Thread: Puritans/Reformers, the Dead Sea Scrolls (and other modern finds)

We all deeply respect the material of the Puritans & Reformers, but given the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, how does this affect their writings? I mean, they were expert, unparalleled exegetes which is why they are still useful today. So why not simply rely upon their works as the apex? How has modern commentary benefited from the use of the Dead Sea scrolls in a way that the Puritans could never have been?

I'm thinking mainly in terms of their writings on the nature, Inspiration etc of the Scriptures. Are our arguments today enhanced at all by more recent discoveries (DSS) and better methods of research?

Once again, if their arguments are still considered unsurpassed, why not use them exclusively and point people to them instead of re-stating them? But if the DSS has any further impact, what would it be?

C'mon...Perg's gonna get sick eatin' so much popcorn.

The Dead Sea Scrolls comprised of OT writings and various other contemporary pseudographic writings such as the Book of Enoch, Jubilees and other apocryphal writings. One advantage was that obscure OT words which translators were unsure of had their meaning clarified when it was seen how the same word was used in different writings. Within the Qumran caves there were manuscripts from every OT book except Esther. The Dead Sea Scrolls helped fill in some of the blanks about the Jewish world of the first century into which the church was born.

Previous to the discovery of the scrolls the oldest OT document was dated quite late. Now the odest scroll dated back to around 300 BC.

Tyndale's translation was the first bible since Vulgate to use the ancient manuscripts Tyndales bible was effectively the grandfather of the Geneva bible. The Dead Sea Scrolls would not really have changed the Reformed/Puritan doctrine as they looked at the whole bible rather than just individual obscure words. Other modern finds from archaeology simply confirm biblical data which was previously disputed. Case in point, Ur of the Chaldees the existance of which was was once, but now scholars tell us Backgammon was first played in Ur.

It's not simply the Dead Sea Scrolls, but a host of other discoveries that have happened since the 17th century: advances in linguistics, koine Greek grammar, Hebrew, the notion of tense as including aspect etc.; the discover of other Semitic languages, papyri etc.; the 20th century breakthrough in eschatology.

We need the Puritans because they help us see what our particular cultural blinkers are (modernity is a powerful animal that warps everything in its path). However, they aren't infallible, and we cannot ignore what has happened since then, just like the Puritans couldn't ignore the massive discoveries of renaissance humanism and the like.

The two temptations we must resist are:

[1] So living in the past that we can't connect with people in the present culture (the bomb shelter approach).

[2] So living in the present and think that all things new are better, that we forget we have major cultural blinkers, and that we stand on the shoulders of greats from the past.

Confessional Christians, like ourselves here on the PB, tend to run the risk of [1], as I have too many times in the past.

Blessings.

Originally Posted by JohnOwen007

It's not simply the Dead Sea Scrolls, but a host of other discoveries that have happened since the 17th century: advances in linguistics, koine Greek grammar, Hebrew, the notion of tense as including aspect etc.; the discover of other Semitic languages, papyri etc.; the 20th century breakthrough in eschatology.

The two temptations we must resist are:

[1] So living in the past that we can't connect with people in the present culture (the bomb shelter approach).

[2] So living in the present and think that all things new are better, that we forget we have major cultural blinkers, and that we stand on the shoulders of greats from the past.

Confessional Christians, like ourselves here on the PB, tend to run the risk of [1], as I have too many times in the past.

Blessings.

As to paragraph 1, that is what I was aiming at. Are these particulars merely a modern confirmation of what the Puritans accomplished or are the Puritans indeed surpassed by these?

BTW, to what "20th century breakthrough in eschatology" do you refer?