Books in Brief
006
The First New Testament
David Estrada and William White, Jr.
(Thomas Nelson Inc., 1978, $5.95)
This work is a popularly written account and analysis of the 1971 “discovery” of Father Jose O’Callaghan that certain fragments from the Dead Sea Scrolls come from first century copies of New Testament documents. The authors are David Estrada, a graduate of Westminster Theological Seminary and a member of the faculty of the University of Barcelona, Spain, and William White, a Ph.D. graduate from the Dropsie College of Hebrew and Cognate Learning.
The fragments all come from Cave 7 of Qumran; thus scholars identify them as 7Q4, 7Q5, etc. Previously, they had been published as unidentified scraps of writing in volume III of Discoveries in the Judaean Desert of Jordan, Les ‘petites grottes’ de Qumran (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1962), and in plate XXX in the accompanying volume of plates. Father O’Callaghan has now made the following identifications:
Fragment 4 = 1 Timothy 3:16; 4:1–3
Fragment 5 = Mark 6:52, 53
Fragment 61 = Mark 4:28
Fragment 62 = Acts 27:38
Fragment 7 = Mark 12:17
Fragment 8 = James 1:23, 24
Fragment 9 = Romans 5:11, 12
Fragment 10 = 2 Peter 1:15
Fragment 15 = Mark 6:48
O’Callaghan believes that his identifications of Fragment 4 and Fragment 5 are absolutely correct; the others he concedes, are less certain.
After the brief introduction by O’Callaghan himself, in which he defends his position, Estrada and White begin their work with a chapter entitled “Startling News from Qumran.” This sets the stage. Much of the remainder of the book is taken up with a fascinating account of the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls and of O’Callaghan’s identification of these small fragments among them: One chapter is even devoted to a description of O’Callaghan’s person, personality, and credentials. He is a husky, gray-haired man who is described as a careful, quiet scholar with a charming personality. He holds two doctorates, in philosophy and classics, is multilingual, editor of the scholarly journal Studia Papyrologica, author of a number of books and articles, and currently Professor of Greek Papyrology and Paleography at the Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome. This part of the book is by far the best. (I was especially impressed with the beautiful description of modern Israel in Chapter 3.) The whole narrative pulses with excitement and wonderment that comes only in times of great discovery. The authors capture and preserve this excitement for their readers.
But at this point the worth of the book comes to an end. O’Callaghan’s identifications generally have been rejected by scholars. The scraps of writing are simply too small to be identified with certainty, each containing only a few letters. Moreover, O’Callaghan must resort to scribal error, textual variation, and other devices to account for the differences between these fragments and the New Testament passages with which he identifies them. While these devices can be legitimate explanations for deviant New Testament texts, one needs more writing than these scraps to know whether they represent New Testament texts at all. For example, C. H. Roberts, an eminent papyrologist of Oxford University, after a brief analysis of O’Callaghan’s identification of 7Q8 with James 1:23–24 says that “attempts to identify scraps such as these are a waste of time … Identifications on this scale are an exercise not in scholarship but fantasy.” (Journal of Theological Studies 23 (1972) 446–447).
Nevertheless, Estrada and White proceed as if the matter were settled, as if O’Callaghan’s identifications are definite. It becomes apparent while reading the book that for Estrada and White more is at stake than simply academic argument. For them, this discovery disproves theories of negative higher criticism which cast doubt on the authenticity and historicity of the New Testament. Estrada and White strongly suggest that critics who reject O’Callaghan’s identification do so because of their theological bias. Indeed, much of the book is devoted to describing the evils of higher criticism.
The following typifies the tone of the book: “But the professors in the seminaries apply the twisted logic of the eighteenth century German philosopher Immanuel Kant and disguise their basic unbelief in the credibility of the New Testament with their layers of academic but unintelligible jargon” (pp. 39–40). The authors’ attitude is that if archaeology and papyri were given their full due, such unbelief would be overthrown.
Curiously enough, the authors themselves know that the scraps are beyond certain identification. On page 125, for instance, they write, “A word of caution must be stated here. The material evidence from Cave 7 is so small that the very best deductions are, and will always be, carefully weighed guesses.” And on page 41: “The material from Cave 7 is so small and provides so little text for comparison and examination that no final probability can be assigned.” In spite of this, Estrada and White manage to convey a sense of certainty that the New Testament is absolutely represented in these fragments, and they use them to vent their spleen against “those who would hide behind a facade of academic objectivity but who simply seek acceptance by the majority and preferment from their peers.”
Clearly the authors have mingled personal belief with scholarship in such a way as to remove themselves from the realm of objectivity. Since 1972 I have found O’Callaghan’s suggestions interesting and deserving of study. After reading this book my enthusiasm has waned.
The First New Testament
David Estrada and William White, Jr.
(Thomas Nelson Inc., 1978, $5.95)
You have already read your free article for this month. Please join the BAS Library or become an All Access member of BAS to gain full access to this article and so much more.