Education of Jesus in the second temple period Judea

Education of Jeses in the Second Temple Period Judea

In ancient times, just like nowadays, the Jews consider their temples the house of God the vey place where the individual can come in contact with the divinity. The importance of the greatest and grandest ancient temples has led to them being nominated as the First temple and the Second temple. Since the periods in which these temples existed were characterized by very different social, cultural and religious factors, the expressions have become a sort of etiquette for them. So when one says the First temple, he is actually referring to the period in which the First temple existed and its characteristics.

The First temple is also known as the temple of Solomon. Its destruction took place in the year 586 BCE. This date marks the beginning of the exile . The Second temple existed between 516 BCE and 70 CE. Cyrus the Great of Persia and Darius the Great allowed for the construction of the temple, which was afterwards destroyed, this time by the Romans. The destruction of the second temple coincided with ending of the revolt which the Jews had started in the year 66 CE.

The construction of the Second temple began after the Jews returned from their exile period. After wondering around and about for about forty years, they must have needed to express their religious beliefs. In addition, the temple represented a spiritual centre, a common point, marking the territory. Reconstructing the temple that had been destroyed had a symbolical meaning, it signified that the Jews were strong again and that their belief in God was strong as well notwithstanding the things that had been going on in the last years. In addition, the temple was needed as a proper location where they could perform rituals and sacrifices.

Some important Jewish authority figures are represented by Zerubbbabel who led the Jews on their way back from exile and Ezra the scribe. It was under the latter that the Great assembly was conceived as an administrative, judicial and spiritual instrument. The creation of the Assembly is one of the most important events in the Second temple period. It is worth underlining the fact that, as far as leadership was concerned, it was entrusted to the council of elders and the high priest. Although the city was under the official political and administrative rule of other peoples, the Jews considered that the true power and authority belonged to those of their same kind. In addition this power was based on religious authority and on the respect for tradition.

The monarch who ordered the construction of the Second temple was Cyrus the Great. His son followed him on the throne after his death . The temple was completed during the reign of Darius of Persia. It is worth mentioning that Pompey attempted to desecrate the temple in the year 63 BCE. He did not steal anything from the temple but killed the priests who tried to prevent him from coming in.

It was Cyrus of Persia who had conquered Babylon that allowed the Jews to come back to Jerusalem . The period of the Second temple is also known as the "Persian period." The main authority figures dating back from this period are Nehemiah and Ezra.

Nehemiah had a very wise strategy in his mind regarding the manner in which he could have consolidated the power of the Jews in the place they were living. He ordered the Jewish families to send ten of their members to come and live in Jerusalem. In this way the Jewish population increased considerably from a numerical point-of-view and started manifesting its ethnic and cultural influences upon the place.

It is worth underlining that the fate of Jerusalem very much depended on the great powers of that time and on the manner in which the power shifted from one authority to another. Alexander the Great was one of the most prominent figures of that time. When he died, the vast empire he had ruled was divided into three parts.

Each of the new and smaller kingdoms came under the leadership of his generals. Jerusalem was under the leadership of Ptolemaic Egypt. Later on it passed under the rule of the Seleucid Syrians. It is worth underlining at this point the fact that the Greek culture played an important part in influencing the Seleucids and their rule.

This influence was visible especially at cultural and social level, in the social customs and in the very attitude to life (which naturally affected the life style). The consequence was that a conflict arose between the Hellenistic Jews and the Greeks who had a certain perspective of life and the traditionalist Jews who wanted to preserve the old traditions and customs.

The conflict was stimulated by a very important fact, that is the religious decrees that Antiochus gave. These decrees were attempting to modify the traditional rituals of worship and prevent the Jews from practicing their own religion. Attacking the religion was synonymous to trying to kill their identity, them as a people. Naturally, this enraged the traditionalist thinkers. The whole tension gathered and its climax was reached in approximately 168 BCE.

It was in this year that a revolt took place, under the command of Judah Maccabee. The revolt ended with Jerusalem being freed. Consequently, the temple was taken back to what it had used to be. The Jews were able to return to it as the spiritual core par excellence. However, the Jews who were defend the Hellenistic views did not disappear all of a sudden.

They were defeated later, by a man Called Simeon the Maccabee. The Jews finally obtained their political independence. As time passed, under the rule of John Hyrcanus and Alexander Janneus, the small Jerusalem grew bigger and bigger. This period is also known as the one of the Hasmonean dynasty. The period lasted for eighty years and it is in this interval that Israel began to be called Judea.

One very important reign that must be brought into discussion at this point is the one of Herod Antipater. The reign was naturally under the ever stronger Roman empire- Jerusalem was one of its provinces. Since the Roman empire was undergoing a flourishing period, so did the city of Jerusalem. This happened because Herod wanted to. He had been given complete autonomy by the empire and thus he became very powerful. Since he was an admirer of the Greek and Roman cultures he attempted to make the city more beautiful and also richer.

Not only did it continue to expand geographically, but it underwent an important period of development. The Temple Mount, the Second Wall, the Citadel, the Antonia fortress are among some of the most relevant examples of architecture which speak about the city's development.

These architectural changes, which could also be seen in the bigger number of palaces and buildings, markets and theatres are a proof that the welfare of the people was undergoing an important development process as well. However, the period was characterized by social and religious changes as well which caused numerous tensions.

The most important differences were probably the dogmatic ones. The fact that Herod made the temple even more beautiful than before did not help him to become more popular with the Jewish population. And this is because of two reasons. On the one hand all those buildings had to be paid by somebody. And that somebody was the Jews. Herod imposed numerous taxes upon them. As a consequence, a population once rich became poorer and poorer. But not only that. Murdering people in order to have their properties was not unusual. On the other hand, it is worth underlining the purpose for which Herod was doing all this building. He did not have the benefit of the people in mind, but his own fame and glory.

There were numerous conflicts between the existing sects and this had a strong impact upon the manner in which the situation developed from a historical point-of-view. It was in this period that Jesus lived and preached, ending up condemned for being considered a rebel against the Roman empire. Pontius Pilate had him convicted to death.

Naturally, numerous episodes of great importance from Jesus' life are connected with the Temple.

The religious unrest in the Jerusalem of those times was one decisive factor for this particular denouement. The constantly growing tensions fragmented the Jewish society and as a consequence, it became weaker. Roman oppression became harsher and harsher, which naturally led to the Jewish population becoming angrier and angrier.

As a consequence, after numerous outburst of violence, another revolt occurred, this time under the command of the Zealots. The entire thing ended with the Roman emperor Titus bringing in his legions and basically destroying Jerusalem.

Religion was obviously one of the most important elements that needs to be considered when analyzing Jewish history, especially in this period. The philosophical differences which fragmented society into adepts of various credos had an important impact upon society. let us begin by analyzing the Pharisees.

The term itself is derived from a Hebrew word which literally means "separated." Right from the ethimological interpretation we can deduce that the Pharisees were a group of people who saw things differently compared to the majority. This difference was manifested in the religious area, but also in the political area and the social one.

The Second Temple was the period in which the Phariseean philosophy flourished. It is worth underlining that it is this very philosophy and religious thought that put the basis of the contemporary forms of Judaism.

During the reign of the king Antiochus Epiphanes in which numerous pressures were being made in order to impose the Hellenistic culture and polytheist religion, an anti-Hellenistic Jewish movement was created in order to defend the traditional views.

This movement was called the Hasidim and the Pharisees are one of the group's successors. It must be added that the beliefs of the Pharisees did not remain the same over time, but changed according to the social and cultural modifications that were taking place in the Jewish society.

The Pharisees were part of the main four sects which were created in the first century BCE. Their different approaches to the existing realities are nothing more but different reactions to what the Jewish people were put up with. It is necessary to mention that the majority of the population was not part of any kind of sect. however, the importance of these thought schools can not ne denied.

The four sects are: the Pharisees, their opponents, the Sadducees, the Essenes and the Zealots who represent the revolutionary attitude. Since the Second temple era was tormented by numerous conflicts and aggressive events, it was only normal for these sects to be supported by the population to a more or less important extent.

The Pharisees and the Sadducees were the most important sects. If the Pharisees had the support of the common population, the Sadducees were less popular because they were associated with the elitist social class. The conflict between the poor and the rich were translated into conflicts between these two sects.

But the difference was not only a material one. It was to be found within the doctrine as well. The Pharisees resisted and opposed the hellenization movement while the others did not.

Nevertheless, these are not the only reasons for which the two sects can be considered as members of an opposition. On the one hand, there was a school of thought which considered that the best laws derive from the Temple. On the other hand there was the philosophical movement which gave more importance to the value of the prophecies and Mosaic laws from the past.

Last but not least the difference is to be found in the manner in which these thought currents interpreted the holy book . Their interpretations regarding the manner in which the Torah is to be applied to the day-to-day life differed as well.

The Second Temple period is characterized by the power of the temple. The problems derived from the fact that while the Temple had the power and authority, it lacked a strong enough legitimacy. Pharisees were considered to be democratic while the Sadducees were seen as conservative and aristocratic.

Education had a very strong religious basis, so the different approaches to the interpretation of the Torah set a distance between the supporters of two sects. While the Pharisees are considered to be conservative, the Sadducees were perceived as trying to change the traditional ways.

It has already been mentioned that there were numerous pressures made during the Second Temple times in order to impose the Hellenistic culture and religion in Jerusalem . This happened especially in the period which lasts from the end of the Old testament until the birth of Jesus Christ.

The Pharisees took it upon themselves to be the most drastic defenders of the Jewish tradition. In fact they are also called Chasidim, a term that can be translated as loyal to God. When Jesus started preaching they were some of the most drastic opponents of his message. Their views can be considered as being extremist.

In addition, it must be mentioned that their interpretations were limited to only some parts of the laws, parts which they alone chose. Furthermore, they added texts themselves. Therefore it can be considered that their perspective was not a balanced, moderate one at all.

The truth is that the Jews were living in a form of government which was half state and half church. While the Jews accepted to be ruled by other peoples, they pretended to be allowed to given themselves internally. The role of the religious authorities was of extreme importance.

It is worth underlining that the Jews had a very superior attitude to the other people. Their God was the absolute God, that means, the God to whom all the people had to obey. But, the mercy of God and his miracles were meant only for them.

This attitude led to a sort of social segregation. Marriages were not allowed between Jews and non-believers -- who were considered inferior. The Pharisees wanted to become the most zealous defenders of these values. They considered themselves to be the most pious. The term Pharisee was used to describe their separation as a separation act from the heathen, the unworthy, the inferior.

Their actions reached a sort of climax during the rule of Antiochus. Their beliefs became harsher and harsher. It is safe to say that even if they wanted to defend the traditional views, their interpretations were rather rigid. It is a known fact that many of them died as martyrs because of this.

One particular situation is better known, when they were attacked on Sabbath by the Syrians and refused to defend themselves interpreting the holy texts literally.

Their attitude was indeed a separatist one. They refused any kind of contact with the heathens and this helped them build up a very solid reputation. This helped their influence to become greater and greater in time. As a consequence, at a certain point they had more authority than the priests themselves.

Unfortunately, while their initial intentions might have been good, their nature was only human. The accumulated prestige and authority had negative consequences, manifested in arrogance and conceit. It is true that they started as the harshest defenders of the traditional sacred texts, but they ended up twisting their meaning according to their own interest.

In fact, one very important aspect that needs to be brought into discussion is the opposition and conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees. Jesus would tell the people that in many ways, what the Pharisees were preaching was true. Not only that, but it could have also been considered admirable. However, there was a very important problem which resided in the fact that the Pharisees limited themselves to preaching while they forgot to apply their preaching in their own lives.

Jesus accuses them of being proud and overwhelmed with elements which are only too vain and human. Not only are they presumptuous, but they would not stop at nothing in order to defend their acquired social status -which brought them so many advantages, the most important one probably coming from the admiration of the people. The fact that they preach harsh measures and strict principles might make them seem as martyrs, but according to Jesus, the fact that they are lazy and would not make any effort to fulfil what they preaching makes them evil and corrupt. While pretending to care for the others through their rigid visions, they are actually making way for themselves. This is why they are not worthy of respect.

The development of the situation can be considered rather dramatic since the school movement started as a reaction of defence in front of the aggression represented by the Hellenistic culture and religion. The course of events turned the Pharisees into rapacious and hypocrite persons, looking for their best interest exclusively.

However, all the positive aspects that can be associated with them led to the spreading of their importance and it is safe to say that they put the basis for contemporary Judaism. Looking at the past facts, the Pharisee alternative was perhaps better than all the other one.

As opposed to the Sadducees, they were (or pretended to be democratic). As opposed to the priests they orientation was far more spiritual. Priesthood was a closed cast. One could serve in the Temple only if his family had a priest among the descendants. And being part of the Temple meant being powerful, respected and having a lot of authority since the Temple was the very institution of internal rule for the Jewish population. Contrary to the priests, the Pharisees were much more popular and liberal. This naturally explains how they managed to grow so popular with the masses.

The role that the Pharisees assumed was an educational one. All they did was teach and preach and their activities were concentrated in the synagogues. Since they considered the heathen to be inferior and ignorant, they also saw it useful to teach the children from the heathen tribes the truth about god and his way.

This was a very pragmatic action, in the sense that those children believed being influenced by the pharisaic thought in their beliefs. From this point-of-view, it can be considered that not only Pharisees made way for contemporary Judaism, but also for Christianity generally speaking.

The main credo of the Pharisees, as well as of all the Jews is the one that only one god exists. Unlike the Sadducees who believe in the power of free will, the Pharisees believe that god decides the destinies of all people. The Essenes thought that the course of actions in a person's life is predestined. The Pharisee view was a bit more moderate in the sense that they tried to reconcile human will with the will and power of god.

Some of the most important beliefs of the contemporary Christians are owed to them. Among them we can mention the concept of the apocalypse, the belief in resurrection and the after life. From this point-of-view it is safe to assert that their most important influence was a pedagogical one.

The main positive aspect of their doctrine can be considered the spiritualized tendency. The main negative aspects are to be found in the exclusivist separatist tendency according to which the descendants of Abraham are better than all the other people and in the exaggerated attention paid to formalism. Since they are considered to oppose prophetism, it is easily understandable by Jesus himself opposed them.

Another important fraction was represented by the Zealots. There are two very important differences between them and the Pharisees. The Pharisees did not believe in the use of armed force in addition, they believed in the omniscience and the omnipotence of God, according to them, man was supposed to accept his destiny and let god decided when he considered it rightful to change things.

The Zealots on the other hand did not a very good job in tolerating the pressures which were being done in order to impose the Hellenistic religion. They also hated the roman dominance and they would have made use of armed force anytime in order to gain their freedom.

Unfortunately, just like the Pharisees they became fanatic in defending their credos. The Sadducees, who were supporters of the pagan culture were naturally considered as opponents by the Zealots. Under these circumstances, the aspect that we may find most striking is represented by the alliance between the Pharisees and the Sadducees against Jesus.

The opposition that the Pharisees demonstrated as far as Jesus was concerned probably derived from the fact that they failed to understand his mission. In their arrogant attitude, they must have understood that he may have wanted to achieve power and glory on earth as an almighty ruler.

According to the New Testament, not all the Pharisees were adversaries of Jesus. It happened for him to eat together with them and it was Pharisee who once warned him about the danger he was exposing himself to.

Ironically, it was the Sadducees who caused Jesus to be crucified. They played a role in his arrest and in his death as well. In addition, they demonstrated a harsh opposition to the early church as well as Jesus' apostles.

The main oppositions between the Pharisees and Jesus are to be found in two areas. One area regards the Messiah. The Pharisees believed that Messiah would one day arrive, but they did not think his nature would be a divine one.

They conceived him as powerful human ruler who would eventually rule in glory over the Israel, being the enemy of the sinners and of those of did not believe. The other area regards the law and the Sabbath.

The Pharisees believed that the traditional laws were absolutely correct and nothing, especially the Messiah would break them. The fact that Jesus talked to all the people and was kind to everybody, from sinners, tax collectors, prostitutes, etc. was mostly shocking for them.

The fact that he ate and drank with the heathen made him dirty in their eyes. In addition, his actions violated the regulations of Sabbath. As it has been mentioned before, the Pharisees were very strict in their interpretation of the laws, whether they were written or oral.

The fact that Jesus forgave people was a blasphemy. In addition, he had the courage to accuse them of hypocrisy. All these elements made them furious and they hated him because they considered him a threat to their status and authority.