My understanding of the use of the word "miraculous" when scholars discuss the Dead Sea Scrolls is that it was exciting to discover that the book wasn't completely different 1000 years ago. There seems to be a lot of localizing of doctrines and borrowing from local gods and myths in a lot of original sources, therefore to find that there…
My understanding of the use of the word "miraculous" when scholars discuss the Dead Sea Scrolls is that it was exciting to discover that the book wasn't completely different 1000 years ago. There seems to be a lot of localizing of doctrines and borrowing from local gods and myths in a lot of original sources, therefore to find that there was a singular authoritative text that was faithfully preserved was the exciting promise of the discovery. Before that, the version they had could've been invented to serve the worldly interests of people in power.
Although the essence of the books maintained their authority and fidelity over the years, the textual variants are still problematic if the goal is to prove that "the word" hasn't been manipulated by flawed men on earth. If you remember Bill Clinton's famous perjury defense that earned him the title "The Wizard of Is", small adjustments in the use of language can affect how the word is interpreted and therefore how the law is applied. Because the Bible wasn't just a religious doctrine but also the foundation for the oldest continuously operating system of law, the textual differences could indicate that edits over time were done not as a matter of faith, but on the instructions of power.
My understanding of the use of the word "miraculous" when scholars discuss the Dead Sea Scrolls is that it was exciting to discover that the book wasn't completely different 1000 years ago. There seems to be a lot of localizing of doctrines and borrowing from local gods and myths in a lot of original sources, therefore to find that there was a singular authoritative text that was faithfully preserved was the exciting promise of the discovery. Before that, the version they had could've been invented to serve the worldly interests of people in power.
Although the essence of the books maintained their authority and fidelity over the years, the textual variants are still problematic if the goal is to prove that "the word" hasn't been manipulated by flawed men on earth. If you remember Bill Clinton's famous perjury defense that earned him the title "The Wizard of Is", small adjustments in the use of language can affect how the word is interpreted and therefore how the law is applied. Because the Bible wasn't just a religious doctrine but also the foundation for the oldest continuously operating system of law, the textual differences could indicate that edits over time were done not as a matter of faith, but on the instructions of power.