Hello,
> I assume you are familiar with the history of debate on the
> interpretation of TLH, 'hang', as crucifixion in 11QT and
> 4QpNah.
I am sure I am less familiar than most with the (full) history of Qumran scholarship.
Nonetheless, in
11QT 64 the verb T-L-H is qualified, more than once.
Greg Doudna wrote:
>Peter, your first objection assumes that 'Hyrcanus is
>not' a Zadokite priest. Why do you think this, and
>how is it that you know this?
>
>(Do you have an answer for this that would not argue
>with equal force that the earlier Oniads also were not
>Zadokites?)
>
>Since there
I always found following titles most helpful in this respect:
T.Ilan, Integrating Women into Second Temple History, Tübingen 1999 (TSAJ 76)
gives necessary background information;
R.Hachlili, Burial Practices at Qumran, RQ 62 (1992), 247-264 (outdated in my
opinion);
E.Schuller, Women in the
Dear Jack,
I have always thought that -while defilement by a corpse certainly IS a problem
in Jewish law- the obligation to bury a dead person always has priority over
purity concerns. Purity certainly can be regained ritually, leaving a corpse
unburied would be an offense (Tobit 2:3-8; only
