Re: orion-list Rechabites vs. Enochian Jews?
George Brooks wrote: Prof. Gibson writes: And if I take the some say correctly, this passage also indicates that there was some doubt that the claim itself (about daughters, etc.) is in any way reliable. REPLY: The Talmud is FULL of some say commentary. I hardly think you are in a position to unwravel the entire Talmud because of the nature of the dialogue-approach to discussion. [snip] Prof. Gibson, I know you find it easier to BLOCK my inquiries than to help explore them with me. So should I take your claim that you make above -- i.e. that my **conjecture** about the import of some say is wrong, and that the conclusion I note **may** be derived from my premise IF my premise is sound is therefore invalid -- as a blocking of my inquiry? In any case, I never made the claim that I was trying to unwravel (sic) the entire Talmud. Rather my purpose was far more modest. And that was only to raise the question of whether, if we accept a particular interpretation of its introduction, a particular text meant what you thought it meant. May I note, then, that if you were indeed interested in doing what you chastise me for supposedly not doing, namely, exploring inquiries, you would not have stopped with the bare (and unsupported) statement that the Talmud is full of the use of the phrase some say to introduce a reputedly traditional claims about persons or groups, since the fact that it is used frequently or not, has little bearing on what the phrase's **meaning function** within the Talmud was. Rather, you would have explored with me whether my conjecture about what the Rabbis **were up to** when they used that phrase -- in notable contrast to their using the one, also found frequently in the Talmud, which attributes the material being recalled to a **specific** authority (R. Jose, R. Judah, etc. ) -- had anything going for it. In other words, the issue at hand is not the frequency of the phrase in the Talmud, but its **meaning and function**. What leads you to think that the **meaning and function** of some say in the introduction to reputedly traditional claims about persons or groups is other than what I think it might me? Yours, JG -- Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.) 1500 W. Pratt Blvd. Floor 1 Chicago, Illinois 60626 e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] For private reply, e-mail to Jeffrey B. Gibson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from Orion, e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: unsubscribe Orion. Archives are on the Orion Web site, http://orion.mscc.huji.ac.il. (PLEASE REMOVE THIS TRAILOR BEFORE REPLYING TO THE MESSAGE)
orion-list Rechabites vs. Enochian Jews?
Prof. Gibson writes: And if I take the some say correctly, this passage also indicates that there was some doubt that the claim itself (about daughters, etc.) is in any way reliable. REPLY: The Talmud is FULL of some say commentary. I hardly think you are in a position to unwravel the entire Talmud because of the nature of the dialogue-approach to discussion. The Talmud represents various threads within RABBINIC thinking. So this is hardly a touchstone to what was happening during Jeremiah's time: 1) because the Rabbis were a later development, and 2) because it may well be that a Rechabite priesthood would not be favorably viewed by the Rabbinic writers. For example, during Jeremiah's time there was a faction of Jerusalem priesthood that Ezekiel took issue with? Would they have been an opposing voice within the Talmud? Almost certainly! Could this be the SAME group as the Rechabites? Let's explore that. The point of the Talmud references... if anyone can locate the correct ones in Eisenman's book... is to show that even the Rabbinic material acknowledges that the Rechabites had an unusually close relationship with the Priesthood. And the Eusebius reference certainly makes it clear that there WAS a Rechabite Priesthood from the point of view of the Church Fathers. So all of this fussing about whether there was or wasn't this would be only for those who didn't find Eusebius credible. So perhaps we can focus on the possible connections between the Rechabites and the Enochain community within Judaism to see if there is a connection there... rather than play forensic semantics with what the Talmud says. The Talmud, as a partisan document, cannot really disprove this point...but presumably it can point out that there WAS an unusual Rechabite presence in Jerusalem. Prof. Gibson, I know you find it easier to BLOCK my inquiries than to help explore them with me you're pattern is quite consistent in this on other lists. But maybe you could adopt a different approach here. What can you tell me about the Enochian community that would help us in this topic? Someone as knowledgeable as you is bound to have something to contribute on the subject of Enoch and those Hebrew who wrote about him. George Brooks Tampa, FL For private reply, e-mail to George Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from Orion, e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: unsubscribe Orion. Archives are on the Orion Web site, http://orion.mscc.huji.ac.il. (PLEASE REMOVE THIS TRAILOR BEFORE REPLYING TO THE MESSAGE)
