Judaism a threat to Roman Emperialists

[Brickjectivity]

Side thread branching from http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...phets-tell-us-scribes-had-changed-50.html#486 where new member Scimitar got into conversation with new member Brickjectivity about this comment to CMike about some anti-semitism in the NT:

I think you are correct about that hatred and add that the hatred came because the roman authorities felt threatened by judaism.

Follow ups:

Uh actually, the Romans were never ever threatened by Judaism. let's not forget that jerusalem was under the foot of Rome. Paying tribute to Rome.

Jerusalem itself was a slight thorn in the side of Rome, and Rome only ever sent out its shamed commanders to jerusalem as a punishment...if it considered jerusalem a real threat, rome would have sent better commanders out to jerusalem. And not the likes of failed pontius pilates and others who preceded him, or succeeded him.

They were threatened not militarily by but judaism itself. Rome believed in glory and in saving the world by conquering it. It was proud of its system of slavery, adding slaves of all nationalities enriched the nation and thus the world. It was kind of sick-o in this respect. Judaism threatened its enslavement mentality, and Jews had their own God which conflicted with Rome's conception of gods and emperors. Keeping it brief: there were many things that Roman emperors would not have liked about Jews.

No they weren't threatened by Judaism spiritually either. The Judaic faith had seen no more prophets according to the rabbinic accounts and Christianity had just announced that a "son of God" had sacrificed himself for the sins of the people - and it was Eastern Christianity that was forming a threat to Rome, spiritually speaking... not Judaism.

And so, Rome had to do something... and they did. And the circus that was the council of nicea plays its part.

Rome didn't want to forego worship of their pagan deities, so they reworked the pagan myths into Christianity - this is known fact.

You can't argue that Judaism was a spiritual threat to Rome, it never was.

Let's not forget, the Jews of jerusalem were hecka jealous about letting heathen into their faith, they just didn't allow it - so this spiritual threat you speak of is not accurate.

Romans were not semites, and so couldn't be following Judaic religion, Mosaic law. Heck, they couldn't even consider it - spiritually, practically or religiously.

They didn't even want to accept christianity as the state religion, but did so because it made "empirical sense".

...I agree. Judaism was a threat to rome because it wouldn't assimilate. It stayed different.

I'm putting this thread into the 'General Religious Debates' area, because I'm not sure if putting it into the Historical Debates section would work since it is about both religion and history. I'd put it into the Judaism section, but it is not strictly a religious discussion about Judaism. Historians and all comers who know something about the subject are welcome, but please follow the forum guidelines about giving credit, not pasting a lot of stuff, etc.

The topic is whether Judaism was a threat to Rome, Roman emperors or the Roman conception of gods and emperors, particulary during the periods in which the Christian New Testament was written and or edited, but other time periods are also of interest.

 

[Tumah]

Great. Now the Romans want to kill us too?!?!?

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Judaism threatened its enslavement mentality

O rly? How so. That is really presuming a lot.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The topic is whether Judaism was a threat to Rome, Roman emperors ...

It depends on how one defines 'threat'. Folks like Bar Kochba were not about to march on Rome, but they were a significant (if localized) irritant.

... or the Roman conception of gods and emperors, particulary during the periods in which the Christian New Testament was written and or edited, but other time periods are also of interest.

No.

 

[Scimitar]

@Cyntha Cypher - yeah like totally.

Judaism was subservient to the Roman empire - that's an historical fact - yet somehow the subjected are the powerful ones who threaten... pfft.

I've not come across something more ridiculous today. Oh wait, I have. Someone claimed clitoral stimulation can enhance spirituality

 

[Nakosis]

It is easier to control people through religion rather than force.

I suspect Rome assimilated many different beliefs and voted on a compromising belief which would be acceptable to a majority, called it Christianity and made it the official religion of Rome.

I think many people at that time wanted a God that had authority. Rome tried to provide them one.

I don't know if 1st century Christianity was a real threat to Judean authority. Maybe more a civil disruption, which would have been a concern to Rome. I suspect there were many messianic sects in Judea. Later on though, Rome happen to have the letters of Paul which they probably felt lent some authority to this religion. So the God of Paul, became the God of Rome.

 

[Brickjectivity]

O rly? How so. That is really presuming a lot.

That Rome was all about enslavement and accumulation of foreigners, that much you'd allow?

Judaism was subservient to the Roman empire - that's an historical fact...

Yes, but Jews somehow managed not to assimilate perfectly, and the appearance of the Christianity seemed to be their 'Fault'. They had synogogues without any gods in them and persisted in their beliefs. It was not perfect subservience. Furthermore the Christians appeared in increasing numbers, seemingly also Jewish. The Jews struggled to differentiate themselves from Christianity, but the Christians were too similar and believed in a resurrected Jewish messiah. The number of Christians increased rapidly by extending the formerly Jewish fellowship to formerly god worshipping Romans. The Jews perhaps appeared to be supplying the Christians with their ideals about peace and freedom.

It depends on how one defines 'threat'. Folks like Bar Kochba were not about to march on Rome, but they were a significant (if localized) irritant.

I agree. They weren't a military threat, but they were the 'Cause' of Christianity at least from a Roman point of view. They played along with Rome, but they never assimilated the way that Rome wanted them to.

No.

Classic Jayhawker Soule.

Great. Now the Romans want to kill us too?!?!?

No, they just want you to intermarry, to share your individuality with them to increase the glory of Rome. That's all.

 

[Scimitar]

yep, like I said somewhere else on this forum - it made empirical sense for rome to adopt christianity.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

That Rome was all about enslavement and accumulation of foreigners, that much you'd allow?

So you don't think that 1st century Judeans were keeping slaves?

 

[Scimitar]

No i believe that he is implying that the jews were enslaved by Rome. And that's true - paying tribute in fear of impending war with the roman war machine, is slavery.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Well Judaism wasn't much of a threat when Titus rolled into Jerusalem and burned the Temple to the ground. Now was it?

 

[Scimitar]

exactly

the whole "judaism was a threat to rome" is a complete joke to any serious historian.

 

[Brickjectivity]

yep, like I said somewhere else on this forum - it made empirical sense for rome to adopt christianity.

This whole thread began when we were discussing why there were antisemitic statements in the NT, which is part of the Christianity that Rome adopted. Everywhere there is Christianity there is at least part of the NT, and it sometimes introduces Jews as a foil for Jesus or for Paul or for Christianity. Jews are the 'Bad guy' in the stories. You admit Rome adopted Christianity, so Rome was at least aware of Jews. Have you heard of the historian Seneca? I was casually googling information and found out that Seneca the 4th century BC historian was alarmed at how gentiles were taking up Jewish customs, with Jews making converts all over the empire. Don't tell me this wasn't a threat. Have you heard of Porphyry? In his work Against the Christians he criticized Jewish practices and Judaism, not just Christianity, blaming both for serious problems throughout the empire. The two, Jews and Christians, were related to Roman minds. Both were resistant to Romanization, and Porphyry attacked both not just one or the other. The historian Tacitus wrote of Jews "Those who come over to their religion adopt the practice, and have this lesson first instilled into them, :flower: to despise all gods, :flower: to disown their country, :flower: and set at nought parents, children, and brethren." These I think are properties that a Roman emperor would not savour. I see no reason why Jews would not be seen as a threat, particularly with the increasing numbers of Christians appearing throughout the empire, refusing to join the armies of Rome or participate in sacrifices to the gods. Of course the Jews were blamed for all kinds of problems as evidenced in Porphyry's attack, and it makes sense that this is a potential cause for antisemitism in the NT.

 

[Brickjectivity]

O rly? How so. That is really presuming a lot.

It presumes that you know something about Judaism's stance upon slavery. If you don't have an opinion about it I could give you one.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

It presumes that you know something about Judaism's stance upon slavery. If you don't have an opinion about it I could give you one.

Their stance on slavery? Given that slave were held in Judea in the 1st century. Please tell me their stance. And provide some documentation please.

 

[Brickjectivity]

It is easier to control people through religion rather than force.

I suspect Rome assimilated many different beliefs and voted on a compromising belief which would be acceptable to a majority, called it Christianity and made it the official religion of Rome.

I think many people at that time wanted a God that had authority. Rome tried to provide them one.

I don't know if 1st century Christianity was a real threat to Judean authority. Maybe more a civil disruption, which would have been a concern to Rome. I suspect there were many messianic sects in Judea. Later on though, Rome happen to have the letters of Paul which they probably felt lent some authority to this religion. So the God of Paul, became the God of Rome.

That is a lot of information. Rome was into assimilating beliefs, yes, including writing itself a new history now and then according to the historian Livvy in his introduction, if I remember correctly -- or was it the introduction to Livvy's history of Rome? Something like that. Yes, the God of the Jews was gaining popularity, which actually was atheism to many Romans. It was certainly controversial.

 

[Scimitar]

This whole thread began when we were discussing why there were antisemitic statements in the NT, which is part of the Christianity that Rome adopted. Everywhere there is Christianity at least part of the NT is, and it sometimes introduces Jews as a foil for Jesus or for Paul or for Christianity. You admit Rome adopted Christianity, so Rome was at least aware of Jews...

Had it escaped your attention that Rome didn't need Christians to make them aware that jews existed? Surely you know that Jerusalem was paying tribute to Caeser... humph. This is tiring.

...Have you heard of Seneca? I was casually googling information and found out that Seneca the 4th century BC historian was alarmed at how gentiles were taking up Jewish customs, with Jews making converts all over the empire.

Yes, I'm very aware of Seneca... what you didn't mention was that Jews were not only in Jerusalem - but spread out amongst other empires, as lost tribes of judea post the rebuilding of the temple by Cyrus the persian in the 5th century BC.

You see, once Babylon was freed of slaves by Cyrus, Cyrus offered the Jews to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the temple for them... some went - others found other lands to settle, some of these ended up in the roman territories and sometimes the romans ended up in theirs as the roman empire was expanding at that time.

Seneca had no right to call them heathen when they were practicing mosaic law and had a racial history of being jews - semites.

Don't tell me this wasn't a threat.

I am telling you exactly that. The jews only wanted to return to jerusalem - their native homeland.

Seneca made a mountain out of a mole hill...

Have you heard of Porphyry? In his work Against the Christians he criticized Jewish practices and Judaism, not just Christianity, blaming both for serious problems throughout the empire. The two, Jews and Christians, were related to Roman minds. Both were resistant to Romanization, and Porphyry attacked both not just one or the other. The historian Tacitus wrote of Jews "Those who come over to their religion adopt the practice, and have this lesson first instilled into them, :flower: to despise all gods, :flower: to disown their country, :flower: and set at nought parents, children, and brethren." These I think are properties that a Roman emperor would not savour. I see no reason why Jews would not be seen as a threat, particularly with the increasing numbers of Christians appearing throughout the empire, refusing to join the armies of Rome or participate in sacrifices to the gods. Of course the Jews were blamed for all kinds of problems, and it makes sense that this is a potential cause for antisemitism in the NT.

So even here, we find that it is only when Christianity goes viral amongst the inhabitants of Jerusalem, that Rome feels threatened - not before.

I tell you why - Christians were increasingly moving away from Rome controlled territories, and caesar, in his wisdom and rulings from succession, recognised that a fowl will grow to be a wolf one day, and bite his proverbial *** - and so, this was seen as a threat to roman empire.

And the romans did their best to curb early christianity, or else the Jews would be mighty displeased that they've been paying tribute to caesar and caesar had not looked after Jewish interests...

...I hope that paints a clearer picture for you.

Mossi

 

[Brickjectivity]

Had it escaped your attention that Rome didn't need Christians to make them aware that jews existed? Surely you know that Jerusalem was paying tribute to Caeser... humph. This is tiring.

We are talking about antisemitism in the NT, about why Rome's perception of Jews or perception of a threat could have caused antisemitism in the NT. You keep wandering off into some other conversation about military threats which were non-existent.

Yes, I'm very aware of Seneca... what you didn't mention was that Jews were not only in Jerusalem - but spread out amongst other empires, as lost tribes of judea post the rebuilding of the temple by Cyrus the persian in the 5th century BC.

actually I did mention it -- right above your reply. I said they were making converts everywhere -- turning Romans into Jewish proselytes.

You see, once Babylon was freed of slaves by Cyrus, Cyrus offered the Jews to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the temple for them... some went - others found other lands to settle, some of these ended up in the roman territories and sometimes the romans ended up in theirs as the roman empire was expanding at that time.

Thank you for providing that background for people who may never have heard of it before. I don't mind that you post redundant information, so long as we can proceed with our discussion.

Seneca had no right to call them heathen when they were practicing mosaic law and had a racial history of being jews - semites.

It doesn't matter if he had no right. He was Roman, and he perceived them to be a threat. It doesn't matter if they deserved it or not. What matters is that the NT got some antisemitism put into it.

I am telling you exactly that. The jews only wanted to return to jerusalem - their native homeland. Seneca made a mountain out of a mole hill...

and other Romans didn't fall for Seneca's theories? What about the flaky senators and drooling murderous emperors the Romans had? They might have listened to Seneca and his ilk rather than some peace loving hippy Jew, don't you think? And like magic some antisemitism appears in the NT, a book supposedly founded upon Judaism; but you refuse to accept that some Romans might have perceived Judaism as a threat. Despite Senaca, despite Pophyry and Tacitus, despite the soul-crushing narrative of Rome you insist that the Romans had no bias against Judaism that would create antisemitism in the NT. The Romans were not above creating histories, that we know. They weren't above killing, torturing, lying, destroying entire countries and salting the ground. They were very dirty, very guilty, but you insist they had no paranoia.

So even here, we find that it is only when Christianity goes viral amongst the inhabitants of Jerusalem, that Rome feels threatened - not before.

Even if that is the case (which you have failed to demonstrate), I have shown that to a Roman the Christian was practically Jewish. You can argue Romans felt threatened because of Christians if you like. It didn't protect Jews from the backsplash, and why is there antisemitism in the NT? Do you deny it is in there?

I tell you why - Christians were increasingly moving away from Rome controlled territories, and caesar, in his wisdom and rulings from succession, recognised that a fowl will grow to be a wolf one day, and bite his proverbial *** - and so, this was seen as a threat to roman empire.

That is something I didn't know. Everybody has an opinion.

And the romans did their best to curb early christianity, or else the Jews would be mighty displeased that they've been paying tribute to caesar and caesar had not looked after Jewish interests...

Perhaps you could explain what you mean here, since you are sharing.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Their stance on slavery? Given that slave were held in Judea in the 1st century. Please tell me their stance. And provide some documentation please.

This is not the full explanation but is good enough for our thread: Rome yearly sent war bands out. It would among other things kidnap new slaves and conquer. Kidnapping is strictly forbidden in Torah, which means that the Jews believed kidnapping was evil (still do). That means they were at odds with Rome on this issue, acting like a conscience it didn't want to have. Whenever Rome caught more people turning them into slaves there were Jews in disagreement with its official actions.

 

[technomage]

The topic is whether Judaism was a threat to Rome, Roman emperors or the Roman conception of gods and emperors, particulary during the periods in which the Christian New Testament was written and or edited, but other time periods are also of interest.

How much of a threat is a province that could be (and was) squashed into near-oblivion in 70 CE, then into utter oblivion after Bar Kokbah? Yeah, the Jews did pretty well militarily for a provincial power against the Romans ... for a while. But once the Romans stopped playing pattycake, it was all over but the crying.