Freethought & Rationalism Archive

spin · 12-08-2003, 05:03 AM

I will be happy to debate any person or group of people who would like to support the case that the Essenes (of Josephus's four Jewish sects fame) are responsible for the Dead Sea Scrolls.

This will mean dealing with the evidence for the case and not just with the opinions of scholars.

It would be good to have such a debate on the books for future reference.

spin

Haran · 12-08-2003, 06:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by spin
I will be happy to debate any person or group of people who would like to support the case that the Essenes (of Josephus's four Jewish sects fame) are responsible for the Dead Sea Scrolls.

So do you buy Golb's theory? If not, I'd like to see your evidence and where you take it, although I'm not really looking for a debate on the issue, myself.

spin · 12-08-2003, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Haran
So do you buy Golb's theory?

The bit that Golb got from Rengstorf about the scrolls coming from Jerusalem I buy.

The scrolls were plainly not produced at Qumran. (Would anyone like to contemplate almost 800 scribes working at Qumran?)

Quote:

If not, I'd like to see your evidence and where you take it, although I'm not really looking for a debate on the issue, myself.

I was offering to debate anyone who was game to defend the Essene connection. I don't need to replace it with something to show that the Essene connection is crap. Once we get there, one can present an alternative. (The house has got to come down before you can reuse the same plot. Of course, you could just keep modifying the original, but the result is almost always a slipshod compromise.)

spin

Toto · 12-08-2003, 09:51 AM

Are you proposing a formal debate? If so, I can move this to the formal debate area (if you haven't cross posted it.)

Amaleq13 · 12-08-2003, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by spin
I was offering to debate anyone who was game to defend the Essene connection.

This is yet another non-reply

to your challenge but would you mind clarifying for me whether you also deny an Essene presence at Qumran or do you accept that Essenes lived there but deny that they produced the scrolls?

I probably lack sufficient knowledge to participate but I would lurk the crap of such a debate.

Apikorus · 12-08-2003, 10:54 AM

I'd be willing to take up the case for identifying Qumranians with Essenes, although I am hardly committed to it. Mostly I think it would be fun to exchange with an expert like spin so I could learn more about this subject. I don't have very much time though and I can't promise to post more than once a day, if even that frequently.

Toto · 12-08-2003, 11:01 AM

It sounds like we have the makings of a formal debate. Posting once a day or once a week is quite acceptable.

I will copy this to the Formal Debate Set up area.

Apikorus · 12-08-2003, 11:05 AM

I'd prefer not making this a formal debate.

MortalWombat · 12-08-2003, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Apikorus
I'd prefer not making this a formal debate.

That's OK, you can wear a sweatshirt and jeans if you like.

spin · 12-08-2003, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amaleq13
This is yet another non-reply to your challenge but would you mind clarifying for me whether you also deny an Essene presence at Qumran or do you accept that Essenes lived there but deny that they produced the scrolls?

Although my proposition doesn't directly impact on the notion of whether the Essenes were or were not at Qumran, I could probably make a strong case against their presence at Qumran. This would be based upon:

1) an analysis of Pliny the Elder in relation to the location of Qumran and the archaeological site above En Gedi,

2) an analysis of the site being originally a military establishment, then a commercial production site, and the fact that the quantity of water stored there is not exceptional in comparison to other such production sites,

3) the presence of a toilet seat (!) at Qumran,

4) the small population shown to live at Qumran,

and probably others. The counter arguments will be:

1) Pliny is not relevant to Qumran, but doesn't discount the possibility of Essenes there,

2) the non-religious use of Qumran doesn't discount the possibility of Essenes there,

3) the toilet may have been for visitors (really, that was the archaeologist's belief!),

4) the Essenes could have lived in artificial caves although there is no positive evidence for this (again, really, that's what two respected archaeologists believe!).

If we were to pursue this, we'd find that there's no way to place Essenes at the site, but we could eke out the case for the possibility if you want to turn a blind eye to certain factors.

Here's something I've already written on Pliny:

Quote:

Pliny and Qumran

Many scholars have long held that Pliny talks of Qumran in his Natural History. However, Pliny simply mentions the fact that below his Essenes was the town of Ein Gedi ("infra hos Engada oppidum fuit"), which should make one look in the hills above the town, as Yizhar Hirschfeld, the Israeli archaeologist, did, finding the remains of what appears to have been a religious community of about the right era there in a lonely spot within the extended oasis of Ein Gedi, with probably only palm trees as company.

For the Latin "infra", Pere de Vaux argued that either "further south" or "further downstream" was what was meant in Pliny's text and further south or further downstream from Qumran was Ein Gedi. (This is called "two bites at the one cherry": he knew a priori what the text meant, but just had to figure out how to get there.) However, in the previous two paragraphs about Judea, Pliny twice uses a term which meant "to the south", "a meridiae", so, if his source wanted to say "further to the south", he could have been clearer, using a term which he had already used, twice.

The notion of "further downstream" is also a mystery: usually downstream refers to rivers (there is no notion of downstream for a sea), so scholars mention that Pliny is following the Jordan, but he left that river a few paragraphs back, then wandered around Gennesaret, drifting off to the east side of the Dead Sea, then crossing over to deal with the Essenes, only relating them to Ein Gedi!

Worse still, we read at the beginning of Pliny's Essene passage, "To the west, the Essenes flee from the coast" ("ab occidente litora Esseni fugiunt"), but Qumran happily sits on a rock terrace not too far from the water line at all. With a higher waterline in the early centuries, as shown by the Madaba Map which shows no Lisan Peninsula, ie it was covered with water, Qumran doesn't give hope of being the home of those who flee from the coast.

spin

12-08-2003, 05:03 AM	#1
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	Essenes and scrolls I will be happy to debate any person or group of people who would like to support the case that the Essenes (of Josephus's four Jewish sects fame) are responsible for the Dead Sea Scrolls. This will mean dealing with the evidence for the case and not just with the opinions of scholars. It would be good to have such a debate on the books for future reference. spin

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-08-2003, 09:51 AM	#4
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Are you proposing a formal debate? If so, I can move this to the formal debate area (if you haven't cross posted it.)

12-08-2003, 10:54 AM	#6
Apikorus Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,396	I'd be willing to take up the case for identifying Qumranians with Essenes, although I am hardly committed to it. Mostly I think it would be fun to exchange with an expert like spin so I could learn more about this subject. I don't have very much time though and I can't promise to post more than once a day, if even that frequently.

12-08-2003, 11:01 AM	#7
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	It sounds like we have the makings of a formal debate. Posting once a day or once a week is quite acceptable. I will copy this to the Formal Debate Set up area.

12-08-2003, 11:05 AM	#8
Apikorus Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,396	I'd prefer not making this a formal debate.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.