Engaging the Evidence for Historicity: Let's Do This

[Rajah Manchou]

Forking a conversation I had with @smac97 on the Why Not Engage the Evidence for Historicity? thread. 

Margaret Barker said: 

"The extraordinary similarity between the History of the Rechabites (the Narrative of Zosimus) and the story of Lehi leaving Jerusalem has already been studied by Mormon scholars. This ancient text, which survives in Greek, Syriac, and Ethiopic, tells the story of some people who left Jerusalem about 600 BCE and went to live in a blessed land. They did not drink wine. They were called the sons of Rechab, which could mean that he was their ancestor, or it could be the Hebrew way of saying they were temple servants, priests who served the divine throne. In their blessed land, angels had announced to them the incarnation of the Word of God from the Holy Virgin who is the Mother of God. Nobody can explain this text." - Barker, Margaret (2005) "Joseph Smith and Preexilic Israelite Religion," BYU Studies Quarterly: Vol. 44 : Iss. 4 , Article 9

Where do LDS scholars and believers propose these Rechabites went? Where was this blessed land that was inhabited by Israelites that left Jerusalem in the 6th century BC? Is it a fiction or a fact, or some mix of both? Non-Mormon scholars like Vladimir Braginsky have proposed a physical real-world location for these accounts. 

Let's engage the evidence for the historicity of these apocryphal Judeo-Christian texts describing ancient Israelites on an island/peninsula in the sea in the 6th century BC.

[RevTestament]

6 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Forking a conversation I had with @smac97 on the Why Not Engage the Evidence for Historicity? thread. 

Margaret Barker said: 

"The extraordinary similarity between the History of the Rechabites (the Narrative of Zosimus) and the story of Lehi leaving Jerusalem has already been studied by Mormon scholars. This ancient text, which survives in Greek, Syriac, and Ethiopic, tells the story of some people who left Jerusalem about 600 BCE and went to live in a blessed land. They did not drink wine. They were called the sons of Rechab, which could mean that he was their ancestor, or it could be the Hebrew way of saying they were temple servants, priests who served the divine throne. In their blessed land, angels had announced to them the incarnation of the Word of God from the Holy Virgin who is the Mother of God. Nobody can explain this text." - Barker, Margaret (2005) "Joseph Smith and Preexilic Israelite Religion," BYU Studies Quarterly: Vol. 44 : Iss. 4 , Article 9

Where do LDS scholars and believers propose these Rechabites went? Where was this blessed land that was inhabited by Israelites that left Jerusalem in the 6th century BC? Is it a fiction or a fact, or some mix of both? Non-Mormon scholars like Vladimir Braginsky have proposed a physical real-world location for these accounts. 

Let's engage the evidence for the historicity of these apocryphal Judeo-Christian texts describing ancient Israelites on an island/peninsula in the sea in the 6th century BC.

I think the Rechabites meet your Malaysia model, but of course I think we have little or no idea where they would have gone. The evidence is extremely sparse at best. Nonetheless, the Lord has said that He has and/or will speak to all peoples. Ultimately, I think the world will know when the time is ripe.

[jkwilliams]

7 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Forking a conversation I had with @smac97 on the Why Not Engage the Evidence for Historicity? thread. 

Margaret Barker said: 

"The extraordinary similarity between the History of the Rechabites (the Narrative of Zosimus) and the story of Lehi leaving Jerusalem has already been studied by Mormon scholars. This ancient text, which survives in Greek, Syriac, and Ethiopic, tells the story of some people who left Jerusalem about 600 BCE and went to live in a blessed land. They did not drink wine. They were called the sons of Rechab, which could mean that he was their ancestor, or it could be the Hebrew way of saying they were temple servants, priests who served the divine throne. In their blessed land, angels had announced to them the incarnation of the Word of God from the Holy Virgin who is the Mother of God. Nobody can explain this text." - Barker, Margaret (2005) "Joseph Smith and Preexilic Israelite Religion," BYU Studies Quarterly: Vol. 44 : Iss. 4 , Article 9

Where do LDS scholars and believers propose these Rechabites went? Where was this blessed land that was inhabited by Israelites that left Jerusalem in the 6th century BC? Is it a fiction or a fact, or some mix of both? Non-Mormon scholars like Vladimir Braginsky have proposed a physical real-world location for these accounts. 

Let's engage the evidence for the historicity of these apocryphal Judeo-Christian texts describing ancient Israelites on an island/peninsula in the sea in the 6th century BC.

I am not familiar with the Rechabites, so I am happy to have an opportunity to learn something new. So, thank you for posting this. In case anyone's interested, a translation of the Narrative of Zosimus is found at https://www.biblestudytools.com/history/early-church-fathers/ante-nicene/vol-9-discovered-additions/apocalypses-and-romances/narrative-of-zosimus-concerning-life-blessed.html.

I'll check this out when I have time. I did find this from the Jewish Encyclopedia entry on Rechabites:

Quote

According to Benjamin of Tudela.

Judah Löw b. Bezaleel, in his "Neẓaḥ Yisrael" (Prague, 1599), claims that the Jews in China are descended from the Rechabites and that they are referred to in Isa. xlix. 12 ("the land of Sinim"). Benjamin of Tudela (1160) found Rechabites in his travel: "Twenty-one days' journey from Babylon, through the desert of Sheba, or Al-Yemen, from which Mesopotamia lies in a northerly direction, are the abodes of the Jews who are called the Rechabites." He describes them as "an independent tribe. The extent of their land is sixteen days' journey among the northern mountains. They have large and fortified cities, with the capital city of Tema. Their nasi is Rabbi Hanan [a name suggestive of the chamber of Hanan]. The Rechabites make marauding expeditions in distant lands with their allies, the Arabs, who live in the wilderness in tents. The neighboring countries fear the Jews, some of whom cultivate the land, raise cattle, and contribute tithes for the men learned in the Law, for the poor of Palestine, and for the mourners of Zion and Jerusalem, who, except on Sabbaths and holy days, neither eat meat nor drink wine, and who dress in black and live in caves." Benjamin's description of the Rechabites isambiguous, and, the text being unpunctuated, it is difficult to tell when he refers to the Rechabites, when to the Arabs, and when to the mourners of Zion. Probably the tents referred to are those of the Arabs, and the abstention from meat and wine applies to the mourners of Zion. The latter evidently were Karaites, who made frequent pilgrimages to Jerusalem in the tenth and eleventh centuries (See Pilgrimage).

The Rechabites were found also by the English missionary Dr. Wolff, in 1828, near Mecca in Arabia. He credits them with the observance of the pure Mosaic law. They speak Arabic and a little Hebrew. They are good horsemen, and number about 60,000.

 

[Rajah Manchou]

34 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

The evidence is extremely sparse at best. 

This is what I'd like to explore. Is the evidence sparse, as critics of the Book of Mormon might say, or have we just not found/identified it yet, as the apologist argument goes? 

Posing the mostly neutral question about the historicity of the Narrative of Zosimus allows us all (critics and apologists alike) to look at the evidence without all the baggage that we bring to the debate about BOM historicity. 

[CA Steve]

8 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Let's engage the evidence for the historicity of these apocryphal Judeo-Christian texts describing ancient Israelites on an island/peninsula in the sea in the 6th century BC.

Just so I am clear here, are you proposing this as an alternate location for the BoM peoples or just as a similar story that can be compared to the BoM?

[Rajah Manchou]

6 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

Just so I am clear here, are you proposing this as an alternate location for the BoM peoples or just as a similar story that can be compared to the BoM?

I would like to set aside the question of the Book of Mormon for the sake of discussion. The questions I'm asking are, were there really Rechabites? What does the evidence say?

But most importantly, if you don't care, or aren't interested in this question, why? What reasons might we have for being interested in Lehites but not Rechabites?

Edited June 29, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[Kevin Christensen]

Gerald Smith here includes some observations on how Jeremiah 35 on the Rechabites fits in with Margaret's talk.

Quote

She notes that the Bible assumes that all the reforms Josiah did were good things.  However, other ancient texts outside the Bible disagree with this assessment:

“Here is our first warning: if the wickedness in Jerusalem, mentioned in the First Book of Nephi, was Josiah’s temple purges we should expect to find information relevant to Mormon tradition in texts outside the Bible—and we do. And the biblical texts themselves take on a new significance if we no longer assume that everyone agreed with Josiah’s purge. Jeremiah, a contemporary of King Josiah, has many passages that seem to criticize what has just happened in the city.”

While Jeremiah (also a contemporary of Lehi) seems to have agreed with some of the changes Josiah made, there are some that clearly rub the prophet the wrong way.  For example, in Jeremiah 35, the prophet brings the Rechabites into the temple.  These are an ancient people, similar to Bedouins, who avoid the cities, living and worshiping in the wilderness.  Jeremiah questions the Rechabites in front of the temple priests.  They respond that they continue in the traditions of their fathers, obeying the rules set down for them.

“But they said, We will drink no wine: for Jonadab the son of Rechab our father commanded us, saying, Ye shall drink no wine, neither ye, nor your sons for ever:  Neither shall ye build house, nor sow seed, nor plant vineyard, nor have any: but all your days ye shall dwell in tents; that ye may live many days in the land where ye be strangers.” (Jeremiah 35:6-7)

Jeremiah turns to the priests and tells them the word of God:

“I have sent also unto you all my servants the prophets, rising up early and sending them, saying, Return ye now every man from his evil way, and amend your doings, and go not after other gods to serve them, and ye shall dwell in the land which I have given to you and to your fathers: but ye have not inclined your ear, nor hearkened unto me.” (Jeremiah 35:15)

Jeremiah is speaking to the temple priests and others, condemning them for going “after other gods”!  These “gods” have given the temple priests a different teaching than are found in the pre-Deuteronomic temple, among the Rechabites on their wilderness altars, or among Lehi’s people.

https://mormonbible.org/holy-bible/old-testament-scholar-discusses-ancient-biblical-concepts-found-book-of-mormon

And there is this on the Narrative of Zosimus, in Glimpses of Lehi's Jerusalem

https://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1081&index=20

As well as this from Welch earlier.

https://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1099&index=16

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

[Rajah Manchou]

12 minutes ago, Kevin Christensen said:

Gerald Smith here includes some observations on how Jeremiah 35 on the Rechabites fits in with Margaret's talk.

https://mormonbible.org/holy-bible/old-testament-scholar-discusses-ancient-biblical-concepts-found-book-of-mormon

And there is this on the Narrative of Zosimus, in Glimpses of Lehi's Jerusalem

https://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1081&index=20

As well as this from Welch earlier.

https://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1099&index=16

Margaret Barker suggests that there were groups of Israelites, like the Rechabites, that fled Jerusalem during or just after Josiah's reforms. She names three historical groups specifically, the Qemant of Ethiopia, the Cochin Jews of India, and the Chiang Min of China.

Mormon publications aside, what are your thoughts on the claims of these historical groups? Is the evidence sufficient to identify them as 6th century BC Israelites, or is the evidence lacking?

Edited June 29, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[Kevin Christensen]

1 hour ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Margaret Barker suggests that there were groups of Israelites, like the Rechabites, that fled Jerusalem during or just after Josiah's reforms. She names three historical groups specifically, the Qemant of Ethiopia, the Cochin Jews of India, and the Chiang Min of China.

Mormon publications aside, what are your thoughts on the claims of these historical groups? Is the evidence sufficient to identify them as 6th century BC Israelites, or is the evidence lacking?

The Book of Jeremiah mentions Rechabites, which is good evidence that they existed apart from the History of the Rechabites (aka the Narrative of Zosimus).   Nibley suggested that Lehi was a Rechabite based on Jeremiah 35 before Jack Welch published on Zosimus.  And that text came from somewhere, and had interesting comparisons to 1 Nephi.   In the wake of "Paradigms Regained" being published in 2002, I had some communications with a First Generation immigrant from Japan, raised in America scholar who had been exploring ties between Shinto and scattered Israel that had been proposed by a native Japanese scholars.  After reading Barker's The Great Angel, he realized that her picture strengthened the case immensely, wrote a long and detailed article that he gave me, and for a while, there was an attempt to get The Great Angel translated into Japanese by the Japanese scholar who had been arguing for a connection in several books. 

I got a copy of the book that proposes scattered remnants in China and still have that on my shelf.  And Margaret also mentions the traditions that some First Temple Jews fled to Arabia, and she connects those traditions with the story of Paul having gone to Arabia for a while, and coming back better equipped to defend Christianity.  She hypothesizes that he met some of the keeper of the First Temple tradition.

So, there is evidence of a sort.  It's been a while since I delved, and I wonder if I still have the essay on the Shinto connection, which struck me as far more elaborate and stronger overall than the Anglican Missionary reporting on what he saw among the Min in China.   I think there is something there.  Worth exploring, if a person has the time and resources and priorities.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

[Robert F. Smith]

This matter was discussed recently on this board:  http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/70270-lehi-and-his-family-were-rechabites-hugh-nibley/ .

 

[Rajah Manchou]

16 hours ago, Kevin Christensen said:

The Book of Jeremiah mentions Rechabites, which is good evidence that they existed apart from the History of the Rechabites (aka the Narrative of Zosimus). Nibley suggested that Lehi was a Rechabite based on Jeremiah 35 before Jack Welch published on Zosimus. And that text came from somewhere, and had interesting comparisons to 1 Nephi.  

Surprising that Nibley recognized a relationship between Lehites and Rechabites even before Welch found evidence for it, independent of Nibley's comments I would guess.

16 hours ago, Kevin Christensen said:

In the wake of "Paradigms Regained" being published in 2002, I had some communications with a First Generation immigrant from Japan, raised in America scholar who had been exploring ties between Shinto and scattered Israel that had been proposed by a native Japanese scholars.  After reading Barker's The Great Angel, he realized that her picture strengthened the case immensely, wrote a long and detailed article that he gave me, and for a while, there was an attempt to get The Great Angel translated into Japanese by the Japanese scholar who had been arguing for a connection in several books. 

Was reading about the Kakure Kirishitan in Japan. Although no claims to Judaism, it is still interesting to see how quickly an abandoned people can change the names of their gods in the name of survival, while still recognizing some elements of their faith.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kakure_Kirishitan

16 hours ago, Kevin Christensen said:

It's been a while since I delved, and I wonder if I still have the essay on the Shinto connection, which struck me as far more elaborate and stronger overall than the Anglican Missionary reporting on what he saw among the Min in China. I think there is something there. Worth exploring, if a person has the time and resources and priorities.

Fair response. I think this is also the challenge Mormonism faces. Evidence or not, its ultimately a question of time, resources and priorities. 

[Rajah Manchou]

16 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

This matter was discussed recently on this board:  http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/70270-lehi-and-his-family-were-rechabites-hugh-nibley/ 

I don't know. I guess I'm approaching this wrong. I think my subconscious hope is that one of the scholars on this board will connect the dots that I am not able to connect, with no training in history or literature or linguistics or what have you. I find the evidence is compelling, but maybe for everybody else there is no there, there.

Edited June 30, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[RevTestament]

On 6/29/2018 at 8:39 AM, Rajah Manchou said:

This is what I'd like to explore. Is the evidence sparse, as critics of the Book of Mormon might say, or have we just not found/identified it yet, as the apologist argument goes? 

Posing the mostly neutral question about the historicity of the Narrative of Zosimus allows us all (critics and apologists alike) to look at the evidence without all the baggage that we bring to the debate about BOM historicity. 

I personally do not equate Rechabites with the Book of Mormon. I think there is much more evidence to substantiate the Book of Mormon than the Rechabite stories, and I believe it is a mistake to connect the two without some evidence. 

I believe it is also relevant to review what we do know. Most people do not realize that most of Israel was carted away, and never returned. The northern tribes carried away by the Assyrians consisted of a majority of the population even counting those who escaped to swell the population of Jerusalem. Then most of the remaining Hebrews carried away by the Babylonians did not return. This proportion can be safely calculated by realizing that only about 1/6 of the priests necessary to fill the 24 courses of temple service returned. Thus, the Hebrews suffered two massive dispersals of their population. Stories of where some of these people went are naturally going to exist, but actual evidence is quite thin. While I believe there is significant amount of evidence to support the Book of Mormon, without the existence of the book itself I don't think we would know where or what to look for, and admittedly, even this is much debated.

[Rajah Manchou]

11 hours ago, RevTestament said:

I personally do not equate Rechabites with the Book of Mormon. I think there is much more evidence to substantiate the Book of Mormon than the Rechabite stories, and I believe it is a mistake to connect the two without some evidence. 

We haven't yet discussed the evidence for Rechabites, so let's set aside the Book of Mormon for the sake of discussion. What I'm trying to resolve is what would evidence for pre-exilic Israelite migrations look like? Some scholars, including Margaret Barker, argue that the Rechabites were a historical group migrating from Jerusalem at precisely the same time as the Lehites. Can we find evidence to support this claim? What does the evidence look like? Since Jenkins asked a similar question of the Book of Mormon, I'll just hijack his question:

Can anyone cite any single credible fact, object, site, or inscription that supports any one story found in the Narrative of Zosimus? One sherd of pottery? One tool of bronze or iron? One carved stone? One piece of genetic data? And by credible, I mean drawn from a reputable scholarly study, an academic book or refereed journal, not some cranky piece of pseudo-science.

[Nevo]

13 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Can anyone cite any single credible fact, object, site, or inscription that supports any one story found in the Narrative of Zosimus? One sherd of pottery? One tool of bronze or iron? One carved stone? One piece of genetic data? And by credible, I mean drawn from a reputable scholarly study, an academic book or refereed journal, not some cranky piece of pseudo-science.

If you're interested in reputable scholarly studies, two important recent contributions are:

• Ronit Nikolsky, "The History of the Rechabites and the Jeremiah Literature," Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 13, no. 2 (2002): 185–207.
  • Abstract: The article examines the cultural milieu of the History of the Rechabites. Following a comparison with early Midrash (Mekhilta de-Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai) and pointing out similarities with Hegesippus and later Christian writings about the Rechabites, it is the conclusion of this article that The History as we have it is a Christian composition, from the fourth century CE. It originated in a monastic milieu, the work of an author who was familiar with Jeremiah literature. The apocryphon attributes to the Rechabites features which characterize the Ten Lost Tribes. It is the first instance where such a connection is made, one that will be more and more widely spread in later centuries.
     
• Chris H. Knights, "The Rechabites Revisited: The History of the Rechabites Twenty-Five Years On," Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 23, no. 4 (2014): 307–320.
  • Abstract: In this article the author revisits the ‘History of the Rechabites’, chs. 8–10 of the Story of Zosimus, a text he first studied in the 1980s, in the light of the work done on the text more recently by Nikolsky and Davila. He looks more closely at the reasons why the text may or may not be Jewish and concludes that, despite his earlier published views, it is more likely to be a Christian composition than a Jewish one.
  • Knights's original dissertation is online here: Volume 1 & Volume 2

Edited July 1, 2018 by Nevo

[Rajah Manchou]

29 minutes ago, Nevo said:

If you're interested in reputable scholarly studies, two important recent contributions are:

• Ronit Nikolsky, "The History of the Rechabites and the Jeremiah Literature," Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 13, no. 2 (2002): 185–207.
  • Abstract: The article examines the cultural milieu of the History of the Rechabites. Following a comparison with early Midrash (Mekhilta de-Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai) and pointing out similarities with Hegesippus and later Christian writings about the Rechabites, it is the conclusion of this article that The History as we have it is a Christian composition, from the fourth century CE. It originated in a monastic milieu, the work of an author who was familiar with Jeremiah literature. The apocryphon attributes to the Rechab ites features which characterize the Ten Lost Tribes. It is the first instance where such a connection is made, one that will be more and more widely spread in later centuries.
     
• Chris H. Knights, "The Rechabites Revisited: The History of the Rechabites Twenty-Five Years On," Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 23, no. 4 (2014): 307–320.
  • Abstract: In this article the author revisits the ‘History of the Rechabites’, chs. 8–10 of the Story of Zosimus, a text he first studied in the 1980s, in the light of the work done on the text more recently by Nikolsky and Davila. He looks more closely at the reasons why the text may or may not be Jewish and concludes that, despite his earlier published views, it is more likely to be a Christian composition than a Jewish one.
  • Knights's original dissertation is online here: Volume 1 & Volume 2

Thanks Nevo. I've read these, but will give them another go with this thread in mind. 

As mentioned in the other thread, I've been looking more at the historical accounts of the Rahmans, often (mis)identified in Slavonic literature with the Rechabites.

[Rajah Manchou]

On 7/1/2018 at 10:28 PM, Nevo said:

If you're interested in reputable scholarly studies, two important recent contributions are:

• Ronit Nikolsky, "The History of the Rechabites and the Jeremiah Literature," Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 13, no. 2 (2002): 185–207.
  • Abstract: The article examines the cultural milieu of the History of the Rechabites. Following a comparison with early Midrash (Mekhilta de-Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai) and pointing out similarities with Hegesippus and later Christian writings about the Rechabites, it is the conclusion of this article that The History as we have it is a Christian composition, from the fourth century CE. It originated in a monastic milieu, the work of an author who was familiar with Jeremiah literature. The apocryphon attributes to the Rechabites features which characterize the Ten Lost Tribes. It is the first instance where such a connection is made, one that will be more and more widely spread in later centuries.
     
• Chris H. Knights, "The Rechabites Revisited: The History of the Rechabites Twenty-Five Years On," Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 23, no. 4 (2014): 307–320.
  • Abstract: In this article the author revisits the ‘History of the Rechabites’, chs. 8–10 of the Story of Zosimus, a text he first studied in the 1980s, in the light of the work done on the text more recently by Nikolsky and Davila. He looks more closely at the reasons why the text may or may not be Jewish and concludes that, despite his earlier published views, it is more likely to be a Christian composition than a Jewish one.
  • Knights's original dissertation is online here: Volume 1 & Volume 2

I've gone through these again. Both Nikolsky and Knights accept that the Rechabites were a historical Biblical group dating to the pre-exilic period. So we can allow Jeremiah 35 as evidence for the existence of a group called Rechabites dating to the 6th century BC:

"The Rechabites in our story (Narrative of Zosimus) can be identified with those of the biblical story: their name and their father’s name are the same, neither group drinks wine, and both stories employ the first person plural—a strong literary device." - Ronit Nikolsky, The History of the Rechabites and the Jeremiah Literature, Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha

"The Rechabites are an often-cited, but seldom studied, Old Testament group. Most general Old Testament works - Intraductions, Histories or Theologies - contain at least one reference to them and, of course, the commentaries on those biblical books in which they appear, or are thought to appear - 2 Kings, Jeremiah, Nehemiah and 1 Chronicles - contain some discussion about them." - The Rechabites Revisited: The History of the Rechabites Twenty-Five Years On, Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 

A few other points that Knights discusses in his dissertation:

• Rechabites as desert-dwelling sectaries, drawing inspiration, and perhaps even descended, from the Nazirites.
• Rechabites as forerunners of the Essene/Qumran communities..
• Rechabites in some sense linked with the title of Elijah and Elisha.
• Rechabites with Yahwistic names and maintained their ancient worship of Yahweh.
• Rechabites as part of the nomadic clan among the Kenites, Kenazzites and Calebites.
• Rechabites observation of distinct practices before the time of Jonadab.
• Rechabites as an entry into analysis of pre-exilic religious life.
• Rechabites and parallels between Elijah and Jonadab.
• Rechabites as being a guild of metalworkers involved in the manufacture of chariots.
• Rechabites as forerunners of the sects which arose in Israel in the Second Temple period.
• Rechabites as full-blooded Israelites.
• Rechabites geographical terms denoting the cultivated Promised Land.
• Rechabites "dwelling in tents" as a clue towards their occupation.
• Rechabites rejection of religion which "thought of a deity who dwelled in a magnificently built house"
• Rechabites promise of salvation through living long life as sojourners in the Promised Land as the reward for obedience.
• Rechabites failure to keep commands would entail loss of long life in the land.
• Rechabites ambivalence towards the the sacrificial cultus of Samaria and Jerusalem, yet were nevertheless fervent Yahwists.
• Rechabites originate in Northern Kingdom and sojourners in Judah and Jerusalem.
• Rechabites as contrast to the infidelity of the nation and Zedekiah's community and persistence of sectarian beliefs after the fall of Jerusalem.

Knights goes into great detail to respond to the above points. His conclusion being:

"The present attempt to provide a systematic and full-scale study of all the available data has led to an endorsement of the view held by Cummings, and certain other scholars before him, perhaps even including St Jerome, that the Rechabites were a group of prophets closely related to Elijah, Elisha and the Sons of the Prophets. What Cummings proposed briefly has been here worked out fully, and what he proposed simply has here been more finely nuanced. It is thus now possible to paint as full a picture as one is able of the Rechabites in the Bible, before moving...to an examination of the various ways in which the biblical traditions about the Rechabites were used in later Jewish writings."

"Cummings' argument is highly suggestive: he is of the opinion that we here have a trace of a split in the prophetic circles in the Northern Kingdom following the death of Elijah, a split between Elisha and the Sons of the Prophets on one hand and the Rechabites on the other, occasioned by the issue of house-building. 

"Yahweh's Promise to the Rechabites, given through Jeremiah his prophet, was that they would never cease 'standing before' him. It was a promise that they would remain as Yahweh's prophets (with an implicit exhortation to return to that function properly), that they would maintain their distinctive practices and remain living in the Promised Land, despite the imminent disaster."

"And they did survive the Fall of Judah in 597-587 BCE, and did remain living in the Land, practising their distinctive lifestyle. The exilic redactors of the material that became the Book of Jeremiah knew this."

"The subsequent history of the Rechabites must be a matter for speculation....It is more likely that they died out in the late exilic or early post-exilic periods, but precisely when and why they died out must remain a mystery - perhaps they had insufficient offspring to continue the sect, or were killed off by plague, or perhaps even by attack. At any rate, the references in the Jewish literature are sufficiently unlike the biblical references to make it certain that they do not refer to the historical Rechabites, so we are unjustified in claiming that the Rechabites survived beyond the end of the sixth century BCE."

"Even if the Rechabites were extinct by the end of the sixth century, they nevertheless represent no mean achievement in the history of Israel. As a group, they survived for around 300 years, maintaining their distinctive practices and outlook. Even if their influence on Israelite and Judaean society was marginal, they nevertheless stood as a symbol and reminder of true Yahwistic faith, as a symbol and reminder of the prophetic critique of the social system of Israel, a critique expressed as much by their lifestyle as by their words. If their quiet message was not heard by society at large, that was not their fault. They had fulfilled their vocation, they had received their promised salvation of 'long life in the land'. They survived the Fall of Jerusalem, and not only escaped the destruction and the chaos, but did so still maintaining their lifestyle and practices, within the land of Israel."

----

Now that we have looked at the evidence for the historicity of the Rechabites, my next question comes from Knights dissertation:

"Given that Jeremiah 35:19 promises that the Rechabites will last forever, and that scripture cannot fail, the Rechabites must be still alive today somewhere. They are nowhere to be found in the 'Known World', so their existence must currently-be in some remote place, referred to under the biblical name Sinim, from whence they will eventually return to Jerusalem."

The Rechabites received a promise that they would be sojourners forever in the promised land, so long as they kept the commandments given to them. What evidence might there be that the Rechabite community persisted outside the land of Israel? Can anyone cite any single credible fact, object, site, or inscription that supports the History of the Rechabites?

Edited July 3, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[Rajah Manchou]

On 7/3/2018 at 5:07 PM, Rajah Manchou said:

"Given that Jeremiah 35:19 promises that the Rechabites will last forever, and that scripture cannot fail, the Rechabites must be still alive today somewhere. They are nowhere to be found in the 'Known World', so their existence must currently-be in some remote place, referred to under the biblical name Sinim, from whence they will eventually return to Jerusalem." - Chris Knights

We've established with near certainty that there was a historical group of Israelites known as the house of Rechabites, between 900 BCE and 600 BCE. The Lord made a covenant, in the temple, with the Rechabites that they would stand before Him forever. Knights goes further to say that so long as the Rechabites kept the Lord's commandments they would live long as sojourners in the land of promise. But this is the last we hear of the Rechabites in the scriptures. Beyond this point, we only have traditions and apocryphal text to work with. We know the Rechabites survived the Babylonian invasion, but they are not mentioned again. Where did they go? Where is this land of promise?

Given lack of interest in this topic, I'll cut this short.  

There is evidence for 6th century BC Israelite migrations in the land known as Sinae, often identified as Sin or Sim, or Sinim. The inhabitants of Sinae, also known as Rahma, were known as the Rahmans. The Rahman civilization appears in the archeological record in 535 BC, with a second colony dating to the 4th and 5th centuries BC. ANE artifacts and technologies have been identified dating back to the early centuries BCE.

Greek and Roman accounts of these Rahmans so closely resembled those of the Rechabites in the OT, that the Rechabites were renamed Rahmans in Judeo-Christian texts. The Rechabites were identified as Rahmans in Judeo-Christian tradition for centuries, they were the inhabitants of the island of Rahma.

There's a lot of interesting material here, and I've done my best to get a discussion going around it. But I'm exhausted. Let me wrap this up with this footnote from "What’s in a Name? Book of Mormon Language, Names, and [Metonymic] Naming." Gordon C. Thomasson, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 3/1 (1994): 1–27.

 

In summary, the Rechabites were a historical group of Israelites that, according to Jewish tradition, were carried to an island in the sea in the 6th century BC. They were later identified as RMN, or Rahmans. Gordon Thomasson proposes that RMN shares the same root as MRMN.

Rechabites = Rahman
Is RMN = MRMN?
 

Edited July 4, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[Nevo]

Knights says in his dissertation that "we are unjustified in claiming that the Rechabites survived beyond the end of the sixth century BCE" and sees the Narrative of Zosimus as a Christian monastic text with no connection to the historical Rechabites. That sounds about right to me. Medieval speculations that the Rechabites would return from "the land of Sinim," based on MT Isaiah 49:12, have no evidentiary value as far as I'm concerned. 1QIsa, by the way, renders it svnyym, which Joseph Blenkinsopp notes is "a gentilic [that] points to Syene = Aswan," at the southern boundary of Egypt (Isaiah 40-55: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, 304).

14 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

The Rahman civilization appears in the archeological record in 535 BC, with a second colony dating to the 4th and 5th centuries BC. ANE artifacts and technologies have been identified dating back to the early centuries BCE.

Where is this documented? Google has never heard of "Rahman civilization." Neither has the Oxford Companion to Archaeology.

Edited July 5, 2018 by Nevo

[Rajah Manchou]

17 minutes ago, Nevo said:

Knights says in his dissertation that "we are unjustified in claiming that the Rechabites survived beyond the end of the sixth century BCE" and sees the Narrative of Zosimus as a Christian monastic text with no connection to the historical Rechabites. That sounds about right to me.

I noted that above. But Knights also says ""Given that Jeremiah 35:19 promises that the Rechabites will last forever, and that scripture cannot fail, the Rechabites must be still alive today somewhere. They are nowhere to be found in the 'Known World', so their existence must currently-be in some remote place, referred to under the biblical name Sinim, from whence they will eventually return to Jerusalem." He then writes another volume on the Rechabite tradition that persisted for centuries in Judeo-Christian thought.

The historical Rechabites certainly disappeared from Old World scriptures in 600 BC, and we would be unjustified in claiming they survived in Judah beyond the 6th century BCE. But the tradition is that they were carried to their promised land, an island beyond the "Known World", in the 6th century BCE. If there is any truth to the traditions, we should not expect to find Rechabites in the OT after 600 BCE. And we don't. If they migrated to a new world, they would be beyond the view of the Jews in Israel. Tehy would know of the Jews in Jerusalem and they would share their history, but the Jews in Jerusalem would know nothing of them. This is exactly what we find described in the Narrative of Zosimus.

What I am asking: is there any historical evidence of migrations of Israelite groups to lands that beyond the historical record in the 6th century BCE? 

39 minutes ago, Nevo said:

Medieval speculations that the Rechabites would return from "the land of Sinim," based on MT Isaiah 49:12, have no evidentiary value. 1QIsa, by the way, renders it svnyym, which Joseph Blenkinsopp notes is "a gentilic [that] points to Syene = Aswan," at the southern boundary of Egypt (Isaiah 40-55: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, 304).

Very true, but unfortunately medieval accounts are all we have to go from when it comes to medieval history. Identification of Sinim with Aswan is one interpretation, but the more common identification is with China. We cannot identify the location of the land of Sinim. What we do know is that the rabbis were convinced that there the Rechabites were to be found in the land of Sinim, and that they could be found by following the path of a river, through the dark clouds until one arrives at their promised land full of trees and fruit.

It seems certain that this fantastic account is inspired by much earlier Greek accounts of Alexander's travels to the far east, and his encounter with the gymnosophists. It appears that the rabbis had read read these accounts of teetotalling naked philosophers, living out in the open, and became convinced that they had found their Rechabites, in Sinim, or India/China. The similarities between the Alexander Romance and the Narrative of Zosimus are clear.

But what are the the origins of these accounts of the naked Rechabite-like Jewish Brahmins of Pseudo-Palladius? This is where we need to dig deeper into the sources. I'm interested in your opinion on this without the bias that might come through my interpretation. If you have an hour, here's a good start:

Jewish Brahmins and the Tale of Zosimus: A Theme Common to Three Religions
J. Duncan M. Derrett, Libraire Museum Tusculanum, 1983 - 16 pages
 

 

1 hour ago, Nevo said:

Where is this documented? Google has never heard of "Rahman civilization." Neither has the Oxford Companion to Archaeology.

By Rahman civilization I mean the first inhabitants of the Malay Peninsula, which the ancients knew by several different names. The first inhabitants, the Rahmans, called it Ramanna.


(source)

The Rahmans/Ramans date the beginning of their civilization to the 6th century BCE, and dating of newly discovered iron furnaces confirm that the first signs of civilization on the peninsula date to 535 BCE.

[Rajah Manchou]

Just now, Rajah Manchou said:

The Rahmans/Ramans date the beginning of their civilization to the 6th century BCE, and dating of newly discovered iron furnaces confirm that the first signs of civilization on the peninsula date to 535 BCE.

I just Googled for the latest update from the archeologists looking at this site. The date has been moved back, and as of two days ago is certified at 582 BCE.

Sungai Batu Archaeological certified as dating back to 582 BC

So an iron-age civilization appears, in the land that medieval rabbis speculate was their promised land, a decade after the Rechabites disappear from the historical record. 

[Rajah Manchou]

On 7/5/2018 at 11:54 AM, Rajah Manchou said:

By Rahman civilization I mean the first inhabitants of the Malay Peninsula, which the ancients knew by several different names. The first inhabitants, the Rahmans, called it Ramanna.



The Rahmans/Ramans date the beginning of their civilization to the 6th century BCE, and dating of newly discovered iron furnaces confirm that the first signs of civilization on the peninsula date to 582 BCE.

Picking up the conversation. Margaret Barker:

"Remnants of the older faith survived in many places, preserved by the descendants of those who fled from Josiah’s purge. There were the mysterious sons of Rechab whose story was told in the History of the Rechabites. Beneath the layers of fantasy and folk tale in this widely known ancient text, we glimpse a group who described themselves as angels, and who had fled from Jerusalem after the time of Josiah. Angels had released them from prison, and they had escaped to the desert, and crossed the great sea to a Paradise land of fruit trees, honey and abundant water. Angels continued to inform them about events in their former world, and so they knew about the life of Jesus. Zosimus, who visited the Rechabites, brought back stone tablets with an account of them. Now Rechab is an interesting name; it can also mean a chariot, and so the angel sons of Rechab might have been the devotees of the chariot throne in the temple who fled from Jerusalem after Josiah’s purge, and settled somewhere across a great sea." - Margaret Barker, What Did King Josiah Reform?

After looking at the data supporting the claim that there were Israelite migrations across the great sea in the 6th century BCE, I propose the Malay Archipelago for the following reasons:

• Judeo-Christian tradition has long identified the Malay Archipelago as the Island of the Blessed, inhabited by Rahmans, Rechabites, and Israelites.
• Unidentified iron-age civilization first appears in 582 BCE.
• Archeologists propose the civilization migrated from west to east with high-heat technology (iron and pottery).
• Archeologists have proposed an ANE culture for this group.
• Earliest monuments/buildings/technologies at this site resemble those we might find in the ANE.
• Massive civilization dating to 582 BCE, but no evidence of permanent homes, as if the people dwelled in tents.
• Earliest historical accounts tell of civilized people who match the traditional descriptions of Rechabites.
• DNA testing indicating Mediterranean admixture.
• No indication of Hindu or Buddhist influence until the 4th and 5th centuries CE.
• Malay folklore identifies the founder (named Marong/Maroni) of this civilization as coming from a port on the Arabian Sea.
• Indigenous folklore indicating the first colonies arrived from the Middle East by boat.

The assumption seems to be that surely scholars would have already made this connection. But that isn't likely. This civilization (the oldest in Southeast Asia) was not discovered until 2009. Scholarship is barely aware of it. As the 582 BCE dating was confirmed just 3 days ago, we can't expect this discussion has happened anywhere but here.

Edited July 6, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[Rajah Manchou]

@smac97 The reason for this thread was to discuss the evidence for Israelite migrations to a location beyond the "known world" in the 6th century BCE. The evidence for such a migration appears the same decade the Lehites would have passed.

Edited July 7, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[Rajah Manchou]

No where else to put this, but thought it was interesting in regards to this thread. I've discussed above the evidence for a historical group of Israelites departing Jerusalem in the 6th century BC, with brass plates. Another claim made by the group in Cochin India is that they have had other Biblical texts. In 1806, Claudius Buchanan brought some of these texts back in England they were placed in a library and forgotten. Only recently has one of these texts been rediscovered and translated into English:

Words of Gad the Seer
December 30, 2016
by Meir Bar-Ilan Ph.D. (Author)

Gad is a prophet most associated with King David in the Holy Bible. This book is the outcome of a prolonged study of a manuscript that was found serendipitously 34 years ago. Actually, this was a re-discovery of a text that for some reason had escaped the eyes of many. It is a story of the survival of Jews remote in place and time, and of their books, visions, angels and divine voices, combined with their belief in God and his covenant with King David and Israel. There is no other book that resembles this one.

A book by the name Words of Gad the Seer is mentioned at the end of I Chronicles, presumably one of the sources of the history of King David. Ever since the book was considered lost and it is mentioned nowhere. In the 18th century Jews from Cochin said that their ancestors have had several apocryphal books, including Words of Gad the Seer, and this statement was published first by Johann Gottfried Eichhorn (1789) and translated by Naphtali H. Wesseley who publicized these fantastic claims (1790). Since none saw the book, it was probably considered to be an oriental legend. So when Solomon Schechter, in 1894 (just before he became occupied with the Genizah), checked manuscripts at the Cambridge library, bought at Cochin around 1806, not only he described the specific manuscript improperly but he also failed to make the right connection to earlier knowledge of that book and thus he under evaluated the text.

In 1927 Israel Abrahams published a paper on this manuscript, but his analysis, once again, had several improper descriptions, and hence the text of Words of Gad the Seer went into oblivion. This book presents the text of Words of Gad the Seer for the first time. First comes an introduction where the history of the manuscript is discussed. Later the characters of the text described and analyzed one feature after the other. The text is found to be having many similarities with the Book of Revelation and several pseudo-apocryphal and apocalyptic books such as 2 Baruch, 4 Ezra and others. Then comes a diplomatic edition of the manuscript where each and every letter (by special fonts) is presented similarly to the manuscript. Later the book is divided to 14 chapters, each is a literary unit by itself, and each has its own introduction and a commentary. Each and every verse is explained in a “multi-focal” commentary in a manner similar to publishing a Biblical book: literary criticism, lexicography, philology and alike.

A special treatment is given to the scribal practices that are reflected in the text: the only non-canonical book with a Massorah, Qeri and Ketib, total number of verses and more. The book is 5227 words in length written in a pseudo-Biblical Hebrew intended to be a book written by the Seer of King David in the 10th century B.C.E. The text is an anthology and varies in style and character: 3 chapters are apocalyptic in nature, 2 chapters are a “mere” copy of Ps 145 and 144 (with different superscriptions and all sorts of different readings, some of them highly important); one chapter is a harmonization of 1 Sam 24 with 1 Chr 21 (that resembles ancient harmonizations of texts as found in the Samaritan Pentateuch and Qumran alike). One chapter is a kind of addendum to 2 Sam 13 (a "feminine story"), one chapter is a sermon, one chapter is a folk story, and there are more blessings, liturgies and other issues. Literary genre, scribalism and scribes' technique are described and analyzed. The book comes with an index and a vast bibliography. The appearance of the text will add a great deal to our understanding of Jewish History and religion. Date: The text assumed to be written either in the Land of Israel at the end of the first century or in the Middle Ages Europe.

 

 

[Rajah Manchou]

This needs to be pulled out, and given its own comment:

"This was a re-discovery of a text that for some reason had escaped the eyes of many. It is a story of the survival of Jews remote in place and time, and of their books, visions, angels and divine voices, combined with their belief in God and his covenant with King David and Israel. There is no other book that resembles this one."

Of course I disagree, there is another book.