[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Josephus & DSS
>From jwest@SunBelt.Net Thu Sep 19 19:00:12 1996
Subject: Re: Josephus & DSS
At 02:18 PM 9/19/96 +0100, you wrote:
> I am overjoyed that the DSS are now available for the rest of us
>to study and I am sure they will help to authenticate statements in the
How on earth can the DSS authenticate the NT? And if Josephus is so
reliable, why does he need support?
>Thanks Beruriah Bloom with the statement:
> "Now it seems as though you are suggesting that an unknown, unnamed
author of a
> text found at Qumran is more reliable than Josephus is."
>and Ian Hutchesson with the statements:
> "I find the advice given here almost scandalous(!?)" and
> "I'd rather go for Josephus on the Essenes than flaky modern
I have already responded to both these in earlier posts. I think however
that you do not quite understand Ian aright.
>I wish there were more of you making your voices felt against all these
>keep denigrating the ancient writings which include the Bible. Perhaps
>should give us some facts from the DSS which they say disprove the New
>Testament and Josephus and then we can make our own minds up instead of just
>accepting wild statements like this implying that Acts is unreliable.
Appalling!!! How can one respond to such notions? I was simply responding
to a request made by a grad student and not entering into some kind of grand
demonic scheme to undermine the NT. Yet I suppose that thos who believe
the Bible to be history must always respond with vitriol to any statements
contrary to theirs.
Professor of Biblical Languages, CCBI
Adjunct Professor of Bible, Quartz Hill School of Theology