Stephen Goranson writes:
Pliny's source on Essenes, M. Agrippa, 15 BCE, wrote when Ein
Gedi (not Jerusalem!) was still ashes (from c. 40 BCE war)--please do not rely
on the Loeb translation that has misled many.
While it is true that Agrippa visited Judea and Jericho in 15 BCE, and wrote a
Stephen,
The use of a general term such as "law" or "legal materials" to describe the halachic material in the Qumran corpus disregards the fact that Qumran legal materials are not homogenous. As noted by P. Davies, C. Hempeland others,there is a difference in content and vocabulary between the
Stephen,
In your recent posting inviting discussion on methodology, falsification, Popper, etc., youwrite the following:
But, to try 3 specific ane cases, perhaps falsifiable claims. 1) In some Qumran texts, the "wicked priest" is Alexander Jannaeus.2) In some Qumran texts, the "teacher of
Dear Stephen,
Some selective responses. (On the Tel Dan Inscription, your comments are both incorrect and out of place on Megillot, and will therefore be ignored.)
You wrote:
"Russell, your misrepresentation included declaring that there was no evidence other that what you mentioned"
Au
Dear Stephen,
You wrote:
"...G. Athas, on detailed observation, declared that dalets were carved in a direction that, if true, falsifies the proposed scenario that a forger carved the arms of the dalet both toward the left and stopped before a stone break; further, Athas claimed that the dalet
Stephen,
You wrote:
'Briefly, and relevantly on "falsification," George Athas' careful physical observations on the Tel Dan Aramaic inscription, if true as stated, falsify your asserted scenario in which a putative forger carved a dalet in the direction of a putative already-broken stone edge
Dear Greg,
I agree with a large number of points you raise. For instance,
Ido not take references to the "end of days" to be (necessarily)
futuristic, for many of the reasons you lay out. I also agree that the
Interpreter of the Law and the Teacher of Righteousness are within the present
With all due respect, Joe, your conclusions appear to far exceedyour
supportingevidence.
(1) If there were Essenes at Qumran, it is most likely they were there in
the capacity of agricultural workers. The Essenes are characterized as
agriculturalists in all theprimary Greeksources,
Slight typo:
4QMMT is IMO best interpreted as an appeal by the Sadducees for the
Maccabeans (Hasidim) _NOT_ to adopt Pharisee practices in the newly dedicated
temple of 164 BCE.
Russell Gmirkin
Greg,
Good to see someone who engages on details. Here is the rabbinical
data with a critical discussion.
m Abot 1.1-4 reads, "(1) Moses received the Torah from Sinai and handed it
on to Joshua, Joshua to the Elders, the Elders to the Prophets; and the Prophets
handed it on to the men of
Greg,
My sympathies. Mr. Goranson hassimilarly posted that my views
on Pesher Habakkuk "follow Barbara Thiering," which is a somewhat odd as history
of scholarship given that I have never read anything of Thiering's and have
never cited her in footnotes or in list discussions. Well,
11 matches
Mail list logo
