FW: Re[8]: Methods in biblical scholarship

Moshe Shulman mshulman at ix.netcom.com
Thu Dec 30 12:22:11 EST 1999


At 07:50 AM 12/30/1999 +0100, you wrote:
>At 15.20 29/12/99 -0500, Moshe Shulman wrote:
>>At 09:01 PM 12/29/1999 +0100, you wrote:
>>>At 10.56 29/12/99 -0500, Moshe Shulman wrote:
>>>>The DSS are filled with tirades against the
>>>>temple as it was. They seemed to be independant of the temple.
>>>If you put it in context, it would help. You'll find strong defences of the
>>>temple in the DSS. The tirades are never against the temple, but against
>>>the people who were in control of it at one stage. There are a few well
>>The point I am making is that they were able to exist without the temple,
>>because they saw it as 'unusable'. The post destruction period would be no
>>different.
>Moshe, that may be your immediate point, but you have diverged from the
>conversation on the position that can be elicited about the writers of the

Maybe you have forgotten, my comment was with regards to your saying that
only the Pharisees were able to function after the destruction of the
temple because they had a theology to deal with it. I just pointed out that
this was an error. The DSS community should also have survived.

>scrolls as to their position in Judaism and thus the texts that they used,
>ie if the people represented by the DSS were not a minor sect, how can one
>exclude the texts known from elsewhere that they used, Jubilees, Enoch,
>Tobit, testaments of various patriarchs, etc?

Maybe Josepehus was right about their being a minor group?

moshe shulman mshulman at NOSPAMix.netcom.com    718-436-7705
CHASSIDUS.NET - Yoshav Rosh            http://www.chassidus.net
Outreach Judaism                       http://www.outreachjudaism.org/
ICQ# 52009254




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list