The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls: The ... - josephprestonkirk

12 DISCOVERY AND CHALLENGE TO BIBLICAL STUDIES
Following the lead of Renan, some good scholars and many crackpots
have tended to conclude, perhaps without adequately researching the
question, that Christianity evolved out of Essenism (which most likely is
the type of Judaism represented in the Dead Sea Scrolls composed at
Qumran). That is myopic. Most scholars now admit that Christianity
was profoundly influenced not only by Essenism, but also by Pharisaism,
the baptism movements, the Enoch groups, the Jewish mystical groups,
Samaritanism, and many other aspects of Early Judaism. I side with the
majority of experts who have learned to shun the one-idea solution to
complex origins.
The Palestinian Jesus Movement was not a form of Hillelite
Pharisaism. It was not even a type of Essenism. While similar to many
other Jewish groups, it was unique. Only in it is there the claim that a
crucified prophet from Galilee is the Messiah, the Son of God, the Savior.
While the preceding conclusions seem dominant in the academy, I do
not think there is a consensus regarding the heart of Qumran theology.
I, for one, think that we must avoid systematizing Qumran phenomena.
There were many competing and conflicting ideas at Qumran, from its
founding around 150 B.C.E. (or later) to its demise in 68 C.E. On the
one hand, we scholars need to resist the temptation to define Qumran
theology narrowly and jettison all documents as non-Qumranic if they
do not fit a perceived paradigm. On the other hand, we need to be inclusive
of all the documents that clearly or apparently represent Qumran
theology and seek to discern how diverse it appears to have been and
where there might be cohesive elements, if not a core. At the same time
in the Qumran Community, there were probably competing ideas and
perceptions, even regarding messianology.
If there were a dominant, or core idea, in the Qumran Community, it
was certainly the cosmic dualism that is articulated in the Rule of the
Community 3–4. This dualism certainly shaped the War Scroll. Without
doubt, the most distinct Qumran concepts are the perception of a bifurcated
humanity—the “Sons of Light,” who struggled against the “Sons of
Darkness”—and of a bifurcated angelology: the “Spirit of Darkness,” who
will be ultimately defeated by “the Spirit of Light (cf. 1QS 3.13–15).”
It seems rather obvious that some Qumranites—not only during their
lifetimes, but also at the same time—held conceptions that were far from
consistent. It is Christianity after 325 C.E. that has misled too many
scholars into thinking about an either-or mentality. Jews, as we know so
clearly from the Mishnah, Tosefta, and the Talmudim, preferred debates
within the house in which the norm tended to be a both-and perception.