John2 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 20, 2023 8:09 am
Hos. 6:2 uses imagery of being "raised up," but it is about the fall and restoration of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah in 700's BCE (e.g., 6:11: "when I restore My people from captivity"), not the resurrection of an End Time Messiah figure. Same goes for Is. 53. I think Paul interpreting these passages to be about resurrection and an End Time Messiah figure and mixing them together and applying them to Jesus is an example of using the OT "loosely," just like Amos' "star" is about a Babylonian star god and Balaam's "star" is about David and not the Teacher of Righteousness or an End Time Messiah figure.
The context is not important in a "pesher". This is very clear in the Qumran writings that you keep mentioning.
The Chaldeans in Habakuk become the Kittim (Romans) in the Habakkuk pesher for example.
They do not care about the context since it is a matter of reinterpreting the scriptures according to their time.
So no, when Paul makes a pesher of Hosea, he does it very specifically and respect what the texts says.
Hosea says that God will raise the bodies of the dead on the 3rd day. Jesus rises on the 3rd day. That is very specific. Not loosely.
Perhaps you have a better understanding of it than I do, but I gather this can be translated as "who came to Damascus"and refer to a past figure.
I don't know what translations you are using but most translators consider it a future tense verse.
Geza Vermes - THE COMPLETE DEAD SEA SCROLLS IN ENGLISH
The star is the Interpreter of the Law
who shall come to Damascus; as it is written, A star shall comeforth out ofJacob and a sceptre shall rise out ofIsrael (Num. xxiv, 17).
Florentino García Martínez - The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition
And the star is the Interpreter of the law, 19
who will come to Damascus, as is written: Num 24:13 « A star moves out of Jacob, and a sceptre arises 20 out of Israel ».
Most scholars also consider that it cannot be the teacher of R:
John J Collins - The scepter and the Star
A consensus developed that the figure expected at the end of days cannot be identified with the Teacher who played a role in the beginning of the community. Rather that historical Teacher (the quasi founder of the community) is referred to in this passage as the Interpreter of the Law and
the eschatological teacher remains in the future. The expectation of "one who will teach righteousness at the end of days" is retained in the final redaction of CD, even though the career of
the historical Teacher is clearly past. The document clearly envisages two teachers, one of whom was dead at the time of the final redaction
and one who was still to come. It is gratuitous to multiply teachers without cause, by identifying the Interpreter of the Law as yet a third figure who preceded the historical Teacher.
Moreover, the same "interpreter of the law" is announced at the end of the days. The end of the days is the future :
Damascus Document
The Stave is the Interpreter of the Law of whom Isaiah said, He makes a tool for His work (Isa. liv, 16); and the nobles of the people are those who come to dig the Well with the staves with which the 10 Stave ordained that they should walk in all the age of wickedness - and without them they shall find nothing - until he comes
who shall teach righteousness at the end of days.
Florilegium
I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever] (2 Sam. vii, 13). I will be hisfather and he shall be my son (2 Sam. vii, 14). He is the Branch of David who shall arise with the Interpreter of the Law [to rule] in Zion
[at the end] of time.
So maybe the future Messiah and the deceased (and now exalted) Teacher are the same person, the same way the deceased Jesus and the future "son of man" figure are thought to be the same person. This would explain why the future Messiah is called an interpreter of the law and one who will "teach righteousness at the end of days," because that was the Teacher's role when he was alive and will continue to be as the future Messiah, like Jesus.
This is very speculative since :
- No Qumran manuscript indicates that the teacher of R will resurrect and return,
- The eschatological and messianic figures are never identified with the teacher
- These messianic figures are never described as resurrected.
I think you are trying to read the life of the Teacher in the light of the life of Jesus. And that influences your reading of the manuscripts.
But Paul seems to imply that he knows more information about Jesus than he cares to share because he says in 1 Cor. 15:3 that he taught what he thought was of "first importance" about Jesus (that he died, was buried and resurrected "according to the scriptures").
So it looks to me like Paul had other information about Jesus that he considered to be less important, things that weren't about his death, burial and resurrection "according to the scriptures."
It's a strange deduction but it's not what I personally read in 1 Cor 15. I simply read that the primary thing he taught the Corinthians was that Jesus died and rose again. Of course he has other things to say about Jesus: his parousia, the last judgment, the resurrection of the dead, etc.
As he says in 1 Cor. 1:23 and 2 Cor. 5:16, "we preach Christ crucified" and "From now on, therefore, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we once regarded Christ according to the flesh, we regard him thus no longer."
Paul does not say here that they knew Jesus in his human body. When he says "according to the flesh", he is talking about their own flesh. They don't regard Jesus according to the flesh but according to the spirit. This is what he says in 2 Cor:5:16-17 :
16 So from now on we regard no one according to the flesh. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer.
17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come:[a] The old has gone, the new is here!
And in
Romans 8 :
1 Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus,
2 because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit who gives life has set you free from the law of sin and death.
3 For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering.And so he condemned sin in the flesh,
4 in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
5 Those who live according to the flesh have their minds set on what the flesh desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires.
6 The mind governed by the flesh is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace.
7 The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so.
8 Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God.
9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ.
10 But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life because of righteousness.
11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of his Spirit who lives in you.
12 Therefore, brothers and sisters, we have an obligation—but it is not to the flesh, to live according to it.
13 For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live.
Moreover, the Corinthians can’t possibly have known personally Christ in his human body.
Even if it is from Ps. 2, the OT can be applied to real people, and the rulers in Judea in Paul's time included Romans.
Or Paul took up that Jewish tradition which established that Psalm 2 was a messianic chapter. And he used it for his little biography of Jesus.
Just as he did with Isaiah 53. To pick and choose from the messianic texts and claim to have discovered the mystery of the Messiah who was crucified to save mankind. And then go and preach the good news. A historical figure is therefore not necessary to explain Paul's Jesus.
And Paul never says anything about the Romans who supposedly killed his Messiah. If Jesus had existed and the Romans had killed Jesus, even if Paul had not known Jesus personally, it would be very surprising for him to have no resentment or regrets towards those who killed his Messiah.
He never says in his letters not to have any resentment towards those who killed Jesus. This should be one of the central themes of his letters if Jesus had existed. In fact, he says just the opposite since Paul asks Christians to submit to the authorities because they come from God.
All this is best explained if Jesus was considered by Paul as a person far away in time.
But Paul didn't exist in a vacuum. He says he knew Peter, and 1 Peter seems genuine to me so I take what it says into account to get a better understanding of Paul (like I do with the James passage regarding the "brother" issue). You can see it differently and disregard the James passage if that seems best to you, but it doesn't work for me.
Yes, but you are appealing to dubious texts that most scholars consider to be inauthentic to explain the Jesus found in Paul. I'm sorry, but I'll pass when you invoke such sources.
I can take or leave the TF, as I said, but I think there could be something to Goldberg's idea that Lk. 24 was based on an original TF. Since I think the James passage is genuine, it follows that Josephus said something about Jesus previously, and Lk. 24 could be reflecting this in the same way Luke/Acts appears to have used Josephus in other cases.
A computer search of the New Testament on the vocabulary cluster “Jesus, man, deed” (᾿Ιησοὺς, ἀνήρ, εργ*), which are the first three major nouns of the Testimonium, reveals that only this passage of Luke shares this cluster. Upon closer examination, one finds this to be only the first indication of a series of location correspondences, nearly synonymous phrases occurring in analogous positions in each text.
https://www.josephus.org/GoldbergJosephusLuke1995.pdf
Id. The TF is considered to be at the very least as a partial interpolation. I'm not interested in invoking such dubious sources in a discussion of Paul's Jesus either.