N
NotWorthy
Guest
The Romans were the ones who chose the High Priest during Jesus’ time. Who do YOU think they would select, the Sadducees who were willing to work with them? Or the Pharisees who wanted to rid Judea of Rome?OK, I’ll have to do a little studying on this. I always thought the Sadducees were a great asset to the Pharisees in helping convict Jesus because of their specific views and their relationship with Rome, but not as a ruling Jewish force. Most Jews must have held them in disdain for aligning themselves with Rome - which also proved to be their downfall.
But now that I think of it. The Romans must have thought they have some sort of authority or they would not have had this sort of relationship.![]()
Do you recall Annias, who often consulted with Caiphas, the High Priest of Jesus’ time? Annias had been High Priest for some 18 years. Then Caiphas, his son-in-law was selected. After Caiphas, three of Annias sons were selected High Priest. One of them, Annias (Junior), was the one who had James the Apostle martyred. Also, Annias was in charge of selling the animals in the Jewish Temple to pilgrims. The courtyard was called the Courtyard of Annias, if I remember correctly. So yes, he wielded much power. I’m not naive enough to think that the Sadducees always wielded this kind of authority, but yes, they held authority in Judea at least during Jesus’ time.
If Greek was the lingua franca, it would make perfect sense that the rest of the Scriptures would be translated into Greek. I don’t understand why this would be a problem.That would make sense as far as needing them translated, except how did the books end up as pat of the Septuagint? The information we have the Jews didn’t have permission to translate any thing other than the Torah so it had to be done at a later time - over a period of time.
I wasn’t aware that there were secular and spurious writings among the Greek Scriptures. Where do you get that from?But, why would Jews add more books to a pagan library without good cause? And why mix them with non-inspired books? The Septuagint is comprised of a collection of both secular and spurious writings, not just inspired Jewish Scriptures.
I’m not sure about the “72 translators is a myth” statement. The legend that they all produced the exact same translation may be a myth, but I haven’t seen anything that would discount the 72 translators.Anyway, I think we can discount the 72 translators as a myth.
Ginger