Historical Background of the New Testament (Part 2): to the 2nd Century BC

The Greek Incursion 

By 338 BC Philip II of Macedon had successfully unified the city-states of mainland Greece, and his son Alexander III (a.k.a. “the Great”) succeeded him as ruler in 336 BC. Most of Alexander’s reign involved a military campaign eastward, absorbing the entire Persian Empire as he conquered territories from Greece to India, including Syria, Judea, and Egypt. He established one of the largest empires of the ancient world, resulting in Greek language, culture, literature, philosophy, and science saturating the conquered lands.

After Alexander’s death in 323 BC, the Empire was ultimately divided into four smaller Hellenistic kingdoms (cf. Dan. 8:21-22; 11:3-4): (1) the Macedonian kingdom of Greece was controlled by the dynasty of General Antigonus I; (2) the Pergamon kingdom of Asia Minor was founded by General Lysimachus and his lieutenant Philetaerus; (3) the Seleucid kingdom of Syria and other near-eastern territories was founded by Seleucus I Nicator (“conqueror”); and (4) the Ptolemaic kingdom of Egypt was founded by Ptolemy I Soter (“savior”).¹ The latter two are most relevant to the background of the New Testament (cf. Dan. 11:5-28).

Judea – the home base of nationalistic Judaism, having surrendered to Alexander’s forces in 332 BC – was subjected to the rule of the Ptolemies to the south until 198 BC; then the Seleucids to the north gained control and dominated the Jews for another half century. During these Hellenistic regimes the Jews were generally allowed to maintain their customs and practice their religion. Judea was regarded as a temple-state, with the Jewish high priest of the family of Zadok² serving as the local authority answerable to the ruling power. But in 175 BC Onias III was deposed from the high-priesthood and replaced by his brother Jason,³ who had offered Seleucid king Antiochus IV⁴ a bribe and promised to intensify the Hellenization of Judea. Then in 171 BC Jason was supplanted by Menelaus (not of the Zadok family),⁵ who had offered a larger bribe to Antiochus with assurance of an even greater push for Hellenization. Meanwhile to the west the power of Rome was increasing and expanding. 

The more orthodox Jews, called Hasidim (“pious ones”), resisted the Hellenizing advances. An attempt was made to remove Menelaus from the high-priesthood and reinstate Jason, which the Seleucids regarded as insurrection. Antiochus led his troops against Jerusalem around 167 BC, reportedly pillaging the city and the temple, slaughtering 40,000 women, children, and men (including Jason), and selling another 40,000 into slavery. He banned the practice of the Jewish religion and set up an image of Zeus in his own likeness, to whom he dedicated the temple. He outlawed the scriptures and circumcision and ordered that pigs be sacrificed on the temple’s altar (Josephus, War 1.1.1-2; 2 Macc. 5:11-14). This fulfilled the prophecy of Dan. 8:9-13; 11:21-39 involving “the abomination of desolation,” which would be repeated by the Romans a couple of centuries later (Dan. 9:24-27; 12:11; cf. Matt. 24:15; Mark 13:14; Luke 21:20). Antiochus held control of the temple for about three years (167-164 BC). This sparked the Maccabean revolt, although some historians characterize it as a civil war between conservative Jews and Hellenizing Jews, with Antiochus siding with the latter.

The Maccabean Revolt

Armed resistance against the Seleucid oppressors was instigated by Mattathias, a priest of the Hasmonean family,⁶ with his five sons: Johanan [John], Simeon [Simon], Eleazar, Jonathan, and Judah [Judas]. When Mattathias died about 166 BC, Judas took his place as leader and became known as Judas Maccabeus (the “Hammer”). He proved to be a formidable leader in guerrila warfare and gained victories in successive clashes with Seleucid troops. Antiochus was preoccupied elsewhere, so he decided to appease the Judeans and lift the ban on Jewish religion. The temple was then restored and reconsecrated in 164 BC, the commemoration of which has been celebrated annually as the feast of Hanukkah, the Hebrew word for “dedication” (cf. John 10:22), a.k.a. “Festival of Lights” (see Josephus, Ant. 12.7.7; 1 Macc. 4:36-59; 2 Macc. 1:18-36; 10:1-8). The fight for independence was seemingly bolstered by a treaty formed with the Romans in 161 BC (secured by Judas’ brother Jonathan), but the stage was set for future oppression and subjugation.

The Hasmoneans were not satisfied with Antiochus’ limited concession and continued the fight for more than two decades until Seleucid control was completely broken and Jewish sovereignty restored in 142 BC under the leadership of Simon, the last surviving son of Mattathias. For the first time in over four centuries the Jews now enjoyed political independence. With no suitable candidate of the Zadok family available,⁷ Simon was appointed high priest “until a trustworthy prophet should arise” (1 Macc. 13:14; 14:41), and his descendants occupied this position for over a hundred years.

Despite this victory, however, Judaism was divided into three disputing factions: (1) the Hasmoneans (later known as Sadduceees, Matt. 22:23; Acts 4:1), who controlled the high-priesthood and temple and held the power in Jerusalem; (2) the Hasidim (later known as Pharisees, Matt. 5:20; 9:11), who campaigned for religious purity; and (3) the Hellenized Jews (later known as Hellenists, Acts 6:1; 9:29), who embraced Greek culture. 

The Hasmonean dynasty continued to increase in power, wealth, and territory. Judas Maccabeus had conquered Idumea to the south in 163 BC, and it was reclaimed in 125 BC by Simon’s son John Hyrcanus (high priest from 134 to 104 BC), who forced the Idumeans to convert to Judaism. John Hyrcanus’ son Judah Aristobulus was the first to be recognized as “king” (Josephus, Ant. 13.11.1; War 1.3.1). Also secured and subjugated were Greek cities like Damascus to the northeast and other Decapolis communities to the east.⁸

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Cleopatra VII Philopator (ca. 69-30 BC) was a descendent of Ptolomy I and the last monarch of the Ptolemaic kingdom. After her death, Egypt became a province of Rome.

     ² 1 Kings 1:34-45; 2:35; 1 Chron. 6:8; 16:39; 24:3, 6; 27:17; 29:22; 2 Chron. 31:10; Neh. 11:11; Ezek. 40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11.

     ³ Before adopting the Greek name Jason, he was known by the Jewish name Yeshua (Josephus, Ant. 12.5).

     ⁴ Mathradates assumed the name Antiochus, after his father Antiochus III the Great, when he became ruler of the Seleucid kingdom; one of the titles he adopted was Epiphanes, i.e., theòs epiphanies, meaning “god manifest.” Antiochus IV Epiphanes ruled the Seleucids from 175 BC until his death in 164 BC.

    ⁵ According to 2 Maccabees Menelaus was of the tribe of Benjamin, but Josephus gives conflicting information.

    ⁶ A descendent of Asamoneus through Joiarib, Simeon, and John (Josephus, Ant. 6.6.1); possibly traced back to Phinehas, Israel’s third high priest (1 Macc. 2:26; cf. Num. 25:7-13; Judg. 20:28; Ezra 7:1-5)?

     ⁷ After Onias III was deposed from the high-priesthood (and later murdered on the order of Antiochus-appointee Menelaus), his son Onias IV moved to Egypt and founded a new temple at Leontopolis, which functioned until Vespasian forced its discontinuance in AD 70 in conjunction with the Jerusalem temple’s destruction.

     ⁸ The Decapolis (League of Ten Cities) was comprised of Scythopolis, Gadara, Hippos, Dion, Pella, Raphana, Canatha, Damascus, Philadelphia, and Galasa (Pliny, Natural History 5.16). On the ministry of Jesus in this region, see Matt. 4:25; 8:28-34; Mark 5:1-20; 7:31-37; Luke 8:26-39. Jews from Arabia (the Nabataean Kingdom), which at times incorporated some or all of the Decapolis, were present on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:11). Later Saul of Tarsus was converted in Damascus and then spent three years in the general vicinity (Acts 9:1-25; Gal. 1:17-18).

Related Posts: Historical Background NT Part 1, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6

Image credit: https://sydney.edu.au/arts/schools/school-of-philosophical-and-historical-inquiry/department-of-classics-and-ancient-history.html

Historical Background of the New Testament (Part 1): to the 4th Century BC

Every culture has been shaped by historical influences. The initial reading audience of each New Testament document would have been familiar with its own history, as well as current events. Assumptions and subtle allusions did not have to be explained to them. Because modern readers are otherwise groping in the dark, knowledge of the New Testament’s historical context is indispensable. 

Our focused investigation begins in the 4th century BC with the Hellenistic Age. From Alexander the Great (336 BC) to the Roman emperor Augustus (27 BC), Grecian influence was the predominant political and cultural force. This leads into the New Testament era, during and after which Rome is the controlling world power. The immediate foreground of the New Testament would extend at least to the second Jewish war with Rome in AD 132-135,¹ and even further into the 4th century to the time of Constantine, reportedly the first Roman emperor to convert to Christianity.²

While the entirety of Hebrew scripture provides much of the New Testament’s historical background, there is a gap of over three centuries separating the respective eras of the Old and New Testaments. At the end of Old Testament history the Persian Empire is dominating the world scene,³ whereas New Testament history opens (and closes) with the dominion of the Roman Empire. In between these two periods – the Intertestamental Period⁴ – the immediate background of the New Testament develops, “an understanding of which is essential to a correct interpretation of the situation of the Jews in the time of Jesus. Religiously, Judaism was transformed into a set of beliefs and practices often quite different from Old Testament religion…. numerous events occurred that prepared the way for the first-century world to be more receptive to the message of the gospel than in many other periods in history” (C. L. Blomberg, Jesus and the Gospels 10). 

Brief Historical Synopsis

“But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth his Son, having been born of woman, having been born under [the] law” (Gal. 4:4, author’s own translation). When New Testament history opens, the world scene in general and Judaism in particular are considerably different than where the Old Testament record leaves off. The nation of Israel had reached the height of its glory when David ruled as king (1010-970 BC) and on into the reign of his son Solomon (970-931 BC). Israel’s downfall ensued as the nation divided (931 BC), the northern kingdom was conquered by the Assyrians (722 BC), the southern kingdom was conquered by the Babylonians (597 BC), followed by seven decades of exile.⁵

The Persian Period

Also known as the Post-Exilic Period, concurrent with the end of Daniel’s life⁶ and the lives of Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Esther, Ezra, and Nehemiah, this segment of history covers about two centuries, from 539 to 331 BC. The dating in later Jewish writings coincides with the reigns of Persian kings (e.g. Dan. 1:21; Hag. 1:1; Zech. 1:1; Ezra 1:1; Neh. 2:1). 

Having conquered the Babylonians in 539 BC, Cyrus the Great permitted the Jews to return to their homeland (2 Chron. 36:20-23). Darius I came to the throne around 521 BC, and in his sixth year the rebuilding of the Jerusalem temple was completed (Ezra 6:15). His son Xerxes I (ca. 486-465 BC) is believed to have been the Ahasuerus [Persian title] in the book of Esther (cf. Ezra 4:6; Dan. 11:2). After the failed attempt of his father to conquer Greece in 492-490 BC (ending at the Battle of Marathon), Xerxes I ordered the second Persian invasion of Greece in 480 BC, during which the famous Battle of Thermopylae occurred where King Leonidas’ 300 Spartan soldiers fought to the death. The following year Grecian troops forced the retreat of the Persians. 

Artaxerxes I, the son of Xerxes I, ruled ca. 465-425 BC, and in his seventh year Ezra and other Jews moved from Babylon to Jerusalem to reform the Jewish state (Ezra 7:7). Nehemiah followed in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes’ reign to oversee the rebuilding of the city’s walls, and after a brief return to Babylon twelve years later, he moved back to Jerusalem to live out the rest of his days (Neh. 13:6). The last Persian king mentioned by name in the Hebrew scriptures is “Darius the Persian” (Neh. 12:22), which may refer to Artaxerxes’ successor Darius II (ca. 424-405 BC) or perhaps his great-grandson Darius III (ca. 336-330 BC),⁷ the last king of Persia, defeated by Alexander the Great in 331 BC, inaugurating a new age.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ This was the third Jewish-Roman war if the revolt of 115-117 (Kitos War) is counted. Following the last rebellion, the Romans banned the Jews from Jerusalem.

    ² Galerius (305-311) continued his predecessors’ persecution of Christians for a time, but came to realize it accomplished no useful purpose and he issued the Edict of Toleration in 311. Flavius Valerius Aurelius Constantinus Augustus (a.k.a. Constantine I) was recognized as emperor of the western regions as early as 306 and reigned over the entire Empire from 324 to 337. He issued the Edict of Milan in 313, granting toleration to all religions and allowing Christianity the right to exist with provisions for restitution. “In the first twenty years of the fourth century the whole situation changed, as the Emperor Constantine (274-337) progressively showed himself favourable to the new religion, accepted it as the religion of the state, and as the last act of his life accepted Christian baptism at the hands of his friend Eusebius of Nicomedia” (S. Neill, History of Christian Missions 39). It has been estimated that the number of Christians in the Roman Empire at least quadrupled in the century following Constantine.

     ³ See 2 Chron. 36:20-23; Neh. 12:22. Cyrus the Great established the Persian Empire in 550 BC and it continued until Alexander the Great defeated Darius III around 331 BC.

     ⁴ The description “Intertestamental” is a Christian designation based on the understanding of the New Testament as a collection of divinely inspired writings corresponding to the ancient Hebrew scriptures. Also called the Second Temple era – the period beginning with the rebuilding of the Jewish temple in the late 6th century BC and ending with its destruction in AD 70.

     ⁵ There were three major deportations into Babylonian exile: 597, 587, and 582 BC.

     ⁶ While Daniel’s prophetic career spanned the entire Babylonian exile (ca. 605-536 BC), he outlived the Babylonian Empire (Dan. 1:21; 10:1).

     ⁷ His original name appears to have been Artashata, but the Greeks called him Codomannus. He was the son of Arsames, son of Ostanes, son of Darius II.

Related Posts: Chronology of Postexilic Period BC, Study of Ancient History, Historical Background NT Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6 

Image credit: https://www.saatchiart.com/art/Painting-Old-books/299445/3396996/view

Understanding the Bible: the Study of Ancient History

In order to get the clearest sense of the Bible and its original setting, “historically oriented biblical scholars have assumed mastery of a range of disciplines as fundamental to the toolkit of their craft” (B. J. Malina, Social World of Jesus xi-xii). Particularly relevant to Bible study are disciplines that enhance our understanding of how ancient literary works were produced and transmitted. 

Historiography is the study of historical writing. Even though the Bible is not strictly a historical narrative, it is packed with historical information. It goes without saying that the aim of the historian is to record facts, not to invent stories. Nevertheless, the ancient historian’s methodology (familiar to his contemporary readers) was not entirely the same as that of modern times. While completeness and accuracy were important, there was less concern about precision of dating and chronological arrangement. This is clearly demonstrated in a comparison of the Synoptic Gospels, wherein thematic or geographical arrangement often trumps chronology.

Papias of Hierapolis (ca. 60-140?) reports that Mark was “Peter’s interpreter and wrote accurately all that he remembered, not indeed, in order, of the things said or done by the Lord…. [he] followed Peter, who used to give teaching as necessity demanded but not making, as it were, an arrangement of the Lord’s oracles, so that Mark did nothing wrong in writing down single points as he remembered them” (as quoted by Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 3.39.15; trans. K. Lake, LCL).

Long before the present-day copyright mentality, the meticulous documenting of sources was not deemed necessary. Without calling attention to it, writers could reasonably expect their contemporary readers to recognize well-known quoted materials. 

Every historian is interested in real people and actual events but is naturally limited to the amount of information he can realistically record. He must therefore be discerning and restrict his investigation and reporting to what he deems significant. The aim of the ancient historian, therefore, was to selectively portray historical accounts so readers could learn political, moral, or religious principles.¹ 

Dr. Luke would not fit into the category of the Roman historian, who tended to focus on events surrounding a single city and its people, or the Jewish historian, who was primarily concerned about the history of one ethno-political group. Rather, Luke shares much in common with the Greek historian, who often travelled to the places he writes about, observed the events he records, and presents a neutral account of the acts and persons he describes.² 

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ See R. Nocolai, “The Place of History in the Ancient World,” in A Companion to Greek and Roman Historiography (ed. J. Marincola) 1-14.

     ² See B. Witherington III, Acts of the Apostles 25-36. Colin Hemer, in The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History, views Luke’s writings according to the various methods of ancient historiography and identifies Luke as a traveling investigator in the same category as Polybius (cf. B. D. Ehrman, The New Testament: Historical Introduction [4th ed.] 124-26). D. E. Aune likens Luke's methodology to ancient historians like Polybius, Strabo, Diodorus, Josephus, and Herodian (NT In Its Literary Environment 117).

Related Posts: Context, Ancient Letter Writing, Ancient Rhetoric, Production of NT Part 1 and Part 2, Historical Background of NT Part 1

Image credit: http://www.vision.org/visionmedia/bible-history/king-james-anniversary/42879.aspx

Music and the Bible: A Brief History

      As music is traced through the Bible and beyond, some interesting facts come to light. A distinction can be seen between secular and religious music, and between vocal and instrumental music, but in modern times these distinctions are often blurred and unrecognized. What can we learn from history that might help ensure the kind of music offered to God in our worship is both acceptable and pleasing to Him? 
Secular and Pagan Music:
     Jubal, in the midst of a godless civilization, was "the father of all those who play the harp and flute" (Gen. 4:21). Laben, an idol worshiper (Gen. 31:19, 30), used "timbrel and harp" on special occasions (Gen. 31:27). The wicked in Job’s day would "sing to the tambourine and harp, and rejoice to the sound of the flute" (Job 21:12). Idol worship in Babylon was accompanied by musical instruments (Dan. 3:5, 15; cf. Isa. 14:11). 
Music Among the Jews:
     While singing appears to have been an important part of Israel’s worship from earliest times (cf. Job 35:10; Exod. 15:1-2; Num. 21:17; Judg. 5:1, 3; 2 Sam. 22:1, 50; 1 Chron. 6:31), the use of instruments of music was something adopted later in their history. After centuries among the Egyptians, when the Jewish people were finally delivered, Miriam and Israelite women went out "with timbrels and dances" (Exod. 15:20), and this came to be a customary form of celebration among the Jews (cf. Judges 11:34; 1 Sam. 18:6; Luke 15:25). When Saul was reluctantly anointed king, it seems that musical instruments accompanied the subsequent prophesying, or perhaps the previous animal sacrifices on the high place (1 Sam. 10:5; cf. 9:12). David was a skillful harp player (1 Sam. 16:16-23) and appears to have introduced musical instruments into Israel’s corporate worship (1 Chron. 15:16; 23:5; Ezra 3:10). There is some question, however, if this was ever approved by God (cf. Amos 6:3-5). As Solomon considered all his vain works and pleasures "under the sun" (i.e., apart from God), he included among them having acquired, in the Hebrew language, shiddâ we-shiddôh (Eccl. 2:8). This is the only occurrence of this expression in the Bible and its meaning is uncertain. While some English translations render it "many concubines," others say "musical instruments of all kinds."

Early Christianity:

     Despite what had become a common Jewish practice (except in the synagogues where no musical instruments were used), the New Testament only records Jesus and His apostles singing, with no mention of instrumental music (Matt. 26:30; Mark 14:26; Acts 16:25; 1 Cor. 14:15). The church was instructed to simply sing and make melody in the heart to the Lord (Rom. 15:9; Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16). Singing is the only kind of worship-music authorized in the New Testament (Heb. 2:12; 13:15; James 5:13), and church history attests to only a cappella music (unaccompanied singing) in Christian worship for several hundred years after the time of Christ.

Later Church History:

     According to ecclesiastical history, Pope Vitalian I introduced the organ into the worship of the Roman Catholic Church in AD 666, although it was not commonly used until much later (M’Clintock and Strong, Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature 7:425; 8:739). Early Reformation leaders, such as John Calvin, John Wesley, Theodore Beza, John Knox, and Martin Luther, opposed the use of musical instruments in worship, primarily because they considered it a Roman Catholic innovation. By the 1800s, however, after ample protest, most Protestant denominations had adopted the practice.

     With the desire and determination to restore pure New Testament Christianity, the leaders of the early Restoration Movement rejected all human innovations, including the use of mechanical instruments of music in Christian worship. They considered it to be one of many unauthorized papal, denominational, and worldly corruptions of the simple New Testament pattern.
     Absent from the New Testament is the practice of worshiping God with musical instruments. Since it is so common-place in today’s religious world, the natural question is: by whose authority was it established? The options are: ancient paganism and worldliness, Jewish worship, Roman Catholicism, or personal preference. However, if the Lord’s revealed preference is considered and the new covenant of Jesus Christ is the basis of one’s faith, there is clearly no divine sanction for it.
–Kevin L. Moore
Originally appearing in The Exhorter (Oct.-Dec. 1999) and republished in The Summit Chronicle 8:1 (March 2008): 15 http://www.churchofchrist.org.nz/assets/summitchronicle/Summit_Chronicle_Issue8.pdf

Related posts: Restoring True Worship, Questions About Music 1, Musical Praise & Biblical Silence

Related Articles: William Woodson's History of Instrumental Music, Jon Mitchell's Does Amos Condemn Instrumental Music?, Donnie DeBord's, Silent Strings

Image credit: http://www.umich.edu/~kelseydb/Exhibits/MIRE/Introduction/AncientEgypt/AncientEgypt.html