Skip to content
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 9 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Will the Theologians Please Sit Down  /  Chapter 20: Counterfeit History  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 9
He argues the Qumran/Dead Sea Scrolls community was isolated, rule-focused, apocalyptic, and likely irrelevant to Jesus and the apostles; how should that shape the confidence with which Christians appeal to Qumran parallels to explain Jesus, the Pharisees, or New Testament controversies?
Another way to ask: Bercot says the Dead Sea Scrolls community was isolated and may not connect much to Jesus or the apostles. How should that affect how confident we are when people use Qumran “parallels” to explain the New Testament?

Direct Answer Bercot’s description suggests we should be cautious and not overly confident when using Qumran parallels to explain Jesus or mainstream Judaism, since that community was isolated and likely had no interaction with Jesus or the apostles. At best, Qumran may show what one separatist group believed, not what everyone practiced.

Support from Transcript:

  • He calls the Qumran documents “sectarian writings…found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.”
  • He says they are “of even less help than Josephus and Philo” for New Testament background.
  • Reason: the group “had separated themselves from normal Jewish life” and formed “an isolated commune in the region of the Dead Sea.”
  • Their writings are “primarily…apocalyptic works and specialized rules for their community.”
  • Key limitation: “To our knowledge, neither Jesus nor his apostles had any interaction with these people.”
Discussion Follow-ups When someone says, “Qumran proves what the Pharisees believed,” what cautions does Bercot’s description raise? How can we differentiate “possible parallel” from “historical explanation”?

Jumpstarter 9 of 10
Back Questions Next