the Romans retook Jerusalem, and in 73 C.E. much of Israel had been recaptured by the Romans. the Jews rebelled and were able to be free of Roman rule, but by 68 C.E. The scriptures were full of times when God had helped his people to win battles, and they believed God would save them again.
They believed God would help them to defeat the aggressors, because the Jews were God’s chosen people. There were many people who claimed to be a messiah both before and after Jesus, and none of them were able to permanently free the Jews from Roman rule. Also, there were many revolutionaries among the Jews who believed with their “zeal” that they could fight off the Romans and free the country from oppression. No one was looking for a messiah the way Christians talk about Jesus today: someone who is deity and is a sacrifice for sin. Only Rome could name someone “King of the Jews,” and that person was always a puppet to Roman rule.
To call yourself a messiah during Roman rule indicated you meant to liberate the Jews from the Romans and was tantamount to treason. “Messiah” means “anointed one”, as in someone who is anointed with oil like what the Jews did with their kings. When the Romans ruled the Jews, many Jews were looking for a “messiah” to liberate them from Roman rule. Lately I have wondered, how much does the historical record of Jesus match up with what we read in the Bible? In “Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth” by Reza Aslan, the author describes the context behind the historical Jesus of Nazareth, and then explains what we know about him, and how it compares to what we read in the New Testament. They may teach good principles, but it’s not all literal history. I remember sitting in bed a week or two later, and thinking: “I bet if I look into the historicity of the Bible, if I’m going to find the same thing, aren’t I.” I don’t even remember what I specifically read, but it didn’t take me too long before I confirmed what I had feared: the stories in the Bible, even including the New Testament, are not all literally true. When I first started studying LDS church history intensively this year, I came to what was to me an obvious conclusion: the LDS church and the LDS scriptures aren’t literally “true” the way I had always been taught they are.
“Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth” by Reza Aslan
0 kommentar(er)
