Echoes of a Prophet: The Use of Ezekiel in the Gospel of John and in Literature of the Second Temple Period (Library Of New Testament Studies)

library of new testament studies

Echoes of a Prophet The Use of Ezekiel in the Gospel of John and in Literature of the Second Temple Period

Gary T. Manning Jr

JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT SUPPLEMENT SERIES

270

Editor

Mark Goodacre

Editorial Board

John M.G. Barclay, Craig Blomberg, Elizabeth A. Castelli, Kathleen E. Corley, R. Alan Culpepper, James D.G. Dunn, Craig A. Evans, Stephen Fowl, Robert Fowler, Simon J. Gathercole, Michael Labahn, Robert Wall, Robert L.Webb

Echoes of a Prophet The Use of Ezekiel in the Gospel of John and in Literature of the Second Temple Period

Gary T. Manning Jr

T&.T CLARK INTERNATIONAL

A Continuum imprint L O N D O N

•

N E W

Y O R K

Copyright 2004 T&T Clark International A Continuum imprint Published by T&T Clark International an imprint of Continuum The Tower Building, 11 York Road, London SE1 7NX

15 East 26th Street, Suite 1703, New York, NY 10010

www. tandtclark.com All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Typeset by Tradespools, Frome, Somerset

EISBN 9780567080868

CONTENTS

Acknowledgments Abbreviations

vii ix

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION AND METHOD

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Previous Work on Ezekiel's Influence on John Intertextuality Methodology Focus of this Work Conventions Outline of the Book

1

2 3 7 19 20 20

Chapter 2 THE USE OF EZEKIEL IN THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS

1. History, Identity, and Eschatology of the Community 2. Epithets for the Community and its Enemies 3. Imitating Ezekiel (Ezekiel 1, 10, 17, 30, 37, 40; Pseudo-Ezekiel) 4. Summary of the Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

22

23 59 68 73

Chapter 3 THE USE OF EZEKIEL IN OTHER SECOND TEMPLE LITERATURE

1. The Merkabah Vision (Ezekiel 1; 3.2, 14-15; 10; Sirach 49.8; Testament of Levi 5.1; 7 Enoch 14.8-25; 39.2; 71.1-2) 2. Sheep and Shepherd (Ezekiel 34; 1 Enoch 89-90; Psalm of Solomon \12\-AA) 3. Dry Bones (Ezekiel 37.1-11; Sirach 49.10; 4 Maccabees 18.17; Lives of the Prophets 3.12; 1 Enoch 90.4-5) 4. Summary of the Use of Ezekiel in other Second Temple Literature

78

79 86 96 99

Echoes of a Prophet

Chapter 4 ALLUSIONS TO EZEKIEL IN JOHN: MAJOR ALLUSIONS

1. Shepherds and Sheep 2. Vine and Branches 3. Summary

100

100 135 149

Chapter 5 ALLUSIONS TO EZEKIEL IN JOHN: MINOR ALLUSIONS

1. The Opened Heavens (Ezekiel 1.1; Genesis 28.12; John 1.51) 2. The Dry Bones Summary of John's Use of the Vision of Dry Bones 3. Water and the Spirit 4. Summary of the Use of Water as Spirit in John

150

150 160 171 172 194

Chapter 6 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

1. 2. 3. 4.

Tendencies in the Form of Allusions Tendencies in the Method of Allusions Messiah and Community Tendencies in Johannine Allusions

Bibliography Index of Scripture and Ancient Sources Index of Modern Authors

198

199 203 206 209 214 225 238

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This book, like most worthwhile accomplishments, owes much to many people. It is both a pleasure and an obligation to give them credit here. This book is a slight revision of my doctoral dissertation, composed under the direction of Marianne Meye Thompson and David Scholer.1 The topic of the use of the Old Testament in the New has been of interest to me for many years. Marianne Meye Thompson suggested the particular topic of the use of Ezekiel in the Gospel of John, for a Johannine Christology seminar paper in the fall of 1999. I am grateful to her for the idea, and especially for her encouragement and excellent advice in the course of my research and writing. David Scholer served as the second reader for the dissertation and gave useful suggestions and encouragement. My time at Fuller Theological Seminary was made both productive and enjoyable by time spent in classes or in research with these two professors, as well as with Dr James Bradley, Dr Donald Hagner, and Dr Ralph Martin. I am grateful to Dr James VanderKam of Notre Dame University, who graciously read an early draft of Chapter 2. His comments provided material direction as well as encouragement at the beginning of my research. I also appreciated encouragement from professors at Talbot School of Theology: Dr Clint Arnold, Dr Michael Wilkins, and many others. I worked on revising the dissertation during my first year teaching at International College and Graduate School in Honolulu; I am thankful for the fellowship with staff and faculty, as well as students who helped me clarify my views on the Gospel of John. Writing the dissertation was also made possible through the generous support of several foundations. I was grateful to Fuller and its donors for providing me with the Full Fellowship; the Juliette M. Atherton Scholarship, the Hawaii Community Scholarship Fund, and the Hawaii Veterans Memorial Scholarship all provided generous funding as well. My extended family was of invaluable support during my studies. There were many times during my doctoral work that I recognized the need for 1. G. Manning, 'Echoes of a Prophet: The Use of Ezekiel in the Gospel of John and in Literature of the Second Temple Period' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Fuller Theological Seminary, 2003).

viii

Echoes of a Prophet

endurance and hard work. I am grateful to my parents, Gary and Karen Manning, for instilling those values in me from a young age, as well as for encouraging me during my doctoral work. My parents-in-law, Joe and Mary Ann Lawson, provided wonderful family andfinancialsupport. Two of my brothers-in-law were especially helpful: David Lawson kept my computer working, and Jonathan Trautner kept my car running. Our church family at the Evangelical Free Church in Diamond Bar, California, was a place of good fellowship and friendship. Our home church, Faith Christian Fellowship of Honolulu, kept us in prayer and kept friendships alive during our years away. Most of my year of research and writing was spent working at home, so my family was close to my work. My wife, Barbara, was unflagging in her encouragement, and kept the house running smoothly when my writing schedule grew heavy. My children, Josiah, Nathaniel, Daniel, Ian, and Caleb provided (mostly) welcome interruptions to my work on a daily basis. I appreciated their patience throughout the year. Finally, this work is dedicated to its three subjects: God's faithful servants Ezekiel and John, and Jesus the Messiah, for whom Ezekiel hoped and about whom John reported.

ABBREVIATIONS AB AcTDan AER AGJU ANF APOT

AUSS BDAG BDB BETL BHS Bib BSac BTB BZ BZNW CBQ CBQMS CDSS Cone ConNT CRINT CQR DJD DNTB

Anchor Bible Acta Theologica Danica American Ecclesiastical Review Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums Anti-Nicene Fathers R.H. Charles (ed.), Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English (2 vols.; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913) Andrews University Seminary Studies F.W. Danker, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2nd edn, 2000). Francis Brown, S.R. Driver and Charles A. Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1907) Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologicarum lovaniensium Biblia hebraica Stuttgartensia Biblica Bibliotheca Sacra Biblical Theology Bulletin Biblische Zeitschrift Beihefte zur ZNW Catholic Biblical Quarterly Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series G. Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English (New York: Penguin Press, 1997) Concordia Coniectanea neotestamentica Compendia rerum iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum Church Quarterly Review Discoveries in the Judaean Desert C.A. Evans and S.E. Porter, Dictionary of New Testament Background (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2000).

Echoes of a Prophet DSD DSS DSSCOL DSSSE DSSHAG ECDSS ExpTim HBT HSM HTCNT HTR HUCA ICC IDE Int ISBE JAOS JBL JBLMS JETS JJS JQRMS JR JSJ JSNT JSNTSup JSOT JSOTSup JSPSup JTS LCL NASB NedTTs

Dead Sea Discoveries Dead Sea Scrolls Dead Sea Scrolls and Christian Origins Library F. Garcia Martinea and E. Tigchelaar, The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition (2 vols.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 19971998) James Charlesworth (ed.), The Dead Sea Scrolls: Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts with English Translations (10 vols.; Tubingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1994-) Eerdmans Commentaries on the Dead Sea Scrolls Expository Times Horizons in Biblical Theology Harvard Semitic Monographs Herder's Theological Commentary on the New Testament Harvard Theological Review Hebrew Union College Annual International Critical Commentary George Arthur Buttrick (ed.), The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (4 vols.; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962) Interpretation Geoffrey Bromiley (ed.), The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (4 vols.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, rev. edn, 1979-88) Journal of the American Oriental Society Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of Biblical Literature Monograph Series Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society Journal of Jewish Studies Jewish Quarterly Review Monograph Series Journal of Religion Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Period Journal for the Study of the New Testament Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Supplement Series Journal of Theological Studies Loeb Classical Library New American Standard Bible Nederlands theologisch tijdschrift

Abbreviations Neot NICNT NIDNTT NovT NovTSup NTS ODJR OTL OTP PVTG RB ResQ RevQ RevScRel RSV SBEC SBLDS SBT Scr SE SJLA SJT SNTSMS SR STDJ StudBL SVTP TDNT TynBul TSAJ TZ UBSGNT VC VCSup VD WBC WUNT ZNW

XI

Neotestamentica New International Commentary on the New Testament Colin Brown (ed.), The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (3 vols.; Exeter: Paternoster Press, 1975) Novum Testamentum Novum Testamentum Supplements New Testament Studies Oxford Dictionary of the Jewish Religion Old Testament Library James Charlesworth (ed.), Old Testament Pseudepigrapha Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti graece Revue biblique Restoration Quarterly Revue de Qumran Revue des sciences religieuses Revised Standard Version Studies in the Bible and Early Christianity SBL Dissertation Series Studies in Biblical Theology Scripture Studia Evangelica I, II, III ( = TU 73 [1959], 87 [1964], 88 [1964], etc.) Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity Scottish Journal of Theology Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series Studies in Religion I Sciences religieuses Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah Studies in Biblical Literature Studia in Veteris Testamenti pseudepigrapha Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich (eds.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley; 10 vols.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964-) Tyndale Bulletin Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum Theologische Zeitschrift United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament Vigiliae christianae Supplements to Vigiliae christianae Verbum domini Word Biblical Commentary Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft

Xll

Echoes of a Prophet

Table of Abbreviations for Ancient Works 1 En. 2 En. 2 Bar. 3 Bar. 4 Bar. 4 Ezra 4 Mace. Ant. Agr. Asc. Isa. Barn. Ep. Jub. Liv. Proph. Men. Peshikta R. Pss. Sol. Sot. Spec. Leg. Sukk. T. Jud. T. Levi T. Mos. T Zeb. Targ. 1 Sam. Targ. Ezek. Targ. Jer.

1 (Ethiopic) Enoch 2 (Slavonic) Enoch 2 (Syriac) Baruch [= Apocalypse of Baruch] 3 (Greek) Baruch 4 Baruch 4 Ezra [= 2 Esd. 3-14] 4 Maccabees Antiquities of the Jews De agricultura Ascension of Isaiah Barnabas Epistle of Barnabas Jubilees Lives of the Prophets Menahot Peshikta Rabbati Psalms of Solomon Sotah De specialibus legibus Sukkah Testament of Judah Testament of Levi Testament of Moses Testament of Zebulon Targum on 1 Samuel Targum on Ezekiel Targum on Jeremiah

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION AND METHOD

The Gospel of John contains some of the most powerful images of Jesus that can be found in the Gospels. Jesus is described as the good shepherd and the true vine; the Holy Spirit flows as water and breath from him. Part of the power of these images lies in their antiquity. Shepherd, vine, water and breath had already served as powerful symbols in the Scriptures of Israel. In John's quest to explain the significance of Jesus, he draws on these images that were already familiar to his readers. While John uses images and quotations from the full range of the Old Testament, these particular images, as well as a few others, bear the stamp of one of Israel's most unusual prophets, Ezekiel. Ezekiel had the disconcerting habit of using familiar metaphors in unfamiliar ways;1 perhaps it is not surprising to find John using Ezekiel's metaphors in new ways to describe Jesus and his followers. In many cases, John combines metaphors from Ezekiel and other passages from the Old Testament; sometimes, there is a hint that Ezekiel provides for John a sort of window on the rest of the Scriptures. When John uses images from Ezekiel, we have the opportunity to overhear a sort of conversation between the prophet and the Evangelist. Ezekiel speaks, and John repeats; but John's iteration is not merely an echo. Each of Ezekiel's metaphors is re-expressed. The original purpose of the metaphor is usually still visible in John's retelling; but in each case, John applies Ezekiel's metaphor to Christ and his community. John was not the first to use these images from Ezekiel; other authors in Second Temple Judaism had also used and modified Ezekiel's metaphors. What follows in this study is an attempt to hear these various 'conversations' with Ezekiel, and thus to understand John's application of Ezekiel's oracles to Jesus Christ.

1. Scholars of Ezekiel typically observe his tendency to play with common metaphors. As Durlesser points out, Ezekiel's 'allegories experimented with unconventional aspects of conventionalized metaphors, and provided... new details, aberrant shifts, and bizarre twists.' J.A. Durlesser, 'The Rhetoric of Allegory in the Book of Ezekiel' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 1988), p. iv.

2

Echoes of a Prophet 1. Previous Work on EzekieVs Influence on John

Four monographs on John's use of the Old Testament have been published in the last century.2 However, these deal only with explicit OT quotations, and so are of limited value for this study, since John never quotes Ezekiel. Numerous commentaries and articles on John have cited possible allusions to Ezekiel in several passages in John; usually, however, Ezekiel is merely listed as one of many OT background passages.3 Several dissertations and monographs make significant mention of Ezekiel's influence on John.4 Other dissertations deal with Ezekiel's influence on Second Temple literature.5 Only one dissertation, however, has been devoted to the relationship between John and Ezekiel. William Fowler's The Influence of Ezekiel in the Fourth Gospel: Intertextuality and Interpretation'6 provides a comparison of John's and Ezekiel's 'theological vocabulary' (words used by both authors fifty times or more, or used in the T am' statements). Fowler's analysis of the main 'points of contact' between John and Ezekiel

2. E.H. Freed, Old Testament Quotations in the Gospel of John (NovTSup, 11; Leiden: E J . Brill, 1965); M.JJ. Menken, Old Testament Quotations in the Fourth Gospel: Studies in Textual Form (Kampen, the Netherlands: Kok Pharos, 1996); G. Reim, Das alttestamentliche Hintergrund des Johannesevangeliums (SNTSMS, 22; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974); B.G. Schuchard, Scripture within Scripture: The Interrelationship of Form and Function in the Explicit Old Testament Citations in the Gospel of John (SBLDS, 133; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992). 3. For example, Schnackenburg proposes multiple background texts for John 10: Ezek. 34.23f.; Mic. 5.1-3; Zech. 11.15-17; 13.7-9; Ps. 23.2; 1 Chron. 4.40; and Isa. 49.9f. This sort of list suggests the exploration of a symbol rather than the examination of a parallel. R. Schnackenburg, The Gospel According to St. John (trans. K. Smyth et al.; HTCNT; 3 vols; New York: Herder and Herder, 1968-1982), vol. 2, pp. 293, 295. 4. B.A. Fikes, 'A Theological Analysis of The Shepherd-King Motif in Ezekiel 34' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1995); J.W. Vancil, 'The Symbolism of the Shepherd in Biblical, Intertestamental, and New Testament Material' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Dropsie University, 1975); M.W. Woods, 'The Use of the Old Testament in the Fourth Gospel: The Hermeneutical Significance for Contemporary Biblical Interpretation' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1980). 5. S. Fujita, T h e Temple Theology of the Qumran Sect and the Book of Ezekiel: Their Relationship to Jewish Literature of the Last Two Centuries B.C.' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Princeton Theological Seminary, 1970); R. Nurmela, 'Prophets in Dialogue: Inner-Biblical Allusions in Zechariah 1-8 and 9-14' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Abo Akademi (Finland), 1996); C. Rowland, 'The Influence of the First Chapter of Ezekiel on Jewish and Early Christian Literature' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Cambridge University, 1974). 6. W.G. Fowler, 'The Influence of Ezekiel in the Fourth Gospel: Intertextuality and Interpretation' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary, 1995).

1. Introduction and Method

3

proves a useful resource for this study. However, this study will part with Fowler's in a few important ways. First, Fowler's method of using the authors' 'theological vocabulary' is not the most useful method for tracing Ezekiel's influence. It causes Fowler to overlook or downplay passages in John and Ezekiel that are clearly parallel yet do not use many of the words on Fowler's list. In other cases, Fowler's method of moving from theological vocabulary to thematic parallel produces parallels that are unpersuasive, or that could be demonstrated to be parallels more persuasively by attention to particular parallel passages. Because of these differences in methodology, this study will diverge from Fowler's in three ways. First, this study focuses more attention on John's allusions to specific passages in Ezekiel. Second, this study attempts to place John's use of Ezekiel within the context of Second Temple usage of Ezekiel. Third, although this study will agree with Fowler on several of the particular 'points of contact' between John and Ezekiel, it will disagree with Fowler on the relative significance of these points of contact with Ezekiel.

2. Intertextuality The study of intertextuality begins with the assumption that a literary work can best be understood when its indebtedness to earlier literary works is analyzed.7 This belief is not unique to modern intertextual study; historical-critical scholarship has long acknowledged the value of searching for parallels between biblical texts and earlier texts (biblical or otherwise). Twentieth-century New Testament scholarship exerted a great deal of effort in finding parallels to NT literature. Such parallels might demonstrate direct verbal dependence on an earlier source, or suggest the source of theological ideas, or provide insight into the thought-world of the NT era. This labor resulted in impressive lists of parallel passages. In fact, because early twentieth-century scholarship was so ready to discover parallels to earlier literature, most of the parallels discussed today have already been noticed. However, such 'background studies' were often hampered by a lack of clear methodology. In some cases, it was unclear what sort of parallel was implied, or whether the parallel indicated dependence in either 7. Paulien emphasizes this importance: 'To the extent that an interpreter misses an author's allusion to previous literature, that interpreter will misunderstand the author's intention.' J. Paulien, Decoding Revelation's Trumpets: Literary Allusions and the Interpretation of Revelation 8:7-12 (AUSS, 11; Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews University Press, 1987), p. 168, also citing J. Hollander, The Figure of Echo: A Mode of Allusion in Milton and After (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1981), pp. 65-66.

4

Echoes of a Prophet

direction between the two documents. There was a tendency to find parallel texts that actually had very little parallel material, or were historically very unlikely to have been available to the author. The lack of controls on identifying parallels led to producing 'laundry lists' of parallel passages. In other cases, scholars arbitrarily focused on one particular parallel text. The classic example of this is Bultmann's work on the Good Shepherd discourse. Despite his excellent observation that John's Good Shepherd had parallels to Numbers 27, Jeremiah 23, and Ezekiel 34, Bultmann decided that the scattered references to a shepherd in the Mandean literature were the primary source of John's shepherd imagery.8 An important correction to these problems came from Samuel Sandmel in his influential article, 'Parallelomania.'9 Sandmel made a number of sharp criticisms about the way in which many scholars adduced parallels between the NT and other Jewish literature. Some of his suggestions are worth examining here, because they had an important influence on later background studies. First, Sandmel argued for closer attention to the context of the proposed parallel: 'Detailed study is the criterion; the detailed study ought to respect the context and not be limited to juxtaposing mere excerpts. Two passages may sound the same in splendid isolation from their context, but when seen in context reflect difference rather than similarity.'10 Second, and related to the first, was Sandmel's focus on discovering the meaning of the parallel material and its role in its new setting. It is not enough to point out a proposed parallel; one must also see how the author used the 'borrowed' material.11 Third, Sandmel insisted that scholars pay attention to the creativity of the later author. Not only may some material be original to the NT author, but further, the NT author may have purposely altered the parallel material.12 Fourth, Sandmel pointed out that not all parallels illustrate dependence. Some parallels arise out of the common Judaism of the authors; some parallels occur when both authors have independently drawn on an earlier text; and some parallels are trivial or coincidental. Especially when the dating of the various texts is in doubt, it is sometimes difficult to establish the direction of the dependence.13 Finally, Sandmel argued against a polemical or biased use of parallels - e.g., making artificial distinctions between Jesus' sayings and similar rabbinic 8. R. Bultmann, The Gospel of John (trans. G.R. Beasley-Murray, R.W.N. Hoare, and J.K. Riches; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1971), pp. 364^67. 9. S. Sandmel, Tarallelomania', JBL 81 (1962), pp. 1-13. 10. Sandmel, Tarallelomania', p. 2. 11. Sandmel, Tarallelomania', p. 5. 12. Sandmel, Tarallelomania', p. 4. 13. Sandmel, Tarallelomania', p. 3.

1. Introduction and Method

5

sayings to the detriment of the latter.14 All of these suggestions have corrected and refined the study of parallels to the NT. In more recent years, the study of parallels to the NT has been supplemented by a focus on intertextuality in literary studies. In some ways, intertextuality is merely a new formulation of the historical-critical study of literary parallels. The main difference has been an increased focus on the conversation between the later work and its literary ancestors.15 Intertextual studies have sought to understand how (e.g.) a New Testament author understood his Old Testament source and adapted material from the older text for use in his own work. The study of intertextuality has only begun when a possible parallel in earlier literature is discovered. From there, the student of intertextuality seeks to learn how the later author interacts with the source document, transforms it, and uses it to advance the later work. Intertextual study considers the two overlapping contexts of an allusion or quotation. Every allusion needs to be examined as an element in both the source document and the alluding document.16 The later author may have used an allusive phrase to remind the readers of the entire passage from which the phrase was drawn. The allusion may be intended to recall a particular theme or complex of ideas in the original passage.17 Intertextual study also pays close attention to the role of the allusion in its new context.18 Finally, intertextual studies consider the congruence between

14. Sandmel, 'Parallelomania', pp. 10-13. 15. Hays defines intertextuality as 'the imbedding of fragments of an earlier text within a later one.' R.B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), p. 14. 16. Unfortunately, there are few consistently used technical terms in the field of biblical intertextuality. The text to which a later text alludes is called 'earlier' or 'precursor' (Hays, Echoes, pp. 24, 30); 'source' (C. A. Evans, Word and Glory: On the Exegetical and Theological Background of John's Prologue (JSNTSup, 89; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), pp. 18-19); 'previous literature' 'prior literature' or 'background passage' (Paulien, Trumpets, pp. 168, 178, 184); 'subtext' (A.D. Hultberg, 'Messianic Exegesis in the Apocalypse: The Significance of the Old Testament for the Christology of Revelation' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 2001), p. 41); or 'former text' (Fowler, 'Influence', p. 13). I use the terms 'source' and 'earlier' interchangeably, as well as 'alluding' and 'later.' 17. Hays describes this phenomenon thus: 'Allusive echo functions to suggest to the reader that text B should be understood in light of a broad interplay with text A, encompassing aspects of A beyond those explicitly echoed.' Hays, Echoes, p. 20. 18. In his examination of the OT quotations in John, Freed points out that this had often been neglected: 'Torrey and others have paid too little attention to the contexts of which the quotations are a part and to the theological motives and stylistic methods of the writers... In every instance [John's] quoted text appears to be adapted to its immediate context, to his literary style, and to the whole plan of the composition of his gospel.' Freed, Old Testament Quotations, p. 129.

6

Echoes of a Prophet

these two contexts. In many cases, an allusion provides a skillful link between two passages that have similar themes or theological aims.19 An allusion can be pictured as the narrow neck of an hourglass, allowing meaning to flow through it from the source document to the alluding document. The allusion itself consists of only a phrase or combination of a few words, but it allows the reader to make further connections between the old passage and the new. If only the allusive words are analyzed, the allusion does not have its full impact. The allusion serves its intended function best when the reader observes its old and new contexts, sees the congruence between those contexts, and makes the connections only hinted at by the allusion. The goal of this book is to analyze the role of allusions to Ezekiel in the Gospel of John in light of allusions to Ezekiel in other literature of the Second Temple period. Such an approach might be called 'comparative intertextuality.' Typically, intertextual studies seek to find the literary background of a single work. They analyze the conversation between a later work and its earlier literary influences. Comparative intertextuality is an attempt to place the intertextual conversations found in a single work within the context of similar intertextual conversations found in other works. In the case of this study, such an approach attempts to triangulate John's usage of Ezekiel. A straightforward study of John's use of Ezekiel is certainly useful; but it can be one-dimensional. Studying John's allusions to Ezekiel alone gives no sense of what is remarkable or what is commonplace in Second Temple literature. The observation that the good shepherd in John 10 derives from Ezekiel 34 is certainly true. It is also likely that John's use of Ezekiel here points to Jesus' status as God's agent and even hints that Jesus is the 'Son of David.' These are useful observations, but still only based on the linear relationship between John and Ezekiel. A comparison with the use of Ezekiel 34 in 1 Enoch 89-90 and in Psalm of Solomon 17 adds more dimensions to the intertextual relationship. We discover how John's use of Ezekiel 34 fits roughly within the range of what other authors did with that passage, but we also discover a few unique emphases in John's use of Ezekiel.20 This approach is not new, but it has not been widely practiced until near the end of the twentieth century. Several works on allusions in John or Revelation compare the use of those allusions to the use of similar allusions in Second Temple literature. Works by Allison, Beale, Johnson,

19. Hultberg agrees with this in his suggestion that 'Profundity of one's allusions is signaled by the integration of the theme or structure of the subtext in the new text as well as by the genre or general tone of the new text itself.' Hultberg, 'Messianic Exegesis', p. 42. 20. See pp. 132-5.

1. Introduction and Method

1

Moyise, and Vogelgesang make extensive comparisons between OT allusions found in Revelation and OT allusions found in other apocalyptic literature or in the DSS.21 Dissertations and monograph by Daise, Johnson, Meeks, and Vander Hoek22 pay some attention to this comparison, while works by Hultberg, Nash, Paulien, and Winsor make such comparisons only in passing.23 3. Methodology The goal of this book is to analyze John's use of material from Ezekiel in light of the use of Ezekiel in other literature of the Second Temple period. Because of the danger of misusing parallels (discussed above), it is important to follow a clear method in the analysis of allusions. Many of the intertextual studies mentioned above carefully describe their methodology for identifying and analyzing allusions, while others allow the reader to discover the methods used. In general, the studies of Revelation have been the most profitable in this regard, probably because the complexity of allusions in Revelation requires the use of careful and consistent methods. All of the methods used in this monograph are informed by previous work on allusions and intertextuality. In some cases, my methods have only been adopted or adapted after tracking down numerous allusions in the DSS, the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, and the New Testament. The methods used thus influence the allusions that are 21. D.C. Allison, Scriptural Allusions in the New Testament: Light from the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSSCOL 5; North Richland Hills, Tex.: BIBAL, 2000); G.K. Beale, 'Revelation', in D.A. Carson and H.G.M. Williamson (eds), It is Written: Scripture Citing Scripture (Festschrift B. Lindars; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), pp. 318-36; D.H. Johnson, 'Our Father Jacob: The Role of the Jacob Narrative in the Fourth Gospel compared to its role in the Jewish Bible and in the Writings of Early Judaism' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 1992); S. Moyise, The Old Testament in the Book of Revelation (JSNTSup, 115; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995); J.M. Vogelgesang, 'The Interpretation of Ezekiel in the Book of Revelation' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, 1985). 22. M.A. Daise, '"Rivers of Living Water" as New Creation and New Exodus: A Traditio-historical Vantage Point for the Exegetical Problems and Theology of John 7:37-39' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Princeton Theological Seminary, 2000); W.A. Meeks, The Prophet-King: Moses Traditions and the Johannine Christology (NovTSup, 14; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1967); G.W. Vander Hoek, 'The Function of Psalm 82 in the Fourth Gospel and History of the Johannine Community: A Comparative Midrash Study' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Claremont Graduate School, 1988). 23. Hultberg, 'Messianic Exegesis'; S.B. Nash, 'Kingship and the Psalms in the Fourth Gospel' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Westminster Theological Seminary, 2000); Paulien, Trumpets', A.R. Winsor, 'A King is Bound in the Tresses: Allusions to the Song of Songs in the Fourth Gospel' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Graduate Theological Union, 1996).

8

Echoes of a Prophet

discovered, and allusions that are discovered sometimes influence the methods used. For example, a simplistic approach to intertextuality might only look for passages that show extensive and precise verbal parallel. But then, despite the strictness of the method, other clear allusions arise that do not fit the initial criteria, and the scholar is forced to revise the criteria to include such allusions. a. Select Passages with Possible Allusions

The first step in 'comparative intertextuality' is to locate passages, in John and in Second Temple literature, that are worth examining for the possibility of Ezekiel's influence on the later work. In one sense, this is a 'pre-step' - the details of this search will not normally be described at length in this study (nor are they described in other intertextual studies). Nevertheless, the approach to finding possible parallels, as opposed to the methods for demonstrating allusion or dependence, is worth a few comments. First, intertextual study begins with the prime criterion of availability: an allusion is only possible if the author had access to the earlier work.24 All the arguments for dependence between two documents are pointless if it is unlikely that the later author had access to the earlier work. The application of this criterion is especially important when comparing documents of disputed date, such as rabbinical material and the NT. In this study, this criterion needs little discussion, since all the Second Temple authors that we will study had access to Ezekiel. Access to particular text forms of Ezekiel is debatable, but rarely matters in the particular examples we will examine. Once it is established that the author had access to the earlier work, then the search for possible allusions can begin. Sections of the later work can be broken down into key words and phrases. For example, the Good Shepherd discourse of John 10 can be broken down into a list of significant shepherding terms and phrases. Then possible allusions can be found by searching for occurrences of those phrases and words, as well as for synonyms and cognates, in the LXX. In some cases, the search needs to be broadened by looking for the occurrence of Hebrew synonyms in the Masoretic Text, especially where no Greek counterpart is available (for example, there are more viticultural terms in the Hebrew of the MT than in the Greek of the LXX). OT passages that combine several of the terms or phrases under consideration suggest themselves as possible references for the allusion. This approach usually leads to several OT passages with parallels to the metaphor in the later passage. In some cases, it is clear that 24. Evans, Word and Glory, pp. 18—19; Hays, Echoes, p. 29; Hultberg, 'Messianic Exegesis', p. 37; Paulien, Trumpets, pp. 179-80.

1. Introduction and Method

9

a passage in Ezekiel contains more of the key terms and phrases than any other text proposed for the allusive passage. In other cases, Ezekiel does not necessarily share more of the Johannine words and phrases, but it seems that the two passages in Ezekiel and John use some key words in the same way. In other cases, discovery of parallels between a later work and Ezekiel results from a less methodical approach - simple familiarity with both texts, achieved by repeated reading. Finally, secondary literature often suggests possible parallels that then require verification and analysis. The history of interpretation provides an important check on the investigation of allusions. If an allusion has never been noticed before, then it is less likely to be genuine.25 b. Establish the Strength of the Allusion The second step in comparative intertextuality is to assess the strength, or 'volume,'26 of the allusion. The main criteria for the strength of an allusion to an earlier work are 1) the number of similar words and phrases 2) used in similar ways 3) when compared against other possible sources. These three criteria establish a unique verbal parallel between two passages. The strength of the allusion can be further established by the presence of 4) structural parallels, 5) repeated allusions to the same or nearby passages, and 6) resonance or congruence between the original context and the new context of the allusion. Each of these criteria will be examined in turn. 1) The more words and phrases that two documents have in common, the clearer the allusion is.27 The allusion is clearest when the two works share common words, but the later work may also allude to the earlier via synonyms or cognate words. In some cases, the use of synonyms or cognates may be due to different text traditions, or allusion to either the Greek or Hebrew text, or faulty memory by the later author. In other 25. Hays suggests that the history of interpretation provides at best a negative criterion for detecting allusions. Hays, Echoes, p. 31. 26. Hays, Echoes, p. 30. 27. This is a common criterion in background and intertextual studies. Chilton calls it 'dictional coherence' (B.D. Chilton, The Glory of Israel: The Theology and Provenance of the Isaiah Targum (JSOTSup, 23; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1983), p. 21); Hultberg calls it the 'criteria of correspondence' (Hultberg, 'Messianic Exegesis', pp. 40-41). See also G.K. Beale, The Use of Daniel in Jewish Apocalyptic Literature and in the Revelation of St. John (Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1984), pp. 308-09; Hays, Echoes, p. 29; J.D. Huntzinger, 'The End of Exile: A Short Commentary on the Shepherd/Sheep Metaphor in Exilic and PostExilic Prophetic and Synoptic Gospel Literature' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Fuller Theological Seminary, 1999), pp. 152-55; S.F. Mathews, 'A Critical Evaluation of the Allusions to the Old Testament in Apocalypse 1:1-8:5' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Catholic University of America, 1987), pp. 11-12; Paulien, Trumpets, pp. 179-80; Vogelgesang, 'Interpretation', pp. 15-16.

10

Echoes of a Prophet

cases, the words or syntax may have been intentionally altered for stylistic reasons, to update older language, or to fit the language or theology of the later context. From a statistical point of view, phrases are far more suggestive of allusion than are single words.28 A later work may coincidentally use three separated words that can be found in an earlier passage, but if those three words are found in a single phrase common to both works, the allusion seems deliberate. Thus, a single phrase in common between two texts may be more important than several shared words not in phrases. For example, Ezek. 17.23-24 and Jn 15.6 both contain the words KAfpa (branch) and SrpouvG) (wither). However, the two words are separated in Ezek. 17.23-24, and it is not the branches that wither. Ezek. 19.12 is a closer parallel to Jn 15.6 because both combine the parallel words in a phrase (e&paveri r\ Although quantity of parallel words and phrases is important, some allusions are clear because of their use of distinctive words. Like the textcritical dictum, words should be 'weighed, not counted': single, distinctive words may increase the probability of allusion more than several nondistinctive words.29 When John uses the rare word kiifyvoau to describe Jesus breathing the Spirit on the disciples (Jn 20.22), it seems quite likely that he intends to recall Ezek. 37.9, 14, which uses the same word to describe God giving his Spirit to the exiles.30 2) The proposed allusion is stronger the more that the shared vocabulary is used in similar ways. That is, the allusion is clearer if the allusive words and phrases have the same narrative role or theological purpose in the two passages.31 If two passages use similar words, but those words have

28. Several authors suggest a criterion similar to this one: Beale, Use of Daniel, pp. 30809; Hays, Echoes, p. 29. On the other hand, some authors pay too much attention to single words to the neglect of phrases, such as Huntzinger, 'End of Exile', pp. 152-55. 29. K. Berding, Poly carp and Paul: An Analysis of Their Literary and Theological Relationship in Light of Poly carp's Use of Biblical and Extra-Biblical Literature (VCSup, 62; Leiden: Brill, 2002), p. 29. 30. See pp. 165-66. 31. Evans suggests something similar when he asks if the parallels show a 'meaningful relationship of language and conceptually.' (Evans, Word and Glory, pp. 18-19; cf. Chilton, Glory of Israel, p. 21). Beale's 'aggregate of evidence' (Beale, Use of Daniel, pp. 309-10) and Hultberg's clearer 'criterion of aggregation' (Hultberg, 'Messianic Exegesis', pp. 40-41) also call for an overlap of verbal and conceptual parallel, although they do not phrase it in quite this way. Some scholars have seen verbal parallel as a less important criterion than others precisely because this second aspect is overlooked. For example, Paulien sees the presence of verbal parallels as important in the detection of allusions, but notes that such parallels 'may prove to be merely superficial or fortuitous' (Paulien, Trumpets, p. 186). But if the shared vocabulary is linked to shared narrative role, then such superficial or accidental parallels will be excluded.

1. Introduction and Method

11

different functions in the two passages, then the parallel is relatively weak. For example, C.H. Dodd suggests that the use of compounds of epxo|ioa and ixyco (with elo- and &;-) in John 10 has a parallel in Ezekiel 34.32 However, these word groups have different roles in the two passages. In Ezekiel 34, they are used to describe God leading his flock out of exile and into the land. In John's image of the shepherd, the words are used to describe the entry of the shepherd into the fold, his freedom to lead the sheep out to good pasture, and his plan to bring in other sheep. Thus, the appointment of Joshua in Numbers 27 is the more likely background for John's use of these words, since there the same words are used to describe the leader's entry before the people, and his role in freely leading the people in and out.33 3) The strength of the allusion is also established by comparison with other possible parallel passages. If the two texts uniquely share the proposed parallel (i.e., no other proposed parallel text has the same material), then the allusion becomes stronger and more credible.34 For example, Psalm 23 might be proposed as the source of John's shepherd imagery (based on shared words and ideas); but clearly, Ezekiel 34 is the more likely candidate, since John shares words, phrases, and ideas with Ezekiel 34 that are not found in Psalm 23.35 If two works uniquely share a particular phrase, it becomes quite likely that the later work is alluding to the earlier work. Conversely, if the phrase in question can be found in a number of earlier works, demonstrating allusion to only one of them is difficult. For example, the phrase 'like sheep without a shepherd' in the Synoptic tradition (Mk 6.34/Mt. 9.36) can hardly be claimed to derive only from Ezekiel 34,36 since that phrase can be found in various forms in six books of the OT. Therefore, whenever possible, this study will compare

32. C.H. Dodd, Historical Tradition in the Fourth Gospel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965), pp. 358-59. 33. See pp. 103-110. 34. Hultberg calls this the 'criterion of uniqueness' (Hultberg, 'Messianic Exegesis', pp. 40-41). The use of this criterion is implied in Beale, Use of Daniel, pp. 309-10; Paulien, Trumpets, p. 186; and Vogelgesang, 'Interpretation', p. 15. Strangely, this is neglected by Hays in his description of methodology, although he seems to occasionally use it in passing (e.g., Hays, Echoes, p. 24). 35. Nielsen proposes both Psalm 23 and Isaiah 53 as background for John 10; but neither of these have as many words or ideas in common with John 10 as Ezekiel 34. K. Nielsen, 'Old Testament Imagery in John', in J. Nissen and S. Pedersen (eds), New Readings in John: Literary and Theological Perspectives (JSNTSup, 182; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999), pp. 66-82 (77). 36. Contra Huntzinger, who recognizes that the phrase can be found in various OT books, yet still emphasizes Ezekiel as the primary background text for Mk 6.34. Huntzinger, 'End of Exile', pp. 190-91,251.

12

Echoes of a Prophet

proposed source passages to see which is the most likely source of the allusion.37 In some cases, authors allude to more than one OT passage. Careful attention to the criteria suggested here will also aid in finding these combined allusions. As part of the exploration of the use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls, Chapter 2 will explore how some authors combine multiple allusions through the use of catchwords or common themes. Once the strength of an allusion is established - by the presence of similar words and phrases, used in similar ways, when compared with other possible source texts - then other criteria can be brought to bear as supporting evidence for the presence of the allusion. 4) Structural parallel is the similarity of order or outline in two passages. By itself, structural parallel may not be conclusive, but if verbal dependence has already been demonstrated, then similar structures in the two texts can add to the evidence for the presence of the allusion.38 5) Repeated reference to the same earlier work is supporting evidence. One allusion is evidence for another: when one allusion to Ezekiel is detected within a text, this can be used as evidence for a nearby allusion to Ezekiel.39 The first allusion serves as evidence that the author is familiar with, and interested in, material from Ezekiel. This evidence becomes stronger if successive allusions are to the same passage in the source text, and if the allusions in the later passage occur in proximity.40 For example, the Damascus Document makes a clear allusion to Ezekiel's 'builders of the barrier' (CD 19.33/Ezek. 13.10). Only a few lines later, the Damascus Document describes being 'enrolled' in the 'council of the people' language that sounds typical of the DSS, but is actually an allusion to Ezek. 13.9. The fact that two allusions to the same oracle in Ezekiel can be found in such close succession provides evidence for both allusions.

37. Strictly speaking, this 'criterion of uniqueness' only strengthens the evidence for the allusion from the reader's perspective, not the allusion itself. In other words, if John wanted to make sure that his readers would sense an allusion, he would add more allusive phrases. He would be less likely to draw attention to the allusion by carefully picking out phrases that were unique to the earlier passage. 38. I downplay the role of structural parallel here, as does Hays. Brawley (R.L. Brawley, 'An Absent Complement and Intertextuality in John 19:28-29', JBL 112 (1993), pp. 427-43 (436-37)) agrees on subordinating structure and repeated reference to straightforward verbal parallel. Studies of intertextuality in Revelation, however, tend to put much greater weight on structural parallel. Cf. Beale, Use of Daniel, pp. 307-08; Hultberg, 'Messianic Exegesis', pp. 38-39; Paulien, Trumpets, p. 185; Vogelgesang, 'Interpretation', p. 16. 39. This use of evidence, termed 'the criterion of concurrence' by Hultberg, is used by a number of authors: Beale, Use of Daniel, pp. 307-08; Berding, Poly carp and Paul, p. 28; Hays, Echoes, p. 30; Hultberg, 'Messianic Exegesis', pp. 3 9 ^ 0 ; Vogelgesang, 'Interpretation', p. 15. 40. Berding, Poly carp and Paul, pp. 28-29.

1. Introduction and Method

13

6) Finally, supporting evidence for the presence of allusion can be found in the 'resonance' between two texts. Two texts can be said to resonate when their contexts deal with similar themes and ideas.41 A proposed allusion extending only to a short phrase may seem rather weak; but if the surrounding contexts of the phrase in both passages touch on the same themes and ideas, the allusion may be rather strong. For example, the allusion to Num. 27.16-23 in Jn 10.1-9 can be established by several parallel words and phrases related to leading and hearing. This parallel becomes striking, however, only when the resonance between the two passages is noticed. John 10 uses leading and listening language to defend the legitimacy of Jesus' role as true shepherd or leader of Israel. Numbers 27 uses similar language to describe the legitimacy of Joshua's leadership over Israel, so that 'the congregation of the Lord will not be like sheep who have no shepherd' (Num. 27.16).42 Such resonance between passages is quite common in genuine allusions. A word should be added here about the relationship between 'echoes' and 'allusions.' Although all scholars do not use these terms exactly the same way, many treat 'echoes' as subsets of 'allusions.' An allusion is any non-quoted reference to a previous work; an 'echo' is a fainter allusion. Hays distinguishes the two on the basis of volume: echoes fulfill the criteria for allusions less clearly (although he often uses the two terms interchangeably, as do I).43 Others use intentionality as the distinguishing factor.44 Allusions (or 'direct allusions') are intended by the author, whereas echoes are the unconscious use of language from the earlier work.45 Thus, direct allusions are intended to draw the reader's attention to the source text, whereas echoes are part of the author's pattern of writing,

41. This is similar to Hultberg's 'criterion of aggregation,' which suggests that the presence of verbal, thematic, and structural parallels increases the probability that the allusion is genuine. Hultberg, 'Messianic Exegesis', pp. 40-41; cf. Beale, Use of Daniel, pp. 307-08, 327. Hays does not list resonance as a criterion for establishing allusion, but he describes the phenomenon as 'resonant overtones' (Hays, Echoes, p. 21). In the realm of explicit quotations, Freed points out the value of observing both the original context and the new context of an OT citation. Freed, Old Testament Quotations, p. 129. 42. See pp. 103-104. 43. Hays, Echoes, p. 29. 44. Beale, Hultberg, and Paulien see the determination of the author's intent in the allusion as both possible and necessary. Part of their concern is natural to the study of Revelation: they need to distinguish between genuine allusions to OT texts and 'stock apocalyptic language'. However, Beale recognizes that authorial intent is often slippery. Thus, for Beale, the 'validity' of an allusion 'can be established without coming to a final decision concerning a writer's consciousness of the reference.' Beale, Use of Daniel, pp. 307, cf. 306; Hultberg, 'Messianic Exegesis', pp. 41-43; Paulien, Trumpets, pp. 172-73, 175. 45. Hollander makes a more subtle distinction: 'echo is a metaphor of, and for, alluding, and does not depend on conscious allusion.' Hollander, The Figure of Echo, pp. 65-66.

14

Echoes of a Prophet

unconsciously absorbed from the source texts.46 This is clearly a valid distinction: all writers can attest the fact that other works influence their diction even when no allusion is intended. However, in most cases, it seems difficult for the modern interpreter to read the mind of the author and discern between intended allusions and unintended echoes. Furthermore, in most cases, it may not be necessary to determine whether the allusion was intended or not. If an allusion is sufficiently strong, readers may be reminded of the source whether the author made a conscious allusion or not. In our attempt to understand John's use of the OT, even unconscious echoes may be of value. Of course, very strong allusions are quite likely intentional. Conversely, very weak allusions may only give us a hint about common phrases of the first century, or the allusions may exist only in the interpreter's mind. These very weak allusions should probably be excluded from consideration. In general, it seems better to discuss the strength of the allusion itself, rather than the author's intention.47 c. Determine the Use of the Allusion Intertextual study has only begun once the presence of an allusion is established. As C.A. Evans put it, 'Is the parallel meaningful? Although this sometimes may be forgotten, this is the real reason for searching for backgrounds and sources of biblical passages.'48 Since intertextuality is concerned with the conversation between a work and its sources, intertextual analysis must move to an examination of the meaning of the allusion. The first step in this examination is to discern the role of the allusion in its new context; to answer the question, 'How does the allusion advance the narrative or theology of the passage?'49 In order to understand John's allusion to Jeremiah's 'true vine' (Jer. 2.21) in Jn 15.1, we need to 46. Paulien further discusses the unconscious aspect of echoes. Paulien, Trumpets, pp. 172-73, 175. 47. Here I have tipped my hand somewhat, revealing my hermeneutical approach. Clearly the author had intentions, and it is often possible to make some observations about those intentions. However, this study primarily focuses on meaning as resident in the text itself, without denying the importance of the meaning resident in the author or in the community of readers. For further discussion of the intersection of intertextuality and the locus of meaning, see Hays, Echoes, pp. 27-28. 48. Evans, Word and Glory, pp. 19-20; cf. Sandmel, 'Parallelomania', 5. 49. Some scholars, such as Hays (31-32, 34-35) and Vogelgesang (15-16), have used this 'usefulness' as a criterion for determining the strength of a proposed parallel. That is, a parallel is more likely to be genuine if discerning its presence illumines the passage. There is some value to this; in general, a hypothesis in any field of knowledge is more credible the more explanatory power it has. However, as Hultberg points out, 'usefulness' as a criterion 'relies too much on the ingenuity (or lack thereof) of the exegete...' He sees it, at best, as a negative criterion - a proposed allusion that has no explanatory value may not be genuine. Hultberg, 'Messianic Exegesis', p. 39.

1. Introduction and Method

15

observe how the 'true vine' allusion advances the discourse of John 15. In John 15, the 'true vine' suggests that Jesus is the only source of life, in contrast to any other possible vines; the allusion to the failure of Israel as God's vine in Jeremiah 2 suggests that Israel is one such false vine. Second, we can begin to understand the significance of the allusion by observing any modifications that were made to the original wording or image.50 For example, Ps. Sol. 17.28, 41 describes the just re-allocation of land under the coming messianic king, using language drawn from Ezek. 45.8; 47.13, 21-22. However, Ezekiel's expectation is that resident aliens will be adopted into the tribes of Israel, while Psalm of Solomon 17 expects that there will no longer be any aliens in Israel. Observing this modification aids in understanding the emphases and theology of Psalms of Solomon 17.51 Analyzing the modification or use of the allusion is possible only when the two contexts are carefully analyzed. In each case in this study, we will examine the meaning and role of the allusive phrase both in its original context and in its new allusive setting. A change in the role or meaning of the allusive material can indicate anything from a new application of the source text, to a mild redirection or reinterpretation of the source text, to a sharp disagreement with the source text. Allusions thus allow us to see the author's indirect or unstated interpretation of the earlier work. In general, most of the allusions in Second Temple literature examined in this study show only subtle variations from their original sense.52 What is startling about many of these allusions in Second Temple literature is not their interpretation of the original texts, but their implicit claims that the Scriptures to which they allude were now being fulfilled in a particular person or in a particular community. d. Compare to other use of Ezekiel in Literature of the Second Temple Period Many works of the Second Temple period allude to passages in Ezekiel. In some cases, it is valuable to compare the usage of the same passage in 50. Hays suggests that 'The twofold task of a criticism attuned to such echoes, then, is (a) to call attention to them so that others might be enabled to hear; and (b) to give an account of the distortions and new figuration that they generate.' Hays, Echoes, p. 21. Schuchard does something similar with OT quotations in John, although he does not address allusions. His work argues that all of the modifications to John's OT citations are intentional. Schuchard, Scripture within Scripture, pp. 151-52, 154. 51. See pp. 94-95. 52. This observation is now becoming commonplace as various scholars pursue intertextual studies. For example, Beale notes that 'Repeatedly the various authors have been shown to exhibit a strong tendency to respect the meaning of the O.T. contexts from which they draw allusions.' Beale, Use of Daniel, p. 327; see also Moyise, The Old Testament in the Book of Revelation, pp. 139-42.

16

Echoes of a Prophet

Ezekiel in various works. For example, Ezekiel's images of vine and tree (Ezekiel 15, 17, 19) seem to have influenced John 15 as well as the agricultural imagery of the Hodayot. A comparison between the use of Ezekiel in John 15 and the Hodayot allows a glimpse of a 'history of interpretation' of Ezekiel, so to speak. Different elements of each allusion can be compared: their roles in their respective works, the distinctive modifications to the original images, and the implied understanding of Ezekiel in the two later works. In some cases, it is also useful to compare the modes of usage. Although ancient writers rarely describe their methods of interpretation, it is often possible to discern what methods were used, and how writers appealed to Scripture. Certainly, the ancient authors did not neatly divide their interpretations into clear types, but often their mode of interpretation can be placed into a spectrum that ranges from prophecy-fulfillment to typological to sapiential. Wherever the interpretation falls in the spectrum, later writers expected the works of Scripture to have relevance for their own time. In some cases, they saw the details of Scripture as prophecies to be fulfilled. In most of these cases, Second Temple authors interpreted the oracles of the writing prophets as events that would later be fulfilled. Not all prophecies were assigned to the future: in some cases, prophecies were seen as having already been fulfilled in history, or as being fulfilled in the events of the author's time. In other cases, especially in the DSS, a sort of typological interpretation can be observed. The term 'typology' needs some explanation, since it has been used to mean anything from a precise method of interpretation to a broad description of any connection between the OT and the NT.53 Not all typology is the same: some focuses more on the later event (the antitype), some more on the events in Scripture (the type); some seems more allegorical, some more historical. There remains debate over the distinction between typology and allegory, over the significance of typology, and over the hermeneutical validity of typological interpretation.54 Despite those issues, various shades of typological interpretation

53. K.J. Woollcombe, 'The Biblical Origins and Patristic Development of Typology', in G.W.H. Lampe and K J . Woollcombe (eds), Essays on Typology (SBT, 22; London: SCM Press, 1957), pp. 39-75 (39). 54. Hays questions whether typology should be considered a method of interpretation, since 'Typology forges imaginative correlations of events' that require a particular understanding of the antitypical events (Hays, Echoes, p. 161). This is certainly valid; nevertheless, typology is a repeatable mode of interpretation that can be shared by a community that agrees on the status of the types and the antitypes as divine interventions. Thus, Christians who believe that the same God worked both in the Passover and in the Cross could independently observe the typological connections between the two.

1. Introduction and Method

17

can indeed be found in literature of the Second Temple period. Here I will define typology as interpretation that makes theological, correspondent connections between entities in Scripture and later entities.55 These entities may be persons, historical events, or institutions. The typological connections are theological in that they are logically based on the continuity of God's action and character. The interpreter, believing that God acts in a consistent fashion, expects to see correlation between God's past work in the Scriptures and God's present work.56 The typological connections are correspondent in that they expect some sort of repetition or recapitulation of the entity in Scripture.57 This recapitulation is not necessarily historical, although typology usually focuses on historical entities. Instead, the interpreters of Scripture expected God to act again with his people in a fashion that was consistent with his character and his covenants. The interpreter expected that his comparison of the two entities would add meaning to the antitypical event (in Scripture), the typological 'fulfillment,' or both.58 Finally, in some cases, the Scriptures were interpreted sapientially. That is, the Scriptures provided timeless principles that could be used to guide contemporary life, or to assign people or events to categories derived from Scripture. While OT wisdom and law naturally lent itself to this sort of

55. Compare Woollcombe's definition of typology: ' . . . the establishment of historical connexions between certain events, persons or things in the Old Testament and similar events, persons or things in the New Testament.' Woollcombe and Lampe use this 'historical connexion' as the primary way to distinguish between typology and allegory. G.W.H. Lampe, 'The Reasonableness of Typology', in G.W.H. Lampe and K.J. Woollcombe (eds), Essays on Typology (SBT, 22; London: SCM Press, 1957), pp. 9-38 (31); Woollcombe, 'Typology', p. 39; cf. I.H. Marshall, 'An Assessment of Recent Developments', in D.A. Carson and H.G.M. Williamson (eds), It is Written: Scripture Citing Scripture (Festschrift B. Lindars; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), pp. 1-21 (10). J. Barr rightly points out that the use of history is a limited criterion for identifying typology, since some clear typology draws on nonhistorical types (e.g., law, wisdom) or uses types in an ahistorical fashion. (J. Barr, Old and New in Interpretation: A Study of the Two Testaments (New York: Harper & Row, 1966), pp. 108-14). My definition is thus fundamentally theological, typology is a way of connecting God's action in the past (in the Scriptures) with his later action (usually in events contemporary to the author). 56. Ellis comments, 'Typological exegesis assumes a divine sovereignty over history, an assumption that admittedly not everyone is prepared to accept.' E. Earle Ellis, foreword to L. Goppelt, Typos: The Typological Interpretation of the Old Testament in the New (trans. D.H. Madvig; Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1982), p. xv. 57. Lampe comments, 'That the great events of Israel's past exhibited a certain pattern of God's acts had indeed already been appreciated by some of the Old Testament writers themselves. The prophets from time to time look forward in the future to a repetition or recapitulation of the rhythm of divine action evident in the history of the past.' Lampe, 'Typology', 26. 58. Marshall, 'Assessment', 10.

18

Echoes of a Prophet

interpretation, it could also be applied to narrative. Past events were seen as providing positive or negative examples for moral or wise behavior. When two works allude to the same passage, their reason for alluding to the passage can also be compared. There seem to be three general reasons why a later passage might allude to Ezekiel. A study of allusions to the rest of the OT would probably discern other purposes for allusions; these are merely the purposes I have observed in the use of allusions to Ezekiel. The first is to describe or draw attention to a 'messianic' figure. By 'messianic,' I accept P.M. Joyce's broad definition of that which 'vests future hopes in a royal figure.'59 Passages in 1 Enoch, Psalm of Solomon 17, and John all use allusions to Ezekiel to advance a messianic hope. Second, some works have a community-centered purpose in alluding to Ezekiel. Such works use the images in Ezekiel to explain or defend the identity of a particular community. Most of the DSS use Ezekiel for this purpose, and some of the allusions in John reflect community-centered concerns.60 Third, some Second Temple authors used allusions to Ezekiel to show continuity between the later writing and the OT prophetic tradition - in essence, to bolster the authority of the later document. Of course, almost any reference to Scripture is likely to have as part of its motivation an appeal to authority; but in some cases, it appears that an allusion to Ezekiel has been used primarily to build the authority of the later document. Some allusions to Ezekiel's vision of the chariot seem to have this purpose. Finally, comparison of the various uses of Ezekiel in later works can lead to observations about the view of Scripture held by the later writers. The mere presence of an allusion says little about an author's view of the earlier work, since there are many possible reasons for the presence of an allusion. Some allusions in the DSS are even designed to condemn the way Scripture is used by outsiders. However, most allusions to Ezekiel in Second Temple literature reveal that Ezekiel's words were regarded as permanently authoritative and relevant. The words of the prophet provided a prophecy that would later be fulfilled, or a picture of God's action that would later be repeated, or an authoritative view of life that should be followed in the present. In this sense, the later authors used the Scriptures as the validating authority behind a comprehensive vision of past, present, and future.

59. P.M. Joyce, 'King and Messiah in Ezekiel', in J. Day, (ed.), King and Messiah in Israel and the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the Oxford Old Testament Seminar (JSOTSup, 270; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), pp. 323-27 (326). 60. Hays sees something like these first two purposes in his 'christocentric' and 'ecclesiocentric' hermeneutics. He sees the use of the OT in the Gospels, and especially in John, as christocentric, and the use of the OT in Paul as primarily ecclesiocentric. Hays, Echoes, pp. xiii, 86.

1. Introduction and Method

19

These four steps for analyzing the presence and purpose of allusions are only an ideal. For various reasons, each analysis of an allusion will omit some of the steps. Only some of the criteria for establishing the strength of the allusion will apply to any single allusion. In some cases, there is not enough data to ask some of the comparative questions. In many cases, the details of the first step (finding possible allusions) are too tedious to describe at length. The last step, comparison to Second Temple literature, will be reserved primarily for Chapters 4 and 5. It should also be clear that the various steps are not always distinct. Some of the steps involved in selecting possible allusions are also part of establishing the strength of the allusion. Observing resonance between two passages is part of establishing the strength of the allusion, but it also serves in determining the role of the allusion in the later passage, and it contributes to our understanding of the author's view of Ezekiel. Comparative analysis of the use of Ezekiel is the final step, but can also be a part of the third step, analyzing the use of an allusion within a text.

4. Focus of this Work Even with a topic as apparently narrow as the use of Ezekiel in the Gospel of John, some topics and data must be excluded. First, although a good case could be made for examining the use of Ezekiel in second-century literature, this study is limited to examining the use of Ezekiel in literature up through AD 70. The impact of Ezekiel on later OT prophets, on other NT writings, on the targumim, and on rabbinic literature is occasionally mentioned, but not carefully examined. Second, a few topics must be eliminated or saved for later research. Although the topic of 'Son of Man' in Ezekiel and in John occasionally arises in this book, a full study of that topic would require a separate monograph. The breadth and depth of the secondary literature on the Son of Man indicates that such a study would be too large to be relegated to a subset of this monograph. Furthermore, since 'Son of Man' can be found in all the Gospels, Ezekiel's Son of Man (arguably) should be studied as part of the historical problem of Jesus' self-understanding rather than as a literary background for the use of Son of Man in John. Although the focus of this study is on the use of Ezekiel in John, it is often necessary to analyze allusions to other OT or Second Temple literature. It would be myopic, for example, to analyze the role of Ezekiel 15 in John 15 without noticing John's strong allusion to Jeremiah 2. Background and intertextual studies have often overemphasized one background text at the expense of others; analyzing the role of other passages can prevent such an overly narrow focus.

20

Echoes of a Prophet

Finally, it is quite likely that there are some broad theological connections between John and Ezekiel that do not reveal themselves in any single parallel. This study does not in general deal with such connections, since my methodology deals only with recognizable parallels between passages.61 5. Conventions Throughout this work I refer to the Fourth Gospel and its author as 'John', without entering into the debate over authorship. That debate is important to our understanding of the Gospel of John, but it does not affect the study of John's allusions to the Old Testament. Likewise, debate continues over John's representation of the historical Jesus. This book cannot enter into that debate at any length, although Jesus' use of imagery from Ezekiel could be used as a connecting point to the Synoptic view of Jesus. Thus, I will use terminology such as 'John's use of Ezekiel' without implying any conclusions about the relationship between dominical sayings and John's accounts. Translations of the New Testament, LXX, and other Greek literature are my own, although in most cases the translations are similar to the Revised Standard Version or the New American Standard. Translations of the MT primarily follow the Revised Standard Version or the New American Standard, but I occasionally diverge from those translations, especially when it allows a clearer demonstration of verbal parallel. For Second Temple literature, the translations are derived from the various critical editions, although again I occasionally change the wording to show verbal parallels more clearly. 6. Outline of the Book Chapter 2 analyzes the use of Ezekiel in the DSS. Perhaps because most of the Scrolls were the product of one community, it is possible to discern some consistent patterns in the use of Ezekiel in the DSS. Chapter 3 analyzes the use of Ezekiel found in other non-canonical literature of the Second Temple era (often called the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha). These works are not the product of a single community, but some trends in the usage of Ezekiel can be observed. Chapter 4 analyzes John's strongest and most extended allusions to Ezekiel: the Good Shepherd (Jn 10.1-30) and True Vine (Jn 15.1-10) metaphors. Chapter 5 deals with allusions that are weaker (and in some cases, more difficult to prove): the 'opened 61.

Some of these broad connections are addressed in Fowler, 'Influence', chs 2-4.

1. Introduction and Method

21

heavens' of Jn 1.51; the resurrection imagery of John 5; the breathing out of the Spirit in Jn 20.22; and the use of water symbolism for the Spirit throughout John (including the 153 fishes of Jn 21.11). Finally, Chapter 6 attempts to synthesize an understanding of John's use of Ezekiel in light of the use of Ezekiel in other literature of the Second Temple period. This leads to some observations on the use of the Old Testament in John and in other works of the Second Temple period.

Chapter 2 THE USE OF EZEKIEL IN THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS

This chapter will attempt to analyze how various works in the Dead Sea Scrolls used Ezekiel.1 The Dead Sea Scrolls contain extensive quotations from and allusions to Ezekiel; an analysis of these quotations and allusions will allow us to observe the relative strictness or freedom of quotation, the trends in appropriation, the reasons for which various authors appropriated Ezekiel, the methods of interpretation, and the way that Ezekiel influenced the thought of later authors. This analysis, together with an analysis of allusions to Ezekiel in other literature of the Second Temple period (Chapter 3), will provide a useful background against which to analyze John's appropriation of Ezekiel. Allusions, of course, are only possible if the later author had access to the earlier texts. We can be fairly confident that members of the Qumran Community knew and studied Ezekiel carefully, not only because of the many quotations, but also because of the presence of copies of Ezekiel in the Qumran library. Fragments of six Ezekiel scrolls have been discovered in the Judean Desert (1Q9, 3Q1, 4Q73, 4Q74, 4Q75, and 11Q4), as well as one scroll at Masada (MasId).2 The uses of Ezekiel discussed in this chapter should be assumed to be allusions rather than quotations, unless specifically stated otherwise. Quotations from Ezekiel are only accompanied by introduction formulae (e.g., 'as it says in Ezekiel the prophet') where specifically mentioned (in CD 3.21-4.6; 19.11-13; 4Q174 1.16-17). The allusions to Ezekiel in the literature of Qumran will be organized thematically. That is, rather than examining every allusion to Ezekiel in the order of occurrence in either the DSS or Ezekiel, I will group the allusions to Ezekiel by the way in which they are used in the DSS.3 In Section 1, I examine how some of the authors at Qumran used Ezekiel to describe the 1. I am indebted to James VanderKam, who kindly looked over a draft of this chapter and made valuable suggestions. 2. The fragments of Ezekiel cover portions of chs 1, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 16, 23, 31-37, and 41. These fragments are catalogued in DSSSE. 3. To see the allusions organized in order of their occurrence in the Qumran literature, see the chart on pp. 76-77.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

23

history, identity, and eschatology of the Community.4 Section 2 shows how Ezekiel was a source for titles and epithets for the Community and its opponents. Section 3 discusses Pseudo-Ezekiel, which is in a class by itself. 1. History, Identity, and Eschatology of the Community a. Righteous Exiles (Ezekiel 11.15; 203-5; 20.18; 39.23; Amos 5.26-27; Damascus Document 1.3-4; 3.16-17; 7.14-15; War Scroll 1.2-3; FlorilegiumJ The use of Scripture in the DSS helps us understand the Community's particular version of Israel's history, and thus of its future. My analysis of the use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls suggests that their understanding of the Exile is especially important. In the Babylonian conquests of the sixth century BC, many residents of Jerusalem had been carried off into exile before the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BC. The author of the Damascus Document and other authors at Qumran used Ezekiel and other Scripture to show that these early exiles were being protected from the destruction, not punished. They were the righteous; those who remained and tolerated corrupt Jerusalemite society were the sinners who would suffer God's wrath. God had removed his presence from the corrupt Temple in Jerusalem, and resided with the righteous exiles until the destruction and restoration of Jerusalem and its Temple. Only those who died during Nebuchadnezzar's siege were under God's punishment. The righteous exiles who returned and set up the new Temple were God's agents of restoration. A new priesthood was then established from among the exiles. Unfortunately, with the returning exiles came deceivers, and so the new Temple became as corrupt as the old. An examination of the use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls suggests that the Community's view of Israel's history was also its view of its own present and future. The current Temple had become corrupt, and so Jerusalem was again under judgment. God had already withdrawn his presence from the Temple and had removed his righteous exiles to protect them from the current corruption and the coming destruction. The Community was the group of righteous exiles at 'Damascus'. God had removed his presence from the Temple, and would soon destroy all of Jerusalem. The Gentile nations would rise up against Israel, but God would miraculously deliver Israel through his Messiah(s) and through his faithful exiles at Qumran. The Temple would then be rebuilt, with the priests of Qumran as the new priesthood. But this time, there would be no 4. Ideally, this section should be divided up into three subsections of history, identity, and eschatology. However, the passages in the DSS that we will examine do not neatly divide up these themes.

24

Echoes of a Prophet

deceivers in the return from exile; all those who had rejected the teaching of the Community would be destroyed along with the Gentiles.5 Qumran's understanding of itself as righteous exiles can be seen in the use of OT scripture. Material from Ezekiel is often used in the DSS to illustrate this self-understanding, but I will begin by demonstrating it from a passage in Amos. The Damascus Document is so called because the Community is described as being in Damascus (CD 6.5, 19; 7.14-19; 8.21; 19.34; 20.12). This may be a metaphorical reference to the Community at Qumran, it may refer to an actual branch of the Qumran sect at Damascus, or it may refer to a period in the sect's history when it (or its founder) resided in Damascus. Whichever is the case, it is clear that the Damascus Document draws on Amos 5.26-27, a passage about the exile of the Northern Kingdom, to describe the founding of the Community. If 'Damascus' was only a cipher for the Qumran Community, then it is likely that the Damascus Document derived that cipher from this passage.

CD 7.14—156 And I will expel (TP*?am) your king's booth and the kywn of your images from my tent (^nwa) to Damascus... 7.18 ... and the 'star'

Amos 5.26-27a And you brought your king's booth7 and the kywn of your images,8 the star of your gods which you made for yourselves. Therefore, I will expel (vrbam) you beyond (nxbnD) Damascus.

5. Brooke's study of the commentaries among the DSS suggests a similar view: Isa. 5.5b6a is altered in 4QpIsa 6 1.1-2 in such a way that it 'implies a reading of Isaiah 5 in which the vineyard is already destroyed but the final judgment is yet to come... As with the tendency in the other commentaries the effect of this alteration is to portray the community as standing between an initial destruction and a future judgment' (G. Brooke, 'The Biblical Texts in the Qumran Commentaries: Scribal Errors or Exegetical Variants?' in C.A. Evans and W.F. Stinespring (eds), Early Jewish and Christian Exegesis (Festschrift H. Brownlee; Homage, 10; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987), p. 90). Anderson, representing another view, suggests that the Community 'understood themselves to be atoning for the sins of the exile and bringing that sad chapter in Israel's history to a close' (G.A. Anderson, 'The Status of the Torah Before Sinai: The Retelling of the Bible in the Damascus Covenant and the Book of Jubilees', DSD 1 (1994), pp. 1-29 (11-12)). This may well be an accurate observation about the view of some of the DSS. However, my observations of the use of Ezekiel suggest a slight modification to that view. They did not believe that the exile had never ended; instead, they believed that a new exile had begun because of the failure of those who returned from exile. 6. The Hebrew text of the Dead Sea Scrolls in this paper is taken from DSS HAG when the text is available (volumes 1, 2, 4A, and 4B at this writing). In other cases, the Hebrew text of DSSSE, or of the various critical editions is consulted. Translations primarily follow those of DSSHAG, DSSSE, or CDSS. 7. Or 'Your king, Sikkuth.' 8. Or 'Kywn, your images.'

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

25

The original sense of Amos 5.26-27 is clear: God would punish the idolatry of Israel (the northern kingdom) by exiling them beyond Damascus. Significantly, nba in the hifil (translated 'expel' above) always refers to exile in the OT. The author made a few creative changes that essentially reversed the meaning of the text and helped it apply more precisely to the situation at Qumran. The verb 'expel' was moved to the beginning to make it clear that the king's booth, the kywn, and the star (left out of the initial citation, but mentioned in the interpretation, CD 7.18-20), rather than just the bearers of those items, were moved to Damascus. This change in emphasis is part of the Damascus Document's interpretational strategy. Using some unusual connections with other Scriptures (Amos 9.11, Num. 24.17), the author manages to interpret the 'king's booth' as the Torah, the 'kywn of the images' as the Prophets, and the 'star' as the 'interpreter of the Torah,' presumably the Righteous Teacher (CD 7.15-18). Finally, the author of the Damascus Document reads Amos' 'beyond' (rtKbnft) as 'from my tent' (^nKE) allowing him to insert the idea, so important in some of the Scrolls, that God had abandoned the Temple. This collection of changes allowed Amos 5.26-27 to be read as a prophecy that God would remove the Scriptures, and their only faithful interpreter, from the Temple and settle them in exile in Damascus. This exile was not a punishment: the Damascus Document emphasizes the 'escape' of the exiles at the beginning and end of its interpretation of Amos 5.26-27. 'But those who heldfirmly(to the covenant) escaped to the land of the north... These escaped at the time of the first visitation. But the backsliders were handed over to the sword' (CD 7.14-15, 21). The line between typology and fulfilled prophecy is not clear in this passage. The author of the Damascus Document sees Amos 5.26-27 as a reference to a historical situation ('these escaped at the time of the first visitation'), suggesting that his application of the passage to the Community was typological. A past event (the Exile) served as a model for a later event (the founding of the Community). The elaborate reinterpretation of the elements of Amos 5.26-27, however, seem more like an attempt to see a fulfillment of prophecy. In either case, the Damascus Document uses Amos 5.26-27 to suggest that the Community consists of exiles spared from the coming destruction of Israel.9

9. M. Abegg suggests that the Qumran Community believed that the Exile had not ended yet; the founding of the Community represented the first steps towards the end of exile. Abegg's survey of the DSS is broad enough and careful enough that his conclusion probably fairly represents the view of the exile common to many of the authors of the DSS. (M. Abegg, 'Exile and the Dead Sea Scrolls', in J.M. Scott (ed.), Exile: Old Testament, Jewish, and Christian Conceptions (JSJ, 56; Leiden: Brill, 1997), pp. 111-25.) However, the Damascus Document's unusual interpretation of exile in Amos 5.26-27 suggests that even within Qumran, there were a variety of ways of describing the exile.

26

Echoes of a Prophet

A few allusions to Ezekiel in the Damascus Document also suggest that Qumran saw itself in a new Exile. The Admonition10 of the Damascus Document begins with an account of the pre-history and founding of the Community (CD 1.3-2.1). Although numerous allusions to Scripture are used, the first allusion is to the summary of the exile and destruction found in Ezekiel's Gog oracle.

CD 1.3-4 For in their treachery (obinoa) in leaving him,11 he hid his face from Israel (^to&PQ vas Tnon) and from his sanctuary and gave them up to the sword (sin*? oam)

Ezek. 39.23 And the nations will know that the house of Israel went into exile for their iniquity because they acted treacherously (ibyft) against me, and I hid my face from them (DHB *3B nno*o); so I gave them into the hand of their adversaries, and all of them fell by the sword ( m m V?En)

The image of God hiding his face from his people occurs in other passages in the OT (Deut. 31.17-18; 32.20; Isa. 54.8; 59.2; Jer. 33.5), but only here in Ezekiel is the image combined with treachery and judgment by the sword. Further, there is some resonance between the two texts: both passages address the judgment of God's people and his gracious deliverance of a remnant (CD 1.3-5; Ezek. 39.21-29). Even the Damascus Document's theme of God's 'dispute with all flesh' and 'judgment against all who scoff at him' is similar in some respects to the judgment of the nations in Ezekiel's Gog oracle (CD 1.2; Ezekiel 38-39). However, the Damascus Document makes some significant changes to the text from Ezekiel. The first change is abbreviation. Some of this abbreviation is important: the Damascus Document omitted the phrase 'for the house of Israel went into exile for their iniquity.' It was important to omit this phrase, because the author of the Damascus Document saw his own Community as the exiles. The exile was not a punishment, but preservation. Those who were left behind were punished; those who were exiled were the righteous. Further, 'house of Israel' seems to have negative, or at least ambivalent, connotations in the Admonition of the Damascus Document. That is, the phrase is consistently used to describe fallen Israel in the Admonition. When the Admonition cites or alludes to an OT passage 10. The section title used in DSSHAG, vol. 2, p. 5. 11. DSSHAG (vol. 2, p. 13 fn) notes that the beginning, 'For their treachery in leaving him' (irrnTB IIOK o^snna) is an allusion to Lev. 26.40, 'For in their treachery in being traitorous to me' (^"bvn "KDK DbjJfcn). The author of the Damascus Document may be connecting Lev. 26.40 to Ezek. 39.23 through the use of the phrase (common to both) ^"ibina, which he does not actually quote.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

27

that uses the phrase 'house of Israel,' it only includes that phrase if it can be applied to apostate Israel. If the author is applying the passage to the Community, then the phrase 'house of Israel' is omitted from the citation or allusion. On at least four occasions in the Admonition (CD 1.3^/Ezek. 39.23; CD 3.16-17/Ezek. 11.15; CD 19.33/Jer. 31.31; CD 19.35/Ezek. 13.9), quotations or strong allusions to OT passages omit the phrase 'house of Israel.'12 When the 'house of Israel' or even 'Israel' does occur in the Admonition of the Damascus Document, it is usually in a negative sense. Only when the Rules section begins, and 'Israel' describes the Damascus Community, does the term acquire any positive sense.13 CD 1.3-4 also notably modifies Ezek. 39.23 by the addition of 'and from his sanctuary,' italicized above. The idea of God abandoning his Jerusalem sanctuary is important to Ezekiel (cf. Ezek. 5.11; 10; 11.16), but it is not found anywhere in the quoted verse or in the Gog oracle. The author of the Damascus Document introduces the phrase here because God's abandonment of the Temple is important to the rest of the Damascus Document (and to some other Scrolls). The Damascus Document appropriately treats the account of the Exile in Ezekiel 39 as history rather than prophecy, but it views God's prior abandonment of the Temple as a paradigm, or a type, of the present abandonment. In the Community's eyes, God had also abandoned the Second Temple, and its destruction was imminent. Just as God left Solomon's Temple and then destroyed it, so he had now left Zerubbabel's Temple and would soon destroy it. The Damascus Document continues its history of the Community by dating its founding to 390 years after the fall of Jerusalem (CD 1.5-6). The editors of DSSHAG are inclined to accept this as 'approximately accurate'14 (giving a date of the founding of the Qumran Community in the early second century BC), but the significance of this date for our study is its source in Ezekiel. The prophet Ezekiel was instructed by God to 'bear the iniquity of Israel' one day for every year of Israel's iniquity, 390 days (Ezek. 4.4-5). In Ezekiel, this time span probably was intended to approximate the number of years from the dedication of Solomon's Temple (975/4 BC) to its destruction in 587 BC.15 Ezekiel was thus atoning for the sins of Israel as seen specifically in the Temple. If the author of the Damascus Document knew of this interpretation of Ezekiel, then he was applying it to the Second Temple: just as Solomon's Temple had been the 12. See pp. 28, 63, 64. 13. The tendency can also be observed in 1QM 2.4/Ezek. 45.17 (see p. 41); 1QH 14.10, 21.6-7/Ezek. 36.22 (see p. 49). 14. DSSHAG, vol. 2, p. 13 fn. 15. For an analysis of the chronology issues in Ezek. 4.4-6, see W. Zimmerli, Ezekiel: A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel (trans. J.D. Martin and R.E. Clements; Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979, 1983), vol. 1, pp. 165-67.

28

Echoes of a Prophet

center of Israel's sin for 390 years before the fall of Jerusalem, so also the Second Temple was the center of Israel's sin for 390 years after the fall of Jerusalem until the Righteous Teacher arose. If this is how the Damascus Document uses the number from Ezekiel, it seems that we have evidence of a typological interpretation. The disobedience under Solomon's temple was a type of the disobedience under Zerubbabel's temple. And just as the disobedience in Solomon's Temple led to God's abandoning it, so the disobedience in Zerubbabel's temple had led to God's leaving it. Nothing in the passage suggests that the author of the Damascus Document saw the 390 years as a prophecy to be fulfilled. The author of the Damascus Document instead saw the 390 years as a repeat of the earlier sin under the first Temple. Thus, they had returned to the time of Ezekiel - they were in a new Exile. The history of the Community is resumed in CD 3.12. In describing the arrogance of those who reject the Community, the author uses a phrase, Tor it is ours,' that is rather cryptic unless the allusion to Ezekiel is observed.

CD 3.16-17 But those who scorn them will not live. Rather, they wallowed in human sin and the ways of impurity and said Tor it is ours.' (KTI rb «o n&*n)16

Ezek. 11.15 Son of man, your brothers, your brothers, your fellow exiles, and the whole house of Israel, all of them, are those to whom the inhabitants of Jerusalem have said (r)»K), 'Go far from YHWH; this land has been given to us (KTI Mb) as a possession.'

Although the proposed allusion is rather brief, the key phrase KTT Mb is found nowhere else in the OT. The fact that references to Ezekiel can be found in the nearby context (a quotation in CD 3.21-4.1 and an allusion in CD 1.3-4) also makes this allusion more likely.17 If CD 3.18 is intended to recall Ezek. 11.15, it is a very appropriate fit. The oracle in Ezekiel 11 is a response to the residents of Jerusalem who have not been exiled. They arrogantly claim that the pre-destruction exiles are under God's judgment and that those who remained deserve to inherit

16. Vermes translates it 'This is our (way).' CDSS, p. 129. 17. The quotation and allusion are discussed above, p. 26, and below, p. 38. Interestingly, there are only a few lines, and no clear OT allusions, between the allusion to Ezekiel in CD 3.18 and the quote from Ezekiel in CD 3.21. The allusion is used to describe the arrogant outsiders and their judgment; the quotation is used to describe the Community and its blessings.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

29

the Land. The oracle sharply rebukes such arrogance: not only is God himself a sanctuary (pifti) for the exiles (Ezek. 11.16), but God will also restore the exiles to the Land, and only the exiles will inherit the Land (Ezek. 11.17). The returning exiles will receive the promise of the new spirit and the heart offlesh(Ezek. 11.19-20);18 those who remained in Jerusalem, who 'practiced abominations,' will be judged by God (Ezek. 11.21). Finally, to make it clear for his listeners that God's wrath is on the inhabitants of Jerusalem rather than on the exiles, Ezekiel reveals the final vision of the departure of the cherubim (Ezek. 11.22-23). The wheeled cherubim, bearing the presence and glory of the Lord, leave Jerusalem and head into the mountain east of Jerusalem. Significantly, God then transports Ezekiel 'in a vision by the Spirit of God' to the exiles (Ezek. 11.24-25). According to Ezekiel, the glory of God is no longer in Jerusalem, but in the mountain, and God sends his prophet to the exiles, not to those in Jerusalem.19 This passage is such a close fit to the Community's self-perception that it is hardly surprising that the Damascus Document uses it here to condemn the scoffers. The Second Temple residents of Jerusalem saw themselves as the possessors of God's sanctuary, and they rejected the Community with an attitude that the DSS identify as arrogance (cf. CD 8.3; 20.11). The Community members saw themselves in the position of Ezekiel's exiles: God's sanctuary was with them, not in Jerusalem; the wrath of God was on Jerusalem, not on them, the righteous exiles. They saw the same future for themselves as for Ezekiel's exiles: they would one day be God's agents for cleansing Israel, they would inherit the Land, and see God destroy the corrupt inhabitants of Jerusalem. God's promise of the new spirit was already being fulfilled in these exiles by the Dead Sea, and it seems likely that they were expecting the new heart of flesh, as 1QH 18.21 hints.20 Perhaps the residents of Qumran were even impressed by Ezekiel's claim that God was now dwelling east of Jerusalem (Ezek. 11.23), as they were. Although the immediate context of CD 3.18 does not raise all of these themes, it does describe the arrogance of those who reject God's commands (CD 3.17), and suggests the idea of God's presence in the Community rather than the Temple (e.g., he 'built them a sure house in Israel,' CD 3.19). The War Scroll adds to the picture of Qumran as righteous exiles.21 In the final battle, the 'Sons of Light' will fight against 'the army of Belial,' 18. See below, p. 50. 19. Ezek. 33.23-29 returns to a similar theme. The survivors of the sack of Jerusalem, in hiding in the wilderness, again confidently claim their inheritance of the Land. Ezekiel responds that even those survivors will die because of their 'abominations.' 20. See discussion below, p. 50. 21. For the War Scroll (1QM), I use the text in DSSHAG, vol 2.

30

Echoes of a Prophet

consisting of the historic enemies of Israel and the 'violators of the covenant' (1QM 1.1-2). The 'Sons of Light' begin the War as returning exiles, as the War Scroll makes clear in its allusion to Ezek. 20.35.22 1QM 1.2-3 The sons of Levi, the sons of Judah, and the sons of Benjamin, the exiles of the wilderness, shall wage war against them [... ]23 according to all their troops, when the exiles, the Sons of Light, return from the wilderness of the peoples (D"»yn -man) to encamp in the wilderness of Jerusalem.

Ezek. 20.35 and I will bring you into the wilderness of the peoples (own -imrbK), and there I will enter into judgment with you face to face.

The allusion consists of only two words, but that phrase can be found nowhere else in the OT. The context of Ezek. 20.35 also suggests that it was the source of the phrase. The passage in Ezek. 20.33-39, a promise to repeat the miraculous deliverance of the Exodus, could easily be interpreted as prophecy about the Qumran Community. The people of Israel will be taken out from the foreign lands where they are scattered (Ezek. 20.34), but 'they will not enter the soil of Israel' (Ezek. 20.38). Instead, much like the wilderness generation, God will 'bring them into the wilderness of the peoples' (Ezek. 20.35). Significantly, there in the wilderness, God will bring them 'into the bond of the covenant' (man mooa Tixam) and will 'purge [them] from rebels' (Ezek. 20.37-38). It is reasonable to suggest that the author of the War Scroll saw in Ezek. 20.33-39 a prophecy fulfilled in the founding of the Community. There had not been a 'wilderness experience' for the returning exiles during the restoration under Zerubbabel and Ezra. Since Ezekiel's prophecy had not previously been fulfilled, they reasoned, it was now being fulfilled in the Community. They had entered into the Covenant in the wilderness (note the standard Qumran phrase m a *ra), and were now awaiting the end. When the time of thefinalwar came, the 'exiles in the wilderness' would be summoned from 'the wilderness of the peoples' to do battle in the wilderness around Jerusalem (1QM 1.2-3).

22. Y. Yadin, The Scroll of the War of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness (trans. B.R.C. Rabin; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962). 23. Bracketed ellipses, as in the critical literature, indicate unrestorable text. In some cases, I have omitted such indications where the state of the text is not necessary to my argument. Unbracketed ellipses indicate my own abbreviation of the text.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

31

Florilegium (4Q174) also uses Ezekiel 20 to describe the Community as righteous exiles in the wilderness, although it will take some effort to demonstrate its allusion to Ezekiel 20. 4Q174 1.14-17 contains a sectarian interpretation of Psalm 1. Not surprisingly, the 'blessed man' of Psalm 1 is interpreted to refer to those who join the Community, and the 'wicked man' refers to those outside the Community (4Q174 1.15-16). To prove this interpretation, and to elaborate on the meaning of 'the counsel of the wicked,' Florilegium gives citations from Isa. 8.11 and Ezekiel, both with introductory formulae referring to 'the book of Isaiah the prophet' and 'the book of Ezekiel the prophet.'24 Isa. 8.11, which Florilegium applies to 'the last days' (4Q174 1.15), is likely cited because it contains two words common to Psalm 1 in the phrase 'walk in the way' Cyna rchri). The oracle found in Isa. 8.11-15 calls for Isaiah not to walk in the way of 'this people,' but rather to 'fear YHWH' (Isa. 8.11-13). If Isaiah obeyed, then God 'will be a sanctuary; but a rock of striking and a stone of stumbling to the two houses of Israel; and a snare and a trap for the inhabitants of Jerusalem' (Isa. 8.14). Thus the author of Florilegium suggests that the blessed man of Psalm 1 is someone who joins the Community; and this Community is God's sanctuary, set in opposition to the 'inhabitants of Jerusalem.' Florilegium continues its explanation of Psalm 1 with a citation from Ezekiel. And this refers to those about whom it is written in the book of Ezekiel, the prophet, that '[...] their idols.' (HErr^i]1^] [...] h) This refers to the sons of Zadok and to men of their council, who pursue righteousness, who have come after them to the Council of the Community. (4Q174 1.16-17) The problem comes with identifying what passage in Ezekiel is cited in the missing section. Vermes first suggested that it is an abbreviated quote from Ezek. 44.10, 'The Levites ([D"1]^) [strayed far from me, following] their idols (DH^lS:).'25 Presumably Vermes chose this passage because of its connection to the sons of Zadok and its suggestion of a new priesthood (Ezek. 44.15). But since the quoted material was negative, Vermes was forced to translate Florilegium's interpretation in a negative, and unlikely 24. For a thorough discussion of Florilegium, see G. Brooke, Exegesis at Qumran: 4QFlorilegium in its Jewish Context (JSOTSup, 29; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1985); A. Steudel, Der Midrasch zur Eschatologie aus der Qumrangemeinde (4QMidrEschatab ) : materielle Rekonstruktion, Textbestand, Gattung und traditionsgeschichtliche Einordnung des durch 4Q174 ("Florilegium") und 4Q177 ("Catena A") reprasentierten Werkes aus den Qumranfunden (STDJ, 13; Leiden: Brill, 1994). 25. CDSS, p. 494.

32

Echoes of a Prophet

sense: 'They are the sons of Zadok who seek their own counsel and follow their own inclination apart from the Council of the Community.' Other editors, presuming that the initial word in the quote is 'not' ([Kji1?), have proposed as the source Ezek. 37.23, 'that they should no longer defile themselves with their idols' (amb^ra THJ 1KECD"1 K*n).26 This allows a reasonable translation of the pesher of line 17 (above), and the words fit the gap in the manuscript. However, it is more difficult to see what connection the author of Florilegium saw between Ezek. 37.23 and the other passages (Psalm 1; Isaiah 8). Another passage, Ezek. 20.18, has not yet been suggested as the source of the quote. 'And I said to their children in the wilderness, "Do not walk ("obrrbtf) in the statutes of your fathers, or keep their ordinances, or defile yourselves with their idols" (iKQOn"^ Dm^am).' This passage has the disadvantage of using the negative particle SK instead of X*h, and not having the same word order as the quoted material in Florilegium. This is not a significant problem; as we have seen, the DSS often make mild changes to quoted material, especially when the wording is influenced by similar passages. But Ezek. 20.18 has three significant advantages over the other proposed passages. First, like Ps. 1.1 and Isa. 8.11, Ezek. 20.18 uses 'walk' terminology to describe separation: Ps. 1.1 ("jTm .. ."|Sn «*?); Isa. 8.11 (-[-m ro*?n); and Ezek. 20.18 OoSn MTTOK y i r a ) . It seems likely that the author of Florilegium connected the three passages around this common admonitory usage of "jbn. The other proposed passages (Ezek. 37.23; 44.10) do not offer as clear a connection to Psalm 1 and Isaiah 8. Second, Ezek. 20.18 advances the interpretation of Psalm 1 and of Florilegium as a whole. Ezek. 20.18 is a call to separate from the corrupt ways of 'the fathers.' That is the point of the interpretation of Psalm 1 not to walk in the ways of the wicked (Ps. 1.1) or in the ways of 'this people' (Isa. 8.11). Using Ezek. 20.18 is also consistent with one of the arguments of 4Q174, that the Community is separate from apostate Israel. Ezek. 44.10 is consistent with that argument, but does not fit well with the interpretation of Psalm 1, and also requires an awkward and unlikely translation. Ezek. 37.23 is not as effective in advancing the argument of Florilegium. Despite the occasional exegetical back flips that Florilegium demonstrates, it presents a coherent line of thought. The reconstruction of the quote should take the coherence of the passage into consideration. Finally, of the three proposed sources, Ezek. 20.18 is the verse most susceptible to a sectarian interpretation. God speaks to his 'children in the 26. Brooke, Exegesis at Qumran: 4QFlorilegium in its Jewish Context, pp. 116-18; DSSSE, p. 355; Steudel, Der Midrasch zur Ezchatologie aus der Qumrangemeinde, pp. 25, 31— 32, 47; M. Wise, M. Abegg, and E. Cook, The Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Translation (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1996). DSSSE reconstructs the text from Ezek. 37.23, but accidentally preserves the earlier reference to Ezek. 44.10.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

33

wilderness' and commands them not to 'walk in the statutes of their fathers' but to 'walk in my statutes' and 'sanctify my Sabbaths' (Ezek. 20.18-20). As we have seen above, some DSS authors could use the wilderness language of Ezekiel 20 as a reference to the Community (1QM 1.2-3; Ezek. 20.35). The combination of elements - wilderness, separation, idolatry of the fathers, correct statutes, and correct Sabbath observance fit well into the particular emphases of the Qumran Community. Thus, although the current editions do not suggest Ezek. 20.18 as the source of the damaged quote in 4Q174 1.16, it offers some advantages that the other proposed sources do not have. Ezek. 20.18 offers a reasonable connection to Psalm 1 and Isaiah 8 through the use of *]Sn; it advances the argument of the interpretation of Psalm 1 and 4Q174 better than the other proposed sources; it is more susceptible to a sectarian interpretation; and it makes use of a passage known to be used in other DSS. If Ezek. 20.18 is the source of 4Q174 1.16, then the quote is used to suggest that the 'righteous man' is the one who separates from the rest of Israel and joins the 'exiles in the wilderness' to be refined by God.27 The several pieces of evidence above, from the Damascus Document, the War Scroll, and Florilegium, suggest that the Qumran Community saw itself in a recapitulation of the Exile, with the members of the Community as righteous exiles. CD 7.14-15 is used to suggest that the exile of the Torah scroll and its interpreter to 'Damascus' had been prefigured in the exile of Amos 5.26-27. CD 1.5-6 used an allusion to the '390 years' of Ezek. 4.4-5 to suggest that they were in a new exile because of the corruption of the Temple. CD 3.16-17 used an allusion to Ezek. 11.15 to invoke the hostility between the righteous exiles and the self-righteous inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to predict the coming resurgence of the exiles. 1QM 1.2-3 described the Community as the 'exiles of the wilderness,' and used language from Ezek. 20.35 to describe God's presence in the wilderness Community. The wilderness language of Ezekiel 20 was also used in Florilegium to describe the separation from corrupt Israel and purification in the wilderness. Florilegium also used Isaiah 8 to imply God's sanctuary among the exiles.28

27. For a good defense of Ezek. 37.23 as the quoted verse, see Brooke, Exegesis at Qumran: 4QFlorilegium in its Jewish Context, pp. 116-18. 28. This understanding of the Exile in the Damascus Document diverges somewhat from Abegg's understanding of the 'Qumran theology of exile.' According to Abegg, the 14 DSS documents that he surveys all describe the Exile as still in effect until God restored the Community into the land and 'established them in their rightful place' (Abegg, 'Exile and the Dead Sea Scrolls', pp. 115, 125). Thus, exile is punishment. My hypothesis, however, does not necessarily disagree with Abegg's. My study is based on a close study of only a few documents that allude to the Exile in Ezekiel and Amos, while Abegg's study deals with a wider variety of texts dealing with exile. Further, a number of my observations are based on a close

34

Echoes of a Prophet

In some cases, the authors of the DSS seem to use a sort of typological interpretation of Scripture, where the past exile was a picture of the present exile, and the past visitation was a picture of the coming visitation. In other cases, the Scriptures were seen as prophecies that were fulfilled in the founding and history of the Community, or would be fulfilled in its future. The tendency towards typological or prophecy-fulfillment interpretation was not arbitrary. In passages judged to have already seen fulfillment in the history of Israel, the authors of the DSS were likely to use typological interpretation, seeing the previous events as pictures of the later events. In passages that were not seen as already fulfilled in Israel's history, Qumranite writers were more likely to see some sign of a prophecy fulfilled in the life of the Community.

b. Gog (Ezekiel 38.13, 22, 23; 39.7, 21; Isaiah 63.12; War Scroll 11.14-17) From the perspective of the Qumran Community, some of Ezekiel's oracles referred to the original Exile and destruction, some oracles prefigured or predicted the rise of the Community, and other oracles referred to the end of the age. Those oracles that had a historical referent either were used as models of the new Exile and coming destruction, or gave categories by which Qumran and its opponents could be evaluated. But many of the later oracles of Ezekiel (esp. Ezekiel 36ff.) had incomplete fulfillment or remained unfulfilled in the return from Exile. Those oracles, according to Qumran writers, predicted the final age, an age in which the 'poor' of the Community would provide the new priesthood of God's restored Temple. The War Scroll (1QM) contains a few allusions to Ezekiel's Gog oracle29 in its description of God's coming intervention in the final war. Some of the lines of the text are damaged beyond restoration, but it is still possible to trace the source of the material to Ezekiel 38-39. 1QM 11.15-17 ... the nations, that [... ] may know [... ] you will execute the judgments

Ezek. 39.21 all the nations will see My judgment which I have executed

intertextual comparison of the context of the quoted material with the context of the quote or allusion; while Abegg mainly analyzes passages that include language of exile or restoration. With such different questions and methodology, different answers are not surprising. 29. I use the term 'Gog oracle' (Ezekiel 38-39) as a convenient title for the passage describing Gog's attack on Israel and his subsequent destruction. Some Ezekiel scholars see this passage as a redaction of various sources, but of course, Second Temple authors would have studied OT books without thinking of any possible source or redaction theories. For various ways of dividing the passage, see L.C. Allen, Ezekiel (WBC, 28-29; Dallas: Word Books, 1990, 1994), vol. 2, pp. 202-03; Zimmerli, Ezekiel, vol. 2, pp. 96-302.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls rtDrnra) against Gog and all his assembly assembled

(n^npan iSnp)...

for you will do battle against them from the heavens...

35

s

BB!DO"nK) (against Gog, 38.1-3, 14; 39.1) 38.13 Have you assembled your assembly (~\hnp rbnpn) to plunder... ? 38.22 I will rain on him and on his troops and the many peoples that are with him, torrential rains, hailstones, fire and brimstone.

Scattered as they are, the verbal parallels are not as impressive as some others we have looked at. However, a number of other items make it clear that Ezekiel's Gog oracle is the source of the prophecy in the War Scroll. Most importantly, only Ezekiel in all the OT has a role for Gog in the Day of the Lord. All other references to Gog in the OT are geographic references with no prophetic sense or symbolism. Further, the fate of Gog in Ezekiel and in the War Scroll is the same. In the War Scroll, Gog (associated with the Kittim, or the Romans) is destroyed by God when Gog attacks Israel. The fate of Gog is discussed at greater length in Ezekiel 38-39, but it is the same: destruction by God. In the War Scroll, there is a messianic presence: 'your servant David' is invoked, as well as the 'Star from Jacob,' the 'Scepter from Israel' and 'your anointed ones' (1QM 11.1-7). Ezekiel's Gog oracle mentions no messianic figure, but it is clear that the peaceful condition of Israel before Gog attacks (Ezek. 38.8) is a result of the restoration of 'David my servant . . . their prince forever' (Ezek. 37.25). The author of the War Scroll also combines similar texts from Ezekiel and Isaiah to describe the purpose of God's destruction of Israel's enemies: 1QM 11.14 to make for yourself an everlasting name (nbii? arc rob

through the people (Din)

Isa. 63.12 Who divided the waters before them to make for himself an everlasting name (oVm nv ib rouS) Ezek. 39.7 And I will make my name known in the midst of my people Israel...

ty

nv -pro)

The War Scroll seems to combine the two texts around their common elements (God's name, God's people). The combination is appropriate: both Isaiah 63 and Ezekiel 39 celebrate God's deliverance of Israel.

36

Echoes of a Prophet

Isaiah recounts both God's wrath against Egypt during the Exodus and his coming wrath against the nations (Isa. 63.1-6, 7-14), while Ezekiel addresses only God's coming destruction of Gog. Both OT passages express a concern for God's glory in his deliverance of his people (Isa. 63.12, 14; Ezek. 38.16, 23; 39.7, 21-22, 28) - an appropriate theme for the War Scroll to introduce in this praise to God for the coming deliverance (1QM 10.1-12.18). Both passages also describe God's pouring out of his Holy Spirit on his people (Isa. 63.10, 11; Ezek. 39.29). The combination of the texts further provides a transition from the new Exodus imagery (1QM 11.9-10) to the Gog imagery (1QM 11.15-18). The War Scroll continues to describe God's purposes in destroying Gog, now with allusions to Ezekiel alone.30 1QM 11.15 to show yourself great and holy (ttnpnnbi i mnn t n) in the eyes of the remnant of the nations (D^ian mm wb), that ... may know (runb) [... ]31

Ezek. 38.23 And I will show myself great and holy Cwznpnm "rfnanm), and make myself known in the eyes of many nations (D-m D-na wb), and they will know (urn) that I am YHWH.

The War Scroll has slightly abbreviated the material from Ezekiel and changed syntax to fit its own context. Another alteration is more significant: Ezekiel's oracle against Gog describes God's glory being revealed to 'many nations' while the War Scroll limits God's glory to 'the remnant of the nations.' It seems likely that the War Scroll has substituted a phrase from a nearby oracle in Ezekiel: 'Then the nations that will remain (T\H& "iw D^an) around you will know that I, YHWH, have rebuilt...' (Ezek. 36.36). This is the only passage in the OT that ascribes 'remnant' (mm) status to the foreign nations, so it is the most likely source for 'the remnant of the nations' in 1QM 11.15.32 The fact that there are strong verbal and conceptual parallels between Ezek. 36.36 and 38.23, and between the oracles of Ezekiel 36 and 38, makes the substitution a reasonable one. The substitution may have been accidental, but if it was intentional, the motive is clear. For the War Scroll, the primary role of the

30. The first half of the line is missing, so we cannot be sure if there were further allusions to Isaiah or Ezekiel (or anything else) between the two allusions discussed. 31. Neither the subject nor the object of the 'knowing' can be determined, because the last few words of this line and the first half of the next line are obliterated. 32. Josh. 23.4, 7, 12 also describe the nations that remain, but this is a description of the captured peoples within Israel after the conquest.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

37

Gentiles is to be destroyed at the end (1QM 1.1-6; 11.8-9; 12.11; 15.2, 13; 16.1, etc.). Ezekiel's 'many nations' may have sounded uncomfortably like a sign of blessing on the Gentiles, while the 'remnant of the nations' from another of Ezekiel's oracles was more conducive to the War Scroll's description of judgment on the nations.33 The uses of Ezekiel's Gog oracle (and related material in Ezekiel 36) are in a sense unremarkable. Ezek. 39.23 is a summary of Israel's offenses against God and God's subsequent judgment in the Exile; the Damascus Document used it to refer to the same events. The author of the Damascus Document made minor modifications to the wording of Ezek. 39.23 so that it would not conflict with the Damascus Document's picture of the Community as righteous exiles. The Gog oracle of Ezekiel 38-39 describes a final battle against Israel's enemies on the 'Day of the Lord'; the War Scroll also uses it to refer to the eschatological battle. In both cases, minor modifications or abbreviations were made to the text to make the role of the Qumran Community in those events clearer.

c. The New Priesthood and New Temple (Ezekiel 40-48; Damascus Document 3.21-4.6; War Scroll 23-4; New Jerusalem,) Ezekiel's final set of oracles, about the restored Temple, priesthood, and Jerusalem (Ezekiel 4CM8), are alluded to in three separate documents at Qumran - the Damascus Document, New Jerusalem, and the War Scroll. Although the main point of Ezekiel's closing chapters seems to be the restoration of the Temple, the Damascus Document and the War Scroll focus primarily on the restored priesthood. New Jerusalem describes the restored Temple, but there are some hints that it has a strong interest in the new priesthood. CD 3.21-4.6 is an interpretation of Ezek. 44.15. Here the reference to Ezekiel is certain, since an introductory formula is used: 'As God swore to them through the hand of Ezekiel, the prophet, saying...' Note the slight changes to the text of Ezekiel made by the author of the Damascus Document: CD 3.21-4.2 The priests and the Levites and the Sons of Zadok 33.

Ezek. 44.15 But the Levitical priests, the sons of Zadok

The final line of the Gog judgment, 1QM 11.18, is mostly unreadable, with only 7\&7\vb remaining. Yadin's attempt at reconstruction sees it as an allusion to Ezek. 7.11. However, most commentaries give up Ezek. 7.11 as untranslatable (Allen, Ezekiel, vol. 1, p. 101; Zimmerli, Ezekiel, vol. 1, p. 197), so this is not terribly helpful. If 1QM 11.18 is a reference to Ezek. 7.11, it may have been attracted to that verse by the word ]inn, also used in the phrase ana pnn (Ezek. 39.11, 15, 16).

38

Echoes of a Prophet

(pns ^ai Q-ibm), who kept the watch of my sanctuary when the children of Israel strayed from me, they shall present to me fat and blood.

(pyn m o-i^n o^nam), who kept the watch of my sanctuary when the children of Israel strayed from me, they will approach me to minister to me and they will stand before me to present to me fat and blood.

The elimination of a few of the verbs near the end of the verse does not significantly alter the meaning; the Damascus Document has a reasonable abbreviation of the Ezekiel passage. In typical fashion, one of these eliminated verbs (*iojn, 'they will stand') appears in the interpretation a few lines later (D'HOUn, 'who stand,' CD 4.4; D1DTO 'their standing,' CD 4.5).34 One important alteration is actually the smallest: the addition of 1 before 'Levites' and 'Sons of Zadok.' In the MT, the lack of the two occurrences of T puts the latter two titles in apposition to the first; that is, the sons of Zadok and the Levites are the priests (the LXX suggests the same apposition).35 But the Damascus Document has to make them into separate groups in order for its interpretation (in the following lines) to work. The priests are 'the penitents of Israel who departed from the land of Judah'; the Levites are 'those who accompany them'; and the sons of Zadok are the 'chosen ones of Israel, those called by name, who stand in the end of days' (CD 4 . 2 ^ ) . There is an interesting resonance between the contexts of Ezekiel 44 and CD 3.21^4.2. This section of the Damascus Document contrasts the 'first ones' who abandoned God's covenant with the faithful who founded the Community (CD 3.10-20). The 'first ones' failed to keep God's laws, and thus were 'given up to the sword' (CD 3.10-11). The last time that the Damascus Document used this phrase was in a quote from Ezek. 39.23 (CD 1.4) describing the destruction of Jerusalem. Now, with the citation of Ezek. 44.15, the Damascus Document connects the past destruction with the coming judgment. The faithful of the Community will receive eternal life and glory (CD 3.20), and will be the new priesthood 'in the end of days' (CD 4.4), while the faithless will be destroyed (CD 3.17). The passage in Ezekiel from which CD 3.2Iff. quotes has a similar theme. Two groups (both from the time when 'all Israel went astray') are contrasted: the 'Levites who went far from me' OtejJD iprn "KDK D'nbn, Ezek. 44.10) and the 'Levites . . . who kept the watch of my sanctuary'

34. DSSHAG, vol. 2, p. 19 fn. 35. This equation of priests and Levites is debated; for a full discussion, see Zimmerli, Ezekiel, vol. 2, pp. 456-57.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

39

mawrnK now -|»a . . . iri^n, Ezek. 44.15).36 The first group is under judgment for defiling God's Temple: they allowed foreigners to serve in the Temple (Ezek. 44.7-8) and sacrificed to idols (44.10, 12, 13). These Levites must 'bear the guilt of their iniquity' (Ezek. 44.10, 12): they will be taken from the priestly service and assigned menial duties in the Temple (Ezek. 44.11, 13-14).37 The second group was faithful; thus they are given the titles withheld from the first: 'Priests' and 'Sons of Zadok' (cf. Ezek. 40.46). More importantly, they receive the right to perform the priestly duties of ministering to God, entering his sanctuary, approaching his table (Ezek. 44.15-16), and following the priestly purification rules (Ezek. 44.17-27). Other elements in Ezekiel 44 resonate with CD 3.2Iff. The Damascus Document, using 'eternal life' and 'last days,' is explicitly eschatological. Although Ezekiel's measurements of the Temple and the land are in some ways mundane and less 'eschatological', it is clear that the restoration results from God's presence in the Temple and the miraculous river from the Temple (Ezek. 47.1-12).38 This description of the Temple river could easily be interpreted (and was so interpreted) as belonging to the final age. Ezekiel may have primarily intended the image to be a metaphorical description of the restoration of the Land as a result of the restoration of the Temple (note the exquisite placing of the river image between the descriptions of restored Temple and restored boundaries of the Land), but his description certainly lends itself to an eschatological interpretation. Any who interpreted the passage eschatologically would naturally connect the Temple river passage with its surrounding texts, and assign the new Temple and renewed boundaries to the end. As with some other Qumran uses of the OT, the author of the Damascus Document shows a remarkable sensitivity to the context of his quotation. The passage in Ezekiel 44 continues by citing the requirements of the new priesthood - requirements that, if not identical to the Community rules, place emphasis on the same themes. For example, Ezekiel's Levites are given careful instructions on clothing (Ezek. 44.17-20; CD 11.3-4), marriage (Ezek. 44.22, notably with a command not to marry widows or divorcees, cf. CD 4.20-21); feast and Sabbath laws (Ezek. 44.24; CD 10.17ff); and ritual purity (Ezek. 44.25-27; CD 12.11-23). In language

36. Zimmerli sees the discussion of these two groups as primarily being related to two classes: the Jerusalem priests and the country priests; thus he sees this whole passage as incompatible with Ezekiel's message of personal accountability (Zimmerli, Ezekiel, vol. 2, pp. 454-58). However, Zimmerli fails to note the relative clauses that distinguish the two groups on the basis of deeds, not geography: ipm lEK vs. nnw 1WK (Ezek. 44.10, 15). 37. Zimmerli, Ezekiel, vol. 2, p. 455. 38. In personal correspondence, James VanderKam suggests that the expectation of a cleansing river from the Temple may have been one reason that the Community was founded on the shores of the Dead Sea just north of the river mouth.

40

Echoes of a Prophet

similar to that in Community Rule and the Damascus Document, Ezekiel's Levites are to settle their own disputes through the application of God's ordinances (Ezek. 44.24). Members of the Community may have also seen a similarity between their property laws (CD 13.14-15; 1QS 1.12) and the priestly requirements of Ezek. 44.28: 'They shall have no inheritance; I am their inheritance: and you shall give them no possession in Israel; I am their possession.'39 The War Scroll (1QM) also uses an allusion to Ezekiel as part of its hope for future service in the Temple. Drawing on the Temple role given to the prince in Ezekiel 44—45, the War Scroll describes the role of the whole army of Qumran in Temple ritual. 1QM 2.3-4 The chiefs ("ton) of the tribes and the fathers of the congregation behind them are to take up their station steadily in the gates of the sanctuary (ttrtpBH nrtfa); their chiefs... with their numbered men shall take up their stations for their festivals (D7THI7O1?), for their firsts of the months40 (Drptfnnb) and Sabbaths (mrntfn), and for all the days of the year (natfn w)...

Ezek. 44.3 As for the prince he shall sit in it [the gate of the sanctuary («npon w ) , 44.1] as prince to eat bread before YHWH. Ezek. 45.17 [The prince will provide the sacrifices] at the feasts (com), on the firsts of the months (DnBnrai), and on the Sabbaths (rnrattm), at all the appointed feasts CHjnirtea) of the house of Israel.

The phrase 'gate of the sanctuary' (ttnpon TO) is only used in Ezek. 44.1, 11 in the OT. And although the combination of festivals, new moons, and Sabbaths is common in the OT, only in Ezekiel is that order followed, although the War Scroll uses festivals (nun) instead of feasts (an), perhaps because ivn elsewhere in the War Scroll refers to 'stations.'41 This is admittedly a weaker allusion than some others; it is not clear that the author intended to invoke the memory or authority of Ezekiel. It is clear that the War Scroll here emphasizes the role of its non-priestly members in

39. The property rules at Qumran were not necessarily motivated by the Levitical land ownership laws or by their mention here in Ezek. 44.28; rather, Qumranites may have found support for their property rules in Ezek. 44. 40. Most translations render this as 'new moons.' However, J. VanderKam, in personal correspondence, suggests the translation 'firsts of the months,' since Qumran did not follow a lunar calendar. 41. Other passages use the order Sabbaths, new moons, festivals (1 Chron. 23.31; 2 Chron. 2.3; 8.13; 31.3; Neh. 10.34). Jub. 44.1 uses the same order. Yadin suggests a link between this order and the Jubilees-based calendar. Yadin, War Scroll, pp. 205-06, 264.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

41

the Temple more than is precedented in levitical law. The precedent for kingly service can be found in the historical narratives of the OT (cf. 1 Kgs 8.63-64; 1 Chron. 16.2), but only in Ezekiel's 'New Temple' oracles do we see a particular gate or station assigned to the prince by law. The author of the War Scroll expanded on this to include a Temple station for all of the leaders and men of the army. The expansion is consistent with the Qumran eschatological hope for a future role in the restored Temple in Jerusalem.42 Another work at Qumran, New Jerusalem (2Q24^27; 4Q554; 5Q13-15) also expands on the final chapters of Ezekiel. This document describes the measurements of sections of the restored city of Jerusalem in a fashion similar to the measurements of Ezekiel 40-48.43 New Jerusalem is in Aramaic, so verbal parallels to Ezekiel cannot be precisely established. However, some phrases in New Jerusalem are at least synonymous with phrases in Ezekiel 40. The narrator of New Jerusalem, like Ezekiel, is led into the city (2Q24 1.1; Ezek. 40.1); and the angelic surveyor shows the prophet what he is measuring throughout both texts. The parallels to Ezekiel are mainly conceptual: the thorough measurement of doors, lintels, towers, pillars, and chambers is strongly reminiscent of Ezekiel's measurements of the Temple. The longest preserved sections of New Jerusalem describe the 'housing complexes' of Jerusalem (5Q15 fr. 12), but short fragments also survive describing the Temple (2Q24 fr. 3, 8; cf. Ezekiel 40-41; esp. 41.22) and the priestly duties (2Q24 fr. 4; cf. Ezek. 45.13-25). The only noticeable difference is one of perspective: New Jerusalem moves from outside the city towards the Temple, while Ezekiel starts at the Temple.44 It is not hard to see the motivation behind the writing of New Jerusalem. The oracle in Ezekiel is chiefly concerned with the new Temple, with its measurements, laws, and rituals (Ezekiel 40-46). Only briefly are the living spaces of Jerusalem described (Ezek. 45.1-6; 48.8-22). Ezekiel's Jerusalem is divided into portions: An allotment of 25,000 by 10,000 cubits is set aside for the Temple grounds and priestly use, another of the same size for the Levites, a smaller allotment for 'all Israel,' and a larger allotment for the prince. The buildings on this land are not described at all by Ezekiel. Further, Ezekiel's description of the priestly duties is hardly comprehensive. Clearly the author of New Jerusalem wanted tofillin the details of the 42. 1QM 3.11; 7.4 make it clear that this refers to a Temple in Jerusalem, not merely to the congregation of Qumran. Yadin, War Scroll, p. 264. 43. For careful description and diagrams of the layout of New Jerusalem and Temple, see M. Chyutin, 'The New Jerusalem: Ideal City', DSD 1 (1994), pp. 71-97 , esp. 94-96. Chyutin also defends his view that the dimensions of the New Jerusalem have mystical significance. 44. A number of these observations were also made by Vogelgesang in his comparison of the New Jerusalem in Revelation and in the DSS. Vogelgesang, 'Interpretation', pp. 151-55.

42

Echoes of a Prophet

priests' duties and living spaces, since the hope of the Community was that they would dwell in the restored city.45 Just as Ezekiel's Temple measurements had the rhetorical effect of concretizing the hopes of the Exiles, New Jerusalem's housing measurements concretized the hopes of the Qumran Community. For Ezekiel and his audience, hope was vested in a restored Temple and Land, but the specific duties and housing of the new priesthood were of lesser import. In contrast, both the housing and duties of the priests were very important to the audience of New Jerusalem, because of their belief that the restored priesthood would come from their ranks. It is a striking fact that two separate works at Qumran - probably written a century apart46 - use the same passage from Ezekiel. The Damascus Document (CD 3.21ff) describes these hopes most explicitly: the Community consisted of the 'Priests and Levites and sons of Zadok' of Ezekiel 44, who would one day supplant the current priesthood in the new Temple.47 New Jerusalem begins from Ezekiel's vision of a restored Temple and 'fills in' the gaps to describe the housing and duties of the new priesthood in the New Jerusalem. Such congruity suggests that there was a continuous interpretational tradition at Qumran about Ezekiel 40-48. The Community saw those chapters as prophecy that would be fulfilled in and through them. The Community interpreted some other passages of Scripture, including parts of Ezekiel, in a typological fashion. Any events that they deemed to have already occurred were treated typologically, as models for what was to come. But since there was not yet a Temple of Ezekiel's specifications (both physical and ritual), and especially since there was not yet a priesthood that fit Ezekiel's high calling, the Community interpreted Ezekiel 40-48 in a prophecy-fulfillment scheme. d. The Heavenly Temple (Ezekiel 1,10, 43; Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice,) The Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice (4Q400-07, 11Q17, Maslk), like New Jerusalem and Florilegium, is concerned with the true Temple. Unlike those works, however, Songs is primarily interested in the heavenly Temple. Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice is a series of thirteen Sabbath liturgical 45. Vogelgesang suggests that 'the transfer of temple descriptions to the city (contrast the purpose of Revelation 21-22) has the purpose of extending cultic holiness and purity to the city.' Vogelgesang, 'Interpretation', p. 155. 46. Vermes places the Damascus Document in about 100 BC, partly because of lack of any reference to the Kittim; and he assigns 5Q15 to the end of the first century BC. CDSS, pp. 125-26, 568. 47. The typical reconstruction of the eschatology of the Damascus Document suggests that only the priests at Qumran, not all the Qumranites, would become the new priesthood. However, the Damascus Document's explanation of Ezek. 44.15 suggests that the author saw even some non-priestly members of Qumran joining the new priesthood.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

43

songs for the first quarter of the year.48 It is not certain that the Songs were composed at Qumran; they contain few of the typically sectarian themes. Its reliance on the Jubilees calendar suggests, if not composition at Qumran, at least the reason for its adoption at Qumran.49 The songs describe various aspects of the heavenly Temple, throne room, angelic beings, and heavenly priesthood. The fragmentary sections perhaps describe various levels of heaven and eschatological events in heaven.50 The entire set of songs is important in the study of merkabah mysticism, but this study will discuss the merkabah tradition only insofar as it involves the use of Ezekiel in this work.51 Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice uses Ezekiel in two important ways. First, the structure of Songs 9-13 seems to follow Ezekiel 40-48; and second, Song 12 (4Q405 20.5-14) is directly dependent on the throne visions of Ezekiel 1,10, and 43. C. Newsom first observed that the structure of Songs 9-13 is dependent on Ezekiel 40-48.52 Like the description of the Temple in Ezekiel 40-48, Songs moves from a description of the outer temple and its chambers (Song 9) to the inner chamber (Song 10-11), and there God's throne-chariot is found (Song 12). Song 13 then describes the praise of the angelic beings. Song 12 has the most parallels to Ezekiel. Although the language of Song 12 is primarily derived from the throne visions of Ezekiel 1 and 10, Newsom correctly suggests that the merkabah is placed here in the Songs because Ezekiel 43 places the throne-vision after the description of the restored Temple. Ezekiel 1 does not clearly connect the throne vision with the Temple; Ezekiel 10 depicts God on his throne leaving the Temple before its destruction; but only Ezekiel 43 shows God's throne entering and residing within the new Temple. Since Song 12 pictures the throne48. The critical edition of Songs is found in C. Newsom, 'Shirot Olat Hashabbat', in J.C. VanderKam and M. Brady (eds), Qumran Cave 4 (DJD, 11; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998), pp. 173-401. However, many of Newsom's comments on the Merkabah elements in Song 12 are found in her earlier edition, C. Newsom, Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice: A Critical Edition (HSM, 27; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985), from which I primarily quote. Davila also provides a useful translation and commentary. J.R. Davila, Liturgical Works (ECDSS; Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2000). 49. Newsom, citing the large number of manuscripts found and the Qumran priestly emphasis, is almost certain of its composition at Qumran. (Newsom, Songs, pp. 61-62). Davila is less persuaded by this evidence. Davila, Liturgical Works, p. 83. 50. See introductory material in Davila, Liturgical Works, pp. 83-96; Newsom, Songs, pp. 8-9, 14-15. 51. For a discussion of the role of 4Q405 in merkabah mysticism, see Davila, Liturgical Works, pp. 83-84, 90-93; I. Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism (AGJU, 14; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1980), p. vii; D J . Halperin, The Faces of the Chariot (TSAJ, 16; Tubingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1988), pp. 52-53; J.J. Kanagaraj, Mysticism in John (JSNTSup, 158; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), pp. 51-54, 92-94. 52. The following material on the structure of Songs 9-12 is derived from the explanation in Newsom, Songs, pp. 51-58.

44

Echoes of a Prophet

chariot in the heavenly Temple as the final stage of the vision, it seems likely that the image is related to Ezek. 43.1-5, with details drawn from Ezekiel's other throne visions. Song 12 is directly dependent on Ezekiel 1 and 10 for much of its language, but it alters the material to suit its own emphases, as will be seen in the table below. Allusions to Ezekiel 1, 10 in 4Q405 20.7-12 (Song 12) 4Q405 20.7 The cherubim prostrate themselves before Him and bless. As they rise, a whispered divine voice (DTnSx noai bip) 8 is heard,

Ezek. 1.24 I heard the sound of the wings... like the voice of God Almighty when he speaks...

and there is a roar of praise. When they raise their wings, (Dms3D DTD) there is a whispered divine voice.

1.24 like a sound of tumult 10.16 when the cherubim raise their wings (ED1?

The cherubim bless the image of the throne-chariot (K02 m a n ) above the firmament, (irp-6 bvtm) 9 and they praise the majesty of the luminous firmament beneath His seat of glory.

1.26 And above the firmament p bmm) over their heads there was the likeness of a throne

When the wheels move (D^BIKH na^ai) angels of holiness come and go (K2T

1.19 And when the living creatures move (rvnnn robai), the wheels moved with them

1.22 a firmament, shining like crystal...

1.13-14 . . . out of the fire came (KST) lightning, and the living creatures darted back and forth (awn Ki:n).53

From between 10 his glorious wheels (^aba yam) there is as it were a fiery vision (&»*) of most holy spirits.

53.

Songs may have read Ki:n (running)

10.6 Take fire from between the wheels (SabaS rnra& BK), from between the cherubim.

(going forth). Newsom, Songs, p. 55.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

About them, the appearance of rivulets of fire (»K •bum n n a ) in the likeness of gleaming brass

rmra),

and a work of 11 radiance (nai3) in many-colored glory, marvelous pigments, clearly mingled.

The spirits of the living 'gods'

S mrrn)

45

Dan. 7.10 A stream of fire issued... 5 4 Ezek. 1.4 . . . in the midst of the fire (tt?Kn "lira), as it were gleaming brass 1.28 Like the appearance of the rainbow... so was the appearance of the surrounding brightness (ran), (cf. 1.4) 1.20 Wherever the spirit would go, they went . . . for the spirit of the living creatures (mnn mi) was in the wheels.

with

1.13 like . . . torches moving continuously (robnnft) between the living creatures.

12 There is a sound of blessing in the tumult of their movement (nrob para), and they praise the Holy One on their way of return.

1.24 when they move (aro^a) a sound of tumult (nbnn Sip) like the sound of an army camp

When they ascend, they ascend (IOBVP Danro) marvelously and when they settle, they stand still.

10.17 When they (the cherubim) stand still, they (the wheels) stand still (TTOJP DTQM) and when they (the cherubim) ascend, they (the wheels) ascend (mrv o a r m ) with them.

move continuously ( the glory of the marvelous chariot(s).

(mm b

The number of verbal parallels and synonyms makes it clear that Song 12 is dependent on Ezekiel's throne visions, despite occasional alterations to the details.56 Some of the alterations seem to be designed to accommodate the angelology of Qumran. For example, the wheeled 'living creatures' in Ezekiel are apparently synonymous with the cherubim (Ezek. 1.15; 10.9, 54. 55. 56. vision

Cf. 1 En. 14.18 (see below, p. 82) for 'streams of fire' in the merkabah. Newsom, Songs, p. 56. As Halperin points out, most of the works in the merkabah tradition alter Ezekiel's in minor or major details. Halperin, Faces of the Chariot, p. 71.

46

Echoes of a Prophet

22). Song 12, perhaps taking its cue from Ezek. 1.20, makes the 'living creatures' into 'the spirits of the living "gods'", and distinguishes them from the cherubim, the 'angels of holiness,' and the 'most holy spirits' (4Q405 20.8, 9, 11). Ezekiel's angelic beings bear God's glorious presence, but are not depicted worshiping God. The Qumran angelology, perhaps influenced by Isaiah 6 and 1 Enoch 14, describes the angelic beings worshiping God (4Q405 20.7-9, 12). The placing of Ezekiel's vision into a liturgical context was part of the reason for making worship the chief function of the angelic beings in Song 12. Perhaps the need to accommodate Ezekiel's vision to the Qumran angelology also motivates some of the other minor changes - the reversal of wheels and angels/living creatures in 4Q405 20.9 and the moving of the chariot above the firmament (4Q405 20.8-9). The most important modifications to Ezekiel's throne-vision are related to the Sabbath Songs' liturgical and merkabah purposes. Unlike some later merkabah literature, the Sabbath Songs describe heavenly visions without hinting at a means of obtaining those visions. The nature of their participation in the heavenly worship is also unclear; was their recitation of the Songs connected with a visionary experience, or was it merely a recitation of the heavenly worship? However, it is clear that Ezekiel's language is appropriated as part of a liturgical experience centered on the heavenly Temple and the throne-room of God.57 The use of the word 'merkabah' (a term not used in Ezekiel's visions) suggests that Song 12 is part of the merkabah tradition, even if mystical participation is not evident. The appropriation of Ezekiel's vision for liturgical or merkabah purposes necessarily entails changing the purpose of Ezekiel's vision. The throne-vision of Ezekiel is an important narrative element that unites the entire prophetic work and is an essential part of expressing its theological emphasis. The initial throne-vision in Ezekiel 1 is a means of transferring God's presence and glory out of the Temple, its traditional seat. The stunning vision of the living throne bearing God's presence is not in the Temple in Ezekiel's first vision. The visions come from heaven to Ezekiel while he is in Babylon (Ezek. 1.1-3), and the visions of God's presence are outdoors (Ezek. 1.4; 3.23). The emphasis on the constantly moving living creatures and their wheels points to God's ability to reside anywhere. The central point of Ezekiel 1 is that God's presence is far more majestic than anything the Temple could hold; and that God's presence is by no means bound to the Temple. In Ezekiel 10, this image is advanced. God's majestic throne begins in the Temple, but leaves; and the fire beneath the throne is the means for the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem. Appropriately, this image comes 57. Newsom describes the Songs as 'a quasi-mystical liturgy designed to evoke a sense of being present in the heavenly temple.' Newsom, Songs, p. 59.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

47

after several chapters describing the sin of Jerusalem and the defilement of the Temple. Ezekiel 10 thus sets God's true presence in opposition to Solomon's Temple. God's presence can only return to his Temple at the end of Ezekiel, after the judgment and restoration of Israel are complete. But this new Temple is built according to heavenly standards and it is served by a purified priesthood in a new age. There, Ezekiel sees a vision of the same majestic throne entering into the holy place and residing forever (Ezek. 43.1-7). The glory of God that could not remain in his defiled Temple, among his defiled people, can now rest contentedly in a new Temple, among his renewed people. Merkabah visions in other literature often appropriate Ezekiel's imagery without fully grasping Ezekiel's theological implications. Typically, the emphasis of merkabah literature is on visionary ascent to heaven to gain access to secret knowledge. This ascent may be put into the experience of great heroes of the faith, as in the Pseudepigrapha (e.g., 1 Enoch 14; 40; 61; 71; 2 Enoch 20; 21; Ascension of Isaiah 6, etc.); or it may be prescribed for the contemporary mystic, as in the Hekhalot literature. In either case, such literature neglects Ezekiel's use of the throne-vision to demonstrate God's majestic presence outside the corrupt Temple and his return after Israel's restoration. However, the merkabah vision in Song 12 seems to preserve more of Ezekiel's understanding of the vision than other merkabah literature. Like other merkabah literature (but not Ezekiel), Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice transfers the throne-vision to a heavenly throne-room or temple. However, unlike most apocalyptic literature, Songs does not emphasize the revelation of secret knowledge, despite its occasional dependence otherwise on apocalyptic literature like 1 Enoch. There is no sense that any visionary, whether ancient or contemporary, has ascended to heaven for a meeting with God to learn secrets. Perhaps the view of the angelic worship could be regarded as the revelation of secrets, but the typical language of revelation is not used in the surviving fragments. Second, an evaluation of the likely significance of the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice within Qumran eschatology suggests a fundamental agreement with Ezekiel. Qumran's liturgy of the heavenly Temple is set in opposition to the liturgy of the Jerusalem Temple.58 The Community cannot honor the idea of God's presence in Jerusalem, so this liturgy focuses on his presence in the heavenly Temple. In other Qumran literature referring to the ideal Temple or God's presence (such as the Damascus Document, the War Scroll, New Jerusalem, see above) the authors of the DSS saw God residing in the Community, but not in the Second Temple. However, this was not a permanent state of affairs; their ultimate hope was 58.

Newsom, Songs, p. 62.

48

Echoes of a Prophet

closely aligned with Ezekiel's: God would dwell one day in a restored Temple in Jerusalem. At first glance, the heavenly Temple of the Songs is inconsistent with the eschatological Temple of the other Qumran literature. However, the use of the Songs at Qumran suggests that they saw no such inconsistency. Their ability to reconcile the two may be based on the existence of both perspectives in the OT and in its traditional interpretation (i.e., the Tabernacle was built from a heavenly model, Ezekiel's Temple may have been based on a heavenly model, but the prophets expected a restored Temple in Jerusalem). Furthermore, Qumran eschatology provided a ready harmonization for the heavenly Temple and the eschatological Temple in the various writings of Qumran. The Community viewed itself in a temporary situation before the destruction of Jerusalem and the dawn of the new age. The Songs allowed a Temple-based worship in the intermediate time before the restored Temple was built. Perhaps, as Newsom suggests, the Sabbath liturgy was the way in which God's presence in the Community was actualized. If the Community was God's Temple, it was because the recitation of the Songs allowed the Community to experience the heavenly Temple by sharing priestly duties with the angels.59 The liturgical nature of Sabbath Songs makes it difficult to classify precisely the use of Ezekiel. Sabbath Songs does not describe events, so fulfilled prophecy and typology are clearly the wrong categories. The usage is not, strictly speaking, sapiential, although the images of the heavenly throne room are timeless. Sabbath Songs is liturgical, and it has a liturgical use of Scripture. That is, Sabbath Songs uses images from Scripture to engage the Community in worship. There is little interpretation of Scripture; rather, Scripture is used to elicit images that exalt God and his dwelling places. e. Restoration and the 'Heart of Flesh' (Ezekiel 36.22-27; Hodayot 14.10; 21.10-13; Community Rule 3.5-9) Ezekiel's oracle of the 'new heart' (Ezek. 36.22-32), prophesying restoration and purification, was the source of inspiration for language in both Hodayot and Community Rule. The first set of allusions in Hodayot are not very impressive, but they set the stage for understanding the view of the heart of flesh at Qumran. In three of the psalms contained in Hodayot, language from Ezek. 36.22 is used to describe God's motives in restoring his people.

59.

Newsom, Songs, pp. 62-63.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls 1QH 14.10 For your own sake (raajjabi) you have done it (nrrraj;), to make the law and truth great... 12.38 It is not for man

49

Ezek. 36.22 It is not for your sake (pwvh vb), House of Israel, that I am going to act (nw), but for Co) my holy name.

(DI*6

[...] that you did it (nrnmj) [...], forC3)[...] 21.6-7 And I know that you, my God, have done (nrrw) these things for yourself (n^b)... to establish everything for your glory. These three lines from Hodayot are part of similar hymns. Hodayot 12 is a more personal hymn of praise for God's mercy towards the author; he thanks God for 'atoning iniquity' and acknowledges that God's reasons for forgiving are not for human advancement only. In Hodayot 14, the author thanks God not only for his own personal deliverance from 'the counsel of violence' (1QH 14.5), but also for God's work in cleansing all the members of the Community, and especially for his future plans for the Community (1QH 14.7-8, 14-19, discussed above). The author is convinced that God has used and will use the Community for his own ends, 'to make the law and truth great.' Finally, Hodayot 21 praises God for his mercy in purifying and revealing himself to a weak and sinful human (1QH 20.32-21.18). The language used to ascribe God's motives to the advancement of his own glory parallels the language in Ezek. 36.22. Although the parallels are not as striking as some others, the phrase 'for your sake' (roara^) combined with 'do' (TiW) cannot be found elsewhere in the OT. The fact that the three passages in Hodayot, like Ezek. 36.22, discuss God's motives in mercifully delivering his people from their own sin, also makes the parallel seem intentional. If they are intentional, the allusions to Ezekiel 36 are significant. The action that God promises for his own glory is the restoration from exile and the cleansing of his people (Ezek. 36.24-29), which are essentially the same actions for which the author of Hodayot is thankful (1QH 12.34-37; 14.3-9, 14-17). Hodayot (not surprisingly) transfers God's promises of restoration and cleansing from Israel to the Community, and hints that a new restoration from exile is now underway in the Community. If the view of this new restoration is in keeping with other material we have looked at (especially in the Damascus Document), then Hodayot also has a typological view of Ezekiel's Exile. The Community is in a new Exile, one that will end with a new visitation on Jerusalem and a new restoration.

50

Echoes of a Prophet

Hodayot 21 contains a further allusion to Ezekiel 36. This allusion further establishes the likelihood that the above references to God's motives in Ezekiel 36 are genuine allusions, but it also adds to our understanding of the use of Scripture in Hodayot. 1QH 21.10-11 I am a creature [of clay ... an ear of du]st and heart of stone (pKH zbi). 21.12-13 You have inscribed forever60 what is to happen in the heart of [stone] ([p^n] aba).

Ezek. 36.26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; and I will remove the heart of stone (pKH 2b) from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.61

The phrase 'heart of stone' is found nowhere else in the OT. The double use of the phrase so soon after the allusion to Ezek. 36.22 (in 1QH 21.6), makes it likely that the reference to the restoration oracle in Ezek. 36.22ff is intentional. The precise use of the wording contributes to our understanding of the eschatology of Hodayot. In some sense, the author believed that the promised restoration and purification was already beginning in the Community, as is clear from his thankfulness for God's accomplished purification (1QH 12.38; 14.10; 21.6). However, Hodayot is still awaiting the final purification. The author notably omits any reference to the heart of flesh. Despite his status as the Instructor who knows God (1QH 20.11), and the primary means of the Community's health (1QH 16.22-24), the author has not yet received the 'heart of flesh.' This omission suggests that Hodayot awaits the transformation from 'heart of stone' to 'heart of flesh' in the coming age. This 'realized eschatology' (i.e., some purification accomplished in the present, but thefinalpurification to be accomplished in thefinalage) mirrors the ideas found in the Community Rule. There, the new initiate's purification by water is described in language reminiscent of Ezek. 36.25-27.

60. The phrase 'inscribed forever . . . in the heart' probably echoes Eccl. 3.11, 'he has set eternity in their heart,' again demonstrating the tendency to combine similar texts. 61. Cf. the same phrases in Ezek. 11.19. This passage is also used in CD 3.16-17 (see above, p. 28) to describe God's promise to judge the inhabitants of Jerusalem and inhabit the land with the exiles. There, it is only these returned exiles who receive the 'new spirit' and the 'heart of flesh.'

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls 1QS 3.7-9 It is by the Holy Spirit of the Community in his (God's) truth that he can be cleansed (-intF) from all his iniquities (imam; bvn) . . . It is by humbling his soul . . . that his flesh can be cleansed ("intt"), by sprinkling with waters of purification (ma '•ran rnrnb), and by sanctifying himself with waters of purity forr s oa wnpnnbi).62

51

Ezek. 36.25, 27 Then I will sprinkle clean water on you (DmntD 0*0 Tip*)D), and you will be clean (ornntDi); I will cleanse you from all your filthiness (MTDKQtt bsn) and from all your idols. 27 And I will put my Spirit within you and cause you to walk in my statutes, and you will be careful to observe my ordinances.

The initiation of new members into the Community is described in language from Ezekiel 36, suggesting that the Community saw the promised restoration already in process. But as in Hodayot, ultimate purification yet remained: At the appointed time for judgment ... He will purify him by the Holy Spirit from all ungodly acts and sprinkle upon him the Spirit of Truth like waters of purification, (to purify him) from all the abominations of falsehood and from being polluted by a spirit of impurity ... (1QS 4.20, 21-22) Members of the Community looked forward to a completion of the purification begun in their initial and daily baptisms. Both the initiation and completion of that purification are described using language from Ezek. 36.25-27. The fact that both Community Rule and Hodayot used the same passage from Ezekiel to describe present and future purification and restoration is significant. It reinforces the view that the Community saw itself in a new Exile that mirrored the first Exile and would end in a new restoration. The similar usage of Ezekiel is evidence for a continuous interpretational tradition at Qumran about the restoration oracle in Ezek. 36.22ff.63 The authors of both Community Rule and Hodayot saw Ezekiel's restoration oracle as a prophecy that was now being fulfilled in the life of the Community, but awaited completion at the end of the age.

62. The phrase ma T33 ('waters of purification') is the typical term used for 'holy water' (Num. 19.9, 13, 20, 21; 31.23). 63. The Damascus Document is usually dated to about 100 BC or earlier. Individual Hodayot are difficult to date; the collection probably dates to the first century BC. CDSS, pp. 125-26, 244.

52

Echoes of a Prophet

f. Showers of Blessing (Ezekiel 34.25-26; Benediction 7) A benediction found in the Benediction (11Q14) contains a brief allusion to Ezekiel 34. 11Q14 7 May he . . . open for you his good treasure which is in heaven to bring down on your land showers of blessing (TO-Q TO»a), dew, rain, early rain and late rain in His/its time, and to give you the produce . . . 8 and wild beasts shall withdraw from your land ( p a n run mm).

Ezek. 34.26 And I will cause showers to come down in their season; they will be showers of blessing (ro-Q t|o©a). 34.25 And I will make a covenant of peace with them and eliminate wild beasts from the land ( p x m p nirrmn) so that they may live securely in the wilderness . . .

The Benediction is mainly a repetition of the covenant blessings found in Deut. 11.14. Ezek. 34.25-26 also echoes those covenant blessings. The Benediction reveals its knowledge of both passages by combining elements from Deuteronomy (early and late rain, corn, wine and oil) with elements from Ezekiel 34 (showers of blessing, absence of wild beasts). Both of those phrases are unique to Ezekiel. There is nothing very startling about the use of Ezekiel here; it merely reveals that the Community longed for the blessings of the Covenant and saw the prophecy in Ezekiel 34 as part of God's promise for his people. The combination of the two texts may also suggest Qumran's eschatological view of the covenant. The blessings of Deuteronomy 11 are not limited to the final age, but the similar blessings in Ezekiel 34 come with the renewed throne of David (Ezek. 34.24) and the 'plantation of renown' (Ezek. 34.29) that God will one day provide. The Benediction clearly asks God to bring his covenant blessings, but also hints at asking God to bring his eschatological blessings.

g. The Everlasting Plantation (Ezekiel 31, 17, 19, 21, 31; Hodayot 14.1418; 16.5-20) Metaphors involving a plant, plantation, or trees are common at Qumran, and especially in the Hodayot. They are among the most difficult sections to analyze at Qumran, because the images and wording are often drawn from a variety of plant metaphors in the OT. In many cases, phrases from different OT passages are conflated in a way that is difficult to untangle. In some cases, particular agricultural metaphors are drawn from OT passages, but the original metaphorical role of those phrases is altered or even reversed. In other cases, the basic metaphor is drawn from one passage, but some of the terminology from other passages. The goal of this

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

53

study is to determine the extent to which plant imagery from Ezekiel is included, and the manner in which it is interpreted. 1QH 14.14-18 is part of a hymn thanking God for establishing the Community. The speaker also praises God for his future plans for his people. The primary image is drawn from the oracle against Egypt (and Assyria) in Ezekiel 31, but some words and phrases are drawn from other parts of Ezekiel, Genesis, Psalms, and Isaiah.64 The author of Hodayot describes God's blessed people as an enormous tree that extends its roots down to the primordial deep, and its branches up to the sky. Its source of power is 'the rivers of Eden' that water it; its branches provide shade for the whole world. All of these elements can be found in the oracle against Egypt and Assyria in Ezekiel 31. The chart below illustrates some of the allusions, and demonstrates that the metaphor is derived primarily from Ezekiel 31. The Hebrew is omitted here for simplicity; parallel English words represent parallel Hebrew words. OT Allusions in Hodayot 14 (1QH 14.14—17) Hodayot 14

Ezekiel 31

Other OT

Their root 15 will sprout

Isa. 27.6 Jacob will take root, Israel will blossom and sprout

like a flower of the field forever,

Isa. 40.6 All flesh is grass, and all its loveliness is like the flower of the field

to make a shoot grow

Ps. 103.15 like a flower of the field, so he flourishes.

Ezek. 31.4 the waters made it grow Isa. 60.21 they will possess the land forever, the branch of my planting.

in branches of the everlasting plantation

So that it covers all the world with its shade,

Other OT

Ezek. 31.6 And all great nations lived under its shade.

Ezek. 17.23 And birds . . . will nest in the shade of its branches.

Ps. 80.10 The mountains were covered with its shade

64. The same image can be found in Dan. 4.8-9 (S. Holm-Nielsen, Hodayot: Psalms from Qumran (AcTDan, 2; Aarhus: Universitetsforlaget, 1960), p. 115), but the Daniel passage is much briefer, and exact parallels are more difficult to establish because Daniel 4 is in Aramaic.

54

Echoes of a Prophet

and its crown 16 (reaches) up to the skies

Ezek. 31.3, 10, 14 its Ezek. 19.11 its height 65 7 " ~° among — — - was raised above the crown J was clouds the clouds 66

Ezek. 17.22 I will take a sprig from the crown of the cedar . . . and I will plant it on a high and lofty mountain.

and its roots down to the abyss.

Ezek. 31.4 The waters made it grow, the abyss made it high.

Ps. 80.9 It took deep root and filled the land

All the streams of Eden will water its branches and they will be seas without limits;

Ezek. 31.7 For its roots extended to many waters 31.16 all the well-watered trees of Eden

Ps. 80.11 it sent out its branches to the sea, and its shoots to the river.

Isa. 27.6 Jacob shall take root, Israel shall blossom and sprout, and fill the whole world with fruit.

17 and its forest will be over the whole world, endless,

and as deep as Sheol its roots.

Gen. 2.9-10 God made every tree grow . . . a river flowed out of Eden to water the garden...

Ezek. 31.15 when it goes down to Sheol

There are a number of indications that the author of Hodayot did not feel bound by the passage that so influenced his language. First, Hodayot does not follow the same order as Ezekiel 31. Rather, it is a fresh reworking of the same metaphor, with its primary wording drawn from the passages listed above. At first, it seems surprising that 1QH 14.14-17 should use Ezekiel 31 so heavily. The author of Hodayot had to transform Ezekiel's oracle of woe against pagan Egypt into a hymn of blessing on God's people. Hodayot omits any part of the oracle that described judgment on the tree.67 The author even takes phrases connected with the destruction of the great Egypt-tree and reverses their meaning to fit his own metaphor. 65. Ezekiel 31 uses rnns for 'crown'; Ezekiel 17, like Hodayot, uses *]3I7. 66. ray may be translated as 'interwoven foliage' or 'clouds' (BDB, p. 721). The word shows up in both Ezek. 19.11 and 31.3, 10,14; BDB suggests that it should be translated as the former in Ezekiel 19 and as the latter in Ezekiel 31. The LXX reverses that, translating it as kv (ieoo) oteXexwv (in the middle of trunks) in Ezek. 19.11 and dc, \ieoov ve$eX&v (in the middle of the clouds) in Ezek. 31.3, 10, 14. 67. The same could be said about his use of Psalm 80. There, the psalmist moves from a description of the mighty vine, Israel, to its current state of abandonment.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

55

Thus, Ezekiel's description of Egypt being cast into Sheol becomes, in Hodayot, the mighty roots going down to Sheol to tap into the abyssal waters. In Ezekiel, 'all the well-watered trees of Eden' are comforted at the destruction of the Egypt-tree; in Hodayot 14, the waters of Eden irrigate the mighty tree. However strange this usage at first seems, the thought of Hodayofs author can perhaps be traced. His elaborate agricultural metaphor was constructed with elements from various OT agricultural metaphors, but he was not overly concerned with the broad meaning of those source metaphors. In Ezekiel 31, the branches, fruit, and height of the tree are pictures of the majesty and prosperity of Egypt before its destruction. Hodayot preserves the positive meaning of the agricultural elements, but transfers the images to Qumran and omits the judgment. Hodayofs other source passages (Psalm 80; Isaiah 27, 40, 60; Ezekiel 17, 19) all use agricultural imagery to describe the majesty and prosperity of Israel or its rulers. That majesty was destroyed (Psalm 80; Ezekiel 17, 19), like the beauty of Eden (Genesis 2), but would one day be restored (Isaiah 27, 40, 60). Hodayot appropriates the imagery, but transfers it from broader Israel to God's true assembly at Qumran. This transformation of images fits the goal and theology of the author. The glory of the pagan nations was fleeting and would be destroyed. Israel's majesty had also faded, so Isaiah's prophecies would be fulfilled in the true Israel, Qumran. Hodayot resumes the image of the Community as a tree in 1QH 16.4— 21, with even more complexity. All of the passages above are used, as well as agricultural images from Genesis 3; Exodus 15; Deuteronomy 11; Psalm 1; Isaiah 5, 10; Jeremiah 2, 17, 48; Ezekiel 15, 21, 26; Hosea 10; and Zephaniah 2. The various allusions are woven together in a manner that is difficult to trace precisely. However, it seems clear that the guiding image is that of Psalm 1 and Jeremiah 17: the blessed and cursed trees. Every part of this basic image is elaborated on by the use of agricultural imagery from other passages. For example, the 'streams of water' of Ps. 1.3 are connected (via allusive language) with Isaiah's pouring out of the Spirit, the rivers of Eden, the Temple river of Ezekiel, the waters of life, and the deluge. The blessed tree of Psalm 1 is connected with the tree of life, the cedars of Ezekiel and Psalm 80, the Branch of David, and Isaiah's trees of blessing. Birds and beasts live under the tree and off the tree, in language that alludes to Psalm 80, Ezekiel 17 and 31. The cursed tree is not only cut off from its water supply, as in Psalm 1; it also withers and burns (in language taken from a variety of OT sources) and is destroyed by the waters of the flood and the Red Sea. The following chart shows only the phrases and ideas that parallel Ezekiel's imagery.

56

Echoes of a Prophet

Allusions to Ezekiel in Hodayot 16 1QH 16.5 in a garden watered by channels [... ] a plantation of cypresses and elms, together with cedars, for your glory.

Ezek. 31.3—4 a cedar... of great height... The waters nourished it, the deep made it grow tall, making its rivers flow round its plantation, sending forth its streams to all the trees of the forest.

16.5-6 Trees of life in the secret source, hidden among all the trees at the water

31.14 all the trees by the water 47.12 And by the river... will grow all trees for food. Their leaves will not wither... their leaves are for healing.

16.7 Their roots extend to the gully, and its trunk opens to the living waters

47.12 They will bear fruit every month because their water flows from the sanctuary

16.8-9 On the shoots of its leaves all the animals of the wood will feed, its trunk will be pasture for all who cross the path, and its leaves for all winged birds.

31.13 On its ruin all the birds of heaven will dwell. And all the animals of the field will be on its branches. 17.23 all winged birds will dwell under it

16.16 But Thou, O my God, hast put into my m o u t h . . . rain for all [those who thirst] and a fount of living waters which shall not fail...

Jer. 17.13 they have forsaken YHWH, the fount of living waters. Ezek. 47.9 everything will live where the river goes

16.17 but they [the waters] will become a torrent overflowing into [... ] of water and into the seas, without end

47.8 these waters... go towards the sea (note increasing water from 47.1-7)

16.18-20 They will swell suddenly from secret hiding-places, [... ] they will become waters of [judgment?] for every tree, green and dry, a marsh for every animal. [... ] like lead in powerful waters [... ] of fire and dry up.

21.3 (MT) a fire... shall consume every green tree and every dry tree 17.24 I dry up the green tree and make the dry tree flourish 19.12 [the vine] dried up; the fire consumed it.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

16.21 By my hand you have opened their spring... turning in accordance with the proper measurement...

57

47.3-5 . . . he measured [the river] a thousand cubits... again he measured a thousand, and it was a river I could not ford...

The role of Ezekiel in Hodayot 16 is much the same as in Hodayot 14. That is, the author of Hodayot draws individual elements from Ezekiel's metaphor, but not the overall meaning of that metaphor. The main thrust of the allegory in Hodayot 16 is that the Community is the blessed tree of Psalm 1/Jeremiah 17; all the other agricultural imagery from other passages of Scripture is brought in to elaborate on elements in the Psalm 1 image: the blessed tree and its reward; the cursed tree and its punishment. In many cases, those elements are brought in with little apparent consideration for their original context. In other cases, the introduction of the other elements is quite deliberate. Psalm 1 is a wisdom psalm about the wise man and the wicked man, but Hodayot transforms that wisdom image by associating the blessed tree with eschatological metaphors: the Branch of David from Isaiah, the replanted cedar of Ezekiel 17, and the trees by the Temple river of Ezekiel 47. The continued dominance of elements from Ezekiel 31 again illustrates the use of agricultural elements to portray majesty and blessing, although those elements are transferred from pagan Egypt to the Community. The particular fashion in which multiple OT allusions have been woven together is quite complicated in Hodayot 16, but it is possible to discern the author's goal in using Scripture. In a sense, he writes a 'midrashic' psalm. That is, he weaves together a variety of Scriptures, united by their common use of agricultural imagery, into a hymn of praise for God's work - past, present, and future - in the Qumran Community. In the process, he deals with questions that beset the Community: How is it that God's true people have so little influence? Why is it that other people in Israel have the appearance of righteousness? How can this small, isolated group be the means for bringing in the new messianic age? The author's answers to these questions are both sapiential and eschatological. Passages such as Psalm 1 and Jeremiah 17 contribute the contrast between the wise of the community and the wicked outside. The tree and vine images from Ezekiel and Isaiah, many containing promises of a future restoration, introduce eschatological elements into the allegory of Hodayot 16. Other passages (such as Exod. 15.10; Deut. 11.14; Ezekiel 19, 21; Hos. 10.1-2, and Zeph. 2.9) are used to describe the coming eschatological judgment on the wicked trees. It is interesting to note that this is the same type of interpretation

58

Echoes of a Prophet

that occurs in Florilegium.6* Florilegium explains Psalm 1 using Isa. 8.11 and Ezek. 20.18, and in the process converts the wisdom of Psalm 1 into eschatology. The author of Hodayot 16 does not present himself as mere observer. He claims to be the sole conduit of the living water, the means of blessing on the Community and judgment on outsiders (1QH 16.16-24, cf. 1QH 18.12ff). God is the ultimate source, but he has decided to use the author of Hodayot 16 as his sole mediator. The only difference between the trees of the Community and the other trees is that the trees of the Community have put down roots to the living waters - water that comes from the mouth of the author and travels through canals dug by the author. The speaker is thus claiming to be God's authoritative prophet and interpreter of Scripture. This role is not described using messianic language, but the exclusive nature of the claims is remarkably similar to claims made by Jesus in the Gospel of John.69 Such exclusive claims strongly suggest that Hodayot 16 was written by the Righteous Teacher, not just one of the many teachers at Qumran. Alternatively, it was written by a later author, but intended to sound as if it came from the mouth of the Righteous Teacher. As discussed above, Hodayot 14 and 16 begin with sapiential texts, but relate those texts to eschatological expectations for the Community. In some cases, these Hodayot imply a typological interpretation of OT passages. For example, the future judgment of outsiders is described with terms drawn from earlier accounts of judgment by water - the flood and the destruction of the Egyptians at the Red Sea. Thus, the future judgment will repeat the earlier judgment. In most other cases, the Hodayot interpret OT passages as prophecies that are beginning to be fulfilled. The author of Hodayot saw, in the humble situation of the Community, the root from which the Branch of David would arise, the sapling from which Ezekiel's cedar would grow, and the hidden forest that would become the trees of life by the Temple river. Perhaps he saw Ezekiel's 'plantation of renown' (Ezek. 34.29) springing up, still shorter in stature than the other trees, but one day to surpass them all because of their exclusive access to the living waters (1QH 16.5-7). The Qumran view that they were in a temporary, intermediate time before the eschaton is also apparent: the plantation has been planted, but it has not grown up to cover the world. For now, they appear small and inconsequential, but their eventual dominance is assured. From the viewpoint of New Testament studies, it is especially interesting to note the intrusion of the future eschatology into the author's present: although the fullness of the glory of the Plantation was yet to come, its

68. 69.

See p. 3. See pp. 180-85.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

59

roots were already set, and it was already being watered in the Community in the wilderness.

2. Epithets for the Community and its Enemies The Qumran view o f salvation history,' discussed above, allowed members of the Community to categorize people and beliefs of their age in terms generated from their history and eschatology. If they were in a new Exile, awaiting a second 'visitation' on Jerusalem, then they could use Ezekiel's epithets and judgment against their enemies, and claim Ezekiel's titles and blessings for themselves. They were the residents of 'Damascus,' the righteous exiles, or they were those who 'sigh and groan' over the condition of Jerusalem. In the coming age, the restored Zadokite priesthood would come from their ranks. The outsiders were the false prophets of Jerusalem, the 'builders of the barrier' and the 'whitewashers.' They would be refused any role in the future Temple. a. Those who Sigh and Groan (Ezekiel 9.4; Zechariah 13.7; Damascus Document 19.7-13) The Damascus Document's MS B70 contains two allusions to Ezekiel, both designed to bring out the difference between the righteous and the wicked. MS A contrasts the destruction of the wicked in Jerusalem with the deliverance of the exiles by comparing Isa. 7.17 with Amos 5.26-27 (discussed above). MS B makes the same contrast between the destruction of the wicked and the salvation of the righteous using Zech. 13.7 and Ezek. 9.4. In CD 19.7-11, Zech. 13.7 is used to describe both the righteous and the wicked: ... when that happens of which it is written by Zechariah the prophet, 'Awake, O sword, upon my shepherd and upon the man (who is) close to me - God says - strike the shepherd so the sheep will be scattered and I will turn my hand to the little ones.' But those who guard it (the precepts) are the poor of the sheep. These will escape at the time of the visitation. But those who remain will be handed over to the sword, when the Messiah of Aaron and Israel comes. Although Zechariah's 'turn my hand to the little ones' seems to describe the destruction of the 'little ones,' The Damascus Document interprets it as 70. Manuscript B contains two columns, 19 and 20. Column 19 is a mildly different recension of columns 7-8 in the main manuscript (A). Column 20 diverges somewhat from MS A, but seems to have the same point. Both A and B are manuscripts found in the Cairo Genizah (tenth and eleventh centuries respectively), but only MS A has been clearly verified by Qumran fragments. DSSHAG, vol. 2, pp. 5-6.

60

Echoes of a Prophet

protection. This interpretation is not too surprising; Zech. 13.8-9 describes the remnant who survive, who will be 'refined' and will be 'my people.' But of course the Damascus Document interprets the deliverance of the remnant as a reference to the Community - 'the poor' is a common term for the members of the Community. The author of the Damascus Document interprets Zech. 13.7 as a prophecy that will be fulfilled at the end. When the Messiah(s) come, 'those who despise' will be punished (CD 19.5-6), and the keepers of the precepts will be delivered (CD 19.9-10). This deliverance of the righteous from among the wicked is further developed in CD 19.11-13 by a quote from Ezek. 9.4. The author of the Damascus Document likely connected Zech. 13.7 with Ezek. 9.4 through the common use of the word 'sword' and the shared emphasis on the deliverance of a righteous remnant. '(And this will be) as it happened at the time of the first visitation; as it is said through Ezekiel, "To make a mark upon the foreheads of those who sigh and groan." But those who remained were turned over to the avenging sword of the covenant's vengeance.'71 The line from Ezekiel describes how some are to be spared from the destruction of Jerusalem. After showing Ezekiel four visions of idolatrous 'abominations' committed in the Temple (Ezek. 8.1-18), God calls for the angelic 'punishers of the city' to approach the altar for instructions (Ezek. 9.1-2). The glory of God prepares to leave the Temple, apparently in preparation for the punishment (Ezek. 9.3), but first God gives instructions so that the innocent will not be destroyed. He appoints a man dressed in white to go through the city, marking the foreheads of 'those who sigh and groan over all the abominations.' All others, starting with the elders in the Temple, will be destroyed by the punishers (Ezek. 9.4-7). There is a stark contrast in these visions between the elders of Israel, confident in their idolatrous worship, and those who mourn at the idolatry in the Temple (Ezek. 8.12; 9.4). To a member of the Community, the parallel to their own situation was clear. As it was with the first visitation, so it would be with the last. They were the ones who sighed and groaned over the spiritual state of the Temple; they would be spared at the coming visitation. The priesthood and all who supported the Temple were confident in their 'abominations' (for so Qumran viewed the Temple calendar and the defiled high priesthood); they would be the first to be destroyed. Interestingly, while the author of the Damascus Document interpreted Zech. 13.7 as prophecy to be fulfilled, he interpreted Ezekiel 9 in a typological sense: '(this will be) as it happened at the time of the first 71. The final phrase, 'the avenging sword of the covenant's vengeance' is taken from Lev. 26.25 (maTapa napa ann). CD 19.13 only differs in the spelling of napa.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

61

visitation.' It is possible that the author of MS B made an essentially historical distinction between the exilic Ezekiel and the post-exilic Zechariah. That is, he interpreted Ezekiel 9 as referring to Nebuchadnezzar's destruction in 587. As a historical passage, the Damascus Document could only use it as a model or type of the coming visitation. Since Zechariah was written after the return from exile, his prophecy of destruction was yet to be fulfilled. CD 19.7-14 makes the most sense if this hypothesis is correct. If the author of the Damascus Document had the same perspective on both Ezekiel and Zechariah, he would most likely have interpreted both texts as prophecies to be fulfilled in the future of the Community. His distinction between the 'first visitation' and the coming visitation makes it likely that he interpreted this section of Ezekiel in a typological sense, and Zechariah in a prophecy-fulfillment sense. b. Builders of the Wall (Ezekiel 13.9-16; 22.17-26; Damascus Document 4.17-18; 6.17; 19.30-35; 20.3-4; Sapiential Work 1.1, 4-5) In their conflict with Jerusalem's religious establishment, the Community often made use of two of Ezekiel's polemical oracles against false prophets, Ezekiel 13 and 22. Ezekiel 13 is an extensive indictment of the false prophets, centering on a key metaphor, 'those who build a wall and whitewash it' (Ezek. 13.10). Ezekiel 22 contains a broader indictment of 'the bloody city,' beginning with a condemnation of the people of Jerusalem and continuing with denunciations of the prophets, priests, and princes of the city; then repeating indictments against the prophets and people. The false prophets hold a significant position in the diatribe, and the 'whitewasher' metaphor from Ezekiel 13 is briefly repeated. Ezekiel 13 and 22 are linked by the 'whitewasher' metaphor and by the polemical tone. These two chapters of Ezekiel are alluded to five times in the Damascus Document (sometimes in succession), and once in Sapiential Work. In one of the accounts of the history and future of the Community (CD 4.5-21), the Damascus Document describes the evil of its own time using allusions to Isaiah and Ezekiel. The author of the Damascus Document sees in his own time the fulfillment of Isaiah's prediction, 'Belial will run unbridled amidst Israel' (Isa. 24.17). This evil in Israel, itemized in CD 4.17-18, is the result of the deception by a group, 'the builders of the wall' and their leader, the is (CD 4.19).72 The phrase 'builders of the wall' ("rn p i n ) alludes to the oracle against false prophets in Ezekiel 13. Ezek. 13.10 warns of God's judgments against false prophets 'because they have deceived my people, saying "Peace!" and there is no peace; and 72. This term is left untranslated in DSSHAG (vol. 2, p. 19), but Vermes translates it as 'Precept,' probably because is is so translated when it occurs (as a derisive phrase) in Isa.

62

Echoes of a Prophet

when someone builds a wall ( p i nan), behold, they [the prophets] whitewash it.' Although the allusion extends to only two words, the fact that p r is an OT hapax legomena (meaning a 'thin or party-wall'73) makes the Damascus Document's allusion to Ezekiel certain. The fact that the Damascus Document makes another allusion to Ezekiel in the near context (Ezek. 44.15, alluded to in CD 3.21-4) only strengthens the argument.74 Ezekiel's metaphor, part of a larger indictment against false prophets in Israel (Ezek. 13.1-23), pictures a thin wall that is disguised by whitewash to look as if it were a thick wall.75 God condemns their dishonesty and promises to bring down a flood that will wipe away the wall, the whitewash, and the whitewashers (Ezek. 13.13-16). In Ezekiel, the metaphor is primarily about the whitewashers, not the builders. CD 4.17-18 instead uses the phrase 'builders of the wall,' probably in mockery of the Pharisaic goal to 'build a wall around Torah.'76 It seems likely that 'builders of the barrier' was a stock epithet for the Pharisees at Qumran even before the writing of the Damascus Document, since the term is used there without explanation.77 The prophets who predicted peace for Israel during Ezekiel's time had given a false sense of security, one that would be totally dashed by the coming cataclysm. The Qumran Community could see the same events happening in their own founding experiences - the religious leadership of Jerusalem rejected the Righteous Teacher's prophecy and thus revealed themselves as false prophets. From the Community's perspective, the false confidence and false teaching of the Temple-based leadership invited a comparison to Ezekiel's whitewashers. The author of the Damascus Document returns to this metaphor twice in CD 8.12-18 (and in its parallel material in MS B, 19.24-31). This time, the Damascus Document makes a more complete allusion to Ezek. 13.10, labeling these deceived teachers 'builders of the barrier and whitewashdaubers' (CD 8.12). As in the earlier description, this group fails to understand or accept the correct interpretation of the Law (their specific failings are catalogued in CD 8.1—9//19.16—23). They in turn are deceived by the same leader, this time called 'one who weighs the wind' and 'the

28.13 (CDSS, p. 130). The 12 seems to be the same deceiver described in CD 1.14 as 'the man of mockery' Cpxbn «TK), taken from Isa. 28.14; and the one who 'sprinkled' (^ttn). Most associate him with some early Pharisee leader. 73. BDB, p i , p. 300. 74. See above, p. 38. 75. Zimmerli, Ezekiel, vol. 1, p. 295. 76. J. VanderKam, personal correspondence. 77. 'Wall-building' apparently became so associated with this negative evaluation of the Pharisees that Hosea's description of YHWH building a wall (Hos. 2.8) was omitted in 4QpHos a . Brooke, 'Qumran Commentaries', p. 91.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

63

Spouter of the Lie' (CD 8.13). The second use of'builder of the barrier' in this section is even more polemical than before: 'And [God] loved those who came after them; for theirs is the covenant with the fathers. And God hates and despises the 'builders of the barrier' (pnn ^"o) and his anger was kindled against them and against all who follow after them' (CD 19.30-32, cf. 8.18-19). 'Those who came after them' is a reference to the Damascus Community (CD 19.29). The anger against the builders is not connected in the text of the Damascus Document to any particular historical event. The author invokes God's judgment against 'anyone who despises God's ordinances' and especially those who turn away from the 'new covenant in the land of Damascus' and back to the false teachers of Jerusalem (CD 19.32-34). The judgment on these backsliders is elaborated in CD 19.33-20.27. The author of the Damascus Document begins his description of the backsliders with two allusions to Jeremiah. CD 19.33 Thus all the men who entered the new covenant in the land of Damascus78 and returned and betrayed and departed ("mci) from the well of

Jer. 31.31 I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel... Jer. 17.13 Those who turn away CHTOI) on earth will be written down, because they have forsaken the fountain of living water

living w a t e r (crTin wn i K a o ) . . .

(D^mro mpn), Y H W H .

This allusion to Jeremiah is worth noting because the writing metaphor in Jeremiah leads the author of the Damascus Document to a passage in Ezekiel that uses a similar image. In typical catchword fashion, the phrase 'will be written down' from Jeremiah is not quoted in CD 19.33 so that the author can use the similar phrase in his allusion to Ezekiel. The allusion to Jer. 17.13 is also consistent with Qumran's view of itself as the Temple in exile: those who have 'forsaken the fountain of living waters' are those who have turned away from 'the place of our sanctuary' (Jer. 17.12). The Damascus Document next describes the judgment against the backsliders by alluding to another part of the same oracle against false prophets in Ezekiel 13 - just one verse before Ezekiel's whitewasher metaphor begins. Clearly the author of the Damascus Document has kept his 'wall-builder' epithet firmly in mind, since he returns to the same passage in Ezekiel so soon after his earlier allusion.

78. Note how the author substitutes 'in the land of Damascus' for Jeremiah's 'with the house of Israel.'

64

Echoes of a Prophet

CD 19.35 (they) will not be accounted among the council of the people (DB moa); and when (the latter) are written (Dnrom), they will not be written ("DrO"1 mb)

Ezek. 13.9 They will not be in the council of my people ("ay Tica), and in the writing (nrom) of the house of Israel, they will not be written (lartr vb\ nor will they enter the land of Israel... (10) ... and when someone builds a wall...

The phrase 'in the council of the people' (Di? Tioa) is found nowhere in the Scriptures except Ezekiel. 13, making the source of the allusion fairly certain.79 The Damascus Document has made a few changes to the text of Ezekiel, converting the simpler 'they will not be' (VTP'Kb) to 'they will not be accounted' ("owir \fib). In Ezekiel, 'the council of my people' is set parallel to 'the house of Israel,' making the two equivalent. The author's omission of the phrase is further evidence that he was hesitant to apply the term 'House of Israel' to the Community (see above, [1 fn 12]). A few lines after the reference to the 'builder of the barrier' and his judgment, the Damascus Document returns to another 'whitewashed passage from Ezekiel. The author of the Damascus Document describes the backslider from the Community thus: 'He is the man "who is melted in the midst of a furnace." When his works become apparent, he shall be expelled from the congregation as one whose lot did not fall among those taught by God' (CD 20.3-4). The phrase quoted from Ezekiel, 'who is melted in the midst of a furnace,' is part of an oracle pronouncing judgment on Jerusalem (Ezek. 22.17-22). The residents of Jerusalem are described as 'dross' that will be melted in the furnace, Jerusalem. While the metaphor is one of purification, the focus is on the destruction of the impure dross (as is also the focus in CD 20.3-4).80 The impurities are described in Ezek. 22.23-31 - greedy prophets who take from the poor, priests who defile God's holy things, princes who use violence to acquire wealth. Ezekiel further describes these prophets with a brief return to his whitewashing metaphor: 'And her prophets have smeared whitewash for them, seeing

79. Tio is occasionally used to refer to the Community, although not elsewhere in the Damascus Document. 1QS 2.24 ('an eternal assembly'); 8.5 ('a most holy assembly'); 9.3 ('a foundation of the Holy Spirit'). The righteous and wicked assemblies are compared in 1QS 11.7-10. Cf. 1QS 4.1 (the hated assembly). 80. Ezekiel's metaphor is itself an intentional alteration of earlier refining metaphors. Refining had been used to refer to Israel's deliverance from Egypt, with Israel as the refined metal. Ezekiel alters the metaphor so that Israel is now the dross. Zimmerli, Ezekiel, vol. 1, p. 464.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

65

false visions and divining lies for them, saying, "Thus says the Lord YHWH," when YHWH has not spoken' (Ezek. 22.28).81 There is an interesting pattern in the usage of Ezekiel in this section of the Damascus Document. The author of the Damascus Document begins by twice alluding to the oracle against false prophets in Ezekiel 13. First, he uses an epithet against false prophets from Ezek. 13.10 (CD 19.24, 31), then a judgment against them from Ezek. 13.9 (CD 19.35). He continues with an allusion to another oracle against false prophets, Ezekiel 22, and one with several verbal parallels to Ezekiel 13 (including the important whitewasher metaphor). Here, he uses an epithet and a judgment from Ezek. 22.20-22 (CD 20.3-4). The Damascus Document's allusions to three phrases from two related oracles in Ezekiel suggest both great familiarity with Ezekiel and a tendency to combine texts. Perhaps the author of the Damascus Document began with his 'wall-builder/whitewasher' epithet from Ezekiel 13; then appropriately drew the judgment against the 'wall-builders' from the same oracle. Then, connecting the oracle in Ezekiel 13 with the oracle in Ezekiel 22 by means of their common whitewasher metaphor, the Damascus Document used the dross and its judgment from Ezekiel 22. Of course, Ezekiel 13 and 22 are not related only by the whitewasher metaphor; both also condemn false prophets, although the latter oracle broadens the scope to include priests and princes. However the two texts were connected in the author's mind, it is clear that his use of Ezekiel continues in the same vein: texts from Ezekiel are used to promote the position of the Community over against the religious establishment in Jerusalem.82 Another allusion to the same oracle in Ezekiel 22 can be found in CD 6.17. CD 6.2-11 recounts the founding of the Community at Damascus. This description of the Community moves into a reminder of how the 'priests' of the Community are to be different from the corrupt priests of the Temple. Among the requirements is a close parallel to Ezek. 22.26.

81. Ezekiel 22 contains abbreviations or modifications of other elements from Ezekiel 13: prophets who do not restore the walls of Jerusalem, and oppression of the poor, in addition to the whitewash metaphor and the accusation of false prophecy. 82. This is much like the combination of texts in 4Q174 for polemical purposes; see pp. 31-32.

66

Echoes of a Prophet

CD 6.17-19 . . . and to distinguish (bnnnbi) between the impure and the pure (Tinttb KBttn ya) and to make known (JPTin*?')) (the difference) between the holy and the profane (^yrb ttrnpn fa), and to observe the Sabbath day in exact detail, and the appointed times...

Ezek. 22.26 Her priests... have not distinguished (I'rian) between the holy and the profane (Sr6 imp-pa), and they have not made known (iiPTin) (the difference) between the impure and the pure (TintD*? xatsrr'pa); and they hide their eyes from my Sabbaths, and I am profaned among them.

Ezekiel draws on similar wording from Lev. 10.10, but the Damascus Document follows Ezekiel, with some influence from the Leviticus passage. From Ezekiel, the Damascus Document used the verbs bna (hifil, to distinguish) and UT (hifil, to make known), the mention of the Sabbath, and the word order.83 The twin phrases 'between clean and unclean' and 'between impure and pure' can be found both in Lev. 10.10 and in Ezek. 22.26, but the Damascus Document more closely follows the wording of those phrases in Ezekiel, where Ezekiel mildly diverges from Leviticus (Leviticus uses the double "pa construction; Ezekiel uses a single pa). The Damascus Document may have been influenced by Lev. 10.10 in some other ways: the Damascus Document follows the positive formulation of Leviticus, and like Leviticus uses the infinitive construct forms of the verbs (instead of the perfect forms used in Ezekiel). On the whole, however, CD 6.17 has more in common with Ezek. 22.26. In addition to the verbal similarities, the two contexts are similar. Both passages address prophets, princes and priests (CD 6.1, 6, 11-21; Ezek. 22.23-28); both express a concern for the acquisition of 'wicked wealth' (CD 6.15-17; Ezek. 22.25, 27, 29); and both express the common concern for orphans and widows84 (CD 6.16-17; Ezek. 22.7, 25, 27). All of these elements are lacking from Lev. 10.10. Ezekiel's whitewash metaphor is used in another of the DSS, A Sapiential Work (4Q424). Unfortunately, this piece is fragmentary, so it is difficult to analyze the context. The first legible line begins:'... with a wine press [... ] outside, and decides to build it and covers its wall with plaster, he also [...] and it collapses due to the rain' (4Q424 1.2). The image follows that of Ezek. 13.10-16, although the wording is not identical. Sapiential Work uses Ezekiel's words for building (ma) and whitewashing, (nitt and ban). The word for wall is not the y n from the beginning of 83. The Damascus Document's reversal of phrases ('holy and profane' switched with 'pure and impure') appears to be a minor aberration; Lev. 10.10; Ezek. 22.26; and Ezek. 44.23 all start with 'holy and profane.' 84. The particular wording about orphans and widows in CD 6.16—17 seems to be drawn from Isa. 10.2.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

67

Ezekiel's metaphor, but the Tp from the rest of the metaphor (Ezek. 13.12, 14, 15). While both passages speak about rain as the agent of destruction, Sapiential Work uses a one-word synonym Q1T (downpour) for Ezekiel's rpiw nm (flooding rain). This makes 4Q424 1.3 the most complete allusion to the whitewasher metaphor at Qumran, since it includes five elements (build, cover, whitewash, wall, and rain), where the other passages contain only two or three (build and/or whitewash, and wall). The original sense of 'false prophet' in Ezekiel's metaphor is somewhat muted in Sapiential Work. Here, the whitewasher is one of a series of people against whom the listener is warned. The exact warning associated with the whitewasher has been lost, but the next warning is against trying to learn precepts 'in the company of hypocrites,' suggesting that the 'whitewasher' was to be avoided in any sort of teaching setting. Vermes suggests that 'the main theme of this poetic composition is to instruct the just man how to ensure the progress of wisdom by not entrusting its propagation to the unworthy.'85 However, the admonition may be broader, since Sapiential Work also contains warnings against people who have little to do with the propagation of wisdom: the sleepy man, the grumbler, the stingy man, and others. The other parties warned against in Sapiential Work are all generic rather than specifically historical, suggesting that 'whitewasher' and 'builder of the wall' had become metaphors for anyone who was deceived, and were no longer limited to the particular group of 'false prophets' who were led astray by the Spouter of Lies. The fact that Sapiential Work was probably written after the composition of the Damascus Document makes this hypothesis reasonable. Perhaps the 'whitewasher' epithet, originally a stock phrase at Qumran to describe the group who supported the 'Spouter,' later came to refer to any person who followed the wrong teaching. The typological term from the Damascus Document could now be used as a sapiential term. Sapiential Work may contain a second, weaker allusion to the Ezekiel 13/22 complex in the following line: 4Q424 1.4-5 And with someone who totters you should not enter a crucible, for he will melt like lead and will not resist before the fire.

Ezek. 22.20 As they gather silver and bronze and iron and lead and tin into the crucible to blow fire on it in order to melt it, so I will gather you...

4Q424 1.4-5 contains three words in common with Ezek. 22.20: crucible ), melt ("jna), and lead (may). None of these words is very common in 85. CDSS, p. 414.

68

Echoes of a Prophet

the OT;86 no two of them can be found in any other passage in the OT besides Ezek. 22.20. Even so, the parallel is not very strong. It would probably not be worth noting if we did not already have an allusion to Ezekiel 13 in the previous line, and if we did not have evidence that the Damascus Document uses Ezekiel 13 and 22 to polemicize against false prophets. If 4Q424 1.4—5 is an allusion to Ezek. 22.20, it is further evidence of Qumran's linking of Ezekiel 13 and 22 as stock texts to be used against false teachers. Like CD 20.3-4, it uses Ezek. 22.17-20 to describe the coming destruction of the unworthy. Here, it is used to advocate separation from those unworthy to avoid being caught in their judgment. Unlike the usage in Ezekiel or in the Damascus Document, Sapiential Work uses the refiner's metaphor in a sapiential sense; it connects the 'wallbuilders' with the generic unworthy, and gives little detail about the specific group of 'wall-builders' in Jerusalem, the Pharisees. The DSS do not interpret Ezekiel 13 or 22 in a prophecy-fulfillment scheme. There is no language suggesting that the 'builders of the barrier' was a prediction fulfilled in the time of Ezekiel or in the time of the Qumran Community. Instead, the interpretation seems to have moved from typological to sapiential. The Damascus Document's typological interpretation is suggested in the phrasing of CD 8.18-19: 'And by his hate for the 'builders of the barrier,' his anger was kindled. And thus is his judgment against anyone who despises God's ordinances...' (cf. CD 19.31-32). That is, God's anger against the false prophets of Ezekiel's time was a model of his anger against the new false prophets who opposed the Community. The author of the Damascus Document was using the epithets in Ezekiel 13 and 22 to describe the first opponents of the Community, with apparent recognition that those epithets had an original historical referent during the Exile. The usage in Sapiential Work is more sapiential; there is no reference to the specific applications of the epithet against either historical group of 'false prophets.' The Damascus Document introduced epithets (and their corresponding judgments) from Ezekiel 13/22; Sapiential Work used those epithets in a generic fashion to give instruction on types of people to avoid.

3. Imitating Ezekiel (Ezekiel 1, 10, 17, 30, 37, 40; Pseudo-Ezekielj Pseudo-Ezekiel (4Q385-391) needs to be treated separately from other Qumran allusions to Ezekiel. First, it is not entirely clear that PseudoEzekiel was composed at Qumran. There is nothing in the six readable 86. TO: ten times in OT, three times in Ezekiel 22; "jna: 19 times in OT, four times in Ezekiel 22; msi?: five times in OT, three in Ezekiel 22.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

69

fragments that is exclusively characteristic of Qumran.87 There is one mention of 'giving them the covenant' (4Q385 1.1), which may indicate Qumran's interest in the document, but none of the other typical vocabulary and emphases of Qumran. Pseudo-Ezekiel" s description of 'many in Israel who love your name and walk on the paths of justice' (4Q385 1.2-3) argues against composition at Qumran; few of the Dead Sea Scrolls have such a positive statement about Israel without limiting it to the Community or eschatological Israel.88 But the main reason that Pseudo-Ezekiel needs to be treated independently is that it does not, strictly speaking, contain allusions to or citations of Ezekiel. We cannot speak of Pseudo-EzekiePs 'usage' of Ezekiel in the same way as we can speak of (e.g.) the Damascus Documenfs usage of Ezekiel. Pseudo-Ezekiel is a work intended to use Ezekiel's authority to advance its own message. As such, it is better to describe Pseudo-Ezekiel as imitating and adding to Ezekiel, not alluding to or quoting from Ezekiel. In this respect, it is something like a Targum, although it takes more freedom with the text. Furthermore, observations about Pseudo-Ezekiel must be cautious and tentative; Pseudo-Ezekiel may have been a sizable document, but only fragments survive. Fragment 1 of 4Q385 contains material from the oracle against the nations in Ezek. 30.2-19. The seven damaged lines contain direct verbal parallels to four phrases in Ezek. 30.3-5 describing God's judgment on the pagan nations of Put, Egypt, Kush, and Arabia. The author apparently composed other elements from stock language of judgment. Little can be observed about the author's modification of the text; perhaps the omission of Ezekiel's 'Wail, alas for the day!' from the beginning of the oracle (Ezek. 30.2) changes the tone from lament to exultation over the destruction of Israel's enemies. Perhaps 4Q385c was originally attached to fragment 1; it also contains woes against Kush, Egypt, and Libya, although the remaining portion is primarily a quotation of Nah. 3.8-10.89 Another fragment of Pseudo-Ezekiel, 4Q386 3.1-3, describes the exile to Babylon, and possibly the later judgment against Babylon. Nothing can be traced to Ezekiel; one phrase 'Babylon is like a cup in YHWH's hand' is from Jer. 51.7. The beginning of fragment 2 is missing; the legible text begins, '[And they will know] that I am YHWH, who redeems my people, giving them the covenant.' It is impossible to connect this with any single passage in Ezekiel. The author used Ezekiel's stock phrase 'they will know that I am

87. 88. 89.

CDSS, p. 571. See above, p. 27. DSSSE, p. 775.

70

Echoes of a Prophet

YHWH,' as Ezekiel does, to conclude a section (as the following blank space in 4Q385 indicates). Fragment 3 contains an abbreviated account of the 'dry bones' oracle of Ezekiel 37; however, it is given a different setting. Ezekiel contests that there are many in Israel who are righteous, and asks how God intends to reward them. God answers, 'I will make the children of Israel see and they will know that I am YHWH,' in a fashion similar to Ezekiel. Then, after a blank space in the text, Pseudo-Ezekiel gives an account of Ezekiel's dry bones vision - abbreviated, but using the same wording (4Q385 2.5-8; Ezek. 37.1-10). In response to the vision, Ezekiel asks God, 'When will these things happen?' God's answer is only partially preserved, 'a tree will bend over and straighten up.' The way in which Pseudo-Ezekiel edits the dry bones vision gives insight into the way some readers of the Second Temple era understood Ezekiel 37. The dry bones vision is given in response to a question about rewards for the individual pious - a question not very characteristic of Ezekiel, but comfortable within later Judaism.90 Ezekiel's God delivers despite the sin of his people, not because of their piety. Ezekiel does describe rewards, but not in connection with the dry bones vision, and never in such terms. Second, it is clear that Pseudo-Ezekiel sees Ezekiel 37 as only about the eschatological resurrection, a point made clear by the response of the resurrected: 'they will bless YHWH of hosts who raised them' (4Q385 2.8). That the vision is interpreted eschatologically is also clear from Ezekiel's repeated question, 'YHWH, when will these things come to pass?' (4Q385 2.3, 9). The idea of resurrected hope and return from exile in Ezekiel's dry bones oracle (Ezek. 37.11-14) is lacking from Pseudo-EzekieFs retelling of the vision. The eschatological interpretation is continued in PseudoEzekiel: God answers Ezekiel's questions about the time of the resurrection with the cryptic phrase 'a tree will bend and stand up' (4Q385 2.10).91 References to other signs of the impending resurrection, if they existed, were destroyed with the rest of fragment 2. But the elements that survive contain a hint of the apocalyptic: eschatological interpretation of Scripture and hidden signs. Fragment 3 contains further 'apocalyptic' elements, none of which are derived from Ezekiel. Apparently in response to Ezekiel's request, YHWH responds, 'See, I measure time and shorten the days and the years [... ] a 90. 'The Vision of the Dry Bones develops a biblical vision and links it to the recompense of the righteous... [it] belong[s] to the sphere of eschatological final processes.' D. Dimant, l 4Q386 ii-iii - A Prophecy on Hellenistic Kingdoms?' RevQ 18, no. 72 (1998), pp. 514—30 (522). 91. On this term, see G. Brooke, 'Ezekiel in Some Qumran and New Testament Texts', in J.T. Barrera and L.V. Montaner (eds), The Madrid Qumran Congress (STDJ, 1; Leiden: Brill, 1992), pp. 317-37 (322).

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

71

little, as you said...' Although it is difficult to be sure of the sense, it seems that God agrees to shorten the time until the resurrection, or until some other eschatological event. Material from 4Q386 2.1-11 should probably be placed either shortly before or after the material in 4Q385, fragment 3 (above). The material in 4Q386 2.1-11 is reasonably well preserved, but contains little that is directly drawn from Ezekiel. It contains a conversation between Ezekiel and YHWH. As in fragment 2, Ezekiel asks about the timing of God's promises: 'When will you assemble them?', apparently in reference to the restoration from exile. God responds in apocalyptic fashion with a series of cryptic signs. 'A son of Belial will plot to oppress my people... a multitude will be defiled... and the wicked man I will kill in Memphis but my children I will bring forth from Memphis, and their remnant I shall return.' (4Q386 2.3-6). The details of a specific leader and specific restoration from Egypt suggest a prophecy written after the fact, as is typical in apocalyptic literature. The connection with the eschaton heightens the similarity to apocalyptic literature. However, the particular details of the 'prophesied' historical events cannot be established with certainty; they likely refer to political turmoil in Egypt and an otherwise unknown return of Jews in the second century BC.92 Fragment 4 of 4Q385 is an abbreviation of the throne-visions of Ezek. 1.4-28; 10.1-3, with several direct parallels to the language of Ezekiel. The only notable addition to Ezekiel's language is that 4Q385 3.5-6 identifies it as 'the vision that Ezekiel saw [... ] the gleam of the chariot (nasiQ).' Ezekiel never uses 'chariot' to describe the throne vision; its use in PseudoEzekiel suggests that Ezekiel's vision had already acquired at least some technical terminology. There are several other small changes that 4Q385 makes to Ezekiel's vision: the four living creatures each have a different face, rather than four faces for each (4Q385 4.9; Ezek. 1.10); the wheels are attached, not one within another (4Q385 4.11; Ezek. 1.16); and there are further living creatures in the coals between the living creatures (4Q385 4.12).93 These alterations have some significance in the history of merkabah interpretation, but are not as important for the study of the interpretation of Ezekiel.94

92. Several historical situations have been proposed that fit some of the details of PseudoEzekiel. For a survey, see D. Dimant, who suggests that the 'son of Belial' is Antiochus IV and that the 'wicked man' is Cleon, a governor of Memphis installed by Antiochus IV. Dimant, l 4Q386 ii-iii', pp. 520-28; cf. D. Dimant, Qumran Cave 4 XXI: Parabiblical Texts Part 4: Pseudo-Prophetic Texts (DJD, 30; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2001). 93. Cf. 4Q405 20.10, discussed above, pp. 45-46. 94. For more on 4Q385 in the history of merkabah mysticism, see Halperin, Faces of the Chariot, pp. 52-54; Kanagaraj, Mysticism in John, pp. 93-96.

72

Echoes of a Prophet

Fragment 10 is too brief to be certain of its meaning, let alone its modification of Ezekiel. The phrase 'hanging from a tree, and the birds [of heaven]' (4Q385 10.3-4) is likely derived from Ezek. 31.1-6 or 17.22-24. Both passages use a cedar tree and birds metaphorically. 1QH 14.15 combines phrases from both tree passages, suggesting that something similar may be happening here. The word 'hanging' Cnbn) is worth commenting on. It does not occur in either of Ezekiel's cedar metaphors, but a similar word, b*bn\ (lofty), appears at the end of Ezek. 17.22. The LXX translator, perhaps unsure of its meaning (it only occurs here in the OT), read it as ibm and translated KCCL Kp€|iaoa) ('and I will hang').95 The occurrence of ^br\ applied to the tree metaphor in 4Q385 is indirect evidence that others in the pre-Masoretic era may have read hbn as nSn.96 A number of scattered lines in the remaining fragments can be read,97 and even some material possibly derived from Ezekiel, but little can be said of their meaning or context without speculating fruitlessly. They do allow us to determine that Pseudo-Ezekiel was an extensive document, and that it was a combination of material from the OT and the author's own composition. Fragment 65 apparently begins a description of the measurements of the New Jerusalem in imitation of Ezekiel 40-47 (cf. New Jerusalem above). Pseudo-Ezekiel in some ways is a summary or abbreviation of passages from Ezekiel that the author regarded as important. Certainly the author's surviving choices - the throne vision, the dry bones, the tree, and the New Jerusalem - are some of Ezekiel's more compelling images. Many of the phrases in 4Q385 fragments 1, 2, and 4 are directly dependent on the phrasing in Ezekiel. The author has also taken pains to use some of Ezekiel's standard phrases: 'son of man' (4Q385 1.1; 2.5; 12.4; 4Q386 2.2);98 'prophesy and say' (4Q385 1.2; 2.5); 'they will know that I am YHWH' (4Q385 2.4; 4Q386 2.1); 'land of Israel' (*?m«r rmx, 4Q386 2.2)99; and 'the river Chebar' (4Q391 fr. 65). However, the author of Pseudo-Ezekiel also composed much of the work himself. Some of it has no parallel anywhere in the OT (e.g., 4Q385 fr. 3), while other sections are drawn from stock prophetic language (e.g., portions of 4Q385 fr. 1). It seems likely that the author was more familiar with Isaiah than with Ezekiel. In his attempt to use 'biblical language,' he uses several phrases common to Isaiah but lacking from Ezekiel. First, 95. Alternatively, his Hebrew text may have been defective here - for perhaps the same reason. 96. This issue will be resumed in Chapter 4; see pp. 144-45. 97. 4Q385 fragment 12; 4Q391 fragments 1, 2, 9, 10, 25, 36, 55, 62, and 65. 98. Although note that this phrase is sometimes used in a fashion atypical of Ezekiel, as in 4Q386 2.2. Dimant, '4Q386 ii-iii', p. 514. 99. Dimant, '4Q386 ii-iii', p. 514.

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

73

4Q385 2.1 describes God as 'YHWH who redeems' (*»un mm), a title never used in Ezekiel, but characteristic of Isaiah (the verb b*o occurs 24 times there, twelve as a title for God (Isa. 41.14; 43.14, etc.)). Second, the title 'YHWH of Hosts' (mans mm), used in 4Q385 2.8; 12.3, is never used by Ezekiel, but is commonly used by most other prophets (Isaiah: 51 times; Jeremiah: 70; minor prophets: 78). Third, 4Q385 3.7 gives God's pronouncement, 'For the mouth of YHWH has spoken these words' Cm mm), typical of Isaiah (Isa. 1.20; 40.5, 58.14; also Mic. 4.4). Ezekiel's oracles from the Lord are normally established by the phrase 'I, YHWH, have spoken' Omm mm, Ezek. 5.13; 6.10, etc.). Fourth, in his description of fallen Babylon, the author of Pseudo-Ezekiel uses the phrase 'a dwelling place for demons' and other language strongly reminiscent of Isa. 13.21. Probably the most important modification that the author of PseudoEzekiel has made to the material it derives from Ezekiel is the subtle inclusion of apocalyptic themes. Ezekiel contains in itself some of the seeds that grew into the later apocalyptic tradition, but it lacks many of the typical apocalyptic features, such as pseudepigraphy, esoteric interpretation of Scripture, elaborate eschatological imagery and cryptic timelines. The author of Pseudo-Ezekiel re-makes Ezekiel, introducing some of those apocalyptic elements. Thus the coming reward of the faithful is important (4Q385 2.2-3), as is the timing of the last days (4Q385 2.3, 9; 3.3-6; esp. 4Q386 2.1-11). The images from Ezekiel are important to Pseudo-Ezekiel, but not their original meanings: the dry bones vision is stripped of its original interpretation, and there is no evidence that the throne vision is placed within its original setting of judgment on Israel and the removal of God's glory from the Temple.

4. Summary of the Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls The first striking observation about the use of Ezekiel at Qumran is the sheer number of strong allusions and quotations. There are more allusions to Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls than in all the rest of Second Temple literature. In the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, allusions to Ezekiel are much rarer and weaker. In many cases, allusions in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha are only conceptual, or limited to a few words from Ezekiel.100 Qumran literature also draws more widely on passages in Ezekiel than other Second Temple literature does. The material surveyed above suggests that Qumran literature alluded to material in 23 of the chapters in Ezekiel (see the chart below). Most of the allusions proposed in other Second Temple literature come from the throne-visions of Ezekiel 1 100.

See the following chapter on 'The Use of Ezekiel in Other Second Temple Literature.'

74

Echoes of a Prophet

and 10, the oracle about shepherds in Ezekiel 34, and the vision of the dry bones in Ezekiel 37. The strength of Qumran's allusions to Ezekiel is also striking. In the majority of the allusions to Ezekiel, Qumran authors exhibited a great sensitivity to the message of Ezekiel. Even brief allusions were usually derived from passages in Ezekiel that contributed to the author's point or resonated with the same theological themes. Of course, Scripture references were always applied to the Community or used to advance a position peculiar to Qumran. Ezekiel was appropriated for use within Qumran, but often without violence to the sense of Ezekiel. For example, CD 19.11-13 examines the deliverance of 'those who sigh and groan' over the condition of Jerusalem (Ezek. 9.4). In Ezekiel, these were clearly the few righteous residents of Jerusalem who were delivered from the destruction of 587 BC. The Damascus Document acknowledges this original meaning, but also sees it as a picture of what will happen at the 'second visitation.' Further, authors at Qumran often show sensitivity to the meaning of prophetic oracles (in Ezekiel and other prophets) by distinguishing between prophecies that were already fulfilled in the Exile and restoration, and prophecies that remained to be fulfilled in the eschaton. Since Ezekiel and other prophets seem to make this distinction in their own writings, attention to it in the DSS confirms their interest in careful interpretation. This combination of extensive and careful use of Ezekiel suggests that many authors in the Community had a strong affinity for that prophet. The fact that stock phrases, images, and ideas from all over Ezekiel were so often used with sensitivity for their original meaning (always, of course, applied to the situation of the Community) suggests that Ezekiel was the object of frequent and extended meditation at Qumran. The role of Ezekiel in certain works, such as the Damascus Document and Hodayot, even competes with the role that Isaiah has. There are a number of reasons that Ezekiel was so important at Qumran. First, the Community shared Ezekiel's priestly concerns. The book of Ezekiel is filled with the concerns of a priest: horror at the defilement of the Temple, sadness at God's abandonment of his holy place, concern for Levitical law, and hope for the establishment of a new Temple with a restored Zadokite priesthood. All of these emotions and hopes found a ready place in the heart of the Community. Their priestly concerns may have arisen out of the role of disillusioned priests in the founding of the Community. Perhaps the Righteous Teacher saw himself in the role of a priestly Ezekiel to a new generation. Second, the Community shared Ezekiel's attitude towards Jerusalem. Like other OT prophets, Ezekiel addresses most of his judgment oracles against God's people. But Ezekiel is unique among the prophets in his focus on Jerusalem. Many of the judgments that other prophets address

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls

75

more broadly against Israel and Judah are directed by Ezekiel against 'the bloody city' (e.g., Ezek. 22.2). Yet Ezekiel did not condemn Jerusalem forever. It would be restored and again be the dwelling-place of God and his people. Ezekiel's anger against the corruption of Jerusalem and his hope for its future can also be found in the DSS. Perhaps the only difference is that Ezekiel communicates a sense of sick dread at the destruction of Jerusalem, while some of the DSS seem to look forward to the 'second visitation' with anticipation. This difference is understandable; Ezekiel likely composed much of his work after the awful destruction of Jerusalem, while the residents of Qumran had not experienced the devastation themselves. Most importantly, the Qumran Community made wide use of Ezekiel because much of their eschatology was built on a replay of the Exile and restoration as seen through Ezekiel's eyes. Other passages, such as the Damascus of Amos 5.26-27, could be appropriated to this Exile eschatology only with some violence. Ezekiel's eschatology, however, was much more in harmony with that of the Community. Ezekiel's oracles about the destruction of Jerusalem may have been already fulfilled, but Qumran authors could see those events recurring through the application of typology (and, of course, such a recurrence would be in harmony with prophecies about Jerusalem found in other prophets). Many of Ezekiel's oracles had not been fulfilled, and these could be applied to the Community's present and future. Ezekiel had predicted a time of purification in the wilderness before the restoration (Ezek. 20.35; 1QM 1.2-3); to the Community, the interpretation was obvious. Ezekiel predicted a restoration of a purified priesthood and the (minor) punishment of priests who had been unfaithful; Qumran saw the current Jerusalem priesthood destroyed and the new priesthood drawn from the Community. Ezekiel predicted that God would give his Spirit and a new heart of flesh to his people; the Community celebrated that giving of the Spirit in their ceremonial baptisms, although they were still awaiting the heart of flesh. Finally, the climax of Ezekiel's oracles was the return of God's presence to a restored Temple in a renewed Jerusalem. This was also the central hope of Qumran. The coincidence on so many eschatological issues suggests that Ezekiel was an important source for Qumran's eschatology, in addition to the important role played by other books from the Scriptures.

76

Echoes of a Prophet

Allusions to Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls Qumran Abbreviated Allusion or Summary

Ezekiel Reference

DSS

Reference

Passage in Ezekiel; summary

he hid his face from Israel and from his sanctuary Three hundred ninety years and said, 'For it is ours.'

CD 1.3-4

39.23

Gog; summary of exile

CD 1.5-6

4.4-5

CD 3.16-17

11.15

The priests... who kept watch of my sanctuary Builders of the wall to distinguish between the impure and the pure ... builders of the wall and whitewashdaubers ... not be accounted among the council of the people to make a mark upon... those who sigh and groan who is melted in the midst of a furnace Plantation, trees by the river

CD 3.21-4.6

44.15

CD 4.19 CD 6.17

13 22

CD 8.12-18// 19.24-31

13

Siege of Jerusalem; sin at the Temple Judgment between first exiles and remnant New Jerusalem; restored priesthood False prophets Failed leaders; defiled priesthood False prophets

CD 19.35

13

False prophets

CD 19.11-13

9.4

Slaughter in Jerusalem

CD 20.3-4

22

Judgment on Jerusalem

1QH 14.14-18

31, 17, 19

For your own sake you have done it. Plantation, trees by the river

1QH 14.10; 12.38; 21.6-7 1QH 16.2-24

36

Heart of stone Return from the wilderness of the peoples Role for tribal leaders and men in the new Temple Judgments against Gog and all his assembly Holy Spirit, waters of purification New Jerusalem

1QH 21.10-13 1QM 1.2-3

36

1QM 2.S-4

44,45

1QM 11.14^16

38,39

Egypt as a cedar; Restored king; vine of Israel God's deliverance of Israel from Exile Egypt as a cedar; Temple river; Judgment on Negev; vine of Israel New heart and new spirit Wilderness generation (after Exile) New Jerusalem; Prince in the new Temple Judgment on Gog

1QS 3.7-8; 4.20-22 2024

36

31,47,21, 19

20.35

40-48

Promise of the Spirit, cleansing New Jerusalem

2. The Use of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls . . . in the book of Ezekiel... ' [ . . . ] their idols' Judgment on Put, Egypt, Kush, Arabia Resurrection of the righteous in Israel Throne-vision hanging from a tree, and the birds of heaven Heavenly Temple; Throne-vision Builder of the wall showers of blessings, wild beasts shall withdraw

11

4Q174 1.16

20.18

Wilderness generation

4Q385 fr. 1

30

Judgment on the nations

4Q385 fr. 3

37

Dry bones

4Q385 fr. 4

1, 10

Throne-visions

4Q385 10

31, 17

Egypt as a cedar (31); Restored king (17)

4Q405 20.7-12

43, 1, 10

Throne-visions

4Q424 1.1 11Q14 1.7

13 34

False prophets Blessings on restored Israel

Chapter 3 THE USE OF EZEKIEL IN OTHER SECOND TEMPLE LITERATURE

We now turn to an examination of the use of Ezekiel in other literature of the Second Temple period (traditionally called the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha). A few citations or clear allusions can be found in 1 Enoch, Testament ofLevi, Sirach, Psalms of Solomon, Lives of the Prophets, and 4 Maccabees. These passages combined contain fewer allusions to Ezekiel than are found in the Damascus Document alone. However, the scattered allusions and quotations of Ezekiel found outside the DSS still have value for this study, because they allow comparison with allusions to Ezekiel in the DSS and in the Gospel of John. Analysis of other literature of Second Temple Judaism must proceed somewhat differently than analysis of the DSS. Members of one community presumably wrote most of the DSS examined above over the course of about a century. Those works not composed by authors from Qumran were at least deemed acceptable for use in the Community. With other Second Temple literature, there was no such relatively homogeneous reading community. The various works likely represent different subsets of Second Temple Judaism, and thus are more likely to disagree with each other on a variety of issues (including their use of the OT). We do not know how broad the influence of some of these books was, although certainly 1 Enoch and Sirach were widely known by the first century AD. Despite the greater diversity of this body of literature, some points of contact in their use of Ezekiel can be found. As in the section on the DSS, the uses of Ezekiel will be organized by themes from Ezekiel. The literature examined here makes use of imagery only from Ezekiel's throne visions (Ezekiel 1, 10), the shepherd oracle (Ezekiel 34) and the valley of the dry bones (Ezekiel 37).l

1. Two brief allusions in Josephus and Philo will not be examined at length. In his description ofZedekiah's punishment 04rcf. 10.8.3§141 ;cf. 2 Kgs 25.6-7), Josephus mentions prophecies of the events by Jeremiah and Ezekiel. According to Ezekiel, Zedekiah would go to Babylon, but would not see it: ccxQeXc, eU Ra$\)kK el8e, KOCGGX; Ie(eKir|A.oc; iTpoeiTre (Ant. 10.8.3§141). a£a) aurov elg Baputaova... Kai OL\)TT)V OI>K oij/eiaL (Ezek. 12.13).

3. The Use of Ezekiel in other Second Temple Literature

79

1. The Merkabah Vision (Ezekiel 1; 3.2, 14-15; 10; Sirach 49.8; Testament of Levi 5.7; 1 Enoch 14.8-25; 39.2; 71.1-2) Ezekiel's vision of God's throne-chariot became, for some, the most important part of Ezekiel, or indeed, the only part worth mentioning. Many apocalyptic writers, beginning with 1 Enoch and continuing on through its ultimate development in the Hekhalot literature, adapted the details of Ezekiel's throne vision. In most cases, these visions of Ezekiel (chs 1, 3, 10, 43) were combined with visions from Isaiah 6 or Daniel 7 and were liberally elaborated with descriptions of the levels and chambers of heaven and the orders of angels.2 Descriptions of or references to the merkabah (as it came to be technically called) can be found in Sir. 49.8 (early second century BC); 1 Enoch 14 (second century BC); Testament of Levi 2, 5 (late second century BC); and 1 Enoch 39-40, 71 (early first century BC).3 Sirach's 'Hall of Faith' (Sirach 44-49) mentions three of the writing prophets by name (Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel; the others are called 'the twelve'). Sirach has only one thing to say about Ezekiel: he 'saw the vision of glory (eidev opaoiv &o£nG)i/f|c; (Kupiou) in Num. 3.39; 3.51; 4.37; 4.41; 4.45; 10.13; 13.3; and as 6ict upooxctYiictTog (KDPLOD) in Num. 9.18; 9.20; 9.23; 33.38; 36.5. It is sometimes translated with other phrases related to speaking or commanding: em. TO OTO^UXTL in Gen. 41.40; Deut. 21.5; Deut. 19.15, etc.; as 6ia prpaxoc, Kupiou (Num. 33.2; 34.5); or hv Tponov ouveia^v (Num. 3.16). 12. There are at least 64 occurrences in the LXX and six in the NT. 13. There are at least 22 occurrences of the pair in the LXX and eighteen in the NT. 14. Contra Robinson, who suggests that 'the language [of 10.1-9] is not coloured by the Old Testament in the way that it is in the allegorical sequel.' J.A.T. Robinson, 'The Parable of John 10:1-5', in Twelve New Testament Studies (SBT; Naperville, 111.: Alec R. Allenson, 1962), pp. 67-75 (69).

106

Echoes of a Prophet

The shepherd of Ezekiel 34 has often been proposed as the sole or primary background for Jn 10.1-9,15 but the appointment of Joshua in Numbers 27 is the more likely source. Ezekiel 34 uses some of the same words (or synonyms) discussed above (7Toi|ir|v, TTpopata, e^aya), eioayu). However, John's use of the -ayco terms is closer to that of Numbers 27. In Ezek. 34.13, God promises that he will lead his people out (e^ayco) of the Gentile nations and into (eloayo)) their sheepfold. In both Numbers 27 and John 10, the similar terms are used to describe the role of the leader of Israel leading his people freely in and out of the camp or sheepfold.16 This is not to suggest that Ezekiel 34 has no role in Jn 10.1-9 (that role will be fully explored below), but that the language of Numbers 27 dominates. John's use of imagery from Joshua's appointment carries significance for Jesus' polemic against the leaders of Israel. Num. 27.16-22 is primarily about the legitimacy of Joshua's rule.17 Moses asks God to appoint a leader over Israel 'so that they will not be like sheep who have no shepherd.' God responds by selecting Joshua, 'a man who has the spirit in himself (Num. 27.19). Moses is to take Joshua before the congregation, publicly lay hands on him, and the people will 'ask for judgment by Urim' from the high priest (Num. 27.20-21). Then some of Moses' glory (LXX 6o£ct; MT Tin, majesty or authority) will pass to Joshua (Num. 27.20), and he will lead the people. This confluence of symbolic actions powerfully affirms Joshua's legitimacy as Moses' replacement over Israel. The use of this imagery in the setting of John 10 is clear. Jesus is saying that he is the legitimate leader of Israel, as Joshua was, and he is calling on the people and the rulers of Israel to accept his leadership. The wilderness generation, including the high priest, made a correct judgment about Joshua. The beginning of the shepherd discourse rebukes the Pharisees and chief priests for their faulty logic in rejecting Jesus, and invites them to make a correct judgment about Jesus. The immediate setting of conflict with the Pharisees in John 9 suggests that the shepherd discourse is a polemic against the Pharisees; the broader setting of conflict with the

15. E.g., Dodd, Historical Tradition, pp. 358-59; Fikes, 'Shepherd-King', p. 183; D.F. Kiefer, 'Ezekiel 34: An Exegetical and Theological Analysis of the Shepherd Motif with Special Reference to John 10' (unpublished masters dissertation, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 1991), p. iii. 16. The phrase 'to go out and go in' may also suggest the breadth of Joshua's leadership; as Gray suggests, lto go out and come in is an idiomatic way of expressing activity... and is a usus loquendi similar in character to the frequent Semitic periphrases for all which consist of two terms for opposed classes... Moses, therefore, begs that his successor may initiate all the undertakings of the people and see them through.' G.B. Gray, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Numbers (ICC, 4; repr., 1956, Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1903). 17. P J . Budd, Numbers (WBC, 5; Waco: Word Books, 1984), p. 308; D.T. Olson, Numbers (Louisville: John Knox, 1996), p. 169.

4. Allusions to Ezekiel in John: Major Allusions

107

authorities in John 7-9 suggests that the polemic is also directed against the Temple council (Jn 7.45-52).18 There are other, peripheral connections between Num. 27.16-22 and Jn 10.1-9. The description of Joshua as a 'man who has the spirit in himself invites comparison to John's Jesus, who is marked by his possession of the Spirit (cf. Jn 1.33; 4.13-14; 7.37-39; 20.22). The transfer of Moses' glory to Joshua reminds the reader of the glory of Jesus in Jn 1.14, 17. And of course, the fact that Joshua and Jesus have the same name ('Iriooug) is significant for some NT authors (Mt. 1.21; Heb. 4.8ff). These are intriguing ways in which John 10 resonates with Numbers 27, and it would not be surprising if John considered them significant as he wrote these passages. However, John explicitly alludes only to the 'leading' and 'following' language of Numbers 27 (elaepxo[ioa, 4£€pxo[iai, e^dyw, and eloaKouw), suggesting that his primary aim in alluding to that text was to discuss Jesus' legitimate leadership and Israel's need to accept it. The opening Trapoi|iia makes this point by presenting a hypothetical decision to be made. The gatekeeper of the fold needs to decide whether someone coming in is a thief or a real shepherd.19 How can the gatekeeper tell the difference? Jesus offers some obvious criteria, couched in language drawn from Numbers 27. A thief would sneak in over the wall and the sheep would be afraid of him, but a legitimate shepherd would enter through the door, and his sheep would come at his call. The application to the context of John 10 is clear: the Pharisees and the priesthood, as 'gatekeepers' of Israel, need to make correct judgments about Jesus' claims to authority (cf. Jn 7.24; 8.15).20 The Temple council has used the wrong criteria (Sabbath-keeping) to reject Jesus (Jn 7.23-24, 32, 45-52), and the Pharisees of the synagogue have used the same wrong criteria to reject Jesus and one of his followers (9.14-16, 24, 34). Jesus acknowledges that

18. Brown (following Brims) also suggests that the background in Numbers 27 gives 'an echo of the priestly ideal and ordination... Jesus was attacking the priests as well as the Pharisees in these parables.' Brown, John, vol. 1, p. 392, citing J.E. Bruns, 'The Discourse on the Good Shepherd and the Rite of Ordination', AER 149 (1963), pp. 386-91. 19. Koester described the passage as a contrast between Jesus and 'the Jewish authorities who monitored access to the synagogue.' Koester, Symbolism, p. 104; see also Robinson, 'The Parable of John 10:1-5', p. 71. 20. This is roughly in agreement with Robinson's and Koester's interpretation of the gatekeeper in Jn 10.1-2. (Koester, Symbolism, p. 104; Robinson, 'The Parable of John 10:1-5', p. 71). However, Brown thinks that the role of the gatekeeper is assigned to Jesus even in Jn 10.1-2. Following Schneider, Brown sees the structure of John 10 as a parable in Jn 10.1-5, and an explanation of the parable in the following verses (Brown, John, vol. 1, pp. 391-92, citing J. Schneider, 'Zur Komposition von Joh. 10', ConNT 11 (1947), pp. 220-25). While this is an attractive suggestion, it does not explain how John 10 alters the meaning of the images on each approach. Jesus is first the shepherd, then the gate; the leaders of Israel are first gatekeepers, then strangers, then hirelings, then wolves.

108

Echoes of a Prophet

they should exclude false leaders (Jn 10.1), but they should accept him as the true leader of Israel because he has openly proclaimed himself (cf. Jn 18.19-21), because many people in Israel are openly accepting him, and because he is 'shepherding the sheep' in a way that no thief would.21 This interpretation of the TTocpoijiia, based on its background in Numbers 27, explains a few of its difficult elements. If the point of the gatekeeper image is to point to Jesus' legitimate rule, then the sense of Xr\oxr\(; in Jn 10.1 becomes clear. The Temple hierarchy has decided to reject Jesus as an insurrectionist, and so Jesus defends himself as a true shepherd. This decision by the Temple council has only been hinted at until now: we hear that they have been planning to kill Jesus (Jn 7.25); that they tried unsuccessfully to arrest him on the Temple grounds (Jn 7.32); that 'none of the rulers or the Pharisees have believed in him' (Jn 7.48); and that the Temple council rejects Jesus before hearing from him (Jn 7.50-52). The labeling of Jesus as an insurrectionist becomes clearer in Jn 11.47-50. The chief priests, Pharisees, and the high priest Caiaphas all condemn Jesus in words that amount to calling him a hrpTr\Q: if Jesus continues, the Romans will intervene. It is better for Jesus to die the death of a revolutionary. In one of the great Johannine ironies, the high priest, who ought to be instrumental in commissioning Jesus as ruler of Israel (Num. 27.19, 21-22), instead conspires for his death. John highlights another great irony at the trial of Jesus. The gatekeepers' judgment is so poor that they crucify their true king as a A^aiife, and allow the real criminal to go free: 'Now Barabbas was a A.T)OTr|uoao) is such a distinctive word.45 It occurs only six times in the LXX, and only here in Jn 20.22 in the NT. Besides the above uses in Gen. 2.7 and Ezek. 37.9, it is used to describe Elijah breathing life back into the widow's dead child (1 Kgs 17.21 LXX) and in three other passages with different metaphorical senses.46 John's allusion to Gen. 2.7 is quite natural, since Ezekiel 37 itself strongly echoes the language of the creation of humanity in Gen. 2.7. In Genesis, the first human life results from God breathing into the lifeless body.47 This breath makes the man a 'living being' (rrn ES^/elg i|/uxf}i> Cciooav) like the animals, but also seems to 'constitute humankind as the image of God.' 48 For both Ezekiel and John, the language of breathing into 44. The difference between the LXX rendering of the two passages represents the difference between the Hebrew: n«©3 = irvori (breath) in Gen. 2.7, and n n = m/eG^a (breath, spirit, wind) in Ezek. 37.9. 45. See p. 10 for the criterion of distinctive wording. 46. It is also used to describe God stirring up the fire of his wrath (Ezek. 21.36) or ending a life with his breath (Job 4.21 LXX), and is used to describe the panting of the messenger in Nah. 1.15 (LXX only). In these cases, it seems closer to the meaning of (Jwoao) or eKcjwaau) in the LXX (see, e.g., Isa. 54.16; Ezek. 22.20-21; Sir. 28.12; 43.4). 47. Brown suggests that Jesus' act is 'evocative of God's creative breath in Gen ii 7.' Brown, John, vol. 2, p. 1022. 48. A.P. Ross, Creation and Blessing: A Guide to the Study and Exposition of Genesis (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1988), pp. 122-23; see also Skinner, who sees the expression as

5. Allusions to Ezekiel in John: Minor Allusions

167

the first human thus suggests the theme of new creation. For Ezekiel, it is Israel that is re-created by God's power and Spirit; for John, it is the followers of Jesus who are re-created by that same power and Spirit.49 Jesus' action in breathing on his disciples may thus be described as a prophetic action, much like those performed by some OT prophets. A prophetic action is a performance by the prophet intended to communicate God's present or future action. Here, Jesus' act of breathing is portrayed as a prophetic action that announces the giving of the Holy Spirit. Jesus' act of breathing is closely tied to his commissioning of the disciples as his messengers (Jn 20.21-22). This commissioning fits into the Johannine theme of God sending Jesus: 'As the Father has sent me, I also send you' (Jn 20.21; cf. 3.17; 5.36; 17.18). However, the commissioning is loosely tied to the creation account. In Genesis, the newly created humans are commissioned as rulers over creation (Gen. 1.26-30; 2.19-20). Perhaps a more striking implication of John's allusion to the creation account is that Jesus takes God's role; in Genesis 2, God breathes on the man, while in Jn 20.22, Jesus breathes on the disciples. Jesus' role in the new creation thus echoes his role in the original creation: 'All things came to be through him; and apart from him, not even one thing came into being which has come into being. In him was life, and the life was the light of men' (Jn 1.34). Perhaps this forms an inclusio; John begins and ends with Jesus as the source of life, the agent of the first creation and the new creation (see also Jn 20.31).50 The allusion in Jn 20.22 to Ezekiel 37 is at least as important as the allusion to the creation account.51 Besides the verbal parallels (see the chart above), a few other pieces of evidence can be brought to bear to demonstrate the strength of John's allusion to Ezekiel 37. The criterion of repeated allusion52 is relevant: John has already alluded once to the dry bones oracle in Jn 5.25-28 (above), as well as to the 'two sticks' oracle which follows in Ezekiel (Jn 10.16; 11.52/Ezek. 37.19-25).53 The material in the preceding oracle (the 'new spirit' and sprinkling of water, Ezek. 36.2528) seems to have influenced John's use of water symbolism.54 T s equivalent for the "image of God.'" J. Skinner, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Genesis (ICC, 1; repr., 1956, Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2nd edn, 1930), p. 57; see also G.J. Wenham, Genesis 1-15 (WBC, 1; Waco: Word Books, 1982), pp. 60-61. 49. Brown, John, vol. 2, pp. 1022, 1037; Morris, John, p. 747, fn 58. 50. 'Symbolically, then, John is proclaiming that, just as in the first creation God breathed a living spirit into man, so now in the moment of the new creation Jesus breathes his own Holy Spirit in the disciples, giving them eternal life.' Brown, John, vol. 2, p. 1037. 51. Beasley-Murray, John, pp. 380-81; Morris, John, p. 747, fn 58; Schnackenburg, John, vol. 3, p. 325. 52. See p. 12. 53. Seep. 115. 54. See pp. 172-73.

168

Echoes of a Prophet

Both Ezekiel 37 and Jn 20.22 are concerned with the giving of God's Spirit. Ezekiel explains the meaning of the raised dry bones in Ezek. 37.1314, 'You will know that I am the Lord when I open your graves... and I will give my Spirit in you, and you will live, and I will place you in your land.' Ezekiel pictures the despairing exiles as dead, in the tomb of Babylon.55 The restoration of Israel is pictured as the restoration of life, God's breathing life back into the dead body. Ezekiel takes the image of the creation in Genesis 2 and re-creates it. In Genesis 2, God breathes the breath (nBtttt/Trvori) of life into the lifeless man, making him a living being (rrn ED^/elc; i(ruxV (oooav). In Ezekiel 37, after the bodies are reconstructed, God (through the prophet) commands the winds to bring breath (mi/-rrv€U|ia) into the lifeless bodies and make them live (rrn/ €Cr|oav). By using the broader term for breath (rm/TTvetyia), Ezekiel is able to carry on an extended word-play (using all three of the meanings of m i / TTveujia)56 and connect the image to his 'new heart' theology. Ezekiel teaches that with the restoration from exile would come a new ability to obey God, empowered by God's Spirit (cf. Ezek. 11.19-20; 36.27; 39.29 (MT only)). The connection between the image of revivified dry bones and Ezekiel's theology of the new spirit can be seen in the parallel phrasing in the following chart: MT

Ezekiel

Translation of MT

37.6

I will put breath into you

m i a m nnn2i

37.14

I will put my Spirit into you

m i DD2 viroi

11.19

I will put a new spirit into them

36.27

I will put my Spirit into you

LXX 6G5GO) TTveOjia jiou elg \)[i6LQ57 SaSaa) TO nvevyux jiou

€l