Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] VanderKam 2nd ed. DSS Today (2010) on Sadducees

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Brak <Brak AT neo.rr.com>
  • To: goranson AT duke.edu
  • Cc: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] VanderKam 2nd ed. DSS Today (2010) on Sadducees
  • Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2010 22:06:49 -0500

"If they did, they succeeded in reversing themselves in fundamental theological tenets within a few years--from nonpredestinarians to all-out determinists, to name just one example. Such a scenario is thoroughly implausible."

I throughly disagree with such an assertion. There are many cases where people (and groups of people) under go complete reversal of theological thought within a space of a few years. I personally witnessed a local church go from being extremely conservative to extremely liberal (for example from "only hymns on the organ/piano" to a full band with drums) in a space of a couple years - caused by the arrival of a new pastor. So for the Qumran sect to go from one belief to the opposing belief is not "thoroughly implausible". In fact by understanding the nature of sects (their birth and growth and off-shooting) its actually very likely. Just my two-cents based on real life experience with it.

B"H
John Steven


goranson AT duke.edu wrote:
Yesterday arrived the brand new second edition of James C. vanderKam, the Dead
Sea Scrolls Today (Eerdmans, 2010). Even if you read the first edition, I
recommend also reading the new edition. For a sample here are two paragraphs
from a longer discussion of the proposal that Sadducees resided at Qumran
(pages 120-121):

"The Sadducees and the Essenes may well have agreed with one another on many
laws or other points; they presumably did not disagree about everything. from
a
historical perspective, one would expect Sadducees and Essenes to share some
views because both had deep priestly roots. The Qumran group may have been
founded and led by priests who called themselves [though not the whole group--
SG] sons of Zadok..., while the term _Sadducee_ seems to be derived from the
name Zadok....Both parties opposed what they understood to be the Pharisaic
tendency to soften some laws and to modify the related penalties. [p. 121]
That
is, one reason why they shared some legal views is that both were conservative
on matters relating to the law.

The nature of the data from the Mishnah...hardly matches the amount and
character of the earlier information from Josephus, Pliny, and others that has
led many to identify the Qumranites as Essenes. That Qumran views and those
attributed to the Sadducees correspond for a few individual laws does not
entail that the Qumran group was Sadducean in any sense in which that name is
commonly employed today. After all, the Qumran manuscripts teach such
prominent
anti-Sadducean doctrines as the existence of multitudes of angels and the
all-controlling power of fate. How could Sadducees develop such teachings,
which are diametrically opposed to what ancient writers said about them? Also,
the fact that an _early_ document such as the Cave 1 copy of the Rule of the
Community...enunciates thoroughly Essene, anti-Sadducean theology makes it
most
improbable that the Qumran residents arose from Sadducean origins. If they
did,
they succeeded in reversing themselves in fundamental theological tenets
within
a few years--from nonpredestinarians to all-out determinists, to name just one
example. Such a scenario is thoroughly implausible."

best,
Stephen Goranson
http://www.duke.edu/~goranson

_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew




  • Re: [b-hebrew] VanderKam 2nd ed. DSS Today (2010) on Sadducees, Brak, 03/06/2010

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page