Who do you think was the "Wicked Priest"?

Discussion about the Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, pseudepigrapha, Philo, Josephus, Talmud, Dead Sea Scrolls, archaeology, etc.
User avatar
John T
Posts: 971
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Who do you think was the "Wicked Priest"?

Post by John T » Thu Feb 22, 2018 10:17 am

Who do you think was the Wicked Priest?

I believe, Johnathan Apphus (ruled 153-143BCE) is the best candidate for the title of "Wicked Priest" as described in; "Commentary on Habakkuk" (IQpHab) and other sources.

The reasons are many and I don't mind going over them once again. But in short, Jonathan illegally obtained the title of High-Priesthood in exchange for providing military support to Alexander Balas. Moreover, he was not from the proper bloodline of the Zadokite priesthood.

I think once you figure out who the Wicked Priest is, it is much easier to rule out/in who was the "Teacher of Righteousness".

Depending on how this thread goes, I will posit my best choice as to who was the "Teacher of Righteousness".




Sincerely,

John T
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

Joseph D. L.
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Who do you think was the "Wicked Priest"?

Post by Joseph D. L. » Fri Feb 23, 2018 2:19 am

My ignorance of the scrolls notwithstanding, I assume it to refer to Sanballat. Clearly they're not talking about anyone in their own times, (ca. fourth century bc), and Ezra and Sanballat were relatively recent. But who knows?

John2
Posts: 2106
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Who do you think was the "Wicked Priest"?

Post by John2 » Fri Feb 23, 2018 4:19 pm

The problem I have with this idea is that Jonathan appears to be named as a legitimate priest in 4Q245, as Flint notes in The Book of Daniel, Volume 2 Composition and Reception:
... 4Q245 differs from 1 Chronicles 5 in extending its list of priests into the Hellenistic period. The name חוניה (Onias) occurs in fr. 1 i.9, שמעון (Simon) in line 10, and the name preceding Simon is reasonably restored as יונתן (Jonathan). While there were several Simons in the Hellenistic period, the sequence Jonathan-Simon is found only among the Maccabees. The list of priests then continues beyond the last Zadokite High Priest, Onias III, and includes the Hasmoneans Jonathan (152-42 BCE) and Simon (142-35 BCE). The priestly list ended in line 10, since line 11 initiates a new list (here of kings), presumably with some introductory comment: This suggests that Simon was the last High Priest in the sequence.

https://books.google.com/books?id=BK29C ... as&f=false
Now the die is shaken, now the die must fall, there ain't a winner in the game, he don't go home with all.

StephenGoranson
Posts: 192
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: Who do you think was the "Wicked Priest"?

Post by StephenGoranson » Sat Feb 24, 2018 2:46 am

I gave reasons to think that Jonathan, High Priest from 152-142, was not the Qumran-view Wicked Priest, on pages 2 through 7 (and endnotes) in:
"Jannaeus, His Brother Absalom, and Judah the Essene."
http://people.duke.edu/~goranson/jannaeus.pdf
That, combined with more recent developments, including Vered Noam's 2014 HTR article, suggest that Sadducee-influenced Alexander Jannaeus (also sometimes called Jonathan) was regarded as wicked by Essenes and Pharisees.

andrewcriddle
Posts: 1521
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Who do you think was the "Wicked Priest"?

Post by andrewcriddle » Sat Feb 24, 2018 3:24 am

StephenGoranson wrote:
Sat Feb 24, 2018 2:46 am
I gave reasons to think that Jonathan, High Priest from 152-142, was not the Qumran-view Wicked Priest, on pages 2 through 7 (and endnotes) in:
"Jannaeus, His Brother Absalom, and Judah the Essene."
http://people.duke.edu/~goranson/jannaeus.pdf
That, combined with more recent developments, including Vered Noam's 2014 HTR article, suggest that Sadducee-influenced Alexander Jannaeus (also sometimes called Jonathan) was regarded as wicked by Essenes and Pharisees.
One potential problem with this very interesting article is that I am not sure that Jews c 100 BCE knew accurately how many years had passed since the end of the Babylonian captivity.

If they were inaccurate on this point, then using for historical purposes statements in the Qumran texts about how many years passed between the captivity and subsequent events becomes problematic.

Andrew Criddle

StephenGoranson
Posts: 192
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: Who do you think was the "Wicked Priest"?

Post by StephenGoranson » Sat Feb 24, 2018 3:40 am

a) Relevant is the article by John J. Collins, The Origin of the Scrolls Community and its Historical Context, Henoch 39 (2017) pages 8-23.
He makes several arguments--some rather similar to mine. He rejects the earlier Jonathan as Wicked Priest, and as well, he rejects Simon as Wicked Priest, the later being the proposal of his teacher, F. M. Cross. Collins' Abstract:

"The first generation of scholars on the Dead Sea Scrolls reached a con-
sensus that the sectarian movement arose in reaction to the disputes over
the High Priesthood in the Maccabean era. The figure of 390 in CD 1 was
thought to point to a date in second century BCE. The fact that the sectar-
ians called themselves “sons of Zadok” was thought to confirm their priestly
origin. The dispute between the Teacher and the Wicked Priest, reflected in
the Pesharim, was thought to be the conflict that gave rise to the movement.
The archeology of Qumran was taken to support a date of origin in the mid-
second century BCE
Doubts about this reconstruction began to emerge when 4QMMT came
to light in the 1980’s. This text indicated that the factors that led to the sepa-
ration of the sect were disputes over interpretation of the Law, especially in
matters of purity. There is no good evidence that such disputes were a sig-
nificant factor in Jewish life as early as the time of the Maccabees. Rather,
sectarianism first emerges somewhat later in the Hasmonean period in the
reigns of John Hyrcanus and Alexander Jannaeus. The most plausible date
for 4QMMT, and also for the quarrel between the Teacher and the Wicked
Priest, is after the death of Alexander Jannaeus when the Hasmonean rulers
agreed to follow the teachings of the Pharisees. The movement known from
the Scrolls must have been in existence for some time at this point, but its ori-
gin should probably be dated to the late second century, in the time of John
Hyrcanus. It was not a reaction to the usurpation of the High Priesthood by
the Hasmoneans."

B) Yes indeed, Andrew, the 390 years may not be accurate. In my one paragraph on this subject
in the 36 page article, before giving one possible reading, I did begin the paragraph acknowledging
that it was not certain: "Further, I suggest that if 390 years was a serious approximate measurement,
which is uncertain, it would have its start time in 538 BCE, because that is when the Jews
were no longer in the hand of Babylon."

User avatar
John T
Posts: 971
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Who do you think was the "Wicked Priest"?

Post by John T » Mon Feb 26, 2018 6:02 am

StephenGoranson wrote:
Sat Feb 24, 2018 2:46 am
I gave reasons to think that Jonathan, High Priest from 152-142, was not the Qumran-view Wicked Priest, on pages 2 through 7 (and endnotes) in:
"Jannaeus, His Brother Absalom, and Judah the Essene."
http://people.duke.edu/~goranson/jannaeus.pdf
That, combined with more recent developments, including Vered Noam's 2014 HTR article, suggest that Sadducee-influenced Alexander Jannaeus (also sometimes called Jonathan) was regarded as wicked by Essenes and Pharisees.
Mr. Goranson,

I thank you for providing a link to your research paper titled: Jannaeus, His Brother Absalom, and Judah the Essene. Your paper is very thorough and uses sound logic for which I must now reconsider my assertion that Jonathan was the (original) Wicked Priest.

Still, I have some sticky points of clarifications that I would like to address. However, I noticed your paper is copyrighted. With your permission I would like to cite parts of your paper for questions and answers on this thread.

If that is o.k. with you.

Sincerely,

John T
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

StephenGoranson
Posts: 192
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: Who do you think was the "Wicked Priest"?

Post by StephenGoranson » Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:39 am

It is o.k. with me. (And "fair use" allows some quoting even with copyright.)
Stephen

StephenGoranson
Posts: 192
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: Who do you think was the "Wicked Priest"?

Post by StephenGoranson » Tue Feb 27, 2018 12:56 am

Though, if it's a long section (in a text free to read online) giving pages numbers (as I did above: "on pages 2 through 7 (and endnotes)") is preferable.

User avatar
John T
Posts: 971
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Who do you think was the "Wicked Priest"?

Post by John T » Tue Feb 27, 2018 10:10 am

Mr. Goranson,

One of the areas that I respectfully request some clarification on is your understanding/trust in the accuracy of C-14 testing.

For example you wrote: "Another caution on overreliance on so-far available C14 data is the unfortunate possibility that some who pay for C14 tests, for whatever reasons, do not always publish all of it; though one cannot know how widespread this practice is, it is a factor."

You also wrote: "...But, as more and more texts became available, it seems somewhat embarrassing to that hypothesis that none of the texts with the Wicked Priest or the Teacher of Righteousness securely predate 100 BCE.".

When you say none of the texts, do you mean none of the texts that mention the Wicked Priest or only the Halakhic Letter (4QMMT)?
What date do you give for Habakkuk Commentary (1QpHab) ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_da ... ea_Scrolls

Sincerely,

John T
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

Post Reply