Communal Life at Qumran and in the Early Church - Research Paper Example

? Archeological Issues of the Qumran Site: Communal Life at Qumran and in the Early Church by November 24, 2015 Archeological Issues of the Qumran Site: Communal Life at Qumran and in the Early Church The warm, dry wind blows across the dessert terrain picking up thousands of pieces of sand and bouncing them off the flat, granite wall that protrudes majestically from the earth below. The waves from the sea can be heard in the distance and tiny cave entrances are barely visible along the rocks surface. Caves such as these are fairly common place along The Dead Sea’s vast domain. These caves hold a secret, however, a secret that created a ripple of controversy among scholars, and archeologists, which is not soon to be quieted. It is from these caves that certain ancient scrolls were found in 1947. These scrolls now coined, The Dead Sea Scrolls, contain a combination of biblical, historical, and societal documents. It is the questions of where these documents originated from, who wrote them, and what significance they have on many of today’s theories; in particular the theory of the similarities of the Qumran and the early church, that are the primary cause of debate. The primary controversy surrounding The Dead Sea Scrolls is the question of where they originated from. There are two main speculations on were these scrolls were written. The first theory is based on the notion that they derived out of the nearby “town” of Qumran. However, there is much debate as to who the inhabitants of Qumran were. Rowland De Vaux was one of the first people to excavate the sight in 1949. After much research and study he came to the conclusion that the remains of Qumran were left by a sectarian religious community. Jodi Magness discusses this theory in her book, The archeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scroll, when she says, “This is certainly true of the pottery from Qumran. In the second part of this chapter, we shall compare the architecture and pottery of Qumran with those of contemporary Judean palaces and villas. The comparisons support the interpretation of Qumran as a sectarian settlement” (73). This sectarian settlement was a group of highly ritualistic Jews, called the Essenes, and this conclusion became known as the “Qumran-Essene Hypothesis”. De Vaux felt that is was the Essene that wrote the Dead Sea scrolls and then later hid them in the caves when they felt they were in danger. He based his findings partly on the information within the Dead Sea scrolls themselves and partly on archeological conclusions drawn from findings at the Qumran site. One of these archeological findings was the cisterns which he determined were “miqva’ot”, or Jewish ritual baths. He came to this conclusion due to their similarity in structure to those found near the Jewish temple mount. Another archeologist by the name of Pessach Bar-Adon felt that the town of Qumran was not inhabited by a group of religious peoples, however, he felt it was used a fortress. He, unlike De Vaux, felt that the Dead Sea scrolls should not be used when arriving at a conclusion to who inhabited Qumran. Solely based on archeological findings and the historical time frame that they city dated back to, he felt the fortress instead belonged to John Hyrcanus. He summarized that Hyrcanus used it as an oasis for his troops as they journeyed across the desert. Robert Donceel and Pauline Donceel-Voute, two noted archeologist who also felt that using the Dead Sea scrolls to arrive at a conclusion was not permissible, jointly felt that Qumran was neither a fortress nor a place of religious refuge. Based on the glassware, stoneware, coins, and metal found at the site they drew the conclusion that Qumran was instead inhabited by wealthy traders, or perhaps was a second home to a wealthy family that lived in Jerusalem. There are a vast group of people, however, who are under the notion that the scrolls were not written in the town of Qumran at all, but instead were manuscripts from several Jewish temples or libraries in Jerusalem. This theory is called the Jerusalem origin theory. According to this theory the priests in Jerusalem took the manuscripts, in an attempt to preserve them, and then stored in the caves near Qumran when fleeing from Roman invasion in 70 CE. Noted archeologists, Yizhar Hirschfeld, takes this view based on the diversity of thought and handwriting amoung the scrolls. She feels that if they were created in one location, such as Qumran, they would be more uniform. The next major controversy surrounding the Dead Sea scrolls is who actually wrote them. The primary school of thought is that they are written by Jewish scholars of some sort. In this hypothesis there are several speculations as to what group of Jewish scholars actually wrote them. The first hypothesis concurs with those who support the Qumran-Essene theory. In which they feel that the Essene, or a religious sect who had separated themselves from the majority of society, actually wrote them while living in Qumran. In conjunction with this theory some believe the group of people living in the town of Qumran were not of the Essene sect; they believe they were instead Sadducees, which are a group of Jewish priests. The final, and most archeologically sound school of thought, is that the scrolls were compiled overtime by several different Jewish scholars and kept in the city of Jerusalem. In this scenario the caves were merely a storage place, or perhaps a hiding place for the scrolls. The only archeological argument that may dispute this theory is research recently published by Ira Rabin, Oliver Hahn, Timo Wolff, Admir Masic, and Gisela Weinberg, who found that the ink used to write Thanksgiving Scroll uses water that was taken from the Dead Sea. The next notion for who wrote the scrolls stems from the Christian Origin theory. Spanish Jesuit Joseph O’Callaghan-Martinez published findings that a fraction of the scrolls preserves writing from the New Testament Gospel of Mark 6:52-53. He also says the scrolls describe the early Christian community. There are some that subscribe to this theory that believe that John the Baptist, and possibly even Jesus himself used the caves as hiding places in their journeys to preach the gospel. In this they believe they could have had a hand in the writing of some of the scrolls and stored them there. Due to the fact that the Dead Sea scrolls are the oldest known documentation of the Bible, two of the world’s major religions rely on this holy text, Jews, and Christians. Before the scrolls were found the oldest known copy of the Bible was the Masoretic text written in 10th century CE. The majority of biblical scriptures found in the caves cross reference exactly with the Masoretic text. However, some of the documents found for the book of Samuel and Exodus in cave four are considerably different in language and content. The Masoretic text, the Septuagint, and the Pentateuch, are the three major manuscripts from which the Bible is written. However, with the introduction of the Dead Sea scrolls some scholars are being forced to consider the possibility of revising a portion of their theories. It has, therefore become increasingly prudent for both religions to uncover the true origin of these texts. Having already discussed the possible connections between the Jewish people and the text it is now prudent to uncover the connection between Christians and the scrolls. Schiffman made the association between the Jewish sect Qumran and the early church in his book, Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls, when he said, “The vaguest of pictures was then beginning to appear: something about a marginal sect of Second Temple Jews and the beginnings of Christianity” (11). This marginal sect of second temple Jews he mentions is in fact the Qumran. We will, therefore, consider the relationship of the Qumran and the Christians under three main headings: doctrinal, literary, and institutional. The first relationship between the early church and the Qumran is that of doctrine. There are numerous similarities between the Qumran doctrine and true early Christian doctrine, although there are, as you will see, numerous contrasts as well. The first similarity we will bring to light is that both groups had a strong belief in predestination, which is the belief that God already knows what you are going to do before you do it. It also can be seen in the context that He already has chosen, or at least knows whom He is going to save before they are born. This comes with the belief that He has chosen special groups of people whom He will save. In this both groups believed that they belonged to one of the special groups of people God had chosen to save and called themselves, the elect. They believed that this current life was just a foretaste of the greatness that awaited them when the end of days final came. Both the Qumran and Christians also believe in the existence of the spirits of good and evil. They believed more specifically that these spirits are engaged in a struggle both in the heavens and mans souls. Both of these groups’ doctrine statements also held to the eschatological concept that Israel is ruled by twelve leaders, also known as the twelve tribes. Also both systems held the belief that the believer shared on this earth and would someday share in heaven the life of the angels. Each group believed that man is a sinner who can be saved only through the grace of God and that they were interpreting the law through a new direct revelation given to them. Both groups had a deep sense of personal devotion to God as exemplified for the Qumran sect in the Thanksgiving Hymns. The sovereignty of God was also upheld by both groups. The first way this was done was by belief that god’s sovereignty was a major aspect of Qumran doctrine. God, they believed, was the maker of all things, the giver of all gifts, and the director of destines of men. God was at the very center of life and history. The introduction to the Fourth Gospel also states that the word of God was the creator of all things and that without this word nothing was made. Most of these similarities come from the fact that both the Christians and the Essens were embedded in the Scriptures and for this reason emphasized the supreme power of God. There, of course were differences in the doctrines of these two groups as well. For example, in early Christianity, all these features, as well as many others were taken up into a new doctrinal structure. It was through the combination of these fundamentals with the common belief that the new faith is what transformed them. The Messianic figure for the Christians is embodied in a single person, Jesus; whereas, for the Qumran sect the messianic concept is personified in several figures. The Qumran community only hoped for restoration, but for the Christians they believed it was fact. Both groups felt that humans were sinful by nature. The Qumran believed that through their rituals or perhaps through ha human Messiah they could be saved. For Christians, however, they felt the concept of their sinful nature went beyond what a human could redeem them from, thus came the belief that their Messiah, Jesus was a part of God Himself. Also, while there are many doctrinal similarities it is important to note that these were not secluded notions of the Qumran but many of these ideas and practices were common in the first century B.C. As most writers know there is a certain literary style by which one writes most texts regardless of the topic. It is important, therefore, to also take a closer look at the literary similarities and differences between the Qumran and the early church. To begin it is prudent to examine the similarities. Many noted scholars feel that the writings of John are closer to Qumran writings than other parts of the New Testament. This can be seen specifically in the fourth Gospel of John. This Gospel contains phrases and expressions that are also found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The general way of thinking and the literary style of the Gospel and Epistles of John also seem to be comparable to those of the Qumran texts. Principles of dualism, which is comparing two contrasted aspects, can be seen in both writings. Specifically both writing compare light versus dark in regards to good versus evil. John states in his writings that the light of the world has appeared and the victory over darkness is won. The light of the world being perceived as Jesus and the victory of darkness being mans sinful nature, or evil. It is important to also note that physically John was near the location of Qumran during the writing of the New Testament. The year A.D. 27, according to Matthew, John the Baptist is in the wilderness of Judea. Also it notes that John lived beyond the Jordan River about ten to twelve miles from the Qumran Monastery. It is believed he was aware of the existences of the monastery and the library, and some say the sect may have influenced Christianity through John, though this is merely speculation. John also talks about how he goes to baptize in the Jordan River which is near the Dead Sea. Another portion of his writings talks about how John is in the wilderness till the day of his manifestation to Israel. John tells his interrogators, “I am the voice crying in the wilderness,” but John’s wilderness and the wilderness of Qumran could be but do not necessarily have to be the same. There is also the possibility of a connection between Jesus and the sect. This connection was surprisingly actually made before the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls. James Vanderkam discusses the connection in his book, Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls, when he states, “As early as 1790, a writer named Karl Bahrdt tried to account for the mysteries in Jesus’ life by suggesting that he was a “secret agent” of the Essene's. Later, in 1863, the renowned biblical scholar Ernest Renan proposed that Jesus had been trained by the Essenes” (321). Qumran is only a few miles from familiar places in the life of Jesus: Jericho, Bethlehem, and Jerusalem. Some scholars even speculate that the unknown years in the life of Jesus (ages twelve to thirty) might have been spent with the sect, though there is no reference to this in the texts. There is also a contrast between the Christian view of Jesus as the Teacher of Righteousness, and the Qumran, messianic idea. However, in the New Testament we have the idea of a pre-existence of Christ before his life on earth. In the Qumran texts there is no hint of the pre-existence of the Teacher of Righteousness or of the Messiah. The last topic that must be discussed when looking at the similarities and differences of the Qumran and the early church are the institutional ones. Both the Qumran and the early church sat in meetings and they had to speak in turn according to rank. This brings us to the fact that both of these groups were organized into companies with ranks. Comparisons have also been made between the authority of the leaders of each group within the Qumran society and the later authority of the Christian leaders, such as bishops. Both groups also held to the concept that the Israel is ruled by twelve leaders, which are representatives from the twelve tribes of Israel. We find that Jesus established a group of twelve Apostles to show this correlation and concept, and the Qumran similarly had a council of twelve members and three priests. We do not know, however, if the three priests in the Qumran community had more authority than the twelve. If they did then some would say this has an uncanny resemblance to the privileged group of three that were part of the Christian Apostles, Peter, James and John. Both groups also faced the prospect of persecution by the Jewish community. Likewise, both of these groups held similar views on the importance of the Book of Isaiah, as well as other Hebrew writings in particular Psalms and Deuteronomy. Ironically both also believed that they were living in the last days of the world, and as discussed previously each believed it was the community of the elect or chosen ones who were to go on to paradise. There are several differences in the Qumran’s view versus that of Christianity however. One major difference in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the gospels is that the Dead Sea Scrolls hide dates and persons; whereas, the gospels are as plain as possible. Some other differences between the way of life of the Qumran and that of Christians are: The Qumran’s selectiveness versus Jesus weight on going out among the common man. Another major difference was in the act of baptism. For the sect baptism was a daily practice, self-administered, whose purpose was to maintain ritual purity. For John and the Christians, it was a personal initiation act. The Qumran community also placed a great emphasis on ritual and the importance of the priests. The Christian community, however, tried to make it apparent that there was not an emphasis on one man above another and that rituals were not the way to live a Christian life. The Qumran likewise put an emphasis on following the letter of the Law as written in previous Hebrew texts. The early church however strove to put an emphasis on charity or good faith acts over that of the Law. There was a major emphasis in this regard to legal purity, particularly when it came to meals. This can be seen in the fact that in the Qumran community the people had to be admitted to the communal meals after first going through an initiation lasting two years. Even then before each meal the Qumran had to wash themselves in the pools, that were uncovered in archeological findings, and then they had to change clothes. The early church leader and founder, Jesus, by contrast was seen regularly breaking bread with publicans and sinners. Overall the tradition behind the Gospels and the Epistles seems to be related to Qumran thought, it seems to have been taken up, however, and radically reinterpreted. It is true that there are links of ideas and practice between the sect of the scrolls and the early church, but it is becoming clear that it is more probable that Christianity took ideas and practices that were already current by the Qumran. It seems definite that the Qumran had at least an influence on the early church, though it cannot be proven for fact that the Qumran and the early church were the same. Through looking at where the dead sea scrolls may have come from, who may have written them, and to whom they have significance, many of the theories surrounding the Dead Sea Scrolls have come to light. In this it also becomes overwhelmingly apparent that the many mysteries surrounding the Dead Sea scrolls have yet to be solved. However, through close examination of one theory, that the Qumran and the early church are one in the same, at least one conclusion was reached. Though the Qumran’s have had some influence on the early church, or perhaps they developed during the same time period, with similar notions, seen through their similarities; their significant differences, however, prove that they are most likely not one in the same. It is through this same scrutiny that many of the mysteries surrounding the scrolls found in the giant, majestic caves near the Dead Sea may be solved. It seems for now, however, they will remain just that, mysteries. One conclusion can be drawn for certain; the world was forever impacted through the scrolls found in those caves. Works Cited Magness, Jodi. The Archaeology of Qumran, and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B Eerdmans Publishing Co, 2002. 73. Print. Schiffman, Lawrence H. Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls: the History of Judaism, the Background of Christianity, the Lost Library of Qumran. New York: Anchor Bible Referance Library, 1995. 11. Print. VanderKam, James C., and Peter Flint. Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Their Significance for Understanding The Bible, Judaism, Jesus, and Chrisitanity, . New York, NY: T & T Clark International, 2002. 321. Print. Read More