1

In his recent book ‘Sapiens, A Brief History of Humankind´, Yuval Noah Harari speaks of
religion as the necessary development of fiction in order to control and manipulate large
numbers of human beings in single actions. Belief is the force that thereby binds them
together. Fiction indeed permeates our lives and constitutes one of our most essential
characteristics tied in with language and its central component of representation. We need to
constantly alter reality to succeed. In this view, the Abrahamic religions are about altering
and indeed distorting reality. Human minds are taken out of the present and placed in time,
thereby heightening understanding. The projection of group imagination away and out of the
environment expresses homo-sapiens’ change.

Forest

Fiction-
cave
Religion- hut
imagination-
mind

danger

‘Eretz-Israel has never been inhabited in the entirety by a single nation, even during those
periods when most of its land area was under Jewish sovereignty, as in the days of Judah
and Israel in Biblical Times or under Hasmonaean kings in Second Temple days. Since
the dawn of history, Eretz-Israel has harboured various nations and peoples living side by
side, whether in peace or hostility………….Despite this significant fact, the overwhelming
majority of the historical studies of that period devote their primary attention to the Jewish
people.’
Aryeh Kasher, Jews and Hellenistic Cities in Eretz-Israel: Relations of the Jews in
Eretz-Israel. Relations of the Jews in Eretz-Israel with the Hellenistic Cities during the
Second Temple Period. (332-70BCE). Mohr Siebeck. 1990.
 2

CHRISTIANITY: BEFORE THE BEGINNING

1

The Jesus Story:

The Jesus story suddenly emerges in the 1st century AD almost out of the blue, an apparent
explosion of spiritual light based on the Talmud and Torah (those parts existent at the time)
but separate from both. Jesus did not it seem to concern himself with what other Middle
Eastern religious thinkers concerned themselves with at the time, although he is specifically
related to John the Baptist his ideas seem strangely different as if from separate origins. Jesus
appears concerned with the present and its connection to the world’s imminent end, expressed
through parables (true mainly gleaned from the Old Testament) and embedded with medicine
and magic. There is no pervading violence or political message, although both linger in the
background-unlike in the foreground with the Pentateuch and the later Qur’an. Jesus appears
to arise from nowhere, with a personal history attached much later; fully formed as if recently
emerged from his chrysalis. Also, our knowledge of Galilee is limited, and we have little
clear evidence as to why a religious movement should emerge from there. Was it a reaction to
King Herod or does it have deeper, more extensive roots. Further, to cloud matters even more
the historical rendition of Jerusalem is marked by clear inaccuracies and the famous meeting
with Pilate highly unlikely.
This first paper will consider the situation in Israel in the centuries up to the real or imagined
birth of Jesus, including the Persian and Greek rule and the consequences for the Yahwist
religions, finishing with Jewish, Hasmonaean, rule, which ended a few generations before
that event. This paper will allude to possible, indeed likely, influences on Jesus’ career and
ideas.
The 500 years before the apparent emergence of Jesus saw vast changes within the Hebrew
polities, a group I have previously described of mixed background, with the population of the
Samarian north decimated and later likewise that of the south. Although the extent of the
decimations is often exaggerated the elimination of large portions of the elite would have had
an immense effect on Hebrew thinking. Whatever the actual numbers there were a large
number of voluntary exiles to Egypt, from Israel to Judah, and enforced exiles to Assyria and
Babylonia. Devastated by military and political setbacks, the Hebrew identity had to be
invented anew. Effectively, the YHWH religion changed and accumulated many
Mesopotamian myths.
History:
Ezra and Neremiah, who propagated a puritanical form of Judaism, were sent into Yehud by
the Persian authorities to effect control. The old political form of prophet, king and High
 3

priest was re-established, although the prophets, often no more than agents of the Persian
king, were soon excluded and the area ruled by king and High Priest. Although governance
resembled a theocracy it is unlikely to have been independent as Persian rule, while tolerant,
was thorough. The king/emperor utilised a network of spies for example, keeping an eye on
his own officials to prevent rebellion, and also used gold and silver coins as a means of
control; coinage meant the king for example controlled the military and the Persian
administration.
Although many historians consider Yehud to have regained prosperity under Nehemiah,
Finkelstein in Jerusalem in the Persian (and Early Hellenistic) Period and the Wall of
Nehemiah, 1 rebukes a number for simply repeating biblical claims, pointing out the lack of
archaeological evidence for Jerusalem’s renewed wealth during Persian rule. In fact, it seems
to have been a backwater still and the biblical claims hyperbole at best. Finkelstein places the
entire population of Yehud as 15000, although other authorities referenced by Finkelstein
hold that there were double that amount, testifying to its now inconspicuous and unimportant
character. Finkelstein estimates that it had drastically shrunk by at least two-thirds from the
Iron Age 11 site. During the Persian period, Jerusalem’s population was approximately 500,
so in fact it was a village. Its urban shrinkage was marvellously hidden by the extreme claims
of Jewish literature. The tendency to fabricate is a characteristic of all three Abrahamic
religions. The low levels of Yehud’s population would have made the possible
implementation of a new cult by Ezra and Nehemiah, the future Judaism with its politically
designed laws and rules, very easy indeed.
Finkelstein holds that the wall was not built in the Persian Period contrary to biblical claims.
He doubts that the walls were built at all as the only evidence is from Nehemiah 3 and
otherwise no evidence exists. The archaeological evidence points to the wall’s construction,
often limited to The City of David area, to the Middle Bronze Age, Late Iron 11 and the Late
Hellenistic period. Any further wall construction was therefore during the latter described
period, a time when Yehud again was a well-organised territorial polity with evident wealth.
The Nehemiah 3 passages may be much later redactions or the idealising of an impoverished
city, little more than a village, bestowing on it past or future imagined glories.
Persian rule helped Yehud, the Jewish identity, to reintegrate through the involvement of
Ezra and Nehemiah, the public Torah readings authorised by Darius I, the Persian king, and
under King Artaxerxes I the prohibition of mixed marriage and increased collectivisation.
The public readings were performed, according to the Bible, by leading figures such as Ezra.
Keeping Yehud stable and content, strengthening a national sense of oneness may have
seemed expedient when Persia was threatened with occasional rebellion, notably from Egypt
and external threats from Greece, for example. The Jews in fact were noted warriors and
often fought as mercenaries (Runessen: 2001:300-303). In Hellenistic times they fought for
Hellenistic rulers in Idumea, as many other ethnic groups did. The Greek rulers mainly
employed mercenary armies.
There is limited information regarding early Greek rule of Palestine, and although what we
know suggests continued rule of the High Priests and aristocracy it is likely to not to have
been one of Jewish ethnic continuity. Competition between two families is noted: the Tobiad

1
Journal for the Study of the Old Testament. Vol. 32.4. (2008) 501-520.
 4

and Oniad High Priests.2 The High Priest position was passed down within aristocratic
families. Nevertheless, tales of a dynamic polity through Persian and Early Hellenistic
periods must be treated with caution. Yehud remained reduced in size from even the
relatively small Judea.
Finkelstein and others believe it went as far north as Mizpah, the Judean desert in the East to
Keilah in the West, the only urban site in the Shephelah-which I have described earlier as
becoming part of the Judah/Israel polities in the 9 th century, therefore remaining within the
Hebrew/Jewish polity for a short period of time.

A revision of Yehud territory placed on descriptions from Ezra and Nehemiah, according to
Finklestein and the prevailing archaeological evidence.3

According to the above revised maps, the major urban centres, such as Gezer and Hazor,
were not part of Yehud and other political, ethnic and religious conditions may have
prevailed there. They did not become part of a Jewish political entity until c160 BCE due to
Hasmonean expansion and Greek retreat and in effect were part of other polities such as
Idumea. Although this is speculative, they were probably no longer Jewish. In Samaria,
during the Hellenistic period, the Isis and Sarapis cult was established at Samaria-Sebaste.
4
Samaria also had a mixed-ethnic group of Jews, Persians, Assyrians and Greeks. As has been
seen worship was varied.5
The Ptolemy’s ruled over Palestine for most of the Hellenistic period and throughout Yehud
functioned as an ethne centred on Jerusalem within a temple polity, but shared with other

2
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/palestine-in-the-hellenistic-age/
3
The Territorial Extent and Demography of Yehud/Judea in the Persian/Early Hellenistic Periods. RB 2010. T.
117-1. Pp 39-54.
4
Magness, Jodi. The Cults of Isis and Gore at Samaria-Sebaste in the Hellebnistic and Roman Periods. Harvard
Theological Review. Vol. 94. Issue 2. Pp 159-179.
5
The Historical Jesus and Historical Samaritans: What can be Said? Biblica. Vol. 81. No 2. 2000. Pp 202-232.
 5

ethnicities. These were common within Ptolemaic rule. 6Although bordering on Syria, Galilee
throughout this period appears mainly Jewish, in the villagers at least, with mixed
populations and varied worship in towns and some villages. 7 There seems to have been
increased friction between the two populations of Gentile and Jew. As the population of
Galilee had not suffered exile or decimation the core of its population remained Jewish
(believers in YHWH), localised in villages. In the Hellenistic era the area had many Greek
colonisers and cities, suggesting a land of two cultures-Jew and various pagan cults and
believers.8 There appears to have been no pagan temples in Lower Galilee (Aviam: page 17).
Aviam (2004) calls Galilee pagan, certainly with the number of pagan places of worship
discovered there and particularly pagan pottery. By the first century Jewish stone ware
appears, directly influenced by Jerusalem. Aviam highlights the Hasmonaean influence on
the Jewish elements of the population in Galilee, which he terms nationalistic. The rituals
surrounding the fashioning of Jewish pottery makes it easy to identify, but leaves only about
50% of found pottery identified as Jewish. Aviam locates the limits of Jewish occupation of
Galilee as at Kibbutz Gabon. In fact the Jewish pottery discovered fits in with Josephus’
description of Jewish occupation.9
Mark A. Chancey10 disputes the pagan nature of Galilee, especially during the lifetime of
Jesus, suggesting that evidence of pagan places of worship during Hellenistic and Roman
times need not mean a large pagan population, as other authors insist. Whether or not there
were large numbers of pagan worshippers, the culture there can nevertheless be described as
mixed. As writing itself and composition was predominantly done in city areas, the literary
and intellectual culture was perhaps Hellenistic.
Evidence from Idumea indicates high levels of migration into areas that once formed part of
Judah, with infusions of Arabs (a name given to peoples of the desert regions from Egypt to
the Arabian Peninsula) and Phoenicians as well as Greek. Changes in population may have
encouraged even more the formation of a religion-based identity in the Jerusalem-based,
aristocratic elite. 11
Lastly, Kasher 1990 provides a description of different ethnic and cultural groups within
Israel and along its borders that help provide greater reality to many protestations of Jewish
ubiquity and ownership. The cities along the coast he declares were in Hellenistic times
populated by Phoenicians and Greeks, thereby worshipping Bal, Hadad and the Greek
pantheon. Arab groups had settled in Gaza, but with Alexander’s victories a large number of
Phoenicians were settled there. As Samaria had rebelled against Alexander, the city was
destroyed and the inhabitants exterminated to be later reconstituted with a Greek or
Macedonian population. According to Kasher, as the result of rebellion and wars between the
6
Hengel, Martin. Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early HELLENISTIC
Period. Wipf and Stock Publishers. 2003.
7
Aviam, Mordechai. Jews, Pagans and Christians in the Galilee: 25 Years of Archaeological Excavations and
Surveys Hellenistic to Byzantine Periods. University of Rochester Press. 2004.
8
Aviam, Mordechai. Jews, Pagans and Christians in the Galilee: 25 Years of Archaeological Excavations and
Surveys Hellenistic to Byzantine Periods. University of Rochester Press. 2004.
9
Shaked, Idan. Avshalom-Gorni, Dina. Jewish settlement in the Hula valley in the first century BC: . Edwards,
Douglas R. Ed.Religion and Society in Roman Palestine: Old Questions, New Approaches. Routledge. Taylor &
Francis Group. 2004
10
The Myth of a Gentile Galilee. The Population of Galilee and New Testament Studies. Cambridge University
Press. 2004.
11
Lipschits, Knoppers, Albertz ed. Judah and the Judeans in the Fourth century BCE. Eisenbrauns 2007.
 6

Greek states (the War of the Diadochi) populations were eradicated and migrants moved in.
Greeks were encouraged to settle in the Near East, and were provided with land.
Intermarriage between Greeks and Phoenicians seems to have been common. Forced
marriage between Greek troopers and native women (often Jewish) were legitimised by law.
Phoenician migration in Philadelphia and present-day Jordan brought into these areas
renewed worship (I have in earlier papers pointed out the early involvement of Phoenicians in
Eretz-Israel, especially in the Israel polity, which was always mixed) of Asteria-Astarte and
also worship of Heracles-Melkart.
On Mount Carmel Hadad and Atargatis were celebrated during Hasmonaean times, but was
later destroyed by the Jews along with the idols of all pagan worship found within the
territory they conquered. In fact, according to Kasher most of Eretz-Israel would have been
both non-Jew and Pagan during the Hellenistic period with most Jews located in Yehud.
Preservation of the religion beyond Israel:
The origin of synagogues, an institution that sustained the Jewish religion, is, according to
Anders Runessen,12 guessed at rather than placed in any period with certainly. Instinct or
intuition places it in the exile period. Although rabbinical Judaism places the synagogue to
the earliest times, this is just myth. Philo and Josephus, with of course no historical evidence
placed synagogue beginnings with Moses, the go to hero and originator, and the rabbis
(Runessen: 2001: 42-45) followed suit. The replacement of sacrifice in the Babylonian exile
was for a long time presented as a likely origins but has long since been dismissed (page 59).
Runessen searching for a definition in order to find its emergence in history sees it as a form
of practice that brought Jewish liturgical worship into every Jewish village. Prayers and
readings were conducted, with only sacrifice excluded. Thereby, mainly through the books,
through its literature, the religion continued amongst pagans, the remembrance and recitation
of the literature-a procedure obsessively continued in Moslem culture. Many authorities place
the emergence of the synagogue with the architecture that framed assembly worship, but
Runessen places it earlier, as many others do, within private houses. Finkelstein principally
connects synagogues to prayer meetings at the time of Manasseh (698-642 BCE). The
practice preceded the architecture, a relatively late development of 70 CE, which framed
large groups. Of importance also here is that it appears to have been a Galilean invention.
Runessen states (pages 28-9) that the synagogue legitimised ritual, symbols, the Passover,
Moses’ Exodus, and other narratives of identity, and thereby ethnic identity itself. The truth
of these events was not the concern on any level, but rather the legitimising process.
Runessen includes legitimisation through archaisation, authorisation (higher authority, such
as Temple) and regulation. He points also to the level of ideology. There are a number of
other attributes but these alone can be found in the following two Abrahamic religions,
Christianity and Islam. These can also be found in other religions, but rarely also connected
to the same intensity of ideology. Whatever the institutions were that predated the Hellenistic
period in terms of political enforcement of Jewish identity, the Hellenistic period probably
occasioned developments within Judaism of the nationalistic behaviour that continued to
cause religious-based rebellions and cultural stubbornness. Martin Hengel argues for the

12
The Origins of the Synagogue. A Socio-Historical Study. Coniectanea Bliblica. New Testament Series. 37.
Almqvist and Wiksell International. Stockholm, 2001.
 7

centralisation of the cult during this time (Runessen: 70-71), which given the cultural
pressure exerted by the Greeks on the less sophisticated seems justified.
Persian rule and Judaism:
With justice, Runessen (250) has placed the changes in Judaic religion (Ancient Fictionality:
Moses, Exodus and Conversion Theory) within a Persian context, not only by utilising the
ever-present functions of the Persian king, all-seeing and omnipotent and omnipresent, but in
its aping of Darius I law reforms. Becoming a religion based on law becomes evident at this
point, the Exodus story restructured to permit both conversion and godly rather than Persian
intervention. Principally, these concerned Persian control of its colony through religion.
Darius enforced law codes on all the ethnic groups and polities under Persian control
(Runessen: 272-273). The Ezra and Nehemiah laws on intermarriage were merely a response
to Persian directives (Runessen: 280-81)
The development of Judaism can if chosen be viewed as the collaboration of Jewish
governors, such as Ezra and Nehemiah with the colonial intentions of the superpowers of the
day to embed religion and their authority within the Jewish groups as a whole, especially as a
consequence of depopulation and diaspora. It was employed as an external means of control
not only of Yehud, but the fragmented Jewish groups as a whole within the hill country. In
fact, a new religion emerged at this point that tends to be seen as constructed out of the word
of god, his governors such as Moses-replicating Persian authority and at times Persian
religion. The Judaic religion became centralised, bound up with ritual and rules, and thereby
mirroring Persian political control masquerading as god-given. Identifying with the empire
ideology of Persia, Judea projected its imaginary future and religion by outwardly embracing
the entire world.
Persian rule, especially under Darius I and Artaxerxes I encouraged the development of a
national Jewish identity, enforcing social cohesion. As part of this process, public readings
were instituted initially within the temple. The political structures and investment of the
Abrahamic religions, Judaism, Christianity and especially Islam were here established. In fact
in some areas of the world, Islam seems to most express, with considerable success, those
early political intentions. Belief structured upon political goals is certainly evident under
Persian rule and guidance.

Greeks bearing gifts:

The Ptolemaic Greeks occupied and governed Palestine after the death of Alexander, and
Runessen (page 156) demonstrates, the High Priests in Jerusalem were given control over
Yehud. Effectively it became, for the first time, a theocracy. While the High Priests now
enjoyed political and religious power, beneath them nevertheless was placed a council of
elders and a council of priests. Conversely, throughout the early period of Greek rule Torah
reading and its meaning became increasingly delegated or assumed by local groups.
Runessen (page 158) identifies two developments-travelling teachers and responsibility given
to the laity to teach as well as Levites and priests. As Hellenistic control over Palestine
progressed, Runessen writes of priestly and Temple controls lessening and authority given to
these independent interpreters. Jesus can therefore be placed within the context of lay readers
 8

who taught or preached at synagogues on a Sabbath. His authority was therefore the result of
tradition.
In the later period of Greek rule, especially after the Seleucids assumed control over Yehud
(201 BCE), there appears to have been continued unrest not just against their Greek overlords
but between the social groups inside the state, referenced briefly above. In the former the
policies of Antiochus IV, enforcing the Jews to assimilate with Greek culture proved
provocative. This reversed the general policy of the Persians and Ptolemy’s. The Seleucids
began to persecute those Jews who resisted. Keeping the Sabbath and circumcision were
prohibited.

Greek rule was it seems less tolerant of the monotheistic Jews as their body-obsession and
intolerance provoked their own. There was a consequent culture clash especially when many
young men began to embrace Greek ideas-on nudity for example. Several of the elite
embraced Greek culture too. The later Jewish reaction was probably also based on the Jewish
community coming into contact again with a superior culture and responding by imitating
many of their literary products and stories. Nevertheless, much of the hill country was no
longer Hebrew or Jewish so the clashes came mainly from the Jerusalem community. It
appears that this period of Greek rule gave rise to iconoclasm, which emerged from this
period onwards, alongside a bitter hatred of polytheism.
Greek and Jewish Literature:
It is likely that the two literatures evolved together. From at least the 8 th century Greece
polities were deeply involved with Near Eastern polities and groups. The Greeks may have
come a little later to using the Phoenician alphabet but otherwise there seems synchronicity-
real or imagined. The Exodus story may have been informed by Persians of Aeschylus, and
the form and dramatic style of many biblical books influenced by Greek writing-and of
course the reverse.13 Sparks also rightly references the role of Assyria, an ancient group that
emphasised nationalism based on a specific god, whose epithets resembled those to YHWH.
Nevertheless Sparks (page 93) declares that the greatest cultural affinity lies between Greece
and Israel.
During the period of Hellenistic dominion Samaria looked to the West, with many
Macedonians settling there. For the Jerusalem priestly authorities they became second class
Jews. The Israelites still professing YHWH worship built a temple at Mount Gerizim. A
Samarian community was formed at Shechem, previously destroyed by the Assyrians and
called themselves Sidonians (the term for Phoenicians, a group who in a previous paper I
suggested formed a good proportion of the Israeli population). The people of Yehud referred
to the Samarians as Cutheans, alluding to Assyrian settlers a few centuries before and
referencing the idea that Samarians were no longer full or proper Jews.14
Throughout the Hellenistic period the Jews and Greeks contested the genuine origins or
source of various parts of the Bible, as to whether Plato and Pythagoras had borrowed from
Moses, and whether in fact Judaism as a whole had borrowed from Plato (Bickerman. 1988.
13
Sparks, Kenton L. Ethnicity and Identity in Ancient Israel: Prolegomena to the Study of Ethnic Sentiments and
Their Expression in the Hebrew Bible. Eisenbrauns. Indiana. 1998. Pages 23-24.
14
Bickerman, Elias Joseph. The Jews in the Greek Age. Harvard University Press. 1988.
 9

Page 14). Bickerman points out (1988. 14) that as a Levantine culture speaking and writing
Aramaic, the Jews would have been more than open to influence by Greece. I have
previously suggested that many biblical stories belong to their neighbours. Bickerman (page
14) additionally points out that Aramaic extended from India to the Nile, and that many ideas
and stories flowed along this route. For example, the Armenian Er found in a Platonic tale, is
from an authentic Eastern myth. Bickerman writes that the two cultures shared that Eastern
culture. Hecataeus of Abdera recorded that under the Persians and Greeks, the Jews had
altered many customs and practices. Hendel (2003: 40) notes that when Zeno made a trip
through Palestine he recorded 78 people’s names of whom only 12 were Semitic. The rest
had Greek names.

Jesus functions within a philosophy of history that perceives Judaic narratives as a truth, with
each personality a function of that truth. Other groups specialised in myth, which means any
stories connected to their gods. 15The perception of the Greek narratives as simply myth, a
view constructed by Josephus, had a basis in the Greek gods immorality but also in the
difficulty of understanding representation, of distant literature being imagined. Jesus must
fulfil the truth of the prophets, inhabiting their truth as a prophet. In Judaism, myth and real
events were never separated. The Hellenistic Jew Artapanus constructed a world in which all
inventions and events proceeded from Judaism-one in which Moses was the teacher of
Orpheus, invented the Egyptian army and its war machines and served in Ethiopia for ten
years (Hendel: 2003: 17). Changing and distorting reality became commonplace, but was
distinguished from Greek writings in not being myth. In effect, Judaic beliefs and the Judaic
god are inserted into Greek myths and narratives. Greek myths are explained by Judaic
history, which obviously came first.
Of importance to the Christian narrative is the connections made by Bloch between Judaic
and Ancient Greek literature, for example the similarities between Aeschylus Persians and
the Moses narrative, and the similar life stories between Moses and Orpheus. The fact that
some of the Bible resembles Greek concepts of narrative, Joseph and the David story,
indicates the possibility that some of the Bible was written under Hellenistic Greek tutelage.
This takes us to one possible point regarding the Jesus narratives: they freely and blatantly
occupy both myth and reality. The Jesus we read of in the Gospels is not the Jesus of reality,
but a modified one to fit Hebrew myth and the myth of a Galilean sect. The Jesus figure
represents dozens of other prophets and holy thinkers and thereby is representative.

Hasmonaeans: Old enemies, new Jews.

The Hasmonaean uprising can be considered a cultural conflict between two contrasting
views of life, between Jewish apocalyptic mind-sets and Hellenistic mysticism, and Jewish
rabbinic tradition and Hellenistic Gnosticism but there was, as is common in such matters,

15
Bloch, R. Moses and Greek Myth in Hellenistic Judaism. T. Romer. Ed. La Construction de la Figure de Moise.
Gabalda. 2007. Page 198.
 10

more involved. 16 Although the attitude of the Greeks to the Jews, and the reverse, may have
been the strongest reason for revolt, the political infighting amongst the elite also provided
motivation. Ptolemy financial reforms increased wealth amongst the elite and created
immense wealth disparity between rich and poor. Problems of greed and exploitation came to
the fore remarked on in Proverbs and Ben Sira (Henlen: 51).
The Tobiads, for example, were a powerful family outside of the priesthood- from which all
powerful Jewish figures had emerged and out of which class Judaism was made. As
Jerusalem was the only Jewish city, the elite were able to control their society with relative
ease. The Tobiads favoured Greek culture and society were friends with the Ptolemy’s in
Alexandria. In Jerusalem Joseph, Tobias’ son and known for his interest in business and
making money, successfully competed with Onias II the High Priest becoming the Ptolemy’s
tax collector in Syria and Phoenicia. 17Greek was fast becoming the written language of
choice displacing Aramaic in official transcripts (Henlen: 59). Important Jews now wrote in
Greek. High Priests too knew and used the language and some younger Jews spoke of turning
Jerusalem into a Greek-style polis. Greek education, important in the Greek homeland,
became an instrument of rapid cultural change. Of equal or even greater importance were the
gymnasia, a principal Greek form of behaviour, began to appear not only in Jerusalem and
the larger urban centre, but in large villages as well (Henlen: 66). There is evidence of Jews
becoming acolytes of Greek cults such as that of Dionysius. This extensive acculturation
reached the point where young Jewish men had operations to restore their foreskin and
rejected the covenant. The priestly elite seemed to have embraced Hellenism or admired it.
Jewish secular writers began establishing long connections between the Jews and Greeks
through Solomon and support by the sons of Abraham in battle alongside Heracles, who
according to this narrative married one of Abraham’s granddaughters.
Henlen demonstrates (page 81) that by the 3 rd century Greek philosophy, principally
Cynicism and Stoicism, was penetrating Palestine-mainly through Hellenised Phoenician and
Syrian intellectuals. Greek intellectual penetration of the Near East, from where they
borrowed much of their own thinking anyway, created intense competition between rival
ethnic groups as to which of them began ‘knowledge’ with the Jews for example claiming
that Abraham and Moses were the root of intellectual curiosity and invention.
Jewish writers of Greek began to compose works lauding and propagating the Bible,
combining in the process both Greek and Jewish myths. Eupolemus, a Greek educated
Palestinian, wrote histories in the Greek style, who too attributes the beginnings of human
achievement to Moses-he was apparently also the inventor of writing/script itself and
transmitted it to the Phoenicians. Artapanus, already mentioned, connects Moses to Thoth-
Hermes, indicating that they were the same god. It was of course a Greek habit to upgrade
heroes to godly status. Gradually, as Henlen points out, the Bible becomes the Bible becomes
the earliest of all books and thereby Judaism the earliest culture. All Hellenism itself becomes
dependent on Moses (page 95).

16
Introduction. Hendel, Martin. Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early
Hellenistic Period. Vol. One. Wipf and Stock Publishers. Oregon. 2003.
17
Hendel, Martin. Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic
Period. Vol. One. Wipf and Stock Publishers. Oregon. 2003.
 11

Many other important Jews embraced Hellenism to one degree or another. Jason of Cyrene
provided a lucid defence of Greek culture, and wrote a Greek style history of the
Hasmonaean revolt. The later Josephus followed his example. Through writing history both
attempted to influence the world’s view of history-locating its core in Palestine.
Certain genres in Jewish literature may possibly have been originally Hellenistic genres: the
epistle, seen in Daniel, Mordecai and Esther: the narrative Romance as exampled by Esther,
Tobit and Judith. The Testament of Joseph appears familiar with the Phaedra legend in
Euripides, the narrative of Joseph and Asenath in first century Alexandria, but Henlen, while
not necessarily agreeing to a direct link places these stories as linked through Near Eastern
stories and literature as well (page 111).

Onias removal to Egypt and the Tobiad’s concern with finance coupled with the family’s
rapid decline meant a new elite group arose in Yehud, facilitating changes. The new elite
were less willing to prostrate themselves before the Greek occupiers. The coming revolt was
a means of asserting Judaism in order to resist the takeover of Israel by Gentiles. In this they
were probably aided by the Ptolemy.
Of a priestly family, Mattathias the Hasmonaean and his sons ignored the Greek authorities,
employing public readings to fight back. The Sabbath was kept in secret. Throughout Greek
rule, in part because of Greek cultures obsession with literature but also as a way of
embedding national identity, the Torah, a compilation of apparently ancient stories and
fables, was formally turned into a collection of holy writings (Runessen: 340). The Seleucids
under Antiochus IV had set out to eliminate Jewish national identity, existent now for several
hundred years from the time of Darius, threatening the social and cultural basis of Jewish
groups. One consequence may have been to increase religious fervour and initiate new
religious groups including the Essenes.
When hostilities began, the Jews had the advantage of serving as mercenaries for the Ptolemy
in Egypt and elsewhere, while the Hellenes were fragmented, attacking from different polities
at different times (Hendel: 2003: page 17). Under Judas the Maccabee, the son of Mattahias,
the temple was retaken and cleansed and the war of independence from superpower control
began-the goal achieved in 142 BCE. The Hellenistic forces against them included troops
from Idumea and Samaria as well as the coastal cities. 18 Several Seleucid armies were
gathered against Galilee, which had then a reasonably large number of Jews, according to 1
Maccabees 5: 14-23. The Hasmoneans or Maccabees provided a number of High Priests once
in power, and Alexandru Mihaila 19suggests there was a holy war component to Hasmonaean
rebellion and expansion. . Kasher (1990) states that the Hasmonaean forces set out to rid
Eretz-Israel of pagan rituals and abominations, intent on exterminating the idolaters. The
Greeks were referred to as Canaanites and Philistines, and according to Kasher memories
were evoked amongst their neighbours of the cruelty of Israel and Judah several centuries
earlier.

18
Cohen, Shaye. From the Maccabees to the Mishnah. 3rd edition. Westminster John Knox Press. 2014.
19
The Holy War Tradition of Israel in Hellenistic and Greco Roman Period (II Cent BCE to I Cent. BCE).
Vladimirescu, Mihai Valentin Pe Urmele Mantuitorului Hristos Aspecte Ale Vieth Cotidiene in Israeli . Craiova
University 2011. ISBN 978 606 14 0090 4
 12

The Jews had indeed identified themselves in relation to their immediate neighbours through
the literary processes of their religion, constructing paradigms of evil and sin on each group
that they made war on or made war on them. Apart from this tendency, evident throughout
the Middle East, there was indeed little thought in either distinction. Their neighbours
probably distinguished sin in exactly the same way except they did not develop the writing
talent that enabled them to do so as effectively. As there is little evidence of authored text,
probably found in elements of the priesthood and later in the growing trend of public reading,
the Jews developed these traits around the period of Persian and Hellenistic domination.
Many of the books appear to have been written with the idea of public reading in mind, or
began that way and morphed into written text. Their neighbours and victims did not and
therefore could not respond to Jewish re-construction of history. The views of Near Eastern
polities and peoples on the Jews would have been enlightening and probably not generous.
Nevertheless, although they were cruel most of the paradigms of cruelty and the religious
fury of their conquests may have been imbibed from the Assyrians.

Conquest:
Hasmonaean or Maccabean expansion occurred in 128 BCE advancing into Samaria. One of
its first acts was the destruction of the Gerizim temple. As it spread it destroyed pagan and
Yahwistic temples in the conquered territories (Runessen: 462). Yahwistic temples outside of
the new Jewish territories continued (page 426). This triumphant new Jewish state was based
on YHWH worship and nationalistic fervour. It expanded its borders into territories where the
population had not traditionally been Jewish or had been centuries before but now consisted
of different ethnic groups. Conversion became part of state policy.
Safrai notes the emergence of a class of sages as the new elite priestly group became
stronger. The Hasmonaeans made alliances with priestly families on the borders of Yehud,
increasing their influence. One converted family of Edomites were made governor of Idumea
once it was conquered. From this family came Herod Antipater. 20

20
Safrai, Shemuel. The Jewish People in the First Century. Historical Geography, Political History,Social. Cultural
and Religious Life and Institutions. Vol.2. 1987. Van Gorcum, Maastricht.
 13

The Hasmonaean priestly polity: the area outside of the blue line indicates pagan groups.
Inside the Jews were mainly in the majority but except in Yehud or Judea were not
ubiquitous.

The rebellion of Jewish elements against the Greeks gave rise to a new Jewish state, the
Maccabee, based on YHWH worship and nationalism-expanding amongst people not
traditionally Jewish but persuading them to become so. An independent state was created for
the first time in over 300 years-in fact this may have been its first incarnation if we view
Jewishness as cultural and exclusively based on YHWH worship.
The arrival of Roman rule in c 60 BCE eliminated the Maccabee state and Herald, a friend of
Augustus, who was only partly Jewish having also likely Idumean origins (Lipschits et al),
took over the running of much of the hill country, including Galilee, within Roman auspices.
This, in short, were the events that Jesus was born to.
Jewish absorption of foreign ideas:
This paper is concerned with the emergence of Jesus, a teacher dealing in magic and
medicine from the apparent conduit of a god of love, and what his connection can therefore
be with the jealous, angry, judgemental god of Judaism-a god of power and tyranny not
 14

forgiveness. The changes to the Judaic religion do not necessarily prophesise such a radical
viewpoint, so, although other aspects of the Jesus cult clearly tie it in with the older religion
there remain many anomalies that with effort can be better answered by allusions to
Dummuz, the Mesopotamian cult, and Orpheus, the Greek one. Either Jesus was
misinterpreted or something is radically amiss.
There is insufficient evidence for monotheistic Judaism during the Persian period and some
evidence that several forms existed, including likely worship of other gods as well as YHWH.
Present day believers in the Abrahamic religions cleave to the version of a priestly elite,
which continually adapted reality. This may have been the case with the Hebrew/Jewish
community in Elephantine, Egypt, as well as the Jews in Mesopotamia and areas in Palestine
outside of the Jerusalem priest’s control. The creation and rise of s synagogues, with their
closer ties to the community, are by some seen as integral to the early Jesus cult.21

2.
Spiritual/religious development of Yehud and YHWH worship.
The destruction of its polities, the numerous exiles and disruption of its identity had caused a
deep crisis within the Hebrew/Jewish psyche allowing the concept of Jeremiah to emerge,
that the harm done to the hill country people, the failure of YHWH to protect them must lay
with them-it could not lay with their god. Group not individual behaviour must have
occasioned their downfall. If the group accepted their punishment and suffered at the hands
of god’s choice of punisher, Babylon, then history would right itself and Israel regain its
political and martial glory. History is hereby constructed as an entity that functions in a semi-
independent role from god, and is independent of events. As advised in the previous paper,
Jeremiah functioned in a political role supporting Babylon and his actions might have simply
been at their behest. The idea of Israel’s punishment and rehabilitation back into the fixed
logic of history may have represented Jeremiah’s apologia for his actions.
Israel/Judah’s concept of itself changed for by identifying with the aggressors it’s elite groups
perceived a spiritual and supernatural role for themselves: from Assyria it assumed
monotheism, from Babylon its myths that allowed its cultural dynamics to identify a role for
Israel/Judah in the distant past, from both Egypt and Mesopotamia the story of Creation and
of Adam and Eve, from Persia angels and the concept of good and bad as differentiated from
compliance and non-compliance with YHWH. By absorbing the various superior cultures
around them, abandoning child sacrifice for example and assuming judgement values of court
proceedings as seen in the debate between Abraham and YHWH with regard to Sodom and
Gomorrah, the Hebrews/Jews spread the imaginative and literary concept of their own
identity. The assumption of law as the core of YHWH worship was at the behest of the
Persian king, Darius I, which was promptly disguised by the Exodus/Moses myth. Through
Adam and Eve, their ethnic group now extended into the beginning of time, and was
projected to its very end.

21

https://www.academia.edu/2946012/Where_Women_Sat_in_Ancient_Synagogues_The_Archaeological_Evid
ence_in_Context
 15

For over two centuries, the Hebrews had been routinely sucked into the often extremely
violent wars between superpowers, Babylon, Assyria, Egypt and subsequently Persia. It had
long lost its independence by the appearance of the last of these and had also long ceased to
consider military adventures and expansion towards their neighbours in the East. Spiritual
expansion, expansion of the imagination, was the only answer. This was done through
identification with their many conquerors, as is evident with Nehemiah, Ezra, Enoch, Isiah
and Hezekiah. Each of these imbibed political systems into their concepts of YHWH and his
religion. Persian dominance introduced the Imperial concept of YHWH, which was extended
into the past, infusing YHWH with the far seeing omnipotence of Persian imperial values.
Although the Hebrews now played only a limited role on the world stage (for us the Near and
Middle East), and for only a very limited period had played any at all, their priests created not
only a magnificent earlier kingdom that resembled the powerful polities and their rulers that
controlled them but one that lead back to the very first man-and woman. That Adam and Eve
was a late development is reflected in the monogamy it propagates, greatly influenced by
Imperialist models, Egyptian, Hellenistic and Roman. The Near Eastern family union
traditionally consisted of many wives and concubines-if the man had wealth and power.
Everything lead to the Jewss, although, in reality, they absorbed as much as created. From
this emerged a singularity, not simply of creation, but of events constructed by single figures.
This singularity is representative of time, going back into the past and also continuing into the
future, determining the future, but also proving a direct link to the past and future. For
example, Adam and Jesus were/are eternally connected, even, in Essene writings, one.
Muhammad can trace his past in Abraham and Adam also. In essence these reflect dynasties.
The Hebrew states had ceased to be tiny polities, denuded of members, isolated, spread out
but had become central to the universe and its existence.
The establishment of Yehud gave an opportunity for Hebrew priests and intellectuals to
construct this new Jewish mentality fixed upon Hebrew literature- which was still being
added to. Binding rituals and codes would eventually transform the YHWH faith from one
choice among a few, priest and temple lead, to one that for some became all-involving,
isolating and eccentric. Before Persian dominance indeed YHWH was a god of power
himself, like an imperial ruler and probably similar to the Moab warrior god Chemosh. As
with such gods he was subject to displays of sudden destruction, indeed evil. YHWH’s
goodness relies on his role as judge, deciding what can be accounted good and what bad. Like
a judge, his destruction of others is preceded by a pronouncement of guilt even if there is
none. The woolly concept of sin is employed. Nowhere is it carefully delineated as it seems
to be in the Zarathustrian religion, where evil is destructive.
The construction of material and spiritual planes, and the interaction between the two,
resolved within paradigms of resurrection may indeed come from the Persian faith. Once
Adam and Eve were thrust out of Paradise, they ceased to inhabit any other plane but earth,
the here and now personified by death.
In much of the Bible, sin and belief are bound up in the material world and YHWH’s
existence there, whereas Zarathustra raises it into the supernatural plane. While the Persian
emperor’s role as all-seeing and universal influenced the Jewish concept of YHWH, the
concepts of Zarathustra and Greek thinking were to influence the cult’s ideas of human nature
and spiritual planes. The Zarathustrian notion of the role humans played in the eternal battle
 16

between good and evil presented human beings as themselves engaged with celestial realms
and supernatural battles-their behaviour affecting the moral fate of the cosmos. As already
stated, the Zarathustrian concept of good and evil is clearer than that of Judaism which
remained concerned with supernatural power and justification. The Zarathustrian ideal can
also be seen in Egyptian mat-which again is clearer than the Judaic position in which
whatever YHWH wills is good and at no point seems to possess a truly independent
paradigm. These views on the importance of human conduct to others was common in the
Near and Middle East, and may also have been a Canaanite paradigm. The Jews may have
shared a different moral paradigm with their Eastern neighbours, one which concerned group
and individual relationships with a god, and one in which human beings were dispensable
according to the god’s will. Goodness is consistently related to YHWH who assumes the role
of reality, not simply its roots but its very truth. In Zarathustra and Egyptian culture,
goodness concerns how people behave to others, not in relation to god. The appalling
personal behaviour of the later Jewish prophets-Jeremiah was probably responsible for the
extermination of his political rivals-contrasts with the tropes against bad behaviour and
character of many Hebrew/Judaic figures.
Max Weber in his late exploration of Judaic thinking, holds that good and evil were
determined by public teaching, and were probably a consequence of literacy-acting justly
took prominence over ritual (1967: 220) but the distinction between just and unjust people
and actions is of the courtroom, it is defined in opposition not defined with scrupulous ethical
understanding. Job’s just nature is tied up with his belief, not his ethical standards. He
performs the required rituals for which he receives immense riches. He is a wealthy and
powerful man, and in fact a priest. Weber makes the point that YHWH, as understood by the
prophets, preferred the ordinary not the elite, because of their lack of hubris, but this is the
high-priest talking as a consequence of their political competition with the political elite
(Weber: 1967: 2018). Yet, public teaching or reading represented a new form of moral
construction-not dissimilar to Greek or at least Athenian practices. Again, was there possible
influence or simply convergence? Was indeed Jesus the result of more democratic forms of
moral reasoning as conceived through public reading and its development?
Weber (page 4) describes the Jews as a pariah group, embodying a caste within the Near East,
but the extent of that embodiment can be overstressed and also when it occurred-which I
suggest was merely a defensive approach to political failure and the near annihilation of the
Hebrews by Assyria, Babylon and Persia. It was a neurotic, indeed pathological, approach
whereby reality was altered by the written word. Egypt was defeated by a mighty Hebrew
general, Israel had been a fabulous polity that created a (relatively) huge empire. One that no
other polity of the time noticed. Although the ordinary people accepted the destruction of
Israel and Judah, the elite, priests and kings, could not and the only way they could deal with
it was to imaginatively identify with their aggressors. The community, or at least the elite,
had suffered a terrifying psychic fracture that could only be healed by transforming the past.
Of equal force, in the construction of Jesus’ dramatized character were probably Greek
concepts of virtue, which again emphasised deeds not thought or belief. Before Jesus, Jewish
prophets mainly acted according to heavenly dictates not humanistic ones. The god of Job
and Moses is a terrible god. Also possibly from Greek culture is the impact on character
(psychological aspects) of good deeds as understood by Stoicism. Doing good deeds made
you happy, bad deeds unhappy. These were preached throughout the mainly western part of
 17

the Empire by Posidonus, who died c 51 BCE, 22having retired to Crete. He was, while alive,
considered the principal thinker of his time influencing Cicero, who studied under him, and
the later writings of Seneca. The importance of public service can be found in Greek and
Roman thinking, whereas Jewish thinking concentrated on service to god, and here it is
suggested that Jesus’ mission concerned people as well as god.
The narrative of King Herod identifies this outcome, although his true sin is not to be Jewish.
Jesus’ hypothesised sacrifice is not only considered its greatest form but in fact also fulfils
Roman ideas of sacrifice of public figures for the greater good of the state, and Socrates’ self-
sacrifice for the same end. Bound up with the moral necessities of child sacrifice it references
Mesopotamian and early Palestinian ideologies. Sacrifice in the Hebrew/Jewish concept
means sacrifice of others-children for example. Bound up with humanistic tropes, the Jesus
story is a Greek and Roman one.
Some of the above factors impacted on the personality of Jesus, particularly the singularity.
Of note: Jesus’ personality was constructed on Elijah and his only true act might have been
the nature of his death. This naturally leads to concerns over his actual existence.

Conclusion:
Public reading and lay preaching clearly underlay the appearance and success of Jesus, as
well as demographic or greater freedom of interpretation. Many of the ideas apparently
expressed by Jesus in the Gospels (if a true interpretation of his thoughts) suggest influences
beyond Judaism and may reflect not only Hellenistic and Roman influences in the hill-
country but influences from all-over the then known world, transported through the Aramaic
language Jesus spoke. Jesus’ teaching was also propounded on medical attitudes, another line
yet to be considered.
The dates of when the biblical books were written is open to dispute, but their literary
formats, while clearly connected to Egyptian and Mesopotamian literature, appear to owe a
clear debt to Greek literature and ideas. The themes are often the same: hospitality in Sodom
and Gomorrah and the Crime of Gilead, although the themes of clan fighting are not
referenced but perhaps can be seen in the Iliad. The treatment of women seems similar.
Although such treatment can be considered normal in the ancient Middle East (and many
parts even now) it cannot be easily found in Ancient Egypt for example. The Hittites too had
powerful women and the Israeli’s conversely claimed courageous women leaders-such as
Rachel. Nevertheless, such matters tended to show patriarchy into sharper relief rather than
suggest female emancipation. Although Henlen (2003) doubts the links are specifically clear,
we do not know when the books, in their present form, were actually written as the first
known examples appear in the Dead Sea Scrolls from the 2nd century BCE.
Even if some stories demonstrate antiquated writing or references this would not be an
uncommon technique of Middle-Eastern literature. When ancient narratives began and their
final form, the result of much negotiation, is very different. The forms of a number of biblical
text show a possible Hellenistic influence, very structured, self-conscious, with the
22
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Poseidonius
 18

employment of numerous literary techniques. They show clear signs of an author’s hand or of
several writerly hands and writerly self-awareness (evident too in some Egyptian and
Mesopotamian literature).
It is likely that Greek literature and ideas influenced Jewish literature and ideas, and equally
that Jewish literature and ideas influenced Greek literature-which itself, like Jewish culture,
was influenced by Mesopotamia. We have here a world culture of sorts with different ideas
mingling, some carried along with the Aramaic language. This places the Christian myths and
ideologies as a transmitter and container of myriad ancient ideas, not a separate phenomenon.