Dead Sea Scrolls Conspiracies and Controversies
From Forgeries to Sci-Fi Fantasy, the Qumran Collection is Part of Modern Popular Imagination
In this guest blog series, Dr. Andrew Perrin explores key topics and texts from his new book Lost Words and Forgotten Worlds: Rediscovering the Dead Sea Scrolls. Follow him on YouTube for more insights into ancient scribes, scrolls, and scriptures.
The Ongoing History of the Dead Sea Scrolls
The Dead Sea Scrolls are ancient texts yet they have become part of popular imagination in our own day. First discovered in caves in the Judaean Desert in the late-1940s and early 1950s, these writings remained unknown and unread for nearly two millennia, tucked away in caves near the site of Qumran. The ongoing interest and intrigue around the scrolls, however, is not only due to their potential for academic research. For better or worse, the Dead Sea Scrolls have become a bottomless fund for conspiracy theory as well as seem to endlessly attract controversy.
Even decades after their complete publication, and now with open access to the scrolls through digital image collections, the range of headlines to tabloid takes on the Dead Sea Scrolls is endless and ongoing. In a way, part of what makes these ancient finds so intriguing is their modern mythology. In this short article, I pick but two of the recent flare ups of Dead Sea Scrolls controversies (the surge of forgeries) and conspiracy theories (alleged alien connections). Buckle up and put on your tin foil hat, this will be fun.
Phony Fragments and Dead Sea Scams
Unfortunately, forgeries and sordid black-market acquisitions are all too common in ancient cultural studies. And biblical studies is not immune. Recent famous examples of would-be biblical proportion include the alleged “Gospel of Jesus’ Wife” papyrus and the “Brother of Jesus” inscription on the so-called “James Ossuary.” Faux fragments have now also become a major headline for Dead Sea Scrolls studies and a flashpoint of controversy for private collectors and scholars alike.
The production and purchase of confirmed forgeries of alleged Dead Sea Scrolls cannot be denied. There is much we don’t know about these objects, such as their provenience (where they came from), provenance (the chain of custody), and the players involved along the way (some are known others are are undisclosed). The reality of forged and illicit texts or artefacts is a problem that cannot be ignored and must become part of any contemporary orientation to the scrolls. Let’s look at some examples and lessons learned.
Many fragments acquired by private collectors in the late 1990s and 2000s have recently been identified as forgeries. The Museum of the Bible announced in 2020 that all the alleged Dead Sea Scroll fragments in their collection were fakes, a hunch already held by many scholars. As a result, Brill has since issued a retraction to the volume wherein the spurious fragments were published. Scholars have also now confirmed forgeries among The Schøyen Collection in Norway. Other privately held alleged fragments purchased by Azusa Pacific University and Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary are under ongoing debate and analysis. The Lying Pen of Scribes catalogue of news media coverage on this ongoing (mis)adventure of modern Dead Sea forgeries well captures how what often began as sensationalized discoveries has now devolved into a saga of debacles.
How can we detect forgeries? There are many methods in place or emerging, ranging from the observational to technological. Let’s look at a few approaches that call the authenticity of several fragments into question.
Let’s start with some basic math. Many of these alleged scroll fragments are of biblical passages. In fact, way too many. Approximately 22-23% of the authentic Dead Sea Scrolls are texts of the Hebrew Scriptures. Yet the vast majority of these new fragments purport to carry the words of holy writ. On that point alone, the statistics hint something is suspicious: there is too many biblical texts scrawled upon these fragments.
Let’s think a bit about theology. It is also the types of passages within these fragments that is all too convenient. For example, the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary holdings include fragments with portions of Psalm 22 (famously a passage inspiring Jesus’ dying words in Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34) as well as Leviticus 18:28-30; 20:24 (a passage read by some as speaking against homosexuality). In these cases, the fragments are perhaps conveniently tailored to theologically loaded passages of interest to certain evangelical audiences and buyers.
Let’s consider text criticism. Many alleged scroll fragments include “new” readings in Hebrew texts, which, if authentic would provide remarkable data for modern Bibles and biblical studies. Take, for example, the alleged groundbreaking reading of “Mount Gerizim” not “Mount Ebal” in the Azusa Pacific University fragment of Deuteronomy 27:4. If the fragment is authentic—which seems highly unlikely—then this single word could revolutionize our understanding of Deuteronomic theology and spark a reorientation of our knowledge of Samaritan Pentateuch texts and tradition.
These samples are but a few of the internal clues that scholars see as suspicious with alleged new fragments. When possible, such hints also take into consideration insights from advanced material, scribal, or even chemical analyses. In many cases, the internal evidence alone suggests such fragments are too good to be true.
What’s fueling this controversy? At least part of this profiteering market is capitalizing on “biblicism” and an overt interest among some evangelical camps where antiquities and apologetics go hand in hand to promote or preserve the fidelity of the Bible. Some might say this sort of new insight is priceless. In fact, the opposite is true: these fragments came at too high a cost and in multiple currencies. Monetarily, many purchase prices are undisclosed, others range into the millions. This supply of forgeries or illicit items to meet a theologically oriented demand in and of itself is an interesting economics issue, to put it lightly. Then there is the more difficult and costly expense of ethics and engagement in what are often illicit avenues for procuring antiquities. These fragments were expensive indeed and in more ways than one.
Simply put: while forged fragments are not part of the ancient Dead Sea Scrolls, for better or worse, they have become part of their modern and ongoing history. None of these texts turned out to be as advertised (literally), but now that they are recognized as fakes students and scholars engaging with the larger and authentic Qumran collection need to be aware of this reality.
One thing is for sure: these fragments at least came from this planet. And that is more than I can say for our next case study, which shifts from controversy to conspiracy and forgeries to science fiction.
Myth Busting: Does the Genesis Apocryphon Reveal Noah was an Ancient Alien?
The Dead Sea Scrolls revealed that the literature and thought inspired by the figure of Enoch were hugely important for the ancient community of Qumran. Many writings later received in Ethiopian Orthodox traditions as 1 Enoch were discovered in early Aramaic copies at Qumran alongside other lesser-known texts alluding to Enochic books, such as the Genesis Apocryphon, or featuring Enoch as a source for revelatory knowledge, like the Book of Giants. These writings are often described as “rewritten scripture” or “parascriptural texts,” since they reimagine and extend pre-flood tales with new interpretive twists and takes on the lives of figures like Enoch, Methusaleh, Lamech, Noah, or the giants, as well as give voice and names to women characters, such as Batenosh or Sarai in the Apocryphon.
The Aramaic Genesis Apocryphon (formerly referred to as the “Lamech Scroll”) has captivated conspiracy theorists advocating Noah’s otherworldly parentage. To be fair, Genesis may have an interpretive gap here that invites such questions. Right after the genealogy from Adam to Noah (Genesis 5:1-32), we learn of the errant watchers ascending earthward, bearing gargantuan children (the Nephilim) by human women (Genesis 6:1-4). Is it possible that Noah’s lineage lies with an otherworldly watcher not with his human father Lamech? This is one of the assertions of the widely received mini-series Ancient Aliens (History Channel, 2009), which includes one contributor claiming that the Dead Sea Scrolls at last prove Noah’s birth was the result of artificial insemination by an otherworldly being. According to them, Noah was part ancestor, part alien. Bet you didn’t see that coming.
Genesis Apocryphon does engage the question of Noah’s paternity, just not with the answer claimed in the History Channel mini-series. Here’s how it went down in this Aramaic text. Suspicious that Noah’s conception might have been the result of an affair with a fallen watcher, Lamech confronts his wife Batenosh demanding the truth. With tears and emotion, Batenosh responds, “O my brother and my husband, recall for yourself my pleasure…in the heat of the moment, and my panting breath!” (1Q20 3:9-10). The lovers’ spat continues yet Lamech leaves with lingering suspicions of an extra-marital and extra-terrestrial affair. After reporting the matter to his father Methusaleh, Lamech is dispatched to consult his grandfather Enoch, “to learn everything truthfully from him” (1Q20 3:22). Eventually, the all-knowing-apocalyptic-rockstar Enoch confirms that Noah’s DNA is not a double helix of human and angelic parentage: “The chi]l[d is t]r[ul]y from you [and ]n[ot] from the sons[ of Heaven” (1Q20 5:10).
Don’t get me wrong: an ancient alien baby would have been cool here. Sadly, that is not the case. But this passage does offer something incredible, not for sci-fi fantasy but a new insight into ancient pre-scientific thoughts about conception. In Gensis Apocryphon, Batenosh’s tearful response was rooted in the reminder to Lamech that she orgasmed during their love making. This is no mere dramatic flair or erotic aside. This reference reflects a Hellenistic understanding that a woman’s climax was the proof of conception. The scribe or scribal community crafting the Aramaic Genesis Apocryphon was drawing upon this knowledge from their wider world and assuming their ancient readers would share that understanding and connect the dots about Noah’s this-worldly parentage.
What started out as a potential conspiracy theory—Noah was an alien—turned into a valuable insight into how ancient scribes and readers were interacting with the pre-scientific knowledge of their day as they reimagined their own ancestral heritage and scriptural texts. While this is not as flashy as the conspiracy theory, it underscores how the Dead Sea Scrolls do open new insights when put in conversation with their ancient cultural contexts.
The Ongoing History of the Dead Sea Scrolls
The quick take on a pair of scrolls-esque controversies and conspiracy theories is the tip of the iceberg for how the Dead Sea Scrolls challenge, change, and confirm our knowledge of biblical texts and the worlds that shaped them. I invite you to dig deeper into the questions and answers about the scrolls in my new book, Lost Words and Forgotten Worlds: Rediscovering the Dead Sea Scrolls, and by subscribing to my YouTube channel.