Current State of Samaritan Studies (Hexateuch)

Discussion about the Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, pseudepigrapha, Philo, Josephus, Talmud, Dead Sea Scrolls, archaeology, etc.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Current State of Samaritan Studies (Hexateuch)

Post by Secret Alias »

My point has been that there is no evidence for the Pentateuch having been known in the Persian era.
Well. You see. There you go again. There is evidence. I've brought it up during the course of the discussion. Not the same thing as saying PERSUASIVE evidence (where 'persuasive' is ultimately a subjective determination). The evidence is:

1. Persian words translated into Hebrew
2. Persian words translated into the Greek translation
3. Persian concepts like pardes, dat
4. Josephus's citation of a presumably Jewish source that Jews and Samaritans practiced levitical laws (calculation of Sabbatical years)
5. the consequences of Samaritan primacy argument (which we are discussing here) namely
(i) a Samaritan text defining Jewish religious life could only have or more likely have been written in an age where northern Israelite culture was at its zenith
(ii) the amount of time necessary for the Qumran fragment to have been produced in a specifically Jewish and specifically isolated setting like Qumran given (a) Joshua being written after Deuteronomy and Deuteronomy after an original Tetrateuch and this Hexateuch to have originated in Samaria and then brought to 'Judaism' and then Qumran specifically c. 250 BCE.

Whether you are persuaded by these arguments they constitute arguments and evidence (where in the case of 5ii a chronological reconstruction is evidentiary).
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Current State of Samaritan Studies (Hexateuch)

Post by Secret Alias »

Don't pretend to understand my research
Once again. I do this with every professional academic who comes to this forum. Let me say I am proud that a brilliant mind has come to the forum. At the same time (a) the forum is and has always been a 'free' discussion forum and (b) I don't egoism and react negatively to anyone who makes discussions about them and their work. Just rubs me the wrong way. It's the ideas that count. You have your opportunity to convince anyone and everyone that everyone else is wrong and you are right. Go ahead and make your case. In 'real life' I hate people who make it all about 'them' and 'their work.' Show me the idea. Break it down for me. Otherwise make friends at a bar, a church, synagogue, mall. Whatever. If you want to attract followers find zeroes.

I had a Holocaust survivor as a mother. In the process of making my son's application for Article 116 (2) I managed to unearth 400 pages from the Swiss archives where the government describes the conditions of her survival in Switzerland as a non-citizen (because of her Swiss mother's marriage to her German father). Didn't spend a day in a classroom. Ever. While it affected her abilities to function as a productive member of society I did inherit her suspicion that if you give someone an opportunity to make an argument 'to your face' and has to resort to tactics, 'read my book' etc. chances are the argument isn't that persuasive.

My mom's quote "academics hide behind big words and long titles." I have to admit I basically agree.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Current State of Samaritan Studies (Hexateuch)

Post by MrMacSon »

Secret Alias wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 9:16 am
My point has been that there is no evidence for the Pentateuch having been known in the Persian era.
Well. You see. There you go again. There is evidence. I've brought it up during the course of the discussion. Not the same thing as saying PERSUASIVE evidence (where 'persuasive' is ultimately a subjective determination).

The evidence is:
  1. Persian words translated into Hebrew
  2. Persian words translated into the Greek translation
  3. Persian concepts like pardes, dat
  4. Josephus's citation of a presumably Jewish source that Jews and Samaritans practiced Levitical laws (calculation of Sabbatical years)
  5. the consequences of Samaritan primacy argument (which we are discussing here) namely:
    1. a Samaritan text defining Jewish religious life could only have or more likely have been written in an age where northern Israelite culture was at its zenith
    2. the amount of time necessary for the Qumran fragment to have been produced in a specifically Jewish and specifically isolated setting like Qumran given
      1. Joshua being written after Deuteronomy; and
      2. Deuteronomy after an original Tetrateuch; and
      3. this Hexateuch to have originated in Samaria; and
      4. then brought to 'Judaism' and then Qumran specifically c. 250 BCE.
Whether you are persuaded by these arguments they constitute arguments and evidence (where, in the case of 5.ii., a chronological reconstruction is evidentiary).

OK. Let's elaborate on some of this.

A. What is
4. *Josephus's citation* of a presumably Jewish source that Jews and Samaritans practiced Levitical laws (calculation of Sabbatical years) [??]

B. re 5.i.
"a Samaritan text[s] defining Jewish religious life...written in an age where northern Israelite culture was at its zenith"
  1. When do you think "northern Israelite culture was at its zenith" ??
  2. Do you have a specific Samaritan text in mind ??

C. re 5.ii.
"the amount of time necessary for the Qumran fragment to have been produced in a specifically Jewish and specifically isolated setting like Qumran"
  1. What Qumran fragment/s are you referring to ??
  2. What do you mean by a "necessary" amount of time ?? | Why does its/their production require a "necessary" amount of time ??

D. re 5.ii.b.
"Deuteronomy after an original Tetrateuch"
  • What evidence is there for "an original Tetrateuch" ??
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Current State of Samaritan Studies (Hexateuch)

Post by neilgodfrey »

Secret Alias wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 9:16 am
My point has been that there is no evidence for the Pentateuch having been known in the Persian era.
Well. You see. There you go again. There is evidence. I've brought it up during the course of the discussion. Not the same thing as saying PERSUASIVE evidence (where 'persuasive' is ultimately a subjective determination). The evidence is:

1. Persian words translated into Hebrew
2. Persian words translated into the Greek translation
3. Persian concepts like pardes, dat
That piece of evidence does not tell us when a particular Hebrew text was written. It only tells us that a handful of Persian words found their way into Hebrew and that at some time those Hebrew speakers used those words in their writings. It does not prove that the writings were composed in the Persian era. I use words today that are from Roman imperial days, and from Norman times, even some Persian and Iranian words. It does not mean I am writing under Roman, Norman or Persian rule.
4. Josephus's citation of a presumably Jewish source that Jews and Samaritans practiced levitical laws (calculation of Sabbatical years)
Have you read any of the works you cited earlier or any of my responses to that point? You have not addressed them but only return to repeating your original point as if nothing those articles I said or anything I have proposed needs any engagement at all. No historian would accept Josephus as a source for practices in Persian times unless his information was independently supported. The best Josephus can do for us is inform us what people in his own day believed, and perhaps what was written in a source a century or two earlier. And we have seen the evidence that what Josephus said about the sabbatical years at the time of Alexander -- I take it you read the articles you cited and works I referenced earlier so you know I am not "making this up" -- has no historical basis.

Josephus also said Alexander read the book of Daniel and the prophecy he was to destroy the Persian empire. We have as much evidence for that being a historical fact as we do for what Josephus says about the sabbatical years in connection with Alexander.
5. the consequences of Samaritan primacy argument (which we are discussing here) namely
(i) a Samaritan text defining Jewish religious life could only have or more likely have been written in an age where northern Israelite culture was at its zenith
Can you please address my earlier specific response to that point. That is not evidence. You are proposing a theory to explain something for which we have no evidence.

Simply ignoring what others say about your assertions and repeating your assertions is not getting you or anyone very far.
(ii) the amount of time necessary for the Qumran fragment to have been produced in a specifically Jewish and specifically isolated setting like Qumran given (a) Joshua being written after Deuteronomy and Deuteronomy after an original Tetrateuch and this Hexateuch to have originated in Samaria and then brought to 'Judaism' and then Qumran specifically c. 250 BCE.
Simply repeating the assumptions underlying the Documentary Hypothesis is not evidence. Nor is repeating conclusions that are based on the DH setting out any evidence. That is all argument based on a hypothesis that is being challenged by the hard data of the archaeological evidence.

Whether you are persuaded by these arguments they constitute arguments and evidence (where in the case of 5ii a chronological reconstruction is evidentiary).
No. They are not evidence at all. They are conclusions and rationales for a belief that a certain event happened at a certain time. They are not evidence for that event. We can interpret texts as if they were written over years or we can interpret them as if they were written within a short time span. The interpretation that is to be preferred is the one that coheres best with the independent, the external evidence.

The evidence is that we have archaeological finds, letters, inscriptions, from Persian times that demonstrate a form of Yahweh worship that has virtually nothing in common with anything we read about in the "Mosaic" or "biblical" religion. Then in the Hellenistic era we have a totally different archaeological find -- Qumran. Something happened and it was not a gradual evolution over many centuries. I am not saying it happened in a single day or year or even decade. But the evidence points to a relatively rapid change or religious revolution -- and even the Bible at places speaks of relatively sudden religious revolutions.
Russell Gmirkin
Posts: 212
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2016 11:53 am

Re: Current State of Samaritan Studies (Hexateuch)

Post by Russell Gmirkin »

Secret Alias wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 9:24 am
Don't pretend to understand my research
Once again. I do this with every professional academic who comes to this forum. Let me say I am proud that a brilliant mind has come to the forum. At the same time (a) the forum is and has always been a 'free' discussion forum and (b) I don't egoism and react negatively to anyone who makes discussions about them and their work. Just rubs me the wrong way. It's the ideas that count. You have your opportunity to convince anyone and everyone that everyone else is wrong and you are right. Go ahead and make your case. In 'real life' I hate people who make it all about 'them' and 'their work.' Show me the idea. Break it down for me. Otherwise make friends at a bar, a church, synagogue, mall. Whatever. If you want to attract followers find zeroes.

I had a Holocaust survivor as a mother. In the process of making my son's application for Article 116 (2) I managed to unearth 400 pages from the Swiss archives where the government describes the conditions of her survival in Switzerland as a non-citizen (because of her Swiss mother's marriage to her German father). Didn't spend a day in a classroom. Ever. While it affected her abilities to function as a productive member of society I did inherit her suspicion that if you give someone an opportunity to make an argument 'to your face' and has to resort to tactics, 'read my book' etc. chances are the argument isn't that persuasive.

My mom's quote "academics hide behind big words and long titles." I have to admit I basically agree.
I did make an extensive and IMHO highly persuasive presentation at the start of this thread, and you have not engaged in a single point. I showed you the idea. I broke it down for you. I created this thread for your benefit at your request and laid out the evidence for your easy viewing, hoping for an interesting two-way discussion. But apparently not only don't you read books, you don't even really seriously read a thread dedicated to your favorite issue. You really have no complaints. I might if I wanted to, but I guess I'm too good-natured.
Last edited by Russell Gmirkin on Mon Nov 28, 2022 12:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Current State of Samaritan Studies (Hexateuch)

Post by neilgodfrey »

Secret Alias wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 9:24 am
Don't pretend to understand my research
Once again. I do this with every professional academic who comes to this forum. Let me say I am proud that a brilliant mind has come to the forum. At the same time (a) the forum is and has always been a 'free' discussion forum and (b) I don't egoism and react negatively to anyone who makes discussions about them and their work. Just rubs me the wrong way. It's the ideas that count. You have your opportunity to convince anyone and everyone that everyone else is wrong and you are right. Go ahead and make your case. In 'real life' I hate people who make it all about 'them' and 'their work.' Show me the idea. Break it down for me. Otherwise make friends at a bar, a church, synagogue, mall. Whatever. If you want to attract followers find zeroes.

I had a Holocaust survivor as a mother. In the process of making my son's application for Article 116 (2) I managed to unearth 400 pages from the Swiss archives where the government describes the conditions of her survival in Switzerland as a non-citizen (because of her Swiss mother's marriage to her German father). Didn't spend a day in a classroom. Ever. While it affected her abilities to function as a productive member of society I did inherit her suspicion that if you give someone an opportunity to make an argument 'to your face' and has to resort to tactics, 'read my book' etc. chances are the argument isn't that persuasive.

My mom's quote "academics hide behind big words and long titles." I have to admit I basically agree.
I am reminded of a book by Richard Hofstadter, Anti-intellectualism in American Life. If the shoe fits....

The common strain that binds together the attitudes and ideas which I call anti-intellectual is a resentment and suspicion of the life of the mind and of those who are considered to represent it; and a disposition constantly to minimize the value of that life. (p. 7)


It seems clear that those who have some quarrel with intellect are almost always ambivalent about it: they mix respect and awe with suspicion and resentment; and this has been true in many societies and phases of human history. In any case, anti-intellectualism is not the creation of people who are categorically hostile to ideas. Quite the contrary: just as the most effective enemy of the educated man may be the half-educated man, so the leading anti-intellectuals are usually men deeply engaged with ideas, often obsessively engaged with this or that outworn or rejected idea. (p. 21)


The spokesmen of anti-intellectualism are almost always devoted to some ideas, and much as they may hate the regnant intellectuals among their living contemporaries, they may be devotees of some intellectuals long dead . . . (p. 22)


Again and again . . . it has been noticed that intellect in America is resented as a kind of excellence, as a claim to distinction, as a challenge to egalitarianism, as a quality which almost certainly deprives a man or woman of the common touch. (p. 51)

And that's not the only book I am reminded of. Given SA's repetitious appeals on this forum to his family connection with the Holocaust to establish the authenticity where he is coming from -- in this case the virtue of anti-intellectualism -- one is reminded of the habit in some quarters to exploit the Holocaust for political, intellectual, ideological, ethnic, religious etc agendas:

Indeed, one is hard-pressed to name a single political cause, whether it be pro-life or pro-choice, animal rights or states’ rights, that hasn’t conscripted The Holocaust. (p. 144 of The Holocaust Industry)

Russell Gmirkin
Posts: 212
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2016 11:53 am

Re: Current State of Samaritan Studies (Hexateuch)

Post by Russell Gmirkin »

neilgodfrey wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 11:26 pm I am reminded of a book by Richard Hofstadter, Anti-intellectualism in American Life. If the shoe fits....

The common strain that binds together the attitudes and ideas which I call anti-intellectual is a resentment and suspicion of the life of the mind and of those who are considered to represent it; and a disposition constantly to minimize the value of that life. (p. 7)


It seems clear that those who have some quarrel with intellect are almost always ambivalent about it: they mix respect and awe with suspicion and resentment; and this has been true in many societies and phases of human history. In any case, anti-intellectualism is not the creation of people who are categorically hostile to ideas. Quite the contrary: just as the most effective enemy of the educated man may be the half-educated man, so the leading anti-intellectuals are usually men deeply engaged with ideas, often obsessively engaged with this or that outworn or rejected idea. (p. 21)


The spokesmen of anti-intellectualism are almost always devoted to some ideas, and much as they may hate the regnant intellectuals among their living contemporaries, they may be devotees of some intellectuals long dead . . . (p. 22)


Again and again . . . it has been noticed that intellect in America is resented as a kind of excellence, as a claim to distinction, as a challenge to egalitarianism, as a quality which almost certainly deprives a man or woman of the common touch. (p. 51)

Interesting comments (and book, which is available at https://ia802903.us.archive.org/6/items ... 966%29.pdf).

I have found that anti-intellectualism is usually an aspect of what Eric Hoffer called The True Believer in the famous book by that name. What happens is that the intellectual world is divided up into trusted sources and distrusted sources. Trusted sources are those within the true believer's echo chamber, whether cult or political party or UFOlogist circles or whatever, who have the inside information. Distrusted sources are the "mainstream" intellectuals of the world: mainstream media, "elitist" university academics, scientists, secularists, non-scientologists, etc. So there is an obsessive intellectual preoccupation with a certain specific set of ideas promoted by trusted sources combined with an entrenched anti-intellectualism against basically the rest of the world.

I like Hofstadter's contrast between the educated man and the half-educated man (read: person). It's as though someone who is half-educated loves learning up to a point, but thinks becoming fully educated is too much work, so they are comfortable stuck right where they are.
StephenGoranson
Posts: 2312
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: Current State of Samaritan Studies (Hexateuch)

Post by StephenGoranson »

Cf. Hofstadter on paranoid style.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Current State of Samaritan Studies (Hexateuch)

Post by Secret Alias »

I know. It is entirely possible that I am anti-intellectual, even dumb. I accept the proposal as a hypothesis. The alternative (and the two are not mutually exclusive) is that Russell is an egoist and he is taking ownership of the idea that the Pentateuch was created in the third century BCE and thus criticisms of the idea are taken personally. Again, I may be dumb and Russell may be taking criticisms too personally.

My own thesis is that I am trying to get out of work and even though I promised myself to actually do work today I am back here wasting my time on brotlose Kunst. I am quite certain about my motivations here.

As an aside. As someone who spent little or no time trying to understand the Samaritans there may be some worth in doing so. Let me explain.

There are two principle sects of Samaritans - 'normative Samaritans' and Dositheans. The name seems to come from the Greek personal name Dositheos. The Dositheans are identified as late as the sixth century as being numerous in Alexandria. So here you have the hint of Greek and Alexandria.

The Dositheans complained about corruption in the normative text. Disagreements arose and are mentioned in the Samaritan sources. But could the Dositheans have used or preferred a Greek Pentateuch even the Samaritikon? If the Pentateuch reflects the sanctity of Samaritan locales and was originally written by Samaritans at Alexandria and then passed on to Jews then it may help your theory. You'd have the origin of your 'Greek' (= written by Greeks or in the Greek period or in Alexandria i.e. however 'Greek' is defined).

The reason I bring this up is that modern Samaritanism is defined by Marqe. They put Marqe on the same status as Moses as a kind of 'lesser Moses' because of the gematria of Marqe and Moses = 345. While it is true that 345 and shemah (his Name) and 'I am that I am' 543 = 888 there are repeated 'mystical references' that point to Marqe using or performing his exegesis with a Greek text.

For instance in his exegesis of the Song of the Sea he focuses on the mystical significance of the first two words 'then sang.' In Hebrew אָז יָשִׁיר. No significance. Marqe takes an extra ordinary interest in these words and spends so much time on them for reasons that don't seem to make any sense. He notes for instance that a relationship exists between אָז and the two words combined "then sang." אָז = 8. But no relationship appears with the second word. But in Greek τότε ᾖσεν = 888. We know that 888 = Joshua. But even on its own there is significance.

There are others which might suggest that the Samaritan tradition itself was founded on a Greek text. Again, Samaritanism = Marqe, Marqe might have employed or preferred a Greek text. Back to work.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Current State of Samaritan Studies (Hexateuch)

Post by Secret Alias »

I also remind people that we founded this site as a free thinking discussion group. It was not originally designed as a place for scholars to promote their books. Academics are welcomed and encouraged to come here but the forum was not created as an aid for promoting book reading but for a free discussions of ideas related to religion. Again I say, if you or any other scholar want to discuss your ideas feel free to make the arguments at the forum. But FWIW I don't see any efforts to simplify and 'discuss' the idea; only a consistent effort to promote your book. As the religious studies field dies a slow death or becomes incorporated into broader streams of investigation I expect more and more ignored books and their authors will come here to this forum (especially as departments close and jobs diminish). Sad but like most things in life, you have to just go with it I guess. Anyway I don't see Peter changing the focus of the forum - i.e. into a book club. But it is great to see another scholar enjoying the forum!

As an aside to the Australian, you've criticized Stephen for being a mere librarian, 99% of scholars who promote 'normative theories' so adding an "anti-intellectual" to the group of "things you despise" is par for the course. I've said it many times before. As a holy warrior against religion, a jihadist for atheism and the destruction of religion it takes about 5 minutes for every discussion to get derailed into some personal insult. Nevertheless your continued participation is good for the forum. Thanks for being here.

Any time Grimkin wants to discuss ideas I am open to a discussion if of course he can tolerate engaging with a dumb person. But then again, if he is wasting his time at this forum he must have expected this sort of low level of intellectualism. Unless of course he came here merely to gain "followers" and "adherents." Sad if that's true. The forum was designed to strip ideas and their proponents naked. If you want to participate STRIP DOWN and join the other nudists.
Post Reply