_awakening

Glenn Beck on the DSS.

Seriously. No joke. Check out this little beauty from a recent radio program:

Beck: You know the… Dead Sea Scrolls. You know what they are? Stu, do you know what the Dead Sea Scrolls are? …

Stu: Well, of course I do.

Beck: No, come on. Most people don’t. I’m not…

Stu: I heard of them. I don’t really know.

Beck: You don’t really know, do you. You have no why they were there.

Stu: Nu uh.

Beck: Sarah, average person doesn’t know. Any idea? Take a guess on what, why the Dead Sea Scrolls are there, anything else.

Sarah: Something religious.

Beck: OK good. Even though I’ve explained this on this program a couple of times, I’m glad to see that, I’m glad to see that even the people that work with me everyday don’t even listen.

Stu: Well, there’s, we were actually talking about American Idol last night. The guy won! It was unbelievable.

Beck: All right. So here’s what happened. When Constantine decided he was going to uh… cobble together an army, um, he did the uh… Council of uh… Nicaea, right, Pat?

Pat: Yea.

Beck: Council of Nicaea. Um… and what they did is brought all of the religious figures, uhh, together, all the Christians and then they said, “Ok, let’s uh, put together the Apostles’ Creed, let’s, you know, you guys do it.” So they brought all their religious scripture together, and that’s when the Bible was first bound and everything else. And then they said, “Anybody that disagrees with this is a heretic and… off with their head!” Well, that’s what the Dead Sea Scrolls are. The Dead Sea Scrolls are those scriptures that people had at the time that they said, “They are destroying all of this truth.” Whether it’s truth or not is, is up to the individual, but that… at that time those people thought that this was something that needed to be preserved and so they rolled up the scrolls and they put ‘em in clay pots and they, they put ‘em in the back of caves where no one could find them. They were hidden scripture because everything was being destroyed that disagreed with the Council of Nicaea and Constantine. That’s what those things are.

[Speechless, mouth hanging open.]

Where does one begin? This is just another example of Beck trying to speak of that which he does not know. He should just stop, really.

[HT: Robert Cargill. His response is brilliant and worth the read.]

But is it Scripture?

April DeConick has a fascinating article in the latest edition of BAR, entitled "What's Up with the Gospel of Thomas?" In the article she argues for a measured and careful consideration when it comes to labeling ancient manuscripts as our categories and understanding of ancients texts has changed. Her main argument centers on the labeling of the Gospel of Thomas as a "Gnostic" text, even though it is not display some of the central Gnostic mythologies. Greater care and discernment, and possibly more nuanced categories, are needed.

Here is how she concludes the article:

The type of religiosity found in the Gospel of Thomas is not all that unusual. You can find references to it in Biblical and nonbiblical literature. It is nothing more than an early Christian expression of mysticism that developed out of an earlier, apocalyptically oriented Christianity that wished for the immediate end of the world. When the end didn’t happen, the Christians were forced to rethink and rewrite their cherished apocalyptic teachings...

We can even locate this mystical form of Christianity historically. It is a form that developed in eastern Syria in the late first and early second centuries, a form of Christianity that was an heir to early Jewish mystical traditions and a precursor to later Eastern Orthodoxy. I think that Thomas’s “place” in early Christianity was misidentified originally not because it represents a type of Christianity unfamiliar to the canonical tradition or deviant from it. The Gospel of Thomas was wrongly identified at first because Western theological interests controlled its interpretation within a Western Christian framework that could not explain its unfamiliar, mystical structure. Yet we now know—in part from manuscript discoveries like the Nag Hammadi collection—that there was a multiplicity of groups, beliefs and traditions in the diverse early Christian communities. Scholars who misunderstood the Gospel of Thomas mislabeled it as Gnostic in order to lump it together with other traditions they thought to be strange, heretical and late.

DeConick's point concerning the nature of the Gospel of Thomas resonates farther than merely the labeling of the Gospel of Thomas as "Gnostic." Her point can be applied to other collections of texts that are considered "extra-biblical."

If there is one thing we have learned from the Dead Sea Scrolls it is this. In the late Second Temple Period, there was the presence of other texts, ultimately not included in the canon of the Hebrew Bible, that were embraced as "scriptural" by various Jewish communities, such as various Enochic, Maccabean, and Qumran texts for example. These texts were embraced by their communities as "scriptural" and on par with the later canonized texts. [There are even variant readings of later canonized texts existing side by side, showing that perhaps there was not even an "official" version of these texts in the late Second Temple period. But that is a discussion for another day.]

DeConick's point is well taken. As we begin to uncover and study new textual finds, we need to carefully and judiciously be open to revising our previously held categories and labels. We may also need to entertain the possible notion that the forces involved in the canonization of texts may have had an agenda larger than the collection of so-called approved texts.

Now whether you agree or not with DeConick's assessment on the Gospel of Thomas, the point must not be missed. There were various communities, both Jewish and Christian, who were writing texts, some were embraced as scripture and out of these some were embraced as canonical. In the end, we need a much more nuanced approach when it comes to the labeling of manuscripts we have in our possession.

Classic Peanuts.

[HT: Chris Brady]

Canon and the DSS.

While doing some reading last night, I came across a few canonical tidbits from James VanderKam's An Introduction to Early Judaism.

It is very likely that there was not a Bible in the second temple period - that is, an accepted, defined, and closed corpus of authoritative texts - but there is no doubt that there were some books widely held to contain divine teaching. [p. 213]

It is important to remember that the production of texts and the canonization of authoritative texts was a long and complex process. The text of the scriptures, therefore, did not fall out of the sky, as it would seem, but took a process of being embraced as authoritative first, then moved on to a more canonical status. What we need to realize is that there were many more texts that were seen as authoritative, to varying degrees, than were ultimately placed in the canon. I think we also need to agree with VanderKam in the fact that the canon was not even closed within the time of the second temple period.

VanderKam also highlights, very succinctly, the impact of the Dead Sea Scrolls on our understanding of texts and canon:

One of the great contributions made by the Dead Sea Scrolls to our knowledge about biblical books is that they have documented the existence of divergent Hebrew texts of certain scriptural works. That is, there was not a single Hebrew text of each of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament; in some cases, such as the book of Jeremiah, there were Hebrew copies that diverged widely from each other. There was a shorter, probably more original version and one that was longer by about one-eighth and that had some material, such as the oracles of the nations, in a different place (in the shorter version they follow 25:19; in the longer one they are chaps. 46-51). This shorter version of Jeremiah had been known from the Greek translation of the book; now it can be seen that the Greek was not a free reworking of the one Hebrew original but was a faithful rendition of a Hebrew base text that diverged considerable from the one found in the traditional Hebrew Bible (called the Masoretic Text)...

We have no evidence that anyone was concerned that the different copies failed to agree word-for-word, although from some of the Qumran commentaries it is apparent that the expositors were aware of variant readings. Rather than bemoaning these, they at times exploited them in their explanations. [pp.215-6]

The fact of the matter is that texts, even the canonical texts, had variant readings in the Second Temple Period and this fact does not seem to be an issue for the faithful of the day. On the contrary, they not only embraced textual variants, they employed them in their interpretive venture. Imagine what kind of chaos that would create today, especially with our fascination with inerrancy and such.

There might come a day when we need to reconsider the versions of our canonical texts, in light of these textual finds. Perhaps it has already begun.

More News on APU and the DSS.

Thanks goes out to Jim Davila for this from the Los Angeles Times:

Southern California universities acquire rare religious texts

Azusa Pacific University has acquired five fragments of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the earliest known versions of the Hebrew Bible.

The 2,000-year-old shards, featuring passages from the books of Exodus, Leviticus and Deuteronomy, will be exhibited in May at the evangelical Christian university in the San Gabriel Valley...

... The five fragments in the Azusa Pacific collection, each about the size of an adult's palm, are stored in a campus safe until they can be readied for the May exhibition that will use artifacts to tell the history of the Bible.

The university bought four of the fragments from a private rare-manuscript dealer in Venice. The fifth came from a Christian ministry in Phoenix that collects biblical artifacts.

University officials would not say how much they paid for the pieces, which include a fragment from the Book of Daniel.

But Robert Duke, an assistant professor of biblical studies, sounded almost giddy as he described the university's new acquisitions. "They are 2,000 years old, and you can still see letters . . . with the naked eye," he said.

The university released a photograph of one fragment that already has been studied by an outside researcher. The brownish-colored section with frayed edges shows part of the 27th chapter of Deuteronomy. In it, Moses delivers a discourse from God, telling the Jewish people to build an altar of stone once they cross the River Jordan into the land of Israel.

The fragment lists the location for the altar as Mount Gerizim. Modern Bibles mentioned another site, Mount Ebal.

James H. Charlesworth, a New Testament professor at Princeton Theological Seminary, said the difference suggests that the fragment may be an original copy of Deuteronomy that was altered at some point by warring factions of Jews.

"We finally found the original text of Deuteronomy," said Charlesworth, who directs the seminary's Dead Sea Scrolls Project. "This is sensationally important."

Azusa Pacific said it is only the third U.S. institution of higher education to acquire fragments of the Dead Sea Scrolls. And some scholars say the purchase has elevated the name of the 8,500-student campus virtually overnight. "They are now on the map," Charlesworth said.

More on APU and the DSS.

Robert Cargill offers a bit more insight on one the DSS fragments acquired by Azusa Pacific University, a fragment of the biblical book of Deuteronomy.

The fragment of Deuteronomy, a portion believed to be 27:4b-6 from the Samaritan Pentateuch text type, was claimed to have originally been found in Qumran Cave IV. The link includes the research of James  Charlesworth and the infra-red photography of Bruce and Ken Zuckerman.

It is well worth the time to read to gain a better grasp of the enormity of the scrolls themselves, as well as one of the fragments APU has just acquired.

Azusa Pacific and the DSS.

This just in:

Azusa Pacific University Acquires Five Dead Sea Scroll Fragments and Rare Biblical Artifacts

September 3, 2009 - In its most significant holding to date―and possibly ever―Azusa Pacific University acquires five Dead Sea Scroll fragments and a collection of rare biblical antiquities.

Joining Princeton University and the Oriental Institute at the University of Chicago, APU becomes only the third institution of higher education to own original Dead Sea Scroll fragments. These earliest known texts of the Hebrew Bible, dating back to roughly 150 B.C., were discovered in the caves of Qumran, east of Jerusalem, between 1947-56. Today, many of the estimated 15,000 known fragments are held in private collections. With this acquisition, APU can study, research, and share these fragments with scholars and the public while carefully preserving the history of Scripture.

Simply incredible. Many thanks goes to the university and the administration in being able to secure such a treasure. This is an acquisition that begins to solidify Azusa Pacific as a top rate academic institution and a place that serious about its scholarship.

If you had a chance to see the DSS exhibit when it was in San Diego, you have an idea of what APU has acquired and how rare this is. The scrolls are perhaps the greatest textual discovery in modern scholarship. The impact the scrolls have had on the development of texts, including canonical texts, is priceless. Having these five fragments at the university, where they can be preserved and studied, is an incredible opportunity for students and faculty.

Since these texts will have a central focus in my doctoral work, I'm blown away. Can't wait to see them in person.

Community of God.

Recently I had a conversation with Jamie about the need to find something to keep me more connected to the academic world... and then this. I was asked to help TA a course at the Haggard Graduate School of Theology at Azusa Pacific by my thesis advisor, Karen Winslow. We had had the conversation a ways back about the possibility of me sitting in one of her classes as a TA and the timing couldn't be better. So starting next week, I'll be helping with GBBL 631 - Community of God.

This class in particular was one that played an important roll in my academic journey. It was because of this class that I was exposed in a much deeper way to the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Qumran community. Here's the class description for GBBL 631:

When Jews returned from exile in Babylon, they constructed a Jewish identity around the Torah, other ancient traditions, and the rebuilt Temple in Jerusalem, During the period of our study, 537—AD 70, they lived under the control of Persians, Greeks, and Romans, except for the century of Hasmonean rule. The ancient resources for our study include Ezra, Nehemiah, 1-2 Chronicles, certain prophets, the Elephantine papyri, Jubilees, the Qumran library, the Targums, Josephus, and Philo. This study of diverse Jewish communities of the “Second Temple period” forms a context for understanding the early Jesus movement, as well as for Rabbinic Judaism, which emerged after the Temple was destroyed in 70 CE.

The class is pretty comprehensive as students are exposed to a wide variety of texts and current scholarship on the time period. The required reading looks like this:

An Introduction to Early Judaism - James C. VanderKam

The Dead Sea Scrolls Today - James C. VanderKam

Rebecca's Children: Judaism and Christianity in the Roman World - Alan F. Segal

Early Judaism: Religious Worlds of the First Judaic Millennium - Martin S. Jaffee

Beyond the Essene Hypothesis: The Parting of the Ways between Qumran and Enochic Judaism - Gabriele Boccaccini

I'm totally looking forward to the class. It should be quite the experience. I'll post more later from the goings on of class as I can.

Thesis Abstract.

So today I spent the better part of the day working on my thesis paper. [With it being so blasted hot, this worked out really nicely.] Anyway, if you're interested, here's the abstract in working form. Enjoy.

The interaction between God and his people is one of covenantal journey, one marked by faith and a deep hope. Perhaps nowhere is this ideal more captured than in the textual writings of the Second Temple Period, especially within those texts often demarcated as “apocalyptic” writings. These texts, formulated by various communities within the Second Temple Period, display a yearning and a strong belief that God is not absent, but quite present in their midst. Trusting in his past faithfulness and promises, these communities believed that God was about to act significantly in their present context, bringing about the expectant hope of complete restoration.

To more deeply appreciate these texts and the communities that developed them, we must initially explore the development of apocalyptic literature as a genre and a vehicle for this expression of faith and hope. How did this genre develop and why was it chosen as a central vehicle of the Second Temple Period? Secondarily, we must explore the texts themselves and their relationship to received texts and traditions. How did these authors and redactors see their texts? Were they “scripture” on equal footing as the received texts of their day? How did they use the vehicle of apocalyptic literature to portray their dreams, desires, and understanding of God and his activity in the world? On a broader scale, what can we learn about the category of “scripture” from the texts collected and produced in the Second Temple Period?

The aim of this paper is to explore selected writings of the Second Temple Period in order to gain a vision of how various expressions of Judaism understood their relationship with God and their world. By specifically exploring the nature of their writings, both of content and category, we hope to gain a clearer vision of their self-understanding, along with their vision of God and his activity in the present world. Central to our discussion will be how these communities utilized the writings that had been handed down to them in the development of their own textual traditions. It is in this interaction with received texts that we have an insightful vantage point into their self-understanding and their view of their own particular texts.

We will be examining three main texts produced from three different communities, which exhibit varied nuances of “Judaisms” within the larger Jewish community of the Second Temple Period – 1 Enoch, the book of Daniel, and the Habakkuk pesharim from the community at Qumran. All three texts evidence an unfolding theological trajectory rooted in an apocalyptic worldview. They all display a reliance upon received texts and traditions, which are integrated into new forms and endowed with new meanings, resulting in a wholly new textual creation.

Reviews and More Reviews.

A sampling of the latest from Review of Biblical Literature. Enjoy.

H. Ausloos, F. García Martínez, M. Vervenne, J. Cook, and B. Lemmelijn, eds.
Translating a Translation: The LXX and Its Modern Translations in the Context of Early Judaism
Reviewed by Tuukka Kauhanen

Craig A. Evans and Emanuel Tov, eds.
Exploring the Origins of the Bible: Canon Formation in Historical, Literary, and Theological Perspective
Reviewed by Everett Ferguson

Weston W. Fields
The Dead Sea Scrolls: A Short History
Reviewed by Eric F. Mason

Harry Alan Hahne
The Corruption and Redemption of Creation: Nature in Romans 8.19-22 and Jewish Apocalyptic Literature
Reviewed by Ron Fay

Jacob Neusner and Alan J. Avery-Peck, eds.
Encyclopedia of Religious and Philosophical Writings in Late Antiquity: Pagan, Judaic, Christian
Reviewed by Mark D. Nanos

Karel van der Toorn
Scribal Culture and the Making of the Hebrew Bible
Reviewed by Frank Polak