Jesus in the Qumran Scrolls ...

[Secret Alias]

http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/jesus-di ... a-scrolls/

[John2]

I try to stay away from drawing too much from very fragmentary Dead Sea Scrolls like 4Q541. And given that in the big picture I tend to see the DSS as proto-Jewish Christian, it is somewhat tempting to see the possible references to crucifixion, the Suffering Servant and a nail in 4Q541 as pertaining to Jesus, but I think it is just too fragmentary, and the word that some (not all) translate as nail is uncertain.

https://books.google.com/books?id=kSawg ... &q&f=false

What stands out more in a "Jesus" way for me is col. 4 (which looks to be in a little better condition):

"(1)... his Wisdom [will be great.] He will make atonement for all the children of his generation. He will be sent to all the sons of (2) his [generation]. His word shall be as the word of Heaven and his teaching shall be according to the will of God. His eternal sun shall burn brilliantly. (3) The fire shall be kindled in all the corners of the earth. Upon the Darkness it will shine. Then the Darkness will pass away (4) [from] the earth and the deep Darkness from the dry land. They will speak many words against him. There will be many (5) [lie]s. They will invent stories about him. They will say shameful things about him. He will overthrow his evil generation (6) and there will be [great wrath]. When he arises there will be Lying and violence, and the people will wander astray [in] his days and be confounded."

But there are other references in the DSS that I think are even more "Jesus"-like, such as the root of planting imagery in the Damascus Document (cf. Rom. 15:12, Rev. 5:5 and 22:16) and the other references in CD to a singular Messiah, the Holy Spirit, the new covenant, the way and Damascus, which are all terms found in the NT (though the root imagery in CD could refer to the sect instead of an individual).

The Scrolls are also big on the word salvation. As Eisenman puts it, "The use of the noun ‘Yesha’ or the verbal noun ‘Yeshu’ ato’ (‘His Salvation’) is fairly widespread at Qumran and much underrated."

The latter form is used at the end of the Damascus Document in reference to seeing "yeshua":

"God will forgive them and they shall see His salvation because they took refuge in His holy Name."

[MrMacSon]

In fragment 24, column 2, the scroll refers to someone called “The Dove”. The writer of the scroll asks that the dove’s followers “not mourn for him”...

Given that Jesus is often identified with a “dove” (eg., Matthew 3:16, Luke 3:22)*, and the Gospels explicitly refer to ... the “mourning” of his followers after the crucifixion (e.g., Luke 24:17), it seemed reasonable to me that “4Q541” may be referring to Jesus.

Professor Puech [the translator of the official translation of The Dead Sea Scrolls; from the Ecole Biblique in Jerusalem] ... said that “dove” was the natural translation of the Hebrew/Aramaic word “Yonah”, which appears in the text, but he preferred to translate it as “agitator” because, after all, the “dove” in early Christianity refers to Jesus. In other words, by his own admission, Puech purposely fudged the translation so that the reference to Jesus would be lost. Why did he do this? According to Father Puech, by 'definition', “The Dead Sea text can’t be referring to Jesus.”

http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/jesus-di ... a-scrolls/

* Besides the dove references to Jesus in Matthew 3:16 and Luke 3:22, there are also dove references in Mark 1:10 and John 1:32.

There are also possible ties with Isaiah 11:2 - "The Spirit of the LORD will rest on him ..."

• The preceding verse - Isaiah 11:1 "A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse; from his roots a Branch will bear fruit" -
  
  might have ties with the dove in Genesis 8:11 coming back with variably either an olive sprig (LXX), branch (Wycliffe, Holkham), or an olive leaf

Simcha Jacobovici's article goes on -

Dr. Robert Deutsch ... considered by many the number one Aramaic and Hebrew epigrapher in the world ...

• “It seems that this is a text written by the followers of Jesus after the crucifixion. They are telling each other not to focus on the ‘nail’ and the ‘crucifixion’ as ‘their enemy’ does, and not to overly ‘mourn’ their loss but, rather, to focus on the ‘eternal light’,” mentioned at the end of the fragment."

...if fragment “4Q541” is referring to Jesus then, maybe, some of the other [DSS] fragments are also referring to him [or a fore-runner]. Based on this investigation, perhaps it’s time to reexamine The Dead Sea Scrolls and their translations.

Even if this text is not "written by the followers of Jesus after the crucifixion", as Robert Deutsch postulates, the reference to dove might herald a pre-Jesus concept.
.

[Secret Alias]

https://remnantofgiants.wordpress.com/2 ... a-scrolls/

[MrMacSon]

.
While this - from https://remnantofgiants.wordpress.com/2 ... a-scrolls/ -

Second, Jacobovici is simply flat-out incorrect that 4Q541 “explicitly refers to Jesus”. For there to be an “explicit” reference, the reference must be, er, just that: explicit. Yet there is no mention of the name Jesus/Yeshu(a) in 4Q541. It doesn’t appear explicitly. Therefore, it is wrong to claim that there is an explicit reference to Jesus in the text.

is true, the author of that blogpost, Deane, fails to adequately address the issue of the reference to 'dove': whether dove is a suitable translation and, if it is, the possible implications, such as whether it refers to another entity, or if 4Q541 could be part of a tradition for some or all of the dove references in the NT gospels (particular if 4Q541 is 1-200 BC/BCE).


Dean is being disingenuous when he says

Jacobovici concludes that, in omitting the translation “dove”, “Puech purposely fudged the translation so that the reference to Jesus would be lost”

as Jacobovici had said

Professor Puech surprised me. He said that “dove” was the natural translation of the Hebrew/Aramaic word “Yonah”, which appears in the text, but he preferred to translate it as “agitator” because, after all, the “dove” in early Christianity refers to Jesus. In other words, by his own admission, Puech purposely fudged the translation so that the 'reference' to 'Jesus' would be lost. ... According to Father Puech, by definition,

• “The Dead Sea text can’t be referring to Jesus.”

Now, if Puech said that, he could have been reiterating the point about 4Q541 being pre-Jesus (in which case Jacobovici would be being disingenuous), or Puech could have been reiterating how 'the “dove” in early Christianity [only] refers to Jesus'.

It's a pity the dove issue has become murky.
.

[John2]

MrMacSon wrote:

"Even if this text is not "written by the followers of Jesus after the crucifixion", as Robert Deutsch postulates, the reference to dove might herald a pre-Jesus concept."

I think certain references in the Damascus Document could herald pre-Jesus concepts, like the expectation of a singular Messiah, seeing salvation and the "root of planting."

Regarding the first two references, Vermes notes in his translation that the reference to seeing salvation at the end of CD ("God will forgive them and they shall see His salvation [yeshu'ato] because they took refuge in His holy Name") is connected to messianism: "The end of the Exhortation of CD is followed in 4Q266, fr. 4, lines 11-12, by a badly preserved allusion to the Messiah: 'God [will set up] a shep[herd for his people] and he will feed (them) in [pastures] ...'" (pg. 136).

(I'd never thought about this before, but the feeding reference here is catching my eye now because of Bernard's thread about the feeding of the 5000.)

Regarding the reference to the root of planting at the beginning of CD, I've mentioned here before that even though I lean towards this as being a reference to the sect and not an individual, the word “root” (shoresh) is tied to the expression "from Israel and Aaron" and the Damascus Document uses this expression elsewhere in its description of a singular Messiah, as Wacholder notes on pg. 214 in "The New Damascus Document":

https://books.google.com/books?id=ZZ58U ... nt&f=false

And Blanton notes on pg. 51 of "Constructing a New Covenant: Discursive Strategies in the Damascus Document" that this connecting phrase "resonates with the sect's messianism":

https://books.google.com/books?id=rdaTp ... ah&f=false

So both the "root" and the Messiah are singular in the Damascus Document and connected to the phrase "from Aaron and Israel" (or "from Israel and Aaron"), and "root" imagery is used to describe both the Messiah and the Suffering Servant in the OT:

“In that day, the Root [shoresh] of Jesse will stand as a banner for the peoples” (Is. 11:10).

"He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root [shoresh] out of dry ground" (Is. 53:2).

And "root" and "plant" imagery is also used to describe Jesus in Christian writings:

"Isaiah says, ‘The Root of Jesse will spring up'” (Rom. 15:12).

“I am the Root and the offspring of David” (Rev. 22:16).

“The Root of David” (Rev. 5:5).

“Beliar … will persecute the plant which the Twelve Apostles of the Beloved have planted” (Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3).

So “root” is not only used to describe the Messiah in the OT and Jesus in the NT, whatever it may mean in the Damascus Document has something to do with God having “visited” (or turned his attention to) a remnant of Israel and causing it to happen twenty years before the rise of the Teacher of Righteousness.

The Damascus Document also mentions “the fallen tent of David” of Amos 9:11 (which is applied to Jesus in Acts 15:16), and “strike the shepherd” of Zech. 13:7 (which is applied to Jesus in Mk. 14:27), and “the fountain of living waters” of Zech. 14:8 and Jer. 2:13 (which is applied to Jesus in Rev. 7:17).

So there's at least a Jesus-like tone in the Damascus Document, coupled with terminology like the new covenant, the way, and a place called Damascus.

[outhouse]

http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/jesus-di ... a-scrolls/

Simcha Jacobovici

I don't waste any time on this clown. Life is to short.


While the question may be worthwhile, I would rather follow a credible scholars avenue.