Why Was The New Testament Missing From The Dead Sea Scrolls???

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: madmac5150

Why were the early Gnostic texts included in the Dead Sea scrolls excluded from the New Testament? Those codices predate the New Testament writings by centuries.

Uhm... which gnostic texts would you be referring to?

Gnostic literature came from the first and early second and third century... and the gnostic writers were not fans of the OT

why would they be included in the dead sea scrolls which were all hebrew texts?

Because the poor lads confused

There were a number of books found in the Dead Sea Scrolls not in the authorised christian OT section of the bible. Jasher, Enoch, Jubilee and uhm Macabees, these were not included because they are more historical than "prophetical".
More about history than Jesus, as such. Readily available at most religious book shops, not hidden or missing

Anyway, the Dead Sea Scrolls were probably squirreled away long before Jesus birth, maybe after, no one is sure, maybe when Babylon invaded or Rome, assumedly when Jerualem was under threat and they wanted to protect the scriptures.
there is no New Testament information because when the Scrolls were put in the caves, there was no New Testament written yet.

I thought the ded Sea scrolls included Jesus stories?

It says they were buried in 68 ad , which is very early for books absolutely is early for books to have been circulated.

An Arab shepherd boy discovered the greatest archeological finds in history in 1947. When the ancient Hebrew scrolls from these caves were examined by scholars they found that this Qumran site contained alibrary with hundreds of precious texts of both biblical and secular manuscripts that dated back before the destruction of the Second Temple and the death of Jesus Christ.
www.grantjeffrey.com...

Quotes from the New Testament in the Dead Sea Scrolls

Finally, after a public relations campaign demanded the release of the unpublished scrolls to other scholars, the last of the unpublished scrolls were released to the academic world. To the great joy and surprise of many scholars, the scrolls contain definite references to the New Testament and, most importantly, to Jesus of Nazareth. In the last few years several significant scrolls were released that shed new light on the New Testament and the life of Jesus. One of the most extraordinary of these scrolls released in 1991 actually referred directly to the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.


There you go, I was wrong

Isaiah spoke of a suffering Messiah, who was the branch of Jesse and was pierced. Just like the fragment referred to on this website in the previous post. The text makes NO mention specifically of Crucifixion.

It was Bart Erhman's interpretation that suggested that the text was Christian because he was desperately trying to 'fit' the data to the idea that 'the community' in Qumran was a pre (and post)-Christian Gnostic group.

Erhman no longer promotes that view but has made no attempt to remove his books from publication. Nor have others dropped their support, because they don't know that Ehrman's ideas were speculative.

a reply to: chr0naut

This is the translation of the text in question on that site...

its considered pseudo-Daniel... not Christian

the pastor that owns that site is simply stretching to find Christian material in the dead sea scrolls



Column 2
He will be called the son of God; they will call him son of the Most High. Like the shooting stars (2) that you saw, thus will be their Kingdom. They will rule for a given period of year[s] upon (3) the earth, and crush everyone. People will crush people, and nation (will crush) nation, (4) until the people of God arises and causes everyone to rest from the sword. (5) His Kingdom will be an Eternal Kingdom, and he will be Righteous in all his Ways. He [will jud]ge (6) the earth in Righteousness, and everyone will make peace. The sword shall cease from the earth, (7) and every nation will bow down to him. As for the Great God, with His help (8) he will make war, and He will give all the peoples into his power; all of them (9) He will throw down before him. His rule will be an Eternal rule, and all the boundaries...

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

originally posted by: mazzroth
Why isn't the Gospel of Thomas in the Bible ? he was a disciple of Jesus.

Because the Gospel of Thomas was written by someone other than Thomas the disciple and contradicts the canonical texts on many points.

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: chr0naut

they were pre-Christian... they tended to adopt other religions beliefs it seems

Before the Christian era they seemed to be more greek mythology based

Keep in mind also "the gnostics" were not a religion... they were writers who had followers

Gnostic writers had a lot of varying beliefs, and in this case and most were talking about christian gnostic writers which would not have been involved with OT literature unless they were trying to show its falsities

While the Nag Hammadi texts quoted modified Hermetic and Greek writings, we have no reason to believe that Gnosticism was pre-Christian. Definitely no actual papyri dateable to anything BC.

In the New Testament letters there are mentions of those who had fallen away from true Christian teachings and seem to have very early Gnostic-like beliefs.

But also, Gnosticism seems to be just as much a reaction against orthodox 1st Century Judaism as to Christianity.

Definitely, the actual textual examples and histories make it apparent that Gnosticism arose almost contemporaneously to very early Christianity.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: madmac5150

Why were the early Gnostic texts included in the Dead Sea scrolls excluded from the New Testament? Those codices predate the New Testament writings by centuries.

Uhm... which gnostic texts would you be referring to?

Gnostic literature came from the first and early second and third century... and the gnostic writers were not fans of the OT

why would they be included in the dead sea scrolls which were all hebrew texts?

Because the poor lads confused

There were a number of books found in the Dead Sea Scrolls not in the authorised christian OT section of the bible. Jasher, Enoch, Jubilee and uhm Macabees, these were not included because they are more historical than "prophetical".
More about history than Jesus, as such. Readily available at most religious book shops, not hidden or missing

Anyway, the Dead Sea Scrolls were probably squirreled away long before Jesus birth, maybe after, no one is sure, maybe when Babylon invaded or Rome, assumedly when Jerualem was under threat and they wanted to protect the scriptures.
there is no New Testament information because when the Scrolls were put in the caves, there was no New Testament written yet.

I thought the ded Sea scrolls included Jesus stories?

It says they were buried in 68 ad , which is very early for books absolutely is early for books to have been circulated.

An Arab shepherd boy discovered the greatest archeological finds in history in 1947. When the ancient Hebrew scrolls from these caves were examined by scholars they found that this Qumran site contained alibrary with hundreds of precious texts of both biblical and secular manuscripts that dated back before the destruction of the Second Temple and the death of Jesus Christ.
www.grantjeffrey.com...

Quotes from the New Testament in the Dead Sea Scrolls

Finally, after a public relations campaign demanded the release of the unpublished scrolls to other scholars, the last of the unpublished scrolls were released to the academic world. To the great joy and surprise of many scholars, the scrolls contain definite references to the New Testament and, most importantly, to Jesus of Nazareth. In the last few years several significant scrolls were released that shed new light on the New Testament and the life of Jesus. One of the most extraordinary of these scrolls released in 1991 actually referred directly to the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.


There you go, I was wrong

Isaiah spoke of a suffering Messiah, who was the branch of Jesse and was pierced. Just like the fragment referred to on this website in the previous post. The text makes NO mention specifically of Crucifixion.

It was Bart Erhman's interpretation that suggested that the text was Christian because he was desperately trying to 'fit' the data to the idea that 'the community' in Qumran was a pre (and post)-Christian Gnostic group.

Erhman no longer promotes that view but has made no attempt to remove his books from publication. Nor have others dropped their support, because they don't know that Ehrman's ideas were speculative.

Thanks Chro, thats really interesting

I guess Mr Erhman did as much as possible to justify his faith when he had it.
I know to little to really comment, best ignore all I have written

a reply to: chr0naut

Definitely, the actual textual examples and histories make it apparent that Gnosticism arose almost contemporaneously to very early Christianity.

Actually there are a few in the Nag Hammadi library that predate Christianity...

One that points to plato as its origins... another the Egyptians... even Zoroastrianism

I forget which text it was, but i've looked into this a while back when i actually learned as well that Gnosticism predated Christianity.

Anyways there are a few texts in the library that are dated to well before Jesus

he Nag Hammadi Library contains several gnostic tractates which are certainly non-Christian. These writings show that Gnosticism did not arise as a Christian heresy.

R. van den Broek, “The Present State of Gnostic Studies.” Vigiliae Christianae 37 (1983), p. 67.

www.mythicistpapers.com...

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: chr0naut

This is the translation of the text in question on that site...

its considered pseudo-Daniel... not Christian

the pastor that owns that site is simply stretching to find Christian material in the dead sea scrolls

Column 2
He will be called the son of God; they will call him son of the Most High. Like the shooting stars (2) that you saw, thus will be their Kingdom. They will rule for a given period of year[s] upon (3) the earth, and crush everyone. People will crush people, and nation (will crush) nation, (4) until the people of God arises and causes everyone to rest from the sword. (5) His Kingdom will be an Eternal Kingdom, and he will be Righteous in all his Ways. He [will jud]ge (6) the earth in Righteousness, and everyone will make peace. The sword shall cease from the earth, (7) and every nation will bow down to him. As for the Great God, with His help (8) he will make war, and He will give all the peoples into his power; all of them (9) He will throw down before him. His rule will be an Eternal rule, and all the boundaries...

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

Many people quote the site you referenced but they are hardly academically accredited (they are an "Ancient Aliens from the constellation Pleiades" site, as per their mission statement).

Many of their texts are inaccurate translations, or are cherry picked non-contextual and truncated texts, used to support the webmasters' views.

They apparently also contain 'texts' that are "channeled" and have no actual academic or historical pedigree.

In short, you cannot trust that texts they quote are accurate or even true.

a reply to: chr0naut

Well IF you have any issues with the translation feel free to give an alternative...

Heres another site...

www.deadseascrolls.org.il...=%274Q246%27

And theres hundreds more

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: chr0naut

Definitely, the actual textual examples and histories make it apparent that Gnosticism arose almost contemporaneously to very early Christianity.

Actually there are a few in the Nag Hammadi library that predate Christianity...

One that points to plato as its origins... another the Egyptians... even Zoroastrianism

I forget which text it was, but i've looked into this a while back when i actually learned as well that Gnosticism predated Christianity.

Anyways there are a few texts in the library that are dated to well before Jesus

he Nag Hammadi Library contains several gnostic tractates which are certainly non-Christian. These writings show that Gnosticism did not arise as a Christian heresy.

R. van den Broek, “The Present State of Gnostic Studies.” Vigiliae Christianae 37 (1983), p. 67.

www.mythicistpapers.com...

The Nag Hammadi 'library' (actually a single jar containing 13 leather bound parchment scrolls) was penned later than 200 years after Christ.

While the scrolls quote earlier texts, those quoted texts are not necessarily the originals or good translations but are re-worded to fit the general Gnostic theme. For instance the Nag Hammadi text entitled "Republic by Plato" in Codex VI is very much shorter and considerably different in content than the actual "Plato's Republic" (of which we have multiple older copies).

The 'real' Plato's Republic is not Gnostic at all.

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: chr0naut

Well IF you have any issues with the translation feel free to give an alternative...

Heres another site...

www.deadseascrolls.org.il...=%274Q246%27

And theres hundreds more

Yes, this site has a good pedigree and accreditation for its translations.

a reply to: chr0naut

Obviously...

Everything in antiquity is a copy of a copy of a copy...

my point is there are many text that have absolutely nothing to do with Christianty

As i've said, this "gnostic" movement tended to adopt religious ideas...

the very word means Knowledge... and not just of Jesus or peoples ideas of him

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: chr0naut

Obviously...

Everything in antiquity is a copy of a copy of a copy...

my point is there are many text that have absolutely nothing to do with Christianty

As i've said, this "gnostic" movement tended to adopt religious ideas...

the very word means Knowledge... and not just of Jesus or peoples ideas of him

... and much is still up to interpretation (like Erhman's suggestion that "the poor" in the DSS wasn't talking generally about those who have no money or goods, but that it was a reference to a cult by that name. Hard to deny but a also stretch to believe).

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: chr0naut

Obviously...

Everything in antiquity is a copy of a copy of a copy...

my point is there are many text that have absolutely nothing to do with Christianty

As i've said, this "gnostic" movement tended to adopt religious ideas...

the very word means Knowledge... and not just of Jesus or peoples ideas of him

I think also that the syncretist nature of Gnosticism (if it ever was a particular cult or belief) is confusing, too.

There were different early Gnostic beliefs and sometimes they believed vastly different things, with different names and mythos (such as regional or ethnic cults) and later Gnostic beliefs which are likely to be an amalgamation of cults and beliefs.

a reply to: chr0naut

Yeah a lot is left to interpretations... but Gnosticism wasn't solely about Christianity

Gnostic Christianity was, which was what you're referring to

said texts written by those that were orthodox Christian, or basically those that were part of the priesthood that had different ideas on what Jesus was all about... people like Basilides and Valentinus

The early church labeled a stack of writers "gnostic" and wrote them off as heretics only because their ideas differed from what the ruling church wanted taught... and mainly because the majority of gnostic writing focuses on reliance of the self and NOT the church for your salvation

early gnostic writing... the stuff before Christianity took hold was quite different

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: chr0naut

Yeah a lot is left to interpretations... but Gnosticism wasn't solely about Christianity

Gnostic Christianity was, which was what you're referring to

said texts written by those that were orthodox Christian, or basically those that were part of the priesthood that had different ideas on what Jesus was all about... people like Basilides and Valentinus

The early church labeled a stack of writers "gnostic" and wrote them off as heretics only because their ideas differed from what the ruling church wanted taught... and mainly because the majority of gnostic writing focuses on reliance of the self and NOT the church for your salvation

early gnostic writing... the stuff before Christianity took hold was quite different

Yes I agree that Gnosticism isn't necessarily a reaction to Christianity.

But, in terms of identifiably Gnostic writings from before Christianity took hold, the point is moot, because as far as I know, there aren't any. The earliest identifiably Gnostic texts being in the Nag Hammadi library and probably being from about 300 years AD.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Originally posted by JoshuaCox
Why Was The New Testament Missing From The Dead Sea Scrolls???

Yeah, the New Testament texts were missing alright…No doubt about it…Why….because JESUS hadn’t even been BORN yet lol

And therefore No New Testament texts could have been written about him back then…

The funniest part in all this, is that Akragon was able to keep a straight face lol

Originally posted by JoshuaCox
So assuming no shinanigans , hypothetically they would have taken all the books everyone agreed on and excluded all the books that were questionable and maybe argued a little over the books some believed but some didn't believe were valid....

Well, there were a lot of shenanigans to be fair…many books that originally made up the “Old Testament”, were removed… These included such books as, “The book of Jubilees”, “The book of Judith”, “1 and 2 Esdras”, “1 and 2 Maccabees” ,”The Wisdom of Solomon” and a few others…

The book of Enoch (1 Enoch) is an especially interesting case. Fragments of the book were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, although many scholars don’t believe it made up the original OT.

Although there have been an increasing number of fragments found of the book, which suggests it was slightly more widespread than originally thought, lending credence to the possibility that it was originally part of the Old Testament books. The Ethiopian Jews certainly believed so, as they kept/made it part of their OT scripture.

The book was also heavily debated to be made part of the cannon by some of the early Church fathers, but eventually it was excluded for rather strange reasons. But the fact that the book was even considered for inclusion, also suggests that it may have originally been part of the OT Books…IMO…


- JC

a reply to: chr0naut

The earliest identifiably Gnostic texts being in the Nag Hammadi library and probably being from about 300 years AD.

these beliefs were only identified as "gnostic" by the early ruling Christian church... even the main idea of "the demiurge" in Christian gnosticism predated anything from Jesus by hundreds of years

Basically the emergence of Christianity gave "gnostics" a target!

Surely anyone can see a vast difference between the OT god and the NT...

So as i've said before, "gnostic" writers tend to adopt other religious beliefs... it isn't a religion... its a belief that knowledge is the way to salvation... which has been something people believed in since we've learned to comunicate

Though again i am pretty sure at least a couple of the texts in the gnostic library date to before Christ... i could be wrong... but i've also read every text in that library

i promise you, the ideas predate Christianity

And Jesus... but then, so do most of Jesus' ideas

a reply to: Joecroft

The funniest part in all this, is that Akragon was able to keep a straight face lol

Straight pint

I had to re-read the title, 3 Times!!!…

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Joecroft

The funniest part in all this, is that Akragon was able to keep a straight face lol

Straight pint

Cheers


- JC

a reply to: JoshuaCox

It's similar to asking why the NT would not be found buried by followers of Islam. Why would it be?