What We're Reading
- God and Race in American Politics: A Short History
by Mark A. Noll - It Happened in Italy: Untold Stories of How the People of Italy Defied the Horrors of the Holocaust
by Elizabeth Bettina - Tradition: Concept and Claim
by Josef Pieper
Our Blogroll
« First Comes Panic, Then Comes Revival? | Main | A Libertarian’s Lincoln »
Bombshell Theory: Israeli Scholar Who Questions Essenes' Existence Doesn't Exist
Claim “has shaken the bedrock of biblical scholarship.”
Western biblical scholars have long discussed and debated the work of biblical scholars living in Israel, amid the scorching deserts of the Middle East. Now a prominent expert disputes that one of those scholars doesn't exist at all - a claim that has shaken the bedrock of biblical scholarship.
Rachel Elior, who nearly destroyed the academic universe as we know it last week when she argued that the ascetic and celibate Jewish community known as the Essenes were a myth fabricated by the first-century historian Josephus, is herself a myth fabricated by journalists desperate for an Eastertime biblical scandal, according to prominent expert Alan Smithee.
The news media and academic world were shaken to their respective cores this week amid reports that a scholar named Rachel Elior, supposedly an professor of Jewish Philosophy and Jewish Mystical Thought at the Hebrew University, attributed authorship of the Dead Sea Scrolls to the Saducees, or Zadokite priests. A key point of the argument was that the Scrolls themselves do not refer to "Essenes." Likewise, the reported scholar allegedly told media outlets that Essenes are not mentioned in Jewish texts of the time.
"That was the dead giveaway," said Smithee, who has set the cat among the academic pigeons once again with his shocking and astounding theory that Elior does not exist. "Because if you look closely at the work of this supposed ?Rachel Elior,' you note that the words ?Rachel Elior' never appear. Likewise, while there are several books that some publishers have credited this Elior with writing, she does not really appear in the scholarly texts written at the time. Historians do not describe meeting her, her personal habits, her preferences, her food preferences, or the like. If she was as prominent as Time, the Associated Press, and other media outlets would have us believe, you would expect to see her name everywhere in the extant texts. We simply don't have that, and there is no evidence to support her existence."
Likewise, Smithee pointed out, the Dead Sea Scrolls talk about resurrection, something that the Sadducees did not believe in.
Smithee's theory has landed like a bombshell in the cloistered world of biblical scholarship. But some traditionalists say it's possible that the Essenes existed AND that Elior does as well. "You remember when James Charlesworth, director of the Dead Sea Scrolls project at Princeton Theological Seminary pointed out to Time magazine that ?Essenes' was a foreign label that the Essenes wouldn't have used for themselves, and that they preferred identifies like ?men of holiness' or ?sons of light'? Well, kind of like that, it's relatively standard practice for a scholar not to refer to themselves very much in their work," said one expert who did not wish to be named, perhaps because the debate is just so incredibly explosive. But the scholar contends that the trend has been changing lately, pointing the work of Simcha Jacobovici, who made headlines in 2007 by announcing the discovery of the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth, Mary Magdalene, their son Judah, and other family members.
"We have far more evidence for the Essenes than we do for Elior," Smithee said, noting that Philo and Pliny describe the Essenes as well as Josephus. "We have only two sources for Elior: A webpage at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem (which can be faked) and a Wikipedia page. And because Wikipedia has been shown to be so unreliable, full of error, and subject to various biases and agendas, it really almost proves that Elior is a fabrication. In fact, the updates on Elior's page have come from outside Israel, so they really can't be trusted to know what they're talking about."
Not surprisingly, Smithee's speculative theory, and his dismissal of the existence of a reported colleague, has raised the hackles of other scholars. The world of Dead Sea scholarship is insular and notoriously catty, and debate has sometimes strayed from purely academic turf.
A Hebrew University professor said denying Elior's existence is groundless. "She's posting comments about her argument to Jim West's biblical studies website," he claimed.
"Oh, and that can't be faked," Smithee responded. Smithee's work will likely further inflame the argument over the controversial Dead Sea Scrolls. He vehemently denies he is trying to add fuel to the fire and claims his theory is based on nothing more than common sense.
Smithee says he has a list of other biblical scholars who probably do not exist and is shopping a book proposal on his earth-shattering research for publication at next year' Easter media speculation rush.
Public domain photo of Qumran water cistern courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.
recent posts
Archives
March 2010February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
| 29 | 30 |
Comments
Okay about Elior's methodology. On a related matter, Essenes did call themselves 'osey hatorah, which is the source of various Greek spelling including Ossaioi and Essaioi etc. and the eventual source of "Essenes" as detailed in
http://www.duke.edu/~goranson/Essenes_&_Others.pdf
and
http://www.duke.edu/~goranson/jannaeus.pdf
Posted By: Stephen Goranson | March 21, 2009 4:46 AM
Is Olson serious or is his posting tongue-in-cheek?
I'm not sure, but I think he his trying to be humorous. If so, then I think he should clarify his intent. Someone may not understand that.
If he is serious, then his investigation into Rachel Elior is seriously deficient. It is not hard to find out if someone exists or not.
Posted By: Art Kelly | March 21, 2009 11:16 AM
It doesn't matter if one can prove that someone exists today. What Ted Olson is saying is that Rachel Elior's methodology for proving the existence of an ancient people is flawed. If one uses ancient contemporary writers to prove the existence of a people group because they make mention of that people group it does not necessarily follow that not making mention of a people group proves the absence or non existence of such a people group.
Posted By: Jim Zieger | March 21, 2009 1:26 PM
Not sure about Rachel Elior, so I googled her name, and she teaches at Hebrew University. They even have a photo. She may exist, but it seems that her field is called "Jewish Thought". She is not a professor of Archaelogy or History, therefore she probably should not make pronouncements about things which people with training and knowledge disagree with her on (in those two fields).
After years of reading B.A.R. (Biblical Archaelogical Review) and looking at the maps and photos, it seems obvious to me that the staff and writers and contributors can't seem to agree on much of anything. This sounds like another one of those cases.
It is more than likely that the anti-Christian news media would try and find someone who will cast doubts upon any historical place/people/thing... because they hope that they can undermine the faith of believers.
Posted By: Shane Hokanson | March 21, 2009 1:31 PM
While Biblical and archeological scholarship can be hard to follow at times, I would suggest a somewhat less arcane form of scholarship is sufficient to make conclusions regarding this particular article - note the line of text immediately below the subtitle of this article, then do a Google or Wikipedia search on the key word contained therein: "Parody."
Posted By: Tim Johnson | March 21, 2009 3:07 PM
Relax, people. The historicity of the NT witness has been under attack since the day after the Resurrection, and after 2000 years it still survives quite well. We will just have to wait for the Second Coming for final confirmation.
Posted By: John Sheldon | March 21, 2009 3:26 PM
I didn't realize that one of America's most celebrated motion picture directors was a Christian and a "prominent expert" on...?!
Posted By: Chris Ryan | March 21, 2009 3:26 PM
I can't even find Waldo, let alone Rachel Elior.
Posted By: DocRoc07 | March 21, 2009 4:42 PM
Bravo, Mr. Olsen. I can almost believe you are real. Am only sorry you forgot to include Smithee's trenchant comments on the Essene material found in Philo the Pastry Dough. Thank you for your excellent work!
Posted By: Happy Steitz | March 21, 2009 4:45 PM
From my research, true scholarship supports the biblical record's authenticity more times than not. The problem with this is that scandals raise interest, and interest raises money. A certain celebrity said, "controversy creates cash." This is true in all territories and fields. But, I honestly think that when something is found to support the biblical record or our understanding of biblical times, it is more interesting than some infamous treachery. I understand that the Essenes themselves do not support the biblical record. However, our understanding of this section of ancient Judaism greatly impacts our understanding of early Christianity. And that understanding, in my belief, supports the biblical record to some degree.
Posted By: BC | March 21, 2009 10:53 PM
What a wonderful example of ironic writing. Congratulations! I feel sorry for those who didn't have the joy of "getting it".
Posted By: Granny Fran | March 22, 2009 1:29 AM
This guys hilarious! Seriously, though, scholars should be more careful about making assertions on flimsy evidence. Mr. Olsen's tongue in cheek expose on the existence or lack therof of the Hebrew scholar underscores the silliness of some of the so called intelligentsia.
Posted By: Dan | March 22, 2009 6:15 AM
Alan Smithee (also Allen Smithee)isn't a real person! Instead, it "is an official pseudonym used by film directors who wish to disown a project, coined in 1968. Until its use was formally discontinued in 2000,[1] it was the sole pseudonym used by members of the Directors Guild of America (DGA) when a director dissatisfied with the final product proved to the satisfaction of a guild panel that he or she had not been able to exercise creative control over a film." See Wikipedia
The entire article is a parody of Rachel Elior's "methodology for proving the existence of an ancient people." as Art Kelly points out above.
Posted By: Lisa Lawrence | March 28, 2009 1:15 PM
There is an art to satire and this author has it. To those asking for more clarity, that clarity destroys the force of satire. (Although the word "Parody" is in the title line.)
Perhaps another medium of communication is best for you.
I on the other hand, love it. Kudos to Mr. Olsen.
Posted By: Todd | April 1, 2009 3:09 PM