I wonder if he thought that maybe, just maybe, that was a nickname for the 'ousted temple priests'?
Since those in Jerusalem celebrated Purim and the scroll writers did not, I would think this theory has problems. None of the theories are 100%, but assuming the scroll writers were either Essene or Essene-like is the best option...imho
“... before the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE”
Why does the author use the term “CE” instead of “AD”? Isn’t that the new secular progressive term to steer people away from a historical biblical perspective? I’ve always gone with BC and AD and I don’t think I’ll ever change.
Anno Domini is good enough for me. Common Era can be for someone else.
Heck, why not go for the gold dude? -The Dead Sea scrolls never existed! Saul of Tarsus and Jesus of Nazareth never existed!
All that crap is make-believe for the weakminded, remember?
Dissidence came about due to Herod's brutalities, his flauting of Jewish moral teaching, his client status with the Romans and tolerance for Roman religious practices, and not the least, in Herod's being an Edomite and not actually a Jew.
Herod's temple, the dissidents held was an abomination as they believed it had been paid for by the Romans in an attempt to bolster Herod within religious elements, though the pro-Herod Sanhedrin accepted it.
In view of the background turmoil, what difference then if the documents in question were written in caves or in Jerusalem houses or the Starbucks of the day?
I know this Prof. Rachel Elior. She has an agenda, she is very anti-Israel and an atheist. I would take James Charlesworth over her any day.
Also, the Essenes were one of MANY sects of Judaism that existed prior to the fall of Jerusalem. There is more evidence (outside of Josephus) for them than for many of the others that scholars ‘accept’.
|
|||
Gods |
Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution. |
||
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
You know what’s weird (and yet not at all unexpected)? If the Bible mentions a person or a group “scholars” automatically assume a skeptical attitude and refuse to consider the person/group as historical until it is “confirmed” by being mentioned elsewhere. But if any text other than the Bible mentions a person/group . . . well then, it’s absolute truth and to deny it is heresy!