Re: Barbara Thiering Refuted!

On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 08:56:27 +1300, in sci.archaeology, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 18:21:32 +0000, Doug Weller
<dweller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 22:08:17 +1300, in sci.archaeology, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 07:53:58 +0000, me@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:




Eric Stevens wrote:

It might be a rhetorical question but you are changing the
subject. We started off with one person who may or may not
want to learn to read pesher.

That's not true. The post that started this thread reads:

"Science is based on the idea that one scientist can replicate
and confirm the work of another scientist. I publicly challenge
Barbara Thiering or any of her followers to explain her "pesher
method" so that a qualified scholar can apply it the the
transfiguration passage in Mark Chapter 9 and independently
come up with the "hidden pesher meaning" of Jesus stripping
the Jewish High Priest naked and carrying out the atonement
ritual in his place."

In the english language, the phrase "So that a qualified scholar"
in the paragraph above means any qualified scholar, not one
particular qualified scholar.

Could it be that you are confusing this thread with some
other thread that started off with one person who may or
may not want to learn to "read pesher" using Thiering's method?

The fact remains that *nobody* can test Thiering's "pesher
method" to see whether they get the same results she does.
Only Thiering can work the method, and she has not revealed
enough of the details for anyone else to replicate her results.
If she ever reveals that as-yet-secret information, *then*
we shall see whether anyone wishes to learn her method.

Ordinarily I would agree with you. However, before you broke the
thread, we were discussing a particular opponent of Thiering who could
not replicate her results (I forget his name, I don't follow this
topic that closely).

My subsequent comment stems from an experience I had some years ago
when I asked persons qualified to read a particular script, to test a
hypothesis that a number of petroglyphs employed a precursor subset of
the particular script. [I'm being coy here because I do not want to
reopen old arguments.]

I COULD NOT GET THESE PEOPLE TO TEST THIS HYPOTHESIS for the simple
reason that they could not bring themselves to even consider the
possibility that it might just be correct. THEY WOULD NOT DO IT.

Actually one person says he did. You disagree. And you can't read
motivations. I didn't test it because it's not my field. Others may have
felt it wasn't worth their time. And you are only talking about a handful
of people.

That last is the point of my remark.


The
same thing applies to Thiering's pesher. A scholar sufficiently
determined that Thiering is talking nonsense will never be able to
either learn or apply Thiering's pesher technique. You have to realise
that pesher is not just a simple substitution code and a determined
failure to deduce the necessary connections will absolutely prevent a
pesher reading.

Your statement only works if Thiering has laid out her methodology clearly
for other people to test.

Its years since I read her books but I can recall that I had no
trouble seeing what she was doing. What I lacked (and still lack) was
the deep biblical knowledge to make or confirm the connections she had
made.

Do you mean you could use her methodology if you had the knowledge?
You seem to be unique in this.



You should be aware that when I wrote the above, I was not taking a
stance of any kind about whether Thiering is correct in her pesher
explanation. I am merely explaining the psychological mechanism which
will prevent an unsympathetic scholar from replicating what she has
done.




Eric Stevens



Eric Stevens
--
Doug Weller --
A Director and Moderator of The Hall of Ma'at http://www.hallofmaat.com
Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk
Amun - co-owner/co-moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Amun/

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Some questions for Christainsen
    ... Please back up and empty your mind; Dr. Thiering is definitely a trip ... is followed by a form of "pesher", ... rare scholar that has even understood it over the decades, ... bright teenager to apply her method, since you have made both claims. ...
    (soc.history.ancient)
  • Re: Thiering FUQ (Frequently Unanswered Questions)
    ... Again I challenge you to demonstrate how Thiering's pesher ... that house her" (Greek word order) is "Mary stayed with her ... Nobody except Thiering disagrees about what it means. ... three Greek words and see what Theiring claims to see, ...
    (soc.religion.quaker)
  • Re: Some questions for Christainsen
    ... is followed by a form of "pesher", ... is never the case in the examples Thiering applies her "method" too. ... OT texts being made to refer to actions of Jesus. ... bright teenager to apply her method, since you have made both claims. ...
    (soc.history.ancient)
  • Re: Some questions for Christainsen
    ... Could you perhaps explain how the "Thiering methodology" differs from ... I happen to find her pesher ... rare scholar that has even understood it over the decades, ... OT texts being made to refer to actions of Jesus. ...
    (soc.history.ancient)
  • Re: Some questions for Christainsen
    ... to get the big picture on her Thiering pesher is to get her articles, ... There is a difference between Essene pesher and Thiering pesher. ... of academics would have to do - requiring a substantial amount of ...
    (soc.history.ancient)
Loading