The Texts Among the Dead Sea Scrolls

[TAO]

If so, then the LDS leaders must be

able to provide at least an approximate date by which

God no longer provided them that annual remission.

One thing I have noticed about God is that he doesn't answer questions you don't sincerely desire yourself.

So asking the LDS leaders for the answer won't work probably. They have more important questions to ask.

You should ask for the answer, and God will decide whether to give it to you.

[volgadon]

Oh, that is easy. Kaf-Bet of Iyyar in the 4th year of the reign of Herod Agrippa, somewhere between 11:00 and 17:43. A Teusday, IIRC. Now that this is out of the way, we can come up with another baroque masterpiece of hairsplitting casuistic criticism against the Mormons.

[Uncle Dale]

Why?

Because they are the purported leaders of the one true religion,

blessed with the continual presence of the Holy Ghost and

spiritual discernment of unrighteousness. Plus they are in

constant contact with God via latter day revelation.

If they cannot tell us, within at least a thousand years, when

God ceased to make His holy presence abide among the Covenant

People, then to which better prophets might we turn?

Or -- perhaps the answer is that God has never withdrawn

his presence from those who earnestly seek Him -- and the

Covenant relationship with Israel evolved, rather than

being abrogated.

Perhaps acceptance in God's eyes is not measured by a perfect

obedience to all the commandments ever given -- but is extended

by grace, through faith, in the midst of imperfect religion.

Perhaps the Gospel has never been articulated by man in its

perfection and fulness, because the Kingdom of Heaven is

not subject to human expression and human understanding.

And perhaps there never was a Nephi, nor any brass plates,

and we waste our precious time worrying over fictions.

UD

[volgadon]

Nephi repeatedly uses the words "write," "writing," "written,"

etc., when speaking of the "things" which the Nephite Records

would contain.

He speaks of writing prophets whose supposed contributions

to the plates of brass predicted numerous details of Jesus'

lifetime/acts.

If this has nothing to do with "texts," then I do not think

I'm the only reader/writer who has been fooled into thinking

that it is a textual problem being addressed, and by Nephi,

given a textual solution.

But, I'm willing to listen to Bro. Antley's views, that it

is not excised writings we should think about, but rather,

excised interpretations.

Yet Nephi also says that the book proceedeth out of the mouth of the Jew.

Like I said, try Jafe's book.

[Uncle Dale]

...try Jafe's book.

When time allows.

So very often, when outsiders come here with questions

regarding the Book of Mormon, the threads devolve into

useless arguments.

I'm encouraged that mine are generally taken seriously,

and that participants honestly attempt to communicate

their best-thought-out contributions.

Even if we often do not agree, I know of nowhere else

where such discussions can take place -- and occasional

progress made in understanding.

I find that gratifying.

UD

[Robert F. Smith]

The "Old Testament" is obviously unchanged, except for minor textual corruptions,

and the Jews of 2010 read and interpret it very much like the Jews of 2000 years ago.

I know that the LDS love to point out passages in the Hebrew Bible that they

view as supportive of the "antiquity of the gospel" and the "7 dispensations;"

but the rest of the Bible-reading world does not agree with that notion.

There has been a tremendous amount of scholarship published on the subject

of the Hebrew Bible (and the LXX) in the past couple of centuries, and the

jist of it all argues against the Jews and Israelites of antiquity being

full-blown Christians (like Alma, Samuel the Lamanite, etc.).

However, if you restrict your analysis to the "New Testament," you might well

argue that doctrines such as no-infant-baptism were inherent in the gospel

of 2000 years ago, no matter what changes (or lack thereof) have been inflicted

upon the NT texts.

Still -- until I hear your ideas spoken from the podium at General Conference,

I'll assume that they remain just that -- ideas and not potential doctrine.

I am enough of a restorationist myself, to deeply suspect the Christian Bible

as written -- and certainly as taught by creedal Christianity. I suspect that

if we could get into a time machine and go back to the days of the very first

Jesus-followers, we would there encounter texts somewhat different from the

modern canon, and teachings very different from modern mainstream Christianity.

UD

Dale,

Here and elsewhere in this thread, you raise questions which require familiarity with what is in fact being said by mainstream scholars on such matters. I normally recommend that interested parties without systematic, professional training at least read relevant magazines (available online) such as Bible Review (BR), though there are many others.

For example, the Jewish editor of BR, Herschel Shanks, has pointed out that the Judaism and Christianity of today are very different than they were 2,000 years ago:

"Today, a more nuanced understanding of the two religions is fast gaining ground: that modern Judaism and Christianity are parallel heritors of a many-faceted ancient Judaism." (

BAR

, 11/1 [Feb 1995], 2).

Later Shanks again comments on this issue (re Gabriele Boccacini, "Multiple Judaisms," BR, 11/1, pp. 38-41, 46), on page 40,

"Boccacini describes the emergence of a more nuanced understanding of these two great faiths: that modern Judaism and Christianity emerged from ancient Judaism--fraternal twins born of the same womb."

Above you seem to agree that the textual canon and teachings would vary from modern mainstream Christianity, but later in this thread you seem to disagree.

However, if you want to understand what the world of Elizabeth & Mary was like, you will have to read the English biblical text systematically and accept that their world was very alien from ours in both culture and language. Understanding what this means cannot be had on the cheap. It requires sustained effort over a long period of time. Notions of apostasy of Jews (which you mention below) is not a concept used by scholars, both because it is not in keeping with the unconditional covenant of Abraham (see Romans 11), and because it constitutes a value judgment which scholars generally shy away from. The Jewish people are a community which certainly retains its biblical promise in both Bible and Book of Mormon, aside from the fact that they are yet with us as a powerful, unavoidable fact of life. Moreover, the Jewish rabbis have always said that the reason for the Diaspora was disobedience by the Jewish people.

Book of Mormon prophecy must be understood in the same sense as Bible prophecy, i.e., if the Book of Mormon names Mary and Jesus long before they are born then bear in mind that the Bible does the same with Cyrus and Josiah. Indeed, if you could read Hebrew, you would see that the prophecies of Jesus are specifically contained in the OT -- where they are masked by mistranslation. Hint: When the temple priest Simeon takes the baby Jesus in hand for the formal redemption of the firstborn ceremony in Luke 2:27-35, he fully recognizes the name and meaning of "Jesus" in the OT context and says so!!

Here is my paper on "Peshat - Plainness" online at http://www.scribd.com/doc/44328710/Peshat-Plainness so that you can see all that it entails. The reason why it is so important to consult with non-Mormon scholars on all these matters is so that no accusation of bias will be casually thrown around -- as it so often is. In addition, these are not matters which are likely to be addressed by LDS General Authorities, nor should we expect them to.

[Kevin Christensen]

Yes -- but I am speaking of what was supposedly on the "plates of brass,"

--- wherein there was reportedly documentation that "surely did shew unto

the prophets of old, all things concerning" the advent of Jesus, his name,

his mother's name, all the details of his passion, etc.

If the "plates of brass" contained all of this proto-Christianity, and

the biblical texts of the DSS do NOT contain such information, then does

Barker cite Zenock, Neum, Zenos, etc. as proof that such details were

excised from the early Bible?

UD

It makes a great deal of difference in what one supposes were on the plates of brass, as well as whether or one one recognizes that there were different versions of Hebrew texts, different texts, and different schools of thought valuing different texts and versions for different reasons. Barker describes several "long exile" texts and traditions, held by those who felt excluded from the rebuilt temple and who looked forward to the restoration of the true temple.

Look at a specific detail of interest regarding the name "Mary. " It helps to recognize that Hebrew lacks consonants, that editors later added pointing to control they wanted texts to be read, and that the Wisdom style made use of punning and similar sounds to convey meanings, for instance "Servant" and "Lamb" have the same consonants. Consider this, from a 2009 overview of Temple Theology by Margaret Barker.

Recall now that damaged text in Psalm 110, which describes the birth of the son of

God in the holy of holies. One of the words that does not fit easily into the text,

though the sense is reasonable, is the word

[LeSellers]

It helps to recognize that Hebrew lacks consonants, ...

I'm sure you meant "... lacks vowels ...".

Lehi

[Uncle Dale]

[CV75]

Exactly WHAT did the "great and abominable church" remove from the "record of the Jews" as it was available in the days when Jesus and his first disciples walked the earth?

Sorry for jumping in late here:

I would suggest the many unique things that are in the Book of Mormon are those that were taken out of the Bible by the great and abominable church. to lead people astray, not those things that naturally or accidentally deteriorated over the years.

1 Nephi 13: 23, 24 mentions that the following were removed: covenants and prophecies, the fullness of the Gospel (more particularly by record of the twelve apostles, which had to have been created within a short time span)--fewer writings than the brass plates, but still of great worth to the Gentiles. I find it interesting that it says

[Uncle Dale]

...

The Book of Mormon makes many plain and precious things clearer.

Well, it quotes three writing prophets from the brass plates,

giving detailed information regarding the future life and death

of Jesus, as Israel's coming messiah.

It gives the impression that Israelites prior to 600 BCE knew

Jesus was their God and would be crucified, etc. etc.

If that sort of Christological prophecy was inscribed in the

brass plates, then it somehow did not make it into the LXX

nor the Hebrew biblical texts found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.

So, we come round to my original question -- did the Church of the Devil

remove many parts of the Christian Gospel from the old Hebrew scriptures,

or did that Mother of Harlots only begin its work of changing the texts

(as Nephi says) after the time of John the Revelator?

If we could somehow recover the original five books of the Pentateuch,

would Genesis contain the "Book of Moses" published in the PGP? Were

such Christ-specific teachings known to the ancient Israelites, but

removed from the scriptures before Jesus ever walked the earth?

UD

[Zakuska]

It gives the impression that Israelites prior to 600 BCE knew

Jesus was their God and would be crucified, etc. etc.

And here I thought the people of the OT knew all of this as well. At least thats what the first Christians tell us.

Chapter 75. It is proved that Jesus was the name of God in the book of Exodus

Justin:

Moreover, in the book of Exodus we have also perceived that the name of God Himself which, He says, was not revealed to

Abraham

or to Jacob, was Jesus, and was declared mysteriously through

Moses

. Thus it is written: 'And the Lord spoke to

Moses

, Say to this people, Behold, I send My

angel

before your face, to keep you in the way, to bring you into the land which I have prepared for you. Give heed to Him, and

obey

Him; do not disobey Him. For He will not draw back from you; for My name is in Him.' Exodus 23:20-21 Now understand that He who led your fathers into the land is called by this name Jesus, and first called Auses Numbers 13:16. (Oshea).

For if you shall understand this, you shall likewise perceive that the name of Him who said to Moses, 'for My name is in Him,' was Jesus. For, indeed, He was also called Israel, and Jacob's name was changed to this also. Now Isaiah shows that those prophets who are sent to publish tidings from God are called His angels and apostles. For Isaiah says in a certain place, 'Send me.' Isaiah 6:8 And that the prophet whose name was changed, Jesus [Joshua], was strong and great, is manifest to all. If, then, we know that God revealed Himself in so many forms to Abraham, and to Jacob, and to Moses, how are we at a loss, and do not believe that, according to the will of the Father of all things, it was possible for Him to be born man of the Virgin, especially after we have such Scriptures, from which it can be plainly perceived that He became so according to the will of the Father?

<snip

Chapter 90. The stretched-out hands of Moses signified beforehand the cross

Trypho:

Bring us on, then, by the Scriptures, that we may also be persuaded by you; for we know that He should suffer and be led as a sheep. But prove to us whether He must be crucified and die so disgracefully and so dishonourably by the death cursed in the law. For we cannot bring ourselves even to think of this.

Justin:

You know that what the prophets said and did they veiled by parables and types, as you admitted to us; so that it was not easy for all to understand the most [of what they said], since they concealed the truth by these means, that those who are eager to find out and learn it might do so with much labour.

Trypho's group:

We admitted this.

Justin:

Listen, therefore, to what follows; for Moses first exhibited this seeming curse of Christ's by the signs which he made.

Trypho:

Of what [signs] do you speak?

Justin:

When the people waged war with Amalek, and the son of Nave (Nun) by name Jesus (Joshua), led the fight, Moses himself prayed to God, stretching out both hands, and Hur with Aaron supported them during the whole day, so that they might not hang down when he got wearied. For if he gave up any part of this sign, which was an imitation of the cross, the people were beaten, as is recorded in the writings of Moses; but if he remained in this form, Amalek was proportionally defeated, and he who prevailed prevailed by the cross. For it was not because Moses so prayed that the people were stronger, but because,

while one who bore the name of Jesus (Joshua) was in the forefront of the battle, he himself made the

sign of the cross

. For who of you knows not that the prayer of one who accompanies it with lamentation and tears, with the body prostrate, or with bended knees, propitiates God most of all? But in such a manner neither he nor any other one, while sitting on a stone, prayed. Nor even the stone symbolized Christ, as I have shown.

Chapter 91. The cross was foretold in the blessings of Joseph, and in the serpent that was lifted up

Justin:

And God by Moses shows in another way the force of the mystery of the cross, when He said in the blessing wherewith Joseph was blessed, 'From the blessing of the Lord is his land; for the seasons of heaven, and for the dews, and for the deep springs from beneath, and for the seasonable fruits of the sun, and for the coming together of the months, and for the heights of the everlasting mountains, and for the heights of the hills, and for the ever-flowing rivers, and for the fruits of the fatness of the earth; and let the things accepted by Him who appeared in the bush come on the head and crown of Joseph. Let him be glorified among his brethren; his beauty is [like] the firstling of a bullock; his horns the horns of an unicorn: with these shall he push the nations from one end of the earth to another.' Deuteronomy 33:13-17

Now, no one could say or prove that the horns of an unicorn represent any other fact or figure than the type which portrays the cross. For the one beam is placed upright, from which the highest extremity is raised up into a horn, when the other beam is fitted on to it, and the ends appear on both sides as horns joined on to the one horn. And the part which is fixed in the centre, on which are suspended those who are crucified, also stands out like a horn; and it also looks like a horn conjoined and fixed with the other horns. And the expression, 'With these shall he push as with horns the nations from one end of the earth to another,' is indicative of what is now the fact among all the nations.

For some out of all the nations, through the power of this mystery, having been so pushed, that is, pricked in their hearts, have turned from vain idols and demons to serve God. But the same figure is revealed for the destruction and condemnation of the unbelievers; even as Amalek was defeated and Israel victorious when the people came out of Egypt, by means of the type of the stretching out of Moses' hands,

and the name of Jesus (Joshua),

by which the son of Nave (Nun) was called. And it seems that the type and sign, which was erected to counteract the serpents which bit Israel, was intended for the salvation of those who believe that death was declared to come thereafter on the serpent through Him that would be crucified, but salvation to those who had been bitten by him and had betaken themselves to Him that sent His Son into the world to be crucified. For the Spirit of prophecy by Moses did not teach us to believe in the serpent, since it shows us that he was cursed by God from the beginning; and in Isaiah tells us that he shall be put to death as an enemy by the mighty sword, which is Christ.

[Uncle Dale]

...the first Christians tell us.

Oh, you don't need to search so far afield as Justin Martyr in

order to find Jesus inserted into the Hebrew Bible -- you can

find that sort of association in the canonical writings --

that Jesus led the Israelites through the wilderness, etc.

So, if a copy of the brass plates is ever dug up in Palestine,

the Mormons will have their proof, that Israelites knew that

Jesus would be their crucified messiah centuries before

Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians.

I don't buy it -- and neither does non-LDS scholarship.

Sorry about that.

UD

[CV75]

did the Church of the Devil remove many parts of the Christian Gospel from the old Hebrew scriptures, or did that Mother of Harlots only begin its work of changing the texts (as Nephi says) after the time of John the Revelator?

Because 1 Nephi Chapters 13 and 14 focus on the plain and precious things that were written by the twelve (Jews), and that these items pertain to the covenants, prophecies and fullness of the gospel as involving the Gentiles, and these would not have been presented to the Gentiles in written form until the ministry to the Gentiles had commenced, these would seem to be the elements that were removed by the great and abominable church early on, and that the Book of Mormon and the other records predicted to come forth restore. So I would say that these specific items were removed from the writings of the twelve as Nephi says. Aside from this particular action by a particular body for a particular purpose, there must be many other corruptions to the Bible (rather the records that eventually comprised it) all along the way. But the specific plain and precious "Gentile-centric" teachings that are pertinent to the "great and marvelous work" are laid out in the Book or Mormon like nowhere else.

[Uncle Dale]

...these would seem to be the elements that were removed by the

great and abominable church early on...

But AFTER the plates of brass had been inscribed, correct?

The plates of brass contained the fulness of the Gospel,

but the DSS biblical texts had been altered by the G&A Church.

Correct?

UD

[Robert F. Smith]

. . . three writing prophets from the brass plates,

giving detailed information regarding the future life and death

of Jesus, as Israel's coming messiah.

It gives the impression that Israelites prior to 600 BCE knew

Jesus was their God and would be crucified, etc. etc.

If that sort of Christological prophecy was inscribed in the

brass plates, then it somehow did not make it into the LXX

nor the Hebrew biblical texts found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.

If we could somehow recover the original five books of the Pentateuch,

would Genesis contain the "Book of Moses" published in the PGP? Were

such Christ-specific teachings known to the ancient Israelites, but

removed from the scriptures before Jesus ever walked the earth?

Oh, you don't need to search so far afield as Justin Martyr in

order to find Jesus inserted into the Hebrew Bible -- you can

find that sort of association in the canonical writings --

that Jesus led the Israelites through the wilderness, etc.

So, if a copy of the brass plates is ever dug up in Palestine,

the Mormons will have their proof, that Israelites knew that

Jesus would be their crucified messiah centuries before

Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians.

I don't buy it -- and neither does non-LDS scholarship.

UD

Dale,

In Post #56 of this thread (yesterday), I mentioned a particular incident in Luke in which a temple priest named Simeon certainly knew and quoted Jesus' name in Hebrew from the OT. The Gospel text is in koine Greek, but that was not the language in which the incident took place. This is merely one occasion in which it is clear that the name "Jesus" was well-known long before his birth. I had hoped that you would take a look at my short paper (which I linked to that post) on "Peshat - Plainness," http://www.scribd.co...eshat-Plainness, which has other such indicators. Such issues are unclear in the KJV, both because different committees translated different parts of it, and because words often have multiple meanings (in a broad semantic range). Naturally, it is difficult to see that in the absence of a knowledge of Hebrew.

So, no, you are quite wrong to suppose that Jesus is not mentioned frequently in the OT Hebrew (in the Massoretic Text we have from the rabbis, as well as in the Dead Sea Scrolls). The same is true in the texts from Qumran, leading a prominent Jewish scholar, Israel Knohl, to write about The Messiah before Jesus: The Suffering Servant of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Univ. of California Press, 2002). Knohl holds the Yehezkiel Kaufman Chair at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem (Kaufman was one of my teachers there back in the 1960s).

The same applies to the Enoch texts contained in the LDS Book of Moses (which is an integral part of RLDS Holy Scriptures). Non-Mormon Matthew Black, the greatest authority on the ancient Enoch texts known from Qumran and from the early canonical Jewish and Christian scriptures, told several LDS scholars in 1976-1977 (including Hugh Nibley) that Joseph Smith must have gotten his Enoch material from a sub-rosa Jewish group which had been secretly transmitting such texts for thousands of years. That was the only explanation which Black could imagine. Nibley covers the astonishing parallels in his Enoch the Prophet, Collected Works of Hugh Nibley vol. 2. Surely you are aware that the Book of 1 Enoch was part of the Scriptural Canon of several groups -- including Ethiopic Falasha Jews (most of whom now live in Israel) and Ethiopic Christians -- as noted by non-Mormon James Charlesworth in his 2-volume Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, xxiv. It was used by the Essenes of Qumran and by NT authors (see Jude). Charlesworth also discusses lost OT writings on p. xxi. Under such circumstances, it is no surprise that some prophets quoted in the Book of Mormon were heretofore unknown to us.

Of course, one of those "writing prophets," namely Zenos (manuscript variants Zenoz, Zinos) in Jacob 5 of the Book of Mormon, has an uncanny parallel in the Vision of Zenez (variants Zenec, Cinez, etc.) in Pseudo-Philo 28:4, which appears to summarize that very parable or allegory of the vineyard described in such detail in Jacob 5, and explained in chapter 6. I can cite the sources for any of these items which you find of interest.

Bob

[Uncle Dale]

...

knew and quoted Jesus' name in Hebrew from the OT.

...

If the name meant something like, "sun of righteousness," then we

might be surprised to find an association with Jesus -- but the

name is like "Joshua," the logical nomenclature for God saving,

or for God saving through the capacity of a man.

There were even anointed Jesus high priests in ancient times --

so again, reference to the name and its meaning is not surprising

in that context.

What is surprising is that Nephi (or was it Jacob?) said that an

angel had told him that the Messiah's name should be Christ.

As I said, there were anointed high priests with a Jesus NAME --

and so their TITLES might be rendered as Christ.

If we were to go strictly by "name," then the latter day movement

should have been called the "Church of Jesus."

But, by "name," I suppose the BoM writers also meant "title."

By the way, I'm 90% finished in marking all the "came to pass"

occurrences in the 1830 text ---- what an exhausting project!!!

Your Uncle Dale

[CV75]

But AFTER the plates of brass had been inscribed, correct?

The plates of brass contained the fulness of the Gospel, but the DSS biblical texts had been altered by the G&A Church.

My read is that the plain and precious things in these chapters particularly refer to the book with the covenants, prophecies (the fulness of the Gospel) as administered to the Gentiles by the twelve (Jews), and documented by them. Many other things went forth from the Jews to the Gentiles in the form of the Bible, but those specific and unique plain and precious parts that Nephi discusses pertain to that which was to be written at the time of the ministry of the Jews to the Gentiles in the eastern hemisphere and then to be removed by the great and abominable church to the disadvantage of the future Gentiles in the western hemisphere. So they would have been removed after the plates of brass had been inscribed.

I'm not sure the book in this instance is the entire Bible. In describing it, Nephi says it is "like unto the engravings which are upon the plates of brass, save there are not so many" and that its contents are "of great worth unto the Gentiles." They are found in a book, evidently one of the many that would have comprised the modern Bible had the plain and precious things not been taken out, and are of specific interest to the Gentiles because they explain, with prophesy, how the covenant with Israel benefits the Gentiles and hoe that in turn blesses the Jews.

The plates of brass may have had, but like the DSS, may not have had these Gentile-specific teachings because they were not necessary for the Jews at that time--albeit more necessary for the Josephites/Lehites than those who wrote the DSS. The Gentile-specific teachings, or the detailed plain and precious Gentile application of the Lord's covenants with Israel, were written by the twelve, went unto the Gentiles early on in the first "time of the Gentiles", were subsequently removed by the great and abominable church, and the rest of the books were compiled into the incomplete Bible and went into the hands of a later generation of Gentiles, specific to a dispensation where the Gospel is brought to the Gentiles first and then by them to the Jews. So the fulness of the Gospel as documented in the DSS or brass plates for the Jews in their day may not have had all the details the Gentiles needed to constitute the fulness of the Gospel for them during the ministry after Christ's ascension and in the latter days. I see these details constituting all the prophetic references to the history leading up to and including the restoration of the Gospel through the Gentiles, and their role in taking the Gospel to the Jews, establishing Zion and the New Jerusalem, etc.

Considering the association of the American Gentiles with the tribe of Joseph, the brass plates with Josephite prophecies would be very germane to the future role of both groups.

[Kevin Christensen]

Well, it quotes three writing prophets from the brass plates,

giving detailed information regarding the future life and death

of Jesus, as Israel's coming messiah.

It gives the impression that Israelites prior to 600 BCE knew

Jesus was their God and would be crucified, etc. etc.

If that sort of Christological prophecy was inscribed in the

brass plates, then it somehow did not make it into the LXX

nor the Hebrew biblical texts found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.

SNIP

Compare this from a John Tvedtnes review in RBBM.

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=4&num=1&id=104

Recently released fragments of the Dead Sea Scrolls discovered nearly half a century ago at Qumran support the view of the Book of Mormon that a knowledge of a savior-messiah was had in ancient Israel.13 One scroll describes a messianic figure who would speak in parables and warns that his opponents would malign him. Another document anticipates the idea that the Messiah would raise the dead. A scroll fragment of only five lines speaks of a "leader of the community" being "put to death" and mentions "piercings" or "wounds." The same text uses such messianic terms as the staff, the branch of David, and the root of Jesse. An Aramaic scroll contains concepts found in Luke 1 and even parallels some of the language of that chapter. Both documents refer to a messiah descended from the house of David. Each uses the phrases "he shall be called the son of the most high," "he will be great upon the earth," and "his kingdom is an eternal kingdom." Another messianic text speaks of the Messiah ruling over heaven and earth, healing the sick, and providing a resurrection from the dead. All of the concepts in this text are found in the Book of Mormon, often in the same combinations found in the Qumran document.

The other interesting thing about these particular fragments involves the half-century going by being these particular fragments were published. Known to the lucky few scholars who had access, they were kept secret for nearly fifty years.

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[Uncle Dale]

>Recently released fragments of the Dead Sea Scrolls discovered nearly half a century ago at Qumran...

I don't think that anybody is denying the fact that there was

a growing religious fervor in Judah, for a Divinely-sent

messiah of David's lineage.

According to the non-sectarian scholarly consensus, this hope

developed after the Persians disallowed a Davidic king in

the re-built Jerusalem. Thenceforth Israel (Judah) was under

foreign occupation for much of her history, and the promise

that God would be their king seemed distant for the occupied Jews.

According to LDS doctrine, the messianic expectations were

built into the "plan of salvation," ere the foundations of

the world were laid, and were revealed in six failed dispensations

and in one, final and successful dispensation.

Either the non-sectarian scholarly consensus is wrong, or

else the Mormon explanation is wrong -- but, in either case,

the expectations for a messiah by the end of the 1st century

BCE were strong in Judea -- and among the Qumranim as well.

It is not surprising to find messianic texts among the DSS.

Perhaps the early Christians had access to those texts, or

perhaps not -- no matter that, in both cases the respective

groups looked backward into the Hebrew Bible for support.

I suppose that Jesus was well aware of these messianic

expectations and prophecies. I suppose that he also fit his

public ministry to offer a response to that messianic fervor.

Matthew takes a special interest in this sort of "fulfillment."

So, yes, there were such expectations, and they did influence

the early Jesus movement, and they did influence the NT texts.

None of which proves that ancient Israelite religion was

based upon a knowledge of Jesus the son of Mary one day

arriving as God incarnate upon the earth, to die for the

sins of men, so that they might be resurrected, etc.

Mormon religion teaches that.

The modern non-sectarian scholarly consensus does not.

You'll not find Zenos, Zenock, and Neum taught in today's

colleges, universities, seminaries and Sunday schools...

Sorry about that.

UD

.

[CV75]

It gives the impression that Israelites prior to 600 BCE knew Jesus was their God and would be crucified, etc. etc.

If that sort of Christological prophecy was inscribed in the brass plates, then it somehow did not make it into the LXX nor the Hebrew biblical texts found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.

did the Church of the Devil remove many parts of the Christian Gospel from the old Hebrew scriptures, or did that Mother of Harlots only begin its work of changing the texts (as Nephi says) after the time of John the Revelator?

In 2 Nephi 25, Nephi explains that

[Robert F. Smith]

The modern non-sectarian scholarly consensus does not.

You'll not find Zenos, Zenock, and Neum taught in today's

colleges, universities, seminaries and Sunday schools...

Sorry about that.

UD

Dale,

As I pointed out a few posts above your comment,

Of course, one of those "writing prophets," namely Zenos (manuscript variants Zenoz, Zinos) in Jacob 5 of the Book of Mormon, has an uncanny parallel in the Vision of Zenez (variants Zenec, Cinez, etc.) in Pseudo-Philo 28:4, which appears to summarize that very parable or allegory of the vineyard described in such detail in Jacob 5, and explained in chapter 6. I can cite the sources for any of these items which you find of interest.

The scholars who translated and published that material from Pseudo-Philo were non-Mormon. As for Neum, that is a standard Classical Hebrew word ne'um meaning "Oracle, visionary utterance; decree" of God (Genesis 22:16, Numbers 24:3-4,15-16, II Samuel 23:1a,Proverbs 30:1, Psalm 36:2, Ezekiel 36:23, Zechariah 12:1, Malachi 2:1). Like the Hebrew name Malachi, "My messenger, angel," it is not clear whether the name is more than just a title. True, we only know of a prophet named Neum from the Book of Mormon, but how did Brother Joseph manage to find such an apt prophetic name? Maybe we need to adopt the absurd theory of Dan Vogel, that Joseph was a Harvard or Oxford scholar in order to account for all his well targeted "hits."

[Uncle Dale]

...

The scholars who translated and published that material from Pseudo-Philo were non-Mormon.

...

And if the scholarly consensus ever agrees that Jesus Christ the son of Mary,

his life story, passion events, crucifixion, universal vicarious atonement,

etc. were known and prophesied among the BCE Israelites and Jews, THAT will

be quite a development.

I predict that no such thing will ever happen, because such precise future

prophecies as we see detailed in the Book of Mormon did not (and do not)

exist among God's covenant people.

This very issue is argued and counter-argued throughout the Book of Mormon.

Those who accept the book as historical will naturally believe that such

writers as Zenos, Zenock, and Neum had crystal clear visions of future events.

As for the rest of us, I'm confident that we will never accept such notions.

UD

[Robert F. Smith]

And if the scholarly consensus ever agrees that Jesus Christ the son of Mary,

his life story, passion events, crucifixion, universal vicarious atonement,

etc. were known and prophesied among the BCE Israelites and Jews, THAT will

be quite a development.

I predict that no such thing will ever happen, because such precise future

prophecies as we see detailed in the Book of Mormon did not (and do not)

exist among God's covenant people.

This very issue is argued and counter-argued throughout the Book of Mormon.

Those who accept the book as historical will naturally believe that such

writers as Zenos, Zenock, and Neum had crystal clear visions of future events.

As for the rest of us, I'm confident that we will never accept such notions.

UD

Dale,

I admire your confidence, but is that wise in the face of facts which don't fit the scholarly consensus?

I have already pointed out how the actual names of kings Cyrus and Josiah were prophesied hundreds of years before they appeared, and that details in Pseudo-Philo 28 duplicate both the name of the visionary and the content of his prophecy in the Book of Mormon. I have noted not only that the gospels of Luke and Matthew make much of an OT fulfillment pattern in the lives of John the Baptizer and of Jesus, but that their names and missions are given by an angel before they are even conceived (Luke 1). This goes to the actual meaning of Jesus' name as a title of his soteriological function in the NT, and this is paralleled by the use of that very name in the OT (in Hebrew) and Book of Mormon in contexts in which Jesus Christ is being specifically predicted by name (I am not referring in any case to use of such a name for a variety of actual individuals in the OT, since, as you note, it was then a popular name -- as it is in modern Hispanic usage).

Naturally, anyone reading the Bible and Book of Mormon is free to disbelieve such claims and to attribute them to insertions after the fact (prophecy ex eventu), but, as you have observed, the discovery of the DSS have made such a position less tenable. Indeed, in the face of this powerful evidence, Jewish scholar Robert Eisenman (one of my former teachers) has even identified the Essenes as the "Christians," though he sees Paul as creating normative Christianity with a resurrected Messiah.

Anyhow, Happy New Year!!!

Bob