[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Herod-Era DSS
Ian Hutchesson writes:
> Dear Russell [Gmirkin],
> >As for the use of "we" implying this was before the TR, to my mind there
> >is no logical basis for such a conclusion. I know Schiffman for one has
> >scenario whereby MMT was the first sectarian writing
> Yes, I did have Schiffman in mind, but I don't find the suggestion of the
> twenty years before the appearance of the righteous teacher as unlikely as
> you do. If MMT precipitated a withdrawal from temple cultus on halakhic
> grounds, this would have put the writers and their followers into a state
> sin, unable to perform their duties in the temple and it was not until the
> teacher gave a way out of this situation that they came through the
In this case what do you do with 4QMMT 92-93 (Martinez) = frag 7+8 line 7 in
which the authors of MMT say they had already segregated (i.e. exiled)
themselves from the rest of the people? Also, there are a couple stray
references to the end of days and the council of Belial, and the way I read
the other scrolls the dominion of Belial at the end of days commenced with
the death of the TR.
> >my view is that MMT was written long
> >after the death of the TR and the passing of the urgent apocalyptic
> >i.e. after the sectarians had nothing better to due than quibble minor
> >points of law.
> This has some appeal, but it's hook, line and sinker in the mouth of the
> sectarian stuff I find somewhat unjustified. Let's forget about Qumran for
> the next few years, let the monastic life die a silent death and drop as
> many assumptions as we can about the dss.
I agree at least 95% There is certainly no archaeological evidence linking
Qumran with the origins of the sect, or with the monastery idea. I do tend
to accept the dss as emanating from a single religious group however. The
absence of any material suggestive of the Pharisees, for instance, is
> Put the righteous teacher back in Jerusalem, in the temple (the unfaithful
> didn't listen to him), a tense armed peace over the cultus, until another
> schism partly brought about by the political choices made at the time in
> which the teacher withdraws from the temple to a private house in
> where he is visited by the high priest. (I can't imagine the high priest
> choofing off to Qumran, can you?)
No. For one thing, an exile to Qumran, practically in the back yard of
Jerusalem, at a time when fairly intense Hasmonean economic activity existed
near the Dead Sea, and Qumran was practically surrounded by Hasmonean
fortresses, is not much better an exile than one in a Jerusalem suburb.
I can imagine, however, with the help of 2 Macc. 4:1-6, 30-38, a high priest
being driven into exile to Antioch.
> The paragragh [preceding] is fairly reasoned to show that the
> Essene traditions may well have come through Nicolas of Damascus, and no
> doubt that it's possible. It's a shame that nothing at the moment will let
> us choose one way or another...
> I also tend to jump on the Essene hypothesis as only weakly
> founded on circumstantial evidence...
True on both counts.
-- Russell Gmirkin