Have the Dead Sea Scrolls changed Christianity?

[Blik]

I think they have. If you read all the footnotes to your new bibles you find that there are some changes made. Some of the scriptures found were much older than any we had before, and translators have used this new information. In the NRSV translation of the bible they used a verse in 1 Samuel that they found had been left out, before, between chapter 10 and 11.

These scrolls let us see scripture as it was in its original setting. So many centuries have gone by that it is often difficult to understand how it was meant originally. Time even changes our languages as we learn by reading English writings from as recent as 500 years ago. Shakespeare wrote from 1589 to 1613, the KJV was published in 1611. The English of Shakespeare has dramatically changed. I am certain the Holy Spirit helped these men, but we need to use the Holy Spirit ourselves as we read it and know some words meant different things to them.

We need to understand that the translators were reflecting the thoughts of the time about Christianity. The popular gossip at the time was so against Jews it was even said they sacrificed children. The KJV reflects this by the way they translated the Hebrew of scripture. Torah is always translated as stern law, with no hint of coming from a loving God’s guidance as the word Torah brings out. Passover is translated as Easter. A study by scholars of the dead sea scrolls helps correct this.

 

[p_rehbein]

Not for me............so................

 

[Roughsoul1991]

I think they have. If you read all the footnotes to your new bibles you find that there are some changes made. Some of the scriptures found were much older than any we had before, and translators have used this new information. In the NRSV translation of the bible they used a verse in 1 Samuel that they found had been left out, before, between chapter 10 and 11.

These scrolls let us see scripture as it was in its original setting. So many centuries have gone by that it is often difficult to understand how it was meant originally. Time even changes our languages as we learn by reading English writings from as recent as 500 years ago. Shakespeare wrote from 1589 to 1613, the KJV was published in 1611. The English of Shakespeare has dramatically changed. I am certain the Holy Spirit helped these men, but we need to use the Holy Spirit ourselves as we read it and know some words meant different things to them.

We need to understand that the translators were reflecting the thoughts of the time about Christianity. The popular gossip at the time was so against Jews it was even said they sacrificed children. The KJV reflects this by the way they translated the Hebrew of scripture. Torah is always translated as stern law, with no hint of coming from a loving God’s guidance as the word Torah brings out. Passover is translated as Easter. A study by scholars of the dead sea scrolls helps correct this.

Not really. More or less just reaffirmed its accuracy. Any changes have not changed anything dramatically.

 

[notuptome]

Dead sea scrolls have not changed Christianity. Dead sea scrolls have aided Gnosticism and unbelief. This war has been going on since the beginning.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Dino246]

Dead sea scrolls have not changed Christianity. Dead sea scrolls have aided Gnosticism and unbelief. This war has been going on since the beginning.

How so?

 

[Dino246]

Christianity has not been changed at all by the Dead Sea Scrolls. It is still rooted firmly in faith in the Person and finished work of Jesus Christ, just as it has been since the beginning. The DSS only provide a little information that is neither fundamental nor critical.

 

[Blik]

Christianity has not been changed at all by the Dead Sea Scrolls. It is still rooted firmly in faith in the Person and finished work of Jesus Christ, just as it has been since the beginning. The DSS only provide a little information that is neither fundamental nor critical.

I like: "Christianity is rooted in truth". People who live their lives without being aware of God in their world are living in a fantasy world.

I feel certain that scripture gives us this truth, and if it does then scripture is truth and every word of scripture agrees with every other word. yet there is disagreements between the old and new testament. They disagree, for example about the law of Moses. I feel that it is our perception of this disagreement, for scripture can be relied on to be truth, all of it.

I determined to find this truth, and when I started my search I found I had to go back in history to when the disagreement started. I found I could rely om history from people who had learned from the scrolls.

I think the scrolls have shown scholars the truth that had been lost through the separation of so much time between the men who report God.

 

[Nehemiah6]

I think the scrolls have shown scholars the truth that had been lost through the separation of so much time between the men who report God.

You seem to be forgetting that the Dead Sea Scrolls included both genuine Scriptures and also apocryphal and heretical writings. None of this has any impact on Bible Christianity.
https://www.deadseascrolls.org.il/learn-about-the-scrolls/scrolls-content?locale=en_US

Apocrypha (אפוקריפה) – The term "Apocrypha" is used here to refer to the specific collection of books considered to be canonical in the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox traditions, but not part of the Hebrew Bible or Protestant canon. Three works of the Apocrypha are found among the Dead Sea Scrolls: Ben Sira (also known as the Wisdom of Ben Sira, Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus), the book of Tobit, and the Epistle of Jeremiah.
[Note: Jesus limited the Hebrew Tanakh to the 24 books of the Hebrew Bible, and excluded the Apocrypha]

Sectarian Texts (חיבורים כיתתיים) – The "Sectarian texts" use unique terminology to describe the special theology, worldview, and history of a particular group, which called itself the Yahad ("Community"). The core texts outline the rules and regulations of the Yahad and emphasize the End of Days, which the Community viewed as imminent. Scholars used to attribute all of the Qumran Scrolls to the Essenes, one of the three major Jewish sects in the Second Temple period. Most now agree that the corpus represents the writings of related, evolving communities rather than a single sect. Even the texts labeled as sectarian were likely to have been composed by multiple groups, within and outside of the Community. Three of the original seven scrolls found in Cave 1 near Qumran were instrumental in identifying sectarian texts and remain some of the most well-known manuscripts: the Community Rule (Serekh HaYahad), the Scroll of the War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness, and the Habakkuk Commentary (Pesher Habakkuk).

Bar Kokhba was a false Jewish messiah, and his letters have been included:
Bar Kokhba Letters (איגרות בר כוכבא) – Fifteen military letters were found stored in a leather waterskin in Cave 5/6 of Nahal Hever, known as the Cave of the Letters. All of the letters in this bundle were written by men who were involved with the administration of Shim‘on b. Kosiba, the leader of the Bar Kokhba Revolt, and most were written in Shim‘on’s name.
So were these people following this false messiah? It is entirely possible.

Scripture (מקרא) – These manuscripts contain material now considered to be part of the Hebrew Bible. Every book is represented among the Dead Sea Scrolls, except the book of Esther. These are the oldest known copies of biblical works.

For example, the Isaiah scroll in the DSS dating from around 200 BC was almost exactly what is found in the Masoretic Text (900 AD), which is the underlying Hebrew text of the King James Bible. Which proves the doctrine of the divine preservation of the Scriptures.

 

[Blain]

As far as Christianity goes no but I do find it interesting to be able to have that capability to read the scrolls my bible I have had since 2013 it was given to me by a friend so it is precious to me

I could download the latest version and. Might but I prefer to have the word in my hands there is something about the book form that I love

 

[oyster67]

I think they have. If you read all the footnotes to your new bibles...

Not my Christianity. Still saved by the Blood of the Lamb.

OBTW, The only footnotes in my Bible are the ones I have penciled in myself, and I do not consider them to be part of God's inspired Word.

 

[Blain]

Not my Christianity. Still saved by the Blood of the Lamb.

OBTW, The only footnotes in my Bible are the ones I have penciled in myself, and I do not consider them to be part of God's inspired Word.

Buddy if only you were in Oklahoma City so I could shake your hand I say this not for this post in particular but because you have long earned my respect

 

[Blik]

You seem to be forgetting that the Dead Sea Scrolls included both genuine Scriptures and also apocryphal and heretical writings. None of this has any impact on Bible Christianity.
https://www.deadseascrolls.org.il/learn-about-the-scrolls/scrolls-content?locale=en_US

Apocrypha (אפוקריפה) – The term "Apocrypha" is used here to refer to the specific collection of books considered to be canonical in the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox traditions, but not part of the Hebrew Bible or Protestant canon. Three works of the Apocrypha are found among the Dead Sea Scrolls: Ben Sira (also known as the Wisdom of Ben Sira, Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus), the book of Tobit, and the Epistle of Jeremiah.
[Note: Jesus limited the Hebrew Tanakh to the 24 books of the Hebrew Bible, and excluded the Apocrypha]

Sectarian Texts (חיבורים כיתתיים) – The "Sectarian texts" use unique terminology to describe the special theology, worldview, and history of a particular group, which called itself the Yahad ("Community"). The core texts outline the rules and regulations of the Yahad and emphasize the End of Days, which the Community viewed as imminent. Scholars used to attribute all of the Qumran Scrolls to the Essenes, one of the three major Jewish sects in the Second Temple period. Most now agree that the corpus represents the writings of related, evolving communities rather than a single sect. Even the texts labeled as sectarian were likely to have been composed by multiple groups, within and outside of the Community. Three of the original seven scrolls found in Cave 1 near Qumran were instrumental in identifying sectarian texts and remain some of the most well-known manuscripts: the Community Rule (Serekh HaYahad), the Scroll of the War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness, and the Habakkuk Commentary (Pesher Habakkuk).

Bar Kokhba was a false Jewish messiah, and his letters have been included:
Bar Kokhba Letters (איגרות בר כוכבא) – Fifteen military letters were found stored in a leather waterskin in Cave 5/6 of Nahal Hever, known as the Cave of the Letters. All of the letters in this bundle were written by men who were involved with the administration of Shim‘on b. Kosiba, the leader of the Bar Kokhba Revolt, and most were written in Shim‘on’s name.
So were these people following this false messiah? It is entirely possible.

Scripture (מקרא) – These manuscripts contain material now considered to be part of the Hebrew Bible. Every book is represented among the Dead Sea Scrolls, except the book of Esther. These are the oldest known copies of biblical works.

For example, the Isaiah scroll in the DSS dating from around 200 BC was almost exactly what is found in the Masoretic Text (900 AD), which is the underlying Hebrew text of the King James Bible. Which proves the doctrine of the divine preservation of the Scriptures.

Do you decide you will have nothing to do with apocrypha writings? Isn't that burying your head in the sand? They are history and were part of the ancient world. You do not need to accept them as scripture, but to throw out everything because it includes something you think is not scripture seems rather foolish to me.

 

[Blik]

Not my Christianity. Still saved by the Blood of the Lamb.

OBTW, The only footnotes in my Bible are the ones I have penciled in myself, and I do not consider them to be part of God's inspired Word.

So you have decided you will have nothing to do with understanding, better, the God who saved you? The changes that have happened has been in a clearer understanding of God who created you, but I guess you take what God offers you and knowing Him better doesn't interest you? Is that how you think?

 

[Dino246]

I like: "Christianity is rooted in truth". People who live their lives without being aware of God in their world are living in a fantasy world.

I feel certain that scripture gives us this truth, and if it does then scripture is truth and every word of scripture agrees with every other word. yet there is disagreements between the old and new testament. They disagree, for example about the law of Moses. I feel that it is our perception of this disagreement, for scripture can be relied on to be truth, all of it.

I determined to find this truth, and when I started my search I found I had to go back in history to when the disagreement started. I found I could rely om history from people who had learned from the scrolls.

I think the scrolls have shown scholars the truth that had been lost through the separation of so much time between the men who report God.

In a recent response to me, you claimed that you only quote Scripture. Here you seem to be saying that you actually rely on history and the writings of men who have studied, rather than Scripture.

The New Testament is Scripture, the same as the Old Testament. I don't know where you got the idea that the New disagrees with the Old. I don't see that. However, the Scriptures teach that the new covenant has replaced the old. The old covenant cannot be followed any longer. What God taught the Israelites in the old covenant was for the Israelites. They couldn't keep their end of it, and God made an end of them.

 

[Scribe]

I think you are making imaginary assumptions about the contributions of the Dead Sea Scrolls to the body of knowledge of ancient manuscripts. There were no English translations in extant at the time of the DSS discovery that required a re-translation after their discovery. And remember there were NO New Testament copies or fragments (most of the scrolls are fragments of a book not the whole book) at all in the collection. So since Christianity is founded on the New Testament scriptures and there were NO New Testament scriptures found among the Dead Sea Scrolls it would therefore be IMPOSSIBLE for them to have changed or to have had any effect on Christianity whatsoever. And as to the pseudonymous writings they were already known to exist and to have been refuted as pseudonymous (under a false name) by the main body of orthodox religious leaders of their day. Nothing new was added by their discovery, they did not suddenly become authentic based on their antiquity.

 

[Blik]

I think you are making imaginary assumptions about the contributions of the Dead Sea Scrolls to the body of knowledge of ancient manuscripts. There were no English translations in extant at the time of the DSS discovery that required a re-translation after their discovery. And remember there were NO New Testament copies or fragments (most of the scrolls are fragments of a book not the whole book) at all in the collection. So since Christianity is founded on the New Testament scriptures and there were NO New Testament scriptures found among the Dead Sea Scrolls it would therefore be IMPOSSIBLE for them to have changed or to have had any effect on Christianity whatsoever. And as to the pseudonymous writings they were already known to exist and to have been refuted as pseudonymous (under a false name) by the main body of orthodox religious leaders of their day. Nothing new was added by their discovery, they did not suddenly become authentic based on their antiquity.

I think you point that Christianity is founded on the New Testament is a description of the changes the DSS is making. As they are opening up understanding of the information we have they show that the founding of Christianity, of salvation through Christ, is founded on God and God is in both the old and new testament. You are still living the way Christianity was added to and changed from the truth as the first apostles gave it. Are you able to see truth in all scripture, both old and new testament? What about the order to not mix fabrics, or the forever truths of all Moses told. If you believe in scripture then all of these things must be truth. Showing how they all agree is what the DSS scrolls has done for Christianity.

 

[Scribe]

I think you point that Christianity is founded on the New Testament is a description of the changes the DSS is making. As they are opening up understanding of the information we have they show that the founding of Christianity, of salvation through Christ, is founded on God and God is in both the old and new testament. You are still living the way Christianity was added to and changed from the truth as the first apostles gave it. Are you able to see truth in all scripture, both old and new testament? What about the order to not mix fabrics, or the forever truths of all Moses told. If you believe in scripture then all of these things must be truth. Showing how they all agree is what the DSS scrolls has done for Christianity.

There is no question that what we call the Old Testament books of the bible are scripture and that the New Testament are not complete without them. In what way did the DSS either change our view or knowledge of the OT canon? And would the ESV (the latest functional equivalent English translation) be the same without the discovery of the DSS?

 

[Blik]

There is no question that what we call the Old Testament books of the bible are scripture and that the New Testament are not complete without them. In what way did the DSS either change our view or knowledge of the OT canon? And would the ESV (the latest functional equivalent English translation) be the same without the discovery of the DSS?

I am just an ordinary, run of the mill person. To study the DSS takes what is way above what I am capable of. What I have done about this situation is to search until I found a person who is capable, who retired early and devoted eight years to study. He has written an explanation of some OT scripture books, verse by verse using this information. I have checked him out, and am assured that any time he uses his own ideas not just reporting he will clearly say so. I use this man's brain to show me what I'm not capable of doing or have the time and money to do. Each chapter takes from 7 to 12 packed pages and some people who have tried to study them say it is over their head. And you want me to put it in a post!!!!!

As I have found, there has been changes in OT scripture that finding older translations brought to light. These changes in scripture are clearly explained in footnotes when they are used. When I studied ancient Hebrew history I always checked the authors to be sure they were using the history found in the DSS.

 

[Blik]

In a recent response to me, you claimed that you only quote Scripture. Here you seem to be saying that you actually rely on history and the writings of men who have studied, rather than Scripture.

The New Testament is Scripture, the same as the Old Testament. I don't know where you got the idea that the New disagrees with the Old. I don't see that. However, the Scriptures teach that the new covenant has replaced the old. The old covenant cannot be followed any longer. What God taught the Israelites in the old covenant was for the Israelites. They couldn't keep their end of it, and God made an end of them.

I do study history and I have studied scripture using a man who uses history to understand what the men understood the words they used to tell of God meant to them. I don't think it is studying man's interpretation of what they think God means, I hope I am right. It has really concerned me, I have searched and begged for someone to study this with me, someone who wants only to understand God and not a man's interpretation of God.

Going to what both you and I think, we want to get God's message straight and not twist it in any way. I feel that saying the old covenant is replaced is not listening when scripture tells us it is obsolete, and there is no use in our discussing that because we both feel so certain of our findings. We both feel certain about what we think about the instructions given to the Israelites, we have posted about it and we have both considered the other's view and still do not agree.

 

[Grandpa]

People tend to find evidence for what they already believe.

They kind of skim and ignore the stuff that doesn't fit and then focus on the "evidence".


The bible, as we have it now, contains so much information that adding a little bit to it probably shouldn't change anything.


And then the big question is, when comparing the dss to the actual bible how do you determine which is authentically the Word of God and which is not? The determining factor for placing one over the other must be the amount of "evidence" that backs up what you already believe.