Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered The First Complete Translation and interpretation of 50 Key Documents Witheld For Over 35 Years: Forbidden Books Of The Bible | Original Aramaic Bible

by Robert H. Eisenman

Dear Brother & Sisters: This Book Is About The True And Very First Books Of The Bible. Way Before any Copies Of The Bible, These Were The Original Manuscripts For They Were Written In Aramaic. God's True Language. 1n 1947 The Dead Sea Scrolls Were Found In 11 Caves, Near The Dead Sea. And in 1992 They Were Translated Into English. By Robert Eisenman and Michael Wise And Was Documented In This Book. I Took The Book Formatted It Perfectly In This Copy. So Everyone That Reads It Will Enjoy And Understand It The Way God Meant It To Be. The Lord Is Coming Soon Please Read His Real Law. And May God Be With You Always And Forever. God Bless You. - Shirley.

Introduction


Why should anyone be interested in the Dead Sea Scrolls? Why are they important? We trust that the present volume, which presents fifty texts from the previously unpublished corpus, will help answer these questions.


The story of the discovery of the Scrolls in caves along the shores of the Dead Sea in the late forties and early fifties is well known. The first cave was discovered, as the story goes, by Bedouin boys in 1947.



Most familiar works in Qumran research come from this cave - Qumran, the Arabic term for the locale in which the Scrolls were found, being used by scholars as shorthand to refer to the Scrolls. Discoveries from other caves are less well known, but equally important. For instance, Cave 3 was discovered in 1952. It contained a Copper Scroll, a list apparently of hiding places of Temple treasure. The problem has always been to fit this Copper Scroll into its proper historical setting. The present work should help in resolving this and other similar questions.


The most important cave for our purposes was Cave 4 discovered in 1954. Since it was discovered after the partition of Palestine, its contents went into the Jordanian-controlled Rockefeller Museum in East Jerusalem; while the contents of Cave 1 had previously gone into an Israeli-controlled museum in West Jerusalem, the Israel Museum.


Scholars refer to these manuscript-bearing caves according to the chronological order in which they were discovered: e.g. 1Q = Cave 1, 2Q = Cave 2, 3 Q = Cave 3, and so on. The seemingly esoteric code designating manuscripts and fragments, therefore, works as follows: 1QS = the Community Rule from Cave 1; 4QD = the Damascus Document from Cave 4, as opposed, for instance, to CD, the recensions of the same document discovered at the end of the last century in the repository known as the Cairo Genizah.


The discovery of this obviously ancient document with Judaeo-Christian overtones among medieval materials puzzled observers at the time. Later, fragments of it were found among materials from Cave 4, but researchers continued using the Cairo Genizah versions because the Qumran fragments were never published. We now present pictures of the last column of this document (plates 19 and 20) in this work, and it figured prominently in events leading up to the final publication of the unpublished plates.


The struggle for access to the materials in Cave 4 was long and arduous, sometimes even bitter. An International Team of editors had been set up by the Jordanian Government to control the process. The problems with this team are public knowledge. To put them in a nutshell: in the first place the team was hardly international, secondly it did not work well as a team, and thirdly it dragged out the editing process interminably.


In 198 5 -8 6, Professor Robert Eisenman, co-editor of this volume, was in Jerusalem as a National Endowment for the Humanities Fellow at the William F.

Genres: Religion, History, Nonfiction, Biblical Studies, Reference, Christianity, Judaism

496 pages, Kindle Edition

First published November 1, 1992

Reviews

[Ian Chapman · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was an important work, in that it broke the monopoly of scholarship around the Dead Sea Scrolls. Previously an elitist group led by an aristocratic French Catholic cleric controlled academic access and monopolised interpretation. The almost thuggish jewish style shown by Eisenman in approach, writing and interpretation is not inappropriate after decades of refined elitism, giving a new dimension to history. In religious terms the Qumran community are shown as Sadducee zealots, partly militarised, rather than austere monkish visionaries.

Today scholarship has moved on, but even so this is still a pivotal work.

[David Withun · Rating 2 out of 5]

-

[Jacques Coulardeau · Rating 4 out of 5]

The long subtitle is the stake of an essential question. “The First Complete Translation and Interpretation of 50 Key Documents Withheld for Over 35 Years.” It is clear they were withheld by the Israeli state. Why, it is not clear, even after reading the whole book. It can only be explained by two main motivations. The first one is that these documents reveal that the Jewish faith or doctrine contained in the Old Testament at the time of Jesus Christ, just slightly before his apparition in the picture to just a little bit after his crucifixion, but also after the stoning of his brother James on the illegal, at least irregular decision of the High Priest of the Temple in Jerusalem, reveal the phylogeny of the three Abrahamic religions that emerged from these one hundred years between let’s say 70 BCE and 70 AD.
Robert Eisenman was the discoverer, and he was swift enough to have all the documents photographed before entrusting them to the Israeli state. He was thus able to publish or release a facsimile of these documents against the will of this Israeli state.
The second explanation is that these documents reveal the deep inner ideological reality of these Jews belonging to this Dead Sea community, and the revelation is brutal. More about it in a moment. I will not discuss these documents in more depth than a few remarks.
The first remark is that the main leader of this community is James, Jesus’s own brother and the first bishop of Jerusalem assassinated by the High Priest of the Temple since the decision was taken in such conditions that it went against the standard regulations for such a decision, the standard regulation that the ruling committee of the Temple had to convene inside the Temple and in this case it convened at the High Priest’s home.
The second remark is that the commentaries are highly repetitive because the same remarks have to be repeated for most documents. A more synthetic presentation would have been a good thing. But at this level of the presentation, it is a good thing that the Hebrew reconstruction of the documents is given and then a translation in English. The Hebrew original is not exploited for the large public of the non-Jews because the basic discussion on the roots used in these documents is hardly evoked, and certainly not detailed. Hebrew is a Semitic language, a tri-consonantal root language. The discussion only uses the English words with the Hebrew terms transliterated into the Latin alphabet. When we know these documents use a set of words that are highly repetitive and even a few semantically connected lines of words, but the discussion of the link between the Hebraic roots is hardly envisaged. The root connections between words are lost and the metaphorical line of the “mouth” and “being swallowed” or “being eaten up” by the “devil of some sort” is not revealed in its deep semantic and scriptural reality. It would be interesting to show this linguistic dimension with “Belial,” the evil one.
The next remark is essential. The authors insist on the way that in these documents from a purely Jewish community, we can see some clusters of words that have their perfect reproductions in some basic Christian documents in the New Testament. Christianity was nothing but a phylogenetic line in the evolution of this Jewish community, and we must keep in mind that James was the Teacher (with other names at times) of this community. This goes along the lines that Christianity was not a later invention. It was contained in and emerged from these documents, from the Jewish community at large and represented the critical side, those who criticized the Temple and the priests for not being zealous enough, King Herod for being an unworthy King of the Jews, of Judea, and a total rejection of the Roman occupation, hence support to those who were against the imperial colonialism imposed onto the Jews. Critical, harshly critical even, but not violent in any way. Zealous yes, Zealot no.
Yet the zealot side of this community will support and even more than support the upheaval against the Roman Empire after the killing of James that will lead to the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in 70 AD, which will not solve the problem that will find peace later on when the Jews were banned from Palestine, the famous diaspora. That zealot movement is for a full return to the very letter of the Torah, a total rejection of the non-Jews, a full nationalism that sounds like jingoism if not a complete racist rejection of the non-orthodox Jews, starting with the Gentile non-Jews and then including the Pharisees.
The rejecting discourse, then, is close to implying that everyone has to be accepted as pure in his (never any “her”) religion, practices, and works. All others are rejected, and the purification discourse could very easily be considered as justifying the worst possible actions of physical elimination, at best enslavement to the pure in respect of the Torah. That is exactly the position of the extreme terrorist trends today within Islam. But it is also the direct inspiration of the Israeli government right now against the Arabs, or Palestinians who have to be eliminated from Palestine that has to be understood as being the Isarael of the twelve tribes.
These documents cast a very sharp light on such trends among the Jews in the century of Jesus Christ. And we can consider that Saul when he became, on his own decision, Paul kept the same segregationist ideas and principles despite opening the Christian faith to Gentiles and calling himself the Apostle of the Gentiles. This trend stating that purity was the objective, and all unpure people had to be eliminated, survived, still survives in the Christian churches and chapels, is highly present in Islam, but we maybe should wonder about the Abrahamic roots of this Islam, and of course, toots that are present in the military imperialism of the Israeli establishment and public opinion.
As I have already said and written to some fellow Jews: the Israeli problem today is the direct heritage of the treatment of Ishmael and his slave Arab mother by Abraham and we, the heirs of this past, should apologize to the Arabs and Muslims of the entire world. It is also true that Christians of all affiliations should apologize to the Muslim peoples martyred by the Crusades.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU

[Robert Anton-Erik · Rating 4 out of 5]

A critically important work even today. I have to disagree with other reviewers' claims that scholarship has moved on or that this book is now pointless. The commentary and translations in this book highlight the ubiquitous vocabulary used across the sectarian texts of the Dead Sea Scrolls. All other translations that I have read obscure significant commonly used terms. I think it necessary to read and compare several translations to even begin to understand what's going on in the Scrolls.

[Rick Massey · Rating 5 out of 5]

Dr. Eisenman was instrumental breaking the monopoly on the majority of the Dead Sea Scrolls that were kept hidden from the rest of us for more than thirty years. This is the fascinating story of how and why he did it.

[Schramm · Rating 2 out of 5]

A very slow read. Mostly boring, but every so often a tid bit of interesting information pops out at you to keep you interested.

[Betsy · Rating 1 out of 5]

Interesting history and material. I did not feel the author know how to write the book was more like a boring lecture.

[Céline FrenchAlps · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some pieces of the scrolls found in the cave 4 of Qumran. Interesting by its contents, and what a mystery for those ancient times !

[Joshua Hutchinson · Rating 4 out of 5]

This work provides the reader with a deeper understanding of the Jewish culture at Qumran.

[Jacques Coulardeau · Rating 4 out of 5]

ROBERT EISENMAN & MICHAEL WISE – THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS UNCOVERED – 1992

The long subtitle is the stake of an essential question. “The First Complete Translation and Interpretation of 50 Key Documents Withheld for Over 35 Years.” It is clear they were withheld by the Israeli state. Why, it is not clear, even after reading the whole book. It can only be explained by two main motivations. The first one is that these documents reveal that the Jewish faith or doctrine contained in the Old Testament at the time of Jesus Christ, just slightly before his apparition in the picture to just a little bit after his crucifixion, but also after the stoning of his brother James on the illegal, at least irregular decision of the High Priest of the Temple in Jerusalem, reveal the phylogeny of the three Abrahamic religions that emerged from these one hundred years between let’s say 70 BCE and 70 AD.
Robert Eisenman was the discoverer, and he was swift enough to have all the documents photographed before entrusting them to the Israeli state. He was thus able to publish or release a facsimile of these documents against the will of this Israeli state.
The second explanation is that these documents reveal the deep inner ideological reality of these Jews belonging to this Dead Sea community, and the revelation is brutal. More about it in a moment. I will not discuss these documents in more depth than a few remarks.
The first remark is that the main leader of this community is James, Jesus’s own brother and the first bishop of Jerusalem assassinated by the High Priest of the Temple since the decision was taken in such conditions that it went against the standard regulations for such a decision, the standard regulation that the ruling committee of the Temple had to convene inside the Temple and in this case it convened at the High Priest’s home.
The second remark is that the commentaries are highly repetitive because the same remarks have to be repeated for most documents. A more synthetic presentation would have been a good thing. But at this level of the presentation, it is a good thing that the Hebrew reconstruction of the documents is given and then a translation in English. The Hebrew original is not exploited for the large public of the non-Jews because the basic discussion on the roots used in these documents is hardly evoked, and certainly not detailed. Hebrew is a Semitic language, a tri-consonantal root language. The discussion only uses the English words with the Hebrew terms transliterated into the Latin alphabet. When we know these documents use a set of words that are highly repetitive and even a few semantically connected lines of words, but the discussion of the link between the Hebraic roots is hardly envisaged. The root connections between words are lost and the metaphorical line of the “mouth” and “being swallowed” or “being eaten up” by the “devil of some sort” is not revealed in its deep semantic and scriptural reality. It would be interesting to show this linguistic dimension with “Belial,” the evil one.
The next remark is essential. The authors insist on the way that in these documents from a purely Jewish community, we can see some clusters of words that have their perfect reproductions in some basic Christian documents in the New Testament. Christianity was nothing but a phylogenetic line in the evolution of this Jewish community, and we must keep in mind that James was the Teacher (with other names at times) of this community. This goes along the lines that Christianity was not a later invention. It was contained in and emerged from these documents, from the Jewish community at large and represented the critical side, those who criticized the Temple and the priests for not being zealous enough, King Herod for being an unworthy King of the Jews, of Judea, and a total rejection of the Roman occupation, hence support to those who were against the imperial colonialism imposed onto the Jews. Critical, harshly critical even, but not violent in any way. Zealous yes, Zealot no.
Yet the zealot side of this community will support and even more than support the upheaval against the Roman Empire after the killing of James that will lead to the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in 70 AD, which will not solve the problem that will find peace later on when the Jews were banned from Palestine, the famous diaspora. That zealot movement is for a full return to the very letter of the Torah, a total rejection of the non-Jews, a full nationalism that sounds like jingoism if not a complete racist rejection of the non-orthodox Jews, starting with the Gentile non-Jews and then including the Pharisees.
The rejecting discourse, then, is close to implying that everyone has to be accepted as pure in his (never any “her”) religion, practices, and works. All others are rejected, and the purification discourse could very easily be considered as justifying the worst possible actions of physical elimination, at best enslavement to the pure in respect of the Torah. That is exactly the position of the extreme terrorist trends today within Islam. But it is also the direct inspiration of the Israeli government right now against the Arabs, or Palestinians who have to be eliminated from Palestine that has to be understood as being the Isarael of the twelve tribes.
These documents cast a very sharp light on such trends among the Jews in the century of Jesus Christ. And we can consider that Saul when he became, on his own decision, Paul kept the same segregationist ideas and principles despite opening the Christian faith to Gentiles and calling himself the Apostle of the Gentiles. This trend stating that purity was the objective, and all unpure people had to be eliminated, survived, still survives in the Christian churches and chapels, is highly present in Islam, but we maybe should wonder about the Abrahamic roots of this Islam, and of course, toots that are present in the military imperialism of the Israeli establishment and public opinion.
As I have already said and written to some fellow Jews: the Israeli problem today is the direct heritage of the treatment of Ishmael and his slave Arab mother by Abraham and we, the heirs of this past, should apologize to the Arabs and Muslims of the entire world. It is also true that Christians of all affiliations should apologize to the Muslim peoples martyred by the Crusades.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU



VERSION FRANÇAISE

Le long sous-titre est l’enjeu d’une question essentielle. « La première traduction et interprétation complètes de 50 documents clés retenus pendant plus de 35 ans ». Il est clair qu’ils ont été retenus par l’État israélien. Pourquoi, on ne le sait pas, même après avoir lu l’ouvrage en entier. Cela ne peut s’expliquer que par deux motivations principales. La première est que ces documents révèlent que la foi ou la doctrine juive contenue dans l’Ancien Testament à l’époque de Jésus-Christ, juste un peu avant son apparition sur la photo jusqu’à un peu après sa crucifixion, mais aussi après la lapidation de son frère Jacques sur décision illégale, ou au moins irrégulière, du Grand Prêtre du Temple de Jérusalem, révèlent la phylogénie des trois religions abrahamiques qui ont émergé de ces cent années entre disons 70 avant J.C. et 70 après J.C.
Robert Eisenman en fut le découvreur, et il fut assez intelligent pour faire photographier tous les documents avant de les confier à l’État israélien. Il a ainsi pu publier ou diffuser un fac-similé de ces documents contre la volonté de cet État israélien.
La deuxième explication est que ces documents révèlent la réalité idéologique intérieure profonde de ces Juifs appartenant à cette communauté de la mer Morte, et la révélation est brutale. J’y reviendrai plus loin. Je ne m’étendrai pas sur ces documents plus en profondeur qu’avec quelques remarques.
La première remarque est que le principal dirigeant de cette communauté est Jacques, le propre frère de Jésus et le premier évêque de Jérusalem assassiné par le Grand Prêtre du Temple puisque la décision a été prise dans des conditions telles qu’elle allait à l’encontre des règles habituelles pour une telle décision, la règle habituelle selon laquelle le comité dirigeant du Temple devait se réunir à l’intérieur du Temple et dans ce cas-ci il s’est réuni au domicile du Grand Prêtre.
La deuxième remarque est que les commentaires sont très répétitifs car les mêmes remarques doivent être répétées pour la plupart des documents. Une présentation plus synthétique aurait été une bonne chose. Mais à ce niveau de présentation, il est bon que la reconstruction en hébreu des documents soit donnée puis une traduction en anglais. L’original hébreu n’est pas exploité pour le grand public des non-Juifs car la discussion de base sur les racines utilisées dans ces documents est à peine évoquée, et certainement pas détaillée. L’hébreu est une langue sémitique, une langue à racines tri-consonantiques. La discussion n’utilise que les mots anglais avec les termes hébreux translittérés en alphabet latin. Quand on sait que ces documents utilisent un ensemble de mots très répétitifs et même quelques chaînes de mots sémantiquement connectées, mais la discussion du lien entre les racines hébraïques est à peine envisagée. Les connexions de racines entre les mots sont perdues et la ligne métaphorique de la « bouche » et « être avalé » ou « être dévoré » par le « diable de quelque sorte » n’est pas révélée dans sa réalité sémantique et scripturale profonde. Il serait intéressant de montrer cette dimension linguistique avec « Bélial », le diable en question justement.
La remarque suivante est essentielle. Les auteurs insistent sur le fait que dans ces documents provenant d’une communauté purement juive, on peut voir des groupes de mots qui ont leurs reproductions parfaites dans certains documents chrétiens de base du Nouveau Testament. Le christianisme n’était rien d’autre qu’une ligne phylogénétique dans l’évolution de cette communauté juive, et nous devons garder à l’esprit que Jacques était le Maître (avec d’autres dénominations parfois) de cette communauté. Cela va dans le sens que le christianisme n’était pas une invention ultérieure, plus tardive. Il était contenu dans et émanait de ces documents, de la communauté juive dans son ensemble et représentait le côté critique, ceux qui critiquaient le Temple et les prêtres pour ne pas être assez zélés, le roi Hérode pour être un roi indigne des Juifs, de la Judée, et un rejet total de l’occupation romaine, d’où le soutien à ceux qui étaient contre le colonialisme impérial imposé aux Juifs. Critiques, sévèrement critiques même, mais pas violents en aucune façon. Zélé oui, zélote non.
Pourtant, le côté zélote de cette communauté soutiendra et même plus que soutiendra le soulèvement contre l’Empire romain après le meurtre de Jacques qui conduira à la destruction de Jérusalem et de son Temple en 70 après J.C., ce qui ne résoudra pas le problème qui trouvera la paix plus tard lorsque les Juifs seront bannis de Palestine, la fameuse diaspora. Ce mouvement zélote est pour un retour complet à la lettre même de la Torah, un rejet total des non-Juifs, un nationalisme total qui ressemble à du chauvinisme, voire à un rejet raciste complet des juifs non orthodoxes, à commencer par les Gentils non-juifs, puis les Pharisiens.
Le discours de rejet implique donc presque que chacun (jamais « chacune ») doit être accepté comme pur dans sa religion, ses pratiques et ses œuvres. Tous les autres sont rejetés, et le discours de purification pourrait très facilement être considéré comme justifiant les pires actions possibles d’élimination physique, au mieux d’asservissement aux purs conformément aux indications de la Torah. C’est exactement la position des tendances terroristes extrêmes d’aujourd’hui au sein de l’islam. Mais c’est aussi l’inspiration directe du gouvernement israélien en ce moment contre les Arabes, ou les Palestiniens qui doivent être éliminés de Palestine, qui doit être comprise comme étant l’Israël des douze tribus.
Ces documents jettent une lumière très vive sur de telles tendances parmi les Juifs au siècle de Jésus-Christ. Et nous pouvons considérer que Saül, lorsqu’il est devenu, de son propre chef, Paul a conservé les mêmes idées et principes ségrégationnistes tout en ouvrant la foi chrétienne aux Gentils et en se qualifiant lui-même d’Apôtre des Gentils. Cette tendance qui prétend que la pureté est l'objectif et que tous les impurs doivent être éliminés, a survécu et survit encore dans les églises et chapelles chrétiennes, est très présente dans l'islam, mais nous devrions peut-être nous interroger sur les racines abrahamiques de cet islam, et bien sûr, sur les racines qui sont présentes dans l'impérialisme militaire de l'establishment israélien et de son opinion publique.
Comme je l'ai déjà dit et écrit à certains de mes coreligionnaires juifs : le problème israélien d'aujourd'hui est l'héritage direct du traitement d'Ismaël et de sa mère esclave arabe par Abraham et nous, les héritiers de ce passé, devrions présenter des excuses aux Arabes et aux musulmans du monde entier. Il est vrai aussi que les Chrétiens de toutes affiliations devraient présenter leurs excuses aux peuples musulmans martyrisés par les Croisades.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU

[Stuart Soldate]

I recently looked at this book after 25 years.
The authors are incredibly self satisfied and their theories about Christianity are a crock of shit. Their theory is that (1)because of certain linguistic similarities, the authors of certain texts were the early Christians.; (2) that the fact that every Christian text expresses a philosophy totally inconsistent with the texts they read proves that christianity was misrepresented by St Paul.
A more obvious reading is that the Quamrun texts were not Christan.
Lolling in self congratlation and contemptuous of others, the writers are totally oblivious to their own stupidity.

[Heather Powell · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very insightful. Since I am reading the Bible for the third time in my life (teenager, late twenties, and now early forties) it was amazing to see how much the Qumran and Damascus documents confirm parts of the Bible and places and occurrences that have been labeled by some to be fictional or over dramatized. To see additional documents confirming their authenticity is awesome. At times it was difficult to follow since I’m a layman to the Word in many ways. Overall though it was a compelling and meaningful read in my opinion.

[Deirdre · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a very good book for its time, and was instrumental in loosening the stranglehold around the scholarship that was involved with the studies of the scrolls' fragments. Now, several years later, 2018, another cave has been found that holds even more fragments. It seems the mysteries will be studied for generations to come, but can we ever really know the true history of Qumran? Will the archaeologists finally agree on who lived there and why the scrolls were stored there?

[Thomas Niles · Rating 3 out of 5]

For someone who doesn't know anything about anything the author is talking about I've been lost 100% of the time

[Judy]

My reading concentrated on the translations and I skipped the interpretations for the most part. Golb wrote that Wise did the translations and does not agree with Eisenman's interpretations which tend to follow a theory that the scrolls were written by an early Jewish Christian group.
From my own reading of the translation, I noted the following:
1. All are from 4Q
2. Many appear to be in Hebrew
3. Women are identified throughout
4. Most are didactic and theological
5. They cover diverse subjects - hymns, magic, testaments, calendrical, legal texts
6. There is mysticism in some of them
7. I do not see correlations with the New Testament; there are many references to Hebrew Bible figures
8. There are "midrash" type stories of Biblical personages
9. There are passages on how to lead a decent life.
10. From MMT 4Q394-398
4Q397-399
line 30 "Second letter" is translated as
מקצת מעשי התורה (30)
Some of the works of the Law (Torah)
lines 13 and 24 refer to an End of Days
אחרית הימים

[Reinhold]

The authors refer to textes that are in a very bad shape and build their base on guesses. Even that they are most probably right because they talk of knowledge they got from other sciences, they let it seem as if it is based on the scrolls. They show parts of the scrolls, with a few signs recognizable and base on that as if it had been a page that was clearly readable.

Maybe try to reread it in the future.

[Jonnie Enloe · Rating 3 out of 5]

Outside of a comparative study of some type, read on it's own, it is simply difficult. Nothing wrong with author or subject. Hard to read about bits of papyrus with text fragments, one after the other with history hanging on each one.

[Karl Stark di Grande Inverno · Rating 3 out of 5]

Molto interessante.
L'unico difetto è il registro piuttosto "alto" delle introduzioni ai vari Rotoli: è un libro scritto da accademici per accademici.
Non troppo divulgativo; c'è poco spazio per le spiegazioni al volgo.

[Linda · Rating 4 out of 5]

A complete translation. 50 key documents. Gave to the church library.

[Bill Kuykendall]

Robert Eisenman was the person most responsible for forcing the release of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1993 -- after they had been hidden from view for nearly 40 years.

[Oma Eagle · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have 1992 edition.

[Steve Bender · Rating 4 out of 5]

Discussion of fragments of texts found in Cave 4 at Qumran. It includes transcriptions of the Hebrew and translations. Interesting speculation on the inhabitants of Qumran.

[Georg Sagittarius · Rating 3 out of 5]

Demagogisch! Schein- & Anti-Christliches (s.a."Jakobus")!
(Qumran-)WAHRHEITEN: Christi Offenb. an Jakob Lorber Bertha Dudde: Gerd Gutemann!

[Timothy Frasca]

Fascinating