Preguntas a Julio sobre los esenios de Qumram

[Luis Fernando]

Julio:
Acerca del maestro de Justicia puede habersele llamado siempre al maximo lider de ellos,segun su tiempo,esta posibilidad no esta descartada.

Luis:
Sí, está descartadísima. El Maestro de Justicia FUE un personaje real, no un cargo en la comunidad de Qumrán. Eso queda atestiguado por el propio Maestro de Justicia en sus escritos

Julio:
Agrego tambien que tanto Cristo y su familia Geograficamente vivian cerca de la comunidad esenia de Qumran en Qumran vivian pocos pero era de las tres sectas mas importantes del tiempo de jesus,esta bien la correccion que hacen que eran miles.

Luis:
En Israel TODO está cerca geográficamente.

Julio:
Juan Bautista primo hermano de Jesus practicaba similar bautismo (por inmercion) que los esenios,solo los ESENIOS practicaban ese tipo de bautismo, el los tiempos de cristo,

Luis:
Eso no es así. El bautismo de Juan el bautismo era de arrepentimiento y se recibía sólo una vez en la vida. El de los esenios era reptido asiduamente. Además, hay un hecho que muestra claramente la imposibilidad de una relación de Juan el bautista con los esenios durante el ministerio del profeta: su vestidura. Es IMPENSABLE que un esenio vistiera de la forma que vestía Juan.... ¿sabrías decirnos porqué, Julio?

Julio
Tambien siendo Santiago de linea sacerdotal y real por eso llego tambien a ser EL LIDER DE LA IGLESIA DE JERUSALEM.

Luis:
¿eh? ¿en qué parte de la Biblia dice eso?

Julio:
Y siendo que era un super legalista,su carta a las 12 TRIBUS es muy parecida a las enseñanzas de los ESENIOS.

Luis:
.... a las doce tribus.... que están EN LA DISPERSIÓN (¿significará algo eso de "la dispersión"?)
¿En qué se parece la carta de Santiago se parece a las enseñanzas de los esenios ?
Citanos las palabras de Santiago y las de los esenios para que podamos comparar.

En cualquier caso, la epístola de Santiago forma parte de la Biblia. Los escritos de los esenios, no.

Julio:
Eso y otras cosas son las que me hacen pensar que si hay posibilidad de poderlos relacionar a los judeo cristianos con los Esenios,y el saber que no quieren revelar el total del contenido de los Rollos del mar Muerto acresenta esa inquietud, he sabido que solo se ha revelado un 20% del material.

Luis:
Dices "he sabido que sólo se ha revelado un 20% del material". Pues como todo lo que tú sepas sea tan cierto como eso, entonces no sabes nada de nada
No sólo eso es falso sino que yo ya he comentado que TODOS los fragmentos pequeños de Qumrán no editados han sido fotografiados y puestos a disposición de la comunidad científica para su observación. Es más, existe un CD-ROM con todo el material encontrado en Qumrán.
Conviene recordar que el Comité Internacional de Edición de los Manuscritos del Mar Muerto está formada por científicos de diversas religiones (católicos y protestantes) así como por gente no creyente (pero científica)
Y hay un HECHO evidente que confirma la imposibilidad de la relación entre los escritos del Mar Muerto y los judeocristianos:
Esos escritos son anteriores en uno o dos siglos a la aparición del cristianismo
Incluso si se confirmara la tesis de O´Callaghan, conviene recordar que ese pequeño trozo de manuscrito que forma parte supuestamente del evangelio de Marcos estaba dentro de una ánfora proveniente de Roma y no junto al resto de manuscritos.

La evidencia científica es aplastante en contra de las suposiciones "exotéricas" de algunos

bendiciones

 

[Jetonius]

Originalmente enviado por: Luis Fernando:
Los esenios existen desde poco después de la deportación a Babilonia
No confundas a todos los esenios con las decenas que había en Qumrán, los cuales llegaron allá después del triunfo de los macabeos

La deportación a Babilonia ocurrió en 587 a.C., en tanto que según el Documento de Damasco el Maestro de Justicia surgió 410 años más tarde, es decir en 177 a.C.
Por lo demás, concuerdo en general con lo expresado por ti (con la corrección sobre el texto supuestamente hallado por O'Callaghan).
Dado que los manuscritos de Qumran han sido datados por paleografía, alusiones internas y espectrometría de masa con acelerador, además de otros criterios, son precristianos, las hipótesis que pretenden identificar en los caracteres de los manuscritos (como el sacerdote impío o el Maestro de justicia) personajes del NT carecen de credibilidad.
En síntesis, los documentos de Qumran nos dicen mucho acerca del ambiente religioso y cultural en el cual nació el cristianismo, y aportan pruebas documentales de la fidelidad de la transmisión del texto del AT, pero no se refieren a Jesús ni a ninguno de sus discípulos.
La hipótesis de Callaghan es muy interesante y él la defiende con fervor, pero por la propia naturaleza de la evidencia, no creo que se logre jamás una demostración fehaciente de ella.


Algunos libros serios en español:
A. Traducciones de los textos de Qumran:
M Jiménez y F. Bonhomme, Los Documentos de Qumran (Mardid: Cristiandad, 1976)
Más completa:
Florentino García Martínez, Textos de Qumran (Madrid: Trotta, 2a Ed., 1993)

B. Visiones de conjunto (historia y literatura):
Antonio González Lamadrid, Los descubrimientos del Mar Muerto (Madrid: BAC, 2a Ed., 1973)
M. Delcor y F. García Martínez, Introducción a la literatura esenia de Qumran (Madrid: Cristiandad, 1982)
F. García Martínez y Julio Trebolle Barrera, Los hombres de Qumran (Mardid: Trotta, 1992).

C. En inglés:
J.A. Fitzmyer, Responses to 101 questions on the Dead Sea Scrolls (New York: Paulist Press, 1992)
Otto Betz y Rainer Riesner, Jesus, Qumran and the Vatican (New York: Crossroad, 1994)
James C. VanderKam, The Dead Sea scrolls today (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994)
James H. Charlesworth (Ed), Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls (New York: Doubleday, 1992).

Dios les bendiga a todos,
Jetonius

 

[Luis Fernando]

Coincido con lo que dices sobre Callaghan
Creo que Thiede tiene más base para "su" datación temprana de una porción del evangelio de Mateo

El asunto del origen de los esenios tras la deportación a Babilonia se refiera más a un origen casi prehistórico de los esenios en general que a un origen real de los esenios de Qumrán en particular, que evidentemente fue mucho más tardío que el fin de aquella deportación.

Bendiciones

 

[Julio7]

Jetonius, te agradesco tu aportacion mas neutral que la de Luis.
yo estoy totalmente en desacuerdo con Luis, porque cree que lo que el dice asi es, y todo esto de los rollos del mar muerto esta en pleno debate el dia de hoy.
asi que tu comentario Luis es bueno siempre y cuando sea solo una aportacion,y no pretendas ser la ultima palabra en este tema.
Jetonius, has leido algun libro del Dr. Robert Eisenman?

 

[Julio7]

Luis aqui esta para que te des una pequeña idea sobre el tema,tan polemico,
esta en ingles,escuche que dijistes que sabias ingles, que te aproveche.
This is a long post, but is a serious subject. I'll have to make it in two parts. As you will all also note, I have many references up to 1992 that is concerning this fascinating subject.....

Who Was the Teacher of Righteousness in the Dead Sea Scrolls?

Research by Kerry A. Shirts

paper presented at the Pacific Northwest Historical Conference April 1992

My Senior Thesis for my Bachelor's Degree in History from Idaho State University



List of Abbreviations Used in References

A- Archaeology

ASTI- Annual of the Swedish Theological Institute

BAR -Biblical Archaeology Review

BO -Biblica et Orientalia

BR- Bible Review

BS- Bibliotheca Sacra

BZAW -Beihart zur Zeitschrift fur Die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

CBQ -Catholic Biblical Quarterly

CC -The Christian Century

CJ- Classical Journal

CQ -Classical Quarterly

CT- Christianity Today

EJ -Encyclopedia Judaica

EQ- Evangelical Quarterly

FARMS- Foundation For Ancient Research and Mormon Studies

GIF- Great Issues Forum

HTR -Harvard Theological Review

JBL -Journal of Biblical Literature

JEGP- Journal of English and Germanic Philology

JJS- Journal of Jewish Studies

JOS -Josephus

JQR- Jewish Quarterly Review

JR- Journal of Religion

NT- Novum Testamentum

OS -Oudtestamentische Studien

RQ- Review De Qumran

VC -Vigiliae Christianae

VT -Vetus Testamentum

WPQ -Western Political Quarterly

WS- Western Speech

WZNT -Wissenschaefliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament

ZFAW -Zeitschrift fur Die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

Introduction

The Dead Sea Scrolls are documents (thousands of fragments) found in caves in the deserts of Palestine around Jerusalem, during the 1940’s-50’s, written by Jewish sectaries who fled to the wilderness in opposition to the prevailing powers at Jerusalem, and specifically the Temple, approximately 200 B.C. Samuel Sandmal, notes that it is clear the community of Qumran arose because of the dissatisfaction of how the priests were running the Temple. It had divine sanction, they did not.1 The scrolls contain instructions on how to live in order to be the receivers of a new covenant the sect felt was coming. In other words the documents seem to have an apocalyptic orientation. Every book of the Bible is represented except the Book of Esther, as well as many apocryphal books, commentaries on these books with their particular application to the sect (arguably the Essenes), sectarian materials on how to join the sect, etc. What most puzzles the scholars and historians of antiquity is the "Teacher of Righteousness". Why? As Geza Vermes notes, "Unfortunately, as the most vital topic of all, the question of the identity of the Teacher of Righteousness, we can be nothing like as clear."2 The term Teacher of Righteousness is not a scriptural one, though it could be based on the analogy of the term Teacher of Falsehood (cf. Isaiah 9:14-15; Habakkuk 2:18).3 It is one of the great mysteries of identification; great because here was a prophet-figure out of Israel’s long illustrious prophetic heritage that was completely unknown. Here was a prophet whom God had revealed his secrets to. This Teacher of Righteousness according to A. Robert Leaney, was specifically gifted to receive the secrets and mysteries of God as were all the prophets of ancient Israel. He was God’s mouthpiece for the community. He interpreted scripture with regard to their contemporaneous situation without regard to origin or context of that scripture. The Teacher of Righteousness founded the Qumran Community.4

This Teacher of Righteousness had enemies, his main antagonist being the "Wicked Priest". So the question of the identity of such major figures in the lives of the Qumran sect, how those lives were lived, what they said, did, and wrote, thrown upon us with no prior warning, has caused a sensation.

History and Background

The era of history we are dealing with depends on the dating of the scrolls. Generally speaking the range is thought to be from 200 B.C. to 70 A.D. Scholars trying to identify the Teacher of Righteousness have two questions which help to give context to the era in which he supposedly lived.

1) Who were the Kittim that the scrolls refer to as the Qumranites enemies?

2) Who were the historical personalities of the second and first centuries B.C. who fit the descriptions of the Teacher of Righteousness and his persecutors, the Wicked Priest and the Man of the Lie?5

We’ll deal with the Kittim below. First we analize the various interpretations of who the Teacher was as he was the main object of the Qumranites’ veneration.

The massive Diaspora (Dispersion) of the Jews had been occurring from the eighth century B.C. In Israel (Palestine) itself, although the Hebrew Torah (the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible) remained paramount, the Greek influences were apparent by 600 B.C. Fourth century silver coins from the Persian province of "Yehud" imitate Greek issues for trading with the Greeks.6 One of the Yehud coins bearing the name "Yehezkiyo", has been considered as belonging to the late Persian period, as has one with a longer inscription, "Yehezkiyo ha-pehah". A new series of coins with the legend "Yehudah" also have a portrait of Ptolemy I. Ptolemy didn’t mint his coins with his portrait until 305 B.C.. The coin suggests a continuity of Judaea as a political unit into the Ptolemaic period.7 The Greek influence did not occur until Alexander the Great took the country from the Persians in 332. This Greek influence affected the Jewish monotheism in Palestine, of which the two dominant groups here were the Pharisees and Sadducees.8 The Ptolemies of Egypt annexed Palestine after Alexander’s death, and saw Palestine as a temple state, hence recognizing the High Priests as the rulers of the country, albeit under Ptolemaic suzerainty.9 With the victory of the Seleucid monarch Antiochus III over Panion (Banyas) in 200, the monarch annexed Judaea from Egypt, hence Palestine was now in control of the Seleucids, not the Ptolemies. Antiochus IV the successor, gave the High Priesthood to Jason in exchange for tribute. Jerusalem was made into a city of the Greek type (175-172), but in 167 Antiochus IV rededicated the Temple of the Hebrew God Yahweh to Olympian Zeus. Thus came the Maccabean uprising led by Judas Maccabaeus of the house of Hasmon, which led to the Jewish independence politically, under Hasmonian rule.10 We learn further from II Maccabees that Antiochus dedicated the Temple to Olympian Zeus and the temple on Mt. Gerizim was dedicated to Zeus Xenius. Orgies involving intercourse with women (i.e. ritual prostitution?) to place in the Temple precincts. Unlawful sacrifices were made on the Altar of Burnt Offering. The royal birthday was celebrated, as were the feasts of Dionysius. Chapter 10 reveals that pagan altars had been placed in the agora of Jerusalem and sacred precincts established. I Maccabees reveals that many Israelites sacrificed to idols and that the king’s order involved the construction of altars, sacred precincts, and shrines for idols. The "Abomination of Desolation" was set on the Altar. The Abomination was a pagan altar placed on the Altar of Burnt Offering. Diodorus, under the impression that the Temple contained a cult-statue of Moses, as Founder, records that Antiochus sacrificed a sow to him on the open-air altar. "All that we can be certain of is that the Temple was dedicated to Zeus Olympius, the favoured god of Antiochus, and that sacrifices of pigs were carried out on a pagan altar constructed over the Altar of Burnt Offering."11

Frank Moore Cross notes the easiness in identifying the priestly conflict out of which the dissident Essene party emerged. More than likely the Qumran Community were the Essenes. In the days of Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175-163 B.C.), the orderly succession of Zadokite High Priests failed. The high priestly office became the prize that Antiochus, the Seleucid overlord, gave to the highest bidder. Rivals for the office emerged, vying for the office which developed into civil war. Antiochus, taking advantage of the confusion and strife carried out his fearful massacres, terminating in the despicable desecration of the Temple, and the Hellenization of Holy Jerusalem.12 This is the time of the uprising of the Maccabees, who led the Jews into their War of Independence, freeing them from their foreign suzerains, and then usurping the office of high priest for themselves. In this way the ancient Zadokite house fell to the illegitimate Hasmonean dynasty. Essene origins are found in this uprising between the priestly houses and their adherents.13 Samuel Sandmal adds that the Qumran community arose because of the dissatisfaction of how the priests were running the Temple. It had divine sanction, they did not. If the emphasis of the family of Zadok is what is meant, then in effect the scrolls repudiate the family of Jehoiarib, Zadok deemed legitimate, Jehoiarib not. This makes the priesthood of the Hasmoneans, which descended from Jehoiarib, the personification of the illegitimate.14

Charles T. Fritsch says the Qumran Community moved out into the wilderness sometime during the reign of John Hyrcanus I.15 He further claims that the writer of 1QpHab is describing a period in Jewish history just before the capture of Jerusalem in 63 B.C. by the Romans. The struggle was between Alexander Janneus or Aristobulus II.16 The profile of Qumran is that of a small settlement in Israelite times occupying the terrace during the eighth and seventh centuries, probably called the city of salt in Joshua 15:62. The site was abandoned for four centuries, until perhaps the reign of John Hyrcanus (135 - 104 B.C.) when it was rebuilt. During Alexander Janneus’ reign buildings were built which served the needs of the Qumran people until an earthquake in 31 B.C.17 Jewish apocalyptic, at Qumran, was centered on the expectation of an eschatalogical event which was to overthrow the universe.18

Clues to Identifying Personalities

Theodor H. Gaster, perhaps the most learned scholar to translate the Dead Sea Scrolls, has noted that the Teacher of Righteousness was the spiritual leader of the community. He was called simply "teacher", or "right teacher". However, after reviewing the material and analysis of trying to identify many individuals with this mysterious person, Gaster thinks the Teacher of Righteousness was not an individual, but an office. All sorts of characters have been identified with him as Gaster lists, Onias, Menelaus, Antiochus Epiphanes, Alexander Janneus, John Hyrcanus, Mattathias, the father of Judas Maccabeus - even Jesus, John the Baptist and Paul. Gaster contends the so-called personages are simply past historical situations.19 What this paper will examine is a brief review of each of these personalities, the arguments for and against, i.e. playing the scholars off each other to show the history of the attempts at identifying two of the most mysterious people who ever lived in antiquity. This historiography demonstrates rather powerfully how historians do their research, enabling us all to polish the art of our discipline by example.

Onias III

Onias III was murdered 176 B.C.20 Onias III was a Zadokite, a priest descended from Zadok, King David’s high priest and originator of the high priests of the Jerusalem Temple. The intrigue was due to Jason (a Syrian symnpathizer) as he supplanted his pro-Egyptian brother Onias III as high priest by buying his office, which shocked the Hasidim. Menelaus, three years later, offered a higher bid and in turn was awarded the office.21 Onias III is identified as the Teacher of Righteousness because, as is learned from II Maccabees, he was murdered at the instigation of Menelaus in the sacred grove of Daphne on the outskirts of Antioch.22 Josephus describes the details of how, during a famine, Onias was asked to pray for rain which he did. God heard Onias as he "was a righteous man, and beloved of God."23 When the people asked for him to pray against their enemies, he prayed that since the people were God’s people, as well as the priests being God’s people, that God would help neither of them in the war against each other, whereupon he was stoned to death.24 Onias is also tied into the Qumran as the community leader in a rather interesting way. Moslem scholars were convinced that there was a pious community of saints living in caves in the region of Jericho. These people had a portentious message for the human race. They were known as the Ashab al-Kahf wa-l ‘Raqim, "The Companions (often rendered simple ‘people’ or ‘inhabitants&#8217

of the Cave and the inscription." ( Sura XVIII, 9-10.) These holy men sought refuge in the desert from the wicked and godless community and in expectation felt God would guide them in their life. Hidden temporarily from the knowledge of men, most commentators are agreed that the people of the Cave were the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus.25 Raqim, the Arabic name of the locale of the cave, is put in Syria or Palestine, so why bother with Ephesus? Because since the 5th century, Ephesus was the site of the Seven Sleepers. The hero of the Arabic account is one Tamlikh, whose name traces etymologically through Greek, Iamblichus which appears in Latin as Malchus, while the Arabs call him Tamlikh, Yamlikh, and Namlikh, while Bamlikh is all that remains, reminding us that Huber claimed Iamblichus-Malchus is simply Abimelech, the friend of Jeremiah who slept for seventy or one hundred years.26 Abimilech in turn has long been identified with Onias-Honi the circle drawer.27 Onias, Abimilech, and Jeremiah all fell into century long slumbers. This Onias has been put forth as the leader of the Qumran Community when they were being persecuted by Antiochus Epiphanes. So we have Tamlikh, the leader of the Companions of the caves, identified through Abimilech, with Onias, the leader of the Qumran Community.28 Onias’ tie in with the Seven Sleepers, also reminds us that they were to awake at the dawn of a new age of faith.29 It is said Onias slept from the destruction of the First Temple to the completion of the Second. The parallel with the Seven Sleepers is obvious. The parallel with the Teacher of Righteousness, assuming a Messianic characterization deemed to return again, is also seen. G.R. Driver notes that though Onias was a righteous man and a Zadokite High Priest, there is no indication that he was a teacher of any sort, let alone a leader of a war-party against a foreign enemy ravaging their country.30 Also, though Onias cannot historically, from the scrolls, anyway, be allowed the title of chief of the Hasidaean party, he can be acclaimed as the leader of the "Sons of Zadok" and Rightful Teacher, though "not a leader of a party with an admitted leader of a party."31 If the Kittim are identified with the Seleucid Greeks, Onias cannot be the Teacher, due to his being friendly with the Syrian overlords, while the Teacher was a bitter enemy of them.32 And Onias’ murder was not on the day of Atonement as was the murder of the Teacher of Righteousness.

Mattathias

In II Maccabees we read of a purge of the Jews on a particular Sabbath. The feast is called in the Mishnah "the day of the fast", and in Lev. xvi:31, a complete day of rest, a Sabbath rest. This was the day the Wicked Priest attacked the Teacher of Righteousness. As James C.G. Greig points out though, it need be only famous from the point of view of the community, not necessarily anyone else outside the community. Greig notes that in I Maccabees we learn that Mattathias was a priest of the sons of Joiarib of Neh. xii:6. He was from Jerusalem but dwelling at Modin. He was high handed in negotiations with the Seleucids. His son Judas left Jerusalem under pressure and Mattathias admonishes everyone who is "zealous in the law, and maintaineth the covenant" to follow him to the mountains and into the wilderness. They were joined by the Assidaeans whose captain was Judas. Greig clearly accepts Mattathias as the Teacher of Righteousness rather than Judas on the grounds that Mattathias initiated the protest against the royal authority.33 Mattathias died 166 B.C. Before he died, according to Josephus, he appointed Judas general after the arrival of the Assidaeans to his party. The fighters for their community were predominantly the Chasidim, the Assidaeans, the keepers of the covenant of Chesed, an important word in the Manual of Discipline. Chesed, according to Greig, "is what one would expect of the self-styled sons of the righteous priest, Zadok."34 Mattathias, the priest of Jerusalem, of the sons of Joiarib, who dwelt in Modin is the Teacher of Righteousness, according to Greig.35 G.R. Driver notes that Mattathias was High Priest from 40 B.C - 37 B.C.36 Driver notes also that the "Sons of Zadok" were the only ones allowed to have the Priesthood from Ezekiel’s standpoint.37 How a son of Joiarib, not Zadok, could have the priesthood is not discussed by Greig. The "Sons of Zadok" (hass d"q) were "sons of righteousness" (sedeq) or the sons of the righteous one (hassaddŒq). The famous Zadokite high priest, Simon the Just, was (hassaddŒq) which connects him to the Covenanters.38 The covenanters loved to play on the various forms and senses of the root, namely ‘lawfulness’ or ‘righteousness’ (sedeq) and ‘justice’, ‘just measure’ (sed q h).39

Zadok

Ben Zion Wacholder claims Zadok is the Teacher of Righteousness.40 He notes the importance of the name Zadok in the Qumran writings, and then contends that the Moreh Sedeq seems to be a paranomasia on the name Zadok. Wacholder says Zadok was the only one to have a tomb designated for him, something usually reserved for royalty. He is clearly set apart in the Qumran literature. In the Damascus Document there are many appelatives given him:

2:12 - anointed one, holy spirit, and seer of truth

2:13 - (his lot), his name

3:19 - sure house

6:4 - staff

6:6 - searcher of the Law and the staff

6:11 - Teacher (yoreh) of Righteousness

7:18 - star and searcher of the Law

7:19 - scepter

7:20 - prince of all the congregation, shephard and friend

7:21 - anointed one of Aaron and Israel41

These designations clearly applied to the traditional Zadok of David’s reign, which according to Wacholder, demonstrates this Zadok to be a direct descendant of the earlier Zadok of King David’s reign. The "Sons of Zadok" were the children of that Zadok who found the Law of the Lord in the form of the Temple Scroll.42 Yigael Yadin also notes the Temple Scroll was the Lost Torah which is referred to by the Qumranites as "The Book of Hagu", the mysterious book also mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls.43 "This book Hahagu is repeatedly referred to in CDC (the Damascus Document), as the authoritative code of laws in which the spiritual guides of the Damascus Sect had expert knowledge."44

The key to understanding the Qumran literature, according to Wacholder is the treatise of Ezekiel 44:15 "And the priests and the Levites and the sons of Zadok who kept charge of my sanctuary, when the sons of Israel strayed from me, shall bring to Me fat and blood." The sons of Zadok here are the chosen of Israel, called by the name, who will arise in the latter days.45 The distinction of the lineage is clear, and the sons of Zadok are assigned a special role in the temple priesthood. These sons of Zadok are, in the Pesher of the Qumran writing, the legitimate people during the Qumran time, hence uniquely called God’s Chosen.46 The phrase in the scrolls "Until the assumption of office of Zadok" infers that Zadok had discovered the Book of the Law, which allegedly had been sealed in the Ark of the Covenant since the days of Joshua. It is this Zadok who founded the Qumran Community and to whom the titles, "Lawgiver", "Searcher of the Law", "staff", and "sure house", are given.47 The single word sedeq summarizes the contrast between Jerusalem under the rule of the scoffer and the group that was led by the Teacher of Righteousness in Damascus. The members of the movement are referred to as yodcey sedeq and its leader is the Moreh or yoreh sedeq, all of which designate Zadok as the founder of the community.48 In fact, this makes the term Beney Sadoq more intelligable, since the sons of Zadok would clearly be the descendants of the Zadok of the Community, not a mystic title or religious term, but actual descendants, sons or grandsons of Zadok, the founder.49

Menahem

This leader of the Zealots is another interesting candidate for the Teacher of Righteousness. He was the son of Judas the Galilean. He was stoned to death in Sept., A.D. 66, by the followers of the rival leader Eleazar ben Jair, the captain of the Temple. Eleazar held out at Masada until the Romans overtook them there after the Temple’s destruction.50 H.E. Del Medico claims that Menahem was the Teacher of Righteousness, and a certain Absolom was his minister.51 Menahem was put to death on 1st Tishri, the Jewish New Year. Del Medico claims that Josephus attributed the massacres of the Jews to their putting Menahem to death. Menahem’s death and his brother’s valient stand at Masada greatly encouraged legends to grow about him being the Messiah. "Is not his name clearly stated in the Bible? (Lam. 1:10)?" Edward Young thought this hypothesis was fascinating but remarked that arguments against it are too strong to entertain it though he did add that Menahem was put to death by the captain of the Temple, Eleazar ben Hananiah, 66 A.D.52 An example of an argument against the late date for a zealot being the Teacher of Righteousness, Young also noted the dating of some scrolls, the Isaiah alone being dated to the second century B.C.53

Jesus

Perhaps the most famous and debated discussion concerning the Teacher’s identity concerns Jesus and the parallels between the two. Michael Grant, after viewing the prevailing arguments, says there are similarities between Jesus and the Teacher of Righteousness. There is a special emphasis on the accuracy and trueness of their claims as opposed by the false teachings and lies of their enemies.54 With the prevailing scholarship of the dating of the scrolls, the view came forth that the Teacher of Righteousness was the biblical Jesus. This caused a furor, and when Dupont-Sommer translated some scrolls, he claimed that the Teacher of Righteousness had been crucified! This needs to be looked at, as well as the concept of Messianism in the scrolls, as it perhaps is the crux of identity between the two.

The reference to crucifixion is in the Commentary of Nahum in the scrolls. G. Vermes notes that the Pharisees in Alexander Janneus’ time were crucified by Janneus for plotting against him "in collusion with the Syrian Seleucid King Demetrius Eucaerus, eight hundred Pharisees were condemned by Janneus, to die on the cross."55 The idea that the Teacher of Righteousness, who had been claimed to be a Messiah, was crucified has not died down yet. In fact, since this view came about, many scrolls have be reasssed as to their Messianic content, as well as the entire concept of Messianism in the scrolls and early Christianity, as well as Judaism.56 H. H. Rowley took exception with John Allegro’s contention that the Teacher of Righteousness was crucified, as well as that this was a unique event in Israel.57 Allegro identifies the "Lion of Wrath" with Alexander Janneus. This is speculative yet we are reminded that Janneus crucified eight hundred of his enemies, and was nicknamed Thrakidan. The link between Thrakidan and the "Lion of Wrath" is unknown.58 C. Rabin notes that the fragment speaks of hanging men alive, which seems to allude to Janneus executing 800 of his enemies by impaling or crucifying (anastaur sas) them (BJ I, iv.6;Ant.XIII. xiv.2)59 What’s happening now is the studies of the Dead Sea Scrolls are moving up into New Testament times, even with a new scroll shedding light on Jesus’ baptism, as well as the idea of the Messiah being crucified.60 It’s also important to keep in mind, that as the scholars work with the texts of the scrolls and the Bible, even from the biblical view, the portrait of Jesus’ messianism is baffling, according to Richard N. Longenecker, Morton Smith, and others.61 With new fragments coming into public view for the first time in 35 years, again scholars claimed they speak of a "pierced Messiah". Professor Robert Eisenmann claimed to find a fragment saying the Messiah would be pierced.62 (See Figure 1) And of course, this is likewise being questioned and studied, as it was earlier.63

Apparently, the "anointed one" was a fluid concept in the time of Jesus, which didn’t necessarily mean the Messiah.64 A king, for instance, being anointed of God did not mean the king was a royal Messiah, so much as just an anointed king.65 The only person in the entire Old Testament called the Messiah was the pagan King Cyrus, of Persia, who was commissioned of God to allow the Jews to go rebuild their temple in their homeland. The New Testament title, Christ, is derived from the Greek, Christos which is the exact equivilant of the Hebrew, m sŒah, rooted in the idea of "to smear with oil" from, mƒshach.66 That Cyrus should be seen as a Messiah is clear from the context of the times, according to D.J. Wiseman. "Obviously Cyrus’ actions inspire such feelings [seeing him as the Anointed of Yahweh]. But this attitude meant the hope of a Davidic messiah was given up and a national messiah was changed for a foreign, not a semitic ruler. But the hope of a Davidic messiah was soon revived in the person of Zerubbabel (Z r B bili).67

In the Zohar of the Hebrew Kabbalah it is said that in the testes are gathered all the oil, dignity, and strength of the male from the whole body. This concept of the seed as oil will explain the practice of anointing, infusing oil into, kings i.e. as a begetting, a bestowing of new life, divine life, and is of vital importance for an understanding of the belief that Jesus was not only the king of the Jews, but also divine, the son of God.68

According to Dupont-Sommer, the Wicked Priest attacked and killed the Teacher of Righteousness on the Day of Atonement.69 The expression "to swallow them up" means to kill him. The Wicked Priest swallowed up the Teacher of Righteousness. A Dupont-Sommer then points out that the Teacher of Righteousness is the subject of the verb (h"phŒa&#8217

- "he has appeared" to wreak vengence on his enemies. This is a supernatural apparition of the Teacher of Righteousness.70 He defends his thesis by saying the verb (h"phŒa&#8217

originally signified "to be resplendent" is used several times in the Old Testament to describe the appearances of Yahveh. He also analyzes in detail the Testament of Levi, and claims it’s the first document to specifically proclaim the Teacher of Righteousness as the Messiah.71 Yet interestingly enough, he shows the many differences between the Teacher of Righteousness and Jesus. The two were not the same, though many parallels and similarities caused J.L. Teicher to claim they were one and the same.72 Dupont-Sommer disagreed.

* The Teacher of Righteousness was a priest, a son of Levi; Jesus was not a priest, but "son of David".

* The Teacher of Righteousness was described as "Messiah of Aaron and Israel".; Jesus was called only "the Messiah".

* The Teacher of Righteousness probably lived generally in Judaea.; Jesus was a Galilean and his preaching took place principally on the shores of the Lake of Tiberius.

* The Teacher of Righteousness was a learned master, venerated to the point his followers would not pronounce his name; Jesus was a familiar teacher, whom his disciples and multitudes approached with complete freedom, whose name was neither secret nor mysterious.

* The Teacher of Righteousness was an author; Jesus wrote nothing, but only spoke his sermons.

* The most serious difference is they were separated by a century. The Teacher of Righteousness died in 65-63 B.C. under the Jewish Priest-King Aristobulus II; Jesus died 30 A.D. under the Roman procurator Pontius Pilate.73

They were not one and the same person according to some scholars and historians, yet they had important cross influence, both coming from apocalyptic backgrounds, sharing possessions with "brothers", and emphasizing the same hermeneutical principle with scriptures, namely, all scripture and prophecy pointed to their own group and time only.74 That Jesus was aware of Qumran is shown by Borge Hjerl-Hansen in a stimulating study of the apocalyptic Matthew 24.75 That the Zealots may have been intimately involved with Qumran, as with Jesus, has been the study of S.G.F. Brandon, which coincides with the above idea of identifying a zealot as the Teacher of Righteousness.76 In fact it’s even been noted that if Jesus and the Teacher of Righteousness are one and the same, the Dead Sea Scrolls may yet demonstrate the very great difficulty for Christianity in that the Teacher of Righteousness was in no way looked upon as divine. Did Jesus’contemporaries see him as divine? There are even some historians who contend that Jesus was not even significant to his contemporaries, as he is not mentioned in any outside non-biblical documents by any contemporaries, Josephus’ account being a later interpolation.77 As studies moved closer into the New Testament era, scholars also began looking at new aspects of identifying the Teacher of Righteousness. Two simply must be looked at for their interest, and the scholars’ response to such identifications.

END PART 1

Kerry A. Shirts

 

[Julio7]

Part 2 continued from PART 1

John the Baptist

Barbara Thiering is perhaps the foremost advocate of this approach. To accomplish this she refutes paleography as the scholars have interpreted it thus far.78 She also claims the word Babylon in the scrolls is a code name for Rome, which does bring the chronology into Jesus’ day. The most interesting aspect of having the Baptist as the Teacher of Righteousness is that Jesus thus becomes the Wicked Priest by this analysis.79 Herschel Shanks, editor of the Biblical Archaeology Review, says one weakness in Theiring’s theory is her dating. Many of the Qumran references to the Teacher of Righteousness are dated 100 years or more before the time of John the Baptist or Jesus.80 He also disagreed with Thiering’s use of what is known as the "Pesher" technique for interpreting scripture. Thiering’s use assumes the Jews used this technique applied to ancient books, and was used on the then new New Testament documents, hence the names in the New Testament are code names. So Jesus did not actually minister or walk where the Gospels say he did, as he was removed from those places, and placed, according to Thiering in areas around Qumran. Thiering notes that Jesus and the Baptist were antagonists and Jesus was glad when he was beheaded, hence Jesus is the Wicked Priest.81 Scholars do, however, admit the tension within the family of Jesus, with his brothers disbelieving him at first and their urging him to accept John’s baptism as the valid way to obtain forgiveness of sins, a discordance Thiering emphasizes.82

James the Just (Brother of Jesus)

Robert Eisenmann is responsible for this interesting personality’s identification with the Teacher of Righteousness.83 Interestingly if his interpretation is correct, this makes Paul the Wicked Priest or perhaps "The Liar" as mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Michael Baigent re-analyzes the dating of the scrolls, something we must always do as we try fitting various pieces of this jigsaw puzzle of identification between scroll personalities and those in history. By identifying various similarities between the Qumran Community and the New Testament, scholars note the very close ties in doctrine, ritual, history, scripture and the economy between the two communities. Of course, Jesus fits the Teacher of Righteousness in many ways, though the differences at this time seem to outweigh those similarities. What has not been noticed so much is how James, Jesus’ brother fits the identity of the Teacher of Righteousness right down to particulars in great detail. By the traditional dating of the scrolls, the main concensus of who the Teacher of Righteousness is has fallen on Jonathan Maccabeus or perhaps his brother.84 By moving the dating of the scrolls forward to the New Testament times and seeing the identification of the Teacher of Righteousness with New Testament personalities, James complies with every attribute of the Teacher of Righteousness!

James was the designated the head of the Jerusalem church. The early church as it appears in Acts is rent by schism from within. Paul was the instigator of this dissention, his chief adversary being James the Just.85 Hence Eisenmann’s identifying Paul with the Liar if not the Wicked Priest himself in the Dead Sea Scrolls.86

As of late, the literature on James being the head of the Jerusalem church as well as his being so righteous as to merit the name James the Righteous, has grown as scholars have re-examined the apocrypha, pseudepigrapha and other non biblical writings.87 As the Teacher of Righteousness is the leader of his community, so is James the Just. As the Teacher of Righteousness is zealous for the law, so is James the Just, he being described that way according to many ancient writers. As the Teacher of Righteousness is killed by his enemy, so is James the Just killed by the Jews, with the High Priest, Ananias taking the lead.88

The Dead Sea Scrolls claim the "Liar" was an adversary of the Teacher, from within the community. The Teacher’s second adversary was from the outside, the Wicked Priest. He conspired to exterminate the "poor", the name the Qumranites applied to themselves, those zealous for the Law. The parallels between the Wicked Priest and the High Priest Ananias are extremely strong.89

James the Just is also associated with Onias the circle drawer in a rather interesting way. Onias is identified with Honi the Circle Drawer as was seen above. Honi the Circle Drawer also operated as a rainmaker in Aristobulus’ era, the son of Alexander Jannaeus, just prior to Pompey’s storming the Temple in 63 B.C. This Honi, according to Josephus is also called Onias the Just.90 James the Just (notice the parallel with Honi’s cognomen) was also reckoned as one of the primordial rainmakers. The fifth-century historian Epiphanius recalled in The Ascent of James, probably based on a lost work of James, how James is a rainmaker. The text also is full of allusions to ascents and the apocalyptic imagery of rainmaking. This idea of rainmaking, and its connection with the apocalyptic judgement is conspicuous in the Qumran literature as well. The Star Prophecy is combined with the famous apocalyptic imagery in Daniel 7 of the Son of Man coming in the clouds of Heaven.91 The clouds of heaven are the Heavenly Host or all the Kedoshim, i.e. holy ones - the "rain" being the Judgment they bring. 4Q318 also discusses the supernatural aspects of the "Sons of Zadok" or the "Elect of Israel", who plays a role in the Last Judgment. It’s interesting to note the tie-in with the two twins John and James in the New Testament "Boanerges"/ Sons of Thunder.92 The Messiah himself has the heavens and the earth at his disposal. The Zaddikim were the "Pillars" that upheld the earth; so were the Pillar Apostles such as James (Gal 2:9).93

The Son of Man was to come on the clouds of heaven which were to rain down judgment. Elijah was likewise designated as a primordial rainmaker, as was Honi-Onias the circle-drawer, because of the circles he drew to bring about rain.94 James, too was to bring the rain, both in its mundane sense and eschatalogical sense. Hugh Schonfield’s essential line of thought is that Jesus deliberately imitated the vissicitudes of "Teacher of Righteousness" who was looked upon as a messianic prophet like Moses and identified with "The Man" who in the last times would instruct the upright in knowledge of the most high. This is a direct link between the "Just One" and the "Son of Man" figure. The "Son of Man" of Daniel’s vision who came with the clouds of heaven was inspired by Moses.95 "In the Dead Sea Scrolls, the ‘Son of Man’ is Michael, but for that matter so is Melchizedek."96 As Merrill P. Millar translates the phrase "The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me because the Lord has anointed me to bring good tidings..."97 The reason for this is simple to see, according to Gaster, who notes the eschatalogical doctrines of the Dead Sea Scriptures derive on a popular level from Iranian lore which the Jews adopted during the Persian domination. A major feature of that lore was the ultimate triumph of Right (Asha) over Perversity (Druj). Accordingly, throughout the scrolls, great stress is laid on Righteousness (sedeq); the brotherhood styles itself "the sons [or, elect] of righteousness", and its opponents as those of perversity (‘awel) - corresponding to the Iranian ashavano and dregvato - and its spiritual mentor, the man who expounds the Torah aright is the "teacher of righteousness". Since Melchizedek lends itself to the interpretation of "king of righteousness" (melech sedeq) and through a popular misinterpretation of Psalms 110:4 (Thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchizedek) - he himself, rather than the priesthood which he served, was deemed to be eternal, hence he takes on the appropriate role of the future messianic king who will establish the dominion of righteousness on the earth.98

Interestingly Melchizedek is also found at Nag Hammadi. "His presence at Qumran could be explained as a prototype for a Zadokite priesthood which was championed there or as part of a conserved tradition. At Qumran he is viewed as a heavenly apocalyptic personage."99 The Nag Hammadi materials couple Melchizedek with Christ with a strong indication between the two. Jesus and Melchizedek are almost interchangable, as messiahs, bearing an everelasting priesthood, commanders of a righteous legion, celebrants of a personal sacrifice, coming off triumphant after overcoming all100 exactly as Qumran is said to have viewed their own messiah, the Teacher of Righteousness.

In fact, in the new scroll fragments the zodiac apparently was prominant especially the notation of the twins, which is correlated in the name in the scrolls, Thomiah, i.e. Gemini. This in turn relates to the disciple of Jesus Judas Thomas, "Thomas the Twin", reckoned as the Lord’s brother in the Nag Hammadi.101 Many personalities are thus tied into this. James apparently was considered by the early Christians with a prominance unlike the other followers of Jesus.

The Teacher of Righteousness as an Office

Disgust set in early with some scholars over the lack of unity in identifying the Teacher of Righteousness. Joseph R. Rosenbloom sarcastically recalled many contradictions among scholars’ attempts at identifying the Teacher of Righteousness. If eligability in identifying this person was with his office of High Priest, being killed by an antagonist and being zealous for the law as the scholars maintain, then what is wrong with identifying Anan ben David as the Teacher? Though of Karaite origins (Medieval times), Anan was murdered by the Rabbanites. He was known for his asceticism, which brought one to righteousness and contributed to the redemption and restoration of Israel. To further strengthen this speculation, Anan also had an individual antagonist, Gaon, who could be the Wicked Priest.102 The Karaites have been ignored for the most part as anyone legitimate in rendering a solution to the identity of the Teacher, whereas in fact, the term "Teacher of Righteousness" has been found in later writings, the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, and later Medieval literature.103 With the apparent confusion and contradictions, some were led to attend to the idea of the Teacher of Righteousness as an office rather than a single individual. This theory is quite attractive according to Theodor H. Gaster, who notes since all sorts of characters have been identified and argued over for this prestigous title, with no one of them fitting all the criteria, "the commentators are merely fitting a stock set of masks upon a stock set of characters, differently identified in different epochs."104 Samuel Sandmal makes Gaster’s point very well. If we concentrate on individuals, Sandmal thinks 152 B.C. is the crucial year. At this time, Alexandar Balas appointed the Hasmonian Jonathan as High Priest on the death of the High Priest Alcimus. Jonathan was killed by his brother Simon, hence the Wicked Priest would be either Jonathan or Simon.

The Teacher of Righteousness apparently founded the community, who opposed the Wicked Priest, "Liar" or "the Man of the Lie", or "Scoffer" if he is an individual. "The Teacher of Righteousness", Sandmal wisely concludes, "could be a title for a succession of leaders after the first Teacher and served out the office."105 G. R. Driver noted that "once the title of ‘Teacher’ appears without qualification in the Scrolls (Z ix 50) as Jesus is occasionally addressed or described as Teacher, this Greek title has been found on a Jewish ossuary dated in the early part or middle of the 1st century A.D. That nothing is known of it before this time seems to indicate that it may have been a coinage of that century."106 H.E. Del Medico concludes brisquely that the Teacher was none other than Nehemiah,107 but then goes on to add that the Qaraites called themselves "Masters of the Scriptures" (ba’ale miqra) which they alone could interpret. The word "Master of Righteousness" (m"reh sedek) is used for master, meaning a teacher of the scriptures. "This term ‘Teacher of Righteousness’ corresponds with the term ‘Professor of Law’, with no supernatural connotations."108 George Wesley Buchanan based his view that the Teacher of Righteousness was an office on the interpretation of Ps. 102:17, which according to Rabbi Isaac meant "With reference to the generation" (Ps. 102:18), they said they had no prophet (NBY&#8217

, no priestly teacher of righteousness (WL’KHN MWRH SDQ) and no temple would atone for them. This suggests that the Teacher of Righteousness, like prophet, was an office to be filled by different men at different times.109

We know of at least half a dozen Zadoks have been found in history, all of them engaged in the same type of activity as in the scrolls. It is a commonplace in all the apocryphal writings that two heroes who behave alike become identified in the minds of later generations. Like the Egyptian writings, which the scrolls have a genuine affinity to, these scrolls are wholly taken up in types and images rather than with unique historical events and personalities; we fail to appreciate how ancient texts operate so thoroughly with interchangeable parts, characters and names. It’s hard for us hard-headed, analytical westerners to understand what goes on, and vast amounts have been written demonstrating that! But for the authors of the scrolls it is quite possible for John to be an Elijah, or for the Teacher of Righteousness, a Messiah.110 "In the Syriac Apocalypse of Paul, the apostle is introduced to Enoch, being told when he is asked, "Who is this weeping angel?" "It is Enoch, the teacher of righteousness."111 This seems to present the Teacher of Righteousness clearly with an office.

The dating of the scrolls

The main problem has been the dating of the scrolls. James C.G. Greig says that the period after 177 B.C. is the era in which events must fit in order to have all events mentioned in the scrolls make sense.112 Solomon A. Birnbaum noted that the War Scroll mentioned the "Kittim of Misrayim" and the "Kittim of Assur", which referenced in all likelihood to the Ptolemies and the Seleucids. If this were accurate the scroll dates to the post-Alexander empire and before the end of the Seleucids kingdom, i.e. between 323 B.C. and 63 B.C.113 Based on the relationship of the scrolls to the jars they were hidden in and other archaeological evidence, Birnbaum’s conclusion is that the manuscripts "could not have been written - nor, of course, composed - later than the middle of the first century B.C.E."114 H. M. Segal traces the view that the Kittim were the Ptolemies and Seleucids to 1 Maccabees where the Macedonians are called the Kittim, and to Professor Sukenik’s interpretation that the Seleucid and Ptolmaic Greeks were those mentioned in the scrolls.115 However, A. Dupont-Sommer has the correct interpretation of the Kittim being the Romans, Cf. Daniel 11:30 where LXX renders the term correctly, and Vulgate: Romani. One particular detail stands out which can only apply to the Romans and that is they worshipped their military standards. On Hab 1,16 DSH says "Its interpretation is that they offer sacrifices to their standards and their weapons of war are their religion." This points only to the Romans as the Roman worship of the signa, a practice not known among the Greeks.116

It might also be added that the picture in the scrolls of the Romans as crafty, treacherous, and cruel oppressors of the peoples of the earth reads like a deliberate protest of the sect against the traditional policy of the Maccabean and Hasmonian princes, Judah, Jonathan, Simeon, and John Hyrcanus. These sought to maintain an alliance with the Romans against their common enemy, the Seleucid Syrians.117

Hugh Schonfield felt the Damascus Document places the Teacher of Righteousness around 176 B.C., which correlates with the "Age of Wrath" mentioned in the scrolls with Antiochus Epiphanes. This is the era of the Teacher of Righteousness as well as when Enoch, and 1 Maccabees were written.118 The discussion of who the Wicked Priest was by A.S. Van Der Woude is concentrated in the era of 150 B.C. to 76 B.C. in which time the Habakkuk Commentary was written.119 K.A. Matthews noted that since the method of dating using the coins, found also at Qumran, is unstable, though most can be safely assigned to the period 150-31 B.C. Following Murphy-O’Connor’s reconstruction of Qumran community life, the Teacher of Righteousness would be a contemporary of Jonathan (160-143 B.C.), thought by some to be the Wicked Priest. Scribal activity at Qumran was thought to have been from 100-31 B.C. The oldest copy of the Rule, as well as the "Manifesto" of 1QS, the hymns of the teacher in 1QH, all of these are at least 150 B.C.120 Edward J. Young says the Isaiah manuscripts dates in the second century B.C.121 Philip R. Davies contends that the date of the IQM, of which the Teacher of Righteousness was the author, is to be placed at 110 B.C., which date is arrived at by identifying Alexander Janneus as the wicked priest. The war scroll is talking about the struggle of the Jews under the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes in the second century B.C. using internal interpretations.122 Paul Garnet noted that in the tests of carbon-14 dating, paleography, the types of pottery used, and also the temperature test on the leather the scrolls were written on, that all the evidence points to being before A.D. 68, and range from 175 B.C. to A.D. 50.123 John C. Trevor noted the weakness in dating them via Paleography as no one is agreed about what the "evolution of the letters" really means. It’s a very subjective research method.124 Raphael Levy noted that the sects’ beginnings are traced to an "Age of Wrath" which occurred about 196 B.C., 390 years after the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem. A Teacher of Righteousness was to be sent in this age.125 John C. Trevor notes that the evidence warranted approaching the search for the Teacher of Righteousness in the era of the Maccabees, when the Greeks were the oppressors.126 William G. Guindon likewise agreed with the assessment that the scrolls, based on carbon-14 dating, analysis of the leather, the coins, etc., all date from pre-Herodian times.127 E.Y. Kutscher notes with internal evidence and what we know of the development of Aramaic and its uses, expressions, etc., that the Genesis Apocryphon was written in the time-frame of 100 B.C. to 100 A.D.128 M. Black also notes this is a strong way to date the scrolls with comparison of other contemporary literature’s expressions, linguistic modes, etc.129 Yigael Yadin observed that the Hasmonian semi-formal script of Isaiah and the Temple Scroll paleographically date to 125-100 B.C. They were probably not composed any later than the reign of John Hyrcanus I (135-104 B.C.) or the beginning of Alexander Janneus’ reign (103-76 B.C.). "The language displays linguistic features, words, and expressions typical of mishnaic Hebrew, hence the scroll can not have been composed beefore the Hasmonian period."130 H.H. Rowley noted the divergent claims of dating the scrolls and tagged the responsibility of the medieval argument for the dating of the scrolls to Solomon Zeitlin who identified many characteristics of the Karaites with Qumran.131 His followers have done as much also, noting, not only a Teacher of Righteousness specifically titled as such in the sect of the Karaites, but also the doctrine of the two Messiahs, a rather unique feature of the scrolls,132 though their Medieval view is now seen to be incorrect.133

With the emergence once again of identifying New Testament personalities with the Teacher of Righteousness, the dating of the scrolls becomes crucial for scholar’s arguments. Barbara Thiering’s contention, since she identifies John the Baptist with the Teacher of Righteousness is that J. T. Milik went beyond the evidence in claiming that paleographically, the personal script of the Teacher of Righteousness which Milik used, can not be used firmly, since it is personal writing style that causes difficulties.134 She also contends that in dating the scrolls paleographically, using expressions and idioms, its important to remember the community used special code words. For instance, Babylon, which was used to denote the Babylon of history, 600 B.C., the Jews last destruction the Qumranites knew of. But Babylon also was used as a code name in the New Testament, especially in Revelations. The scrolls use Babylon to mean Rome, as does the New Testament, hence Thiering called for a new look, and identified John the Baptist with the Teacher of Righteousness.135 Herschel Shanks reviewed her book and notes that she dates the Gospels much earlier than other scholars do, which will startle them, especially the idea that John was written 37 A.D.136 He also notes that Thiering is simply inventing a subtext to the text of the Gospels which is not recognized by anyone else.137 James H. Charlesworth notes that Thiering’s view is completely unoriginal and actually a 200 year old argument, with nothing new and original.138

A much more serious attempt at bringing light to the dating of the scrolls is brought by Robert Eisenmann who contends that James the Just, the brother of Jesus is the Teacher of Righteousness. Herschel Shanks explained in the Biblical Archaeology Review, that the carbon-14 tests have validated and added extra support for the paleographical dating of the scrolls. Eisenmann contends he wasn’t allowed to participate in the testing procedures. He contends that the Testament of Kohath dates around mid-first century C.E. The paleographers date it to 100 B.C.E. while the carbon-14 tests on this document dated it to 300 B.C.E.! The testers admitted that chemical contamination fouled up the test on the Testament of Kohath, which Eisenmann wants retested, though it likely won’t happen, according to Shanks.139 Now, since new scroll fragments are being released, Benedict T. Viviano has noted they contain "Beatitudes" very similar to Jesus’ beatitudes, both sets being complementary which sharpens our focus on the New Testament context, never before available.140 Michael O. Wise and James D. Tabor have translated a fragment describing a messianic figure in the scrolls who will be resurrected and bring about the resurrection for all. This description clearly fits the biblical Jesus.141 The debate over a "pierced Messiah" is growing as the argument is over the translation of one crucial line in a fragment, bringing the scrolls ever closer to the New Testament.142 And now the scrolls are bringing new meaning to Jesus’s baptism and the symbol of the dove at that event that can only be described as incredible.143 The scrolls are illuminating the New Testament Pharisees and Sadducees, as well as every one of the Gospels.144 The recent reprinting of James H. Charlesworth’s John and the Dead Sea Scrolls, an anthology of scholar’s views of the parallels between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament, is testimony to the effect that the most interesting study of the scrolls is yet to come. With them we may yet have a chance to identify the Teacher of Righteousness. James H. Charlesworth’s study of parallels between the Gospel of John and Qumran is an interesting indication.

One of the most endured titles the Qumranites gave themselves was the "sons of light". It’s interesting that this peculiar expression and designation is only had at Qumran, and in the Gospel of John. (To help see the two contrasted and compared I will put the Bible reference in bold, which will be on the left side. The comparison next to the bold text is from the Dead Sea Scrolls texts.

Comparison of John With the Dead Sea Scrolls: Unique Expressions

1. to pneuma t s al theias 1. rwh ‘mt

"the spirit of truth" "Spirit of Truth"

(Jn 14:17; 15:26; 16:13) (IQS 3:18f; 4:21,23)



2. to pneuma to hagion 2. brwh qwds

"the Holy Spirit" "by the Spirit of Holiness" (or Holy Spirit)

(Jn 14:26; 20:22) (IQS 4:21)



3. huioi ph tos 3. bny ‘wr

"sons of light" "sons of light"

(Jn 12:36) (IQS 3:13,24,25)



4. z n ai nion 4. bhyy nsh

"eternal life" "in perpetual life"

(Jn 3:15, 16,36; 4:14, (IQS 4:7)

36; 5:24,39; 6:27, 40,47, 54,68)

This terminological relationship between these two texts are strengthened and shown in greater depth when it’s seen they also share seven additional shared literary expressions:

5. to ph s t s z n 5. b’wr hhyym

"the light of life" "in the light of life"

(Jn 8:12) (IQS 3:7)



6. kai ho peripat n en t skotia 6. wbdrky hwsk ythlkw

"and he who walks in "to walk in all the

the darkness" ways of darkness"

(Jn 12:35) (IQS 3:21)

ou m peripat s en t skotia llkt bkwl drky hwsk

"he will not walk in the "to walk in all the ways of darkness" darkness"

(Jn 8:12) (IQS 4:11)



7. h org tou theou 7. b’p ‘brt’l nqmt

"the wrath of God" "by the furious wrath of

(Jn 3:36) the God of vengence" (IQS 4:12)



8. typhl n ophthalmous 8. ‘wrwn ‘ynym

"the eyes of the blind" "blindness of eyes"

(Jn 10:21; Jn 9:1,2,13,17-20) (IQS 4:11)



9. pl r s charitos 9. brwb hsdw

"full of grace" "in the fulness of his grace"

(Jn 1:14) (IQS 4:5)



10. ta erga tou theou 10. m’ y’l

"the works of God" "the works of God"

(Jn 6:28; 9:3) (IQS 4:4)



11. hoi anthr poi... n gar 11. m’ y tw’bh aut n pon ra ta erga

"the works of abomination" "the men...because their (IQS 4:10)

works were evil" kwl m’ y gbr

(Jn 3:19) all the works of a man" (IQS 4:20)145

The reason for putting these phrases in comparison is because they are associated with the Teacher of Righteousness for the Qumran Community as they are with Christ for the Christians. Each group saw their leader as the expounder of the Law, the light of the community, the instructor in truth and righteousness. What this study of the Teacher of Righteousness shows us is never be dogmatic. "In John 1:17 we find the statement that "grace and truth came through Jesus Christ".146 The exact idea is found concerning the community’s attitude of their Teacher of Righteousness. "The probability that John’s pattern of thought was influenced by the pattern of thought recorded in IQS 3:13ff becomes more certain since in both texts ‘abundant grace’ is conjoined not with the usual biblical correlative concepts ‘glory’ (e.g. Ps 84:11; Eph 1:6) of ‘favour’ (e.g. Est 2:17; Gen 6:8ff; 19:19) but with ‘truth’. Finally it is significant that in both texts ‘the works of God’ are antithetical to ‘the works of man.’"147

Considering how the Qumranites applied messianic aspects to their own leader, the Teacher of Righteousness, and considering that the new fragments are describing the Messiah as they saw him, which descriptions are matching the biblical Jesus’ teachings very well, we need to stress caution about being dogmatic. With the old view, the Teacher of Righteousness was identified with almost anyone who had even a few resemblences to him. With the new fragments coming out (1990’s), and their dating moving closer to New Testament times, we have to restudy the whole issue of just who this Teacher was whom God revealed his secrets to, and who interpreted the Law for the congregations, who died at the hands of his enemy and who was looked upon as a messiah. We still don’t know who he was, but I believe that gap in our knowledge is closing, perhaps faster than we think. We would do good to heed the words of one of our religious historians, "We have no right to treat ‘History’ as the true and accurate image of things. Like science and religion, history must argue its case on evidence. This body is like a jury: every member must do his own thinking and make up his own mind (that is the beauty of these meetings we are told), but only after viewing all the evidence. This is a staggering assignment, but no one can evade it and still form an intelligent opinion."148

 

[Julio7]

El saco su investigacion de todos estos lugares y Autores, y todavia no da por sentado nada,en camvio tu si.
Endnotes

1. Samuel Sandmal, Judaism and Christian Beginnings, N.Y., Oxford University Press, (1978), p. 102; Frank Moore Cross, The Ancient Library of Qumran and Modern Biblical Studies, The Haskell Lectures, Greenwood Press, Westport Conneticut, (1958) p. 96, "The priests of Qumran regarded the Jerusalem sanctuary as defiled, its priests false, its calendar unorthodox."

2. Geza Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, 3rd Ed., Penguin Books, (1987), P. 32.

3. Charles F. Pfeiffer, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Bible, Baker Studies in Biblical Archaeology, Baker House, (1969), pg. 70

4. A.R.C. Leaney, The Rule of Qumran and its Meaning, Westminster Press, (1966), pp. 118f; Cf. Michael A, Knibb, The Qumran Community, Cambridge University Press, (1987), p. 9. Cf. Isaac Rabinowitz, "The Authorship, Audience, and Date of the De Vaux Fragment of an Unknown Work", in JBL, # 71, (1952), pp. 19-32, where , "mystery" or "secret" frequently occurs in the scrolls. DSH 7:5 "the mysteries of the words his servants, the prophets; 7:14, "in his prudent mysteries", etc., A close Aramaic parallel to the expression is Daniel 2:28f, "But there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets." God is the source of knowledge which he gives to his chosen ones. The phrase "that I may disclose to you", and "that I may open your eyes", have very interesting correlations in the Lachish Letters, documents found written in Jeremiah’s day. Cf. Harry Torcyzner, The Lachish Letters, 3 Vols., Oxford University Press, (1938), Vol. 2, p. 53, the word (ha-piqqeah), "is certainly nothing else but the well known Hebrew adjective "open-eyed" (compare the frequent "to open the eyes" in biblical Hebrew), "seeing", Cf. Exodus IV, 11, "...or the seeing, or the blind; XXIII,8, "...for the gift blindeth the seeing ...", "There is no other linguistic explanation of "to open the eyes". Hence the prophet in the Lachish Letters is called the "open eyed."

5 A. Powell Davies, The Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls, A Mentor Book, (1956), p. 73; Pfeiffer, Ibid., pp. 71f, notes that the identification of the Teacher of Righteousness clearly falls on how we identify the Kittim, as Greeks, or Romans.

6. Michael Grant, The Founders of the Western World, Charles Scribner’s Sons, (1991), p. 241

7. Fergus Millar, "The Background to the Maccabean Revolution: Reflections on Martin Hengel’s ‘Judaism and Hellenism’", in JJS, # 29-30, (1978-79), p.7

8. Grant, Ibid., p. 241

9. Grant, Ibid., p. 241

10. Grant, Ibid., p. 241

11. Fergus Millar, "The Background to the Maccabean Revolution: Reflections on Martin Hengel’s ‘Judaism and Hellenism’", in JJS, # 29-30, (1978-79), pp. 18f

12. Frank Moore Cross, "The Historical Context of the Dead Sea Scrolls", in Herschel Shanks, Understanding the Dead Sea Scrolls, Random House, (1992), p. 28

13. Cross, Ibid., p. 28

14. Samuel Sandmal, Judaism and Christian Beginnings, Oxford University Press, (1978), p. 102

15. Charles T. Fritsch, The Qumran Community, It’s History and Scrolls, The MacMillan Co., (1956), 1st printing, p. 20

16. Fritsch, Ibid., p. 83; For an interesting discussion of Janneus and the rebellion of Pharisees, hence the provocation leading to him crucifying 800 Jews, using the Slavonic Josephus, contrasted with the regular Greek translation, C. Rabin, "Alexander Jannaeus and the Pharisees", in JJS, # 7, (1956), pp. 3-11. Also A. Dupont-Sommer, The Jewish Sect of Qumran and the Essenes, The MacMillan Co., (1956), p. 49, says the Teacher was in prominance during the last ten years of the second century B.C. Several critics have arguede that the persecuting Priest mentioned in the Habakkuk Commentary was Alexander Janneus, not Aristobulus II. "But was Janneus ever delivered into the hands of his enemies as the Commentary (ix, 8-12) specifies, in spite of his military and political defeats? This detail, on the contrary fits perfectly Aristobulus II, who was made prisoner by the Romans and died in chains. It is, hoever, not impossible that the Teacher of Righteousness had a brush with Alexander Janneus. The theory concnering Janneus...place the ministry of the Teacher in the first third of the first ceentury B.C. This is worth emphasizing."

17. James B. Pritchard, Archaeology and the Old Testament, Princeton University Press, (1958), P. 49

18.Jean Danielou, A History of Early Christian Doctrine Before the Council of Nicea, Vol. 2, translated by John Austin Baker, The Westminster Press, (1973), p. 446

19. Theodor H. Gaster, The Dead Sea Scriptures, Doubleday, (1956), 3rd Ed., (1976), p. 29

20. Herschel Shanks, Understanding the Dead Sea Scrolls, Random House, (1992), p. 80

21. Charles F. Pfeiffer, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Bible, Baker Studies in Biblical Archaeology, Baker Books, (1969), p. 38

22. Upton Clary Ewing, The Prophet of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Philosophical Library, (1963), p. 26. Cf. Eerdman’s Bible Dictionary, William B. Eerdman’s Publishing, (1987), p. 782; Cf. Jonathan A. Goldstein, II Maccabees, The Anchor Bible, Doubleday and Co., (1983), pp. 238ff, where the debate over whether Onias III would go to a pagan shrine or not, since he was a righteous man.

23. JOS, "Antiquities", Bk XIV, 2:1. Cf. James H. Charlesworth, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 2 Vols., Doubleday, (1985), Vol. 2, "4 Maccabees", p. 548, note a; Onias a man of highest integrity, "the Greek phrase rendered ‘a man of highest integrity’, lit. = ‘beautiful and good’ the standard Greek description of the ‘true gentleman’".

24. JOS, Antiquities, Bk. XIV, 2:1

25. Hugh Nibley, "Qumran and the Companions of the Cave: The Haunted Wilderness", in RQ, 5(April 1965):177-98, reprinted in Old Testament and Related Studies, F.A.R.M.S., Deseret Book, (1986), pp., 253-284. Cf. Zev Vilnay, Legends of Jerusalem, Jewish Publication Society, (1973), pp. 25f for idea on of the cave under the Dome of the Rock where holy men can go and dwell in isolation away from the world; Borge Kjerl-Hansen, "Did Christ Know the Qumran Sect?" in RQ, 4(1959), p. 496, "The Qumran archaeology has , however, now given us quite new and extensive material to illustrate the desert as the scene of religious life in the late Jewish period." The desert is full of nature caves, as he notes on p. 502, and these caves, grottos were obviously dwelling places for the people, pg. 502. Cf. JOS, "Antiquities", Vi, 2, p. 258, Whiston Translation, Kregel Publications, for the Maccabees leaving to live in the caves of the desert. Also, Yigael Yadin, Bar Kokhba, Random House, (1971), pp. 56ff, for excellent pictures of caves, as well as the most complete information on Bar Kokhba and dwelling in caves.

26. Nibley, Ibid., p. 257

27. Nibley, Ibid., p. 258; H. E. Del Medico, The Riddle of the Scrolls, translated from L’Enigme des Manuscripts de la Mer Morte by H. Garner, Robert M McBride Co., (1958), Burke Publishing Co., Ltd. 1st edition (1959), p. 140 where he contends in spite of the play on words at Joel 2:23, where mwrh could either "teacher" or "rain" it is hardly possible to see a Teacher of Righteousness with Onias "The rain maker." The word play is missed by consulting the KJV. Therein the verse reads, "Rejoice in the Lord your God: for he hath given you the former rain moderately..." (my emphasis). The Hebrew = "TsidqŒyƒh", from a root "tsƒdaq = righteous (ness). The NIV translates the verse as "rejoice in the Lord your God, for he has given you the autumn rains in righteousness". H. E. Del Medico, The Riddle of the Scrolls, Burke Publishing, (1959), P. 103, notes that the word "Master of Righteousness" (m"reh sedek) is used for "master" (m"reh) meaning a teacher of the scriptures. This term "Teacher of Righteousness" corresponds with the term "professor of Law" with no supernatural connotations. Saddig, does connote "just", "lawful", as found in R. Laird Harris, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, 2 Vols., Moody Press, (1980), Vol. 2, p. 752. The closeness of , sedeq, "justice", "righteousness" and, s d q, "be just", "righteous" are easily seen. Cf. Richard N. Longenecker "The Messianic Secret in the Light of Recent Discoveries", EQ, #41, 1969, p. 212, where the Moreh ha-sedeq is echoed in the hymns such as "And thou, O my God, hast placed in my mouth rain [divine teaching] as an early shower of rain." the IQH 8.16, 17-26 shows this figure of rain (divine teaching given through the teacher at Qumran) is continued.

28. Nibley, Ibid., pp. 258f

29. Nibley, Ibid., p. 266

30. G. R. Driver, The Judaean Scrolls, Shocken Books, (1965), pp. 134f

31. Driver, Ibid., p. 135

32. Driver, Ibid., p. 135

33. James C.G. Greig, "The Teacher of Righteousness and the Qumran Community", NTS, # 2, (1955-56), pp. 119-126

34. Greig, Ibid., p. 126

35. Greig, Ibid., p. 126. Cf. G.R. Driver, The Judaean Scrolls, Shocken Books, (1965), p. 186, wherein he notes the weapon Mattathias used to hew down a Jew who consented to offer sacrifice to a heathen deity, a sacrificial curved ‘chopper’ ( ‹d£&#8216

, so a curved dagger (sica) became the characteristic weapon both of the extreme rebels and the Covenanters. Cf. JOS, "Antiquities", Bk XII. 6, 1,2, (p. 258), Whiston Translation, where Mattathias dies a natural death without a Wicked Priest killing him. Charles F. Pfeiffer, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Bible, p. 128, also clearly notes that the "Teacher suffered martyrdom at the hands of the Wicked Priest.

36. Driver, The Judaean Scrolls, p. 38. Cf. Michael Baigent/Richard Leigh, The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception, Summit Books, (1991), p. 201. Mattathias fits the bill for being a zealot.

37. Driver, The Judaean Scrolls, p. 255

38. Driver, The Judaean Scrolls, pp. 254f

39. Cf. R. Laird Harris, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, Vol. 2, pp. 752ff, where (sedeq) is justice, rightness, (sed q&#402

is justice, righteousness, (saddŒq) is just, lawful, righteous. The root of these words, sdq means "to be straight". The earliest use of these words, sedeq, sed qƒ, occur in relation to the function of judges. The righteous one, the saddŒq, is not to be put to death (Exo. 23:7).

40. Ben Zion Wacholder, The Dawn of Qumran, Hebrew Union College Press, (1983), p. 99

41. Wacholder, Ibid., pp. 109f

42. Wacholder, Ibid, pp. 112, 124

43. Yigael Yadin, The Temple Scroll, The Hidden Law of the Dead Sea Sect, Random House, (1985), pp. 113ff, 117ff, 192, 225, 229

44. H. M Segal, "The Habakkuk Commentary and the Damascus Fragments", in JBL, #70, (1951), p. 132

45. Wacholder, Ibid, p. 115

46. Wacholder, Ibid, p. 116

47. Wacholder, Ibid., p.118

48. Wacholder, Ibid, p.129

49. Wacholder, Ibid, p. 140; Cf. Frank Moore Cross, The Ancient Library of Qumran and Modern Biblical Studies, Greenwood Press, (1958), p. 116, "We have noted that the Teacher of Righteousness was a priest, a fervent supporter of the Zadokite high priesthood, and hence presumably of Zadokite lineage himself." Also Philip R. Davies, Behind the Essenes, History and Ideology in the Dead Sea Scrolls, Scholars Press, (1987), p. 53, "The occupation of the high priesthood by Zadokites is accepted by P and endorsed by Ben Sira (45:24; 51:12). However, he dissents in identifying Zadok as the founder of the community, (p. 55), Zadokites was a title, which, by applying Zadok to a person, makes it a personal name, which is conjectural.

50. F.F. Bruce, New Testament History, Doubleday and Co., (1971), p. 116

51. H. E. Del Medico, The Riddle of the Scrolls, pp. 139-140

52. Edward Young, "Survey of Old Testament Literature", CT, (Feb. 15, 1960), p. 6

53. Edward Young, "The Dead Sea Scrolls" CT, (Nov. 26, 1956), p. 5

54. Michael Grant, Jesus, An Historian’s Review of the Gospels, Charles Scribner’s Sons, (1977), p. 82

55. G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, Penguin Books, (1962), pp. 22f. He notes that Alexander Janneus is designated in the 4QpHos II, 2-3, the "young lion" who executed the "seekers of smooth things" by hanging men alive, (p. 31)

56. For instance, Glenn Hinson, "Hodayoth, III, 6-18: In What Sense Messianic?", in RQ, #6, (1960), pp. 183-204; Isaac Rabinowitz, "The Authorship and Date of the De Vaux Fragment of an Unknown Work", in JBL, # 71, (1952), pp. 19-32; Isaac Rabinowitz, "The Second and Third Columns of the Habakkuk Interpretation-Scroll", in JBL, #69, (1950), pp. 31-49; Dale C. Allison Jr., "The Authorship of IQS III, 13 - IV, 14", in RQ, #38, (May 1980), pp. 257-268; David E. Aune, "A Note on Jesus’ Messianic Consciousness and 11 HQ Melchizedek", in EQ, #45, (1973), pp. 161-165; Otto A. Piper, "The Book of Mysteries (Qumran I 27) A Study in Eschatology", in JR, #XXXVIII, (Ap. 1958), #2, pp. 95-106; J.A. Sanders, "Habakkuk in Qumran, Paul, and the Old Testament", in JR, #XXXIX, (Oct. 1959), #4, pp. 232-244; Raymond E. Brown, "The Messianism of Qumran", in CBQ, #19, (1957), pp. 53-82; Paul Garnet, "Atonement Constructions in the Old Testament and the Qumran Scrolls", in EQ, #46, (1974), pp. 131-163; M. H. Segal, "The Habakkuk Commentary and the Damascus Fragments", in JBL, #70, (1951), pp. 131-147; Gerald J. Blidstein, "A Rabbinic Reaction to the Messianic Doctrine of the Scrolls?", in JBL, #90, (1971), p. 331, where Melchizedek is designated as the Messianic King. Cf. T. Gaster, The Dead Sea Scriptures, (p. 26) where Melchizedek is the "King of Righteousness", as a Messianic figure; Also on Melchizedek and the ties with the Messianic doctrine, Gareth Lee Cockerill, "Melchizedek or King of Righteousness", in EQ, #63, #4, (1991), pp. 305-312; Joseph A. Fitzmyer, "Now This Melchizedek..." (Heb 7:1)", in CBQ, #25, (1963), pp. 305-321; John G. Gammie, "Loci of the Melchizedek Tradition of Genesis 14:18-20", in JBL, #90, (1971), pp. 385-396; Merrill P. Millar, "The Function of ISA 61:1-2 in 11Q Melchizedek", in JBL, #88, (1969), pp. 467-469; Joseph A Fitzmyer, "Further Light on Melchizedek from Qumran Cave 11", in JBL, #86, (1967), pp. 25-41; Mikeal C. Parsons, "Son and High Priest: A Study in the Christology of Hebrews", in EQ, #60;2, (1988), pp. 195-215; Paul Garnet, "Salvation and Atonement in the Qumran Scrolls", in WZNT, #3, pp. 5-15; Paul Winter, "Sadoqite Fragments IV 20,21", in ZFAW, #68-69, (1956-57), pp. 77fff; Sa-Moon Kang, "Divine War in the Old Testament and in the Ancient Near East", in BZAW, #177, pp. 193fff; Hans Kosmala, "At the End of Days", in ASTI, #2, (1963), pp. 26-34

57. H.H. Rowley, "4QpNahum and the Teacher of Righteousness", in JBL, #75, (1956), pp. 188-193

58. H. H. Rowley, Ibid., p. 189

59. C. Rabin, "Alexander Janneus and the Pharisees", in JJS, #7, (1956),p. 4

60. Dale C. Allison Jr., "The Baptism of Jesus and a New Dead Sea Scroll", in BAR, (Mar/Ap. 1992), pp. 58ff, wherein the dove at Jesus’ baptism is re-examined and found a powerfully integrated symbol of the apocalyptic literature in general, and ties back into the creation specifically. The popularizers have been quick to jump onto this as in for example, Reverend Dr. Charles Francis Potter, The Lost Years of Jesus Revealed, Fawcett Gold Medal, (1962), p. 138, wherein he notes that "whether the Teacher of Righteousness is the Messiah or not, he was killed by his enemies possibly crucified, about the year 688 U.C. (Urbs Condita, Latin for the founding of the city of Rome, believed to have been 753 B.C.), that would figure out as 65 B.C. for the death of the great Qumran teacher." (p. 138, My Emphasis). He speculates that perhaps the tradition of Jesus and the Teacher of Righteousness may have become confused and hence molded together later on, (p. 139)

61. Richard N. Longenecker, "The Messianic Secret in the Light of New Discoveries", in EQ, #41, (1969), p. 211; Morton Smith, "What is Implied by the Variety of Messianic Figures?", in JBL, #78, (1959), pp. 66-72

62. G. Vermes "The ‘Pierced Messiah’ Text - An Interpretation Vanishes", in BAR, (July/Aug. 1992), pp. 80ff. Robert Eisenmann/Michael Wise, The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered, Element Books, (1992), pp. 24ff, discuss this fragment. "The reference to ‘woundings’ or ‘pollutions’ in line 5 of fragment 7 of the present text and the total ambience of reference to Messianic prophecy from Isaiah, Jeremiah, Zechariah, etc. heightens the impression that a Messianic execution of some kind is being referred to...this reference to meholalot (woundings) in line 5 of fragment 7, followed by an allusion to ha-cohen (the priest) - sometomes meaning the high priest - would appear to refer to an allusion from Isa. 53:5" which speaks of the "suffering servant."

63. G. Vermes, Ibid., p. 82, where its pointed out that the word mhwllwt, translated as "wounds" or "piercings" which is similar to mhll ("Wounded, pierced") in Isa. 53:3, derives from the same Hebrew root (HLL) as the phrase hlly (the slain i.e. "fatally wounded") of the Kittim [the final foe]. The Hebrew verb hll is used in Isa. 51:9 (mhwllt) and Job 26:13 (hllh).

64. M. De Jonge, "The Use of the Word ‘Anointed’ in the Time of Jesus", NT, # 8, (1966), p. 147

65. M. De Jonge, Ibid., P. 135

66. W.E. Vine, Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, Thomas Nelson Publishers, (1985), p. 6. Cf. Solomon Zeitlin, "The Origin of the Idea of the Messiah", SEHJ, # 2, pp. 394-406, where he notes that in the second Temple period no king or priest was actually anointed with oil. Also, Joseph Klausner, The Messianic Idea in Israel, George Allen and Unwin Ltd., translated from Hebrew by W.F. Stinespring, (1956), pp. 7ff, where the idea of political and spiritual redemption was not always connected with the idea of a personal Messiah. Paul Winter in his review of G. Jeremias’ book Der Lehrer der Gerechtigkeit, noted that Jeremias negatively assessed the idea that the Teacher of Righteousness was an eschatalogical Heilsgestalt, a prophet or priestly Messiah coming in the last days, in ATR, # 46, (1964), p. 323

67. D. J. Wiseman, People’s of Old Testament Times, Oxford Clarendon Press, (1973), p. 319

68. Richard Broxton Onians, The Origins of European Thought about the Body, the Mind, the Soul, the World, Time and Fate, Cambridge University Press, (paperback) (1988), pp. 188f. The interpretation of the seed, the stuff of life and strength, as "oil" perhaps explains the belief among the Semites and elsewhere that the fat contains the life, and more particularly why the fat about the kidneys has been singled out as the seat of life and strength by Arabs and Australian natives. See his long and interesting discussion on anointing, (p. 189, note 2), where the gist is where the king of Israel becomes Yahweh-anointed, the king becomes the son of God as well, representing God here on earth.

69. A. Dupont-Sommer, The Jewish Sect of Qumran and the Essenes, MacMillan Co., (1956), p. 32. The reason the Wicked Priest attacked the Teacher of Righteousness on the Day of Atonement can be seen in that the Essenes followed a solar calendar as opposed to the lunar calendar of the rest of the Jews. Cf. Jacob Milgrom, "New Temple Festivals in the Temple Scroll", The Temple in Antiquity, Truman G. Madsen, Ed., Vol. 9 in the Religious Studies Monograph Series, Religious Studies Center, BYU, (1984), pp. 125-133; Jacob Milgrom, "The Dead Sea Temple Scroll", in Scriptures for the Modern World, Paul R. Cheesman/C. Wilfred Griggs, Eds., Vol. 11 of the Religious Studies Monograph Series, Religious Studies Center BYU, (1984), pp. 61-73. For the actual calendar, timetables involved etc., A Preliminary Edition of the Unpublished Dead Sea Scrolls, The Hebrew and Aramaic Texts From Cave Four, Fascicle #1, Reconstructed and edited by Ben Zion Wacholder/Martin G. Abegg, Biblical Archaeological Society, (1991), Appendix C, pp. 104-118. For an interesting contrast, Jean Danielou, The Dead Sea Scrolls and Primitive Christianity, Helicon Press, (1958), pp. 53-87

70. A. Dupont-Sommer, Ibid., p. 34

71. A. Dupont-Sommer, Ibid., p. 56

72. A. Dupont-Sommer, Ibid., p. 160

73. A. Dupont-Sommer, Ibid., pg. 161f. Cf. Danielou, The Dead Sea Scrolls and Primitive Christianity, translated from the French by Salvator Attanasio, Helicon Press, (1958), p. 54, where he notes the Teacher of Righteousness is located in the timeframe of 180 B.C. to 60 B.C., "In every way, therefore, this Teacher of Righteousness appears on the scene at least a half-century before the birth of Christ." Cf. Joseph A. Fitzmyer, "The Qumran Scrolls, the Ebionites, and Their Literature", in The Scrolls and the New Testament, Ed., Krister Stendahl, Harper and Bros., (1957), p. 219, wherein the Teacher of Righteousness can aptly be called an Erl"sergestalt, a redeemer. "As a revealer of truth, the Teacher of Righteousness and the True Prophet can be favorably compared, for their functions are definitely similar." Also see Michael O. Wise/James D. Tabor, "The Messiah at Qumran", in BAR, (Nov/Dec 1992), pp. 60ff, wherein they demonstrate rather beaustifully the ways in which the Messiah from Qumran fragments is described very similarly to the description of Christ in the New Testament, i.e. the ruler of heaven and earth, how this Messiah will raise the dead (!), heal the sick, and announce glad tidings to the poor.

74. James H. Charlesworth, Jesus Within Judaism, The Anchor Bible Reference Library, Doubleday, (1988), pp. 59f

75. Borge Hjerl-Hansen, "Did Christ Know the Qumran Sect?", in RQ, #4, (1959), pp. 495-508. Discussing Christ’s question to the disciples at Matt. 11:7, about who they went to see in the desert, which Hansen claims meant Qumran. Cf. Bruce Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the New Testament, United Bible Societies, (1971), p. 29, where after discussion of the term and problems the Greek of Matt. 11:2, causes, namely, the translators decided on "Why then did you go out?[in the wilderness] To see a prophet?" This would fit as the Qumranites of course viewed their Teacher of Righteousness as a prophet who received the mysteries (Raz) of God; Cf. A.R.C. Leaney, The Rule of Qumran and its Meaning, Westminster Press, (1966), p. 147, knowledge, gnosis, etc.

76. S.G.F. Brandon, Jesus and the Zealots, Charles Scribner’s Sons, (1967), pp. 61f, 133, 178

77. Baigent, Ibid., p. 131. The Ebionites likewise did not hold the concept of Jesus being the "only begotten", or as divine, see C. Rabin, "The ‘Teacher of Righteousness’ in the ‘Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs’?", in JJS, #3, (1952), pp. 127f

78. Barbara Thiering, Jesus and the Riddle of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Harper SanFrancisco, (1992), pp. 14f

79. Ibid., p. 19

80. Herschel Shanks, "Did Jesus Really Die on the Cross?", in BAR, (Sept/Oct, 1992), pp. 69f; Cf. James H. Charlesworth, "Sense or Sensationalism? The Dead Sea Scrolls Controversy", in The Christian Century, (Jan. 29, 1992), p. 95 wherein he notes that Theiring is simply resurrecting an old view that was acknowledged by Albert Schweitzer long ago in his historical study on various approaches to Jesus, The Quest for the Historical Jesus, (1906).

81. Thiering, pp. 83ff

82. Edgar Hennecke/Wilhem Schneemelcher, Neutestamentliche Apokryphen, (New Testament Apocrypha), translated by R. McL. Wilson, 2 Vols., Westminster Press, (1959), Vol. 1, p. 418. It also says Mary, Jesus’ mother urged him to just follow John.

83. Robert Eisenmann, James the Just in the Habakkuk Pesher, Leiden, (1986). As found in Michael Baigent’s The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception.

84. Baigent, Ibid., p. 151

85. Baigent, Ibid., p. 186

86. Baigent, Ibid., p. 195

87. James M. Robinson, The Nag Hammadi Library in English, Harper and Row, (1988), "The Gospel of Thomas", p. 127, where the disciples ask Jesus after he leaves who is in charge? Jesus replies "Wherever you are, you are to go to James the righteous, for whose sake heaven and earth came into being." Cf. A. Guillaumont, H-Ch. Puech, G. Quispel, N. Till., Yassah ‘Abd Al Mas h, The Gospel According to Thomas, Coptic text established and translated, Leiden E.J. Brill, Harper and Bros., (1959), p. 9, "go to James the Righteous". M.R. James, The Apocryphal New Testament, Oxford, (1924), p. 3, James, the Lord’s brother, an illustrious man, vowed he would not eat bread from the hour he had drunk the Lord’s cup until he had seen the ressurrected Lord. Christ gave him bread and drink. Cf. Bertil Gartner, The Theology of the Gospel According to Thomas, translated by Eric J. Sharpe, Harper and Bros., (1961), pp. 56f, where James is the central figure among the faithful after Christ’s departure. It is also to him who the resurrected Lord appeared to first. James is called the righteous one by Jesus, and the expression "for whose sake heaven and earth came into being" is a Jewish form of expression, a title of high honor normally applied to the Torah, David, the Messiah, Israel, etc. F. Legge, Forerunners and Rivals of Christianity, 2 Vols., Peter Smith, (1915), reprinted 1950, permission of Cambridge Univ. Press, Vol. 2, pp. 25f, James was supposed to have handed down numerous discourses of the Ophites, (a widespread Gnostic sect) to Mariamne, a sister of Philip.; Edgar Hennecke/Wilhelm Schneemelcher, Neutestamentliche Apokryophen, (New Testament Apocrypha), 2 Vols., Westminster Press, (1964), Vol. 2, pp. 28f, where Peter is the head of the circle of believers after Christ left, but that Paul didn’t regard the twelve as an established institution functioning in his time. Gal. 1:18f, Paul saw Peter and James, but not the other Apostles. Pg. 45, James the Just chosen as Bishop of the Jerusalem Church. p. 71, Peter advised the Tripolitans to trust no teacher whom James had not approved of. p. 419, Paul noted James as a pillar of the church, 1 Cor. 15:7, Gal. 2:9, James was holy from birth, drinking no wine nor strong drink, shunning the razor, wearing no wool, and was the only one allowed in the sanctuary of the Temple. Because he had prayed so long on his knees for the people, they were calloused like a camel’s. He was called ‘Oblias’ - "protection of the people". He was also known as the Righteous. Josephus attributes the destruction of the Temple, 70 A.D. to the Jews stoning James to death at the Temple for saying Jesus was in heaven on the Right hand of God and was coming again in the clouds of heaven.

88. Baigent, Ibid., pp. 194f.

89. Baignet, Ibid., p. 196. In all fairness, it must be acknowledged that Michael Baignet’s book has not escaped its share of criticism. Herschel Shanks, editor of the Biblical Archaeology Review, reviewed Baigent’s book in his magazine for( Nov/Dec. 1991), pp. 66-71, "Is the Vatican Suppressing the Dead Sea Scrolls?" wherein he notes the first half of Baigent’s book is riddled with inaccuracies about the International Team and their efforts, but acknowledges that the scrolls have been suppressed and Baigent’s book is good for getting the public’s awareness up. Though Shanks disagrees with Baigent that there is anything serious undermining Christianity in the scrolls. The point is that information needs to be made more available concerning all the connections of the Dead Sea Scrolls with any movement, historical aspects of Judasim, Christianity, Islam, whatever. The scrolls have now been released for the public to access them, in part largely due to Shanks influence through his magazine, Biblical Archaeology Review.

90. Robert Eisenmann/Michael Wise, The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered, Element Books, (1992), p. 260

91. Eisenmann, Ibid., p. 260

92. Eisenmann, Ibid., p. 261; Cf. James M. Robinson, The Nag Hammadi Library In English, Harper and Row, (1988), p. 296, Wherein the Gnostic treatise, "The Thundererfect Mind" is discussed. The thunder herein is a figure understood in conjunction with the Greek and Hebrew concept of coming from the highest God (The Greeks sometimes called Zeus "The Thundering One"), It is the way in which God makes himself known on the earth. James Joyce played on this theme in his Finnigan’s Wake, wherein the fall of Finnegan’s body tumbling down the ladder (symbolic of man’s fall) was captured... bababadalgharaghtakamminarronnkonnbronntonnerronntuonnthunntrovarrhounawns

kawntoohoohoordenenthurnuk!, in Joseph Campbell/Henry Morton Robinson, A Skeleton Key to Finnegan’s Wake, Penguin Books, (1986), p. 31, wherein also this thunderclap noise is identical with the Viconian thunderclap, the voice of God’s wrath, which terminates the old aeon and starts the cycle of history anew." (my emphasis). Cf. Hugh Nibley, "Tenting, Toll, and Taxing" in WPQ, 19/4 (1966): 599-630, reprinted in The Ancient State, Vol. 10, The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, FARMS/Deseret Books, (1991), pp. 34f, Wherever we turn the earliest records of the human race offer a surprisingly uniform portrait of the wandering storm driven hero, a Horus, Enlil, Marduk, Mazda, Zeus, Teshub, Celtic Mercury, or Norse Othinn, mounted on his thunderwagon and leading his toiling hosts across the windy steppes while the earth trambles and the sky gives forth with appalling electrical displays. Anu, the first and highest of the Mesoptamian deities is the "rider of the storms who occupies the dais [tent] of sovereignty.

93. Eisenmann, Ibid., p. 261

94. Eisenmann, Ibid., p. 261

95. Hugh Schoenfield, The Passover Plot, New Light on the History of Jesus, (1965), Bantam Book, p. 209. Cf. William O. Walker, Jr. "The Origin of the Son of Man Concept as Applied to Jesus", John Maier/Vincent Tollers, Eds., The Bible in its Literary Milieu. Eerdman’s Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, Michigan, (1979), pp. 156-165. Also Hugh Nibly, "The Enoch Figure", Enoch the Prophet, Deseret Book, (1986), pp. 36-40. wherein he notes the "Son of Man" tradition in the intertestamental period was in a fluid state and could be adapted to any Messianic figure.

96. Hugh Nibley, Enoch the Prophet, Deseret Book, (1986), p. 36; It’s interesting to compare/contrast the etymologies of Melchizedek and Yahweh as the Lord of Righteousness

 

[Luis Fernando]

Oye, Julio, ya me he leído lo que has puesto y me surge una gran interrogante:
¿Podrías decirme qué parte de ese escrito dice algo esencialmente diferente a lo que vengo diciendo desde que abrí este epígrafe?

O mejor aún,
¿qué parte de ese escrito afirma algo lejanamente parecido a la teorías que tú crees sobre, por ejemplo, el Maestro de Justicia?

Espero tu respuesta ya que tengo la impresión de que a este debate le queda muy poco porque lo que tú citas para apoyar tu posición resulta que apoya la mía

 

[Luis Fernando]

Hey, mi mensaje anterior fue escrito antes de que Julio añadiera más material

Me leo lo nuevo y luego rehago mi respuesta

 

[Luis Fernando]

Vale, fantástico.
El día 11 de este mes escribí:
AH!!! y me apuesto con quien quiera una coca-cola a que Julio nos vendrá con las teorías de una tal Barbara E Thiering y R Eisenman, que provocan el jolgorio general de toda la comunidad científica.

Bueno, aparte de que acerté de pleno en mi predicción, cabe señalar el gran problema del que creo que adolece Julio:
tiene libros pero no acaba de captar la importancia que tiene lo ÚLTIMO descubierto a la hora de determinar la verdad sobre Qumrán.
Por ejemplo, el pedazo de texto en inglés que nos ha puesto está escrito en el año 1992.
En el 1993 Florentino García y Julio Trebolle escribieron "Los hombres de Qumrán" en donde encontramos lo siguiente:

"Al mismo tiempo se daban a conocer al gran público las opiniones de dos profesores, R. Eisenman y Barbara E. Thiering. Éstos afirman que los manuscritos de Qumrán y, en particular, los pesharim proceden de una secta judeo-cristiana o de un grupo judío de tendencias zelotas, que fueron escritos en los años de la revuelta judía contra Roma (años 68-70 dC) y que contienen información que hace cambiar la historia de los orígenes cristianos. Los dos autores hacen, sin embargo, propuestas muy vagas y dispares. Según Eisenman, el Maestro de Justicia del que hablan los manuscritos de Qumrán podría ser el mismo Jesús de Nazaret, o tal vez Juan el Bautista o Santiago (nota mía: ¿y porqué no Caperucita Roja o Peter Pan?). Para B.Thiering, el llamado Sacerdote Impío podría hber sido Pablo o el mismo Jesús de Nazaret, etc (nota mía: ¿porqué no Blancanieves o Cenicienta?).
En el Congreso Internacional sobre los Manuscritos del Mar Muerto, organizado por la Universidad Complutense y celebrado en El Escorial en marzo d 1991, fueron presentados por primera vez los resultados de las pruebas del carbono 14 aplicadas a una serie de manuscritos de diferentes épocas, cuatro de ellos de fecha bien conocida, para poder controlar así los resultados de las mismas pruebas científicas. El resultado fue una clamorosa confirmación de la datación de los manuscritos que había sido propuesta anteriormente por los paleógrafos y, en particular, por el profesor F. M. Cross de la Universidad de Harvard. En su ponencia a este Congreso el profesor H. Stegemann zanja la discusión en torno a la propuesta de Eisenman con estas palabras:
"En consecuencia, las ideas del doctor Eisenman a este respecto pueden ser rechazadas. Al menos no pueden seguir molestando a la hipótesis común sobre el caracter esenio de los manuscritos de Qumrán"
La tesis de que los manuscritos de Qumrán reflejan los orígenes judeo-cristianos reposa sobre una datación errónea de los mismos.
----

Un poquito más abajo, el profesor Julio Trebollé hace una descripción EXACTA de determinado tipo de personajes que dan credibilidad a Eisenman, a los cuales llama "aprendices de maestros de la sospecha"


Antes de seguir, te hago un par de preguntas, Julio:
¿qué es la paleografía?
¿piensas responder a las preguntas todavía no has respondido y que hice en el primer mensaje de este epígrafe?

 

[Julio7]

Luis,el comentario que puse fue de Kerry A. Shirt hecho en el año 1998 lee bien y veras QUE HACE comentarios hasta de CAYCE 10 Años antes que se encontraran LOS DSS,hasta el año 1998.

 

[Julio7]

Paleografia tiene que ver con el estudio de textos antiguos,paleografia es una palabra muy usada en el tema de las cuevas de qumran DSS.
me gustaria que aportaras tambien algo, no que te la lleves solo questionandome,que el tema son los rollos del mar muerto,y quiero saber mas sobre ese tema tu postura ya la conosco es la postura catolica y la de algunos evangelicos, no quiero que este tema se haga personal ,pero esa es la manera tuya por lo que veo de hacer debate,y es una manera muy juvenil de hacer apologia.

 

[Julio7]

Lost Years of Jesus Revealed
by Rev. Charles F. Potter.

The Lost Years of Jesus : Documentary Evidence of Jesus' 17-Year Journey to the East; Elizabeth Clare Prophet
The Lost Teachings of Jesus; Mark L. Prophet, Elizabeth Clare Prophet
The Autobiography: of Jesus of Nazareth and the Missing Years; Richard G. Patton
The Lost Teachings of Jesus : Mysteries of the Higher Self; Mark L. Prophet, Elizabeth Clare Prophet


For centuries Christian students of the Bible have wondered where Jesus was and what he did during the so-called "eighteen silent years" between the ages of twelve and thirty.

(aqui yo tradusco,por siglos los estudiantes de la biblia se han preguntado,que paso en la vida de Jesucristo,los llamados 18 años de silencio,entre la edad de 12 hasta los 30 años.

The amazing and dramatic scrolls of the great Essene library found in cave after cave near the Dead Sea have given us the answer at last.
(los facinantes y dramaticos rollos de la gran libreria esenia encontrada en las cuevas serca del mar muerto, nos han dado la respuesta al fin).

That during those "lost years" Jesus was a student at this Essene school is becoming increasingly apparent.
(que durante esos años perdidos,jesus fue un estudiante de la escuela esenia,cada ves es mas aparente)
Scholars are gradually admitting the startling parallels between his doctrines and vocabulary and those of the Essenes and their "Teacher of Righteousness," who was evidently executed nearly a century before the birth of Jesus. It is to his title and authority that Jesus probably succeeded.
(Eruditos poco a poco estan admitiendo,estos paralelos,entre las doctrinas y vocabulariosdel Maestro de justicia,aparentemente una siglo antes del nacimiento de Cristo.
Es por el titulo y la autoridad que Jesus probablemente tubo exito.

 

[Luis Fernando]

Vamos a ver, Julio, ¿sobre qué quieres que aporte?
Te propongo 3 temas:
1- Influencia de los esenios en la sociedad judía
2- Qumrán como prototipo de una comunidad monástica
3- Visión apocalíptica en Qumrán

Elige uno

 

[Julio7]

La 3 esta bien.

 

[Jetonius]

Originalmente enviado por: Julio7:
Paleografia tiene que ver con el estudio de textos antiguos,paleografia es una palabra muy usada en el tema de las cuevas de qumran DSS.

Esta explicación es muy general. La paleografía es el estudio de la forma de las letras que los escriban daban a los textos que copiaban. La forma precisa de escribir las diversas letras cambiaba con el tiempo, de modo que en principio es posible datar un escrito (o si es una copia, saber cuándo se realizó) si se tienen muestras similares de otros documentos cuya datación sea segura por otros medios.
En el caso de los textos de Qumran, Frank Moore Cross estableció tres períodos paleográficos, a saber: arcaico (250 a 150 a.C.), hasmoneo (150-30 a.C.) y herodiano (30 a.C.- 70 d.C.), con subdivisiones dentro de cada período y clasificación del tipo de letras.
No he opinado sobre el texto del apologista mormón Kerry Shirts porque aún no has colocado las últimas 50 referencias.
Bendiciones en Cristo,
Jetonius

 

[Julio7]

Estimado Jetonius, ya no quise poner los restantes porque estan en ingles y estan un poco largos pero si gusta lo pongo?

 

[Jetonius]

Originalmente enviado por: Julio7:
Estimado Jetonius, ya no quise poner los restantes porque estan en ingles y estan un poco largos pero si gusta lo pongo?

Estimado Julio:
Claro que me gustaría, por eso es que te recordé que faltaban. Todo el artículo está en inglés, de modo que no esperaba otra cosa de las últimas referencias.
Bendiciones en Cristo
Jetonius

 

[Julio7]

Who Was the Teacher of Righteousness? PART 4 of 4
From: Kerry A. Shirts
Date: 11 Apr 1998


Comments
96. Hugh Nibley, Enoch the Prophet, Deseret Book, (1986), p. 36; It’s interesting to compare/contrast the etymologies of Melchizedek and Yahweh as the Lord of Righteousness. Philo, Josephus and the N.T. book of Hebrews knew "Melchizedek" to mean "King of Righteousness". The Hebrew Root is mlk = "king" and sdq = righteousness. Or Melchi zedek (mlky sdq). This is a title, not a personal name. Michael, an angel in the Dead Sea Scrolls is given authority over dominion among all flesh and dispenses with justice (sdq). Hence the reason perhaps for the medieval rabbinic speculations that identify Melchizedek with Michael the archangel. Michael was also a Melchi zedek (mlky sdq). Interestingly, Jeremiah 23:6 called the future messiah yahwˆ sidqˆn–, which name has denoted "Yahweh is our righteousness". In his oracle over Babylon, Jeremiah said "YHWH has brought forth our vindication (sidq t n&#8211

! (Jer 51:10). This word didn’t so much mean righteousness as vindication or just due. Jer 23:6; 33:16 calls YHWH, yahwˆ sidq n– = "Sustainer of our vindication". This equals m"sŒ sidqƒt n–, "Bringer forth of our vindication". Cf. to Jer 51:10 ‘" ˆ s d q"t = "Executor of vindications". Showing the close ideas of the root Sdq as "righteousness, vindication, justice, which is the role or title given to Melchizedek, YHWH, Zedek iah,(!) and the Teacher of Righteousness, as an individual in his office. Information from Gareth Lee Cockerill, "Melchizedek or ‘King of Righteousness’, in EQ, 63:4 (1991), 305-312; Julian Obermann, "The Divine Name YHWH in the Light of Recent Discoveries", in JBL, #68, (1949), pp. 316f

97. Merrill P. Millar, "The Function of Isa 61: 1-2 in 11Q Melchizedek", in JBL, #88, (1969), p. 468

98. Theodor H. Gaster, The Dead Sea Scriptures, Anchor Press Books, (1976), p. 390

99. Ann N. Madsen, "Melchizedek at Qumran and Nag Hammadi" in Apocryphal Writings and the Latter Day Saints, Vol. 13 in the Religious Studies Monograph Series, Religious Studies Center, BYU, (1986), p.294

100. Madsen, Ibid., p. 294

101. Gaster, Ibid., p. 261; Cf. Bentley Layton,The Gnostic Scriptures, Doubleday and Co., (1987), "The Book of Thomas the Contender Writing to the Perfect", p. 403, where Jesus says to Thomas, "Now, since it is said you are my double and my true companion...inasmuch as you are going to be called my sibling it is not unfitting for you to be unacquainted with yourself." Layton notes that the traditions of early Christian, Syria, Mesoptamia, and India, Jude Thomas was Jesus’ twin brother. Interestingly, G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, showed various horoscopes in the Dead Sea Scrolls, (pgs. 305-307), and William A. Beardslee, "The Casting of Lots at Qumran and in the Book of Acts", in NT, #4, (1960), p. 246, contends that the casting of lots was the theological use which described the divine decision. It represented an eschatalogical decision of God." Cf. Hugh Nibley, "The Arrow, The Hunter, and the State, in WPQ, 2/3 (1949), pp 328-44, Reprinted in The Ancient State, FARMS/Deseret Book, (1991), pp. 1-32, "The incredible range and accuracy of the primitive arrow that so astound the civilized observer are proof to the savage himself of the operation of a supernatural power, a is evident in the prayers that the legendary heroes of the steppe - Finnish, Norse, Russian, Kazakh, Turkish, and Yakut - address to their three enchanted arrows before releasing them. And for instance in the arrow-prayers of the Indians and the Bedouin, all eloquently expressing the humility of men about to entrust their lives and their fate to a power beyond their control." (pg. 3). These arrows were in later cultures cut up and used as identification rods as for instance in the tribes of Israel (Num. 17), and used in divination practices such as casting of lots for choosing leaders. "Bundles of seven divination arrows standing for the combined gentes of the Osage, recall similar tribal bundles of the Scythians, Alans, Slavs, and ancient Germans (who also chose their leaders by drawing willow lots)", which compare well with the Persian baresma, and the Roman fasces. A bundle of twelve rods (the rods of Israel were likewise tied in a symbolic bundle of twelve), standing for originally the twelve Etruscan tribes. The cosmic numbers seven, twelve, and fifty-two have astral and divinatory significance and suggest the modern card deck, (pg. 11). Cf. Hugh Nibley, "Sparsiones", in CJ, 40 (1945), pp 515-43, for the Roman adaptation of this census arrow, bundle, rod in allowing admittance into their feasts. "The objects of the rixae, were sortes, coming from the word sero, "set in rows" i.e. strung on a line, and goes back to the oracular shrines of Prehistoric Italy, where at the New Year the Earth Goddess (as Fortuna) would tell the people their fortunes by means of lots and dice. The lots -sortes - were hung on a line, a linea, and became prophetic for the simple reason that they were cast. Divination has been the heritage of the race!

102. Joseph R. Rosenbloom, "Historical Identifications in the Dead Sea Scrolls", in RQ, #2, (Oct. 1958), p. 269.

103. C. Rabin, "The ‘Teacher of Righteousness’ in the ‘Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs’", in JJS, Vol. 3, (1952), pp. 127f. Cf. Marc Bregman, "Another Reference to ‘a Teacher of Righteousness’ in Midrashic Literature", in RQ, #37, (Sept. 1979), pp. 97-100, who notes a rather standard formula, "May a teacher of righteousness come...in our days" (YB’ MWRH SDQ...BYMYNW) in the Tanhuma-Yelammedenu; Jonathan P. Siegel, "Two Further References to the Teacher of Righteousness", in RQ, #35, (Mar. 1978), pp. 437-440, noting that the tenth century Qaraite YEPHET BEN ALI in the Leningrad Public Library where the Teacher of Righteousness is equated with Elijah the Prophet; Manfred R. Lehmann, "Talmudic Material Relating to the Dead Sea Scrolls", in RQ, #3, Fevrier (1959), pp. 391-404

104. Theodor H. Gaster, The Dead Sea Scriptures, Anchor Press Book, (1976), p. 30.

105. Samuel Sandmal, Judaism and Christian Beginnings, Oxford University Press, (1978), p. 102

106. G.R. Driver, The Judaean Scrolls, Shocken Books, (1965), pp. 258f

107. H.E. Del Medico, The Riddle of the Scrolls, translated from L’Enigme des Manuscripts de la Mer Morte, by H. Garner, Robert M. McBride Co., (1959), p. 103

108. H. E. Del Medico, Ibid., p. 103

109. George Wesley Buchanan, "The Office of Teacher of Righteousness", in RQ, #34, (July 1977), p. 241. Cf. Buchanan, "The Priestly Teacher of Righteousness", in RQ, #24, (Mar. 1969), p. 554

110. Hugh Nibley, Since Cumorah, Deseret Books/FARMS, (1989), p. 290; Cf. Nibley, Old Testament and Related Studies, p. 250, The Teacher of Righteousness was of priestly descent, of the Zadokite line, who himself was another mysterious prophet, whom some believe lived at the time of Moses, a type of priest who looked forward to the Messiah. Allegro believes that the Teacher himself may have been Zadok. The important thing is the discovery of an undeniable tradition of a line of persecuted Messianic prophets. This is in perfect agreement with the Zenock and Zenos tradition in the Book of Mormon. Since one of the commonest phenomena in the apocryphal literature, including the scrolls, is the frequent duplication and corruption of proper names, it might not be too much to suggest that Zadok might be a corruption of the name Zenock, since of course in Hebrew the vowels are not written, and the Hebrew "d" resembles the "n" closely enough (in the archaic script) to have been confused by an early copyist-very common type of mistake. Be that as it may, the peculiar type of prophet represented by Zenock and Zenos is now fully established by the scrolls.

111. Hugh Nibley, Enoch the Prophet, Deseret Books/FARMS, (1986), p. 5

112. James C.G. Greig, "The Teacher of Righteousness", NTS, #2, (1955-56), p. 123. This would be the time of Antiochus Epiphanes and his immediate successors where he feels we would find all circumstance to satisfy the conditions.

113. Solomon A. Birnbaum, "Notes on the Internal and Archaeological Evidence Concerning the Cave Scrolls", in JBL, #70, (1951), p. 227f

114. Birnbaum, p. 232

115. H. M. Segal, "The Habakkuk Commentary and the Damascus Fragments", in JBL, #70, (1951), p. 133

116. Segal, Ibid., pp. 133f; Cf. J.L. Teicher’s rebuttal however, J.L. Teicher, "The Habakkuk Scroll", in JJS, #4-5, (1953-4), pp. 47-59

117. Segal, Ibid., p. 134

118. Hugh Schonfield, Secrets of the Dead Sea Scrolls, A.S. Barnes and Co., (1957), pp. 22-27. He also notes that the testamentary aspects of the Damascus Document places it around 120-70 B.C..

119. A. S. Van Der Woude, "Wicked Priest or Wicked Priests; Reflections on the Identification of the Wicked Priest in the Habakkuk Commentary", in JJS, #33, 1-2, (1982), pp. 357ff. He feels that as the teacher of righteousness was an office, which several individuals served in, likewise would the wicked priest be more in line with a succession of individual antagonists, i.e. an office as designating any who were the Qumranites enemies.

120. K. A. Matthews, "The Background of the Paleo-Hebrew Texts at Qumran", in The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth, Essays in honor of David Noel Freedman, Carol Meyers Ed., Eisenbrauns, (1983), pp. 556f

121. Edward J. Young, "The Dead Sea Scrolls", in CT, (Nov. 26, 1956), p. 5

122. Philip R. Davies, "IQM, The War Scroll from Qumran", in BO, #32, Romae, E. Pontifico Instituto Biblico, (1977), pp. 15-19

123. Paul Garnet, "Salvation and Atonement in the Qumran Scrolls", in WZNT, #3, J.C.B. Mohr, (Paul Siebeck) Tubingen, p. 5

124. John C. Trevor, "Some Comments on the Paleography of the Dead Sea Scrolls", in JJS, pp. 195-199

125. Raphael Levy, "First Dead Sea Scroll Found in Egypt Fifty Years Before Qumran Discoveries", in BAR, (Sept./Oct. 1982), p. 46

126. John C. Trevor, "Scrolls From a Dead Sea Cave", in CC, #67, (July 12, 1957), p. 840

127. William G. Guindon, "Radioactive Carbon and the Dead Sea Scrolls", in CBQ, #13, (1951), p. 271

128. E. Y. Kutscher, "Dating the Language of the Genesis Apocryphon", in JBL, #76, (1957), pp. 288-292

129. M. Black, "The Dating of the New Hebrew Scrolls on Internal Evidence", in JJS, #1-3, (1948-1952), p. 199

130. Yigael Yadin, The Temple Scroll, The Hidden Law of the Dead Sea Sect, Random House, (1985), pp. 219ff

131. Solomon Zeitlin, "The Dead Sea Scrolls and Modern Scholarship", in JQR, Monograph Series, #3, (1956)

132. Thus, N. Wieder, "The Doctrine of the Two Messiahs Among the Karaites", in JJS, #6, (1955), pp. 14-25; Jonathan P. Siegal, "Two Further Medieval References to the Teacher of Righteousness", in RQ, #35, (Mar 1978), pp. 438-440; Marc Bregman, "Another Reference to a ‘Teacher of Righteousness’ in Midrashic Literature", in RQ, #37, (Sept. 1979), pp. 97-100; For the two Messiahs, N. Wieder, "The ‘Law Interpreter’ of the Sect of the Dead Sea Scrolls: The Second Moses", in JJS, #4-5, (1953-4), pp. 158-175; J. Liver, "The Doctrine of the Two Messiahs in Sectarian Literature in the Time of the Second Commonwealth", in HTR, #52, (Jan. 1959), #1, pp. 149-185; Charles C. Torrey, "The Messiah of Ephraim", in JBL, #67, (1947), pp. 253-277; For an LDS view and the relationship with the Mormon prophet, Joseph Smith, see Joseph Fielding McConkie, His Name Shall be Joseph, Ancient Prophecies of the Latter Day Seer, Hawkes Publishing, (1980), Hugh Nibley, Since Cumorah, pp. 205f, wherein he notes that "The mystery of Joseph appears in Benjamin’s admonition to his children in the Twelve Patriarchs: ‘Follow the example of the holy and good man Joseph. For until death he was not willing to tell regarding himself" ("No Man Knows My History"); ‘but Jacob, having learned it from the Lord, told it to him (Banjamin).’ In the Dead Sea Scrolls the famous Teacher of Righteousness is also called Asaph, that being...another name for Joseph, which as H.J. Schonfield observes, ‘thus far fits in with the Joseph traditions.’ Jacob blessing Joseph according to Banjamin’s Testament, saying ‘In thee shall be fulfilled the prophecies of heaven, which say that the blameless one shall be defiled for lawless men.’ According to the Testament of Zebulon, Joseph’s three days in the cistern were a type of the descent of the Lord made to the spirits in prison. One can readily see how the Joseph type would be applied to any suffering servant, though the Messiah remains the archtype. Indeed, the Christian fathers were fond of working out elaborate parallels between Joseph and Jesus. The Teacher of Righteousness was also called the Chosen One, Asaph, the Son of Berechiah, Joseph the Just, and Joseph ben Joezer, so that his given name probably was Joseph and he ‘appears to us as a composit figure’ just as his wicked opponent does. The Joseph tradition has been traced backwards as well as forwards, and Bo Reicke has found significant parallels in the Ras Shamra fragments of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries B.C.

133. H.H. Rowley, The Zadokite Fragments and the Dead Sea Scrolls, MacMillan Press, (1955), pp. 1-3

134. Barbara Thiering, Jesus and the Riddle of the Dead Sea Scrolls, HarperSanFrancisco, (1992), p. 15

135. Thiering, Ibid., p. 16; Cf. Lawrence H. Schiffman, "New Light on the Pharisees, Insights From the Dead Sea Scrolls", in BR, (June 1992), pp. 30-33,54, wherein he notes the code names "Ephraim" is for the Pharisees, while "Manasseh" is for the Sadducees.

136. Herschel Shanks, "Did Jesus Really Die on the Cross?", in BAR, (Sept.Oct. 1992), p. 69

137. Shanks, Ibid., p. 69

138. James H. Charlesworth, "Sense or Sensationalism? The Dead Sea Scroll Controversy", in CC, (Jan 29, 1992), p. 95

139. Herschel Shanks, "Carbon-14 Tests Substantiate Scroll Dates", in BAR, (Nov/Dec 1991), p. 72

140. Benedict T. Viviano, "Beatitudes Found Among Dead Sea Scrolls", in BAR, (Nov/Dec 1992), pp. 53ff,66

141. Michael O. Wise, James D. Tabor, "The Messiah at Qumran", in BAR, (Nov/Dec, 1992), pp. 60-65

142. G. Vermes, "The ‘Pierced Messiah’ Text-An Interpretation Evaporates", in BAR, (Jul/Aug 1992), pp. 80-82; James D. Tabor responds in BAR, (Nov/Dec 1992), pp. 58f

143. Dale C. Allison, "The Baptism of Jesus and a New Dead Sea Scroll", in BAR, (March/Ap 1992), pp. 58-60 Cf. James C. Vanderkam, "The Dead Sea Scrolls and Early Christianity", in BR, (Feb, 1992), pp. 16-23,40, notes several doctrines similar in both Qumran and the New Testament Christianity, the eschatalogical view of world time, they were in the last days. The idea of an apocalyptic battle between light and dark, good and evil; and a doctrine of the resurrection.

144. Lawrence H. Schiffman, "New Light on the Pharisees, Insights From the Dead Sea Scrolls", in BR, (June 1992), pp. 30-33, 54; also Lawrence Schiffman, "The Sadducean Origins of the Dead Sea Scroll Sect", Understanding the Dead Sea Scrolls, Herschel Shanks, Ed., Random House, (1992), (Ch. 3); James C. Vanderkam, "The People of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Essenes or Sadducees?", Understanding the Dead Sea Scrolls, (Ch. 4)

145. James H. Charlesworth, "A Critical Comparison of the Dualism in IQS 3:13-4:26 and the Dualism Contained in the Gospel of John", in John and the Dead Sea Scrolls, Christian Origins Library, (1990), pp. 101ff

146. Charlesworth, Ibid., p. 103

147. Charlesworth, Ibid., p. 103

148. Hugh Nibley, "Do Religion and History Conflict?", in GIF, #5, (1955), p. 25.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------