Thom Stark buries Richard Carrier – 11QMelchizedek (11Q13)

This second part of my response to Richard Carrier will deal essentially with the interpretation of three texts: Daniel 9:24-27, Isaiah 52:7-53:12, and 11QMelchizedek. I will spend the bulk of my time responding point by point to Carrier’s claims, before concluding with a fresh interpretation of 11QMelch, based on new research. I’ve changed my mind back and forth on various questions regarding 11QMelch, but never have I found Carrier’s claims to accord with the data we have. He constantly misreads the texts; he makes contradictory claims about the nature of pesher, as he thinks it suits his purposes, and ultimately fails on virtually every point. The one point he has made that forced me to look closer at the scroll is that it follows the same timeline as Daniel in terms of a ten jubilee cycle. I was of course, with all scholars, already aware of this, but his insistence on the central significance of this point drove me to closer examination of the scroll. Not surprisingly, as it turns out and as I will show, Carrier’s understanding of the timeline of events between Daniel 9 and 11QMelch is incorrect, but I owe to his insistence on this question the clarity I now have about what 11QMelch is saying about the last days.

http://religionatthemargins.com/2012/06/it-is-finished-for-richard-carriers-dying-messiah-part-2/

As always, Thom is well supported by scholarship – actual scholarship, like even from his own field. Give it a good read.

You Might Also Like

3 Replies to “Thom Stark buries Richard Carrier – 11QMelchizedek (11Q13)”

  1. As always, Thom is well supported by scholarship – actual scholarship, like even from his own field.

    “Even”? Is he in the habit of making grand claims outside his area of expertise or summat?

    Give it a good read.

    Excellent idea.

Leave a Reply, Please!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.