A question I have pondered recently:
If I were transported back in time to the second temple period would I easily recognize the religion practiced by ancient Israel as Judaism?
I’m tempted to say no. Here’s why:
1. No prayer services
2. Only one religious gathering place
3. Music in the Temple
4. Sacrificial cult
5. Tum’ah and tahara are central to life, red cows
6. Caste hierarchy is important
7. Tribal affiliation is important
8. Nationwide gatherings in Jerusalem three times a year
9. Kingship
Am I missing anything big?
*Edit: We're talking about the first temple period. Thanks, Mike.
It depends what years you are talking about. I don't think monotheism was introduced as a staple of Judaism until around 610-450 BC.
ReplyDeleteWatch the Bible Unearthed videos.
I'll throw some popcorn in the microwave and begin the viewing.
ReplyDeleteAre you assuming that the acceptance or composition of Deuteronomy marks the introduction of monotheism in ancient Israel?
yeah your also forgetting
ReplyDelete1)no one believed that the torah didnt come from g-d.
2)no apikosis
To see most of the things you describe you'd have to go back to the First Temple period. For example, during the second temple period there were no tribal affiliations (in fact ten of the tribes had been obliterated two centuries or so earlier, long before the destruction of the First Temple), synagogue prayer was firmly established and for most of that period the monarchy was really just a Roman governership.
ReplyDeleteIn response to the comment above, apikorsis flourished during the Second Temple period, as attested to by the early dominance of the Hellenists described in the story of Chanukah, the ascendence of the tzedokim, and the inroads of Roman culture and secularism into Israel. Do you think everyone stood by silently while Rabbinic Judaism was created out of thin air?
Mikeskeptic
Mikeskeptic,
ReplyDeleteGood points. Time to go edit the post. Where is your knowledge of Jewish history from?
One minor quibble: I'm not so sure that synagogue prayer was "firmly" esablished in the second temple period. If I recall correctly the evidence is a bit unclear on that topic.
What about culture?
ReplyDeleteIsraelites were proud warriors, not cloistered yarmulke-wearing, kugel-eating pansies. They were also fiercely independent, agricultural, and absolutely hated foreign rule.
Jewish Freak,
ReplyDeleteI doubt that those characterizations were specific to ancient Israel. Actually, from a conceptual point of view I would hate foreign rule today and would probably fight against any enemy groups that were trying to kill me. I'm not too keen on farming though.
-Skeptodox
Ken Spiro
ReplyDeleteGreatest Jewish History Professor
"Ken Spiro
ReplyDeleteGreatest Jewish History Professor"
Yikes, he's from Aish. You've just opened yourself up to a blog full of condescending comments. I'm getting the hell outta here.
I've never heard of a real "professor" from Aish. (Gerald Schroeder doesn't count. He's a quack.) Does/did Ken Spiro teach at a real university as well?
ReplyDelete"I've never heard of a real "professor" from Aish."
ReplyDeleteWhich makes sense, it's not a university.
"Gerald Schroeder doesn't count. He's a quack."
Huh? Why?
"Does/did Ken Spiro teach at a real university as well?"
http://www.aish.com/a/ken_spiro.asp
Never taught at a university. Nor does he have his PhD. I'd agree, Ken Spiro is most certainly not a professor.
Regarding Gerald Schroeder, look here for one: http://www.talkreason.org/articles/schroeder.cfm
ReplyDeleteSkeptodox...
ReplyDeleteYou called the man a "quack". First of all, that's lashon horah. Secondly, "quack" is usually associated with mental health issues (I work in the field). So to prove your point you send me to a site who's mission is to publish:
"...papers with well-thought out arguments against creationism, intelligent design, and religious apologetics."
Ohhhhh, "well-thought out arguements", so says they. And a site that is dedicated to arguing against religious ideas is not a site I'd trust to decide who is a "quack" and who is not.
Anyway, my shabbos book club read one of Schroeder's books, and while some of the science/physics-oriented people felt he choose data to suit his conclusions, we found many of his claims fascinating.
By the way, for someone with such skepticism, you may want to evolve from the anthropomorphism's:
ReplyDelete"This would be embarrassing to God if it were true."
Very grade 5.
Dear Avrum,
ReplyDeleteNo.
Sincerely,
Skeptodox
>One minor quibble: I'm not so sure that synagogue prayer was "firmly" esablished in the second temple period. If I recall correctly the evidence is a bit unclear on that topic.
ReplyDeleteI think the traditional sources are clear that the liturgy was largely established by the Men of the Great Assembly at the beginning of the second temple period. I don't know what the scholarly world thinks about that though.