show_no_mercy

The only argument that I see here is that the "Essenes" never refer to themselves as "Essenes". What, then, did the community that produced the DSS call themselves?

maryhelena

So the myth of the Essenes is hitting the big time!

Actually, does anybody know if anyone else has come up with the Essene myth, legend, non-existence theory before now?

Toto

I think that up to now, everyone has assumed that there was a group called the Essenes or something similar. The point of dispute has been whether the Scrolls were a product of the Essenes or if they were written in Jerusalem and transported to Qumran for safekeeping. If the latter, one would not necessarily expect to find any evidence for their existence in the DSS themselves.

show_no_mercy

If we could find out the etymology of the name "essene" then it might be helpful to know who they were and if they actually existed. So far I don't think there's any consensus on where Josephus and Philo got the name from.

If this is true, then the "Essenes" might have just meant "Jesus Movements". But "Essene" coming from the Arabic of the Greek name of Jesus seems backwards to me.

Toto

Especially since the Aramaic form of Jesus is Yeshua, not Isa

Dave31

Here's a new blog on this

Dead Sea Scrolls Not Written by Essenes
http://tbknews.blogspot.com/2009/03/...y-essenes.html

mountainman

Dear maryhelena,

An intriguing question!


Perhaps Eusebius c.324 CE

I think it is a reasonable theory.
Eusebius wanted a Jewish-Hellenistic connection.
Not the normal Hellenistic-Jewish connection.
A transitional "missing link" for "early christianity".

Everyone knew about the therapeutae.
Everyone knew about the Pharisees and Sadducees.
So he invented a group of "Jewish therapeutae".
He makes sure Josephus says they are "Pythagorean".
He was out to convert the Hellenistic civilisation remember.
(Or Constantine was)
A little early PR is useful ...

No real problems there.

After he composes and inserts the testimonia flavianum
Eusebius adds some further interpolations to Josephus,
Philo, Pliny and Hippolytus (thanks Andrew) all of
whom he had before him in the imperial scriptoria,
concerning the historical existence of a very early
"new and strange nation of Essenes" who would
become the earliest precursors to the "new and
strange religion" of fourth century christianity.

Very resourceful, perhaps, our man Eusebius.
But perhaps he was commanded to do so?
Who really knows? The C14?
And will time tell?


Best wishes,


Pete

maryhelena

Hi, Pete

Indeed, the whole thing is most intriguing!

Yes, the argument in favor of Eusebius provides him with intent i.e. to help along the historical Jesus concept.

The argument for Josephus also provides him with intent - but I would argue here that his intent, his motivation, would not primarily be to deceive. Well, on one level, of course, it could be read that way - but on another level, a level taking into consideration who, or what, Josephus was, the charge of outright deception might have to be re-considered.

In other words, Josephus can't simply be written off as a historian who tampered the books. Josephus, in his own work, tells us he was more than a historian - for example my quote in a previous post. To just see Josephus as a historian is to underestimate the man!

I recently came across a book, online, that looks as though it throws a much needed spotlight on the other role Josephus plays. The book is "Dreams and Dream Reports in the Writing of Josephus, A Traditio-Historical Analysis (or via: amazon.co.uk)" by Robert Karl Gnuse. One can view quite a lot of pages on Google Books. Unfortunately, on amazon, the price is very high, 240 dollars .......free shipping though..

Clivedurdle

What about the archaeology?

Note the number of dwellings!

maryhelena

Looks like I can answer my own question......

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/biblic.../message/20202