----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen Goranson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 3:13 PM Subject: Re: [Megillot] anachronisms & not; etc.
> Dierk, > > Thanks for clarifying what you meant. I bought and still have R. Bergmeier's > book, and read it and read every available review, and Duke library owns it > too; and I have _Qumran kontrovers_ checked out and at home. > > I didn't notice any burning "at the stake of ignorance," Giordano Bruno-like, > or otherwise. > Not in "Qumran kontrovers" 2003, Stephen, but in the days after the release of "Die Essenerberichte des Flavius Josephus" 1993 in the Netherlands (sic!).Wasn't it you who has always pointed to Bergmeier's "retreat from the own arguments", thus his further irrelevance for the forthcoming of the Essene research, already a decade ago on Qumran-Bet? But as you can see: there was no such retreat ( B. didn't even chance a yota of his arguments), merely a muzzle from above and a book that soon had to fade away from the market, simply because it wasn't conform to the contemporary understanding of Essene historicity and - as a result - to the historicity of Stegemann's Essene Union (a fairy tale as we know today). _Dierk _______________________________________________ g-Megillot mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.McMaster.CA/mailman/listinfo/g-megillot
