Raphael Haim Golb

Discussion about the Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, pseudepigrapha, Philo, Josephus, Talmud, Dead Sea Scrolls, archaeology, etc.
semiopen
Posts: 340
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 6:27 pm

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by semiopen » Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:52 pm

I'm still trying to understand the "liberal" crack in the first post.

Tourette_syndrome ?

User avatar
John T
Posts: 897
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by John T » Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:54 pm

semiopen wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:52 pm
I'm still trying to understand the "liberal" crack in the first post.

Tourette_syndrome ?
This thread was truncated by Peter from another subject. Hence the non sequitur regarding the trial of Golb.

In other words, never mind. :cheeky:

John T
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 5160
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by Peter Kirby » Thu Nov 16, 2017 9:25 pm

John T wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 5:08 am
Is Norman banned from internet sites like this one?
Possibly, but he's not banned from this one (as far as as I know, he's never signed up).
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

User avatar
John T
Posts: 897
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by John T » Fri Nov 17, 2017 3:45 pm

Peter Kirby wrote:
Thu Nov 16, 2017 9:25 pm
John T wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 5:08 am
Is Norman banned from internet sites like this one?
Possibly, but he's not banned from this one (as far as as I know, he's never signed up).
Then by all means, invite Norman to join this forum.
I have some questions I would like to ask him regarding James the Just and the DSS. :cheers:

John T
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 2169
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by DCHindley » Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:24 am

John T wrote:
Fri Nov 17, 2017 3:45 pm
Peter Kirby wrote:
Thu Nov 16, 2017 9:25 pm
John T wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 5:08 am
Is Norman banned from internet sites like this one?
Possibly, but he's not banned from this one (as far as as I know, he's never signed up).
Then by all means, invite Norman to join this forum.
I have some questions I would like to ask him regarding James the Just and the DSS. :cheers:
Let's maintain a separation between Norman Golb, and his son Raphael Golb.

Norman is a Jewish scholar with a theory that the DSS are not just sectarian literature that can be ignored as aberrations from "normative" Judaism, but repositories for texts that had been in use all over the region, and thus actually representing "normative" Judaism.

Raphael Golb, his son, is - I believe - a lawyer, who felt that his dad's hypothesis was being contemptuously "poo-poo'd" by Lawrence Schiffman, a scholar with measurably more clout in Jewish academia, because Norman was not being "politically correct."

Apparently, most modern Jews would prefer to think that pre-rabbinic Judaism was fairly close in doctrines to the Rabbinic tradition that developed after the revolt of 66-73 CE. Thus, it is preferable to marginalize the DSS as aberrations held by "Essenes" rather than normative. This is basically the position of Lawrence Schiffman.

If Norman Golb the scholar is correct, though, that the kind of Judean beliefs found in the DSS represent the "norm" of that day and region, right in the heart of Judaea, then Rabbinic Judaism did not exist in the 1st century BCE and earlier, when the scrolls were likely produced.

The teachings and beliefs found in the DSS are quite different from Rabbinic traditions. Our concepts of what constitutes the beliefs and traditions of Sadducees, Pharisees and Essenes, must be completely wrong, or the sources that were preserved (mainly Josephus, Philo and the NT) have purposely misrepresented them to Roman and Greek speakers for rhetorical reasons.

This is why so many Jewish scholars have adopted the interpretation that the DSS were produced by "Essenes" and thus did not in any way represent normative Judaism of the time they were likely produced, that is, of Sadducees & Pharisees. So L. Schiffman was motivated to marginalize Norman Golb.

This position of Schiffman also pleases many Christian scholars, because the doctrines of the NT Gospels and Acts presuppose certain teachings as Sadducean & Pharasiac that are fairly close (though not identical) to what Josephus says about them. Many Christian scholars, including moderates and liberals and even some agnostics, thus also agree that N. Golb's hypothesis MUST be pure bunk.

And so the whole issue of what to make of the DSS has become incredibly divisive and embittered, both for Jews and Christians of the academy.

Most also used to laugh to scorn the idea of plate tectonics in geology until it was demonstrated scientifically, many, many decades after the theory was proposed.

Maybe Norman is correct and maybe not (I do not have a firm position on the question), but that is yet to be hashed out. There are many ways to connect dots that have not yet been tried or even imagined. That is what makes the process fun! :lol:

That being said, I don't think this justifies Raphael's method of "not getting mad but getting even," by means of character assassination through duplicitous means (falsely attributed salacious e-mails meant to smear his father's antagonists). I do not believe that Norman Golb has condoned his son's actions, and probably was a bit embarrassed by them. Raphael, though, would not be the first to employ such tactics.

The legitimacy issue over of the "James brother of Jesus" ossuary a while back seemed to also have been accompanied by a wave of salacious e-mails spooked to look like legitimate messages that sought to malign Eisenman and others who weighed in on the matter as skeptics of its authenticity. Usually these opponents to authenticity thought that the "brother of Jesus" part was scratched on by the person who owned it in modern times as a means to enhance its value in order to sell it to a museum.

A number of advocates for authenticity, on the other hand, felt that the entire label "James brother of Jesus" was not only true, but this artifact MUST be the ossuary of James the Just the Brother of Jesus from Christian tradition. This view is an overstatement in my opinion, as there could be many possible persons named James (very popular name in that time) who may also have had a brother named Jesus (again, a popular name of that time) for us to assume this with such certainty. But even so, it has become their "proof" that James existed and consequently validates the truth value of Christian traditions.

Let's not even talk about present day US politics on both ends of the spectrum! :facepalm:

This is why I try to remain neutral on matters like this. I don't want to let the tail wag the dog.

DCH (wuff wuff)

User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 2169
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by DCHindley » Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:25 am

duplicate removed
Last edited by DCHindley on Sun Nov 19, 2017 8:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Steven Avery
Posts: 317
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by Steven Avery » Sat Nov 18, 2017 10:43 am

Just to be clear on my position, it is solely based on the comparison of the multi-felony prosecution and what was essentially harmless actions, with no negative results, no financial element, and any minor disruption easily rectified. If Norman Golb is totally wrong in his position, and if there is no plagiarism actually done by Lawrence Schiffman, to me it is rather irrelevant to the case around Raphael Golb. The scholarly questions are legitimate, and even if Raphael was going off of a totally errant viewpoint, if his mind was in a scholarly fog, there should never have been a prosecution.

DCH, you use "salacious" a lot. That pertains, afaik, to sexual type of vulgar content. Is that how you are using it here?

btw, your post is in twice.

Steven

User avatar
John T
Posts: 897
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by John T » Sun Nov 19, 2017 7:54 am

My apologies.

Norman Golb released his book titled, "Who wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls?" back in 1995. I have seen interviews of him in the past (YouTube) but I did not realize how long ago those interviews were.

A quick review of his bio (date of birth) would have him being almost 90 years old.
Clearly, it would not be appropriate to solicit his opinion in his late stage of life.

Again, my apologies.

Sincerely,

John T
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

Steven Avery
Posts: 317
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by Steven Avery » Sun Nov 19, 2017 2:35 pm

Wait, Norman was never banned from nuttin. Some limitations were placed on Raphael, but I do not know if they are active. Of course, his lawyer might well advise him not to mix it up too much even if there is no court limitations that apply.

My dad had a very sharp mind past 95, so there is no reason why a 90-year-old might not contribute excellently to a conversation. However, I don't think Norman was ever involved in internet discussions. Meanwhile, I did sort of invite Raphael to join us, but I don't think it got posted. Raphael probably did read the invite, and of course I emphasized that this forum is interested and would likely treat him well.

My understanding, no jail (2 month is hanging) at this time, as they are filing a motion with the Supremes. Shhh... this might be the first public whisper about that plan.

Steven

User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 2169
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by DCHindley » Sun Nov 19, 2017 8:24 pm

Steven Avery wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 10:43 am
DCH, you use "salacious" a lot. That pertains, afaik, to sexual type of vulgar content. Is that how you are using it here?
Yeah, from what I remember the posts would make lewd comments about various people, maybe use course language, in imitation of a person of low moral caliber (more of a caricature of "the kind of man you would not want your daughter to date").

Eisenman said to me that he became aware of them when colleagues started to e-mail him asking "did you really say *that* to the Dean?!" The guy, who I had previously exchanged messages on a Prodigy discussion board, did not come across to me as someone who would hardly talk like that, so when he said he was deeply embarrassed by this kind of thing being linked to him, I believed him. The Raphael Golb imitations were maybe not as sexually crude as the ones Eisenman described to me, but the crudeness was there.

I'm not saying that Raphael Golb had anything to do with Eisenman's problem (don't recall off the top of my head which incident occurred before the other) but it seems that whoever it was in both cases had no problem with talking vulgarly. I've made some pretty weird observations over the years, just from doing regular internet searches for terms that come up in these kind off discussion groups. I once used to joke that Internet searches of the word Jesus would turn up hits to porn sites, but I was genuinely surprised when searching for terms that come up in sites like this all the time returned porn sites. I'll just name two names, and you can do the research: "Flavius Josephus" (regular hard core porn) and "Hermes Trismegistus" (boy erotica). It became pretty clear to me that there are at least two persons out there who were involved in both "our" world and "those" worlds.

It's a sad world out there.

DCH

Post Reply