Sunday Psalm Studies: Psalms of Solomon 17-18 (Part 3)

Psalm 17 (of Solomon), continued

The bulk of the Messianic Song of Ps Sol 17 was examined in Part 2 of this study. The Song consists of two main stanzas (vv. 26-34a, 34b-42), with an introduction (vv. 21-25) and conclusion (vv. 43-44). The conclusion will be treated here, before turning to the 18th Psalm.

Messianic Song: Conclusion (vv. 43-44)
Verse 43

“His utterances (are) shown pure by fire,
over prized gold (of) the first (order);
in (the) gatherings he will thoroughly judge (the) tribes
of a people made holy.
His words (are) as (the) words of (the) holy (one)s
in (the) midst of peoples made holy!”

The Messiah’s rule over the Kingdom of God’s people, during the eschatological New Age of Israel’s restoration, was described in some detail in Stanza 2. Here in the conclusion the focus is on his role as judge in the midst of the people. He will “judge thoroughly/throughout” (vb diakri/nw), with words that are holy and pure.

Verse 43 is comprised of three pairs of couplets, the last of which (e-f) is parallel to the first two (a-d). The first line of the third couplet (e) matches the first couplet (ab):

    • “His utterances (are) shown pure by fire,
      over prized gold (of) the first (order)”
    • “His words (are) as (the) words of (the) holy (one)s”

The plural nouns r(h/mata (“utterances”) and lo/goi (“words”) are parallel, with identical meaning. The two comparisons are likewise similar in meaning—both emphasize the holiness and purity of the Messiah’s words. The first comparison, with purified gold, is traditional (Psalm 12:7[6]; Mal 3:3; cf. also Isa 48:10; Jer 9:7; Dan 11:35; Zech 13:9); the eschatological aspect of this imagery is notable in Mal 3:2-3; Dan 11:35 and Zech 13:9. The verb puro/w means “be/set on fire”; its use here (as a perfect participle, viz., a verbal adjective) has the contextual meaning “shown/proven pure by fire”, “tested/refined by fire”. The second comparison focuses of the specific attribute of holiness. Here the substantive plural adjective a%gioi (“holy ones”) likely refers to the divine/heavenly beings (i.e., angels), though it can also refer to human beings. Indeed, for the Community of the Qumran texts, there was a direct correlation between the “holy ones” on earth (i.e., the members of the Community) and those of heaven (the angels); cf. Ps 89:6-8 [5-7]. At the end time, the heavenly ones will join together with those on earth. The community of the Psalms of Solomon may have held similar eschatological ideas regarding their own religious self-identity and place in the coming New Age.

The Messiah will utter his holy words in the midst of a holy people—viz., the faithful ones of Israel/Judah who will be “made holy” (vb a(gia/zw) by God in the New Age. The use of the plural la/oi (“peoples”) in the final line may reflect a stylistic variation; more likely, it is meant to distinguish the tribes of the people (cf. the parallel in the second couplet [cd]), though it may also allude to the eschatological expectation that the other nations (viz., those who survive the Judgment) will likewise be purified, joining together with Israel in the worship of YHWH during the New Age.

Verse 44

“Happy (are) the (one)s coming to be (born) in those days—
to see the good (thing)s of Yisrael,
in (the) gathering together of (the) tribes,
which God shall do!”

The Song closes with a beatitude, using the traditional formula beginning with the adjective maka/rio$ (“happy, blessed” = Hebrew yr@v=a^); cf. my earlier note on this formula. The blessing is for all those people who come to be born during the time of the Kingdom, under the Messiah’s rule, in the New Age of Israel’s restoration.

Conclusion of the Psalm (vv. 45-46)
Verse 45

“May God make His mercy come quickly upon Yisrael!
May He rescue us from (the) uncleanness of profane enemies!”

The Psalm concludes with a prayer, similar to the one at the beginning of the Messianic Song (vv. 21ff), asking for YHWH to send His Messiah and thus to usher in the New Age of restoration for His people. The hope that this will occur quickly (vb taxu/nw) almost certainly reflects the eschatological expectation of the psalmist (and of the community that produced and used the Psalms)—viz., that the coming of the Messiah will, indeed, happen very soon.

Verse 46

“(The) Lord—He (is) our King into the Age and still (further)!”

The final line of the Psalms echoes the initial line (in v. 1), with a theological declaration that YHWH is the true King of His people. The Davidic Messiah, who will rule over the Kingdom on earth in the New Age, is only a vassal-servant of the Supreme King, functioning as His representative among the people. This royal theology is present in many of the canonical Psalms that we have studied, and it informs much of the Messianic thought among Jews and early Christians as well.

Psalm 18 (of Solomon)

The 18th Psalm (of Solomon), the last of the collection, is also a Messianic Psalm, though considerably shorter and narrower in scope than the 17th. In many ways, it summarizes the Messianic expectation and eschatological hope expressed in the other Psalms. The superscription designates it as a Psalm “yet (again) of the Anointed Lord” (e&ti tou= xristou= kuri/ou). It opens, much like Ps Sol 17, with a hymn to YHWH (vv. 1-4), followed by a prayer (v. 5), and a blessing for those who will be born during the coming Messianic Age (vv. 6-9, cf. 17:44, above). The Psalm closes with a hymnic benediction (vv. 10-12), in which the expected faithfulness of God’s people is compared (implicitly) to the obedience of the heavenly bodies.

Hymn to YHWH (vv. 1-4)
Verse 1

“Lord, your mercy (is) upon the works of your hands into the Age,
your goodness over a rich gift upon Yisrael!”

The opening hymn praises YHWH for His attributes and characteristic actions—particularly those demonstrating His faithfulness, devotion, and covenant loyalty toward His people. Like all human beings, the Israelite/Judean people are the “works of (His) hands” (viz., YHWH as Creator); but He specifically established Israel as His people, by means of a special covenant with them.

Verse 2

“Your eyes are looking upon them, and not (one) of them will be lacking;
your ears are listening to (the) need of (the) poor (offered) in hope.”

YHWH regularly shows care and attention toward His people, by looking upon them (i.e., watching, overseeing) so that their needs will be met; none of His faithful ones will be left wanting or in need (see, e.g., Ps 23:1; 34:10-11 [9-10]; 37:25). Similarly, He hears their prayer when they make a plea or request to Him in their need; this is the significance of the noun de/hsi$—viz., a request for some need, or based on a need that a person has. The righteous make such requests “in hope”, with the expectation that God will answer them. As often in the canonical Psalms, the righteous are identified with the poor; here, the attribute is more properly related to their situation in time of need.

Verse 3

“Your judgments upon all the earth (are made) with mercy,
and your love (is) upon (the) seed of Abraham, (the) sons of Yisrael.”

As the Sovereign Ruler (King and Judge) over all the universe, YHWH makes judgments upon/over the entire earth (viz., all humankind). Even in the judgments that He makes with regard to the other nations, YHWH shows kindness and mercy to them, but He demonstrates a special love toward the people of Israel. The expression “son(s) of Israel” is in apposition to “seed of Abraham”. The more difficult reading is the genitive singular ui(ou (“of a son”), referring to Abraham as a “son of Israel”, lit. “(the) seed of Abraham, a son of Israel”. However, other manuscripts have an accusative plural (ui(ou/$) which is more fitting to the context of the verse—viz., the “sons of Israel” are designated as the “seed of Abraham” (i.e., Abraham’s descendants); cf. Wright, p. 202. The reference to Abraham serves as an implicit allusion to the covenant between YHWH and Israel (established initially with Abraham).

Verse 4

“Your child-training upon us (is) as a firstborn (son), an only (child),
to turn a hearing soul away from lack of learning in lack of knowledge.”

YHWH’s love for His people is like that of a father for an only son (monogenh/$), who would also be, of course, his firstborn. On the idea of the Israelite people as God’s son (or children), cf. Exod 4:22-23; Deut 32:6, 19; Hos 1:10 [2:1]; 11:1; Isa 43:6; 64:8[7]; Jer 31:9. The concept came to be applied to believers in Christ, quite apart from any ethnic distinction, especially by Paul (e.g., Gal 3:26; 4:5-6; Rom 8:14-15, 19, 23) and in the Johannine writings (where te/kna, “offspring, children” is always used, Jn 1:12; 11:52; 1 Jn 3:1-2, 10; 5:2). As a loving parent, YHWH trains His child, expressed by the customary noun paidei/a; such training includes instruction and discipline, which is necessary in order to keep the child from being without proper learning (a)maqi/a) and, as a result, acting with ignorance (lit. “lack of knowledge”, a&gnoia). The idea of God disciplining His people, as a parent does to his/her child, appears frequently in Scripture—e.g., Deut 8:5; 2 Sam 7:14; Job 5:17; Ps 94:12; 118:18; Prov 3:11; Jer 31:18; Heb 12:5-11; Rev 3:19.

It is the “hearing” (i.e., obedient) soul that responds to discipline, and thus receives proper training; some manuscripts read u(phkoon (“hearing under [obedience]”) and others eu)hkoon (“good/well hearing”), but the meaning is essentially the same (cf. Wright, p. 204).

Prayer (vv. 5)

“May God cleanse Yisrael for (the) day of mercy with a good account [i.e., blessing],
for (the) day gathered out [i.e., chosen], with (the) ruling of His Anointed!”

The prayer here in v. 5, as in Ps Sol 17 (vv. 21ff), anticipates the coming of the Messiah, which will usher in the New Age of Israel’s restoration. The psalmist specifically asks YHWH to cleanse His people (Israel) in preparation for that day, a day expected to come very soon. It is with a “good account” (or word spoken, eu)logi/a), i.e., blessing, that God will bring about this cleansing (cf. John 15:3). The day when Messiah comes is a day specially chosen by God, “gathered out” from all others.

Blessing for the Messianic Age (vv. 6-9)
Verse 6

“Happy (are) the (one)s coming to be (born) in those days—
to see the good (thing)s of (the) Lord that He will do for the coming generation,”

This section begins with a beatitude formula that closely resembles the one in 17:44 (see above).

Verse 7

“under (the) rod of (the) Anointed Lord’s child-training—
in (the) fear of his God,
in (the) wisdom of (the) Spirit,
and of righteousness and strength—”

The blessings that YHWH will provide for His people during the New Age will occur under the leadership and rule of the Messiah. As God’s representative (and vassal-servant), it is the Messiah who will carry out the training of the people (as God’s children); again, the noun and motif of paidei/a (“child-training”) is used (cf. verse 4, above).

The Messiah will be faithful and devoted to YHWH, as indicated by the expression “in (the) fear of his God” (i.e., fear of YHWH), cf. 17:40. For the attributes of wisdom, righteous, and strength, cf. the Messianic Song of Ps Sol 17 (vv. 22ff, 26ff, 28, 32ff, 36-40). The wording here, as at several points in Ps Sol 17, is inspired by Isa 11:2-4ff (regarded as a Messianic prophecy by Jews and early Christians alike).

Verse 8

“to set men straight in works of righteousness, in (the) fear of God,
to make them all stand (straight) in (the) sight of the Lord—”

The discipline that the Messiah provides for God’s people will ensure that they can remain on a “straight path” (vb “set/put down straight”, kateuqu/nw), and that they will be able to stand (vb “set down”, so as to be stationed in place, kaqi/sthmi) before God, in His sight. I have followed the reading e)nw/pion (“in the eyes/sight of”), though other manuscripts repeat e)n fw/bw| (“in fear [of]”) from the first line rather than e)nw/pion; cf. Wright, p. 206. As a holy and righteous people, the restored Israel of the New Age will all produce “works of righteousness”, i.e., their actions will be right and holy.

Verse 9

“a good generation in (the) fear of God in (the) days of mercy!”
Interlude [dia/yalma]

The coming of the Messiah will be a “day [sing.] of mercy” (v. 5), but the period of his reign—viz., the New Age of the Kingdom—will constitute “days [plur.] of mercy”. All of the people born during this period will themselves constitute a “good generation” —the noun genea/ (translated “generation”) denoting the people who “come to be (born)” during a certain period of time (cf. verse 6; 17:44). They will be good and righteous, fearing and serving God with faithfulness and devotion, just like their leader the Messiah (v. 7; 17:40).

For the indicator dia/yalma, comparable to Hebrew hl*s# (Selah), cf. on 17:29 (in Part 2 of this study).

Closing Benediction (vv. 10-12)
Verse 10

“Great (is) our God and (to be held) in honor,
putting down house in (the) highest (place)s—
the (One) arranging throughout (the) lights in (their) passage,
for times of (the) hours from days to days;
and they have not stepped aside from (the) path that He ordered for them!”

The closing benediction of the Psalm takes the form of a hymn to YHWH, praising His power and faithfulness in His role as Creator (and King) of the universe. As King, He dwells in the highest places (above the heavens), from where He governs and orders all things in the cosmos. The focus is upon the heavenly bodies (lights/luminaries, fwsth/r plur.)—i.e., the sun, moon, and stars of the heavens. He arranges and sets them all in order (vb diata/ssw), so that they move and appear in a regular manner, each body having a particular mode of movement (porei/a), and a passageway or ‘course’ through which they move; cf. Judg 5:20; Psalm 19:6-7 [5-6]. As a result, human beings can utilize them reliably as a way to track the hours of the day and the days of the months and years. Subservient to the King (and His power/authority), the heavenly bodies continue to move just as they were ordered (vb e)nte/llw, denoting a charge or duty placed on someone). The bodies have continuously maintained their course and have not once “stepped alongside” away from their directed path; cf. Gen 1:16; Psalm 8:4[3]; 136:9; 147:4; 148:3ff, and on the fixed boundaries that the created bodies cannot cross, cf. Psalm 74:17; 104:9.

Verse 11

“In (the) fear of God their path (is), according to each day,
from which day God founded them, even until (the) Age.”

This couplet reaffirms the theological-cosmological point made in v. 10 (see above), emphasizing that the heavenly bodies are obedient to God’s command (“in [the] fear of God”), just like the Messiah and the holy/faithful ones of His people. In this regard, the behavior of the heavenly bodies serves as a type-parallel for the “holy ones” on earth. God established them (at the creation), just as He established His people for the New Age (making them holy and guiding/training them in righteousness). The heavenly bodies are obedient servants of God throughout the former Age (and into the New); like the heavenly beings (i.e., angels), they are the faithful residents of heaven, while human beings (i.e., God’s people) are the faithful ones on earth.

Verse 12

“And (so) they have not gone astray
from (the) day He founded them,
from (the) generations (of the) beginning
they have not stood away from their paths,
if not (as) God gave the charge to them
by (the) order of His servants!”

The use of the heavenly bodies as an exemplar for human beings (i.e., God’s people) becomes clearer with the use of the verb plana/w (“go astray”), as also by the reference to “generations” past (the same noun, genea/, occurs in vv. 6 and 9, referring to the holy/faithful generation of the Messianic Age). The repeated emphasis on the heavenly bodies remaining in/on their right paths naturally brings to mind the path/walking motif familiar from Wisdom literature, including in the Psalms (see esp. throughout Psalm 119). The obedient servant of YHWH follows the path that He has laid out.

The final two lines point out that the only time that the heavenly bodies depart from their ordained path is when God specifically commands it. The last line is almost certainly an allusion to Josh 10:12-14 (cf. also, possibly, Isa 38:8).

*    *    *    *    *

This brings to a close our series exploring selected deuterocanonical and extra-canonical Psalms. Beginning with our next study, we will return to the canonical Scriptures, looking at some of the compositions that may be regarded as among the oldest Psalms (insofar as it can be determined), both within and outside of the Psalter.

    • References above marked “Wright” are to Robert B. Wright, The Psalms of Solomon: A Critical Edition of the Greek Text, Jewish and Christian Texts in Contexts and Related Studies, vol. 1 (T & T Clark: 2007). Those marked “Wright OTP” are to the same author’s annotated translation (with introduction) in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha [OTP], Volume 2, ed. James H. Charlesworth, Anchor Bible Reference Library [ABRL] (1985), pp. 639-70.

Sunday Psalm Studies: Psalms of Solomon 17-18 (Part 2)

Psalm 17 (of Solomon), continued

The first portions of the 17th Psalm of Solomon were discussed in Part 1 of this study: (1) the Hymn to YHWH, vv. 1-10, and (2) the transitional/expository verses 11-20. They describe the present time of distress for God’s people and anticipate the coming of the appointed servant (i.e., the royal/Davidic Messiah) who will rescue the righteous/faithful ones and establish God’s Kingdom on earth. This eschatological scenario is expounded in detail in vv. 21-44, which comprise a Messianic Song, in two main stanzas (vv. 26-34a, 34b-42), with an introduction (vv. 21-25) and conclusion (vv. 43-44).

Messianic Song: Introduction (vv. 21-25)
Verse 21

“See, O Lord, and raise up for them
their King, (the) son of David—
at the time which you (have) seen, O God,
to reign as king over Yisrael your servant!”

The Messianic Song begins with a call to YHWH, making this Song function as a prayer-Psalm. The author/protagonist asks God to cause the royal/Davidic Messiah (“son of David”) to “stand up” (i.e., rise up) and appear on the scene. As a descendent of David, this person will be heir to the promises made by YHWH to David (cf. verse 4). Since the end of the Davidic dynasty, other rulers (such as the Hasmoneans) have reigned as imposters over the people; the throne of the Kingdom does not properly belong to them, but only to a rightful ruler from David’s line (v. 6).

On the designation “son of David” and its Messianic significance in the New Testament and among early Christians (as applied to the person of Jesus Christ), see Part 8 of the series “Yeshua the Anointed”.

Verses 22-24

“Gird him underneath (with the) strength—
to break apart (the) unrighteous rulers;
to cleanse Yerušalaim from (the) nations
trampling (her) down in destruction;
in wisdom (and) in righteousness
to thrust out sinners from (the) inheritance;
to rub out (the) overweening (pride) of (the) sinner
as (if it were) a potter’s vessel;
with a rod of iron
to grind together their substance;
to destroy (the) lawbreaking nations
with (the) word of his mouth!”

The psalmist also asks YHWH to give strength (i)sxu/$) to the Davidic Messiah so that he will be able to accomplish his end-time mission. The verb used is u(pozw/nnumi (“gird under[neath], undergird”), alluding to the girding of one’s loins (for battle). The phrasing comes from Psalm 18:33[32]— “The Mighty (One is) the (One) girding me (with) strength” —even though the actual wording in the LXX differs slightly, using perizw/nnumi (“gird around”) and du/nami$ (“power”): “God (is) the (One) girding me round about (with) power”.

The purpose for this strengthening by YHWH—viz., the accomplishment of the Messiah’s mission—is expressed by a series of clausal statements government by verbal infinitives (that is, infinitives of purpose/result):

    • “to break apart [vb qrau/w] the unrighteous rulers”
    • “to cleanse [vb kaqari/zw] Jerusalem…” (reading kaqari/sai rather than the imperative kaqa/rison; cf. Wright, p. 188)
    • “to thrust out [vb e)cwqe/w] the sinners…”
    • “to rub out [vb e)ktri/bw] the pride/arrogance of the sinner”
    • “to grind [lit. rub] together [vb suntri/bw] their substance”
    • “to destroy [vb o)leqreu/w] the nations…”

The lines in vv. 23b-24a have a chiastic structure that is clearly drawn from Psalm 2:9:

    • to rub out (the) overweening (pride) of (the) sinner
      • as (if it were) a potter’s vessel;
      • with a rod of iron
    • to grind together their substance;

The chiasm is bracketed by the verbal infinitives of the related verbs e)ktri/bw (“rub out”, i.e., wipe out, destroy) and suntri/bw (“rub together”, i.e., “grind together”, crush, pulverize). In the LXX the verb suntri/bw is used to translate Hebrew Jp^n` (I), “smash to pieces”, but the verb in the first line of v. 9 is misread as hu*r* (“shepherd”, Grk poimane/w) rather than uu^r* (II) “smash, shatter”. The Greek of the Pss Sol here more accurately reflects the Hebrew of Ps 2:9.

In verse 24, the allusion to Ps 2:9 is blended with that of Isaiah 11:4, as the “rod of iron” wielded by the Davidic ruler becomes the “rod of his mouth”, with which he slays the wicked. Here the Pss Sol agrees with the LXX in rendering Hebrew fb#v# (“rod, staff”) with lo/go$ (“word”). Psalm 2 and Isaiah 11:1ff both came to be viewed as Messianic prophecies, which early Christians also applied to the person of Jesus Christ—cf. the use of Ps 2:9 in Rev 2:27; 12:5; 19:15, and Isa 11:4 in 2 Thess 2:8. The prophecies allude to the idea that the royal/Davidic Messiah will play a central role in ushering in God’s end-time Judgment upon the nations (and the wicked).

Verse 25

“With his threatening (appearance the) nations (are) to flee from his face,
and (he is) to show sinners (guilty) by (the) word of their hearts!”

The Messiah’s appearing is thought to be in a threatening manner (a)peilh/, “threat”) so that the nations will flee in fear. The sinful/wicked ones will realize their guilt and understand the punishment that is coming upon them. The Messiah’s presence will have the effect of showing sinners to be guilty (vb e)le/gxw). Cf. John 16:8-11; indeed, the Gospel of John expresses the idea that the world will be judged based on how it responds to Jesus (the Messiah) while he is present—whether personally (incarnate on earth), or manifest through the presence of the Spirit (cf. also 3:19; 5:22ff; 9:39; 12:31, 47-48).

There is a clear parallel between the expression “by the word of his mouth” (v. 24) and “by the word of their hearts” (v. 25).

Messianic Song: First Stanza (vv. 26-34a)
Verse 26

“And he will gather together a holy people
whom he will lead forth in righteousness;
and he will judge (the) tribes of (the) people
made holy under [i.e., by] (the) Lord his God.”

The wicked will be slain and punished in the Judgment (vv. 23-25); this applies both to the nations and to the wicked/sinful ones among the Israelite/Jewish people. By contrast, those who are righteous and faithful will be kept safe and gathered together (vb suna/gw) as a “holy people”. These people will be led by the Davidic Messiah as their ruler (king and judge). It is God, not the Messiah, who sanctifies the people and makes them holy; once purified, they can be governed by the Messiah in righteousness. It is likely that the community of the Psalms (of Solomon), much like the Qumran Community, viewed themselves as representing the holy ones of the end times; if not exclusively so, they certainly would have identified themselves prominently as belonging to this “holy people”. This sense of religious self-identity, with a strong eschatological orientation, was very much shared by the early Christian communities as well.

Verses 27-28

“And he will not allow unrighteousness to lodge in their midst any more,
and he will not let dwell with them any man knowing evil.
For he shall know them, that all of them are sons of God,
and he will apportion them in their tribes upon the land,
and (the one) dwelling along and (the) foreigner shall not dwell alongside them any more.”

This poetic unit is framed by the idea that unrighteousness will no longer (ou) + e&ti) dwell in the midst of the holy people (v. 6). This includes foreigners and temporary residents (i.e., resident aliens, etc.)—anyone who does not truly and properly belong to the holy people (viz., the holy ones among the twelve tribes of Israel). At the center of these five lines is the declaration that the Messianic Ruler will know who the holy people are—the ones who truly are the “sons of God”. For a similar relationship between believers in Christ (as the sons/children of God) and the Messiah (Christ), cf. Jn 1:12; 11:52; 1 Jn 3:1, 10; 5:2; Rom 8:14, 16, 19; 9:8; Gal 3:26; Phil 2:15. And, for Christ knowing who the true believers (i.e., sons of God) are, cf. Jn 5:42; 6:64; 8:37f, 55; 10:14ff, 27; 13:11, 18; 14:7ff; 15:21; 16:3; cf. also Matt 7:23.

Verses 29-30a

“He will judge (the) peoples and nations in (the) wisdom of his righteousness,
Interlude [dia/yalma]
and he will hold (the) peoples of (the) nations (as) slaves to him under his yoke.”

The idea that the Messiah will rule and judge people in/with right(eous)ness (dikaiosu/nh) reflects the right(eous) character of God Himself as King and Judge (Psalm 50:6; 96:13; 98:9; Isa 51:5, etc.). The wording here is probably inspired by Isa 11:4 (see on v. 24 above), with Isa 11:1-9 again being treated as a Messianic prophecy. In early Christian thought, Jesus Christ was also expected to judge the world/nations “in righteousness” at the end-time (Acts 17:31).

The Greek term dia/yalma means something like “(partway) through (the) musical composition”, indicating a pause or musical interlude. It corresponds to the Hebrew hl*s# (Selah), and its inclusion here is probably done in imitation of the canonical Psalms; it does not seem particularly integral to the stanza or to the Song as a whole. In fact, one could treat v. 29 and v. 30a together as a poetic unit, as I have done above.

Verses 30b-31

“And he will glorify the Lord in a (most) distinguished place of all the earth,
and (so) he shall cleanse Yerušalaim in holiness as from (the) beginning,
(for the) coming of (the) nations from (the) end(s) of the earth to see His glory,
bearing (as) gifts her sons (that) had been thrust out,
and to see the glory of (the) Lord (with) which God glorified her.”

The restoration of the Kingdom in the New Age entails the cleansing and sanctification of Jerusalem as the holy city (and capital of the Kingdom), restoring it to the status that it had earlier times, and even giving to it a greater glory.

The Messiah’s rule over the nations involves their coming to Jerusalem, for two purposes: (1) returning the exiled Israelites/Judeans to the holy land, and (2) paying homage to the King (Messiah) and giving worship to YHWH. In this regard, the poet of the Song is drawing upon eschatological prophecies (dealing with the post-exilic period and the restoration of Israel) such as Isaiah 2:2-4 par, and chap. 60; cf. also the Psalms in the collection of 93-100. It is clear that the people of the nations have not all been destroyed in the Judgment; a number of them survived or were spared, and it is understood that they will join with Israel in worshiping YHWH and submitting to the rule of the King Messiah.

Verse 32

“And he (will be) a righteous king over them, taught by God,
and there will not be (any) unrighteousness in his days in the midst of them;
for (they) all (shall be) holy, and their king (the) Anointed Lord.”

In the New Age of Israel’s restoration, both the King (Messiah) and the people will be righteous and holy (cf. Jer 23:5). Here, the Davidic Ruler is specifically called by the title “(the) Anointed” (xristo/$), juxtaposed with the title “Lord” (ku/rio$). This joining of titles was similarly applied to the person of Jesus by early Christians (Luke 2:11; Acts 2:36; Rom 1:4, et al.).

Verses 33-34a

“He will not place (his) trust upon horse and rider and bow,
nor will he multiply unto him(self) gold and silver for war,
and in many (warriors) he will not gather hope for a day of war.
(The) Lord Himself is his King—
the hope of the (one) powerful in hope of God!”

The Messiah, though understood as the ruler of a real (socio-political) kingdom on earth, does not exercise power in reliance on ordinary political or military means. This reflects an important theological emphasis in the canonical Psalms—e.g., 20:8[7]; 33:17; 44:7[6]; 147:10f; cf. Isa 31:1; 36:9; Prov 21:31.

In accordance with the ancient Israelite royal theology, the human king is a vassal-servant of YHWH (the Supreme King), who gives strength and protection to His loyal servant in time of need (in battle, etc.). Since the Messiah trusts (i.e., has his hope) in YHWH as his King, he becomes powerful because of this hope, since he has YHWH’s strength on his side.

Messianic Song: Second Stanza (vv. 34b-42)
Verses 34b-35

“And he will have mercy on the nations (who stand) in fear in his sight;
for he will strike (the) earth with the word of his mouth into the Age,
(and) will bless (the) people of (the) Lord in wisdom with a good heart!”

The first stanza essentially described the Messiah’s establishment of his rule in the Kingdom of the New Age; now, in the second stanza, more detail is given to the rule itself—that is, the government of the Messianic Kingdom.

As long as the remaining people of the nations revere YHWH and submit to him (lit., are “in fear in his sight”), the Messiah will show mercy (and favor) to them. Verse 35a essentially declares that the ruling power which the Messiah displayed in the great Judgment (v. 24, citing Isa 11:4) will continue throughout the New Age (“into the Age”). The description of striking the earth “with the word of his mouth” alludes again to Isa 11:4 (LXX).

The mercy/favor shown to the nations (i.e., the devout/faithful ones) is paralleled by the blessing that he speaks (vb. eu)loge/w) to God’s people (viz., the faithful ones of Israel/Judah).

Verse 36

“And he (himself will be) clean from sin,
(in order) to rule a great people;
he will show rulers (when they are wrong) and will take out sinners
by (the) strength of his word.”

The holiness and righteousness of the Messiah is expressed here in v. 36a in terms of being clean (i.e., pure) from sin; God has made him to be so in order to “rule a great people”. The parallels with the orthodox view of the sinlessness of Jesus Christ are obvious (cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Heb 4:15; 7:26; 1 Pet 2:22; 1 John 3:5).

Verse 36b represents an expository development of the statement in v. 35b (with its allusion to Isa 11:4). The Messiah’s striking of the earth with “the word of his mouth” involves: (1) the judgment and rebuke of people (even of chiefs and rulers), showing them when they are wrong (vb e)le/gxw, cf. verse 25); and (2) the punishment of sinners, which means the removal of them (vb e)cai/rw, “take out”) from the midst of the holy people.

Verses 37-38

“And he will not be without strength in his days, (relying) upon his God,
for God made him to be
powerful in work by (His) holy Spirit,
and wise in (the) counsel of understanding,
with strength and righteousness.
Indeed, (the) blessing of (the) Lord (remains) with him in strength,
and (so) he will not (ever) be without strength.”

The Divine strength mentioned in v. 22 (see above) possessed by the Messiah remains active throughout his reign (cf. v. 34a)—a point that is further developed here, alluding again to Isa 11:2ff.

Verses 37-38 comprise a distinct poetic unit, as is clear from the framing use of the double-negative idiom ou) + vb a)sqene/w, “he will not be without strength”, so as to express all the more emphatically the Messiah’s strength.

Verses 39-40

“His hope (rests) upon (the) Lord—
and (so) who is able (to prevail) against him?
Strong in his works and mighty in (the) fear of God,
(he is) shepherding the flock of (the) Lord
in trust and righteousness,
and will not allow (there) to be a lack of strength
among them in their pasture.”

As in vv. 33-34a, it is emphasized that the Messiah trusts (i.e., has his hope) in YHWH, who is the source of his strength. After the type-pattern of David (1 Sam 16:11ff; 17:20, 34ff; 2 Sam 5:2; Ps 78:71-72), the Messiah will act like a shepherd, guiding and protecting the people (as a flock). This imagery draws upon ancient Near Eastern royal symbolism, as well as the theological idea (in Israel) of YHWH as the Shepherd of His people—e.g., Psalm 23; 28:9; 80:1ff; Isa 40:11; Jer 31:10; Ezek 34:15. For the specific application of this line of tradition to the Davidic Messiah, see Micah 5:1-3 [2-4]; Jer 23:1-8; Ezek 34:23-24; and, as applied to Jesus, Matt 2:6 (citing Mic 5:1[2]); Mk 14:27 (citing Zech 13:7); cf. John 10:2ff, 11ff; Heb 13:20; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:4; Rev 7:17.

Verse 41

“In holiness he shall lead them all,
and there will not be among them (any) overweening (pride)
(for them) to exercise power against (any) among them.”

The Messiah will be holy, sanctified by God, and he will lead the people (also made holy) together in holiness. I read o(sio/thti (“holiness”, cf. Wright, p. 198), rather than the variant i)so/thti (“equality”), though the latter could certainly relate to the situation implied in lines 2-3. Indeed, society in the Messianic Kingdom of the New Age will be governed by justice and equality. All of the people will think and act in an upright and humble manner, with no u(perhfani/a—that is, an “overblown/overinflated” sense of oneself, an overweening pride/arrogance (such as characterizes the wicked/nations, v. 23). As a result, no one will exercise power against another (vb katadunasteu/w) in an oppressive manner.

Verse 42

“This (is) the good appearance of (the) king of Yisrael,
which God knew (beforehand),
(so as) to raise him up over (the) house of Yisrael
to train it as (His) child!”

In these final couplets, the person and reign of the Messiah is summarized with the characteristic of eu)pre/peia—lit., “a good appearance”, implying beauty, dignity, and honor/majesty, particularly in this royal context (cf. Psalm 50[49]:2 LXX). YHWH knew the character and nature of the Messiah beforehand and understood how he would lead and govern the people; cf. the wording in v. 21 (above): “at the time which you (have) seen [i.e., known], O God”.

The use of the verb a)ni/sthmi (“stand up”, in a transitive-causative sense, “make stand up”, i.e., “raise up”) serves as an inclusio with the earlier occurrence in v. 21 (see above), effectively framing the entire Song. The psalmist called on YHWH to raise up the Messiah, and here, at the end of the Song, he expresses the belief and expectation that this will be done—viz., that the Davidic Ruler anointed by God will soon appear to usher in the New Age of God’s Kingdom on earth.

The holy people (v. 32) of the New Age are called “sons of God” (v. 27), and so they are to be trained and guided as God’s children. The verb paideu/w (“raise/train a child [pai=$]”) is used for this activity, in which the Messiah will play a leading role.

*    *    *    *    *

The remainder of the 17th Psalm of Solomon, along with the 18th, will be discussed in the concluding Part 3 of this study.

    • References above marked “Wright” are to Robert B. Wright, The Psalms of Solomon: A Critical Edition of the Greek Text, Jewish and Christian Texts in Contexts and Related Studies, vol. 1 (T & T Clark: 2007). Those marked “Wright OTP” are to the same author’s annotated translation (with introduction) in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha [OTP], Volume 2, ed. James H. Charlesworth, Anchor Bible Reference Library [ABRL] (1985), pp. 639-70.

Sunday Psalm Studies: Psalms of Solomon 17-18 (Part 1)

The Psalms of Solomon (Pss 17-18)

For our final selection from the prominent deuterocanonical and extra-canonical Psalms, I have chosen the last two (viz., the 17th and 18th) Psalms of the collection known as the Psalms of Solomon. The attribution of these Psalms to Solomon (in superscriptions that resemble those of the canonical Psalms) is regarded as pseudepigraphic by virtually all commentators. Like David, Solomon was noted in the historical tradition for his literary-poetic output (1 Kings 5:12-14 [4:32-34]), and thus he was a natural figure to whom different kinds of wisdom and poetic texts might be attributed. For example, in both Pss Sol 17 and 18, the superscription reads “A yalmo/$ (belonging) to Solomon”, while 17 adds “with a song” (meta\ w|dh=$). The noun yalmo/$ properly denotes music played (lit. “plucked”) on the harp, or, specifically, a song sung to music on the harp.

This collection of eighteen Psalms survives only in Greek and Syriac translation, but it generally recognized that they were originally composed in Hebrew, as argued and demonstrated by earlier commentators such as Ryle/James and Gray in their critical editions (cf. Wright, p. 12; OTP, p. 640). In this regard, note the 1998 dissertation by R. J. Blackburn, “Hebrew Poetic Devices in the Greek Text of the Psalms of Solomon” (Temple University), and the study by R. R. Hann, The Manuscript History of the Psalms of Solomon, Septuagint and Cognate Studies 13 (1982); and cf. R.A. Martin, Syntactical Evidence of Semitic Sources in Greek Documents, Septuagint and Cognate Studies 3 (1974). A few possible “semiticisms” (i.e., “hebraisms”) and translational errors (indicating translation from Hebrew into Greek and Syriac) will be mentioned in the notes.

Even though the Greek and Syriac manuscripts of the Psalms of Solomon date from the 10th century A.D. (or later), there is evidence that they were composed and in circulation much earlier (cf. Wright, pp. 1-7; OTP, pp. 640-1). The Codex Alexandrinus (5th century) lists the Psalms in its catalog, after the Old and New Testament (and the Clementine epistles), though the leaves which must have contained the Psalms have not survived. They are similarly listed, as prominent deuterocanonical or extracanonical writings, in two 6th century catalogs (the Synopsis of the Holy Scriptures by Ps-Athanasius, and the list of [sixty] books of Scripture in Anastasius Sinaita’s Questions and Responses). The close similarity between the 11th Psalm of Solomon and the 5th chapter of Baruch has also been noted (cf. Wright, pp. 3-4), suggesting a possible 1st century A.D. date.

More significant for commentators are the vivid historical references, especially in the 2nd, 8th, and 17th Psalms (see below), indicating a proximity in time to key historical-political events of the 1st century B.C.—most notably, the Roman invasion of Judea by Pompey (who captured Jerusalem in 63 B.C.), and the siege of Jerusalem in 37 B.C. by Herod the Great (and the Roman general Sosius) which led to the final destruction of the Hasmoneans (in 30 B.C.). It is generally thought that the Psalms of the collection were mainly composed in the mid-late 1st century B.C., with the collection (largely in the form that has come down to us) having been completed by the early-mid 1st century A.D. (probably prior to 70 A.D.).

The 17th Psalm is especially noteworthy (and justly famous) for its intensive and thorough expression of a distinctive messianic expectation—of the sort that normally comes to mind when we use the term “messianism”. In other words, we find the expectation of a (human) ruler from the line of David, chosen and appointed/anointed by God, who will re-establish the Kingdom for Israel here at the end of the current Age. In some ways, this messianism is closer to the eschatological-political expectation we find at points in the New Testament (e.g., Acts 1:6; Mark 11:10 par, etc.) than it is to the messianism evinced in the Qumran texts. And yet, at the same time, the Psalms of Solomon are clearly the product of a specific Jewish community (during the first centuries B.C./A.D.) akin to the Community of the Qumran texts. The Qumran Community is typically identified as Essene, while the Psalms of Solomon have variously been attributed to the Pharisees, Essenes, as well as other groups (cf. Wright, pp. 7-11; OTP, pp. 641ff).

Psalm 17 (of Solomon)

The 17th Psalm has the superscription “A hymn plucked (on the harp) [yalmo/$], (belonging) to Solomon, with a song”. The addition “with a song” (meta\ w)|dh=$) may be meant to distinguish the song regarding the Messiah (vv. 21-44) from the Hymn to God in vv. 1-10. The superscription further adds “to the King” (tw=| basilei=), which, in the overall context of the Psalm, seems to have a two-layered meaning: (1) a hymn to YHWH the King (v. 1), (2) and a song regarding the coming Messianic Ruler.

Hymn to YHWH (“the Lord”): Verses 1-10
Verses 1-3

“Lord, you (are) our King into the Age and yet (further),
for in you, O God, does our soul boast!
What even (is) the time of a man’s life upon the earth?—
according to his time, so (is) his hope upon it;
but we have (our) hope upon God our Savior,
for the strength of our God is with mercy into the Age,
and the Kingdom of our God is over the nations into the Age!”

The Hymn to YHWH (“the Lord”) begins with this opening declaration of praise, emphasizing His identity as the great King over all. As we have seen in our studies, the Kingship of YHWH is an important theme in the canonical Psalms (e.g., the collections of 93-100 and 146-150)—a universal Kingship that extends over all creation, and, in particular, over all the nations (v. 3). This thematic emphasis in the Hymn sets the stage for the focus on the coming of the Messianic king, who will re-establish the Kingdom for Israel, and the eschatological manifestation of God’s Kingdom on earth. The emphasis on the people’s hope (e)lpi/$, vb e)lpi/zw) is eschatological—and, in reality, is a Messianic hope. It implies a state of suffering and distress in the current Age, from which God’s people (i.e., the faithful/devout ones) soon expect to be rescued and delivered. The eschatological aspect is emphasized by repeated use of the expression ei)$ to\n ai)w=na (“into/unto the Age”, i.e., the coming New Age); the flat conventional translation of “forever” obscures the concrete eschatological orientation of the Hymn.

Some manuscripts include the expression e)n kri/sei (“in/with judgment”) in the final line of verse 3, i.e., “the Kingdom of our God is over the nations with judgment into the Age”.

Verse 4

“You, O Lord, chose David (as) king over Yisrael,
and swore an oath to him about his seed unto the Age—
(that) his kingdom (was) not to be left off from in front of you.”

The central expository section (vv. 4-9) of the hymn begins with this reference to God’s choice of David as king of Israel. It has the double-purpose of aligning with YHWH’s Kingship (over all the nations, vv. 1-3) and also foreshadowing the announcement of the coming the Messianic king (from the line of David) here at the end-time. The promise to David (cf. 2 Samuel 7) features in a number of the canonical Psalms and was a vital historical tradition that informed the eschatology of both the Qumran Community and early Christians (cf. Parts 6, 7, and 8 of the series “Yeshua the Anointed”).

The Syriac omits the eschatological phrase “unto/into the Age” in v. 4b.

Verse 5

“And (yet), in our sins, sinful (one)s stood up against us,
set themselves upon us and thrust us out!
Those to whom you did not give (the) promise took away with force,
even (though) they did not esteem your name th(at is to be held) in honor!”

In spite of God’s promise to David (v. 4), the Israelite/Judean people lost the kingdom (and the Davidic royal line). This is explained, in accordance with Scriptural tradition (esp. the Deuteronomic history and in the Prophets), as having occurred because of the people’s sins. This description in v. 5 seems to summarize the entire Israelite/Judean history, from the exile(s) in the 8th-6th centuries, down to the rise of the Maccabean/Hasmonean rulers. It might be best to view v. 5a, with the reference to the “sinful (one)s”, as summarizing the pre-Hasmonean history (viz., the periods of Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, and Greek rule), while 5b alludes to the Hasmoneans, who seem to have been viewed by the community of the Psalms as “illegitimate usurpers of the government and religion” (Wright OTP, p. 665). God did not give the promise of the kingship to them, but only to legitimate rulers from the line of David.

In any case, all of these foreign or illegitimate rulers are distinguished by their marked impiety—that is, they do not honor or revere YHWH (and His name) as they should. For the community of the Psalms (much like the Qumran community), their fellow countrymen (such as the Hasmoneans) were largely viewed as being unfaithful and lacking true devotion to God. This widespread faithlessness is characteristic of the end-time ‘period of distress’ (cf. below).

Verse 6

“With (misplaced) esteem they set up a kingdom for their haughtiness;
they desolated the throne of David by an overweeningly (proud) exchange!”

Instead of esteeming and honoring God, these illegitimate rulers (presumably the Hasmoneans, cf. above) sought honor/esteem (do/ca) for themselves. The kingdom which they established was on behalf of (lit. a)nti/, “in exchange for, in place of”) their own high-mindedness (or ‘haughtiness’, lit. “height”, u%yo$); this was an overweeningly prideful “exchange” (a)lla/gma) that left desolate (vb e)rhmo/w) the throne that rightfully belonged to David and his descendants.

Verse 7

“But you, O God, cast them down and took their seed from the earth,
in the standing up against them (by) a man different from our race!”

These illegitimate rulers (viz., the Hasmoneans) were overthrown and destroyed by a foreigner. As mentioned above, this has been interpreted as a reference to the siege of Jerusalem in 37 B.C. by Herod (an Idumean) and the Roman general Sosius, which led to the extermination of the Hasmonean rulers (by 30 B.C.). The tendency of earlier commentators was to view this instead as a reference to Pompey’s invasion of Judea some thirty years earlier, as a result of which Aristobulus and his children were taken away to Rome (Josephus, Antiquities 14.4.5, 5.4, 6.1; War 1.7.7, 8.6; cf. Wright OTP, p. 666).

Verse 8

“According to their sinful deeds you gave back to them (in exchange),
O God,
it was found for them according to their (own) works!”

Just as Israel (and her kings) lost the kingdom because of their sins (v. 5), so also the usurping (Hasmonean) rulers were overthrown and perished because of their own sinful deeds.

Verse 9

“According to their sinful deeds God did not have any mercy (on) them,
(but) searched out their seed and did not let one of them get away!”

Verse 9, with its shift from second to third person address, serves as a transition from the expository section of the hymn (vv. 4-8) to the closing confessional statement in v. 10. It essentially reprises (in third person address) the declaration in v. 8 regarding God’s punishment of the illegitimate (Hasmonean) rulers.

The Syriac, along with some Greek manuscripts, omit the initial “according to their sinful deeds”. If original, if could have been omitted accidentally, or as a redundant repetition; on the other hand, it could be secondary, copied into the text (i.e., dittography) from the earlier line. Cf. Wright OTP, p. 666.

Verse 10

“Trustworthy (is) the Lord in all His judgments that He makes upon the earth!”

This final declaration echoes the initial praise of YHWH as King over all the earth. As the Sovereign Ruler, He is also the great Judge, just and faithful in all the judgments that He makes. These judgments include punishment against the faithless and wicked ones (for their sins); and, indeed, the judgment against the Hasmonean rulers anticipates the great end-time Judgment that will be brought upon all the nations of the earth.

Transition: Verses 11-20

I regard verses 11-18a, along with 18b-20, as transitional, joining the hymn of vv. 1-10 to the Messiah-song of vv. 21-44. It describes the current time of distress, prior to the coming of God’s Messiah.

Verses 11-12

“The lawless (one) made desolate our land, (to keep anyone) from inhabiting it;
he slew young and old and their offspring together!
In (the) excellence of his anger, he sent them away until upon (the) west;
and even the chief men of the land he did not spare from being toyed with!”

The expression that opens verse 12, “in the anger of his beauty” (Syriac “in the beauty of his anger”), is problematic and Wright (OTP, p. 666) suggests that it may represent a mistranslation from the Hebrew. If the Greek (and Syriac) rendering is correct, then it could mean that verse 12 refers to God’s action, while v. 11 refers to the human oppressor. On the other hand, the human oppressor is clearly the subject throughout the rest of vv. 11-14, and so he should presumably be understood as the subject in v. 12 as well. For lack of a better option, I have followed the Syriac syntax, understanding ka/llo$ (“beauty”) in the sense of “excellence”. Perhaps the idea is to a “well-formed (i.e., robust) anger”.

The expression “the lawless (one)” (o( a&nomo$) surely refers to the same invading oppressor mentioned in vv. 7ff; as noted above, this may allude to Herod the Great, while other commentators see a reference to the Roman general Pompey. In any case, this invader slays many of the people (v. 11) and sends others (prim. the leaders and nobles) into exile (v. 12), while, in so doing, he also mocks and “toys with” the rulers and other prominent men. For those who see the “lawless one” as Pompey, the exile “unto the sinking (of the sun) [i.e., west]”, may refer to Aristobulus (and his children) being taken away to Rome (cf. above).

For similar use of the substantive adjective a&nomo$ (“lawless [one]”) as the designation for a wicked and oppressive ruler who is active at the end-time, cf. 2 Thess 2:8.

Verses 13-14

“In his foreignness the hostile (one) acted with overweening (pride),
and (indeed) his heart was foreign, away from our God!
And (so) all these (thing)s he did in Yerušalaim,
just as also the nations (do) in (their) cities for their gods!”

In verse 7b, the oppressor was described as “different/foreign” (a)llo/trio$) from the Israelites/Jews of the land, which probably is allusion to Herod’s ethnicity (as an Idumean), though it clearly would apply to a Roman such as Pompey as well. Here, in v. 13, his “foreignness” (a)llotrio/th$) is not merely ethnic, it applies to his religious identity and his faithfulness to God (or lack thereof). That is, his heart was foreign (a)llo/trio$), explained as being “away from” (a)po/) God. Clearly this means that he adopted, or was willing to accept, pagan cultural-religious practices, even in the holy city of Jerusalem. There is doubtless an echo here of the historical tradition surrounding the evil deeds of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, which included the most blatant desecration of the Temple; the unprecedented actions by Antiochus served as a figure-type for those of the Roman conquerors (viz., eschatological fulfillment of the earlier type-pattern), as is clear from the use of Dan 9:27 (cf. 11:31; 12:11) in the Eschatological Discourse (Mark 13:14 par; cf. especially Luke 21:20ff).

In v. 14a, the Syriac reads “and Jerusalem did”, rather than “he did in Jerusalem”; cf. Wright OTP, p. 666.

Verse 15

“And (the) sons of the covenant took hold of (these things) living in the midst of the nations mixed together—
there was no one doing in (their) midst, among them in Yerušalaim, mercy and truth!”

The example shown by the wicked ruler(s) of the land came to be followed by the Israelite/Jewish people (“sons of the covenant”) as well. Though they should have remained faithful to the covenant, they instead adopted the same foreign religious and cultural practices installed by the “lawless one”. Moreover, they became unfaithful and wicked from an ethical standpoint as well, ceasing to act according to “mercy and truth”.

Verses 16-18a

“Th(ose) loving (the) gatherings of (the) holy (one)s fled from them,
as sparrows (that have) spread out away from their nest!
They wandered in desolate (place)s, to save their souls from evil—
and it was precious in (the) eyes of (those) dwelling along, (any) soul of theirs having been saved!
(So the) scattering of them under (the) lawless (one)s came to be into all the earth.”

The Israelite and Jews who remained faithful and devout fled from the others (who were unfaithful). Here, these righteous ones are described by the characteristic expression “those loving the gatherings of the holy” (some manuscripts omit “of the holy” [o(si/wn]). This might mean leaving one’s family and homeland—lit., the koith/ (where one lays down), i.e., “bed” (or “nest”, in the case of a sparrow). They were forced to wander in “desolate (place)s”, probably alluding the same Scripture (Isa 40:3) that was adopted (as an ideal) by both the Qumran Community and early Christians. The holy ones gathered together “in the desert”, away from the corruption of others in the cities (esp. Jerusalem). They did this in order to protect and “save” their souls. This suggests that the community of the Psalms understood salvation largely in terms of religious identity—viz., belonging to the set apart community of the righteous—much as we see in the Qumran texts.

This self-imposed exile was a dispersion (lit., a “scattering”) akin to the earlier exilic dispersions of the Israelite/Judean people.

Verses 18b-19a

“(It was) that the heaven held up the dropping of rain upon the earth;
springs of the age(s) were held back, out of (the) abysses (and) from (the) high hills.”

The disruption of the social-religious order (vv. 14-15) is matched here by a disruption of the natural order—specifically a drought, with both water from rainfall and natural springs being ‘held back’. It is not clear if this is meant to refer to an actual historical drought (in Jerusalem/Judea), or whether it is symbolic of the wickedness and faithlessness of the people—or both.

Verse 19b-20

“For there was no (one) among them acting (with) rightness and (right) judgment,
from (the) chief of them even (to the) least of (the) people, (they were) in every (kind of) sin—
the king in law-breaking,
and the judge in disobedience,
and the people in sinfulness!”

Here, in the final lines of the transitional section(s), the deplorable condition of society is summarized. This very much reflects the eschatological orientation of the community of the Psalms (as also of the early Christians). As the current Age comes to a close, people are seen to be moving further away from right conduct and faithfulness to God, and, correspondingly, sin and wickedness become more pervasive throughout society. It is at this point, in this time of distress, that, according to the community’s eschatological expectation, God will send His Messiah. And it is to the Song of the Messiah, in vv. 21ff, that we will turn in Part 2 of this study.

    • References above marked “Wright” are to Robert B. Wright, The Psalms of Solomon: A Critical Edition of the Greek Text, Jewish and Christian Texts in Contexts and Related Studies, vol. 1 (T & T Clark: 2007). Those marked “Wright OTP” are to the same author’s annotated translation (with introduction) in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha [OTP], Volume 2, ed. James H. Charlesworth, Anchor Bible Reference Library [ABRL] (1985), pp. 639-70.

Sunday Psalm Studies: 4QPs Eschatological Hymn

Additional Qumran Psalms

There are a few additional extra-canonical Psalms of note in the Qumran scrolls, besides those in the great Cave 11 Psalms Scroll (11QPsa) that we have already examined. For example, in the Cave 4 scroll 4QPsf there are two compositions in Columns IX and X, the first of which (in Col. IX) has been given the generic designation “Eschatological Hymn”, while the second (Col. X) is referred to as “The Apostrophe to Judah”. It is assumed that these represent two distinct compositions, but, since the opening lines of each (at the beginning of the column) are lost, it is not possible to be certain on this point. The meter of the “Apostrophe to Judah” does seem to be noticeably different from the somewhat more regular (generally 3+3) meter of the “Eschatological Hymn”. The two hymns do, however, have a similar eschatological emphasis.

Eschatological HYMN (4QPsf, Col. IX)

If the “Apostrophe to Judah” in Col. X is indeed a separate composition, then this hymn in Col. IX would seem to be relatively short. However, the actual size/scope and structure of the poem remains difficult to determine, due the fragmentary condition of the scroll at the beginning and end of the column. The first three lines are almost completely lost, with not enough surviving to allow for any kind of translation; it is also fragmentary, with additional lines lost, as the bottom of the column.

The Community of the Qumran texts, much like the earliest Christian communities, had a strong eschatological orientation to their religious self-identity. They viewed themselves as representing the righteous/holy ones of the end time, through whom God (and His messianic agent[s]) would usher in the New Age.

As always in these Qumran compositions, lacuna (gaps) in the text are indicated by square brackets; occasionally it is possible to fill in the gaps, particularly when only a single letter is missing. Plausible restorations have been established in the critical editions and standard translations (e.g., DSS Bible) and are followed here.

Metrically, this poem seems to follow a three-beat (3+3) couplet format.

Lines 4-8

“…many [. . . ]
and let them praise (the) name of YHWH!
[F]or He comes to judge every (thing) d[o]ne,
to carry away (the) wicked (one)s from the earth,
[(so) that (the) sons of] crookedness shall not be found!”

As mentioned above, the first three lines (of the column) are almost completely missing, and the fourth line also is fragmentary. It seems likely that lines 1-5a contained the first two couplets of the hymn, the second of which is partially preserved. For first line of this couplet, only the word <ybr (“many”) survives; the line may have contained a reference to the nations/peoples acknowledging YHWH as God, with the Psalmist calling on them to worship and give praise to Him (second line), cf. Ps 40:4[3]; 97:1. This is an eschatological theme that we find in a number of the canonical Psalms, particularly those emphasizing the universal Kingship of YHWH; see especially Pss 93-100 and the final Hallelujah collection (146-150).

Lines 5b-8a of the column seem to contain a tricolon (3+3+3) declaring the end-time Judgment of God upon humankind. The announcement that “He comes to judge…” is similarly found in Psalm 96 (v. 13) and 98 (v. 9)—both part of the Kingship collection (93-100) mentioned above. Here, it is said that YHWH will come to judge the deeds of human beings (“every deed”, “every [thing] done”); this is a basic principle characterizing the eschatological Judgment (and YHWH’s role as Judge)—cf. Ps 94:2; Dan 7:10; Joel 3:12ff; Matt 12:36; John 3:19ff; Acts 17:31; Rom 2:2ff; 14:10ff; 2 Cor 5:10, etc.

The Judgment will result in the wicked being “carried/taken away”. The verb used is hb*v*, which frequently refers to captives that are taken away (i.e., deported/exiled). The verb can be used specifically of the captivity/exile of Israel (e.g., Ps 106:46; 137:3), and almost certainly that allusion is intended here. The captivity of the nations (in the Judgment) mirrors the historical captivity of Israel/Judah; that earlier captivity reflected YHWH’s judgment(s) against His people, but it is the surrounding nations who will be “carried away” in the end-time Judgment (viz., the “Day of YHWH”). The wicked (also designated “sons of crookedness”) will no longer be found among the righteous; they will have been removed. The noun hl*w+u^ (“crookedness”) often carries the more forcefully negative connotation of “injustice, wickedness”; for the specific expression “sons of crookedness” (hl*w+u^ yn@B=), cf. 2 Sam 3:34; 7:10; Ps 89:23[22]; 1 Chron 17:9. As a designation for the wicked, the expression is comparable to “sons of worthlessness” (lu^Y~l!B= yn@B=, cf. the “Apostrophe to Judah below), with /B@ (“son”) used categorically for the characteristic behavior (and identity) of persons belonging to a particular group.

Lines 8-11

“[And will give (forth)] (the) heave[n]s their dew,
and there will be no scorchi[ng within t]heir borders;
and (the) earth [will give (forth)] her fruit in her time,
and not will be lean [(the) out]put coming from her!”

The Judgment results in punishment for the wicked, but blessing for the righteous. The end-time blessing is described here in terms of the fertility of the land (cf. Joel 3:19-27, etc.). The heavens will give forth water (lit., “dew”, but standing for “rain”, etc., cf. Psalm 133:3) plentifully, at the right time, to enable the growth of vegetation and crops. There will no longer be any scorching heat (/opD*v!) to dry up the vegetation. The third person plural suffix (“within their borders”), in context here, refers to “(the) heavens” (dual) in line 1—i.e., the earth lies between the bounds of the upper hemisphere (the ‘dome’ of the heavens). However, it also surely alludes to the righteous ones of God’s people, and to the borders of their land. The two-fold nature of the cosmos (“heavens” and “earth”) is reflected in the poetic parallelism of these two couplets. The heaven gives the rain, and the earth produces fruit. In the second line, the blessing is expressed in negative (privative) terms—there will not be any searing drought (from heaven) nor leanness of output (from the earth). The verb vj^K* properly means “be(come) lean”, but it can also carry a range of connotative and associated meanings: “deceive, delude, deny, contradict, feign/pretend”. For the use of this verb in the context of the failure of plants and crops to bear fruit, cf. Hos 9:2; Hab 3:17.

Lines 11-14

“(The) trees of fruit [will . . .] their vines,
and will not be le[an (the) out]put from them;
(the one)s pressed down will eat and be satisfied,
(those) fearing YHWH [. . . ]
….”

The promise of blessing (in terms of fertility) continues here, referring specifically to the fruit trees and vines. Again, it is declared that the output will not be lean (vb vj^K*); rather, the output will be abundant, so that the righteous will be able to eat their fill and be satisfied (vb ub^v*).

The righteous are characterized with traditional terminology, as those who fear (ar@y`, i.e., revere, honor, and obey) YHWH, but as also as ones who are “bent/pressed down (low)” (wn`u*). This term wn`u* (along with the related yn]u*) occurs frequently (especially in the Psalms) as characteristic of the righteous. It denotes a pressed-down and low(ly) state, with three distinct aspects of meaning: (a) poverty and need, (b) experience of affliction and oppression (often at the hands of the wicked), and (c) an attitude of humility and devotion (to YHWH).

Apostrophe to Judah (4QPsf, Col. X)

The poem in Column X is generally regarded as a separate composition distinct from the “Eschatological Hymn” of Col. IX (above); however, one should at least consider the possibility that it represents a continuation of the Col. IX Hymn.

Lines 5-6

“Then let (the) heavens and earth give praise as one,
now let (the) stars of (the) twilight give (out) praise!”

As with the “Eschatological Hymn”, the opening lines of this “Apostrophe to Judah” are almost completely missing from the lost beginning of the column (only part of a single word remains from line four). The initial word of line 5 (apparently, “and from them”, <hmw) presumably represents the end of a couplet (and probably the first two couplets [?] of the composition), but the context cannot be determined. In the first surviving couplet, the Psalmist calls upon the entire universe (“heavens and earth”) to give praise to YHWH—an orientation that we find occasionally in the canonical Psalms, particularly those which focus on the universal Kingship of YHWH (cf. 69:35[34]; 89:6[5]; 96:11; 148:4), however the specific mention of the stars (and the expression “stars of twilight”) is more unusual (but see Ps 148:3; Job 38:7). A number of Psalms express the idea of nature (the heavens, etc.) speaking or singing out in praise (or witness) of YHWH’s greatness and righteousness, etc. (viz., His identity as Creator and King/Judge of the universe); cf. 19:1ff; 50:6; 97:6.

Lines 7-10

“Be glad (now), O Yehudah, in your (great) gladness!
Be glad (in) your gladness, twirl (with) your twirling!
Go round your festive rounds, fulfill your v[o]ws—
for no (longer) is Beliyya‘al in your midst!”

After the call for heaven and earth to give praise, the Psalmist calls on Judah to rejoice, giving forth expressions of praise and joy in light of the expected (end-time) blessings that are coming to her (cf. the “Eschatological Hymn” above). In the second line, this joy is further expressed in terms of spinning round (i.e., twirling, dancing), lyG]; this is a regular praise-term in the Psalms. The verbal root ggj^ has a comparable meaning (“go round”, i.e., in a dance, procession, or festal celebration), though the noun gj^ came to refer specifically to a religious festival—and to the pilgrimage festivals prescribed by the Torah (cf. Arabic ḥajj and ḥijjat). To preserve the connection with lyG! (in the previous line), I have translated the verb gg~j* simply as “go round”, with the plural of gj~ as “festive rounds”. For the faithful ones of Israel/Judah, their joy is expressed by fulfilling the religious obligations (such as regarding the festivals and vows) of the covenant (viz., the Torah precepts and regulations, etc.).

The reason for their joy is specified in the final line (of this quatrain): Belial is no longer “in their midst”. In light of the reference to the “sons of crookedness” in the “Eschatological Hymn” (see above), this mention of ‘Belial’ (lu^Y~l!B=) is perhaps to be understood as a shorthand for the expression “sons of worthlessness” (lu^Y~l!B= yn@B=), which occurs numerous times in the Scriptures. However, by the time that this hymn was composed, the noun lu^Y~l!B= had come to be used as a term for a personal (or personified) spirit of wickedness and corruption. This shift in meaning may already be evident in the Book of Jubilees (mid-second century B.C.), cf. 1:20 along with 15:33, but it had definitely occurred in the sectarian writings of the Qumran Community (e.g., the Rule [1QS], the War Scroll [1QM], and the Thanksgiving Hymns [Hodayot, 1QH])—in these writings “Belial” has become a proper name, just in the New Testament (2 Cor 6:15) and other early Christian (and contemporary Jewish) texts (e.g., the Sibylline Oracles 2.167; 3.63, 73; Martyrdom of Isaiah 1:8f; 2:4). With the coming of the end-time Judgment, the wicked (i.e., “sons of Belial”), along with the evil spirit that inspires their wickedness, are to be removed from the midst of the righteous.

Lines 10-13

“May your hand be raised high, your right hand be strong!
See—(the) hostile (one)s shall perish,
and shall be scattered, all (those) [mak]ing trouble!”

This tricolon (which could also be parsed as a quatrain) makes clear that the term lu^Y~l!B= (‘Belial’) in the previous line refers primarily to the wicked (viz., the “sons of Belial”, “sons of worthlessness” = “sons of crookedness [hl*w+u^]” in the Eschatological Hymn). The wicked will be removed from the midst of the righteous. In the prior Hymn, this was described in terms of captivity/exile (vb hb*v*), as it also is here with the verb dr^P* (“[be] spread out, scattered”). But, from the standpoint of the Judgment, this also (practically) means the death/destruction of the wicked, as expressed by the verb db^a* (“perish”). It is a general religious principle (emphasized especially in the Wisdom literature) that the wicked will ultimately perish, but here it finds eschatological realization (in the Judgment). The wicked are “hostile” toward the righteous, and thus are the enemies of God’s people, even as (historically) the surrounding nations have been adversaries of Israel/Judah. The call for Judah to have a (right) hand that is strong and raised/lifted high, suggests that the righteous ones (of Israel/Judah) may play a role in the defeat and expulsion/destruction of the wicked. The Qumran Community certainly held such an expectation as part of their own religious identity, as expressed most thoroughly (and vividly) in the War Scroll (1QM).

Lines 13-15

“But you, O YHWH, shall be unto (the) dista[nt] (future)—
your weight into (the) dista[nt (future) even ti]ll (the end)!
[Pr]aise YH(WH)!”

The hymn ends with this couplet of praise to YHWH, declaring that His Kingship will last into the far distant future (i.e., forever). The eternal life and existence of YHWH is contrasted with the brief life of the wicked that comes to an end with the Judgment (cf. the tricolon above). The temporal-durative expressions <l*oul= (“into/into [the] distant [future]”) and du^ (“until [the end]”) occur frequently in the Psalms.
The noun dobK* means “weight”, often in the sense of “worth, value”; as applied to God, it indicates that which makes Him worthy of praise—His greatness and holiness, His Divine splendor, etc. In terms of the Kingship of YHWH, it also specifically refers to His majesty. 

The work concludes with the traditional exhortation Hy` Wll=h^ (Halelû Yāh), “Praise YH(WH)!” This call to praise occurs a number of times in the canonical Psalms, most notably in the final collection (146-150) where it opens and closes each Psalm.

*     *     *     *     *

In the next study, we will look at the last of the extracanonical Psalms in the Qumran Psalm scrolls—namely, the three exorcism psalms that occur grouped together (along with Psalm 91) in the Cave 11 ‘Apocryphal Psalms’ scroll (11QPsApa [11Q11])

The reference “DSS Bible” is to The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible, translated with commentary by Martin Abegg, Jr., Peter Flint, and Eugene Ulrich (HarperCollins: 1999).

“Who Is This Son of Man…?”: Daniel 7:13-14 (Part 2)

In the first part of this study, examining the influence of Daniel 7:13f on the use of the expression “the son of man” in the Gospels, the literary context, background, and interpretation of that passage were surveyed briefly. It remains to consider the evidence regarding the extent of the possible influence. As we have discussed, there are certainly allusions to Dan 7:13f in the Synoptic “son of man” sayings in Mark 13:26 and 14:62 pars, but how does the usage in Dan 7:13 relate to the collection of “son of man” references as a whole?

There are a good number of scholars who view Dan 7:13f as the principal source of influence for the eschatological sayings, if not the entire Gospel usage. However, as support for this view, much depends on whether—or to what extent—Jews and early Christians, in the early-mid first century A.D., would have understood the expression “the son of man” (in Greek or in Aramaic) as a reference to the figure described in Dan 7:13-14. Based on the line of interpretation established by the analysis in Part 1, this means that the expression would refer to a heavenly being who would rule over the kingdom of God (and the “holy ones”) in the New Age. The eschatological setting and focus is clear enough in the context of Daniel, and it certainly seems to have prevailed for the interpretation and application of the passage in the Qumran Community as well (for the influence of Daniel 7 on the Qumran text 4Q246, see Part 1, and my earlier study on this passage). For the Qumran Community, as for early Christians, the eschatological outlook cannot be separated from their Messianic expectations. If “the son of man” is taken to refer to an eschatological figure, who will deliver God’s people (the “holy ones”) at the end-time and rule over the Kingdom of the New Age, then this corresponds quite closely to several of the Messianic figure-types attested among Israelites and Jews during the first centuries B.C./A.D.—including the royal/Davidic figure-type.

If Jesus, and/or the early Christians who made use of the expression “the son of man”, understood it fundamentally as a Messianic reference (or title), based on a Messianic interpretation of Daniel 7:13-14, then one must assume that many readers/hearers of the time would have been expected to understand it in much the same way. What evidence is there for such an understanding of the expression in the first century? It is actually very slight. In spite of the eschatological (and Messianic) significance of the book of Daniel for the Qumran Community, there is no indication that “(the) son of man” was ever used as a Messianic reference. As for other Jewish texts, written during the first centuries B.C./A.D., there are only two—the Similitudes of Enoch and 2/4 Esdras—which make use of the expression in such a way. For scholars who would argue that “the son of man” in the Gospels is likewise rooted in a Messianic/eschatological interpretation of Dan 7:13f, these two writings are essential.

The Similitudes of Enoch

The Similitudes (or Parables) of Enoch refer to chapters 37-71 of the book of 1 Enoch (Ethiopic Enoch). These chapters are not among the portions of 1 Enoch found in the Qumran caves, and scholars are in general agreement that they represent a distinct (and separate) work that was later included in the book of 1 Enoch. The date of the Similitudes, however, continues to be disputed. This is significant with regard to the use of the expression “the son of man”. If the Similitudes are to be utilized as evidence for a Messianic use of the expression “the son of man” at the time of Jesus (and/or among early Christians), then it is more meaningful if the Similitudes are dated to the early- or mid-first century (at the latest).

Most scholars today would date the Similitudes to the first-century A.D., though there is less agreement when attempts are made to narrow this window to a more a precise date. Nickelsburg, in his critical commentary (1 Enoch 2: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, Chapters 37-82, Hermeneia [Fortress Press: 2011]), dates it to the late first-century (as does Bauckham, in his “Son of Man”, Volume 1: Early Jewish Literature [Eerdmans: 2023]); however, other commentators prefer an early first-century date. There has recently been a shift toward favoring an early date; this can be seen from the 2005 Enoch Seminar (in which the Similitudes were the focus, with essays published in Boccaccini, Enoch and Messiah Son of Man: Revisiting the Book of Parables [Eerdmans: 2007]), and also, for example, in the Charlesworth-Bock collection of essays Parables of Enoch: A Paradigm Shift (T&T Clark Jewish and Christian Texts Series, Bloomsbury: 2013).

Part of the difficulty with judging the relation of the expression “the son of man” to the Similitudes is the language (Ethiopic, Ge‘ez) of the work as it has come down to us. It is generally agreed that the Ethiopic is a translation of, most likely, an Aramaic original, possibly through an intermediary translation in Greek. As it happens, there are three Ethiopic expressions that generally correspond to Aramaic [a]vn[a] rb (or Hebrew <da[h] /b), and which probably represent translational variants of that underlying expression (cf. Bauckham, pp. 32-3):

    • walda sab’ (46:2, 3, 4; 48:2)
    • walda be’esi (62:5; 69:29 [bis]; 71:14)
    • walda ’egwala ’emaḥeyāw (62:7, 9, 14; 63:11; 69:26, 27; 70:1; 71:17).

Interestingly, in all but four of the sixteen occurrences, a demonstrative pronoun is used (viz., “that son of man”)—zekku (46:2; 48:2; 62:5, 9, 14; 63:11) or we’etu (69:26, 29 [bis]; 70:1; 71:17)—or, in one case, “this son of man” (zentu, 46:4); Bauckham, p. 33. The significance of this usage will be discussed (in Part 3); however, it strongly suggests that “son of man” is not being used as a title in the Similitudes—in contrast with the apparent titles “Righteous (One)” and “Elect/Chosen (One)”, cf. below.

The expression “son of man”, in the three Ethiopic variant forms noted above, occurs in two main portions of the Similitudes:

    • In chapters 46-48 (46:2-4; 48:2), part of the Second Parable (chaps. 45-57)
    • In chapters 62-63 and 69 (62:5, 7, 9, 14; 63:11; 69:26-27, 29), part of the Third Parable (chaps. 58-69)

There are also important occurrences in the closing section (epilogue), chaps. 70-71 (70:1; 71:14, 17). As the work progresses, it becomes clear that the “son of man” is to be identified with the heavenly figure otherwise called “(the) Elect/Chosen (One)” and “(the) Righteous (One)”. Those titles— “Righteous” (ṣādeq) and “Elect/Chosen” (—eruy)—connect the heavenly figure with the human people of God: the “righteous (one)s” and “elect/chosen (one)s”. This can be seen clearly in 38:1-2 (for the term “righteous”) and in 39:6ff (“elect/chosen”). The heavenly figure is the ruler and protector of the humans, in the eschatological context of the Judgment. The righteous/chosen ones are also referred to as “holy (one)s”, as in Daniel 7:18, 21-22, 25, 27. There is thus a clear parallel, and close relationship, between the heavenly figure and the community of the righteous/holy ones (on earth); cf. the parallel between the “one like a son of man” in Dan 7:13-14 and the “holy ones” in vv. 22-27.

While allusions to Daniel 7 can be found throughout the Similitudes (cf. the Table in Casey, p. 107 for a list of 32 possible allusions), the specific use of Dan 7:13f is established in 46:1:

“There I saw one who had a head of days,
and his head was like white wool.
And with him was another, whose face was like the appearance of a man;
and his face was full of graciousness like one of the holy angels.”
(Nickelsburg/Hermeneia)

In v. 2, Enoch asks about who this person resembling a human being is, since the presence of a human in heaven is rather unexpected and unusual. Angels are typically described this way, and yet the emphasis throughout the Similitudes is on the human nature of this figure—he is not simply “like a son of man”(Dan 7:13), he is a “son of man”. The significance of this becomes clear in the conclusion (chaps. 70-71), cf. below. Here, Enoch asks “about that [zekku] son of man—who he was and whence he was (and) why he went with the Head of Days”. The answer comes in verse 3:

“This is the son of man who has righteousness,
and righteousness dwells with him,
and all the treasuries of what is hidden he will reveal;
For the Lord of Spirits has chosen him,
and his lot has prevailed through truth
in the presence of the Lord of Spirits forever.”
(Nickelsburg/Hermeneia)

Again, we see emphasized the fundamental characteristics of “righteousness” and of being “chosen” by God. Almost certainly, this terminology derives from the Deutero-Isaian usage, most notably in 42:1 (“Chosen [One]”) and 53:11 (“Righteous [One]”), by way of a well-established Messianic interpretation and application. Daniel 7:13-14 is applied in much the same way. Indeed, the role of this “son of man” in the end-time Judgment is clear from verse 4ff—it is a role that is emphasized even more strongly in chapters 62-63ff (note how 62:2ff alludes to Isaiah 11:2-4ff), being further summarized at the close of the Parables in 69:26-29.

While the punishment of the wicked (i.e., the nations) is given prominence, the role of the “son of man” as ruler/judge also entails the care and protection he provides for the righteous. We find this latter aspect expressed most clearly in chapter 48. This “son of man” (v. 2), the Righteous and Chosen One (see vv. 3-7ff), will protect and deliver the righteous in the time of the Judgment. Here, the “son of man” is also called “(the) Anointed (One)” (v. 10, cf. also 52:4), utilizing the familiar Messianic title—to designate the eschatological judge and ruler, though the Davidic aspect of this figure-type (cp. Psalms of Solomon 17) is downplayed, and scarcely even mentioned by the author.

In the Epilogue (chaps. 70-71), the exaltation of Enoch to heaven is narrated, being described briefly (at first) in 70:1-2, how he was “lifted up”, while he was still living, “into the presence of that [we’etu] son of man and into the presence of the Lord of Spirits”. Later on, at the very close of the work (71:13-17), it is revealed to Enoch that he, himself, is “that son of man” (v. 14, cf. also v. 17) and the Righteous/Chosen (One):

“You (are) that Son of Man who was born for righteousness,
and righteousness dwells on you,
and the righteousness of the Head of Days will not forsake you.”
(Nickelsburg/Hermeneia)

In Part 3 of this study, we shall explore further the interesting parallels between the Similitudes and the Gospel Tradition, regarding this use of the expression “son of man”, and also consider the extent to which the Similitudes (and/or the eschatological thought expressed in them) may have influenced the Gospel usage.

2/4 Esdras

The deutero-canonical work known as 2 (or 4) Esdras can be dated rather securely to the end of the first-century A.D. The core treatise (chaps. 3-14) is a Jewish work, often referred to as “4 Ezra”, probably originally composed in Hebrew (or Aramaic), but which has come down to us today in Latin (and other versions) presumably by way of an intermediary Greek translation. It is the eschatological visions in chapters 11-12 and 13 which are related to Daniel 7. The “Eagle” vision in chaps. 11-12 is explicitly, and consciously, presented as a further interpretation on the four-kingdoms vision in Daniel 7, expounded here in 12:10-39. It is quite clearly a Messianic interpretation (and application) of the vision (12:32ff).

Much the same applies to the vision in chapter 13, of a man who comes up from the sea, just as the beasts came up out of the sea in the Daniel 7 vision (vv. 2-8). In this regard, the Esdras vision represents a reworking of the earlier Daniel vision:

“And I looked, and behold, this wind made something like the figure of a man come up out of the sea. And I looked, and behold, that man flew with the clouds of heaven…” (13:3, Metzger/OTP)

Clearly, this alludes to Dan 7:13, and yet the author/seer has adapted it so that the “one like a son of man” comes up out of the sea, just like the beasts do; having risen from the sea, then he ascends on the clouds of heaven. In the remainder of the vision, the Daniel 7 scenario is supplemented by traditional eschatological references from Daniel 2 and Isa 11:2-4ff (see above), emphasizing this figure’s role in the end-time Judgment.

The interpretation of the vision comes in vv. 21-56; and, again, we see that the Scriptural traditions involved (including Dan 7:13-14) are given a Messianic interpretation (vv. 25ff), while the detail of the man’s coming up out of the sea is explained (rather unconvincingly) in vv. 51ff. There appears to be a certain disconnect between the vision and its interpretation, suggesting that they come from two distinct sources. In any event, the Messiah’s role in the Judgment is prominent—entailing a judgment upon all of the nations assembled together (vv. 37ff). The reference to the Messiah as God’s “son” (“my son”, vv. 33, 37, 52) is probably derived from a traditional Messianic interpretation of Psalm 2:7; indeed, there would seem to be allusions to Psalm 2 (par Isa 11:2-4) throughout the passage.

The use of Daniel 7:13-14 in 2/4 Esdras is quite similar, in a number of respects, to its use in the Similitudes of Enoch (see the discussion above). In each work, the Scripture has been given an eschatological and Messianic interpretation (and application), focusing on the end-time Judgment of the nations. The one “like a son of man” is explained as a Messianic figure, chosen by God, who is revealed at the end-time. His principal role is as the overseer of the Judgment—bringing punishment on the wicked (nations), but also protecting and delivering the righteous (people of God).

The distinctive element in the Similitudes is the identification of Enoch—an exalted human being (“son of man”)—with the heavenly/Messianic figure. Interestingly, while the motif of the “son of man” coming up from the sea (to heaven) in 2/4 Esdras 13 could be explained in a similar way—viz., as the exaltation of a human being—the interpretation in vv. 51ff does not follow this line at all, opting instead for a rather banal (and unconvincing) interpretation of the “sea” (v. 52). One suspects that the author/seer of the original vision (vv. 1-13) may have had something different in mind. In any case, the motif of a human being (“son of man”) exalted to heaven, so as to become “the/that son of man”, is obviously relevant to the Gospel Tradition, and to the early Christian understanding of the implications and consequences of Jesus’ exaltation. This will be discussed further in Part 3.

References above marked “Casey” are to Maurice Casey, Son of Man: The Interpretation and Influence of Daniel 7 (SPCK: 1979).
Those marked “Bauckham” are to Richard Bauckham, “Son of Man”, Volume 1: Early Jewish Literature (Eerdmans: 2023).
Those marked “Nickelsburg” are to George W. E. Nickelsburg and James C. VanderKam, 1 Enoch 2: A Commentary on the Book of Enoch Chapters 37-82, Hermeneia Commentary Series (Fortress Press: 2012). “Nickelsburg/Hermeneia” marks the translation of the Similitudes in the Commentary.
“Metzger/OTP” refers to the translation of 2/4 Esdras (4 Ezra) by Bruce M. Metzger in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha [OTP], Volume 1: Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments, ed. by James H. Charlesworth, Anchor Bible Reference Library [ABRL] (Doubleday: 1983), pp. 517-60.

 

“Who Is This Son of Man…?”: Daniel 7:13-14 (Part 1)

The Influence of Daniel 7:13-14

When it comes to the use of the expression “the son of man” (o( ui(o\$ tou= qeou=) in the Gospels, perhaps no issue has been so vigorously debated among New Testament scholars as the influence of Daniel 7:13-14. The matter has been addressed at a number of points in these studies. There can be no doubt that there are allusions to Dan 7:13f in the sayings of Mark 13:26 and 14:62 pars (see the earlier study), but the extent to which the (Aramaic) use of the expression (in Daniel) influenced the Gospel Tradition in this regard continues to be much disputed. Some scholars believe that the entire Gospel usage of the expression is inspired by Dan 7:13f. More common is the view that the eschatological “son of man” sayings, as a whole, stem from that Scripture tradition—whether the appropriation is viewed as coming from Jesus himself (in authentic sayings), or as an interpretive creation by early Christians. Before proceeding with an analysis of the evidence for the influence of Dan 7:13f on the “son of man” sayings, it will be worth examining briefly the Scripture passage itself, in its literary context. (The following section is an adaptation of a supplemental study in the earlier series “Yeshua the Anointed”.)

Background and Interpretation of Daniel 7:13-14

Dan 7:13-14 holds a central place in chapter 7 of the book of Daniel (for the structure of the chapter, cf. below). It is part of the heavenly Throne-vision in vv. 9-12, similar to other such visions in the Old Testament and Jewish tradition—1 Kings 22:19ff; Isaiah 6; Ezekiel 1; 3:22-24; 10:1, cf. also 1 Enoch 14:18-23; 60:2; 90:20, etc (Collins, p. 300). The throne is said to have wheels, and thus is to be understood as a chariot-throne, which draws upon ancient Near Eastern mythic imagery, associated with heavenly/celestial phenomena—i.e. the fiery chariot of the sun, etc—and the divine powers which control them. For chariot imagery related to God and Heaven in the Old Testament, cf. 2 Kings 23:11; Psalm 68:17; 104:3; Isa 66:15; Jer 4:13; Ezek 1:15-21; 10:2. The idea of God’s chariot-throne would play an especially important role among the Jewish visionary mystics of the Merkabah/Hekhalot tradition.

Interestingly the text of verse 9 reads “the thrones [pl. /w`s*r=k*] were set [lit. thrown, i.e. into place]”, and there is some question as to the use of the plural here. It probably should be taken as indicative of the setting—the heavenly Council or Court. In ancient Near Eastern (Canaanite) tradition, the high deity °E~l (generally identified with YHWH in the Old Testament) presides over the Council of the gods; in the context of Israelite monotheism, the “gods” (°¢lîm/°§lœhîm) are created heavenly beings (i.e. Angels) who sit in the Council—Psalm 82:1; 89:7; Job 1:6, etc. For an elaborate description of the Angels surrounding the chariot-throne of God, cf. the so-called “Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice” (4Q400-407, 11Q17) from Qumran (discussed in an earlier study), esp. 4Q405 frags. 20, 23 (11Q17 cols. 7-10); and in early Christian tradition, note Matt 25:31, as well as the (Christian?) corollary of human beings on the thrones surrounding God/Christ (Matt 19:28; Rev 4:2ff; 20:4). Cf. Collins, p. 301.

On the throne is seated the /ym!oy qyT!u^ (±attîq yômîn), usually translated as “(the) Ancient of Days”, with the adjective qyT!u^ understood (on the basis of its cognates in Hebrew) as “advanced”, either in the sense of age or of prominence and wealth (majesty, etc). This image is likely drawn from the mythic-religious tradition of depicting the high God °E~l as an elderly patriarch (with long white/grey beard), though here it has been adapted to traditional Israelite visionary images of the glory of God (El / YHWH)—Exod 24:9-11; 1 Kings 22:19ff; Isa 6:1-5; Ezek 1. Verse 9b-10a vividly depicts the divine figure seated on his fiery chariot-throne, with countless multitudes (of heavenly beings) serving him. The vision scene in 1 Enoch 14:15-23 provides an interesting comparison.

From verses 11-12 it is clear that the Heavenly Council is also the Court, with God ruling as Judge (Psalm 82, etc). Judgment is brought against the Beasts of the earlier part of the vision (vv. 2-8, cf. below)—a sentence of death is pronounced and executed against one Beast (the fourth), while the others are stripped of their kingdoms but allowed to live for a time. It is in this context that verses 13-14 must be understood:

“and, see!—with the clouds of the Heaven(s), (one) like a son of man [vn`a$ rb^K=]…”

This figure comes near and approaches the “Ancient of Days”, and is given authority/rule (/f*l=v*), honor/glory (rq*y+), and (a) kingdom (Wkl=m^), so that “all the peoples, nations and tongues [i.e. languages] would serve him”. The question as to the identity of this “(one) like a son of man” has long vexed commentators, leading to a variety of interpretations, some more plausible than others. In terms of the original context of the vision in the book of Daniel, I would suggest three basic possibilities regarding this figure:

    1. Symbolic—he represents the Kingdom of God or the people of God (and their dominion)
    2. Real, but archetypal—i.e. he is the heavenly archetype of humankind (“son of man”), specifically the righteous/holy ones (people of God)
    3. Real, and personal—he is a real heavenly being, an Angel such as Michael who represents the people of God, supporting and protecting them, etc.

Sound arguments can be made for each of these:

1. The symbolic view is supported by the structure of the passage (chapter 7) itself, where the “(one) like a son of man”, and the kingdom he receives, is set parallel with the people of God (and they kingdom they receive), cf. below. Also, this figure resembling a human being is clearly meant as a contrast with the four “beasts” of vv. 2-8; since they are taken to represent four earthly kingdoms (in their savagery and violence), it is logical that the human being likewise represents the kingdom of the people of God.

2. The same parallelism could just as well be interpreted in an archetypal sense—that the heavenly “son of man” is the type/pattern for the righteous/holy ones on earth. This certainly seems to be the way that Daniel 7 was expounded and interpreted in the Similitudes of Enoch (1 Enoch 37-71, see the discussion below), and also, to some extent, by the Qumran community (cf. below).

3. It is the third view, however, which seems best to fit the immediate context and thought-patterns in the book of Daniel. Angels are prominent in the second half of the book, and are generally depicted in human terms (Dan 8:15; 9:21; 10:5; 12:5-7; cf. also 3:25), as they often are elsewhere in the Old Testament (Gen 18:2; Josh 5:13; Judg 13:6, 8, 16; Ezek 8:2; 9-10; Zech 1:8; 2:5, cf. Collins, pp. 306-7). A specific identification with the chief Angel (Archangel) Michael is possible, given his comparable role and position in Dan 12:1 (cf. also 10:13, 21). The “(one) like a son of man” should probably be understood as a real heavenly being, at least similar to an (arch)Angel such as Michael. This does not eliminate the parallelism or corollary with the people of God, as is clear enough by the evidence from Qumran (on this, cf. below).

Before proceeding, it may be helpful to examine the structure of Daniel 7 in outline form:

    • V. 1: Narrative introduction/setting
    • Vv. 2-14: The Vision of the Four Beasts
      • The Four Beasts (vv. 2-8)
      • The Ancient of Days who presides in Judgment over the Beasts (vv. 9-12)
      • The Son of Man who receives the everlasting kingdom/dominion (vv. 13-14)
    • Vv. 15-27: The Interpretation of the Vision
      • Basic outline/explanation: Four Kingdoms (vv. 15-18)
      • The Kingdom of the Fourth Beast (vv. 19-25)
      • Judgment and the Kingdom of the People of God (vv. 26-27)
    • V. 28: Conclusion

Verses 13-14 and 26-27 are clearly parallel in several respects:

    • Judgment in the Heavenly Court (vv. 9-12, 26)
      • Kingdom taken away from the Beast(s)
    • Everlasting Kingdom/Dominion
      • Given to the “one like a son of man” (vv. 13-14)
      • Given to the “people of the Holy Ones of the Most High” (v. 27)

Interestingly, we find the same basic paradigm, it would seem, in the Pseudo-Daniel (Aramaic) text 4Q246 from Qumran, which was certainly influenced by Daniel 7.

An important point lies in the way that heavenly and human beings are united in the term “holy ones” (Heb. <yvdwq, Aram. /yvydq). Although a few instances are uncertain or disputed, the majority of occurrences of the plural “holy ones” in the Old Testament would seem to refer to heavenly beings—Deut 33:2; Psalm 89:5, 7; Job 5:1; 15:15; Dan 4:17; Zech 14:5, and cf. also the LXX of Exod 15:11. The only clear instances where “holy ones” refer to human beings (on earth) are in Deut 33:3 (cf. the parallel with verse 2); Psalm 16:3; 34:10. Especially significant is the usage in the Qumran texts, which in many ways are close to the eschatological/apocalyptic imagery and thought-world of Daniel, and, indeed, were certainly influenced by the book. The Qumran Community saw itself as connected with the Angels—the holy/righteous ones on earth, corresponding to the Holy Ones in Heaven; this was a key aspect of their self-understanding, in particular, of their eschatological role and identity. Indeed, they referred to themselves as “congregation of the holy ones”, and in 1QM 10:10; 12:7; 1QH 11:11-12 we find the very expression (“people of the holy ones”) as in Dan 7:27; note also the variant formula “holy ones of the people” (1QM 6:6; 16:1). On the relation between the Community and the Angels, and their inter-connection, cf. especially in the War Scroll (1QM 12:7, etc), passages in the Rule documents (1QSa 2:8-9; 1QSb 3:25-26; 4:23-25), and in the Hymns (1QH 3:21-22; 4:24-25; 11:11-12). For these and other references, cf. Collins pp. 313-7.

In the Similitudes of Enoch (1 Enoch 37-71), which may well be contemporary with Jesus and the earliest Gospel tradition (see Part 2 of this study), there is an equally clear, and (in some ways) even more precise correspondence between the holy/righteous ones on earth and in heaven—1 Enoch 39:5; 47:2; 51:4, etc. It is indicated that their true nature and position will be revealed at the end-time Judgment (1 En 38:4-5). The Son of Man is their ideal/archetypal heavenly representative (the Righteous One, the Elect One); in the concluding chapters 70-71, we see how Enoch himself, as the first human being to be raised to heavenly status, is identified with this Son of Man, apparently merging/assimilating with him in some way.

What of the traditional interpretation of the “one like a son of man” with the Messiah in Jewish thought? Apart from the possible example of 4Q246 from Qumran, this association does not seem to have been clearly formed until the 1st century A.D. In the Similitudes of Enoch, the Son of Man figure, certainly inspired by Daniel 7, is specifically called “(the) Anointed One” (1 En 48:10; 52:4); cf. also the context in 2/4 Esdras 13 (late 1st-century A.D.). The Messianic interpretation came to be the dominant view in Rabbinic literature (b. Sanh. 89a; Num. Rabbah 13:14, et al); even the plural “thrones” in Dan 7:9 could be understood in this light (one throne for God, one for the Messiah), as traditionally expressed by R. Akiba (b. Chag. 14a; b. Sanh. 38b).

In the second part of this study, we shall examine in more detail the possibility that the expression “the son of man” could, at the time of Jesus, have been understood as a Messianic reference, and might have been applied to a Messianic figure (such as Jesus) as a shorthand title, referring specifically to the heavenly figure (“one like a son of man”) in Dan 7:13f

References marked “Collins” above are to John J. Collins’ commentary on Daniel in the Hermeneia series (Fortress Press: 1993), esp. pages 299-323.

The Old Testament in the Gospel Tradition: Isaiah 40:3

This is the start of a new series, set to run through Easter, focusing on key Old Testament Scripture passages which were influential in the development and shaping of the early Gospel Tradition.

Isaiah 40:3

We begin with the opening section of the Gospel narrative. Both the Synoptic and Johannine narratives begin with a description of John the Baptist’s ministry; and, central to this description is a citation of Isaiah 40:3. Indeed, this quotation effectively marks the beginning point of the Synoptic narrative. The citation in Mark 1:3 is virtually identical with the LXX of Isa 40:3:

“A voice crying (out) in the desolate (land): ‘Make ready the way of (the) Lord, make His broken (path)s straight!'”
fwnh\ bow=nte$ e)n th=| e)rh/mw|: e)toima/sate th\n o(do\n kuri/ou eu)qei/a$ poiei=te ta\$ tri/bou$ au)tou=

The only difference is that the LXX has “the broken (path)s of our God” rather than “…His broken (path)s”. The LXX is a reasonably accurate rendering of the Hebrew, a literal translation of which (in English) would be:

“A voice (is) calling (out): ‘Turn (your) face in the hinterland [i.e. desert] (to) the way/path of YHWH! Make straight in the (desert) plain a place (to walk) up for our God!'”

The text (and context) of the Hebrew will be discussed in the supplemental notes on Isa 40:1-8.

According to the generally-accepted theory regarding the Synoptic Gospels, Matthew and Luke each made use of the Markan Gospel. Matthew’s account in 3:1-6 does follow Mk 1:3-5 quite closely, while Luke 3:1-6f differs more noticeably. Neither Matthew or Luke follows the composite citation (of Mal 3:1 and Isa 40:3) in Mk 1:2-3. If those Gospel writers did make use of Mark, then they must have ‘corrected’ the citation to include only the words from Isaiah. Another possibility is that their Synoptic source was not the Gospel of Mark per se, but (a collection of) material, earlier than Mark, which was common to all three Gospels. With this theory, the Synoptic source contained the citation of Isa 40:3, and it was the Markan writer who added Mal 3:1.

In the Synoptics, the quotation of Isa 40:3 is part of the introductory narration, applied by the Gospel writers (and other early Christians) to John the Baptist and his ministry. However, in the Gospel of John (1:19-28), it is the Baptist himself who cites the Scripture (v. 23). There are reasons, on objective grounds, to accept the historicity of this detail—viz., that John the Baptist applied Isa 40:3 to himself, as the basis (and reason) for his ministry in the Judean desert. The use of Isa 40:3 by the Community of the Qumran texts (cf. below) for a similar purpose makes this all the more likely.

If an identification with the “voice” of Isa 40:3 was genuinely part of John the Baptist’s self-understanding, and featured in his ministry, then it explains how this Scripture would have become fixed in the early Tradition. It was based on historical memory, derived from John’s own preaching.

Originally, Isa 40:3 referred to the immediate expectation of a return from Exile for Israelites and Judeans. Regardless of one’s view on the authorship/composition of the Deutero-Isaian poems (chaps. 40-55), they are clearly written from the standpoint of the Exile, and the promise of return/restoration is a fundamental theme throughout. Over the course of time, however, these poems took on more of an eschatological emphasis. Based on this line of development, the idea of YHWH appearing to bring His people out of Exile was transformed into an end-time appearance, when He would bring Judgment on the nations and deliver His people at the end of the Age.

This eschatological interpretation informs the use of Isa 40:3, both by John the Baptist and by the Qumran Community. In each instance, the motif of “preparing the way” for the Lord relates to the idea of preparing for the eschatological event. For the Community of the Qumran texts, the identification with Isa 40:3 is found most clearly in the so-called Rule of the Community [1QS] text:

“And when these have become a community in Israel in compliance with these arrangements, they are to be segregated from within the dwelling of the men of sin to walk to the desert in order to open there His path. As it is written: ‘In the desert, prepare the way of  ****, straighten in the steppe a roadway for our God’. This is the study of the Law wh[i]ch He commanded through the hand of Moses, in order to act in compliance with all that has been revealed from age to age, and according to what the prophets have revealed through His holy Spirit.” (8:12-16).

This is one of several data-points that has led some scholars to theorize a relationship, or at least some contact, between John the Baptist and the Community of the Qumran texts (usually identified as Essene). I have discussed this subject in an earlier article. In any case, John’s manner of “preparing the way” is quite different from that of the Qumran Community. The focus of his ministry (preaching and baptizing) was to lead the people of Israel to repent and change their lives, in preparation for the coming of the Great Day (of Judgment, thought to be imminent). This can be viewed as a democratization of the sectarian orientation of the Qumran Community. Rather than being required to join a regulated Community, it was enough for people to repent, sincerely, and to commit themselves to an upright way of life. The cleansing symbolized by his baptism rite, much like the ritual washings that took place in the Qumran Community, was an important component demonstrating this shift in mindset and behavior.

Given the emphasis on leading people to repentance, it is little surprise that John’s ministry came to be identified with the coming of “Elijah” in Malachi 4:5-6 [3:23-24]. This identification of John the Baptist with the “Elijah” of the end-time was relatively widespread among early Christians. It is more or less explicit in Luke 1:17, and Jesus seems to affirm the point as well (Mk 9:11-13 par; Matt 11:14). A popular association is indicated in Mk 6:15; 8:28 par, and by the description of John’s appearance and dwelling in the desert (Mk 1:6 par). However, according to Jn 1:21, the Baptist himself specifically denies any such an identification, implying that Jesus should be considered the “Elijah to come”; and, indeed, during the time of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus appears to have been identified with Elijah at a number of points in the early Tradition. For more on this subject, cf. Parts 2–3 of the series “Yeshua the Anointed”, and also the articles on the Baptism of Jesus in “Jesus and the Gospel Tradition”.

There can be little doubt that the eschatological orientation of John’s ministry, at the historical level, was closely related to the Messianic expectations among Israelites and Jews at the time. This comes through clearly enough in the Gospel accounts as we have them, even though it may not be immediately obvious upon a casual reading. The Gospel Tradition presents, in various ways, a juxtaposition between John the Baptist and Jesus, regarding the Messianic identity of each. This contrast—affirming it for Jesus rather than John—is implicit in the tradition of the Baptist’s saying in Mk 1:7-8 par, and is dealt with more directly by Luke (3:15ff), and especially in the Gospel of John (1:19-28, cp. vv. 6-8, 15/30; 3:26-30ff). In Jn 1:19-23, the Baptist explicitly denies being several different Messianic figure-types. It is not entirely clear what “the Messiah” signifies here; at the historical level, it seems unlikely that it is a reference to the royal (Davidic) Messiah, seeing as the Prophetic figures—especially “Elijah” and Moses (“the Prophet [like Moses]”)—are more directly applicable to John. While the Davidic figure-type came to dominate Messianic thought, in the 1st century B.C./A.D. the Messianic expectations of Israelites and Jews, represented (for example) by the Qumran texts, appears to have been more varied and diverse. There are a number of Messianic figure-types, which I have surveyed in considerable detail in the series “Yeshua the Anointed”, and essentially all of them were applied to Jesus by early Christians. The Baptist’s response in Jn 1:20ff does much the same.

In John’s original preaching, etc, “the Lord” for whom he is preparing the way is YHWH—the eschatological point of reference, in applying the Scripture, is the end-time appearance of YHWH, when He comes to bring Judgment on the earth and to save/deliver His people. However, the idea was generally accepted that God would act through a chosen representative, as His intermediary. Most commonly this was understood as a heavenly figure (Angel, etc), but it came to be applied to a range of Messianic figure-types as well (as detailed in my series “Yeshua the Anointed”). Such an “Anointed One” could be a human being (such as a ruler from the line of David [Parts 6–8]), or a heavenly being (Michael, ‘Melchizedek,’ the “Son of Man” figure-type, etc [Part 10]), or some mixture of both. In Malachi 3:1ff, the Messenger who precedes YHWH, and who appears on His behalf, is best understood (in the original context) as an Angelic/heavenly figure. While Mark 1:2 (cf. also Lk 7:27 par), identifies John the Baptist as this Messenger, there is no indication that the Baptist viewed himself as such. Indeed, when he speaks of “the (one who is) coming” (o( e)rxo/meno$), most likely an allusion to Mal 3:1ff (LXX) [cf. the discussion in my earlier note], he is unquestionably referring to another—a heavenly/Messianic figure, identified with Jesus (at the Baptism) in the early Gospel Tradition. The use of Isa 42:1ff in shaping this particular line of tradition, will be the subject of the next article in this series.

Additional Note on Isa 40:3 and the Qumran Community

As noted above, Isaiah 40:3 was an important Scripture in terms of the Qumran Community’s self-identity. Many of the Qumran texts evince a belief that the end was near, and that the Community, as the faithful ones (or “remnant”) of Israel, held a central place in the work of God that was about to take place. This is expressed most clearly in two central documents which shape and define the history and character of the Community—the “Community Rule” [1QS, etc] and the so-called Damascus Document [CD/QD]. I already mentioned the citation of Isa 40:3 in 8:12-16; another allusion is to be found at 9:19-20:

“This is the time for making ready the path to the desert, and he will teach them about all that has been discovered, so that they can carry it out in this moment…” (9:19-20)

The Community of these texts has separated from all other people, living apart together in the desert (presumably at the site of Khirbet Qumrân, among others[?]), devoting themselves to a strict communal lifestyle centered on the study and exposition/interpretation of the Law and Prophets. This Way (Heb. Er#D#) in the desert is a “way of holiness” (cf. Isa 35:8ff; 57:14), which also draws upon several important images and ideas from Israelite history and the oracles of the Prophets (esp. Deutero-Isaiah):

    • The return of exiles to the Land—defined in terms of the the coming of salvation from God (Isa 62:10-11)
    • This is parallel to the way of the Israelites through the wilderness (i.e. the Exodus traditions) into the Promised Land (Isa 11:16; 48:21; 51:10-11)
    • This same salvation is also understood more properly in an eschatological sense, in terms of the coming Judgment (Isa 1:27-31, etc)

These aspects play on the dual meaning of the verb bWv (šû», “turn, return”)—i.e., (1) the return from exile and the restoration of Israel, and (2) a return to God, that is, a turning back away from sin. The Qumran Community refers to itself at times as <yb!v* (š¹»îm), “ones turning/returning”, in two qualified senses:

    • The š¹»ê Yi´r¹°¢l—the faithful ones or “converts” of Israel, i.e. those who have joined the Community (CD 4:2-3; 6:3-7)
    • The š¹»ê peša±—the ones who have turned away (i.e. repented) from sin (CD 2:5; 20:17; 1QS 1:17; 10:20; 1QHa VI.24; X.9; XIV. 6); the expression is likely derived from Isaiah 59:20f.

By turning from sin and the wickedness/faithlessness of the world, and joining the Community, one follows the “way of holiness” and prepares for the end-time Judgment and the salvation God will bring for his faithful ones.

Additional Note on the Text of Isa 40:3 and Its Use in the NT

All three Synoptic Gospels follow the LXX, except for the substitution of au)tou= (“his”) in place of tou= qeou= h(mw=n (“of our God”), which may have been an intentional (Christian) modification; in any case, it helps to make the passage apply to Jesus, rather than God the Father (YHWH). Luke is unique in giving a more complete quotation, of verses 3-5 (though 5a is omitted). Again the LXX is followed, with only a few minor differences. Here is the Lukan rendering of vv. 3-5 inclusive (with 5a omitted):

“A voice crying (out) in the desolate (land): ‘Make ready the way of (the) Lord, make His broken (path)s straight! Every chasm will be filled, and every mountain and hill will be made low; and the winding (place)s will be (turned) into a straight (road), and the rough (spots) into smooth paths; and all flesh will see the salvation of our God!'”

One may understand the early Christian use and application of Isa 40:3 three ways, or on three distinct levels (cf. the discussion above):

    1. At the historical level—i.e. what John said about himself, or how he was viewed by people at the time
    2. In an eschatological or Messianic sense—John as the herald who prepares people for the coming of God (and His Judgment) at the end-time, and
    3. In relationship to Christ—as the forerunner who prepares people for the appearance of Jesus

Translations of the Qumran texts given above (adapted slightly) are from The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition, ed. by Florentino García Martínez & Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar (Brill/Eerdmans: 1997-8 & 2000).

 

 

Saturday Series: Isaiah 24-27

Isaiah 24-27

In these studies focusing on the book of Isaiah, we have had occasion to examine the division of the book spanning chapters 13-27. These chapters represent a unified and coherent work, characterized by the nation-oracle form and genre. A careful critical examination indicates that a core of authentic Isaian material—that is, nation-oracles from the time of the prophet (the Assyrian period, late 8th century B.C.)—has been set in the later context of the Babylonian conquests of the 6th century. In the previous study, as part of an exegetical analysis of the poem in 14:4b-21, I discussed the theory that the oracle refers to the Assyrian ruler Sargon II who held the title “king of Babylon” (cf. the Assyrian context of vv. 24-27). On the basis of this theory, one may posit that an anti-Assyrian oracle, prophesying the (eventual) fall of the Assyrian empire, was subsequently applied (and reinterpreted) as a message of judgment against Babylon in the 6th century (some time before its fall to Persia in 539). Chapter 13 is an anti-Babylonian oracle prophesying the fall of the Babylonian empire (cf. also 14:22-23; 21:1-10).

The 6th century Babylonian setting also seems to be in view in chapters 24-27, serving as an inclusio (with chapter 13) for the entire work, enclosing all of the other (Isaian, etc) material in chaps. 14-23. Certain similarities in tone and style raise the possibility that chapters 13 and 24-27, on the whole, may have been composed by the same author (see Roberts, p. 194, 306). It is not only the judgment against Babylon that is emphasized in these chapters, but the nation-oracle genre has been expanded and developed into message of judgment with cosmic scope—that is, the poems in these chapters represent an oracle against all the nations worldwide (Babylon being only the most prominent). While this wider outlook is found in chapter 13 (vv. 4, 9-11ff), it is even more prominent in chaps. 24-27, the poems of which evince an eschatological and apocalyptic orientation. Indeed, commentators often refer to chaps. 24-27 as the Isaian “Apocalypse”.

The dating of these chapters remains in dispute, and, while most critical commentators would date them well after the time of Isaiah himself, there is a range of scholarly opinion on just how much later they were composed. The eschatological elements present in these poems, along with other aspects of language and style, make it unlikely that they were composed prior to the 6th century and the beginnings of the Persian period. J. J. Roberts, in his fine critical commentary (First Isaiah, Heremeneia [Fortress Press: 2015]) would date the section to the late 7th or early 6th century, which would be among the earliest estimates. A setting of the mid-6th century seems probable, but we shall see how well the exegetical and critical evidence bears this out.

By all accounts, Isa 24-27, as a unit, represents the earliest surviving example of Jewish eschatological and apocalyptic writing. It draws upon both the nation-oracle genre and the well-established prophetic tradition of the “day of YHWH” —an expression which refers to the time of God’s judgment against a particular nation or people. For the most part, the “day” is related to a specific nation; however, by the 6th century, and into the exilic and post-exilic periods, this concept began to be developed into a “day” when God would judge all the nations together. Perhaps the earliest example of this development is to be found in the oracle of Joel 3, which may have been written at time roughly comparable to Isa 13, 24-27 (i.e. in the early-mid 6th century). In the book of Joel, it is likely that the Babylonian conquests are in view, and that the future restoration of Israel (return from exile, etc) is tied to God’s judgment, not only on Babylon, but on all the nations of earth.

It is sometimes difficult to know, in apocalyptic writing, whether the worldwide dimension is meant to be taken in a realistic, concrete sense, or whether a local/regional situation is being described in cosmic terms. It should also be noted that, in such an early example of Jewish eschatology, the eschatological aspect is not nearly so clearly defined as in subsequent writings of the first centuries B.C./A.D. While a “New Age” is certainly envisioned for Israel and Judah, it is harder to be sure of how precise the author understood its connection with the end of the current Age (on a cosmic scale). However, the numerous allusions to the primeval history (including the Creation)—i.e. the beginning of the current Age—strongly suggests that the end of that Age is also in view.

The historical and literary factors outlined above provide the parameters within which we may embark on a critical study of the poems of chapters 24-27. It will not be possible to examine every verse in detail; however, a close study of key selected passages should prove most valuable, both for our understanding of the book of Isaiah, and as an example of Biblical (Old Testament) criticism in action. Let us begin with the opening lines of 24:1-13.

Isaiah 24:1-13

Verses 1-3

“See! YHWH is emptying out the earth and laying it waste,
and He twists its face and scatters (the one)s dwelling (on) it!” (v. 1)
….
“Emptied, the earth will be emptied out,
and plundered, it will be plundered—
for YHWH has spoken this spoken (word).” (v. 3)

The opening verses 1-3 emphasize that YHWH is about to make the earth empty and desolate (using the alliterative verb pair b¹qaq and b¹laq); the violence of this act is indicated by the additional verbs ±¹wâ (“twist”) and b¹zaz (“plunder”). The action is taken on the earth (i.e. the inhabited land) itself, in verses 1 and 3; however, in the intervening verse 2 the effect on the human inhabitants is described. The Hebrew noun °ereƒ can be translated “earth” or “land”; the former suggests a cosmic (worldwide) event, while the latter could be understood more plausibly as a local event. The Qumran Isaiah scroll (1QIsaa) reads °¦¼¹mâ (“ground”) instead of °ereƒ (“earth, land”) in verse 1.

Commentators have noted many instances where these poems in Isa 24-27 seem to borrow from existing works, including the unquestionable oracles of Isaiah, but also from the other prophetic writings, along with the Torah, etc. The author/editor appears to be drawing from written works—that is, it is a literary phenomenon, often referred to in Biblical and textual studies as intertextuality. Even in these opening three verses we may note the following:

    • Similarities in vv. 1, 3 with the vocabulary and thematic emphasis of (earlier) prophetic passages such as Nahum 2:2, 9-10.
    • The comparison with different groups/categories of people in society appears to be an expanded version of Hosea 4:9 (cp. Isa 3:4ff)
    • The use of the verb pûƒ in the Hiphil (“break apart, scatter”) in v. 1 likely alludes to the dispersion of humankind in the Babel narrative of Genesis (cf. 10:18; 11:4, 8-9).

These intertextual references suggest two main themes at work:

    • A development of the prophetic Day of YHWH motif, from the nation/judgment-oracles in Nahum, Hosea, et al.
    • The use of imagery from the Primeval History (and the Creation narrative) in Genesis, to indicate the manner in which the end of the Age will resemble its beginning.
Verses 4-6

“It dries up, the (entire) earth withers,
it languishes, the inhabited (world) withers,
(the) highest place languishes with the earth;
and the earth is corrupted under (the one)s dwelling on her,
for they have crossed over (the) instructions (of YHWH),
they replaced (His decree) inscribed (for all time),
broke (the) agreement binding (into the) distant (future)!
Upon this [i.e. for this reason], a curse has devoured the earth,
and (the one)s dwelling on her face guilt;
upon this, dwellers of the earth are diminished,
and (the) human (being)s left over (are just) a few.”

A range of literary references and (poetic) devices are packed into these lines, emphasizing repeatedly the great judgment that is coming upon all humankind. That it will affect every human being, regardless of social position or status, was already made clear in verse 2. The author intends the situation to parallel that of the great Flood in most ancient times, in the days of Noah, when the vast majority of humankind perished, and only a few survived. The reference to the “agreement binding (into the) distant (future)” (b®rî¾ ±ôl¹m, i.e. ‘eternal covenant’) is almost certainly an allusion to Genesis 9:16, and the covenant God established with humankind after the Flood. This is perhaps the first example of an eschatological application of the great Flood—that is, as a type-pattern of the Judgment that will come upon the world at the end of the current Age (Matt 24:37-38 par; 1 Pet 3:20ff; 2 Pet 2:5ff). Human beings, in their sinfulness, have violated this binding agreement (b®rî¾) with God, and so face the curse (°¹lâ) that is built into the ancient covenant format, as a punishment for failing to fulfill the terms of the agreement.

Verses 7-9

“(The) fresh (wine) dries up, (the) vine languishes,
(and) all (the one)s joyful of heart groan;
(the) delightful (sound) of tambourine has ceased,
(the) noise of (the one)s rejoicing has left off,
(the) delightful (sound) of (the) harp has ceased!
With a song they no longer drink wine,
(and the) beer is bitter for (the one)s drinking it.”

These verses provide a good example of how clever poetic form and style can serve to enhance the message of prophecy. A pair of couplets dealing with the drinking of alcohol (wine/beer) bracket a central tricolon on the joyful social activity and communal celebration that accompanies such drinking. The curse on the earth causes the wine to dry up, which ends up affecting human society. More than this, however, it illustrates how the joy of living is destroyed by the judgment, in ways that might not immediately be apparent.

The alliterative pairing of the the verbs °¹»al (“dry up”) and °¹mal (“grow weak, languish”) echoes that of verse 4 (see above). A separate(?) root °¹»al has the fundamental meaning “mourn, lament”, and it is likely that there is a bit of wordplay intended here—i.e., as the wine “dries up”, the people’s joy comes to an end and they being to “mourn”. The disappearance of joy is depicted in terms of musical celebration; the tricolon of verse 8 is a chiasm:

    • delightful sound of tambourine ceases
      • noise of the ones rejoicing leaves off (i.e. fades away)
    • delightful sound of the harp ceases
Verses 10-12

“(The) city of confusion is broken down,
every house is shut up from coming (in) [i.e. so no one can enter];
an outcry over (the) wine (is) in the (street)s outside,
all joy has gone down (with the sun),
(the) delight of the earth is removed.
Ruin is left (behind) in the city,
and crashing to ruins (the) gate is struck (down)!”

These three verses have a similar poetic structure to those of vv. 7-9: a pair of thematically parallel couplets (emphasizing destruction) surround a central tricolon dealing with the loss of joy in society. Again this loss of joy is tied to the image of the drying up of the wine (i.e. the withering of the vine on earth). Now, however, the sense of loss has shifted to the reality of a city facing destruction and ruin. This figurative city, using the synonymous nouns qiryâ and ±îr, is called “city of confusion” (qirya¾ tœhû), using the same word (tœhû, “confusion”) from Genesis 1:2, which describes the unformed chaos of the primeval universe before God established the created order. Given the context of chapters 13-27 (see above), it is possible that Babylon is foremost in mind, however, if so, it must still be maintained that this great city represents all cities of the nations. The book of Revelation famously makes considerable use of this same Babylon / Great-City symbolism. When the City falls in the Judgment, the order of the world—the natural and social order both—disintegrates, and the world falls into chaos and emptiness, just as in the primeval condition at the beginning of creation.

Verse 13

“For thus it shall be in (the) inner-part of the earth,
in (the) midst of the peoples,
as (the) shaking of an olive (tree),
as (the) gleanings when (the) harvest-cutting is finished.”

This rhythmically balanced quatrain closes the first part of the poem, and forms a thematic parallel with the opening verse (see above). The same themes of the destruction/shaking of the earth and the scattering of its inhabitants are found here, only set within the image of the harvest. The harvest, marking the end of the growing season and life-cycle, serves as a natural metaphor for the end of the current Age. Joel 3, possibly composed at around the same time as this poem, makes use of the same imagery in an eschatological context (v. 13). The book of Revelation, influenced by both passages, follows the same line of imagery, involving the vine harvest (14:14-20). The oracle against Babylon in Jeremiah 50-51, with its use of the harvest motif (50:16; 51:33) is also relevant in this context.

We will continue this discussion in next week’s study, as we consider how the poem in 24:1-13 fits into the overall scope and thematic structure of chaps. 24-27.

The Antichrist Tradition: Part 2

In Part 1 of this study, I explored the Old Testament background of the Antichrist Tradition, focusing on the “wicked tyrant” motif in the Prophetic nation-oracles, and, especially, in the book of Daniel, where the figure of Antiochus IV Epiphanes would serve as a type-pattern for subsequent eschatological traditions.

A number of post-Scriptural Jewish writings from the period c. 250 B.C. to 100 A.D. have survived, including a wealth of texts from Qumran with manuscripts that were actually copied and preserved during this time. To some extent, these writings bridge the gap between the Old Testament Scriptures and the years when the New Testament texts were composed. I have already discussed a number of key Jewish texts in earlier notes and articles (esp. throughout the series “Yeshua the Anointed”); within Judaism of this time, eschatology, apocalypticism, and Messianic thought all function together, and rarely can they be separated. Much the same is true for early Christianity; I discuss the relationship between Messianism and early Christian eschatology in a previous article.

Here, in Part 2 of the current study, we will survey the most relevant texts and passages which might relate to the background of the Antichrist Tradition, illustrating eschatological themes and motifs that would have been familiar among Jews and Christians by the middle of the first-century A.D.

An important note to keep in mind, regarding these Jewish apocalyptic writings, is that they tend to be pseudepigraphic, meaning that they purport to record the prophetic visions and oracles received by famous figures of the past (e.g., Enoch, Abraham, Moses, Elijah, etc). Commentators, however, are virtually unanimous in the opinion that such texts are not authentic records from the time of those legendary characters, but, rather, were composed much later on and set in the mouths of Enoch, et al, as a literary device. This does not mean that the writings are purely fictional, since they almost certainly contain older traditions, to varying degrees, but that the apparent historical setting is a literary device, and not genuine. Many critical commentators would hold that the book of Daniel (esp. chapters 7-12), as the primary apocalyptic writing in the Old Testament, is pseudepigraphic in just this way (cf. the discussion in Part 1).

This pseudepigraphic aspect of Jewish apocalyptic texts is important in the way that it frames the eschatological beliefs and expectations. End-time events, which, it was thought (or hoped), would soon take place in the lifetime of the readers, etc, are presented as prophecies of the distant future, uttered by persons who lived hundreds or thousands of years earlier. Gradually, this chronological-historical aspect would be expressed more systematically—i.e., the end-time as the final period in a long sequence of Israelite/Jewish history.

The Eschatological Pattern (c. 100 B.C.)

Our sources for the 2nd (and early 1st) century B.C. are extremely slight; some of the Qumran texts likely date from this time (cf. below), though the majority, it would seem, are from the later Hasmonean and Herodian periods. Even so, there is evidence that a literary and conceptual pattern, for expressing common eschatological expectations, had been established by c. 100 B.C. It is a rudimentary pattern, centered firmly on the traditional idea that the end of the (current) Age will be marked by widespread wickedness and corruption. While the current Age, as a whole, may be seen as wicked in this way, the evil and impiety among human beings increases dramatically as the end draws near. Most apocalyptic writings which express this sort of eschatology generally accept (and take for granted) that people are already living in this wicked end-time.

One of the earliest examples is found in the Book of Jubilees, a pseudepigraphic work with an ethical-religious, rather than eschatological, emphasis. Presented as a prophetic revelation to Moses on Mount Sinai (1:4ff), the book is actually a clever reworking of the historical narratives in the Pentateuch (Genesis and Exodus), designed to impress upon Jews (in the 2nd century) the obligation to live in obedience to the Covenant and the Torah. The need for such an exhortation is especially great given the wickedness of the current period of history, which corresponds to the end-time. The worldview of Jubilees was consonant with that of the Qumran Community (cf. below), so it is not surprising that the book was quite popular, at least for a time, among the Community, and may even have been regarded as authoritative Scripture.

The eschatological dimension of the historical survey in Jubilees is stated clearly in the introductory section (1:4-29), but otherwise does not feature prominently within in the narrative. One exception is chapter 23, an interlude between the Abraham and Jacob narratives, set in the context of the death and burial of Abraham. The rise of an especially evil and wicked generation is foreseen, which, at the level of the pseudepigraphic historical narrative, may refer to the sins of Israel in the wilderness, etc, but actually is describing the end-time period of wickedness (i.e. in the distant future). This wicked generation is described in considerable detail in vv. 16-21, leading to the great Judgment by God on humankind (Israel, specifically, vv. 22-25), after which there will be a New Age, a ‘Golden Age’ of peace and prosperity for God’s people (vv. 23-31). This plays on the historical theme (in the Prophets) of Israel’s restoration, a theme that, even in the later strands of Old Testament tradition, came to be understood in a definite eschatological sense.

The eschatological framework in Jubilees 23 is even more pronounced in the great Book of Enoch (1 Enoch), a lengthy composite work, produced over several centuries, and containing a wide range of traditional and literary material. The earliest portions date from the 2nd century B.C., while the latest elements, it would seem, were composed in the early/mid 1st century A.D. (cf. below). At its core, doubtless, are various ancient traditions regarding Enoch; however, around this developed a diverse collection of apocalyptic and eschatological writings. Like Jubilees, this book (some form of it), was popular with the Qumran Community, as evidenced by the numerous copies, and related writings, that have been preserved.

One of the oldest eschatological sections of 1 Enoch is the so-called “Apocalypse of Weeks” (93:1-10 + 91:11-17), which divides history (i.e. the current Age) into a series of “weeks”, periods marked by specific events and characteristics. With each week, evil and injustice will become ever greater (93:4), culminating in the wicked generation of the seventh week (vv. 9-10). After this comes the Judgment, with violent destruction of the wicked on earth (eighth week), and eternal destruction of all evil (ninth week), followed by the heavenly New Age of the tenth week that stretches into eternity (91:12-17). This basic historical-eschatological pattern appears in other sections of the book as well; we may note the references in 91:6-7 and 100:1-4, the last of which is particularly vivid in its description of widespread lawlessness and violence in the end-time.

The eschatology of 1 Enoch also emphasizes the wickedness and arrogance of the nations (and their kings), who oppose God and refuse properly to acknowledge His authority. This aspect of the Judgment of the Nations (cf. the concluding section of Part 1) features in the historical survey at the end of the “Book of Dreams” (chaps. 83-90), the so-called “Animal Apocalypse” in chaps. 89-90—a collective assault by the Nations (vv. 16-19) precedes the final Judgment and beginning of the New Age (vv. 20-42).

The Psalms of Solomon (Ps Sol 17)

The “wicked tyrant” motif, inherited from the Prophetic nation-oracles, and emphasized in the book of Daniel (cf. the discussion in Part 1), is generally absent from the eschatological framework in Jubilees and 1 Enoch, outlined above. Perhaps the earliest example of its inclusion is found in the 17th of the so-called Psalms of Solomon. Most commentators would date these Psalms to the mid-1st century B.C., sometime after the year 63, based on the presumed allusions to the conquests by the Roman general Pompey (d. 48 B.C.), e.g., in the 2nd, 8th, and 17th Psalms. If this is correct, then Pompey would fill the “wicked tyrant” pattern in the 1st century much as Antiochus IV Epiphanes did in the 2nd (the Danielic prophecies in chaps. 7-12). Antiochus represented the Seleucids, partial heirs to the Hellenistic empire of Alexander, while Pompey represented the empire of Rome—the great world power of the time, in all its violence and corruption.

The wickedness of the current Age, the end-time (cf. above), serves as the context for Ps Sol 17. In particular, the Psalm describes how the faithlessness of the Israelite/Jewish people has led to the arrival of a powerful foreign ruler (i.e. Pompey), called “the lawless one” (v. 11), who lays waste to the land and inaugurates a period of intense wickedness, marked by a disruption of the social and natural order (vv. 15-20). The language of the “wicked tyrant” tradition is especially prominent in verse 13, where it is stated of this ruler that he “was a stranger, and his heart alien to our God, he acted arrogantly”. His corruption and desecration of Jerusalem, causing a disturbance of Israelite religion (vv. 14-15a), seems to echo the famous actions of Antiochus IV; as preserved in the prophecies of Daniel, it was this aspect of Antiochus that would play a significant role in the early development of the Antichrist Tradition (discussed in Part 3).

It is also noteworthy that “wicked tyrant” motif in Ps Sol 17 is more firmly rooted in Messianic thought and expectation, especially as related to the Davidic ruler figure-type (vv. 1-4, 21-25ff). It is the Davidic Messiah who will act on God’s behalf to defeat/subdue the nations and bring Judgment on the wicked. The New Age to come (vv. 30ff) is more properly a Messianic Age, according to the traditional theme of the restoration of the Israelite kingdom. The juxtaposition of Messiah (i.e. Christos) and wicked ruler provides the conceptual matrix for the very idea of anti-Christ.

Belial/Beliar

Important to Jewish eschatology in the first centuries B.C./A.D. is the figure of Belíal (Beli/al, variant spelling Belíar, Beli/ar), representing a complex line of tradition, the origins of which remain obscure. The name is a transliteration of the Hebrew lu^Y^l!B= (b®liyya±al), a (proper) noun occurring 27 times in the Old Testament. In the Greek Septuagint (LXX) version, it is always translated, rather than transliterated, except in the A-text of Judges 20:13. Unfortunately the exact meaning and derivation of the word remain uncertain (for more detail, cf. my article on “2 Cor 6:14-7:1 and the Dead Sea Scrolls”). Ultimately, the meaning has to be determined by the context where it is used in the Old Testament. The oldest usage would seem to be preserved in several examples of early poetry, especially in Psalm 18:5[4] (= 2 Sam 22:5), where it is synonymous with “Death” (tw#m*, m¹we¾) and “Sheol” (loav= š®°ôl, see my earlier article for more on this term). The expression “deadly (poison) of Beliyya’al” (lu^Y^l!B= rb^D= d®»ar b®liyya±al) in Psalm 41:9[8] (also 101:3) likely stems from the same use of lu^Y^l!B= as a name for Death.

Much more frequent is the expression “son/s of Beliyya’al”, ben / b®nê b®liyya±al (Deut 13:14; Judg 19:22; 20:13; 1 Sam 2:12; 10:27; 25:17; 1 Kings 21:10, 13; 2 Chron 13:7), along with the parallel (and more or less equivalent) expression “man/men of Beliyya’al”, °îš / °anšê b®liyya±al (1 Sam 25:25; 30:22; 2 Sam 16:7; 20:1; 1 Kings 21:13; Prov 16:27), °¹¼¹m b®liyya±al (Prov 6:12); also “daughter [ba¾] of Beliyya’al” in 1 Sam 1:16. In Hebrew, the word ben (/B#, “son”) is often used in the sense of a person belonging to a particular group or category, i.e. possessing a set of certain characteristics in common, and so it must be understood in these instances. It refers to a Beliyya’al-like person, someone who “belongs” to Beliyya’al, with evidence (by his/her attitudes and behavior) of similar characteristics. The context of the passages cited above makes clear that a “son/man of Beliyya’al” essentially refers to a person who violates and disrupts the order of things—either in a specific social (or religious) setting, or within society at large. This relates to the idea of hostility, chaos, and confusion (i.e. disorder), rather than the more direct association with Death in the poetic references mentioned above.

It is hard to say whether, in the expression “son/man of Beliyya’al”, the word b®liyya±al is used in an abstract sense, or as a proper noun (i.e. personal name). Both are possible, though the parallel with Death/Sheol in Psalm 18:5, etc, suggests that an ancient (mythological) personification of death (and the grave) informs the usage. This figurative association would naturally extend to encompass the idea of chaos, confusion, and destruction—all related to the realm of death and “non-existence”, i.e. the primal condition of the universe (as a dark, formless mass [see Gen 1:2 etc]) prior to the establishment of the created order by God. At the same time, b®liyya±al is clearly synonymous with the more abstract concepts of “evil” (r¹±), “wickedness” (reša±) and “trouble” (°¹wen), especially in the Wisdom writings (Prov 6:12; 16:27; 19:28; Job 34:18). Most likely, this is a secondary development, from the expression “son/man of Beliyya’al”, and the characteristic of a such a person as a wicked trouble-maker (see the generalized usage, where the expression is implied, in 2 Sam 23:6; Nahum 1:11; 2:1 [1:15]). A wicked/evil thought, expressed by d¹»¹r b®liyya±al (Deut 15:9; Psalm 101:3 [?]), may involve wordplay with an older poetic expression “deadly (poison) [dbr] of Beliyya’al” (Ps 41:9, cf. above).

We do not encounter the word/name Beliyya’al again until the first centuries B.C., when it appears in a number of surviving Jewish texts of the period. (e.g., Jubilees 1:20). Already in Greek texts (and translations) of the time, the variant spelling Belíar (instead of Belíal) is attested as a transliteration of the Hebrew word. Most notably, b®liyya±al occurs frequently in the Qumran texts (discussed below), where it is used to refer to an evil figure opposed to God, personifying (and governing) the darkness and wickedness of the current (evil) Age. As such, the name is more or less synonymous with “(the) Sa‰an” or “Devil”. This is a significant development from the earlier Hebrew expression “son(s) of Beliyya’al”. Now, those who ‘belong’ to Beliyya’al are defined in a pronounced dualistic sense as the “sons of darkness”, opposed to God and to the “sons of light” (i.e. the Qumran Community); and the wicked “sons of darkness” will be destroyed (along with Beliyya’al) by God’s end-time Judgment that is about to be ushered in. As Paul in 2 Cor 6:14 exhorts and warns first-century believers:

“…choose for yourselves light or darkness, the Law of the Lord or the works of Belial!”

The Qumran Texts

The Community of the Qumran texts was fundamentally eschatological, its members believing firmly that they were the faithful remnant of God’s people, the holy ones of the end-time. They would be at the center of the end-time events, when God would send his Anointed One(s) to them, bringing about the great Judgment that would destroy the wicked and introduce the New Age. The figure of Belial (cf. above) was important to the world-view of the Community. He was the Evil One (akin to, but not necessarily identical with, the Satan), also known by the titles “Spirit of Deceit/Falsehood” and “Spirit/Prince of Darkness”; he was the prince, or leader, of the false/evil spirits, but he also exercises control over the world during the current, wicked Age. The world, and the inhabitants in it—i.e. the nations and the wicked/faithless of Israel—are called the “dominion of Belial” (1QS 1:18, 24; 2:19).

Members of the Community knew they had to contend with Belial on a regular basis, as the Community Rule document (1QS) states clearly (3:13-4:26; 10:21, etc). Belial has opposed God’s people all throughout the Age, from the time of Moses to the present (Damascus Document [CD/QD] 4:12-19; 5:17-19). Only at the end-time, with the Judgment, will his power finally be broken, but not before a period of intense activity, during the time of much greater wickedness that precedes the end (cf. above; CD 7:21ff; 12:2-3; 1QS 4:11ff, 18-23).

The end-time defeat of Belial is portrayed as a great eschatological battle in the War Scroll (1QM), a war between the “Sons of Light” and the “Sons of Darkness”. The “Sons of Light” are the faithful ones of Israel—i.e. the members of the Community in its fullness—together with the holy ones of heaven (Michael and the Angels), while the “Sons of Darkness” are similarly comprised of wicked human beings (esp. the nations) along with evil spirits. For a similar juxtaposition of the earthly and heavenly realms, cf. chapter 12 of the book of Revelation (also 19:11-21). That the wicked nations are part of the “army of Belial” is clear from 1QM 1:1-2ff, 13: 15:2-3, etc; this makes Belial a great world-leader, a portrait that certainly influenced the later Antichrist tradition, as we shall see. Belial and his forces—human and demonic—will be defeated and destroyed in the battle (4:2; 13:10-12; 14:4-15; 18:1-5, etc). The “sons of darkness” who belong to Belial are a reflection of the older idiom “sons of Belial”, “men of Belial” (cf. above); these expressions are retained, in an eschatological context, in several other Qumran texts—e.g., the Florilegium (4Q174) on 2 Sam 7:11 and Psalm 2:1-2 (both Messianic passages, col. i. 1-9, 18-ii. 5), and the Testimonia (4Q175) on Josh 6:26 and the “Psalms of Joshua” (lines 21-29).

In the eschatological conflict, the Community is led by the Angel Michael (1QM 17:6-7), but also by Anointed (Messianic) figures—a Davidic Ruler (Anointed of Israel) and a ruling Priest (Anointed of Aaron). In this regard, Belial can literally be called an Anti-Christ (Anti-Messiah), one who is opposed to the Messiah. The idea of a direct opposition is expressed more clearly in several texts which involve the figure of Melchizedek, who may be characterized as a Messiah—the heavenly-redeemer figure-type (cf. Part 10 of the series “Yeshua the Anointed”, along with the supplemental article on Hebrews). He also possesses attributes of the royal (Davidic) Messiah and Anointed Priest, based on the line of tradition deriving from Psalm 110:1-3. The Melchizedek of these texts (most notably 11QMelch) closely resembles the Angel Michael as a heavenly deliverer, and so it should be no surprise that his opponent, Melchiresha, resembles Belial. The name Melchiresha is patterned after Melchizedek, emphasizing wickedness (uv^r#, reša±) instead of righteousness (qd#x#, ƒedeq). In 11QMelch 11-14, Melchizedek is the one who exercises the Judgment on Belial, delivering the righteous (sons of God) from his power. Melchiresha holds a similar power over the “sons of light” in the current wicked Age (4Q544 frag. 2, lines 3ff, frag. 3, lines 1-3) and will likewise be judged in the end-time (implied in 4Q280 frag. 1, lines 1-2ff).

A different kind of eschatological opponent is described in the commentary (pesher) on Habakkuk (1QpHab), reflecting more directly the immediate history of the Community. The quasi-Messianic leader known as the “Teacher of Righteousness” (cf. Part 4 of the series “Yeshua the Anointed”) was opposed by the “Man of Lies”, part of a pattern of opposition/persecution in the last days (2.1-9); similar labels and titles, including that of “False Prophet” are applied to these wicked persons (and their leaders), cf. 5.11; 8.16ff; 10.9. While this history is set in the end time and “last days”, it precedes the violent attacks by the nations (the Kittim, i.e. Rome); the wickedness described in 1QpHab relates to the corruption of the current Priesthood (9:4ff, etc), to which the Priestly leadership of the Community was utterly opposed.

The book of Daniel was enormously influential in the Qumran Community, to judge from the number of surviving manuscripts, as well as the so-called Pseudo-Daniel writings—texts which were inspired by the canonical book, or which resemble it in some way. Unfortunately, these texts (4Q242, 243-4, 245, 246) are all highly fragmentary, so it is impossible to get a clear picture of the overall content. Based on the apparent structure of 4Q243-4 and 4Q245, and the apocalyptic narrative pattern (cf. above), we may surmise that each of these texts would have concluded with an eschatological section—i.e. the final stage in the survey of Israel’s history (presented as prophecy). Fragments 16 & 24 of 4Q243 seem to resemble Daniel 7, and may refer to a “wicked tyrant” of the end-time, similar to that patterned after Antiochus IV (cf. the discussion in Part 1).

Also inspired by Daniel 7, it would seem, is the famous “Son of God” text (4Q246). Some commentators have suggested that the ruler called “Son of God” and “Son of the Highest” (col. ii, line 1) is a wicked ruler, who takes these divine titles for himself, in opposition to God and His people. If so, then this would be the clearest example of a Jewish precursor to the Antichrist tradition. However, the majority of commentators take the opposite view—that the person called by these titles is a positive, Messianic figure. I would tend to agree; I am not aware of any instance where such titles are used for (or by) a wicked ruler. The divine pretensions of rulers in the “wicked tyrant” tradition are expressed rather differently (as discussed in Part 1); it is most unlikely that such divine titles would be associated with a wicked ruler without any further qualification. Moreover, the close parallels with the Angelic announcement in Luke 1:32-33, 35 seem to confirm the positive, Messianic significance of these titles in context.

The early 1st-century A.D.

When we turn to Jewish eschatology in the first half of the 1st century A.D., a time contemporary with the earliest strands of the New Testament, there are several apocalyptic writings that are worth noting. We may begin with the Similitudes of Enoch (1 Enoch 37-71), a portion of the book of Enoch not attested among the Qumran manuscripts, and often thought to date from the early-mid 1st century A.D. The eschatological emphasis in the Similitudes is on the coming of the end-time Judgment, when the wicked nations shall be judged (along with their kings/rulers), and their kingdoms transferred to the rule of the righteous. The elect/righteous ones are represented (and personified) by the “Elect One” and “Righteous One”, a heavenly redeemer also called by the titles Anointed (Messiah) and “Son of Man”. It is he who will bring about the Judgment on God’s behalf.

The defeat of the nations and their kings is especially prominent. The second parable (similitude), chaps. 45-57, describes this in terms of a military attack (and defeat) that occurs in a great valley (53-56). The scenario is no doubt inspired by the oracle in Joel 3 (cf. the discussion in Part 1), and is likewise found in the book of Revelation (16:12-16; 19:17-21). The Similitudes are laced throughout with references and allusions to the book of Daniel (chap. 7, etc), and there can be little doubt that the (wicked) rulers of the nations are inspired by the “wicked tyrant” motif from the Old Testament Prophets.

The Assumption of Moses is another apocalyptic pseudipgraphon, with certain similarities to the book of Jubilees (cf. above). Moses utters a prophecy of Israel’s future history (chaps. 2-6) that concludes with a prediction of the end-time (chaps. 7-10), understood to be the author’s own time (the present). The end-time begins with a period of great wickedness, including the persecution and oppression of the righteous (illustrated by the martyrdom of the Levite Taxo and his sons). This time of wickedness, described vividly in 7:3-10, reaches its climax with the coming of a foreign king (“the king of the kings of the earth”), much like the “lawless one” in Ps Sol 17 (cf. above), who will brutally attack the righteous and desecrate the true religion (8:1-5ff). He thus very much resembles the “wicked tyrant” (Antiochus IV) in the book of Daniel, following that type-pattern, only his appearance is set within a more precise eschatological sequence.

The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs is a collection of Jewish pseudepigraphic writings, inspired by Genesis 49. The underlying material and tradition is Jewish, but there are signs of subsequent Christian editing and adaptation as well. The final (Christian) form dates from the 2nd century A.D., but the Jewish stratum must be considerably earlier. The Aramaic Levi document from Qumran, for example, is related in some way to the Testament of Levi. Of course the Christianized portions cannot be used as evidence for Jewish thought of the period; however, early Christians likely would not have adapted the material if they did not find in it a certain affinity to their own thought, with eschatology and Messianism that was amenable for application to Jesus (as the Messiah).

The name Belial (variant “Beliar”, cf. above) occurs frequently in the Testaments—nearly 30 times: Asher 1:8; 3:2; Benjamin 3:3, 5, 8; 6:1, 7; 7:1-2; Dan 1:7; 4:7; 5:1, 10-11; Issachar 6:1; 7:7; Joseph 7:4; 20:2; Judah 25:3; Levi 3:3; 18:12; 19:2; Naphtali 2:6; 3:2; Reuben 4:8, 11; 6:4; Simeon 5:3; Zebulun 9:8. The portrait is quite similar to that of the depiction of Belial in the Qumran texts (discussed above), with the overall emphasis being ethical rather than eschatological (cf. Peerbolte, Antededents, pp. 289-92). Beliar, now identified more directly with the Satan/Devil, is the leader of the evil/deceitful spirits, and will become even more prominent in the period of wickedness before the end (T. Issachar 6:1). His power will be broken in the eschatological Judgment (T. Levi 3:3; Zebulun 9:8), and this will be done by the God’s Messiah (i.e. Jesus)—T. Dan 5:10-11; Benjamin 3:8; Levi 18:12; Judah 25:3; Simeon 6:6.

Also worthy of mention are the Sibylline Oracles, a mixture of Jewish, Christian, and pagan (Greco-Roman) material, even more complex and difficult to date than the Testaments. Books 3-4 are generally considered to be Jewish, having reached their current form by the end of the 1st century A.D. In all likelihood the Jewish material and traditions in these books go back to at least the early part of the century, and perhaps as far back as the 2nd century B.C. There are a number of passages which refer to the coming (end-time) events; while not presented in a systematic format, they show the development of a number of key eschatological themes (cf. Peerbolte, Antecedents, pp. 327-31):

    • A period of suffering and distress for humankind, marked by disruptions (chaos) in both the social and natural order—3:635-651, 796-806
    • This will be a time of great wickedness, preceding God’s Judgment on the world—4:152-161
    • It will be marked by the rise of a powerful and wicked world-ruler, a foreign monarch—3:75-92, 611-615
    • The nations will attack the people of God, and also the Temple in Jerusalem—3:657-668

All of these components feature in the Synoptic “Eschatological Discourse” of Jesus, discussed further in Part 3. The figure of Beliar also occurs in at least two passages (2:154-173; 3:63-74), but in terms of a more personal manifestation or incarnation(?) during the end-time period of wickedness. The idea of Belial incarnate as a Satanic/demonic miracle-working figure (and ruler) in the end-time almost certainly influenced the subsequent Antichrist Tradition (cf. the discussion in Part 3).

2 Baruch and 2/4 Esdras (late 1st-century)

The Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch (2 Baruch), and the work known as 2 Esdras (or 4 Esdras / 4 Ezra), were both written in the latter part of the 1st century A.D. They are thus contemporary with the book of Revelation, and, indeed, they each resemble Revelation, in terms of its visionary narrative and symbolism, in a number of important ways. These two texts may be said to represent the pinnacle of the development of Jewish eschatology in the first centuries B.C./A.D. Portions of the Sibylline Oracles (cf. above) likely date from this same period.

Space does not permit a detailed treatment of the eschatology of 2 Baruch; it will suffice to offer a general survey and summary. Especially noteworthy is the vision-cycle in chapters 53-77, which utilizes the apocalyptic pattern of presenting the end-time as the final stage in a sequence of periods of Israelite history. The time immediately preceding the coming of the Anointed One will be a period of great distress and suffering—wickedness, violence, chaos and upheaval, etc (chaps. 69-70)—to climax with the defeat of the nations by the Messiah (i.e. the Judgment, chaps. 70-72). Similar descriptions of the end-time period of suffering and wickedness are found in 48:26-41 and 83:9-21 (cf. Peerbolte, Antecedents, pp. 317-9).

In chapters 36-40 there is a vision of four natural features—forest, cedar tree, a stream, and a vine—which, much like the visions in Daniel 2 and 7, are interpreted as a series four great kingdoms that are to follow, one after the other. Each will be more powerful (and wicked) then the one prior, with the fourth being the most evil and brutal of all. The reign of this kingdom corresponds to the great end-time period of wickedness and distress, which will come to an end when it is finally defeated by the forces of the Messiah. The ruler of the fourth kingdom resembles the “little horn” of the fourth beast/kingdom in the Daniel 7 vision (cf. also in Dan 8), and very much follows the “wicked tyrant” motif as developed in Daniel (with the type-pattern of Antiochus IV, cf. Part 1).

Mention should also be made of the use of the symbolic figures of “Leviathan” and “Behemoth” in 29:3-4, as mythic/demonic creatures who represent the (primeval) forces of chaos and disorder. Just as darkness and chaos preceded the establishment of the first Creation (Gen 1:2), so also there will be a time of chaos before the coming of the New Age (the new Creation). The same basic tradition occurs in 1 Enoch 60:7-8 and 2/4 Esdras 6:49-52 (cf. below). The application of this line of symbolism in the book of Revelation (i.e. the Sea- and Earth-creatures of chapters 13ff) suggests that it is at least marginally relevant to the Antichrist Tradition.

Finally, in the apocalypse of 2/4 Esdras, we find perhaps the most developed form and presentation of these eschatological themes and motifs. It is also the Jewish writing of the period which most closely resembles the book of Revelation and early Christian eschatology c. 70-100 A.D. The earlier apocalyptic pattern (cf. above) is now presented with much greater precision, following the same basic sequence as we see in the Assumption of Moses and 2 Baruch (above): a period of suffering and wickedness, chaos and disorder, which reaches its climax with the rise of a wicked (world) ruler; after this follows the defeat of the nations (by the Messiah) and the great Judgment, bringing about the New Age of peace and righteousness.

The end-time period of distress is described vividly (and at length) in the two visions of chapters 5-6 (cf. especially 5:1-12; 6:18-24); similar eschatological signs (cp. the Eschatological Discourse, Mark 13:4-8ff, 24-25 par) are given in 8:49ff; 9:3-6; 14:16-18 (cf. Peerbolte, Antecedents, pp. 304-8). There is a brief allusion to a coming end-time ruler, during this time of wickedness, in 5:6-7. A clearer description is found in the vision of chapters 11-12, of the Eagle and the Lion, inspired at least in part by the visions in Daniel 7-8. The eagle, with twelve wings and three heads, like the Sea-creature of Revelation 13ff, rather clearly symbolizes the Roman Empire—the great (and wicked) world-power of the time. The last of the three heads is the final ruler of the kingdom, and the time when it is defeated by the Messiah (the Lion), 12:31-34, at the height of its arrogance and ungodliness (i.e., the “wicked tyrant” motif). Attempts have been made to identify these three heads with specific Roman emperors, much as in the case of the heads of the Sea-creature in Revelation (cf. Part 3, and the relevant daily notes).

Finally, the great vision of the “man out of the sea” in chapter 13 should be noted. In Daniel and Revelation, it is the wicked kingdom (beast/creature) that comes out of the Sea, while here in 2/4 Esdras it is God’s Messiah (also called his “Son”, vv. 32, 37) who rises from the midst of the Sea. It is at this time that the nations, assembled together for attack, are defeated and destroyed, marking the coming of the Judgment. For more on this Judgment of the Nations motif, cf. the concluding section in Part 1.

Supplemental Study: New Testament Eschatology and the Book of Daniel

Supplemental Study:
New Testament Eschatology and the Book of Daniel

Apart from the book of Isaiah (esp. Deutero-Isaiah, chaps. 40-66), no Old Testament writing influenced Jewish and early Christian eschatology more than the book of Daniel. The exact nature of this influence depends on how one dates the book and its composition. According to the standard critical view, the book, in the form we have it, was written around the year 165 B.C., though it may contain earlier traditions. This allows for the possibility that eschatological/apocalyptic themes in the book, which are also found in, for example, the Book of Enoch and a number of the Qumran texts (written earlier or around the same time), are not directly dependent on Daniel, but on a set of common traditions. By contrast, the traditional-conservative view holds that essentially the book is an authentic composition from Daniel’s own time (6th cent. B.C.). This would greatly increase the likelihood that similarities in the Qumran texts, etc, are inspired/influenced primarily, if not entirely, by the book of Daniel.

In this brief study, supplemental to the current series Prophecy and Eschatology in the New Testament, I will be examining several specific areas, as they relate to the use of Daniel in the New Testament:

    1. The use of Daniel in the Qumran texts
    2. The “Seventy Weeks” oracle in Dan 9:24-27
    3. The “Son of Man” vision in Dan 7:13-14ff
    4. The influence of the concluding visions in chapters 10-12

1. The use of Daniel in the Qumran texts

The book of Daniel features prominently in the Qumran texts (Dead Sea Scrolls), in several ways: (a) manuscripts of the book, (b) apocalyptic works influenced by Daniel, and (c) imagery and beliefs drawn from Daniel. The way the Qumran Community interpreted and applied the visions of the book is quite instructive for how the earliest Christians would have understood them as well.

a. Copies of Daniel at Qumran

There are eight manuscript copies of the book of Daniel among the Qumran texts, making it one of the most frequently copied Scriptures (after the Pentateuch, Isaiah, and Psalms). All of the manuscripts are quite fragmentary, but together they cover nearly the entire book. The relatively large number of copies is an indication of the importance and popularity of the book in the Qumran community.

b. The Pseudo-Danielic Writings

There are four texts which are sometimes referred to by the label “Pseudo-Daniel”, due to the presence of Daniel as a central character, or based on similarities to the Old Testament book. Like Dan 2:4b-7:28, these texts were all written in Aramaic.

The first text is represented, it seems, by two manuscripts (4Q243-244). Based on a reconstruction of the surviving fragments, a likely outline of the text can be established. Daniel is standing before Belshazzar (cf. Dan 5), and, like Stephen in his Acts 7 speech, delivers a history of God’s people which turns into a ‘prophecy’ of events which will occur in the Hellenistic period (as in Dan 10-11), and which, in turn, leads into a description of the end-time—after a period of great oppression, God’s people will be delivered and the holy kingdom established (cf. Dan 12:1ff). A second text, apparently with a similar structure and orientation, is preserved in a couple of small fragments (4Q245). Also surviving in a few fragments is the “Prayer of Nabonidus” (4Q242), which records an episode similar to that experienced by Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 4, only here the central figure is king Nabû-na’id (Nabonidus, 556-539 B.C.). Many critical scholars, based on historical parallels with the Babylonian “Nabonidus Chronicle”, believe that the more authentic tradition may indeed have involved Nabonidus, who was replaced by Nebuchadnezzar in the Biblical account.

Especially significant is the fourth text, the famous 4Q246, surviving in a large fragment with two columns. It also has many parallels and similarities to the book of Daniel, in which a king’s troubling vision is interpreted by a prophet/seer (unnamed in the text as we have it). The seer announces events to come—a period of great distress, involving warfare among the kings/nations of the Near East (col. 1, lines 4-6), culminating in the rise of a great ruler who will bring an end to the wars (lines 7-9). A time of war and upheaval is mentioned again in column 2, lines 2-3, followed by the rise of the “people of God” (line 4). This has led some scholars to posit that the great ruler is actually a kind of ‘Antichrist’ figure who brings a false peace. The language used to describe him, however, makes this most unlikely. He is best viewed as a Messianic figure (of the Davidic-ruler type); and there are surprising parallels with the announcement of Jesus’ birth in Luke 1:32-33, 35. It is said of this person that:

    • “he will be great” (col. 1, line 7; Lk 1:32)
    • “he will be hailed as Son of God” (col. 2, line 1; Lk 1:35)
    • “he will be called Son of the Highest” (col. 2, line 1; Lk 1:32)
    • there is also reference to an “everlasting kingdom” (col. 2, lines 5, 9; Lk 1:33)

The rise of this figure is parallel to the rise of the “people of God”, similar to the pattern and structure we see in Daniel 7. Overall in the text, we see possible allusions to Dan 3:33; 4:31; 7:14, 27, and other portions of the book as well.

All of these texts provide evidence for the extent to which the book of Daniel (and/or its underlying traditions) helped to shaped the eschatological and apocalyptic worldview of the Qumran Community.

c. Other signs of influence at Qumran

There are numerous references or allusions to the book of Daniel in the Qumran texts; I point out here the most prominent of these.

i. The expression <ym!Y`h^ tyr!j&a^ (“after the days”, “following the days”, “[in] the following days”) is a common Semitic (and Old Testament) idiom; however, its distinctive eschatological connotation (“end of the days”, end time, etc) is probably due primarily to its occurrence in Daniel 2:28 and 10:14 (cf. also 8:19, 23; 12:8). It appears a number of times in the Qumran texts, such as: the Florilegium (4Q174, cf. below), the Damascus Document (CD 4:4; 6:11), the so-called ‘Messianic Rule’ (1QSa 1:1), the ‘Halakhic Letter’ (4QMMT C [4Q398] 13-16), and the Commentaries (pesharim) on Isaiah (4QpIsaa fr. 5-6, line 10) and Habakkuk 1QpHab 2:5-6).

ii. The so-called Florilegium (4Q174), in its surviving portion, consists of a series of Scripture verses which are given an eschatological (and Messianic) interpretation, viewed as referring to end-time events which were about to occur in the time of the Qumran Community. At the end of our surviving fragment, Daniel 12:10 is cited as an eschatological prophecy. We do not have the entire explanation/commentary on this verse, but it contains an allusion to Dan 11:32, and almost certainly would have been understood as applying to the Community as embodying the faithful ones of Israel at the end-time.

iii. The Commentary (pesher) on Habakkuk (§7) treats Hab 2:3, a verse which some commentators believe was utilized in the book of Daniel (8:17; 10:14; 11:27, 35; 12:12). While Daniel is not specifically cited here in the pesher, the astute readers of Scripture in the Qumran community would certainly have seen the connection. The theme in these verses is that there may be a ‘delay’ in the fulfillment of the prophecies. This allows for an exhortation to faithfulness, but also for the possibility that the ancient predictions of the coming end are about to be fulfilled in the Community’s own time.

iv. The Qumran texts record perhaps the earliest known attempt to make a precise calculation of when the end will occur, based on the “Seventy Weeks” oracle in Daniel 9 (cf. below), along with other time indicators given in the book. Naturally, the Community, like most groups with a strong eschatological orientation, believed that theirs was the time in which these things would come to pass. In the Damascus Document, a precise application of the “Seventy Weeks” oracle is made, in relation to the Community’s own history. CD 20:14 mentions the “forty years” which are to pass—i.e. from a particular point in their own recent history—which, according to their method of calculation, would complete the period of 490 (70 x 7) years prophesied in the book of Daniel.

2. The “Seventy Weeks” oracle in Dan 9:24-27

I have already presented a detailed examination of the background of this passage, as well as an exegetical analysis and interpretation, in an earlier study (part of the series “Yeshua the Anointed One”), and I will not repeat that here. Instead, I wish to focus specifically on the use of the passage in the Eschatological Discourse of Jesus, along with a brief consideration of its influence on 2 Thessalonians 2 and the early Christians “Antichrist” tradition.

At the beginning of vv. 14-23 in the Markan version of the Eschatological Discourse, Jesus states:

“And when you should see the ‘stinking thing of desolation’ [to\ bde/lugma th=$ e)rhmw/ew$] having stood where it is necessary (that it) not (be) [i.e. where it ought not to be]…then the (one)s in Yehudah must flee into the mountains…” (v. 14)

Matthew’s version here (24:15-16) is virtually identical, even including the same editorial aside (marked by the ellipsis above): “the (one) reading must put/keep (this) in mind”. The only difference is that in Matthew the allusion is made specific (“the [thing] uttered through Daniyyel the Foreteller”), and the phrase “where it is necessary (that it) not (be)” is explicitly identified with the Temple sanctuary: “…in the Holy Place”. Thus, in Matthew’s version, Jesus is describing a direct fulfillment of the thing prophesied in Dan 9:27—presumably meaning that some sort of idol/image is to be set up in the Temple, or that the holy place will be desecrated in a similar way. Luke’s version of this is radically different.

If we keep, for the moment, with the version in Mark/Matthew, we must ask what Jesus (and/or the Gospel writer) has in mind here. The editorial aside suggests that there is an accepted understanding or interpretation of this allusion, which the writer, at whatever point the aside was included (in Mark or an earlier source), would have assumed was known by his audience. Possibly Luke is clarifying this very interpretation, but there is no way of being certain on this point. The tradition in 2 Thessalonians 2 (cf. below), suggests that this is not the case; rather, a more literal kind of fulfillment of Dan 9:27 is in mind. The critical view, that the original passage refers to the actions of the Syrian ruler Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) c. 171-167 B.C., whether or not recognized by Jesus and his contemporaries, most likely serves as the pattern or model for what would take place in the great time of distress. As I mentioned in the earlier study on Dan 9:24-27, there are two possibilities which fit this pattern, and the historical context of the Eschatological Discourse (and the 1st century time frame of the Gospel tradition, c. 30-80 A.D.), reasonably well:

    • The emperor Gaius’ (Caligula) establishment of the imperial cult, including his statue which was to be placed in the Jerusalem Temple, transforming it into an imperial shrine (c. 40 A.D., Josephus, Antiquities 18.256-307). In his Commentary on Daniel (11:31), Jerome states that Antiochus IV had similarly set up an image of Jupiter (Zeus) Olympius in the Jerusalem Temple.
    • The transformation of Jerusalem into a (pagan) Roman city (Aelia Capitolina) in the reign of Hadrian, following the suppression of the Jewish (Bar-Kochba) revolt in 132-135 A.D.

If we wish to keep to the 1st century and the lifetime of the first disciples (Mark 13:30 par, etc) as a time frame, the first option is by far the closest fit, likely occurring less than 10 years after the end of Jesus’ ministry. Luke’s version (cf. Part 3 of the study on the Eschatological Discourse) more obviously relates to the siege and destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., including the destruction and despoiling of the Temple. That interpretation also would generally fit within the lifetime of the disciples.

Many Christians today, under the realization that events described in the Discourse were not all fulfilled in the 1st century, naturally assume that much of it—including the allusion to Dan 9:27—still awaits fulfillment at a future time (and/or our own time). While this is an obvious solution to the problem, it tends to negate the significance of the passage for the first disciples and Jesus’ original audience. A solution which attempts to respect both sides of the equation—complete/accurate fulfillment without ignoring the original historical setting—usually involves a two-layer interpretation: partial fulfillment in the disciples’ own time (1st century) and complete fulfillment at a time yet to come.

The same difficulty arises when we turn to Paul’s own “eschatological discourse” in 2 Thessalonians 2 (to be discussed in an upcoming study in this series). In verses 3-4, Paul seems to be drawing upon the same Dan 9:27 tradition, as interpreted by early Christians—perhaps even referring to the exact Gospel tradition in Mark 13:14ff par. However, here it is not an image/statue of the ruler, but the ruler himself who “sits in the shrine of God”, indicating that he is God. If 2 Thessalonians is genuinely Pauline (as the text claims), then it was likely written around 50 A.D., or perhaps a bit earlier. The actions and policies of the emperor Gaius, c. 40 (cf. above) would have still been fresh in the minds of many Jewish and Christians; Paul may be envisioning and describing a similar sort of action, only on a more extreme scale of wickedness. Obviously there is a problem here in considering Paul’s discourse as authentic prophecy, since, by all accounts, nothing of the sort took place in the Jerusalem Temple while it stood. This has led commentators to adopt various solutions, none of which are entirely satisfactory. One option is to assume that the Temple setting should be understood figuratively, in terms of a wicked ruler desecrating the holy things of God (in a more general sense); this allows the prophecy still to apply to a future end-time ruler. A more literal interpretation would require that the Temple be rebuilt at a future time (a dubious proposition itself); yet, there is nothing at all in the text to indicate that Paul is speaking of any other Temple than the one standing in his day.

The Gospel tradition surrounding the reference to Dan 9:27 certainly played a role in the development of the early Christian “Antichrist” tradition, though it is not possible to trace this in detail. Roughly speaking, Paul’s account in 2 Thessalonians 2 appears to stand halfway between the saying in Mark 13:14 par and the Beast-vision(s) in the book of Revelation (esp. chapter 13). Revelation 13:11-18 describes a great world-ruler, along the lines of the Roman Empire/Emperor, who controls all of society and requires that all people worship him. This figure is typically referred to as “Antichrist”, though the word itself is never used in the book of Revelation, occurring only in the Letters of John (1 Jn 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 Jn 7), where it refers both to a spirit of false belief and to false believers who act/speak according to this spirit. Many commentators assume that 1 Jn 2:18 also refers to an early form of the “Antichrist” tradition similar to the “man of sin/lawlessness” in 2 Thess 2, but I am by no means convinced of this. It does, however, reflect the common worldview that, as the end-time approaches, wicked leaders and rulers, false Christs and false prophets, etc, would arise and exercise baleful power/influence over people at large. There is every reason to think that much of this expectation goes back to Jesus’ own teaching, such as is preserved in the Eschatological Discourse.

3. The “Son of Man” vision in Dan 7:13-14ff

I have also examined this particular passage in considerable detail as part of the series “Yeshua the Anointed”, and will here limit the discussion to its influence on the New Testament and early Christian tradition. Three areas will be dealt with: (a) the sayings of Jesus in Mark 13:26-27; 14:62, etc; (b) the references in Revelation 1:7, 13; 14:14; and (c) its relation to the early Christian expectation of Jesus’ future return.

a. Mark 13:26-27; 14:62 par

I discussed the background of the title “Son of Man”, and its use to designate a Messianic figure-type, in Part 10 of the series “Yeshua the Anointed”. This eschatological use of the title comes primarily, if not exclusively, from Daniel 7:13-14. Taken together with the references to Michael (10:13ff; 12:1ff), who is identified with the “one like a son of man” in Dan 7 by many commentators, we have the portrait of a divine/heavenly figure who functions as God’s appointed representative to deliver His people, bring about the Judgment, and establish the Kingdom of God at the end-time. This, indeed, is the very sort of picture we see in Jesus’ eschatological sayings involving the “Son of Man”. Nowhere is this stated to precisely as in the Eschatological discourse, where the appearance of the Son of Man is described (in the Markan version) as follows:

“And then they will look with (open) eyes at the Son of Man coming in/on (the) clouds with great power and splendor. And then he will set forth the Messengers and they will bring together upon (one place) the (chosen one)s gathered out, (from) out of the four winds, from (the farthest) point of earth unto (the farthest) point of heaven.” (13:26-27)

This clearly draws upon the image in Dan 7:13, where the “one like a son of man” is seen coming “with the clouds of heaven”. In Daniel, the heavenly/divine figure comes toward God (the ‘Ancient of Days’); but, according to the basic eschatological framework (based on Dan 12:1ff, etc), this has shifted to an appearance on earth at the end-time. The Son of Man comes to deliver the elect/chosen ones among God’s people, and to usher in the Judgment. There is some thought among (critical) commentators that Jesus here, and in other Son of Man sayings, is referring to a separate divine/heavenly figure and not to himself. While Mk 13:26 par, in its original context, could conceivably be interpreted this way, the subsequent saying in 14:62 par, during Jesus’ interrogation before the Jewish Council (Sanhedrin), cannot. The Synoptic tradition, despite some variation among the Gospels, is quite clear on this point. The Council (High Priest, in Mark/Matthew) asks Jesus specifically about his identity and self-understanding: “Are you the Anointed (One), the Son of the Blessed (One)?” (v. 61). This is the context for the Son of Man saying which follows:

“I am; and you will look with (open) eyes at the Son of Man sitting out of the giving (hand) [i.e. at the right hand] of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.” (v. 62)

The phrase “with the clouds of heaven” is a more direct quote from Dan 7:13 than in Mk 13:26. It is joined with an allusion, almost certainly, to Psalm 110:1, reflecting (and introducing) the idea, which would become so prominent in the earliest Christian tradition, of Jesus’ exaltation to God’s right hand (in Heaven) following the resurrection. Since it is stated that the people in the Council will see the Son of Man coming, this is usually understood in terms of the Son of Man’s end-time appearance on earth. However, in light of the actual context of Dan 7:13-14, and traditional references such as in Acts 7:55-56, some commentators would interpret this differently. For example, W. F. Albright and C. S. Mann, in their commentary on Matthew in the Anchor Bible series, argued strongly that all these references to the Son of Man’s coming in glory originally referred to the exaltation of Jesus—his coming to God the Father in Heaven (as in Dan 7:13f); only secondarily did early Christians apply this in terms of Jesus’ future return. I do not agree with this interpretation, especially as it relates to the eschatological description in Mk 13:26-27, since it would ignore the rather clear tradition of the end-time deliverer’s appearance (from Dan 12:1ff), so central to much Jewish eschatology of the period.

b. Revelation 1:7, 13; 14:14

The book of Revelation cites or alludes to Daniel 7:13-14 several times as well. The first is the poetic utterance at the close of the introduction, which combines Zech 12:10 along with Dan 7:13:

“See, he comes with the clouds—and every eye will look on him, even the same (one)s who stabbed out (into) him, and all the offshoots [i.e. tribes/races] of the earth will beat (themselves) over him. Yes, amen.” (1:7)

Interestingly, the same two Scriptures are also brought together in Matthew’s version (24:30) of the Son of Man saying in Mk 13:26 (above). There can be no doubt that here Dan 7:13 refers to a visible appearance to the people on earth at the end-time. All of the book of Revelation emphasizes the status/position of the exalted Jesus—this traditional usage of Dan 7:13 brings out the motif, otherwise associated with the Son of Man figure in the Gospel tradition, of Jesus’ return in divine glory.

Verse 13 is part of the introductory vision (of the exalted Jesus), and it is an even more precise quotation from Dan 7:13. Strictly speaking, it is not the title “Son of Man”, as used by Jesus in the Gospel tradition; rather, the description goes back to the actual wording of the original Daniel vision:

“…and, in the middle of the lamp(stand)s, (one) like a son of man, sunk in [i.e. clothed with] (a garment down) to the feet, and having been girded about…with a golden girdle.” (v. 13)

This identifies the exalted Jesus precisely with the heavenly “Son of Man” figure in Dan 7. Much the same occurs in the visionary description of 14:14:

“And I saw [i.e. looked], and see!—a white cloud, and upon the cloud was sitting (one) like a son of man, holding upon his head a golden crown/wreath and in his hand a sharp tool (for) plucking [i.e. sickle].”

This brings together three distinct eschatological elements:

    • The exalted Jesus as the Son of Man figure in Daniel
    • His visible appearance in/on the clouds, and
    • The coming of the Son of Man figure to bring about the end-time Judgment

These last two references in the book of Revelation are, apart from Stephen’s vision in Acts 7:55-56 (which echoes Mk 14:62 par), the only occurrences of the title/expression “Son of Man” in the New Testament outside of the Gospels.

c. Jesus’ Return in early Christian Tradition

The extent to which Daniel 7:13-14 influenced early Christian eschatology, this appears to have taken place almost entirely through the Gospel tradition. I note several relevant examples:

    • The imagery of the Ascension narrative in Acts (1:9), where it is stated that Jesus was visibly “taken up” into a cloud, and it is announced to the disciples (v. 11) that Jesus will return just as he was taken up—i.e. in/on the clouds.
    • In Paul’s (only) description of Jesus’ future return, 1 Thess 4:17, believers will be snatched up into the clouds, where we/they will meet Jesus—i.e. his presence/appearance is in/on the clouds. This seems to reflect the basic tradition in Mk 13:26-27 par.
    • The frequent theme in early Christian preaching, of Jesus’ exaltation to Heaven, implies that he comes toward the Father, where he receives a position in glory at God’s right hand (Mk 12:36 par; [16:19]; Acts 2:33-34; 5:31; Rom 8:34; Phil 2:9; Heb 1:3, etc). Again, it is fair to say that this basic belief reflects the combination of Dan 7:13 and Psalm 110:1 expressed in Mk 14:62 par. It is from that position in Heaven, in glory, that Jesus will come to judge the world (Acts 17:31, etc).

4. The Influence of the Visions in Daniel 10-12

From the standpoint of the structure of the book of Daniel, chapters 7-12 should be taken together, as a collection of oracles and visions of events to come—covering the Hellenistic period (to at least the time c. 165-4 B.C.), and culminating in the eschatological period (time of the end), however this is to be defined (and interpretations differ widely). Since we have already discussed chapter 7 and 9, it is worth focusing here on the visions in chapters 10-11, and, especially, the concluding scene in chapter 12. These three chapters played a significant role in shaping Jewish and early Christian eschatology. There are several factors to be noted:

    • The presence of the heavenly being Michael as protector/deliverer of the faithful (10:13, 21; 12:1)
    • The period of warfare and persecution, detailed particularly in chaps. 10-11; there is a heavenly component to this warfare as well which suited eschatological and apocalyptic thinking.
    • The rise of wicked rulers and powers, who are described symbolically as animals/beasts (also in chapters 7-8); the descriptions in chaps. 10-11 build more readily upon the famous passage in 9:24-27.
    • The expression of a distinct eschatological/apocalyptic world view—history progressing, growing in violence and wickedness, to culminate in a sudden and intense period of suffering and distress before the appearance of the end.

In addition, there are a number of specific details in chapter 12, in particular, which are of tremendous importance:

    • The appearance of the heavenly savior-figure (Michael) at the end time (v. 1)
    • The reference to a period of great distress which will engulf all the nations (v. 1)
    • Association with the time of the resurrection, with the implied Judgment (v. 2)
    • The separation of the righteous and the wicked (v. 2-3, 10ff)
    • The heavenly/eternal reward of the righteous, following the Judgment (v. 3)
    • The events/time of the end as a secret or mystery hidden away (sealed) (v. 4, 9)
    • Daniel’s question of “when / how long?” (v. 6), with the visionary/heavenly answer (vv. 7ff)
    • A period of intense persecution of God’s people (vv. 7ff)
    • The time-indicators and connection back to 9:24-27 (vv. 7, 11-12)

We saw above (Section 1) the way in which Dan 12:1ff influenced the eschatology (and Messianism) of the Qumran texts. Similarly, a careful reading of the Synoptic Eschatological Discourse (Mark 13 par), especially in verses 14-27, shows that Jesus is drawing significantly upon Daniel 12. The statement in verse 19 is virtually a quotation from Dan 12:1:

“For (in) those days (there) will be distress of which there has not come to be such as this, from the beginning of the formation (of the world) which God formed until the (time) now, and (there certainly) would not come to be (so again)!”

The entire period of distress described in vv. 14-22, and beginning with the allusion to Dan 9:27 (cf. also 12:11), seems to have chapter 12 in mind. Moreover, the time of warfare mentioned in vv. 7-8 could easily refer to Dan 10-11. Given the similarity (and traditional association) between Michael and the heavenly “Son of Man” figure, Jesus’ description of the Son of Man’s sudden appearance (vv. 26-27) to deliver the elect fits well with the reference to Michael in Dan 12:1. Also, the time of persecution (of the disciples), with the climactic exhortation to endure until the end is reflected at several points in Dan 12.

Other (eschatological) sayings and teachings of Jesus may allude to these chapters as well. Cf. for example, Matt 10:22 (Dan 12:12-13); 13:43 (Dan 12:3); 25:46, also John 5:29 (Dan 12:2); Luke 10:21b (Dan 12:1). Their influence may be reflected variously at other points in the New Testament, such as in Paul’s description of the “man of sin/lawlessness” in 2 Thess 2:3ff (cf. Dan 11:36, etc), or in the numerous exhortation to be faithful and endure until the end (James 1:12, etc).

The book of Revelation is, of course, heavily influenced by the book of Daniel, and also these chapters in particular. These are being discussed throughout the current series of daily notes on Revelation, but we may highlight some of the more important themes and motifs here:

    • The important position of Michael, who engages in heavenly warfare with the wicked powers (as in Daniel 10, cf. above)—Rev 12:7-9ff
    • The sealing of the visionary book, only to be opened at the time of the end (Dan 12:4, 9; also 8:26; 9:24)—Rev 5-6; 8:1ff; also 10:4; 22:10
    • The period of “great distress”, and of the faithful believers who come through this time and receive heavenly/eternal reward (Dan 12:1ff)—Rev 1:9; 7:14 (cf. chap 6 and subsequent visions in the book)
    • The specific idiom “time, times, and half a time” (i.e. 3½ years) in Dan 12:7, 14 (cf. also 9:27 where the same period of time is indicated)—Rev 12:14
    • The Beast-visions in Revelation 13 (also subsequent chapters) are largely inspired by the book of Daniel—the famous visions in chapters 4 and 7, but also in the kings and powers at war in chapters 10-11 (cf. 11:36, etc)