[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: orion Hirschfeld implications
[The following text is in the "ISO-8859-1" character set]
[Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set]
[Some characters may be displayed incorrectly]
Well...the claim has always been that the only site north of En Gedi that
could be considered is Qumran, and that particular claim has been bassooned
over us all for two generations now, loudest, but hardly solo, by F.M.
Once one discovers that all of *two* sites fulfil the requirements for
being considered as the site Pliny had in mind (the two near En Gedi), one
wonders why Qumran would have to be included. The only reason I can see has
nothing to do with Pliny, but with some scholars´ imaginative constructions
of hypothetical relationships between the caves and the Qumran site.
If there is *one* principle exegetes should have learned by the time they
start doing professional work, it is the duty to read a document in *its*
terms, and not in terms of some other document...