Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: NO MORE MAIL

Expand Messages
  • al baughman
    ... have ... the ... *concede* that ... Priestly ... monopoly on ... etc. ... And as you ... the ... so would ... OT were ...
    Message 1 of 1 , Sep 23, 1998
      ---Tom Simms wrote:
      >
      > On Wed, 23 Sep 1998 07:48:27 -0700, Robert.Schacht@... writes:
      > >At 09:07 AM 9/23/98 -0400, Stevan Davies wrote:
      > >Phil asked:
      >
      > [... Snip ...]
      >
      > >No one has challenged this so far, so I will. What evidence do you
      have
      > >that transmission was controlled by Judeans? Need I remind you that
      the
      > >Tanakh was not a book, but a bunch of scrolls? While I will
      *concede* that
      > >the Torah has been transmitted to us by Judeans (perhaps by the
      Priestly
      > >Source), what about the other scrolls? Jerusalem did not have a
      monopoly on
      > >these; other copies have been found at Qumran, in the Cairo Geniza,
      etc.
      > >The Septuagint, I recall, was a product of Egypt, not Jerusalem.
      And as you
      > >well know, the canon, particularly with respect to the Prophets and
      the
      > >Writings, is conventionally held to have been set at Jamnia-- and
      so would
      > >not affect Galilean praxis during Jesus' lifetime.
      > >
      > >So please provide your evidence that the canon, and texts, of the
      OT were
      > >under the control of Judean scribes.
      >
      > Well, since you've already *conceded* the point, I won't have to
      > bother.
      >
      > However, there is a Galilean angle to the Tanakh. The scribes
      > moved to Galilee after the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE, but
      > they moved to Jamnia, south of Joppa, for the Synod that completed
      > the Tanakh in 132 CE. That's in Judea and on the coast a half
      > point south of due west of Jerusalem.
      >
      > BTW, the LXX supposedly came from Judean texts yet it more often
      > agrees with the Qumran texts than with the later completed Tanakh.
      > How do you explain that?
      >
      > Would you consider that the later completed Tanakh was in revision
      > well after the deposition of the Qumran texts and was in the often
      > noted revisions in Galilee in reaction to the Septuagint texts now
      > so favored by the new group in town, the Christians?
      >
      > >Bob
      > >
      > CUL8R
      >
      > Tom Simms
      >
      >
      > PLEASE DO SEND ME ANY MORE E-MAIL

      _________________________________________________________
      DO YOU YAHOO!?
      Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.