Basic HTML Version
28
especially those from the "Bar Kokhba"
era (132-135) and from Masada
(ancient Jewish fortress which fell in
73),
confirm
thc accuracy of thc present
text to an
even grealer degree.
Bruce
points out that "the Biblical Hebrew
texts at Murabba'at conform
exaclly
to
the consonantal text preserved by the
later Massoretes" (p. 57).
Biblical fragments from Masada
"contaio a text which, like those of
Murabba'at, bear the stamp of the tradi–
tional recension, and push back the date
of this
stabi/ized Hebre/ll text
to a time
no latel' than the fiYJt JeUJiJh revolt>'
("Dead Sea Scrolls,"
Encyclopaedia
Britannica,
1970 ed ition).
The finds lend confirmation to what
other evidence had
told
111
tdl along.
Ancient and medieval historians have
maintained clown through the ages that
our Hebrew Bible has been accurately
handed clown from the edition made by
Ezra.
The Jcwish historian, Josephus, a
priest of the scholarly ranks, tells how
carefully the Holy Scriptures were
preserved. After pointing out how the
Hebrew Bible was finally completed in
the days of King Artaxcrxes of Persia,
he states:
"It is true, our history hath been
written since Artaxerxes very particu–
larly, but hath not been esteemed of the
like authority with the former by our
forefathers, because therc hath not been
an exact succession of prophets since
that time; and how firmly we have
given credit to those books of our own
nation, is evident by what we do, for
during so many ages as have already
passed,
no one
has been so bold as
eithel' to add
any thing to them,
Jo take
any thing
from them,
or Jo make all)'
change
in them"
(Contra Apion, 1,
8).
No wonder the official Jewish com–
munity pr<:scrved it so faithfully. They
venerated the text as divine - and
would have considered any alteration a
sin in the extreme!
Sectarians and heretics treated the
text quite differently.
Qumran Texts Corrupted
The Esscne group at Qumran accepted
and prcserved more than one form
of thc Biblc text. In discussing these
TIJe
PLAIN TRUTH
variants, one scholar points out "there
is one thing which is quite cer–
tain:
theu pages did not have the
approval of the Palestinian rabbinic
a"thorities"
(H. E. Del Medico,
The
Riddle of Jhe Scroi!J,
translatcd by H .
Garner, p. 194).
Another authority tells us: "Moshe
Greeoberg reminds us that the sect
which left us this treasure of manu–
scripts had rejected the authority of thc
Jerusalem priesthood and withdrawn
from the mainstream of Jewish history.
Forros of the text which it was willing
to use and copy may have been already
rejected by the more orthodox leaders of
Judaism" (Burrows,
More Light on the
Dead Sea Scrolls,
p.
161).
This is how the Jewish authori–
ties viewed thc situation. Sincc these
inaccurat~
Qumran texts werc refused
approval of the official authorities,
they therefore would not have the
approval of Israel's God !
We do oot have to go to the Qumran
scrolls to try to find the W ords of
Israel's God. That word has becn care–
fully preserved over the centuries, in the
officially approved versíon. And the
great importance of the Dead Sea
Scrolls is this: they
confirm
the author–
ity of and correctness of the traditional
text.
The Posítive Contribution
Another valuable contribution made
by all the manuscripts is in the matter
of language. Thc scarcity of ancient
Hebrew manuscripts makes cach addi–
tional one, even though fragmentary,
potentially of great value. The notable
contribution toward Semitíc philology,
palaeography, and epigraphy of the
manuscripts is beyond dispute.
The Scrolls contribute to the total
sum of this knowledgc, including geo–
graphical, historical, and biographical
details of the times.
A significant point, which sorne of
the more cooservative theologians tend
to rnioimize, is the additional light
sorne of these variant texts throw on
Bible understanding itself. Even when
realizing the faithful conservation of
the Masoretic text, there are sorne pas–
sages which are still not clear.
Sorne Bible translations will insert
January
1971
footnotes with the statement, "Hebrew
obscure" or "passage obscure." The text
is not at fault, but the knowledge of
how to translate this particular Hebrew
ídiom is lacking!
It
is inevitable that
the present-day knowledge of ancient
Hcbrew would be imperfect.
But sometimes in such cases, a variaot
text, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls or the
Septuagint, will give a
paraphrase
which elucidates the real meaning of
the obscure passage. These unofficial
paraphrases give us tbe possible mean–
ing of the official text in sorne few cases
where our knowledge is otherwise
deficient.
M. H. Goshen-Gottstein of the
Hebrew University explains this impor–
tant point quite clearly: "The Scrolls
help us thus to solve a number of
cmces
( difficult problems] in the Masoretic
text and to gain a deeper insight ínto it.
But we must remember that they
only
present to m in a clearer light certain
facts which are formd a/so in the MT
(Masoretic Text)"
(Text and L4ngttage
in Bible and Q11mran,
p.
87).
Above all, these fiods confirm the
authenticíty of the Bible. Writing spe–
:: ifically of the Qumran Isaiah. Scrolls,
Yigacl Yadio, famed soldier-archae–
ologist, gave this summary:
"There is no question that the
over–
llihelming significance
of the texts lies
in the fact that these scrolls, which are
about a thousand years
OLDER
than any
Hebrew text hitherto discovered, vary
only slightly from the text as it is
known to us and used today.
It th11s
proves the antiqttit)' and a11thenticity of
tbe MaJOI'etic texf' (The Message of
the Scroils,
p.
89).
Of this there is no guestion!
The Masoretic text has been very
accurately preserved. But you may say,
"That's
interesting,
but of what real
IMPORTANCE
is Ít?"
IJVh;
has such painstaking care been
taken to maintain the text - and
WHO
was really responsible?
You need to understand the answers
- the reasons. They're made plain in
our
fREE
reprint article, "Do We Have
the Complete Bible ?" and our booklct
Proof of the Bíble.
Sent only by personal
request. O