Should all of the dead sea scrolls be considered scripture?

Jim Langston · Aug 28, 2017

Amongst the dead sea scrolls there were some manuscript fragments that are not a part of our canon. Since the scrolls that we consider canon matches what we know today, can we as Christians say they are false in good conscience? The most we could say is we are not sure, I believe, to say they were wrong on the face of it seems illogical.

An example, and case in point, would be the manuscript 11Q13. This scroll does appear to be commentary, however, and am not sure how to classify that. Can commentary be inspired?

11Q13 - Wikipedia

Tolworth John · Aug 28, 2017

The answer is in the link.
"The text is an apocalyptic commentary on the Jubilee year of Leviticus 25"
It has been clasified by those studing it.

Jim Langston · Aug 28, 2017

I am not interested in their opinion because I have found many scripture outside of canon. If you don't want to bother thinking for yourself why even come to forums? I do not venerate any man, and neither should you.

Quid est Veritas? · Aug 28, 2017

Walk into your average Christian bookstore: Should all the books on the shelves be considered scripture?

There must be a method of sifting the wheat from the chaff, and generally years and years of discussions by the Church Fathers have done this for us. I think they have been quite methodical about it.

Remember, the dead sea scrolls are the writings of a small religious sub-group of Second Temple Judaism. Maybe Essene, maybe not. So their writings aren't necessarily representative of Second Temple Judaism at all.

buzuxi02 · Aug 28, 2017

Generically scripture comes from the Latin scribe, 'to write". If you mean divinely inspired scripture, I use the texts my Church has handed down to me. The litmus test was simply those books that everyone from antiquity always agreed upon in most places and eventually these were endorsed in council and became standard. So a newly discovered text regardless of the content would not be added, because divinely inspired scripture also presuppose's that it was known and accepted by the prior generations in antiquity.

geiroffenberg · Aug 28, 2017

Jim Langston said:
Amongst the dead sea scrolls there were some manuscript fragments that are not a part of our canon. Since the scrolls that we consider canon matches what we know today, can we as Christians say they are false in good conscience? The most we could say is we are not sure, I believe, to say they were wrong on the face of it seems illogical.

An example, and case in point, would be the manuscript 11Q13. This scroll does appear to be commentary, however, and am not sure how to classify that. Can commentary be inspired?

11Q13 - Wikipedia

Don't have to be false just because they're not canon. Even the bible recommends books that is not canon

Sea Horse · Aug 28, 2017

Scripture is God-breathed as we see in 2 Timothy 3:16-17
Other books can be nice to read , even these mentioned in bible like book of Enoch , but they are not inspired by God , and it's not my or your duty to preserve them but God , if he wanted dead sea scrolls included in Bible he would do it .
Psalms 12:6-7

Dave-W · Aug 28, 2017

Jim Langston said:
Can commentary be inspired?

Depends on what you mean by "Inspired." If a cataclysm were to occur today and your home gets buried; what would some one find a thousand years from now when they excavate your house? Would they find scraps and partial pages of books by Billy Graham? Watchman Nee? David Wilkerson? Derek Prince? Other christian authors? Maybe you have commentaries by Benson, McArthur, Tyndale, Lightfoot, etc.

Would you consider those writings "inspired?" NO?
Then why would you have them?

OR - are they inspired, but not at the same level or to the same degree as Scripture? I would suppose the latter; inspired but not scripture.

Norbert L · Aug 28, 2017

Jim Langston said:
Amongst the dead sea scrolls there were some manuscript fragments that are not a part of our canon. Since the scrolls that we consider canon matches what we know today, can we as Christians say they are false in good conscience? The most we could say is we are not sure, I believe, to say they were wrong on the face of it seems illogical.

An example, and case in point, would be the manuscript 11Q13. This scroll does appear to be commentary, however, and am not sure how to classify that. Can commentary be inspired?

11Q13 - Wikipedia

I remember reading an article about deciding what is canon and what is not. The author pointed out something that's not so obvious. False prophets also wrote thing down and their writings also get handed down and preserved 2 Peter 2:1. Just because something is ancient, doesn't make it automatically scripture.

JoeP222w · Aug 28, 2017

Jim Langston said:
Amongst the dead sea scrolls there were some manuscript fragments that are not a part of our canon. Since the scrolls that we consider canon matches what we know today, can we as Christians say they are false in good conscience? The most we could say is we are not sure, I believe, to say they were wrong on the face of it seems illogical.

An example, and case in point, would be the manuscript 11Q13. This scroll does appear to be commentary, however, and am not sure how to classify that. Can commentary be inspired?

11Q13 - Wikipedia

Only that which is the canon of scripture.

Jim Langston · Aug 28, 2017

Sea Horse said:
Scripture is God-breathed as we see in 2 Timothy 3:16-17
Other books can be nice to read , even these mentioned in bible like book of Enoch , but they are not inspired by God , and it's not my or your duty to preserve them but God , if he wanted dead sea scrolls included in Bible he would do it .
Psalms 12:6-7

How do you know they are not inspired by God? Because some man says so? We are entering the end times because the church has failed us. The Catholic church has an assassins prayer for when you go kill someone, excuse me if I don't the catholic churches word for anything.

So, outside of some men in robes not adding it to their bible, how can you say it is NOT inspired by God? If you come back and say because the church fathers said so then we will never agree.

Edit: Whoever edited my text, I accept it.

Jim Langston · Aug 28, 2017

Dave-W said:
Depends on what you mean by "Inspired." If a cataclysm were to occur today and your home gets buried; what would some one find a thousand years from now when they excavate your house? Would they find scraps and partial pages of books by Billy Graham? Watchman Nee? David Wilkerson? Derek Prince? Other christian authors? Maybe you have commentaries by Benson, McArthur, Tyndale, Lightfoot, etc.

Would you consider those writings "inspired?" NO?
Then why would you have them?

OR - are they inspired, but not at the same level or to the same degree as Scripture? I would suppose the latter; inspired but not scripture.

I can agree with that, inspired but not the same degree as scripture.

My question comes then, if someone taught something coming out of the dead sea scrolls, is it righteous for the church to squelch it?

Dave-W · Aug 28, 2017

Jim Langston said:
My question comes then, if someone taught something coming out of the dead sea scrolls, is it righteous for the church to squelch it?

If it is something that goes against scripture, absolutely. If it supports or clarifies scripture, it should be looked at very carefully and prayerfully; and determined on a case by case basis.

Hawkins · Aug 28, 2017

Jim Langston said:
Amongst the dead sea scrolls there were some manuscript fragments that are not a part of our canon. Since the scrolls that we consider canon matches what we know today, can we as Christians say they are false in good conscience? The most we could say is we are not sure, I believe, to say they were wrong on the face of it seems illogical.

An example, and case in point, would be the manuscript 11Q13. This scroll does appear to be commentary, however, and am not sure how to classify that. Can commentary be inspired?

11Q13 - Wikipedia

They are a library of the Essenes. The library contains all kinds of books, not just the Bible. The Jewish definition of the Canon is basically the same as the Protestant version of the OT Canon. The difference is only the arrangement of the books.

Citizen of the Kingdom · Aug 28, 2017

Jim Langston said:
I can agree with that, inspired but not the same degree as scripture.

My question comes then, if someone taught something coming out of the dead sea scrolls, is it righteous for the church to squelch it?

Using the dead sea scrolls as proof text wouldn't be acceptable ... but as a commentary about a certain passage .. why not if you also supplied the biblical text it was commenting on.

Jim Langston · Aug 28, 2017

Sea Horse said:
Scripture is God-breathed as we see in 2 Timothy 3:16-17
Other books can be nice to read , even these mentioned in bible like book of Enoch , but they are not inspired by God , and it's not my or your duty to preserve them but God , if he wanted dead sea scrolls included in Bible he would do it .
Psalms 12:6-7

Do not put this on God. God, for the most part, only interferes in the affairs of Man when it is required for His work.

There are many stumbling blocks in scripture, Jesus resurrected is a stumbling block to the Jews, and foolishness to gentiles.

I find many stumbling blocks among the Christian, and I will write a forum post on the subject.

Jim Langston · Aug 28, 2017

Norbert L said:
I remember reading an article about deciding what is canon and what is not. The author pointed out something that's not so obvious. False prophets also wrote thing down and their writings also get handed down and preserved 2 Peter 2:1. Just because something is ancient, doesn't make it automatically scripture.

I would not trust the Pharisees to know who was and was not a false prophet, and I definitely don't trust the Catholic church. So, who are the ones who called them false prophets and who were they so I can do my own research.

It seems everyone is basing their stance on someone else's opinion, although yours does seem to be verifiable.

That being said, it may be true that 11Q13 is from a false prophet. We can not know that for certain either way though without more information/proof. So, we can not say it is false, correct?

So if someone is teaching the ideas and concepts taught in one of these scrolls, is it righteous for us Christians to squelch them because it is not in our canon?

If you claim you are only allowing the canon to be taught, then I would state that you are/could be blocking God's will, especially in these end times.

We, as Christians, have every right to defend the canon as being the inspired word of God. We do not have the right to say historic scripture, such as the books of Enoch and other, non canon books. [Edit: ... are not inspired by God.]

JackRT · Aug 28, 2017

I accept the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Nag Hammadi Library and other non-canonical scriptures in exactly the same way that I accept the Bible itself. They are all human documents. I approach all these documents like a prospector would approach his claim. I am prepared to spend a lot of time and effort searching for the shining nuggets of wisdom and insight but I am also prepared to have to shift a lot of rubble in order to find them.

Shempster · Aug 28, 2017

Very interesting topic

JackRT · Aug 28, 2017

Shempster said:
I have a friend that uses the DSS to prove that scripture is authentic.
That's all fine, but he refuses to accept the fact that they also gave us the Gnostic writings and the Book of Giants as well.

Who exactly is "they"? If the Gnostic writings you mention are the Nag Hammadi Library, then you should be aware that there is no connection at all between them and the Dead Sea Scrolls. I have never heard of the Book of Giants --- can you give me a source?

Should all of the dead sea scrolls be considered scripture?

Non denominational fundamentalist

Well-Known Member

Non denominational fundamentalist

In Memoriam to CS Lewis

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Non denominational fundamentalist

Non denominational fundamentalist

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!

Member

Well-Known Member

Non denominational fundamentalist

Non denominational fundamentalist

Well-Known Member

ImJustMe

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency