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

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
Does that effect the question??

Of course it does since nearly all of them are the Hebrew Old Testament.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

"cover up", I knew there was a conspiracy!

originally posted by: chr0naut

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.

Or the canonical texts were altered from the originals.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
Does that effect the question??

Of course it does since nearly all of them are the Hebrew Old Testament.

My bad I was merging 2 archeological finds..

68ad was very early for any to have made it in their collection.

That's exactly when the first books were being written.

I thought it was buried in. 200+ ad, which would fall perfectly in the middle of 1ad and the. Council of nicea.

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.

I dont think it is unheard of for bits of those stories to have made it in their collection.

If I'm right they think that was right at the time the first books were being written..

That said there is a very large paper trail of Christians fiddling with Judaism to make it fit a Christian narrative, so...

Look at the messiah prophecy..

No Jew before or since thought it refereed to the divine and there were multiple people that recieved that title..

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: chr0naut

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.

Or the canonical texts were altered from the originals.

There are about 65,000 New Testament fragments and texts from all over the ancient world, some dating from 31 years after the death of Christ (and therefore within living memory of the eyewitnesses) and they all agree with each other to a high degree. Not a lot of opportunity to be altered unless it was a massive worldwide government sponsored project that even accessed lost and buried textual sources.

But the Gospel of Thomas could have been rewritten easily as we have only one 'ancient' copy of it - in the Nag Hammadi Codex II.

But go on, tell me how the canonical texts must have been altered, perhaps provide some evidence to support the frequent claims?

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

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.

I dont think it is unheard of for bits of those stories to have made it in their collection.

If I'm right they think that was right at the time the first books were being written..

That said there is a very large paper trail of Christians fiddling with Judaism to make it fit a Christian narrative, so...

Look at the messiah prophecy..

No Jew before or since thought it refereed to the divine and there were multiple people that recieved that title..

"there is a very large paper trail of Christian fiddling with Judaism to make it fit with the Christian narrative" - is there? where has it gone to, I can't seem to find it?

not popular enough. The Christian Greek Scriptures do after all expose religious teachers within both Judaism and the Qumran sect. Who wants to collect texts in their private library or collection (that of the Qumran sect or the people that lived there and their views/ideas/philosophies and theosophies, in particular the ones that had influential positions when it comes to scholarship, education and collecting scrolls) that so accurately and honestly exposes the false prophets and false teachers as for example the Pauline letters do? Or Jesus when he reminded people that they shouldn't use the title teacher/rabbi as a religious title for anyone or look up to people in that sense, as is what led to things like the Qumran sect, other sects, Judaism, Christendom (they prefer "Father") and Islam (they prefer "teacher" again and have various such religious titles that give the wrong impression about certain individuals as to their capabilities and intentions or motives).

No, the Christian Greek Scriptures would not be popular among the Qumran people and the sect+rabbis+spiritual father(s)* that were mostly responsible for managing this library (with a collection of many different texts from many different sources and religious movements and philosophical movements).

*: the main spiritual father of these people is Satan according to the Christian Greek Scriptures (one of those reasons the text below would not be popular in Qumran):

2 Cor 11:12-15
12 But what I am doing I will continue to do, in order to eliminate the pretext of those who are wanting a basis for being found equal to us in the things about which they boast. 13 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for Satan himself keeps disguising himself as an angel of light. 15 It is therefore nothing extraordinary if his ministers also keep disguising themselves as ministers of righteousness. But their end will be according to their works.

John 8:42-48a:
42 Jesus said to them: “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I have not come of my own initiative, but that One sent me. 43 Why do you not understand what I am saying? Because you cannot listen to my word. 44 You are from your father the Devil, and you wish to do the desires of your father. That one was a murderer when he began, and he did not stand fast in the truth, because truth is not in him. When he speaks the lie, he speaks according to his own disposition, because he is a liar and the father of the lie. 45 Because I, on the other hand, tell you the truth, you do not believe me. 46 Who of you convicts me of sin? If I speak truth, why is it that you do not believe me? 47 The one who is from God listens to the sayings of God. This is why you do not listen, because you are not from God.”
48 In answer the Jews said to him:...

The Qumran sect was a Jewish sect. The Christian Greek Scriptures would be just about as popular among them as they were among the Jewish scholars and rabbis* that are exposed by it. (*: and the Judaism they taught)

There's also the matter of timing, most of the texts found at Qumran date from before the completion of the Christian Greek Scriptures which was around 100 CE. Even from before Jesus was even born.

When all the scrolls and fragments are sorted out, they account for about 800 manuscripts. About one quarter, or just over 200 manuscripts, are copies of portions of the Hebrew Bible text. Additional manuscripts represent ancient non-Biblical Jewish writings, both Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha.*

Some of the scrolls that most excited scholars were previously unknown writings. These include interpretations on matters of Jewish law, specific rules for the community of the sect that lived in Qumran, liturgical poems and prayers, as well as eschatological works that reveal views about the fulfillment of Bible prophecy and the last days. There are also unique Bible commentaries, the most ancient antecedents of modern running commentary on Bible texts.

Who Wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls?

Various methods of dating ancient documents indicate that the scrolls were either copied or composed between the third century B.C.E. and the first century C.E. Some scholars have proposed that the scrolls were hidden in the caves by Jews from Jerusalem before the destruction of the temple in 70 C.E. However, the majority of scholars researching the scrolls find this view out of harmony with the content of the scrolls themselves. Many scrolls reflect views and customs that stood in opposition to the religious authorities in Jerusalem. These scrolls reveal a community that believed that God had rejected the priests and the temple service in Jerusalem and that he viewed their group’s worship in the desert as a kind of substitute temple service. It seems unlikely that Jerusalem’s temple authorities would hide a collection that included such scrolls.

Although there likely was a school of copyists at Qumran, probably many of the scrolls were collected elsewhere and brought there by the believers. In a sense, the Dead Sea Scrolls are an extensive library collection. As with any library, the collection may include a wide range of thought, not all necessarily reflecting the religious viewpoints of its readers. However, those texts that exist in multiple copies more likely reflect the special interests and beliefs of the group.

*: Both the Apocrypha (literally, “hidden”) and the Pseudepigrapha (literally, “falsely attributed writings”) are Jewish writings from the third century B.C.E. through the first century C.E. The Apocrypha are accepted by the Roman Catholic Church as part of the inspired Bible canon, but these books are rejected by Jews and Protestants. The Pseudepigrapha are often in the form of expansions on Biblical stories, written in the name of some famous Bible character.
...

Source: What Is the Truth About the Dead Sea Scrolls?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
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?

And that's the short succinct version of my comment above. Thanks OccamRazor04.

Of course, at first I only wanted to say:

not popular enough

But then I thought, what's the point in pointing out the obvious without at least some elaboration and background data to back up the point. I wish I could be more succinct like you when doing that though. I always end up reading things that make me think, 'hey I wanna share that nugget too'. Or talking about related things such as the subjects emphasized by my bible quotations. And then that leads to more attempts to explain what I'm talking about in different ways.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Because the New Testament was written later.

By Greco-Romans.

And the DSS people were Jewish and enemies of Rome and didn't share literature that wasn't written yet.

The oldest New Testament extant is from the 4th century.

So is the Clementine Recognitions.

The Gospel of the Hebrews wasn't even written yet and other than the book I just mentioned is the only Aramaic language book about Jesus (pbuh) known to exist and from the description of Jerome I believe was written in Syriac.

That's where Christianity formed, not in Rome, in Syria. Damascus, Antioch, Pella, Petra, Edessa.

There were many book burnings after Orthodox Catholicism was created and all is lost.

The DSS give us a glimpse of Judaism as it was turning into Nazarene Judaism, uses the Jewish Christian designation Ebionites and the Way, Nosrei, Zaddikim, as in "Just Ones" like James and John and Peter.

It even has the 12/3/1 hierarchy of the Gospels and Acts, New Testament.

And a very Pauline like "Enemy" who shows up in the Clementine Homilies and Recognitions under that name, and tries to kill James.

It's obvious that the character is Paul because not only is it written in a margin "Saul" on one MS. but he gets papers from the High Priest to persecute the followers of Jesus (pbuh).

Next chapter he appears cloaked as Simon Magus.

Check out the work of Robert Eisenman.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
The Dead Sea scrolls were a library of Hebrew and later Christian texts that spanned hundreds of years BC to like 200ad(?)..

Most scholars conclude they only cover up to the period of the late Second Temple (70AD).

OK that could explain it, New Testament books were either not written yet (before 70AD) or not put into writing but orally passed on, similar like they did with the teaching of Buddha for centuries maybe millennia

a reply to: galien8

And written anonymously.

Seriously no Gospel's actual author is even known so it is unlikely that oral tradition was relied upon to preserve the life of Jesus (pbuh).

I think it is more likely that Jesus (pbuh) was a real person who lived around the time but that his death is based on the "Righteous Teacher" who is hung on a tree on Passover or before.

Like the Talmud reports of Jesu ben Pandira that place him back about a century and are about Jesus (pbuh).

Because you can sense Paul fits as the "Lying Tongue" perfectly and the Wicked Priest could be one of two or more people.

Also called "Enemy" and also in Clementine Homilies and Recognitions, a MS. as old as the oldest Bible.

I don't know what the connection is, exactly, nobody does, but I am certain there is one.

originally posted by: Disturbinatti
a reply to: galien8

And written anonymously.

Seriously no Gospel's actual author is even known so it is unlikely that oral tradition was relied upon to preserve the life of Jesus (pbuh).

I think it is more likely that Jesus (pbuh) was a real person who lived around the time but that his death is based on the "Righteous Teacher" who is hung on a tree on Passover or before.

Like the Talmud reports of Jesu ben Pandira that place him back about a century and are about Jesus (pbuh).

Because you can sense Paul fits as the "Lying Tongue" perfectly and the Wicked Priest could be one of two or more people.

Also called "Enemy" and also in Clementine Homilies and Recognitions, a MS. as old as the oldest Bible.

I don't know what the connection is, exactly, nobody does, but I am certain there is one.

Jesus (hallelujah)

a reply to: galien8

Is that a literal, or sarcastic, Halaluyah?