The Messiah in the Dead Sea Scrolls - Two Suffering Servants in Judea ?

[John T]

And why would the author of these hymns, identify the teacher of righteousness and Michael with the same messianic attributes ?

The identification with the servant of Isaiah is found in other Qumran manuscripts that concern an eschatological messianic and sometimes priest figure. Can the same be said for Michael?

Messianic attributes? I'm not sure I follow. If you mean they share the same cause, that is to bring an end to the Angel of Darkness and his allotted spirits. Then yes, the angel of truth and the teacher of righteousness share in the same messianic attributes. 1Qs III 20-25.

"For God has established the spirits in equal measure until the final age, and has set everlasting hatred between their divisions." 1Qs III 15-20.

[Sinouhe]

And why would the author of these hymns, identify the teacher of righteousness and Michael with the same messianic attributes ?

The identification with the servant of Isaiah is found in other Qumran manuscripts that concern an eschatological messianic and sometimes priest figure. Can the same be said for Michael?

Messianic attributes? I'm not sure I follow. If you mean they share the same cause, that is to bring an end to the Angel of Darkness and his allotted spirits. Then yes, the angel of truth and the teacher of righteousness share in the same messianic attributes. 1Qs III 20-25.

"For God has established the spirits in equal measure until the final age, and has set everlasting hatred between their divisions." 1Qs III 15-20.

I don't find this verse to be particularly messianic.

This is what I call a messianic verse :

• 4Q161 - fragment 8-10 (Isaiah 11)
  [And there shall come forth a rod from the stem of Jesse and a Branch shall grow out of its roots. And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding,the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowl­edge and of the fear of the Lord. And his delight shall be in the fear of the Lord. He shall not judge by what his eyes see, or pass sentence by what his ears hear; he shall judge the poor righteously and shall pass sentence justly on the humble of the earth] (Isaiah xi, 1-3).
  -->[Interpreted, this concerns the Branch] of David who shall arise at the end [of days] ... God will uphold him with [the spirit of might, and will give him] a throne of glory and a crown of [holiness] and many-coloured garments . . . [He will put a sceptre] in his hand and he shall rule over all the [nations].

Isaiah 11 concerns the servant and futur Messiah.
The character in the self glorification hymns is identified with the servant of Isaiah. The character in the Hodayot is also identified to the Servant.

Is the angel Michael identified elsewhere with the servant in the DSS?

[John T]

Sinouhe and I previously discussed this in this thread. The issue is that 4Q491, fr. 11 is similar but far from identical to another Hymn found in 4Q471 and other fragments (Normally called Glorification Hymn B). However, this hymn clearly has a human protagonist. If the protagonists of the 2 hymns are the same (as most scholars believe) then 4Q491, fr. 11 is about an exalted human. If the protagonists are different (as I have suggested) then 4Q491, fr. 11 is probably about an angelic figure.

Andrew Criddle

My understanding, is they are from two different scrolls on the same hymn. It just so happens that 4Q491, fr. 11 has more surviving lines. In this case more is better. Of course I'm no expert but that is my understanding and if correct we have an angelic figure as the protagonist. I can be convinced otherwise but I haven't seen the justification. This is all about angels and demons. If in doubt, try to remember the main thing is the main thing.

[John T]

Is the angel Michael identified elsewhere with the servant in the DSS?

I try to avoid conflating Enochic Judaism with the prophet Isaiah.
If you want me to beat to the chase. Jesus is not Michael.
Got to keep them separated.

[Sinouhe]

Is the angel Michael identified elsewhere with the servant in the DSS?

I try to avoid conflating Enochic Judaism with the prophet Isaiah.
If you want me to beat to the chase. Jesus is not Michael.
Got to keep them separated.

I am talking about the servant of Isaiah and the DSS. I did mentioned Jesus or Enoch here

[ABuddhist]

Is the angel Michael identified elsewhere with the servant in the DSS?

Jesus is not Michael.
Got to keep them separated.

With all due respect, this has been challenged, most notably by Darrell Hannah’s doctoral dissertation, later revised and published by Moer Siebeck and then Wipf & Stock in 1999: "Michael and Christ: Michael Tradition and Angel Christology in Early Christianity".

For a useful summary of its claims, see Dr. Carrier's blog post "Was Jesus-Is-Michael an Early Christian Mystery Teaching?": https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/18485

In order to assuage concerns that Dr. Carrier would only endorse or reject insane ideas, I quote him as writing, "I have not thought this equation defensible enough to include as any premise in my work to date. I still consider it an intriguing possibility with some support in the evidence, but not something one can reliably “prove.” Although I think now, after having read Hannah, the case is better than I thought (even if still not iron clad). Hence in On the Historicity of Jesus I only mentioned it as a potential (not proven) path in thinking from Daniel 9 and 12 to the core originating Christian concept of Christ".

The following blog-post, "Michael the Great Prince and Saviour of Israel", https://isthatinthebible.wordpress.com/ ... of-israel/ , draws upon commentaries to the Revelation to John and the Shepard of Hermas in order to further this claim. A relevant quotation is: "Another intriguing connection is made in The Shepherd of Hermas, a second-century Christian text sometimes included in early Bibles. It describes a glorious angel who justifies the penitent (Mandate 5) and tests believers (Parable 8) among his various roles. In Parable 8, this angel, previously referred to as Christ, is given the name Michael.".

[John T]

Peter Schafer - Two Gods in Heaven (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Schäfer)
The author thus models himself at the same time as the suffering servant of God in Isaiah 53[/highlight], thereby presumably placing himself in the messianic interpretative tradition of the Suffering Servant Songs. This could be interpreted as a further reference to the historical Teacher of Righteousness.
I have argued in favor of “some kind of Teacher of Righteousness redivivus: the founder of the sect who was imagined by his later followers as elevated into heaven and expected to return at the end of time as the priestly Messiah in order to lead the members of the community in the final battle.”
Whoever the hero of the Self- Glorification Hymn is, and whatever his function at the end of days, he is a human being who in a unique manner is exalted into heaven and enthroned there. We do not hear of anything comparable regarding any other human—with the exception of Enoch, who becomes the Son of Man in the Similitudes of the Ethiopic Book of Enoch.
Our hero is not just one angel among many angels, and it is not said that he will be transformed into an angel. Rather, he is and remains a human being who is elevated to the status of a god, and as such will return to earth".

The suffering servants in the Dead Sea scrolls are not messiahs. The Teacher of Righteousness does not identify himself as a messiah. I know of no such scroll that supports Schafer's view. What the Teacher of Righteouness says over and over again is when all is said and done the sons of light will be made to stand with the gods. 4Q427.

Until then,

"Thy servant is a spirit of [flesh]." Hymn2 (formely 24) pg. 252. The Thanksgiving Hymns.

Try as one might there is no there, there for Dr. Carrier, et al.

[ABuddhist]

Try as one might there is no there, there for Dr. Carrier, et al.

What does this mean?

And are you suggesting that people who claim that early Christians (and their texts) conflated Jesus and Michael are only doing this because they try to conflate such figures?

[Sinouhe]

The suffering servants in the Dead Sea scrolls are not messiahs. The Teacher of Righteousness does not identify himself as a messiah. I know of no such scroll that supports Schafer's view. What the Teacher of Righteouness says over and over again is when all is said and done the sons of light will be made to stand with the gods. 4Q427.

Until then,

"Thy servant is a spirit of [flesh]." Hymn2 (formely 24) pg. 252. The Thanksgiving Hymns.

Try as one might there is no there, there for Dr. Carrier, et al.

The servant in Isaiah is the eschatological Messiah in the DSS :

• 4Q161 - fragment 8-10 (Isaiah 11)
  [And there shall come forth a rod from the stem of Jesse and a Branch shall grow out of its roots. And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding,the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowl­edge and of the fear of the Lord. And his delight shall be in the fear of the Lord. He shall not judge by what his eyes see, or pass sentence by what his ears hear; he shall judge the poor righteously and shall pass sentence justly on the humble of the earth] (Isaiah xi, 1-3).
  -->[Interpreted, this concerns the Branch] of David who shall arise at the end [of days] ... God will uphold him with [the spirit of might, and will give him] a throne of glory and a crown of [holiness] and many-coloured garments . . . [He will put a sceptre] in his hand and he shall rule over all the [nations].

It would be difficult to explain why some eschatological characters are identified with the servant, a messianic claim for the sect, if they don’t have messianic vocation, as if being the servant of Isaiah was an interchangeable label for anyone. Still, there can be a former servant and a future servant of Isaiah. But several servants as if it was a common title? No.

When Jesus is identified with the servant of Isaiah or with the suffering servant of Isaiah, it is also the same character. Not several and multiple servants. And there is obviously the image of the Messiah associated with this identification in the NT.

Schaffer's view is shared by Michael O Wise, Martin Abegg, or Morton Smith.
And Esther Eschel also admits that the idea is plausible.
I don't see what this has to do with Richard Carrier. You're definitely making a lot of irrelevant points.

I will stop here with you.

[ABuddhist]

Try as one might there is no there, there for Dr. Carrier, et al.

What does this mean?

And are you suggesting that people who claim that early Christians (and their texts) conflated Jesus and Michael are only doing this because they try to conflate such figures?

To further clarify, key texts found within the Christian canon supporting the claim that Jesus is Michael are:

Revelation to John 12:7, in which Michael is said to lead a heavenly army against Satan.

Philippians 2:5-11 (which, in describing Jesus as being a name given to him after he became an Earthly being, leaves unanswered the question of what his name before was).

Letter to the Hebrews, talking about Jesus as saving people through acts done in heaven - in Hebrews's case, serving as a high priest in a heavenly temple.

These three traditions, together, suggest a possible model in which Jesus, before he was on Earth as Jesus, was in heaven as Michael - and may in future as Michael play a heavenly role again. The other early Christian text to which I referred (Shepard of Hermas), strengthens this interpretation.

It is true that Jesus, in GJohn and in later Christian theology, is not said to be an angel, but theologies differ and change over time, as the proliferation of sects reveals.