Stephen, J. Frey and H. Stegemann (Ed.)_Qumran kontrovers_Beitr�ge zur den Textfunden vom Toten Meer, Bonifatius, Paderborn 2003.
The fact that Stegemann has edited an article by Bergmeier*, directly followed by a refutation by J. Frey**, which quite obviously turns into a kind of support for Bergmeier reveals the intention behind - to make the best out of a bad job. Bergmeier, as you know, was already literary buried in early 1994, his work removed from the book market in perpetuity. He was indeed the Giordano Bruno of his time, burnt at the stake of ignorance, sacrificed to the Essene world view of the early 90s. However, somebody has let risen the schoolteacher again - probably thought as vanguard auxiliary (B. never rejected Essenes a priori) in the upcoming confrontation on basic axioms. * The historical value of the Essene reports in Philo and Josephus, pp.11-22 ** On the historical analysis of the ancient Essene reports, pp.23-56 _Dierk ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen Goranson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 1:54 PM Subject: [Megillot] anachronisms & not; etc. > Dierk, do you have the citation of the article unclearly described as > involving Stegemann, Bruno, and Bergmeier? _______________________________________________ g-Megillot mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.McMaster.CA/mailman/listinfo/g-megillot
