Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
11-21-2003, 08:43 AM | #11 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta Canada
Posts: 2,612
|
Quote:
1) I won't argue the standard Essene Hypothesis, because I'm persuaded that it's probably incorrect. Rather I'll follow the lead of Martinez et al.--the so-called "Groningen Hypothesis"--and argue that those at Qumran represent a splinter from mainstream Essenism. That, in short, we can identify Qumran by the Essenes, but not the Essenes by Qumran. 2) You're not just going to try and falsify my position, but are also going to present an alternative model of Scrolls origin. It would be helpful to know what that model will be in advance. It's not enough to simply say "These are the problems with an Essene identification,"--I know there are problems. I accept it because it's the best fit. To falsify that, you need to illustrate a better fit. Regards, Rick |
|
11-21-2003, 09:10 AM | #12 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
|
Quote:
To falsify anyone's Essene scrolls relationship, all I have to do is show that it is wrong. I will offer an alternative only after showing that the Essene stuff is wrong. The alternative however does involve not retrojecting Pharisaic ideas of the Jewish religion into the analysis. I will have to do it all from memory as I have been doing here so far, for all my books (except the first volume of the Martinez and Tigchelaar translation with text) are on another continent. And try not to wear Josephus out on the Essenes. Remember his audience and what they knew of Greek schools. Which Greek school do the Essenes best fit? It's up to you. spin |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|