The Messiah at Qumran

060

Among the most intriguing of the newly released Dead Sea Scrolls is a fragment that was originally called “On Resurrection.” It was assigned for publication to Abbe Jean Starcky, who died in 1988 without publishing it. After Starcky’s death, it was given to Father Emile Puech of the École Biblique in Jerusalem, who is the present “official editor.”¹ Shortly before the Biblical Archaeology Society published its facsimile edition of previously unpublished scroll photographs in 1991,² a photograph and preliminary translation of this text appeared in BAR.³

The official editors have now changed the name of this text to the “Messianic Apocalypse.” It may be easier just to call it 4Q521—that is, document 521 from Qumran Cave 4. The more we study it, the clearer the conclusion becomes: 4Q521 is an extremely important text.

It is written on leather and is in Hebrew. About 15 fragments of the text from three columns have been identified, but most are very small and do not join The largest body of text, principally two fragments, comes from column 2 and consists of 14 mostly broken lines. It is these 14 lines that we will analyze here. The text was written sometime between 200 B.C.E. and the fall of the Temple in 70 C.E., probably after 100 B.C.E. It is difficult to be more precise.

Three striking features of this text are significant: First, it speaks of a single messianic figure who will rule heaven and earth. Second, in the clearest possible language, it describes the resurrection of the dead expected to occur during the time of this Messiah. And third, it contains an exact verbal parallel with the Gospels of Matthew and Luke.

Scholarship on the Dead Sea Scrolls by now almost takes it for granted that the Qumran community expected not one, but two messiahs.⁴ It is this that is supposed to provide one of the major differences between the messianic expectations at Qumran, on the one hand, and Christianity, on the other. For example, James VanderKam, a leading scholar on the subject, tells us: “There is no doubt that the Qumran covenanters and the early Christians shared a similar eschatological outlook. Both must be regarded as eschatological communities in the sense that both had a lively expectation that the end of days would come soon and ordered their communal beliefs and practices according to this article of faith … [But,] although both groups had messianic expectations, they are different in some respects. The faith of Qumran was that the last days would bring two messiahs … The more prominent messiah is the priestly one—the messiah of Aaron. The second and apparently lower-ranking messiah is the lay one—the messiah of Israel. Precisely what the [Qumran] messiahs would do, other than officiate at the messianic banquet, is not clear … There is no second messiah in the New Testament, as there was at Qumran.”⁵

This Qumranic concept of two messiahs was supposedly derived from post-exilic Biblical literature, which portrays both Zerubbabel (a Davidic descendant) and Joshua, the High Priest, as “anointed Ones” (the Hebrew for messiah is meshiach, which literally means “the anointed One”) (see especially Zechariah 6:9–14). Just as these two fifth-century B.C.E. figures shared power, so, it is said, Qumranic authors expected two messiahs, a priestly messiah and a Davidic messiah, who would arise in the Last Day and share authority over a restored Israel, the priestly messiah presiding in matters of Law and ritual and the Davidic scion leading God’s forces into eschatological battle.

The early Christians, in contrast, focused on a single Messiah or Christ (the Greek Christos is a translation of the Hebrew meshiach, anointed One). They expected this person to be a descendant of King David and of course saw Jesus of Nazareth in this role (Mark 8:27–9:02; Acts 2:36). Jesus is presented as a direct descendant of David (Matthew 1:1–16; Luke 2:4). The early Christians clearly regarded Jesus as God’s cosmic agent, who would return in power and glory to rule heaven and earth (Mark 14:61–62; 13:26–27).

Our Qumran text, 4Q521, is, astonishingly, quite close to this Christian concept of the messiah. Our text speaks not only of a single messianic figure (“[the hea]vens and the earth will obey His Messiah, [the sea and all th]at is in them”), but it also describes him in extremely exalted terms, quite like the Christian view of Jesus as a cosmic agent.

That there was in fact an expectation of a single messianic figure at Qumran is really not so surprising. A re-examination of the Qumran literature on this subject leads one to question the two-messiah theory.

As a matter of fact, only once in any Dead Sea Scroll text is the idea of two messiahs stated unambiguously. That statement appears in the nearly complete copy of the Manual of Discipline (1QS), published in the earliest days of Qumran research. Column 9:10–11 states: “They shall be judged by the first statutes, by which the Community members were ruled at first, until there shall come the Prophet and the Messiahs [plural] of Aaron and Israel.”

Understandably (since it is so well preserved and has long been available to researchers), the Manual of Discipline, 1QS, has exercised enormous influence on scholarly conceptions of the Dead Sea Scroll community. But it is now becoming apparent that this copy of the Manual of Discipline is a late and heavily revised version of one or more earlier literary works. The oldest version of the Manual of Discipline (4Q259) lacks these crucial lines.⁶ Thus, it is likely that they were added later and testify to certain developments in Qumranic thinking about the messiah.

061

Other Dead Sea Scroll texts that are often cited in discussions about the idea of two messiahs are ambiguous. For example, column 12:22–23 of the Damascus Covenant says, “This is the rule for the assembly of the camps who walk in it [a gloss: in the Age of Wickedness] until there shall arise the Messiah of Aaron and Israel.” Those who argue for a definite expectation of two messiahs at Qumran understand the Messiah of Aaron and Israel as two distinct figures. But it is equally valid—indeed, preferable grammatically—to understand this phrase as describing one figure who arises from the collective Aaron and Israel. He represents both the priestly and lay elements of the nation. Thus conceived these lines refer back to the first column of the same text which reads, “And in the Age of Wrath he remembered them and caused the root he had planted to sprout from Israel and Aaron” (CD 1:5–7).

In short, there is not much evidence in the previously published scrolls that straightforwardly supports a putative doctrine of two messiahs. What evidence there is reminds us that we must be careful about method. We must also allow for differences between the texts, differences that arise because, while many of the scrolls represent the views of a single movement, they nevertheless come from different places and different times. Further, we must be very careful about “harmonizing” what different texts say.

The newly released texts, mostly from Cave 4, only reinforce this need for caution. Not one speaks of two messiahs (though it must be said that references to any messiah at all are sparse). These texts usually describe a traditional Davidic warrior-prince. For example, the fragmentary 4Q458, which is a sort of apocalypse, refers to the destruction of the “uncircumcised” and then speaks of someone “anointed with the oil of the Kingdom.”⁷ To all appearances this figure is a warrior, but in any case, only one person is described as anointed. The so-called “Son of God” text (4Q246) also conceives of a single messianic war leader.⁸ The author of this Aramaic work writes: “He shall be called the Son of God; they will call him Son of the Most High … He will judge the earth in righteousness … and every nation will bow down to him … with (God’s) help he will make war, and … [God] will give all the peoples into his power.”

Only one of the newly released scrolls presents a different idea about a messianic figure (though it doesn’t actually use the word “messiah”). In this work, known as 4QAaron A,⁹ instead of a Davidic warrior, a marvelous priest is the focus. In describing the priest, the author gives his imagination full rein: “His [the messianic priest’s] wisdom will be great. He will make atonement for all the children of his generation … His word shall be as the word of Heaven [“Heaven” is a circumlocution for “God”] and his teaching shall be according to the will of God. His eternal sun shall burn brilliantly.”¹⁰ This is a somewhat different concept of a messianic figure, but it does not ipso facto suggest a second messiah.

So the text that is the subject of this article (4Q521) is, in speaking of a single Messiah, more the rule than the exception. And even if it is true that some Qumran texts conceived of two messiahs, it is not clear that the idea was either important or central.

Of course it is possible that lost portions of our text (and other new texts) may have described other messianic figures.¹¹ As always, we can only analyze what we actually have.

In 4QAaron A, as in our text, the messianic figure or priest is described in extremely exalted terms, much like the Christian messiah. Perhaps the best way to appreciate the variety of viewpoints in the Qumran corpus is to compare our text, 4Q521, to another Qumran text where the messiah is described in less exalted terms:

Then shall come the Messiah of Israel, and before him shall sit the heads of the thousands of Israel, each according to his standing in their camps and musterings. And all the clan heads of the Community, together with the wise of the holy Community, shall sit before them, each according to his degree of honor. And when they shall assemble for the common table, to eat and to drink the wine, and when the common table shall be set and wine poured for drinking, no one shall reach out his hand to the first loaf of bread, nor the first cup of wine, before the priest; for he shall bless the first bread and the wine and extend his hand over the bread first. Then the Messiah of Israel shall extend his hand … (1QSa 2:14–20).

The Messiah in this text eats and drinks with a small band of followers, among whom he must take the second seat, as it were, to a Priest. This Messiah is described in very human terms. He enters into everyday life and is little more than primus inter pares.

In contrast, the Messiah of our text, 4Q521, controls heaven and earth, heals the wounded and raises the dead. He rules over nature. Even death, that old enemy, cannot stand before him (he will resurrect the dead).

Christians embraced a similarly exalted view of their Messiah as one who ruled heaven and earth. They expected that the entire cosmos would be subjected to him (Philippians 2:9–10; 1 Corinthians 15:24–28). They remembered him as one who had power over the demonic spirits, over disease and death and even over the forces of nature. This exalted view of Jesus is well summed up in the disciples’ exclamation when Jesus calms a storm on the Sea of Galilee: “Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him?” (Mark 4:35–41). Matthew 28:18 is more direct; there Jesus is portrayed as saying, “All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me.”

The messiah of our text is thus much closer to the Christian messiah in this regard than in any previously published text and requires us to re-examine the previously rather restricted views of messianic expectations at Qumran. Our text, 4Q521, also has special significance because it reflects a clear belief in the resurrection of the dead: “He will … resurrect the dead.” Heretofore scholars have heatedly debated whether the people who composed the Dead Sea Scrolls believed in the distinctively Jewish doctrine of the resurrection of the dead. We know that various Jewish groups during the late Second Temple period (200 B.C.E.–70 C.E.) held different views of the afterlife. The first references to the idea of the dead being raised occur only in late portions of the Hebrew Bible (e.g., Daniel 12:1–3). Belief in the resurrection of the dead emerged in certain Jewish circles from the second century B.C.E. down through the first century C.E. Some Jews adopted the doctrine and fervently adhered to it. Others denied it. We see evidence of the dispute in the Apocrypha and in the New Testament (2 Maccabees 12:43–45; 15:11–16; Mark 12:18–27; Acts 23:6–10). Obviously, for early Christians, faith in the resurrection of Jesus, and indeed, of all humankind at the end of days, was a cardinal doctrine (1 Corinthians 15:12; Acts 14:15).

But what about the movement that collected and composed the Dead Sea Scrolls? Did they believe in the resurrection of the dead? Geza Vermes, in his widely circulated book, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English (3rd ed. [New York: Penguin, 1987], p. 56), says that the scrolls never clearly mention the idea, and concludes that resurrection played no 065part in their eschatology. Vermes’s view is commonly reflected in many standard Qumran studies. Of course, Vermes and other scholars had no access to this new text. From our text we now have an unambiguous statement that “raising the dead” was indeed an important expectation of the messianic age among at least some elements of the movement reflected in the scrolls.

Moreover, if this is correct, as we believe it is, then this is the first evidence outside the New Testament for an important aspect of this belief. This Dead Sea Scroll text appears to say that it is the Messiah who will raise the dead. That is the common Christian understanding. But that was not the usual Jewish view when Christianity arose. Those Jews who believed in resurrection apparently thought that it was something God, not the Messiah, would do. For example, in a prayer still recited in synagogues, some portions of which antedate the Roman destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E. (the Shemone Esrai, or 18 Benedictions), we read (in the second benediction):

Lord, you are almighty forever, who makes the dead to live … and keeps your word faithfully to them who sleep in the dust … And you are faithful to make the dead alive. Blessed are you, Lord, who makes the dead alive.

This passage clearly regards resurrection as a divine action. It is God who will resurrect the dead. In our Dead Sea Scroll text, the author presumably would have agreed that power over life and death ultimately comes from God, but he would insert God’s Messiah as the mediator of resurrection. Here the Dead Sea Scroll text stands with earliest Christianity, rather than what emerged as rabbinic Judaism.

The line of our text (line 12) relating to the resurrection of the dead is remarkable for another reason: It contains one of the closest, most direct linguistic parallels to a New Testament text that has ever been discovered in the scrolls. The line reads:

Then he will heal the sick, resurrect the dead, and to the poor [he will] announce glad tidings.

In Matthew and Luke we read that while John the Baptist is in prison, he sends his disciples to ask Jesus, “Are you the coming one, or do we look for another?” In inquiring about Jesus’ messianic identity, John’s disciples want to know what the signs of the true Messiah will be. Jesus answers:

Go and report to John what you have seen and heard: the blind receive sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, the poor have the glad tidings preached to them (Matthew 11:4–5; Luke 7:22–23).

These then are the “signs of the messiah.”

The language of our Dead Sea Scroll text is virtually identical to that in Matthew and Luke. The Christian signs of the messiah were, as it were, foreshadowed in the Jewish literature from Qumran.

The fact that parallels to our Dead Sea Scroll text appears in both Matthew and Luke almost word for word indicates that the passage from the Gospels comes from a very early Christian tradition that scholars call “Q” (from the German word Quelle, meaning “source”). Q is a hypothetical collection of the “Sayings of Jesus” compiled in the middle of the first century, before the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) were written. Q accounts for the many virtually identical sayings in Matthew and Luke; Matthew and Luke both used Q as their source.

The passages from Matthew and Luke then reflect a very early Christian expectation of the signs of the messianic age and the marks for identifying the Messiah. It was a view shared by the Jews represented by our Dead Sea Scroll text, a text that closely matches Matthew and Luke although it was probably composed earlier.

The last phrase of line 12 of our text, proclaiming glad tidings to the poor, is a direct quotation from Isaiah 61:1, which tells of an “anointed One” (i.e., Messiah) who will work various signs before the Day of the Lord. This passage from Isaiah is especially important in the Gospel of Luke. Luke highlights it as the inauguration of the messianic mission of Jesus. According to Luke 4:18, it is this very verse from Isaiah that Jesus reads in his hometown synagogue at Nazareth. It is this very verse that Jesus there claims he fulfills (Luke 4:21)! Thus, both our text and Luke look back to the same Isaianic text as evidence of messianic fulfillment.

Isaiah 61:1 says nothing about this Anointed One “raising the dead,” however. Indeed, in the entire Hebrew Bible there is nothing at all about a messianic figure raising the dead. Yet in both Luke and Matthew (quoting from Q), we find the reference to raising the dead linked to glad tidings for the poor. The two phrases are linked as “signs of the messiah”: “The dead are raised up and the poor have glad tidings preached to them”—precisely as in our Dead Sea Scroll!

With this newly released Dead Sea Scroll fragment, we are taken back to a very early tradition within Palestinian Judaism regarding the “signs of the Messiah,” common to the Dead Sea Scroll movement and early Christianity. This tradition was obviously shared by early Christians, who were still part of the Jewish community.

We may go one step further: The passage from Matthew/Luke is clearly connected with the movement of John the Baptist. It is he who sends the query to Jesus from his prison cell. The tradition we are dealing with here was shared by the community of John the Baptist and the early followers of Jesus. The strong connections between John the Baptist and the Dead Sea Scroll movement have often been noted.¹² With our new text, we are in a better position to speak of the common expectations of a variety of interrelated apocalyptic and baptist groups that fled to the “wilderness” to prepare the “Way of the Lord” (Isaiah 40:3; Luke 3:4; 1QS 8.9 [though this last passage seems to be allegorical]). They appear to have shared a specific set of expectations, and they draw in strikingly similar ways upon a common core of prophetic texts from the Hebrew Bible. This new Dead Sea Scroll text provides a direct and very significant example of a common messianic hope among the followers of John the Baptist, Jesus and (so it appears) the Dead Sea Scrolls’ Teacher of Righteousness.

Among the most intriguing of the newly released Dead Sea Scrolls is a fragment that was originally called “On Resurrection.” It was assigned for publication to Abbe Jean Starcky, who died in 1988 without publishing it. After Starcky’s death, it was given to Father Emile Puech of the École Biblique in Jerusalem, who is the present “official editor.”1 Shortly before the Biblical Archaeology Society published its facsimile edition of previously unpublished scroll photographs in 1991,2 a photograph and preliminary translation of this text appeared in BAR.3 The official editors have now changed the name of this text to the […]