Path: christian
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
From: nichael@bbn.com (Nichael Cramer)
Subject: Re: Dead Sea Scrolls
Organization: BBN, Interzone Office
References: <36qu92$6j1@geneva.rutgers.edu>
Reply-To: ncramer@bbn.com
Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu

av337@freenet.carleton.ca (Michael S. Kerr) writes:
	   LOOKING FOR INFO ON DEAD SEA SCROLLS.

An excellent book is Joseph Fitzmyer's _Responses to 101 Questions on
the DSS_ published by Paulist Press.  Lots of easily accessible
information written by one of the giants in the field.

      ...   Were the 'Essenes'
   actually an order of some kind or is this theory out the window?

There's no doubt the Essenes existed.  The only question is whether 1]
the people at Qumran were Essenes and 2] (a _possibly_ different
question) whether the people who are responsible for the DSS were Essenes.

The current majority scholarly opinion (held by Fitzmyer, for example)
is that that the folks at Qumran were responsible for the Scrolls and
that they were Essenes.

For a dissenting view (particular with the identification as Essenes)
see the article in the current issue of the Biblical Archeaology
Riview. 

   Where(or can) i get a publication of the complete Scrolls, 
   accurately translated?

First, you almost certainly do _not_ want translations of the
_complete_ DSS.  There are portions of are over 800 scrolls, the vast
majority of which are tiny fragments, some containing as little as a
few letters.

The best currently available translation (into English) is probably
Geza Vermes' _Dead Sea Scrolls_.  This contains translations of some
two dozen or so of the most complete and most important of the
scrolls.  (The 3rd edition was recently published.)

In December Brill is scheduled to publish Florentine Garcia Martinez's
_The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated_.  This will contain translations of
200[!] of the texts.  (NOTE: This book was original published in
Spanish.)

For most of the others --and again these are primarily fragments of
use only to the most highly technical work-- you would have to resort
to various journal articles.

(OTOH if someone were interested in examining the originals in their
full glory, the standard reference is the series _Discoveries in the
Judean Desert_ published by Clarendon.  Any well stocked university
library system should have these.)

         ... Why was access to the Scrolls only
   given a select few individuals and unreasonably denied to many]
   others?

This is certainly the way that this was played out in the press but
this is not really an accurate accounting of what happened.

1] Publication of the majority of the useful Scroll proceeded without
any undo postponement.  For example major _popular_ translations of
the Scrolls (e.g. the first edition of Vermes' book above) were being
published within about 10 years of the discovery of the scrolls.

2] The assignment of newly discovered manuscripts to a single scholar
(or a small group of scholars) is the *absolutely*standard* procedure
for dealing with the publication of such discoveries.  While there may
have been some problems in this particular case, there was _nothing_
special going on here.

3] The only manuscripts "withheld" were those from Cave 11.  When
discovered, this cave was filled with a heap of debris "over a metre
deep".  Mixed into this garbage were literally hundreds of scroll
fragments (many the size of a fingernail).  To state the problem
(over)simply: this is not exactly something that can be sorted out
overnight.

Now it surely true that all of this could have happened a lot faster
and certainly acedemic territoriality was in full bloom (a "scandal"
is usually the politest way in which this described).  But all this
silliness about the Scrolls being "hidden" or secrets being kept (my
personal favorite is the "suppression by the Vatican" model) is simply
attributable to the standard popular-press feeding frenzy.

(Again, for more on this, see Fitzmyer's book above.)

      ... Do the Dead Sea Scrolls shed any light on Jesus?

None whatsoever.

...well, at least not directly.  From the DSS we can learn facts about
the environment, the world and the religious gestalt in which the NT
was born.  But the DSS contain nothing _directly_ bearing on any NT
matters.

   Curious to know and i hope some of you might help me out here.

Hope this helps.

   mike kerr
   --


--
Nichael                                                              __
ncramer@bbn.com                                   Be as passersby  --IC