News-Record.com

This is in fact an offensive, biased and misleading exhibit, in which the current state of research on the Dead Sea Scrolls has been carefully distorted to cater to a Christian perspective.

In a word, the Raleigh museum (which is run by the North Carolina Department of the Environment) agreed to downplay and conceal the evidence brought to light by a major group of secular-minded, Jewish researchers who, over the past decade, have rejected the old "Essene" theory of scroll origins, and to physically exclude them from participating in the lecture series accompanying the exhibit.

Since the museum is a state-run institution, the role of government officials in displaying religiously controversial artifacts must also be addressed.

This is, of course, a serious issue that should be carefully examined by major news sources. Instead, we have silence, viciously implied innuendo about Jewish culture coming from North Carolina authorities, mendacious claims about a fabricated "consensus" that doesn't exist, and a continuing pattern of catering to evangelical (and, I might add, financial) interests.

For further information on this propoganda masquerading as an exhibit, previously dished out to the public in various private "science" museums around the country, see, e.g., http://www.nowpublic.com/culture/did-christian-agenda-lead-biased-dead-sea-scrolls-exhibit-san-diego .

To View from Here:

Judging from the Nowpublic article you linked, what happened in San Diego was unsavory, perhaps even a disgrace.

However, as Nancy Mclaughlin indicated, the Raleigh exhibit was "created specifically for the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences."

So my question is: do you have any reason to believe that the Raleigh exhibit is in fact comparable to the San Diego one?

With best wishes,

D. Fish

To View from Here:

Judging from the Nowpublic article you linked, what happened in San Diego was unsavory, perhaps even a disgrace.

However, as Nancy Mclaughlin indicated, the Raleigh exhibit was "created specifically for the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences."

So my question is: do you have any reason to believe that the Raleigh exhibit is in fact comparable to the San Diego one?

With best wishes,

D. Fish

D. Fish,

You need only look at their website, which contains the same type of revolting mendacities as the ones put forward in the previous exhibits.

In fact, the situation here seems to be even worse. The museum's press release states that the "group" who, according to the exhibitors, wrote the scrolls "saw themselves as the 'true Israel' and viewed those living in Jerusalem, including the priesthood at the Temple, as corrupt."

What most readers of the press release will not know, is that the expression "true Israel" was a term first used by a number of early Church fathers, who believed that Christians were the "true Israel" and that the Jews were evil sinners. The expression is found nowhere in the Dead Sea Scrolls, and its outrageous use here, by employees of the North Carolina Department of the Environment, amply reveals the intent of the exhibitors.

The press release also asserts: "Most scholars believe the Scrolls were copied and composed by a group that broke away from mainstream Judaism to live a communal life at Qumran..."

But there is today no evidence whatsoever to support the statement that "most scholars believe" this. In fact, even the San Diego exhibitors apparently felt that they were obliged to correct this assertion in their catalog, where they wrote that "many" scholars still defend the old Qumran-sectarian theory.

What is really going on here, is that the people who put together this traveling exhibit happen to "believe" in that theory, and they are trying to use the exhibit and accompanying, biased lecture series to fabricate a consensus that no longer exists.

The present reality is that "many" other scholars now believe that Qumran was a fortress and pottery factory, that no sect ever lived there or copied scrolls there, and that the Scrolls are the writings of various Jewish groups living in the Jerusalem region, taken down to the desert for safekeeping during the siege and sacking of that city by the Romans.

Why doesn't the museum inform the public that the scrolls were copied by over 500 scribes? Why don't they summarize any of the other historical, textual and archaeological evidence relied on by the scholars who have concluded that the Qumran-sectarian theory was a blunder of science, and that the scrolls must be the remains of libraries from the Jerusalem area?

Finally, look at the museum's list of lecturers. Jodi Magness, who is known to be a doctrinaire defender of the old Qumran-sectarian theory, will be giving the lecture on the "archaeology of Qumran." Why didn't the museum invite the prominent Israel Antiquities Authority archaeologists Yitzhak Magen and Yuval Peleg, who, after ten years of excavations at Qumran, concluded that Magness was fundamentally wrong, that the site was a fortress and pottery factory and had nothing to do with the scrolls hidden in the caves?

So I repeat: why is the museum offering the public a one-sided and outdated interpretation of the archaeology of Qumran? Don't they think people living in North Carolina might be interested in learning about the results of the Magen and Peleg excavations?

What is worse, why didn't the museum invite University of Chicago historian Norman Golb to lecture? As is well known, Golb is one of the world's leading proponents of the Jerusalem theory, whose many writings on this topic include the important book Who Wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls?, as well as key essays published in the Cambridge History of Judaism and the Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society.

This is actually a crucial question, because Golb has put out a whole series of articles (available on the Oriental Institute website) specifically exposing the errors contained in these museum exhibits. Was it appropriate for a governmental institution to simply ignore these articles, without even informing the public that the claims made in the exhibit have been subjected to scathing criticism by a leading scholar in the field?

So I conclude again that this is a biased and misleading exhibit, designed to cater to a "true Israel" Christian perspective, and whose creators have pulled the wool over the pubic's eyes by carefully distorting the current state of research.

What we have here, in fact, is an obvious insult to the public's intelligence. Judging from the mediatized success of previous exhibits, however, the Raleigh museum's press release will simply be published by one local newspaper after another, with no mention whatsoever of the ongoing controversy concerning these exhibits -- let alone any serious investigative research into the conflict.

Dear View,

I assume you are Jewish, judging from the intensity of your emotional involvement. Even if you're not, your response seems a bit vitriolic and over-reactive to me.

The fact is; any number of scientific positions and schools of thought tend to be committed to "traditional" or established interpretations of data, from evolutionary theory to the nature of subatomic particles, etc. It shouldn't be of any great concern that there is an "orthodox" or prevailing view here. Yes, other views need to be included; but why bring in this “true Israel” Christian issue.

It is also just fine with me that there are alternative views; some of which I am familiar with from previous readings on the subject. But the Qumran/Essene view has certainly been the most prevalent one from early on; especially since scrolls were found in the vicinity of the biblical texts detailing the teachings and practices of the Essenes. But the other view certainly has merit. I just think your reaction includes a little axe-grinding.

And frankly, as a Christian, I see no connection whatsoever between the “true Israel” concept of the Essenes and the NT viewpoint. Some have conjectured that John the Baptist was an Essene, or even Yeshua himself. But these views have no palpable evidence and have been discounted. For one thing, the Essenes antedated the Christian movement, and had no provable connection to it.

Therefore, the biblical/Christian idea of the Church being the “true Israel” was never based on the idea that OT Israel was not “true;” or that the continuing Jewish community was also not “true;” only that the life and teachings of Messiah (Jesus) regarding the primacy of loving God and neighbor were closer to the essential OT Spiritual intent; AND that Yeshua was indeed the true Messiah, and throough his sacrificial death became the perfect Yom Kippur for his people Israel, and the Savior of humanity. Paul’s discourse on the nature of Israel in Romans 9-11 certainly asserts the superiority of Yeshua’s atonement over all that came before and the futility of legalism; but he also says:

“I tell the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit, that I have great sorrow and continual grief in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Messiah for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises; of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Messiah came . .. .” (Romans 9: 1-5)

These, and other NT teachings, are not anti-Semitic (against Semites – a racial term, not religious), but rather a theological viewpoint. You can believe it (NT) or not, of course, but it has NADA to do with the Dead Sea Scrolls or the “true Israel” concept of the Essenes, who were far from the only Jewish sect which saw itself as the “true Israelite tradition;” including the Sadducees and the Pharisees. There are still today Jewish sects who feel this way.

To assert that this somehow prejudices the exhibit against Judaism, and FOR Christianity, because of some kind of governmental conspiracy to advance the more traditional view and exclude newer Jewish ones is utterly unfounded: especially since your “true Israel” connection is a real bust. There may be other reasons, such as bureaucratic or scientific infighting; but I doubt seriously that it is because the Essene connection is seen to support Christianity and not Judaism. My understanding has always been that the Scrolls simply corroborate the received texts of both the Christian OT and the Tenach. Sounds to me like there is more at issue here than a reasoned campaign to include all views of the scrolls – which I support.

Dear Nikos,

Part of the problem, as I see it, with your defense of the "true Israel" statement, is that you seem to be presupposing that the Essenes lived at Qumran and wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls. This is precisely the view that has been rejected, on the basis of specific evidence hidden from the public in the museum's exhibit, by each of the major archaeological teams that have reexamined the evidence over the past decade -- the Donceels, Hirschfeld and, most recently, Magen and Peleg.

As I said above, the term "true Israel" is not found anywhere in the Dead Sea Scrolls. What is more, many researchers now believe that the scrolls are the remains of libraries from the Jerusalem area, that their contents are essentially eclectic, and that they include a corpus of around 100 texts written precisely by the "corrupt" Temple priests referred to in the museum's press release.

You speak of the "'true Israel' concept of the Essenes" -- I know of no historical evidence whatsoever that the Essenes had any such concept. This is a projection backwards of early Christian ideas, in light of the theory (which has in fact been around for many centuries) that Essenes were a basic part of Jesus' background. But nothing in the Dead Sea Scrolls corroborates that theory. To be sure, various books exist (all of them written before the research of the past decade) about "The Dead Sea Scrolls and Christianity," etc., but they are always based on speculative arguments and assumptions that have now been rejected by all kinds of researchers.

While I appreciate your desire to see the "true Israel" idea as theological rather than antisemitic, I believe it is commonly recognized (see, e.g., the four-volume History of Antisemitism by Leon Poliakov, in particular the first volume, From the Time of Christ to the Court Jews) that these matters cannot be separated as easily as that, but are in fact painfully interwoven in history. And I believe part of living together today as Jews and Christians is acknowledging the painfully interwoven Jewish and Christian pasts and exercising caution (here I am referring to the museum) when it comes to the appropriation of a Jewish cultural treasure for Christian purposes.

This being said, even if "true Israel" were merely a theological affair, the museum curators issued this false statement about the authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Why did they do this? Since the museum is run by the North Carolina Department of the Environment, its personnel cannot be engaged in theological controversies. They are obliged by law to stick to a scientific presentation of the evidence. And as I stated earlier, the expression "true Israel" doesn't even occur in the Dead Sea Scrolls. What, then, is the scientific basis for this assertion contained in the museum's press release?

Finally, I must disagree with the implication of your assertion that "the Qumran/Essene view has certainly been the most prevalent one from early on." That was indeed true early on, but it is no longer true. Yes, many traditional scrolls scholars -- those who based their careers on the Qumran-Essene theory before the findings of the past decade -- have refused to admit that they blundered. But a clear majority of the researchers who have now come to the fore have rejected the old theory. Many others have been cautiously neutral all along, writing interesting articles about particular texts that don't presuppose any particular identification, e.g., about Hellenistic ideas seen in the language of one or another scroll.

There is, at any rate, no evidence to support the museum's utterly partial assertion that "most scholars believe" the scrolls were written by Essenes living at Qumran. In fact, the New York Times has spoken of a "rising tide" of opposition to that theory. The careful manipulation of evidence in the exhibit and the exclusion of major opposing researchers from the museum's lecture series, clearly point to what is really going on here -- an intentional effort to distort the facts and mislead the public.

On View's comment,

"Since the museum is run by the North Carolina Department of the Environment, its personnel cannot be engaged in theological controversies."

Any lawyers or judges reading this? My understanding is that the First Amendment prevents any government agency in this country from taking sides in a horrifying fight over the meaning of religious documents. What on earth do the Dead Sea Scrolls have to do with the environment?

Someone should sue the "North Carolina Department of the Environment" to stop this mess now. Either they give a completely balanced presentation or they shut the whole thing down.

I have never heard such nonsense -- the government doesn't have the right to present ancient documents? Teaching the history of the Essenes who nourished Christ is like displaying a giant cross on government property?

America is a religious nation, founded by Christians. We respect your freedom to believe anything you like. But don't go telling us we don't have the right to inform the public about the history of Christianity.

Harold,

Allow me to say that I, for one, certainly didn't mean to suggest that the government doesn't have the right to display the Dead Sea Scrolls. I merely suggested that when they decide to do so, they should make sure that they provide the public with (as Con Law puts it) a "balanced" description of the two salient opposing interpretations of scroll origins. Instead, the North Carolina Department of the Environment has offensively taken sides in a bitter and widening academic dispute.

I should also clarify that I didn't mean to suggest that there is "some kind of governmental conspiracy to advance the more traditional view and exclude newer Jewish ones." For all I know, the decision to host this misleading exhibit and the ensuing posting of repugnant statements on the museum's website resulted simply from ignorance and bureaucratic ineptitude. Ultimately, it is the media's job to investigate such matters, inform the public, and hold the government accountable for wasting people's taxes on an exhibit that was carefully designed to defend an old theory against the opposing interpretation of an entire group of major historians and archaeologists.

As for your assertion that "America is a religious nation, founded by Christians," you are entitled to your opinion, but I don't share your perspective. I might also note that the salaries of the directors of the North Carolina Department of the Environment are being paid by the honest and decent people of this state, whether Jewish, Christian, atheist or of any other persuasion.

YES! I agree completely, Holden. Well said. Seems to me that this is more of a – let’s find some novel way to accuse Christians of currying favor with the government. I mean; it’s an historical document, for goodness sake, regardless of the surrounding controversy.

That being said, thanks, View, for your informed input. Actually, I have no dog in this fight between the varying interpretations of evidence. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with the veracity of either Judaism or Christianity – only that it gives much greater credibility to the integrity of our Scripture texts.

“And as I stated earlier, the expression "true Israel" doesn't even occur in the Dead Sea Scrolls.”

I’m sure you’re right. And I never inferred that it did. I think the idea comes from the Essene writings surrounding the “Teacher of Righteousness” and his espousal of a more vigorous and “faithful” prophetic and eschatological Judaism – or “true” Israel. As far as I recall right now, the term is not in the NT either, per se. Paul does refer to the Church thus in Galatians 6:16:

“And as many as walk according to this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.”

And there is certainly much NT epistolary material that pictures the Church as the fulfillment of God’s vision of a universal “Israel” of the Spirit, with a cosmic Gospel and worldwide presence. Nevertheless, there is a deep respect throughout the NT for the OT, its personages and its teachings. In Romans 11: 18 ff. Paul warns Christians not to get haughty about their inclusion in the new universal Israel of God, but to understand their awesome debt to historic Israel.

So regardless of all claims to the contrary, the NT is NOT anti-Semitic. Just because some “Christians” (many in name only) distorted its teachings for their own purposes, does not indict the Gospel or the NT record – any more than the very vicious anti-Christian words of some Jewish writers historically automatically infers that all Jews hate Christians; or that the Judaism is inherently anti-Christian.

I must admit that I am somewhat weary of bitter Jews trotting out all the distorted examples of so-called Christian anti-Semitism. As I said, it cuts both ways. We need to get past the anti- rhetoric and find civil and respectful ground for commonality and debate. Even though I affirm the New Covenant of Yeshua, I cannot, based both on the love enjoined by Him and Paul’s teaching in Romans 9-11, have anything but respect for Jewish people. We may disagree on many positions and theological points, but we have too much in common to hate and berate – or continually accuse at the slightest supposed provocation. I certainly bow to your superior knowledge regarding the new theories, and will look into them more extensively. But I think you are reading much more into this than is there.

I don't think it can be denied that Christian antisemitism exists as a historical phenomenon. View from Here did not say the NT was antisemitic, he said a number of early Church fathers were antisemitic. I think we should at least be clear about what is and is not being said.

Further, he didn't say the expression "true Israel" appears in the NT. He said it was first used by a number of early Church fathers who believed that the Jews were sinners and that Christians were the "real" Israel. The expression isn't used in the sectarian scrolls that mention a "teacher of righteousness," and there's no evidence it "comes from" those writings.

And finally, View from Here didn't say Christians are currying favor with the government, he said the government issued a false statement, and improperly agreed to allow a group of Christian scholars to broadcast their opinion to the public, while excluding their opponents. This in itself, if it is true, obviously requires some kind of explanation from the DOE in Raleigh.

I was shocked to learn that Golb and Magen have not been invited to lecture at an exhibit of this importance. Jodi Magness, whose work on Qumran is extremely weak, will undoubtedly attack Magen in her lecture as she has done elsewhere (egged on, incidentally, by the laughter of encouraging audiences); Magen deserves the opportunity to respond in full to whatever she says. The one exhibit where Golb has been invited so far was in Kansas City, where the museum director said the decision was necessary for scientific reasons.

Here are links to articles by Golb that demolish the credibility of these exhibits:

http://oi.uchicago.edu/pdf/dss_fact_fiction_2007.pdf

http://oi.uchicago.edu/pdf/san_diego_virtual_reality_2007.pdf

http://oi.uchicago.edu/pdf/dss_review_sandiego_catalogue_2007.pdf

http://oi.uchicago.edu/research/is/deadseascrolls.html

See also his Forward editorial at

http://www.forward.com/articles/10497/

To the best of my knowledge, Golb is the only scrolls scholar who has reviewed the current exhibits at length (or indeed at all). That he was excluded from participating is a shameful commentary on the management and purpose of the Raleigh exhibit.

" . . . Christian antisemitism exists as a historical phenomenon."

Of course, there has been some ; but there has ALSO been anti-Christianism from the Jewish community as well - beginning with examples from the NT epistles, as well as Jewish writings. The tendency has been to vilify Christians and ignore Jewish offenses. It must be remembered when citing “early church fathers” that their views varied widely, and were not all considered correct or orthodox by the Church as a whole. One must also consider the hateful opposition of many first-century Jews to Christianity. That some Christian writers over-reacted is part of the mix.

"Further, he didn't say the expression "true Israel" appears in the NT."

I didn’t say he did. I was simply pointing out that indeed it does not; and that there is no palpable NT or Jesus connection with the Essenes. Read carefully.

“ . . . View from Here didn't say Christians are currying favor with the government . . . “

I beg to differ:

“ . . . and a continuing pattern of catering to EVANGELICAL [mine] (and, I might add, financial) interests.”

Personally, I don’t see what difference theories about the source of the Scrolls makes to either Jewish or Christian interests. The idea that Christians favor the older Essene view because it comports with a “true Israel” view that MIGHT have some connection to Christian beginnings and later self-appraisals; and also favors a view that appears to impugn the then-current priesthood at Jerusalem, is fatuous at best, and prejudicial at worst. As if that implies anti-Semitism! Really!

Although the term ”true Israel” does not appear, as such, in the NT, I have noted that the concept is indeed there – NOT as a racial derogation, but as a theological construct. Any NT scholar, or reputable historian, knows that this position is based solely on Jesus himself, his atonement (New Covenant in His blood), the resultant Gospel message, and the subsequent establishment of the Church – NOT on any prior assertions of Jewish, or pagan, sects. In the NT the New Covenant is seen simply as the positive fulfillment by Yeshua of the OT sacrificial system, not as a reason to reject Jews as persons.

That’s the rub here; NOT whether there should, or should not be, full representation of views. I agree; there should be. Bu then, this is not a research lab in a university setting where this kind of back-and-forth goes on; but rather a popular exhibit. Settled, popular positions tend to predominate in such settings.

That some feel threatened by the exhibit’s preference for a particular view is ancillary. Reading anti-Semitic conspiracy into it seems forced and overly sensitive to me – regardless of the academic conflicts and disagreements that swirl about it. If View’s controversy had stayed squarely on the academic level, all would have been agreeable to all fair-minded persons. It was the weak religious insinuations that poisoned the waters and undermined the case, IMO. Even if the accusations are true, it makes the accuser look petulant and hypersensitive - a counter-productive tack.

Nikos said: "There has ALSO been anti-Christianism from the Jewish community as well ... The tendency has been to vilify Christians and ignore Jewish offenses."

I can hardly believe my eyes. Did Jews torture Christians in the Inquisition? Did Jews massacre Christians in pogroms?

Minister Lois Olena, in her article on the "New Anti-Semitism," says that the idea of the new or "true" Israel "was the invention of Justin Martyr and other highly motivated Church Fathers." She also explains that the idea is "considered a given in many modern Christian circles," and that it "is fundamentally anti-Semitic at its theological core... Though the concept has been received as true since about year A.D. 150, it is not only erroneous in terms of biblical interpretation but also unethical, as it has been used at times by the Church as justification for Christian maltreatment of Jews for centuries."

http://www.newantisemitism.org/

So I again concur with View that the issuing of false "true Israel" claims about the Dead Sea Scrolls in a press release put out by a North Carolina governmental department is insensitive at best, and will be found extremely troubling by anyone who is concerned with Jewish-Christian relations in the USA.

"Did Jews torture Christians in the Inquisition? Did Jews massacre Christians in pogroms?"

Of course they didn't. Even a first grader could understand that one has to have politcal power to exercise comprehensive oppression - like the Jewish authorities of first-century Jerusalem over the newly formed Church - or those who persecuted Paul and other Christians in first-century cities where they held considerable sway and influence. Or the vitriolic passages in some Talmudic and other writings.

Even today evangelical Christians are not really welcome in Israel, and are very limited in terms of religious freedoms we consider the hallmark of enlightened tolerance. I don't mean to be ciritical of Jewish people in general; but many are not the epitome of tolerance and acceptance, and most Christians anti-Semitic bigots - though you would think this from the popluar media.

Those in a minority status have to be very muted and secretive in their anti- comments and activities. That Christians have been in a power and majority position over the centuries has allowed for eccentric, misinformed, and distorted attitudes to often prevail. If the situation had been reversed we would no doubt have seen much of the same from Jewish authorities, if the frist-century and current Israeli practice is any indication.

I just think we need to be fair and balanced here. It IS a two-way street, regardless of your simplistic spin.

To Nikos:

Everyone knows that the Roman authorities persecuted Christians, but to claim that Jews, at any point in history, engaged in "comprehensive oppression" of Christians is preposterous. All kinds of Jewish-Christian polemics are, of course, documented, but Jews didn't go around murdering people.

Since you seem to be uninformed, you may want to read up on some of the sources at the Center for the Study of Historical Christian Antisemitism (http://www.hcacentre.org/), or order a copy of Christian Antisemitism: A History of Hate by William Nichols at your local bookstore (it's 500 pages long but well worth the read).

As for "true Israel," this is an antisemitic doctrine created by Ignatius and other Church fathers, the aim being to argue that the the Church predates Judaism and that the Hebrew Bible was actually a Christian book containing allegories about Jesus. This has nothing to do with the Dead Sea Scrolls -- which were written in Hebrew, by Jews -- and I am horrified to learn that North Carolina is violating its basic civic and educational duties in such a manner.

Jodi Magness will be lecturing on the archaeology of Qumran?? This is not a good sign.

Magness has close ties with the Dorot Foundation, an organization that has been using its funds and influence to control the way the Dead Sea Scrolls are presented in museums and so-called "international conferences" all over the world. She often speaks at Dorot-related functions, and she has been active on the board of trustees of the Dorot-funded "American Schools of Oriental Research" (ASOR).

She was until recently on ASOR's annual meeting committee, and she gave both lectures on Qumran at last year's ASOR/SBL conference in San Diego, viciously attacking Israeli archaeologists Itzhak Magen and Yuval Peleg, who were not invited to respond to her. If she has a finger in the making of this exhibit, you can bet the ranch it was rigged.

For details, see http://www.nowpublic.com/culture/charity-fund-involved-dead-sea-scrolls-conflict

Don't miss, at the bottom of the page, the horrifying eye-witness account of Magness attacking Magen & Peleg as a warmly receptive crowd of SBL "bible scholars" encouraged her with approving laughter. Apparently she's angry at Magen for stealing her thunder and demonstrating that the arguments she's been making for years are baseless.

For example, she says that animal bones found at Qumran must have been used for unknown "ritual" purposes, while ignoring the fact that such bones were commonly used as part of the manufacture of pottery or for other industrial purposes (glue-making, etc.).

She'll tell you the pottery of Qumran was "poor" and therefore "sectarian," without mentioning that this claim has been refuted by Israel's key expert on ancient pottery, Rachel Bar Nathan. The pottery at Qumran was just like the pottery at Jericho and elsewhere in the region.

She'll tell you the dining hall was "communal" and therefore "sectarian," without mentioning that Israeli archaeologist Yizhar Hirschfeld has shown such dining halls were commonly used by soldiers' slaves.

All of Magness' arguments are on the same speculative level, and if she is monopolizing the "archaeology of Qumran" topic at this exhibit as she has done elsewhere, watch out for the same old Qumran-Essene nonsense you've been hearing for years, dished out with a veneer of "scholarly" charisma.

"Everyone knows that the Roman authorities persecuted Christians, but to claim that Jews, at any point in history, engaged in "comprehensive oppression" of Christians is preposterous."

Read my lips (or keyboard), Sandy. I said that they did not - but only because, as a decided minority, they didn't have opportunity for “comprehensive oppression.” If the hostile Jews, reported in the book of Acts, could have done so, I believe they would have enlarged thier persecution. They certainly did what they could to hinder the Gospel being presented in thier synagogues by the Apostle Paul. It only takes a bit of reading in historic Jewish writings to see the anti-Christian, anti-Gentile prejudice and disdain of some Jews. And don't pass the buck by saying it was because others caused them to. We are ALL of us sinners, with the capacity for arrogance, hatred, prejudice, and oppression of others.

Is it not just possible, Sandy, that Jewish attitudes toward the stupid, inferior, and unclean goyim have been partly to blame for less-than-loving attitudes toward Jews. If we can't face the truth, we will never be able to communicate in peace, honesty and reality. Loading ALL the blame on Christians and others solves nothing, and prolongs ill will.

I assert very strongly that it has not been true, biblically enlighted Christians who persecuted Jews over the centuries; but unregenerate, nominal "Christians," pagans, unsaved Romanist torturers, and secularists who did the most evil and dastardly things. Hitler and company were CERTAINLY NOT genuine Christians of any kind. Even the crusaders were just a bunch of gold-seeking renegades who had no real Christian commitments or convictions. You incorrectly lump true follwers of Messiah in with nominal, cultural "Christians" as haters and persecutors. This is a kind of prejudice and injustice in itself - or perhaps ignorance of what a true disciple of Yeshua is.

We must ALL admit the historical descent into hate and condescension by our progenitors, and stop casting all the blame on one party. Quite frankly, Christians are very tired of being berated, unfairly lumped with pseudo-believers, and continually guilt-tripped.

If we cannot humble ourselves and admit our sins, as the Tenach admonishes, then we are at an impasse. Repentance all-around is the only key to rapprochement and healing. It’s time to go forward rather than constantly dragging out our mutual failures and sins. Remember yes, browbeat no!

"Read my lips (or keyboard), Sandy. I said that they did not."

Excuse me? Here is what you said:

"Even a first grader could understand that one has to have political power to exercise comprehensive oppression -- like the Jewish authorities of first-century Jerusalem over the newly formed Church -- or those who persecuted Paul and other Christians in first-century cities where they held considerable sway and influence."

So thank you very much, I know how to read. Talk about humbling yourself and admitting your sins!

The real problem here is that you appear to be attempting to brush off an issue that is deeply upsetting to many people -- the outrageous use of the antisemitic expression "true Israel" in the museum's press release -- by first making a distinction between "theology" and antisemitism, and then engaging a dispute about the historical significance of Christian antisemitism. It is well known that the expression "true Israel ("Verus Israel," see the book by Marcel Simon) is antisemitic, and you should have the courage to confront it and object to it when you see it, like many decent Christians have done.

See, e.g., The Myth of Christian Beginnings by Christian theologian Robert Wilken, p. 197:

"Christian anti-semitism grew out of the Bible, i.e. the New Testament, as it was understood and interpreted by Christians over centuries. The roots of Christian anti-semitism need be traced no further than Christianity itself... Christians ... thought of themselves as ... the true Israel.... Judaism, in the Christian view, had no reason to exist once Christianity came into being. We must learn ... to live with the unpleasant fact that anti-semitism is a part of what it has meant historically to be a Christian, and is still part of what it means to be a Christian."

I simply meant to say in that paragraph that there was a BRIEF period when Jews had a MEASURE (limited by Roman control) of political wherewithal to persecute the emerging Messianic community in first-century Palestine - which they did. But I would not categorize this as "comprehensive" oppression, but rather, limited persecution, because of the Roman presence. "Comprehensive oppression," as I meant to portray it, means prolonged periods of socio-political domination, which European societies have exercised. Sorry if that was unclear.

". . . the unpleasant fact that anti-semitism is a part of what it has meant historically to be a Christian, and is still part of what it means to be a Christian."

This is the kind of ignorant misinformation that has characterized both Jewish and humanist critiques of Christianity and Christian history – especially today, when it is open season on Christians and biblical Christianity. Not only does the NT declare that Jesus was indeed the true, promised Messiah, but that the then Jewish religious authorities rejected him and provoked the Roman authorities to crucify him. This act brought upon the entire nation, through their representative rulers, the judgments of God in 70 AD - as similar unbelief and unfaithfulness had done in OT times.

This does not mean that present-day Jews are responsible for the crucifixion; but it does present again the choice to either love and accept him, or despise and reject him. The constructing of Christian-bashing excuses to reject God’s offer of redemption through Messiah (the Gospel) only further alienates contemporary Jews from their glorious Messiah. It is not, however, the business of Christians to interfere in God’s dealings with Jews in this regard – other than to share the Gospel in humility and love. Any acts of hatred or persecution are ungodly, sinful and counterproductive in terms of Jew’s seeing Messianic truth and the love of the Holy Spirit resident in the hearts of both Gentile and Jewish believers.

You can drag out these anti-messianic detractors all you want, but they are seeing Christ and His Church through eyes of prejudice and animosity, spinning history and biblical interpretation according to their unbelief and resentment at every turn. I have read some of their critiques, and find that they totally misunderstand and distort the NT scriptures and the genuine Gospel message.

As Apostle Paul put it:

“Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.” (I Corinthians 1: 20-25)

The above debate about whether or not the apostles are anti-semitic seems to me somewhat besides the point and irrelevant to the issue of the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Raleigh exhibit is clearly part of an ongoing effort to mislead the public as to the current state of research in this field. The key researchers who have rejected the old theory have been excluded from participating, and the museum's website presentation (including the "true Israel" press release) is full of mendacious statements designed to conceal the basic findings of the past decade. Hopefully the North Carolina officials responsible for the exhibit will take remedial action, as they ought to do pursuant to their basic duties towards all members of the public, including Jews, Christians, atheists and anyone else who might be interested in the topic. Governmental agencies should not host exhibits that speak towards any particular religious group, or towards a religious audience in general.

I see that an article on this issue by Robert Dworkin, entitled "The Ethics of Exhibition," was posted over a month ago on the Center for Inquiry website.

http://spinozaslens.blogspot.com/

See also, on the same site, Susan Jacoby's piece "Talking to Ourselves." I love her opening sentence:

"Americans are increasingly close-minded
and unwilling to listen to opposing views."

It is interesting to see that you believe that the Christian apostles were anti-semitic. Considering the fact that the were Jews, and all but one focussed on ministering particularly to the Jews. I suppose that was also an underhanded secret attempt at wiping out Israel right? Paul himself said that he would rather give up his own salvation that all of his brother Jews could be saved. Also, New Testament scripture states that salvation was first to the Jew and then to the gentile. Again, I do not understand your idea of anti-semitism it appears to be an unsubstantiated view. Second, you speak of so much evidence proving that Qumran was not all that many claim it to be, however you do not site that evidence. When the fact is that the scholars who believe that the scrolls were written by the Qumran society, etc. (views supported by this exhibit). In fact, the books in which I read that denied this fact only came from modern liberal scholars believing in an evolutionary theory of the scriptures, which in itself is a very weak position considering things such as the suzerian pact structure of Deuteronomy that clearly comes from the 2000's Bc.

I suppose that what I am saying is this. substantiate your argument. I understand that it is unethical to produce exhibits that are not well rounded in their information, however where in America will you find a Wold War II exhibit from the point of view of the Japanese? And vise-versa where in Japan will you find a world war II museum from the view point of America? The problem isnt that they are narrow minded, the problem is that you can only put so much into an exhibit. In such a case there is little reason to make a big to do about obscure understandings or hypothesis concerning the origins of the scrolls when the majority are at least, in some small way, in agreement. I have nothing against Jews, in fact I love them. Hebrew is my single most academic passion. However, I do understand the need for these people to represent what they see as the most accepted view. I simply wish that your speculation would be kept at the level of speculation, and not be brought to the level of gossip. You treat your speculations as facts, and then try to get people upset on the internet because of what you think might be true. Do not sell your speculation as fact. If you have a problem take it to the leaders and people in charge of the exhibit. This little comment page is useless, and is a sad attempt at appearing to care about the subject at hand.

Kenny, I don't think anyone here is saying the apostles were antisemitic -- certainly I wouldn't say that (although it's a view some are known to hold). It is very important to understand the difference between the New Testament and the early Church fathers (Gregorius, Justin Martyr, Chrysostom and many others), who were indeed deeply antisemitic. Please do a google search or see, e.g., these links for details:

http://www.endtimepilgrim.org/antisemchurch.htm

http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Church_Fathers

Your statement that researchers who reject the Essene theory are "modern liberal scholars believing in an evolutionary theory of the scriptures" seems to confirm that the Raleigh exhibit is religiously oriented and biased towards a theory which is not supported by current research.

Information is starting to come out on how this scandal came about -- apparently the N.C. government people in Raleigh hired, as their "scientific consultant," Dr. Risa Levitt Kohn -- i.e., the same person who presented herself as a "Dead Sea Scrolls scholar" last year in San Diego before admitting that she was "far from an expert" and had only a "tangential" knowledge of the field. She acquired notoriety by announcing that the scrolls are not "Jewish" texts and that the public must not be "confused" with an accurate account of current research. See the comments and links at

http://video.yahoo.com/watch/2970878/8519788

All of which leads me to ask: why on earth did the N.C. Dept. of the Environment hire this person, who first made a false claim about herself and then admitted that she is "far from an expert"? Shouldn't they have hired someone with specific scholarly expertise in the field?

Just came back from the Dead Sea Scrolls exhibit at the museum. I'm sorry so many people are so upset by this, but I didn't see how it was possibly "pro-Christian" or "anti-semitic" at all. The exhibit did focus on evidence that the individuals who wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls were probably Essene (which, as I understood it, were still Jewish people)... but it also pointed out that this was an early hypothesis, that there were some other ideas (and it named them) and that they encouraged patrons to research and develop their own ideas. Honestly, I thought it was neat to look at the evidence and see what archaeologists concluded from it, but in the end I didn't take it as fact. I took it as being a really neat thing to see science in action... looking at all the clues trying to come up with reasonings. The truth is that our human experiences do cloud our judgment. But the other truth is that the Essene hypothesis could be right and others could be wrong or vice versa, but ultimately that was of little importance to me. I liked seeing the cultural artifacts such as the oil lamps, pottery, cloth, Roman coins, caves, etc. It was really neat to learn that Duke University had the chance to buy some of the Dead Sean Scrolls and they turned it down... or that the Dead Sea Scrolls had been put up for purchase in a US newspaper add. And it was also neat to see something thousands of years old and of such historical importance. So, honestly, I thank the NC Museum of Natural Sciences for bringing the exhibit. Whatever slant that there was, I honestly don't think that people came away being anti-semitic or pro-Christian... it was just neat to see history. It's something that I never thought I'd ever see in my lifetime and something I now feel like I understand a "little" bit more.

"The exhibit did focus on evidence that the individuals who wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls were probably Essene (which, as I understood it, were still Jewish people)... but it also pointed out that this was an early hypothesis, that there were some other ideas (and it named them) and that they encouraged patrons to research and develop their own ideas."

In other words, it's an enjoyable exhibit, but the museum is egregiously misinforming the public, and you came away believing that there is a distinction between "evidence" that Essenes wrote the scrolls and "some other ideas" in the plural -- rather than one fundamentally opposing theory based on solid material evidence.

Please observe:

(1) "Ideas" don't have the same status as "evidence."

(2) The exhibit is clearly slanted towards the Essene theory, and fails to inform the public that scrolls scholarship is currently polarized between that theory and a fundamentally different one (not "others" in the plural).

(3) This is part of a concerted effort to sustain the Essene theory by hiding the specific evidence that has led a steadily increasing number of researchers to favor the opposing view. Those researchers believe that there is no evidence whatsoever to support the Essene theory, which, according to them, was in fact a major blunder of scholarship. Were you informed of the specific material reasons they have reached this conclusion?

As for antisemitism, I never said the exhibit itself was antisemitic. I said the museum's website presentation includes an antisemitic statement, which anyone can verify. Doesn't that trouble you at all?

Some precision will be useful here.

It is true that scrolls scholarship is currently polarized between two salient opposing theories: the Qumran-sectarian theory and the Jerusalem theory. If the exhibit lumps the Jerusalem theory together with a variety of "ideas" that have been proposed on the margins of scrolls research, the museum is basically slandering an entire group of researchers who have changed the entire nature of the crucial questions being discussed in this field of studies.

So what I would like to know is, does this exhibit tell the truth?

Here are some basic facts that people have been putting together during the past twenty years:

(1) the scrolls were copied by over 500 scribes;

(2) apart from the Copper Scroll, no historical documents such as correspondence or contracts were found among the scrolls, but they all consist of scribal copies of literary texts;

(3) no material or textual proof has been found of any connection between Qumran and the scrolls (several claims to the contrary have been exposed as false);

(4) the remains of women and children were found scattered among the graves that were opened in the Qumran cementery, even though Pliny describes the Essenes of the Dead Sea area as celibate;

(5) inkwells are commonly found in archaeological sites in ancient Israel and Jordan; soldiers needed inkwells for correspondence; more inkwells were found at Shu'afat (near Jerusalem) than at Qumran; and archaeologists now reject the old identification of a locus at Qumran as a "scriptorium";

(6) the pottery found at Qumran is of the same type as that found at many other places in the region;

(7) dining areas like the one found at Qumran were commonly used by soldiers' slaves;

(8) a great variety of conflicting doctrines are found among the scrolls, showing that they could not have been written by any single group;

(9) the Copper Scroll, found along with the other texts in one of the caves, is now considered by most specialists to contain a list of treasures of the Temple in Jerusalem, hidden in the Judaean wilderness during the siege and sacking of the city by the Romans; and

(10) scholars now believe a corpus of around 100 scrolls were actually written by Temple priests.

Does the museum clearly explain these facts, and indicate that they have led many researchers to conclude that no sect ever lived or wrote texts at Qumran and that the scrolls must have come from the Jerusalem region?

If not, the exhibit is not telling the truth, and should be modified to take account of current research.