Major NT discoveries of the 20th century

Sounds interesting - I have a ton of reading to do, but while it's referenced here at least I won't forget. :)
 
the trouble with baigent and leigh is that they're not terribly well respected as historians with, by most standards, a tendency to make huge assumptions and leaps in logic, plus a regrettably tabloid approach to history, you know, "THE BOOK THEY DON'T WANT YOU TO READ!!!!" sort of thing.

my own opinion on the dead sea scrolls is that the qumran sect were, well, sectarians, basically jewish but ascetic (which is a bit problematic in judaism) with about the same relationship to mainstream judaism as, say, charismatic pentecostalists do to the archbishop of canterbury - disreputable but not quite heretics. the group that eventually became the early church may or may not have been the qumranis (or the essenes) and may or may not have been mates of theirs. at any rate they would undoubtedly have known of each other even if not in contact or on friendly terms.

the thing that interests me a bit more is the accusation that the dead sea scrolls have been "suppressed" because they contradicted the new testament or bits of the old testament. now NT suppression is not my problem, but OT is, so i once asked a dead sea scrolls scientist if it were possible that textual variations could be explained by their being private scrolls (you're not allowd to emend public ones) and he said yes, that it was perfectly possible. also, incorrectly written scrolls shouldn't really be used, they should be buried, i believe. which i think these were.

just my two penn'orth.

b'shalom

bananabrain
 
Interesting comment, BB - so are you saying that rather than having their own "splinter" ideals outside of Judaism, the Qumran group seems to have been fairly well within the boundaries of traditional Judaism of the period?

I guess I specifically mean - *if* there were any discrepancies between the Dead Sea Scrolls and accepted canonical texts, then could this not suggest textual amendment by the group's scribes to either emphasise particular aspects of their own teachings - else even to add??
 
bananabrain said:
my own opinion on the dead sea scrolls is that the qumran sect were, well, sectarians, basically jewish but ascetic (which is a bit problematic in judaism) with about the same relationship to mainstream judaism as, say, charismatic pentecostalists do to the archbishop of canterbury - disreputable but not quite heretics. the group that eventually became the early church may or may not have been the qumranis (or the essenes) and may or may not have been mates of theirs. at any rate they would undoubtedly have known of each other even if not in contact or on friendly terms.
Click to expand...

This is fairly close to my opinion on the subject. The Essenes may have been "proto-Christians" - a Jewish sect that was giving birth to the doctrines that would become Christianity, but still a Jewish sect. They began developing their own version of the "Godman" mystery religions incorporating Jewish Messianic prophecy. Mainstream Jews weren't interested, but gentiles, who were already familiar with the myriad versions of the basic myth, gobbled it up. After that it kind of got away from the Essenes and ceased being an adaptation of the mysteries for Judaism and became its own religion.

Thus, it's not surprising to find a mixture of Old Testament and early Gnostic texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls. The earliest Gnostic scholars were probably Greek speaking Jews in and around Alexandria, Egypt and may have been related in some way to the Essenes. As the Jewish version of the mysteries became less Jewish through Paul and his gentile converts the Gnostic philosophy was squeezed out and the teachings became more and more difficult to recognize for what they were and where they came from.
 
Abogado del Diablo said:
Thus, it's not surprising to find a mixture of Old Testament and early Gnostic texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Click to expand...
:confused: Not sure what Gnostic texts you're referring to here. AFAIK, there are NO DSS texts generally recognized as "Gnostic".

WHKeith said:
My understanding of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that the only sayings that might have a bearing on Christ's ministry refer to the "Teacher of Righteousness," a rather fuzzy messianic figure who may have been discussed a century before the Christian era, ...
Click to expand...
There's actually quite a lot in the DSS that has some bearing on Jesus's ministry.
  1. Apocalyptic writings about the endtimes. (OK, some of these were known before the DSS discovery, like Enoch.)
  2. Various exalted figures that are at times talked about in a way similar to the way early Christians talked about Jesus. In addition to Enoch, there is Melchizedek, to whom Jesus is compared in the NT book of Hebrews.
  3. A fragment that talks about a Jewish exorcist who forgives sins. (This disproves the argument of some Christians that Jesus's forgiving sins in the NT proves he was equal to God in the eyes of the authors.)
  4. The ethical dualism of "followers of Truth/Light" vs. "followers of evil/dark".
  5. The community structure, which is similar in some ways to the Christian community that wrote the Didache.
On this last point, does anyone know anything about the connections between Qumran (and similar communities) and Christian monasteries? Are there pagan models for these communities, too? I'd appreciate any good references (especially books).
 
well the last thing that I heard on another forum is that the Dead Sea Scrolls were written prior to the believed birth of Jesus of Nazereth so that is a possible response to Wolfgang. The scholar has written a book on the subject and Ian Wilson states that they were not written by the Essenes.

I am also under the impression that only 40% have been translated and released to the world and the rest is held up I wonder why? It is written that one part has been with a polish priest for translation for many years.....but what about the rest?

Love beyond measure

Sacredstar
 
Dear All

It is interesting that there is amazing similiarity in some of the dead sea scrolls and later books. The beatitudes for instance as the same feel as the sermon on the mount.

The Beatitudes (4Q525)

Blessed is ......with a pure heart
and does not slander with his tongue.
Blessed are those who hold to her (Wisdom's) precepts
and do not hold to the ways of inquiity.
Blessed are those who rejoice in her,
and do not burst forth in ways of folly.
Blessed are those who seek her with pure hands
and do not pursue her with a treacherous heart.

Blessed is the man who has attained Wisdom,
and walks in the Law of the Most High.
He directs his heart towards her ways,
and restrains himself by hre corrections,
and always takes delight in her chastisements.
He does not forsake her when he sees distress,
not abandon her in time of strain.

He will not forget her (on the day of ) fear,
and will not despise her when his soul is afflicted.
For always he will meditate on her,
and in his distress he will consider (her?)
(He will place her) before his eyes
so as not to walk in the ways of (folly).

(Do not) forsake your inheritance to the nations
nor your portions to the strangers
Those who fear GOD observe her wisdom's ways
and walk in all her precepts
and do not reject her corrections

Also interesting the strong feminine influence in the above.

Love beyond measure

Sacredstar
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top