What's the basis for the legitimacy of the 2nd temple? Are there any Abrahamic faiths that outright reject its validity?
Samaritanism
>>17427632There is none. There was neither a first temple nor a second temple. The temple area today is a Roman fort built around a previous temple dedicated to Zeus.
>>17427635Interesting. It appears they don't reject the idea of a 2nd temple, they just don't think the Jews built it in the right place.
Why does that temple have Greek architecture?
>>17427802Because it's Canaanite architecture, and the Greeks were heavily influenced by the Canaanites.
>>17427874That architecture is very clearly Greek. It has Doric and Aeolic columns and the same crenellations ffs. Who do you think is fooled by this?
>>17427888You didn't understand my answer:1. That's a model, just an interpretation.2. We have very few examples of Canaanite architecture.3. We know that the Greeks were heavily inspired by Canaanite architecture.Thus, obviously it's best to work with the Greeks where knowledge on Canaanite architecture runs out.Some notes: There are no Doric columns in the picture. Aeonic columns are lifted directly from the Canaanites. The capitals are clearly corinthian, however.Additionally, crenels long predate the Greeks.Nobody is trying to fool you, however in your haste to to be a dickhead you certainly made yourself out to be one.
>>17427635It rejects the first temple too
>>17427802Because Gaygreeks were influential? Same reason we have signs in English?
>>17428123>1. That's a model, just an interpretation.Yes, and that model is based on Greek architecture. >2. We have very few examples of Canaanite architecture.True, but it's not clear to me you know what a Canaanite is exactly.>3. We know that the Greeks were heavily inspired by Canaanite architecture.Exactly the reverse. There's only Greek architecture found in the Levant, and none coming from the middle east until much later.If you were trying to build up an idea of a Semitic Canaanite architecture, you would look east, not west. Going back to the original point, the Greek invaded the Levant in the Bronze Age Collapse and again under Macedonian influence hence there are recurring Greekisms painted on the near east. The near east never invades the west in the same manner. >Some notes: There are no Doric columns in the pictureThey're clearly are and you did not bother to even spend a fraction of a second examining those by the smaller doors flanking the central gate or the door leading into the east and west wings. They're the smaller columns in this model.>Aeonic columns*Aeolic. You don't even know how they're spelled, much less their history you absolute buffoon. >The capitals are clearly corinthianI would agree with that. The medium sized ones looked like aeolic with filigree to me, but zooming in I'd agree with that.>crenels long predate the GreeksWe're talking about a specific kind and you failed to draw a single actual comparison with the Canaanites, instead you chose to prove that the columns were in fact Corinthian- gotchaing yourself hardcore.Also, that's even more asinine. Canaanites are clearly the mortal enemies of the OT Hebrews and Greeks are never listed in that capacity, so why on Earth would they promote a philia with Canaanites? They're ignoring their own alleged history just for the sake of LARPing as semitic (even though we've already agreed that there are no semitic influences here).
i had a feeling it was the we wuz canaanites schizo
>>17427654They seethed about the location so hard they even modified one of their ten commandments to support their competing location. Most of the Samaritan Pentateuch decalogue looks pretty normal until you get to the end.>(Commandment No. 8) You shall not covet your neighbor's house.>(Commandment No. 9) You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his man-servant, nor his maid-servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's.>(Commandment No. 10) It shall be when your god will bring you to the Canaanite land, which you are going to inherit, you shall set yourself up great stones, and plaster them with plaster, and you shall write on them all the words of this law. It shall be, when you are passed over the Jordan, that you shall set up these stones, which I command you this day, in Mount Gerizim. There shall you build an altar to Yahweh your God, an altar of stones: you shall lift up no iron tool on them. You shall build the altar of Yahweh your God of uncut stones; and you shall offer burnt offerings thereon to Yahweh your God: and you shall sacrifice peace-offerings, and shall eat there; and you shall rejoice before Yahweh your God. That mount beyond the Jordan, behind the way of the going down of the sun, in the land of the Canaanites who dwell in the Arabah, over against Gilgal, beside the oaks of Moreh, against Shechem (Nablus).Also, they definitely disagree with the construction of any temples made out of cut rock, and say it must be a simple altar of unhewn stone.
>>17427802Historically, Synagogues used different languages like Aramic/Syraic, Greek and Hebrew, it is only in late antiquity when this was challenged. Actual synagogues had murals, images and more too. Pic related is of the Dura-Europos synagogue. >>17427632Within Christianity and Judaism, the idea is that Haggai and Zechariah encouraged the rebuilding of the Temple and performance of rituals and sacrifices after the return from Babylonian exile. Psalms historically was interpreted as stating the Temple reflected the covenant. Competing Jewish, Christian accounts basically differed on what that meant and what the temple means. In Christianity, it is seen as a prefiguration of the Incarnation and all the details and rituals are archetypes of what would happen to Jesus. In Judaism, it reflects the convenant between God and the Jews and the idea that the rituals and laws in Judaism are the "house of God" as in the means of God's activity, the temple being just a visible imagery of that.
>>17428759sounds like cope for not having connections to artisinal masons. what's up with the seethe, though? is there a political reason for it?
>>17428766I feel bad making this simplistic reply to such a nice post but>it reflects the convenant between God and the JewsI thought that was circumcision? Are there multiple covenants, or is that just a post-Pharisees thing?
>>17428766It is worth noting that historically, the focus was on the rituals and the temple practices. Interpretations differed about the meaning of them. Judaism and Christianity are so to speak two remaining traditions of those temple practices. Some of these did not care about any messiahs or so on and some saw the rituals as the goal. Although, we like to think of Judaism as centered on Moses. Some held other figures like Enoch as being more important. Below is an academic lecture on this.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-C6jB9n9DHY&t=2994s
>>17427654Nah the reason the Jews in the Bible fucking hate the Samaritans is because they completely reject the 2nd temple and any authority it’s priesthood ever had.
>>17428772Within Judaism historically and contemporarily, yes.They believe there are cumulative convenants. In Christianity they are held to deepened revelations pointing to the incarnation rather than cumulative and binding. The one you are thinking of is called the Brit Avraham or the Covenant of Abraham. This is actually more important in Christianity in the general soteriological view. There the covenant is between Abraham and God and about the Jewish people being special. However, Christianity sees this as prefiguration of all humanity and the relationship between God and humanity and God setting the stage for the incarnation. In Judaism, this one is actually still around but symbolically is understood to only apply to Jews and be until the end of time.In Judaism, there is also the Mosaic Covenant or Brit Moshe. This is the one Judaism actually focuses on because it sets up what Jews are supposed to do. In Christianity, this convenient was fulled by the Incarnation. Jews reject that.In Judaism, the Brit Noahide or Noahide covenant is what applies to gentiles. It requires basic ethics. This is represented by the rainbow with Noah in Judaism and applies to all people including Jews but just not the only thing they must do.In Judaism there is also the Brit Kehuna or priestly convenant between Aaron and God. This is for priestly class of Jews or Kohanim. In Christianity, they believed this was true but was fulfilled as well. Jews don't believe that and hold that this is what makes them continue to do and seek ritual practices. The Jewish messiah is held to be a feature of the Davidic convenant. Which is basically God promising to restore priestly power, the ability for jews to follow their laws, and for God to give them their own land. It is also a promise that humans will be ethical in the future. It is the source for the Jewish messiah.
There is also the final convenant or the new convenant. In Judaism this refers to the world to come. This one is interpreted differently based on the tradition of Judaism. Orthodox Jews thinks it refers to culmination of God's plan for the world. It is called the "World to Come" and typically associated with spiritual perfection, the fulfillment of divine justice, and a world of ultimate peace and harmony. This way after the Messiah returns in Jduaims though. In Reform Judaism, it is just the perfection of ethics that will enable people to be successfully close to God and in some accounts finally be able to rituals again. Christianity understands the references to this covenant to refer to the Second Coming of Jesus paraousia.
>>17428768Divided opinions based on the split of Judeans during the Babylonian exile. It's estimated by archaeologists that about 10-20% of the population, mostly the ruling classes of cities, were exiled during the conquest (and yes, this might include all skilled stoneworkers as you suggested). Samaritans claim they're the majority who were never forced to relocate and thus uphold the original traditions of Israel, and that those who left brought pagan teachings into the religion when they came back. The Jewish claim (including that of modern Jews) is that pretty much all the Jews were displaced, and that Samaritans descend from foreigner immingrants who incorporated paganism into their faith. The latter claim is far less likely to be true, so I'm inclined to say the Samaritans have the better claim to be true Jews here.The Samaritan 10th commandmend is absolutely a late interpolation intended to reinforce their claim, however. Like the Sadducees, they only accept the five books of the Torah (they also have a Samaritan Book of Joshua that's more like a medieval midrash with no historical link to the 2nd temple period). The Torah, if it was heavily redacted by a Jerusalem-based priestly elite that returned from the Exile, seems to place relatively little importance to the proper location of the temple, and the city of Jerusalem seems almost like an afterthought in the narrative. The academic explanation that most makes sense to me is that the post-exilic elite in the Persian period wrote and/or redacted the Torah to unify both those who returned and the "Samaritans" who stayed behind into one coherent nation following the laws of Moses.The Samaritans also disagree on the location of Mount Moriah where the binding of Isaac supposedly took place, claiming it's also supposed to be Gerizim instead of the Temple Mount of the Jews.
>>17428819>during the Babylonian exile1) There was no Babylonian exile.2) The last classical jews were wiped out in the 2nd century AD with the original Sanhedrin, pretenders were wiped out by the 4th century AD.3) Rabbinicalists today have nothing to do with classical era jews, their school comes from the 9th century AD.
>>17428189Samaritans are OG Even the Gospel confirms it
>>17427874>Canaanite architectureyeah he already said Greek architecture. Who do you think taught the Levantines how to build?
>>17428825>There was no Babylonian exileit's in the babylonian records bro
>>17428825Babylonian historical records give us accurate dates of conquests (based on astronomical observations) and numbers of the deported so I'm inclined to trust those instead of the schizo ramblings of a conspiratard on 4channel. However, you're perfectly right that rabbinical Judaism doesn't go back the 2nd temple Pharisees and the supposed unbroken link in teachings (all the way back to Moses, lol) is as real as the Catholic concept of apostolic succession by laying of hands, so congratulations on being a broken clock.
>>17428836The Caanaites were not Greek. Greeks in the Old Testament are symbolically identified with Javan. Javan is traditionally identified as the ancestor of the Ionians, one of the principal Greek tribes. This link is linguistically supported by the similarity between "Yavan" and "Ionia," a region of Greek settlement in western Asia Minor. Further, there is really early influence on Greek materials on Biblical materials. Pic is of an academic book looking at how Greek mythic elements appear in the Old Testament.
>>17428842>Babylonian historical records give us accurate dates of conquestsOh, they conquered the Levant, but there were no jews nor an Israel nor a Judea.
>>17428842holy fucking based
>>17428843it's a meme anon, he's imitating a resident schizo that thinks the greeks were nords and the vikings invented writing in 300ad
>>17428847Oh there were. They were around. It is worth noting that this early Jewish identity was very fluid too. What we often think of as Jewish are royal religious materials. There also was a Judea.
>>17428854I have never seen a schizo making those claims, but I have repeatedly seen a schizo asserting that Judaism was invented out of thin air by Italians in the 9th century
>>17428858it might be the same guy, actually
>>17428847If there were no Jews in the Levant in 587BC, who were the "last classical jews" who "were wiped out in the 2nd century AD" descended from? When Nebuchadnezzar II made Zedekiah king in 597BC, who where the subjects in the latter's kingdom?
>>17428857>It is worth noting that this early Jewish identity was very fluid tooIt's not that it was fluid, it's that Israeli historians are just rewriting all of the actual natives and invaders to fit their narrative of not one but two super-secret world superpowers that no one hears about until after the Maccabean revolt. Hate to break it to you but you're getting scammed.
>>17428847>Noah's Ark didn't happenOkay checks out>The Exodus is a simple myth, the Israelites are just CanaanitesLooks good to me>David and Solomon never existedWell uh, I dunno... that's possible I guess.>The Israelites and Judaeans aren't realYeah I don't know about that one chief.
>>17428843>Greeks in the Old TestamentThere was no Javan and the OT was written in the 3rd century by Greek speaking Alexandrians under Ptolemy the cult-crafter.
>>17428881Yakub's right hand birdman??
>>17428837No it isn't. It's explicitly and noticeably not in the Babylonian records.>>17428880>>David and Solomon never existed>Well uh, I dunno... that's possible I guess.You're asking me to believe that two superpowers emerged in a backwater during the height of the Bronze Age Collapse. There's just no possible way. Even Egypt didn't come out the same after that.
Constantine wrote the Old Testament
>>17428887They were well integrated with the Sidonians at that point who did emerge as a superpower, yes.Also Solomon spent all of his gold just for a single temple from them. I don't think the obvious fact that Kings is a heavily edited puff piece is really a substantial argument against the historicity Solomon.
Read James Jordan's trilogy on Revelation.The destruction of the temple in AD 70 is a type, a forunner as it were, of the end of the world. Essentially it was the end of the old world and the beginning of the new one.Note that in Revelation it says that the city of Jerusalem is spiritually called Sodom and Egypt.What happened with both Sodom and Egypt? Those who followed the true God had to leave because destruction was coming.The Jews who rejected Christ had abandoned God and in this way had become the new Sodom which is why they also are called Jezebel or the harlot.The Christians had to leave Jerusalem for its destruction was near.God allowed Rome (the beast) to destroy the harlot. The temple had become a place of wormwood (poisonous teachings) spewed forth by the serpent, who is Satan.
>>17428891In the original Greek, then a bunch of Italians invented a conlang (Hebrew) and translated it into the Masoretic Text in the centuries that followed. You can tell this is the undeniable truth because just count the words in the languages or something. This was once revealed to me in a dream by the ghost of a Medean goddess in the form of a sexy little girl who regularly haunts me in the night and I swear I was not on drugs at the exact moment the divine gnosis revealed itself to me. Sincerely yours. Dr. Ammon.
>>17428904>They were well integrated with the SidoniansSo much so that they blended in directly with everyone else and there's no independent evidence of them. There is no evidence of Solomon nor David. No they did not create two nations where everyone else is getting erased and pulped by circumstance and misfortune across not one, not two, but three continents. And no, the Babylonians did not produce a single ounce of evidence for jews. They conquered a region and you're explicitly lying about who the denizens were.
>>17428912>There is no evidence of Solomon nor DavidYeah no evidence at all, except maybe this thing called the Bible which infallible, inerrant, true, and inspired by God.By the way, do you ever wonder what the 666 in Revelation is all about? That goes back to Solomon. This trilogy explains it.
>>17428908Apocalyptic literature although thought of as prophetic actually was written during the time the events were going on.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tB7GmfmTks8https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAYanhoBKlU
>>17428930>By the way, do you ever wonder what the 666 in Revelation is all aboutno because i understand it's just a nero reference
>>17428938I will be blunt. I don't care what some unbelieving, homosexual "scholars" have to say about basically anything.Some of these people actually claim that that stupid "Wailing Wall" in Jerusalem is a piece of the temple which somehow wasn't destroyed. We know that is a lie for several reasons:>Jesus Christ Himself said that not one stone would be left standing. The Romans destroyed the entire temple. Every part of it. (And in fact they destroyed the whole city).>their Wailing Wall is not even in the right place for where the temple was>the whole Wailing Wall tradition was made up by Talmudist Rabbis only a few hundred years ago and has nothing to do with the Bible, and in fact it is blasphemous
>>17428942>i understand it's just a nero referenceNo, it's not "just" a Nero reference. It has several layers of meaning, and Nero is only one of them. I'm not trying to be mean but I'm so tired of these reductionist statements where something can mean ONLY one thing. That is wrong.
>>17428843>The Caanaites were not Greek.That is true. However, there are parallels between the Greek/Roman gods and the Canaanite and Egyptian gods.Amos 5:26 and Acts 7:43 speak of a demonic false god named Remphan (in the Egyptian pantheon) or Moloch (in the Canaanite pantheon) which is equivalent to the Greek Kronos or Roman Saturn. It is a human sacrifice deity.Did you know that the central bank in ancient Rome was also the temple of Saturn? It was literally the same place. Kind of like Black Rock today.
>>17428798They also reject the prophets/wisdom books and only read the Pentateuch.
>>17428945based
>>17428958There is no god with the name of Moloch in the Canaanite pantheon.
>>17430044It is in the Bible, both Old and New Testaments.
>>17428958Banking was invented by the temples in Mesopotamia and Egypt.
>>17427632It is beneath the dignity of the United States to be involved with this issue.
