Dead Sea Scrolls

[Flynmonkie]

The scrolls are here in KC for a few months. I will be viewing them in April. I wondered if anyone had any good "reads" for historical information for me in preparation for this visit? I know very little about them.

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

I can't suggest any concise reads that would provide a summary since most of my work on them is detailed and academic, but I'll do my best to provide a general summary...

The Dead Sea Scrolls were found at Khirbat Qumran between 1947 and 1956 in a number of clay jars scattered in caves. The Scrolls contain the earliest manuscripts of the Old Testament, the Hebrew apocarypha and intertestamental literature, and a number of other documents.

These 'other' documents, generally unique to the 'Qumran community,' reveal that writers of the Scrolls as an alternative sect of Second Temple Judaism (the Judaism of the four centuries before and generation after Jesus). Archaeological work at the site has revealed an entire monastery complex, where they set up an alternate temple structure (believing the temple in Jerusalem to be corrupted for a variety of reasons... very interesting if you want to know). They practiced excessive ritual purity, including ritual bathing, and thought of themselves as the true and faithful remnant of pre-exilic Israel whom God would save at the end of the age.

Among the more important documents found (besides biblical and common intertestamental literature) are the Community Rule, War Scroll, Damascus Document, and Copper Scroll.

Their sectarian affiliation is a matter of some debate. Immediately on finding the Scrolls, the Qumran community was described as a settlement of Essenes- a puritanical and mystical Jewish sect common in rural areas. In recent times that has come up for debate (although the majority of scholars maintain some relation with the Essenes)- they been labled everything from a branch of Sadducees who believed in the messiah and the resurrection (due to their purity laws- see the Community Rule) to the zealots (due to their apocalypticism- see the War Scroll). Some have even suggested a connection between them and John the Baptist (who practiced ritual washing, was clearly oriented toward the end times, and wandered in the Judean wildness where the community was location; I think this view makes great fiction, but can't be established, or denied, on historical grounds).

Anyway, regardless of who they were affiliated with (zealots or no), the Great Jewish Revolt broke out in AD 66 and two years later (68) the Roman general (and soon emperor) Vespasian, as part of his scortched earth policy, destroyed the entire community. It's thought that the Scrolls where placed in jars and hidden in the caves when the inevitable end was obvious.

Hope this helps! What an exciting opportunity!

 

[ContentInHim]

The scrolls are a great faith builder, if you feel shaky!

Remember that the wonderful scroll of that great prophet Isaiah is almost complete. AND best of all, it's like 99.99% the same as what we have today. Should give all of us faith that God has protected His scripture from contamination! (not to say that all translations are good )

 

[Flynmonkie]

Thank you both!

Yes, I am really excited about this. They are open to the public (if you can get tickets! As you can imagine it is filling up rather quickly!) I am going with my Honors program, I am not sure if it will be a different "type" of tour than the average person gets or not at this point.

http://www.unionstation.org/deadseascrolls/dss_lectures.cfm

I know a bit about the Nag Hammadi, but I have not studied any of this in depth. Are the scrolls a part of the 1945 discovery of these texts? These also were found in clay jars. But I thought this was rather common in this area. In fact, I remember reading that the mother of the man that made the discovery of the Nag Hammadi, initally used the scrolls as kindling! (Makes you wonder what else has been devalued and lost!) What makes them different than the Dead Sea Scrolls? Gnostisim?

 

[lionroar0]

I'm jealous.

Peace

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

I know a bit about the Nag Hammadi, but I have not studied any of this in depth. Are the scrolls a part of the 1945 discovery of these texts? These also were found in clay jars. But I thought this was rather common in this area. In fact, I remember reading that the mother of the man that made the discovery of the Nag Hammadi, initally used the scrolls as kindling! (Makes you wonder what else has been devalued and lost!) What makes them different than the Dead Sea Scrolls? Gnostisim?

Gnosticism, right on.

They have nothing to do with the Dead Sea Scrolls, although they were found around the same time. Nag Hammadi is a village in Upper Egypt.

The Nag Hammadi library is a collection of gnostic writings from the third and fourth centuries AD. They basically contain our first glimpse at gnosticism on its own terms (that is, apart from the testimony of the church fathers). It even contains some of the writings of one of the earliest gnostic heretics, Valentius. The Gospel of Thomas was also among them.

That said, they haven't really told us much. The library has given us a slightly more nuanced picture of gnosticism than we'd have from the church fathers alone, but it's not materially different from what we'd suspected for centuries. They're interesting academically, but they don't tell us anything new about Jesus or his world (unlike the DDS).

Christopher Tuckett, in an exhaustive study, has even gone through each of the texts to show that they are literarily dependent on the written gospels and even later gospel harmonies (like that of Tatian). They clearly do not evidence independent sources of Jesus-material. His only reservation was the Gospel of Thomas, and hence all the Jesus Seminar fuss about it. Thomas is a very early text (most date it around the beginning of the second century) and doesn't really contain any grammar or speech patterns from the canonical gospels. Thus, some have supposed that it gives as a new historical eye to see independent oral traditions about Jesus. John Dominic Crossan, a radical historical Jesus scholar, has based his career off this hypothesis.

Unfortunately, it's a bad hypothesis. Though the grammar and style of the canonical gospels aren't present, Thomas contains Jesus-sayings spread across Mark, Q Source, Special M and redaction M, Special L and redaction L, John, and a variety of other sources detected within the canonical gospels. In order to believe that Thomas was an independent and reliable source, we would have to believe A. that Thomas had access to such a wide range of oral traditions that it practically encompasses every hypothesized early Christian community, and B. that not a single one of the canonical gospel sources takes a leading position of authenticity over the others, but that authentic and inauthentic material is spread quite evenly across all strains of the canonical tradition. This is simply too much of a jump for any honest historian to make.

Anyway, that's the Nag Hammadi library.

 

[Flynmonkie]

A few months ago I picked up a couple of Robert Funk and Elaine Pagels books. I am in a two semester Bioethics course where I have been to lectures by Richard Dawkins, read Steven J. Gould to now this. We are covering all the controversial topics in Biology and Ethics or varying forms of Philosophy. It has been very interesting as a Christian to say the least! (I plan to see Marcus Borg - Part of the Jesus Seminar, in late April at a local Presbyterian church in Kansas). I have yet to read these books short of Gould; however, I am aware of the controversy of these codices.

I have read the (translated) gospel of Thomas; honestly, to me it seems that is exactly what it is. If I understood you correctly, as if someone tried to "recount" words they have heard.. Such as if I were to relate to you a sermon from my pastor.. So from what you are saying about nuances of oral tradition, I must be on the right track.

If I remember correctly, the sum of the Dead Sea scrolls were also confusing as that they were not all uniform in language and pen, an accumulation of varying styles? I wonder why this is the case. IN addition, I have read there were 500, and some places say close to 800 various scrolls found. Do you happen to know an exact figure?

Of course, I am yet but a novice at this study, my feet are barley wet. My thoughts going into this are that God works through everything, no matter, His glory comes through. Gods work is through the Spirit. Get that right (personal intimate relationship) and He promises to lead us to what we need. I think of all the ways that He has worked with me, for we cannot always understand the mind of God. Or should I say, there are some things we will not understand. I need no proof. I know most Christians would say the same. I am not so ready to run out and use the term “Gnostic” as most would. In fact, as I am sure you know it means "knowledge". I stick pretty closely, as closely as being wise as a serpent, of not quenching the Spirit by thinking of what IS noble, true and worthy of praise, such as Paul instructs of positive thinking and encouragement. What these texts offer me is the understanding of the essence of the different forms of religiosity. The varying stages each of us travel in our sanctification, if I may?

This is truly fascinating. You know, something else I read was a controversy about the carbon dating of these texts – have you heard or read any reliable information on this?

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

If I remember correctly, the sum of the Dead Sea scrolls were also confusing as that they were not all uniform in language and pen, an accumulation of varying styles? I wonder why this is the case. IN addition, I have read there were 500, and some places say close to 800 various scrolls found. Do you happen to know an exact figure?

I don't know about the exact figure, but the varying style, grammar, penmanship, and language are probable just due to the fact that the Scrolls were written over two hundred years. I believe there were ever Greek fragments found.

A few months ago I picked up a couple of Robert Funk and Elaine Pagels books.

I'm so sorry. Haha.

I'd highly suggest reading N.T. Wright's The Challenge of Jesus and Judas and the Gospel of Jesus. May I also suggest The Historical Jesus by Gary Habermas (not by favorite, but it's helpful).

I am in a two semester Bioethics course where I have been to lectures by Richard Dawkins, read Steven J. Gould to now this.

Ha, again, I'm so sorry.

Have you read any Alister McGrath, William Lane Craig, or John Polkinghorne? McGrath has graduate degrees is chemistry and physics and has just completed a 3-volume work on nature, science, and theology. Polkinghorne is a leading particle astrophyscist and quantum theoriest. And both of them are Anglican priests! I'd highly, highly recommend McGrath's Dawkins God, and Polkinghorne's Belief in God in an Age of Science and Science and the Trinity.

Of course, I am yet but a novice at this study, my feet are barley wet. My thoughts going into this are that God works through everything, no matter, His glory comes through. Gods work is through the Spirit. Get that right (personal intimate relationship) and He promises to lead us to what we need. I think of all the ways that He has worked with me, for we cannot always understand the mind of God. Or should I say, there are some things we will not understand. I need no proof. I know most Christians would say the same. I am not so ready to run out and use the term “Gnostic” as most would. In fact, as I am sure you know it means "knowledge". I stick pretty closely, as closely as being wise as a serpent, of not quenching the Spirit by thinking of what IS noble, true and worthy of praise, such as Paul instructs of positive thinking and encouragement. What these texts offer me is the understanding of the essence of the different forms of religiosity. The varying stages each of us travel in our sanctification, if I may?

Maybe I'm just tired but... I don't get it.

(I plan to see Marcus Borg - Part of the Jesus Seminar, in late April at a local Presbyterian church in Kansas).

Have fun. I think he's dead wrong and his scholarship is... unacademic... but way I hear, he's a delightful individual. He was even willing to coauthor a book with his principle detractor, the ever-brilliant N.T. Wright, on the meaning of Jesus.

 

[ContentInHim]

I'm not a Borg fan. His books have weakened the less than a mustard seed faith of my step-daughter.

Now William Craig Lane - there's a man filled with the Holy Spirit. His eyes shine and his whole face shows the love of God! Plus he's a super writer!

 

[Flynmonkie]

Thanks for the suggested reading. Yes, it has been quite an experience for me delving into the oppositional trains of thought. I have found it only strengthens my resolve. Can you imagine my reaction sitting front row at Richard Dawkins lecture, having NO idea what he was about. I mean I had somewhat of a clue with the title "God Delusion" but I had no idea he was the Fred Phelps of the atheist crowd! I am pretty easy going about differences; however, this was pure mockery. My professors had quite a bit of fun with me on this one (could you even call him atheist - I don't know too many "true" atheists that are that angry at the church..) I have no idea what path God has me on. There are days when I wonder, but I know I have gained much from all of this.

On the variations of text I meant yes, there were Greek and other languages found. If I remember correctly.

I am going to pick up these authors also. I have to say I appreciate Gould’s approach to the migration of scientific fact and faith. I admire his tone towards Christianity. I really do appreciate a civil dialog between differences, how else do we communicate? I guess in a nutshell what I said before (you didn't get!) Is that first and foremost I believe I am instructed to work on myself, it is my example that assists and supports in fellowship of others. Work out my own salvation. But ultimately, inspired or not, it is not a "thing" we do that quickens a heart to Him. No text, or codices saves, this is the sole work of the Holy Spirit. My role is to work on me, explain what I can, pray when I cannot, and rely on Him for everything.

So, just as CF includes varying denominations, yet all Christian, I am sure the texts reflect as such. Each person at their own level of sanctification (Justification, Sanctification, then eventual Glorification but not in this life) I always say, many different paths, one truly narrow gate.

ContentInHim I will keep your step-daughter in my prayers..