Dead Sea Scrolls

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
L

Livingforchrist

Guest
#1
I have a question, I have been looking into the Dead Sea Scrolls and I've noticed something, that some scholars will say that they contain most of the Old Testament, but nothing really of the New Testament and absolutely nothing about Jesus. I have noticed that other scholars claim that in fact they do contain some passages of the New Testament and that they do talk about Jesus, for instance "In 1991 the world was astonished to hear that one of the unpublished scrolls included incredible references to a "Messiah" who suffered crucifixion for the sins of men. The scroll was translated by Dr. Robert Eisenman, Professor of Middle East Religions of California State University. He declared, "The text is of the most far-reaching significance because it shows that whatever group was responsible for these writings was operating in the same general scriptural and Messianic framework of early Christianity." "This scroll identified the Messiah as the "Shoot of Jesse" (King David's father) the "Branch of David," and declared that he was "pierced" and "wounded." The word "pierced" remind us of the Messianic prophecy in Psalms 22:16: "They pierced my hands and feet." The prophet Jeremiah (23:5) said, "I will raise unto David a righteous branch." These are some texts from an article about the Dead Sea Scrolls showing evidence of Jesus Christ, while other articles say that there is absolutely no evidence of Jesus in the scrolls. What are your thoughts on this subject. Thank you!
 
Aug 13, 2014
193
2
0
#2
I think the Bad Spirits helped in the findings just to add more confusion to the many. Those Spirits live here with us and they know just how to get into some of us so we must be careful what we take in.

Mac.
 
L

Livingforchrist

Guest
#3
So you believe the Dead Sea scrolls are not legitimate? And they're actually to cause confusion and evil?
 

wattie

Senior Member
Feb 24, 2009
2,987
1,014
113
New Zealand
#4
Is the dead sea scrolls - the nostic gospels? Eg.. Gospel of Mary.. another gospel with a cross that gets huge and starts talking.. etc..?

I thought in the dead sea scrolls there was also found a complete Old Testament.. that was dated earlier than the oldest manuscripts we had.. but was still the same as the OT we have now.. so validated that it hadn't been modified or changed.

Hmmm..
 
L

Livingforchrist

Guest
#5
I don't know about the gospel of Mary or anything of that sort. I did read though that they did find the complete Old Testament and some of the new and some texts talking about the "Messiah" I'm just wondering why some scholars disagree on whom the sea scrolls are talking about regarding the "Messiah"
 
Jun 5, 2014
1,750
6
0
#6
I don't know about the gospel of Mary or anything of that sort. I did read though that they did find the complete Old Testament and some of the new and some texts talking about the "Messiah" I'm just wondering why some scholars disagree on whom the sea scrolls are talking about regarding the "Messiah"
What we do know with certainty is that the Dead Sea Scrolls contain a Book of Isaiah (Great Isaiah Scroll) that is identical with the exception of a few insignificant discrepancies to what we already had. That Great Isaiah Scroll has been dated to before Christ. The Book of Isaiah contains Messianic prophecies.

The significance of this is that we know that those Messianic prophecies were made before Christ walked the Earth and this is also evidence to some extent that accurate copies were made.
 
L

Livingforchrist

Guest
#7
Thank you, for taking time to answer. Very informative. So do you think the Dead Sea scrolls are evidence of the accuracy of the bible? I feel like everything they find, supporting the scriptures they label it as not enough evidence or inaccurate.
 
Jun 5, 2014
1,750
6
0
#8
Thank you, for taking time to answer. Very informative. So do you think the Dead Sea scrolls are evidence of the accuracy of the bible? I feel like everything they find, supporting the scriptures they label it as not enough evidence or inaccurate.
Doubters will never be satisfied with the evidence.

Definitely the Great Isaiah Scroll is evidence to some extent that Isaiah was copied accurately down through the centuries.

It is also evidence that the Messianic prophecies in Isaiah were written before Christ walked the Earth.

So the Dead Sea Scrolls, with respect to Isaiah in particular, add to the evidence that Scripture was copied accurately and the Messianic prophecies about Christ were in fact prophecies because they were made before He ever walked the Earth.
 
L

Livingforchrist

Guest
#9
Amen! You're definitely correct! And you're right doubters will never be satisfied! Thank your for all the great information. And God Bless you
 
Jun 27, 2015
112
2
0
#10
You are confusing the Dead Sea Scrolls with the Nag Hammadi library. Both were discovered at about the same time and both are incredibly valuable in understanding our Judeo-Christian heritage.
 
L

Livingforchrist

Guest
#11
Really? So the Dead Sea scrolls don't have some passages from the New Testament? And they don't speak about a "pierced Messiah"? I'm just trying to get a better understanding.
 
Jun 5, 2014
1,750
6
0
#12
Really? So the Dead Sea scrolls don't have some passages from the New Testament? And they don't speak about a "pierced Messiah"? I'm just trying to get a better understanding.
I don't mean to speak for JackRT, but I think he is referring to your comment about whether the DSS are legitimate or cause confusion and evil and wattie's comment about the Gospel of Mary.

Gnostic texts including the Gospel of Mary are part of the Nag Hammadi library.

I don't think that there is much question that what I said about the Great Isaiah Scroll from the DSS is correct.

To my knowledge, nothing found among the DSS has been confirmed as a New Testament manuscript. Some claims along those lines have been made, but none have been substantiated as far as I can determine.
 
S

sassylady

Guest
#13
I believe they are just one more proof of the authenticity of the scriptures.
 

JimmieD

Senior Member
Apr 11, 2014
895
18
18
#15
I have a question, I have been looking into the Dead Sea Scrolls and I've noticed something, that some scholars will say that they contain most of the Old Testament, but nothing really of the New Testament and absolutely nothing about Jesus. I have noticed that other scholars claim that in fact they do contain some passages of the New Testament and that they do talk about Jesus, for instance "In 1991 the world was astonished to hear that one of the unpublished scrolls included incredible references to a "Messiah" who suffered crucifixion for the sins of men. The scroll was translated by Dr. Robert Eisenman, Professor of Middle East Religions of California State University. He declared, "The text is of the most far-reaching significance because it shows that whatever group was responsible for these writings was operating in the same general scriptural and Messianic framework of early Christianity." "This scroll identified the Messiah as the "Shoot of Jesse" (King David's father) the "Branch of David," and declared that he was "pierced" and "wounded." The word "pierced" remind us of the Messianic prophecy in Psalms 22:16: "They pierced my hands and feet." The prophet Jeremiah (23:5) said, "I will raise unto David a righteous branch." These are some texts from an article about the Dead Sea Scrolls showing evidence of Jesus Christ, while other articles say that there is absolutely no evidence of Jesus in the scrolls. What are your thoughts on this subject. Thank you!
The people at Qumran seem to have believed in 2 messiahs. They believed in a messiah who would be a king and another who would be a high priest.
 

JimmieD

Senior Member
Apr 11, 2014
895
18
18
#16
Doubters will never be satisfied with the evidence.

Definitely the Great Isaiah Scroll is evidence to some extent that Isaiah was copied accurately down through the centuries.

It is also evidence that the Messianic prophecies in Isaiah were written before Christ walked the Earth.

So the Dead Sea Scrolls, with respect to Isaiah in particular, add to the evidence that Scripture was copied accurately and the Messianic prophecies about Christ were in fact prophecies because they were made before He ever walked the Earth.
Have you read the DSS version of Jeremiah? It's not the same as the version of Jeremiah you're probably familiar with.
 
Jun 27, 2015
112
2
0
#17
The people at Qumran seem to have believed in 2 messiahs. They believed in a messiah who would be a king and another who would be a high priest.
Extract from an old sermon of mine:

Messiah means literally "anointed one" and was the common way in which the Jews referred to kings of the dynasty of David. "Anointed" refers of course to the method of coronation of the Jewish kings. It translated into the Greek as "Christ". The Jews regarded themselves as a "theocracy"... a kingdom ruled by God. The Jews also envisaged a (metaphorical) throne room in which there were three thrones. God occupied the central throne. At "the right hand of God" was the throne of the "king messiah" who was the reigning king of the house and family of David. At "the left hand of God" was the throne of the "priest messiah" who was the high priest of the house and family of Zadok. Ideally there were always two messiahs who were known collectively as the "sons of God". All these terms, "messiah", "kingdom of God", "at the right hand of God" and "son of God" were political rather than religious statements. It was a later generation of gentile Christians who re-interpreted these phrases in a very different religious sense. Both before and after the death of Jesus the early Christians, who were, after all, practicing Jews, understood these terms in their traditional sense. Jesus in claiming to be the messiah had not committed any blasphemy... there was no religious crime that the high priest could legitimately charge him with. That is why they went to the Romans to do the job.
 
Last edited:
Jun 5, 2014
1,750
6
0
#18
Have you read the DSS version of Jeremiah? It's not the same as the version of Jeremiah you're probably familiar with.
Right.

Which opens that big can of worms of whether the DSS are closer to the Septuagint (LXX) or the Masoretic Text.
 

Dan_473

Senior Member
Mar 11, 2014
9,054
1,051
113
#19
Have you read the DSS version of Jeremiah? It's not the same as the version of Jeremiah you're probably familiar with.
i'm interested in details of this... is the DSS of Jeremiah available online?
 

Dan_473

Senior Member
Mar 11, 2014
9,054
1,051
113
#20
Right.

Which opens that big can of worms of whether the DSS are closer to the Septuagint (LXX) or the Masoretic Text.
good, some more info...
why do you say it opens a can of worms?