Seers, Sybils, and Sages in Hellenistic-Roman Judaism (Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism)

SEERS, SIBYLS AND SAGES IN HELLENISTIC-ROMAN JUDAISM

SEERS, SIBYLS A N D SAGES I N HELLENISTIC-ROMAN JUDAISM

J O H N J. C O L L I N S

' ' 6 8 ‫יי־ ל ־‬

BRILL ACADEMIC PUBLISHERS, INC. BOSTON · LEIDEN

2001

Library of C o n g r e s s Cataloging-in-Publication D a t a Collins, J o h n Joseph, 1946Seers, sibyls, and sages in Hellenistic-Roman Judaism/by John J. Collins, p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0 - 3 9 1 - 0 4 1 1 0 - X 1. Apocalyptic literature—History and criticism. 2. Bible. O.T. D a n i e l Criticism, interpretation, etc. 3. Oracula sibyllina. 4· Sibyls. 5. Dead Sea scrolls—Criticism, interpretation, etc. 6. Wisdom literature—Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. Title BS646.C657 2001 296.1—dc21 2001035446

ISBN 0-391-04110-X © All

rights

Copyright

reserved.

a retrieval

1997

No [tirt system,

mechanical,

by El.

in any

recording

permission Authorization

is granted

the appropriate Clearance

fees

Center, Danvers

form

the

items

are paid

be reproduced, without

internal

provided

directly

MA 01913, to

translated,

or

prior

/vrsomi!

that

to The

stored

mcuns, electronic,

publisher.

RosenχκκΙ

Fees are subject

Netherlands

or by any

for

by Brill

111

The

or otherwise,

from

to photocopy use

Leiden,

publication may

of this

or transmitted

photocopying,

Brill,

Copyright

Dritt, Suite 9 / 0 USA. change.

rRINTEP IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

written

in

CONTENTS

Foreword. Acknowledgements

vii ix

Introduction 1.

Before the Canon. Scriptures in Second Temple Judaism

3

I. Apocalypticism 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Genre, Ideology and Social Movements in Jewish Apocalypticism The Place of Apocalypticism in the Religion of Israel Jewish Apocalypticism against its Hellenistic Near Eastern Environment Apocalyptic Eschatology as the Transcendence of Death T h e Kingdom of God in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha The Christian Adaptation of the Apocalyptic Genre

25 39 59 75 99 115

II. Daniel 8.

Nebuchadnezzar and the Kingdom of God. Deferred Eschatology in the Jewish Diaspora 9. Stirring up the Great Sea: The Religio-Historical Background of Daniel 7 10. The Meaning of the End in the Book of Daniel 11. "The King has become a Jew:" The Perspective on the Gentile World in Bel and the Snake

131 139 157 167

III. Sibyls 12. The Jewish Adaptation of SibyUine Oracles 13. T h e Sibyl and the Potter: Political Propaganda in Ptolemaic Egypt 14. A Symbol of Otherness. Circumcision and Salvation in the First Century

181 199 211

IV. Dead Sea Scrolls 15. The Origin of the Qumran Community: A Review of the Evidence 16. Was the Dead Sea Sect an Apocalyptic Movement? 17. The Origin of Evil in Apocalyptic Literature and the Dead Sea Scrolls 18. Prophecy and Fulfillment in the Qumran Scrolls

239 261 287 301

V. Wisdom and apocalypticism 19. Cosmos and Salvation: Jewish Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the Hellenistic Age 20. The Sage in the Apocalyptic and Pseudepigraphic Literature 21. The Root of Immortality. Death in the Context of Jewish Wisdom 22. Wisdom, Apocalypticism and the Dead Sea Scrolls 23. Wisdom, Apocalypticism and Generic Compatibility

317 339 351 369 385

Indices Index of authors Index of passages Index of subjects

407 415 433

FOREWORD

During the talks which led to the decision to initiate the Supplements to the Journal for the Study ofJudaism, I was trying to draw the profile of the "ideal" book which readers of JSJ would immediately recognize as representative of their field. As models of such a book, I mentioned a monograph on the Book ofJubilees, and a collection of articles on Apocalypticism by John J. Collins. The reason for mentioning Jubilees is obvious, and equally obvious to me were the reasons for suggesting a collection of articles by Collins as a model for the books of the Series. Collins has done basic groundwork on complex theoretical issues such as the genre of Apocalypticism, but has also produced detailed case analyses of discrete units of texts; he has dealt with Jewish literature in Hebrew and Aramaic as well as with Jewish literature in Greek; his research spans practically the whole period covered by JSJ with an emphasis on the general Hellenistic an Roman Periods, and in it literary, socio-historical, religio-historical or theological themes are equally important. Writing a monograph in the Book of Jubilees is not an easy task, nor one which can be done at short notice. Preparing a collection of John J . Collins' essays for publication seemed feasible, and once he agreed to become the editor of the new Series I did not hesitate to put forth my request. He graciously agreed to prepare such a collection and selected the 23 articles which form the present book. These articles are thematically grouped in an Introduction, which discusses the problem of the Canon in Second Temple Judaism, and five parts. The first part contains seven articles dealing with Apocalypticism, and includes a previously unpublished study on "The Christian Adaptation of the Apocalyptic Genre"; the second part comprises four studies on the Book of Daniel; the third part offers three papers on the Sibylline Oracles, including a previously unpublished study on "The Jewish Adaptation of Sibylline Oracles"; the fourth part is formed by four studies on the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the fifth part analyzes in five articles the relationship between Wisdom and Apocalypticism. Each article demonstrates Collins' rigorous methodology and the breadth of his curiosity. He analyzes with the same interest the Jewish literature in Hebrew or in Aramaic as he does the literature

in Greek, he is equally attentive to the theoretical problems as to the sociological background of this literature, and considers with equal care the "normative" writings and the sectarian non-canonical works. For these reasons, this book is a model for the scholarly study of all aspects of Judaism, from the Persian period through Late Antiquity, including its influence on early Christianity, precisely the field of interest of the JSJSup Series. It goes without saying, that given the character of this volume, its publication in the JSJStip Series has been the exclusive decision of the assistant editor. Florentino Garcia Martinez

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The following articles have been published previously and are republished with permission: "Before the Canon. Scriptures in Second Temple Judaism," in Old Testament Interpretation. Past Present and Future. Essays in Honor of Gene M. Tucker, ed. J.L. Mays, D.L. Petersen and K.H. Richards (Nashville: Abingdon, 1995) 225-41, published by permission of Abingdon Press. "Genre, Ideology and Social Movements in Jewish Apocalypticism," Mysteries and Revelations. Apocalyptic Studies since the Uppsala Colloquium, ed. J.J. Collins a n d J . H . Charlesworth (JSPSup 9; Sheffield: J S O T , 1991) 11-32, published by permission of Sheffield Academic Press. "The Place of Apocalypticism in the Religion of Israel, Ancient Israelite Religion, Essays in Honor of F.M. Cross, ed. P.D. Miller, P.D. Hanson and S.D. McBride (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987) 539-58, published by permission of AugsburgFortress Publishers. 'Jewish Apocalyptic Against its Hellenistic Near Eastern Environment," BASOR 220(1975) 27-36, published by permission of the American School of Oriental Research. "Apocalyptic Eschatology as the Transcendence of Death, ‫ יי‬CBQ 36(1974) 21-43, published by permission of the Catholic Biblical Association. "The Kingdom of God in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha," The Kingdom of God in Twentieth Century Interpretation, ed. W. Willis (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1987) 81-95, published by permission of Hendrickson publishers. "Nebuchadnezzar and the Kingdom of God. Deferred Eschatology in the Jewish Diaspora," in Loyalitätskonflikte in der Religionsgeschichte. Festschrift für Carsten Colpe, ed. Christoph Elsas and Hans G. Kippenberg (Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann, 1990) 252-57, published by permission of Königshausen & Neumann Verlag. "Stirring up the Great Sea. The Religio-Historical Background of Daniel 7," The Book of Daniel in the Light of New Findings, ed. A.S. van der Woude; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1993) 121-36, published by permission of Leuven University Press. "The Meaning of 'The End' in the Book of Daniel," Of Scnbes and Scrolls. Studies on the Hebrew Bible, Intertestamental Judaism and Christian

Origins, H.W. Attridge, J.J. Collins and T. Tobin, ed. (Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1990) 91-98, published by permission of University Press of America. ' " T h e King has Become a J e w / The Perspective on the Gentile World in Bel and the Snake," Diaspora Jews and Judaism. Essays in Honor of, and in Dialogue with A. Thomas Kraabel (South Florida Studies in the History of Judaism 41; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992) 335-46, published by permission of Scholars Press. "The Sibyl and the Potter: Political Propaganda in Ptolemaic Egypt," Religious Propaganda and Missionary Competition in the New Testament World, ed. Lukas Bormann, Kelly Del Tredici and Angela Standhartinger (Leiden: Brill, 1994) 57-69, published by permission of Ε.J. Brill Publishers. "A Symbol of Otherness: Circumcision and Salvation in the First Century," "To See Ourselves as Others See Us." Christians, Jews, "Others" in Late Antiquity, ed. Jacob Neusner and Ernest S. Frerichs (Chico: Scholars Press, 1985)163-186, published by permission of Scholars Press. "The Origin of the Qumran Community: A Review of the Evidence," To Touch the Text. Biblical and Related Studies in Honor of Joseph A. Fitzmyer, S.J., ed. Paul J. Kobelski and Maurya P. Horgan (New York: Crossroad, 1989) 159-78, published by permission of Crossroad Publishing Co. "Was the Dead Sea Sect an Apocalyptic Movement?" Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls, ed. L.H. Schiffman (Sheffield: J S O T , 1990) 25-51, published by permission of Sheffield Academic Press. "The Origin of Evil in Apocalyptic Literature and the Dead Sea Scrolls,'5 Congress Volume, Paris 1992, ed. J.A. Emerton (Leiden: Brill, 1995) 25-38, published by permission of E.J. Brill Publishers. "Prophecy and Fulfillment in the Q.umran Scrolls," JETS 30(1987) 267-78, published by permission of the Evangelical Theological Society. "Cosmos and Salvation: Jewish Wisdom and Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Age," History of Religions 17 (1977) 121-142, published by permission of the University of Chicago. "The Sage in the Apocalyptic and Pseudepigraphic Literature," The Sage in Israel and the Ancient Near East, ed. John G. Gammie and Leo Perdue (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990) 343-54, published by permission ofJames E. Eisenbrauns. "The Root of Immortality. Death in the Context of Jewish Wisdorn," HTR 71(1978)177-92, published by permission of Harvard Theological Review. "Wisdom, Apocalypticism and the Dead Sea Scrolls," 'Jedes Ding hat

seine Zeit..." Studien zur israelitischen und aUoHentalischen Weishat Diethelm Michel zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. A.A. Diesel et al. (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1996), published by permission of Walter de Gruyter Publishers. "Wisdom, Apocalypticism, and Generic Compatibility" In Search of Wisdom. Essays in Memory of John G. Gammie, ed. L. Perdue, B.B. Scott and W J . Wiseman (Louisville: Westminster, 1993) 165-85, published by permission of Westminster/John Knox Press. Chapter 7, "The Christian Adaptation of the Apocalyptic Genre," a paper delivered at the International Symposium on the Book of Revelation, Athens, September 1995. Chapter 12, "The Jewish Adaptation of Sibylline Oracles." Paper presented at a conference on Sibyls and Sibylline Oracles in Macerata, Italy, in September 1994. These essays have been edited to standardize the style. Some errors have been corrected and some references have been updated, but there has been no systematic revision. The opening essay, "Before the Canon," has been expanded to include more complete documentation than was included in the previously published essay.

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER O N E

BEFORE T H E CANON. SCRIPTURES IN S E C O N D TEMPLE JUDAISM

It is the nature of scholarship that the firm conclusions of one generation are reexamined and overturned by the next. The recent debate about the canonization of Hebrew Scripture is a case in point. The traditional Jewish view, which ascribes the fixing of the canon and its division into three sections to Ezra and the "Men of the Great Assembly," 1 has been discredited for some time. In the late 19th century, however, a new orthodoxy arose.2 On this view, the Torah was canonized in the time of Ezra, the Prophets were complete by the time of Ben Sira at the beginning of the second century BCE and the Writings were closed at the Council of Jamnia, about 90 CE.3 T h e larger canon of the Christian Church was believed to have originated as the canon of Alexandrian, and more broadly Diaspora, Judaism. 4 But this consensus too has eroded in the last third of the twentieth century. A.C. Sundberg conclusively demonstrated that "there was no 'Alexandrian canon' of Hellenistic Judaism that was distinct from and different in content from a 'Palestinian canon.'" Rather, he argued, "in addition to closed collections of Law and Prophets, a wide religious literature without definite bounds circulated throughout Judaism as holy scripture before Jamnia." 5 More recendy, Jamnia itself has come under

1 This view is attributed to Elias Levita, in his book ‫ מ ס ו ר ח ה מ ס ו ר ת‬in the first half of the sixteenth century. Levita was building on the work of David Kimhi (1160-1235). The Talmudic tractate Baba Bathra 14b-15a credits the Men of the Great Assembly with writing the books of Ezekiel, the Twelve Minor Prophets, Daniel and the Scroll of Esther. 2 H.E. Ryle, The Canon of the Old Testament (London: MacMillan, 1892); F. Buhl, Canon and Text of the Old Testament (Edinburgh: Clark, 1892) 24; G.F. Moore, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era (New York: Schocken, 1971) 1.86; S.R. Driver, An Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament (New York: Meridian, 1957) i-xi; O. Eissfeldt, The Old Testament. An Introduction (New York: Harper & Row, 1965) 564-68. 3 On the origin of this idea see D.E. Aune, "On the Origins of the , Council of Yavneh' Myth," JBL 110(1991) 491-93, who traces the idea of "a council of Pharisees" to Spinoza, and the location at Yavneh to Heinrich Graetz. 4 The history of the "Alexandrian Canon" hypothesis has been chronicled by A.C. Sundberg, The Old Testament of the Early Church (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1964). 5 Sundberg, The Old Testament, 102-03.

scrutiny and the hypothesis of a Council of Jamnia has been very widely rejected. 6 The Council of Jamnia The discussion of the "Council of Jamnia," however, involves a number of distinct issues, which should be treated with discrimination. The evidence is as follows. Before the fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE, R. Johanan ben Zakkai established an academy at Jamnia (Yavneh) which proceeded to function like a Sanhédrin in the period between the Jewish revolts (70-132 CE). Johanan was succeeded by R. Gamaliel II. Somewhere between 80 and 117 CE Gamaliel was deposed for a time, and Eleazar ben Azariah was installed as head of the academy. The Mishnah reports that on the day of the installation of Eleazar, the sages ruled that both Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes "make the hands unclean," that is, are holy books. The same passage states that "all the Holy Scriptures render the hands unclean," and so it is clear that the point at issue was whether Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes ranked among the Holy Scriptures. This passage is followed by a series of enactments introduced by the phrase "on that day" (m. Tadaim 3:5-4:4). Later tradition (b. Berakot 28a) claimed that every ruling introduced by the phrase "on that day" was made on that occasion. 7 Consequently, the impression arose that there was a single session which made definitive decisions in the manner of the later Church Councils. This impression is misleading. The deliberations at Jamnia were closer to the character of a school, academy, or court. 8 The celebrated discussion of Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs, in Mishnah Tadaim 3:5, only records that there was some dispute about the status of these books, and in fact such disputes were not terminated by the decisions at Jamnia. Some later rabbis, notably R. Meir (135-170) denied that Eccle6

J.P. Lewis, "What Do We Mean by Jabnch?" Journal of Bible and Religion 32(1964) 125-32 (reprinted in S.Z. Leiman, ed.. The Canon and Masorah of the Hebrew Bible. An Introductory Reader [New York: Ktav, 1974] 254-61); S. Z. Leiman, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture (Hamden, CT: Archon, 1975) 120-24; P. Schäfer, "Die sogenannte Synode von Jabne," Judaica 31(1975) 54-64; 116-24; G. Stcmbergcr, "Die sogenannte 'Synode von Jabnc' und das frühe Christentum," Kairos 19(1977) 14-21; R. Bcckwith, The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church and Its Background in Early Judaism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985) 276-77; J. Barton, Oracles of God: Perceptions of Ancient Prophecy in Israel after the Exile (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986) 24. 7 J.P. Lewis, "Jamnia (Jabnch), Council of," Anchor Bible Dictionary 3. 634-7. This claim has been shown to be untenable. See Leiman, The Canonization of Hebreiv Scriptures, 122. " Lewis, , Jamnia," 636.

siastes defiled the hands. 9 There is no evidence that the status of other Writings was debated, or that a final decision regarding the canon was reached at Jamnia. The notion of a Council ofJamnia, on the analogy of the Church Councils, is properly discredited. The Jamnia hypothesis, however, admits of a looser formulation. Sundberg, who defended the hypothesis, used the "Council" as "a loose term designating the decisions of the Pharisaic schools that gathered at Jamnia and gained ascendancy in Judaism following the fall of Jerusalem." 10 He also recognized "that the actions of the schools of Jamnia were not official decisions. Probably there was no body in Judaism that functioned in an 'official5 capacity after the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70."" While the term "Council" is unsatisfactory, the deliberations at Jamnia in the period between the revolts had an important bearing on the emergence of the biblical canon. The word "canon" is admittedly anachronistic in this context. It is first applied to a definite list of scriptural books in fourth century Christianity, 12 and carries the connotation "rule of faith" as well as "fixed number. ‫ יי‬The kind of authority ascribed to these books in a Jewish context was somewhat different. Nonetheless, for the sake of convenience we may follow standard usage and use the term "canon" to mean that a specific number of books is recognized as qualitatively different from other literature and endowed with a normative status for a religious community. In the case of Scripture, the authority of the literature derives from divine inspiration. 13 A fixed number of books The delimitation of a fixed number of biblical books is in fact first attested at the end of the first century, when the academy at Jamnia was in session.14 In his tract Against Apian, written in the last decade of 9

Leiman, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture, 123. Sundberg, The Old Testament, 113. 11 Ibid., 127. 12 The earliest usage in this sense is usually attributed to Athanasius, in his Defence of the Nicene ΰφηίύοη 18.1-2 (c. 350 CE) and his Festal Letter (367 CE). Cf. also the Council of Laodicea, canon 59 (c. 360 CE). See W. Beyer, "κανών," TO/VT 3(1965) 601; L M . McDonald, The Formation of the Christian Biblical Canon (Nashville: Abingdon, 1988) 43. A posssible earlier occurrence is found in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 6.25.3-5, but there the word may mean "norm" rather than list of Scriptures. 13 Leiman, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture, 14-15, distinguishes between canonical literature, such as the Mishnah or Talmud, and the inspired canonical literature of the Bible. 14 The argument of Beckwith (The Old Testament Canon, 238, following R.H. Charles) that a reference to twenty two books has been lost from the Book ofJubilees 10

the first century CE, the Jewish historian Josephus sets out to refute the detractors of his people. The first point at issue is the antiquity of the Jews and the reliability of their records. After some disparaging remarks about the trustworthiness of the Greeks as antiquarians, he emphasizes the care with which Jewish records are preserved. "With us," he says, "it is not open to everybody to write the records." This privilege was reserved for prophets, guided by divine inspiration. Consequently "there is no discrepancy in what is written." He goes on: we d o not possess myriads of inconsistent books, conflicting with each other. O u r books, those which are justly accredited, are b u t two a n d twenty, a n d contain the record of all time. O f these, five are the books of Moses, comprising the laws and the traditional history f r o m the birth of m a n d o w n to the d e a t h of the lawgiver. T h i s period falls only a little short of three t h o u s a n d years. F r o m the d e a t h of Moses until Artaxerxes, w h o succeeded X e r x e s as king of Persia, the prophets subsequent to Moses wrote the history of the events of their own times in thirteen books. T h e r e m a i n i n g four books contain h y m n s to G o d a n d precepts for the c o n d u c t of h u m a n life. F r o m Artaxerxes to o u r o w n time the complete history has been written, but has not b e e n d e e m e d w o r t h y of equal credit with the earlier records, because of the failure of the exact succession of the p r o p h e t s (Against Apion 1.37-41).

This passage in Josephus is most probably the earliest witness to the notion that only a specific number of books were "justly accredited" among the Jews. A similar idea is found in the apocalypse of 4 Ezra, which is roughly contemporary with the tract Against Apion. This apocalypse envisages a situation where "thy law has been burned and so no one knows the things that have been done or will be done by thee" (4 Ezra 14:21). Ezra is given a fiery liquid to drink, which causes his heart, and mouth, to pour forth understanding. Five scribes write down what he says, so that over a period of forty days ninety four books are written. Then Ezra is told: M a k e public the twenty-four books that you wrote first a n d let the w o r t h y a n d the u n w o r t h y read them; b u t keep the seventy that were written last, in o r d e r to give t h e m to the wise a m o n g your people. For in t h e m is the spring of understanding, the fountain of wisdom, a n d the river of knowledge (4 Ezra 14:45-47).

While 4 Ezra differs sharply from Josephus in the claim that the hidden books contain the higher wisdom, it shares the notion of a special category of books, limited to a specific number. It is generally assumed that Josephus > 22 books are the same as 4 Ezra's 24, though counted differently. Some later authorities, such as Origen and (second century BCE) at 2:23 must be rejected. Sec J.C. VanderKam, The Book of Jubilees (Louvain: Peeters, 1989) 2.13-14.

Jerome, count Judges-Ruth and Jeremiah-Lamentations each as one book, for a total of 22, while 24 is the standard number in Talmudic sources.15 We know from Antiquities book 11 that Josephus included the book of Esther, which has not been found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, and is also missing from the lists of Melito of Sardis in the second century and of Athanasius in the fourth. On the other hand, we cannot assume that Josephus' canon was identical with our Hebrew Bible, since he narrates the contest between Darius' guards, which is only found in the apocryphal book of 1 Esdras (1 Esdr 3; cf. Ant. 11.33). This may be an issue of text rather than of canon; 1 Esdras may not have been regarded as a different book from EzraNehemiah. While some uncertainty remains, however, 4 Ezra and Josephus, taken together, constitute strong evidence that a "canon," in the sense of a fixed number of authoritative books, had been established, at least in some circles, by the end of the first century. The antiquity of the canon What was the origin of this "canon"? The theory that it was promulgated by the sages at Jamnia has been shown to lack supporting evidence, but the same can be said of any other theory. Several recent works have argued that the Hebrew canon was closed before the turn of the era. Sid Leiman suggested that the activity of Judas Maccabee, as described in 2 Macc 2:14-15 "may, in fact, be a description of the closing of the Hagiographa, and with it, the entire biblical canon." 16 The passage in question reads: "In the same way Judah also collected all the books that had been lost on account of the war which had come upon us, and they are in our possession. So if you have need of them, send people to get them for you." Beckwith goes further and asks: w h a t is m o r e likely t h a n that, in gathering together the Scriptures, h e a n d his c o m p a n i o n s the Hasidim classified complete collection in the w a y which f r o m that time traditional, dividing the miscellaneous non-Mosaic writings Prophets a n d the o t h e r Books? 17

scattered the now became into the

But 2 Maccabees says nothing whatever about canonization. It only says that Judas collected "all the books that had been lost on account of the war." There is no suggestion that he distinguished between books that were canonical and others that were not, much less that he introduced distinctions within a canonical corpus. In fact, all the 15

See Leiman, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture, 32. Ibid, 29. 17 Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon, 152. 16

available evidence suggests that the category of Scriptures, or authoritative writings, was open-ended throughout the Second Temple period. This is not to say that there was no recognition of authoritative Scriptures. The formation of the Hebrew canon was a lengthy process, which can be traced back to the promulgation of "the book of the law" in the reform ofjosiah (621 BCE).18 Ezra is often credited with giving the Torah, or Pentateuch, its final shape.19 The books of Ezra and Nehemiah, however, make no mention of the Day of Atonement, although Nehemiah 8 describes the liturgical observances of the seventh month, especially the Feast of Booths. The omission indicates that the Pentateuch had not yet reached its final form, although Ezra presupposes other priestly laws, and must have had something close to the Torah as we know it.20 The prophetic corpus took shape somewhere in the Persian or early Hellenistic period. The first clear witness to a canon, in the sense of an accepted corpus of authoritative scripture, is found in the prologue to Ben Sira. The prologue was written by Sirach's grandson, who had migrated to Egypt in 132 BCE, in the thirty eighth year of Euergetes II. The prologue was written some time later, possibly after the death of that king in 117 BCE.21 It begins with the following statement: Many great teachings have been given to us through the Law and the Prophets and the others that followed them, and for these we should praise Israel for instruction and wisdom...So my grandfather Jesus, who had devoted himself especially to the reading of the Law and Prophets and the other books of our ancestors, and had acquired considerable proficiency in them, was himself also led to write something pertaining to instruction and wisdom.

It has been widely assumed that this statement implies a tri-partite canon, 22 but in fact it is not at all clear that "the other books of our ‫ "י‬Leiman, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture, 16. Leiman goes on to adduce evidence for pre-Deuteronomic "written and canonical law corpora" (p. 19), but "canonical" here means little more than "authoritative." 19 E.g. G.W. Anderson, "Canonical and Non-Canonical," in P. Ackroyd and C.F. Evans, ed., The Cambridge History of the Bible I. From the Beginnings to Jerome (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970) 122-23. 20 J. Blenkinsopp, Ezra-Nehemiah. A Commentary (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1988) 157, 291. 21 P.W. Skchan and A.A. DiLella, The Wisdom of Ben Sira (AB 39; Garden City: Doubleday, 1987) 134, following Rudolf Smcnd, Die Weisheit des Jesus Sirach erklärt (Berlin: Reimer, 1906) 3-4, who argues that the aorist participle, συγχρονίσας, "having been a contemporary," implies that the passage was written after the king's reign had come to an end. 22 So Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon, 111; E E . Ellis, The Old Testament in Early Christianity (WUNT 54; Tübingen: Mohr, 1991), 9.

ancestors" constitute a canonical category. They are simply "other traditional writings." 23 The category is open-ended and, according to the grandson, Sirach himself felt free to contribute to it. The Jewish writings to which Sirach alludes are quite limited. He wrote at some time in the first quarter of the second century BCE, before the composition of most of the books we know as Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha and of the Book of Daniel. He also shows no awareness of some older writings that were eventually accepted as biblical, such as Ruth, Song of Songs, Esther or, most surprisingly, Ezra (although he praises Nehemiah in Sir 49:13).24 Even writings on which he draws freely, such as Proverbs, are not necessarily distinguished as qualitatively different from other religious writings. They are traditional, but not necessarily canonical in the later sense of the term. There is no doubt that the book of the Torah is of fundamental importance to him, (witness his bold identification of the Book of the Law with Wisdom in 24:23) and that he draws heavily on traditional Jewish literature. 25 There is also, however, evidence of dependence on non-Jewish wisdom texts: there are numerous points of contact with the Greek gnomic poet Theognis, 26 and with the Demotic wisdom book of Phibis, preserved in Papyrus Insinger.27 The ideal sage not only devotes himself to the study of the law of the Most High, but seeks out the wisdom of all the ancients (Sir 39:1). There is in Sirach what we might call a "canon consciousness" with respect to the Torah, but there is no sense of a closed canon beyond the books of Moses. It is commonly inferred that the collection of Prophets was closed by Sirach's time, and that the inference is confirmed by the fact that Daniel was not included in the Prophets in the Hebrew Bible. This inference, too, is unsafe. T o be sure, Sirach knew all the prophets of the Hebrew Bible, and refers to the Twelve as such. In his review of Israelite history in the "Praise of the Fathers," however, it is not apparent, that he makes any distinction between the prophetic books and Nehemiah. In the New Testament period, David was often regarded as a prophet and the Psalms as prophecy (e.g. Acts 2:30). In short we cannot tell just how much material was categorized 23

See the remarks of Barton, Oracles of God, 47. Skehan and DiLella, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 41; Leiman, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture, 29. 25 See E.J. Schnabel, Law and Wisdom fiom Ben Sira to Paul (Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1985) 69-73, 26 T. Middendorp, Die Stellung Jesu Ben Siros zwischen Judentum und Hellenismus (Leiden: Brill, 1973) 15-22; J . T . Sanders, Ben Sira and Demotic Wisdom (Chico: Scholars Press, 1983) 29-38. 27 Sanders, Ben Sira and Demotic Wisdom, 61-106. 24

under "The Prophets" in Ben Sira's time.28 Daniel, too, is often identified as a prophet in antiquity. 4QF10ri1egium (4ÇH 74) 2:4 speaks of "the book of Daniel the Prophet," Matt 24:15 refers to "the prophet Daniel, ‫ יי‬and Josephus regards him as "one of the greatest prophets" {Ant 10.11.7 §266-68). While Daniel is not included in the prophets in the Masoretic Bible, it is quite possible that the book was classified as prophetic in antiquity, or that the line between prophets and writings was not clearly drawn. 29 Most of our witnesses through the New Testament period attest a bi-partite rather than a tri-partite division of the scriptures: so Matt 5:17; 7:12; 11:13; 16:16; 22:40; Luke 16:29-31; Acts 13:15; 24:14; 28:23; Rom 3:21. The normal reference is to "The Law and the Prophets. 30 ' ‫ י‬Luke 24:44 is exceptional in the N T in referring to "the law of Moses, the prophets and the psalms." A similar view of Scripture is implied in Philo's account of the Therapeutae {De vita contemplativa §25) he says that in each house they had a consecrated room into which they took nothing but "laws and oracles delivered through the mouth of the prophets, and psalms and anything else which fosters and perfects knowledge and piety." This passage is often cited as evidence for a tri-partite canon, 31 but the last category "anything else" is clearly open-ended. As in Luke, there is recognition that the Psalms belong among the holy scriptures, but there is nothing to indicate how either the Therapeutae or Philo delimited the books of the prophets. Philo's own usage of scripture is predominantly focused on the Torah, which he cites forty times as often as the books of the Prophets and Hagiographa combined. 32 Here again there is recognition that the Torah is in a class by itself, but that prophetic and other books are also of value, without any clear demarcation of the latter categories. The boundary between the Prophets and the other Writings remains a problem in the passage from Josephus quoted above. Josephus assigns 13 books to the prophetic corpus, and only four to the Writings. The latter four are most plausibly identified as Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs. On this reckoning, EzraNehemiah, Chronicles, Esther and Job must be assigned to the

29

Barton, Oracles of God, 48. See Klaus Koch, "Is Daniel also among the Prophets?" Int 39(1985) 117-30; Barton, Oracles of God, 35-37 30 Barton, Oracles of God, 35. 31 E.g. Leiman, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture, 31; Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon, 117; Ellis, The Old Testament, 8-9. 32 Leiman, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture, 31. 29

Prophets. 33 Such an alignment corresponds neither to the Hebrew nor to Greek Bibles as they emerged in later tradition. Diverse Scriptures The evidence, then, for the period before 70 CE points to a core canon, consisting of the Torah and Prophets, which was universally accepted, although the precise definition of the prophetic corpus seems to have varied, and an open-ended supplement of "other writings" was also acknowledged. It is quite possible that some group or groups delimited the "other writings" exacdy as Josephus and 4 Ezra did. Already in the nineteenth century Frants Buhl argued that we cannot possibly assume that the representation which Josephus, residing in Rome shordy after the Synod of Jamnia, gives of the contents and idea of the canon must have been influenced by the decisions of the Synod.

Instead, "it is highly probable that Josephus in his Apology reported simply the teaching of the Pharisees of his times."34 More recendy Frank Cross has also argued that Josephus was drawing on Pharisaic tradition, and has further suggested that both text and canon were fixed under the auspices of Hillel, in the early first century CE. He cites a saying from the Talmud (Sukkah 20a) that When Israel forgot the Torah, Ezra came up from Babylon and reestablished it; and when Israel once again forgot the Torah, Hillel the Babylonian came up and reestablished it,

but the point of this saying is usually taken, quite satisfactorily, to refer to the interpretation of the Torah, rather than to the canon. 35 A more weighty consideration can be found in the account of the dispute about Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs in the Mishnah: "Ecclesiastes is among the lenient decisions of the School of Shammai and among the stringent decisions of the School of Hillel" (m. Tadaim 3:5; cf. Megillah 7a). The ruling at Jamnia affirmed the teaching of the house of Hillel. This would seem to suggest that the status of particular books had been discussed in the disputes between the houses of Hillel and Shammai before 70 CE, and that the sages at Jamnia only needed to address a few outstanding disputes. 33

So Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon, 80, Buhl, Canon and Text, 25. 35 F.M. Cross, "The Text Behind the Text of the Hebrew Bible," Bible Review 1(1985) 13-25. 34

Hillel, however, did not speak for all Judaism. There is good evidence that other strands of Judaism had a wider body of Scriptures than did the Pharisees. One corpus of evidence in this regard is constituted by the Greek Bible inherited by early Christianity. There is considerable variation in the manuscripts and in the lists cited by the Church Fathers, and so it is inappropriate to speak of an Alexandrian canon. The most frequent additional books are those that came to be designated Apocrypha after the Reformation: Tobit, Judith, Sirach, Wisdom of Solomon, 1-2 Maccabees, Baruch, Letter of Jeremiah, 1-2 Esdras, Prayer of Manasseh and the additions to Esther and Daniel. Others that are sometimes included are 3-4 Maccabees, Psalm 151 and the Psalms of Solomon. While 2 Esdras and possibly 4 Maccabees were composed after 70 CE, the others had presumably won status in Jewish circles before they were adopted by Christians. It is difficult to see why books such as Judith or 1 Maccabees should have been accepted as Scripture by Christians if they were not so recognized in some Jewish circles. Presumably these were the books that enjoyed Scriptural status in the Diaspora, even if they were never formalized as a canon. New light has now been shed on the Scriptures of the land of Israel by the publication of the Dead Sea Scrolls.36 The evidence of the Scrolls for the canon has often been discounted on the grounds that they only represent a sectarian view. There is indeed compelling evidence that the collection as a whole has a sectarian character. 37 It has a predilection for sectarian rule-books (12 copies of the Community Rule, 7 of the Damascus Document) and books of a Hasmonean or Pharisaic stamp (the books of Maccabees, Judith, Psalms of Solomon) are conspicuously absent. Nonetheless, as the extent of the collection becomes clear, it is apparent that not all the writings were distinctively sectarian. 3 " It has been estimated that about a thousand documents were hidden in the caves. Fragments of some 900 survive, although only about 660 are sufficiently well preserved to permit a characterization of their content. 39 While this corpus is 36 Ε. Τον, with Stephen Pfann, The Dead Sea Scroll·, on Microfiche (Leiden: Brill, 1993); F. Garcia Martinez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated (Leiden:' Brill, 1994). 3 ' For the debate on the provenance of the Scrolls see N. Golb, "Who Hid the Dead Sea Scrolls?" BA 48(1985) 68-82; F. Garcia Martinez, "A 'Groningen' Hypothesis of Qumran Origins and Early History," RevQ 14(1990) 521-41; J.C. VanderKam, The Dead Sea Scrolls Today (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994) 71-98. M On the problem of distinguishing sectarian literature, see C.A. Newsom, " 'Sectually Explicit' Literature from Qumran," in W.H. Propp, B. Halpern and D.N. Freedman, ed., The Hebrew Bible and its Interpreters (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990) 167-87. Η. Stegemann, Die Essener, Qumran, Johannes der Täufer

not a random sampling of the literature of the time, much of it was surely known beyond the confines of the sect that preserved it. The evidence of the Scrolls The most explicit comment on the authoritative writings of the day is found in the so-called Halakhic Letter, 4 Q M M T . This document is addressed to a religious leader of Israel, most probably a High Priest, and it sets out the reasons why the community had separated itself from the majority of the people. It appeals to the leader to consider the validity of the sectarian interpretation of Scripture: "For on account of [these things] we have [written] for you that you may perceive in the book of Moses [and in the words of the projphets and in Davi[d ] from generation to generation. ‫ יי‬The statement refers to the familiar categories of the Law and the Prophets. David was widely regarded as a prophet, but he is singled out as the author of a special category (Psalms). These were the Scriptures that were presumed to be common to all Jews. 40 The canon that the sectarians shared with the authorities was basically a bi-partite canon, with the addition of Psalms. The fundamental importance of the revealed Torah at Qumran is beyond doubt. According to the "Well midrash" on Num 21:18 in the Damascus Document, "the Well is the Law, and those who dug it were the converts of Israel who went out of the land of Israel to sojourn in the land of Damascus...The Stave is the Interpreter of the Law..." 41 Similarly, the Community Rule instructs the sectarians to prepare in the wilderness the way of the Lord, and specifies that "this is the study of the Law which He commanded by the hand of Moses." 42 In 1 QS 8, the fundamental revelation of the Law is supplemented by "all that has been revealed from age to age" and by what "the Prophets have revealed by His Holy Spirit." The authoritative status of the Prophets, and the Psalms, is confirmed by the fact that they are subject to a special form of interpretation, in und Jesus (Fribourg: Herder, 1993) 116-93 regards only a small portion of the library as distinctively sectarian. 39 Stegemann, Die Essener, 113. 40 Suggestions that a reference to Chronicles, and so to the rest of the Writings, (Ellis, The Old Testament, 10) should be restored in the lacuna seem improbable. Chronicles is barely attested at Qumran, and there is no evidence that it enjoyed any special authority. 41 CD 6:2-11 (trans. G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Saolls in English [4th ed.; Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1995]) 101. The translation of the phrase ‫( טכי ישראל‬here: "converts of Israel") is disputed. Alternative renderings are "returnees of Israel" or "captivity of Israel." 42 1QS 8:14-15.

the pesharim, which apply the words of the prophets to the experiences of the community at the end of days. The pesher mode of interpretation could be applied to prophetic passages in the Torah as well as to the prophetic books as can be seen from the pesher on Genesis 49 in 4Q252. There is also a pesher on Psalms, and Daniel is interpreted in pesher-like manner in the Florilegium and in the Melchizedek scroll, but none of the other Writings is interpreted in this way. This suggests that Psalms and Daniel were regarded as prophetic books, even if Psalms was understood to constitute a special category in 4 Q M M T . This view of the emerging canon corresponds with what we know from other sources for the period between the Maccabees and the fall ofJerusalem in 70 CE. The common view of authoritative Scriptures, however, is modified in a number of ways by the Scrolls. First there is the existence of variant texts. Examples include a text of Exodus that corresponds to the Samaritan recension, except that it lacks the distinctively Samaritan mention o f M t . Gerizim at Exod 20:1743 and a text of Jeremiah that agrees with the short recension found in the Septuagint. 44 The most controversial example is provided by the Psalms Scroll from Cave 11.45 This scroll contains most of the last third of the Psalter but in an unconventional arrangement. It also includes a poem identical with 2 Sam 23:1-7 ("the last words of David") and several apocryphal psalms: Psalm 151 (a variant of the corresponding Psalm in the Greek psalter), Pss. 154-55, which are also extant in Syriac, and a poem related to Sir 51:13-19, 30. There are also three psalms which were previously unknown: "A Plea for Deliverance," "Apostrophe to Zion," and a "Hymn to the Creator." There is also a prose catalogue of David's compositions, placed neither at the beginning nor at the end (it is followed by Pss. 140:15, 134:1-3 and Psalm 151). The editor of this scroll, James Sanders, regarded it as a portion of the Davidic Psalter.46 The inclusion of "the last words of David" 43

P.W. Skehan, "Qumran and the Present State of Old Testament Text Studies: The Masoretic Text," JBL 78(1959) 21-25. See the study of the scroll by Judith E. Sanderson, An Exodus Scrollfrom Qumran: 4QpaleoExodm and the Samaritan Tradition (HSS 30; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986) and the official publication in P.W. Skehan, E. Ulrich and J.E. Sanderson, Qumran Cave 4. IV. Palaeo-Hebrew and Greek Biblical Manuscripts (DJD 9; Oxford: Clarendon, 1992) 53-130. 44 Ε. Τον, "The Literary History of the Book of Jeremiah in the Light of its Textual History," inJ.H. Tigay, ed., Empirical Models for Biblical History (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1985) 213-37. 45 J.A. Sanders, The Psalms Scroll of Qumran Cave 11 (llQPs*) (DJD 4; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1965). 46 Sanders has often defended this view. See e.g. "The Psalms Scroll from Qumran [1 lQPs a ] Reviewed," in On Language, Culture and Religion. In Honor of ΕΛ. Nida

and the prose catalogue suggest that the entire collection was regarded as Davidic. There is no distinction in the scroll between canonical and non-canonical material. Sanders infers that the content and order of the Psalter had not yet been finalized in this period. This conclusion was vigorously disputed by such scholars as M. Goshen-Gottstein, 47 S. Talmon 4 8 and P. Skehan, 49 who suggested that it was merely a collection for liturgical use, without implications for the canon. It is difficult to see, however, why a catalogue of David's works should be included in a liturgical collection. It is probably true that the scroll was not viewed as definitive or canonical; the question is whether any collection of Psalms was so viewed in this period. Whatever use was made of the Psalms scroll, no distinction was made between canonical and apocryphal compositions. Sanders has had the better of the argument: the Psalter was still fluid at Qumran. 5 0 It should be noted that the Psalms Scroll shows no signs of distinctively sectarian interests. Since some of the additional material is also found in other manuscript traditions (Pss 151, 154-5) we must conclude that variation in the Psalter was not peculiar to Qumran. Another more perplexing kind of variation is presented by the Temple Scroll. This document weaves together related but different legal texts, mainly from Deuteronomy and Leviticus, often with new interpretations. 51 It is presented as a first person address of God to Moses, so that it becomes in effect a new Torah. The status of this document vis-a-vis the traditional Torah remains one of the puzzles of the Dead Sea Scrolls. In view of the first person divine speech, one assumes that if the document was accepted at all it was accepted as divine revelation. T h e divine name is written in square script, as it is in biblical books (e.g. Isaiah), not in palaeo-Hebrew script as in the pesharim. Yadin took this as evidence that the Temple Scroll (M. Black and B. Smalley, eds.; The Hague: Mouton, 1974) 19-99. • 7 M . Goshen-Gottstein, "The Psalms Scroll (11QPs»)—A Problem of Canon and Text," Textus 5(1966) 73-78; 48 S. Talmon, "Extra-Canonical Psalms from Qumran—Psalm 151," in idem., The World of Qumran from Within (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1989) 244-72, (originally published in Hebrew, Tarbiz 35[1966] 214-34). 49 "Qumran and Old Testament Criticism," in Qumrân: sa piété, sa théologie et son milieu (BETL 46; ed. M. Delcor; Gemblouz: Duculot, 1978) 163-82. 50 See the review of the debate by G.H. Wilson, "The Qumran Psalms Scroll Reconsidered: Analysis of the Debate," CBQ, 47(1985) 624-42, and the full treatment of the issues by P.W. Flint, "The Psalters at Qumran and the Book of Psalms," (Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Notre Dame, 1993, to be published by Brill). 51 O n the sources of the Temple Scroll see M.O. Wise, A Critical Study of the Temple Saollfiom Qumran Cave 11 (Chicago: The Oriental Institute, 1990).

enjoyed the status of scripture at Qumran. 5 2 Ben Zion Wacholder goes farther, and argues that the author of the Temple Scroll "set out to rival Moses, hoping to succeed where his predecessor had failed" and infers that it was the Torah of the Qumran community. 53 It does, in fact, emphasize matters which are highlighted elsewhere in sectarian documents, such as marital impurity, the purity of the Sanctuary, and sinful wealth, and it presupposes the sectarian 364 day calendar. Yet there is no clear reference to it in the other sectarian literature, in contrast to the abundance of references to the traditional Torah. Yadin's suggestion that the Temple Scroll is "The Book of Meditation" referred to in the Damascus Document and lQSa is not compelling: 54 the book in question is more likely to be the traditional Torah. Some scholars have argued that the Temple Scroll is not a product of the Qumran sect at all, but is rather a traditional pseudepigraphon like Jubilees, that shares some common traditions with the sect.55 Larry Schiffman makes the noteworthy observation that "whereas the other texts from Qumran see the extrabiblical material as derived from inspired biblical exegesis, the author of the Temple Scroll sees it as inherent in the biblical text." 56 It makes no reference to a ‫ י ח ד‬or distinct sectarian organization. Given the extensive correspondence with the sectarian scrolls on halakhic issues, however, the Scroll should be regarded as sectarian, at least in a broad sense. While it was not necessarily produced in or for the ‫ י ח ל‬of the Community Rule, it represents the reformist strands ofJudaism from which that community emerged. It has been suggested that the Temple Scroll is a new Torah for the New Age.57 On this view, the hidden sense of the Law was partially disclosed in such documents as 1QS and CD, but would be available to all surviving Jews in the end-time in a new Torah. This suggestion is unsatisfactory, however. The end-time in the Scrolls is 52

Y. Yadin, The Temple Scroll. The Hidden Law of the Dead Sea Sect (New York: Random House, 1985) 68. 53 B.Z. Wacholder, The Dawn of Qumran (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 1983) 228. 54 Y. Yadin, The Temple Scroll (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1983) 1.394. 55 H. Stegemann, "Das Land in der Tempelrolle und in anderen Texten aus den Qumranfunden," in Das Land Israel in biblischer £eit (G. Strecker, ed.; Göttingen: Vandcnhoeck & Ruprecht. 1983) 154-71; L.H. Schiffman, Sectarian Law in the Dead Sea Saolls (Chico: Scholars Press, 1983) 17. 56 Schiffman, ibid. 57 M. Fishbanc, "Use, Authority and Interpetation of Mikra at Qumran," in M. J . Mulder, ed., Mikra. Text, Translation, Reading and Interpretation of the Hebrew Bible, in Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity (CRINT 2.1; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988) 365. Wise, A Critical Study, 167-79; "The Eschatological Vision of the Temple Scroll," JNES 49(1990) 155-72.

associated with the coming of the messiah, but the king envisaged in the Temple Scroll is conspicuously lacking in messianic traits.58 The Scroll presents a law for this age rather than for the end of days. It is a reformist proposal. We do not know whether its author hoped that it would replace the traditional Torah. If he did, he was disappointed. Those who preserved the Scroll presumably read it in conjunction with the Torah, perhaps interpreting the Torah in its light. The problem presented by the Temple Scroll is extreme, because of the use of divine speech, but analogous problems are presented by a number of other documents. 59 One, known long before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, is the book of Jubilees. Here we have a document, supposedly revealed to Moses by an angel, which covers the same ground as the Book of Genesis but is often at variance with the biblical text. The variation may be understood as making explicit what was thought to be implicit in the text (e.g. the 364 day calendar), but nonetheless it involves an amazing freedom. Some of the novel elements, such as the role of Mastema or Satan, have really no exegetical basis in the biblical text. Jubilees does not challenge the traditional Torah. Rather it provides a complementary revelation which could serve as a guide for the interpretation of the older document, to which it refers as "the first law" (Jub 6:22). Yet it is presented as an independent revelation, not as a midrash or commentary. In this case we have evidence that it was accepted as an authoritative document by some Jews in antiquity. CD 16:2-4 says that the exact determination of the times is stricdy defined in the Book of the Divisions of the Times into their Jubilees and Weeks, and this is surely none other than the book of Jubilees. It is cited as an authoritative source, and there are no grounds for the claim that its authority is less than that of other scriptures. Fragments of at least 14 copies of Jubilees have been found at Qpmran. Only five biblical books (Genesis, Exodus, Deuteronomy, Isaiah and Psalms) are represented by more manuscripts. 60 Jubilees later became part of the canon of the Christian Church in Ethiopia. Various parts of 1 Enoch are also represented in multiple copies at Qumran. 1 Enoch is cited in the New Testament in Jude 14-15, is 58

11QTempIe 57:1-59:11. See my remarks in "Teacher and Messiah. The One Who Will Teach Righteousness at the End of Days," in E. Ulrich andJ.C. VanderKam, ed., The Community of the Renewed Covenant. The Notre Dame Symposium on the Dead Sea Saolls (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1994) 193-210. 59 See J Strugnell, "Moses-Pseudepigrapha at Qumran," in L.H. Schiffman, ed., Archeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls ( Sheffield: J S O T , 1990) 221-56; Ε. Τον, "The Bible as Reworked, Expanded, and Rephrased in the Qumran Manuscripts," in Ulrich and VanderKam, ed., The Community of the Renewed Covenant, 111-34. 60 See VanderKam, The Dead Sea Saolls Today, 153-55.

cited as Scripture in Barnabas 16:5 and, like Jubilees, was later canonical in the Ethiopian Church. The fact that Enoch and Jubilees survived in Christian circles suggests that they were known more widely than most of the writings found at Qumran. Beckwith has argued that apocryphal books are not cited with such formulae as "it is written" in the Scrolls, but the argument is tendentious. 61 T h e Damascus Document cites a Levi apocryphon with the phrase "of which Levi son of Jacob spoke," but it also introduces biblical citations with the phrases "Moses said" and "Isaiah said." The so-called Testimonia (4Q175) draws passages not only from Deuteronomy and Numbers, but also from the apocryphal Psalms of Joshua. 62 The evidence is sporadic and incomplete, but it is apparent that at least some apocryphal compositions could be cited as authoritative sources. In addition to the few cases where documents are cited, the Scrolls contain a huge corpus of previously unknown writings.63 Many of these writings are not distinctively sectarian. Some, such as the Genesis Apocryphon or the Pseudo-Ezekiel text are adaptations of a biblical prototype. Others, such as the Testaments of Amram and Qahat, are independent pseudepigrapha. In some cases, such as the Pseudo-Daniel literature, it is uncertain whether the fragments represent a re-working of a biblical text or are independent compositions that happen to share common themes and figures with the more familiar Scriptures. At least some of this literature is presented in the form of divine revelation. While we cannot be sure whether or how far these compositions were regarded as authoritative, we must bear in mind that some of the biblical Writings are poorly attested at Qumran. All the books of the Hebrew Bible except Esther have been found among the scrolls,64 but Chronicles is represented by a single scrap. If Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs or Ruth were not known to us as part of the traditional Bible, there would be no reason to think that they were Scripture at Qumran. We have seen that the Writings generally 61

Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon, 75, 358-66. C.A. Ncwsom, "'The 'Psalms of Joshua' from Q u m r a n Cave 4," JJS 39(1988) 56-73. Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon, 75, cites the view of I.H. Eybers that "it would be rash to suppose that it is the Q u m r a n work which is being put side by side with the Pentateuch, rather than the canonical Joshua," but, again, the argument is tendentious and depends on presuppositions about the canon. See I.H. Eybers, "Some Light on the Canon of the Q u m r a n Sect," in Leiman, ed., The Canon and Masorah of the Hebrew Bible, 34. 63 See D. Dimant, "Apocalyptic Texts at Q u m r a n , " in Ulrich and VanderKam, ed., The Community of the Renewed Covenant, 175-91. 64 F.M. Cross," The Ancient Library of Qumran (Garden City: Doublcday, 1961) 40. 62

carried less authority than the Torah and the Prophets. There is no evidence that there was a clear distinction between canonical and non-canonical Writings at Qumran. Jamnia revisited Most of the writings hidden in the caves near the Dead Sea disappeared from the scene of history and played no further part in Jewish or Christian life. Most of the Apocrypha, and all the GrecoJewish literature, vanished from the tradition passed on by the rabbis. Ben Sira is the only one of the traditional Apocrypha cited in the rabbinic corpus, although mention is made of the otherwise unknown works of Ben La'aga (‫ין‬. Sanhédrin 28a) and Ben Tagla (.Koheleth Rabbah 12:12). Origen, in his Letter to Africanus 13, acknowledges the currency of the book of Maccabees, outside the canon, but adds that the Jews not only do not use Tobit and Judith, but do not even have them "in the Hebrew apocrypha." We need not infer that the Hebrew apocrypha was a well-defined category. The point is simply that Tobit and Judith were not current in Hebrew (or Aramaic) in Origen's time. Origen also mentions a "Letter" that appears as part of Jeremiah in the Hebrew but is usually found separately in the Greek. The reference is presumably to the Episde of Jeremiah. 65 Apart from these cases, however, there is remarkably litde controversy about the status of apocryphal writings in the rabbinic tradition. In this shrinking of the corpus of religious literature we discover the true significance of Jamnia for the formation of the canon. Shaye Cohen has argued that Jamnia marked the end ofjewish sectarianism: 'Pharisaic triumph' is not a useful description of the events at Yavneh. Perhaps many, if not most, of the sages there assembled were Pharisees or the descendants of Pharisees, but they made little of their ancestry.. .Yavneh was a grand coalition of different groups and parties, held together by the belief that sectarian self-identification was a thing of the past.

But even this inclusive vision had its limits: Those who refused to join the coalition and insisted on sectarian selfidentification were branded minim and cursed. Those rabbis who could not learn the rules of pluralism and mutual tolerance were banned. 66 65 On the original language of the Episde see C.A. Moore, Daniel, Esther and Jeremiah. The Additions (AB 44; Garden City: Doubleday, 1977) 326-7. 66 S.J.D. Cohen, "The Significance of Yavneh: Pharisees, Rabbis, and the End of Jewish Sectarianism," HUCA 55(1984) 50.

The strand of Judaism that is most prominent in the Dead Sea Scrolls could find no place at Jamnia, since it relied on claims of revelation that were not accepted by the rabbis. Moreover, if most of the rabbis at Jamnia were Pharisees, it was inevitable that Pharisaic opinions would prevail. So it was with the canon. If the twenty-two or twenty-four book canon had taken shape before 70 CE, as seems likely, it was the canon of a party, not of all Jews. After 70, through the influence ofJamnia, other Scriptures were ignored and lost. The rejection of other Scriptures cannot be entirely explained as benign neglect. A saying attributed to R. Akiba proclaimed that one who reads the outside books would have no share in the world to come (m. Sanhednn 10:1). The Talmud explains that "this means the books of the heretics" (b. Sanhednn 100b), which presumably included Christian literature. There is other evidence that Christian writings were specifically rejected: "The Gospels (hagilyonym) and the books of the heretics do not defile the hands" 67 and "the Gospels and the books of heretics are not to be rescued but allowed to burn where they are, names of God and all."68 Reasons can be imagined for excluding some of the Pseudepigrapha and sectarian writings.69 Most obviously, books that had been composed in Greek, such as the Wisdom of Solomon, did not qualify for consideration. Books such as Jubilees, 1 Enoch and the Temple Scroll would have been unacceptable to the Rabbis because of their calendrical teachings. There is no clear evidence that books were excluded because of apocalyptic content. R. Akiba, who pronounced the most severe ban on the "outside books" is credited with an ascent to Paradise (Hag 14b) and with endorsing Bar Kokhba as messiah (j. Ta'anit 4.8), and so he at least can not have been too negatively disposed toward apocalyptic speculation. 70 Yet the fact that the apocalypses relied on special revelations, the virtual equivalent of a voice from heaven, 71

67

Tosefta Yadaim 2:13. G.F. Moore, "The Definition of the Jewish Canon and the Repudiation of Christian Scriptures," in Leiman, ed., The Canon and Masorah 101. O n the word gilyon (alternatively awen gilyori] as a perversion of euaggelion, Gospel, see Moore, ibid., 105. 68 Tosefta Shabbath 13; Moore, "The Definition," 101. 69 S. Zeitlin, "An Historical Study of the Canonization of the Hebrew Scriptures," in Leiman, ed., The Canon and Masorah, 141-99; S.Z. Leiman, "Inspiration and Canonicity," in E.P. Sanders et al., ed., Jewish and Christian S(lf-Def1mtwn (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981 ) 2.56-63.; Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon, 367-69. 70 See the remarks of L. Ginzberg, "Some Observations on the Attitude of the Synagogue towards the Apocalyptic-Eschatological Writings," in Leiman, ed., Canon and Masorah, 142-63. 71 Compare the famous story in h. Baba Metzia 59b, which cites Deut 30:12 ("it is not in heaven") and concludes "we pay no attention to a heavenly voice, because

may have made them less than congenial to the rabbis, although Daniel was too well established to be questioned. T o a great degree, decisions on canonicity may have been determined by pragmatic rather than ideological considerations. 72 The only reason given in the rabbinic texts for the exclusion of books other than the books of the heretics is a late date of composition. Tosefta Tadaim 1:13, after pronouncing on the books of the heretics, adds "the books of the son of Sirach and all books that have been written since his time do not defile the hands." This point is related to the widespread, though not universal, view that prophetic inspiration had ceased in the Persian period. 73 At least it suggests that the Rabbis were aware of a difference between the age of Scripture and their own time. Such considerations may help explain the omission of a relatively recent book like 1 Maccabees. A more weighty concern, however, may have been the need to limit the number of books: "whoever brings into his house more than the twenty-four books introduces confusion into his house" (Ecclesiastes Rabbah 12:12). T h e books included were simply those that were most firmly established in the circles of the Sages who made the decisions. By restricting the number of "properly accredited" books the Sages provided a common frame of reference for their debates and reduced the risk of sectarian division. Their strategy played its part in ensuring the survival of Judaism in a time of crisis. Yet it also involved a goodly measure of loss. The writings retrieved in scraps from the caves of the Dead Sea may not quite contain "the spring of understanding, the fountain of wisdom and the river of knowledge" like the hidden books of 4 Ezra 14, but they do contain a rich and variegated picture of Jewish practices, beliefs and hopes in a period before Judaism and Christianity went their separate ways and sealed their identities in their different conceptions of the canon.

Thou hast long since written in the Torah at Sinai 'after the majority must one incline' (Exod 23:2). 72 Cohen, "The Significance of Yavneh," 17-53. 73 Josephus, Ag Ap 1:40-41; Tosefta Sota 13:2. See F.E. Greenspahn, "Why Prophecy Ceased," JBL 108(1989) 37-49.

PART O N E APOCALYPTICISM

CHAPTER T W O

GENRE, I D E O L O G Y AND SOCIAL M O V E M E N T S IN J E W I S H APOCALYPTICISM

1979 was a landmark year in the study of apocalypticism. In addition to the international conferences at Uppsala 1 and Louvain, 2 it saw the publication of several major studies: the study of the genre in Semeia 14,3 an influential article by Jean Carmignac 4 and the first of a series of studies on apocalypticism and the problem of evil by Paolo Sacchi. 5 Christopher Rowland's The Open Heaven was also completed, though not published in that year. 6 This outpouring reflected a build-up of interest in the subject over the previous decade, and involved attempts both to take stock of the field and to chart new courses. Some trends and points of convergence were evident in these studies of 1979. There was widespread agreement that a distinction should be made between the literary genre apocalypse and the wider, looser categories of "apocalyptic" or "apocalypticism." 7 The primary distinguishing mark of the genre was that the material was presented as revelation. Several of these studies emphasized the "vertical" aspects of apocalypticism: the interest in mysteries and in

1 D. Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tuhingen: Mohr, 1983). 2 J . Lambrecht, ed., L'Apocalypse johannique et l'apocalyptique dans le Nouveau Testament (BETL 53; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1980). 3 J.J. Collins, ed., Apocalypse. The Morphology of a Genre (Semeia 14; Missoula, M T : Scholars Press, 1979). 4 J . Carmignac, "Qu'est-ce que l'apocalyptique?" RevQ 10(1979-81) 3-33. 5 P. Sacchi, "D 'Libro dei Vigilant!' e l'apocalittica," Henoch 1(1979) 42-92. 6 C. Rowland, The Open Heaven. A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early Christianity (New York: Crossroad, 1983). Ithamar Gruenwald's study Apocalyptic and Merkauah Mysticism (AGJU 14; Leiden: Brill, 1980) appeared the following year. 7 This distinction was already made by Klaus Koch, The Rediscoveiy of Apocalyptic (SBT 2/22; Naperville, IL: Allenson, 1972) and taken up by Paul Hanson, "Apocalypse, Genre," "Apocalypticism," IDBSup 27-34. See also M.E. Stone, "lists of Revealed Things in the Apocalyptic Literature," in F.M. Cross et al. ed., Magnalia Dei• The Mighty Acts of God (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1976) 439-43 and idem, "Apocalyptic Literature," in M.E. Stone, ed., Jewish Writings from the Second Temple Period (CRINT 2/2; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 392-93; M.A. Knibb, "Prophecy and the Emergence of the Jewish Apocalypses," in R. Coggins et al., ed., Israel's Prophetic Tradition. Essays in Honour of Peter Ackroyd (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982) 160-61.

the heavenly world. 8 This emphasis was largely in reaction against the one-sided emphasis on eschatology which had dominated study of the field in the past. The change in emphasis corresponded to a shift in the focus of the study of apocalypticism, away from the alleged "dawn of apocalyptic" 9 in prophetic texts of the post-exilic period to the Pseudepigrapha, and especially to the Enoch corpus, which had been thrust to the fore by the publication of the Aramaic fragments from Qumran. 1 0 The Uppsala Colloquium, however, represented, quite deliberately, a very wide spectrum of views. The participants were drawn from diverse fields and had diverse ideas of what was meant by apocalypticism. After some 25 papers, which had not been circulated in advance, there was one session devoted to seeking consensus. When the participants voted contra άφηύίοηβπι, pro descrìptione,u in a phrase often quoted since then, this did not represent a consensus on proper procedure, but was an expression of fatigue and a recognition that much more time would be needed to mediate the differing viewpoints. The final resolution was a diplomatic evasion of the issue at the end of a very stimulating, but exhausting, conference. Consensus, of course, is rarely found in scholarly discussion, and the disagreements on the subject of apocalypticism are scarcely greater than those in other areas of biblical studies. There is, at least, general agreement on the corpus of relevant literature. The most heated debates are not so much over the understanding of this material but over the proper use of terminology. The basic problem here lies in the propensity of scholars to select some feature of an apocalyptic writing that happens to interest them, and arbitrarily declare it to be the essence of "apocalyptic" or apocalypticism. So the introductory essay in a recent volume on Apocalyptic and the New Testament notes (with approval) that scholars who have explored the relationship between apocalyptic and Jesus or the apostle Paul, like Schweitzer and Käsemann, have avoided basing their research on assumptions drawn from a study of the literary genre and have instead focused on apocalyptic as a theological concept." 12 8 So especially Rowland, Gruenwald. Note also the subsequent studies of I. Culianu, Psychonadia / (Leiden: Brill, 1983) and C. Kappler, ed.. Apocalypses et Voyages dans L'Au-Delà (Paris: Cerf, 1987). 9 P.D. Hanson, The Dawn of Apocalyptic (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975). 10 J . T . Milik, The Books of Enoch (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976). 11 Hellholm, Apocalypticism, 2. 12 R.E. Sturm, "Defining the Word 'Apocalyptic': A Problem in Biblical Criticism," i n j . Marcus and M.L. Soards, eds., Apocalyptic and the New Testament. Essays in

GENRE, IDEOLOGY AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

27

The advantage of "a theological concept," from this point of view, is that it is not constrained by the evidence of the ancient apocalyptic literature, "much of which is indeed abstruse and fantastic" 13 but can be defined by the theologian, in whatever way is most convenient for the explication of Jesus or Paul. Whether or not this theological concept accurately reflects the thought ofJesus or Paul, it can only compound the terminological confusion in modern scholarship. There can be no consensus in the definition of a term such as "apocalyptic" unless we accept the constraints of a specific body of evidence. T h e observation of Klaus Koch remains true: the word "apocalyptic" refers first of all to a body of literature, and any analysis of the phenomenon must begin with an analysis of the literature. 14 This is not to say that apocalypticism should be reduced to the literary genre, or viewed only as a literary convention. It is simply to affirm the methodological necessity of a common starting point. T h e term "apocalyptic" refers first and foremost to the kind of material found in apocalypses. T o use the word in any other way is to invite terminological confusion. T H E DISCUSSION OF THE G E N R E

My own contribution to the debate in 1979 was concerned with the definition and delineadon of the literary genre, as part of an SBL task force whose findings were published in Semeia 14. We proposed a definition that was based on a combination of form (narrative framework, revelation mediated by an otherworldly being) and content (disclosure of supernatural world and of eschatological future). In retrospect, I would, inevitably, do some things differently. In Semeia 14, we proposed a six fold typology. We distinguished two broad types, the "historical" apocalypses such as Daniel, and the heavenly ascents, often associated with Enoch. That distinction is, I think, fundamental, even though we find mixed types (e.g. the Similitudes of Enoch). I would not go so far as Martha Himmelfarb, who would argue that we have two different genres here, although I appreciate the basis for her argument. 15 We further divided each of these types into three sub-types, on the basis of their eschatology. While I think these distinctions were accurate, I have found them

Honor of J. Louis Martyn (JSNTS 24; Sheffield: J S N T , 1989) 37 (emphasis added). Similarly M.C. de Boer, "Paul and Jewish Apocalyptic Eschatology," ibid., 187. 15 Sturm, "Defining the Word," 37. 14 Koch, Rediscovery, 23. 15 M. Himmelfarb, Tours o f / M (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983) 61.

less significant in my further work, and I would not now insist on them. In the Jewish apocalypses, at least, the main distinction is between the eschatology of the "historical" works and that of the ascents, and so the two-fold typology is adequate. In my own discussion of the Jewish apocalypses I identified some partial texts (e.g. Daniel 7-12; Jubilees 23) as apocalypses. I would now speak simply of the dominant genre of these works as wholes. I would also allow for cases of mixed genre (e.g. Jubilees) which have significant affinities with more than one genre. Finally, I would include a rather general statement of function, in the definition, a point to which I will return below. I regard these points as relatively minor modifications of the analysis in Semeia 14. There has been considerable discussion of the genre in the last decade. Among the more noteworthy contributions should be mentioned the text-linguistic studies of David Hellholm on Revelation and the Shepherd of Hermas. 16 While insights from this approach have helped clarify some points in the general discussion, such as the importance of distinguishing between different levels of abstraction, it has not, as yet, been widely adopted. For many scholars it remains more mysterious than the texts it seeks to clarify, but I would like to suspend judgment on it until a greater body of such studies becomes available. Instead I would like to focus on two issues that concern the relation between the genre and the broader phenomenon of apocalypticism. First is the question whether the apocalypses have a significant common content, which implies a world view that was distinctive in the ancient world. Second is the historical development of the genre and its relation to specific social groups or movements. 1. Form and Content In an article published in 1979, at almost exactly the same time as Semeia 14, the late Jean Carmignac argued that "l'Apocalyptique" is a literary genre that describes heavenly revelations by means of symbols, in short that it is essentially a literary style and that there is common content in only the most general terms.17 A number of scholars have taken similar positions. Christopher Rowland pro-

lfi D. Hcllholm, "The Problem of Apocalyptic Genre and the Apocalypse of John," Semeia 36 (1986) 13-64; Dos Visionenbuch des Hermas als Apokalypse: Formgeschichtliehe und texttheoretische Studien zu einer literarischen Gattung. (ConNT 13.1. Lund: Gleerup, 1980). 17 Carmignac, "Qu'est-ce que l'apocalyptique?" 20.

posed that "apocalyptic seems essentially to be about the revelation of the divine mysteries" and emphasized the diversity of the contents. 18 Relying on Rowland's survey, John Barton drew the conclusion that "the attempt to find any unifying theme among all the apocalypses that are extant is doomed to failure." 19 He would allow that the adjective "apocalyptic" has meaning ("concerned with the disclosure of secrets") but finds it too broad to be useful. The noun "apocalyptic" (and presumably "apocalypticism") is for him devoid of content and it makes no sense to speak of an apocalyptic movement. At the Uppsala conference Hartmut Stegemann also argued that Apokalyptik is only a literary phenomenon, concerned with the revelation of secrets.20 He allowed, however, that the term might also refer to the Wirkungsgeschichte of apocalypses, e.g. to the influence of the Enoch tradition on the Qumran community. T h e issue here is not a theoretical one of how a genre should, in principle be defined. Genres may be defined in various ways and on various levels of abstraction. It is possible to identify a corpus of texts which are "revelations of heavenly mysteries" but that corpus will be much broader than what is usually associated with the word apocalypse. T h e real issue here is whether there is a sub-group of revelations which can be defined on the basis of content, or to put the matter another way, whether those texts which are generally regarded as apocalypses (Daniel, 1 Enoch, Revelation etc.) have significant common content which distinguishes them from other revelations. With the exception of Carmignac, scholars do not call all the visions in the Hebrew Bible "apocalypses." The analysis of the genre in Semeia 14, which was based on content as well as form, argued that there is indeed a common content, which is broadly constitutive of a world-view, which was both distinctive and significant in late antiquity. T o be sure, the content common to all the apocalypses is fairly abstract and general. T h e mysteries they disclose involve a view of human aflairs in which major importance is attached to the influence of the supernatural world and the expectation of eschatological judgment. Apocalypses may contain all sorts of data, about cosmological secrets, halachic instructions or sapiential reflection, which is all highly important for the interpretation of the individual

18

Rowland, The Open Heaven, 70-72. J. Barton, Oracles of God. Perceptions of Ancient Prophecy in Israel after the Exile (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1986) 201. 50 H. Stegemann, "Die Bedeutung der Qumranfunde fur die Erforschung der Apokalyptik," in Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism, 498. 19

texts, but the co-ordinates of the world-view are set by the orientation to the supernatural world and the eschatological expectation. Scholars such as Rowland or Barton who see only the variety of contents miss the forest for the trees. They are also misled by a tendency to equate eschatology with the kind of public historical crisis envisaged in Revelation, and a failure to recognize the importance of personal eschatology, the judgment of the dead, which is of crucial importance in both the "historical" apocalypses and in the heavenly ascents. This world-view, with its eschatological dimension, is historically much more specific and limited than the phenomenon of dreams and visions, or the interest in the revelation of mysteries. I would, however, emphasize that the world-view that is common to all the apocalypses is much broader and less specific than what is usually called apocalypticism in modern scholarship. The latter is usually based only on the "historical" type of apocalypse such as Daniel and Revelation, and often involves the hasty generalization of motifs that are relatively rare (e.g. the division between the two ages in 4 Ezra). If apocalypticism is understood as the world view of the apocalypses, then it is a broad world view, within which several more specific ideologies and movements can be identified. At the very least we need to distinguish between the "historical" type of apocalypticism, typified by Daniel and Revelation, and the more cosmic, mystical, orientation of the heavenly ascents. These smaller groupings may well be more helpful in interpreting a particular text. Nonetheless, two points should be made. 1 In the interest of consistent terminology, it is better to retain "apocalypse" as the inclusive term, which embraces different sub-groups than to restrict the label arbitrarily to one sub-group. A definition of "apocalypse" or "apocalypticism" which excludes either Daniel and Revelation, on the one hand, or the heavenly ascents, on the other, is confusing rather than helpful. 2 T h e content of the genre as a whole is still distinctive, at least in the context of Judaism through the first Christian centuries. Ben Sira, First Maccabees, Josephus, the Mishnah, all attest forms of Judaism that are clearly distinct from apocalypticism, even on the broadest definition of the latter. Obviously, the distinctiveness of the apocalyptic world-view decreases with time. T h e category is more useful with reference to the second century BCE than to the second century CE. Most scholars, however, would grant that the world-view of the Book of the Watchers differs significantly from anything that preceded it in the Jewish

tradition. 21 There is greater continuity with the Hebrew prophets in the case of Daniel, but there too there was significant novelty, both in the degree of interest in supernatural powers and in the eschatological hope for resurrection and judgment. 22 2. The Historical Development T h e question of distinctiveness, then, leads us to the second major issue in the current discussion, the historical development of both the genre and the world view. The definition of the genre proposed in Semeia 14 might be described as a "common core" definition: it attempts to extract characteristics which are common to all exemplars of the genre. The range of material surveyed was essentially the same as in the Uppsala conference: the Mediterranean world and the Near East over a period of roughly 500 years. This attempt to find a core of defining characteristics is certainly a common way of defining a genre, perhaps the most common. 23 It has been challenged, however, both in the general field of literary criticism and in its application to the genre apocalypse, on the grounds that it is ahistorical. In his helpful introduction to the theory of genres, Kinds of Literature, Alastair Fowler has argued that genres are "positively resistant to definition" and that the expectation of necessary elements or defining characteristics, which is almost universal among critics writing about genre, is "without any sufficient basis.24'‫ י‬For Fowler, genres are looser historical entities, held together by "family resemblances" and genetic connections. 25 A young Dutch scholar, E. J . Tigchelaar, has argued for a similar view of genre in the case of

21

M. Barker, The Older Testament. The Survival of Themesfromthe Ancient Royal Cult in Sectarian Judaism and Early Christianity (London: SPCK, 1987) is exceptional, if not unique, in arguing that 1 Enoch is representative of the traditional religion of Jerusalem. 22 O n the relation of the early apocalypses to traditional Israelite religion see my essay, "The Place of Apocalypticism in the Religion of Israel," in P.D. Miller, P.D. Hanson and S.D. McBride, eds., Ancient Israelite Religion. Essays in Honor of Frank Moore Cross (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987) 539-58. 23 For a survey of concepts of genre in literary criticism see A. Fowler, Kinds of Literature. An Introduction to the Theory of Genres and Modes (Cambridge: Harvard, 1982) 37-53. 24 Ibid., 39. 25 T h e "family resemblance" approach to the apocalyptic genre was already advocated b y j . G . Gammie, "The Classification, Stages of Growth, and Changing Intentions in the Book of Daniel," JBL 95 (1976) 193.

the apocalyptic literature, although as yet he has not worked out its application at any length. 26 Three issues may be distinguished here: a) the possibility of definition, b) the importance of diachronic development in the understanding of the genre and c) the genetic dimension. a. The Possibility of Definition Fowler's contention that "genres are positively resistant to definition" does not withstand serious scrutiny. What cannot be defined can not be distinguished and so cannot be recognized at all. If Fowler can recognize a genre "tragedy" he must have at least an implicit definition which enables him to distinguish tragedies from other dramas. His own resistance to definitions is due in large part to the inconsistency of traditional usage. "Oedipus at Colonus" is traditionally called a tragedy, although it lacks most of the classic characteristics of the genre. Similarly, in the Jewish Pseudepigrapha, the Apocalypse of Moses (a variant of the Life of Adam and Eve) is not an apocalypse in any modern sense of the word, and the Testament of Abraham is not a testament. T o say that traditional usage is not consistent, however, is not to say that consistent usage is impossible. In the context of modern scholarship, genres are analytical categories, which do not necessarily coincide with the use of genre labels in antiquity. b. Diachronic Development We must readily agree with Fowler's insistence that genres have a diachronic dimension, and change over time. Definitions are necessarily synchronic, and some critics have inferred that the definition of apocalypse in Semeia 14 is ahistorical.27 This charge seems to me to misunderstand the purpose of a definition. Beginning with the work of Koch, the study of the literary genre was an attempt to focus the discussion on specific texts, in reaction against vague generalizations about the "essence of apocalyptic" or theological concepts. The definition of the genre in Semeia 14 did not include any statement of function. It has been widely criticized on this point, 2 " but reluctance 26 E.J. Tigchelaar, Apocalyptiek, Begrrp en Onbegnp (Groningen: University of Groningen, 1985); "More on Apocalyptic and Apocalypses," JSJ 18 (1987) 137-44. See now his book, Prophets of Old and the Day of the End (Leiden: Brill, 1996) 1-15. 27 So F. Garcia Martinez, "Encore l'Apocalyptique," JSJ 17 (1987) 229; Tigchelaar, "More on Apocalyptic and Apocalypses," 138; K. Rudolph, "Apokalyptik in der Diskussion," in Hcllholm, ed., Apocalypticism, 775. 2B See Hellholm, "The Apocalypse ofJohn and the Problem of Genre," Semeia 36 (1986) 69-70.

to posit a single function for the genre arose precisely from an awareness of the variety of historical settings in which it might be employed. 29 The paradigm of the genre is like a grammatical paradigm, helpful for analysing particular statements, but not in itself the vehicle of meaning. Meaning is found in statements, in which the grammar is actualized and applied. Now it is quite true that grammatical paradigms also have a function: to clarify grammar and enhance communication. In the same way the genre apocalypse can be said to have a function: e.g. "to legitimate the transcendent authorization of the message." 30 I would now accept the amendment to the definition of the genre offered in Semeia 36, in the light of the suggestions of Hellholm and Aune: an apocalypse is intended to interpret present earthly circumstances in the light of the supernatural world and of the future, and to influence both the understanding and the behavior of the audience by means of divine authority. 31

This definition of the function of the genre, however, is rather different from those which have prevailed in previous study, e.g. "for the consolation of a group in crisis." The more specific functions, which tie the genre to precise social settings (such as "a group in crisis"), fit some apocalypses but not all. It does not seem to me that social setting can be inferred from literary genre. I would still want to emphasize that the genre can accommodate a considerable range of social settings, and that these have to be established by historical study. A definition, then, serves not only to identify the common elements, but also to provide a foil against which the variations in particular works can be highlighted. My own study of the Jewish apocalypses, The Apocalyptic Imagination,32 differs from other books on the subject such as those of D.S. Russell33 or Christopher Rowland, 34 precisely in the attempt to deal with the individual apocalypses in their historical context. Synchronic and diachronic elements are complementary aspects of the study of a genre, and should not be regarded as mutually exclusive. 29 This point is appreciated by Tigchelaar, "More on Apocalyptic and Apocalypses," 138. 30 D. Aune, "The Apocalypse of J o h n and the Problem of Genre," Semeia 36 (1986) 87. 31 A. Yarbro Collins, "Introduction: Early Christian Apocalypticism," Semeia 36 (1986) 7. 32 The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1984). 33 D.S. Russell, The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1964). 34 Rowland, The Open Heaven.

Nonetheless, the call for more attention to the diachronic developments can be fruitful, and certainly points the discussion in the right direction. This is most obvious in the case of the earliest apocalypses, such as Daniel and the "Book of the Watchers" in 1 Enoch, which are experimental compositions, where "features belonging to other genres are assembled into a new work of art." 35 The eventual emergence of "apocalypse" as a genre label, at the end of the first century CE, was possible because the literary forms had attained a measure of stability. We should be wary, however, of attempts to explain all differences between individual works by developmental theories. The differences between the Book of the Watchers and 4 Ezra are due less to their respective places in the development of the genre than to the fact that they were informed by different theological traditions and were written in very different circumstances. The development of a genre is not mechanical and cannot be plotted on a straight line. c. The Genetic Dimension Family resemblances derive from biological relationships. By anain literature, the basis of resemblance lies in literary tradition. What produces generic resemblances...is tradition: a sequence of influence and imitation and inherited codes connecting works in the genre. 36

There is obvious merit in this observation. In the apocalyptic literature, we can speak of an Enoch tradition and a Daniel tradition, the latter including Revelation and 4 Ezra, and of the influence of both traditions on the Similitudes of Enoch. Such tracing of particular developments is certainly necessary, but it can be seen as complementary to the "common core" type of definition rather than as an alternative to it. Some recent critics, however, would use the criterion of genetic relationships to restrict the field of apocalypticism to Jewish and Christian material. According to Tigchelaar (141), "Seeing genre as a historical group with family resemblances restricts the generic analysis to texts which are genetically related." 37 He would exclude "the so-called Greek and Roman apocalypses" from the discussion, pending proof of genetic connections. F. Garcia Martinez has argued even more vehemently against the perspective of the religions35 36 37

Tigchelaar, "More on Apocalypses and Apocalyptic," 139. Fowler, Kinds of Literature, 42. Tigchelaar, "More on Apocalypses and Apocalyptic," 141.

geschichtliche Schule which was presupposed both in the Uppsala Conference and in Semeia 14. For him, one of the "firmly established results" of the Uppsala Conference is that the "history of religions" approach must be abandoned, because it leads to confusion. 38 This attempt to confine the genre to Jewish and Christian material cannot be justified on either historical or literary grounds. Alastair Fowler, a leading proponent of the "family resemblance" approach, issues an important caveat: In generic resemblance, the direct line of descent is not so dominant that genre theory can be identified with source criticism. We need to leave room for polygenesis...and for more remote influences...Codes often come to a writer indirecdy, deviously, remotely, at haphazard, rather than by simple chronological lines of descent. 39

In fact, the genesis of the genre apocalypse in Judaism remains uncertain. 40 There are obvious lines of continuity with prophetic visions, but also with Babylonian dream interpretation. Some of the most stimulating contributions of the last decade have explored possible genetic connections between Babylonian material and Enoch and Daniel. 41 T h e relationship between Jewish and Persian apocalypses remains in dispute, but at present the evidence does not permit us to rule out a genetic connection there. 42 Influence of Greek and Roman material remains a live possibility throughout the history of the genre in Judaism and Christianity. T h e religionsgeschichtliche approach to apocalypticism has always focused on the eastern Mediterranean world in late antiquity where historical relationships are distincdy possible. It has never extended its phenomenological horizons to include, say, the Nordic Voluspa. 43 A truly phenomenological study of apocalyptic and related materials without restriction of time and place might well be interesting, but that is not what was attempted at Uppsala. Even an approach that is focused on genetic relationships cannot afford to treat the Jewish and Christian material in isolation.

38 Garcia Martinez, "Encore l'Apocalyptique," 228-29. Nonetheless he has contributed to the volume edited by Kappler, Apocalypses et Voyages dans L'Au-Delà, which is conceived from a history of religions perspective. 39 Fowler, Kinds of Literature, 43. 40 See my comments in The Apocalyptic Imagination, 19-32. 41 J . C . VanderKam, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition (CBQMS 16; Washington: CBA, 1984); H. Kvanvig, Roots of Apocalyptic (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1987). 42 See A. Hultgàrd, "Bahman Yasht: A Persian Apocalypse," in J.J. Collins and J H. Charlesworth, ed. Mysteries and Revelations (Sheffield: J S O T , 1991) 114-34. 43 Pace Garcia Martinez, "Encore l'apocalyptique," 228, citing Lars Hartman.

The most notable and influential attempt in the last decade to treat apocalypticism as a single tradition has been that of the Italian scholar Paolo Sacchi. 44 Sacchi's work has been primarily focused on the Enoch corpus, but it is presented as an approach to Jewish apocalypticism as a whole. Instead of surveying the entire field and looking for common elements, he starts from a particular text, the Book of the Watchers, which he takes to be the oldest apocalypse. He then attempts to discover the key to the system of thought in this book and finds it in the explanation of evil, in the idea that evil is before human will as the consequence of an original sin, which has irremediably corrupted Creation. This idea, then, becomes for Sacchi the essence of apocalypticism. He can trace its influence clearly in the Enoch corpus, and he finds it in somewhat different form in 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch. Sacchi also finds a place for Daniel in this trajectory, although this is disputed by his disciple, Boccacini.45 His ideas have been used by Garcia Martinez to argue that apocalypticism has a generative role in the sectarian writings from Qumran. 4 6 There is no doubt that Sacchi has pointed to an issue of major importance in several apocalyptic texts and his work is especially helpful in understanding the Enoch material. As an approach to the phenomenon of apocalypticism, however, it has serious disadvantages. Even if the Book of the Watchers is the oldest apocalypse, it does not follow that it should be normative for the notion of apocalypticism. 47 As Sacchi himself notes, it is in many ways distinctive, and atypical of the corpus. If we were to restrict the corpus of apocalyptic works to a tradition genetically connected with the Book of the Watchers we would have a very small corpus, excluding even 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch which Sacchi regards as apocalyptic. T h e origin of evil is not a primary concern of Daniel. Yet Daniel is at least as influential as the Book of the Watchers on the later apocalyptic tradition. Apocalypticism cannot be defined on the basis of a single book and cannot be restricted to a single strand of tradition.

44 Sacchi's essays arc now collected in his L'afwcalittica giudaica e ta sua storia (Brescia: Paideia, 1990). 45 G. Boccacini, "E Daniele un tcsto apocalittico? Una (ri)dcfinizione del pensiero del Libro di Daniele in rapporto al Libro dei Sogni e all'apocalittica," Henoch 9 (1987) 267-99 4 ‫ ״‬F. Garcia Martinez, "Les Traditions Apocalyptiques a Qumrân," in C. Kappler, ed., Apocalypses et Voyages dans l'Au-Dela (Paris: Cerf, 1987) 201-35. 47 See the criticisms of Tigchelaar, "More on Apocalyptic and Apocalypses," 143.

GENRE IDEOLOGY AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

37

APOCALYPTIC MOVEMENTS

From what we have seen thus far it should be obvious that it is a gross over-simplification to speak of "the apocalyptic movement." 48 At the least, we must allow for several movements, at different times, not necessarily connected with each other genetically. Moreover, we should not necessarily posit a community or movement behind every text, although it is the current fashion to do so. There is little evidence that a movement, apocalyptic or other, lies behind a work such as 4 Ezra. T h e main difficulty in speaking about "apocalyptic movements" in ancient Judaism does not lie in the meaning of the term, but in the lack of social documentation. A movement might reasonably be characterized as apocalyptic if it shares the world-view typical of the apocalypses. T h e most straightforward example would be a community which used apocalypses as its typical form of expression. The "chosen righteous" of the Enoch tradition may be a case in point, although we can say very little about them as a community. 49 A movement or community might also be apocalyptic if it were shaped to a significant degree by a specific apocalyptic tradition, or if its world view could be shown to be similar to that of the apocalypses in a distinctive way. T h e Essene movement and Qumran community would seem to qualify on both counts. 50 The point at issue here is not the presence of apocalyptic materials in the Qumran library, which is not necessarily significant, but their role in the major sectarian rules, C D and 1QS, which must be taken as authoritative statements of the self-understanding of the sect. T h e analogies between 1 Enoch, Jubilees and CD have been rehearsed repeatedly in recent years. It has even been argued (unjustifiably in my opinion) that Enoch and Jubilees are Essene.51 C D explicitly alludes both to the Watchers and to Jubilees, and the line of influence is not in dispute. For our present context it will suffice to point to the Discourse of the Two Spirits, which forms the metaphysical backdrop of the Community Rule. Here human life is 48 In fairness to W. Schmithals, The Apocalyptic Movement: Introduction and Interpretation ((Nashville: Abingdon, 1975) it should be noted that the book originally appeared as Die Apokalyptik: Einfiihrung und Deutung (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1973). 49 See The Apocalyptic Imagination, 56-63. 50 See my essay, "Was the Dead Sea Sect an Apocalyptic Community?" in this volume, and my book, Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Saolls (London: Roudedge, 1997). 51 P.R. Davies, Behind the Essenes. History and Ideology in the Dead Sea Saolls (BJS 94; Adanta: Scholars Press, 1987) 107-34.

understood as an arena of conflict between spirits or angels of Light and Darkness, which will culminate in an eschatological finale, with "everlasting blessing and eternal joy in life without end" for the one party and "shameful extinction in the fire of the dark regions" for the other. The doctrine of the two Spirits is not derived from Enoch or Daniel, and may well be indebted to Persian sources, but the world-view is quintessentially apocalyptic, in its orientation to the supernatural world and its eschatological expectation. T o say that Qumran was an apocalyptic community is not, of course, to describe it exhaustively. As we have seen, apocalypticism allows of many variations and can be combined with various theological traditions. Qumran can be called a halachic community as well as an apocalyptic one. Equally, there is no reason to take Qumran as a paradigm for the social setting of apocalypticism. The designation "apocalyptic" however draws attention to an important aspect of the world-view of Qumran, which serves to relate it to some strands of ancient Judaism and to distinguish it from others. CONCLUSION

The study of apocalypticism has had to sail between the Scylla of those who would identify it with a highly specific tradition and the Charybdis of those who would empty it of all content. Both extremes should be avoided. "Apocalyptic" is an ambivalent term, insofar as it refers to different kinds of material, but it is not significantly more ambivalent than other terms such as prophecy or wisdom that we freely use to characterize the ancient literature. The way to overcome the ambiguity is not by rhetorical flourishes banning all use of the term (and thereby making room for other demons worse than the first)52 but by qualifying it and making distinctions where necessary. The use of the term should be controlled by analogy with the apocalyptic texts, and not allowed to float freely as an intuitive "theological concept." And it must always be kept in mind that the debates about definitions and terminology are only prolegomena to the study of the apocalyptic texts.53 52

E.g. the adoption of the term "millenarian" by P.R. Davies, "The Social World of Apocalyptic Writings," in P.R. Ackroyd, ed., The Social World of Ancient Israel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) 253. 53 Several major studies of individual apocalypses have appeared in recent years. Note M.E. Stone, Fourth Ezra (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990); J.J. Collins, Daniel (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993); P. Tiller, A Commentary on the Animal Apocalypse of 1 Enoch (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993); D.C. Harlow, The Greek Apocalypse of Baruch (3 Baruch) in Hellenistic Judaism and Early Christianity (Leiden: Brill, 1996).

CHAPTER THREE

T H E PLACE O F APOCALYPTICISM IN T H E RELIGION O F ISRAEL

In a seminal essay, published in 1969, F.M. Cross claimed that "in many respects the most serious lacuna in the study of apocalyptic has been in the early era, in its relations to older biblical religion. ,, ‫י‬ Much study has been devoted to this issue in the intervening years, but the lacuna has not been definitively filled. Instead, expanding research on the apocalyptic literature has shown that the issue is even more complex than had been thought and that any theory of "the origins of apocalyptic" necessarily involves some over-simplification and confusion. It is now widely recognized that the word "apocalyptic" used as a noun obscures some quite basic distinctions. In 1970, K. Koch distinguished between "apocalyptic as a literary type" and "apocalyptic as a historical movement. 2‫ יי‬This distinction was refined by P.D. Hanson in 1975 in his definitions of "apocalypse" as a literary genre, "apocalypticism" as the ideology of a particular kind of socioreligious movement, and "apocalyptic eschatology" as a religious perspective that is not confined to either apocalypses or apocalyptic movements. 3 While these distinctions are quite fundamental, it is also important to appreciate the relationship between the three terms. As Koch already argued, the starting point for any discussion of "apocalyptic" matters must lie in those texts which are recognized as apocalypses. 4 Apocalyptic eschatology is most appropriately defined as the kind of 1

F.M. Cross, "New Directions in the Study of Apocalyptic,"Apocalypticism, JTC 6(1969) 161. 2 K. Koch, Ratlos vor der Apokalyptik (Gütersloh: Mohn, 1970; English trans. M. Kohl, The Rediscovery ofApocalyptic [SBT 2/22; Naperville: Allenson, 1972]). 5 P.D. Hanson, "Apocalypticism," IDBSup, 28-34. M.E. Stone ("Lists of Revealed Things in Apocalyptic Literature," in F.M. Cross et al., ed., Magnalia Dei, The Mighty Acts of God [Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday & Co., 1976] 414-52) distinguishes between apocalypse and apocalypticism or apocalyptic, in a manner closer to Koch. 4 Koch, The Rediscovery, 23. Koch's list (Daniel, 1 Enoch, 2 Baruch, 4 Ezra, Apocalypse ofAbraham, Revelation) is too brief. For the full corpus, sceJ.J. Collins, ed., Apocalypse: The Morphology of a Genre, Semeia 14 (1979). The list of Jewish apocalypses should at least include 2 Enoch,3 Baruch, and Apocalypse of Zephaniah, and arguably also Jubilees and Testament of Abraham. Most of these texts can be found in J . H . Charlesworth, ed., The Old Testament Pseudepig rapha, vol. 1: Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday & Co., 1983).

eschatology that is typical of apocalypses, although it may also be found elsewhere. The movements most appropriately called apocalyptic are those which either produced apocalypses or were characterized by the beliefs and attitudes typical of the genre. 5 Whether some postexilic prophecy should be called apocalyptic or taken to attest an apocalyptic movement depends on our assessment of the similarities between this material and the literary genre apocalypse. One of the problems that has beset the quest for "the origin of apocalyptic" is that the apocalypses are not simply uniform but contain diverse subgenres and motifs that may be traced to different sources. 6 If we wish to arrive at an understanding of the historical development of apocalypticism, it is necessary to differentiate the various apocalyptic texts and the movements that may be inferred from them. T h e two major types of apocalypse—the "historical apocalypse," characterized by an extended review of history in the guise of prophecy, and the otherworldly journey 7 —are both first exemplified in developed form in the Hellenistic period, in the books of Daniel and 1 Enoch. It is on the development of this material that we wish to focus here. The dominant trend in recent scholarship on apocalyptic origins has sought to establish an unbroken connection with postexilic prophecy. 8 O. Plöger believed that a selection of postexilic eschatological passages such as Isaiah 24-27; Zechariah 12-14; and Joel could produce a line, w h e n j o i n e d together, that leads f r o m the older restoration eschatology, which is certainly within the sphere of influence of the pre-exilic p r o p h e t i c promises, to the r a t h e r different, dualistic a n d apocalyptic f o r m of eschatology, such as we find in a fairly complete f o r m in the Book of Daniel. 9 5 See further my discussion in The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to the Jewish Matrix of Christianity (New York: Crossroad, 1984), chap. 1. 6 See my discussion of the forms of apocalyptic literature in Daniel, with an Introduction to Apocalyptic Literature (FOTL 10; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984). 7 For the typology, see J.J. Collins, "The Jewish Apocalypses," Semeia 14 (1979) 12-15, and The Apocalyptic Imagination, chap. 1. 8 The rival thesis of G. von Rad (Die Theologie des Alten Testaments [5th ed., Munich: Kaiser, 1968] 2.316-38) that apocalypticism is derived from wisdom has stimulated much discussion but won little following. For a recent review of scholarship, see M. Knibb, "Prophecy and the Emergence of the Jewish Apocalypses," Israel's Prophetic Tradition: Essays in Honour of Peter Ackroyd (ed. R. Coggins, A. Phillips, and M. Knibb; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982) 155-80. An important by-product of the discussion has been the observation of affinities between apocalypticism and "mantic wisdom" (H.-P. Müller. "Mantische Weisheit und Apokalyptik," VTSup 22 [1972] 269-93). 9 O. Plöger, Theocracy and Eschatology (Richmond: Knox, 1968) 108.

THE PLACE OF APOCALYPTICISM IN THE RELIGION OF ISRAEL

41

Plöger admitted that the line was a broken one but affirmed continuity nonetheless and related the whole development to the rise of the Hasidim, who are known from the Maccabean books. Hanson also views Daniel as one station along a continuum reaching from pre-exilic prophecy to full-grown apocalyptic, very much at home on Jewish soil and manifesting foreign borrowing only as peripheral embellishments. 10

Hanson, however, has denied that the development of apocalypticism can be attributed to a single movement or party. Since he dates compositions such as Isaiah 24 72‫־‬earlier than Plöger, he posits a gap in the continuum in the fourth century BCE. The later apocalypses are analogous to the postexilic prophecies in their revival of ancient myth and their sociological matrix but are not the products of a continuous movement." It is fair to say that Plöger and Hanson have concentrated on the development of cosmic eschatology, which they regard as the heart of apocalypticism, and trace the connections primarily with Daniel rather than Enoch. 12 Even in the case of Daniel, many scholars have questioned whether cosmic eschatology is an adequate rubric for understanding the book. O n the one hand, there has been renewed interest in the visionary form of the material, which also has biblical precedents, to be sure. 13 O n the other hand, some features of Daniel's eschatology, which are not attested in late prophecy, especially the belief in resurrection, can hardly be regarded as peripheral embellishments. 14 Continuity with the biblical tradition is less obvious in the journeys of Enoch than in the symbolic visions of Daniel. Plöger's thesis, which sought to tie the development of apocalypticism to a particular party, is especially vulnerable. Both Daniel and 1 Enoch provide internal evidence of developing movements in the pre-Maccabean period. These movements are not related to Plöger's eschatological conventicles but in each case have strong links with the eastern Diaspora. 10

P.D. Hanson, "Old Testament Apocalyptic Reexamined," in idem, ed., Visionaries and Their Apocalypses (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983) 53 (originally published in Interpretation 25 [1971] 454-79). 11 Hanson, in his article "Apocalypticism" in IDBSup, speaks repeatedly of apocalyptic movements. 12 Note, however, Hanson's later essay, "Rebellion in Heaven, Azazel and Euhemeristic Heroes in 1 Enoch 6—11 "JBL 96 (1977) 195-233. 13 For example, C. Rowland, The Open Heaven A Study ofApocalyptic injudavrm and Early Christianity (New York: Crossroad, 1982) 13-14. 14 J.J. Collins, "Apocalyptic Eschatology as the Transcendence of Death," in Hanson, ed., Visionaries and Their Apocalypses, 61-84 (originally published in CBQ 37 [1974] 21-43).

The Enoch Movement The publication of the Aramaic fragments of 1 Enoch from Qumran byJ.T. Milik in 1976 has been a turning point in the recent study of apocalypticism. Milik claimed, on the basis of paleography, that a copy of the Astronomical Book (1 Enoch 72-82) dates "from the end of the third or the beginning of the second century," while a manuscript of the Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1-36), including fragments of chaps. 112‫־‬, dates from the first half of the second century BCE15 If we assume that these manuscripts were not autographs, both compositions may well date from the third century, appreciably earlier than had previously been thought. Consequently new attention has been focused on the Enochic writings as evidence for apocalypticism prior to Daniel and the Maccabean revolt.16 The early date of several Enochic writings seems assured even apart from the paleography of the Qumran fragments. The Animal Apocalypse (1 Enoch 85-90), which is part of the Book of Dreams (1 Enoch 83-90), clearly alludes to the Maccabean revolt and is roughly contemporary with the Book of Daniel. Yet it seems to presuppose the Book of the Watchers at 1 Enoch 86-87 (the story of the fallen angels). The Apocalypse of Weeks (7 Enoch 93:1-10; 91:11-17) does not refer to the desecration of the Temple by Antiochus Epiphanes and was probably written before it. This apocalypse is now embedded in the Epistle of Enoch (1 Enoch 91-105) and may have always been an integral part of it. The Epistle fits as well in the preMaccabean era as in the Hasmonean period to which it was dated by R.H. Charles, and its polemic against idolatry can be more plausibly assigned to the earlier date. Moreover, the Book ofJubilees, itself of Maccabean origin, seems to refer not only to the Astronomical Book, the Book of the Watchers, and the Book of Dreams but also to the Epistle of Enoch (although this allusion is disputed).17 It appears, then, that we have a corpus of writings in the name of Enoch, composed over roughly the half century before the Mac-

15

J.T. Milik, The Books of Enoch (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976) 5-7. "‫ י‬See especially M.E. Stone, Scriptures, Sects and Visions (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980) 27-47; reprinted in Hanson, ed., Visionaries and Their Apocalypses, 85100), and J.C. VanderKam, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition (CBQMS 16; Washington: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1984). 17 Jub 4: 16-25. VanderKam, Enoch, 142-49; G.W.E. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature Betiveen the Bible and the Mishnah (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1981) 149-50. For the date of Jubilees, J.C. VanderKam, Textual and Historical Studies in the Book of Jubilees (HSM 14; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1977) 214-85.

cabean revolt.18 It is reasonable to suppose that the literary continuity is due to the ongoing activity of a group, and there are indications within the books themselves of an emerging group identity. 1 Enoch is introduced as "the words of the blessing of Enoch according to which he blessed the chosen and righteous who must be present on the day of distress." T h e chosen and righteous appear to be technical terms throughout the book for a particular group, which is not simply identical with the Jewish people. (Contrasts between the righteous and the sinners are especially sharp in the Epistle.) The Book of the Watchers and the Astronomical Book, which seem to be the oldest sections of 1 Enoch, give least indication of a distinct group identity. In 1 Enoch 10: 16 "the plant of righteousness and truth" is apparendy Israel, and there is no reference to a further offshoot — on the contrary, "all the sons of men shall be righteous" (/ Enoch 10:21). By contrast, the Apocalypse of Weeks assigns the origin of the plant of righteousness to the third week, in the time of Abraham, but has another development at the end of the seventh week. Then "the chosen righteous from the eternal plant of righteousness" will be chosen. 19 This special group is evidendy an offshoot from Israel. The Animal Apocalypse also recounts the rise of a special group in 1 Enoch 90:6: "and small lambs were born from those white sheep, and they began to open their eyes and see." Modern scholarship has often associated this development with the rise of Hasidim, who, like the lambs, take up arms and make common cause with Judas Maccabee. 20 The Apocalypse of Weeks also endorses the use of the sword against the wicked and is compatible with what we know of the Hasidim. The apocalyptic movement underlying the early Enoch literature appears to have become more sharply defined in the crisis under Antiochus Epiphanes, but it must have originated some considerable time before that. The "symbolic universe" 21 of the movement, also, 18 T h e Similitudes of Enoch (1 Enoch 37—71) are a later development, although they are Jewish and no later than the first century CE See D.W. Suter, "Weighed in the Balance: The Similitudes of Enoch in Recent Discussion," RelSRev 7 (1981) 217-

21. 19

O n the terminology, see F. Dexinger, Henochs Zehnwochenapokalypse und offene Probleme der Apokalyptikforschung (Leiden: Brill, 1977) 164-77. 20 1 Macc 2:42; 1 Macc 7:12-13; 2 Macc 14:6. See especially M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1974) 1.179. See the comments of G.W.E. Nickelsburg, "Social Aspects of Palestinian Jewish Apocalypticism,' ‫ י‬in D. Hellholm, ed.; Apocalypticism_in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tübingen: M o h r / Siebeck, 1983) 641-54. Related developments are attested m Jubilees 23 and C D 1. 21 Hanson ("Apocalypticism," 30) defines apocalypticism as "the symbolic universe in which an apocalyptic movement codifies its identity and interpretation of reality."

may have undergone some adjustments at that point, but the main outlines of the Enochic system may be found already in the Book of the Watchers and the Astronomical Book, which may be as old as the third century. Our knowledge of the history of this early Enoch movement is very sketchy, but some points have been clarified by recent study.22 A Mesopotamian Context The figure of Enoch is fashioned after Mesopotamian prototypes, especially Enmeduranki, who appears as seventh king in several antediluvian lists.23 This association is already evident in the Ρ source in Gen 5:21-24, where Enoch is placed seventh from creation. 24 The age of Enoch, 365 years, suggests an association with the solar year. Enmeduranki was associated with the sun-god Shamash. It is less certain whether the biblical phrase wayyithallek 'et-ha'elohtm, usually translated "he walked with God," reflects the tradition that Enmeduranki was admitted to the divine assembly and implies the later tradition that Enoch sojourned with the angels.25 Even if the use of the article with 'elohim reflects a polytheistic source, it is possible that his walking was still on earth. 2fi The motif of Enoch's final translation is derived from the Babylonian flood hero Utnapishtim. 27 The general context of these associations is clear enough. The Jewish writer constructs Enoch as a counterpart to legendary Mesopotamian heroes, no less than they in fame and distinction. This kind of competition between traditions is quite old and is reflected, for example, in the biblical appropriation of the flood story. It becomes much more blatant in the Hellenistic period, when Ps. Eupolemus attributes the discovery of astrology to Enoch and Artapanus credits Moses with inventing the Egyptian animal cults.28 22

VanderKam (Enoch) hasprovided the most complete discussion to date. Ibid., chaps. 1 and 2. The association with Enmeduranki was proposed by H. Zimmern in 1903 and has been widely accepted. 24 In the J source (Gen 4: 17), Enoch is son of Cain, grandson of Adam. 25 So VanderKam, Enoch, 44. For the texts about Enmeduranki, see W.G. Lambert, "Enmeduranki and Related Matters," JCS 21 (1967) 126-38. 26 T h e same phrase is used in connection with Noah in Gen 6:9. Cf. similar expressions for a relationship with God in Mai 2:6 and Mic 6:8. 2 ' ANET, 95. Note also the suggestion of R. Borger ("Die Bcschwörungsserie BIT MESERI und die Himmelfahrt Hcnochs," JMS 33 [1974] 183-96), who relates Enoch to Utuabzu, seventh sage and counselor of Enmeduranki, who ascended to heaven. 28 See J J . Collins, Behveen Athens and Jerusalem.Jewùh Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (New York: Crossroad, 1983) 32-39, and, more broadly, M. Braun, History and Romance in Graeco-Oriental Literature (Oxford: Blackwell, 1938). 23

The Priestly portrait of Enoch in Genesis stops far short of the legend developed in 1 Enoch. Enoch is not said to transmit revelations or to write books, and he is not contemporaneous with the fallen angels. Whatever association with the heavenly world is implied, it does not yet have the revelatory function that is crucial to 1 Enoch. Enoch , s role as revealer is, however, illuminated by the parallel with Enmeduranki. The Sumerian king was admitted into the divine assembly and shown mysteries that included the tablets of heaven and the techniques of divination. Enoch reveals "that which appeared to me in the heavenly vision and which I know from the words of the holy angels and understand from the tablets of heaven" (/ Enoch 93:2). Enmeduranki was regarded as the founder of the bārû guild of diviners and the mediating revealer of its methods. Enoch, the " scribe of righteousness" (/ Enoch 12:4), is the prototype of the "righteous and chosen" and is cast as their mediator of revelation. T h e analogy with Enmeduranki suggests that the Enoch movement was in some sense a Jewish counterpart to the Mesopotamian diviners. On the evidence of the literature, however, the influence of divination was stricdy limited. 29 Enoch does not employ the techniques of the bārû—consulting entrails, observing oil on water, or manipulating the cedar rod. T h e only Babylonian medium of revelation that he endorses is the dream, which had some precedent in biblical tradition (cf. Jacob and Joseph), although it had also been subject to criticism.30 Interestingly, dream interpretation was not especially characteristic of the bārû guild.31 The Enochic interest in the astral world may have been stimulated by the science of the astrologers, but Enoch does not use the stars for divination. The relation of the Enoch movement to the Babylonian diviners may be clarified by consideration of two biblical parallels. Second Isaiah vehemently ridicules the diviners and wise men of Babylon and contrasts them with the servant of the Lord (Isa 44:25-26; 47:13). Yet his demonstrations of Yahweh's superiority are colored by this polemic. He places exceptional emphasis on the claim that his God has foretold things from of old. T h e ability to predict is 29 VanderKam, who has argued at length for the relevance of divination as a background for apocalypticism, notes that the two "certainly have not produced comparable literature" (Enoch, 62). 30 O n dreams in the biblical tradition, see E.L. Ehrlich, Da Traum in Alten Testament (Berlin: Töpelmann, 1953). Note the negative evaluations of dreams in Deut 13: 1-3; J e r 23:25-28; 29:8; Sir 34: 1-8. 31 VanderKam, Enoch, 61.

accepted as a criterion of divine power. The prophet is not a diviner, but he claims to outdo them at their primary task.32 The court legends in Daniel 1-6 also have a Babylonian setting. Here Daniel is trained as a Babylonian wise man and, at least in Daniel 2, appears to be a member of a guild.33 He too outdoes the Chaldeans at their own task of interpreting dreams and mysterious writing, but he does so by the power of the God of Israel. Daniel, like Enoch, endorses the dream as a medium of revelation but does not resort to the divinatory techniques of the bārû. In each of these cases, the Jewish prophet or wise man is in competition with his Babylonian counterparts and accepts some of their presuppositions but also maintains a distinctive identity. The competitive aspect is not so explicit in the case of Enoch but is implied by the comparison with Enmeduranki. The analogy with Daniel is especially interesting for the present discussion. It is well known that the tales in Daniel 1-6 represent a preapocalyptic stage of the Daniel tradition, which is primarily concerned with problems of Jewish identity in the eastern Diaspora. 34 It seems that the Enoch tradition had its roots in a similar context. What is especially important is that the interest in the revelation of mysteries that is fundamental to apocalypticism 35 is introduced in both traditions in this context — in Daniel's role as dream interpreter and Enoch's ascent to heaven. Both go well beyond Second Isaiah and come closer to Babylonian models in the manner in which revelation is received. T o be sure, both traditions undergo some development, both in the manner of revelation and in the area of eschatology, before we can speak of apocalypses, and the development involves some reappropriation of Israelite traditions. Yet the understanding of revelation as the interpretation of mysteries, especially through dreams, which was developed in the Babylonian setting, remained an important constituent of the apocalyptic world view.36 32

See P. von der Osten-Sackcn, Die Apokalyptik in ihrem Verhältnis zu Prophetie und Weisheit (Theologische Existenz heute 157; Munich: Kaiser, 1969) 18-23. 33 J.J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel (HSM 16; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1977) 27-36. 34 W.L. Humphreys, "A Life-Style for the Diaspora: A Study of the Tales of Esther and Daniel," JBL 92 (1973) 211-23; J J. Collins. "The Court-Tales in Daniel and the Development of Apocalyptic,"JBL 94 (1975) 218-34. 35 This has been repeatedly emphasized in recent years. See the definition of apocalypse in Semeia 14(1979) 9; Rowland, The Open Heaven, 13-14; J. Carmignac, "Qu'est-ce que l'apocalyptique? Son emploi à Qumrân," RevQ 10(1979) 3-33; H. Stegemann, "Die Bedeutung der Qumranfunde für die Erforschung der Apokalyptik," in Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism, 495-530. See the formulation of VanderKam (Enoch, 62), who argues that a common structure of revelation through enigmatic signs distinguishes both Meso-

The differences between the Daniel and Enoch traditions should also be noted. Daniel is a practitioner of courdy wisdom, concerned with the rise and fall of kingdoms. The earliest Enoch tradition is characterized by pseudoscientific speculation on cosmology and astronomy. These interests derive from the ascent of Enoch and his connection with the solar calendar. 37 The distinctive interests suggest that each tradition originally had a different Sitz im Leben and explain some of the differences between the apocalyptic movements that developed. 38 The Daniel tradition first takes on a clearly apocalyptic character during the crisis of the Maccabean era. It is now apparent that Enochic apocalypticism had taken shape before then. The "symbolic universe" of this movement is most fully described in the Book of the Watchers, which contains the oldest extant account of Enoch's ascent, as distinct from his final translation. 39 The Symbolic Universe of Enoch The report of Enoch's äscent is embedded in the Book of the Watchers, 1 Enoch 12—16. This passage occupies a pivotal place in the book. The myth of the Watchers in 1 Enoch 6—11 makes no mention of potamian divination and Jewish apocalypticism from biblical prophecy. Compare J J . Collins, "Jewish Apocalyptic Against Its Hellenistic Near Eastern Environment," BASOR 220 [1975] 27-36), where I emphasize revelation by interpretation as a widespread characteristic of the Hellenistic age (cf. also The Apocalyptic Vision, 67-93). J . Carmignac ("Description du phénomène de l'apocalyptique dans l'Ancien Testament," in Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism, 163-70) argues that dreams are at the origin of apocalypticism, without regard to extrabiblical material. ' ‫ ד‬The antiquity of this material is supported by the fact that the Astronomical Book does not reflect a dispute between solar and lunar calendars, as does Jubilees in the Maccabean era. Instead, it polemicizes against a 360-day calendar which was never official in Judaism and has its closest parallels in Babylonia. See VanderKam, Enoch, 91-104. The primitive character of Enoch's astronomy is emphasized by O. Neugebauer, The "Astronomical" Chapters of the Ethiopie Book of Enoch (72—82) (Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1981). 3 " Compare the argument of R.R. Wilson, "From Prophecy to Apocalyptic: Reflections on the Shape of Israelite Religion," Semeia 21 (1981) 93, that "the shape of a particular group's religion and literature will depend on the group's social and religious background." " The oldest fragments ascribed to the Astronomical Book by Milik do not overlap at all with the Ethiopie text, although they do overlap with another Qumran fragment of the Astronomical Book. The pre-Maccabean Astronomical Book seems to have been quite different from the text that survived. The original form cannot be reconstructed simply by excising supposed additions from the Ethiopie text. The book as we have it does not describe Enoch's ascent, but clearly presupposes a heavenly tour (cf 76: 1). The clearest reference is in 81 :5, where three angels set Enoch down in front of his house. Since these have not been mentioned !before, they are thought to be derived from the Animal Apocalypse (cf 87:3). The tour framework then may be part of a secondary recension of the Astronomical Book.

Enoch and is widely thought to be woven from two older traditions.40 Chapters 12-16, where Enoch is introduced for the first time, has aptly been called "a kind of commentary" on that myth. 41 It pronounces a verdict on the Watchers of the preceding chapters and highlights some aspects of their sin: they abandoned heaven and became unclean with human women, and they spread a worthless mystery on earth. On the other hand, this passage prepares us for the "true" revelation, which will be furnished in the journeys of Enoch in 1 Enoch 17-36. This revelation is also directly related to the story of the Watchers. While the various segments of the Book of the Watchers may have had diverse origins, they are now related to each other in a coherent apocalypse.42 In view of Enoch's other associations with Enmeduranki, we must assume that the idea of his ascent for revelatory purposes was suggested, at least in part, by that king's admission to the divine assembly. The actual account in 1 Enoch 14 however, does not even mention the heavenly tablets that are noted in 1 Enoch 81:1 and 93:2. Instead, it is shaped in large part by the tradition of prophetic throne visions, reaching back to Micaiah ben Imlah (1 Kings 22) and Isaiah 6.43 Prophetic influence is conspicuous in the climax of the vision, where Enoch is given a mission to rebuke the Watchers. There are also several noteworthy departures from the prophetic tradition. The whole experience is set in a dream, a "mantic" medium but one that had ancient Israelite precedents. It should be noted, however, that dreams of journeys to heaven or the netherworld are not recorded in the Hebrew Bible but are attested in Mesopotamia. 44 The actual upward travel of Enoch is recorded. The vision of the heavenly mansion is far more complex than what we find in the prophets and has affinities with later, mystical,

40 Hanson, "Rebellion in Heaven," 197, and, in more detail, G.W.E. Nickelsburg, "Apocalyptic and Myth in 1 Enoch 6—11," JBL 96 (1977) 384-86, and D. Dimant, "1 Enoch 6—11: A Methodological Perspective," SBLASP (1978) 1:323-39. 41 G.W.E. Nickelsburg, "Enoch, Levi and Peter: Recipients of Revelation in Upper Galilee," JBL 100 (1981) 575. 42 J J . Collins, "The Apocalyptic Technique: Setting and Function in the Book of the Watchers," CBQ.44 (1982) 91-111; J.C. Thorn, "Aspects of the Form, Meaning and Function of the Book of the Watchers," Neotestamentica 17 (1983) 40-48. 43 I. Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkcwah Mysticism (Leiden: Brill, 1980) 21-42: Rowland. The Open Heaven. 78-80. 44 A.L. Oppenheim, The Interpretation of Dreams in the Ancient Near Elast (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1956) 214. Note especially the "Vision of the Nether World" attributed to an Assyrian prince in a tablet from the seventh century (ANET, 109-10), and see further H. Kvanvig. Roots of Apocalyptic (WMANT 61; Ncukirchcn-Vluyn: Ncukirchcncr Verlag, 1988).

literature. 45 It would seem to presuppose already some tradition of mystical speculation. Most significandy, Enoch is implicitly cast as a revealer of mysteries. The Watchers are angels who descend to reveal a worthless mystery. Enoch is a human being who ascends to get the true revelation. 46 T h e sin of the Watchers is specified in 1 Enoch 12-16 as improper marriage and improper revelation. Both of these factors are prominent in 1 Enoch 6— 11, where they lead to the spread of violence on earth. By analogy with other apocalyptic writings, it is very probable that the myth is used paradigmatically to describe the author's own time, although we cannot demand an exact correlation of all details. There is a growing consensus that the editorial section in 1 Enoch 12— 16 implies a critique of the Jerusalem priesthood (see esp. 1 Enoch 15:2: "You ought to petition on behalf of men, not men on behalf of you").47 T h e description of Enoch as a "scribe of righteousness" suggests that the author and his circle may have been scribes too. T h e application of the myth can hardly be restricted to the priesthood, however. It surely entails a more general description of a world gone awry. In view of the analogies with Greek myths, especially that of Prometheus, 48 the general situation is most probably the spread of Hellenistic culture in the third century. The myth would seem to imply that superhuman forces are at work, but human responsibility is not necessarily excluded thereby. Rather, the paradigm of the Watchers underlines the responsibility of sinners and their liability to punishment. 49 Enoch's own revelation is derived from his tour, which begins in 1 Enoch 17 and takes him to the ends of the earth, accompanied by angelic guides.50 It is evident that the author draws on a learned tradition of cosmology and mythical geography. It is inappropriate, however, to ask whether "scientific" or eschatological interests 45

So esp. Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism. While Enoch is given the privilege of entering to the divine presence that is denied to some angels, VanderKam's statement that he "attains at least the status of an angel" (Enoch, 131) does not seem to be justified in the Book of the Watchers. Such a definitive exaltation is attested, however, in the later tradition: 1 Enoch 71 ;2 Enoch 22, and the so-called 3 Enoch 4. 47 D.W. Suter, "Fallen Angel, Fallen Priest: The Problem of Family Purity in 1 Enoch 6—16, HUCA 50 (1979) 115-35; Nickelsburg, "Enoch, Levi and Peter," 586. 48 Nickelsburg, "Apocalyptic and Myth/' 383-405. Nickelsburg sees an allusion to the wars of the Diadochi in 1 Enoch 6 — 11. 49 1 Enoch 98:4 counters the deterministic implications of the story of the Watchers by insisting that "sin was not sent on the earth but man of himself created it." 50 M. Himmelfarb (TOUTS of Hell: An Apocalyptic Form in Jewish and Christian Literature [Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1983] 50-60) comments on the form of the tour and points to analogies in Ezekiel 40-48 and in ancient dream interpretation. These analogies do not account for the range of the content. 46

predominate in this composition. The pseudoscientific lore is placed at the service of eschatology. Enoch's first tour in chaps. 17-19 culminates with the prison for the stars of heaven. The second tour begins in chap. 20 again with the place of punishment of the stars and proceeds to the abodes of the dead in chap. 22. Subsequently, Enoch sees the fire of all the lights of heaven, the place where God will set his throne in the end time and the place of judgment for sinners (chaps. 23-27). 5 ' The remainder of the tour, to the ends of the earth, serves to fill in the cosmological context of the places of judgment and reaffirm the order of the universe, which had been eclipsed by the revolt of the Watchers. 52 Enoch's tour cannot be adequately explained either as a midrash on "walking with the angels" or by the precedent of Enmeduranki. While there are many partial parallels, it does not seem that this tour was based on a clear model. 53 Rather, it expresses the new symbolic universe of one Jewish movement in the Hellenistic age. The orderly world traversed by Enoch stands in sharp contrast to the anomie of the story of the Watchers and presumably reflects the disparity between the author's faith in a divinely controlled universe and the actual historical experience of the time. The symbolic universe of Enoch is expressed in mythological terms although it embraces pseudoscientific cosmology. Two aspects are especially important. First, there is a transcendent world, which is not accessible to humanity without special revelation. 54 It includes the heavenly council of God and his angelic hosts. It also includes an elaborate cosmology that is undisturbed by the disruptions of the Watchers. Second, there is the assurance of a definitive judgment. This is not only foretold. It is built into the cosmology in the places of judgment. This judgment will deal not only with the fate of the earth but also with the fate of individuals beyond death. Both these aspects serve to restore the sense of order and justice disrupted by the Watchers. 51

Stone (Scriptures, Seek and Virions, 34-35) acknowledges "some eschatological interest, particularly in chapters 1 - 6 and 10:14-16" but passes over the eschatological significance of Enoch's tour. 52 VanderKam's statement that the order of the universe is presupposed and unchanging in the Book of the Watchers (Enoch, 7 n. 24) does not appear to take the descent of the Watchers into account. 53 See VanderKam, Enoch, 137-8. The parallels that have been adduced include the travels of Gilgamesh and the Odyssey, especially book 11. 54 It is often observed that many of the places observed by Enoch are actually located on earth (e.g., Rowland, The Open Heaven 124-26). His experience is transcendent, however, in the sense that it goes beyond the normal range of human experience.

The Astronomical Book has a similar mythological framework. It is presented as an angelic revelation mediated by Uriel, the guide of all the heavenly bodies. Several angelic leaders of the stars are named, especially in 1 Enoch 82.55 The eschatological horizon is shown in the allusion to "the new creation which will last forever" in 1 Enoch 72:1 and the upheavals "in the days of the sinners when many heads of the stars will go astray" (/ Enoch 80).56 Reward after death is implied at 1 Enoch 81:4. T h e predominant interest of the Astronomical Book is in calendrical and cosmological matters, but they are presented in the context of an apocalyptic view of the world. The cosmological interest recedes in the "historical" Enoch apocalypses, the Animal Apocalypse and the Apocalypse of Weeks. These works represent a new stage in the Enoch movement, marked by a more sharply defined group identity and the appropriation of new literary forms. Their novelty over against the Book of the Watchers should not be underestimated. Here we can only note some points of continuity. T h e periodization of history is already adumbrated, though certainly not developed, in / Enoch 10:12, where the Watchers are bound for seventy generations. Both "historical" apocalypses provide for a final judgment that involves the destruction of the Watchers. T h e Animal Apocalypse is allegorical throughout and attaches great importance to angelic activity, notably the seventy angelic "shepherds" of the nations. Yet it evidently endorses the human initiative of Judas Maccabee (the horned ram in 1 Enoch 90:9). The Epistle (1 Enoch 91 —105) speaks more directly in terms of human causality, but angels figure prominently in the judgment and the life beyond death (1 Enoch 102—104). It appears then that the Enoch movement has its own distinctive history, which has little relation to the eschatological conventicles posited by Plöger. Rather, it originated in the confrontation with Mesopotamian culture in the eastern Diaspora 57 and its "scientific" interests developed in that setting. The subsequent development of 55 VanderKam's statement that the Astronomical Book "does not disclose a transcendent reality beyond the perceivable universe" (Enoch, 109) is odd, since he recognizes the pervasive role of tne angels (103 n. 84). 56 VanderKam (Enoch, 106-7) argues that chaps. 80 and 81 are secondary additions. The allusion to Enoch's return to earth at 81: 5 seems to presuppose the Animal Apocalypse (87: 3), but this may be part of a broader revision rather than simply an addition. The objection to chap. 80 is that the disruption of the stars allegedly contradicts 72: 1, which says that their regulations will last until the new creation. Whether there is a real contradiction here is questionable. The regulations may still be in force if some stars digress, or the events described in chap. 80 may be part of the transition to the new creation. 57 This is not to say that any of the extant Enoch books were necessarily written in Babylonia. It is generally agreed that at least the Book of Dreams and Epistle were

an eschatologically oriented apocalyptic movement seems to have been prompted by the culture crisis of the Hellenistic age, well in advance of the Antiochan persecution. The "symbolic universe" constructed in the Book of the Watchers draws on many traditions, including biblical prophecy, but also retains the imprint of a tradition of pseudoscientific learning. Relation to Biblical Tradition The question of continuity with the biblical tradition does not admit of a simple answer, not only because of the diversity of Enoch's sources but also because of the diversity within the older Israelite religion. The biblical canon is shaped to a great degree by Deuteronomic influence. In Deut 30: 12 we are assured that God's commandment "is not in heaven, that you should say, 'Who will go up for us to heaven, and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?'" The whole premise of Enochic revelation is thereby undermined. A similar perspective is found in the wisdom literature in the rhetorical question of Agur: "Who has ascended to heaven and come down?" (Prov 30:1-4). There is no reason to suppose that the Enoch group rejected the Mosaic law, but it was not sufficient for them; hence the need for the higher angelic revelation. The heavenly revelations cannot be understood as an explanatory midrash on the Torah. They give new information, things that Enoch alone is supposed to have seen (/ Enoch 19:3). It is significant that these revelations are ascribed to a figure far older than Moses, older even than the Israelite people. I Enoch is very sharply in contrast with Deuteronomic religion.58 There were other strands of Israelite religion, however, that allowed

written in Palestine. The provenance of the Book of the Watchers is quite uncertain. The book draws on various traditions besides Babylonian ones. Milik thinks the author "was perhaps himself a Jcmsalemite, for he has an excellent knowledge of the environs of the Holy City (26:2-27: 1)" {The Booh of Enoch, 26). Nickclsburg has a stronger case for Galilean origin because of the peculiar prominence of the region around Dan and Mt. Hermon in the story of the Watchers ("Enoch, Levi and Peter," 586-87) but even here the geographical location may have been attached to one of the sources of the Book of the Watchers. ss The covenantal allusions noted by L. Hartman in 1 Enoch 1 — 5 (Asking for a Meaning: A Study of 1 Enoch 1—5 [Lund: Gleerup, 1979]) are placed in a new context of cosmic rather than Deuteronomic law. Consequently it seems misleading to describe Enoch's "pattern of religion" as "covenantal nomism" (as docs E.P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism [Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977]). See the discussion of law in / Enoch in C. Münchow, Ethik und Eschatologie. Ein Beitrag zum Verständnis derfrühjüdischenApokalyptik (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1981) 16-42.

more room for mythological speculation. 59 The angelic world which enjoys such prominence in 1 Enoch is a direct development of the heavenly council and host that are widely attested in the Hebrew Bible.60 The throne vision in 1 Enoch 14, with its entourage of holy ones, stands in the tradition of the prophetic visions of Micaiah ben Imlah and Isaiah. Cosmic eschatology also has strong Israelite roots, as Hanson and others have argued. An intriguing passage in Isa 24:21 -23 says that "on that day the Lord will punish the host of heaven, in heaven, and the kings of the earth, on the earth....They will be shut up in a prison, and after many days they will be punished." In its context, this passage is related to the reign of the Lord of hosts on Zion. It evidendy presupposes a mythical story that is not explicit in the text and raises the possibility that Enoch's concept of the prison for the host of heaven is derived from a tradition that was at home in the Jerusalem cult. Other allusions to the punishment of heavenly beings are found in Psalms 82 and 58. The idea that Yahweh will judge the nations and the world is widely attested in the psalms and the prophets (e.g., Psalms 96; 98; Isa 2:4). Even in the light of the mythical traditions associated especially with the Jerusalem cult, there is much that is new in Enoch, much of which may be attributed to the distinctive character of the Enoch tradition. No biblical prophet enjoys the same degree of access to the heavenly world. Enoch's revelation is the disclosure of a mystery, which contains extensive information about the heavenly world or about history. It is not simply the proclamation of God's plan. The range of cosmological speculation is greatly enlarged. The angels are now given names and are the focus of much greater attention than was the case in the Hebrew Bible. We may note here the rabbinic tradition that the names of the angels were brought back from Babylon. 61 Two other points are of more far-reaching importance. First, the hope for judgment after death radically alters the biblical view of salvation. The language of resurrection is used a number of times in 59

See the suggestive article of M. Barker, " Some Reflections Upon the Enoch Myth,"J507"15 (1980) 7-29, although she greatly exaggerates the importance of the fallen angels in the Enochic corpus. See also Stone, Scriptures, Sects and Visions, 30. 60 F.M. Cross, "The Council of Yahweh in Second Isaiah," JNES 12 (1953) 27477; P.D. Miller, The Divine Warrior in Early Israel (HSM 5; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973) 66-74; E.T. Mullen, Jr., The Assembly of the Gods: The Divine Council in Canaanite and Early Hebrew Literature (HSM 24; Chico, Calif: Scholars Press, 1980). 61 Bereshit Rabba, at Gen 18:1. H. Bietenhard, Du himmlische Welt im Urchristentum und Spätjudentum (Tübingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 1951) 12.

the Hebrew Bible for the restoration of the Jewish people— for example, Ezekiel 37 and Isa 26: 19.62 The discussion in 1 Enoch 22, however, is presented in the context of mythical geography and is indebted both to Babylonian and to Greek traditions. 63 The motif of awakening from sleep used in 1 Enoch 91:10 echoes Isa 26:19, but the extended discussion in / Enoch 102 — 104 speaks in terms of the elevation of the righteous to the stars and to the host of heaven 64 We cannot now be sure of the circumstances in which the belief in the afterlife began to play a role in the Enoch tradition. In view of the cosmological context in the Book of the Watchers, and the association with the angels in the Epistle, we must suspect that reflection on the translation of Enoch himself played a part in this development. Personal afterlife is not, of course, the only aspect of apocalyptic eschatology. 1 Enoch also looks for the end of this world and a new creation in which the earth will be transformed, ideas more in accordance with prophetic eschatology. Yet the hope for a blessed afterlife, especially in the angelic form that is explicit in 1 Enoch 104 has great implications for apocalyptic piety and goes hand in hand with the tendency to mysticism evident in Enoch's association with the angels and in his throne vision.65 Second, the claim of a special exclusive revelation often entails a tendency to sectarianism. 66 1 Enoch presents an elaborate view of the world based on Enoch's alleged experience. The movement that accepts Enoch as its authority is likely to be at variance with those who do not. It is difficult to assess how far the Enoch movement was estranged from the rest of Jewish society at the various stages of its history. If we can assume that the lunar calendar of rabbinic Judaism was already in force in the third century, the 364-day calendar of the Astronomical Book would have been an obstacle to fi2

Isa 26: 19 is sometimes taken as a reference to the resurrection of individuals (e.g., L.J. Greenspoon, "The Origin of the Idea of Resurrection," in B. Halpcrn and J.D. Levcnson, ed., Traditions in Transformation [Winona Lake, In.: Eisenbrauns, 1981] 284-86), but the context is clearly concerned with the wellbeing of the nation rather than of individuals. 6 ‫ י‬Sec the thorough study by M.-T. Wacker, Weltordnung und Gericht. Studien zu I Henoch 22 (Wurzburg: Echter, 1982). Babylonian influence is apparent in the location of the underworld inside a mountain, Greek influence in the differentiation of groups after death. 64 See especially G.W.E. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, Immortality and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism (Harvard Theological Studies 26; Cambridge: Harvard Univcrsity Press, 1972) 112-29. 65 On apocalyptic piety, see J.C.H. Lcbram, "The Piety of the Jewish Apocalyptists," in Hellnolm, ed., Apocalypticism, 171-210. 6 ‫ יי‬This is not necessarily always the case. 2 Baruch uses the claim of special revelation to buttress the authority of the Mosaic law.

participation in the cult.67 However, we are poorly informed about the history of the calendar, and the Enoch group may not have been located in proximity to the Temple in any case. A few passages reflect a negative attitude to the Second Temple or to the priesthood. 68 Yet the Animal Apocalypse seems to mourn the death of Onias III (/ Enoch 90:8) and make common cause with Judas Maccabee. T h e message of the Epistle is intended broadly for the "sons of earth" (/ Enoch 105:1-2). If the Animal Apocalypse and the Apocalypse of Weeks are correctly associated with the Hasidim, this would imply active participation in the events of the Maccabean era. It is noteworthy, however, that the books of Enoch were treasured in the Qumran community, which eventually made a cleaner break with Jewish society.69 Daniel and Enoch The apocalyptic visions of Daniel seem prima fade to stand in clearer continuity with biblical prophecy. Two recent studies have independendy traced the development of the symbolic vision form from Amos to the apocalypses.70 Yet the development is also significandy modified by the form of the dream report, as we might expect in the light of Daniel 1 - 6 . Dream reports throughout the ancient Near East are characteristically presented within a conventionalized frame that tells about the dreamer, the locality, and the circumstances and often reports his reaction at the end.71 This frame is an important formal element in the visions of Daniel. Daniel lacks the cosmological interests of Enoch (which recede even in the "historical" Enochic apocalypses of the Maccabean era). Yet the symbolic universe of Daniel is closer to that of Enoch than to 67 T h e history of the calendar is in dispute. See J . C . VanderKam, "The Origin, Character and Early History of the 364-Day Calendar: A Reassessment o f j a u b e r t ' s Hypotheses," CBQ, 41 (1979) 390-411; P.R. Davies, "Calendrical Change and Q u m r a n Origins: An Assessment of VanderKam's Theory," CßQ.45 (1983) 80-89; and VanderKam, " T h e 364-Day Calendar in the Enochic Literature," SBLASP (1983) 157-65. 68 We have noted that a critique of the priesthood may be implied in the Book of the Watchers. T h e Apocalypse of Weeks dismisses the entire postexilic period as "an apostate generation" and ignores the restoration of the Persian era. T h e Animal Apocalypse says that the offerings of the Second Temple were impure. 69 O n the affinities of the Enoch literature with the Q u m r a n sect, see especially G.W.E. Nickelsburg, " T h e Episde of Enoch and the Q u m r a n D t e r a t u r e / ' T O 33 (1982) 333-48. 70 S. Niditch, The Symbolic Vision in Biblical Tradition (HSM 30: Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1983); K. Koch, "Vom profetischen zum apokalyptischen Visionsbericht," in Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism, 413-46. 71 Oppenheim, The Interpretation of Dreams, 187.

its biblical precedents. 72 The heavenly host is more active here than in any other biblical book.73 The patron angels of the nations are the forces behind history in Daniel 10, as in the Animal Apocalypse, and the victory of Michael in Dan 12:1 is evidently of crucial importance for the Jews on earth. 74 The vision of the divine throne in Daniel 7 is remarkably similar to that of 1 Enoch 14, and the analogy strongly supports the view that the "holy ones" in Daniel are heavenly beinge.75 The resurrection in Daniel 12, where the wise teachers will shine like stars, directly parallels the formulation of 1 Enoch 104:2. Further parallels can be drawn between the periodization of history as seventy weeks of years in Daniel 9, the seventy shepherds in the Animal Apocalypse, and the schema of weeks in the Apocalypse of Weeks. Daniel also attests the rise of a distinct group, the maskîlîm, who act in the time of persecution by instructing the masses. The instruction they give is presumably the view of the world disclosed in Daniel's visions. Here again, the claim to a higher revelation involves a sectarian tendency, although the maskîlîm are actively engaged with the rest of Jewish society. The stance of the Danielic group is rather different from the militant posture of the righteous in 1 Enoch and does not correspond to what we are told of the Hasidim in the books of Maccabees. 76 The various apocalyptic groups of the Maccabean era can be classified together only if Hasidim is used as a very broad umbrella term. It is noteworthy, however, that both the Danielic and the Enochic writings were preserved at Qumran. In Daniel as in Enoch, we find a movement that has its own historical roots, quite distinct from earlier prophetic groups. In the stress of the Antiochan persecution, it formulated an apocalyptic symbolic universe that owed much to ancient myth. 77 The fact that 72 Sec my remarks in "Apocalyptic Genre and Mythic Allusions in Daniel," JSOT 21 (1981) 83-100. 73 The extraordinary claim of W.S. Towner [Daniel [Interpretation; Atlanta: Knox, 1984] 173) that "a de-mythologizing of angels and the heavenly forces has already taken place in the Danielic corpus" cannot be defended historically. 74 His importance is all the greater if he is identified with the "one like a son of man" in chap. 7. See my arguments in The Apocalyptic Vision, 144-46. Sec also Rowland, The Open Heaven 178-83. 75 Ibid., 123-44. See also A. Lacocque, The Book of Daniel (Mania‫׳‬. Knox, 1979) 130-32. 76 Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision, 201-5. Compare Nickelsburg, "Social Aspects of Palestinian Jewish Apocalypticism," 647-48. 77 Especially in the adaptation of the Canaanite Baal/Yamm myth in chap. 7. See Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision, 96-104 and the essay, "Stirring Up the Great Sea" in this volume. AJ. Ferch (The Son of Alan in Daniel 7 [Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews University Press, 1979]) misconstrues the nature of mythic allusions, which inevitably involve a transformation of the mythic source. See my comments in "Apocalyptic Genre and Mythic Allusions," 91-95.

the canonical Daniel draws so heavily on myth has scandalized some pious commentators, but this was in fact a point of continuity with Israelite tradition, especially with the cult traditions of Jerusalem. 78 Again, the innovations are significant. Daniel does not explicitly expect a new creation, and the hope for a "kingdom" (presumably on earth) has strong biblical precedents, but the hope for salvation is changed radically by the belief in the resurrection of the dead. We must emphasize that the increased use of myth does not detract from the seriousness of human actions in history. It does, however, place those actions in a new perspective, where their value cannot be measured by their success in this world. Conclusion Jewish apocalypticism, as we find it in 1 Enoch and Daniel, cannot be adequately described as a child of prophecy any more than it can be adequately attributed to Babylonian influence or any other single source. It was essentially a new creation, designed for the needs of a new age, and one that embraced different movements and traditions. Novelty, of course, is not an obstacle to authenticity. Every stage of Israelite religion is marked by changes, often stimulated by contact with neighboring, pagan religions. Jewish apocalypticism was one of several ways in which Jews of the Hellenistic age attempted to adapt their traditions. Despite their sectarian tendencies, these groups continued to interact with other areas ofJewish society. Even the Essenes, who were extreme in their withdrawal, were still recognized as a Jewish "philosophy" by Josephus. It is increasingly evident that apocalypticism continued to play a part in Judaism long after the rise of Christianity, 79 although it is true that it had a far more central place in the new religion.80

78 This has been shown especially by Hanson, "Old Testament Apocalyptic Reexamined" and idem, 'Jewish Apocalyptic Against Its Ancient Near Eastern Environment," RB 78 (1971) 31-58. 79 A.J. Saldarini, "Apocalypses and 'Apocalyptic' in Rabbinic Literature and Mysticism," Semeia 14 (1979) 187-205; Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism; Rowland, The Open Heaven, 271-348. 80 See my essay, "The Apocalyptic Context of Christian Origins," The Bible and Its Traditions, Michigan Quarterly Review 22 (1983) 250-64.

CHAPTER FOUR

J E W I S H APOCALYPTICISM AGAINST ITS HELLENISTIC NEAR EASTERN E N V I R O N M E N T

In 1950 G. Ernest Wright published The Old Testament Against Its Environment, which became one of the most influential Englishlanguage books on biblical theology in the subsequent quarter of a century. 1 The book has been criticized for its excessive emphasis on the preposition "against" — the differences between ancient Israel and its neighbors. 2 Yet it shared the common presupposition of nearly all biblical scholarship in this century, that the Old Testament can only be understood in the light of its Near Eastern context. A comprehension of the surrounding cultures remains a prerequisite to the understanding of the Israelite texts, since the language of the Old Testament, though modified and adapted, was drawn heavily from these cultures. The importance of the Near Eastern background has been axiomarie in the study of early Israel. However, it has received surprisingly little attention in the study of the post-exilic period. In fact, semiticists in general pay little attention to the period after the rise of Persia. Most of the major reviews of Mesopotamian and Canaanite culture dismiss the Hellenistic period in a few paragraphs. 3 Consequently late developments such as Jewish apocalypticism are often explained as intrusive elements of Greek or Persian origin.4 Recendy Paul D. Hanson has protested against the neglect of the Semitic component in Jewish apocalypticism. 5 Updating the work of Gunkel 6 by use of the Ugaritic myths, Hanson argues that apo1

G.E. Wright, The Old Testament Against Its Environment (SBT 1/2; Chicago: Regnery, 1950). See the comments of J . Barr, "Trends and Prospects in Biblical Theology," JTS 25(1974) 267 and B.S. Childs, Biblical Theology in Crisis (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1970) 47-50. 3 E.g. A.L. Oppenheim, Ancient Mesopotamia (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964) 63; H.W.F. Saggs, The Greatness that was Babylon (New York: Hawthorn, 1962) 152-3; S. Moscati, Die Phoniker (Zurich: Kindler, 1966) 65. 4 See the classic work of W. Bousset, Die Religion des Judentums im späthellenistischen Zeitalter (3rd ed.; ed. H. Gressman; Tübingen: Mohr, 1926) 478-84. 5 P.D. Hanson, "Jewish Apocalyptic against its Near Eastern Environment," RB 78(1971) 31-58; "Old Testament Apocalyptic Re-examined," Interpretation 25(1971) 454-79. 6 H. Gunkel, Schöpfung und Chaos (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1895).

calypticism drew heavily on the mythic patterns and motifs of the ancient Near East. This insight is of fundamental importance for understanding the apocalyptic texts and for appreciating their continuity with earlier Near Eastern traditions. We cannot fail to be surprised, however, that in a study of the Near Eastern environment of postexilic apocalypticism Hanson refers to no non-biblical data later than the time of Sennacherib. One is left with the impression that the post-exilic period was the Sheol of ancient civilization where the myths and ideas of an earlier period led a shadowy afterlife, enjoying vitality only in so far as they were reincarnated in Jewish apocalypticism. Yet the period which followed the rise of Persia was one of the most eventful in the entire history of the Near East. In particular the conquests of Alexander had a profound impact on the eastern civilizations. The impact included an unprecedented circulation of ideas among the various peoples, but more significantly the conditions of life in the conquered areas were changed and as a result there was a transformation of attitudes which went far beyond the literary influence of motifs and patterns. We could hardly expect that Judaism, either in its homeland or in the diaspora, was untouched by this upheaval. If we would appreciate Jewish apocalypticism against its contemporary Near Eastern environment we must look beyond the traces of literary influence between particular books to similar phenomena in the various cultures and the common or similar conditions which produced them. In this essay I wish to consider some of the more conspicuous features which Jewish apocalypticism shared with its Hellenistic Near Eastern environment. While occasional examples of literary borrowings can be found, I will be chiefly concerned with the parallel developments in different national traditions, each of which retained its distinctive character. The similarities which we find throughout the Hellenistic Near East are due primarily to the fact that traditions which had much in common to begin with (e.g. the idea of the kingship of the national deity) were subjected to the same new circumstances. In particular the alteration of political conditions by the advent of the Greeks must be considered a root cause of the new developments in the Hellenistic age. The political setting The most obvious result of the conquests of Alexander was the demise of native rule in the various Near Eastern states. Despite the attempts of the Ptolemies and Seleucids to claim the titles and

traditions of previous native rulers, they were still representatives of a foreign, intrusive civilization.7 Of course the loss of national kingships in the ancient Near East was not entirely due to the campaigns of Alexander. The Jewish kingdom had already been destroyed by the Babylonians, the Babylonian by the Persians. Eventually the Ptolemaic and Seleucid kingdoms would fall to the Romans. T h e Jews were not the only Near Eastern people who resisted Hellenistic rule in the Near East. After the battle of Raphia in 217 BC, in which native Egyptians were enrolled in the Ptolemaic army for the first time, there followed a series of native uprisings, of which the most important took place in the reign of Ptolemy V Epiphanes (204-180 BC).8 These were not simply confrontations of Greeks and Egyptians. T o some extent the revolts were encouraged and assisted by Greek mercenaries, while some conservative Egyptian priests sided with the Ptolemies. 9 Yet, as is clear from their propaganda, the rebels often saw the conflict as a nationalistic rebellion against the Greeks. In the Demotic Chronicle, a pesher-like document from the early Ptolemaic period, the focal point of the prophecy reads: It is a man from Heracleopolis who will rule after the Ionians. 'Rejoice, Ο prophet of Harsaphis.' That means: The prophet of Harsaphis rejoices after the Ionians. For a ruler has arisen in Heracleopolis. 10

The prophecy looks with anticipated delight to the day when the Greek rulers will be replaced by a king from a legitimate Egyptian line." Again, the Potter's Oracle looks forward to a "king from the sun" who will be sent by Isis, and the destruction of the city by the 7

See W.W. Tarn, Hellenistic Civilization (3rd ed.; Cleveland: World, 1961) 128-29 on the Seleucids; 205 on the Ptolemies. 8 Tarn, Hellenistic Civilization, 205; C. Préaux, "Politique du race ou politique royale, , ‫ י‬Chronique d'Egypte 11(1936) 111-38; "Esquisse d'une histoire des révolutions égyptiennes sous les Lagides," ibid., 522-52; E. Will, Histoire politique du monde hellenistique II (Nancy: Berger-Levrault, 1967) 32-36. 9 Préaux, "Politique du race," 111-38; S.K. Eddy, The King is Dead (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1961) 300. 10 C.C. McCown, "Hebrew and Egyptian Apocalyptic Literature," HTR 18(1925) 357-411. Heracleopolis was the scene of the mythical battle between Horus and Seth and the crowning of Osiris and Horus. Its claim to bc the seat of sovereignty at least for Upper Egypt is indicated by its Egyptian title "City of the Royal child" and the tide of its High Priest, "King of Upper Egypt." See H. Bonnet, "Herakleopolis," Reallexicon der Aegyptischen Religionsgeschichte (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1952) 286-7. 11 See now, however, J . H . Johnson, "Is the Demotic Chronicle an Anti-Greek Tract?" in H.-J. Thissen and K.-Th. Zauzich, ed., Grammata Demotika (Festschrift E. Lüddeckens; Würzburg: Zauzich, 1984) 107-24, who argues that the objection is not to the foreign origin of the Greek rulers, but to their mis-rule.

sea (Alexandria).12 Here again the hope of the oracle centers on the restoration of the native kingship and the displacement of the Greeks. The role of Isis in the Potter's Oracle, and the mythological associations of Heracleopolis show the fusion of politics and religion typical of the entire ancient Near East. The Seleucids, who ruled over a greater variety of subjects, also encountered a series of revolts, beginning with the rise of the Parthians shortly after 250 bc 13 In the reign of Antiochus III (223187 BC) we find revolts led by Greek generals, Molon in Media and Achaeus in Asia Minor, who, like their counterparts in Egypt, exploited the unrest of the native people. Antiochus III himself was killed in battle with the people of Elam in 187 BC when he was attacking the temple of Bel. According to Diodorus Siculus he accused the temple priests of declaring war on him, so here too there may have been a revolt.14 The role of the temple in Elam draws attention once again to the fusion of religion and politics. This point is further illustrated by an incident in Babylon in 168 BC.15 Several statues of Hellenized gods were made from gold taken from the Esagila treasury and set up in the temple. Certain "thieves" then attacked the temple and stripped the statues. For this olfence they were condemned to death and burnt. We are familiar with the use of the term "thieves" to designate resistance fighters in the writings of Josephus. 16 We may suspect that the "thieves" in question were prompted by religio-nationalistic motives rather than desire for booty. These various incidents provide the broader context in which the Maccabean rebellion must be seen. We might continue the history of Near Eastern resistance through the Roman period to show that the Jewish revolts against Rome similarly did not take place in a 12

For the Potter's Oracle, sec L. Koenen, "Die Prophezeiungen des 'Töpfers'," ζΡΕ 2(1968) 178-209, "The Prophecies of a Potter: A Prophecy of World Renewal Becomes an Apocalypse," in D.H. Samuel, ed., Proceedings of the twelfth International Congress of Papyrology (Toronto: Hakkcrt, 1970) 249-54. Sec further the essay "The Sibyl and the Potter" in this volume. 3

the Roman Empire," Classical Philology 35(1940) 1-21; Will, Histoire politique, 10-20. 14 Diodorus 28.3.1; 29.15.1; cf. Strabo 16.1.18, Justin 32.2; Eddy, The King is Dead, 133. 15 T.G. Pinches, The Old Testament in the Light of the Historical Records and Legendi of Assyria and Babylonia (3rd ed.; London: SPCK, 1908) 480 and 561; A.T. Olmstead, "Intertcstamcntal Studies," JA OS 56(1936) 242-56. 16 M. Hengcl, Die Z^oten (Leiden: Brill, 1961) 25-46. A striking parallel to this incident is recorded in Josephus, Ant 17.6.2-3 (149-63); JW\. 33.2-4 (65154). Shortly before his death Herod had a golden eagle set up over the entry to the temple in Jerusalem. A group of Jews, led by two "doctors of the law" pulled it down and suffered martyrdom as a result.

‫י‬

vacuum, although, like the Maccabean revolt, they certainly had their own distinctive characteristics. 17 We should note that Persia was also part of the Hellenistic Near Eastern scene and contributed to the resistance against Greece and Rome. The oracle of Hystaspes, which may have been associated with the campaigns of Mithridates against Rome in the first century BC, looks to a "king from heaven" as a savior figure and prophesies the subjection of the west by the east.18 T h e Zand-Γ Vohûman Yasn (Bahman Yasht), a late "midrashic" expansion of a lost text of the Avesta, the Vohûman Yasn, contains in its first chapter a schema of four kingdoms of which the first three are Persian and the fourth is ruled by the "divs with dishevelled hair." 19 The first non-Persian kingdom is presumably the one which overthrew the Persians—i.e. the Greeks. 20 Since the fourth kingdom is also the last before the end of the millennium this section of the Zand must date to the Hellenistic era and be interpreted as a Persian antiHellenistic oracle (although it has been updated to refer to much later, Sassanian, kings). There are then examples of national resistance to Hellenistic rule throughout the Near East from Egypt to Persia, although they are admittedly not numerous. Messianism, as the desire for the restoration of native monarchy, was not a peculiarity of the Jews but was a feature of the entire Near East in the Hellenistic period. The ways in which the national aspirations of each state were expressed also had much in common throughout the area. The common element in Near Eastern political aspirations in the Hellenistic age can be seen from the widespread use of the celebrated schema of the four kingdoms. The division of history into a schema of four world kingdoms followed by some form of decisive divine intervention is found in Daniel 2 and 7, in the fourth Sibyl, the Bahman Yasht and a number of Latin texts of which the oldest is 17 H. Fuchs, Der geistige Widerstand gegen Rom in der antiken Welt (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1938) is concerned chiefly with propaganda rather than actual rebellions. On the political oracles of the Hellenistic period, see J.J. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (SBLDS 13; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1974) ch. 1 and M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974) 1. 184-6. 18 H. Windisch, Die Orakel des Hystaspes (Amsterdam: Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschapen, 1929); J . Hinnells, "The Zoroastrian Doctrine of Salvation in the Roman World," in E.J. Sharpe and J.R. Hinnells, ed., Man and His Salvation (Manehester: Manchester University, (1973) 125-48. 19 B.T. Anklesaria, ^anrf-f Vohûman Yasn (Bombay: Cama Oriental Institute, 1957). See D. Flusser, "The Four Empires in the Fourth Sibyl and in the Book of Daniel," Israel Oriental Studies 2(1972) 166-67. 20 Eddy, The King is Dead, 19, argues that the "dishevelled hair" is a direct reference to Alexander, who is always portrayed on coins with tousled hair by contrast with the neady groomed Persians of the Persepolis reliefs.

a fragment of the chronographer Aemilius Sura, which has been dated between 181 and 171 BC.21 The passage in the Sibyl (Sib Or 4:49-101) combines the four kingdoms with a schema of ten generations. The fourth kingdom, the Macedonian, coincides with the tenth generation. The Romans are not included in the schema. It appears then that this four kingdom passage should also be dated to the Hellenistic period, prior to the rise of Rome. 22 In Sibylline Oracles 4 and the Roman authors the sequence is Assyria, Media, Persia and Macedonia. The inclusion of Media in this sequence points to an eastern origin since Median power never spread to the west. Flusser has argued convincingly that the schema is of Persian origin. 23 For our purpose, the point to note is that the same schematization of history could be adapted by Persians, Jews, Romans, and the people from whom the Romans adapted it.24 In each case the schema is hostile to the Greeks, who always constitute the fourth (last) world-kingdom. All the peoples who used the schema could view history as running a predetermined course, divided into four periods culminating in the destruction of the Greek kingdom by divine intervention, whether in the form of the Roman empire (Aemilius Sura), the kingdom of God (Daniel) or a new millennium (Bahman Yasht). In the case of the four-kingdom schema we find a pattern which was used internationally, and we must assume that it was consciously borrowed by each people in turn. More often the individual nations drew on their own traditions for their propaganda. 25 So we read in Ps. Callisthenes of the Egyptian hope that Nektanebo would return and conquer the Persians.26 The king in the Potter's Oracle will be an Egyptian king sent by Isis. Similarly, the Jews expected a king from the line of David (e.g. Psalms of Solomon 17:3) or drew their images of the kingdom of God from Canaanite or Israelite royal traditions. 27 The Persian oracles were attributed to the legendary Persians Zoroaster and Hystaspes. We have less direct evidence of 21

Swain, "The Theory of the Four Monarchies," 2-5 Flusser. "The Four Empires," 148-53; also J J . Collins, "The Place of the Fourth Sibyl in the Development of the Jewish Sibyllina,"JJ-S 25(1974) 365-80. The Fourth Sibyl in its present form is a Jewish work from the late first century AD 2‫ג‬ Flusser, "The Four Empires," 173. 24 Swain, "The Theory of the Four Monarchies," 4, has argued that it was brought from Asia Minor to Rome after the battle of Magnesia. 25 Sec especially J.Z. Smith, "Native Cults in the Hellenistic Period," History of Religions 11(1971) 236-49. 2, ' See Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 14. 27 See e.g. J.A. Emerton, "The Origins of the Son of Man Imagery," JTS 9(1958) 225-42. 22

political oracles from Mesopotamia, but there too we find native traditions used for anti-Hellenistic propaganda. The legend of Semiramis preserved by Diodorus seems to have been developed specifically to surpass the exploits of Alexander. 28 Similarly the Babylonian priest Berossus told the story of Nebuchadnezzar in such a way that his hero appeared greater than Alexander, Seleucus and even Heracles. 29 I have suggested elsewhere that Daniel 2 may be an adaptation of a Babylonian oracle in which Nebuchadnezzar was recalled as the head of gold, implying that his reign was a golden age, and the schema of the four metals was used to suggest a decline in history to the nadir of Greek dominion, which, however, would soon be destroyed. 30 The revival of ancient myths T h e interest in native traditions aroused by the opposition to Greek rule provides the context in which we must view the resurgence of ancient myth in Jewish apocalyptic literature, which has been noted by Cross, Hanson and others. The sages and prophets of the Hellenistic Near East looked not only to the great leaders of the past but also to the ancient myths to provide meaningful paradigms for the present, and especially to the myths of kingship and creation. L. Koenen has shown how the Potter's Oracle draws on the structure of Egyptian creation myths and concludes: It is obvious that the savior-king of the prophecies plays the role of Horus. In this role he overwhelms the chaos of Seth, as does every Egyptian king, and he restores equilibrium to Egypt.31

Many of the Potter's predictions correspond closely to the prophecy of Neferty which dates from 1991 BC In Mesopotamia, while we lack evidence of the use of ancient myths in eschatological oracles, it is significant that there was an archaizing tendency and an interest in the myths during this period. 32 All our copies of the ritual for the

28

Diodorus 2.7.3; 20.3.5. See Eddy, The King ts Dead, 122-23. Josephus, AgAp 1.131 -44; F. Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker III C (Leiden: Brill,1958) 389-91, 406-7 (Abydenus); Eddy, The King is Dead, 125. On the phenomenon of rewrit:ng history in the interests of nationalistic propaganda in the Hellenistic age see M. Braun, History and Romance (Oxford: Blackwell, 1938), and B.Z. Wachholder, Eupolemus (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 1974) 71-96. 30 J.J. Collins, "The Court-Tales of Daniel and the Development of Apocalyptic," JBL 94(1975) 218-34. 31 Koenen, "The Prophecies of a Potter," 250. 32 Eddy, The King is Dead, 128-31. 29

Akitu festival come from the Seleucid period. It contains provisions for the recital of the Enuma Elish, the great epic of creation. Since both the epic and the Akitu festival are inseparably linked to the Babylonian kingship, their use in the Hellenistic period could have two implications. O n the one hand, the Seleucid monarchs might claim to win legitimacy by practicing the ritual and supporting Babylonian religion.33 On the other hand the continuation of the ancient rituals could serve to keep alive the recollection of a native kingship.34 T h e two attitudes could be held contemporaneously by different groups. The main point for our purpose is that the ancient myths still enjoyed vitality in the Hellenistic period despite the transformed circumstances. Similarly a lament for Uruk, a Sumerian work composed in the third millennium BC, was recopied in the early Hellenistic period, when Babylon had again been overrun by foreigners. 35 The invasion of the Guti, which occasioned the original composition, now became a paradigm for any foreign invasion. 36 We may compare the typological use of the Exodus motif in O T writings such as Deutero-lsaiah. As a final testimony to the revival of ancient myths in the Hellenistic period we may note that Berossus took the trouble to translate Babylonian mythology for his Greek readers. 37 The use of ancient myth does not in itself, of course, make a writing apocalyptic, but as Gunkel and more recently Cross and Hanson have shown, the myths supply an essential ingredient of apocalyptic literature. The renewed interest in the Babylonian myths in the Hellenistic period and the use of Egyptian myth in political prophecy, provide some analogies for the resurgence of ancient myth in Jewish apocalyptic. This resurgence seems to have been a learned phenomenon, rather than a product of folklore as popular ballads might be. At least in Babylon we know that the scribes who copied the ancient texts required a lengthy education to master the mysteries of cuneiform. 38 In both Babylon and Egypt the use of ancient materials associated with cult and royalty suggests the

33

So Tarn, Hellenistic Civilization, 128-29. • Eddy, The King is Dead, 109-10. 35 Pinches, The Old Testament, 477-78. 36 The Hyksos serve a similar function in Egyptian tradition. Cf. Eddy, The King is Dead, 295-96. 37 For the fragments of Berossus see Jacoby, Die Fragmente, III C, 364-97; P. Schnabel, Berossos und die babylonisch-hellenistische Literatur (Leipzig: Teubner, 1923); S. M. Burstein, The Babyloniaca of Berossus (Malibu: Undena, 1978). 38 G.R. Driver, Semitic Writing (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1948) 64-66; R. Meister, "Zur Erlernung des chaldaischen an Hofe Nebukadnczzars," Anzeiger der Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien. Philosophische--Historische Klasse 90(1953) 3-4. ‫נ‬

activity of a priestly scribal class, not popular folklore. We see the signs of learned interpretation in the commentary style of the Demotic Chronicle and in the imposing learning of Berossus. The signs of learned activity can also be seen in Jewish apocalyptic writings. The Jews who wrote (and read) sibylline oracles in epic Greek hexameters were not the rank and file of the peasantry. The eschatological prophecies of Qiimran were produced by prolonged study of the biblical texts. Von Rad has noted the frequency with which the pseudonymous authors of apocalyptic books are presented as wise men—Daniel, Enoch, Ezra, Baruch, etc.39 Daniel may serve as a good example of the self-understanding of the Jewish apocalyptist. Unlike most pseudonymous writings, Daniel's visions are prefaced by a collection of tales which establish the hero's character. He is explicidy portrayed as a wise man, trained in the professional skills of the Chaldeans and in their language and literature (Dan 1:4). The book of Daniel also provides our best clue for the social function of this literature. The heroes of the book, who are universally understood to represent the circle in which the book was written, are the wise, maskilîm (Dan 11t33j35).40 These are an elite group, and are the only people who have true understanding. Their task in the eschatological crisis was to instruct the masses (yābînû lārabbîm, 11:33). Their literature and wisdom may be described as esoteric in so far as it was produced by a restricted, learned class. However, it was not esoteric in the sense of being secret. It was intended for the rabbîm and could therefore be said to be hortatory in purpose. In the context of Daniel it was clearly intended to inspire resistance to the Hellenistic king, a purpose shared by such nonJewish works as the Demotic Chronicle, Potter's Oracle and Bahman Yasht. Jewish apocalyptic literature was a learned phenomenon, produced by maskîlîm or wise men. This, however, is not to support the thesis of Von Rad that Jewish apocalyptic derives from "wisdom." 41 There is no manifest relation between the "wisdom" expressed in the visions of Daniel or Enoch and the collections of sayings found in Proverbs or Ben Sira. It may be that there were other wisdom circles in Judaism than those represented by Proverbs and Ben Sira. Job, at least, makes far greater use of the ancient myths than do the other 39

316.

G. von Rad, Theologie des Alten Testaments (4th ed.; Munich: Kaiser, 1965) 2.

40 See for example M. Dekor, Le Livre de Daniel (Paris: Gabalda, 1971) 15-19; V. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews (New York: Atheneum, 1970). 41 For a fuller critique see Collins, "The Court Tales of Daniel."

wisdom books.42 However the relation of J o b to the rest of the wisdom tradition is unclear at best. The identity and social place of the mas/ctlîm of Daniel or the authors of other apocalyptic books must remain largely enigmatic. 43 We may, however, infer from the characters of Daniel, Enoch and other pseudonymous heroes, from the scribal activity of Qumran, and from the learned transmission of mythology in Mesopotamia that the apocalyptic books were produced by people of some learning. The analogy with the revived interest in ancient mythology elsewhere in the Hellenistic Near East may provide a clue as to the provenance of the mythical materials used in Jewish apocalyptic literature. We know that traditions dating back to the second millennium were available and were used in both Egypt and Babylon. In these areas the old traditions had been passed on not only in the royal cult but also in the scribal schools. Jewish apocalyptic writings drew on mythical traditions of Israelite and Canaanite origins, of which the best examples are often found in the Ugaritic texts from the second millennium BC.44 We do not know in what form such traditions were available in the Hellenistic age or how they had been transmitted, but some ancient Phoenician and Canaanite traditions were available to Philo Byblius in the first century AD.45 In Israel too it is inevitable that there were more extensive traditions than those preserved in the biblical canon. We should expect that certain mythological materials were associated with the royal cult in the pre-exilic period but these could not have had a cultic Sitz-im-Leben in the post-exilic period. It is possible however that they were passed on in learned circles, either in Palestine or in the Diaspora. Job's frequent use of mythic materials may be significant in this respect. In any case, in view of the survival of Canaanite materials in Byblos there is no reason why ancient lore should not have been available to Jewish writers in the Hellenistic age.

12

Sec M.H. Pope, Job (AB 15; Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1973) passim: F.M. Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrav Epic (Cambridge, MA: Harvard, 1973) 344-5! 4 ‫ י‬A number of apocalyptic writings arc associated with the Qumran community. In addition to the properly sectarian documents such as the War Scroll, fragments of other apocalyptic writings such as I Enoch have been found at Qumran. It is not clcar whether any of these latter originated in the community. 44 Emerton, "The Origin of the Son of Man Imagery;" Cross, Canaanite Myth, 345. 45 See J. Barr, "Philo of Byblos and his Phoenician History," BJRL 57(1974) 17-63.

Prophecy by interpretation Jewish apocalypticism grew out of a situation of political, cultural, and religious alienation, that was due in large part to foreign domination in the Hellenistic and Roman periods. 46 In interpreting that situation it had recourse to the patterns and motifs of ancient mythology. This process is paralleled in other Near Eastern states in the Hellenistic age. We have noted the learned character of the use of ancient myths in this period. This fact is significant not only for the identity of the groups which produced this literature but also for the understanding of revelation which was involved. This may be described as prophecy by interpretation and may be illustrated by the Hebrew term pesher. The term pesher is most familiar from the Qumran scrolls where it refers to a particular mode of interpreting scripture with reference to eschatological events.47 The word is also used in the book of Daniel, however, to refer to the interpretation of dreams and of the mysterious writing on the wall. It ultimately derives from an Akkadian term for dream interpretation. 48 Its use in Daniel and Qumran points up a fundamental difference between Jewish apocalypticism and biblical prophecy. In prophecy, revelation consisted of the direct transmission of the word of God. In apocalypticism, it involves the interpretation of mysterious realities which are given cryptically in scripture, dreams and other phenomena. T h e importance of biblical interpretation in apocalypticism and in post-exilic Judaism in general has often been emphasized. 49 Less attention has been paid, however, to two points which qualify this observation: First, the interpretation of scripture (i.e. a revered writing from the past) in such a way as to produce an eschatological prophecy was not peculiar to Judaism. In the Egyptian Demotic Chronicle we find an almost exact parallel to the Qumran pesharim, where a text is 6 ‫י‬ of apocalypticism, but refers to a universally recognized factor in the composition of several major works, such as Daniel, much of 1 Enoch, 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch. 47 See F.F. Bruce, Biblical Exegesis in the Qiimran Texts (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959); O. Betz, Offenbarung und Schriftforschung in der Qumransekte (WUNT 6; Tübingen: Mohr, 1960). 48 A.L. Oppenheim, "The Interpretation of Dreams in the Ancient Near East," Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 46(1956) 217; A. Finkel, "The pesher of Dreams and Scriptures," ÄroQ,5(1963) 357-70. 49 E.g. J . Wellhausen, Skizzen und Vorarbeiten (Berlin: Reimer, 1899) 225-34; L. Hartman, Prophecy Interpreted (Lund: Gleerup, 1966).

interpreted line by line.50 Such specific commentary was relatively rare in either Jewish or Gentile writings. More typical is the weaving together of traditional motifs, in such a way as to reapply the language of the older scripture without giving a direct commentary. We find this midrashic tendency in the Potter's Oracle, both in the use of traditional motifs in its original composition and in the redaction of the oracle itself by later additions. We may also note how the Bahman Yasht has been expanded and reapplied in the Pahlevi form which is now extant. Second, the interpretation of scripture is part of a broader phenomenon of prophecy by interpretation. As we have seen, the word pesher could also be used to refer to the interpretation of dreams. In Daniel we find the interpretation of a scriptural prophecy (the seventy years of Jeremiah, Daniel 9) side by side with the interpretation of visions and dreams. Now the interpretation of the visions in Daniel involves an elaborate literary fiction. There is no reason to doubt that both vision and interpretation were composed by the same author. However, Daniel is not merely said to have had the vision. It must be explained to him by an angelic interpreter. Revelation is not given directly, but is mediated by interpretation. The extended allegorical visions of 1 Enoch similarly posit the necessity of interpretation. We have noted the role of interpretation in the Demotic Chronicle, where a text is expounded. In the Persian Bahman Yasht the schema of the four kingdoms is presented in an allegorical vision followed by an interpretation, in a manner very reminiscent of Daniel 2. T h e same style of prophecy by interpretation is found in the widespread use of astrological predictions in the Hellenistic world.51 Astrology was especially associated with the Chaldeans 52 but its influence in Egypt is attested by the oracles of Nechepso and Petosiris.53 Especially in the latter work astral phenomena are repeatedly interpreted with reference to political upheavals. In each case, whether the data to be interpreted be scripture, stars or 50 F. Daumas, "Littérature prophétique et exegétique égyptienne et commentaires esséniens," in A. Barucq, ed.. A la rencontre de Dieu: Memorial Albert Gelin (Le Puy: Mappus, 1961) 203-21. 51 F. Cumont, Astrology and Religion among the Greeks and Romans (Reprint of 1912 edition; New York: Dover, 1960); A.M.J. Fcstugicre, La Révélation de Hermes Trimégiste (4 vols.; Paris: Gabalda, 1944-54) 1.89-186. 52 Sec the description of the Chaldeans in Diodorus 2.29-31; H.L.Jansen, Die Henochgestalt (Norske videnskapsakademi i Oslo. Historisk-filosofisk Klasse Skrifter 1 ; Oslo: Dybwad, 1939) 13-19. 53 E. Riess, "Nechepsonis et Pctosiridis fragmenta magica," Philologus Supplementband 6(1892-93) 329-88; W. Kroil, "Nechepso, PWRE 10(1935) 2160-7.

allegorical visions, revelation is given indirectly and requires the mediation of a wise interpreter. 54 This style of prophecy by interpretation differs from earlier biblical prophecy by its suggestion of determinism. A prophecy of this kind is not simply a threat or a promise whose fulfilment is conditional on a certain human response. Rather the events of the future are already contained in the texts which are interpreted, or in the movements of the stars. No human actions can influence them. The objective of this type of prophecy is not to change the course of events but to understand and adapt. 55 The deterministic implications of this style of revelation were augmented throughout the Hellenistic world by the use of pseudepigraphy. Pseudepigraphy is an extremely complex phenomenon, which is attested in all kinds of literature in all ages, for quite diverse motives.56 However, the extent of its use in political prophecy of the Hellenistic age is remarkable. T h e Demotic Chronicle, written after the advent of the Greeks, is ascribed to the time of Pharaoh Tachos. T h e Potter , s Oracle is ascribed to the time of King Amenhotep. The Persian political oracles are ascribed to the legendary figures of Hystaspes and Zoroaster. Sibylline oracles were written throughout the Hellenized world from Rome to Egypt.57 In view of this phenomenon it is impossible to explain Jewish pseudepigraphy purely by the alleged decline of prophecy and closing of the canon. 58 It is part of a wider phenomenon of the Hellenistic world. It must be related to the widespread esteem for antiquity in this period and the conviction that age is a guarantee of truth. 59 In political oracles pseudepigraphy must be related to the interest in the ancient myths and legends which we have noted. In each case there is a turning to 54

Cf. the role of the Teacher of Righteousness in the Qumran community. On astrological speculation at Qumran see J . Carmignac, "Les horoscopes de Qumrân," RevQ 6( 1964-65) 199-206; M. Delcor, "Recherches sur un horoscope en langue hebraique provenant de Qumrân," ReuQ 7( 1965-66) 521-42; Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1.237-8. 55 Precedent for this kind of revelation can be found in the so-called "Akkadian apocalypses" of an earlier period. See A.K. Grayson, Babylonian HisUnical-Literary Texts (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1975); W.G. Lambert, The Background of Jewish Apocalyptic (London: Athlone, 1978). 56 B.M. Metzger, "Literary Forgeries and Canonical Pseudepigrapha," JBL 91(1972) 3-24. 57 V. Nikiprowetzky, La Troisième Sibylle (Paris: La Haye, 1970) 1-10. Persian and Babylonian sibyls are also mentioned in ancient sources, but their existence is doubtful. 58 So especially R.H. Charies, APOT 2.ix. 59 For a similar attitude in Hellenistic philosophy see O. Gigon, "Die Erneuerung der Philosophie zur Zeit Ciceros," in W.K.C. Guthrie et al., ed., Recherches sur la Tradition Platonicienne. Fondation Hart Entretiens Tome III (Verone: Valdonega, 1957) 25-65.

the distant past for wisdom to illumine the present. This phenomenon attests a sense of alienation and loss of meaning in the present, and a conviction that bygone ages had greater wisdom. Whatever factors led to the use of pseudepigraphy in apocalyptic literature, there can be no doubt that one of its effects was to increase the sense of determinism. If all things could be foretold by Hystaspes, Enoch, or the Sibyl, and the accuracy of their predictions could be shown by lengthy ex eventu prophecy, then the course of events must already have been determined in their time.60 Of course there is a measure of determinism in all predictive prophecy and the tablets of destiny are an ancient feature of Mesopotamian religion. The impression of determinism, however, is greatly increased by the use of pseudepigraphy and ex eventu prophecy. Determinism is widely recognized as a factor in the Zeitgeist of the Hellenistic age/' 1 Like the esteem for antiquity, it attests a sense of alienation from the present. People who turned to deterministic views of history had little confidence in their ability to control the course of events. In the Near East the loss of confidence in the present and the political process can be traced directly to the loss of national independence and the consequent disorientation of politics and religion. In Greece and Rome a similar transformation was produced by the transition from city-state to world-empire, 62 which also involved the disruption of the traditional molds of politics and religion. Conclusions It has been the purpose of this essay to draw attention to some of the aspects ofJewish apocalypticism which were typical of the Hellenistic Near East. The discussion could be extended indefinitely. Most of the features by which apocalypticism is usually distinguished from prophecy — periodization, expectation of the end of the world, afterlife, esoteric symbolism, dualism etc.— are found throughout the Hellenistic world and must be considered representative of the Zeitgeist of late antiquity. The fact that these features became prominent in Judaism only after the exile, at a time when they were also widespread in the neighboring religions, cannot be entirely coincidental. 60 An intriguing example of this kind of prophecy from Hellenistic Grccce is the Alexandra of Lycophron. See Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 8. 61 A.M.J. Festugière, Personal Religion among the Greeks (Berkeley: University of California, 1954) 41. 62 M.P. Nilsson, Geschichte der griechischen Religion //(Munich: Beck, 1950) 279; H. Jonas, The Gnostic Religion (2nd ed.; Boston: Beacon, 1963) 5-7; 241-65.

There have been unending debates as to whether apocalypticism is "essentially" a child of Old Testament prophecy 63 or a product of Hellenistic-oriental syncretism, 64 or a borrowing from Iranian religion.65 O u r thesis in this essay is that such alternatives distort the question and can only be misleading. Apocalypticism was not a "borrowing" from any source whatever, but is a phenomenon in its own right, with complex sources. We would agree with Hanson that there is indeed continuity with Old Testament tradition, which can be traced back ultimately to the Canaanite myths. Continuity, however, implies development, and therefore change. The manner in which apocalypticism developed Israelite traditions is closely paralleled by developments in other traditions in the Hellenistic Near East. Therefore, continuity with the past, with Israelite tradition, is complemented by continuity with its contemporary environment. The continuity ofJewish apocalypticism with the Hellenistic Near East has two dimensions. O n the one hand there are certainly cases of the direct influence of motifs and ideas. The international use of the schema of the four kingdoms is a case in point. However, even in such cases the motifs which are borrowed must have a point of contact in the native tradition. If the Persian imagery of light and darkness can be used in the Qumran War Scroll, it is only because the imagery of light and darkness was already associated with holy war in the Old Testament in a less developed way.66 More important, however, are other phenomena which cannot be explained as simple borrowings but are independent, parallel developments in the various traditions, due to similar conditions. The expectation of an ideal future king in both Egypt and Judah in the Hellenistic age is due, not to influence in either direction, but to the loss of native kingship in both countries. Despite the manifold similarities among the various states in the Hellenistic age, each tradition retained its identity. Jewish apocalypticism is quite distinct from the political expectations of Egypt, but the differences are not greater than those between Egypt and Babylon in the same period. The major factor which caused similar parallel developments in the various traditions, and thereby constituted a common Zeitgeist, was the spread of Hellenistic power and culture throughout the Near 63

So H.H. Rowley, The Relevance of Apocalyptic (New York: Association, 1964). H.D. Betz, " O n the Problem of the Religio-Historical Understanding of Apocalypticism," Apocalypticism. Journalfor Theology and the Church 6(1969) 134-56. 65 W.R. Murdock, "History and Revelation in Jewish Apocalypticism," Interpretation 21(1967) 167-87. 66 J.J. Collins, "The Mythology of Holy War in Daniel and the Qumran War Scroll," FT25(1975) 596-612. 64

East. This caused a disruption in the traditional order and therefore led to a loss of meaningfulness and to alienation. We have looked briefly at a few of the more conspicuous phenomena which reflect that alienation—determinism, revival of ancient myths, pseudepigraphy. Underlying all of these phenomena is a new world view in which the present is valued less than the remote past or the idealized future. The extent to which the world view of the Near Eastern peoples was transformed by the new political situation of the Hellenistic age has never been adequately studied and lies well beyond the scope of this paper. 67 Yet it is only against the background of such an overall world view that we can understand the relationships between the various national traditions. We can no longer consider Israelite tradition and Hellenistic syncretism as mutually exclusive alternatives. Rather we must appreciate that the particular manner in which tradition was adapted in Judaism in the Hellenistic age was molded by the Zeitgeist of the entire Near East.

67

See especially J.Z. Smith, "Birth Upside Down or Right Side Up?" History of Religions 9(1970) 281-303; "A Place on Which to Stand: Symbols and Social Change," Worship 44(1970) 457-74.

C H A P T E R FIVE

APOCALYPTIC E S C H A T O L O G Y AS T H E T R A N S C E N D E N C E O F DEATH

Ever since the work of Albert Schweitzer, 1 the terms "apocalyptic" and "eschatology" have occasioned lively debate in N T studies.2 More recently they have again come to the forefront in the assertion by Ernst Käsemann that "Apocalyptic is the mother of Christian theology," 3 and in the theological writings of Jürgen Moltmann and Wolfhart Pannenberg. 4 Despite the theological weight often placed on these terms, their connotation is far from clear. Not only is the relation between the two terms disputed but neither term individually carries a clear meaning. 5 In the case of eschatology, some scholars distinguish between a stricter and a looser understanding of the term. 6 Others refuse to describe as "eschatological" anything which does not involve the end of the world.7 The term "apo1

A. Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical Jesus (New York: Macmillan, 1969). This article is the text of the Boylan lecture to the Irish Biblical Association, Dec. 6, 1972, at Earlsfort Terrace, Dublin. Translations of biblical passages are taken from the New American Bible. 3 Käsemann's thesis has been presented in two essays in Robert Funk, ed., Journal for Theology and the Church 6 (1969): "The Beginnings of Christian Theology" (pp. 17-46) and "On the Topic of Primitive Christian Apocalyptic" (pp. 99-133). The volume also contains reactions to Käsemann's views by Gerhard Ebeling and Ernst Fuchs. 4 Jürgen Moltmann, Theology of Hope (tr. J.W. Leitch; London: SCM Press, 1967): Wolfhart Pannenberg, Revelation as History (London: Sheed and Ward, 1969). The views of Pannenberg and his circle on apocalypticism depend heavily on the work of Dietrich Rössler, Gesetz und Geschichte (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1960) and are most fully expressed by Ulrich Wilckens, "The Understanding of Revelation Within the History of Primitive Christianity," in Revelation a* History, 55-122. 5 O n the history of the discussion of "apocalyptic" see especially two recent books, J.M. Schmidt, Die Jüdische Apokalyptik (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag des Erziehungsvereins, 1969) and Klaus Koch, The Rediscovery of Apocalyptic (Naperville, Illinois: Allenson, 1972). The debate on the term "eschatology" is summarized by Hans-Peter Müller, Ursprünge und Strukturen alttestamentlicher Eschatologie (BZAW 109; Berlin: Töpelmann, 1969) 1-11. See also H.D. Preuss ,Jahweglaube und Zukunftserwartung (BWANT 87; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1968). 6 So, for example, Th.C. Vriezen, "Prophecy and Eschatology," Vetus Testamentum Supplement I (Leiden: Brill, 1953), 199-229; G. von Rad, Old Testament Theology (tr. D.M.G. Stalker; Edinburgh & London: Oliver and Boyd, 1965) 2.114-115. 7 So G. Hölscher, Die Ursprünge der jüdischen Eschatologie (Glessen: Töpelmann, 1925) 3; S. Mowinckel, He That Cometh (tr. G.W. Anderson; Oxford: Blackwells, 1959) 126, and most recently, J . van der Ploeg, "Eschatology in the Old Testament" OTS 17 (1972)89-99. 2

calyptic" has been used with nuances ranging from a particular literary form of revelation literature to a philosophy of life prevalent in the intertestamental period. 8 The juxtaposition of the words "eschatology" and "apocalyptic" in our title potentially evokes the shades of several different scholarly debates. Did the pre-exilic prophets have an eschatology? What is the relation between eschatology and history? Is apocalypticism the child of prophecy? Should "apocalyptic" be defined by its form or its content? What is the theological value of apocalyptic? and so forth. It is important therefore that we begin by sorting out those questions and making clear which ones we will address and which we will pass. Let us start from the minimum which is universally agreed—both "eschatology" and "apocalyptic" have some association with future expectation. Further, every scholar agrees that the future expectation of the pre-exilic prophets was significantly different from the type of future expectation found in the book of Daniel and certain works of intertestamental Judaism which are usually referred to as "apocalyptic." The existence of these two types of future expectation is admitted by all, even though there is much disputation as to the names by which we may refer to them. Much of this disputation is purely terminological and makes no real contribution to our understanding of either phenomenon. Accordingly, I do not wish to enter into the purely terminological discussion which has recently been engaged by Carmignac and van der Ploeg.9 Rather I wish to consider the phenomenon of future expectation in the Jewish tradition, in particular the later type, found in Daniel and the intertestamental works. By the term "apocalyptic eschatology" I merely wish to refer to this type of future expectation. 10 I am aware that not all the material in the so-called "apocalyptic books" is explicitly relevant to future expectations. Apocalypses, as their name suggests, are largely revelations of heavenly secrets. As examples of this fact we might mention the heavenly journeys of Enoch in 1 Enoch 1-36 or the description of the movements of the stars in the so-called "book of the heavenly luminaries" in 1 Enoch 8 In addition to the literature listed in notes 3 and 4 above see the collection of essays in Interpretation 25 (1971), and the discussions by Gerhard von Rad, Theologie des Allen Testaments (4th ed.; München: Kaiser, 1965) 2.315-330 and Martin Hengel, Judentum und Hellenismus (Tübingen: Mohr, 1969) 319-380. 9 Jean Carmignac, "La Notion d'Eschatologie dans la Bible et à Qumran," RevQ 7(1969) 17-31; van der Ploeg, "Eschatology in the Old Testament." 10 I borrow the phrase "apocalyptic eschatology" from Paul D. Hanson, 'Jewish Apocalyptic Against its Near Eastern Environment" RB 68 (1971) 35.

72-82." I will argue later in this essay that the revelation of these heavenly secrets is not in fact irrelevant to the future expectations of their writer. However, in delimiting my subject I am guided primarily by the passages which deal explicidy with future expectations. I do not propose to discuss all aspects of the phenomenon of apocalypticism but only the aspect of future expectation. Two further points I take as given. First, the distinction between the manner in which the future expectation of the prophets is presented and the manner of presentation in apocalyptic literature has been adequately described.12 Apocalyptic literature is marked by pseudonymity and its revelations are mediated by visions and dreams to a far greater extent than is the case in the prophetic writings. These literary devices lessen the immediacy of the apocalypticisms visions. As a result the visions appear to impart information about a predetermined future rather than an existentiell call to repentance. 13 This difference in immediacy I take to be generally accepted. My concern is different. I ask rather about the content of the future expectation. Irrespective of whether the future was predetermined or not, was the apocalyptic view of what was going to happen in any way different from what the prophets expected? It will become evident that the literary form of the apocalypses is in fact significant for their future expectation. Secondly, I take it that all scholars agree that the expectation of the prophets focused on the life of the nation. Whether they prophesied doom or salvation, the issue was the peace and prosperity of Israel in the promised land. As we shall see, there is no such unanimity on the central issue of apocalyptic eschatology. Many attempts to distinguish the central issue of the later type of future expectation from the prophetic type have been blurred by the confusing data of postexilic prophecy. For that reason I wish to omit postexilic prophecy from my discussion, and concentrate on the fully developed apocalyptic eschatology as typified by the book of Daniel.14 " This fact was stressed by von Rad, Theology of the Old Testament, 2. 307 and, in greater detail, by M.E. Stone, "Lists of Revealed Things in the Apocalyptic Literature," in F.M. Cross, et al., ed., Magnolia Dei: The Mighty Acts of God (Garden Citv, New York: Doubleday, 1976) 439-43. 2 ‫י‬ Zechariah," Vetus Testamentum Supplement 22 (1972) 47-71. Von Rad, Old Testament Theology, 2. 304-305. 13 O n the question of determinism in apocalypticism see especially P. von der Osten-Sacken, Die Apokalyptik in ihrem Verhältnis zu Prophetic und Weisheit (Theologische Existenz Heute, 157; München: Kaiser, 1969). 14 This is not to dispute the crucial importance of postexilic prophecy as the time of transition from the future expectation of the prophets to apocalyptic eschatology.

My objective, then, is to clarify the distinctive character of the later type of Jewish future expectation as found in the book of Daniel and the intertestamental apocalypses, over against the expectation of the prophets. My essay will have three parts. (1) First, I will examine some attempts which have been made to formulate the distinctive character of apocalyptic eschatology and which I consider unsuccessful. (2) Secondly, I will present my own formulation and support it by an examination of apocalyptic texts. (3) Thirdly, I will comment on the historical and theological significance of this particular type of future expectation. Unsuccessful Formulations Although the existence of two types of future expectation in the Old Testament is generally admitted, and although several scholars of note have attempted to formulate the distinction, no clear and consistent formulation has yet, to my knowledge, been made. We may begin by discussing some of the formulations which have been proposed. a. The Idea of a Definitive End Julius Wellhausen and his followers felt that only the future expectation of the postexilic period could rightly be called eschatology. This term they then reserved for a belief in the end of the world. 15 This formulation emphasizes a dualism which is both temporal and cosmological. With some slight variations, it is still the formulation most widely found. So Th.C. Vriezen, in distinguishing the looser and stricter senses of eschatology writes: In a narrower sense the only thing we can understand by it is the

apocalyptic form of 'olam habba' as against the 'olam hazzeh, or life in heaven as against life on earth,

while he also argues for the validity of applying the term eschatology to the earlier form of prophetic expectation "even if there is no See Paul D. Hanson,'s articles "Jewish Apocalyptic Against its Near Eastern Environment," RB 68 (1971) 31-58 and "Old Testament Apocalyptic Rcexamined," Int 25 (1971) 454-479 and his book, The Daivn of Apocalyptic (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975). Also Otto Plögcr, Theocracy and Eschatology (tr. S. Rudman; Oxford: Blackwclls, 1968); R. North "From Prophecy to Apocalyptic via Zechariah," 47-71 and Samuel Amslcr, "Zacharie et l'origine de l'apocalyptique" Vêtus Testamentum Supplement 22 (1972) 227-231. 15 See the review by Müller, Ursprünge und Strukturen, 2 ff. Hugo Grcssmann shared this definition of eschatology but claimed to find it already in the pre-exilic prophets.

question of the destruction of the kosmos." 16 Here, as in Wellhausen the essential difference between the two types is that in the later type the world is destroyed. Similarly Sigmund Mowinckel, while less clear-cut in his definition, also seems to share this view. He writes: Eschatology is a doctrine or a complex of ideas about 'the last things,' which is more or less organically coherent and developed. Every eschatology includes in some form or other a dualistic conception of the course of history, and implies that the present state of things and the present world order will suddenly come to an end and be superseded by another of an essentially different kind...The universe itself is thrown into the melting pot... 1 '

Mowinckel goes on to say that eschatology in this sense was not found in the pre-exilic prophets. Further: Any sober historical consideration which avoids the confusion of different ideas will recognize that Deutero-Isaiah himself does not yet present a true eschatology. We miss the idea of a definite end to the present order, and of a new world of an essentially different character from this one. 18

Such expressions as "the present order of things" are extremely vague. All future hope can be described as the hope for "a new order of things." This in itself gives us no basis for distinguishing one type of future hope from another. Mowinckel would certainly admit that Deutero-Isaiah hoped for a new order of things. What is essential in his definition is the idea of a definite end. There are two facets to this idea. One is the cosmological destruction of the world and the other is the temporal end of history. We may discuss these two facets separately since they do not necessarily coincide. Human history can come to an end without the destruction of the world. Neither facet, however, provides an adequate formulation of the distinctive character of apocalyptic eschatology. First, the cosmological end of the world is certainly a very important motif in some apocalyptic texts. Perhaps its classical expression is that found in 4 Ezra 7:30-31: Then shall the world be returned to primeval silence seven days, like as the first beginnings, so that no man is left. And it shall be, after seven days, that the Age which is not yet awake shall be aroused, and that which is corruptible shall perish.

We might also mention the gospel passage, "Heaven and earth shall pass away but my word will not pass away." 19 However, there are 16 17 18 19

Vriezen, "Prophecy and Eschatology," 199. Mowinckel, He That Cometh, 125-126. Ibid., 266. Luke 21:23. cf. also Rev 21:1.

important apocalyptic texts which do not refer to an end of the world. Notable among these is our prime example of pre-Christian apocalyptic eschatology—the book of Daniel. There we read of a resurrection, and we are told that the just will shine like stars, but nothing is said of a transition to a new world. The term qēs, which is usually translated "end," occurs in Dan, but never as the "end" of anything in particular and seems to refer to "a time of crisis" rather than to a definitive end. 20 Again in the Qumran Scrolls, there is only one passage, in the third column of the Hodayot, which possibly speaks of the destruction of the world.21 Yet the Scrolls are generally recognized as the literature of an "apocalyptic community." 22 The idea of the definitive destruction of the world is also missing in certain sections of 1 Enoch (chs 1—36 and 91 —105, apart from the Apocalypse of Weeks). Yet no one will deny that these texts exemplify the later, fuller, type of future hope which is described as apocalyptic eschatology. It is clear then that the distinctive character of this type of future expectation does not consist of the belief in the end of the world. The second aspect of the formulation of Wellhausen and Mowinckel, which sees a definitive end as the essential character of the later expectation, is the idea of a temporal end, an end of history. Now the only sense in which we could unambiguously speak of an "end of history" is with reference to the final destruction of all human life. This of course is never the case, in any of the Jewish or Christian texts. In any looser sense, we can only speak of the end of one period of history, which really means the transition from one period to another. If history means the account of human actions, then we can obviously find a new period of history even in a new creation, as can be seen in Isa 65:17fT.: Lo I am about to create new heavens and a new earth;...No longer shall there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not round out his full life-time; he dies a mere youth who

30 It is used in parallelism to the word mô'êd in 11:21, ki 'od qës lammô'ëd and again in 11:35 'ad 'it qës ki 'ôd lammô'ëd and the word mô'ëd occurs in 11:29 in a noncschatological sense as "appointed time." 21 1QH 3:29-33: "Then the floods of Belial go over all steep banks like a fire that devoureth all their...in order to destroy every green and dry tree by their channels, and it sweepeth with burning flames until all that drink of them are no more; it devoureth the foundations of clay and the extension of the dry land; and the foundations of the mountains become a burning, and the roots of flint becomc streams of pitch and it devoureth right down to the great deep." (Tr. Svcnd HolmNielsen, Hodayot [Aarhus: Univcrsitetsforlagct, 1960] 65). 22 In the phrase of F.M. Cross, Jr., The Ancient Library of Qumran and Modem Biblical Studies (Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1958) 56.

reaches but a hundred years, and he who fails of a hundred shall be thought accursed. They shall live in the houses they build, and eat the fruit of the vineyards they plant...

Most of all a formulation based on the idea of the "end of history" cannot provide us with an adequate conceptual framework to contain a notion like Dodd's "realized eschatology5' or the belief of the Qumran community that it had already made the transition to a new form life, while still in this life, in history. 23 In short, despite the fact that the term eschatology is normally used to describe it, the future hope of late postexilic and intertestamental Judaism cannot be defined with reference to "the end" of something. By this conclusion I repudiate the recent attempt of J . van der Ploeg, to reduce the term "eschatology" to a narrow etymological connotation. 24 Even apart from the questionable appropriateness of trying to equate the meaning of a word with its etymology, the attempt manifesdy fails to work. For van der Ploeg, It is abundantly clear what Old or New Testament eschatology should mean in theology, the knowledge of the end of this period, this time, and of the rather short space of time which precedes the end. It is more specified by what precedes than by what follows.

So, even though van der Ploeg admits that Second Isaiah pronounces the end of an era, he cannot be said to have an eschatology because he "is interested above all in what comes after." Van der Ploeg does not want to deny that there is any concern in "eschatological" passages for what comes after the end, but he insists that it is secondary and not essential. Yet he admits that "in the New Testament the accent lies rather on the birth of salvation" (p. 91). While it is true that most of the passages containing the word "eschaton" deal with the end of something (naturally enough), it is surely wrong to consider these passages decisive for the main interest of the books in which they occur. If the apocalyptic books were written, as is widely believed, to give hope to the faithful in times of oppression, it would be indeed extraordinary if they were primarily concerned with "the end" and not with what lies beyond it. This is in fact borne out by several passages in such recognized apocalyptic books as Revelation, 4 Ezra, and 2 Baruch, which speak at length of what lies beyond the destruction. 25 23

O n the "realized eschatology" of the Qumran community see especially H.W. Kuhn, Enderwartung und Gegenwärtiges Heil (SUNT 4; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966). Similady in the Apocalypse of Weeks (1 Enoch 93:1-10; 91:11-17) the crucial transition seems to take place within history, in the seventh of ten weeks. 24 J . van der Ploeg, "Eschatology in the Old Testament." 25 Revelation 21-22; 4 Ezra 7:89-101; 10:25-28; 2 Baruch 49-52; 72-74.

In fairness to van der Ploeg, it must be stated that his objective was merely to clarify the use of a term, not to outline a particular type of future expectation. Nevertheless, when he states that "true and explicit eschatology belongs to the apocalyptic literature," and proceeds to define eschatology in a narrow etymological sense, he is suggesting a false understanding of the apocalyptic books. b. The Distinction of Two Penods There is another type of formulation which has frequently been used to express the distinctive element of apocalyptic eschatology. This type of formulation focuses not on the definitive end, but on the transition from one period or age to another. So Johannes Lindblom has written that "our starting point must be the idea of two ages rather than the end of all things." 26 Similarly, van der Ploeg does not speak of the end of the world, but of the end of "this period." The crucial point about this type of formulation, however, is what one considers to be the end of a period. We have already seen that Mowinckel did not find the expectation of a new world order adequately expressed in Second Isaiah because that prophet did not speak of a definitive end to the old order. If the distinction between two ages requires the destruction of the world in between, then the doctrine of the two ages becomes a variant of the idea of the end of the world. 27 If on the other hand, the distinction is made between two historical periods, we cannot deny that such a distinction was made already by the pre-exilic prophets. Georg Fohrer has argued that the point of transition between the two types of expectation came when the "either‫־‬or" of the great prophets was transformed into a temporal doctrine of two ages.28 As examples of the latter he points to the emergence, in second and third Isaiah of an "eternal covenant" (Isa 55:3;61:8) with "eternal signs" (Isa 55:13), "eternal prosperity" (Isa 45:17; 51:6, 8) and "eternal peace" (Isa 51:11). But these expectations were not a purely postexilic phenomenon as Fohrer claims. Even apart from more controversial passages such as Isaiah 2 and 11 and Micah 4, the new covenant promised in Jeremiah 31 and the return to the desert followed by a new covenant in Hosea 2 already mark the transition from an age of change to an age of lasting good relations between Israel and God. 26

Johannes Lindblom, Prophecy in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Blackwells, 1962) 360. These two doctrines coincide in late apocalyptic texts such as Revelation and 4 Ezra. 28 "Die Struktur der alttestamentlichen Eschatologie" in Studien zur Alttestamentlichen Prophetie (BZAYV 99; Berlin: Töpelmann, 1967), 32-58. 27

Similarly Gerhard von Rad has said "the message of the prophets has to be termed eschatological wherever it regards the old historical bases of salvation as null and void." 29 He draws attention here to a highly significant point of transition in Israel's future hope, but one which was made already at the beginning of the period of the classical prophets. T h e hope for new institutions modeled on the old ones remained an important aspect of the future hope of the Jews right through the N T period. 30 However, this feature can already be found in the pre-exilic prophets, notably in Hosea 2 and Jeremiah 31. It became more frequent and more emphatic in later literature, but this shows how a continuous theme runs through prophetic and apocalyptic eschatology and is gradually developed. It illustrates the continuity between the two types of future hope. It does not show us the difference. c. Apocalypticism as Mythology A further type of formulation which has been applied to apocalyptic eschatology, is, if not entirely successful, distinctly more fruitful. This approach considers apocalypticism as a form of mythology. We may consider the recent formulation by Paul D. Hanson. Hanson defines prophetic eschatology as the announcement to the nation of the divine plans for Israel and the world which the prophet, with his insight into Yahweh's divine council, has witnessed unfolding within the covenant relationship between Israel and Yahweh, which plans the prophet proceeds to translate into the terms of plain history, real politics and human instrumentality,

whereas apocalyptic eschatology is the disclosure (usually esoteric in nature) to the elect of the prophetic vision of Yahweh's sovereignty (including his future dealings with his people, the inner dealings of the cosmos, etc.) which vision the visionaries have ceased to translate into terms of plain history, real politics and human instrumentality because of a pessimistic view of reality growing out of the bleak postexilic conditions in which the visionary group found itself.31

These definitions in a sense, deal with the form of presentation rather than the content. Even as formal descriptions they are not entirely satisfactory. The suggestion that the O T prophets 29

Von Rad, Old Testament Theology, 2.118. Cf. the dictum "Urzeit gleicht Endzeit." Cf. F.M. Cross, "New Directions in the Study of Apocalyptic" in Journal for Theology and the Church 6(1969)157-174; Mowinckel, He That Cometh, 1551Γ. 51 Hanson, , Jewish Apocalyptic Against its Near Eastern Environment," 34-35. 30

"translated" a mythical message into "plain history" smacks too much of twentieth century demythologizing. Surely both prophets and apocalypticists presented their message as they themselves saw it. If, however, we insist that both types of visionaries are reporting what they saw, then Hanson's definitions provide a good illustration of the intrinsic relation of the form to the message. For the prophets the most significant action takes place on earth. Even if a decision is taken in the divine council, it is acted out on earth, in "plain history." For the apocalypticists however, the most significant action takes place between heavenly mythological beings, in the conflict of God and Belial, Christ and Anti-Christ, angels and demons. In this respect apocalypticism shares the worldview of the ancient cosmic mythologies. 32 This shift of focus from earthly to heavenly events first emerges clearly in the book of Daniel, although it is partially visible in some of the postexilic prophets, notably Isaiah 24-27 and Zechariah. It carries with it a radical change in the nature of future hope. When the most significant action is situated among the heavenly beings then the main hope of human beings is to be elevated to this higher sphere of life. If human beings are elevated to the heavenly form of life, whether this happens by a resurrection after death or already before death, the restrictions of the human condition are cast off and in particular death is transcended. In classical biblical prophecy the issue had always been the life of the nation. Apocalypticism still deals with a communal context, whether it be the nation or, more often, the just, but its concern has extended to the life of the individual. By its focus on heavenly, supernatural realities it provides a possibility that human life can transcend death, not merely by the future generations of the nation but by passing to the higher, heavenly sphere. It is this hope for the transcendence of death which is the distinctive character of apocalyptic eschatology over against Old Testament prophecy. Apocalyptic Eschatology as the Transcendence of Death In support of this thesis I shall now adduce some texts from the second century BCE which are usually classified as "apocalyptic." My 32 The affities of apocalypticism with the ancient myths had of course often been noted before, notably by Hermann Gunkel, Schöpfung und Chaos (Göttingen: Vandenhocck & Ruprecht, 1895) and Hugo Grcssmann, Der Urspning der israelitischjüdischen Eschatologie (Göttingen: Vandenhocck & Ruprecht, 1905). Cf. also S.B. Frost "Eschatology and Myth," VT 2(1952) 70ÍT; F.M. Cross, "New Directions in the Study of Apocalyptic"; Amos Wilder, "Eschatological Imagery and Earthly Circumstance," NTS 5 (1959) 229-245 and on a more popular level, B.W. Anderson, Creation versus Chaos (New York: Association Press, 1967).

selection is determined by a number of factors. First, I adduce nothing earlier than the second century because the material in the late prophetic books, which is sometimes described as "apocalyptic" or "proto-apocalyptic"—such as Isaiah 24-27 or the book of Zechariah—represents the transition from prophetic to apocalyptic eschatology, but is not regarded as a full development of the later type of future hope. Secondly, I adduce nothing later than the first century BCE—i.e., I do not include the Book of Revelation, 4 Ezra or 2 Baruch, because they represent a further, later stage in the development of Jewish and Christian future expectation. In so limiting my texts I confine myself to one phase of Jewish apocalypticism. Later apocalyptic literature expressed the transcendence of death in different terms. Almost 300 years separate the book of Daniel from 4 Ezra. Thirdly, I avoid as far as possible works of uncertain origin such as the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs and the Apocalypse of Abraham. Much needs to be clarified about the provenance of these works before we can purposefully integrate them into the thought of any given period. My main text is the book of Daniel, and I will supplement this with reference to the Qumran Scrolls, 1 Enoch, Jubilees and the Assumption of Moses, all of which appear to have been written in Palestine in the second, or at latest, first century BCE. 3 3 First, let us consider the second half of the book of Daniel. Chapters seven and eight both consist of visions of heavenly events. These are followed by a prayer in ch. 9. This in turn is followed by two visions of the angel Gabriel, the first of which contains the famous prophecy of seventy weeks; the second of which contains a coded description of the Hellenistic wars, culminating in the judgment scene in Daniel 12. The first point we may notice is that chapters seven and eight deal with heavenly events and are not merely figurative descriptions of earthly batdes. I base this assertion chiefly on the use of the word (fdôsîm (Aramaic qaddîšîn) "holy ones." In ch. 7 we read that the "littie horn" was waging war with the holy ones and overcoming them, until the Ancient of Days came (7:21). In ch. 8 (10-11) "the litde horn pitted its strength against the host of heaven and some of the stars of heaven he cast to the ground." From the parallelism of 33 The Qumran community originated in the second century BCE but many of the texts may not have been composed until later. O n the dating of individual documents see F.M. Cross, The Ancient Library of Qumran, 34ff. On the date of the Assumption ofMoses and ofJubilees 23 see most recendy G.W. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, Immortality and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism (HTS 26; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1972) 43-47.

these two verses, we can see that the q'dôsîm, holy ones, in Daniel are the angelic host.34 This is in fact the usual meaning of the term q'dôsîm in the O T and at Qumran. 3 5 In the book of Daniel this interpretation is borne out by the use of the term qādâš to designate an angelic figure in Dan 8:10, and the fact that in chapters ten and eleven the heavenly batde is fought between Michael and Gabriel on the one hand and the princes of Greece and Persia on the other. The "people of the holy ones," (7:27 and 8:24), however, surely refers to Israel.36 The possessive form is used to express the relationship between heavenly patrons and human people. In Dan 10:21 Michael is "your prince." In Dan 7 the expression is inverted—Israel is the people of Michael and his fellow angels. The kingdom attributed to the people is all under heaven and might be considered as a subdivision of the entire angelic kingdom. From the references in Daniel 10 to the angels of Greece and Persia it is apparent that the author of Daniel is working here with the old idea that each nation has a corresponding angelic "prince" who rules over it. This idea is old in biblical literature. Perhaps the locus classicus is Deuteronomy 32, where God set up the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God. 37 Here the nations and their angels are not identical but stand in direct correspondence with each other. A similar correspondence between humans on earth and the angelic host in heaven can be seen in Judg 5:19-20:

34

There are three possible interpretations of the "holy ones" in Daniel: (a) The term refers to Israel. This is the traditional interpretation, recently defended by C. W. Brekelmann, "The Saints of the Most High and their Kingdom," OTS 14 (1965) 305-329, and M. McNamara, Daniel, in The Neiv Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture (London: Nelson, 1969) 664. (b) It refers to the angelic host. So M. Noth, "The Understanding of History in Old Testament Apocalyptic" in The Laws of the Pentateuch and other Essays (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1967), 194-214. (c) It refers simultaneously to both Israel and the angelic host. So Annie Jaubert, La Notion d'Alliance dans le Judaïsme (Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1963) and most recently, S. Lamberigts, "Le sens de qdwšym dans les textes de Qumran," ETL 46 (1970) 24-39. I believe that the term qedâšîm refers to the angelic host, but that the "people of the holy ones" refers to Israel. 35 Ps 34:10 is the only clear exception. 36 Contra Noth, who regards this phrase as synonymous with "the holy ones of the Most High," see "The Understanding of History," 223. 3 ' So LXX, confirmed now by evidence from Qumran. The M T has "sons of Israel." See P.W. Skehan, "A fragment of the 'Song of Moses' (Dt 32) from Qumran," BASOR 136 (1954), 12-15. Also D. Barthélémy, "Les Tiqqunë Söpherim et la Critique Textuelle de l'ancien Testament," Vêtus Testamentum Supplement 9 (1962) 295.

The kings came and fought; then they fought, those kings of Canaan, at Thaanach by the waters of Megiddo...From the heavens the stars too fought; from their courses they fought against Sisera.38

Again in Isa 24:21 we read that Yahweh will punish "the host of heaven in the heavens and the kings of the earth on the earth. ‫ יי‬In all these passages we are dealing with a two-storey universe, where events happen on one level on earth but also on another level in the heavens." There are some glimpses in the Old Testament of a tradition of a batde between angelic beings in heaven. The most noted of these is perhaps Isa 14 which tells of the revolt of Helal ben Shachar. 39 This however is only a glimpse of a tradition which seldom comes to direct expression before Daniel and the rise of apocalypticism. Usually in the Old Testament, though Yahweh and his host fight from heaven, they fight against human, earthly enemies. 40 For a complete portrayal of batdes between divine beings we must go all the way back to the cosmic myths of ancient Canaan and Mesopotamia. 41 In the ancient mythologies the cosmic batde in the heavens was the significant action, while the earthly counterpart was only a by-product. T h e return of emphasis to the heavens as the locus of action is a very significant departure in Daniel and shows the acceptance of a world structure closely akin to the ancient mythologies. 42 Daniel, however, takes a significant step beyond what we find in either the ancient mythologies or in the earlier books of the Bible. It suggests that the just can be elevated to the heavenly sphere of life to join the angelic host. T h e text reads: 38

The importance of the human part of this synergism is emphasized in the Song of Deborah by the curse against Meroz, in vs. 23, because its inhabitants did not turn out to help Yahweh. 39 Cf. also the passage from Isa 24 quoted above. 40 Cf. the text from Judg 5 quoted above. Also Hab 3:12: "In wrath you bestride the earth, in fury you trample the nations." 41 The alternative would be to posit influence from Persian dualism. In Plutarch, De Inde et Osiride, 47flf., we read an account of the heavenly battle between the forces of Ormazd and Ahriman, which may very possibly have influenced the formulation of the war between the sons of light and the sons of darkness at Qumran. See David Winston, "The Iranian Component in the Bible, Apocrypha and Qumran," History of Religions, 5 (1966) 183-216. However, the few passages in the Bible to which we have referred are sufficient to indicate that there was a Canaanite-Palestinian tradition of a battle in the heavens. O n cosmic war in Ugarit and Mesopotamia see especially Patrick D. Miller, The Divine Wanior in Early Israel, (Harvard Semitic Monographs 5; Harvard University Press, 1973). 42 Daniel was not entirely original in this. Traces of this mythical pattern can already be found in the Isaiah apocalypse (Isa 24-27) and Zechariah, but only in Dan does it become fully evident.

Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake; some shall live forever, others shall be an everlasting disgrace. But the wise shall shine brightly like the splendor of the firmament, and those who lead the many to justice shall be like the stars forever (Dan 12:2-3).

Some scholars have considered the reference to the stars here as a simple comparison. 43 This, however, is unlikely. The stars had long been identified with the angelic host in biblical tradition. In J u d g 5:20 the stars were said to fight against Sisera.44 The identification is explicit in Dan 8:10: "its power extended to the host of heaven, so, that it cast down to earth some of the host and some of the stars and trampled on them." The entire second half of Dan deals with the heavenly counterpart of the battle of the Jews with Antiochus Epiphanes on earth. There is nothing to suggest that the author was interested in the revival of earthly life. Rather, Dan 12:1-3 describes the final coming together of the two spheres of life by the elevation of the just to join the angelic host. This interpretation is confirmed by several passages in the contemporary literature. In particular we may cite 1 Enoch 104:2 which promises the just that "you will shine as the stars of heaven" and 104:6, "you will become companions to the hosts of heaven." Again in the Similitudes of Enoch (39:5) the dwelling places of the righteous are with the holy angels.45 In Dan this elevation is the result at once of a final judgment and a final battle. 46 It is, therefore, a vindication of the righteous. At the time at which Daniel was written this vindication was necessary especially for the martyred righteous who had lost their lives for their faith. The promise of elevation showed that this loss was not as absolute as might appear since the just were raised to a higher, lasting form of life. In Daniel the promise of elevation comes in temporal sequence at a future time. It involves the raising of the dead, although the elevation of the living is not excluded. 47 The impression is given that it only takes place at the end of a period, after a time of great tribulation. This is also the case in certain other works of the second century BCE. In Jub 23:27-31 the just are promised that "their bodies 4

‫ י‬So Aagc Bentzen, Darnel (2nd ed., Tübingen: Mohr, 1952) 52. Cf. also Isa 14, where Lucifer tried to set his throne above the stars of heaven. Further 1 Enoch 80:6; J o b 38:7; Sir 43:8f.; 2 Bar 51:10. 45 Cf. also Assumption of Moses, 10:7, where Israel is elevated to the stars. Matt 22:30: "At the resurrection men and women do not marry but are like angels in heaven." 46 See the discussion by Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 11 -28. 47 Cf. 1 Thes 4:13-18. 44

will rest in the earth and their spirits will have much joy." Here no resurrection is promised, but the just are assured that they will transcend death at a future time. Again, in the final section of 1 Enoch the elevation of the just to the stars comes at the conclusion of the judgment of a period and is definitely future. 48 This is also true of the corporate elevation of Israel in the Assumption of Moses, 10:9. T h e transcendence of death was not necessarily to be awaited as stricdy future. It could also be experienced as present reality. This seems to have been the case at least in the Qumran community. Although the Qumran sect is generally recognized as an apocalyptic community, there is no clear reference to the resurrection of the dead. 49 Various interpretations of the community's attitude to death and afterlife have been put forward. Chaim Rabin, amazingly, finds ample evidence of a belief in resurrection to confirm his thesis that the scrolls are Pharisaic. 50 At the other extreme R.B. Laurin finds no evidence of either immortality of the soul or resurrection of the body. 51 In between, most scholars find some form of spiritual immortality other than physical resurrection. 52 Most penetrating, perhaps is the analysis of H.W. Kuhn, who finds in the Scrolls and particularly in the Hodayot, the conviction of present participation in angelic life, coupled with the expectation of further fulfillment in the future. 53 Death does not arise as a theological problem in the Hodayot, because the community believed that it had already transcended death by passing over into the community of the angels. This is well illustrated by a passage in 1QH 3:19-23: 48 O n the eschatology of this section of 1 Enoch see Pierre Grelot, "L'Eschatologie des Esséniens et le Livre d'Henoch," RevQ 1 (1958/9) 113-31, and Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 112-130. In the first section of 1 Enoch (chapters 1-36) chap. 22 describes the abode of the souls while they await the day of judgment. The Similitudes of Enoch do not give a consistent picture. In 38:5 the righteous already dwell with the angels, but in chap. 51 a future resurrection is expected. The fourth section of 1 Enoch (chs 83-90) apparendy expects a future resurrection in 90:33. 49 This statement must be qualified in light of texts that were published subsequendy. See my review of this issue in Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls (London: Roudedge, 1997). 50 C. Rabin, Qumran Studies (Oxford: Clarendon, 1957). For two possible references to resurrection in 1QH 6: 29, 34 cf. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 150-151, who, like most scholars, rejects Rabin's interpretation. 51 R.B. Laurin, "The Question of Immortality in the Qumran Hodayot," JSS 3(1958) 344-355. 52 For a summary of the debate, with references, see Nickelsburg, Resurrection 144-145. 53 H.W. Kuhn, Enderwartung und Gegenwärtiges Heil (SUNT 4; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966). A very similar position is held by Helmer Ringgrcn, The Faith of Qumran. Theology of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1963).

I give thanks to you, Ο Lord, For you have redeemed me from the pit And from Sheol Abaddon you have lifted me up

to the eternal height (rum 'wlm) And I will walk to and fro on an unsearchable plain And I know that there is hope for him whom you have created from the dust for the eternal assembly, And the perverse spirit you have cleansed from great

transgression to be stationed with the host of the holy ones, And to enter into fellowship with the congregation of the children of heaven And you have apportioned to man an eternal destiny with the spirits of knowledge.

In this text it is apparent that the author is convinced that he already possesses eternal life. This conviction is repeated in 1QH 11:3-14: "You have cleansed man from sin... that he might be joined with the sons of your truth, and in a lot with your holy ones...with the everlasting host." 54 The conviction of the presence of the angelic host in the community is reflected in the "Messianic Rule": Nor shall anyone who is afflicted by any form of human uncleanness whatsoever be admitted into the assembly of God...for holy angels are present in their congregation. 55

In more general terms, 1QS 4:6-8 promises abundance of bliss, with length of days and fruitfulness and all blessings without end and eternal joy in perpetual life and the glorious crown and garment of honor in everlasting light.

Here again we find the promise of eternal life, with no mention of the fact of death. We cannot suppose that the authors of these documents believed that members of the community would not in fact die.56 In any case, the literature was produced over more than one generation, some of it clearly after the Teacher of Righteousness had passed away.57 Yet there is very little evidence of a belief in the resurrection of the dead. The reason for this can only be that the community believed that death was already transcended by its fellowship with the angelic host. 54

For a summary of the discussion of these passages with full references see Nickelsburg, Resurrection. 152-156. 1 follow Nickclsburg's translations here. 55 lQSa, 2:3-11. Cf. also IQM, 7:4-6. On the parallel to I Cor 11:10 sec Joseph A. Fitzmyer, "A Feature of Qumran Angclology and the Angels of 1 Cor 11:10," NTS 4 (1957-8) 48-58 (= Paul and Qumran, ed. J. Murphy-O'Connor; London: Chapman, 1968) 31-47. 5, ‫ י‬On the evidence of burials at Qumran see Roland de Vaux, L'Archéologie et les Mss de ta Mer Morte (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961) 46-47. 5 ' This contradicts the view of Ringgrcn that the community ignored the belief

The fact that such a conception was possible for the Q u m r a n community shows that the most significant aspect of the future hope of second century Judaism was not the physical resurrection of the body, which was hardly envisaged at the time, nor a transformation of the earth, nor the ushering in of a new age, but the transition from one sphere of life to another. Such a transition is vertical rather than horizontal, spatial rather than temporal. I do not mean that it must be conceived in crudely spatial terms, that life with the heavenly host must be lived in a heaven distinct from earth. Evidendy the Q u m r a n community enjoyed this higher level of life right here on earth. Rather I mean that there is another sphere of life parallel to this. In the words of 4 Ezra, "the Most High made not one world, but two." 58 These two, however, are not only in temporal succession, as envisaged by 4 Ezra, and often thought to be typical of all Jewish apocalypticism. They are also contemporaneous, as envisaged by Daniel, 1 Enoch, and Qumran. The religious ideal of a life of heightened intensity and perfection was not entirely relegated to a future Utopia. It was also something eternally present in the heavenly court. This belief inevitably opened the way for some form of mystic participation in the higher form of life, even if only on a communal basis, as was the case at Qumran. 5 9 We may note that if we regard the world view of apocalypticism as a two-storey universe rather than as a theory of two world ages, we can see that revelations of heavenly secrets, such as we get in the heavenly journeys of Enoch and again in 1 Enoch chaps. 72-82, are not irrelevant to the eschatology of these works. If the future hope of the apocalypticist was to be elevated to a heavenly life, then any information about the heavenly regions where such life is most fully lived is relevant to that hope. In this way it is possible to find a coherent world view in the apocalyptic writings. Theological Conclusions There are two conclusions relevant to biblical theology which I wish to draw from the foregoing. O n e concerns the contrast of Greek and Hebrew thought which has been fashionable for some time in biblical theology. T h e other regards the logic of eschatological expectations, or the function filled by future expectation in the living out of present experience. in resurrection because earlier generations were of no relevance. 58 4 Ezra 7:40. 59 On an individual basis we should note the heightened interest in such figures as Enoch and Elijah in the intertestamental period.

a. Similarity to Greek Thought The hope for the transcendence of death in late postexilic Judaism inevitably reminds us of the Platonic idea of the immortality of the soul.60 Plato also believed in the existence of a higher world, the world of ideas, to which the good soul could be elevated upon death. As in most of the Jewish texts this transition in its complete form was basically something to be hoped for in the future, after the death of the individual, although he could participate in it proleptically by a good life and contemplation of the ideas here on earth. Both traditions believed that the righteous would experience an ultimate vindication which would not be cut off by death. Inevitably there were important differences between the Platonic tradition and Jewish apocalyptic eschatology. One was the far greater emphasis on personal mysticism in the Platonic tradition while the Jewish tradition remained predominantly interested in the community. In this, Jewish apocalypticism showed its roots in biblical prophecy. However the common ground remains highly significant. The essential point in both traditions is that earthly biological life is not the highest form of experience for which human beings can hope. There is a whole higher realm of life, expressed in the Jewish tradition by reference to the divine council and in the Platonic tradition by the world of ideas. Both traditions allow for some possibility of experiencing this higher life proleptically before death by living a just life.61 The similarity between the two traditions can be well illustrated from the ambiguities of the Wisdom of Solomon. Some scholars have interpreted this book fairly successfully from an almost exclusively Greek background. 62 Others have gone so far as to argue that it was written in Hebrew. 63 On the one hand we find such 60

For Plato's teaching on immortality sec cspccially the Phacdo and the myth of Er at the end of the Republic. 61 We may describe this higher form of life as the life of the spirit if we are careful to note that spirituality does not necessarily mean immateriality. Cf. R. North "Separated Spiritual Substances," CÖQ, 29 (1967) 419-449. In the Jewish texts the angelic form of life seems to be a state intermediate between God and man but the question of immateriality is simply not an issue. 62 So most recently J.M. Reese, Hellenistic Influence on the Book of Wisdom (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1970). 65 See Joseph Rcidcr, The Book of Wisdom (Dropsie College scries; New York: Harper and Brothers, 1957) 22-29. The main champion of the Hebrew original of Wisdom was D.S. Margoliouth, "Was the Book of Wisdom written in Hebrew?," Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1890) 263-97. More recently others have maintained a Hebrew original for the first 10 chapters—so E.A. Speiser, "The Hebrew Origin of the First Part'of the Book of Wisdom," JQR 14(1923-24) 455-87, and C.E. Purinton, "Translation Greek in the Wisdom of Solomon," JBL 47(1928) 276-304.

characteristically Greek statements as that "the corruptible body weighs down the sour 5 (9:15), and we may suspect Greek influence of a Platonizing kind in the statement that "God created man for incorrupdon" (2:23). O n the other hand, we find the vindication of the just man expressed not merely as immortality of the soul but also as being "numbered among the sons of God" and having "a portion among the holy ones" (5:5), precisely the hope ofJewish apocalyptic eschatology in Daniel, Enoch and Qumran. 6 4 The Greek hope of immortality of the soul and the eschatology of the Jewish apocalypses was not precisely the same, but Wisdom shows how successfully the two could be combined. The similarity between certain patterns of Greek thought and apocalyptic eschatology might be explained in part by Hellenistic influence on Jewish thought in the intertestamental period. 65 The fact of Hellenistic influence or at least the influence of Hellenisticoriental syncretism can hardly be doubted. The spread of the belief in astral immortality in the Hellenistic world undoubtedly helped prepare the way for the idea of elevation to the heavenly host.66 There is no reason however to regard apocalyptic eschatology as a foreign growth in the Jewish tradition. The idea of a two-storey universe which made apocalyptic eschatology possible was always present to some degree in the biblical tradition and indeed in the ancient Near East as a whole. Recent studies have shown the importance of the divine council in the Old Testament. 67 The M

On the affinities between the Greek doctrine of immortality of the soul and the Jewish doctrine of elevation to the heavenly host see G.W. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 177-180. O n the eschatology of the book of Wisdom see P. Grelot, "L'Eschatologie de la Sagesse et les Apocalypses juives,"in A. Barucq, ed., A La Rencontre de Dieu. Mémorial Albert Gelin (Le Puy: Mappus, 1961) 165-178; Paul Beauchamp, "Le salut corporel des justes et la conclusion du livre de la Sagesse," Bib 45 (1964) 491-526; C. Larcher, Études sur le Livre de la Sagesse (Paris: Gabalda, 1969)103-132, 301-328; M. Delcor, "L'immortalité de l'âme dans le livre de la Sagesse et dans les documents de Qumrân," Nouvelle Revue Théologique 77 (1955) 627630. For a possible reference to astral immortality in Wis 3:7f. see Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 60. 65 For alleged Greek influence on Jewish eschatology sec T.F. Glasson, Greek Influence on Jewish Eschatology (London: SPCK, 1961); Hcngcl, Judentum und Hellenismus, and H.D. Betz. "On the Problem of the Religio-historical Understanding of Apocalypticism," Journal for Theology and the Church 6 (1969) 134-156, argue for a more general Greek influence on Jewish apocalypticism. 66 O n astral immortality in the Hellenistic world see especially Franz Cumont, Lux Perpetua (Paris: Geuthner, 1949)142-188. 67 F.M. Cross, "The Council of Yahweh in Second Isaiah," JNES 12 (1953) 274278; R.N. Whybray, The Heavenly Counsellor in Is. 40:13-14 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971); R.E. Brown "The Pre-Christian Semitic Concept of Mystery," CBQ, 20 (1958) 417-420; H.W. Robinson, "The Council of Yahweh," JTS 45 (1944) 151-157.

prophets had access to this higher sphere as a source of information. 68 A few chosen individuals such as Enoch and Elijah seem to have gained permanent access to it. Furthermore the psalms and wisdom literature both speak of "life'5 in absolute terms which suggest a higher sphere of life, even though it is not specifically associated with the divine council.69 The great emphasis on "history" in modern biblical theology has often led to the impression that Israel had a one-dimensional, or nearly one-dimensional view of the world.70 This view must be modified. While Israel certainly had a distinctive world-view, and one in which emphasis on human history played an important part, there remain important analogies with Greek tradition in the concept of a higher realm of life.71 The affinities of late Jewish hope for the transcendence of death expressed in categories drawn from O T tradition, with the Platonic hope of the immortality of the soul expressed in terms drawn from Greek philosophy, go a long way to disprove the strong contrast between Greek and Hebrew thought advocated by some biblical theologians.72 b. The Logic of Apocalyptic Eschatology The apocalyptic writings had no one literally intended portrayal of the manner in which the elevation to the higher form of life will take place. Daniel speaks of a resurrection. Jubilees 23 says that the bodies of the just would remain in the earth but their spirits would rejoice. The Qumran community experienced the transition as a present reality, but also expected a future vindication which was variously described in the War Scroll, 11Q. Melchizedek, etc. This variety of 6,1

Cf. Jer 23:18, 22 where the false prophets are denounced because they had not stood in Yahweh's council. 69 For "life" used absolutely in the Wisdom literature, cf. Prov 2:19; 5:6; 6:23; 10:17-15:24, etc. On the eschatology of the Psalms see L. Sabourin, The Psalms (Staten Island, New York: Society of St. Paul, 1969) I, 145-151 and the literature there cited. The future hope of the apocalyptic writings may in a sense be considered as an insertion of the hope of "life" in the psalms and wisdom literature into the communal and political framework of the prophetic tradition. 70 Cf. the use made of biblical theology by Harvey Cox in The Secular City (New York: Macmillan, 1965) 15-32. 71 Cf. in this respect the article of N.P. Bratsiotis, "Ncphcsch-Psyche, Ein Beitrag zur Erforschung der Sprache und der Theologie der Septuaginta," Vetus Testamentum Supplements 15(1966) 58-89, especially his conclusion on p. 87. "Der hebraischc Terminus 'nephesch' und der sehr alte griechische Begriff 'psyche' weisen im grossen und ganzen diessclbc Breite der Bedeutung und dieselbe Mannigfaltigkeit in der Abwandlung ihrer Bedeutung auf." Bratsiotis is conccrncd here primarily with pre-Platonic Greek thought. 72 Sec especially Thorlief Boman, Hebrew Thought Compared with Greek (tr. Jules L. Moreau; London: S.C.M. Press, 1960). Contrast James Barr, The Semantics of Biblical

expression can hardly surprise us. Hope is by nature of things unseen, which can only be figuratively or symbolically expressed, and no one symbol can exhaust its potentialities. It is clear from the example of Qumran that the transition to the higher form of life was essentially a depth experience in the present. Death was transcended by an intensity in this life, which was not destroyed by physical decease, rather than by future revivification. In recent years certain theologians have pointed out that eschatological formulations are essentially projections of hopes experienced in the present. In that respect they indicate a present depthexperience, rather than an objective future expectation. So Rudolf Bultmann wrote: The meaning in history lies in the present and when the present is conceived as the eschatological present by Christian faith, the meaning in history is realized. 73

Also Karl Rahner: Man's knowledge of the future still to come, even his revealed knowledge, is confined to such prospects as can be derived from a reading of his present eschatological experience. 74

These assertions are in some degree supported by the evidence of Qumran or by the assertion in the Wisdom of Solomon that "Righteousness is eternal" (1:15). However, they can hardly be said to do justice to the logic of eschatology as found in the apocalyptic texts. In those texts, while the present experience of righteousness gives rise to the hope of final vindication, it is also true that the hope of final vindication confirms and even makes possible the present experience of righteousness and divine approval. Neither present experience nor future hope can be ignored. They are mutually interdependent. This interdependence is evident again and again in the apocalyptic texts. When, in Dan 12:12, the angel sums up the message of the preceding visions in the words "blessed are they who stand firm" he is encouraging the just to stand firm by the promise of resurrection which has been given at the beginning of the chapter, but also assuring them that even while they are standing firm they are blessed. Again in 1 Enoch 104:14 the righteous are told to "be hopeful and cast not away hope, for ye shall have great joy as the Language (Oxford: University Press, 1961). See the comments of Brevard S. Childs on the debate, Biblical Theology in Crisis (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1970) 44-47. 73 R. Bultmann, History and Eschatology (GifTord Lectures, 1955; New York: Harper and Row, 1957) 155. 74 K. Rahner, "The Hermeneutics of Eschatological Assertions" in Theological Investigations, 4 (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1966) 334.

angels of heaven," "for the paths of righteousness are worthy of acceptation but the paths of unrighteousness will suddenly be destroyed and vanish" (94:1). Here again the point of the writer is that the paths of righteousness should be accepted here and now, but he realizes that this requires a degree of hopefulness and confidence in the future which is made possible by the promise of future joy. Even at Qumran, where the emphasis is very heavily on present experience there remains a promise of future consummation for God through the mysteries of His understanding and through His glorious wisdom has appointed a period for the existence of wrongdoing; but at the season of visitation He will destroy it forever; and then the truth of the world will appear forever (1QS 4:18-19).

The logic of these texts might be described as follows. The objective is that people should live justly, responding in a free and uninhibited manner to the demands of righteousness, and so attain the experience of the approval of God. Now one of the main factors which inhibits such a free response to righteousness is the fear of personal loss, of pursuing an unprofitable course of action, and especially of the ultimate loss of death. So the impious in the Wisdom of Solomon reason: Our life is a passing shadow And there is no retreat from our end... Come therefore let us enjoy the good things that are... Let us crown ourselves with rosebuds ere they wither... Let our strength be the rule of our righteousness, For weakness is proved to be unprofitable (Wis 2:5fl).

These fears are countered by the hope of a form of life which transcends death. This hope gives the freedom necessary to respond freely to the demands of righteousness and so attain the present depth-experience in life. This logic of Jewish apocalyptic eschatology carries over into the New Testament. It is well expressed in a passage in Romans 6:9ff: We know that Christ, once raised from the dead, is never to die again: he is no longer under the dominion of death. For in dying as he died he died to sin, once for all, and in living as he lives, he lives to God. In the same way you must regard yourselves as dead to sin and alive to God...Put yourselves at the disposal of God as dead men raised to life, yield your bodies to him as implements for doing right.

In this passage it is the assurance of resurrection which enables the Christian to give up his body to doing right with no interest other than living to God. The same point is made by the gospel saying: "Lay up for yourselves treasure in heaven"—not so that you may

eventually enjoy them, but so that they may mediate a present depth experience of eternal life— "for where your treasure is, there is your heart also" (Matt 6:19-21) . The important thing in this logic of eschatology is surely the attainment of the present depth experience, of liberation in response to the demands of righteousness. If this is attained, the manner in which it is mediated is of lesser importance. It is undoubtedly true that this depth experience can be attained by some without a belief in the heavenly host, immortality of the soul or resurrection of the body. It is also true that belief in an afterlife does not necessarily involve liberation, or the attainment of a depth-experience. However, if we are to understand the thought pattern of apocalyptic eschatology we must realize that, for the apocalypticists, present experience and future hope were intrinsically connected and mutually interdependent. 75 Conclusion This essay has been an attempt to clarify the distinctive nature of the future hope of late post-exilic Judaism. This hope cannot be understood as the expectation of a purely future event, and, despite the etymology of the word eschatology, it is not primarily concerned with the end of anything. Rather it is concerned with the transcendence of death by the attainment of a higher, angelic form of life. This hope shows considerable affinities with the Greek doctrines of the immortality of the soul. It cannot be adequately understood as either a future expectation or a present depth-experience. It is essentially an interpénétration of both.

75 Cf. Carl E. Braaten, History and Hermeneutics (New Directions in Theology Today 2; London: Lutterworth Press, 1968) 179: "The present without its past and future is fleeting and meaningless. Eschatology must point out the realm of future hope beyond death." Also Karl Rahner, "The Hermeneutics of Eschatological Assertions," in Theological Investigations, 4, 326: "The self-understanding of Scripture itself, no matter how existentially interpreted, undoubtedly excludes an elimination of eschatology."

C H A P T E R SIX

T H E K I N G D O M O F G O D IN T H E APOCRYPHA AND PSEUDEPIGRAPHA

Kingdom of God does not appear as a standard, fixed expression in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha as it does in the Gospels. There are however various motifs associated with "kingdom" which are important for establishing the possible range of meaning of the phrase. Daniel We begin our review with the canonical Book of Daniel, which is in fact a pseudepigraph in chs 7-12, and belongs chronologically with the Apocrypha. The tales in chs 1-6 are somewhat older than the apocalyptic visions of the Maccabean era, and, at least in some cases, are traditional stories which developed over a long period of time.1 T h e theme of world kingdoms runs throughout these stories as they trace the career of Daniel under Babylonian, Median, and finally Persian rule. The inclusion of Darius the Mede in this sequence is a notorious problem, since Babylon was never ruled by Media, and Darius was the name of a later, Persian king. The solution of the problem lies in the discovery that Daniel was adapting a scheme which was conventional in Near Eastern political propaganda. According to this schema there would be a sequence of four world kingdoms followed by a fifth, final one. 2 The schema is known from a Roman chronicler, Aemilius Sura, who wrote about 175 BCE. Aemilius lists the kingdoms as Assyria, Media, Persia, and Macedonia, followed by Rome. The same kingdoms are listed in the Fourth Sibylline Oracle, a Jewish work from the late first century CE,

1 J.J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel (Harvard Semitic Monographs 16; Missoula: Scholars, 1977) 8-11. The tradition-historical background has been most vividly illustrated in the case of Dan 4 by the discovery of the Prayer of Nabonidus at Qpmran. 2 T h e existence of this schema was pointed out by J.W. Swain, "The Theory of the Four Monarchies: Opposition History Under the Roman Empire," Classical Philology 35 (1940) 1-21. The most complete discussion is by David Russer, "The Four Empires in the Fourth Sibyl and in the Book of Daniel," Israel Oriental Studies 2 (1972) 148-75.

which may, however, incorporate an older source. 3 Because of the inclusion of Media, the schema is thought to have originated in Persia. Originally, the schema served as propaganda against the Greek empire of Alexander. The implication was that history had run its course and that the fourth, Greek, kingdom would soon be overthrown. The schema of the four kingdoms is found explicitly in Dan 2 in the interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar's dream, and again in ch 7. It also informs the structure of the book as a whole. Chapters 1-6 mention Babylonian, Median, and Persian kings. Chapters 7-12 repeat this sequence and anticipate the coming of "the prince of Greece" (10:20). It is apparent then that Daniel identifies the kingdoms as Babylon, Media, Persia, and Greece—Babylon is substituted for Assyria because of its role in the destruction of Jerusalem. In Nebuchadnezzar's dream in Dan 2 the four world kingdoms are symbolized as a statue, made of metals of declining value, which is destroyed by a stone that then becomes a great mountain. 4 Daniel explains that in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed, nor shall its sovereignty be left to another people. It shall break in pieces all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, and it shall stand forever (2:44).

This kingdom set up by God is not further described. From the context we should suppose that it is a Jewish kingdom which will rise to replace, and destroy, the previous gentile kingdoms. It differs from other kingdoms insofar as it will not pass away, but it is presumably a political, earthly kingdom like them. 5 The kingdom set up by God must, however, be distinguished from the kingdom, or kingship, of God. In Dan 3:33 Nebuchadnezzar praises God: "His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and his dominion is from generation to generation." Here again there is a contrast between the transience of human kingdoms, even that of the mighty Nebuchadnezzar, and the permanence of God's reign. The kingdom of God here is not an earthly kingdom set up by God, but the power by which "the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will" (Dan 4:29). In these hymnic passages 3

J.J. Collins, "The Sibylline Oracles," J H. Charlesworth, ed., The Old Testament Pesudepigrapha (2 vols; Garden City, New York: Doublcday, 1983) 1:381-89. 4 On the symbolism of the dream sec Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel, 34-46. 5 It is possible that Daniel was adapting a Babylonian prophecy which predicted a lasting Babylonian kingdom. Sec Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1984) 76-77 and compare the Babylonian Uruk prophecy.

Daniel draws on the biblical tradition where Yahweh is proclaimed king in the Psalms. The four-kingdom schema is taken up again in Dan 7 in the context of an apocalyptic vision from the time of the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes. In this case the four kingdoms are represented as beasts rising from the sea. T h e dominant imagery of the passage is drawn from the myth of combat between a god and a sea monster or dragon, which Israel had adapted from the more ancient Near Eastern cultures. 6 God, the ancient of days, is depicted as a royal judge who confers "dominion and glory and kingdom 5 ' on "one like a son of m a n " (7:13-14). Subsequendy we are told that "the holy ones of the Most High shall receive the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever" (7:18) and finally that the kingdom and the dominion and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the holy ones of the Most High: their kingdom shall be an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey them (7:27).

T h e interpretation of this chapter, which has had such profound influence on the Gospels, remains very controversial. There is evidendy a contrast between the everlasting kingdom conferred by God and the transient human kingdoms which precede it, as in Dan 2. Further, it is clear that an earthly Jewish kingdom is envisaged, which will be worldwide and everlasting (7:27). The controversy concerns the interpretation of the "one like a son of man" and the "holy ones of the Most High." Some scholars take these expressions simply as ways of referring to the Jewish people. 7 Against this, however, is the fact that every undisputed mention of "holy ones" in Daniel refers to angels, 8 and that figures who appear in human likeness are also angels.9 If Dan 7 is read in the context of chs 10-12, it is clear that Daniel envisaged two dimensions in history. The conflict on earth between Jews and Greeks is only the reflection of the batde between their angelic patrons. T h e victory of the Jews corresponds to, and depends 6 Collins, The Apocalyptic Vmon of the Book of Daniel, 95-101; The Apocalyptic Imagination, 79-80. For the background myth see John Day, God's Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1985) and Adela Yarbro Coffins, The Combat Myth in the Book of Revelation (Harvard Dissertations in Religion 9; Missoula: Scholars, 1976) 57-100. ‫ י‬So, recendy, L.F. Hartman and A.A. DiLella, The Book of Daniel (AB 23; Garden City: Doubleday, 1978) 85-102; M. Casey, Son of Man: The Interpretation and Influence of Daniel 7 (London: SPCK, 1979) 7-50; W.S. Towner, Daniel (Interpretation; Adanta:John Knox, 1984) 105-6. 8 Dan 4:10, 14, 20; 8:13. Cf. the angelic "holy ones" in / Enoch 14:22-23. 9 Dan 8:15-16; 9:21; 10:5, 16, 18; 12:6-7. Cf. the Animal Apocalypse in I Enoch 8390 where men represent angels, or humans transformed to an angelic state.

on the victory of the archangel Michael. Accordingly it seems most probable that the "one like a son of man" is Michael, who represents Israel on the heavenly level. The "holy ones" are the angelic host and "the people of the holy ones" are the Jews. 10 The kingdom then is realized on two levels and involves simultaneously an angelic kingdom and the earthly dominion of the Jewish people. A precise parallel to this idea is found in the Qumran War Scroll, where God is said to "raise up the rule of Michael in the midst of the gods and the realm of Israel in the midst of all flesh" (1QM 17:7)." The apocalyptic kingdom of Dan 7 is not simply identical with that envisaged in Dan 2 but involves an otherworldly dimension. Dan 12 promises that the faithful Jews can share in this dimension by resurrection, and that the wise teachers will shine like the stars forever and ever, which in apocalyptic idiom, means to join the fellowship of the angels.12 The everlasting kingdom thus becomes accessible not only to future generations but also to the righteous after death. On the basis of our examination of Daniel, then, we can distinguish three aspects of the kingdom motif. First, there is the hymnic use for the sovereignty of God, by which he disposes of all kingdoms. Second, there is the earthly dominion of the Jewish people, which is a kingdom set up by God. Finally, there is the apocalyptic kingdom of the angels, which involves the exaltation of righteous human beings after death. These three ideas are not mutually exclusive. All three are implied in the apocalyptic vision in Dan 7. The Sibylline Tradition The theme of world kingdoms plays a major role in the Sibylline Oracles from the Jewish Diaspora. The main body of Sib O r 3 was composed in Egypt around the middle of the second century BCE. 1 3 Sib O r 3:97-161 introduces the theme of kingship and shows that it was a cause of strife from the beginning. The section concludes with a list of world kingdoms in 3:156-61. The other main sections of the 10

Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Darnel, 123-47; The Apocalyptic Imagination, 78-85. Cf. A. Lacocque: The Book of Daniel (Atlanta: Knox, 1979) 131-34; C. Rowland, The Open Heaven (New York: Crossroad, 1983) 178-83; Day, God's Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea, 167-78. " U.B. Müller, Messias and Menschensohn in jüdischen Apokalypsen und in der Offenbarung Johannes (Gütersloh: Mohn, 1972) 28. 12 Cf. 1 Enoch 102:2, 6. 13 J J . Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (SBLDS 13; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1974) 24-37; "Sibylline Oracles," OTP 1:354-61.

original corpus follow a pattern of sin, followed by tribulation, followed by the advent of a king or kingdom. In Sib O r 3:196-294 this pattern is demonstrated from Jewish history at the time of the Babylonian exile. T h e exile comes to an end when God sends a king (286), who must be identified in this context as Cyrus of Persia.14 In other passages the focus of the sibyl is on Hellenistic Egypt. In Sib O r 3:192-93 the time of deliverance will come in "the seventh reign, when a king of Egypt, who will be of the Greeks by race, will rule." T h e king in question is either Ptolemy VI Philometor (if Alexander is counted as the first) or his anticipated successor. Similar references to the seventh king are found in Sib O r 3:318 and 608. In Sib O r 3:652 "God will send a king from the sun, who will stop the entire earth from evil war." T h e reference again is to a Ptolemaic king.15 The sibyl looked for a king from the Ptolemaic line who would mediate deliverance for the Jews as Cyrus of Persia had done at the end of the Babylonian exile. In the final section of the book the sibyl speaks of a kingdom which will be raised up by God (767-795). The temple will be a center of pilgrimage for all nations; wolves and lambs will feed together, as envisaged in Isa 11. This eschatological kingdom is apparendy distinct from the reign of the seventh, Ptolemaic king, but it is also an earthly kingdom, which will bring to an end the sequence of world kingdoms. Throughout Sib O r 3 God is "the great King" (499, 560, 616, 784, 808) who must be worshipped by all. As in Dan 1-6 the kingship of God is his sovereignty by which he disposes of all kingdoms. The Sibylline tradition is continued in additions which were made to Sib O r 3 in the first century BCE. One of these oracles (3:46-62) anticipates that after the Roman conquest of Egypt (31 BCE) "the most great kingdom of the immortal king will become manifest over men" (Sib O r 3:47-48). This will be a universal kingdom ruled by a "holy prince.' ‫ י‬This figure is not identified as a Roman or Egyptian leader and may be a Jewish messiah. The advent of the "kingdom of God" here is understood primarily as the occasion for "the judgment of the great king, immortal God" (3:56), executed by means of a fiery cataract from heaven. A similar expectation of destructive judgment pervades the fifth 14 Contra J . Nolland, "Sib O r II1. 265-94. An Early Maccabean Messianic Oracle," JTS 30 (1979) 158-67, who finds a typological allusion to a Davidic messiah here. 15 Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism, 40-44. The Egyptian background of the phrase "king from the sun" is shown by its occurrence in the Potter's Oracle, col. 3.

book of Sibylline Oracles, composed in Egypt on the eve of the great Diaspora revolt of 115 CE.16 In V 108 the judgment is brought about by "a certain king sent from God," about whom we are told no more. Elsewhere in Sib Or 5 the savior figure is said to come from heaven. The most explicit passage is found in w 414-28: For a blessed man came from the expanses of heaven with a scepter in his hands which God gave him and he gained sway over all things well, and gave back the wealth to all the good, which previous men had taken.

He is also said to refashion "the city which God desired" by building a tower which touches the clouds, (cf. Sib O r 5:252, where the wall of Jerusalem is said to extend as far as Joppa). Despite the heavenly origin of the savior king, Sib O r 5 remains true to the Sibylline tradition. God himself is the king (5:499) who must be worshipped by all. His kingdom on earth is an eschatological kingdom centered in Jerusalem but universal in scope. The Egyptian Sibylline tradition is remarkable for its lack of the otherworldly dimension so characteristic of the apocalyptic literature. There is no talk of angels and no expectation of resurrection. The hope is the traditional Israelite hope for the transformation of the earth. The fourth book of Sibylline Oracles, which, in its present form comes from Syria or the Jordan valley (ca. 80 CE), shows more affinity with apocalyptic eschatology.17 Here again the sequence of world kingdoms provides the context for the eschatological expectation. The sibyl, like Daniel, speaks of a sequence of four kingdoms, over ten generations, ruled in turn by Assyria (six generations), Media (two generations), Persia and Macedonia (one each). The rise of Rome follows. Since Rome is not integrated into the numerical sequence, it appears to have been added to update an older oracle. The final demise of the world kingdoms does not lead to a final "kingdom of God" in Sib Or 4. Instead, God will "burn the whole earth and destroy the whole race of men" (Sib O r 4:176). This universal destruction is then followed by a resurrection and final judgment. The resurrection is a restoration on earth: those who are pious "will live on earth again" (187). This final state is not called a kingdom in Sib O r 4, but it takes the place of the world kingdoms. 16 Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism, 73-95; "Sibylline Oracles," 1:390-2. O n the historical setting see also M. Hengel, "Messianischc Hoffnung und politischer 'Radikalismus' in der jüdisch-hellenistischcn Diaspora," in D. Hellholm, ed., Apocalyptyicvm in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tübingen: Mohr, 1983) 653-84. » Collins, "Sibylline Oracles," OTP 1:381-83.

Other Diaspora Usage The Sibylline Oracles, with their focus on the succession of world empires, are an important, but somewhat atypical, strand of Diaspora Judaism. 18 The idea of the sovereignty of God is the common denominator of all references to the kingdom, including those of the Sibyllines. This idea did not necessarily entail the expectation of an eschatological kingdom. 19 For 2 Maccabees, God is the "King of Kings" who controls the course of history (13:4). The revolt ofJason, the Hellenizer, is a revolt against "the holy land and the kingdom" (1:7). Kingdom here can only mean the sovereignty of God, perhaps as expressed through the law.20 The second letter prefixed to 2 Macc declares that God "has saved all his people, and has returned the inheritance to all, and the kingship and priesthood and consecration" (2:17). Whether the "kingship" here refers to the Hasmonean dynasty 21 or whether it is meant as equivalent to consecration in a spiritual sense, it is certainly conceived as present after the re-consecration of the temple. In the philosophical circles of Diaspora Judaism the "kingdom" took on a more spiritual, or ethical sense. The Wisdom of Solomon declares that "there is no dominion (basileion) of Hades on earth, for righteousness is immortal" (1:14-15). Even though the righteous "seemed to have died" (3:2), they will judge nations and rule over peoples and the Lord will reign over them forever (3:8). Here the kingdom is something that the righteous enjoy after death: "But the righteous live forever, and their reward is with the Lord...therefore they will receive majestic royalty" (5:16). In this sense we can understand how "the desire for wisdom leads to a kingdom" (6:20). Finally we are told that wisdom guided the righteous man and "showed him the kingdom of God and gave him knowledge of angels" (10:10). T h e reference is to Jacob. The apparent equation of 18

For a survey of Jewish Hellenistic literature apart from Pliilo see J . J. Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem. Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (New York: Crossroad, 1983). 19 The most complete survey of references to the kingdom of God and related concepts in the "intertestamental" literature is that of Odo Camponovo, Königtum, Königsherrschafl und Reich Gottes in den Jriihjiidischen Schriften (OBO 58; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1984). See also M. Lattke, "On the Jewish Background of the Synopric Concept 'The Kingdom of God,"' in B. Chilton, ed., The Kingdom of God (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 72-91. 20 So Componovo, Königtum, 187. 21 So J.A. Goldstein, "How the Authors in I and II Maccabees treated the "Messianic Prophecies," i n j . Neusner et al., ed., Judaisms and Their Messiahs (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987) 83-84.

the "kingdom of God" with the world of the angels is reminiscent of Daniel, and indeed the Wisdom of Solomon is influenced at many points by apocalyptic traditions. 22 It does not, however, retain the expectation of a kingdom on earth, and there is a tendency to identify the kingdom with wisdom and righteousness which are the root of immortality (Wis 15:3). Other writings of the Diaspora go further in spiritualizing the "kingdom." 23 For 4 Macc 2:23 the mind which follows the law will rule a kingdom characterized by the four cardinal virtues. The idea found in Stoicism that the wise man is a king is also in Philo (e.g. Migr Abr 197; Abr 261; De Somniis (2:244). For Philo, kingdom (basileia) is the rule of the wise man, and it is established by God (Abr 261). "Kingdom" (basileia) can even be defined as wisdom (Migr Abr 197) or as virtue (De Somniis 2:244). The Apocalyptic Kingdom The apocalyptic idea of the kingdom, developed in Dan 7-12, figures more prominently in the Judaism of the land of Israel, although even there it is not as prevalent as we might expect. The kingdom is not a prominent motif in the early Enoch literature. 24 In the Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1-36) God is called the eternal king (9:4; 12:3; 25:35,7; 27:3). When he "comes down to visit the earth for good" (25:3) his throne will be established on a mountain. Then "the chosen" will receive life from the fruit of a tree, "and they will live a long life on earth, as your (Enoch's) fathers lived, and in their days sorrow and pain and toil and punishment will not touch them" (25:6). The reign of God, then, will finally involve a return to a paradisiac state. In view of ch 22 we must assume that the spirits of the dead can also participate in this state, even though it is located on earth. However, the Book of the Watchers does not refer to this eschatological state as "the kingdom of God." God is king of all eternity. Again in the Book of Dreams (1 Enoch 83-90), God is hailed by prayer as "Lord King, great and powerful in your majesty, Lord of the whole creation of heaven, King of Kings and God of the whole world" (84:2). In the Animal Apocalypse (1 Enoch 90:20) the Lord takes 22 G.W. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, Immortality and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism (Cambridge: Harvard, 1972) 68-82; J . J . Collins, "Cosmos and Salvation. Jewish Wisdom and Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Age." History of Religions 17 (1977) 121-42. 23 K.L. Schmidt, basileia (tou theou) in Hellenistic Judaism," 7ZWT(1964) 1:57424

Camponovo, Königtum, 257.

his seat for judgment on a throne "in the pleasant land" (Israel). The transformation that follows the judgment is again located on earth, although it apparendy involves a resurrection of the dead. In the Apocalypse of Weeks (1 Enoch 93:1-10; 91:11-17) both the historical temple and the eschatological one are associated with the kingship of God. T h e final consummation is an exercise of divine sovereignty, but it cannot be equated with the kingdom of God. The Enochic writing which bears closest resemblance to Daniel is the Book of Similitudes (1 Enoch 37-71), a document of disputed date which most probably comes from around the time of Christ. 25 The expression "kingdom of God" is not used, and God is called king in only one passage (1 Enoch 63:2-4). However, the theme of kingship is more important than a purely terminological inquiry might suggest. At the center of the Similitudes are God, the "Lord of Spirits5' or "Head of Days,55 and the exalted angelic figure called "that Son of Man.5526 T h e main function of the Son of Man figure is to judge and destroy the kings and the powerful. And this Son of Man whom you have seen will rouse the kings and the powerful from their resting places, and the strong from their thrones, and will loose the reins of the strong.. .and he will cast down kings from their thrones and from their kingdoms (/ Enoch 46:4-5).

The Lord of Spirits is ultimately the one "who is king over all kings55 (63:4, cf. Dan 4:29), but he sets the Son of Man on his throne of glory (61:8; 62:5) to function as royal judge. The Similitudes do not speak of an earthly kingdom to replace that of "the kings of the mighty.55 T h e emphasis is rather on the resting places of the righteous with the angels and holy ones (39:5; cf. 51:4). The kingship of God is viewed primarily in its negative aspect, in the destruction of the kings of the earth. T h e Son of Man is also called "messiah 5 ' (48:10; 52:4) and takes over traditional kingly functions, 27 but his kingdom has an otherworldly character. The Testament of Moses Perhaps the clearest example of an "apocalyptic55 kingdom of God is found in the Testament of Moses, which is not formally an apocalypse, but is closely related to the "historical" apocalypses in form and

25 D.W. Suter, Tradition and Composition in the Parables of Enoch (SBLDS 47; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1979) 11-38. 26 See Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 142-54. 27 J . Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1975) 98-99.

theme. In its present form the Testament dates from about the turn of the eras. It is probable, however, that the original document dates from the Maccabean period. 28 The redacted Testament is one of the few compositions that can be dated with confidence to the first half of the first century CE, and so it is of considerable interest for the context in which Jesus lived. The Testament of Moses reviews the history of Israel so as to demonstrate a pattern of sin and punishment. In ch 8: there will come upon them punishment and wrath such as has never happened to them from the creation till that time.

The punishment in question looks very much like the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes. The Testament goes on to tell of a man named Taxo who takes his seven sons and resolves to fast for three days, go into a cave in the open country and die rather than transgress the commandments, "for if we do this and do die, our blood will be avenged before the Lord" (9:7). There follows directly the announcement that "then his kingdom will appear throughout his whole creation" (10:1). The manifestation of the kingdom will be the vengeance of God on his enemies, through the hands of an angel. Israel will be raised up to the heaven of the stars and see her enemies from on high. As in Daniel and the Similitudes of Enoch, the kingdom here has a strongly destructive aspect. The statement in 10:8 that Israel will mount up above the necks and wings of the eagle breaks the metrical pattern, and so can be shown to involve a redactional change from the Roman period, when the eagle symbolized Rome. 29 The Testament does not speak of a Jewish kingdom to replace the Roman. The exaltation to the stars (10:9) should probably be understood, by analogy with Dan 12, to imply immortality. Otherwise we are given no positive description of the kingdom. Perhaps the most important point to note is that the kingdom is ushered in with no human agency. The contribution of the human Taxo is to purify himself and die—a course of action very similar to the maskîlîm, or wise teachers in Dan 11. In the Testament, as in Daniel and the Similitudes of Enoch, the kingdom of God is brought about by the transcendent power of 2 " For the debate on the provenance of the Testament see the essays, in G. W. Nickelsburg, ed., Studies on the Testament of Moses ( Missoula: Scholars Press, 1973). For its relation to the apocalypses see Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 102-6. 29 Adela Yarbro Collins, "Composition and Redaction of the Testament of Moses 10," HTR 69 (1976) 179-86. Cf. the incident in 4 BCE when two doctors of the law incited some youths to pull down the golden eagle from the temple (Josephus, JW 1.33.2-4 [648-55]; Λη/ 17.6.2-3 [149-63]).

God and his angels. It is not to be attained by human revolution and does not even involve the earthly career of a messiah. The Psalms of Solomon Messianic expectations did persist throughout this period, however. 30 Apart from the Qumran scrolls, the major witness is found in the Psalms of Solomon, from the mid-first century BCE These Psalms were written after the violation of Jerusalem by Pompey in 63 BCE The Psalmist takes the subsequent death of Pompey in Egypt as evidence "that it is God who is great, powerful in his great strength. He is king over the heavens, judging even kings and rulers" (Pss Sol 2:2930). As in Dan 4, God is the king who disposes of all kingdoms. The Psalms' theology of kingship is most fully laid out in Pss Sol 17. After an initial declaration that "you, Lord, are our king forevermore" (v 1) and that "the kingdom of our God is forever over the nations in judgment 1 ' (v 3), the psalm recalls how God chose David as king. "Those to whom you did not make the promise" (the Hasmoneans) set up a kingdom because of their arrogance, and provoked the punishment of God through the hand of the lawless one (Pompey). Now the psalmist prays, "See, Lord, and raise up for them their king, the son of David, to rule over your servant Israel" (Pss Sol 17:21). The kingdom ruled by this messiah is essentially the restoration of a national Jewish kingdom. He will "purge Jerusalem from gentiles" (17:22); and "he will have gentile nations serving him under his yoke" (v 30); and "there will be no unrighteousness among them in his days, for all shall be holy, and their king shall be the Lord Messiah (v 32).31 The Psalms of Solomon show the influence of apocalypticism in one important respect: the belief that "those who fear the Lord shall rise up to eternal life" (3:12; cf. 13:11 ; 14:3; 15:13). The dominant emphasis, however, is on the restoration of a national kingdom where the kingship of God is mediated by a Davidic messiah. The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs Messianic expression about the turn of the era is not well documented, apart from the Dead Sea Scrolls. That is due, at least in 30

J.H. Charlesworth, "The Concept of the Messiah in the Pseudepigrapha," ANRW 2.19 (ed. W. H. Haase; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1979) 188-218. 31 See further Camponovo, Königtum, 200-228; G. Davenport, "The 'Anointed of the Lord' in Psalms of Solomon 17," in G.W. Nickelsburg and J.J. Collins, ed., Ideal Figures in Ancient Judaism (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1980) 67-92.

part, to the limitation of our sources. The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs are widely believed to preserve Jewish material from the second century BCE forward. Perhaps the most notable of these traditions is the association of the messiah with both Levi and Judah. In the present form of the Testaments, one messiah, Christ, is both priest and king, but it is very probable that the earlier tradition envisaged a dual messiahship as we also find at Qumran. According to Test Dan 13:10-13, salvation will arise from Levi and Judah and defeat Beliar. Then the souls of the saints will rest in Eden and rejoice in the new Jerusalem and "the Holy One of Israel will reign over them. 5 ' The kingdom of God here has a distinctly apocalyptic character insofar as it involves victory over Beliar, resurrection, and a new, rather than restored, Jerusalem. It is also Christian in its present form. Unfortunately, the Testaments do not provide independent evidence of Jewish beliefs but need corroboration from other sources.32 Messianic Movements in the First Century We know from Josephus that there were messianic movements in the first century CE which did not leave written records of their ideology.33 A number of these movements developed after the death of Herod, led by such figures as Judas of Galilee, Simon, a servant of Herod, and Athronges, a shepherd. 34 At the time of the first Jewish revolt against Rome further messianic pretenders appeared— Menahem, son of Judas, and most notably Simon Bar Giora. 35 In the early second century the great Diaspora revolt centered on the messianic figure Andreas (Lukuas) and of course Bar Kochba was also a messianic figure. In all of these cases the messianic movements were actively and violently revolutionary, and the objective was to replace Roman rule with a native Jewish kingdom. Josephus distinguishes these violent revolutionaries from

32

For an overview of the debate about the Testaments see J J . Collins, "Testaments," in M.E. Stone, ed., Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 325-44; "The Testamentary Literature in Recent Scholarship," in G.W. Nickelsburg and R.A. Kraft, ed., Early Judaism and its Modern Interpreters (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986) 268-78. 33 The best account of these movements can be found in R.A. Horsley and J . Hanson, Bandits, Prophets and Messiahs (Minneapolis: Winston/Seabury, 1986) ch 3. 34 Judas: Ant 17.10.5. (271-72); Simon: Ant 17.10.6 (273-76); Athronges: Ant 17.10.7 (278-85). 35 Menahem: JW 2.17.8-9 (433-48). On the mcssianic character of Simon see Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, 120-27.

another group of scoundrels, in act less criminal but in intention more evil...Cheats and deceivers, claiming inspiration, they schemed to bring about revolutionary changes by inducing the mob to act as if possessed and by leading them out into the wild country on the pretence that there God would give them signs of approaching freedom. 36

The best known examples of this type, Theudas and the Egyptian, 37 did not claim to be messiahs and are not said by Josephus to have spoken of a kingdom; but, we simply do not know how they conceived their actions. They bear enough similarity to Taxo in the Testament of Moses to merit mention here. 38 Messianism in the Apocalypses Messianic expectations were integrated into an apocalyptic schema in the great apocalypses from the end of the first century CE, 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch.39 Fourth Ezra draws on the four-kingdom schema of Daniel in the vision of the lion and the eagle in chs 11-12. The eagle symbolizes Rome, "the fourth kingdom which appeared in a vision to your brother Daniel'' (12:11). The lion is "the Messiah whom the Most High has kept until the end of days, who will arise from the posterity of David" (12:32). The function of this messiah is to rebuke and destroy the nations, especially Rome, and to deliver "the remnant of my people" (12:34). In 4 Ezra 13, the messiah, identified as "he whom the Most High has been keeping for many ages" (12:26) and "my son" (13:32, 37) rises from the sea on a cloud. He destroys the nations with the breath of his mouth and gathers the lost tribes of Israel. According to 4 Ezra 7:28-30 the messiah will reign on earth for 400 years, and then die. There will follow seven days of primeval silence, a new creation, and the resurrection of the dead. The traditional hope for a messianic kingdom is thus given a place in the schema, but it is not the ultimate focus of hope. Second Baruch operates with a similar schema. Here again we find the four-kingdom sequence, in ch 39. The messiah will uproot the fourth kingdom, and "his dominion will last forever until the world 36

JW 2.13.4 (258-60). Theudas: Ant 20.5.1 (97-99); Acts 5:36. The Egyptian: JW 2.13.5 (261-63); Acts 21:38. 38 On the relevance of these figures to discussions of "the kingdom" see E.P. Sanders, Jesus and Judaism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985) 138. 39 See M. E. Stone, "The Concept of the Messiah in II Ezra," J . Neusner, ed., Religions in Antiquity, Essays in Memory of E.R. Goodenough (Leiden: Brill, 1968) 295-312; Müller, Messias und Menschensohn, 83-154. 37

of corruption has ended and until the times which have been mentioned before have heen fulfilled" (40:3). His reign is nonetheless temporary. The description of his reign in ch 29 is followed by the prediction that it will happen after these things when the time of the appearance of the Anointed One has been fulfilled and he returns with glory, that then all who sleep in hope of him will rise (30:1-2).

The reign of the messiah marks the end of gentile dominion and brings about the transformation of the earth (cf. chs 72-74), but again the focus of the apocalyptic hope lies beyond the messianic reign in the new age of the resurrection. Neither 2 Baruch nor 4 Ezra uses the expression "kingdom of God" for the messianic age, but their conceptions are evidently of relevance here, especially in view of their use of the four kingdom schema. The Targums to the Prophets T h e Targumic and Rabbinic literature lie outside the scope of this survey. Yet the Targum Jonathan to the Prophets requires some comment, since a number of recent studies have argued that its "kingdom theology may represent first century thinking." 40 The difficulty of dating the Targumic material is notorious. At most, particular exegetical traditions can be shown to be early by comparison with other, dateable material. 41 The motif of the "kingdom of God" has attracted attention because the phrase is used in a set, standard way, as it also is in Gospels, but not in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, and because the Targumic use of the phrase contrasts with the Rabbinic use of "the kingdom of heaven" for the rule of the law. In the Targum of Isaiah the phrase "kingdom of God" or "kingdom of the Lord" is used in place of a reference to God himself: e.g. at Isa 24:23 the M T "because the Lord of hosts will reign on Mt. Zion" is rendered "because the kingdom of the Lord of hosts will be revealed on Mt. Zion." 42 We should not conclude that the kingdom

40 B. Chilton, The Kingdom of God, 22. Sec also his The Glory of Israel, The Theology and Provenance of the Isaiah Targum (Sheffield: J S O T , 1982). The relevance of the Targums for the teaching of Jesus is also urged by Klaus Koch, "Offenbaren wird sich das Reich Gottes." NTS 25(1979)158-65. 41 See Chilton, The Glory of Israel, 4-12. 42 The references to the kingdom of God, or of the Lord, are laid out clcarly by Camponovo, Königtum, 419-28.

is simply a periphrasis for God himself.43 The phrase is used in contexts where the M T is already eschatological. The characteristic Targumic phrase "the kingdom of the Lord will be revealed" puts the emphasis on the expectation of an eschatological event. The idea of the "revelation" of the kingdom has its closest parallel in Test Moses 10:1, and the very fact that it is revealed gives it an "apocalyptic 5 ' character. Yet the Targum does not show the interest in an angelic transcendent world, characteristic of Daniel or the Similitudes of Enoch. Rather, the kingdom is associated with Mt. Zion. 44 The Targum shows a developed interest in the Davidic messiah, and also associates him with Zion (Targum Isaiah 16:1, 5).45 In general the eschatology of the Targum looks for a Jewish restoration, but it also includes the resurrection of the dead (Targum Isaiah 26:19). In all of this the "kingdom theology" of the Targum may be compatible with that of the Psalms of Solomon or perhaps (but less clearly) of 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch. As in all of this literature there is a sharp antithesis between the fate of Jerusalem and that of Rome (e.g. Targum Isaiah 54:1). The kingdom of God is, of course, based on the idea of divine sovereignty, but it would seem to imply the expectation of an earthly kingdom too. Klaus Koch is probably right when he concludes: the kingdom of God, the kingdom of the messiah and the dominion of Israel (over the nations) belong together for the Targum. 46

Conclusion We have seen that the motif of the kingdom of God was a complex one in Judaism in the period 200 BCE-100 CE The basic underlying « So Chilton, The Glory of Israel, 77. Cf. his article "Regnum Dei Deus Est." SJT 31 (1978) 261-70. He qualifies the identification however by saying that the periphrasis is "employed in respect of divine and saving revelation, particularly on Mt. Zion." Cf. his clarification of his view in The Kingdom of God, 23: "I have suggested that the future oriented eschatological aspect of the kingdom is to be acknowledged, but that it stems from Jesus' view of God, and not from a particular expectation of the future." 44 Chilton (The Glory of Israel, 78) finds a discrepancy between an exclusively Zion-associated kingdom in Targum Isaiah and a more universal one in Targum Zechariah, but the biblical Isaiah already conceives of a universal kingdom centered on Zion. 45 The references to the messiah in the Isaiah Targum are collected by Chilton, The Glory of Israel, 86-96. In an appendix, 112-17, he concludes that "the other Latter Prophets Targums appear to reflect messianic teaching consistent with that represented in the Isaiah Targum, but not so fully," and that the Jeremiah and Ezekiel targum are closest to that of Isaiah. In Targum Micah 4:7-8 the revelation of the kingdom is explicidy associated with the messiah. 46 Koch, "Offenbaren," 164.

idea of all conceptions of the kingdom was that God is king of the universe, past, present, and future. In some contexts the kingdom could be understood in a moral or spiritual way, especially in the Hellenistic Diaspora. In the great majority of cases, however, especially in the land of Israel, in the first centuries BCE and CE, it was expected that the "kingship" of God would be manifested in an eschatological kingdom. The eschatological kingdom could still be conceived in various ways. We may contrast the apocalyptic kingdom of Dan 7-12 or Test Moses 10, which would be brought about by angels, with the more traditional messianic kingdom of Pss Sol 17. These two types however do not remain pure and separate:47 in 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch the messianic kingdom is accommodated as a transitory stage within an apocalyptic framework. Even the earthly kingdom of the Psalms of Solomon involved the resurrection of the dead, but this belief was not taken up in the Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (i.e. Sib Or 3 and 5). Finally we lack direct information about the ideology of the various messianic and prophetic movements mentioned by Josephus, which left no records of their own, but which apparently aimed at the restoration of the Jewish nation. The common denominator of all eschatological formulations of the kingdom, however, in addition to the postulate of divine sovereignty, was rejection of foreign rule. The implementation of the kingdom of God, whether by a messiah or a direct heavenly intervention, implied the destruction of the kings and the mighty of this world. The material we have reviewed here illustrates the associations which would have been attached to the proclamation of the kingdom of God in the first century. It is of course possible that Jesus departed radically from these ways of understanding the kingdom, but at the very least they provide the context within which his proclamation would have been understood.

47 Cf. the classic typology of Jewish eschatology proposed by Sigmund Mowinckel, He That Cometh (Nashville: Abingdon, 1955) 281.

CHAPTER SEVEN

T H E CHRISTIAN APPROPRIATION O F T H E APOCALYPTIC T R A D I T I O N

The genre of literature that we call apocalyptic takes its name from the Apocalypse of John. 1 Historically, however, the genre had been developed over two and a half centuries in Judaism before John had his visions on Patmos. No other book in the New Testament has such clear and well-established precedents in Jewish literature. This fact has been a source of scandal for some Christian theologians. Martin Luther, who compared the book to the Jewish apocalypse of Fourth Ezra, found it neither prophetic nor apostolic, and denied that it either taught or recognized Christ. 2 For Rudolf Bultmann, The Christianity of Revelation has to be termed a weakly Christianized Judaism. The significance of Christ is practically limited to this: that he gives the passionate eschatological hope a certainty which the Jewish apocalyptists lack.3

For both Luther and Bultmann, the association with the Jewish apocalypses had negative overtones. This is a theological judgment, not usually shared by scholars in the history of religions tradition, but by no means unusual. Consequendy, theologically minded scholars who seek to defend the book are often at pains to distinguish it from the Jewish apocalypses, by insisting on its prophetic character, 4 or, recendy, on its epistolary form. 5 The tendency to import theological evaluation into the discussion of literary issues is unfortunate, and can only confuse the situation. 1

F. Lücke, Versuch einer vollständigen Einleitung in die Offenbarung Johannis und in die gesamte apokalyptische Literatur (Bonn: Weber, 1832). 2 M. Luther, "Vorrede auf die OfTenbarung des Johannes," in Das Neue Testament Deutsch (Wittenberg, 1522). E. Lohse, "Wie Christlich ist die Offenbarung des Johannes?" NTS 34(1988) 322. 3 R. Bultmann. Theology of the New Testament (New York: Scribners, 1955) 2.175. 4 D. Hm, "Prophecy and Prophets in the Revelation of St. John," NTS 18(197172) 401-18; F.D. Mazzaferri, The Genre of the Book of Revelationfroma Source-Critical Perspective (BZNW 54; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1988) 259-378. See also E. Schüssler Fiorenza, "The Phenomenon of Early Christian Apocalyptic," in D. Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tübingen: Mohr, 1983) 312, who insists on the prophetic character of Revelation but does not deny its continuity with Jewish apocalypticism. 5 M. Karrer, Die Johannesoffenbarung als Brief (FRLANT 140; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986),

The dependence of Revelation on the tradition of Jewish apocalypticism cannot seriously be doubted. Nonetheless, every individual literary work has some distinctive features, and it is reasonable to ask whether the distinctive features of Revelation over against the Jewish apocalypses are due specifically to its Christian character and how great a difference they make in worldview and in ethical implications. The apocalyptic tradition In order to appreciate the distinctiveness of Revelation, it is necessary to bear in mind the tradition it inherited from Judaism. The Jewish apocalypses may be divided into two types: those that describe otherworldly ascents, such as that of Enoch, and those that are historically oriented, such as Daniel. 6 Although John is called up to the heavenly throne-room in Revelation 4, the affinities of his visions are primarily with Daniel rather than with Enoch. Major representatives of the type, 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch, are roughly contemporary with Revelation. The various parallels between these books, however, cannot be adequately explained by theories of literary dependence, and require us to posit traditions that circulated orally or in sources no longer extant. 7 There is also a corpus of relevant literature, such as the Sibylline Oracles and the Dead Sea Scrolls, that is not in the literary form of apocalypses but that has similar views of history and eschatology. The most important precedent for John's apocalyptic visions is without doubt the Book of Daniel, 8 although the central place of the messiah in Revelation is more closely paralleled in the contemporary apocalypses of 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch.9 Daniel, of course, was often regarded as a prophet, both in ancient Judaism (Josephus; 4 Q Florilegium) and in early Christianity (Matt 24:15), although his book is not grouped with the Prophets in the Hebrew Bible.10 Revelation, too is presented not only as apo6

J.J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1984) 1-32. R. Bauckham, The Climax of Prophecy. Studies on the Book of Revelation (Edinburgh: Clark, 1993) 38-91 ("The Use οΓ Apocalyptic Traditions"). 8 For the influence of Daniel on Revelation see A. Yarbro Collins, "The Influence of Daniel on the New Testament," in J J . Collins, Daniel (Hermcneia; Minncapolis: Fortress, 1993) 90-112. 9 U.B. Müller, Messias und Menschensohn in jüdischen Apokalypsen und in der Offenbarung des Johannes (Gütersloh: Mohn, 1972). On the influence of Daniel's "Son of Man" in Revelation see A. Yarbro Collins, "The Son of Man Tradition and the Book of Revelation," i n j . H. Charlesworth, ed., The Messiah (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992) 536-68. ‫ "י‬Κ. Koch, "Is Daniel also among the Prophets?" Interpretation 39(1985) 117-30; Collins, Daniel, 52. 7

kalypsis, but as a prophecy (1:3; 22:6-7) and its author is properly regarded as an early Christian prophet." Prophecy was a broad category in the Hellenistic and Roman worlds, and could encompass various kinds of revelation including what we call apocalyptic.12 Nonetheless, the Book of Daniel already involved a transformation of prophecy as it had been practiced in ancient Israel. The transformation involved both form and content. The author of Daniel did not speak in his own name, but concealed his identity behind a pseudonym. He did not claim direct inspiration by God, but reported visions that had been mediated to him by angels. The content of the prophecy did not consist of oracles or direct exhortation, but rather relied on visionary descriptions to put the events of history in a new light. The emphasis was on understanding rather than on direct exhortation. The vision encompassed a wide sweep of history, culminating in a time of crisis, followed by an eschatological judgement. The author's present, then, was put in perspective as part of a cosmic plan. While some of these features were anticipated in exilic and post-exilic prophecy, especially in Ezekiel and Zechariah, the total Gestalt was developed in Daniel in a way that was quite new. Most crucially, Daniel differed from earlier prophecy in extending the hope of resurrection and glory after death to those who understood the message and were faithful to the end. The fact that Daniel and most apocalypses rely on symbolic language to convey a new understanding of events, and seldom exhort the reader direcdy, has been a source of much misunderstanding. No less an authority than Martin Buber alleged that "the apocalyptic writer has no audience turned towards him; he speaks into his notebook. 5 ' 13 But Daniel's visions carried a powerful message for the Jewish people during the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes, by the way in which they described the world. Actions

11 M.E. Boring, "The Apocalypse as Christian Prophecy," in G.W. MacRae, ed., SBL Seminar Papers, 1974 (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1974) 2.43-62. D.E. Aune, Prophecy in early Christianity and the Ancient Mediterranean World (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983) 274-88; E. Schüssler Fiorenza, "Apokalypsis and Propheteia: Revelation in the Context of Early Christian Prophecy," in The Book of Revelation. Justice and Judgment (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985) 133-56 (= J . Lambrecht, ed., L'Apocalypse johannique et l'Apocalyptique dans le Nouveau Testament (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1980) 105-28.. 12 J . Barton, Oracles of God. Perceptions of Ancient Prophecy in Israel after the Exile (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988). For a balanced appreciation of Revelation as both prophetic and apocalyptic see R. Bauckham, The Theology of the Book of Revelation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993) 2-9. 13 M. Buber, "Prophecy, Apocalyptic and the Historical Hour, "Pointing the Way (New York: Harper, 1957) 200.

are shaped by understanding, and the descriptive visions of Daniel could influence the reader just as profoundly as the direct harangues of Amos or Jeremiah. Moreover, not all apocalyptic writings were as reticent about direct exhortation as was Daniel. / Enoch concludes with the socalled Epistle of Enoch, which addresses the reader as directly as any prophet. Roughly contemporary with Revelation, 2 Baruch coneluded its revelation with a long letter to the nine and a half tribes that were across the Euphrates, which spelled out its message in explicit detail (2 Bar 78-86). Parenesis, then, is by no means alien to Jewish apocalypses, even if it is often achieved by indirect means. Distinctive features of Revelation Revelation has often contrasted with the Jewish apocalypses with respect to its parenetic emphasis. 14 In addition to its selfcharacterization as apocalypse and prophecy, the whole book of Revelation is presented as a circular letter to the seven churches of Asia Minor. 15 The use of the letter form reflects the practice of other Christian teachers, most notably Paul, and says something about the situation in which John wrote. But letters are of many kinds, and the fact that something is sent as a circular letter does not determine the message it contains, the form in which that message is cast or the kind of authority it claims. The specific letters to the seven churches at the beginning of Revelation have an obvious parallel in the letter at the end of 2 Baruch.16 Revelation is exceptional insofar as the whole book is presented as a letter, presumably because John was not able to visit the seven churches in person. The letter was presumably read to the assembled congregations to which it was sent. Jewish apocalypses were also circulated, but we do not know how. A difference in the manner of circulation, however, is extrinsic to the nature of the work itself, and points to the distinctiveness of early Christian assemblies rather than to that of Revelation. The 14

302.

E.g. Schüssler Fiorenza, "The Phenomenon of Early Christian Apocalyptic,"

15 See the extensive discussion by Karrcr, Die Johannesoffenbarung als Brief, but also the more balanced discussion of Bauckham, The Theology of the Book of Revelation, 12-17. 16 P.M. Bogacrt, "Les Apocalypses contemporaines de Baruch, d'Esdras et dc Jean," in J . Lambrecht, ea. L'Apocalypse johannique et l'Apcalyptique dans le Nouveau Testament (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1980) 55, argues that Revelation was influenced by 2 Baruch in its use of the epistolary form, but this must be considered dubious. Karrcr, in contrast tries to minimize the relevance of the parallel (Die Johannesoffenbarung ab Brief, 49-52)

body of Revelation, in chaps. 4-22, is unlike anything that we find in any other New Testament epistle.17 While Revelation is, among other things, a circular letter, this designation is of very limited help in appreciating the content of the book. Two other distinctive features of Revelation are commonly cited as evidence of its prophetic character: the fact that John did not use a pseudonym and the absence of historical reviews (such as the schema of the four kingdoms in Daniel).18 Some scholars have tried to make pseudepigraphy into the sine qua non of apocalyptic writing,19 but this is surely to over-rate it. Pseudepigraphy is only one of several formal markers of the apocalypses and is by no means peculiar to the genre. Historical reviews are clearly not a sine qua non, even in historically oriented apocalypses. (They are equally lacking in the Similitudes of Enoch). Nonetheless, the absence of both these features in Revelation is noteworthy. The two features are closely related. By attributing his revelation to a great figure of the past, such as Daniel or Enoch, an author was able to have that figure "prophesy" the course of intervening history after the fact, and thereby enhance both the authority and the credibility of his message.20 T h e absence of pseudepigraphy and ex eventu prophecy point to one fundamental difference between Revelation and all Jewish apocalypses. This concerns its location on the historical and eschatological time-table. O n e of the purposes of historical reviews was to enable the readers to see where they stood in the course of pre-determined events. Typically, they stood near the end. In Daniel, sixty nine and a half weeks of years have passed; only half a week remains until the time of deliverance. In Revelation, however, as in all the early Christian writings, a crucial act of deliverance has already taken place with the death and resurrection of Jesus. For this reason, Revelation shows no interest in history prior to Jesus. Presumably, it has become irrelevant. The conviction that the eschatological age has begun gave rise in early Christianity to a new outpouring of prophecy, and lent new authority to prophetic utterances. For that reason, John did not need to enhance his authority by presenting his work as the revelation of Enoch or 17 Karrer, Die Johannesoffenbarung als Brief, 282, argues that there is an implicit dialogue with the reader throughout the book, but such an orientation is not peculiady epistolary, and can be argued equally well for the visions of Daniel. 18 Schüssler Fiorenza, "The Phenomenon of Early Chrisdan Apocalyptic," 310. 19 So especially Mazzaferri, The Genre of the Book of Revelation, 181-84. 20 J.J. Collins, "Pseudonymity, Historical Reviews and the Genre of the Revelation o f j o h n , " CBQ.39(1977) 329-43.

Baruch, but could claim authority in his own name. We should note, however, that these changes did not prove to be essential to the Christian adaptation of the apocalyptic genre. Subsequent Christian apocalypses dispense with the epistolary framework and only the Shepherd of Hermas refuses the device of pseudonymity. 21 While Christianity had its own new understanding of its place on the eschatological timetable, we should note that the apocalyptic genre admitted some variation in this matter. While Daniel envisages a single turning point in history, the Apocalypse of Weeks, an Enochic writing from Maccabean times, allows for a two-stage eschatology. The "chosen righteous from the eternal plant of righteousness" are chosen at the end of the seventh week. History continues, however, and it is only in the tenth week that the judgement takes place followed by a new creation. The eighth and ninth weeks are characterized by the progressive triumph of righteousness. In Revelation, in contrast, the death and resurrection of Jesus are followed by the reign of the beasts. In this respect, the kind of timetable envisaged in Revelation is closer to what is presupposed in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Damascus Document (1:7) posits a turning point in history when God causes a shoot to sprout from Aaron and Israel (presumably the emergence of the sect). Nonetheless Belial is still loosed on Israel in the period following this turning point (4:13). Jewish eschatology, then, was not all strictly future, but could allow for an "in-between" stage, or for a measure of realized eschatology. What we find in Revelation, and throughout the New Testament, is a particular actualization of this "in-between" stage, in specifically Christian terms. Thus far, then, we find that Revelation does indeed modify the typical apocalyptic genre in certain ways, reflecting the Christian conviction that the messiah has already come and that the eschatological age has begun. These modifications do not entail a rejection of the apocalyptic worldview, but actualize it in a particular way, that is not without analogy in Judaism. Moreover, as Bultmann noted, John is very similar to the Jewish apocalypticists in his emphasis on the distress of the present and the hope for a deliverance yet to come. The understanding of history and the ethical implications entailed by this new situation are still shaped to a great degree by the conventions of Jewish apocalypticism. In order to probe further the interplay of Jewish tradition and Christian

21

For an overview of the Christian apocalypses, see A. Yarbro Collins, "The Early Christian Apocalypses," Semeia 14(1979) 61-121.

innovation I propose to look more closely at the use of traditional messianic imagery in Revelation, and its application to the Christian messiah. The Son of Man and the Lamb that was Slain Twice in the opening chapters of Revelation traditional imagery is applied to Jesus in strikingly new ways. First, in 1:12-16, J o h n sees "one like a Son of Man, clothed in a long robe...His head and his hair were white as white wool, white as snow." What is remarkable about this picture is that two figures from Daniel 7, the whiteheaded Ancient of Days and the one like a Son of Man, are fused into one. 22 While there is some fluidity in Jewish texts between descriptions of angels and those of the deity, the fusion here must be seen as purposeful. Significandy, the Son of Man does not refuse John's obeisance, as the angels elsewhere do (Rev 19:10; 22:8-9). In Revelation, the messiah/Son of Man is one who may be worshipped, and this point is reiterated in Chapter 5.23 There were Jewish precedents for referring to the messiah as Son of God, and much of the imagery associated with the Son of Man was also associated with the deity,24 but worship of any figure other than the Most High God is highly exceptional in a Jewish context. 25 The worship ofJesus, and the way in which divine imagery is applied to him, marks perhaps the most fundamental point at which Revelation departs from Jewish precedent. Another striking image is offered in Chapter 5. John is told that "the Lion of the tribe ofJudah, the Root of David, has conquered," but what he sees is not a lion but "a lamb standing as if it had been slaughtered" (5:6). T h e lion is a traditional messianic symbol (Gen 49:9). T h e lamb only acquired messianic significance in a Chrisrian context because of its sacrificial connotations and the death of Jesus. 26 In the words of David Barr: 22

See Yarbro Collins, "The , Son of Man' Tradition and the Book of Revelation." The two figures are also identified in the Old Greek translation of Daniel, but this is most probably due to textual corruption. 23 Bauckham, The Climax of Prophecy, 133-40 ("The Worship of Jesus"). 24 J.J. Collins, The Scepter and the Star. The Messiahs of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Ancient Literature (New York: Doubleday, 1995) 154-72 ("The Messiah as the Son of God") and 173-94 ("The Danielic Son of Man"). 25 L.W. Hurtado, One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988). It is possible that the Son of Man is the recipient of worship in 1 Enoch 48:5 (Similitudes), but it is also possible that the worship is directed to the Lord of Spirits in that passage. 26 Lohse, "Wie Chrisdich ist die Offenbarung des Johannes?" 329.

a more complete reversal of value would be hard to imagine...the Lamb is the Lion. Jesus is the Messiah, but he has performed his messianic office in a most extraordinary way, by his death. 27

It is important, however, to see that the two symbols are held in tension. The Lion is not simply replaced by the Lamb, as will become evident later in Revelation Chapter 19.28 Rather, the point is that the Lamb, who died a shameful death on the cross, is now enthroned in power and glory as the Lion. A somewhat similar tension can be found in the Similitudes of Enoch.29 There the Son of Man, or Righteous One, is the heavenly champion of the poor and the lowly, who are the righteous ones on earth. The heavenly righteous one is hidden, but when he will be revealed he will cast down the kings and the mighty and exalt the lowly righteous ones. Revelation differs from the Similitudes, however, in one important respect. In the Christian context, the Son of Man is not only the champion of the lowly; he has himself experienced their lot. The persecuted Christians can identify with the Lamb that was slain more fully than with a figure who is only revealed in glory. The war with the Dragon Revelation chapter 12 is a promising test case for our purpose, since it provides an exceptionally clear example of the use ofJewish source material, in the account of the battle between Michael and the Dragon in vss. 7-9. This passage is surrounded by three other units to make up the chapter. First we read of the woman giving birth in heaven, under the hostile watch of the Dragon. Her child is clearly identifiable as the messiah, the one who is to rule the nations with a rod of iron (cf. Ps 2:9). He is immediately snatched away to God and his throne. This passage is usually understood as a reference to the ascension of Jesus, 30 but the fact that there is no reference to his death has given rise to the suspicion that here too we may have a Jewish source.31 In the present context, the passage must be read as a highly condensed synopsis of the career of the messiah. There is no interest here in history before the birth of the messiah, not even in

27

D.L. Barr, "The Apocalypse as a Symbolic Transformation of the World: A Literary Analysis," Interpretation 38(1984) 41. 28 See A. Yarbro Collins, "Eschatology in the Book of Revelation," Ex Auditu 6(1990) 69-70. 29 Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 142-54. 30 P. Prigent, Apocalypse 12. Histoire de l'exégèse (Tübingen: Mohr, 1959) 8, 136. 31 Α. Yarbro Collins, The Combat Myth in the Book of Revelation (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1976) 105.

the history of Israel. The focus falls on the short interval between the time of Christ and the author's present. The second section, vss. 7-9 tells of the battle in heaven between Michael and the Dragon. This is a new episode, linked to the preceding verses by the figure of the Dragon. The abrupt transition and the fact that Michael rather than Christ is the protagonist constitute strong evidence that we have here a Jewish source. T h e casting down of Satan had its biblical source in Isaiah 14, and was developed in an apocalyptic context, possibly as early as the first century CE, in 2 Enoch 29 and the Life of Adam and Eve 12-17.32 The role of Michael as heavenly warrior is adumbrated in Daniel 10 in his batde with the Prince of Greece and again in the War Scroll from Qumran where his adversary is Belial. The Dragon of Revelation 12 resembles Belial as a cosmic, Satanic, figure. It seems likely, then, that we have here a fragment of a Jewish myth. The placement of this fragment in Revelation is remarkable, however, since it marks neither the beginning nor the end of history but follows the birth and exaltation of the messiah. In short, the birth and snatching up of the messiah only marks the beginning of the eschatological woes. In the context of Revelation as a whole, the messiah will come again. The double coming of the messiah is, of course, a specifically Christian concept, necessitated by the abrupt termination of the earthly career of Jesus. The third section of Revelation 12 is for all practical purposes a reinterpretation of the second. The "loud voice" proclaims "the kingdom of our God" and the authority of the messiah. But here the defeat of Satan is not attributed to Michael, but to the Christian brethren who have defeated him by "the blood of the Lamb" and by their testimony, "for they did not cling to life in the face of death." The martyrs share in the victory of Michael by their willingness to die. Finally, the last section of the chapter describes how the dragon sets off to make war on earth "in great wrath because his time is short." The third section, in particular, gives a clear picture of the ethical implications of the vision. It is an ethic for martyrdom. 33 Christians can defeat Satan by refusing to cling to life in the face of death. In this they are inspired by the powerful example of Christ; hence the "blood of the Lamb." But while this ethic of martyrdom has a distinctively Christian nuance here, it is not without precedent in

32

Ibid., 82. A. Yarbro Collins, "The Political Perspective of the Revelation to John," JBL 96(1977) 241-56. 33

Judaism. 34 In Daniel 10-12 the heroes in the time of persecution are the wise teachers who fall by sword and flame "so that they may be refined, purified and cleansed" (Dan 11: 35) but who subsequently shine like the stars in the resurrection. They are not said explicitly to defeat the "prince of Greece" but they share in the victory at the resurrection. In both texts, the key to victory and exaltation is willingness to renounce life in this world. 35 The primary difference between the two passages is that in Revelation the ethic is reinforced by the example of Jesus, and the ultimate victory is guaranteed by his exaltation. The central Christian event of the death and resurrection ofJesus, then, leads to a modification of the structure of eschatology, insofar as the career of the messiah is both past and future. This modification, however, does not lead to a different ethic from that of a Jewish apocalypse like Daniel, but reinforces it by the example of Christ and strengthens the certainty of the outcome. Here again it is important to note that the role of Michael is supplemented, not negated. The victory of the martyrs is not just a moral victory. Revelation, like Daniel, emphatically asserts that evil is overthrown in an objective sense. In Daniel and the Qumran War Scroll, Michael plays a key role in the final phase of the battle. In Revelation, he is relegated to the first phase. The final phase is ushered in by the theophany of Christ as Divine Warrior in Chapter 19. The sword of his mouth A third illustration of the transformation of Jewish tradition is provided by Revelation 19. Here John sees the heavens opened and a rider on a white horse, who is identified as the Word of God and is clearly the messiah. He leads the armies of heaven. From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. Subsequently, the beast and the false prophet are thrown alive into the lake of fire and their followers are slain by the rider on the horse. The image of the sword of the mouth is derived from Isaiah 11:4 and is a staple of messianic prophecy around the turn of the era. 36 The Hebrew text of Isaiah speaks of "the rod of his mouth," with which he shall strike the earth, while with the breath of his lips he shall slay the wicked. The Septuagint rendered the phrase in question as "the word of his mouth" and it is quoted in this form in 34

Cf. Bauckham, The Climax of Prophecy, 237. Sec further J.J. Collins, "Apocalyptic Eschatology as the Transcendence of Death," CBQ,35(1974) 21-43. 36 Collins, The Scepter and the Star, 49-68. 35

the Psalms of Solomon 17:24-5. The effect is equally destructive: the messiah is to smash the arrogance of sinners like a potter's jar; to shatter all their substance with an iron rod; to destroy the unlawful nations with the word of his mouth.

Similarly, in the Dead Sea Scrolls we find a prayer for the messianic "Prince of the Congregation:" (May you smite the peoples) with the might of your hand and ravage the earth with your scepter; may you bring death to the ungodly with the breath of your lips ( l Q S b 5:24-5).

T h e apocalypse of 4 Ezra, roughly contemporary with Revelation, envisages the messiah as a man who rises from the sea and wages war against a hostile multitude: And behold when he saw the onrush of the approaching multitude, he neither lifted his hand nor held a spear or any weapon of war; but I saw only how he sent forth from his mouth as it were a stream of fire and from his lips a flaming breath and from his tongue he shot forth a storm of sparks. All these were mingled together, the stream of fire and the flaming breath and the great storm, and fell on the onrushing multitude which was prepared to fight and burned them all up, so that suddenly nothing was seen of the innumerable multitude but only the dust and ashes and the smell of smoke (4 Ezra 13:9-11).

It should be noted that the violence of the messiah typically has a fantastic character. He was not expected to prevail by normal military means, but by divine power. The implications of this imagery for human action might vary. Apocalyptic visions could sometimes be used to encourage militant action. 37 More typically, however, the apocalyptic tradition was quietistic. Daniel dismissed the Maccabees as at most "a little help" (Dan 11:34). 4 Ezra most probably meant to discourage revolutionary initiatives by promising a greater miraculous deliverance in the future. But if the violence of the judgment had a fantastic, miraculous character, it was none the less real. It is essential to the logic of both 4 Ezra and of Revelation that the wicked will actually be destroyed. We are often told that the violent imagery of divine judgment is "transvalued" in Revelation. David Barr argues that "we have here all the traditional images of the eschatological battle, but again they are reversed." 38 Since the wicked are slain by "the sword of his mouth,"

37 38

T h e Animal Apocalypse in 1 Enoch appears to support the Maccabean revolt. Barr, "The Apocalypse as a Symbolic Transformation of the World," 42.

they are undone, that is, by the word of Jesus which is on the one hand the Word of God...but also the word of his testimony...Thus, once again, it is the death ofJesus and the witness of his followers that slays the wicked.39

Similarly, M. Eugene Boring writes: This conqueror destroys his enemies, not with a literal sword, but with the sword of his mouth; his only weapon is his word, the Word of God which he himself is (19:13).40 But, as we have seen, the sword or word or breath of his mouth is the standard weaponry of the messiah in Jewish apocalypticism. It is not, to be sure, ordinary human violence, but it brings death and destruction nonetheless. The activity of Christ as divine warrior in Chapter 19 cannot be equated with his death which has already taken place. It is of the essence of the apocalyptic vision in both Judaism and Christianity that the defeat of evil and the wicked is a real, public event that only takes place at the end of history. The death of Jesus marks a veritable D-day in the eschatological timetable, but the final judgment is yet to come. Rather than a transvaluation of apocalyptic imagery, what we find in Revelation 19 is a transvaluation of the figure of Jesus of Nazareth. There is nothing in the Gospels to suggest that Jesus wielded a sword against anyone, either by hand or mouth. Precisely for that reason, the idea that he was the messiah, son of David, must have seemed extremely paradoxical to most Jews of the time. The expectations associated with the messiah are set forth quite clearly in such texts as the Psalms of Solomon and the Scroll of Benedictions (lQSb) from Qumran, which we have cited above. He was to drive the Gentiles from Jerusalem, slay them with the breath of his mouth and rule them with an iron rod. The historical career ofJesus hardly fulfilled these expectations. What we find in Revelation, and to a lesser extent in other apocalyptic passages such as Mark 13, is the projection into the future of what was unfulfilled in the past. Jesus did not destroy the wicked in his earthly life, but he would return with supernatural power to complete the task. The picture of Christ that we get in Revelation 19 is at variance with any account of the historical Jesus, but it conforms perfectly to the expectations of the apocalyptic genre.

39

Ibid. M.E. Boring, Révélation (Interpretation; Louisville: Knox, 1989) 196. See also the criticism of this position by A. Yarbro Collins, "Eschatology in the Book of Revelation" 69-70. 40

Here again we find that the ethics of Revelation are shaped by apocalyptic tradition rather than by Christian innovation. Nowhere does J o h n of Patmos tell us to love our enemies, nor does he preach forgiveness. Rather, his themes are justice and judgment, and in this respect he stands fully in the tradition ofJewish apocalypticism. Conclusion The new situation of Christianity led to some modifications in the apocalyptic genre, intensifying the focus on the present and imminent future and expanding the role of the messiah. The Christian apocalypticist writes at a different point on the eschatological timetable from his Jewish counterpart. The messiah has already come. T h e life of the messiah, and especially his suffering and death are available to the Christian visionary as a source of inspiration and example. Moreover, the role of the messiah in Revelation is more exalted than in any Jewish apocalypse, since he is the recipient of worship. But Christianity did not simply bend the apocalyptic genre to its purpose. The transformations worked both ways. The impact of apocalyptic conventions is most obvious in the portrayal of Jesus as divine warrior in Chapter 19, a portrayal that draws little from the Gospels and that is strikingly similar to the contemporary portrayal of the messiah in 4 Ezra. Moreover, the ethical values of Revelation are not conspicuously different from those of Jewish apocalypses such as Daniel and 4 Ezra, and lack the most distinctive notes of the teaching of Jesus. These observations should not, however, be taken in the spirit of Luther to question the authenticity of Revelation as a Christian book. Rather they should serve to remind us that the roots of Christianity are deeply embedded in Jewish soil.

PART T W O DANIEL

CHAPTER EIGHT

NEBUCHADNEZZAR AND T H E K I N G D O M O F G O D Defened Eschatology in the Jewish Diaspora The Book of Daniel contains, in its first six chapters, a collection of stories which are older than the apocalyptic visions of the Maccabean era, and were composed for a very different setting.1 These stories describe the adventures of Daniel and his companions at the court of successive Babylonian kings and of "Darius the Mede." While the stories are legendary in character, they depict vividly some of the issues which confronted Jews in exile. Daniel and his friends enter the service of the Gentile kings, but still retain their Jewish identity and faith. So, in the opening chapter, they refuse the royal food, evidendy for reasons of kashrut. The three young men in Chap. 3 risk death rather than worship the statue which the king has erected. In Chap. 6 Daniel risks his life rather than neglect his daily prayers. Chaps. 2 and 4 emphasize the superior ability of the God of Daniel to reveal mysteries, and Chap. 5 shows that even a powerful king cannot ofTend that God with impunity. Daniel's involvement at the court, and his professional involvement with Babylonian sages, in no way dilute his adherence to traditional Jewish monotheism and opposition to idolatry. Conversely, Daniel's religious loyalty in no way impedes his allegiance to the Gentile kings. T o be sure, it is "the God of heaven" who has given the kingdom to Nebuchadnezzar (2:37), and that God sets up kings and removes them in turn (2:21), but sovereignty on earth has been entrusted to Gentile kings. In the political theology of Daniel 1-6, the eternal kingdom of the God of heaven is over all. On earth there is a universal dominion, called simply "the kingdom," which passes from Babylon to Media to Persia. This state of affairs has been compared to that envisaged in Chronicles, where the Lord rules all the kingdoms of the nations (2 Chron 20:6) but has entrusted them to Cyrus, king of Persia (2 Chron 36:23).2 Unlike the

1

See J o h n J . Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel (Missoula: Scholars, 1977) 8-11; Reinhard G. Kratz, Translatio Imperii. Untersuchungen zu den aramäischcn Danielerzählungen und ihrem theologiegeschichtlichcn Umfeld (WMANT 63; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neularchener Verlag, 1991) 146-8. 2 Kratz, Translatio Imperii, 260-79.

Chronicler, however, Daniel 1-6 has no interest in the Davidic line and, although its horizon extends to "the first year of King Cyrus" (1: 21; 6:29), it makes no mention of the Jewish restoration. The perspective of Daniel 1-6, in sharp contrast to Chaps. 7-12 is not eschatological, but oriented to the present. There is one apparent exception on this point, however. Chap. 2 contains Nebuchadnezzar's famous dream, of a statue with a head of gold, breast and arms of silver, loins and thighs of bronze, legs of iron and feet of iron and clay, which will be destroyed by a stone which strikes the feet. Daniel interprets this dream with reference to four kingdoms, of which Nebuchadnezzar represents the first. The stone which destroys the statue is interpreted by the statement that "in those days the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed," and which will bring all previous kingdoms to an end. This is the only passage in Daniel 1-6 which speaks of the destruction of Gentile rule as such, or of an eschatological realization of the kingdom of God on earth. Reinhard Kratz has argued that this eschatological interlude is anomalous in the tales of Daniel 1-6 and should be regarded as a secondary alteration. 3 The original dream would then have envisaged only the fall of the Babylonian empire to the Medes and Persians, and would have had an historical perspective similar to Chaps. 4 and 5. T h e chronological frame of Daniel 1-6 involves not four kingdoms, but three, Babylon, Media and Persia. The tales would then present a tightly coherent ideology, and would admit of an early, pre-Hellenistic date. Kratz's suggestion, however, requires drastic textual surgery, including the rejection of the interpretation found in the text, which interprets the metals as successive kingdoms. If the statue is interpreted in terms of kingdoms, the imagery requires that they be at least four in number. If Babylon is the first kingdom, the fourth can be no earlier than the Greek, and the composition must date to the Hellenistic period. It may well be that the dream was not originally composed for its present context, and it may originally have had a different meaning, 4 but the eschatological dimension is integral to the interpretation now found in the text. It is my contention that this interpretation makes excellent sense in the context of Daniel 1-6, and that it should not be removed to make the text conform to modern ideas of coherence. 3

Ibid., 48-70. E.g. that the metals represented individual kings within the Babylonian kingdom, which is then overthrown by the Medo-Pcrsian empire (so Kratz, Translatio Imperii, 62-70, among others). 4

The four kingdoms The schema of four kingdoms, followed by a fifth of definitive character, is well known from Roman historiography. The typical Roman view is expressed in a fragment attributed to one Aemilius Sura: The Assyrians were the first of all races to hold power, then the Medes, after them the Persians, and then the Macedonians. Then when the two kings, Philip and Antiochus, of Macedonian origin, had been completely conquered, soon after the overthrow of Carthage, the supreme command passed to the Roman people. 5

This Roman use of the schema is neither revolutionary nor eschatological, except insofar as it proclaims a "realized eschatology" in the Roman empire. It is evident, however, that the Roman authors were adapting an older schema. The sequence of Assyria, Media and Persia was not derived from Roman or Greek history, but must have originated in the east. In fact, this "three kingdom schema" is known from Herodotus and Ktesias, who derived it from Persian sources.6 This original schema, like the later Roman one, was not revolutionary, but served to propagate the view that the Achaemenid empire was the legitimate heir to the earlier world kingdoms. Daniel 2 differs from the schema attested in Herodotus and Ktesias in two respects. Babylon replaces Assyria as the first kingdom, and the sequence is extended to four kingdoms, followed by a kingdom of God. The substitution of Babylon for Assyria can be attributed to the author of Daniel 2, since it is required by the setting in the court of Nebuchadnezzar. The extension of sequence of kingdoms, however, is not likely to have originated with Daniel. Not only is the Roman topos of four kingdoms followed by a fifth independent of Daniel, but the original sequence of Assyria, Media, Persia is also found in a Jewish "four kingdom" passage in the Fourth Sibylline Oracle?

5 The fragment is preserved in Velleius Paterculus, who wrote about the tum of the era. Sura appears to regard the second Punic war (218-201 BCE) as decisive, so he presumably wrote before the third Punic war (149-46). See also Polybius 38.22, Dionysius of Halicamassus 1.2.2-4, Tacitus, Hist 5.8-9, Appian, Preface, 9, and Doron Mendels, "The Five Empires. A Note on a Hellenistic Topos," American Journal of Philology 102 (1981) 330-37. 6 Herodotus 1.95, 130; Ktesias in Diodorus Siculus 2.21.8; 28.8; 32.5-6; 34.6. 7 See David Flusser, "The four empires in the Fourth Sibyl and in the book of Daniel," Israel Oriental Studies 2 (1972) 148-75.

In a famous article published in 1940, Joseph Ward Swain argued that the sequence of four kingdoms followed by a fifth was a motif of Near Eastern resistance to Hellenism." He suggested that the Romans picked up the motif from anti-Seleucid propaganda after the battle of Magnesia in 190 BCE The evidence for this theory is admittedly slight. The only Near Eastern texts which attest the motif are the Jewish ones. The Jewish evidence is important, however. Daniel, at least shows that the sequence of four kingdoms was known by the early second century, and was not of Roman origin. The Sibylline passage, too, may point to a pre-Roman, anti- Hellenistic use of the motif, since the oracle against Rome appears to be a redactional insertion. 9 It is likely, then, that the Roman tradition was adapted from an older anti-Hellenistic schema of four kingdoms, beginning with Assyria. Daniel 2 also presupposes the existence of such a schema, and adapts it to begin with Babylon. In Daniel 2 the sequence of four kingdoms is expressed through the symbolism of metals in a statue. Here too we encounter traditional symbolism. The sequence of metals, of declining value, is best known from Hesiod's Works and Days, 1.109-201. Hesiod describes a sequence of five ages, golden, silver, bronze, a fourth which is not identified with a metal, and iron. The fourth age breaks the pattern of decline, and is inserted to accommodate the heroes of Greek legend. It is likely, then, that Hesiod was already adapting a pre-existing schema of four ages represented by metals. The ultimate origin of this schema is unknown. 10 The sequence of metals also appears in Persian tradition, most notably in the Bahman Yasht, chap. 1. There we read that Ahura Mazda showed "the wisdom of all-knowledge" to Zarathustra. Through it he saw "the trunk of a tree, on which there were four branches: one of gold, one of silver, one of steel and one of mixed iron."11 These are interpreted as "the four periods which will come" 8 J.W. Swain, "The Theory of the Four Monarchies Opposition History under the Roman Empire," Classical Philology 35 (1940) 1-21. 9 The Sibyl structures history in ten generations and four kingdoms. Macedonia is the tenth generation and fourth kingdom. Rome is the subject of a further oracle, but it is not integrated into the numerical sequence. See Flusser, "The four empires," 148-53; John J. Collins, "The Place of the Fourth Sibyl in the Devclopment of the Jewish Sibyllina," JJS 25 (1974) 365-80. 10 Walter Burkert, "Apokalyptik im frühen Griechentum: Impulse und Transformationen,"in David Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the near East (Tübingen: Mohr, 1983) 235-54, posits an Aramaic sibyl as the common source of Hesiod and Daniel, but this is simply an appeal to the unknown. On the Indo-Iranian Urmythos see Bodo Gatz, Weltalter, goldene Zeit und sinnverwandte Vorstellungen (Spudasmata 16, Hildesheim: Olms, 1967). 11 B.T. Anklesaria, Zand-î Vohûman Yasn and Two Pahlevi Fragments (Bombay:

in the millennium of Zarathustra. The golden period is the period of Zarathustra himself and that of mixed iron is "the evil sovereignty of the 'divs' having dishevelled hair... " The same division of periods and metals is found in Denkard 9.8, where the periods are identified differently.12 The motif of "mixed iron" is particularly interesting in relation to Daniel, especially since it is not found in Hesiod. The significance of the Persian parallels is clouded by the uncertainty of dating. It has been argued that the 'divs' with dishevelled hair in the Bahman Yasht refer to the Macedonians, and that this, too, was a document of anti-Hellenistic resistance.13 The Yasht as we have it, however, is several centuries later than Daniel. The Bahman Yasht and the Denkard preserve material from lost texts of the Avesta, but there is no consensus on the antiquity of the particular motif of the four metals/periods. 14 Nonetheless, the similarities between the texts, especially in the motif of "mixed iron," can scarcely be coincidental. Daniel's statue provides a more appropriate setting for the metals than the tree of the Bahman Yasht, but direct dependence of either text on the other cannot be demonstrated. 15 Here again, we must posit a common source, and suppose that Daniel 2 is adapting imagery which was more widely known. The adaptation of traditions in Daniel 2 The combination of kingdoms and metals in the imagery of the statue implies gradual decline in the political order of the Near East. The destruction of the statue implies the subordination of all these kingdoms to the kingdom of God. The eschatological implications of the dream were already present in the traditional material adapted by the author of Daniel 2. What is remarkable in the biblical text is the lack of emphasis on its eschatological features. In the context of Daniel 2 the primary emphasis falls on Daniel's ability to tell and Cama Oriental Institute, 1957) 101-02. A variant schema is found in chap. 3, according to which there are seven metal branches, indicating periods. 12 See Flusser, "The four empires," 165-74. 13 S.K. Eddy, The King is Dead. Studies in the Near Eastern Resistance to Hellenism 33432 B.C. (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1961) 19. 14 The antiquity of the Bahman Yasht is disputed by Philippe Gignoux, "Apocalypses et Voyages Extra-Terrestres dans l'Iran Mazdéen," in C. Kappler, et al., Apocalypses et Voyages dans l'Au-Delà (Paris: Cerf, 1987) 353. 15 Jacques Duchesne-Guillemin, "Apocalypse juive et apocalypse iranienne," in U. Bianchi and M.J.Vermaseren, eds., La sotenologia dei culti orientait nell' Impero Romano (Leiden: Brill, 1982) 753-61, argues for that the Persian motif is derived from Daniel, but see the refutation of his argument by Mary Boyce, "On the Antiquity of Zoroastrian Apocalyptic," BSOAS 47 (1984) 71-72.

interpret the king's dream, while the Chaldean wise men fail. The king reacts with admiration to this feat, but pays no attention whatever to the content of the interpretation, which might have been expected to cause him consternation. The revelation of mystery, rather than imminent divine intervendon, is the focus of the story. The eschatological implications of the dream are muted by the context in which it is placed. In this regard, Daniel 2 contrasts sharply with the use of the four kingdom topos in Daniel 7. In the latter chapter, the dream is Daniel's own, and the Babylonian setting recedes into the background. Instead the attention of the reader, like that of Daniel himself, is focused on the fourth beast and its imminent destruction In Daniel 2, however, the fictive setting in the reign of Nebuchadnezzar is a crucial element. Consequently we are invited to consider the dream from the perspective of the king. To be sure, his kingdom will pass, but its destruction is not imminent. The irruption of the kingdom of God is still in far in the future, in the time of a later kingdom. The lack of emphasis on the eschatological element in Daniel 2 should not be taken to indicate that eschatology is extraneous to these stories, and the result of redactional activity. Indeed, if a redactor had introduced an eschatological perspective to Daniel 2 we should expect that he would have placed more emphasis on it. Rather, we must recognize that eschatology has an integral place in the tales of Daniel 1-6, although it is far less important here than in chaps. 7-12. The crucial concept is that of the sovereignty or kingship of God. In Daniel 2, when Daniel has interpreted the dream, Nebuchadnezzar confesses that "your God is God of gods and lord of kings" (2:47). Later he proclaims that "his kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and his dominion endures through all generations" (3:33, compare 4:31; 6:27). This sovereignty is exercised in the present through the agency of Gentile kings. From a Jewish perspective, this arrangement could not be permanent. It is a theme of Daniel 1-6 that human kingdoms are transitory. Gentile monarchs bring about their downfall by hybris and idolatry, a point most vividly illustrated in Daniel 5 in the story of Belshazzar's feast. The destruction of the statue in Daniel 2 bespeaks the end of idolatry as well as of Gentile power. From this perspective, the ultimate kingdom set up by the God of heaven is only the corollary, and final fulfillment, of the sovereignty of the Most High, which even Nebuchadnezzar acknowledges in the present. The eschatology of Daniel 2 complements the theme of divine sovereignty in the present, and does not contradict it.

The eschatological hope of Daniel 1-6, however, is not urgent. For the present, Daniel is content to serve the Gentile overlords to whom the Most High had given the kingdom. Consequendy, the author tones down the revolutionary implications of the "four kingdom" schema by placing it in a context where its fulfillment does not appear imminent. The final kingdom of God is assured, but not imminent. Eschatology is not denied, but deferred. Deferred eschatology was arguably typical of much of post-exilic Judaism, between the decline of prophecy and the rise of apocalypticism. Such an attitude is compatible with the perspective of the books of Chronicles or of Sirach, which were written in the land of Israel. The most natural Sitz-im-Leben for the stories in Daniel, however, is in the Diaspora, where they are ostensibly set. The deferral of eschatological hope is part of a strategy for maintaining Jewish life in a Gentile environment, even in the service of Gentile kings. It makes it possible for Jews such as Daniel to reconcile temporary loyalty to Gentile monarchs with their permanent loyalty to the Most High God. As such, the muted eschatological perspective of Daniel 2 is an integral part of the religio-political ideology of these Aramaic tales.

C H A P T E R NINE

S T I R R I N G UP T H E G R E A T SEA The Religio-Historical Background of Daniel 7 It is now more than a century since Hermann Gunkel published his ground-breaking study Schöpfung und Chaos, in which he traced the influence of ancient Near Eastern mythology in various biblical texts, including Daniel chapter 7,' Gunkel began with the observation that certain features of the vision were not explained in the interpretation, e.g., why the beasts rise out of the sea, or the one like a son of man comes with the clouds of heaven. He further noted that this imagery had traditional associations, and pointed to a string of passages in the Hebrew Bible and post-biblical Jewish texts where monsters from the sea represent powers which are hostile to God: Isa 27:1; 30:7; Ezek 29; 32; Pss. 68:31; 74:13; 87:4; Pss. Sol 2:2. These passages imply a mythic narrative which is not to be found in the Hebrew Bible, but Gunkel claimed to have found its prototype in the Babylonian creation story, the Enuma Elish. Gunkel's general insight, that the imagery of the beasts from the sea alludes to a fuller narrative, whose prototype must be sought outside the Hebrew Bible, has been widely accepted, 2 while it has also met with considerable resistance. 3 The view that this prototype is found in the Enuma Elish is no longer defended, as it was to a great degree rendered obsolete by the discovery of the Ugaritic texts in 1929.4 Within a few years of that discovery, the relevance of the 1

Hermann Gunkel, Schöpfung und Chaos in Urzeit und Endzeit. Eine religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung über Gen 1 und Ap Joh 12 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1895). Daniel 7 is discussed in pp. 323-35. 2 For succinct reviews of scholarship see Carsten Colpe, "ho huios tou anthröpou," TDNT 8 (1968) 406-20, Klaus Koch, Das Buch Daniel (Erträge der Forschung; Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1980) 230-34. 3 E.g. J . A. Montgomery, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel (ICC; New York: Scribners, 1927) 323, L.F. Hartman and A.A. DiLella, The Book of Daniel (Anchor Bible 23; Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1978)212; M.P. Casey, Son of Man. The Interpretation and Influence of Daniel 7 (London: SPCK, 1979) 35-38. Arthur J . Ferch, The Son of Man in Daniel Seven (Andrews University Seminary Doctoral Dissertation Series; Berrien Springs: Andrews University Press, 1979) 40-107; Chrys C. Caragounis, The Son ofMan (WUNT 38; Tübingen: Mohr, 1986) 36-41. * In the early part of the twentieth century, Iranian backgrounds for apocalypticism were in vogue. See Koch, Das Buch Daniel, 231-33. Since these no longer figure in the discussion of Daniel 7 we will not discuss them here.

Ugaritic material for Daniel 7 was noted by Otto Eissfeldt,5 who saw the fourth beast of Daniel 7 as a reflection of the chaos monster Lotan. A more influential proposal was made by John Emerton in 19586 (and independently by Leonhard Rost in the same year)7. Emerton argued that the juxtaposition of the man-like figure who comes with the clouds and the divine "Ancient of Days" derives from Canaanite mythology, where Baal, the rider of the clouds, is subordinate to El, the father of years. The proposed Ugaritic background of Daniel 7 derived support from the influential article of Carsten Colpe on "ho huios tou anthropou" in TDNT, and it has subsequently been endorsed by several scholars, although it also remains a matter of lively debate. 8 Recendy a new element has been injected into the debate by Helge Kvanvig, in a learned and original study that revives the claims of a Mesopotamian background, but with reference to the seventh century BCE "Vision of the Underworld" rather than to the Enuma Elish.9 Kvanvig's proposal has some prima facie attractiveness, since the first six chapters of Daniel are set in Babylon, and BabyIonian parallels have figured prominently in the discussion of other early apocalyptic texts.10 It also provides a new focus for questions about the criteria for determining religio-historical parallels, and about the significance of these parallels for understanding a text. 5 Otto Eissfeldt, Baal Ζaphon, Zeus Kasios und der Durchzug der Israeliten durchs Meer (Halle: Niemeyer, 1932) 25-30. 6 J A. Emerton, "The Origin of the Son of Man Imagery," JTS 9 (1958) 225-42. 7 Leonhard Rost, "Zur Deutung des Menschensonnes in Daniel 7," in G. Delling, ed., Gott und die Götter. FestgabefiirErich Fascher zum 60. Geburtstag (Berlin: Evangelische Verlag, 1958) 41-3. A. Bcntzcn, Daniel (HAT 19; 2nd ed., Tübingen: Mohr, 1952) 58-65; King and Messiah (2nd ed.; Oxford: Blackwcll, 1970) 73-75. argued that Daniel 7 was an adaptation of the supposed pre-exilic Thronbesteigungsfest, or festival of the enthronement of Yahweh, and included motifs of Canaanite origin, although he also endorsed the view that the "Son of M a n " was the primal man. 8 J.J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel (HSM 16; Missoula, Montana: Scholars Press, 1977) 95-106; J . Day, God's Conflict with the dragon and the sea (University of Cambridge Oriental Publications 35; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985) 151-78; J. Goldingay, Daniel (Word Biblical Commentary; Dallas: Word, 1989) 151. 9 H. Kvanvig, Roots ofApocalypt1c(\VM.ANJ 61; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1988) 389-441. The vision was originally published by E. Ebcling, Tod und Leben nach den Vorstellungen der Babylonier (Berlin & Leipzig: de Gruytcr, 1931) 1-19 and re-edited by W. von Soden, "Die Unterweltsvision eines assyrischen Krönprinzen," Ze',sc^nft fi'r Assyriologie 9 (1936) 1-31 (= Aus Sprache, Geschichte und Religion Babyloniens. Gesammelte Aufsätze [Naples:Istituto Universitario Orientale, 1989] 29-67). English translations can bc found in Kvanvig, Roots of Apocalyptic, 390-91 and in AMT109-110 (E. A. Speiser). 10 Sec e.g. J . VanderKam, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition (CBQMS 16; Washington, D. C.: Catholic Biblical Association, 1984).

A few preliminary matters may be addressed at the outset. On the most elementary level, it should be clear that the parallels are of significance for the sense of the text, rather than for its reference. Gunkel was not suggesting that the pious Jews of the Maccabean era were looking to Marduk for deliverance, but that familiarity with the Enuma Elish can help us better understand how they envisaged their situation. T o say that the one like a son of man "is" Marduk, or the Canaanite Baal, pertains to a different level of meaning than the claim that he should be identified as the archangel Michael or as a symbol for the Jewish people. It is to say that he functions in a manner similar to the way Marduk, or Baal, functions in the pagan myths. This distinction is elementary, but is sometimes missed by those who polemicize against religio-historical parallels.11 Second, some critics demand "congeniality in ideological standpoint between the presumed background and the author of our text," 12 with the implication that pagan mythology is in principle not congenial to the work of a pious Jew. This formulation of the issue assumes that the ideological standpoint of the text is clear-cut, and risks confusing what is congenial to the text with what is congenial to the critic.13 Appropriation of foreign motifs and thought patterns requires that some aspect of the presumed background be congenial to the author, but does not require identity of outlook. In Daniel 1-6, Daniel is cast in the model of the Babylonian wise-men, although his religious ideology is fundamentally different from theirs. By positing an area of similarity between Daniel and the Chaldeans, the authors of the tales are able to assert the superiority of Daniel and his God. Similarly, the use of imagery associated with Marduk or with Baal may serve to make the claim that Yahweh, not the pagan deities, is the true deliverer. Whether pagan myths constitute the background to Daniel 7 must be judged by the light they throw on the text, not pre-judged by modern assumptions about what is permissible for an ancient Jew.

11 E.g. Ferch, The Son of Man, 64, contends that "the sea and the beasts of Dan 7 are interpreted as the earth and four kings or kingdoms and not as chaos symbols." T o say that the beasts are chaos symbols is in no way incompatible with the interpretation as kings or kingdoms, since it pertains to a différent level of meaning. 12 Caragounis, The Son of Man, 38. 13 Casey, Son of Man, 18, allows that the imagery may have Canaanite roots, but insists that "from the author's own perspective...he was drawing on native Israelite imagery as a conservative defender of the faith might be expected to." Pre-conceived expectations about what imagery a conservative defender of the faith may use takes precedence here over the actual usage of the contemporary Jewish texts (e.g. 1 Enoch) which draw freely on material of diverse origins.

Perhaps the main methodological problem in determining religiohistorical influences concerns the degree of correspondence that must be found between the ancient myth and biblical text. Parallels, of course, are of various kinds. Some may concern isolated points. For example, the representation of the kingdoms of Persia and Greece by a ram and a he-goat has been explained from the signs of the Zodiac and their correlation with specific nations in Hellenistic times.14 T h e astral background, however, does not illuminate the action described in Daniel 8, the defeat of the ram and the subsequent blasphemous career of the little horn. Other parallels are structural in nature, and explain the way a complex of motifs is organized. So Kvanvig claims that the "Vision of the Netherworld" provided a model for Daniel 7 as a whole, and a similar claim can be made for the Baal myth from Ugarit. 15 It has been argued that motifs should not be "torn out of their living contexts" but "should be considered against the totality of the phenomenological conception of the works in which such correspondences occur." 16 Such demands are justified when the objective is to compare the overall message of the myth and the biblical text, but this has never been the issue in the discussion of Daniel 7. Literary influence necessarily involves tearing motifs, or patterns, from one context and transferring them to another. In fact, the richness of the allusion depends precisely on the tension between the two different contexts. T o take a familiar example, there is no doubt that Mark 13:26 ("then they will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory") is influenced by Daniel 7. The Markan passage reproduces very little of Daniel's vision: it is not presented as a dream or a vision, there is no mention of the sea, or beasts, or the Ancient of Days. Yet the particularity of the description of the Son of Man is only intelligible if we catch the allusion to Daniel. T h e allusion is assured by the fact that a few motifs are clustered together (Son of Man, clouds, power and glory), but the correspondence is by no means complete. Mark 13 represents a reinterpretation, and therefore an alteration, of Daniel 7 rather than a reproduction.

14

A. Caquot, "Sur les auatre Bêtes de Daniel VII," Semitica 5(1955) 5-13. See also P. Porter, Metaphors and Monsters. A Literaiy-Critical Study of Daniel 7 and 8 (Coniectanea Biblica O T series 20; Lund: Glcerup, 1983), who attempts to explain the animal imagery in Daniel from the root metaphor of "shepherd." 16 A.J. Ferch, "Daniel 7 and Ugarit: A Reconsideration," JBL 99(1980) 75; citing Claus Westermann, "Sinn und Grenze religionsgeschichtlichcr Parallelen," 7X< 90(1965) 490-91 and Nahum Sarna, Understanding Genesis (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966) xxvii. 15

On the other hand, for a significant structural parallel it is not enough that there be some resemblance between individual motifs. First, the manner in which the motifs are related to each other, and function within their context, is crucial. Not all the "Son of Man" sayings in the Gospels are necessarily related to Daniel 7. Second, while the two contexts are necessarily different, there must be some point of analogy between them, so that the use of the older text becomes appropriate and helpful. Mark 13 and Daniel 7 are linked by the fact that both are scenes of public eschatology and envisage a great historical crisis and its resolution. We must allow, however, that whoever composed Daniel 7 was a creative author, not a mere copyist of ancient sources. It should be no surprise that his composition is a new entity, discontinuous in some respects with all its sources. What is significant is whether the analogy with ancient myths throws light on the particular choice of motifs in Daniel's vision, and on the way in which those motifs are combined. The Canaanite background The Ugaritic material that is of primary interest for Daniel 7 is found in the Baal cycle (CTA 1-6) and more specifically in the conflict between Baal and Yamm (CTA 2). It must be emphasized that no one suggests that the author of Daniel knew this myth in the precise formulation found at Ugarit. The argument is similar to Gunkel's appeal to the Enuma Elish: the myth of Baal and Yamm is one formulation of a traditional narrative presupposed in Daniel 7, and can throw light on the choice of imagery and structure of relationships in the biblical text. According to the Ugaritic myth, Yamm/Sea sends an embassy to the high god El to demand that Baal be given over to him. The gods are intimidated, and El is willing to comply, but Baal resists. A struggle between Baal and Yamm ensues. Baal is aided by the craftsman Kothar-wa-Khasis who tells him: Truly I say to you, Ο Prince Baal, I repeat (to you) Ο Rider of the Clouds: Now your enemy, Baal, now your enemy you will smite, now you will smite your foe. You will take your everlasting kingdom, your dominion for ever and ever.

Kothar-wa-Khasis then gives Baal magical clubs, with which he attacks and kills Yamm. Astarte instructs Baal to scatter Yamm, and when that is done there is a cry: "Yamm is indeed dead! Baal shall be king." This last declaration and the words of Kothar-wa-Khasis to Baal make clear that what is at stake in the conflict is kingship

among the gods. This kingship, however, is subject to that of El, as high god. Baal appears in harmonious subordination to El in a text published in Ugaútica V: "El sits next to Astarte, El the judge next to Hadad the shepherd." 17 The view that Baal's kingship was subject to El is also reflected in the Phoenician history of Philo Byblios who says that "Zeus Demarous, who is Hadad, king of the gods" reigned by the consent of Kronos (E1).IR When Baal succumbs to Mot (Death) in another episode of the cycle, El appoints Athtar as king in his place (CTA 6.1.43-65). The conflict for universal kingship constitutes the first point of analogy between this myth and Daniel 7. In Daniel, the four beasts are kings or kingdoms, who are stripped of their dominion, while the "one like a son of man" receives everlasting dominion and a kingship that shall never be destroyed. Beyond this general analogy in context, there are parallels in a number of motifs and in the relationships between them. Daniel's vision begins with the statement that "the four winds of heaven were stirring up the great sea." Out of this sea, four great beasts arise, but the sea is the source, and the beasts are its offshoots. There is no further reference to the sea in Daniel 7, and its presence in the vision must be explained from its traditional associations. Gunkel already noted the depiction of the sea in Hebrew poetry, as a force that has to be subdued by God and is associated with the monsters Rahab and Leviathan (who appears at Ugarit as Lotan, the twisting serpent). In view of the frequency of allusions to this tradition within the bible,19 there can be little doubt that the sea in Daniel 7 should also be understood in this context. The tradition is ultimately of Canaanite origin, but the symbolism of the sea is familiar from the Hebrew Bible, and does not in itself require direct acquaintance with Canaanite sources. Gunkel's most important insight has been vindicated, however. T o say that beasts arise from the sea is not simply to say that kings will arise on the earth, despite the interpretation in Dan 7:17. The imagery implies that the kings have a metaphysical status. They are the embodiments of the 17

J . Nougayrol et al., Ugantica V(Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1968) 2.2b-3a. "‫ י‬Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 1.10.31. A.I. Baumgarten, The Phoenician History of Philo of Byblos. A Commentary (Études Préliminaires aux Religions Orientales dans l'Empire Romain; Leiden: Brill, 1981) 217-19, emphasizes the différences between the portrayals of EI in the Ugaritic texts and in Philo, but concludes: "while comparisons between Ugaritic and Byblian El...are hazardous it would seem that the traditions about El in these two cities were similar. In the mythology of both towns El delegated authority to the younger gods while retaining ultimate and unchallenged supremacy for himself." 19 E.g. J o b 26,12-13; Ps 89,8-11; Isa 17,12-14; 51,9-10.

primeval power of chaos symbolized by the sea in Hebrew and Canaanite tradition. 20 The depiction of the beasts in Daniel is drawn from other sources, but the source from which they rise, and so the dominant image in the opening part of Daniel's vision, has its ultimate origin in Canaanite myth. The other complex of motifs in Daniel 7 that recalls Canaanite imagery concerns the "one like a son of man" and the Ancient of Days. Emerton observed the significance of the entourage of clouds, which normally denotes divine status in ancient Israel: the act of coming with clouds suggests a theophany of Yahwe himself. If Dan. vii. 13 does not refer to a divine being, then it is the only exception out of about seventy passages in the OT. 21

Yet in Daniel 7 the one who comes with clouds is clearly subordinate to the Ancient of Days. This configuration has no precedent in the biblical tradition. It is quite intelligible, however, against the background of Canaanite mythology, where Baal appears in subordination to El.22 Moreover the descriptions of the two figures have affinities with the Canaanite gods. Baal's stock epithet in the Ugaritic texts is "rider of the clouds." 23 El is called ab mm, which is most frequently, and plausibly, taken as abû šānīma, father of years,24 and is similar in sense to "Ancient of Days." Admittedly, the meaning of this phrase is disputed, 25 and in any case it is a different epithet from what we find in Daniel. There is no dispute, however, that El is portrayed as an aged god in the Ugaritic

20 Compare A. Lacocque, The Book of Daniel (Atlanta: Knox, 1979) 138: "The nations proceed from chaos and arc the works of chaos." Kvanvig, Roots, 503-05, fully appreciates this point, although he favors a difFercnt derivation of the symbolism. In contrast, the point is missed by Ferch, "Daniel 7 and Ugarit," 81 ("The sea and the beasts are interpreted as the earth and four kings or kingdoms and not as chaos symbols"). This is to ignore the associations of the imagery even within the biblical context. It should be noted that Kvanvig, Roots, 505, understands the "earth" of Dan 7:17 in a mythological sense, as the underworld. 21 Emerton, "The Origin," 231-32. Cf. Deut 33,26; Pss 68,5; 104,3. 22 CTA 2.1.21, Ugaritica F2.2b-3a, cited above. 23 The objection of Kvanvig, Roots, 507-08, that clouds were commonly associated with vegetation gods and not specific to Baal, is disingenuous, as he does not suggest any other vegetation god that is more relevant to Daniel. The "Vision of the Netherworld," which he proposes as background has no place for such a figure. 24 CTA 1.3.24; 4.4.24; 6.1.36; 17.6.49. The phrase is taken as "father of years" by Rost, "Zur Deutung des Menschensohnes," 42; F.M. Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973) 16; Day, God's Conflict, 161, among others. 25 M. Pope, El in the Ugaritic Texts (Leiden: Brill, 1955) 33, suggests "father of exalted ones." O. Eissfeldt, El im ugaritischen Pantheon (Leipzig: Akademie Verlag, 1951) 30, proposed "father of mortals," while Cyrus H. Gordon, "El, Father of

texts,26 and that Daniel 7 is exceptional in the Hebrew Bible in depicting God in this way. The epithets of El also include that of "judge," 27 and he is attended by a divine council of the bn qds, "sons of the holy one." 28 There are, of course, also important differences between Daniel 7 and the Ugaritic myth. Daniel speaks of four beasts which come up out of the sea. The Canaanite myth is thus adapted to accommodate the schema of four kingdoms, which is already found in Daniel chap. 2. Second, the beast is not slain in combat, as was the case with Lotan and Yamm in the myth. Instead it is executed in a judicial assembly. We have here a distinctively Jewish adaptation of the myth, which emphasizes the sovereignty of the supreme God. In older texts of the biblical tradition, Yahweh is said to slay the dragon (Isa 51:9; 27:1). Here the executioner is not specified, but the sentence is presumably passed by the Ancient of Days. Since the "one like a son of man" receives dominion after the death of the beast, it is reasonable to assume that he has in some way triumphed over it. The importance of the judgment scene here may be related to the growing importance of the idea of a final judgment in the apocalyptic literature of the Hellenistic period. Despite these differences between the Ugaritic texts and Daniel 7, the main ingredients of the biblical vision are already found in the ancient myths. What is important is the pattern of relationships: the opposition between the sea and the rider of the clouds, the presence of two god-like figures and the fact that one who comes with the clouds receives everlasting dominion. These are the relationships which determine the structure of the vision in Daniel 7. The old story has been given a new literary form, and adapted to fit a new historical situation, but the basic structure persists. Kvanvig's proposal Kvanvig5s proposal differs from those of Gunkel and Emerton in so far as it posits the dependence of Daniel 7 on a specific Akkadian text, the "Vision of the Netherworld." This text is introduced as "a night vision" or "dream." The dreamer finds himself in the Sunem," JNES 35 (1976) 261-62 took šnm as the name of a god. None of these suggestions has proven persuasive. See Day, God's Conflict, 161. The plural of "years" in Ugaritic is usually mt rather than mm , but this objection is not decisive as other words have variant plural forms (e.g. r% head). 26 CTA 4.5.65-6: "You are great, El, you are indeed wise, the grey hairs of your beard indeed instruct you." (cf. CTA 3.5.10). See Cross, Canaanite Myth, 16-17. 27 Ugaritica F2.2b-3a, citcd above. 28 CTA 2.1.21.

Netherworld, where he sees 15 gods who have hybrid forms (e.g. one has the head of a lion, hands of men and feet of a bird). He also sees "one man" whose face was "similar to that of an Anzu bird" and who was armed with a sword and a bow. Then he sees "the warrior Nergal" on a royal throne, surrounded by the Annunaki, the great gods, with lightning flashing from his arms. The god is about to put him to death, but the divine counsellor intervenes. Nergal then rebukes him for dishonoring the queen of the Netherworld. He tells him that this [spirit] which you saw in the nether world, is that of the exalted shepherd: to whom my father...the king of the gods, gives full responsibility...

He goes on to speak of "your begetter, ...wise in speech, broad in understanding" who nonetheless "closed his ear for his sp[ee]ch, ate the taboo and stamped on the abomination" and threatens to "throw you down to the winds." 29 After the dreamer awakes, the account concludes with a third person account of how he praised Nergal and Ereshkigal, and how the scribe resolved to do always what Nergal commanded. Kvanvig claims that this vision shares with Daniel 7 basic features of both form and content. As regards form, it is true that both are dream visions, and both have similar "frames" (introductory and concluding statements) in the manner typical of Near Eastern dream accounts. 30 The dreams, however, are of different types. Daniel 7 is a symbolic dream, which is followed by an interpretation. The "Vision of the Netherworld" is a "message dream" which culminates in a speech by the god to the visionary, which requires no interpretation. 31 Unlike Daniel, the dreamer in the vision is involved in the action of the dream. 32 Formally the Akkadian vision is of great 29 This passage of the dream is problematic, largely because of a lacuna before the reference to "your begetter." Kvanvig interprets the "exalted shepherd" as an "ideal king" with whom the father of the visionary is contrasted. The threat at the end applies to both the visionary and his father. Speiser's translation, in contrast, implies that the "exalted shepherd" is identical with the visionary's father. Kvanvig identifies the visionary as a son of King Esarhaddon (680-669 BCE). 30 A.L. Oppenheim, The Interpretation of Dreams in the Ancient Near East (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1956) 187. 31 Oppenheim, ibid., 185. Kvanvig, Roots of Apocalyptic, 445, tries to blur the distinction by claiming that the Akkadian dream also has a symbolic feature in so far as the "one man" is interpreted as the "ideal king." In fact the man is identified as the king, but his human form is realistic, not symbolic. 32 Again, Kvanvig attempts to blur the difference by claiming that "Daniel moves in front of the throne to ask for the interpretation of the vision." (Roots of Apocalyptic, 446). In fact Daniel is not said to move in front of the throne. He acts

interest for the background of early Jewish apocalypses, but is more relevant to the otherworldly journeys of Enoch than to the symbolic vision of Daniel. Much closer formal models for Daniel 7 can be found in the dreams in chaps. 2 and 4, or even in the less developed "night visions" of Zechariah. Moreover, while the motif of kingship appears in the Akkadian vision, it is primarily concerned with the fate of the individual visionary himself. There is no such concern in Daniel 7, and it is difficult to see any analogy in theme between the two visions. Kvanvig compares the pattern of content of the two visions under five headings: 1 Action of nature (the winds and the sea in Daniel). It is admitted that there is no parallel at this point. 33 2 The "monsters. " Daniel describes four beasts. Whether the 15 gods of the vision are really analogous is questionable. The point of comparison is that both are hybrid in form, and some of the same constituent parts occur in both, but not in the same combination. 34 What this suggests is that the conception of the beasts in Daniel is influenced in a general way by the hybrid forms which are typical not only of this text but of Mesopotamian mythology and art in general. 3 God on the throne. In both visions a god is seated for judgment and surrounded by attendants and by fire. The significance of this parallel is diminished, however, by the fact that fire is very frequently associated with theophanies and Near Eastern gods are commonly surrounded by their council.35 The location of the

within the dream, to ask for the interpretation, but this action is outside the frame of the symbolic vision. 33 Kvanvig, Roots, 503-05, docs, however, propose a Mesopotamian background for the sea: "In Mesopotamian mythology Apsu, the subterranean water-deep, was regarded as the abode of strange composite creatures of different kinds. These could be of benevolent or malevolent character." Kvanvig's understanding of the imagery is influenced by the fact that he regards the vision of the man from the sea in 4 Ezra 13 as independent of Daniel 7, and as an instance where a benevolent character rises from the sea. Most scholars, however, see 4 Ezra 13 as derived from Daniel 7, and not as an independent witness to the symbolism of the sea, which is entirely malevolent in Daniel. 34 E.g. the first beast in Daniel 7 is a lion with eagles wings. It is made to stand on 2 feet and is given a human heart. In the "Vision," one god is a lion standing on its hind-legs, and several have lion heads, while a god with no lion features has wings. There is no mention of a human heart. Kvanvig, Roots, 536-37, exaggerates the correspondence by combining features from different gods as parallels to individual beasts. 35 Kvanvig, Roots, 445: "Such visions of the supreme god, sitting on his throne, surrounded by attendants, are well attested in Old Testament and Jewish texts, as well as in Mesopotamia."

scene in the Netherworld constitutes a significant point of difference over against Daniel. 4 The judgment. In both visions the god acts as judge, but that is the extent of the parallel. In Daniel the one being judged is a beast from the sea, in the "Vision" it is the visionary himself.36 The accusation in Daniel is not stated explicidy, but is presumably related to the "great words" the horn was speaking. The accused in the Vision does not display any similar defiance. In Daniel the beast is slain, in the Vision there is a reprieve. 5 The ideal ruler, designated as a man. This is the most dubious of all the analogies proposed by Kvanvig. Daniel 7 announces the coming of "one like a son of man" who stands in contrast to the beasts from the sea. He is an ideal ruler in the sense that he receives the eschatological kingdom. There is no analogous figure in the Akkadian vision. There the dreamer is told that the man he saw in the dream is "the exalted shepherd...to whom the king of the gods gives full responsibility...' ‫י‬3‫ ד‬but he is evidendy an historical king whose reign is either present or already past. 38 In no case is the Assyrian king given everlasting dominion. The expression "one man" (isten etlu) appears in several Akkadian dream reports. 39 The role of this figure can vary. In some cases he comes to the aid of the dreamer (e.g. Gilgamesh) but he does not act in the "Vision of the Netherworld," and it is not apparent that he is an intermediary between gods and men. 40 All that can be inferred from the phrase is that it was frequendy used for significant figures in dreams. In biblical visions, too, human figures often appear (Dan 8:15; 9:21; 10:5, etc.). Here again the parallel between the two visions is quite limited and of a general nature. Kvanvig has argued that the parallels between Daniel and the Akkadian Vision "indicate a dependence" since "they occur in two night-visions with the same sequence of basic content." 41 This claim involves considerable exaggeration. Both visions involve hybrid beings, a human figure, a god on his throne and a judgment scene. 36 Kvanvig describes the accused in both visions as a "rebel king'1 but this is to obscure fundamental differences. 37 von Soden and Speiser read the verb in the past tense. 38 Kvanvig, Roots, 433, identifies him as Sennacherib. Speiser's translation implies that he is identical with the visionary's father. 39 Kvanvig, Roots, 415. Examples are found in the dreams of Gilgamesh, the death dream of Enkidu, the dreams of the righteous sufferer in Ludlul Bel Nemeqi and a dream ofNabonidus (ANET 309-10). 40 Contra Kvanvig, Roots, 421. The expression refers to dead humans in a number of cases. 41 Kvanvig, Roots, 457.

T h e pattern of relationships between these elements, however, is entirely different in the two visions. In Daniel the hybrid beings are beasts from the sea and are in opposition to the human figure and the enthroned god. In the Akkadian Vision, they are gods and not in opposition to any of the other parties. The human figure contrasts with the hybrid gods, as a different kind of being, but he is not in conflict with them and does not in any sense triumph over them. In the Akkadian vision the one accused in the judgment scene is the visionary himself. The visions have a very different setting: the Akkadian one is in the Netherworld. The theme of the two passages is also quite different: Daniel is concerned with universal kingship, the "Vision" with the fate of the visionary. The comparison between the Vision of the Netherworld and Daniel 7 breaks down precisely at those crucial structural points where the analogy with Canaanite myth was most helpful. The Akkadian text has neither sea nor clouds; there is no opposition between the hybrid gods and the human figure, no destruction of a monster and no conferral of everlasting dominion. The Canaanite myth provides a much better explanation for the configuration of the key motifs in Daniel 7. It is also more directly relevant to the central theme of universal kingship. The transmission of the Canaanite material T h e most persistent objection to the view that Daniel 7 is influenced by Canaanite mythology concerns the long interval between the date of the Ugaritic texts (14th century BCE) and the composition of Daniel. Given the paucity of our sources for Canaanite religion after Ugarit, and the highly selective nature of the biblical tradition, it is hardly surprising that the lines of transmission cannot be traced conclusively. We must be content to demonstrate the possibility that the author of Daniel had access to these traditions, whether through Jewish or gentile channels. An extensive attempt to reconstruct the background of Daniel 7 in later pagan traditions has been made by Rollin Kearns. 42 It is possible to demonstrate the continued vitality of the cult of Baal Haddad, the Baal of the Ugaritic texts, into the Christian era, 43 but we lack texts to fill out the traditions associated with the cult in the later period. Our most important literary source, the Phoenician History of Philo Byblius, certainly contains Canaanite traditions, but 42 43

R. Kearns, Vorfragen zur Chmtologie ///(Tübingen: Mohr, 1982) 3-82. Ibid., 46-57.

has reconceived them in Hellenistic categories, so that their recovery requires careful analysis.44 In any case the material in Philo sheds litde light on Daniel 7. Kearns has argued that the cult of Baal Haddad in Palestine had produced an eschatological, apocalyptic reformulation of the tradition, which was then taken up by Jewish writers.45 The existence of this pagan tradition, however, is inferred from the Jewish texts, Daniel 7 and 4 Ezra 13. It is not attested in any pagan source, and so is extremely hypothetical. The pagan cult introduced into Jerusalem by Antiochus Epiphanes is generally recognized to have involved the worship of Baal Shamem, whence several allusions involving the word šmm, make desolate, in Daniel. 46 Here again we know relatively little about the symbolism of the cult.47 Many scholars object that precisely because of the Canaanite background of the cult introduced by Epiphanes, the author of Daniel would not have used symbolism that was known to have any Canaanite associations.48 This argument is not as compelling as it may initially seem. Use of the imagery from another cult does not necessarily reflect any compromise with its practice. An author may borrow symbolism in order to polemicize against its source—Hosea's use of Canaanite imagery is a well-known case in point. Daniel's portrayal of Antiochus Epiphanes as (the litde horn on) the beast from the sea is all the more scathing if its mythological overtones are fully recognized, in view of the king's devotion to Baal Shamem/Zeus Olympius. Nonetheless, it is easier to suppose that the author of Daniel was using imagery which had long been at home in the religion of Israel. In fact, as we have seen, several aspects of this imagery are well 44 See Baumgarten, The Phoenician History, 265-66: "Philo has taken what were, in his time, recent versions of ancient Phoenician traditions. In the process of presenting them, Philo has revised them to make them fit his own personal theories." 45 Kearns, Vorfragen, III, 98-100. 46 Dan 8:13; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11. The role of Baal Shamem (identified with Zeus Olympius) corresponds to that of El rather than Baal/Haddad. See R.A. Oden, "Baal Shamem and El," CßQ,39 (1977) 457-73. 47 Zeus Olympius appears as a throned figure on the reverse of coins of Antiochus Epiphanes, but the imagery is not distinctive enough to warrant any conclusions. The thesis of J. Morgenstern, "The 'Son of Man' of Daniel 7:13f. A new interpretation," JBL 80 (1961) 65-77, that Daniel 7 reflects a reform of Tyrian solar religion by Antiochus Epiphanes, is universally rejected as too conjectural. See also his "The King-god among the Western Semites and the Meaning of Epiphanes," F T 10 (1960) 138-97. 48 E.g. P. Mosca, "Ugarit and Daniel 7: A Missing Link," Bib 67(1986)499: "I seriously doubt that the impeccably orthodox Jewish author of Daniel 7 would turn to such a source for inspiration..." One wonders by what canon "orthodoxy" was judged impeccable in the second century BCE. Daniel shows considerable freedom in drawing motifs and ideas from various sources, and the idea of resurrection, with

attested in the Hebrew Bible—the chaotic sea, with its monsters, the rider of the clouds, the heavenly council.49 The one point that is difficult to reconcile with the biblical tradition is the juxtaposition of two apparently divine figures, the one like a son of man and the Ancient of Days. Otto Eissfeldt argued that a few biblical passages show Yahweh as distinct from and subordinate to El Elyon.50 In Deut 32,8 Elyon is said to divide the nations according to the number of the sons of El,51 and Israel falls to Yahweh's portion. In Ps 82 God (elohim) stands in the council of El and reminds the gods that they are all "sons of Elyon." These passages certainly testify to a fuller mythology in ancient Israel than is normally acknowledged in the Hebrew Bible. Whether either passage necessarily understands Yahweh as subordinate to Elyon is questionable. 52 It is unlikely, in any case, that such an understanding would have persisted down to the time when Daniel was written. It is interesting to note, however, that the Melchizedek scroll from Qumran understands the 'elôhîm of Ps 82 to refer, not to Yahweh, but to Melchizedek, a heavenly being subordinate to Yahweh. 53 The old mythology has been adapted so that there is no doubt of the supremacy of Yahweh, while some functions assigned to Yahweh in the older texts are now assigned to an angel. We do not know when this kind of adaptation was introduced into the Jewish tradition. It may well be presupposed in the juxtaposition of the "one like a son of man" and the Ancient of Days in Daniel 7. Many scholars have seen the Sitz-im-Leben of Canaanite mythology in Israelite religion in the royal cult.54 The most specific proposal in this regard has been offered by Paul Mosca, who claims to find in Ps 89 a crucial link between the Canaanite mythology attested at Ugarit, on the one hand, and Daniel 7 on the other. The Psalm celebrates the incomparability of Yahweh in "the assembly of holy ones" and grounds his primacy in his control over "the swelling of the sea" (vs 10) and slaying of Rahab (vs 11). It proceeds to describe which the book culminates, was scarcely established orthodoxy at that time. 49 Mosca, "Ugarit and Daniel 7," 500-01, lists 16 points at which Daniel 7 has "a demonstrably biblical pedigree." 50 Otto Eissfeldt, "El and Yahweh," JSS 1 (1956) 25-37. 51 Hence LXX, "angels of God". See 4 Q D c u f (P. W. Skehan, "A Fragment of the Song of Moses from Qumran," BASOR 136 [1954] 12-15). M T reads "sons of Israel." 52 See Emerton, "The Origin of the Son of Man Imagery," 241. 53 11 QMelch 2:9-10. Paul J . Kobelski, Melchizedek and Melchireša' (Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series 10; Washington D.C.: Catholic Biblical Association, 1981) 8. 54 E.g. Bentzen, Daniel, 64; Emerton, "The Origin of the Son of Man Imagery," 240-42. Goldingay, Daniel, 151, thinks rather of learned circlcs in Judaism.

his throne (vs 15) and proclaim his kingship (vs 19). Thus far we can see a parallel between Yahweh in the Psalm and Baal's victory over Yamm in the Ugaritic texts. Mosca, however, argues that Yahweh is assimilated to El and that the role of Baal is transferred to the Davidic king, of whom it is said, in vs 26, "I will set his hand upon the sea, his right hand upon the rivers." The king is God's son,55 as Baal is son of El, and he too is granted everlasting dominion (vss 30, 37).56 We see here many of the ingredients of Daniel's vision, presented as the indirect report of a vision (vs 20). There is also other evidence that the Davidic king was regarded as an 'elôhîm under Yahweh: he is addressed as such in Ps 45:7.57 While none of this provides a clear prototype for the scene in Daniel 7, it shows that many of the motifs associated with the Baal myth were adapted to Israelite religion in the period of the monarchy. 58 There can be no doubt that many more mythological traditions were transmitted in Second Temple Judaism than are now extant in the Hebrew Bible.59 Glimpses of such traditions can be seen in the so-called "Apocalypse of Isaiah," which alludes to Leviathan (27:1), the destruction of Mot, or Death (25:8), and an enigmatic punishment of the host of heaven (24:21-23). Other mythological traditions come to light in the extra-biblical apocalypses such as 1 Enoch and in the Dead Sea Scrolls, and it is generally agreed that all this material was not created de novo in the Hellenistic period. 60 The possibility that Daniel 7 drew on more extensive traditions than are now attested in the Hebrew Bible, and which were ultimately of 55

Ps 89,27-28. Compare Pss 2,7; 110,3. Mosca also construes Ps 89,37-38 ("His line shall continue forever, and his throne endure before me like the sun. It shall be established forever like the moon, an enduring witness in the skies.") to mean that the Davidic throne is "in the skies" but it is easier to take it that the moon is in the skies, and that the point of comparison is the permanence of the throne. See Mosca, "Once Again the Heavenly Witness of Psalm 89:38 " JBL 105(1986) 27-37. 57 Ps 89 is much more modest in this regard. See Mosca, "Ugarit and Daniel 7," 513. 58 The gap can not be bridged by appeal to Ps 8, where ben 'ādām (the son of man, as a generic term for humanity in parallelism to 'en&‫ )ז‬is given supremacy over all creatures of land and sea, as the context there is reminiscent of Genesis 2 rather than of the Chaoskampf {pace Mosca, "Ugarit and Daniel 7," 516-17). 59 This point is made validly, though with exaggeration, by Margaret Barker, The Older Testament (London: SPCK, 1987). 60 Interest in ancient myths was a widespread phenomenon in the Hellenistic age, as witnessed by Philo of Byblos, Berossus of Babylon and the use of old Egyptian traditions in the Potter's Oracle (see Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel, 102-03). Mosca, "Ugarit and Daniel 7," 499, makes the apt observation that in each case the author turns to old traditions of his own culture, not that of his neighbor. This point lends weight to the view that the Canaanite traditions had been assimilated to Judaism long before the time of Daniel. 56

Canaanite origin, can hardly be disputed. Unfortunately, for the present we must be content with the possibility and hope that some future textual discoveries will clarify the exact channels by which this material was transmitted. The fact remains, however, that the ancient Canaanite myths provide the most adequate background for understanding the configuration of motifs which we find in Daniel 7. Conclusions In conclusion, I would like to draw attention to some of the implications of reading Daniel 7 against a background of Canaanite mythology. The first concerns the literary unity of Daniel 7. There is a long tradition, especially in German scholarship, that posits source divisions within the chapter, and would attribute the so-called "Son of Man psalm" to a different source than the vision of the beasts from the sea. Both the sea and the rider of the clouds have integral parts in the Canaanite myth. Any source division that separates the sea from the heavenly figures can hardly be credible. The second concerns the unity of the Book of Daniel. The religiohistorical background which we have posited for Daniel 7 is quite different from what we find in Daniel 1-6. T o be sure there is continuity, which indicates that the author of chap. 7 deliberately connected his vision with the older tales. The most obvious point of continuity is with the four-kingdom schema of chap. 2, and in a more general way with the theme of succession to world dominion, which is pervasive in chaps. l-6. fil The specific imagery with which the kingdom theme is filled out in Daniel 7, however, is no longer drawn from stories about Babylonian and Persian kings, but from old traditions that had probably been at home in the Jerusalem cult. This observation supports the view that Daniel 7 comes from a different time and historical context than chaps. 1-6.62 Perhaps the greatest significance of the mythic background, however, lies in its implications for the kind of literature we have in Daniel 7. These are not steno-symbols which can be decoded and discarded, as Norman Perrin would have it.63 Rather, the power of the vision lies in its evocation of a pattern which transcends any par61

The first beast of chap. 7, which was given a human heart, must also be related to the transformation of Nebuchadnezzar in chap. 4 (Kvanvig, Roots, 487). 62 It should be noted, however, that Daniel 7-12 draws traditions from many sources, and can not all be explained from a Canaanite background. 6 ‫" י‬Eschatology and Hermeneutics: Reflections on Method in the Interpretation of the New Testament," JBL 93(1974) 11.

ticular historical situation. From Daniel's perspective, the struggle between Antiochus Epiphanes and the Jews was a re-enactment of a primordial struggle between the chaotic forces of the Sea and the rider of the clouds, which had been recurring from time immemorial. It was therefore even more terrible than it might seem, but there were grounds for reassurance, since the outcome was known. Such a view of history could not be adequately articulated in plain prose, but required the symbolism most richly provided by the ancient myths.

T H E MEANING O F " T H E END" IN T H E B O O K O F DANIEL

Eschatology, discussion of "the end," is a topic of central importance in biblical studies, which continues to play a vital part in modern theology. Already in the eighth century BCE Amos declared, "The end has come upon my people Israel" (Amos 8:2). For Amos, the end in question was the end of Israel as an independent nation. Similarly, Ezekiel spoke of the "end" of Judah. While the classical prophets entertained expectations of definitive change, they did not expect an end of this world or of the historical process. Such ideas emerge in the apocalyptic literature, beginning in the early second century BCE, where we are told that "the world will be written down for destruction," and "the first heaven will vanish and pass away, and a new heaven will appear." 1 By the end of the first century CE expectation of an end of this world was widespread. The new heaven and new earth of Revelation entailed the passing away of the first heaven and earth (Rev 21:1). According to 4 Ezra 7:30 this world would be returned to primeval silence for seven days. The place of the Book of Daniel in this development is disputed. On the one hand, it is often regarded as the first instance of "true and explicit eschatology" in the Hebrew Bible.2 On the other hand, it never speaks of an end of this world, and one scholar has even suggested that its eschatology is no different from that of the Enthronement Psalms or of earlier prophecy. 3 Yet the later chapters of Daniel are dominated by the expectation of an "end" to a degree that has no parallel in the Psalms or earlier Prophets. Daniel is also exceptional, even among the ancient apocalypses, in attempting to calculate the exact time until that "end" would come. It is true that the more elaborate scenarios of later apocalypses such as 4 Ezra 1 1 Enoch 91:14, 16 (the Apocalypse of Weeks). Even here the historical process does not come to an end, since "after this there will be many weeks without number for ever..." (91:17). 2 J.P.M. van der Ploeg, "Eschatology in the Old Testament," OTS 17 (1972) 92. 3 Rex A. Mason, "The Treatment of Earlier Biblical Themes in the Book of Daniel," in James L Crenshaw, ed., Perspectives on the Hebrew Bible: Essays in Honor of Walter J. Harrelson (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1988) 99.

should not be read back into Daniel, 4 but neither should the distinctivenes of Daniel over against the earlier Prophets be ignored. There is, moreover, evidence of development in the expectation of the end within Daniel 7-12, and it is important that all the evidence be taken into account. The word ‫קץ‬, end, occurs 14 times in Daniel 8-12. 5 Some of these occurrences are not immediately relevant to our discussion. In 9:26 and 11:45 "his end" refers to the death of Antiochus Epiphanes. In 11:6, 13 the reference is to the end of a period of years in the history of the Ptolemies and Seleucids. In the other instances, however, a more definitive end is in view. In four instances, 8:17, 19; 11:27, 35 there is an allusion to Hab 2:3, where ‫ קץ‬is linked with ‫מועד‬, appointed time. In 8:17; 11:35, 40; 12:4, 9 the expression is ‫עח קץ‬, time of the end. In 12:6 the end is specified as "the end of the wonders" and in 12:13 as "the end of the days." The word ‫ קץ‬is also used without qualification in 9:26 and 12: 13. The idea of an end is tied to the calculation of time in 12:6-7 where the "end of the wonders" is expected after "a time, times and half a time." The end and the kingdom The first attempt to calculate a definite period of time in Daniel is found in 7:25, which says that "the holy ones of the Most High" 6 will be given into the power of the little horn for "a time, times and half a time." In this case, the period of time in question is clearly the length of the persecution. At the end of this period the little horn will be condemned "to destruction and perdition until the end" (‫עד‬ ‫)סופא‬. "Until the end 5 ' here seems to mean that the destruction is 4

The tendency of older handbooks to produce a synthetic view of apocalyptic eschatology, based especially on 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch, is found occasionally in recent scholarship (e.g., the "Systematic Presentation" of Messianism in Emil Schuercr, The Histoiy of the Jewish People in the age of Jesus Christ [rev. and ed. Gcza Vermes, Fergus Millar and Matthew Black; Edinburgh: Clark, 1979] 2.514-47) but has been generally rejected in work of the last two decades. See my attempt to differentiate between the different apocalypses in "The Jewish Apocalypses," Semeia 14 (1979) 2159 and in The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1984) passim; also Michael E. Stone, "Apocalyptic Literature" in M.E. Stone, ed., Jeivish Literature of the Second Temple Period (CRINT 2/2; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 383-441. Even Schucrer balances the systematic presentation with a historical survey which attempts to treat the material in chronological order (pp. 497-513). 5 The Aramaic equivalent, 0‫ופא‬, occurs twice in chap. 7. In ν 28 it indicates the end of the revelation. In ν 26 the beast is not condemned to be destroyed "until the end." 6 O r possibly "the most high Holy Ones." See André Lacocque, The Book of Daniel(Atlanta: Knox, 1979) 131;John Goldingay, "'Holy Ones on High' in Daniel 7:18," JBL 107 (1988) 495-97.

final, not that it will terminate at a certain point, and so the Aramaic word does not have the quasi-technical force that ‫ קץ‬acquires in the later chapters. The decisive point in Chapter 7 is expressed as a judgment scene. Thereafter the kingdom of the beast will be destroyed and the people of the holy ones will receive an everlasting kingdom. The motif of kingdoms in chap. 7 is taken over from chaps. 1 -6, which deal with the succession of Near Eastern kingdoms, and, in 2:44 with a final kingdom set up by God. In chap. 7 the kingdom is initially given to the holy ones, or angels (7:18),7 but also to "the people of the holy ones" (7:27) who will presumably rule on earth. Nothing is said of the nature of this kingdom. The essential point is that Israel will enjoy sovereignty over the other nations, and the visionary has simply not sketched out any details. Taken in isoladon, this eschatological kingdom is compatible with the expectations of the older Prophets, although it could be filled out in various ways. Chap. 7 is probably the oldest part of Daniel 7-12, since it is written in Aramaic (like the older tales) and makes no clear reference to the profanation of the temple, which figures prominently in chaps. 8-12. The end. and the temple In Chapter 8, the angel Gabriel explains to Daniel that "the vision is for the end time" (8:17) or for "the appointed time of the end" (8:19). Both phrases echo Hab 2:3: ‫כ י ע ו ד חזון ל מ ו ע ד ו י פ ח ל ק ץ ו ל א י כ ז ב‬

for the vision awaits its time; it hastens to the end, it will not lie. 8

The allusion to Habakkuk lends authority to the view that a vision has an appointed time for its fulfilment. The "end'' in Habakkuk was the goal of the vision. In Daniel it is the ‫ ע ח ק ץ‬a distinct chronological period. The end-time here embraces the sequence of events described in Daniel's vision, and so is a period rather than the endpoint of that period. In 8:19 the time of the vision's fulfillment, "the appointed time of the end," is also called "the latter time of the wrath" (‫ ) א ח ר י ת הזעם‬. Similarly in the Qumran scrolls we find references to the1)‫ ק ץ ה א ח ר ו ן‬Q p H a b 7:7, 12; compare the last generation in C D 1:12; 1QpHab 7:2) and to ‫קץ ח ר ו ן‬, the age of 7 For the angelic interpretation of the holy ones see my The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel (HSM 16; Missoula: Scholars, 1977) 123-47, and my commentary on Daniel m the Hermeneia series (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993) 313-7. 8 See however J . Gerald Janzen, "Habakkuk 2:2-4," HTR 73 (1980) 53-78, who reads 'ēd witness, for 'öd, and understands the root ‫ פוח‬as testify: "For the vision is a witness to a rendezvous, a testifier to the end—it does not lie."

wrath (CD 1:5; 1QH 3:28). In all of these cases the ‫ קץ‬refers to the period of tribulation before the definitive divine intervention. Daniel 8 also addresses the duration of this period. One holy one asks another in 8:13: "for how long is the vision?" and specifies it with reference to "the daily offering, the desolating transgression and the sanctuary and the host given over to be trampled." 9 The answer is given in terms of the daily offering: "for two thousand three hundred evenings and mornings until the sanctuary is set right." The actual interpretation of the vision ends with the breaking of the little horn (i.e., the death of Antiochus Epiphanes) and describes neither the rededication of the temple nor anything that comes after it. The number of days given, 1,150, is problematic, since it is less than the three and a half years of Daniel 7, but greater than the three years for which the temple was actually desecrated (1 Macc 4:52-54). It is undoubtedly a real prediction, made before the rededication of the temple. The divergence from the three and a half years may be explained by the fact that it refers to a different, and shorter period than chap. 7. The earlier reference was to the duration of the persecution; the calculation in chap. 8 begins from the desecration of the temple some months later.10 In chap. 8, then, the end of the period of wrath coincides with the end of the desecration of the temple. The ensuing state is not described. The most elaborate account of Daniel's eschatological chronology is found in chap. 9 in the prophecy of the seventy weeks of years. The three and a half years of Daniel 7 (and again of chap. 12) correspond to the last half-week of Daniel 9, when the desolator will suppress sacrifice a n d offering and the desolating a b o m i n a t i o n will b e in their place, until the p r e - d e t e r m i n e d destruction is p o u r e d out (9:27).

Here again the dominant concern is with the profanation of the temple. Little is said about what is to follow this last half-week, except for the introductory statement in 9:24: Seventy weeks are d e t e r m i n e d for your people a n d for your holy city, to finish the transgression, to bring sins to completion a n d to cancel iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal vision a n d p r o p h e t a n d to anoint a most holy place. 9

On the textual problems of this passage see James A. Montgomery, Daniel (ICC 19; New York: Scribners, 1927) 340-45.' I‫״‬ Hans Burgmann ("Die vier Endzeittennine im Danielbuch," ζΑΙΥ 86 [1974] 544) suggests that this figure was a compromise between the three and a half years of Daniel 7 and the three years that the temple was dcsccratcd according to 1 Maccabees. It is not apparent why such a compromise should bc found in Daniel, especially since other, contradictory figures arc also given.

The clearest point in this list is the last: the rededication of the temple. We cannot conclude from this that Daniel's only aspiration was the restoration of the cult. "To bring in everlasting righteousness" suggests a more far-reaching transformation. There is no doubt, however, that the desecrated temple dominates both chaps. 8 and 9 and that its restoration was the primary focus of the author's hopes in these chapters. The end and resurrection In chap. 11, in the review of Hellenistic history in the guise of prophecy, we are twice reminded that "there is still an end at the appointed time" (11:27, compare 35, again alluding to Habakkuk). T h e "time of the end" is defined somewhat differendy here from chap. 8. In 11:35, the persecution of the "wise" is not yet in the "time of the end." In 11:40 that phrase introduces the real prediction of the last compaign and death of the Syrian king. This is followed in 12:1 by the account of the resurrection of the dead "at that time." T h e focal point of the end in this section is no longer the rededication of the temple, but the judgment of the dead. The observation that the rededication of the temple is not the final "end" envisaged in the Book of Daniel is corroborated in the Epilogue in 12:5-13. In a manner reminiscent of chap. 8 an angelic figure asks "how long until the end of the wonders?" The root ‫ פ ל א‬, wonder, is used in different forms for the actions of Antiochus Epiphanes in 8:24 and 11:26. The wonders certainly include the desecration of the temple, but the reference here is broader than in chap. 8. T h e angel's answer repeats the "time, times and a half' of chap. 7. T h e duration is further specified in 12:11: F r o m the time w h e n the continual offering is taken away a n d the desolating a b o m i n a t i o n is set u p is o n e t h o u s a n d two h u n d r e d a n d ninety days.

This figure is a possible calculation of three and a half years," but it is obviously higher than the 1,150 days of chap. 8, although both calculations start from the disruption of the temple cult. Dan 12: 12 adds a further 45 days, to reach 1,335.12 11 Karl Marti [Das Buch Dankt [ΗΚΑΤ 18; Tübingen: Mohr, 1901] 92) breaks it down as 42 months of 30 days each, plus an intercalated month of 30 days. Burgmann ("Die vier Endzeittermine," 547) offers a more complicated calculation based on a 364 day year and also involving intercalary days. 12 Thomas Fischer, Seleukxden und Makkabäa (Bochum: Brockmeyer, 1980) 143-44 attempts to treat the figures in Dan 12:11-12 as prophecies after the fact. The 1,290

By far the simplest explanation of this variation is that the date was recalculated when the first number of days had passed, and then again when the second number elapsed. 13 It is a well-known fact that groups who make exact predictions do not just give up when the prediction fails to be fulfilled. Instead they find ways to explain the delay.14 One such way was to make a revised (presumably more precise) calculation. The re-calculation, however, had to be elicited by something, most probably by the passing of the date originally predicted. It is interesting to note that Dan 12:12 uses the verb ‫ ח כ ה‬, wait, which is also used in Hab 2:3, a passage to which Daniel has frequently alluded: "if it tarries wait for it, for it will surely come and it will not be late." The Pesher on Habakkuk from Qumran applies this passage to the "men of truth...when the last end-time is drawn out for them" (1QpHab 7:12). A similar situation is envisaged in Daniel. The "end" which was envisaged after 1,150 days, and then again after 1,290 days, is drawn out, and the faithful must "wait" for the later date. If this interpretation is correct, however, both figures in chap. 12 were added after the actual rededication of the temple, which took place exacdy three years after its desecration. For the author of this section of Daniel, the "end" is not constituted by the restoration of the temple cult. Rather it is marked by the resurrection. It is the "end of days" (]‫ )קץ הימי‬when Daniel too will rise to his destiny (12:13). Obviously, the final date predicted by Daniel also came and went. Daniel's prophecy was not discredited. Indeed Josephus, more than two centuries later, claimed that Daniel was distinguished from the other prophets because he not only prophesied future things but also fixed the time at which they would come to pass {Ant. 10.11.7 § 267). The exact figures took on symbolic significance, just as Jeremiah's prophecy of 70 years had been re-interpreted in Daniel. For Josedays would then refer to Judas' capture of the temple, 1,335 to the re-dedication. By counting back from the date of the re-dedication in December, 164, he arrives at a starting point in mid-167, and suggests that the daily offering was disrupted some six months before the installation of the desolating abomination. Dan 12:11, however, clearly takes both the disruption of the cult and the installation of the abom!nation together as the starting-point, and so Fischer's proposal is unsatisfactory. 13 This explanation was proposed by Hermann Gunkel, Schöpfimg und Chaos in Urzeit und Endzeit (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1895) 269, and has been widely accepted. 14 See the classic study by Leon Festinger et al., When Prophecy Fails: A Social and Psychological Study of a Modem Group that Predicted the Destruction of the World (New York: Harper & Row, 1956). Festinger's theory is applied to O T prophetic texts, but not to Daniel, by Robert P. Carroll, When Prophecy Failed. Cognitive Dissonance in the Prophetic Traditions of the Old Testatnent (New York: Seabury, 1979).

phus, Daniel's prophecy extended to the destruction ofJerusalem by the Romans. For Hippolytus and Jerome it referred to the time of the Antichrist and the end of the world. These, of course, were later adaptations of Daniel's prophecy, but it is clear from 12:5-13 that the Hebrew writer already looked beyond the restoration of the temple for an "end" that involved the transcendence of death. Interpreting the variety There is, then, some variety in the meaning of "the end" within Daniel 7-12. One way to explain this is to suppose that these chapters were composed over a few years and that the thought of the author or authors was modified in the process. We have already seen some reason to think that chap. 7 is slightly older than 8-12, if only by a few months, since it is in Aramaic and does not reflect the desecration of the temple. The end it envisages is the end of the persecution, to be followed by a kingdom of the people of the holy ones. Chaps. 8 and 9 appear to have been written shordy after that event and are dominated by the shock it engendered. Accordingly, in these chapters, the primary focus of "the end" is the restoration of the temple cult. Chaps. 10-12, however, give a more comprehensive account of the period of wrath, and focus their hopes not on the restoration of the temple but on the resurrection of the dead. The epilogue in Dan 12:5-13 was apparently written after the rededication of the temple, but still awaits the coming of "the end of the wonders." It may be, then, that "the end" took on new meanings in the light of new circumstances, and that the focus on the resurrection of the dead only emerged in the composition of the final major section, chaps. 10-12. While this conclusion is plausible, however, it is less than certain. Chaps. 7-9 are all very elliptical in what they say about the salvation that is to come, and it would be rash to conclude that each gives a complete account of the author's beliefs at a given time. As the book stands, in any case, the visions in chaps. 7-12 must be read as complementary, and not as independent compositions. The juxtaposition of complementary accounts is a typical feature of dream reports from antiquity (cf. the dreams of Gilgamesh and of Joseph) and is very typical of apocalyptic literature (compare the Similitudes of Enoch, 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, Revelation). 15 From the viewpoint of the final editor, the removal of the desolating abomination 15

Adela Yarbro Collins, The Combat Myth in the Book of Revelation (HDR 9; Missoula: Scholars, 1976) 33-44.

and the restoration of the temple cult are preconditions of the end, but do not in themselves constitute the state of salvation. That state is described somewhat vaguely as a kingdom in chap. 7. Its most distinctive feature is specified in chap. 12 in the resurrection of the dead and the exaltation of the maskîlîm to the stars. Whether or not this latter belief was held by the author when chap. 7 was composed, the association of the righteous with the stars or angels is highly congruent with the close association of the faithful Jews with the holy ones of the Most High in the earlier chapter. 16 As the vast majority of commentators have recognized, the eschatology of these visions difTers from that of the earlier Prophets and the Psalms in several significant respects. They are pervaded by a sense of determinism, since the whole course of post-exilic history is purportedly foretold in the time of the exile, and all is written in the "book of truth" (Dan 10:21). The idea of an end at an appointed time is part of that scenario. In this respect Daniel is much closer to the Enochic Apocalypse of Weeks and Animal Apocalypse than to anything in the Hebrew Bible. The most significant difference over against the Hebrew Scriptures, however, lies in the hope of resurrection. 17 This is not a minor modification of prophetic eschatology but entails a profound shift in world-view.18 For the prophets, the goal of salvation was long life in the land and to see one's children's children. 19 For the maskîlîm of Daniel, as for the righteous of 1 Enoch 104, it is to become companions to the host of heaven. There is, of course, continuity with prophetic eschatology too. Daniel still thinks collectively of the people, and the judgment of the dead is not individualized as it is in later apocalypses. Daniel still entertains the hope for a kingdom on earth, in which the restored temple will surely have its place. The resurrection, however, adds a new ingredient to biblical eschatology, which would lend itself to more otherworldly tendencies 16

For the equivalence of stars and angels in Dan 12:3, sec Collins, The Apocalyptic Virion, 136-37. Compare 1 Enoch 104:1-6. 17 Some scholars find a belief in individual resurrection already in Isa 26:19 (e.g., Robert Martin-Achard, From Death to Life: A Study of the Development of the Doctrine of the Resurrection in the Old Testament (Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1960) 130-38; Gerhard F. Hasel, "Resurrection in the Theology of Old Testament Apocalyptic," ^ 4 H ^ 9 2 (1980) 267-84; Leonard J . Greenspoon, "The Origin of the Idea of R esurrection, in Baruch Halpern and Jon D. Levenson, eds., Traditions in Transformation (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1981) 247-321. That passage, however, can be read more naturally, like Ezekicl 37, as a metaphor for the restoration of the Jewish nation. 18 See my essay, "Apocalyptic Eschatology as the Transcendence of Death," CBQ 36 (1974) 2143; reprinted in Paul D. Hanson, ed., Visionaries and Their Apocalypses (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983) 61-84. 19 This is still the case even in Isa 65:17-25, which speaks of a new heaven and a new earth.

in some strands of Judaism and in Christianity. Despite the communal emphasis in Daniel 12, the hope of the maškîlîm is radically different from that of a prophet such as Jeremiah. The affinities of Daniel on this point are not with the canonical Hebrew Scriptures (despite occasional attempts to harmonize them) but with the pseudepigraphic apocalypses.

CHAPTER ELEVEN

" T H E KING HAS BECOME A J E W " The Perspective on the Gentile World in Bel and the Snake Bel and the Snake is an apocryphal story appended to the Book of Daniel in the Greek and other versions. It tells how Daniel contrives to destroy the temple of Bel and have its priests put to death, and then kills a live serpent worshipped by the Babylonians. These actions provoke the wrath of the Babylonians, who coerce the king to hand over Daniel, whom they then throw into the lions' den. Daniel, survives, nourished by the prophet Habakkuk, who is transported from Judea for the purpose. When the king finds him alive after seven days, he releases Daniel, extols his God and throws his enemies to the lions. The relationship of this story to the Hebrew-Aramaic Book of Daniel is disputed. 1 The most obvious point of contact concerns the episode of Daniel in the lions' den. This motif was probably older than either story in which it now occurs. Both stories portray the Gentile king in exceptionally positive light. They also have some minor motifs in common, such as the use of the king's ring as a seal and the execution not only of Daniel's enemies but of their entire families. These latter motifs, however, are not very distinctive. On the whole, the differences between the two stories are much more impressive than the similarities. It is unlikely that either story depends direcdy on the other. In any case, Bel and the Snake does not appear to be derived from Daniel 6.2 There are two Greek versions of the apocryphal book, the Old Greek and Theodotion. It is generally agreed that the O G is the older of these.3 One of the peculiarities of that version is that Daniel is identified as a priest, 1

James A. Montgomery, Daniel (ICC; Edinburgh: Clark, 1929) 270, suggested that Bel was an eadier, popular form of the story. L.F. Hartman and A.A. DiLella, The Book of Daniel (AB 23; Garden City: Doubleday, 1977) 21, regard it as obvious that the apocryphal story was influenced by Daniel 6. Carey A. Moore, Daniel, Esther and Jeremiah. The Additions (AB 44; Garden City: Doubleday, 1977) 147-9 holds that the two stories have only a kernel of tradition in common. 1 See Lawrence M. Wills, The Jew in the Court of the Foreign King (HDR 26; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990) 129-38. Wills attaches more significance than I do to the motifs of the king's seal and the slaughter of the priests' families, and holds that Daniel 6 borrowed motifs from Bel and the Snake. 3 J . Schiipphaus, "Der Verhältnis von LXX- und Theodotion-Text in den apokryphen Zusätzen zum Danielbuch," %AW83(1971) 49-63.

who was a companion of the (nameless) king of Babylon.4 The story does not presuppose the identity of Daniel as established in Daniel 1-6, and the failure to name the king of Babylon suggests that the story circulated independently. The Court Tale tradition Bel and the Snake bears some generic similarity to the Aramaic tales in Daniel 2-6, in so far as it describes the adventures of Daniel at the Gentile court. It retains some typical features of the Court-Tale genre: 5 the king is gullible and Daniel's opponents are villainous and murderous. However, Bel and the Snake also differs from the Aramaic stories in several significant respects: First, the courtly elements of the story are reduced. Daniel's enemies are not rival sages, but priests and the Babylonian populace. Since Daniel is also identified as a priest in the OG, the conflict here is between priests of rival religions rather than between courtiers. This suggests a different Sitz-im-Leben for this story from that of the tales in Daniel 1-6. The court setting is retained because of the traditional associations of Daniel, and because of the persistent interest in the king, but some aspects of the court context have lost their significance. Second, the story of Bel and the Snake places less reliance on legendary features, or on interventionist theology, than the Aramaic tales. Of course the episode of Daniel in the lions' den, and of the miraculous transportation of Habakkuk to feed him there, is highly legendary, but such features are notably absent in Daniel's encounters with Bel and the Snake. The exposé of Bel has the character of a detective story. Daniel traps the priests by sprinkling ashes on the floor of the temple. Again, he disposes of the snake by feeding it a strange concoction which causes it to burst. No divine intervention is necessary in these cases. The commonsense, rational approach of these stories is typical of Jewish polemic against idols, which often takes the form of reductio ad absurdum? 4 Theodotion's version of the opening verses can be understood as a reworking of the O G , designed to incorporate it into the Book of Daniel, sincc Cyrus is named in Dan 6:28 and 10:1. The redactor must have realized that Darius the Mede was problematic, and substituted the name of an actual Median king, Astyages. 5 The best account of the genre is that of Wills, The Jew in the Court of the Foreign King. 5 Wills, The Jeiv in the Court of the Foreign King, 132, who cites the story attributed by Josephus to Hccataeus of Abdera about the Jewish archer Mosollamus, who shot a bird which pagan soldiers were watching to see if their campaign would be auspicious (AgAp1.22 §201-4).

Third, the polemic against idols is much more central in this story than in any of the tales in Daniel 1-6. More importandy, the context of the polemic is different. In Daniel 1 -6, as in Esther, the Jewish exiles pursue their careers without malice towards the Gentiles or their religious practices. If Daniel lectures Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar on true worship, it is only because he has been called in to address their problems. Belshazzar, moreover, is guilty of abusing the Jewish temple vessels. Daniel is not crusading against idolatry. The confrontations in Daniel 3 and 6 concern the rights of the Jews to be faithful to their own religion. In Bel and the Snake, in contrast, Daniel takes the offensive, and sets out to destroy the pagan idols, without provocation. There is no parallel for such aggressive action by a Jew in the other court tales. Even the idol parodies, such as Isa 44:9-20 or the Letter of Jeremiah, do not narrate or call for the destruction of the idols. Finally, despite the polemic against the idols, the Gentile king is portrayed in very positive light. It is, of course, typical of these stories that the Gentile king comes to acknowledge the God of Israel in some way. Bel and the Snake, however, introduces a new idea in genre of Jewish Court Tales when it has the Babylonians say, after the death of the snake, that "the king has become a Jew." It is not apparent that this accusation is justified in the context of the story and it is not endorsed by the author, but it is striking that such a possibility is even considered. Each of these points suggests that the apocryphal story reflects a rather different Sitz-im-Leben from the Aramaic Daniel stories, and invite some reflections on the setting of this intriguing work in Second Temple Judaism. For much of the Second Temple period the Jewish people lived in harmony with Gentile overlords, both in the Diaspora and in the land of Israel. The Court Tale, which describes the adventures of Jews in the service of foreign kings, is one of the typical literary products of the period. The biblical prototype of the genre is found in the Joseph story; the main examples are found in the books of Esther and Daniel. The genre was not peculiar to Judaism. Stories of a foreigner at court seem to have flourished especially under the Persian empire and several can be found in Herodotus. Many of these stories show what Larry Wills has called the "ruled ethnic perspective," and were a means for subject peoples to express their aspirations and dignity in fictional form. 7

7

Wills, The Jew in the Court of the Foreign King, 55-74.

The Jewish stories of this type are characterized by two features: loyalty to the king, on the one hand, and a strong sense of Jewish identity on the other. Esther and Mordecai show their exemplary loyalty to the king by exposing a plot to assassinate him (Esth 2:1923). Daniel flatters Nebuchadnezzar as the head of gold (Dan 2: 38) and wishes that the king's dream be for those who hate him and its interpretation for his enemies (4:19). Conflict is usually ascribed to the envy or malice of other courtiers, rather than to the king himself. In the Book of Esther, the danger is stirred up by Haman. Both Daniel and his three companions are victims of plots by rival courtiers (chaps. 3, 6). In each case the Jews arouse envy or resentment not only by their success at court, but by the fact that they are different. In the words of Haman: T h e r e is a certain people scattered a n d separated a m o n g the peoples in all the provinces of your kingdom; their laws are different f r o m those of every o t h e r people a n d they d o not keep the king's laws, so that it is not a p p r o p r i a t e for the king to tolerate t h e m (3:8).

In fact, Jews only had problems with Gentile laws in matters of religion and worship. The accusations against the Jews in Daniel 3 are more specific: T h e r e are certain J e w s w h o m you have a p p o i n t e d over the affairs of the province of B a b y l o n . . . T h e s e pay n o heed to you, Ο King. T h e y d o not serve your gods a n d they d o not worship the golden statue that you have set u p (3:12).

Idolatry and conversion Rejection of idolatry was, of course, one of the trademarks of Judaism in the post-exilic period. 8 The famous idol parodies of Second Isaiah are in the context of the overthrow of Babylon and the restoration of Judah, and are understandably colored with nationalistic fervor. Rejection of idols, however, did not necessarily imply the rejection of Gentile sovereignty. The fragmentary Prayer of Nabonidus, found at Qumran, the king recounts how he was smitten with an evil disease for seven years by the decree of God. For those seven years he was praying to gods of silver, gold and other materials, until a Jewish diviner taught him to honor the true God. While the conclusion of the document is missing, it is evidently ‫ י‬H.D. Preuss, VerspottungfremderReligionen im Alten Testament (BWANT 12; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1971). On the critique of idolatry in the Hellenistic period see M. Gilbert, Le critique des dieux dans le Livre de la Sagesse (Sg. 13-15) (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1973); J.J. Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem. Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (New York: Crossroad, 1983) 137-74.

implied that the king comes to the knowledge of the true God. 9 The notorious episode of Nabonidus' self-imposed exile in Teman, then, was construed in Jewish tradition as divine punishment. What is remarkable, however, is that it also becomes the occasion for a story of the king's conversion, for which, of course, there was no historical basis whatever. The Jewish adaptation of the Nabonidus tradition was taken further in the Book of Daniel. Here Nabonidus is replaced by the more familiar figure of Nebuchadnezzar. The king is driven away from human society for "seven times" to teach him a lesson: that the Most High has sovereignty over the kingdom of mortals and gives it to whom he will" (4:32). In the end, Nebuchadnezzar "blessed the Most High and praised and honored the one who lives forever" (4:34). In the following chapter Belshazzar is berated for failing to learn from the example of Nebuchadnezzar and reverting to the worship of gods of silver and gold (5:23). Belshazzar meets a sudden fate, but he is exceptional among the Gentile kings in Daniel 1-6. The king who succeeds to the kingdom, the fictional "Darius the Mede," is sympathetic to Daniel, even when he is coerced by his courtiers to throw him to the lions. When Daniel survives the ordeal Darius is quick to recognize the God of Daniel as the living God. One of the lessons of Daniel 1-6 is that even Gentile kings must worship the God of heaven, who is the God of Israel, if their sovereignty is to endure. Conversely, these stories do not envisage any imminent overthrow of Gentile dominion. Their hopes and fantasies center on the sympathies, if not the outright conversion, of the Gentile monarchs. These stories do not define in detail the kind, or degree, of conversion expected of the kings. At the end of Daniel 2, Nebuchadnezzar tells Daniel "Truly your God is God of gods and Lord of kings and a revealer of mysteries..." (vs. 47). Nonetheless, in the next chapter he proceeds to set up a golden statue, and demand that his officials worship before it. While there are often problems of continuity between the individual stories in a book like Daniel, it his clear that the king's acknowledgment of the God of gods in Chap. 2 does not necessarily entail the renunciation of idols. Nebuchadnezzar seems to make a fresh discovery of the true God in Chap. 3, and again in Chap. 4. The last of these, which is an adaptation of the Nabonidus tradition, is especially interesting. In the Prayer of Nabonidus, the king confesses that he used to pray to idols, and this

9

See R. Meyer, Das Gebet des Nabonid (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1962).

would seem to imply that he had now renounced the practice, but it does not necessarily mean that he had become a monotheist. In Daniel 5, when Daniel berates Belshazzar for failing to learn from the example of Nebuchadnezzar, he points to the worship of idols, but not of the true God. This could be construed to mean that Nebuchadnezzar had renounced the worship of idols, but it may only mean that he acknowledged the superiority of the God of heaven. Interestingly enough, in the story of Nebuchadnezzar's madness in Daniel 4, the king is not told to renounce idolatry. Daniel simply counsels him to "atone for your sins with righteousness, and your iniquities with mercy to the oppressed" (vs. 27). Eventually, of course, the king acknowledges the sovereignty of the Most High, but he does not explicitly reject all other gods. Cyrus of Persia had acknowledged "the Lord, God of Heaven" as the one who had given him dominion (Ezra 1:2) without prejudice to his continuing polytheism. Josephus claims that even the mighty Alexander the Great acknowledged the God of Jerusalem. 10 Such acknowledgment is little more than a gesture of respect and does not imply conversion in any exclusive sense.11 The accusation of the Babylonians against the king in Bel and the Snake raises the possibility of a more serious conversion: "The king has become a Jew." In pre-exilic Israel, one only became a member of the people by intermarriage. 12 There were laws regulating the alien and the sojourner, but they were recognized as distinct categories. In the post-exilic period it became more common for people to attach themselves to the Jewish people for religious reasons (e.g. Isa 56:3,6), and gēr, alien, took on the meaning of proselyte.13 Not until the second century BCE however, do we hear of people becoming Jews. On three occasions the Maccabees compelled the Gentile inhabitants of recently conquered areas to adopt the Jewish way of life, including circumcision.14 Among them were the Idu10

Ant 11.8.5 §333. S.J.D. Cohen, "Alexander the Great and Jaddus the High Priest according to Josephus," AJSRev 7-8(1982-3) 41-68. There arc numerous examples of such praise of the God of Israel by Gentiles, dating back to Hiram of Tire in the time of Solomon (2 Chron 2:11). 11 On the spcctrum of different ways in which a Gentile might be attached to Judaism see S.J.D. Cohen, "Crossing the Boundary and Becoming a Jew," HTR 82(1989) 13-33. 12 J . Milgrom, "Religious Conversion and the Revolt Model for the Formation of Israel," JBL 101(1982) 169-76. 13 D. Kcllermann, "gûr," TOOT 2.439-49; K.G. Kuhn, "prosëlytos," TDNT 6(1968) 728-30. 14 Josephus, Ant 13.9.1 §257; 11.3 §319; 15.4 §397; S.J.D. Cohen, "Conversion to Judaism in Historical Perspective: From Biblical Israel to Postbiblical Judaism," Conservative Judaism 36(1983) 36.

means, from whom the house of Herod came. While some people regarded the later Idumeans as "half-Jews," they accepted and persevered in their Jewish identity. In the Book of Judith, which is probably of Hasmonean date, 15 when Achior the Ammonite "saw all that the god of Israel had done, he believed firmly in god, and was circumcised, and joined the house of Israel, remaining so to this day" (14:10). Here again the way to become a Jew was to be circumcised. The Epic of Theodotus, which says that the inhabitants of Shechem were required to adopt the Jewish way of life by being circumcized (pentemnomenous ioudaisai) should also be taken as a reflection of the policies of the Hasmoneans. 16 The expression "to become a Jew," however, is found, to my knowledge, in only one pre-Christian text besides Bel and the Snake. That occurrence, surprisingly, refers to Antiochus Epiphanes, who according to 2 Macc 9:17, resolved on his death-bed "to become a Jew and visit every inhabited place to proclaim the power of God." There are some noteworthy parallels between these two occurrences of the motif of becoming a Jew. Both involve Gentile kings, and both arguably reflect a Gentile perspective on what it means to become a Jew. Neither mentions circumcision, or any practice of Jewish law. Antiochus promises only to proclaim the power of God. The king in Bel and the Snake is said to have become a Jew because he has apparendy rejected idolatry. Neither would necessarily have been accepted by a Jewish community, 17 and they would certainly not have been accepted as Jewish by the Hasmoneans. Both stories, however show the emerging definition of Judaism in the Hellenistic world. Later, in the Roman period, such authors as Tacitus (Hist 5.5.2) and Juvenal (Sat 14.96-106) would regard circumcision as an essential mark of conversion to Judaism. 18 In the Hellenistic period, however, Jewishness was less stricdy defined, at least in some circles.

15 G.W.E. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature Between the Bible and the Mishnah (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981) 109. J •J· Collins, "The Epic of Theodotus and the Hellenism of the Hasmoneans," HTR 73(1980) 93-104. The expression may be a paraphrase by Alexander Polyhistor rather than the phrase of Theodotus. 17 This point is validly emphasized by Cohen, "Crossing the Boundary," 27. It does not necessarily mean that circumcision was considered necessary for salvadon. See J.J. Collins, "A Symbol of Otherness: Circumcision and Salvadon in the First Century," in J . Neusner and E.S. Frerichs, eds., 70 See Ourselves as Others See Us: Christians, Jews, "Others" in Late Antiquity (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985)163-85. 18 M. Stem, Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism (Jerusaalem: The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanides, 1980) 2.26,103. See also W. Gutbrod, "Israel," 77WT3(1965) 370.

It is interesting to compare these cases of "becoming a Jew" with the story of a king who actually did convert to Judaism, Izates of Adiabene, in the first century CE. The king's mother, Helena, who had already converted to Judaism, discouraged him from being circumcised, for fear that his subjects "would not tolerate the rule of a Jew over them." He was also assured by a Jew, Ananias, that he could worship God even without circumcision, but another Jew, named Eleazar, gave a stricter interpretation of the law and the king was circumcized. 19 This story, however, implies that Izates was not really a Jew, and would not be considered a Jew by his subjects, until he underwent circumcision. The difference between Izates and Cyrus in Bel and the Snake reflects different historical settings—the story of Izates is considerably later. While Bel and the Snake is a fiction, and not an historical report, it presupposes that the king's subjects would consider him to have become a Jew if he rejected idolatry, even if he had not been circumcised. There is, however, also a notable difference between the king in Bel and the Snake and Antiochus Epiphanes in 2 Maccabees 9. Antiochus makes his promise under duress, having been brought to his knees by the disease with which he is smitten by God. 20 Cyrus is persuaded of the futility of idols by Daniel's demonstration. For Antiochus, "becoming a Jew" is an act of repentance, and a dramatic reversal of his earlier attitude. Cyrus had been a sympathetic figure from the start. Moreover, Antiochus' death-bed resolution can hardly inspire much confidence in the context of 2 Maccabees and it is not in fact carried out. Cyrus is judged by others to have become a Jew, and while his conversion was not complete by Hasmonean standards, the narrative credits him with a significant move in permitting the destruction of the idols. The Destruction of the Idols Bel and the Snake is exceptional among Jewish court tales by Daniel's aggressive attitude towards the pagan idols. Even stories like the Prayer of Nabonidus and Daniel 4-5, which are clearly critical of idolatry, do not describe or demand the destruction of the idols. The destruction of idols was commanded by the Book of Deuteronomy, 19

Ant 20.2.4 § 38-48. See L.H. SchiflVnan, "The Conversion of the Royal House of Adiabene in Josephus and Rabbinic Sources,"in L.H. Feldman and G. Hata eds., Josephus, Judaism and Christianity (Detroit: Wayne State, 1987) 293-312. 20 Doron Mendels, "A Note on the Tradition of Antiochus IV's Death," IEJ 31(1981) 53-6 has argued plausibly that 2 Maccabees account of Antiochus' death is modelled on the Nabonidus tradition, which also underlies Daniel 4.

but the command concerned "the nations whom you are about to dispossess" and so the land of Israel. The zealous action of Elijah, and the reform of Josiah, were also directed against idolatry in the land of Israel. For an attack on idols outside of Israel we must wait for the Book of Jubilees, an apocalypse composed in Israel in the second century BCE21 In Jubilees 12:2 Abraham upbraids his father: "What help or advantage do we have from these idols before which you worship and bow down?" His father advises him to "be silent, my son, lest they kill you." Abraham, however, "arose in the night and burned the house of idols. And he burned everything in the house. And there was no man who knew" (12:12-13).22 T h e spirit of the Book ofJubilees is very different from that of the Court Tales of Esther or Daniel. It exhibits hostility not only to idolatry, but to the Gentiles. Abraham exhorts Jacob to "Separate yourself from the gentiles and do not eat with them, and do not perform deeds like theirs" (22:16). Intermarriage with foreigners is condemned at length (30:7-17). Levi and his sons are blessed "because he was zealous to do righteousness and judgment and vengeance against all who rose up against Israel" (30:18). This militant nationalism reflects the setting in which Jubilees was written, either the time of the Maccabean revolt or the subsequent campaigns of the Hasmoneans. In Bel and the Snake, however, we find no such hostility to the Gentiles. Daniel is the loyal servant, and honored friend of the king. His efforts are directed towards enlightening the king, and delivering him from the deceptions of the Babylonian priests. There is no objection to Gentile sovereignty as such. Bel and the Snake, then combines some features which are otherwise associated with diverse settings in Judaism. On the one hand the acceptance of Gentile sovereignty is typical of Diaspora literature in the post-exilic period; on the other hand the aggressive attitude towards idols is otherwise associated with nationalistic or exclusivistic strands in the Hellenistic period. In fact, there is no consensus as to the provenance of this document.

21 For different positions on the date of Jubilees see J . VanderKam, Textual and Historical Studies in the Book of Jubilees (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1977) 207-88, who favors the early Maccabean era and D. Mendels, The Land of Israel as a Political Concept in Hasmonean Literature (Tübingen: Mohr, 1987) 57-88. See also the cautionary observations of R. Doran, "The Non-Dating ofJubilees," JSJ 20(1989) 1-11. 22 The legend of Abraham's destruction of the idols subsequendy became widespread. See e.g. Apoc Abraham 1-8. Compare the analogous action by J o b in T. J o b 2-5.

The Provenance of Bel and the Snake It is generally agreed that the Old Greek translation of Daniel was completed no later than 100 BCE.23 If we may assume that Bel and the Snake was incorporated into the Book of Daniel by the O G translator, 24 then the date can be no later than the second century BCE.25 Moreover, the simple paratactic style and occasional Hebraisms (e.g. kai egeneto) suggest that the story was composed in a Semitic language, probably Hebrew rather than Aramaic in view of the apparent use of the waw consecutive. 26 Since the translation was included in the Old Greek of Daniel, the original date of composition can hardly be later than 150 BCE. The fact that the O G version makes Daniel a priest, in contradiction to Daniel 1, also suggests a date before M T Daniel had become authoritative, therefore before the mid-second century. On the other hand, the idea that a Gentile could "become a Jew" is not attested before the second century. There are then, reasonably strong indicators of date, which point to the first half of the second century BCE. The place of origin is more elusive. T h e ostensible setting is Babylon, but the story shows no familiarity with Babylonian life and religion. T h e story of the statue of Bel is a crude parody, and there was no prominent cult of a live serpent in Babylon. Yehoshua Grintz has argued that the story was composed in Babylon "when Bel was no longer worshipped," so between the destruction of the temple of Bel by the Persian king Xerxes and its restoration by Alexander the Great. 27 This theory does not account for the episode of the Snake, which suggests that the author had only the most superficial familiarity with Babylonian religion. Wolfgang Roth, in contrast, gave primary consideration to the polemic against idolatry, and assigned the book to Egyptian Judaism in the first century BCE. 2 8 This date is too late, however. Moreover, if the original language was Hebrew or Aramaic, then an origin in the Egyptian Diaspora, 2 ‫ י‬Sharon Pace Jeansonnc, The Old Greek Translation of Daniel 7-12 (CBQMS 19; Washington: CBA. 1988) 19, argues that "the translation of the Semitic text of Daniel into Greek is possible and plausible at a point shortly after its written composition." 24 Moore, The Additions, 128. 25 Contra W.M.W. Roth, "For Life, He Appeals to Death (Wis 13:18). A Study of Old Testament Idol Parodies," f.BQ, 37(1975) 43, who suggests a date in the first century BCE. 26 See Moore, The Additions, 119-20. Moore suggests that the original composition was in Aramaic but that Theodotion was based on a Hebrew translation. This solution seems unduly complicated. 27 Yehoshua M. Grintz, "Bel and the Dragon." Encjud 4(1971) 412. 28 Roth, "For Life, He Appeals to Death," 21-47.

in the Hellenistic period, is very unlikely, since there is no clear example of Egyptian-Jewish literature from this period in a Semitic language. If the original language was Hebrew rather than Aramaic, the land of Israel is by far the most likely place of composition. 29 Composition in Aramaic is also quite compatible with composition in the Jewish homeland in this period. Witton Davies argued that the story reflects bitter persecution, and so associated it with the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. 30 In fact, however, it is Daniel, not the Babylonians who initiates hostilities in this story, and the Gentile king is sympathetic to the Jew throughout. Such a portrayal of a Gentile king is more plausibly dated before the time of Antiochus Epiphanes rather than later. We may suggest then that the original document was composed in Judea in the first quarter of the second century BCE, in circles different from those that collected the tales of Daniel 1-6. Since this is the only source in which Daniel is identified as a priest, we might suppose that the author too belonged to priestly circles. If this reconstruction is right, then the story of Bel and the Snake can illuminate another facet of a poorly documented period of Jewish history. T h e only document that is firmly dated to the first quarter of the second century is the Wisdom of Ben Sira. That book, too, has a deferential attitude towards rulers,31 and is glowing in its praise of Simon the Just, "in whose time the house of God was renovated" by the beneficence of the Seleucid king, Antiochus III.32 Sirach also knows the uselessness of offerings to idols that can neither eat nor smell.33 The wisdom teacher, however, lacks Daniel's zeal for the destruction of idols and pays little attention to specifically Gentile kings.34 Bel and the Snake represents a more purist, less tolerant, strain, emerging in Judaism in this period. What is of interest in this document, however, is that religious intolerance did not necessarily entail political rebellion. It expresses the hope for the triumph of monotheism even within the domain of Gentile sovereignty. The hope was that destruction of idols might be accomplished if the king, even in a loose sense, were to become a Jew. 29

So also T. Witton Davies, "Bel and the Dragon," A P O T 1.656. Davies, ibid. 31 E.g. Sir 10:5: "Sovereignty over everyone is in the hand of God, who imparts his majesty to the ruler." 32 Sir 50:1, compare Ant 12.3.3 §129-44. 33 Sir 30:19. 34 The glaring excepdon is found in the prayer in Sir 36:12: "Smash the heads of the hostile rulers..." The authenticity of this prayer is disputed. See T. Middendorp, Die Stellung Jesu ben Siros zwischen Judentum und Hellenismus (Leiden: Brill, 1973) 113, 125. 30

PART T H R E E SIBYLS

CHAPTER TWELVE

T H E JEWISH TRANSFORMATION OF SIBYLLINE ORACLES

In a lengthy review essay of H.W. Parke's posthumous book on Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy in Classical Antiquity, David Potter praised the work for having "finally succeeded in rescuing sibyls from the fringes of Judeo-Christian pseudepigrapha where they have been relegated by many scholars, and in placing the development of the sibylline tradition firmly in the classical world." 1 I am not aware that Parke himself had any such salvific intentions. His book is as irenic as it is learned. But Potter's claim raises some fundamental questions about "the sibylline tradition," if we may speak of such a thing as a unified entity. 2 If the sibyl occupied an important place in the prophetic imagination of Christians, and even of Moslems, through the Middle Ages, what sibyl was this? The oracles read and revised in the time of the Crusades had not been written on leaves in the cave at Cumae, nor were they uttered by a shrivelled old woman who had lived for centuries but forgotten to ask for the gift of youth. They were, for the greater part, written by anonymous Jews and Christians, beginning in the Hellenistic and Roman periods. Michelangelo did not paint sibyls on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel because they knew the ritual response to the birth of an androgyne, but because they were believed to have prophesied Christ. While Parke's book reminds us that sibyls and sibylline prophecy had a long and illustrious history in pagan antiquity, their influence on the Christian West was due primarily to the way the tradition was developed in the Jewish and Christian pseudepigrapha. It is true, of course, that both Jews and Christians propagated oracles in the name of the sibyl because of her reputation in the pagan world. But in the process they changed the kind of oracles attributed to the sibyl, and thereby extended her reputation long after the gods of antiquity had faded away 1 D.S. Potter, "Sibyls in the Greek and Roman World," Journal of Roman Archaeology 3(1990) 471-83 (the quotation is from p.471); H.W. Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy in Classical Antiquity (London and New York, 1988; paperback edition, 1992). 2 In his book, Prophecy and Histoiy in the Crisis of the Roman Empire. A Historical Commentary on the thirteenth Sibylline Oracle (Oxford, 1990) 102, Potter opines that "it is probably incorrect to speak of a 'Sibylline tradition' in antiquity."

The pagan sibylline oracles Unfortunately, we have only scattered examples of sibylline verses from pagan sources. 3 They are usually written in epic hexameters, but this was generally true of Greek oracles and not peculiar to the sibyl.4 Consequently, an oracle attributed to the sibyl in one case might be assigned to the Pythian oracle on another. 5 Some were evidently predictions of warfare. Plutarch reports an oracle related to the battle of Chaeronea in the fourth century: As for the battle on Thermodon, may I be far away from it as an eagle in the clouds and the upper air, to behold it only. T h e vanquished weeps, but the victor is destroyed. 6

Another example from Pausanias refers more openly to the Second Macedonian War: You Macedonians who boast in the dynasty of the Argeadae, Philip when he rules shall be to you a blessing and a bane. Indeed the earlier shall place monarchs over towns and peoples, but the younger shall lose all honour, when he has been subdued by men both from west and east. 7

Other sibylline oracles deal with natural disasters. Pausanias speaks of an earthquake which shook the island of Rhodes so severely that it appeared that the oracle of the sibyl with reference to Rhodes had been fulfilled.8 Strabo cites an oracle about the Pyramus river silting up its beach and reaching to Cyprus. 9 An oracle to this effect is also found in Sib O r 4:99-101. Consultations of the sibylline books at Rome are recorded on about 50 occasions, dating between 496 and 100 BCE.10 These accounts typically tell of some plague, famine or prodigy which 3

Most of the extant examples are collected in C.H. Alexandre, Excursus ad Sibyllina (Paris, 1856) 118-47; 242-53. See also G. Crönert, "Oraculorum Sibyllinorum Fragmentum Osloense," Symbolae Osloenses 6(1928) 57-59. In addition to the study of Parke see now Innocenzo Cervelli, "Question! Sibilline," Studi Storni 4(1993) 895-1001 (pp.895-934 provide a review of the pagan sibyls). 4 Potter, "Sibyls in the Greek and Roman world," 474, citcs a sibylline oracle in iambic trimeters. 5 E.g. the famous line "do not disturb Camarina, for it is better undisturbed," which probably originated as a Delphic response, is found in Sib Or 3.736. 6 Plutarch, Dem 19; 21.4. Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 119. 7 Pausanias, 7.8.9; Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 132. 8 Pausanias 2.7.1. 9 Strabo 1.3.8; 12.2.4. 10 H. Cancik, "Libri Fatales. Römischc Offcnbarungsliteratur und Geschichtstheologie," in D. Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tübingen, 1983) 549-76; Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 190-215.

provided the impulse for consultation, and some details of a ritual prescribed by the sibylline books. The actual oracles are not cited. It would seem, however, that the Roman sibylline books were quite different in character from the preserved sibylline oracles, which typically predict disasters rather than prescribe solutions. Only one direct quotation from the Libri Sibyllini has been preserved, in the Memorabilia of Phlegon." This is an oracle, or a combination of two oracles, of seventy hexameters in all. It reports the birth of an androgyne, and prescribes a long list of rituals and offerings to the gods. T h e nature of the Roman collection probably changed in the first century BCE, when the old collection was destroyed by fire, and oracles were collected from Erythrae and other sources.12 The use of acrostics was used as a guideline in judging the authenticity of the oracles collected. It is not apparent, however, that acrostics were always a feature of sibylline style. In the standard collection, there is only one example of an acrostic, a Christian poem in Sib O r 8:21750. While sibylline oracles were invoked for political purposes on more than one occasion in the late Republic, they were also used in the traditional way in response to prodigies. Tibullus gives the enduring impression of the Roman associations of sibylline oracles around the turn of the era: [The Sibyls] told that a comet would be the evil sign of war, and how plenty of stones would rain down on the earth. They say that trumpets have been heard and weapons clashing in the sky, and that groves have prophesied defeat... 1 3

Another extended oracle, of 37 hexameters, preserved by Phlegon, was apparendy used by Augustus in support of the celebration of the Ludi Saeculares in 17 BCE.14 Like the oracle on the birth of the androgyne, this oracle is in large part a prescription of rituals, but it concludes by promising lasting Roman dominion "over all the land of Italy and of the Latins" if its rituals were followed.15 These scattered examples may give some sense of the characteristics associated with sibylline oracles. With the exception of the Roman sibylline books, which appear to have prescribed rituals, the 11

FGH 257 F 37 (pp. 1188-91). Luisa Breglia Pulci Doria, Oracoli Sibillini tra Ritual! e Propaganda (Studi su Flegonte di Tralles) (Napoli: Liguori, 1983); H. Diels, Sibyllimsche Blatter (Berlin: Reiner, 1890). 12 Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 138-39. 13 Tibullus, 2.5.71-80. Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 210, suggests that Tibullus may have been influenced by Livy's accounts of the consultadons of sibylline oracles at an earlier period. 14 Diels, Sibyllinische Blätter, 14. 15 See Breglia Pulci Doria, Oracoli Sibillini, 210-68.

oracles seem to be predictions of wars, political events or natural disasters. While several such predictions might be strung together, the oracles do not appear to be developed literary units.16 A passage in Sib O r 3:401-88, which is usually attributed to the Erythrean sibyl and which predicts assorted natural and military disasters, may give a fair impression of the style. The oldest Jewish oracles Sibylline prophecy was originally a Greek phenomenon, which enjoyed considerable prestige in the Roman world but had been imported into Italy by Greek colonists.17 The Jews were, to the best of our knowledge, the only eastern people in antiquity who engaged in the production of sibylline oracles, and they did so repeatedly over several hundred years.18 We find reports of other sibyls outside the Greek and Roman world, but these reports should be viewed with considerable scepticism. Nicanor, who allegedly wrote the deeds of Alexander the Great, is said to have reported a Persian sibyl.19 At most, we may suppose that he encountered a Persian prophetess, whom he dubbed a sibyl, by way of assimilating her to Greek categories. The Libyan sibyl listed by Varro was, in Parke's words, "simply a literary fantasy," derived from Euripides. 20 In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, scholars conjured up a BabyIonian sibyl, as the supposed source of the passage about the tower of Babylon in Sib O r 3:97-109.21 The passage in question, however, is blatantly anti-Babylonian and depends on the Book of Genesis. At the end of Book 3 of the Sibylline Oracles, the sibyl says that she "left the long Babylonian walls of Assyria" (Sib Or 3:810). She goes on, however, to claim that she was daughter-in-law of Noah (3:827), and there can be little doubt that the real author was Jewish. 16

A. Momigliano, "From the Pagan to the Christian Sibyl," Nona Contribute (Rome, 1992) 13: "Pagan Sibylline oracles seldom went beyond individual events; they seldom pursued what wc might call the great currents of world history." " Sec Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 71-99 on the association of the sibyl with Cumae. ,8 J.J. Collins, "The Development of the Sibylline Tradition." ANRW 11.20.1 (1986) 421-59. 19 We have the report third hand, cited by Varro, who in turn was cited by Lactantius, Divinae Institutiones 1.6.8-12. 20 Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Oracles, 32. 21 J . GcfTcken, "Die Babylonische Sibylle," Nachrichten der königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen phil.-hist. Kl. (1900) 88-102; W. Bousset, "Die Beziehungen der ältesten jüdischen Sibylle zur Chaldäischcn," .ζ/VTV 3(1902) 23-50. A. Peretti, La Sibilla Babilonese nella Propaganda Ellenisttca (Firenze: La Nuova Italia, 1943). See the critique o f V . Nikiprowctzky, "La Sibylle juive et le 'Troisième Livre' des 'PscudoOracles Sibyllins‫ ׳‬depuis Charles Alexandre," ANRW 11.20.1 (1986) 477-521

Pausanias concludes his list of sibyls with reference to a prophetess who was brought up in Palestine named Sabbe, whose father was Berosus and her mother Erymanthe. Some say she was a Babylonian, while others call her an Egyptian Sibyl.22

This sibyl is further identified with the Persian in the Preface to the Sibylline Oracles. There is evidence, then, that the Jewish sibyl was sometimes mistaken for Babylonian, or Egyptian, or Persian, in the Greek world, a fact due in large part to the pseudonymity of the Jewish writings and the attempt to conceal their Jewish authorship. There is no good evidence, however, that any eastern people except the Jews actually produced sibylline verses. The oldest Jewish oracles are found in the first part of the standard collection of Sibylline Oracles (Books 1 -8).23 In the preface to these books, which can have been written no earlier than the sixth century CE,24 the editor claims to be the first "to set forth the oracles called Sibylline, which are found scattered and confusedly read and recognized, in one continuous and connected book." This collection (Books 1-8) was held to have a Christian character: for they expound very clearly about Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the divine Trinity, source of life, and about the incarnate career of our Lord and God and Savior Jesus Christ.

The editor also acknowledges that "they clearly recount the things which are expounded in the Mosaic writings and the books of the prophets." In fact, Books 3-5 are generally recognized as Jewish

22

Pausanias 10.12.9. The sibyl may have been associated with Berosus because both had accounts of primeval history. On the name Sabbe, and the variant Sambethe, see E. Schuerer, A History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ, (rev. and ed. by G. Vermes, F. Millar and M. Goodman; 3 vols.; Edinburgh, 1973-1987) 3. 622-26. 23 The standard collection is derived from two manuscript collections, one of which included books 1-8, while the other repeated some of this material, mainly from books 4, 6 and 8, and also included books 11-14. See A. Rzach, Oracula Sibyllina (Leipzig, 1891); J . Geffcken, Die Oracula Sibyltina (Leipzig, 1902); English translation: J.J. Collins "Sibylline Oracles," in J.H. Charlesworth, ed. The Old Teslament Pseudepigrapha (2 vols.; New York, 1983, 1985) 1.317-472. Since the first two books of the second collection duplicate material from the first, there are no books 9 and 10 in the standard collection. 24 It depends on a work entided "Theosophy," which was a compilation of gentile testimonies in support of Christian teachings, and which was written in the time of the Emperor Zeno (474-91 CE). See Ε. Schuerer, A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ (revised and edited by G. Vermes, F. Millar and M. Goodman; 3 vols.; Edinburgh, 1973-87) 2.624, 628-9.

compositions, while Jewish strata can be recognized in Books 1-2 (which form one literary unit) and 8.25 Potter claims that "the sibyl was not selected by Christians as an important prophetess because of the background of the Jewish sibylline tradition," but because of the prestige of the sibyl in pagan circles.26 Yet only two of the shorter books in the collection can be regarded as original Christian compositions. Momigliano expressed the situation accurately and concisely: "The Jews had taught the Christians to forge Sibylline oracles, and their forgeries were in turn used and interfered with by Christians."27 There has been near unanimity among scholars that the earliest Jewish sibylline oracles are found in Book 3, date from the second century BCE, and were written in Egypt.28 Potter, however, has attempted to cast doubt on the antiquity of the Jewish oracles, and has even questioned whether these oracles were originally promulgated in the name of the sibyl.29 He grants that the third Sibylline Oracle, as it now stands, clearly contains a great deal ofJewish material, and some of it is obviously hellenistic in date. But this does not mean that the oracle in this 5th-6th c. AD collection is a hellenistic text as it is preserved. The tradition is so fluid that all that can be said about the texts...is that they had reached the form which they now assume at the time the collection was assembled.™

Such skepticism is scarcely warranted by the text. Most scholars agree that the oracles in vss. 1-96 were not originally part of the main body of the work.31 The third book proper begins at vs. 97. It is also agreed that the long collection of oracles against various places in the middle part of the book (vss. 295-544) contains oracles of diverse origin, some

25

See the introductions to the translations of the individual books in Collins, "Sibylline Oracles." 26 Potter, "Sibyls in the Greek and Roman World," 483. 27 A. Momigliano, "From the Pagan to the Christian Sibyl: Prophecy as History of Religion," Nono Contribute (Rome, 1992) 735. 28 See especially J. Geffckcn, Komposition und Entstehungszeit der Oracula Sibyllina (Leipzig, 1902). 2 ^ Potter faults the tradition of sibylline scholarship initiated by Gcifcken, and continued in my own work, for its "obsessive desire to isolate specific 'Christian,' 'Jewish,' and pagan elements in the poems and then to date them" (Prophecy and History, 96 n. 1). But his own sweeping statements about the futility of such efforts make no response to the arguments that have been advanced about specific passages. ' w Potter, "Sibyls in the Greek and Roman World," 478. 51 The exception is V. Nikiprowctzky, La Troisième Sibylle (Paris, 1970) 60-66, 217-25. In most manuscripts, Sibylline Oracles 3 bears the heading "from the second book, about God." Between verses 92 and 93, three manuscripts insert the note "seek here the remnants of the second book and the beginning of the third." The fragmentary oracle in vss. 93-96 is of uncertain provenance.

of which are derived from the Erythrean sibyl.32 Only one verse, 776, can be identified as a Christian interpolation. 33 If we bracket these passages, however, we still have some 475 sibylline verses (97-294 and 545-829) whose Jewish origin, in the Ptolemaic period, cannot reasonably be doubted. These oracles are punctuated by references to the seventh king of Egypt (193, 318, 608).34 Several passages presuppose the well-being of the Jerusalem temple. There are only a couple of allusions to Rome (161, 175-6) and no suggestion of conflict between Rome and the Jews or Christians. If the text were fluid down to the fifth or sixth century as Potter supposes, it is strange that Rome and Christianity have left so little trace, and that the interest in a king of Egypt from the line of the Greeks is so prominent. Potter has questioned whether "what we have in this oracle was originally attributed to a sibyl at all."35 The conclusion of Sib Or 3, which explicidy identifies the author as a sibyl, could, in principle, have been added at a late stage. But Alexander Polyhistor, who wrote in the first century BCE, attributes the account of the destruction of the tower of Babel to "the sibyl."36 Potter remains unconvinced: we cannot know if Alexander wrote this because he had read lines resembling Orac. Sib. 3.97-104 in a sibylline text, or if the author of these lines wrote them because he had read Alexander.

Alexander, in short, may have invented a sibylline reference, and someone then composed a sibylline book to incorporate it. I find this reasoning far-fetched. Alexander Polyhistor is, in fact, our main source for the fragments of Hellenistic-Jewish writers, which he

32

Verses 401-88 are widely believed to be pagan oracles taken from the Erythrean sibyl. This sibyl was said to have sung of the Trojan war and to have prophesied that Homer would write falsehoods (cf. Sib O r 3:414-32). Hence, perhaps, the association of Book 3 as a whole with the Erythrean sibyl. In Sib O r 3:814, the sibyl claims to be "born of Erythrae," and oracles found in this book are regulady attributed to the Erythrean Sibyl by Lactantius. Vss 350-80 date from the first century BCE. 33 For detailed argumentation see J J . Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (Missoula, Montana, 1974) 21-33. 34 For discussion of these passages and their implications for dating see Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 28-32. Nikiprowetzky, La Troisième Sibylle, 208-17, argues for a first century date for the whole book, and takes the seventh king as Queen Cleopatra. 35 Potter, "Sibyls in the Greek and Roman World," 478. 36 See Schuerer, A History, 3. 646-7, Nikiprowetzky, La Troisième Sibylle, 17-19. The quotation from Alexander Polyhistor is preserved by Eusebuis, Chronicle (ed. Schoene) I col. 23.

quoted copiously.37 There can be no reasonable doubt that he was familiar with a Jewish sibyl, whose work included an account of the tower of Babel. If we are not to multiply entities without cause, we must conclude that the Jewish oracles from the second century BCE which are now attributed to a sibyl in Book 3 were composed originally under the sibylline pseudonym. We have several other instances where Jewish works were composed under Gentile pseudonyms in the Hellenistic age (e.g. the pseudo Orphic texts, pseudo-Phocylides) and where Jews imitated Greek literary forms (the tragedy of Ezekiel, the epics of Philo and Theodotus). The heyday of such compositions was the second century BCE. 3 8 Our question, then, is how far these earliest Jewish oracles conformed to pagan prototypes, and in what ways they adapted and redefined the genre. Continuity and innovation H.W. Parke has argued, reasonably enough, that if Hellenistic Jewish writers wanted to pass off their compositions as the work of a sibyl, they had to assume the literary conventions expected of a Sibyl. The matter to be conveyed was sometimes more appropriate to a Hebrew prophet, but the manner had to approximate generally to the style of a pagan prophetess. 3 "

The problem, however, is that the overall impression given by the Jewish and Christian books is very different from that conveyed by the extant pagan oracles. Sib Or 3:97-829, which is generally thought to contain the oldest material in the standard collection, is loosely structured. It begins with an account of the tower of Babel, followed by a euhemeristic account of the Titans. This account of early history is followed by a list of kingdoms and a further prophecy of world kingdoms, followed by a passage of miscellaneous woes. Then there is a long passage in praise of the Jews. The middle part of the book is taken up with oracles against various places, including the passage we have already " See the classic study of J. Freudenthal, Alexander Polyhistor und die von ihm erhaltenen Reste jüdischer und samaritanischer Geschichtswerke (2 vols.; Breslau, 1874-75) and the comments of J. Strugncll, "General Introduction, with a note on Alexander Polyhistor," in Charlesworth, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 2.777-8 (introducing the translations of the fragmentary Jewish writings). 38 Sec further Schuercr, 'Jewish Writings under Gentile Pseudonyms," in A History, 3. 617-94 (written by M. Goodman), and J.J. Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem. Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (New York, 1984). 35 Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 6.

ascribed to the Erythrean sibyl. The latter part of the book contains an exhortation to the Greeks to bring offerings to the temple of the great God, a eulogy of Jews, a prophecy of judgment on idolators, and repeated predictions of eschatological judgment interspersed with appeals for conversion. T h e book concludes with an explicit attribution to the sibyl. Some of the other Jewish sibylline books are more tightly structured. The core of the fourth book is taken up with a prophecy of four kingdoms (Assyria, Media, Persia, Greece), which span ten generations. This is followed by a prophecy of the rise of Rome, which is not counted in the ten generations, and seems to have been added to bring the oracle up to date in the Roman period. If we bracket out the passage on Rome, the four-kingdom oracle, which culminates in the rule of Macedonia, presumably dates from the Hellenistic period and is arguably older than anything in Book 3. Sib O r 1-2 was also structured by a schema of ten generations. Apart from the obvious use of prophetic hexameters, and the selfidentification of the sibyl at the end, the clearest indication of continuity with the pagan oracles in Sib Or 3 is found in the oracles against various places in vss. 295-544, including the verses that appear to have been borrowed from the Erythrean sibyl. The sibylline character of the oracles would seem to rest on such passages as this, and so I would argue that some part of this section, though obviously not all of it, was included in the work of the original Jewish sibyl. Less obvious, perhaps, is the general resemblance of Sib O r 3:545-72 and 624-34 to the oracles preserved by Phlegon insofar as the oracles do not merely predict disasters, but also prescribe a remedy, which relies heavily on ritual action: Greece, also, by offering the holocausts of oxen and loud-bellowing bulls, which she has sacrificed, at the Temple of the great God, will escape the din of war and panic and pestilence...(564-6) Sacrifice to God hundreds of bulls and firstborn lambs and goats at the recurring times..." (625-6).

The interest in ritual and sacrifice is especially characteristic of the Roman sibyllina, and it is not clear that the Jewish sibyllist would have known such oracles, but the resemblance is worth noting. The most obvious innovation of the Jewish sibyl lies in her emphasis on moral exhortation. Sibylline oracles had always been used for religious and political propaganda. The denunciations of idolatry in the Third Sibyl (e.g. vss. 545-49) can be viewed in that light; it is important that sacrifice be ofTered to the right God. But the sibyl also interjects exhortation of a more directly ethical nature:

avoid adultery and indiscriminate intercourse with males. Rear your own offspring and do not kill it, for the Immortal is angry at whoever commits these sins (762-6).40

It is readily admitted that the Jewish sibyllist had no pagan precedent for his religious exhortation and moral censure. In this matter he stood in the tradition of the Hebrew prophets, not that of the pagan sibyl. But neither the oracles of destruction against various places nor the passages of moral exhortation determine the overall shape of the Jewish sibylline oracles. These elements are embedded in a broad historical framework, which reaches back to the building of the tower of Babel, is greatly concerned with the succession of world kingdoms, and looks forward to an eschatological judgment and ultimately to the transformation of the earth to an idyllic and Utopian state. It is this concern with universal history that gives the oracles of the standard collection their distinctive shape.41 The question arises whether this concept of universal history, ranging from primeval times to the imminent future, was associated with the sibyl in pagan antiquity, or whether it was the contribution of the Jewish pseudepigraphic writers. The sibyl and universal history Parke, assuming that the Jewish sibyl followed pagan prototypes closely, has claimed that the Sibyl does not usually start her prophecy from some point in contemporary historic time and continue straight into the future. She begins with some primevally early epoch and leads on in chronological sequence through succeeding ages. 42

But where do we find such an oracle attributed to the sibyl, except in cases that clearly betray Jewish authorship? The sibyl was presumed to be ancient, and she was alleged to have predicted the Trojan war. 43 But the claim that she predicted events at different periods in 40

Compare the praise of the Jews in vss. 218-64, which contains an implicit denunciation of the vices of the Gentiles. 41 See especially A. Momigliano, "From the Pagan to the Christian Sibyl," 735: "What emerges from this brief and superficial analysis of Book III of the Sibylline books is the complicated effort undertaken by the Jewish Sibylline forger...in order to transform the Sibylline oraclcs into a new, religious, interpretation of the whole of history." 42 Parke, 1bid., 7. 43 Heraclitus said that the sibyl "reaches a thousand years by her voice on account of the god," (Plutarch, De Pythiae Oraculis 397B), but the reference is presumably to her longevity, and does not imply that she prophesied the course that history would take over a thousand years.

history does not require that she ever strung these events together in chronological sequence. Contrary to Parke, the literary device of converting comment on the past and present into the form of prophecy spread over a vast period was not an invention of the Greeks. It is found in various forms throughout the Near East, not least in the Hebrew Bible.44 Ex eventu prophecies that bear some analogies to the sibylline prophecies can be found in Babylonian prophecies dating from the time of Nebuchadnezzar I (c. 1127-1105 BCE) to the Hellenistic period. 45 They became a trade-mark of the Jewish apocalyptic writings in the Hellenistic period. 46 The classical sources do not indicate that such extended prophecy after the fact was a significant factor in pagan sibylline oracles.47 Sib O r 3 followed the account of the tower of Babel with a euhemeristic account of Greek mythology. Parke asks whether the Jewish author, in imitating his model, was faced with a theogony as part of the pattern." 48 The sibyllist was indeed familiar with such Greek materials. T h e obvious source is Hesiod.49 By incorporating a Hesiod-like passage, the Jewish sibyllist strengthened his credentials as a witness from the Greek world, and disguised his Jewish identity. It is not necessary to infer that a theogony was a standard element in sibylline prophecy. Parke admits that the notion of a finiil judgment, or of the définitive intervention of a god on behalf of his people, was "a termination not normally accepted as a concept by the classical Greeks." 50 The Jewish notion of divine judgment could be combined readily enough with the predictions of disasters, beloved by the sibyl, but here again we find a significant adaptation of the traditional sibylline form in the Jewish work. The notion of a cosmic judgment was a standard feature of Jewish apocalyptic writings roughly contemporary with the Third Sibyl.

44

An early example can be found in Gen 15:18-21. A.K. Grayson, Babylonian Historical-Literaiy Texts (Toronto, 1975); W.G. Lambert, The Background ofJewish Apocalyptic (London, 1979). 46 J.J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York, 1984) 6. 47 Mention should be made here of the Alexandra of Lycophron, which begins with the first sack of Troy by Heracles and concludes with an extensive oracle about the Romans. Whether Lycophron modelled his poem on (unknown) sibylline prototypes, or whether the Alexandra served as a model for later sibyllists, is much disputed, but in any case Cassandra is not a sibyl. See Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 16-17. 48 Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 11. 49 O n the use of Hesiod in Sib Or 1-2 see A. Kurfess, "Homer und Hesiod im 1 Buch der Oracula Sibyllina," Philologus 100(1956) 147-53. 50 Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 11. 45

The notion of universal history was by no means unknown to the Greeks. Arnaldo Momigliano has argued that it was primarily Greek historians who developed it.51 The point at issue here is whether universal history had become a theme of sibylline prophecy in pagan antiquity, before the genre was appropriated by the Jews. T o my knowledge, there is only one piece of positive evidence for such a theme in a pagan Sibylline oracle. This is the famous line in Virgil's fourth Eclogue: "ultima Cumaei venit iam carminis aetas." Virgil goes on to speak of a new world order, the end of the iron generation and the rise of a "gens aurea." The grammarian Servius, writing about 400 CE explained that the Cumean sibyl divided the saecula according to metals, said who would rule over each saeculum, that the Sun, identified with Apollo, would reign over the tenth and that everything would be renewed after the saecula had run their course. The Fourth Eclogue Scholarship on the Fourth Eclogue has been sharply divided between those who maximize the contribution of the sibyl and see Virgil as a purveyor of eastern mysticism,52 and those who minimize the role of the sibyl and place Virgil in the tradition of classical poetry. 53 Recendy Morton Smith described the Fourth Eclogue as "a delightful nonsense poem for a child's birthday," and derisively declared that "to suggest that he [Virgil] took it seriously would equate him in stupidity with his interpreters." 54 But even Smith granted that "some of the nonsense, it is true, may have come from the prophetic original." 55 Other minimalist critics, such as Günther Jachmann, have also accepted that that Virgil was referring to a 51

A. Momigliano, "The Origins of Universal History," in R.E. Friedman, ed., The Poet and the Historian. Essays in Literary and Historical Biblical Criticism (Chico, CA, 1983) 133-48. 52 The classic example of this trend is E. Norden, Die Geburt des Kindes (Leipzig, 1924). See also H. Jcanmaire, La Sibylle et le Retour de l'Age d'Or (Paris, 1939). 53 G. Jachmann, "Die Vierte Eklogc Vergils," Annali délia Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa 21(1953) 13-62; G. Williams, Tradition and Originality in Roman Poetry (Oxford, 1968) 274-84; W. Clausen, "Virgil's Mcssianic Eclogue," in J.L. Kugel, ed., Poetry and Prophecy. The Beginnings of a Literary Tradition (Ithaca, N.Y., 1990) 65-74; G. Radkc, "Vergils Cymacum Carmen," Gymnasium 66(1959) 217-46 argued that the "Cumean" was not the sibyl at all, but Hcsiod. This interpretation is found in some of the ancient scholia on Virgil, but has been decisively refuted by A. Wlosok, " , Cumacum Carmen' (Verg., Eel. 4,4): Sibyllenorakcl oder Hcsiodgcdicht?," in Forma Futuri. Studi in onore diMichele Pellegrino (Turin, 1975) 692-709. 54 M. Smith, "On the History of Apokalypto and Apokalypsis," in D. Heitholm, ed., Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tübingen, 1983) 13. 55 Ibid.

known sibylline oracle, predicting the return of a golden age,56 and Arnaldo Momigliano, in one of his last publications, lent his authority to the view that "...Virgil provides some direct evidence for pagan Sibylline oracles which went beyond the prophecy of individual events..." 57 No contemporary scholar is prepared to speculate as boldly on the nature of this Cumean oracle as Norden did in his celebrated Geburt des Kindes, now universally rejected. The most venturesome contemporary scholar is David Flusser, who takes his lead from the commentary of Servius. Flusser argues that "Servius' Sibyl was surely pagan: the last, the tenth ruler is the Sun, the Sol Invictus or the Persian Mithras, who was understood as a sun-god." 58 He goes on to suggest that Servius was acquainted with the Persian sibyl, listed by Varro. But the existence of this Persian sibyl is poorly attested, and must be considered extremely dubious. Much of what Servius says can be inferred from Virgil , s poem. The idea that the sibyl divided the saecula by metals may be inferred from the promise of end of the iron generation and the coming of the golden. We cannot be certain, however, whether this motif was actually part of the sibylline prophecy or was introduced by Virgil in imitation of Hesiod. T o reconstruct a Persian sibyl, as Flusser does, on the basis of such inferences, is speculative indeed. The likelihood that Virgil was influenced by a pagan sibyl from the east seems rather remote, if only because the existence of such eastern sibyls is very dubious. Several scholars, however, have argued for another eastern influence on the poem, not from a pagan source but precisely from the Jewish sibylline oracles.59 If these were known to Alexander Polyhistor, they could equally well be known to Virgil. The visit of Herod to Rome in 40 BCE and the decree of the senate proclaiming him king of Judea occurred in the consulship of Asinius Pollio, who is addressed in the Fourth Eclogue. 60 An allusion to Jewish prophecy, then, might seem both plausible and timely.61 Most recendy, Parke has lent his support to this view:

56

Jachmann, "Die vierte Eldoge," 23 (following Th. Mommsen, Römische Chronologie, 184), 48. 57 Momigliano, "From the Pagan to the Christian Sibyl," 729 58 D. Flusser, "The four empires in the Fourth Sibyl and in the Book of Daniel," Israel Oriental Studies 2(1972) 163. 59 A. Kurfess, "Vergils vierte Ekloge und die Oracula Sibyllina," Historisches Jahrbuch der Gorres Gesellschaft 73(1956) 120-27. 60 Josephus, Ant 14. 377-89. 61 So Kurfess, "Vergils vierte Ekloge," 124.

Here it is significant that Vergil not merely presupposes the immediate advent of the Golden Age, but also endows it with some of the special features of the Jewish Sibyllines.62

A more extended argument along these lines was ofTered by R.G.M. Nisbet. 63 Two motifs in particular bring a Jewish source to mind: the birth of a child which marks the advent of the golden age, and the idyllic promise that flocks will not fear great lions and that the serpent shall die (lines 22, 24). T h e Jewish source in question is the Book of Isaiah, which speaks of the birth of a child in chapters 7 and 9, and of idyllic peace between the animals in Chap. 11. The correspondences are not so close as to suggest that Virgil knew the LXX, but Nisbett points a "close paraphrase of Isaiah" in Sib O r 3:788ff, a passage that begins "Rejoice, maiden..." Nisbett suggests that the kore here might ambiguously refer, or be taken to refer, to the virgin of Isaiah 7. Admittedly, there is nothing about the birth of a child in the extant sibylline oracles, but says Nisbett, the text was exceptionally fluid, and it is clear that the poet was using an oracle that is now lost. The miraculous child and the animal-peace are in both Isaiah and Virgil, but only the animal-peace in the Sibyl; it would avoid an awkward coincidence if we could suppose that Virgil's version of the Sibyl made some allusion to the child.

It seems to me, however, that the fluidity of the sibylline text has been exaggerated. In any case it provides no warrant for supplying sibylline oracles that are never actually attested. Moreover, I am not persuaded that the correspondences between Virgil and Isaiah, or between Virgil and Sib Or 3 are more than coincidence. Virgil's Virgo is not the mother of the child in the fourth Eclogue. The kore of the sibyl is the "virgin daughter of Zion." Neither can be identified with the virgin who bears a son in Isaiah chapter 7. The sibyl is obviously dependent on Isaiah for the transformation of the animal world. In Virgil, however, the lions and serpents are motifs in a passage that is indebted to the bucolic poetry of Theocritus. 65 As Nisbet acknowledges, the theme of "peace among the animals" fits western notions easily enough, even though it is not paralleled in 62

Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Oracles, 146. R.G.M. Nisbet, "Virgil's Fourth Eclogue: Easterners and Westerners," Bulletin of the Institute for Classical Studies 25(1978) 59-78. Compare also A. Kurfess, "Vergils vierte Eklogc und die Oracula Sibyllina," Historisches Jahrbuch der Gorres Gesellschaß 73(1956) 121-22. 64 Ibid., 66. Parke concedes that "it is too improbable that he had followed back the Oracula Sibyllina to their roots in the Scptuaginta," but he also posits a Jewish sibylline oracle that difTcred from what wc now have (Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 146). 65 Nisbet, "Virgil's Fourth Eclogue," 66. 63

western poetry before Virgil.66 Even if we suppose that this motif was borrowed from the Jewish sibyl, which is possible but by no means certain, this is only one motif in the poem. The Third Sibyl does not link the "peace among the animals" with the symbolism of the golden age, nor does it envisage a future where Achilles is sent again to Troy. The concept of an ultima aetas is more significant for our theme of universal history than the motif of peace among the animals. The question remains why Virgil associated the final age with a sibylline prophecy. Jachmann declared blundy that this question cannot be answered, and he may be right.67 We cannot even be sure that Virgil was citing a sibylline oracle that actually existed outside the Eclogue. He may have invented the allusion, just as he invented allusions to the sibyl in the Aeneid. 68 Even a fictitious allusion, however, requires some verisimilitude. It must have been plausible and credible that a sibyl would speak of a final age. Virgil and his audience must have associated the sibyl with this kind of prophecy, even if there was no specifically Cumean prophecy on the theme. It is possible, though far from certain, that Virgil derived the notion of a final age from Jewish sibylline prophecy. While Sib Or 3 does not divide history into ages, it envisages a wonderful, definitive future, along the lines of Isaiah chapter 11. The division into ages is typical of some other early Jewish sibylline oracles, most particularly Sib O r 4 and Sib O r 1-2. The oracle contained in the first and second books provides the best analogy, since it also associates the ages with metals. 69 As in the Fourth Eclogue, the golden age marks a new beginning, but unlike Virgil's poem, that new beginning comes, not at the end of history, but after the Flood. If Virgil indeed knew this oracle, or any Jewish prophecy, he adapted it freely. It does not, however, seem to me to be necessary to suppose that Virgil depended on a Jewish sibyl for the notion of the final age. The division of history into saecula had a native Italian background in 66

Ibid. Nisbet goes on to comment that "the coincidence becomes very considerable when one takes into account the prophetic nature of both passages and Virgil's acknowledged debt to the Sibyl." 6 ‫ י‬Jachmann, "Die vierte Ekloge," 37. 68 See Luciano Nicastri, "D Cumaeum Carmen di Virgilio (eel. IV 4)," in Marcello Gigante, ed., Civilta dei Campt Flegrei. Atti del Corwegno Internationale (Napoli, 1992) 41-78: "Ora è vero che Virgilio vuole che il lettore intenda un reale oracolo Sibillino 'cumeo', ma ciô non significa afFatto che quell'oracolo sia esistito fiiori dell'ecloga" (pp.70-71). 69 Kurfess, "Vergils vierte Ekloge," 125. See also Kurfess, "Oracula Sibyllina I/II," .ζ/Vjy40(1941) 151-65. Kurfess argues persuasively for a date around the turn of the era.

Etruscan tradition, which held that the Etruscan name would disappear after ten saecula, and there was some speculation in the first century BCE that the final saeculum was at hand. 70 Either the Cumean sibyl or Virgil himself may have picked up the theme from an Etruscan source. Virgil does not suggest that the sibyl's prophecy spanned the course of all ten generations in the manner of the Jewish oracles. Conversely, the Jewish sibyl need not have learned the division of history into ages from a pagan sibyl. The periodization of history was widespread in Jewish apocalyptic writings, and took several forms.71 It is too simple to say, with Momigliano, that a Jew conceived the idea of using the form of Sibylline oracles as a medium for communicating Jewish apocalyptic notions to the Greeks who did not know them. 72

Rather, the oracles were a medium for communicating the Jewish religion, in which apocalyptic notions had come to play a part by this time. David Flusser has made an impressive argument that both the sibyls and the apocalypses ultimately derived their ten-fold division of history from Persian traditions, such as we find in the Bahman Yasht. 73 The transmission of Persian traditions in the preChristian period, however, is a far more complex and problematic topic that the sibylline oracles, and we shall pursue it no further. It may suffice to say that there were many sources from which the Jewish sibyllists may have drawn the motif of ten generations besides Virgil's Cumean sibyl. While Virgil may have known a sibylline oracle that spoke of a final generation, it is not apparent that he knew a sibyl that prophesied universal history in the manner of the Jewish books.74 Even if he did know such oracles, the possibility that that they were Jewish 70 Cancik, "Libri Fatales," 557-58; Β. Gladigow, "Actas, aevum und saeclorum ordo. Zur Struktur zeitlicher Deutungssystemc, in D. Hcllholm, ed., Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tübingen, 1983) 262-65. A haruspex Volcanius allegedly took the comets that appeared after Caesar's death as a sign of the end of the ninth saeculum and the beginning of the tenth. See also I.S. Ryberg, "Vergil's Golden Age," Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 89(1958) 114-15. 71 See the comprehensive survey by A. Yarbro Collins, "Numerical Symbolism in Jewish and Early Christian Apocalyptic Literature," ANRW 2.21.2 (1984) 122287 (= Cosmology and Eschatology m Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism [Leiden: Brill, 1996] 55-138). 72 Momigliano, "From the Pagan to the Christian Sibyl," 738. 73 Flusser, "The four empires," 171. The Bahman Yasht refers to the "tenth century" of Zoroaster. 74 In Aeneid 1. 257-98, Virgil has Jupiter reveal the future of Aeneas's descendants, to whom he has given imperium sine fine, but even this vaticinium ex eventu lacks the universal scopc that we find in the Jewish sibyllina.

can not be ruled out. The theme of universal history is far better attested in the Jewish sibylline oracles than in their pagan counterparts. T h e shape of the sibylline oracles that have come down to us is more likely to be the innovation of the Jewish pseudepigraphers than a feature of pagan oracles that are no longer extant. Conclusion The reviewer's claim, noted at the beginning of this essay, that Parke's masterly book had rescued the sibyl from the fringes of the Jewish pseudepigrapha, betrays a rather short-sighted view of the sibylline tradition and its significance in western culture. T o be sure, its roots lay in pagan antiquity, and Parke's book is a splendid introduction to that part of the tradition. But the leaves of Cumae were lost in the wind, and the literary heritage of the pagan sibyl is meager indeed. T h e books collected in the Byzantine period were primarily Jewish and partly Christian in character. They included enough conventional sibylline verses about various catastrophes to lend credibility to the pseudonym under which they were published. But they also transformed the pagan oracles into a new literary form, characterized by a sweeping view of universal history and a concern with ethical teaching which was alien to the pagan sibyl. The pseudonymous authors of these books were not peripheral to the tradition. It was they who rescued the sibyl from a dying culture and made her a reputable prophet in the Christian Middle Ages.

CHAPTER T H I R T E E N

T H E SIBYL AND T H E P O T T E R : POLITICAL PROPAGANDA IN PTOLEMAIC EGYPT

Much of the literature of the Hellenistic Jewish Diaspora is generally held to have been written with propagandists or apologetic intent. This is especially true of literature with Gentile pseudonyms (the Sibyl, Aristeas) or composed in traditional Greek forms (the tragedy of Ezekiel, the epic of Philo).1 It is unnecessary to prolong the debate as to whether the primary audience of this material was Jewish or Gentile. 2 Propaganda typically bolsters the security of the propagandist group by addressing the world around it, whether or not that world is prepared to listen. The Jews of the Hellenistic Diaspora were first of all working out their own identity, as people who were Jewish by religion and Greek by culture. There is ample evidence that they welcomed the affirmation of Gentiles who embraced Jewish religious practices in various degrees.3 Much of the propaganda of Hellenistic Judaism is religious in nature. It proclaims the one God, denounces idolatry and certain sexual offences, and argues that some apparently irrational Jewish practices (such as the dietary observances) admit of a spiritual, allegorical interpretation. 4 The Sibylline Oracles certainly participate in this religious propaganda. Long passages are devoted to oudining true religious observance. 5 But the Sibyllines difTer from most of the Diaspora literature in so far as their propaganda also has an overt political element. The twelve books of Oracles represent a long tradition over several hundred years, and the political emphases

1

See e.g. E. Schuerer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 135) (rev. and ed. G. Vermes, F. Millar and M. Goodman; Edinburgh: Clark, 1986) 617-18. See also the remarks of Dieter Georgi, The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986) 83-51. It is a pleasure to oifer this essay to Dieter Georgi, who was a reader on my dissertation committee and contributed much to my education in Hellenistic Judaism. 2 V. Tcherikover, 'Jewish Apologetic Literature Reconsidered," Eos 48(1956) 169-93, 3 L.H. Feldman, Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993) 288-382. 4 J J . Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem. Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (New York: Crossroad, 1983) 137-74. 5 E.g. Sib O r 3:8-45; 218-64; 545-600; 715-31; 762-66. BC-AD

vary in the different books, and even within individual books.6 Here we shall focus on the fountainhead of the tradition, in Egyptian Judaism in the Hellenistic period. ThefirstJeivish Sibyl Sibylline oracles were a ready medium for propaganda. 7 The author does not speak in his own voice, but conceals his identity under the pseudonym of the Sibyl. The choice of this pseudonym offered several advantages to a Jewish author of the second century BCE. She was a figure of great antiquity, known throughout the Hellenistic world. The Sibyl had apparently originated in Asia Minor, but Sibylline oracles were extant in Italy by the late sixth century BCE. 8 Sibyls and Sibylline oracles multiplied in the Hellenistic period, so that Varro, the Roman antiquarian, could list ten sibyls (none of them Jewish) in the first century BCE.9 In view of this proliferation, it is not surprising that Jews should claim a Sibyl too. She offered a medium that was analogous to Hebrew prophecy, in so far as it allowed extended discourses, unlike the circumscribed responses of the oracular shrines. Like the Hebrew prophets, the Sibyl relied on assertion, backed by a claim of inspiration, rather than argument. Propaganda is most effective when it appears to state what is the case, rather than invite rational thought. Sibylline oracles also allowed considerable flexibility in their contents. The form required Homeric hexameters, and so presupposed a certain level of Greek education, but otherwise consisted of predictions that "when certain conditions obtain, something will happen." 10 Repetition is endemic to the genre, as the loosely structured collections go over the same ground again and again, and thereby implant it ever deeper in the consciousness of the reader or listener. The credibility of the Sibyl is enhanced by frequent "prediction" of things that have already happened, a device made possible by the supposed antiquity of the Sibyl. 6

J.J. Collins, "The Development of the Sibylline Tradition," ANRW 11.20.1 (1987) 421-59; D.S. Potter, Prophecy and History in the Crisis of the Roman Empire. A Historical Commentary on the Thirteenth Sibylline Oracle (Oxford: Clarendon, 1990). 7 See the discussion of propagandistic techniques, with reference to Egyptian oracles, by A.B. Lloyd, "Nationalist Propaganda in Ptolemaic Egypt," Historia 31(1982) 33-55. 8 H.W. Parke, SibyL· and Sibylline Prophecy in Classical Antiquity (ed. B.C. McGing; London and New York: Routledge, 1988) 51-99. 9 Lactantius, Divinae Institutiones 1.6.8-12. Varro did not mention cither a Jewish or a Babylonian sibyl. Pausanias is the first pagan author to mention a Jewish sibyl, named Sabbe, and he says that others call her Babylonian or Egyptian (Potter, Prophecy and History, 107). 10 Potter, Prophecy and History, 104.

The third book of Sibylline Oracles is a loosely structured accumulation of oracles, which grew by addition and insertion over a period of a century and a half." Some passages, such as Sib Or 3: 46-92, clearly date to the Roman era (after the batde of Actium in 31 BCE). There is general agreement, however that the nucleus of the book (vss. 97-294; 545-808) dates from the mid-second century BCE. The key to the dating lies in three references to the "seventh king" of the Greek dynasty, who must be identified either as Ptolemy VI Philometor (180-164 and 163-145 BCE), if Alexander the Great is counted as the first king, or his short-lived successor Ptolemy VII Neos Philopator (145-44 BCE). 1 2 If there is a central theme in these oracles, it is the call to the Greek world to honor the Most High God and offer sacrifices in his temple (vss. 624-34; 716-18). The sibyllist is unabashed in praise of the Jewish people and their way of life (218-64; 702-13), and regularly justifies predictions of doom with moral condemnation (185-86 on Roman pederasty; 601-07 on idolatry). The exhortations, however, are framed by political prophecies. A long oracle on world kingdoms in vss. 162-95 concludes with a denunciation of Rome, which will "fill everything with evils," but especially Macedonia, which was divided by Rome after the battle of Pydna in 168 BCE and annexed as a Roman province in 147 BCE. Then, we are told, in "the seventh reign, when a king of Egypt, who will be of the Greeks by race, will rule... the people of the great God will again be strong." Some scholars have seen here an allusion to the Maccabean revolt, which took place during the reign of Philometor. 13 If so, this is the only acknowledgement of the Maccabees in the book, and it is a faint one. It is more likely that the rise of the people of God is a real prophecy, as yet unfulfilled. This passage does not explicidy state that the seventh king of Egypt will be responsible for the rise of the people of God, but the fact that they rise in his reign invites that inference. The other references to the seventh king are also elliptic. In vs. 318 we find that Egypt will be torn by civil strife in the reign of the seventh king, but then will rest. There was civil war between Philometor and his " J . J . Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (SBLDS 13; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1974) 24-33; "The Sibylline Oracles," OTP 1.354-61. 12 The thesis of V. Nikiprowetzky, La Troisième Sibylle (Paris: Mouton, 1970) 215, that the seventh king was Cleopatra VII, has found no followers. Nikiprowetzky was led to this position by his desire to preserve the unity of the book. 13 So A. Momigliano, "La Portata Storica dei Vaticini sul Settimo Re nel Terzo Libro degli Oracoli Sibillini," in Forma Futun. Studi in Onore del Cardinale Michele Pellegrino (Turin: Erasmo, 1975) 1081.

brother, Euergetes II Physcon, and again briefly between Physcon and Philometor's widow, Cleopatra II.14 In vss. 608-9 we read that God will punish all people for idolatry "whenever the young seventh king of Egypt rules his own land, numbered from the line of the Greeks." The following verses go on to predict that "a great king will come from Asia" and overthrow the kingdom of Egypt. Antiochus IV Epiphanes conducted a successful invasion of Egypt in 170-69, at a time when Philometor was still a youth and under the tutelage of advisors.15 Whether the Sibylline reference is an allusion to this historical event is questionable, since there is no hint of Antiochus's disastrous second invasion, when he was humiliated by the Romans. It is more likely that historical reminiscences were incorporated into genuine predictions of future upheavals. None of these passages gives a clear picture of the role of the seventh king. There is, however, one passage that ascribes a more active role to king. Vss 652-6 predict: then God will send a king from the sun, who will stop the entire earth from evil war, killing some, imposing oaths of loyalty on others; and he will not do all these things by his private plans but in obedience to the noble teachings of the great God.

The identity of this king is the key to the political propaganda of the Sibyl. Many scholars have assumed that the reference is to a Jewish messiah and translated it as "from the east," by analogy with Isa 41:25 (LXX) where the phrase is "from the rising of the sun." 16 But "from the sun" does not mean "from the east," and in any case the Jewish messiah was not expected to come from the east. I argued in my dissertation twenty years ago that the phrase must be understood against the background of Egyptian mythology, where the king was understood as the son of the sun-god Re. 17 A precise parallel is found in the Potter's Oracle, a nearly contemporary piece of Egyptian nationalist propaganda in oracular form. 18 The fact that both the Sibyl and the Potter focus their expectations on a "king from the sun" invites a comparison between Jewish and Egyptian political propaganda in the Ptolemaic era.

14 15 16

P.M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria (Oxford: Clarendon, 1972) I. 119-21. O. Morkholm, Antiochus IV of Syria (Copenhagen: Gyldcndal, 1966) 64-87. So Nikiprowetzky, La Troisième Sibylle, 133; Momigliano, "La Portata Storica,"

1081. 17

Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism, 40-44. T h e parallel was noted by E. Norden, Die Geburt des Kindes (Leipzig: Teubner, 1924) 55η.2, 147. See also J. Gwyn Griffiths, "Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Era," in Apocalypticism in the Hellenistic World and in the Near East (ed. D. Hellholm; Tübingen: Mohr, 1983) 290. 18

The Potter's Oracle The Potter's Oracle stands in a tradition of native Egyptian propaganda, exemplified in such works as the Oracle of the Lamb to Bocchoris and the Demotic Chronicle.9‫ י‬It survives in three fragmentary papyri from the second and third centuries CE,20 but it must date from the Hellenistic era, since it is directed against the Greeks, not the Romans. Like the Sibylline Oracles, this oracle is attributed to a legendary figure, a potter in the reign of King Amenhotep, 21 who acts as the incarnation of the creator god Khnum. This potter goes to the island of Helios-Re, where he proceeds to make pottery. The people, however, smash the pottery and drag the prophet before the king. T h e potter then interprets his action as a prophetic sign. 'Just as the pottery has been destroyed, so Egypt and, finally, the city of the followers of the evil god Typhon-Seth will be destroyed.'' 22 Then Egypt will prosper, when the king from the sun, who is benign for fifty five years, comes, the giver of good things, sent by the great goddess Isis, so that those who survive will pray that those who have already died may rise to share in the good things.

The Potter was buried in Heliopolis, the city of the sun. Ludwig Koenen argued that the papyrus fragments P 2 and P 3 of the Potter's Oracle represent two recensions of the oracle, which may be dated soon after 129 BC and 116 BC respectively.23 The dating depends on a quotation from the Oracle of the Lamb to Bocchoris, another Egyptian nationalist prophecy which dates from the Persian period. 24 The passage says that the true king is not the king of two years, but the one who will reign for fifty five years. (The reference to 55 years is missing in P2). Koenen argued that the king of two years was Harsiesis, who led an abortive revolt in 130-129 BCE, and

19 Gwyn Griffiths, "Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Era," 273-93; Doyd, "Nationalist Propaganda in Ptolemaic Egypt," 33-55; F. Dunand, "L'Oracle du Potier et la formation de l'apocalyptique en Egypte," in L'Apocalyptique (ed. F. Raphael; Paris: Geuthner, 1977) 39-67. 20 See the edition of the text by L. Koenen, "Die Prophezeiungen des 'Töpfers'," ZPE 2(1968) 178-209. 21 There were four pharaohs of this name in the eighteenth dynasty (approximately 1550-1300 BCE. 22 Koenen, "The Prophecies of a Potter. A Prophecy of World Renewal Becomes an Apocalypse," Proceedings of the Twelfth International Congress of Papyrology (D.H. Samuel, ed.; Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1970) 249. 23 Koenen, "Die Prophezeiungen," 186-93 24 Griffiths, "Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Era," 285-87.

that the ideal of fifty five years was devised to reject any claim on behalf of Ptolemy VIII Euergetes, who reigned for 54 years. Subsequent publication of the Oracle of the Lamb, however, showed that both numbers were already present in the older oracle. 25 At most, the Potter's Oracle may have applied the older oracle to Harsiesis and Euergetes, but the passage itself cannot have been composed to fit those situations. Already in his edition, Koenen had argued that the quotation from the Oracle of the Lamb was an interpolation in the Potter's Oracle, and in another essay he argued that a prophecy of the same kind as the Potter's Oracle was known to Callimachus, who made use of it in his Hymn to Delos.26 The Potter's Oracle, then was a fluid tradition, which was updated repeatedly in light of historical events. The use of the present participle ktizomenen with reference to Alexandria suggests that a stratum of the oracle dates from the beginning of the Hellenistic period. 27 However, the Oracle also refers to a king who will come down from Syria and will be hated by all. Antiochus Epiphanes was the first Syrian king to invade Egypt, and the Oracle presumably had this precedent in mind. The Potter's Oracle was still copied in the third century CE. If the Potter's Oracle evolved gradually over several generations as has been suggested, then it is quite possible that the Jewish sibyllist was familiar with it at some stage of its development, and borrowed from it the expression "king from the sun" for the expected deliverer. Inevitably, the expression takes on a different meaning in a Jewish context. The Sibyl was certainly not prophesying a restoration of native Egyptian kingship. The old Pharaonic ideology, however, was not the exclusive property of Egyptian nationalists in the Ptolemaic period. The Ptolemies themselves laid claim to the old Pharaonic titles.28 These titles were translated into Greek under Ptolemy IV Philopator and were applied in abundance to Ptolemy V Euergetes on the Rosetta Stone. Both these kings were called "son of the Sun." 29 The Ptolemy is also called "son of Re" in the texts inscribed at the temple of Edfu, and identified as Horus. 30 The Ptolemies supported the Egyptian priesthood, and in return were 25

Koenen, "A Supplementary Note on the Date of the Oracle of the Potter," ZPE 54(1984) 9-13. 26 L. Koenen, "Die Adaptation Ägyptischer Königsidcologic am Ptolemäerhof," in Egypt and the Hellenistic World (cd. W. Peremans; Studia Hellcnistica 27; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1983) 184. 27 Griffiths, "Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Era," 289-90. 28 Sec especially Koenen, "Die Adaptation Ägyptischer Königsideologie," 15229

Ibid., 155. ·‫ יי‬Griffiths, "Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Era," 289.

recognized as the living Horus, even though the sincerity of the honor may be doubted. 31 A king from the sun, then, was not necessarily a native Egyptian king. The title could equally well be applied to "a king of Egypt from the line of the Greeks." In view of the importance attached to the reign of the seventh king in Sib O r 3, it is very probable that the king expected by the Sibyl was a benevolent Ptolemy. In fact, Ptolemy Philometor's benevolence to the Jews is well known. It was he who gave Onias IV land to build his temple at Leontopolis, quite near Heliopolis where the Potter was supposedly buried. Josephus claims that he set Onias and Dositheus over all his army, 32 and, even if we allow for some exaggeration, it is clear that Onias enjoyed high rank. 33 Aristobulus, the Jewish philosopher, was allegedly the teacher of Philometor. 34 It is understandable, then, that some Diaspora Jews, especially those who had fled from Jerusalem with Onias on the eve of the Maccabean revolt, would look to the Ptolemaic king as their potential savior. The Potter's Oracle and the Sibylline Oracle, then, put forward rival claims as to who was the true "king from the sun." For the Egyptian oracle, it was a native king who would overthrow the Greeks. For the Jewish Sibyl, it was the Ptolemaic king in whose reign Jerusalem would be restored. 35 Horus and. Seth Besides the obvious difference in their ultimate goals, however, there are other differences between the Potter and the Sibyl. The Potter's Oracle, no less than the Sibylline Oracle, champions the restoration of a particular cult. T h e divine statues will be restored to Egypt. The Potter lacks, however, the moral exhortation of the Sibyl. The 31 See the remarks of H.W. Fairman, The Triumph of Horus. An Ancient Egyptian Sacred Drama (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974) 33. 32 AgAp 2.49. 33 A. Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt (Tübingen: Mohr, 1985) 8. M 2 Macc 1:10. 35 In view of the consistent monotheism of the Sibyl, the title must bc taken as honorific. There are, however, a number of documents dating from the second century BCE. in which the contracting parties and witnesses are Jewish and which refer to the Ptolemies as gods (CPJ 1. 23, 24). Note also the existence of a syncretistic prayer, in Aramaic but in Demotic script, which calls for help on the Egyptian God Horus side by side with the God of Israel. See C.F. Nims and R.C. Steiner, "A Paganized Version of Psalm 20:2-6 from the Aramaic Text in Demotic Script," JAOS 103(1983) 261-74. Evidence for Jewish veneration of Helios comes mainly from the land of Israel, where the sun is depicted on several synagogue floors in the second to the fourth centuries. See Feldman, Jew and Gentile, 67, 483.

characteristically Jewish concerns about homosexuality and idolatry have no reflection in the Egyptian work. The most striking difference, however, concerns the different ways in which the political situation is symbolized. The Potter's Oracle evokes Egyptian myth not only in the phrase "king from the sun," but also in its labelling of the Alexandrian Greeks as "Typhonians." The Typhonians are the followers of Seth, the adversary of Horus. According to the myth, Seth revolts against Osiris and kills him. 36 The new king, Horus, takes revenge on Seth for his father. Every Egyptian king is Horus; all the enemies of Egypt are followers of Seth. The Potter's Oracle envisages the future after the pattern of the myth. The Ptolemaic rulers, who laid claim to the Egyptian mythology, were also identified with Horus. Callimachus, in his hymn to Delos, applies the myth of Horus (Apollo) and Seth (Ares) to the victory of Ptolemy II Philadelphus over the Gauls ("the Titans of a later day," vs. 174) in 275 BCE.37 The Gauls are said to wear posteras anaideas, just as the Greeks in the Potter's Oracle are said to be zönophoroi, girdle wearers.The victory of Ptolemy IV Philopator over Antiochus III at Raphia was commemorated in a decree which boasted that the Ptolemy slew his enemies as Horus, son of Isis had slain his foes.38 The Rosetta Stone proclaims Ptolemy V Euergetes to be "a god from a god and goddess just as Horus, the son of Isis and Osiris, the defender of his father Osiris." 39 The victory of Horus over Seth was protrayed on the walls of the temple at Edfu, and the Ptolemy was identified as Horus. 40 The myth could be applied in different ways by opposing factions. One of the native Egyptian rebels under Ptolemy VII Euergetes (Physcon) was named Harsiesis (Horus, son of Isis). In Ptolemaic propaganda, evidenced in a papyrus fragment, he was called ho theoisin echthros, the enemy of the gods.41

36 See J.G. Griffiths, The Conflict of Horus and Seth from Egyptian and Classic Sources (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 1960); H. tc Velde, Seth, God of Confusion. A Study of his Role in Egyptian Mythology‫ ׳‬and Religion (Leiden: Brill, 1967). 37 Koenen, "Die Adaptation ägyptischer Königsideologie am Ptolemäerhof," 174-90. 3 " H.J. Thissen, Studien zum Raphiadekret (Beiträge zur klassischen Philologie 23; Meisenheim am Glan: Hain, 1966) 7. 39 S.M. Burstein, The Hellenistic Agefromthe Battle of Ipsos to the Death of Cleopatra VII (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985) 132; C. Onasch, "Zur Königsideologie der Ptolemäer in den Dekreten von Kanopus und Memphis (Rosettana)," Archiv fur Papyrus Forschung 24/25(1976) 137-55 40 Fairman, The Triumph of Horus. 41 L. Koenen, "THEOISIN ECHTHROS Ein Einheimischer Gegenkönig in Aegypten (132/1)," Chronique d'Egypte 34(1959) 103-119.

The myth of Horus and Seth lent itself to political propaganda, because on the one hand it provided ready-made labels for heroes and villains. One of the simplest forms of propaganda consists of identifying an individual or group as a focal point of communal hatred. 42 Callimachus identified the Gauls as latter-day Titans. The Potter's Oracle identified the Alexandrians as Typhonians. Remarkably, however, no such enemy is identified in the earliest stratum of the Third Sibylline Oracle. The "king from the sun" plays the role of Horus, but no one is cast in the role of Seth. 43 The difference between the Sibyl and the Potter in this respect can be understood readily enough in view of their different relationships to the Ptolemaic rulers. The Potter's Oracle is a révolutionary document, aiming at the overthrow of the Greeks. The Jewish oracle, if it was written under Philometor, was addressed to a ruler who was well disposed. While there were various factions in Egypt in the mid-second century, the Sibyl does not wish to antagonize any of them unduly. There is no reflection here of the strained relations between the Jews and Physcon,44 and no sweeping denunciation of the nadve Egyptians.45 The Sibyl's denunciations of idolatry might be offensive to many in Egypt, but no political group is dismissed as an irredeemable enemy. More surprising, however, is the failure to denounce the Seleucids, the common enemy of Judaism and Ptolemaic Egypt in the time of Philometor.We have noted already that Antiochus Epiphanes had invaded Egypt in the time of Philometor, and may be the prototype of the "king from Syria, who will be hated by all" in the Potter's Oracle. We have also noted a possible reminiscence of this invasion in Sib O r 3:611-15, which tells how "a great king will come from Asia" and overthrow the kingdom of Egypt. But the Sibyl's attitude towards this figure is not at all clear. He is certainly not portrayed as an incarnation of Seth, and there is no reflection either of Antiochus' downfall or of his persecution of the Jews. 45 Lloyd, "Nationalist Propaganda," 34, citing J.A.C. Brown, Techniques of Persuasion (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1963) 28. 43 The Sibyl envisages an eschatological assault on the Temple, after the manner of Psalm 2, but the adversaries are identified in general terms as "the kings of the peoples" (3:663). 44 Josephus, AgAp 2.53-55; V. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews (New York: Atheneum, 1970) 282, Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria 1.121.. 45 Contrast in this regard the treatment of the Egyptians in Wisdom 15-19, which reflects the hostile relations of the first century CE. On the date of Wisdom I must agree with D. Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon (AB 43; Garden City, New Y Ū rk: Doubleday, 1979) 20-25, against D. Georgi, Weisheit Salomes (JSHRZ 3/4; Gütersloh: Mohn, 1980) 395-96.

The Sibyl's silence on Epiphanes stands in sharp contrast to the portrayal of the king in the nearly contemporary Book of Daniel, where the Gentile kingdoms are beasts that rise from the chaotic sea, and Epiphanes is an upstart horn on the fourth beast. The imagery of Daniel is drawn from Canaanite myth, filtered through a long history of Israelite usage.46 In the present context, however, it is worth noting that some scholars have argued that Daniel's vision should be understood against the backdrop of the myth of Horus and Seth. 47 There is in any case a basic structural similarity between the various combat myths of the eastern Mediterranean world and the Near East.4a A positive god of life, fertility or order (Baal, Marduk, Horus) does batde with a negative deity of disorder and chaos (Yamm, Tiamat, Seth). The imagery of all these myths was equally applicable to political propaganda, and the biblical tradition was not reticent in using mythological labels for political adversaries.49 If the Sibyl had shared Daniel's feelings about Antiochus Epiphanes, it would not have been difficult to portray him as a Typhonian figure.50 The Sibyl and the Maccabees We touch here on the controverted question of the Sibyl's attitude towards the Maccabean revolt. We have noted the possible allusion in Sib O r 3:194: "then the people of the great God will again be strong." Even if this is read as a reference to the revolt, it is a faint endorsement. I suggested in my dissertation that the sibyllist was a supporter of Onias IV, the exiled High Priest who enjoyed high rank under Philometor. 51 This hypothesis might explain the Sibyl's detachment from the cause of the Maccabees, who, from a Zadokite point of view, usurped the High Priesthood. There is certainly hope 45

For full discussion see the commentary on Daniel 7 in J.J. Collins, Daniel (Hermeneia: Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993). 47 J.W. van Hcntcn, "Antiochus IV a a typhonic figure in Daniel 7," in The Book of Daniel in the Light of Recent Findings. Colloquium Biblicum Lovaniense 1991 (ed. A.S. van der Woude; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1993), 222-43, building on the suggestion o f J . C . H . Lebram, "König Antiochus im Buch Daniel," VT 25(1975) 737-72. 4B J . Fontenrose, Python. A Study of Delphic Myth and Its Origin (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1959). 49 See J . Day, God's conflict with the dragon and the sea. Echoes of a Canaanite myth in the Old Testament (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985). 50 Van Hcntcn, "Antiochus IV," argues that "it is likely that in Alexandrian circles Antiochus IV was ridiculed and associated with the typhonic," but the argument is a priori, and lacks supporting evidence. 51 Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 52-53,'

in Sib O r 3 for a full restoration of the Jerusalem temple, and nothing to indicate that the restoration under the Maccabees was satisfactory. T h e lack of outrage against Antiochus Epiphanes might be explained if the Sibyl wrote in the later years of Philometor, when Epiphanes was dead and the Syrians no longer controlled Judea. In any case, the earliest Jewish Sibylline Oracles are remarkably irenic and posirive, when viewed in the context of the contemporary Egyptian propaganda and of Jewish apocalypses such as Daniel. They bear witness to an era ofJewish success in Egypt, when it was possible to dream of a glorious restoration of the Jerusalem temple under Ptolemaic patronage. Epilogue The positive relations between Jew and Gentile reflected in Sib O r 3 contrast sharply with the kind of propaganda we find in a later stage of the tradition, reflected in Sib Or 5, from the early second century CE. By then, relations between Jews and Egyptians had deteriorated to the point where the Jews were portrayed as the Typhonians in Egyptian propaganda. 52 A fragmentary papyrus from the time of the Jewish revolt under Trajan (115-117 CE) urges its readers to "attack the Jews," who are characterized as "lawbreakers once cast out from Egypt by the wrath of Isis."53 The text warns that Jews will inhabit the land, or city, of Helios.54 It also warns Egyptians not to let their city become desolate, presumably with reference to Memphis. The Jewish Sibyl, on the other hand, foretold the destruction of Memphis without compunction: Mighty Memphis, who formerly boasted most to wretched mortals, you will weep in dire straits and disastrous fate.55

She also predicts the destruction of Isis and Sarapis. The Sibyl does not make use of the myth of Horus and Seth, but the book is full of scathing denunciations of enemies, targeting Rome even more than Egypt. When the Fifth Sibyl looks for deliverance, the hope is no longer for a king from the sun but for a man from heaven (256, 414). 52 See David Frankfurter, "Lest Egypt's City be Deserted: Religion and Ideology in the Egyptian Response to the Jewish Revolt (116-117 C.E.)," JJS 43(1992) 20320. 53 CPJ 520 (V. Tcherikover, A. Fuks, M. Stern and D.M. Lewis, Corpus Papyrorum Judaicarum (Cambridge: Harvard, 1964) 3. 119-21. Frankfurter, "Lest Egypt's City be Deserted," 208, also refers to an unpublished fragment from Oxyrhynchus. 54 The readings of the two fragments differ at this point. 55 Sib O r 5:63-65, cf. 180-81.

The book ends on a note of despair, with the extinction of all the stars. In fact, the conflict of propaganda between Jews, Greeks and Egyptians in Roman Egypt, which had raged throughout the Roman era and is only belatedly reflected in the Sibylline Oracles, 56 ended in the virtual extinction of Egyptian Judaism after the failure of the revolt.

56

Sec J.G. Gager, The Origins of Anti-Semitism (New York: Oxford, 1983) 43-66; Feldman, Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World, 84-176.

A SYMBOL O F OTHERNESS: C I R C U M C I S I O N AND SALVATION IN T H E FIRST C E N T U R Y

In Acts 15:1, we are told that some men came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the brethren that "unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses you cannot be saved," and that Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and debate with them. T h e position of these Judeans is often regarded as archetypically Jewish. Circumcision, after all, was the sign of the covenant with Abraham: This is my covenant which you shall keep, between me and you and your descendants after you: every male among you shall be circumcised...and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you (Gen. 17:10-11).

Its importance is amply attested by the events of the Maccabean era and by the forcible circumcisions of the Hasmoneans. 1 While the custom was not uniquely Jewish, it was virtually synonymous with Judaism in the Roman period. The satirist Persius could speak simply of "the sabbath of the circumcised' 5 (Sat. 5.184). Tacitus held that Jews "adopted circumcision to distinguish themselves from other peoples by this difference. Those who are converted to their ways follow the same practice" (Hist. 5.2). Petronius, in a more derisive tone, says that The Jew may worship his pig-god and clamor in the ears of high heaven, but unless he also cuts back his foreskin with the knife, he shall go forth from the people and emigrate to Greek cities and shall not tremble at the fasts of Sabbath imposed by the law (Frag. 37).

There is no doubt that circumcision was widely perceived by Gentiles as a symbol of Judaism's otherness. The Pauline rejection of circumcision as a requirement for Gentiles was surely a significant factor in emergent Christianity's "breaking away" from its Jewish matrix. Yet Jewish views on circumcision and on the salvation of the Gentiles were not entirely uniform, so the conflict within the Christian community has been said to reflect an "internal Jewish debate." 2 In this essay I wish to review the spectrum of Jewish opinions in the 1 2

See R. Meyer, "peritemnô," 7Z)jVT6(1968) 72-84. H.D. Betz, Galatians (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979) 89.

Greco-Roman Diaspora, which was more diversified and generally less stringent than the homeland. I shall address three questions: 1 what did Jews demand of Gentiles, on the evidence of the socalled propaganda literature? 2 at what point was a Gentile considered to become a member of the Jewish community? 3 what can be said of the controversial category of "God-fearers" or Gentiles on the periphery of Judaism? The answers to these questions may help clarify how far the Christian dispute reflected an internal Jewish debate, and how far it resulted from new factors which were intrinsic to Christianity itself. 1. The Jewish propaganda literature By Jewish propaganda literature I mean those compositions which are ostensibly addressed to a Gentile audience. Whether these works were composed primarily for a Gentile audience or were rather intended to bolster the self-respect of the Jews has been disputed since Tcherikover's famous article.3 This question does not seem to me to admit of an unequivocal answer. Propaganda is often most effective with the home constituency, and it is probable that most readers of these works were Jews. Yet they obviously seek and claim the respect of the Greeks, and what better way to bolster self-respect than by winning the respect of others? 4 Whatever the case, these works do provide some specific indications of what Diaspora Judaism wanted from the Gentile world. I will consider four examples: the third Sibylline Oracle and the Letter of Aristeas from the Ptolemaic period, and, from the Roman, Pseudo-Phocylides and the fourth Sibylline Oracle. The main body of Sib. Or. 3 was composed in the second century BCE, probably in the reign of Ptolemy VI Philometor, who was exceptionally favorable to the Jews.‫ י‬The oracles have a strong political and eschatological interest. They expect a decisive turning point in the reign of "the seventh king of Egypt from the line of the Greeks" (vss 193, 318, 608), most probably either Philometor himself or his expected successor Neos Philopator. This king is referred to in 3 V. Tchcrikover, , Jewish Apologetic Literature Reconsidered," Eos 48(1956) 169-93. 4 See further my discussion in Between Athens and Jerusalem. Jervish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (New York: Crossroad, 1983) 8-10. 5 J.J. Collins, ÌT1e Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (SBLDS 13; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1974) 21-34; "The Sibylline Oracles," in J . H . Charlcsworth, ed., The Old Testament Pseudeptgrapha (Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1983) 1.354-57.

Egyptian idiom as "a king from the sun" who will stop the entire earth from evil war. 6 The sibyl does not look immediately for Jewish independence but for a favorable Gentile monarch under whose patronage "the people of the great God will again be strong" and will be "guides in life for all mortals." 7 The oracles unabashedly praise the Jews as "a race of most righteous men" (219). Specific features which are singled out are rejection of astrology and superstition, practice of social justice (218-264) and avoidance of idolatry and homosexuality (573-600). These are presumably the ways in which they can serve as guides in life for all mortals. In a number of passages, however, the sibyl appeals directly to the Greeks: "To what purpose do you give vain gifts to the dead and sacrifice to idols? Who put error in your heart that you should abandon the face of the great God and do these things?" (547-549). The way for Greece to escape the din of war is "by offering the holocausts of oxen and loud-bellowing bulls...at the Temple of the great God." The sibyl does not expect immediate conversion: "you certainly will not sacrifice to God until everything happens," but "what God has planned will not go unfulfilled." (570-71). The Egyptian Sibyllines (Books 3 and 5, but also 11-14) are exceptional in Diaspora Judaism by their lack of belief in a judgment after death or resurrection. 8 Salvation is to be sought in this world. For the Jews it is a peaceful life around the temple free from war (702-09). For Greeks it is also life free from war and subjection. It is a collective, political state, not a matter of individual conversion. The requirements are the abandonment of idolatry and offering sacrifice at the temple of the great God, presumably in Jerusalem. These requirements are filled out in a few other passages. In vss. 624-634 the sibyl appeals to the Gentiles to turn back and be converted—by offering sacrifices to the immortal God and practising justice. In the eschatological time they will repent of idolatry, send to the temple and ponder the law of the Most High 6

Sib. Or. 3:652. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 40-43. The phrase "king from the sun" also occurs in the Egyptian Potter's Oracle. 7 Sib. Or. 3: 194-195. A. Momigliano, sees here an allusion to the Maccabcan revolt, but nothing else in Sib. Or. 3 supports this suggestion; "La portata storica dei vatdcini sul settimo re nel terzo libro degli Oracoli Sibillini," Forma Futuri• Studi in Onore del Cardinale Michele Pellegrino (Turin: Bottega d'Erasmo, 1975) 1077-84. Sib. Or. 3:767 would seem to imply that the Ptolemaic kingdom is an intermediate stage to be superseded finally by the kingdom of God. 8 M. Hengel disputes this in "Messianische Hoffnung und politischer 'Radikalismus' in der jüdisch-hellenistischen Diaspora," in D. Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tübingen: Mohr, 1983) 656 η.2. He points to Sib. Or. 4:178-190 which speaks of resurrecdon, and Sib. Or. 3:705ff. Sib.

(716-723). They are warned not to attack Jerusalem (732-40), to "shun unlawful worship," and to avoid adultery, homosexuality and infanticide (762-66). The requirements for salvation, then, are partly cultic and partly moral. While the salvation of the Gentiles is eschatological, the sibyl may have expected it in the fairly near future. What is notable for our present discussion is that the Greeks are never required to practise circumcision, observe the more distinctive commandments, or become Jewish. The focal point of conversion is worship of the true God in the Jerusalem temple. 9 Greek mythology is accommodated by an euhemeristic explanation in which Kronos and Zeus are reduced to human status (vss 110-115), but worship is restricted to "the most high God" or "the great God" who may, however, be conceived in Greek terms.10 The Letter of Aristeas is presented as a letter from one Greek to another, although it is patently composed by a Jew." Here there is no appeal for conversion. Indeed conversion is unnecessary, since God, the overseer and creator of all things, whom they worship, is He whom all men worship, and we too, your Majesty, though we address him differently, as Zeus and Dis; by these names men of old not unsuitably signified that He through whom all creatures receive life and come into being is the guide and lord of all (Ep. Arist. 16).12

The purpose of the Letter is not to convert, but to win sympathy and admiration; it is full of expressions of praise for Jerusalem, the law and the wisdom of the translators. The author does not avoid the distinctive, separatist aspects of Jewish law, but defends them by means of allegorical interpretation. Moses fenced the people in so "that we might not mingle at all with any of the other nations" (139). What this means, however, is that they should be "free from all vain imaginations." This position can be appreciated by "leading Egyptian priests" who "call us men of God." This title applies to "those who worship the true God." The Epistle, like the sibyl, rejects Or. 4 cannot be assimilated to the same tradition as Sib. Or. 3 and 5, in view of their fundamentally different attitudes to temple worship. It is usually located in Syria or the Jordan valley. Sib. Or. 3:705fT does not speak of eternal life, but is concerned with the continuing generations of the Jewish people, as Hengcl himself admits. 9 Compare the traditional Jewish hope in Isa 2:2-4. ιω On the identification of the God of Judaism with Greek conceptions of God, see M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974) 1:261-261. Compare Artapanus, who adopts an cuhermeristic explanation of Egyptian cults and claims that Moses founded them, but appears to endorse the cults as useful. See Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 32-38. " Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 81-86. 12 Compare Celsus in Origcn, Contra Celsum, 1.24 and 5.41; Hcngcl, Judaism and Hellenism, 1.262.

polytheism and gives an euhemeristic explanation of its origin (128138). In doing so, the author could hope to win the respect of philosophically oriented Gentiles. 13 Judaism is presented as a nonviolent, non-aggressive philosophy (148). The sages selected for the work of translation are "men of the finest character and highest culture," versed in Greek as well as in Jewish literature (121). They "rejected a rough and uncouth manner...and never assumed an air of superiority to others" (122). They did not present themselves as members of an exclusive, chosen people. The attitude of the Epistle is well summed up by Hadas: The theology premised is applicable to all mankind, not to the Jews alone, and God's providence is universal. It is not suggested that God will show special consideration for the Jews simply by virtue of their being Jews, nor is there any hint of proselytization...The Jews follow their own traditional usage to attain a religious end; the same end may be attained by others by a different path." 14

Both the sibyl and Ps. Aristeas praise Judaism explicidy. Ps. Phocylides does not even mention it. Jewish authorship is inferred from a few allusions to the Pentateuch. Since some of these concern relatively obscure points (e.g. 140: "If a beast of your enemy falls on the way, help it to rise") we might not expect a Gentile author to pick them out, but the issue is not beyond question. 15 Jewish authorship is supported by a reference to bodily resurrection (103104) and by the extensive parallels between these sayings and the summaries of Jewish law in Philo's Hypothetica 7.1-9 and Josephus' Against Apion 2. 190-219, but while Philo and Josephus claim to be summarizing Jewish laws, Ps. Phocylides does not. 16 The common material in Philo, Josephus and Ps. Phocylides concerns the network of family and social relations, and the characteristically Jewish polemic against adultery and homosexuality. Ps. Phocylides, however, lacks any polemic against idolatry; it even refers to the heavenly bodies as "blessed ones" (75, 163) and says that the dead will become "gods" (104). These allusions are not 13 M. Nilsson, Geschichte der Griechischen Religion (Munich: Beck, 1950) 2:546-52; G. Delling, "Monos Theos," Studien zum Neuen Testament und zum hellenistischen Judentum (Götüngen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1970) 391-400; H.W. Attridge, First Century Cynicism in the Epistles of Heraclitus, (HTS 29; Chico: Scholars Press, 1976) 13-23. 14 M. Hadas, Aristeas to Philocrates (New York: Harper, 1951) 62. 15 See P.W. van der Horst, The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides (SVTP 4; Leiden: Brill, 1978) 70-76. 16 J.E. Crouch, The Origin and Intention of the Colossian Haustafel (FRLANT 109; Götüngen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1972) 84-101; M. Küchler, Frühjiidische Weisheitstraditionen (Götüngen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979) 207-318; Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 143-148.

incompatible with monotheism, and the expression heis theos esti sophos (vs. 54) may be taken to affirm it, but monotheism is scarcely an issue in these sayings. There is no question here of conversion to a specific cultic practice or of rituals such as circumcision.17 Salvation involves both the immortality of the soul and the resurrection of the body, but the only requirement that can be inferred is conformity to the ethic set forth in the sayings. In the public realm, too, we are told that "wisdom directs the course of lands and cities" (131). The Jewish law is an implicit contributor to this wisdom, but it is not explicitly acknowledged. There is no distinction here between Jew and Greek. The purpose of Ps. Phocylides has puzzled commentators. It is evidently not a proselytizing work nor can it be taken as propaganda for Judaism at all. If it was written by a Jew, the author does not appear to have attached importance to that fact. Some scholars have suggested that we have here the work of a "God-fearer"—i.e. a Gentile on the threshold of Judaism, familiar with the Torah from the preaching of the synagogue.18 The affinities with Philo and Josephus do indeed support a connection with the synagogue, but the identification of "God-fearers" is problematic, as we shall see later. If the work can stand as an example of Jewish teaching, it is remarkable for its lack of insistence on the distinctive aspects of Judaism. Our final example of Diaspora literature ostensibly addressed to Gentiles is Sib. Or. 4. This document comes from the late first century of the common era and differs from the Egyptian Sibylline tradition of Books 3 and 5 in significant ways: it rejects temple worship and expects a resurrection of the dead. 19 The typical Sibylline review of history culminates with the threat of the destruction of the world by fire. This impending threat provides the context for the sibyl's preaching: Ah wretched mortals, change these things, and do not lead the great God to all sorts of anger, but abandon daggers and groanings, murders and outrages, and wash your whole bodies in perennial rivers. Stretch out your hands to heaven and ask forgiveness for your previous deeds and make propitiation for bitter impiety with words of praise; God will grant repentance and will not destroy (Sib. Or. 4: 162-69).

17 Vs. 31 "Do not eat blood; abstain from foot sacrificed to idols," is an interpolation found in only one inferior manuscript. Another reference to "gods" in vs. 98 is unintelligible and must be emended. 18 Van der Horst, The Sentences, 76. 19 J J. Collins, "The Place of the Fourth Sibyl in the Development of the Jewish SibylIina/7JS25(1974) 365-80; "The Sibylline Oracles," 381-83.

This appeal is addressed to humanity at large. In the aftermath of the Jewish revolt, the plea to abandon daggers and murders may be addressed primarily to Jews. The baptism which the sibyl calls for cannot be equated with proselyte baptism, but is a symbol of repentance for Jews and Gentiles. As such, it may be compared to the baptism of John. There is no suggestion that those who wash their bodies in perennial rivers are thereby incorporated into the Jewish people. There is no appeal for circumcision of the Gentiles, or for proselytism at all. After the resurrection "as many as are pious" (hossoi d'eusebeousi) wiU live on earth again. This sibyl definitely rejects not only idolatry, adultery and homosexuality, but also animal sacrifice and even temples. Such a view of religion might appeal to philosophically sophisticated pagans, but it is at odds not only with popular pagan religion, but also with much of traditional Judaism. That it was written after the destruction of the temple is presumably a factor here, but other strands ofJudaism, including Sib. Or. 5, did not renounce temple worship in principle at this time. This brief sampling of Diaspora literature shows some variation, but also some dominant trends. What these Jews asked of Gentiles was primarily that they worship the one true God. This was usually thought to entail a rejection of idolatry. They also insisted on an ethical code with special emphasis on avoiding adultery and homosexuality. 20 The lack of reference to circumcision is impressive, even in contexts where we would expect to find it—e.g. Ezekiel the tragedian fails to mention it as a requirement for celebrating the Passover.21 Most of the works which have been regarded as propaganda literature show litde interest in proselytizing, but show a desire to share and be accepted in the more philosophically sophisticated strata of Hellenistic culture. Salvation is seldom restricted to membership of the Jewish people. 22 This literature may not represent all strata of Jewish society, but it represents a substantial body of opinion nonetheless. 20 See the discussion of "the common ethic" in Between Athens and Jerusalem, 141-168. 21 J.B. Segal, The Hebrew Passoverfromthe Earliest Times (London: Oxford, 1963) 24. 22 In "The Covenant as a Soteriological Category and the Nature of Salvation in Palestinian and Hellenistic Judaism," in R. Hamerton-Kelly and R. Scroggs, ed., Jews, Greeks and Christians, essays in honor of W.D. Davies (Leiden: Brill, 1976) 34-38, E. P. Sanders identifies different levels of salvation in Philo. The highest level is the vision of the Logos. Sanders concludes that "only some will see, but all of those who see will be Jews or proselytes,' ‫ י‬but adds "(with the possible exception of a few wise Gentiles)." In Prob. 73-75, Philo includes in the small number of the wise the seven sages of Greece, the Persian Magi, Indian Gymnosophists, as well as the Jewish Essenes.

II. Conversion andproselytism The literary remains of the Hellenistic Diaspora represent the views of well-educated Jews who saw themselves, in Philo's words, as "near to being citizens, because they differ little from the original inhabitants" (Mos. 1.35). Philo and Josephus claim that this form of Judaism was attractive to Gentiles. Philo claims that not only Jews but almost every other people, particularly those which take more account of virtue, have so far grown in holiness as to value and honor our laws (Mos. 2.17).

We may assume some exaggeration here, but the claim is supported by Seneca's complaint that the customs of this accursed race have gained such influence that they are now received throughout all the world. The vanquished have given their laws to the victors.23

Both Philo and Seneca emphasize the observance of the sabbath. Philo presents the synagogues as schools of philosophy which stand wide open in every city on each seventh day, where the law is preached under two main "heads" of duty to God and to humanity (Spec. Leg. 2.62). Josephus claims that the Jews of Antioch were constantly attracting to their religious ceremonies multitudes of Greeks, and these they had in some measure incorporated into themselves (JW 7.3.3[45]).

There is some evidence of active proselytizing in Rome. In 139 BCE the Jews were allegedly expelled from Rome "because they attempted to transmit their sacred rites to the Romans." 24 The expulsion under Tiberius in 19 CE may have had a similar reason: "they were converting many of the natives to their customs." 25 Such 23 Seneca, in Augustine, De Civitate Dei, 6.11. M. Stern, Greek and Latin Authors on Jeivs and Judaism (Jcnisalcm: The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1974) 1:431. 24 Valerius Maximus 1.3.3. Three summaries of this text survive, one of which says that the Jews "attempted to infect the Roman customs with the cult of Jupiter Sabazius". A second docs not mention the Jews, and the third does not mention Sabazius. In "Sabazius and the Jews in Valerius Maximus: A Re-examination,"J&S 69(1979) 35-38, E.N. Lane argues that the Jews were expelled, but that the association with Sabazius is due to an error in the transmission of the text. 25 Cassius Dio, Hist Romana 57.18.5a (Stern, Greek and Latin Authors, 365). Josephus blames this episode on four individuals who deceived a proselyte named Fulvia (Ant. 18.3.4-5[65-84]). See also Tacitus. Annals, 2.85.5, Suetonius. Tiberius, 36.1 and E.M. Smallwood, The Jews under Roman Rule (Leiden: Brill, 1976) 201-206.

active proselytizing is not well attested elsewhere,26 but Judaism attracted adherents throughout the Diaspora. The question that arises is at what point these people ceased to be "others" and were accepted as members of the Jewish people. In the Talmud, there are three requirements for a proselyte: circumcision, baptism and sacrifice.27 The requirements of baptism and sacrifice are not attested before the end of the first century. However circumcision of proselytes is clearly evidenced from the Maccabean era on, not only in the forcible circumcision of the Idumeans and Itureans by the Hasmoneans (Ant 13.9.1 [257-58] and 13.11.1 [318]), but also in the story of Achior's conversion in Judith 14:10. The Herods required Gentiles to be circumcised before they married into the family; some accepted and some declined.28 In the Roman Diaspora, the custom is attested by Tacitus (Hist. 5.2), Petronius (Frag. 37) and Juvenal (Sat. 14.99). Whether it was universally held as a requirement for conversion to Judaism has nonetheless been questioned from time to time.29 We may infer from Philo that there were some Jews in Alexandria who dispensed with the practice of circumcision. In his famous discussion of the limits of allegorical interpretation in Migr. Abr. 8994, Philo says: "such men I for my part should blame for handling the matter in too easy and oflhand a manner." He is in agreement with their allegorical understanding of circumcision as "the excision 26 Horace, Sal. 1.4.138-143, which is often cited in this context, does not necessarily refer to proselytizing at all, but may involve coercion for other purposes. See J . Nolland, "Proselytism or Politics in Horace, Satires 1.4.138-143," VC 33(1979) 347-55. 27 Β J . Bamberger, Proselytism in the Talmudic Period (New York: Ktav, 1968, first published in 1939) 42-55; G.F. Moore, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era (New York: Scribners, 1971, first published in 1927) 331. S.J. Cohen, "Conversion to Judaism in Historical Perspective, , ‫ י‬Conservative Judaism 36(1983) 31-45, notes that the triple requirement is attributed to Rabbi Judah the Patriarch in Sifre Numbers 108, but docs not appear anywhere in the Mishnah. In "At the Crossroads: Tannaitic Perspectives on the Jewish-Christian Schism,1' in E.P. Sanders, A.I Baumgarten and A. Mendelson, ed., Jewish and Christian ά^-Βφηιύοη (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981) 2: 115-156, L.H. Schiffman argues that proselyte baptism is presupposed by Christian baptism, but this is by no means necessary. Tliere is some inherent probability that die practice of sacrifice by converts originated before the destruction of the temple, but neither requirement is attested in first-century stories of conversions such as, Joseph andAseneth and the story of Izates of Adiabene. 28 Ant. 16.7.6(225): Syllaeus the Arab refused, saying that if he complied he would be stoned to death by the Arabs. Ant 20.7.1 (139); Epiphanes of Commagene declined but Azizus of Emessa consented, in order to marry Drusilla, daughter of Herod Agrippa. Ant 20.7.3 (145); Polemo, king of Cilicia, was circumcised in order to marry Bcrnice. When the marriage collapsed he abandoned Judaism again. 29 Recently, N.J. McElcney, "Conversion, Circumcision and the Law," NTS 20(1974) 328-333.

of pleasure and all passions, and the putting away of the impious conceit," but argues that literal observance is to the spiritual as the body is to the soul, and cannot be neglected. What is noteworthy, however, is the tolerant tone of his disapproval. He stops far short of denying that the allegorizers are authentic Jews or members of the covenant people. While he presents his view strongly, he presents it as simply his own opinion, and he was not in a position to impose his opinion on the whole Jewish community. Insofar as he shares their allegorical understanding, moreover, he may have felt more kinship with such people than with the literalists. The context of the discussion is the importance of good reputation. Philo comments that very many, after coming to Virtue's feet with no counterfeit or unreal homage and with their eyes open to her genuine loveliness, through paying no regard to the general opinion have become the objects of hostility, just because they were held to be bad, when they were really

good (Migr. Abr. 86). If this refers to the allegorists, it would seem that Philo was rather sympathetic to them, while other elements in the Jewish community were far more hostile.30 Philo defends the need for literal observance of circumcision, but he does not simply affirm it as "a sign of the covenant." He is at pains to justify it in terms that will appear respectable to a Greek. 31 On the one hand, he emphasizes its hygienic value.32 On the other, he accords primacy to its allegorical significance (the excision of pleasure and conceit).33 He can even derive support from the Egyptians, "a race regarded as pre-eminent for its populousness, its antiquity and its attachment to philosophy" (Spec. Leg. 1.2), although elsewhere he calls them "a worthless breed, whose souls were infected with the poison and bad temper alike of the crocodiles and asps of their country" (Leg. ad Gaium, 166-70). Philo does not treat

30 P. Borgen, Paul Preaches Circumcision and Pleases Men (Trondhcim: Tapir, 1983) 43, 71, argues that there was some persecution of those who abandoned circumcision, and draws an analogy with Paul. 31 For a summary of Philo's statements on circumcision, secJ.Z. Smith, "Fcnces and Neighbors: Some Contours of Early Judaism," in Imagining Religion: From Babylon to Jonestown (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1982) 14. 32 Spec. Leg. 1.4-7. Philo lists four allegedly traditional arguments in favor of circumcision: freedom from ulceration, cleanliness, assimilation to the heart and increased fertility. 33 Spec. Leg. 1.8-11; Qyaest in Gen. 3.46-52 (on Gen 17:10-14). The symbolic understanding of circumcision as circumcision of the heart was widespread already in the biblical period. Cf. Lev 26:41; Dcut 10:16, 30:6; Jer 4:4, 9:25; Ezek 44:7,9. Also 1QS 5:5.

circumcision as a central symbol of ethnic or religious identity,34 but the extent of his apologia shows his awareness that it was widely so regarded (cf. also Q]uaest in Gen. 3.46-52). Philo's allegorical understanding of the significance of circumcision inevitably detracts from the importance of the physical rite, even though he defends that too. Philo could have agreed with Paul that "he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly nor is true circumcision something external and physical. He is a Jew who is one inwardly and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not literal" (Rom 2:28-29). In view of Philo's comments on the alllegorists, we must allow that there were some ethnic Jews who abandoned circumcision without repudiating Judaism, however much other Jews may have "blamed" them. Of course, this could also be said of the Hellenizers before the Maccabean revolt. However they were a rather different case because of their political ambitions. We do not know how numerous these allegorizers may have been, but their existence shows that the absolute link between circumcision and Judaism which Petronius righdy or wrongly perceived in Rome could not be presumed in all areas of the Diaspora. 35 The question of circumcision is, of course, more likely to be controversial in the case of a convert than in the case of an ethnic Jew. Philo's pronouncements on the matter leave room for debate. In Quaest in Ex. 2.2, he argues that "in reality the proselyte is one who circumcises not his uncircumcision but his desires and sensual pleasures and the other passions of the soul. For in Egypt the Hebrew nation was not circumcised." The implication of this passage is surely that circumcision is not an essential prerequisite for membership of the Hebrew nation. Harry Wolfson saw here a reference to "spiritual proselytes" or "God-fearers," and contrasted them with the "full proselytes" to whom Philo refers elsewhere.36 34

J.Z. Smith, "Fences and Neighbors," 14: "For Philo, the practice seems to have litde to do with either ethnic or religious identity." 35 P. Borgen, "The Early Church and the Hellenistic Synagogue," in Paul Preaches Circumcision and Pleases Men, 68-69, finds "also in other writings hints.. .which suggest that there were Jews who ignored circumcision." The example which he cites from Ignatius, Philad. 6.1 discourages learning Judaism from the uncircumcised, but docs not say that the latter are Jews (despite the interpretation offered by C.K. Barrett, "Jews and Judaizcrs in the Episdcs of Ignatius," in HamertonKelly and Scroggs, ed., Jews, Greeks and Christians, 234,242). Borgen also adduces Abot of Rabbi Nathan 26 and related rabbinic material, but again, this does not direcdy support his case. See also his "Debates on Circumcision in Philo and Paul," ibid., 15-32. 36 Spec. Leg. 1.52; 308-309; Virt. 103,104. Wolfson, Philo (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard, 1948) 2:370. Compare also F. Siegert, "Gottesfürchtige und Sympathisanten,"J^74(1973) 123.

The other passages do not mention a requirement of circumcision either, and the distinction between two kinds of proselyte has no basis in Philo's terminology. In view of the passage in Migr. Abr. 8994, we may assume that Philo would "blame" a convert who did not fulfil the literal commandments, including circumcision, but the ritual is not an entrance requirement and its omission does not necessarily exclude the proselyte from the Jewish community, at least in theory.37 Philo's position here may be compared to that ascribed to R. Joshua in the Babylonian Talmud (Teb. 46a). R. Eliezer is said to have held that one who is circumcised but not baptized is a convert, as in the case of the Jews at the Exodus. R.Joshua maintained that one who is baptized but not circumcised is a convert, like the Israelite women at the Exodus. The sages insisted on both requirements. In the Jerusalem Talmud (j. Kid. 3.14.64d), R.Joshua is said to have required both circumcision and baptism. Bamberger argues that the Jerusalem version is the "correct" one and that even the Babylonian text "cannot mean that R. Joshua permitted conversion without circumcision," for "how indeed could R. Joshua have flouted the direct written word of the Torah?" 38 The issue, however, is not what R. Joshua actually held but what was the view attributed to him, and this cannot be decided by a priori considerations. Neither R. Joshua nor Philo is suggesting that circumcision be abandoned. The question is simply at what point a convert becomes a Jew, whether circumcision is a prerequisite for entry, or a duty consequent on admission.39 The view attributed to R.Joshua in the Babylonian Talmud is the latter, and it was evidently not accepted by the sages. Philo's position seems to be similar. Both discussions are theoretical, and do not prove the actual existence of uncircumcised proselytes, but they have at least potential significance nonetheless.40

37 Borgen, "The Early Church," 67: "bodily circumcision was not the requirement for entering the Jewish community, but was one of the commandments which they had to obey after having received the status of Jews." Borgen compares the position of Hillel in b. Shabbath 31 a, which docs not, however, address this question dirccdy. See also N.J. McEleney, "Conversion," 328-29. J. Nolland, "Uncircumcised proselytes?" JSJ 12(1981) 173-79, against McElency, infers from Migr. Abr. that Philo would have insisted on circumcision. 38 Bamberger, Proselytism, 46-52. Compare W.G. Braude, Jewish Proselytizing in the First Five Centuries of the Common Era (Providence: Brown, 1940) 76. 39 S. Bialoblocki, Die Beziehungen des Judentums zu Proselyten und Proselytentum (Berlin: Nobels Kulturbibliothek, 1930) 15. 40 Bamberger, Proselytism, 51.

When Philo speaks of proselytes, he ignores the ritual aspect of conversion and pays far greater attention to its social aspects. Proselytes, he says, should be accorded every favor and consideration and equal rank with the native born because they have left their country, their kinsfolk and their friends for the sake of virtue and religion. Let them not be denied another citizenship or other ties of family and friendship... 4 1

Religion was an integral part of civic life in the Hellenistic and Roman cities. Jewish monotheism might win the respect of the philosophically sophisticated, but proselytes who abandoned the worship of pagan gods would thereby be cut off from many civic and social activities. Jews as a group did not enjoy full citizenship in Alexandria or other cities of the Diaspora in the first century, 42 and so the status of proselytes must have been ambiguous. Atheism, or refusal to worship the gods, was at least a scandal, perhaps a crime. 43 Jews were exempt from this charge (at least by custom), but the status of the proselyte was less clear.44 Consequendy, proselytes could on occasion be persecuted, as we know from the case of Flavius Clemens under Domitian, although this seems to have been exceptional. 45 Quite apart from the legal ramifications, however, conversion to Judaism involved a major social transition. Philo explains Balaam's oracle "Behold, a people will dwell alone and among the nations it will not be reckoned," as follows: not because their dwelling-place is set apart and their land severed from others, but because in virtue of the distinction of their peculiar customs they do not mix with others to depart from the ways of their fathers (Mos. 1.278).

Even Jews who minimized their observance of strange customs would still be set apart socially if they refused to worship the pagan 41

Spec. Leg. 1.52. Cf. Spec. Leg. 1.308-309; Virt. 103,104. Smallwood, The Jews under Roman Rule, 227-230. The decisive evidence is found in the letter of Claudius. See also S. Applebaum, "The Legal Status of the Jewish Communities in the Diaspora," in S. Safrai and M. Stern, ed., The Jewish People in the First Century, Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum, (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974) 1.420-463. 43 J . Juster, Les Juifs dans l'Empire Romain (Paris: Geuthner, 1914) 1:254-259. R. MacMullen, Paganism in the Roman Empire (New Haven: Yale, 1983) 62: "to deny the reality of the gods was absolutely unacceptable. You would be ostracized for that, even stoned in the streets." 44 V. Tchcrikover, Hellenistic Civilisation and the Jews (New York: Atheneum, 1970) 306: "there exists no document which exempts the Jews from participating in the worship of the gods." 45 Smallwood, The Jews under Roman Rule, 378-83. 42

gods. The objection against Jewish claims to citizenship, from Alexandria to Ionia, was that they did not worship the gods of their neighbors. 4 " Practical monotheism, with its social consequences, was a more significant dividing line between Jew and Gentile than an individual ritual such as circumcision. Conversion to Judaism involved joining a new community and being accepted as a member of a synagogue. 47 We may assume that synagogues would normally have insisted on circumcision, but in a place like Alexandria there may have been exceptions. The most elaborate literary account of a conversion from the Diaspora is found in the romance Joseph and Aseneth. The portrayal of the conversion process here accords well with what we have seen in Philo. Aseneth is a representative or model proselyte. 48 In 15:6 she is told that in future she will be called "city of refuge," and those who attach themselves to the Lord through repentance will be protected by her "wall." Since she is a woman, the issue of circumcision does not arise, but the fact that the main literary portrayal of the proselyte experience from the Hellenistic Diaspora concerns a woman should perhaps warn us not to attach too much importance to circumcision. In fact, Aseneth's conversion is not marked by any ritual. The episode of the honeycomb describes a mystical experience of some sort, but it is not a repeatable rite.49 The formulaic references to eating the bread of life, drinking the cup of immortality and anointing with the oil of incorruption are most satisfactorily explained as a reference to the entire Jewish way of life (8:5-6 and 15:4).50 When Joseph first meets Aseneth, he tells her that it is not fitting for a pious man (andn theosebei) who blesses with his mouth the living God and eats the blessed bread of life and drinks the blessed cup of immortality and anoints himself with the blessed oil of incorruption to kiss an alien woman who blesses dead and d u m b idols with her mouth and eats from their table bread of strangling and drinks from their libations a cup of treachery and anoints herself with oil of perdition. 51 46

For Alexandria, AgAp. 2.65; for Ionia, Ant. 12.3.2 (126). J.Z. Smith, "Fences and Neighbors," 15, notes that affiliation with a synagogue is one of the most common items noted in Jewish epitaphs from antiquity. Note also the rabbinic maxim that the rejection of idolatry is the acknowledgement of the whole law (Sifre Numbers 111, Sifre Deut 54, Megilla 13a, Moore, Judaism, 1:325). 4 " C. Burchard, Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth (Tübingen: Mohr, 1965) 119; Collins, Betiveen Athens and Jerusalem, 217. 49 On the alleged affinities of Joseph and Aseneth with mystery religions see D. Sanger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien (WUNT 2/5; Tübingen: Mohr, 1980). 50 Burchard, Untersuchungen, 86. M. Philoncnko, Joseph et Aseneth: Introduction. Texte Critique et Notes (Leiden: Brill, 1968) 91, attempts to identify a ritual here. 51 I follow the text of C. Burchard, "Ein vorläufiger griechischer Text von Joseph und Aseneth," Dielheimer- Blatter zum Alten Testament \ 4(1979) 2-53. 47

Since the eating and drinking are predicated of Joseph as a pious man, they cannot be a ritual of initiation but must refer to the habitual practice of the pious Jews. The point of distinction from Gentiles is, again, the rejection of idolatry and its attendant sacrifices and social functions. Even before the encounter with Aseneth, we learn that Joseph does not eat with the Egyptians, although he is the ruler of all Egypt (7:1 and 20:9). The actual conversion of Aseneth takes place when she throws away the idols which she formerly worshipped (10:13). Her acceptance into the Israelite community takes place when Joseph embraces her—that is, admits her to the social intimacies from which she previously had been excluded. It is consolidated when she marries Joseph and acknowledges Jacob as her father. The network of social relations gives external expression to the conversion that has taken place inwardly. Joseph and Aseneth is of course a fiction. It tells us an author's ideal, not the historical custom. It is very doubtful that a Jew in Egyptian service could remain as socially aloof as Joseph. Yet in the Ptolemaic era it was possible for Jews to rise in the government service without abandoning Judaism and probably without engaging in idolatry.52 Joseph and Aseneth posits good relations between Joseph and the Egyptians. Pentephres is an Egyptian priest, and Joseph does not eat with him (7: 1), but Pentephres is glad to give his daughter, and he blesses the God ofjoseph (3:3; 20:7). Both he and the pharaoh might be taken to represent pagan sympathizers with Judaism, although neither observes any Jewish laws.53 Whether such people can attain salvation (which for Joseph and Aseneth is immortality) is not really discussed. Aseneth was "dead" before her conversion, but then she was not especially sympathetic to the God of Israel at that point either. 54 The best known story of an historical conversion to Judaism in the Diaspora is the story of the royal house of Adiabene recounted by Josephus (Ant 20.2.3-4 [34-48]). A Jewish merchant named Ananias "visited the king's wives and taught them to worship God after the

52

The priest Onias, founder of Leontopolis, was a general in the army of Philometor (Josephus, AgAp 2.49). See P.M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria (Oxford: Clarendon, 1972) 1.83-84. 53 See M. Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth, 51. 54 The conclusion of Sanders ("The Covenant as a Soteriological Category," 23) that "Outside ofJudaism there is no salvation" seems to me more unequivocal than the text warrants.

manner of the Jewish tradition." Through them he also won over Izates, the crown prince. In the meantime, his mother Helena had been converted by another Jew. When Izates wished to be circumcised, since he considered that he would not be genuinely a Jew otherwise, his mother tried to stop him For, she said, he was a king; and if his subjects should discover that he was devoted to rites that were strange and foreign to themselves, it would produce much disaffection and they would not tolerate the rule of a Jew over them.

Ananias supported her, partly out of self-interest, since he feared he would be blamed if there was a revolt, but also because he held that he could worship God (to theion sebein) even without circumcision if he had fully decided to be devoted to the ancestral customs of the Jews, for this was more important than circumcision.

He added that God would pardon him if, constrained by necessity and by fear of his subjects, he failed to perform the rite. Izates was persuaded for the time being, but later another Jew, Eleazar, came from Galilee. He had a reputation for being very strict about the law, and persuaded Izates that circumcision was indeed necessary. His mother's fears of rebellion were not realized and indeed, Izates enjoyed divine protection. He and his mother became renowned benefactors of Jerusalem. This fascinating story gives rise to several problems. There is no reason to doubt the report that the conversion took place in two stages, but it is difficult to know how far the interpretative comments are supplied by Josephus himself rather than by the characters to whom they are attributed. Izates is in many ways an atypical proselyte. He is, after all, about to become king, and so his case involves political complications." We know little of conditions in Adiabene and whether they were at all similar to the western Diaspora. Yet some conclusions can be drawn on the basis of Josephus' narrative. Ananias justifies his position with a general theological principle—it is possible to worship God without circumcision. This is not simply a matter of expediency. 5 ‫'׳‬Josephus must have been aware of this principle. As we have seen, it had some support in Alexandria

55 Jacob Neusncr, A History of the Jews in Babylonia: I. The Parthian Period, (BJS 62; Chico California: Scholars Press, 1984, original publication Leiden: Brill, 1969) 6167. 56 Contra Bamberger, Proselytism, 51.

and even in rabbinic Judaism. 57 This principle, however, is qualified here in two respects. First, Izates' mother implies that his subjects would not regard him as a Jew if he was not circumcised, and this accords with Izates' own initial senriment. 58 Second, the assurance the God would pardon the omission suggests that it is normally culpable. Izates is excused because of "necessity," just as a dispensation might be given to a hemophiliac. The latter point, however, is compatible with the view that circumcision is not an entry requirement but an obligation consequent to admission. 59 The story is regrettably elliptical on Izates' status and practice after his conversion but before his circumcision. We are told that he read the law, but we are not told whether his devotion to the ancestral laws of the Jews extended to Sabbath observance or dietary laws, or whether he abandoned all worship of pagan gods. If he did, would this not have upset his subjects as much as circumcision? Further, while his subjects would not have regarded him as a Jew until he was circumcised, it is not clear how he was regarded by Ananias or by himself. It has been suggested that the expression "to worship God" (to theion sebein), is a play on the phrase sebomenos ton theon, and denotes a special class of "God-fearers" who observed the Jewish laws but stopped short of circumcision. But this is far from certain. 60 It would seem, however, that "to worship God" means to do all that is necessary and so, presumably, to ensure salvation (in whatever sense) whether it qualifies one as a Jew or not. The ambiguity of Izates' case is heightened by his peculiar situation. For him, to become a Jew is not to join a synagogue, as it would have been in Alexandria or Rome. Izates' case rests on his internal decision to an unusual degree. The story of Izates corroborates the view that in popular perception circumcision was a major identifying sign of Judaism. It also shows that there was some difference of opinion within Judaism as to whether circumcision was necessary for salvation. What is not clear is whether Izates was for a time, by way of exception, an uncircumcised proselyte, or whether Ananias was affirming that one could worship God without converting to Judaism. In the peculiar 57 Besides the dispute in the Babylonian Talmud noted above, see also the disagreement between R. Eliezer and R. Joshua as to whether Gentiles have a share in the world to come (Tos. Sanhednn 13.2). See Siegert, "Gottesfurchtige," 119-120. 58 J . Nolland, "Uncircumcised Proselytes?"JS7 12(1981) 173-194, argues that Izates would be left "in sociological terms, something less than a Jew" (193). 59 Bialoblocki, Die Beziehungen, 15. 60 Siegert, "Gottesfürchtige," 129.

case of Izates, where the usual social complications may not have held, the difference may not be of ultimate importance. III. The "God-fearers" The story of Izates raises the question of the existence of "Godfearers," a class of pious Gentiles who stopped short of full acceptance of the law. The description of this class in the PaulyWissowa article of Kuhn and Stegemann is typical: they frequent the services of the synagogue, they are monotheists in the biblical sense, and they participate in some of the ceremonial requirements of the Law, but they have not moved to full conversion to Judaism through circumcision. They are called...sebomenoi or phoboumenoi ton theon.6'

Estimates of their number have been high ("perhaps millions").62 Yet recently A.T. Kraabel has proclaimed their disappearance and argued that "at least for the Roman Diaspora, the evidence presently available is far from convincing proof for the existence of such a class of Gentiles." 63 The issue has a number of aspects which should be distinguished. First, there is a question as to whether certain expressions such as hoi phoboumenoi ton theon are technical terms for a well-defined class. Second, whether there was a class of pious Gentiles interested in Judaism, and third, whether those Gentiles, if they existed, conformed to the description set out in Pauly- Wissowa. The only undisputed technical name for pious Gentiles is the expression "fearers of heaven" in the Talmudic literature. 64 Even here it does not seem that a consistent code of behavior was implied. In the opinion of Saul Liebermann "all the , fearers of Heaven' must have accepted monotheism and the moral laws, whereas in questions of religious ceremonies and ritual they may have widely difTered."65 There is also some difference of opinion as to whether these "fearers of heaven" would attain salvation after death. The story of the Roman senator who gave his life to protect the Jews in Midrash Debarim Rabba 2.24 clearly implies that he would not have been

fil

K.G. Kuhn and H. Stcgcmann, "Prosclyten," PYVRE Sup 9(1962) 1260. Encyclopedia Judaica, 10:55. 6‫ג‬ A.T. Kraabel, "The Disappearance of the 'God-Fearers,‫" ׳‬Numen 28(1981) 121. 64 L.H. Feldman, 'Jewish 'Sympathizers' in Classical Literature and Inscripdons," TAPA 81(1950) 208; Siegert, "Gottesfürchtige," 110. 65 S. Liebermann, Greek in Jewish Palestine (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1942) 81. 62

saved if he had not been circumcised. 66 By contrast, Rabbi is said to have told Antoninus that he could eat of Leviathan in the world to come, but not of the Passover lamb, since he was not circumcised. 67 Outside the rabbinic literature, the main body of evidence is found in Acts in the usage of phoboumenoi and sebomenoi. Even here it is questionable how far these are technical terms rather than ad hoc descriptions. 68 The non-technical sense is suggested in part by the strange distribution—phoboumenoi in the first half of Acts, sebomenoi in the second. The expression tön sebomenön prosely ton in Acts 13:43 makes it difficult to maintain that sebomenoi was a technical term for a class distinct from proselytes. Moreover, it is not clear precisely what constitutes a phoboumenos or sebomenos, beyond some reverence for the God of Israel. Cornelius, who is certainly not a proselyte, shows his piety by almsgiving and prayer. In other cases the "God-fearers" are associated with the synagogues. In no case, however, are we told how far they kept the Jewish law or whether they were strict monotheists. Supporting evidence for the terminology of Acts is rare indeed. No technical terms for such pious Gentiles are found in Hellenistic Jewish literature before Josephus. In Joseph and Aseneth it is Joseph, the Israelite, who is called theosebes (8:5,6) and phoboumenos ton theon (8:5,6 and 8:9). Even in Josephus, only one passage uses sebomenoi in the supposed technical sense, Ant 14.7.2(110). This passage explains the wealth of the Jerusalem temple by reference to the contributions of ton kata ten oikoumenen Ioudaiön kai sebomenön ton theon. Even in this case the interpretation is disputed. Kirsopp Lake argued that since sebomenön does not have the article, it should be read as a further description of the Jews, so "all the Jews worshipping God throughout the world." 69 Against this, the presence of the kai and the analogy with Acts supports the view that the sebomenoi are distinct (e.g. Acts 17:17: "he spoke in the synagogue, ‫ יי‬tois loudaiois kai tois sebomenois).70 Even if the reference in Josephus is to pious Gentiles, the use of the term is poorly supported. Neither phoboumenos ton theon nor sebomenos ton theon occurs in inscriptions.71 Debate has centered on the occurrence of the Greek 66

Siegert, "Gottesfürchtige," 110-112. Liebermann, Greek in Jewish Palestine, 78-80. 68 K. Lake, "Proselytes and God-Fearers," in F.J. Foakes Jackson and K. Lake, ed., The Beginnings of Christianity: Part 1. The Acts of the Apostles (London: MacMillan, 1933) 74-96. 69 Lake, "Proselytes and God-Fearers," 85. 70 R. Marcus, "The Sebomenoi in Josephus," Jewish Social Studies 14(1952) 247250; Siegert,"Gottesfürchtige," 127. 71 Siegert, "Gottesfürchtige," 151. 67

term theosebës and the Latin metuens. The term theosebës is used by Josephus to refer to Poppaea, consort of Nero, who interceded for Jews on two occasions. She was not known for her piety, however, and there is no reason to infer from Josephus anything more than a general sympathy for the Jews. 72 Those, like Lifshitz, who find evidence for the "God-fearers'' in the inscriptions, assume the existence of this class on the basis of Acts and Josephus and look for anything that could be interpreted as a reference to it.73 The problem with this procedure was noted by Feldman. 74 Both theosebës and metuens can be used in a pagan, polytheistic context. 75 When they are used in a Jewish context, they may simply refer to Jews. Until recently there was no clear instance of the use of theosebeis to refer to Gentile sympathizers with Judaism. Such an instance now seems to be provided by a late second- or early third-century CE inscription from Aphrodisias in Asia Minor. This inscription uses the term for a group that is distinguished from the Jews but associated with them. 76 Other occurrences must now be reconsidered in light of this: e.g., the problematic inscriptions from the Miletus theatre (.Eioudeön tön kai Theosebiöri), where the word order initially suggests one group, the Jews, rather than two, and the Pantikapaion inscription which refers to the synagogue, tön loudaiön kai theon seboon?1 It should be noted, however, that theosebës is not in any case an unequivocal term. It may still, on occasion, refer to a Jew (as in Joseph and Aseneth), or, in a polytheistic context, to a pagan. The meaning of each occurrence must be judged from its context. The Aphrodisias evidence bears most directly on the use of the plural theosebeis to designate a group. Occurrences of the singular theosebës in epitaphs or in the inscriptions from the Sardis synagogue remain quite ambiguous. Even in the Aphrodisias inscription it is not clear

72

Ant. 20.8.11 (195); Vit. 16. She was implicated in the murder of Agrippina and the banishment of Octavia. See Sicgert, "Gottesfürchtige," 160. 73 Β. Lifshitz, "Du Nouveau sur les "Sympathisants," JSJ 1(1970) 80: "Si donc ces demi-proselytes sont indubitablement attestés chez Josephe et dans le N T on les cherchait tout naturellement dans les inscriptions." 74 Feldman, 'Jewish 'Sympathizers'," 205. 75 For theosebës see G. Bertram, "theosebës, theosebeia," TONT 3( 1965) 123-128. In the phrase detim metuens, deum may be genitive plural (Siegcrt, "Gottesfürchtige," 152). 76 J.M. Reynolds and R. Tannenbaum, Jews and Godfearers at Aphrodisias (Cambridge Philological Society, 1987). (This inscription had not been published when this article was written). 77 Sec L. Robert, Nouvelles Inscriptions de Sardes (Paris: Maisonneuve, 1964) 41, and T. Rajak, "Jews and Christians as Groups in a Pagan World," i n j . Neusner and E.S. Frcrichs, ed., "To See Ourselves av Others See Us." Christians, Jews, "Others," in Late Antiquity (Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1985) 247-81.

what qualifies a person as a member of the theosebeis.78 Finally, it is well to remember that theosebeis is not the term used in Acts, and so it does not confer a technical sense on sebomenoi or phoboumenoi. The case for a technical understanding of metuens rests largely on Juvenal's fourteenth satire, which refers to a Roman father who is metuentem sabbata.79 In the same passage, however, the phrase metuunt ius refers to full proselytes. In the inscriptions, metuens is found in both pagan and Jewish epitaphs. There is no unambiguous occurrence for God-fearer, although that usage is not necessarily excluded. 80 The terminology, then, shows some fluctuation. Phoboumenoi, sebomenoi and theosebeis can all on occasion refer to Gentiles who are associated with Judaism in some way, but none of these terms is unequivocal, and each occurrence must be interpreted in its own context. The evidence for Gentile adherents of Judaism is not, however, limited to this terminology. We have already noted the statements of Philo and Seneca about the spread of Jewish laws and Josephus' claim that the Jews of Antioch partially incorporated Gentile admirers. Josephus further claims that T h e masses h a v e long since shown a keen desire to a d o p t o u r religious observances; a n d there is not o n e city, G r e e k or b a r b a r i a n , n o r a single nation, to which o u r custom of abstaining f r o m work on the seventh day has not spread, a n d w h e r e fasts a n d the lighting of lamps a n d m a n y of o u r prohibitions in the m a t t e r of food are not observed

(AgAp. 2.282). This claim is corroborated by frequent allusions to Jewish customs in the Roman satirists from the time of Augustus.81 Much of the Roman evidence suggests a rather superstitious curiosity, although it could lead in time to full conversion (cf. Juvenal's fourteenth satire, 78 See the comments of A.T. Kraabel, "Synagoga Caeca: Systematic Distortion in Gentile Interpretations of Evidence for Judaism in the Early Christian Period," in Neusner and Frerichs, ed., "To See Ourselves," 219-46. 79 The argument was developed by j . Bernays, "Die G0ttesfìirchtígen bei Juvenal," Gesammelte Abhandlungen von Jacob Bernays (Berlin: Hertz, 1885) 2:71-80. 80 Siegert, "Gottesfürchtige," 152 81 On the Roman reception of Judaism see M. Stern, "The Jews in Greek and Latin Literature," in Safrai and Stern, ed., The Jewish People in the First Century, 2: 1101-1159; J . G . Gager, The Origins of Anti-Semitism: Attitudes Toward Judaism in Paganism and Christian Antiquity (Oxford: Oxford University, 1983). Even Augustus is said to have boasted that "not even a Jew, my dear Tiberius, observes the Sabbath fast as faithfully as I did to-day" (Suetonius, Augustus, 76). See also R. Goldenberg, "The Jewish Sabbath in the Roman World up to the Time of Constantine the Great," in H. Temporini and W. Haase, ed., ANRW II. 19.1 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1979) 414-447.

where the father observes the sabbath and the son is eventually circumcised). The distinction between the partially observant father and fully converted son is supported by Epictetus' reference to the type-figure who "is not a Jew but is only acting the part," as opposed to one who has been baptized. 82 Josephus claims that at the outbreak of the Jewish war, when the Syrians had rid themselves of the Jews, "still each city had its Judaizers, who aroused suspicion" (JW 2.18.2 [463]). These constituted "an equivocal element" which the Syrians regarded as alien, though evidently not as Jews. 83 Moreover, even if one regards the account of Paul's missionary activity in Acts as largely fictional, the fiction requires verisimilitude to establish plausibility. Luke would scarcely have given such prominence to a category that was not known to exist at all. This evidence shows beyond reasonable doubt that Judaism in the Roman Diaspora did win adherents who stopped short of circumcision. It does not, however, corroborate the description of this class that we find in the Paul)‫׳‬-Wissowa article of Kuhn-Stegemann or in Lifshitz's article. What we find is a broad range of degrees of attachment, not a class with specific requirements or with a clearly defined status in the synagogue. Juvenal's fourteenth satire illustrates the range: first the father who observes the sabbath, then the son who worships nothing but the clouds and the divinity of heaven, finally circumcision. Not all so-called "God-fearers," even in Acts, were necessarily monotheists or had necessarily quit the pagan community. 84 We should like to know more of the manner in which the Jews of Antioch incorporated Greeks, or how far Philo identified the prosely toi who have joined the new and godly commonwealth and have equal rank with the native born (Spec. Leg. 1. 51-52) with the proselytes who have circumcised not their uncircumcision but their desires and pleasures (Quaest in Ex. 2.2). There was also a spectrum of opinion on the Jewish side, as we can see from the story of Izates and from the debate over allegorists in Alexandria. It has been said that the crucial question which confronted firstcentury Judaism was that posed by the Gentile world.85 This is 82 Arrian, Diss. 2.9.19-21. Note that the point of transition here is not circumcision but baptism. 83 Josephus also claims that the women of Damascus had with few exceptions become converts to the Jewish religion (JW 2.20.2 [560]). The hyperbole of this claim should cast some doubt on all Josephus' claims about the popularity of Jewish religion. 81 Contra Lifshitz, "Du Nouveau sur les 'Sympathisants,"'80. 85 W.D. Davies, "From Schweitzer to Scholem: Reflections on Sabbatai Svi," JBL 95(1976) 547.

probably true in the sense that the very survival of Judaism depended on working out a modus vivendi with the Gentile world. It is not true, however, that first-century Judaism was gready preoccupied with the salvation of the Gentiles. That was ultimately a matter for the eschatological age. In the meantime, the literature suggests a "selfconfident Judaism" in Kraabel's phrase. 86 There is relatively little evidence of active proselytizing (despite Matt 23:15).87 Jews were, however, both willing and able to attract Gentiles to their synagogues and Gentiles were eager to adopt Jewish customs. Diaspora Judaism seems to have accepted a wide range of Gentile behavior (from superficial interest to full conversion), and was not too greatly concerned to establish specific points at which one became eligible for salvation.88 Of course, the literary evidence may not give us the whole picture, but it suggests that full incorporation into the Jewish people was not generally considered essential for Gentiles to worship God in an adequate and acceptable way. I V . The Christian

debate on

circumcision

The people who came from Judea to Antioch according to Acts 15 represent the stricter end of the spectrum of Jewish opinion. The position of Paul, however, cannot be equated with that of even the most liberal Hellenistic Jews. No Hellenistic Jew actively discouraged circumcision. According to Acts 21, Paul was accused of teaching all the Jews among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or observe the customs. Whether this charge was justified is disputed. 89 Paul was primarily concerned with Gentiles. Moreover, he told the Corinthians that any one who is already circumcised should not seek to remove the marks of his circumcision (1 Cor 7:18). Whether the children subsequently should be circumcised is not clear. Yet even with regard to the Gentiles,

86

A.T. Kraabel, "Paganism and Judaism: T h e Sardis Evidence," in A. Benoit, M. Philonenko, et C. Vogel, ed., Paganisme, Judaïsme, Christianisme: Melanges offerts a Marcel Simon (Paris: de Boccard, 1978) 21. Compare Gager, The Origins of AntiSemitism, 99. 87 Only 8 of 731 inscriptions from Italy mention proselytes (Kuhn-Stegemann, "Proselyten,' 1264). 88 In his "Paul and the T o r a h , " in Anti-Semitism and the Foundations of Christianity (New York: Paulist, 1979) 58, L. Gaston claims that legalism arose as a Gentile problem because God-fearers not under the covenant had to establish their righteousness by performance of certain works. I know of no evidence which would support this view. ® e.g. Gaston, "Paul and the T o r a h , " 66; Gager, The Origins of Anti-Semitism, 211-12.

Paul goes much further than a Jew like the Ananias who converted Izates. While neither circumcision nor uncircumcision matters (and so might be expected to be optional), he tells his Gentile converts that if they have themselves circumcised, Christ will be of no advantage to them (Gal 5:2). The strength of his feelings on the subject is clear when he warns the Philippians against "the dogs...who mutilate the flesh" (Phil 3:2) or wishes that those who trouble the Galatians might mutilate themselves (Gal 5: 12). These statements are made in polemical heat, to be sure, but they are worthier of a Roman satirist than of a Hebrew born of Hebrews. Paul's vehement rejection of circumcision comes from the fact that he preached a new creation in which there was neither Jew nor Greek, circumcision nor uncircumcision (Gal 6: 15). This new creation had its own theological basis—faith in Christ—and its own social reality with its distinctive rituals of baptism and the Lord's supper. 90 Paul's converts are not said to join the synagogue, even as "God-fearers," but formed their own new assembly. Circumcision symbolized a different social reality and a different way to salvation, hence the decisive rejection. Despite recent claims to the contrary, 91 Paul's rejection of circumcision symbolized a rejection of the ultimate efficacy of the contemporary synagogue.92 He did not of course reject the heritage of Judaism or deny that the Jews were heirs to the promises, and he certainly continued to regard himself as a Jew. Yet those Jews who did not believe in Christ were not "in Christ," and that was what mattered. Paul's belief in the resurrection of Jesus and its eschatological implications distinguished him radically from Diaspora Jews such as Philo or Ananias. Prior to his conversion, he was probably at the stricter end of the spectrum in terms of the importance he attached to circumcision. 93 After his conversion he continued to attach greater importance to it than did many Jews of the Diaspora, but for largely negative reasons. It symbolized and facilitated the contrast between the new creation and the old. Diaspora Judaism, in general, had

90

E.P. Sanders, Paul, the Laiv and the Jewish People (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983) 176, with reference to 1 Corinthians. 91 Especially by Gaston and Gager. 92 E.P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977) 7: "In short, this is what Paul finds wrong with Judaism: it is not Christianity." While Paul would not have distinguished Judaism and Christianity in this way, Sanders' insight is essentially correct. 93 Gaston, "Paul and the Torah," 61, suggests that Paul was a Shammaitc, but specific correspondence is lacking. See Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, 138 n.61.

sought to emphasize points of similarity to its gentile environment. Paul was concerned to emphasize the novelty, and therefore the "otherness" of the new creation. The implied devaluation of the Jewish way of life stirred greater passions than was ever the case with the allegorists of Alexandria, and made for a crucial and fateful difference from the Jews of the Diaspora who also, in their way, extended the hope of salvation to the Gentiles.

PART F O U R DEAD SEA SCROLLS

T H E O R I G I N O F T H E Q U M R A N COMMUNITY: A REVIEW O F T H E EVIDENCE

After five decades of study, the origin of the Qumran community is still the subject of widely diverse hypotheses.1 The reason is, of course, that the evidence of the scrolls is very elliptic on this subject. T h e imminent publication of 4 Q M M T , the supposed letter of the Teacher of Righteousness to the Wicked Priest, may cast some new light on the issue.2 For the present, however, it is worthwhile to review the available evidence and try to clarify how far the main current hypotheses can claim a textual basis. I will focus on three issues: (1) the causes of dissension between the Dead Sea sect and the rest of Judaism; (2) the time at which the sect emerged as a distinct organization; and (3) the opposition to the Teacher associated with the Man of Lies. 1. The Causes of Dissension The Damascus Document addresses the issues which distinguished the sect from the rest of Israel in three passages. In C D 3:12 we are told that "with those who held fast to the commandments of God, those who were left over of them, God established his covenant with Israel forever, to reveal to them the hidden things (nistārât) in which all Israel strayed: he manifested to them his holy sabbaths, his glorious feasts, the testimonies of his righteousness and the ways of his truth and the desires of his will which man must do and by which he must live." In this passage the "covenant with Israel" is restricted 1 For a sampling of recent proposals see B.Z. Wacholder, The Dawn of Qumran (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 1983); P.R. Davies, The Damascus Covenant (Sheffield: J S O T , 1983); R. Eisenman, Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians and Qumran (Leiden: Brill, 1983); B.E. Thiering, Redating the Teacher of Righteousness (Sydney: Glenburn, 1979). N. Golb ("Who Hid the Dead Sea Scrolls?" BA [June, 1985] 6882) denies that Qumran was an Essene settlement but fails to account for the community described in 1QS or Pliny's reference to an Essene setdement between Jericho and Ain Gedi {Nat. Hist. 5.15). 2 E. Qimron and J . Strugnell, "An Unpublished Halakhic Letter from Qumran" in Biblical Archeology To-Day: Proceedings of the International Congress on Biblical Archeology (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1985) 400-407. See now E. Qimron and J . Strugnell, Qumran Cave 4. IV. Miqsat Ma'ase Ha-Torah (DJD 10; Oxford: Clarendon, 1994).

to a remnant and requires a new revelation. 3 The content of that revelation is primarily the cultic calendar. Presumably the "desires of his will" include other matters besides, but the only matters mentioned specifically are the observance of sabbaths and feasts. The issues between the sect and the rest of Israel are elaborated in the discussion of the "three nets of Belial" in CD 4:15-5:12. These are fornication, riches, and profanation of the Temple. The author admits that other people see these practices as "three kinds of righteousness" They are seen as sinful only in light of the distinctive halakhah of the sect. The fornication in question consists of taking two wives in their lifetime (either polygamy or divorce). In support of the halakhah, Gen 1:27 and Deut 17:17 are cited. Neither passage carried this implication in its biblical context, but a similar prohibition is found in the Temple Scroll, in the "law of the king."4 Profanation of the temple is said to result from failure to observe purity laws—lying with a woman during her period, and marrying nieces. Here again CD extends the evident range of the biblical text (Lev 18:13), again in accordance with the Temple Scroll (66:16-17). This passage does not clarify the second net of Belial, "wealth" but it adds a further grievance against the enemies of the sect. They say the ordinances of the covenant are not sure. Rejection of the sectarian claim of revelation is construed as blasphemy. The third passage in CD which discusses the points of dissension between the sect and the rest of Judaism is in CD 6:11-7:6. Those who enter the covenant are forbidden to enter the Temple to light its altar in vain. While this need not imply a total boycott of the Temple, it surely involves a refusal to participate in the official Temple cult.5 Instead, they should "act according to the exact interpretation of the Law during the age of wickedness" This involves "separation from the sons of the pit" and avoidance of "the unclean riches of wickedness acquired by vow or anathema or from the temple treasure." This comment clarifies the second net of Belial in the earlier passage. The enemies of the sect are implicitly accused of robbing the poor of the people by exploitation of Temple offerings.6 3 L.H. Schiffman (The Halakha at Qumran [Leiden: Brill, 1975] 22-32) argues that the nistar is the sectarian interpretation of the Torah, through divinely inspired exegesis. 4 11QT 57:17-18. Wacholder (The Daun of Qumran, 119-24) argues that the "three nets of Belial" are derived from the Temple Scroll, which he regards as the Torah of Qumran. His case is strongest on the marriage laws. 5 See the discussion of this passage by Davics, The Damascus Covenant, 134-40; J. Murphy O'Connor, "The Damascus Document Revisited" RB 92 (1985) 234-38. 6 Compare IQpHab 12:6 where the Wicked Priest is said to have stolen the wealth of the poor ones.

Those who enter the covenant are further enjoined to observe the difference between sacred and profane and keep the sabbath and festivals "according to the findings of the members of the new covenant in the land of Damascus." This third passage in CD, then, recapitulates the points of dissent as envisaged by the document. These are the cultic calendar and Temple cult, certain purity laws and wealth that is considered unclean. A more direct and elaborate account of the issues separating the sect from the rest of Judaism is found in 4 Q M M T , which is characterized by the editors as "a polemic-halakhic letter,' ‫ י‬which was "probably written immediately after the separation of the sect.7‫יי‬ The original document must be pieced together from the surviving fragments, but it apparently contained (1) an opening formula, (2) a calendar, (3) a list of distinctive Qumran halakhot, and (4) an epilogue discussing the reasons for the sect's withdrawal. The prominence of the calendar is an obvious point of resemblance to CD. The specific halakhot described by Strugnell and Qimron do not correspond to those in C D but they share common concerns with ritual purity and marital status. Some topics are also concerned with tithes offered to the priests, an issue which may be related to the "unclean riches of wickedness" denounced in CD. Calendrical considerations are also prominent in 1QS. There we are told that those who enter the covenant must live "in accordance with all that has been revealed concerning their appointed times" (1:8), and are forbidden to "depart from any command of God concerning their times; they shall be neither early nor late for any of their appointed times (1:14-15). Elsewhere in 1QS we are told that the Council of the Community "shall be an agreeable offering, atoning for the land and determining the judgment of wickedness" (8:10, compare 5:6) and we might infer from this that the community did not rely on the official Temple cult. 1QS 8 goes on to say that none of the things hidden from Israel but discovered by the interpreter of the law should be concealed from those who have been confirmed for two years in the community. In 1QS, as in CD 3, the sectarian understanding of the covenant involves the new revelation of matters hidden from the rest of Israel. Thus far, the primary issue between the sect and the rest of Israel would seem to be the cultic calendar, although other matters of ritual purity also impinge on the status of the Temple and its cult. It 7 Qimron and Strugnell, "An Unpublished Halakhic Letter," 401. This judgment about the time of origin is not necessarily correct.

is worth noting, however, what issues are not mentioned in these documents. The most widely held explanation of the separation of the sect from the rest of Judaism is that it was triggered by the usurpation of the high priesthood by the Maccabees. This explanation is held not only by the classic consensus of Cross, Vermes, Milik, and others, 8 but also by scholars like Murphy-O'Connor, who hold that the sect had an earlier origin but that a quarrel over the high priesthood precipitated the move to Qumran. 9 The right of succession to the high priesthood is an issue of primary importance for those scholars who hold that the Teacher of Righteousness was the High Priest in Jerusalem and was ousted by Jonathan Maccabee. It is with some surprise, then, that we note that neither CD nor 1QS suggests that the legitimacy of the High Priest was an issue. Neither is it an issue in 4 Q M M T , although that document is apparently addressed to a leader of Israel. There is, however, another source of information about the origin of the Qumran community—the peshanm. These compositions are usually dated somewhat later than 1QS and C D — a b o u t the middle of the first century BCE This dating rests in part on the palaeography of the documents, of which only single exemplars have been found (i.e., there are no multiple copies of any pesher) and in part on the historical allusions in 4QpNahum, which transparently refer to Alexander Jannaeus (103-76 BCE) and events in the first half of the first century (compare also the pesher on Hosea). We cannot assume, however, that all the peshanm were composed at the same time or that the extant documents are autographs. 10 The pesher on Habakkuk could, in principle, be older than that on Nahum. Even if it is not, its evidence should not be slighted, since it may preserve old traditions of the community. The passages that concern us in the peshanm are those related to the Teacher of Righteousness and the Wicked Priest. Like most scholars, I hold that the Wicked Priest should be identified as Jonathan Maccabee. The clearest allusions are those to the death of the Wicked Priest in 4QpPs a 4:8-10 and 1QpHab 9:8-12, which say that God gave him into the hands of his enemies (1QpHab), who are 8

F.M. Cross, The Ancient Library of Qtimran (Garden City, NY: Doublcday, 1961) 109-60; G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls: (Qumran in Perspective (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981) 151; J . T . Milik, Ten Tears of Discovery in the Wilderness of Judaea (London: SCM, 1959) 80-83; H. Stegemann, Die Entstehung der Qumrangemeinde (Bonn: published privately, 1971) 204-26. ‫י‬ J . Murphy-O'Connor, "The Esscncs and their History," RB 81 (1974) 22930. 10 See M.P. Horgan, Pesharim: Qumran Interpretations of Biblical Books (Washington: CBA, 1979) 3-4.

specified in 4QpPs a as "the ruthless ones of the Gentiles." Most scholars agree that this can only refer to the death ofJonathan at the hand of Trypho (1 Macc 12:39-53; 13:23)." It must be said, however, that other allusions do not seem especially apt for Jonathan, and the passage which says that he "walked in the ways of drunkenness" (1 Q p H a b 11:13-14) is more easily applied to either Simon 12 or Alexander Jannaeus. 13 It is certainly possible that the title is applied to more than one individual. The attempt of van der Woude to assign each reference in the Habakkuk commentary to a different individual is unconvincing, 14 but the possibility that more than one High Priest is involved cannot be dismissed. The fact that the reference is to High Priests is assured by the wordplay rF (Wicked)/r's (Head). Two passages in the pesharim bear directly on the causes of the rift between the Teacher and his followers and the High Priesthood. The first is in 1 Q p H a b 8:9-13, where Hab 2:5-6 is interpreted with reference to the Wicked Priest, who was called by the true name at the beginning of his course, but when he ruled in Israel, he became arrogant, abandoned God, and betrayed the statutes for the sake of wealth. He stole and amassed the wealth of the men of violence who had rebelled against God and he took the wealth of peoples to add to himself guilty sin. And the abominable ways he pursued with every sort of unclean impurity. 15

The interpretation of this passage has been much debated. T o be "called by the name of truth" has been taken to mean either that his name had honorable associations (e.g., for Jonathan, the son of Saul; for Simon, Simon the Just) 16 or that he was a legitimate priest,17 or

11

G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls, 151; A.S. van der Woude, "Wicked Priest or Wicked Priests? Reflecdons on the Identification of the Wicked Priest in the Habakkuk Commentary," j3‫׳‬S 33 (1982) 356. 12 So Cross, The Ancient Library, 152. Cross's identification of the Wicked Priest as Simon rests largely on a passage in the Testimonia, which refers not to the Wicked Priest but to "a cursed man, one of Belial." 13 Van der Woude, "Wicked Priest or Wicked Priests?" 358; W. H. Brownlee, "The Wicked Priest, the Man of Lies, and the Righteous Teacher,"JQÄ 73 (1982) 5. According tojosephus, Alexander Jannaeus became ill from overdrinking at the end of his life (Ant. 13.15.5 [398]). 14 Some of the allusions provide no basis for a specific identification. The proposal that the first wicked priest was Judas Maccabee is very dubious since it relies on a confused passage in Josephus which says that Judas was High Priest after Alcimus (Ant 12.11.2 [434]). Brownlee, "The Wicked Priest," also favors multiple "Wicked Priests." 15 Trans. Horgan, Pesharim, 17. 16 Cross, The Ancient Library, 142. 17 Horgan, Pesharim, 4 L

simply that he had a good reputation. 18 The phrase translated "at the beginning of his course" (b'tehillat emdw) is often rendered "when he first arose.5'19 Milik contends that "ramad is a general term which refers to the performance of any office, political, religious or eschatological." 20 We must note, however, that it is often used for priestly service, and, since the antecedent here is "priest," the reference is most naturally to the priestly office.21 The verb mašal is rightly taken to indicate civil authority but not kingship, and therefore to be appropriate for the early Hasmoneans. 22 Many scholars have argued that the passage refers to the two stages of Jonathan's rise to power: he became "ruler and leader" after the death of Judas (1 Macc 9:30) but was appointed high priest by the Syrian king Alexander Balas in 152 BCE (1 Macc 10:20). This assumption of the High Priesthood is the reason most widely posited for the rift between the Qumran sect and the Jerusalem priesthood. Hans Burgmann finds an allusion to the usurpation of the priesthood in the text of Habakkuk cited here, "woe to him who multiplies what is not his own," but the pesher conspicuously fails to make this association.23 Instead "what is not his own" is interpreted as "the wealth of the men of violence" and "the wealth of the peoples." Stegemann claims that hakkāhēn hārāša' must be translated "the illegitimate priest" and that priestly illegitimacy can only result from cultic abuses or from the wrong ancestry.24 He finds the cultic charges against the Wicked Priest too general and concludes that his ancestry must have been the issue, although he admits that this is never stated in the scrolls.25 The assertion that "wicked" here means "illegitimate" is not necessarily compelling, however—there are no parallels to establish the usage. Moreover, both Stegemann and Burgmann, and indeed most scholars who have addressed this question, base their argument on deductive rather than inductive reasoning: they assume that the usurpation of the High Priesthood must have been the reason why Jonathan was designated "Wicked ‫ "י‬G. Jeremias, Der Lehrer der Gerechtigkeit (Göttingen: Vandcnhoeck & Ruprecht, 1963) 36-40; G.W.E. Nickclsburg, "Simon —A‫ ׳‬Priest with a Reputation for Faithfulness," BASOR 223 (1976) 67-68. 19 See G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1968) 240. 20 Milik, Ten Years, 65. 21 Horgan, Pesharim, 41. Compare the use of ma'amad for priestly service, 1 Q M 2:3, Mishnah Ta'anit 4:2, Y. Yadin, The Scroll of the War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness (Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1962) 202-7. 22 Milik, Ten Tears, 65-66. 23 H. Burgmann, %uxi lösbare Qtimranprobltme (Frankfurt: Lang, 1986) 75 24 Stegemann, Die Entstehung, 110-1 1. 25 Ibid., 111. Compare Milik, Ten Years, 83.

Priest." However plausible this deduction may seem, we must recognize that it is never supported by the explicit statements of the texts, although 1QpHab 8:9-13 provided a golden opportunity for making the charge. 26 Moreover, this passage in the pesher can plausibly be construed to exclude this reason for the rift. We have noted already that W is often used for specifically priestly service. If it carries this connotation here, the Wicked Priest enjoyed a good reputation at the beginning of his service as High Priest. This is not conceivable if he was thought to be illegitimate because of descent or, parenthetically, if he had ousted the Teacher of Righteousness from the office. In any case, the charges against him here concern usurpation of wealth and cultic impurity. The accusation of illgotten wealth is also made against "the last priests of Jerusalem" in 1QpHab 9:4, while the Wicked Priest is said to defile God's sanctuary in 12:9. We have seen that these offenses also figured prominendy in CD. The second crucial passage is found in 1QpHab 11:4-8. There we are told that the Wicked Priest pursued the Teacher to his place of exile and attempted to disrupt his celebration of the Day of Atonement. This passage conveys two important pieces of information. First, the Teacher was observing a different cultic calendar than the High Priest (who otherwise would have been officiating in Jerusalem). In light of the prominence of the calendar as an issue in CD, this is not surprising. In view of this fact, however, it is surely unlikely that the Teacher had recently been officiating as High Priest in the Jerusalem Temple. There is no evidence that Jonathan, or any of the Hasmoneans, introduced a new calendar, and the Teacher can scarcely have switched calendars when he went to Qumran. The second piece of information in 1QpHab 11 is that the High Priest took the initiative in attempting to suppress the sect. This is confirmed by other passages. 1QpHab 9:9 speaks of the wrong done to the Teacher and his followers. 1QpHab 12:6 says that the Wicked Priest plotted to destroy completely the poor ones, and 12:10 adds that he stole their wealth. A fragmentary passage in 4QpPsa 4:8-10 has been reconstructed to say that the Wicked Priest tried to kill the Teacher. A much-quoted passage from a supposed Teacher-hymn in the Hodayot says that the author was driven out "like a bird from his nest" (1QH 4:8-9). We should not then suppose that the secession of the Teacher and his followers was a unilateral decision. At least some of the initiative lay with the "wicked" High Priest.

26

Brownlee, "The Wicked Priest," 17.

One further piece of evidence from the peshanm has potential significance for the feud between the Teacher and the Wicked Priest. Both the Teacher of Righteousness (in 1QpHab 2:8; 4QpPsa 2:19; 3:15) and the Wicked Priest (in 1QpHab 8:16; 9:16; 11:12) are referred to as "the priest." Hartmut Stegemann has insisted that this title is a technical term and that it proves that both of these figures were High Priests.27 The argument has recently been formulated succinctly by Murphy-O'Connor: The available evidence reveals that hakēhēn is always used in a 'titular' or 'non-titular' sense. In the latter the meaning is 'the aforementioned priest.' However, in the Scrolls the sense is always 'titular' and elsewhere this absolute usage always designated the High Priest... 2 "

Hence the conclusion that the Teacher must have been an otherwise unknown High Priest who officiated in the Jerusalem Temple during the so-called Intersacerdotiuiri29 and was displaced by the "Illegitimate Priest," Jonathan. The bold assertions of Stegemann and Murphy-O'Connor are not sustained by the evidence, even as that evidence is presented by Stegemann. 30 Many instances of the titular usage refer to the priest of a specific shrine in the preexilic period, but this fact does not invalidate Stegemann's claim for the postexilic usage. He acknowledges a problem in the case of Ezekiel, who is identified as "the priest" in Ezek 1:3. He claims, however, that "the priest" is used absolutely to refer to "the Aaronid High Priest" in the following cases: Ezra (Ezra 7:11; 10:10, 16; Neh 8:2, 9; 12:26), Meremoth (Ezra 8:33), Eliashib (Neh 13:4), Shelemaiah. (Neh 13:13), and Simon (Sir 50:1). Only two of these five priests (Eliashib and Simon) are generally recognized to have been High Priests. It has indeed been suggested that Ezra came to Jerusalem as High Priest,31 but this suggestion lacks direct evidence and is open to the objection that Ezra is not listed in the line of high priests in Nehemiah 12.32 27 Stegemann, Die Enstehung, 102 nn. 328 and 329. He further claims that the title cannot be used merely for a claim to High Priesthood but only for one who actually held the office. 28 Murphy-O'Connor, "The Damascus Document Revisited," RB 92 (1985) 239. 29 Josephus, Ant. 20.10.4 [357] says the office was vacant for seven years (between Alcimus and Jonathan). Elsewhere he says that Judas Maccabec had functioned as High Priest and that the interval was only four years. 30 Stegemann,' Die Entstehung, A 79-82 n. 328. 31 K. Koch, "Ezra and the'Origins of Judaism,'"JSS 19 (1974) 190-93. 32 H.G.M. Williamson, Ezra, Nehemiah (Word Bible Commentary 16; Waco: Word, 1985) 91. Williamson judges Koch's suggestion "most improbable." Similarly D.J. Clines (Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther [The New Century Bible Comment-

Moreover, on his arrival in Jerusalem he is said to have delivered gold, silver, and vessels to Meremoth son of Uriah, the priest (Ezra 8:33). It is difficult to see how "the priest" can designate "High Priest" simultaneously in the case of both Ezra and Meremoth. The argument that the absolute titular use of "the priest" must designate high priest is unfounded. There is no basis, then, for a sharp distinction between the usage in the pesharim and such usage as we find in C D 14:7 which refers to "the priest who is appointed at the head of the many. , ‫ י‬All we can infer is that the Teacher was regarded as the priest par excellence by his own followers. T h e expression "the priest" obviously could mean the High Priest, and probably does so in the case of the "Wicked Priest,5' but it is not in itself evidence that the Teacher of Righteousness ever functioned as High Priest in Jerusalem. Since the scrolls never assert either that he had so functioned or that his opponent had usurped the High Priesthood, and in view of the calendrical difference between the Essenes and the Jerusalem Temple, the theory that the Teacher was a displaced High Priest must be judged highly improbable. 33 The primary reason why scholars have thought that the usurpation of the High Priesthood was a factor in the secession of the Qumran sect is that it seems (to modern scholars) to be the development in the early Hasmonean period which was most likely to cause such a split. O u r examination of the evidence, however, fails to confirm this hypothesis. The theory is not thereby rendered impossible, but we must ask whether it is necessary. The scrolls provide adequate reasons for the rejection of the Jerusalem cult: the difference in calendar, halakhic matters concerning purity and marriage, and the ill-gotten wealth of the ruling priests. The break may have been precipitated by the Teacher's criticism of the High Priest or by the attempt on the part of the authorities to suppress the variant calendar. It may be that the Teacher and his followers had been able to observe their own cultic calendar during the Intersacerdotium, 34 but that when Jonathan became High Priest he ary; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984] 99) asserts that Ezra "was not high priest, but simply a member of the high-priestly family." For a reconstruction of the High-Priestly lineage in the Persian period, see F.M. Cross, "A Reconstruction of the J u d e a n Restoration," JBL 94 (1975) 17. T h e list does not include Ezra, Meremoth, or Shelemaiah. 33 See also H. Burgmann, "Das umstrittene intersacerdotium in Jerusalem 159152 v. Chr.," JSJ 11 (1980) 135-76. 34 This does not require that the Teacher or another Essene leader was de facto High Priest. At most the Teacher would have functioned as High Priest for his own group, but we do not know whether in fact they performed ceremonies which required a High Priest (e.g., on the Day of Atonement).

insisted on uniformity. This suggestion too is hypothetical, but it requires us to make fewer assumptions beyond the actual evidence than does the customary view about a dispute over the priesthood. 2. The Time of the Emergence of the Sect Even if the secession of the Qumran community was not a reaction to the usurpation of the High Priesthood, the origin of the settlement by the Dead Sea is dated to the early Hasmonean period on archaeological grounds. Moreover, if the original Wicked Priest was Jonathan Maccabee, the activity of the Teacher of Righteousness must be dated to his time. The main debate has been whether the Essenes had already been in existence as an orgarnized group before this time and for how long. As usual, the lack of consensus reflects the paucity of the evidence. T o begin with, there is some ambiguity as to what is meant by the emergence of the sect. It is important to distinguish between the traditions of a group, however distinctive, and a sectarian form of organization. Despite the claim in CD 3 that the distinctive requirements of the "new covenant" were revealed, most scholars have assumed that they were derived from older traditions. It is certainly true that the 364-day calendar is found in documents which were not demonstrably composed by Essenes (the Astronomical Book of Enoch and Jubilees). This was presumably a tradition shared with other Jewish groups and one which was quite probably older than any organization of Essenes. The books of Enoch reflect a tradition which goes back at least to the middle of the third century, but provides no evidence as to how the tradents were organized. The Enoch tradition is part of the religious legacy inherited by the Qumran community, but it is not itself evidence for preQumran Essenes since it lacks the distinctive organization of the sect.35 Similarly, arguments that some Essene traditions (interest in divination and astrology, Iranian themes) can be traced to a Babylonian setting cannot be taken as evidence that the organization of the Essene sect should be localized there. 36 The Damascus Document describes the emergence of the sect in three places. Column 1 is the only passage which gives indications of dates. As the text now stands we are told that God "visited" the 35

See further J.J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1984) 56-63. 36 J . M u r p h y - O ' C o n n o r , "The Essenes and Their History," RB 81 (1974) 222-26; "The Damascus Document Revisited," RB 92 (1985) 228-29. It is not apparent to me that any of the points listed requires a Babylonian setting.

remnant of Israel "in the age of wrath, three hundred and ninety years after he had given them into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar" and caused "a root of cultivation" to spring from Israel and Aaron. 37 Yet we are told that these were like blind men for twenty years until the coming of the Teacher of Righteousness. In this passage, then, there is a clear distinction between two stages in the emergence of the community, although they are not far apart. The emergence of the "root of cultivation" here has often been correlated with other groups of the postexilic period, who are mentioned in apocalyptic literature, most notably "the chosen righteous from the eternal plant of righteousness" in the Apocalypse of Weeks (1 Enoch 93:10). T h e other passages in CD, however, suggest a more distinct form of organization than can be inferred from the apocalypses. In C D 3:13 we read that God established his covenant with Israel by revealing the hidden things. Yet the recipients of this revelation were still defiling themselves until God pardoned them and built them a sure house. Finally in C D 6 we are told that God remembered the covenant of the forefathers and raised from Aaron men of understanding and from Israel men of wisdom. In this case there is no reference to a further period of error, but a figure called the Searcher of the Law is said to set up ordinances for the whole period of wickedness.38 This figure is usually identified as the Teacher of Righteousness. 39 The passage goes on to speak of a covenant which involved a rejection of the Temple cult. T h e passages in cols. 3 and 6 do not distinguish as clearly as does col. 1 between two stages: the initial formation of the group and the advent of the Teacher. Col. 3 is most easily understood to say that the initial stage involved a covenant, while a second involved the "sure house." In col. 6 the elect from Aaron and Israel must be correlated with the first stage in col. 1. The covenantal agreement not to use the Temple "in vain" is mentioned after the "Searcher of the Law" and could be one of his ordinances, but the passage sees no discontinuity between this figure and the initial men of Aaron and Israel. It seems likely, then, though not certain, that the formation of the "new covenant" which was the hallmark of the Qumran sect preceded the advent of the Teacher by a short period 37

This is the standard interpretation of the passage, exemplified in the translation of Vermes. 38 T h e Searcher of the Law is identified as the "staff" of Num 21:18 (mehāqēq) while the statutes are m'hôq'qôt. 39 Davies (The Damascus Covenant, 123-25) identifies him with an earlier leader, before the rise of the "Teacher of Righteousness" but this is to multiply figures without cause. See my discussion in The Apocalyptic Imagination, 125-26.

(the 20 years of col. 1), although he may have finalized the ordinances and completed the separation from the rest of Judaism. 40 As we have noted, the only explicit indications of date in C D are the figures "390 years" and "20 years'' in col. 1. These figures are controversial for two reasons. On the one hand, they disrupt the rhythmical balance of the parallel lines and are quite probably glosses. On the other hand, the precise meaning of the passage is open to question. T o say that the numbers are added as glosses, however, does not give us license to disregard them. They are evidently ancient glosses and reflect the sect's own calculation of its origin.41 T h e interpretation of the passage presents the more serious problem. The figure 390 is derived from Ezek 4:5, where it refers to the punishment of the house of Israel.42 This is a schematic figure, however, and cannot be taken as chronologically exact, as we can see by comparison with Daniel 9, where the period from the destruction of the Temple to the Maccabean era is calculated as 490 years. 43 At most we can assume that such figures as 390 years and 490 years could only be plausible several hundred years after the exile and so point to a date in the Hellenistic era. Moreover, there are problems with the standard translation of C D 1. T h e verb pāqad, "visit," which is usually taken in a benign sense here, is used elsewhere in CD in the sense of "punish." 44 The expression Itytw ,wtm is usually translated here as "after he had given them," which is an unusual construal of the preposition. 45 The He40 In I Q S 8 the motifs of "planting" and "Aaron and Israel," which arc used of the first stage in CD I and the "house" (stage 2 in C D 3) arc all used with reference to the group which "prepares in the desert the way of the Lord" (possibly the pioneering settlers at Qumran). The fusion of terminology here again suggests that the cmcrgcnce of the sect was remembered as a continuous process. 41 It has been suggested that if we add the 390 years and 20 years of blindness, allow the biblical figure of 40 years for the carcer of the Teacher, and add the 40 years from his death to the destruction of his enemies (CD 20:15), we arrive at 490 years, the 70 weeks of years of Daniel 9 (F.F. Bruce, "The Book of Daniel and the Qumran Community," Neotestamentica et Semitica [cd. E.E. Ellis and M. Wilcox; Edinburgh: Clark, 1969] 232; G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls. 147-48). If this suggestion is correct, it would point to a date for the end of the age a century after the first emergence of the sect. The chronological data in CD would then presumably have been inserted within that century and before the pesher on Habakkuk, which discusses the delay of the end. was composed. 42 Vermes (The Dead Sea Scrolls, 158) says that we may "safely discard" this derivation since the document shows no interest in the fate of northern Israel. This is to lose sight of the symbolic understanding of scripture in the scrolls, where the original rcfercncc is often disregarded. 43 Vermes (The Dead Sea Scrolls, 158-59) gives several illustrations of the unreliability of the chronology of ancient Jewish writers. 44 C D 5:15; 7:9; 8:2, 3. 45 See Davies, The Damascus Covenant, 65.

brew could be construed differently, by taking the 390 years as equivalent to "the epoch of wrath" and Itytw Jwtm as indicating the manner of punishment (to give them, or by giving them, into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar). On this interpretation the 390 years do not necessarily indicate the time of the emergence of the sect, but only identify the "age of wrath" with the period prophesied by Ezekiel. Even if we disallow any chronological value to the 390 years, however, C D 1 contains valuable information in the statement that those in the elect group were like blind men for twenty years, presumably a round figure for half a generation. This blindness is relieved by the advent of the Teacher of Righteousness.46 If the Teacher was a contemporary of Jonathan Maccabee, as most scholars infer from the pesharim, then the "plant root" can scarcely be dated earlier than 172 BCE While this information is neither as clear nor as exact as we would wish, it does reflect the community's own recollection of its history. T o overrule this evidence, we would need to find passages in the scrolls which require (and not merely permit) a different calculation. Jerome Murphy-O'Connor and Philip Davies claim to find such evidence in CD. Their reconstruction of Essene origins is "based on the conviction that CD unambiguously pointed to the Exile in Babylon as the time and place of the origin of the Essene movement." 47 This conviction has been subjected to a thorough and careful critique by Michael Knibb, 48 and there is no need to repeat all the arguments here. I will focus only on what seems to me to be the central issue, especially since Murphy-O'Connor has attempted a rebuttal of Knibb on this point. 49 The central issue is the interpretation of the three passages in CD 1, 3, and 6 which recount the emergence of the sect. In cols. 3 and 6 the rise of the new group follows direcdy on a reference to the exile. This would also be true in col. 1 if the chronological data were excised. Knibb explains the abrupt transition by reference to

46 Ibid., 175, 200. Davies regards the reference to the Teacher in 1:11 as secondary, but he is led to this conclusion by his reconstruction of the history of the sect and of CD, not by any textual evidence. 47 Murphy-O'Connor, "The Damascus Document Revisited," 226. 48 M. Knibb, "Exile in the Damascus Document," JSOT 25 (1983) 99-117. 49 "The Damascus Document Revisited," 227-28. Murphy-O'Connor makes a major concession to his critics when he accepts the translation "converts of Israel" (rather than returnees) for sby yisra'el (ibid., 233), although he makes an exception for CD 19:33-34.

the same theological pattern that we find in other literature of the period, namely that which sees the condition of exile as lasting beyond the return at the end of the sixth century and being brought to an end only in the events of a much later period. 50

This pattern is exemplified in Daniel 9 and 1 Enoch 93. MurphyO'Connor counters that this pattern is not found in any of the source documents of CD (from which he excludes col. 1). In the apocalypses the exile is followed by a period of lawlessness, which comes to an end in the writer's generation, when, in 1 Enoch 93, a new group emerges. In CD, there is no interval of lawlessness.51 Murphy-O'Connor has correctly perceived that the understanding of history in CD is different from that of the apocalypses. In the apocalypses, the rise of a movement heralds the end of an era. CD emphasizes that Belial is let loose upon Israel during the time of the existence of the sect. The different emphasis here may well derive from the dualistic world view which is expounded in 1QS and only hinted at in CD. 52 It does not follow, however, that the sect must have arisen during the exile or at the start of the postexilic period. C D 5:17-21 moves directly from "ancient times" when Moses and Aaron arose to "the epoch of the desolation of the land." We do not infer that the author placed the desolation in the premonarchic period 53 . Knibb's argument does not require complete correspondence between the theological patterns of CD and the apocalypses. The significant parallel is that the condition of exile persists beyond the sixth century. 54 Therefore, a passage like CD 3, which mentions no intervening events between the exile and the rise of the sect, does not necessarily date the latter event to the sixth century. 55 The evidence of CD (apart from col. 1) is compatible with an exilic date but does not require it. It cannot then overrule the explicit evidence of col. 1 for a later date. 50

Knibb, "Exile in the Damascus Document," 110. "The Damascus Document Revisited," 227. 52 On the dualism of CD sec my essay "Was the Dead Sea Sect an Apocalyptic Movement?" in this volume. 53 T h e authenticity of the reference to Moses and Aaron here has been questioned by J . Murphy-O'Connor ("An Essene Missionary Document? CD 11, 14-VI, 1," RR 77 [1970] 224) but is accepted by Davies [The Damascus Covenant, 121). In either case the extant text shows that contiguous references do not necessarily imply immediate historical continuity. 51 The closcst parallel to CD is neither I Enoch 93 nor Daniel but Jub 1:13-15, which says that when God scatters Israel they will forget the laws, and specifically the calendar (compare CD 3:13-15). 55 Davies (The Damascus Covenant, 202) grants that an "exilic origin" docs not necessarily imply a sixth century BCE date, but then it is difficult to see what is the chronological value of an exilic origin. 51

I conclude then that the two stages of the emergence of the sect, the "plant root 5 ' and the advent of the Teacher, must be dated in close proximity to each other, most probably in the second century. Nothing requires an earlier date for an organized community or for a "new covenant," although various traditions of the sect can undoubtedly be traced to a much earlier time. 3. The Man of the Lie A third area of dispute in the area of Qumran origins concerns the figure of the "Man of the Lie," also known as the Scoffer and the Spouter of Lies.56 Some scholars still assume that this figure is identical with the Wicked Priest, but G.Jeremias and H. Stegemann have made a strong case for his separate identity.57 Whereas the Wicked Priest is said to "rule in Israel" (1QpHab 8:9-10), the Liar is the leader of a group which rejected the authority of the Teacher. Both are enemies of the Teacher, but only the Wicked Priest is accused of defiling the sanctuary (1QpHab 12:8-9). The feud with the Man of the Lie concerns the true teaching:58 he is said to have led Israel astray and caused them not to listen to the Teacher (CD 1:15; 4QpPs37 1:25). Various hypotheses have been advanced about the identity of this figure and his relation to the Teacher. Hans Burgmann identifies him with Simon Maccabee, brother of the Wicked Priest Jonathan, and credits him with founding the Pharisaic sect.59 For Stegemann, he was a Hasidic leader who refused to accept the authority of the Teacher and led a break-away group which became the Pharisees.60 Murphy-O'Connor, in contrast, sees the "Man of the Lie" as the 56 This figure appears in CD 1:14; 8:13; 19:26; 20:15 (compare also CD 4:19 which refers to "Precept," a "spouter"). IQpHab 2: If.; 5:9-12; 10:1-13; 4QPss 3 1:26; 4:14. The text of 1QpMic 10:2 has been reconstructed to yield another reference, but this suggestion should be rejected (Horgan, Pesharim, 60). 57 G. Jeremias, Der Lehrer der Gerechtigkeit (SUNT 2; Göttingen: Vandenhocck & Ruprecht, 1963) 79-126; H. Stegemann, Die Entstehung, 41-53. Stegemann corrects some ofjeremias's arguments but confirms his main thesis. 58 The designation "Man of the Lie" may have overtones of Persian dualism. In Yasna 30 the evil spirit is "he who was of the Lie," and his followers are "the followers of the Lie" (See P.J. Kobelski, Melchizedek and Melchiresa; [CBQMS 10; Washington: CBA, 1981] 89). 59 H. Burgmann, 2jw1 lösbare Qumranprobleme, 13-256. 60 Stegemann, Die Entstehung, 227-28. The statement of Murphy-O'Connor that Stegemann regards the "Man of the Lie" as "a leader in the Essene movement" is not quite accurate, since Stegemann, quite correctly, refrains from using the name Essene at this stage of the development of the sect (J. Murphy-O'Connor, "The Judean Desert," in Early Judaism and its Modem Interpreters [ed. R.A. Kraft and G.W.E. Nickelsburg; Adanta: Scholars Press, 1986] 141).

leader of "non-Qumran Essenism" which refused to follow the Teacher to the desert,61 and has even suggested that he be identified with Judah the Essene.62 Recent discussion of the "Man of the Lie" has been heavily influenced by the work ofJeremias and Stegemann. Jeremias argued that the Man of the Lie and the Teacher were originally members of the same community. 63 Stegemann modified this argument and argued that the Man of the Lie was originally leader of his own community and that the Teacher may originally have belonged to it.64 Both scholars relied primarily on 1QpHab 5:8-12, where Hab 1:13b is interpreted as follows: The interpretation of it concerns the House of Absalom and their artisans, who were silent at the rebuke of the Teacher of jghteousness and did not support him against the Man of the Lie— who rejected the Law in the midst of all their council.

g

There are three notorious problems in this passage: the identity of the House of Absalom, the antecedent of "their council" and the question whether the Teacher was administering or suffering the rebuke. Stegemann is surely right that the "House of Absalom" is, syntactically, the most natural antecedent of "their council." 65 He proceeds to argue that the silence of the "House of Absalom" was understood to indicate support for the Man of the Lie and must therefore have been his community. This argument is not persuasive. The pesher reflects disappointment that the House of Absalom failed to help the Teacher, and help could scarcely have been expected from the community of the Man of the Lie. Moreover, if the House of Absalom had actually taken the side of the Man of the Lie, it would surely have been accused of something more than silence. The simplest interpretation of the passage is that the "house of Absalom" was, and remained, neutral ground. Its identity remains uncertain, but it is noteworthy that 1 Maccabees identifies two supporters of Jonathan Maccabee as "sons of Absalom." 66 It is possible that the "house of Absalom,' 1 was the actual name of a clan and that the symbolic associations of the name were fortuitous. 61

J , Murphy-O'Connor, "The Essence and their History," RB 81 (1974) 235. J . Murphy-O'Connor, "Judah the Essene and the Teacher of Righteousness," / M 2 . 1 0 (1981) 579-86. 6, Jeremias, Der Lehrer, 86-87. 61 Stegemann, Die Entstehung, 48-52. 65 Stegemann (Die Entstehung, 49) against Jeremias (Der Lehrer, 86), who takes it as the congregation of the Tcacher and the Man of the Lie. 66 I Macc 11 :70; 13: 11; D.N. Freedman, "The 'House of Absalom' in the Habakkuk Scroll," BASOR 114 (1949) 11-12. 63

The reference to "the rebuke of the Teacher of Righteousness" is ambiguous. Jeremias correctly established that the word in question [twkht) means rebuke, as in 1QS 6:1; C D 7:2; 9:2-8,67 not physical punishment as in Burgmann , s theory. 68 He proceeds to argue from 1QS 9:16-18 that such remonstrance would only have taken place between two members of the same community. 69 This point is not well founded: it is not apparent that the directive of 1QS 9 was already in force when this encounter took place. We have a possible clue as to the nature of the rebuke in 1 Q p H a b 5:11-12. We are told that the Man of the Lie rejected the Torah in the midst of the assembly. If the Teacher was rebuking the Man of the Lie, the rebuke was probably in accordance with this Torah. We may compare 4QpPs a 4:8-9, which says that "the Wicked Priest sought to murder the Teacher...and the law which he sent to him." From this it would seem that the Teacher made an attempt to win over his enemies by presenting them with a Torah (perhaps analogous to 4 Q M M T , the so-called "Letter of the Teacher of Righteousness to the Wicked Priest"). The effort was evidently unsuccessful, and the experience of rejection may have led him to formulate the rule of 1QS 9:16-18. On the other hand, if the Man of the Lie was administering the rebuke, this would presumably be related to his rejection of the law and of the divine authority of the Teacher. The use of twkht in IQpHab 5:4 would seem to favor an active rather than a passive use and so that the Teacher was the one administering the rebuke. Other evidence strengthens the impression that the feud was not an inner sectarian one. In C D 1:14 the man of mockery is said to spout waters of falsehood "to Israel" and lead them astray. He did not merely resist the claims of the Teacher but actively preached a different message. His audience was not just a congregation or community, but Israel. In C D 4:19-20 the "builders of the wall" who have followed the spouter are said to be trapped in two of the nets of Belial, in which he traps Israel. T h e disagreement then is not only over the authority of the Teacher but involves some of the halakhic issues which separated the sect from the rest of Israel. It is probable that those whom the Man of the Lie "led astray" included some who had hitherto been followers of the Teacher. CD 20:14-15 speaks of "the men of war who turned back with the Man of the Lie."70 The 67

Note also the use of the term in 1 QpHab 5:4 where twkht convicts the wicked ones of the people. 68 ζμιή lösbare Qumranprobleme, 84. 69 Jeremias, Der Lehrer, 85-86. 70 The designation "men of war" is derived from Deut 2:14.

same column says that those who rejected the "new covenant in the land of Damascus" would receive the same judgment as their companions who turned back with the men of scoffing. These traitors to the new covenant should not, however, be simply identified with the followers of the Scoffer. Indeed 1QpHab 2:1-10 distinguishes three groups of traitors: the "traitors together with the Man of the Lie" (2:1-2) who did not accept the words of the Teacher; the traitors to the new covenant, who were unfaithful to it; and the traitors at the end of days.71 Here again there seems to be a distinction between those who followed the Man of the Lie instead of the Teacher and those who were members of the new covenant. 72 The peshanm emphasize the success of the Man of the Lie.73 He led many astray (4QpPs 3 1:26; 1QpHab 10:9) and built a city of vanity and established a congregation with deceit (1QpHab 10:10).74 From this it would seem that he was credited with building up a movement, not merely retaining the loyalty of an old movement against the challenge of the Teacher, and not merely with causing a split within a sect. Murphy-O'Connor's view that the Man of the Lie and his followers represent "non-Qumran Essenism" 75 is implausible on several counts. T o begin with, we have found no evidence that the Liar was ever an "Essene." Further, there is no evidence that the "Qumran Essenes" were ever at variance with other settlements of the sect.76 Finally, there is evidence that the reverse was true. The Damascus Document, which clearly comes from a community loyal

71

For discussion of this passage see Jeremias, Der Lehrer, 79-82. He concludcs that there were three distinct groups, but not ncccssarily at three distinct times. 72 C D 1:17 says the Scoffer caused "the curses of his covenant" to cling to those he led astray. This is usually understood as God's covenant. If it were the Scoffcr's covenant it would indicate that he had a distinct covenant which was "his." 73 Stegemann, Die Entstehung, 44-45. 74 This passage might be thought to lend support to Burgmann's identification of the Liar witn Simon (Zwei lösbare Qumranprobleme, 175-83). Cross described Simon as "the builder par exccllcncc" (The Ancient Library of Qumran. 150; sec I Macc 13:10, 33, 52; 14:33, 37) and identified him with the cursed "man who rebuilds this city" in the Testimonia. Jeremias, however, has pointed out that in IQpHab the reference to building a city is derived from the biblical text. The pesher reinterprets it as building a congrégation. The passage does not necessarily have the same reference as the one in the Testimonia. 75 "The Essence and their History," 235. 76 Sec further my comments in "Was the Dead Sea Sect an Apocalyptic Community?" Philo and Josephus speak of one sect with many setdements. They do not, of course, mention Qumran. Qumran is identified as an Essene community primarily bccausc of Pliny's reference to an Essene settlement by the Dead Sea (Nat. Hist. 5.15) and the correspondences between the Community Rule and the account in Josephus.

to the Teacher, legislates for "those who live in camps following the order of the land" (7:6-9),77 and therefore provides for "nonQumran Essenes5' within the Teacher's movement. The view of Vermes, that 1QS and CD reflect the different branches of the Essenes reported by Josephus and that these were complementary and not schismatic, remains the most probable theory.78 Stegemann's thesis that the followers of the Man of the Lie became the Pharisees 79 has some evidence to support it. This evidence consists of the use of stereotypical designations such as "seekers after smooth things" and "Ephraim." In the pesher on Nahum the "seekers after smooth things" appear as opponents of the "Lion of Wrath" who hanged men alive. They are also said to have advised "Demetrius, king of Greece" to enter Jerusalem. The Lion is clearly identifiable as Alexander Jannaeus, and in this context the "seekers" are clearly the Pharisees.80 Ephraim is identified as "the seekers after smooth things at the end of days" and the pesher also refers to "those who lead Ephraim astray" and "lead many astray." Stegemann points out that "leading astray" (ht'h) is a motif associated with the Man of the Lie.81 Also in CD 1, the followers of the Spouter are said to have sought smooth things. The question is whether stereotypical language necessarily has the same referent in different contexts or may have been applied at various times to different opponents of the sect.82 The only passage which may contain information about the halakhic views of the Man of the Lie is found in CD 4:19-5:12. There we are told that the followers of "Precept," a spouter, are caught in two of the three nets of Belial. These are fornication by marrying "two women in their lifetime" and profanation of the Temple by breach of purity and marriage laws. The purity laws in question (sleeping with a menstruating woman) are too general to be helpful. 83 It is interesting, however, that Louis Ginzberg regarded the marriage laws in this passage as a clear exception to what he 77 This passage is sometimes regarded as redactional, but Davies (The Damascus Covenant, 142) makes a case for its authenticity. Rules for the "camps" also appear in CD 12-14. 78 Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls, 105-9. 79 Stegemann, Die Entstehung, 250. 80 See E. Schuerer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (rev. and ed. G. Vermes and F. Millar; Edinburgh: Clark, 1973) 1. 219-28. 81 Stegemann, Die Enstehung, 69-72. 82 See the objections of Murphy-O'Connor, "The Essenes and their History," 240-41. 83 m. Niddah 1: 1-7 shows that the definition of menstrual impurity was subject to various interpretations.

perceived as the Pharisaic character of the book.04 He argued that, despite thousands of differences between rabbis on other matters, "there is not a single case of incestuous marriage on which they are not unanimous." Hence the halakha of the sect would indeed be in conflict with the rabbis on this matter. Against this line of argument, we cannot assume that the views of the earliest Pharisees are accurately reflected in the Mishnah and Talmud, and so the halakhic issues in CD cannot confirm the proposed identification of the followers of the Man of the Lie as Pharisees. That identification does, however, remain possible, even if it cannot be proved conclusively. The Evidence of the Teacher Hymns Thus far we have made little reference to a body of material which many scholars regard as the work of the Teacher of Righteousness himself—the so-called Teacher Hymns. 85 While the ascription of these hymns is necessarily hypothetical, it is plausible.86 The presumed author claims to be a mediator of revelation in a way that is only attested in the case of the Teacher (1QpHab 7:4). Unfortunately, these hymns contain very little biographical information. The most informative passage is found in 1QH 4:5-5:4. 87 Perhaps the most noteworthy claim advanced in this hymn is that "teachers of lies" have banished the author from his land "like a bird from its nest" (1QH 4:8-9). While the hymn does not focus on the individual "Man of the Lie,,‫ י‬he is surely included among these teachers, who are also described as "lying prophets" and "seers of falsehood." The charges against these people are very similar to what we found in the Damascus Document. They have schemed "to exchange the Law engraved on my heart by Thee for the smooth things (which they speak) to Thy people." Their errors concern "feast days" (compare CD 3:14-15), their teachings are described as "snares" (m'sûdôt) and "designs of Belial" (1QH 4:12-13; compare the three m'sûdôt of Belial in CD 4:15), and they say of the vision of 84

L. Ginzberg, An Unknown Jeivish Sect (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1970) 127-30. 85 Jeremias, Der Lehrer, 168-267. H.W. Kuhn (Enderwartung und gegenwärtiges Heil [SUNT 4; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprccht, 1966] 23) lists the most widely accepted Teacher Hymns: 2:1-19; 4:5-29; 5:5-19; 5:20-6:36; 7:6-25; 8:4-40. Jeremias also includes 2:31-39; 3:1-18 and extends two other hymns: 4:5-5:4 and 5:20-7:5. 86 Jeremias (Der Lehrer, 172-73) contrasts the terminology of the Teacher Hymns with that of the rest of the Hodayot. 87 Jeremias, Der Lehm, 211.

knowledge "it is not sure" (1QH 4:18; compare CD 5:12). Their offense includes rejection of the Teacher, but is not only a question of authority. We read in another hymn that the Teacher encountered rebellion within his own community (1QH 5:23-25), and that some who were bound by his testimony were deceived (6:19). While the "lying prophets" may have made inroads among the Teacher's followers, however, there is no indication that the dispute was primarily an innersectarian one. The reasons why the Teacher was driven out were apparently the halakhic ones which are said to have caused the separation of the sect in C D and 4QMMT. It is noteworthy that neither 1QH nor CD makes reference to the "Wicked Priest," who figures so prominendy in the peshanm. This fact is anomalous for the widely held views that a dispute over the priesthood caused the emergence of the community, or that the Teacher was a displaced High Priest when he encountered the Man of the Lie. One possible explanation for the absence of the Wicked Priest in these documents is that the feud with the "teachers of lies" came first and that the Teacher's community had already crystallized as a separate entity before its feud with the High Priest.88 Conclusion Our review of the evidence for the origin of the Qumran community has led us to question several widely held hypotheses. The claim that the sect originated in the Babylonian Exile contradicts the most explicit evidence of the Damascus Document, without adequate warrant. The view that the withdrawal of the sect was caused by a dispute over the High Priestly succession lacks textual evidence to support it. T h e thesis that the Teacher of Righteousness functioned as High Priest during the Intersacerdotium is not only unsupported, but implausible. There is no evidence that the "Man of the Lie" was an Essene leader. The identity of both the Teacher and the "Man of the Lie" remains enigmatic and will probably continue to remain so, unless new evidence is found. We know that both were prophetic figures in the mid-second century BCE They were largely concerned with halakhic matters, although this should certainly not be taken to exclude a concern for metaphysical beliefs or for eschatology.89 88 According to 4QMMT: "we have separated ourselves from the majority of the people...from intermingling in these matters and from participating with them in these [matters]" (Qimron and Strugnell, "An Unpublished Halakhic Letter from Qumran," 402). 89 See further my article "Was the Dead Sea Sect an Apocalyptic Community?"

Attempts to identify either one with figures otherwise known have hitherto been unsuccessful.90 Given the sketchiness of our knowledge of ancient Judaism, this is hardly surprising. While the results of our review have been negative, they may perhaps clear the way for a more realistic appraisal of our limited knowledge on this fascinating topic.

The attempt of J. Carmignac to identify the Teacher with Judah the Essene ("Qui était le Docteur de Justice?" RevQ 10 [1980] 235-46) has been refuted at length by Burgmann (<«« lösbare Qumranprobleme, 231-56) and Murphy-O'Connor ("Judah the Essene and the Teacher of Righteousness," RtvQ 10 [1981] 579-86).

WAS T H E DEAD SEA S E C T AN APOCALYPTIC MOVEMENT?

The phrase "an apocalyptic community" was used by F.M. Cross, in his book The Ancient Library of Qumranto characterize the sect that produced the Dead Sea Scrolls. By this phrase he intended to signal the affinities of the scrolls with apocalypticism, a phenomenon found in various literary forms, but especially in apocalypses such as Daniel and Revelation. Cross picked out two dominant themes of apocalypticism: first, a theology of history obsessed with the "last things," and, second, a cosmic dualism, the struggle between supernatural forces of good and evil. These themes were never perceived as the only important characteristics of the sect. The motivation of the group according to Cross "proves to root profoundly in older Judaism, specifically in the priesdy laws of ritual purity, 2‫ יי‬but this was coupled with "a thoroughgoing apocalypticism" which provided the context for the self-understanding of the community. Cross's characterization of apocalypticism and of the Qpmran community was formulated four decades ago. He himself later expressed reservations about the description of apocalypticism, 3 but his perception of the Qpmran community has been very widely shared. This perception went hand in hand with the widely held view that the Essenes were an ofTshoot of the Hasidim of the Maccabean period. Thus Martin Hengel, in his sweeping synthesis of the period, attributed "the first climax of Jewish Apocalyptic" 4 to the Hasidim, and found in the central Essene writings like the Community Rule a "further development of apocalyptic historical thinking." 5 While there are inevitable variations of nuance and terminology, Cross and Hengel may fairly be taken as representing a dominant scholarly consensus on these issues. 1 F.M. Cross, The Ancient Library of Qumran and Modern Biblical Studies (revised edition; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1961), 76-78. 2 Ibid., 76. 3 F.M. Cross, "New Directions in the Study of Apocalyptic," Apocalypticism, Journal fir Theology and the Church 6 (ed. R.W. Funk; New York: Herder and Herder, 1969), 158-59. 4 M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974), I. 175. 5 /fe/., 218.

In recent years, however, key elements of this consensus have been challenged. One challenge concerns the terminology and arises from the ongoing discussion of the nature of apocalypses and the subsequent use of the adjective "apocalyptic." Hartmut Stegemann, in a lucid discussion on the significance of the Qumran library for apocalypticism, concludes flatly that the community itself was "keine apokalyptische Bewegung." 6 He reaches this conclusion because of his understanding of the term "apocalyptic": material is only apocalyptic if it is found in an apocalypse, and an apocalypse is a literary form of heavenly revelation, typically conveyed through visions, heavenly journeys, or angelic communications. None of the major compositions of the Qumran sect is in the form of an apocalypse and so the community cannot be characterized as apocalyptic. Stegemann is certainly right in defining apocalypses primarily as revelations, and in pointing out that few if any apocalypses were composed at Qumran. 7 Many scholars would, however, permit an extended use of the adjective "apocalyptic" to characterize themes and motifs that are typical of apocalypses, even when they occur elsewhere. 8 The themes singled out by Cross are typical of some, though not all, apocalypses, and the Qumran community could at most be called apocalyptic in a qualified sense. Even if one prefers Stegemann's stricter use of the terminology, however, questions remain as to how the Qumran community was related to the movements that produced apocalypses in the second century BCE and whether eschatology and dualism were as important for the community as Cross maintained. A second challenge to the consensus represented by Cross and Hengel, which also bears on the relation of the sect to the movements that produced the apocalypses, is historical in focus. This challenge arises from the ongoing debate about the origin of the Qumran sect. The dominant consensus, supported also by Stegemann, 9 has regarded Qumran as an Essene settlement, and viewed the Essenes as an offshoot of the Hasidim of the Maccabean

6 H. Stegemann, 'Die Bedeutung der Qumranfundc fur die Erforschung der Apokalyptik', in D. Hcllholm, ed., Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tiibingcn: Möhr, 1983), 525. Compare also J . Carmignac, "Qu'est-ce que l'Apocalyptique? Son emploi a Qumran," Rev £ 1 0 (1979-81), 3-33. ' So already J . J . Collins, 'The Jewish Apocalypses', Apocalypse, The Morphology of a Genre, Semeia 14 (1979), 48-49. * See my discussion of "apocalyptic" terminology in The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1984), 9-11. 9 H. Stegemann, Die Entstehung der Qumrangemeinde (Bonn: printed privately, 1971).

era. Hengel went furthest in filling out a description of the Hasidim and ascribing to them a wide range of apocalyptic writings.10 Both this description of the Hasidim and the relation of the Hasidim to the Essenes have been questioned." The Hasidim are in fact rather poorly attested. They were "mighty warriors in Israel" (1 Macc. 2.42), who supported Judas Maccabee (2 Macc. 14.6). They were also the first to seek peace, and they expressed an ill-founded trust in Alcimus because he was a priest of the line of Aaron, and they were probably identified with the group of scribes who approached him to ask for terms (1 Macc. 7.12-13). Otherwise, we have no direct information about either their organization or their ideology. Recendy, several divergent theories of the origin of the Essenes have been proposed. 12 The one which has gathered the most support locates the origin of the movement in Babylon, long before the Maccabean era. 13 This proposal is far from commanding a consensus, however, and must be assessed critically. Its significance for our present purpose is that it suggests a matrix for the Dead Sea sect that is quite distinct from the movements of the Maccabean period. A third challenge to the view that Qpmran was an apocalyptic community concerns the ideology of the sect itself. There is no doubt that dualism and eschatology figure prominently in documents that were composed and not merely preserved by the sect. The questions that have been raised concern both the nature and the importance of eschatology. It has been suggested that the original aspirations of the sect were closer to the traditional Deuteronomic hope for restoration from exile than to the eschatology of the apocalypses, 14 and that eschatology was in any case of secondary importance compared with Torah observance. 15 It has

10

Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism 1, 175-80. P.R . Davies, 'Hasidim in the Maccabean Period‫׳‬, JJS 28 (1977), 127-40; J . J . Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel (Harvard Semitic Monographs 16; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1977), 202-203; G.W. Nickelsburg, "Social Aspects of Palestinian Jewish Apocalypticism" in Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism, 647-48. 12 See the diverse theories of D. Dimant, "Qumran Sectarian Literature," in M. E. Stone, ed., Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period (Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum 2.2; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984), 542-47; B.Z. Wacholder, The Daum of Qumran (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 1983); R. Eisenman, Maccabees, Zadolites, Christians and Qumran, A New Hypothesis of Qumran Origins (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1983); B.E. Thiering, Redating the Teacher of Righteousness (Sydney: Theological Explorations, 1979). 13 J . Murphy-O'Connor, "The Essenes and Their History," RB 8 (1974), 215-44; "The Essenes in Palestine," BA 40 (1977), 100-124; P.R. Davies, The Damascus Covenant (Sheffield: J S O T , 1983). 14 P.R. Davies, "Eschatology at Qumran," JBL 104 (1985) 39-55. 15 Stegemann, "Die Bedeutung der Qumranfunde," 523. 11

also been suggested that cosmic dualism, familiar from the War Scroll and the Community Rule, was a secondary development, and not part of the original ideology of the sect.16 The relation between the Community Rule and the Damascus Document becomes an important issue in this context, as does the provenance of the Temple Scroll and its relation to the Qumran sect. We have, then, a number of interrelated issues over and beyond the terminological question addressed by Stegemann. The issue I wish to focus on here is the ideology of the sect in the early phase of its history reflected in the Damascus Document, and its relation to other strands of postexilic Judaism. We know of several distinct groups in the Second Temple period that were apocalyptic in the sense that they expressed their identity in apocalypses, specifically in the books of Daniel, 1 Enoch, and Jubilees. While a theology of history is not necessarily constitutive of all apocalypticism, each of these writings, in fact, expresses a theology of history that differs in significant ways from the traditional Deuteronomic model. It is widely believed that there is some historical connection between these apocalyptic groups and the Dead Sea sect, and this belief draws support from the fact that all these apocalypses were preserved at Qumran, and that the distinctive sectarian calendar is also attested in 1 Enoch and Jubilees. The traditional Deuteronomic theology of history is clearly expressed in a series of prayers from diverse locations and dates— Ezra 9, Nehemiah 9, Daniel 9, Bar. 1.15-3.8.17 A fine example is preserved at Qumran in The Words of the Heavenly Luminaries (4QDibrê HaM r> ôrôt). Typically, these prayers acknowledge that Israel has been justly punished and appeal for mercy for God's own sake and for the sake of his covenant. The frame of reference is the traditional Mosaic covenant. The sin of Israel is punished by loss and desolation of the land. The desired goal is restoration of the people to the land of Israel. One such prayer is found in the apocalyptic book of Daniel, but its theology is so atypical of that book that its authenticity has often been doubted. 18 It is not, in any case, part of the revelation that Daniel receives. That revelation, spoken by the angel, provides a

16

Davies, , Eschatology', 50-52. Compare J.L. Duhaime, "La Redaction de 1QM XIII et l'évolution du dualisme a Qumrân," RB 84 (1977), 237-38. 17 See O.H. Steck, Israel und das gewaltsame Geschick der Propheten (NeukirchenVluyn: Neukirchcncr Verlag, 1967), 110-95. 18 See my discussion in Daniel, with an Introduction to Apocalyptic Literature (FOTL 20; Grand Rapids: Ecrdmans, 1984), 89-96.

very different theology of history.19 The duration of the desolation is decreed in advance—seventy weeks of years. This desolation may still be construed as a punishment for the sin of Israel, but it is at least aggravated by the "desolator.' 5 The great visions of Daniel in chapters 7 and 8 do not begin with the sin of Israel, but speak in mythological terms of beasts rising from the sea or of conflict between the astral signs of the ram and he-goat. The beasts symbolize particular nations but the symbolism suggests that there are supernatural powers in revolt against the God of heaven. This impression is confirmed in chapters 10-12, where we read of combat between the patron angels of the nations, and King Antiochus exalts himself above every god to confront the God of gods. There is at least a tendency to dualism here, although it is not fully realized: the opponents of God are not princes of evil at large, but are correlated with specific nations. Just as Michael, "prince of Israel," is opposed to the angelic princes of the Gentiles, so the primary opposition on Earth is between Israel and the foreign overlords. Yet, there is evidently a split within the Jewish people too, between the "people who know their God," the maškîlîm, and those who succumb to the king. The maškîlîm were a distinct group in the Maccabean crisis who had their own traditions, represented by the tales in Daniel 1-6.20 They were set apart not only by their fidelity to the law in the face of persecution, but also by their claim to have a special apocalyptic revelation, over and above the law of Moses. The revelations contained in the book of Daniel are heavily eschatological, but we cannot conclude that eschatology was the primary interest of the group. At the very least, eschatology supports Torah observance, and it would be misleading to argue that one was more important that the other. The maskîlîm of Daniel eagerly awaited the end of the desolation of Israel. It is not entirely clear what kind of restoration was envisaged. Chapter 7 speaks of a kingdom which is given to the people of the holy ones, and we may assume that a national Jewish kingdom was intended. In chapter 12, however, we see a different dimension of eschatology. There we read that the dead, or some of them at least, will be raised and that the maškîlîm will "shine like the stars." The hope of reward after death significantly alters the tradi-

19

O.H. Steck, 'Weltgeschehen und Gottesvolk im Buch Daniel', Kirche, ed. D. Lührmann and G. Strecker (Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1980), 53-78, argues for a more consistendy Deuteronomic interpretation of the whole chapter. 20 See further J.J. Collins, "The Social Setting of the Book of Daniel," Interpretation 39 (1985), 131-43.

tional eschatology of the Deuteronomic prayers. It provides for salvation on the basis of individual choice, not simply by membership in the people of Israel. T o be sure, the maškîlîm were still a group and Daniel is not individualistic in emphasis. Yet, the hope for individual salvation constitutes an important variation in the broad traditional pattern of covenantal nomism. 21 The maškîlîm of Daniel did not constitute the only apocalyptic movement of the Maccabean era. The book of Enoch contains a small corpus of apocalypses, composed over a span of half a century prior to the Maccabean revolt, and it is reasonable to assume that there was some social continuity between them. 22 The greatest indications of a sectarian movement are found in the Apocalypse of Weeks and the Animal Apocalypse. The Apocalypse of Weeks speaks of "the chosen righteous from the eternal plant of righteousness." This clearly refers to a sectarian group since "the eternal plant of righteousness" was Israel, sprung from Abraham in the third week. The rise of this group occurs at the end of the seventh week, presumably several hundred years after the destruction of the Temple. (The previous week spanned the entire duration of the First Temple.) In the Animal Apocalypse "small lambs" appear, who find a leader in a horned ram that is evidently to be identified as Judas Maccabee. The emergence of this group, then, would seem to have occurred shortly before the Maccabean revolt, but it is now clear that the Enoch tradition, like the Danielic tradition, goes back at least to the third century BCE. 2 3 Both the Apocalypse of Weeks and the Animal Apocalypse have an elaborate theology of history. In the Apocalypse of Weeks the full course of history is divided into weeks. Similar schemata appear in Daniel 9, the Sibylline Oracles, and some documents found at Qumran. This kind of elaborate periodization is not, however, attested in Judaism before the Hellenistic period. In its Jewish expression the idea is related to the Levitical notion of the jubilee. The idea that all of history is divided into a set number of periods is, however, also found in non-Jewish sources in the Hellenistic period and is very probably influenced by Persian millennial speculation, as David

21 E.P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977), subsûmes virtually all of Palestinian Judaism under the pattern of "covenantal nomism." While this is correct on a very general level, a pattern which fails to distinguish between 1 Enoch and Sirach is obviously of limited value. 22 J.C. VanderKam, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition (Washington, D.C.: Catholic Biblical Association, 1984); Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 3367. 23 M.E. Stone, Scriptures, Sects and Visions (Philadelphia: Fortress. 1980), 27-35.

Flusser has shown. 24 In the Enochic Apocalypse of Weeks, the turning point comes with the election of the chosen righteous in the seventh week, which follows directly on the destruction of the Temple. This week is inhabited by "an apostate generation." The Second Temple is not even acknowledged here, and it seems safe to infer that "the chosen righteous" were alienated from it. They are given "sevenfold teaching concerning His whole creation" — in short, they enjoy special revelation. The emergence of the "chosen righteous" is in itself a climax of history. The Apocalypse of Weeks, however, completes the scenario. In the eighth week a sword will be given to the righteous and they will acquire houses. In the ninth, judgment will be revealed to the whole world and the wicked will vanish. In the tenth will be the judgment of the Watchers and a new heaven will appear. The destruction of Jerusalem and dispersion of Israel is a punishment for the people's own impiety, as it is in the Deuteronomic model of history. The "chosen righteous" in effect constitute a remnant. It is, however, a sectarian remnant, which implies the rejection of other postexilic Jews. The restoration they hope for includes the acquistion of houses, and so presumably possession of the land, but it ultimately involves a judgment of the whole world and a new creation. If the Apocalypse of Weeks is read in the context of the Epistle of Enoch, within which it was transmitted even in Aramaic, the righteous can hope to "shine like the lights of heaven" and be companions to the "host of heaven" (104.2, 4, 6) like the masktlim of Daniel. Again, the traditional covenantal expectation is extended beyond the restoration of the land. The Animal Apocalypse also uses the number seventy in its schematization of history. The "sheep" of Israel were given over to seventy "shepherds" as punishment. The "house" of the sheep Jerusalem) and the "tower" (the Temple) were destroyed (89:66). Later the tower was rebuilt, but the bread placed on its table was impure, and the sheep were blind (89.73-74). Finally, "lambs" were born from the sheep and they began to open their eyes (90.6). These presumably correspond to the chosen righteous who are given special revelation in the Apocalypse of Weeks. The final scenario of this apocalypse also involves a cosmic judgment in which the "Watchers" and the shepherds are destroyed. A new house (new Jerusalem) is set 24 D. Flusser, "The Four Empires in the Fourth Sibyl and in the Book of Daniel," Israel Oriental Studies 2 (1972), 148-75. On periodization in Jewish and Christian texts see A.Y. Collins, "Numerical Symbolism in Jewish and Early Christian Apocalyptic Literature,"ANRW 11.21.2, 1221-87 = Cosmology and Eschatol°gy in Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism (Leiden: Brill, 1996) 55-138.

up, though not a new tower or Temple. Even the "wild beasts" (or Gentiles) come to worship and the "sheep" are transformed into "white bulls" like Adam. Here again the final restoration puts an end to the punishment of Israel. Again the lambs are a distinct group, although they make common cause with the Maccabees. The final restoration is not simply repossession of the land, but involves a judgment of cosmic scope. Supernatural beings, Watchers and shepherds, are very prominent throughout. The shepherds in part serve the purpose of God by punishing Israel, although they are guilty of excess in doing so. We might compare the role of Assyria in Isaiah 10, as the rod of the Lord's anger which is nonetheless guilty itself, but in 1 Enoch the shepherds are supernatural figures and they are destroyed with the Watchers or fallen stars as heavenly rebels against God. Both the Apocalypse of Weeks and the Animal Apocalypse take note of the descent of the Watchers and include them in the final judgment. The story is, of course, most fully expounded in the older Book of the Watchers. This story provides a very different explanation of human misery than does the Deuteronomic tradition. The primary responsibility for evil rests not with humanity but with supernatural forces which disrupt the earth. There is a confrontation between the good archangels and the fallen Watchers (/ Enoch 10-11). Moreover, the evil spirits which come forth from the giants remain to do evil on earth (15.9-12). The Epistle of Enoch seems to draw back from this tradition when it declares that "sin was not sent of earth, but man of himself created it" (98.4). Their role in the Apocalypse of Weeks and the Animal Apocalypse is less clear. Their inclusion in the judgment implies that they have some responsibility for the course of history. The dualism implicit in the myth of the Watchers is not developed in the Enochic writings, and so we can speak only of an incipient dualism. It is not clear just how sharply the lambs or the chosen righteous distinguished themselves from their contemporaries. There is no mention of a new covenant and no command to separate from the wicked. There was some alienation from the Temple. It is possible, though never explicitly stated, that the Enochic calendar was a factor in this. The movement developed a theology of history with a strong eschatological focus. The expectation of imminent change probably contributed to the heightened self-consciousness of the movement, but there is no reason to think that eschatology was in itself the raison d'être of the group. It was part of the conceptual structure which supported the practices of the group. As the claim to revelation provided authority, eschatology offered the hope of final

validation. Again, eschatology and Torah are complementary, and should not be weighed against each other. A final witness to apocalyptic movements in the Maccabean era is found in the book of Jubilees, which was also preserved in several copies at Qumran. This is a work of mixed genre: in one respect it is a midrash on Genesis, but it is also in the form of an apocalypse insofar as it is a heavenly revelation, mediated to Moses by an angel. 25 It also displays the typical apocalyptic belief in a final judgment of cosmic scope and the activity of angelic (and demonic) powers. Jubilees makes use of the early Enoch books. If the allusions to the Animal Apocalypse identified by VanderKam are correct, it cannot have been composed before the outbreak of the Maccabean revolt.26 The general context of the book is betrayed by the polemic against public nakedness (3.31) and the prohibition against fighting on the Sabbath (50.12)—concerns which were prominent in the crisis under Antiochus Epiphanes. Jubilees mentions the persecution at the hands of "the sinners of the Gentiles who have neither mercy nor compassion" (23:23) but does not acknowledge the Maccabean revolt.27 Instead, the turning point of history comes when "the children shall begin to study the laws" (23.26). This development resembles the emergence of the chosen righteous in the Apocalypse of Weeks, or the lambs of the Animal Apocalypse. In view of the failure to acknowledge the Maccabees, and the prohibition of fighting on the Sabbath, Jubilees cannot be attributed simply to the same group, although they shared basic ideas and drew on common traditions. The retelling of the book of Genesis in Jubilees has a predominant Halakhic interest. T h e laws are intended for all Israel, and include such common observances as circumcision and the Sabbath, although they also include distinctive details which often parallel the Temple Scroll, as Yadin and Wacholder have pointed out. 28 Most significant for the provenance of Jubilees is the insistence on the solar calendar of 364 days, which in this case (unlike the Astronomical Book of Enoch) is accompanied by a polemic against "observations of the 25

Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 63-67. On Jubilees as an apocalypse see also C. Rowland, The Open Heaven (New York: Crossroad, 1983), 51-52 and Stegemann, "Die Bedeutung der Qumranfunde," 509. 26 J . C. VanderKam, "Enoch Traditions in Jubilees and other Second Century Sources," Seminar Papers (Society of Biblical Literature, 1978), 1.229-51. 27 O n the date of Jubilees see further J . C . VanderKam, Textual and Historical Studies in the Book of Jubilees (Harvard Semitic Monographs 14; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1977), 214-85. 28 Y. Yadin, The Temple Scroll (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1984), pasrim; Wacholder, The Dawn of Qumran, 42-53.

m o o n — h o w (it) disturbs the seasons and comes in from year to year ten days too soon" (Jub. 6.37), i.e., the 354 day lunar calendar. If we can assume that the latter was the official calendar of the Jerusalem Temple when Jubilees was written (there is no direct evidence), then the calendrical disagreement would mean that Jubilees was a sectarian document and that its distinctive halakhic requirements reflect the observances of a distinct group. As in the Enochic apocalypses, the practical observances in Jubilees are also given an apocalyptic context. On the one hand, they are authorized as the revelation given to Moses, but also by frequent appeal to "the heavenly tablets." The expression is familar from Enoch, and in view of the clear use of the Enoch material in Jubilees, we must assume that the Enochic usage is prior. 29 The material contained in these tablets includes halakhic material, but also the future destiny of the sons ofJacob (32.21) and "the judgment of all" (5.13). The "heavenly tablets" cannot be equated with the tablets of the law but constitute a further, more comprehensive source of revelation. On the other hand, the observances of Jubilees are reinforced by the prospect of the eschatological judgment. The eschatology of Jubilees has various aspects.30 Chapter 1 builds on the Deuteronomic model of history. The exile is a punishment for the sins of Israel. It entails forgetting the law and going astray in the matter of the calendar. Then, after this they will turn to m e f r o m a m o n g the Gentiles with all their h e a r t . . . a n d I will g a t h e r t h e m f r o m a m o n g all the Gentiles a n d . . . I will g r a n t t h e m a n age of p e a c e a n d righteousness a n d set t h e m a p a r t as a n upright p l a n t . . . a n d I will build m y sanctuary in their midst a n d I will dwell with t h e m a n d be their G o d (1.15-18).

The "plant" imagery is reminiscent of the Apocalypse of Weeks. The final transformation is more fully elaborated in chapter 23, which promises a transformation of the world so that there will be no Satan or destroyer. People will live a thousand years and after death their spirits will have much joy. Most fundamental is the assurance that the judgment of all is inscribed in the heavenly tablets (5.13). Only in chapter 23 is there any sense that the transformation is imminent. Jubilees, like the early Enoch literature (i.e., the Book of the Watchers and the Astronomical Book of Enoch) is concerned not so much with the proximity of the judgment as with its inevitability. w

Contra Wacholder, The Dawn of Qumran, 61. See G.L. Davenport, The Eschatology of the Book ofJubilees (Leiden: Brill, 1971). Davenport regards the main eschatological sections in chapters 1 and 12 as secondary additions, but his reasons are not compelling. 30

Jubilees makes extensive use of the myth of the Watchers, drawing on the Book of the Watchers and the Animal Apocalypse, but it also develops the myth. The spirits descended from the Watchers are led by the prince Mastema. 31 He retains one-tenth of the spirits on earth to corrupt and lead astray the sons of men. While the number of spirits is restricted here, in contrast to 1 Enoch 15-16, Jubilees develops the role of Mastema. He is conceived mythologically as a supernatural figure, an evil archangel. He is directly opposed by the Angel of the Presence at the binding of Isaac and again at the Exodus. While he is repulsed on these occasions, his activity continues until the eschaton. This cosmic struggle also has a psychological dimension. Thus Moses asks God to have mercy on His people "and create in them an upright spirit and let not the spirit of Beliar rule over them to accuse them before Thee and to ensnare them from all the paths of righteousness so that They may perish from before Thy face" (1.20). While "belial" is used impersonally in the biblical tradition for the spirit of deceit or perversity, in the context of Jubilees the spirit of Beliar that accuses people must be understood as a demonic agent. The book of Jubilees then presents a developed dualism in which the conflict of angelic figures clearly persists throughout history, and it is probably the earliest document in the Jewish tradition to do so.32 Mastema retains some characteristics of Satan in the postexilic biblical books, but Satan has not hitherto been portrayed as the leader of evil spirits. The crucial point here is that Mastema is an agent of evil at large. This contrasts with the roughly contemporary book of Daniel, in which Michael, prince of Israel, is pitted against the patron angels of specific nations, Persia and Greece, and in which even demonic beasts from the sea are mythological counterparts to kingdoms. In contrast to Daniel (but in agreement with Deuteronomy) Jubilees denies that God appointed any angel or spirit over Israel (Jub. 15.32). This denial cannot be taken, however, to indicate opposition to the developing notion of an exalted angel,33 since the Angel of the Presence protects Israel at the Exodus and has a higher portfolio in the heavenly court than the angel of Israel. The Angel of the Presence is not paired with Mastema in as symmetrical 31 There is some doubt as to whether Mastema is a proper name or is used as an abstract noun (as "belial" is used in the Hebrew Bible), but there is no doubt that a demonic figure is intended. See VanderKam, Textual and Historical Studies, 257 n. 91. 32 O n the dualism of Jubilees see M. Tcstuz, Les Idées religieuses du livre des Jubilés (Paris: Minard, 1960), 75-99. 33 On the development of an exalted angel in apocalyptic literature see Rowland, The Open Heaven, 94-113.

a fashion as we find in some dualistic compositions from Qumran, but that is no reason to deny the fundamentally dualistic conception of Jubilees that human destiny is swayed by the conflict of supernatural, angelic, or demonic beings.34 This dualistic framework distinguishes Jubilees clearly from the Deuteronomic tradition on which it also draws. With Jubilees, then, we draw considerably closer to the world of Qumran, not only in its preoccupation with matters of halakhah and especially of purity, but also in the dualistic framework within which human activity is located. Yet, Jubilees gives no hint of a new covenant or of an organization with procedures for admission and rules of membership. The group that produced it had obvious affinities with the Enoch movement. The maškîlîm of Daniel were another contemporary group, distinct but yet related in some ways. All of these were apocalyptic groups in the sense that they expressed their world view in apocalypses. All these groups had a theology of history, which was not fully uniform, but showed common tendencies that diverged from the Deuteronomic tradition. The course of history was not fully governed by the Deuteronomic principle of sin and punishment, because there were also supernatural powers opposed to God. The hope for restoration was focused on a group within Israel endowed with a new revelation. The salvation hoped for was not simply the restoration of Israel, but had a transcendent dimension involving afterlife and cosmic judgment. Eschatology per se was never the raison d'être of these groups, but was part of the conceptual structure that supported their actions and practices. The Dead Sea Sect Martin Hengel's claim that the Essene writings from Qumran contain a development of apocalyptic historical thinking is based most directly on the first four columns of the Community Rule. 35 There is still an evident connection with the Deuteronomic tradition: the scroll describes a covenantal ceremony, 36 and the role of IsraePs sin is acknowledged in a confessional prayer. The covenant, however, is not for all the people of Israel but for those who freely devote themselves—in short, it is formed through the free choice of 34 Assertions that Jubilees is not dualistic can be found in Wacholder, The Dawn of Qiimran, 82, and Davies, "Eschatology," 50-51. 35 Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1, 218. 36 On the covenant in 1QS see K. Baltzer, The Covenant Formulary (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971), 99-112.

individuals, even if that choice can also be said to be predetermined. 37 The sin, moreover, is due to the dominion of Belial, and history is the arena of conflict between the two spirits, or angels, of light and darkness. There is certainly development here, even beyond the dualism of Jubilees, but there is continuity, too. While the Community Rule speaks elsewhere of atoning for the land (8.6, 10), the fruit of the spirit of light is great peace in a long life, and "eternal joy in life without end" (1QS 4.7). The sons of darkness, on the other hand, are doomed to eternal torment at the hands of the avenging angels. Again, a personal, individualized eschatology has been added to the hope for the restoration of the land. There is, however, another sectarian rule book included in the library of Qumran, the so-called Damascus Document. Since this document is less obviously dualistic that the Community Rule, it has been suggested that it may represent an earlier phase of the sect, which was less apocalyptic in character than the Community Rule and closer in its theology to the Deuteronomic tradition. 38 The first question that confronts us here is whether we can assume that this sect was a single unified organization. Most scholars have assumed that it was, and moreover that it was identical with the Essene sect described by Josephus and other ancient authors. 39 According to Josephus, the Essenes did not have one city, but many setded in each city (JW 2.8.4 [124]). Philo says they lived in villages (‫ן‬Quod Omnis Probus 76). Accordingly, the Qumran settlement has been viewed as a kind of headquarters 40 or retreat center 41 for the sect, and the Community Rule as the rule book of this establishment. The Damascus Document, on the other hand, provides for life in "camps" throughout the country, although it also provides for "the assembly of all the camps." Against this view, which sees the different rule books and settlements as parts of a coherent whole, it has been suggested that the Qumran community was founded by a splinter group of Essenes led by the "Teacher of Righteousness." The Essene sect, it is suggested, was an older movement, and it continued not only independently of Qumran, but in opposition to it. It has even been suggested that the 37 Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, 240-57, has a good discussion of the novelty of the sectarian covenant. 38 So Davies, "Eschatology," 52-53. 39 For a representative discussion see G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Saolls, Qumran in Perspective (revised edition; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981) 87-109. 40 So Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls, 109. 41 So L.H. Schifiman, Sectarian Law in the Dead Sea Saolls (Brown Judaic Studies, 33; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1983), 12-13.

infamous "Man of the Lie" was a leader of the main body of Essenes that refused to follow the Teacher into the wilderness.42 The Damascus Document has been thought to preserve the ideology of the original Essene movement, even though it has undergone a "Qumran recension." 43 I should add that scholars who affirm some of these points do not necessarily accept all of them. An initial issue here is the use of the name "Essene." It may be well at the outset to recall the reasons for identifying any form of the Dead Sea sect with the Essenes.44 First, there is the geographical testimony of Pliny that the Essenes lived by the Dead Sea "above" Engedi and Masada. Further, the procedures for admission through multiple stages described by Josephus can be correlated with the prescriptions of the Community Rule. Other features of the Essenes paralleled in the scrolls are the communal use of the property, common means, devotion to the study of the laws, ritual baths and concern for purity, and a peculiar attitude toward the Temple cult.45 The combination of location and communal organization has satisfied most scholars that Qumran was indeed an Essene settlement. There are, however, discrepancies between the ideology of the Essenes as described by Philo and Josephus and what we find in the scrolls. The discrepancies bear directly on the apocalyptic character of the sect. No mention is made in the Greek sources of a conflict between supernatural forces of light and darkness, or of dualism in any form. Equally, no mention is made of Messianic expectation, or of the restoration of Israel, or of an eschatological Temple or the like. Josephus attributes a highly personal eschatology to the Essenes, analogous to Greek views on the immortality of the soul, and speaks of "a life reserved for the good beyond the ocean" while wicked souls suffer endless punishments in a murky and wintry place. Hippolytus, however, attributes to the Essenes the resurrection of the body as well as the immortality of the soul, and also a final judgment, conflagration, and eternal punishment of the wicked.4fi Philo and Josephus wrote for Hellenized audiences, and it is understandable that they might wish to downplay some aspects of 42

Murphy-O'Connor, "The Essenes in Palestine," 118-21; 'The Essenes and their History', 233-38, Stegemann, Die Entstehung der Qumrangemeinde, 228-32, identifies the followers of the Man of the Lie as the Pharisees. 43 So Davies, 7he Damascus Covenant. 44 Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls, 116-36. 45 Ant 18.1.5 (18-19). Cf. CD 6.11-2. The interpretation of both passages is disputed. 46 Hippolytus, Refutation 9.27. See M. Smith, "The Description of the Essenes in Josephus and the Philosophoumcna," Hebreic Union College Annual 29 (1958), 273-313.

the sect and emphasize others. Be that as it may, the descriptions of the Essenes correspond with the Qumran Community Rule more fully than with any other extant Hebrew or Aramaic document, although there are also points of contact with the Damascus Document and the Temple Scroll. The multistage process of admission, provision for common use of property, and common meals are oudined in the Community Rule. There are even correspondences on matters of detail, such as the prohibition of spitting, and the requirement to hate the unjust {JW 2.8.7 [139]). Josephus's account is based primarily on the "monastic" or celibate order of Essenes. While the Community Rule does not require celibacy, it makes no reference to marriage or to the education of children. By contrast, the Damascus Document specifically provides for the marriage of those who live in camps (CD 7.6). The eschatology of the Essenes, as described by Josephus, finds its closest parallel in 1QS 4, which promises "eternal joy in life without end" to the righteous and "everlasting damnation" with "shameful extinction in the fire of the dark regions" to the wicked. The correspondences are not complete or exact, and the value ofJosephus's account as a description of the Dead Sea sect remains limited, but that account is closer to the Community Rule than to the Damascus Document or to any other extant sectarian writings of the period. While Philo and Josephus were aware that the Essenes were not limited to one settlement, there is no reason to believe that their accounts were based on "nonQumran" Essenes who were in disagreement with, or opposed to, the Qumran community. 47 The identification of the Dead Sea sect as Essene rests on analogies in communal organization rather than in beliefs or ideology. If any material is to be called Essene, it should at least reflect an organized community. The occasional categorizing of the Enoch material, Jubilees, or the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs as Essene seems quite unjustified. A second preliminary question concerns the relation of the Damascus Document to the Qumran settlement. The Document includes provision for a situation where people "live in camps according to the order of the land" (CD 7.6), and so concerns more than the Qumran setdement. It does, however, speak of a new covenant in the land of Damascus, and the relation of this covenant to Qumran is the point at issue.

47 This was suggested by Murphy-O'Connor, "The Essenes and their History," 235-36. So also Davies, "Eschatology," 53.

The historical sections of the Admonition in the first part of the Damascus Document speak fairly clearly about the emergence of a sect in the post-exilic period. 48 The only explicit information we are given on when this happened is in column 1. A remnant of people survived the exile; then, 390 years after the fall of Jerusalem, God visited this remnant and caused a "root of planting" to grow from Aaron and Israel. The people were still blind for twenty years until God raised up a Teacher of Righteousness to guide them. The chronological data here may well have been added as glosses,49 but they cannot be disregarded for that reason. They still represent a reconstruction of the origins from within the sect itself and cannot be dismissed unless there is equally clear evidence for a different date. The numbers are schematic and so the exactitude of the dates cannot be pressed.50 Nevertheless, the development of the sect can be placed no earlier than the Hellenistic period, most probably in the early second century BCE. The "root of planting," then, is roughly contemporary with the emergence of the chosen righteous of the eternal plant of righteousness in 1 Enoch. The parallel passage in CD 3, which tells how God established his covenant with a remnant after the exile, must be understood in this chronological framework. The fact that the Document moves directly from the exile to the new covenant, without mention of any intervening history, has no chronological significance. The postexilic period is similarly compressed in the Apocalypse of Weeks and in Jubilees 1.5' The covenant that God established "with them that held fast to the commandments of God who were left over of them" (CD 3.12) is elsewhere in the document called "the new covenant in the land of Damascus." There is no consensus on the geographical reference here. Damascus is variously taken as Qumran, Babylon, a place or state of separation from Jewish society, or literally as Damascus. In view of the prevalence of symbolic interpretation in the document, and the lack of other connections with Damascus, we can probably 4a I take the Admonition to be a substantial unity, although there arc certainly glosses and rcdactional variants, as can bc seen from the variant readings in CD 78 (MS A) and 19-20 (MS B). See the analysis of Davies, The Damascus Covenant, especially pp. 56-59 on the complementarity of the three discourses which begin at CD 1.1, 2.2 and 2.14. Opinion is divided as to whether the Laws belong to the same document as the Admonition. Stegcmann argues that they do not (Die Entstehung der Q11mrangemeinde, 128). D. Dimant defends the unity of the endre document and claims that it is corroborated by the unpublished Qumran fragments ('Qumran Sectarian Literature', 490-97). 19 So Davies, The Damascus Covenant, 62-63. 50 Contra Wacholder, The Dawn of Qi/mran, who reckons the 390 years from 597 to 197/6 BCE. 51 See M.A. Knibb, "Exile in the Damascus Document," JSOT25 (1983), 110.

rule out the literal meaning. 52 The equation with Babylon depends on taking C D 3 to mean that the new covenant was constituted in the Babylonian exile, which as we have seen is not a necessary interpretation of C D 3 and is contradicted chronologically by C D 1.53 A crucial passage is C D 6:5, which says that those who dug the well of the law were the sby yisra'el who "went out of the land of Judah and sojourned in the land of Damascus." These are men of understanding from Aaron and men of wisdom from Israel and must be identified with the plant root of C D 1. The phrase "sby yisra'el who went out from the land of J u d a h " occurs without reference to Damascus in 4:23 as an identification of the "priests" of Ezekiel's prophecy. The "going out" in these cases is not the indiscriminate deportation of exiles, but the voluntary separation of a reform movement. The context requires that the sby yisra'el are a new movement, and this in itself favors the translation "penitents" rather than "captivity" or "returnees." 54 Moreover, the plant root is explicidy said to be a penitential movement in 1.8. The sense is clarified in a further reference to the "sby yisra'el who departed from the way of the people" (8.16). Damascus, then, is not the place of exile of those deported by Nebuchadnezzar, but symbolizes the separate dwelling place or places of the sect, whether Qumran was specifically intended or not. 55 According to the chronology of CD 1, the Damascus covenant was formed 390 years after the exile, just as the chosen righteous of the Apocalypse of Weeks emerged at the end of a "week" after the fall ofJerusalem. It is, of course, possible that the "plant root" drew on an older tradition, as the "chosen righteous" and "small lambs" of Enoch evidendy drew on an older Enochic tradition, but C D does not provide evidence for this. What concerns us here is the point at which the new covenant was formed. According to C D 1, a period of twenty years elapsed between the emergence of the plant root and the arrival of the Teacher. 56 These

52

Wacholder, The Dawn of Qumran, 181, posits an actual migration to Damascus. See Rnibb, "Exile in the Damascus Document." The Babylonian hypothesis has been expounded at greatest length by Murphy-O'Connor. He marshals various supplementary arguments, but the thesis stands or falls on the interpretation of CD. '* Knibb, "Exile in the Damascus Document," 106-107, who emphasizes the parallel expression sby pF (2.5; 20.17). 55 The mention of Damascus in the Isaiah-Amos-Numbers midrash (7.15-19) is exceptionally complex because of the fusion of different biblical passages. This passage is not found in the parallel C D 19. Murphy-O'Connor conceded that Damascus refers to Qumran in this passage ("The Essenes and their History," 221‫־‬ 53

22). 56

Contra Wacholder, The Dawn of Qumran, 109, who places the Teacher at the beginning of the twenty year period.

stages may be distinguished in CD 3, which says that God established his covenant with those who were left over, and then pardoned their offences and built them a "sure house." It is not entirely clear whether this refers to two distinct stages, or only to one. If two stages are meant, as in CD 1, then the covenant was apparently established before the Teacher arrived. C D 6, however, envisages one continuous process. The elect group from Aaron and Israel dig the well of the law with the "staffs" provided by the "Interpreter of the Law." Since this figure established the ordinances for the whole epoch of wickedness, he must be identified with the Teacher. T h e "one who will teach righteousness at the end of days" (6.11) is an eschatological figure yet to come. Nothing is gained by supposing that this part of CD was written before the arrival of the historical Teacher and that he is anticipated as a figure still to come in C D 6.11. 57 The extant form of the document shows that an eschatological "one who will teach righteousness" was still expected after the historical Teacher had come and gone. It is gratuitous, then, to suppose that there had been yet another authoritative Interpreter before the historical Teacher. C D sees the Teacher as establishing and confirming that covenant and not as leading a new departure away from it. It is well established that there was a split in the sect of the new covenant after the arrival of the Teacher, and that the opposing faction was led by the Man of Lies.58 It is not apparent, however, what status the Man of Lies had enjoyed before the arrival of the Teacher, or that he and his followers can be called Essenes after the split. We have, in fact, virtually no information about him except that he opposed the Teacher. There is no reason whatever to associate him with the Essenes described by Josephus and Philo. The Teacher , s community, on the other hand, cannot be restricted to Qumran. CD, which with the Peshanm provides the rare explicit references to the Teacher, still legislates for settlements "in camps." This datum is highly compatible with the information that the Essenes lived in villages, or in several cities. It is no objection against this that the laws of CD (which may be a distinct document in any case) include laws for relations with Gentiles. These laws are not so preponderant that we should necessarily assume a Gentile environment. 59 57

So Davies, The Damascus Covenant, 124. See especially Stegcmann, Die. Entstehung. In C D 20.12 those who turned back with the men of scoffing had been members of the new covenant. 59 Murphy-O'Connor, following S. Iwry, argues that the laws require a Gentile environment ("The Essenes and their History," 223). Sec the cridque of Knibb, "Exile in the Damascus Document," 104-105. 58

The Damascus Document, then, may be taken as a representative document of the "new covenant," the authoritative expositor of which was the Teacher of Righteousness. It is an early document. Even the conclusion of the Admonition in CD 19-20, which appears to be a supplementary epilogue, was written within forty years of the death of the Teacher. If we accept the common assumptions that the Teacher was also the founder of the Qumran settlement, or at least was accepted there, and that the Community Rule is the rule of that setdement, then C D and the Community Rule at least pertain to the same sect. Moreover, they cannot easily be assigned to different historical periods since both were composed by the end of the second century BCE and continued to be copied down to the first century CE. We turn now to the character of the movement described in CD. It is based in the first instance on divine election and revelation: God established his convenant with them by revealing to them hidden things concerning which all Israel had strayed (3.13-14). In this respect, it resembles the various apocalyptic groups of the early second century BCE.60 We are not told the manner of the original revelation. As the sect develops, the primary medium of revelation is inspired exegesis, and the Teacher can be called the Interpreter of the Law. Whether all the original revelation was necessarily derived from the law of Moses is not so clear. A crucial element in this revelation concerns the calendar of holy Sabbaths and appointed times, and this calendar is of course a link with Enoch and Jubilees, and also with the Temple Scroll.61 In any case, with the arrival of the Teacher of Righteousness, the sect had no need to rely on the authority of legendary heroes such as Enoch. T h e authority accorded to the contemporary figure of the Teacher is probably a major reason why the sectarians dispensed with the literary form of the apocalypse.62 There is, then, both 60

A.-M. Denis, Les Themes de connaissance dans le Document de Damas (Louvain: Louvain University, 1967), 208-209. Denis emphasizes the affinities of CD with Daniel. See also O. Betz, Offenbarung und Schrißforschung in der Qumransekte (Tübingen: Mohr, I960). 61 If, as is widely assumed, this calendar differed from the one used in the Temple in the Maccabean era, then it is surely unlikely that the Teacher of Righteousness ever functioned as High Priest in the official Temple cult. However, the nature of the official calendar at this period remains in dispute. Contrast the views of J.C. VanderKam, "The Origin, Character and Early History of the 364Day Calendar, A Reassessment ofjaubert's Hypotheses," C5Q.41(1979), 390-411 and P.R. Davies, "Calendrical Change and Qumran Origins: An Assessment of VanderKam's Theory," CÖQ45 (1983), 80-89. 62 See the comments of J.L. Duhaime, 'La Règle de la Guerre de Qumrân et l'apocalyptique', Science et Esprit 36 (1984), 67-88.

resemblance and difference between this group and apocalyptic groups in their reliance on new revelation. The specific reasons for the separation of this group from the rest of Jewish society are halakhic matters: the calendar, disagreement about the correct use of the Temple, and laws of purity and marriage. We have seen that some of these concerns were shared by the apocalyptic groups. What concerns us here, however, is the conceptual framework within which these observances are viewed. CD contains a theology of history no less than the apocalypses of the Maccabean era. The essential outline is found in the opening column. The destruction ofJerusalem and dispersion of Israel were a punishment for sin. The postexilic period is an "epoch of wrath." But then God raises up a plant root from Aaron and Israel to possess the land. This root is a remnant of the people of Israel, or rather a remnant of the remnant that survived the exile. The view of history summarized in this passage has been described as an "exilic ideology," and compared with The Words of the Heavenly Luminaries or the prayer in Daniel 9.63 All do indeed bear some relation to the traditional Deuteronomic model of history. Nonetheless, the conception of history in CD differs from that of a work like The Words of the Heavenly Luminaries in several crucial respects. The period of the present takes on a distinct character as "the age of wrath" (1.5: qēs hār0rì). This idea derives from a full-fledged division of history into periods, such as we find in the Apocalypse of Weeks or in Daniel's seventy weeks of years. We are told explicitly in CD 2.9-10 that God had known the "exact epochs of all them that come into being in eternity...even unto that which will befall in the epochs of all the years of eternity." Moreover, we are told in CD 16, in the legal section of the document, that "the exact statement of all the epochs of Israel's blindness...can be learnt in the Book of the Divisions of Times into their Jubilees and Weeks." This has usually been taken as a reference to the book of Jubilees, and the reference is confirmed by mention of "the angel Mastema" in the following verse. There is good reason, then, to believe that the members of the new covenant acquired their periodization of history from apocalyptic sources. The wrath in question is presumably the anger of God (cf. 20.15: "and during that period the anger of God will be kindled against Israel"). In CD, however, there is another factor: "during all these

63

So Da%‫׳‬ics, 'Eschatology', 52-53.

years Belial shall be let loose upon Israel" (4.13). The blindness of Israel is due to the fact that the people are trapped in the three nets of Belial (CD 4.15, cf. the Pesher on Psalm 37). In these cases Belial is clearly a supernatural agent, like the prince Mastema in Jubilees. The equivalence of the two figures is suggested by the reference to Mastema in CD 16. C D 12.2 refers to spirits of Belial that obtain dominion over men. In Jubilees 1.20 Moses prays that the spirit of Beliar does not rule over the people of Israel. Whether or not Belial is read as a proper name in these passages, in the context of both books the spirits must be associated with the demonic prince. 64 The balanced dualism of the Community Rule (1QS), which pits the Prince of Light against the Prince of Darkness, is expressed only once in CD, at 5.18, when we are told that Moses and Aaron arose with the help of the Prince of Light, while Belial raised up Jannes and his brother. The authenticity of this passage has been quesdoned. 65 The Prince of Light does not occur elsewhere in CD, and it is somewhat surprising that the two spirits are not mentioned in C D 2, the most systematically theological passage in the document. Even if this passage is secondary, however, there is no doubt that Belial is deeply imbedded in CD and that CD has a dualistic view of history. The essenrial idea of cosmic dualism is that there is a supernatural power of evil opposed to God. This idea was novel in second century Judaism and has a clear antecedent only in the book of Jubilees. In view of the role of the Angel of the Presence in Jubilees, a figure such as the Prince of Light is by no means implausible in CD, and the authenticity of the reference in CD 5:18 should not be too readily dismissed.66 In view of the role of Belial in CD, it is conceivable that the age of wrath refers also to the wrath of Belial. A parallel for such an idea can be found in a passage in the Hodayot, which speaks of a period of 64 D.R Schwartz, "To Join Oneself to the House ofJudah (Damascus Document IV, 11)," RevQ 10 (1981), 439-40, suggests that the reference to Belial in CD 4.13 derives from 1 Sam. 2.12, where the sons of Eli are called , sons of Beliar. CD is also concerned with the replacement of a corrupt priesthood and draws further on 1 Samuel in this context (e.g. the motif of a 'sure house' is derived from 1 Sam. 2.35). The biblical terminology may explain the choice of the name Belial (rather than e.g. Mastema). 65 J.-L. Duhaime, "L'Instruction sur les deux esprits et les interpolations dualistes a Qumrân (1QS H l , 3-1V, 26)" RB 84 (1977), 584-87; Duhaime, "Dualistic Reworking in the Scrolls from Qumran," CBQ 49 (1987) 32-56; J . MurphyO'Connor, "An Essene Missionary Document? CD 11, 14-VI, 1," RB 77 (1970) 224. 66 The authenticity of the passage is not challenged by Davies, The Damascus Covenant, 121. Denis, Les Themes de connaissance, 108, suggests that the "Prince of Lights" here may be God himself.

wrath for all Belial (qēs hârôn l'kol b'iîyyal, 3:28) followed by the fiery floods of Belial. In the Community Rule, the period of the existence of the community is "the dominion of Belial" (1.18, 23; 2.19). The wrath of God and the wrath of Belial are not necessarily incompatible. One might say that God expressed his anger against Israel by unleashing Belial. The difference in comparison with a document like The Words of the Heavenly Luminaries is that now the evil in the world has a supernatural source over and above human sin.67 It may be significant that CD begins its catalogue of those who walked in the hardness of their hearts not with Adam or Cain but with the Watchers of Enochic fame (CD 2.17-18).6" Regardless of the precise attribution of the wrath, CD attests the idea that Belial is loosed against Israel for a period which overlaps that of the existence of the sect. This idea has rightly been identified as "the very heart of the sectarian thought." 69 It has no exact parallel in the pre-Qumran literature. In Jubilees the prince Mastema is active throughout history and was loosed more intensively against Egypt at the time of the Passover (Jub. 49.2), but has no special period of intensified activity against Israel. There is an analogy between the unleashing of Belial here and that of the beasts from the sea in Daniel, but Belial lacks the specific national correlatives of the Danielic beasts.70 Instead, his human correlatives are the sinners of Israel who are caught in his nets: dualism here bespeaks sectarianism. Yet C D never explains who Belial is, or how he fits into God's plan. It refers to Belial as to a figure who is well known. We may suspect then that CD presupposes more of the dualism of Qumran than it explicitly sets forth. The role of Belial constitutes a great difference between the theology of history in CD and the traditional Deuteronomic theology of The Words of the Heavenly Luminaries. A further difference lies in the conception of Israel. The traditional prayer speaks simply of Israel as God's people. In CD those who will inherit the land are an offshoot of Israel and are explicitly recognized as a "new covenant." The ideal of separation from the rest of society goes hand in 67

Murphy-O'Connor, "An Essene Missionary Document," 227, contrasts CD 2.2-13 with 2.14-6.1 on the grounds that here error is attributed to divine causality by prédestination whereas in the "Missionary Document" it is left to human responsibility (compare Schwartz, "To Join Oneself," 445-46). This argument fails to account for the role of Belial in the "Missionary Document." M E. Janssen, Das Gottesvolk und seine Geschichte (Ncukirchcn-Vluyn: Ncukirchcner Verlag, 1971), 114-15. 6 ‫ י‬Dimant, "Qumran Sectarian Literature," 493. 70 J.J. Collins, 'The Mythology of Holy War in Daniel and the Qumran War Scroll', Π 25 (1975), 596-612.

hand with the dualistic theology of the sect. The choice is not simply between Israel and the nations but between two ways, and the choice cuts through the traditional people of Israel. Finally, there is a difference in the goal of restoration. The Words of the Heavenly Luminaries looked simply for the gathering in of the exiles. C D also entertains the idea of the restoration of Israel, albeit as a new covenant, under the leadership of the Messiahs of Aaron and Israel.71 We do not find a great sense of urgency in CD. The focus is rather on the community, which provides a sure house even in the present. Yet the community is clearly an interim stage and there is a greater fulfillment to come. We may compare the qualified fulfillment of history with the emergence of the chosen righteous in the Apocalypse of Weeks. The statement that forty years will elapse after the death of the Teacher until the expiration of the followers of the Man of Lies (20.14) suggests that there was at least occasional concern to calculate the time of the end. 72 The restoration of the land and the Temple are not the only aspects of the eschatology of CD. Those that hold fast to the new covenant are promised eternal life and all the glory of Adam (3.20). Those who turn from the way are threatened with great wrath with fiery flames by all the angels of destruction (2.5-6). While CD does not describe a final judgment, such a judgment is presupposed. C D then modifies the theme of restoration of traditional Deuteronomic theology and combines it with personal eschatology. In this, it corresponds almost exacdy with the Community Rule, but also resembles Jubilees and is substantially compatible with the fuller scenario of a work like the Animal Apocalypse. The Damascus Document is certainly closer to the eschatology of the apocalypses than to the traditional eschatology of a work like The Words of the Heavenly Luminaries. The eschatology in no way detracts from the central importance of Torah observance (as understood by the sect), but rather intensifies it. As we have seen earlier, this complementality of Torah and eschatology was also typical of the apocalypses.

71 O n the Messianic expectations of Qumran see A.S. van der Woude, Die messianischen Vorstellungen der Gemeinde von Qumran (Assen: van Gorcum, 1957); J . J . Collins, The Scepter and the Star. The Messiahs of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Ancient Literature (New York: Doubleday, 1995). 72 Cf. the concern over the prolongation of the time in 1QpHab 7. The Pesher on Ps. 37 predicts that the wicked will be eliminated in 40 years.

Conclusion CD is certainly not an apocalypse. The sect whose history it reflects had found a new medium of revelation in the inspired exegesis of the Teacher and did not rely on visions or ascents in the name of an ancient seer. Yet it also has significant affinities with the apocalypses of the Maccabean era, in its claim to special revelation, use of periodization, dualism, and eschatology. CŪ and the sect it describes presuppose the theology of history developed in the apocalypses. In this sense, Hengel's claim that the sect represented a development of apocalyptic historical thinking is well justified. It is true that C D is not so emphatically dualistic as are 1QS or 1QM, and also that it pays less attention to the heavenly world than do other sectarian compositions. We have seen, however, that the differences are not absolute. The role of Belial in C D is compatible with the full dualism of the two spirits and, if 5:18 is original, it would seem to presuppose that doctrine. Various explanations may be proposed for the differences between CD and 1QS in this regard. It may result from the different character of the documents, and the more argumentative and apologetic nature of CD. 73 It may be that interest in the angelic world was more strongly developed at Qumran than in the wider sect. It is possible that C D was written before the doctrine of the two spirits was formulated as we find it in 1QS 3-4 with the terminology of light and darkness and strong Persian overtones. It is also possible, however, that this formulation of the doctrine was never obligatory, and that differences in formulation and emphasis do not necessarily bespeak doctrinal disagreement. 74 C D and 1QS 3-4 agree in affirming a supernatural figure (Belial in CD) who is opposed to God but ultimately under divine control. The increased role of the angelic Prince of Light in 1QS 3-4 and other documents is an elaboration of this fundamental dualistic opposition and does not necessarily imply a significant

73

So Dimant, "Qumran Sectarian Literature," 503. M. Smith, "What is Implied by the Variety of Messianic Figures?" JBL 78 (1959), 66-72, suggested that eschatology was a comparatively arbitraiy and individual matter for the sect. He was certainly correct that strict consistency of doctrinal formulation was not required. It seems to me, however, that there is an underlying coherence in both the eschatology and the dualism of the sect which was compatible with variation in formulation. See my discussion in The Apocalyptic Imagination, 122-41, as well as Dimant, "Qumran Sectarian Literature." Davies, "Eschatology," 41, misses the point when he takes this position to mean that everyone at Qumran believed everything written there. 74

ideological shift. There is some vacillation on the importance of the Prince of Light even within the War Scroll. In 1QM 13 an exposition on Belial and the Prince of Light is followed by a rhetorical question: "which angel or prince can compare with thy succour?"—a reminder that the Prince of Light is not the ultimate resource of the sect.75 Whether or not the opposition of angelic princes (as attested in C D 5.18) was an original element in CD, this formulation of dualism was current in sectarian sectors at a very early date, possibly even before the setdement at Qumran. One of the most elaborate formulations of dualism in terms of opposing angelic figures is found in the Testament of Amram, which is dated palaeographically to the mid-second century BCE.76 Remarkably, however, there is no trace of dualism in the Temple Scroll. If this document originated in the same circles as either Jubilees, CD, or 1QS, the complete absence of dualism is difficult to explain. 77 The affinities of CD with the apocalypses are not so great as to require that all these compositions derived from the same group. They do, however, strongly support the opinion that the Dead Sea sect originated in the same general milieu as the apocalyptic movements. The consensus represented by Cross and Hengel, that Qumran was an "apocalyptic community," needs to be qualified in some respects—in its identification of apocalypticism with a theology of history that is typical only of some apocalypses, and in its overly synthetic view of the Hasidim. Yet this consensus has not been entirely invalidated. It has, at least, the merit of locating the development of the Dead Sea sect within the proper context of analogous movements in the second century BCE.

75

The differing emphases of the passages cannot bc resolved by source criticism. The final editor, at least, both affirmed the role of the angelic princes and denied that they were comparable to God. 76 J.T. Milik, "4Q, Visions de Amram et une citation d'Origene," RB 79 (1972), 77-97; PJ. Kobelski, Melchizedek and Melchiresha (Washington: Catholic Biblical Association, 1981), 25. Davies' claim that the Melchizedek text is prior to Test. Amram is unsupported by any evidence ("Eschatology," 51). 77 H. Stegemann, "Das Land in der Tempelrolle und in anderen Texten aus den Qumranfunden," in G. Strecker, ed., Das Land Israel in biblischer Zeit (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983) 154-71, also contrasts the ideal of restoration in the Temple Scroll with that of sectarian documents such as CD.

T H E O R I G I N O F EVIL IN APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE AND T H E DEAD SEA SCROLLS

One of the more novel approaches to the study of apocalypticism in recent years has been that of the Italian scholar Paolo Sacchi. Sacchi has argued in a series of articles, recently collected in his book L'Apocalittica Giudaica e la sua Storiathat apocalypticism should be understood primarily as an ideology. He distinguishes this ideology from the literary genre apocalypse, but remains vague on what if any relationship there is between them. He looks for the essence of the tradition in its origin, which he finds in the Enochic Book of the Watchers. Here, he claims, the generative idea lies in the notion that sin is not of human origin but is antecedent to human choice. The fall of the Watchers is the primordial sin. The apocalyptic tradition that unfolds in 1 Enoch addresses this generative idea in various ways. The tradition is not static. The Book of Jubilees marks a significant development along the same lines as the Book of the Watchers. Mastema, or Satan, now emerges as the personalized embodiment of evil. The Epistle of Enoch even records a contradiction of the original conception: I swear to you, you sinners, that as a m o u n t a i n has not, a n d will not, b e c o m e a slave, n o r a hill a w o m a n ' s maid, so sin was not sent u p o n the earth, b u t m a n of himself created it (1 E n o c h 98:4).

The Doctrine of the two Spirits at Qumran (which Sacchi attributes to the Teacher of Righteousness) is alleged to be completely in line with the Book of the Watchers, although it does not share the eschatology of the Enochic book. 2 The continuity lies in the fact that evil is attributed to a supernatural source. Sacchi's view of apocalypticism has now been taken up by Florentino Garcia Martinez, and used as one of the pillars of the socalled "Groningen hypothesis" of the origin of the Qumran sect.3 1

P. Sacchi, L'Apocalittica Giudaica e la sua Storia (Brescia: Paideia, 1990). See the endorsement of Sacchi's approach by F. Garcia Martinez, "Encore l'Apocalyptique," JSJ 17(1987) 231. 2 Sacchi, L'Apocalittica Giudaica, 76. 3 F. Garcia Martinez, "Qumran Origins and Early History: A Groningen Hypothesis," Folia Orientalia 25(1989) 113-36; Garcia Martinez and van der Woude, "A 'Groningen' Hypothesis of Qumran Origins and Early History," R e v Q 14(1990) 521-41.

This hypothesis assumes, with most scholars, that the major rule books and such crucial documents as 4 Q M M T and the Pesharim, pertain to the same sect. It also assumes, in accordance with the long-standing consensus, that the sect is Essene, or at least an offshoot of the Essene movement. It locates the origin of this movement in Palestine, specifically "in the Palestinian apocalyptic tradition before the antiochian crisis."4 The understanding of this apocalyptic tradition is taken from Sacchi. Garcia Martinez claims that the dualism of Qumran was a modification of the tradition found in 1 Enoch and Jubilees, and that the ‫ יחד‬can be seen as development of the same movement. 5 My objective here is to examine the coherence of this movement and more specifically its relevance to the dualism of the two spirits, as we find it in the Qumran Community Rule. Sacchi is certainly correct that the problem of evil has a generative role in the apocalyptic literature, and that the typical apocalyptic explanation of evil posits a supernatural source. Whether this idea can be treated as the essence of apocalypticism is another matter. The problem of evil is as central in wisdom as in apocalyptic literature. What is distinctive is the kind of explanation and resolution of the problem that is provided. Like most scholars, I would argue that the apocalyptic explanation of evil lies in its eschatology, at least as much as in its protology. The Book of the Watchers does not stop with the fall of the Watchers. It also describes their judgment and punishment, and fully two thirds of the work are taken up with Enoch's tour of the cosmos, where he sees such marvels as the chambers of the dead and the place prepared for the final judgment. These motifs are not incidental. They are fully as important to the structure of apocalyptic thought as the primordial sin. Sacchi's focus on the origin of evil is too narrow to comprehend the phenomenon of apocalypticism. That said, however, the origin of evil is also important, and it provides one good testing ground for the hypothesis that the Community Rule stands in a continuous tradition with the apocalypses. Here, however, we encounter a second problematic dimension in Sacchi's work: it is unclear whether the continuity of the tradition is 4 Garcia Martinez, "Qumran Origins," 113. The hypothesis also attaches great importance to the formative period before withdrawal to Qumran and embraces van der Woude's theory of multiple Wickcd Priests (A. S. van der Woudc, "Wicked Priest or Wicked Priests? Reflections on the Identification of the Wicked Priest in the Habakkuk Commentary." JJS 33(1982) 349-59. 5 Garcia Martinez, "Origcncs apocalipticos del movimicnto csenio y origenes de la secta qumránica," Communio 18(1985) 358.

supposed to lie in phenomenological similarity or in adherence to specific traditions. Phenomenological similarity can be found on a relatively high level of abstraction, and does not require direct influence. The proposition that the origin of evil is antecedent to human decisions is as true of Persian dualism as it is of the Book of the Watchers. It does not follow that the Enochic book is in any way dependent on Persian sources, and it scarcely makes sense to say that it stands in the same tradition as the Gathas. It is not entirely clear to me whether this is the kind of continuity Sacchi has in mind, but I think not. Garcia Martinez, at least, has been very explicit in rejecting this kind of broader phenomenological similarity as the basis for apocalyptic tradition. 6 If we look for a narrower kind of continuity, however, based on specific traditions, then the relationship between the myth of the Watchers and Qumran dualism is not so simple. The myth of the Watchers T h e fundamental myth utilized by the Book of the Watchers has been aptly characterized by Paul Hanson as "Rebellion in Heaven." 7 T h e creation itself is good, just as it is in Genesis 1. The Watchers, led by Asael and Semihazah, revolt; they are not evil from the beginning. T h e origin of this myth is unclear. Genesis 6, which provides the starting point for the story with its enigmatic reference to •‫כני האלוהי‬ who have intercourse with human women, does not posit rebellion in heaven. 8 T h e "sons of God" are not accused of any sin in Genesis. The Nephilim or "mighty men of old," who were on the earth in those days and are usually taken to be the offspring of these unions, 9 are described as "men of renown," surely a positive reference. T h e flood is brought on by the wickedness of humankind, and the inclination of the thoughts of their hearts. T h e Yahwist may be giving a moralising adaptation of an older myth, but the prototype is more likely to conform to the Atrahasis epic, where the Flood is brought about by the increase of humanity, than to a story such as we find in 1 Enoch}0 Milik's suggestion, that the Enochic myth is presupposed

6

Garcia Martinez, "Encore l'Apocalyptique," 228. P. Hanson, "Rebellion in Heaven, Azazel and Euhcmerisdc heroes in 1 Enoch 6-11,'"JBL 96(1977) 195-233. 8 D.L. Petersen, "Genesis 6:1-4, Yahweh and the Organization of the Cosmos," JSOT 13(1979) 52-54; R. S. Hendel, "Of Demigods and the Deluge: Toward an Interpretation υ ί Genesis 6:1-4 ,"JBL 106(1987) 16. 9 C. Westermann, Genesis 1-11 (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1984) 368. 10 O n the relevance of Atrahasis to Genesis see B. Batto, Slaying the Dragon: Mythmaking in the Biblical Tradition (Louisville: Westminster, 1992) Chap. 2. See also 7

in Genesis, is without foundation." On the other hand, the Enochic Book of the Watchers clearly embodies sources, which variously ascribe leadership of the revolt to Semihazah or Asael, and which can have originated no later than the third century BCE. 1 2 In the Book of the Watchers, the union with human women is assumed to be sinful, probably because it involves the transgression of divinely appointed boundaries. The sin is compounded by the illicit revelation which the Watchers impart, and by the violence of the giants whom they beget. It is reasonable to infer that this sin is paradigmatic. Various allegorical applications have been suggested, to the spread of Hellenism 13 or to the corruption of the priesthood. 14 In 1 Enoch 12-16, a secondary expansion of the story of the Watchers, 15 the spirits of the giants become evil spirits on earth (1 Enoch 15: 8-10). In this way the revolt of the Watchers becomes the ultimate cause of the existence of evil spirits and, by implication, of human sin. The author of the Book of Jubilees knew and used the Book of the Watchers, but adapted it in several respects.Ifi Jubilees is basically a retelling of Genesis, and unlike the Book of the Watchers it includes the story of Adam and Eve (chapter 3). Sin does not originate in heaven, but on earth. T h e angels initially come down "to teach men to do what is just and right on earth" (4:15), and are subsequently attracted to human women. As in Enoch, the spirits of the giants become evil spirits on earth, and after the Flood, "the unclean demons began to lead the children of Noah's sons astray and to mislead them and destroy them" (Jub 10:1). They were created for the purpose of destroying (Jub 10: 5-6), although they were not part of the original creation. These spirits now have a leader, Mastema, who is described as a prince, and who bears a strong resemblance to the Satan of Hebrew Scriptures. 17 Only one tenth of the spirits are al-

the comments of Hanson, "Rebellion in Heaven," 213-15 and Hendcl, "Of Demigods and the Deluge," 22-23. 11 J . T . Milik, The Books of Enoch (Oxford: Clarendon, 1976) 31. 12 There is no reason to push the date back to the fifth ccntury, pace Sacchi, L'Apocalittica, 67. 3 ‫י‬ 383-405. 14 So D.W. Sutcr, "Fallen Angel, Fallen Priest. The Problem of Family Purity in 1 Enoch 6-16," HUCA 50(1979) 115-35. 15 G.W. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature Between the Bible and the Mishnah (Philadelphia, 1981) 52-54. lr 'J.C. VandcrKam, "Enoch Traditions in Jubilees and Other Second-Century Sources," in Paul J . Achtcmcier, ed., Society of Biblical Literature 1978 Seminar Papers (Missoula: Scholars Press 1978) 1. 229-251. 17 Mastema first appears m Jubilees 10, and is presumably one of the spirits of the giants. In later tradition Satan was identified with the serpent of the Garden of

lowed to remain with him, for the purpose of destroying and misleading mankind. These spirits operate by divine permission, but they are not ultimately responsible for human sin, since Adam fell long before they came on the scene. The story of the Watchers continues to provide a major frame of reference in Jubilees, even though it is altered, and placed in a new context. We may, then, speak of a common tradition, at least with regard to the origin of evil. It does not necessarily follow that Jubilees and the Enoch books came from the same community or that the continuity was sociological in nature. T h e ideological differences between Enoch and Jubilees are considerable, and would also have to be taken into account. What the "common tradition 5 ' involves here is simply that the author of Jubilees knew the Book of the Watchers and used it for his purposes. The Qumran Sect That there is some relationship between the Qumran sect and the books of Enoch and Jubilees, is beyond doubt. Some eleven manuscripts preserve portions of the Enochic literature. 18 Jubilees is also preserved in multiple copies,19 and is cited as authoritative in the Damascus Document (CD 16:3). Perhaps the most important point of affinity between Enoch and Jubilees and Qumran lies in the common tradition of a solar calendar, which is highlighted as a major factor in the dispute between the Qumran sect and the Jerusalem Temple, especially in the Damascus Document and 4QMMT. 2 0 One may also speak of a phenomenological similarity between the world view expressed in several sectarian documents and that of the apocalypses, in so far as major importance is attached to the influ-

Eden (e.g. Rev 12: 9). This identification is not made, at least explicitly, in Jubilees. The accound of creation in Jubilees ii has no place for an evil spirit. On Satan in the Hebrew Scriptures, see Peggy L Day, An Adversary in Heaven. Satan in the Hebrew Bible (Adanta: Scholars Press, 1988). 18 Milik, The Books of Enoch, 6. 19 J.C. VanderKam and J . T. Milik, "The First Jubilees Manuscript from Qumran Cave 4: A Preliminary Publication," JBL 110(1991) 243-70. 20 E. Qimron and J . Strugnell, "An Unpublished Halakhic Letter from Qumran," i n j . Amitai, ed., Biblical Archaeology Today. Proceedings of the International Congress on Biblical Archaeology Jerusalem, April, 1984 (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1985) 400-07; "An Unpublished Halakhic Letter from Qumran," The Israel Museum Journal 4(1985) 9-12; J.J. Collins, ' T h e Origin of the Qumran Community, A Review of the Evidence, " in P. Kobelski and M. Horgan, ed., To Touch the Text. Biblical and Related Studies in Honor of Joseph A. Fitzmyer, SJ. (New York: Crossroad, 1989) 160-61.

ence of the supernatural world on human affairs and the expectation of eschatological judgment. 21 T o speak of shared traditions and phenomenological similarity, however, is not necessarily to speak of a unified tradition or a single movement. The Groningen hypothesis shares with the older Hasidic hypothesis (which saw the Hasidim of the Maccabean period as the matrix of all sorts of sectarian developments) a tendency to oversimplify sectarian Judaism. Since some of the Enochic compositions and Jubilees refer to the emergence of a distinct (sectarian?) group about this time, there is a powerful temptation to lump all sectarian movements together and obliterate their differences.22 This tendency is to be resisted. We find remarkably little appeal to the Enoch tradition in the major sectarian documents of Qumran. The Damascus Document cites the story of the Watchers in the course of an admonition to walk perfectly in all His ways and not follow after thoughts of the guilty inclination and after eyes of lust. The Watchers provide the first negative example in a review of human conduct: because they walked in the stubbornness of their heart, the heavenly Watchers fell; they were caught because they did not keep the commandments of God.

The fall of the Watchers is paradigmatic for human sinfulness, in so far as it illustrates a pattern that is repeated through history. It is not causative, however, and it is not understood as the origin or source of human sinfulness.23 A much more elaborate explanation of the origin of evil is found in the Community Rule. Here we read: From the god of Knowledge comes all that is and shall be. Before ever they existed He established their whole design, and when, as ordained 21

Sec my essay "Was the Dead Sea Sect an Apocalyptic Movement?" in L.H. SchifFman, ed., Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls (Sheffield: J S O T , 1990) 25-51. Sec also the survey of apocalyptic influence on the Scrolls by F. Garcia Martinez, "Les Traditions Apocalyptiques a Qumrân," in C. Kappler, ed., Apocalypses et Voyages dans l'Au-Delà (Paris: Cerf, 1987) 201-35. 22 1 Enoch 90: 6-9, 103: 10; Jub 23: 26. See also P.R. Davies. Behind the Essenes (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987) 107-34. D. Dimant, "Qumran Sectarian Literature," in M.E. Stone, ed., Jewish Writings from the Second Temple Period (Assen: van Gorcum/Philadclphia: Fortress, 1984) 544, regards the Animal Apocalypse (1 Enoch 85-90) as a work of the Dead Sea sect. 23 The "pesher on Azazel and the angels" in the "Pesher on the Periods" (4Q180) published byJ.T. Milik, "Milki-sedeq et MiIkÎ-reša dans les anciens Écrits Juifs et Chrétiens," J J S 23(1972) 112, attributes a more causative role to Azazel and his cohorts in misleading Israel, but the text is very fragmentary. Milik reconstructs the text to say that God established the activity of the angels before creation.

for them, they come into being, it is in accord with His glorious design that they accomplish their task without change...He has created man to govern the world, and has appointed for him two spirits in which to walk until the time of His visitation: the spirits of truth and falsehood... 2 4

This explanation of the origin of evil is not only different from what we find in Enoch and Jubilees. It bears scarcely any relation to the myth of the Watchers. The Epistle of Enoch, with its explicit denial that sin was sent on earth, stands in the Enochic tradition, even though it contradicts the Book of the Watchers. It still operates with reference to the same myth. This is not the case with the Community Rule. There is, perhaps, a reminiscence of Jubilees at 1QS 3:23-24, which refers to the dominion of the Spirit of Darkness as ‫ממשלח‬ ‫ משטמתו‬and refers to the spirits of his lot who cause the sons of light to stumble. But the Rule makes no mention of the Watchers, or of any angelic rebellion. Instead, the demonic spirits are subsumed into a new system and given a new origin. Dualism was instituted by God as part of creation itself.25 There is a different underlying myth here, and it was recognized almost as soon as the Scroll was published. It is the myth of Persian dualism. 26 In the Gathas, the oldest part of the Avesta, which are generally considered to be the work of Zoroaster himself, humanity and even the supreme God has to choose between two Spirits, one of whom is holy and the other a destroyer. The two Spirits are the twin children of Ahura Mazdah, the Wise Lord, 27 although later the holy Spirit is identified with Ahura Mazdah, and the spirit of destruction is primordial. 28 These spirits were associated with light and darkness from an early time, as evidenced by Plutarch, who cites Theopompus

24 Trans. G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1975) 75. 25 Compare 1QM 13:10-12, which says that Belial, ‫ מ ל א ך משטמה‬was created to destroy. The difference between the Book of the Watchers and the Community Rule at this point is noted by M.J. Davidson, Angels at Qumran. A Comparative Study of 1 Enoch 1—36, 72-108 and Sectarian Writings from Qumran (Sheffield: J S O T , 1992) 297. 26 A. Dupont-Sommer, Apercus préliminaires sur les manuscrits de la Mer Morte (Paris: Maisonneuve, 1950) 107, 113, 119 and Nouveaux aperçus sur les manuscrits de la Mer Morte (Paris: Maisonneuve, 1953) 157-72, K.G. Kuhn, "Die Sektenschrift und die iranische Religion," ξΓΚ49(1952) 296-316. For the debate on this issue see P . J . Kobelski, Melchizedek and Melchiresa' (Washington: Catholic Biblical Association, 1981)84-98. 27 R.C. Zaehner, Daum and Twilight of Zoroastrianism (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1961) 50-51. 28 This development is attested as early as the fourth century BCE by Eudemus of Rhodes, a pupil of Aristotle. See Kobelsla, Melchizedek and Melchireša', 92.

(about 300 BCE) as his source. 29 There is, of course, some adaptation of the Persian myth in the Jewish context. God creates rather than begets the two Spirits. As creator, God is clearly transcendent, above both light and darkness. This doctrine was already affirmed by Second Isaiah, who claimed for his God the sovereignty Zoroaster attributed to Ahura Mazda: "I form light and create darkness, I make weal and create woe; I the Lord do all these things" (Isa 45:7).30 This affirmation of the creator, however, has the consequence of making responsibility for evil rest with God. In the Persian myth, the evil spirit still becomes evil by choice. In the Jewish treatise, it is ereated evil by God. There are, of course, several precedents in biblical tradition for the notion that evil comes from the Lord (cf. 2 Sam 19: 9, Amos 3:6, Sir 33:14-15). Such a monistic view is typical of the Deuteronomic tradition, with its negative attitude towards mythology. There is a sharp difference, however, between Deuteronomic monism and the dualism under God that we find in the Scroll. There is an equally sharp difference between the Scroll and earlier apocalyptic tradition on this point. It has been argued that the dualistic myth of the Two Spirits is a secondary development at Qumran, introduced into the Community Rule by interpolation. 31 It should be noted, however, that this is not the only evocation of Persian dualism in the Scrolls. In the Gathas, the opponents of Zoroaster are "the followers of the Lie," and the evil spirit is "He who is of the Lie."32 In the Damascus Document, the opponent of the Teacher is "the man of the Lie." 33 The occurrence of this designation in a document which lacks the explicit contrast of the two Spirits, and which is largely concerned with the early history of the sect, suggests that the Persian influence can not be limited to the obviously dualistic passages. It should also be noted that one of the most explicitly dualistic texts, the Testament of Amram, appears on palaeographic grounds to be one of the earliest of the 29

Plutarch, Isis and Osiris, 46-47. See J . Gwyn Griffiths, Plutarch, De Iside et Osiride (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1970) 471, J. Hani, "Plutarque en face du dualisme iranien," REG 77(1964) 489-525. 30 Morton Smith, "Π Isaiah and the Persians," JAOS 83-84(1963) 415-21; D. Winston, "The Iranian Component in the Bible, Apocrypha and Qumran," History of Religions 5(1965-66) 189. 31 See J . L. Duhaime, "Dualistic Reworking in the Scrolls from Qumran," CZ?Q, 49(1987) 32-56. 32 Yasna 30.3-6; 32.3-5; Zachner, Dawn and Twilight, 42-43. 33 CD 8: 13; 19: 26; 20:15; see also 1QpHab 2: If; 5: 9-12; 10: 9; 4QpPs 37 i 18; iv 14. See G. Jeremias, Der Lehrer der Gerechtigkeit (Göttingen: Vandenhocck & R u p r e c h t 7 9 - 1 2 6(1963‫״‬ , H. Stegemann, Die Entstehung der Qu published privately, 1971) 41-53; Collins, "The Origins of the Qumran Commun1ty," 172-77.

non-biblical scrolls.34 This too weighs against the hypothesis that the dualism was a secondary development in the Qumran sect.35 Garcia Martinez claims that Sacchi has clearly demonstrated that the determinism characteristic of the Essene movement according to the classical sources and so prominent in the sectarian writings comes from the idea of an original sin which antedates history.36

This is far from true. In fact Sacchi has clearly recognized the contradiction between the myth of the Watchers and the myth of the Two Spirits. He also acknowledges that the myth of the fallen angels is not used in the major writings of the Qumran sect.37 But if that myth is crucial to the apocalyptic tradition, how then can the Qumran community be regarded as part of that tradition? or how can the treatise of the Two Spirits be said to be perfecdy in line with the Book of the Watchers?38 There is no doubt that the Book of the Watchers was known, and preserved in multiple copies at Qumran. The fact that the Community Rule departs from the Enochic tradition, or rather ignores it, is therefore all the more remarkable. In fact, the whole notion of "the apocalyptic tradition" which Garcia Martinez derives from Sacchi is too simple. While the Book of the Watchers may be the earliest extant apocalypse, it is not for that reason normative. A different strand of apocalyptic tradition, prior to the Qumran Community, can be found in the Book of Daniel. Sacchi's student, Gabriele Boccaccini, has quite correcdy pointed out that Daniel does not belong to the same ideological tradition as Enoch, by Sacchi's own criteria. 39 Boccaccini's inference that Daniel is not an apocalyptic text only confuses the discussion by changing the accepted reference of words. Better to say that apocalypticism 34

J.T. Milik, " 4 Q Visions de Amram et une citation d'Origène," RB 79(1972) 77-97. Milik suggests a date in the first half of the second century BCE. He also claimed that Jub 46: 6-47:9 was dependent on Test. Amram, but his argument rests on speculation about a passage that is not actually extant in Test. Amram. The date of the War Scroll, the other great dualistic document from Qumran, is disputed. Y. Yadin, The Scroll of the War of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962) 246, argued for a Roman date. An early date for the dualistic framework of the scroll was defended by L. Rost, "Zum Buch der Kriege der Söhne des Lichts gegen die Söhne der Finsternis," TLZ 80(1955) 206 and P. von der Osten-Sacken, Gott und Belial. Traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zum Dualismus in den Texten aus (Qumran (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1969) 28-30. 36 Garcia Martinez, "Qumran Origins and Early History," 119. 37 Sacchi, L'Apocalittica Giudaica, 290. 38 Ibid., p.76. 39 Boccaccini, Middle Judaism (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991) 159-60. I do not accept Boccaccini's characterization of Daniel, but he is correct that it is different from Enoch.

should not be identified with the Enochic tradition. Moreover, Daniel was at least as influential as 1 Enoch on the major sectarian texts. It is preserved in six manuscripts at Qumran, and is cited as authoritative prophecy in 4 Q Florilegium and 11 QMelchizedek. The influence of Daniel is also evident both in previously unknown "pseudo-Danielic" literature, and in literary borrowings in sectarian compositions, notably in the War Scroll.40 Other myths of the origin of evil Several different myths of the origin of evil, or mythic paradigms for human sinfulness, can be found in apocalyptic literature. We have seen two of them in 1 Enoch and the Community Rule. While the Book of Daniel does not address the subject directly, it uses a familiar mythic pattern as a paradigm for the eruption of evil in the Maccabean era. The myth of the sea and its monsters, which provides the imagery for Daniel's dream in Chapter 7, can be traced back to Ugarit. 41 Several allusions to it can be found in the Hebrew Bible.42 In this tradition, evil or chaos is primordial, not created, but it does not have a pre-determined sphere of influence in human affairs, such as we find in the myth of the two Spirits. Yet another explanation of evil in the apocalyptic literature emerges in 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch, at the end of the first century of the common era. These apocalypses witness to a dispute about responsibility for evil. In one of the most poignant passages in the apocalyptic. literature 4 Ezra complains, " Ö Adam what have you done? For though it was you who sinned, the fall was not yours alone, but ours also who are your descendants." 43 The question is repeated in 2 Baruch: " O Adam, What was it that you did to all your posterity? 10

See the survey of A. Mertens, Das Buch Daniel im Lichte der texte vom Toten Meer (Würzburg: Katholisches Bibclwcrk, 1971). This study needs to be updated, at least to take account of the "Son of God" text (4Q246). See my study, "The Son of God Text from Qumran," in M. dc Boer, ed., From Jesus to John. Essays on Jesus and Chrtstology m Honour of M. dejonge (Sheffield: J S O T , 1993) 65-82. 41 See my article "Stirring Up the Great Sea. The Rcligio-Historical Background of Daniel 7," in A.S. van der Woude, ed., The Book of Daniel in the IJght of New Findings (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1993) 121 -36. On the contrast between this myth and the dualism of Qumran see Collins, "The Mythology of Holy War in Daniel and the Qumran War Scroll," V T 25(1975) 596-612. 42 See J. Day, God's Battle with the Dragon and the Sea (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985). On the importance of this myth in Israelite religion sec also J.D. Levcnson, Creation and the Persistence of Evil. The Jewish Drama of Divine Omnipotence (San Francisco: Harper, 1988) 1-50. 43 4 Ezra 7: 1. On the whole issue see A.L. Thompson, Responsibility for Evil in the Theodicy of IVEzra (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1977) and the excursus on Adam's sin in M.E. Stone, Fourth Ezra (Hermcncia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990) 63-77.

And what should be said to Eve who first listened to the serpent?" (48:42). This time, however, Baruch answers his own question: For though Adam first sinned and brought untimely death upon all men, yet each one of those who were born from him has either prepared for his own soul its future torment or chosen for himself the glories that are to be...Adam was responsible for himself only: each one of us is his own Adam. 44

4 Ezra and 2 Baruch evidently belong to a common tradition: their disagreement is formulated with reference to the same myth. The myth in question, however, is not the myth of the Watchers, but the story of Adam and Eve, the myth which eventually dominated the western tradition. Here the responsibility for sin lies unequivocally on the human level. The dispute concerns the degree of Adam's responsibility, but there is no role for fallen angels. In fact, 2 Baruch attributes responsibility for the fall of the angels to humanity, rather than vice versa: For the man who was a danger to himself became a danger even to the angels. For at the time he was created they enjoyed freedom. And some of them came down to earth and had intercourse with women. And those who did so then were tormented in chains. But the rest of the innumberable host of angels restrained themselves. And those who lived on earth perished all together through the waters of the flood.45

This summary of the story of the fallen angels goes beyond what we find in Genesis, and presupposes the tradition as found in the Book of the Watchers, but it does not use that tradition to frame the discussion of the origin of evil. It is not clear that the author of 4 Ezra even knew the Enoch literature. It may be that there is a tacit polemic against Enochic revelation in 4 Ezra: Ezra insists that he did not wish to inquire about the ways above, but about those things that we daily experience (4: 23). It would be grossly misleading, however, to say that 4 Ezra stands in the same tradition as 1 Enoch in its approach to the origin of evil. Equally, I find no basis for the claim of Garcia Martinez that 4 Ezra deliberately rejects the dualistic explanation of evil found in the Community Rule and that the rejection is still within a common tradition. 46 The fact is that 4 Ezra never refers to the two spirits. His own explanation of the origin of evil does not point outside of histo-

44

2 Baruch 54: 15-19, trans, of R.H. Charles revised by L. H. Brockington in H. F.D. Sparks, ed., Vu Apocryphal Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon, 1984) 874-75. 45 2 Bar 56: 10-15. 46 F. Garcia Martinez, "Traditions Communes dans le IVe Esdras et dans les MSS de Qumran," Revue de Qumran 15(1991) 297.

ry, but to its beginning. The source of evil lies within the human heart, the cor malignum, not in the sin of angels or in the Spirit of Darkness. The divergence of 4 Ezra from both 1 Enoch and Qumran on this point is not a disagreement within a common framework, such as we find between the Book of the Watchers and the Epistle of Enoch, or between 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch. It is a divergence that arises from radically different premises. In some later apocalyptic texts the myth of the Watchers is integrated with other explanations of the origin of evil, as indeed is already the case in Jubilees. So in 2 Enoch 18: 3 (long recension) Satanail becomes the leader of the Watchers, and in the Books of Adam and Eve there is a unique combination of the fall of Satan, the fall of the angels and the fall of Adam. 47 The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs draw on both the dualism of the Two Spirits (T. Judah 20, T. Asher) and the myth of the Watchers (T. Reuben 5: 6-7, T. Naphtali 3:5), but in the Testaments the women seduce the angels rather than vice versa. This is also the case in 2 Baruch. This kind of conflation becomes common in texts that may plausibly be dated to the first century CE, but not in 4 Ezra, and only to a very limited degree in 2 Baruch, in the passage cited above (56:10-15). Later the myth of the Watchers is integrated with a dualism of Light and Darkness in the system of Mani. 40 One conclusion that follows from this brief overview concerns the coherence of the apocalyptic corpus. I agree with Sacchi, against Carmignac, 49 and Stegemann, 50 that apocalypticism can not be reduced to a literary genre. There is a genre apocalypse, but the apocalypses share enough common patterns to enable us to extrapolate a world view, and this world view can also come to expression in works that are not formally revelations.51 I do not agree, however, that apocalypticism can be reduced to a single stream of tradition, or a single socially continuous movement. The nature of the coherence 47 M. Delcor, "Lc myth de la chute des anges et de l'origine des géants comme explication du mal dans le monde dans l'apocalyptique juive; Histoire des traditions," RHR 190(1976) 48; G. Stroumsa, Another Seed: Studies in Gnostic Mythology (Leiden: Brill, 1984) 24. 4(1 J.C. Reeves, Jeivish Lore in Manichaean Cosmogony. Studies in the Book of Giants Traditions (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 1992) 207. 4, J . Carmignac, "Quest-ce que l'Apocalyptique? Son emploi à Qumrân," Revue de Qumran 10(1979-81) 3-33. 50 H. Stegemann, "Die Bedeutung der Qumranfundc für die Erforschung der Apokalyptik, in D. Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (TüDingen: Mohr, 1983) 495-530. 51 See further my essay "Genre, Ideology and Social Movements in Jewish Apocalypticism," in J.J. Collins and J H. Charlcsworth, ed., Mysteries and Revelations. Apocalyptic Studies since the Uppsala Colloquium (Sheffield: J S O T , 1991) 11-25.

is phenomenological, and apocalypticism can not be confined to Judaism and Christianity in the Hellenistic and Roman periods. It is because of the phenomenological similarity that a conservative, almost xenophobic community such as we find in the Qumran Community Rule could adapt the dualistic structure of Zoroastrianism for its purposes. Within this phenomenological complex, however, we find a number of distinct apocalyptic movements, each with its own theological premises. There are of course common motifs, shared by different movements, but our overview of the diverse myths of the origin of evil shows that there is real diversity too. Communities are founded by people, not by traditions, and peopie may be informed and influenced by more than one strand of tradition. This was surely the case at Qumran. It is now universally acknowledged that all the documents found at Qumran are not ideologically consistent. If we accept the hypothesis that the scrolls represent the library of the sect, then the sectarians were quite widely read. The books of Enoch and Jubilees were still preserved and read. The ideology of the sect, however, as formulated in the Community Rule, was a novum over against the apocalyptic tradition as found in either Daniel or Enoch. Part of the novelty lay in its heavy reliance on Deuteronomic tradition, in its conception of a new covenant. This covenant was put in a new context, that was phenomenologically akin to the apocalypses, but owed more to Persian traditions than to 1 Enoch for the structure of its teaching. How these traditions found their way into the Qumran community remains enigmatic. The sharp antithesis of light and darkness was certainly congenial to a sectarian view of the world, but the myth of the Watchers could surely have been adapted for that purpose too. One suspects that the choice of myth was related to the pre-history of the Qumran group, and that the authors of the Community Rule and the War Scroll came from different circles than those that produced the Enoch material, even though they had some things in common. The Qumran community can not be traced to a single root, and the apocalyptic literature can not all be attributed to a single tradition.

P R O P H E C Y AND FULFILLMENT IN T H E Q U M R A N SCROLLS

It is a commonplace that the interpretation of older Scriptures is a major factor in the composition of Jewish writings of the Hellenistic and Roman periods. The forms of interpretation are diverse. Geza Vermes makes a broad distinction between "pure" exegesis, intended to clarify the Biblical text, and "applied" exegesis, which establishes a connection between the Scripture and the new circumstances of the author. 1 Both phenomena can be observed already in the Hebrew Bible, from the brief explanatory glosses in the text to the major rewriting of earlier material that we find in Chronicles. 2 The distinction between the two kinds of exegesis is difficult to maintain in practice, since the need to clarify the text often arises precisely from the sensibilities of a new era. Nonetheless it has some heuristic value in indicating the poles of the spectrum in early Jewish Biblical interpretation. The literature of the Hellenistic period attests the continuation and development of the full range of inner-Biblical interpretation, but it also attests a significant new development. Now, for the first time, we find formal and systematic Biblical commentaries. These commentaries are of two kinds. On the one hand there are the commentaries of Philo, which explain the Biblical text in the categories of Hellenistic philosophy. On the other there are the peshanm from Qumran, which are in fact the oldest extant Biblical commentaries. Philo's commentaries are devoted to the books of the Torah. They are allegorical in method and are heavily indebted to Greek philosophy. The pesharim expound the books of the prophets and the Psalms, which were also understood to be prophetic. They too make use of allegorical interpretation—e.g., "Lebanon is the council of the community" (1QpHab 12: 3-4)—but more often they simply specify the references of the text (e.g. when the "wicked" is specified

1 G. Vermes, "Bible and Midrash: Early Old Testament Exegesis," in P.R. Ackroyd and C.F. Evans, ed., The Cambridge History of the Bible. From the Beginnings to Jerome (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1970) 199—231. 2 See M. Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon, 1985).

as the Wicked Priest).3 Since our concern here is with the interpretation of prophecy we will confine our attention to the Qumran commentaries. I. The Character of the Pesharim The texts hitherto published from Qumran include fifteen that have been identified with certainty as pesharim.4 These are based on the books of Habakkuk, Micah, Zephaniah, Isaiah, Nahum and Psalms. (The so-called Pesher on Genesis is a less clear example of the genre). There are no duplicate copies, but there are fragments of multiple manuscripts on Isaiah, Micah, Zephaniah and Psalms. There are also some indications of copying errors, and so it is unsafe to conclude that the extant copies are autographs. 5 The manuscripts are usually dated from the mid-first century BC onward, on the basis of paleography and of the historical allusions, especially in the pesher on Nahum. 6 It should be noted that there are differences between the individual pesharim. The proportion of commentary to text is much smaller in 4QpIsa 3 than in 1QpHab. There is, however, a consistent format that is used throughout. 7 The text is cited section by section, each lemma followed by an interpretation, which is introduced by a formula, usually including the word pesher (e.g. peser haddābār, pisrô 'at). The length of the section cited may vary, and occasionally part of the citation may be repeated in the course of the interpretation (e.g. 1QpHab 3:14; 5:6). The method of citing the text by sections lends itself to atomistic interpretation with scant regard for the original literary context, much less the original historical context." So, in 1QpHab 4-6 most of the passages cited are referred to the Kittim, but one sentence ("Why do you heed traitors...?") is said to refer to the "house of

‫ג‬ J.A. Fitzmycr, "The Use of Explicit Old Testament Quotations in Qumran Literature and in the New Testament," in his Essays on the Semitic Background of the .New Testament (Missoula: Scholars, 1974) 53: "We may characterize both the Qumran and the New Testament use of the Old Testament in general as a literal exegesis" (italics his). 4 M.P. Horgan, Pesharim: Qumran Interpretations of Biblical Books (CBQMS 8; Washington: Catholic Bible Association, 1979) 1. 5 Ibid., p. 4. 6 D. Dimant, "Qumran Sectarian Literature," in M.E. Stone, ed., Jeivish Writings of the Second Temple Period (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 489. 7 Horgan, Pesharim 237-244. 8 The atomization of the pesharim has often been noted; cf. e.g. K. Eiliger, Studien Zum Habakkuk Kommentar vom Toten Meer (Tübingen: Mohr, 1953) 139-142; F.F. Bruce, Biblical Exegesis in the Qumran Texts (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959) 11.

Absalom," a group that is not otherwise mentioned. Disregard for the historical context is integral to the method. According to the explicit statement of 1QpHab 7:1-2, God told Habakkuk to write down the things that are going to come upon the last generation, but the fulfillment of the end time he did not make known to him.

Rather, it was to the Teacher of Righteousness that "God made known all the mysteries of the words of his servants the prophets." Interpretation, then, is itself an inspired activity. It proceeds on the assumption that the words of the prophets are mysteries that refer to eschatological time. 9 The method of interpretation that we find in the peshanm has its roots in the interpretation of dreams in the ancient Near East.10 This is indicated already by the name pesher itself." The word is found, both as a noun and as a verb, in the Aramaic of Daniel, where it refers to the interpretation of dreams (chaps. 2 and 4) and of the writing on the wall (chap. 5). The Akkadian cognate pašāru is also used for dream interpretation but implies not only the explanation of the dream but also the dispelling of its evil consequences. 12 The latter connotation was evidently lost in the Book of Daniel, in view of the misadventures of Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar. Nonetheless some scholars have held that the word is not adequately translated as "interpretation." Isaac Rabinowitz has argued forcefully that "the Peshers are not the commentaries, expositions, or otherwise exegetical works that they are commonly held to be" and suggests that the terms "presage, prognostic, while unsatisfactory in some respects, are not too wide of the mark." 13 I believe that Rabinowitz is mistaken in his sharp antithesis of exegesis and prognostic, but his article has the merit of underlining the fact that the peshanm are a very specific kind of commentary, based on the assumption that the text consists of predictions of future events.

9

Elliger, Studien 150-156; Ο. Betz, Offenbarung und Schriftforschung in der Qumransekte (Tübingen: Mohr, 1960) 36-59. 10 L. Silberman, "Unriddling the Riddle," RevQ 3 (1961) 330-331; A. Finkel, "The Pesher of Dreams and Scriptures," AwQ.4 (1963) 357-370; M. Fishbane, "The Qumran Pesher and Traits of Ancient Hermeneutics," in Proceedings of the Sixth World Congress of Jewish Studies 1 Jerusalem: World Union ofJewish Studies, 1979) 97-114. " Horgan, Peshanm, 230-237. 12 A.L. Oppenheim, The Interpretation of Dreams in the Ancient Near East (Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 46/3; Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1956) 217-225. 13 I. Rabinowitz, "Pesher/Pittaron. Its Biblical Meaning and Its Significance in the Qumran Literature,"ÄroQ,8 (1973) 230.

This atomistic method of interpreting ancient texts was not unique to ancient Judaism. The technique is found in Egyptian sources as early as the Book of the DeadV A very interesting example is found in the so-called Demotic Chronicle, a document from the early Hellenistic period that cites a series of supposedly ancient prophecies and then comments on them. 15 The prophecies appear to be composed ex eventu or after the fact, except where they predict that a native Egyptian dynasty will arise from Heracleopolis after the demise of the Ionians or Greeks.16 The interest of this text as a parallel to ancient Judaism is further enhanced by the fact that certain pharaohs are condemned for their failure to act in accordance with "the Law," whereas the ruler who is to come "will not abandon the Law." ("The Law" here has been taken to mean more than traditional laws, embracing the concept of right or justice).17 While the formal parallel between this text and the pesharim is intriguing, there is no evidence of literary influence in either direction. At most the analogy is indicative of the similarity of circumstances that prevailed throughout the Near East in the Hellenistic period. The model that influenced the pesharim lies closer to hand in the Jewish, Biblical book of Daniel. II. The Interpretation of Prophecy in Daniel The interpretation of Jeremiah's prophecy of the seventy years in Daniel 9 marks a hermeneutical shift in the history of ancient Jewish exegesis. It is the first case where a prophetic oracle is explicitly interpreted allegorically, or understood to mean something other than what it literally says. There are, of course, many earlier instances where prophecies are reinterpreted in the light of a new situation, or even reinterpreted in an eschatological sense.18 14

Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation, 452-453; F. Daumas, "Littérature Prophétique et Excgétiquc Egyptienne et Commentaires Èsséniens," in A. Barucq et al., ed., A la Rencontre de Dieu. Memorial A. Gelm (Paris: Mappus, 1961) 203-221. 15 W. Spiegelberg, Die sogennante Demotische Chronik (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1914); E. Bresciani, "La cronaca demotica," in Letteratura e Poesia dell' antico Egypto (Torino: Erasmo, 1969) 551-562. See also J.H.Johnson and R.K. Ritner, "Multiple Meaning and Ambiguity in 'The Demotie Chronicle,'" in S. Israelit-Groll, ed., Studies in Egyptology Presented to Miriam Lichtheim (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1990) 494-506. 6

‫י‬

Harsaphes will proceed in joy after the Ionians, for a ruler shall have arisen in Heracleopolis." See J.G. Griffiths, "Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Era," in D. Hellholm, cd., Apocalypticism in the Hellenistic World and the Near East (Tübingen: Mohr, 1983) 280. 17 C F. Nims, "The Term Hp, 'Law, Right,' in Demotic," JNES 7 (1948) 243-260. 18 Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation, 465-474.

Ezek 38:17, where Gog is identified as "he of whom I spoke in former days by my servants the prophets of Israel," is widely recognized as a reinterpretation of Jeremiah's prophecy of "evil from the north" (Jer 4:6). In that case, however, the reinterpretation is simply a specification and does not involve an alteration of the original prophecy. The situation is different in Daniel 9, where seventy years are reinterpreted to mean seventy "weeks" of years. The novel interpretation of prophecy in the book of Daniel must be seen in the context of the understanding of revelation throughout that book. 19 In the tales that make up Daniel 1-6, Daniel is represented as a wise man at the Babylonian court who is able to interpret dreams (chaps. 2 and 4) and other mysteries (chap. 5) when the Babylonian wise men fall. Daniel's success is attributed to the power of his God, who "gives wisdom to the wise and knowledge to those who have understanding; he reveals deep and mysterious things" (Dan 2:21-22). Nonetheless, the form of the interpretations is similar to the decipherment of symbolic dreams elsewhere in the ancient Near East.20 T h e full dream is recounted and then broken down and interpreted piecemeal. The interpretation is symbolic or allegorical (e.g. "The tree you saw...it is you, Ο king," 4:20-22). The dream vision undergoes some development in chaps. 7 and 8. While it is possible to trace a history of the symbolic vision form in Biblical prophecy, beginning with Amos,21 there is obviously also continuity between the dreams that Daniel interprets in chaps. 2 and 4 and the visions that he sees in chaps. 7 and 8. (The continuity is most obvious between chaps. 2 and 7). The main difference is that now the interpreter is an angel, as in Zechariah 1-6, a fact that emphasizes the mysterious, supernatural character of the revelation. The manner of interpretation is similar to that of the dreams in chaps. 2 and 4: The visions are described and then interpreted piecemeal in an allegorical sense (e.g. 8:21 : "The he-goat is the king of Greece"). The interpretation of the seventy years in Daniel 9 follows the same pattern of allegorical interpretation that we find in the dreams and visions.22 The angel's discourse is not formally introduced as the 19 O n the forms of revelation in Daniel see J.J. Collins, Daniel, with an Introduction to Apocalyptic Literature (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984) 6-11. 20 Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation, 447-450; Oppenheim, The Interpretation of Dreams, 206-225. 21 K. Koch, "Vom profetischen zum apokalyptischen Visionsbericht," in Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism, 413-446; S. Niditch, The Symbolic Vision in Biblical Tradition (Chico: Scholars, 1983). 22 Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation, 482-489.

interpretation of the prophecy, but the association seems obvious in view of Daniel's preoccupation at the beginning of the chapter. Unlike the dreams and visions, the mystery to be interpreted in this case consists of a single datum, the seventy years of desolation. (In Jer 25:11 the land is to lie desolate; Daniel speaks of the desolations of Jerusalem). What is significant, however, is that the prophecy is regarded as a mystery that must be decoded, like the writing on the wall in Daniel 5, and that a new revelation is necessary for its interpretation. It has been suggested that the construal of prophecy as dreams or visions had its Biblical warrant in Num 12:6: "If there is a prophet among you, I the Lord make myself known to him in a vision, I speak with him in a dream." 23 This suggestion is attractive, although the warrant is never cited in pre-Christian Jewish literature. It concerns, however, only the justification of the hermeneutical shift, not its cause. In the case of Daniel 9 the interpretation applies the prophecy ofJeremiah to a new situation, several hundred years later than its literal terms would allow. The use ofJeremiah's prophecy in this way is especially remarkable since both the Chronicler and the prophet Zechariah had regarded the prophecy as fulfilled in the sixth century. The author of Daniel 9 could, in a sense, claim to be interpreting Scripture by Scripture, insofar as the move from seventy years to seventy weeks of years is suggested by the discussion of weeks of years in Leviticus 25. Yet Leviticus does not suggest the specific content of the interpretation. Sixty-nine-and-a-half of the seventy weeks are filled out by a sketch of postexilic Jewish history. The historical sketch is schematic and not exact, and sixty-two weeks are passed over virtually without comment. The focus of the interpretation is on the last week, from the time when "an anointed one" is cut off (most probably a reference to the murder of the high priest Onias III in 170 BC). If, as seems virtually certain, the author lived in this last week, in the period of crisis under Antiochus Epiphanes, the interpretation of Jeremiah's prophecy then fits the pattern that we find in many apocalypses of the historical type.24 An overview of history is provided in the guise of prophecy, but written after the fact, concluding with a real prediction of an eschatological nature (in this case the decreed end of the desolator). This same pattern is found in the dream interpretation in Daniel 2 in the visions in chaps. 7 and 8 and again in chaps. 10—12 but also in the Enochic apo23 L.H. Silberman, "Unriddling the Riddle," 331. See also D. Patte, Early Jewish Hermeneutic in Palestine{ SBLDS 22; Missoula: Scholars, 1975) 301. 24 Collins, Daniel 11-12; The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1984) 5-6.

calypses of the Maccabean era (the Apocalypse of Weeks and the Animal Apocalypse). In each of these cases a mysterious revelation is interpreted in such a way as to correlate it with history (with varying degrees of accuracy from a modern viewpoint) but also so as to predict an eschatological finale of history. The prophecy of Jeremiah in Daniel 9 is treated no differendy than the dreams and visions of Daniel and Enoch. It is generally recognized that apocalyptic revelations are substantially ex eventu, or after the fact. The claim that the whole course of history was revealed to Enoch before the flood is a literary device, which serves various purposes. It conveys a sense of determinism, since the course of history was foreknown even then. Most importandy, it inspires confidence in the eschatological predictions with which these revelations typically end. The classic illustration is Daniel 11, where, as Porphyry already claimed in antiquity, the revelation gives an accurate account of events down to the career of Antiochus Epiphanes but erroneously predicts that he would die in the land of ‫י‬ Israel ("between the sea and the glorious holy m o u n t a i n , 1 1 : 4 5 difficult to avoid the conclusion that the revelation was composed during the time of Epiphanes and before his death and was intended to inspire confidence that his death, and the vindication of his victims, was imminent. The use of Jeremiah's prophecy in Daniel 9 functions in a manner similar to the use of a pseudonym such as Enoch. It invokes the authority of antiquity, and it permits an ex eventu prophecy of the intervening history. Here again there is a real prediction, that the decreed end will be poured out on the desolator (9:27). The prediction is warranted by the fact that Jeremiah had prophesied a specific duration for the desolation. The fact that that duration is interpreted allegorically, however, and, at least by modern reckoning, corresponds only loosely and schematically to the period identified in the interpretation, suggests that the prediction is not really derived from the prophecy but that the prophecy is invoked to lend authority to a prediction that is made for other reasons.

III. Interpretation in the Pesharim The manner in which the interpretation is derived from (or at least related to) the text in the pesharim is the subject of a long-standing debate. Already in 1951 William H. Brownlee proposed thirteen hermeneutical principles that he found to be operative in the Habakkuk commentary. 25 These included not only general principles 25 W.H. Brownlee, "Biblical Interpretation among the Sectaries of the Dead Sea Scrolls," BA 14(1951) 54-76.

‫י‬

) .

such as the assumption that prophecy has an eschatological meaning but also methodological clues, such as the rearrangement of letters in a word or the division of a word into two or more parts. Brownlee argued for a very close relationship between text and commentary and found the pesher "essentially midrashic in character." This view was flatly contradicted by Karl Elliger in 1953, who found many of Brownlee's explanations farfetched. 26 Elliger insisted that Daniel was a much closer parallel than the rabbinic midrashim and that the commentary was generated by the attempt to address the concerns of the community rather than by exegetical techniques. Lou Silberman, writing a decade after Brownlee, affirmed the continuity of the pesharim with Daniel and traditional dream interpretation but pointed out that even in those cases interpretations are derived from, or related to, the text.27 He proceeded to argue for an analogy between the pesharim and the late Petirah Midrashim 28 and to argue for a close derivation of the commentary from the text, often relying on little-known secondary meanings of roots to make his point. 29 More recently Rabinowitz has disputed the relationship between pesher and midrash, 30 while that relationship has been affirmed by George Brooke.31 Even if one does not accept all the exegetical suggestions of Brownlee and Silberman, there can be no doubt that the pesharim make use of midrashic techniques such as plays on the double meaning of words. There is equally no doubt that the commentaries cannot be adequately explained by these techniques alone. Maurya Horgan gives a balanced summary of four modes of interpretation in the pesharim:32 (1) The pesher may follow the action ideas and words of the lemma closely; (2) it may grow out of one or more key words, roots or ideas; (3) it may consist of metaphorical identifications of figures or entities named in the lemma; (4) it may be only loosely related to the lemma. The third point is especially significant as it points to the fact that the pesharim presuppose a body of information about the figures mentioned that is correlated with the prophetic text but not derived from it. 26

K. Elliger, Studien, 157-164. Eiliger questions cases where Brownlee divides words and treats the letters of a word as abb reviations for other words. " Silberman, "Unriddling" 326-327. 28 His primary illustration of Petirah Midrash is taken from Qoh. Rah. 12:1. 25 E.g. he realtes the verb pwg in 1QpHab i 10 to the Hebrew pwq, Aramiac npq, "go forth," rather than the more usual understanding, "grow numb." 30 Rabinowitz, Pesher/Piltaron. 31 G J . Brooke, "Qumran Pesher: Toward the Redefinition of a Genre," /?«;Q,10 (1979/81) 483-503. 32 Horgan, Pesharim 244-245.

The interrelation between exegetical technique and independent tradition can be illustrated by a few passages from 1QpHab. At the end of the first column Hab 1:5 is cited. Most of the citation is lost because of the fragmentary nature of the text, but the interpretation presupposes the reading bwgdym, "traitors," rather than bgwym, "among the nations," as in MT. Most probably the commentator found the variant reading in his text. There is no reason to suspect him of altering it.33 T h e citation may be reconstructed as: Look, Ο traitors, and see, wonder and be amazed, for I am doing a deed in your days that you would not believe if it were told.

The interpretation that follows (1QpHab 2:1-10) is concerned exclusively with the identification of the traitors. Not one but three identifications are affirmed: The traitors together with the Man of the Lie, the traitors to the new covenant, and the traitors at the end of days who are the ruthless ones of the covenant. Each of the three groups is accused of not "believing" or "being faithful" (h'myn) in accordance with the citation, and the reference to "your days" may have suggested the interpretation in terms of the end of days. Nonetheless it is clear that all the interpretation cannot be derived from the text. The interpretation presupposes that the Man of the Lie and the Teacher are known figures and that the designation "traitors" can be plausibly referred to the Man of the Lie and his followers. The pesher correlates the prophetic text with the otherwise known history of the community, using the words "traitors" and "believe" as catchwords. A second illustration may be taken from 1QpHab 8. Here there is a relatively lengthy citation of Hab 2:5-6, which concerns a haughty man who multiplies what is not his own. The interpretation identifies the figure as the Wicked Priest, although the citation gave no hint of his priesdy status. The points of contact with the text are that he became arrogant and took the wealth of the men of violence and of the nations. Here again the pesher presupposes certain information about this priest and adds information that has no point of connection in the text: that he abandoned God, that the men of violence had rebelled against God, and that he was guilty of impurity. Moreover it distinguishes two stages in his career: when he first arose and was called by the name of truth, and when he ruled in Israel. This distinction has no basis in the text.

33 Horgan, ibid., p. 23, points out that bwgdym is suggested as an emendation in BHS on the basis of the Greek hoi kataphronêtoi.

A third Ulustration is taken from 1QpHab 11. The text of Hab 2:15 is cited as follows: "Woe to him who gives his neighbors to drink, mixing in his wrath—indeed, making (them) drunk in order that he might look upon their feasts." "Their feasts" (mw'dyhm) difTers from the reading of the M T (m'wryhm, "their nakedness5'). Silberman regards the change as the deliberate alteration of a commentator who lacked the ingenuity to do anything with the M T reading but wanted a peg on which to hang his story.34 The possibility that the text had already been corrupted can not be discounted. In any case, the "feasts" become the main focus of the interpretation here. There is no reference to drunkenness in the interpretation. Instead the commentator appears to construe the text to mean that the villain drinks or swallows his neighbor. 35 The neglect of the motif of drunkenness here contrasts with the following passage (1QpHab 11 : 8b-15), where it is emphasized. In 1QpHab 11: 4-8a the commentator again introduces information that has no apparent basis in the text: the statement that the priest pursued the Teacher to his place of exile. From these illustrations it is clear that the commentator is not simply exegeting the prophetic text but is correlating it with an independent body of information about the history of the community. There are always points of connection with the text, but the constraints placed on the interpreter are minimal. A text may be interpreted in more than one way, and words and phrases do not necessarily carry the same meaning whenever they occur. (Hassadîq, "the righteous," is interpreted as the Teacher of Righteousness in Hab 1:13, but the saddîq of 2:4b ["the righteous man will live by his faithfulness"] is interpreted as everyone who observes the Law and is faithful to the Teacher). The interpretations are highly selective, and many features of the text are ignored. (This is more obvious in the pesher on Isaiah). Consequently what is found in the interpretations is never simply required by the text, although it is limited by the points of connection that can be found in a given lemma. Not all the interpretations in the pesharim refer to the history of the community. As in the apocalypses, there are also genuine predictions. Some of these are of a general nature (e.g. 4:3: "God will not destroy his people by the hand of the nations," or 13:3: "God will wipe out completely all those who serve the idols"). Others are more specific. The wealth of the last priests of Jerusalem will be 54

Silberman, "Unriddling the Riddle," 358. So Brownlee, "Biblical Interpretation," 68. Silberman, "Unriddling the Riddle," 355, attempts to derive mašqeh "gives to drink," from nšq, "armament," in the sense of "hostile encounter." 35

given over to the army of the Kittim (9: 4-6). God will sentence the Wicked Priest to complete destruction (12: 5). These predictions are virtually all concerned with retriburion, mosdy against the priests and in a few cases against the Gentiles. All pertain to the definitive events expected in the end of days. IV. The Function of the Pesharim The most obvious clue to the function of the pesharim is the prominence of the motif of retribution. T h e commentaries provide assurance that the Wicked Priest, the last priests of Jerusalem, and the idols of the nations will be destroyed, by showing that the destruction has long been foretold in prophecy. This exposition provides consolation for the "poor ones" who are oppressed in the present. In this regard the pesharim resemble the ex eventu prophecies of the apocalypses. In both cases visionaries are thought to have predicted events long after their time. T h e fact that some of these events can already be verified insures the reliability of those that are still to come. Unlike the apocalypses the pesharim explicitly identify some predictions as already fulfilled and do not employ the device of pseudonymity. Nonetheless the efTect is similar. The expectation of retribution and vindication is supported by the authority of ancient prophecy. Both sets of documents presuppose and encourage the belief that the "end of days" was imminent in the time of the actual author. A second function of the pesharim is also paralleled in the apocalypses. They provide confirmation and legitimation for the identity of certain groups in the present. 36 When Enoch predicts the emergence of the chosen righteous, or Daniel predicts the rise of the maškîlîm, they are understood to provide a prophetic sanction and mandate for these groups. This function is more prominent in the pesharim insofar as Biblical words and phrases are used to label individuals and groups. So the general epithets "righteous" and "wicked" are given very specific reference in 1QpHab. The righteousness of the Qumran community, and the wickedness of the High Priest, is confirmed by the correspondence with the prophetic text. This use of prophecy for legitimation is often in evidence in the use of scripture in other Qumran documents. So, in C D 4: 2-3, the 36

W.H. Brownlee, The Midrash Pesher of Habbaknk (Missoula: Scholars, 1979) 3536, speaks of "vindication." This is not, however, to say that "the basis for their sectarianism was their interpretation of scripture" (so Patte, Early Jewish Hermenetitic, 214).

"priests, the Levites and the sons of Zadok" of Ezek 44:15 are identified as "the converts of Israel who departed from the land of Judah," "those who joined them," and "the elect of Israel...who shall stand at the end of days." The sectarian group derives not only an honorific title from the Biblical text but also confirmation of its place in the divine plan. Again, in 1QS 8 the settlement in the wilderness is said to be the fulfillment of Isa 40:3. Whether we suppose that the settlement was a deliberate attempt to fulfill the command of the prophet, or that the prophecy was invoked after the fact, the correspondence with a prophetic text confirmed the l ightness of the settlement. From a modern critical viewpoint, the exegetical method of pesharim involves the manipulation of the prophetic text to meet the needs of the community. As Silberman has put it, the text provides pegs on which the commentator hangs his message, although he uses much ingenuity to justify the connections. In Vermes' terms, this is "applied" rather than "pure" exegesis. Needless to say, the members of the Qumran community would not have formulated the matter in this way. What is manipulation to us was to them the revelation of the mysteries hidden in the text. They were, of course, not the only group in history that considered itself the primary beneficiary of God's providence. Nonetheless the belief that the true meaning of the words of the prophets concerned the Qumran community can hardly fail to strike us as naive. The claim of revelation appears here to be a rhetorical device, however sincerely employed, that masks the actual process of Biblical interpretation. V. The Pesharim as Historical Evidence Much of the modern study of the pesharim has been devoted to attempts to reconstruct the history of the Qumran community from the allusions in the commentaries. 37 This enterprise has been problematic, most obviously because of the fondness of the pesharim for coded titles such as "the Wicked Priest" and the lack of explicit names. (The mention of Demetrius king of Greece in 4QpNahum is the notable exception, and even there the information is deficient.) The pesharim do not provide continuous narrative, such as we find in historiographie texts like 1 Maccabees, or even in the ex eventu prophecies in the apocalypses. Nonetheless the expectation that the pesharim provide evidence for historical reconstruction is well ground37

E.g. F.M. Cross, The Ancient Library of Qi/mran (Garden City: Doubleday, 1961) 111-160; H. Stegemann, Die Entstehung der Q11mrangemeinde (Bonn: published privately, 1971).

ed. Not only do we find explicit reference to Demetrius king of Greece and some rather transparent references to other figures (most notably the "Lion of Wrath, ‫ י י‬who is generally recognized as Alexander Jannaeus), but the genre of the pesharim itself supports the expectation. We have seen that a major factor in the exegetical method of the peshanm involves the correlation of the Biblical text with data known from other sources concerning persons, groups and events. The very fact that the peshanm do not provide a continuous narrative about, or clear description of, such figures as the Wicked Priest and Man of the Lie requires that we assume that the readers were familiar with these figures from some other source. Pesher exegesis, like dream interpretation, is largely an exercise in correlation. Unlike some forms of haggadic midrash it allows litde scope for creative fiction, since it has litde scope for narrative. There is obviously a creative element in the pesharim where they predict future, eschatological events. The credibility of these predictions, however, depends on the recognition that much of the ancient prophecy has already been fulfilled. Consequendy when the incidents cited as the pesher of specific texts are alleged to have already taken place they must be already familiar to the readers and cannot be new creations of the interpreter. We can infer from this that stories about the Wicked Priest (e.g. that he was given into the hand of his enemies and that he disrupted the Teacher on the Day of Atonement) were already in circulation before the pesher on Habakkuk was written. Whether these stories were historically accurate is of course a further question, but the enigmatic allusions of the pesharim must be seriously examined in any attempt to reconstruct the history of the Qumran community. VI. The Pesharim and the New Testament The style of commentary developed in the Qumran pesharim was not continued in either Judaism or Christianity. The closest Jewish parallels are found in the Petirah Midrashim to which Silberman has drawn attention. There we find the same point-by-point identification of symbols in the manner of dream interpretation (e.g. Qoh. Rab. 12:1: "The light—this is the Torah, and the moon—this is the Sanhedrin"). In the midrash, however, the interpretations are not claimed to be inspired, and they do not focus on historical and eschatological events as the pesharim do. On the Christian side there have been many proposals concerning "pesher-iike exegesis" in the NT. 38 The 38 D. Hay, " N T Interpretation of the O T , " IDBSup 444; see Brooke, "Qumran Pesher," 484.

pesharim do indeed throw valuable light on the early Christian understanding of Scripture, but there is no actual example of pesher in the NT. 39 The relationship between the pesharim and the N T may be considered briefly with reference to two blocks of material that are often adduced in this regard: the formula quotations in Matthew, 40 and the quotations in the speeches in Acts.41 The Matthean passages affirm that events in the life of Jesus happened "to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet' 5 (e.g. Matt 1:22). They differ from the pesharim by their focus on the Messiah: They are messianic rather than eschatological. Formally, the procedure is the reverse of what we find in the pesharim. They do not move from text to interpretation but start from a narrative about Jesus and add the Biblical quotations. In principle this procedure provides greater scope for the creation of new material than was the case in the pesharim, since it provides a full narrative and does not merely allude to one. The quotations in Acts are, likewise, Christological in focus and are cited as proof-texts in a narrative. They are not interpreted atomistically in the manner of the pesharim. Here again the narrative gives greater freedom for creativity than was the case in the pesharim, although there can be little doubt that the story ofJesus was traditional by the time the speeches in Acts were written. In view of these significant differences it is best to avoid loose references to "pesher-like" exegesis. Yet the pesharim have shed some important light on the NT. Both sets of documents share some basic presuppositions—e.g., that the primary reference of prophecy is not to the time of the prophets themselves but to the time of the interpreters and to the eschatological future. In both cases we are dealing with applied exegesis that makes creative use of the Biblical text to confirm and legitimate the novel beliefs of a community. While the early Christians made their own adaptation of Jewish methods of interpretation they continued to share some of their most basic assumptions, and their use of the Scriptures is scarcely intelligible apart from the Jewish context in which they lived.

39

See Fitzmycr, "The Use of Explicit Old Testament Quotations," 6. T h e analogy between these passages and the pesharim was argued by K. Stendahl, The School of St. Matthew (Lund: Glccrup, 1954)183-202. 41 E.g. D. Goldsmith, "Acts 13:33-37: A Pesher on II Samuel 7 ,"JBL 87 (1968) 321-324. 40

PART FIVE W I S D O M AND APOCALYPTICISM

C O S M O S AND SALVATION: J E W I S H W I S D O M AND APOCALYPTICISM IN T H E HELLENISTIC AGE

"Wisdom" and "apocalyptic" have traditionally been regarded in biblical studies as two quite distinct types of literature and thought. Recendy the distinction has been put in question by the thesis of Gerhard von Rad that apocalypticism is rooted in wisdom.1 Von Rad realized that the Hebrew wisdom books lack the interest in eschatology which he himself considered the "sicherste Spezifikum" of apocalypticism, but argued that the encyclopedic interests of wisdom could have been expanded to include the "last things." 2 His argument betrays a certain ambiguity as to what is meant by "wisdom"—whether it is defined in terms of the books which are usually classified as wisdom literature (Proverbs, Job, Qoheleth, Sirach, Wisdom of Solomon) or in terms of the supposed interests of a scribal class. T h e most fruitful subsequent studies which have related wisdom and apocalypticism have in fact looked outside the conventional wisdom literature for their evidence. H.P. Müller has convincingly argued that "mantic wisdom" of the type represented in Daniel 1-6 plays an important part in apocalyptic literature but this type of "wisdom" has no necessary relation to what we find in Proverbs or Sirach. 3 J.Z. Smith has argued that "wisdom and apocalyptic are related in that both are essentially scribal phenomena" and "the paradigmatic thought of the scribe" has given rise to both. 4 This conclusion is certainly justified but its significance is 1

G. von Rad, Theologie des Alten Testaments (4th ed.; Munich: Kaiser, 1965) 2:315-30: "die apokalyptischen Schriften sowohl hinsichdich ihrer Stoffe wie hinsichtlich ihrer Fragestellungen wie hinsichdich ihrer Argumentation in den Überlieferungen der Weisheit wurzeln" (p. 327). See also his Wisdom in Israel (Nashville: Abingdon, 1972) 263-83. A connection between wisdom and apocalypticism was proposed as early as 1857 by L. Noack (seeJ.M. Schmidt, Diejüdische Apokalyptik [Neukirchen Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlng des Erziehungsvereins, 1969] 13-14). 2 Von Rad, Theologie 2.328. 5 H.-P. Müller, "Mantische Weisheit und Apokalyptik," Congress Volume Uppsala, Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 22 (Leiden: Brill 1972) 268-93. See also J J . Collins, "The Court Tales in Daniel and the Development of Apocalyptic," JBL 94 (1975) 218-34. 4 J.Z. Smith, "Wisdom and Apocalyptic," in B. Pearson, ed., Religious Syncretism in Antiquity: Essays in Conversation with Geo Widengren (Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1975)140.

somewhat diluted by Smith's own contention that "the faith of the scribe...permeates every other genre of literature as well, including the historiographie." 5 Smith has shown that common thought patterns can be found throughout a wide range of Hellenisticoriental literature and that neither Jewish wisdom nor apocalypticism can be considered in isolation. There remains, however, the question raised by von Rad whether the peculiar type of wisdom represented by the Jewish wisdom books has anything in common with apocalypticism other than that which is common to "every other genre of literature." There is in fact evidence for a more direct rapprochement between the conventional biblical wisdom tradition and apocalyptic literature. This evidence is found in the Wisdom of Solomon, which Johannes Fichtner, in 1937, described as an "apokalyptisches Weisheitsbuch," or at least "apokalyptisierendes." 6 The Wisdom of Solomon was composed somewhere around the turn of the era, too late to lend any support to von Rad's theory that apocalypticism derived from wisdom. 7 Yet it provides our clearest and most explicit example of the "Eschatologisierung der Weisheit" posited by von Rad. 8 Accordingly, it provides an exceptional opportunity to study the degrees of compatibility and conflict between wisdom and apocalyptic thought patterns, quite apart from the question of historical derivation. 9 5 Ibid., 136. The role of paradigmatic thinking in Greek thought has been shown by B. Snell (The Discovery of the Mind [New York: Harper, 1960] 191-226). See also the work of M. Eliadc, on mythic paradigms, e.g. Patterns in Comparative Religion (Trans. R. Sheed; New York: World Publishing Co., 1963), and The Myth of the Eternal Return (Trans. W.R. Trask; New York: Pantheon Books, 1964). 6 J . Fichtner, "Die Stellung der Sapienda Salamonis in der Literatur und Geistesgcschichte ihrer Zeit," 36 (1937) 113-32. See also P. Grelot, "L'Eschatologic de la Sagesse et les Apocalypses Juives," in A. Barucq, ed., A la Rencontre de Dieu: Memorial Albert Gelin (Le Puy: Mappus 1961), 165-78; C. Larcher, Études sur le Livre de ta Sagesse (Paris: Gabalda 1969)103-32; L. Ruppert, Der leidende Gerechte (Würzburg: Echter Verlag, 1972)70-105. 7 There is no precise indication of the date of the Wisdom of Solomon. Proposed dates range from the seoond century BCE to about 40 CE For a summary sec J . Reider, The Book of Wisdom (New York: Harper, 1957)12-14. " Von Rad, Theologie, 2:329. Von Rad touches briefly on the cosmological interest in the Wisdom of Solomon in Theologie, 2: 317-18, and on its treatment of history in Wisdom in Israel, 282-83, "by way of a footnote," but he never discusses it in detail. 9 Mention should be made of two contributions to the discussion of wisdom and apocalypticism which suffer from their failure to consider the "cschatologising of wisdom." P. von der Osten-Sacken (Die Apokalyptik in ihrem Verhältnis zu Prophetie und Wrisheit, Theologische Existenz heute, 157 [Munich: Kaiser Verlag, 1969]) takes Qpheleth as his main example of wisdom, and, not surprisingly, finds that it has little in common with apocalypticism. J . Gammic ("Spatial ana Ethical Dualism in Jewish Wisdom and Apocalyptic Literature," JBL 93 [1974]: 356-85) points out

It is noteworthy that the wisdom book which deals most extensively with eschatology is a product of the Diaspora, and conspicuously influenced by Hellenistic philosophy. 10 This fact raises the question whether the basis for such rapprochement as we find between apocalypticism and wisdom should not be sought in the wider environment of the Hellenistic age rather than in the direct interaction of the two Jewish traditions. In this essay we will begin by discussing the ideas which provide the unity and coherence of the Wisdom of Solomon, and consider the eschatology of the book in the light of these ideas. Then we will relate the Wisdom of Solomon to other developments in the Hellenistic world. Finally we will compare and contrast the world view of Wisdom with that of the Jewish apocalypses. The Wisdom of Solomon The Wisdom of Solomon may be divided into three sections: the "book of eschatology" in chapters 1-5, the "book of Wisdom" proper in chapters 6-9, and the "book of history" in chapters 10-19." Several older commentators argued that the different sections should be ascribed to two or more authors, 12 but the more recent studies strongly support the unity of the book. 13 While there is no doubt that diverse traditions and materials were incorporated, the book as it stands presents an intelligible whole in which the various parts are related in an integral way. certain features which are common to wisdom and apocalypticism but he docs not provide an explanation and does not show the significance of the elements in question for either wisdom or apocalypticism. 10 Larcher, Études, 181-236; J.M. Reese, Hellenistic Influence on the Book of Wisdom and its Consequences (Analecta Biblica, 41; Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1970) 32-89. " So J . Fichtner, Weisheit Salomos (HAT 2 / 6 (Tübingen: Mohr, 1938) 7; Reider, 2; J . Geyer, The Wisdom of Solomon (Torch Bible Commentaries; London: S.C.M. Press, 1963) 24-26; E.G. Clarke, The Wisdom of Solomon (Cambridge Bible Commentary; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973) 3-4. A slighdy different division is proposed by A.G. Wright, "The Structure of the Book of Wisdom," Biblica 48 (1967) 165-84. J.M. Reese ("Plan and Structure in the Book of Wisdom," CBQTI [1965] 391-99) also distinguishes "the book of divine justice and human folly" (11:15-15:19) but this section is direcdy related to the punishment of the Egyptians at the Exodus and should be regarded as a subsection of the "book of history." 11 E.g., F. Fockc (Die Entstehung der Weisheit Salomos [Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1913]) argued that chaps. 1-5 come from a different hand than the rest of the book. For a concise summary of the debate, see Reider, The Book of Wisdom, 1522. " See especially the discussion by Reese (Hellenistic Influence, 122-45). Reese argues that the use of flashbacks and recurring themes tie the various sections together and present a consistent theological oudook.

The overall purpose of the book is clearly stated in the opening verse: it is an exhortation to "the judges of the earth" to "love righteousness." 14 However, Pseudo-Solomon does not rely on direct gnomic exhortation in the style of proverbial literature but grounds his message in a view of the universe and of human destiny.15 Specifically, he maintains that there is an order in the world which is directed to salvation and well-being: God did not make death and he does not delight in the death of the living. For he created all things that they might exist, and the generative processes of the world preserve life.16

The salvific tendency of the world is explained by the presence of righteousness in the world: "Neither is there a kingdom of Hades upon earth, for righteousness is immortal." 17 The exhortation to love righteousness is therefore an urging to put oneself in tune with that force in the world which is immortal and leads to immortality. The way in which humanity is related to the salvific forces of the world is further expressed in terms of wisdom. Wisdom is, of course, the human attribute of understanding, but it also has a cosmic dimension. Wisdom is a spirit that loves humanity {philanthröpon gar pneuma sophia), evidently synonymous with the "holy spirit of discipline" and the "spirit of the Lord" which "has filled the inhabited earth" and "holds all things together." 18 This spirit/ wisdom "will not enter a soul that devises evil nor dwell in a body that is subject to sin." 19 By implication, it will enter into a righteous soul and abide in a sinless body—or, in the formulation of Wis Sol. 7:27: "generation by generation passing into holy souls she makes them friends of God and prophets." Human beings become wise, and 14

Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 117, categorizes the book as a logos protreptikos or didactic exhortation. 15 Gnomic exhortation was not foreign to Hellenistic Judaism, as is shown by the sayings of Ps. Phocylides (see A.M. Kurfess, "Das Mahngcdicht des sogenannten Phokylides im zweiten Buch der Oracula Sibyllina," ZNW 38 [1939] 171-81). 16 Wis Sol. 1:13-14. The translation of verse 14b (sôtêrioi hai geneseis tou kosmou) is disputed. See the discussion of A.T.S. Goodrick, The Book of Wisdom (Oxford Church Bible Commentary; London: Rivingtons, 1913) 96-97. Most translations render sôtêrioi by "wholesome" (RSV, Reider) or an equivalent, but the lexika favor an active sense "saving" or "delivering." Sec also G. Ziener, Die theologische Begnffsprache im Buche der Weisheit (Bonner Biblische Beitrage 11; Bonn: Hanstein, 1956) 137, who translates "heilbringend." 17 Wis Sol 1:14-15. The personification of Hades here echoes apocalyptic l a n g a g e ; of. Rev. 6:8 and 20:13-14. 8 ‫י‬ Études, 362-76. 19 Wis Sol. 1:4. The Platonic opposition of soul and body is not implied in this passage (see Goodrick, The Book of Wisdom, 86-87).

friends of God, by the indwelling of the spirit of wisdom, which is also the cosmic principle which holds all things together. While Wis Sol. 1:4 implies that the recipients of wisdom must already be righteous, Wis Sol. 7:27 suggests that it is wisdom which makes them righteous, but we should not regard these statements as opposed. Rather, wisdom and righteousness are inseparable. Neither is found without the other. What is important is that the wisdom and righteousness of an individual is not an isolated relationship with God but partakes of an order and purpose which is immanent in the universe. The cosmic dimension of wisdom is expressed most elaborately in chapters 6 — 9 (the "book of Wisdom" proper). Wisdom is so embedded in the universe that it can be expressed in physical terms— "manifold, subtile, mobile, clear, unpolluted," pervading all things by reason of her pureness. 20 In 8:1 Wisdom is quite explicitly the principle of order, which "reaches mightily from end to end and orders all things well." When Wisdom enters into people, it does not simply make them just. T h e transformation is not only moral. It is first of all an appropriation of wisdom, which involves "an accurate knowledge of the things that are, to know the structure of the world and the working of the elements, the beginning and end and middle of times..." 21 This understanding leads to righteousness, and so to immortality, because, in the famous s0rìtes of 6:17-20: the beginning of her (wisdom) is the truest desire for instruction and concern for instruction is love of her, and love of her is keeping of her laws and adherence to her laws is assurance of incorruption and incorruption makes one near to God. So the desire for wisdom leads to a kingdom. 22

The righteousness and destiny of the individual depend on the appropriation of the wisdom which orders the universe. The description of cosmic wisdom in chapters 6-9 may well be considered the heart of the book. The other two sections (1-5 and 10-19) illustrate the way in which this wisdom affects the destiny of the individual and the course of history. The "book of eschatology" contrasts the righteous with the impious. The fate of each is ultimately determined by their understanding of God and the world. The impious are those who "reasoned not rightly" (2:1) and "knew 20

Wis Sol 7:22-24. O n the echoes of Greek philosophy in this passage, see Ziener, Die theologische Begriffsprache, 139-48. 21 Wis Sol 7:17-18. Ziener, Die theologische Begriffsprache, 140-41. 22 The sorites is imperfect, since it should conclude by joining the beginning and end: "the beginning of wisdom makes one near to God" (sec Goodrick, The Book of Wisdom, 175).

not the mysteries of God" (2:22). Consequently they resolve to "let our strength be the rule of our righteousness for weakness is proved to be unprofitable" (2:11). When the judgment comes they realize their mistake: "we erred from the path of truth...and we did not know the way of the Lord" (5:6-7). By contrast, the righteous individual "professes to have knowledge of God" and "declares the end of the righteous blessed" (2:13,16). Consequently such people are not seduced by the short-term gains of wickedness, for their hope is full of immortality (3:4). Those who understand and appreciate the role of righteousness in the world order can avail of its fruits: "the righteous live forever" (5:15). Not only are the wicked condemned by God; they are also rejected by the forces of the cosmos, since God "will make all creation his weapons for the repulse of his foes" (5:17). Salvation and judgment are not divorced from the workings of the world but are a necessary consequence of the way the world is ordered. The wise man, who understands the structure of the world, also understands the principles of God's judgment and can live his life in the light of those principles. The involvement of the cosmos in the relations between God and humanity is even more vividly illustrated in the "book of history" in chapters 10-19. These chapters consist of a brief review of the history recorded in the book of Genesis (chap. 10) and a lengthy reflection on the Exodus (chaps. 1 1-19).23 However, Pseudo-Solomon is not concerned with the recitation of "salvation history" as the unique and exceptional history of Israel. No individual names are used. Each of the biblical characters illustrates a type, the "righteous"—in 10:4, Noah; in 10:5, Abraham; in 10:6, Lot; in 10:10, Jacob; etc.24 Further, the events in question are not ascribed to the direct intervention of God but to the constant activity of wisdom in the world. Revelation does not take place by theophanies, but by the constant mediation of wisdom. 25 The primary locus of 23

These chapters are frequently called a "midrash," but this use of the term seems excessively loose. For bibliography and critique, see Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 91-98. 24 See B.L. Mack, "Imitado Mosis: Patterns of Cosmology and Soteriology in the Hcllenisdc Synagogue," Studia Philnnica 1 (1972) 30-31 25 In Wis Sol 18:16 the "all-powerful word" of God leaps from heaven as a stern warrior, in a passage strikingly similar to Rev. 19:11-16. However, in view of the frequent equivalence of "word" and "wisdom" this passage may be taken as an epiphany of wisdom rather than directly of God. A list of passsàgcs in Hellenistic Jewish texts where word and wisdom arc equivalent can be found in L.K.K. Dey, The Intermedia[y World and Patterns of Perfection in Philo and Hebrews (SBLDS 25; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976) 8.

revelation is the world, created by word and wisdom (9:1-2). The history of Israel provides a paradigmatic example of the experience of righteous individuals or a righteous people, but it is only an illustration of the workings of the universe. Wisdom and righteousness are not necessarily confined to Israel. The experience of Israel and its enemies is expressed as an experience of the cosmos rather than a direct encounter with God. Idolators are punished "by means of those very creatures whom they esteemed as gods" (12:27). The plagues of Egypt and the crossing of the sea reveal that "nature fights for the righteous" (15:17) and that creation, ministering to thee its maker, strains itself against the unrighteous for punishment and slackens for beneficence on behalf of those that trust in you [God]" (16: 24).26

Even when the whole creation in its particular nature was fashioned again anew complying with your commands so that your servants might be kept unharmed,

this miraculous transformation does not require a direct intervention of God. Instead, it is brought about by an inner mutation of the universe, prompted only by God's command: the elements, being changed in order among themselves, as in a psaltery the notes vary the character of the tune, yet always adhering to the sound." 27

In the words of A.T.S. Goodrick: Even miracles are regarded by 'Wisdom' not as a derangement of the universe, but as a rearrangement of the harmony of it."28 The hand of God can, of course, be discerned in the workings of the cosmos. It is precisely from the greatness and beauty of creation that the creator is recognized (13:1).29 Wisdom involves the recognition of God through the works of creation, since this is required by a full understanding of the world. It is the wisdom which recognizes God which leads to righteousness and immortality: "For to know thee is perfect righteousness and to know thy might is the 26

See especially P. Beauchamp, "Le salut corporel des justes et la conclusion du livre de la Sagesse," Biblica 46 (1964) 491-526; also Ziener, Die theologische Begriffsprache, 136-36. 27 See the discussion by J.P.M. Sweet, "The Theory of Miracles in the Wisdom of Solomon," in C.F.D. Moule, ed., Miracles (London: Mowbray, 1966) 115-26. 28 Goodrick, The Book of Wisdom, 251. 29 See T. Finan, "Hellenistic Humanism in the Book of Wisdom," Irish Theological Quarterly 27 (1960): 30-48; Ziener, Die theologische Begrtffsprache, 132-35.

root of immortality." 30 Yet this knowledge is indirect, mediated by wisdom, through the cosmos. It is not given directly by the prophetic "word of the Lord" or by ecstatic revelation.31 It appears then that the Wisdom of Solomon presents a coherent theology throughout the book. God is encountered through the cosmos, by wisdom. History illustrates the structure of the universe, and eschatology is also built in to that structure. The human way to salvation is by understanding the structure of the universe and adapting to it in righteousness. Human destiny is not predetermined by the structure of the universe but it is framed by the fixed and limited options provided by that structure. The Cosmos and Religion in Near Eastern and Hellenistic Thought The world view of the Wisdom of Solomon is based on the belief that human destiny, history, and eschatology are all bound up with the structure of the universe. This belief must be seen in the light of the religious importance of the cosmos throughout the ancient Near East, but especially in the context of the Hellenistic age, when the older religious traditions underwent some significant changes. The importance of the cosmos in religion and mythology all the world over has been established at length by Mircea Eliade.32 In the more specific context of the eastern Mediterranean, Cornelius Loew has written of the "cosmological conviction" which was fundamental to the world view of ancient Mesopotamia. This conviction held that "the meaning of life is rooted in an encompassing cosmic order in which man, society and the gods all participate." 33 The cosmological conviction was often expressed in narratives in the mythological mode: the Sumerians and their successors could express their convictions about the meaning and purpose of life by telling stories about the gods, especially 'creation stories' describing the primordial establish-

‫ "י‬Wis Sol. 15:3. See R.E. Murphy, "To Know Your Might Is the Root of Immortality [Wis Sol. 15:3]," CBQ.26 (1963) 88-93. " Wisdom is given to Solomon in response to prayer in Wis Sol. 7:7, but the gift consists of the ability to understand; it is not an infusion of ready-made knowledge; see below. 35 See, e.g., Eliade, The Myth of the Eternal Return. Patterns in Comparative Religion (n. 5 above). 33 C. Loew, Myth, Sacred History and Philosophy (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1967) 5. Loew draws heavily on the 3-vol. opus of Eric Voegelin, Order and Histoiy (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1956-57). See further J.Z. Smith, "The Influence of Symbols upon Social Change: A Place on Which to Stand," Worship 44 (1970) 460-66.

ment of cosmic organization in terms of activities of the gods and relationships they established. 34

These mythological narratives express the belief that human destiny is bound up with a greater order of things and that it is important to understand that order by whatever means. In the biblical tradition, the cosmological conviction was modified by the dominance of monotheistic faith in Yahweh, who was sharply distinguished from the created universe. Nevertheless, the Yahwist and the Priestly source begin with accounts of creation. Further, the sacred history of Exodus and Sinai also fills the role of cosmogonie myth, since it explains the structure of the world by recounting the way in which Israel was created. 35 The sacred history of the Hebrews, like the creation stories of the Mesopotamians, gives expression to the structure of the universe by the use of narratives in the mythological mode. Over against the mythological mode, which explains first principles and uldmate realities by reference to the acts of a god or gods, we may set the conceptual mode of science and philosophy which relies on abstract and impersonal categories (being, matter). The development of conceptual thinking, the "discovery of the mind" has rightly been credited to the Greek thinkers of the sixth and fifth centuries BCE36 In the words of Loew: These thinkers and their colleagues achieved one of the great differentiating insights in human history. They discovered that nature, as given in man's experience, is an autonomous realm. 37

Despite his statement that "all things are full of gods," Thaïes spoke of water, not Oceanus or Poseidon, as the first principle of the universe. When Anaximander claimed that no element or individual thing could be the first principle, he spoke in abstract impersonal terms of the Apeiron or Unlimited, not of a divinity outside the world. The Ionian cosmologists were the first thinkers in antiquity to attempt to grasp the universe in a purely conceptual mode. However, there were intermediary stages between full-fledged mythology and scientific or philosophical cosmology. Werner Jaeger has pointed to the Theogony of Hesiod as "one of the preparatory stages

34

Loew, Myth, 13. See F.M. Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973) 112-44, esp. 120. 36 Snell, The Discovery of the Mind, (n. 5 above), 191-245, Loew, Myth, 204-38 37 Loew, Myth, 216-17. 35

of the philosophy soon to come." 38 By including abstract forces such as Eros in the Theogony and Ens in the Works and Days among his divinities, Hesiod prepared the way for conceptual thinking, while he still thought in the genealogical categories of mythology. An analogous intermediate stage can be found in the wisdom literatures of the ancient Near East.39 In Egypt, Maat is a goddess, daughter of Re, but she can also be equated with law, justice, or primeval order. 40 In the Hebrew tradition, personified wisdom represents an intermediary stage between mythology and logic. Its abstract conceptual dimension is indicated by the name "wisdom" but it retains some of the dynamism of mythology by the use of personification. Both Maat and the Hebrew wisdom point to an underlying conception of a cosmic order which is essentially impersonal. 41 In Israelite wisdom Yahweh is the ultimate guarantor of this order but he does not interfere with its operation. In Klaus Koch's phrase, his role is one of "midwifery" in bringing acts and events to their natural consequences.4'2 The Wisdom of Solomon is obviously in continuity with the Hebrew wisdom tradition, 43 but it develops the cosmic character of wisdom and describes it in language which is more consistently conceptual and scientific. While Wisdom is still personified as a female who can be desired as a bride (8:2), it is more frequently described in objective terms and given a physical dimension which was lacking in the earlier books. While Sirach had spoken of wisdom 38

W. Jaeger, The Theology of the Early Greek Thinkers (Oxford: Clarendon, 1947) 14-15. ‫ ״נ‬Ibid., 16. 40 H. Brunncr, "Ägyptologie," Handbuch der Orientalistik (Leiden: Brill 1952) 1, sec. 2: 93; S. Morenz, Gott und Mensch im alten Ägypten (Leipzig: Koehler & Anchang, 1964) 66, 118, 133; H. H. Schmid, Wesen und Geschichte der Weisheit (BZAW 101; Berlin: Töpclmann, 1966) 17-20. 41 See H. Gese, Lehre und Wirklichkeit in der alten Weisheit (Tübingen: Mohr 1958) 33-44; H.H. Schmid, Gerechtigkeit als Weltordnung (Beiträge zur historischen Theologic, 40; Tübingen: Mohr, 1968); Schmid, Wesen und Geschichte der Weisheit, 144-68; von Rad, Wisdom in Israel, 144-76. 42 K. Koch, "Gibt es ein Vcrgeltungsdogma im Alten Testament" Zeitschrift far Theologie und Kirche 52 (1955) 1-42 (reprinted in K. Koch, ed., Um das Prinzip der Vergeltung in Religion und Recht des Alten Testaments [Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1972] 130-80; English translation: "Is There a Doctrine of Retribution in the Old Testament?" in J.L. Crenshaw, cd., Theodicy in the Old Testament [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983] 57-87). Koch explains such terms asylllm and hšyb in this sense. Koch's thesis has been disputed by Gesc (Lehre und Wirklichkeit, 60), who argues that Yahwism broke through the impersonal charactcr of this order to affirm the freedom of Yahweh. Gesc in turn, has been refuted by H.D. Preuss, "Das Gottesbild der älteren Weisheit Israels," Studies in the Religion of Ancient Israel (VTSup 23; Leiden: Brill, 1972) 117-45. 45 See Larcher, Études, 97-101.

"pitching its tent" (24: 8) in Israel, it showed no signs of a meta· physical theory of how this was possible. The Wisdom of Solomon, however, explains the indwelling of wisdom in the souls of the righteous in accordance with its cosmological conceptions of the physical universe. Wisdom is "more mobile than any motion" and "because of her pureness she pervades and penetrates all things" so she can "pass into holy souls" (7:27). Again, the physical world is given an autonomy in the Wisdom of Solomon that never appears in the earlier books. Nature fights for the righteous (15:7). This idea had several precedents in the mythological mode in the Hebrew Bible—the stars fought from heaven in Judg 5:20 and the sun stood still at Joshua J s bidding in Josh 10:12. However, these occurrences are singled out as miraculous. In the Wisdom of Solomon even miracles conform to regular natural laws.44 The importance of knowing the structure of the world is also more prominent here. In the earlier wisdom books it was implied in the encyclopedic interests of the sages, but here it is explicitly related to the wisdom that leads to God. History is now also included in the sphere of wisdom. The Hebrew wisdom book of Ben Sira already contained a list of examples of righteous men. The Wisdom of Solomon goes further by eliminating proper names and by attributing to wisdom a guiding role in the history of Israel. History, like the cosmos, is an illustration of the workings of wisdom. Finally, the effectiveness of wisdom is not limited to the empirical life of the individual. It also endures beyond death, because wisdom and righteousness are immortal and can make righteous people immortal, too. In all, then, the Wisdom of Solomon clearly goes beyond the earlier wisdom books by attempting to give a consistent conceptual and even scientific account of the world and of human destiny. The universe or cosmos is the context of all human experience, so even religious experience and hopes are expressed in terms which make cosmological sense. The increased prominence of the cosmos in religious concerns must be seen in the context of what A.J. Festugière has called the "Hellenistic mood." 45 The spread of cosmic religion, the expression of religious values in terms of the physical universe, was one of the constituent factors in that mood. 44

See Sweet (n. 27 above). A J . Festugière, Personal Religion among the Greeks (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1954) 37-52. 45

Cosmic religion, in turn, had various forms and resulted from various influences. One factor was the spread of Chaldean astronomy and astrology. The stars had always played a prominent part in the cosmic conviction of the Babylonians but, in the opinion of Franz Cumont, the development of scientific astronomy from the eighth century onward led to a virtually "new religion."46 The astral religion thenceforward identified with the Chaldeans laid far more explicit emphasis on the material universe, especially the stars, although it never completely abandoned the personal anthropomorphic gods, who were either identified with the stars or thought to dwell in them. 47 Chaldean astrology bound together history and cosmology by attempting to predict historical events from the movements of the stars. The popularity of these conceptions throughout the Near East is reflected in the oracles of Nechepso and Petosiris, from Egypt, in the second century BCE.4b Astrological predictions play no part in the Wisdom of Solomon, but it is noteworthy that the arrangement of the stars (astrôn theseis) is listed among the elements of Solomon's wisdom in 7:19. The Chaldean tradition is important, however, as it shows that Festugière's Hellenistic mood was not confined to the tradition of Greek philosophy but also had roots in the Semitic world. More directly relevant to the Wisdom of Solomon is the Greek tradition of cosmic religion which tried to integrate the scientific approach of the cosmologists with religious conceptions. Already in Plato, especially in the Timaeus and the Laws, we find a conceptual cosmological reflection on the universe which leads to the recognition of God as the "Soul of the Cosmos." 49 This tradition was developed by the Stoics. The Stoics were quite probably influenced by the astral religion of the Chaldeans, 50 but they integrated their borrowings into a philosophical system. The Stoic Logos is especially illuminating for the idea of wisdom in the Wisdom of Solomon. The Logos, or Pneuma, was a very fine fiery substance which "permeates and is transfused through the passive matter it organizes." It is at 46 F. Cumont, Astrology and Religion among the Greeks and Romans (New York: Dover Publications. 1960, reprint of 1912 cd.) 3-21. 47 On the astral religion of the Chaldeans, sec Diodorus Siculus 2:29-31. Also Philo, De Migratione Abrahae 32 (178-81), Quis Heres 20 (96-99). 4 ‫ יי‬See W. Κ roll, "Nechepso," in G. YVissowa and VV. Kroll, ed., Paulys RealEncydopädie der Classtehen Altertumsuwissenschaft (Stuttgart: Mctzler, 1935) 16: 2160-67. On astral religion in the Greek tradition see P. Boyancé, "La Religion astrale de Platon a Ciceron," Revue des Études Grecques 65(1952) 312-61. 49 Festugière, Personal Religion, 49. 50 M. Pohlenz, "Stoa und Semitismus," Neue Jahrbücher fiir Wissenschaft und Jugendbildung 2 (1926) 257-69; Die Stoa (2d ed.; Göttingen: Vandenhocck & Ruprecht, 1959) 1:106-8.

once Nature, God, and Reason. Human reason "literally and physically has a share in the Divine Nature." The ideal of the Stoic wise man is to put himself in harmony with this cosmic principle by living according to nature (or reason).51 The Stoics showed little interest in history as such, but they believed in the periodic destruction and renewal of all things. History and eschatology were ultimately understood in terms of the natural process of the cosmos.52 The human soul was not considered immortal by the earlier Stoics, although it was thought to survive the body for a time until it dissolved. However, later Stoicism found a place for "the idea of 'astral immortality' of the return of the souls of good men to the aethereal regions of the Upper Cosmos whence they came, where they spend a happy immortality contemplating the workings of Divine Reason." 53 This belief was part of a syncretistic development of Stoicism in the second and first centuries BCE, often associated with Posidonius. 54 In the words of A.H. Armstrong: These ideas fit very well into the common world-view which took shape in the last centuries BC and dominated later pagan thought, the view of the eternal cosmos, a single organism, ruled by a divine power residing in or manifesting itself through the bright fiery regions of the upper atmosphere, in the visible gods, the sun and the other heavenly bodies, with which divine power the highest parts of men's souls were naturally akin, so that they might hope to return after death to the aethereal regions, their true home. 55

The affinities between the Logos of the Stoics and Wisdom in the Wisdom of Solomon are obvious and have often been noted. 56 There is no doubt that the Jewish work was influenced by Stoic ideas and terminology. Yet there are also important differences—

51 A.H. Armstrong, An Introduction to Ancient Philosophy (London: Methuen, 1947) 122-29. See also Pohlenz, Die Stoa, 1:64-158. The Stoic texts are conveniendy collected in C J . de Vogel, Greek Philosophy (Leiden: Brill, 1959) 3:51-100. 52 Pohlenz, Die Stoa, 1: 75-81; de Vogel, Greek Philosophy, 3: 54-58. On cosmology und eschatology in the Hellenistic world (especially the doctrine of the "Great Year"), see further J.J. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (SBLDS 13; Missoula, Mont.: Soholars Press, 1974) 101-4. 53 Armstrong, An Introduction, 144; see de Vogel, Greek Philosophy, 3:96-97. 54 De Vogel attributes the doctrine of astral immortality to Posidonius but Armstrong disputes this. 55 Armstrong, An Introduction, 144. On astral immortality, see the summary discussion by M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1974), 1:197. Astral immortality was known in Greece as early as the fifth century BCE, but was not then associated with a physioal theory. 56 See Ziener, Die theologische Begriffsprache, 142-50; J.A.F. Gregg, The Wisdom of Solomon (Cambridge Bible for Schools snd Colleges, 30; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1909) xvii, Larcher, Études, 367-76.

most obviously the insistence on a transcendent God in the Wisdom of Solomon as opposed to the immanent divinity of the Stoics. Pseudo-Solomon drew freely on various philosophical sources, and in fact the Stoicism of the period was itself syncretistic and had embodied elements of other systems, especially Platonism.57 The eclecticism of the Wisdom of Solomon was in keeping with the mood of the age. The relation of the book to Stoicism is limited, then, but nevertheless significant. Both insist that divinity is encountered in and through the universe. In both, history and eschatology are functions of the structure of the universe, and the righteous individual is the wise one who understands that structure and conforms to it. There is clear continuity between the Wisdom of Solomon and earlier Hebrew wisdom, but precisely at those points where Pseudo Solomon goes beyond his predecessors, in stressing the role of the cosmos as the medium between God and humanity, he is in line with at least one branch of Hellenistic thought. The Affinities and Differences between Wisdom and Apocalypticism When we turn now to the Jewish apocalypses we find considerable areas of affinity with the hellenized wisdom of the Wisdom of Solomon. The affinities are grounded in the religious significance of the cosmos. History and eschatology are related to the structure of the universe and salvation is attained by understanding that structure and adapting to it in righteousness. This shared perspective does not eliminate the very real and significant differences between them, but it does constitute a common bond which distinguishes both the Hellenistic wisdom book and the apocalypses from their earlier biblical precedents in wisdom and prophecy. Any comparison of wisdom and apocalypticism in the Jewish tradition must start from the fact that the apocalypses are presented as one kind of wisdom. Daniel, Enoch, Ezra, and Baruch were all sages rather than prophets. 58 The heroes of the book of Daniel were maškîlím, wise teachers. In the Enoch literature and Qumran scrolls great emphasis is laid on the understanding of "mysteries."59 In Daniel the knowledge of the maškîlîm seems to refer primarily to the 57 Armstrong, An Introduction, 140-47: "it seems quite possible that there was less which was genuinely Platonic in the thought of the 'Platonist' Antiochus than in that of the Stoic Posidonius." 59 Von Rad, Theologie, 2: 316. 59 See R.E. Brown, The Semitic Background of the Term "Mystery" in the New Testament (Facet Books, Biblical Scries, 21; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1968)12-30. On wisdom material at Qumran, see J.C. Lebram, "Die Theologie der späten Chokma und häretisches Judentum," ZA I f 77 (1965) 202-11.

eschatological denouement of the crisis under Antiochus Epiphanes, but it also includes revelation about the angelic world, in the present. 60 In other apocalyptic writings cosmological mysteries are explicidy included. Enoch discourses at length on "everything that takes place in heaven" and "the earth, and all things that take place on it from first to last" (1 Enoch 2:1-2). Large sections of the book are taken up with heavenly topography and one whole section, the book of the heavenly luminaries, is devoted to the movements of the stars. The mysteries of Qumran include the heavenly lights according to their mysterious [laws], the stars according to the paths [which they follow]...the providential reservoirs according to their functions [and snow and hailstones] according to their mysterious [laws] ( 1 Q H 1:11-12).

Cosmic mysteries are inevitably prominent in apocalypses such as 3 Baruch or 2 Enoch which describe the visionary's journey through the heavens. The apocalyptic determinism of history, stressed by von Rad and others,61 is based on the assumption that the course of events is built into the structure of the universe. In the Qumran Hodayot (1:21-25): The world is graven before Thee with the graving tool of the reminder for all the unending seasons together with the cycles of the number of everlasting years with all their times.

In 4 Ezra 5:50-55 the imminence of the end is assured by the fact that "creation is already grown old, and is already past the strength of youth": history comes to an end by a cosmological necessity. In the Enochic "book of the heavenly luminaries" (80: 6) the eschatological upheavals are accompanied, if not caused, by the transgressjon of the chiefs of the stars. Cosmological data are also direcdy relevant to the eschatology of the individual. Enoch's tour of the heavens pays special attention to the "dwelling places of the holy and the resting places of the righteous" (39:4) or the places that "have been created for this very purpose that the spirits of the souls of the dead should assemble therein" (22:3). The cosmology of Enoch is designed to show that the afterlife is provided for in the structure of the universe. The motif of astral immortality which we have noted in the Hellenistic world finds a place in the apocalypses too: 60 See J J . Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel (Harvard Semitic Monographs 16; Missoula, Mont.: Soholars Press, 1977) chap. 3. 61 Von Rad, Theologie, 2:317. On apocalypdc determinism see Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision, chap. 3.

For in the heights of that world shall they dwell, and they shall be made like unto the angels, and be made equal to the stars" (2 Bar 51:9),

or ye shall shine as the lights of heaven...and the portals of heaven shall be opened to you...for ye shall become companions of the hosts of heaven (1 Enoch 104:2, 6).62

We have seen above that Jewish wisdom in the Hellenistic age stood in continuity with the older biblical wisdom but also differed from it, precisely in its emphasis on the role of the cosmos. Similarly, the Jewish apocalypses show many important links with biblical prophecy. However, the interest of the apocalypses in cosmological data has baffled scholars who approach this material only against the background of biblical prophecy. 63 Despite the manifold points of continuity with prophecy, the apocalyptic understanding of revelation and the world is fundamentally different. This is shown especially in the emphasis on wisdom and understanding which we find in the apocalypses. A prophet such as Amos called on his hearers to obey the word of the Lord. The judgment which he threatened could on occasion be averted by obedience. By contrast, the external course of events is fixed in the apocalypses. The hearer can only understand and adapt. While understanding presumably leads to obedience (to the Law) there is a significant shift in emphasis from the direct moral imperative to the plea for understanding. 64 Since the apocalypses presume that the course of history is built into the structure of the universe, cosmology naturally acquires a new importance. Since apocalyptic eschatology lays great stress on personal afterlife and often associates it with the stars or angels,65 the geography of the heavens acquired relevance for salvation in a way that was lacking in prophecy. In the Jewish apocalypses, then, history and eschatology can be understood in terms of the physical cosmos to a far greater extent than in biblical prophecy. Understanding rather than obedience is 62

Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1:197. See also Dan. 12:2 and Testament (Assumption) of Moses 10:9 where astral imagery is used and the association with the angelic host is very probably implied. Sec J.J. Collins, "Apocalyptic Eschatology as the Transcendcncc of Death," CBQ,36 (1974): 21-43. 63 M. Stone, "Lists of Revealed Things in Jewish Apocalyptic," in Magnalia Dei: G. Ernest Wright In Memoriam (Garden City: Doubleday, 1976) has drawn attention to this problem in recent scholarship. 64 See Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision, chap. 3. The shift in emphasis can already bc seen in postexilic prophecy (e.g., Ezek. 38, 2 Isaiah). On the transitional period after the exile which saw the decline of prophecy and the emergence of some apocalyptic tendencies, sec P.D. Hanson, The Daum of Apocalyptic (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975). 65 See Collins, "Apocalyptic Eschatology."

the key to salvation because God does not address humanity directly but through the fixed order of cosmos and history which he allows to follow its own course. T h e angelic revelations interpret that order. They do not interrupt it. Those who understand and adapt to the order in righteousness transcend death, often by sharing the life of the angels or the stars. These elements of the apocalyptic world view are also found in the Wisdom of Solomon, in the syncretisric philosophy of late Hellenism, as described by Armstrong, and more broadly, in the Hellenistic mood described by Festugière. So the Wisdom of Solomon is able to use some motifs drawn direcdy from apocalyptic tradition. The "mysteries of God" refer to the eschatological "prize for blameless souls" (1: 22) and the righteous dead are "numbered among the sons of God." 66 At the same time the book can use Platonic language on the immortality of the soul and echo the Stoics on the physical nature of cosmic wisdom.67 Underlying this fusion of traditions was the common conviction of the Hellenistic age that the wise individual who understands the true structure of the universe is also the righteous one who can attain immortality. The conviction that the experience of God and even eschatology is mediated through the cosmic order constitutes the common ground of wisdom and apocalypticism. This common ground was shared by other movements in the Hellenistic age and cannot be adequately explained by the influence of wisdom traditions on apocalypticism or vice versa. 68 In fact, despite their common ground, wisdom (as found in the Wisdom of Solomon) and apocalypticism diverge from each other in very important respects.

66 See Ruppert, Der leidende Gerechte 70-105; G.W. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, Immortality and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism (Harvard Theological Studies 26; Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press, 1972) 58-62. 67 A. Dupont-Sommer, "De l'immortalité astrale dans la 'Sagesse de Salomon' (3:7)," Revue des Études Grecques 62 (1949) 80-86, has argued that Wis Sol. 3:7 (emended) refers to astral immortality, but his opinion is refuted by Larcher, Études, 319, η. 2. 68 The Hellenistic mood cannot be explained in terms of the influence of one movement on another. Jewish apocalypticism shows no signs of philosophioal influence and the analogies with Chaldean astral religion are very imprecise. Rather we should look to the common historical and sociological factors which gave rise to the various movements e.g., the breakup of the polis in the west and the spread of Hellenism in the Near East. Such an inquiry lies beyond the scope of this essay. See J J . Collins, "Jewish Apocalyptic against its Hellenistic Near Eastern Environment," BASOR 220 (1975) 27-36; J.Z. Smith, "Native Cults in the Hellenistic Period," History of Religions 11 (1971) 236-49; M.P. Nilsson, Geschichte der griechischen Religion (2d ed.; Munich: Beck, 1961) 2:293; H. Jonas, The Gnostic Religion (2d ed.; Boston: Beacon Press, 1963) 3-23, 241-65.

First, there is an obvious difference in mode. The Wisdom of Solomon is basically written in the conceptual mode of philosophy and science. True, this mode is not perfectly maintained. Traces of mythological conceptions are found—for example, in the "sons of God" or "holy ones" of Wis Sol 5:5, and the Word of God which leaps from heaven in 18:15. However, the persistent attempts of the book to give a rationally acceptable account of the indwelling of wisdom or of the miraculous renewal of the earth, and the use of the personified concept "wisdom" rather than a fully personal figure such as an angel, all reflect an approach to reality which at least aspires to conceptual, philosophical thinking. By contrast, the apocalypses are written in an unequivocally mythological mode. Their world is peopled by supernatural persons, good and fallen angels. If the righteous may be said to be like the stars after death, we are constantly reminded that the stars are identical with the angelic host. Even the most "scientific" apocalypse, the "book of the heavenly luminaries" still identifies the leading stars by angelic names in chapter 82. There is no attempt in the apocalypses to provide a metaphysical theory of wisdom or to explain how the soul becomes immortal. While the apocalypses share the "cosmological conviction," they are closer to the thought patterns of the ancient mythologies than to philosophy or scientific cosmology.69 This difference in mode of expression might be considered a matter of idiom which does not imply any deep-lying divergence in world view. A second contrast between wisdom and the apocalypses is, therefore, more significant. This concerns the manner in which wisdom is acquired. In both types of writing, wisdom is a gift of God. When Solomon prays for wisdom, however, what he is given is an ability to understand. His knowledge follows from the use of his natural reasoning. By contrast the angelic revelations in the apocalypses give specific knowledge, in the form of visions and prophecies of particular events or heavenly realities. While sapiential revelation is immanent, channeled through the natural human processes of thought, apocalyptic revelation is ecstatic, and conferred from outside.70 69 On the use of ancient mythological patterns in apocalyptic writings, sec Hanson, Daum, 292-324; "Zcchariah 9 and the Recapitulation of an Ancient Ritual Pattern," JBL 92 (1973): 37-69; Collins, Apocalyptic Vision, chap. 4; and especially A. Yarbro Collins, The Combat Myth in the Book of Revelation (Harvard Dissertations in Religion, 9; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press 1976). The paradigmatic thinking noted by Smith, "Wisdom and Apocalyptic" (n. 4 above), is applied in the apocalypses especially to mythic paradigms. Such ecstatic revelation was also widespread in the Hellenistic world and reflects an aspect of the Hellenistic mood different from the philosophical strand found in Stoicism (see Hengel ,Judaism and Hellenism, 1:210-18).

The discontinuity between apocalyptic revelation and the normal cognitive process corresponds to the discontinuity of apocalyptic salvation with the normal processes of the world. The idea of personal immortality in the Wisdom of Solomon has much in common with that found in apocalyptic writings. In Wisd. of Sol. 5:5 the assertion that the righteous is numbered among the sons of God or the "saints" reflects the frequent apocalyptic hope for an afterlife with the angels. In both Wisdom and the apocalypses immortality is attained by the wise, who act in righteousness. However, in the Wisdom of Solomon the wisdom and righteousness which bring immortality are built into the structure of the universe and constitute the order which pervades both heaven and earth. 71 Immortality is therefore in unbroken continuity with the order of this world. In fact, the righteous only "seemed to have died" (3:2). In the apocalypses, by contrast, the wisdom and righteousness which bring immortality are not prevalent on earth. The earthly world is characterized by the absence of cosmic order and stands in sharp discontinuity with both the heavenly world and the world to come. The Wisdom of Solomon claims explicitly that the generative forces of the world preserve life and that there is no kingdom of Hades on earth (1:14). In the apocalyptic writings, by contrast, the eschatological crisis is precipitated precisely by the fact that the earth is in the grip of infernal forces—the beasts from the sea in Daniel and the Apocalypse ofJohn, Belial in the Qumran scrolls. In 4 Ezra the generative forces of the world are past their youth and in decline. The salvation which follows is a new creation, distinguished from the old by seven days of primeval silence. The vision of a new heaven and a new earth is one of the most powerful apocalyptic evocations of salvation.72 The Wisdom of Solomon also speaks of a new creation insofar as "the whole creation in its nature was fashioned anew/' This, however, was in the past and brought about within the natural processes by the rearrangement of the elements. The salvation of the world does not require its replacement by a new order but lies in the proper working of its natural process and specifically in the multitude of the wise.73 71 R.J. Taylor, "The Eschatological Meaning of Life and Death in the Book of Wisdom 1-5," Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 42 (1966) 72-137, insists that immortality in Wisdom is a gift of God, but we must remember that here as in the earlier Wisdom literature, the gift of God is mediated through a cosmic order and so admits of a "natural" explanation. 72 Note esp. Rev. 21:1; cf. Isa 65:17; 66:22. 73 Wis Sol. 6:24. The argument of G. Kuhn ("Beitrage zur Erklärung des Buches der Weisheit," ^ / W 28 [1929]: 334-41) that Wisdom implies a future renewal of the world is unconvincing.

The contrast between wisdom and apocalypticism is strikingly illustrated in the few apocalyptic passages which refer to personified wisdom. An enigmatic fragment in 1 Enoch 42 describes how wisdom sought a dwelling place among men but found none, and so she "returned to her place and took her seat among the angels." While the relation of this passage to its context is obscure, the attitude expressed is typically apocalyptic. Wisdom and order are not found on earth, but only in the angelic world. Apocalyptic wisdom stands in direct contrast to the wisdom of Proverbs, whose delight is to be with the sons of men, and to Sirach, where wisdom finds a home in Israel. The Jewish sapiential tradition is based on the premise that wisdom can be found in all creation. The apocalyptic premise is that the world is in a state of anomie. Wisdom has retired to heaven and can be known only by heavenly revelations.74 The experience of anomie and alienation was increasingly widespread in the Hellenistic and Roman periods, and might even be said to constitute part of the "Hellenistic mood." The cosmic religion of the Hellenistic age had various implications. While the strong sense of cosmic order which typified the Stoics never died out there is also ample evidence that, in the words ofJ.Z. Smith, During the hellenistic period, there was a 'radical revaluation' (Hans Jonas's phrase) of this all-pervasive 'cosmological conviction,' a revaluation which has led classicists such as Gilbert Murray to speak of a 'failure of nerve,' E.R. Dodds to describe the period as 'an age of anxiety,' and Eric Voegelin to formulate a shift from a , compact experience of the cosmos' to 'a differentiated experience of existential tension.' 75

The "cosmic paranoia" 76 of late antiquity had various forms, many of which were much more acute than Jewish apocalypticism, where the world was still, at least ultimately, controlled by a good God. 77 It

74 The Hebrew wisdom book which has greatest affinities with apooalypticism, the Book ofJob, also arises out of a failure to find order and justice in the world. In Job 28:13, man docs not know the way to wisdom. Consequently Job falls back on a supernatural revelation in the mythological mode where God speaks from a storm cloud and appeals to cosmogonie myth. Job differs from the apocalypses and from the Wisdom of Solomon in its lack of any future eschatology (see Cross, Canaanite Myth, 343-46). 75 J.Z. Smith, "Birth Upside Down or Right Side Up?" History of Religions 9(1970) 295. 76 Ibid. 77 J.Z. Smith ("A Pearl of Great Prioc and a Cargo of Yams—A Study in Situational Incongmity," History of Religions 16 [1976]: 1-19) sees a move "from the apocalyptic pattern that the wrong king is on the throne, the cosmos will thereby bc destroyed and the right god will either restore proper kingship (his terrestrial

is, however, obvious that the "cosmic conviction" of the Hellenistie age contained divergent strands, some of which, like Stoicism and Jewish wisdom insisted that cosmic order embraced the earth, while others, including Jewish apocalypticism, held that wisdom had fled to the heavenly regions and the earth, at least temporarily, was ruled by hostile forces. Conclusion Our examination of the affinities between Jewish apocalypticism and the hellenized Wisdom of Solomon has revealed important areas of both similarity and divergence. Wisdom and apocalypticism most obviously differ in their modes of presentation: wisdom basically used the reflective, conceptual language of philosophy; apocalypticism, the personified language of mythology. More significandy, wisdom found salvation within the processes of nature and affirmed the principle of order in all creation, while apocalypticism posited a sharp break between the heavenly regions and the earthly, or between the present world and the world to come, and rejected the present world order. These differences are important and show that apocalypticism and wisdom embody different perspectives within Judaism, which must be carefully distinguished. Nevertheless, despite the significant differences, we have argued that Jewish wisdom and apocalypticism share significant features which disdnguish them both from their biblical precedents. They share a "cosmological conviction" by which the way to salvation lies in understanding the structure of the universe and adapting to it. This conviction that God's dealings with humanity are mediated through the cosmos is distinctly different from the presuppositions of biblical prophecy, which calls not for understanding, but for obedience to the word of the Lord. The earlier Hebrew wisdom shares the emphasis on understanding but does not yet relate history and eschatology to cosmology in the explicit manner found in the Wisdom of Solomon. The integration of eschatological and other religious beliefs with the cosmological understanding of the universe was a dominant characteristic of the Hellenistic age, which is evident in a broad spectrum of forms from the philosophy of the Stoics to

counterpart) or will assume kingship himself, to the gnostic pattern that if the wrong king is sitting on the throne then his heavenly counterpart must likewise be the wrong god." Both apocalyptic and gnostic patterns reflect a "situational incongruity"—that the world is out of joint.

the astrology of the Chaldeans. The Jewish literature of the period shared that characteristic, in various ways. The explanation of the common emphasis on the cosmos which Jewish apocalypticism shares with the Wisdom of Solomon and which distinguishes both from the earlier biblical tradition must be sought in their common environment in the Hellenistic age.

CHAPTER TWENTY

T H E SAGE IN T H E APOCALYPTIC AND PSEUDEPIGRAPHIC LITERATURE

In the second volume of his Old Testament Theology Gerhard von Rad advanced the controversial thesis that the Jewish apocalyptic literature was the child of wisdom rather than of prophecy. 1 This proposal has been widely criticized and is certainly one-sided, 2 but it has the merit of drawing attention to some hitherto neglected aspects of the apocalyptic books. Not least among these is the fact that the figures to whom the major apocalypses are ascribed, Enoch, Daniel, Ezra, Baruch, are sages or scribes. Daniel came to be regarded as a prophet already in antiquity (Matt 24:15; Josephus, Antiquities 10:11:7) but in the Hebrew Bible he is presented as a maskîl and included among the wise men of Babylon (Dan 2:13).3 There is here a certain blurring of the distinction between sage and prophet, and the apocalyptic sages bear greater resemblance to Ezekiel or Zechariah than to Sirach or Ecclesiastes, but they are sages nonetheless. It may fairly be argued that the earliest apocalypses of Enoch and Daniel mark the emergence of a new ideal of sage in Judaism. The Figure of Enoch Since the publication of the Aramaic fragments from Qumran in 1976,4 it is generally acknowledged that the earliest parts of I Enoch were composed before the Maccabean revolt and that at least their literary sources go back to the third century BCE.5 A certain amount 1 G. von Rad, Theologie des Alten Testaments (5th ed.; Munich: Kaiser, 1968) 31638. For the English translation of an earlier edition see Old Testament Theology (New York: Harper & Row, 1967), 2:301-15. 2 See the recent assessments by M. Knibb, "Prophecy and the Emergence of the Jewish Apocalypses," Israel's Prophetic Tradition: Essays in Honour of Peter R. Ackroyd (ed. R. Coggins, A. Phillips, and M. Knibb; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982) 165-69: M.E. Stone, "Apocalyptic literature," in idem, ed., Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period ( Compendia Rerum ludaicarum ad Novum Tcstamentum 2.2; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 388-89; and my The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1984) 17. 3 See the reflections of K. Koch, "Is Daniel also among the Prophets?" Interpretation 39(1985) 117-30. 4 J.T. Milik, The Books of Enoch (Oxford: Clarendon, 1976). 5 M.E. Stone, Scriptures, Sects, and Visions (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980) 27-47. Milik puts the earliest parts of the corpus several centuries earlier.

of speculation on the figure of Enoch is presupposed already in the Ρ source in Genesis but not the full legend of Enoch as we find it in 1 Enochs The primary narrative about Enoch is found in the first section of the book, commonly called the Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1-36), where Enoch is introduced abruptly in chap. 12: And before everything Enoch had been hidden and none of the sons of men knew where he was hidden or where he was, or what had happened. And all his doings were with the Holy Ones and with the Watchers in his days. And I, Enoch, was blessing the Great Lord and the King of Eternity and behold the Watchers called to me, Enoch the scribe, and said to me: "Enoch, scribe of righteousness, go, inform the Watchers of heaven who have left the high heaven... (/ Enoch 12:1-4)

Enoch, then, is introduced initially in the role of scribe, and his function is one of intermediary between the angels in heaven and their fallen brethren on earth. After he has delivered his message, the Watchers on earth asked me to write out for them the record of a petition that they might receive forgiveness, and to take the record of their petirion up to the Lord in heaven. For they themselves were not able from then on to speak, and they did not raise their eyes to heaven out of shame for the sins for which they had been condemned. And then I wrote out the record of their petition and their supplication in regard to their spirits and the deeds of each one of them, and in regard to what they asked, that they should obtain absolution and forbearance. (7 Enoch 13:44)

Thus far Enoch is apparently modelled on the familiar figure of the scribe, whose skill in writing gives him importance not only in communication but also in legal proceedings. Another skill is attributed to him in the "Book of the Giants," which is not included in the Ethiopie manuscripts of 1 Enoch but is attested as part of the Enochic writings at Qumran, in manuscripts from the first century BCE.7 T h e r e the giants seek the services of Enoch, "the scribe of distinction," to interpret a dream. The role of dream interpreter provides an interesting association of Enoch with Daniel, and may also be taken to reflect the actual practice of a class of sages in the ancient Near East.

6

T h e link between Enoch and the fallen angels is not made in Genesis. K. Beyer, Die aramäischen Texte vom Toten Meer (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1984) 258-68; J.A. Fitzmycr and D.J. Harrington, A Manual of Palestinian Aramaic Texts (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1978) 68-79. 7

Enoch, however, is no ordinary scribe since he carries communications between heaven and earth. As such he is also a visionary and even has some of the characteristics of a shaman. 8 In 1 Enoch 13:7-8 he induces a dream by sitting by the waters of Dan, southwest of Hermon, and reading the petition of the Watchers until he falls asleep. In 14:9 he ascends to heaven in his vision. If the sage of Ben Sira travels through the lands of foreign nations (Sir 38:4), Enoch travels to the ends of the earth, with an angelic guide, and sees such inaccessible places as the prison of the host of heaven (18:14), the abodes of the dead (chap. 22), the valley of judgment (chap. 27), and the garden of righteousness (chap. 32). From all of this he is necessarily an expert on cosmology. Similarly, in the "Astronomical Book" (1 Enoch 72-82) he is an expert on the movements of the stars, not by the fallible process of human observation, but because "Uriel, the holy angel who was with me and is their leader, showed me" (72:1). The sources of his knowledge are succinctly summarized in the Apocalypse of Weeks (1 Enoch 93:2): "That which appeared to me in the heavenly vision, and I know from the words of the holy angels and understand from the tablets of heaven"—in short, his wisdom is derived from heavenly revelation. The claims made for Enoch go far beyond the analogies with ancient Near Eastern scribes. T o a great extent he is modelled on the mythological figure of Enmeduranki, founder of the bārû guild of diviners and omen interpreters. 9 The correspondences are already in evidence in Genesis. Enoch is placed seventh from creation in the Ρ source (Gen 5:21-24). Enmeduranki is the seventh king in several antediluvian king lists. The age of Enoch, 365 years, suggests an association with the solar year. Enmeduranki is favored by the sun god Shamash, who brings him into his presence. Enmeduranki is not the only model for Enoch in Genesis: the translation of Enoch to the divine realm corresponds rather to the Mesopotamian flood hero Utnapishtim. Already by the time the Priestly source was written, however, Enoch was being developed as a Jewish counterpart to the primeval heroes of Mesopotamian myth. 10 The most natural Sitz im Leben for this development was in the eastern Diaspora. 8 S. Niditch, "The Visionary," in J.J. Collins and G.W. Nickelsburg, ed. Ideal Figures in Ancient Judaism ( Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1980) 153-79. 9 See especially J . VanderKam, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition (CBQ.MS 16; Washington: Catholic Biblical Association, 1984) 23-51. VanderKam also discusses other proposed Mesopotamian models. 10 The assimiladon ofJewish heroes to pagan prototypes flourished especially in Hellenistic Judaism. See my Between Athens and Jerusalem: Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (New York: Crossroad, 1983) 32-43.

Genesis gives no hint of the role of Enoch as revealer, which becomes crucially important in 1 Enoch. This role is, however, illuminated by the analogy with Enmeduranki. A fragmentary cuneiform text describes how the gods Shamash and Adad brought Enmeduranki into their assembly and "showed him how to observe oil on water, a mystery of Anu, [Enlil and Ea], they gave him the tablet of the gods, the liver, a secret of heaven and [underworld]." 11 He then transmitted this knowledge to the bārû guild. Enoch too is taken into the heavenly council and shown the tablets of heaven. While the Jewish text does not pick up the Babylonian methods of divination, Enoch corresponds to Enmeduranki insofar as he is a primeval archetypal mediator of revelation. Like Enmeduranki, Enoch is a mythical figure. The writings attributed to him are pseudepigraphs. The phenomenon of pseudepigraphy was widespread in the Hellenistic period, and is not adequately explained by any one function. 12 The antiquity of Enoch presumably lent authority to the apocalypses, and permitted them to present an overview of history in the guise of prophecy. It is also likely that the pseudonym had social implications. The Babylonian diviners were regarded as "offspring of Enmeduranki." The books of Enoch often speak of a class of the "righteous and chosen" and Enoch, the righteous scribe, must be considered their prototype. We know regrettably little about this Enochic group. We do not know whether they induced dreams or practiced heavenly ascents, but it is at least clear that they thought about these things. It is also clear that they speculated on cosmology and on the movements of the stars, regarded dreams as valid media of revelation and believed that the course of history and eschatology was inscribed on the tablets of heaven. They were, or at least included in their number, scribes who were familiar with a wide range of ancient lore and who wrote books in the name of Enoch. It is attractive to suppose that they regarded Enoch's ascent as a paradigm for their own mystical experiences, but this must, of course, remain a hypothesis.13 It is noteworthy that belief in reward and punishment after death first appears in Judaism

11

W.G. Lambert, "Enmeduranki and Related Matters," JCS 21 (1967) 132. B.M. Metzger, "Literary Forgeries and Canonical Pscudcpigrapha," JBL 91 (1972) 3-24; W. Speyer, Die literarische Fälschung im heidnischen und christlichen Altertum: Ein Versuch ihrer Deutung (Munich: Beck, 1971); K. von Fritz, Pseudopythagorica, Lettres de Platon, Littérature Pseudepigraphe Juive (Entretiens sur l'antiquité classique 18, pseudepigrapha 1; Geneva: Hardt, 1972). " See M. Himmelfarb, "From Prophecy to Apocalypse: The Book of the Watchers and Tours of Heaven," in A. Green, ed., Jewish Spirituality: From the Bible through the Middle Ages (World Spirituality 13; New York: Crossroad, 1986) 153-54. 12

in books attributed to Enoch, who was himself believed to have been taken up alive to God. Despite the influence of Enmeduranki on the figure of Enoch, the Jewish sages who produced the Enochic literature were by no means diviners of the Babylonian type.14 Rather they represented a Jewish alternative to the diviners.15 They also claimed to know divine mysteries and boasted of an ancient prototype who had ascended to heaven. They were influenced by their Babylonian counterparts in some respects—their high regard for dreams, their interest in the stars and in the tablets of heaven. In accordance with Jewish tradition, they rejected most methods of divination and omenseeking. What one finds in the Enochic apocalypses is ultimately a new phenomenon, which draws motifs and patterns from many sources, both pagan and biblical, but which cannot be adequately understood as the sum of its sources. Apocalyptic wisdom continues to share some assumptions with Babylonian divination, which were also widespread in the Hellenistic world. 16 It is wisdom encoded in mysterious signs, not the straightforward, empirical wisdom of Proverbs and Sirach, and it carries with it the implication that the course of history has been determined on the heavenly tablets.17 For the decoding of these mysteries, however, the Jewish sages relied not primarily on divinatory techniques but on what they believed to be divine revelation. The Figure of Daniel The analogies with Enmeduranki suggest that the figure of Enoch was originally developed in the eastern Diaspora, although the place of composition of the earliest extant Enochic writings remains quite uncertain. One encounters a similar situation in the Book of Daniel. The stories in Daniel 1-6 are explicitly set in Babylon, where Daniel and his companions are trained as professional courtiers. It does not, of course, automatically follow that the stories were composed in 14 VanderKam, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition, 62, notes the dissimilarity between the literature of divination and the apocalypses. 15 Compare the polemic against Babylonian divination in Second Isaiah (Isa 44:25-26, 47:13) and the contrast between Daniel and the wise men of Babylon in Daniel 1-6. See further my essay, "The Place of Apocalypdcism in the Religion of Israel," in P.D. Miller, P.D. Hanson, and S.D. McBride, ed., Ancient Israelite Religion: Essays in Honor of Frank Moore Cross (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987) 543-51. 16 Compare my remarks in , Jewish Apocalyptic against Its Hellenistic Near Eastern Environment," BASOR 220 (1975) 27-36. 17 H.P. Müller, "Mantische Weisheit und Apokalyptik," Congress Volume: Uppsala 1971 (VTSup 22; Leiden: Brill, 1972) 268-93, has aptly named this kind of wisdom "mantic wisdom."

Babylon, but the Babylonian setting is most easily explained if at least the underlying tradition originated there. 18 This hypothesis is strengthened by the observation that Babylonian lore is reflected, however inaccurately, in the stories—for example, the legend about Nabonidus in Daniel 4, and the name of Belshazzar in Daniel 5. Unlike Enoch, Daniel is set in postdiluvian history and lives out his career on earth. He can therefore more easily serve as a model to be imitated. He is cast in a quite specific institutional role as courtier. He receives an education in "the letters and language of the Chaldeans" (Dan 1:4) and is thereafter numbered among "the wise men of Babylon" (2:12-13), together with the "magicians, enchanters, sorcerers, and Chaldeans" (2:2). The duties of this class include the interpretation of the king's dreams. When Daniel is successful at this task he is promoted to high administrative office. There is an obvious parallel between Daniel and the earlier biblical figure of Joseph, but the later stories cannot be explained as a midrash on the Genesis text. Both the Joseph and the Daniel stories belong to a broader genre of court tales, which reflect the similarity in court structures from Egypt to Babylon.19 While the stories in Daniel 1-6 are obviously legendary, the institutional setting is not incongruous. The argument of W.L. Humphreys that these stories propose "a lifestyle for Diaspora" is convincing, and has been widely accepted. 20 Within the Babylonian setting, Daniel is distinguished at once by his loyalty to the successive monarchs and his fidelity to Jewish law. Not only is it possible to observe the kosher laws at the royal court, but those who do so outshine their colleagues both in physical appearance and in wisdom. Not only do Daniel and his companions escape punishment for refusing to participate in idolatry, but they ultimately win the respect of the king and promotion in his administration. The stories address the inevitable tension between the particularism ofJewish law and the requirements of serving a pagan ruler and affirm that it can be overcome by the power of God. The

IB

See further my Daniel; With an Introduction to Apocalyptic Literature (FOTL 20; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984) 34-36. For a different approach sec J.G. Gammie, "The Classification, Stages of Growth, and Changing Intentions in the Book of Daniel," JBL 95 (1976) 196-202, who sets the composition of the talcs in Jerusalem in the reign of Ptolemy IV Philopator (221 -204 BCE). 19 The genre has most recently been studied by L. Wills, "The Court Legend in Post-Exilic Judaism" (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 1987, later published as The Jew in the Court of the Foreign King [Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990]). 20 W.L. Humphreys, "A Life-Style for Diaspora: A Study of the Talcs of Esther and Daniel," JBL 92 (1973) 211-23.

message of these tales was most immediately relevant to Jews who worked, in whatever capacity, in the service of foreign governments, and most directly relevant to Jews who served at a royal court. Their relevance was not, of course, restricted to such people. There was also a broader message that true wisdom was founded on fidelity to the God who "gives wisdom to the wise and knowledge to those who have understanding" (2:21). Wisdom comes by revelation from the true God. Prayer and piety are ultimately more important than the technical training of the Chaldeans. In Dan 1:4, Daniel and his companions are described as maškîlîm b'kol hokmäh (NRSV: "versed in every branch of knowledge"). In the last section of the book (11:33, 35; 12:3) maskîlîm is the technical name for the wise Jews who remain faithful at the time of the Maccabean revolt, some of whom are martyred but who are rewarded by exaltation after the resurrection. It is widely recognized that these later chapters (7-12) come from a different situation than the tales in chaps. 1-6. The later chapters clearly focus on the persecution of the Jews by Antiochus Epiphanes in 168-164 BCE While some of the stories in chaps. 1-6 were relevant to that situation, none of them can be shown to have been composed with it in mind. The tales, then, must be regarded as older tradition taken up by the author of chaps. 7-12 in the Maccabean era. The appropriation of the epithet maskîlîm as a label for the heroes of the Maccabean period and the choice of Daniel as pseudonym suggests that the author of chaps. 7-12 wanted to affirm continuity with the heroes of the tales. Comparison and contrast between the two halves of the book provide some interesting insight into the development of the figure of the sage in the Danielic tradition. While Daniel is presumably still a courtier in chaps. 7-12 he is no longer shown to function in that setting. Rather than interpret dreams and signs for a king, he becomes himself the recipient of revelation, which is interpreted to him by an angel. These chapters are no longer concerned with the problems of a career in foreign service. Instead they are concerned with world history and the survival of the Jewish people. Daniel does not address the Gentile king about these matters, but is caught up in his personal communion with the heavenly world. Ultimately the Book of Daniel holds out the hope that the faithful sages will be elevated to the stars, to join the heavenly host after death. Martin Buber contrasted the apocalyptic writer with the prophet on the issue of his involvement in this world: The prophet addresses persons...to recognize their situation's demand for decision and to act accordingly. The apocalyptic writer has no

a u d i e n c e t u r n e d towards him; he speaks into his notebook. 2 1

One can see how Buber arrived at this assessment if one looks only at the pseudepigraphic figure of Daniel. The apocalyptic writer, however, may be more directly represented in the brief account of the maškîlîm in chap. 11, who do indeed address persons "to recognize their situation's demand for decision and to act accordingly." There does, however, appear to be a change in institutional setting over against the older tales. There is no reason to think that the maskilîm worked in foreign service. Their mission was to the Jewish public, to make many understand (11:33). They were apparently teachers, but we are unfortunately uninformed about their social organization. The maskilîm of Daniel are often identified with the Hasidim who are mentioned in the books of Maccabees. 22 The Hasidim are described as "mighty warriors of Israel" (1 Macc 2:42), supporters of Judas Maccabeus (2 Macc 14:6), who were the first to seek peace when Alcimus became high priest (1 Macc 7:13). They are probably to be identified with the company of scribes (synag5gē grammateön) who came to Alcimus (1 Macc 7:12). Some modern scholars have also credited them with the composition of the Enochic literature. In fact we know very little about these Hasidim. We are given no account of their beliefs, and so do not know whether they were, or included, apocalyptic visionaries. Their militant character is compatible with some of the Enochic literature, but seems incongruent with the maškîlîm of Daniel. It is possible that "Hasidim" was a broad umbrella term that embraced various strands of Jewish resistance at this time, but this is only a possibility. The available evidence does not allow us to fill out our knowledge of the apocalyptic sages by identifying them with the Hasidic scribes.23 The nature of the maškîltm and their wisdom must be inferred from the Book of Daniel itself. As in 1 Enoch the Danielic sages deal in a wisdom encoded in mysterious signs—typified for Daniel 1-6 by 21

M. Buber, "Prophecy, Apocalyptic, and the Historical Hour," Pointing the Way (New York: Harper, 1957) 200. 22 E.g., M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974), 1:175218; A. LaCoc que, Daniel et son temps (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1983) 131 -39; English translation as Daniel in His Time (Columbia: University of South Carolina, 1988) 27-32. 23 For critiques of the Hasidic hypothesis see P.R. Davies, "Hasidim in the Maccabean Period," JJS 28 (1977) 127-40; and my "Daniel and His Social World," Interpretation 39 (1985) 132-34. See now also the comprehensive study of the Hasidim by J . Kampen, The Hasideans and the Origin of Pharisaism (Adanta: Scholars Press, 1988).

the writing on the wall as well as by Nebuchadnezzar's dreams. In Daniel 7-12 the primary medium of revelation is the symbolic dream. The sage has now become a recipient of dreams, which must be interpreted by an angel. In Daniel 9 the prophecy ofJeremiah is also interpreted as a mysterious revelation, analogous to the symbolic dream. Just as four beasts can signify four kings in a dream, so seventy years in a biblical prophecy can signify seventy weeks of years. This mode of biblical interpretation expounded to the Danielic sage was subsequently developed at length in the Qumran Pesharim. T h e term pesher is already used for the interpretation of dreams and of the writing on the wall in Daniel 1 -6.24 The Mantic Sage and Interpretation of Scripture Both 1 Enoch and Daniel have been aptly described as "mantic wisdom." 25 The sage, then, in these works embraces also mantic activities. In both cases the encounter with Babylonian divination seems to have played a part in the development of apocalyptic wisdom, although the Jewish authors were selective in their borrowings and produced an essentially new genre. The emergence of explicit biblical interpretation for the sage in Daniel 9 is a significant milestone in the integration of apocalyptic wisdom into the biblical tradition. The further course of this development is most clearly seen in the Qumran community. The Dead Sea sect preserved multiple copies of Daniel and the early Enochic writings, and has been called an "apocalyptic community" with some justification. 26 The importance of biblical interpretation for that community is evident in the Pesharim and various midrashic writings and in the provision for continual study of the Torah in 1QS 6. Two other major pseudepigraphic writings from around the time of Daniel, Jubilees and the Testament of Moses, are in large part rewritings of the biblical text. Needless to say, these books do not simply reproduce their biblical models, but reinterpret them in the light of other traditions and new circumstances. Both books, however, present their material under the authority of Moses—a far more central figure in Jewish tradition than either Enoch or Daniel—and 24 O n the emergence of "mantological exegesis" in Hellenistic Judaism see M. Fishbane, Biblical Exegesis in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon, 1985) 443-524. 25 Müller, "Manüsche Weisheit und Apokalyptik." This subject is explored in detail by S. B. Reid, Enoch and Daniel A Form Critical and Sociological Study of Historical Apocalypses (Berkeley: Bibal, 1989). 26 F.M. Cross, The Ancient Library of Qumran (Garden City Doubleday, 1961) 78. See my comments in The Apocalyptic Imagination, 115-41.

both portray him as a sage with heightened prophetic powers (Jub 23-31, T. Mos 9-10). Ezra and Baruch as Visionary Sages The tension between the apocalyptic revelation of the mantic or visionary sage and Mosaic authority comes to the fore in the great apocalypses from the last first century CE, 2 Baruch and 4 Ezra.'21 These works are separated from Daniel and the early Enochic books by two-and-one half centuries and come from a rather different theological milieu. In his dialogue with the angel, Ezra pointedly does not ask about the exits of hell or the entrances of Paradise, since he has neither ascended to heaven nor descended to the abyss (4 Ezra 4:7-9). The passage is reminiscent of the words of Agur in the Book of Proverbs (30:1 -4) and the contrast with Enoch is presumably deliberate. 28 Yet in the end Ezra accepts the necessity of apocalyptic revelation, in the form of symbolic visions that explicitly refer back to Daniel (4 Ezra 12-13). Like Daniel, he stimulates visions by fasting, and, without biblical precedent, by eating the plants of the field (4 Ezra 9:26). The relation of Ezra's revelation to the Mosaic scriptures is explicitly addressed in chap. 14. There God speaks to Ezra from a bush, as he had spoken to Moses. Ezra laments that the law has been burnt, and is commissioned by God to reproduce it. He receives inspiration in the form of fiery liquid and dictates to five scribes for forty days. In this time they write out not only the twenty-four books of the Hebrew scriptures but also seventy others, which are reserved for "the wise among the people. For in them is the spring of understanding, the fountain of wisdom, and the river of knowledge" (14:46‫־‬ 47). These secret revelations had also been given to Moses at Mount Sinai (14:4-6), but the line of transmission had been broken. Ezra receives a new revelation of the same data. Since the extrabiblical revelation is secret, there is no record against which it can be checked. The apocalyptic writers are, in effect, free to advance their own new revelations, while claiming—and perhaps believing—that they are only reproductions of the revelation given to Moses and Ezra. The figure of Baruch differs from that of Ezra in that his community responsibility is emphasized. 29 He addresses the people at regular intervals throughout the book. The people regard him as 27

See my The Apocalyptic Imagination, 155-80. See M. Knibb, "Apocalyptic and Wisdom in 4 Ezra," JSJ 13 (1983) 56-74. ‫ י‬See especially G. Saylcr, Have the Promises Failed? (SBLDS 72; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1984) 79-85. 28 2

a "father" (2 Baruch 32:9) and he reassures them that "Israel will not lack a wise man, nor the tribe ofJacob a son of the Law" (46:4). The primary function of the wise man is to instruct and admonish the people to observe the Torah (44:2-3, 45:1-2) for "we have nothing now apart from the Mighty One and his Law" (85:3). Despite these assertions, however, Baruch does offer something more than the law. As surely as Ezra, he is a recipient of apocalyptic visions, which put the law in a broader context, informed by eschatological expectations. There is no opposition between the law and these expectarions, but the law alone is no longer sufficient for the pastoral needs of the people. It is instructive at this point to contrast Baruch with another sage who championed the Torah, Ben Sira. Sirach poured scorn on those who trust in dreams: "As one who catches at a shadow and pursues the wind" (Sir 34:2). He allowed the possibility that they might be sent from God as a visitation (34:6) but insisted that "without such deceptions the law will be fulfilled and wisdom is made perfect in truthful lips" (34:8). Baruch's revelations come in visions in his sleep (2 Baruch 36:1, 53:1), which are dreams in fact if not in name. While both sages are concerned with the Torah, the understanding they bring to it is very different. Conclusion: A Superior Wisdom Comparison of Enoch and Daniel, on the one hand, and 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch, on the other, shows that there are significant variations in the ideal of the visionary sage in the apocalyptic literature. Further nuances could be added by consideration of the full corpus. 30 There are however some consistent features of apocalyptic wisdom that distinguish it from traditional Hebrew wisdom.31 Most fundamental of these is the claim to have, and reliance upon, a supernatural revelation. Even a sage like Ezra who disavows heavenly ascents, still relies on dreams and visions. Unlike the personified Wisdom of Proverbs and Sirach, Wisdom in 1 Enoch found no place where she could dwell, and returned to heaven (1 Enoch 42:1). Yet the apocalyptic sage is not at a loss, as Qpheleth was, to know what God 30 See my The Apocalyptic Imagination, passim. The corpus of pseudepigrapha published by J . H . Charlesworth, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (2 vols.; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983-85), is much more extensive not only because it includes other genres, but also because it contains much later material (some of which may be as late as the ninth century CE). 31 See further my "Cosmos and Salvation: Jewish Wisdom and Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Age," History ‫ם‬/Religions 17 (1977) 121-42.

had done from beginning to end (Qoh 3:11), because he claims to have access to the recesses of wisdom in the heavens, in the person of the pseudonymous visionary.32 One finds, then, in the sages of the apocalypses a denial of earthly wisdom, but also a claim to a higher, superior wisdom. Rabbinic Judaism did not, on the whole, follow this model of wisdom, but reverted to the tradition of Sirach with its combination of the Torah and human ingenuity. The legacy of the apocalyptic tradition was important for early Christianity, however, where Paul could castigate "the wisdom of this world" and yet claim to impart "a secret and hidden wisdom of God" (1 Cor 2:6, 7).

32

The psychology of pseudonymity lies beyond the scope of this essay and in any ease has hitherto resisted satisfactory explanation. Sec the inconclusive remarks of C. Rowland, The Open Heaven: A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early Christianity (New York: Crossroad, 1982) 240-47.

CHAPTER T W E N T Y O N E

T H E R O O T O F IMMORTALITY: DEATH IN T H E C O N T E X T O F J E W I S H WISDOM

In his influential study The Sacred Canopy, Peter Berger asserted that the power of religion depends, in the last resort, upon the credibility of the banners it puts in the hands of men as they stand before death or, more accurately, as they walk, inevitably, toward it.1

Berger was not suggesting that religion is primarily a private obsession of the individual with death. Rather his thesis is that religion is a social phenomenon, part of the human enterprise of "worldbuilding'5 by which we attempt "to impose a meaningful order upon reality."2 The significance of death is not an individual matter because "death radically challenges all socially objectivated definitions of reality—of the world, of others, and of the self. Death radically puts in question the taken-for-granted, 'business-as-usual' attitude in which one exists in everyday life. Here everything in the daytime world of existence in society is massively threatened with 'irreality'—that is, everything in that world becomes dubious, eventually unreal, other than what one used to think." 3 In short, death is a threat to the meaningfulness not only of the individual life, but of the common enterprise of society and, indeed, of any attempt, social, religious or philosophical, to perceive reality as a coherent and purposeful order. We need not commit ourselves to Berger's suggestion that the problem of death is the ultimate test of the power of religion. It is sufficient to note that death is one central problem that pervades religious and philosophical literature from the epic but fruitless search of Gilgamesh for eternal life to Martin Heidegger's quest of authenticity in "being-unto-death." The Jewish wisdom literature is no exception. Jewish wisdom (like Egyptian) was directly concerned with affirming a meaningful order in reality.4 Wisdom itself was the prin1

Peter L. Berger, The Sacred Canopy (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1969) 51. Ibid., 22. ‫נ‬ Ibid., 43. . 4 See Hartmut Gese, Lehre und Wirklichkeit in der alten Weisheit (Tübingen: Mohr, 1958); Hans Heinrich Schmid, Gerechtigkeit als Weltordnung (Tübingen: Mohr, 1968); 2

ciple of order by which the earth was founded and the heavens established (Prov 3:19). Humans were wise by participation in the same wisdom which gave order to the universe and characterized the work of God in creation. This wisdom was manifest in the prosperity and well-being both of wise individuals and of the created order. T h e ordered reality of the wisdom tradition, like any other, could be called into question by the inescapable phenomenon of death. The problem was expressed most directly by Qoheleth: What befalls the fool will befall me also; why then have I been so very wise?...For of the wise man as of the fool there is no enduring remembrance, seeing that in the days to come all will have been forgotten. How the wise man dies just like the fool! (Qoh 2:15-16). The sentiments are obvious and commonplace and might occur to any reflective person at any time, quite independently of Qoheleth's formulation. The question they raise is a fundamental one, not only for the individual but for the entire value system of wisdom and the view of reality on which it was built. Berger observed that: Insofar as the knowledge of death cannot be avoided in any society, legitimations of the reality of the social world in the face of death are decisive requirements in any society.5 Similarly, since the knowledge of death could not be avoided in the tradition which affirmed wisdom as a principle of cosmic order, that tradition had to cope with the problem of death in such a way that its other assumptions about reality would not be undermined. In this essay we will consider two strikingly different attempts to cope with the problem of death within the context of the wisdom tradition. The one is in Sirach, composed in Palestine about the beginning of the second century BCE/' The other is in the Wisdom of Solomon, composed in Alexandria some time between 100 BCE and 40 CE. 7

Schmid, Wesen und Geschichte der Weisheit (BZAYV 101; Berlin: Töpelmann, 1966) 17-27; 144-68. 5 Berger, Sacred Canopy, 43-44. 6 The date of Sirach is fixed by the prologue which was composed by Sirach's grandson, who translated the book into Greek. The grandson came to Egypt in 132 BCE ("in the thirty-eighth year of the reign of Euergetes"). The grandfather's work is usually dated about 180 BCE with a few dissenting voices who argue for a third century date. See Martin Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974) 1. 131 ;Johann Marböck, Weisheitim Wandel: Untersuchungen zur Weisheitstheologie beißen Sira (BBB 37; Bonn: Hanstein, 1971) 9. ‫ י‬There is no consensus on the date of the Wisdom of Solomon. For the various scholarly opinions sec Joseph Rcider, The Book of Wisdom (Dropsic College Series; New York: Harper, 1957) 12-14.

I. Life and Death in Sirach Sirach is acutely aware of the problem of death. He knows that "all living beings become old like a garment, for the decree from of old is, 'You must surely die!'" (14:17) and that a heavy yoke is on the sons of Adam, from the day they come forth from their mother's womb till the day they return to the mother of all. Their perplexities and fear of heart—their anxious thought is the day

of death (40:1-2). For Sirach death is an indisputable given and is part of the order of creation: Good is the opposite of evil, and life is the opposite of death; so the sinner is the opposite of the godly. Look upon all the works of the Most High; they likewise are in pairs, one the opposite of the other

(33:14-15). The opposition of life and death is one of a series of oppositions in creation, but both are "works of the Most High": "good things and bad, life and death, poverty and wealth, come from the Lord" (11:14). Further, he asserts the works of the Lord are all good, and he will supply every need in its hour, and no one can say, , This is worse than that/ for all things will prove good in their season (39:33-34).

As Qpheleth might say, there is a time to be born and a time to die, and one might infer that "the decision as to what is better is really a discerning of the appropriate time." 8 As we shall see, the notion that life and death are complementary is of central importance for Sirach. In itself, however, it is scarcely a solution to the problem of death. T h e idea that "the universe is a marvelous, harmonious order of complementary pairs" 9 may vindicate the aesthetics of the creator but it does not speak to the human desire for fulfillment, or answer such questions as "what gain has the worker from his toil?" (Qoh 3:9) or "what advantage has the wise man over the fool?" (Qoh 6:8). Yet such questions were fundamental to the wisdom tradition. It was not enough that there be order in the world. That order must also fulfill the promise of wisdom for human fulfillment. In fact Sirach's discussion of life and death is not exhausted by the conclusion that both are works of God and good in their time. He 8

James L. Crenshaw, "The Problem of Theodicy in Sirach: On Human Bondage," JBL 94 (1975) 53. 9 Ibid., 58.

can also assert that "before a man are life and death and whichever he chooses will be given to him" (15:17) and that "God allotted to them the law of life" (17:11). These statements are juxtaposed with the clear assertion that "He gave to men few days and a limited time" (17:2) and clearly imply that "life" and "death" which are set before humanity cannot be assessed in days and time. Again, we find in 22: 11 that the life of the fool is worse than death. Life and death are not only biological and temporal. They are also qualitative, and the qualitative meaning of "life" does not necessarily coincide exactly with the biological. The fool experiences "death" in life, and the wise man, who follows the law of God finds "life"—although he too will die. It is clearly in this qualitative sense that humanity can choose between life and death. 1. The qualitative sense of "life" The qualitative understanding of life and death played a fundamental role in the formulation of the wisdom tradition in the book of Proverbs. 10 "Life" is the primary gift of wisdom. "She is a tree of life to those who lay hold of her" (Prov 3:18), and she proclaims in Prov 8:35-36: he who finds me finds life and obtains favor from the Lord; but he who misses me injures himself; all who hate me love death."

It is true that in some passages the life in question is "length of days and years of life" (3:2, compare 3:16) but in other passages "life" and "death" can not be simply correlated with biological or temporal processes. In Prov 9:18 the clients of the wanton woman are already in the depths of Sheol. In Prov 8:36 those who hate wisdom and love death are not, necessarily, suicidal, but are attracted by a life which the sage equates with death. Conversely, the life ofTered by wisdom is not simply duration of existence, but is a life in "favor from the Lord." In the same sense "the mouth of the righteous is a fountain of life" (10:11), and life is "in the path of righteousness" (12:28).

10

Christa Kayatz, Studien zu Proverbien 1-9 (Ncukirchcn-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1966) 102-16. On the qualitative use of "life" elsewhere in the O T sec Gerhard von Rad, "Life and Death in the O T , " TD.NT 2.843-49; Rudolf Bultmann, "The Concept of Life in the O T , " ibid., 849-51; Walther Zimmcrli, "'Leben' und 'Tod' im Buche des Propheten Ezechiel," TZ 13 (1957) 494-508; Christoph Barth, Die Errettung vom Tode in den individuellen Klage- und Dankliedern des Alten Testaments (Zollikon: Evangelischer Verlag, 1947) 117, 145, 152. On the use and transformation of mythological motifs in the discussion of "life" in Proverbs sec also Richard J . Clifford, "Proverbs IX: A suggested Ugaritic Parallel," VT 25 (1975) 298-306.

The correlation of wisdom and life is a fundamental component of "reality" in the wisdom tradition. Wisdom is the principle by which God ordered the world. It is manifest not only in the natural order, but also in human wisdom and righteousness. The fruit of this wisdom is "life" in an absolute and unqualified sense. Hence the order of the universe is coherent with the human desire for fulfillment. It is against this background that we must see the assertion of Sirach that humanity is given a choice between life and death. 2. Death as limit It is important to realize, however, that the unqualified use of "life" as an absolute term does not necessarily imply the continuation of life after death. Despite occasional protests, there is general agreement that neither Proverbs nor Sirach expresses a belief in the significant survival of the individual after death." The traditional belief in a shadowy survival in Sheol or the netherworld is maintained, but such an anemic existence is not considered "life" in any meaningful sense of the word. 12 Sirach soberly warns that "in Hades one cannot look for luxury" (14:16). At best, "the decree of Hades has not been shown you" (14:12). Sheol is not a place of retribution where the good are rewarded—for "whether life is for ten or a hundred or a thousand years there is no inquiry about it in Hades"(41:4). Even the praise of God is not possible in Sheol, for "from the dead, as from one who does not exist, thanksgiving has ceased" (17:28). In this respect Sirach was consistent with the entire Israelite tradition. 13 The negation of life in Sheol was assumed by Sirach as a simple matter of factual reality which he saw no reason to dispute. Further, while Sirach can, like Proverbs, affirm an absolute life which is offered by wisdom, that life does not undermine the reality of either physical life or physical death. Rather, the transcendent life of wisdom embraces both physical life and death as 11 See the conclusive review of the material by Bruce Vawter, "Intimations of Immortality and the Old Testament," JBL 91(1972) 158-71. A belief in immortality has been attributed to Sirach especially by Tadeusz Penar (Northwest Semitic Philology and the Fragments of Ben Sira (Rome: Biblical Institute, 1975] 9, 24, 49, 54) following the principles of Mitchell Dahood, Psalms III (AB 17A; Garden City, NY: Doublcday, 1970) XLI, U I . 12 O n the traditional Israelite view of Sheol see Nicholas J . Tromp, Primitive Conceptions of Death and the Netherworld in the Old Testament (BibOr 21; Rome: Biblical Institute, 1969). 13 A clear affirmation of a positive afterlife is found in no biblical book before Daniel, which was written more than a decade after Sirach. A possible but doubtful reference to resurrection can be found in the earlier "Isaianic Apocalypse" (Isa 26:19). See J o h n J . Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel (HSM 16; Missoula: Scholars, 1977) 170-75.

a complementary pair. Death is the necessary limit of life. When God gave humanity the law of life he had already assigned them "few days, a limited time." But he had also given them authority over the things upon the earth. The fulfillment of human sovereignty over creation is not negated by the shortness of life. In fact, it is precisely the limited character of life which makes possible fulfillment in the sense of an experience lived and pursued up to the limit. In the Hebrew tradition limit is an intrinsic aspect of creaturehood. In Genesis 1, creation is the process of separation of the distinct entities which are thereby limited over against each other. The limits of humanity are repeatedly defined over against God. As in Greek tragedy the essence of hybris consists in the human attempt to dispense with these limits and become "like God, knowing good and evil" (Gen 3:5) or to "take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever" (Gen 3:22).14 The acceptance of the limit proper to created beings is pervasive in the O T wisdom books.15 The beginning of wisdom is the "fear of the Lord." While this phrase is used loosely as a virtual synonym for religion, it nevertheless gives clear expression to the creature's sense of dependence and subordination—to the awareness of limit over against God. 16 Yet, the fear of the Lord is not perceived as negative in Sirach. On the contrary: The fear of the Lord is glory and exultation, and crown of rejoicing. The fear of the Lord delights the gladness and joy and long life. With him who fears go well at the end; on the day of his death he (Sir 1:11-13)."

gladness and a heart and gives the Lord it will will be blessed

The fear of the Lord does not give immortality, but it gives long life, and a blessing on the day of death. It gives "glory and exultation" within the proper limits of human life. As the limiting end of life, death is not necessarily terrible. Sirach is not insensitive to the common fear of death. He knows that 14 On this theme in the O T sec Donald E. Gowan, When Man Becomes God (Pittsburgh Theological Monograph Series 6; Pittsburgh: Pickwick, 1975). 15 Gerhard von Rad, Wisdom in Israel (Nashville:Abingdon, 1972) 97-1 12. 16 The meaning of the "fear of the Lord" in the O T is discussed by Joachim Bcckcr, Gottesfiirchrt im Alten Testament (AnBib 25; Rome: Biblical Institute, 1965). The role of the phrase in Sirach is discusscd by Josef Haspecker, Gottesfurcht bei Jesus Sirach (AnBib 30; Rome: Biblical Institute, 1967). Sec also James L. Crenshaw. "The Eternal Gospel (Eccl 3:11)," in Essays in Old Testament Ethics (J.PhilipHyatt in Memoriam; ed. James L. Crenshaw and John T. Willis; New York: Ktav, 1974) 4445. 17 See also 1:14-20; 2:1-18; 25:10-11; 40:26-27 etc. Haspecker, Gottesfircht, 209-18 and passim.

humanity's "anxious thought is the day of death" (40:1-2) and that the reminder of death is bitter "to one who lives at peace among his possessions" (41:1). T h e wise man, however, does not succumb to fears or bitterness. He knows that wisdom lies in the fear of the Lord and that fulfillment can be found within one's proper limits: do not fear the sentence of death; remember your former days and the end of life; this is the decree of the Lord for all flesh and how can you reject the good pleasure of the Lord (Sir 41:3 4).

In fact the limitation of human life invites a modest measure of hedonism: do not deprive yourself of a happy day; let not your share of desired good pass by you...Give and take and beguile yourself, because in Hades one cannot look for luxury (14:14, 16).18

Sirach is not a pessimist and despair is not his mood. He finds fulfillment in life, and can speak of a transcendent life which can overcome the anxiety of impending death, but that life attains its transcendence within the limited time which precedes death. 19 3. Transcendence in Sirach What then is the nature of the transcendent life envisaged by Sirach? First, we must note that Sirach very seldom speaks of "life" in the absolute sense, which is quite frequent in Proverbs. However, he describes the effects of wisdom by drawing on traditional symbols of vitality. Wisdom ew tall like a cedar in Lebanon and like a cypress on the heights of S(24:ermon...like a palm tree in Engedi and like rose plants in Jericho... 13-14).

She "went forth like a canal from a river and like a water channel into a garden" (24:30). T h e wise man "will be sheltered by her from 18 Compare the attitude of Qoh 8:15: "And 1 commend enjoyment, for man has no good thing under the sun but to eat and drink, and enjoy himself, for this will go with him in his toil, through the days of life which God gives him under the sun." See also Qoh 10:7-11; 11 :8. 19 The corrélation of limit and fulfillment in Sirach may be compared to the view of Martin Heidegger that every being "encounters freely and spontaneously the necessity of its limit...Coming to stand, accordingly, means: to achieve a limit for itself, to limit itself. Consequendy, a fundamental characteristic of the essent is to telos, which means not aim or purpose, but end. Here 'end' is not meant in a negative sense, as though there were something about it that did not continue, that failed or ceased. End is ending in the sense of fulfillment ( Vollendung)." (Martin Heidegger, An Introduction to Metaphysics [New Haven: Yale, 1959] 60). Compare also John Dominic Crossan, The Dark Interval (Niles, IL: Argus, 1975) 13-46.

the heat and will dwell in the midst of her glory" (14:27). "She will come to meet him like a mother and feed him with the bread of understanding and give him the water of wisdom to drink. He will lean on her and will not fall" (15:2-4).20 In each of these passages we are given a cluster of images which describes, or rather suggests, the vitality conferred by wisdom. The images are drawn from the familiar world of commonsense reality. However, they are used in an obviously analogical sense to describe something which is less readily accepted as a matter of fact—the life of wisdom. Each analogy is obviously limited and even the entire cluster of images does not provide a comprehensive picture. The fulfillment offered by wisdom can not be described directly but only suggested, by analogy. The very multiplicity of images frustrates the desire to capture reality in one univocal expression. Yet it is this multiplicity of impressions that gives richness and depth to the idea of wisdom, with a force and clarity that could scarcely be matched in any univocal formulation. Sirach's description of the life of wisdom must be understood, in Ian Ramsey's well-known terminology, as a "disclosure model" rather than a "picture model." 21 Picture models are "copies reproducing identically those properties common to model and original which, for the particular purpose in mind, are importantly relevant." 22 Disclosure or "analogue" models, by contrast, do not attempt to reproduce any properties of the original identically, but only a "structure or web or relationship." 23 The particular examples used need not correspond exactly to that which they illustrate but only reflect some common process or suggest analogous relationships. As we have seen, the imagery of Sirach does not permit us to piece together a comprehensive picture or exact description of the life of wisdom. Instead we must be content with partial similarities— wisdom is like a cedar, palm tree or watered garden insofar as these all exhibit remarkable fertility and vitality. Wisdom may be compared to mother and wife, or even food and drink, insofar as all these sustain and nourish life, whether physically or emotionally. None of these images, however, can be said to correspond exactly to

For similar imagery in Proverbs and in Egyptian wisdom literature see Kayatz, Studien, 102-16. 51 Ian T. Ramsey, Models and Mystery (London: Oxford, 1964) 1-21; compare Bernard E. Mcland, Fallible Forms and Symbols (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976) 26, 130 and Max Black, Models and Metaphors: Studies in Language and Philosophy (Ithaca, NY: Cornell 1962) 219-43. 22 Ramsey, Models, 3. " Ibid., 9, citing Black. Models and Metaphors 222.

the life of wisdom. In the words of Bernard Meland, disclosure models "presuppose a distance between humanly formed notions or analogies and the realities toward which inquiry is being directed." 24 The juxtaposition of diverse images makes clear that no one image is exhaustive and so the distance between any analogy and the reality is evident. The images used are not made defining or descriptive in any categorical or doctrinal sense, but they are simply suggestive in an explorative effort to find a way in which the reality apprehended can be thought about or made marginally intelligible.25

We have noted that the imagery used by Sirach to describe the life of wisdom is drawn from the world of commonsense reality. We should bear in mind that commonsense reality for Sirach included the traditional idea of Sheol and does not necessarily always enjoy the same status with us. Further, Max Black has taught us that any metaphorical usage "selects, emphasizes, suppresses and organizes" features of the original.26 The imagery of Sirach, then, does not necessarily ground us in a solid world of objective fact. However, it is significant that Sirach takes as his point of departure a commonsense view of reality, such as was readily accepted at the time. His procedure is inductive. He does not dispute the reality of the world of appearances. However, the network of relationships organized in the imagery of Sirach may disclose a new dimension in the world of appearances which was not clearly evident before. The life of wisdom disclosed in Sirach does not stand outside this world of commonsense reality and does not reject the commonsense view of life as limited by death. Rather, it is presented as a deeper, qualitative dimension within that life, which is accessible only through the concrete images which constitute everyday reality. 4. The problem of death In what way does this "disclosure model" of transcendent life resolve the problem of death for the wisdom tradition? Ultimately, the problem remains. A Qoheleth might still protest that the wise man dies just like the fool and that both share a like fate in Sheol. Sirach would presumably respond that the life of wisdom is more than physical life, removes the terror of death and provides a fulfillment adequate to human desire. The ambiguous use of the word "life" for both mortal existence and its enrichment by wisdom creates a 24

25 26

Meland, Fallible Forms, 130.

Ibid . Black, Models and Metaphors, 44.

deliberate confusion. Because the qualitative "life" of wisdom prevails unambiguously over the qualitative "death" of the fool, the fact that every human life ends in death seems less important. There is a certain analogy here with the kind of logic Levi-Strauss claims to find in myths: myths construct models of reality by means of which the human mind can evade unwelcome contradictions, such as that human beings cannot enjoy life without suffering death...The function of myth is to 'mediate' such contradictions, to make them appear less final than they really are and thus more acceptable. 27

The idea of the qualitative "life" of wisdom may be said to "mediate" or confuse the contradiction of life and death and make it seem less important than it does initially. We could scarcely say that Sirach is attempting to evade reality, welcome or not. His model of transcendent life takes full account of the reality of death as the limit of life and does not dispute the current, unpleasant assumptions about the reality of Sheol. His solution does not eliminate the threat of death, but at least it mutes that threat without abandoning the inductive approach to reality which is characteristic of the wisdom tradition. 28 II. Life and Death in the Wisdom of Solomon The Wisdom of Solomon is a product of Alexandrian Judaism and employs an extensive Hellenistic vocabulary which is foreign to the earlier wisdom books.29 It also makes relatively little use of proverbial material and develops its ideas at greater length. It derives various conceptions (loosely) from Greek philosophy but its fundamental assumptions about reality are in clear continuity with the Hebrew wisdom tradition. More clearly than ever wisdom appears as a principle of cosmic order: "she pervades and penetrates all things by reason of her pureness" (7:24) and "in full might she reaches from end to end and orders all things graciously" (8:1). Wisdom is "a spirit that loves humanity" and is evidently synonymous with the "spirit of the Lord" which "has filled the in27

This formulation of Levi-Strauss's theory is given by Edmund Lcach ("LeviStrauss in the Garden of Eden: An Examination of some Rcccnt Developments in the Analysis of Myth," in Claude Levi-Strauss: The Anthropologist as Hero [ed. E. Nelson Hayes and Tanya Hayes; Cambridge: M.I.T., 1970] 51). 28 On the inductive character of the wisdom tradition see further John J. Collins, "The Biblical Precedent for Natural Theology," JAAR 15(1977) Supplement B:3567. 29 Sec especially James M. Reese, Hellenistic Influence on the Book of Wisdom and is Consequences (AnBib 41; Rome: Biblical Institute, 1970).

habited earth 5 ' and "holds all things together." She is "initiated into the knowledge of God" (8:4) but also "passes into holy souls and makes them friends of God and prophets" (7:27). While the cosmological theory of the Wisdom of Solomon is much more elaborate than that of Proverbs or Sirach, it shares with them the conviction that wisdom is a principle of order which pervades the world and offers ultimate fulfillment for humanity. 30 The promise of wisdom, here as in the earlier tradition, is "life." God "created all things that they might exist, and the generative forces of the world preserve life" (1:14).31 Life and death have a qualitative meaning which does not coincide exacdy with the biological: "old age is not honored for length of time, nor measured by number of years; but understanding is gray hair for men and a blameless life is ripe old age" (4:8-9). Righteousness and wisdom promise a life that is more than ordinary life.32 Thus far the Wisdom of Solomon is in accordance with the earlier tradition, but it goes further. God, we are told, "did not make death, and does not delight in the destruction of the living" (1:13). Further, "there is no kingdom of death upon earth, for righteousness is immortal" (1:14-15). These statements come perilously close to denying the reality of physical death. The denial of death is carried further in the discussion of the fate of the righteous: "in the eyes of the foolish they seemed to have died...but they are in peace" (3:2,3) and "their hope is full of immortality" (3:4).33 This apparent denial of the reality of death, at least in the case of the righteous, goes hand in hand with the positive belief in immortality. "God created man for incorruption" (2:23) and the wise and righteous attain this destiny. We read explicitiy in 5:15 that "the righteous live forever." Contrary to Sirach's belief that there is no inquiry about life in Sheol, the Wisdom of Solomon envisages a judgment where the righteous are numbered among the sons of God, and have their lot among the saints (5:1-5). In short the Wisdom of Solomon shares the

30 See further John J . Collins, "Cosmos and Salvation: Jewish Wisdom and Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Age," HR 17 (1977-78) 121-42. 51 On the translation of this verse see Collins, "Cosmos and Salvation," n. 16: A.T.S. Goodrick, The Book of Wisdom (The Oxford Church Bible Commentary; London: Rivingtons, 1913) 96-97. 32 O n the qualitative use of "life" and "death" in the Wisdom of Solomon see C. Larcher, Études sur le Livre de la Sagesse (EBib; Paris: Gabalda, 1969) 285-300. 33 See Dieter Georgi, "Der vorpaulinische Hymnus Phil 2,6-11," in %fit und Geschichte. Dankesgabe an Rudoy Bultmann (ed. Eric Dinkier; Tübingen: Mohr, 1964) 270-72: "Genau besehen hat der Weg des Gerechten nur den Schein des Leidens und Sterbens. Es wird mit Absicht doketisch geredet."

conviction of Proverbs and Sirach that wisdom confers "life" in a transcendent sense, but unlike them it envisages that life as immortality in the presence of God. 1. Traditions presupposed by the Wisdom of Solomon The emergence of a doctrine of immortality in the Wisdom of Solomon has been adduced as evidence of the "progressive" character of the author, by the contrast with the "conservative" character of Sirach. 34 The merit of such labels is open to question. For all his undeniable caution, Sirach was not averse to new ideas. Numerous parallels to contemporary Hellenistic ideas have been found in his work.35 The great hymn in Sirach 24, which borrows imagery from the aretalogies of Isis36 and concludes by identifying Wisdom and the book of the Law (24:23) does not suggest a rigid conservative who was merely concerned to preserve the tradition. On the other hand, the Wisdom of Solomon may well have been right of center in the spectrum of Alexandrian Judaism. 37 The difference between the two books is probably more a matter of cultural environment than of personal temperament. The traditions received by the Wisdom of Solomon, and so the current assumptions about the nature of reality, were different from those presupposed by Sirach, at points directly related to the question of immortality. Specifically, the Wisdom of Solomon is influenced by two traditions which were known to Sirach only minimally if at all. First is the Platonic/Pythagorean tradition of Greek philosophy. 38 The influence of this tradition is evident in a few passages in the Wisdom of Solomon, most notably, perhaps, in 9:15 "for a perishable body weighs down the soul." There is extensive debate whether the Wisdom of Solomon adopts the Platonic concept of the immortality of the soul or presupposes the more Hebraic notion of the resurrection of the body. 39 The book contains no explicit reference 34 So A.A. Di Leila, "Conservative and Progressive Theology: Sirach and Wisdorn," CBQ38 (1966) 139-46. 35 Sec especially Th. Middendorp, Die Stellung Jem Ben Siros zwischen Judentum und Hellenismus (Leiden: Brill, 1973) 7-34; Marböck, Weisheit im Wandel, 160-73. 36 Hans Conzelmann, "Die Mutter der Weisheit," in Zeit und Geschichte (above, η. 33) 225-34. 37 For the spcctrum of opinions in Alexandrian Judaism sec Harry Austryn Wolfson, Philo (2 vols; Cambridge: Harvard, 1948) 1. 3-86. 38 On the question of Platonic and other Greek philosophical influences on the Wisdom of Solomon see Larcher, Études, 350-61 and Reese, Hellenistic Influence,

12-16. 39 For a summary of the debate see Larcher, Études, 320-27. The most substantial argument for bodily resurrection in the book is provided by Paul Beauchamp. "Le salut corporel dans le livre de la Sagesse," Bib 45 (1964) 491-526. Bcauchamp

to bodily resurrection and there is no reason to suppose that it is implied. On the contrary, immortality is an attribute of the spiritual: righteousness and the souls of the righteous are immortal. While the conception of the soul is not consistently Platonic it at least refers to a spiritual dimension of the person. The doctrine of immortality centers on the existence of this spiritual dimension, not on any supposed resurrection. This idea of immortality has a strong affinity with Platonism and is most probably influenced by it, even though it does not conform to it exactly. The second tradition which influenced the idea of immortality in the Wisdom of Solomon is Jewish apocalypticism, which flowered in the century after the composition of Sirach. 40 This influence is transparendy evident in Wis 5:1-5 which describes a judgment scene in which the righteous is "numbered among the sons of God" and "his lot is among the saints.5' A recent scholar has even suggested that this passage is a fragment of an apocalyptic text.41 It should be noted that bodily resurrection was never a necessary element in apocalyptic eschatology and appears consistently only in a few later apocalypses. In the earlier apocalypses the more usual conception is that the righteous are admitted to the angelic host—which is frequently designated as "the sons of God" or the "saints," as in Wis 5:5.42 2. Immortality and wisdom More important, however, for our purpose than the derivation of these ideas is the way in which they were integrated into the wisdom tradition. The Wisdom of Solomon does not claim to base its idea of immortality on philosophical argument or apocalyptic revelation. Instead it is founded in the traditional idea of wisdom which gives argues that an interest in the physical restoration of the universe runs through the second half of the book and infers that bodily resurrection is implicit. This however is not a necessary inference. Other scholars, such as Larchcr, are inclined to posit bodily resurrection, because of an unsubstantiated assumption that such was standard Jewish belief. So also Di Leila, "Conservative and Progressive Theology." 154. 40 O n the relation of apocalypticism to the wisdom tradition, with special attention to the Wisdom of Solomon, see Collins, "Cosmos and Salvation." 41 Lothar Ruppert, Der leidende Gerechte (Forschung zur Bibel 5; Würzburg: Echter, 1972) 73-105. George W. Nickelsburg (Resurrection, Immortality and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism [HTS 26; Cambridge: Harvard, 1972] 60) implies the use of apocalyptic motifs here. See also Mathias Delcor, "L'immortalité de l'âme dans le Livre de la Sagesse et dans les documents de Qumrân," NRTh 77 (1955) 614-30 and Pierre Grelot, "L'eschatologie de la Sagesse et les apocalypses juives," in A. Barucq, ed., A la Rencontre de Dieu. Memorial Albert Gelin (Le Puy: Mappus, 1961) 16578. 42 See further J o h n J . Collins, "Apocalyptic Eschatology as the Transcendence of Death," CBQ.36 (1974) 21-43.

coherence to the universe and promises life to the individual. The expectation of immortality is extrapolated from the qualitative experience of wisdom and righteousness. The immortality of the righteous individual is implied by the immortality of righteousness (1:15). Heeding the laws of wisdom is the assurance of immortality (6:18). T o know God is complete righteousness and to know his power is the root of immortality (15:3). The hope of the righteous is full of immortality because of their present conviction that their souls are in the hand of God (3:2). The experience of wisdom and righteousness to which the Wisdom of Solomon appeals is fundamentally similar to that which constitutes transcendent life in Sirach. In both cases we find the affirmation of a qualitative fulfillment in life, which retains its significance even in the face of death. The difference between the two books is that the Wisdom of Solomon goes on to project this transcendent life of wisdom into the future and assert positively that the righteous will live forever. The cognitive value of such a projection, or the validity of the knowledge it gives us about the future, is not, of course, subject to verification (short, at least, of "eschatological verification"!). Furthermore, the wide variety of eschatological doctrines, even within Judaism in the Hellenistic age,43 should warn us against assuming that any eschatological formulation is a "picture-model" which gives us a simple replica of reality. We can only assess a doctrine such as this as a "disclosure model" which, in Bernard Meland's phrase, is "a human formulation having the value only of a venture in intelligibility."44 The validity and value of such a formulation can only be judged in terms of the degree to which it fits our experience, or "chimes in with the phenomena," 45 in short, the degree to which it enables us to perceive a coherent structure in reality. The doctrine of immortality in the Wisdom of Solomon then can be most appropriately assessed in terms of the adequacy with which it resolves the problem of death within the context of the wisdom tradition. By contrast with the imagistic presentation of transcendent life in Sirach, the explicit assertion of the Wisdom of Solomon that "the righteous live forever" is univocal and unambiguous and may seem to obscure its explorative character as a "disclosure model." However, the very boldness of the formulation has distinct advantages. The doctrine of immortality in the Wisdom of Solomon is intro43 44 45

See, for example, Nickelsburg, Resurrection. Meland, Fallible Forms, 130. ' Ramsey, Models, 15.

duced in a very specific context, in which the conflict of two philosophies of life culminates in the torture and murder of the righteous man. We are told that those who deny immortality will conclude they should "crown themselves with rosebuds before they wither" (2:8) and let might be their law of right since what is weak proves to be unprofitable (2:11). We need not dwell on the limitations of this argument. The great majority of the writers of the Hebrew Bible would not, presumably, have found it compelling. However, it points to an obvious strength of the doctrine of immortality as a formulation of transcendent life. The righteous man is enabled to affirm the ultimate value of wisdom and righteousness, when everything else, even life itself, is in jeopardy. When the most immediate images of this world are negative ones of suffering and death, the idea of an otherworldly life can give expression to the persistence of values which no persecution can destroy. It is well known that the apocalyptic writings which are the main locus of belief in an afterlife in Judaism flourished especially in times of persecution. 46 The psychological value of an unambiguous affirmation of afterlife in a situation of persecution is obvious. Further, there is no doubt that a positive belief in immortality resolves the problem of death in a far more direct and definitive way than the qualitatively transcendent life of Sirach which remains clearly limited by death. However, the idea of immortality also introduces serious tensions into the Jewish wisdom tradition. We have seen that while Sirach's resolution of the problem of death had some of the quality of LeviStraussian myth, he could not be accused of evading reality. In the Wisdom of Solomon, however, the reality of death is at least partially denied. God, we are told, did not make death, so it is no longer considered as one of God's works as it was in Sirach. In Wis 3:2 we are told that the righteous only seem to die. This suggestion introduces a dichotomy between appearance and reality which is foreign to the wisdom tradition. In Sirach and Proverbs appearances do not exhaust reality, but the deeper aspects of "wisdom" and "life" are only accessible in and through the world of appearances. The wisdom tradition was founded on the assumption that the world of

46

See for example Lou H. Silbermann, "The Human Deed in a Time of Despair: The Ethics of Apocalyptic," in Essays in Old Testament Ethics, 191-202. O n the role of the afterlife in apocalyptic writings see further Collins, "Apocalyptic Eschatology,"and "The Symbolism of Transcendence in Jewish Apocalyptic," BR 19(1974) 5-22.

appearances is real, and proceeded inductively to understand and appreciate that world on a more profound level. In the Wisdom of Solomon, however, if the death of the righteous is mere seeming, there is imminent danger that physical life is illusory too. In this way the affirmation of transcendent life could lead to the devaluation, rather than appreciation of the particular instances and experiences which make up the immediate substance of life. This tendency is apparent in the comment in Wis 9:15 that "a perishable body weighs down the soul." The idea of immortality in the Wisdom of Solomon, then, carries with it a Platonizing tendency to disregard the reality and value of the world of appearances. This tendency is not only contrary to the wisdom tradition expressed in Proverbs and Sirach but is also in tension with the basic thrust of the Wisdom of Solomon itself, which is based on the affirmation of the goodness of the created order. Wisdom pervades the universe holding all things together and ordering all things well. Even the knowledge of God is reached inductively from the world of appearances: "from the greatness and beauty of created things correspondingly (analogös) the creator of them is perceived" (13:5).47 In this perspective there is no dichotomy between appearance and reality. Absolutes such as greatness and beauty, and we might assume, "life" in an absolute sense, are only known analogously from finite human experiences. We have seen above that the idea of immortality in the Wisdom of Solomon is extrapolated from a view of the structure of reality. The wise and righteous individual is immortal because righteousness and wisdom are immortal. The wisdom in which the wise individual participates is the principle of cosmic order, so human destiny is directly related to the structure of the world. We have also seen that the validity of this doctrine can only be assessed in terms of the degree to which it fits the phenomena and permits a coherent perception of reality. In the Wisdom of Solomon the coherence between personal destiny and cosmic order is maintained by denying that death is part of God's creation and suggesting that the death of the righteous is illusory. The cosmic order, then, does not embrace all the phenomena. Death, which is at least a significant area of apparent experience, is excluded from ordered reality. Consequently, there is a certain ambiguity about the status of other areas of

47

See Larcher, Études, 396-98; Thomas Finan. "Hellenistic Humanism in the Book of Wisdom," /7‫־‬Q,27 (1960) 30-48.

apparent experience too.48 In this way the inductive basis of the wisdom perception of reality is placed in question if not undermined. Conclusion Both Sirach and the Wisdom of Solomon attempt to resolve the problem of death by some conception of transcendent life‫—־‬a life which cannot be measured in biological or temporal terms and is therefore on a different level from the life which is negated by death. For Sirach this transcendent life does not entail the denial of death. Death remains important as the proper limit of life, and the life promised by wisdom is seen as a qualitative enrichment of biological and temporal existence. This conception does not entirely remove the problem of death but makes it less important by transferring the emphasis to the qualitadve level. The Wisdom of Solomon also envisages a qualitative enrichment of life by wisdom but extends the conception to an immortality beyond this life. This solution offers a more definite resolution of the problem of death, but it creates a considerable tension in the wisdom tradition and even within the Wisdom of Solomon itself. The wisdom tradition was based on an inductive approach to reality which endeavored to find a structured order in the entire world of appearances. The Wisdom of Solomon shared this inductive approach but could not integrate the phenomenon of death into its conception of ordered reality. By excluding death from the order of creation, the Wisdom of Solomon departed radically from the experienrial realism of the wisdom tradition and threatened to undermine the coherence of its own position within that tradition.

48

It is interesting to note that a similar tension is found in the works of Plato. In the Phaedo the physical world is false and evil, e.g. Phaedo 66: "so long as we have the body and the soul is contaminated by such an evil, we shall never attain completely what we desire. "In the Symposium, by contrast, Plato attributes to Diotima a view of the universe as a cosmic ladder in which the lower material rungs provide the essential steps on which alone we can ascend to higher truths. See Symposium 211.

CHAPTER TWENTY T W O

WISDOM, APOCALYPTICISM AND T H E DEAD SEA SCROLLS

The relationship between the apocalyptic writings of ancient Judaism and biblical wisdom was placed on the agenda of scholarship by von Rad's provocative claim that wisdom was "the mother of apocalyptic." 1 In three and a half decades since that claim was made, the relationship has been examined by several scholars.2 I am not aware of a single significant study that endorses von Rad's conclusion without major modifications. It is generally granted that he drew attention to some important aspects of the apocalypses, and that apocalyptic revelation has significant affinities with mantic wisdom, but not with the proverbial wisdom of Proverbs and Qoheleth. The crucial differences are in the area of eschatology, which is a central concern of the apocalypses and is virtually absent from the biblical wisdom books. Even if we were to grant, with Diethelm Michel, that some sages entertained the belief in reward and punishment after death, 3 we would still be far removed from the apocalyptic visions of Daniel or Enoch. The entire discussion has been hampered by the fact that both terms, wisdom and apocalyptic, cover a considerable range of fairly disparate material. Sometimes, indeed we find an interweaving of traditions. The Wisdom of Solomon incorporates elements of apocalyptic eschatology. 4 4 Ezra engages in a kind of argumentation that is characteristic of wisdom circles.5 Attempts to generalize the rela1

G. von Rad, Theologie des Alten Testaments (Munich: Kaiser, 1960) 2.314-28. P. von der Osten-Sacken, Die Apokalyptik in ihrem Verhältnis zu Prophetie und Weisheit, (Munich: Kaiser, 1969); H.-P. Müller, "Mantische Weisheit und Apokalyptik," Congress Volume Uppsala (VTSup 22; Leiden: Brill, 1972) 268-93; J.J. Collins, "Cosmos and Salvadon: Jewish Wisdom and Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Age," History of Religions 17(1977) 121-42: M.A. Knibb, "Apocalyptic and Wisdom in 4 Ezra," JSJ 13 (1982) 56-74; J J . Collins, "Wisdom, Apocalypticism and Generic Compatibility," in L.G. Perdue, B.B. Scott and W.J. Wiseman eds., In Search of Wisdom. Essays in Memory ofJ.G. Gammie (Louisville: Westminster, 1993) 165-85; D. Michel, "Weisheit und Apokalyptik," in A.S. van der Woude, ed., The Book of Daniel (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1993) 413-34. 3 Michel, "Weisheit und Apokalyptik," points to Pss 73 and 37 and Proverbs 2. I am not convinced that any of these passages actually involves a belief in retribudon after death. 4 See Collins, "Cosmos and Salvation." 5 See Knibb, "Apocalyptic and Wisdom in 4 Ezra." 2

tionship between the two categories, however, encounter severe problems, and should, arguably, be abandoned. In this essay, I wish to take a narrower focus, and examine the relationship between one wisdom book, that of Sirach, which was roughly contemporary with the early apocalypses, and one body of literature that has significant apocalyptic features, the Dead Sea Scrolls.6 Here at least we have evidence that Ben Sira and the sages of Qumran grappled with some of the same issues, even if they reached somewhat different conclusions. The relationship in this case is not necessarily paradigmatic for other comparisons of sapiential and apocalyptic texts, but it may nonetheless shed some light on the conflict of religious ideologies in Hellenistic Judea. The Dead Sea Scrolls, of course, are themselves a complex body of literature, which embody diverse strands of thought. I assume here the view that these Scrolls were the library of the Qumran community. The ideology of that community finds its most official expression in the Community Rule, but is also reflected in several related documents, including the Hodayot, or Thanksgiving Hymns, the Pesharim and the War Scroll.7 The Qumran community was a particular settlement of a broader sectarian movement, which is represented by the Damascus Document (CD). There are, however, many writings found among the Scrolls whose provenance is uncertain. These include several sapiential and hymnic compositions, which are relevant to our discussion. All we can hope to do in these cases is point out ways in which they agree or disagree with Sirach, on the one hand, and the sectarian scrolls on the other. The Qumran community, as evidenced by the Community Rule and related documents, drew on various traditions that were older than the rise of the community. One cluster of these traditions is found in the apocalyptic book of 1 Enoch and the closely related book of Jubilees? The influence of these books on Qumran is not confined to the topic of eschatology. Another major issue concerns the origin of evil, and the related issues of predestination and free will. Indeed, 6 The relationship between Ben Sira and Qumran has been addressed by M. R. Lehmann, "Ben Sira and the Qumran Literature," Revue de Qumran 3(1961) 103-16 and J. Carmignac, "Les Rapports entre L'Ecclésiastique et Qumrân," Revue de Qumrân 3(1961) 209-18. Both articles arc primarily concerned with identifying common terminology. 7 See further J J . Collins, The Scepter and the Star (New York: Doubleday, 1955) 10. 8 Collins, "Was the Dead Sea Sect an Apocalyptic Movement?" in L. SchifTmann, cd., Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls (Sheffield: J S O T , 1990) 25-51; F. Garcia Martinez, "Qumran Origins and Early History. A Groningen Hypothesis," Folia Onentalia 25(1989) 113-36.

it has been argued that this is the generative idea in the early apocalypses, insofar as it formulates the underlying question to which the eschatology and other themes of apocalyptic writing respond. 9 But the reflections of the Qumran community on this subject were not guided only by apocalyptic traditions. Above all, they were guided by the Torah. The centrality of the Torah for the thinking of the sect hardly needs to be elaborated. The Community Rule stipulates that wherever ten assembled "there should not be missing a man to interpret the Torah day and night" (1QS 6:6). According to the Damascus Document, the Torah is the "well" of Num 21:18, which the converts of Israel dug. The enigmatic "Book of Meditation" or "Book of Hagu" is most probably nothing other than the Torah. Now this kind of Torah piety is not attested in the early apocalyptic writings of Enoch or Daniel (although it is probably implied in the Book of Jubilees). It has important antecedents, however, in wisdom circles. Psalm 154, previously known in Syriac but now attested inl lQPsalms col 18, says that the meditation of the righteous is on the Law of the Most High 10 and the Wisdom Text with Beatitudes (4Q525) blesses the man who attains Wisdom and walks in the law of the Most High.11 The classic text for the association of wisdom with the Torah, however, is Ben Sira.12 There we read that all wisdom is the book of the covenant of the Most High God, the law that Moses commanded us (24:23). The most obvious and fundamental common ground linking Sirach with Qumran is the shared tradition of Torah piety. We should not think that this was common to all strands ofJudaism at the time. There is no trace of it in Qoheleth and little if any in 1 Enoch. It plays a fundamental role, however, both in the wisdom of Ben Sira and in the spirituality of Qumran, and we may assess that role by testing it with reference to the specific issue of the origin of evil.

Genesis 1-3 in Ben Sira The story of Adam and Eve, which is usually taken as the canonical account of the origin of sin in Jewish and especially Christian tradition, receives no attention outside of Genesis in the Hebrew Bible. With the possible exception of some texts of uncertain date 9 P. Sacchi, L'Apocalittica giudaica e la sua Storia (Brescia: Paideia, 1990); "Die Macht der Sünde in der Apokalyptik," JBTh 9(1994) 111-24. 10 F. Garcia Martinez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated{Leiden: Brill, 1994) 305. 11 Ibid. 395. 12 See e. g. H. Stadelmann, Ben Sira als Schriftgelehrter (Tübingen: Mohr, 1980); E.J. Schnabel, Laui and Wisdom from Ben Sira to Paul (Tübingen: Mohr, 1985).

from Qumran, it is Ben Sira who provides the first attempt to grappie with the implications of this story.13 His most explicit reference to it is singularly unfortunate, as it inaugurates a line of interpretation that can only be described as misogynistic: "From a woman sin had its beginning and because of her we all die" (25:24). There can be no doubt that Sirach is referring to Eve here,14 but his hermeneutic is probably indebted to the portrayal of the "strange woman" ('iššāh Zārāh) of Proverbs. There is an interesting parallel to Sirach in a fragmentary wisdom text from Qumran, 4Q184, better known as "The Wiles of the Wicked Woman": "She is the start of all the ways of wickedness...for her paths are paths of death" (4QJ84:8-9). Neither Proverbs nor 4QJ 84, however, implies any reference to Eve, nor do they address the ultimate origin of sin and death. They are concerned with a particular kind of woman, even if their rhetoric is hyperbolic. Ben Sira, by his allusion to the biblical text, makes a far more sweeping claim. But while Sir 25:24 is indicative of the sage's notoriously negative view of women, 15 it is not consistent with his other pronouncements on the origin of sin and death. It seems to be an ad hoc comment, made in the context of a lengthy reflection on "the wicked woman," but it has not been integrated into a coherent theological system. Sirach addresses the origin of sin most directly in 15:11-20. The passage takes the form of a controversy: 16 "Do not say it was the Lord's doing that I fell away, for he does not do what he hates." There was in fact a lively debate on the origin of sin in Hellenistic Jerusalem. One current explanation was provided by the Book of the Watchers in 1 Enoch 1-36, which expanded the story of the sons of God in Genesis 6 and attributed various kind of evil (violence, fornication, astrology) to the fallen angels. This apocalypse refrains from attributing the origin of sin to the creator, but it implies that the problem is not of human origin either. Even within the Enoch literature, this explanation did not go unchallenged. In the Epistle of Enoch, which may be roughly contemporary with Ben Sira, we read: I swear to you, you sinners, that as a mountain has not, and will not, become a slave, nor a hill a woman's maid, so sin was not sent on the earth, but man of himself created it (/ Enoch 98:4). 13

For an overview seeJ.R. Lcvison, Portrait!: of Adam in Early Judaism from Sirach to 2 Baruch (Sheffield: JSOT, 1988). 14 Pace J. R. Lcvison, "Is Eve to Blame? A Contextual Analysis of Sirach 25:24," C5CL47(1985) 617-23. 15 W.C. Trenchard, Ben Sira's View of Women. A Literary Analysis (Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1982). 16 SceJ.L. Crenshaw, "The Problem of Theodicy in Sirach: On Human Bondage," JBL 94(1975) 47-64.

The implied opponents of Ben Sira neither appeal to fallen angels nor accept human responsibility, but they actually had good biblical precedents for their position. Compare the "evil spirit from Yahweh 5 ' that fell on King Saul in 1 Sam 19:9. Ben Sira himself seems to entertain a similar position on occasion. In 33:10-13, a passage that also alludes to the creation of Adam, he proclaims: Every man is a vessel of clay, and Adam was created out of the dust.17 In the fullness of his knowledge the Lord distinguished them and appointed their different ways. Some he blessed and exalted, and some he made holy and brought near to himself; but some he cursed and brought low, and turned them out of their place. Like clay in the hand of the potter, to be molded as he pleases, so all are in the hand of their Maker, to be given whatever he decides.18

The problem is how to balance a monistic belief in a good, omnipotent, creator with the evident presence of evil in the world. Sirach addresses this problem most directly in 15:14: "God created the human being [adarri) in the beginning and placed him in the power of his inclination (b'yadyisrô)." The wordyēser, inclination, is related to the word for "potter" in Sirach 33 (yāsēr) and to the verb used in Gen 2:7 ("the Lord God formed man out of the dust of the ground"). One might infer that the "inclination" is the form given to human beings by the creator. While there is no mention of an inclination in Genesis 1-3, the term appears twice in the Flood story (J source): Gen 6:5, "every inclination of the thoughts of their hearts is evil continually55 and Gen 8:21: "the inclination of the human heart is evil from youth.55 The association of the yēser with evil is typical of biblical usage.19 Only two passages use the term in a positive sense: Isa 26:3 speaks ofyēser sāmûk, a steadfast disposition, and in 1 Chron 29:18 David asks that God preserve the inclination of the thoughts of the heart of the people. (The word appears to be neutral in 1 Chron 28:9). Later, in rabbinic literature, the yēser acquires a technical sense, and is conceived as a force that determines behavior. 20 T h e Talmud attributes to R. Jose the Galilean the view that "the righteous are ruled by the good inclination...the wicked are ruled by the evil inclination...average people are ruled 17

Greek: "All men are from the ground, and Adam was created from the earth." Compare Sir 11:14: "Good and bad, life and death, poverty and wealth are from the Lord." 19 F.C. Porter, "The Yecer HaRa. A Study in the Jewish Doctrine of Sin," in Biblical and Semitic Studies (New York: Scribners, 1901) 93-156; R.E. Murphy, "Yēser in the Qumran Literature," Bib 39(1958) 334-44. 20 G.F. Moore, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era (New York: Schocken, 1971) 1.474-96; E.E. Urbach, The Sages. Their Concepts and Beliefs (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1975) 1.471-83. 18

by both 5 ' (b.Berakot 61b).21 Rabbinic usage attributes a power to the inclinations that is not implied in the biblical usage. Urbach summarizes the situation as follows: In Sirach, as in the Bible, theyēser is the natural inclination of man, and also in the teaching of the Tannaim and Amoraim it sometimes denotes the power of thought, or serves as a synonym for the heart as the source of human desires. However, rabbinic teaching did to some extent personify 'the Evil Inclination,' to whom were ascribed attributes, aims and forms of activity that direct man, even before he was explicitly identified, as by the Amora Resh Laqish, with Satan and the angel of death. 22

T h e potency of the evil inclination (or "evil heart:" cor malignum) plays a prominent part in the apocalypse of 4 Ezra, written at the end of the first century CE: For the first Adam, burdened with an evil heart, transgressed and was overcome, as were also all who were descended from him. Thus the disease became permanent; the Torah was in the people's heart along with the evil root, but what was good departed, and the evil remained. 23

4 Ezra stops short of saying that God created the evil heart, but the Sages are explicit on this point. So Sifre Deuteronomy §45: "My children I have created for you the Evil Inclination, (but I have at the same time) created for you the Torah as an antidote." 24 There is clearly some progression between the Bible and the rabbinic literature. The question is, where does Sirach fit in this process? Recent scholarship has been consistent in emphasizing the neutrality of the inclination in Sirach, and its conformity to the Biblical view.25 It is clear from the following verses that Sirach envisages free choice. The formulation is Deuteronomic: If you choose, you can keep the commandments... Before each person are life and death, and whichever one chooses will be given.26 21

The duality of the human inclinations is derived exegctically from the two yods in the word wyysr in Gen 2:7 (Genesis Rabbah 14:4; Moore, Judaism, 1.484). 22 Urbach, The Sages, 1.472. 23 4 Ezra 3:21-22; 4:20. See M.E. Stone, Fourth Ezra (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990) 63-67. 24 Urbach, The Sages, 1.472. 25 J . Hadot, Penchant Mauvais et Volonté Libre dans La Sagesse de Ben Sira (L'Ecclésiastique){Brussels: University Press, 1970) 209; G.L. Prato, Il Problema délia Teodicea in Ben Sira (Rome: Biblical Institute, 1975) 240; P.W. Skehan and A.A. DiLella, The Wisdom of Ben Sira (New York: Doubleday, 1987) 272. Hadot provides an extensive survey of other passages where yeser might be reconstructed on the basis of the Greek.There is a clear reference to the evil inclination in the Greek text of Sir 37:3, but this seems to arise from a mistranslation of the Hebrew. 26 Sir 15:15,17. Cf. Deut 30:15.

The inclination is not an external, supernatural force. Yet if Sirach is credited with any coherence at all, this passage must be read in the light of Chap. 33, which insists that people are clay in the hand of the potter (yôsêr), to be given whatever God decides. The exercise of human choice is conditioned by the inclination with which a person is fitted at creation, and so the wordyēser in 15:14 can not be simply equated with free will.27 The emphasis in Sirach's argumentation is influenced by the immediate context of a passage. In Chap. 15, he is concerned to defend God from implication in human sin, and so he puts the emphasis on free will, but in Chap. 33 his focus is on the omnipotence of God and the symmetrical order of creation. There is an unresolved tension in his thought between divine determination and human free will.28 Sirach fills out his understanding of creation of humanity in 17:124. T h e clearest references are to Genesis 1 rather than Genesis 2-3, although the notice that God created the human being (anthröpon, Adam) out of the ground shows that Genesis 2 is also in view. Sirach notes that humanity is made in the divine image and enjoys authority over the rest of creation, but, characteristically, ignores the reference to male and female in Gen 1:27. What is most surprising about this passage, however, is that Sirach also ignores the story of the "Fall." 29 Death does not result from the sin of Adam (or Eve!) but is part of creation from the beginning (17:1-2; cf. 41:4). God filled humanity with knowledge and understanding and showed them good and evil (Sir 17:7, cf. Gen 2:9). There is no suggestion, however, that they were forbidden to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Instead, God allotted to them the law of life. He established with them an eternal covenant and revealed to them his decrees. Their eyes saw his glorious majesty and their ears heard the glory of his voice (11-13).

The reference here is to the revelation at Sinai (cf. Exod 19:16-19). Sir 45:5 says that "the law of life and knowledge" was given to Moses on Mt. Sinai. The designation "law of life" is derived from Deut 30:11-20. In this context, the "eternal covenant" of vs. 12 must " The New Revised Standard Version and the commentary of Skehan and DiLella translate the term simply as "free choice." 28 This tension is recognized by G. Maier, Mensch und Freier Wille (Tübingen: Mohr, 1971) 98-115. In Maier's view, the deterministic view was traditional, and Ben Sira moves away from it in debate with opponents in Chap. 15. 79 C. Meyers, Discovering Eve (New York: Oxford, 1988) 77-78, has argued that the story of Adam and Eve is not properly characterized as a Fall, but in any case it involves disobedience to a divine command, followed by expulsion from the Garden. This sequence is ignored in Sirach 17.

also refer to the Sinai covenant, although Sir 44:18 uses the phrase for the covenant with Noah. Compare Bar 4:1, where the Torah is "the law that endures forever." But Sirach allows no interval between the creation and the giving of the Torah. Rather, he implies that the law of life was given to humanity from the beginning. The sin of Adam (which Sirach does not even acknowledge) is no more significant than the sin of anyone else who breaks the Law. Sirach appears to be close to the rabbinic position cited above from Sifre Deuteronomy §45 that God provided the Torah as an antidote to the human inclination. Despite this vigorous endorsement of Deuteronomic theology and human responsibility, however, Sirach's over-all position remains ambiguous. A Hebrew redactor of Chap. 15 complemented the statement that God left humanity in the power of its inclination with the phrase "He set him in the power of his spoiler" (hôtpô). The phrase is not supported by the versions. The original Sirach had no place for a demonic "spoiler,5' and in this he differed both from the Enochic tradition and from the Qumran Community Rule. Consequendy, the human "inclination" ultimately comes from God. There was, then, in Sirach's own theology a basis for the view that sin also comes from God, even though this inference was unacceptable to the sage. Genesis 1-3 in the Scrolls We now have, in the Dead Sea Scrolls, a corpus of literature close to Sirach's time and place that includes some reflections on Genesis 1-3 and also develops the concept of the yeser beyond its biblical connotations. 30 Some of the texts in question, 4Q422 (the Paraphrase on Genesis and Exodus), 4Q504-506 (the Words of the Heavenly Luminaries), 4Q304-305 (the Mysteries of Creation) and 4Q416-418, 423 (Sapiential Work A) are of uncertain provenance. None of them refers to the yahad or uses clearly sectarian terminology, but at least Sapiential Work A shows affinities with other sectarian writings that suggest a common milieu.31 Two

M

Most of these texts were brought together by E. Glickler Chazon in a paper "How Close is Close? On the interrelationship between texts from Qumran,' read at the Society of Biblical Literature Meeting in Chicago, in November 1994. I am grateful to Dr. Chazon for providing me with a copy of her paper. G. Vermes, "Genesis 1-3 in Post-Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic Literature before the Mishnah," JJS 43(1992) 221-25 does not refer to important Qumran texts that had not yet been published when his article was written.

issues that arise in these texts invite comparison with Sirach: the status of the knowledge of good and evil and the role of the evil inclination. We have noted that Sirach ignores the prohibition of eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, but insists that from the beginning God "filled them with knowledge and understanding." Sapiential Work A suggests the kind of exegesis that may underlie this position, by combining Genesis 2:9 and 3:6 so that "every good fruit and every pleasant tree is desirable to give knowledge" (4Q423:2). The garden is a metaphor for life, and the situation of Adam is that of Everyman: Is not this a garden...and in all your works. He put you in charge of it to work it and guard it...It will produce thorns and thisdes for you. It will not give you of its strength...in your toil...she will give birth, and every mother's womb...in all your possessions, for everything it will produce for you. 32

In view of the fragmentary state of the text we cannot be sure why the garden will produce thorns and thistles, or whether it will only do so in some circumstances. It seems clear, however, that Adam's authority over the garden is generalized, and taken to apply to Everyman, the implied addressee of the text. If the difficulty of life is related to sin, it is Everyman's sin that is responsible, but the available evidence suggests that this text agrees with Sirach's view that "hard work was created for everyone and a heavy yoke is laid on the children of Adam" (Sir 40:1) simply by the fiat of the Creator. Like Sirach, however, the author of Sapiential Work A was quite aware of the reality of sin. He cautions his readers: Do not be deluded with the thought of the evil inclination [...] Investigate the truth. (4Q417.2.ii.12-13).

T h e evil inclination is related to the distinction between good and evil, and hence to Genesis 2-3, in a very fragmentary passage in 4Q416.1.1.15-16, in the context of a promise of divine judgment: so that the just man may distinguish between good and evil [...] all [...] the inclination of the flesh, and those who understand...

31

T. Elgvin, "Admonition Texts from Qumran Cave 4," in M. O. Wise et al., eds., Methods of Investigation of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Khirbet Qumran Site (New York: New York Academy of Sciences, 1994) 179-94, emphasizes the affinities with sectarian texts. D.J. Harrington, "Wisdom at Qumran," in E. Ulrich and J . VanderKam, eds., The Community of the Renewed Covenant (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1994) 137-52, stresses the lack of sectarian terminology. 52 Cited from Elgvin, "Admonition Texts," 188.

The term yeser is also used, however, in a positive sense in 4Q417.2.i.11, "to walk in the inclination of its knowledge." 33 It appears, then, that the "inclination" in 4QSapientia1 Work A can be either good or bad. People can resist the evil inclination, and exercise at least a measure of free choice. The context for human choice in this sapiential work is significantly different from that of Sirach, since it is made in view of the impending judgement of God. Where Sirach repeatedly urges his readers to contemplate the day of their death, the Sapiential Work from Qumran urges them to meditate on the mystery that is to come (or the mystery of existence) which, however mysterious, provides a frame of reference that transcends human life. The evil inclination also plays a part in the paraphrase of Genesis in 4Q422. The relevant passage is translated by Torleif Elgvin as follows: [...He set mankind on the ear]th, He set him in charge to eat the fruit [s of the soil] that he should not eat from the tree that gives knowfledge of good and evil...] He rose against Him and they forgot [His laws...] in evil inclination and deed[s of injustice... 34

This text differs from Sirach and 4QSapientia1 Work A in acknowledging the prohibition of the tree of knowledge and Adam's disobedience. This is a more straightforward reading of the Genesis story. Because of the fragmentary state of the text it is not clear whether Adam is regarded as Everyman or as a unique case. There is reason to think, however, that at least Adam's sin is paradigmatic, because the fragment ends with a reference to the evil inclination. The second column of this text goes on to talk about the Flood. Since theyeser first appears in Genesis in the context of the Flood, it seems likely that 4Q422 is making a connection between the two episodes. A similar connection is made in the Words of the Heavenly Luminaries, and Esther Chazon has suggested that in that text too theyeser may have been read back into the Genesis episode.35 There is then considerable support for the view that human sin, beginning with Adam, is a consequence of the evil inclination. None of these texts excludes the possibility of a complementary good inclination, and none of them is very explicit as to why humanity has such inclinations in the first place. All of them locate the inclinations within the human being, and do not personify them as independent forces. None of these texts holds the first Adam responsible for the 33

Garcia Martinez, The Dead Sea Saolls Translated, 387. T. Elgvin, "The Genesis Section of 4Q422 (4QParaGenEx0d)," Dead Sea Discoveries 1(1994) 180-96. The citation is from p. 185. 35 Chazon, "How Close is Close?" 34

sin of his progeny. Rather, Adam is representative of human beings of all generations. The term yēser appears in several texts from Qumran apart from the context of Genesis 2-3.36 T h e "guilty inclination" appears as a recurring force in history in the Damascus Document. CD 2-3 provides an overview of the history of sin, beginning not with Adam but with the Watchers. In effect, this passage de-mythologizes the Watchers, who introduce sin on earth in 1 Enoch, and treats them just like human sinners. The passage goes on to say that those who remain steadfast inherit all the glory of Adam, a concept also known to Ben Sira (Sir 49:16). C D by-passes the story of the Fall, but subscribes to the tradition that the root of sinful behavior is the human decision to follow the evil inclination. The document goes on in col. 4 to talk about the agency of Belial in the world, which would seem to imply a different explanation of sinful behavior. Rather than resort to textual surgery to resolve this apparent contradiction, it is simpler to suppose that the autor of CD was familiar with different traditions and had not managed to synthesize them into a coherent theory. In fact, we find the agency of Belial complementing the human inclination in several texts from Qumran. The term yēser appears more than twenty times in the Hodayot. Sometimes it has the neutral sense of "creature" (1QH 9:21, formerly =1:21).37 A few passages refer to the steadfast inclination [yēser sāmûk, cf. Isa 26:3: 9:35, = 1:35; 10:9,36, =2:9,36). Several passages associate theyēser with evil: 13:5-6, 31-2, (= 5:5-6, 31-2); 15:3, (= 7:3). Here again the inclination is internal to the human being. So the psalmist thanks God for not abandoning him to the plottings of his inclination (13:5-6). But in 1QH 15:3 we read that "Belial is present when the inclination of their being becomes apparent." There is, then, some kind of synergism between the evil inclination and Belial, a factor which may shed some light on the apparent inconsistency of C D that we have noted above. A similar association seems to be implied in 1 lQPss 19:15-16: May Satan not rule over me or an unclean spirit; may neither pain nor an evil inclination (yēser ra') take possession of my bones.

The inclination is still created by God: "for I know that in your hand is the inclination of every spirit" (7:17=15:13). This latter statement 36

Murphy, "Yēser in the Qumran Literature," 334-44; Hadot, Penchant Mauvais, 47-55. 37 I follow the numbering of the Hodayot proposed by E. Puech, "Quelques aspects de la restauration du Rouleau des Hymnes (1QH)," JJS 39(1988) 38-55, and used in Garcia Martinez, The Dead Sea Saolls Translated.

is no more deterministic than what we have found in Sir 33:13, which says that all creatures are like clay in the hand of the potter, but it also brings to mind the doctrine of the two spirits in the Community Rule. The term yeser appears in both positive and negative senses in the Community Rule. In 1QS 4:5 and 8:3 we read of the steadfast inclination (yēser sāmûk). But 1QS 5:5 prescribes that no one should wander in the stubborness of his heart, to err following his heart, his eyes and the plan of his inclination. Rather, one should "circumcize the foreskin of the inclination." The use of yeser, then, in the sectarian scrolls, seems quite close to what we find in Ben Sira, with the significant exception of the association of the yeser with Belial in 1QH 15:3, and 1 lQPsalms (and less directly in CD). The term yeser is conspicuously lacking, however, in the discussion of the creation of humanity in the Community Rule. The Instruction on the Two Spirits (1QS 3-4) says that God "created man to rule the world and placed within him two spirits so that he would walk with them until the moment of his visitation." The phrase "to rule the world" (lememšelet tebet) is consistent with the use of the verb himšîl in several texts from Cave 4 with reference to the role of Adam (4Q381, 4Q422, the Words of the Heavenly Luminaries and 4QSapientia1 Work A). No exegetical justification is given for the introduction of two spirits, although one may be presupposed. It is possible that the author read the nišmat hayyîm and the nepeš hayyāh of Gen 2:7 as two spirits; compare Genesis Rabbah 14:10: H e r e the neshamah (soul) is identified with nefesh, w h e r e a s in a n o t h e r text (Gen 17:22) the neshamah is equated with ruah (spirit)...because "life" (hayyîm) is written in both texts, proving that they are analogous."‫י‬

But neither the midrash nor any source outside of Qumran understood the Genesis text to refer to opposing spirits. Here, then, we have a clear break with the interpretation of Genesis that we have found in Ben Sira and in various texts from Cave 4. P. Wernberg-M011er has argued that the Instruction on the Two Spirits should be understood in terms of the good and evil inclinations, and that it does not represent a radical break with earlier interpretations: It is significant that o u r a u t h o r regards the two "spirits" as created by G o d , a n d that according to I V , 2 3 a n d o u r passage b o t h "spirits" dwell in m a n as created by G o d . W e are therefore not dealing here M

Midrash Rabbah (Trans. H. Freedman; New York: Soncino, 1983) 118.

with a kind of metaphysical, cosmic dualism represented by the two "spirits," but with the idea that man was created by God with two "spirits"—the Old Testament term for "mood" or "disposition." That R W H W T is used here as a psychological term seems clear; and the implication is that the failure of man to "rule the world" is due to man himself because he allows his "spirit of perversion," that is to say his perverse and sinful propensities, to determine his behaviour. We have thus arrived at the rabbinic distinction between the evil and the good YĒSER. 3 9

It is certainly true that the two spirits have a psychological dimension.They struggle in the heart of human beings (1QS 4:23). It is also true that the entire passage is based, however loosely, on Genesis 2-3. The Instruction concludes with a statement that God "has given a legacy to the sons of men for knowledge of good [and evil]," a statement that suggests that this document, like Sirach and 4QSapientia1 Work A, may not have regarded the tree of knowledge as off limits. Significandy, the Community Rule, like CD, promises the elect that "the glory of Adam" will be theirs (1QS 4:23). But Wernberg-M011er,s inference that "we are therefore not dealing here with a kind of metaphysical, cosmic dualism" is clearly a non sequitur. The Instruction clearly identifies the two spirits with the Prince of Lights and the Angel of Darkness (3:20-21). The dualism is simultaneously psychological, moral and cosmic. The relation between the cosmic and the psychological may be similar to what we have seen in 1QH 15 and 11 QPsalms. There is a synergism between the psychological realm and the agency of the supernatural angels or demons. The cosmic dimension of this dualism unmistakeably shows the influence of Zoroastrianism. The passage is also exegetical, but the hermeneutical lens is provided by the Zoroastrian dualism of light and darkness. 40 Wisdom and Apocalypticism reconsidered The teaching on the two spirits provides a nice focal point for comparison of Ben Sira and Qumran on the origin of sin. Despite the startling novelty of the Community Rule, we can now see its formulation in the context of an ongoing debate in the wisdom schools of Judea in the second century BCE. All the documents we 39 P. Wernberg-M011er, "A Reconsideration of the Two Spirits in the Rule of the Community (1Q. Serek 111,13—IV, 26," Revue de Qumrân 3(1961) 413-41. The citation is from p.422. 40 See further J.J. Collins, "The Origin of Evil in Apocalyptic Literature and the Dead Sea Scrolls," in J.A. Emerton, ed., Congress Volume, Paris (Leiden: Brill, 1995) 25-38.

have considered try to understand the problem of sinful behavior in the context of the Genesis account of creation. None of them has a doctrine of original sin, in the sense that Adam is responsible for the sin of his descendants. All of them take some liberties with the biblical text in the process, Ben Sira no less than the Community Rule. We noted above the tension in Ben Sira between the Deuteronomic theology with its emphasis on free choice and the recognition that the Lord appointed the different ways of humanity (Sir 33:11). Sirach lays the foundation for a dualistic view of the world with his assertion that all the works of the Lord come in pairs, one the opposite of the other (33:15). His dualism, which may be influenced by Stoic philosophy, 41 is primarily ethical and psychological. It is not metaphysical. The reference to the yēser in Chap. 15 can be understood readily in this context, in light of the usage 4QSapientia1 Work A and 4Q422 from Qumran. Human beings have both a good and a bad inclination, but they are not bereft of the power of choice. Despite its deterministic language, the Community Rule also presupposes the power to choose. The opening columns of the Scroll describe a Deuteronomic covenant renewal in which the covenanters freely choose to submit to the commandments. Insofar as the two spirits are placed within human beings, and "feud in the heart of man" (1QS 4:23) they function in a way similar to the two inclinations. The dualism of Qumran is also ethical and psychological. But it is also more, for the two spirits are also metaphysical powers, the Prince of Light and the Prince of Darkness or Belial. Moreover, the Community Rule presupposes a mythic structure, whereby history is divided between these conflicting powers, but in the end God will intervene with a decisive judgement. 42 This mythological structure with its eschatological implications is phenomenologically similar to what we find in the apocalypses, even though the specific myth of the two spirits is not found in the books of Enoch or Daniel, and probably reflects the influence of Zoroastrianism. The appeal to supernatural forces as an explanation of evil clearly separates all forms of apocalypticism from the traditional wisdom of Ben Sira. The appeal to supernatural forces, however, does not necessarily distinguish apocalypticism from all wisdom literature. The Instruction of the Two Spirits is not an apocalypse; it is not presented as a revelation. Its literary genre is, in fact, a typical wisdom genre. 41

R. Pautrel, "Ben Sira et le stoicisme," RSR 51(1963) 535-49. Wernbcrg-Meller's attempt to deny the eschatological dimension of the Community Rule is completely unconvincing ("The Two Spirits," 420-21). 42

4QSapientia1 Text A, which does not have the doctrine of the two spirits, has an eschatological perspective which we associate with apocalypticism rather than with traditional Hebrew wisdom. The Wisdom of Solomon is also informed by apocalyptic traditions about the judgment of the dead. "Wisdom" cannot be identified with any one worldview. The apocalyptic mindset of the Scrolls can furnish the content of a wisdom instruction just as well as the empirical thisworldly mindset of Proverbs and Qoheleth. 43 Neither the apocalyptic nor the sapiential literature ever finally resolved the question of the origin of evil.44 At the end of the first century CE, these issues were still debated in the rival apocalypses of 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch. In a passage reminiscent of St. Paul (Rom 5:12), 4 Ezra asks: Ο Adam, what have you done? For though it was you who sinned, the fall was not yours alone, but ours also who are your descendants" (4 Ezra 7:118).

The question is echoed in 2 Baruch 48:42: " O Adam, What was it that you did to all your posterity? 2 Baruch, however, adds a rejoinder that is very much in the tradition of Ben Sira and the Dead Sea Scrolls: For though Adam first sinned and brought untimely death upon all men, yet each one of those who were born from him has either prepared for his own soul its future torment or chosen for himself the glories that are to be...Thus Adam was resonsible for himself alone; each one of us is his own Adam.

43 44

See Collins, "Wisdom, Apocalypticism and Gcneric Compatibility." J J . Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1984) 156-80.

CHAPTER TWENTY THREE

WISDOM, APOCALYPTICISM AND GENERIC COMPATIBILITY

The relationship between wisdom and apocalypticism has been the subject of at least two distinct debates in recent biblical scholarship. In Hebrew Bible/Old Testament scholarship, the debate is associated especially with the proposal of Gerhard von Rad that "the real matrix from which apocalyptic literature originates" is wisdom.1 While that thesis has not won acceptance, it has contributed to a tendency in the discussion to view apocalypticism as a kind of wisdom. 2 In New Testament circles, on the other hand, the focus has been on the tension between sapiential forms and apocalyptic expectations in the teaching attributed to Jesus. This debate has recendy been focused on the sayings source, Q. In a paper originally published in 1964, James Robinson identified the "Gattung" of Q,as "Logoi Sophon." He commented, presumably with von Rad in mind, that the presence of apocalyptic sayings in Q w a s all the more comprehensible in view of the emerging scholarly awareness that apocalypticism and wisdom, rather than being at almost mutually exclusive extremes within the spectrum of Jewish alternatives, share certain affinities and congruencies that encourage a transition from one to the other. 3

Helmut Koester, however, argued that apocalyptic predictions were not part of the primitive collection and that "Q, domesticated the logoi through a kind of apocalypticism which identified Jesus with the future Son of Man. 5 ' 4 Recendy John Kloppenborg has taken up these issues in his thorough redactional study of Q and argued that "the formative component in Q. consisted of a group of six "wisdom speeches" which were hortatory in nature and sapiential in their 1 G. von Rad, Old Testament Theology (New York: Harper & Row, 1965) 2: 306 (German original, 1960). 2 Cf. the section on "Die Weisheit der Apokalyptiker" in M. Küchler, Frühjüdische Weisheitstraditwnen (OBO 26; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979) 62-87. 3 J.M. Robinson, "LOGOI SOPHON. O n the Gattung of Q," inJ.M. Robinson and H. Koester, eds., Trajectories through Early Christianity (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971) 112. 4 H. Koester, "GNOMAI DIAPHOROI. The Origin and Nature of Diversification in the History of Eariy Christianity," in Robinson and Koester, Trajectories, 138.

mode of argumentation." 5 The announcement of judgment and apocalyptic sayings constitute a secondary stage in the formation of Q. Kloppenborg cautiously refrained from any claims about the ultimate origin of any of the sayings,6 but Burton Mack has drawn a controversial inference: To notice the aphoristic quality of the sayings of Jesus and isolate an early "sapiential" layer in their collection is to define a particular style of speech of great significance for the quest of the historical Jesus." 7 Specifically, "this turns the table on older views of Jesus as an apocalyptic preacher and brings the message of Jesus around to another style of speech altogether. 8

For Mack, evidently, wisdom and apocalypticism are, again, "almost mutually exclusive extremes," the position from which Robinson thought scholarship had moved away in 1964. I do not propose to resolve here such complex questions as the nature of Q o r the teaching of the historical Jesus, but to fill in part of the background of the discussion, by sketching the relationships between sapiential and apocalyptic traditions in Jewish materials around the turn of the era, and thereby try to clarify some of the issues in the New Testament debate. The Old Testament debate The view that apocalypticism was derived from wisdom had been proposed by others before von Rad, but had never won much support. 9 Von Rad's argument was based on the discontinuity he perceived between the apocalyptic view of history and that of the prophets, but he also noted the enormous erudition of Enoch and Daniel, the interest in nature exemplified in the Astronomical Book of Enoch and the fact that the putative apocalyptists were described as wise men and scribes.10 In all of this, he drew attention to aspects of the apocalyptic literature that had been neglected, and contributed 5 J.S. Kloppcnborg, The Formation of Q. Trajectories in Ancient Wisdom Collections (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987) 317. 6 Ibid, 244. 7 B. Mack, A Myth of Innocence. Mark and Christian Origins (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988) 60. 8 Ibid, 59. 9 It was proposed already in the 19th ccntury by L. Noack and H. Ewald, and in the early 20th century by G. Hölscher. See J.M. Schmidt, Die jüdische Apokalyptik (Neukirchen‫־‬Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag des Erziehungsvereins, 1969) 13-14; 2021; 258-9. 10 Von Rad expanded his arguments in the 4th edition of his Theologie (Munich: Kaiser, 1965) 316-38.

to its subsequent re-assessment. So H.-P. Müller traced the roots of apocalypticism to "mantic wisdom," which was concerned with dreams and omens, but which leaves little trace in the biblical wisdom books." Michael Stone studied the "lists of revealed things" in the apocalypses and concluded that such speculative concerns most probably derived from wisdom sources.12 Again, however, he found very few parallels in the biblical wisdom books. John Gammie discussed the different kinds of dualism in the two bodies of literature. 13 Others have pointed to examples of "wisdom thinking" in 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch, which wresde at length with the problem of theodicy, 14 and there is demonstrable apocalyptic influence in the Wisdom of Solomon, in its formulation of the judgment of the dead. 15 Yet the differences between the apocalypses and the biblical wisdom books remain overwhelming. It would be hard to think of two books more dissimilar than Ecclesiastes and 1 Enoch. A fundamental flaw in von Rad's proposal lay in his failure to define his terms, or to discriminate between the different kinds of material covered by the terms "wisdom" and "apocalyptic." In the subsequent quarter of a century much ink has been spilt on the ambiguity of "apocalyptic." We have learned to distinguish between apocalypse as a literary genre and apocalypticism as a world view, to recognize the different strands of tradition in Jewish apocalypticism and to beware of facile inferences from literary works to social movements. 16 While there have also been important studies of wisdom in this period, not least by von Rad himself,17 there has been less attention to the problems of ambiguity and definition. The volume on the Sage in Israel and the Ancient Near East, edited by John Gammie and Leo Perdue, ranges from Egypt and Mesopotamia in the second millennium to the Hellenistic period and beyond. 18 It 11

H.-P. Müller, "Mantische Weisheit und Apokalyptik," Congress Volume Uppsala (VTSup 22; Leiden: Brill, 1972) 268-93. w M.E. Stone, "Lists of Revealed Things in the Apocalyptic Literature," in F.M. Cross, W. Lemke and P.D. Miller, ed., Magnolia Dei. The Mighty Acts of God (Garden City: Doubleday, 1976) 414-51. 13 J.G. Gammie, "Spatial and Ethical Dualism in Jewish Wisdom and Apocalyptic Literature," JBL 93(1974) 356-85. 14 M.A. Knibb, "Apocalyptic and Wisdom in 4 Ezra," JSJ 13(1982) 56-74; FJ. Murphy, "Sapiential Elements in the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch," JQR 77(1986) 311-27. 15 J.J. Collins, "Cosmos and Salvation. Jewish Wisdom and Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Age," HR 17(1977) 121-42. 16 See my essay "Genre, Ideology and Social Movements in Jewish Apocalypticism," in J J . Collins and J.H. Charlesworth, eds., Mysteries and Revelations. Apocalyptic Studies Since the Uppsala Colloquium (JSPSup 9; Sheffield: J S O T , 1991) 11-32, 17 Von Rad, Wisdom in Israel (Nashville: Abingdon, 1972). 18 Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1990.

provides the most compendious view of "wisdom" yet available. Thereby it also poses the question of coherence and variation within this vast corpus and highlights the need for a typology. For our present purposes, it will be helpful to distinguish five broad types of sapiential material: 19 1 wisdom sayings (Spruchweisheit, including aphorisms and more developed instructions and admonitions) such as we find in Proverbs 10-30;20 2 theological wisdom, including both speculative passages such as Proverbs 8 and reflections on theodicy (such as the entire book of Job) 3 nature wisdom, exemplified in J o b 28, 38-41; 4 mantic wisdom (divination and dream interpretation) and 5 higher wisdom through revelation, including apocalyptic revelations.21 While these types are not mutually exclusive, and the first three are intermingled in the biblical wisdom books, they are, nonetheless, distinct. T o say that apocalypticism is an example of wisdom by revelation (type 5) or is influenced by mantic wisdom (type 4) does not imply any necessary connection between apocalypticism and the experiential wisdom of Proverbs. It is also necessary to distinguish between the literary forms of wisdom and a sapiential world view, if such a thing there be. In his excellent introduction to Old Testament Wisdom, ]dime?, Crenshaw suggests that wisdom involves "a marriage between form and content." 22 Formally wisdom consists of proverbial sentence or instruction, debate, intellectual reflection; thematically, wisdom comprises self-evident intuitions about mastering life for human betterment, gropings after life's secrets with regard to innocent suffering, grappling with finitude, and quest for truth concealed in the created order and manifested in Dame Wisdom.

He suggests that "wisdom is a particular attitude toward reality, a world view."23 The world view consists in a way of looking at things that 15

I am building here on the three-fold typology of nature wisdom, practical wisdom and theological wisdom, proposed by J . Crenshaw, "Method in Determining Wisdom Influence Upon Historical Literature," JBL 88(1969) 132. 20 O n this material see now Carol R. Fontaine, Traditional Sayings in the Old Testament A Contextual Study (Bible and Literature 5; Sheffield: Almond, 1982); Claus Westermann, Wurzeln der Weisheit (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1990). 21 For this category see M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974) 1. 202-18. 22 J . L Crenshaw, Old Tetament Wisdom. An Introduction (Atlanta: Knox, 1981) 19. 23 Ibid, 17.

begins with humans as the fundamental point of orientation. It asks what is good for men and women. And it believes that all essential answers can be learned in experience, pregnant with signs about reality itself.24

It is, I think, apparent that Crenshaw has only the biblical wisdom books in mind in all of this, and is not reckoning with mande wisdom, or with the higher wisdom through revelation of the Hellenisdc period. His usage, however, is typical of Old Testament scholarship and he is certainly right that the wisdom books of the Hebrew Bible share a world view as well as pardcular literary forms. This world-view involves more than a point of orientation. It also involves a set of assumptions about the universe. It affirms a world where there is an organic connection between cause and effect, where human fulfillment, such as it is, is to be found in this life and where wisdom can be attained from accumulated experience without recourse to special revelations. (The relationship of the Book of J o b to this world-view is complex, but that need not detain us here). Whether this world-view was distinctive in ancient Israel is open to question. Roland Murphy maintains that "the sapiential understanding of reality was shared by all Israelites; it was not a mode of thinking that belonged to only one class."25 So, "it should come as no surprise that Isaiah, or any other prophet should use a parable. But Isaiah is not to be classified among the sages." Two observations about the wisdom tradition may help shed light on this situation. First, in the context of the Hebrew Bible, wisdom is often defined negatively: it is marked by its lack of explicit appeal to the specific revelatory traditions of Israel. Nonetheless, the sapiential world view is also shared by other traditions, as Murphy observes, because they all draw on the common fund of human experience. Second, while the sages occasionally appeal to personal experience, the wisdom books are, for the most part, compendia of traditional opinions. The strategy of the sages is well articulated by Bildad, in J o b 8:8-10: For inquire, I pray you, of bygone ages, and consider what the fathers have found; for we are but of yesterday and know nothing for our days on earth are a shadow.

The sages do not aspire to originality. Rather they reflect the consensus of their culture, and pass on the commonly accepted 24

Ibid, 18. R.E. Murphy, The Wisdom Literature. Job, Proverbs, Ruth, Canticles, Ecclesiastes and Esther (FOTL 13; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981) 3. 25

assumptions about reality. The biblical wisdom books do not give us the full range of ancient Israelite ideas about reality. They pay little attention to mythological beliefs, although the author ofJob, at least, was familiar with them. It is reasonable to believe, however, that what they give us was widely shared in Israelite society. The question arises, however, whether the characteristic forms of wisdom literature were necessarily wedded to that world view, and this question is crucial for the relation between biblical wisdom and apocalypticism. The apocalyptic literature which first appears in the Hellenistic period introduces a view of the world which is sharply at variance not only with the biblical wisdom books, but with the Hebrew Bible as a whole.26 This new world view 1s distinguished primarily by the increased importance attached to supernatural agents and a world beyond this one, and by the hope for judgment and vindication beyond death. Of course, belief in the supernatural world was commonplace in antiquity. What was novel was the degree to which this world was thought to impinge on human affairs and human beings could have access to it. The new world view is depicted most vividly in 1 Enoch. Here we find that 1 the earth is corrupt and in need of cleansing; 2 the corruption is due, not just to human sin, but to the irruption of fallen angels; 3 we are assured that this condition is not final, because Enoch has had access to the divine throne and seen the heavenly tablets; 4 his revelations include the final judgment both of this world and of the fallen Watchers, and also the abodes of the dead where individuals await justice. 27 The Book of Daniel, too, though written in a more traditional biblical idiom, has a similar view of the world. The earth is over-run by the beasts from the sea, or is governed by the rebellious angelic princes of Persia and Greece. Daniel too sees the divine throne, and is assured of coming judgment and of the resurrection of the dead. The world view of these early apocalypses may be contrasted with that of the biblical wisdom books in three crucial respects: 1 The increased importance of the supernatural world and supernatural agents in human affairs. This is reflected even in the 56 See my essay, "The Place of Apocalypticism in the Religion of Israel," in P.D. Miller, P.D. Hanson, and S.D. McBride, eds., Ancient Israelite Religion. Essays in Honor of Frank Moore Cross (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987) 539-58. 27 O n the world-view of 1 Enoch see further G.W. Nickelsburg, "The Apocalyptic Construction of Reality in 1 Enoch," in Collins and Charlesworth, eds., Mysteries and Revelations, 51-64,

literary form of the apocalypses, where angelic mediators play an essential role. 2 The expectation of eschatological judgment and reward or punishment beyond death. 3 The perception that something is fundamentally wrong with this world. This is often described in modern scholarship as a sense of anomie, and such a description is well justified in the case of 1 Enoch or Daniel, or in the Qumran texts which speak of a reign of Belial. Two qualifications are in order, however. First, the anomie is never total: 1 Enoch in fact devotes considerable space to affirming the order of the cosmos (e.g. the Astronomical Book, Chaps 72-82, and Chaps. 2-5 in the Book of the Watchers). Second, the problem is not always portrayed in extreme cosmic imagery. In works like 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch the fundamental problem is the fate of Israel. Of course the sages too could find this world less than satisfactory on occasion-—witness the pessimism of Qoheleth. In apocalypticism, however, the sense that something is wrong with this world is sharpened by the expectation of eschatological judgment. T h e contrast in word view between apocalypticism and traditional wisdom is most sharply drawn in the wisdom books from about the time when apocalypticism was emerging. The ironic question of Agur, "who has ascended to heaven and come down?" (Prov 30:4), was probably too early to constitute a polemic against the claims made for Enoch. On the other hand, when Qoheleth asks "who knows whether the spirit of man goes upward and the spirit of the beast goes down to the earth?" (Qoh 3:21), it is quite possible that he is polemicizing against the apocalyptic claims of life beyond death. Ben Sira, who was surely familiar with early apocalyptic speculation, unequivocally rejected it:28 A man of no understanding has vain and false hopes, and dreams give wings to fools. As one who catches at a shadow and pursues the wind, so is he who gives heed to dreams... Unless they are sent from the Most High as a visitation, do not give your mind to them. 28

J.D. Martin, "Ben Sira—Child of his Time," inJ.D. Martin and P.R. Davies, eds., A Word in Season. Essays in Honour of William McKane (JSOTSup 42; Sheffield: J S O T , 1986) 141-61, labors to establish affinities between Sirach and apocalyptic literature with regard to the order of the cosmos and the use of history, but he lacks any criteria to assess the significance of the very general similarities he finds. Also D.E. Orton, The Understanding Scribe. Matthew and the Apocalyptic Ideal (JSNTSup 25; Sheffield: J S O T , 1989) 101, 224 overiooks the differences between Sirach and the apocalypses.

For dreams have deceived many, and those who put their hope in them have failed. Without such deceptions the law will be fulfilled, and wisdom is made perfect from truthful lips (34:1-8).

Granted the escape clause, that dreams may be sent from the Most High on occasion, it is clear that Sirach is not favorably disposed to apocalyptic revelations. He is equally blunt on the question of afterlife: "whether life is for ten or a hundred or a thousand years, there is no inquiry about it in Hades" (41:4). Yet Sirach is a transitional figure in the history ofJewish wisdom. He is the first sage to find room for the biblical history, and the special place of Israel, in his world view.29 The fathers whom he praises are the patriarchs and heroes of biblical history. Even Enoch finds a place, though not as a source of revelation. Moreover, "the wisdom of all the ancients" includes prophecies, and pre-eminently the law of the Most High (39:1-2). Even the prayer in Chap. 36, which is without parallel in the wisdom books of the Hebrew Bible in its nationalistic fervor and expectation of divine intervention, is not inconceivable on the lips of Sirach, steeped as he is in the biblical tradition, although it is also without parallel in his book. 30 In short, while Sirach was skeptical of ideas which were novel in his day, he illustrates the fact that the wisdom tradition could expand to take account of a wide range of traditional material. In the period after the Maccabean revolt, apocalyptic literature won increasing acceptance in Judaism. Daniel is cited as authoritative scripture at Qumran 3 1 and its authority is assumed in the New Testament and in Josephus. The belief in resurrection, one of the trademarks of the apocalypses, was taken up by the Pharisees. It is not surprising then, that we find various combinations and permutations of sapiential and apocalyptic material in the so-called intertestamental literature. Leaving aside the mantic and revelatory kinds of wisdom which are intrinsically related to apocalypticism, we note that both nature wisdom and theological wisdom are used in apocalyptic contexts in various ways.32

29 B.L. Mack, Wisdom and the Hebrew Epic (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985). 30 The authenticity of the prayer is disputed. It is assumed by some commentators (most recently A.A. DiLella, The Wisdom of Ben Sira [AB 39; Garden City: Doubleday, 1987] 420, but rejected by T. Middcndorp, Die Stellung Jesu ben Stras zwischen Judentum und Hellenismus (Leiden: Brill, 1973) 113,125 and Mack, Wisdom, 200. 51 4QF10r 2:3: "as is written in the book of Daniel the prophet." 32 See Collins, "Cosmos and Salvation," 121-42.

So the readers of 1 Enoch are invited to contemplate the regularity of heaven and earth (chs. 2-5). One of the earliest Enoch books, the Astronomical Book, is an extended treatise on the regularity of the heavenly bodies, and such nature wisdom seems to have been a primary interest of the early Enoch movement. It is characteristic of apocalyptic literature, however, that the order of nature is flawed. In 1 Enoch 5 the regularity of nature is a foil for human rebellion, while the Astronomical Book concludes with a prediction of how "in the days of the sinners the years will become shorter..." The natural wisdom does not finally determine the world view. The most important wisdom imparted by Enoch is derived from what he has seen on the heavenly tablets and is shown by angels. Even the order of the heavens is revealed by an angel. 33 Again, the dialogues in 4 Ezra might be viewed as examples of deliberative theological wisdom, pondering the problem of theodicy. The solution to that problem, however, is given in the apocalyptic visions in the second half of the book. The sapiential elements are put in the new context of the apocalyptic world view. Sapiential sayings can also find a place in an apocalyptic context, and it is on this material that I wish to focus here, both because this material is most commonly associated with the world view of biblical wisdom, and because it is the kind of wisdom at issue in the New Testament debate about wisdom and apocalypticism. Sapiential sayings and apocalypticism Wisdom sayings are of various kinds. What they have in common is the attempt to express a general truth in a concise way. At the most fundamental level we can distinguish between declarative sayings, in the indicative, and commands and prohibitions in the imperative. 34 On a more developed level there is a corresponding distinction between sayings collections (e.g. Prov 10-21) on the one hand, and Instructions or Admonitions on the other. Collections of declarative sayings are never found in the apocalypses. There is an apparent ideological reason for this. Sayings, as we find them in Proverbs, draw on human experience and observation as their source of wisdom. Apocalypses are oriented toward supernatural revelation. It would be rash to conclude that declarative sayings could not be 33

So also in 2 Enoch, where Enoch is given extensive cosmological revelations in chs. 23-33. 34 Murphy, Wisdom Literature, 4-6. See also Crenshaw, "Wisdom," in J . H . Hayes, ed., Old Testament Form Criticism (San Antonio: Trinity University Press, 1974) 22564.

adapted to an apocalypdc world view, but the apocalypse as a literary genre has a different way of presenting reality. In so far as it purports to describe the unique experiences of the visionary it does not lend itself to the formulation of general proverbial truths. There is, however, a place for instructions and admonitions in the apocalypses, and these sometimes have a sapiential character. 35 Both apocalyptic and wisdom literature aim to influence the behavior of the readers by instilling a view of the world. In the wisdom literature the implications are regularly filled out in instructions which freely use imperatives and prohibitions. In the apocalyptic literature the instruction is often left implicit. (E.g. when the wise in Daniel 11 instruct the rabbîm, the instruction is not narrated but can be inferred from the context). There are, however, a few instances where the instruction is spelled out. Perhaps the clearest use of a sapiential instruction in an apocalyptic context is found in the second Sibylline Oracle. 36 This is a Christian adaptation of a Jewish oracle, probably from the second century CE. The Jewish oracle was organized around the familiar Sibylline schema of ten generations. At the end of the description of the tenth generation, the Christian redactor inserted a passage about "a great contest for entry to the heavenly city. It will be universal for all men, holding the glory of immortality" (2:39-55). At this point there is inserted a lengthy extract from the sayings of PseudoPhocylides. This is known independently as a Hellenistic Jewish gnomologion, in the tradition of Greek gnomologia but very similar in theme to traditional Jewish wisdom.37 At the end of the extract the Sibyllist resumes, "this is the contest, these are the prizes, these the awards..." (2:149). The extract from Pseudo-Phocylides is evidently meant to supply the rules for the contest, the criteria for the apocalyptic judgment. This Sibylline Oracle is exceptional in several respects. It is the only case where we find an extensive quotation from a known sapiential text in an apocalyptic context. The usage, then, is blatant-

35 This point has been noted on occasion, e.g. U. Wilckens, "sophia," T D N T 7(1971) 503; Küchlcr, Frühjüdische Weisheitstraditionen, 81-84; J.S. Kloppenborg, "Symbolic Eschatology and the Apocalypticism of Q," HTR 80(1987) 290. Robinson lists "The Words of Enoch the Righteous" (1 Enoch) and the Testaments of the Twelve. Patriarchs as examples of Logoi Sop/wn ("LOGOI SOPHON," 106-09). Also recently R.A. Piper, Wisdom in the Q;Tradition (SNTSMS 61; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) 8, who dismisses the apocalyptic material too quickly. 36 J J . Collins, "The Sibylline Oracles," in OTP 1.345-53. 37 P. W. van der Horst, The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides (SVTP 4; Leiden: Brill, 1978).

ly secondary. Moreover, the sentences are inserted intact and not redacted. (There are a few omissions). There is none of the eschatological urgency here that scholars usually identify in the sayings of Jesus. Rather we find the typical sapiential ethic of moderation: "Do not gain wealth unjusdy, but live from legitimate things" (vs. 56); "do not damage your mind with wine or drink to excess" (vs. 95). There are echoes of biblical texts, including the ten commandments (vss. 58, 60, 64, 73). T h e sayings represent everyday wisdom, and are not materially altered by their new context. While this text is exceptional in many respects, it may serve as a warning that ancient writers could sometimes juxtapose materials that seem ideologically incompatible to us. Our second example is more in the mainstream of Jewish apocalypticism. T h e Epistle of Enoch (1 Enoch 91-104) is the last major section of the collection we know as 1 Enoch. This document was customarily dated to the early first century BCE, but opinion has recendy shifted in favor of a date before the Maccabean revolt.38 A major factor in the dispute about the date concerns the unity of the composition. Those who favor the later date assume that the Apocalypse of Weeks is an independent composition, secondarily imbedded in the Epistle. This assumption has been challenged in light of the Aramaic fragments from Qumran. While the apocalypse is formally distinct, there is no good evidence that it ever circulated independendy, outside of its present context. The affinity of the Epistle with wisdom instructions is apparent from the exordium: "hear my children, all the words of your father and listen properly to the voice of my mouth" (91:3). The ensuing instruction distinguishes repeatedly between the wise and the foolish. The typical form consists of an exhortation or admonition, followed by a short motivation clause (e.g. 94:1: "and now I say to you my children, love righteousness and walk in it; for the paths of righteousness are worthy of acceptance, but the paths of iniquity will quickly be destroyed and vanish1'). The most typical form of admonition is the Woe (e.g. 96:8: "woe to you, you powerful, who through power oppress the righteous, for the day of your destruction will come"). 39 In the context of the Hebrew Bible, such woes are more typical of prophetic than of sapiential literature, but it has been argued that this form of expression (like the corresponding

38

See J J . Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1984) 52-53. See the form-critical analysis by G.W. Nickelsburg, "The Apocalyptic Message of 1 Enoch 92-105," CBQ39(1977) 309-43. 39

beatitude) was originally developed in wisdom settings.40 The woeform is attested in Sir 2:12-14; 41:8-9.41 The subject matter of Enoch's instruction is quite traditional, and is primarily concerned with the exploitation of the poor by the rich. It differs from other sapiential instructions in two respects. First, the authority to which he lays claim derives from his knowledge of the heavenly tablets. His utterances, therefore, have the quality of revelation, and give his instruction a prophetic as well as a sapiential tone. Second, the primary motivating factor is the expectation of judgment, and the assurance for the righteous that they "will shine like the lights of heaven and will be seen, and the gate of heaven will be opened to you" (104:2). As a corollary of this, it is a premise of the apocalyptic world view that earthly wealth is fleeting, and this conviction strengthens the woes against the wicked. Unlike the sayings of Ps. Phocylides in Sib O r 2, the words of Enoch are thoroughly permeated with an apocalyptic world view. A third example of a sapiential instruction in an apocalyptic text is found in 2 Enoch, a work of disputed origin which is most often ascribed to the Egyptian Diaspora in the first century CE.42 After his tour of the heavens, Enoch is given 30 days to instruct his sons, before he is finally taken from them. His instruction is found in Chaps. 39-66. It begins in typical sapiential style: "Give heed my children to the admonition of your father..." The instruction includes an account of what Enoch has learnt in the heavens, but is chiefly given over to ethical exhortation. Especially notable is the use of macarisms and curses (42:6-14; 52:1-15). These are often reminiscent of traditional wisdom: "Happy is he who turns aside from the path of change and walks in the right paths!" (42:10, cf. Prov 4:11); "Happy is he who sows right seed, for he shall harvest it sevenfold" (42:11, cf. Job 4:8; Prov 22:8). Moreover, they show the kind of universal humanist ethic usually associated with Near Eastern wisdom: "(Happy is he who) clothes the naked with a garment and to the hungry gives his bread! Happy is he who judges righteous judgment for orphan and widow" (42:8-9); "Whoever insults a person's face insults the face of the Lord; whoever treats a person's face with repugnance treats the face of the Lord with 40

E. Gerstenberger, "The Woe-Oracles of the Prophets," JBL 81(1962) 249-64; J. W. Whedbee, Isaiah and Wisdom (Nashville: Abingdon, 1971) 80-110. 41 Nickelsburg, "Apocalyptic Message," 327, notes that the "Say not..." réfutation form also occurs both in the Epistle and in Ben Sira. 45 See Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 195-98; F. I. Andersen, "2 (Slavonic Apocalypse of) Enoch," OTP 1.91-221. Quotations here arc from Andersen's translation.

repugnance" (44:2, cf. Prov 14:31); "Happy is he who glorifies all the works of the Lord. Cursed is he who insults the creatures of the Lord" (52:5-6, cf. Sir 39:14-16); "Happy is he who preserves the foundations of the fathers where they have been made sure. Cursed is he who destroys the rules and restrictions of the fathers" (52:9-10). Unlike the sayings of Ps.-Phocylides in Sib Or 2, however, the instructions of Enoch are integrally related to their context. In his heavenly journey, Enoch was shown the order of creation, and this is the basis of his ethical teaching: "The Lord with his own two hands created mankind; and in a facsimile of his own face. Small and great the Lord created" (44:1). But it is also reinforced by the prospect of a final judgment: Because on the day of the great judgment every deed of mankind will be restored by means of the written record. Happy is he whose measure will prove to be just and whose weight just and scales just! Because on the day of the great judgment every measure and every weight and every scale will be exposed as in the market; and each one will recognize his measure and, according to measure, each shall receive his reward (44:5).

And again: "All this will make itself known in the scales in the book on the great judgment day" (52:15). The apocalyptic revelation provides a framework for the sapiential ethics, but does not materially change them in any obvious way. Both the Epistle of Enoch and the instructions in 2 Enoch have something of the character of testaments in so far as they are presented as a deathbed addresses by Enoch to his sons. The testament as a literary form was most fully developed in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. The provenance of this document is notoriously difficult.43 Our present interest is in the way in which the testaments, in their extant form, are structured. While the structure is not fully consistent in all twelve testaments, the following pattern is typical: 1 the patriarch addresses his sons; 2 he recalls an episode from his life; 3 he delivers an extended ethical exhortation; 4 there is a prediction, with an eschatological dimension; 5 the testament concludes with the death and burial of the patriarch. 44 45 See my review of the debate, "Testaments," in M.E. Stone, ed., Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, (CRINT 2/2; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 325-55. 44 Compare E. von Nordheim, Die Lehre der Alten 1. Das Testament als Literaturgattung im Judentum da Hellenistisch-Römischen Zeit (Leiden: Brill, 1980) 228.

The area of affinity between the Testaments and the wisdom literature is obviously the ethical exhortation. As Hollander and de Jonge have shown, the scholar who studies the ethical passages of the Testaments and looks for parallels will find them in the Septuagint, particularly in Eccl, Prov and Sir, and to a lesser extent, in YVisSol and 4Mac. 45

Eckhard von Nordheim has even argued that the genre should be understood as an adaptation of the Near Eastern wisdom instruction/admonition. 46 The context of a father instructing his sons, and the appeal to his own experience are typical sapiential motifs. Yet here again we find rather typical sapiential material embedded in a world view that is typically apocalyptic. The point may be illustrated from the Testament of Dan. In the opening chapter Dan recalls an episode from his youth, confessing that in my heart I rejoiced concerning the death of Joseph, a true and good man, and that I took pleasure in the selling of Joseph, because father loved him more than us. For the spirit of jealosy and vainglory said to me: you also are his son. (1:4-6).

While he does not evade responsibility for his crime, however, there was another factor at work: "one of the spirits of Beliar conspired with me..." Dan proceeds to warn his children against the blinding force of anger, and against lying. Such a warning is commonplace in the wisdom tradition, but here it is given with a metaphysical backdrop: a twofold mischief is anger with lying and they assist one another in order to disturb the mind; and when the soul is disturbed continually, the Lord departs from it and Beliar rules over it (4:7). Finally D a n t u r n s to p r e d i c t the f u t u r e : in the last days you will depart from the Lord and be wroth with Levi and fight against Judah.

The reason for their rebellion: I have read in the book of Enoch, the righteous one, that your prince is Satan.

So they will be led into captivity, but when you return to the Lord you will obtain mercy. 45

H.W. Hollander and M. de Jonge, The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. A Commentary (SVTP 8; Leiden: Brill, 1985) 43. 46 von Nordheim, Die Lehre der Alten, 1. 239-40 and Die Lehre der Alten II. Das Testament als Literaturgattung im Alten Testament und im Alten Vorderen Orient (Leiden: Brill, 1985).

Then there will arise unto you from the tribe of Judah and Levi the salvation of the Lord, and he will make war against Beliar and he will give a victorious vengeance to our fathers.

Whether the testament in its extant form is of Jewish or Christian origin, the manner in which sapiential and apocalyptic elements are combined is of interest. The ethical teaching of the testament is sapiential, undergirded by the experience of the patriarch. That experience, however, is understood in the light of the apocalyptic world view. So sin is not solely of human making, but results from the prompting of Beliar. Moreover, the exhortation is strengthened by the eschatological prediction. There is a goal in view (the restoration of Israel) and an assurance that a savior will defeat Beliar. The wisdom tradition provides the ethical focus of the testament; the apocalyptic tradition provides the explanatory frame, the larger context of meaning. Apocalyptic influence in wisdom texts Our examples thus far have concerned the use of sapiential instructions in apocalyptic texts. We must also ask whether the wisdom instruction, as a free-standing genre, was at all affected by the apocalyptic world view. In fact, there are very few examples of free-standing Jewish wisdom instructions from the period between Ben Sira and the Mishnah. The fragmentary examples which have been published from Qumran are quite traditional, and may in any case be older compositions. 47 The lengthy admonition in the Damascus Document is thoroughly apocalyptic in perspective, but this of course is part of a larger, covenantal document. 48 The sayings of Pseudo-Phocylides and Pseudo-Menander, from the Egyptian 47 4Q. 184, 185. Küchler, Frühjüdische Weisheitstraditionen, 102-105; H. Lichtenberger, "Eine weisheitliche Mahnrede in den Qjimranfunden (4Q. 185)," in M. Delcor, ed., Qumrân. Sa piété, sa théologie et son milieu (Louvain: Louvain University Press, 1978) 151-62; T.H. Tobin, S.J. "4Q185 and Jewish Wisdom Dterature," in H.W. Attridge, J.J. Collins and T.H. Tobin, SJ., eds., 0/Scribes and Scrolls. Studies on the Hebrew Bible, Intertestamental Judaism, and Christian Origins presented to John Strugnell (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1990) 145-52. For a wisdom admonition with possible eschatological overtones see Carol A. Newsom, "4Q370: An Admonition Based on the Flood," RevQ_ 49-52(1988) 23-43. In view of the fragmentary nature of this document, however, it is difficult to discern its genre. On the genre of the Damascus Document see P.R. Davies, The Damascus Covenant (JSOTSup 25; Sheffield: J S O T , 1983) 48-55. On its apocalyptic perspective, J.J. Collins, "Was the Dead Sea Sect an Apocalyptic Community?" in L H . Schißmann, ed., Archeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls (JSPSup 8; Sheffield: J S O T , 1990) 25-51.

Diaspora, are unaffected by apocalypticism.49 (Pseudo-Phocylides expresses a belief in afterlife [vss 103-104] but does so in Hellenistic terms without reference to a judgment). 50 Recendy, however, Klaus Berger has resurrected a Hebrew wisdom text from the Cairo Geniza, which was originally published at the beginning of the century and is of considerable interest for our purposes. 51 Berger has argued for a date about the end of the first century CE. His arguments on this point have been sharply and effectively criticized by Hans-Peter Rüger, who makes a more plausible case for a medieval date. 52 The interest of the text, however, is to some extent independent of its date, as it raises the question of the relationship between worldview and genre in a Jewish wisdom text. In many ways this text resembles Ben Sira, with frequent exhortations to love wisdom and avoid folly. The exhortation is rather general and abstract. Many traditional sapiential themes, such as wealth and poverty and family relations, are lacking. There are, however, admonitions against wine and strong drink, and a general disparagement of bodily satisfaction. The text is informed by a strong dualism in two senses. On the one hand, there is an antithesis of body and spirit: whoever occupies himself with building up his body will destroy his spirit and his soul (1:8). On the other hand, this world stands over against the world to come. The skepticism of Ecclesiastes is accepted as valid for this world, but is corrected in light of the eschatological future. This world is folly; the next world is gain (1:4). Whoever seeks the world to come despises this world (3:5-6). No one can enjoy both. Those who satisfy their desires for food and drink and unchastity and deny the world to come, are fools, while those who fear God do not love this world (4:11-13). Berger maintains that this document provides the closest extant parallel to the Instruction of the Two Spirits at Qumran, but it pays little attention to metaphysical powers. It does however outline two sharply conflicting ways, in a manner reminiscent of 1QS or of the Johannine literature. The way of folly is marked by pride and pleasure in this world; the way of the wise by humility and grief over 49

Küchler, Frühjüdische Weisheitstraditionen, 303-18. VandcrHorst, The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides, 185-88. 51 K. Beiger, Die WeisheitsschHft aus der Kairoer Geniza. Erstedition, Kommentar und Uebersetzung (Tübingen: Franke, 1989). Compare S. Schechter, "Genizah Fragments," JQR 16(1904) 425-42. 52 H.-P. Rüger, Die Weisheitsschriß am der Kairoer Geniza (VVUNT 53; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1991) 1-19. While Berger had only collected early parallels, Rüger shows that later ones can also be found, and that some linguistic forms also point to a medieval date. 50

the destruction of Jerusalem (4:1-2,6, cf. 6:7-13). Life is under the shadow of an impending judgment: "those who despise wisdom and the fear of God—what will they do on the last day?" (6:13). The importance of this text for our purpose is that it shows that the traditional form of the wisdom instruction could be adapted to an apocalyptic world-view, similar to what we find at Qumran, although examples of such adaptation are rare. The form of sapiential sayings is not necessarily tied to a this-worldly ideology such as we find in Proverbs. The forms of wisdom speech are adaptable, and may be used in the service of more than one world-view. The New Testament Debate I return now to J o h n Kloppenborg's thesis that the formative component in Q_ consisted of a group of six "wisdom speeches" which were hortatory in nature and sapiential in their mode of argumentation. 53

Kloppenborg's position rests on extensive redaction-critical argumentation, which is of necessity hypothetical. Such arguments are seldom definitive, and I doubt that Kloppenborg has had the last word on Q, 54 but for the present we can take his reconstruction to focus the discussion, and to ask whether this view of the Jesus tradition necessarily "turns the table on older views of Jesus as an apocalyptic preacher" to the degree that Burton Mack suggests. It should be clear from our discussion thus far that there is no necessary antithesis between "apocalyptic" and "sapiential." For the significance of the distinction, two questions are crucial: 1) what kind of wisdom is involved? and 2) what determines the world-view in the speeches in question? Kloppenborg's formal analysis of the speeches55 makes clear that the dominant form is the admonition, usually in the imperative with a motivating clause. The inaugural sermon begins with a series of beatitudes. Only once, in 6:43-45, do we find a cluster of declarative wisdom sayings ("for each tree is known by its own fruit. For figs are not gathered from thorns, nor are grapes picked from a bramble bush"). Such aphorisms, based on the observation of nature, are 53

Kloppenborg, The Formation of Q 317. See the review by A. Yarbro Collins in CBQ50(1988) 720-22. Also her article, "The Son of Man Sayings in the Sayings Source," in P. Kobelski and M. Horgan, eds., To Touch the Text. Biblical and Related Studies in Honor ofJoseph A. Fitzmyer (New York: Crossroad, 1989) 369-89. 55 The Formation of Q, 342-45. 54

conspicuously lacking in the apocalypses, but they have a minor role here too. On the other hand, there are good apocalyptic parallels for the beatitudes (e.g. 2 Enoch 42:6-14; 52:1-15) and especially for the curses that follow them in Luke 6 (cf. the Epistle of Enoch)}6 Admonitions, as such, are quite compatible with an apocalyptic context. It is not easy to determine the world-view of the speeches as reconstructed by Kloppenborg. On the one hand, he defines these speeches by the lack of explicit apocalyptic elements (even the promise of reward in heaven in 6:22-23 is excised as secondary). On the other hand several sayings can easily be taken to imply an apocalyptic context, and indeed are so taken in the tradition. These include the opening beatitudes, which surely imply a scenario of eschatological reversal. Kloppenborg contrasts the Q beatitudes with both sapiential beatitudes and the majority of those found in apocalyptic books because they do not function as conditions of salvation or admonitions as to how one should act, but "pronounce blessing on a group defined by social and economic circumstances." 57 The "woes" in the Epistle of Enoch, however, function in a precisely corresponding way: they pronounce woe on a group defined by social and economic circumstances (7 Enoch 94:8: "woe to you, you rich...") In both cases an impending reversal is presupposed. While Luke 17:33/Matt 10:39, ("whoever loses his life will preserve it"), which Kloppenborg places at the end of the sapiential speeches, is open to more than one interpretation, it makes excellent sense in an apocalyptic context. In sum, the world view of these wisdom speeches depends on the wider context in which they are read, and so it does not appear to me that Kloppenborg's stratification of the Q tradition necessarily "turns the tables" on the view that Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet. The context provided by the Q document as a whole has, at the least, considerable apocalyptic features. T o quote Kloppenborg: Q's perspective is framed both spatially by transcendent realities— heaven (6:23; 12:33), hell or Hades (10:5; 12:5), Sophia (7:35; 11:49), the Son of Man (12:8-9, 10, 40 etc.), angels (12:8-9), demons (11:1426), and the devil (4:1-13)—and temporally by the coming judgment (3:7-9; 10:13-15; 11:31-32; 22:29-30), the destruction of the impenit56 H.D. Bctz, Essays on the Sermon on the Mount (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985) 28: "In the field of Jewish literature, the type of religious macarism is encountered chiefly in apocalyptic writings." For use of beatitudes in a wisdom text see now 4QBeat and E. Puech, "Un Hymne Essénien en partie retrouvé et les Béatitudes," Rev d 49-52(1988) 59-88. 57 The Formation of Q 188.

ent at the Parousia (3:17; 17:26-30) and the eschatological meal in the kingdom (13:28-29; cf. 14:126-24). Consistent with apocalyptic idiom, the Parousia marks an abrupt termination of the present age.58

In view of this description, it is not surprising that Norman Perrin could take Q as a prime illustration of early Christian apocalypticism.59 Kloppenborg, however, resists this conclusion. He admits that "it is difficult to miss the pervasive eschatological tenor" of the wisdom elements in Q, but questions whether the term apocalyptic is an accurate characterization of them. 60 He claims that two observations are crucial: First, much of the specialized vocabulary of apocalypticism and even some of its central presuppositions are absent from large portions of Q. And second, in those sections which do reflect apocalyptic idiom, the restraint and high degree of selectivity in Q's use of apocalyptic language and assumptions are striking, and require some explanation.61

The first of these observations seems to me specious. No individual apocalyptic work reflects the full repertoire of the genre. The "central presupposition" of apocalypticism which Kloppenborg finds lacking in Q, is a "sense of anomie, of devastating and inescapable pollution, of demonic domination." Now it is fair to say that apocalypticism differs from other strands of biblical thought, and from Hebrew wisdom in particular, by the sense that the world is out of joint, but the forms and degree of anomie differ considerably. While the popular perception of apocalypticism is shaped to a great degree by such powerful images of chaos as the beasts of Daniel 7 or the dragon of Revelation, such images are not found in all apocalypses. On the other hand, Q_ hardly portrays a world where all is well. It is a world where the blessed are poor, hungry and subject to some measure of persecution (6:20-23); a world inhabited by an "evil generation" and subject to impending judgment (11:29-32). Q, lacks the powerful imagery of Daniel or Revelation, but its world is nonetheless disrupted by evil, and is more reminiscent of the apocalypses than of Proverbs or Ecclesiastes. It also seems specious to argue that the apocalyptic language does not function in the same way in Q as it does in other apocalyptic

58

"Symbolic Eschatology," 296. N. Perrin and D.C. Duling, The New Testament. An Introduction (2nd ed.; New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, 1982) 100-07. 60 "Symbolic Eschatology," 291. 61 Ibid, 293. 59

writings. Again, apocalyptic language has a range of functions and all need not be exemplified in every pericope. Kloppenborg finds that the message of Q. 17:23-37, that eschatological destruction will occur without any warning, is neither consoling nor comforting, but the moment of consolation in Ç) is found in the Beatitudes, and the apocalyptic judgment is always a two-edged sword.62 When New Testament scholars distinguish between apocalypticism and the "symbolic eschatology" found in the teaching ofJesus, or of Q, as if apocalyptic eschatology were not symbolic, it is difficult to avoid the impression that apologetic interests are at work. 63 Kloppenborg's second observation, however, that Q's use of apocalyptic language is relatively restrained, seems to me valid and significant. Q, even in its final form, is certainly not an apocalypse, and consequently it lacks the kind of narrative descriptions that are typical of that genre. Kloppenborg is surely right that a major component of Q. can be appropriately categorized as "wisdom speeches." There is no generic incompatibility, however, between these speeches and an apocalyptic world-view. Accordingly the sharp redaction-critical separation of the sapiential speeches from the announcement of judgment should be viewed with some suspicion, and will need to be evaluated critically. Q m u s t be seen as a creative adaptation of both sapiential/instructional and apocalyptic traditions, and we should beware of imposing our ideals of generic purity. In the context of Judaism at the turn of the era wisdom was polymorphous and was justified in many children.

62 In fact, Kloppenborg acknowledges the affinity between the function of the judgment in Q, and in the apocalypses in a footnote ("Symbolic Eschatology," 306) but does not modify his main argument in light of this concession. 6 ‫ י‬Kloppenborg is neither the first nor the most flagrant example. See N. Perrin, "Eschatology and Hcrmcneudcs: Reflections on Method in the Interpretation of the New Testament," JBL 93(1974) 3-14 and my critique, "The Symbolism of Transcendence in Jewish Apocalyptic," Biblical Research 19(1974) 5-22.

INDICES

INDEX O F A U T H O R S Ackroyd, P. R. 8, 38, 301 Alexandre, C. H. 182 Amitai, J . 291 Amsler, S. 78 Andersen, F. I. 396 Anderson, B. W. 84 Anderson, G. W. 8 Anklesaria, B. T. 63, 134 Applebaum, S. 223 Armstrong, A. H. 329, 330 Attridge, H. W. 215, 399 Aune, D . E . 3 , 3 3 , 1 1 7 Baltzer, K. 272 Bamberger, B.J. 219, 222, 225 Barker, M. 3 1 , 5 3 , 1 5 3 Barr, D. L. 122, 125 Barr, J . 59, 68, 94 Barrett, C. K. 221 Barth, C. 354 Barthélémy, D. 86 Barton, J . 4 , 9 , 1 0 , 2 9 , 3 0 , 1 1 7 Barucq, A. 7 0 , 9 3 , 3 0 4 , 3 1 8 , 3 6 3 Batto, B. 289 Bauckham, R. 116,117,118,121, 124 Baumgarten, Α. I. 144, 151, 219 Beauchamp, P. 93, 323, 362 Becker, J . 356 Beckwith, R. 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 18, 20 Benoit, A. 233 Bentzen, A. 88, 140, 152 Berger, P. 351, 352 Bernays, J . 231 Bertram, G. 230 Betz, H. D. 7 3 , 9 3 , 2 1 1 , 4 0 2 Betz, O. 69, 279, 303 Beyer, K. 340, 400 Beyer, W. 5 Bialoblocki, S. 222, 227 Bianchi, U. 135 Bietenhard, H. 53 Black, M. 158, 358, 359 Blekinsopp, J . 8 Boccacini, G. 36, 295 Boer, M. D. de 27, 296 Bogaert, P. M. 118 Boman, Th. 94 Bonnet, H. 6J Borgen, P. 220, 221, 222 Borger, R. 44

Boring, Μ. Ε. 117,126 Bousset, W. 59, 184 Boyancé, P. 328 Boyce, M. 135 Braaten, Ε. 97 Bratsiotis, Ν. P. 94 Braude, W. G. 222 Braun, M. 44, 65 Brekelmann, C. W. 86 Bresciani, E. 304 Brockington, C. H. 297 Brooke, G. J . 308,313 Brown, J . A. C. 207 Brown, R. E. 93, 330 Brownlee, W. H. 243, 245, 307, 308, 310, 311 Bruce, F. F. 69, 250, 302 Brunner, H. 326 Buber, M. 117,345,346 Buhl, F. 3, 11 Bultmann, R. 9 5 , 1 1 5 , 3 5 4 Burchard, C. 224 Burgmann, H. 160, 161, 244, 247, 253, 255, 256, 260 Burkert, W. 134 Burstein, S. M. 206 Camponovo, O. 105, 106, 109, 112 Cancik, H. 182, 196 Caquot, A. 141 Caragounis, C. 139,141 Carmignac, J . 25, 27, 29, 46, 47, 71, 76, 260, 262, 298, 370 Carroll, R. P. 162 Casey, M. 101,139,141 Cervelli, I. 182 Charles, R. H. 42, 71, 297 Charlesworth, J . H. 35, 39, 100, 109, 116, 185, 188, 212, 298, 349, 387, 390 Chazon, E. G. 376, 378 Childs, B. S. 59, 95 Chilton, B. 105,112,113 Clarke, E . G . 319 Clausen, W. 192 Clifford, R . J . 354 Clines, D . J . 246 Coggins, R. 25, 339 Collins, Α. Y. 33, 101, 108, 116, 120, 121, 122, 123, 126, 163, 196, 208, 267, 334, 401

Collins, J . J . 17,25,31,33,35,37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 44, 46, 47, 48, 56, 57, 63, 64, 65, 67, 72, 73, 99, 100, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 109, 110, 116, 119, 121, 122, 124, 131, 134, 140, 153, 158, 159, 164, 170, 173, 184, 185, 187, 188, 191, 199, 200, 201, 202, 208, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 224, 248, 249, 252, 256, 259, 262, 264, 265, 266, 269, 298, 305, 306, 317, 329, 331, 332, 333, 334, 337, 341, 343, 344, 346, 347, 348, 349, 355, 360, 361, 363, 365, 369, 370, 381, 383, 387, 390, 392, 394, 395, 396, 397, 399, 404 Colpc, C. 139,140 Conzelmann, H. 362 Cox, H. 94 Crenshaw, J . L. 154,326,353,356, 372, 388, 389, 393 Crönert, G. 182 Cross, F. M. 1 , 1 8 , 3 9 , 5 3 , 6 5 , 6 8 , 7 7 , 80, 83, 84, 85, 93, 145, 146, 242, 243,247, 256, 261, 262, 312, 325, 336, 347, 387 Crossan, J . D. 357 Crouch, J . E. 215 Cumont, F. 70, 93, 328 Dahood, M. 355 Daumas, F. 70, 304 Davenport, G. L. 270 Davidson, M. J . 293 Davies, P. R. 37, 38, 55, 239, 240, 249, 250, 251, 252, 257, 263, 264, 272, 273, 274, 275, 276, 278, 280, 281, 284, 292, 346. 391, 399 Davies, T. W. 177 Davies, W. D. 232 Day, J . 101, 102, 140, 146, 208, 296 Day, P. L. 291 Delcor, M. 67, 93, 298, 363, 399 Delling, G. 140, 215 Denis, A. M. 279,281 Dexinger, F. 43 Dey, L. F. K. 322 Diels, H. 183 DiLella, A. A. 8 , 9 , 1 0 1 , 1 3 9 , 1 6 7 , 362, 363, 374, 375, 392 Dimant, D. 18, 48, 263, 276, 282, 284, 292, 302 Dodd, C. H. 81 Doran, R. 175 Doria, L. B. P. 183 Driver, G. R. 66, 71 Driver, S. R. 3 Duchesne-Guillcmin, J. 135

Duhaime, J. L. 2 6 4 , 2 7 9 , 2 8 1 , 2 9 4 Duling, D. C. 403 Dunand, F. 203 Dupont-Sommer, A. 293, 333 Ebeling, E. 140 Eddy, S. K. 61, 62, 63, 65, 66, 135 Ehrlich, E. L. 45 Eisenman, R. 239, 263 Eissfeldt, O. 3, 140, 145, 152 Elgvin, T. 377, 378 Eliadc, M. 318, 324 Elliger, K. 302, 303, 308 Ellis, Ε. E. 8 , 1 0 , 1 3 Emerton, J . A. 64, 68, 140, 145, 152, 381 Evans, C F. 8,301 Ewald, H. 386 Eybers, I. H. 18 Fairman, H. W. 205, 206 Feldman, L. H. 174, 199, 205, 210, 228, 230 Ferch, A. J . 5 6 , 1 3 9 , 1 4 1 , 1 4 2 , 1 4 5 Fcstinger, L. 162 Festugière, A. M. J. 70, 72, 327, 328 Fichtner, J. 318, 319 Finan, T. 323, 366 Finkel, A. 69, 303 Fischer, T. 161 Fishbane, M. 16, 301, 303, 304, 305, 347 Fitzmyer, J . 90, 302, 314, 340 Flint, P. W. 15 Flusser, D. 63, 64, 99, 133, 134, 135, 193, 196, 267 Foakes Jackson, F. J . 229 Focke, F. 319 Fohrer, G. 82 Fontaine, C. R. 398 Fontcnrosc, J. 208 Fowler, A. 3 1 , 3 2 , 3 4 , 3 5 Frankfurter, D. 209 Fraser, P. M. 202, 207, 225 Freedman, D. N. 254 Frerichs, E. S. 173,230,231 Freudcnthal, J . 188 Friedman, R. E. 192 Fritz, K. von 342 Frost, S. B. 84 Fuchs, H. 63 Fuks, A. 209 Funk, R. 75 Gager, J . G. 2 1 0 , 2 3 1 , 2 3 3 , 2 3 4 Gammic.J. G. 3 1 , 3 1 8 , 3 4 4 , 3 8 7 Garcia Martinez, F. 12, 32, 34, 35,

36, 287, 288, 289, 292, 295, 297, 370, 371, 378, 379 Gaston, L. 233, 234 Gatz, B. 134 GefFcken, J . 184, 185, 186 Georgi, D. 199, 207, 361 Gerstenberger, E. 396 Gese, H. 326,351 Geyer, J . 319 Gigante, M. 195 Gignoux, P. 135 Gigon, O. 71 Gilbert, M. 170 Ginzberg, L. 20, 257, 258 Gladigow, B. 196 Glasson, T. F. 93 Golb, N. 12, 239 Goldenberg, R. 231 Goldingay, J . 140, 152, 158 Goldsmith, D. 314 Goldstein, J . A. 105 Goodman, M. 185, 199 Goodrick, A. T. S. 320, 321, 323, 361 Gordon, C. H. 145 Goshen-Gottstein, M. 15 Gowan, D. E. 356 Grayson, A. K. 71,191 Green, A. 342 Greenspahn, F. E. 21 Greenspoon, L. J . 54, 164 Gregg, J . A. F. 329 Grelot, P. 89, 318, 363 Gressmann, H. 78, 84 Griffiths, J . G. 202, 203, 204, 206, 294, 304 Grintz, Y. M. 176 Gruenwald, I. 25, 26, 48, 49 Gunkel, H. 59, 84, 139, 143, 144, 162 Gutbrod, W. 173 Guthrie, W. K. C. 71 Haase, W. 231 Hadas, M. 215 Hadot, J . 374, 379 Halpem, B. 54, 164 Hamerton-Kclly, R. 217,221 Hani,J. 294 Hanson, J . 110 Hanson, P. D. 25, 26, 31, 39, 41, 42, 43, 48, 53, 57, 59, 65, 76, 78, 83, 84, 164, 289, 290, 332, 334, 343, 390 Harlow, D. C. 38 Harrington, D. J . 340,377 Hartman, L. F. 52, 69, 101, 139, 167 Hasel, G. F. 164

Haspecker, J . 356 Hata, G. 174 Hay, D. 313 Hayes, J . H. 393 Heidegger, M. 357 Hellholm, D. 25, 26, 28, 32, 33, 43, 46, 104, 115, 134, 182, 192, 196, 213, 262, 298, 304, 305 Hendel, R. S. 289, 290 Hengel, M. 43, 62, 63, 71, 76, 104, 213, 214, 261, 263, 272, 329, 332, 334, 346, 352, 388 Henten, J . W. van 208 Hill, D. 115 Himmelfarb, M. 27, 49, 342 Hinnells, J . 63 Hollander, H. 398 Hölscher, G. 75, 386 Horgan, M. P. 242, 243, 244, 253, 291, 302, 303, 308, 309, 401 Horslcy, R. A. 110 Horst, P. W. van der 215,216, 394, 400 Hultgard, A. 35 Humphreys, W. L. 46, 344 Hurtado, L. W. 121 Israelit-Groll, S.

304

Jachmann, G. 192, 193, 195 Jacoby, F. 65, 66 Jaeger, W. 325, 326 Jansen, H. L. 70 Janssen, Ε. 282 Janzen, J . G. 159 Jaubert, A. 86 Jeanmarie, H. 192 Jeansonne, S. P. 176 Jeremias, G. 244, 253, 254, 255, 256, 258, 294 Johnson, J . H. 61, 304 Jonas, H. 72, 333 Jonge, M. de 398 J u s t e r J . 223 Kampen, J . 346 Kapplcr, C. 26, 35, 36, 135, 292 Karrer, M. 115,118,119 Käsemann, E. 75 Kasher, A. 205 Kayatz, C. 354, 358 Kearns, R. 150, 151 Kellermann, D. 172 Kloppenberg, J . S. 385, 386, 394, 401, 402, 403, 404 Knibb, M. A. 2 5 , 4 0 , 2 5 1 , 2 5 2 , 2 7 6 , 277, 278, 339, 348, 369, 387

Kobelski, P. J. 152, 253, 285, 291, 293, 401 Kock, Κ. 1 0 , 2 5 , 2 7 , 3 2 , 3 9 , 5 5 , 7 5 , 112, 1 13, 116, 139, 246, 305, 326, 339 Koenen, L. 62, 65, 203, 204, 206 Koester, H. 385 Kraabel, A. T. 2 2 8 , 2 3 1 , 2 3 3 Kraft, R . A . 110,253 Kratz, R. G. 131,132 Kroll, W. 70, 328 Küchler, M. 2 1 5 , 3 8 5 , 3 9 4 , 3 9 9 , 4 0 0 Kugel, J . L. 192 Kuhn, G. 335 Kuhn, H . W . 8 1 , 8 9 , 2 5 8 Kuhn, K. G. 1 7 2 , 2 2 8 , 2 3 2 , 2 9 3 Kurfess, Α. 191, 193, 194, 195, 320 Kvanvig, Η. 35, 48, 140, 142, 145, 147, 148 Lacocque, Α. 56, 102, 145, 158, 346 Lake, Κ. 229 Lamberigts, S. 86 Lambert, W. G. 4 4 , 7 1 , 3 4 2 Lambrecht, J . 2 5 , 1 1 7 , 1 1 8 Lane, Ε. Ν. 218 Larcher, C. 9 3 , 3 1 8 , 3 1 9 , 3 2 0 , 3 2 6 , 329, 333, 361, 362, 363, 366 Lattke, M. 105 Laurin, R. B. 89 Lebram, J. C. H. 54, 208, 330 Lehmann, M. R. 370 Leiman, S. Z. 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 20 Lemke, W. 387 Lcvenson,J. D. 54, 164, 296 Lcvi-Strauss, C. 360 Lcvison, J . R. 372 Lewis, D. M. 209 Lewis, J . P. 4 Lichtenberger, H. 399 Licbermann, S. 228, 229 Lifshitz, B. 230, 232 Lindblom, J . 82 Lloyd, A. B. 200, 203, 207 Loew, C. 324, 325 Lohse, E. 115,121 Lücke, F. 115 Luther, M. 115 Mack, B. L. 322, 386, 392 MacMullen, R. 223 MacRae, G. W. 117 Maier, G. 375 Marböck,J. 352, 362 Marcus, J . 26 Marcus, R. 229 Margoliouth, D. S. 92

Marti, Κ. 161 Martin, J . D. 391 Martin-Achard, R. 164 Mason, R. A. 157 Mazzaferri, F. D. 115,119 McBridc, S. D. 31, 343, 390 McCown, C. C. 61 McDonald, L. M. 5 McElency, N . J . 219,222 McNamara, M. 86 Meister, R. 66 Meland, Β. E. 358, 359, 364 Mendels, D. 133,174,175 Mendclson, A. 219 Mertens, A. 296 Metzger, Β. M. 71,342 Meyer, R. 171,211 Meyers, C. 375 Michel, D. 369 Middendorp, Th. 9, 177, 362, 392 M i l g r o m J . 172 Milik, J . T. 2 6 , 4 2 , 4 7 , 5 2 , 2 4 2 , 2 4 4 , 285, 289, 290, 291, 292, 295, 339 Millar, F. 158, 185, 199, 257 Miller, P . D . 3 1 , 5 3 , 8 7 , 3 4 3 , 3 8 7 , 390 Moltmann, J. 75 Momigliano, A. 184,186,190,192, 193, 196, 201, 202, 213 Montgomery, J. A. 139, 160, 167 Moore, C. A. 19, 167 Moore, G. F. 3, 20, 176, 219, 224, 373, 374 Morenz, S. 326 Morgenstern, J . 151 Morkholm, O. 202 Mosca, P. 151,152,153 Moscati, S. 59 Moule, C. F. D. 323 Mowinckel, S. 75, 79, 80, 82, 83, 114 Mulder, M . J . 16 Mullen, Ε. T , Jr. 53 Müller, H. P. 4 0 , 7 5 , 7 8 , 1 0 2 , 1 1 1 , 116, 317, 343, 347, 369, 387 Münchow, C. 52 Murdock, W. R. 73 Murphy, F.J. 387 Murphy, R. E. 324, 373, 379, 389, 393 Murphy-O'Connor, J. 9 0 , 2 4 0 , 2 4 2 , 246, 248, 251, 252, 253, 254, 256, 257, 260, 263, 274, 275, 277, 278,

281, 282

Neusner.J. 105, 111, 173, 226, 230, 231 Newsom, C. A. 12, 18, 399

Nicastri, L. 195 Nickelsburg, G.W. E 42, 43, 48, 49, 52, 54, 55, 56, 85, 88, 89, 90, 93, 106, 108, 109, 110, 173, 244, 253, 263, 290, 333, 341, 363, 364, 390, 395, 396 Niditch, S. 55, 305, 341 Nikiprowetzky, V. 71, 184, 186, 187, 201, 202 Nilsson, M. P. 7 2 , 2 1 5 , 3 3 3 Nims, C. F. 205, 304 Nisbet, R. G. M. 194, 195 Noack, L. 317,386 Nolland, J . 103, 219, 222, 227 Norden, E. 192, 193, 202 Nordheim, E. von 397, 398 North, R. 77, 78, 92 Noth, M. 86 Nougayrol, J . 144 Oden, R. A. 151 Olmstead, A. T. 62 Onasch, C. 206 Oppenheim, A. L. 48, 55, 59, 69, 147, 303, 305 Orton, D. E. 391 Osten-Sacken, P. von der 46, 77, 295, 318, 369 Pannenberg, W. 75 Parke, H. W. 181, 182, 183, 184, 188, 190, 191, 194, 197, 200 Patte, D. 306,311 Pautrel, R. 382 Pearson, B. 317 Penar, T. 355 Perdue, L. G. 369 Pcretti, A. 184 Perrin, N. 154, 403, 404 Petersen, D. L. 289 Pfann, S. 12 Phillips, A. 339 Philonenko, M. 224, 225, 233 Pinches, T. G. 62, 66 Piper, R. A. 394 Ploeg, J . van der 75, 76, 81, 82, 157 Plöger, Ο. 40, 41, 51, 78 Pohlcnz, M. 328, 329 Pope, M. H. 68, 145 Porter, F. C. 373 Porter, P. 142 Potter, D. S. 181, 182, 186, 187, 200 Prato, G. L 374 Préaux, C. 61 Preuss, H. D. 75, 170, 326 Prigent, P. 122 Puech, E. 379, 402 Purinton, C. E. 92

Qimron, E.

239, 241, 259, 291

Rabin, C. 89 Rabinowitz, I. 303, 308 Rad, G. von 40, 67, 75, 76, 77, 83, 317, 318, 326, 330, 331, 339, 354, 356, 369, 385, 386, 387 Radke, G. 192 Rahner, Κ. 95, 97 Rajak, T. 230 Ramsey, L T. 358, 364 Reese, J . M. 9 2 , 3 1 9 , 3 2 0 , 3 2 2 , 3 6 0 , 362 Reeves, J . C. 298 Reid, S. B. 347 R e i d e r J . 92, 318, 319, 352 Reynolds, J. M. 230 Riess, E. 70 Ringgren, H. 89, 90 Ritner, R. K. 304 Robert, I. 230 Robinson, H. W. 93 Robinson, J. M. 385, 394 Rössler, D. 75 Rost, L. 140, 145, 295 Roth, W. M. W. 176 Rowland, C. 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 33, 41, 46, 48, 50, 56, 57, 102, 269, 271, 350 Rowley, H. H. 73 Rudolph, K. 32 Rüger, H. P. 400 Ruppert, L. 318, 333, 363 Russell, D. S. 33 Ryberg, I. S. 196 Ryle, H. E. 3 Rzach, A. 185 Sabourin, L. 94 Sacchi, P. 25, 36, 287, 288, 290, 295, 371 Safrai, S. 223, 231 Saggs, H. W. F. 59 Saldarini, A. J . 57 Samuel, D. H. 62 Sanders, E. P. 20, 52, 111, 217, 219, 225, 254, 266, 273 Sanders, J. A. 14,15 Sanders, J . T. 9 Sanderson, J . E. 14 Sänger, D. 224 Sarna, N. 142 Sayler, G. 348 Schäfer, P. 4 Schechter, S. 400 SchifFman, L. H. 16, 174, 219, 240, 273, 292, 370, 399

Schmid, H. H. 3 2 6 , 3 5 1 , 3 5 2 Schmidt, J . M . 75,317,386 Schmidt, K. L. 106 Schmithals, W. 37 Schnabel, E . J . 9 , 3 7 1 Schuerer, E. 158, 185, 187, 188, 199,

,

257

Schüpphaus, J . 167 Schüssler Fiorcnza, E. 115, 117, 118, 119 Schwartz, D. R. 281,282 Schweitzer, A. 75 Scott, B. B. 369 Scroggs, R. 217,221 Segal, J . B . 217 Sharpe, E.J. 63 Siegert, F. 2 2 1 , 2 2 7 , 2 2 9 , 2 3 1 Silberman, L. 3 0 3 , 3 0 6 , 3 0 8 , 3 1 0 , 312, 313, 365 Skehan, P. W. 8, 9, 14, 15, 86, 152, 374, 375 Smallwood, E. M. 218, 223 Smend, R. 8 Smith, J . Z. 6 4 , 7 4 , 2 2 0 , 2 2 1 , 2 2 4 , 317, 318, 324, 333, 336 Smith, M. 192, 274, 284, 294 Snell, B. 318, 325 Soards, M. L. 26 Soden, W. von 140, 149 Sparks, F. D. 297 Speiser, E. A. 92, 149 Speyer, W. 342 Spicgclberg, W. 304 Stadelmann, H. 371 Steck, Ο. H. 264, 265 Stcgcmann, H. 12, 13, 16, 29, 46, 228, 232, 233, 242, 244, 246, 253, 254, 256, 257, 262, 263, 269, 274, 276, 278, 285, 294, 298, 312 Steiner, R. C. 205 Stcmberger, G. 4 Stendahl, K. 314 Stem, M. 1 7 3 , 2 0 9 , 2 1 8 , 2 2 3 , 2 3 1 Stone, M. E. 25, 38, 42, 50, 53, 77, 110, 111, 158, 263, 266, 292, 296, 302, 332, 339, 374, 387, 397 Strecker, G. 265, 285 Stroumsa, G. 298 Strugnell, J. 17, 188, 239, 241, 259, 291 Sturm, R. E. 26, 27 Sundberg, A. C. 3, 5 Suter, D. W. 43, 49, 107, 290 Swain.J. W. 6 2 , 6 4 , 9 9 , 1 3 4 Sweet, J . P. M. 323, 327 Talmon, S.

15

Tannenbaum, R. 230 Tarn, W . W . 6 1 , 6 6 Taylor, R . J . 335 Tcherikovcr, V. 67, 199, 207, 209, 212, 223 Temporini, H. 231 Testuz, M. 271 Thcisohn,J. 107 Thiering, B. E. 239, 263 Thissen, H . J . 61,206 Thorn, J . C. 48 Thompson, A. L. 296 T i g a y J . H . 14 Tigchelaar, E . J . 3 1 , 3 2 , 3 3 , 3 4 , 3 6 Tiller, P. 38 Tobin, T. H. 399 T Ū v, Ε. 1 2 , 1 4 , 1 7 Towner, W. S. 56, 101 Trenchard, W. C. 372 Tromp, N . J . 355 Ulrich, E. 14,17,377 Urbach, E. E. 373, 374 VanderKam, J . C. 7, 12, 17, 35, 42, 44, 45, 46, 47, 49, 50, 51, 55, 140, 175, 266, 269, 271. 279, 290, 291, 341, 343, 377 Vaux, R. de 90 Vawter, B. 355 Velde, H. de 206 Vermasercn, M. J . 135 Vermes, G. 158, 185, 199, 242, 243, 244, 249, 250, 257, 273, 274, 293, 301, 312, 376 Voegelin, E. 324 Vogel, J. de 233, 329 Vriezen, Th. C. 75, 78, 79 Wacholdcr, Β. Z. 16, 65, 239, 240, 263, 269, 270, 272, 276, 277 Wacker, M. T. 54 Wellhausen, J . 69, 78, 79, 80 Wernberg-M011er, P. 380, 381, 382 Westcrmann, C. 142, 289, 388 Whedbec, J . W. 396 Whybray, R. N. 93 Wilckens, U. 75, 394 Wilder, A. 84 Will, E. 61, 62 Williams, G. 192 Williamson, H. G. M. 246 Willis, J . T. 356 Wills, L. M. 167, 168, 169, 344 Wilson, R. R. 47 Windisch, H. 63 Winston, D. 87, 207, 294

Wise, Μ. Ο. 15, 16, 377 Wiseman, W . J . 369 Wissowa, G. 328 Wlosok, A. 192 Wolfson, A. A. 221,362 Woude, A. S. van der 208, 243, 283, 287, 288, 296, 369 Wright, A. G. 319 Wright, G. E. 59

Yadin, Y.

16, 244, 269, 295

Zaehner, R. C. 293, 294 Zauzich, K. Th. 61 Zeidin, S. 20 Zicner, G. 3 2 0 , 3 2 1 , 3 2 3 , 3 2 9 Zimmerli, W. 354 Zimmern, H. 44

INDEX O F PASSAGES

Hebrew Bible Genesis 1 1-3 1:27 2:7 2:9 3:5 3:6 3:22 4:17 5:21-24 6 6:5 6:9 8:21 15:18-21 17:10-11 18:1 49 49:9

356 371-381 240, 375 373, 374, 380 375, 377 356 377 356 44 44, 341 372 373 44 373 191 211 53 14 121

Exodus 19:16-19 20:17 23:2

375 14 375

Leviricus 18:13 25 26:41

240 306 220

Numbers 12:6 21:18

306 13, 249, 371

Deuteronomy 2:14 10:16 13:1-3 17:17 30:6 30:11-20 30:12 30:15 32 32:8 33:26

255 220 45 240 220 375 20, 52 374 86 152 145

Joshua 10:12

327

Judges 5:19-20 5:20

86-87 88, 327

1 Samuel 2:12 19:9

281 373

2 Samuel 2:35 19:9 23:1-7

281 294 14

1 Kings 22

48

1 Chronicles 28:9 29:18

373 373

2 Chronicles 2:11 20:6 36:23

172 131 131

Ezra 1:2 7:11 8:33 9 10:10, 16

172 246 246, 247 264 246

Nehemiah 8 8:2 8:9 9 12 12:26 13:13

8 246 246 264 246 246 246

Esther 2:19-23 3:8

170 170

Job 4:8 8:8-10 26:12-13 28:13 28:38-41 38:7

396 389 144 336 388 88

Psalms 2 2:7 2:9 8 34:10 37 45:7 58 68:5 68:31 73 74:13 82 87:4 89 89:8-11 89:27-8 89:37-8 96 98 104:3 110:3 134:1-3 140:1-5

207 153 122 153 86 369 153 53 145 139 369 139 53, 152 139 152-53 144 153 153 53 53 145 153 14 14

Proverbs 2 2:19 3:2 3:16 3:18 3:19 4:11 5:6 6:23 8 8:35-36 8:36 9:18 10-21 10-30 10:11 10:17-15:24 12:28 14:31 22:8 ON. Ι Λ 30:1-4 30:4

369 94 354 354 354 352 396 94 94 388 354 354 354 393 388 354 94 354 397 396 52, 348 391

Ecclesiastes 2:15-16 3:9 3:11 6:8 8:15 10:7-11 11:8

352 353 350 353 357 357 357

Isaiah 2 2:2-4 2:4 6 7 9 10 11 11:4 14 17:12-14 24-27 24:21 24:21-23 25:8 26:3 26:19 27:1 30:7 40:3 41:25 44:9-20 44:25-26 45:7 45:17 47:13 51:6 51:8 51:9 51:9-10 51:11 55:3 55:13 56:3, 6 61:8 65:17 65:17-25 66:22

82 214 53 48 194 194 268 82, 103, 194, 195 124 87, 88, 123 144 40, 41, 84, 85, 87 87 53, 153 153 373, 379 54, 164, 355 139, 146, 153 139 312 202 169 45, 343 294 82 45, 343 82 82 146 144 82 82 82 172 82 80, 335 164 335

Jeremiah 4:4 4:6 9:25 23:18, 22 23:25-28 25:11 29:8 31

220 305 220 94 45 306 45 82, 83

Ezekiel 1:3 4:5 29 32 37 38 38:17 40-48 44:7, 9 44:15 Daniel 1-6 1:4 2 2:2 2:12-13 2:13 2:21 2:21-22 2:37 2:38 2:44 2:47 3:12 3:33 4 4:10, 14, 20 4:19 4:20-22 4:27 4:29 4:31 4:32 4:34 5 5:23 6:27 6:28 6:29 7

7-12 7:13-14 7:17 7:18 7:21 7:25 7:27

246 250 139 139 54, 164 332 305 49 220 312 46, 55, 99, 131-32, 168-69, 265, 317, 34344, 345, 347 67, 344 46, 63, 65, 70, 100, 102, 133-37, 146, 303, 305, 306 344 344 339 131, 345 305 131 170 100, 159 136, 171 170 100, 136 99, 109, 303, 305, 344 101 170 305 172 100, 107 136 171 171 303, 305, 306, 344 171 136 168 132 56, 63, 85, 86, 100, 102, 121, 136, 139-55, 208, 265, 296, 305-6, 403 28, 99, 106, 114, 163, 345, 347 101 144 101, 159 85 158 86, 101, 159

8 8:10 8:10-11 8:13 8:15 8:15-16 8:17, 19 8:21 8:24 9

12:1 12:2 12:2-3 12:3 12:4 12:5-13 12:6 12:6-7 12:9 12:11 12:12 12:13

265, 305-6 88 85, 86 101, 151, 160 149 101 158, 159 305 86, 161 56, 70, 85, 250, 252, 264, 280, 304-5, 307, 347 101, 149 160 158 151, 160, 307 56, 86 265, 306 168 101, 149 101 101 100 86, 164 108, 394 158 80 161 158, 161 80 151 67, 346 67, 345 125 80, 124, 158, 161 158, 161 158, 307 56, 85, 102, 108, 165, 265 56, 161 332 88 164, 345 158 161, 163 158 101 158 151, 161, 162 95, 161, 162 158

Hosea 2

82, 83

Joel

40

9:21 9:24 9:26 9:27 10 10-12 10:1 10:5 10:6 10:18 10:20 10:21 11 11:6, 13 11:21 11:26 11:27 11:29 11:31 11:33 11:33, 35 11:34 11:35 11:40 11:45 12

Amos 3:6 8:2

294 157

Micah 4 6:8 Habakkuk 1:5 1:13 2:3

2:4 2:5-6 2:15 3:12

310 243, 309 310 87

82 44

Zechariah 1-6 12-14

84, 85, 148 305 40

309 254, 310 158, 159, 162

Malachi 2:6

44

New Testament Matthew 5:17 6:19-21 7:12 10:39 11:13 12:2 16:16 22:30 22:40 23:15 24:15

10 97 10 402 10 314 10 88 10 233 10, 116, 339

Mark 13 13:26

126, 142-43 142

Luke 6 16:29-31 17:33 21:23 24:44

5:12 6:9

383 96

1 Corinthians 2:6, 7 7:18 11:10

350 233 90

Galatians 5:2 5:12 6:15

234 234 234

Philippians 3:2

234

1 Thcssalonians 88 4:13-18 402 10 402 79 10

Acts 2:30 5:36 13:15 13:43 15 15:1 17:17 21 21:38 24:14 28:23

9 111 10 229 233 211 229 233 111 10 10

Romans 2:28-29 3:21

221 10

Jude 14-15

17

Revelation 1:3 1:12-16 4 4-22 5 5:6 12 12:7-9 12:9 19 19:10 19:11-16 21-22 21:1 22:6-7 22:8-9

28-30, 34, 39, 118-27 117 121 116 119 121 121 122-23 122-23 291 122, 124, 126 121 322 81 79, 157, 335 117 121

Apocrypha Baruch 1:15-3:8 4:1

264 376

Bel and the Snake 167-177 1 Esdras 3

7

4 Ezra 3:21-22 4:7-9 4:20 4:23 5:50-55 7:1 7:28-30 7:30 7:30-31 7:40 7:89-101 7:118 9:26 10:25-28 11-12 12-13 12:11 12:26 12:32 12:34 13 13:9-11 13:32, 37 14 14:4-6 14:21 14:45-47 14:46-47

374 348 374 297 331 296 111 157 79 91 81 383 348 81 111 348 111 111 111 111 148, 151 125 111 21, 348 348 6 6 348

Judith 14:10

173, 219

1 Maccabees 2:42 4:52-54 7:12 7:12-13 7:13 9:30 10:20 11:70 12:39-53 13:10 13:11

43, 263, 346 160 346 43, 263 346 244 244 254 243 256 254

13:23 13:33, 52 14:33, 37

243 256 256

2 Maccabees 1:7 1:10 2:14-15 2:17 9 9:17 13:4 14:6

105 205 7 105 174 173 105 43, 263, 346

4 Maccabees 2:23

106

Psalm 151

14, 15

Sirach 1:11-13 1:14-20 2:1-18 2:12-14 10:5 11:14 14:14, 16 14:16 14:17 14:27 15:2-4 15:11-20 15:14 15:15, 17 15:17 17:1-2 17:1-24 17:2 17:7 17:11 17:11-13 17:28 22:11 24 24:8 24:13-14 24:23 24:30 25:10-11 25:24 30:19 33 33:10-13 33:11

67, 353-360, 371-76 356 356 356 396 177 353, 373 357 355 353, 355 358 358 372 373, 375 374 354 375 375 354 375 354 375 355 354 362 327 357 9, 362, 371 357 356 372 177 375 373 382

33:13 34:1-8 34:2 34:6 34:8 36 36:12 37:3 38:4 39:1 39:1-2 39:14-16 39:33-34 40:1 40:1-2 40:26-27 41:1 41:3-4 41:4 41:8-9 43:8 44:18 45:5 49:13 49:16 50:1 51:13-19 51:30

380 45, 392 349 349 349 392 177 374 341 9 392 397 353 377 353, 357 356 357 357 355, 375, 392 396 88 376 375 9 379 177, 246 14 14

Wisdom of Solomon 318-24, 360-67 1-5 319, 321 1:4 320-21 1:5-7 320 1:13 361 1:13-14 320 1:14 335, 361 1:14-15 105, 320, 361 1:15 95, 364 1:22 333 2:1 321 2:5 96 2:8 365 2:11 322, 365 2:13, 16 322

2:22 2:23 3:2 3:2, 3 3:4 3:7 3:8 4:8-9 5:1-5 5:5 5:6-7 5:15 5:16 5:17 6-9 6:17-20 6:18 6:20 6:24 7:7 7:17-18 7:19 7:22-24 7:24 7:27 8:1 8:2

8:4 9:1-2 9:15 10-19 10:4 10:5 10:6 10:10 12:27 13:1 13:5 15-19 15:3 15:7 15:17 16:24 18:15 18:16

322 93, 361 105, 335, 364, 365 361 322, 361 333 105 361 361, 363 93, 334, 335, 363 322 322, 361 105 322 319, 321 321 364 105 335 324 324 328 321 360 320, 321, 327, 361 321, 360 326 361 323 93, 362, 366 319, 321, 322 322 322 322 105, 322 323 323 366 207 106, 324, 364 327 323 323 334 322

Pseudepigrapha Apocalypse of Abraham 39, 85 1-8 175

Assumption of Moses 85 10:7 88 10:9 89, 332

Apocalypse of Moses 32

2 Baruch

Apocalypse of Zcphaniah 39

30:1-2 32:9

36, 39 112 349

36:1 39 40:3 44:2-3 45:1-2 46:4 48:42 49-52 51:9 51:10 53:1 54:15-19 56:10-15 72-74 78-86 85:3

349 111 112 349 349 349 297, 383 81 332 88 349 297 297, 298 81, 112 118 349

27:3 37-71 38:5 39:4 39:5 42 42:1 46:4-5 48:10 51 51:4 52:4 61:8 62:5 63:2-4 71 72-82

39, 331

72:1 76:1 80 80:6 81:1 81:4 81:5 82 83-90 84:2 85-90 86-87 89:73-74 90:6 90:6-9 90:8 90:9 90:20 90:33 91-104 91-105 91:3 91:10 91:11-17 91:14, 16 91:17 93:1-10 93:2 93:10 94:1 94:8 96:8 98:4 102-104 102:2, 6 103:10 104:1-6 104:2 104:2, 4, 6

3 Baruch 1 Enoch 1-36 2-5 2:1-2 5 6-11 9:4 10-11 10:12 10:16 10:21 12-16 12:1-4 12:3 12:4 13:7-8 13:44 14 14:9 14:22-23 15-16 15:2 15:8-10 15:9-12 17 17-36 18:14 19:3 22 22:3 25:3-5, 7 25:6 26:2-27:1 27

34, 37, 39, 42-57, 70, 266-67, 287-99 42, 76, 80, 106, 340, 372 391. 393 331 393 47, 49 106 268 51 43 43 47, 48, 49, 290 340 106 45 341 340 48, 53, 56 341 101 271 49 290 268 49 48 341 52 54, 89, 341 331 106 106 52 341

106 43, 107 89 331 88, 107 336 349 107 107 89 107 107 107 107 107 49 42, 76-77, 91, 341, 391 51, 341 47 51 88, 331 48 51 47, 51 51 42, 101, 106 106 42 42 267 43, 267 292 55 51 106 89 395 42, 51, 80 395 54 42, 81, 107 157 157 42, 81, 107 45, 48, 341 249 96, 395 402 395 49, 268, 287, 372 51, 54 102 292 164 56, 88, 396 267

104:2, 6 104:6 104:14 105:1-2

332 88 95 55

2 Enoch 18:3 22 23-33 29 39-66 42:6-14 42:8-9 42:10 42:11 44:1 44:2 44:5 52:1-15 52:5-6 52:9-10 52:15

39,331,396 298 49 393 123 396 396, 402 396 396 396 397 397 397 396, 402 397 397 397

Joseph and Aseneth 224-225. 229-30 3:3 225 7:1 225 8:5-6 224, 229 8:9 229 10:13 225 15:4 224 15:6 224 20:7 225 20:9 225 Letter of Aristeas 214-15 16 214 121 215 122 215 128-138 215 139 214 148 215 Life of Adam and Eve 32 12-17 123

3 Enoch 4 Jubilees 1 1:13-15 1:15-18 1:20 3 3:31 4:15 5:13 6:22

6:37 10:1 10:5-6 12:2 12:12-13 15:32 22:16 23 23-31 23:23 23:26 23:27-31 30:7-17 30:18 32:21 46:6-47:9 49:2 50:12

49

Psalm 154 154-55

371 14, 15

37, 39, 347 276 252 270 271,281 290 269 290 270 17 270 290 290 175 175 271 175 28, 85, 94. 270 348 269 269, 292 88 175 175 270 295 282 269

Psalms of Solomon 2:2 139 2:29-30 109 3:12 109 13:11 109 14:3 109 15:13 109 17 109, 114 17:1 109 17:3 64, 109 17:21 109 17:22 109 17:24-25 125 17:30 109 17:32 109 Sibylline Oracles 71, 102-104, 181-235 1-2 195 2 394 2:39-55 394 2:56 395 2 : 5 8 , 6 0 , 6 4 , 7 3 395 2:95 395 2:149 394 3 114,186-90,212-14 3:1-96 186 3:8-45 199 3:46-62 103

3:46-92 3:47-48 3:56 3:97-104 3:97-109 3:97-161 3:97-294 3:97-829 3:110-15 3:156-61 3:162-95 3:185-86 3:192-3 3:193 3:194 3:194-5 3:196-294 3:218-64 3:219 3:295-544 3:318 3:401-88 3:414-32 3:499 3:545-49 3:545-600 3:545-808 3:545-829 3:547-49 3:560 3:564-6 3:570-71 3:573-600 3:601-07 3:608 3:608-9 3:611-15 3:616 3:624-34 3:625-6 3:652 3:702-09 3:702-13 3:705 3:715-31 3:716-18 3:716-23 3:732-40 3:736 3:762-6 3:767 3:767-795 3:784 3:788 3:808

201 103 103 187 184 102 187, 201 188 214 102 201 201 103 212 208 213 103 190, 199, 201, 212 212 186 103, 201, 212 184 187 103 189 199 201 187 212 103 189 212 212 201 103, 212 202 207 103 201, 213 189, 202 103, 213 213 201 213-14 199 201 13-14 214 182 189, 199, 214 213 103 103 194 103

3:810 3:814 3:827 4 4:49-101 4:99-101 4:162-69 4:176 4:178-90 4:187 5 5:63-65 5:108 5:252 5:256 5:414 5:414-28 5:499 8:217-50

184 187 184 63-64, 133, 195 64 182 216 104 213 104 114, 209, 217 209 104 104 209 209 104 104 183

Testament of Abraham 32, 39 Testament of Asher 298 Testament of Dan 1:4-6 398 4:7 398 13:10-13 110 Testament of Job 2-5 175 Testament o f j u d a h 298 20 Testament of Moses 347 8 108 9-10 348 9:7 108 10 114 10:1 108, 113 10:8 108 10:9 108 Testament of Naphtali 3:5 298 Testament of Reuben 5:6-7 298 Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs 85, 109-110, 275, 397

Dead Sea Scrolls 1QH (Hodayot; numbers follow Sukenik's edition and Vermes's translation) 331 1:11-12 379 1:21 331 1:21-25 379 1:35 258 2:1-19 379 2:9, 36 258 3:1-18 89-90 3:19-23 160, 282 3:28 80 3:29-33 258 4:5-29 4:5-5:4 258 245, 258 4:8-9 258 4:12-13 259 4:18 379 5:5-6 258 5:5-19 5:20-6:36 258 258 5:20-7:5 259 5:23-25 379 5:31-2 259 6:19 89 6:29, 34 379, 380 7:3 258 7:6-25 258 8:4-40 80 11:3-14 379 15 379 15:13 1 QM 2:3 7:4-6 13 13:10-12 17:7

244 90 285 293 102

1 QpHab 1:10 2:1 2:1-10 2:8 3:14 4-6 4:3 5:4 5:6 5:8-12 5:9-12 5:11-12 7 7:1-2

308 253, 256, 294 256, 309 246 302 302 310 255 302 254 253, 294 255 283 303

7:2 7:4 7:7 7:12 8 8:9-10 8:9-13 8:16 9:4 9:4-6 9:8-12 9:9 9:16 10:1-13 10:9 10:10 11 11:4-8 11:8-15 11:12 11:13-14 12:3-4 12:5 12:6 12:8-9 12:9 12:10 13:3

159 258 159 159, 309 253 243, 246 245 311 242 245 246 253 256, 256 245, 245, 310 246 243 301 311 240, 253 245 245 310

1QS 1:8 1:14-15 1:18, 23 2:19 3-4 3:23-24 4 4:5 4:6-8 4:7 4:18-19 4:23 5:5 5:6 6 6:1 6:6 8 8:3 8:6 8:10 8:14-15 9:16-18

241 241 282 282 284, 293 275 380 90 273 96 381, 220, 241 347 255 371 241, 380 273 241, 13 255

162 245

294 310 310

245

380

382 380

250, 312 273

1QSa 2:3-11

90

1QSb 5:24-5

125

4 Q504-506 (see Words of the Heavenly Luminaries) 4Q525

4QMMT

13, 239, 241-42, 255, 259, 288, 291

4QpIsaa

302

4QpMic 10:2

253

4QpNah

242,302,312

4QpPsa1ms 1:25 1:26 2:19 3:15 4:8-9 4:8-10 4:14 37 37 i 18 37 iv 14

253 253, 256 246 246 255 242-3,245 253 283 294 294

4Q.174 2:3 2:4

296 392 10

4Q184 8-9

372

4Q.184, 185

399

4Q252

14

4Q304-305

376

4Q381

380

4Q416-418

376

4Q416 1. i. 15-16

377

4Q417 2.i.11 2. ü. 12-13

378 377

4Q422

376, 378, 380, 382

4Q423 2

376, 380, 382 377

371

11 QMelchizedek 296 2.9-10 152 llQPsalms col. 18 19:15-16

380,381 371 379

1 lQTemple 57:1-59:11 57:17-18 66:16-17

17 240 240

CD 1 1:1 1:4 1:5 1:7 1:8 1:12 1:14 1:15 1:17 2 2-3 2:2 2:2-13 2:5 2:5-6 2:9-10 2:14 2:14-6:1 2:17-18 3 3:5-6 3:12 3:13 3:13-14 3:13-15 3:14-15 3:20 4:1-2, 6 4:2-3 4:11-13 4:13 4:15 4:15-5:12 4:19 4:19-20 4:19-5:12

250, 251, 257, 276-78 276 400 160,280 120 277,400 159 253,255 253 256 281 379 276 282 277 283 280 276 282 282 241,248,251,252, 276-78 400 239, 276 249 279 252 258 283 401 311 400 120, 281 258, 281 240 253 255 257

4:23 5:12 5:15 5:17-21 5:18 6 6:2-11 6:5 6:7-13 6:11 6:11-12 6:11-7:6 7-8 7:2 7:6 7:6-9 7:9 7:15-19 8:13 8:16 8:23 9:2-8 12-14 12:2 14:7 16 16:2-4 16:3

277 259 250 252 281, 249, 13 277 401 278 274 240 276 255 275 257 250 277 253, 277 250 255 257 281 247 280, 17 291

284, 285 251, 278

19 19-20 19:26 19:33-34 20:12 20:14 20:14-15 20:15 20:17

277 276, 279 253, 294 251 278 283 255 250, 253, 280, 294 277

Genesis Apocryphon 18 Pseudo-Daniel

18

Pseudo-Ezekiel 18 Prayer of Nabonidus 170-71, 174

294

Testament of Amram 18, 294-5 Tcstimonia 281

243, 256

Words of the Heavenly Luminaries 264, 280, 282-3, 375, 380 Hellenistic Jewish Authors

Aemilius Sura

64, 99, 133

Artapanus

44

Ezekiel the Tragedian 217 Josephus Against Apion 1.22 1.37-41 1.40-41 1.131-44 2.49 2.53-55 2.65 2.190-219 2.282

168 6 21 65 205, 225 207 224 215 231

Antiquities 10.11.7 11 11.3 11.8.5 11.33

10, 162, 339 7 172 172 7

12.3.2 12.3.3 12.11.2 13.9.1 13.11.1 13.15.5 14.7.2 14.377-89 15.4 16.7.6 17.6.2-3 17.10.5-7 18.1.5 18.3.4-5 20.2.3-4 20.2.4 20.7.1 20.7.3 20.8.11 20.10.4

224 177 243 172, 219 219 243 229 193 172 219 62, 108 110 274 218 225 174 219 219 230 246

Jewish War 1.33.2-4 2.8.4 2.8.7

62, 108 273 275

2.13.4 2.13.5 2.17.8-9 2.18.2 2.20.2 7.3.3

111 111 110 232 232 218

Vita 16

230

De Specialibus 1.2 1.4-7 1.8-11 1.51-52 1.52 1.308-9 2.62

Legibus 220 220 220 232 221, 223 221, 223 218

De Virtutibus 103, 104

221, 223

Philo De Abrahamo 261

106

De Vita Contemplativa 25 10

Hypothetica 7.1-9

215

De Vita Mosis 1.35 218 1.278 223 2.17 218

Legatio ad Gaium 166-70 220 De Migratione Abrahami 32 328 86 220 89-94 219, 222 197 106

Pseudo-Eubolemtis 44 Pseudo-Menander 399

Quod omnis Probus Liber sit 73-75 217 76 273 Quaesdones et Solutiones in Exodum 2.2 221, 232 Quaesdones et Solutiones in Genesim 3.46-52 220, 221 Quis Rcrum Divarum Heres sit 20.96-99 328 De Somniis 2.244

Psetido-Phocylides 320, 396, 399 31 216 54 216 75 215 98 216 103-4 215, 400 104 215 131 216 140 215 163 215 Theodotus 173

106 Mishnah

m. Megillah 7a

11

m. Ta'anit 4.2

244

m. Niddah 1.1-7

257

m. Yadaim 3.5 3.5-4.4

11 4

m. Sanhednn 10:1

20

Talmud b. Baba Bathra 14b-15a 3

b. Sanhédrin 100b

b. Baba Mctzia 59b 20

j. Sanhédrin 28a

19

b. Berakot 28a 61b

b. Shabbat 31a

222

b. Sukkah 20a

11

j. Ta'anit 4.8

20

b. Ycbamot 46a

222

b. Hagiga 14b j. Kiddushin 3.14.64d b. Mcgillah 13a

4 374 20 222 224

Tosefta t. Sanhédrin 13.2

227

t. Shabbat 13

20

t. Sota 5a

21

t. Yadaim 1.13 2.13

21 20

Other Rabbinic Texts Abot de Rabbi Nathan 26 221 Genesis Rabbah 14:4 374 14:10 380 Koheleth Rabbah 12:1 308,313 12:12 19,21

Petirah Midrashim 308, 313 Sifrc 45 54

374, 376 224

Sifre 108 111

219 224

Midrash Debarim Rabbah 2.24 228 Targums Targum Isaiah 16:1, 5 113 112 24:23 113 26:19 113 54:1

Targum Jonathan 112 T. Micah 4:7-8

113

T. Zechariah

113

INDEX OF PASSAGES

Christian Sources Athanasius Defense of the Nicene Definition 18.1-2 5

Ignatius Philad. 6.1

221

Augustine De Civitate Dei 6.11 218

Justin Martyr 32.2

62

Barnabas 16:5

18

Council of Laodicea 59 5 Eusebius Ecclesiastical History 6.25.3-5 5 Praeparatio Evangelica 1.10.31 144 Hippolytus Refutation 9.27

Lactantius Divinac Institutiones 1.6.8-12 184, 200 Origen Contra Celsum 1.24 214 5.21 214 Letter to Africanus 13 19 Shepherd of Hermas 28

274 Classical Authors

Appian Preface 9 Arrian Diss. 2.9.19-21

Hesiod Thcogony

Works and Days 326 1.109-201 134 232

Cassius Dio Historia Romana 57.18.5a 218 Diodorus Siculus 2.7.3 65 2.21.8 133 2.29-31 70, 328 20.3.5 65 28.3.1 62 28.8 133 29.15.1 62 32.5-6 133 34.6 133 Dionysius of Halicamassus 1.2.2-4 133 Herodotus 1.95, 130

325-26

133

133

Horace Satire 1.4.138-43

219

Juvenal Satire 14.96-106 14.99

173 219

Pausanias 2.7.1 7.8.9 10.12.9

182 182 185

Persius Satire 5.184

211

Petronius Frag. 37

211, 219

Philo Byblius

150-51, 153

Phlegon Memorabilia

183, 189

Plato Laws

328

Strabo 1.3.8 12.2.4 16.1.18

182 182 62

231

Phacdo 66

367

Suetonius Augustus 76

Symposium 211

367

Tiberius 36.1

218

Timaeus

328

Tacitus Annals 2. 85.5

218

History 5.2 5.5.2 5.8-9

211, 21 173 133

Theognis

9

Tibullus 2.5.71-80

183

Varro

193, 2C

Pliny Natural History 5.15 239, 256 Plutarch Dem. 19 21.4

182 182

Isis and Osiris 46-47 47

294 87

De Pythiae Oraculis 397b 190

Vellerns Paterculus 133

Polybius 38:22

Virgil Fourth Eclogue 192-97

133

Pseudo-Callisthenes 64

Acneid 1.257-98

196

Egyptian Texts Book of the Dead

304

Oracles of Ncchepso and Petosiris 70, 328

Demotic Chronicle 61, 67, 69, 71, 203, 304

Papyrus Insingcr 9

Oraclc of the Lamb to Bocchoris 203-204

Potter's Oraclc 62, 64, 65, 67, 70-71, 202-207

Persian Texts Bahman Yasht 63, 67, 70, 196 1 134

Oracle of Hystaspes 63

Denkard 9.8

135

Gathas

293-4

Yasna 30 30.3-6 32.3-5

253 294 294

Akkadian Enuma Elish

66,139-41

Texts Vision of the Netherworld 147, 149, 150

Ugaritic Texts C T A 1-6 1.3.24 2 2.1.21 4.4.24

143 145 143 145-46 145

4.5.65-6 6.1.36 6.1.43-65 17.6.49

146 145 144 145

145,146,

INDEX OF SUBJECTS This index does not include items that are pervasive (e.g. apocalypticism, Qumran, or items that can be found easily through the chapter headings. Aaron 120, 249, 252, 263, 276, 278, 280-1, 283 Abraham 175,211,266,322 Absalom 254, 301, Achaeus 62 Achilles 193 Achior 173, 219 Actium 201 Adad 342 Adam 44, 268, 282-3, 290, 296-8, 353, 373-83 Adiabene 1 7 4 , 2 1 9 , 2 2 5 Agrippina 230 Agur 52, 348, 391 Anriman 87 Ahura Mazda 134, 293-4 Ain Gedi/Engedi 239, 274, 357 Akiba 20 Akitu festival 66 Alcimus 243, 246, 263, 346 Alexander the Great 60-1, 63, 65, 172, 176, 184 Alexander Balas 244 Alexander Jannaeus 242-3, 257, 312, Alexander Polyhistor 187, 193 Alexandria 62, 204, 223, 224, 226, 232, 235, 352 aUegorists 219-21, 232, 235 Amenhotcp 71, 203 Ammonite 173 Ananias 174,225-7,234 Anaximander 325 Andreas/Lukuas 110 animal cults 44 Antichrist 84, 163 Antioch 211,218,231-3 Antiochus of Ascalon 330 Antiochus III 6 2 , 1 7 7 , 2 0 6 Antiochus Epiphanes 43, 56, 108, 117, 151, 154, 158, 160-1, 173-4, 177, 202, 204, 207-9, 265, 269, 3067, 331, 345 Antoninus 229 Anu 342 Apeiron 325 Aphrodisias 230 ApŪ110 192,206

Ares 206 Aristobulus 205 Aristotle 293 Artaxerxes 6 Asael 290 Aseneth 224-5 Asia Minor 62 assembly/council, divine 48, 934 146 148 Assyria ' 64/100, 104, 133-4, 184, 189, 268 Astarte 143-4 astral immortality 93, 329, 333 astrology 45, 70, 213, 329, 338 astronomy 47, 329 Athanasius 5n, 7 Athtar 144 Athronges 110 Atonement, Day of 8, 245, 247, 313 Atrahasis 289 Augustus 183, 231 Avesta 63, 135, 293 Azazel 292 Azizus of Emessa 219 Baal 56, 140-5, 150-1, 153, 208 Baal Shamem 151 Babel, tower of 187-8, 190-1 Babylon 53, 62, 66, 68, 73, 99, 100, 131-3, 140, 168, 170, 176, 184, 251, 263, 276-7, 339, 343-4 Balaam 223 baptism 2 1 7 , 2 1 9 , 2 3 2 , 2 3 4 Bar Kochba 20,110 Barnabas 211 bārû guild 45-6,341 Bel 62, 167-77, Belial/r 84, 110, 120, 123, 240, 243, 252, 257-8, 271, 273, 281-2, 284-5, 293, 335, 379, 382, 391, 398-9 Belshazzar 136, 169, 171-2, 344, Ben La'aga 19 Ben Tagla 19 Berossus 65-7, 153, 185 Booths, Feast of 8 Byblos 68

Caesar 196 Cain 44, 282 Cairo Geniza 400 calendar 17,47,51,54-5,241,245, 247-8, 268-70, 279-80, 291 Callimachus 204, 206-7 Camarina 182 Canaan 56, 59, 64, 68, 73, 87, 140 Carthage 133 Chacronea 182 Chaldean 46, 67, 70, 135, 141, 328, 333, 338, 344, 345 Christ 8 4 , 1 0 7 , 1 1 0 , 1 1 5 , 1 2 3 - 4 , 1 8 1 , 185, 234 circumcision 172, 211-32, 269 Cleopatra II 202 Cleopatra VII 201 conversion 211-28 Cornelius 229 cosmological conviction 324-5, 328, 337 cosmology 47, 49, 50-1, 324-30 covenant 82, 211, 220, 239, 249, 253, 256, 263, 276-7, 279, 309, 375 covenantal nomism 52, 266 Cumae 197 Cumean sibyl 192-3, 195-6 Cyprus 182 Cyrus 103, 131, 174 Damascus 232, 256, 276-7 Dan 52, 341, 398 Darius 7, 99, 131, 171 David 9, 13-5, 64, 121, 373 definition of apocalypse 27-8. Demetrius 257, 312, 313 determinism 49, 71-2, 164, 331, 382 Diaspora 3, 12, 41, 51, 68, 106, 131, 175-6, 199, 211-35, 344, 396, 400 Diaspora revolt 104, 110, 209-10 Dioaorus Siculus 62, 65 divination 45-6, 343, 347 Domitian 223 Dositheus 205 dragon 122-3, dreams 45, 49, 69, 100, 132, 149, 305-7, 340, 343-9, 387, 391 Drusilla 219 dualism 72, 78-9, 253, 261-2, 272, 281, 283-5, 289, 293-6, 299, 381-2, 387 Ea 342 Edfu 204, 206 Egypt 65-6, 68, 70-1, 73, 102-4, 108, 186-7, 199-208 210-1, 221, 282, 323, 325, 328, 344, 387

Egyptian, the (prophet) 111 Egyptians 61 El 140, 143-5, 152-3, Eli 281 El Elyon 152 Elam 62 Eleazar ben Azariah 4 Eleazar from Galilee 226 Eliashib 246 Eliezer. R. 222, 227 Elijah 94, 175 end of days 311 end of history 78-82,157-65 En Gedi 239, 274, 357 Enkidu 149 Enlil 342 Enmeduranki 44-6, 48, 50, 341-3 Enuma Elish 66, 135, 141, 143 Ephraim 257 Epictetus 232 Epiphanes of Commagene 219 Ercshkigal 147 Erythrae 183 Erythrean sibyl 184, 187, 189 Esagila 62 Esarhaddon 147 Essenes 37, 57, 217, 239, 247-8, 251, 253, 256-7, 259, 261-3, 272-5, 278, 288, 295, eternal life 90, 109, 275, 283 Ethiopia 17-8, Etruscan 196 Eudemus of Rhodes 293 Euhemerism 214-5 Euripides 184 Eve 290, 297, 372, 375 exegesis 301-14, 347 ex eventu prophccy 72, 119, 191, 196, 304, 307, 312 exile 251-2, 280 Exodus 66, 222, 271, 322, 325 Ezra 246 Flavius Clemens 223 four kingdoms 63-65, 99-101, 104, 111, 133-5, 154, 189 Fulvia 218 Gabriel 159 Galilee 52 Gamaliel II 4 Gathas 289, 294 Gauls 206-7 Gerizim 14 Gilgamesh 50, 149, 163, 351 God-fearers 212, 216, 221, 227-33 Groningen hypothesis 287-8, 292

Gud 66 Gymnosophists

217

Hadad 144, 150-1, Hades 105, 320, 335, 355, 392 Hagu/Meditation 16, 371 Haman 170 Harsaphis 61, 304 Harsiesis 203, 206 Hasidim 7, 41, 43, 55-6, 261-3, 285, 292 346 Hasmonean 105, 173, 175, 211, 219, 244-5, 247 Helena 174,226, Heliopolis 205 Hellenistic mood 327, 333, 336 Heracleopolis 61-2, 304 Heracles 65, 191 Heraclitus 190 Hermon 52, 341, 357 Herod 110,173,193,219 Herod Agripp 219 Herodotus 133, 169 Hesiod 191-3, 325-6, High Priest 13,208,242-7,259,279, 311 Hillel 11-2, 222 holy ones 85-86, 101-2, 107, 158-9, 334-5, 361, 363 Homer 187, 200 Horus 61, 65, 204-8 hybris 356 Hystaspes 63-4, 71-2 idolatry 199, 201, 206, 213, 215, 217, 344 idols 167-77 Idumeans 173, 219 immortality 92-94, 97, 106, 274, 3224, 329, 333, 335, 351-67, 394 Insinger, Papyrus 9 Interpreter of the Law 279 Ionia 224 Ionians 61, 304, 325 Isaac 271 Isis 61-2, 64, 206, 209, 362, Itureans 219, 226 Izates 174,219,226-8,232,234 Jacob 45, 105, 175, 225, 270, 322, 349 Jamnia 3 - 5 , 7 , 1 1 , 1 9 , 2 0 , Jannes 281 Jason 105 Jericho 239, 357 Jerusalem 5, 14, 52-3, 57, 62, 100, 104, 109-10, 113, 126, 151, 154,

172, 187, 205, 209, 213-4, 226, 229, 242, 244-7, 257, 267, 270, 276, 280, 291 310-11 372 Jesus ' 108, 114, 119, 120-4, 126, 185, 234, 247, 314 Johanan ben Zakkai 4 John the Baptist 217 John of Patmos 115,119,127, Jonathan Maccabee 242-6, 248, 251, 253-4 Jonathan son of Saul 243 Joppa 104 Jordan 104, 214 Jose the Galilean, R. 373 Joseph 45, 224-5, 229, 344, 398 Josiah 8, 175, Joshua 327 Joshua, R. 222, 227 Judah 110,121,398 Judah the Essene 254 Judah the Patriarch 219 Judas of Galilee 110 Judas Maccabee 7,43,51,55,243-4, 263, 266, 346 Jupiter 196 Jupiter Sabazius 218 Khnum 203 Kitdm 301,311 Kothar wa Khasis Kronos 144, 214 Ktesias 133

143

Lactandus 187 Laodicea, Council of 5n Lebanon 301, 357 Leontopolis 205, 225 letters 118-119 Levi 110,175,398 Leviathan 144, 153, 229 Light and Darkness 38,273-4,281, 284-5, 293-5, 298, 381-2 Logos 124, 126, 217, 322, 328-9 Lot 322 Louvain 25 Lucifer 88 Ludi Saeculares 183 Luke 232 Lycophron 191 Maat 326 Maccabees 14, 56, 125, 172, 201, 208-9, 242, 268 Macedonia 64, 104, 134, 182, 189, 201 Magi 217 Magnesia 134

Man of Des 239, 253-8, 274, 278, 283, 294, 309, 313 Mani 298 mantic wisdom 48,3 17, 388 Marduk 141, 208 martyrdom 62 Masada 274 maskilîm 56, 67-8, 108, 164-5, 265-7, 272, 330, 345-6 Mastema ' 1 7 , 2 7 1 , 2 8 0 - 2 , 2 8 7 , 2 9 0 , 293, Media 62, 64, 99, 100, 104, 131-3, 189 Meir, Rabbi 4 Megiddo 87 Melchizedek 152 Melito of Sardis 7 Memphis 209 Menahem, son ofJudas 110 Meremoth 246-7 Mesopotamia 44-5, 51, 59, 65, 68, 72, 87, 140, 148, 325,341, 387 messiah 17,103,107-8,110-2,116, 120-7, 202, 274, 283 Micaiah ben Imlah 48, 53 Michael 56, 102, 122-4, 141, 265, 271 Michclangclo 181 midrash 269, 308-9, 313, 322 Miletus 230 minim 19 Mithras 193 Mithridates 63 Molon 62 Mordechai 170 Moses 6 , 9 , 1 3 , 1 6 - 8 , 4 4 , 5 2 , 2 1 1 , 214, 233, 252, 270-1, 279, 281, 348, 375, Mot 144, 153 mythology 65-66,83-84,139-55, 199-208 Nabonidus 149,171,174,344 natural law 327 Nebuchadnezzar 65, 100, 131-7, 154, 169, 171-2, 249-50, 277, 347 Nebuchadnezzar I 191 Nechcpso 70, 328 Ncferty 65 Nektanebo 64 Nergal 147 Nero 230 Nicanor 184 Noah 44, 184, 290, 322, 376 Occanus 325 Octavia 230

Odyssey 50 Ormazd 87 Onias III 55, 306 Onias IV 205, 208, 225 Osiris 61, 206, Oxyrhynchus 209 Pantikapaion 230 Paradise 20, 348 parencsis 118 Parthians 62 Passover 217, 229, 282 Paul 211, 2 2 1 , 2 3 2 - 3 , 2 3 5 , 3 5 0 , 3 8 3 Pentephres 225 periodization 51, 56, 72, 280 rerscpolis 63 Persia 64, 100, 103-4, 131-3, 142, 189, 271, 390 Persians 63-4, 133 pesher/peshanm 14, 69-70, 242-7, 256, 278, 301-14, 347 Pctosiris 70, 328 Pharisees 5, 11, 19-20, 89, 253, 2578, 392 Phibis 9 Philo Byblios 68, 144, 150, 153 Phlegon 183, 189 Plato 92, 328, 330, 333, 367 Polcmo of CUicia 219 Pompcy 109 Poppaea 230 Porphyry 307 Poseidon 325 Posidonius 329-30 priesthood 49, 55, 242-8, 290, 310, 312 Prometheus 49 propaganda 63, 99, 199-210, 212, 216-7, prosclytc/prosclytism 172, 217-28 pseudepigraphy 71-2, 119 pseudonymity 67-8, 117, 120, 350 Ptolemies 60-1, 103, 158, 204 Ptolemy II Philadelphus 206 Ptolemy IV Philopator 204, 206, 208-9, 225, 344 Ptolemy V Epiphanes 61, 204 Ptolemy VI Philometor 103, 201, 212, Ptolemy VII Philopator 201, 206-7, 212 Ptolemy VIII Euergctcs II (Physcon) 202, 204, 207, 352 Pydna 201 Pythian oracle 182 Q.

385, 401-4

Rabbi 229 Rahab 144, 152 Raphia 61, 206 Re 202-4, 326, realized eschatology 81 Reformation 12 Resh Laqish 374 resurrection 53-4, 57, 80, 88-9, 91, 94, 96, 102, 104, 107, 112-4, 117, 124, 161-4, 213, 215-7, 234, 265, 274, 345, 362-3, 390, 392 revolts, Jewish 4, 62, 110, 217 Rhodes 182 Rome 11, 62-4, 71-2, 104, 108, 111, 113, 182, 187, 189, 193, 201, 209, 218, 227 Romans 61, 64, 103, 191, 202-3, 218 Rosetta Stone 204, 206 Sabbath 211, 227, 231, 239-40, 269, 279 Sabbe 185, 200 Samaritan recension 14 Sambethe 185 Sanhédrin 4 Sarapis 209 Sardis 230 Sassanians 63 Satan 17, 123, 270-1, 290-1, 298, 374, 398 Saul 373 Seleucids 60-2, 66, 158 Seleucus 65 Semihazah 290 Sennacherib 60, 149, Septuagint 14, 124, 194, 202, Servius 192-3 Seth 61, 65, 205-9 Shamash 44, 342 Shechem 173 shaman 341 Shammai 11 Shelemaiah 246-7 Sheol 90, 354-5, 359-60 Simon the Just 177, 243, 246 Simon, servant of Herod 110 Simon bar Giora 110 Simon Maccabee 243, 253, 256 Sinai 325, 348, 375 Son of Man 101, 102, 107, 116, 1212, 140, 142-3 spirit/pneuma 320-1, 328 stars 50-1, 54, 56, 88-9, 108, 124, 164, 265, 267-8, 327, 328, 331-4 Stoics 328-30, 333-4, 337, 382 Sumerian 45, 66 Syllaeus 219

synagogue 216, 224, 229-30, 232, 234 Syria 104,214 tablets, heavenly 48, 270, 341-3 Tachos 71 Taxo 108, Teacher of Righteousness 71, 90, 239, 242-3, 245-60, 273-4, 276-9, 283-4, 301, 309-10, 312, Teman 171 temple 55, 62, 103, 108, 161-3, 189, 207, 209, 213-4, 216-7, 229, 240-1, 245-7, 249-50, 257, 266-8, 274, 27983, 291 Thaïes 325 Theocritus 194 Theognis 9 theology, biblical 59, 91, Theopompus 293 Therapeutae 10 Theudas 110 throne vision 53, 54 Tiamat 208 Tiberius 218, 231 Titans 188, 206-7 Trojan war 190 Troy 191, 195 Trypho 243 Two Spirits 37, 273, 284, 287, 293-6, 380, 382, 400 Typhonians 206-9 Ugarit 87, 142, 144, 296 Ugaritic 59, 68, 135-6, 143, 145-6, 150, 153 Uppsala colloquium 25-6, 29, 31,3 5, Uriah 247 Uruk 66 Utnapishtim 44, 341 Utuabzu 44 Varro 184, 200, Virgil 192-6 Volcanius 196 Voluspa 35 Wicked Priest 239-40, 242-8, 253, 255, 259, 287, 301, 309, 310, 312-3, Word (Logos) 124, 126, 217,322 Xerxes Yamm

6, 176 56, 143, 153, 208

yēser (New York) Zeno, Emperor Zeus 214

373-81 185

Zeus Demarous Zeus Olympius Zion 194

144 151

Zodiac 142 Zoroastcr/Zarathustra 293-4, 299, 381

64, 71, 134-5,