Historicity of Jesus - 2

[dhu]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Berossus and Genesis, Manetho and Exodus
Hellenistic Histories and the Date of the Pentateuch

by Russell Gmirkin

Berossus and Genesis, Manetho and Exodus proposes a provocative new theory regarding the date and circumstances of the composition of the Pentateuch. Gmirkin argues that the Hebrew Pentateuch was composed in its entirety about 273-272 BCE by Jewish scholars at Alexandria that later traditions credited with the Septuagint translation of the Pentateuch into Greek. The primary evidence is literary dependence of Gen. 1-11 on Berossus' Babyloniaca (278 BCE) and of the Exodus story on Manetho's Aegyptiaca (c. 285-280 BCE), and the <b>geo-political data contained in the Table of Nations. </b>A number of indications point to a provenance of Alexandria, Egypt for at least some portions of the Pentateuch. That the Pentateuch, drawing on literary sources found at the Great Library of Alexandria, was composed at almost the same date as the Septuagint translation, provides compelling evidence for some level of communication and collaboration between the authors of the Pentateuch and the Septuagint scholars at Alexandria's Museum. The late date of the Pentateuch, as demonstrated by literary dependence on Berossus and Manetho, has two important consequences: the definitive overthrow of the chronological framework of the Documentary Hypothesis, and a late, 3rd century BCE date for major portions of the Hebrew Bible which show literary dependence on the Pentateuch.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Shem, Ham, Japeth are the geopolitical equivalents of the Seleucid, Ptolemaic, and Mainland territories. even in broad outline, no other period of history matches these national identities in the Septuagint/Pentateuch.

[ramana]

So there was reason the Muslims burned down the library in Alexandria to wipe out future researches into the origins of these politico-religious movements.

[Hauma Hamiddha]

Celsus etc on the Isaistic madmen
My apologies if this has been posted before here.

[Shambhu]

<!--QuoteBegin-ramana+Jan 21 2009, 05:00 AM-->QUOTE(ramana @ Jan 21 2009, 05:00 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->So there was reason the Muslims burned down the library in Alexandria to wipe out future researches into the origins of these politico-religious movements.
[right][snapback]93539[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That is debatable..I dont know too much about Phoenicians etc, but I think muslims will burn down anything non-islamic when they get all "religious". THey don't know what they have burnt, nor do they care. IMO..

[Husky]

<!--QuoteBegin-ramana+Jan 21 2009, 05:00 AM-->QUOTE(ramana @ Jan 21 2009, 05:00 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->So there was reason the Muslims burned down the library in Alexandria to wipe out future researches into the origins of these politico-religious movements.[right][snapback]93539[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->You are overestimating them. History records otherwise. The faithful's reasoning for library burnings have been documented many times. It's pure islamic hatred of anything non-islamic.

In the case of the last ancient library of Alexandria, the caliph or whoever decided the fate of the library with the words:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->"If these writings of the Greeks agree with the koran (alternate versions: book of God) they are useless and need not be preserved: if they disagree, they are pernicious and ought to be destroyed."<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->For instance, see Gibbon's The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, p.912 (where Gibbon has "book of God" instead of koran. But we know that since it is the faithful islamis who are speaking, it's not the christian bible being referred to this time, but the koran.
Gibbon repeats the declaration - the christian side of the story - but does not seem to believe it.)

Gibbon, noticing a silver lining to the islamic bonfire, remarked on the islamic burning of the last Alexandrian library that,
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->if the ponderous mass of Arian and Monophysite controversy (one of the early deadly disputes that keeps occurring between all the nonsense christian streams/subcults) were indeed consumed in the public baths, a philosopher may allow, with a smile, that it was ultimately devoted to the benefit of mankind.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->In other words, Gibbon is saying Good Riddance since the muslims destroyed by and large mostly christian rubbish at that point, because the *christos* had already destroyed the ancient pagan literature at Alexandria earlier on.

While historic revisionists want to consider the islamic reasoning for the burning of the Alexandrian library to be otherwise than what christians have handed down (yes, it is hard to believe christianism, though it is fingerpointing at islam's intolerance in this case), the matter seems to rather be confirmed by an identical islamic 'logic' that islamaniacs followed when behaving the same way toward Persian libraries, like the one the Persians had at Ctesiphon. Such matters were discussed in several Iranian sites.
Thought I'd also posted a link related to this earlier. Yes:
<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Mar 30 2007, 07:40 AM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Mar 30 2007, 07:40 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Islamic destruction of Persian libraries are mentioned in this Iranian site (though it is confusing the Faithful Arabians with general Arabians):
http://www.iranpoliticsclub.net/library/en...ears1/index.htm
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>The Book Burnings</b>

The book burnings started, they practically burned all our books in the glorious world famous Persian Library of Ctesiphone. The Persian documented history, science, literature, poetry, music and scripture of centuries and millenniums were burned to ashes by Arabo-Muslim. The only book needed in Islam is Quran, so they burned everything else! The book burnings continued for days and weeks!<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Like I said, christoislamism is the same religion: christians hated books because they were pagan/anti-christian - except for the babble. Islamics hated any book that wasn't the koran.[right][snapback]66326[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Then they repeated the pattern of burning libraries in India as well.
It's what christoislamism is good at: christos burnt the earlier libraries at Alexandria, as well as the Julian and other Roman libraries, while the islamaniacs got the last one at Alexandria and the ones of the Persians and several of the Dharmics of India. Christoislamism is the same religion after all.

<!--QuoteBegin-Hauma Hamiddha+Jan 21 2009, 05:29 AM-->QUOTE(Hauma Hamiddha @ Jan 21 2009, 05:29 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Celsus etc on the Isaistic madmen
[right][snapback]93542[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Great. Thanks.

[dhu]

from hasmonean wiki page:

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The ensuing Maccabbee Revolt (167 BCE) began a twenty-five-year period of Jewish independence potentiated by the steady collapse of the Seleucid Empire under attacks from the rising powers of the Roman Republic and the Parthian Empire. However, the same power vacuum that enabled the Jewish state to be recognized by the Roman Senate c. 139 BCE was next exploited by the Romans themselves.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

1. Hasmoneans are supposedly allergic to images on their coins.
2. Hasmoneans were allied to Rome.
3. The reference to Antiochus' 'Abomination of desolation' in the OT Daniel is verifiably a reference to a Roman Caesar (Titus Flavius).
4. Antiochus' campaign mirrors the Titus campaign in that the temple was sacked. (Very likely this is a back projection of the Titus experience, as well)
5. Greek Normative Ethics as reflected in Ethica Nichomachea

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->According to historical sources including the books 1 Maccabees and 2 Maccabees and the first book of The Wars of the Jews by the Jewish historian Josephus (37–c. 100 CE),[2] the Hasmonean Kingdom rose after a successful revolt by the Jews against the Seleucid king Antiochus IV. After Antiochus' successful invasion of Ptolemaic Egypt was turned back by the intervention of the Roman Republic[3] he moved instead to assert strict control over Israel, sacking Jerusalem and its Temple, suppressing Jewish religious and cultural observances, and imposing Hellenistic practices.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[dhu]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->To your question:
"How could these Jews "misunderstand" their Holy Writings so deeply?"
They didn't. The passages you cite are not exceptions but fit into a
singular interpretive framework of Jewish scripture. Simply compare
any of the `misunderstandings' of Jewish scripture in the Gospels to
the `misunderstandings' in Josephus and it is clear that both texts
share the mindset of the Flavian court. <b>In both `histories' the
prophecies of Daniel and Jeremiah came to pass during a campaign</b>
which the Galilean towns were laid low, Jerusalem was encircled with
a wall, and <b>the Temple was razed. </b>Also note these subjects are
covered in the same order in both works.
The real question is this:
If the Gospels and the works of Josephus were produced by different
groups, how did each group come to record that Titus was the `son of
Man'?
Joe Atwill
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[dhu]

NT was crafted to conform to the prophecy in Daniel. Roman provenance of OT is doubtful.

[dhu]

Indians need to start tying together the various components. Is there a relationship between ( the fact of ) OIT and the rise of monotheistic cultural terrorism within a western imperial context? Quite Possibly.

As Shri Kosla Vepa has remarked, Darius knew about the Indian homeland and left the Eastern flank relatively unattended; after all, Bharat was only a sister (actually, mother) civilization. The same dynamic applied to Bharatiya view of its western border. Furthermore, Persians tried to apply the same geostrategic logic with the Greeks; arguing, probably with good evidence, that Perseus, the founder of the Greeks, had a Persian origin. Probably, the Greek connection to Persians was common knowledge at the time. But the Greeks denied the Truth of their origins. Monotheism was a consequence of this Greek endeavor.

With the demise of Persia, which was (at least) a 750 year Greco-Roman imperial project, the Indic western border threat opened up. Previous Central Asian incursions ( e.g. Hunas ) were only a small nuisance by Indian continental standards. For example, there is no Magyar speaking state in the heart of India as there is in Europe. Nor was there ever a threat perception from the west. Actually, the extreme of monotheism was *required* to reverse the general east-to-west migratory trajectories and gradients observed by the OIT group, Oppenheimer, Nichols, and so on. Alexander was the first, and only with the advent of Islam was the western border breached.

[dhu]

<!--QuoteBegin-"ramana"+-->QUOTE("ramana")<!--QuoteEBegin-->Black Mass: Apocalyptic Religion and the Death of Utopia

<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->
From Publishers Weekly
Some readers will see pessimism where others see sober appraisal in Gray's antiutopian argument that we must reconcile ourselves to a world of multiple truths and incompatible freedoms, where there is no overarching meaning and human values and desires can never be fully harmonized. The views that history progresses toward perfection and the millenarian faith in human salvation—both rooted in abiding Christian myths—are as tenacious as they have proven destructive, the renowned British political theorist and critic argues. Building succinctly on arguments developed in his previous work (including Two Faces of Liberalism and Al Qaeda and What It Means to Be Modern), Gray traces the course of apocalyptic-utopian politics from early Christianity through its secular variant in the Enlightenment and into modern political thought from Marx to Francis Fukuyama, the French Revolution to radical Islamism. Centrally, he assails the contemporary American right (and staunch neoconservative fellow traveler Tony Blair), which after 9/11 advanced into the mainstream the utopianism previously confined to the extreme right and left. His eloquent and illuminating attack also challenges a notion common to the liberal establishment: that history moves inexorably toward the universal application of U.S.-style liberal democracy. He calls it a delusional article of faith that, like the utopian variants before it, easily justifies violence in the name of a greater destiny. (Oct.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

and
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Gray's work traces the origins, and shows the evolution of the two ideas that have intertwined together to spawn the modern horrors of the French Revolution, Nazism, Communism, and which have now infiltrated the U.S. and are guiding American foreign policy, with absolutely disastrous results.

The genesis of these two ideas is due to Christianity. The first of them is that the world was soon coming to an end, and with its end, all evil would be forever banished, and a new world would emerge that was utterly good and harmonious. The second of these ideas is that history is a teleological process - it has a goal, an end point, it is moving towards something, progress is possible. This idea is derived from the Book of Revelation, which depicts the world as eventually becoming a better place with the continual destruction of evil forces.

These ideas got secularized during The Enlightenment, and give rise to the idea of a Utopia - a place where all human conflicts have washed away and everyone lives in perpetual peace. Such a place is possible because with enough knowledge will can set up a society that will not give rise to any conflicts. In other words, a perfect society is an obtainable goal, one that involves eradicating the maladies that have continually plagued our societies. Gray contends this is impossible, and this type of thinking is the danger inherent in pursuing, any and all, utopian projects.

Utopian thinking views the world/society, as the source of ills and conflicts, and not humans, and by doing so, makes human life expendable; ultimately compels the people who are under it spell to engage in violence as a means to attempt to achieve their goal. After all, what's a little bloodshed if it leads to the world becoming a heaven on Earth?

This line of thinking also precludes them from grasping the fatal flaw in their thinking - that human beings are not capable of becoming conflict-less beings; they will always possess conflicting and competing needs and values. No amount of knowledge will ever be able to make humans that mutable. And as such, people will resist having their lives radically altered by someone else's utopian scheme, and if nothing else this would prevent utopias from working, even if they were viable.

Gray goes on to explain how a left wing idea, a utopia, became embedded in right wing thinking. And also to show this utopian brand in thinking in action in the Bush administration in particular in foreign policy ventures. Instead of viewing terrorist as a security threat, he instead saw them as evil forces, whose complete annihilation would make the world a better place. Since making the world a better place is the right thing to do, anything that advances that goal is also good, it is imperative that various torture methods be adopted to achieve this end. Moreover, democracy and human rights are a good thing, so a world that has more places with these things in them, would be better, so the right thing to do would be to invade Iraq, by any means necessary (lying about the WMDs) and liberate it by force.

Overall, this is a thought, wide ranging, insightful, and interesting book about the well intentioned, but exceedingly dangerous mind set that is currently guiding U.S. foreign policy.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Actually its the Western mind and not just US mind.

The idea of utopia even though its a Greek idea is really akin to Garden of Eden and is the driving force for all the monotheistic religious orders.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Husky]

What do we know already?
1. Empire manufactures mass subversionist movement called christianism meant to stifle Jewish resistance to imperial rule (oppression)
2. Empire sees success and the means of repeating the same by re-engineering their monstrosity each time to suit the various sublocalities of the Empire (e.g. Epistle to the Galatians was meant to target Galatia -> Anatolia under Celts).
3. Roman empire dead, but monstrosity (christianism) lives on. Monstrosity makes new empires through conquest, theft and others' blood: christian western world of the present.
4. New christian empire once again re-engineers the meme that controls it and which it controls (christianism), to fit onto different unconverted lands: co-opting/infiltrating/subverting different existing movements, manufacturing fictional 'issues' and new movements from these. Dravidianism, tamil identity as separate from Hindu Dharma in SL and TN, nationalist identity as separate from Hindu Dharma in Nepal, creating new ethnic identities (adivasis/aborigines, dalits) to alienate communities from their existing traditio-cultural-historic ethnic ones, castism, women's rights, 'social' rights, workers' rights, human rights, terrorists' rights, religious rights/right to propagate terrorism, blablalala). Jeebus as a "dalit" (liberation theology), as an "adivasi", as an Orissan, as every kind of Hindu community.
All that's in India. Elsewhere we knew them to have devised (or being in the process of devising) other tailored christianisms to correspond to different settings:
www.cca.org.hk/blog/cca/2004_07_01_cca.htm
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->He also mentioned about Asian theologians articulating their contextual theologies like Minjung theology in Korea, Homeland theology in Taiwan, People�s theology in the Philippines, Water Buffalo theology in Thailand, Dalit theology in India, and Buraku liberation theology in Japan.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Liberation theologies in S America (and protestantism used by AmeriKKKa to send the primary catholic identity into disarray, thereby creating dissension in the countries and their governments, so that US can meddle in, break and control the lands. Positive side-effect is that WASPy AmeriKKKa gives catholicism some of its own medicine.)

^ Localisation of christianism.
Means of propagation, same as always: use of native missionaries to argue their 'point' (the point being the applicability of the constructed christian retrovirus to the local situation). Think targetted Gospels, including "Romans" entry in the babble, Maccabees, Epistle to who's-its and everybody. <- That also made use of zombie native missionaries who bought the con lock-stock and tried to sell it on among their own kind.

[ramana]

<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+Jan 29 2009, 02:56 PM-->QUOTE(dhu @ Jan 29 2009, 02:56 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Husky, please post the following in the historicity thread.  The narrative is much clearer now. 



http://www.livius.org/maa-mam/maccabees/1macc01.html
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>1 Maccabees 1</b>
The First Book of Maccabees describes the struggle of the Jews for religious, cultural, and political independence against the Seleucid king Antiochus IV Epiphanes and his successors, who were Greeks and sympathized with the hellenization of Judah. It is slightly ironic that the anonymous author of The First Book of Maccabees wrote a history to make his point, because this literary genre was invented by Greeks. 
 
Although the book is biased, it is not the worst of all historical studies from Antiquity; in fact, the author is quite capable. He presents the Jewish leaders Judas, Jonathan, and Simon as devout people and has little sympathy for people who favor hellenization, but it must be noted that he nowhere mentions divine intervention.

The contents of the book can be summarized as follows:

    * Chapter 1-2: The <b>hellenization of Judah</b> and the non-violent resistance by Mattathias;
    * Chapter 3-9: Military actions by Judas the Maccabaean ('battle hammer'): after 166, he defeats the Seleucid armies three times and liberates Jerusalem, where the temple is purified; more operations; Judas' defeat and death in 161;
    * Chapter 9-12: Continued warfare, led by Judas' brother Jonathan (160-143), who, benefiting from wars of succession in the Seleucid Empire, restores the fortunes of the Jewish nationalists and adds to their territories;
    * Chapter 13-16: The third brother, Simon, achieves political independence, and founds the Hasmonaean dynasty.

The author must have been a cultivated Jew living in Judah, and can be dated to c.100 BCE. The <b>presumed Hebrew or Aramaic original is now lost, but the Greek version</b>, which must have been popular in the Diaspora, has survived and was accepted as canonical by the Christians, until, in the sixteenth century, the scholars of the Reformation preferred to concentrate on those texts of the Jewish Bible that were written in Hebrew.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[right][snapback]94007[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[ramana]

Why did the Empire die or rather morph into the Monstrosity in 325 AD? I think it inspired Muhammed who wasnt alone in crafting a new Monstrosity for the Asia which fianlly ended the Westward migrations from time immemorial!

[dhu]

History has ended. this is in vein of last prophet innovation of Christianity.

[ramana]

Dhu I wrote this in respone to some one who thought Jesus can be adopted as another avatar!

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Chiron, I am afraid you dont get it. The earliest Messanic(from Moses) monotheism was to bring normative thinking to West Asia which was the host of many civilizations. When this got Persianised, Hellenized and Romanised it became Christianism. Islam was a reversal which dehellenized while keeping the Romanism of total control of State and Religion. Islam was to normatize the rest of Asia and stop the westward migrations/onslaughts from time immemorial. Marxism is to normatize the Slavs and the remaining Asians. Its incomplete understanding of the above political movements masquerading as religions to think they can be absorbed into Hindusim.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

In response someone else said whats normatize!

[dhu]

Every Modern Indian has come across this Normatization process. Whenever some idiot Abrahamc asks why Ram had to fight with Ravana; wasn't he being violent and how can a perfected God be violent? Or when some idiot Marxist sees systematic caste in India and how can there be so many divisions, isn't it injustice? Normatization is the essence of pysops/propaganda mechanism that is Abrahamism. The 'is' and the 'ought' are fused and any perceived deviation is labeled as injustice, upon which to militate. Reality deviating from Principle is Injustice, according to these worthies and idiots.

Nonabrahamic 'Karma' is the exact opposite where Reality has its own force of representation and cannot be overcome by an affected 'Will to Power'. The Reality of Sita abduction is a fact, no matter how much we may wish it were not so. At the very least, (the narrative of) Sita abduction represents a learning situation (but for abrahamic, it is only an Injustice against the Lord God and a propaganda point and they do not care for the reality of the abducted woman!!!! same thing with abortion, deviation from the definition of "Life" is an Affront against Lord God; and no one cares about the woman!!!!).

[dhu]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Marxism is to normatize the Slavs and the remaining Asians.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Ramana,

Any progress on the 'sealed train' of Lenin? Origins of Maoism, Kai-shek?. The recent "people's movements" in Nepal and Burma were the real eye-openers.

[Shambhu]

Re 296:

Hindus are also too ignorant about the Abrahamic god wiping out villages, killing people, destroying their property etc. Not to mention what the god commanded his followers to do.

Philosophical defense of Dharma aside, Hindus should at least be able to stuff the Abrahamic's mouth with tales of murder from his own "God",

[dhu]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Why is there such an asymmetry? It has to do with what
colonialism is also about: establishing frameworks of inquiry
into the nature of human beings and societies through the use
of power and violence </b>(S. N. Balagangadhara et al., 2008).
Once established and generalized, such frameworks continue
to draw their legitimacy through sources other than those that
are cognitive in nature. Today, it appears to me, this legitimizing
process has reached its apotheosis in the guise of an attitude
that suggests that a science of culture and the sciences of the
social are simply impossible because of human and epistemic
limitations. Needless to say, a persistent ‘anti-scientific’ attitude
adds fodder to such an attitude.   link<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[HareKrishna]

The 4 christian obsessions:eternal hell,the heretic,the devil,sin.All interconected.