It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Good for you for googling dead sea scrolls and reading a few articles on the internet. Sons of Zadok connects to the priestly order of Melchizedek. Melchi Tzedek, Zadok, Zadokites, Zaddikim and the Zaddik or Just one James. We know the Qumran civilization had a leader called the Zaddik, or righteous one. This is the formal title for the Teacher of Righteousness and was James title which became in English, James the Just(Zaddik). So you should stop talking about the Scrolls like you have read them, because by stating that they are from 200BC you show your lack of knowledge about the scrolls. They are from a period spanning a couple of hundred years and the oldest scrolls are from roughly 200BC But they were most likely left behind or had no living person to retrieve them in the years of the rebellion that climaxed in the demise of the Israelites in the Holy Land and nobody found them until the 1940's. So it's completely plausible what Eisenman states. He isn't anti-Paul he just connects the scrolls with the book of acts in a very convincing way and the story of acts is about Paul vs James. That's a fact.
What is your point? I like Eisenman, I like his theory and I am into his work. Paul is most likely not the Wicked priest and is the lying spouter. I don't believe I said otherwise and if I did it was a goof because I am well aware that he thinks they are separate people. At least I don't have to use other people's quotes to make a point. If you can't use your own words then this is not the thread for you.You have stated your opinion and that is all. Besides googling a few things real quick and posting it as if it was your knowledge then quoting someone and going nowhere with it.