[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Josephus & DSS
.>>Now it seems as though you are suggesting that an unknown, unnamed author of
>>text found at Qumran is more reliable than Josephus is.
>FIrst, you must be assuming that I desire to use the Qumran texts to
>reconstruct the whole of Jewish history. I am not. I am simply saying that
>if you want to understand what someone has said you must read their words
>and not someone's interpretation of those words. (ad fontes!!!!!)
Okay, so according to your logic I shouldn't be reading any of the discussions
of the Bible, Mishnah or DSS on Orion or ioudaios-l <g>!
>> Having read some of these texts already
>Some? To gain a complete understaning one must read them ALL.
Excuse me, but who has read them ALL? How do you know that ALL of them made it
to the 20th century, or have been found at Qumran or anywhere else?
>>, I certainly do not see their author(s) as being "objective"
>>in any sense of the word about the era in which they lived or their
>You make my point for me.
Who is ever objective about the era in which they live, or about their
>>How can I arbitrarily decide that they are to be
>>believed, Josephus is not?
>>And besides (to return to my original question to which you responded), the
>>author(s) of the scrolls never claim in any document thus found that they are
>>Essenes. Josephus is our primary source for information that there ever was a
>>group called "Essenes." So how can throwing out Josephus and his evidence
>>"prove" that the Qumranites were Essenes?
>You can't!!!! But which do you wish- to understand the Qumranites as they
>understood themselves or as Josephus the novelist understood them?
So far, you still have not given me any evidence that the Qumranites understood
themselves to have been Essenes, or any reason why contemporary scholars should
presume that they were.
Speaking of novels, have you ever read A CANTICLE FOR LIEBOWITZ ?
(No comparisons with DSS scholarship intended, of course <g>)