|
Updated: 2020.08.30 
Pl. of צְדוֹקִי. (For chronological development, see my Chronology Of Tanakh, From "The Big Nᵊtiyâh", Live-LinkT Technology
צְדוֹקִים is, most often, the name of one of the three major 1st century Judean sects; usually Hellenized to Σαδδουκαιος. English translations further sanitize some instances of the already-Hellenized term of its original, hated, Judaic ethnicity, gentilizing it, instead, to "saints" (righteous ones) in order to make certain passages sound like they were written to gentile Christians instead of Jews.
"According to most scholars" originally Bᵊn•eiꞋ-Tzâ•dōqꞋ—sons of Tzâ•dōqꞋ—eventually evolved into the Hellenist Kō•han•imꞋ and the wealthy aristocratic class of Hellenist Jews – both of whom collaborated with the Hellenist Roman occupiers.
The Bᵊn•eiꞋ-Tzâ•dōqꞋ derive from Tzâ•dōqꞋ Bën-Akh•i•tūvꞋ, the Kō•heinꞋ ha-Jâ•dōlꞋ during the reign of Dâ•widꞋ ha-MëlꞋëkh, who returned the A•rōnꞋ ha-Bᵊrit and remained loyal to Dâ•widꞋ ha-MëlꞋëkh, anointing Shᵊlōm•ōhꞋ as MëlꞋëkh—for which his descendants were awarded exclusive right to serve as Kō•han•imꞋ
Bën-Gurion Univ. Prof. of Linguistics Ëlish•âꞋ Qim•ronꞋ has demonstrated from Dead Sea Scroll 4Q MMT that the Qum•rânꞋ-"Essenes" were also צְדוֹקִים. As the better-known צְדוֹקִים of the Beit ha-Mi•qᵊdâshꞋ in Yᵊru•shâ•layꞋim were corrupt Hellenist Roman appointee vassals, i.e., the "כֹּהֵן הַרֶשׁעַ," the Qum•rânꞋ-"Essene" צְדוֹקִים were clearly the more authentic, and probably hearkened back to the Khasidim.
Consequently, it is essential to distinguish between the Hellenist Roman appointed vassals of the Beit ha-Mi•qᵊdâshꞋ who sometimes weren't even genealogically kohanim at all, from the Qumran צְדוֹקִים. As the Hellenist Roman quisling " צְדוֹקִים" in the Beit ha-Mi•qᵊdâshꞋ were obviously Hellenized from the earlier Bᵊn•eiꞋ Tzâ•dōqꞋ Tzᵊdoq•imꞋ, it is justified to refer to the "צְדוֹקִים" in the Beit ha-Mi•qᵊdâshꞋ, who often weren't Bᵊn•eiꞋ Tzâ•dōqꞋ, as Hellenist צְדוֹקִים. We can then easily differentiate the Hellenist צְדוֹקִים from the authentic (probably Khasidim-) "Bᵊn•eiꞋ Tzâ•dōqꞋ" Tzᵊdoq•imꞋ of Qum•rânꞋ. See also related terms Tzedaqah, Tzadiq, Tzeddeq, Qumran צְדוֹקִים and Hellenist צְדוֹקִים.
The genuine צְדוֹקִים were displaced from the Beit ha-Mi•qᵊdâshꞋ, first by the Syrian Hellenists (Antioch IV Epiphanes) and later by the Romans, both of whom appointed their own 'Kō•han•imꞋ' and 'Kō•heinꞋ ha-Jâ•dōlꞋ', who weren't even genealogically authentic kō•han•imꞋ—corrupting the priesthood irreversibly, forever.
The first genealogically non-Kō•heinꞋ Roman appointee "Kō•heinꞋ ha-Jâ•dōlꞋ" was a fanatic Hellenist named Menelaus (d. ca. B.C.E. 162), who succeeded Yᵊho•shuꞋa Bën-Shim•onꞋ (II) Bën-Tzâ•dōqꞋ.
The corruption of the Kᵊhun•âhꞋ is well documented in Ta•na"khꞋ: Ma•lâkh•iꞋ 1,8,13-14; 2.8-9, 13; Ëzᵊr•âꞋ 10.18ff; Nᵊkhëm•yâhꞋ 13.29.
Specifically, it was Yᵊho•shuꞋa Bën-Shim•onꞋ (II) Bën-Tzâ•dōqꞋ, a rabid Hellenizer Reformist, who Hellenized—corrupted—the Kᵊhun•âhꞋ for all time. He was also the last Kō•heinꞋ ha-Jâ•dōlꞋ who was even genealogically qualified! He purchased the office of Kō•heinꞋ ha-Jâ•dōlꞋ from Antiochus IV Epiphanes in B.C.E. 175, deposing the last Kō•heinꞋ ha-Jâ•dōlꞋ who was faithful to Tor•âhꞋ—his own brother, Yᵊkhon•yâhꞋ Bën-Shim•onꞋ (II) Bën-Tzâ•dōqꞋ.
Consequently, the genuine Kō•han•imꞋ> / צְדוֹקִים were relegated primarily to Qum•rânꞋ. The genealogically unqualified Roman puppets who served as priests in the Beit ha-Mi•qᵊdâshꞋ in Yᵊru•shâ•layꞋim were Hellenist צְדוֹקִים who became known as the "Sadducees."
It then becomes clear why the genuine צְדוֹקִים of Qum•rânꞋ called Yᵊho•shuꞋa Bën-Shim•onꞋ (II) Bën-Tzâ•dōqꞋ (and his successors) Kō•heinꞋ hâ-RëshꞋa instead of Kō•heinꞋ ha-Jâ•dōlꞋ. The Qum•rânꞋ Kha•sid•imꞋ Tzᵊdoq•imꞋ also designated the last Kō•heinꞋ ha-Jâ•dōlꞋ who was faithful to Tor•âhꞋ, Yᵊkhon•yâhꞋ Bën-Shim•onꞋ (II) Bën-Tzâ•dōqꞋ, as the MorꞋeih ha-TzëdꞋëq.
The argument that Yᵊkhon•yâhꞋ Bën-Shim•onꞋ (II) Bën-Tzâ•dōqꞋ cannot be the MorꞋeih ha-TzëdꞋëq because the MorꞋeih ha-TzëdꞋëq is documented to have lived at a later time is as silly as arguing that A•har•onꞋ couldn't have been the Kō•heinꞋ ha-Jâ•dōlꞋ because the Kō•heinꞋ ha-Jâ•dōlꞋ is documented to have lived when the Beit ha-Mi•qᵊdâshꞋ was destroyed in 70 C.E.
The relationship between the Romans and the Hellenist צְדוֹקִים was always a case of the compromising Hellenist צְדוֹקִים being rejected as apostate and turncoat כֹּהֵן הַרֶשׁעַ by the rest of the Jews while their refusal to give allegiance to Rome, manifested in their resistance against the occupying authorities, failed to satisfy the Roman Hellenists.
5 Then the
sâ•tânꞋ 4.1.1 took [RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa ] and brought him up into the high place 4.5.1 of theHei•khâlꞋ 4.5.2 in the Ir ha-QoꞋdësh 4.5.3 & 1.18.7 …8 Another time the
sâ•tânꞋ 4.1.1 took [RibꞋi ]Yᵊho•shuꞋa into a very high, steep har and said to him, 'See all of the legions,4.8.1 and their kingships,4.17.1 and governments, and all of the good things in them.' 4.8.2 Then he said to him, 'It is mine, and if you will kneel down and bow to me one bow,4.9.1 I will give it to you.' (The Nᵊtzârim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matitᵊyâhu (NHM, in English)
Of the three major
It's no accident that the Hellenist Roman gentile Christian Church identified with the Roman-collaborating Hellenist צְדוֹקִים – 180° opposite to the anti-Hellenist, Judean
Instead of regarding the Roman-collaborating Hellenist צְדוֹקִים as apostates —like the Judaic Pᵊrush•iꞋ RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa and Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ did (!), the Hellenist Roman gentiles of Christianity have always been on the opposite—Hellenist צְדוֹקִים—side of the fence, regarding "Pharisee" (Pᵊrush•iꞋ) Judeans ("Jews") as the derogatory (and misojudaic) synonym for "hypocrite."
While there had always been a difference of religion between even the Hellenist צְדוֹקִים and the Roman occupiers, 66 C.E. introduced a fissure between the Hellenist צְדוֹקִים and Hellenist Romans that cracked open, creating a no-longer-bridgeable chasm, when increasing tensions between Hellenists and Jews erupted in the desecration, by Hellenists (including non-Jewish foreigner occupiers), of a Beit ha-KᵊnësꞋët in Keis•ârꞋiyâh (Caesarea). The Romans refused to take any action against the Hellenists. It was impossible for the Pᵊrush•imꞋ to accept a Roman policy that, by their refusal to punish the offenders, passively endorsed Hellenist desecration of their Bât•eiꞋ ha-KᵊnësꞋët.
The writing was on the wall and not even the Hellenist צְדוֹקִים could any longer ignore it. With their lifeline of Jewish-Roman relations irreparably destroyed, the option of trying to walk a middle path of assimilation between Jews and Romans evaporated. The Hellenist צְדוֹקִים, forced to choose sides, broke with the Romans. Ël•i•ëꞋzër Bën Kha•nan•yâhꞋ, son of the Hellenist Tzᵊdoq•imꞋ Kō•heinꞋ ha-Jâ•dōlꞋ, stopped the apostate Tᵊphil•otꞋ and qor•bân•otꞋ in the Beit ha-Mi•qᵊdâshꞋ for the Roman Emperor, which they had earlier authorized to comply with the Roman occupiers, and subsequently led a successful attack on the Roman garrison occupying Yᵊru•shâ•layꞋim. The pro-Roman, Hellenist king descended from an Ë•dom•iꞋ-Arab father and Arab mother, Agrippa II, sided with the Romans and fled Yᵊru•shâ•layꞋim. These were the trigger events that culminated in the destruction of the Beit ha-Mi•qᵊdâshꞋ 4 years later, in 70 C.E.
"Professor Martin Richards, of the Archaeogenetics Research Group at the University of Huddersfield, has published a paper… Archaeogenetics can help to resolve this dispute [of the origin of
We have settled this issue by looking at large numbers of whole mitochondrial genomes – sequencing the full 16,568 bases of the molecule – in many people from across Europe, the Caucasus and the Middle East. We have found that, in the vast majority of cases,
"This means that, even though Jewish men may indeed have migrated into Europe from [Judea] around 2000 years ago, they brought few or no wives with them. They seem to have married with European women, firstly along the Mediterranean, especially in Italy [Hellenist Roman women], and later (but probably to a lesser extent) in western and central Europe. This suggests that, in the early years of the Diaspora, Judaism took in many converts from amongst the European population, but they were mainly recruited from amongst women. Thus, on the female line of descent, the
 |
|
 |