Re: "Debating Qumran: Collected Essays on Its Archaeology" by Jodi Magness

On Oct 26, 2:50 pm, Jack Linthicum <jacklinthi...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Oct 26, 2:36 pm, David <pchristain...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...
How does the chronology of the settlement differ as between
Dr. Magness and Dr. Thiering?

Hint: Both cannot possibly be right; one of them is wrong -
the other is right.

One question: Doesn't Dr. Magness refute Dr. Thiering?

http://www.archaeological.org/webinfo.php?page=10408

Answer - NO!

Please see -

Madelyn Yribarren - review
http://www.arts.ualberta.ca/JHS/reviews/review181.htm

"Magness' conclusions rest more on the actual archaeological evidence
than the evidence of texts like the Hebrew Bible and the Dead Sea
Scrolls.
Magness notes that de Vaux used information from the Damascus Document
to place the beginning of the occupation at nearly four hundred years
after the Babylonian invasion of Jerusalem (586 BCE). Then she adds
sixty years to account for the life and death of the Teacher of
Righteousness,
which places the beginning occupation at 135 BCE. This coincides with
de
Vaux's initial date for Period 1a at 130 BCE. Magness suggests that
the
archaeological evidence indicates that Qumran was not occupied until
later.
She cites the lack of pottery found at the site from the 2nd Century
BCE
and interprets some of the coins found at the site differently than de
Vaux.
De Vaux found a number of coins that dated to the reign of Alexander
Janneus,
and from this he concluded that the occupation level Period 1b should
date
to the period of the reign of Alexander Janneus. However, in
antiquity coins
remained in circulation many years after production. Magness thus
maintains
that Qumran was not inhabited by the sectarian community until around
100-50 BCE (p. 65)."

Two hundred years

CONTRA Magness on 100-50 BCE

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/2830

"In 141- 140 BC, at the time Simon Maccabeus established the
Hasmonean dynasty of high priests, the Hasidim-Essenes were
forced out of Jerusalem as a result of their continuing political
activism.
They record the event and its date in their Testament of Levi, 17,10.
They went to Qumran, their 'desolate country', a location suited to
their astronomical studies. It may have belonged to the Davids
since the time the round well was built there in the Iron Age."

Re: [qumran_origin] The Revolutionary Thiering Dating Scheme for
Gospel Period History

CONTRA Magness and De Vaux because of incorrect translation in CD 1
relating to Teacher of Righteousness

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/189

"Then I pointed out that the famous passage on the 390 years in CD 1,
which
gives a date for the Teacher, is correctly translated 'the 390 years
for his
giving them...' and it is incorrect to translate ' 390 years after he
gave
them...' The Babylonian names are pseudonyms for Romans, as in 1 Peter
5:13
and Rev 18, consistently with the assumptions of the pesharim. The 390
years are drawn from Ezek 4:5 and used as a prophecyof the length of
the
Roman occupation, not past history. The 'Period of Wrath' when the 390
years
began is AD 6, when the Roman occupation began. The word
'wrath' (charon)
always refers to the Romans. Thus the Teacher, coming 20 years after
the
Period of Wrath, came in AD 26. He died, according to CD 20, about 40
years
before a date that is best interpreted as AD 70, that is, he died
about AD
30. These dates support all the other parallels indicating that the
Teacher
was John the Baptist."

In addition,

Excerpts of a Review on Dr. Magness's book
by Magen Broshi and Hanan Eshel, Jerusalem, Bar Ilan University

More good news
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/5479





.