The Masoretic Text and the Dead Sea Scrolls
Should the original Hebrew Bible text be modified based on information obtained from the Dead Sea Scrolls?
Inside Qumran Cave four, where 15,000 Dead Sea Scroll fragments from more than 580 documents were found. Many of the Biblical fragments from Cave 4 preserve readings that deviate from the standard readings of the Masoretic Text. To scholars, these variants are uniquely valuable because of their antiquity: The Dead Sea Scrolls are 1,000 years older than our earliest complete edition of the Masoretic Text. Photo: Hershel Shanks
Almost all of the known Dead Sea Scrolls have been transcribed, transliterated, translated and either published or nearly published. But as soon as this task is accomplished, scholars are faced with new challenges: Do insights from the scrolls add to the Masoretic text (known as the original Hebrew Bible text, or the Tanakh, which roughly corresponds to the Protestant Old Testament), and if so, should the original Hebrew Bible text be modified based on this information?
Scholars from both sides of the divide weigh in on this issue below.
The Dead Sea Scrolls did not, as some early dreamers speculated, answer the age-old question: Where is the original Bible? Not, as it turns out, in the caves of Qumran. Nor do the scrolls include long lost books of the Bible. Furthermore, the scrolls did not utterly transform our image of the original Hebrew Bible text. Indeed, one of the most important contributions of the scrolls is that they have demonstrated the relative stability of the Masoretic text.
Nevertheless, there are differences (some quite significant) between the scrolls and the Masoretic text. Furthermore, these differences have made scholars rethink variant readings found in other ancient manuscripts. How should scholars treat these variants with relationship to the Masoretic text? Should they try to determine which readings are the most original and then incorporate them in a new critical edition of the Hebrew Bible? Or should they continue to use the Masoretic text as their base? Does a single version of the Hebrew Bible exist that is older than all others presently known, and if so, where is the original Bible? These questions are not merely academic; for any changes made to scholarly editions of the Masoretic text will have repercussions for decades of research and will affect all future Bible translations.
What is the significance of the Dead Sea Scrolls? Why are they so important to our understanding of the Bible, Christianity and Judaism? In our free eBook The Dead Sea Scrolls: Discovery and Meaning, find out what the scrolls tell us about the Bible, Christianity and Judaism.
As is typical in the world of academics and research, there are scholars on each side of every argument. The case of using the Dead Sea Scrolls to modify the Masoretic text is no different. Ronald S. Hendel of the University of California, Berkeley, argues that scholars can reconstruct a more original Hebrew Bible text if they “combine the best from each tradition.” James A. Sanders, founder and president emeritus of the Ancient Biblical Manuscript Center in Claremont, California, responds by urging scholars to “keep each tradition separate.”
And as far as answering the question: Where is the original Bible (and whether such a thing even exists): We don’t know. But to all scholars and Biblical archaeologists we can offer this advice: Keep digging!
This Bible History Daily feature was originally published on July 20, 2011.
Related reading in Bible History Daily
All-Access members, read more in the BAS Library
Not a BAS Library or All-Access Member yet? Join today.
Related Posts
Must-Read Free eBooks
Unlock Unlimited Access to the Bible's Past
Unlock Unlimited Access to the Bible's Past
Become an All-Access Member to explore the Bible's rich history. Get Biblical Archaeology Review in print, full online access, and FREE online talks. Plus, enjoy special Travel/Study discounts. Don't miss out—begin your journey today!
to the q& u it should be separate! if they like they may make a note where it defers for the one we have in English and not another translation! and for the love of god add in there the Hebrew and Greek and any other language found so others may learn…last time i checked just cause god cause you to be scholars it does not give anyone the right to hold bk the word of god to any! freely give freely receive new testament and old testament or other wise known Hebrew bible or many other names….as remembered {their may be more to this passage } if a stranger so journey in the land and will for sake his fathers house and all others to worship the one true god of Israel then he must be received unto them as and equal or family kinsfolk etc….so i do believe we should have it separated not another translation of it or revised edition this is bringing all ppl not to believe in god and well we will all be accountable for sure……..
The originals I believe were burned perhaps only leaving these scrolls and fragments. I also believe they were Ennesses (?) Which may be why they his these scrolls to protect them. Christianity enveloped from here.
Jehovah or Yehowah YHWH
(YaHoWaH adonai)lord God are just titles, the world needs to call the Creator by his name forget the jewish tradition, as Jesus told them Hyprocrites you honor me with your lips but your heart is off from me and many verses were he condems the jewish people. Psalms83:18
Looking in to archaeological things ,
I notice no one here mentions the ARAMAIC TEXTS , Marya = YHWH ,
Mshikka = Messiah , Hebrew YHWH Yod Hey Vav Hey , and so on ,
Have not so far discovered any direct translation YHWH which translates to Jehovah,
The name so i am finding, seems to consist of four letters , Dead sea scrolls should be translated chronologically if possible and from Masoretic & Aramaic , in to other languages , Yashuah / Jesus spoke Aramaic as did his disciples or is this also incorrect ?
Interesting to compare the transmission and editing/redaction of the ‘Old Testament’ with the Quran. In the latter case, God instructed Muhammad and his followers to rote-learn the Quran. Many were able to learn the whole Quran (and millions today are ‘Hafiz’ i.e. can recite the whole book). This was to prove more reliable than handwritten copying of texts, which we see has brought challenges for Jews and Christians.
One point that should be noted is the fact that these scrolls may be “shaimis” defective writings that contain HaShems name must be buried as per halakic law. So to put 100% reliance on them and ignore rabbi Asher and the sages knowledge and effort is not realistic.
From 1949 until 1992 no Jews were allowed to view or study the scrolls. The chief Christian priest in charge said publically that “Judaism is a dirty false belief” on international news..the Israeli gov soon after forced the release of the scrolls for the world to.see…I would wonder what was tampered with over 45 years in the hands of amtisemetic scholars who were and still are attempting to discredit the hebrew Tanakh ??
One thing to research is the fact that there are hundreds of admitted additions by antisemetic church fathers to the original koine Greek papyri of the New Testament. Johanna comma 1john57-8,.Mark16;9-20 and hundreds of other words changes made which appear in most of the Christian bibles today are not in the original pre Nicean papyri from 150ce.
So it seems Christian scholars ignore this and instead try to some how “prove” Judaism wrong by insinuating the masoretic text was corrupted by rabbis…I find this amusing. Their Jesus quoted Talmud “you notice the speck in your brothers eye but ignore the plank in your own”Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 149a…lol. G-d has a sense of humor…The NIV version of the NT notes all the roman additions to the koine Greek originals…Yet many Christians reject this truth and instead try to prove the Tanakh wrong.My artscroll Tanakh matches the Isaiah copper scroll at Qumram 99%…compare your Latin or KJV..Watch Tenak Talk on you tube for more detailed data.שלום
What copper scroll are you referring to? The Copper Scroll (3Q15) is one of the Dead Sea Scrolls found in Cave 3 near Khirbet Qumran. Unlike the others, it is not a literary work, but a list of 64 places where various items of gold and silver were buried or hidden.
Wikipedia the koine Greek new testament papyri.Look at papyri 75..no miracle healings or Jesus forgiving an Adulteress woman…Trinity and end of Mark not there either ..So why not focus on these later roman additions ?And leave our Torah and our people alone!
I looked at P75, and although many lacunae make passages such as John 11 very difficult to read, John 9 clearly has the testimony of the man born blind stating that Jesus healed him from blindness. The adulterous woman pericope was known to “float” around in various places, so not finding it in P75 is not an issue, especially with all the lacunae.
Regarding a couple of points claimed by yaakov.
1. There doesn’t seem to be any valid reason to believe that the prohibition on written or oral use of Yhwh was established until a relatively late period. The two Ketef Hinnom amulets dated to approximately 600 BCE use the name in a formula very nearly matching Hebrew biblical blessing. All of the archaeological finds (which are very few) which include reference to this god use Yh or Yhwh or something very close — nothing at all like the rabbinical substitutions. In fact, according to authoritative jewish sources, prohibitions didn’t exist prior to the Talmud. Certainly there are thousands of times in the scripture that the name is specifically stated to be made *known* — not hidden or veiled or evaded.
2. As for the translations, only cave 4 (which contained 40% of the finds) was delayed, and jews weren’t the only people who were aggravated by that. However, as to the original texts themselves, the evidence is substantial. Unlike documents from later times, there haven’t been any issues concerning forgeries, tampering, or alterations.
My potential problems with “generally accepted” ideas about the scrolls are related to early dating, and the practice of deeming certain texts as “canon” and treating others — where they have survived — as basically invalid. The same is true of texts that ended up in the “Christian canon”. The picking and choosing has been used retroactively by authorities to support their ideas of what is correct. And since there are variations even in the earliest manuscripts available, it’s clear that neither the Jewish nor Christian texts were “fixed” until fairly late.
The Dead Sea Scrolls are among some of the most valuable aids to help us sort through, analyze, and understand the development of belief which emerged and characterized three of the world’s most significant religions. I appreciate the general scholarly work BAS makes available. Thanks.
To Kurt, the NWT translation committee ( how many even had a degree in Biblical languages) decided on jehavoh as reasonable. By what authority?
Lets keep in mind that their is a variant in Deut that claim Mount Gerizim as the holy mountain chosen by God. This sounds more logical that they were told God would choose the place and then it took a few hundred years till David captured Jerusalem and so it was decided that was the place God chose.
The Samaritans may be right on this one. The plains of Samaria are more the Israelite Plymouth rock when they crossed the Jordan then a mountaintop fortress.
All other attestations to Jerusalem Oh Jerusalem, could merely be the Southern version of events
https://foundationjudaismchristianorigins.org/ftp/dead-sea-scrolls/unpub/DSS-deuteronomy.pdf