Methods in biblical scholarship (Solomon)

Numberup at Numberup at
Tue Dec 28 02:24:44 EST 1999

Representative of what?  "Normative Judaism" is for the most part the descendant of
the Pharisaic school of thought, as the rabbis are the inheritors of the Pharisees.
Though 1 Enoch and other apocalyptic works were valued by the Covenant Community
["Essenes"] of Qumran, so far as I can determine, they have not been a part of any
know canon of the Pharisaic sages, i.e., rabbinic Judaism.  That, I thought, was the

Solomon Landers
Memra Institute for Biblical Research

Ian Hutchesson wrote:

> Solomon Landers write:
> >Aramaic fragments of 1 Enoch ...
> >... was not a part of any known canon of the Hebrew or Jewish Bible,
> though it
> >appears to have been in use by sectarians or adherents of alternative
> "Judaisms."
> As the text appeared abundantly at Qumran along with all the major OT/HB
> works and is cited in CD as having value, it would seem to be
> representative, unless you for some reason consider the people who were
> responsible for the Qumran deposit as being 'sectarians or adherents of
> alternative "Judaisms."' If this is the case, how do you justify the position?
> Cheers,
> Ian

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list