Bible Books: One Bible from Many?

042

From the earliest discovery of two different versions of Isaiah in Qumran Cave 1 (one a precursor to the received Hebrew text, the other anomalous to Qumran), it was clear that the Dead Sea Scrolls would radically change the history of the biblical text as we knew it. After all, at the time, the earliest known copies of the Hebrew Bible dated from the tenth century C.E. (with the exception of the fragmentary Nash Papyrus, which contains only 24 lines and probably dates to the second century B.C.E.). The Qumran caves provided remnants of more than 250 biblical scrolls dating from the third century B.C.E. through the first century C.E.

The picture was further enriched by the subsequent discovery of biblical materials at Masada and in the Judean desert caves associated with the second-century C.E. Bar Kokhba Revolt against Rome. Together, these documents have opened a window on the biblical text in the centuries that constitute the formative period for postbiblical Judaism and the background for the rise of Christianity.

The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible attempts to present readers with English translations of these ancient biblical manuscripts. To some, this may seem to be of little use, since most of the differences between the Qumran biblical texts and the Masoretic Hebrew Bible (the standard, received text) are minute: For example, where the Masoretic and Samaritan texts have the Hebrew equivalent of “the cattle of Egypt” in Exodus 9:6, the Qumran text (4Qpaleo-Exodm) and the Septuagint have “the cattle of the Egyptians.” Nevertheless, this English translation of the scrolls, with their new readings clearly marked in italics, should for the most part be helpful to readers trying to gain a general understanding of the major variants found in the Qumran texts. For example, the same Qumran manuscript cited above (as well as the Samaritan Pentateuch) has a long addition to Exodus 9:5, which emphasizes the participation of both Moses and Aaron in asking Pharaoh for Israel’s freedom.

While it is true that scholars will continue to debate what these variations mean (are they indicative of variant texts that existed already in biblical times, later textual corruptions or interpretive additions to the original text?), it is still valuable to be able to see at a glance the kinds of textual variations that have led to new theories about the development of the biblical text. Furthermore, now that these English translations are readily available, it should be possible to quiet the silly conspiracy theories that developed during the long delays in publication of the scrolls.

Although all of the books of the canonical Hebrew scriptures except for Esther have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, the material is fragmentary. Most manuscripts are made up only of tiny, broken pieces. This posed special problems for the translators. They decided that, for the most part, the best-preserved texts would serve as the main text, with variants from other Dead Sea Scroll manuscripts listed at the bottom of each page. Whenever a word or passage is absent from the Dead Sea Scrolls, the editors fill in the gap based on readings found in three other sources: the Masoretic (or rabbinic) Bible manuscripts, the earliest of which date to the tenth century C.E.; the Septuagint, the Greek version of the Hebrew Bible, from the second century B.C.E. but known only from copies dating to the early Christian period; and the Samaritan Pentateuch maintained by a small sect of Judaism in Israel, which claims that it dates from before the Christian era. This provides a smooth reading even when part of a verse is missing from the scrolls. Sometimes the translators of The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible have chosen to highlight interesting variants in the scroll texts by the use of italics. Variations that have significance in English translation are pointed out in footnotes.

The text of The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible is, therefore, a composite text, which leads us to the main problem with this volume. The multiple variations in the biblical Dead Sea Scrolls have shown us that we can no longer speak of only one version of the Hebrew biblical texts in late antiquity. The Book of Exodus, for example, circulated in a variety of forms, each substantially the same 043as our book but including its own specific readings and some noticeable variants, as we have seen. The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible gives the false impression that for some reason one text from among those that we now know to have existed should be given prominence and translated as the main text. But most of the translated texts have been selected simply based on their state of preservation, not because they are necessarily more accurate or in any way more authoritative. The authors would have been better off listing all the variants in columns so that no one text would have been given prominence and so that readers would come away with a truer sense of the various manuscript families or groups that competed with one another in ancient times.

A similar problem with the book is apparent in its title. The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible suggests that a specific collection of texts constitutes the Hebrew or Jewish Bible, the Christian Old Testament. Yet if one attempts to define the term “Hebrew Bible,” it becomes apparent that those books included in the sacred scriptures vary from group to group and from time to time. Today the Jewish, Catholic and Protestant versions of the Bible include some different books and, since these books circulated originally as separate scrolls, they also appear in different orders in modern editions. The concept of a canon that determined which books were to be included and which were to be excluded from the official scriptures was already of concern at the time of the origins of rabbinic Judaism and early Christianity, even though the final decisions had not yet been made. Yet it is possible to investigate what books were considered sacred to the Jewish people in that period. One clue is provided by the Dead Sea Scrolls. Since they predate the early Christians, the scrolls do not inform us about the New Testament canon, but they do indicate which books of the Hebrew Bible were important to the Qumran sectarians. One indication of their importance is that they were left in the caves at Qumran; another is the frequency with which they were preserved (the number of manuscripts of each). Of course, from the fragmentary nature of many of the scrolls, we cannot tell if there was any specific order to the texts of the holy scriptures. The editors of The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible, however, have basically assumed a canon that is more inclusive than that in Jewish editions of the Hebrew Bible, but not as inclusive as, say, the Catholic Bible (which also includes Judith, Susannah and Maccabees, for example). Further, in arranging this volume they have assumed an order corresponding to the Five Books of Moses, followed by Jubilees, the Prophets with 1 Enoch and Daniel, the Psalms and apocryphal books such as Ben Sira and Tobit. In other words, the authors assume that certain apocryphal and pseudepigraphical works were considered “biblical” by the ancient sectarians of Qumran, and hence ought to be included in this “Bible.”

Based on quotations from these works in sectarian texts, it does appear that Jubilees and the Testament of Levi were considered canonical at Qumran. However, there is really no way of being certain that the expanded canon proposed by the authors of this volume is accurate and that any of the other books now deemed extrabiblical were truly considered biblical at Qumran. The editors do acknowledge, at least to some extent, this problem in their introduction where they write that “there was, and there was not, a Bible” at the turn of the millennium and that “Dead Sea Scrolls Scriptures” might be a better title for the book.

Among the most valuable aspects of this volume are the editors’ introductions to each 044book. The introductions provide information on the various biblical manuscripts available for each text as well as on the character of the texts preserved among the scrolls. They represent an up-to-date survey of the state of scholarship on these manuscripts and will be read with great interest by scholars. The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible is an important contribution that will provide much information for those who are sufficiently schooled in biblical studies and in the Dead Sea Scrolls to place the material in proper perspective. But it needs to be read with caution lest false assumptions are made about the authority of particular texts or their canonicity. As we are nearing the full publication of all of the Dead Sea Scrolls, including all the Greek and Hebrew biblical material, we must try to find a way to convey to general readers the full scope of the textual traditions preserved in the scrolls and to open this fascinating material to the widest possible audience.

From the earliest discovery of two different versions of Isaiah in Qumran Cave 1 (one a precursor to the received Hebrew text, the other anomalous to Qumran), it was clear that the Dead Sea Scrolls would radically change the history of the biblical text as we knew it. After all, at the time, the earliest known copies of the Hebrew Bible dated from the tenth century C.E. (with the exception of the fragmentary Nash Papyrus, which contains only 24 lines and probably dates to the second century B.C.E.). The Qumran caves provided remnants of more than 250 biblical scrolls […]