Journal of Biblical Literature - Society of Biblical Literature

340 Journal of Biblical Literature
tinian Judaism. Diversity is no surprise either, since the influences on Judaism were
more than merely Hellenistic.
Non-Hellenistic Influences on Judaism
Judaism has always been changing, coming under the influence of Babylonian,
Egyptian, Phoenician, Persian, and Zoroastrian cultures (among others); the opening
chapters of Genesis are symptomatic of that. Under Roman rule it continued to be
shaped and influenced, such that the hellenization of Judaism should not be taken as a
unique or separate movement (see M. Goodman, “Epilogue,” in Hellenism in the Land
of Israel, ed. Collins and Sterling, 304–7). We see the linguistic influence of Persian and
Aramaic in the Bible, and then Latin too in rabbinic literature. Perhaps the most extensive
influence has come from Greek culture, and for that alone it deserves a particular
place, but not at the expense of other influences.
As a mutual process we should also recognize that Judaism influenced other cultures.
The “oriental” influence on Greece has already been demonstrated by M. L. West
(The East Face of Helicon: West Asiatic Elements in Early Poetry and Myth [Oxford:
Clarendon, 1997]), although few would agree with many of the examples. It has been
seen too in the possible adoption by Greeks of Jewish-Greek religious terms (H. W.
Pleket, “Religious History as the History of Mentality: The ‘Believer’ as Servant of the
Deity in the Greek World,” in Faith, Hope, and Worship: Aspects of Religious Mentality
in the Ancient World [ed. H. S. Versnel; Leiden: Brill, 1981], 152–92) or of belief in
angels (A. R. R. Sheppard, “Pagan Cults of Angels in Roman Asia Minor,” Talanta
[1980-81]: 12–13, 77–101) and might be seen more broadly still. We would have to call
this by the awkward terms “Judaization” or “Hebraization.” Thus, if the origins of the
Jewish synagogue lie, as some believe, in the adoption of an Egyptian prayer house
(proseucheµ) and the adaptation of Greek meeting places (synagoµgai), then perhaps we
should speak of the “hebraization” of Egyptian worship or Greek meetings. To focus
solely on hellenization is to present a misleading one-way relationship. As long as books
on the history of Israel begin or end with Alexander the Great (or even Antiochus IV),
the prime focus will be on the effects of hellenization. Lester L. Grabbe, by contrast, in
beginning his study with the Persian period, emphasizes the continuity through the
political eras, the movement in the Persian period away from the temple and priesthood,
and the diversity in external influences on Judaism from the Persian to the Roman
period (see Judaic Religion in the Second Temple Period: Belief and Practice from the
Exile to Yavneh [London: Routledge, 2000], 53).
Conclusions
While reservations have been expressed concerning the explanation for the religious
development in the period and the causes of the Maccabean revolt, the recognition
of the Hellenistic nature of much of Second Temple Judaism remains important.
The significance accorded to the Greco-Roman background of Christianity in Hengel’s
own The Pre-Christian Paul (Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1991) and other
studies (e.g., J. J. Meggitt, Paul, Poverty and Survival [T & T Clark, 1998]) is in part a
consequence of this, and the occasional drive to determine whether an idea is Jewish or
“Greek” becomes obsolete when it can be both at once. Increased interest in the Jewish
Jesus perhaps implies a Hebraic kernel that does not exist, and the counterpoint interest