[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Qumran question (fwd)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 1996 21:46:37 EST
From: David Jay Kaufman <djk2@acpub.duke.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <ioudaios-l@lehigh.edu>
Subject: Re: Qumran question

On Sun, 3 Mar 1996, Ian Hutchesson wrote:

> To David Jay Kaufman,
> I wasn't actually asking you to post your entire thesis, I was asking for a
> little bibliography of *ancient sources* that underlay the first post you
> made on the subject. I wouldn't want you to waste much time, just a few
> references from a few sources. That's all!
> Ian Hutchesson

My theory is based primarily upon logic. The sources that I might cite, 
such as War VII 423ff simply fit into the logical framework. If you were 
to take away the logical framework, at this point, the theory would 
collapse. The pieces of evidence that I have collected to this point are 
not substantial enough to support the theory on their own. I have not 
been able to collect all of the supporting evidence from the Mishnah, 
Talmud, or even the Dead Sea Scrolls, so I am not able to cite a large 
number of specific examples. My theory, rather than concentrating on 
anything that identifies the groups by name, merely deals with things 
that them. The recent post by Herb Basser is an excellent example. There 
are many things that seem to connect the Essenes with the Pharisees in 
opposition to the Sadducees. The kind of textual interpretation for 
example or perhaps the discussions of ritual purity. The argument that 
the Essenes call themselves sons of Zadok is also perfectly 
understandable. The Essenes would have been the direct descendants of the 
Oniad line and therefore could legitimately call themselves "Sons of 
Zadok". The Hasmonean Priests, the Sadducees were not in the direct line 
and did not associate themselves with Zadok because of blood relation, 
but because of their need to justify their usurpation of the High 
Priesthood from the Oniads. Zadok had taken over the High Priesthood from 
Abitar. Josephus discusses this in Ant. VIII 11. As I have not done the 
legwork required for this topic to be an actual thesis itself, I have 
relegated it to the appendix of my Master's Thesis. At this point, it is 
primarily based upon logic, on general feelings, and vague remembrances 
from past classes. I only include it in my thesis as a topic for further 
discussion and I am glad that it has lived up to that hope in this forum.

-David K.