Law and Grace, Old Covenant and New Covenant ( Archived) (133)

This is interesting.

And Galilee, the fourth and northernmost area of Palestine? Well, that has been a matter of debate. To be sure, the population there was Jewish, for Jesus is well-known for his mission among the Galilean Jews. But where did those Jews come from?

Many people may wonder why this is a question. Have not Jews been in Galilee since the Twelve Tribes settled there in the thirteenth century BC? Actually, no.

Certainly Galilee was settled by the tribes of Zebulon, Naphtali, Issachar and Asher. Later it belonged to David’s kingdom and then to the northern nation of Israel. But the Assyrian Emperor Tiglath-Pileser III conquered Israel in 733 BCE and the surviving rump state was obliterated by his successor Shalmaneser V in 722. All the population was relocated to other areas of the empire.

At this moment, Galilee drops out of history for the next 600 years. To be sure, 2 Kings 17 tells of the resettlement of Samaria, but Galilee is not mentioned.

Archaeological research now reveals this was not just an oversight of the Biblical writers. Surface surveys indicate no human occupation of the Galilee during the sixth and seventh centuries BCE. A few scattered, small settlements began to appear in following centuries, mostly military outposts and a few small farming communities which sent their harvests to the coastal cities. The same conclusions can be drawn from the excavations of major sites as well. So Galilee remains essentially empty for more than half a millennium following the Assyrian invasions.

The archaeological evidence reveals a sudden change about the start of the first century BC. Over a period of a couple decades, dozens of new villages appear. This indicates that a new, rather large, population comes into Galilee. The trend continues for the next half century or so, with many new settlements appearing and then growing larger.

Who were these new inhabitants? These new archaeological findings indicate that they were transplanted Judeans. The ancient historian Josephus relates how Alexander Jannaeus, the King of Israel from 102 to 76 BC, extended the northern boundary of his Judean-centered country into Galilee during his reign using military means.

Unfortunately, Josephus says nothing about Jannaeus’ management of the country once it came under his control. For a long time, scholars have held that he simply converted the people he found there, the Itureans, to Judaism. Since there was no large population in Galilee at the time, we now know this incorrect.

The archaeology instead reveals that the new inhabitants were Judeans. First, the currency of the region is now that of the Judean Janneaus and his successors; it is not that of the coastal cities or of Damascus further north in Syria. Second, excavated village areas reveal the same interest in religious purity common among Judeans, with ritual baths cut out of the bedrock and houses that contained stone bowls, cups and plates that were impervious to impurity. Third, the Galileans followed a Judean diet in that they did not eat pork; no pig bones are found in the garbage dumps.

So the archaeological research of recent decades now shows that the Galilean population of Jesus’ time were descendants of Judean immigrants of a century or so earlier.

Modern observant Jews no longer voice the name aloud. It is believed to be too sacred to be uttered and is often referred to as the 'Ineffable', 'Unutterable' or 'Distinctive Name'. Various proposals still exist for the vocalization of in which the stem of the name Yahweh (Yah) remains widely accepted but discrepancies exist on agreement of the ending ('weh'). Early Christian literature written in Greek used spellings that can be transcribed by 'Yahweh'. This pronunciation and spelling, as with many religious and scholarly issues, remains the subject of ongoing debate.

Well that is in direct conflict with what I just posted which was from a reputable source. I will take their word over yours. Galileans at the time that Christ was alive were Jews and descended of Judeans. That’s not really important anyway unless you can prove that Yahweh of the OT was not the same Yahweh of the NT.

I’m sorry but there is no reason (based on your fallacious posting history on this site) that I should believe anything you say over this credible website.

Early


Buzzy - the early christians did indeed circulate the "books" you speak of, and a lot more. It wasn't the early Christians who rejected them, it was the Canon Divines. I had an opportunity to read the rules they supposedly used to decide what goes in the Canon. By there own rules the book of Hebrews shouldn't have been included in the Canon since they had no idea who wrote it. Then there's Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Nobody knows for sure who wrote them, they have simply been attributed to those guys. Even so, the acuracy of the Bible is unmatched by any other book of antiquity.

Remember he said."You faith hath made thee whole" or the like. if they had faith it was done to them. (disciples) In some place the no work could be done because of lack of faith.

Compare Jesus' real Hebrew name to YHWH and you will have a more accurate name for YHWH.