tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10143682.post2060964533076125278..comments2023-11-02T04:57:38.738-05:00Comments on The Macintosh Biblioblog: Review: Dead Sea Scrolls Exhibit in Kansas CityJoe Weakshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16379505860158377008noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10143682.post-1755486197001025962009-03-13T13:24:00.000-05:002009-03-13T13:24:00.000-05:00These messages seemed unstable to me from the begi...These messages seemed unstable to me from the beginning. Now I see why:<BR/>http://www.bobcargill.com/who-is-charles-gadda.htmlJoe Weakshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16379505860158377008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10143682.post-58452816626736008532007-06-12T14:32:00.000-05:002007-06-12T14:32:00.000-05:00We're sorry if we made that impression. Admittedl...We're sorry if we made that impression. Admittedly, our name sounds ridiculous, but bear in mind that when we created our blog we were trying to call attention to something that no one seemed to be interested in. Now at least a few people seem to have picked up on it here and there.<BR/><BR/>All we said in our posting was that Golb has an article out entitled "Fact and Fiction in Current Exhibitions of the Dead Sea Scrolls—A Critical Notebook for Viewers," and it's available on the U of Chicago website at http://oi.uchicago.edu/research/projects/scr/<BR/><BR/>Anyone who thinks the Kansas City exhibit was a good one may wish to reconsider his opinion after reading that article.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for not deleting!We Demand A Neutral Scientific Exhibithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00985248842743715838noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10143682.post-70169216273580686882007-06-12T13:01:00.000-05:002007-06-12T13:01:00.000-05:00Dear anonymous "We demand...",You oughtn't find en...Dear anonymous "We demand...",<BR/><BR/>You oughtn't find enemies where there are none. You weren't being censored. I removed none of your other posts/links. I experienced you has broadcasting the same material in a argumentative tone and so deleted it, that's all. I understand now that there was an additional article you referenced covering the KC exhibit as opposed to the Seattle one. I did not pick up on that sublety. I've triend to reinstate the comment but don't see a way to do that.<BR/>But seriously, you shouldn't pick fights where you aren't getting them. As I mentioned, Norman Golb's "Who Wrote The Dead Sea Scrolls?" is one of two books in my church library on the DSS. I've no political interested in maintaining anything in Qumran studies.<BR/>If I implied you are a crackpot, it's because you came across as one (odd name, bizarro blogs). Your blogger ID and the handful of one post shoutcast blogs you have throw up all kinds of red flags that this is an internet troll wreaking havoc. I apologize for not taking you seriously completely, but you have to understand how your identity can create such an impression.<BR/>I empathize with the frustration of your academic position. It causes you to resort to this type of posting m.o. You might however be mindful of inviting a better reception.Joe Weakshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16379505860158377008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10143682.post-32100224696410263792007-06-12T11:44:00.000-05:002007-06-12T11:44:00.000-05:00Thanks. Incidentally, we never said there was any...Thanks. Incidentally, we never said there was anything "radical" or "threatening" going on. By deleting our posting and using those words, Mr. Weaks implied we are crackpots. All we said is that Golb's article offered a different perspective on whether the exhibit was good or not. Readers can judge for themselves.We Demand A Neutral Scientific Exhibithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00985248842743715838noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10143682.post-66327795255138299592007-06-12T02:59:00.000-05:002007-06-12T02:59:00.000-05:00I don't know who those people are, but they are ri...I don't know who those people are, but they are right that Norman Golb has published a detailed analysis of the Kansas City exhibit, it's linked on Jim West's biblical studies blog at http://drjimwest.wordpress.com/2007/06/08/norman-golbs-guide-for-dead-sea-scrolls-exhibit-attendees/<BR/><BR/>I doubt if this article is in your library, because it just came out last week, which makes it new too :)Suzannehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02021465941649603454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10143682.post-74215805048499517322007-06-12T02:29:00.000-05:002007-06-12T02:29:00.000-05:00There is very good reason for us to remain anonymo...There is very good reason for us to remain anonymous, we have explained exactly why on our blog. But since you feel obliged to resort to censorship, why don't you yourself post the link to Golb's detailed attack on the exhibit, so your readers can judge for themselves whether it was a good exhibit or a bunch of lies?We Demand A Neutral Scientific Exhibithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00985248842743715838noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10143682.post-48135994518057853412007-06-09T19:15:00.000-05:002007-06-09T19:15:00.000-05:00Dear Mr. "We Demand..."There's nothing radical or ...Dear Mr. "We Demand..."<BR/>There's nothing radical or threatening about the material you promote. We have one of the books in my church library. But there's no place for these points you're making to be anonymous. It is for that reason that I'll delete future posts.Joe Weakshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16379505860158377008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10143682.post-61099693904432490622007-06-09T19:07:00.000-05:002007-06-09T19:07:00.000-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.We Demand A Neutral Scientific Exhibithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00985248842743715838noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10143682.post-70411669776586938622007-05-14T21:16:00.000-05:002007-05-14T21:16:00.000-05:00I had the opportunity to see the exhibit on April ...I had the opportunity to see the exhibit on April 16. An excellent presentation - I could have stayed longer, but the others in our group had other commitments... <BR/><BR/>Well worth seeing/experiencing.Richhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10547887795289485297noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10143682.post-7152981919378163442007-04-18T20:50:00.000-05:002007-04-18T20:50:00.000-05:00You misunderstand our point -- it's not at all a "...You misunderstand our point -- it's not at all a "new invention", and that's precisely the problem. The "majority" argument has for years been the fall-back position of the traditional Qumranologists who try to defend their position not on the basis of reason and science, but on a refusal to engage the opposing school of research, the implication being that they don't NEED to engage it because they're the "majority". <BR/>Scientific truth isn't established by taking votes (compare the claim that Pluto isn't a planet, decided by a "vote" at a conference to the fury of others who disagreed and weren't included), but by whether the claim being made fits the evidence.We Demand A Neutral Scientific Exhibithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00985248842743715838noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10143682.post-9439287729395447502007-04-18T19:47:00.000-05:002007-04-18T19:47:00.000-05:00I'm sorry, but I will have to remove myself from t...I'm sorry, but I will have to remove myself from this conversation. When you treat my phrase "majority of scholars" as if it's a new invention, it makes me doubt your credentials as an academic scholar.<BR/>And even still, this anonymous posting is not conducive to any discussion; it has no place here.<BR/>If you have an axe to grind, please swing at a different tree.Joe Weakshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16379505860158377008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10143682.post-63393253000178574342007-04-18T16:20:00.000-05:002007-04-18T16:20:00.000-05:00We recommend that you read Golb's detailed discuss...We recommend that you read Golb's detailed discussion of the Seattle exhibit on the University of Chicago website, before making up your mind on the Kansas City exhibit. <BR/>(The link is:<BR/>http://oi.uchicago.edu/research/is/deadseascrolls.html). <BR/>Hopefully what you say about the Kansas City exhibit is true, but your reference to the Qumran/Essen "majority" and the "minority" of other views in the plural, seems to indicate that you have been misled. The fact is that the majority of the scholars who have reexamined Qumran over the past decade, including the official Israel Antiquities Authority team led by Magen and Peleg, have all concluded that Qumran was a secular site and that the scrolls came from Jerusalem. This is why the Cambridge History of Judaism has only two articles on the topic, one representing each of the two salient theories (Qumran/Essene and Jerusalem libraries). The many scholars who based their careers on the old theory long before all this new research was done, naturally continue to stick to their guns, but the use of the term "majority" is misleading. It's just like with any poll: the numbers can be read in different ways depending on which way you're looking at it. (For example, a majority support Clinton v. Barak, but a greater majority supports Barak v. Giuliani than Clinton v. Giuliani and Barak's fundraising is better: how to interpret these numbers?) Assuming that the exhibit mentions Golb, does it also mention Magen, Peleg, Cansdale, Zangenberg, Bar Nathan, Elior, or any of the other proponents of the Jerusalem theory who have become the major trend in current scrolls scholarship? We have not seen the exhibit, so we would be grateful if you would answer this specific question, necessitated by the fact that the museum's on-line material fails to treat Qumran research of the past decade, or the Jerusalem theory, in an appopriate manner.<BR/>Furthermore, one must take account of the facts that no scholarly poll has been conducted on this matter, that many of the scholars cited as proponents of the old theory are deceased and, as we said, that the Cambridge History of Judaism has only two articles on the topic, one for each of the two salient theories. Did the editors of that standard reference work do a poll before deciding to print those two articles?We Demand A Neutral Scientific Exhibithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00985248842743715838noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10143682.post-72874173130256564222007-04-13T20:20:00.000-05:002007-04-13T20:20:00.000-05:00Dear anonymous "We Demand..." person,Not sure whet...Dear anonymous "We Demand..." person,<BR/>Not sure whether to take you seriously, with such an absurd identity, but I did read the Golb article you mentioned.<BR/>It is obvious that the author has not been to the exhibit. I submit to you that this aspect of the exhibit--namely, what to assert regarding the identity of those who created/used the scrolls--was treated very well. As I indicated in my review, they were very appropriately acknowledging not just of the majority view but others as well. When one is championing a minority opinion (one which I am sympathetic too, by the way), it does not bode well to attack a summary review that does indeed give voice to the differing views.Joe Weakshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16379505860158377008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10143682.post-69574005648684053962007-04-13T19:53:00.000-05:002007-04-13T19:53:00.000-05:00Professor Norman Golb of the University of Chicago...Professor Norman Golb of the University of Chicago, who is scheduled to talk in the Kansas City Scrolls exhibit lecture series on April 24, has published a fascinating opinion piece on the Scrolls in the Jewish Forward.<BR/><BR/>The link is http://www.forward.com/articles/take-claims-about-dead-sea-scrolls-with-a-grain-of/.We Demand A Neutral Scientific Exhibithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00985248842743715838noreply@blogger.com