Horizon

The politics surrounding the dead sea scrolls and similar finds are really bizarre and slightly scary.

I mean, some group of people decides what to translate and publish and what to hold back, and we're talking about texts that can have enormous and conceivably disastrous influence in the world.

One of the problems there is that the politics of academia get involved as well. From what I understand of the DSS, they're being sat upon not for any particularly nefarious purposes, but for the insipid (and even more frustrating) reason that by only releasing them at a trickle, the scholars involved are on the gravy train for life.

From what I understand of the DSS, they're being sat upon not for any particularly nefarious purposes, but for the insipid (and even more frustrating) reason that by only releasing them at a trickle, the scholars involved are on the gravy train for life.

Certainly, and in some sense that's even more scary. But in any case some kind of logic must determine what the publish first. I'm not saying it's necessarily "nefarious", it could be something perfectly mundane, like the condition of the materials, but of course we don't know that, do we? It's also possible that one of those scrolls says something that will seriously complicate the beliefs (and who knows, maybe even the canon) of more than a few versions of christianity.

Susanna Elm said something intriguing the other day, that it's conceivable that some of the DSS might provide evidence that Jesus was an Essene. (This was pure speculation, but it's certainly plausible enough as far as I can tell.)

Ben, you seem to be closer to modern christianity than I am, considering that I am not remotely religious and was raised that way. What do you think would be the implications of something like that?

What do you think would be the implications of something like that?

Different things for different people, I suppose. Since I became aware of the issue, I've generally assumed that Jesus and John the Baptist were at least on the fringes of the Essenes[*], and from where I sit as a Catholic convert I can't see any particular implication for Christianity. But both individuals and denominations are remarkably diverse and respond to the same data in radically different ways, so I couldn't make any predictions.

[*] Though it's also possible that he was a Pharisee. In a sense, both Christianity and modern Judaism are descendants of first-century Pharisaical Judaism.

On second thought, I can make a prediction. I'm pretty certain that any texts that have relevance on early Christianity will be used by partisans of almost any position to buttress it. Regardless of contents, it's certain to vindicate both the notion that the early church was sexually egalitarian and that it was inherently misogynist. I've already seen arguments that the DSS prove early Christianity to be modernist and liberal, as well as assertions that they prove utter inerrancy of scriptural transmission.

One of the reasons for this is that the primary documents — especially the Gnostic ones — are excruciatingly dull. Selective quotation becomes much easier when any fact checker will start daydreaming three lines after the quoted text ends.

That's been my experience anyway. On this subject in particular, your mileage may vary.

Oh, and who's Susanna Elm?

*quick googling later*

If she's the RS prof at Berkeley, it looks like she rocks! Count the languages on the Publications section of her CV.

If she's the RS prof at Berkeley, it looks like she rocks! Count the languages on the Publications section of her CV.

She does indeed. :)

I've already seen arguments that the DSS prove early Christianity to be modernist and liberal, as well as assertions that they prove utter inerrancy of scriptural transmission.

>groan

Ben - Would like to help you translate the Dutch article on Roberty. Can you refer me to its location, title, etc...

I've sent you email with the extract and a link.