[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Qumran question (fwd)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 07:20:59 EST
From: James R. Davila <jrd4@st-andrews.ac.uk>
To: Multiple recipients of list <ioudaios-l@lehigh.edu>
Subject: Re: Qumran question

>try wiseman or martinez--the text was published in 92 i think--the
>orion list will certainly have it at their fingertips. resurrection is
>to be expected at qumran since they had daniel and it was an important
>work for the dss folks.
>quite likely people will knopw it. i wouldnt be surprised that
>shifman's reclaiming the dss also has it,

Uh uh, Herb.  You're not getting off that easily.  The text you're alluding
to is 4Q521, translated as "4QMessianic Apocalypse" by Garcia Martinez on
pp. 394-95.  Yes, it clearly mentions resurrection, but what evidence is
there that it was a sectarian text?  My question is, where in the texts
that have connections with Sadducean legal traditions is there an allusion
to resurrection?  I believe the answer is nowhere.  I am not willing to
presuppose some kind of doctrinal unity on the Scrolls just because they
were found together.

Resurrection aside, there are other difficulties in the way of any simple
identification of the Sadducees and the Bne Zadok of the Scrolls.  Josephus
says they accepted only the written law and didn't believe in destiny or an
afterlife.  The book of Acts says that they didn't believe in resurrection,
angels, or spirits.  But 4QMMT seems to allude to the standard Jewish canon
(torah, prophets, David) as authoritative  and to expect some sort of
reckoning at the "end of days."  The Damascus Rule is very interested in
angels, predestination, and eternal life.  I'm not sure if there are
comparable problems with the Temple Scroll, so maybe we can let Larry have
it for his Sadducees.

Jim Davila
University of St. Andrews