How was Palestine during Jesus’ time?
The first century Palestine was a place full of conflict. For a time, in the Holy Land was dynastic conflicts for power, infighting and occasional large-scale wars. During the second century BC, temporarily established a Jewish kingdom more or less unified – as mentioned the Book of Maccabees of the Old Testament. However, in 63 BC, this land was again in conflict and was invaded by new conquerors. More than half a century before the birth of Jesus, Palestine fell to the legions of Pompey and imposed Roman rule. But the Roman Empire was widespread at the time, and too preoccupied with their own problems, to install the necessary administrative structure to govern directly. Thus, the Romans decided to create a line of puppet kings, governing Palestine under his tutelage. This is the Herodian Dynasty of Kings – That they were not Jews but Arabs. The first of these was Antipater, who ascended the throne of Palestine 63 BC
We imagine a land conquered by force, its inhabitants under the rule of a king-puppet regime that remained in power through military force (Romana obviously). The people of the country could maintain its own religion, but Rome was the supreme authority. His authority was exercised through the Roman law which was forcibly imposed by the Roman legionaries, as they did then in England.
In 6 of the Age Cristano, the situation became critical. That year, Palestine was divided administratively into a Roman province and two Tetrachy. Herod reigned in tetrarquía, Galilee, but Judea – Capital spiritual and secular – was put under direct control of Rome, under the administration of a Roman procurator settled in Caesarea. The Roman regime was brutal and tyrannical. They assumed direct control of Judea, three thousand rebels were summarily crucified. The temple of Solomon was raped and plundered, imposed heavy taxes, torture was frequently used, many people committed suicide. This situation did not improve at all with the arrival of Pontius Pilate, who presided as procurator of Judea from 26 EC and 36 EC. Contrary to the image that the Bible presents, existing records indicate that Pilate was a cruel and corrupt man who not only perpetuated, but intensified abuses of their predecessors.
Is surprising that no other – at least at first sight – no criticism of Rome in the Gospels, nor any mention of the weight of the Roman yoke. Moreover, the Gospel story suggests that the inhabitants of Judea were pleasantly pleased with their lot. But in truth, very few were happy and many were far from pleased. The Jews of the Holy Land can easily be divided into various sects and subsects. We have, for example, the Sadducees – A small but wealthy caste landowners to anger of his compatriots, collaborated with the Romans. They were also the Pharisees – a progressive group who introduced many reforms to Judaism – that despite the image that they give the Gospels, were made final, but passive resistance against the Roman Empire. Were the Essenes – A mystical guidance austere sect – whose teachings were much more influential and prevalent than is generally supposed. It is worth mentioning also the Nazarene – Of those who took part Samson, centuries ago, and still existed at the time of Jesus.
There were many other groups and sects besides those mentioned.
The year 6 CE, when the Romans assumed direct control of Judaea, a Pharisee rabbi called Judas of Galilee created a group of revolutionary militants, apparently composed of Pharisees and Essenes. This group was renamed “The Zealots”. The Zealots were not a cult in the strict sense of the word was a movement that recruited its members from various sects. At the time of the mission of Jesus, the Zealots had assumed an ever-increasing role in the affairs of the Holy Land. The activity of these zealots continue outside of Roman control until long after the Crucifixion. As early as 44 CE is rebel activity had intensified as armed conflict and could see it coming.
In 66 CE the conflict broke out and all Judea rose in organized rebellion against the Romans. It was a tough and desperate uprising, which ultimately proved futile. Only in Caesarea, the Romans massacred 20,000 Jews. In four years, Roman legions occupied and razed Jerusalem, looting and destroying the Temple. The epilogue of this revolt meant a mass exodus of Jews leaving the Holy Land. However, they were enough to incite another rebellion, after about sixty years (132 EC). Finally, the year 135 CE, Emperor Hadrian decreed that all Jews should be expelled from Judea and Jerusalem became essentially a Roman city. It was called Aelia Capitolina.
The life of Jesus almost covered the first 35 years of conflict that lasted over 140 years. This conflict did not end with the departure of Jesus, but continued for a hundred years, presenting the popular feelings and psychological attitudes that occur naturally at such sustained resistance against an oppressor. One of these feelings was the hope and the desire to have a hero-Messiah to free his people from the tyrannical yoke of Rome. It was only by virtue of historical accident and the term semantic Messiah came to be applied exclusively to Jesus.
For Jesus’s contemporaries, no Messiah would never be taken by deity. In fact, the idea of a Messiah, God would be absurd, but unthinkable. The Greek word for Messiah is “Christos” or “Christ.” The term – either in Hebrew or Greek – meant simply the Anointed One (The Chosen) and referred generally to a king. Thus, when David was anointed king in the Old Testament, became explicitly a Messiah or Christ. And every Jewish king of the house of David was known by the same title. Even during the Roman occupation of Judea, the High Priest of Israel, appointed by Rome, was called Priest Priest Messiah or Christ. [2]
However, for the zealots, and other enemies of Rome, this priest was necessarily a false Messiah.
For them, the true Messiah meant something different, was the King lost stranger descendant of David who would deliver his people from Roman tyranny. The term Messiah, then, ever meant something divine. Meant nothing but a “King Messiah.” And the people came to denote that King Messiah who would also be a liberator.
In other words, was a purely political term significance – something very different from the later Christian idea of a Son of God. It was this political term and mundane that was passed to apply to Jesus. He was called Jesus the Messiah, Jesus the Christ in Greek. Later this term contract by Jesus Christ, a purely ceremonial title was distorted to be a proper name.
[1] Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln, Holy Blood, Holy Grail, pp.322-327. Adapted in part.
[2] Maccoby, Revolution in Judaea, p.99.
