Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

archibald wrote on another thread:

Interesting.

But......James was openly preaching near the temple (Eisenmann thinks)?

Also, 'Paul' would not have been 'establishment'?

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3780&start=50

So (apparently) did the Teacher of Righteousness, as Kim, for example, notes.

The Dead Sea Scrolls community attacked the Wicked Priest as having taken over the Jerusalem Temple wrongfully in kicking out the Teacher of Righteousness.

https://books.google.com/books?id=XvreA ... em&f=false

And Paul would certainly have been part of the establishment since he had been a Pharisee (Php. 3:5), who are arguably the ones the DSS sect were opposed to, as VanderKam, for example, notes:

"Seekers of smooth things" is the name the Scrolls community gave to their opponents, who are almost certainly the Pharisees ... it is likely that the word for smooth things (halaqot) is a word play for the Pharisaic term halakhot (laws).

https://books.google.com/books?id=i2i5h ... ot&f=false

According to Josephus, even the Sadducees, who did not believe in the oral Torah of the Pharisees, were "able to do almost nothing of themselves; for when they become magistrates ... they addict themselves to the notions of the Pharisees, because the multitude would not otherwise bear them" (Ant. 18.1.4) and "have not the populace obsequious to them" like the Pharisees did (Ant. 13.10.6).

Yes, but is there another way of looking at it, that the 'fully formed template' did not require there to actually be a Jesus?

I suppose not, but there is at least a Messiah (or the expectation of a Messiah) in the DSS, particularly in the Damascus Document where it is always a singular Messiah. And I've always been intrigued by the ending of the Damascus Document, which says that when the Messiah comes in the Last Days, "God will forgive them and they shall see His salvation because they took refuge in His holy Name," with the Hebrew for "His salvation" being "yeshuato," i.e., "His yeshua," which of course is Jesus' name; plus the reference to "seeing" this yeshua is interesting given all the talk in the NT about "seeing" Jesus/the Son of Man (e.g., 1 Cor. 9:1, "Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?").

And as Eisenman notes in The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered:

The use of the noun ‘Yesha’ or the verbal noun ‘Yeshu’ ato’ (‘His Salvation’) is fairly widespread at Qumran and much underrated.

https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/scro ... d07.htm#44

What a surprise. John2 shilling again.

MrMacSon wrote on another thread regarding the examples I gave of similarities between the Dead Sea Scrolls and Christianity there:

There's likely to be a lot more going on in Second Temple Judaism and in the early-mid post Second Temple period than we have been and still are commonly led to believe.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3780&start=50

Well, sure, but as Lim and Bauckham noted in the other thread regarding practicing a new covenant and "the way" in the DSS, the only other group that we know to have used these concepts were Jewish Christians, so why prefer to imagine that another sect may have used them too versus looking at all the other similarities between the DSS and Jewish Christianity and wondering how these ideas may have "flowed full-blown and almost without alteration into the main 'opposition' orientation of the first century CE," as Eisenman puts it?

I have Stephan on ignore and I'm not going to read anything he has to say about Eisenman because in my experience any discussion of Eisenman tends to aggravate him and it makes me not enjoy being on this forum. To me my interest in Eisenman is no different than my interest in Nehemia Gordon or Boyarin, who have been equally as influential on me regarding Christianity and who I frequently mention. No one ever accuses me of being them or trying to sell their books or promoting Karaism, so I don't understand why it would be any different (in Stephan's mind anyway) when it comes to Eisenman, and in any event I don't have time for it.

John2 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2018 7:09 pm
MrMacSon wrote on another thread regarding the examples I gave of similarities between the Dead Sea Scrolls and Christianity there:

There's likely to be a lot more going on in Second Temple Judaism and in the early-mid post Second Temple period than we have been and still are commonly led to believe.

[link to post proper; previous post was to the top of page] - viewtopic.php?p=80741#p80741

Well, sure, but as Lim and Bauckham noted in the other thread regarding practicing a new covenant and "the way" in the DSS, the only other group that we know to have used these concepts were Jewish Christians, so why prefer to imagine that another sect may have used them too versus looking at all the other similarities between the DSS and Jewish Christianity and wondering how these ideas may have "flowed full-blown and almost without alteration into the main 'opposition' orientation of the first century CE," as Eisenman puts it?

You seem to be posting a fait accompli and seem to be seeking to limit investigation when you say why prefer to imagine that another sect may have used them too versus looking at all the other similarities between the DSS and Jewish Christianity"". Your reference to 'prefer to imagine' grates.

MrMacSon wrote:

You seem to be posting a fait accompli and seem to be seeking to limit investigation when you say why prefer to imagine that another sect may have used them too versus looking at all the other similarities between the DSS and Jewish Christianity"". Your reference to 'prefer to imagine' grates.

Regarding your last sentence, sorry about that. That wasn't my intention. Feel free to apply other words ("think of," "ponder," suppose," "brainstorm," "conceptualize").

Regarding the rest, I'm not opposed to "conceptualizing" any ideas regarding the DSS. Wise, for example (who worked with Eisenman on The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered), "supposes" that the Teacher of Righteousness was someone he calls "Judah, a forgotten prophet who predated Jesus as a messianic figure by a century and has had a profound impact on the course of Christianity and Western civilization."

https://books.google.com/books?id=_ihmQ ... kQ6AEIJzAA

That's fine with me, even if it's not my thing. Is there a particular idea in this vein that you like?

In my view, I'm okay with the idea of there having been an unknown sect prior to the first century CE that wrote the DSS, but whoever they may have been would still seem similar to Jewish Christians to me. I don't "suppose" that Jesus existed in a vacuum, and it seems plausible to me that he could have sprung from soil that had been prepared by the DSS sect.

No problem. There's been quite a bit of discussion on this forum about the DSS scrolls, the Teacher of Righteousness, etc.

A few people here think Greg Doudna is one of the better commentators. You could search "righteousness" or "Doudna" on the forum search box (top right). I tend to search one word at a time, then sequentially enter the other/s in the search box on the left hand side.

eta: eg. http://www.earlywritings.com/forum/sear ... hteousness

eta2: Doudna has argued that the 'Teacher of Righteousness' was Hyrcanus II (dunno if he still thinks that)

John2 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2018 5:44 pm I suppose not, but there is at least a Messiah (or the expectation of a Messiah) in the DSS, particularly in the Damascus Document where it is always a singular Messiah. And I've always been intrigued by the ending of the Damascus Document, which says that when the Messiah comes in the Last Days, "God will forgive them and they shall see His salvation because they took refuge in His holy Name," with the Hebrew for "His salvation" being "yeshuato," i.e., "His yeshua," which of course is Jesus' name; plus the reference to "seeing" this yeshua is interesting given all the talk in the NT about "seeing" Jesus/the Son of Man (e.g., 1 Cor. 9:1, "Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?").

Please correct me if I'm mistaken but weren't the DSS scrolls all in Hebrew and Aramaic? One cave I understand had a small smattering of Greek texts, mostly non-religious, but the bulk was Hebraic and Aramaic.

Do we see any sigh of Jewish groups during this time using any other languages besides Hebrew and Aramaic for their religious texts?