The Dead Sea Scrolls & the New Testament

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Ulan
Posts: 1050
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: John T

Post by Ulan » Sat Jan 14, 2017 2:58 am

OK, it's a given that the details of Eisenman's theories don't work because of the dating issue. His attributions of certain figures in the texts to historical people are wrong. Still, is there really nothing left from the DSS for us to work on? While 100 years is a long time, there are many aspects in social life and thought that survive the times. I just look at the political landscape in my home country, and one of the government parties had already been for decades a mainstay of parliament hundred years ago. Looking at the DSS, I wonder whether some of the thought of these groups survived during that time. We have the peshers of the DSS, and rewriting old texts was still popular hundred years after the commonly thought begin of Christianity. I think we should at least take this part of the DSS heritage seriously, even if it doesn't tell us anything about specific people that were involved with founding Christianity, as the texts are too early.

User avatar
John T
Posts: 882
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: John T

Post by John T » Sat Jan 14, 2017 3:58 am

Secret Alias wrote: But there have to be ground rules. If C-14 disproves a theory there isn't any value continue to talk about it any longer.
Just what theory of John T did C-14 disprove?

Huller dost protest too much, me thinks.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

User avatar
spin
Posts: 2066
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 10:44 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: John T

Post by spin » Sat Jan 14, 2017 4:54 am

Ulan wrote:OK, it's a given that the details of Eisenman's theories don't work because of the dating issue. His attributions of certain figures in the texts to historical people are wrong. Still, is there really nothing left from the DSS for us to work on? While 100 years is a long time, there are many aspects in social life and thought that survive the times. I just look at the political landscape in my home country, and one of the government parties had already been for decades a mainstay of parliament hundred years ago. Looking at the DSS, I wonder whether some of the thought of these groups survived during that time. We have the peshers of the DSS, and rewriting old texts was still popular hundred years after the commonly thought begin of Christianity. I think we should at least take this part of the DSS heritage seriously, even if it doesn't tell us anything about specific people that were involved with founding Christianity, as the texts are too early.
The DSS have been picked over in such fine detail for many years and will be sifted through for many more. The cultural and linguistic background to the texts is better understood now than ever before. The major problem for us is that the texts were not written for posterity or as history. There are some historical allusions, but they are so sparse they do not provide enough for us to anchor the context(s) of the documents. I think we can say with reference to an Antiochus and a King Jonathan and an Amelios who kills, we are dealing with a period prior to the death of Pompey (as recorded in the Psalms of Solomon), reasonably presuming that Amelios was Aemilius Scaurus, a general of Pompey. That leaves us with a lot of range, perhaps up to 100 years before the death of Pompey. But what we have is all too vague and every boy and his dog has a theory. It's all very dispersive.

Scholars have plotted a range of Judaisms among the texts. They have better understood the role and position of women. Angelology, eschatology, messianisms, and a host of other topics have been looked into. The evolution of texts: for example, there are so many fragments of cave #4 copies of the first "Dead Sea Scroll" (found by Solomon Schechter in two recensions in the Fustat Geniza in Cairo in the late 19th century) that stages of its development are better understood. The same with 1QS ("the Community Rule").

What is not needed are arbitrary contextualizations for the scrolls and the slinging matches that accompany them. Work goes on quietly. Look at the papers published in the learned journals.
Dysexlia lures • ⅔ of what we see is behind our eyes

Ulan
Posts: 1050
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: John T

Post by Ulan » Sat Jan 14, 2017 12:24 pm

OK, that makes sense. Which means that there isn't enough material to bridge the time gap, if you can't even quite pinpoint the starting point.

User avatar
John T
Posts: 882
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: John T

Post by John T » Sat Jan 14, 2017 5:56 pm

spin wrote:What is not needed are arbitrary contextualizations for the scrolls and the slinging matches that accompany them. Work goes on quietly. Look at the papers published in the learned journals.
Do you know where I can find these so-called: "learned journals"?

I search the internet frequently and can't figure out who is the current leading scholar on who wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Professor Shiffman estimated there are about 150 Dead Sea Scroll scholars and there has been some ugly fighting among them as to who wrote the scrolls. http://www.chabad.org/library/article_c ... hgodDgMPLg

From what I have read, most scholars fall into one of two camps. The Essene theory and the Jerusalem-Libraries theory.

However, no one seems to be able to name the top scholars and where they go to debate their theories and present facts that support it.

Any suggestions?
Thanks in advance.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

StephenGoranson
Posts: 141
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: The Dead Sea Scrolls & the New Testament

Post by StephenGoranson » Sun Jan 15, 2017 7:17 am

Relevant learned journals include:
Revue de Qumran (from 1958-)
Dead Sea Discoveries (from 1994-)

Another English translation source:
Dead Sea scrolls. Selections.
Title The Dead Sea scrolls : Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts with English translations / edited by James H. Charlesworth with F. M. Cross ... [et al.].
Published Tübingen : J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck) ; Louisville : Westminster/John Knox Press, 1994-<c2011>
Description v. <1-3, 4a-4b, 6b, 7> ; 27 cm.
Series Princeton Theological Seminary Dead Sea scrolls project
Contents v. 1. Rule of the community and related documents -- v. 2. Damascus document, war scroll, and related documents -- v. 3. Damascus Document II, some works of the Torah, and related documents -- v. 4A. Pseudepigraphic and non-Masoretic psalms and prayers -- v. 4B. Angelic liturgy : Songs of the Sabbath sacrifice -- v. 6B. Pesharim, other commentaries, and related documents -- v. 7. Temple Scroll and related documents.
Notes "The Princeton Dead Sea Scrolls Project intends to present an improved critical text -- with an apparatus criticus where appropriate and possible -- to all the nonbiblical documents found in the eleven Qumran caves (that means all the documents not collected within the Biblia Hebraica)."--Vol. 7., p. xv.
Notes Includes bibliographical references.
Linking notes Online version: Dead Sea scrolls. Selections. Dead Sea scrolls. Tübingen : J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck) ; Louisville : Westminster/John Knox Press, 1994-<c2002>
Online version: Dead Sea scrolls. Selections. Dead Sea scrolls. Tübingen : J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck) ; Louisville : Westminster/John Knox Press, 1994-<c2002>
ISBN 9780664219949
0664219942
9783161474262 (v. 6B : Mohr Siebeck)
3161474260 (v. 6B : Mohr Siebeck)
9780664225889 (v. 6B : Westminster John Knox Press)
0664225888 (v. 6B : Westminster John Knox Press)
9783161497551 (v. 7 : Mohr Siebeck)
3161497554 (v. 7 : Mohr Siebeck)
9780664238186 (v. 7 : Westminster John Knox Press)
0664238181 (v. 7 : Westminster John Knox Press)
(OCLC) Control Num 28799102

some of my publications:
http://people.duke.edu/~goranson/


User avatar
John T
Posts: 882
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: The Dead Sea Scrolls & the New Testament

Post by John T » Sun Jan 15, 2017 9:16 am

Goranson,

Thanks for the recommendations.

I started sifting through your list and took a cursory look at the journals/links and came across some roadblocks. For example; the "Dead Sea Discoveries" journal looks promising but has a subscription rate of $138.00. Or you can read A la carte for $30 an article. I don't have that kind of money to find out who is the best scholar regarding who wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls . Perhaps you can help me narrow the search and tell me if the editorial board consists of closed minded scholars like Schiffman or to do they let minority views to be published as well?

Of the list below who would you say is the most respected researcher without an ax to grind.


Dead Sea Discoveries, Editorial Board:

J. Ben Dov, University of Haifa, Israel
M.J. Bernstein, Yeshiva University, USA
G.J. Brooke, University of Manchester, UK
E. Chazon, Hebrew University Jerusalem, Israel
J.J. Collins, Yale University, USA
D.K. Falk, Pennsylvania State University, USA
J. Frey, Universität Zürich, Switzerland
M. Goff, Florida State University, USA
F. García Martínez, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium
J. Joosten, University of Oxford, UK
M. Kister, Hebrew University Jerusalem, Israel
R.G. Kratz, Georg August Universität Göttingen, Germany
A. Lange, Universität Wien, Austria
J. Magness, University of South Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA
S. Metso, University of Toronto, Canada
H. Najman, Yale University, USA
V. Noam, Tel Aviv University, Israel
M. Popovic, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
E. Puech, École Biblique et Archeologique Française de Jerusalem, Israel
L.H. Schiffman, New York University, USA
E. Schuller, McMaster Univerversity, Canada
A. Shemesh, Bar-Ilan University, Israel
L.T. Stuckenbruck, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Germany
E.J.C. Tigchelaar, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium
E. Tov, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel
J.C. VanderKam, University of Notre Dame, Indiana, USA
C. Wassen, Uppsala University, Sweden

If anyone else would like to pick a favorite or least favorite please do so.

Thanks in advance.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

User avatar
arnoldo
Posts: 543
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 6:10 pm
Location: Latin America

Re: John T

Post by arnoldo » Sun Jan 15, 2017 10:02 am

John2 wrote:arnoldo wrote:
Metaphorically/Metaphysically speaking there are similarities between 1 Peter2:5 and 2 Cor3:3.
Do you mean 2 Cor. 6:16-17?

"What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. If anyone destroys God's temple, God will destroy that person; for God's temple is sacred, and you together are that temple."

There is also 1 Cor. 6:19:

"Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God?"

And Rom. 12:1:

"Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God--this is your true and proper worship."

And Rom. 15:16:

"He gave me the priestly duty of proclaiming the gospel of God, so that the Gentiles might become an offering acceptable to God, sanctified by the Holy Spirit."

And Php. 2:17:

"But even if I am being poured out like a drink offering on the sacrifice and service coming from your faith, I am glad and rejoice with all of you."

Nelson writes:
Gartner has shown quite convincingly that one not need to look to the influences of Stoicism and the works of Philo in order to understand the manner in which Paul uses the Temple as a description of the Christian community. It was one of Gartner's major concerns to illustrate the resemblance of what he calls the 'temple symbolism' of the Qumran sect to Paul's use of the Temple. While that is not our present task we do certainly acknowledge that Paul's description of the Church as the new Temple does 'resemble the temple symbolism and overall ideology of the Qumran community.'

https://books.google.com/books?id=FoDQu ... le&f=false
See Gartner, "The Temple and the Community in Qumran and the New Testament":

https://books.google.com/books?id=V7uPV ... an&f=false

And Charlesworth notes:
Outside Qumran and the Christian literature in the Hellenistic-Roman period or earlier, there seems to be no parallel to an understanding of a group as temple.

https://books.google.com/books?id=axIMo ... an&f=false
Those verses you cited use the metaphor of the temple in relation to Jesus and his followers. In contrast, 2 Corinthians 3:3 uses the metaphor of a letter to the followers of Jesus.
http://biblehub.com/2_corinthians/3-3.htm

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 8033
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: The Dead Sea Scrolls & the New Testament

Post by Secret Alias » Sun Jan 15, 2017 11:20 am

Of the list below who would you say is the most respected researcher without an ax to grind.
Why not start by giving up on the least likely and in fact nearly impossible theory - i.e. Eisenman's - and go through the list on your own and come to a new appreciation of the evidence? Eisenman's theory won't work so it is pointless to try and make this a binary 'either/or' with one or two respected scholars and Eisenman. It's simply a matter of throwing out the garbage and working from what's not rotten in the fridge.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Ben C. Smith, Bernard Muller, Bing [Bot], GakuseiDon, Jax, JoeWallack, John2, MrMacSon and 63 guests