Dierk van den Berg wrote:
> Generally speaking, it is alrteady a technical term. > > Is it? What's your evidence for this, especially if you think that > the "technical" meaning > of this term is not "adversary"? > And this term is not used by the Yahad !!!You are dealing, thus, with > Satan-terminology ofthe long-living predecessor sect of the mxhqq,IMO > the philosophical root of the Essenes in Josephus et par. Satan terminology? What makes you think, as you apparently do, that the content of their terminology was not grounded in the biblical text or in Hebrew usage where ha satan is a common noun and means adversary? What's your evidence for the beliefs of this "long living predecessor sect" vis a vis satan/Satan, let alone that they used ha satan in a non biblical (special) way? Jeffrey -- Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon) 1500 W. Pratt Blvd. Chicago, Illinois e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
