IsraelPalestine For Critical Thinkers: #3 The Rise of Christianity in Israel-Palestine

In this episode, Richard Bass take us back to the tumultuous time of first century CE in Israel-Palestine, when the events of Jesus’ life took place and the Roman’s destroyed the Second Temple. We also discuss how Christianity grew to become the religion of the Roman Empire, transforming Israel-Palestine into a Christian holy land, and dominating there until the 7th century.
Hashtags:
#israelpalestine
Host:
Richard Bass
Animated by:
Thought Café
thoughtcafe.ca
Music Composition & Sound Design:
Allan Levy
Written by:
Richard Bass & Thought Café
Images by:
Wikimedia Commons
Additional Images by:
“Arch of Titus Menorah” by Steerpike
is licensed under CC BY 3.0
via Wikimedia Commons
“Titus Augustus Denarius” by CClassical Numismatic Group, Inc.
is licensed under CC-BY-SA-3.0
(creativecommons.org/licenses/b...)
via Wikimedia Commons
“StJohnsAshfield StainedGlass GoodShepherd”
by Alfred Handel, Photo by Toby Hudson
is licensed under CC-BY-SA-3.0
via Wikimedia Commons
“Jerusalem Holy Sepulchre BW 15” by Berthold Werner
is licensed under CC-BY-SA-3.0
via Wikimedia Commons
“Nero 1” by cjh1452000
is licensed under CC-BY-SA-3.0
via Wikimedia Commons
“Domiziano da collezione albani, fine del I sec. dc. 02”
Photo by Sailko is licensed under CC-BY-SA-3.0
via Wikimedia Commons
“Brosen icon constantine helena” by Brosen
is licensed under CC-BY-SA-3.0
via Wikimedia Commons
“The Church of the Holy Sepulchre-Jerusalem”
by www.flickr.com/photos/jlascar/
is licensed under CC-BY-2.0
via Wikimedia Commons

[@MarkiusFox]

This is like the calm before the storm. Excellent series even though the episodes are short.

[@carianoff]

I wish these were all an hour long. Great job.

[@CallOfDuty4Fish]

Short, but good!

[@asdfgretw123]

The roman empire was very accepting of a number of different polytheistic religions, but Christianity, a monotheistic ideology wouldn't accept the other religions and insisted that there was only 1 god. This is what the Romans had issue with, and why they banned Christianity as the Christians essentially were making trouble and couldn't play nice with all the other ideologies. This is at least the account given in 'Sapiens: a brief history of human-kind' by Yuval Harari.

[@afce44]

Great videos!! Can't wait to see the next episode. Congrats for this wonderful work!

[@recourseconsulting5064]

these are great, things i didn't realize or understand before, about how things unfolded. love the timeline - so clear

[@LeCinemaNousAppartient]

Really nice series. Too bad there are no subtitles :)

[@Mat-wd8zn]

This is good history trust. Well researched

[@jobe1316]

This is blocked from posting on Facebook. Work with me to get the block removed so we can show this knowledge to the unknowing.

[@7alazona]

excellent series! when's the next episode?

[@jcorbiere]

This coming week. It focusses on Islam.

[@7alazona]

Thanks for letting me know! Can't wait :)

[@alvinleonora7582]

Who watching on May 2021 (Palestine and Israel war)

[@howarthe1]

Why did the Israelites and the Romans have trouble getting along? Were the Romans overbearing as rulers? I thought that most of the peoples they conquered thrived within the empire...

[@rast29]

A lot of the conflict had to do with polythism vs Monothism. The Romans considered the idea that you wouldn't worship their gods as backward and rude. The Romans were also richer and more technologically advanced then the Jews (baths, roads, big armies and navies) and this attracted many Jews to adopt Roman customs they thought to be superior to their own. That included religion, which made conservative Rabis upset. And the Romans absolutely did not accept any challenge to their authority. That was considered a crime against the state and the penalty was crucification. Jesus was not special in that regard since this punishment happened all the time.

[@GeterPoldstein]

First, you have a long-standing cultural and military conflict between the Greeks and the Judeans. There had been a couple centuries of war there, plus something of an intractable difference in attitudes toward the human body (see also: circumcision). As the chief clients of Rome, the Greeks had a lot of influence. Second, there were some Judean factions that particularly disliked the royalty of the time. Herod the Great was brought to power by the Romans and was only mostly ethnically Judean, plus his reign marked the end of the Hasmonean period. The century of Hasmonean rule was marked by periodic mass murder of peoples not ethnically and religiously pure-Judean. It's not really accurate to describe it as "Romans vs. Jews." These days, we think of those Judeans who opposed the Romans as "The Jews," but these factions were the same people who killed the High Priest of the Judeans for collaborating. Your average Judean was probably a good deal more concerned with safety than the Sicarii who wound up at Masada. (Sicarii is Latin for "dagger-ers" and refers to a group known for killing people in crowds to escape detection and maximize terror.) Third, and notably, the best history we have seems to indicate that the Israelite peoples had a long history of rebelling harder than was common among other conquered peoples. Aside from the Hasmonean period, the Israelites had been under one empire or another for over 1000 years when Hadrian imposed the exile. The Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, and Romans all wrote about how curiously rebellious the Israelites were. In the end, the Romans came down unusually hard on the Judeans. Ironically, it's because of Rome's exceptional respect for local religions. The new high priest (you remember the Sicarii killed the previous) was "a bold youth" (via Josephus) and refused to sacrifice for the Emperor. The Romans may not have agreed that יהוה‎ was the _only_ god, but they were pretty sure he was a big one, at least locally. Refusing to sacrifice was, in the end, the reason the Romans destroyed the Jewish temple and exiled the current priesthood.

[@richardbass2298]

Hi Erin. Tks for your question. The Romans, like the Greeks centuries before them, originally left the Israelites to themselves. This didn’t last, however. A series of Roman provocations which included oppressive taxation, confiscation of property, and stealing from the Temple treasury led to a major Israelite rebellion in 66 CE, known as the Great Revolt. Like the ancient Hasmonean revolt (Maccabees) against Antiochus Epiphanes and the Seleucid Greeks centuries earlier, it was rooted in the longstanding ideological tension between Judaism (ethical monotheism) and Hellenism (secular humanism). Historian Flavius Josephus, a general in the Israelite army during this period, provides several accounts of the revolt and the subsequent war with the Romans in his Wars of the Jews. He describes the massive campaign the Romans led against the Jews, which began in the north, in Galilee, and ended with the siege of Jerusalem. The final results were the deaths of several hundred thousand Jews and the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. Only sixty years after the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, Judea was in a process of recovery, but it would not last long. The Roman emperor at the time was Hadrian, whose reign (117-138 CE) was marked by strained relations with the Parthian kingdom to the east. Like the Seleucid Greek ruler Antiochus Epiphanes, Hadrian believed that all the inhabitants of his empire, especially those in Rome’s eastern territories, should adopt a single culture and form of worship-Roman Hellenism. Only such uniformity of thought, he felt, would guarantee protection from the expansion of the Parthian kingdom into Roman territories. Historian Meir Ben-Dov writes the following about Hadrian’s concerns: “Hadrian feared that the existence of different ideologies and nations, each aspiring to its own, distinctive, national identity, would arouse Parthian hopes that the conquered people would rise against Rome.” Like his predecessor Antiochus, Hadrian attempted to impose Roman culture on the Israelites/Jews. His harsh decrees included a ban on Jewish education, on the ordination of rabbis, and on circumcision. Like their ancestors, the Hasmoneans, the Judeans of the 2nd century resisted Rome’s attempts to forcibly convert them. A powerful conflict was thus ignited, which culminated in an open revolt. The immediate stimulus for the revolt was Hadrian’s order that a temple to Jupiter be built on the ruins of the destroyed Jewish Temple. This time, it was Simeon Bar Kochba who hoisted the banner of rebellion (132-135 CE). Bar Kochba was supported by the Talmudic sage, Rabbi Akiva. Like the previous revolt, the Bar Kochba revolt was initially successful because Rome was dealing with various other trouble spots throughout their empire. After their initial victories over the Romans, the Judean rebels established an independent state and even minted coins. Hadrian then proceeded to send one of his greatest generals, Julius Severus, to put down the rebellion. A fierce two-year struggle followed.The Romans’ superior numbers and systematic methods wiped out one Jewish stronghold after another in Judea and the Galilee. The Roman vengeance that followed was severe. Many Jews that survived the massacres were sold into slavery. Hadrian also sought to obliterate all traces of Jerusalem as a Jewish city. All the structures and ruins remaining from the Great Revolt of the previous century were razed to the ground. Hadrian then built a new pagan city on the site of Jerusalem, named it Aelia Capitolina, and forbade Jews to live there. The name was a combination of “Aelius,” which was the name of Hadrian’s family, and “Capitolinus,” the name of his favorite deity. Hadrian also renamed the whole region-formerly Judea-Syria Palestina, a name that was later adopted by the British when they called the region Palestine. The name Palestine was chosen by Hadrian because it was associated with the Philistines, the ancient enemies of the Jews. Hadrian’s goal was to eradicate the name and memory of any Jewish heritage from the region, and what better way to do so than to rename the territory after the Jews’ former enemies? In the years following the revolt, Hadrian made anti-religious decrees forbidding Torah study, Sabbath observance, circumcision, Jewish courts, meeting in synagogues, and other ritual practices.This period of persecution lasted throughout the remainder of Hadrian’s reign, until 138 C.E. The Talmud records the martyrdom of the famous sage Rabbi Akiva, executed for ignoring Hadrian’s decrees. So the basis of the tension between the ancient Romans was the same as with the ancient Greeks. Roman/Hellenistic ideology and Judaism’s ethical monotheism were incompatible.

[@segban]

Richard Bass Your missing 2 major points. First corruption of Rome as well as Jewish local goverment. The Jews and Romans was getting along quite fine since Jewish Local Kings was bribing to Rome and keeping their religion to themselves as race. Until ofcourse Jesus of Nazareth came. He conflicted with local goverment because he preeched religion is not based on race but fatih and virtue. Yeah crucify me if you like but Jesus of Nazareth wouldnt have met the infamous end if he was approved local Jewish Goverment. Second one: Well o fcourse Romeans wouldnt have approved Jesus anyway since there can be only one Divi Filius or son of god. Romans at the time were having legitimacy proglem since Empire was lacking direct involment of common people. While the empire trying to use religion to approve his reign some other religious teaching saying otherwise was and always will be a major threat.

[@howarthe1]

Richard Bass Thank you. I'm thinking maybe that my original assumption that Rome was tolerate of the religions and cultures of their conquered peoples needs updating. It sounds like sometimes they were tolerant and sometimes they were not, depending on how many taxes they needed for some far-away project and how afraid they were of an uprising or revolt in any given province at any given time. My Sunday school teacher tried to compare the Romans a the time of Christ to the Nazis of 20th century Germany, and I'm just sure that is not right.

[@dplameras]

Paul did meet Jesus on the way to Damascus. Acts 9:4-6

[@aabb2639]

Jesus is better documented then anyone else in the history of this series.

[@terrybaptist795]

Is the chalice of Valencia which is in Cathedral in Valencia spain. The cup which is is at the top of the chalice which made of deep red agate though not 100% confirmed might be the cup that our lord and savior jesus christ used during the last last super with his disciples. Whats your opinion?

[@Lucasal1296]

its a great video and i'm sure that demands a lot of work but i would like the videos to be a bit longer if possible =S

[@MrJerome55555]

Christianity always a religion of peace

[@Martin-bs6ct]

lol!!! No religion is a religion of peace. Have you never heard of the Crusades?

[@bhenediktusniscalawastu3768]

Sarcastic

[@DaniTechGuy]

It's 2-11-15 Where is the next part you said at 3:18 on 2-10-15 there would be a third part Where is it?????????

[@yf8979]

C. 440 BC"the region I am describing skirts our sea, stretching from Phoenicia along the coast of Palestine-Syria till it comes to Egypt, where it terminates". In C.135 A.D after there Jewish revolt, Judea was amalgamated to Syria-palestina and NOT renamed. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_name_%22Palestine%22

[@1bgrant]

Aren't you forgetting the People's Front of Judea?

[@ibyofshieldz6796]

Something a bit off in these videos if I may mention - Judaism believes Abraham was Jewish - the common consensus is that Jesus was also Jewish. However, Muslims also believe that Abraham and Jesus were Muslim, based on their actions and sayings, typical of a Muslim. Since there isn't concrete evidence for the religion of Abraham, or Jesus - just 'a common consensus' or an 'agreement' I think it's a little unfair. Edit: You mention this in your next video - well done.

[@Astral_Wave]

They're all the same thing. Endless debate and Millions dead later, all three are natural evolutions of prehistoric afro-asiatic mythology. Dumb stuff...

[@jessejackson9618]

Paul was not a Jewish convert.

[@gerardgibbs2894]

Correct . He was from a devout Jewish family based in the city of Tarsus

[@jayanthikannan6863]

jesus was not born in the 1st century

[@sabuomarrr1]

why call it israelpalestine when historically it was called palestina. this is non debateable

[@roi3831]

This name was invented by the Greeks and was later used by the Romans and the British

[@roi3831]

The name "Palestine" is fake

[@sabuomarrr1]

a person Its a name over 2500 years old and has been used for 2500 years. And the Arabs kept it for over 1400 years. In history the name has been Palestina

[@roi3831]

Omaragorn And israel is a name 4000 years old

[@martinkollarovic9376]

a person *a name that doesn't appear in any historical source except an old fantasy book

[@shazzylogo]

Judeo-Christianity is a modern oxymoron. Judaism did not exist before Christ. Before Christ was the faith of the Israelites, who’s teachings became decayed and subverted by the corrupt teachings by the Pharisees and Sadducess. A Portion of the corrupted Israelites rejected Jesus the Messiah and their leaders and Elders went into Babylon and compiled their Oral tradition into the writings of the Mishnah that evolved into the first portion of the Talmud and at this juncture Judaism was born. It is the Talmud and not the Bible which is the hermeneutic system of Orthodox Judaism. Jesus Christ was the last seed and remnant of Israel though Abraham and Issac when he was crucified and died on the cross because all had rejected him. Jesus Christ promised that anyone from all peoples, all languages and all nations who believe in him as lord and savior are the true seed of Israel (this is not tied to land). This brings together the Hebrew covenant (Old testament) fulfilled in the new covenant (New Testament) in fulfillment of Gods promise of salvation and eternal life. The one true god can only be found at the foot of the cross through belief in Jesus Christ (the anointed one). Amen

[@Littlemanloki]

Where did you find this information? Was it pulled from academic writings? I'm not asking this as a means to challenge nor contest what you have said (as I'm fairly new to this, and don't have the sufficient information from both sides to form a self-standing argument), I'm just asking so I can do further research into it. Thanks!

[@luisdotgarcia]

Palestine means the Land of the Philistines in Greek because they were Greeks from the Island of Crete. They were the Palestinians that occupied Palestine and were destroyed by the Assyrians and the Babylonians. There are no Palestinians nowadays because they don’t exist. The term was stolen after the birth of Israel.

[@shainazion4073]

No, Palestine in greek means "land of those that wrestle with God" the word "palesteis" means wrestler. Palestine is the Greek for Israel, which means he who wrestles with God.

[@martinkollarovic9376]

nice blaming romans for the crucifixion, but it was jews who requested it and voted for it

[@GeterPoldstein]

+Martin K (Ace One) Perhaps worth pointing out that this is not an historically corroborated event. Jesus' Nazarenes were one of a bunch of categories of Jews at the time. It could be argued that the subset of the priesthood that participated in Roman government bore responsibility. But it's unlikely, given the way such decisions were made, that it was ever put to the "vote of the rabble" described in the Gospels. The narrative in which "The Jews" as a whole called for Jesus' death came up during the Middle Ages, as an explanation for why it was just to deny Jews rights in Europe.

[@Beanskiiii]

+GeterPoldstein no, the bible clearly says the Jews did, even thought Pilate didn't see any wrong doing in Jesus.

[@martinkollarovic9376]

+GeterPoldstein they requested it, threatened Pilate to tell the Emperor that Jesus was declaring himself a king which was a heavy crime. But that applied to "secular" quasi-kings, not one in the Kingdom of God in the heaven.

[@GeterPoldstein]

+Martin K (Ace One) +ChillsandThrills I think they key question is whether you believe the Gospels, written generations later, recalled the event accurately. Given that the Romans kept excellent records and made no note of such an event, and no historian has managed to find corroborating evidence, it's kind of a stretch. And again, there was no "The Jews" at the time. "The Jews" included the Nazarenes (who a few generations later would start thinking of themselves as Christians) as much as it did the Pharisees and Sadducees and dozen other categories. The insistence on Jewish responsibility for the crucifixion has been used to justify an awful lot of hate of modern Jews, who have as much descent from "the Jews" of 23AD as do modern Christians.

[@martinkollarovic9376]

GeterPoldstein the area was partially autonomous and jews had some rights there so there were 'the Jews'

[@hellmouthisnogod8492]

Give some evidence for Jesus, not make a documentation based on bible and myths.