Author of The Judas Brief, The Case for a Proto-Gospel, The Moses Mystery, 101 Myths of the Bible and other books and articles. Address: New York, United States
Draft of a law school thesis describing the different court systems in Palestine under the Britis... more Draft of a law school thesis describing the different court systems in Palestine under the British Mandate and how they functioned with respect to Jews, Arabs, British, and foreigners. The paper was written in preparation for an LLD degree by Emanuel Greenberg. His son, Gary Greenberg, added a brief editorial introduction and slightly modified the title to reflect the time at which it was written.
Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities (JSSEA) # 29), 2009
With regard to Twelfth Dynasty chronology, the standard chronology (i.e., the High Chronology) de... more With regard to Twelfth Dynasty chronology, the standard chronology (i.e., the High Chronology) developed by Edgerton and Parker has come under substantial attack by advocates of a shorter dynasty (i.e. Low Chronology) with a somewhat later starting date. In this paper I will argue that Manetho’s Twelfth Dynasty chronology derived from accurate Egyptian chronological records and that his original uncorrupted account of this dynasty coincided precisely with the standard (High) chronology
Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities (JSSEA) # 25) , 2002
Each of the four major Egyptian King-lists–Turin Canon, Table of Sakkara, Table of Abydos, Maneth... more Each of the four major Egyptian King-lists–Turin Canon, Table of Sakkara, Table of Abydos, Manetho–has a radically different roster for the number of kings in Egypt’s Memphite Sixth Dynasty. Only Manetho follows the Sixth Dynasty with a Memphite Seventh and Eighth Dynasty. Egyptologists have attempted to correlate Manetho’s Seventh and Eighth Dynasties with the different number of kings for the Sixth Dynasty. In this article, published in JSSEA, I argue that Manetho never had a Seventh and Eighth Dynasty and that his redactors badly garbled his text by misunderstanding summation lines in Manetho’s text. I identify the specific errors made, show how they came about, and restore Manetho’s original Sixth Dynasty chronology. The reconstructed version shows that Manetho’s original chronological record for the Sixth Dynasty was consistent with the Table of Abydos, which had the longest list, and that the reasons for the different number of kings in the Sixth Dynasty resulted from political differences between different cult centers as to which kings were or were not legitimate.
Presentation at the 2016 Annual Meeting of MAR-SBL, 2016
Scholars consider John 11:45-54, which describes a meeting of the Sanhedrin to discuss putting Je... more Scholars consider John 11:45-54, which describes a meeting of the Sanhedrin to discuss putting Jesus to death and Jesus’ reaction to that decision, to be a particularly challenging passage due to its significant departures from the synoptic narratives. Attempts to explain and/or harmonize it with the synoptic gospels, however, tend to treat the episode in isolation from the rest of John. In this paper, it will be proposed that John 11:45-54 is the key to understanding John’s many troubling narrative and chronological departures form the synoptic gospels, particularly the story of Jesus’ last visit to Jerusalem before he is arrested. It will be my argument that John 11:45-54 introduced a significant plot change to the synoptic Passion accounts and that John had to make many changes to the synoptic narrative in order to make his alternative plot work. More specifically, in the synoptic gospels, the priests want to kill Jesus because they see his actions in the Temple as a threat to their authority. Jesus is an earthly political rival. In John, Jesus’ popularity in the final days stems from the raising of Lazarus, a heavenly power, and the priests want to kill Jesus because they fear that his popularity from raising Lazarus will cause Rome to destroy the Temple and the nation. John places the plot to kill Jesus in the context of his gospel message about eternal life. To present this alternative plot, John needed to eliminate the conflicting and distracting issue of earthly political rivalry. In the course of the paper I will look at how John 11:45-54 interacts with several troubling issues in John’s gospel, including John’s s account of Jesus’ last visit to Jerusalem, the money-changers scene, and what appears to be disguised elements of a Jewish trial,
Presentation at the 1997 International Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, 1997
The story of Osarseph, preserved by Josephus and attributed by him to an Egyptian priest named Ma... more The story of Osarseph, preserved by Josephus and attributed by him to an Egyptian priest named Manetho, tells of the struggles between a rebellious Egyptian priest named Osarseph and a Pharaoh Amenhotep and his son “Ramesses also called Sethos”. Osarseph, according to the story, seized control of Egypt for thirteen years, instituted a reign of terror, and destroyed Egypt’s religious institutions. The pharaoh fled from Egypt and hid his son away for safety. Later, the son returned and expelled Osarseph from Egypt. This Osarseph, says Manetho, was Moses, the biblical hero..
Most Egyptologists and biblical scholars who study this report easily recognize that it tells of events during the reign of Pharaoh Akhenaten, but they uniformly reject the identification of Moses with Osarseph. By concentrating solely on the passage identifying these two figures as one and the same, however, I submit that scholars have overlooked many additional passages that have literary parallels in the biblical Exodus account, but which switch the role of villain and hero.
“These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day tha... more “These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens . . .” Gen. 2:4
The above quote from Gen. 2:4 introduces us to the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Many biblical scholars believe that the next few verses contain a slightly different version of Creation than that contained earlier in Gen. 1. What is especially unusual is the reference to the “generations of the heavens and the earth.” In the several other instances when Genesis says, “These are the generations of . . .”, it refers to information about a parent and their children. This would imply that Genesis 2 is about the Children of the Heavens and Earth, a polytheistic throwback to an earlier cosmogony. But whose cosmogony?
The bible makes reference to two separate women named Deborah. One was the nurse to Abraham’s son... more The bible makes reference to two separate women named Deborah. One was the nurse to Abraham’s son Isaac and the other was, in the much later period of the Judges, a military leader referred to as “a mother in Israel”. Both seem to have mythic images and both are identified with a particular Tree of Weeping.
The Egyptian goddess Neith has a reputation as both a military figure and as a mother goddess and nurse, characteristics that caused the Greeks to identify her with the goddess Athena. In Hebrew, Deborah means “Bee” and that symbol is closely identified with Neith. A Temple to Neith was called “House of the Bee”, and the Bee was the symbol of kingship in Lower Egypt.
In this paper I will argue that both Deborahs were mythological figures based on Hebrew recollections of the goddess Neith, the goddess who ruled in the area of Egypt where Israel dwelled in earlier times. In support of this argument I will draw upon some materials in Plutarch’s account of the Osiris myth, which suggests that Neith may have been associated with a Tree of Weeping. I will also make other mythological comparisons between Neith and the two Deborahs.
If we had no reliable written sources mentioning the name of Jesus’ mother, a good guess would be... more If we had no reliable written sources mentioning the name of Jesus’ mother, a good guess would be Mary. Statistically, it was one of the most popular, if not the most popular, name for Jewish women in the first century. In the Christian scriptures, more women have the name Mary than any other name. The question I wish to raise here is whether we have any reliable written evidence that Mary was the name of Jesus’ mother.
At the time of Jesus, the Roman calendar day began at about sunrise, and in the Jewish calendar t... more At the time of Jesus, the Roman calendar day began at about sunrise, and in the Jewish calendar the day began at about sunset. That means that every Jewish calendar day overlapped two different Roman calendar days and every Roman calendar day overlapped two different Jewish calendar days. In this essay I would like to draw attention to some chronological problems in the gospel accounts caused by the authors using the Roman calendaring system to date events in Jerusalem that unfolded according to a Jewish calendaring system.
If it can be demonstrated that John does indeed know a very large number of story details from th... more If it can be demonstrated that John does indeed know a very large number of story details from the synoptic gospels, often agreeing with one synoptic gospel against another, might it not also be the case that John, too, had a theological agenda, that he also wanted to correct errors that he perceived in one or the other synoptic gospels, and that his corrections made it difficult to see his reliance on a synoptic source?
Sadly, the gospel accounts are at complete odds with the available historical data about the rela... more Sadly, the gospel accounts are at complete odds with the available historical data about the relationship between Pilate and the Jews. The evidence suggests that the gospel accounts are wrong, that if there is any historical core to this story then Pilate never intended to release Jesus and Jews had nothing to do with Pilate’s decision to have Jesus crucified.
In the period when the Gospels were being written, rival traditions existed about Judas, a negati... more In the period when the Gospels were being written, rival traditions existed about Judas, a negative image in the communities where the canonical Gospels originated, and a positive image within some other communities such as Paul’s circle, the Q community and the proponents of the Gospel of Peter. Given the priority of Paul and Q, and the ambiguity as to motive in Mark, this evidence strongly suggests to me that Judas did not originally have a negative reputation, and the hostility towards him was a subsequent development.
It will be my suggestion that John, writing about a half-century after Paul, preserved a pre-Paul... more It will be my suggestion that John, writing about a half-century after Paul, preserved a pre-Pauline form of the Eucharist teaching and that Paul’s revelation is a radical reinterpretation and explanation of what Jesus must have meant when he delivered the version preserved by John.
In this lecture by Gary Greenberg presented at a meeting of the ARCE-NY, he describes numerous li... more In this lecture by Gary Greenberg presented at a meeting of the ARCE-NY, he describes numerous literary parallels between episodes in Genesis concerning the brothers Jacob and Esau and literary accounts in ancient Egypt about the brother gods Horus and Seth.
Draft of a law school thesis describing the different court systems in Palestine under the Britis... more Draft of a law school thesis describing the different court systems in Palestine under the British Mandate and how they functioned with respect to Jews, Arabs, British, and foreigners. The paper was written in preparation for an LLD degree by Emanuel Greenberg. His son, Gary Greenberg, added a brief editorial introduction and slightly modified the title to reflect the time at which it was written.
Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities (JSSEA) # 29), 2009
With regard to Twelfth Dynasty chronology, the standard chronology (i.e., the High Chronology) de... more With regard to Twelfth Dynasty chronology, the standard chronology (i.e., the High Chronology) developed by Edgerton and Parker has come under substantial attack by advocates of a shorter dynasty (i.e. Low Chronology) with a somewhat later starting date. In this paper I will argue that Manetho’s Twelfth Dynasty chronology derived from accurate Egyptian chronological records and that his original uncorrupted account of this dynasty coincided precisely with the standard (High) chronology
Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities (JSSEA) # 25) , 2002
Each of the four major Egyptian King-lists–Turin Canon, Table of Sakkara, Table of Abydos, Maneth... more Each of the four major Egyptian King-lists–Turin Canon, Table of Sakkara, Table of Abydos, Manetho–has a radically different roster for the number of kings in Egypt’s Memphite Sixth Dynasty. Only Manetho follows the Sixth Dynasty with a Memphite Seventh and Eighth Dynasty. Egyptologists have attempted to correlate Manetho’s Seventh and Eighth Dynasties with the different number of kings for the Sixth Dynasty. In this article, published in JSSEA, I argue that Manetho never had a Seventh and Eighth Dynasty and that his redactors badly garbled his text by misunderstanding summation lines in Manetho’s text. I identify the specific errors made, show how they came about, and restore Manetho’s original Sixth Dynasty chronology. The reconstructed version shows that Manetho’s original chronological record for the Sixth Dynasty was consistent with the Table of Abydos, which had the longest list, and that the reasons for the different number of kings in the Sixth Dynasty resulted from political differences between different cult centers as to which kings were or were not legitimate.
Presentation at the 2016 Annual Meeting of MAR-SBL, 2016
Scholars consider John 11:45-54, which describes a meeting of the Sanhedrin to discuss putting Je... more Scholars consider John 11:45-54, which describes a meeting of the Sanhedrin to discuss putting Jesus to death and Jesus’ reaction to that decision, to be a particularly challenging passage due to its significant departures from the synoptic narratives. Attempts to explain and/or harmonize it with the synoptic gospels, however, tend to treat the episode in isolation from the rest of John. In this paper, it will be proposed that John 11:45-54 is the key to understanding John’s many troubling narrative and chronological departures form the synoptic gospels, particularly the story of Jesus’ last visit to Jerusalem before he is arrested. It will be my argument that John 11:45-54 introduced a significant plot change to the synoptic Passion accounts and that John had to make many changes to the synoptic narrative in order to make his alternative plot work. More specifically, in the synoptic gospels, the priests want to kill Jesus because they see his actions in the Temple as a threat to their authority. Jesus is an earthly political rival. In John, Jesus’ popularity in the final days stems from the raising of Lazarus, a heavenly power, and the priests want to kill Jesus because they fear that his popularity from raising Lazarus will cause Rome to destroy the Temple and the nation. John places the plot to kill Jesus in the context of his gospel message about eternal life. To present this alternative plot, John needed to eliminate the conflicting and distracting issue of earthly political rivalry. In the course of the paper I will look at how John 11:45-54 interacts with several troubling issues in John’s gospel, including John’s s account of Jesus’ last visit to Jerusalem, the money-changers scene, and what appears to be disguised elements of a Jewish trial,
Presentation at the 1997 International Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, 1997
The story of Osarseph, preserved by Josephus and attributed by him to an Egyptian priest named Ma... more The story of Osarseph, preserved by Josephus and attributed by him to an Egyptian priest named Manetho, tells of the struggles between a rebellious Egyptian priest named Osarseph and a Pharaoh Amenhotep and his son “Ramesses also called Sethos”. Osarseph, according to the story, seized control of Egypt for thirteen years, instituted a reign of terror, and destroyed Egypt’s religious institutions. The pharaoh fled from Egypt and hid his son away for safety. Later, the son returned and expelled Osarseph from Egypt. This Osarseph, says Manetho, was Moses, the biblical hero..
Most Egyptologists and biblical scholars who study this report easily recognize that it tells of events during the reign of Pharaoh Akhenaten, but they uniformly reject the identification of Moses with Osarseph. By concentrating solely on the passage identifying these two figures as one and the same, however, I submit that scholars have overlooked many additional passages that have literary parallels in the biblical Exodus account, but which switch the role of villain and hero.
“These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day tha... more “These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens . . .” Gen. 2:4
The above quote from Gen. 2:4 introduces us to the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Many biblical scholars believe that the next few verses contain a slightly different version of Creation than that contained earlier in Gen. 1. What is especially unusual is the reference to the “generations of the heavens and the earth.” In the several other instances when Genesis says, “These are the generations of . . .”, it refers to information about a parent and their children. This would imply that Genesis 2 is about the Children of the Heavens and Earth, a polytheistic throwback to an earlier cosmogony. But whose cosmogony?
The bible makes reference to two separate women named Deborah. One was the nurse to Abraham’s son... more The bible makes reference to two separate women named Deborah. One was the nurse to Abraham’s son Isaac and the other was, in the much later period of the Judges, a military leader referred to as “a mother in Israel”. Both seem to have mythic images and both are identified with a particular Tree of Weeping.
The Egyptian goddess Neith has a reputation as both a military figure and as a mother goddess and nurse, characteristics that caused the Greeks to identify her with the goddess Athena. In Hebrew, Deborah means “Bee” and that symbol is closely identified with Neith. A Temple to Neith was called “House of the Bee”, and the Bee was the symbol of kingship in Lower Egypt.
In this paper I will argue that both Deborahs were mythological figures based on Hebrew recollections of the goddess Neith, the goddess who ruled in the area of Egypt where Israel dwelled in earlier times. In support of this argument I will draw upon some materials in Plutarch’s account of the Osiris myth, which suggests that Neith may have been associated with a Tree of Weeping. I will also make other mythological comparisons between Neith and the two Deborahs.
If we had no reliable written sources mentioning the name of Jesus’ mother, a good guess would be... more If we had no reliable written sources mentioning the name of Jesus’ mother, a good guess would be Mary. Statistically, it was one of the most popular, if not the most popular, name for Jewish women in the first century. In the Christian scriptures, more women have the name Mary than any other name. The question I wish to raise here is whether we have any reliable written evidence that Mary was the name of Jesus’ mother.
At the time of Jesus, the Roman calendar day began at about sunrise, and in the Jewish calendar t... more At the time of Jesus, the Roman calendar day began at about sunrise, and in the Jewish calendar the day began at about sunset. That means that every Jewish calendar day overlapped two different Roman calendar days and every Roman calendar day overlapped two different Jewish calendar days. In this essay I would like to draw attention to some chronological problems in the gospel accounts caused by the authors using the Roman calendaring system to date events in Jerusalem that unfolded according to a Jewish calendaring system.
If it can be demonstrated that John does indeed know a very large number of story details from th... more If it can be demonstrated that John does indeed know a very large number of story details from the synoptic gospels, often agreeing with one synoptic gospel against another, might it not also be the case that John, too, had a theological agenda, that he also wanted to correct errors that he perceived in one or the other synoptic gospels, and that his corrections made it difficult to see his reliance on a synoptic source?
Sadly, the gospel accounts are at complete odds with the available historical data about the rela... more Sadly, the gospel accounts are at complete odds with the available historical data about the relationship between Pilate and the Jews. The evidence suggests that the gospel accounts are wrong, that if there is any historical core to this story then Pilate never intended to release Jesus and Jews had nothing to do with Pilate’s decision to have Jesus crucified.
In the period when the Gospels were being written, rival traditions existed about Judas, a negati... more In the period when the Gospels were being written, rival traditions existed about Judas, a negative image in the communities where the canonical Gospels originated, and a positive image within some other communities such as Paul’s circle, the Q community and the proponents of the Gospel of Peter. Given the priority of Paul and Q, and the ambiguity as to motive in Mark, this evidence strongly suggests to me that Judas did not originally have a negative reputation, and the hostility towards him was a subsequent development.
It will be my suggestion that John, writing about a half-century after Paul, preserved a pre-Paul... more It will be my suggestion that John, writing about a half-century after Paul, preserved a pre-Pauline form of the Eucharist teaching and that Paul’s revelation is a radical reinterpretation and explanation of what Jesus must have meant when he delivered the version preserved by John.
In this lecture by Gary Greenberg presented at a meeting of the ARCE-NY, he describes numerous li... more In this lecture by Gary Greenberg presented at a meeting of the ARCE-NY, he describes numerous literary parallels between episodes in Genesis concerning the brothers Jacob and Esau and literary accounts in ancient Egypt about the brother gods Horus and Seth.
Uploads
Papers by Gary Greenberg
the standard (High) chronology
It will be my argument that John 11:45-54 introduced a significant plot change to the synoptic Passion accounts and that John had to make many changes to the synoptic narrative in order to make his alternative plot work. More specifically, in the synoptic gospels, the priests want to kill Jesus because they see his actions in the Temple as a threat to their authority. Jesus is an earthly political rival. In John, Jesus’ popularity in the final days stems from the raising of Lazarus, a heavenly power, and the priests want to kill Jesus because they fear that his popularity from raising Lazarus will cause Rome to destroy the Temple and the nation. John places the plot to kill Jesus in the context of his gospel message about eternal life. To present this alternative plot, John needed to eliminate the conflicting and distracting issue of earthly political rivalry.
In the course of the paper I will look at how John 11:45-54 interacts with several troubling issues in John’s gospel, including John’s s account of Jesus’ last visit to Jerusalem, the money-changers scene, and what appears to be disguised elements of a Jewish trial,
Most Egyptologists and biblical scholars who study this report easily recognize that it tells of events during the reign of Pharaoh Akhenaten, but they uniformly reject the identification of Moses with Osarseph. By concentrating solely on the passage identifying these two figures as one and the same, however, I submit that scholars have overlooked many additional passages that have literary parallels in the biblical Exodus account, but which switch the role of villain and hero.
The above quote from Gen. 2:4 introduces us to the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Many biblical scholars believe that the next few verses contain a slightly different version of Creation than that contained earlier in Gen. 1. What is especially unusual is the reference to the “generations of the heavens and the earth.” In the several other instances when Genesis says, “These are the generations of . . .”, it refers to information about a parent and their children. This would imply that Genesis 2 is about the Children of the Heavens and Earth, a polytheistic throwback to an earlier cosmogony. But whose cosmogony?
The Egyptian goddess Neith has a reputation as both a military figure and as a mother goddess and nurse, characteristics that caused the Greeks to identify her with the goddess Athena. In Hebrew, Deborah means “Bee” and that symbol is closely identified with Neith. A Temple to Neith was called “House of the Bee”, and the Bee was the symbol of kingship in Lower Egypt.
In this paper I will argue that both Deborahs were mythological figures based on Hebrew recollections of the goddess Neith, the goddess who ruled in the area of Egypt where Israel dwelled in earlier times. In support of this argument I will draw upon some materials in Plutarch’s account of the Osiris myth, which suggests that Neith may have been associated with a Tree of Weeping. I will also make other mythological comparisons between Neith and the two Deborahs.
Talks by Gary Greenberg
the standard (High) chronology
It will be my argument that John 11:45-54 introduced a significant plot change to the synoptic Passion accounts and that John had to make many changes to the synoptic narrative in order to make his alternative plot work. More specifically, in the synoptic gospels, the priests want to kill Jesus because they see his actions in the Temple as a threat to their authority. Jesus is an earthly political rival. In John, Jesus’ popularity in the final days stems from the raising of Lazarus, a heavenly power, and the priests want to kill Jesus because they fear that his popularity from raising Lazarus will cause Rome to destroy the Temple and the nation. John places the plot to kill Jesus in the context of his gospel message about eternal life. To present this alternative plot, John needed to eliminate the conflicting and distracting issue of earthly political rivalry.
In the course of the paper I will look at how John 11:45-54 interacts with several troubling issues in John’s gospel, including John’s s account of Jesus’ last visit to Jerusalem, the money-changers scene, and what appears to be disguised elements of a Jewish trial,
Most Egyptologists and biblical scholars who study this report easily recognize that it tells of events during the reign of Pharaoh Akhenaten, but they uniformly reject the identification of Moses with Osarseph. By concentrating solely on the passage identifying these two figures as one and the same, however, I submit that scholars have overlooked many additional passages that have literary parallels in the biblical Exodus account, but which switch the role of villain and hero.
The above quote from Gen. 2:4 introduces us to the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Many biblical scholars believe that the next few verses contain a slightly different version of Creation than that contained earlier in Gen. 1. What is especially unusual is the reference to the “generations of the heavens and the earth.” In the several other instances when Genesis says, “These are the generations of . . .”, it refers to information about a parent and their children. This would imply that Genesis 2 is about the Children of the Heavens and Earth, a polytheistic throwback to an earlier cosmogony. But whose cosmogony?
The Egyptian goddess Neith has a reputation as both a military figure and as a mother goddess and nurse, characteristics that caused the Greeks to identify her with the goddess Athena. In Hebrew, Deborah means “Bee” and that symbol is closely identified with Neith. A Temple to Neith was called “House of the Bee”, and the Bee was the symbol of kingship in Lower Egypt.
In this paper I will argue that both Deborahs were mythological figures based on Hebrew recollections of the goddess Neith, the goddess who ruled in the area of Egypt where Israel dwelled in earlier times. In support of this argument I will draw upon some materials in Plutarch’s account of the Osiris myth, which suggests that Neith may have been associated with a Tree of Weeping. I will also make other mythological comparisons between Neith and the two Deborahs.