Scholar Claims Dead Sea Scrolls 'Authors' Never Ex

[daytonhorn]

The Link
As one who doesn't believe or not believe in a god, and who thinks religion is pretty silly, I am curious if this makes a dent in any Christian's faith.
If you still believe just as strongly, please explain why. Blind expressions of faith will not serve to enlighten me.

 

[HornCyclist]

The dead sea scrolls were all Old Testament books. I do not see how this has anything to with Christianity.

And besides, someone still wrote the things?

 

[daytonhorn]

When I went to Vacation Bible School the Methodist and Lutheren pastors spent quite a bit of time teaching the Old Testament.

And apparently, it does matter to some biblical scholars who wrote the scrolls since they are claiming that the Essenes did, in fact, author the Dead Sea Scrolls.

At any rate, your post is non-responsive to mine. Next.

 

[ProdigalHorn]

Why is it that you believe that a single scholar's theory ought to overturn any faith in God, when the myriad of scholar's theories concerning its validity haven't swayed you?

Also to add - the Bible had already long since been assembled, and the works therein had been sited long before the Dead Sea scrolls were discovered. They served as powerful evidence corroborating the dates of those writings, but those dates were accepted before that time. So even in the event that the scrolls were not written by the same people who we have so far believed, I don't see how that detracts from the validity of scripture.

 

[BattleshipTexas]

So his argument is "As Elior explains, the Essenes make no mention of themselves"? Pretty stupid argument.

Then he says: "This is legend on a legend". Except there are numerous first hand accounts, hardly legends. Like that by Philo of Alexandria who writes extensively about them.

Then he says: "and there's no mention of them in any of the Jewish texts and sources of that period." Philo is a well known Jew and in fact is the leader of the Jews in Alexandria. How can this guy get away with saying that when Philo is so well known and respected? Philo gives a first hand account, not copying from someone else.

But anyway, this is about Judaism, it has nothing to do with jesus or the New Testament. Even for jews, what does it matter whether Essenes made these copies or renegade priests? Either way they are very old copies of the Old Testament.

 

[texas_ex2000]

I'm a science nerd. And I can't understand how people who love science, who are enamoured with how the universe works from the largest galaxies to mitcondrial tRNA...I don't know how people can study that and not believe there's some greater power. After a trip to a natural history museum, I look up and say to myself, "Dude, that's f'ing brilliant."

 

[Tan Ted Deki]

I believe strongly in God's power, mercy, mystery and word. I understand the comments that you made and I respect the aspect of your question that indicates a search for real answers to historical events and the development of religion.

I am not an expert on the dead sea scrolls and I cannot possibly make a well-educated comment on the truth or fiction of the article to which you've linked us. I appreciate the link as a topic to consider.

I can very much connect with the comment you made about the silliness of religion. I have no doubt that much of religion is silliness because so much is controlled by human imperfection. I have yet to find an institution of any kind in this world that is not fraught with the "silly" by-products of the ridiculousness of human nature.

I will just say this and hope that you will understand that it is not intended to be an avoidance of your basic question but rather one man's true response to your question.

My knowledge of God is not something I can't deliver to you in words. For certain, my brain is not something that fully understands the intricacies of all that is and was. That fact however does not excuse me from the important mission of seeking knowledge.

I am far from a "perfect" Christian. My heart is often dark and my faith is frequently weak. I have doubts and at times I have encountered knowledge and newly discovered truths that have attacked the very basic foundation of my understanding of things. An honest walk through those moments has, to date, always ended up bringing me closer to God and not further. In these moments I often realize that I am being taught about the truth of my previous understanding and that God doesn't fit in my "box of how I currently understand things".

But the bottom line is this. I believe in God and not in biblical scholars. This article, to me, while relevant to my knowledge of the world and our human history, has no bearing or significant relevance in the basis of my faith. I hope that makes sense. Trust me, I understand how that can make you roll your eyes but it just is what it is. It's the nature of faith (and that does not mean I am not interested in your thoughts on the matter).

For the record, the concept of "blind faith" is something to which I also share an aversion. I hope you will consider the possibility that one can lead a life where faith is of extreme value and still have their eyes wide to new truth. Those concepts are not in direct combat in my opinion although it is a struggle to constantly remember to apply both of them.

So what is my basis for continued belief and what drives me to continue to (attempt to) follow a life of faith?

This...
"Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?"

"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets."
The Link

The fact is that my personal experience has been such that the more I have attempted to follow this and the messages of the Gospels, the more I have found joy and truth and love in my life.

I truly hope that I have done a decent job of answering your question and that it is clear (if nothing else) that a person of faith can respect the place from where you are coming.

 

[theropods]

I don't really see why it makes the authenticity of the Dead Sea Scrolls problematic if the Essenes wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls or if priestly outcasts took them from the temple as that scholar contends. Nowhere in there does it dispute the antiquity or authenticity of the scrolls.

 

[NBMisha]

The Dead Sea Scrolls are not witness to the development of religion. Religion, as an institutional force, existed for thousands of years prior. And humans have been having religious beliefs and expressing religious behavior for as long as there have been humans.

 

[TexonLongIsland]

Thanks a lot, this has completely destroyed my belief in Buddha.

 

[Oilfield]

I grew up Catholic, went to Catholic schools, etc. I can recall very little mention of the Dead Sea Scrolls when I was growing up. I understand that they're very important historical artifacts, but they never were a key component of my faith.

 

[allweatherHorn]

There is a world of difference between being in awe of the inexplicable wonders of nature, on the one hand, and thinking that some selective texts written by humans are actually the "word" of a particular all-powerful god who intends to keep his/her existence a mystery while imposing particular obligations on threat of damnation (all the while allowing children to be slaughtered and abused because, to intervene, would be to end the mystery of his/her existence), on the other. The latter is ridiculous and worthy of criticism regardless of the degree of ******** in some old scrolls.

 

[formermav43]

Why would this alter anyone's faith? The value of the Dead Sea Scrolls is their antiquity, which helps confirm the overall accuracy of later copies of scripture, regardless of who wrote them. Although the Essene hypothesis has always been the most widely advanced, it is still just a guess.

I suppose this is interesting on some level, but I really don't understande the connection between the article and the OP's question.

 

[Texas_Rocks]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[mia1994]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Monahorns]

I agree with the others who say that it is not important who wrote the Dead Sea scrolls. Their authorship is not the point which brings benefit to believers. Others have said it but I will repeat, the value of the Dead Sea scrolls is the age of the writings and there very high degree of agreement with the other manuscripts we have of the Hebrew scriptures.

So again who wrote them is irrelevant to the faith. The fact that they written when they were written and what was written is the key.

 

[Rip76]

"I'm a science nerd. And I can't understand how people who love science, who are enamoured with how the universe works from the largest galaxies to mitcondrial tRNA...I don't know how people can study that and not believe there's some greater power. After a trip to a natural history museum, I look up and say to myself, "Dude, that's f'ing brilliant." "

My thoughts exactly.....

 

[RomaVicta]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[jameson_bond]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[ProdigalHorn]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[general35]

I don't know how people can study that and not believe there's some greater power.
__________________________________________________

They would rather believe that some particles came out of a void of nothingness and randomly exploded.

 

[bozo_casanova]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[jameson_bond]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[bozo_casanova]

jameson, look, when I read your quote, it doesn't ring true. Not for any practicing member of any faith or denomination I know of. It's contrary to both teaching and observation. It denies that the the nature of each will vary widely from person to person and that they are both internally constructed.

You act as if belief was something imposed on a believer and as if faith was the product of observation. That's silly.

And at least in the case of faith it's counter to the point of the whole thing- if you can hold it up to causality and observe it, it's NOT faith. Faith is the belief in that which is unobservable and unprovable.

 

[jameson_bond]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Anastasis]

I'm still trying to figure out why this is suppose to "make a dent" on what a Christian believes?

Oh, and...

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Nordberg]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Monahorns]

This quote struck me.

In reply to:

---

---

 

[mop]

this reminds me of the time that a fellow worker at Katz's (worked there in college) asked me how i could believe in Christianity if we don't even know Jesus' actual birthday. i laughed and tried desperately to explain it to him.....i didn't get anywhere.

who wrote the dead sea scrolls has nothing to do with how incredibly they match other textual streams. the dead sea scrolls are amazing in their own right whether or not there were ever actually a people called "essenes." having said that, the logic stream by the person mentioned in the article seems very bad. there are 8 separate mentions of the Essenes in ancient history. why would a bunch of different historians agree about a mythical people? i suppose it is possible, but certainly seems unlikely. regardless, the essenes are not a Biblical people, having nothing to do with the Bible apart from their presumed role in keeping the Dead Sea Scrolls....if it wasn't them, it WAS someone and it doesn't particularly matter who apart from the interest in history.

 

[NickDanger]

I think a big problem right now for organized religions (btw, one doesn't believe in Buddha and Buddhism is more of a philosophy than a religion) is that so many things seem to come out which supposedly prove so many matters to be false or incorrect. They are frequently brushed aside with an "Ahh...details don't matter to a person of faith" type of response. "The story of Noah's Ark wasn't meant to be takenly literally" (to just point out the first truly ridiculous story among others which may not be truly absurd). It is also argued that differentiating between what should and shouldn't be taken literally is not all that important. If that's the truth then both "none" and "all" ought to be circles that are available for your No. 2 pencil. The more some of us hear that a man of faith doesn't need truth or accuracy in teachings, the more we walk away.

I'm not likely to engage further so don't read anything into a failure to respond.