| Secrets of the Scrolls
 SPU Professor Says Dead Sea Manuscripts Shed New Light on Judaism, Christianity, and the Scriptures IN EARLY 1947, as the United Nations debated the partition of Palestine, three young
Bedouin cousins were tending their goats in the Judean Desert near the
Dead Sea. The youngest, Muhammad Ahmed el-Hamed, noticed a hole
leading into a cave in the rocky hillside above the ancient Jewish sectarian
settlement of Qumran. Throwing a stone through the hole, he was surprised
to hear the sound of shattering pottery. He told his cousins, and
the three imagined they had come upon a golden treasure. 
              
                |  This is the entrance to a cave in the hills above the ancient settlement of Qumran, Israel, home of the Jewish scribes responsible for recording the 24  Dead Sea Scrolls.
 
 
 |  |  But when el-Hamed snuck back the next morning to explore, he found
			  not gold, but earthen jars containing seven scrolls. Little did the young
			  goatherd know the surpassing value of the
			  find — arguably the greatest archaeological
			  discovery of all time.			   In the end, more than 50,000 fragments
			  of some 900 manuscripts were discovered
			  in 11 caves, where members of the Qumran
			  community, fleeing a Roman invasion, had
			  hidden them nearly 2,000 years earlier. The manuscripts date from about 250 BCE
			  (BC) to about 70 CE (AD). Approximately
			  one-quarter are biblical, comprising fragments
			  of every book in the Hebrew Bible
			  (what Christians call the Old Testament)
			  except Esther, I Chronicles, and Nehemiah. The rest are religious
			  texts: apocryphal writings, biblical commentaries, legal and liturgical
			  manuscripts, and hymnals and prayer books.			   Ten of the scrolls — including four never before been seen by the
			  public — are on exhibit at the Pacific Science Center (PSC) in Seattle
			  until January 7, 2007. Among those advising the PSC in its preparations
			  for the exhibit was Seattle Pacific University Professor of New Testament
			  John Levison, author of The Spirit in First-Century Judaism.			   Levison moderated a panel of international Dead Sea Scrolls scholars
			  for a standing-room-only audience at SPU on October 12, 2006, and
			  spoke at a private dessert and tour of the PSC exhibit for Seattle Pacific
			  Fellows and friends on November 3. He will also be the featured speaker
			  December 6 at Seattle’s Town Hall as part of the PSC’s Distinguished
			  Lecture Series. In the following interview, Levison talks about the scrolls
			  and their significance in illuminating our interpretation of Scripture, as
			  well as our understanding of first-century Judaism and early Christianity. Q: What would you say is the greatest significance of the
discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls? A: In terms of the Hebrew Bible, or what is commonly called
the Old Testament, the greatest significance is this: Prior to
1947, our oldest text — the Masoretic Text (which takes its
name from Hebrew scribes called Masoretes) — was from
about the year 925 CE. All of our translations of the Old Testament
were based on the Masoretic Text. Then, overnight, we
discovered manuscripts dating from a thousand years earlier.
That is amazing.
 Q: You use the notations “BCE” (Before the Common Era)
			  and “CE” (Common Era) instead of “BC” and “AD.” Why?A: Chronologically, dates are equivalent in both systems. For
			  the most part, BCE and CE have become the standard for anybody
			  who does scholarly work involving ancient history. It’s
			  really a matter of sensitivity. As a Christian scholar, I use BCE
			  and CE because I wouldn’t expect my Jewish colleagues to continue
			  to use notations meaning “in the year of the Lord” [AD]
			  and “before Christ” [BC] when a religiously neutral notation
			  was available.
 Q: Since they were discovered in 1947, what has been the
			  focus of Dead Sea Scrolls scholarship?			  A: There have been several areas of focus. Key, of course, is simply
			  piecing together thousands and thousands of fragments into
			  comprehensible texts. This is exhausting and painstaking work.
			  Most of the scrolls from Cave 1 (the first one discovered) were in
			  good shape, and scholars immediately saw their value for understanding
			  early Christianity. Other scholars have focused on what
			  the scrolls tell us about the history of the text of the Hebrew
			  Bible. Still others have simply tried to piece together this strange
			  and mysterious community of Qumran — their beliefs and
			  practices, and to set them in the context of early Judaism. Finally,
			  the last 15 years have seen, under the leadership of Emanuel Tov,
			  the production of the excellent published series, Discoveries in the
			  Judean Desert.
 Q: What prompted your own involvement in Dead Sea
			  Scrolls research? A: I came about my interest in the scrolls by a more general
			  interest in what’s called “Second Temple Judaism,” or Judaism in
			  the Greco-Roman era. For instance, the scrolls play a major role
			  in my research about the Holy Spirit in early Judaism because
			  we know from a scroll called The Community Rule that the
			  Qumran community claimed you had to be purified by the Holy
			  Spirit. In fact, there’s a high concentration of “Spirit” language in
			  the Dead Sea Scrolls. My interest has been in how the Jewish
			  world in the Greco-Roman era understood the Holy Spirit, and
			  then how that relates to the way the early Christians viewed the
			  work of the Holy Spirit. So I came from a broader topic to a
			  more narrow focus on the scrolls.
 Q: Is there any tension among Jewish, Christian, and other
			  scrolls scholars in terms of bringing personal religious
			  biases to the work?A: No. Many of the scholars who work on the scrolls are
			  Christians, such as John Collins [Yale Divinity School], Jim
			  VanderKam [University of Notre Dame], and Marty Abegg
			  and Peter Flint [Trinity Western University in Langley, B.C.].
			  Emanuel Tov is an Israeli scholar. Scrolls scholars come from all
			  different kinds of national and religious backgrounds, and focus
			  on a wide variety of research questions. But as a rule they don’t
			  define themselves in categories. If they’re doing their job well —
			  as real historians — they don’t conflict; they dovetail.
 Q: What implications does the discovery of such early
			  manuscripts of the Hebrew Bible have for our
			  understanding of the Old Testament today?
			  A: Many interesting questions are raised by this discovery. I
			  think one of the most important has to do with the canonization
			  process. Perhaps the best illustration is the issue of Psalm 151.
  Prior to the discovery of the scrolls, we knew there was a
			  Psalm 151 in the Septuagint, which is the earliest Greek translation
			  of the Hebrew Bible, begun in the third century BCE. But
			  the Hebrew Masoretic Text — dated 1,000 years later — had
			  only 150 psalms. Scholars and biblical translators could not
			  account for the extra psalm, and they tended to give preference
			  to the Masoretic Text in principle, so they did not as a rule
			  include Psalm 151 in the canon.			   Then, in 1947, we discover that a Hebrew Psalms scroll
			  includes Psalm 151 in a manuscript a thousand years older than
			  the Masoretic Text. It was easy to dismiss Psalm 151 as not
			  being a part of the canon when there was no earlier Hebrew
			  equivalent. You could say that somewhere along the line it got
			  added; let it go. But what happens now is that we have Psalm
			  151 both in Greek and in a similar pre-70 CE Hebrew form.
			  We know that the Bible used by the early Christians included it.
			  So do you open the canon and say, “This was in the Bible of the
			  early church, so it should be included”? Or do you say, “No, the
			  canon is sealed.” Is canon a process that can be revised? Or is the
			  door closed, like a treaty? It’s a big question.			   Q: Are there substantial differences between the text of
			  the Hebrew Bible manuscripts found at Qumran
			  and the Masoretic Text? A: Yes … and no. On the one hand, they show a stability in the
			  text. We see how faithful the Masoretic tradition was, that it
			  could preserve a lengthy ancient text for over a thousand years.
			  On the other hand, there are some key differences. An extra
			  psalm. Slightly different wording. Most important is the occasional
			  variation that clarifies something that was puzzling in the
			  Masoretic Text. A good example is Isaiah 53:11. The translation
			  of the Masoretic Text reads: “Out of the suffering of his soul, he
			  will see and be satisfied.” He will see what? The word “see” has no
			  object. But in the Isaiah scrolls found at Qumran, we find that verse 11 contains the missing object: “Out of the suffering of his
soul, he will see light.” And guess what? The Septuagint also has
the missing word.
 Q: What kinds of things do the scrolls tell us about first century
			  Jews and Judaism?A: Some scholars have suggested that we should not say “Judaism”
			  but “Judaisms.” That sums up part of the contribution of the
			  scrolls; we see in them still another form of early Judaism. The
			  scrolls, for instance, provide keen evidence that some Jews were
			  highly apocalyptic. They expected earnestly and excitedly the
			  end of the age. This segment of Judaism, in turn, helps us to
			  understand John the Baptist’s apocalyptic edge. Remember how
			  he said, “The ax is laid to the root of the tree”? It also helps us to
			  appreciate the apocalyptic language of Jesus, himself a Jew. And
			  it helps us to understand Paul’s encouragement to the Corinthians
			  not to change their physical or social circumstances; in his
			  early days, he clearly expected the end of the world in his lifetime.
			  And I have not even mentioned the scrolls’ importance for
			  illuminating Revelation, itself an “apocalypse.”
  Q: You say that scrolls research helps us to understand early
			  Christianity as well. If the content of the scrolls is primarily
			  pre-Christian and doesn’t include the New Testament, how does
			  it help shed light on the early followers of Jesus? A: The scrolls are illuminating for early Christianity as part of
			  early Judaism. The early church did not see itself as Christian as
			  opposed to Jewish; they understood themselves as a Jewish movement
			  within Judaism. I have already talked about how a Jewish
			  apocalyptic view aids our understanding of John the Baptist,
			  Jesus, Paul, and Revelation. There are countless other ways the
			  material in the Qumran scrolls sheds light on early Christians
			  and indeed the New Testament; some of the best examples are
			  perhaps in the first eight chapters of Acts. There we see that the
			  early Christians enjoy a common meal; this was also a key feature
			  at Qumran. They share their financial resources; this was an
			  essential dimension of life at Qumran. They have clear lines of
			  apostolic authority; there are clear lines of authority (though not
			  apostolic, of course) at Qumran. The followers of Jesus first
			  receive the Holy Spirit at Pentecost; the community of Qumran
			  celebrated its annual covenant renewal on Pentecost. The correspondences
			  are actually stunning … as are the differences. But
			  there is much to be gleaned about the life of early Christians from
			  the scrolls.
 Q: Do you think that either Jesus or John the Baptist ever
			  visited the Qumran community in its later days? A: John the Baptist may have. Here’s a guy who is baptizing
			  7 miles north of this community. He’s dressed in camel’s hair
			  and eats locust and wild honey. It wouldn’t surprise me that he
			  associated with this separatist community. The Qumran Community
			  Rule says about purification, “And if your heart is not
			  pure, then the water will not wash you.” Boy, does that sound
			  like John the Baptist when he sees the Pharisees and Sadducees
			  coming to be baptized. “You snakes,” he says, “who warned you to
			  flee from the wrath to come? Therefore bear fruit in keeping
			  with repentance.” John the Baptist would have fit in very well
			  with the Qumran way of life — though they would have had
			  some differences of opinion, not least that John believed Jesus
			  was the awaited Messiah.
 Jesus is less likely to have visited Qumran because his lifestyle
			  was so different from theirs. He was accused of hanging
			  with prostitutes, sinners, and the abettors of Rome — tax collectors.
			  No room for them in the enclave by the Dead Sea!			   Q: Do you think the significance of the Dead Sea Scrolls has
			  been overemphasized? A: It has been said that the scrolls unlock everything, or that
			  they don’t give us anything, or that they uncover a world of mystery
			  that Christians have suppressed (á la The Da Vinci Code).
			  But they don’t do any of that. They’re a remarkable find. We have
			  an actual, isolated community that sequestered itself, kept hundreds
			  of scrolls, copied them, and preserved them in such a way
			  that 2,000 years later they are illuminating our understanding of
			  the Scriptures, first-century Judaism, and early Christianity. In
			  that sense, it would be difficult to overstate their importance.
   —INtroduction by 
KATHy HENNING (hennik@spu.edu)— photo by Richard T. Nowitz / CORBIS
 
 Back to the topBack to Home
 |