- Jul 9, 2005
- 839
- 406
- 61
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Pardon my ignorance, but what is the "DSS" and the Gnostic writings?
Edit: Book of Giants as wall
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
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.
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.
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.
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.
These dead sea scrolls were preserved with our canon. It is quite obvious to me that all these scrolls were venerated by those who kept them. At one time the book of Enoch was canon until the time of Jesus, because the book of Enoch foretold his coming as the Messiah, so they removed it. The Israelites who moved to Africa, however, didn't get the notice to destroy their copy. So here we have, as I see it, a God inspired book that was once canon but is no longer considered canon because the Pharisees decided to remove it. Jesus comes and admonishes the Pharisees, yet here we are 2000 years later still taking their judgement for what is inspired by God and what is not.
Matthew 5:20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.
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.
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.
Seems the man you venerate is rather local, could be wrong.
I know God because I am beyond your comprehension.
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 read a book a long time ago: The Dead Sea scrolls : a new translation, by Wise, Abegg and Cook, 1996. It contains sectarian and religious scrolls/fragments that were not part of the Bible. One theory states the Dead Sea Scrolls were written by the Essenes and the Essene community was all male. There was an all male cemetery found on ground near the mud brick structures at Qumran, below the caves where the scrolls were found. There were community rules in the scrolls. There were verses stating the communities ambition to become better than the Jerusalem priestly establishment. There were some literary texts. Qumran is a national park where tour buses stopped. They have a theater with a movie about the place.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
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?
Then teach me in a private thread. I'll listen.Because I have teachings that need to be taught NOW and can not teach them because the forum gods declared that anything not in the canon can not be taught. I can not tell you what it is because then they'll just delete this post too. But the teachings are in the dead sea scroll 11Q13 which the current church does not accept as canon so stifles it, as the Pharisees stifled the book of Enoch. If the church leaders here do no come up with a solution then I will put it in God's hands once again, as I have had to do before with this board when they banned me for not agreeing to their man made theories of Calvinism and Dispensationalism.
We are soon entering the end times and .... <self REDACTED>
Very sorry. I was confusing two different things. The DSS were written before Christ. The Gnostic writings were after. The book of giants is really strange and interesting. It can be found online. Of course, it is not complete. It sounds alot like Greek Mythology.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?
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.
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.]
And I thought I was the only one who studied those! I've had those same questions too. Especially after reading Enoch and seeing it quoted by Jude in the New Testament.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
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?