real life wrote:Hi timber,
The early Christian converts were primarily Jews who came from numerous geographic regions, as well as nearly all sects and subgroups of the Jewish community, including Pharisees and many of the Levitical priests.
The early Christians were very aggressively evangelistic in their efforts to reach out to all Jews, even at the risk of their lives and property.
To assume (on the basis of what? your opinion and that of others?) that there COULD NOT and WOULD NOT have been any social intercourse between the two 'based on what we know of the origins, philosophies, values, and practices' of the Essenes is a weak argument indeed.
What is truly known of the Essenes? Precious little other than the beliefs revealed by their writings, especially when compared with what is known of other Jewish sects, including Christians, of the same period.
How did they originate? Nobody knows.
Who were their primary leaders? Little is known for sure.
However, the values that they shared with early Christians are quite remarkably similar based on the Qumran documents.
Your analogy of Robertson leading the parade etc is either based on your ignorance of the Essenes values & beliefs as recorded in their writings, or your presumption that everybody else must be ignorant of the Essenes values.
------------------
And the circular argument regarding 7Q5 remains so, despite your weak protest. Simply restating an argument is not a defense.
The Qumran community did indeed disband by 68 AD, the Dead Sea scrolls are attributable to them, and the documents are nearly all thought to predate 50 AD. So points 1,2, 3 are not under dispute.
To try to conclude (#4) that no Qumran document can be identified with the Gospel of Mark, 'because it can't be that old' is clearly an exercise in circular reasoning.
You know, maybe you should've typed slower so that you understood it.
But at least you got some a 'me too' from your fan club, so you probably feel pretty good that you're held in such high esteem. The longer your posts , probably the more impressed they'll be.
Scholarship and academic integrity are absent from your postings, rl, as are logic, reason, understanding, and valid forensic practice.
A compendium of what is known from antiguity of the Essenes may be found
HERE
It cannot be said any evidence solidly linking the Essenes to Christianity exists; quite the contrary, actually. There are superficial similarities, in the emphasis both sects placed on prophecy, however, the individual interpretations passed down to us from the contemporary writings of the two sects disclose major, irreconcilable differences. The Qumran Essenes most emphatically rejected the notion of prophets modifying, let alone replacing Mosaic Law, Levitical teaching, and the Talmud, all of which were held by the Essenes to be immutable, foundational to their theology, sacrosanct, the source of their faith. It is evident the Essenes ascribed authority to the books of the Bible according to the age of those books; the older the book, the higher its authority. The primary focus of the Essenes was "The Works of The Law", they were exclusionary, secretive, a circumstance diametrically at odds with Christian teaching.
Interesting - nearly to the point of being conclusive - is that there is no reference to Christ or Christianity to be found in the Essene texts, and no reference of the Essene's or their practices to be found in the contemporary writings of Christianity; neither sect mentions the other sect.
Interesting as well is the Essene's take on messianic matters; they held there were to be 2 messiahs, one priestly, the other kingly, a Davidic, or descended from the House of David, kingly messiah, and an Aaronic, or descended from the House of Aaron, priestly messiah. Their writings reference explicitly "the messiahs of Aaron and of Israel" - unambiguosly plural, denoting two distinct entities. Further, the Qumran writings make clear greater importance was place by the sect on the Aarionic messiah, the priestly messiah, rather than the Davidic, or kingly messiah. Clearly, the Qumran writings portray a signal emphasis on the authority and ascendency of the priesthood, a concept at the heart of their messianic vision. By the evidence, the Qumran writers expected there would be "A Teacher of Righteousness", the death of which worthy was to be followed within the span of two generations ("40 years") by the appearance, ascendency, and triumph of The Two Messiahs, the greater of which, "The Annointed One", was to be descended not from David, not of royal ancetry, but from Aaron, of priestly ancestry, a messiah who would return the Jews proper worship - proper, of course, as according to the precepts of the sect.
According to the Qumranic "Manual of Discipline", considered by legitimate scholars and researchers to be an authentic compendium of the sect's principles, paradigms, and teachings, the "Teacher of Righteousness" would validate the Qumranic/Essene "Way of Salvation", setting forth the rules and rituals necessary to prepare the Jewish people - and the world besides - for the coming of the 2 messiahs.
Central to the Christian proposition is the death and resurection of The Christ, in fulfillment of prophecies. In the Qumranic literature, there is no similar concept. A central tenet of Qumranic faith was the sanctity of the Sabbath; their writings make clear they considered contemporary Jewish practice in such regard heretical, to the point the Essenes refrained from temple worship, that they might not be contanminated - rendered "unclean" - through association with those they considered to be usurpers and apostate, the Pharisees and Saducees. The Christian attitude toward the Sabbath was if anything even more liberal than that observed by the Jewish sects against which the Essenes stood. Christ's purported declarations, "The sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath", and "What man of you, if he has one sheep and it falls into a pit on the sabbath, will not lay hold of it and lift it out?", issued in criticism of the Pharisees and Saducees, would have been appalling, even unthinkable, to an Essene, for whom any and all profane activity - anything unrelated to worship - was on the sabbath most condignly prohibited. Of paramount significance the the Essenes was the sanctity of the priesthood, their priest having among them the highest of all rankings, while Christian teaching placed faith in Christ the Savior above the priesthood - yet another concept wholly inconsistent with - antithetical to - core Essene teaching.
To qualify for acceptance into the Essene sect, an individual had to follow a proscribed path of ritual accomplishments over a period of years, achievement of which was determined by council of priests, elders, and lay initiated, whereas Christianity calls for no training, probation, or indoctrination, but only for the ritual of baptism to bring one into the faith - again, a concept unthinkable to an Essene. To the Essenes, ritual ablutions were an item of daily practice of faith, necessary to preserve both body and soul from sin and uncleanliness. The Essenes had no concept of "Baptism"; theirs was the notion that ablutions were necessary acts of faith, to be practised many times daily, according to set and rigid standards. Physical purification rites and rituals apart from a single Baptism have no role in Christianity, whereas they were a signal feature of Essene religious practice.
The Essenes placed a particular emphasis on daties and calendars, the Calendar of The Book of Jubilees the framework of their liturgy, whereas in Christian teaching, there is no such emphasis, and in the first chapter of Acts, Paul relates that "The Angel of God" admonished the disciples to cease and forever abstain from such inquiries; "It is not for you to know the dates that God has fixed". That notion is yet another wholly antithetical to Essene teaching, which placed great emphasis on the determination, through the analysis of prohecy, of dates expected to see the fulfillment of the Essene messianic concept. Chritian teaching is that Christ the Messia establishes a "New Covenent", Qumranic Essene teaching is that the arrival of their messiahs will mark a return to the Mosaic Covenant, with all its Levitical prescriptions and proscriptions. Christianity renders spiritual the Mosaic Covenant, Qumranic Essene teachings concretely institutionalize the strictest interpretation of the Mosaic Covenant, rendering Mosaic Law not an ethical concept but a physical juridical code.
It is inherent to the Christian poroposition that followers "go forth and teach the word", whereas the Qumran writings leave no doubt the Essenes were a secretive society, holding itself apart from the larger society about them, a monastic community in precept and practice. That an initiate might share Essene teachings and secrets with a non-believer was among the highest of possible sins. The Qumran writings disclose nothing of an intellectual or spiritual freedom of a sort necessary to facillitate "Christian Thought".
Now, again, you are welcome to dispute any of the foregoing - simply present your evidence and establish its superior authority. That you, or anyone else, disagree with the consensus positions of legitimate scholars and researchers, objecting to or disregarding established, accepted evidence while providing no substantive, externally corroborated, academically valid evidence in support of your proposition or refutation of the consensus proposition demonstrates only - and quite clearly - that those who forward the proposition your posts endorse haven't the foggiest notion of what they're talking about.
