The Romans were not the first to the Temple Mount. There was a Jewish Civil War before the Romans got to the Temple Mount.
Robert Eisenman
Acts has two parts: the 3rd person first half and the we, I second half. This second half is more historical than the first half.
The Revolutionary Jews (revolting against Rome) were led by Jesus, James, and others.
Who did the literary reconstruction that is the New Testament?
Answer: Josephus, Paul, Herodians (Paul admits, at the end of Romans, that he is a Herodian.), Epaphraditus
James observed the Nazarite oath. (There were two types of Nazarite oaths–one, taken by Paul was temporary and involved the payment of money; the other one was of longer term, probably 7 years.)
Paul DOES NOT like James.
James was attacked by Paul and the pro-Roman faction (including Paul).
James was from a Jewish sect that opposed Rome. Paul and the Herodians did not oppose Rome.
Derek Lambert (co-moderator)
Did Rome have an influence on the Gospels and the Pauline Letters?
I am referencing the book, Creating Christ: How Roman Emperors Invented Christianity by James S. Valliant.
Dr. Robert Eisenman
The publisher of Josephus, Epaphraditus was a secretary of the Flavians.
James was not into loving your enemies. James would have held to the War Scroll which taught hating your enemies. Loving your enemies is Roman. There is an Apocalyptic War in the War Scrolls in the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Steefen
How you get Jesus as being an Apocalyptic prophet without an Apocalyptic War is a question that needs to be answered.
Dr. Robert Eisenman
The Dead Sea Scrolls are anti-Roman messianic, not pro-Roman messianic.
Jesus may not have been crucified.
Steefen
The historical Jesus may have died at the Battle of Galilee or if he escaped to Jerusalem and was Jesus of Gamala, he was killed by the Idumeans. That is how I can agree that the historical Jesus may not have been crucified.
Dr. Robert Eisenman responding to a question from Luther Williams
The Qumran Community called themselves Zealots. They are anti-Roman. They are anti-Pharisaic. They are anti-Herodian.
We found Dead Sea Scrolls at Masada.
Dead Sea Scrolls do influence Islam.
Islam is more like the aggressiveness of the War Scroll in the Dead Sea Scrolls than like the pro-Roman, and peaceful messianism of the New Testament.
Steefen
Derek keep pushing nonsense that Gentiles = Israelites in the Disapora.
Derek
Does Jesus fulfill any prophecies of the Hebrew Bible?
Dr. Eisenman
The only proof of Jesus’ existence is through James. James had a brother. Paul says at the beginning of Galatioas that all he knows is that he [the brother of James] was crucified for holding War Scroll and Apocalyptic War against Rome beliefs.
Steefen
Wait a second. The brother of James would then have to have been crucified by Felix. So, in addition to the Jesus of Galilee who stole Vespasian’s peace dipolomats’ horses, we have “Jesus” brother of James.
The brother of James that you are talking about would not have been crucified AD 69 – 70. While I hold to Jesus of Galilee and his mariners/fishermen who lost their battle with Vespasian and Titus, you are saying there was a brother of James who was crucified by Felix.
Dr. Eisenman
All Essenes were not peaceful.
Steefen
Oh my GAWD, Derek.
Dr. Eisenman
To answer Derek’s question, the term “Lord Jesus Christ” is Greco-Roman terminology, a Jew would not call a teacher Lord.
And, you want the Penguin Edition of James, the Brother of Jesus.
John the Baptist was a member of the Qumran community to the extent that they all were baptists. Jesus would not have had to be taught by or baptized by John the Baptist. John the Baptist was co-opted into the gospels.
“The Holy Angels will come down and join our camps” was the reason for baptism. The Holy Angels (their weapon of mass destruction) were supposed to help the Qumran Community (with its War Scroll) defeat Rome. The camps had to be pure so the Angels could go back to Heaven.
The reason the gospels were able to survive in the Roman World is that they are NOT full of anti-Roman antagonism, otherwise, they would have had to have been put in caves like the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Luther brings up Joseph Atwill
Would the names (Simon, Eleazar, etc.) used in the gospels signal awareness in Jews?
Dr. Eisenman
There were two types of Jews/Zionists: 1) those who collaborated with Rome and 2) the anti-Roman hardcore Jews.
Dr. Eisenman closes explaining that the Jewish-Palestinian confrontation needs an expansion to see that Jordan was the state of the Palestinians.
I was thinking, reading the Wikipedia article, “This guy sounds like Jack Kerouac” and lo, that’s precisely the generation he came from.
And that’s precisely the way he approaches his studies, and that’s why you have to take everything he says with a metric ton of salt.
We already knew some Jews collaborated with the Romans, and others resisted them, but to argue that’s the only two kinds makes no sense at all. In reality, you’re going to get gradations, grey areas.
If Paul was a Herodian and he founded Christianity, how come the gospels paint Herod and his family in such a villainous light?
Because there were many currents in the early Christian church (whatever you call it). Because it’s a lot more complicated than people with a conspiratorial mindset can ever fathom.
Bart Ehrman in today’s post
Is the Koran More Reliable than the New Testament?
Steefen
Professor Robert Eisenman says the content of the Dead Sea Scrolls influenced the content of the Koran. With the Apocalyptic war preparations in the War Scroll and the peacefulness of the gospels, the Koran leans more towards the War Scroll Zealots than the less aggressive Jesus.
In a freshly post-Jewish Civil War post-Jewish Revolt era, apocalypticism and messianism had better been peaceful even with the peacekeeper being crucified. So, the tone of the Koran is more reliable than the gospels.
Apparently, John the Baptist was a Zealot of the War Scroll mindset. That community was into bathing because they believed the angels would help them in their apocalyptic war. The angels could not come down to Earth, get contaminated by humans and go back to heaven. You have said Jesus thought his kingdom would get established during the time of Roman occupation by the help of God. The Bible has Jesus saying:
Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? Mt: 26: 53.
So, Jesus’ association with John the Baptist associates him with a far more aggressive and militant circle; and Herod then would be fearful of a leader of that stripe.
In this way, baptism was preparation not only for the coming judgment but for the coming apocalyptic war.
[Antiquities of the Jews 18.117] For Herod had killed this good man, who had commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, righteousness towards one another and piety towards God. For only thus, in John’s opinion, would the baptism he administered be acceptable to God, namely, if they used it to obtain not pardon for some sins but rather the cleansing of their bodies, inasmuch as it was taken for granted that their souls had already been purified by justice.
The post-Jewish Civil War and the post-Jewish Revolt sits heavily on the gospel that it turns the historical events and even the historical Jesus 180 degrees from Apocalyptic War, to no offense against Rome, no blaming Rome, and not even identifying Rome when Jesus “sees” Jerusalem surrounded by armies (Jesus does not see and identify one Roman standard, soldier, or general).
Do you agree The Koran is more reliable because it is not weighed down by the Roman subjugation, say the first decade after the war AD 70 – 80 about the time the synoptic gospels were completed?
godspell: How could Muhammad have been influenced by the Dead Sea Scrolls if he couldn’t read, wasn’t an Essene, and wasn’t anywhere near where the scrolls were kept, namely in the Essene community? Muhammad was Jewish? Who knew?
Muhammad could have had the Old and New Testaments read to him, because they were widely available where he was. The DSS, not so much.
Possible, of course, that he could read but not write, as some think was the case with Jesus. But that still wouldn’t explain how he had access to texts produced for the internal use of what was essentially a monastic community. Jesus could have, because he was John’s disciple, and John was probably an Essene. And of course Muhammad could have just had the Angel Gabriel read the scrolls to him before bedtime. Is that what you think happened, steefen?
The Essenes died out sometime after the First Century (one problem with purist apocalyptic sects is that they tend to discourage reproduction, so you really do have to get the timing right or you die out long before the Apocalypse comes, and then you never get to say ‘I told you so!’). Their writings were mainly lost, which is why it was a big deal to find them.
I don’t know who Eisenman thinks wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls, but pretty sure he doesn’t think it was Arabian polytheists, living over five centuries after Jesus.
I note you didn’t even try to respond to my previous post.
If I were a betting man, I’d wager that will continue to be a thing.
God Mispelled,
The statement was the content of the Dead Sea Scrolls influenced the content of the Koran which does not imply Mohammed reading undiscovered scrolls in a cave. Ideas and religious beliefs travel.
= = =
First a video, second a paper, third, awaiting an answer from Dr. Eisenman
The Video
** you do not have permission to see this link **
The Paper
** you do not have permission to see this link **
I sent a question to Dr. Eisenman:
Explain to me how the ideas of an isolated cult in Palestine that died out sometime in the 1st Century and was largely forgotten, traveled to the Arabian Peninsula in the 6th Century, Stiffen. 😉
If the Essenes can be said to have influenced Islam, they did so through the New Testament, which was indirectly influenced by their ideas through Jesus.
And why, pray tell, does Muhammad say that Jesus was never crucified, and in fact was never killed at all?
What Dead Sea Scroll did that come from?
You get that the Dead Sea Scrolls are not the same thing as the Nag Hammadi discovery, decades later? Right? The ones that actually contain a lot of information about early Christian beliefs?
I wouldn’t wait up for Dr. Eisenman’s response.
Steefen
Reply from Prof. Eisenman
I would think anti-Antinomianism, i. e., Paulinism. Your last conclusion is certainly true, and you could add, escaped to the Arabian Peninsula. He also might have met some in Northern Syria where some did go – near today’s Kurdistan.
Best, RE
Judith said
godspell,Why so mean? (“Which might just prove insane minds think alike…”) Why not ignore those who irritate or bore you with their contributions to The Forum? You’ve been kind to me and I appreciate it but that same kindness toward others here would be equally appreciated!
Judith,
Thank you.
Steefen
Definition of antinomian. 1 : one who holds that under the gospel dispensation of grace (see grace entry 1 sense 1a) the moral law is of no use or obligation because faith alone is necessary to salvation. 2 : one who rejects a socially established morality.
The Koran is the heir of Jamesian anti-antinomianism. The Koran shares the ethos of James, not the ethos of Paul. The tone of the Koran is more reflective of the messianism of the first 67% of the first century and more reliable than the gospels in that respect.
Even with The Koran’s own historical context and vicissitudes, the ethos and the tone of The Koran is more reflective of zealot Christians who adhered to the War Scroll of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
The Koran’s own historical context and vicissitudes are not direct counter-claims to the ethos and tone claims.
= = =
Some members of the Qumran community escaped the tribulation of AD70 to the Arabian Peninsula.
Steefen
Do you agree The Koran is more reliable because it is not weighed down by the Roman subjugation, say the first decade after the war AD 70 – 80 about the time the synoptic gospels were completed?
Dr. Ehrman
No, I decidedly don’t. It had its *own* historical context and vicissitudes.
Steefen
Definition of antinomian. 1 : one who holds that under the gospel dispensation of grace (see grace entry 1 sense 1a) the moral law is of no use or obligation because faith alone is necessary to salvation. 2 : one who rejects a socially established morality.
The Koran is the heir of Jamesian anti-antinomianism. The Koran shares the ethos of James, not the ethos of Paul. The tone of the Koran is more reflective of the messianic majority of the first 67% of the first century and more reliable than the gospels in that respect. You have informed us on this blog that Jesus only had a small following; so, far from being in the majority of zealots or a sizeable minority, Jesus’s followers would be in the single digit percentage of those seeking change, if not a fraction of 1% while the ethos of James and the tone of Apocalyptic War as opposed to Apocalyptic tribulation of destruction of Temple and defeat of people was a vocal and sizeable minority, was a sizeable minority if not larger against the pro-Roman Herodians.
Even with The Koran’s own historical context and vicissitudes, the ethos and the tone of The Koran are more reflective of zealot Christians who adhered to the War Scroll of the Dead Sea Scrolls and more reflective of the Jews who wanted to run Paul out of town or worse. The Koran’s own historical context and vicissitudes are not direct counter-claims to the ethos and tone claims.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)