that the worship of Yahweh as national god played a key role in the formation of the monarchic state remains common among scholars, but the evidence is in fact slender—for example, none of the patriarchs, tribes, or early kings has a name based on Yahweh.[33] We do not know what god the earliest kings worshiped, but from the mid-9th century the court cult in Israel (meaning the northern kingdom) was definitely linked to Yahweh, and same applied to Judah from the time of king Jehoshaphat, a close ally of the king of Israel.[34]
It was in Samaria that Yahweh had the title "God of Israel"–no "God of Judah" is mentioned anywhere in the Bible–[35] and the name "Israel" appears to have taken on an ideological role in Judah after the fall of Samaria to the Assyrians in c.720 BCE, with Judah cast as the "true" Israel.[36]
The emergence of the monarchic state involved the concentration of power through kingship.[37] The king used national religion to exert his authority,[10] and as head of the state was also the head of the national religion and God's viceroy on Earth.[38]
Worship (temples, sacrifice, etc)[edit]
The Hebrew Bible gives the impression that the temple in Jerusalem was the most important or even sole temple of Yahweh, but this was not the case.[39] The earliest known Israelite place of worship is a 12th-century open-air altar in the hills of Samaria featuring a bronze bull reminiscent of Canaanite Bull El. The archaeological remains of further temples have been found at Dan on Israel's northern border, at Arad in the Negev, and at Beersheba (both in the territory of Judah),[40] and the evidence of the Biblical texts indicates that Shiloh, Bethel, Gilgal, Mizpah, Ramah and Dan were major sites for festivals, sacrifices, making of vows, private rituals and the adjudication of legal disputes.[41]
The centre of Yahweh's worship lay in three great annual festivals, all coinciding with major events in rural life: Passover with the birthing of lambs, Shavuot with the cereal harvest, and Sukkot with the fruit harvest.[42] These probably pre-dated the arrival of the Yahweh religion,[42] but became linked to the invented national history of Israel: Passover to the exodus from Egypt, Shavuot to the law-giving at Sinai, and Sukkot to the wilderness wanderings.[39] In the reworked religious calendar the festivals celebrated Yahweh's salvation of Israel and Israel's status as his holy people, although the earlier agricultural meaning was not entirely lost.[43]
There was also an annual ceremony–probably at the New Year–during which Yahweh was enthroned in the Temple.[44]
Yahweh's worship presumably involved sacrifice, but many scholars have concluded that the rituals detailed in Leviticus 1-16, with their stress on purity and atonement, were introduced only after the Babylonian exile, and that in reality any head of a family was able to offer sacrifice as occasion demanded.[45] (A number of scholars have also drawn the conclusion that infant sacrifice, whether to the underworld deity Molech or to Yahweh himself, was a part of Israelite/Judahite religion until the reforms of King Josiah in the late 7th century BCE).[46] Sacrifice was presumably complemented by the singing or recital of psalms on occasions varying from royal and public to communal and personal, but again the details are scant.[47] Prayer played little role in official worship.[48]
Relationship to other gods and goddesses[edit]
The Hebrew Bible provides evidence that many gods other than Yahweh were worshiped in Israel and Judah–for example, when King Josiah reformed Jerusalem's religious practice in the late 7th century, places of worship for other gods around Jerusalem had to be destroyed, priests had to be stopped from burning incense to Baal and the sun and moon and the "host of heaven," and Yahweh's own temple had to be purged of Baal, Asherah, the Host of Heaven, the chariots of the sun, and more.[49]
Yahweh and El merged at religious centres such as Shechem, Shiloh and Jerusalem, and the priesthood of Yahweh inherited the religious lore of El.[50] Yahweh appropriated many of the older supreme god's titles such as El Shaddai (El of the Mountains) and El Elyon (El Almighty), but Yahwism did not absorb the bull cult associated with El, and the rejection of the golden calf of Aaron and the bulls of Jeroboam was fundamental to the Israelite self-understanding as expressed in the biblical scriptures.
Yahweh's appearances as a storm god owe much to Canaanite depictions of Baal.[51] Baal and Yahweh coexisted in the early period of Israel's history, but from the 9th century they were considered irreconcilable, probably as a result of the attempts of King Ahab and Jezebel, his Phoenician queen, to elevate him in the northern kingdom.[52]
Goddesses worshiped in Israel and Judah included Asherah, Astarte, and a deity called the Queen of Heaven, who was probably a fusion of Astarte and the Mesopotamian goddess Ishtar.[53] Evidence increasingly suggests Asherah, formerly the wife of El, was worshiped as Yahweh's consort, and various biblical passages indicate that her statues were kept in his temples in Jerusalem, Bethel, and Samaria.[53] Yahweh may also have appropriated Anat, the wife of Baal, as his consort, as Anat-Yahu ("Anat of Yahu," i.e., Yahweh) is mentioned in 5th century records from the Jewish colony at Elephantine in Egypt.[54]
There is evidence also of the worship of further gods and goddesses from the Canaanite pantheon, such as the "Queen of Heaven" mentioned in Jeremiah who might be Astarte (also known as Ishtar,[55] Both the archaeological evidence and the biblical texts document tensions between groups comfortable with the worship of Yahweh alongside local deities such as Asherah and Baal and those insistent on worship of Yahweh alone during the monarchical period (1 Kings 18, Jeremiah 2)[56][57] The Deuteronomistic source gives evidence of a strong monotheistic party during the reign of king Josiah during the late 7th century BCE, but the strength and prevalence of earlier monotheistic worship of Yahweh is widely debated based on interpretations of how much of the Deuteronomistic history is accurately based on earlier sources, and how much Deuteronomistic redactors have re-worked that history to bolster their own theological views.[58] The archaeological record documents widespread polytheism in and around Israel during the period of the monarchy.[56]
Traditional scholarship distinguished "orthodox Yahwism"–the worship of Yahweh alone by the elite–from heterodox popular and family religion,[59][60] but there was in fact no authority deciding what was orthodox and what was not, and Yahweh was probably only one among many objects of veneration.[61] Orthodox or "normative" Yahwism did not exist in either Israel or Judah for most of the monarchical period.[62]
Yahweh and monotheism[edit]
Scholars agree that monotheism was not inevitable, but was the culmination of a unique set of historical circumstances that arose in Israel.[63]
The religious ideas put forward through most of the Hebrew Bible represent the beliefs of a small minority of Jerusalem-centred Judeans who worshipped the god Yahweh exclusively.[64] Long before then, Canaanite (meaning pre-Iron Age) belief had been built around the concept of the "divine family", while Iron Age Israelite belief stressed instead the "divine council"; when Yahweh absorbed El the other deities were de-emphasised, Yahweh's supremacy over the pantheon was stressed, and the imagery switched to "divine council".[65] The biblical rhetoric which emerged from this process was not "pure" monotheism in the modern sense but a statement of Israel's special relationship with Yahweh.[65]
Since the late 1980s there has been a major shift in the scholarly consensus on when and how the tradition of aniconism (the prohibition on images of God) arose in Israel.[66]
Everything in the moral realm was understood in relation to Yahweh as a manifestation of holiness. Divine law protected family relationships and the welfare of the weaker members of society; purity of conduct, dress, food, etc. were regulated. Religious leadership resided in priests who were associated with sanctuaries, and also in prophets, who were bearers of divine oracles. In the political sphere the king was understood as the appointee and agent of Yahweh.[67]
Following the destruction of the monarchy and loss of the land at the beginning of the 6th century (the period of the Babylonian exile), a search for a new identity led to a re-examination of Israel's traditions. Yahweh now became the only god in the cosmos.[68]
The fifth century Elephantine papyri were written by a group of Egyptian Jews living at Elephantine near the Nubian border, and witness a religion that has been described as "nearly identical to Iron Age II Judahite religion".[69] The papyri describe these Jews as worshiping Anat-Yahu (or AnatYahu), either the wife of Yahweh or as a hypostatized aspect of the god.[54][70][71] "Even in exile and beyond, the veneration of a female deity endured."[72]
See also[edit]
Adonai
Ancient Semitic religion
Canaanite religion
God
God in Abrahamic religions
Jehovah
Kyrios
Sacred Name Movement
the seven names of God
Notes[edit]
1.Jump up ^ In the Hebrew Bible this is written as יהוה (YHWH), without vowels; the original pronunciation was lost many centuries ago, but it was probably "Yahweh" – Miller, 2000, p.2
2.Jump up ^ Canaanites in this article means the indigenous Bronze Age and early Iron Age inhabitants of southern Syria, the coast of Lebanon, Israel, the West Bank and Jordan. – Dever, 2002, p.219
3.Jump up ^ For the varying mss of this verse, see Smith, 2002, p.32 fn. 43.
References[edit]
Citations[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Edelman 1995, p. 190.
2.Jump up ^ Miller 1986, p. 110.
3.Jump up ^ Grabbe 2010, p. 184.
4.Jump up ^ Grabbe 2007, p. 153.
5.Jump up ^ Dijkstra 2001, p. 92.
6.Jump up ^ Dever 2003, p. 128.
7.Jump up ^ Hackett 2001, p. 158–159.
8.Jump up ^ Smith 2002, p. 72.
9.Jump up ^ Wyatt 2010, p. 69–70.
10.^ Jump up to: a b c Betz 2000, p. 917.
11.^ Jump up to: a b Chalmers 2012, p. no pagination.
12.Jump up ^ Grabbe 2007, p. 151,153.
13.Jump up ^ Van Der Toorn 1999, p. 912.
14.Jump up ^ Van Der Toorn 1999, p. 912-913.
15.Jump up ^ Van Der Toorn 2010, p. 247-248.
16.Jump up ^ Gnuse 1997, p. 31.
17.Jump up ^ Dever 2003, p. 228.
18.Jump up ^ Cook 2004, p. 7.
19.Jump up ^ Coogan & Smith 2012, p. 8.
20.^ Jump up to: a b Smith 2002, p. 33.
21.^ Jump up to: a b Hess 2007, p. 103.
22.Jump up ^ Coogan & Smith 2012, p. 7–8.
23.Jump up ^ Handy 1994, p. 101.
24.^ Jump up to: a b Smith 2002, p. 32.
25.Jump up ^ Noll 2001, p. 124–126.
26.Jump up ^ Schniedewind 2013, p. 93.
27.Jump up ^ Hackett 2001, p. 156.
28.Jump up ^ Moore & Kelle 2011, p. 266.
29.Jump up ^ Niehr 1995, p. 53.
30.Jump up ^ Moore & Kelle 2011, p. 268.
31.Jump up ^ Halpern & Adams 2009, p. 26.
32.Jump up ^ Smith 2010, p. 119–120.
33.Jump up ^ Moore & Kelle 2011, p. 126–127.
34.Jump up ^ Levin 2013, p. 247.
35.Jump up ^ Davies 2010, p. 107.
36.Jump up ^ Wyatt 2010, p. 61, footnote 1.
37.Jump up ^ Meyers 2001, p. 166–168.
38.Jump up ^ Miller 2000, p. 90.
39.^ Jump up to: a b Davies 2012, p. 112.
40.Jump up ^ Dever 2003a, p. 388.
41.Jump up ^ Bennett 2002, p. 83.
42.^ Jump up to: a b Albertz 1994, p. 89.
43.Jump up ^ Gorman 2000, p. 458.
44.Jump up ^ Petersen 1998, p. 23.
45.Jump up ^ Davies & Rogerson 2005, p. 151-152.
46.Jump up ^ Gnuse 1997, p. 118.
47.Jump up ^ Davies & Rogerson 2005, p. 158-165.
48.Jump up ^ Cohen 1999, p. 302.
49.Jump up ^ Collins 2005, p. 101–102.
50.Jump up ^ Smith 2001, p. 140.
51.Jump up ^ Collins 2005, p. 101-102.
52.Jump up ^ Smith 2002, p. 47.
53.^ Jump up to: a b Ackerman 2003, p. 395.
54.^ Jump up to: a b Day 2002, p. 143.
55.Jump up ^ Dever 2005, p. 234.
56.^ Jump up to: a b & Keel 1998, p. not defined.
57.Jump up ^ Smith 2001, p. not defined.
58.Jump up ^ Smith 2001, p. 151–154.
59.Jump up ^ Collins 2005, p. 122-123.
60.Jump up ^ Darby 2014, p. 50.
61.Jump up ^ Bennett 2002, p. 84.
62.Jump up ^ Ahlstrom 1991, p. 140.
63.Jump up ^ Gnuse 2006, p. 129.
64.Jump up ^ Wright 1999, p. 52.
65.^ Jump up to: a b Gnuse 2006, p. 656.
66.Jump up ^ McDonald 2007, p. 20-28.
67.Jump up ^ Miller 2000, p. 50–51.
68.Jump up ^ Smith 2001, p. 193.
69.Jump up ^ Noll 2001, p. 248.
70.Jump up ^ Niehr 1995, p. 58.
71.Jump up ^ Ackerman 2003, p. 394.
72.Jump up ^ Gnuse 1997, p. 185.
Bibliography[edit]
Ackerman, Susan (2003). "Goddesses". In Richard, Suzanne. Near Eastern Archaeology:A Reader. Eisenbrauns. ISBN 978-1-57506-083-5.
Ahlstrom, Gosta W. (1991). "The Role of Archaeological and Literary Remains in Reconstructing Israel's History". In Edelman, Diana Vikander. The Fabric of History: Text, Artifact and Israel's Past. A&C Black.
Albertz, Rainer (1994). A History of Israelite Religion, Volume I: From the Beginnings to the End of the Monarchy. Westminster John Knox.
Bennett, Harold V. (2002). Injustice Made Legal: Deuteronomic Law and the Plight of Widows, Strangers, and Orphans in Ancient Israel. Eerdmans.
Betz, Arnold Gottfried (2000). "Monotheism". In Freedman, David Noel; Myer, Allen C. Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible. Eerdmans. ISBN 9053565035.
Chalmers, Aaron (2012). Exploring the Religion of Ancient Israel: Prophet, Priest, Sage and People. SPCK.
Cohen, Shaye J.D. (1999). "The Temple and the Synagogue". In Finkelstein, Louis; Davies, W. D.; Horbury, William. The Cambridge History of Judaism: Volume 3, The Early Roman Period. Cambridge University Press.
Cohn, Norman (2001). Cosmos, Chaos, and the World to Come: The Ancient Roots of Apocalyptic Faith. Yale University Press.
Collins, John J. (2005). The Bible After Babel: Historical Criticism in a Postmodern Age. Eerdmans.
Coogan, Michael D.; Smith, Mark S. (2012). Stories from Ancient Canaan (2nd Edition). Presbyterian Publishing Corp. ISBN 9053565035.
Cook, Stephen L. (2004). The Social Roots of Biblical Yahwism. Society of Biblical Literature.
Darby, Erin (2014). Interpreting Judean Pillar Figurines: Gender and Empire in Judean Apotropaic Ritual. Mohr Siebeck.
Davies, Philip R.; Rogerson, John (2005). The Old Testament World. Westminster John Knox.
Davies, Philip R. (2010). "Urban Religion and Rural Religion". In Stavrakopoulou, Francesca; Barton, John. Religious Diversity in Ancient Israel and Judah. Continuum International Publishing Group.
Day, John (2002). Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan. Continuum.
Dever, William G. (2003a). "Religion and Cult in the Levant". In Richard, Suzanne. Near Eastern Archaeology:A Reader. Eisenbrauns. ISBN 978-1-57506-083-5.
Dever, William G. (2003b). Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come From. Eerdmans.
Dever, William G. (2005). Did God Have A Wife?: Archaeology And Folk Religion In Ancient Israel. Eerdmans. ISBN 978-0-8028-2852-1.
Dijkstra, Meindert (2001). "El the God of Israel-Israel the People of YHWH: On the Origins of Ancient Israelite Yahwism". In Becking, Bob; Dijkstra, Meindert; Korpel, Marjo C.A. et al. Only One God?: Monotheism in Ancient Israel and the Veneration of the Goddess Asherah. A&C Black.
Edelman, Diana V. (1995). "Tracking Observance of the Aniconic Tradition". In Edelman, Diana Vikander. The Triumph of Elohim: From Yahwisms to Judaisms. Peeters Publishers. ISBN 9053565035.
Elior, Rachel (2006). "Early Forms of Jewish Mysticism". In Katz, Steven T. The Cambridge History of Judaism: The Late Roman-Rabbinic Period. Cambridge University Press.
Gnuse, Robert Karl (1997). No Other Gods: Emergent Monotheism in Israel. Continuum.
Gorman, Frank H., Jr. (2000). "Feasts, Festivals". In Freedman, David Noel; Myers, Allen C. Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible. Amsterdam University Press. ISBN 978-1-57506-083-5.
Finkelstein, Israel; Silberman, Neil Asher (2002). The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Sacred Texts. Simon and Schuster.
Frerichs, Ernest S. (1998). The Bible and Bibles in America. Scholars Press.
Gnuse, Robert (1999). "The Emergence of Monotheism in Ancient Israel: A Survey of Recent Scholarship". Religion 29: 315–336.
Grabbe, Lester (2010). "'Many nations will be joined to YHWH in that day': The question of YHWH outside Judah". In Stavrakopoulou, Francesca; Barton, John. Religious diversity in Ancient Israel and Judah. Continuum International Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-567-03216-4.
Grabbe, Lester (2007). Ancient Israel: What Do We Know and How Do We Know It?. A&C Black.
Hackett, Jo Ann (2001). "'There Was No King In Israel': The Era of the Judges". In Coogan, Michael David. The Oxford History of the Biblical World. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-513937-2.
Halpern, Baruch; Adams, Matthew J. (2009). From Gods to God: The Dynamics of Iron Age Cosmologies. Mohr Siebeck.
Handy, Lowell K. (1995). Among the Host of Heaven: The Syro-Palestinian Pantheon as Bureaucracy. Eisenbrauns.
Hess, Richard S. (2007). Israelite Religions: An Archaeological and Biblical Survey. Baker Academic.
Humphries, W. Lee (1990). "God, Names of". In Bullard, Roger Aubrey. Mercer Dictionary of the Bible. Mercer University Press.
Keel, Othmar (1997). The Symbolism of the Biblical World: Ancient Near Eastern Iconography and the Book of Psalms. Eisenbrauns.
Levin, Christoph (2013). Re-Reading the Scriptures: Essays on the Literary History of the Old Testament. Mohr Siebeck.
Liverani, Mario (2014). Israel's History and the History of Israel. Routledge. ISBN 978-1317488934.
Mafico, Temba L.J. (1992). "The Divine Name Yahweh Alohim from an African Perspective". In Segovia, Fernando F.; Tolbert, Mary Ann. Reading from this Place: Social Location and Biblical Interpretation in Global Perspective 2. Fortress Press.
Mastin, B.A. (2005). "Yahweh's Asherah, Inclusive Monotheism and the Question of Dating". In Day, John. In Search of Pre-Exilic Israel. Bloomsbury.
Meyers, Carol (2001). "Kinship and Kingship: The early Monarchy". In Coogan, Michael David. The Oxford History of the Biblical World. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-513937-2.
McDonald, Nathan (2007). "Aniconism in the Old Testament". In Gordon, R.P. The God of Israel. Cambridge University Press.
Miller, Patrick D (2000). The Religion of Ancient Israel. Westminster John Knox Press. ISBN 978-0-664-22145-4.
Miller, Patrick D (1986). A History of Ancient Israel and Judah. Westminster John Knox Press.
Moore, Megan Bishop; Kelle, Brad E. (2011). Biblical History and Israel's Past: The Changing Study of the Bible and History. Eerdmans.
Niehr, Herbert (1995). "The Rise of YHWH in Judahite and Israelite Religion". In Edelman, Diana Vikander. The Triumph of Elohim: From Yahwisms to Judaisms. Peeters Publishers. ISBN 9053565035.
Noll, K.L. (2001). Canaan and Israel in Antiquity: An Introduction. A&C Black.
Petersen, Allan Rosengren (1998). The Royal God: Enthronement Festivals in Ancient Israel and Ugarit?. A&C Black.
Schniedewind, William M. (2013). A Social History of Hebrew: Its Origins Through the Rabbinic Period. Yale University Press.
Smith, Mark S. (2010). God in Translation: Deities in Cross-Cultural Discourse in the Biblical World. Eerdmans.
Smith, Mark S. (2001). The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel's Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts. Oxford University Press.
Smith, Mark S. (2002). The Early History of God: Yahweh and the Other Deities in Ancient Israel. Eerdmans.
Smith, Morton (1984). "Jewish Religious Life in the Persian Period". In Finkelstein, Louis. The Cambridge History of Judaism: Volume 1, Introduction: The Persian Period. Cambridge University Press.
Sommer, Benjamin D. (2011). "God, names of". In Berlin, Adele; Grossman, Maxine L. The Oxford Dictionary of the Jewish Religion. Oxford University Press.
Van Der Toorn, Karel (1995). "Ritual Resistance and Self-Assertion". In Platvoet, Jan. G.; Van Der Toorn, Karel. Pluralism and Identity: Studies in Ritual Behaviour. BRILL.
Van Der Toorn, Karel (1999). "Yahweh". In Van Der Toorn, Karel; Becking, Bob; van der Horst, Pieter Willem. Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible. Eerdmans.
Van Der Toorn, Karel (1996). Family Religion in Babylonia, Ugarit and Israel: Continuity and Changes in the Forms of Religious Life. BRILL.
Wright, J. Edward (2002). The Early History of Heaven. Oxford University Press.
Wyatt, Nicolas (2010). "Royal Religion in Ancient Judah". In Stavrakopoulou, Francesca; Barton, John. Religious Diversity in Ancient Israel and Judah. Continuum International Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-567-03216-4.


[hide]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Names of God


in China ·
 in Christianity ·
 in Hinduism ·
 in Islam ·
 in Judaism ·
 in Zoroastrianism
 
"God", "Allah", in Arabic.
"God", "Khuda", in Persian and Urdu.
"God", "YHWH", in Hebrew.


Adonai ·
 Ahura Mazda ·
 Allah ·
 Brahman ·
 Elohim ·
 El Shaddai ·
 Haneullim ·
 Hu ·
 I Am that I Am ·
 Ik Onkar ·
 Ishvara ·
 Jah ·
 Jehovah ·
 Khuda ·
 The Lord ·
 Ngai ·
 Olodumare ·
 The One ·
 Parvardigar ·
 Shangdi ·
 Svayam Bhagavan ·
 Tetragrammaton (YHWH) ·
 Yahweh
 

  


Categories: Yahweh
Ancient Semitic religions
Creator gods
Deities in the Hebrew Bible
Judeo-Christian topics
Names of God
Sky and weather gods
Tetragrammaton
War gods







Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Беларуская
Български
Eesti
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
한국어
Հայերեն
Interlingua
Italiano
עברית
ქართული
Latina
მარგალური
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Polski
Português
Русский
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
ไทย
Türkçe
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 18 April 2015, at 19:31.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahweh












Babylonian captivity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Babylonian exile)
Jump to: navigation, search

Part of a series on
Jews and Judaism
Star of David
Etymology ·
 Who is a Jew?
 Jewish peoplehood ·
 Jewish identity
 

Religion[show]






















Texts[show]
























Communities[show]






















Population[show]




























































































Denominations[show]
















Culture[show]













Languages[show]













History[show]









































Politics[show]












Category Category
Portal icon Judaism portal
WikiProject WikiProject

v ·
 t ·
 e
   
The Babylonian captivity (or Babylonian exile) is the period in Jewish history during which a number of Jews of the ancient Kingdom of Judah were captives in Babylonia. After the Battle of Carchemish in 605 BCE, Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem, resulting in tribute being paid by King Jehoiakim.[1] Jehoiakim refused to pay tribute in Nebuchadnezzar's fourth year, which led to another siege in Nebuchadnezzar's seventh year, culminating with the death of Jehoiakim, and the exile of King Jeconiah, his court and many others; Jeconiah's successor Zedekiah and others were exiled in Nebuchadnezzar's eighteenth year; a later deportation occurred in Nebuchadnezzar's twenty-third year. These deportations are dated to 597 BCE, c. 587 BCE, and c. 582 BCE, respectively.
After the fall of Babylon to the Persian king Cyrus the Great in 539 BCE, exiled Jews began to return to the land of Judah. According to the biblical book of Ezra, construction of a second temple in Jerusalem began at this time. All these events are considered significant in Jewish history and culture, and had a far-reaching impact on the development of Judaism.
Archaeological studies have revealed that not all of the population of Judah was deported, and that, although Jerusalem was utterly destroyed, other parts of Judah continued to be inhabited during the period of the exile.[2] The return of the exiles was a gradual process rather than a single event, and many of the deportees or their descendants did not return.


Contents  [hide]
1 Biblical accounts of the exile
2 Archaeological and other non-Biblical evidence
3 Exilic literature and post-exilic revisions of the Torah/Pentateuch
4 Significance in Jewish history
5 Chronology
6 See also
7 References
8 Further reading

Biblical accounts of the exile[edit]
In the late 7th century BCE, the kingdom of Judah was a client state of the Assyrian empire. In the last decades of the century, Assyria was overthrown by Babylon, an Assyrian province. Egypt, fearing the sudden rise of the Neo-Babylonian empire, seized control of Assyrian territory up to the Euphrates river in Syria, but Babylon counter-attacked. In the process Josiah, the king of Judah, was killed in a battle with the Egyptians at the Battle of Megiddo (609 BC).
After the defeat of Pharaoh Necho's army by the Babylonians at Carchemish in 605 BCE, Jehoiakim began paying tribute to Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon. Some of the young nobility of Judah (such as Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego) were taken to Babylon.
In the following years, the court of Jerusalem was divided into two parties, in support of Egypt and Babylon. After Nebuchadnezzar was defeated in Battle in 601 BCE by Egypt, Judah revolted against Babylon, culminating in a three-month siege of Jerusalem beginning in late 598 BCE.[3] Jehoiakim, the king of Judah, died during the siege,[4] and was succeeded by his son Jehoiachin (also called Jeconiah) at the age of eighteen.[5] The city fell on 2 Adar (March 16) 597 BCE,[6] and Nebuchadnezzar pillaged Jerusalem and its Temple and took Jeconiah, his court and other prominent citizens (including the prophet Ezekiel) back to Babylon.[7] Jehoiakim's uncle Zedekiah was appointed king in his place, but the exiles in Babylon continued to consider Jeconiah as their Exilarch, or rightful ruler.
Despite warnings by Jeremiah and others of the pro-Babylonian party, Zedekiah revolted against Babylon and entered into an alliance with Pharaoh Hophra. Nebuchadnezzar returned, defeated the Egyptians, and again besieged Jerusalem, resulting in the city's destruction in 587 BCE. Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the city wall and the Temple, together with the houses of the most important citizens. Zedekiah was blinded, and taken to Babylon with many others. Judah became a Babylonian province, called Yehud Medinata (Judah Province),[8] putting an end to the independent Kingdom of Judah. (Because of the missing years in the Jewish calendar, rabbinic sources place the date of the destruction of the First Temple at 3338 HC (423 BCE)[9] or 3358 HC (403 BCE)).[10]



 Illustration from the Nuremberg Chronicle of the destruction of Jerusalem under the Babylonian rule
The first governor appointed by Babylon was Gedaliah, a native Judahite; he encouraged the many Jews who had fled to surrounding countries such as Moab, Ammon, Edom, to return, and took steps to return the country to prosperity. Some time later, a surviving member of the royal family assassinated Gedaliah and his Babylonian advisors, prompting many refugees to seek safety in Egypt. By the end of the second decade of the 6th century, in addition to those who remained in Judah, there were significant Jewish communities in Babylon and in Egypt; this was the beginning of the later numerous Jewish communities living permanently outside Judah in the Jewish Diaspora.
According to the book of Ezra, the Persian Cyrus the Great ended the exile in 538 BCE,[11] the year after he captured Babylon.[12] The exile ended with the return under Zerubbabel the Prince (so-called because he was a descendant of the royal line of David) and Joshua the Priest (a descendant of the line of the former High Priests of the Temple) and their construction of the Second Temple in the period 521–516 BCE.[11]
Archaeological and other non-Biblical evidence[edit]
Nebuchadnezzar's siege of Jerusalem, his capture of King Jeconiah, his appointment of Zedekiah in his place, and the plundering of the city in 597 BCE as described in 2 Kings in the Bible are confirmed by a passage in the Babylonian Chronicles:[13]:293

In the seventh year, in the month of Kislev, the king of Akkad mustered his troops, marched to the Hatti-land, and encamped against the City of Judah and on the ninth day of the month of Adar he seized the city and captured the king. He appointed there a king of his own choice and taking heavy tribute brought it back to Babylon.
Jehoiachin's Rations Tablets describing ration orders for a captive King of Judah, identified with King Jeconiah, have been discovered during excavations in Babylon, in the royal archives of Nebuchadnezzar.[14][15] One of the tablets refers to food rations for "Ya’u-kīnu, king of the land of Yahudu" and five royal princes, his sons.[16]
Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonian forces returned in 588/586 BCE and rampaged through Judah, leaving clear archaeological evidence of destruction in many towns and settlements there.[13]:294 Clay ostraca referred to as the Lachish letters from this period were discovered during excavations; one, which was probably written to the commander at Lachish from an outlying base, describes how the signal fires from nearby towns are disappearing: "And may (my lord) be apprised that we are watching for the fire signals of Lachish according to all the signs which my lord has given, because we cannot see Azeqah."[17] This correlates with the book of Jeremiah,[18] which states that Jerusalem, Lachish and Azekah were the last cities to fall to the Babylonians. Archaeological finds from Jerusalem testify that virtually the whole city within the walls was burnt to rubble in 587 BCE and utterly destroyed.[13]:295
The biblical books of 2 Kings and Jeremiah give varying numbers of exiles forcibly deported to Babylon and at one time it was widely believed that virtually the entire population was taken into captivity there. However archaeological excavations and surveys enable the population of Judah before the Babylonian destruction to be calculated with a high degree of confidence at approximately seventy-five thousand. Taking the different biblical numbers of exiles at their highest, twenty thousand, this would mean that at most twenty-five percent of the population were deported to Babylon, the remaining seventy-five percent staying in Judah.[13]:306 Although Jerusalem was destroyed and depopulated, large parts of the city remaining in ruins for one hundred and fifty years, numerous other settlements in Judah continued to be inhabited with no signs of disruption visible in archaeological studies.[13]:307
The biblical book of Ezra includes two texts said to be decrees of Cyrus the Great, conqueror of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, allowing the deported Jews to return to their homeland after decades and ordering the Temple rebuilt. The differences in content and tone of the two decrees, one in Hebrew and one in Aramaic, have caused some scholars to question their authenticity.[19] The Cyrus Cylinder, an ancient tablet on which is written a declaration in the name of Cyrus referring to restoration of temples and repatriation of exiled peoples, has often been taken as corroboration of the authenticity of the biblical decrees attributed to Cyrus,[20] but other scholars point out that the cylinder's text is specific to Babylon and Mesopotamia and makes no mention of Judah or Jerusalem.[20] Professor Lester L Grabbe asserted that the "alleged decree of Cyrus" regarding Judah, "cannot be considered authentic", but that there was a "general policy of allowing deportees to return and to re-establish cult sites". He also stated that archaeology suggests that the return was a "trickle" taking place over decades, rather than a single event.[21]
As part of the Persian Empire, the former Kingdom of Judah became the province of Judah (Yehûd medîntā') with different borders, covering a smaller territory.[21] The population of the province was greatly reduced from that of the kingdom, archeological surveys showing a population of around thirty thousand people in the fifth to fourth centuries BCE.[13]:308
An exhibition in Jerusalem has on display over 100 cuneiform tablets that detail trade in fruits and other commodities, taxes, debts and credits accumulated between Jews driven from, or convinced to move from Jerusalem by King Nebuchadnezzar around 600 BCE. They include details on one exiled Judean family over four generations, all with Biblical Hebrew names, many still in use today.[22][23]
Exilic literature and post-exilic revisions of the Torah/Pentateuch[edit]
The exilic period was a rich one for Hebrew literature. Biblical depictions of the exile include Book of Jeremiah 39–43 (which saw the exile as a lost opportunity); the final section of 2 Kings (which portrays it as the temporary end of history); 2 Chronicles (in which the exile is the "Sabbath of the land"); and the opening chapters of Ezra, which records its end. Other works from or about the exile include the stories in Daniel 1–6, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, the "Story of the Three Youths" (1 Esdras 3:1–5:6), and the books of Tobit and Book of Judith.[24]
The Priestly source, one of the four main sources of the Torah/Pentateuch in the Bible, is primarily a product of the post-exilic period when the former Kingdom of Judah had become the Persian province of Yehud.[25] Also during this Persian period, the final redaction of the Pentateuch took place.[13]:310
Significance in Jewish history[edit]


 This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2013)



James Tissot, The Flight of the Prisoners.
In the Hebrew Bible, the captivity in Babylon is presented as a punishment for idolatry and disobedience to Yahweh in a similar way to the presentation of Israelite slavery in Egypt followed by deliverance. The Babylonian Captivity had a number of serious effects on Judaism and Jewish culture. For example, the current Hebrew script was adopted during this period, replacing the traditional Israelite script. This period saw the last high-point of biblical prophecy in the person of Ezekiel, followed by the emergence of the central role of the Torah in Jewish life. According to many historical-critical scholars, the Torah was altered during this time, and began to be regarded as the authoritative text for Jews. This period saw their transformation into an ethno-religious group who could survive without a central Temple.[26]
This process coincided with the emergence of scribes and sages as Jewish leaders (see Ezra). Prior to exile, the people of Israel had been organized according to tribe. Afterwards, they were organized by smaller family groups. Only the tribe of Levi continued in its temple role after the return. After this time, there were always sizable numbers of Jews living outside Eretz Israel; thus, it also marks the beginning of the "Jewish diaspora", unless this is considered to have begun with the Assyrian Captivity of Israel.
In Rabbinic literature, Babylon was one of a number of metaphors for the Jewish diaspora. Most frequently the term "Babylon" meant the diaspora prior to the destruction of the Second Temple. The post-destruction term for the Jewish Diaspora was "Rome", or "Edom".
Chronology[edit]
The following table is based on Rainer Albertz's work on Israel in exile.[27] (Alternative dates are possible.)

Year
Event
609 BCE Death of Josiah
609–598 BCE Reign of Jehoiakim (succeeded Jehoahaz, who replaced Josiah but reigned only 3 months) Began giving tribute to Nebuchadnezzar in 605 BCE. First deportation, including Daniel.
598/7 BCE Reign of Jehoiachin (reigned 3 months). Siege and fall of Jerusalem.
 Second deportation, 16 March 597
597 BCE Zedekiah made king of Judah by Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon
594 BCE Anti-Babylonian conspiracy
588 BCE Siege and fall of Jerusalem. Solomon's Temple destroyed.
 Third deportation July/August 587
583 BCE Gedaliah the Babylonian-appointed governor of Yehud Province assassinated.
 Many Jews flee to Egypt and a possible fourth deportation to Babylon
562 BCE Release of Jehoiachin after 37 years in a Babylonian prison.[28] He remains in Babylon
539 BCE Persians conquer Babylon (October)
538 BCE Decree of Cyrus allows Jews to return to Jerusalem
520–515 BCE Return by many Jews to Yehud under Zerubbabel and Joshua the High Priest.
 Foundations of Second Temple laid
See also[edit]
Avignon Papacy, sometimes called the "Babylonian Captivity of the Papacy".
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Coogan, Michael (2009). A Brief Introduction to the Old Testament. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2.Jump up ^ Ephraim Stern (November–December 2000). "The Babylonian Gap". Biblical Archaeology Review 26 (6). "From 604 B.C.E. to 538 B.C.E.—there is a complete gap in evidence suggesting occupation. ... I do not mean to imply that the country was uninhabited during the period between the Babylonian destruction and the Persian period. There were undoubtedly some settlements, but the population was very small. Many towns and villages were either completely or partly destroyed. The rest were barely functioning. International trade virtually ceased. Only two regions appear to have been spared this fate—the northern part of Judah (the region of Benjamin) and probably the land of Ammon, although the latter region awaits further investigation."
3.Jump up ^ Geoffrey Wigoder, The Illustrated Dictionary & Concordance of the Bible Pub. by Sterling Publishing Company, Inc. (2006)
4.Jump up ^ Dan Cohn-Sherbok, The Hebrew Bible, Continuum International, 1996, page x. ISBN 0-304-33703-X
5.Jump up ^ 2Kings 24:6–8
6.Jump up ^ Philip J. King, Jeremiah: An Archaeological Companion (Westminster John Knox Press, 1993), page 23.
7.Jump up ^ The Oxford History of the Biblical World, ed. by Michael D Coogan. Pub. by Oxford University Press, 1999. pg 350
8.Jump up ^ Yehud being the Babylonian equivalent of the Hebrew Yehuda, or "Judah", and "medinata" the word for province
9.Jump up ^ Rashi to Talmud Bavli, avodah zara p. 9a. Josephus, seder hadoroth year 3338
10.Jump up ^ malbim to ezekiel 24:1, abarbanel et al.
11.^ Jump up to: a b "Second Temple Period (538 B.C.E. to 70 C.E.) Persian Rule". Biu.ac.il. Retrieved 2014-03-15.
12.Jump up ^ Harper's Bible Dictionary, ed. by Achtemeier, etc., Harper & Row, San Francisco, 1985, p.103
13.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g Finkelstein, Israel; Silberman, Neil Asher (2001). The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts. Simon and Schuster. ISBN 978-0-684-86912-4.
14.Jump up ^ Thomas, David Winton (1958). Documents from Old Testament Times (1961 ed.). Edinburgh and London: Thomas Nelson. p. 84.
15.Jump up ^ Cf. 2Kings 24:12, 24:15–24:16, 25:27–25:30; 2Chronicles 36:9–36:10; Jeremiah 22:24–22:6, 29:2, 52:31–52:34; Ezekiel 17:12.
16.Jump up ^ "Babylonian Ration List: King Jehoiakhin in Exile, 592/1 BCE". COJS.org. The Center for Online Judaic Studies. Retrieved 23 August 2013. "Ya’u-kīnu, king of the land of Yahudu"
17.Jump up ^ Translation from Aḥituv, Shmuel. Echoes from the Past. Jerusalem: CARTA Jerusalem, 2008, pg. 70.
18.Jump up ^ Jeremiah 34:7
19.Jump up ^ Bedford, Peter Ross (2001). Temple Restoration in Early Achaemenid Judah. Leiden: Brill. p. 112 (Cyrus edict section pp. 111–131). ISBN 9789004115095.
20.^ Jump up to: a b Becking, Bob (2006). ""We All Returned as One!": Critical Notes on the Myth of the Mass Return". In Lipschitz, Oded; Oeming, Manfred. Judah and the Judeans in the Persian Period. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. p. 8. ISBN 978-1-57506-104-7.
21.^ Jump up to: a b Grabbe, Lester L. (2004). A History of the Jews and Judaism in the Second Temple Period: Yehud - A History of the Persian Province of Judah v. 1. T & T Clark. p. 355. ISBN 978-0567089984.
22.Jump up ^ http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4622505,00.html
23.Jump up ^ http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/03/us-israel-archaeology-babylon-idUSKBN0L71EK20150203
24.Jump up ^ Rainer Albertz, Israel in exile: the history and literature of the sixth century BCE (page 15 link) Society for Biblical Literature, 2003, pp.4–38
25.Jump up ^ Blum, Erhard (1998). "Issues and Problems in the Contemporary Debate Regarding the Priestly Writings". In Sarah Shectman, Joel S. Baden. The strata of the priestly writings: contemporary debate and future directions. Theologischer Verlag. pp. 32–33.
26.Jump up ^ A Concise History of the Jewish People | Naomi E. Pasachoff, Robert J. Littma | Rowman & Littlefield, 2005 | pg 43
27.Jump up ^ Rainer Albertz, Israel in exile: the history and literature of the sixth century BCE, p.xxi. page 77 with another list of dates
28.Jump up ^ 2 Kings 25:27
Further reading[edit]
 Wikimedia Commons has media related to Babylonian captivity.


 This article's further reading may not follow Wikipedia's content policies or guidelines. Please improve this article by removing excessive, less relevant or many publications with the same point of view; or by incorporating the relevant publications into the body of the article through appropriate citations. (August 2013)
Maps
Yehud Medinata map, CET – Center For Educational technology
Yehud Medinata Border map, CET – Center For Educational technology
Google-Books
Peter R. Ackroyd, "Exile and Restoration: A Study of Hebrew Thought of the Sixth Century B.C." (SCM Press, 1968)
Rainer Albertz, Bob Becking, "Yahwism after the Exile" Van Gorcum, 2003)
Blenkinsopp, Joseph, "Judaism, the first phase: the place of Ezra and Nehemiah in the origins of Judaism" (Eerdmans, 2009)
Nodet, Étienne, "A search for the origins of Judaism: from Joshua to the Mishnah" (Sheffield Academic Press, 1999, original edition Editions du Cerf, 1997)
Becking, Bob, and Korpel, Marjo Christina Annette (eds), "The Crisis of Israelite Religion: Transformation of Religious Tradition in Exilic & Post-Exilic Times" (Brill, 1999)
Bedford, Peter Ross, "Temple restoration in early Achaemenid Judah" (Brill, 2001)
Berquist, Jon L., "Approaching Yehud: new approaches to the study of the Persian period" (Society of Biblical Literature, 2007)
Grabbe, Lester L., "A history of the Jews and Judaism in the Second Temple Period", vol.1 (T&T Clark International, 2004)
Levine, Lee I., "Jerusalem: portrait of the city in the second Temple period (538 B.C.E.-70 C.E.)" (Jewish Publication Society, 2002)
Lipschitz, Oded, "The Fall and Rise of Jerusalem" (Eisenbrauns, 2005)
Lipschitz, Oded, and Oeming, Manfred (eds), "Judah and the Judeans in the Persian period" (Eisenbrauns, 2006)
Lipschitz, Oded, and Oeming, Manfred (eds), "Judah and the Judeans in the fourth century B.C.E." (Eisenbrauns, 2006)
Middlemas, Jill Anne, "The troubles of templeless Judah" (Oxford University Press, 2005)
Stackert, Jeffrey, "Rewriting the Torah: literary revision in Deuteronomy and the holiness code" (Mohr Siebeck, 2007)
Vanderkam, James, "An introduction to early Judaism" (Eerdmans, 2001)
Wikisource-logo.svg Wikisource.
"Babylonian Captivity". Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). 1911.
"Babylonish Captivity". New International Encyclopedia. 1905.


[hide]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Major articles in Jewish history


Timeline ·
 Israelites ·
 Ancient Israel and Judah ·
 United Israel ·
 Northern Kingdom ·
 Judah ·
 Schisms ·
 Ten Lost Tribes ·
 Babylonian captivity ·
 Hasmoneans ·
 Sanhedrin ·
 Jewish–Roman wars ·
 Pharisees ·
 Diaspora ·
 Middle Ages ·
 Under Muslim rule ·
 Haskalah ·
 Israel
 

See also: WP:Jewish history


  


Categories: Ancient Israel and Judah
Ancient Jewish Persian history
Babylonia
Expulsions of Jews
Hebrew Bible events
History of Purim
Jewish Babylonian history
Jewish Iraqi history
Second Temple











Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Беларуская
Български
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Français
Frysk
한국어
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
עברית
ქართული
Kiswahili
Latina
Latviešu
Magyar
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
پنجابی
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Slovenčina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Türkçe
Українська
اردو
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 23 April 2015, at 02:59.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babylonian_captivity













Babylonian captivity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Babylonian exile)
Jump to: navigation, search

Part of a series on
Jews and Judaism
Star of David
Etymology ·
 Who is a Jew?
 Jewish peoplehood ·
 Jewish identity
 

Religion[show]






















Texts[show]
























Communities[show]






















Population[show]




























































































Denominations[show]
















Culture[show]













Languages[show]













History[show]









































Politics[show]












Category Category
Portal icon Judaism portal
WikiProject WikiProject

v ·
 t ·
 e
   
The Babylonian captivity (or Babylonian exile) is the period in Jewish history during which a number of Jews of the ancient Kingdom of Judah were captives in Babylonia. After the Battle of Carchemish in 605 BCE, Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem, resulting in tribute being paid by King Jehoiakim.[1] Jehoiakim refused to pay tribute in Nebuchadnezzar's fourth year, which led to another siege in Nebuchadnezzar's seventh year, culminating with the death of Jehoiakim, and the exile of King Jeconiah, his court and many others; Jeconiah's successor Zedekiah and others were exiled in Nebuchadnezzar's eighteenth year; a later deportation occurred in Nebuchadnezzar's twenty-third year. These deportations are dated to 597 BCE, c. 587 BCE, and c. 582 BCE, respectively.
After the fall of Babylon to the Persian king Cyrus the Great in 539 BCE, exiled Jews began to return to the land of Judah. According to the biblical book of Ezra, construction of a second temple in Jerusalem began at this time. All these events are considered significant in Jewish history and culture, and had a far-reaching impact on the development of Judaism.
Archaeological studies have revealed that not all of the population of Judah was deported, and that, although Jerusalem was utterly destroyed, other parts of Judah continued to be inhabited during the period of the exile.[2] The return of the exiles was a gradual process rather than a single event, and many of the deportees or their descendants did not return.


Contents  [hide]
1 Biblical accounts of the exile
2 Archaeological and other non-Biblical evidence
3 Exilic literature and post-exilic revisions of the Torah/Pentateuch
4 Significance in Jewish history
5 Chronology
6 See also
7 References
8 Further reading

Biblical accounts of the exile[edit]
In the late 7th century BCE, the kingdom of Judah was a client state of the Assyrian empire. In the last decades of the century, Assyria was overthrown by Babylon, an Assyrian province. Egypt, fearing the sudden rise of the Neo-Babylonian empire, seized control of Assyrian territory up to the Euphrates river in Syria, but Babylon counter-attacked. In the process Josiah, the king of Judah, was killed in a battle with the Egyptians at the Battle of Megiddo (609 BC).
After the defeat of Pharaoh Necho's army by the Babylonians at Carchemish in 605 BCE, Jehoiakim began paying tribute to Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon. Some of the young nobility of Judah (such as Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego) were taken to Babylon.
In the following years, the court of Jerusalem was divided into two parties, in support of Egypt and Babylon. After Nebuchadnezzar was defeated in Battle in 601 BCE by Egypt, Judah revolted against Babylon, culminating in a three-month siege of Jerusalem beginning in late 598 BCE.[3] Jehoiakim, the king of Judah, died during the siege,[4] and was succeeded by his son Jehoiachin (also called Jeconiah) at the age of eighteen.[5] The city fell on 2 Adar (March 16) 597 BCE,[6] and Nebuchadnezzar pillaged Jerusalem and its Temple and took Jeconiah, his court and other prominent citizens (including the prophet Ezekiel) back to Babylon.[7] Jehoiakim's uncle Zedekiah was appointed king in his place, but the exiles in Babylon continued to consider Jeconiah as their Exilarch, or rightful ruler.
Despite warnings by Jeremiah and others of the pro-Babylonian party, Zedekiah revolted against Babylon and entered into an alliance with Pharaoh Hophra. Nebuchadnezzar returned, defeated the Egyptians, and again besieged Jerusalem, resulting in the city's destruction in 587 BCE. Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the city wall and the Temple, together with the houses of the most important citizens. Zedekiah was blinded, and taken to Babylon with many others. Judah became a Babylonian province, called Yehud Medinata (Judah Province),[8] putting an end to the independent Kingdom of Judah. (Because of the missing years in the Jewish calendar, rabbinic sources place the date of the destruction of the First Temple at 3338 HC (423 BCE)[9] or 3358 HC (403 BCE)).[10]



 Illustration from the Nuremberg Chronicle of the destruction of Jerusalem under the Babylonian rule
The first governor appointed by Babylon was Gedaliah, a native Judahite; he encouraged the many Jews who had fled to surrounding countries such as Moab, Ammon, Edom, to return, and took steps to return the country to prosperity. Some time later, a surviving member of the royal family assassinated Gedaliah and his Babylonian advisors, prompting many refugees to seek safety in Egypt. By the end of the second decade of the 6th century, in addition to those who remained in Judah, there were significant Jewish communities in Babylon and in Egypt; this was the beginning of the later numerous Jewish communities living permanently outside Judah in the Jewish Diaspora.
According to the book of Ezra, the Persian Cyrus the Great ended the exile in 538 BCE,[11] the year after he captured Babylon.[12] The exile ended with the return under Zerubbabel the Prince (so-called because he was a descendant of the royal line of David) and Joshua the Priest (a descendant of the line of the former High Priests of the Temple) and their construction of the Second Temple in the period 521–516 BCE.[11]
Archaeological and other non-Biblical evidence[edit]
Nebuchadnezzar's siege of Jerusalem, his capture of King Jeconiah, his appointment of Zedekiah in his place, and the plundering of the city in 597 BCE as described in 2 Kings in the Bible are confirmed by a passage in the Babylonian Chronicles:[13]:293

In the seventh year, in the month of Kislev, the king of Akkad mustered his troops, marched to the Hatti-land, and encamped against the City of Judah and on the ninth day of the month of Adar he seized the city and captured the king. He appointed there a king of his own choice and taking heavy tribute brought it back to Babylon.
Jehoiachin's Rations Tablets describing ration orders for a captive King of Judah, identified with King Jeconiah, have been discovered during excavations in Babylon, in the royal archives of Nebuchadnezzar.[14][15] One of the tablets refers to food rations for "Ya’u-kīnu, king of the land of Yahudu" and five royal princes, his sons.[16]
Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonian forces returned in 588/586 BCE and rampaged through Judah, leaving clear archaeological evidence of destruction in many towns and settlements there.[13]:294 Clay ostraca referred to as the Lachish letters from this period were discovered during excavations; one, which was probably written to the commander at Lachish from an outlying base, describes how the signal fires from nearby towns are disappearing: "And may (my lord) be apprised that we are watching for the fire signals of Lachish according to all the signs which my lord has given, because we cannot see Azeqah."[17] This correlates with the book of Jeremiah,[18] which states that Jerusalem, Lachish and Azekah were the last cities to fall to the Babylonians. Archaeological finds from Jerusalem testify that virtually the whole city within the walls was burnt to rubble in 587 BCE and utterly destroyed.[13]:295
The biblical books of 2 Kings and Jeremiah give varying numbers of exiles forcibly deported to Babylon and at one time it was widely believed that virtually the entire population was taken into captivity there. However archaeological excavations and surveys enable the population of Judah before the Babylonian destruction to be calculated with a high degree of confidence at approximately seventy-five thousand. Taking the different biblical numbers of exiles at their highest, twenty thousand, this would mean that at most twenty-five percent of the population were deported to Babylon, the remaining seventy-five percent staying in Judah.[13]:306 Although Jerusalem was destroyed and depopulated, large parts of the city remaining in ruins for one hundred and fifty years, numerous other settlements in Judah continued to be inhabited with no signs of disruption visible in archaeological studies.[13]:307
The biblical book of Ezra includes two texts said to be decrees of Cyrus the Great, conqueror of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, allowing the deported Jews to return to their homeland after decades and ordering the Temple rebuilt. The differences in content and tone of the two decrees, one in Hebrew and one in Aramaic, have caused some scholars to question their authenticity.[19] The Cyrus Cylinder, an ancient tablet on which is written a declaration in the name of Cyrus referring to restoration of temples and repatriation of exiled peoples, has often been taken as corroboration of the authenticity of the biblical decrees attributed to Cyrus,[20] but other scholars point out that the cylinder's text is specific to Babylon and Mesopotamia and makes no mention of Judah or Jerusalem.[20] Professor Lester L Grabbe asserted that the "alleged decree of Cyrus" regarding Judah, "cannot be considered authentic", but that there was a "general policy of allowing deportees to return and to re-establish cult sites". He also stated that archaeology suggests that the return was a "trickle" taking place over decades, rather than a single event.[21]
As part of the Persian Empire, the former Kingdom of Judah became the province of Judah (Yehûd medîntā') with different borders, covering a smaller territory.[21] The population of the province was greatly reduced from that of the kingdom, archeological surveys showing a population of around thirty thousand people in the fifth to fourth centuries BCE.[13]:308
An exhibition in Jerusalem has on display over 100 cuneiform tablets that detail trade in fruits and other commodities, taxes, debts and credits accumulated between Jews driven from, or convinced to move from Jerusalem by King Nebuchadnezzar around 600 BCE. They include details on one exiled Judean family over four generations, all with Biblical Hebrew names, many still in use today.[22][23]
Exilic literature and post-exilic revisions of the Torah/Pentateuch[edit]
The exilic period was a rich one for Hebrew literature. Biblical depictions of the exile include Book of Jeremiah 39–43 (which saw the exile as a lost opportunity); the final section of 2 Kings (which portrays it as the temporary end of history); 2 Chronicles (in which the exile is the "Sabbath of the land"); and the opening chapters of Ezra, which records its end. Other works from or about the exile include the stories in Daniel 1–6, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, the "Story of the Three Youths" (1 Esdras 3:1–5:6), and the books of Tobit and Book of Judith.[24]
The Priestly source, one of the four main sources of the Torah/Pentateuch in the Bible, is primarily a product of the post-exilic period when the former Kingdom of Judah had become the Persian province of Yehud.[25] Also during this Persian period, the final redaction of the Pentateuch took place.[13]:310
Significance in Jewish history[edit]


 This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2013)



James Tissot, The Flight of the Prisoners.
In the Hebrew Bible, the captivity in Babylon is presented as a punishment for idolatry and disobedience to Yahweh in a similar way to the presentation of Israelite slavery in Egypt followed by deliverance. The Babylonian Captivity had a number of serious effects on Judaism and Jewish culture. For example, the current Hebrew script was adopted during this period, replacing the traditional Israelite script. This period saw the last high-point of biblical prophecy in the person of Ezekiel, followed by the emergence of the central role of the Torah in Jewish life. According to many historical-critical scholars, the Torah was altered during this time, and began to be regarded as the authoritative text for Jews. This period saw their transformation into an ethno-religious group who could survive without a central Temple.[26]
This process coincided with the emergence of scribes and sages as Jewish leaders (see Ezra). Prior to exile, the people of Israel had been organized according to tribe. Afterwards, they were organized by smaller family groups. Only the tribe of Levi continued in its temple role after the return. After this time, there were always sizable numbers of Jews living outside Eretz Israel; thus, it also marks the beginning of the "Jewish diaspora", unless this is considered to have begun with the Assyrian Captivity of Israel.
In Rabbinic literature, Babylon was one of a number of metaphors for the Jewish diaspora. Most frequently the term "Babylon" meant the diaspora prior to the destruction of the Second Temple. The post-destruction term for the Jewish Diaspora was "Rome", or "Edom".
Chronology[edit]
The following table is based on Rainer Albertz's work on Israel in exile.[27] (Alternative dates are possible.)

Year
Event
609 BCE Death of Josiah
609–598 BCE Reign of Jehoiakim (succeeded Jehoahaz, who replaced Josiah but reigned only 3 months) Began giving tribute to Nebuchadnezzar in 605 BCE. First deportation, including Daniel.
598/7 BCE Reign of Jehoiachin (reigned 3 months). Siege and fall of Jerusalem.
 Second deportation, 16 March 597
597 BCE Zedekiah made king of Judah by Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon
594 BCE Anti-Babylonian conspiracy
588 BCE Siege and fall of Jerusalem. Solomon's Temple destroyed.
 Third deportation July/August 587
583 BCE Gedaliah the Babylonian-appointed governor of Yehud Province assassinated.
 Many Jews flee to Egypt and a possible fourth deportation to Babylon
562 BCE Release of Jehoiachin after 37 years in a Babylonian prison.[28] He remains in Babylon
539 BCE Persians conquer Babylon (October)
538 BCE Decree of Cyrus allows Jews to return to Jerusalem
520–515 BCE Return by many Jews to Yehud under Zerubbabel and Joshua the High Priest.
 Foundations of Second Temple laid
See also[edit]
Avignon Papacy, sometimes called the "Babylonian Captivity of the Papacy".
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Coogan, Michael (2009). A Brief Introduction to the Old Testament. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2.Jump up ^ Ephraim Stern (November–December 2000). "The Babylonian Gap". Biblical Archaeology Review 26 (6). "From 604 B.C.E. to 538 B.C.E.—there is a complete gap in evidence suggesting occupation. ... I do not mean to imply that the country was uninhabited during the period between the Babylonian destruction and the Persian period. There were undoubtedly some settlements, but the population was very small. Many towns and villages were either completely or partly destroyed. The rest were barely functioning. International trade virtually ceased. Only two regions appear to have been spared this fate—the northern part of Judah (the region of Benjamin) and probably the land of Ammon, although the latter region awaits further investigation."
3.Jump up ^ Geoffrey Wigoder, The Illustrated Dictionary & Concordance of the Bible Pub. by Sterling Publishing Company, Inc. (2006)
4.Jump up ^ Dan Cohn-Sherbok, The Hebrew Bible, Continuum International, 1996, page x. ISBN 0-304-33703-X
5.Jump up ^ 2Kings 24:6–8
6.Jump up ^ Philip J. King, Jeremiah: An Archaeological Companion (Westminster John Knox Press, 1993), page 23.
7.Jump up ^ The Oxford History of the Biblical World, ed. by Michael D Coogan. Pub. by Oxford University Press, 1999. pg 350
8.Jump up ^ Yehud being the Babylonian equivalent of the Hebrew Yehuda, or "Judah", and "medinata" the word for province
9.Jump up ^ Rashi to Talmud Bavli, avodah zara p. 9a. Josephus, seder hadoroth year 3338
10.Jump up ^ malbim to ezekiel 24:1, abarbanel et al.
11.^ Jump up to: a b "Second Temple Period (538 B.C.E. to 70 C.E.) Persian Rule". Biu.ac.il. Retrieved 2014-03-15.
12.Jump up ^ Harper's Bible Dictionary, ed. by Achtemeier, etc., Harper & Row, San Francisco, 1985, p.103
13.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g Finkelstein, Israel; Silberman, Neil Asher (2001). The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts. Simon and Schuster. ISBN 978-0-684-86912-4.
14.Jump up ^ Thomas, David Winton (1958). Documents from Old Testament Times (1961 ed.). Edinburgh and London: Thomas Nelson. p. 84.
15.Jump up ^ Cf. 2Kings 24:12, 24:15–24:16, 25:27–25:30; 2Chronicles 36:9–36:10; Jeremiah 22:24–22:6, 29:2, 52:31–52:34; Ezekiel 17:12.
16.Jump up ^ "Babylonian Ration List: King Jehoiakhin in Exile, 592/1 BCE". COJS.org. The Center for Online Judaic Studies. Retrieved 23 August 2013. "Ya’u-kīnu, king of the land of Yahudu"
17.Jump up ^ Translation from Aḥituv, Shmuel. Echoes from the Past. Jerusalem: CARTA Jerusalem, 2008, pg. 70.
18.Jump up ^ Jeremiah 34:7
19.Jump up ^ Bedford, Peter Ross (2001). Temple Restoration in Early Achaemenid Judah. Leiden: Brill. p. 112 (Cyrus edict section pp. 111–131). ISBN 9789004115095.
20.^ Jump up to: a b Becking, Bob (2006). ""We All Returned as One!": Critical Notes on the Myth of the Mass Return". In Lipschitz, Oded; Oeming, Manfred. Judah and the Judeans in the Persian Period. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. p. 8. ISBN 978-1-57506-104-7.
21.^ Jump up to: a b Grabbe, Lester L. (2004). A History of the Jews and Judaism in the Second Temple Period: Yehud - A History of the Persian Province of Judah v. 1. T & T Clark. p. 355. ISBN 978-0567089984.
22.Jump up ^ http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4622505,00.html
23.Jump up ^ http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/03/us-israel-archaeology-babylon-idUSKBN0L71EK20150203
24.Jump up ^ Rainer Albertz, Israel in exile: the history and literature of the sixth century BCE (page 15 link) Society for Biblical Literature, 2003, pp.4–38
25.Jump up ^ Blum, Erhard (1998). "Issues and Problems in the Contemporary Debate Regarding the Priestly Writings". In Sarah Shectman, Joel S. Baden. The strata of the priestly writings: contemporary debate and future directions. Theologischer Verlag. pp. 32–33.
26.Jump up ^ A Concise History of the Jewish People | Naomi E. Pasachoff, Robert J. Littma | Rowman & Littlefield, 2005 | pg 43
27.Jump up ^ Rainer Albertz, Israel in exile: the history and literature of the sixth century BCE, p.xxi. page 77 with another list of dates
28.Jump up ^ 2 Kings 25:27
Further reading[edit]
 Wikimedia Commons has media related to Babylonian captivity.


 This article's further reading may not follow Wikipedia's content policies or guidelines. Please improve this article by removing excessive, less relevant or many publications with the same point of view; or by incorporating the relevant publications into the body of the article through appropriate citations. (August 2013)
Maps
Yehud Medinata map, CET – Center For Educational technology
Yehud Medinata Border map, CET – Center For Educational technology
Google-Books
Peter R. Ackroyd, "Exile and Restoration: A Study of Hebrew Thought of the Sixth Century B.C." (SCM Press, 1968)
Rainer Albertz, Bob Becking, "Yahwism after the Exile" Van Gorcum, 2003)
Blenkinsopp, Joseph, "Judaism, the first phase: the place of Ezra and Nehemiah in the origins of Judaism" (Eerdmans, 2009)
Nodet, Étienne, "A search for the origins of Judaism: from Joshua to the Mishnah" (Sheffield Academic Press, 1999, original edition Editions du Cerf, 1997)
Becking, Bob, and Korpel, Marjo Christina Annette (eds), "The Crisis of Israelite Religion: Transformation of Religious Tradition in Exilic & Post-Exilic Times" (Brill, 1999)
Bedford, Peter Ross, "Temple restoration in early Achaemenid Judah" (Brill, 2001)
Berquist, Jon L., "Approaching Yehud: new approaches to the study of the Persian period" (Society of Biblical Literature, 2007)
Grabbe, Lester L., "A history of the Jews and Judaism in the Second Temple Period", vol.1 (T&T Clark International, 2004)
Levine, Lee I., "Jerusalem: portrait of the city in the second Temple period (538 B.C.E.-70 C.E.)" (Jewish Publication Society, 2002)
Lipschitz, Oded, "The Fall and Rise of Jerusalem" (Eisenbrauns, 2005)
Lipschitz, Oded, and Oeming, Manfred (eds), "Judah and the Judeans in the Persian period" (Eisenbrauns, 2006)
Lipschitz, Oded, and Oeming, Manfred (eds), "Judah and the Judeans in the fourth century B.C.E." (Eisenbrauns, 2006)
Middlemas, Jill Anne, "The troubles of templeless Judah" (Oxford University Press, 2005)
Stackert, Jeffrey, "Rewriting the Torah: literary revision in Deuteronomy and the holiness code" (Mohr Siebeck, 2007)
Vanderkam, James, "An introduction to early Judaism" (Eerdmans, 2001)
Wikisource-logo.svg Wikisource.
"Babylonian Captivity". Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). 1911.
"Babylonish Captivity". New International Encyclopedia. 1905.


[hide]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Major articles in Jewish history


Timeline ·
 Israelites ·
 Ancient Israel and Judah ·
 United Israel ·
 Northern Kingdom ·
 Judah ·
 Schisms ·
 Ten Lost Tribes ·
 Babylonian captivity ·
 Hasmoneans ·
 Sanhedrin ·
 Jewish–Roman wars ·
 Pharisees ·
 Diaspora ·
 Middle Ages ·
 Under Muslim rule ·
 Haskalah ·
 Israel
 

See also: WP:Jewish history


  


Categories: Ancient Israel and Judah
Ancient Jewish Persian history
Babylonia
Expulsions of Jews
Hebrew Bible events
History of Purim
Jewish Babylonian history
Jewish Iraqi history
Second Temple











Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Беларуская
Български
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Français
Frysk
한국어
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
עברית
ქართული
Kiswahili
Latina
Latviešu
Magyar
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
پنجابی
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Slovenčina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Türkçe
Українська
اردو
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 23 April 2015, at 02:59.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babylonian_captivity


















Page semi-protected

Moses

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

For other uses, see Moses (disambiguation).

Moses
Rembrandt - Moses with the Ten Commandments - Google Art Project.jpg
Moses Breaking the Tablets of the Law by Rembrandt

Born
Goshen, Lower Egypt
Died
Mount Nebo, Moab
Spouse(s)
Zipporah
Children
Gershom
Eliezer
Parent(s)
Amram (father)
Jochebed (mother)
Relatives
Aaron (brother)
Miriam (sister)
Moses (/ˈmoʊzɪz, -zɪs/;[1] Hebrew: מֹשֶׁה‎, Modern Moshe Tiberian Mōšéh ISO 259-3 Moše; Syriac: ܡܘܫܐ Moushe; Arabic: موسى‎ Mūsā; Greek: Mωϋσῆς Mōÿsēs in both the Septuagint and the New Testament) was, according to the Hebrew Bible, a former Egyptian prince later turned prophet, religious leader and lawgiver, to whom the authorship of the Torah is traditionally attributed. Also called Moshe Rabbenu in Hebrew (מֹשֶׁה רַבֵּנוּ, Lit. "Moses our Teacher/Rabbi"), he is the most important prophet in Judaism.[2][3] He is also an important prophet in Christianity and Islam, as well as a number of other faiths.
The existence of Moses as well as the veracity of the Exodus story are disputed among archaeologists and Egyptologists, with experts in the field of biblical criticism citing logical inconsistencies, new archaeological evidence, historical evidence, and related origin myths in Canaanite culture.[4][5][6] Other historians maintain that the biographical details and Egyptian background attributed to Moses imply the existence of a historical political and religious leader who was involved in the consolidation of the Hebrew tribes in Canaan towards the end of the Bronze Age.
According to the Book of Exodus, Moses was born in a time when his people, the Israelites, were increasing in numbers and the Egyptian Pharaoh was worried that they might ally with Egypt's enemies.[7] Moses' Hebrew mother, Jochebed, secretly hid him when the Pharaoh ordered all newborn Hebrew boys to be killed in order to reduce the population of the Israelites. Through the Pharaoh's daughter (identified as Queen Bithia in the Midrash), the child was adopted as a foundling from the Nile river and grew up with the Egyptian royal family. After killing an Egyptian slavemaster (because the slavemaster was smiting a Hebrew), Moses fled across the Red Sea to Midian, where he encountered the God of Israel speaking to him from within a "burning bush which was not consumed by the fire" on Mount Horeb (which he regarded as the Mountain of God).
God sent Moses back to Egypt to demand the release of the Israelites from slavery. Moses said that he could not speak with assurance or eloquence,[8] so God allowed Aaron, his brother, to become his spokesperson. After the Ten Plagues, Moses led the Exodus of the Israelites out of Egypt and across the Red Sea, after which they based themselves at Mount Sinai, where Moses received the Ten Commandments. After 40 years of wandering in the desert, Moses died within sight of the Promised Land.
Rabbinical Judaism calculated a lifespan of Moses corresponding to 1391–1271 BCE;[9] Jerome gives 1592 BCE,[10] and Ussher 1571 BCE as his birth year.[11][note 1]



 Moses and the tablets of law, by José de Ribera.
In a metaphorical sense in the Christian tradition, a "Moses" is the leader who delivers the people from a terrible situation. When Abraham Lincoln, was assassinated in 1865 after freeing the slaves, black Americans said they had lost "their Moses".[14]


Contents  [hide]
1 Name
2 Biblical narrative 2.1 Prophet and deliverer of Israel
2.2 Lawgiver of Israel
3 Sources
4 Moses in Hellenistic literature
5 Historicity
6 Moses in religious traditions 6.1 Judaism
6.2 Christianity 6.2.1 Mormonism
6.3 Islam
6.4 Baha'i Faith
7 Modern reception 7.1 Literature
7.2 In Freud
7.3 Criticism
7.4 Figurative art
7.5 Michelangelo's statue
7.6 Film and television
8 See also
9 Notes
10 Citations
11 Further reading
12 External links

Name
Moses' name is given to him by Pharaoh's daughter: "He became her son, and she named him Moshe (Moses)." This name may be either Egyptian or Hebrew. If connected to an Egyptian root, via msy "to be born" and ms, "a son", it forms a wordplay: "he became her son, and she named him Son." There should, however, be a divine element to the name Moses (bearers of the Egyptian name are the "son of" a god, as in Thutmose, "son of Thut"), and his full name may therefore have included the name of one of the Egyptian gods. Most scholars agree that the name is Egyptian, and that the Hebrew etymology is a later interpretation, but if the name is from a Hebrew root then it is connected to the verb "to draw out": "I drew him (masha) out of the water," states Pharaoh's daughter, possibly looking forward to Moses at the well in Midian, or to his role in saving Israel at the Red Sea.[15]
Biblical narrative



 Moses rescued from the Nile, 1638, by Nicolas Poussin.
Prophet and deliverer of Israel



 Moses before the Pharaoh, a 6th-century miniature from the Syriac Bible of Paris


 Moses strikes water from the stone, by Francesco Bacchiacca


 Moses holding up his arms during the battle, assisted by Aaron and Hur; painting by John Everett Millais


 Moses surveys Canaan from West of the Jordan, 1909 illustration
The Israelites had settled in the Land of Goshen in the time of Joseph and Jacob, but a new pharaoh arose who oppressed the children of Israel. At this time Moses was born to his father Amram, son of Kohath the Levite, who entered Egypt with Jacob's household; his mother was Jochebed (also Yocheved), who was kin to Kohath. Moses had one older (by seven years) sister, Miriam, and one older (by three years) brother, Aaron.[note 2]
Pharaoh had commanded that all male Hebrew children born be drowned in the river Nile, but Moses' mother placed him in an ark and concealed the ark in the bulrushes by the riverbank, where the baby was discovered and adopted by Pharaoh's daughter. One day after Moses had reached adulthood he killed an Egyptian who was beating a Hebrew. Moses, in order to escape Pharaoh's death penalty, fled to Midian (a desert country south of Judah).
There, on Mount Horeb, God revealed to Moses his name YHWH (probably pronounced Yahweh) and commanded him to return to Egypt and bring his Chosen People (Israel) out of bondage and into the Promised Land (Canaan).[note 3] Moses returned to carry out God's command, but God caused Pharaoh to refuse, and only after God had subjected Egypt to ten plagues did Pharaoh relent. Moses led the Israelites to the border of Egypt, but there God hardened Pharaoh's heart once more, so that he could destroy Pharaoh and his army at the Red Sea Crossing as a sign of his power to Israel and the nations.
From Egypt, Moses led the Israelites to Mount Sinai, where he was given ten commandments from God, written on stone tablets. However, since Moses remained a long time on the mountain, some of the people feared that he might be dead, so they made a golden statue of a calf and worshipped it, thus disobeying and angering God and Moses, the latter, out of anger, broke the tablets. Moses later ordered the elimination of those who had worshipped the golden statue, which was melted down and fed to the idolaters. He also wrote the ten commandments on a new set of tablets. Later at Mount Sinai, Moses and the elders entered into a covenant, by which Israel would become the people of YHWH, obeying his laws, and YHWH would be their god. Moses delivered laws of God to Israel, instituted the priesthood under the sons of Moses' brother Aaron, and destroyed those Israelites who fell away from his worship. In his final act at Sinai, God gave Moses instructions for the Tabernacle, the mobile shrine by which he would travel with Israel to the Promised Land.
From Sinai, Moses led the Israelites to Paran on the border of Canaan. There he sent twelve spies into the land. The spies returned with samples of the land's fertility, but warned that its inhabitants were giants. The people were afraid and wanted to return to Egypt, and some rebelled against Moses and against God. Moses told the Israelites that they were not worthy to inherit the land, and would wander the wilderness for forty years until the generation who had refused to enter Canaan had died, so that it would be their children who would possess the land.
When the forty years had passed, Moses led the Israelites east around the Dead Sea to the territories of Edom and Moab. There they escaped the temptation of idolatry, received God's blessing through Balaam the prophet, and massacred the Midianites, who were God's enemies. On the banks of the Jordan, in sight of the land, Moses assembled the tribes. After recalling their wanderings he delivered God's laws by which they must live in the land, sang a song of praise and pronounced a blessing on the people, and passed his authority to Joshua, under whom they would possess the land. Moses then went up Mount Nebo to the top of Pisgah, looked over the promised land of Israel spread out before him, and died, at the age of one hundred and twenty. More humble than any other man (Num. 12:3), "there hath not arisen a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom YHWH knew face to face" (Deuteronomy. 34:10).



 A Russian Orthodox icon of the prophet Moses, gesturing towards the burning bush; 18th-century (Iconostasis of Transfiguration Church, Kizhi Monastery, Karelia, Russia)


 Moses lifts up the brass serpent, curing the Israelites from poisonous snake bites in a painting by Benjamin West
Lawgiver of Israel
Further information: Law of Moses, Mosaic authorship, Deuteronomist, Book of Deuteronomy § Deuteronomic code and 613 Mitzvot



William Blake's "Moses Receiving the Law"


 Death of Moses by Alexandre Cabanel
Moses is honoured among Jews today as the "lawgiver of Israel", and he delivers several sets of laws in the course of the four books. The first is the Covenant code, Exodus 19-24, the terms of the covenant which God offers to Israel at the foot of Sinai. Embedded in the covenant are the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments, Exodus 20:1-17) and the Book of the Covenant (Exodus 20:22-23:19).[18] The entire Book of Leviticus constitutes a second body of law, the Book of Numbers begins with yet another set, and the Book of Deuteronomy another.
Moses has traditionally been regarded as the author of those four books and the Book of Genesis, which together comprise the Torah, the first and most revered section of the Jewish Bible.
Sources
Apart from a few scattered references elsewhere in the Jewish scriptures, all that is known about Moses comes from the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.[19] The majority of scholars date these four books to the Persian period, 538-332 BCE.[20]
No Egyptian sources mention Moses or the events of Exodus-Deuteronomy, nor has any archeological evidence been discovered in Egypt or the Sinai wilderness to support the story in which he is the central figure.[21]
Moses in Hellenistic literature
Further information: Moses in Judeo-Hellenistic literature



 The Moses Window at the Washington National Cathedral depicts the three stages in Moses' life.
Non-biblical writings about Jews, with references to the role of Moses, first appear at the beginning of the Hellenistic period, from 323 BCE to about 146 BCE. Shmuel notes that "a characteristic of this literature is the high honour in which it holds the peoples of the East in general and some specific groups among these peoples."[22]:1102
In addition to the Judeo-Roman or Judeo-Hellenic historians Artapanus, Eupolemus, Josephus, and Philo, a few non-Jewish historians including Hecataeus of Abdera (quoted by Diodorus Siculus), Alexander Polyhistor, Manetho, Apion, Chaeremon of Alexandria, Tacitus and Porphyry also make reference to him. The extent to which any of these accounts rely on earlier sources is unknown.[22]:1103 Moses also appears in other religious texts such as the Mishnah (c. 200 AD), Midrash (AD 200–1200),[23] and the Qur'an (c. 610—653).
The figure of Osarseph in Hellenistic historiography is a renegade Egyptian priest who leads an army of lepers against the pharaoh and is finally expelled from Egypt, changing his name to Moses.
In Hecataeus
The earliest existing reference to Moses in Greek literature occurs in the Egyptian history of Hecataeus of Abdera (4th century BC). All that remains of his description of Moses are two references made by Diodorus Siculus, wherein, writes historian Arthur Droge, "he describes Moses as a wise and courageous leader who left Egypt and colonized Judaea."[24]:18 Among the many accomplishments described by Hecataeus, Moses had founded cities, established a temple and religious cult, and issued laws:
After the establishment of settled life in Egypt in early times, which took place, according to the mythical account, in the period of the gods and heroes, the first . . . to persuade the multitudes to use written laws was Mneves [Moses], a man not only great of soul but also in his life the most public-spirited of all lawgivers whose names are recorded.[24]:18
Droge also points out that this statement by Hecataeus was similar to statements made subsequently by Eupolemus.[24]:18
In Artapanus
The Jewish historian Artapanus of Alexandria (2nd century BCE), portrayed Moses as a cultural hero, alien to the Pharaonic court. According to theologian John Barclay, the Moses of Artapanus "clearly bears the destiny of the Jews, and in his personal, cultural and military splendor, brings credit to the whole Jewish people."[25]
Jealousy of Moses' excellent qualities induced Chenephres to send him with unskilled troops on a military expedition to Ethiopia, where he won great victories. After having built the city of Hermopolis, he taught the people the value of the ibis as a protection against the serpents, making the bird the sacred guardian spirit of the city; then he introduced circumcision. After his return to Memphis, Moses taught the people the value of oxen for agriculture, and the consecration of the same by Moses gave rise to the cult of Apis. Finally, after having escaped another plot by killing the assailant sent by the king, Moses fled to Arabia, where he married the daughter of Raguel [Jethro], the ruler of the district." [26]
Artapanus goes on to relate how Moses returns to Egypt with Aaron, and is imprisoned, but miraculously escapes through the name of YHWH in order to lead the Exodus. This account further testifies that all Egyptian temples of Isis thereafter contained a rod, in remembrance of that used for Moses' miracles. He describes Moses as 80 years old, "tall and ruddy, with long white hair, and dignified."
Some historians, however, point out the "apologetic nature of much of Artapanus' work,"[27]:40 with his addition extra-biblical details, as with references to Jethro: The non-Jewish Jethro expresses admiration for Moses' gallantry in helping his daughters, and chooses to adopt Moses as his son.[27]:133
In Strabo
Strabo, a Greek historian, geographer and philosopher, in his Geography (c. AD 24), wrote in detail about Moses, whom he considered to be an Egyptian who deplored the situation in his homeland, and thereby attracted many followers who respected the deity. He writes, for example, that Moses opposed the picturing of the deity in the form of man or animal, and was convinced that the deity was an entity which encompassed everything – land and sea:[22]:1132
35. An Egyptian priest named Moses, who possessed a portion of the country called the Lower Egypt, being dissatisfied with the established institutions there, left it and came to Judaea with a large body of people who worshipped the Divinity. He declared and taught that the Egyptians and Africans entertained erroneous sentiments, in representing the Divinity under the likeness of wild beasts and cattle of the field; that the Greeks also were in error in making images of their gods after the human form. For God [said he] may be this one thing which encompasses us all, land and sea, which we call heaven, or the universe, or the nature of things. . . .36. By such doctrine Moses persuaded a large body of right-minded persons to accompany him to the place where Jerusalem now stands. . . . ''[28]
In Strabo’s writings of the history of Judaism as he understood it, he describes various stages in its development: from the first stage, including Moses and his direct heirs; to the final stage where "the Temple of Jerusalem continued to be surrounded by an aura of sanctity." Strabo’s "positive and unequivocal appreciation of Moses’ personality is among the most sympathetic in all ancient literature." [22]:1133 His portrayal of Moses is said to be similar to the writing of Hecataeus who "described Moses as a man who excelled in wisdom and courage."[22]:1133
Egyptologist Jan Assmann concludes that Strabo was the historian "who came closest to a construction of Moses' religion as monotheism and as a pronounced counter-religion." It recognized "only one divine being whom no image can represent. . . [and] the only way to approach this god is to live in virtue and in justice."[29]:38
In Tacitus
The Roman historian Tacitus (ca. 56—120 AD) refers to Moses by noting that the Jewish religion was monotheistic and without a clear image. His primary work, wherein he describes Jewish philosophy, is his Histories (ca. 100), where, according to Murphy, as a result of the Jewish worship of one God, "pagan mythology fell into contempt."[30] Tacitus states that, despite various opinions current in his day regarding the Jews' ethnicity, most of his sources are in agreement that there was an Exodus from Egypt. By his account, the Pharaoh Bocchoris, suffering from a plague, banished the Jews in response to an oracle of the god Zeus-Amun.
A motley crowd was thus collected and abandoned in the desert. While all the other outcasts lay idly lamenting, one of them, named Moses, advised them not to look for help to gods or men, since both had deserted them, but to trust rather in themselves, and accept as divine the guidance of the first being, by whose aid they should get out of their present plight.[31]
In this version, Moses and the Jews wander through the desert for only six days, capturing the Holy Land on the seventh.[31]
In Longinus
The Septuagint, the Greek version of the Hebrew Bible, influenced Longinus, who may have been the author of the great book of literary criticism, On the Sublime, although the true author is still unknown for certain. However, most scholars agree that the author lived in the time of Augustus or Tiberius, the first and second Roman Emperors.
The writer quotes Genesis in a "style which presents the nature of the deity in a manner suitable to his pure and great being," however he does not mention Moses by name, but instead calls him "the Lawgiver of the Jews." Besides its mention of Cicero, Moses is the only non-Greek writer quoted in the work, and he is described "with far more admiration than even Greek writers who treated Moses with respect, such as Hecataeus and Strabo.[22]:1140
In Josephus
In Josephus' (37 – c. 100 AD) Antiquities of the Jews, Moses is mentioned throughout. For example Book VIII Ch. IV, describes Solomon's Temple, also known as the First Temple, at the time the Ark of the Covenant was first moved into the newly built temple:

When King Solomon had finished these works, these large and beautiful buildings, and had laid up his donations in the temple, and all this in the interval of seven years, and had given a demonstration of his riches and alacrity therein; ... he also wrote to the rulers and elders of the Hebrews, and ordered all the people to gather themselves together to Jerusalem, both to see the temple which he had built, and to remove the ark of God into it; and when this invitation of the whole body of the people to come to Jerusalem was everywhere carried abroad, ... The Feast of Tabernacles happened to fall at the same time, which was kept by the Hebrews as a most holy and most eminent feast. So they carried the ark and the tabernacle which Moses had pitched, and all the vessels that were for ministration to the sacrifices of God, and removed them to the temple... Now the ark contained nothing else but those two tables of stone that preserved the ten commandments, which God spake to Moses in Mount Sinai, and which were engraved upon them...[32]
According to Feldman, Josephus also attaches particular significance to Moses' possession of the "cardinal virtues of wisdom, courage, temperance, and justice." He also includes piety as an added fifth virtue. In addition, he "stresses Moses' willingness to undergo toil and his careful avoidance of bribery. Like Plato's philosopher-king, Moses excels as an educator."[27]:130
In Numenius
Numenius, a Greek philosopher who was a native of Apamea, in Syria, wrote during the latter half of the 2nd century AD. Historian Kennieth Guthrie writes that "Numenius is perhaps the only recognized Greek philosopher who explicitly studied Moses, the prophets, and the life of Jesus . . . "[33]:194 He describes his background:

Numenius was a man of the world; he was not limited to Greek and Egyptian mysteries, but talked familiarly of the myths of Brahmins and Magi. It is however his knowledge and use of the Hebrew scriptures which distinguished him from other Greek philosophers. He refers to Moses simply as "the prophet", exactly as for him Homer is the poet. Plato is described as a Greek Moses.[33]:101
In Justin Martyr
The Christian saint and religious philosopher Justin Martyr (103–165 AD) drew the same conclusion as Numenius, according to other experts. Theologian Paul Blackham notes that Justin considered Moses to be "more trustworthy, profound and truthful because he is older than the Greek philosophers."[34] He quotes him:

I will begin, then, with our first prophet and lawgiver, Moses . . . that you may know that, of all your teachers, whether sages, poets, historians, philosophers, or lawgivers, by far the oldest, as the Greek histories show us, was Moses, who was our first religious teacher.[34]
Historicity



 Memorial of Moses, Mount Nebo, Jordan
The tradition of Moses as a lawgiver and culture hero of the Israelites can be traced to the Deuteronomist source, corresponding to the 7th-century Kingdom of Judah. Moses is a central figure in the Deuteronomist account of the origins of the Israelites, cast in a literary style of elegant flashbacks told by Moses. The mainstream view is that the Deuteronomist relies on earlier material that may date to the United Monarchy, so that the biblical narrative would be based on traditions that can be traced roughly to the 10th century, or about four centuries after the supposed lifetime of Moses. By contrast, Biblical minimalists such as Philip Davies and Niels Peter Lemche regard the Exodus as a fiction composed in the Persian period or even later to give hope of return to Canaan for a Diaspora community, without even the memory of a historical Moses.[35][36] Given this possible late composition it would seem that the figure of Moses may be a composite drawn from a number of different sources.
The question of the historicity of the Exodus (specifically, the Pharaoh of the Exodus, identification of whom would connect the biblical narrative to Egyptological chronology) has long been debated, without conclusive result. There were at least two periods in Egyptian history in which Asiatic Semites were expelled from Egypt. One was associated with the expulsion of the Semitic Hyksos at the beginning of the Late Bronze Age. The second was following the commencement of the reign of Setnakhte at the end of the 19th Dynasty. Manetho seems to confuse the two, for instance, in a distorted account reported in Josephus, he supposedly states that Moses was originally Osarseph, a renegade priest, who led a band of lepers out of Avaris (referred to as Raamses in the Bible).(Exodus 1:11) Osarseph, may be a memory of a shadowy visier, originally from Syria (Hurru), known as Yursu (self-made), who came to prominence as Chancellor Bay just prior to the second event. Pi Ramesses may be the "store city" Raamses mentioned in Exodus, which was the capital of the Egyptian Empire in the 19th to end of the 20th Dynasty of Egypt, giving quite a specific date to the Egyptian part of Exodus.
Some scholars, like Kenneth Kitchen and Frank Yurko suggest that there may be a historical core beneath the Exodus and Sinai traditions, even if the biblical narrative dramatizes by portraying as a single event what was more likely a gradual process of migration and conquest. Thus, the motif of "slavery in Egypt" may reflect the historical situation of imperialist control of the Egyptian Empire over Canaan over the period of the Thutmosides down to the revolt against Merenptah and Rameses III, after which it declined gradually during the 12th century under the pressure from the Sea Peoples and the general Bronze Age collapse: Israel Finkelstein points to the appearance of settlements in the central hill country around 1200 as the earliest of the known settlements of the Israelites.[37]
A cyclical pattern to these highland settlements, corresponding to the state of the surrounding cultures, suggests that the local Canaanites combined an agricultural and nomadic lifestyles, particularly under Aramaean and Neo-Hittite influence. When Egyptian rule collapsed after the invasion of the Sea Peoples, the central hill country could no longer sustain a large nomadic population, so they went from nomadism to sedentism.[38] Canaanite refugees from the lowlands seem to have fused with Shasu, nomadic Aramaean elements, using pithoi cisterns for the capture of water, hillside terracing and other elements from the Aegean and Western Anatolian "Peoples of the Sea", living in scattered hamlets and avoding the husbandry of pigs, suggesting a new type of culture in the region.
However, Finkelstein states in the same book that at the earlier time proposed by most scientists for the Exodus, based upon the Biblical chronology 400 years prior to the reign of King David, Egypt was at the peak of its glory, with a series of fortresses guarding the borders and checkpoints watching the roads to Canaan. That means an exodus of the scale of over 600,000 soldiers described in the Torah would have been impossible.[39] This implies a total civilian population, with women and children, of over a million, which would have numbered between a third and a half of the total Egyptian population at the time.
While the general narrative of the Exodus and the conquest of the Promised Land may be remotely rooted in historical events, the figure of Moses as a leader of the Israelites in these events cannot be substantiated.[40][41][42][43] William Dever agrees with the Canaanite origin of the Israelites but allows for the possibility of some immigrants from Egypt among the early hilltop settlers, leaving open the possibility of a Moses-like figure in Transjordan ca 1250-1200.[44]
Martin Noth holds that two different groups experienced the Exodus and Sinai events, and each group transmitted its own stories independently of the other one, writing that "The biblical story tracing the Hebrews from Egypt to Canaan resulted from an editor's weaving separate themes and traditions around a main character Moses, actually an obscure person from Moab."[45] Given the existence of a Moabite king Mesha, etymologically identical to the Hebrew Moshe, it is possible that there was a memory of a culture hero who was associated with the end of Egyptian influence at Timna during the late Bronze Age.[46]
The "Kenite hypothesis", originally suggested by Cornelius Tiele in 1872, supposes that the figure of Moses is a reflection of a historical Midianite priest of Yahweh, whose cult was introduced to Israel from southern Canaan (Edom, Moab, Midian) by the Kenites. This idea is based on an old tradition (recorded in Judges 1:16, 4:11) that Moses' father-in-law was a Midianite priest of Yahweh, as it were preserving a memory of the Midianite origin of the deity. While the role of the Kenites in the transmission of the cult is widely accepted, Tiele's view on the historical role of Moses finds less support in modern scholarship.[47]
William Albright held a more favorable view towards the traditional views regarding Moses, and accepted the essence of the biblical story, as narrated between Exodus 1:8 and Deuteronomy 34:12, but recognized the impact that centuries of oral and written transmission have had on the account, causing it to acquire layers of accretions.[45]
Recently Aidan Dodson,[48] M. Georg[49] and R. Krauss[50] all suggest that the story of Moses as a Prince of Egypt may contain a distorted memory of Pharaoh Amenmesses. In texts written after his disappearance Amenmesses "was explicitly denied any royal status - being simply ´Mose´ and perhaps also ´enemy´... Indeed it has been suggested that Amenmesses´ memory has survived in a far more universal way, in that his career was transmogrified into the Old Testament story of Jewish law-giver, Moses." Dodson concludes "... this connection is beyond proof and such a survival of Amenmesses into world consciousness remains but an intriguing possibility".
Moses in religious traditions

Prophet Moses
MosesStrikingTheRock GREBBER.jpg
Moses striking the rock

Prophet, Saint, Seer, Lawgiver, Apostle to Pharaoh, Reformer, 'One to Whom God Spoke',[51] 'Our Leader Moses',[52] Leader of the Exodus, Holy Forefather[53]

Born
Goshen, Lower Egypt
Died
Mount Nebo, Moab
Venerated in
Judaism, Christianity, Islam
Feast
Orthodox Church & Catholic Church: Sept 4
Attributes
Tablets of the Law
Judaism
Main articles: Moses in Hellenistic literature and Moses in Rabbinic Literature
There is a wealth of stories and additional information about Moses in the Jewish apocrypha and in the genre of rabbinical exegesis known as Midrash, as well as in the primary works of the Jewish oral law, the Mishnah and the Talmud. Moses is also given a number of bynames in Jewish tradition. The Midrash identifies Moses as one of seven biblical personalities who were called by various names.[54] Moses' other names were: Jekuthiel (by his mother), Heber (by his father), Jered (by Miriam), Avi Zanoah (by Aaron), Avi Gedor (by Kohath), Avi Soco (by his wet-nurse), Shemaiah ben Nethanel (by people of Israel).[55] Moses is also attributed the names Toviah (as a first name), and Levi (as a family name) (Vayikra Rabbah 1:3), Heman,[56] Mechoqeiq (lawgiver)[57] and Ehl Gav Ish (Numbers 12:3).[58]
Jewish historians who lived at Alexandria, such as Eupolemus, attributed to Moses the feat of having taught the Phoenicians their alphabet,[59] similar to legends of Thoth. Artapanus of Alexandria explicitly identified Moses not only with Thoth / Hermes, but also with the Greek figure Musaeus (whom he calls "the teacher of Orpheus"), and ascribed to him the division of Egypt into 36 districts, each with its own liturgy. He names the princess who adopted Moses as Merris, wife of Pharaoh Chenephres.[60]
Ancient sources mention an Assumption of Moses and a Testimony of Moses. A Latin text was found in Milan in the 19th century by Antonio Ceriani who called it the Assumption of Moses, even though it does not refer to an assumption of Moses or contain portions of the Assumption which are cited by ancient authors, and it is apparently actually the Testimony. The incident which the ancient authors cite is also mentioned in the Epistle of Jude.
To Orthodox Jews, Moses is called Moshe Rabbenu, `Eved HaShem, Avi haNeviim zya"a. He is defined "Our Leader Moshe", "Servant of God", and "Father of all the Prophets". In their view, Moses received not only the Torah, but also the revealed (written and oral) and the hidden (the `hokhmat nistar teachings, which gave Judaism the Zohar of the Rashbi, the Torah of the Ari haQadosh and all that is discussed in the Heavenly Yeshiva between the Ramhal and his masters). He is also considered the greatest prophet.[61]
Arising in part from his age, but also because 120 is elsewhere stated as the maximum age for Noah's descendants (one interpretation of Genesis 6:3), "may you live to 120" has become a common blessing among Jews.
Christianity



 Moses appeared at the Transfiguration of Jesus
For Christians, Moses — mentioned more often in the New Testament than any other Old Testament figure — is often a symbol of God's law, as reinforced and expounded on in the teachings of Jesus. New Testament writers often compared Jesus' words and deeds with Moses' to explain Jesus' mission. In Acts 7:39–43, 51–53, for example, the rejection of Moses by the Jews who worshiped the golden calf is likened to the rejection of Jesus by the Jews that continued in traditional Judaism.
Moses also figures in several of Jesus' messages. When he met the Pharisee Nicodemus at night in the third chapter of the Gospel of John, he compared Moses' lifting up of the bronze serpent in the wilderness, which any Israelite could look at and be healed, to his own lifting up (by his death and resurrection) for the people to look at and be healed. In the sixth chapter, Jesus responded to the people's claim that Moses provided them manna in the wilderness by saying that it was not Moses, but God, who provided. Calling himself the "bread of life", Jesus stated that He was provided to feed God's people.
Moses, along with Elijah, is presented as meeting with Jesus in all three Gospel accounts of the Transfiguration of Jesus in Matthew 17, Mark 9, and Luke 9, respectively. Later Christians found numerous other parallels between the life of Moses and Jesus to the extent that Jesus was likened to a "second Moses." For instance, Jesus' escape from the slaughter by Herod in Bethlehem is compared to Moses' escape from Pharaoh's designs to kill Hebrew infants. Such parallels, unlike those mentioned above, are not pointed out in Scripture. See the article on typology.
His relevance to modern Christianity has not diminished. Moses is considered to be a saint by several churches; and is commemorated as a prophet in the respective Calendars of Saints of the Eastern Orthodox Church, Roman Catholic Church, and Lutheran churches on September 4.[62] He is commemorated as one of the Holy Forefathers in the Calendar of Saints of the Armenian Apostolic Church on July 30.
Mormonism
Main article: Book of Moses
Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (colloquially called Mormons) generally view Moses in the same way that other Christians do. However, in addition to accepting the biblical account of Moses, Mormons include Selections from the Book of Moses as part of their scriptural canon.[63] This book is believed to be the translated writings of Moses, and is included in the Pearl of Great Price.[64]
Latter-day Saints are also unique in believing that Moses was taken to heaven without having tasted death (translated). In addition, Joseph Smith, Jr. and Oliver Cowdery stated that on April 3, 1836, Moses appeared to them in the Kirtland Temple in a glorified, immortal, physical form and bestowed upon them the "keys of the gathering of Israel from the four parts of the earth, and the leading of the ten tribes from the land of the north."[65]
Islam
Main article: Moses in Islam
See also: Biblical narratives and the Qur'an § Moses (Mūsā موسى)



Maqam El-Nabi Musa, Jericho.
Moses is mentioned more in the Quran than any other individual and his life is narrated and recounted more than that of any other prophet.[66] In general, Moses is described in ways which parallel the Islamic prophet Muhammad,[67] and "his character exhibits some of the main themes of Islamic theology," including the "moral injunction that we are to submit ourselves to God."
Moses is defined in the Qur'an as both prophet (nabi) and messenger (rasul), the latter term indicating that he was one of those prophets who brought a scripture and law to his people.
Huston Smith (1991) describes an account in the Qur'an of meetings in heaven between Moses and Muhammad, which Huston states were "one of the crucial events in Muhammad's life," and resulted in Muslims observing 5 daily prayers.[68]
Moses is mentioned 502 times in the Qur'an; passages mentioning Moses include 2.49-61, 7.103-160, 10.75-93, 17.101-104, 20.9-97, 26.10-66, 27.7-14, 28.3-46, 40.23-30, 43.46-55, 44.17-31, and 79.15-25. and many others. Most of the key events in Moses' life which are narrated in the Bible are to be found dispersed through the different Surahs of Qur'an, with a story about meeting Khidr which is not found in the Bible.[66]
In the Moses story related by the Qur'an, Jochebed is commanded by God to place Moses in an ark and cast him on the waters of the Nile, thus abandoning him completely to God's protection.[66][69] Pharaoh's wife Asiya, not his daughter, found Moses floating in the waters of the Nile. She convinced Pharaoh to keep him as their son because they were not blessed with any children.
The Qur'an's account has emphasized Moses' mission to invite the Pharaoh to accept God's divine message[70] as well as give salvation to the Israelites.[66][71] According to the Qur'an, Moses encourages the Israelites to enter Canaan, but they are unwilling to fight the Canaanites, fearing certain defeat. Moses responds by pleading to Allah that he and his brother Aaron be separated from the rebellious Israelites. After which the Israelites are made to wander for 40 years.[72]
According to Islamic tradition, Moses is buried at Maqam El-Nabi Musa, Jericho.
Baha'i Faith
In the Baha'i Faith, Moses is considered a messenger from God who is considered equally authentic as those sent in other eras.[73] An epithet of Moses in Baha'i scriptures is Interlocutor of God.[74] Moses is further described as paving the way for Baha'ullah and his ultimate revelation, and a teacher of truth, whose teachings were in line with the customs of his time.[75]
Modern reception
Literature
 Wikiquote has quotations related to: Moses
Thomas Mann's novella The Tables of the Law is a retelling of the story of the exodus from Egypt, with Moses as its main character.
In Freud
Sigmund Freud, in his last book, Moses and Monotheism in 1939, postulated that Moses was an Egyptian nobleman who adhered to the monotheism of Akhenaten. Following a theory proposed by a contemporary biblical critic, Freud believed that Moses was murdered in the wilderness, producing a collective sense of patricidal guilt that has been at the heart of Judaism ever since. "Judaism had been a religion of the father, Christianity became a religion of the son", he wrote. The possible Egyptian origin of Moses and of his message has received significant scholarly attention.[29]
Opponents of this view observe that the religion of the Torah seems different from Atenism in everything except the central feature of devotion to a single god,[76] although this has been countered by a variety of arguments, e.g. pointing out the similarities between the Hymn to Aten and Psalm 104.[77][78] Freud's interpretation of the historical Moses is not well accepted among historians, and is considered pseudohistory by many.[79]
Criticism
Main article: Criticism of Moses
In the late 18th century the deist Thomas Paine commented at length on Moses' Laws in The Age of Reason, and gave his view that "the character of Moses, as stated in the Bible, is the most horrid that can be imagined",[80] giving the story at Numbers 31:13-18 as an example. In the 19th century the agnostic Robert G. Ingersoll wrote "...that all the ignorant, infamous, heartless, hideous things recorded in the 'inspired' Pentateuch are not the words of God, but simply 'Some Mistakes of Moses'".[81] In the 2000s, the atheist Richard Dawkins referring, like Paine, to the incident at Numbers 31:13-18, concluded, "No, Moses was not a great role model for modern moralists."[82]
Figurative art



 Sculpture in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Moses is depicted in several U.S. government buildings because of his legacy as a lawgiver. In the Library of Congress stands a large statue of Moses alongside a statue of the Apostle Paul. Moses is one of the 23 lawgivers depicted in marble bas-reliefs in the chamber of the U.S. House of Representatives in the United States Capitol. The other twenty-two figures have their profiles turned to Moses, which is the only forward-facing bas-relief.[83][84]



 Statue by Michelangelo Buonarotti — in Basilica San Pietro in Vincoli, Rome
Moses appears eight times in carvings that ring the Supreme Court Great Hall ceiling. His face is presented along with other ancient figures such as Solomon, the Greek god Zeus and the Roman goddess of wisdom, Minerva. The Supreme Court building's east pediment depicts Moses holding two tablets. Tablets representing the Ten Commandments can be found carved in the oak courtroom doors, on the support frame of the courtroom's bronze gates and in the library woodwork. A controversial image is one that sits directly above the chief justice's head. In the center of the 40-foot-long Spanish marble carving is a tablet displaying Roman numerals I through X, with some numbers partially hidden.[85]
Michelangelo's statue
Michelangelo's statue of Moses in the Church of San Pietro in Vincoli, Rome, is one of the most familiar masterpieces in the world.[citation needed] The horns the sculptor included on Moses' head are the result of a mistranslation of the Hebrew Bible into the Latin Vulgate Bible with which he was familiar. The Hebrew word taken from Exodus means either a "horn" or an "irradiation." Experts at the Archaeological Institute of America show that the term was used when Moses "returned to his people after seeing as much of the Glory of the Lord as human eye could stand," and his face "reflected radiance."[86] In early Jewish art, moreover, Moses is often "shown with rays coming out of his head."[87]
Another author explains, "When Saint Jerome translated the Old Testament into Latin, he thought no one but Christ should glow with rays of light — so he advanced the secondary translation.[88][89] However, writer J. Stephen Lang points out that Jerome's version actually described Moses as "giving off hornlike rays," and he "rather clumsily translated it to mean 'having horns.'"[90] It has also been noted that he had Moses seated on a throne, yet Moses was neither a King nor ever sat on such thrones.[91]
Film and television
Moses was portrayed by Theodore Roberts in DeMille's 1923 silent film The Ten Commandments. Moses appears as the central character in the 1956 Cecil B. DeMille movie, also called The Ten Commandments, in which he is portrayed by Charlton Heston. A television remake was produced in 2006.
Burt Lancaster played Moses in the 1975 television miniseries Moses the Lawgiver. In the 1981 film History of the World, Part I, Moses is portrayed by Mel Brooks.[92] Sir Ben Kingsley is the narrator of the 2007 animated film, The Ten Commandments.
Moses appears as the central character in the 1998 DreamWorks Pictures animated movie, The Prince of Egypt. He is voiced by Val Kilmer.[93]
In 2014, Ridley Scott directed the film Exodus: Gods and Kings, in which Christian Bale portrays the central character Moses.[94] It portrays Moses and Rameses II as being raised by Seti I as cousins.
See also
Mosaic authorship
Osarseph
Passage of the Red Sea
Table of prophets of Abrahamic religions
Notes
1.Jump up ^ Saint Augustine records the names of the kings when Moses was born in the City of God: "When Saphrus reigned as the fourteenth king of Assyria, and Orthopolis as the twelfth of Sicyon, and Criasus as the fifth of Argos, Moses was born in Eygpt,..."[12]
Orthopolis reigned as the 12th King of Sicyon for 63 years, from 1596-1533; and Criasus reigned as the 5th King of Argos for 54 years, from 1637-1583.[13]
2.Jump up ^ According to Manetho the place of his birth was at the ancient city of Heliopolis.[16]
3.Jump up ^ "It was the prophet's call. It was a real ecstatic experience, like that of David under the baka-tree, Elijah on the mountain, Isaiah in the temple, Ezekiel on the Khebar, Jesus in the Jordan, Paul on the Damascus road. It was the perpetual mystery of the divine touching the human."[17]
Citations
1.Jump up ^ "Moses". Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary.
2.Jump up ^ Deuteronomy 34:10
3.Jump up ^ Maimonides, 13 principles of faith, 7th principle
4.Jump up ^ "Princeton University Press Press Reviews, retrieved 6th June 2009". Press.princeton.edu. 2011-11-06. Retrieved 2012-04-03.
5.Jump up ^ The Quest for the Historical Israel: Debating Archeology and the History of Early Israel, 2007, Society of Biblical Literature, Atlanta, ISBN 978-1-58983-277-0.
6.Jump up ^ John Van Seters, "The life of Moses", ISBN 90-390-0112-X
7.Jump up ^ Exod. 1:10
8.Jump up ^ Exod. 4:10
9.Jump up ^ Seder Olam Rabbah[full citation needed]
10.Jump up ^ Jerome's Chronicon (4th century) gives 1592 for the birth of Moses
11.Jump up ^ the 17th-century Ussher chronology calculates 1571 BC (Annals of the World, 1658 paragraph 164)
12.Jump up ^ St Augustine. The City of God. Book XVIII. Chapter 8 - Who Were Kings When Moses Was Born, And What Gods Began To Be Worshipped Then.
13.Jump up ^ Herman L. Hoeh. COMPENDIUM OF WORLD HISTORY, VOLUME 1. A Dissertation Presented to The Faculty of the Ambassador College, Graduate School of Theology, 1962. 1967 Edition.
14.Jump up ^ Martha Hodes (2015). Mourning Lincoln. Yale University Press. pp. 164, 237,.
15.Jump up ^ Dozeman 2009, p. 81-82.
16.Jump up ^ Rev. John McClintock, D.D., and Dr. James Strong, S.T.D.. "Mo'ses." In: Cyclopaedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature. Vol. VI.— ME-NEV. New York: Harper & Brothers, Publishers, 1882. pp.677-687.
17.Jump up ^ Rev. Professor Nathaniel Schmidt, Ph.D.. "Moses: His Age and His Work. II." The Biblical World. Vol. 7, No. 2 (Feb., 1896), pp. 105-119. p.108.
18.Jump up ^ Hamilton 2011, p. xxv.
19.Jump up ^ Van Seters 2004, p. 194.
20.Jump up ^ Ska 2009, p. 260.
21.Jump up ^ Meyers 2005, p. 5-6.
22.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Shmuel, Safrai, M. Stern (ed) The Jewish People in the First Century, Van Gorcum Fortress Press (1976)
23.Jump up ^ Hammer, Reuven. The Classic Midrash: Tannaitic Commentaries on the Bible, Paulist Press (1995) p. 15
24.^ Jump up to: a b c Droge, Arthur J. Homer or Moses?: Early Christian Interpretations of the History of Culture, Mohr Siebeck (1989)
25.Jump up ^ Barclay, John M. G. Jews in the Mediterranean diaspora: from Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE - 117 CE), University of California Press (1996) p. 130
26.Jump up ^ "Moses". JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 2010-03-02.
27.^ Jump up to: a b c Feldman, Louis H. Josephus's Interpretation of the Bible, University of California Press (1998)
28.Jump up ^ Strabo. The Geography of Strabo, XVI 35, 36, Translated by H.C. Hamilton and W. Falconer, pp. 177-178,
29.^ Jump up to: a b Assmann, Jan (1997). Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism. Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-58738-3. See also Y. Yerushalmi's monograph on Freud's Moses.
30.Jump up ^ Tacitus, Cornelius. The works of Cornelius Tacitus: With an essay on his life and genius by Arthur Murphy, Thomas Wardle Publ. (1842) p. 499
31.^ Jump up to: a b Tacitus, Cornelius. Tacitus, The Histories, Volume 2, Book V. Chapters 5, 6 p. 208.
32.Jump up ^ Josephus, Flavius. The works of Flavius Josephus: Comprising the Antiquities of the Jews, trans. by William Whiston, (1854) Book VIII, Ch. IV, pp. 254-255
33.^ Jump up to: a b Guthrie, Kenneth Sylvan. Numenius of Apamea: The Father of Neo-Platonism, George Bell & Sons (1917)
34.^ Jump up to: a b Blackham, Paul; ed. Paul Louis Metzger. Trinitarian Soundings in Systematic Theology, in essay: "The Trinity in the Hebrew Scriptures", Continuum International Publ. Group (2005) p. 39
35.Jump up ^ Stead, Michael R.; John W. Raine (2009). The Intertextuality of Zechariah 1-8: Ideals and Realities. T.& T.Clark Ltd. p. 42. ISBN 978-0-567-29172-1.
36.Jump up ^ Meyers, Carol (2005). Exodus. Cambridge University Press. p. 3. ISBN 978-0-521-00291-2.
37.Jump up ^ I Finkelstein and N. Na'aman, eds., From Nomadism to Monarchy (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1994)
38.Jump up ^ Finkelstein, Israel and Silberman, Neil Asher (2001). The Bible Unearthed. New York: Free Press. ISBN 0-684-86912-8.
39.Jump up ^ Finkelstein, Israel and Silberman, Neil Asher (2001). The Bible Unearthed. New York: Free Press. ISBN 0-684-86912-8.
40.Jump up ^ Who Were the Early Israelites? by William G. Dever (William B. Eerdmans Publishing, Grand Rapids, MI, 2003)
41.Jump up ^ The Bible Unearthed by Neil Asher Silberman and Israel Finkelstein (Simon and Schuster, New York, 2001)
42.Jump up ^ "''False Testament''by Daniel Lazare (Harper's Magazine, New York, May 2002)". Harpers.org. Retrieved 2010-10-11.
43.Jump up ^ "Archaeology and the Hebrew Scriptures".
44.Jump up ^ Dever, William G. (2002). What Did the Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It?. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. ISBN 0-8028-2126-X.
45.^ Jump up to: a b "Moses." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2007. Encyclopædia Britannica Online
46.Jump up ^ Magnussen, Magnus (1975), "BC, the Archaeology of the Bible Lands" (BBC Books)
47.Jump up ^ DDD (1999:911).
48.Jump up ^ Dodson, Aidan (2010), "Poisoned Legacy: The fall of the 19th Egyptian Dynasty" (American University in Cairo Press)
49.Jump up ^ Georg, M (2000), "Mose - Name und Namenstraeger. Versuch einer historischen Annaeherung" in "Mose. Aegypten und das Alte Testament", edited by E. Otto, (Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk, Stittgart)
50.Jump up ^ Krauss, R (2000), "Moise le pharaon" (Editions du Roche)
51.Jump up ^ This title is held specifically in Islam.
52.Jump up ^ This is a specifically Jewish title
53.Jump up ^ Moses is commemorated as a forefather, along with the patriarchs, in the Armenian Apostolic Church
54.Jump up ^ Midrash Rabbah, Ki Thissa, XL. 3-3, Lehrman, P.463
55.Jump up ^ Yalkut Shimoni, Shemot 166 to Chronicles I 4:18, 24:6; also see Vayikra Rabbah 1:3; Chasidah p.345
56.Jump up ^ Rashi to Bava Batra 15s, Chasidah p.345
57.Jump up ^ Bava Batra 15a on Deuteronomy 33:21, Chasidah p.345
58.Jump up ^ Rashi to Berachot 54a, Chasidah p.345
59.Jump up ^ Eusebius, Præparatio Evangelica ix. 26
60.Jump up ^ Eusebius, l.c. ix. 27
61.Jump up ^ "Judaism 101: Moses, Aaron and Miriam". Jewfaq.org. Retrieved 2010-03-02.
62.Jump up ^ Great Synaxaristes: (Greek) Ὁ Προφήτης Μωϋσῆς. 4 Σεπτεμβρίου. ΜΕΓΑΣ ΣΥΝΑΞΑΡΙΣΤΗΣ.
63.Jump up ^ Skinner, Andrew C. (1992), "Moses", in Ludlow, Daniel H, Encyclopedia of Mormonism, New York: Macmillan Publishing, pp. 958–959, ISBN 0-02-879602-0, OCLC 24502140
64.Jump up ^ Taylor, Bruce T. (1992), "Book of Moses", in Ludlow, Daniel H, Encyclopedia of Mormonism, New York: Macmillan Publishing, pp. 216–217, ISBN 0-02-879602-0, OCLC 24502140
65.Jump up ^ The Doctrine and Covenants 110:11
66.^ Jump up to: a b c d Annabel Keeler, "Moses from a Muslim Perspective", in: Solomon, Norman; Harries, Richard; Winter, Tim (eds.), Abraham's children: Jews, Christians, and Muslims in conversation, by . T&T Clark Publ. (2005), pp. 55 - 66.
67.Jump up ^ Keeler (2005) describes Moses from the Muslim perspective: ”Among prophets, Moses has been described as the one ‘whose career as a messenger of God, lawgiver and leader of his community most closely parallels and foreshadows that of Muhammad’, and as ‘the figure that in the Koran was presented to Muhammad above all others as the supreme model of saviour and ruler of a community, the man chosen to present both knowledge of the one God, and a divinely revealed system of law’. We find him clearly in this role of Muhammad’s forebear in a well-known tradition of the miraculous ascension of the Prophet, where Moses advises Muhammad from his own experience as messenger and lawgiver.”
68.Jump up ^ Smith, Huston. The world's religions HarperCollins, (1991) p. 245
69.Jump up ^ Quran 28:7
70.Jump up ^ Quran 79:17–19
71.Jump up ^ Quran 20:47–48
72.Jump up ^ Quran 5:20
73.Jump up ^ Historical Context of the Bábi and Bahá'í Faiths
74.Jump up ^ Paradise and Paradigm: Key Symbols in Persian Christianity and the Baháí̕ Faith, Christopher Buck - 1999
75.Jump up ^ The Bahá'í: The Religious Construction of a Global Identity - Page 256, Michael McMullen - 2000
76.Jump up ^ "Order of the Aten Temple".
77.Jump up ^ Jan Assmann, op. cit.
78.Jump up ^ Atwell, James E. (2000). "An Egyptian Source for Genesis 1". Journal of Theological Studies 51 (2): 441–477. doi:10.1093/jts/51.2.441.
79.Jump up ^ Bernstein, Richard J. (1998). Freud and the Legacy of Moses. New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-63096-7.
80.Jump up ^ Thomas Paine The Age of Reason part II, 1796
81.Jump up ^ Robert G. Ingersoll, Some Mistakes of Moses chapter XXIX
82.Jump up ^ Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, 2006, chapter 7
83.Jump up ^ "Relief Portraits of Lawgivers: Moses. Architect of the Capitol". Aoc.gov. 2009-02-13. Retrieved 2010-03-02.
84.Jump up ^ "Courtroom Friezes: North and South Walls: Information Sheet." Supreme Court of the United States. [1]
85.Jump up ^ "In the Supreme Court itself, Moses and his law on display" Religion News Service
86.Jump up ^ MacLean, Margaret. (ed) Art and Archaeology, Vol. VI, Archaeological Institute of America (1917) p. 97
87.Jump up ^ Devore, Gary M. (2008). Walking Tours of Ancient Rome: A Secular Guidebook to the Eternal City. Mercury Guides. p. 126. ISBN 978-0-615-19497-4.
88.Jump up ^ Thomason, Dustin; Caldwell, Ian (2005). The Rule of Four. New York: Random House. p. 151. ISBN 0-440-24135-9.
89.Jump up ^ Gross, Kenneth (2005). The Dream of the Moving Statue. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press. p. 245. ISBN 0-271-02900-5.
90.Jump up ^ Lang, J. Stephen (2003). What the Good Book Didn't Say: Popular Myths and Misconceptions About the Bible. New York: Citadel Press. p. 114. ISBN 0-8065-2460-X.
91.Jump up ^ Boitani, Piero (1999). The Bible and its Rewritings. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. p. 126. ISBN 0-19-818487-5.
92.Jump up ^ "History of the World: Part I".
93.Jump up ^ "Prince of Egypt".
94.Jump up ^ "Exodus: Gods and Kings". IMDB.
Further reading
Asch, Sholem. Moses. New York: Putnam, 1958. ISBN 0-7426-9137-3.
Assmann, Jan. Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism. Harvard University Press, 1997. ISBN 0-674-58738-3.
Barenboim, Peter. Biblical Roots of Separation of Power, Moscow : Letny Sad, 2005, ISBN 5-94381-123-0, http://lccn.loc.gov/2006400578
Barzel, Hillel. "Moses: Tragedy and Sublimity." In Literary Interpretations of Biblical Narratives. Edited by Kenneth R.R. Gros Louis, with James S. Ackerman & Thayer S. Warshaw, 120–40. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1974. ISBN 0-687-22131-5.
Buber, Martin. Moses: The Revelation and the Covenant. New York: Harper, 1958.
Card, Orson Scott. Stone Tables. Deseret Book Co., 1998. ISBN 1-57345-115-0.
Chasidah, Yishai. "Moses." In Encyclopedia of Biblical Personalities: Anthologized from the Talmud, Midrash and Rabbinic Writings, 340–99. Brooklyn: Shaar Press, 1994.
Cohen, Joel. Moses: A Memoir. Mahwah, N.J.: Paulist Press, 2003. ISBN 0-8091-0558-6.
Dozeman, Thomas B. (2009). Commentary on Exodus. Eerdmans.
Daiches, David. Moses: The Man and his Vision. New York: Praeger, 1975. ISBN 0-275-33740-5.
Fast, Howard. Moses, Prince of Egypt. New York: Crown Pubs., 1958.
Freud, Sigmund. Moses and Monotheism. New York: Vintage, 1967. ISBN 0-394-70014-7.
Gregory of Nyssa. The Life of Moses. Transl. Abraham J. Malherbe and Everett Ferguson. Preface by John Meyendorff. The Classics of Western Spirituality. Paulist Press, 1978. 208 pp. ISBN 9780809121120
Halter, Marek. Zipporah, Wife of Moses. New York: Crown, 2005. ISBN 1-4000-5279-3.
Hoffmeier, James K. 'Moses and the Exodus.' In: Israel in Egypt: The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition, pp. 135–63. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
Hamilton, Victor (2011). Exodus: An Exegetical Commentary. Baker Books.
Ingraham, J. H.. The Pillar of Fire: Or Israel in Bondage. New York: A.L. Burt, 1859. Reprinted Ann Arbor, Mich.: Scholarly Publishing Office, University of Michigan Library, 2006. ISBN 1-4255-6491-7.
Kirsch, Jonathan. Moses: A Life. New York: Ballantine, 1998. ISBN 0-345-41269-9.
Kohn, Rebecca. Seven Days to the Sea: An Epic Novel of the Exodus. New York: Rugged Land, 2006. ISBN 1-59071-049-5.
Lehman, S.M. (translator), Freedman, H. (ed.), Midrash Rabbah, 10 volumes, The Soncino Press, London, 1983.
Mann, Thomas. "Thou Shalt Have No Other Gods Before Me." In The Ten Commandments, 3–70. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1943.
Salibi, Kamal. The Bible Came from Arabia. London: Jonathan Cape, 1985.
Sandmel, Samuel. Alone Atop the Mountain. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1973. ISBN 0-385-03877-1.
Ska, Jean Louis (2009). The Exegesis of the Pentateuch: Exegetical Studies and Basic Questions. Mohr Siebeck. pp. 30–31,260. ISBN 978-3-16-149905-0.
Southon, Arthur E. On Eagles' Wings. London: Cassell and Co., 1937. Reprinted New York: McGraw-Hill, 1954.
Van Seters, John (2004). "Moses". In Barton, John. The Biblical World. Taylor & Francis.
Van Seters, John (1994). The Life of Moses: The Yahwist as Historian in Exodus-Numbers. Peeters Publishers.
Wiesel, Elie. “Moses: Portrait of a Leader.” In Messengers of God: Biblical Portraits & Legends, 174–210. New York: Random House, 1976. ISBN 0-394-49740-6.
Wildavsky, Aaron. Moses as Political Leader. Jerusalem: Shalem Press, 2005. ISBN 965-7052-31-9.
Wilson, Dorothy Clarke. Prince of Egypt. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1949.
K. van der Toorn, Bob Becking, Pieter Willem van der Horst: Dictionary of deities and demons in the Bible
External links
 Look up משה in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
 Wikimedia Commons has media related to Moses.
 Wikiquote has quotations related to: Moses
 Wikisource has original works written by or about:
Moses
 This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: "Moses". Jewish Encyclopedia. 1901–1906.
The Geography, Book XVI, Chapter II The entire context of the cited chapter of Strabo's work

Moses
Levite

Preceded by
NA Lawgiver Succeeded by
Joshua


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Prophets in the Hebrew Bible
















































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Quranic prophets





       
























        


























       


























[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Ark of the Covenant topics























































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Catholic Saints















Stained glass of the Four Evangelists in Bockweiler, Germany











































































































































































































































































































Portal icon
Portal icon




Authority control
WorldCat ·
 VIAF: 13586858 ·
 LCCN: n79058331 ·
 ISNI: 0000 0001 0777 5288 ·
 GND: 118641190 ·
 SELIBR: 194421 ·
 NLA: 49682355
 

  


Categories: Prophets of the Hebrew Bible
Ancient Egyptian Jews
Angelic visionaries
Moses
15th-century BC biblical rulers
Biblical murderers
Book of Exodus
Adoptees
Christian saints from the Old Testament
Eastern Orthodox saints
People celebrated in the Lutheran liturgical calendar
Prophets of Islam
People in the canonical gospels
Torah people
Wonderworkers



























Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

View source

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Acèh
Afrikaans
Alemannisch
አማርኛ
العربية
Aragonés
ܐܪܡܝܐ
Asturianu
Azərbaycanca
বাংলা
Bân-lâm-gú
Башҡортса
Беларуская
Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎
Български
བོད་ཡིག
Bosanski
Brezhoneg
Català
Čeština
Chamoru
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deitsch
Deutsch
Dolnoserbski
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Fiji Hindi
Føroyskt
Français
Furlan
Gaeilge
Gàidhlig
Galego
贛語
ગુજરાતી
한국어
Հայերեն
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Ilokano
Bahasa Indonesia
Interlingua
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
Basa Jawa
ქართული
Қазақша
Kernowek
Kiswahili
Kurdî
Ladino
Лакку
Лезги
Latina
Latviešu
Lëtzebuergesch
Lietuvių
Limburgs
Lumbaart
Magyar
Македонски
മലയാളം
मराठी
مصرى
Bahasa Melayu
Mìng-dĕ̤ng-ngṳ̄
Монгол
မြန်မာဘာသာ
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
Occitan
Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
پنجابی
پښتو
Piemontèis
Polski
Português
Română
Rumantsch
Русиньскый
Русский
Scots
Shqip
Sicilianu
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Soomaaliga
کوردی
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Tagalog
தமிழ்
Taqbaylit
Татарча/tatarça
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
اردو
Tiếng Việt
Võro
Winaray
ייִדיש
Yorùbá
粵語
Zazaki
Žemaitėška
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 14 April 2015, at 07:02.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses













Page semi-protected

Moses

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

For other uses, see Moses (disambiguation).

Moses
Rembrandt - Moses with the Ten Commandments - Google Art Project.jpg
Moses Breaking the Tablets of the Law by Rembrandt

Born
Goshen, Lower Egypt
Died
Mount Nebo, Moab
Spouse(s)
Zipporah
Children
Gershom
Eliezer
Parent(s)
Amram (father)
Jochebed (mother)
Relatives
Aaron (brother)
Miriam (sister)
Moses (/ˈmoʊzɪz, -zɪs/;[1] Hebrew: מֹשֶׁה‎, Modern Moshe Tiberian Mōšéh ISO 259-3 Moše; Syriac: ܡܘܫܐ Moushe; Arabic: موسى‎ Mūsā; Greek: Mωϋσῆς Mōÿsēs in both the Septuagint and the New Testament) was, according to the Hebrew Bible, a former Egyptian prince later turned prophet, religious leader and lawgiver, to whom the authorship of the Torah is traditionally attributed. Also called Moshe Rabbenu in Hebrew (מֹשֶׁה רַבֵּנוּ, Lit. "Moses our Teacher/Rabbi"), he is the most important prophet in Judaism.[2][3] He is also an important prophet in Christianity and Islam, as well as a number of other faiths.
The existence of Moses as well as the veracity of the Exodus story are disputed among archaeologists and Egyptologists, with experts in the field of biblical criticism citing logical inconsistencies, new archaeological evidence, historical evidence, and related origin myths in Canaanite culture.[4][5][6] Other historians maintain that the biographical details and Egyptian background attributed to Moses imply the existence of a historical political and religious leader who was involved in the consolidation of the Hebrew tribes in Canaan towards the end of the Bronze Age.
According to the Book of Exodus, Moses was born in a time when his people, the Israelites, were increasing in numbers and the Egyptian Pharaoh was worried that they might ally with Egypt's enemies.[7] Moses' Hebrew mother, Jochebed, secretly hid him when the Pharaoh ordered all newborn Hebrew boys to be killed in order to reduce the population of the Israelites. Through the Pharaoh's daughter (identified as Queen Bithia in the Midrash), the child was adopted as a foundling from the Nile river and grew up with the Egyptian royal family. After killing an Egyptian slavemaster (because the slavemaster was smiting a Hebrew), Moses fled across the Red Sea to Midian, where he encountered the God of Israel speaking to him from within a "burning bush which was not consumed by the fire" on Mount Horeb (which he regarded as the Mountain of God).
God sent Moses back to Egypt to demand the release of the Israelites from slavery. Moses said that he could not speak with assurance or eloquence,[8] so God allowed Aaron, his brother, to become his spokesperson. After the Ten Plagues, Moses led the Exodus of the Israelites out of Egypt and across the Red Sea, after which they based themselves at Mount Sinai, where Moses received the Ten Commandments. After 40 years of wandering in the desert, Moses died within sight of the Promised Land.
Rabbinical Judaism calculated a lifespan of Moses corresponding to 1391–1271 BCE;[9] Jerome gives 1592 BCE,[10] and Ussher 1571 BCE as his birth year.[11][note 1]



 Moses and the tablets of law, by José de Ribera.
In a metaphorical sense in the Christian tradition, a "Moses" is the leader who delivers the people from a terrible situation. When Abraham Lincoln, was assassinated in 1865 after freeing the slaves, black Americans said they had lost "their Moses".[14]


Contents  [hide]
1 Name
2 Biblical narrative 2.1 Prophet and deliverer of Israel
2.2 Lawgiver of Israel
3 Sources
4 Moses in Hellenistic literature
5 Historicity
6 Moses in religious traditions 6.1 Judaism
6.2 Christianity 6.2.1 Mormonism
6.3 Islam
6.4 Baha'i Faith
7 Modern reception 7.1 Literature
7.2 In Freud
7.3 Criticism
7.4 Figurative art
7.5 Michelangelo's statue
7.6 Film and television
8 See also
9 Notes
10 Citations
11 Further reading
12 External links

Name
Moses' name is given to him by Pharaoh's daughter: "He became her son, and she named him Moshe (Moses)." This name may be either Egyptian or Hebrew. If connected to an Egyptian root, via msy "to be born" and ms, "a son", it forms a wordplay: "he became her son, and she named him Son." There should, however, be a divine element to the name Moses (bearers of the Egyptian name are the "son of" a god, as in Thutmose, "son of Thut"), and his full name may therefore have included the name of one of the Egyptian gods. Most scholars agree that the name is Egyptian, and that the Hebrew etymology is a later interpretation, but if the name is from a Hebrew root then it is connected to the verb "to draw out": "I drew him (masha) out of the water," states Pharaoh's daughter, possibly looking forward to Moses at the well in Midian, or to his role in saving Israel at the Red Sea.[15]
Biblical narrative



 Moses rescued from the Nile, 1638, by Nicolas Poussin.
Prophet and deliverer of Israel



 Moses before the Pharaoh, a 6th-century miniature from the Syriac Bible of Paris


 Moses strikes water from the stone, by Francesco Bacchiacca


 Moses holding up his arms during the battle, assisted by Aaron and Hur; painting by John Everett Millais


 Moses surveys Canaan from West of the Jordan, 1909 illustration
The Israelites had settled in the Land of Goshen in the time of Joseph and Jacob, but a new pharaoh arose who oppressed the children of Israel. At this time Moses was born to his father Amram, son of Kohath the Levite, who entered Egypt with Jacob's household; his mother was Jochebed (also Yocheved), who was kin to Kohath. Moses had one older (by seven years) sister, Miriam, and one older (by three years) brother, Aaron.[note 2]
Pharaoh had commanded that all male Hebrew children born be drowned in the river Nile, but Moses' mother placed him in an ark and concealed the ark in the bulrushes by the riverbank, where the baby was discovered and adopted by Pharaoh's daughter. One day after Moses had reached adulthood he killed an Egyptian who was beating a Hebrew. Moses, in order to escape Pharaoh's death penalty, fled to Midian (a desert country south of Judah).
There, on Mount Horeb, God revealed to Moses his name YHWH (probably pronounced Yahweh) and commanded him to return to Egypt and bring his Chosen People (Israel) out of bondage and into the Promised Land (Canaan).[note 3] Moses returned to carry out God's command, but God caused Pharaoh to refuse, and only after God had subjected Egypt to ten plagues did Pharaoh relent. Moses led the Israelites to the border of Egypt, but there God hardened Pharaoh's heart once more, so that he could destroy Pharaoh and his army at the Red Sea Crossing as a sign of his power to Israel and the nations.
From Egypt, Moses led the Israelites to Mount Sinai, where he was given ten commandments from God, written on stone tablets. However, since Moses remained a long time on the mountain, some of the people feared that he might be dead, so they made a golden statue of a calf and worshipped it, thus disobeying and angering God and Moses, the latter, out of anger, broke the tablets. Moses later ordered the elimination of those who had worshipped the golden statue, which was melted down and fed to the idolaters. He also wrote the ten commandments on a new set of tablets. Later at Mount Sinai, Moses and the elders entered into a covenant, by which Israel would become the people of YHWH, obeying his laws, and YHWH would be their god. Moses delivered laws of God to Israel, instituted the priesthood under the sons of Moses' brother Aaron, and destroyed those Israelites who fell away from his worship. In his final act at Sinai, God gave Moses instructions for the Tabernacle, the mobile shrine by which he would travel with Israel to the Promised Land.
From Sinai, Moses led the Israelites to Paran on the border of Canaan. There he sent twelve spies into the land. The spies returned with samples of the land's fertility, but warned that its inhabitants were giants. The people were afraid and wanted to return to Egypt, and some rebelled against Moses and against God. Moses told the Israelites that they were not worthy to inherit the land, and would wander the wilderness for forty years until the generation who had refused to enter Canaan had died, so that it would be their children who would possess the land.
When the forty years had passed, Moses led the Israelites east around the Dead Sea to the territories of Edom and Moab. There they escaped the temptation of idolatry, received God's blessing through Balaam the prophet, and massacred the Midianites, who were God's enemies. On the banks of the Jordan, in sight of the land, Moses assembled the tribes. After recalling their wanderings he delivered God's laws by which they must live in the land, sang a song of praise and pronounced a blessing on the people, and passed his authority to Joshua, under whom they would possess the land. Moses then went up Mount Nebo to the top of Pisgah, looked over the promised land of Israel spread out before him, and died, at the age of one hundred and twenty. More humble than any other man (Num. 12:3), "there hath not arisen a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom YHWH knew face to face" (Deuteronomy. 34:10).



 A Russian Orthodox icon of the prophet Moses, gesturing towards the burning bush; 18th-century (Iconostasis of Transfiguration Church, Kizhi Monastery, Karelia, Russia)


 Moses lifts up the brass serpent, curing the Israelites from poisonous snake bites in a painting by Benjamin West
Lawgiver of Israel
Further information: Law of Moses, Mosaic authorship, Deuteronomist, Book of Deuteronomy § Deuteronomic code and 613 Mitzvot



William Blake's "Moses Receiving the Law"


 Death of Moses by Alexandre Cabanel
Moses is honoured among Jews today as the "lawgiver of Israel", and he delivers several sets of laws in the course of the four books. The first is the Covenant code, Exodus 19-24, the terms of the covenant which God offers to Israel at the foot of Sinai. Embedded in the covenant are the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments, Exodus 20:1-17) and the Book of the Covenant (Exodus 20:22-23:19).[18] The entire Book of Leviticus constitutes a second body of law, the Book of Numbers begins with yet another set, and the Book of Deuteronomy another.
Moses has traditionally been regarded as the author of those four books and the Book of Genesis, which together comprise the Torah, the first and most revered section of the Jewish Bible.
Sources
Apart from a few scattered references elsewhere in the Jewish scriptures, all that is known about Moses comes from the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.[19] The majority of scholars date these four books to the Persian period, 538-332 BCE.[20]
No Egyptian sources mention Moses or the events of Exodus-Deuteronomy, nor has any archeological evidence been discovered in Egypt or the Sinai wilderness to support the story in which he is the central figure.[21]
Moses in Hellenistic literature
Further information: Moses in Judeo-Hellenistic literature



 The Moses Window at the Washington National Cathedral depicts the three stages in Moses' life.
Non-biblical writings about Jews, with references to the role of Moses, first appear at the beginning of the Hellenistic period, from 323 BCE to about 146 BCE. Shmuel notes that "a characteristic of this literature is the high honour in which it holds the peoples of the East in general and some specific groups among these peoples."[22]:1102
In addition to the Judeo-Roman or Judeo-Hellenic historians Artapanus, Eupolemus, Josephus, and Philo, a few non-Jewish historians including Hecataeus of Abdera (quoted by Diodorus Siculus), Alexander Polyhistor, Manetho, Apion, Chaeremon of Alexandria, Tacitus and Porphyry also make reference to him. The extent to which any of these accounts rely on earlier sources is unknown.[22]:1103 Moses also appears in other religious texts such as the Mishnah (c. 200 AD), Midrash (AD 200–1200),[23] and the Qur'an (c. 610—653).
The figure of Osarseph in Hellenistic historiography is a renegade Egyptian priest who leads an army of lepers against the pharaoh and is finally expelled from Egypt, changing his name to Moses.
In Hecataeus
The earliest existing reference to Moses in Greek literature occurs in the Egyptian history of Hecataeus of Abdera (4th century BC). All that remains of his description of Moses are two references made by Diodorus Siculus, wherein, writes historian Arthur Droge, "he describes Moses as a wise and courageous leader who left Egypt and colonized Judaea."[24]:18 Among the many accomplishments described by Hecataeus, Moses had founded cities, established a temple and religious cult, and issued laws:
After the establishment of settled life in Egypt in early times, which took place, according to the mythical account, in the period of the gods and heroes, the first . . . to persuade the multitudes to use written laws was Mneves [Moses], a man not only great of soul but also in his life the most public-spirited of all lawgivers whose names are recorded.[24]:18
Droge also points out that this statement by Hecataeus was similar to statements made subsequently by Eupolemus.[24]:18
In Artapanus
The Jewish historian Artapanus of Alexandria (2nd century BCE), portrayed Moses as a cultural hero, alien to the Pharaonic court. According to theologian John Barclay, the Moses of Artapanus "clearly bears the destiny of the Jews, and in his personal, cultural and military splendor, brings credit to the whole Jewish people."[25]
Jealousy of Moses' excellent qualities induced Chenephres to send him with unskilled troops on a military expedition to Ethiopia, where he won great victories. After having built the city of Hermopolis, he taught the people the value of the ibis as a protection against the serpents, making the bird the sacred guardian spirit of the city; then he introduced circumcision. After his return to Memphis, Moses taught the people the value of oxen for agriculture, and the consecration of the same by Moses gave rise to the cult of Apis. Finally, after having escaped another plot by killing the assailant sent by the king, Moses fled to Arabia, where he married the daughter of Raguel [Jethro], the ruler of the district." [26]
Artapanus goes on to relate how Moses returns to Egypt with Aaron, and is imprisoned, but miraculously escapes through the name of YHWH in order to lead the Exodus. This account further testifies that all Egyptian temples of Isis thereafter contained a rod, in remembrance of that used for Moses' miracles. He describes Moses as 80 years old, "tall and ruddy, with long white hair, and dignified."
Some historians, however, point out the "apologetic nature of much of Artapanus' work,"[27]:40 with his addition extra-biblical details, as with references to Jethro: The non-Jewish Jethro expresses admiration for Moses' gallantry in helping his daughters, and chooses to adopt Moses as his son.[27]:133
In Strabo
Strabo, a Greek historian, geographer and philosopher, in his Geography (c. AD 24), wrote in detail about Moses, whom he considered to be an Egyptian who deplored the situation in his homeland, and thereby attracted many followers who respected the deity. He writes, for example, that Moses opposed the picturing of the deity in the form of man or animal, and was convinced that the deity was an entity which encompassed everything – land and sea:[22]:1132
35. An Egyptian priest named Moses, who possessed a portion of the country called the Lower Egypt, being dissatisfied with the established institutions there, left it and came to Judaea with a large body of people who worshipped the Divinity. He declared and taught that the Egyptians and Africans entertained erroneous sentiments, in representing the Divinity under the likeness of wild beasts and cattle of the field; that the Greeks also were in error in making images of their gods after the human form. For God [said he] may be this one thing which encompasses us all, land and sea, which we call heaven, or the universe, or the nature of things. . . .36. By such doctrine Moses persuaded a large body of right-minded persons to accompany him to the place where Jerusalem now stands. . . . ''[28]
In Strabo’s writings of the history of Judaism as he understood it, he describes various stages in its development: from the first stage, including Moses and his direct heirs; to the final stage where "the Temple of Jerusalem continued to be surrounded by an aura of sanctity." Strabo’s "positive and unequivocal appreciation of Moses’ personality is among the most sympathetic in all ancient literature." [22]:1133 His portrayal of Moses is said to be similar to the writing of Hecataeus who "described Moses as a man who excelled in wisdom and courage."[22]:1133
Egyptologist Jan Assmann concludes that Strabo was the historian "who came closest to a construction of Moses' religion as monotheism and as a pronounced counter-religion." It recognized "only one divine being whom no image can represent. . . [and] the only way to approach this god is to live in virtue and in justice."[29]:38
In Tacitus
The Roman historian Tacitus (ca. 56—120 AD) refers to Moses by noting that the Jewish religion was monotheistic and without a clear image. His primary work, wherein he describes Jewish philosophy, is his Histories (ca. 100), where, according to Murphy, as a result of the Jewish worship of one God, "pagan mythology fell into contempt."[30] Tacitus states that, despite various opinions current in his day regarding the Jews' ethnicity, most of his sources are in agreement that there was an Exodus from Egypt. By his account, the Pharaoh Bocchoris, suffering from a plague, banished the Jews in response to an oracle of the god Zeus-Amun.
A motley crowd was thus collected and abandoned in the desert. While all the other outcasts lay idly lamenting, one of them, named Moses, advised them not to look for help to gods or men, since both had deserted them, but to trust rather in themselves, and accept as divine the guidance of the first being, by whose aid they should get out of their present plight.[31]
In this version, Moses and the Jews wander through the desert for only six days, capturing the Holy Land on the seventh.[31]
In Longinus
The Septuagint, the Greek version of the Hebrew Bible, influenced Longinus, who may have been the author of the great book of literary criticism, On the Sublime, although the true author is still unknown for certain. However, most scholars agree that the author lived in the time of Augustus or Tiberius, the first and second Roman Emperors.
The writer quotes Genesis in a "style which presents the nature of the deity in a manner suitable to his pure and great being," however he does not mention Moses by name, but instead calls him "the Lawgiver of the Jews." Besides its mention of Cicero, Moses is the only non-Greek writer quoted in the work, and he is described "with far more admiration than even Greek writers who treated Moses with respect, such as Hecataeus and Strabo.[22]:1140
In Josephus
In Josephus' (37 – c. 100 AD) Antiquities of the Jews, Moses is mentioned throughout. For example Book VIII Ch. IV, describes Solomon's Temple, also known as the First Temple, at the time the Ark of the Covenant was first moved into the newly built temple:

When King Solomon had finished these works, these large and beautiful buildings, and had laid up his donations in the temple, and all this in the interval of seven years, and had given a demonstration of his riches and alacrity therein; ... he also wrote to the rulers and elders of the Hebrews, and ordered all the people to gather themselves together to Jerusalem, both to see the temple which he had built, and to remove the ark of God into it; and when this invitation of the whole body of the people to come to Jerusalem was everywhere carried abroad, ... The Feast of Tabernacles happened to fall at the same time, which was kept by the Hebrews as a most holy and most eminent feast. So they carried the ark and the tabernacle which Moses had pitched, and all the vessels that were for ministration to the sacrifices of God, and removed them to the temple... Now the ark contained nothing else but those two tables of stone that preserved the ten commandments, which God spake to Moses in Mount Sinai, and which were engraved upon them...[32]
According to Feldman, Josephus also attaches particular significance to Moses' possession of the "cardinal virtues of wisdom, courage, temperance, and justice." He also includes piety as an added fifth virtue. In addition, he "stresses Moses' willingness to undergo toil and his careful avoidance of bribery. Like Plato's philosopher-king, Moses excels as an educator."[27]:130
In Numenius
Numenius, a Greek philosopher who was a native of Apamea, in Syria, wrote during the latter half of the 2nd century AD. Historian Kennieth Guthrie writes that "Numenius is perhaps the only recognized Greek philosopher who explicitly studied Moses, the prophets, and the life of Jesus . . . "[33]:194 He describes his background:

Numenius was a man of the world; he was not limited to Greek and Egyptian mysteries, but talked familiarly of the myths of Brahmins and Magi. It is however his knowledge and use of the Hebrew scriptures which distinguished him from other Greek philosophers. He refers to Moses simply as "the prophet", exactly as for him Homer is the poet. Plato is described as a Greek Moses.[33]:101
In Justin Martyr
The Christian saint and religious philosopher Justin Martyr (103–165 AD) drew the same conclusion as Numenius, according to other experts. Theologian Paul Blackham notes that Justin considered Moses to be "more trustworthy, profound and truthful because he is older than the Greek philosophers."[34] He quotes him:

I will begin, then, with our first prophet and lawgiver, Moses . . . that you may know that, of all your teachers, whether sages, poets, historians, philosophers, or lawgivers, by far the oldest, as the Greek histories show us, was Moses, who was our first religious teacher.[34]
Historicity



 Memorial of Moses, Mount Nebo, Jordan
The tradition of Moses as a lawgiver and culture hero of the Israelites can be traced to the Deuteronomist source, corresponding to the 7th-century Kingdom of Judah. Moses is a central figure in the Deuteronomist account of the origins of the Israelites, cast in a literary style of elegant flashbacks told by Moses. The mainstream view is that the Deuteronomist relies on earlier material that may date to the United Monarchy, so that the biblical narrative would be based on traditions that can be traced roughly to the 10th century, or about four centuries after the supposed lifetime of Moses. By contrast, Biblical minimalists such as Philip Davies and Niels Peter Lemche regard the Exodus as a fiction composed in the Persian period or even later to give hope of return to Canaan for a Diaspora community, without even the memory of a historical Moses.[35][36] Given this possible late composition it would seem that the figure of Moses may be a composite drawn from a number of different sources.
The question of the historicity of the Exodus (specifically, the Pharaoh of the Exodus, identification of whom would connect the biblical narrative to Egyptological chronology) has long been debated, without conclusive result. There were at least two periods in Egyptian history in which Asiatic Semites were expelled from Egypt. One was associated with the expulsion of the Semitic Hyksos at the beginning of the Late Bronze Age. The second was following the commencement of the reign of Setnakhte at the end of the 19th Dynasty. Manetho seems to confuse the two, for instance, in a distorted account reported in Josephus, he supposedly states that Moses was originally Osarseph, a renegade priest, who led a band of lepers out of Avaris (referred to as Raamses in the Bible).(Exodus 1:11) Osarseph, may be a memory of a shadowy visier, originally from Syria (Hurru), known as Yursu (self-made), who came to prominence as Chancellor Bay just prior to the second event. Pi Ramesses may be the "store city" Raamses mentioned in Exodus, which was the capital of the Egyptian Empire in the 19th to end of the 20th Dynasty of Egypt, giving quite a specific date to the Egyptian part of Exodus.
Some scholars, like Kenneth Kitchen and Frank Yurko suggest that there may be a historical core beneath the Exodus and Sinai traditions, even if the biblical narrative dramatizes by portraying as a single event what was more likely a gradual process of migration and conquest. Thus, the motif of "slavery in Egypt" may reflect the historical situation of imperialist control of the Egyptian Empire over Canaan over the period of the Thutmosides down to the revolt against Merenptah and Rameses III, after which it declined gradually during the 12th century under the pressure from the Sea Peoples and the general Bronze Age collapse: Israel Finkelstein points to the appearance of settlements in the central hill country around 1200 as the earliest of the known settlements of the Israelites.[37]
A cyclical pattern to these highland settlements, corresponding to the state of the surrounding cultures, suggests that the local Canaanites combined an agricultural and nomadic lifestyles, particularly under Aramaean and Neo-Hittite influence. When Egyptian rule collapsed after the invasion of the Sea Peoples, the central hill country could no longer sustain a large nomadic population, so they went from nomadism to sedentism.[38] Canaanite refugees from the lowlands seem to have fused with Shasu, nomadic Aramaean elements, using pithoi cisterns for the capture of water, hillside terracing and other elements from the Aegean and Western Anatolian "Peoples of the Sea", living in scattered hamlets and avoding the husbandry of pigs, suggesting a new type of culture in the region.
However, Finkelstein states in the same book that at the earlier time proposed by most scientists for the Exodus, based upon the Biblical chronology 400 years prior to the reign of King David, Egypt was at the peak of its glory, with a series of fortresses guarding the borders and checkpoints watching the roads to Canaan. That means an exodus of the scale of over 600,000 soldiers described in the Torah would have been impossible.[39] This implies a total civilian population, with women and children, of over a million, which would have numbered between a third and a half of the total Egyptian population at the time.
While the general narrative of the Exodus and the conquest of the Promised Land may be remotely rooted in historical events, the figure of Moses as a leader of the Israelites in these events cannot be substantiated.[40][41][42][43] William Dever agrees with the Canaanite origin of the Israelites but allows for the possibility of some immigrants from Egypt among the early hilltop settlers, leaving open the possibility of a Moses-like figure in Transjordan ca 1250-1200.[44]
Martin Noth holds that two different groups experienced the Exodus and Sinai events, and each group transmitted its own stories independently of the other one, writing that "The biblical story tracing the Hebrews from Egypt to Canaan resulted from an editor's weaving separate themes and traditions around a main character Moses, actually an obscure person from Moab."[45] Given the existence of a Moabite king Mesha, etymologically identical to the Hebrew Moshe, it is possible that there was a memory of a culture hero who was associated with the end of Egyptian influence at Timna during the late Bronze Age.[46]
The "Kenite hypothesis", originally suggested by Cornelius Tiele in 1872, supposes that the figure of Moses is a reflection of a historical Midianite priest of Yahweh, whose cult was introduced to Israel from southern Canaan (Edom, Moab, Midian) by the Kenites. This idea is based on an old tradition (recorded in Judges 1:16, 4:11) that Moses' father-in-law was a Midianite priest of Yahweh, as it were preserving a memory of the Midianite origin of the deity. While the role of the Kenites in the transmission of the cult is widely accepted, Tiele's view on the historical role of Moses finds less support in modern scholarship.[47]
William Albright held a more favorable view towards the traditional views regarding Moses, and accepted the essence of the biblical story, as narrated between Exodus 1:8 and Deuteronomy 34:12, but recognized the impact that centuries of oral and written transmission have had on the account, causing it to acquire layers of accretions.[45]
Recently Aidan Dodson,[48] M. Georg[49] and R. Krauss[50] all suggest that the story of Moses as a Prince of Egypt may contain a distorted memory of Pharaoh Amenmesses. In texts written after his disappearance Amenmesses "was explicitly denied any royal status - being simply ´Mose´ and perhaps also ´enemy´... Indeed it has been suggested that Amenmesses´ memory has survived in a far more universal way, in that his career was transmogrified into the Old Testament story of Jewish law-giver, Moses." Dodson concludes "... this connection is beyond proof and such a survival of Amenmesses into world consciousness remains but an intriguing possibility".
Moses in religious traditions

Prophet Moses
MosesStrikingTheRock GREBBER.jpg
Moses striking the rock

Prophet, Saint, Seer, Lawgiver, Apostle to Pharaoh, Reformer, 'One to Whom God Spoke',[51] 'Our Leader Moses',[52] Leader of the Exodus, Holy Forefather[53]

Born
Goshen, Lower Egypt
Died
Mount Nebo, Moab
Venerated in
Judaism, Christianity, Islam
Feast
Orthodox Church & Catholic Church: Sept 4
Attributes
Tablets of the Law
Judaism
Main articles: Moses in Hellenistic literature and Moses in Rabbinic Literature
There is a wealth of stories and additional information about Moses in the Jewish apocrypha and in the genre of rabbinical exegesis known as Midrash, as well as in the primary works of the Jewish oral law, the Mishnah and the Talmud. Moses is also given a number of bynames in Jewish tradition. The Midrash identifies Moses as one of seven biblical personalities who were called by various names.[54] Moses' other names were: Jekuthiel (by his mother), Heber (by his father), Jered (by Miriam), Avi Zanoah (by Aaron), Avi Gedor (by Kohath), Avi Soco (by his wet-nurse), Shemaiah ben Nethanel (by people of Israel).[55] Moses is also attributed the names Toviah (as a first name), and Levi (as a family name) (Vayikra Rabbah 1:3), Heman,[56] Mechoqeiq (lawgiver)[57] and Ehl Gav Ish (Numbers 12:3).[58]
Jewish historians who lived at Alexandria, such as Eupolemus, attributed to Moses the feat of having taught the Phoenicians their alphabet,[59] similar to legends of Thoth. Artapanus of Alexandria explicitly identified Moses not only with Thoth / Hermes, but also with the Greek figure Musaeus (whom he calls "the teacher of Orpheus"), and ascribed to him the division of Egypt into 36 districts, each with its own liturgy. He names the princess who adopted Moses as Merris, wife of Pharaoh Chenephres.[60]
Ancient sources mention an Assumption of Moses and a Testimony of Moses. A Latin text was found in Milan in the 19th century by Antonio Ceriani who called it the Assumption of Moses, even though it does not refer to an assumption of Moses or contain portions of the Assumption which are cited by ancient authors, and it is apparently actually the Testimony. The incident which the ancient authors cite is also mentioned in the Epistle of Jude.
To Orthodox Jews, Moses is called Moshe Rabbenu, `Eved HaShem, Avi haNeviim zya"a. He is defined "Our Leader Moshe", "Servant of God", and "Father of all the Prophets". In their view, Moses received not only the Torah, but also the revealed (written and oral) and the hidden (the `hokhmat nistar teachings, which gave Judaism the Zohar of the Rashbi, the Torah of the Ari haQadosh and all that is discussed in the Heavenly Yeshiva between the Ramhal and his masters). He is also considered the greatest prophet.[61]
Arising in part from his age, but also because 120 is elsewhere stated as the maximum age for Noah's descendants (one interpretation of Genesis 6:3), "may you live to 120" has become a common blessing among Jews.
Christianity



 Moses appeared at the Transfiguration of Jesus
For Christians, Moses — mentioned more often in the New Testament than any other Old Testament figure — is often a symbol of God's law, as reinforced and expounded on in the teachings of Jesus. New Testament writers often compared Jesus' words and deeds with Moses' to explain Jesus' mission. In Acts 7:39–43, 51–53, for example, the rejection of Moses by the Jews who worshiped the golden calf is likened to the rejection of Jesus by the Jews that continued in traditional Judaism.
Moses also figures in several of Jesus' messages. When he met the Pharisee Nicodemus at night in the third chapter of the Gospel of John, he compared Moses' lifting up of the bronze serpent in the wilderness, which any Israelite could look at and be healed, to his own lifting up (by his death and resurrection) for the people to look at and be healed. In the sixth chapter, Jesus responded to the people's claim that Moses provided them manna in the wilderness by saying that it was not Moses, but God, who provided. Calling himself the "bread of life", Jesus stated that He was provided to feed God's people.
Moses, along with Elijah, is presented as meeting with Jesus in all three Gospel accounts of the Transfiguration of Jesus in Matthew 17, Mark 9, and Luke 9, respectively. Later Christians found numerous other parallels between the life of Moses and Jesus to the extent that Jesus was likened to a "second Moses." For instance, Jesus' escape from the slaughter by Herod in Bethlehem is compared to Moses' escape from Pharaoh's designs to kill Hebrew infants. Such parallels, unlike those mentioned above, are not pointed out in Scripture. See the article on typology.
His relevance to modern Christianity has not diminished. Moses is considered to be a saint by several churches; and is commemorated as a prophet in the respective Calendars of Saints of the Eastern Orthodox Church, Roman Catholic Church, and Lutheran churches on September 4.[62] He is commemorated as one of the Holy Forefathers in the Calendar of Saints of the Armenian Apostolic Church on July 30.
Mormonism
Main article: Book of Moses
Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (colloquially called Mormons) generally view Moses in the same way that other Christians do. However, in addition to accepting the biblical account of Moses, Mormons include Selections from the Book of Moses as part of their scriptural canon.[63] This book is believed to be the translated writings of Moses, and is included in the Pearl of Great Price.[64]
Latter-day Saints are also unique in believing that Moses was taken to heaven without having tasted death (translated). In addition, Joseph Smith, Jr. and Oliver Cowdery stated that on April 3, 1836, Moses appeared to them in the Kirtland Temple in a glorified, immortal, physical form and bestowed upon them the "keys of the gathering of Israel from the four parts of the earth, and the leading of the ten tribes from the land of the north."[65]
Islam
Main article: Moses in Islam
See also: Biblical narratives and the Qur'an § Moses (Mūsā موسى)



Maqam El-Nabi Musa, Jericho.
Moses is mentioned more in the Quran than any other individual and his life is narrated and recounted more than that of any other prophet.[66] In general, Moses is described in ways which parallel the Islamic prophet Muhammad,[67] and "his character exhibits some of the main themes of Islamic theology," including the "moral injunction that we are to submit ourselves to God."
Moses is defined in the Qur'an as both prophet (nabi) and messenger (rasul), the latter term indicating that he was one of those prophets who brought a scripture and law to his people.
Huston Smith (1991) describes an account in the Qur'an of meetings in heaven between Moses and Muhammad, which Huston states were "one of the crucial events in Muhammad's life," and resulted in Muslims observing 5 daily prayers.[68]
Moses is mentioned 502 times in the Qur'an; passages mentioning Moses include 2.49-61, 7.103-160, 10.75-93, 17.101-104, 20.9-97, 26.10-66, 27.7-14, 28.3-46, 40.23-30, 43.46-55, 44.17-31, and 79.15-25. and many others. Most of the key events in Moses' life which are narrated in the Bible are to be found dispersed through the different Surahs of Qur'an, with a story about meeting Khidr which is not found in the Bible.[66]
In the Moses story related by the Qur'an, Jochebed is commanded by God to place Moses in an ark and cast him on the waters of the Nile, thus abandoning him completely to God's protection.[66][69] Pharaoh's wife Asiya, not his daughter, found Moses floating in the waters of the Nile. She convinced Pharaoh to keep him as their son because they were not blessed with any children.
The Qur'an's account has emphasized Moses' mission to invite the Pharaoh to accept God's divine message[70] as well as give salvation to the Israelites.[66][71] According to the Qur'an, Moses encourages the Israelites to enter Canaan, but they are unwilling to fight the Canaanites, fearing certain defeat. Moses responds by pleading to Allah that he and his brother Aaron be separated from the rebellious Israelites. After which the Israelites are made to wander for 40 years.[72]
According to Islamic tradition, Moses is buried at Maqam El-Nabi Musa, Jericho.
Baha'i Faith
In the Baha'i Faith, Moses is considered a messenger from God who is considered equally authentic as those sent in other eras.[73] An epithet of Moses in Baha'i scriptures is Interlocutor of God.[74] Moses is further described as paving the way for Baha'ullah and his ultimate revelation, and a teacher of truth, whose teachings were in line with the customs of his time.[75]
Modern reception
Literature
 Wikiquote has quotations related to: Moses
Thomas Mann's novella The Tables of the Law is a retelling of the story of the exodus from Egypt, with Moses as its main character.
In Freud
Sigmund Freud, in his last book, Moses and Monotheism in 1939, postulated that Moses was an Egyptian nobleman who adhered to the monotheism of Akhenaten. Following a theory proposed by a contemporary biblical critic, Freud believed that Moses was murdered in the wilderness, producing a collective sense of patricidal guilt that has been at the heart of Judaism ever since. "Judaism had been a religion of the father, Christianity became a religion of the son", he wrote. The possible Egyptian origin of Moses and of his message has received significant scholarly attention.[29]
Opponents of this view observe that the religion of the Torah seems different from Atenism in everything except the central feature of devotion to a single god,[76] although this has been countered by a variety of arguments, e.g. pointing out the similarities between the Hymn to Aten and Psalm 104.[77][78] Freud's interpretation of the historical Moses is not well accepted among historians, and is considered pseudohistory by many.[79]
Criticism
Main article: Criticism of Moses
In the late 18th century the deist Thomas Paine commented at length on Moses' Laws in The Age of Reason, and gave his view that "the character of Moses, as stated in the Bible, is the most horrid that can be imagined",[80] giving the story at Numbers 31:13-18 as an example. In the 19th century the agnostic Robert G. Ingersoll wrote "...that all the ignorant, infamous, heartless, hideous things recorded in the 'inspired' Pentateuch are not the words of God, but simply 'Some Mistakes of Moses'".[81] In the 2000s, the atheist Richard Dawkins referring, like Paine, to the incident at Numbers 31:13-18, concluded, "No, Moses was not a great role model for modern moralists."[82]
Figurative art



 Sculpture in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Moses is depicted in several U.S. government buildings because of his legacy as a lawgiver. In the Library of Congress stands a large statue of Moses alongside a statue of the Apostle Paul. Moses is one of the 23 lawgivers depicted in marble bas-reliefs in the chamber of the U.S. House of Representatives in the United States Capitol. The other twenty-two figures have their profiles turned to Moses, which is the only forward-facing bas-relief.[83][84]



 Statue by Michelangelo Buonarotti — in Basilica San Pietro in Vincoli, Rome
Moses appears eight times in carvings that ring the Supreme Court Great Hall ceiling. His face is presented along with other ancient figures such as Solomon, the Greek god Zeus and the Roman goddess of wisdom, Minerva. The Supreme Court building's east pediment depicts Moses holding two tablets. Tablets representing the Ten Commandments can be found carved in the oak courtroom doors, on the support frame of the courtroom's bronze gates and in the library woodwork. A controversial image is one that sits directly above the chief justice's head. In the center of the 40-foot-long Spanish marble carving is a tablet displaying Roman numerals I through X, with some numbers partially hidden.[85]
Michelangelo's statue
Michelangelo's statue of Moses in the Church of San Pietro in Vincoli, Rome, is one of the most familiar masterpieces in the world.[citation needed] The horns the sculptor included on Moses' head are the result of a mistranslation of the Hebrew Bible into the Latin Vulgate Bible with which he was familiar. The Hebrew word taken from Exodus means either a "horn" or an "irradiation." Experts at the Archaeological Institute of America show that the term was used when Moses "returned to his people after seeing as much of the Glory of the Lord as human eye could stand," and his face "reflected radiance."[86] In early Jewish art, moreover, Moses is often "shown with rays coming out of his head."[87]
Another author explains, "When Saint Jerome translated the Old Testament into Latin, he thought no one but Christ should glow with rays of light — so he advanced the secondary translation.[88][89] However, writer J. Stephen Lang points out that Jerome's version actually described Moses as "giving off hornlike rays," and he "rather clumsily translated it to mean 'having horns.'"[90] It has also been noted that he had Moses seated on a throne, yet Moses was neither a King nor ever sat on such thrones.[91]
Film and television
Moses was portrayed by Theodore Roberts in DeMille's 1923 silent film The Ten Commandments. Moses appears as the central character in the 1956 Cecil B. DeMille movie, also called The Ten Commandments, in which he is portrayed by Charlton Heston. A television remake was produced in 2006.
Burt Lancaster played Moses in the 1975 television miniseries Moses the Lawgiver. In the 1981 film History of the World, Part I, Moses is portrayed by Mel Brooks.[92] Sir Ben Kingsley is the narrator of the 2007 animated film, The Ten Commandments.
Moses appears as the central character in the 1998 DreamWorks Pictures animated movie, The Prince of Egypt. He is voiced by Val Kilmer.[93]
In 2014, Ridley Scott directed the film Exodus: Gods and Kings, in which Christian Bale portrays the central character Moses.[94] It portrays Moses and Rameses II as being raised by Seti I as cousins.
See also
Mosaic authorship
Osarseph
Passage of the Red Sea
Table of prophets of Abrahamic religions
Notes
1.Jump up ^ Saint Augustine records the names of the kings when Moses was born in the City of God: "When Saphrus reigned as the fourteenth king of Assyria, and Orthopolis as the twelfth of Sicyon, and Criasus as the fifth of Argos, Moses was born in Eygpt,..."[12]
Orthopolis reigned as the 12th King of Sicyon for 63 years, from 1596-1533; and Criasus reigned as the 5th King of Argos for 54 years, from 1637-1583.[13]
2.Jump up ^ According to Manetho the place of his birth was at the ancient city of Heliopolis.[16]
3.Jump up ^ "It was the prophet's call. It was a real ecstatic experience, like that of David under the baka-tree, Elijah on the mountain, Isaiah in the temple, Ezekiel on the Khebar, Jesus in the Jordan, Paul on the Damascus road. It was the perpetual mystery of the divine touching the human."[17]
Citations
1.Jump up ^ "Moses". Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary.
2.Jump up ^ Deuteronomy 34:10
3.Jump up ^ Maimonides, 13 principles of faith, 7th principle
4.Jump up ^ "Princeton University Press Press Reviews, retrieved 6th June 2009". Press.princeton.edu. 2011-11-06. Retrieved 2012-04-03.
5.Jump up ^ The Quest for the Historical Israel: Debating Archeology and the History of Early Israel, 2007, Society of Biblical Literature, Atlanta, ISBN 978-1-58983-277-0.
6.Jump up ^ John Van Seters, "The life of Moses", ISBN 90-390-0112-X
7.Jump up ^ Exod. 1:10
8.Jump up ^ Exod. 4:10
9.Jump up ^ Seder Olam Rabbah[full citation needed]
10.Jump up ^ Jerome's Chronicon (4th century) gives 1592 for the birth of Moses
11.Jump up ^ the 17th-century Ussher chronology calculates 1571 BC (Annals of the World, 1658 paragraph 164)
12.Jump up ^ St Augustine. The City of God. Book XVIII. Chapter 8 - Who Were Kings When Moses Was Born, And What Gods Began To Be Worshipped Then.
13.Jump up ^ Herman L. Hoeh. COMPENDIUM OF WORLD HISTORY, VOLUME 1. A Dissertation Presented to The Faculty of the Ambassador College, Graduate School of Theology, 1962. 1967 Edition.
14.Jump up ^ Martha Hodes (2015). Mourning Lincoln. Yale University Press. pp. 164, 237,.
15.Jump up ^ Dozeman 2009, p. 81-82.
16.Jump up ^ Rev. John McClintock, D.D., and Dr. James Strong, S.T.D.. "Mo'ses." In: Cyclopaedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature. Vol. VI.— ME-NEV. New York: Harper & Brothers, Publishers, 1882. pp.677-687.
17.Jump up ^ Rev. Professor Nathaniel Schmidt, Ph.D.. "Moses: His Age and His Work. II." The Biblical World. Vol. 7, No. 2 (Feb., 1896), pp. 105-119. p.108.
18.Jump up ^ Hamilton 2011, p. xxv.
19.Jump up ^ Van Seters 2004, p. 194.
20.Jump up ^ Ska 2009, p. 260.
21.Jump up ^ Meyers 2005, p. 5-6.
22.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Shmuel, Safrai, M. Stern (ed) The Jewish People in the First Century, Van Gorcum Fortress Press (1976)
23.Jump up ^ Hammer, Reuven. The Classic Midrash: Tannaitic Commentaries on the Bible, Paulist Press (1995) p. 15
24.^ Jump up to: a b c Droge, Arthur J. Homer or Moses?: Early Christian Interpretations of the History of Culture, Mohr Siebeck (1989)
25.Jump up ^ Barclay, John M. G. Jews in the Mediterranean diaspora: from Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE - 117 CE), University of California Press (1996) p. 130
26.Jump up ^ "Moses". JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 2010-03-02.
27.^ Jump up to: a b c Feldman, Louis H. Josephus's Interpretation of the Bible, University of California Press (1998)
28.Jump up ^ Strabo. The Geography of Strabo, XVI 35, 36, Translated by H.C. Hamilton and W. Falconer, pp. 177-178,
29.^ Jump up to: a b Assmann, Jan (1997). Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism. Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-58738-3. See also Y. Yerushalmi's monograph on Freud's Moses.
30.Jump up ^ Tacitus, Cornelius. The works of Cornelius Tacitus: With an essay on his life and genius by Arthur Murphy, Thomas Wardle Publ. (1842) p. 499
31.^ Jump up to: a b Tacitus, Cornelius. Tacitus, The Histories, Volume 2, Book V. Chapters 5, 6 p. 208.
32.Jump up ^ Josephus, Flavius. The works of Flavius Josephus: Comprising the Antiquities of the Jews, trans. by William Whiston, (1854) Book VIII, Ch. IV, pp. 254-255
33.^ Jump up to: a b Guthrie, Kenneth Sylvan. Numenius of Apamea: The Father of Neo-Platonism, George Bell & Sons (1917)
34.^ Jump up to: a b Blackham, Paul; ed. Paul Louis Metzger. Trinitarian Soundings in Systematic Theology, in essay: "The Trinity in the Hebrew Scriptures", Continuum International Publ. Group (2005) p. 39
35.Jump up ^ Stead, Michael R.; John W. Raine (2009). The Intertextuality of Zechariah 1-8: Ideals and Realities. T.& T.Clark Ltd. p. 42. ISBN 978-0-567-29172-1.
36.Jump up ^ Meyers, Carol (2005). Exodus. Cambridge University Press. p. 3. ISBN 978-0-521-00291-2.
37.Jump up ^ I Finkelstein and N. Na'aman, eds., From Nomadism to Monarchy (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1994)
38.Jump up ^ Finkelstein, Israel and Silberman, Neil Asher (2001). The Bible Unearthed. New York: Free Press. ISBN 0-684-86912-8.
39.Jump up ^ Finkelstein, Israel and Silberman, Neil Asher (2001). The Bible Unearthed. New York: Free Press. ISBN 0-684-86912-8.
40.Jump up ^ Who Were the Early Israelites? by William G. Dever (William B. Eerdmans Publishing, Grand Rapids, MI, 2003)
41.Jump up ^ The Bible Unearthed by Neil Asher Silberman and Israel Finkelstein (Simon and Schuster, New York, 2001)
42.Jump up ^ "''False Testament''by Daniel Lazare (Harper's Magazine, New York, May 2002)". Harpers.org. Retrieved 2010-10-11.
43.Jump up ^ "Archaeology and the Hebrew Scriptures".
44.Jump up ^ Dever, William G. (2002). What Did the Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It?. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. ISBN 0-8028-2126-X.
45.^ Jump up to: a b "Moses." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2007. Encyclopædia Britannica Online
46.Jump up ^ Magnussen, Magnus (1975), "BC, the Archaeology of the Bible Lands" (BBC Books)
47.Jump up ^ DDD (1999:911).
48.Jump up ^ Dodson, Aidan (2010), "Poisoned Legacy: The fall of the 19th Egyptian Dynasty" (American University in Cairo Press)
49.Jump up ^ Georg, M (2000), "Mose - Name und Namenstraeger. Versuch einer historischen Annaeherung" in "Mose. Aegypten und das Alte Testament", edited by E. Otto, (Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk, Stittgart)
50.Jump up ^ Krauss, R (2000), "Moise le pharaon" (Editions du Roche)
51.Jump up ^ This title is held specifically in Islam.
52.Jump up ^ This is a specifically Jewish title
53.Jump up ^ Moses is commemorated as a forefather, along with the patriarchs, in the Armenian Apostolic Church
54.Jump up ^ Midrash Rabbah, Ki Thissa, XL. 3-3, Lehrman, P.463
55.Jump up ^ Yalkut Shimoni, Shemot 166 to Chronicles I 4:18, 24:6; also see Vayikra Rabbah 1:3; Chasidah p.345
56.Jump up ^ Rashi to Bava Batra 15s, Chasidah p.345
57.Jump up ^ Bava Batra 15a on Deuteronomy 33:21, Chasidah p.345
58.Jump up ^ Rashi to Berachot 54a, Chasidah p.345
59.Jump up ^ Eusebius, Præparatio Evangelica ix. 26
60.Jump up ^ Eusebius, l.c. ix. 27
61.Jump up ^ "Judaism 101: Moses, Aaron and Miriam". Jewfaq.org. Retrieved 2010-03-02.
62.Jump up ^ Great Synaxaristes: (Greek) Ὁ Προφήτης Μωϋσῆς. 4 Σεπτεμβρίου. ΜΕΓΑΣ ΣΥΝΑΞΑΡΙΣΤΗΣ.
63.Jump up ^ Skinner, Andrew C. (1992), "Moses", in Ludlow, Daniel H, Encyclopedia of Mormonism, New York: Macmillan Publishing, pp. 958–959, ISBN 0-02-879602-0, OCLC 24502140
64.Jump up ^ Taylor, Bruce T. (1992), "Book of Moses", in Ludlow, Daniel H, Encyclopedia of Mormonism, New York: Macmillan Publishing, pp. 216–217, ISBN 0-02-879602-0, OCLC 24502140
65.Jump up ^ The Doctrine and Covenants 110:11
66.^ Jump up to: a b c d Annabel Keeler, "Moses from a Muslim Perspective", in: Solomon, Norman; Harries, Richard; Winter, Tim (eds.), Abraham's children: Jews, Christians, and Muslims in conversation, by . T&T Clark Publ. (2005), pp. 55 - 66.
67.Jump up ^ Keeler (2005) describes Moses from the Muslim perspective: ”Among prophets, Moses has been described as the one ‘whose career as a messenger of God, lawgiver and leader of his community most closely parallels and foreshadows that of Muhammad’, and as ‘the figure that in the Koran was presented to Muhammad above all others as the supreme model of saviour and ruler of a community, the man chosen to present both knowledge of the one God, and a divinely revealed system of law’. We find him clearly in this role of Muhammad’s forebear in a well-known tradition of the miraculous ascension of the Prophet, where Moses advises Muhammad from his own experience as messenger and lawgiver.”
68.Jump up ^ Smith, Huston. The world's religions HarperCollins, (1991) p. 245
69.Jump up ^ Quran 28:7
70.Jump up ^ Quran 79:17–19
71.Jump up ^ Quran 20:47–48
72.Jump up ^ Quran 5:20
73.Jump up ^ Historical Context of the Bábi and Bahá'í Faiths
74.Jump up ^ Paradise and Paradigm: Key Symbols in Persian Christianity and the Baháí̕ Faith, Christopher Buck - 1999
75.Jump up ^ The Bahá'í: The Religious Construction of a Global Identity - Page 256, Michael McMullen - 2000
76.Jump up ^ "Order of the Aten Temple".
77.Jump up ^ Jan Assmann, op. cit.
78.Jump up ^ Atwell, James E. (2000). "An Egyptian Source for Genesis 1". Journal of Theological Studies 51 (2): 441–477. doi:10.1093/jts/51.2.441.
79.Jump up ^ Bernstein, Richard J. (1998). Freud and the Legacy of Moses. New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-63096-7.
80.Jump up ^ Thomas Paine The Age of Reason part II, 1796
81.Jump up ^ Robert G. Ingersoll, Some Mistakes of Moses chapter XXIX
82.Jump up ^ Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, 2006, chapter 7
83.Jump up ^ "Relief Portraits of Lawgivers: Moses. Architect of the Capitol". Aoc.gov. 2009-02-13. Retrieved 2010-03-02.
84.Jump up ^ "Courtroom Friezes: North and South Walls: Information Sheet." Supreme Court of the United States. [1]
85.Jump up ^ "In the Supreme Court itself, Moses and his law on display" Religion News Service
86.Jump up ^ MacLean, Margaret. (ed) Art and Archaeology, Vol. VI, Archaeological Institute of America (1917) p. 97
87.Jump up ^ Devore, Gary M. (2008). Walking Tours of Ancient Rome: A Secular Guidebook to the Eternal City. Mercury Guides. p. 126. ISBN 978-0-615-19497-4.
88.Jump up ^ Thomason, Dustin; Caldwell, Ian (2005). The Rule of Four. New York: Random House. p. 151. ISBN 0-440-24135-9.
89.Jump up ^ Gross, Kenneth (2005). The Dream of the Moving Statue. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press. p. 245. ISBN 0-271-02900-5.
90.Jump up ^ Lang, J. Stephen (2003). What the Good Book Didn't Say: Popular Myths and Misconceptions About the Bible. New York: Citadel Press. p. 114. ISBN 0-8065-2460-X.
91.Jump up ^ Boitani, Piero (1999). The Bible and its Rewritings. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. p. 126. ISBN 0-19-818487-5.
92.Jump up ^ "History of the World: Part I".
93.Jump up ^ "Prince of Egypt".
94.Jump up ^ "Exodus: Gods and Kings". IMDB.
Further reading
Asch, Sholem. Moses. New York: Putnam, 1958. ISBN 0-7426-9137-3.
Assmann, Jan. Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism. Harvard University Press, 1997. ISBN 0-674-58738-3.
Barenboim, Peter. Biblical Roots of Separation of Power, Moscow : Letny Sad, 2005, ISBN 5-94381-123-0, http://lccn.loc.gov/2006400578
Barzel, Hillel. "Moses: Tragedy and Sublimity." In Literary Interpretations of Biblical Narratives. Edited by Kenneth R.R. Gros Louis, with James S. Ackerman & Thayer S. Warshaw, 120–40. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1974. ISBN 0-687-22131-5.
Buber, Martin. Moses: The Revelation and the Covenant. New York: Harper, 1958.
Card, Orson Scott. Stone Tables. Deseret Book Co., 1998. ISBN 1-57345-115-0.
Chasidah, Yishai. "Moses." In Encyclopedia of Biblical Personalities: Anthologized from the Talmud, Midrash and Rabbinic Writings, 340–99. Brooklyn: Shaar Press, 1994.
Cohen, Joel. Moses: A Memoir. Mahwah, N.J.: Paulist Press, 2003. ISBN 0-8091-0558-6.
Dozeman, Thomas B. (2009). Commentary on Exodus. Eerdmans.
Daiches, David. Moses: The Man and his Vision. New York: Praeger, 1975. ISBN 0-275-33740-5.
Fast, Howard. Moses, Prince of Egypt. New York: Crown Pubs., 1958.
Freud, Sigmund. Moses and Monotheism. New York: Vintage, 1967. ISBN 0-394-70014-7.
Gregory of Nyssa. The Life of Moses. Transl. Abraham J. Malherbe and Everett Ferguson. Preface by John Meyendorff. The Classics of Western Spirituality. Paulist Press, 1978. 208 pp. ISBN 9780809121120
Halter, Marek. Zipporah, Wife of Moses. New York: Crown, 2005. ISBN 1-4000-5279-3.
Hoffmeier, James K. 'Moses and the Exodus.' In: Israel in Egypt: The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition, pp. 135–63. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
Hamilton, Victor (2011). Exodus: An Exegetical Commentary. Baker Books.
Ingraham, J. H.. The Pillar of Fire: Or Israel in Bondage. New York: A.L. Burt, 1859. Reprinted Ann Arbor, Mich.: Scholarly Publishing Office, University of Michigan Library, 2006. ISBN 1-4255-6491-7.
Kirsch, Jonathan. Moses: A Life. New York: Ballantine, 1998. ISBN 0-345-41269-9.
Kohn, Rebecca. Seven Days to the Sea: An Epic Novel of the Exodus. New York: Rugged Land, 2006. ISBN 1-59071-049-5.
Lehman, S.M. (translator), Freedman, H. (ed.), Midrash Rabbah, 10 volumes, The Soncino Press, London, 1983.
Mann, Thomas. "Thou Shalt Have No Other Gods Before Me." In The Ten Commandments, 3–70. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1943.
Salibi, Kamal. The Bible Came from Arabia. London: Jonathan Cape, 1985.
Sandmel, Samuel. Alone Atop the Mountain. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1973. ISBN 0-385-03877-1.
Ska, Jean Louis (2009). The Exegesis of the Pentateuch: Exegetical Studies and Basic Questions. Mohr Siebeck. pp. 30–31,260. ISBN 978-3-16-149905-0.
Southon, Arthur E. On Eagles' Wings. London: Cassell and Co., 1937. Reprinted New York: McGraw-Hill, 1954.
Van Seters, John (2004). "Moses". In Barton, John. The Biblical World. Taylor & Francis.
Van Seters, John (1994). The Life of Moses: The Yahwist as Historian in Exodus-Numbers. Peeters Publishers.
Wiesel, Elie. “Moses: Portrait of a Leader.” In Messengers of God: Biblical Portraits & Legends, 174–210. New York: Random House, 1976. ISBN 0-394-49740-6.
Wildavsky, Aaron. Moses as Political Leader. Jerusalem: Shalem Press, 2005. ISBN 965-7052-31-9.
Wilson, Dorothy Clarke. Prince of Egypt. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1949.
K. van der Toorn, Bob Becking, Pieter Willem van der Horst: Dictionary of deities and demons in the Bible
External links
 Look up משה in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
 Wikimedia Commons has media related to Moses.
 Wikiquote has quotations related to: Moses
 Wikisource has original works written by or about:
Moses
 This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: "Moses". Jewish Encyclopedia. 1901–1906.
The Geography, Book XVI, Chapter II The entire context of the cited chapter of Strabo's work

Moses
Levite

Preceded by
NA Lawgiver Succeeded by
Joshua


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Prophets in the Hebrew Bible
















































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Quranic prophets





       
























        


























       


























[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Ark of the Covenant topics























































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Catholic Saints















Stained glass of the Four Evangelists in Bockweiler, Germany











































































































































































































































































































Portal icon
Portal icon




Authority control
WorldCat ·
 VIAF: 13586858 ·
 LCCN: n79058331 ·
 ISNI: 0000 0001 0777 5288 ·
 GND: 118641190 ·
 SELIBR: 194421 ·
 NLA: 49682355
 

  


Categories: Prophets of the Hebrew Bible
Ancient Egyptian Jews
Angelic visionaries
Moses
15th-century BC biblical rulers
Biblical murderers
Book of Exodus
Adoptees
Christian saints from the Old Testament
Eastern Orthodox saints
People celebrated in the Lutheran liturgical calendar
Prophets of Islam
People in the canonical gospels
Torah people
Wonderworkers



























Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

View source

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Acèh
Afrikaans
Alemannisch
አማርኛ
العربية
Aragonés
ܐܪܡܝܐ
Asturianu
Azərbaycanca
বাংলা
Bân-lâm-gú
Башҡортса
Беларуская
Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎
Български
བོད་ཡིག
Bosanski
Brezhoneg
Català
Čeština
Chamoru
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deitsch
Deutsch
Dolnoserbski
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Fiji Hindi
Føroyskt
Français
Furlan
Gaeilge
Gàidhlig
Galego
贛語
ગુજરાતી
한국어
Հայերեն
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Ilokano
Bahasa Indonesia
Interlingua
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
Basa Jawa
ქართული
Қазақша
Kernowek
Kiswahili
Kurdî
Ladino
Лакку
Лезги
Latina
Latviešu
Lëtzebuergesch
Lietuvių
Limburgs
Lumbaart
Magyar
Македонски
മലയാളം
मराठी
مصرى
Bahasa Melayu
Mìng-dĕ̤ng-ngṳ̄
Монгол
မြန်မာဘာသာ
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
Occitan
Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
پنجابی
پښتو
Piemontèis
Polski
Português
Română
Rumantsch
Русиньскый
Русский
Scots
Shqip
Sicilianu
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Soomaaliga
کوردی
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Tagalog
தமிழ்
Taqbaylit
Татарча/tatarça
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
اردو
Tiếng Việt
Võro
Winaray
ייִדיש
Yorùbá
粵語
Zazaki
Žemaitėška
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 14 April 2015, at 07:02.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses















Biblical criticism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is about the academic treatment of the Bible as a historical document. For criticisms made against the Bible as a source of reliable information or ethical guidance, see Criticism of the Bible.



 The Gutenberg Bible, the first printed Bible
Biblical criticism is the scholarly "study and investigation of biblical writings that seeks to make discerning judgments about these writings".[1] Viewing biblical texts as having human rather than supernatural origins, it asks when and where a particular text originated; how, why, by whom, for whom, and in what circumstances it was produced; what influences were at work in its production; what sources were used in its composition; and what message it was intended to convey. It will vary slightly depending on whether the focus is on the Hebrew Bible, the Old Testament, the letters of New Testament or the Canonical gospels. It also plays an important role in the quest for a Historical Jesus.
It also addresses the physical text, including the meaning of the words and the way in which they are used, its preservation, history and integrity. Biblical criticism draws upon a wide range of scholarly disciplines including archaeology, anthropology, folklore, linguistics, Oral Tradition studies, and historical and religious studies.


Contents  [hide]
1 Background
2 History 2.1 Hebrew Bible/Old Testament
2.2 New Testament
3 Methods and perspectives 3.1 Textual criticism
3.2 Source criticism
3.3 Form criticism and tradition history
3.4 Redaction criticism
3.5 Canonical criticism
3.6 Rhetorical criticism
3.7 Narrative criticism
3.8 Psychological criticism
3.9 Socio-scientific criticism
3.10 Postmodernist criticism
3.11 Feminist exegesis
4 New Testament authenticity and the historical Jesus 4.1 Multiple attestation
4.2 Tendencies of the developing tradition
4.3 Embarrassment
4.4 Coherence
4.5 The Crucifixion
4.6 Semitisms
4.7 Sitz im Leben
5 Notable biblical scholars
6 See also
7 Notes
8 Further reading
9 External links

Background[edit]



 Andover-Harvard Theological Library, Harvard Divinity School.
Biblical criticism, defined as the treatment of biblical texts as natural rather than supernatural artifacts, grew out of the rationalism of the 17th and 18th centuries. In the 19th century it was divided between the higher criticism, the study of the composition and history of biblical texts, and lower criticism, the close examination of the text to establish their original or "correct" readings. These terms are largely no longer used, and contemporary criticism has seen the rise of new perspectives which draw on literary and multidisciplinary sociological approaches to address the meaning(s) of texts and the wider world in which they were conceived.
A division is still sometimes made between historical criticism and literary criticism. Historical criticism seeks to locate the text in history: it asks such questions as when the text was written, who the author/s might have been, and what history might be reconstructed from the answers. Literary criticism asks what audience the authors wrote for, their presumptive purpose, and the development of the text over time.
Historical criticism was the dominant form of criticism until the late 20th century, when biblical critics became interested in questions aimed more at the meaning of the text than its origins and developed methods drawn from mainstream literary criticism. The distinction is frequently referred to as one between diachronic and synchronic forms of criticism, the former concerned the development of texts through time, the latter treating texts as they exist at a particular moment, frequently the so-called "final form", meaning the Bible text as we have it today.
History[edit]
Part of a series on
The Bible
The Malmesbury Bible


Canons ·
 Books
 [show]






















Authorship ·
 Development
 [show]












Translations ·
 Manuscripts
 [show]














Biblical studies[show]
































Interpretation[show]













Perspectives[show]









Wikipedia book Bible book    Portal icon Bible portal
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Both Old Testament and New Testament criticism originated in the rationalism of the 17th and 18th centuries and developed within the context of the scientific approach to the humanities (especially history) which grew during the 19th. Studies of the Old and New Testaments were often independent of each other, largely due to the difficulty of any single scholar having a sufficient grasp of the many languages required or of the cultural background for the different periods in which texts had their origins.
Hebrew Bible/Old Testament[edit]



 Title page of Richard Simon's "Critical History" (1685), an early work of biblical criticism.
Modern biblical criticism begins with the 17th century philosophers and theologians—Thomas Hobbes, Benedict Spinoza, Richard Simon and others—who began to ask questions about the origin of the biblical text, especially the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament, i.e., Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy). They asked specifically who had written these books; according to tradition their author was Moses, but these critics found contradictions and inconsistencies in the text that they concluded made Mosaic authorship improbable. In the 18th century Jean Astruc (1684–1766), a French physician, set out to refute these critics. Borrowing methods of textual criticism already in use to investigate Greek and Roman texts, he discovered what he believed were two distinct documents within Genesis. These, he felt, were the original scrolls written by Moses, much as the four Gospel writers had produced four separate but complementary accounts of the life and teachings of Jesus. Later generations, he believed, had conflated these original documents to produce the modern book of Genesis, producing the inconsistencies and contradictions noted by Hobbes and Spinoza.
Astruc's methods were adopted by German scholars such as Johann Gottfried Eichhorn (1752–1827) and Wilhelm Martin Leberecht de Wette (1780–1849) in a movement which became known as the higher criticism (to distinguish it from the far longer-established close examination and comparison of individual manuscripts, called the lower criticism); this school reached its apogee with the influential synthesis of Julius Wellhausen (1844–1918) in the 1870s, at which point it seemed to many that the Bible had at last been fully explained as a human document.
The implications of "higher criticism" were not welcomed by many religious scholars, not least the Catholic Church. Pope Leo XIII (1810–1903) condemned secular biblical scholarship in his encyclical Providentissimus Deus;[2] but in 1943 Pope Pius XII gave license to the new scholarship in his encyclical Divino afflante Spiritu: "textual criticism ... [is] quite rightly employed in the case of the Sacred Books...Let the interpreter then, with all care and without neglecting any light derived from recent research, endeavor to determine the peculiar character and circumstances of the sacred writer, the age in which he lived, the sources written or oral to which he had recourse and the forms of expression he employed".[3] Today the modern Catechism states: "In order to discover the sacred authors' intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current. For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression".[4]
New Testament[edit]



Albert Schweitzer (1875-1965). His The Quest of the Historical Jesus (1906) demonstrated that 19th century "lives of Jesus" were reflections of the authors' own historical and social contexts.
The seminal figure in New Testament criticism was Hermann Samuel Reimarus (1694–1768), who applied to it the methodology of Greek and Latin textual studies and became convinced that very little of what it said could be accepted as incontrovertibly true. Reimarus's conclusions appealed to the rationalism of 18th century intellectuals, but were deeply troubling to contemporary believers. Baron d'Holbach (1723-1789) - "Ecce Homo -The History of Jesus of Nazareth, a Critical Inquiry" (1769), the first Life of Jesus described as a mere historical man, published anonymously in Amsterdam. George Houston translated the work into English—published in Edinburgh, 1799, London, 1813, and New York in 1827—for which "blasphemy" Houston was condemned to two years in prison. In the 19th century important scholarship was done by David Strauss, Ernest Renan, Johannes Weiss, Albert Schweitzer and others, all of whom investigated the "historical Jesus" within the Gospel narratives. In a different field the work of H. J. Holtzmann was significant: he established a chronology for the composition of the various books of the New Testament which formed the basis for future research on this subject, and established the two-source hypothesis (the hypothesis that the gospels of Matthew and Luke drew on the gospel of Mark and a hypothetical document known as Q). By the first half of the 20th century a new generation of scholars including Karl Barth and Rudolf Bultmann, in Germany, Roy Harrisville and others in North America had decided that the quest for the Jesus of history had reached a dead end. Barth and Bultmann accepted that little could be said with certainty about the historical Jesus, and concentrated instead on the kerygma, or message, of the New Testament. The questions they addressed were: What was Jesus’s key message? How was that message related to Judaism? Does that message speak to our reality today?
The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1948 revitalised interest in the possible contribution archaeology could make to the understanding of the New Testament. Joachim Jeremias and C. H. Dodd produced linguistic studies which tentatively identified layers within the Gospels that could be ascribed to Jesus, to the authors, and to the early Church; Burton Mack and John Dominic Crossan assessed Jesus in the cultural milieu of first-century Judea; and the scholars of the Jesus Seminar assessed the individual tropes of the Gospels to arrive at a consensus on what could and could not be accepted as historical.
Contemporary New Testament criticism continues to follow the synthesising trend set during the latter half of the 20th century. There continues to be a strong interest in recovering the "historical Jesus", but this now tends to set the search in terms of Jesus' Jewishness (Bruce Chilton, Geza Vermes and others) and his formation by the political and religious currents of first-century Palestine (Marcus Borg).
Methods and perspectives[edit]



Source criticism: diagram of the two-source hypothesis, an explanation for the relationship of the gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke.
The critical methods and perspectives now to be found are numerous, and the following overview should not be regarded as comprehensive.
Textual criticism[edit]
Textual criticism (sometimes still referred to as "lower criticism") refers to the examination of the text itself to identify its provenance or to trace its history. It takes as its basis the fact that errors inevitably crept into texts as generations of scribes reproduced each other's manuscripts. For example, Josephus employed scribes to copy his Antiquities of the Jews. As the scribes copied the Antiquities, they made mistakes. The copies of these copies also had the mistakes. The errors tend to form "families" of manuscripts: scribe A will introduce mistakes which are not in the manuscript of scribe B, and over time the "families" of texts descended from A and B will diverge further and further as more mistakes are introduced by later scribes, but will always be identifiable as descended from one or the other. Textual criticism studies the differences between these families to piece together a good idea of what the original looked like. The more surviving copies, the more accurately can they deduce information about the original text and about "family histories".
Textual criticism is a rigorously objective[clarification needed] discipline using a number of specialized methodologies, including eclecticism, stemmatics, copy-text editing and cladistics. A number of principles have also been introduced for use in deciding between variant manuscripts, such as Lectio difficilior potior: "The harder of two readings is to be preferred".[5] Nevertheless, there remains a strong element of subjectivity, areas where the scholar must decide his reading on the basis of taste or common-sense: Amos 6.12, for example, reads: "Does one plough with oxen?" The obvious answer is "yes", but the context of the passage seems to demand a "no"; the usual reading therefore is to amend this to, "Does one plough the sea with oxen?" The amendment has a basis in the text, which is believed to be corrupted, but is nevertheless a matter of judgement.[6]
Source criticism[edit]
Source criticism is the search for the original sources which lie behind a given biblical text. It can be traced back to the 17th-century French priest Richard Simon, and its most influential product is Julius Wellhausen's Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels (1878), whose "insight and clarity of expression have left their mark indelibly on modern biblical studies".[7] An example of source criticism is the study of the Synoptic problem. Critics noticed that the three Synoptic Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were very similar, indeed, at times identical. The dominant theory to account for the duplication is called the two-source hypothesis. This suggests that Mark was the first gospel to be written, and that it was probably based on a combination of early oral and written material. Matthew and Luke were written at a later time, and relied primarily on two different sources: Mark and a written collection of Jesus's sayings, which has been given the name Q by scholars. This latter document has now been lost, but at least some of its material can be deduced indirectly, namely through the material that is common in Matthew and Luke but absent in Mark. In addition to Mark and Q, the writers of Matthew and Luke made some use of additional sources, which would account for the material that is unique to each of them.
Form criticism and tradition history[edit]
Form criticism breaks the Bible down into sections (pericopes, stories) which are analyzed and categorized by genres (prose or verse, letters, laws, court archives, war hymns, poems of lament, etc.). The form critic then theorizes on the pericope's Sitz im Leben ("setting in life"), the setting in which it was composed and, especially, used.[8] Tradition history is a specific aspect of form criticism which aims at tracing the way in which the pericopes entered the larger units of the biblical canon, and especially the way in which they made the transition from oral to written form. The belief in the priority, stability, and even detectability, of oral traditions is now recognised to be so deeply questionable as to render tradition history largely useless, but form criticism itself continues to develop as a viable methodology in biblical studies.[9]
Redaction criticism[edit]
Redaction criticism studies "the collection, arrangement, editing, and modification of sources", and is frequently used to reconstruct the community and purposes of the authors of the text.[10] It is based on the comparison of differences between manuscripts and their theological significance.[11]
Canonical criticism[edit]
Associated particularly with the name of Brevard S. Childs, who has written prolifically on the subject, canonical criticism is "an examination of the final form of the text as a totality, as well as the process leading to it".[12] Where previous criticism asked questions about the origins, structure and history of the text, canonical criticism addresses questions of meaning, both for the community (and communities—subsequent communities are regarded as being as important as the original community for which it was produced) which used it, and in the context of the wider canon of which it forms a part.[1]
Rhetorical criticism[edit]
Rhetorical criticism of the Bible dates back to at least Saint Augustine. Modern application of techniques of rhetorical analysis to biblical texts dates to James Muilenberg in 1968 as a corrective to form criticism, which Muilenberg saw as too generalized and insufficiently specific. For Muilenberg, rhetorical criticism emphasized the unique and unrepeatable message of the writer or speaker as addressed to his audience, including especially the techniques and devices which went into crafting the biblical narrative as it was heard (or read) by its audience. "What Muilenberg called rhetorical criticism was not exactly the same as what secular literary critics called rhetorical criticism, and when biblical scholars became interested in "rhetorical criticism", they did not limit themselves to Muilenberg's definition...In some cases it is difficult to distinguish between rhetorical criticism and literary criticism, or other disciplines". Unlike canonical criticism, rhetorical criticism (at least as defined by Muilenberg) takes a special interest in the relationship between the biblical text and its intended audience within the context of the communal life setting. Rhetorical criticism asks how the text functions for its audience, including especially its original audience: to teach, persuade, guide, exhort, reproach, or inspire, and it concentrates especially on identifying and elucidating unique features of the situation, including both the techniques manifest in the text itself and the relevant features of the cultural setting, through which this purpose is pursued.[13]
Narrative criticism[edit]
Narrative criticism is one of a number of modern forms of criticism based in contemporary literary theory and practice—in this case, from narratology. In common with other literary approaches (and in contrast to historical forms of criticism), narrative criticism treats the text as a unit, and focuses on narrative structure and composition, plot development, themes and motifs, characters, and characterization.[14] Narrative criticism is a complex field, but some central concerns include the reliability of the narrator, the question of authorial intent (expressed in terms of the context in which the text was written and its presumed intended audience), and the implications of multiple interpretation—i.e., an awareness that a narrative is capable of more than one interpretation, and thus of the implications of each.[15]
Psychological criticism[edit]
Psychological biblical criticism is a perspective rather than a method. It discusses the psychological dimensions of the authors of the text, the material they wish to communicate to their audience, and the reflections and meditations of the reader.
Socio-scientific criticism[edit]
Socio-scientific criticism (also known as socio-historical criticism and social-world criticism) is a contemporary form of multidisciplinary criticism drawing on the social sciences, especially anthropology and sociology. A typical study will draw on studies of contemporary nomadism, shamanism, tribalism, spirit-possession, and millenarianism to illuminate similar passages described in biblical texts. Socioscientific criticism is thus concerned with the historical world behind the text rather than the historical world in the text.[16]
Postmodernist criticism[edit]



 The "Tomb of Joshua" at Kifl Haris, a Palestinian village located northwest of the Israeli settlement of Ariel in the West Bank. Postmodernist criticism frequently locates biblical references in a modern setting.
Postmodernist biblical criticism treats the same general topics addressed in broader postmodernist scholarship, "including author, autobiography, culture criticism, deconstruction, ethics, fantasy, gender, ideology, politics, postcolonialism, and so on". It asks questions like: What are we to make, ethically speaking, of the program of ethnic cleansing described in the book of Joshua? What does the social construction of gender mean for the depiction of male and female roles in the Bible?[17]
In textual criticism, postmodernist criticism rejects the idea of an original text (the traditional quest of textual criticism, which marginalised all non-original manuscripts), and treats all manuscripts as equally valuable; in the "higher criticism" it brings new perspectives to theology, Israelite history, hermeneutics, and ethics.[18]
Feminist exegesis[edit]
Feminist criticism of the Bible utilizes the same means and essentially strives for the same ends as feminist literary criticism. It is therefore made up of a variety of peoples, including, but not limited to, Jews, people of color, and feminist Christians such as Elisabeth Fiorenza.
New Testament authenticity and the historical Jesus[edit]
Multiple attestation[edit]
The criterion of multiple attestation or "independent attestation" is an important tool used by scholars. Simply put, the more independent witnesses that report an event or saying, the better.
The gospels are not always independent of each other. There is a possibility that Matthew and Luke copied contents from Mark's gospel.[19] There are, however, at least four early, independent sources. The criterion of multiple attestation focuses on the sayings or deeds of Jesus that are attested to in more than one independent literary source such as the Apostle Paul, Josephus, Q, and/or the Gospel of the Hebrews. The force of this criterion is increased if a given motif or theme is also found in different literary forms such as parables, dispute stories, miracle stories, prophecy, and/or aphorism.[20][21]
Multiple attestation has a certain kind of objectivity. Given the independence of the sources, satisfaction of the criterion makes it harder to maintain that it was an invention of the Church.[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28]
Tendencies of the developing tradition[edit]
It is important that scholars research the earliest testimonies. To do this, they need to figure out the earliest gospel and the earliest parts of the gospels. Ideally, this material would come from eyewitnesses, but that is not always possible.
The writings of the Church Fathers are helpful in this regard. They wrote that the Hebrew Gospel was the first written while the Gospel of John was later. Also, because certain "laws" govern the transmission of tradition during the oral period, we can, by understanding these "laws", determine which tradition is early and which is late.[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29]
Embarrassment[edit]
The criterion of embarrassment, also known as the "criterion of dissimilarity", is an analytical tool that biblical scholars use in assessing whether the New Testament accounts of Jesus' actions and words are historically accurate. Simply put, trust the embarrassing material. If something is awkward for an author to say and he does anyway, it is more likely to be true.[30]
The essence of the criterion of embarrassment is that the Early Church would hardly have gone out of its way to "create" or "falsify" historical material that only embarrassed its author or weakened its position in arguments with opponents. Rather, embarrassing material coming from Jesus would naturally be either suppressed or softened in later stages of the Gospel tradition, and often such progressive suppression or softening can be traced through the Gospels.
The evolution of the depiction of the Baptism of Jesus exhibits the criterion of embarrassment. In the Gospel of the Hebrews, Jesus is but a man (see adoptionism) submitting to another man for the forgiveness of the "sin of ignorance" (a lesser sin, but sin nonetheless). Matthew's description of the Baptism adds John's statement to Jesus: "I should be baptized by you", attempting to do away with the embarrassment of John baptising Jesus, implying John's seniority. Similarly, it resolves the embarrassment of Jesus undergoing baptism "for the forgiveness of sin", the purpose of John's baptising in Mark, by omitting this phrase from John's proclamations. The Gospel of Luke says only that Jesus was baptized, without explicitly asserting that John performed the baptism. The Gospel of John goes further and simply omits the whole story of the Baptism. This might show a progression of the Evangelists attempting to explain, and then suppress, a story that was seen as embarrassing to the early church.[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28]
Coherence[edit]
The Criterion of coherence (also called consistency or conformity) can be used only when other material has been identified as authentic. This criterion holds that a saying and action attributed to Jesus may be accepted as authentic if it coheres with other sayings and actions already established as authentic. While this criterion cannot be used alone, it can broaden the database for what Jesus actually said and did.[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28]
The Crucifixion[edit]
The criterion of the Crucifixion emphasizes that Jesus met a violent death at the hands of Jewish and Roman officials and that the authentic words and actions of Jesus would alienate people, especially powerful people.[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28]
Semitisms[edit]
Since Jesus spoke in Aramaic, traces of Aramaic in the Gospels argue in favor of a primitive tradition that may go back to Jesus. Semitisms are structured according to general rules that allow Hebrew speakers and hearers to say and hear things according to predictable patterns. Hebrew and Aramaic are linguistically very closely related and they follow similar elementary rules. For example, the pun in Matt 23:24, "straining out the gnat (galma) and swallowing a camel (gamla)" points in the direction of the historical Jesus.[22][31]
Sitz im Leben[edit]
Main article: Sitz im Leben
The sayings and actions of the historical Jesus must reflect the Sitz im Leben or the concrete social, political, economic, agricultural, and religious conditions of ancient Palestine, while sayings and actions of Jesus that reflect social, political, economic, agricultural, or religious conditions that existed only outside Palestine or only after the death of Jesus are to be considered inauthentic.[20][21][23][24][25][26][27][28][32]
Notable biblical scholars[edit]
William Albright (1891–1971): Professor at Johns Hopkins University and the founder of American biblical archaeology
Albrecht Alt (1883–1956): prominent in early debates about the religion of the biblical patriarchs; he was also an important influence on the generation of mid-20th century German scholars like Martin Noth and Gerhard von Rad
Jean Astruc (1684–1776): early French biblical critic, who adapted source criticism to the study of Genesis
Margaret Barker (1944–): maintains that the polytheistic practices of the First Jewish Temple survived and influenced gnosticism and early Christianity
Walter Bauer (1877–1960): redefined the parameters of orthodoxy and heresy with his multiregional hypothesis for the origins of early Christianity
F. C. Baur (1792–1860): explored the secular history of the primitive church
Rudolf Karl Bultmann (1884–1976): New Testament scholar who defined an almost complete split between history and faith, called demythology
D. A. Carson (1946–): Canadian New Testament scholar of the Gospel of John
John J. Collins (1946–): Irish scholar of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Second Temple Judaism; he has worked extensively on Jewish messianism and apocalypticism
Frank Moore Cross (1921–2012): American biblical scholar and Harvard professor notable for his interpretations of the Deuteronomistic History, the Pentateuch, and the Dead Sea Scrolls, as well as his work in Northwest Semitic Epigraphy
William G. Dever (1933–): American biblical archaeologist, known for his contributions to the understanding of early Israel
Johann Gottfried Eichhorn (1752–1827): applied source criticism to the entire Bible, decided against Mosaic authorship
Alvar Ellegård (1919–2008): linguist who reordered the chronology of New Testament texts and a proponent of the "Jesus Myth Theory"
Bart D. Ehrman (1955–): University of North Carolina professor, who has examined issues of textual corruption and authorship in New Testament and Early Christian texts
Israel Finkelstein (1949–): Israeli archaeologist and Professor at Tel Aviv University, an advocate for re-dating remains previously ascribed to King Solomon to the rule of the Omrides
Johann Jakob Griesbach (1745–1812): pioneered the Griesbach hypothesis, which supports the primacy of the Gospel of Matthew
Hermann Gunkel (1862–1932): father of form criticism, the study of the oral traditions behind the text of the Pentateuch
Niels Peter Lemche (1945– ): biblical scholar at the University of Copenhagen associated with biblical minimalism, which warns against uncritical acceptance of the Bible as history
Bruce Metzger (1914–2007): biblical scholar sometimes referred to as "the dean" of New Testament textual criticism and wrote the definitive The Text of the New Testament (Oxford University Press, 1964)
Martin Noth (1902–1968): developed tradition history and scholar on the origins of the Pentateuch and the Deuteronomistic History
Robert M. Price ( 1954–): American theologian and philosopher
Rolf Rendtorff (1925–): German critic who advanced an influential non-documentary hypothesis for the origins of the Pentateuch
Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768–1834): German theologian and philosopher whose theoretical hermeneutics underlie much of modern biblical exegesis
Albert Schweitzer (1875–1965): German theologian who was a pioneer in the quest for the historical Jesus
John Van Seters (1935–): American Hebrew Bible scholar who favors a supplementary model for the creation of the Pentateuch
Baruch Spinoza (1632–1677): Dutch philosopher, who collected discrepancies, contradictions, and anachronisms from the Torah to show that it could not have been written by Moses
Baron d'Holbach (1723–1789): leading French/German encyclopedist, published anonymously in Amsterdam in 1769 "Ecce Homo: The History of Jesus of Nazareth, a Critical Inquiry", the first Life of Jesus describing him as a mere historical man. Translated into English by George Houston and published by him in Edinburgh, 1799, London, 1813, (for which "blasphemy" Houston was condemned to two years in prison), and New York, 1827
David Friedrich Strauss (1808–1874): German critic who published influential work on the historical origins of Christian beliefs, most notably in his Das Leben Jesu
Thomas L. Thompson (1939–): outspoken critic of Albright's conclusions about archaeology and the historicity of the Pentateuch
Julius Wellhausen (1844–1918): German biblical critic and popularizer of a four-source documentary hypothesis
Wilhelm Martin Leberecht de Wette (1780–1849): early German contributor to higher criticism and the study of Pentateuchal origins
Joseph Wheless (1868–1950): American lawyer who traced origins of the scriptures, examining original Hebrew and Greek meanings, and the translations into Latin and English
R. N. Whybray (1923–1997): critiqued the assumptions of source criticism underlying the documentary hypothesis
N. T. Wright (1948-):a retired Anglican bishop and current professor of New Testament and Early Christianity at the University of St. Andrews, Wright is known for the New Perspective on Paul and his Christian Origins and the Question of God series.[33][34]
See also[edit]
Detailed Christian timeline
Essays and Reviews
Gospel harmony
Christian heresy in the modern era - theologians tried for supporting biblical criticism
Historical method
New Testament places associated with Jesus
Pentateuchal criticism
Parallelomania
Timeline of the Bible
Notes[edit]
1.^ Jump up to: a b Harper's Bible Dictionary, 1985
2.Jump up ^ Fogarty, page 40.
3.Jump up ^ Encyclical Divino afflante Spiritu, 1943.
4.Jump up ^ Catechism of the Catholic Church, Article III, section 110
5.Jump up ^ Johann Jakob Griesbach (1745–1812) published several editions of the New Testament. In his 1796 edition, he established fifteen critical rules, including a variant of Bengel's rule, Lectio difficilior potior, "the hardest reading is best." Another was Lectio brevior praeferenda, "the shorter reading is best," based on the idea that scribes were more likely to add than to delete. "Critical Rules of Johann Albrecht Bengel". Bible-researcher.com. Archived from the original on 13 February 2010. Retrieved 2010-03-16.
6.Jump up ^ David J. A. Clines, "Methods in Old Testament Study", section Textual Criticism, in On the Way to the Postmodern: Old Testament Essays 1967–1998, Volume 1 (JSOTSup, 292; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), pp. 23–45.
7.Jump up ^ Antony F. Campbell, SJ, "Preparatory Issues in Approaching Biblical Texts", in The Hebrew Bible in Modern Study, p.6. Campbell renames source criticism as "origin criticism".
8.Jump up ^ Bibledudes.com
9.Jump up ^ Yair Hoffman, review of Marvin A. Sweeney and Ehud Ben Zvi (eds.), The Changing Face of Form-Criticism for the Twenty-First Century, 2003
10.Jump up ^ Religious Studies Department, Santa Clara University.
11.Jump up ^ Redaction Criticism.
12.Jump up ^ Norman K. Gottwald, "Social Matrix and Canonical Shape", Theology Today, October 1985.
13.Jump up ^ M.D. Morrison, "Rhetorical Criticism of the Hebrew Bible"
14.Jump up ^ Johannes C. De Klerk, "Situating biblical narrative studies in literary theory and literary approaches", Religion & Theology 4/3 (1997).
15.Jump up ^ Christopher Heard, "Narrative Criticism and the Hebrew Scriptures: A Review and Assessment", Restoration Quarterly, Vol. 38/No.1 (1996)
16.Jump up ^ Frank S. Frick, Response: Reconstructing Israel's Ancient World, SBL[dead link]
17.Jump up ^ David L. Barr, review of A. K. M. Adam (ed.), Handbook of Postmodern Biblical Interpretation, 2000
18.Jump up ^ David J. A. Clines, "The Pyramid and the Net", On the Way to the Postmodern: Old Testament Essays 1967–1998, Volume 1 (JSOTSup, 292; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998).
19.Jump up ^ Catherine M. Murphy, The Historical Jesus For Dummies, For Dummies Pub., 2007. p 14 Google Link
20.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g Catherine M. Murphy, The Historical Jesus For Dummies, For Dummies Pub., 2007. p 14, 61-77
21.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew, Yale University Press, 2009.
22.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Maureen W. Yeung, Faith in Jesus and Paul: a comparison, Volume 147, Mohr Siebeck Pub, 2002. pp 54-56
23.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Blue Butler Education, Historical Study of Jesus of Nazareth: An Introduction
24.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f N. S. Gill, Discussion of the Historical Jesus
25.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Bart D. Ehrman, Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium, Oxford, 1999. pp 90–91.
26.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, Doubleday, 1991. v. 1, pp 174–175, 317
27.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Stanley E. Porter, The Criteria for Authenticity in Historical-Jesus Research: Previous Discussion and New Proposals (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000).
28.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Gerd Thiessen & Dagmar Winter, The Quest for the Plausible Jesus: The Question of Criteria (Westminster: John Knox Press, 2002).
29.Jump up ^ James R. Edwards, The Hebrew Gospel & the Development of the Synoptic Tradition, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 2009. pp 1-118
30.Jump up ^ Catherine M. Murphy, The Historical Jesus For Dummies, For Dummies Pub., 2007. p 14
31.Jump up ^ James R. Edwards, The Hebrew Gospel & the Development of the Synoptic Tradition, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 2009. pp 127-128
32.Jump up ^ Maureen W. Yeung, Faith in Jesus and Paul: A Comparison, Volume 147, Mohr Siebeck Pub, 2002. p 55
33.Jump up ^ [1]
34.Jump up ^ [2]
Further reading[edit]
Barton, John (1984). "Reading the Old Testament: Method in Biblical Study, Philadelphia, Westminster, ISBN 0-664-25724-0".
Barenboim Peter, Biblical Roots of Separation of Powers, Moscow : Letny Sad, 2005, ISBN 5-94381-123-0, http://lccn.loc.gov/2006400578
Birch, Bruce C., Walter Brueggemann, Terence E. Fretheim, and David L. Petersen (1999). A Theological Introduction to the Old Testament, ISBN 0-687-01348-8.
Coggins, R. J., and J. L. Houlden, eds. (1990). Dictionary of Biblical Interpretation. London: SCM Press; Philadelphia: Trinity Press International. ISBN 0-334-00294-X.
Ehrman, Bart D. (2005). Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why. HarperSanFrancisco. ISBN 0-06-073817-0.
Fuller, Reginald H. (1965). The Foundations of New Testament Christology. Scribners. ISBN 0-684-15532-X.
Goldingay, John (1990). "Approaches to Old Testament Interpretation. Rev. ed. Downers Grove, IL, InterVarsity, ISBN 1-894667-18-2".
Hayes, John H., and Carl R. Holladay (1987). "Biblical Exegesis: A Beginner's Handbook, Rev. ed. Atlanta, GA, John Knox, ISBN 0-8042-0031-9".
McKenzie, Steven L., and Stephen R. Haynes, eds. (1993). "To Each Its Own Meaning: An Introduction to Biblical Criticisms and Their Applications, Louisville, KY, Westminster/John Knox, ISBN 0-664-25784-4".
Levenson, Jon D. The Hebrew Bible, The Old Testament, and Historical Criticism: Jews and Christians in Biblical Studies, 1993, Westminister/John Knox Press, ISBN 0-664-25407-1
Rogerson, John (1984). Old Testament Criticism in the Nineteenth Century. ISBN 978-0-8006-0737-1.
Morgan, Robert, and John Barton (1988). "Biblical Interpretation, New York, Oxford University, ISBN 0-19-213257-1".
Soulen, Richard N. (1981). "Handbook of Biblical Criticism, 2nd ed. Atlanta, Ga, John Knox, ISBN 0-664-22314-1".
Stuart, Douglas (1984). "Old Testament Exegesis: A Primer for Students and Pastors, 2nd ed., Philadelphia, Westminster, ISBN 0-664-24320-7".
Shinan, Avigdor, and Yair Zakovitch (2004). That's Not What the Good Book Says, Miskal-Yediot Ahronot Books and Chemed Books, Tel-Aviv
External links[edit]
David J. A. Clines, "Possibilities and Priorities of Biblical Interpretation in an International Perspective", in On the Way to the Postmodern: Old Testament Essays 1967–1998, Volume 1 (JSOTSup, 292; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), pp. 46–68 See Section 6, Future Trends in Biblical Interpretation, overview of some current trends in biblical criticism.
Philip Davies, review of John J. Collins, "The Bible after Babel: Historical Criticism in a Postmodern Age", 2005 Reviews a survey of postmodernist biblical criticism.
Allen P. Ross (Beeson Divinity School, Samford University), "The Study of Textual Criticism" Guide to the methodology of textual criticism.
Yair Hoffman, review of Marvin A. Sweeney and Ehud Ben Zvi (eds.), The Changing Face of Form-Criticism for the Twenty-First Century, 2003 Discusses contemporary form criticism.
Exploring Ancient Near Eastern Civilizations on the Internet Introduction to biblical criticism
Library of latest modern books of biblical studies and biblical criticism


[hide]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
The Bible and history


General studies
Biblical criticism ·
 Biblical studies ·
 History of ancient Israel and Judah ·
 The Bible and history ·
 Quest for the historical Jesus ·
 Jesus Christ in comparative mythology
 
Bible.malmesbury.arp.jpg


Historicity
Biblical archaeology ·
 Historicity of Jesus ·
 Historicity of the Bible ·
 Historical reliability of the Gospels ·
 List of artifacts in biblical archaeology ·
 List of biblical figures identified in extra-biblical sources ·
 List of burial places of biblical figures ·
 List of Hebrew Bible manuscripts ·
 List of New Testament papyri ·
 List of New Testament uncials ·
 Historical Jesus
 

Criticism
Criticism of the Bible ·
 Christ myth theory
 

Bible Portal


  


Categories: Biblical criticism
Christian terminology






Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Azərbaycanca
Български
Català
Čeština
Deutsch
Esperanto
Français
한국어
Interlingua
Italiano
Magyar
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Plattdüütsch
Polski
Português
Русский
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Svenska
Türkçe
ייִדיש
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 3 April 2015, at 03:57.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_criticism












Biblical criticism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is about the academic treatment of the Bible as a historical document. For criticisms made against the Bible as a source of reliable information or ethical guidance, see Criticism of the Bible.



 The Gutenberg Bible, the first printed Bible
Biblical criticism is the scholarly "study and investigation of biblical writings that seeks to make discerning judgments about these writings".[1] Viewing biblical texts as having human rather than supernatural origins, it asks when and where a particular text originated; how, why, by whom, for whom, and in what circumstances it was produced; what influences were at work in its production; what sources were used in its composition; and what message it was intended to convey. It will vary slightly depending on whether the focus is on the Hebrew Bible, the Old Testament, the letters of New Testament or the Canonical gospels. It also plays an important role in the quest for a Historical Jesus.
It also addresses the physical text, including the meaning of the words and the way in which they are used, its preservation, history and integrity. Biblical criticism draws upon a wide range of scholarly disciplines including archaeology, anthropology, folklore, linguistics, Oral Tradition studies, and historical and religious studies.


Contents  [hide]
1 Background
2 History 2.1 Hebrew Bible/Old Testament
2.2 New Testament
3 Methods and perspectives 3.1 Textual criticism
3.2 Source criticism
3.3 Form criticism and tradition history
3.4 Redaction criticism
3.5 Canonical criticism
3.6 Rhetorical criticism
3.7 Narrative criticism
3.8 Psychological criticism
3.9 Socio-scientific criticism
3.10 Postmodernist criticism
3.11 Feminist exegesis
4 New Testament authenticity and the historical Jesus 4.1 Multiple attestation
4.2 Tendencies of the developing tradition
4.3 Embarrassment
4.4 Coherence
4.5 The Crucifixion
4.6 Semitisms
4.7 Sitz im Leben
5 Notable biblical scholars
6 See also
7 Notes
8 Further reading
9 External links

Background[edit]



 Andover-Harvard Theological Library, Harvard Divinity School.
Biblical criticism, defined as the treatment of biblical texts as natural rather than supernatural artifacts, grew out of the rationalism of the 17th and 18th centuries. In the 19th century it was divided between the higher criticism, the study of the composition and history of biblical texts, and lower criticism, the close examination of the text to establish their original or "correct" readings. These terms are largely no longer used, and contemporary criticism has seen the rise of new perspectives which draw on literary and multidisciplinary sociological approaches to address the meaning(s) of texts and the wider world in which they were conceived.
A division is still sometimes made between historical criticism and literary criticism. Historical criticism seeks to locate the text in history: it asks such questions as when the text was written, who the author/s might have been, and what history might be reconstructed from the answers. Literary criticism asks what audience the authors wrote for, their presumptive purpose, and the development of the text over time.
Historical criticism was the dominant form of criticism until the late 20th century, when biblical critics became interested in questions aimed more at the meaning of the text than its origins and developed methods drawn from mainstream literary criticism. The distinction is frequently referred to as one between diachronic and synchronic forms of criticism, the former concerned the development of texts through time, the latter treating texts as they exist at a particular moment, frequently the so-called "final form", meaning the Bible text as we have it today.
History[edit]
Part of a series on
The Bible
The Malmesbury Bible


Canons ·
 Books
 [show]






















Authorship ·
 Development
 [show]












Translations ·
 Manuscripts
 [show]














Biblical studies[show]
































Interpretation[show]













Perspectives[show]









Wikipedia book Bible book    Portal icon Bible portal
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Both Old Testament and New Testament criticism originated in the rationalism of the 17th and 18th centuries and developed within the context of the scientific approach to the humanities (especially history) which grew during the 19th. Studies of the Old and New Testaments were often independent of each other, largely due to the difficulty of any single scholar having a sufficient grasp of the many languages required or of the cultural background for the different periods in which texts had their origins.
Hebrew Bible/Old Testament[edit]



 Title page of Richard Simon's "Critical History" (1685), an early work of biblical criticism.
Modern biblical criticism begins with the 17th century philosophers and theologians—Thomas Hobbes, Benedict Spinoza, Richard Simon and others—who began to ask questions about the origin of the biblical text, especially the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament, i.e., Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy). They asked specifically who had written these books; according to tradition their author was Moses, but these critics found contradictions and inconsistencies in the text that they concluded made Mosaic authorship improbable. In the 18th century Jean Astruc (1684–1766), a French physician, set out to refute these critics. Borrowing methods of textual criticism already in use to investigate Greek and Roman texts, he discovered what he believed were two distinct documents within Genesis. These, he felt, were the original scrolls written by Moses, much as the four Gospel writers had produced four separate but complementary accounts of the life and teachings of Jesus. Later generations, he believed, had conflated these original documents to produce the modern book of Genesis, producing the inconsistencies and contradictions noted by Hobbes and Spinoza.
Astruc's methods were adopted by German scholars such as Johann Gottfried Eichhorn (1752–1827) and Wilhelm Martin Leberecht de Wette (1780–1849) in a movement which became known as the higher criticism (to distinguish it from the far longer-established close examination and comparison of individual manuscripts, called the lower criticism); this school reached its apogee with the influential synthesis of Julius Wellhausen (1844–1918) in the 1870s, at which point it seemed to many that the Bible had at last been fully explained as a human document.
The implications of "higher criticism" were not welcomed by many religious scholars, not least the Catholic Church. Pope Leo XIII (1810–1903) condemned secular biblical scholarship in his encyclical Providentissimus Deus;[2] but in 1943 Pope Pius XII gave license to the new scholarship in his encyclical Divino afflante Spiritu: "textual criticism ... [is] quite rightly employed in the case of the Sacred Books...Let the interpreter then, with all care and without neglecting any light derived from recent research, endeavor to determine the peculiar character and circumstances of the sacred writer, the age in which he lived, the sources written or oral to which he had recourse and the forms of expression he employed".[3] Today the modern Catechism states: "In order to discover the sacred authors' intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current. For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression".[4]
New Testament[edit]



Albert Schweitzer (1875-1965). His The Quest of the Historical Jesus (1906) demonstrated that 19th century "lives of Jesus" were reflections of the authors' own historical and social contexts.
The seminal figure in New Testament criticism was Hermann Samuel Reimarus (1694–1768), who applied to it the methodology of Greek and Latin textual studies and became convinced that very little of what it said could be accepted as incontrovertibly true. Reimarus's conclusions appealed to the rationalism of 18th century intellectuals, but were deeply troubling to contemporary believers. Baron d'Holbach (1723-1789) - "Ecce Homo -The History of Jesus of Nazareth, a Critical Inquiry" (1769), the first Life of Jesus described as a mere historical man, published anonymously in Amsterdam. George Houston translated the work into English—published in Edinburgh, 1799, London, 1813, and New York in 1827—for which "blasphemy" Houston was condemned to two years in prison. In the 19th century important scholarship was done by David Strauss, Ernest Renan, Johannes Weiss, Albert Schweitzer and others, all of whom investigated the "historical Jesus" within the Gospel narratives. In a different field the work of H. J. Holtzmann was significant: he established a chronology for the composition of the various books of the New Testament which formed the basis for future research on this subject, and established the two-source hypothesis (the hypothesis that the gospels of Matthew and Luke drew on the gospel of Mark and a hypothetical document known as Q). By the first half of the 20th century a new generation of scholars including Karl Barth and Rudolf Bultmann, in Germany, Roy Harrisville and others in North America had decided that the quest for the Jesus of history had reached a dead end. Barth and Bultmann accepted that little could be said with certainty about the historical Jesus, and concentrated instead on the kerygma, or message, of the New Testament. The questions they addressed were: What was Jesus’s key message? How was that message related to Judaism? Does that message speak to our reality today?
The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1948 revitalised interest in the possible contribution archaeology could make to the understanding of the New Testament. Joachim Jeremias and C. H. Dodd produced linguistic studies which tentatively identified layers within the Gospels that could be ascribed to Jesus, to the authors, and to the early Church; Burton Mack and John Dominic Crossan assessed Jesus in the cultural milieu of first-century Judea; and the scholars of the Jesus Seminar assessed the individual tropes of the Gospels to arrive at a consensus on what could and could not be accepted as historical.
Contemporary New Testament criticism continues to follow the synthesising trend set during the latter half of the 20th century. There continues to be a strong interest in recovering the "historical Jesus", but this now tends to set the search in terms of Jesus' Jewishness (Bruce Chilton, Geza Vermes and others) and his formation by the political and religious currents of first-century Palestine (Marcus Borg).
Methods and perspectives[edit]



Source criticism: diagram of the two-source hypothesis, an explanation for the relationship of the gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke.
The critical methods and perspectives now to be found are numerous, and the following overview should not be regarded as comprehensive.
Textual criticism[edit]
Textual criticism (sometimes still referred to as "lower criticism") refers to the examination of the text itself to identify its provenance or to trace its history. It takes as its basis the fact that errors inevitably crept into texts as generations of scribes reproduced each other's manuscripts. For example, Josephus employed scribes to copy his Antiquities of the Jews. As the scribes copied the Antiquities, they made mistakes. The copies of these copies also had the mistakes. The errors tend to form "families" of manuscripts: scribe A will introduce mistakes which are not in the manuscript of scribe B, and over time the "families" of texts descended from A and B will diverge further and further as more mistakes are introduced by later scribes, but will always be identifiable as descended from one or the other. Textual criticism studies the differences between these families to piece together a good idea of what the original looked like. The more surviving copies, the more accurately can they deduce information about the original text and about "family histories".
Textual criticism is a rigorously objective[clarification needed] discipline using a number of specialized methodologies, including eclecticism, stemmatics, copy-text editing and cladistics. A number of principles have also been introduced for use in deciding between variant manuscripts, such as Lectio difficilior potior: "The harder of two readings is to be preferred".[5] Nevertheless, there remains a strong element of subjectivity, areas where the scholar must decide his reading on the basis of taste or common-sense: Amos 6.12, for example, reads: "Does one plough with oxen?" The obvious answer is "yes", but the context of the passage seems to demand a "no"; the usual reading therefore is to amend this to, "Does one plough the sea with oxen?" The amendment has a basis in the text, which is believed to be corrupted, but is nevertheless a matter of judgement.[6]
Source criticism[edit]
Source criticism is the search for the original sources which lie behind a given biblical text. It can be traced back to the 17th-century French priest Richard Simon, and its most influential product is Julius Wellhausen's Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels (1878), whose "insight and clarity of expression have left their mark indelibly on modern biblical studies".[7] An example of source criticism is the study of the Synoptic problem. Critics noticed that the three Synoptic Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were very similar, indeed, at times identical. The dominant theory to account for the duplication is called the two-source hypothesis. This suggests that Mark was the first gospel to be written, and that it was probably based on a combination of early oral and written material. Matthew and Luke were written at a later time, and relied primarily on two different sources: Mark and a written collection of Jesus's sayings, which has been given the name Q by scholars. This latter document has now been lost, but at least some of its material can be deduced indirectly, namely through the material that is common in Matthew and Luke but absent in Mark. In addition to Mark and Q, the writers of Matthew and Luke made some use of additional sources, which would account for the material that is unique to each of them.
Form criticism and tradition history[edit]
Form criticism breaks the Bible down into sections (pericopes, stories) which are analyzed and categorized by genres (prose or verse, letters, laws, court archives, war hymns, poems of lament, etc.). The form critic then theorizes on the pericope's Sitz im Leben ("setting in life"), the setting in which it was composed and, especially, used.[8] Tradition history is a specific aspect of form criticism which aims at tracing the way in which the pericopes entered the larger units of the biblical canon, and especially the way in which they made the transition from oral to written form. The belief in the priority, stability, and even detectability, of oral traditions is now recognised to be so deeply questionable as to render tradition history largely useless, but form criticism itself continues to develop as a viable methodology in biblical studies.[9]
Redaction criticism[edit]
Redaction criticism studies "the collection, arrangement, editing, and modification of sources", and is frequently used to reconstruct the community and purposes of the authors of the text.[10] It is based on the comparison of differences between manuscripts and their theological significance.[11]
Canonical criticism[edit]
Associated particularly with the name of Brevard S. Childs, who has written prolifically on the subject, canonical criticism is "an examination of the final form of the text as a totality, as well as the process leading to it".[12] Where previous criticism asked questions about the origins, structure and history of the text, canonical criticism addresses questions of meaning, both for the community (and communities—subsequent communities are regarded as being as important as the original community for which it was produced) which used it, and in the context of the wider canon of which it forms a part.[1]
Rhetorical criticism[edit]
Rhetorical criticism of the Bible dates back to at least Saint Augustine. Modern application of techniques of rhetorical analysis to biblical texts dates to James Muilenberg in 1968 as a corrective to form criticism, which Muilenberg saw as too generalized and insufficiently specific. For Muilenberg, rhetorical criticism emphasized the unique and unrepeatable message of the writer or speaker as addressed to his audience, including especially the techniques and devices which went into crafting the biblical narrative as it was heard (or read) by its audience. "What Muilenberg called rhetorical criticism was not exactly the same as what secular literary critics called rhetorical criticism, and when biblical scholars became interested in "rhetorical criticism", they did not limit themselves to Muilenberg's definition...In some cases it is difficult to distinguish between rhetorical criticism and literary criticism, or other disciplines". Unlike canonical criticism, rhetorical criticism (at least as defined by Muilenberg) takes a special interest in the relationship between the biblical text and its intended audience within the context of the communal life setting. Rhetorical criticism asks how the text functions for its audience, including especially its original audience: to teach, persuade, guide, exhort, reproach, or inspire, and it concentrates especially on identifying and elucidating unique features of the situation, including both the techniques manifest in the text itself and the relevant features of the cultural setting, through which this purpose is pursued.[13]
Narrative criticism[edit]
Narrative criticism is one of a number of modern forms of criticism based in contemporary literary theory and practice—in this case, from narratology. In common with other literary approaches (and in contrast to historical forms of criticism), narrative criticism treats the text as a unit, and focuses on narrative structure and composition, plot development, themes and motifs, characters, and characterization.[14] Narrative criticism is a complex field, but some central concerns include the reliability of the narrator, the question of authorial intent (expressed in terms of the context in which the text was written and its presumed intended audience), and the implications of multiple interpretation—i.e., an awareness that a narrative is capable of more than one interpretation, and thus of the implications of each.[15]
Psychological criticism[edit]
Psychological biblical criticism is a perspective rather than a method. It discusses the psychological dimensions of the authors of the text, the material they wish to communicate to their audience, and the reflections and meditations of the reader.
Socio-scientific criticism[edit]
Socio-scientific criticism (also known as socio-historical criticism and social-world criticism) is a contemporary form of multidisciplinary criticism drawing on the social sciences, especially anthropology and sociology. A typical study will draw on studies of contemporary nomadism, shamanism, tribalism, spirit-possession, and millenarianism to illuminate similar passages described in biblical texts. Socioscientific criticism is thus concerned with the historical world behind the text rather than the historical world in the text.[16]
Postmodernist criticism[edit]



 The "Tomb of Joshua" at Kifl Haris, a Palestinian village located northwest of the Israeli settlement of Ariel in the West Bank. Postmodernist criticism frequently locates biblical references in a modern setting.
Postmodernist biblical criticism treats the same general topics addressed in broader postmodernist scholarship, "including author, autobiography, culture criticism, deconstruction, ethics, fantasy, gender, ideology, politics, postcolonialism, and so on". It asks questions like: What are we to make, ethically speaking, of the program of ethnic cleansing described in the book of Joshua? What does the social construction of gender mean for the depiction of male and female roles in the Bible?[17]
In textual criticism, postmodernist criticism rejects the idea of an original text (the traditional quest of textual criticism, which marginalised all non-original manuscripts), and treats all manuscripts as equally valuable; in the "higher criticism" it brings new perspectives to theology, Israelite history, hermeneutics, and ethics.[18]
Feminist exegesis[edit]
Feminist criticism of the Bible utilizes the same means and essentially strives for the same ends as feminist literary criticism. It is therefore made up of a variety of peoples, including, but not limited to, Jews, people of color, and feminist Christians such as Elisabeth Fiorenza.
New Testament authenticity and the historical Jesus[edit]
Multiple attestation[edit]
The criterion of multiple attestation or "independent attestation" is an important tool used by scholars. Simply put, the more independent witnesses that report an event or saying, the better.
The gospels are not always independent of each other. There is a possibility that Matthew and Luke copied contents from Mark's gospel.[19] There are, however, at least four early, independent sources. The criterion of multiple attestation focuses on the sayings or deeds of Jesus that are attested to in more than one independent literary source such as the Apostle Paul, Josephus, Q, and/or the Gospel of the Hebrews. The force of this criterion is increased if a given motif or theme is also found in different literary forms such as parables, dispute stories, miracle stories, prophecy, and/or aphorism.[20][21]
Multiple attestation has a certain kind of objectivity. Given the independence of the sources, satisfaction of the criterion makes it harder to maintain that it was an invention of the Church.[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28]
Tendencies of the developing tradition[edit]
It is important that scholars research the earliest testimonies. To do this, they need to figure out the earliest gospel and the earliest parts of the gospels. Ideally, this material would come from eyewitnesses, but that is not always possible.
The writings of the Church Fathers are helpful in this regard. They wrote that the Hebrew Gospel was the first written while the Gospel of John was later. Also, because certain "laws" govern the transmission of tradition during the oral period, we can, by understanding these "laws", determine which tradition is early and which is late.[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29]
Embarrassment[edit]
The criterion of embarrassment, also known as the "criterion of dissimilarity", is an analytical tool that biblical scholars use in assessing whether the New Testament accounts of Jesus' actions and words are historically accurate. Simply put, trust the embarrassing material. If something is awkward for an author to say and he does anyway, it is more likely to be true.[30]
The essence of the criterion of embarrassment is that the Early Church would hardly have gone out of its way to "create" or "falsify" historical material that only embarrassed its author or weakened its position in arguments with opponents. Rather, embarrassing material coming from Jesus would naturally be either suppressed or softened in later stages of the Gospel tradition, and often such progressive suppression or softening can be traced through the Gospels.
The evolution of the depiction of the Baptism of Jesus exhibits the criterion of embarrassment. In the Gospel of the Hebrews, Jesus is but a man (see adoptionism) submitting to another man for the forgiveness of the "sin of ignorance" (a lesser sin, but sin nonetheless). Matthew's description of the Baptism adds John's statement to Jesus: "I should be baptized by you", attempting to do away with the embarrassment of John baptising Jesus, implying John's seniority. Similarly, it resolves the embarrassment of Jesus undergoing baptism "for the forgiveness of sin", the purpose of John's baptising in Mark, by omitting this phrase from John's proclamations. The Gospel of Luke says only that Jesus was baptized, without explicitly asserting that John performed the baptism. The Gospel of John goes further and simply omits the whole story of the Baptism. This might show a progression of the Evangelists attempting to explain, and then suppress, a story that was seen as embarrassing to the early church.[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28]
Coherence[edit]
The Criterion of coherence (also called consistency or conformity) can be used only when other material has been identified as authentic. This criterion holds that a saying and action attributed to Jesus may be accepted as authentic if it coheres with other sayings and actions already established as authentic. While this criterion cannot be used alone, it can broaden the database for what Jesus actually said and did.[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28]
The Crucifixion[edit]
The criterion of the Crucifixion emphasizes that Jesus met a violent death at the hands of Jewish and Roman officials and that the authentic words and actions of Jesus would alienate people, especially powerful people.[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28]
Semitisms[edit]
Since Jesus spoke in Aramaic, traces of Aramaic in the Gospels argue in favor of a primitive tradition that may go back to Jesus. Semitisms are structured according to general rules that allow Hebrew speakers and hearers to say and hear things according to predictable patterns. Hebrew and Aramaic are linguistically very closely related and they follow similar elementary rules. For example, the pun in Matt 23:24, "straining out the gnat (galma) and swallowing a camel (gamla)" points in the direction of the historical Jesus.[22][31]
Sitz im Leben[edit]
Main article: Sitz im Leben
The sayings and actions of the historical Jesus must reflect the Sitz im Leben or the concrete social, political, economic, agricultural, and religious conditions of ancient Palestine, while sayings and actions of Jesus that reflect social, political, economic, agricultural, or religious conditions that existed only outside Palestine or only after the death of Jesus are to be considered inauthentic.[20][21][23][24][25][26][27][28][32]
Notable biblical scholars[edit]
William Albright (1891–1971): Professor at Johns Hopkins University and the founder of American biblical archaeology
Albrecht Alt (1883–1956): prominent in early debates about the religion of the biblical patriarchs; he was also an important influence on the generation of mid-20th century German scholars like Martin Noth and Gerhard von Rad
Jean Astruc (1684–1776): early French biblical critic, who adapted source criticism to the study of Genesis
Margaret Barker (1944–): maintains that the polytheistic practices of the First Jewish Temple survived and influenced gnosticism and early Christianity
Walter Bauer (1877–1960): redefined the parameters of orthodoxy and heresy with his multiregional hypothesis for the origins of early Christianity
F. C. Baur (1792–1860): explored the secular history of the primitive church
Rudolf Karl Bultmann (1884–1976): New Testament scholar who defined an almost complete split between history and faith, called demythology
D. A. Carson (1946–): Canadian New Testament scholar of the Gospel of John
John J. Collins (1946–): Irish scholar of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Second Temple Judaism; he has worked extensively on Jewish messianism and apocalypticism
Frank Moore Cross (1921–2012): American biblical scholar and Harvard professor notable for his interpretations of the Deuteronomistic History, the Pentateuch, and the Dead Sea Scrolls, as well as his work in Northwest Semitic Epigraphy
William G. Dever (1933–): American biblical archaeologist, known for his contributions to the understanding of early Israel
Johann Gottfried Eichhorn (1752–1827): applied source criticism to the entire Bible, decided against Mosaic authorship
Alvar Ellegård (1919–2008): linguist who reordered the chronology of New Testament texts and a proponent of the "Jesus Myth Theory"
Bart D. Ehrman (1955–): University of North Carolina professor, who has examined issues of textual corruption and authorship in New Testament and Early Christian texts
Israel Finkelstein (1949–): Israeli archaeologist and Professor at Tel Aviv University, an advocate for re-dating remains previously ascribed to King Solomon to the rule of the Omrides
Johann Jakob Griesbach (1745–1812): pioneered the Griesbach hypothesis, which supports the primacy of the Gospel of Matthew
Hermann Gunkel (1862–1932): father of form criticism, the study of the oral traditions behind the text of the Pentateuch
Niels Peter Lemche (1945– ): biblical scholar at the University of Copenhagen associated with biblical minimalism, which warns against uncritical acceptance of the Bible as history
Bruce Metzger (1914–2007): biblical scholar sometimes referred to as "the dean" of New Testament textual criticism and wrote the definitive The Text of the New Testament (Oxford University Press, 1964)
Martin Noth (1902–1968): developed tradition history and scholar on the origins of the Pentateuch and the Deuteronomistic History
Robert M. Price ( 1954–): American theologian and philosopher
Rolf Rendtorff (1925–): German critic who advanced an influential non-documentary hypothesis for the origins of the Pentateuch
Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768–1834): German theologian and philosopher whose theoretical hermeneutics underlie much of modern biblical exegesis
Albert Schweitzer (1875–1965): German theologian who was a pioneer in the quest for the historical Jesus
John Van Seters (1935–): American Hebrew Bible scholar who favors a supplementary model for the creation of the Pentateuch
Baruch Spinoza (1632–1677): Dutch philosopher, who collected discrepancies, contradictions, and anachronisms from the Torah to show that it could not have been written by Moses
Baron d'Holbach (1723–1789): leading French/German encyclopedist, published anonymously in Amsterdam in 1769 "Ecce Homo: The History of Jesus of Nazareth, a Critical Inquiry", the first Life of Jesus describing him as a mere historical man. Translated into English by George Houston and published by him in Edinburgh, 1799, London, 1813, (for which "blasphemy" Houston was condemned to two years in prison), and New York, 1827
David Friedrich Strauss (1808–1874): German critic who published influential work on the historical origins of Christian beliefs, most notably in his Das Leben Jesu
Thomas L. Thompson (1939–): outspoken critic of Albright's conclusions about archaeology and the historicity of the Pentateuch
Julius Wellhausen (1844–1918): German biblical critic and popularizer of a four-source documentary hypothesis
Wilhelm Martin Leberecht de Wette (1780–1849): early German contributor to higher criticism and the study of Pentateuchal origins
Joseph Wheless (1868–1950): American lawyer who traced origins of the scriptures, examining original Hebrew and Greek meanings, and the translations into Latin and English
R. N. Whybray (1923–1997): critiqued the assumptions of source criticism underlying the documentary hypothesis
N. T. Wright (1948-):a retired Anglican bishop and current professor of New Testament and Early Christianity at the University of St. Andrews, Wright is known for the New Perspective on Paul and his Christian Origins and the Question of God series.[33][34]
See also[edit]
Detailed Christian timeline
Essays and Reviews
Gospel harmony
Christian heresy in the modern era - theologians tried for supporting biblical criticism
Historical method
New Testament places associated with Jesus
Pentateuchal criticism
Parallelomania
Timeline of the Bible
Notes[edit]
1.^ Jump up to: a b Harper's Bible Dictionary, 1985
2.Jump up ^ Fogarty, page 40.
3.Jump up ^ Encyclical Divino afflante Spiritu, 1943.
4.Jump up ^ Catechism of the Catholic Church, Article III, section 110
5.Jump up ^ Johann Jakob Griesbach (1745–1812) published several editions of the New Testament. In his 1796 edition, he established fifteen critical rules, including a variant of Bengel's rule, Lectio difficilior potior, "the hardest reading is best." Another was Lectio brevior praeferenda, "the shorter reading is best," based on the idea that scribes were more likely to add than to delete. "Critical Rules of Johann Albrecht Bengel". Bible-researcher.com. Archived from the original on 13 February 2010. Retrieved 2010-03-16.
6.Jump up ^ David J. A. Clines, "Methods in Old Testament Study", section Textual Criticism, in On the Way to the Postmodern: Old Testament Essays 1967–1998, Volume 1 (JSOTSup, 292; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), pp. 23–45.
7.Jump up ^ Antony F. Campbell, SJ, "Preparatory Issues in Approaching Biblical Texts", in The Hebrew Bible in Modern Study, p.6. Campbell renames source criticism as "origin criticism".
8.Jump up ^ Bibledudes.com
9.Jump up ^ Yair Hoffman, review of Marvin A. Sweeney and Ehud Ben Zvi (eds.), The Changing Face of Form-Criticism for the Twenty-First Century, 2003
10.Jump up ^ Religious Studies Department, Santa Clara University.
11.Jump up ^ Redaction Criticism.
12.Jump up ^ Norman K. Gottwald, "Social Matrix and Canonical Shape", Theology Today, October 1985.
13.Jump up ^ M.D. Morrison, "Rhetorical Criticism of the Hebrew Bible"
14.Jump up ^ Johannes C. De Klerk, "Situating biblical narrative studies in literary theory and literary approaches", Religion & Theology 4/3 (1997).
15.Jump up ^ Christopher Heard, "Narrative Criticism and the Hebrew Scriptures: A Review and Assessment", Restoration Quarterly, Vol. 38/No.1 (1996)
16.Jump up ^ Frank S. Frick, Response: Reconstructing Israel's Ancient World, SBL[dead link]
17.Jump up ^ David L. Barr, review of A. K. M. Adam (ed.), Handbook of Postmodern Biblical Interpretation, 2000
18.Jump up ^ David J. A. Clines, "The Pyramid and the Net", On the Way to the Postmodern: Old Testament Essays 1967–1998, Volume 1 (JSOTSup, 292; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998).
19.Jump up ^ Catherine M. Murphy, The Historical Jesus For Dummies, For Dummies Pub., 2007. p 14 Google Link
20.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g Catherine M. Murphy, The Historical Jesus For Dummies, For Dummies Pub., 2007. p 14, 61-77
21.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew, Yale University Press, 2009.
22.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Maureen W. Yeung, Faith in Jesus and Paul: a comparison, Volume 147, Mohr Siebeck Pub, 2002. pp 54-56
23.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Blue Butler Education, Historical Study of Jesus of Nazareth: An Introduction
24.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f N. S. Gill, Discussion of the Historical Jesus
25.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Bart D. Ehrman, Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium, Oxford, 1999. pp 90–91.
26.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, Doubleday, 1991. v. 1, pp 174–175, 317
27.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Stanley E. Porter, The Criteria for Authenticity in Historical-Jesus Research: Previous Discussion and New Proposals (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000).
28.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Gerd Thiessen & Dagmar Winter, The Quest for the Plausible Jesus: The Question of Criteria (Westminster: John Knox Press, 2002).
29.Jump up ^ James R. Edwards, The Hebrew Gospel & the Development of the Synoptic Tradition, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 2009. pp 1-118
30.Jump up ^ Catherine M. Murphy, The Historical Jesus For Dummies, For Dummies Pub., 2007. p 14
31.Jump up ^ James R. Edwards, The Hebrew Gospel & the Development of the Synoptic Tradition, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 2009. pp 127-128
32.Jump up ^ Maureen W. Yeung, Faith in Jesus and Paul: A Comparison, Volume 147, Mohr Siebeck Pub, 2002. p 55
33.Jump up ^ [1]
34.Jump up ^ [2]
Further reading[edit]
Barton, John (1984). "Reading the Old Testament: Method in Biblical Study, Philadelphia, Westminster, ISBN 0-664-25724-0".
Barenboim Peter, Biblical Roots of Separation of Powers, Moscow : Letny Sad, 2005, ISBN 5-94381-123-0, http://lccn.loc.gov/2006400578
Birch, Bruce C., Walter Brueggemann, Terence E. Fretheim, and David L. Petersen (1999). A Theological Introduction to the Old Testament, ISBN 0-687-01348-8.
Coggins, R. J., and J. L. Houlden, eds. (1990). Dictionary of Biblical Interpretation. London: SCM Press; Philadelphia: Trinity Press International. ISBN 0-334-00294-X.
Ehrman, Bart D. (2005). Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why. HarperSanFrancisco. ISBN 0-06-073817-0.
Fuller, Reginald H. (1965). The Foundations of New Testament Christology. Scribners. ISBN 0-684-15532-X.
Goldingay, John (1990). "Approaches to Old Testament Interpretation. Rev. ed. Downers Grove, IL, InterVarsity, ISBN 1-894667-18-2".
Hayes, John H., and Carl R. Holladay (1987). "Biblical Exegesis: A Beginner's Handbook, Rev. ed. Atlanta, GA, John Knox, ISBN 0-8042-0031-9".
McKenzie, Steven L., and Stephen R. Haynes, eds. (1993). "To Each Its Own Meaning: An Introduction to Biblical Criticisms and Their Applications, Louisville, KY, Westminster/John Knox, ISBN 0-664-25784-4".
Levenson, Jon D. The Hebrew Bible, The Old Testament, and Historical Criticism: Jews and Christians in Biblical Studies, 1993, Westminister/John Knox Press, ISBN 0-664-25407-1
Rogerson, John (1984). Old Testament Criticism in the Nineteenth Century. ISBN 978-0-8006-0737-1.
Morgan, Robert, and John Barton (1988). "Biblical Interpretation, New York, Oxford University, ISBN 0-19-213257-1".
Soulen, Richard N. (1981). "Handbook of Biblical Criticism, 2nd ed. Atlanta, Ga, John Knox, ISBN 0-664-22314-1".
Stuart, Douglas (1984). "Old Testament Exegesis: A Primer for Students and Pastors, 2nd ed., Philadelphia, Westminster, ISBN 0-664-24320-7".
Shinan, Avigdor, and Yair Zakovitch (2004). That's Not What the Good Book Says, Miskal-Yediot Ahronot Books and Chemed Books, Tel-Aviv
External links[edit]
David J. A. Clines, "Possibilities and Priorities of Biblical Interpretation in an International Perspective", in On the Way to the Postmodern: Old Testament Essays 1967–1998, Volume 1 (JSOTSup, 292; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), pp. 46–68 See Section 6, Future Trends in Biblical Interpretation, overview of some current trends in biblical criticism.
Philip Davies, review of John J. Collins, "The Bible after Babel: Historical Criticism in a Postmodern Age", 2005 Reviews a survey of postmodernist biblical criticism.
Allen P. Ross (Beeson Divinity School, Samford University), "The Study of Textual Criticism" Guide to the methodology of textual criticism.
Yair Hoffman, review of Marvin A. Sweeney and Ehud Ben Zvi (eds.), The Changing Face of Form-Criticism for the Twenty-First Century, 2003 Discusses contemporary form criticism.
Exploring Ancient Near Eastern Civilizations on the Internet Introduction to biblical criticism
Library of latest modern books of biblical studies and biblical criticism


[hide]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
The Bible and history


General studies
Biblical criticism ·
 Biblical studies ·
 History of ancient Israel and Judah ·
 The Bible and history ·
 Quest for the historical Jesus ·
 Jesus Christ in comparative mythology
 
Bible.malmesbury.arp.jpg


Historicity
Biblical archaeology ·
 Historicity of Jesus ·
 Historicity of the Bible ·
 Historical reliability of the Gospels ·
 List of artifacts in biblical archaeology ·
 List of biblical figures identified in extra-biblical sources ·
 List of burial places of biblical figures ·
 List of Hebrew Bible manuscripts ·
 List of New Testament papyri ·
 List of New Testament uncials ·
 Historical Jesus
 

Criticism
Criticism of the Bible ·
 Christ myth theory
 

Bible Portal


  


Categories: Biblical criticism
Christian terminology






Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Azərbaycanca
Български
Català
Čeština
Deutsch
Esperanto
Français
한국어
Interlingua
Italiano
Magyar
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Plattdüütsch
Polski
Português
Русский
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Svenska
Türkçe
ייִדיש
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 3 April 2015, at 03:57.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_criticism














Criticism of the Bible

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is about criticisms of the Bible as a source of reliable information or ethical guidance. For the academic treatment of the Bible as a historical document, see Biblical criticism.

Crystal Clear app kedit.svg
 This article may need to be rewritten entirely to comply with Wikipedia's quality standards. You can help. The discussion page may contain suggestions. (February 2014)
Part of a series on
The Bible
The Malmesbury Bible


Canons ·
 Books
 [show]






















Authorship ·
 Development
 [show]












Translations ·
 Manuscripts
 [show]














Biblical studies[show]
































Interpretation[show]













Perspectives[hide]

Gnostic ·
 Islamic ·
 Qur'anic

Inerrancy ·
 Infallibility
 Criticism of the Bible

Wikipedia book Bible book    Portal icon Bible portal
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
The view that the Bible should be accepted as historically accurate and as a reliable guide to morality has been questioned by many scholars in the field of biblical criticism. In addition to concerns about morality, inerrancy, or historicity, there remain some questions of which books should be included in the Bible (see canon of scripture). Jews discount the New Testament and Old Testament Deuterocanonicals, Jews and most Christians discredit the legitimacy of New Testament apocrypha, and a view sometimes referred to as Jesusism does not affirm the scriptural authority of any biblical text other than the teachings of Jesus in the Gospels.


Contents  [hide]
1 Bible history issues
2 Translation issues
3 Ethics in the Bible
4 Internal consistency
5 The Bible and science
6 The Bible and archaeology
7 Unfulfilled prophecies 7.1 Messianic prophecies
7.2 Prophecies after the event
7.3 The success of Joshua
7.4 The destruction of Tyre
7.5 The protection of the King of Judah
7.6 The death of the king of Judah
7.7 The death of Josiah
7.8 The land promised to Abraham
7.9 The fate of Damascus
7.10 The fate of Jews who stay in Egypt
7.11 The return of Jewish prisoners of war
7.12 The strength of Judah
7.13 The identity of the conquerors of Babylon
7.14 Jehoiakim prophecies
7.15 New Testament 7.15.1 The imminence of the second coming

8 Notable critics
9 See also
10 References
11 Further reading
12 External links

Bible history issues[edit]



 The Gutenberg Bible, the first printed Bible
Part of a series on
Criticism of religion

By religion
Buddhism ·
 Christianity  (Catholicism ·
 Jehovah's Witnesses ·
 Seventh-day Adventist)
   ·
 Protestantism ·
 Hinduism ·
 Islam  (Twelver Shi'ism)
   ·
 Jainism ·
 Judaism ·
 Mormonism ·
 Sikhism
 
By religious figure
Jesus ·
 Moses ·
 Muhammad ·
 Ellen G. White
 
By text
Bible ·
 Book of Mormon ·
 Quran ·
 Talmud
 
Critics
Mikhail Bakunin ·
 Giordano Bruno ·
 Richard Dawkins ·
 Denis Diderot ·
 Epicurus ·
 Ludwig Feuerbach ·
 Stephen Fry ·
 Sita Ram Goel ·
 Emma Goldman ·
 Sam Harris ·
 Ayaan Hirsi Ali ·
 Christopher Hitchens ·
 Baron d'Holbach ·
 David Hume ·
 Robert Green Ingersoll ·
 Karl Marx ·
 Friedrich Nietzsche ·
 Michel Onfray ·
 Thomas Paine ·
 Pierre-Joseph Proudhon ·
 Ayn Rand ·
 André Servier ·
 David Silverman ·
 Max Stirner ·
 Bertrand Russell ·
 Dayanand Saraswati ·
 Victor J. Stenger ·
 Voltaire
 
Religious violence
Terrorism ·
 War ·
 Buddhism ·
 Christianity ·
 Islam ·
 Judaism ·
 Mormonism
 
Related topics
Abuse ·
 Apostasy ·
 Crisis of faith ·
 Criticism of atheism ·
 Criticism of monotheism ·
 Persecution ·
 Sexuality ·
 Slavery
 
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Main articles: Biblical Criticism and Higher Criticism
The Hebrew Bible and Christian Bibles are works considered sacred and authoritative writings by their respective faith groups that revere their specific collections of biblical writings.[1] The Hebrew Bible, upon which the Christian Old Testament is based, was originally composed in Biblical Hebrew, except for parts of Daniel and Ezra that were written in Biblical Aramaic. These writings depict Israelite religion from its beginnings to about the 2nd century BC. The Christian New Testament was written in Koine Greek. (See Language of the New Testament for details.)
At the end of the 17th century few Bible scholars would have doubted that Moses wrote the Torah, but in the late 18th century some liberal scholars began to question his authorship, and by the end of the 19th century some went as far as to claim that as a whole the work was of many more authors over many centuries from 1000 BC (the time of David) to 500 BC (the time of Ezra), and that the history it contained was often more polemical rather than strictly factual. By the first half of the 20th century Hermann Gunkel had drawn attention to mythic aspects, and Albrecht Alt, Martin Noth and the tradition history school argued that although its core traditions had genuinely ancient roots, the narratives were fictional framing devices and were not intended as history in the modern sense.

While the limits of the canon were effectively set in these early centuries, the status of scripture has been a topic of scholarly discussion in the later church. Increasingly, the biblical works have been subjected to literary and historical criticism in efforts to interpret the texts independent of Church and dogmatic influences. Different views of the authority and inspiration of the Bible also continue to be expressed in liberal and fundamentalist churches today. What cannot be denied, however, is the enormous influence which the stories, poetry, and reflections found in the biblical writings have had, not only on the doctrines and practices of two major faiths, but also on Western culture, its literature, art, and music.[1]
In the 2nd century, the gnostics often claimed that their form of Christianity was the first, and they regarded Jesus as a teacher, or allegory.[2] Elaine Pagels has proposed that there are several examples of gnostic attitudes in the Pauline Epistles.[citation needed] Bart D. Ehrman and Raymond E. Brown note that some of the Pauline epistles are widely regarded by scholars as pseudonymous,[3] and it is the view of Timothy Freke, and others, that this involved a forgery in an attempt by the Church to bring in Paul's Gnostic supporters and turn the arguments in the other Epistles on their head.
Some critics have alleged that Christianity is not founded on a historical figure, but rather on a mythical creation.[4] This view proposes that the idea of Jesus was the Jewish manifestation of a pan-Hellenic cult, known as Osiris-Dionysus,[5] which acknowledged the non-historic nature of the figure, using it instead as a teaching device.
Translation issues[edit]
Main articles: Biblical manuscripts, Textual criticism and Biblical inerrancy
Some critics express concern that none of the original manuscripts of the books of the Bible still exist. All translations of the Bible have been made from well-respected but centuries-old copies. Religious communities value highly those who interpret their scriptures at both the scholarly and popular levels. Translation of scripture into the vernacular (such as English and hundreds of other languages), though a common phenomenon, is also a subject of debate and criticism.[6]
Translation has led to a number of issues, as the original languages are often quite different in grammar and word meaning. While the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy states that "inerrancy" applies only to the original languages, some believers trust their own translation as the truly accurate one—for example, the King-James-Only Movement. For readability, clarity, or other reasons, translators may choose different wording or sentence structure, and some translations may choose to paraphrase passages.
Because many of the words in the original language have ambiguous or difficult to translate meanings, debates over correct interpretation occur. For instance, at creation(Gen 1:2), is רוח אלהים (ruwach 'elohiym) the "wind of god", "spirit of god"(i.e., the Holy Spirit in Christianity), or a "mighty wind" over the primordial deep? In Hebrew, רוח(ruwach) can mean "wind","breath" or "spirit". Both ancient and modern translators are divided over this and many other such ambiguities.[7][8][9][10] Another example is the word used in the Masoretic Text [Isa 7:14] to indicate the woman who would bear Immanuel is alleged to mean a young, unmarried woman in Hebrew, while Matthew 1:23 follows the Septuagint version of the passage that uses the Greek word parthenos, translated virgin, and is used to support the Christian idea of virgin birth. Those who view the masoretic text, which forms the basis of most English translations of the Old Testament, as being more accurate than the Septuagint, and trust its usual translation, may see this as an inconsistency, whereas those who take the Septuagint to be accurate may not.
In the History of the English Bible, there have been many changes to the wording, leading to several competing versions. Many of these have contained Biblical errata—typographic errors, such as the phrases Is there no treacle in Gilead?, Printers have persecuted me without cause, and Know ye not that the unrighteous shall inherit the kingdom of God?, and even Thou shalt commit adultery.[11]
More recently, several discoveries of ancient manuscripts such as the Dead Sea scrolls, and Codex Sinaiticus, have led to modern translations like the New International Version differing somewhat from the older ones such as the 17th century King James Version, removing verses not present in the earliest manuscripts (see List of omitted Bible verses), some of which are acknowledged as interpolations, such as the Comma Johanneum, others having several highly variant versions in very important places, such as the resurrection scene in Mark 16. The King-James-Only Movement rejects these changes and uphold the King James Version as the most accurate.[12]
Ethics in the Bible[edit]
Main article: Ethics in the Bible
Certain moral decisions in the Bible are questioned by many modern groups. Some of the most commonly criticized ethical choices include subjugation of women, religious intolerance, use of capital punishment as penalty for violation of Mosaic Law, sexual acts like incest,[13] toleration of the institution of slavery in both Old and New Testaments,[14] obligatory religious wars and the order to commit the genocide of the Canaanites and the Amalekites. Christian Apologists support the Bible's decisions by reminding critics that they should be considered from the author's point of view and that Mosaic Law applied to the Israelite people (who lived before the birth of Jesus). Other religious groups see nothing wrong with the Bible's judgments.[15] One example that is often cited is the biblical law of the rebellious son:[16]

"If any man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father or his mother, and when they chastise him, he will not even listen to them, then his father and mother shall seize him, and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gateway of his home town. And they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey us, he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death; so you shall remove the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear of it and fear." (Deut. 21:18-21)
Other critics of the Bible, such as Friedrich Nietzsche who popularized the phrase "God is dead",[17] have questioned the morality of the New Testament, regarding it as weak and conformist-oriented.
Internal consistency[edit]
Main article: Internal consistency of the Bible
There are many places in the Bible in which inconsistencies—such as different numbers and names for the same feature, and different sequences for the same events—have been alleged and presented by critics as difficulties.[18] Responses to these criticisms include the modern documentary hypothesis, the two-source hypothesis and theories that the Pastoral Epistles are pseudonymous.[19]:p.47 Contrasting with these critical stances are positions supported by other authorities that consider the texts to be consistent. Such advocates maintain that the Torah was written by a single source, the Gospels by four independent witnesses, and all of the Pauline Epistles to have been written by the Apostle Paul.[citation needed]
However authors such as Raymond Brown have presented arguments that the Gospels actually contradict each other in various important respects and on various important details.[20] W. D. Davies and E. P. Sanders state that: "on many points, especially about Jesus’ early life, the evangelists were ignorant … they simply did not know, and, guided by rumour, hope or supposition, did the best they could".[21] More critical scholars see the nativity stories either as completely fictional accounts,[22] or at least constructed from traditions that predate the Gospels.[23][24]
For example, many versions of the Bible specifically point out that the most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses did not include Mark 16:9-20, i.e., the Gospel of Mark originally ended at Mark 16:8, and additional verses were added a few hundred years later. This is known as the "Markan Appendix".[25][26][27]
Mosaic authorship, authorship of the Gospels and authorship of the Pauline Epistles are topics that remain widely debated.
The Bible and science[edit]
Main article: Science and the Bible
The universe, as presented literally in the Bible, consists of a flat earth within a geocentric arrangement of planets and stars (e.g. Joshua 10:12–13, Eccles. 1:5, Isaiah 40:22, 1 Chron. 16:30, Matthew 4:8, Rev. 7:1).

Joshua 10:12 On the day that the Lord gave up the Amorites to the Israelites, Joshua stood before all the people of Israel and said to the Lord: “Sun, stand still over Gibeon. Moon, stand still over the Valley of Aijalon.” 13 So the sun stood still, and the moon stopped until the people defeated their enemies.
Eccles. 1:5 The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises.
Isaiah 40:22 He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in.
1 Chron. 16:30 Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.
Matthew 4:8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;
Rev. 7:1 And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.
Psalm 103:12 As far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us.



[28] Modern astronomy has provided overwhelming evidence that this model is false. The spherical shape of the earth was established with certainty by Hellenistic astronomers in the 3rd century BCE. The heliocentric nature of the solar system was conclusively established in the 16th century CE. Many modern Christians and Jews assert that these passages are written as metaphorical or phenomenological descriptions and not meant to be taken literally.[29] This response is intuitive given the modern prevalence of the expression "the sun rises" despite that it is common knowledge in the English speaking world that the sun does not, in fact, rise.
Another common point of criticism regards the Genesis creation narrative. According to young Earth creationism, which takes a literal view of the book of Genesis, the universe and all forms of life on Earth were created directly by God sometime between 5,700 and 10,000 years ago. (The Bible traces back to Adam's creation around 4000 BCE. There is debate over the 24 hour earth-days in which the earth was created as only on the fourth day were the sun, moon and stars created - without the sun a 24 hour earth-day is impossible. Genesis 1:16-19) This assertion is contradicted by radiocarbon dating of fossils, as well as modern understanding of genetics, evolution, and cosmology.[30] For instance, astrophysical evidence suggests that the universe is approximately 13.8 billion years old.[31] Moreover, it would require an impossibly high rate of mutation to account for the current amount of genetic variation in humans if all humans were descended from two individuals several thousand years ago.[32]

The argument that the literal story of Genesis can qualify as science collapses on three major grounds: the creationists' need to invoke miracles in order to compress the events of the earth's history into the biblical span of a few thousand years; their unwillingness to abandon claims clearly disproved, including the assertion that all fossils are products of Noah's flood; and their reliance upon distortion, misquote, half-quote, and citation out of context to characterize the ideas of their opponents.
— Bully for Brontosaurus by Stephen Jay Gould
Science-faith think tanks such as the Biologos foundation and Reasons to Believe have sought to reconcile these scientific challenges with the Christian faith.
The Bible and archaeology[edit]
Main articles: The Bible and history and Biblical archaeology
According to one of the world's leading biblical archaeologists, William G. Dever,

"Archaeology certainly doesn't prove literal readings of the Bible...It calls them into question, and that's what bothers some people. Most people really think that archaeology is out there to prove the Bible. No archaeologist thinks so."[33] From the beginnings of what we call biblical archeology, perhaps 150 years ago, scholars, mostly western scholars, have attempted to use archeological data to prove the Bible. And for a long time it was thought to work. William Albright, the great father of our discipline, often spoke of the "archeological revolution." Well, the revolution has come but not in the way that Albright thought. The truth of the matter today is that archeology raises more questions about the historicity of the Hebrew Bible and even the New Testament than it provides answers, and that's very disturbing to some people.[34]
Dever also wrote:

Archaeology as it is practiced today must be able to challenge, as well as confirm, the Bible stories. Some things described there really did happen, but others did not. The biblical narratives about Abraham, Moses, Joshua and Solomon probably reflect some historical memories of people and places, but the 'larger than life' portraits of the Bible are unrealistic and contradicted by the archaeological evidence....[35] I am not reading the Bible as Scripture… I am in fact not even a theist. My view all along—and especially in the recent books—is first that the biblical narratives are indeed 'stories,' often fictional and almost always propagandistic, but that here and there they contain some valid historical information...[36]
Tel Aviv University archaeologist Ze'ev Herzog wrote in the Haaretz newspaper:

This is what archaeologists have learned from their excavations in the Land of Israel: the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to swallow is that the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom. And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the God of Israel, YHWH, had a female consort and that the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai.[37][38]
Professor Finkelstein, who is known as "the father of biblical archaeology", told the Jerusalem Post that Jewish archaeologists have found no historical or archaeological evidence to back the biblical narrative on the Exodus, the Jews' wandering in Sinai or Joshua's conquest of Canaan. On the alleged Temple of Solomon, Finkelstein said that there is no archaeological evidence to prove it really existed.[39] Professor Yoni Mizrahi, an independent archaeologist who has worked with the International Atomic Energy Agency, agreed with Israel Finkelstein.[39]
Regarding the Exodus of Israelites from Egypt, Egyptian archaeologist Zahi Hawass said:

“Really, it’s a myth,”... “This is my career as an archaeologist. I should tell them the truth. If the people are upset, that is not my problem.”[40]
Unfulfilled prophecies[edit]
See also: Bible prophecy
The alleged fulfillment of biblical prophecies is a popular argument used as evidence by Christian apologists to support the claimed divine inspiration of the Bible. They see the fulfillment of prophecies as proof of God's direct involvement in the writing of the Bible.[41]
Messianic prophecies[edit]
See also: Jesus and messianic prophecy and Judaism's view of Jesus
According to Christian apologists, the alleged fulfillment of the messianic prophecies in the mission, death, and resurrection of Jesus proves the accuracy of the Bible. However, according to Jewish scholars, Christian claims that Jesus is the messiah of the Hebrew Bible are based on mistranslations[42][43][44] and Jesus did not fulfill the qualifications for Jewish Messiah.
An example of this is Isaiah 7:14. Christians read Isaiah 7:14 as a prophetic prediction of Jesus' birth from a virgin, while Jews read it as referring to the birth of Ahaz's son, Hezekiah.[45][46] They also point out that the word Almah, used in Isaiah 7:14, is part of the Hebrew phrase ha-almah hara, meaning "the almah is pregnant." Since the present tense is used, they maintain that the young woman was already pregnant and hence not a virgin. This being the case, they claim the verse cannot be cited as a prediction of the future.[46][47]
Prophecies after the event[edit]
Main articles: Postdiction and Vaticinium ex eventu
An example of an alleged after-the-fact prophecy is the Little Apocalypse recorded in the Olivet Discourse of the Gospel of Mark. It predicts the siege of Jerusalem and destruction of the Jewish Temple at the hands of the Romans in 70 AD. Most mainstream New Testament scholars concede this is an ex eventu (foretelling after the event), as are many of the prophecies in the Old Testament such as Daniel 11.[48][49][50][51][52][53][54]
Another example is Isaiah's prophecy about Cyrus the Great. Traditionally, the entire book of Isaiah is believed to pre-date the rule of Cyrus by about 120 years. These particular passages (Isaiah 40-55, often referred to as Deutero-Isaiah) are believed by most modern critical scholars to have been added by another author toward the end of the Babylonian exile (ca. 536 BC).[55] Whereas Isaiah 1-39 (referred to as Proto-Isaiah) saw the destruction of Israel as imminent, and the restoration in the future, Deutero-Isaiah speaks of the destruction in the past (Isa 42:24-25), and the restoration as imminent (Isiah 42:1-9). Notice, for example, the change in temporal perspective from (Isiah 39:6-7), where the Babylonian Captivity is cast far in the future, to (Isaiah 43:14), where the Israelites are spoken of as already in Babylon.[56]
The success of Joshua[edit]
The Book of Joshua describes the Israelite conquest of Canaan under the leadership of Joshua, the son of one of the aides to Moses. After Moses' death, God tells Joshua to conquer Canaan and makes predictions of his success.[57] Amongst other things, Joshua was to be given a vast dominion that included all of the Hittite land, and the advantage of facing no one who could stand up to him.
While the Book of Joshua delineates many successful conquerings, the Canaanites were not amongst those conquered and the Israelites did suffer defeat. Judah, a leader of one of the twelve tribes of Israel, is unable to dislodge the Jebusites from Jerusalem and was forced to cohabit,[58] while the Manassites, another of the twelve tribes, lack the strength to occupy several Canaan towns.[59] Other bastions of resistance dot the landscape.[60][61] Even after Joshua's death, the land is only partially conquered with the Canaanites remaining a significant external threat.[62][63][64] Critics argue that Joshua never lives to see the full territory God promises him and that the substantial resistance put up by the indigenous population violates God's promise of battles in which no enemy was his equal.
The destruction of Tyre[edit]



Tyre harbour##Ezekiel predicts that the ancient city of Tyre will be utterly destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar and "made a bare rock" that will "never be rebuilt" (Ezekiel 26:1, 26:7-14). However, Tyre withstood Nebuchadrezzar's siege for 13 years, ending in a compromise in which the royal family was taken into exile but the city survived intact.
Apologists cite the text as saying that the prophecy states that "many nations" would accomplish the destruction of Tyre, and claim that this refers to later conquerors (Ezekiel 26:3), but skeptics[65][66] counter that this was a reference to the "many nations" of Nebuchadrezzar's multinational force (Nebuchadrezzar was described by Ezekiel as "king of kings", i.e., an overking, a ruler over many nations), and that subsequent conquerors didn't permanently destroy Tyre either (it is now the fourth-largest city in Lebanon). Ezekiel himself admitted later that Nebuchadnezzar could not defeat Tyre (Ezekiel 29:18).
##Ezekiel said Egypt would be made an uninhabited wasteland for forty years (Ezekiel 29:10-14), and Nebuchadrezzar would be allowed to plunder it (Ezekiel 29:19-20) as compensation for his earlier failure to plunder Tyre (see above). However, the armies of Pharaoh Amasis II defeated the Babylonians. History records that this Pharaoh (also known as Ahmose II) went on to enjoy a long and prosperous reign; Herodotus writes that:

It is said that it was during the reign of Ahmose II that Egypt attained its highest level of prosperity both in respect of what the river gave the land and in respect of what the land yielded to men and that the number of inhabited cities at that time reached in total 20,000.[67]
The prophecy in chapter 29 dates in December 588—January 587. 20 years later, in the year 568, Nebuchadnezzar attacked Egypt.[68] F.F. Bruce writes still more exactly that the Babylonian king invaded Egypt already after the siege of Tyre 585—573 BC and replaced the Pharaoh Hophra (Apries) by Amasis:

The siege of Tyre was followed by operations against Egypt itself. Hophra was defeated, deposed and replaced by Amasis, an Egyptian general. But in 568 BC Amasis revolted against Nebuchadnezzar, who then invaded and occupied part of the Egyptian frontier lands.[69]
Flavius Josephus even writes in his Antiquities, citing the 4th century Greek writer Megasthenes that Nebuchadnezzar had control of all northern Africa unto present day Spain:

Megasthenes also, in his fourth book of his Accounts of India, makes mention of these things, and thereby endeavours to show that this king (Nebuchadnezzar) exceeded Hercules in fortitude, and in the greatness of his actions; for he saith that he conquered a great part of Libya and Iberia.[70]
On the other hand Nebuchadnezzar makes no mention of this campaign against Egypt in his inscriptions, at least that are currently known. It is too simple to argue with Herodotus, especially because his credibility was ever since contested.[71] The forty years are not to understand as an exact number. This figure became a significant period of chastisement to the Hebrews remembering the forty years in the desert after the exodus from Egypt.[72]
The protection of the King of Judah[edit]
##Isaiah spoke of a prophecy God made to Ahaz, the King of Judah that he would not be harmed by his enemies (Isaiah 7:1-7), yet according to 2 Chronicles, the king of Aram and Israel did conquer Judah (2 Chronicles 28:1-6).
In Isaiah (Isaiah 7:9) the prophet says clearly that a prerequisite for the fulfillment of the prophecy is that Ahaz stands firm in his faith. F.F. Bruce claims that this means Ahaz should trust God and not seek military help in the Assyrians, which Ahaz did.[73]
The death of the king of Judah[edit]
##In predicting Jerusalem's fall to Babylon, Jeremiah prophesied that Zedekiah, the king of Judah, would "die in peace" (Jeremiah 34:2-5). However, according to Jeremiah (Jeremiah 52:9-11), he was put in prison until the day of his death.
Apologists maintain that Zedekiah did not suffer the same terrible death as all the other nobles of Judah did when Nebuchadnezzar killed them in Riblah. Jeremiah also told Zedekiah in his prophecy that he would have to go to Babylon, which the Apologists claim implies that he will be imprisoned. There are no historical records of what happened with Zedekiah in Babylon[74] and a peaceful death is not ruled out.[citation needed]
The death of Josiah[edit]
##Prophetess Huldah prophesied that Josiah would die in peace (2 Kings 22:18-20), but rather than dying in peace, as the prophetess predicted, Josiah was probably killed at Megiddo in a battle with the Egyptian army (2 Chronicles 35:20-24).[75]
Apologists allege that the prophecy of Huldah was partially fulfilled because Josiah did not see all the disaster the Babylonians brought over Jerusalem and Judah. The prophetess clearly stated that because of Josiah's repentance, he will be buried in peace. But the king did not keep his humble attitude. As mentioned in 2 Chronicles (2 Chronicles 35:22), he did not listen to God's command and fought against the Egyptian pharaoh Necho. It is quite possible that he did this "opposing the faithful prophetic party".[76] Prophecy in the biblical sense is except in some very few cases never a foretelling of future events but it wants to induce the hearers to repent, to admonish and to encourage respectively; biblical prophecy includes almost always a conditional element.[77]



 Map showing the borders of the Promised Land, based on God's promise to Abraham in Genesis 15:18-21: In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites, And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims, And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.
The land promised to Abraham[edit]
Main article: Promised Land
##According to Genesis and Deuteronomy (Genesis 15:18, 17:8 and Deuteronomy 1:7-8), Abraham and his descendants, the Israelites will unconditionally (Deuteronomy 9:3-7) own all the land between the Nile River and the Euphrates River for an everlasting possession. But a critic says it never happened, that they never owned all that land forever.[78]
An apologist's counter-claim would be that a reading of Davidic conquests tells of the Israelite occupation of all the promised lands. F.F. Bruce writes:

David's sphere of influence now extended from the Egyptian frontier on the Wadi el-Arish (the "brook of Egypt") to the Euphrates; and these limits remained the ideal boundaries of Israel's dominion long after David's empire had disappeared.[79]
Acts 7:5 and Hebrews 11:13 are taken out of context if used as evidence against the fulfillment of these prophecies. Stephen does not state in Acts that the prophecy was not fulfilled. Moreover, it does not seem any problem for him to mention side by side the promise to Abraham himself and that Abraham did not get even a foot of ground. This becomes understandable with the concept of corporate personality. Jews are familiar with identifying individuals with the group they belong to. H. Wheeler Robinson writes that

Corporate personality is the important Semitic complex of thought in which there is a constant oscillation between the individual and the group—family, tribe, or nation—to which he belongs, so that the king or some other representative figure may be said to embody the group, or the group may be said to sum up the host of individuals.[80]
The letter to the Hebrews speaks about the promise of the heavenly country (Hebrews 11:13-16).
The fate of Damascus[edit]
##According to Isaiah 17:1, "Damascus will no longer be a city but will become a heap of ruins", but in fact Damascus is considered among the oldest continually inhabited cities in the world.
An apologist's response to this statement is that this verse refers to the destruction of Damascus as a strong capital of Syria. This was fulfilled during the Syro-Ephraimite War.

The prophecy perhaps dates from about 735 BC, when Damascus and Israel were allied against Judah (Isaiah 7:1). Damascus was taken by Tiglath-Pileser in 732, and Samaria by Sargon in 721.[81]
The passage is consistent with 2 Kings 16:9, which states that Assyria defeated the city and exiled the civilians to Kir.
The fate of Jews who stay in Egypt[edit]
##According to Jeremiah 42:17, Jews who choose to live in Egypt will all die and leave no remnant. But history shows that Jews continued to live there for centuries, later establishing a cultural center at Alexandria. A Jewish community exists at Alexandria even to this day.[82]
According to apologists, a more thorough examination of the surrounding text suggests that Jeremiah is stating that no refugees who flee to Egypt would return to Israel except for few fugitives. Jeremiah 42-44 had relevance mainly to the group of exiles who fled to Egypt. It emphasizes that the future hopes of a restored Israel lay elsewhere than with the exiles to Egypt.[83]
The return of Jewish prisoners of war[edit]
##Isaiah and Jeremiah (Isaiah 27:12-13, Jeremiah 3:18, Jeremiah 31:1-23, and Jeremiah 33:7) predicted the return of the exiles taken from Israel by the Assyrians in 722 BC. It never happened. Following the conquest of the northern kingdom by the Assyrians in 721 BC, the 10 tribes were gradually assimilated by other peoples and thus disappeared from history.[84] Unlike the Kingdom of Judah, which was able to return from its Babylonian Captivity in 537 BC, the 10 tribes of the Kingdom of Israel never had a foreign edict granting permission to return and rebuild their homeland. Assyria has long since vanished, its capital, Nineveh, destroyed in 612 BC.
Apologists, however, charge that Luke 2:36 states that Anna the Prophetess, daughter of Phanuel of the tribe of Asher, was living as a widow in the sanctuary ministering to God with and fastings and petitions night and day. Thus, at least some (tiny) portion of Israel returned, since it was unlikely that a lone female would return to the land of Israel unaccompanied by kinsmen as safe escort.
Although the exiled Israelites from the Northern kingdom did not return from Assyria, apologists state that it must be considered that these passages also contain the expectation of the messianic days. Theologians point out that in Isaiah 27:12-13 Euphrates and the Wadi of Egypt represent the northern and southern borders of the Promised Land in its widest extent (Genesis 15:18) and thus they refer these verses to the return of the Israelites to Jerusalem in the last days, in the messianic time. Israelites will be gathered from wherever they have been expelled from the north, Assyria, to the south, Egypt.[85] Jeremiah's prophecy of Israel's and Judah's return from the north in Jeremiah 3:18 is preceded by the request of Yahweh to the Israelites to come back (verse 14). After fulfilling this condition God will increase their number and none will miss the ark of the covenant (verse 16). All nations will then honour the Lord (verse 17). Consequently Christian scholars refer verse 18 to messianic times when there will be a kingdom united as in the days of David and Solomon.[86] Jeremiah 31 should be seen in context with chapter 30. Some scholars argue that these chapters were written early in Jeremiah's ministry and refer to Northern Israel. Later these poems were updated and referred to Judah as well, probably by Jeremiah himself, when it was realized that Judah had passed through similar experiences to those of Israel.[87] The Book of Consolation (Jeremiah 30:1—31:40) reaches his final, messianic scope in the establishment of a New Covenant between Yahweh and the House of Israel and the House of Judah.[88]
The strength of Judah[edit]
##Isaiah 19:17 predicted that "the land of Judah shall be a terror unto Egypt". Assuming that the 'terror' implied was a large-scale military attack of Egypt, it never happened.
According to theologians, the statement that the "land of Judah" will terrify the Egyptians is not a reference to a large army from Judah attacking Egypt, but a circumlocution for the place where God lives; it is God and his plans that will terrify Egypt. Verse 17 has to be understood in its context. The second "in that day" message from verse 18 announces the beginning of a deeper relationship between God and Egypt, which leads to Egypt's conversion and worshiping God (verses 19-21). The last "in that day" prophecy (verses 23-25) speaks about Israel, Assyria and Egypt as God's special people, thus, describing eschatological events.[89][90]
The identity of the conquerors of Babylon[edit]
##Isaiah 13:17, Isaiah 21:2, Jeremiah 51:11, and Jeremiah 51:27-28 predicted that Babylon would be destroyed by the Medes, Ararat, Minni and Ashkenaz and Elamites. The Persians under Cyrus the Great captured Babylon in 539 BC. Daniel 5:31 incorrectly stated that it was Darius the Mede who captured Babylon.
Christian apologists state that the prophecy in Isaiah 13:21 could possibly have been directed originally against Assyria, whose capital Ninive was defeated 612 BC by a combined onslaught of the Medes and Babylonians. According to this explanation the prophecy was later updated and referred to Babylon[91] not recognizing the rising power of Persia. On the other hand it can be mentioned that the Persian king Cyrus after overthrowing Media in 550 BC did not treat the Medes as a subject nation.

Instead of treating the Medes as a beaten foe and a subject nation, he had himself installed as king of Media and governed Media and Persia as a dual monarchy, each part of which enjoyed equal rights.[92]
Jeremiah prophesied at the height of the Median empire's power, and thus he was probably influenced to see the Medes as the nation that will conquer Babylon. Several proposals were brought forth for "Darius the Mede" out of which one says that Cyrus the Great is meant in Daniel 5:31.
Jehoiakim prophecies[edit]
##The prophet Daniel states that in the third year of the reign of King Jehoiakim, Nebuchadnezzar conquered Judah (Daniel 1:1-2). The third year of Jehoiakim's reign was 605 BC, at which time Nebuchadnezzar was not yet king of Babylon. It was in 597 BC that Nebuchadnezzar takes Jerusalem, by then Jehoiakim had died.
Apologists respond that this is not a prophecy but a statement. Daniel 1:1 is a problem of dating. But already F.F. Bruce solved this problem explaining that when Nebuchadnezzar, son of king Nabopolassar, was put in charge over a part of his forces, he defeated Necho in the battle of Carchemish 605 BC. In this situation his father Nabopolassar died. Before Nebuchadnezzar as heir apparent returned to Babylon he settled the affairs in the Asiatic countries bordering the Egyptian frontier, which means also Judah, and took captives from several countries as, for example, also from the Jews.[93]
##Jeremiah prophesied that the body of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, would be desecrated after his death (Jeremiah 22:18-19, Jeremiah 36:30-31). However, his death was recorded in 2 Kings 24:6 where it says that "Jehoiakim slept with his fathers". This is a familiar Bible expression that was used to denote a peaceful death and respectful burial. David slept with his fathers (1 Kings 2:10) and so did Solomon (1 Kings 11:43). On the other hand, 2 Chronicles 36:5-6 states that Nebuchadnezzar came against Jehoiakim, bound him in fetters, and carried him to Babylon. Judging from the treatment Zedekiah was accorded when the Babylonians bound him and carried him away to Babylon (Jeremiah 52:9-11), one might justifiably argue that his body probably was desecrated after his death. Jeremiah, however, predicted that Jehoiakim's own people would be his desecraters, that his own people would not accord him lamentations appropriate for a king, that his own people would cast his body "out beyond the gates of Jerusalem".
Apologists proposal for a partial solution:

In the 7th year of his reign, in the month of Kislev (December/January 598/97), Nebuchadnezzar himself left Babylon and undertook the subjection of rebellious Judah. In that same month, King Jehoiakim died in Jerusalem. (On the basis of a comparison with 2 Kings 24:6,8,10ff, with the Babylonian Chronicle, Wiseman 73, lines 11-13, Kislev is the ninth month. In the twelfth month, Adar, Jerusalem was taken. Jehoiachin's reign falls in these three months.) It is not impossible that he was murdered by a political faction who thereby sought more mild treatment for their country. His 18-year old son Jehoiachin was raised to the throne (2 Kings 24:8). Three months later Jerusalem was entirely surrounded by Babylonians. Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to the city of Judah (al-ya-ahu-du), and on the second day of the month of Adar he comquered the city and took its king prisoner.[94]
Also F.F. Bruce writes that Jehoiakim died in Juda before the siege of Jerusalem began.[95] This would mean that Jehoiakim was desecrated after his death and in this way the prophecy of Jeremiah was fulfilled. The passage in 2 Chronicles 36:5-6 does not speak explicitly about Jehoiakim's death. Thus, it can be seen as a parallel to Daniel 1:1-2[96] which speaks about an event in the lifetime of the king of Judah (see paragraph above). 2 Kings 24:6, nevertheless, remains unclear.
##Part of the desecration prophecy was that Jehoiakim would "have no one to sit upon the throne of David" (Jeremiah 36:30), but this too was proven false. Upon Jehoiakim's death, his son Jehoiachin "reigned in his stead" for a period of three months and ten days (2 Chronicles 36:8-9, 2 Kings 24:6-8). Also, there are biblical genealogies that purport to show Jehoiakim as a direct ancestor of Jesus (1 Chronicles 3:16-17, Matthew 1:11-12).[75]
Apologists say that if Jehoiakim had not been killed by his own people, on the condition that this supposition is true (see preceding paragraph), in all likelihood, Jehoiakim would have been put to death by the Babylonians. The Israelites anticipated what Nebuchadnezzar intended to do. In this case, most probable, Jehoiakim's son Jehoiachin would not have become king and Jeremiah's prophecy would have been fulfilled in its full sense. Jehoiachin's successor, Zedekiah, was no descendant of Jehoiakim, but his brother.
The double reckoning of Jehoiachin in Matthew 1:11-12 is made possible by the fact that the same Greek name can translate the two similar Hebrew names Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin.[97] In this way in verse 11 Jehoiakim and in verse 12 Jehoiachin is meant. The verse Jeremiah 36:30 says that Jehoiakim's descendants will not be kings in Judah anymore. This does not mean that he cannot be an ancestor of the Messiah.
New Testament[edit]



 The Wailing Wall by night. According to Luke 19:41-44: As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it and said, "If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace—but now it is hidden from your eyes. The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God's coming to you.
Jesus said in Matt. 24:2; Mark 13:2; Luke 19:44; Luke 21:6 that "no stone" of Jerusalem or of the Second Temple would be left upon another. This prophecy failed, as the wailing wall (a remnant of the ancient wall that surrounded the Jewish Temple's courtyard,) still remains.
In reply, John Robinson writes that

it was the temple that perished by fire while the walls of the city were thrown down.[98]
The imminence of the second coming[edit]
See also: Second coming
Jesus prophesied that the second coming would occur during the lifetime of his followers and Caiphas, and immediately after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE (referred to as abomination of desolation in Matt 24:15).

For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom. (Matthew 16:27-28)

"When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. I tell you the truth, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes." (Matthew 10:23)

..Again the high priest (Caiphas) asked him, "Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?""I am", said Jesus. "And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven." (Mark 14:61-62)

Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. "Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down." As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. "Tell us", they said, "when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?" So when you see standing in the holy place 'the abomination that causes desolation,' spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand—then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let no one on the roof of his house go down to take anything out of the house. Pray that your flight will not take place in winter or on the Sabbath. For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now-and never to be equaled again. Immediately after the distress of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken. At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, right at the door. I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. (Matthew 24)

(see also Mark 13:1-30, Luke 21:5-35, Mark 13:30-31, Mark 9:1, Luke 9:27, John 21:22, Matthew 26:62-64, Mark 14:62)
It may be argued that Jesus was not speaking of the second coming in Matthew 16:28 but instead referred to a demonstration of his or God's might; a viewpoint which allows the fulfillment of the prophesy through a variety of traumatic events, notably, the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in 70 AD. The temple's destruction is held by proponents to demonstrate that God was on the side of the Christian people rather than that of the Jews. However, at that time only some of Jesus' disciples still lived.[99] In the same way Matthew 10:23 should be understood.[100] Note, however, that this view (referred to as Preterism) is not the majority view among American denominations, especially by denominations that espouse Dispensationalism.[101][102][103] Furthermore it is a misunderstanding that Jesus meant Caiphas in Mark 14:62. The word "you will see" is in Greek "ὄψεσθε" [opsesthe, from the infinitive optomai],[104] which is plural and not singular. Jesus meant that the Jews, and not just the high priest, will see his coming.
This prophecy is also seen in the Revelation of Jesus to John.

The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John,... Look, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and all the peoples of the earth will mourn because of him. So shall it be! Amen. (Revelation 1:1,7)

"Behold, I am coming soon! Blessed is he who keeps the words of the prophecy in this book. ... Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done." ... He who testifies to these things says, "Yes, I am coming soon." Amen. Come, Lord Jesus. (Revelation 22:7,12,20)

Despite the strongly repeated promises to the seven churches of Asia (Revelation 1:4,11) in the 1st century CE, Jesus has not come quickly or shortly according to critics.
Apologists respond that the word "soon" (other translations use "shortly" or "quickly") does not have to be understood in the sense of close future. The Norwegian scholar Thorleif Boman explained that the Israelites, unlike Europeans or people in the West, did not understand time as something measurable or calculable according to Hebrew thinking but as something qualitative.

We have examined the ideas underlying the expression of calculable time and more than once have found that the Israelites understood time as something qualitative, because for them time is determined by its content.[105]

...the Semitic concept of time is closely coincident with that of its content without which time would be quite impossible. The quantity of duration completely recedes behind the characteristic feature that enters with time or advances in it. Johannes Pedersen comes to the same conclusion when he distinguishes sharply between the Semitic understanding of time and ours. According to him, time is for us an abstraction since we distinguish time from the events that occur in time. The ancient Semites did not do this; for them time is determined by its content.[106]
In this way expressions of time, such as "soon", do not mean that the denoted event will take place in close future but that it will be the next significant event.[107]
The Apostle Paul also predicted that the second coming would be within his own lifetime, 1 Thessalonians 4:17:

After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.
[108]

The philosopher Porphyry (232-305 CE), in his Kata Christianon (Against the Christians), a book burned and banned by the church in 448 CE writes of Paul:

Another of his astonishingly silly comments needs to be examined: I mean that wise saying of his, to the effect that, We who are alive and persevere shall not precede those who are asleep when the lord comes—for the lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout... and the trumpet of god shall sound, and those who have died in Christ shall rise first- then we who are alive shall be caught up together with them in a cloud to meet the lord in the air... Indeed—there is something here that reaches up to heaven: the magnitude of this lie. When told to dumb bears, to silly frogs and geese—they bellow or croak or quack with delight to hear of the bodies of men flying through the air like birds or being carried about on the clouds. This belief is quackery of the first rate.
The apologists answer for the passage in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 is that Paul speaks about his own presence at the last day only hypothetically. He identifies himself with those Christians who will still live in the time of Jesus' return but does not want to express that he himself will still experience this.[109] That becomes fully clear some verses later in which he says that the Day of the Lord comes like a thief (1 Thessalonians 5:1-2). The comparison of the Day of the Lord with a thief is a word of Jesus himself (Matthew 24:43-44), which expresses the impossibility to say anything about the date of his second coming (Matthew 24:36).
Notable critics[edit]
##Isaac Asimov
##Richard Dawkins
##Albert Einstein [110]
##Christopher Hitchens
##Robert G. Ingersoll[111]
##Thomas Paine
##Bertrand Russell
##Mark Twain
##Voltaire
See also[edit]
##Bible conspiracy theory
##Criticism of the Book of Mormon
##Criticism of the Talmud
##Criticism of the Qur'an
##Christ myth theory
##Misquoting Jesus
##Tahrif
References[edit]
1.^ Jump up to: a b "Bible." The Crystal Reference Encyclopedia. West Chiltington: Crystal Reference, 2005. Credo Reference. 29 July 2009
2.Jump up ^ Ehrman, Bart D. (2003). Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew. New York: Oxford. pp. 122–123, 185. ISBN 0-19-514183-0.
3.Jump up ^ Ehrman, Bart D. (2004). The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings. New York: Oxford. pp. 372–3. ISBN 0-19-515462-2. Brown, Raymond E. (1997). Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Anchor Bible. pp. 621, 639, 654. ISBN 0-385-24767-2. Scholars who hold to Pauline authorship include Wohlenberg, Lock, Meinertz, Thornell, Schlatter, Spicq, Jeremais, Simpson, Kelly, and Fee. Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, p. 622.
4.Jump up ^ Examples of authors who argue the Jesus myth hypothesis: Thomas L. Thompson The Messiah Myth: The Near Eastern Roots of Jesus and David (Jonathan Cape, Publisher, 2006); Michael Martin, The Case Against Christianity (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1991), 36–72; John Mackinnon Robertson
5.Jump up ^ Freke, Timothy and Gandy, Peter (1999) The Jesus Mysteries. London: Thorsons (Harper Collins)
6.Jump up ^ "Bible." The Columbia Encyclopedia. New York: Columbia University Press, 2008. Credo Reference. 29 July 2009
7.Jump up ^ The Bible in the Syriac tradition, Sebastian P. Brock, p. 13
8.Jump up ^ God's conflict with the dragon and the sea: echoes of a Canaanite myth, John Day
9.Jump up ^ Understanding Biblical Israel: a reexamination of the origins of monotheism, Stanley Ned Rosenbaum
10.Jump up ^ The Jewish religion: a companion By Louis Jacobs, p. 251
11.Jump up ^ Exod. 20:14, 1631 edition of the King James Version of the Bible.
12.Jump up ^ Eric Pement, Gimme the Bible that Paul used: A look at the King James Only debate online.
13.Jump up ^ Genesis 19:30-36
14.Jump up ^ "How Can We Trust a Bible that Tolerated Slavery?" Discovery Series, RBC Ministries. July 27, 2009.
15.Jump up ^ [1][dead link]
16.Jump up ^ Schulweis, Harold M. (2009). Conscience: The Duty to Obey and the Duty to Disobey. Woodstock, Vermont: Jewish Lights. pp. 28–30. ISBN 1-58023-419-4.
17.Jump up ^ Saugstad, Andreas. "Nietzsche & Christianity" July 28, 2009.
18.Jump up ^ "Contradictions from the Skeptic's Annotated Bible". Skepticsannotatedbible.com. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
19.Jump up ^ Knight, George William, Howard Marshall, and W. Ward Gasque. The Pastoral Epistles: A Commentary on the Greek Text (New International Greek Testament Commentary). William. B. Eerdmans, 1997. ISBN 0-8028-2395-5 / 9780802823953
20.Jump up ^ Brown, Raymond Edward (1999-05-18). The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke (The Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library). Yale University Press. p. 36. ISBN 0-300-14008-8.
21.Jump up ^ W.D Davies and E. P. Sanders, 'Jesus from the Jewish point of view', in The Cambridge History of Judaism ed William Horbury, vol 3: the Early Roman Period, 1984.
22.Jump up ^ Sanders, Ed Parish (1993). The Historical Figure of Jesus. London: Allen Lane. p. 85. ISBN 0-7139-9059-7.
23.Jump up ^ Hurtado, Larry W. (June 2003). Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans. p. 319. ISBN 0-8028-6070-2.
24.Jump up ^ Brown, Raymond Edward (1977). The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in Matthew and Luke. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday. pp. 104–121. ISBN 0-385-05907-8.
25.Jump up ^ The role and function of repentance in Luke-Acts, by Guy D. Nave, pg 194 – see http://books.google.com/books?id=4CGScYTomYsC&pg=PA194&lpg=PA194&dq=%2B%22markan+appendix%22&source=bl&ots=ex8JIDMwMD&sig=oCI_C1mXVSZYoz34sVlgRDaO__Q&hl=en&ei=3pq_St6aGYnSjAefnOU2&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2#v=onepage&q=%2B%22markan%20appendix%22&f=false
26.Jump up ^ The Continuing Christian Need for Judaism, by John Shelby Spong, Christian Century September 26, 1979, p. 918. see http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=1256
27.Jump up ^ Feminist companion to the New Testament and early Christian writings, Volume 5, by Amy-Jill Levine, Marianne Blickenstaff, pg175 – see http://books.google.com/books?id=B2lfhy5lvlkC&pg=PA175&lpg=PA175&dq=%2B%22markan+appendix%22&source=bl&ots=vp5GVlmghC&sig=XN1KJCsBkTWO2Fot4SBhnpWoRkY&hl=en&ei=3pq_St6aGYnSjAefnOU2&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5#v=onepage&q=%2B%22markan%20appendix%22&f=false
28.Jump up ^ Driscoll, J.F. (1909). "Firmament". In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved 26 May 2008 from New Advent. ("That the Hebrews entertained similar ideas appears from numerous biblical passages...").
29.Jump up ^ The Galileo Controversy at Catholic Answers
30.Jump up ^ http://ncse.com/cej/3/2/answers-to-creationist-attacks-carbon-14-dating
31.Jump up ^ "Cosmic Detectives". The European Space Agency (ESA). 2013-04-02. Retrieved 2013-04-15.
32.Jump up ^ Barbara Bradley Hagerty (August 9, 2011). "Evangelicals Question The Existence Of Adam And Eve". All Things Considered.
33.Jump up ^ Bible gets a reality check, MSNBC, Alan Boyle
34.Jump up ^ The Bible's Buried Secrets, PBS Nova, 2008
35.Jump up ^ Dever, William G. (March–April 2006). "The Western Cultural Tradition Is at Risk". Biblical Archaeology Review 32 (2): 26 & 76.
36.Jump up ^ Dever, William G. (January 2003). "Contra Davies". The Bible and Interpretation. Retrieved 2007-02-12.
37.Jump up ^ The Nature of Home: A Lexicon of Essays, Lisa Knopp, p. 126
38.Jump up ^ Deconstructing the walls of Jericho
39.^ Jump up to: a b http://www.middleeastmonitor.org.uk/news/middle-east/2705-senior-israeli-archaeologist-casts-doubt-on-jewish-heritage-of-jerusalem
40.Jump up ^ Did the Red Sea Part? No Evidence, Archaeologists Say, The New York Times, April 3, 2007
41.Jump up ^ Nathan Busenitz, John MacArthur. Reasons We Believe. Crossway, 2008. ISBN 1-4335-0146-5 / 9781433501463. Aug. 6, 2009: [2]
42.Jump up ^ Why did the majority of the Jewish world reject Jesus as the Messiah, and why did the first Christians accept Jesus as the Messiah? by Rabbi Shraga Simmons (about.com)
43.Jump up ^ Michoel Drazin (1990). Their Hollow Inheritance. A Comprehensive Refutation of Christian Missionaries. Gefen Publishing House, Ltd. ISBN 965-229-070-X.
44.Jump up ^ Troki, Isaac. "Faith Strengthened".
45.Jump up ^ Glaser, Zhava. "Almah: Virgin or Young Maiden?" Issues—A Messianic Jewish Perspective. July 30, 2009.
46.^ Jump up to: a b "The Jewish Perspective on Isaiah 7:14". Messiahtruth.com. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
47.Jump up ^ Why do Jews reject the Christian dogma of the virgin birth? The Second Jewish Book Of Why p.66 by Alfred J. Kolatch 1985
48.Jump up ^ Peter, Kirby (2001–2007). "Early Christian Writings: Gospel of Mark". Retrieved 2008-01-15.
49.Jump up ^ Achtemeier, Paul J. (1992). "The Gospel of Mark". The Anchor Bible Dictionary 4. New York, New York: Doubleday. p. 545. ISBN 0-385-19362-9.
50.Jump up ^ Meier, John P. (1991). A Marginal Jew. New York, New York: Doubleday. pp. v.2 955–6. ISBN 0-385-46993-4.
51.Jump up ^ Helms, Randel (1997). Who Wrote the Gospels?. Altadena, California: Millennium Press. p. 8. ISBN 0-9655047-2-7.
52.Jump up ^ Funk, Robert W.; Hoover, Roy W.; The Jesus Seminar (1993). The five Gospels: the search for the authentic words of Jesus: new translation and commentary. New York, New York: Macmillan. ISBN 0-02-541949-8.
53.Jump up ^ Crossan, John Dominic (1991). The historical Jesus: the life of a Mediterranean Jewish peasant. San Francisco, California: HarperSanFrancisco. ISBN 0-06-061629-6.
54.Jump up ^ Eisenman, Robert J. (1998). James the Brother of Jesus: The Key to Unlocking the Secrets of Early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Penguin Books. p. 56. ISBN 0-14-025773-X.
55.Jump up ^ Simon John De Vries: From old Revelation to new: a tradition-historical and redaction-critical study of temporal transitions in prophetic prediction. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing 1995, ISBN 978-0-8028-0683-3, p. 126
56.Jump up ^ Watson E. Mills, Roger Aubrey Bullard: Mercer dictionary of the Bible. Mercer University Press 1990, ISBN 978-0-86554-373-7, p. 414
57.Jump up ^ Joshua 1:1-9
58.Jump up ^ Joshua 15:63
59.Jump up ^ Joshua 17:12-13
60.Jump up ^ F.F. Bruce, Israel and the nations, Michigan, 1981, page 19.
61.Jump up ^ Judges 3:5-6
62.Jump up ^ Biblical peoples and ethnicity: an archaeological study of Egyptians, Ann E. Killebrew, pp. 152-154, 2005
63.Jump up ^ International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: E-J, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, p. 1136
64.Jump up ^ The Old Testament world, By John Rogerson, Philip R. Davies, 1989, p. 358
65.Jump up ^ "The Tyre Prophecy Again". The Skeptical Review. March–April 1999. Retrieved 2007-11-08.
66.Jump up ^ "Ezekiel and the Oracles against Tyre". CRI/Voice Institute. 2006. Retrieved 2007-11-08.
67.Jump up ^ Herodotus, (II, 177, 1)
68.Jump up ^ New Jerusalem Bible, Standard Edition published 1985, introductions and notes are a translation of those that appear in La Bible de Jerusalem—revised edition 1973, Bombay 2002; footnote to Ezekiel 29:1,19.
69.Jump up ^ F.F. Bruce, Israel and the nations, Michigan, 1981, pages 94.
70.Jump up ^ "Flavius Josephus, Antiquities Book X, chapter 11, first paragraph". Ccel.org. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
71.Jump up ^ John Marincola, Classical Association, Greek historians, Cambridge University Press, 2001, pages 37-39. Books.google.com. ISBN 978-0-19-922501-9. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
72.Jump up ^ Frederic Charles Cook, ed. (2006-10-04). "Bible Commentary: Proverbs-Ezekiel—footnote to Ezekiel 29:10-12". Ccel.org. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
73.Jump up ^ F.F. Bruce, Israel and the nations, Michigan, 1981, pages 62-67
74.Jump up ^ Siegfried Herrmann, A history of Israel in Old Testament times, London, 1981, SCM Press Ltd, page 284.
75.^ Jump up to: a b "Prophecies: Imaginary and fulfilled". Infidels.org. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
76.Jump up ^ F.F. Bruce, Israel and the nations, Michigan, 1981, page 84.
77.Jump up ^ New Jerusalem Bible, Standard Edition published 1985, introductions and notes are a translation of those that appear in La Bible de Jerusalem—revised edition 1973, Bombay 2002; page 1189—introduction to the book of Jonah.
78.Jump up ^ "Yahweh's Failed Land Promise, Farrell Till". Theskepticalreview.com. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
79.Jump up ^ F.F. Bruce, Israel and the nations, Michigan, 1981, page 32.
80.Jump up ^ Greidanus, Sidney (1999). Preaching Christ from the Old Testament. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. p. 198. ISBN 978-0-8028-4449-1. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
81.Jump up ^ New Jerusalem Bible, Standard Edition published 1985, introductions and notes are a translation of those that appear in La Bible de Jerusalem—revised edition 1973, Bombay 2002; footnote to Isaiah 17:1
82.Jump up ^ "The Argument from the Bible (1996)". Infidels.org. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
83.Jump up ^ John Arthur Thompson, The Book of Jeremiah, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1980, page 141.
84.Jump up ^ "Ten Lost Tribes of Israel". Britannica Online. Britannica.com. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
85.Jump up ^ Herbert M. Wolf, Interpreting Isaiah, published by Zondervan, 1985, page 146
86.Jump up ^ New Jerusalem Bible, Standard Edition published 1985, introductions and notes are a translation of those that appear in La Bible de Jerusalem—revised edition 1973, Bombay 2002; footnote to Jeremiah 3:18
87.Jump up ^ John Arthur Thompson, The Book of Jeremiah, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1980, page 552
88.Jump up ^ New Jerusalem Bible, Standard Edition published 1985, introductions and notes are a translation of those that appear in La Bible de Jerusalem—revised edition 1973, Bombay 2002; footnote to Jeremiah 30
89.Jump up ^ Gary V. Smith, Isaiah 1-39, B&H Publishing Group, 2007, pages 360-363
90.Jump up ^ John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 1-39, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1986, pages 375-381
91.Jump up ^ New Jerusalem Bible, Standard Edition published 1985, introductions and notes are a translation of those that appear in La Bible de Jerusalem—revised edition 1973, Bombay 2002; footnote to Isaiah 21:1.
92.Jump up ^ F.F. Bruce, Israel and the nations, Michigan, 1981, page 96.
93.Jump up ^ Daniel's First Verse by F.F.Bruce
94.Jump up ^ Claus Schedl, History of the Old Testament, Volume IV, Translation of 'Geschichte des Alten Testaments', Society of St.Paul, Staten Island, New York 10314, 1972, pages 349-350
95.Jump up ^ F.F. Bruce, Israel and the nations, Michigan, 1981, pages 88.
96.Jump up ^ New Jerusalem Bible, Standard Edition published 1985, introductions and notes are a translation of those that appear in La Bible de Jerusalem—revised edition 1973, Bombay 2002; footnote to 2 Chronicles 36:6
97.Jump up ^ New Jerusalem Bible, Standard Edition published 1985, introductions and notes are a translation of those that appear in La Bible de Jerusalem—revised edition 1973, Bombay 2002; footnote to Matthew 11:1.
98.Jump up ^ John A.T., Robinson, Redating the New Testament, London, 1976, page 20
99.Jump up ^ Dr. Knox Chamblin, Professor of New Testament, Reformed Theological Seminary: Commentary on Matthew 16:21-28—see last 4 paragraphs
100.Jump up ^ Theodor Zahn, F.F. Bruce, J. Barton Payne, etc. hold this opinion is the meaning of Matthew 10:23?
101.Jump up ^ Riemer, Michael (2000). IT Was At Hand. p. 12.
102.Jump up ^ Garland, Anthony (2007). A Testimony of Jesus Christ—Volume 1. p. 114.
103.Jump up ^ Sproul, RC (1998). The Last Days According to Jesus. p. 156.
104.Jump up ^ Online Interlinear New Testament in Greek—Matthew 26
105.Jump up ^ Thorleif Boman, Hebrew Thought compared with Greek, W.W.Norton & Company, New York—London, 1970, page 137
106.Jump up ^ Thorleif Boman, Hebrew Thought compared with Greek, W.W.Norton & Company, New York—London, 1970, page 139
107.Jump up ^ Witherington, III, The Paul Quest, InterVarsity Press, 2001, page 140
108.Jump up ^ See also 1Cor7:29-31, 15:51-54 andRomans 13:12
109.Jump up ^ New Jerusalem Bible, Standard Edition published 1985, introductions and notes are a translation of those that appear in La Bible de Jerusalem—revised edition 1973, Bombay 2002; footnote to 1 Thessalonians 4:15: "Paul includes himself among those who will be present at the parousia: more by aspiration, however, than by conviction."
110.Jump up ^ Einstein: "The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish."
111.Jump up ^ Brandt, Eric T., and Timothy Larsen (2011). "The Old Atheism Revisited: Robert G. Ingersoll and the Bible". Journal of the Historical Society 11 (2): 211–238. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5923.2011.00330.x.
Further reading[edit]
##The Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy, by C. Dennis McKinsey (Prometheus Books 1995)
##The Historical Evidence for Jesus, by G.A. Wells (Prometheus Books 1988)
##The Bible unearthed, by I. Finkelstein and N. Asherman (Touchstone 2001)
##David and Solomon, by I. Finkelstein and N. Asherman (Freepress 2006)
##The Jesus Mysteries, by T. Freke and P. Gandy (Element 1999)
##The Jesus Puzzle, by Earl Doherty (Age of Reason Publications 1999)
##Not the Impossible Faith, by R. Carrier (Lulu 2009)
##BC The archaeology of the Bible lands, by Magnus Magnusson (Bodley Head 1977)
##godless, by Dan Barker (Ulysses Press 2008)
##Why I became an Atheist, by John W. Loftus (Prometheus books 2008)
##The greatest show on earth, by Richard Dawkins (Blackswan 2007)
##The god delusion, by Richard Dawkins (Blackswan 2010)
##101 myths of the Bible by Gary Greenberg (Sourcebooks 2000)
##Secret origins of the Bible by Tim Callahan (Millennium Press 2002)
##The Origins of Biblical Monotheism by Mark S. Smith (Oxford University Press 2001)
External links[edit]
 Wikiquote has quotations related to: Criticism of the Bible
##Bible Research —The Gender-Neutral Bible Controversy
##Introduction to the Bible and Biblical Problems, Internet Infidels website
##Examination of the Prophecies —Examination of the Old Testament Prophecies of Jesus by Thomas Paine


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Criticism of religion


































































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
The Bible and history











Bible.malmesbury.arp.jpg


























  


Categories: Criticism of the Bible
Criticism of Judaism










Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Deutsch
فارسی
עברית
Magyar
日本語
Português
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Svenska
Edit links
This page was last modified on 17 March 2015, at 17:34.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Bible











Criticism of the Bible

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is about criticisms of the Bible as a source of reliable information or ethical guidance. For the academic treatment of the Bible as a historical document, see Biblical criticism.

Crystal Clear app kedit.svg
 This article may need to be rewritten entirely to comply with Wikipedia's quality standards. You can help. The discussion page may contain suggestions. (February 2014)
Part of a series on
The Bible
The Malmesbury Bible


Canons ·
 Books
 [show]






















Authorship ·
 Development
 [show]












Translations ·
 Manuscripts
 [show]














Biblical studies[show]
































Interpretation[show]













Perspectives[hide]

Gnostic ·
 Islamic ·
 Qur'anic

Inerrancy ·
 Infallibility
 Criticism of the Bible

Wikipedia book Bible book    Portal icon Bible portal
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
The view that the Bible should be accepted as historically accurate and as a reliable guide to morality has been questioned by many scholars in the field of biblical criticism. In addition to concerns about morality, inerrancy, or historicity, there remain some questions of which books should be included in the Bible (see canon of scripture). Jews discount the New Testament and Old Testament Deuterocanonicals, Jews and most Christians discredit the legitimacy of New Testament apocrypha, and a view sometimes referred to as Jesusism does not affirm the scriptural authority of any biblical text other than the teachings of Jesus in the Gospels.


Contents  [hide]
1 Bible history issues
2 Translation issues
3 Ethics in the Bible
4 Internal consistency
5 The Bible and science
6 The Bible and archaeology
7 Unfulfilled prophecies 7.1 Messianic prophecies
7.2 Prophecies after the event
7.3 The success of Joshua
7.4 The destruction of Tyre
7.5 The protection of the King of Judah
7.6 The death of the king of Judah
7.7 The death of Josiah
7.8 The land promised to Abraham
7.9 The fate of Damascus
7.10 The fate of Jews who stay in Egypt
7.11 The return of Jewish prisoners of war
7.12 The strength of Judah
7.13 The identity of the conquerors of Babylon
7.14 Jehoiakim prophecies
7.15 New Testament 7.15.1 The imminence of the second coming

8 Notable critics
9 See also
10 References
11 Further reading
12 External links

Bible history issues[edit]



 The Gutenberg Bible, the first printed Bible
Part of a series on
Criticism of religion

By religion
Buddhism ·
 Christianity  (Catholicism ·
 Jehovah's Witnesses ·
 Seventh-day Adventist)
   ·
 Protestantism ·
 Hinduism ·
 Islam  (Twelver Shi'ism)
   ·
 Jainism ·
 Judaism ·
 Mormonism ·
 Sikhism
 
By religious figure
Jesus ·
 Moses ·
 Muhammad ·
 Ellen G. White
 
By text
Bible ·
 Book of Mormon ·
 Quran ·
 Talmud
 
Critics
Mikhail Bakunin ·
 Giordano Bruno ·
 Richard Dawkins ·
 Denis Diderot ·
 Epicurus ·
 Ludwig Feuerbach ·
 Stephen Fry ·
 Sita Ram Goel ·
 Emma Goldman ·
 Sam Harris ·
 Ayaan Hirsi Ali ·
 Christopher Hitchens ·
 Baron d'Holbach ·
 David Hume ·
 Robert Green Ingersoll ·
 Karl Marx ·
 Friedrich Nietzsche ·
 Michel Onfray ·
 Thomas Paine ·
 Pierre-Joseph Proudhon ·
 Ayn Rand ·
 André Servier ·
 David Silverman ·
 Max Stirner ·
 Bertrand Russell ·
 Dayanand Saraswati ·
 Victor J. Stenger ·
 Voltaire
 
Religious violence
Terrorism ·
 War ·
 Buddhism ·
 Christianity ·
 Islam ·
 Judaism ·
 Mormonism
 
Related topics
Abuse ·
 Apostasy ·
 Crisis of faith ·
 Criticism of atheism ·
 Criticism of monotheism ·
 Persecution ·
 Sexuality ·
 Slavery
 
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Main articles: Biblical Criticism and Higher Criticism
The Hebrew Bible and Christian Bibles are works considered sacred and authoritative writings by their respective faith groups that revere their specific collections of biblical writings.[1] The Hebrew Bible, upon which the Christian Old Testament is based, was originally composed in Biblical Hebrew, except for parts of Daniel and Ezra that were written in Biblical Aramaic. These writings depict Israelite religion from its beginnings to about the 2nd century BC. The Christian New Testament was written in Koine Greek. (See Language of the New Testament for details.)
At the end of the 17th century few Bible scholars would have doubted that Moses wrote the Torah, but in the late 18th century some liberal scholars began to question his authorship, and by the end of the 19th century some went as far as to claim that as a whole the work was of many more authors over many centuries from 1000 BC (the time of David) to 500 BC (the time of Ezra), and that the history it contained was often more polemical rather than strictly factual. By the first half of the 20th century Hermann Gunkel had drawn attention to mythic aspects, and Albrecht Alt, Martin Noth and the tradition history school argued that although its core traditions had genuinely ancient roots, the narratives were fictional framing devices and were not intended as history in the modern sense.

While the limits of the canon were effectively set in these early centuries, the status of scripture has been a topic of scholarly discussion in the later church. Increasingly, the biblical works have been subjected to literary and historical criticism in efforts to interpret the texts independent of Church and dogmatic influences. Different views of the authority and inspiration of the Bible also continue to be expressed in liberal and fundamentalist churches today. What cannot be denied, however, is the enormous influence which the stories, poetry, and reflections found in the biblical writings have had, not only on the doctrines and practices of two major faiths, but also on Western culture, its literature, art, and music.[1]
In the 2nd century, the gnostics often claimed that their form of Christianity was the first, and they regarded Jesus as a teacher, or allegory.[2] Elaine Pagels has proposed that there are several examples of gnostic attitudes in the Pauline Epistles.[citation needed] Bart D. Ehrman and Raymond E. Brown note that some of the Pauline epistles are widely regarded by scholars as pseudonymous,[3] and it is the view of Timothy Freke, and others, that this involved a forgery in an attempt by the Church to bring in Paul's Gnostic supporters and turn the arguments in the other Epistles on their head.
Some critics have alleged that Christianity is not founded on a historical figure, but rather on a mythical creation.[4] This view proposes that the idea of Jesus was the Jewish manifestation of a pan-Hellenic cult, known as Osiris-Dionysus,[5] which acknowledged the non-historic nature of the figure, using it instead as a teaching device.
Translation issues[edit]
Main articles: Biblical manuscripts, Textual criticism and Biblical inerrancy
Some critics express concern that none of the original manuscripts of the books of the Bible still exist. All translations of the Bible have been made from well-respected but centuries-old copies. Religious communities value highly those who interpret their scriptures at both the scholarly and popular levels. Translation of scripture into the vernacular (such as English and hundreds of other languages), though a common phenomenon, is also a subject of debate and criticism.[6]
Translation has led to a number of issues, as the original languages are often quite different in grammar and word meaning. While the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy states that "inerrancy" applies only to the original languages, some believers trust their own translation as the truly accurate one—for example, the King-James-Only Movement. For readability, clarity, or other reasons, translators may choose different wording or sentence structure, and some translations may choose to paraphrase passages.
Because many of the words in the original language have ambiguous or difficult to translate meanings, debates over correct interpretation occur. For instance, at creation(Gen 1:2), is רוח אלהים (ruwach 'elohiym) the "wind of god", "spirit of god"(i.e., the Holy Spirit in Christianity), or a "mighty wind" over the primordial deep? In Hebrew, רוח(ruwach) can mean "wind","breath" or "spirit". Both ancient and modern translators are divided over this and many other such ambiguities.[7][8][9][10] Another example is the word used in the Masoretic Text [Isa 7:14] to indicate the woman who would bear Immanuel is alleged to mean a young, unmarried woman in Hebrew, while Matthew 1:23 follows the Septuagint version of the passage that uses the Greek word parthenos, translated virgin, and is used to support the Christian idea of virgin birth. Those who view the masoretic text, which forms the basis of most English translations of the Old Testament, as being more accurate than the Septuagint, and trust its usual translation, may see this as an inconsistency, whereas those who take the Septuagint to be accurate may not.
In the History of the English Bible, there have been many changes to the wording, leading to several competing versions. Many of these have contained Biblical errata—typographic errors, such as the phrases Is there no treacle in Gilead?, Printers have persecuted me without cause, and Know ye not that the unrighteous shall inherit the kingdom of God?, and even Thou shalt commit adultery.[11]
More recently, several discoveries of ancient manuscripts such as the Dead Sea scrolls, and Codex Sinaiticus, have led to modern translations like the New International Version differing somewhat from the older ones such as the 17th century King James Version, removing verses not present in the earliest manuscripts (see List of omitted Bible verses), some of which are acknowledged as interpolations, such as the Comma Johanneum, others having several highly variant versions in very important places, such as the resurrection scene in Mark 16. The King-James-Only Movement rejects these changes and uphold the King James Version as the most accurate.[12]
Ethics in the Bible[edit]
Main article: Ethics in the Bible
Certain moral decisions in the Bible are questioned by many modern groups. Some of the most commonly criticized ethical choices include subjugation of women, religious intolerance, use of capital punishment as penalty for violation of Mosaic Law, sexual acts like incest,[13] toleration of the institution of slavery in both Old and New Testaments,[14] obligatory religious wars and the order to commit the genocide of the Canaanites and the Amalekites. Christian Apologists support the Bible's decisions by reminding critics that they should be considered from the author's point of view and that Mosaic Law applied to the Israelite people (who lived before the birth of Jesus). Other religious groups see nothing wrong with the Bible's judgments.[15] One example that is often cited is the biblical law of the rebellious son:[16]

"If any man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father or his mother, and when they chastise him, he will not even listen to them, then his father and mother shall seize him, and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gateway of his home town. And they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey us, he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death; so you shall remove the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear of it and fear." (Deut. 21:18-21)
Other critics of the Bible, such as Friedrich Nietzsche who popularized the phrase "God is dead",[17] have questioned the morality of the New Testament, regarding it as weak and conformist-oriented.
Internal consistency[edit]
Main article: Internal consistency of the Bible
There are many places in the Bible in which inconsistencies—such as different numbers and names for the same feature, and different sequences for the same events—have been alleged and presented by critics as difficulties.[18] Responses to these criticisms include the modern documentary hypothesis, the two-source hypothesis and theories that the Pastoral Epistles are pseudonymous.[19]:p.47 Contrasting with these critical stances are positions supported by other authorities that consider the texts to be consistent. Such advocates maintain that the Torah was written by a single source, the Gospels by four independent witnesses, and all of the Pauline Epistles to have been written by the Apostle Paul.[citation needed]
However authors such as Raymond Brown have presented arguments that the Gospels actually contradict each other in various important respects and on various important details.[20] W. D. Davies and E. P. Sanders state that: "on many points, especially about Jesus’ early life, the evangelists were ignorant … they simply did not know, and, guided by rumour, hope or supposition, did the best they could".[21] More critical scholars see the nativity stories either as completely fictional accounts,[22] or at least constructed from traditions that predate the Gospels.[23][24]
For example, many versions of the Bible specifically point out that the most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses did not include Mark 16:9-20, i.e., the Gospel of Mark originally ended at Mark 16:8, and additional verses were added a few hundred years later. This is known as the "Markan Appendix".[25][26][27]
Mosaic authorship, authorship of the Gospels and authorship of the Pauline Epistles are topics that remain widely debated.
The Bible and science[edit]
Main article: Science and the Bible
The universe, as presented literally in the Bible, consists of a flat earth within a geocentric arrangement of planets and stars (e.g. Joshua 10:12–13, Eccles. 1:5, Isaiah 40:22, 1 Chron. 16:30, Matthew 4:8, Rev. 7:1).

Joshua 10:12 On the day that the Lord gave up the Amorites to the Israelites, Joshua stood before all the people of Israel and said to the Lord: “Sun, stand still over Gibeon. Moon, stand still over the Valley of Aijalon.” 13 So the sun stood still, and the moon stopped until the people defeated their enemies.
Eccles. 1:5 The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises.
Isaiah 40:22 He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in.
1 Chron. 16:30 Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.
Matthew 4:8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;
Rev. 7:1 And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.
Psalm 103:12 As far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us.



[28] Modern astronomy has provided overwhelming evidence that this model is false. The spherical shape of the earth was established with certainty by Hellenistic astronomers in the 3rd century BCE. The heliocentric nature of the solar system was conclusively established in the 16th century CE. Many modern Christians and Jews assert that these passages are written as metaphorical or phenomenological descriptions and not meant to be taken literally.[29] This response is intuitive given the modern prevalence of the expression "the sun rises" despite that it is common knowledge in the English speaking world that the sun does not, in fact, rise.
Another common point of criticism regards the Genesis creation narrative. According to young Earth creationism, which takes a literal view of the book of Genesis, the universe and all forms of life on Earth were created directly by God sometime between 5,700 and 10,000 years ago. (The Bible traces back to Adam's creation around 4000 BCE. There is debate over the 24 hour earth-days in which the earth was created as only on the fourth day were the sun, moon and stars created - without the sun a 24 hour earth-day is impossible. Genesis 1:16-19) This assertion is contradicted by radiocarbon dating of fossils, as well as modern understanding of genetics, evolution, and cosmology.[30] For instance, astrophysical evidence suggests that the universe is approximately 13.8 billion years old.[31] Moreover, it would require an impossibly high rate of mutation to account for the current amount of genetic variation in humans if all humans were descended from two individuals several thousand years ago.[32]

The argument that the literal story of Genesis can qualify as science collapses on three major grounds: the creationists' need to invoke miracles in order to compress the events of the earth's history into the biblical span of a few thousand years; their unwillingness to abandon claims clearly disproved, including the assertion that all fossils are products of Noah's flood; and their reliance upon distortion, misquote, half-quote, and citation out of context to characterize the ideas of their opponents.
— Bully for Brontosaurus by Stephen Jay Gould
Science-faith think tanks such as the Biologos foundation and Reasons to Believe have sought to reconcile these scientific challenges with the Christian faith.
The Bible and archaeology[edit]
Main articles: The Bible and history and Biblical archaeology
According to one of the world's leading biblical archaeologists, William G. Dever,

"Archaeology certainly doesn't prove literal readings of the Bible...It calls them into question, and that's what bothers some people. Most people really think that archaeology is out there to prove the Bible. No archaeologist thinks so."[33] From the beginnings of what we call biblical archeology, perhaps 150 years ago, scholars, mostly western scholars, have attempted to use archeological data to prove the Bible. And for a long time it was thought to work. William Albright, the great father of our discipline, often spoke of the "archeological revolution." Well, the revolution has come but not in the way that Albright thought. The truth of the matter today is that archeology raises more questions about the historicity of the Hebrew Bible and even the New Testament than it provides answers, and that's very disturbing to some people.[34]
Dever also wrote:

Archaeology as it is practiced today must be able to challenge, as well as confirm, the Bible stories. Some things described there really did happen, but others did not. The biblical narratives about Abraham, Moses, Joshua and Solomon probably reflect some historical memories of people and places, but the 'larger than life' portraits of the Bible are unrealistic and contradicted by the archaeological evidence....[35] I am not reading the Bible as Scripture… I am in fact not even a theist. My view all along—and especially in the recent books—is first that the biblical narratives are indeed 'stories,' often fictional and almost always propagandistic, but that here and there they contain some valid historical information...[36]
Tel Aviv University archaeologist Ze'ev Herzog wrote in the Haaretz newspaper:

This is what archaeologists have learned from their excavations in the Land of Israel: the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to swallow is that the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom. And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the God of Israel, YHWH, had a female consort and that the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai.[37][38]
Professor Finkelstein, who is known as "the father of biblical archaeology", told the Jerusalem Post that Jewish archaeologists have found no historical or archaeological evidence to back the biblical narrative on the Exodus, the Jews' wandering in Sinai or Joshua's conquest of Canaan. On the alleged Temple of Solomon, Finkelstein said that there is no archaeological evidence to prove it really existed.[39] Professor Yoni Mizrahi, an independent archaeologist who has worked with the International Atomic Energy Agency, agreed with Israel Finkelstein.[39]
Regarding the Exodus of Israelites from Egypt, Egyptian archaeologist Zahi Hawass said:

“Really, it’s a myth,”... “This is my career as an archaeologist. I should tell them the truth. If the people are upset, that is not my problem.”[40]
Unfulfilled prophecies[edit]
See also: Bible prophecy
The alleged fulfillment of biblical prophecies is a popular argument used as evidence by Christian apologists to support the claimed divine inspiration of the Bible. They see the fulfillment of prophecies as proof of God's direct involvement in the writing of the Bible.[41]
Messianic prophecies[edit]
See also: Jesus and messianic prophecy and Judaism's view of Jesus
According to Christian apologists, the alleged fulfillment of the messianic prophecies in the mission, death, and resurrection of Jesus proves the accuracy of the Bible. However, according to Jewish scholars, Christian claims that Jesus is the messiah of the Hebrew Bible are based on mistranslations[42][43][44] and Jesus did not fulfill the qualifications for Jewish Messiah.
An example of this is Isaiah 7:14. Christians read Isaiah 7:14 as a prophetic prediction of Jesus' birth from a virgin, while Jews read it as referring to the birth of Ahaz's son, Hezekiah.[45][46] They also point out that the word Almah, used in Isaiah 7:14, is part of the Hebrew phrase ha-almah hara, meaning "the almah is pregnant." Since the present tense is used, they maintain that the young woman was already pregnant and hence not a virgin. This being the case, they claim the verse cannot be cited as a prediction of the future.[46][47]
Prophecies after the event[edit]
Main articles: Postdiction and Vaticinium ex eventu
An example of an alleged after-the-fact prophecy is the Little Apocalypse recorded in the Olivet Discourse of the Gospel of Mark. It predicts the siege of Jerusalem and destruction of the Jewish Temple at the hands of the Romans in 70 AD. Most mainstream New Testament scholars concede this is an ex eventu (foretelling after the event), as are many of the prophecies in the Old Testament such as Daniel 11.[48][49][50][51][52][53][54]
Another example is Isaiah's prophecy about Cyrus the Great. Traditionally, the entire book of Isaiah is believed to pre-date the rule of Cyrus by about 120 years. These particular passages (Isaiah 40-55, often referred to as Deutero-Isaiah) are believed by most modern critical scholars to have been added by another author toward the end of the Babylonian exile (ca. 536 BC).[55] Whereas Isaiah 1-39 (referred to as Proto-Isaiah) saw the destruction of Israel as imminent, and the restoration in the future, Deutero-Isaiah speaks of the destruction in the past (Isa 42:24-25), and the restoration as imminent (Isiah 42:1-9). Notice, for example, the change in temporal perspective from (Isiah 39:6-7), where the Babylonian Captivity is cast far in the future, to (Isaiah 43:14), where the Israelites are spoken of as already in Babylon.[56]
The success of Joshua[edit]
The Book of Joshua describes the Israelite conquest of Canaan under the leadership of Joshua, the son of one of the aides to Moses. After Moses' death, God tells Joshua to conquer Canaan and makes predictions of his success.[57] Amongst other things, Joshua was to be given a vast dominion that included all of the Hittite land, and the advantage of facing no one who could stand up to him.
While the Book of Joshua delineates many successful conquerings, the Canaanites were not amongst those conquered and the Israelites did suffer defeat. Judah, a leader of one of the twelve tribes of Israel, is unable to dislodge the Jebusites from Jerusalem and was forced to cohabit,[58] while the Manassites, another of the twelve tribes, lack the strength to occupy several Canaan towns.[59] Other bastions of resistance dot the landscape.[60][61] Even after Joshua's death, the land is only partially conquered with the Canaanites remaining a significant external threat.[62][63][64] Critics argue that Joshua never lives to see the full territory God promises him and that the substantial resistance put up by the indigenous population violates God's promise of battles in which no enemy was his equal.
The destruction of Tyre[edit]



Tyre harbour##Ezekiel predicts that the ancient city of Tyre will be utterly destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar and "made a bare rock" that will "never be rebuilt" (Ezekiel 26:1, 26:7-14). However, Tyre withstood Nebuchadrezzar's siege for 13 years, ending in a compromise in which the royal family was taken into exile but the city survived intact.
Apologists cite the text as saying that the prophecy states that "many nations" would accomplish the destruction of Tyre, and claim that this refers to later conquerors (Ezekiel 26:3), but skeptics[65][66] counter that this was a reference to the "many nations" of Nebuchadrezzar's multinational force (Nebuchadrezzar was described by Ezekiel as "king of kings", i.e., an overking, a ruler over many nations), and that subsequent conquerors didn't permanently destroy Tyre either (it is now the fourth-largest city in Lebanon). Ezekiel himself admitted later that Nebuchadnezzar could not defeat Tyre (Ezekiel 29:18).
##Ezekiel said Egypt would be made an uninhabited wasteland for forty years (Ezekiel 29:10-14), and Nebuchadrezzar would be allowed to plunder it (Ezekiel 29:19-20) as compensation for his earlier failure to plunder Tyre (see above). However, the armies of Pharaoh Amasis II defeated the Babylonians. History records that this Pharaoh (also known as Ahmose II) went on to enjoy a long and prosperous reign; Herodotus writes that:

It is said that it was during the reign of Ahmose II that Egypt attained its highest level of prosperity both in respect of what the river gave the land and in respect of what the land yielded to men and that the number of inhabited cities at that time reached in total 20,000.[67]
The prophecy in chapter 29 dates in December 588—January 587. 20 years later, in the year 568, Nebuchadnezzar attacked Egypt.[68] F.F. Bruce writes still more exactly that the Babylonian king invaded Egypt already after the siege of Tyre 585—573 BC and replaced the Pharaoh Hophra (Apries) by Amasis:

The siege of Tyre was followed by operations against Egypt itself. Hophra was defeated, deposed and replaced by Amasis, an Egyptian general. But in 568 BC Amasis revolted against Nebuchadnezzar, who then invaded and occupied part of the Egyptian frontier lands.[69]
Flavius Josephus even writes in his Antiquities, citing the 4th century Greek writer Megasthenes that Nebuchadnezzar had control of all northern Africa unto present day Spain:

Megasthenes also, in his fourth book of his Accounts of India, makes mention of these things, and thereby endeavours to show that this king (Nebuchadnezzar) exceeded Hercules in fortitude, and in the greatness of his actions; for he saith that he conquered a great part of Libya and Iberia.[70]
On the other hand Nebuchadnezzar makes no mention of this campaign against Egypt in his inscriptions, at least that are currently known. It is too simple to argue with Herodotus, especially because his credibility was ever since contested.[71] The forty years are not to understand as an exact number. This figure became a significant period of chastisement to the Hebrews remembering the forty years in the desert after the exodus from Egypt.[72]
The protection of the King of Judah[edit]
##Isaiah spoke of a prophecy God made to Ahaz, the King of Judah that he would not be harmed by his enemies (Isaiah 7:1-7), yet according to 2 Chronicles, the king of Aram and Israel did conquer Judah (2 Chronicles 28:1-6).
In Isaiah (Isaiah 7:9) the prophet says clearly that a prerequisite for the fulfillment of the prophecy is that Ahaz stands firm in his faith. F.F. Bruce claims that this means Ahaz should trust God and not seek military help in the Assyrians, which Ahaz did.[73]
The death of the king of Judah[edit]
##In predicting Jerusalem's fall to Babylon, Jeremiah prophesied that Zedekiah, the king of Judah, would "die in peace" (Jeremiah 34:2-5). However, according to Jeremiah (Jeremiah 52:9-11), he was put in prison until the day of his death.
Apologists maintain that Zedekiah did not suffer the same terrible death as all the other nobles of Judah did when Nebuchadnezzar killed them in Riblah. Jeremiah also told Zedekiah in his prophecy that he would have to go to Babylon, which the Apologists claim implies that he will be imprisoned. There are no historical records of what happened with Zedekiah in Babylon[74] and a peaceful death is not ruled out.[citation needed]
The death of Josiah[edit]
##Prophetess Huldah prophesied that Josiah would die in peace (2 Kings 22:18-20), but rather than dying in peace, as the prophetess predicted, Josiah was probably killed at Megiddo in a battle with the Egyptian army (2 Chronicles 35:20-24).[75]
Apologists allege that the prophecy of Huldah was partially fulfilled because Josiah did not see all the disaster the Babylonians brought over Jerusalem and Judah. The prophetess clearly stated that because of Josiah's repentance, he will be buried in peace. But the king did not keep his humble attitude. As mentioned in 2 Chronicles (2 Chronicles 35:22), he did not listen to God's command and fought against the Egyptian pharaoh Necho. It is quite possible that he did this "opposing the faithful prophetic party".[76] Prophecy in the biblical sense is except in some very few cases never a foretelling of future events but it wants to induce the hearers to repent, to admonish and to encourage respectively; biblical prophecy includes almost always a conditional element.[77]



 Map showing the borders of the Promised Land, based on God's promise to Abraham in Genesis 15:18-21: In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites, And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims, And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.
The land promised to Abraham[edit]
Main article: Promised Land
##According to Genesis and Deuteronomy (Genesis 15:18, 17:8 and Deuteronomy 1:7-8), Abraham and his descendants, the Israelites will unconditionally (Deuteronomy 9:3-7) own all the land between the Nile River and the Euphrates River for an everlasting possession. But a critic says it never happened, that they never owned all that land forever.[78]
An apologist's counter-claim would be that a reading of Davidic conquests tells of the Israelite occupation of all the promised lands. F.F. Bruce writes:

David's sphere of influence now extended from the Egyptian frontier on the Wadi el-Arish (the "brook of Egypt") to the Euphrates; and these limits remained the ideal boundaries of Israel's dominion long after David's empire had disappeared.[79]
Acts 7:5 and Hebrews 11:13 are taken out of context if used as evidence against the fulfillment of these prophecies. Stephen does not state in Acts that the prophecy was not fulfilled. Moreover, it does not seem any problem for him to mention side by side the promise to Abraham himself and that Abraham did not get even a foot of ground. This becomes understandable with the concept of corporate personality. Jews are familiar with identifying individuals with the group they belong to. H. Wheeler Robinson writes that

Corporate personality is the important Semitic complex of thought in which there is a constant oscillation between the individual and the group—family, tribe, or nation—to which he belongs, so that the king or some other representative figure may be said to embody the group, or the group may be said to sum up the host of individuals.[80]
The letter to the Hebrews speaks about the promise of the heavenly country (Hebrews 11:13-16).
The fate of Damascus[edit]
##According to Isaiah 17:1, "Damascus will no longer be a city but will become a heap of ruins", but in fact Damascus is considered among the oldest continually inhabited cities in the world.
An apologist's response to this statement is that this verse refers to the destruction of Damascus as a strong capital of Syria. This was fulfilled during the Syro-Ephraimite War.

The prophecy perhaps dates from about 735 BC, when Damascus and Israel were allied against Judah (Isaiah 7:1). Damascus was taken by Tiglath-Pileser in 732, and Samaria by Sargon in 721.[81]
The passage is consistent with 2 Kings 16:9, which states that Assyria defeated the city and exiled the civilians to Kir.
The fate of Jews who stay in Egypt[edit]
##According to Jeremiah 42:17, Jews who choose to live in Egypt will all die and leave no remnant. But history shows that Jews continued to live there for centuries, later establishing a cultural center at Alexandria. A Jewish community exists at Alexandria even to this day.[82]
According to apologists, a more thorough examination of the surrounding text suggests that Jeremiah is stating that no refugees who flee to Egypt would return to Israel except for few fugitives. Jeremiah 42-44 had relevance mainly to the group of exiles who fled to Egypt. It emphasizes that the future hopes of a restored Israel lay elsewhere than with the exiles to Egypt.[83]
The return of Jewish prisoners of war[edit]
##Isaiah and Jeremiah (Isaiah 27:12-13, Jeremiah 3:18, Jeremiah 31:1-23, and Jeremiah 33:7) predicted the return of the exiles taken from Israel by the Assyrians in 722 BC. It never happened. Following the conquest of the northern kingdom by the Assyrians in 721 BC, the 10 tribes were gradually assimilated by other peoples and thus disappeared from history.[84] Unlike the Kingdom of Judah, which was able to return from its Babylonian Captivity in 537 BC, the 10 tribes of the Kingdom of Israel never had a foreign edict granting permission to return and rebuild their homeland. Assyria has long since vanished, its capital, Nineveh, destroyed in 612 BC.
Apologists, however, charge that Luke 2:36 states that Anna the Prophetess, daughter of Phanuel of the tribe of Asher, was living as a widow in the sanctuary ministering to God with and fastings and petitions night and day. Thus, at least some (tiny) portion of Israel returned, since it was unlikely that a lone female would return to the land of Israel unaccompanied by kinsmen as safe escort.
Although the exiled Israelites from the Northern kingdom did not return from Assyria, apologists state that it must be considered that these passages also contain the expectation of the messianic days. Theologians point out that in Isaiah 27:12-13 Euphrates and the Wadi of Egypt represent the northern and southern borders of the Promised Land in its widest extent (Genesis 15:18) and thus they refer these verses to the return of the Israelites to Jerusalem in the last days, in the messianic time. Israelites will be gathered from wherever they have been expelled from the north, Assyria, to the south, Egypt.[85] Jeremiah's prophecy of Israel's and Judah's return from the north in Jeremiah 3:18 is preceded by the request of Yahweh to the Israelites to come back (verse 14). After fulfilling this condition God will increase their number and none will miss the ark of the covenant (verse 16). All nations will then honour the Lord (verse 17). Consequently Christian scholars refer verse 18 to messianic times when there will be a kingdom united as in the days of David and Solomon.[86] Jeremiah 31 should be seen in context with chapter 30. Some scholars argue that these chapters were written early in Jeremiah's ministry and refer to Northern Israel. Later these poems were updated and referred to Judah as well, probably by Jeremiah himself, when it was realized that Judah had passed through similar experiences to those of Israel.[87] The Book of Consolation (Jeremiah 30:1—31:40) reaches his final, messianic scope in the establishment of a New Covenant between Yahweh and the House of Israel and the House of Judah.[88]
The strength of Judah[edit]
##Isaiah 19:17 predicted that "the land of Judah shall be a terror unto Egypt". Assuming that the 'terror' implied was a large-scale military attack of Egypt, it never happened.
According to theologians, the statement that the "land of Judah" will terrify the Egyptians is not a reference to a large army from Judah attacking Egypt, but a circumlocution for the place where God lives; it is God and his plans that will terrify Egypt. Verse 17 has to be understood in its context. The second "in that day" message from verse 18 announces the beginning of a deeper relationship between God and Egypt, which leads to Egypt's conversion and worshiping God (verses 19-21). The last "in that day" prophecy (verses 23-25) speaks about Israel, Assyria and Egypt as God's special people, thus, describing eschatological events.[89][90]
The identity of the conquerors of Babylon[edit]
##Isaiah 13:17, Isaiah 21:2, Jeremiah 51:11, and Jeremiah 51:27-28 predicted that Babylon would be destroyed by the Medes, Ararat, Minni and Ashkenaz and Elamites. The Persians under Cyrus the Great captured Babylon in 539 BC. Daniel 5:31 incorrectly stated that it was Darius the Mede who captured Babylon.
Christian apologists state that the prophecy in Isaiah 13:21 could possibly have been directed originally against Assyria, whose capital Ninive was defeated 612 BC by a combined onslaught of the Medes and Babylonians. According to this explanation the prophecy was later updated and referred to Babylon[91] not recognizing the rising power of Persia. On the other hand it can be mentioned that the Persian king Cyrus after overthrowing Media in 550 BC did not treat the Medes as a subject nation.

Instead of treating the Medes as a beaten foe and a subject nation, he had himself installed as king of Media and governed Media and Persia as a dual monarchy, each part of which enjoyed equal rights.[92]
Jeremiah prophesied at the height of the Median empire's power, and thus he was probably influenced to see the Medes as the nation that will conquer Babylon. Several proposals were brought forth for "Darius the Mede" out of which one says that Cyrus the Great is meant in Daniel 5:31.
Jehoiakim prophecies[edit]
##The prophet Daniel states that in the third year of the reign of King Jehoiakim, Nebuchadnezzar conquered Judah (Daniel 1:1-2). The third year of Jehoiakim's reign was 605 BC, at which time Nebuchadnezzar was not yet king of Babylon. It was in 597 BC that Nebuchadnezzar takes Jerusalem, by then Jehoiakim had died.
Apologists respond that this is not a prophecy but a statement. Daniel 1:1 is a problem of dating. But already F.F. Bruce solved this problem explaining that when Nebuchadnezzar, son of king Nabopolassar, was put in charge over a part of his forces, he defeated Necho in the battle of Carchemish 605 BC. In this situation his father Nabopolassar died. Before Nebuchadnezzar as heir apparent returned to Babylon he settled the affairs in the Asiatic countries bordering the Egyptian frontier, which means also Judah, and took captives from several countries as, for example, also from the Jews.[93]
##Jeremiah prophesied that the body of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, would be desecrated after his death (Jeremiah 22:18-19, Jeremiah 36:30-31). However, his death was recorded in 2 Kings 24:6 where it says that "Jehoiakim slept with his fathers". This is a familiar Bible expression that was used to denote a peaceful death and respectful burial. David slept with his fathers (1 Kings 2:10) and so did Solomon (1 Kings 11:43). On the other hand, 2 Chronicles 36:5-6 states that Nebuchadnezzar came against Jehoiakim, bound him in fetters, and carried him to Babylon. Judging from the treatment Zedekiah was accorded when the Babylonians bound him and carried him away to Babylon (Jeremiah 52:9-11), one might justifiably argue that his body probably was desecrated after his death. Jeremiah, however, predicted that Jehoiakim's own people would be his desecraters, that his own people would not accord him lamentations appropriate for a king, that his own people would cast his body "out beyond the gates of Jerusalem".
Apologists proposal for a partial solution:

In the 7th year of his reign, in the month of Kislev (December/January 598/97), Nebuchadnezzar himself left Babylon and undertook the subjection of rebellious Judah. In that same month, King Jehoiakim died in Jerusalem. (On the basis of a comparison with 2 Kings 24:6,8,10ff, with the Babylonian Chronicle, Wiseman 73, lines 11-13, Kislev is the ninth month. In the twelfth month, Adar, Jerusalem was taken. Jehoiachin's reign falls in these three months.) It is not impossible that he was murdered by a political faction who thereby sought more mild treatment for their country. His 18-year old son Jehoiachin was raised to the throne (2 Kings 24:8). Three months later Jerusalem was entirely surrounded by Babylonians. Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to the city of Judah (al-ya-ahu-du), and on the second day of the month of Adar he comquered the city and took its king prisoner.[94]
Also F.F. Bruce writes that Jehoiakim died in Juda before the siege of Jerusalem began.[95] This would mean that Jehoiakim was desecrated after his death and in this way the prophecy of Jeremiah was fulfilled. The passage in 2 Chronicles 36:5-6 does not speak explicitly about Jehoiakim's death. Thus, it can be seen as a parallel to Daniel 1:1-2[96] which speaks about an event in the lifetime of the king of Judah (see paragraph above). 2 Kings 24:6, nevertheless, remains unclear.
##Part of the desecration prophecy was that Jehoiakim would "have no one to sit upon the throne of David" (Jeremiah 36:30), but this too was proven false. Upon Jehoiakim's death, his son Jehoiachin "reigned in his stead" for a period of three months and ten days (2 Chronicles 36:8-9, 2 Kings 24:6-8). Also, there are biblical genealogies that purport to show Jehoiakim as a direct ancestor of Jesus (1 Chronicles 3:16-17, Matthew 1:11-12).[75]
Apologists say that if Jehoiakim had not been killed by his own people, on the condition that this supposition is true (see preceding paragraph), in all likelihood, Jehoiakim would have been put to death by the Babylonians. The Israelites anticipated what Nebuchadnezzar intended to do. In this case, most probable, Jehoiakim's son Jehoiachin would not have become king and Jeremiah's prophecy would have been fulfilled in its full sense. Jehoiachin's successor, Zedekiah, was no descendant of Jehoiakim, but his brother.
The double reckoning of Jehoiachin in Matthew 1:11-12 is made possible by the fact that the same Greek name can translate the two similar Hebrew names Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin.[97] In this way in verse 11 Jehoiakim and in verse 12 Jehoiachin is meant. The verse Jeremiah 36:30 says that Jehoiakim's descendants will not be kings in Judah anymore. This does not mean that he cannot be an ancestor of the Messiah.
New Testament[edit]



 The Wailing Wall by night. According to Luke 19:41-44: As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it and said, "If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace—but now it is hidden from your eyes. The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God's coming to you.
Jesus said in Matt. 24:2; Mark 13:2; Luke 19:44; Luke 21:6 that "no stone" of Jerusalem or of the Second Temple would be left upon another. This prophecy failed, as the wailing wall (a remnant of the ancient wall that surrounded the Jewish Temple's courtyard,) still remains.
In reply, John Robinson writes that

it was the temple that perished by fire while the walls of the city were thrown down.[98]
The imminence of the second coming[edit]
See also: Second coming
Jesus prophesied that the second coming would occur during the lifetime of his followers and Caiphas, and immediately after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE (referred to as abomination of desolation in Matt 24:15).

For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom. (Matthew 16:27-28)

"When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. I tell you the truth, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes." (Matthew 10:23)

..Again the high priest (Caiphas) asked him, "Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?""I am", said Jesus. "And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven." (Mark 14:61-62)

Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. "Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down." As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. "Tell us", they said, "when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?" So when you see standing in the holy place 'the abomination that causes desolation,' spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand—then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let no one on the roof of his house go down to take anything out of the house. Pray that your flight will not take place in winter or on the Sabbath. For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now-and never to be equaled again. Immediately after the distress of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken. At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, right at the door. I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. (Matthew 24)

(see also Mark 13:1-30, Luke 21:5-35, Mark 13:30-31, Mark 9:1, Luke 9:27, John 21:22, Matthew 26:62-64, Mark 14:62)
It may be argued that Jesus was not speaking of the second coming in Matthew 16:28 but instead referred to a demonstration of his or God's might; a viewpoint which allows the fulfillment of the prophesy through a variety of traumatic events, notably, the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in 70 AD. The temple's destruction is held by proponents to demonstrate that God was on the side of the Christian people rather than that of the Jews. However, at that time only some of Jesus' disciples still lived.[99] In the same way Matthew 10:23 should be understood.[100] Note, however, that this view (referred to as Preterism) is not the majority view among American denominations, especially by denominations that espouse Dispensationalism.[101][102][103] Furthermore it is a misunderstanding that Jesus meant Caiphas in Mark 14:62. The word "you will see" is in Greek "ὄψεσθε" [opsesthe, from the infinitive optomai],[104] which is plural and not singular. Jesus meant that the Jews, and not just the high priest, will see his coming.
This prophecy is also seen in the Revelation of Jesus to John.

The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John,... Look, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and all the peoples of the earth will mourn because of him. So shall it be! Amen. (Revelation 1:1,7)

"Behold, I am coming soon! Blessed is he who keeps the words of the prophecy in this book. ... Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done." ... He who testifies to these things says, "Yes, I am coming soon." Amen. Come, Lord Jesus. (Revelation 22:7,12,20)

Despite the strongly repeated promises to the seven churches of Asia (Revelation 1:4,11) in the 1st century CE, Jesus has not come quickly or shortly according to critics.
Apologists respond that the word "soon" (other translations use "shortly" or "quickly") does not have to be understood in the sense of close future. The Norwegian scholar Thorleif Boman explained that the Israelites, unlike Europeans or people in the West, did not understand time as something measurable or calculable according to Hebrew thinking but as something qualitative.

We have examined the ideas underlying the expression of calculable time and more than once have found that the Israelites understood time as something qualitative, because for them time is determined by its content.[105]

...the Semitic concept of time is closely coincident with that of its content without which time would be quite impossible. The quantity of duration completely recedes behind the characteristic feature that enters with time or advances in it. Johannes Pedersen comes to the same conclusion when he distinguishes sharply between the Semitic understanding of time and ours. According to him, time is for us an abstraction since we distinguish time from the events that occur in time. The ancient Semites did not do this; for them time is determined by its content.[106]
In this way expressions of time, such as "soon", do not mean that the denoted event will take place in close future but that it will be the next significant event.[107]
The Apostle Paul also predicted that the second coming would be within his own lifetime, 1 Thessalonians 4:17:

After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.
[108]

The philosopher Porphyry (232-305 CE), in his Kata Christianon (Against the Christians), a book burned and banned by the church in 448 CE writes of Paul:

Another of his astonishingly silly comments needs to be examined: I mean that wise saying of his, to the effect that, We who are alive and persevere shall not precede those who are asleep when the lord comes—for the lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout... and the trumpet of god shall sound, and those who have died in Christ shall rise first- then we who are alive shall be caught up together with them in a cloud to meet the lord in the air... Indeed—there is something here that reaches up to heaven: the magnitude of this lie. When told to dumb bears, to silly frogs and geese—they bellow or croak or quack with delight to hear of the bodies of men flying through the air like birds or being carried about on the clouds. This belief is quackery of the first rate.
The apologists answer for the passage in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 is that Paul speaks about his own presence at the last day only hypothetically. He identifies himself with those Christians who will still live in the time of Jesus' return but does not want to express that he himself will still experience this.[109] That becomes fully clear some verses later in which he says that the Day of the Lord comes like a thief (1 Thessalonians 5:1-2). The comparison of the Day of the Lord with a thief is a word of Jesus himself (Matthew 24:43-44), which expresses the impossibility to say anything about the date of his second coming (Matthew 24:36).
Notable critics[edit]
##Isaac Asimov
##Richard Dawkins
##Albert Einstein [110]
##Christopher Hitchens
##Robert G. Ingersoll[111]
##Thomas Paine
##Bertrand Russell
##Mark Twain
##Voltaire
See also[edit]
##Bible conspiracy theory
##Criticism of the Book of Mormon
##Criticism of the Talmud
##Criticism of the Qur'an
##Christ myth theory
##Misquoting Jesus
##Tahrif
References[edit]
1.^ Jump up to: a b "Bible." The Crystal Reference Encyclopedia. West Chiltington: Crystal Reference, 2005. Credo Reference. 29 July 2009
2.Jump up ^ Ehrman, Bart D. (2003). Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew. New York: Oxford. pp. 122–123, 185. ISBN 0-19-514183-0.
3.Jump up ^ Ehrman, Bart D. (2004). The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings. New York: Oxford. pp. 372–3. ISBN 0-19-515462-2. Brown, Raymond E. (1997). Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Anchor Bible. pp. 621, 639, 654. ISBN 0-385-24767-2. Scholars who hold to Pauline authorship include Wohlenberg, Lock, Meinertz, Thornell, Schlatter, Spicq, Jeremais, Simpson, Kelly, and Fee. Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, p. 622.
4.Jump up ^ Examples of authors who argue the Jesus myth hypothesis: Thomas L. Thompson The Messiah Myth: The Near Eastern Roots of Jesus and David (Jonathan Cape, Publisher, 2006); Michael Martin, The Case Against Christianity (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1991), 36–72; John Mackinnon Robertson
5.Jump up ^ Freke, Timothy and Gandy, Peter (1999) The Jesus Mysteries. London: Thorsons (Harper Collins)
6.Jump up ^ "Bible." The Columbia Encyclopedia. New York: Columbia University Press, 2008. Credo Reference. 29 July 2009
7.Jump up ^ The Bible in the Syriac tradition, Sebastian P. Brock, p. 13
8.Jump up ^ God's conflict with the dragon and the sea: echoes of a Canaanite myth, John Day
9.Jump up ^ Understanding Biblical Israel: a reexamination of the origins of monotheism, Stanley Ned Rosenbaum
10.Jump up ^ The Jewish religion: a companion By Louis Jacobs, p. 251
11.Jump up ^ Exod. 20:14, 1631 edition of the King James Version of the Bible.
12.Jump up ^ Eric Pement, Gimme the Bible that Paul used: A look at the King James Only debate online.
13.Jump up ^ Genesis 19:30-36
14.Jump up ^ "How Can We Trust a Bible that Tolerated Slavery?" Discovery Series, RBC Ministries. July 27, 2009.
15.Jump up ^ [1][dead link]
16.Jump up ^ Schulweis, Harold M. (2009). Conscience: The Duty to Obey and the Duty to Disobey. Woodstock, Vermont: Jewish Lights. pp. 28–30. ISBN 1-58023-419-4.
17.Jump up ^ Saugstad, Andreas. "Nietzsche & Christianity" July 28, 2009.
18.Jump up ^ "Contradictions from the Skeptic's Annotated Bible". Skepticsannotatedbible.com. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
19.Jump up ^ Knight, George William, Howard Marshall, and W. Ward Gasque. The Pastoral Epistles: A Commentary on the Greek Text (New International Greek Testament Commentary). William. B. Eerdmans, 1997. ISBN 0-8028-2395-5 / 9780802823953
20.Jump up ^ Brown, Raymond Edward (1999-05-18). The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke (The Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library). Yale University Press. p. 36. ISBN 0-300-14008-8.
21.Jump up ^ W.D Davies and E. P. Sanders, 'Jesus from the Jewish point of view', in The Cambridge History of Judaism ed William Horbury, vol 3: the Early Roman Period, 1984.
22.Jump up ^ Sanders, Ed Parish (1993). The Historical Figure of Jesus. London: Allen Lane. p. 85. ISBN 0-7139-9059-7.
23.Jump up ^ Hurtado, Larry W. (June 2003). Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans. p. 319. ISBN 0-8028-6070-2.
24.Jump up ^ Brown, Raymond Edward (1977). The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in Matthew and Luke. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday. pp. 104–121. ISBN 0-385-05907-8.
25.Jump up ^ The role and function of repentance in Luke-Acts, by Guy D. Nave, pg 194 – see http://books.google.com/books?id=4CGScYTomYsC&pg=PA194&lpg=PA194&dq=%2B%22markan+appendix%22&source=bl&ots=ex8JIDMwMD&sig=oCI_C1mXVSZYoz34sVlgRDaO__Q&hl=en&ei=3pq_St6aGYnSjAefnOU2&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2#v=onepage&q=%2B%22markan%20appendix%22&f=false
26.Jump up ^ The Continuing Christian Need for Judaism, by John Shelby Spong, Christian Century September 26, 1979, p. 918. see http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=1256
27.Jump up ^ Feminist companion to the New Testament and early Christian writings, Volume 5, by Amy-Jill Levine, Marianne Blickenstaff, pg175 – see http://books.google.com/books?id=B2lfhy5lvlkC&pg=PA175&lpg=PA175&dq=%2B%22markan+appendix%22&source=bl&ots=vp5GVlmghC&sig=XN1KJCsBkTWO2Fot4SBhnpWoRkY&hl=en&ei=3pq_St6aGYnSjAefnOU2&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5#v=onepage&q=%2B%22markan%20appendix%22&f=false
28.Jump up ^ Driscoll, J.F. (1909). "Firmament". In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved 26 May 2008 from New Advent. ("That the Hebrews entertained similar ideas appears from numerous biblical passages...").
29.Jump up ^ The Galileo Controversy at Catholic Answers
30.Jump up ^ http://ncse.com/cej/3/2/answers-to-creationist-attacks-carbon-14-dating
31.Jump up ^ "Cosmic Detectives". The European Space Agency (ESA). 2013-04-02. Retrieved 2013-04-15.
32.Jump up ^ Barbara Bradley Hagerty (August 9, 2011). "Evangelicals Question The Existence Of Adam And Eve". All Things Considered.
33.Jump up ^ Bible gets a reality check, MSNBC, Alan Boyle
34.Jump up ^ The Bible's Buried Secrets, PBS Nova, 2008
35.Jump up ^ Dever, William G. (March–April 2006). "The Western Cultural Tradition Is at Risk". Biblical Archaeology Review 32 (2): 26 & 76.
36.Jump up ^ Dever, William G. (January 2003). "Contra Davies". The Bible and Interpretation. Retrieved 2007-02-12.
37.Jump up ^ The Nature of Home: A Lexicon of Essays, Lisa Knopp, p. 126
38.Jump up ^ Deconstructing the walls of Jericho
39.^ Jump up to: a b http://www.middleeastmonitor.org.uk/news/middle-east/2705-senior-israeli-archaeologist-casts-doubt-on-jewish-heritage-of-jerusalem
40.Jump up ^ Did the Red Sea Part? No Evidence, Archaeologists Say, The New York Times, April 3, 2007
41.Jump up ^ Nathan Busenitz, John MacArthur. Reasons We Believe. Crossway, 2008. ISBN 1-4335-0146-5 / 9781433501463. Aug. 6, 2009: [2]
42.Jump up ^ Why did the majority of the Jewish world reject Jesus as the Messiah, and why did the first Christians accept Jesus as the Messiah? by Rabbi Shraga Simmons (about.com)
43.Jump up ^ Michoel Drazin (1990). Their Hollow Inheritance. A Comprehensive Refutation of Christian Missionaries. Gefen Publishing House, Ltd. ISBN 965-229-070-X.
44.Jump up ^ Troki, Isaac. "Faith Strengthened".
45.Jump up ^ Glaser, Zhava. "Almah: Virgin or Young Maiden?" Issues—A Messianic Jewish Perspective. July 30, 2009.
46.^ Jump up to: a b "The Jewish Perspective on Isaiah 7:14". Messiahtruth.com. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
47.Jump up ^ Why do Jews reject the Christian dogma of the virgin birth? The Second Jewish Book Of Why p.66 by Alfred J. Kolatch 1985
48.Jump up ^ Peter, Kirby (2001–2007). "Early Christian Writings: Gospel of Mark". Retrieved 2008-01-15.
49.Jump up ^ Achtemeier, Paul J. (1992). "The Gospel of Mark". The Anchor Bible Dictionary 4. New York, New York: Doubleday. p. 545. ISBN 0-385-19362-9.
50.Jump up ^ Meier, John P. (1991). A Marginal Jew. New York, New York: Doubleday. pp. v.2 955–6. ISBN 0-385-46993-4.
51.Jump up ^ Helms, Randel (1997). Who Wrote the Gospels?. Altadena, California: Millennium Press. p. 8. ISBN 0-9655047-2-7.
52.Jump up ^ Funk, Robert W.; Hoover, Roy W.; The Jesus Seminar (1993). The five Gospels: the search for the authentic words of Jesus: new translation and commentary. New York, New York: Macmillan. ISBN 0-02-541949-8.
53.Jump up ^ Crossan, John Dominic (1991). The historical Jesus: the life of a Mediterranean Jewish peasant. San Francisco, California: HarperSanFrancisco. ISBN 0-06-061629-6.
54.Jump up ^ Eisenman, Robert J. (1998). James the Brother of Jesus: The Key to Unlocking the Secrets of Early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Penguin Books. p. 56. ISBN 0-14-025773-X.
55.Jump up ^ Simon John De Vries: From old Revelation to new: a tradition-historical and redaction-critical study of temporal transitions in prophetic prediction. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing 1995, ISBN 978-0-8028-0683-3, p. 126
56.Jump up ^ Watson E. Mills, Roger Aubrey Bullard: Mercer dictionary of the Bible. Mercer University Press 1990, ISBN 978-0-86554-373-7, p. 414
57.Jump up ^ Joshua 1:1-9
58.Jump up ^ Joshua 15:63
59.Jump up ^ Joshua 17:12-13
60.Jump up ^ F.F. Bruce, Israel and the nations, Michigan, 1981, page 19.
61.Jump up ^ Judges 3:5-6
62.Jump up ^ Biblical peoples and ethnicity: an archaeological study of Egyptians, Ann E. Killebrew, pp. 152-154, 2005
63.Jump up ^ International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: E-J, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, p. 1136
64.Jump up ^ The Old Testament world, By John Rogerson, Philip R. Davies, 1989, p. 358
65.Jump up ^ "The Tyre Prophecy Again". The Skeptical Review. March–April 1999. Retrieved 2007-11-08.
66.Jump up ^ "Ezekiel and the Oracles against Tyre". CRI/Voice Institute. 2006. Retrieved 2007-11-08.
67.Jump up ^ Herodotus, (II, 177, 1)
68.Jump up ^ New Jerusalem Bible, Standard Edition published 1985, introductions and notes are a translation of those that appear in La Bible de Jerusalem—revised edition 1973, Bombay 2002; footnote to Ezekiel 29:1,19.
69.Jump up ^ F.F. Bruce, Israel and the nations, Michigan, 1981, pages 94.
70.Jump up ^ "Flavius Josephus, Antiquities Book X, chapter 11, first paragraph". Ccel.org. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
71.Jump up ^ John Marincola, Classical Association, Greek historians, Cambridge University Press, 2001, pages 37-39. Books.google.com. ISBN 978-0-19-922501-9. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
72.Jump up ^ Frederic Charles Cook, ed. (2006-10-04). "Bible Commentary: Proverbs-Ezekiel—footnote to Ezekiel 29:10-12". Ccel.org. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
73.Jump up ^ F.F. Bruce, Israel and the nations, Michigan, 1981, pages 62-67
74.Jump up ^ Siegfried Herrmann, A history of Israel in Old Testament times, London, 1981, SCM Press Ltd, page 284.
75.^ Jump up to: a b "Prophecies: Imaginary and fulfilled". Infidels.org. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
76.Jump up ^ F.F. Bruce, Israel and the nations, Michigan, 1981, page 84.
77.Jump up ^ New Jerusalem Bible, Standard Edition published 1985, introductions and notes are a translation of those that appear in La Bible de Jerusalem—revised edition 1973, Bombay 2002; page 1189—introduction to the book of Jonah.
78.Jump up ^ "Yahweh's Failed Land Promise, Farrell Till". Theskepticalreview.com. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
79.Jump up ^ F.F. Bruce, Israel and the nations, Michigan, 1981, page 32.
80.Jump up ^ Greidanus, Sidney (1999). Preaching Christ from the Old Testament. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. p. 198. ISBN 978-0-8028-4449-1. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
81.Jump up ^ New Jerusalem Bible, Standard Edition published 1985, introductions and notes are a translation of those that appear in La Bible de Jerusalem—revised edition 1973, Bombay 2002; footnote to Isaiah 17:1
82.Jump up ^ "The Argument from the Bible (1996)". Infidels.org. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
83.Jump up ^ John Arthur Thompson, The Book of Jeremiah, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1980, page 141.
84.Jump up ^ "Ten Lost Tribes of Israel". Britannica Online. Britannica.com. Retrieved 2009-04-11.
85.Jump up ^ Herbert M. Wolf, Interpreting Isaiah, published by Zondervan, 1985, page 146
86.Jump up ^ New Jerusalem Bible, Standard Edition published 1985, introductions and notes are a translation of those that appear in La Bible de Jerusalem—revised edition 1973, Bombay 2002; footnote to Jeremiah 3:18
87.Jump up ^ John Arthur Thompson, The Book of Jeremiah, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1980, page 552
88.Jump up ^ New Jerusalem Bible, Standard Edition published 1985, introductions and notes are a translation of those that appear in La Bible de Jerusalem—revised edition 1973, Bombay 2002; footnote to Jeremiah 30
89.Jump up ^ Gary V. Smith, Isaiah 1-39, B&H Publishing Group, 2007, pages 360-363
90.Jump up ^ John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 1-39, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1986, pages 375-381
91.Jump up ^ New Jerusalem Bible, Standard Edition published 1985, introductions and notes are a translation of those that appear in La Bible de Jerusalem—revised edition 1973, Bombay 2002; footnote to Isaiah 21:1.
92.Jump up ^ F.F. Bruce, Israel and the nations, Michigan, 1981, page 96.
93.Jump up ^ Daniel's First Verse by F.F.Bruce
94.Jump up ^ Claus Schedl, History of the Old Testament, Volume IV, Translation of 'Geschichte des Alten Testaments', Society of St.Paul, Staten Island, New York 10314, 1972, pages 349-350
95.Jump up ^ F.F. Bruce, Israel and the nations, Michigan, 1981, pages 88.
96.Jump up ^ New Jerusalem Bible, Standard Edition published 1985, introductions and notes are a translation of those that appear in La Bible de Jerusalem—revised edition 1973, Bombay 2002; footnote to 2 Chronicles 36:6
97.Jump up ^ New Jerusalem Bible, Standard Edition published 1985, introductions and notes are a translation of those that appear in La Bible de Jerusalem—revised edition 1973, Bombay 2002; footnote to Matthew 11:1.
98.Jump up ^ John A.T., Robinson, Redating the New Testament, London, 1976, page 20
99.Jump up ^ Dr. Knox Chamblin, Professor of New Testament, Reformed Theological Seminary: Commentary on Matthew 16:21-28—see last 4 paragraphs
100.Jump up ^ Theodor Zahn, F.F. Bruce, J. Barton Payne, etc. hold this opinion is the meaning of Matthew 10:23?
101.Jump up ^ Riemer, Michael (2000). IT Was At Hand. p. 12.
102.Jump up ^ Garland, Anthony (2007). A Testimony of Jesus Christ—Volume 1. p. 114.
103.Jump up ^ Sproul, RC (1998). The Last Days According to Jesus. p. 156.
104.Jump up ^ Online Interlinear New Testament in Greek—Matthew 26
105.Jump up ^ Thorleif Boman, Hebrew Thought compared with Greek, W.W.Norton & Company, New York—London, 1970, page 137
106.Jump up ^ Thorleif Boman, Hebrew Thought compared with Greek, W.W.Norton & Company, New York—London, 1970, page 139
107.Jump up ^ Witherington, III, The Paul Quest, InterVarsity Press, 2001, page 140
108.Jump up ^ See also 1Cor7:29-31, 15:51-54 andRomans 13:12
109.Jump up ^ New Jerusalem Bible, Standard Edition published 1985, introductions and notes are a translation of those that appear in La Bible de Jerusalem—revised edition 1973, Bombay 2002; footnote to 1 Thessalonians 4:15: "Paul includes himself among those who will be present at the parousia: more by aspiration, however, than by conviction."
110.Jump up ^ Einstein: "The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish."
111.Jump up ^ Brandt, Eric T., and Timothy Larsen (2011). "The Old Atheism Revisited: Robert G. Ingersoll and the Bible". Journal of the Historical Society 11 (2): 211–238. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5923.2011.00330.x.
Further reading[edit]
##The Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy, by C. Dennis McKinsey (Prometheus Books 1995)
##The Historical Evidence for Jesus, by G.A. Wells (Prometheus Books 1988)
##The Bible unearthed, by I. Finkelstein and N. Asherman (Touchstone 2001)
##David and Solomon, by I. Finkelstein and N. Asherman (Freepress 2006)
##The Jesus Mysteries, by T. Freke and P. Gandy (Element 1999)
##The Jesus Puzzle, by Earl Doherty (Age of Reason Publications 1999)
##Not the Impossible Faith, by R. Carrier (Lulu 2009)
##BC The archaeology of the Bible lands, by Magnus Magnusson (Bodley Head 1977)
##godless, by Dan Barker (Ulysses Press 2008)
##Why I became an Atheist, by John W. Loftus (Prometheus books 2008)
##The greatest show on earth, by Richard Dawkins (Blackswan 2007)
##The god delusion, by Richard Dawkins (Blackswan 2010)
##101 myths of the Bible by Gary Greenberg (Sourcebooks 2000)
##Secret origins of the Bible by Tim Callahan (Millennium Press 2002)
##The Origins of Biblical Monotheism by Mark S. Smith (Oxford University Press 2001)
External links[edit]
 Wikiquote has quotations related to: Criticism of the Bible
##Bible Research —The Gender-Neutral Bible Controversy
##Introduction to the Bible and Biblical Problems, Internet Infidels website
##Examination of the Prophecies —Examination of the Old Testament Prophecies of Jesus by Thomas Paine


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Criticism of religion


































































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
The Bible and history











Bible.malmesbury.arp.jpg


























  


Categories: Criticism of the Bible
Criticism of Judaism










Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Deutsch
فارسی
עברית
Magyar
日本語
Português
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Svenska
Edit links
This page was last modified on 17 March 2015, at 17:34.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Bible










Historical Jesus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search




 In the 21st century, the third quest for the historical Jesus witnessed a fragmentation of the scholarly portraits of Jesus after which no unified picture of Jesus could be attained at all.[1][2]
The term "historical Jesus" refers to attempts to "reconstruct the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth by critical historical methods", in "contrast to Christological definitions ('the dogmatic Christ') and other Christian accounts of Jesus ('the Christ of faith')".[3] It also considers the historical and cultural context in which Jesus lived.[4][5][6]
Virtually all scholars who write on the subject accept that Jesus existed,[7][8][9][10] although scholars differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the accounts of his life, and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.[11][12][13][14] Historical Jesus scholars typically contend that he was a Galilean Jew living in a time of messianic and apocalyptic expectations.[15][16] Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist, whose example he may have followed, and after John was executed, began his own preaching in Galilee for only about two to three years prior to his death. He preached the salvation, cleansing from sins, and the Kingdom of God, using parables with startling imagery, and was said to be a teacher and a faith healer.[17] Some scholars credit the apocalyptic declarations of the Gospels to him, while others portray his Kingdom of God as a moral one, and not apocalyptic in nature.[18] He sent his apostles out to heal and to preach the Kingdom of God.[19] Later, he traveled to Jerusalem in Judea, where he caused a disturbance at the Temple.[15] It was the time of Passover, when political and religious tensions were high in Jerusalem.[15] The Gospels say that the temple guards (believed to be Sadducees) arrested him and turned him over to Pontius Pilate for execution. The movement he had started survived his death and was carried on by his brother James the Just and the apostles who proclaimed the resurrection of Jesus.[20] It developed into Early Christianity (see also List of events in early Christianity).
Since the 18th century, three separate scholarly quests for the historical Jesus have taken place, each with distinct characteristics and developing new and different research criteria.[21][22] The portraits of Jesus that have been constructed in these processes have often differed from each other, and from the dogmatic image portrayed in the gospel accounts.[1] These portraits include that of Jesus as an apocalyptic prophet, charismatic healer, Cynic philosopher, Jewish Messiah and prophet of social change,[23][24] but there is little scholarly agreement on a single portrait, or the methods needed to construct it.[1][2][25] There are, however, overlapping attributes among the various portraits, and scholars who differ on some attributes may agree on others.[23][24][26]
A number of scholars have criticized the various approaches used in the study of the historical Jesus—on one hand for the lack of rigor in research methods, on the other for being driven by "specific agendas" that interpret ancient sources to fit specific goals.[27][28][29] By the 21st century the "maximalist" approaches of the 19th century which accepted all the gospels and the "minimalist" trends of the early 20th century which totally rejected them were abandoned and scholars began to focus on what is historically probable and plausible about Jesus.[30][31][32]
Part of a series on
Jesus

Jesus in Christianity[show]


























Jesus in Islam[show]










Background[show]





Jesus in history[show]










Perspectives on Jesus[show]












Jesus in culture[show]




Portal icon Christianity portal
Portal icon Islam portal

v ·
 t ·
 e
   


Contents  [hide]
1 Historical elements 1.1 Existence 1.1.1 Evidence of Jesus
1.2 Portraits of the historical Jesus
2 Ministry of Jesus 2.1 Works and miracles
2.2 Jesus as divine 2.2.1 Messiah
2.2.2 Son of God
2.2.3 Son of Man
2.2.4 Other depictions
2.3 Jesus and John the Baptist
2.4 Ministry and teachings 2.4.1 Length of ministry
2.4.2 Parables and paradoxes
2.4.3 Eschatology
2.4.4 Laconic sage
2.4.5 Table fellowship
2.4.6 Disciples
2.4.7 Asceticism
2.5 Jerusalem 2.5.1 Entrance to Jerusalem
2.5.2 Temple disturbance
2.6 Crucifixion
2.7 Burial and Empty Tomb
2.8 Resurrection appearances
3 Methods of research
4 Criticism of Jesus research methods 4.1 Theological bias
4.2 Lack of methodological soundness
4.3 Scarcity of sources
4.4 Myth theory
5 See also
6 Notes
7 References
8 External links

Historical elements[edit]
Existence[edit]
Most contemporary scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his nonexistence as effectively refuted.[7][9][10][33][34][35] We have no indication that writers in antiquity who opposed Christianity questioned the existence of Jesus.[36][37] There is, however, widespread disagreement among scholars on the details of the life of Jesus mentioned in the gospel narratives, and on the meaning of his teachings.[14] Scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the biblical accounts of Jesus,[14] and historians tend to look upon supernatural or miraculous claims about Jesus as questions of faith, rather than historical fact.[38]
Evidence of Jesus[edit]
Main articles: Historical reliability of the Gospels, Sources for the historicity of Jesus, Josephus on Jesus and Tacitus on Christ
There is no physical or archeological evidence for Jesus, and all the sources we have are documentary. The sources for the historical Jesus are mainly Christian writings, such as the gospels and the purported letters of the apostles. The authenticity and reliability of these sources has been questioned by many scholars, and few events mentioned in the gospels are universally accepted.[39]
In conjunction with biblical sources, three mentions of Jesus in non-Christian sources have been used in the historical analyses of the existence of Jesus.[40] These are two passages in the writings of the Jewish historian Josephus, and one from the Roman historian Tacitus.[40][41]
Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews, written around 93–94 AD, includes two references to the biblical Jesus Christ in Books 18 and 20. The general scholarly view is that while the longer passage, known as the Testimonium Flavianum, is most likely not authentic in its entirety, it is broadly agreed upon that it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus, which was then subject to Christian interpolation or forgery.[42][43] Of the other mention in Josephus, Josephus scholar Louis H. Feldman has stated that "few have doubted the genuineness" of Josephus' reference to Jesus in Antiquities 20, 9, 1 and it is only disputed by a small number of scholars.[44][45][46][47]
Roman historian Tacitus referred to Christus and his execution by Pontius Pilate in his Annals (written ca. AD 116), book 15, chapter 44.[48] Robert E. Van Voorst states that the very negative tone of Tacitus' comments on Christians make the passage extremely unlikely to have been forged by a Christian scribe[49] and Boyd and Eddy state that the Tacitus reference is now widely accepted as an independent confirmation of Christ's crucifixion,[50] although some scholars question the authenticity of the passage on various different grounds.[49][51][52][53][54][55][55][56][57]
Other considerations outside Christendom are the possible mentions of Jesus in the Talmud. The Talmud speaks in some detail of the conduct of criminal cases of Israel and gathered in one place from 200-500 C.E. "On the eve of the Passover Yeshua was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostacy." The first date of the Sanhedrin judiciary council being recorded as functioning is 57 B.C.E.[58]
Portraits of the historical Jesus[edit]
Main articles: Portraits of the historical Jesus and Quest for the historical Jesus
Since the 18th century, three separate scholarly quests for the historical Jesus have taken place, each with distinct characteristics and developing new and different research criteria.[21][22] The portraits of Jesus that have been constructed in these processes have often differed from each other, and from the dogmatic image portrayed in the gospel accounts.[1] These portraits include that of Jesus as an apocalyptic prophet, charismatic healer, Cynic philosopher, Jewish Messiah and prophet of social change,[23][24] but there is little scholarly agreement on a single portrait, or the methods needed to construct it.[1][2][25] There are, however, overlapping attributes among the various portraits, and scholars who differ on some attributes may agree on others.[23][24][26]
Contemporary scholarship, representing the "third quest," places Jesus firmly in the Jewish tradition.[59] Leading scholars in the "third quest" include E. P. Sanders, Geza Vermes, Gerd Theissen, Christoph Burchard, and John Dominic Crossan.[59] Jesus is seen as the founder of, in the words of E. P. Sanders, a '"renewal movement within Judaism."[59] This scholarship suggests a continuity between Jesus' life as a wandering charismatic and the same lifestyle carried forward by followers after his death.[59] The main criterion used to discern historical details in the "third quest" is the criterion of plausibility, relative to Jesus' Jewish context and to his influence on Christianity.[59] The main disagreement in contemporary research is whether Jesus was apocalyptic.[59] Most scholars conclude that he was an apocalyptic preacher, like John the Baptist and the apostle Paul.[59] In contrast, certain prominent North American scholars, such as Burton Mack and John Dominic Crossan, advocate for a non-eschatological Jesus, one who is more of a Cynic sage than an apocalyptic preacher.[59]
Ministry of Jesus[edit]
Works and miracles[edit]



 Early Christian image of the Good Shepherd. Fourth century.
Jesus is said to have performed various miracles in the course of his ministry. These mostly consist of miraculous healing, exorcisms and dominion over other things in nature besides people.
As Albert Schweitzer showed in his Quest of the Historical Jesus, in the early 19th century, debate about the "Historical Jesus" centered on the credibility of the miracle reports. Early 19th century scholars offered three types of explanation for these miracle stories: they were regarded as supernatural events, or were "rationalized" (e.g. by Paulus), or were regarded as mythical (e.g. by Strauss).[citation needed]
Scholars in both Christian and secular traditions continue to debate how the reports of Jesus' miracles should be construed. The Christian Gospels states that Jesus has God's authoritarian power over nature, life and death, but naturalistic historians, following Strauss, generally choose either to see these stories as legend or allegory, or, for some of the miracles they follow the rationalizing method. For example, the healings and exorcisms are sometimes attributed to the placebo effect.[citation needed]
Jesus as divine[edit]
Jesus was a charismatic preacher who taught the principles of salvation, everlasting life, and the Kingdom of God.[18] Scholars see him as accepting a divine role in the approaching apocalypse as the divine king.[60] Jesus' use of three important terms: Messiah, Son of God, and Son of Man, reveals his understanding of his divine role.[18][60]
Messiah[edit]
Main article: Messiah
In the Hebrew Bible, three classes of people are identified as "anointed," that is, "Messiahs": prophets, priests, and kings.[60] In Jesus' time, the term Messiah was used in different ways, and no one can be sure how Jesus would even have meant it if he had accepted the term.[60] Though Messianic expectations in general centered on the King Messiah, the Essenes expected both a kingly and a priestly figure in their eschatology.[citation needed]
The Jews of Jesus' time waited expectantly for a divine redeemer who would restore Israel, which suffered under Roman rule. John the Baptist was apparently waiting for one greater than himself, an apocalyptic figure.[61] Christian scripture and faith acclaim Jesus as this "Messiah" ("anointed one," "Christ").
Son of God[edit]
Main article: Son of God
Paul describes God as declaring Jesus to be the Son of God by raising him from the dead, and Sanders argues Mark portrays God as adopting Jesus as his son at his baptism,[60] although many others do not accept this interpretation of Mark.[62] Sanders argues that for Jesus to be hailed as the Son of God does not mean that he is literally God's offspring.[60] Rather, it indicates a very high designation, one who stands in a special relation to God.[60]
In the synoptic Gospels, the being of Jesus as "Son of God" corresponds exactly to the typical Hasidean from Galilee, a "pious" holy man that by God's intervention performs miracles and exorcisms.[63][64]
Son of Man[edit]
Main article: Son of Man
The most literal translation here is "Son of Humanity", or "human being". Jesus uses "Son of Man" to mean sometimes "I" or a mortal in general, sometimes a divine figure destined to suffer, and sometimes a heavenly figure of judgment soon to arrive. Jesus usage of son of man in the first way is historical but without divine claim. The Son of Man as one destined to suffer seems to be, according to some, a Christian invention that does not go back to Jesus, and it is not clear whether Jesus meant himself when he spoke of the divine judge.[60] These three uses do not appear together, such as the Son of Man who suffers and returns.[60] Others maintain, that Jesus' use of this phrase, illustrates Jesus' self understanding as the divine representative of God.[65]
Other depictions[edit]
The title Logos, identifying Jesus as the divine word, first appears in the Gospel of John, written c. 90-100.[66]
Raymond E. Brown concluded that the earliest Christians did not call Jesus, "God".[67] New Testament scholars broadly agree that Jesus did not make any implicit claims to be God.[68] See also Divinity of Jesus and Nontrinitarianism.
Pinchas Lapide sees Jesus as a rabbi in the Hasid tradition of Hillel the Elder, Yochanan ben Zakai and Hanina Ben Dosa.[citation needed]
The gospels and Christian tradition depict Jesus as being executed at the insistence of Jewish leaders, who considered his claims to divinity to be blasphemous, see also Responsibility for the death of Jesus. Historically, Jesus seems instead to have been executed as a potential source of unrest.[18][69][70]
Jesus and John the Baptist[edit]
Main article: John the Baptist



 Judean hills of Israel
Jesus began preaching, teaching, and healing after he was baptized by John the Baptist, an apocalyptic ascetic preacher who called on Jews to repent.
Jesus was apparently a follower of John, a populist and activist prophet who looked forward to divine deliverance of the Jewish homeland from the Romans.[71] John was a major religious figure, whose movement was probably larger than Jesus' own.[72] Herod Antipas had John executed as a threat to his power.[72] In a saying thought to have been originally recorded in Q,[73] the historical Jesus defended John shortly after John's death.[74]
John's followers formed a movement that continued after his death alongside Jesus' own following.[72] John's followers apparently believed that John might have risen from the dead,[75][dubious – discuss] an expectation that may have influenced the expectations of Jesus' followers after his own execution.[72] Some of Jesus' followers were former followers of John the Baptist.[72] Fasting and baptism, elements of John's preaching, may have entered early Christian practice as John's followers joined the movement.[72]
John Dominic Crossan portrays Jesus as rejecting John's apocalyptic eschatology in favor of a sapiential eschatology, in which cultural transformation results from humans' own actions, rather than from God's intervention.[19]
Historians consider Jesus' baptism by John to be historical, an event that early Christians would not have included in their Gospels in the absence of a "firm report".[76] Like Jesus, John and his execution are mentioned by Josephus.[72]
John the Baptist's prominence in both the Gospels and Josephus suggests that he may have been more popular than Jesus in his lifetime; also, Jesus' mission does not begin until after his baptism by John. Fredriksen suggests that it was only after Jesus' death that Jesus emerged as more influential than John. Accordingly, the Gospels project Jesus's posthumous importance back to his lifetime. One way Fredriksen believes this was accomplished was by minimizing John's importance by having John resist baptizing Jesus (Matthew), by referring to the baptism in passing (Luke), or by asserting Jesus's superiority (John).[citation needed]
Scholars posit that Jesus may have been a direct follower in John the Baptist's movement. Prominent Historical Jesus scholar John Dominic Crossan suggests that John the Baptist may have been killed for political reasons, not necessarily the personal grudge given in Mark's gospel.[77] Going into the desert and baptising in the Jordan suggests that John and his followers were purifying themselves for what they believed was God's imminent deliverance. This was reminiscent of such a crossing of the Jordan after the Exodus (see Book of Joshua), leading into the promised land of their deliverance from oppression. Jesus' teachings would later diverge from John's apocalyptic vision (though it depends which scholarly view is adopted; according to Ehrman or Sanders apocalyptic vision was the core of Jesus' teaching) which warned of "the wrath to come," as "the axe is laid to the root of the trees" and those who do not bear "good fruit" are "cut down and thrown into the fire." (Luke 3:7-9) Though John's teachings remained visible in those of Jesus, Jesus would emphasize the Kingdom of God not as imminent, but as already present and manifest through the movement's communal commitment to a relationship of equality among all members, and living by the laws of divine justice.[citation needed] All four Gospels agree that Jesus was crucified at the requested of the Jewish Sanhedrin by Pontius Pilate.[citation needed] Crucifixion was the penalty for criminals, robbers, traitors, and political insurrection, used as a symbol of Rome's absolute authority - those who stood against Rome were utterly annihilated.[citation needed]
Ministry and teachings[edit]
Main article: Ministry of Jesus
The synoptic Gospels agree that Jesus grew up in Nazareth, went to the River Jordan to meet and be baptised by the prophet John (Yohannan) the Baptist, and shortly after began healing and preaching to villagers and fishermen around the Sea of Galilee (which is actually a freshwater lake). Although there were many Phoenician, Hellenistic, and Roman cities nearby (e.g. Gesara and Gadara; Sidon and Tyre; Sepphoris and Tiberias), there is only one account of Jesus healing someone in the region of the Gadarenes found in the three synoptic Gospels (the demon called Legion), and another when he healed a Syro-Phoenician girl in the vicinity of Tyre and Sidon.[78] Otherwise, there is no record of Jesus having spent any significant amount of time in Gentile towns.[citation needed] The center of his work was Capernaum, a small town (about 500 by 350 meters, with a population of 1,500-2,000) where, according to the Gospels, he appeared at the town's synagogue (a non-sacred meeting house where Jews would often gather on the Sabbath to study the Torah), healed a paralytic, and continued seeking disciples.[citation needed]
Once Jesus established a following (although there are debates over the number of followers), he moved towards the Davidic capital of the United Monarchy, the city of Jerusalem.
Length of ministry[edit]
Historians do not know how long Jesus preached. The synoptic Gospels suggest a period of up to one year.[79] The Gospel of John mentions three Passovers,[80] Jesus' ministry is traditionally said to have been three years long.[81][82] In the view of Paul N. Anderson, John's presentation is more plausible historically than that of the Synoptics.[83]
Parables and paradoxes[edit]
Main article: Parables of Jesus
Jesus taught in parables and aphorisms. A parable is a figurative image with a single message (sometimes mistaken for an analogy, in which each element has a metaphoric meaning). An aphorism is a short, memorable turn of phrase. In Jesus' case, aphorisms often involve some paradox or reversal. Authentic parables probably include the Good Samaritan and the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard. Authentic aphorisms include "turn the other cheek", "go the second mile", and "love your enemies".
Crossan writes that Jesus' parables worked on multiple levels at the same time, provoking discussions with his peasant audience.[19]
Jesus' parables and aphorisms circulated orally among his followers for years before they were written down and later incorporated into the Gospels. They represent the earliest Christian traditions about Jesus.[70]
Eschatology[edit]
Jesus preached mainly about the Kingdom of God. Scholars are divided over whether he was referring to an imminent apocalyptic event or the transformation of everyday life.
A great many - if not a majority - of critical Biblical scholars, going as far back as Albert Schweitzer, hold that Jesus believed that the end of history was coming within his own lifetime or within the lifetime of his contemporaries.[84]
The evidence for this thesis comes from several verses, including the following:
In Mark 8:38-9:1, Jesus says that the Son of Man will come "in the glory of the Father with the holy angels" during "this adulterous generation." Indeed, he says, "there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see that the Kingdom of God has come in power."
In Luke 21:35-36, Jesus urges constant, unremitting preparedness on the part of his followers in light of the imminence of the end of history and the final intervention of God. "Be alert at all times, praying to have strength to flee from all these things that are about to take place and to stand in the presence of the Son of Man."
In Mark 13:24-27, 30, Jesus describes what will happen when the end comes, saying that "the sun will grow dark and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will be falling from heaven, and ... they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds with great power and glory." He gives a timeline for this event: "Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away before all these things take place."
The Apostle Paul also seems to have shared this expectation. Toward the end of 1 Corinthians 7, he counsels Christians to avoid getting married if they can since the end of history was imminent. Speaking to the unmarried, he writes, "I think that, in view of the impending crisis, it is well for you to remain as your are." "I mean, brothers and sisters, the appointed time has grown short ... For the present form of this world is passing away." (1 Corinthians 7:26, 29, 31) In 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17, Paul also seems to believe that he will live to witness the return of Jesus and the end of history.
According to Geza Vermes, Jesus' announcement of the imminent arrival of the Kingdom of God "was patently not fulfilled" and "created a serious embarrassment for the primitive church".[85] According to E.P. Sanders, these eschatological sayings of Jesus are "passages that many Christian scholars would like to see vanish" as "the events they predict did not come to pass, which means that Jesus was wrong."[86]
Robert W. Funk and colleagues, on the other hand, wrote that beginning in the 1970s, some scholars have come to reject the view of Jesus as eschatological, pointing out that he rejected the asceticism of John the Baptist and his eschatological message. In this view, the Kingdom of God is not a future state, but rather a contemporary, mysterious presence. John Dominic Crossan describes Jesus' eschatology as based on establishing a new, holy way of life rather than on God's redeeming intervention in history.[19]
Evidence for the Kingdom of God as already present derives from these verses.[87]
In Luke 17:20-21, Jesus says that one won't be able to observe God's Kingdom arriving, and that it "is right there in your presence."
In Thomas 113, Jesus says that God's Kingdom "is spread out upon the earth, and people don't see it."
In Luke 11:20, Jesus says that if he drives out demons by God's finger then "for you" the Kingdom of God has arrived.
Furthermore, the major parables of Jesus do not reflect an apocalyptic view of history.
The Jesus Seminar concludes that apocalyptic statements attributed to Jesus could have originated from early Christians, as apocalyptic ideas were common, but the statements about God's Kingdom being mysteriously present cut against the common view and could have originated only with Jesus himself.[87]
Laconic sage[edit]
The sage of the ancient Near East was a self-effacing man of few words who did not provoke encounters.[88] A holy man offers cures and exorcisms only when petitioned, and even then may be reluctant.[88] Jesus seems to have displayed a similar style.[88]
The Gospels present Jesus engaging in frequent "question and answer" religious debates with Pharisees and Sadducees. The Jesus Seminar believes the debates about scripture and doctrine are rabbinic in style and not characteristic of Jesus.[89] They believe these "conflict stories" represent the conflicts between the early Christian community and those around them: the Pharisees, Sadducees, etc. The group believes these sometimes include genuine sayings or concepts but are largely the product of the early Christian community.
Table fellowship[edit]
Open table fellowship with outsiders was central to Jesus' ministry.[19] His practice of eating with the lowly people that he healed defied the expectations of traditional Jewish society.[19] He presumably taught at the meal, as would be expected in a symposium.[70] His conduct caused enough of a scandal that he was accused of being a glutton and a drunk.[70]
John Dominic Crossan identifies this table practice as part of Jesus' radical egalitarian program.[19] The importance of table fellowship is seen in the prevalence of meal scenes in early Christian art[19] and in the Eucharist, the Christian ritual of bread and wine.[70]
Disciples[edit]
Main article: Disciple (Christianity)
Jesus recruited twelve Galilean peasants as his inner circle, including several fishermen.[90] The fishermen in question and the tax collector Matthew would have business dealings requiring some knowledge of Greek.[91] The father of two of the fishermen is represented as having the means to hire labourers for his fishing business, and tax collectors were seen as exploiters.[92] The twelve were expected to rule the twelve tribes of Israel in the Kingdom of God.[90]
The disciples of Jesus play a large role in the search for the historical Jesus. However, the four Gospels, use different words to apply to Jesus' followers. The Greek word "ochloi" refers to the crowds who gathered around Jesus as he preached. The word "mathetes" refers to the followers who stuck around for more teaching. The word "apostolos" refers to the twelve disciples, or apostles, whom Jesus chose specifically to be his close followers. With these three categories of followers, Meier uses a model of concentric circles around Jesus, with an inner circle of true disciples, a larger circle of followers, and an even larger circle of those who gathered to listen to him.
Jesus controversially accepted women and sinners (those who violated purity laws) among his followers. Even though women were never directly called "disciples", certain passages in the Gospels seem to indicate that women followers of Jesus were equivalent to the disciples. It was possible for members of the "ochloi" to cross over into the "mathetes" category. However, Meier argues that some people from the "mathetes" category actually crossed into the "apostolos" category, namely Mary Magdalene. The narration of Jesus' death and the events that accompany it mention the presence of women. Meier states that the pivotal role of the women at the cross is revealed in the subsequent narrative, where at least some of the women, notably Mary Magdalene, witnessed both the burial of Jesus (Mark 15:47) and discovered the empty tomb (Mark 16:1-8). Luke also mentions that as Jesus and the Twelve were travelling from city to city preaching the "good news", they were accompanied by women, who provided for them out of their own means. We can conclude that women did follow Jesus a considerable length of time during his Galilean ministry and his last journey to Jerusalem. Such a devoted, long-term following could not occur without the initiative or active acceptance of the women who followed him. However, most scholars would argue that it is unreasonable to say that Mary Magdalene's seemingly close relationship with Jesus suggests that she was a disciple of Jesus or one of the Twelve.[citation needed] In name, the women are not historically considered "disciples" of Jesus, but the fact that he allowed them to follow and serve him proves that they were to some extent treated as disciples.
The Gospels recount Jesus commissioning disciples to spread the word, sometimes during his life (e.g., Mark 6:7-12) and sometimes during a resurrection appearance (e.g., Matthew 28:18-20). These accounts reflect early Christian practice as well as Jesus' original instructions, though some scholars contend that historical Jesus issued no such missionary commission.[93]
According to John Dominic Crossan, Jesus sent his disciples out to heal and to proclaim the Kingdom of God. They were to eat with those they healed rather than with higher status people who might well be honored to host a healer, and Jesus directed them to eat whatever was offered them. This implicit challenge to the social hierarchy was part of Jesus' program of radical egalitarianism. These themes of healing and eating are common in early Christian art.[19]
Jesus' instructions to the missionaries appear in the synoptic Gospels and in the Gospel of Thomas.[19] These instructions are distinct from the commission that the resurrected Jesus gives to his followers, the Great Commission, text rated as black (inauthentic) by the Jesus Seminar.[94]
Asceticism[edit]
See also: Evangelical counsels
The fellows of the Jesus Seminar mostly held that Jesus was not an ascetic, and that he probably drank wine and did not fast, other than as all observant Jews did.[95] He did, however, promote a simple life and the renunciation of wealth.
Jesus said that some made themselves "eunuchs" for the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 19:12). This aphorism might have been meant to establish solidarity with eunuchs, who were considered "incomplete" in Jewish society.[96] Alternatively, he may have been promoting celibacy.
Some[who?] suggest that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, or that he probably had a special relationship with her,[97] or that he was married to Mary the sister of Lazarus.[citation needed] However, Ehrman notes the conjectural nature of these claims as "not a single one of our ancient sources indicates that Jesus was married, let alone married to Mary Magdalene."[98]
John the Baptist was an ascetic and perhaps a Nazirite, who promoted celibacy like the Essenes.[99] Ascetic elements, such as fasting, appeared in Early Christianity and are mentioned by Matthew during Jesus' discourse on ostentation.
Jerusalem[edit]



 The narrow streets of Via Dolorosa, Jerusalem.
See also: Jerusalem in Christianity
Jesus and his followers left Galilee and traveled to Jerusalem in Judea. They may have traveled through Samaria as reported in John, or around the border of Samaria as reported in Luke, as was common practice for Jews avoiding hostile Samaritans. Jerusalem was packed with Jews who had come for Passover, perhaps comprising 300,000 to 400,000 pilgrims.[100]
Entrance to Jerusalem[edit]
Main article: Palm Sunday
Jesus might have entered Jerusalem on a donkey as a symbolic act, possibly to contrast with the triumphant entry that a Roman conqueror would make, or to enact a prophecy in Zechariah. Christian scripture makes the reference to Zechariah explicit, perhaps because the scene was invented as scribes looked to scripture to help them flesh out the details of the gospel narratives.[70]
Temple disturbance[edit]
Main article: Jesus and the Money Changers
Jesus taught in Jerusalem, and he caused a disturbance at the Temple.[70] In response, the temple authorities arrested him and turned him over to the Roman authorities for execution.[70] He might have been betrayed into the hands of the temple police, but Funk suggests the authorities might have arrested him with no need for a traitor.[70]
Crucifixion[edit]



Antonio Ciseri's 1862 depiction of Ecce Homo, as Pontius Pilate delivers Jesus to the crowd
Jesus was crucified by Pontius Pilate, the Prefect of Iudaea province (26 AD to 36 AD). Some scholars suggest that Pilate executed Jesus as a public nuisance, perhaps with the cooperation of the Jewish authorities.[70] E. P. Sanders argued that the cleansing of the Temple was an act that seriously offended his Jewish audience and eventually led to his death,[101][102][103] while Bart D. Ehrman argued that Jesus' actions would have been considered treasonous and thus a capital offense by the Romans.[104] The claim that the Sadducee high-priestly leaders and their associates handed Jesus over to the Romans is strongly attested.[69] Historians debate whether Jesus intended to be crucified.[105]
The Jesus Seminar argued that Christian scribes seem to have drawn on scripture in order to flesh out the passion narrative, such as inventing Jesus' trial.[70] However, scholars are split on the historicity of the underlying events.[106]
John Dominic Crossan points to the use of the word "kingdom" in his central teachings of the "Kingdom of God," which alone would have brought Jesus to the attention of Roman authority. Rome dealt with Jesus as it commonly did with essentially non-violent dissension: the killing of its leader. It was usually violent uprisings such as those during the Roman-Jewish Wars that warranted the slaughter of leader and followers. As the balance shifted in the early Church from the Jewish community to Gentile converts, it may have sought to distance itself from rebellious Jews (those who rose up against the Roman occupation). There was also a schism developing within the Jewish community as these believers in Jesus were pushed out of the synagogues after the Roman destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD, see Council of Jamnia. The divergent accounts of Jewish involvement in the trial of Jesus suggest some of the unfavorable sentiments between such Jews that resulted. See also List of events in early Christianity.



Pietro Perugino, Crucifixion of Christ, 1494-1496, Florence
Aside from the fact that the Gospels provide different accounts of the Jewish role in Jesus's death (for example, Mark and Matthew report two separate trials, Luke one, and John none), Fredriksen, like other scholars (see Catchpole 1971) argues that many elements of the gospel accounts could not possibly have happened: according to Jewish law, the court could not meet at night; it could not meet on a major holiday; Jesus's statements to the Sanhedrin or the High Priest (e.g. that he was the messiah) did not constitute blasphemy; the charges that the Gospels purport the Jews to have made against Jesus were not capital crimes against Jewish law; even if Jesus had been accused and found guilty of a capital offense by the Sanhedrin, the punishment would have been death by stoning (the fates of Saint Stephen and James the Just for example) and not crucifixion. This necessarily assumes that the Jewish leaders were scrupulously obedient to Roman law, and never broke their own laws, customs or traditions even for their own advantage. In response, it has been argued that the legal circumstances surrounding the trial have not been well understood,[107] and that Jewish leaders were not always strictly obedient, either to Roman law or to their own.[108] Furthermore, talk of a restoration of the Jewish monarchy was seditious under Roman occupation. Further, Jesus would have entered Jerusalem at an especially risky time, during Passover, when popular emotions were running high. Although most Jews did not have the means to travel to Jerusalem for every holiday, virtually all tried to comply with these laws as best they could. And during these festivals, such as the Passover, the population of Jerusalem would swell, and outbreaks of violence were common. Scholars suggest that the High Priest feared that Jesus' talk of an imminent restoration of an independent Jewish state might spark a riot. Maintaining the peace was one of the primary jobs of the Roman-appointed High Priest, who was personally responsible to them for any major outbreak. Scholars therefore argue that he would have arrested Jesus for promoting sedition and rebellion, and turned him over to the Romans for punishment.

Both the gospel accounts and [the] Pauline interpolation [found at 1 Thes 2:14-16] were composed in the period immediately following the terrible war of 66-73. The Church had every reason to assure prospective Gentile audiences that the Christian movement neither threatened nor challenged imperial sovereignty, despite the fact that their founder had himself been crucified, that is, executed as a rebel.[109]
However, Paul's preaching of the Gospel and its radical social practices were by their very definition a direct affront to the social hierarchy of Greco-Roman society itself, and thus these new teachings undermined the Empire, ultimately leading to full scale Roman persecution of Christians aimed at stamping out the new faith.
Burial and Empty Tomb[edit]
Some scholars are split on whether Jesus was buried. Craig A. Evans contends that, "the literary, historical and archaeological evidence points in one direction: that the body of Jesus was placed in a tomb, according to Jewish custom."[110] John Dominic Crossan, based on his unique position that the Gospel of Peter contains the oldest primary source about Jesus, argued that the burial accounts become progressively extravagant and thus found it historically unlikely that an enemy would release a corpse, contending that Jesus' followers did not have the means to know what happened to Jesus' body.[111] Crossan's position on the Gospel of Peter has not found scholarly support,[112] from Meyer's description of it as "eccentric and implausible",[113] to Koester's critique of it as "seriously flawed".[114] Habermas argued against Crossan, stating that the response of Jewish authorities against Christian claims for the resurrection presupposed a burial and empty tomb,[115] and he observed the discovery of the body of Yohanan Ben Ha'galgol, a man who died by crucifixion in the first century and was discovered at a burial site outside ancient Jerusalem in an ossuary, arguing that this find revealed important facts about crucifixion and burial in first century Palestine.[116] Other scholars consider the burial by Joseph of Arimathea found in Mark 15 to be historically probable,[117] and some have gone on to argue that the tomb was thereafter discovered empty.[118] More positively, Mark Waterman maintains the Empty Tomb priority over the Appearances.[119] Michael Grant wrote:

[I]f we apply the same sort of criteria that we would apply to any other ancient literary sources, then the evidence is firm and plausible enough to necessitate the conclusion that the tomb was indeed found empty.[120]
However, Marcus Borg notes:

the first reference to the empty tomb story is rather odd: Mark, writing around 70 CE, tells us that some women found the tomb empty but told no one about it. Some scholars think this indicates that the story of the empty tomb is a late development and that the way Mark tells it explains why it was not widely (or previously) known[121]
Likewise, scholars Gerd Theissen and Annette Merz conclude that "the empty tomb can only be illuminated by the Easter faith (which is based on appearances); the Easter faith cannot be illuminated by the empty tomb."[122]
Resurrection appearances[edit]
Main article: Resurrection appearances of Jesus



The Incredulity of Saint Thomas by Caravaggio (16th century), depicts the resurrected Jesus.
Peter, Paul, and Mary apparently had visionary experiences of a risen Jesus.[70] Paul recorded his vision in an epistle and lists other reported appearances. The original Mark reports Jesus' empty tomb, and the later Gospels and later endings to Mark narrate various resurrection appearances.
The two oldest manuscripts (4th century) of Mark, the earliest Gospel, break off at 16:8 stating that the women came and found an empty tomb "and they said nothing to anyone because they were afraid". (Mk 16:8) The passages stating that he had been seen by Mary Magdelene and the eleven disciples (Mk 16:9-20) were added only later, and the hypothetical original ending was lost. Scholars have put forth a number of theories concerning the resurrection appearances of Jesus. The Jesus Seminar concluded: "In the view of the Seminar, he did not rise bodily from the dead; the resurrection is based instead on visionary experiences of Peter, Paul, and Mary."[123] E.P. Sanders argues for the difficulty of accusing the early witnesses of any deliberate fraud:

It is difficult to accuse these sources, or the first believers, of deliberate fraud. A plot to foster belief in the Resurrection would probably have resulted in a more consistent story. Instead, there seems to have been a competition: 'I saw him,' 'so did I,' 'the women saw him first,' 'no, I did; they didn't see him at all,' and so on. Moreover, some of the witnesses of the Resurrection would give their lives for their belief. This also makes fraud unlikely.[124]
Most scholars believe supernatural events cannot be reconstructed using empirical methods, and thus consider the resurrection a non-historical question but instead a philosophical or theological question.[125]
Methods of research[edit]
See also: Quest for the historical Jesus



Albert Schweitzer, whose book coined the term Quest for the historical Jesus
In the early church, there were already tendencies to portray Jesus as a verifiable demonstration of the extraordinary.[126][127] Since the 18th century, scholars have taken part in three separate "quests" for the historical Jesus, attempting to reconstruct various portraits of his life using historical methods.[21][128] While textual criticism (or lower criticism) had been practiced for centuries, a number of approaches to historical analysis and a number of criteria for evaluating the historicity of events emerged as of the 18th century, as a series of "Quests for the historical Jesus" took place. At each stage of development, scholars suggested specific forms and methodologies of analysis and specific criteria to be used to determine historical validity.[129]
The first Quest, which started in 1778, was almost entirely based on biblical criticism. This was supplemented with form criticism in 1919 and redaction criticism in 1948.[129] Form criticism began as an attempt to trace the history of the biblical material before it was written down, and may thus be seen as starting when textual criticism ends.[130] Form criticism looks for patterns within units of biblical text and attempts to trace their origin based on the patterns.[130] Redaction criticism may be viewed as the child of text criticism and form criticism.[131] This approach views an author as a "redactor" i.e. someone preparing a report, and tries to understand how the redactor(s) has molded the narrative to express their own perspectives.[131]
At the end of the first Quest (c. 1906) the criterion for multiple attestation was used and was the major additional element up to 1950s.[129] The concept behind multiple attestation is simple: as the number of independent sources that vouch for an event increases, confidence in the historical authenticity of the event rises.[129]
Other criteria were being developed at the same time, e.g. "double dissimilarity" in 1913, "least distinctiveness" in 1919 and "coherence and consistency" in 1921.[129] The criterion of double dissimilarity views a reported saying or action of Jesus as possibly authentic, if it is dissimilar from both the Judaism of his time and also from the traditions of the early Christianity that immediately followed him.[132] The least distinctiveness criterion relies on the assumption that when stories are passed from person to person, the peripheral, least distinct elements may be distorted, but the central element remains unchanged.[133] The criterion of "coherence and consistency" states that material can be used only when other material has been identified as authentic to corroborate it.[129]
The second Quest was launched in 1953, and along with it the criterion of embarrassment was introduced.[129] This criterion states that a group is unlikely to invent a story that would be embarrassing to themselves.[129] The criterion of "historical plausibility" was introduced in 1997, after the start of the third Quest in 1988.[129] This principle analyzes the plausibility of an event in two separate components: contextual plausibility and consequential plausibility, i.e. the historical context needs to be suitable, as well as the consequences.[129]
A new characteristic of the modern aspects of the third quest has been the role of archaeology and James Charlesworth states that few modern scholars now want to overlook the archaeological discoveries that clarify the nature of life in Galilee and Judea during the time of Jesus.[134] A further characteristic of the third quest has been its interdisciplinary and global nature of the scholarship.[135] While the first two quests was mostly by European Protestant theologians, the third quest has seen a worldwide influx of scholars from multiple disciplines.[135]
More recently historicists have focussed their attention on the historical writings associated with the period in which Jesus lived[136][137] or on the evidence concerning his family.[138][139][140] The redaction of these documents through early Christian sources till the 3rd or 4th centuries has also been a rich source of new information.
Criticism of Jesus research methods[edit]
A number of scholars have criticised Historical Jesus research for religious bias and lack of methodological soundness, and some have argued that modern biblical scholarship is insufficiently critical and sometimes amounts to covert apologetics.[141][142]
Theological bias[edit]
John Meier, a Catholic priest and a professor of theology at University of Notre Dame, has stated "... I think a lot of the confusion comes from the fact that people claim they are doing a quest for the historical Jesus when de facto they’re doing theology, albeit a theology that is indeed historically informed ..."[143] Meier also wrote that in the past the quest for the historical Jesus has often been motivated more by a desire to produce an alternate Christology than a true historical search.[28]
The British Methodist scholar Clive Marsh[144] has stated that the construction of the portraits of Jesus as part of various quests have often been driven by "specific agendas" and that historical components of the relevant biblical texts are often interpreted to fit specific goals.[29] Marsh lists theological agendas that aim to confirm the divinity of Jesus, anti-ecclesiastical agendas that aim to discredit Christianity and political agendas that aim to interpret the teachings of Jesus with the hope of causing social change.[29][145]
The New Testament scholar Nicholas Perrin has argued that since most biblical scholars are Christians, a certain bias is inevitable, but he does not see this as a major problem.[146][147]
Lack of methodological soundness[edit]
The historical analysis techniques used by biblical scholars have been questioned,[27][28][29] and according to James Dunn it is not possible "to construct (from the available data) a Jesus who will be the real Jesus."[148][149][150]
W.R. Herzog has stated that "What we call the historical Jesus is the composite of the recoverable bits and pieces of historical information and speculation about him that we assemble, construct, and reconstruct. For this reason, the historical Jesus is, in Meier's words, 'a modern abstraction and construct.'"[151]
Donald Akenson, Professor of Irish Studies in the department of history at Queen's University has argued that, with very few exceptions, the historians attempting to reconstruct a biography of the man apart from the mere facts of his existence and crucifixion have not followed sound historical practices. He has stated that there is an unhealthy reliance on consensus, for propositions, which should otherwise be based on primary sources, or rigorous interpretation. He also identifies a peculiar downward dating creep, and holds that some of the criteria being used are faulty. He says that the overwhelming majority of biblical scholars are employed in institutions whose roots are in religious beliefs. Because of this, more than any other group in present day academia, biblical historians are under immense pressure to theologize their historical work. It is only through considerable individual heroism, that many biblical historians have managed to maintain the scholarly integrity of their work.[152][153]
Dale Allison, a Presbyterian theologian and professor of New Testament Exegesis and Early Christianity at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, says, "... We wield our criteria to get what we want ..."[27]
According to James Dunn, "...the 'historical Jesus' is properly speaking a nineteenth- and twentieth-century construction using the data provided by the Synoptic tradition, not Jesus back then and not a figure in history."[154] (Emphasis in the original). Dunn further explains that "the facts are not to be identified as data; they are always an interpretation of the data.[155]
Since Albert Schweitzer's book The Quest of the Historical Jesus, scholars have for long stated that many of the portraits of Jesus are "pale reflections of the researchers" themselves.[23][156][157] Albert Schweitzer accused early scholars of religious bias. John Dominic Crossan summarized the recent situation by stating that many authors writing about the life of Jesus "... do autobiography and call it biography."[23][158]
Scarcity of sources[edit]
Bart Ehrman and separately Andreas Köstenberger contend that given the scarcity of historical sources, it is generally difficult for any scholar to construct a portrait of Jesus that can be considered historically valid beyond the basic elements of his life.[159][160] On the other hand, scholars such as N. T. Wright and Luke Timothy Johnson argue that the image of Jesus presented in the gospels is largely accurate, and that dissenting scholars are simply too cautious about what we can claim to know about the ancient period.[125]
Myth theory[edit]
Main article: Christ myth theory
The Christ myth theory is the proposition that Jesus of Nazareth never existed, or if he did, he had virtually nothing to do with the founding of Christianity and the accounts in the gospels.[161] Many proponents use a three-fold argument first developed in the 19th century: that the New Testament has no historical value, that there are no non-Christian references to Jesus Christ from the first century, and that Christianity had pagan and/or mythical roots.[162]
In recent years, there have been a number of books and documentaries on this subject. Some "mythicists" say that Jesus may have been a real person, but that the biblical accounts of him are almost entirely fictional.[163][164][165]
The scholarly consensus is that the Christ myth theory has been refuted, and that Jesus indeed existed as a historical figure.
See also[edit]
Academic approachBiblical archaeology
Biblical criticism
Biblical manuscript
Census of Quirinius, the enrollment of the Roman provinces of Syria and Judaea for tax purposes taken in the year 6/7.
Criterion of dissimilarity
Criticism of the Bible
Historical background of the New Testament
Historicity of Jesus Sources for the historicity of Jesus
Historicity of the Bible
Jesus Seminar
Christian approachChronology of Jesus
Detailed Christian timeline
Gospel harmony
Life of Jesus in the New Testament
Ministry of Jesus
Associated sitesÆnon
Al Maghtas
Bethabara
New Testament places associated with Jesus
Qasr el Yahud
Notes[edit]
1.^ Jump up to: a b c d e The Quest for the Plausible Jesus: The Question of Criteria by Gerd Theissen and Dagmar Winter (Aug 30, 2002) ISBN 0664225373 page 5
2.^ Jump up to: a b c Jesus Research: An International Perspective (Princeton-Prague Symposia Series on the Historical Jesus) by James H. Charlesworth and Petr Pokorny (Sep 15, 2009) ISBN 0802863531 pages 1-2
3.Jump up ^ The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, edited by Frank Leslie Cross, Elizabeth A. Livingstone, p 779, at http://books.google.co.za/books?id=fUqcAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA779&dq=Historical+Jesus,+Quest+of+the.%22+Oxford+Dictionary+of+the+Christian+Church&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ZPszVN7tN4XEPbyzgMAO&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Historical%20Jesus%2C%20Quest%20of%20the.%22%20Oxford%20Dictionary%20of%20the%20Christian%20Church&f=false
4.Jump up ^ Amy-Jill Levine in the The Historical Jesus in Context edited by Amy-Jill Levine et al. 2006 Princeton Univ Press ISBN 978-0-691-00992-6 pages 1-2
5.Jump up ^ Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium by Bart D. Ehrman (Sep 23, 1999) ISBN 0195124731 Oxford University Press pp. ix-xi
6.Jump up ^ Ehrman, Bart. The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003. ISBN 0-19-515462-2, chapters 13, 15
7.^ Jump up to: a b In a 2011 review of the state of modern scholarship, Bart Ehrman (a secular agnostic) wrote: "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees" B. Ehrman, 2011 Forged : writing in the name of God ISBN 978-0-06-207863-6. page 285
8.Jump up ^ Robert M. Price (an atheist who denies the existence of Jesus) agrees that this perspective runs against the views of the majority of scholars: Robert M. Price "Jesus at the Vanishing Point" in The Historical Jesus: Five Views edited by James K. Beilby & Paul Rhodes Eddy, 2009 InterVarsity, ISBN 028106329X page 61
9.^ Jump up to: a b Michael Grant (a classicist) states that "In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary." in Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels by Michael Grant 2004 ISBN 1898799881 page 200
10.^ Jump up to: a b Richard A. Burridge states: "There are those who argue that Jesus is a figment of the Church’s imagination, that there never was a Jesus at all. I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that anymore." in Jesus Now and Then by Richard A. Burridge and Graham Gould (Apr 1, 2004) ISBN 0802809774 page 34
11.Jump up ^ Jesus Remembered by James D. G. Dunn 2003 ISBN 0-8028-3931-2 page 339 states of baptism and crucifixion that these "two facts in the life of Jesus command almost universal assent".
12.Jump up ^ Prophet and Teacher: An Introduction to the Historical Jesus by William R. Herzog (4 Jul 2005) ISBN 0664225284 pages 1-6
13.Jump up ^ Crossan, John Dominic (1995). Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography. HarperOne. p. 145. ISBN 0-06-061662-8. "That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be, since both Josephus and Tacitus ... agree with the Christian accounts on at least that basic fact."
14.^ Jump up to: a b c Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee by Mark Allan Powell 1998 ISBN 0-664-25703-8 pages 168–173
15.^ Jump up to: a b c Sanders, E. P. The historical figure of Jesus. Penguin, 1993.
16.Jump up ^ John Dickson, Jesus: A Short Life. Lion Hudson 2009, pp. 138-9.
17.Jump up ^ Theissen, Gerd and Annette Merz. The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide. Fortress Press. 1998. translated from German (1996 edition). Chapter 10. Jesus as healer: the miracles of Jesus.
18.^ Jump up to: a b c d Theissen, Gerd and Annette Merz. The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide. Fortress Press. 1998. translated from German (1996 edition)
19.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j Crossan, John Dominic. The essential Jesus. Edison: Castle Books. 1998.
20.Jump up ^ E.P. Sanders, The Historical Figure of Jesus. p.280
21.^ Jump up to: a b c The Jesus Quest: The Third Search for the Jew of Nazareth by Ben Witherington (May 8, 1997) ISBN 0830815449 pages 9-13
22.^ Jump up to: a b Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee by Mark Allan Powell (1 Jan 1999) ISBN 0664257038 pages 19-23
23.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown: An Introduction to the New Testament by Andreas J. Köstenberger, L. Scott Kellum 2009 ISBN 978-0-8054-4365-3 pages 124-125
24.^ Jump up to: a b c d The Cambridge History of Christianity, Volume 1 by Margaret M. Mitchell and Frances M. Young (Feb 20, 2006) ISBN 0521812399 page 23
25.^ Jump up to: a b Images of Christ (Academic Paperback) by Stanley E. Porter, Michael A. Hayes and David Tombs (Dec 19, 2004) ISBN 0567044602 T&T Clark page 74
26.^ Jump up to: a b Familiar Stranger: An Introduction to Jesus of Nazareth by Michael James McClymond (Mar 22, 2004) ISBN 0802826806 pages 16-22
27.^ Jump up to: a b c Allison, Dale (February 2009). The Historical Christ and the Theological Jesus. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. p. 59. ISBN 978-0-8028-6262-4. Retrieved Jan 9, 2011. "We wield our criteria to get what we want."
28.^ Jump up to: a b c John P. Meier (26 May 2009). A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, Law and Love. Yale University Press. pp. 6–. ISBN 978-0-300-14096-5. Retrieved 27 August 2010.
29.^ Jump up to: a b c d Clive Marsh, "Diverse Agendas at Work in the Jesus Quest" in Handbook for the Study of the Historical Jesus by Tom Holmen and Stanley E. Porter (Jan 12, 2011) ISBN 9004163727 pages 986-1002
30.Jump up ^ John P. Meier "Criteria: How do we decide what comes from Jesus?" in The Historical Jesus in Recent Research by James D. G. Dunn and Scot McKnight (Jul 15, 2006) ISBN 1575061007 page 124 "Since in the quest for the historical Jesus almost anything is possible, the function of the criteria is to pass from the merely possible to the really probable, to inspect various probabilities, and to decide which candidate is most probable. Ordinarily the criteria can not hope to do more."
31.Jump up ^ The Historical Jesus of the Gospels by Craig S. Keener (13 Apr 2012) ISBN 0802868886 page 163
32.Jump up ^ Jesus in Contemporary Scholarship by Marcus J. Borg (1 Aug 1994) ISBN 1563380943 pages 4-6
33.Jump up ^ Robert E. Van Voorst Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence Eerdmans Publishing, 2000. ISBN 0-8028-4368-9 page 16 states: "biblical scholars and classical historians regard theories of non-existence of Jesus as effectively refuted"
34.Jump up ^ James D. G. Dunn "Paul's understanding of the death of Jesus" in Sacrifice and Redemption edited by S. W. Sykes (Dec 3, 2007) Cambridge University Press ISBN 052104460X pages 35-36 states that the theories of non-existence of Jesus are "a thoroughly dead thesis"
35.Jump up ^ The Gospels and Jesus by Graham Stanton, 1989 ISBN 0192132415 Oxford University Press, p. 145: "Today nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed".
36.Jump up ^ Encyclopedia of theology: a concise Sacramentum mundi by Karl Rahner 2004 ISBN 0-86012-006-6 pages 730-731
37.Jump up ^ Van Voorst, Robert E (2000). Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence. Eerdmans Publishing. ISBN 0-8028-4368-9-page 15
38.Jump up ^ "What about the resurrection? ... Some people believe it did, some believe it didn't. ... But if you do believe it, it is not as a historian" Ehrman, B. Jesus, Interrupted, pg 176 HarperOne; 1 Reprint edition (2 February 2010)
39.Jump up ^ Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee by Mark Allan Powell 1998 ISBN 0-664-25703-8 page 181
40.^ Jump up to: a b Jesus and the Gospels: An Introduction and Survey by Craig L. Blomberg 2009 ISBN 0-8054-4482-3 pages 431-436
41.Jump up ^ Van Voorst (2000) pp. 39-53
42.Jump up ^ Schreckenberg, Heinz; Kurt Schubert (1992). Jewish Traditions in Early Christian Literature. ISBN 90-232-2653-4.
43.Jump up ^ Kostenberger, Andreas J.; L. Scott Kellum; Charles L. Quarles (2009). The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown: An Introduction to the New Testament. ISBN 0-8054-4365-7.
44.Jump up ^ The new complete works of Josephus by Flavius Josephus, William Whiston, Paul L. Maier ISBN 0-8254-2924-2 pages 662-663
45.Jump up ^ Josephus XX by Louis H. Feldman 1965, ISBN 0674995023 page 496
46.Jump up ^ Van Voorst, Robert E. (2000). Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence ISBN 0-8028-4368-9. page 83
47.Jump up ^ Flavius Josephus; Maier, Paul L. (December 1995). Josephus, the essential works: a condensation of Jewish antiquities and The Jewish war ISBN 978-0-8254-3260-6 pages 284-285
48.Jump up ^ P.E. Easterling, E. J. Kenney (general editors), The Cambridge History of Latin Literature, page 892 (Cambridge University Press, 1982, reprinted 1996). ISBN 0-521-21043-7
49.^ Jump up to: a b Robert E. Van Voorst, Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence, Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2000. p 39- 53
50.Jump up ^ Eddy, Paul; Boyd, Gregory (2007). The Jesus Legend: A Case for the Historical Reliability of the Synoptic Jesus Tradition Baker Academic, ISBN 0-8010-3114-1 page 127
51.Jump up ^ F.F. Bruce,Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974) p. 23
52.Jump up ^ Theissen, Gerd; Merz, Annette (1998). The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. p. 83. ISBN 978-0-8006-3122-2.
53.Jump up ^ The Case Against Christianity, By Michael Martin, pg 50-51, at http://books.google.co.za/books?id=wWkC4dTmK0AC&pg=PA52&dq=historicity+of+jesus&hl=en&sa=X&ei=o-_8U5-yEtTH7AbBpoCoAg&ved=0CCUQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=tacitus&f=false
54.Jump up ^ The Historical Jesus in the Twentieth Century: 1900-1950, By Walter P. Weaver, pg 53, pg 57, at http://books.google.co.za/books?id=1CZbuFBdAMUC&pg=PA45&dq=historicity+of+jesus&hl=en&sa=X&ei=o-_8U5-yEtTH7AbBpoCoAg&ved=0CEoQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=tacitus&f=false
55.^ Jump up to: a b Secret of Regeneration, By Hilton Hotema, pg 100, at http://books.google.co.za/books?id=jCaopp3R5B0C&pg=PA100&dq=interpolations+in+tacitus&hl=en&sa=X&ei=CRf-U9-VGZCe7AbxrIDQCA&ved=0CCAQ6AEwATge#v=onepage&q=interpolations%20in%20tacitus&f=false
56.Jump up ^ Jesus, University Books, New York, 1956, p.13
57.Jump up ^ France, RT (1986). Evidence for Jesus (Jesus Library). Trafalgar Square Publishing. pp. 19–20. ISBN 0-340-38172-8.
58.Jump up ^ Schachter/H.Freedman, Jacob. "Sanhedrin". come-and-hear.com. The Soncino Press. Retrieved 22 January 2015.
59.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h Theissen, Gerd and Annette Merz. The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide. Fortress Press. 1998. translated from German (1996 edition). Chapter 1. The quest of the historical Jesus. p. 1–15.
60.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i Sanders, E. P. The historical figure of Jesus. Penguin, 1993. Chapter 15, Jesus' view of his role in God's plan.
61.Jump up ^ Funk, Robert W. and the Jesus Seminar. The gospel of Jesus: according to the Jesus Seminar. HarperSanFrancisco. 1999.
62.Jump up ^ Brown, Raymond E.; et al. (1990). The New Jerome Biblical Commentary. Prentice Hall. ISBN 0-13-614934-0.
63.Jump up ^ Vermes, Geza Jesus the Jew, Fortress Press, New York 1981. p.209
64.Jump up ^ Paolo Flores d'Arcais, MicroMega 3/2007, p.43
65.Jump up ^ Dunn, James D. G.; McKnight, Scot (2005). The historical Jesus in recent research Volume 10 of Sources for biblical and theological study. Eisenbrauns (EISENBRAUNS). p. 325. ISBN 1575061007.
66.Jump up ^ Harris, Stephen L., Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985. "John" p. 302-310
67.Jump up ^ "[T]here is no reason to think that Jesus was called God in the earliest layers of New Testament tradition." in "Does the New Testament call Jesus God?" in Theological Studies, 26, (1965) p. 545-73
68.Jump up ^ John Hick, The Metaphor of God Incarnate, page 27: "A further point of broad agreement among New Testament scholars ... is that the historical Jesus did not make the claim to deity that later Christian thought was to make for him: he did not understand himself to be God, or God the Son, incarnate. ... such evidence as there is has led the historians of the period to conclude, with an impressive degree of unanimity, that Jesus did not claim to be God incarnate."; Gerd Lüdemann, "An Embarrassing Misrepresentation", Free Inquiry, October / November 2007: "the broad consensus of modern New Testament scholars that the proclamation of Jesus' exalted nature was in large measure the creation of the earliest Christian communities."
69.^ Jump up to: a b "Jesus Christ." Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005
70.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k l Funk, Robert W. and the Jesus Seminar. The acts of Jesus: the search for the authentic deeds of Jesus. HarperSanFrancisco. 1998.
71.Jump up ^ Crossan, John Dominic. The essential Jesus. Edison: Castle Books. 1998. p. 146
72.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g Funk, Robert W. and the Jesus Seminar. The acts of Jesus: the search for the authentic deeds of Jesus. HarperSanFrancisco. 1998. John the Baptist cameo. p. 268
73.Jump up ^ Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels. HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. p. 178
74.Jump up ^ See Matthew 11:7-10. Crossan, John Dominic. The essential Jesus. Edison: Castle Books. 1998. p. 146
75.Jump up ^ Mark 6:14, 16, 8:28
76.Jump up ^ Harris, Stephen L., Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985. "The Historical Jesus" p. 255-260
77.Jump up ^ following the conclusion of Josephus' Antiquities 18.5: "Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion, (for they seemed ready to do any thing he should advise,) thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties, by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it would be too late."
78.Jump up ^ Mark 7:24-30
79.Jump up ^ Introduction. Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels. HarperSanFrancisco. 1993.
80.Jump up ^ First: 2:13 and 2:23; second: 6:4; third: 11:55, 12:1, 13:1, 18:29, 18:39, 19:14
81.Jump up ^ Richard L. Niswonger, New Testament History, Zondervan, 1993, p. 152
82.Jump up ^ Geoffrey W. Bromiley, International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: A-D, Wm. B. Eerdmans 1995 p. 682
83.Jump up ^ The Fourth Gospel and the Quest for Jesus: Modern Foundations Reconsidered, Continuum International Publishing Group, 2006 p. 162
84.Jump up ^ Ehrman, Bart. Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium. Oxford. 1999. page 127.
85.Jump up ^ Geza Vermes. The Authentic Gospels of Jesus. Penguin, 2003. p. 381.
86.Jump up ^ E. P. Sanders. The Historical Figure of Jesus. Penguin, 1993. p. 178
87.^ Jump up to: a b Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels. HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. "God's Imperial Rule: Present or Future," p 136-137.
88.^ Jump up to: a b c Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels. HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. Introduction, p 1-30.
89.Jump up ^ Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels. HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. pp. 103-104.
90.^ Jump up to: a b Ehrman, Bart. Peter, Paul, and Mary Magdalene: The Followers of Jesus in History and Legend. Oxford University Press, USA. 2006. ISBN 0-19-530013-0
91.Jump up ^ Bruce Chilton, Craig A. Evans, Studying the Historical Jesus: Evaluations of the State of Current Research (BRILL, 1998 ISBN 9004111425, 9789004111424), p. 136
92.Jump up ^ Catherine M. Murphy, The Historical Jesus for Dummies 2007 ISBN 0470167858, 9780470167854, p. 23
93.Jump up ^ Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels. HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. "Mark," p 39-127.
94.Jump up ^ Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels. HarperSanFrancisco. 1993.
95.Jump up ^ Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels. HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. page 221.
96.Jump up ^ Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels. HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. page 220.
97.Jump up ^ Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels. HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. page 221.
98.Jump up ^ Bart D. Ehrman, Fact and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code p.144
99.Jump up ^ Jewish Encyclopedia: Essenes: "The similarity in many respects between Christianity and Essenism is striking: There were the same communism (Acts iv. 34-35); the same belief in baptism or bathing, and in the power of prophecy; the same aversion to marriage, enhanced by firmer belief in the Messianic advent; the same system of organization, and the same rules for the traveling brethren delegated to charity-work (see Apostle and Apostleship); and, above all, the same love-feasts or brotherly meals (comp. Agape; Didascalia)."
100.Jump up ^ Sanders, E. P. The historical figure of Jesus. Penguin, 1993. p. 249
101.Jump up ^ Sanders 1987, p.[citation needed]
102.Jump up ^ The Jesus Seminar concurs that the temple incident led to Jesus' execution.
103.Jump up ^ The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church reports that "it is possible" that the temple disturbance led to Jesus' arrest, offers no alternative reason, and states more generally that a political rather than religious motivation was likely behind it. "Jesus Christ." Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005
104.Jump up ^ Ehrman 1999, p. 221-3
105.Jump up ^ Are You the One? The Textual Dynamics of Messianic Self-Identity
106.Jump up ^ Brown 1993, vol. 1, p. 711-12; Funk 1998, p. 152-3
107.Jump up ^ Barrett, CK 'The Gospel According to St. John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes', Westminster John Knox Press, 1978, page 49, 'The alleged contraventions of Jewish law seem to rest upon misunderstandings of Jewish texts'
108.Jump up ^ Barrett, CK 'The Gospel According to St. John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes', Westminster John Knox Press, 1978, pp. 49-50, 'The explanation is that special circumstances were regularly allowed to modify the course of the law. For example, Simeon b. Shetah (fl. 104-69 B.C.) caused to be hanged 80 women (witches) in one day, though it was against the law to judge more than two. 'The hour demanded it' (Sanhedrin 6.4, Y. Sanhedrin 6,235c,58). Nisan 15, so far from being an unlikely day, was one of the best possible days for the execution of Jesus. The regulation for the condemnation of a 'rebellious teacher' runs: 'He was kept in guard until one of the Feasts (passover, Pentecost, or Tabernacles) and he was put to death on one of the Feasts, for it is written, And all the people shall hear and fear, and do no more presumptuously (Deuteronomy 17.13)' (Sanhedrin 11.4). There was only one day on which 'all the people' were gathered together in Jerusalem for the Passover; it was Nisan 15, the Marcan date for the crucifixion.'
109.Jump up ^ Fredriksen, Paula. (2000) From Jesus to Christ: The Origins of the New Testament Images of Christ. Second Edition. Yale University Press. p. 122 ISBN 0300084579
110.Jump up ^ Craig A. Evans, "The Silence of Burial" in Jesus, the Final Days Ed. Troy A. Miller. p.68
111.Jump up ^ Crossan 1994, p. 154-158; cf. Ehrman 1999, p.229
112.Jump up ^ N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), p. 49; who wrote "[Crossan's hypothesis] has not been accepted yet by any other serious scholar."
113.Jump up ^ Ben Meyer, critical notice of The Historical Jesus, by John Dominic Crossan, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 55 (1993): 575
114.Jump up ^ Helmut Koester, Ancient Christian Gospels (London: SCM, 1990), p. 220.
115.Jump up ^ G. Habermas, The Historical Jesus, (College Press, 1996) p. 128; he observed that the Jewish polemic is recorded in Matthew 28:11-15 and was employed through the second century, cf. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 108; Tertullian, On Spectacles, 30
116.Jump up ^ G. Habermas, The Historical Jesus, (College Press, 1996) p. 173; cf. Vasilius Tzaferis, "Jewish Tombs At and Near Giv'at ha-Mivtar", Israel Exploration Journal 20 (1970) pp. 38-59".
117.Jump up ^ Brown 1993, vol. 2, ch. 46
118.Jump up ^ e.g. Paul L. Maier, "The Empty Tomb as History", in Christianity Today, March, 1975, p. 5
119.Jump up ^ Mark W. Waterman, The Empty Tomb Tradition of Mark: Text, History, and Theological Struggles (Los Angeles: Agathos Press, 2006) p. 211-212
120.Jump up ^ M. Grant, Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels (New York: Scribner's, 1977) p. 176
121.Jump up ^ Borg, Marcus J. "Thinking About Easter" Bible Review. April 1994, p. 15 and 49
122.Jump up ^ Theissen, Gerd; and Merz, Annette. The historical Jesus: A comprehensive guide. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. 1998. Tr from German (1996 edition). p. 503. ISBN 978-0-8006-3123-9
123.Jump up ^ Funk, Robert W (1998). The Acts of Jesus: The Search for the Authentic Deeds of Jesus. A Polebridge Press Book from Harper San Francisco. ISBN 0-06-062978-9.
124.Jump up ^ "Jesus Christ." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2007. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 10 Jan. 2007
125.^ Jump up to: a b Meier 1994 v.2 ch. 17; Ehrman 1999 p.227-8
126.Jump up ^ Georgi, Dieter (1986). The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians. Philadelphia, PA: Fortress.
127.Jump up ^ Georgi, Dieter (1991). Theocracy in Paul's Praxis and Theology. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress.
128.Jump up ^ The Quest for the Plausible Jesus: The Question of Criteria by Gerd Theissen and Dagmar Winter (Aug 30, 2002) ISBN 0664225373 pages 1-6
129.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j Criteria for Authenticity in Historical-Jesus Research by Stanley E. Porter 2004 ISBN 0567043606 pages 100-120
130.^ Jump up to: a b The Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology by Alan Richardson 1983 ISBN 0664227481 pages 215-216
131.^ Jump up to: a b Interpreting the New Testament by Daniel J. Harrington (Jun 1990) ISBN 0814651240 pages 96-98
132.Jump up ^ The Historical Jesus and the Final Judgment Sayings in Q by Brian Han Gregg (30 Jun 2006) ISBN 3161487508 page 29
133.Jump up ^ Criteria for Authenticity in Historical-Jesus Research by Stanley E. Porter 2004 ISBN 0567043606 pages 77-78
134.Jump up ^ "Jesus Research and Archaeology: A New Perspective" by James H. Charlesworth in Jesus and archaeology edited by James H. Charlesworth 2006 ISBN 0-8028-4880-X pages 11-15
135.^ Jump up to: a b Soundings in the Religion of Jesus: Perspectives and Methods in Jewish and Christian Scholarship by Bruce Chilton Anthony Le Donne and Jacob Neusner 2012 ISBN 0800698010 page 132
136.Jump up ^ Mason, Steve (2002), "Josephus and the New Testament" (Baker Academic)
137.Jump up ^ Tabor, James (2012)"Paul and Jesus: How the Apostle Transformed Christianity" (Simon & Schuster)
138.Jump up ^ Eisenman, Robert (1998), "James the Brother of Jesus: The Key to Unlocking the Secrets of Early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls" (Watkins)
139.Jump up ^ Butz, Jeffrey "The Brother of Jesus and the Lost Teachings of Christianity" (Inner Traditions)
140.Jump up ^ Tabor, James (2007), "The Jesus Dynasty: The Hidden History of Jesus, His Royal Family, and the Birth of Christianity"
141.Jump up ^ "Introducing the Journal of Higher Criticism".
142.Jump up ^ Hendel, Ronald (June 2010). "Knowledge and Power in Biblical Scholarship". Retrieved 2011-01-06. "... The problem at hand is how to preserve the critical study of the Bible in a professional society that has lowered its standards to the degree that apologetics passes as scholarship ..."
143.Jump up ^ Meier, John. "Finding the Historical Jesus: An Interview With John P. Meier". St. Anthony Messenger. Retrieved Jan 6, 2011. "... I think a lot of the confusion comes from the fact that people claim they are doing a quest for the historical Jesus when de facto they’re doing theology, albeit a theology that is indeed historically informed."
144.Jump up ^ "Biography Clive Marsh".
145.Jump up ^ Clive Marsh "Quests of the Historical Jesus in New Historicist Perspective" in Biblical Interpretation Journal Volume 5, Number 4, 1997 , pp. 403-437(35)
146.Jump up ^ "Jesus is His Own Ideology: An Interview with Nick Perrin"."My point in the book is to disabuse readers of the notion that Jesus scholars are scientists wearing white lab coats. Like everyone else, they want certain things to be true about Jesus and equally want certain others not to be true of him. I’m included in this (I really hope that I am right in believing that Jesus is both Messiah and Lord.) Will this shape my scholarship? Absolutely. How can it not? We should be okay with that."
147.Jump up ^ McKnight, Scot (4/09/2010). "The Jesus We'll Never Know". Retrieved Jan 15, 2011. "One has to wonder if the driving force behind much historical Jesus scholarship is ... a historian's genuine (and disinterested) interest in what really happened. The theological conclusions of those who pursue the historical Jesus simply correlate too strongly with their own theological predilections to suggest otherwise." Check date values in: |date= (help)
148.Jump up ^ Jesus Remembered Volume 1, by James D. G. Dunn 2003 ISBN 0-8028-3931-2 pp. 125-126: "the historical Jesus is properly speaking a nineteenth- and twentieth-century construction using the data supplied by the Synoptic tradition, not Jesus back then," (the Jesus of Nazareth who walked the hills of Galilee), "and not a figure in history whom we can realistically use to critique the portrayal of Jesus in the Synoptic tradition."
149.Jump up ^ Meir, Marginal Jew, 1:21-25
150.Jump up ^ T. Merrigan, The Historical Jesus in the Pluralist Theology of Religions, in The Myriad Christ: Plurality and the Quest for Unity in Contemporary Christology (ed. T. Merrigan and J. Haers). Princeton-Prague Symposium on Jesus Research, & Charlesworth, J. H. Jesus research: New methodologies and perceptions : the second Princeton-Prague Symposium on Jesus Research, Princeton 2007, p. 77-78: "Dunn points out as well that 'the Enlightenment Ideal of historical objectivity also projected a false goal onto the quest for the historical Jesus,' which implied that there was a 'historical Jesus,' objectively verifiable, 'who will be different from the dogmatic Christ and the Jesus of the Gospels and who will enable us to criticize the dogmatic Christ and the Jesus of the Gospels.' (Jesus Remembered, p. 125)."
151.Jump up ^ Herzog, W. R. (2005). Prophet and teacher: An introduction to the historical Jesus. Louisville, Ky: Westminster John Knox Press. p. 6
152.Jump up ^ Akenson, Donald (1998). Surpassing wonder: the invention of the Bible and the Talmuds. University of Chicago Press. pp. 539–555. ISBN 978-0-226-01073-1. Retrieved Jan 8, 2011. "... The point I shall argue below is that, the agreed evidentiary practices of the historians of Yeshua, despite their best efforts, have not been those of sound historical practice ..."
153.Jump up ^ "Queen's University:Department of History". Retrieved Jan 22, 2011. "Don Akenson: Professor Irish Studies"
154.Jump up ^ Dunn, James (2003). Christianity In the Making Volume 1: Jesus Remembered. Cambridge, MA: Eermans. p. 126.
155.Jump up ^ Jesus Remembered, by James Dunn; p.102
156.Jump up ^ Jesus the Christ by Walter Kasper (Nov 1976) ISBN page 31
157.Jump up ^ Theological Hermeneutics by Angus Paddison (Jun 6, 2005) ISBN 0521849837 Cambridge Univ Press page 43
158.Jump up ^ The Historical Jesus by John Dominic Crossan (Feb 26, 1993) ISBN 0060616296 page xviii
159.Jump up ^ The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown: An Introduction to the New Testament by Andreas J. Köstenberger, L. Scott Kellum 2009 ISBN 978-0-8054-4365-3 pages 117–125
160.Jump up ^ Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium by Bart D. Ehrman 1999 ISBN 0-19-512473-1 pages 22–23
161.Jump up ^ Bart Ehrman, Did Jesus Exist? Harper Collins, 2012, p. 12, ""In simpler terms, the historical Jesus did not exist . Or if he did, he had virtually nothing to do with the founding of Christianity." further quoting as authoritative the fuller definition provided by Earl Doherty in Jesus: Neither God Nor Man. Age of Reason, 2009, pp. vii–viii: it is "the theory that no historical Jesus worthy of the name existed, that Christianity began with a belief in a spiritual, mythical figure, that the Gospels are essentially allegory and fiction, and that no single identifiable person lay at the root of the Galilean preaching tradition."
162.Jump up ^ "Jesus Outside the New Testament" Robert E. Van Voorst, 2000, p=8-9
163.Jump up ^ Richard Dawkins. The God Delusion. p. 122. ISBN 1-4303-1230-0.
164.Jump up ^ God is Not Great, Christopher Hitchens, 2007, Chapter 8
165.Jump up ^ "The Messiah Myth: The Near Eastern Roots of Jesus and David" Thomas L. Thompson Basic Book Perseus Books' 2005
References[edit]
Barnett, Paul W. (1997). Jesus and the Logic of History (New Studies in Biblical Theology 3). Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press. ISBN 0-85111-512-8.
Bauckham, Richard (2011). Jesus: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-957527-4.
Brown, Raymond E. (1993). The Death of the Messiah: from Gethsemane to the Grave. New York: Anchor Bible. ISBN 0-385-49449-1.
Brown, Raymond E. et al. The New Jerome Biblical Commentary Prentice Hall 1990 ISBN 0-13-614934-0
Bock, Darrell L., Studying the Historical Jesus: A Guide to Sources and Methods.. Baker Academic: 2002. ISBN 978-0-8010-2451-1.
Craffert, Pieter F. and Botha, Pieter J. J. "Why Jesus Could Walk On The Sea But He Could Not Read And Write". Neotestamenica. 39.1, 2005.
Crossan, John Dominic. Jesus : A Revolutionary Biography. Harpercollins: 1994. ISBN 0-06-061661-X.
Dickson, John. Jesus: A Short Life, Lion Hudson plc, 2008, ISBN 0-8254-7802-2, ISBN 978-0-8254-7802-4, Google Books
Ehrman, Bart D. (1999). Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium. New York: Oxford. ISBN 0-19-512473-1.
Fiensy, David A.; Jesus the Galilean: soundings in a first century life, Gorgias Press LLC, 2007, ISBN 1-59333-313-7, ISBN 978-1-59333-313-3, Google books
Fredriksen, Paula (2000). Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews: A Jewish Life and the Emergence of Christianity. New York: Vintage Books. ISBN 978-0-679-76746-6.
Gnilka, Joachim.; Jesus of Nazareth: Message and History, Hendrickson Publishers, 1997.
Gowler, David B.; What Are They Saying About the Historical Jesus?, Paulist Press, 2007,
Grant, Michael. Jesus: A Historian's Review of the Gospels. Scribner's, 1977. ISBN 0-684-14889-7.
Funk, Robert W. (1998). The Acts of Jesus: The Search for the Authentic Deeds of Jesus. HarperSanFrancisco. ISBN 0-06-062978-9.
Harris, by William V. Ancient Literacy. Harvard University Press: 1989. ISBN 0-674-03380-9.
Meier, John P., A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, Doubleday,
v. 1, The Roots of the Problem and the Person, 1991, ISBN 0-385-26425-9v. 2, Mentor, Message, and Miracles, 1994, ISBN 0-385-46992-6v. 3, Companions and Competitors, 2001, ISBN 0-385-46993-4v. 4, Law and Love, 2009, ISBN 978-0-300-14096-5O'Collins, G. Jesus: A Portrait. Darton, Longman and Todd: 2008. ISBN 978-0232527193
O'Collins, G. Christology: A Biblical, Historical, and Systematic Study of Jesus. OUP: 2009. ISBN 978-0199557875
Sanders, E.P. Jesus and Judaism. Augsburg Fortress Publishers: 1987.
Sanders, E.P. The Historical Figure of Jesus. Lane The Penguin Press: 1993.
Vermes, G. Jesus the Jew: A Historian's Reading of the Gospels. SCM Classics:2001, ISBN 0-334-02839-6
Theissen, Gerd and Merz, Annette. The Historical Jesus: A Comprehensive Guide. Fortress Press: Minneapolis, 1998. ISBN 0-8006-3122-6.
Van Voorst, Robert E., Jesus Outside the New Testament, 2000, Eerdmans, google books
Witherington III, Ben. The Jesus Quest: The Third Search for the Jew of Nazareth. InterVarsity Press: 1997. ISBN 0-8308-1544-9.
Wright, N.T. Christian Origins and the Question of God, a projected six volume series of which three have been published under:
v. 1, The New Testament and the People of God. Augsburg Fortress Publishers: 1992.;v. 2, Jesus and the Victory of God. Augsburg Fortress Publishers: 1997.;v. 3, The Resurrection of the Son of God. Augsburg Fortress Publishers: 2003.Wright, N.T. The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering who Jesus was and is. IVP 1996
Yaghjian, Lucretia. "Ancient Reading", in Richard Rohrbaugh, ed., The Social Sciences in New Testament Interpretation. Hendrickson Publishers: 2004. ISBN 1-56563-410-1.
External links[edit]
"Jesus Christ". Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 2009. The first section, on Jesus' life and ministry


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Jesus






























































































Commons page
Wikiquote page




[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
The Bible and history











Bible.malmesbury.arp.jpg


























  


Categories: Jesus and history
Perspectives on Jesus














Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Esperanto
Français
한국어
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Interlingua
Italiano
Nederlands
日本語
Nordfriisk
Plattdüütsch
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Edit links
This page was last modified on 24 April 2015, at 14:18.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus














Historical Jesus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search





In the 21st century, the third quest for the historical Jesuswitnessed a fragmentation of the scholarly portraitsof Jesus after which no unified picture of Jesus could be attained at all.[1][2]
The term "historical Jesus" refers to attempts to "reconstruct the life and teachings of Jesusof Nazareth by critical historical methods", in "contrast to Christological definitions ('the dogmatic Christ') and other Christian accounts of Jesus ('the Christ of faith')".[3]It also considers the historical and cultural contextin which Jesus lived.[4][5][6]
Virtually all scholars who write on the subject accept that Jesus existed,[7][8][9][10]although scholars differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the accounts of his life, and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptizedby John the Baptistand was crucifiedby the order of the Roman PrefectPontius Pilate.[11][12][13][14]Historical Jesus scholars typically contend that he was a GalileanJew living in a time of messianicand apocalypticexpectations.[15][16]Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist, whose example he may have followed, and after John was executed, began his own preaching in Galileefor only about two to three years prior to his death. He preached the salvation, cleansing from sins, and the Kingdom of God, using parableswith startling imagery, and was said to be a teacher and a faith healer.[17]Some scholars credit the apocalyptic declarations of the Gospels to him, while others portray his Kingdom of God as a moral one, and not apocalyptic in nature.[18]He sent his apostlesout to heal and to preach the Kingdom of God.[19]Later, he traveled to Jerusalemin Judea, where he caused a disturbance at the Temple.[15]It was the time of Passover, when political and religious tensions were high in Jerusalem.[15]The Gospels say that the temple guards(believed to be Sadducees) arrested him and turned him over to Pontius Pilate for execution. The movement he had started survived his death and was carried on by his brother James the Justand the apostleswho proclaimed the resurrection of Jesus.[20]It developed into Early Christianity(see also List of events in early Christianity).
Since the 18th century, three separate scholarly quests for the historical Jesushave taken place, each with distinct characteristics and developing new and different research criteria.[21][22]The portraits of Jesusthat have been constructed in these processes have often differed from each other, and from the dogmatic image portrayed in the gospel accounts.[1]These portraits include that of Jesus as an apocalyptic prophet, charismatic healer, Cynic philosopher, Jewish Messiahand prophet of social change,[23][24]but there is little scholarly agreement on a single portrait, or the methods needed to construct it.[1][2][25]There are, however, overlapping attributes among the various portraits, and scholars who differ on some attributes may agree on others.[23][24][26]
A number of scholars have criticized the various approaches used in the study of the historical Jesus—on one hand for the lack of rigor in research methods, on the other for being driven by "specific agendas" that interpret ancient sources to fit specific goals.[27][28][29]By the 21st century the "maximalist" approaches of the 19th century which accepted all the gospels and the "minimalist" trends of the early 20th century which totally rejected them were abandoned and scholars began to focus on what is historically probable and plausible about Jesus.[30][31][32]
Part of a serieson
Jesus

Jesus in Christianity[show]


























Jesus in Islam[show]










Background[show]





Jesus in history[show]










Perspectives on Jesus[show]












Jesus in culture[show]




Portal iconChristianity portal
Portal iconIslam portal

v·
t·
e



Contents [hide]
1Historical elements1.1Existence1.1.1Evidence of Jesus
1.2Portraits of the historical Jesus
2Ministry of Jesus2.1Works and miracles
2.2Jesus as divine2.2.1Messiah
2.2.2Son of God
2.2.3Son of Man
2.2.4Other depictions
2.3Jesus and John the Baptist
2.4Ministry and teachings2.4.1Length of ministry
2.4.2Parables and paradoxes
2.4.3Eschatology
2.4.4Laconic sage
2.4.5Table fellowship
2.4.6Disciples
2.4.7Asceticism
2.5Jerusalem2.5.1Entrance to Jerusalem
2.5.2Temple disturbance
2.6Crucifixion
2.7Burial and Empty Tomb
2.8Resurrection appearances
3Methods of research
4Criticism of Jesus research methods4.1Theological bias
4.2Lack of methodological soundness
4.3Scarcity of sources
4.4Myth theory
5See also
6Notes
7References
8External links

Historical elements[edit]
Existence[edit]
Most contemporary scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholarsand classical historianssee the theories of his nonexistence as effectively refuted.[7][9][10][33][34][35]We have no indication that writers in antiquity who opposed Christianity questioned the existence of Jesus.[36][37]There is, however, widespread disagreement among scholars on the details of the life of Jesus mentioned in the gospel narratives, and on the meaning of his teachings.[14]Scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the biblical accounts of Jesus,[14]and historians tend to look upon supernatural or miraculous claims about Jesus as questions of faith, rather than historical fact.[38]
Evidence of Jesus[edit]
Main articles: Historical reliability of the Gospels, Sources for the historicity of Jesus, Josephus on Jesusand Tacitus on Christ
There is no physical or archeological evidence for Jesus, and all the sources we have are documentary. The sources for the historical Jesus are mainly Christian writings, such as the gospelsand the purported letters of the apostles. The authenticity and reliability of these sources has been questioned by many scholars, and few events mentioned in the gospels are universally accepted.[39]
In conjunction with biblical sources, three mentions of Jesus in non-Christian sources have been used in the historical analyses of the existence of Jesus.[40]These are two passages in the writings of the Jewish historian Josephus, and one from the Roman historian Tacitus.[40][41]
Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews, written around 93–94 AD, includes two references to the biblical Jesus Christ in Books 18and 20. The general scholarly view is that while the longer passage, known as the Testimonium Flavianum, is most likely not authentic in its entirety, it is broadly agreed upon that it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus, which was then subject to Christian interpolation or forgery.[42][43]Of the other mention in Josephus, Josephus scholar Louis H. Feldmanhas stated that "few have doubted the genuineness" of Josephus' reference to Jesus in Antiquities 20, 9, 1and it is only disputed by a small number of scholars.[44][45][46][47]
Roman historianTacitusreferred to Christus and his execution by Pontius Pilatein his Annals(written ca.AD 116), book 15, chapter 44.[48]Robert E. Van Voorst states that the very negative tone of Tacitus' comments on Christians make the passage extremely unlikely to have been forged by a Christian scribe[49]and Boyd and Eddy state that the Tacitus reference is now widely accepted as an independent confirmation of Christ's crucifixion,[50]although some scholars question the authenticity of the passageon various different grounds.[49][51][52][53][54][55][55][56][57]
Other considerations outside Christendom are the possible mentions of Jesus in the Talmud. The Talmud speaks in some detail of the conduct of criminal cases of Israel and gathered in one place from 200-500 C.E. "On the eve of the Passover Yeshua was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostacy." The first date of the Sanhedrin judiciary council being recorded as functioning is 57 B.C.E.[58]
Portraits of the historical Jesus[edit]
Main articles: Portraits of the historical Jesusand Quest for the historical Jesus
Since the 18th century, three separate scholarly quests for the historical Jesushave taken place, each with distinct characteristics and developing new and different research criteria.[21][22]The portraits of Jesus that have been constructed in these processes have often differed from each other, and from the dogmatic image portrayed in the gospel accounts.[1]These portraits include that of Jesus as an apocalyptic prophet, charismatic healer, Cynic philosopher, Jewish Messiahand prophet of social change,[23][24]but there is little scholarly agreement on a single portrait, or the methods needed to construct it.[1][2][25]There are, however, overlapping attributes among the various portraits, and scholars who differ on some attributes may agree on others.[23][24][26]
Contemporary scholarship, representing the "third quest," places Jesus firmly in the Jewish tradition.[59]Leading scholars in the "third quest" include E. P. Sanders, Geza Vermes, Gerd Theissen, Christoph Burchard, and John Dominic Crossan.[59]Jesus is seen as the founder of, in the words of E. P. Sanders, a '"renewal movement within Judaism."[59]This scholarship suggests a continuity between Jesus' life as a wandering charismatic and the same lifestyle carried forward by followers after his death.[59]The main criterion used to discern historical details in the "third quest" is the criterion of plausibility, relative to Jesus' Jewish context and to his influence on Christianity.[59]The main disagreement in contemporary research is whether Jesus was apocalyptic.[59]Most scholars conclude that he was an apocalyptic preacher, like John the Baptist and the apostle Paul.[59]In contrast, certain prominent North American scholars, such as Burton Mackand John Dominic Crossan, advocate for a non-eschatological Jesus, one who is more of a Cynic sage than an apocalyptic preacher.[59]
Ministry of Jesus[edit]
Works and miracles[edit]




Early Christian image of the Good Shepherd. Fourth century.
Jesus is said to have performed various miraclesin the course of his ministry. These mostly consist of miraculous healing, exorcismsand dominion over other things in nature besides people.
As Albert Schweitzershowed in his Quest of the Historical Jesus, in the early 19th century, debate about the "Historical Jesus" centered on the credibility of the miracle reports. Early 19th century scholars offered three types of explanation for these miracle stories: they were regarded as supernatural events, or were "rationalized" (e.g. by Paulus), or were regarded as mythical (e.g. by Strauss).[citation needed]
Scholars in both Christian and secular traditions continue to debate how the reports of Jesus' miracles should be construed. The Christian Gospels states that Jesus has God's authoritarian power over nature, life and death, but naturalistic historians, following Strauss, generally choose either to see these stories as legendor allegory, or, for some of the miracles they follow the rationalizing method. For example, the healings and exorcisms are sometimes attributed to the placebo effect.[citation needed]
Jesus as divine[edit]
Jesus was a charismatic preacher who taught the principles of salvation, everlasting life, and the Kingdom of God.[18]Scholars see him as accepting a divine role in the approaching apocalypse as the divine king.[60]Jesus' use of three important terms: Messiah, Son of God, and Son of Man, reveals his understanding of his divine role.[18][60]
Messiah[edit]
Main article: Messiah
In the Hebrew Bible, three classes of people are identified as "anointed," that is, "Messiahs": prophets, priests, and kings.[60]In Jesus' time, the term Messiah was used in different ways, and no one can be sure how Jesus would even have meant it if he had accepted the term.[60]Though Messianic expectations in general centered on the King Messiah, the Essenesexpected both a kingly and a priestly figure in their eschatology.[citation needed]
The Jews of Jesus' time waited expectantly for a divine redeemer who would restore Israel, which suffered under Roman rule. John the Baptistwas apparently waiting for one greater than himself, an apocalyptic figure.[61]Christian scripture and faith acclaim Jesus as this "Messiah" ("anointed one," "Christ").
Son of God[edit]
Main article: Son of God
Paul describes God as declaring Jesus to be the Son of God by raising him from the dead, and Sanders argues Mark portrays God as adopting Jesus as his son at his baptism,[60]although many others do not accept this interpretation of Mark.[62]Sanders argues that for Jesus to be hailed as the Son of God does not mean that he is literally God's offspring.[60]Rather, it indicates a very high designation, one who stands in a special relation to God.[60]
In the synoptic Gospels, the being of Jesus as "Son of God" corresponds exactly to the typical Hasideanfrom Galilee, a "pious" holy man that by God's intervention performs miraclesand exorcisms.[63][64]
Son of Man[edit]
Main article: Son of Man
The most literal translation here is "Son of Humanity", or "human being". Jesus uses "Son of Man" to mean sometimes "I" or a mortal in general, sometimes a divine figure destined to suffer, and sometimes a heavenly figure of judgment soon to arrive. Jesus usage of son of man in the first way is historical but without divine claim. The Son of Man as one destined to suffer seems to be, according to some, a Christian invention that does not go back to Jesus, and it is not clear whether Jesus meant himself when he spoke of the divine judge.[60]These three uses do not appear together, such as the Son of Man who suffersandreturns.[60]Others maintain, that Jesus' use of this phrase, illustrates Jesus' self understanding as the divine representative of God.[65]
Other depictions[edit]
The title Logos, identifying Jesus as the divine word, first appears in the Gospel of John, written c. 90-100.[66]
Raymond E. Brownconcluded that the earliest Christians did not call Jesus, "God".[67]New Testament scholars broadly agree that Jesus did not make any implicit claims to be God.[68]See also Divinity of Jesusand Nontrinitarianism.
Pinchas Lapidesees Jesus as a rabbi in the Hasid tradition of Hillel the Elder, Yochanan ben Zakaiand Hanina Ben Dosa.[citation needed]
The gospels and Christian tradition depict Jesus as being executed at the insistence of Jewish leaders, who considered his claims to divinity to be blasphemous, see also Responsibility for the death of Jesus. Historically, Jesus seems instead to have been executed as a potential source of unrest.[18][69][70]
Jesus and John the Baptist[edit]
Main article: John the Baptist




Judean hills of Israel
Jesus began preaching, teaching, and healing after he was baptizedby John the Baptist, an apocalyptic ascetic preacher who called on Jews to repent.
Jesus was apparently a follower of John, a populist and activist prophet who looked forward to divine deliverance of the Jewish homeland from the Romans.[71]John was a major religious figure, whose movement was probably larger than Jesus' own.[72]Herod Antipas had John executed as a threat to his power.[72]In a saying thought to have been originally recorded in Q,[73]the historical Jesus defended John shortly after John's death.[74]
John's followers formed a movement that continued after his death alongside Jesus' own following.[72]John's followers apparently believed that John might have risen from the dead,[75][dubious– discuss]an expectation that may have influenced the expectations of Jesus' followers after his own execution.[72]Some of Jesus' followers were former followers of John the Baptist.[72]Fasting and baptism, elements of John's preaching, may have entered early Christian practice as John's followers joined the movement.[72]
John Dominic Crossan portrays Jesus as rejecting John's apocalyptic eschatology in favor of a sapiential eschatology, in which cultural transformation results from humans' own actions, rather than from God's intervention.[19]
Historians consider Jesus' baptism by John to be historical, an event that early Christians would not have included in their Gospels in the absence of a "firm report".[76]Like Jesus, John and his execution are mentioned by Josephus.[72]
John the Baptist's prominence in both the Gospels and Josephus suggests that he may have been more popular than Jesus in his lifetime; also, Jesus' mission does not begin until after his baptism by John. Fredriksen suggests that it was only after Jesus' death that Jesus emerged as more influential than John. Accordingly, the Gospels project Jesus's posthumous importance back to his lifetime. One way Fredriksen believes this was accomplished was by minimizing John's importance by having John resist baptizing Jesus (Matthew), by referring to the baptism in passing (Luke), or by asserting Jesus's superiority (John).[citation needed]
Scholars posit that Jesus may have been a direct follower in John the Baptist's movement. Prominent Historical Jesus scholar John Dominic Crossansuggests that John the Baptist may have been killed for political reasons, not necessarily the personal grudge given in Mark's gospel.[77]Going into the desert and baptising in the Jordan suggests that John and his followers were purifying themselves for what they believed was God's imminent deliverance. This was reminiscent of such a crossing of the Jordan after the Exodus (see Book of Joshua), leading into the promised land of their deliverance from oppression. Jesus' teachings would later diverge from John's apocalyptic vision (though it depends which scholarly view is adopted; according to Ehrman or Sanders apocalyptic vision was the core of Jesus' teaching) which warned of "the wrath to come," as "the axe is laid to the root of the trees" and those who do not bear "good fruit" are "cut down and thrown into the fire." (Luke 3:7-9) Though John's teachings remained visible in those of Jesus, Jesus would emphasize the Kingdom of God not as imminent, but as already present and manifest through the movement's communal commitment to a relationship of equality among all members, and living by the laws of divine justice.[citation needed]All four Gospels agree that Jesus was crucified at the requested of the Jewish Sanhedrin by Pontius Pilate.[citation needed]Crucifixion was the penalty for criminals, robbers, traitors, and political insurrection, used as a symbol of Rome's absolute authority - those who stood against Rome were utterly annihilated.[citation needed]
Ministry and teachings[edit]
Main article: Ministry of Jesus
The synoptic Gospels agree that Jesus grew up in Nazareth, went to the River Jordanto meet and be baptised by the prophet John (Yohannan) the Baptist, and shortly after began healing and preaching to villagers and fishermen around the Sea of Galilee(which is actually a freshwater lake). Although there were many Phoenician, Hellenistic, and Romancities nearby (e.g. Gesaraand Gadara; Sidonand Tyre; Sepphorisand Tiberias), there is only one account of Jesus healing someone in the region of the Gadarenes found in the three synoptic Gospels (the demon called Legion), and another when he healed a Syro-Phoenician girl in the vicinity of Tyre and Sidon.[78]Otherwise, there is no record of Jesus having spent any significant amount of time in Gentile towns.[citation needed]The center of his work was Capernaum, a small town (about 500 by 350 meters, with a population of 1,500-2,000) where, according to the Gospels, he appeared at the town's synagogue(a non-sacred meeting house where Jews would often gather on the Sabbathto study the Torah), healed a paralytic, and continued seeking disciples.[citation needed]
Once Jesus established a following (although there are debates over the number of followers), he moved towards the Davidiccapital of the United Monarchy, the city of Jerusalem.
Length of ministry[edit]
Historians do not know how long Jesus preached. The synoptic Gospels suggest a period of up to one year.[79]The Gospel of John mentions three Passovers,[80]Jesus' ministry is traditionally said to have been three years long.[81][82]In the view of Paul N. Anderson, John's presentation is more plausible historically than that of the Synoptics.[83]
Parables and paradoxes[edit]
Main article: Parables of Jesus
Jesus taught in parables and aphorisms. A parableis a figurative image with a single message (sometimes mistaken for an analogy, in which each element has a metaphoric meaning). An aphorism is a short, memorable turn of phrase. In Jesus' case, aphorisms often involve some paradox or reversal. Authentic parables probably include the Good Samaritanand the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard. Authentic aphorisms include "turn the other cheek", "go the second mile", and "love your enemies".
Crossan writes that Jesus' parables worked on multiple levels at the same time, provoking discussions with his peasant audience.[19]
Jesus' parables and aphorisms circulated orally among his followers for years before they were written down and later incorporated into the Gospels. They represent the earliest Christian traditions about Jesus.[70]
Eschatology[edit]
Jesus preached mainly about the Kingdom of God. Scholars are divided over whether he was referring to an imminent apocalyptic event or the transformation of everyday life.
A great many - if not a majority - of critical Biblical scholars, going as far back as Albert Schweitzer, hold that Jesus believed that the end of history was coming within his own lifetime or within the lifetime of his contemporaries.[84]
The evidence for this thesis comes from several verses, including the following:
In Mark 8:38-9:1, Jesus says that the Son of Man will come "in the glory of the Father with the holy angels" during "this adulterous generation." Indeed, he says, "there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see that the Kingdom of God has come in power."
In Luke 21:35-36, Jesus urges constant, unremitting preparedness on the part of his followers in light of the imminence of the end of history and the final intervention of God. "Be alert at all times, praying to have strength to flee from all these things that are about to take place and to stand in the presence of the Son of Man."
In Mark 13:24-27, 30, Jesus describes what will happen when the end comes, saying that "the sun will grow dark and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will be falling from heaven, and ... they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds with great power and glory." He gives a timeline for this event: "Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away before all these things take place."
The Apostle Paul also seems to have shared this expectation. Toward the end of 1 Corinthians 7, he counsels Christians to avoid getting married if they can since the end of history was imminent. Speaking to the unmarried, he writes, "I think that, in view of the impending crisis, it is well for you to remain as your are." "I mean, brothers and sisters, the appointed time has grown short ... For the present form of this world is passing away." (1 Corinthians 7:26, 29, 31) In 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17, Paul also seems to believe that he will live to witness the return of Jesus and the end of history.
According to Geza Vermes, Jesus' announcement of the imminent arrival of the Kingdom of God "was patently not fulfilled" and "created a serious embarrassment for the primitive church".[85]According to E.P. Sanders, these eschatological sayings of Jesus are "passages that many Christian scholars would like to see vanish" as "the events they predict did not come to pass, which means that Jesus was wrong."[86]
Robert W. Funkand colleagues, on the other hand, wrote that beginning in the 1970s, some scholars have come to reject the view of Jesus as eschatological, pointing out that he rejected the asceticismof John the Baptist and his eschatological message. In this view, the Kingdom of Godis not a future state, but rather a contemporary, mysterious presence. John Dominic Crossan describes Jesus' eschatology as based on establishing a new, holy way of life rather than on God's redeeming intervention in history.[19]
Evidence for the Kingdom of God as already present derives from these verses.[87]
In Luke 17:20-21, Jesus says that one won't be able to observe God's Kingdom arriving, and that it "is right there in your presence."
In Thomas 113, Jesus says that God's Kingdom "is spread out upon the earth, and people don't see it."
In Luke 11:20, Jesus says that if he drives out demons by God's finger then "for you" the Kingdom of God has arrived.
Furthermore, the major parables of Jesus do not reflect an apocalyptic view of history.
The Jesus Seminar concludes that apocalyptic statements attributed to Jesus could have originated from early Christians, as apocalyptic ideas were common, but the statements about God's Kingdom being mysteriously present cut against the common view and could have originated only with Jesus himself.[87]
Laconic sage[edit]
The sage of the ancient Near East was a self-effacing man of few words who did not provoke encounters.[88]A holy man offers cures and exorcisms only when petitioned, and even then may be reluctant.[88]Jesus seems to have displayed a similar style.[88]
The Gospels present Jesus engaging in frequent "question and answer" religious debates with Pharisees and Sadducees. The Jesus Seminarbelieves the debates about scripture and doctrine are rabbinic in style and not characteristic of Jesus.[89]They believe these "conflict stories" represent the conflicts between the early Christian community and those around them: the Pharisees, Sadducees, etc. The group believes these sometimes include genuine sayings or concepts but are largely the product of the early Christian community.
Table fellowship[edit]
Open table fellowship with outsiders was central to Jesus' ministry.[19]His practice of eating with the lowly people that he healed defied the expectations of traditional Jewish society.[19]He presumably taught at the meal, as would be expected in a symposium.[70]His conduct caused enough of a scandal that he was accused of being a glutton and a drunk.[70]
John Dominic Crossan identifies this table practice as part of Jesus' radical egalitarian program.[19]The importance of table fellowship is seen in the prevalence of meal scenes in early Christian art[19]and in the Eucharist, the Christian ritual of bread and wine.[70]
Disciples[edit]
Main article: Disciple (Christianity)
Jesus recruited twelve Galilean peasants as his inner circle, including several fishermen.[90]The fishermen in question and the tax collector Matthew would have business dealings requiring some knowledge of Greek.[91]The father of two of the fishermen is represented as having the means to hire labourers for his fishing business, and tax collectors were seen as exploiters.[92]The twelve were expected to rule the twelve tribes of Israelin the Kingdom of God.[90]
The disciples of Jesus play a large role in the search for the historical Jesus. However, the four Gospels, use different words to apply to Jesus' followers. The Greek word "ochloi" refers to the crowds who gathered around Jesus as he preached. The word "mathetes" refers to the followers who stuck around for more teaching. The word "apostolos" refers to the twelve disciples, or apostles, whom Jesus chose specifically to be his close followers. With these three categories of followers, Meier uses a model of concentric circles around Jesus, with an inner circle of true disciples, a larger circle of followers, and an even larger circle of those who gathered to listen to him.
Jesus controversially accepted women and sinners (those who violated purity laws) among his followers. Even though women were never directly called "disciples", certain passages in the Gospels seem to indicate that women followers of Jesus were equivalent to the disciples. It was possible for members of the "ochloi" to cross over into the "mathetes" category. However, Meier argues that some people from the "mathetes" category actually crossed into the "apostolos" category, namely Mary Magdalene. The narration of Jesus' death and the events that accompany it mention the presence of women. Meier states that the pivotal role of the women at the cross is revealed in the subsequent narrative, where at least some of the women, notably Mary Magdalene, witnessed both the burial of Jesus (Mark 15:47) and discovered the empty tomb (Mark 16:1-8). Luke also mentions that as Jesus and the Twelve were travelling from city to city preaching the "good news", they were accompanied by women, who provided for them out of their own means. We can conclude that women did follow Jesus a considerable length of time during his Galilean ministry and his last journey to Jerusalem. Such a devoted, long-term following could not occur without the initiative or active acceptance of the women who followed him. However, most scholars would argue that it is unreasonable to say that Mary Magdalene's seemingly close relationship with Jesus suggests that she was a disciple of Jesus or one of the Twelve.[citation needed]In name, the women are not historically considered "disciples" of Jesus, but the fact that he allowed them to follow and serve him proves that they were to some extent treated as disciples.
The Gospels recount Jesus commissioning disciples to spread the word, sometimes during his life (e.g., Mark 6:7-12) and sometimes during a resurrection appearance (e.g., Matthew 28:18-20). These accounts reflect early Christian practice as well as Jesus' original instructions, though some scholars contend that historical Jesus issued no such missionary commission.[93]
According to John Dominic Crossan, Jesus sent his disciples out to heal and to proclaim the Kingdom of God. They were to eat with those they healed rather than with higher status people who might well be honored to host a healer, and Jesus directed them to eat whatever was offered them. This implicit challenge to the social hierarchy was part of Jesus' program of radical egalitarianism. These themes of healing and eating are common in early Christian art.[19]
Jesus' instructions to the missionaries appear in the synoptic Gospels and in the Gospel of Thomas.[19]These instructions are distinct from the commission that the resurrected Jesus gives to his followers, the Great Commission, text rated as black (inauthentic) by the Jesus Seminar.[94]
Asceticism[edit]
See also: Evangelical counsels
The fellows of the Jesus Seminar mostly held that Jesus was not an ascetic, and that he probably drank wine and did not fast, other than as all observant Jews did.[95]He did, however, promote a simple lifeand the renunciation of wealth.
Jesus said that some made themselves "eunuchs" for the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 19:12). This aphorism might have been meant to establish solidarity with eunuchs, who were considered "incomplete" in Jewish society.[96]Alternatively, he may have been promoting celibacy.
Some[who?]suggest that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, or that he probably had a special relationship with her,[97]or that he was married to Mary the sister of Lazarus.[citation needed]However, Ehrman notes the conjectural nature of these claims as "not a single one of our ancient sources indicates that Jesus was married, let alone married to Mary Magdalene."[98]
John the Baptistwas an ascetic and perhaps a Nazirite, who promoted celibacy like the Essenes.[99]Ascetic elements, such as fasting, appeared in Early Christianityand are mentioned by Matthew during Jesus' discourse on ostentation.
Jerusalem[edit]




The narrow streets of Via Dolorosa, Jerusalem.
See also: Jerusalem in Christianity
Jesus and his followers left Galilee and traveled to Jerusalem in Judea. They may have traveled through Samaria as reported in John, or around the border of Samaria as reported in Luke, as was common practice for Jews avoiding hostile Samaritans. Jerusalem was packed with Jews who had come for Passover, perhaps comprising 300,000 to 400,000 pilgrims.[100]
Entrance to Jerusalem[edit]
Main article: Palm Sunday
Jesus might have entered Jerusalem on a donkey as a symbolic act, possibly to contrast with the triumphant entry that a Roman conqueror would make, or to enact a prophecy in Zechariah. Christian scripture makes the reference to Zechariah explicit, perhaps because the scene was invented as scribes looked to scripture to help them flesh out the details of the gospel narratives.[70]
Temple disturbance[edit]
Main article: Jesus and the Money Changers
Jesus taught in Jerusalem, and he caused a disturbance at the Temple.[70]In response, the temple authorities arrested him and turned him over to the Roman authorities for execution.[70]He might have been betrayed into the hands of the temple police, but Funk suggests the authorities might have arrested him with no need for a traitor.[70]
Crucifixion[edit]




Antonio Ciseri's 1862 depiction of Ecce Homo, as Pontius Pilate delivers Jesus to the crowd
Jesus was crucified by Pontius Pilate, the Prefectof Iudaea province(26 ADto 36 AD). Some scholars suggest that Pilate executed Jesus as a public nuisance, perhaps with the cooperation of the Jewish authorities.[70]E. P. Sandersargued that the cleansing of the Templewas an act that seriously offended his Jewish audience and eventually led to his death,[101][102][103]while Bart D. Ehrmanargued that Jesus' actions would have been considered treasonous and thus a capital offense by the Romans.[104]The claim that the Sadducee high-priestly leaders and their associates handed Jesus over to the Romans is strongly attested.[69]Historians debate whether Jesus intended to be crucified.[105]
The Jesus Seminar argued that Christian scribes seem to have drawn on scripture in order to flesh out the passion narrative, such as inventing Jesus' trial.[70]However, scholars are split on the historicity of the underlying events.[106]
John Dominic Crossanpoints to the use of the word "kingdom" in his central teachings of the "Kingdom of God," which alone would have brought Jesus to the attention of Roman authority. Rome dealt with Jesus as it commonly did with essentially non-violent dissension: the killing of its leader. It was usually violent uprisings such as those during the Roman-Jewish Wars that warranted the slaughter of leader and followers. As the balance shifted in the early Churchfrom the Jewish communityto Gentile converts, it may have sought to distance itself from rebellious Jews (those who rose up against the Roman occupation). There was also a schism developing within the Jewish community as these believers in Jesus were pushed out of the synagogues after the Roman destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD, see Council of Jamnia. The divergent accounts of Jewish involvement in the trial of Jesussuggest some of the unfavorable sentiments between such Jews that resulted. See also List of events in early Christianity.




Pietro Perugino, Crucifixion of Christ, 1494-1496, Florence
Aside from the fact that the Gospels provide different accounts of the Jewish role in Jesus's death(for example, Mark and Matthew report two separate trials, Luke one, and John none), Fredriksen, like other scholars (see Catchpole 1971) argues that many elements of the gospel accounts could not possibly have happened: according to Jewish law, the court could not meet at night; it could not meet on a major holiday; Jesus's statements to the Sanhedrin or the High Priest (e.g. that he was the messiah) did not constitute blasphemy; the charges that the Gospels purport the Jews to have made against Jesus were not capital crimes against Jewish law; even if Jesus had been accused and found guilty of a capital offenseby the Sanhedrin, the punishment would have been death by stoning (the fates of Saint Stephenand James the Justfor example) and not crucifixion. This necessarily assumes that the Jewish leaders were scrupulously obedient to Roman law, and never broke their own laws, customs or traditions even for their own advantage. In response, it has been argued that the legal circumstances surrounding the trial have not been well understood,[107]and that Jewish leaders were not always strictly obedient, either to Roman law or to their own.[108]Furthermore, talk of a restoration of the Jewish monarchy was seditious under Roman occupation. Further, Jesus would have entered Jerusalem at an especially risky time, during Passover, when popular emotions were running high. Although most Jews did not have the means to travel to Jerusalem for every holiday, virtually all tried to comply with these laws as best they could. And during these festivals, such as the Passover, the population of Jerusalem would swell, and outbreaks of violence were common. Scholars suggest that the High Priest feared that Jesus' talk of an imminent restoration of an independent Jewish state might spark a riot. Maintaining the peace was one of the primary jobs of the Roman-appointed High Priest, who was personally responsible to them for any major outbreak. Scholars therefore argue that he would have arrested Jesus for promoting sedition and rebellion, and turned him over to the Romans for punishment.

Both the gospel accounts and [the] Pauline interpolation [found at 1 Thes 2:14-16] were composed in the period immediately following the terrible war of 66-73. The Church had every reason to assure prospective Gentile audiences that the Christian movement neither threatened nor challenged imperial sovereignty, despitethe fact that their founder had himself been crucified, that is, executed as a rebel.[109]
However, Paul's preaching of the Gospel and its radical social practices were by their very definition a direct affront to the social hierarchy of Greco-Roman society itself, and thus these new teachings undermined the Empire, ultimately leading to full scale Roman persecution of Christians aimed at stamping out the new faith.
Burial and Empty Tomb[edit]
Some scholars are split on whether Jesus was buried. Craig A. Evanscontends that, "the literary, historical and archaeological evidence points in one direction: that the body of Jesus was placed in a tomb, according to Jewish custom."[110]John Dominic Crossan, based on his unique position that the Gospel of Petercontains the oldest primary source about Jesus, argued that the burial accounts become progressively extravagant and thus found it historically unlikely that an enemy would release a corpse, contending that Jesus' followers did not have the means to know what happened to Jesus' body.[111]Crossan's position on the Gospel of Peter has not found scholarly support,[112]from Meyer's description of it as "eccentric and implausible",[113]to Koester's critique of it as "seriously flawed".[114]Habermas argued against Crossan, stating that the response of Jewish authorities against Christian claims for the resurrection presupposed a burial and empty tomb,[115]and he observed the discovery of the body of Yohanan Ben Ha'galgol, a man who died by crucifixion in the first century and was discovered at a burial site outside ancient Jerusalem in an ossuary, arguing that this find revealed important facts about crucifixion and burial in first century Palestine.[116]Other scholars consider the burial by Joseph of Arimatheafound in Mark 15to be historically probable,[117]and some have gone on to argue that the tomb was thereafter discovered empty.[118]More positively, Mark Waterman maintains the Empty Tomb priority over the Appearances.[119]Michael Grant wrote:

[I]f we apply the same sort of criteria that we would apply to any other ancient literary sources, then the evidence is firm and plausible enough to necessitate the conclusion that the tomb was indeed found empty.[120]
However, Marcus Borgnotes:

the first reference to the empty tomb story is rather odd: Mark, writing around 70 CE, tells us that some women found the tomb empty but told no one about it. Some scholars think this indicates that the story of the empty tomb is a late development and that the way Mark tells it explains why it was not widely (or previously) known[121]
Likewise, scholars Gerd Theissen and Annette Merz conclude that "the empty tomb can only be illuminated by the Easter faith (which is based on appearances); the Easter faith cannot be illuminated by the empty tomb."[122]
Resurrection appearances[edit]
Main article: Resurrection appearances of Jesus




The Incredulity of Saint Thomasby Caravaggio(16th century), depicts the resurrected Jesus.
Peter, Paul, and Mary apparently had visionary experiences of a risen Jesus.[70]Paul recorded his vision in an epistle and lists other reported appearances. The original Mark reports Jesus' empty tomb, and the later Gospels and later endings to Mark narrate various resurrection appearances.
The two oldest manuscripts (4th century) of Mark, the earliest Gospel, break off at 16:8 stating that the women came and found an empty tomb "and they said nothing to anyone because they were afraid". (Mk 16:8) The passages stating that he had been seen by Mary Magdelene and the eleven disciples (Mk 16:9-20) were added only later, and the hypothetical original ending was lost. Scholars have put forth a number of theories concerning the resurrection appearances of Jesus. The Jesus Seminarconcluded: "In the view of the Seminar, he did not rise bodily from the dead; the resurrection is based instead on visionary experiencesof Peter, Paul, and Mary."[123]E.P. Sandersargues for the difficulty of accusing the early witnesses of any deliberate fraud:

It is difficult to accuse these sources, or the first believers, of deliberate fraud. A plot to foster belief in the Resurrection would probably have resulted in a more consistent story. Instead, there seems to have been a competition: 'I saw him,' 'so did I,' 'the women saw him first,' 'no, I did; they didn't see him at all,' and so on. Moreover, some of the witnesses of the Resurrection would give their lives for their belief. This also makes fraud unlikely.[124]
Most scholars believe supernatural events cannot be reconstructed using empirical methods, and thus consider the resurrection a non-historical question but instead a philosophical or theological question.[125]
Methods of research[edit]
See also: Quest for the historical Jesus




Albert Schweitzer, whose book coined the term Quest for the historical Jesus
In the early church, there were already tendencies to portray Jesus as a verifiable demonstration of the extraordinary.[126][127]Since the 18th century, scholars have taken part in three separate "quests" for the historical Jesus, attempting to reconstruct various portraits of his life using historical methods.[21][128]While textual criticism(or lower criticism) had been practiced for centuries, a number of approaches to historical analysisand a number of criteria for evaluating the historicity of events emerged as of the 18th century, as a series of "Quests for the historical Jesus" took place. At each stage of development, scholars suggested specific forms and methodologies of analysis and specific criteria to be used to determine historical validity.[129]
The first Quest, which started in 1778, was almost entirely based on biblical criticism. This was supplemented with form criticismin 1919 and redaction criticismin 1948.[129]Form criticism began as an attempt to trace the history of the biblical material before it was written down, and may thus be seen as starting when textual criticism ends.[130]Form criticism looks for patterns within units of biblical text and attempts to trace their origin based on the patterns.[130]Redaction criticism may be viewed as the child of text criticism and form criticism.[131]This approach views an author as a "redactor" i.e. someone preparing a report, and tries to understand how the redactor(s) has molded the narrative to express their own perspectives.[131]
At the end of the first Quest (c. 1906) the criterion for multiple attestationwas used and was the major additional element up to 1950s.[129]The concept behind multiple attestation is simple: as the number of independent sources that vouch for an event increases, confidence in the historical authenticity of the event rises.[129]
Other criteria were being developed at the same time, e.g. "double dissimilarity" in 1913, "least distinctiveness" in 1919 and "coherence and consistency" in 1921.[129]The criterion of double dissimilarity views a reported saying or action of Jesus as possibly authentic, if it is dissimilar from both the Judaism of his time and also from the traditions of the early Christianitythat immediately followed him.[132]The least distinctiveness criterion relies on the assumption that when stories are passed from person to person, the peripheral, least distinct elements may be distorted, but the central element remains unchanged.[133]The criterion of "coherence and consistency" states that material can be used only when other material has been identified as authentic to corroborate it.[129]
The second Quest was launched in 1953, and along with it the criterion of embarrassmentwas introduced.[129]This criterion states that a group is unlikely to invent a story that would be embarrassing to themselves.[129]The criterion of "historical plausibility" was introduced in 1997, after the start of the third Quest in 1988.[129]This principle analyzes the plausibility of an event in two separate components: contextual plausibility and consequential plausibility, i.e. the historical context needs to be suitable, as well as the consequences.[129]
A new characteristic of the modern aspects of the third quest has been the role of archaeology and James Charlesworthstates that few modern scholars now want to overlook the archaeological discoveries that clarify the nature of life in Galileeand Judeaduring the time of Jesus.[134]A further characteristic of the third quest has been its interdisciplinary and global nature of the scholarship.[135]While the first two quests was mostly by European Protestant theologians, the third quest has seen a worldwide influx of scholars from multiple disciplines.[135]
More recently historicists have focussed their attention on the historical writings associated with the period in which Jesus lived[136][137]or on the evidence concerning his family.[138][139][140]The redaction of these documents through early Christian sources till the 3rd or 4th centuries has also been a rich source of new information.
Criticism of Jesus research methods[edit]
A number of scholars have criticised Historical Jesus research for religious bias and lack of methodological soundness, and some have argued that modern biblical scholarship is insufficiently critical and sometimes amounts to covert apologetics.[141][142]
Theological bias[edit]
John Meier, a Catholic priest and a professor of theology at University of Notre Dame, has stated "... I think a lot of the confusion comes from the fact that people claim they are doing a quest for the historical Jesus when de facto they’re doing theology, albeit a theology that is indeed historically informed ..."[143]Meier also wrote that in the past the quest for the historical Jesus has often been motivated more by a desire to produce an alternate Christologythan a true historical search.[28]
The British Methodist scholar Clive Marsh[144]has stated that the construction of the portraits of Jesus as part of various quests have often been driven by "specific agendas" and that historical components of the relevant biblical texts are often interpreted to fit specific goals.[29]Marsh lists theological agendas that aim to confirm the divinity of Jesus, anti-ecclesiasticalagendas that aim to discredit Christianity and political agendas that aim to interpret the teachings of Jesus with the hope of causing social change.[29][145]
The New Testament scholar Nicholas Perrinhas argued that since most biblical scholars are Christians, a certain bias is inevitable, but he does not see this as a major problem.[146][147]
Lack of methodological soundness[edit]
The historical analysis techniques used by biblical scholars have been questioned,[27][28][29]and according to James Dunnit is not possible "to construct (from the available data) a Jesus who will be the real Jesus."[148][149][150]
W.R. Herzog has stated that "What we call the historical Jesus is the composite of the recoverable bits and pieces of historical information and speculation about him that we assemble, construct, and reconstruct. For this reason, the historical Jesus is, in Meier's words, 'a modern abstraction and construct.'"[151]
Donald Akenson, Professor of Irish Studies in the department of history at Queen's University has argued that, with very few exceptions, the historians attempting to reconstruct a biography of the man apart from the mere facts of his existence and crucifixion have not followed sound historical practices. He has stated that there is an unhealthy reliance on consensus, for propositions, which should otherwise be based on primary sources, or rigorous interpretation. He also identifies a peculiar downward dating creep, and holds that some of the criteria being used are faulty. He says that the overwhelming majority of biblical scholars are employed in institutions whose roots are in religious beliefs. Because of this, more than any other group in present day academia, biblical historians are under immense pressure to theologize their historical work. It is only through considerable individual heroism, that many biblical historians have managed to maintain the scholarly integrity of their work.[152][153]
Dale Allison, a Presbyterian theologian and professor of New Testament Exegesis and Early Christianity at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, says, "... We wield our criteria to get what we want ..."[27]
According to James Dunn, "...the 'historical Jesus' is properly speaking a nineteenth- and twentieth-century construction using the data provided by the Synoptic tradition, notJesus back then and nota figure in history."[154](Emphasis in the original). Dunn further explains that "the facts are not to be identified as data; they are always an interpretationof the data.[155]
Since Albert Schweitzer's book The Quest of the Historical Jesus, scholars have for long stated that many of the portraits of Jesus are "pale reflections of the researchers" themselves.[23][156][157]Albert Schweitzer accused early scholars of religious bias. John Dominic Crossansummarized the recent situation by stating that many authors writing about the life of Jesus "... do autobiography and call it biography."[23][158]
Scarcity of sources[edit]
Bart Ehrmanand separately Andreas Köstenbergercontend that given the scarcity of historical sources, it is generally difficult for any scholar to construct a portrait of Jesus that can be considered historically valid beyond the basic elements of his life.[159][160]On the other hand, scholars such as N. T. Wrightand Luke Timothy Johnsonargue that the image of Jesus presented in the gospels is largely accurate, and that dissenting scholars are simply too cautious about what we can claim to know about the ancient period.[125]
Myth theory[edit]
Main article: Christ myth theory
The Christ myth theory is the proposition that Jesus of Nazarethnever existed, or if he did, he had virtually nothing to do with the founding of Christianityand the accounts in the gospels.[161]Many proponents use a three-fold argumentfirst developed in the 19th century: that the New Testamenthas no historical value, that there are no non-Christian references to Jesus Christ from the first century, and that Christianity had pagan and/or mythical roots.[162]
In recent years, there have been a number of booksand documentarieson this subject. Some "mythicists" say that Jesus may have been a real person, but that the biblical accounts of him are almost entirely fictional.[163][164][165]
The scholarly consensus is that the Christ myth theory has been refuted, and that Jesus indeed existed as a historical figure.
See also[edit]
Academic approachBiblical archaeology
Biblical criticism
Biblical manuscript
Census of Quirinius, the enrollment of the Roman provinces of Syria and Judaea for tax purposes taken in the year 6/7.
Criterion of dissimilarity
Criticism of the Bible
Historical background of the New Testament
Historicity of JesusSources for the historicity of Jesus
Historicity of the Bible
Jesus Seminar
Christian approachChronology of Jesus
Detailed Christian timeline
Gospel harmony
Life of Jesus in the New Testament
Ministry of Jesus
Associated sitesÆnon
Al Maghtas
Bethabara
New Testament places associated with Jesus
Qasr el Yahud
Notes[edit]
1.^ Jump up to: abcdeThe Quest for the Plausible Jesus: The Question of Criteriaby Gerd Theissen and Dagmar Winter (Aug 30, 2002) ISBN 0664225373page 5
2.^ Jump up to: abcJesus Research: An International Perspective (Princeton-Prague Symposia Series on the Historical Jesus)by James H. Charlesworth and Petr Pokorny (Sep 15, 2009) ISBN 0802863531pages 1-2
3.Jump up ^The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, edited by Frank Leslie Cross, Elizabeth A. Livingstone, p 779, at http://books.google.co.za/books?id=fUqcAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA779&dq=Historical+Jesus,+Quest+of+the.%22+Oxford+Dictionary+of+the+Christian+Church&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ZPszVN7tN4XEPbyzgMAO&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Historical%20Jesus%2C%20Quest%20of%20the.%22%20Oxford%20Dictionary%20of%20the%20Christian%20Church&f=false
4.Jump up ^Amy-Jill Levinein the The Historical Jesus in Contextedited by Amy-Jill Levine et al. 2006 Princeton Univ Press ISBN 978-0-691-00992-6pages 1-2
5.Jump up ^Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millenniumby Bart D. Ehrman (Sep 23, 1999) ISBN 0195124731Oxford University Press pp. ix-xi
6.Jump up ^Ehrman, Bart. The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings.New York: Oxford University Press, 2003. ISBN 0-19-515462-2, chapters 13, 15
7.^ Jump up to: abIn a 2011 review of the state of modern scholarship, Bart Ehrman(a secular agnostic) wrote: "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees" B. Ehrman, 2011 Forged : writing in the name of GodISBN 978-0-06-207863-6. page 285
8.Jump up ^Robert M. Price(an atheist who denies the existence of Jesus) agrees that this perspective runs against the views of the majority of scholars: Robert M. Price "Jesus at the Vanishing Point" in The Historical Jesus: Five Viewsedited by James K. Beilby & Paul Rhodes Eddy, 2009 InterVarsity, ISBN 028106329Xpage 61
9.^ Jump up to: abMichael Grant(a classicist) states that "In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary." in Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospelsby Michael Grant 2004 ISBN 1898799881page 200
10.^ Jump up to: abRichard A. Burridgestates: "There are those who argue that Jesus is a figment of the Church’s imagination, that there never was a Jesus at all. I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that anymore." in Jesus Now and Thenby Richard A. Burridge and Graham Gould (Apr 1, 2004) ISBN 0802809774page 34
11.Jump up ^Jesus Rememberedby James D. G. Dunn 2003 ISBN 0-8028-3931-2page 339 states of baptism and crucifixion that these "two facts in the life of Jesus command almost universal assent".
12.Jump up ^Prophet and Teacher: An Introduction to the Historical Jesusby William R. Herzog (4 Jul 2005) ISBN 0664225284pages 1-6
13.Jump up ^Crossan, John Dominic (1995). Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography. HarperOne. p. 145. ISBN 0-06-061662-8. "That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be, since both Josephus and Tacitus ... agree with the Christian accounts on at least that basic fact."
14.^ Jump up to: abcJesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galileeby Mark Allan Powell 1998 ISBN 0-664-25703-8pages 168–173
15.^ Jump up to: abcSanders, E. P. The historical figure of Jesus. Penguin, 1993.
16.Jump up ^John Dickson, Jesus: A Short Life.Lion Hudson 2009, pp. 138-9.
17.Jump up ^Theissen, Gerd and Annette Merz. The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide. Fortress Press. 1998. translated from German (1996 edition). Chapter 10. Jesus as healer: the miracles of Jesus.
18.^ Jump up to: abcdTheissen, Gerd and Annette Merz. The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide. Fortress Press. 1998. translated from German (1996 edition)
19.^ Jump up to: abcdefghijCrossan, John Dominic. The essential Jesus. Edison: Castle Books. 1998.
20.Jump up ^E.P. Sanders, The Historical Figure of Jesus.p.280
21.^ Jump up to: abcThe Jesus Quest: The Third Search for the Jew of Nazarethby Ben Witherington (May 8, 1997) ISBN 0830815449pages 9-13
22.^ Jump up to: abJesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galileeby Mark Allan Powell (1 Jan 1999) ISBN 0664257038pages 19-23
23.^ Jump up to: abcdefThe Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown: An Introduction to the New Testamentby Andreas J. Köstenberger, L. Scott Kellum 2009 ISBN 978-0-8054-4365-3pages 124-125
24.^ Jump up to: abcdThe Cambridge History of Christianity, Volume 1 by Margaret M. Mitchell and Frances M. Young (Feb 20, 2006) ISBN 0521812399page 23
25.^ Jump up to: abImages of Christ(Academic Paperback) by Stanley E. Porter, Michael A. Hayes and David Tombs (Dec 19, 2004) ISBN 0567044602T&T Clarkpage 74
26.^ Jump up to: abFamiliar Stranger: An Introduction to Jesus of Nazarethby Michael James McClymond (Mar 22, 2004) ISBN 0802826806pages 16-22
27.^ Jump up to: abcAllison, Dale (February 2009). The Historical Christ and the Theological Jesus. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. p. 59. ISBN 978-0-8028-6262-4. Retrieved Jan 9,2011. "We wield our criteria to get what we want."
28.^ Jump up to: abcJohn P. Meier (26 May 2009). A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, Law and Love. Yale University Press. pp. 6–. ISBN 978-0-300-14096-5. Retrieved 27 August2010.
29.^ Jump up to: abcdClive Marsh, "Diverse Agendas at Work in the Jesus Quest" in Handbook for the Study of the Historical Jesusby Tom Holmen and Stanley E. Porter (Jan 12, 2011) ISBN 9004163727pages 986-1002
30.Jump up ^John P. Meier"Criteria: How do we decide what comes from Jesus?" in The Historical Jesus in Recent Researchby James D. G. Dunn and Scot McKnight (Jul 15, 2006) ISBN 1575061007page 124 "Since in the quest for the historical Jesus almost anything is possible, the function of the criteria is to pass from the merely possible to the really probable, to inspect various probabilities, and to decide which candidate is most probable. Ordinarily the criteria can not hope to do more."
31.Jump up ^The Historical Jesus of the Gospelsby Craig S. Keener (13 Apr 2012) ISBN 0802868886page 163
32.Jump up ^Jesus in Contemporary Scholarshipby Marcus J. Borg (1 Aug 1994) ISBN 1563380943pages 4-6
33.Jump up ^Robert E. Van VoorstJesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient EvidenceEerdmans Publishing, 2000. ISBN 0-8028-4368-9page 16 states: "biblical scholars and classical historians regard theories of non-existence of Jesus as effectively refuted"
34.Jump up ^James D. G. Dunn"Paul's understanding of the death of Jesus" in Sacrifice and Redemptionedited by S. W. Sykes (Dec 3, 2007) Cambridge University Press ISBN 052104460Xpages 35-36 states that the theories of non-existence of Jesus are "a thoroughly dead thesis"
35.Jump up ^The Gospels and Jesusby Graham Stanton, 1989 ISBN 0192132415Oxford University Press, p. 145: "Today nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed".
36.Jump up ^Encyclopedia of theology: a concise Sacramentum mundiby Karl Rahner 2004 ISBN 0-86012-006-6pages 730-731
37.Jump up ^Van Voorst, Robert E (2000). Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence. Eerdmans Publishing. ISBN 0-8028-4368-9-page 15
38.Jump up ^"What about the resurrection? ... Some people believe it did, some believe it didn't. ... But if you do believe it, it is not as a historian" Ehrman, B. Jesus, Interrupted, pg 176 HarperOne; 1 Reprint edition (2 February 2010)
39.Jump up ^Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee by Mark Allan Powell 1998 ISBN 0-664-25703-8page 181
40.^ Jump up to: abJesus and the Gospels: An Introduction and Surveyby Craig L. Blomberg 2009 ISBN 0-8054-4482-3pages 431-436
41.Jump up ^Van Voorst (2000)pp. 39-53
42.Jump up ^Schreckenberg, Heinz; Kurt Schubert (1992). Jewish Traditions in Early Christian Literature. ISBN 90-232-2653-4.
43.Jump up ^Kostenberger, Andreas J.; L. Scott Kellum; Charles L. Quarles (2009). The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown: An Introduction to the New Testament. ISBN 0-8054-4365-7.
44.Jump up ^The new complete works of Josephusby Flavius Josephus, William Whiston, Paul L. Maier ISBN 0-8254-2924-2pages 662-663
45.Jump up ^Josephus XXby Louis H. Feldman1965, ISBN 0674995023page 496
46.Jump up ^Van Voorst, Robert E. (2000). Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient EvidenceISBN 0-8028-4368-9. page 83
47.Jump up ^Flavius Josephus; Maier, Paul L. (December 1995). Josephus, the essential works: a condensation of Jewish antiquities and The Jewish warISBN 978-0-8254-3260-6pages 284-285
48.Jump up ^P.E. Easterling, E. J. Kenney (general editors), The Cambridge History of Latin Literature, page 892 (Cambridge University Press, 1982, reprinted 1996). ISBN 0-521-21043-7
49.^ Jump up to: abRobert E. Van Voorst, Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence, Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2000. p 39- 53
50.Jump up ^Eddy, Paul; Boyd, Gregory (2007). The Jesus Legend: A Case for the Historical Reliability of the Synoptic Jesus TraditionBaker Academic, ISBN 0-8010-3114-1page 127
51.Jump up ^F.F. Bruce,Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974) p. 23
52.Jump up ^Theissen, Gerd; Merz, Annette (1998). The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. p. 83. ISBN 978-0-8006-3122-2.
53.Jump up ^The Case Against Christianity, By Michael Martin, pg 50-51, at http://books.google.co.za/books?id=wWkC4dTmK0AC&pg=PA52&dq=historicity+of+jesus&hl=en&sa=X&ei=o-_8U5-yEtTH7AbBpoCoAg&ved=0CCUQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=tacitus&f=false
54.Jump up ^The Historical Jesus in the Twentieth Century: 1900-1950, By Walter P. Weaver, pg 53, pg 57, at http://books.google.co.za/books?id=1CZbuFBdAMUC&pg=PA45&dq=historicity+of+jesus&hl=en&sa=X&ei=o-_8U5-yEtTH7AbBpoCoAg&ved=0CEoQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=tacitus&f=false
55.^ Jump up to: abSecret of Regeneration, By Hilton Hotema, pg 100, at http://books.google.co.za/books?id=jCaopp3R5B0C&pg=PA100&dq=interpolations+in+tacitus&hl=en&sa=X&ei=CRf-U9-VGZCe7AbxrIDQCA&ved=0CCAQ6AEwATge#v=onepage&q=interpolations%20in%20tacitus&f=false
56.Jump up ^Jesus, University Books, New York, 1956, p.13
57.Jump up ^France, RT(1986). Evidence for Jesus (Jesus Library). Trafalgar Square Publishing. pp. 19–20. ISBN 0-340-38172-8.
58.Jump up ^Schachter/H.Freedman, Jacob. "Sanhedrin". come-and-hear.com. The Soncino Press. Retrieved 22 January2015.
59.^ Jump up to: abcdefghTheissen, Gerd and Annette Merz. The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide. Fortress Press. 1998. translated from German (1996 edition). Chapter 1. The quest of the historical Jesus. p. 1–15.
60.^ Jump up to: abcdefghiSanders, E. P. The historical figure of Jesus. Penguin, 1993. Chapter 15, Jesus' view of his role in God's plan.
61.Jump up ^Funk, Robert W.and the Jesus Seminar. The gospel of Jesus: according to the Jesus Seminar.HarperSanFrancisco. 1999.
62.Jump up ^Brown, Raymond E.; et al. (1990). The New Jerome Biblical Commentary. Prentice Hall. ISBN 0-13-614934-0.
63.Jump up ^Vermes, GezaJesus the Jew, Fortress Press, New York 1981. p.209
64.Jump up ^Paolo Flores d'Arcais, MicroMega3/2007, p.43
65.Jump up ^Dunn, James D. G.; McKnight, Scot (2005). The historical Jesus in recent research Volume 10 of Sources for biblical and theological study. Eisenbrauns(EISENBRAUNS). p. 325. ISBN 1575061007.
66.Jump up ^Harris, Stephen L., Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985. "John" p. 302-310
67.Jump up ^"[T]here is no reason to think that Jesus was called God in the earliest layers of New Testament tradition." in "Does the New Testament call Jesus God?" in Theological Studies, 26, (1965) p. 545-73
68.Jump up ^John Hick, The Metaphor of God Incarnate, page 27: "A further point of broad agreement among New Testament scholars ... is that the historical Jesus did not make the claim to deity that later Christian thought was to make for him: he did not understand himself to be God, or God the Son, incarnate. ... such evidence as there is has led the historians of the period to conclude, with an impressive degree of unanimity, that Jesus did not claim to be God incarnate."; Gerd Lüdemann, "An Embarrassing Misrepresentation", Free Inquiry, October / November 2007: "the broad consensus of modern New Testament scholars that the proclamation of Jesus' exalted nature was in large measure the creation of the earliest Christian communities."
69.^ Jump up to: ab"Jesus Christ." Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005
70.^ Jump up to: abcdefghijklFunk, Robert W.and the Jesus Seminar. The acts of Jesus: the search for the authentic deeds of Jesus.HarperSanFrancisco. 1998.
71.Jump up ^Crossan, John Dominic. The essential Jesus. Edison: Castle Books. 1998. p. 146
72.^ Jump up to: abcdefgFunk, Robert W.and the Jesus Seminar. The acts of Jesus: the search for the authentic deeds of Jesus.HarperSanFrancisco. 1998. John the Baptist cameo. p. 268
73.Jump up ^Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels.HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. p. 178
74.Jump up ^See Matthew 11:7-10. Crossan, John Dominic. The essential Jesus. Edison: Castle Books. 1998. p. 146
75.Jump up ^Mark 6:14, 16, 8:28
76.Jump up ^Harris, Stephen L., Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985. "The Historical Jesus" p. 255-260
77.Jump up ^following the conclusion of Josephus' Antiquities18.5: "Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion, (for they seemed ready to do any thing he should advise,) thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties, by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it would be too late."
78.Jump up ^Mark 7:24-30
79.Jump up ^Introduction. Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels.HarperSanFrancisco. 1993.
80.Jump up ^First: 2:13and 2:23; second: 6:4; third: 11:55, 12:1, 13:1, 18:29, 18:39, 19:14
81.Jump up ^Richard L. Niswonger, New Testament History, Zondervan, 1993, p. 152
82.Jump up ^Geoffrey W. Bromiley, International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: A-D, Wm. B. Eerdmans 1995p. 682
83.Jump up ^The Fourth Gospel and the Quest for Jesus: Modern Foundations Reconsidered, Continuum International Publishing Group, 2006p. 162
84.Jump up ^Ehrman, Bart. Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium.Oxford. 1999. page 127.
85.Jump up ^Geza Vermes. The Authentic Gospels of Jesus. Penguin, 2003. p. 381.
86.Jump up ^E. P. Sanders. The Historical Figure of Jesus. Penguin, 1993. p. 178
87.^ Jump up to: abFunk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels.HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. "God's Imperial Rule: Present or Future," p 136-137.
88.^ Jump up to: abcFunk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels.HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. Introduction, p 1-30.
89.Jump up ^Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels.HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. pp. 103-104.
90.^ Jump up to: abEhrman, Bart. Peter, Paul, and Mary Magdalene: The Followers of Jesus in History and Legend. Oxford University Press, USA. 2006. ISBN 0-19-530013-0
91.Jump up ^Bruce Chilton, Craig A. Evans, Studying the Historical Jesus: Evaluations of the State of Current Research(BRILL, 1998 ISBN 9004111425, 9789004111424), p. 136
92.Jump up ^Catherine M. Murphy, The Historical Jesus for Dummies2007 ISBN 0470167858, 9780470167854, p. 23
93.Jump up ^Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels.HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. "Mark," p 39-127.
94.Jump up ^Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels.HarperSanFrancisco. 1993.
95.Jump up ^Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels.HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. page 221.
96.Jump up ^Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels.HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. page 220.
97.Jump up ^Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels.HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. page 221.
98.Jump up ^Bart D. Ehrman, Fact and Fiction in the Da Vinci Codep.144
99.Jump up ^Jewish Encyclopedia: Essenes: "The similarity in many respects between Christianity and Essenism is striking: There were the same communism (Acts iv. 34-35); the same belief in baptism or bathing, and in the power of prophecy; the same aversion to marriage, enhanced by firmer belief in the Messianic advent; the same system of organization, and the same rules for the traveling brethren delegated to charity-work (see Apostle and Apostleship); and, above all, the same love-feasts or brotherly meals (comp. Agape; Didascalia)."
100.Jump up ^Sanders, E. P.The historical figure of Jesus. Penguin, 1993. p. 249
101.Jump up ^Sanders 1987, p.[citation needed]
102.Jump up ^The Jesus Seminar concurs that the temple incident led to Jesus' execution.
103.Jump up ^The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church reports that "it is possible" that the temple disturbance led to Jesus' arrest, offers no alternative reason, and states more generally that a political rather than religious motivation was likely behind it. "Jesus Christ." Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005
104.Jump up ^Ehrman 1999, p. 221-3
105.Jump up ^Are You the One? The Textual Dynamics of Messianic Self-Identity
106.Jump up ^Brown 1993, vol. 1, p. 711-12; Funk 1998, p. 152-3
107.Jump up ^Barrett, CK 'The Gospel According to St. John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes', Westminster John Knox Press, 1978, page 49, 'The alleged contraventions of Jewish law seem to rest upon misunderstandings of Jewish texts'
108.Jump up ^Barrett, CK 'The Gospel According to St. John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes', Westminster John Knox Press, 1978, pp. 49-50, 'The explanation is that special circumstances were regularly allowed to modify the course of the law. For example, Simeon b. Shetah (fl.104-69 B.C.) caused to be hanged 80 women (witches) in one day, though it was against the law to judge more than two. 'The hour demanded it' (Sanhedrin 6.4, Y. Sanhedrin 6,235c,58). Nisan 15, so far from being an unlikely day, was one of the best possible days for the execution of Jesus. The regulation for the condemnation of a 'rebellious teacher' runs: 'He was kept in guard until one of the Feasts (passover, Pentecost, or Tabernacles) and he was put to death on one of the Feasts, for it is written, And all the people shall hear and fear, and do no more presumptuously (Deuteronomy 17.13)' (Sanhedrin 11.4). There was only one day on which 'all the people' were gathered together in Jerusalem for the Passover; it was Nisan 15, the Marcan date for the crucifixion.'
109.Jump up ^Fredriksen, Paula. (2000) From Jesus to Christ: The Origins of the New Testament Images of Christ.Second Edition. Yale University Press. p. 122 ISBN 0300084579
110.Jump up ^Craig A. Evans, "The Silence of Burial" in Jesus, the Final DaysEd. Troy A. Miller. p.68
111.Jump up ^Crossan 1994, p. 154-158; cf. Ehrman 1999, p.229
112.Jump up ^N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), p. 49; who wrote "[Crossan's hypothesis] has not been accepted yet by any other serious scholar."
113.Jump up ^Ben Meyer, critical notice of The Historical Jesus, by John Dominic Crossan, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 55 (1993): 575
114.Jump up ^Helmut Koester, Ancient Christian Gospels (London: SCM, 1990), p. 220.
115.Jump up ^G. Habermas, The Historical Jesus, (College Press, 1996) p. 128; he observed that the Jewish polemic is recorded in Matthew 28:11-15and was employed through the second century, cf. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 108; Tertullian, On Spectacles, 30
116.Jump up ^G. Habermas, The Historical Jesus, (College Press, 1996) p. 173; cf. Vasilius Tzaferis, "Jewish Tombs At and Near Giv'at ha-Mivtar", Israel Exploration Journal20 (1970) pp. 38-59".
117.Jump up ^Brown 1993, vol. 2, ch. 46
118.Jump up ^e.g. Paul L. Maier, "The Empty Tomb as History", in Christianity Today, March, 1975, p. 5
119.Jump up ^Mark W. Waterman, The Empty Tomb Tradition of Mark: Text, History, and Theological Struggles(Los Angeles: Agathos Press, 2006) p. 211-212
120.Jump up ^M. Grant, Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels(New York: Scribner's, 1977) p. 176
121.Jump up ^Borg, Marcus J. "Thinking About Easter" Bible Review. April 1994, p. 15 and 49
122.Jump up ^Theissen, Gerd; and Merz, Annette. The historical Jesus: A comprehensive guide. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. 1998. Tr from German (1996 edition). p. 503. ISBN 978-0-8006-3123-9
123.Jump up ^Funk, Robert W (1998). The Acts of Jesus: The Search for the Authentic Deeds of Jesus. A Polebridge Press Book from Harper San Francisco. ISBN 0-06-062978-9.
124.Jump up ^"Jesus Christ." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2007. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 10 Jan. 2007
125.^ Jump up to: abMeier 1994 v.2 ch. 17; Ehrman 1999 p.227-8
126.Jump up ^Georgi, Dieter (1986). The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians. Philadelphia, PA: Fortress.
127.Jump up ^Georgi, Dieter (1991). Theocracy in Paul's Praxis and Theology. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress.
128.Jump up ^The Quest for the Plausible Jesus: The Question of Criteriaby Gerd Theissen and Dagmar Winter (Aug 30, 2002) ISBN 0664225373pages 1-6
129.^ Jump up to: abcdefghijCriteria for Authenticity in Historical-Jesus Researchby Stanley E. Porter 2004 ISBN 0567043606pages 100-120
130.^ Jump up to: abThe Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theologyby Alan Richardson 1983 ISBN 0664227481pages 215-216
131.^ Jump up to: abInterpreting the New Testamentby Daniel J. Harrington (Jun 1990) ISBN 0814651240pages 96-98
132.Jump up ^The Historical Jesus and the Final Judgment Sayings in Qby Brian Han Gregg (30 Jun 2006) ISBN 3161487508page 29
133.Jump up ^Criteria for Authenticity in Historical-Jesus Researchby Stanley E. Porter 2004 ISBN 0567043606pages 77-78
134.Jump up ^"Jesus Research and Archaeology: A New Perspective" by James H. Charlesworth in Jesus and archaeologyedited by James H. Charlesworth 2006 ISBN 0-8028-4880-Xpages 11-15
135.^ Jump up to: abSoundings in the Religion of Jesus: Perspectives and Methods in Jewish and Christian Scholarshipby Bruce ChiltonAnthony Le Donneand Jacob Neusner2012 ISBN 0800698010page 132
136.Jump up ^Mason, Steve (2002), "Josephus and the New Testament" (Baker Academic)
137.Jump up ^Tabor, James (2012)"Paul and Jesus: How the Apostle Transformed Christianity" (Simon & Schuster)
138.Jump up ^Eisenman, Robert (1998), "James the Brother of Jesus: The Key to Unlocking the Secrets of Early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls" (Watkins)
139.Jump up ^Butz, Jeffrey "The Brother of Jesus and the Lost Teachings of Christianity" (Inner Traditions)
140.Jump up ^Tabor, James (2007), "The Jesus Dynasty: The Hidden History of Jesus, His Royal Family, and the Birth of Christianity"
141.Jump up ^"Introducing the Journal of Higher Criticism".
142.Jump up ^Hendel, Ronald (June 2010). "Knowledge and Power in Biblical Scholarship". Retrieved 2011-01-06. "... The problem at hand is how to preserve the critical study of the Bible in a professional society that has lowered its standards to the degree that apologetics passes as scholarship ..."
143.Jump up ^Meier, John. "Finding the Historical Jesus: An Interview With John P. Meier". St. Anthony Messenger. Retrieved Jan 6,2011. "... I think a lot of the confusion comes from the fact that people claim they are doing a quest for the historical Jesus when de facto they’re doing theology, albeit a theology that is indeed historically informed."
144.Jump up ^"Biography Clive Marsh".
145.Jump up ^Clive Marsh "Quests of the Historical Jesus in New Historicist Perspective" in Biblical Interpretation JournalVolume 5, Number 4, 1997 , pp. 403-437(35)
146.Jump up ^"Jesus is His Own Ideology: An Interview with Nick Perrin"."My point in the book is to disabuse readers of the notion that Jesus scholars are scientists wearing white lab coats. Like everyone else, they want certain things to be true about Jesus and equally want certain others not to be true of him. I’m included in this (I really hope that I am right in believing that Jesus is both Messiah and Lord.) Will this shape my scholarship? Absolutely. How can it not? We should be okay with that."
147.Jump up ^McKnight, Scot (4/09/2010). "The Jesus We'll Never Know". Retrieved Jan 15,2011. "One has to wonder if the driving force behind much historical Jesus scholarship is ... a historian's genuine (and disinterested) interest in what really happened. The theological conclusions of those who pursue the historical Jesus simply correlate too strongly with their own theological predilections to suggest otherwise."Check date values in: |date=(help)
148.Jump up ^Jesus RememberedVolume 1, by James D. G. Dunn 2003 ISBN 0-8028-3931-2pp. 125-126: "the historical Jesus is properly speaking a nineteenth- and twentieth-century construction using the data supplied by the Synoptictradition, notJesus back then," (the Jesus of Nazareth who walked the hills of Galilee), "and nota figure in history whom we can realistically use to critique the portrayal of Jesus in the Synoptic tradition."
149.Jump up ^Meir, Marginal Jew, 1:21-25
150.Jump up ^T. Merrigan, The Historical Jesus in the Pluralist Theology of Religions,in The Myriad Christ: Plurality and the Quest for Unity in Contemporary Christology(ed. T. Merrigan and J. Haers). Princeton-Prague Symposium on Jesus Research, & Charlesworth, J. H. Jesus research: New methodologies and perceptions : the second Princeton-Prague Symposium on Jesus Research, Princeton 2007,p. 77-78: "Dunn points out as well that 'the Enlightenment Ideal of historical objectivity also projected a false goal onto the quest for the historical Jesus,' which implied that there was a 'historical Jesus,' objectively verifiable, 'who will be different from the dogmatic Christ and the Jesus of the Gospels and who will enable us to criticize the dogmatic Christ and the Jesus of the Gospels.' (Jesus Remembered, p. 125)."
151.Jump up ^Herzog, W. R. (2005). Prophet and teacher: An introduction to the historical Jesus. Louisville, Ky: Westminster John Knox Press. p. 6
152.Jump up ^Akenson, Donald (1998). Surpassing wonder: the invention of the Bible and the Talmuds. University of Chicago Press. pp. 539–555. ISBN 978-0-226-01073-1. Retrieved Jan 8,2011. "... The point I shall argue below is that, the agreed evidentiary practices of the historians of Yeshua, despite their best efforts, have not been those of sound historical practice ..."
153.Jump up ^"Queen's University:Department of History". Retrieved Jan 22,2011. "Don Akenson: Professor Irish Studies"
154.Jump up ^Dunn, James (2003). Christianity In the Making Volume 1: Jesus Remembered. Cambridge, MA: Eermans. p. 126.
155.Jump up ^Jesus Remembered, by James Dunn; p.102
156.Jump up ^Jesus the Christby Walter Kasper (Nov 1976) ISBN page 31
157.Jump up ^Theological Hermeneuticsby Angus Paddison (Jun 6, 2005) ISBN 0521849837Cambridge Univ Press page 43
158.Jump up ^The Historical Jesusby John Dominic Crossan (Feb 26, 1993) ISBN 0060616296page xviii
159.Jump up ^The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown: An Introduction to the New Testamentby Andreas J. Köstenberger, L. Scott Kellum 2009 ISBN 978-0-8054-4365-3pages 117–125
160.Jump up ^Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millenniumby Bart D. Ehrman 1999 ISBN 0-19-512473-1pages 22–23
161.Jump up ^Bart Ehrman, Did Jesus Exist?Harper Collins, 2012, p. 12, ""In simpler terms, the historical Jesus did not exist . Or if he did, he had virtually nothing to do with the founding of Christianity." further quoting as authoritative the fuller definition provided by Earl Dohertyin Jesus: Neither God Nor Man.Age of Reason, 2009, pp. vii–viii: it is "the theory that no historical Jesus worthy of the name existed, that Christianity began with a belief in a spiritual, mythical figure, that the Gospels are essentially allegory and fiction, and that no single identifiable person lay at the root of the Galilean preaching tradition."
162.Jump up ^"Jesus Outside the New Testament" Robert E. Van Voorst, 2000, p=8-9
163.Jump up ^Richard Dawkins. The God Delusion. p. 122. ISBN 1-4303-1230-0.
164.Jump up ^God is Not Great, Christopher Hitchens, 2007, Chapter 8
165.Jump up ^"The Messiah Myth: The Near Eastern Roots of Jesus and David" Thomas L. ThompsonBasic Book Perseus Books' 2005
References[edit]
Barnett, Paul W.(1997). Jesus and the Logic of History (New Studies in Biblical Theology 3). Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press. ISBN 0-85111-512-8.
Bauckham, Richard(2011). Jesus: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-957527-4.
Brown, Raymond E.(1993). The Death of the Messiah: from Gethsemane to the Grave. New York: Anchor Bible. ISBN 0-385-49449-1.
Brown, Raymond E. et al.The New Jerome Biblical CommentaryPrentice Hall 1990 ISBN 0-13-614934-0
Bock, Darrell L., Studying the Historical Jesus: A Guide to Sources and Methods.. Baker Academic: 2002. ISBN 978-0-8010-2451-1.
Craffert, Pieter F. and Botha, Pieter J. J. "Why Jesus Could Walk On The Sea But He Could Not Read And Write". Neotestamenica. 39.1, 2005.
Crossan, John Dominic. Jesus : A Revolutionary Biography. Harpercollins: 1994. ISBN 0-06-061661-X.
Dickson, John.Jesus: A Short Life, Lion Hudson plc, 2008, ISBN 0-8254-7802-2, ISBN 978-0-8254-7802-4, Google Books
Ehrman, Bart D. (1999). Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium. New York: Oxford. ISBN 0-19-512473-1.
Fiensy, David A.; Jesus the Galilean: soundings in a first century life, Gorgias Press LLC, 2007, ISBN 1-59333-313-7, ISBN 978-1-59333-313-3, Google books
Fredriksen, Paula (2000). Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews: A Jewish Life and the Emergence of Christianity. New York: Vintage Books. ISBN 978-0-679-76746-6.
Gnilka, Joachim.; Jesus of Nazareth: Message and History, Hendrickson Publishers, 1997.
Gowler, David B.; What Are They Saying About the Historical Jesus?, Paulist Press, 2007,
Grant, Michael. Jesus: A Historian's Review of the Gospels.Scribner's, 1977. ISBN 0-684-14889-7.
Funk, Robert W.(1998). The Acts of Jesus: The Search for the Authentic Deeds of Jesus. HarperSanFrancisco. ISBN 0-06-062978-9.
Harris, by William V. Ancient Literacy. Harvard University Press: 1989. ISBN 0-674-03380-9.
Meier, John P., A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, Doubleday,
v. 1, The Roots of the Problem and the Person, 1991, ISBN 0-385-26425-9v. 2, Mentor, Message, and Miracles, 1994, ISBN 0-385-46992-6v. 3, Companions and Competitors, 2001, ISBN 0-385-46993-4v. 4, Law and Love, 2009, ISBN 978-0-300-14096-5O'Collins, G.Jesus: A Portrait. Darton, Longman and Todd: 2008. ISBN 978-0232527193
O'Collins, G.Christology: A Biblical, Historical, and Systematic Study of Jesus. OUP: 2009. ISBN 978-0199557875
Sanders, E.P.Jesus and Judaism. Augsburg Fortress Publishers: 1987.
Sanders, E.P.The Historical Figure of Jesus. Lane The Penguin Press: 1993.
Vermes, G.Jesus the Jew: A Historian's Reading of the Gospels. SCM Classics:2001, ISBN 0-334-02839-6
Theissen, Gerdand Merz, Annette. The Historical Jesus: A Comprehensive Guide. Fortress Press: Minneapolis, 1998. ISBN 0-8006-3122-6.
Van Voorst, Robert E., Jesus Outside the New Testament, 2000, Eerdmans, google books
Witherington III, Ben. The Jesus Quest: The Third Search for the Jew of Nazareth. InterVarsity Press: 1997. ISBN 0-8308-1544-9.
Wright, N.T.Christian Origins and the Question of God, a projected six volume series of which three have been published under:
v. 1, The New Testament and the People of God.Augsburg Fortress Publishers: 1992.;v. 2, Jesus and the Victory of God.Augsburg Fortress Publishers: 1997.;v. 3, The Resurrection of the Son of God.Augsburg Fortress Publishers: 2003.Wright, N.T.The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering who Jesus was and is. IVP 1996
Yaghjian, Lucretia. "Ancient Reading", in Richard Rohrbaugh, ed., The Social Sciences in New Testament Interpretation. Hendrickson Publishers: 2004. ISBN 1-56563-410-1.
External links[edit]
"Jesus Christ". Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 2009. The first section, on Jesus' life and ministry


[show]
v·
t·
e

Jesus






























































































Commons page
Wikiquote page




[show]
v·
t·
e

The Bible and history











Bible.malmesbury.arp.jpg





























Categories: Jesus and history
Perspectives on Jesus














Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk










Read

Edit

View history


















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Esperanto
Français
한국어
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Interlingua
Italiano
Nederlands
日本語
Nordfriisk
Plattdüütsch
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Edit links
This page was last modified on 24 April 2015, at 14:18.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Useand Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus













Biblical studies

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Biblical scholar)
Jump to: navigation, search

For other uses, see Bible study (disambiguation).
Part of a series on
The Bible
The Malmesbury Bible


Canons ·
 Books
 [show]






















Authorship ·
 Development
 [show]












Translations ·
 Manuscripts
 [show]














Biblical studies[hide]


Archeology ·
 Artifacts ·
 Dating ·

Historicity ·
 Internal consistency ·

People ·
 Places ·
 Names
 Novum Testamentum Graece
Documentary hypothesis
Wiseman hypothesis
Synoptic problem
NT textual categories
Science and the Bible

Biblical criticism

Historical ·
 Textual ·
 Source ·
 Form ·

Redaction ·
 Canonical
 


Interpretation[hide]
Hermeneutics
Pesher ·
 Midrash ·
 Pardes

Allegorical interpretation ·
 Literalism

Prophecy ·
 Inspiration
 

Perspectives[hide]

Gnostic ·
 Islamic ·
 Qur'anic

Inerrancy ·
 Infallibility
 Criticism of the Bible

Wikipedia book Bible book    Portal icon Bible portal
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Biblical studies is the academic application of a set of diverse disciplines to the study of the Jewish and Christian scriptures, the Bible.[1][2] For its theory and methods, the field draws on disciplines ranging from archaeology, literary criticism, history, philology, and social sciences.[1]
Many secular as well as religious universities and colleges offer courses in biblical studies, usually in departments of religious studies, theology, Judaic studies, history, or comparative literature. Biblical scholars do not necessarily have a faith commitment to the texts they study, but many do.


Contents  [hide]
1 Definition
2 Academic societies
3 Biblical criticism
4 History of the Bible
5 Original languages
6 See also
7 References
8 Further reading
9 External links

Definition[edit]
The Oxford Handbook of Biblical Studies defines the field as a set of various, and in some cases independent disciplines for the study of the collection of ancient texts generally known as the Bible.[1] These disciplines include but are not limited to archaeology, Egyptology, textual criticism, linguistics, history, sociology and theology.[1]
Academic societies[edit]
Several academic associations and societies promote research in the field. The largest is the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL) with around 8,500 members in more than 80 countries. It publishes many books and journals in the biblical studies, including its flagship, the Journal of Biblical Literature. SBL hosts one academic conference in North America and another international conference each year, as well as smaller regional meetings.
Biblical criticism[edit]
The research of biblical scholars is frequently called biblical criticism. It does not presuppose, but also does not deny, belief in the supernatural origins of the scriptures. Instead, it applies to the Bible methods of textual analysis used in other disciplines of the humanities and social sciences. Many biblical scholars also interact with traditional Jewish and Christian interpreters and methods of interpretation, which may be called biblical exegesis or hermeneutics and history of interpretation or reception history.
History of the Bible[edit]
Historical research has often dominated modern biblical studies. Biblical scholars usually try to interpret a particular text within its original historical context and use whatever information is available to reconstruct that setting. Historical criticism aims to determine the provenance, authorship, and process by which ancient texts were composed. Famous theories of historical criticism include the documentary hypothesis which suggests that the Pentateuch was compiled from four different written sources, and different reconstructions of "the historical Jesus" based primarily on the differences among the canonical Gospels.
Original languages[edit]
Most of the Jewish Bible, the Tanakh, which is the basis of the Christian Old Testament, was written in Biblical Hebrew, though a few chapters were written in Biblical Aramaic. The New Testament was written in Koine Greek, with possible Aramaic undertones, as was the first translation of the Jewish Bible known as the Septuagint or Greek Old Testament. Therefore, Hebrew, Greek and sometimes Aramaic continue to be taught in most universities, colleges and seminaries with strong programs in biblical studies.
See also[edit]
The Bible and history
Biblical hermeneutics
Chronology of the Bible
Higher criticism
References[edit]
1.^ Jump up to: a b c d The Oxford Handbook of Biblical Studies by J. W. Rogerson and Judith M. Lieu (May 18, 2006) ISBN 0199254257 page xvii
2.Jump up ^ Introduction to Biblical Studies, Second Edition by Steve Moyise (Oct 27, 2004) ISBN 0567083977 pages 11–12
Further reading[edit]
The Cambridge History of the Bible, 3 vols., eds. P. R. Ackroyd, C. F. Evans, S. L. Greenslade and G. W. H. Lampe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963, 1969, 1970.
Frei, Hans. The Eclipse of Biblical Narrative: A Study in Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century Hermeneutics. New Haven: Yale, 1974.
Greenspahn, Frederick E. "Biblical Scholars, Medieval and Modern," in J. Neusner et al. (eds.), Judaic Perspectives on Ancient Israel (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987), pp. 245–258.
Harrison, Peter. The Bible, Protestantism, and the Rise of Natural Science. Cambridge: Cambridge U.P., 2001.
Harrisville, Roy A. & Walter Sundberg. The Bible in Modern Culture: Baruch Spinoza to Brevard Childs. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001.
Knight, Douglas A. and Gene M. Tucker, eds. The Hebrew Bible and Its Modern Interpreters. Philadelphia: Fortress/Chico: Scholars Press, 1985.
Nicholson, Ernest W. The Pentateuch in the Twentieth Century: The Legacy of Julius Wellhausen. Oxford: Clarendon, 1998.
Noll, Mark A. Between Faith and Criticism: Evangelicals, Scholarship, and the Bible in America. Harper & Row, 1986.
Reventlow, Henning Graf. The Authority of the Bible and the Rise of the Modern World. Tr. J. Bowden. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985.
Sherwood, Yvonne and Stephen D. Moore. The Invention of the Biblical Scholar: A Critical Manifesto. Fortress, 2011.
Sperling, S. David. Students of the Covenant: A History of Jewish Biblical Scholarship in North America. Atlanta Scholars Press, 1992.
Sugirtharajah, R.S. The Bible and the Third World: Precolonial, Colonial, and Postcolonial Encounters. Cambridge: Cambridge U.P., 2001.
External links[edit]
Bible Studies - Staying in the Word
Society of Biblical Literature
AcademicBible.com from the German Bible Society
Wabash Center's Internet Guid to Religion: Bible


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Christian theology



































































































































































































































































































































P christianity.svg




[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
The Bible and history











Bible.malmesbury.arp.jpg


























  


Categories: Biblical studies
Christian terminology


Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Български
Čeština
Deutsch
Français
한국어
Italiano
Magyar
Nederlands
日本語
Polski
Português
Русский
Simple English
Slovenčina
Svenska
Українська
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 12 December 2014, at 01:32.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_studies










Biblical studies

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Biblical scholar)
Jump to: navigation, search

For other uses, see Bible study (disambiguation).
Part of a series on
The Bible
The Malmesbury Bible


Canons ·
 Books
 [show]






















Authorship ·
 Development
 [show]












Translations ·
 Manuscripts
 [show]














Biblical studies[hide]


Archeology ·
 Artifacts ·
 Dating ·

Historicity ·
 Internal consistency ·

People ·
 Places ·
 Names
 Novum Testamentum Graece
Documentary hypothesis
Wiseman hypothesis
Synoptic problem
NT textual categories
Science and the Bible

Biblical criticism

Historical ·
 Textual ·
 Source ·
 Form ·

Redaction ·
 Canonical
 


Interpretation[hide]
Hermeneutics
Pesher ·
 Midrash ·
 Pardes

Allegorical interpretation ·
 Literalism

Prophecy ·
 Inspiration
 

Perspectives[hide]

Gnostic ·
 Islamic ·
 Qur'anic

Inerrancy ·
 Infallibility
 Criticism of the Bible

Wikipedia book Bible book    Portal icon Bible portal
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Biblical studies is the academic application of a set of diverse disciplines to the study of the Jewish and Christian scriptures, the Bible.[1][2] For its theory and methods, the field draws on disciplines ranging from archaeology, literary criticism, history, philology, and social sciences.[1]
Many secular as well as religious universities and colleges offer courses in biblical studies, usually in departments of religious studies, theology, Judaic studies, history, or comparative literature. Biblical scholars do not necessarily have a faith commitment to the texts they study, but many do.


Contents  [hide]
1 Definition
2 Academic societies
3 Biblical criticism
4 History of the Bible
5 Original languages
6 See also
7 References
8 Further reading
9 External links

Definition[edit]
The Oxford Handbook of Biblical Studies defines the field as a set of various, and in some cases independent disciplines for the study of the collection of ancient texts generally known as the Bible.[1] These disciplines include but are not limited to archaeology, Egyptology, textual criticism, linguistics, history, sociology and theology.[1]
Academic societies[edit]
Several academic associations and societies promote research in the field. The largest is the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL) with around 8,500 members in more than 80 countries. It publishes many books and journals in the biblical studies, including its flagship, the Journal of Biblical Literature. SBL hosts one academic conference in North America and another international conference each year, as well as smaller regional meetings.
Biblical criticism[edit]
The research of biblical scholars is frequently called biblical criticism. It does not presuppose, but also does not deny, belief in the supernatural origins of the scriptures. Instead, it applies to the Bible methods of textual analysis used in other disciplines of the humanities and social sciences. Many biblical scholars also interact with traditional Jewish and Christian interpreters and methods of interpretation, which may be called biblical exegesis or hermeneutics and history of interpretation or reception history.
History of the Bible[edit]
Historical research has often dominated modern biblical studies. Biblical scholars usually try to interpret a particular text within its original historical context and use whatever information is available to reconstruct that setting. Historical criticism aims to determine the provenance, authorship, and process by which ancient texts were composed. Famous theories of historical criticism include the documentary hypothesis which suggests that the Pentateuch was compiled from four different written sources, and different reconstructions of "the historical Jesus" based primarily on the differences among the canonical Gospels.
Original languages[edit]
Most of the Jewish Bible, the Tanakh, which is the basis of the Christian Old Testament, was written in Biblical Hebrew, though a few chapters were written in Biblical Aramaic. The New Testament was written in Koine Greek, with possible Aramaic undertones, as was the first translation of the Jewish Bible known as the Septuagint or Greek Old Testament. Therefore, Hebrew, Greek and sometimes Aramaic continue to be taught in most universities, colleges and seminaries with strong programs in biblical studies.
See also[edit]
The Bible and history
Biblical hermeneutics
Chronology of the Bible
Higher criticism
References[edit]
1.^ Jump up to: a b c d The Oxford Handbook of Biblical Studies by J. W. Rogerson and Judith M. Lieu (May 18, 2006) ISBN 0199254257 page xvii
2.Jump up ^ Introduction to Biblical Studies, Second Edition by Steve Moyise (Oct 27, 2004) ISBN 0567083977 pages 11–12
Further reading[edit]
The Cambridge History of the Bible, 3 vols., eds. P. R. Ackroyd, C. F. Evans, S. L. Greenslade and G. W. H. Lampe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963, 1969, 1970.
Frei, Hans. The Eclipse of Biblical Narrative: A Study in Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century Hermeneutics. New Haven: Yale, 1974.
Greenspahn, Frederick E. "Biblical Scholars, Medieval and Modern," in J. Neusner et al. (eds.), Judaic Perspectives on Ancient Israel (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987), pp. 245–258.
Harrison, Peter. The Bible, Protestantism, and the Rise of Natural Science. Cambridge: Cambridge U.P., 2001.
Harrisville, Roy A. & Walter Sundberg. The Bible in Modern Culture: Baruch Spinoza to Brevard Childs. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001.
Knight, Douglas A. and Gene M. Tucker, eds. The Hebrew Bible and Its Modern Interpreters. Philadelphia: Fortress/Chico: Scholars Press, 1985.
Nicholson, Ernest W. The Pentateuch in the Twentieth Century: The Legacy of Julius Wellhausen. Oxford: Clarendon, 1998.
Noll, Mark A. Between Faith and Criticism: Evangelicals, Scholarship, and the Bible in America. Harper & Row, 1986.
Reventlow, Henning Graf. The Authority of the Bible and the Rise of the Modern World. Tr. J. Bowden. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985.
Sherwood, Yvonne and Stephen D. Moore. The Invention of the Biblical Scholar: A Critical Manifesto. Fortress, 2011.
Sperling, S. David. Students of the Covenant: A History of Jewish Biblical Scholarship in North America. Atlanta Scholars Press, 1992.
Sugirtharajah, R.S. The Bible and the Third World: Precolonial, Colonial, and Postcolonial Encounters. Cambridge: Cambridge U.P., 2001.
External links[edit]
Bible Studies - Staying in the Word
Society of Biblical Literature
AcademicBible.com from the German Bible Society
Wabash Center's Internet Guid to Religion: Bible


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Christian theology



































































































































































































































































































































P christianity.svg




[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
The Bible and history











Bible.malmesbury.arp.jpg


























  


Categories: Biblical studies
Christian terminology


Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Български
Čeština
Deutsch
Français
한국어
Italiano
Magyar
Nederlands
日本語
Polski
Português
Русский
Simple English
Slovenčina
Svenska
Українська
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 12 December 2014, at 01:32.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_studies














Classical antiquity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

"Classical era" redirects here. For the Classical period in music, see Classical period (music). For the classics journal, see Classical Antiquity (journal).



 The Parthenon is one of the most iconic symbols of the classical era, exemplifying ancient Greek culture
Part of a series on
Classicism

Classical antiquity
Greco-Roman world
 
Age of Enlightenment
Neoclassicism
 Economics ·
 Music ·
 Physics
 
20th-century neoclassicism
Between World War I and II
 Ballet ·
 Economics ·
 Music
 Philosophy
 
v ·
 t ·
 e
   

Human history
↑ Prehistory
Recorded history
Ancient
Earliest records
Africa ·
 Americas

East Asia ·
 South Asia

Mediterranean ·
 Near East
 
Postclassical

Africa ·
 Americas

Central Asia ·
 East Asia ·

South Asia ·
 Southeast Asia

Europe ·
 Middle East
 
Modern


Early modern ·
 Modern
 Contemporary

See also

Modernity ·
 Futurology
 

↓ Future
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Classical antiquity (also the classical era, classical period or classical age) is a broad term for a long period of cultural history centered on the Mediterranean Sea, comprising the interlocking civilizations of ancient Greece and ancient Rome, collectively known as the Greco-Roman world. It is the period in which Greek and Roman society flourished and wielded great influence throughout Europe, North Africa and the Middle East.
Conventionally, it is taken to begin with the earliest-recorded Greek poetry of Homer (8th–7th century BC), and continues through the emergence of Christianity and the decline of the Roman Empire (5th century AD). It ends with the dissolution of classical culture at the close of Late Antiquity (AD 300–600), blending into the Early Middle Ages (AD 600–1000). Such a wide sampling of history and territory covers many disparate cultures and periods. "Classical antiquity" may refer also to an idealised vision among later people of what was, in Edgar Allan Poe's words, "the glory that was Greece, and the grandeur that was Rome."[1]
The culture of the ancient Greeks, together with some influences from the ancient Orient, prevailed throughout classical antiquity as the basis of art, [2] philosophy, society, and educational ideals. [3] These ideals were preserved and imitated by the Romans. [4] This Greco-Roman cultural foundation has been immensely influential on the language, politics, educational systems, philosophy, science, art, and architecture of the modern world: From the surviving fragments of classical antiquity, a revival movement was gradually formed from the 14th century onwards which came to be known later in Europe as the Renaissance, and again resurgent during various neo-classical revivals in the 18th and 19th centuries.


Contents  [hide]
1 Archaic period (8th to 6th centuries BC) 1.1 Phoenicians and Carthaginians
1.2 Greece 1.2.1 Greek colonies
1.3 Iron Age Italy
1.4 Roman Kingdom
2 Classical Greece (5th to 4th centuries BC)
3 Hellenistic period (323 BC to 146 BC)
4 Roman Republic (5th to 1st centuries BC)
5 Roman Empire (1st century BC to 5th century AD)
6 Late Antiquity (4th to 7th centuries AD)
7 Revivalism 7.1 Politics
7.2 Culture
8 Timeline
9 See also
10 Notes
11 References

Archaic period (8th to 6th centuries BC)[edit]
Further information: Iron Age Europe
The earliest period of classical antiquity takes place before the background of gradual re-appearance of historical sources following the Bronze Age collapse. The 8th and 7th centuries BC are still largely proto-historical, with the earliest Greek alphabetic inscriptions appearing in the first half of the 8th century. Homer is usually assumed to have lived in the 8th or 7th century, and his lifetime is often taken as marking the beginning of classical antiquity. In the same period falls the traditional date for the establishment of the Ancient Olympic Games, in 776 BC.
Phoenicians and Carthaginians[edit]
Main articles: Phoenicia and Ancient Carthage
The Phoenicians originally expanded from Levantine ports, by the 8th century dominating trade in the Mediterranean. Carthage was founded in 814 BC, and the Carthaginians by 700 BC had firmly established strongholds in Sicily, Italy and Sardinia, which created conflicts of interest with Etruria.
Greece[edit]
Main article: Archaic period in Greece
The Archaic period followed the Greek Dark Ages, and saw significant advancements in political theory, and the rise of democracy, philosophy, theatre, poetry, as well as the revitalisation of the written language (which had been lost during the Dark Ages).
In pottery, the Archaic period sees the development of the Orientalizing style, which signals a shift from the Geometric style of the later Dark Ages and the accumulation of influences derived from Phoenicia and Syria.
Pottery styles associated with the later part of the Archaic age are the black-figure pottery, which originated in Corinth during the 7th century BC and its successor, the red-figure style, developed by the Andokides Painter in about 530 BC.
Greek colonies[edit]
Main articles: Apoikiai and Magna Graecia
Iron Age Italy[edit]



Etruscan civilization in north of Italy, 800 BC.
The Etruscans had established political control in the region by the late 7th century BC, forming the aristocratic and monarchial elite. The Etruscans apparently lost power in the area by the late 6th century BC, and at this point, the Italic tribes reinvented their government by creating a republic, with much greater restraints on the ability of rulers to exercise power.[5]
Roman Kingdom[edit]
Main article: Roman kingdom
According to legend, Rome was founded on April 21, 753 BC by twin descendants of the Trojan prince Aeneas, Romulus and Remus.[6] As the city was bereft of women, legend says that the Latins invited the Sabines to a festival and stole their unmarried maidens, leading to the integration of the Latins and the Sabines.[7]
Archaeological evidence indeed shows first traces of settlement at the Roman Forum in the mid-8th century BC, though settlements on the Palatine Hill may date back to the 10th century BC.[8][9]
The seventh and final king of Rome was Tarquinius Superbus. As the son of Tarquinius Priscus and the son-in-law of Servius Tullius, Superbus was of Etruscan birth. It was during his reign that the Etruscans reached their apex of power.
Superbus removed and destroyed all the Sabine shrines and altars from the Tarpeian Rock, enraging the people of Rome. The people came to object to his rule when he failed to recognize the rape of Lucretia, a patrician Roman, at the hands of his own son. Lucretia's kinsman, Lucius Junius Brutus (ancestor to Marcus Brutus), summoned the Senate and had Superbus and the monarchy expelled from Rome in 510 BC. After Superbus' expulsion, the Senate voted to never again allow the rule of a king and reformed Rome into a republican government in 509 BC. In fact the Latin word "Rex" meaning King became a dirty and hated word throughout the Republic and later on the Empire.[citation needed]
Classical Greece (5th to 4th centuries BC)[edit]
Main article: Classical Greece



 Delian League ("Athenian Empire"), right before the Peloponnesian War in 431 BC
The classical period of Ancient Greece corresponds to most of the 5th and 4th centuries BC (i.e. from the fall of the Athenian tyranny in 510 BC to the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC).
In 510, Spartan troops helped the Athenians overthrow their king, the tyrant Hippias, son of Peisistratos. Cleomenes I, king of Sparta, put in place a pro-Spartan oligarchy conducted by Isagoras.
The Greco-Persian Wars (499–449 BC), concluded by the Peace of Callias resulted in the dominant position of Athens in the Delian League, which led to conflict with Sparta and the Peloponnesian League, resulting in the Peloponnesian War (431–404 BC), which ended in a Spartan victory.
Greece entered the 4th century under Spartan hegemony. But by 395 BC the Spartan rulers removed Lysander from office, and Sparta lost her naval supremacy. Athens, Argos, Thebes and Corinth, the latter two of which were formerly Spartan allies, challenged Spartan dominance in the Corinthian War, which ended inconclusively in 387 BC. Later, in 371 BC, the Theban generals Epaminondas and Pelopidas won a victory at the Battle of Leuctra. The result of this battle was the end of Spartan supremacy and the establishment of Theban hegemony. Thebes sought to maintain its position until it was finally eclipsed by the rising power of Macedon in 346 BC.
Under Philip II, (359–336 BC), Macedon expanded into the territory of the Paeonians, the Thracians and the Illyrians. Philip's son, Alexander the Great, (356–323 BC) managed to briefly extend Macedonian power not only over the central Greek city-states, but also to the Persian Empire, including Egypt and lands as far east as the fringes of India. The classical period conventionally ends at the death of Alexander in 323 BC and the fragmentation of his empire, which was at this time divided among the Diadochi.
Hellenistic period (323 BC to 146 BC)[edit]
Main article: Hellenistic period
Further information: Hellenistic philosophy and Hellenistic religion
Classical Greece entered the Hellenistic period with the rise of Macedon and the conquests of Alexander the Great. Greek becomes the lingua franca far beyond Greece itself, and Hellenistic culture interacts with the cultures of Persia, Central Asia, India and Egypt. Significant advances are made in the sciences (geography, astronomy, mathematics etc.), notably with the followers of Aristotle (Aristotelianism).
The Hellenistic period ended with the rise of the Roman Republic to a super-regional power in the 2nd century BC and the Roman conquest of Greece in 146 BC.
Roman Republic (5th to 1st centuries BC)[edit]



 The extent of the Roman Republic and Roman Empire in 218 BC (dark red), 133 BC (light red), 44 BC (orange), 14 AD (yellow), after 14 AD (green), and maximum extension under Trajan 117 (light green)
Main article: Roman Republic
Further information: culture of ancient Rome
The republican period of Ancient Rome began with the overthrow of the Monarchy c. 509 BC and lasted over 450 years until its subversion, through a series of civil wars, into the Principate form of government and the Imperial period. During the half millennium of the Republic, Rome rose from a regional power of the Latium to the dominant force in Italy and beyond. The unification of Italy under Roman hegemony was a gradual process, brought about in a series of conflicts of the 4th and 3rd centuries, the Samnite Wars, Latin War, and Pyrrhic War. Roman victory in the Punic Wars and Macedonian Wars established Rome as a super-regional power by the 2nd century BC, followed up by the acquisition of Greece and Asia Minor. This tremendous increase of power was accompanied by economic instability and social unrest, leading to the Catiline conspiracy, the Social War and the First Triumvirate, and finally the transformation to the Roman Empire in the latter half of the 1st century BC.
Roman Empire (1st century BC to 5th century AD)[edit]
Main article: Roman Empire



 The extent of the Roman Empire under Trajan, AD 117
Determining the precise end of the Republic is a task of dispute by modern historians;[10] Roman citizens of the time did not recognize that the Republic had ceased to exist. The early Julio-Claudian "Emperors" maintained that the res publica still existed, albeit under the protection of their extraordinary powers, and would eventually return to its full Republican form. The Roman state continued to call itself a res publica as long as it continued to use Latin as its official language.
Rome acquired imperial character de facto from the 130s BC with the acquisition of Cisalpine Gaul, Illyria, Greece and Hispania, and definitely with the addition of Iudaea, Asia Minor and Gaul in the 1st century BC. At the time of the empire's maximal extension under Trajan (AD 117), Rome controlled the entire Mediterranean as well as Gaul, parts of Germania and Britannia, the Balkans, Dacia, Asia Minor, the Caucasus and Mesopotamia.
Culturally, the Roman Empire was significantly hellenized, but also saw the rise of syncratic "eastern" traditions, such as Mithraism, Gnosticism, and most notably Christianity. The empire began to decline in the crisis of the third century
Late Antiquity (4th to 7th centuries AD)[edit]



 The Western and Eastern Roman Empires by 476
Main articles: Late Antiquity and Migration period
Late Antiquity saw the rise of Christianity under Constantine I, finally ousting the Roman imperial cult with the Theodosian decrees of 393. Successive invasions of Germanic tribes finalized the decline of the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century, while the Eastern Roman Empire persisted throughout the Middle Ages, in a state called the Roman Empire by its citizens, and labelled the Byzantine Empire by later historians. Hellenistic philosophy was succeeded by continued developments in Platonism and Epicureanism, with Neoplatonism in due course influencing the theology of the Church Fathers.
Many individuals have attempted to put a specific date on the symbolic "end" of antiquity with the most prominent dates being the deposing of the last Western Roman Emperor in 476,[11][12] the closing of the last Platonic Academy in Athens by the Eastern Roman Emperor Justinian I in 529,[13] and the conquest of much of the Mediterranean by the new Muslim faith from 634-718.[14] These Muslim conquests, of Syria (637), Egypt (639), Cyprus (654), North Africa (665), Spain (718), Crete (820), and Sicily (827), (and the sieges of the Eastern Roman capital, First Arab Siege of Constantinople (674–78) and Second Arab Siege of Constantinople (717–18)) severed the economic, cultural, and political links that had traditionally united the classical cultures around the Mediterranean, ending antiquity, see (Pirenne Thesis).[15]
The original Roman Senate continued to express decrees into the late 6th century, and the last Eastern Roman emperor to use Latin as the language of his court in Constantinople was emperor Maurice, who reigned until 602. The overthrow of Maurice by his mutinying Danube army under Phocas resulted in the Slavic invasion of the Balkans and the decline of Balkan and Greek urban culture (leading to the flight of Balkan Latin speakers to the mountains, see Origin of the Romanians), as well as provoked the Byzantine–Sasanian War of 602–628, in which all the great eastern cities, except Constantinople, were lost. The resulting turmoil did not end until the Muslim conquests of the 7th century finalized the irreversible loss of all the largest Eastern Roman imperial cities besides the capital itself. The emperor Heraclius in Constantinople, who emerged during this period, conducted his court in Greek, not Latin, though Greek had always been an administrative language of the eastern Roman regions. Eastern-Western links weakened with the ending of the Byzantine Papacy.
The Eastern Roman empire's capital city of Constantinople was left as the only unconquered large urban center of the original Roman empire, as well as being the largest city in Europe. Over the next millennium the Roman culture of that city would slowly change, leading modern historians to refer to it by a new name, Byzantine, though many classical books, sculptures, and technologies survived there along with classical Roman cuisine and scholarly traditions, well into the Middle Ages, when much of it was "rediscovered" by visiting Western crusaders. Indeed, the inhabitants of Constantinople continued to refer to themselves as Romans, as did their eventual conquerors in 1453, the Ottomans. (See Rûm and Romaioi.) The classical scholarship and culture that was still preserved in Constantinople was brought by refugees fleeing its conquest in 1453 and helped to spark the Renaissance, see Greek scholars in the Renaissance.
Ultimately, it was a slow, complex, and graduated change in the socioeconomic structure in European history that led to the changeover between Classical Antiquity and Medieval society and no specific date can truly exemplify that.
Revivalism[edit]
Further information: Carolingian Renaissance, Ottonian Renaissance, Renaissance, Classical studies, Classicism and Legacy of the Roman Empire
Respect for the ancients of Greece and Rome affected politics, philosophy, sculpture, literature, theater, education, architecture and even sexuality.
Politics[edit]
In politics, the late Roman conception of the Empire as a universal state, headed by one supreme divinely-appointed ruler, united with Christianity as a universal religion likewise headed by a supreme patriarch, proved very influential, even after the disappearance of imperial authority in the west.
That model continued to exist in Constantinople for the entirety of the Middle Ages; the Byzantine Emperor was considered the sovereign of the entire Christian world. The Patriarch of Constantinople was the Empire's highest-ranked cleric, but even he was subordinate to the Emperor, who was "God's Vicegerent on Earth". The Greek-speaking Byzantines and their descendants continued to call themselves "Romans" until the creation of a new Greek state in 1832.
After the fall of Constantinople in 1453, the Russian Tsars (a title derived from Caesar) claimed the Byzantine mantle as the champion of Orthodoxy; Moscow was described as the "Third Rome" and the Tsars ruled as divinely-appointed Emperors into the 20th century.
Despite the fact that the Western Roman secular authority disappeared entirely in Europe, it still left traces. The Papacy and the Catholic Church in particular maintained Latin language, culture and literacy for centuries; to this day the popes are called Pontifex Maximus which in the classical period was a title belonging to the Emperor, and the ideal of Christendom carried on the legacy of a united European civilisation even after its political unity had disappeared.
The political idea of an Emperor in the West to match the Emperor in the East continued after the Western Roman Empire's collapse; it was revived by the coronation of Charlemagne in 800; the self-described Holy Roman Empire ruled over central Europe until 1806.
The Renaissance idea that the classical Roman virtues had been lost under medievalism was especially powerful in European politics of the 18th and 19th centuries. Reverence for Roman republicanism was strong among the Founding Fathers of the United States and the Latin American revolutionaries; the Americans described their new government as a republic (from res publica) and gave it a Senate and a President (another Latin term), rather than make use of available English terms like commonwealth or parliament.
Similarly in Revolutionary and Napoleonic France, republicanism and Roman martial virtues were upheld by the state, as can be seen in the architecture of the Panthéon, the Arc de Triomphe, and the paintings of Jacques-Louis David. During the revolution France itself followed the transition from republic to dictatorship to Empire (complete with Imperial Eagles) that Rome had undergone centuries earlier.
Culture[edit]
Epic poetry in Latin continued to be written and circulated well into the 19th century. John Milton and even Arthur Rimbaud got their first poetic education in Latin. Genres like epic poetry, pastoral verse, and the endless use of characters and themes from Greek mythology left a deep mark on literature of the Western World.
In architecture, there have been several Greek Revivals, which seem more inspired in retrospect by Roman architecture than Greek. Washington, DC is filled with large marble buildings with facades made out to look like Roman temples, with columns constructed in the classical orders of architecture.
In philosophy, the efforts of St Thomas Aquinas were derived largely from the thought of Aristotle, despite the intervening change in religion from Hellenic Polytheism to Christianity. Greek and Roman authorities such as Hippocrates and Galen formed the foundation of the practice of medicine even longer than Greek thought prevailed in philosophy. In the French theater, tragedians such as Molière and Racine wrote plays on mythological or classical historical subjects and subjected them to the strict rules of the classical unities derived from Aristotle's Poetics. The desire to dance like a latter-day vision of how the ancient Greeks did it moved Isadora Duncan to create her brand of ballet.
Timeline[edit]
Main article: Timeline of classical antiquity


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Timeline of classical antiquity





See also[edit]

Portal icon Classical Civilisation portal
Classical architecture
Classical tradition
Classics (Classical education)
Outline of classical studies Outline of ancient Egypt
Outline of ancient Greece
Outline of ancient Rome
Postclassical Era (the next period)
Regions during classical antiquityAncient history of Cyprus
Gaul
Hellenistic Greece
History of the Balkans
Roman Britain
Roman Dacia
Troy
Notes[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Poe EA (1831). "To Helen".
2.Jump up ^ Helga von Heintze (de): Römische Kunst (Roman art). In: Walter-Herwig Schuchhardt (1960): Bildende Kunst I (Archäologie) (Visual arts I — archaeology). Das Fischer Lexikon (de). S. Fischer Verlag. p. 192. "Bestimmend blieb (...) der italisch-römische Geist, der sich der entlehnten Formen nur bediente. (...) Ohne [die] Begegnung [mit der griechischen Formenwelt, author's note] hätte der italisch-römische Geist sich wohl kaum in künstlerischen Schöpfungen ausdrücken können und wäre nicht über die Ansätze, die wir in den Kanopen von Chiusi (...), der kapitolinischen Wölfin (...), dem Krieger von Capestrano (...) erhalten haben, hinausgekommen. Auch die gleichermaßen realistische wie unkünstlerische Auffassung der Porträts im 2. und 1. J[ahr]h[undert] v[or] Chr[istus] konnte sich nur unter dem Einfluß griechischer Formen ändern." ("Determinant remained the Italic-Roman spirit, that just availed itself of the borrowed forms. (...) Without having come across [the world of the Greek forms], the Italic-Roman spirit would hardly have been able to express itself in works of art and would not have got beyond the starts that are preserved in the canopic jars of Chiusi, the Capitoline Wolf, the Warrior of Capestrano. Also the likewise realistic and inartistic conception and production of the portraits in the second and the first centuries BC could only change under the influence of Greek forms.")
3.Jump up ^ Der Große Brockhaus. 1. vol.: A-Beo. Eberhard Brockhaus, Wiesbaden 1953, p. 315. "Ihre dankbarsten und verständnisvollsten Schüler aber fand die hellenistische Kultur in den Römern; sie wurden Mäzene, Nachahmer und schließlich Konkurrenten, indem sie die eigene Sprache wetteifernd neben die griechische setzten: so wurde die antike Kultur zweisprachig, griechisch und lateinisch. Das System dieser griechisch-hellenistisch-römischen Kultur, das sich in der römischen Kaiserzeit abschließend gestaltete, enthielt, neben Elementen des Orients, die griechische Wissenschaft und Philosophie, Dichtung, Geschichtsschreibung, Rhetorik und bildende Kunst." ("The Hellenistic culture but found its most thankful and its most understanding disciples in the Romans; they became patrons, imitators, and finally rivals, when they competitively set the own language beside the Greek: thus, the antique culture became bilingual, Greek and Latin. The system of this Greco-Latin culture, that assumed its definitive shape in the Roman imperial period, contained, amongst elements of the Orient, the Greek science and philosophy, poetry, historiography, rhetoric and visual arts.")
4.Jump up ^ Veit Valentin (de): Weltgeschichte — Völker, Männer, Ideen (History of the world — peoples, men, ideas). Allert de Lange (de), Amsterdam 1939, p. 113. "Es ist ein merkwürdiges Schauspiel — dieser Kampf eines bewussten Römertums gegen die geriebene Gewandtheit des Hellenismus: der römische Geschmack wehrt sich und verbohrt sich trotzig in sich selbst, aber es fällt ihm nicht genug ein, er kann nicht über seine Grenzen weg; was die Griechen bieten, hat soviel Reiz und Bequemlichkeit. In der bildenden Kunst und in der Philosophie gab das Römertum zuerst den Kampf um seine Selbständigkeit auf — Bilden um des Bildes willen, Forschen und Grübeln, theoretische Wahrheitssuche und Spekulation lagen ihm durchaus nicht." ("It is a strange spectacle: this fight of a conscious Roman striving against the wily ingenuity of Hellenism. The Roman taste offers resistance, defiantly goes mad about itself, but there does not come enough into its mind, it is not able to overcome its limits; there is so much charm and so much comfort in what the Greeks afford. In visual arts and philosophy, Romanism first abandoned the struggle for its independence — forming for the sake of the form, poring and investigation, theoretical speculation and hunt for truth were by no means in its line.")
5.Jump up ^ Ancient Rome and the Roman Empire by Michael Kerrigan. Dorling Kindersley, London: 2001. ISBN 0-7894-8153-7. page 12.
6.Jump up ^ Adkins, 1998. page 3.
7.Jump up ^ Myths and Legends – Rome, the Wolf, and Mars. Accessed 2007-3-8.
8.Jump up ^ Matyszak, 2003. page 19.
9.Jump up ^ Duiker, 2001. page 129.
10.Jump up ^ The precise event which signaled the transition of the Roman Republic into the Roman Empire is a matter of interpretation. Historians have proposed the appointment of Julius Caesar as perpetual dictator (44 BC), the Battle of Actium (September 2, 31 BC), and the Roman Senate's grant of Octavian's extraordinary powers under the first settlement (January 16, 27 BC), as candidates for the defining pivotal event.
11.Jump up ^ Clare, I. S. (1906). Library of universal history: containing a record of the human race from the earliest historical period to the present time; embracing a general survey of the progress of mankind in national and social life, civil government, religion, literature, science and art. New York: Union Book. Page 1519 (cf., Ancient history, as we have already seen, ended with the fall of the Western Roman Empire; [...])
12.Jump up ^ United Center for Research and Training in History. (1973). Bulgarian historical review. Sofia: Pub. House of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences]. Page 43. (cf. ... in the history of Europe, which marks both the end of ancient history and the beginning of the Middle Ages, is the fall of the Western Roman Empire.)
13.Jump up ^ Hadas, Moses (1950). A History of Greek Literature. Columbia University Press. p. 327. ISBN 0-231-01767-7.
14.Jump up ^ Henry Pirenne (1937). Mohammed and Charlemagne English translation by Bernard Miall, 1939. From Internet Archive. The thesis was originally laid out in an article published in Revue belge de Philologie et d'Histoire 1 (1922), pp. 77-86.
15.Jump up ^ Henry Pirenne (1937). Mohammed and Charlemagne English translation by Bernard Miall, 1939. From Internet Archive. The thesis was originally laid out in an article published in Revue belge de Philologie et d'Histoire 1 (1922), pp. 77-86.
References[edit]
Grinin L. E. Early State in the Classical World: Statehood and Ancient Democracy. In Grinin L. E. et al. (eds.)Hierarchy and Power in the History of civilizations: Ancient and Medieval Cultures 9pp.31–84). Moscow: URSS, 2008.Early State in the Classical World


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Classical antiquity by region

































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Ancient Greece





























































































































































































































































































































































































































Category
Portal
WikiProject




[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Ancient Rome topics



































































































































































































































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Ancient Greek and Roman wars

























































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Periods of the history of Europe











  


Categories: Classical antiquity
Greco-Roman world
Mediterranean
History of Europe by period








Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Alemannisch
العربية
বাংলা
Беларуская
Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎
Български
Boarisch
Bosanski
Català
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Français
Frysk
Galego
한국어
Hrvatski
Ido
Bahasa Indonesia
Íslenska
Italiano
ქართული
Latina
Lietuvių
Македонски
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча
Plattdüütsch
Português
Русский
Scots
Simple English
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
Tiếng Việt
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 16 April 2015, at 16:34.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_antiquity













Classical antiquity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

"Classical era" redirects here. For the Classical period in music, see Classical period (music). For the classics journal, see Classical Antiquity (journal).



 The Parthenon is one of the most iconic symbols of the classical era, exemplifying ancient Greek culture
Part of a series on
Classicism

Classical antiquity
Greco-Roman world
 
Age of Enlightenment
Neoclassicism
 Economics ·
 Music ·
 Physics
 
20th-century neoclassicism
Between World War I and II
 Ballet ·
 Economics ·
 Music
 Philosophy
 
v ·
 t ·
 e
   

Human history
↑ Prehistory
Recorded history
Ancient
Earliest records
Africa ·
 Americas

East Asia ·
 South Asia

Mediterranean ·
 Near East
 
Postclassical

Africa ·
 Americas

Central Asia ·
 East Asia ·

South Asia ·
 Southeast Asia

Europe ·
 Middle East
 
Modern


Early modern ·
 Modern
 Contemporary

See also

Modernity ·
 Futurology
 

↓ Future
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Classical antiquity (also the classical era, classical period or classical age) is a broad term for a long period of cultural history centered on the Mediterranean Sea, comprising the interlocking civilizations of ancient Greece and ancient Rome, collectively known as the Greco-Roman world. It is the period in which Greek and Roman society flourished and wielded great influence throughout Europe, North Africa and the Middle East.
Conventionally, it is taken to begin with the earliest-recorded Greek poetry of Homer (8th–7th century BC), and continues through the emergence of Christianity and the decline of the Roman Empire (5th century AD). It ends with the dissolution of classical culture at the close of Late Antiquity (AD 300–600), blending into the Early Middle Ages (AD 600–1000). Such a wide sampling of history and territory covers many disparate cultures and periods. "Classical antiquity" may refer also to an idealised vision among later people of what was, in Edgar Allan Poe's words, "the glory that was Greece, and the grandeur that was Rome."[1]
The culture of the ancient Greeks, together with some influences from the ancient Orient, prevailed throughout classical antiquity as the basis of art, [2] philosophy, society, and educational ideals. [3] These ideals were preserved and imitated by the Romans. [4] This Greco-Roman cultural foundation has been immensely influential on the language, politics, educational systems, philosophy, science, art, and architecture of the modern world: From the surviving fragments of classical antiquity, a revival movement was gradually formed from the 14th century onwards which came to be known later in Europe as the Renaissance, and again resurgent during various neo-classical revivals in the 18th and 19th centuries.


Contents  [hide]
1 Archaic period (8th to 6th centuries BC) 1.1 Phoenicians and Carthaginians
1.2 Greece 1.2.1 Greek colonies
1.3 Iron Age Italy
1.4 Roman Kingdom
2 Classical Greece (5th to 4th centuries BC)
3 Hellenistic period (323 BC to 146 BC)
4 Roman Republic (5th to 1st centuries BC)
5 Roman Empire (1st century BC to 5th century AD)
6 Late Antiquity (4th to 7th centuries AD)
7 Revivalism 7.1 Politics
7.2 Culture
8 Timeline
9 See also
10 Notes
11 References

Archaic period (8th to 6th centuries BC)[edit]
Further information: Iron Age Europe
The earliest period of classical antiquity takes place before the background of gradual re-appearance of historical sources following the Bronze Age collapse. The 8th and 7th centuries BC are still largely proto-historical, with the earliest Greek alphabetic inscriptions appearing in the first half of the 8th century. Homer is usually assumed to have lived in the 8th or 7th century, and his lifetime is often taken as marking the beginning of classical antiquity. In the same period falls the traditional date for the establishment of the Ancient Olympic Games, in 776 BC.
Phoenicians and Carthaginians[edit]
Main articles: Phoenicia and Ancient Carthage
The Phoenicians originally expanded from Levantine ports, by the 8th century dominating trade in the Mediterranean. Carthage was founded in 814 BC, and the Carthaginians by 700 BC had firmly established strongholds in Sicily, Italy and Sardinia, which created conflicts of interest with Etruria.
Greece[edit]
Main article: Archaic period in Greece
The Archaic period followed the Greek Dark Ages, and saw significant advancements in political theory, and the rise of democracy, philosophy, theatre, poetry, as well as the revitalisation of the written language (which had been lost during the Dark Ages).
In pottery, the Archaic period sees the development of the Orientalizing style, which signals a shift from the Geometric style of the later Dark Ages and the accumulation of influences derived from Phoenicia and Syria.
Pottery styles associated with the later part of the Archaic age are the black-figure pottery, which originated in Corinth during the 7th century BC and its successor, the red-figure style, developed by the Andokides Painter in about 530 BC.
Greek colonies[edit]
Main articles: Apoikiai and Magna Graecia
Iron Age Italy[edit]



Etruscan civilization in north of Italy, 800 BC.
The Etruscans had established political control in the region by the late 7th century BC, forming the aristocratic and monarchial elite. The Etruscans apparently lost power in the area by the late 6th century BC, and at this point, the Italic tribes reinvented their government by creating a republic, with much greater restraints on the ability of rulers to exercise power.[5]
Roman Kingdom[edit]
Main article: Roman kingdom
According to legend, Rome was founded on April 21, 753 BC by twin descendants of the Trojan prince Aeneas, Romulus and Remus.[6] As the city was bereft of women, legend says that the Latins invited the Sabines to a festival and stole their unmarried maidens, leading to the integration of the Latins and the Sabines.[7]
Archaeological evidence indeed shows first traces of settlement at the Roman Forum in the mid-8th century BC, though settlements on the Palatine Hill may date back to the 10th century BC.[8][9]
The seventh and final king of Rome was Tarquinius Superbus. As the son of Tarquinius Priscus and the son-in-law of Servius Tullius, Superbus was of Etruscan birth. It was during his reign that the Etruscans reached their apex of power.
Superbus removed and destroyed all the Sabine shrines and altars from the Tarpeian Rock, enraging the people of Rome. The people came to object to his rule when he failed to recognize the rape of Lucretia, a patrician Roman, at the hands of his own son. Lucretia's kinsman, Lucius Junius Brutus (ancestor to Marcus Brutus), summoned the Senate and had Superbus and the monarchy expelled from Rome in 510 BC. After Superbus' expulsion, the Senate voted to never again allow the rule of a king and reformed Rome into a republican government in 509 BC. In fact the Latin word "Rex" meaning King became a dirty and hated word throughout the Republic and later on the Empire.[citation needed]
Classical Greece (5th to 4th centuries BC)[edit]
Main article: Classical Greece



 Delian League ("Athenian Empire"), right before the Peloponnesian War in 431 BC
The classical period of Ancient Greece corresponds to most of the 5th and 4th centuries BC (i.e. from the fall of the Athenian tyranny in 510 BC to the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC).
In 510, Spartan troops helped the Athenians overthrow their king, the tyrant Hippias, son of Peisistratos. Cleomenes I, king of Sparta, put in place a pro-Spartan oligarchy conducted by Isagoras.
The Greco-Persian Wars (499–449 BC), concluded by the Peace of Callias resulted in the dominant position of Athens in the Delian League, which led to conflict with Sparta and the Peloponnesian League, resulting in the Peloponnesian War (431–404 BC), which ended in a Spartan victory.
Greece entered the 4th century under Spartan hegemony. But by 395 BC the Spartan rulers removed Lysander from office, and Sparta lost her naval supremacy. Athens, Argos, Thebes and Corinth, the latter two of which were formerly Spartan allies, challenged Spartan dominance in the Corinthian War, which ended inconclusively in 387 BC. Later, in 371 BC, the Theban generals Epaminondas and Pelopidas won a victory at the Battle of Leuctra. The result of this battle was the end of Spartan supremacy and the establishment of Theban hegemony. Thebes sought to maintain its position until it was finally eclipsed by the rising power of Macedon in 346 BC.
Under Philip II, (359–336 BC), Macedon expanded into the territory of the Paeonians, the Thracians and the Illyrians. Philip's son, Alexander the Great, (356–323 BC) managed to briefly extend Macedonian power not only over the central Greek city-states, but also to the Persian Empire, including Egypt and lands as far east as the fringes of India. The classical period conventionally ends at the death of Alexander in 323 BC and the fragmentation of his empire, which was at this time divided among the Diadochi.
Hellenistic period (323 BC to 146 BC)[edit]
Main article: Hellenistic period
Further information: Hellenistic philosophy and Hellenistic religion
Classical Greece entered the Hellenistic period with the rise of Macedon and the conquests of Alexander the Great. Greek becomes the lingua franca far beyond Greece itself, and Hellenistic culture interacts with the cultures of Persia, Central Asia, India and Egypt. Significant advances are made in the sciences (geography, astronomy, mathematics etc.), notably with the followers of Aristotle (Aristotelianism).
The Hellenistic period ended with the rise of the Roman Republic to a super-regional power in the 2nd century BC and the Roman conquest of Greece in 146 BC.
Roman Republic (5th to 1st centuries BC)[edit]



 The extent of the Roman Republic and Roman Empire in 218 BC (dark red), 133 BC (light red), 44 BC (orange), 14 AD (yellow), after 14 AD (green), and maximum extension under Trajan 117 (light green)
Main article: Roman Republic
Further information: culture of ancient Rome
The republican period of Ancient Rome began with the overthrow of the Monarchy c. 509 BC and lasted over 450 years until its subversion, through a series of civil wars, into the Principate form of government and the Imperial period. During the half millennium of the Republic, Rome rose from a regional power of the Latium to the dominant force in Italy and beyond. The unification of Italy under Roman hegemony was a gradual process, brought about in a series of conflicts of the 4th and 3rd centuries, the Samnite Wars, Latin War, and Pyrrhic War. Roman victory in the Punic Wars and Macedonian Wars established Rome as a super-regional power by the 2nd century BC, followed up by the acquisition of Greece and Asia Minor. This tremendous increase of power was accompanied by economic instability and social unrest, leading to the Catiline conspiracy, the Social War and the First Triumvirate, and finally the transformation to the Roman Empire in the latter half of the 1st century BC.
Roman Empire (1st century BC to 5th century AD)[edit]
Main article: Roman Empire



 The extent of the Roman Empire under Trajan, AD 117
Determining the precise end of the Republic is a task of dispute by modern historians;[10] Roman citizens of the time did not recognize that the Republic had ceased to exist. The early Julio-Claudian "Emperors" maintained that the res publica still existed, albeit under the protection of their extraordinary powers, and would eventually return to its full Republican form. The Roman state continued to call itself a res publica as long as it continued to use Latin as its official language.
Rome acquired imperial character de facto from the 130s BC with the acquisition of Cisalpine Gaul, Illyria, Greece and Hispania, and definitely with the addition of Iudaea, Asia Minor and Gaul in the 1st century BC. At the time of the empire's maximal extension under Trajan (AD 117), Rome controlled the entire Mediterranean as well as Gaul, parts of Germania and Britannia, the Balkans, Dacia, Asia Minor, the Caucasus and Mesopotamia.
Culturally, the Roman Empire was significantly hellenized, but also saw the rise of syncratic "eastern" traditions, such as Mithraism, Gnosticism, and most notably Christianity. The empire began to decline in the crisis of the third century
Late Antiquity (4th to 7th centuries AD)[edit]



 The Western and Eastern Roman Empires by 476
Main articles: Late Antiquity and Migration period
Late Antiquity saw the rise of Christianity under Constantine I, finally ousting the Roman imperial cult with the Theodosian decrees of 393. Successive invasions of Germanic tribes finalized the decline of the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century, while the Eastern Roman Empire persisted throughout the Middle Ages, in a state called the Roman Empire by its citizens, and labelled the Byzantine Empire by later historians. Hellenistic philosophy was succeeded by continued developments in Platonism and Epicureanism, with Neoplatonism in due course influencing the theology of the Church Fathers.
Many individuals have attempted to put a specific date on the symbolic "end" of antiquity with the most prominent dates being the deposing of the last Western Roman Emperor in 476,[11][12] the closing of the last Platonic Academy in Athens by the Eastern Roman Emperor Justinian I in 529,[13] and the conquest of much of the Mediterranean by the new Muslim faith from 634-718.[14] These Muslim conquests, of Syria (637), Egypt (639), Cyprus (654), North Africa (665), Spain (718), Crete (820), and Sicily (827), (and the sieges of the Eastern Roman capital, First Arab Siege of Constantinople (674–78) and Second Arab Siege of Constantinople (717–18)) severed the economic, cultural, and political links that had traditionally united the classical cultures around the Mediterranean, ending antiquity, see (Pirenne Thesis).[15]
The original Roman Senate continued to express decrees into the late 6th century, and the last Eastern Roman emperor to use Latin as the language of his court in Constantinople was emperor Maurice, who reigned until 602. The overthrow of Maurice by his mutinying Danube army under Phocas resulted in the Slavic invasion of the Balkans and the decline of Balkan and Greek urban culture (leading to the flight of Balkan Latin speakers to the mountains, see Origin of the Romanians), as well as provoked the Byzantine–Sasanian War of 602–628, in which all the great eastern cities, except Constantinople, were lost. The resulting turmoil did not end until the Muslim conquests of the 7th century finalized the irreversible loss of all the largest Eastern Roman imperial cities besides the capital itself. The emperor Heraclius in Constantinople, who emerged during this period, conducted his court in Greek, not Latin, though Greek had always been an administrative language of the eastern Roman regions. Eastern-Western links weakened with the ending of the Byzantine Papacy.
The Eastern Roman empire's capital city of Constantinople was left as the only unconquered large urban center of the original Roman empire, as well as being the largest city in Europe. Over the next millennium the Roman culture of that city would slowly change, leading modern historians to refer to it by a new name, Byzantine, though many classical books, sculptures, and technologies survived there along with classical Roman cuisine and scholarly traditions, well into the Middle Ages, when much of it was "rediscovered" by visiting Western crusaders. Indeed, the inhabitants of Constantinople continued to refer to themselves as Romans, as did their eventual conquerors in 1453, the Ottomans. (See Rûm and Romaioi.) The classical scholarship and culture that was still preserved in Constantinople was brought by refugees fleeing its conquest in 1453 and helped to spark the Renaissance, see Greek scholars in the Renaissance.
Ultimately, it was a slow, complex, and graduated change in the socioeconomic structure in European history that led to the changeover between Classical Antiquity and Medieval society and no specific date can truly exemplify that.
Revivalism[edit]
Further information: Carolingian Renaissance, Ottonian Renaissance, Renaissance, Classical studies, Classicism and Legacy of the Roman Empire
Respect for the ancients of Greece and Rome affected politics, philosophy, sculpture, literature, theater, education, architecture and even sexuality.
Politics[edit]
In politics, the late Roman conception of the Empire as a universal state, headed by one supreme divinely-appointed ruler, united with Christianity as a universal religion likewise headed by a supreme patriarch, proved very influential, even after the disappearance of imperial authority in the west.
That model continued to exist in Constantinople for the entirety of the Middle Ages; the Byzantine Emperor was considered the sovereign of the entire Christian world. The Patriarch of Constantinople was the Empire's highest-ranked cleric, but even he was subordinate to the Emperor, who was "God's Vicegerent on Earth". The Greek-speaking Byzantines and their descendants continued to call themselves "Romans" until the creation of a new Greek state in 1832.
After the fall of Constantinople in 1453, the Russian Tsars (a title derived from Caesar) claimed the Byzantine mantle as the champion of Orthodoxy; Moscow was described as the "Third Rome" and the Tsars ruled as divinely-appointed Emperors into the 20th century.
Despite the fact that the Western Roman secular authority disappeared entirely in Europe, it still left traces. The Papacy and the Catholic Church in particular maintained Latin language, culture and literacy for centuries; to this day the popes are called Pontifex Maximus which in the classical period was a title belonging to the Emperor, and the ideal of Christendom carried on the legacy of a united European civilisation even after its political unity had disappeared.
The political idea of an Emperor in the West to match the Emperor in the East continued after the Western Roman Empire's collapse; it was revived by the coronation of Charlemagne in 800; the self-described Holy Roman Empire ruled over central Europe until 1806.
The Renaissance idea that the classical Roman virtues had been lost under medievalism was especially powerful in European politics of the 18th and 19th centuries. Reverence for Roman republicanism was strong among the Founding Fathers of the United States and the Latin American revolutionaries; the Americans described their new government as a republic (from res publica) and gave it a Senate and a President (another Latin term), rather than make use of available English terms like commonwealth or parliament.
Similarly in Revolutionary and Napoleonic France, republicanism and Roman martial virtues were upheld by the state, as can be seen in the architecture of the Panthéon, the Arc de Triomphe, and the paintings of Jacques-Louis David. During the revolution France itself followed the transition from republic to dictatorship to Empire (complete with Imperial Eagles) that Rome had undergone centuries earlier.
Culture[edit]
Epic poetry in Latin continued to be written and circulated well into the 19th century. John Milton and even Arthur Rimbaud got their first poetic education in Latin. Genres like epic poetry, pastoral verse, and the endless use of characters and themes from Greek mythology left a deep mark on literature of the Western World.
In architecture, there have been several Greek Revivals, which seem more inspired in retrospect by Roman architecture than Greek. Washington, DC is filled with large marble buildings with facades made out to look like Roman temples, with columns constructed in the classical orders of architecture.
In philosophy, the efforts of St Thomas Aquinas were derived largely from the thought of Aristotle, despite the intervening change in religion from Hellenic Polytheism to Christianity. Greek and Roman authorities such as Hippocrates and Galen formed the foundation of the practice of medicine even longer than Greek thought prevailed in philosophy. In the French theater, tragedians such as Molière and Racine wrote plays on mythological or classical historical subjects and subjected them to the strict rules of the classical unities derived from Aristotle's Poetics. The desire to dance like a latter-day vision of how the ancient Greeks did it moved Isadora Duncan to create her brand of ballet.
Timeline[edit]
Main article: Timeline of classical antiquity


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Timeline of classical antiquity





See also[edit]

Portal icon Classical Civilisation portal
Classical architecture
Classical tradition
Classics (Classical education)
Outline of classical studies Outline of ancient Egypt
Outline of ancient Greece
Outline of ancient Rome
Postclassical Era (the next period)
Regions during classical antiquityAncient history of Cyprus
Gaul
Hellenistic Greece
History of the Balkans
Roman Britain
Roman Dacia
Troy
Notes[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Poe EA (1831). "To Helen".
2.Jump up ^ Helga von Heintze (de): Römische Kunst (Roman art). In: Walter-Herwig Schuchhardt (1960): Bildende Kunst I (Archäologie) (Visual arts I — archaeology). Das Fischer Lexikon (de). S. Fischer Verlag. p. 192. "Bestimmend blieb (...) der italisch-römische Geist, der sich der entlehnten Formen nur bediente. (...) Ohne [die] Begegnung [mit der griechischen Formenwelt, author's note] hätte der italisch-römische Geist sich wohl kaum in künstlerischen Schöpfungen ausdrücken können und wäre nicht über die Ansätze, die wir in den Kanopen von Chiusi (...), der kapitolinischen Wölfin (...), dem Krieger von Capestrano (...) erhalten haben, hinausgekommen. Auch die gleichermaßen realistische wie unkünstlerische Auffassung der Porträts im 2. und 1. J[ahr]h[undert] v[or] Chr[istus] konnte sich nur unter dem Einfluß griechischer Formen ändern." ("Determinant remained the Italic-Roman spirit, that just availed itself of the borrowed forms. (...) Without having come across [the world of the Greek forms], the Italic-Roman spirit would hardly have been able to express itself in works of art and would not have got beyond the starts that are preserved in the canopic jars of Chiusi, the Capitoline Wolf, the Warrior of Capestrano. Also the likewise realistic and inartistic conception and production of the portraits in the second and the first centuries BC could only change under the influence of Greek forms.")
3.Jump up ^ Der Große Brockhaus. 1. vol.: A-Beo. Eberhard Brockhaus, Wiesbaden 1953, p. 315. "Ihre dankbarsten und verständnisvollsten Schüler aber fand die hellenistische Kultur in den Römern; sie wurden Mäzene, Nachahmer und schließlich Konkurrenten, indem sie die eigene Sprache wetteifernd neben die griechische setzten: so wurde die antike Kultur zweisprachig, griechisch und lateinisch. Das System dieser griechisch-hellenistisch-römischen Kultur, das sich in der römischen Kaiserzeit abschließend gestaltete, enthielt, neben Elementen des Orients, die griechische Wissenschaft und Philosophie, Dichtung, Geschichtsschreibung, Rhetorik und bildende Kunst." ("The Hellenistic culture but found its most thankful and its most understanding disciples in the Romans; they became patrons, imitators, and finally rivals, when they competitively set the own language beside the Greek: thus, the antique culture became bilingual, Greek and Latin. The system of this Greco-Latin culture, that assumed its definitive shape in the Roman imperial period, contained, amongst elements of the Orient, the Greek science and philosophy, poetry, historiography, rhetoric and visual arts.")
4.Jump up ^ Veit Valentin (de): Weltgeschichte — Völker, Männer, Ideen (History of the world — peoples, men, ideas). Allert de Lange (de), Amsterdam 1939, p. 113. "Es ist ein merkwürdiges Schauspiel — dieser Kampf eines bewussten Römertums gegen die geriebene Gewandtheit des Hellenismus: der römische Geschmack wehrt sich und verbohrt sich trotzig in sich selbst, aber es fällt ihm nicht genug ein, er kann nicht über seine Grenzen weg; was die Griechen bieten, hat soviel Reiz und Bequemlichkeit. In der bildenden Kunst und in der Philosophie gab das Römertum zuerst den Kampf um seine Selbständigkeit auf — Bilden um des Bildes willen, Forschen und Grübeln, theoretische Wahrheitssuche und Spekulation lagen ihm durchaus nicht." ("It is a strange spectacle: this fight of a conscious Roman striving against the wily ingenuity of Hellenism. The Roman taste offers resistance, defiantly goes mad about itself, but there does not come enough into its mind, it is not able to overcome its limits; there is so much charm and so much comfort in what the Greeks afford. In visual arts and philosophy, Romanism first abandoned the struggle for its independence — forming for the sake of the form, poring and investigation, theoretical speculation and hunt for truth were by no means in its line.")
5.Jump up ^ Ancient Rome and the Roman Empire by Michael Kerrigan. Dorling Kindersley, London: 2001. ISBN 0-7894-8153-7. page 12.
6.Jump up ^ Adkins, 1998. page 3.
7.Jump up ^ Myths and Legends – Rome, the Wolf, and Mars. Accessed 2007-3-8.
8.Jump up ^ Matyszak, 2003. page 19.
9.Jump up ^ Duiker, 2001. page 129.
10.Jump up ^ The precise event which signaled the transition of the Roman Republic into the Roman Empire is a matter of interpretation. Historians have proposed the appointment of Julius Caesar as perpetual dictator (44 BC), the Battle of Actium (September 2, 31 BC), and the Roman Senate's grant of Octavian's extraordinary powers under the first settlement (January 16, 27 BC), as candidates for the defining pivotal event.
11.Jump up ^ Clare, I. S. (1906). Library of universal history: containing a record of the human race from the earliest historical period to the present time; embracing a general survey of the progress of mankind in national and social life, civil government, religion, literature, science and art. New York: Union Book. Page 1519 (cf., Ancient history, as we have already seen, ended with the fall of the Western Roman Empire; [...])
12.Jump up ^ United Center for Research and Training in History. (1973). Bulgarian historical review. Sofia: Pub. House of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences]. Page 43. (cf. ... in the history of Europe, which marks both the end of ancient history and the beginning of the Middle Ages, is the fall of the Western Roman Empire.)
13.Jump up ^ Hadas, Moses (1950). A History of Greek Literature. Columbia University Press. p. 327. ISBN 0-231-01767-7.
14.Jump up ^ Henry Pirenne (1937). Mohammed and Charlemagne English translation by Bernard Miall, 1939. From Internet Archive. The thesis was originally laid out in an article published in Revue belge de Philologie et d'Histoire 1 (1922), pp. 77-86.
15.Jump up ^ Henry Pirenne (1937). Mohammed and Charlemagne English translation by Bernard Miall, 1939. From Internet Archive. The thesis was originally laid out in an article published in Revue belge de Philologie et d'Histoire 1 (1922), pp. 77-86.
References[edit]
Grinin L. E. Early State in the Classical World: Statehood and Ancient Democracy. In Grinin L. E. et al. (eds.)Hierarchy and Power in the History of civilizations: Ancient and Medieval Cultures 9pp.31–84). Moscow: URSS, 2008.Early State in the Classical World


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Classical antiquity by region

































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Ancient Greece





























































































































































































































































































































































































































Category
Portal
WikiProject




[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Ancient Rome topics



































































































































































































































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Ancient Greek and Roman wars

























































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Periods of the history of Europe











  


Categories: Classical antiquity
Greco-Roman world
Mediterranean
History of Europe by period








Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Alemannisch
العربية
বাংলা
Беларуская
Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎
Български
Boarisch
Bosanski
Català
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Français
Frysk
Galego
한국어
Hrvatski
Ido
Bahasa Indonesia
Íslenska
Italiano
ქართული
Latina
Lietuvių
Македонски
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча
Plattdüütsch
Português
Русский
Scots
Simple English
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
Tiếng Việt
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 16 April 2015, at 16:34.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_antiquity