Why was the Veil Rent?

[HARK!]

Did we search into Rachel Elior at all? I did I don't agree on some of her theories that many reject.. maybe share that. Just what do they disagree with? Those that disagree they have a reason. So she's right yet others are wrong? I think those that disagree have like her earned the right to be listened to if were digging into this. That's just what some of this is (theory) and that is not fact or truth.

I can't name a scholar that I agree with on ever point. The fact remains the the Essenes lived in Ein Gedi and that John the Baptist was practicing his ministry at Betharaba (Renamed Qumran by the Muslims).

alling the word of God "unbiblical" on a Christian site..well anyway.

You have grossly misunderstood. I didn't say that the word of Yah was unbiblical.

Let me put it another way. You will not find where Yah outlined a list of scrolls as a Canon, anywhere in scripture. He charged the Zadokites to teach his word; and this scroll was in their library.

It also makes a prophecy that can't be found in any other scroll, that the veil would be rent in conjunction with the coming of Messiah.

 

[Ceallaigh]

The Canon? The church fathers?

Let me put it another way. You will not find where Yah outlined a list of scrolls as a Canon, anywhere in scripture.

Doesn't scripture tell us that Jesus give all authority to his apostles and in that authority didn't they appoint those who would succeed them? “Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." Matthew 18:18

He charged the Zadokites to teach his word; and this scroll was in their library.

Where is it written that He charged the Zadokites?

 

[Jonaitis]

Why was the veil rent?

In order to answer this question, we need to ask what was the purpose of the veil to begin with? There lies your answer.

 

[Carl Emerson]

I can't name a scholar that I agree with on ever point. The fact remains the the Essenes lived in Ein Gedi and that John the Baptist was practicing his ministry at Betharaba (Renamed Qumran by the Muslims).



You have grossly misunderstood. I didn't say that the word of Yah was unbiblical.

Let me put it another way. You will not find where Yah outlined a list of scrolls as a Canon, anywhere in scripture. He charged the Zadokites to teach his word; and this scroll was in their library.

It also makes a prophecy that can't be found in any other scroll, that the veil would be rent in conjunction with the coming of Messiah.

So a scroll was allegedly found in their library - How does that make it an inspired writing ?

 

[HARK!]

So a scroll was allegedly found in their library - How does that make it an inspired writing ?

The detail of the prophecy concerning our Messiah is clearly inspired.

 

[daq]

So a scroll was allegedly found in their library - How does that make it an inspired writing ?

When you say allegedly are you implying that you believe it may not have actually been found where it is claimed to have been found?

 

[Carl Emerson]

I think we need a lot more information and fulfilment of one prophesy does not ascertain divine inspiration of a wider work.

We don't consider the writings of Nostradamus or George Orwell divinely inspired on the basis of one correct prediction - we need to see that the theology they are presenting is in keeping with the rest of scripture and the text has what J B Philips calls the 'ring of truth'.

 

[Ceallaigh]

So a scroll was allegedly found in their library - How does that make it an inspired writing ?

Apocrypha is usually kept in comprehensive scholarly libraries. I first came across the Book of Mormon in such a library maintained by those whom I know are thoroughly against Mormonism. They most likely also had a copy of the Koran.

 

[daq]

The physical evidence refutes this article.

http://www.qumran.fr/images/PDF/DeJonge_1988.pdf

This scripture was found at Betharaba, the dwelling place of the Zadok Priesthood, after they were expelled form the Temple. The Zadokites were charged by YHWH to teach and preserve his word.

My computer will not download that link because it says it is a security risk for some reason. Do you know whether or not a fragment or fragments of the actual passage you quoted in the OP was/were found at the DSS site?

 

[HARK!]

Do you know whether or not a fragment or fragments of the actual passage you quoted in the OP was/were found at the DSS site?

That is a pertinent question that I hadn't considered. The Greek manuscript is from the 11th century.

The PDF is an excerpt of 19 pages from a book written by Marinus de Jong 1988. It's a difficult read; as it is comparing fragments and texts from other sources, and the work of those who have researched the various fragments, in addition to comparisons with other texts. I have not viewed the Q fragments; nor have I been able to find a translation of those fragments.

It will take some serous time to get an answer on that; but it is possible that this highly detailed prophecy is a variant that was added in the 11th century.

 

[daq]

That is a pertinent question that I hadn't considered. The Greek manuscript is from the 11th century.

The PDF is an excerpt of 19 pages from a book written by Marinus de Jong 1988. It's a difficult read; as it is comparing fragments and texts from other sources, and the work of those who have researched the various fragments, in addition to comparisons with other texts. I have not viewed the Q fragments; nor have I been able to find a translation of those fragments.

It will take some serous time to get an answer on that; but it is possible that this highly detailed prophecy is a variant that was added in the 11th century.

In searching for an alternate location where that same PDF might be posted online I happened upon a medium to short paper written by the same author, (Marinas de Jonge), on the same subject matter. I just finished reading this article and it doesn't appear to be good news. He says that chapter ten is a deliberate (Christian) addition. The problem is that he only offers this up in one very short paragraph-statement, (consisting of one long sentence), and offers no evidence for his opinion. I was a little disappointed but it is what it is.

de Jonge: Levi in Ar. Levi and T. Levi

 

[HARK!]

In searching for an alternate location where that same PDF might be posted online I happened upon a medium to short paper written by the same author, (Marinas de Jonge), on the same subject matter. I just finished reading this article and it doesn't appear to be good news. He says that chapter ten is a deliberate (Christian) addition. The problem is that he only offers this up in one very short paragraph-statement, (consisting of one long sentence), and offers no evidence for his opinion. I was a little disappointed but it is what it is.

de Jonge: Levi in Ar. Levi and T. Levi

Here it is:
Chapter 10, the first of the three SER-passages in T. Levi dealing with the sins of the sons of Levi, is a deliberate addition on the part of the author of this testament who wanted to stress that point, important in his picture of the Levitical priesthood.

de Jonge: Levi in Ar. Levi and T. Levi

 

[Joy]

MOD HAT ON

After Staff Review

This Thread
is Now
Permanently Closed

As requested by OP.

MOD HAT OFF​