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

Re: orion question to moderator

Jim West wrote:

> If Stephen were sincerely interested in addressing the moderator he
> would
> have contacted her privately.  I am taken aback by the suggestion that
> our
> posts have been "egregious".  In answer to Stephens question- for
> myself I
> say, answer away, Sir.  I await your proof that the Essenes were the
> authors
> of the Qumran scrolls.  Pleas do not bother us with Pliny, though, as
> he
> proves nothing.  And please do not suggest that the locale proves
> anything
> either.

    I have been completely ignoring this discussion, but at this point I
would pose two questions, in particular to Jim West.  First, what would
"prove" something about he Dead Sea Scrolls to you?  At this distance,
all there is is data and varying inerpretations of it.  Plausible
interpretatins should be considered over implausible interpretatins.
There is no data that can prove anything, so saying that Pliny proves
nothing is rather irrelevant.  There is raw data, and ther is
interpretation of that data.  Period.  What your interpretive grid
allows in and allows for is up to you.  IT doesn't make Pliny or locale
or anything else more or less valuable in reconstruction.  Note that I
am not taking a positionhere.  I am responding to someone who appers to
merley jettison data that seems inconvenient without providing a method
to evaluate what data dos exist is a forthright way.  I'm not even
asking or objectivity, which as any good post-Modern knows doesn't
exist.  Can Orion get back to substantive discussion of the DSS?  If you
don't value the data or accept the inerpretationsof others, that's fine
with me but I don't really care.  I don[t know your position or
Stephen's, so I'm not taking sides.  I don't personally think enough
data exists to take a strong position, but I've never seen the site in
person.   This bickering seems pointless and it's filling my mail box
too much.

Ken Litwak