It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Dead Sea Scrolls, a few interesting things for ats members.

page: 1
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 08:25 PM
link   
Greetings, I just wanted to make ats members aware of a few things in the DSS that you probably did not know at all. Things that are contradicting to modern Judaism such as the "devil". More so than ever I create this thread to gain interest int he writings altogether as an individual for spiritual truth in the divine. These scrolls have open my eyes on many subjects. The majority of the scrolls are rituals/laws, but the others are amazing stories/tales/?myths?/legends/add on bible/more apocrypha/writings/wisdoms and more



A quick reference for those who do not know who the Essene's are.

here are a few things that many do not know.


1: The DSS are not strongly prejudice/racist as many believe. They are strong willed jews (essenes) who believe what they taught. A few (and I mean probably 2) writings are against those who are gentiles. The verbatim is the same as ancient Hebrews were in the past.

2: The devil is mentioned a whole heck of a lot in the DSS. They make reference to Belial, not Satan (deceiver) although the two names are the same supernatural being IMO. I must admit that this may be surprising when you compare to ancient hebrew/modern judaism, the same religion who denies any evil being such as Satan. Satan being only in Christian doctrine. As you can see Satan was around pre 200 B.C. Meaning that someone accepted the being before the Essene's!

3: Son of man is mentioned in a few scrolls, but not more astoundingly is it mentioned in one scroll that speaks of God bringing his Son (I.E. Jesus). This scroll is highly debated and later was translated into something else for easier consumptions for Jewish scholars.

4. The teacher of righteousness is still a conundrum within scholar academics to this day. Although, probably an Essenic leader, if he was a major player in some religious revolution (being bigger than the Essene's) he would of had been mentioned more.

5. Easy to read translation version is in


The Dead sea scrolls; Translated and with commentary by michael wise, martin Abegg Jr. and Edward cook


6. Some semi references to Jesus' speeches and teachings. Not entirely there, but the allusion is there.


This short list will hopefully create a interest to you. G day
edit on 30-9-2011 by Jordan River because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 08:33 PM
link   
Hello - I am interested in your post because I need to learn more about the Bible. My understanding is that the Dead Sea Scrolls form the basis of what we know to be our Bible - albeit in many versions. Recently I have learned that the Bible had several sections removed/omitted such as the Book of Enoch.

Is what you present here part of the Bible we know or does it represent the omissions?

Thank you. Much Peace...



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jordan River
Greetings, I just wanted to make ats members aware of a few things in the DSS that you probably did not know at all. Things that are contradicting to modern Judaism such as the "devil". More so than ever I create this thread to gain interest int he writings altogether as an individual for spiritual truth in the divine. These scrolls have open my eyes on many subjects. The majority of the scrolls are rituals/laws, but the others are amazing stories/tales/?myths?/legends/add on bible/more apocrypha/writings/wisdoms and more



A quick reference for those who do not know who the Essene's are.

here are a few things that many do not know.


1: The DSS are not strongly prejudice/racist as many believe. They are strong willed jews (essenes) who believe what they taught. A few (and I mean probably 2) writings are against those who are gentiles. The verbatim is the same as ancient Hebrews were in the past.

2: The devil is mentioned a whole heck of a lot in the DSS. They make reference to Belial, not Satan (deceiver) although the two names are the same supernatural being IMO. I must admit that this may be surprising when you compare to ancient hebrew/modern judaism, the same religion who denies any evil being such as Satan. Satan being only in Christian doctrine. As you can see Satan was around pre 200 B.C. Meaning that someone accepted the being before the Essene's!

3: Son of man is mentioned in a few scrolls, but not more astoundingly is it mentioned in one scroll that speaks of God bringing his Son (I.E. Jesus). This scroll is highly debated and later was translated into something else for easier consumptions for Jewish scholars.

4. The teacher of righteousness is still a conundrum within scholar academics to this day. Although, probably an Essenic leader, if he was a major player in some religious revolution (being bigger than the Essene's) he would of had been mentioned more.

5. Easy to read translation version is in


The Dead sea scrolls; Translated and with commentary by michael wise, martin Abegg Jr. and Edward cook


6. Some semi references to Jesus' speeches and teachings. Not entirely there, but the allusion is there.


This short list will hopefully create a interest to you. G day
edit on 30-9-2011 by Jordan River because: (no reason given)


Yes that does seem very jewlike to ommit anything having to do with Yeshua. The scrolls are probably a part of a prophecy concerning Jesus, "the teacher of righteousness" and the revolution he was to bring was a spiritual revolution, this could be no other than Jesus or "Yeshua" (in hebrew). Ofcourse Jesus came to save all mankind, not just jews, which was his reason for conscripting apostles like Paul (Saul of Tarsus) for spreading the word to the gentile nation. The essenes did get one thing backwards, the intolerance of gentiles and women.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 08:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amanda5
Hello - I am interested in your post because I need to learn more about the Bible. My understanding is that the Dead Sea Scrolls form the basis of what we know to be our Bible - albeit in many versions. Recently I have learned that the Bible had several sections removed/omitted such as the Book of Enoch.

Is what you present here part of the Bible we know or does it represent the omissions?

Thank you. Much Peace...


Amanda, to my knowledge the Essenes collected a lot of the (jewish/old testament) books of the bible in their Dead Sea scrolls, as well as having a lot of their own writings and some of the other books not included in the bible (such as the Book of Enoch).

The bible wasn't based on anything they put together, they just also collected it themselves, and this is one of the reasons finding the scrolls was so fantastic - previously, the oldest copies of the old testament we had were the masoretic texts (masoretes were scribes who passed down the jewish bible), and these dated to about 1000 AD. The Dead Sea scrolls took us back an extra millenia to a little before the time of Christ and helped verify the incredibly accuracy of the old testament as we had received it due to the care of the masoretes and their transcriptions.

The essenes had some other interesting things in their collection, like the copper scroll (basically an old list of treasures) as well as a lot of their traditions as mentioned in the OP.
edit on 9/30/2011 by Praetorius because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amanda5
Hello - I am interested in your post because I need to learn more about the Bible. My understanding is that the Dead Sea Scrolls form the basis of what we know to be our Bible - albeit in many versions. Recently I have learned that the Bible had several sections removed/omitted such as the Book of Enoch.

Is what you present here part of the Bible we know or does it represent the omissions?

Thank you. Much Peace...


Many books were omitted due to hearsay (Gnostics mainly) and other stories were deemed fake/forged. The bible you have (the standard bible) this work was created through many early church farthers and other pious people. Do not let anyone tell you that the nicean council created the bible, that is a misconception. IT took a few centuries to create the New testament.

the truth of the matter is that the first official claiming of a complete New testmament was around 367 ce. from a powerful bishop of alexandria "athanasius. So you could probably guess sometime around 200 adish

Did you know that the Catholic bible have more books in it than a reformer?

That being said these claimed "forged and fake" books were omitted. But the books paint a great picture of Christ early years, and even a epic tale of Jesus going to hell for 3 days "before resurrection" Probably my favorite.
These are the christian apocrypha which I recommend reading first.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000



Yes that does seem very jewlike to ommit anything having to do with Yeshua. The scrolls are probably a part of a prophecy concerning Jesus, "the teacher of righteousness" and the revolution he was to bring was a spiritual revolution, this could be no other than Jesus or "Yeshua" (in hebrew). Ofcourse Jesus came to save all mankind, not just jews, which was his reason for conscripting apostles like Paul (Saul of Tarsus) for spreading the word to the gentile nation. The essenes did get one thing backwards, the intolerance of gentiles and women.


I disagree. The teacher of rightousness was claimed to have been around 200 B.C.. 200 years before Christ. I do accept the fact that dating could be anywhere between 2-10 years off through modern technology/study/scholar, but 200 years is way off for the teacher to be Jesus. I think the Teacher was a long lost prophet. Why do I say this? Afterwards the Jewish community put an end to prophecy during the same time the essenes were running around.

Doesn't that fit together more peacefully?



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amanda5
Hello - I am interested in your post because I need to learn more about the Bible. My understanding is that the Dead Sea Scrolls form the basis of what we know to be our Bible - albeit in many versions. Recently I have learned that the Bible had several sections removed/omitted such as the Book of Enoch.

Is what you present here part of the Bible we know or does it represent the omissions?

Thank you. Much Peace...


Amanda - the answer to the last question is... "both".
The Dead Sea Scrolls don't form the basis of the Bible - the majority of the translations that we have (on shelves, for example) are from other extant texts; the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, however, validated those translations and the accuracy of the texts that we have. This is why they are so significant to Biblical Scholars; they show the consistancy and unchanged nature of the Old Testament.

Regarding books that were left out of the Biblical Canon... there are plenty of these, but each was left out for a good reason. The majority of the books left out were not accepted as canonical literature because their authorship was unknown, or because they were written significant periods of time AFTER the events, or because the authors were not eyewitnesses to the events they described. For example, the Gospel of Thomas was not written by the apostle, but was written much, much later.(around 340ad), and was revealed by "Gnostic" means (e.g dreams, visions, often drug-induced). This didn't meet the critera for validity.

That's just one example. The Book of Enoch is a slightly different case, in that it is referenced in the Bible, and was known and accepted by the Jewish people, but was also not a part of THEIR canon... for similar reasons. It's ceratinly an interesting book, but the criteria for the Bible was simple... it had to be accurate, authentic and without error.

Hope that helps.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 09:04 PM
link   
Thank you for your responses. The only issue I have is that every book should have been included - it is up to the individual to decide whether a section should be omitted. I guess that is an ethical viewpoint about freedom to choose being an option for every person. When I pick up a Bible I want to read every 'chapter' as it were because I like many other people do not want to be told how to think. I can use my intellect to sort through options I don't need anyone to think for me.

Thank you again. Much Peace...



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 09:06 PM
link   
I think its been common knowledge that religeon is and always has been a myth. IMO its the exact same as beliveing in the tooth fairy or the easter bunny
Now we all know santa is real though



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllUrChips
I think its been common knowledge that religeon is and always has been a myth. IMO its the exact same as beliveing in the tooth fairy or the easter bunny
Now we all know santa is real though



COmmon knowledge? Really? all ats members are not all atheist dude
way to derail
edit on 30-9-2011 by Jordan River because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllUrChips
I think its been common knowledge that religeon is and always has been a myth. IMO its the exact same as beliveing in the tooth fairy or the easter bunny
Now we all know santa is real though

That's simply a silly thing to say, as atheism is an intellectually dishonest opinion.

For those wanting to be accurate, agnosticism is really about as far as you can push it since I'm not aware of anyway to disprove that ANYTHING exists somewhere, let alone a supernatural creator standing above and beyond the laws of the physical realm...especially when science is finally coming to terms with the likely existence of many additional dimensions and possibly parallel or multiple universes, and so on.

And I'm not aware of many that ever touted the actual existence of the tooth fairy or easter bunny as physical entities, but Santa was based on a historical person, and I think you might be surprised how many other 'myths' are based in real-world occurrences as well.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 09:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Amanda5
 
My my, you're in for a ride and a lot of research, then.


You'll want to look for the Apocrypha (or a catholic bible that includes this), the Nag Hammadi library, the Dead Sea Scrolls, probably a jewish Tanakh (as a lot of our bibles contain segments from the Septuagint, which I'd also recommend a copy of directly), and a good many other resources containing the non-biblical books.

The Lost Books might actually have most of this online for you (and others), but I haven't ever looked too much into their sources to verify anything. There's definitely a good bit of information out there for you to sort through. I tend to shy away from most of the gnostic writings myself as they just seem to get a little overly-strange for my taste.

Good searching, and enjoy.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by Amanda5
 
My my, you're in for a ride and a lot of research, then.


You'll want to look for the Apocrypha (or a catholic bible that includes this), the Nag Hammadi library, the Dead Sea Scrolls, probably a jewish Tanakh (as a lot of our bibles contain segments from the Septuagint, which I'd also recommend a copy of directly), and a good many other resources containing the non-biblical books.

The Lost Books might actually have most of this online for you (and others), but I haven't ever looked too much into their sources to verify anything. There's definitely a good bit of information out there for you to sort through. I tend to shy away from most of the gnostic writings myself as they just seem to get a little overly-strange for my taste.

Good searching, and enjoy.




neat site, I thought sacredwriting was the best source



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Jordan River
 
It may be, I've only used the Lost Books site on a few occasions although I should definitely play with it more.

Can you double-check the site you're talking about and give me a link? I ran a search and I don't think I'm finding the one you're actually referring to based on what I got.

Thanks friend.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Amanda5
 


Thats the best honest answer I have read so far on ATS, you keep doing what your doing in your pace talk to Yahweh or Yeshuah in prayers deap from your hart, ask them to guide you, believe me! you will be answered.

I bet my life on it.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jordan River

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000



Yes that does seem very jewlike to ommit anything having to do with Yeshua. The scrolls are probably a part of a prophecy concerning Jesus, "the teacher of righteousness" and the revolution he was to bring was a spiritual revolution, this could be no other than Jesus or "Yeshua" (in hebrew). Ofcourse Jesus came to save all mankind, not just jews, which was his reason for conscripting apostles like Paul (Saul of Tarsus) for spreading the word to the gentile nation. The essenes did get one thing backwards, the intolerance of gentiles and women.


I disagree. The teacher of rightousness was claimed to have been around 200 B.C.. 200 years before Christ. I do accept the fact that dating could be anywhere between 2-10 years off through modern technology/study/scholar, but 200 years is way off for the teacher to be Jesus. I think the Teacher was a long lost prophet. Why do I say this? Afterwards the Jewish community put an end to prophecy during the same time the essenes were running around.

Doesn't that fit together more peacefully?


The jews put an end to the prophecy because they did not believe that God can be contained within the flesh of a man, but by admitting this they are saying that God is a liar and that all things are not possible through him, which is why they could never accept Jesus Christ as the messiah (up until the end of the 19th century). if God is almighty he can do whatever he pleases, but then they go and say that God doesn't have the juice to inhabit the flesh of a mortal, when he had the juice to inhabit a burning bush, while both objects are in the physical realm and very much destructible.

Quite the conundrum we have to be able to say that God is all powerful but he doesnt have the power to inhabit a man's body. Right there are 2 contradictions. So which one is the truth? God is either not all powerful and cannot do the things he claims and is a liar, or he is all powerful and he is able to inhabit a man's body (Jesus Christ).

The jews wanted to squash this prophecy because they knew it would lead to what i have just stated and then they would be forced to recognize a messiah that they didn't have the faith or foresight to believe possible, even though their own God told them "Through Me all things are possible", even though Isaiah prophecied that God would come in the flesh (Immanuel).

home.comcast.net...

Interesting is it not?



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Praetorius
 


I believe the site the OP was referring to is this:

www.sacred-texts.com...



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Praetorius
 


I don't know if it was a mistake, but Sacred Text is the one I use the most.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


The truth is that Jesus Crhist is NOT! God he is the son of God, God has a name of his own and his name is YAHWEH.

This is why you don't understand what they were saying, cause you believe in this system of things, in other words you believe in RELIGION! religion was ment to mislead people from the truth. Most of Christianity today believes in trinidadian gods, this was don by the Illuminati to divide and conquer humanity, the goal is to mislead you from the true God of creation Yahweh.

How would you know the truth if you don't know the truth and the truth is God Yahweh, thats why

"Jesus said " You cant go to the father unless you go thrue me. Amen!



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000


The jews put an end to the prophecy because they did not believe that God can be contained within the flesh of a man, but by admitting this they are saying that God is a liar and that all things are not possible through him, which is why they could never accept Jesus Christ as the messiah (up until the end of the 19th century). if God is almighty he can do whatever he pleases, but then they go and say that God doesn't have the juice to inhabit the flesh of a mortal, when he had the juice to inhabit a burning bush, while both objects are in the physical realm and very much destructible.

Quite the conundrum we have to be able to say that God is all powerful but he doesnt have the power to inhabit a man's body. Right there are 2 contradictions. So which one is the truth? God is either not all powerful and cannot do the things he claims and is a liar, or he is all powerful and he is able to inhabit a man's body (Jesus Christ).

The jews wanted to squash this prophecy because they knew it would lead to what i have just stated and then they would be forced to recognize a messiah that they didn't have the faith or foresight to believe possible, even though their own God told them "Through Me all things are possible", even though Isaiah prophecied that God would come in the flesh (Immanuel).

home.comcast.net...

Interesting is it not?


Oh yes I agree with this whole heartily. This and my TOR theory both co-exist peacefully in my opinion.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join