[Since the Second Temple Law was complicated and self-contradictory, accusations could always occur (especially if one attracted attention).
This threat of accusation made it easy for common folk to choose a lack of self worth in order to avoid catastrophic accusations.]
[The mirror of the world3a or the thought experiment3a narrows the range of ‘somethings2a’ that a person can envision1a.
The Second Temple elites always acted more ritually pure relative to the subjects.
Therefore, one particular ‘something2a’ became the best option for the common folk.
What was that something2a?
Here it is:
Get along by (trying to) meet ritual demands and, most importantly, avoid being accused of violating the Law.]
[What might help me understand this?
I turn to the model of the thought experiment where I choose ‘something’.]
Summary of text [comment] page 83
[Let me go back to the return from the Babylonian exile.
Why did the common folk of the second temple allow a sovereigninfra to form?
Why did they consistently support Sadducees, Pharisees and Scribes in their devotion to an objectorganization of ritual purity?]
[The decline of the Roman Empire may have been tempered by the multiplication of less politically minded Christians.]
[Consider histories of Franklin Roosevelt written in the 20th century (7700s U0’).
Not one assessed the economic consequences of Roosevelt’s tragic and capricious presidential leadership.
The Federal Reserve Board caused the Great Depression.
Roosevelt did nothing to stop their madness.
He enhance the Great Depression by supplementing economic with political uncertainty.
Why did America not fall into revolution?
The common folk were still Christian.]
[Modern intellectuals rarely correlate the political rhetoric (words) with economic consequences (bondage).
Indeed, it seems that their job is to produce the words that put the common folk into bondage.]
[Why did modern historians believe the rhetoric of the Pagan Romans?
Traditional pagan Romans blamed Christianity for their decline.
Naive and self-absorbed modern intellectuals took their words at face value.]
Maybe, the enhanced economic performance of (what later was negatively labeled) “the Christians” permitted the Roman Empire to survive as long as it did.
This conclusion flies in the face of massive tomes, carrying titles like The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire.]
