Essenes

[rivertree]

I don't know if you have had discussions here about the essenes- I tried to check back a bit but could not find posts about them.

I'm sort of fascinated with the essenes.

I read on a Jewish site once that stated the ancient Jews thought of the essenes as a branch of or type of pharisees. I don't know what their sources were, they seemed to be a pretty conservative site.

One thing I know about the essenes, they seemed to follow very strict rules- that would be similar to the pharisees.

Some say Jesus or rhe early Christians may have been influenced by the essenes. I know there were some familiar wordings about darkness and light in their writings. and it's been a while since I read about it, but I think they had some sort of ceremonial supper that might bear some familiarity to that mentioned in the New Testament.

If Jesus did come out of or was influenced by the essenes, I know he rejected at least some of their rules and revealed many spiritual principles. He seemed very concerned that we not be burdened down with rules, or led by the "blind leading the blind". He wanted (wants) us to commune with the Father individually and communally.

There is more information that lead some to believe that John the Baptist may have been an essene.

Anyway, I would like to know so much more on this subject.

 

[WinBySurrender]

I don't know if you have had discussions here about the essenes- I tried to check back a bit but could not find posts about them.

I'm sort of fascinated with the essenes.

I read on a Jewish site once that stated the ancient Jews thought of the essenes as a branch of or type of pharisees. I don't know what their sources were, they seemed to be a pretty conservative site.

One thing I know about the essenes, they seemed to follow very strict rules- that would be similar to the pharisees.

Some say Jesus or rhe early Christians may have been influenced by the essenes. I know there were some familiar wordings about darkness and light in their writings. and it's been a while since I read about it, but I think they had some sort of ceremonial supper that might bear some familiarity to that mentioned in the New Testament.

If Jesus did come out of or was influenced by the essenes, I know he rejected at least some of their rules and revealed many spiritual principles. He seemed very concerned that we not be burdened down with rules, or led by the "blind leading the blind". He wanted (wants) us to commune with the Father individually and communally.

There is more information that lead some to believe that John the Baptist may have been an essene.

Anyway, I would like to know so much more on this subject.

Jesus is God. He came from the Father, via the Holy Spirit. He wasn't "influenced" by anything other than His own will and that of the Father's. I seriously doubt the Essenes had any influence over the early church. They were legalists to the nth degree, even stricter and more anal about the Law than the Pharisees. Just my two cents worth.

 

[Root of Jesse]

There is some assertion that Jesus' human ancestors were Essenes. The Life of the Blessed Virgin Mary by Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich

 

[WinBySurrender]

There is some assertion that Jesus' human ancestors were Essenes. The Life of the Blessed Virgin Mary by Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich

Essenes were required to sell everything they owned to be in the sect. They lived communally. They had to carry a spade, per Deuteronomy 23:13.

Joseph made his living as a carpenter, traveled alone except for his betrothed from Nazareth to Bethlehem, and the Bible gives no indication whatsoever that Jesus' ancestors beyond Joseph and Mary were Essene.

Jesus may not have owned anything, but He bought or rented a house in Capernaum (Matthew 4:12, 13). He did not live communally, but alone in that house, though I suspect He was rarely there.

Jesus is God. He owed none of His characteristics as God or man to any man, but only to God. Speculations based on His behavior and character as a man and extrapolating them to mean He was "influenced" by men of any stripe, or was raised in an environment that became the basis of His ministry is laughable.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Essenes were required to sell everything they owned to be in the sect. They lived communally. They had to carry a spade, per Deuteronomy 23:13.

Joseph made his living as a carpenter, traveled alone except for his betrothed from Nazareth to Bethlehem, and the Bible gives no indication whatsoever that Jesus' ancestors beyond Joseph and Mary were Essene.

Jesus may not have owned anything, but He bought or rented a house in Capernaum (Matthew 4:12, 13). He did not live communally, but alone in that house, though I suspect He was rarely there.

Jesus is God. He owed none of His characteristics as God or man to any man, but only to God. Speculations based on His behavior and character as a man and extrapolating them to mean He was "influenced" by men of any stripe, or was raised in an environment that became the basis of His ministry is laughable.

Maybe I wasn't specific enough. Actually, I see that I wasn't. The link talks about the ancestors of Jesus' grandmother on his mother's side. Mary's parents were Anne and Joachim. Anne's ancestors were Essenes.

 

[WinBySurrender]

Maybe I wasn't specific enough. Actually, I see that I wasn't. The link talks about the ancestors of Jesus' grandmother on his mother's side. Mary's parents were Anne and Joachim. Anne's ancestors were Essenes.

Anne is a Hebrew name? I did not know that. Seriously, tell me how we learned these names? They don't appear in the Bible. Are we back to "tradition" as valid? I'm not playing that game anymore, sorry.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Anne is a Hebrew name? I did not know that. Seriously, tell me how we learned these names? They don't appear in the Bible. Are we back to "tradition" as valid? I'm not playing that game anymore, sorry.

No, this tradition is different from Tradition, and is on the same plane as legend. But seriously, you don't think Anne is a Hebrew name? What about Hannah? Sort of like Stewart/ Stuart or Stephen/Steven.

Hannah certainly does appear in the Bible.

You, sir, need to learn about what Catholics think, if you ever expect to dialogue with them. Or do you content yourself with shoving us all in a hole, calling us non-Christians, and persecuting us? It is very apparent to me that you're anti-Catholic.

 

[WinBySurrender]

You, sir, need to learn about what Catholics think, if you ever expect to dialogue with them. Or do you content yourself with shoving us all in a hole, calling us non-Christians, and persecuting us? It is very apparent to me that you're anti-Catholic.

One, I've never, ever called you "non-Christian" so don't try to tag me with that lie. Persecuting you? Oh, for the luvva ... ? Are you serious? You think exchanges on an Internet forum is persecution? The Micronesians who have given up their heads for the faith would laugh in your face!

I used to be Catholic. I never heard the gospel in Mass, I never received fellowship that comforted me or made me feel I was among people who loved me, and I even helped the parish priest off-base (I was in the military) with CYO. I'm not anti-Catholic, though I do find the "doctrines" of tradition and the saints to be completely unbiblical and am not shy (you may have noticed) of saying so. If you want to have a discussion with Baptists, you cannot refer to the traditions as evidence, as we do not accept them. Look at Paul's sermon in Athens. Not once did he appeal to Scripture, but to what the Greco-Roman world revered: intellect. And he won many to Christ because of it. If you want to hold a discussion, we have to find a common ground, and tradition is out of bounds. Deal with Scripture, and we can talk.

PS: I offered you a compromise the other day. I note you never responded.

 

[jlmagee]

I don't know if you have had discussions here about the essenes- I tried to check back a bit but could not find posts about them.

I'm sort of fascinated with the essenes.

I read on a Jewish site once that stated the ancient Jews thought of the essenes as a branch of or type of pharisees. I don't know what their sources were, they seemed to be a pretty conservative site.

One thing I know about the essenes, they seemed to follow very strict rules- that would be similar to the pharisees.

Some say Jesus or rhe early Christians may have been influenced by the essenes. I know there were some familiar wordings about darkness and light in their writings. and it's been a while since I read about it, but I think they had some sort of ceremonial supper that might bear some familiarity to that mentioned in the New Testament.

If Jesus did come out of or was influenced by the essenes, I know he rejected at least some of their rules and revealed many spiritual principles. He seemed very concerned that we not be burdened down with rules, or led by the "blind leading the blind". He wanted (wants) us to commune with the Father individually and communally.

There is more information that lead some to believe that John the Baptist may have been an essene.

Anyway, I would like to know so much more on this subject.

I have looked into some less than credible thoughts that the Essenes became Christian. Maybe James was a late leader of the Essenes(?). If I go any further I would be stating things that I do not want to defend. Google "Teacher of righteousness". This may be where John the Baptist comes in even though I do not remember him mentioned. One of the more credible reads is here:

Dead Sea Scrolls | Who Is the Teacher of Righteousness? | The Dead Sea Scrolls and Why They Matter

So much of what you will find is speculation.

 

[jlmagee]

You could also read/read about the Dead Sea Scrolls. Essentially, what you have stated you know is what is known. You may glean some specifics on their beliefs, etc. Clear linkage to Jesus, not so much. Yea, some of their teachings were similar, they were Jewish.

 

[Root of Jesse]

One, I've never, ever called you "non-Christian" so don't try to tag me with that lie. Persecuting you? Oh, for the luvva ... ? Are you serious? You think exchanges on an Internet forum is persecution? The Micronesians who have given up their heads for the faith would laugh in your face!

I asked a question, must of hit a sensitive spot in you. But you do come off as anti-Catholic.

I used to be Catholic. I never heard the gospel in Mass, I never received fellowship that comforted me or made me feel I was among people who loved me, and I even helped the parish priest off-base (I was in the military) with CYO.

If you never heard the gospel in Mass, it's because you didn't listen. Every Sunday there are four lengthy readings of Scripture-usually one OT, a psalm, an Epistle reading, and a gospel reading. Every day, there are three-one non-gospel, one psalm, and one gospel reading. The entire first half of the Mass is called "The Liturgy of the Word." Regarding fellowship, I understand that it leaves a lot to be desired, but the reason to be Catholic is not because of the people in the pews. The reason to be Catholic is because Jesus is really present there, at the altar.

I'm not anti-Catholic, though I do find the "doctrines" of tradition and the saints to be completely unbiblical and am not shy (you may have noticed) of saying so. If you want to have a discussion with Baptists, you cannot refer to the traditions as evidence, as we do not accept them. Look at Paul's sermon in Athens. Not once did he appeal to Scripture, but to what the Greco-Roman world revered: intellect. And he won many to Christ because of it. If you want to hold a discussion, we have to find a common ground, and tradition is out of bounds. Deal with Scripture, and we can talk.

I have offered tons of scriptural evidence, which you've summarily dismissed, saying you disagree with my interpretation. But my interpretation is what the Catholic Church has always believed.

PS: I offered you a compromise the other day. I note you never responded.

I may have missed it. Can you point me there? Look, I know you're passionate about Christ, and I appreciate that. SO AM I. I could care less about someone here on the internet-if that's what I have to take, so be it. That's why I haven't run away from the 'dialogue'. It has no effect.
The above was just a question about your motives, if I was wrong, it won't be the first, or the last time. You've denied it, so be it.

 

[rivertree]

WinbySurrender:

“[FONT=&quot]Jesus is God. He came from the Father, via the Holy Spirit. He wasn't "influenced" by anything other than His own will and that of the Father's”[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Perhaps a better question for me to have asked would be- “Were the essenes influenced by Jesus?”[/FONT]

 

[rivertree]

[FONT=&quot]Root of Jesse:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
“There is some assertion that Jesus' human ancestors were Essenes." Then you gave a link, The life of The Blessed Virgin Mary (sorry, I am not allowed to post links yet). Thank you for this link, I appreciate it.



I bookmarked this page by Anne Catherine Emmerich, though I don’t know who she was or is, because I found the content so interesting. Do you think she was taking her material from just her visions, or was she supplementing the material with other sources in addition to that from her visions?

 

[rivertree]

jlmagee:


Thank you for the link from BAR! It’s been a while since I have looked at the BAR (Biblical Archaeology review) site. I have bookmarked the link, I think I will copy the material from the Anne Catherine Emmerich site, and the Bar site, and send it to my Kindle. I sometimes can concentrate on my reading much better if I read from my Kindle, which goes everywhere withme.

In your other message you suggested reading from the Dead Sea Scrolls, which I have to some extent, but haven’t come up with anything conclusive. For one thing, there are still some holdouts who do not concede that the Dead Sea Scrolls were even written/scribed/stored by the essenes. I myself am hopeful that they were, for no reason that I understand. I guess I just like the idea of a mystery, and a mystery solved. When I read about the Dead Sea Scrolls, I find myself gravitating toward those scholars that perhaps represent what I would like to believe, and rejecting the scholars who reject that which brings me joy. (Just tryin’ to be honest).

The other thing is that there are dichotomies. Outside of the Scriptures they scribed I mean. Some concepts seems to reflect concepts found in early Christianity, other do the opposite.

Way greater scholars than myself (not that I’m a scholar) struggle over these same things.

Still I persist in my curiosity. I really appreciate all the input put forth here in the Christian History Forum.

 

[WinBySurrender]

WinbySurrender:

“[FONT=&quot]Jesus is God. He came from the Father, via the Holy Spirit. He wasn't "influenced" by anything other than His own will and that of the Father's”[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Perhaps a better question for me to have asked would be- “Were the essenes influenced by Jesus?”[/FONT]

That's a good question. It is one I can't answer. I'll do some research and post a reply later.

 

[rivertree]

Since the essenes, if they were indeed the scribes, preservers and writers of the Dead Sea Scrolls, would have been wonderfully dedicated “people of the book”, a phrase which is used sometimes to describe the Hebrews. Although they my not have all been Jewish. I read somewhere that the Greek mathematician, Pythagoras, was for part of his life, some type of essene.


This is what I am curious about though. And it may put on display my ignorance, but I am just wanting to learn.

Sometimes when I look things up in the Old Testament, I see things written about the Masoratic Text. I read in Wikipedia that the Masoratic Text

“was primarily copied, edited and distributed by a group of Jews known as the Masoretes between the 7th and 10th centuries CE. Though the consonants differ little from the text generally accepted in the early 2nd century (and also differ little from some Qumran texts that are even older), it has numerous differences of both greater and lesser significance when compared to (extant 4th century) manuscripts of the Septuagint, a Greek translation (made in the 3rd to 2nd centuries BCE) of the Hebrew Scriptures that was in popular use in Egypt and Israel and that is believed by scholars to be the source often quoted in the New Testament.”

I have sometimes wondered if these mysterious Masoretes were not some form of, or forerunners of, the essenes.

 

[ranpleasant]

If you want to have a discussion with Baptists, you cannot refer to the traditions as evidence, as we do not accept them.

If you want to hold a discussion, we have to find a common ground, and tradition is out of bounds. Deal with Scripture, and we can talk.

On what authority are you attempting to set the rules of this forum?

If you want to have a discussion with Catholics you have to understand that we will refer to Holy Tradition as evidence. We understand that you don't take it as evidence but we will still state it since we believe it. The Word of God, both Holy Tradition and Holy Scripture, is absolutely never out of bounds for Catholics. Holy Tradition is how we deal with Holy Scripture, it gives context to Holy Scripture.

Ran Pleasant

 

[Root of Jesse]

[FONT=&quot]Root of Jesse:[/FONT]

“There is some assertion that Jesus' human ancestors were Essenes." Then you gave a link, The life of The Blessed Virgin Mary (sorry, I am not allowed to post links yet). Thank you for this link, I appreciate it.



I bookmarked this page by Anne Catherine Emmerich, though I don’t know who she was or is, because I found the content so interesting. Do you think she was taking her material from just her visions, or was she supplementing the material with other sources in addition to that from her visions?

This link is for the entire book: The Life of the Blessed Virgin Mary by Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich
This one is about her: Anne Catherine Emmerich - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm not going to comment on the veracity, because I don't know. Her visions were told to a man who wrote them, and it is said that he had his own agenda. I really don't know. In fact, after investigation, it is said that much of it is not from her. I would probably characterize the book as a historical novel. How much came from her, and how much came from other sources, we don't know.
I don't really know whether it even matters or not. One gospel says Jesus was born in a manger, one says a cave. I think what's important is that our Lord and Saviour was manifested as a human.

 

[WinBySurrender]

On what authority are you attempting to set the rules of this forum?

On what authority? Scripture. I referred Jesse to it. Did you not read it? It was in the post to which you replied. Perhaps I should quote it for you:

Acts 17 NASB
18 And also some of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers were conversing with him. Some were saying, "What would this idle babbler wish to say?" Others, "He seems to be a proclaimer of strange deities," - because he was preaching Jesus and the resurrection.
19 And they took him and brought him to the Areopagus, saying, "May we know what this new teaching is which you are proclaiming?
20 "For you are bringing some strange things to our ears ; so we want to know what these things mean."
21 (Now all the Athenians and the strangers visiting there used to spend their time in nothing other than telling or hearing something new.) 22 So Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus and said, "Men of Athens, I observe that you are very religious in all respects.
23 "For while I was passing through and examining the objects of your worship, I also found an altar with this inscription, 'TO AN UNKNOWN GOD.' Therefore what you worship in ignorance, this I proclaim to you.
24 "The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands;
25 nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things;
26 and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation,
27 that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us;
28 for in Him we live and move and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, 'For we also are His children.'
29 "Being then the children of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and thought of man.
30 "Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent,
31 because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead."
32 Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some began to sneer, but others said, "We shall hear you again concerning this."
33 So Paul went out of their midst.
34 But some men joined him and believed, among whom also were Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris and others with them.

​

If you want to have a discussion with Catholics you have to understand that we will refer to Holy Tradition as evidence. We understand that you don't take it as evidence but we will still state it since we believe it. The Word of God, both Holy Tradition and Holy Scripture, is absolutely never out of bounds for Catholics. Holy Scirpture is how we deal with Holy Scripture, it gives context to Holy Scripture.

Paul won the Athenians over, not by arguing from his viewpoint - the Torah and his own witness of Christ - but from the intellectual viewpoint held so dearly by the Greeks. And yet again, my point is that you cannot convince me of the validity of Tradition by arguing from Tradition, any more than Paul could have argued for Christ from the Torah in a crowd of Greeks. The Greeks knew nothing of the Torah. I've already rejected Tradition as invalid. Paul knew there was no point in referencing a work they had never read. Therefore, for an intellectual discussion to occur between you and I, we must find common ground as Paul did with the Greeks, and I am assuming that common ground could potentially be Scripture.

But it's up to you gentlemen. This is the third time I've offered Root of Jesse a basis on which to discuss faith in Christ and the history of His church. I will not offer again.

 

[Root of Jesse]

On what authority? Scripture. I referred Jesse to it. Did you not read it? It was in the post to which you replied. Perhaps I should quote it for you:

Acts 17 NASB
18 And also some of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers were conversing with him. Some were saying, "What would this idle babbler wish to say?" Others, "He seems to be a proclaimer of strange deities," - because he was preaching Jesus and the resurrection.
19 And they took him and brought him to the Areopagus, saying, "May we know what this new teaching is which you are proclaiming?
20 "For you are bringing some strange things to our ears ; so we want to know what these things mean."
21 (Now all the Athenians and the strangers visiting there used to spend their time in nothing other than telling or hearing something new.) 22 So Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus and said, "Men of Athens, I observe that you are very religious in all respects.
23 "For while I was passing through and examining the objects of your worship, I also found an altar with this inscription, 'TO AN UNKNOWN GOD.' Therefore what you worship in ignorance, this I proclaim to you.
24 "The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands;
25 nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things;
26 and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation,
27 that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us;
28 for in Him we live and move and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, 'For we also are His children.'
29 "Being then the children of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and thought of man.
30 "Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent,
31 because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead."
32 Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some began to sneer, but others said, "We shall hear you again concerning this."
33 So Paul went out of their midst.
34 But some men joined him and believed, among whom also were Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris and others with them.

​

Paul won the Athenians over, not by arguing from his viewpoint - the Torah and his own witness of Christ - but from the intellectual viewpoint held so dearly by the Greeks. And yet again, my point is that you cannot convince me of the validity of Tradition by arguing from Tradition, any more than Paul could have argued for Christ from the Torah in a crowd of Greeks. The Greeks knew nothing of the Torah. I've already rejected Tradition as invalid. Paul knew there was no point in referencing a work they had never read. Therefore, for an intellectual discussion to occur between you and I, we must find common ground as Paul did with the Greeks, and I am assuming that common ground could potentially be Scripture.

But it's up to you gentlemen. This is the third time I've offered Root of Jesse a basis on which to discuss faith in Christ and the history of His church. I will not offer again.

Well, to be fair, I've shown where Paul tells Timothy IN SCRIPTURE that he is to use both tradition and Scripture. So Scripturally, I've shown where Tradition is as valid as Scripture. Not "tradition" meaning "practices" but "Tradition" which gives meaning and context to Scripture. I've said, for example, that priestly celibacy and abstaining from meat on Fridays, are "traditions" whereas the meaning of John 6, and Apostolic Succession, and the Trinity come from "Tradition".

I guess I'm asking if you believe the doctrine of the Trinity? Why? There is no doctrine of the Trinity in Scripture. The pieces are in Scripture, but it's Tradition that puts them all together and gives meaning to the term. By the same principal, we have the Eucharist, and every other Catholic doctrine and dogma.