Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Septuagint vs Hebrew, influence of Constantine ????

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Harold Holmyard <hholmyard AT ont.com>
  • To: "b-hebrew-lists.ibiblio.org" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Septuagint vs Hebrew, influence of Constantine ????
  • Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 13:15:27 -0500

Dear Ethel,

You wrote:

Constantine decreed legal reasons for capital punishment (IOW death/murder):
1. No one can convert to Judaism.
2. No Christian can marry a Jew.
3. No Chrisitian can be circumcized.
4. No Christian can read the Talmud.

The historical site you have provided from Fordham University shows the general truth of the first two of these four points, and other sources suggest the validity of the other two points:
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/jewish/jews-romanlaw.html

1. On the first point above, see the third paragraph below:

I. Laws of Constantine the Great, October 18, 315: Concerning Jews, Heaven-Worshippers,* And Samaritans

We wish to make it known to the Jews and their elders and their patriarchs that if, after the enactment of this law, any one of them dares to attack with stones or some other manifestation of anger another who has fled their dangerous sect and attached himself to the worship of God [Christianity], he must speedily be given to the flames and burn~ together with all his accomplices.

Moreover, if any one of the population should join their abominable sect and attend their meetings, he will bear with them the deserved penalties.

HH: On the second point, again the death penalty was enacted (see last paragraph):

2. The laws of Constantius (337-361), the second selection, forbid intermarriage between Jewish men and Christian women. A generation later, in 388, all marriages between Jews and Christians were forbidden.

II. Laws of Constantius, August 13, 339:Concerning Jews, Heaven-Worshippers, And Samaritans

This pertains to women, who live in our weaving factories and whom Jews, in their foulness, take in marriage. It is decreed that these women are to be restored to the weaving factories. [Marriages between Jews and Christian women of the imperial weaving factory are to be dissolved.]

This prohibition [of intermarriage] is to be preserved for the future lest the Jews induce Christian women to share their shameful lives. If they do this they will subject themselves to a sentence of death. [The Jewish husbands are to be punished with death.]

3. On the third point about circumcision, see another source:
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/cstdy:@field(DOCID+il0014)

Roman rule, nevertheless, continued. Emperor Hadrian (A.D. 117-38) endeavored to establish cultural uniformity and issued several repressive edicts, including one against circumcision.

Wikipedia throws some question on this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision_and_law

According to the Historia Augusta, the Roman emperor Hadrian issued a decree banning circumcision in the empire,[2] triggering the Jewish Bar Kokhba revolt of 132 AD. The Roman historian Cassius Dio, however, made no mention of such a law, and blamed the Jewish uprising instead on Hadrian's decision to rebuild Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolina, a city dedicated to Jupiter.
Hadrian's successor, Antoninus Pius, permitted Jews to circumcise their own sons, but forbade them (upon penalty of death or banishment) from circumcising non-Jews. Genesis 17:12 commands that Jews must circumcise their slaves; this law prohibited that practice, as well as making it illegal for a man to convert to Judaism.

The Jewish Encyclopedia is similar:
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=47&letter=H

Thus, Spartianus ("Hadrianus," § 14) reports that the Jews rebelled because circumcision was interdicted; while the more reliable Dion Cassius says (lxix. 12) that Hadrian attempted to turn Jerusalem into a pagan city, which the Jews regarded as an abomination, and they therefore rebelled. It is possible that both of these measures were responsible for the rebellion; on the other hand, it is also possible that they were merely the consequences of it. Hadrian, who had a gentle disposition, was lauded throughout the great empire as a benefactor; he indeed so proved himself on his many journeys. Palestinian cities like Cæsarea, Tiberias, Gaza, and Petra owed much to him; and his presence in Judea in 130 is commemorated on coins with the inscription "Adventui Aug[usti] Judææ." He therefore could have had no intention of offending the Jews; but as a true Roman he believed only in the Roman "sacra" (Spartianus, l.c. § 22). It may have happened that in his zeal to rebuild destroyed cities he had disregarded the peculiarities of the Jews. The law against circumcision was founded on earlier Roman laws, and did not affect the Jews only.

4. On the fourth point, one Jewish source attributes this same Jewish revolt in A.D. 132 to laws against the Talmud:
http://www.come-and-hear.com/dilling/chapt02.html

Emperor Hadrian and the Talmud

Hadrian was Emperor of the Roman World empire from 117 A.D. to his death, 138 A.D. In 132 A.D. the Jews began a revolt, and for four years carried on a bloody war. Otherwise Hadrian's reign was peaceful.

The reason for this Pharisee revolt is told by Rodkinson in his History of the Talmud:
One of the causes of the great revolt against the Romans at this time was the prohibition by the Roman government of the study of the Torah [Talmud] … they rebelled, led by Bar Kochba. Rabbi Aqiba (Akiba) was the first to become his adherent, who journeyed from town to town, inciting the Israelites to rebel … It is not surprising, therefore, that Hadrian was not contented barely with the massacre of the sages of the Talmud, but was intent also on the destruction of the Talmud itself … he decreed that if any of the old rabbis should qualify a young rabbi … both should be put to death … believing that with the death of the elder generation the Talmud would be forgotten and Israel would blend with the nations and its memory be obliterated; because he very well knew that as long as the Talmud existed there was little hope for the assimilation of the Jews with other nations. This decree however, was not executed … the efforts of Hadrian met with no success … He saw the Talmud still existing … uniting Israel into one people, and establishing it still more firmly as a national and religious whole … the Talmud regained its former power and influence.

And the pupil of one of the contemporary rabbis "Rabbi Jehudah the Nasi" (the "prince") became "the compiler of the Mishnah" (or laws of the Talmud). (See Exhibit 14 and Exhibit 15) In 553 A.D. Emperor Justinian forbade the spread of the Talmudic books throughout the Roman Empire. (Corp. Juris. can. VII Decretal, lib V, Tit. IV, cap. 1)a

Another Jewish site has this:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/letters.asp

In Christian countries, the Talmud and other Jewish law books were censored by Christian authorities, who believed that certain passages of those books contained insults to Christianity or Gentiles.

A third source says:
http://www.crisismagazine.com/march2003/letters.htm

The couple of negative references to “Jesus” in the Talmud, in fact, may not even be referring to Jesus of Nazareth at all but more likely to another “Jesus” who lived centuries later. This question is difficult to determine since the Talmud was subject to Christian censorship concerning these same passages.

We naturally think of the written Talmud when we hear the word, but the oral law pre-existed its written form.

Yours,
Harold Holmyard






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page