Posted on 01/25/2014 6:51:38 AM PST by GonzoII
The literacy rate in Biblical times was VERY low:
“Nonetheless, this percentage is reflected in one of the rules in Soferim 11:2 (ed. Higger, p. 218):A town in which there is only one who reads; he stands up, reads (the Torah), and sits down, he stands up, reads and sits down, even seven times. In other words, in some towns there was only one person who could read the Torah, which is a highly (Hebrew) religious reading.25 This rule appears also in t. Megila though with a slight difference: instead of ‘town’ it says there: ‘a synagogue of which there is only’, etc.26 However, this minor difference in the text has no significance since in the small towns in the Land of Israel there usually was one synagogue only, such as in Korazim, Beit-Shearim, and so forth. That is to say that the meaning of that rule was the same even though there was a textual difference. Calculating the balance between males and females, taking into consideration that female literacy rate is always lower than the male rate leads to the idea of there being one reader only in various places. If the fact is not overlooked that in all the synagogues that have been unearthed there was place for more than 50 people, the conclusion must be reached that while issuing that rule the Tanna was speaking of a town where the literacy rate was approximately 1 percent (if not lower). It may be argued that the Tanna ruled in a unique case, but it seems that usually the Tannaim did not speak of rare cases. On the contrary, most if not all, of the cases studied show that the rules of the Tannaim played their role in people’s lives.27 Of course, it does not mean that in all rural places there was such literacy, but, on the other hand, if there were towns with 1% literacy, then the literacy of all the towns was not higher than 5% (at most). Therefore, taking into consideration the above rule, together with the fact that there are rules that reflect a zero literacy rate in the rural areas lead to the assumption of a low rate of literacy in the whole population. Even if we assume that in cities (as happens all over the world in urban areas in comparison to rural areas), such as Tiberias, for example, the literacy rate was double and even triple in comparison with the towns, still the figures of literacy are around 2-15%. With the assumption that the rural population was around 70% (with 0% literacy), 20% of urban population (with 1-5% literacy), and 10% of highly urban population (with 2-15% literacy), the total population literacy is still very low. Thus, it is no exaggeration to say that the total literacy rate in the Land of Israel at that time (of Jews only, of course), was probably less than 3%. At first glance this figure looks quite low, and maybe too low. However, in a traditional society, knowing how to read was not a necessity: neither for economic reasons, nor for intellectual ones. On the contrary. Why should a farmer send his son to learn how to read when it entails a waste of working time (=money)? Why should he himself learn how to read if his culture is based on oral tradition (though with a written Torah)? According to the Torah, there is no need to read or write, except for writing the Mezuza, Tefilin, and the Torah itself. However, for these purposes there was always a scribe, so a Jew in antiquity could fulfill the commandments of the Torah while being illiterate. Not only that, but 3% of the total population seems to be high in comparison with other cultures. In ancient Egypt, a land with a lot of scribes, only half a percent were literate.28 Now, even if it is taken into consideration that training in hieroglyphs takes much more time than script with some 22 symbols, still the conclusion of the extent of literacy in a neighboring country some millennia later with literacy rates that are some six times larger than its predecessor, seems quite plausible. According to the growth processes in population and urbanization as mentioned above, it may be surmised that before the beginning of these processes, in the days of the Maccabees and at the end of the ‘biblical’ period, the literacy rate of the Jewish people was 1.5% if not lower. Nevertheless, if the conclusion seems farfetched, it can be rejected only by cogent arguments.29 - See more at: http://www.evidenceforchristianity.org/were-people-literate-in-the-time-of-jesus-r/#sthash.imGBtbQ0.dpuf";
http://www.evidenceforchristianity.org/were-people-literate-in-the-time-of-jesus-r/
If someone is familiar with the extremely hypothetical nature of arguments recorded in Talmudic times, this is no evidence or even indication at all of the literacy rate of religious Jews. It just isn’t.
“Robert Stein: Literacy rate in biblical times
William Harris- 5-10% (Ancient Literacy)
Catherine Hezser- 10-15% (Jewish Literacy in Roman Palestine)
Harry Gamble- 15-20% (Books and Readers in the Early Church)
Col. 4:16; 1 Thess.5:27; Rev.1:3; 22:18; 1 Tim. 4:13; Acts 15:21,31; Luke 4:16-21
“These, and the other letters of the New Testament, were meant to be read aloud. If, as I assume, Paul was a careful writer, he would therefore have penned these letters more for his readers’ ears than for their eyes”
“... the New Testament writers anticipated that the members of this corporate audience would not have individual copies of their works before them, but that someone would read aloud what they have written... The main sense involved was not their eyes but their ears, and the experience was not a visual one but an auditory one.
“... the person who brought the gospel to them... knew the context of the work and may very well have practiced reading the goepel aloud before he read it publicly...”
http://tinubos.blogspot.com/2010/02/robert-stein-literacy-rate-in-biblical.html
Or, as the Jewish custom, a fair number of people had lengthy, very specific, Scripture and teachings committed to exact memory.
Examples, please......
Links and sources please.
Something... ANYTHING, besides your say so.
really?
you can no longer be taken seriously
How many?
No longer?
At which point in time WAS she taken seriously by you?
Someone who will not verify claims claiming someone else can’t be taken seriously?
Now THAT’S funny.
bttt
You have mis-representated the availability of copies of the New Testament in the early church. Qumran fell to the Romans in 68 AD. It was not a part of the Christian community, and yet fragments of the LXX and various books of the New Testament were discovered there. Some of these fragments were in a script known as Zierstil, which was used in Egypt between 100 BC and 50 AD. Other NT fragments were in the Herculann script, used by the scribes from 50 AD to 80. The point being that these copies prove the New Testament was in wide circulation before 68 AD.
You are so far removed from the faith I don't have time for your heretical nonsense.
How many people were alive per complete set of “Biblical Scripture” in the time and region you mention? That number is probably well over 100,000 even if you can prove that a complete set of Scripture existed there, prior to AD 400.
What was the literacy rate? I have posted estimates in the region ranging from 1.5% to 20%.
Most early Christians NEVER read the “Bible” or any authentic written portion of today's accepted Bible versus.
IT WAS SPOKEN TO THEM!
Supposing, then, a child to be so far educated at home; suppose him, also, to be there continually taught the commandments and observances, and, as the Talmud expressly states, to be encouraged to repeat the prayers aloud, so as to accustom him to it. At six years of age he would be sent to school; not to an academy, or “beth hammedrash,” which he would only attend if he proved apt and promising; far less to the class-room of a great Rabbi, or the discussions of the Sanhedrim, which marked a very advanced stage of study. We are here speaking only of primary or elementary schools, such as even in the time of our Lord were attached to every synagogue in the land. Passing over the supposed or real Biblical notices of schools, and confining our attention strictly to the period ending with the destruction of the Temple, we have first a notice in the Talmud (Bab. B. 21, b), ascribing to Ezra an ordinance, that as many schoolmasters as chose should be allowed to establish themselves in any place, and that those who had formerly been settled there might not interfere with them. In all likelihood this notice should not be taken in its literal sense, but as an indication that the encouragement of schools and of education engaged the attention of Ezra and of his successors. Of the Grecianised academies which the wicked high-priest Jason tried to introduce in Jerusalem (2 Macc. 4:12, 13) we do not speak, because they were anti-Jewish in their spirit, and that to such extent, that the Rabbis, in order to “make a hedge,” forbade all gymnastic exercises. The farther history and progress of Jewish schools are traced in the following passage of the Talmud (Bab. B. 21, a): “If any one has merit, and deserves that his name should be kept in remembrance, it is Joshua, the son of Gamaliel. Without him the law would have fallen into oblivion in Israel. For they used to rest on this saying of the law (Deut. 11:19), ‘Ye shall teach them.’ Afterwards it was ordained that masters be appointed at Jerusalem for the instruction of youth, as it is written (Isa. 2:3), ‘Out of Zion Shall go forth the law.’ But even so the remedy was not effectual, only those who had fathers being sent to school, and the rest being neglected. Hence it was arranged that Rabbis should be appointed in every district, and that lads of sixteen or seventeen years should be sent to their academies. But this institution failed, since every lad ran away if he was chastised by his master. At last Joshua the son of Gamaliel arranged, that in every province and in every town schoolmasters be appointed, who should take charge of all boys from six or seven years of age.” We may add at once, that the Joshua here spoken of was probably the high-priest of that name who flourished before the destruction of the Temple, and that unquestionably this farther organisation implied at least the existence of elementary schools at an earlier period. Every place, then, which numbered twenty-five boys of a suitable age, or, according to Maimonides, one hundred and twenty families, was bound to appoint a schoolmaster. More than twenty-five pupils or thereabouts he was not allowed to teach in a class. If there were forty, he had to employ an assistant; if fifty, the synagogue authorities appointed two teachers. This will enable us to understand the statement, no doubt greatly exaggerated, that at the destruction of Jerusalem there were no fewer than four hundred and eighty schools in the metropolis. From another passage, which ascribes the fall of the Jewish state to the neglect of the education of children, we may infer what importance popular opinion attached to it. But indeed, to the Jew, child-life was something peculiarly holy, and the duty of filling it with thoughts of God specially sacred. It almost seems as if the people generally had retained among them the echo of our Lord’s saying, that their angels continually behold the face of our Father which is in heaven. Hence the religious care connected with education. The grand object of the teacher was moral as well as intellectual training. To keep children from all intercourse with the vicious; to suppress all feelings of bitterness, even though wrong had been done to one’s parents;1 to punish all real wrong-doing; not to prefer one child to another; rather to show sin in its repulsiveness than to predict what punishment would follow, either in this or the next world, so as not to “discourage” the child—such are some of the rules laid down.1 A teacher was not even to promise a child anything which he did not mean to perform, lest its mind be familiarised with falsehood. Everything that might call up disagreeable or indelicate thoughts was to be carefully avoided. The teacher must not lose patience if his pupil understood not readily, but rather make the lesson more plain. He might, indeed, and he should, punish when necessary, and, as one of the Rabbis put it, treat the child like a young heifer whose burden was daily increased. But excessive severity was to be avoided; and we are told of one teacher who was actually dismissed from office for this reason. Where possible, try kindness; and if punishment was to be administered, let the child be beaten with a strap, but never with a rod. At ten the child began to study the Mishnah; at fifteen he must be ready for the Talmud, which would be explained to him in a more advanced academy. If after three, or at most five, years of tuition the child had not made decided progress, there was little hope of his attaining to eminence. In the study of the Bible the pupil was to proceed from the book of Leviticus to the rest of the Pentateuch, thence to the Prophets, and lastly to the Hagiographa. This regulation was in accordance with the degree of value which the Rabbis attached to these divisions of the Bible.2 In the case of advanced pupils the day was portioned out—one part being devoted to the Bible, the other two to the Mishnah and the Talmud. Every parent was also advised to have his child taught swimming. It has already been stated that in general the school was held in the synagogue. Commonly its teacher was the “chazan,” or “minister” (Luke 4:20); by which expression we are to understand not a spiritual office, but something like that of a beadle. This officer was salaried by the congregation; nor was he allowed to receive fees from his pupils, lest he should show favour to the rich. The expenses were met by voluntary and charitable contributions; and in case of deficiency the most distinguished Rabbis did not hesitate to go about and collect aid from the wealthy. The number of hours during which the junior classes were kept in school was limited. As the close air of the school-room might prove injurious during the heat of the day, lessons were intermitted between ten A.M. and three P.M. For similar reasons, only four hours were allowed for instruction between the seventeenth of Thamuz and the ninth of Ab (about July and August), and teachers were forbidden to chastise their pupils during these months. The highest honour and distinction attached to the office of a teacher, if worthily discharged. Want of knowledge or of method was regarded as sufficient cause for removing a teacher; but experience was always deemed a better qualification than mere acquirements. No teacher was employed who was not a married man. To discourage unwholesome rivalry, and to raise the general educational standard, parents were prohibited from sending their children to other than the schools of their own towns. Edersheim, A. (2003). Sketches of Jewish social life in the days of Christ (pp. 133–137). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
I keep forgetting that you worship not Yeshua, but the catholic alternative.
Pardon the oversight.
Check with Chabad in your town, and you will find that things have changed little to this day.
>> “What was the literacy rate?” <<
.
100% (in Hebrew, not necessarily in other “commercial” languages)
When Jerusalem fell to the Romans in 70 AD there were 482 schools there.
EDUCATION — the transfer of knowledge, morals, and attitudes from one person to another, and usually from one generation to the next. For the Israelites, the goal of education was to prepare people to know God and to live peacefully with one another (Luke 2:52); education did not emphasize the “three R’s.” The method of education was different, too, although by New Testament times, it had changed significantly. In the Old Testament period education was rather informal. Children were taught in the home by the parents. However, by New Testament times schools had been established to assist parents in the teaching of their children.
God gave the responsibility of teaching to parents (Deut. 11:19). To be a parent meant to teach. Both parents were involved in the child’s education; however, the father was responsible to see that his children were properly educated (Prov. 1:8–9). A young son stayed with his mother when the father went to the fields to work. Therefore, a boy’s first significant instruction came from his mother (Prov. 31:1–9). As the boy grew, the father’s involvement in his son’s education increased, especially as they began to work together in the fields or in the father’s trade. A daughter stayed on with her mother and continued under her instruction. In the close-knit family structure of that day, as parents became grandparents they also became involved in teaching their grandchildren (Deut. 4:9; 2 Tim. 1:5; 3:14–15). A parent’s responsibility for instructing children continued until death.
The term “father” was applied to teachers outside the family, also, and teachers often called their students “sons.” God made Joseph a “father” to the PHARAOH (Gen. 45:8), which means that the Pharaoh listened to Joseph as a pupil listens to his teacher and receives instruction from him. Throughout Proverbs the term “my son” indicates the same teacher-pupil relationship (Prov. 1:8, 10, 15; 2:1; 3:1, 11). And in the New Testament Paul spoke of Timothy as his son (1 Tim. 1:18).
During the period between the Old and New Testaments, SYNAGOGUES and schools were established. Generally, each rabbi taught in a village school supported by the parents of the children who attended. The teacher, or rabbi, of the school helped the parents by instilling religious truths in the boys’ minds; however, the parents still were responsible for their children’s education. In choosing a rabbi as a village teacher, the parents were more concerned with his personal character than with his ability to teach. His example was more important than his teaching skills. The ideal rabbi was a married man who also was industrious and serious. He would never joke with the boys, nor would he tolerate any wrongdoing. However, it was considered important that he be a patient man. Both rabbi and parents took God as their model for proper teaching. God was the Master Teacher (Is. 30:20–21), who taught by word and example (Ps. 78:1; Deut. 8:2–3).
Every father was expected to teach his son a trade. A Jewish proverb reads, “He who does not teach his son a useful trade teaches him to be a thief.” Usually, a son followed in his father’s occupation, with the father passing on his skills and trade secrets.
Scholars do not agree on how many Israelites could read and write in Old Testament times. By the New Testament period, however, almost every village had its own school where reading and writing were taught to the boys. Parents sent their sons to school for the purpose of learning to read the Scriptures; they continued in school from the age of 6 or 7 until about 12 years of age. If the parents wanted their son to receive more training, he was sent to Jerusalem, where a number of notable rabbis had schools. Paul spent time there, studying under GAMALIEL (Acts 22:3), a famous rabbi. School was in session year-round, with the day beginning shortly after sunrise and continuing until about 10:00 A.M. On a hot day, the students would be dismissed for the remainder of the day. If the weather was more comfortable, classes reconvened about 3:00 P.M. for several more hours of study.
The school consisted of one classroom; all the students studied together. The teacher sat on a low platform (Luke 4:20); the students sat at his feet (Acts 22:3). Because the students were at different learning levels, the instruction had to be individualized. While the rabbi worked with one student or group, the others busied themselves with assignments. Because the rabbi believed that if the student did not voice his lessons they would be forgotten, students spoke out loud as they read and memorized.
Youngblood, R. F., Bruce, F. F., & Harrison, R. K., Thomas Nelson Publishers (Eds.). (1995). In Nelson’s new illustrated Bible dictionary. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, Inc.
Nonsense! It was nowhere near that high. Education was for the rich and the elite.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.