Review, @degruyter_TRS “The Rewritten Scrolls from Qumran: Texts, Translation, and Commentary”

 The Dead Sea Scrolls, as a mystical object the majority of Jewish and Christian believers still ignore, is relatively new. As an object of study, newer still. Yet, in recent years scholars have paid more attention to the content of the scrolls more than the scrolls themselves. We have come to understand a lot about these lost desert communities, isolationists who had retreated to wait for the end of their world. While many scholars focus on the more well-known works, there is still room yet to explore the richness of works largely ignored. Such is case with Ariel Feldman (Ph.D, University of Haifa) who has turned his attention the rewritten Joshua Scrolls (4Q378, 4Q379, 4Q522, 4Q123, 5Q9, Mas 1039-211).

There is not merely a propositional monograph supported with eruditic footnotes. Rather, Feldman presents us a unique type of scholarship, so that while he examines the scrolls for their connectivity, he likewise gives us a solid commentary on the fragments therein. This book of 9 chapters is divided into several parts. First, Feldman gives us an introduction to the history of these particular scrolls. In the first chapter, Feldman makes the argument (as he reminds us in the final chapter) that Joshua is the most rewritten book among the Minor Prophets. He then gives details about the scrolls themselves. Following this are several chapters dedicated to succinct literary and contextual commentary on the various scrolls and fragments. Following this are two concluding chapters arguing for various positions on composition and vorlage. His conclusions, because he has invested such a great amount of work in the preceding chapters, are almost unquestionable at this stage of scholarship.

I will briefly focus on the commentary section. For this, I will use his chapter on 4Q378 (the second chapter of the book), for no other reason than the material provides for an allusion in my New Testament studies. We are introduced to the manuscript itself, giving us the sequence of fragments. Following this is the author’s summary of the contents. For this scroll, we are introduced to one relatively free of narrative but filled with discourses. The author gives us an approximate span of the canon where the fragment would appear. The central portion of each chapter is the text and commentary. The text, of course, is given in the original language. The commentary covers the text, different readings, and includes the author’s comments. I am reminded most of the Hermeneia series. After this, there is a detailed discussion of the contents of the fragment, calling attention to (in this case) Joshua and Moses and Joshua’s succession. Finally, Feldman gives us a list of biblical allusions and discusses provenance.

In total, this is a highly detailed and much needed contribution to these scrolls. If all such Dead Sea Scroll fragments were treated in such a manner, scholarship in this area would find itself near completion. I am most impressed with the attention to detail of the text and the sharp focus of the commentary. Feldman does not get bogged down into outlying issues but remains focused on the fragments and their suspected place as rewritten Scripture. Anyone studying this area, as well as the New Testament or Second Temple Judaism must find this book a necessity.

Posted on

In the Mail: @DeGruyter_TRS “The Rewritten Scrolls from Qumran: Texts, Translation, and Commentary (Beihefte Zur Zeitschrift Fur Die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft) “

Among the unknown Jewish writings that emerged from the caves of Qumran are five scrolls rewriting the Book of Joshua. The present volume offers a detailed analysis of these texts and explores their relationship with each other and other Second Temple Jewish writings concerned with the figure of Joshua. The first full-blown study of this group of scrolls, this book is of interest to students and scholars working in the fields of the Dead Sea scrolls and ancient Jewish biblical interpretation.

Part of my dissertation is looking at rewriting… so this will come in handy, I believe.

Posted on

Revelation 10 and the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice (4Q400-7)

English: Qumran refectory (locus 77) Français ...
English: Qumran refectory (locus 77) Français : Qumran réfectoire (locus 77) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Again, sorry for the brevity, just wanted to put this out there. By now, you know I am working on my 3rd book, one that is taking a different look at Revelation. As I write the book, it slowly changes. I don’t think it will morph anymore, mind you, but what started off as X has now become Y. Or something like that. Anyway,

Read Revelation 10.1-11. Note especially Revelation 10.4-5 and seven thunders speaking unknown things. We find this in the Qumran collection called the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice (4Q400-7). There are nine fragments. One reads,

the third of the chief princes. He will exalt the God of the exalted gels seven times, with seven words of wonderful exaltations.

And

seven mysteries of knowledge in the wonderful mystery of the seven regions of the hol

seven times with (that) of the third to ue of the thi be strengthened seve

There is more in the fragments, but this should give you a taste. What are this fragments thought to represent? Why… an ancient liturgy.

Boom.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Posted on

Some affinity between Revelation 9 and 4Q300 (also 1QMysteries)

English: Stained Glass depiction of Revelation...
English: Stained Glass depiction of Revelation 3:20 “Jesus at the Door.” Window attributed to the Quaker City Glass Company of Philadelphia, 1912. Installed in St. Matthew’s German Evangelical Lutheran Church in Charleston, South Carolina. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

So, I don’t want to really get into this at the moment, but if you look at Revelation 9, you will see something very similar to the DSS fragment below. See this brief paper by Torleif Elgvin, especially the part where he mentions Flusser’s arguments on 1Q27 and how it influenced the Rosh Hashanah liturgy.

My goal is not to suggest John used 1Q27, but to show the use of ‘smoke’ in both, as (as it appears to me) something similar… like an ancient liturgy.

Frag. 1 col. I (= 4Q299 1; 4Q300 3)

1 all
2 mysteries of sin
3 their wisd. And they do not know the mystery of existence, nor understand ancient matters. And they do not
4 know what is going to happen to them; and they will not save their souls from the mystery of existence.
5 And this will be for you the sign /that this is going to happen./ When those born of sin are locked up, evil will disappear before justice as rkness disappears before
6 light. As smoke vanishes, and n longer exists, so will evil vanish for ever. And justice will be revealed like the sun which regulates
7 the world. And all those who curb the wonderful mysteries will no longer exist. And knowledge will pervade the world, and there will ne be folly there.
8 This word will undoubtedly happen, the prediction is truthful. And by this he will show you that it is irrevocable: Do not all
9 nations loathe sin? And yet, it is about by the hands of all of them. Does not praise of truth come from the mouth of all nations?
10 And yet, is there perhaps one lip or one tongue which persists with it? What people would wish to be oppressed by another more powerful than itself? Who
11 would wish to be sinfully looted of its wealth? And yet, which is the people not to oppress its neighbour? Where is the people which has not
12 looted of its wea … and the exits

Enhanced by Zemanta

Posted on

Insert Pun about the Virgin Birth – My take

First, it begins here with comments by Dr. Francesca Stavrakopoulou, an expert in the Hebrew bible. T. Michael Law, the expert in the Greek Old Testament, known in the heavenly tongue as Septuagint, weighs in about the mistranslation part. Mark Goodacre finds his mic. ]], a colleague of Jim’s via SOTS, weighs in as well.

Dr. Stravrakopoulou suggests that Matthew reads Isaiah 7.14 as a mistranslation resulting in the understanding a virgin birth. The Law is laid down on whether or not the LXX Isaiah is a mistranslation or not. The LXX is not a mistranslation (in part, as there is no real whole translation theory until after the time of Jesus) but a re-authoring. That’s my pet theory, I guess. Anyway, Goodacre does a great job (warning, British accent that lulls you in) of discussing the use of Scripture in telling the story.

However, Barton is the focal point for me.

that no one would have translated parthenos as virgin unless there had ALREADY been a virgin-birth tradition.

There is a very important virginal/extra-natural birth tradition pre-dating Matthew’s retelling the story of Jesus. Noah, at Qumran and in Enoch (an obviously important book to early /an/Christians, is presented as havingmiraculous birth. I am also going to go into my other pet theory, that the genealogy has something to do with Stoicism, etc… although this is not well-defined and thus, I’ll leave this for later.

A few other areas to look:

  • Virgil in the fourth Eclogue, recognized by the Patristics as problematic so re-interpreted. 
  • Augustus was said to have had his birth announced by portent among other supernatural occurrences

There iss a fertile ground in Matthew’s world not for a mistranslation, but for the use of portents, births out of the natural order to explain surprise births, and to highlight the divine qualities of a person. This is not, in anyway, required to be connected to a Greco-Roman schema of demigods and the such. Matthew, no doubt, intended his audience to understand that Mary was impregnated according to God’s will, the first factor in the greatness of Jesus and used his bible, the LXX (because, as T. Michael Law would have it, God Spoke Greek), to do so. He was not the first Jew to promote the divine-ordained, and free of the sins of this world, birth of a prophet to other Jews, but followed a rather Jewish pattern as seen in the Genesis Apocryphon and Enoch, books and thoughts closer to the authors of the Gospels and much more palatable to their audience than Greco-Roman myths.

This gets into the post-/structural debate of placing emphasis. Either we place it on Matthew or the audience, although I like the middle ground myself. We can reasonably identify certain qualities of Matthew and we can reasonably identify the audience in a certain social situation, but not the initial reception beyond that of acceptance. My supposition is that Matthew very well intended that the audience would understand the story as meaning that Mary was impregnated by an angel/holy Spirit but accepting a presented literary structure is not the only goal of the author — I would contend that Matthew would rather have wanted his audience to receive what he meant by the inclusion of this story. An example I used in discussing this with a friend via phone was Virgil reading his poem about the ascendency of Rome and Augustus to the Emperor Augustus who knew very well many of the events enshrined did not occur as written and more than likely, if reception history is the judge, understood the intended allegory.

Anyway, here is my 2.5 shekels.

Posted on

Interview with Prof. Lawrence Schiffman (@LHSchiffman) on “Outside the Bible”

Prof. Lawrence Schiffman talks with Rabbi Barry Schwartz, JPS Director, about his role as Editor of Outside the Bible, a groundbreaking JPS anthology of second temple literature to be released in 2013.

You can find Dr. Schiffman’s site (and blog) here. The publishers have a blog as well, which can be found – and watched for news – here.

Outside the Bible is the most comprehensive collection of texts comprising ancient Israel’s excluded scriptures and earliest biblical commentary, accompanied by modern commentary that places them in context and explains their significance for Jews and Christians alike.

Funds are needed to complete this groundbreaking project, destined to become a classic. This remarkable three-volume anthology is projected for late fall 2013 publication. For more information, please download the Outside the Bible Brochure

I cannot wait for such an anthology, which promises to fulfill a much needed voided in the area.

Posted on

11QMelchizedek (11Q13)

Col. 1out Moses “Indeed, i holy  Lev 25:12Col 2

1  sk m 

2 And as for what he said, “In year of the jubilee

3 nner Let every creditor remit what he has lent Go release

4 nd of days concerns the captives about whom Its interpretation is that he]

5 will assign them to the sons of heaven and the lot of Melchizedek, f their lot amid the pordek,

6 who will make them return and will proclaim freedom to them, to free them from the of all their iniquities. And thus will this thing happen

7 in the first week of the jubilee that occurs after the ninth jubilee. Now the dment id of the tenth bilee,

8 when atonement (will be made) for all the sons of for the mn of the lot Melzedek [] pt…wm about who ht l  them.

9 Indeed, it is the time of the year of grace of Melchiz. And he will by his strength raise up the holy ones of God to execute judgment as it has been written

10 concerning him in the songs of David, as it says, “Elohim ands in the assemby in the midst of elohim he judges.” Ps 82:1And concerning it he sa “Above it,

11 to the heights, return. el will judge the nations.” Ps 7:8-9 And as for what he sa judge unjustly and show impartiality to the wicked. selah.” Ps 82:2

12 Its interpretation concerns Belial and the spirits of his lot wh..in their turning away from the commandments of el to

13 And Melchizedek will exact the vengeances of the judgments of el  of Belial and the hand of all w

14 And his helpers will be all the elim  H ‘ all the sons of el and hph

15…this…This is the day hich spoke beautiful

16 on (the) mountains are the feet of the messenclaims peace, the messen (Isa 52:7)

17 Its interpretation: The mountns are of the prophet, those w proph to all

18 And the messenger iointed of the spir whom Dan said:

19 of good who proclai he is the one about whom it is wn, when

20 “to comfo Isa 61:2-3 to struct them in all the ages of the wo

21 in truth l  h 

22  h will turn away from Belial and t

23 by the judgments of el, as it has been written about him, on, ‘Your God reigns'” (Isa 52:7). Zon i

24 those who uphold the covenant, those who turn aside from walking in the ways of the people. But “Your elhim”

25 the hand of Belial. And as for that which he has said, “You will blow the rn in the m Lev 25:9

Also, take a gander here.

Posted on

Thom Stark buries Richard Carrier – 11QMelchizedek (11Q13)

This second part of my response to Richard Carrier will deal essentially with the interpretation of three texts: Daniel 9:24-27, Isaiah 52:7-53:12, and 11QMelchizedek. I will spend the bulk of my time responding point by point to Carrier’s claims, before concluding with a fresh interpretation of 11QMelch, based on new research. I’ve changed my mind back and forth on various questions regarding 11QMelch, but never have I found Carrier’s claims to accord with the data we have. He constantly misreads the texts; he makes contradictory claims about the nature of pesher, as he thinks it suits his purposes, and ultimately fails on virtually every point. The one point he has made that forced me to look closer at the scroll is that it follows the same timeline as Daniel in terms of a ten jubilee cycle. I was of course, with all scholars, already aware of this, but his insistence on the central significance of this point drove me to closer examination of the scroll. Not surprisingly, as it turns out and as I will show, Carrier’s understanding of the timeline of events between Daniel 9 and 11QMelch is incorrect, but I owe to his insistence on this question the clarity I now have about what 11QMelch is saying about the last days.

http://religionatthemargins.com/2012/06/it-is-finished-for-richard-carriers-dying-messiah-part-2/

As always, Thom is well supported by scholarship – actual scholarship, like even from his own field. Give it a good read.

Posted on