This may have been discussed. The Dead Sea scrolls are in Salt Lake. No biggie. You buy a ticket. You go see the stuff. Cool.

Every time LDS have a chance to toot their horn over some past evidence, that no matter how implausible, that supports their Bull Shit claims they are typically all over it.

I haven't heard or seen a peep from the church. Is it because these scrolls are actual history and not manufactured at headquarters?

The Dead Sea scrolls have a funny history. When news of their discovery was first released to the world, the religious community practically had an orgasm. Then when they found out there were books of the bible in there that had been left out, and believed lost until now, they practically couldn't wait to learn more about that stuff. There was all kinds of speculation about what was in there, and how it proved this form of Christianity was the true form, which always happened to correlate to whichever group was having the collective orgasm. Finally, once translations started coming out that contradicted bible cannon, or worse, showed how the myths evolved, and were all made up BS, the religious world couldn't forget about the Dead Sea Scrolls fast enough.

Let me clarify. I do not mean that the Dead Sea scrolls contained a secret DeVinci code, or a smoking gun that shows Christ was an member of a secret lizard person society. What the Dead Sea scrolls help us see, is the evolution of the bible, and the stories therein. Now just as organic evolution is toxic to certain fundamental Christian beliefs, bible evolution is also problematic.

If the absolute never changing word of God, changes, even in minor ways, then that kind of puts certain parts of Christendom in a tight spot. Then you got the Mormons, who have made a living by accepting that the bible has been changed, but then claiming to know what the original version of bible was supposed to be. When that doesn't line up with really old, almost first edition copies of Leviticus, then that is almost as embarrassing as translating a common and easily translatable Egyptian document into an obvious false retelling of a classic bible story, that is painfully easy to show as a false translation.

Has anyone gone to see the exhibit in SLC?

It was okay. There were interesting parts and sadly not as much about the scrolls themselves as I would have liked. The scrolls were interesting but 90% of it was about how great Israel is.

I spent nearly three hours in the exhibit and thought it was beautiful. It is an historical exhibit about religion, but many people I have talked to find it a religious experience.

I went in without looking for god, I didn't find him, in fact, I was turned even further from the bible being holy text. There is so much ancient culture and history surrounding these artifacts, that it, IMHO, makes absolutely no sense for civilization today.

The ultimate destruction of Qumran by the Romans should be a cautionary tale for all believers. The deluded Qumranites must have charged into battle against the Romans confident that God would give His chosen "Sons of Light" victory over the wicked Romans in a final triumph of good over evil. Pathetic.

The Book of Judith - familiar to JS - actually has a warning against just relying on God. Judith was a heroine who used her brain. JS used the story of Judith in 1st Nephi, but had no heroine because he didn't believe in women being capable. You will find many Jewish girls named Judith.

Don't forget that BYU spent a lot of time translating many of the scrolls. I don't know if they were a part of the new exhibit in SLC (probably not since these scrolls fragments were newer), but they did spend a lot of time academically on something that wasn't going to prove the church true.

Are we sure about that? I suspect that they will (if they have not already) stretch and contort DSS studies to support LDS truth claims. If Gee and Sorenson can do that with Egyptology and Mesoamerican studies, then it only stands to reason that they plan to do the same with the DSS. After all, truth can be found anywhere for those with eyes to see or ears to hear.

There was a speaker at Education Week at BYU that spoke on the Dead Sea Scrolls. He mentioned this -- that everyone believed that they would prove the BoM to be true. He stated quite simply, "They don't.", right from the start in order to dispel all rumors and expectations.

I applaud his honesty.

Contrast this with lies peddles by the BoM tours.

I was thinking about the Book of Judas (not sure if it is from the DSS or another group of scrolls-- my mind is scrambled with chemo and cold medicine). Anyway, it was so heretic to the belief of Judas Iscariot's betrayal that it was banned from the bible. I find that extremely interesting--

There is a separate space before the scrolls exhibit focused on the BYU work on the scrolls. I haven't been through that part, but I should next time I'm there.

I have a complete copy of the Dead Sea Scriptures, 1976 printing of the 1956 Theodore Gaster translation.

This man actually translated rather than looking in a hat.

This is a scholastic work with introduction and notes by the author.

It is an interesting and intriguing study.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/16/2014 05:16PM by thedesertrat1.

I went through the exhibit and thought it was really well done. A lot of the exhibit is setting the context of time and place, so it takes awhile to get to the scrolls themselves.

There is a separate BYU exhibit but I didn't bother with it.

My daughter and I came to various conclusions:

Yes, there is a lot of Israel information. They are trying hard to establish the Jewish history, IMO it is to support their claim on the land today.

I thought there was some pandering to the American Evangelical community who are big supporters of Israel.

I would recommend the exhibit. I am going again next month with some out-of-town visitors. Be warned that it is 2-3 hours of standing and walking with very few places to sit down, so if you have physical limitations ask the staff for some assistance.

Comments from the Tanners:

"The Book of Mormon states that the Bible went from the Jews to the Gentiles in its purity, but was then changed.[46] With the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls it is now clear that Smith's additions to the Old Testament are not supported by ancient manuscripts. Christianity was not taught in the Old Testament."

http://www.utlm.org/newsletters/no116.htm



"....If Mormon scholars could find similarities between the text of the Book of Mormon and documents that were not known in Joseph Smith's day, this type of evidence would be impressive. The Dead Sea Scrolls, for instance, should provide a great deal of evidence for the Book of Mormon if it is really an ancient record. The Isaiah scroll found at Qumran Cave 1 should have caused a great deal of joy among Mormon scholars, for here is a manuscript of Isaiah which is hundreds of years older than any manuscript previously known. Surely, if the Book of Mormon were true, this manuscript would be filled with evidence to support the text of Isaiah in the Book of Mormon and thus prove that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God. Instead of proving the Book of Mormon, however, it has turned out to be a great disappointment to Mormon scholars."

http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/changech12a.htm

Interesting idea about JS stuff being reinforced by the Dead Sea Scrolls. I would suggest that JS in fact corrected a lot of the Old Testament in the Inspired Revision and the texts could be compared to see if JS got it right or not.

"With the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls it is now clear that Smith's additions to the Old Testament are not supported by ancient manuscripts. Christianity was not taught in the Old Testament."

When I first started having doubts I tried diving into the BoM to strengthen my testimony. Read with the slightest bit of doubt, the whole thing is beyond absurd. The entire book, from 600 BC on, is full of new testament christianity. The old testament has prophecies of a messiah, but very little detail. The BoM has his name, his mother's name, how he would die, baptism, etc... So, we are to believe that the BoM prophets, to have received such detail from god, were the greatest prophets to have ever lived, OR other ancient manuscript finds would show that other prophets had taught with similar detail, and those details were somehow lost. There's no evidence to support the latter scenario, and thousands of pieces of evidence to show that the BoM is a product of Joe and Co.'s demented minds.

The BOM has so many dead-on prophecies it was obviously done after the fact.

If that's not enough some of the "prophecies" are in the PAST TENSE:

6 And now, I would ask of you, my beloved brethren, wherein the
Lamb of God DID FULFILL all righteousness in being baptized by
water?

7 Know ye not that he WAS holy? But notwithstanding he being
holy, he showeth unto the children of men that, according to
the flesh he humbleth himself before the Father, and witnesseth
unto the Father that he would be obedient unto him in keeping
his commandments.

8 Wherefore, after he WAS BAPTIZED with water the Holy Ghost
DESCENDED upon him in the form of a dove.

9 And again, it showeth unto the children of men the straitness
of the path, and the narrowness of the gate, by which they
should enter, he HAVING SET the example before them.

10 And he SAID unto the children of men: Follow thou me.
Wherefore, my beloved brethren, can we follow Jesus save we
shall be willing to keep the commandments of the Father?

-- 2 Nephi 31:6-10 (emphasis added)


According to the note at the bottom of the page this was
supposed to have been written some time between 559 B.C. and
545 B.C.

Charlie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Interesting idea about JS stuff being reinforced
> by the Dead Sea Scrolls. I would suggest that JS
> in fact corrected a lot of the Old Testament in
> the Inspired Revision and the texts could be
> compared to see if JS got it right or not.


Exactly. The scrolls should confirm JS version of Isaiah but they don't

Yep.

There was no angel guarding the caves, no one died beholding the parchments/scroll, no visitations prefacing the discovery, The scrolls are still here for all to see. MMMMh, can they be true?

One more nail in the coffin of the BoM is the usage of the proper noun (name) of Lucifer , which comes from the KJV. That name exists absolutely no where in any original texts , and especially in the DSS .

I've been to the exhibit. Seemed interesting but I still think there's a lot it doesn't tell us. My TBM friend is fascinated by the scrolls...which is weird?

To reinforce caedmon's post: the LDS church wants to use the scrolls as proof of its superior understanding of God's intervention- but everything in the scrolls undermines everything the LDS church teaches or has ever taught.

Why was knowledge (i.e. translation) of the DSS suppressed for so long? Is that explained or clarified?

My understanding is that the Catholic Church controlled the study of the scrolls, and they were uneasy about what they might reveal about the "early church", so they sat on them a long time. Is this right?

The scrolls have been in the control of scholars and the Israeli government. There is a set of facsimiles at the Vatican museum.

caedmon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The scrolls have been in the control of scholars
> and the Israeli government. There is a set of
> facsimiles at the Vatican museum.


thanks, caedmon !

You'd think Monson could hot foot it on down to the exhibition with rock in hand and tell us what they really say....

I guess if Egyptian can be translated in two entirely separate ways, then so can Aramaic.

The KJV is the Lord's version. Nothing else matters.