History and the Bible¶

There are two main sets of questions or ways of looking at history and the Bible. In fact, they need to be asked of each book individually.

Firstly, as with any ancient text, we want to know as much as we can about the world which produced it. When and where was it written, by whom, for what purpose? What was this text's role in the social and religious life of the people who read it or heard it read aloud?

The second question, which is known as the question of historicity, asks how reliable the text is as a historical source. Is it intended as a factual account or the telling of a fable? Did the events occur as written? Can background information in the narrative be relied on? If it is set in the past does the setting accurately reflect that past or is it influenced more by the writer's own time?

It makes sense to address these sets of questions in the order stated. We need to place the text in time to understand which historical events it is recounting, and to determine how the given writer might have obtained the necessary information. Then by finding out about the social and economic interests of those who produced and used it, we will be in a better position to assess the source's perspective and potential bias.

Thus we will postpone examining historicity for the moment, and look first at the world in which the biblical texts were produced.

The early textual trail¶

In the Text section we traced the development of the Bible we now possess, going backwards from today, past the 300s of Constantine to earlier fragments known mainly from the 200s.

Those Christian Bibles, where they include the OT, use the Greek LXX form of that collection of books. Meanwhile, Jewish scholars in the emerging Rabbinic tradition were consolidating the original-language Hebrew OT. At this point, these two streams of tradition proceeded relatively separate from each other, indeed to some extent hostile.

Looking at the NT books, we saw that, although we don't have the autographs (the original manuscript from the author's hand, which must have existed at some point), we can estimate their composition in a sequence from the 50s or so CE for Paul's genuine letters, and perhaps also some of the other letters, to the period after 70 CE for most of the rest. Within about fifty years after that date, the four canonical Gospels were likely to have been substantially as we have them now.

Written in the late first century, or perhaps the early second for some, these books take us to the first stop we should make if we go deeper in time, which is Roman Judaea in the late first and early second century.

Roman Judaea¶

The Romans took control in the southern Levant from 63 BCE, but allowed it to be ruled by a client monarchy to begin with. They found it to be one of their most unruly territories and gradually exerted more direct political control through the course of the first century CE. They ended up in a full-scale war against rebels there, which resulted in the siege of Jerusalem and destruction of the Temple in 70 CE.

There was a further major revolt in 132-135 with someone known as Simon bar Kochba (son of the Star) leading the people as a Messianic pretender. Several other more limited episodes of rebellion and messianic expectation occurred in between these major eruptions. Out of this series of uprisings and wars emerged not one but two religions, Christianity and Judaism.

Christianity took the traditions of Judaism and transformed them into a new shape. But at the same time, Jewish practice and faith underwent a radical shift as they adjusted to the loss of the Temple, the reality of Roman power, and the needs of Jews not only in and around Judaea but all over the substantial diaspora.

There is a huge amount that could be written about this milieu, but here we will focus on the biblical writings themselves. Bear in mind also that these texts are themselves one of a relatively small number of sources for this period and location. However, we must not accept them as sources uncritically.

Apocalypse literature¶

A rise of interest in the last days and a hope for divine deliverance can be a reaction to oppression and a perception that the world is in a state of crisis. In the Jewish tradition this came to be expressed through apocalyptic literature. These comprise visions supposedly received by some long-dead prophet - a famous name that sells scrolls, like Enoch or Moses.

Apocalypse comes from the Greek, and means something uncovered or disclosed. In Latin this is revelatio, i.e. a revelation. The revelations typically include prophecies apparently made from the past describing events of the writer's own day, an angelically-guided tour of heaven and hell, and predictions of the coming tribulations and judgement.

The only complete apocalyptic book in the Bible is called Revelation in English, and is attributed to one John of Patmos. He is thought to be different from the John(s) who wrote the Gospel and Letters of John that are also in the NT. But his work is only one of a grand tradition of such visions stretching back several centuries.

The date of this Apocalypse (or Revelation) of John is unknown, but is likely to be in the period 90 - 120 CE. Around this same time, there was an outpouring of similar literature. We have many other surviving examples, such as Apocalypses attributed to Ezra (4 Ezra), Baruch (2 and 3 Baruch) and Abraham.

These and other sources from earlier in the first century, like 4 Maccabees, show that a number of important ideas were in circulation during the period. In the face of Roman state terror, believers hoped for divine intervention and a restoration of justice. The hard times were interpreted as punishment from God for the sins of the people. The sufferings of pious martyrs were believed to atone for this guilt.

Repentance, or turning again (to God), was held to be necessary as preparation for the end-times. Thus Jesus announces his mission at the beginning of the Gospel of Mark - The time is fulfilled, and God’s Kingdom is at hand! Repent, and believe in the Good News. (1:14).

The Gospels¶

Mark was probably the first gospel to be written, after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE. The other evangelists copied from him and each other, until four versions were collected into the NT we have today. There were other competing gospels, but these appear to be mostly later creations.

By the time these accounts of the life of Jesus were written, not only had the centre of their religious life, the Jerusalem Temple, been destroyed, but an irrevocable split had occurred between the followers of Jesus and the Jewish communities from which they had arisen. Bringing in more and more gentile (non-Jewish) converts, and abandoning observance of food laws and circumcision, the Christians were becoming a separate group.

The tensions this created are most obvious in the Gospel of John, where the Jews are cast as a hostile force opposing Jesus and his disciples. For the sake of the plot, they continue the Old Testament role of the stubborn Israelites who refuse to heed the prophets of Yahweh. This literary device, embedding a sectarian conflict into the pages of the sacred book of one party, was to underpin centuries of antisemitism on behalf of the Church.

The Correspondence¶

The gospels were written some decades later than the events they depict. Earlier than these documents, we have the letters written by Paul of Tarsus in around the 50s CE.

The genuine letters in the NT are its oldest constituents. There are disputes over which ones are genuine, but seven of Paul's letters are generally accepted as such, while several others attributed to him are believed to pseudonymous. Some of the letters written by others (James, Peter, John, Jude) may also date back to the early period.

Collections of letters, either philosophical or devotional, were a popular literary form at the time. Paul's letters, although addressed to specific church groups to deal with particular issues, found universal appeal and began to be copied and circulated. Their explanations of Christian doctrines and encouragement to believers elevated them to scriptural status.

Historical Jesus?¶

In contrast to the gospels, Paul does not tell us much at all about Jesus in his life. What can we say about the historical Jesus? In modern times, it has been historical orthodoxy that although the biblical accounts are fabulous, yet Jesus did exist. More recently, this assumption has come under challenge.

Perhaps Jesus was a myth all along? A cosmic figure, originally the subject of a conflict myth taking place in a heavenly realm, he was later placed on Earth only in the imagination of the gospel writers. Or a literary creation based on some real-world exemplars, but with authorial imagination added in. Or part of the secret symbolism of a hallucinogenic mushroom cult. All of these theories and more have been put forward.