Chapter VIII - As the Drama Continues

 

It has served us well - this myth of Christ.

                                   Pope Leo X

 

1. Scrolls' monopoly: the collapse and after

 

Time has not stood still since that day in September 1991 when the Scrolls transcripts were released to the public by the Huntington Library, though one could easily get that impression from all the noise emanating from Biblical scholarly circles spilling over into the media. It is now very much a media event. The current situation is: what until that time was a debate confined to a small circle of specialists has turned into an acrimonious public squabble; and considering the stakes involved this is only to be expected. While there have been some fascinating new developments that are worth examining, they do not, however, alter the basic picture of Christianity presented in the book. If anything they add to it by supplying more details about Christianity's borrowings from Qumranian sources. They also add greatly to the continuing drama.

It will no doubt be some years before members of the public can be expected to be in a position to grasp all the major issues involved in the controversy; it may well take a new generation to recognize and accept the reality that the Church version of its history has virtually been overthrown. (It is hoped that the present book will be of some help in understanding this.) Likewise, it will be a while before a consensus is reached on the history of Christianity - if ever - but the ultimate outcome seems inevitable: the Church will not be able to defend its version of history or its doctrine. There does not seem to be much it can do about it. The horse has bolted; keeping the barn door shut won't make it come back in. Then there is also the albatross to bear - of having concealed the Scrolls from public view for over four decades. This is not easy to explain away, especially when Eisenman and Robinson were able to publish their facsimile edition of all the Scrolls texts within two years of their coming into Eisenman's possession. (This story is related a little later)

At the present time, the drama has shifted from Qumran to academia and the media. Many reputations and careers are now at stake. At the centre of controversy are two men: Robert Eisenman whom we have already met, and a young manuscripts specialist and Aramaic scholar from Chicago - Dr Michael Wise. We shall get to the story of their remarkable collaboration shortly, but first, a little more about the drama of the discovery of the Scrolls that now bids fair to overtake the drama of the birth of Christianity itself - though without the attendant bloodshed.

As noted previously, the Scrolls manuscripts were released to the public by the Huntington Library in September 1991, on the 22nd to be exact. This, however, had been preceded by a dramatic development. On September 5, 1991, American newspapers reported that Professor Ben-Zion Wacholder of the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati and his graduate student Martin Abegg had used the secret concordance of Hebrew words prepared by the International Team (and leaked by someone) to recreate the texts with the help of computer analysis. It is unnecessary to go into the technical details, but it appears likely that they had used artificial intelligence (AI) techniques to supply the missing verbs and arrive at a plausible text. They claimed eighty percent accuracy for their reconstruction - a figure that appears rather optimistic to this writer (himself a computer scientist), but it does not really matter. Less than three weeks later, the Huntington Library released the full transcripts.

Even this release had been pre-empted - by Robert Eisenman no less. It transpired that he had a source in Jerusalem - within the confines of the Ecole Biblique itself. This source had been feeding him photographs of the Scrolls beginning late in the year 1989. Within a year, before the end of 1990, he had in his possession a complete set of photographs of all the Scrolls materials! This now explains how he and J.M. Robinson were able to bring out their two-volume magnum opus A Facsimile Edition of the Dead Sea Scrolls within weeks of their release by the Huntington Library: they had made use of the material supplied by Eisenman's secret source at the Ecole Biblique.[1]

This was soon followed by another major development - the publication of the book The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered: The First Complete Translation and Interpretation of 50 Key Documents withheld for over 35 years authored by Eisenman and Wise. It represents a major advance in the history of modern Biblical scholarship. It is now a primary source for all research on the subject (including some of the work leading to the present volume). The Introduction to the book (written in third person) describes how the materials happened to come into Eisenman's hands:

 

...behind the scenes events were transpiring that would make even these discussions [some controversies and rumours] moot.

Eisenman had been identified in the flurry of world-wide media attention as the scholarly point man in this struggle. As a result, photographs of the remaining unpublished Dead Sea Scrolls were made available to him. These began coming to him in September 1989. At first they came in small consignments, then more insistently, until by the autumn of 1990, a year later, photographs of virtually the whole of the unpublished corpus and then some had been made over to him. Those responsible for this obviously felt he would know what to do with them. The present editors hope that this confidence has been justified. The publication of the two volume Facsimile Edition two years later, together with the present volume, is the result.[2]

(Eisenman and Wise, pp. 3-4)

 

Eisenman, it turned out, had excellent help; his choice of Michael Wise had been most fortunate. In contrast to the flamboyant Eisenman with his reputation for abrasiveness, Wise appears softly spoken and studious. But as often the case with such people, Wise seems absolutely sure of his grasp of his subject; his mild exterior conceals a formidable mastery of two esoteric fields - ancient manuscripts, and Semitic languages (Hebrew and Aramaic).[3] The more the two examined the Scrolls, the more convinced they became that the origins of Christianity as presented by the Church was entirely unfounded.

To begin with, they found that the community of Qumran had messianic expectations. This of course is something that was already known as has been made clear in the text. But what is new and extraordinary is that the Qumranians believed that the coming Messiah would perform miracles - like healing the sick and resurrecting the dead. In the text known as the 'Messiah of Heaven and Earth' given by Eisenman and Wise we have the following remarkable passage (p. 23):

 

The Heavens and Earth will obey His Messiah, ...and all that is in them...

And for wonders that are not the works of the Lord ... Then He will heal the sick, resurrect the dead, to the meek announce glad tidings ...He will lead the Holy Ones; He will shepherd them.

 

Then there is the passage about the Davidic Messiah given by Geza Vermes in the latest revision of his book The Dead Sea Scrolls: Qumran in Perspective (S.C.M. Press, London 1994. p. 53):

 

I shall be the father and he shall be my son. He is the branch of David who shall arise with the Interpreter of the Law to rule in Zion at the end of time.

 

The Gospels of course attribute all these to Jesus the Messiah (Christ). This lends further support to the claim made by Andre Dupont-Sommer and later also by John Allegro that Jesus of the Gospels was a fictional character created by drawing upon traditions and expectations of the people living at the time, as reflected in the Qumran texts. (I have stated before my own preference: Jesus was probably an unimportant brother of James who came to be given the attributes of the expected Messiah, to be used in Paul's propaganda. Either way, he can only be seen as the embodiment of the expectations of the Qumran community.)

There are recent reports of Eisenman and Wise as having located references (if my somewhat hurried reading is correct) that show the story of the crucifixion of Christ (or Messiah) to be in the Scrolls. It is said to refer to what they call a 'Pierced Messiah' anticipating Christ on the Cross. Their reading is: 'They shall slay the Prince of Congregation by Piercing'.

This reading remains controversial but eminently plausible. Some, notably those allied on the side of the Church, fiercely oppose it, while independent scholars - Norman Golb of Chicago for instance - find this plausible. The following passage is found in one of the texts published by Eisenman and Wise which could also refer to a crucifixion (p. 145):

 

Investigate and seek and know how Jonah wept. Thus, you shall not destroy the weak by wasting away or by [crucif]ixion ...Let not the nail touch him. Then you shall raise up for your father a name of rejoicing and for all your brothers a [firm] Foundation. ...You shall see and you shall rejoice in the Eternal Light and you will not be one who is hated of (God).

(Emphasis added.)

 

This beautiful passage is from the recently published Qumran text known as 'A Firm Foundation'[4] As Eisenman and Wise point out, this text and its imagery of light has close connections with the Gospel of John. The reference to the 'Pierced Messiah' which came to light only recently was apparently found by them in a fragment that is not one of the fifty texts given in their book. It is a small fragment, not much larger than a postage stamp, that was found presumably after its publication. If the train of revelations from the Qumran texts continues along these lines, the case for the historicity of Jesus will become increasingly hard to sustain. The Gospels have been shown to be even more untrustworthy than previously thought; they owe everything save distortions and fabrications to the Qumranians.

The battle for the interpretation of the Qumran texts has predictably given rise to a division within the community of Biblical scholars. The 'orthodox' position, the one held by the Church that is, is under assault from several quarters - doctrinal, historical and, not the least, its own conduct in concealing the truth. The Church, however, sees the greatest threat as coming from Eisenman; not even John Allegro posed such a problem. In what can only be seen as a damage control effort, the Church has come out with its own version called Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls: The Controversy Resolved edited by John Charlesworth, published by Doubleday of New York (1992). Despite the hopeful title the controversy is definitely not resolved. For one it fails to explain why the Church and its institutions found it necessary to sit on the manuscripts for forty years and more. As a damage control exercise, it is unimpressive, especially considering the enormous financial and publicity resources at the Church's command.

Recognizing this, orthodox Christian scholars have mounted a feverish campaign against Eisenman and Wise, particularly the former. One has an eerie sense of having seen all this before - in the case of John Allegro to be precise. There are now similar efforts in motion to discredit Eisenman as an irresponsible scholar and publicity hound. As in the case of Allegro, no one has tried to refute his work on scholarly grounds; only charges are being floated that he is fond of making sensational statements in the media. How any of this changes anything in the Dead Sea Scrolls (which Eisenman published) remains unexplained. Publicity hound or not - Eisenman's record of having published both the facsimile edition of all the texts, and the translations of fifty key documents is likely to stand for the foreseeable future as a monumental contribution.

Norman Golb has also pointed out that criticisms of the readings given by Eisenman and Wise are premature in view of the fact that their offering is a first pioneering edition of documents that lay buried for two thousand years and more. There are bound to be revisions and better readings in subsequent editions. Timeliness is often no less important than accuracy. In any event, Church partisans are not on very firm grouud when they denounce Eisenman for his actions while they themselves had been sitting on the same material for more than forty years. They had every opportunity while Eisenman had to struggle long and hard for access. All of us owe him a debt of gratitude for his resourcefulness and his commitment to the progress of knowledge.

Nor is this the whole story of the Church's intransigence. Upon learning that E.J. Brill of Leiden had a contract with Eisenman to publish the Facsimile Edition, the Vatican brought its formidable influence to bear on the publisher and had the contract cancelled at the last moment. Fortunately, the Biblical Archaeological Society of Washington stepped in and published it with a minimum of delay. Eisenman and Wise tell us in their introduction:

 

In pursuance of the goal of absolutely free access without qualifications, Eisenman was preparing the Facsimile Edition of all the unpublished plates. This was scheduled to appear the following spring through E.J. Brill of Leiden, Holland. Ten days, however, before it was scheduled for publication in April 1991, after pressure was applied by the International Team [of the Ecole Biblique], the publisher inexplicably withdrew and Hershel Shanks and the Biblical Archaeology Society to their credit stepped in to fill the breach.

(p.4)

 

In the light of this sordid history, the Church's charges against Eisenman - as a man more interested in publicity than true scholarship rings hollow. The onus now is on Christian scholars to produce evidence that their Jesus of the Gospels was historical; and this evidence will have to be independent of the New Testament. For too long, the Church has gotten away with its claim that the Gospels represent a historical Jesus; they will now have to produce independent evidence. If Jesus Christ is not historical but only a creation of interested parties - a personification of the messianic expectations of the Qumran cult - what happens to the teachings of Christianity as the word of God revealed to His Only Son? This is the fate of every paurusheya religion - as perishable as the purusha who created it.

Deeply perturbed by these developments, the Ecole Biblique invited a team of Belgian experts led by Dr Pauline Donceel Voute to study the archaeology of Qumran. In this their hope was that the study would substantiate the Church position - that the Qumranians were recluses who had little to do with the rest of Palestine, and therefore completely divorced from the movement that led to the birth of Christianity. The plan backfired. The result was a comical denouement worthy of an Italian opera buffa. The Belgians found that Qumran was a major producer of perfumes (balsam oil) - a highly profitable commodity in Palestine. They found also evidence of other luxury items. This does not go very well with the official Church version of Qumranians as reclusive monks uninterested in the outside world.

Not less embarrassing for the Ecole Biblique was the determination by the Belgian team that the late Father de Vaux had grossly misinterpreted his own archaeological finds. He had described a perfumery as the office used in preparing manuscripts! - the Dead Sea Scrolls no less! This was noted by Michael Wise who went on to point out that the Scrolls showed the hand of literally hundreds of different scribes over different periods - hardly possible had they all been produced by just a few scribes working in a single room. The inescapable conclusion is: the Dead Sea Scrolls were created by people living all over Palestine, and not just a few scribes belonging to a reclusive group working in a single office. These findings also shattered what was left of de Vaux's reputation as an archaeologist. But as Eisenman pointed out, de Vaux's training was in sociology, not archaeology. The orthodox position, it seems, lies in shambles.

 

2. Pontifex Maximus

 

With many of the pieces in place, we may now attempt to piece together a final picture of the evolution of Christianity from its obscure Qumranian origins into its modern form. To do this, however, we need to go to the Council of Nicea of AD 325 dominated by two men - Emperor Constantine and Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea. It was at the Council of Nicea that the assembled priests voted to confer divinity on Jesus the Messiah. What if they had voted the other way? This was inconceivable for Constantine wanted it that way. It suited his political purpose. Eusebius made sure that the priests voted the way the emperor wanted. He had no wish to be crucified by Constantine. Eusebius was not the kind of man to repeat the mistake of Jesus - real or mythical.

Constantine headed the Council of Nicea. He saw it as a convenient political forum to establish firm authority over some of the chronically turbulent subjects of his vast empire.                                                                                                    He died a 'Christian', allowing himself to be baptized on his deathbed. All through his reign he was Pontifex Maximus, the head of Rome's solar religion. It was a title he never relinquished. He remained a pagan sun worshipper all his life. His patronage of Christianity was purely a political act. He changed its Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday - the sacred day according to his own solar religion. And he made December 25, the winter solstice - the day on which the sun 'rises' from the lowest point on the ecliptic - the day for Christmas. (The Winter Solstice now falls on December 21.) In other words, he made Christianity subordinate itself to his own solar religion. This was his price for granting recognition to Christianity.

But Constantine wanted more. As a pagan ruler he did not see God as very different from man - especially himself. Since the Jews (and Christians) do not recognize their God as man, he wanted to be recognized as their messiah. Eusebius and the assembled priests dutifully complied. Eusebius is said to have ingratiated himself with his emperor by proclaiming: "It is as if the religion of Abrabam is at last fulfilled - not in Jesus, but in Constantine!"

So Constantine, Pontifex Maximus, the Divine Pagan Emperor became the Messiah of the Chosen People; he was willing to grant a small portion of his divineness to Jesus the Messiah. And this is what Eusebius and the assembled priests conferred upon Jesus through their vote: this at least is my reading of the events leading to Constantine assuming the position of the Head of the Church. He was in a sense an earlier-day Henry VIII. Eusebius was Constantine's Cardinal Wolsey, except there was no entrenched religious authority to challenge him. But he retained his position as the head of Rome's pagan religions - as Pontifex Maximus.

In due course, with the Roman Empire greatly weakened in the west, the Bishop of Rome usurped the title of Pontifex Maximus while calling himself the Vicar of Christ. And, in the Middle Ages, he became the temporal head of Rome as well. In support of this usurpation medieval Popes produced a forged document - the notorious Donation of Constantine - in which the late emperor expressing himself in Medieval Latin had with great humility made over both his temporal power and religious authority to the Bishop of Rome, Pope Sylvester, who was not even Pope at the time. In reality, the Bishop of Rome had not ranked much higher in Constantine's court than a palace cook. But no matter; as a consequence of the forged document and the political skill of the Popes, aided by the ineptitude of European rulers, Rome, the 'home of forgeries' became the Holy See of Pontifex Maximus. Modern Christianity was born.

 

3. Endgame

 

The whole metamorphosis, as we look at it today is truly breathtaking. The stern and uncompromising early Christianity with its 'zeal for the Law' was hijacked by St Paul and later fulfilled by Constantine, with his faithful minion Eusebius announcing to the Council of Nicea - "the religion of Abrabam is at last fulfilled - not in Jesus, but in Constantine." He was absolutely right of course. Through these series of strategic moves and countermoves did the remarkable institution called modern Christianity come into existence. And now it has come a full circle with the Dead Sea Scrolls threatening to unravel the whole game. The recent history of the Dead Sea Scrolls goes to show the doctrinal fragility of a paurusheya religion like Christianity - as perishable as the purusha on whose authority it rests.

This conundrum in the doctrinal world of Christianity is now being matched by developments in the temporal realm as well. Italy and Europe are in the midst of what is being billed in the European press as the 'trial of the century' - the trial of Italian Mafia figures and several important politicians. As noted in Chapter I, the star defendant in the trial is no less a person than Giulio Andreotti, seven times premier of Italy, friend and protege of Liclo Gelli - the Puppet-master of P2. In November 1995, Italian authorities charged Andreotti with having masterminded the assassination of journalist-blackmailer Mino Pecorelli. Pecorelli, it will be recalled, had been releasing embarrassing details about P2 and its links to the Vatican and the Italian government until he was assassinated on Gelli's orders. It is now being charged that Andreotti himself issued the order for Pecorelli's assassination. (Chapter I)

This trial has the potential to reveal a good deal about the connections between the Vatican and the underworld, including, possibly, details surrounding the death of Pope John Paul I. As also noted in Chapter I, Cardinal Posadas Ocampo of Mexico was assassinated in the Guadalajara airport while on an intelligence-gathering mission in drug infested central Mexico. The true nature of the cardinal's mission, and the extent of the Vatican's involvement in the Latin American drug trade are matters for conjecture. The close connection between the Vatican Bank and Roberto Calvi's Banco Ambrosiano of Milan with its drug-related money laundering operation, however, is an established fact. The trial of Andreotti and others should help shed light on these extraordinary developments.

In summary, we may now say that while the debate goes on - all the while generating more heat than light - the basic picture of Christianity has been changed for ever. It is neither unique nor original. Its scriptures and its history owe more to forgery and plagiarism than to any divine inspiration. It is the most massive forgery and the greatest deception in all history. That, in the final analysis, is the message of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

  

 

 

Selected Bibliography

 

1. Primary works
(excluding the texts of the Dead Sea Scrolls)

The Bible: Authorised King James Version

The Book of Enoch and the Secrets of Enoch

Complete works of Flavius Josephus (Against Apion, Antiquities of the Jews, Wars of the Jews)

Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (by Edward Gibbon)

Dialogues of Plato

Les Vrays Centuries (of Michele de Nostradame, in French)

The Recognitions of Clement

Twelve Caesars (of Suetonius)

Annals of Imperial Rome (of Tacitus)

Bhagavadgita, The (in Sanskrit)

Mahabharata, The (in Sanskrit)

Rigveda, The (in Sanskrit)

Other miscellaneous works in Sanskrit

 

2. Qumran Texts

(Texts of the Dead Sea Scrolls)

Community Rule

Copper Scroll

Damascus Document

Habakkuk Commentary

Temple Scroll

War Scroll

(All these in translation by Geza Vermes below)

Texts recently published by Eisenman and Wise in Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered (see below)

 

3. Main references

 

Allegro,   John Marco  Allegro,   John Marco  Baigent, Michael  and Richard Leigh. Barrett, C.K. (Editor).  Casas, Bartolome de Las.       Charlesworth, James H. (Editor)	The Dead Sea Scrolls: A reappraisal, (2nd edition.), London, Penguin Books, 1990. The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Christian Myth, London, Newton Abbot, 1979. The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception, New York, Summit Books, 1991. The New Testament Sources, San Francisco, HarperCollins, 1989. The Devastation of the Indies: A Brief Account,   (Translated from the Spanish by Herma Briffault), Baltimore and London, The Johns Hopkins Universitv Press. 1992. Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls: The Controversy Resolved, New York, Doubleday, 1992.
de Rosa, Peter.	Vicars of Christ: The Dark Side of the Papacy, London, Corgi Books, 1988.
Eisenman, Robert.	Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians and Qumran, Leiden; EJ. Brill, 1983.
Eisenman, Robert  and Michael Wise.	The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered: The First Complete Translation and Interpretation of 50 Key Documents Withheld for over 35 years, New York; Penguin Books, 1992.
Elst, Koenraad.	Psychology of Prophetism: A secular look at the Bible, New Delhi, Voice of India, 1993.
George, Susan and Fabrizio Sabelli.	Faith and Credit: The World Bank's secular empire, London, Penguin Books, 1994.
Golb, Norman.	Who Wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls? New York, Scribner, 1995.
Gael, Sita Ram.	Papacy: Its doctrine and history, New Delhi, Voice of India, 1986.
Lea, Henry Charles.	A History of the Inquisition of Spain, 4 volumes, New York, 1907.
Panikkar,    Raimundo.	The Unknown Christ of Hinduism, London, Darton, Longman and Todd, 1963
Pelikan, Jaroslav,	Jesus through the Centuries: His place in the history of culture, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1985
Priolkar, A.K.	The Goa Inquisition: The terrible tribunal for the East, New Delhi, Voice of India, 1961.
Schubert, Kurt.	The Dead Sea Community: Its Origin and Teachings, London, Harper, 1959.
Silberman, Neil  Asher.	The Hidden Scrolls, New York, Grosset/Putnam, 1994.
Swamp, Ram.	Hindu View of Christianity and Islam, New Delhi, Voice of India, 1992.
Swamp, Ram.	The Word as Revelation: Names of gods, New Delhi, Voice of India, 1978
Vermes, Geza.	The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, London, Penguin, 1973.
Vermes, Geza.	The Dead Sea Scrolls: Qumran in perspective, William Collins, London, 1977. (Revised edn. S.C.M. Press, London, 1994.)
Yallop, David.	In God's Name, London, Jonathan Cape, 1984.