[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
A word should be added about the role played in our text by Melchizedek, the ancient 'king of Shalem
and priest of God Most High', who is said, in Gen. 14.18-20, to have conferred upon Abraham (and, by
implication, upon Abraham's descendants) the blessing of that deity. Melchizedek is introduced into
our sermon as the future savior-king who will bring peace and salvation to the faithful and condign
punishment to the wicked and who will also mediate divine forgiveness for the former on the Final
Day of Atonement.
The reason why he is chosen for this role is really very simple. First: the eschatological doctrines of
the Dead Sea Scriptures derive, in large measure, from Iranian lore which, during the period of Persian
domination, the Jews picked up on a popular level. (2) A major feature of that lore was the ultimate
triumph of Right (Asha) over Perversity (Druj). Accordingly, throughout the Scrolls, great stress is
placed on Righteousness (sedeq); the Brotherhood styles itself 'the sons [or, elect] of righteousness',
(3) and its opponents those 'of perversity' ('awel) (4)—corresponding to the Iranian ashovano and
dregvato—and its spiritual mentor, the man who expounds the Torah aright, is 'the teacher of
righteousness'. (5)
Now, since the name Melchizedek lends itself readily to the interpretation 'king of righteousness'
(melech sedeq), (6) and since—through a mistaken interpretation of Psalm 110.4 (Thou art a priest for
ever, after the order of Melchizedek)—he himself, rather than the priesthood which he served, was
popularly deemed to be eternal, he becomes at once an appropriate candidate for the role of the future
messianic king who will establish the dominion of righteousness on earth. (7) Moreover, this notion
could draw also on the widespread myth of the ancient hero redivivus, who would reappear eventually
to save his people (8)—a myth associated in sundry passages of the Old Testament with David. (9)
Second: Melchizedek's title 'king of Shalem' lends itself, with equal facility, to a fanciful association
with the Hebrew words, shalom, 'peace', (10) and shallem, 'requite', so that he can at once be identified
with the promised redeemer who will bring both peace to the faithful and requital to the wicked.
Third: Melchizedek combines the functions of king and priest, and therefore serves fittingly as a
prefiguration of the future Messiah who will not only re-establish the dominion of God over that of
Belial, but also mediate forgiveness for the faithful on the Final Day of Atonement, as did the high
priest on the annual holy day (cf. Lev. 16.30-33). (11)
It has been suggested that the title, melech shalem, 'king of Shalem', in Gen. 14.18, is an historicization
on the part of the Biblical writer (or his source) of an original mal'ach shalom, 'angel of peace', and
that the role assigned to Melchizedek in our sermon harks back to that earlier myth. (12) It has been
suggested also that he is here regarded as an hypostasis of God Himself. In regard to such theories,
however, we may perhaps be content, as was that ancient worthy himself, with but a tenth part.
Although, by virtue especially of his assumed immortality, Melchizedek did indeed become the subject
of divers legends in both Jewish and Christian lore, (13) it is not necessary to go beyond the simple
midrashic interpretation of Scripture summarized above in order to account for his messianic role in
our text. (14)
2. The text entitled The New Covenant is quite obviously part of a homiletic exposition of the famous
prophecy in Jer. 31.31-33: 'Behold, days are coming' saith the Lord, 'when I will make a new covenant
with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. ... I will put my Law in their inward parts, and in their
heart will I write it; and will be their God, and they will be My people.'
3. The war against Gog and Magog would mark the end of the present Era of Wickedness, but not the
end of the world. It would last forty years-the period of so-called 'Messianic travail', and would pave
the way for the 'Era of (Divine) Favor'. This too needed its blueprint, and a small portion of that
blueprint is preserved in what has generally been called The Two-Column Fragment.
This tantalizing document, found in the same cave as the main scrolls, is really a Manual of Discipline
for the future Restored Congregation of Israel. It has excited es-pecial interest because it describes the
protocol for a ban-quet attended by 'the Messiah'. This has led to the belief that it deals with the
Messianic Banquet (on the flesh Leviathan) often described in rabbinic literature, and also that it
prefigures, albeit in a limited degree, the Christian Eucharist.
The plain fact is, however, that the term 'Messiah'—or, more specifically, 'Messiah of Israel'—means
no more than 'the duly anointed king'. This text, as we have said, is concerned with the administration
of the future ideal community of Israel. After describing the rules that are to obtain regarding
education, eligibility for public office, and military service, the author takes up the question of rank
and precedence.
The high priest, he affirms, is to occupy the supreme position and to be superior to any layman. He
then gives a pertinent illustration. If, he says, the anointed king himself (expressly described as 'the
Messiah [anointed] of Israel', in implied contrast with the Messiah of Aaron', i.e., the high priest)
should attend a communal banquet, the high priest is nevertheless to be seated first, and it is to be the
high priest's duty and privilege to pronounce the Grace before Meals. Moreover, in order to make the
point even clearer, our author lays it down explicitly that this rule is to be observed even at smaller
gatherings, when there may be no more than ten persons present—the minimum religious quorum
[minyan] in traditional Jewish law!
The interpretation of this document as referring to a 'Lord's Supper' has been bolstered by a daring but
unfortunate conjecture, whereby a faint and damaged passage of the text is made to read: 'When God
begets the Messiah, he [i.e., the Messiah] is to enter with them'. It may therefore be pointed out that the
crucial word 'God' is here simply an arbitrary restoration, and that the word read as 'begets' (viz.
YW[LI]D) is more probably to be read 'is present' (viz. YW[']D), while that rendered 'he is to enter'
means properly 'he is to come' and belongs to the next sentence. What is actually said, therefore, is that
'if the anointed (king, i.e., [hmlk] hmsih) happens to be present (yw[']d) with them, the priest, as head
of the entire Congregation of Israel is (nevertheless) to come ... and take his seat (first)'. (15)
~ IV ~~
Lastly come four texts attesting the 'messianic' expectations of the men who wrote the Scrolls and of
the community at Qumran.
1. The first contains extracts (pitifully short, to be sure) from commentaries on relevant verses from
the Last Blessing of Jacob (Gen. 49) and from the promise of God to David in the Book of Samuel.
2. The second is a catena of five Scriptural passages attesting the advent of the Future Prophet and the
Anointed King and the final discomfiture of the impious. The first four are taken from the Pentateuch,
and include an excerpt from the oracles of Balaam. The fifth is an interpretation of a verse from the
Book of Joshua. An interesting feature of this document (not noticed by the original editor) is that
precisely the same passages of the Pentateuch are used by the Samaritans as the stock testimonial to
the coming of the Taheb, or future 'Restorer'. (16)
They evidently constituted a standard set of such quotations, of the type that scholars have long
supposed to have been in the hands of New Testament writers when they cited passages of the Hebrew
Bible supposedly confirmed by incidents in the life and career of Jesus. The interest of this text is [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl szamanka888.keep.pl
A word should be added about the role played in our text by Melchizedek, the ancient 'king of Shalem
and priest of God Most High', who is said, in Gen. 14.18-20, to have conferred upon Abraham (and, by
implication, upon Abraham's descendants) the blessing of that deity. Melchizedek is introduced into
our sermon as the future savior-king who will bring peace and salvation to the faithful and condign
punishment to the wicked and who will also mediate divine forgiveness for the former on the Final
Day of Atonement.
The reason why he is chosen for this role is really very simple. First: the eschatological doctrines of
the Dead Sea Scriptures derive, in large measure, from Iranian lore which, during the period of Persian
domination, the Jews picked up on a popular level. (2) A major feature of that lore was the ultimate
triumph of Right (Asha) over Perversity (Druj). Accordingly, throughout the Scrolls, great stress is
placed on Righteousness (sedeq); the Brotherhood styles itself 'the sons [or, elect] of righteousness',
(3) and its opponents those 'of perversity' ('awel) (4)—corresponding to the Iranian ashovano and
dregvato—and its spiritual mentor, the man who expounds the Torah aright, is 'the teacher of
righteousness'. (5)
Now, since the name Melchizedek lends itself readily to the interpretation 'king of righteousness'
(melech sedeq), (6) and since—through a mistaken interpretation of Psalm 110.4 (Thou art a priest for
ever, after the order of Melchizedek)—he himself, rather than the priesthood which he served, was
popularly deemed to be eternal, he becomes at once an appropriate candidate for the role of the future
messianic king who will establish the dominion of righteousness on earth. (7) Moreover, this notion
could draw also on the widespread myth of the ancient hero redivivus, who would reappear eventually
to save his people (8)—a myth associated in sundry passages of the Old Testament with David. (9)
Second: Melchizedek's title 'king of Shalem' lends itself, with equal facility, to a fanciful association
with the Hebrew words, shalom, 'peace', (10) and shallem, 'requite', so that he can at once be identified
with the promised redeemer who will bring both peace to the faithful and requital to the wicked.
Third: Melchizedek combines the functions of king and priest, and therefore serves fittingly as a
prefiguration of the future Messiah who will not only re-establish the dominion of God over that of
Belial, but also mediate forgiveness for the faithful on the Final Day of Atonement, as did the high
priest on the annual holy day (cf. Lev. 16.30-33). (11)
It has been suggested that the title, melech shalem, 'king of Shalem', in Gen. 14.18, is an historicization
on the part of the Biblical writer (or his source) of an original mal'ach shalom, 'angel of peace', and
that the role assigned to Melchizedek in our sermon harks back to that earlier myth. (12) It has been
suggested also that he is here regarded as an hypostasis of God Himself. In regard to such theories,
however, we may perhaps be content, as was that ancient worthy himself, with but a tenth part.
Although, by virtue especially of his assumed immortality, Melchizedek did indeed become the subject
of divers legends in both Jewish and Christian lore, (13) it is not necessary to go beyond the simple
midrashic interpretation of Scripture summarized above in order to account for his messianic role in
our text. (14)
2. The text entitled The New Covenant is quite obviously part of a homiletic exposition of the famous
prophecy in Jer. 31.31-33: 'Behold, days are coming' saith the Lord, 'when I will make a new covenant
with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. ... I will put my Law in their inward parts, and in their
heart will I write it; and will be their God, and they will be My people.'
3. The war against Gog and Magog would mark the end of the present Era of Wickedness, but not the
end of the world. It would last forty years-the period of so-called 'Messianic travail', and would pave
the way for the 'Era of (Divine) Favor'. This too needed its blueprint, and a small portion of that
blueprint is preserved in what has generally been called The Two-Column Fragment.
This tantalizing document, found in the same cave as the main scrolls, is really a Manual of Discipline
for the future Restored Congregation of Israel. It has excited es-pecial interest because it describes the
protocol for a ban-quet attended by 'the Messiah'. This has led to the belief that it deals with the
Messianic Banquet (on the flesh Leviathan) often described in rabbinic literature, and also that it
prefigures, albeit in a limited degree, the Christian Eucharist.
The plain fact is, however, that the term 'Messiah'—or, more specifically, 'Messiah of Israel'—means
no more than 'the duly anointed king'. This text, as we have said, is concerned with the administration
of the future ideal community of Israel. After describing the rules that are to obtain regarding
education, eligibility for public office, and military service, the author takes up the question of rank
and precedence.
The high priest, he affirms, is to occupy the supreme position and to be superior to any layman. He
then gives a pertinent illustration. If, he says, the anointed king himself (expressly described as 'the
Messiah [anointed] of Israel', in implied contrast with the Messiah of Aaron', i.e., the high priest)
should attend a communal banquet, the high priest is nevertheless to be seated first, and it is to be the
high priest's duty and privilege to pronounce the Grace before Meals. Moreover, in order to make the
point even clearer, our author lays it down explicitly that this rule is to be observed even at smaller
gatherings, when there may be no more than ten persons present—the minimum religious quorum
[minyan] in traditional Jewish law!
The interpretation of this document as referring to a 'Lord's Supper' has been bolstered by a daring but
unfortunate conjecture, whereby a faint and damaged passage of the text is made to read: 'When God
begets the Messiah, he [i.e., the Messiah] is to enter with them'. It may therefore be pointed out that the
crucial word 'God' is here simply an arbitrary restoration, and that the word read as 'begets' (viz.
YW[LI]D) is more probably to be read 'is present' (viz. YW[']D), while that rendered 'he is to enter'
means properly 'he is to come' and belongs to the next sentence. What is actually said, therefore, is that
'if the anointed (king, i.e., [hmlk] hmsih) happens to be present (yw[']d) with them, the priest, as head
of the entire Congregation of Israel is (nevertheless) to come ... and take his seat (first)'. (15)
~ IV ~~
Lastly come four texts attesting the 'messianic' expectations of the men who wrote the Scrolls and of
the community at Qumran.
1. The first contains extracts (pitifully short, to be sure) from commentaries on relevant verses from
the Last Blessing of Jacob (Gen. 49) and from the promise of God to David in the Book of Samuel.
2. The second is a catena of five Scriptural passages attesting the advent of the Future Prophet and the
Anointed King and the final discomfiture of the impious. The first four are taken from the Pentateuch,
and include an excerpt from the oracles of Balaam. The fifth is an interpretation of a verse from the
Book of Joshua. An interesting feature of this document (not noticed by the original editor) is that
precisely the same passages of the Pentateuch are used by the Samaritans as the stock testimonial to
the coming of the Taheb, or future 'Restorer'. (16)
They evidently constituted a standard set of such quotations, of the type that scholars have long
supposed to have been in the hands of New Testament writers when they cited passages of the Hebrew
Bible supposedly confirmed by incidents in the life and career of Jesus. The interest of this text is [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]