Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Regarding the identity of the "kings of the peoples" in CD col 8, while the expression "the peoples" (ha-amim) is applicable to Gentiles, it can also refer to all people in general, including Jews, like in Dt. 7:6:

"For you are a people holy to the LORD your God. The LORD your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession."

http://biblehub.com/hebrew/5971.htm

So whoever these "kings of the peoples" were, they could have ruled over Jews and Gentiles (which would be the case even if they were Seleucids).

These kings are mentioned in an interpretation of Dt. 32:33:

"'Their wine is the venom of serpents, the cruel poison of asps.' The serpents are the kings of the peoples and their wine is their ways. And the poison of asps is the chief [or "head"; Hebrew: rosh] of the kings of Greece who came to wreak vengeance upon them."

The reference to the "kings of Greece" makes the identification of the preceding "kings of the peoples" seem straightforward enough. These were Greek kings and likely the Seleucids.

But even if we forget about James and Eisenman, the big picture makes this identification hard for me to accept. For example, there are any number of OT verses that mention foreign kings and their peoples, yet these kings are tied to a prophecy that pertains to "the princes of Judah" (Hos. 5:10), who:

"have become like those who remove the bound; wrath shall be poured upon them. For they shall hope for healing but He will crush them. They are all of them rebels, [ms. B: for they have entered the Covenant of repentance but] they have not turned from the way of traitors but have wallowed in the ways of whoredom and wicked wealth ... and every man has sinned against his near kin, and has approached for un-chastity, and has acted arrogantly for the sake of riches and gain. And every man has done that which seemed right in his eyes and has chosen the stubbornness of his heart. They have not kept apart from the people [ms. B: and their sin] and have willfully rebelled by walking in the ways of the wicked."

And this seems to suggest that these kings were seen as not properly observing Jewish laws. This is reinforced by CD cols. 4 and 5, which ties the issue of fornication to "joining the house of Judah," polluting the Temple and a law that pertains to Israelite kings (Dt. 17:17) :

"[T]here shall be no more joining the house of Judah, but each man shall stand on his watchtower: 'The wall is built, the boundary far removed' [Mic. 7:2]. During all those years Belial shall be unleashed against Israel, as He spoke by the hand of Isaiah, son of Amoz, saying, 'Terror and the pit and the snare are upon you, 0 inhabitant of the land' [Is. 24:17]. Interpreted, these are the three nets of Belial with which Levi son of Jacob said that he catches Israel by setting them up as three kinds of righteousness. The first is riches, the second is fornication, and the third is profanation of the Temple. Whoever escapes the first is caught in the second, and whoever saves himself from the second is caught in the third [Is. 24:18].

"The builders of the wall [Ezk. 13:10] who have followed after ' Precept' - 'Precept' was a spouter of whom it is written, 'They shall surely spout' [Mic. 2:6] - shall be caught in fornication twice by taking a second wife while the first is alive, whereas the principle of creation is, 'Male and female created He them' [Gen. 1:27]. Also, those who entered the Ark went in two by two. And concerning the prince it is written, He shall not multiply wives to himself [Dt. 17:17]; but David had not read the sealed book of the Law which was in the ark (of the Covenant), for it was not opened in Israel from the death of Eleazar and Joshua, and the elders who worshipped Ashtoreth. It was hidden and (was not) revealed until the coming of Zadok. And the deeds of David rose up, except for the murder of Uriah, and God left them to him.

"Moreover, they profane the Temple because they do not observe the distinction (between clean and unclean) in accordance with the Law, but lie with a woman who sees her bloody discharge. And each man marries the daughter of his brother or sister, whereas Moses said, You shall not approach your mothers sister; she is your mother's near kin [Lev. 18:13]. But although the laws against incest are written for men, they also apply to women. When, therefore, a brother's daughter uncovers the nakedness of her father's brother, she is (also his) near kin."

Notice that they use David as an example of a king that did not follow the law against taking multiple wives, and not a foreign king, and that it is for not properly observing these laws against fornication that these kings polluted the Temple (and not because they desecrated it in the manner of Antiochus or Pompey).

So my question is, what kings could be viewed as being Greek and ruled over "the peoples" (possibly Jews and Gentiles), to whom a law and a prophecy that pertain to Israelite kings could be applied and who polluted the Temple because they did not properly observe Jewish laws besides the Herodians?

Another element of Eisenman's theory I want to discuss is the identity of an enemy of the Teacher of Righteousness who is called the Liar/Spouter of Lies/Scoffer. This person is mentioned in some of the pesharim and the Damascus Document as having rejected the Torah and the "way" taught by the Teacher of Righteousness and created his own congregation "without way":

"[Interpreted, this concerns] those who were unfaithful together with the Liar, in that they [did] not [listen to the word received by] the Teacher of Righteousness from the mouth of God. And it concerns the unfaithful of the New [Covenant] in that they have not believed in the Covenant of God [and have profaned] His holy Name" (1QpHab col. 2).

"Interpreted, this concerns the House of Absalom and the members of its council who were dumb at the time of the chastisement of the Teacher of Righteousness and gave him no help against the Liar who flouted the Law in the midst of their whole [congregation]" (1QpHab col. 5).

"Interpreted, this concerns the Spouter of Lies who led many astray that he might build his city of vanity with blood and raise a congregation on deceit, causing many thereby to perform a service of vanity for the sake of its glory, and to be pregnant with [works] of deceit, that their labour might be for nothing" (1QpHab col. 10).

"[T]hey were like blind men groping for the way. And God ... raised for them a Teacher of Righteousness to guide them in the way of His heart. And he made known to the latter generations that which God had done to the latter generation, the congregation of traitors, to those who departed from the way. This was the time of which it is written, 'Like a stubborn heifer thus was Israel stubborn' [Hos. 4:16], when the Scoffer arose who shed over Israel the waters of lies. He led them astray in a wilderness without way by bringing low the everlasting hills, and by causing them to depart from the paths of righteousness, and by removing the bound with which the forefathers had marked out their inheritance" (CD col. 1).

CD col. 5 appears to tie this person to the fornicating kings I mentioned in the previous post:

"The builders of the wall [Ezk. 13:10] who have followed after ' Precept' - 'Precept' was a spouter of whom it is written, 'They shall surely spout' [Mic. 2:6] - shall be caught in fornication twice by taking a second wife while the first is alive, whereas the principle of creation is, 'Male and female created He them' [Gen. 1:27]. Also, those who entered the Ark went in two by two. And concerning the prince it is written, He shall not multiply wives to himself [Dt. 17:17]; but David had not read the sealed book of the Law which was in the ark (of the Covenant), for it was not opened in Israel from the death of Eleazar and Joshua, and the elders who worshipped Ashtoreth. It was hidden and (was not) revealed until the coming of Zadok. And the deeds of David rose up, except for the murder of Uriah, and God left them to him."

Now, coincidently or not, Acts says that the early Christian sect was called "the Way":

"But Saul, yet breathing threatening and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest, and asked of him letters to Damascus unto the synagogues, that if he found any that were of the Way, whether men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem" (9:1-2).

"ome were hardened and disobedient, speaking evil of the Way before the multitude" (19:9).

"And about that time there arose no small stir concerning the Way" (19:23).

"... the Way which they call a sect" (24:14).

Acts also (coincidently or not) says that Paul was visited and well received by King Agrippa and his sister Bernice (who Josephus says were rumored to have had an incestuous relationship) while he was in custody in chapters 25 and 26:

"Agrippa the King and Bernice arrived at Caesarea, and saluted Festus. And as they tarried there many days, Festus laid Paul's case before the King, saying, 'There is a certain man left a prisoner by Felix; about whom, when I was at Jerusalem, the chief priests and the elders of the Jews informed me, asking for sentence against him' ... And Agrippa said to Festus, 'I also could wish to hear the man myself.' ... So on the morrow, when Agrippa was come, and Bernice, with great pomp ... at the command of Festus Paul was brought in ... And as he [Paul] thus made his defense ... and said, 'I am not mad, most excellent Festus; but speak forth words of truth and soberness. For the king knows of these things, unto whom also I speak freely: for I am persuaded that none of these things is hidden from him; for this hath not been done in a corner. King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets? I know that you believe.' And Agrippa said to Paul, 'With but little persuasion you would fain make me a Christian. And Paul said, 'I would to God, that whether with little or with much, not you only, but also all that hear me this day, might become such as I am, except of these bonds' ... And the king rose up, and the governor, and Bernice, and they that sat with them: and when they had withdrawn, they spoke one to another, saying, 'This man has done nothing worthy of death or of bonds.' And Agrippa said to Festus, 'This man might have been set at liberty, if he had not appealed to Caesar.'"

Also (coincidently or not), Paul is defensive in his letters about being thought of as a liar (twice in the context of mentioning James and the other apostles):

"I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie" (Gal. 1:20).

"The God and Father of the Lord Jesus, who is to be praised forever, knows that I am not lying" (2 Cor. 11:31).

"I speak the truth in Christ--I am not lying, my conscience confirms it through the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 9:1).

So both the Damascus Document and Acts use the expression "the way" to refer to their respective movements and connect it to a place called Damascus, and both of these movements were led by a teacher who had an enemy who rejected the Torah and started his own congregation.

That Paul rejected the Torah and James opposed him seems clear enough by comparing the letters that bear their names:

"Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard? ... [D]oes God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you by the works of the law, or by your believing what you heard? So also Abraham 'believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.' Clearly no one who relies on the law is justified before God, because 'the righteous will live by faith.' ... Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian" (Gal. 3:2-24).

"What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? ... Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds ... You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, 'Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,' and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone" (James 2:14-24).

Also, it should be noted that the reference in James 2:23 to Abraham being called "God's friend" is to my knowledge elsewhere mentioned (coincidently or not) only in the Damascus Document and another DSS writing, Jubilees:

"Abraham ... was accounted friend of God because he kept the commandments of God and did not choose his own will" (CD col. 3)

"[H]e [Abraham] was found faithful, and was recorded on the heavenly tablets as the friend of God" (Jub. 19:9-10).

Another interesting coincidence (even if it *is* only a coincidence) is that Paul bases his Torah-free teaching on Hab. 2:4, "The righteous will live by his faith":

"Clearly no one who relies on the law is justified before God, because 'the righteous will live by faith' (Gal. 3:11).

"For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed--a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: 'The righteous will live by faith'" (Rom. 1:17).

This same verse is applied in 1QpHab col. 8 to "all those who observe the Law in the House of Judah, whom God will deliver from the House of judgement because of their suffering and because of their faith in the Teacher of Righteousness."

The word that Vermes has translated as "suffering" (amal) has the sense of "works":

http://biblehub.com/hebrew/5999.htm

So the Habakkuk Pesher happens to have a doctrine of "faith and works" that is similar to the "faith and ... actions ... working together" mentioned in James 2:22.