[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Qumran Monastary
>In short, Jim, a "Qumran monastery" is just another layer of cow's doovers
>that needs to be removed from the dancing couple Texts and Place.
>
>We really don't know what the function of the place was at the time of the
>deposition of the texts, notwithstanding the discovery of more caves and
>sensational JP articles. But people are inextricably locked into viewing the
>texts as reflecting the community (and some kind of community based around
>Khirbet Qumran there was -- whether it be a simply farming community, or
>something else, who knows yet?), if that community is seen in an unjustified
>way, the texts will tend to be interpreted likewise. Further archaeological
>work could be based on wrong assumptions.
>
>I am of the opinion that we would do better to *totally forget* about Qumran
>while working on the texts -- at least for a good while until the bare
>contents of the texts can be dealt with in themselves.
>
>Fare ye well,
>
>Ian Hutchesson
>
>
I suppose that, if we are to do any substantive work, we do need to move
ahead of the "tradition" which we have received from the first generation of
scholars- until their work is demonstrated to be true (if it ever can be).
Jim West