[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: orion Orion Sadducees (MMT) et al, Part 1
At 09:47 17/07/97 -0500, Jack Kilmon wrote:
> First, this is getting a bit afield from Dale's original question
>regarding thepresence of "proto-Christians" near Damascus. Since Orion
>is a forum for
>the scholarly discussion of the DSS and the people of the DSS, I assume
Right -- and why unsupported assumptions cannot stand.
>those that were *first* (the immediate
>surviving followers of Y'shua and the Jamesian community of Netzarim)
>is indeed in the form of a "stemma" from an historical standpoint
No such "stemma" may be assumed.
> Please note that "Christianity" is in quotes. I thought it was
>clear that I was referring to a genre within Judaism that can be
>exemplified by some of the DSS texts as well as some of the
>pseudepigraphal writing of the time...a genre in
>which those that were *first* in succession (and perhaps the
>DSS people) found themselves.
To describe this genre as Christian, even in quotes, implies substantiation
of a begged question. Any connection with Christianity must be
demonstrated, not assumed. The issue in question here is strictly your use
of the term Christian, quoted or otherwise, in describing this group by
*assuming* the connection, without demonstrating the connection or
continuity. Why don't you simply switch to a logical term? If you have
some bias against Netzarim that shouldn't be a problem. There's other
logical descriptions. If, for example, you used 'Yeshuine Jews'
consistently I think that would solve the problem... unless you've some
reason to continue insisting on anachronistically injecting 'Christian' into
>> There was no disputation "on 'legitimate Judaism'" during this period.
> Of course there was.....sometimes violent.
One may not *assume* it was about 'legitimate Judaism' with no
substantiation whatsoever, particularly when MMT demonstrates otherwise, as
both Qimron and Susskind have stated. If you haven't read Qimron it's
central to this issue and you should do so. The disputations were *within*
legitimate Judaism, over which version of Torah she-ba'al peh was "right"
and should be followed, in its entirety, by all of 'legitimate Judaism'.
I've seen no evidence of disputation regarding the definitions or bounds of
'legitimate Judaism' -- which came under the undisputed jurisdiction of the
Beyt Din Ha-Gadol during this period. There were certainly arguments over
this in the Beyt Din Ha-Gadol, but no record of any decision excluding any
two of the three major sects from 'legitimate Judaism.' (Even if there were
record of such an excision, one could *still* not assume any connection with
Christianity, quoted or otherwise. Any connection or continuity would still
have to be demonstrated, not assumed.)
Paqid 16, Global Congregation of Nazarene Jews
Netzarim Virtual Community Center