The Dead Sea Scrolls
- Thread starter dot23
- Start date
-
- Tags
- dead sea scrolls
A
Anonymous
Guest
What exactly is being released? The scrolls themselves or the information on them. There is a big difference there, since they could easily lie about it considering how secretive the whole deal was.
A
Anonymous
Guest
was there a date set for the release?
cas
cas
All i heard was that the Vatican have released (they say) the entirity of the original DSS manuscripts from the vaults. Of course, I find that hard to believe! Oh and I think they're already out there, as an American academic was saying how great it was that they finally had access. Let me do a bit of poking around myself (oo er)
okay found this (check the dateline!)
Vatican scholars prepare to rewrite the Bible
okay this is odd, I can't find anything on the guardian website apart from the one above, nothing on the Beeb (the original source of the story) and nothing on cnn. Also nothing from ask, google or any other decent search engine. What happened to this story?
right tracked down this precis:
also this:
Dead Sea Scrolls complete after 54 years
Kind of odd that an Israeli claims to have completed the DSS as I was told whilst studying the subject at Uni that the Vatican 'confiscated' most of the really interesting pieces, and removed all jewish, arabic and secular scholars from the project replacing them with christian denominations mostly (surprise) catholic. This came from someone who worked on the project in its early days, and who once sat on a sheaf of them in a bar in Rome to stop secret vatican agents from seeing them! Could have been a wind up to make the course more interesting - but he didn't have much of a sense of humour.
okay found this (check the dateline!)
Vatican scholars prepare to rewrite the Bible
okay this is odd, I can't find anything on the guardian website apart from the one above, nothing on the Beeb (the original source of the story) and nothing on cnn. Also nothing from ask, google or any other decent search engine. What happened to this story?
right tracked down this precis:
also this:
Dead Sea Scrolls complete after 54 years
Kind of odd that an Israeli claims to have completed the DSS as I was told whilst studying the subject at Uni that the Vatican 'confiscated' most of the really interesting pieces, and removed all jewish, arabic and secular scholars from the project replacing them with christian denominations mostly (surprise) catholic. This came from someone who worked on the project in its early days, and who once sat on a sheaf of them in a bar in Rome to stop secret vatican agents from seeing them! Could have been a wind up to make the course more interesting - but he didn't have much of a sense of humour.
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2001
- Messages
- 54,631
That was an interesting quote that ended the Guardian article:
"Martyn Percy, a canon doctor at Sheffield university, welcomed the initiative but suggested the results may be less than dramatic. "There has never been a settled, definitive version of the Bible, it has been an evolving book which has gone through many translations. Only fundamentalists think it came in a fax from heaven."
This could do with repeating on many threads on these forums!
Evolution in the natural world is thought to occur by Natural Selection. Darwin chose this phrase to contrast with the breeding of livestock by artificial selection.
So in which sense is the Bible evolving? Answers, on a postcard, to the Vatican...
It's all very well to be flexible in one's beliefs, but it seems to me that looking at new evidence through the scratched lens of one's old spectacles may not get one very far.
"Martyn Percy, a canon doctor at Sheffield university, welcomed the initiative but suggested the results may be less than dramatic. "There has never been a settled, definitive version of the Bible, it has been an evolving book which has gone through many translations. Only fundamentalists think it came in a fax from heaven."
This could do with repeating on many threads on these forums!
Evolution in the natural world is thought to occur by Natural Selection. Darwin chose this phrase to contrast with the breeding of livestock by artificial selection.
So in which sense is the Bible evolving? Answers, on a postcard, to the Vatican...
It's all very well to be flexible in one's beliefs, but it seems to me that looking at new evidence through the scratched lens of one's old spectacles may not get one very far.
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2001
- Messages
- 54,631
Yes, I checked the relevent links. Did I miss something?
All I was implying is that whatever the Vatican chooses to reveal will not change the status quo very much, if at all. After all, I hardly think they are going to turn round and say, "Sorry folks, we got it all wrong, all this time! Jesus wasn't the Son of God after all, he was just a ..."
So I expect just the merest amount of adjustment to the 'evolving Bible', and this will make no real difference to Catholic doctrine or ritual.
If I am wrong, I will be happy to acknowledge the fact.
All I was implying is that whatever the Vatican chooses to reveal will not change the status quo very much, if at all. After all, I hardly think they are going to turn round and say, "Sorry folks, we got it all wrong, all this time! Jesus wasn't the Son of God after all, he was just a ..."
So I expect just the merest amount of adjustment to the 'evolving Bible', and this will make no real difference to Catholic doctrine or ritual.
If I am wrong, I will be happy to acknowledge the fact.
rynner said:
C'mon rynner miracles happen
I got a suspicion that the Vatican is just preparing us for the changes that there will be when JP II goes to find out if the Boss approves - in person.
Papal infallability might be going and probably a change of attitude to birth control. A punch-up over biblical contents might be just the thing to hide this.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Surely a future pope revoking papal infallibility would create an almighty paradox?
A
Anonymous
Guest
isnt that the same sort of story line as was in the film dogma where they tried to prove that god was falable (sp?)
cas
cas
rynner, there's a body of 'evidence' that Jesus was real, but it tends to point out his uhmanity, not his divinity. So the Vatican could release/include-in-new-new-testament material that gives Jesus 'historical' viability. This would add to Catholicism as it wouldn't damage Jesus' status, but would harm detractors who try to claim Jesus didn't exist, or was a composite character.
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2001
- Messages
- 54,631
I never doubted that Jesus was real - I just do not believe all the stuff the church has attached to him i.e his 'divine' status. So you are really echoing what ! said, Dot, that the church will not change its religious beliefs even if it does add in a few extra historical details. Naturally the Church will not do anything to harm its status - that would be turkeys voting for Christmas.
But it is those details that have led others to question the church's interpretation of the whole story, especially the fact that the teachigs ascribed to Jesus were in fact current among the Essenes before he was born. The idea that he was 'just' a humble carpenter is probably a misinterpretation too. That is the whole point of the genealogies in the new testament - they were to prove that he really was of royal birth, and thereby fitted to be the King of the Jews. (Admittedly the two genealogies disagree, but this is typical of the many contradictions in the Bible...)
But it is those details that have led others to question the church's interpretation of the whole story, especially the fact that the teachigs ascribed to Jesus were in fact current among the Essenes before he was born. The idea that he was 'just' a humble carpenter is probably a misinterpretation too. That is the whole point of the genealogies in the new testament - they were to prove that he really was of royal birth, and thereby fitted to be the King of the Jews. (Admittedly the two genealogies disagree, but this is typical of the many contradictions in the Bible...)
JamesWhitehead
Piffle Prospector
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2001
- Messages
- 14,201
Rumours that the DSS would blow Christianity apart when revealed
in full have been around for years. The story of their delayed
appearance and the scandals of scholarship surrounding them were
documented in a book called The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception by
Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, published ten years ago.
Despite the fact that these writers are the authors of the Holy
Blood and Grail twaddle, the above named book is sober and
sensible, telling a tale of vanity and incompetence rather than
conspiracy.
The Catholic Church has certainly not been helpful but the failures
of individuals are at the heart of the problem.
Considering the room for interpretation in the Bible, it seems
unlikely that bigots will be persuaded to budge an inch by any
related writings whatever. Faith has always managed to fly free
of all texts.
in full have been around for years. The story of their delayed
appearance and the scandals of scholarship surrounding them were
documented in a book called The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception by
Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, published ten years ago.
Despite the fact that these writers are the authors of the Holy
Blood and Grail twaddle, the above named book is sober and
sensible, telling a tale of vanity and incompetence rather than
conspiracy.
The Catholic Church has certainly not been helpful but the failures
of individuals are at the heart of the problem.
Considering the room for interpretation in the Bible, it seems
unlikely that bigots will be persuaded to budge an inch by any
related writings whatever. Faith has always managed to fly free
of all texts.
You been reading the Agnosticism thread?
On the matter of text being changed there is an open secret amongst scholars of biblical writings. This was first told to me back 1975-ish when I used to play chess with one such, Tom Patty. Talking generally he told me that the Greek used to describe Joseph as a carpenter was of a form that emplied he was an employer of carpenters or perhaps what the mediaeval guilds would call a master carpenter. This would mean that Joseph was a wealthy man, possibly noble.
Not reading archaeic Greek myself I cannot comment on the veracity of this, but I have seen it repeated.
On the matter of text being changed there is an open secret amongst scholars of biblical writings. This was first told to me back 1975-ish when I used to play chess with one such, Tom Patty. Talking generally he told me that the Greek used to describe Joseph as a carpenter was of a form that emplied he was an employer of carpenters or perhaps what the mediaeval guilds would call a master carpenter. This would mean that Joseph was a wealthy man, possibly noble.
Not reading archaeic Greek myself I cannot comment on the veracity of this, but I have seen it repeated.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2002
- Messages
- 429
just trawling through old threads again
I was very interested to read here that all the DSS have finally been released. At first I was going to merely comment on all the 'conspiricys' surrounding the scrolls. I was just going to say that with such an important subject one should expect to see plenty of people out there with axes to grind. The biggest reason for their slow release into the public domain is the fragmentary nature of the scrolls. They needed to be pieced back together, translated - things which take a very long time, particularly as any mistranslations would have a huge impact on the Judaeo-Christian world.
As I was musing over this I suddenly realised that the Vatican had been holding the DSS! Er, since when? It is my understanding that they are in Israel.
BTW I possess an excellent translation of the DSS (of all the ones that were available at the time of course!). It is called 'The Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Translation' by Michael Wise, Martin Abegg, Jr. & Edward Cook. It is well referenced and indexed. I also have a copy of the Dead Sea Scrolls Deception but like many other books in my library, I haven't gotten around to reading it yet. The curse of having a full time job. Still, it lets me buy more books
I was very interested to read here that all the DSS have finally been released. At first I was going to merely comment on all the 'conspiricys' surrounding the scrolls. I was just going to say that with such an important subject one should expect to see plenty of people out there with axes to grind. The biggest reason for their slow release into the public domain is the fragmentary nature of the scrolls. They needed to be pieced back together, translated - things which take a very long time, particularly as any mistranslations would have a huge impact on the Judaeo-Christian world.
As I was musing over this I suddenly realised that the Vatican had been holding the DSS! Er, since when? It is my understanding that they are in Israel.
BTW I possess an excellent translation of the DSS (of all the ones that were available at the time of course!). It is called 'The Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Translation' by Michael Wise, Martin Abegg, Jr. & Edward Cook. It is well referenced and indexed. I also have a copy of the Dead Sea Scrolls Deception but like many other books in my library, I haven't gotten around to reading it yet. The curse of having a full time job. Still, it lets me buy more books
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2002
- Messages
- 13,692
Perhaps there's two sets then?
Oh Gawd...
Anyone taking bets on which will be denounced as apocryphal first?
Oh Gawd...
Anyone taking bets on which will be denounced as apocryphal first?
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2002
- Messages
- 429
According to Wise, Abegg, Jr. and Cook (as mentioned in my previous post) the 'Dead Sea Scrolls' can refer to texts found in caves near the Wadi Murabba'at, the Wadi Daliyeh, the ruins of Masada and the Wadi Qumran. When people normally talk of the DSS they are usually referring to the Qumran scrolls. The scrolls found at Masada come from the same period as Qumran, but the Murabba'at and Daliyeh scrolls are from different periods (presumably much later but doesn't specify).
It has been estimated that there may have been up to a thousand scrolls in the Qumran caves but many have vanished. The scholars have recovered the remains of about 870 separate scrolls.
What is my point, you ask? Well, I guess it is possible that the Vatican may have acquired some of the lost Qumran scrolls or some other scrolls from the Dead Sea region. If that is the case, they have been very naughty to hide them away for so long.
It has been estimated that there may have been up to a thousand scrolls in the Qumran caves but many have vanished. The scholars have recovered the remains of about 870 separate scrolls.
What is my point, you ask? Well, I guess it is possible that the Vatican may have acquired some of the lost Qumran scrolls or some other scrolls from the Dead Sea region. If that is the case, they have been very naughty to hide them away for so long.
well the guy who originally discovered the cave wasn't stupid - he quickly smuggled several lots out and sold them to import/export types and foreign collectors, without realising their value. The scrolls then start moving around europe, africa and the middle east, some are bought by the vatican, some are aquired by universities, some end up at the bottom of the aegean, some are lost. The cave structure was investigated and unearthed by an international team, and again, although they catalogued the positions of vases etc, the path of each individual vase/casement is harder to follow, and many were undubtedly flogged off by unscrupulous helpers. An attempt has been made by the Vatican to quosh/distort the research, and the fact that what's released is invariably old testament texts rather that any material relating to or written at the time of Jesus' alleged life causes many raised eyebrows in academia.
Or at least that's what I heard... I've trawled ofr some links to find out who actually owns the majority of the scrolls and I'll be buggered if I can find anything useful.
Or at least that's what I heard... I've trawled ofr some links to find out who actually owns the majority of the scrolls and I'll be buggered if I can find anything useful.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2002
- Messages
- 429
I don't think the Vatican legitimately own any of the scrolls. When they were first discovered most people thought they were fakes because they were written in Aramaic (too vulgar for writing scriptures). A few scrolls were toted around the USA but these were eventually bought by Israel. As a number of scrolls are known to be missing from the caves we can conclude that they either disintegrated on removal from the caves, or are in various private collections. Also bear in mind the law regarding ancient artifacts. It is illegal to remove artifacts from the country of discovery without that country's permission. (Back in the 1940/1950's there were raised eyebrows concerning the legality of selling some of the scrolls outside the Middle East). I'm pretty sure that Israel and Jordan have kept tight grip on these treasures since then.
Glancing at my book of translation (I forgot to mention that it was published in 1996), all the texts appear to be OT in nature although some clearly appear to have been inspirations for parts of the NT. I don't believe there is any conspiricy surrounding the DSS. Both Judaic and Christian gospels are fixed. Nothing is going to change unless someone finds manuscripts signed 'God', or 'Jesus' or 'Peter' etc. Both faiths are far bigger than the Bible. There are hundreds of other stories, legends and canons that surround and complement the Bible. I think that many people who do not follow these faiths, and indeed many who do, fail to appreciate this. The Bible is not the 'be all and end all' of these religions. I just know I'm gonna get flamed for this one!
I seem to be rambling again. Good luck in your search Dot23. I'll be interested in the results.
Glancing at my book of translation (I forgot to mention that it was published in 1996), all the texts appear to be OT in nature although some clearly appear to have been inspirations for parts of the NT. I don't believe there is any conspiricy surrounding the DSS. Both Judaic and Christian gospels are fixed. Nothing is going to change unless someone finds manuscripts signed 'God', or 'Jesus' or 'Peter' etc. Both faiths are far bigger than the Bible. There are hundreds of other stories, legends and canons that surround and complement the Bible. I think that many people who do not follow these faiths, and indeed many who do, fail to appreciate this. The Bible is not the 'be all and end all' of these religions. I just know I'm gonna get flamed for this one!
I seem to be rambling again. Good luck in your search Dot23. I'll be interested in the results.
Hospitaller
Ephemeral Spectre
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2001
- Messages
- 427
- Location
- Ireland
The Dead Sea Scrolls Book of Daniel
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, Dot 23 wrote:
"I did study the DSS under one of the original analysts in the pre-all catholic research group at Uni (did horribly on the exam!). He was convinced that the messages held within them were dangerous to the vatican and the papcay, and the story about 'retro-fitting' daniel came from him. Not only were daniel and ezekiel's words interpretted as being about Jesus, the wording was changed in the original scripture so as to make it appear a stronger prophecy than it was originally."
It took me a while to look into this one. My current immersion in academia accounts for both my late reply and my aversion to people stating opinion as fact!
Anyway, some of the most important variations found in the Book of Daniel scrolls found at Qumran are footnoted in modern bible translations. The New International Version, for example, has an extensive footnote on the variant reading at Daniel 10:16. The New Revised Standard Version, meanwhile, dumps the traditional Masoretic reading completely in Daniel 7:1, replacing it with the variant reading from the Dead Sea Scrolls.
So whatever about wording being changed in original scripture, our current translations are being updated using the Dead Sea Scrolls. Many "King James Version (KJV) only" fundamentalists may balk at this, seeing the textus receptus on which the KJV is based as the verbal plenary inspired word of God. What they may not realise is that this theory of inspiration is Islamic. They are the inheritors of a tradition which tries to hold the "Christian" bible on the same level as the Quran, whereas it really is the equivalent of the Hadith. The equivalent of the Quran in Christian theology is Jesus Christ - both are believed by their respective devotees to be uncreated and to have pre-existed eternally in heaven with God apart from their earthly manifestation (there are other less straightforward parallels which I won't go into now). No such claim is made for the Bible in primitive Christianity. Indeed much of what we now call the Bible did not exist when the first Christian's were alive. They were followers of Christ, not bibliolaters. I have digressed...
It is important to be aware that the Dead Sea Scrolls books of Daniel (1QDan.a, 1QDan.b, 4QDan.a, 4QDan.b, 4QDan.c, 4QDan.d, 4QDan.e, pap6QDan) were not preserved complete and intact, having been subject to the appetites of cave worms or the ravages of time. However, many scrolls found at Qumran quote from and refer to Daniel (4Q242, 4Q243-244, 4Q245, 4Q246, 4Q489, ?4Q551, 4Q552-3, ).
Nowhere in the Dead Sea Scrolls versions of Daniel can it be found that the wording differs from the our current scripture so as to make it appear a stronger prophecy than it was originally. Of course there are many variants, different words used to describe vegetables, spelling mistakes (in one place Nebuchadnezzar is spelt "Mechandnezzar"), and various others, the details of which I won't bore you with (unless requested) as they don't significantly alter the meaning of the text.
What is important, however, is the absence of the whole of what we now call Chapter 12 of the Book of Daniel from all of the Dead Sea versions of Daniel. Chapter 12 is important in that it is the first book of the pre-Christian Jewish canon to speak explicitly of resurrection. The resurrection referred to therein refers only to the Jewish people. A time is prophetically described when the obedient faithful rise to shine forever like stars, and all evil is done away with. Daniel himself pleads ignorance in the text to the meaning of this prophecy (Daniel 12:8), and its interpretation is refused to him (Daniel 12:9).
However, Daniel 12 is quoted in another Dead Sea Scroll (4Q174), so we know that it existed at that time. Whether it was edited from the Dead Sea Daniel Scrolls by their authors or fell subject to cave worms and time, I do not know, and welcome comment. What I do know is that the last portion of the Book of Daniel did exist at that time - it is quoted in 4Q174.
On a final note, whereas the Christian classification of the "Old Testament" writings includes Daniel amongst the 'Prophets', the Jewish "Tanak" includes Daniel amongst the "Kethubhim" ('Writings'). In the Dead Sea Scrolls Daniel is classified under "Prophets". This has much relevance, not least to the comments made by Dot23's lecturer. It's main relevance, though, is that it tells us much more about the authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls than about their contemporaries in Judaism or fledgling Christianity.
It would appear that Dot23's lecturer was uninformed regarding the Dead Sea Scrolls versions of Daniel. Perhaps he had not read the scrolls for himself but only "about" them. (As a third-level lecturer I know that this can be often the case with many of my colleagues) If it was more than five years ago, he could legitimately theorise about the biblical scrolls from Qumran being kept from the faithful for fear of shattering their faith. (Which wouldn't be hard if like our KJV-only friends it was based mainly on a book).
However, since 1999 all of the biblical scrolls from Qumran have been available to buy in English translation thanks to Martin Abegg Jr., Peter Flint and Eugene Ulrich. Those wishing to discuss the relevance of the Dead Sea Scrolls to the biblical canon and Christianity on this forum would do well to get their hands on a copy (ISBN 0 567 08715 8) in order that they might give an informed opinion.
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, Dot 23 wrote:
"I did study the DSS under one of the original analysts in the pre-all catholic research group at Uni (did horribly on the exam!). He was convinced that the messages held within them were dangerous to the vatican and the papcay, and the story about 'retro-fitting' daniel came from him. Not only were daniel and ezekiel's words interpretted as being about Jesus, the wording was changed in the original scripture so as to make it appear a stronger prophecy than it was originally."
It took me a while to look into this one. My current immersion in academia accounts for both my late reply and my aversion to people stating opinion as fact!
Anyway, some of the most important variations found in the Book of Daniel scrolls found at Qumran are footnoted in modern bible translations. The New International Version, for example, has an extensive footnote on the variant reading at Daniel 10:16. The New Revised Standard Version, meanwhile, dumps the traditional Masoretic reading completely in Daniel 7:1, replacing it with the variant reading from the Dead Sea Scrolls.
So whatever about wording being changed in original scripture, our current translations are being updated using the Dead Sea Scrolls. Many "King James Version (KJV) only" fundamentalists may balk at this, seeing the textus receptus on which the KJV is based as the verbal plenary inspired word of God. What they may not realise is that this theory of inspiration is Islamic. They are the inheritors of a tradition which tries to hold the "Christian" bible on the same level as the Quran, whereas it really is the equivalent of the Hadith. The equivalent of the Quran in Christian theology is Jesus Christ - both are believed by their respective devotees to be uncreated and to have pre-existed eternally in heaven with God apart from their earthly manifestation (there are other less straightforward parallels which I won't go into now). No such claim is made for the Bible in primitive Christianity. Indeed much of what we now call the Bible did not exist when the first Christian's were alive. They were followers of Christ, not bibliolaters. I have digressed...
It is important to be aware that the Dead Sea Scrolls books of Daniel (1QDan.a, 1QDan.b, 4QDan.a, 4QDan.b, 4QDan.c, 4QDan.d, 4QDan.e, pap6QDan) were not preserved complete and intact, having been subject to the appetites of cave worms or the ravages of time. However, many scrolls found at Qumran quote from and refer to Daniel (4Q242, 4Q243-244, 4Q245, 4Q246, 4Q489, ?4Q551, 4Q552-3, ).
Nowhere in the Dead Sea Scrolls versions of Daniel can it be found that the wording differs from the our current scripture so as to make it appear a stronger prophecy than it was originally. Of course there are many variants, different words used to describe vegetables, spelling mistakes (in one place Nebuchadnezzar is spelt "Mechandnezzar"), and various others, the details of which I won't bore you with (unless requested) as they don't significantly alter the meaning of the text.
What is important, however, is the absence of the whole of what we now call Chapter 12 of the Book of Daniel from all of the Dead Sea versions of Daniel. Chapter 12 is important in that it is the first book of the pre-Christian Jewish canon to speak explicitly of resurrection. The resurrection referred to therein refers only to the Jewish people. A time is prophetically described when the obedient faithful rise to shine forever like stars, and all evil is done away with. Daniel himself pleads ignorance in the text to the meaning of this prophecy (Daniel 12:8), and its interpretation is refused to him (Daniel 12:9).
However, Daniel 12 is quoted in another Dead Sea Scroll (4Q174), so we know that it existed at that time. Whether it was edited from the Dead Sea Daniel Scrolls by their authors or fell subject to cave worms and time, I do not know, and welcome comment. What I do know is that the last portion of the Book of Daniel did exist at that time - it is quoted in 4Q174.
On a final note, whereas the Christian classification of the "Old Testament" writings includes Daniel amongst the 'Prophets', the Jewish "Tanak" includes Daniel amongst the "Kethubhim" ('Writings'). In the Dead Sea Scrolls Daniel is classified under "Prophets". This has much relevance, not least to the comments made by Dot23's lecturer. It's main relevance, though, is that it tells us much more about the authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls than about their contemporaries in Judaism or fledgling Christianity.
It would appear that Dot23's lecturer was uninformed regarding the Dead Sea Scrolls versions of Daniel. Perhaps he had not read the scrolls for himself but only "about" them. (As a third-level lecturer I know that this can be often the case with many of my colleagues) If it was more than five years ago, he could legitimately theorise about the biblical scrolls from Qumran being kept from the faithful for fear of shattering their faith. (Which wouldn't be hard if like our KJV-only friends it was based mainly on a book).
However, since 1999 all of the biblical scrolls from Qumran have been available to buy in English translation thanks to Martin Abegg Jr., Peter Flint and Eugene Ulrich. Those wishing to discuss the relevance of the Dead Sea Scrolls to the biblical canon and Christianity on this forum would do well to get their hands on a copy (ISBN 0 567 08715 8) in order that they might give an informed opinion.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2002
- Messages
- 429
St.Clair said:
This is the second time that I have seen you say this on the MB. Could you please direct me to your sources that discuss the DSS wrt Christianity?
A
Anonymous
Guest
Mana- All of the scriptures contain information that is contrary to christian belief. I need only point you to the bible and therefore to the dead sea scrolls. I cant be bothered giving you too many examples because I presume that you have a bible. You can do the work, mate. I will not summerise years of my work to benifit anyone else. Particularly deliverers of cheekyness.
Jesus is described in one of the gospels (you go and find out which one....a clue though.....'tis the first words in the particular gospel) as being descended from the royal line of David......through Joseph! Jesus exsistance in Christian belief was created by a union between God and Mary.
Barrabas is named Jesus Barrabas in one gospel (again, you find out) which directly translates from the Hebrew into "Jesus, Son of God". You tell me....what Jesus, Son of God did pilot set free.
The first gospel that was translated of the dead sea scrolls was the Gospel of Thomas. It begins by explaining that "this is written by the twin" It says much that is apocryphal and has therefor been added to the Gnostic Gospels. It quotes christ, saying many different things that are not found in any other gospel. They all contradict popular christian belief. As I say, you do your own groundwork mate. They reveal a military styled jesus and a very liberal one who tells his followers NOT to go through the pains of worship. It reveals the details about Magdelene and Christ and how they kissed and..........
Check it out yourself. If you are truly interested and you have never studied these things before, then this is a good start.
You thought you were asking a difficult or trapping question but I have no problems answering it. Now you have the chance to answer it for yourself. Good luck on your quest!
I have not mentioned the New or Old Testement Apocrypha nor have I had to go into any great depth. There is much that is contrary to Christian belief and I believe the Knights Templar found heretical and apocryphal information which completely changed their christian outlook.
As a military group of warrior monks they could have been very excited if they came across a reference to Christ instructing his people to "take up your swords".
Not only was Jesus called Joshua Ben Joseph (spelling still changes quite a bit) but his name was incredibly common in the area. Unlike the names: Mark, Peter, Mary, John, etc, etc.
Crucifixion was also common and not exclusive to Christ. Many people who claimed any authority beyond the Roman Empire was given the chance to be crucified with everyone else.
Viniger was a beverage (however being given it instead of water while being tortured is still an awful state of affairs) and was drunk by the higher and lower classes. Kids are still taught that it was unthinkable to be given viniger whatever the situation. Although the viniger added to his torture the above does put a different light on the situation.
Jesus is described in one of the gospels (you go and find out which one....a clue though.....'tis the first words in the particular gospel) as being descended from the royal line of David......through Joseph! Jesus exsistance in Christian belief was created by a union between God and Mary.
Barrabas is named Jesus Barrabas in one gospel (again, you find out) which directly translates from the Hebrew into "Jesus, Son of God". You tell me....what Jesus, Son of God did pilot set free.
The first gospel that was translated of the dead sea scrolls was the Gospel of Thomas. It begins by explaining that "this is written by the twin" It says much that is apocryphal and has therefor been added to the Gnostic Gospels. It quotes christ, saying many different things that are not found in any other gospel. They all contradict popular christian belief. As I say, you do your own groundwork mate. They reveal a military styled jesus and a very liberal one who tells his followers NOT to go through the pains of worship. It reveals the details about Magdelene and Christ and how they kissed and..........
Check it out yourself. If you are truly interested and you have never studied these things before, then this is a good start.
You thought you were asking a difficult or trapping question but I have no problems answering it. Now you have the chance to answer it for yourself. Good luck on your quest!
I have not mentioned the New or Old Testement Apocrypha nor have I had to go into any great depth. There is much that is contrary to Christian belief and I believe the Knights Templar found heretical and apocryphal information which completely changed their christian outlook.
As a military group of warrior monks they could have been very excited if they came across a reference to Christ instructing his people to "take up your swords".
Not only was Jesus called Joshua Ben Joseph (spelling still changes quite a bit) but his name was incredibly common in the area. Unlike the names: Mark, Peter, Mary, John, etc, etc.
Crucifixion was also common and not exclusive to Christ. Many people who claimed any authority beyond the Roman Empire was given the chance to be crucified with everyone else.
Viniger was a beverage (however being given it instead of water while being tortured is still an awful state of affairs) and was drunk by the higher and lower classes. Kids are still taught that it was unthinkable to be given viniger whatever the situation. Although the viniger added to his torture the above does put a different light on the situation.
Some of the apocrypha.... for your reading pleasure.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2002
- Messages
- 429
Thanks to St. Clair for the info and thanks to Minor Drag for the link.
However I still don't see where anything in the DSS has any major impact on the Christian gospels. The DSS are OT texts. Some of the texts appear to provide inspiration for some of the NT gospels but no actual gospels have been found. The Gospel of Thomas is not found in the DSS.
However I still don't see where anything in the DSS has any major impact on the Christian gospels. The DSS are OT texts. Some of the texts appear to provide inspiration for some of the NT gospels but no actual gospels have been found. The Gospel of Thomas is not found in the DSS.
A
Anonymous
Guest
the dead sea scrolls are the oldest known copies of the bible so therefore cannot be deemed as "off topic". Because they are original and well preserved, there is a standard of translation that revealed much that the canonical works excluded. If the grail is simply the cup of christ then this is indeed Off Topic. But if the grail is allagorical then existance as a concept may be far older.
Yes, the first text translated of the Nag Hammadi find was the Gospel of Thomas and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Error on my part but the Nag Hammadi is no less relevant to my point. Whereas the DDS concentrates on the old testement period and as such distorts the orthodox view that is derived from the older texts. The Nag do contain many relevant gospels.
Apart from Thomas, the other references are from the Bible. The new testement has many implications for the modern church. Always did!!
Sorry for any misunderstanding.
Yes, the first text translated of the Nag Hammadi find was the Gospel of Thomas and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Error on my part but the Nag Hammadi is no less relevant to my point. Whereas the DDS concentrates on the old testement period and as such distorts the orthodox view that is derived from the older texts. The Nag do contain many relevant gospels.
Apart from Thomas, the other references are from the Bible. The new testement has many implications for the modern church. Always did!!
Sorry for any misunderstanding.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2002
- Messages
- 429
Dead Sea Scrolls etc etc
Well I'm glad that's all been cleared up. I was never disputing the fact that there are inconsistantcies (sp?) in the bible. Thanks again to Minor Drag for the link, there's some very interesting stuff there, particularly on the message boards.
Welcome to the board btw.
Well I'm glad that's all been cleared up. I was never disputing the fact that there are inconsistantcies (sp?) in the bible. Thanks again to Minor Drag for the link, there's some very interesting stuff there, particularly on the message boards.
Welcome to the board btw.
MrRING
Android Futureman
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2002
- Messages
- 6,053
Copper Dead Sea Scroll
On the tv show Encounters with the Unexplained they just had a show about the Dead Sea Scrolls.
I didn't learn anything new except for the existance of a copper scroll that is more like a treasure map (hence my buried treasure thread earlier). According to the show, it reveals locations where various amounts of "talents" and an explination of the copper scroll are buried.
Has anybody ever heard of the copper scroll before and/or have their own theories about it?
Here is a site on it:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/LAS/wsrp/educational_site/dead_sea_scrolls/copperscroll.shtml
On the tv show Encounters with the Unexplained they just had a show about the Dead Sea Scrolls.
I didn't learn anything new except for the existance of a copper scroll that is more like a treasure map (hence my buried treasure thread earlier). According to the show, it reveals locations where various amounts of "talents" and an explination of the copper scroll are buried.
Has anybody ever heard of the copper scroll before and/or have their own theories about it?
Here is a site on it:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/LAS/wsrp/educational_site/dead_sea_scrolls/copperscroll.shtml