Evening star., 1955-05-29
By RICHARD FRYKLUND

Some eight years after the dis
covery Of the first Of those amazing
Biblical documents called the Dead
Sea Scrolls, scholars still are not
positive they know exactly what
they have.
There Is no doubt that the manu-
scripts are important. They are, in
fact, the most important archeologi-
cal finds of all time for Biblical
scholarship. But there is still much
disagreement about the exact age
of the scrolls and their significance
in the history Of Christianity and
Judaism.
It is not surprising that scholars
are still arguing about the scrolls.
A thorough evaluation will take
years of study by men in many fields
of interest - archaeology, paleogra-
ply, theology, language-and even
atomic science.
Theories on the significance OF
the scrolls are being published now
in learned journals. But what is a
sure thing to one scholar is sheer
folly to another. The footnotes are
peppered with unprofessorial criti-
cism of the judgment, knowledge
and even the motives Of rival the
orists.
Found Neor Jericho
The actual documents being stud
led and debated are group OF
scrolls and bits of manuscripts
found in several caves near the Dead
Sea, not far from Jericho. They are
the oldest Biblical manuscripts
known to exist. They are documents
which most scholars thought a few
years ago could not possibly have
survived, because the Palestine air
was thought to be too moist to pre-
serve any truly ancient writings.
But in 1947 a Bedouin shepherd
named Muhammad Dib astounded
the world of Biblical scholars by
producing scrolls which were at
tributed to the time of Christ and
before. He said he found them in a
cave. A search over the subsequent
wears AAASAS NSSN
ments in several caves.
Before one can understand the
full significance of the manuscripts.
it must be realized that the Oldest
copies of the Old Testament in the
original Hebrew date from only
1000 years ago-that is the Ma
soretic Text" the standard Hebrew
Bible. The oldest known fragments
of the Christian Bible go back an
other 500 years and are based on a
Greek translation of the Old Testa-
ment-the "Septuagint Bible" trans
lated about two centuries before
Christ.
Only Copies
So the only versions of the holy
books of two great religions have
been late copies of the originals or
have been translations. 1t was
known, however, that errors were
unavoidable every time the Testa-
ments we're copied and translated.
So scholars would have given any
number of eye teeth for look at a
truly ancient Bible. They would
have been equally avid for chance
to study original historical docu-
ments from the period of Christ.
The Dead Sea manuscripts. most
scholars now believe, are just the
sort of documents they were look
. ing for. Learned men all over the
Judaic Christian world are still
amazed that they were found.
Almost every book of the Old
Testament is represented by at least
a few fragments. The Book of Isaiah
was found virtually intact.
And Isaiah, of course, is the one
book of the Old Testament that
Jews and Christians were most
anxious to see in an ancient Hebrew
version. For that book contains the
prophesies of better days for Judea
and of the coming of the Savior.
An Ancient Brotherhood
Also among the Dead Sea scrolls
were manual Of discipline" Of an
ancient brotherhood. group of al
most Biblical psalms, a lengthy
commentary on the Book of Habak-
kuk, an account of a war between
"the Children of Light and the Chill
dren of Darkness" copies Of several
apocryphal books of the Bible-one
of which has been "lost" for 1000
years Cthe Book of Lemech)-many
secular manuscripts which will be
used to fill out the history of the
years around the time of Christ,
and two large copper scrolls which
must be important but which are
too fragile to unroll
What can be learned from the
documents? The answer to that
depends to a certain extent on their
real age and Interpretation. One
outstanding Old Testament scholar
says they aren't particularly old at
all-are probably, in fact, forgeries
and hoaxes dating back perhaps to
the Middle Ages.
But almost all qualified experts
disagree with him. The documents
are genuine. they say, and date to a
period beginning l00-odd years BIC.
to a century or more AID. They
base their conclusion on archeo-
8@Es8SSsas$s;$$ss#