Hebrews is not one of the 7 authentic Pauline letters.
As mentioned above:
The really important thing is that the author of Hebrews 8 actually quotes Jeremiah 31:31–34 at length.
And this is where we get a much stronger textual clue.
The author of Hebrews follows the Septuagint form of Jeremiah. The Catholic NAB’s textual note explicitly says:
“In citing Jer the author follows the Septuagint.”
So:
Hebrews gives us very strong evidence of someone using the Greek/shorter textual tradition of Jeremiah.
= = =
Hebrews was not written by Paul.
- The Source of the Gospel: In ** you do not have permission to see this link **]
- Writing Style: Hebrews is written in some of the most elegant, polished, and rhetorically advanced Greek in the entire New Testament. Paul’s undisputed letters use a much more urgent, direct, and conversational style. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
- Missing Salutation: Paul signed all 13 of his traditional letters with his name and an initial greeting. Hebrews completely skips a standard introduction and reads more like a recorded sermon than a traditional letter. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
Steve Campbell, author of Historical Accuracy:
My improvement of the draft concludes this:
Neither Jesus nor Paul can be said, on the evidence we have, to have used specifically the short or long edition of Jeremiah. However, Hebrews definitely uses the Septuagint’s shorter edition of Jeremiah
in its extended quotation of Jeremiah 31:31–34 (Hebrews 8:8–12).
That is the more accurate formulation.
And I think this distinction is important for your larger argument: Hebrews gives us clear evidence that at least one early Christian author was working with the shorter/Septuagintal form of Jeremiah, whereas the evidence from Jesus and Paul is insufficient to identify which edition they used.
= = = =
Steefen:
Now THAT is constructive criticism that is useful other than Robert’s categorical simplistic put-down.
Robert said
It is constructive to encourage the posting of good YouTube videos here and to discourage the posting of misleading YouTube videos.
I agree. That’s off-topic because the video discusses the following information.
So there are really two generations of DNA research:
| Period | Research | What it accomplished |
|---|---|---|
| 1990s | Woodward et al. / Hebrew University | Early PCR-based ancient-DNA experiments on Judean Desert parchment |
| 2015 | Teasdale et al. | Major advances in parchment DNA sequencing methodology |
| 2020 | Anava et al., Cell | Large-scale high-throughput sequencing of Dead Sea Scroll parchment; identified sheep, goat, ibex and cow |
| 2024 | Further methodological work | Improved non-destructive DNA recovery, including confirmation of the DSS species identifications |
The 2020 paper is the definitive citation for the sheep/cow Dead Sea Scroll finding you’re asking about.
Robert said
Nope, obviously not a typo. Why can’t you just admit it when some of your videos are shown to be misleading or when you get something wrong? Until you can do that I’m not inclined to answer too many of your questions.
I know when I make a typo.
Second, I have admitted when a video got something wrong AND I leave a YouTube comment on that video as well as here.
Since you have taken the attitudes “I’m wrong, sue me,” and “you disagree when I say something is a typo” I encourage myself not to ask you any more questions.
Diversity and some scholars suspected this: Genizah.
This means no Qumran community because of the diversity of manuscript origins.
No, it doesn’t. It just means scrolls were collected from different groups in the community’s library at Qumran. This has long been understood
= = = = =
Steefen:
- Location: MacGorman Performing Arts Center at Southwestern Seminary (4616 Stanley Avenue, Fort Worth, TX).
- Dates: July 2, 2012 – January 13, 2013.
- Highlights: Featured 21 original Dead Sea Scroll fragments (12 of which had only been seen privately prior)
Steefen:
I attended this Exhibit.
= = = = = =
I knew Qumran had a scriptorium.
The Dead Sea Scrolls scriptorium refers to a long upper-floor room in the main ruin of Khirbet Qumran that early archaeologists identified as a specialized writing studio where the Dead Sea Scrolls were copied.
Excavator Roland de Vaux originally proposed this identification in the 1950s based on plaster furniture, low benches, basins, and short inkwells found in the settlement. Under this traditional theory, the isolated desert community (frequently linked to the Essenes) manufactured and copied their own sectarian and biblical library on-site before hiding the texts in nearby caves.
- The Scriptorium Hypothesis: Proponents argue the specialized furniture and inkwells match the functional requirements of an ancient desk-and-bench writing room.
- Alternative Interpretations: Other scholars challenge the “scriptorium” label, noting that no actual fragments of scrolls were found inside the Qumran architectural ruins. Critics suggest the room may have served as a dining area, a general administrative space, or a watchtower rather than a dedicated copying studio, arguing that many scrolls were likely brought to the caves from libraries in Jerusalem.
Steefen:
My position, then was: The scrolls were in jars. There are sectarian scrolls pertaining to the Qumran community. Those scrolls were written and copied at Qumran.
Did this community have a library with other scrolls. Yes.
Were those other scrolls copied at Qumran. Not necessarily.
Conclusion in 2013: The Qumran community only wrote and copied their own sectarian scrolls but they had other scrolls, they had a library or a collection of other scrolls also.
= = = =
When disaster struck, all scrolls were rushed to the caves.
In 1990, it was known that some scrolls pre-dated the Qumran settlement.
Steefen: you couldn’t have Qumran sect texts before the Qumran settlement, so since they were religious, the texts earlier than the settlement were other religious texts which could have included scripture, example, conflicting versions of Jeremiah, one short and one long.
In 2012, thousands of parchment fragments > Well, since parchment has DNA, let’s categorize the fragments by parchment DNA.
The video is accurate, what I must do is stop thinking about the Qumran community and say the War Scroll.
There is no Qumran community as my focus had been. This video has kept up later than I wanted to delay going to bed. I’ll finish thinking about this another day.
The problem is not with the video. “This means no Qumran community because of the diversity of manuscript origins” means I have to open my focus of the Qumran community because it is more than their community and their sectarian texts as per Florentino Garcia Martinez’s book, Second Edition. Even if my scholarly edition had short and long Jeremiah, I didn’t look at that, I was looking at Eisenman, I was looking at the bad guy opposing the Teacher of Righteousness.
= = = =
And, yes, when a video has an error, I do share comments when I know something is inaccurate. I did that recently with a video misread the Songs of Solomon.
“I was looking at the bad guy”
- The Wicked Priest: A corrupt high priest who originally walked in truth but later abandoned it. He persecuted the Teacher of Righteousness, tracked him down in exile, and confronted him on the Day of Atonement. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
- The Man of Lies (also called the Spouter of Lies): An opponent who rejected the legal and religious interpretations taught by the Teacher of Righteousness and led followers astray. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
- The Wicked Priest is frequently identified as a Hasmonean high priest, such as Jonathan Maccabeus (Jonathan Apphus) or Alexander Jannaeus. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
- The Man of Lies is generally viewed as a rival religious leader or teacher within contemporary Jewish society who disputed the Qumran community’s authority. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
- Role: The spiritual founder and leader of the Qumran sectarian community (often identified with the Essenes). He is described as a legitimate priest (of Zadokite lineage) to whom God revealed the true, hidden meaning of the prophetic scriptures. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
- Historical Identity: While anonymous in the texts, scholars have proposed various 2nd-century BCE figures, such as an ousted High Priest from the Zadokite line (potentially linked to Onias III) or a prophetic leader active during the early Hasmonean period. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
- Role: The chief antagonist and persecutor of the Teacher of Righteousness. The texts accuse him of starting out righteous, becoming arrogant, defiling the Temple in Jerusalem, and violently pursuing the Teacher—even confronting him on the Day of Atonement. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
- Historical Identity: Mainstream consensus generally links him to a Hasmonean High Priest or ruler, with Jonathan Apphus or Simon Thassi as the most common candidates, while others suggest figures like Alexander Jannaeus or John Hyrcanus. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
- Role: A rival religious or ideological leader who rejected the authority and strict legal interpretations (halakhah) of the Teacher of Righteousness, leading members of Israel astray into a “trackless wilderness” of false teachings. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
- Historical Identity: Scholars often view the Spouter of Lies as the leader of an opposing Jewish faction during the Hasmonean era—such as the early Pharisees or a competing Jerusalem priestly authority—who taught “smooth things” or lax interpretations of the Torah compared to the Qumran group. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)