michael or yhwh.pdf
Post on 22-Nov-2015
28 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
http://jsp.sagepub.comPseudepigrapha
Journal for the Study of the
DOI: 10.1177/0951820706069186 2006; 16; 75 Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha
Rick Van de Water Michael or Yhwh? Toward Identifying Melchizedek in 11Q13
http://jsp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/16/1/75 The online version of this article can be found at:
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
can be found at:Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Additional services and information for
http://jsp.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:
http://jsp.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. by Ilie Chiscari on November 13, 2007 http://jsp.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
Journal for the study of the Pseudepigrapha
Vol 16.1 (2006): 75-86
2006 Sage Publications (London, Thousand Oaks, CA, and New Delhi)
DOI: 10.1177/0951820706069186
http://JSP.sagepub.com
Michael or Yhwh?
Toward Identifying Melchizedek in 11Q13
RICK VAN DE WATER
1300 Junipero Serra Blvd., San Francisco, CA 94132, USA
Abstract
Scholars are still divided over the identity of the gure Melchizedek in 11Q13. Is he an
angel, or is Melchizedek simply another title for Yhwh? This article argues that these
two opposing views can be reconciled by seeing the gure Melchizedek as an expression
of what the early rabbis called belief in two Powers in heaven. The way he is portrayed
in 11QMelch is comparable to Philos concept of the divine MPHPK and the belief of the Magharians. While there are clear indications in 11Q13 that Melchizedek is an inter-
mediary, there are equally compelling arguments that he is Yhwh. The author of 11Q13
uses a collage of biblical texts to present him as a divine intermediary. The fact that a
number of biblical messianic titles are conated in the person of Melchizedek encourages
seeing other Qumran descriptions of exalted gures as referring to him as well.
Keywords: Tisha bAv; Jeremiah; LXX; MT; Edomites; Temple; Gedaliah; assassination
Since the initial publication of 11QMelch, the gure Melchizedek has
usually been described as an angel (Michael or otherwise).1 F. Manzi,
1. E.g. A.S. Van der Woude, Melchisedek als himmlische Erlsergestalt in den
neugefundenen eschatologischen Midraschim aus Qumran Hhle XI, OTS 14 (1965),
pp. 354-73 (369); F. Garca Martnez, Qumran and Apocalyptic (Leiden: E.J. Brill,
1992), p. 176; J. VanderKam, The Dead Sea Scrolls Today (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans;
London: SPCK, 1994), p. 171. D. Flusser criticized that identication as anachronistic
dependence on Talmudic and medieval rabbinic tradition (Judaism and the Origins of
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. by Ilie Chiscari on November 13, 2007 http://jsp.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
76 Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 16.1 (2006)
however, has recently argued against such an identication.2 His argu-
ment is based on the long-observed appropriation for Melchizedek of a
number of biblical statements concerning Yhwh.3 This leads him to con-
clude that, rather than referring to an intermediary of Yhwh, Melchi-
zedek is simply a divine title for Yhwh himself.4 While his point is a
valid one, Manzi admits that there remains much to be said for the idea
that Melchizedek is an intermediary.5 The purpose of this article is to
argue that the identication of Melchizedek as an intermediary can be
reconciled with Manzis thesis that Melchizedek is a divine title.
The expression two Powers (EHJHCJE) recurs in early rabbinic polemic against belief that God has a divine mediator who shares his
throne.6 According to A.F. Segal, the biblical theophanies constitute a
most important part of the tradition.7 Since Philo and some apocalyptic
writings show awareness of it, Segal has concluded that the interpretation
of the biblical theophanies in terms of a divine intermediary must predate
Christianity [Jerusalem: Magnes/Hebrew University, 1988], p. 188). J. Fitzmyer has
voiced reservations about it as complicated by the fact that the author of the text seems
to refer to Melchizedek as Elohim (Further Light on Melchizedek from Qumran Cave
11, JBL 86 [1967], pp. 25-41 [32]).
2. F. Manzi, Melchisedek e langelologia nellepistola agli Ebrei e a Qumran
(AnBib, 136; Rome: Pontical Biblical Institute, 1997), pp. 67-96.
3. Yahwehs inheritance (Deut. 32.9), the year of favor for Yahweh (Isa. 61.2a) and
the day of vengeance of our God (Isa. 61.2b) have all been appropriated for Melchi-
zedek (2.5, 9, 13); cf. J.T. Milik, Milk-sedeq et Milk-rea dans les anciens crits juifs
et chrtiens, JJS 23 (1972), pp. 124-25; E. Puech, Notes sur le manuscrit de
XIQMelkisdeq, RevQ 12 (1987), pp. 510-11.
4. Manzi, Melchisedek, p. 64.
5. Manzi, Melchisedek, pp. 91-92.
6. E.g. Sifre Deut. 379; Sifre Zuta Shalah 15.30; Tanhuma Kadoshim 4; Gen. R. 1.7;
Deut. R. 2.33; Eccles. R. 2.12; Pesikta Rabbati 20.4. In this regard, divine is usually
dened in terms of certain traits and roles characteristic of God (e.g. eternal, innite,
creator, universal ruler, eschatological judge, etc.) that are not applied to other beings
(cf. A.F. Segal, Two Powers in Heaven: Early Rabbinic Reports about Christianity and
Gnosticism [SJLA, 25; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1977], p. 23, who also notes [p. 261] that the
rabbis used the expressions two gods and second god in connection with such belief.
Philo used second god in reference to the MPHPK [Quest. in Gen. 2.62]. Cf. also R. Bauckham, The Throne of God and the Worship of Jesus, in C.C. Newman et al.
(eds.), The Jewish Roots of Christological Monotheism: Papers from the St. Andrews
Conference on the Historical Origins of the Worship of Jesus [Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1999],
pp. 43-69 [45 and 53 n. 24]).
7. Segal, Two Powers, p. 184.
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. by Ilie Chiscari on November 13, 2007 http://jsp.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
VAN DE WATER Michael or Yhwh? 77
the second century CE.8 Supporting his view is the mention by medieval
Karaite commentators of the Magharians, a rst-century Jewish sect
believing in a celestial being who created the world, was placed over all
creation, and was Gods intermediary who appeared to the patriarchs and
spoke to the prophets.9 Qirqisani explained the name Magharians as
derived from the discovery of their writings in caves.10 Since the Essenes
are not mentioned in Qirqisanis presentation of early Jewish sects,
Magharians may simply be an ad hoc name for them.11 Though their
belief has been related to Philos concept of the divine MPHPK, their alleged existence prior to the Christian era makes his inuence on them
unlikely.12 What is more probable is that Philos interpretation of the
intermediary of the biblical theophanies reects a more widespread belief
in certain early Jewish sectors.13 What will be argued below is that
11QMelch reects belief comparable to that of Philo and the Magharians.
That this is not unthinkable is argued by the fact that a similar idea
8. Segal, Two Powers, pp. 260-61.
9. L. Nemoy (ed.), Yaqub Al-Qirqisani, Kitab Al-Anwar Wal-Maraqib: Code of
Karaite Law (New York: Alexander Kohut Memorial Foundation, 1939), p. 55 I. 2.8;
idem, Karaite Anthology: Excerpts from the Early Literature (New Haven: Yale Uni-
versity Press, 1952) 50; H.A. Wolfson, The Pre-Existent Angel of the Magharians and
Al-Nahawandi, JQR 51 (1960), pp. 91-93; W. Bacher, Qirqisani, the Karaite, and his
Work on Jewish Sects, in P. Birnbaum (ed.), Karaite Studies (New York: Harmon,
1971), p. 275.
10. Qirqisani, Kitab Al-Anwar, I.2.8. Some of their writings were found in the ninth
century in a cave near Jericho and signicantly inuenced the beliefs of the Karaites of
Jerusalem (cf. R. de Vaux, A propos des manuscrits de la Mer Morte, RB 57 [1950], pp.
417-29 [421-42]).
11. J. Fossum, The Name of God and the Angel of the Lord: Samaritan and Jewish
Concepts of Intermediation and the Origin of Gnosticism (WUNT, 36; Tbingen: Mohr,
1985), p. 330.
12. Wolfson, Pre-Existent Angel, pp. 95-96. Qirqisani recorded that the book of the
Alexandrian was among the scrolls found in the ninth century (cf. Bacher, Qirqisani,
p. 275); see also D.T. Runia, Philo in Early Christian Literature: A Survey (Assen: Van
Gorcum; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993), pp. 15-16.
13. For Philo as a compiler of traditions, rather than an innovator, cf. W.L. Knox,
Pharisaism and Hellenism, in H. Loewe (ed.), Judaism and Christianity. II. The Contact
of Pharisaism with Other Cultures (repr.; New York: Ktav, 1969 [1937]), pp. 61-111
(62); G. Bertram, Philo und die jdische Propaganda in der antiken Welt, in W. Grund-
mann (ed.), Christentum und Judentum: Studien zur Erforschung ihres gegenseitigen
Verhltnisses (Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs, 1940), pp. 79-105. For the striking parallels
between Philos traditions and those of the Karaites, cf. B. Revel, The Karaite Halakah
and its Relation to Sadducean, Samaritan and Philonian Halakah, in Birnbaum (ed.),
Karaite Studies, pp. 1-88.
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. by Ilie Chiscari on November 13, 2007 http://jsp.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
78 Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 16.1 (2006)
appears in other writings found at Qumran. The reference to the God of
Israel and the Angel / Messenger of his truth in 1QS 3.24, for example,
has been noted in this regard.14 The latter title, moreover, is widely
considered to refer to the gure Melchizedek of 11QMelch 2.13.15
That Melchizedek is indeed presented there as an intermediary is
underlined by a couple of problems with Manzis thesis. The rst con-
cerns the interpretation of Ps. 82.1 in 11QMelch 2.9-10. Manzi claims
that the rst occurrence of )J9= in Ps. 82.1 simply refers to = in 82.1b.16 Three lines down, however, in 11QMelch 2.13, the text asserts
that Melchizedek is to carry out the vengeance of Gods judgments.
That statement appears to make a distinction between Melchizedek and
=.17 The second observation is that, though Manzi has simply assumed that the name Melchizedek means King of Righteousness, his ren-
dering is not the only possibility.18 As has long been suggested, an
alternative to understanding the yod in B54J as a hireq compaginis is to take the more straightforward function of the yod as a rst singular
pronominal sufx. This would give the title, My king is righteousness.19
Who, though, would refer to him as my king? It is worth considering
that the title is Gods designation of him and thus offers another argu-
ment that Melchizedek is not merely a title for God.
These indications of a distinction between Melchizedek and =, how-ever, need not overrule Manzis case for the identication of Melchi-
zedek as Yhwh. It is not unlikely that the citation of Isa. 52.7 (your God
is king) in 11QMelch 2.24-25 was interpreted in the lacuna as referring
14. Segal, Two Powers, pp. 20-21.
15. Cf. van der Woude, Melchisedek, p. 369; Y. Yadin, The Scroll of The War of
the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1957),
pp. 234-36; P. Kobelski, Melchizedek and Melchirea (CBQMS, 10; Washington: Catho-
lic Biblical Association of America, 1981), p. 139; J.T. Milik, 4QVisions de Amram et
une citation dOrigne, RB 79 (1972), pp. 77-79 (86); C. Newsom, Songs of the Sabbath
Sacrice: A Critical Edition (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985), p. 37. Also 4Q177 12-13.7:
his Angel of Truth will help all the children of light from the power of Belial.
16. Manzi, Melchisedek, pp. 64-65.
17. A. Aschim, Melchizedek and Jesus: 11QMelchizedek and the Epistle to the
Hebrews, in Newman et al. (eds.), Jewish Roots, pp. 129-47 (135).
18. Of the grammatical examples Manzi gives for comparison (Melchisedek, p. 71 n.
220), not one uses the rst singular pronominal sufx.
19. J. Fitzmyer: my king is upright (Now this Melchizedek [Heb 7,1], CBQ
25 [1963], pp. 305-21 [311]); idem: my king is Sedeq (Essays on the Semitic Back-
ground of the New Testament [Sources for Biblical Study, 5; Missoula, MT: Scholars
Press, 2nd edn, 1974], pp. 229-30).
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. by Ilie Chiscari on November 13, 2007 http://jsp.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
VAN DE WATER Michael or Yhwh? 79
to Melchizedek.20 His inauguration of a Sabbath era of pardon can also be
seen as a role of Yhwh. The jubilee year of liberation (Lev. 25.9-13) is
combined with the sabbatical year of remission of debts (Deut. 15.2) and
is interpreted eschatologically as the year of grace for Melchizedek
(11QMelch 2.9) in allusion to Isa. 61.1-2.21 Performing the role of the
Anointed of the Spirit in Isaiah 61, he proclaims liberty for captives to
free them from their iniquities (11QMelch 2.5-6).22 This spiritual dimen-
sion given to his proclamation interprets the text of Isaiah: the liberation
he proclaims is from sin. That this takes place in the rst week of the
tenth jubilee (2.7) equates it with Daniels seventy weeks (Dan. 9.24)
leading up to the atonement for sin (*HCA3JJ (11QMelch 2.6) appears to refer to H3E from the citation of Lev. 25.13 in the lacuna (11QMelch 2.2). Thus the jubilee return to the ancestral home is interpreted in terms of the
return and purication of the remnant from their sins (2.6).24 That in
biblical prophecy it was Yhwh who would bring back the captives once
more places Melchizedek in his role.25
Liberation from sin is achieved at the end of the tenth jubilee by atone-
ment made for those associated with Melchizedek (11QMelch 2.7-8).
20. C.M. de Jonge and A.S. van der Woude, 11QMelchizedek and the New Testa-
ment, NTS 12 (196566), pp. 301-26 (305); Fitzmyer, Further Light, p. 41; Milik,
Milk-sedeq, p. 125; Puech, Notes, p. 511; Garca Martnez, Qumran and Apocalyptic,
p. 176.
21. For the same combination of Isa. 61.1-2 with Lev. 25.9-13 in the Gospel of Luke,
cf. G.J. Brooke, Shared Intertextual Interpretations in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the New
Testament, in M. Stone and E. Chazon (eds.), Biblical Perspectives: Early Use and
Interpretation of the Bible in the Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1998),
pp. 35-57.
22. 9>9JH?H=H[9]=3HK=CHC59>9=CBH. 23. For Dan. 9.24 in 11QMelch 2.6 and the restoration of the end of 2.18 with a
citation from Dan. 9.25, see Fitzmyer, Further Light, p. 29; cf. also J.M. Baumgarten,
The Heavenly Tribunal and the Personication of Sedeq in Jewish Apocalyptic, ANRW
19.1 (1979), pp. 222-23; D. Dimant, Qumran Sectarian Literature, in M. Stone (ed.),
Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period (CRINT, 2.2; Assen: Van Gorcum; Phila-
delphia: Fortress, 1984) 532; Garca Martnez, Two Messianic Figures, p. 23.
24. For the followers of B5499CH> as that remnant, cf. CD 16.1-5; 1QH 6.8-14; 1QM 13.8; 14.5-9.
25. E.g. Deut. 30.3; Pss. 53.7; 126.1; 146.7; Jer. 23.3; Ezek. 34.13; 37.21; Tob. 13.10.
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. by Ilie Chiscari on November 13, 2007 http://jsp.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
80 Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 16.1 (2006)
Though the fragmentary text leaves uncertain whether Melchizedek is
the subject of that atonement, it is indeed probable.26 That particular
lacuna, moreover, is overshadowed by a general context strongly sug-
gestive of priesthood.27 Perhaps the most obvious of the priestly elements
there is Melchizedeks performance of the roles of the priestly Messiah
of Isaiah 61.28 Another is his very name. There is much to suggest that,
rather than referring to the priest of Gen. 14.18, Melchizedek alludes to
the priest like Melchizedek in Ps. 110.4, who is called my Lord and is
invited to sit at the right hand of the Lord (110.1).29
That he is portrayed as a heavenly priest bolsters the argument for his
being the agent of the expiation achieved on the Day of Atonement
(11QMelch 2.7-8) in inauguration of the tenth jubilee (Lev. 25.9).30
Though it was traditionally the high priest who performed the atonement
rite on that day (Lev. 16), the expiation presented in 11QMelch is more
eschatological than liturgical.31 In biblical tradition, as well as in other
Qumran documents, it is Yhwh who not only avenges, but also atones.32
Likewise 11QMelch presents the eschatological atonement as a work of
God.33 Since Melchizedek performs Yhwhs roles in liberating, judging,
avenging and ruling, is it unreasonable to conclude that it is also his act
of atonement that delivers those of his lot from the vengeance? This is
the apparent meaning of the fragmentary phrase in 11QMelch 2.6: and
he proclaimed liberty for them to set them free from [ ] all their iniqui-
ties.34 In light of biblical prophecy, his eschatological act of atonement
would thus constitute yet another afrmation that he is Yhwh.
26. Aschim, Melchizedek and Jesus, p. 132.
27. Kobelski, Melchizedek, p. 64; Aschim, Melchizedek and Jesus, p. 139. Due to
the lacuna, de Jonge and van der Woude (11QMelchizedek, p. 306) questioned Melchi-
zedeks priesthood, though the latter had previously suggested that CA< in 11QMelch 2.6-8 was in reference to Melchizedek (Melchisedek, p. 363).
28. For Isa. 61.1-10 as the discourse of a high priest, cf. P. Grelot, Sur Isae LXI: La
premire conscration dun grand prtre, RB 97 (1990), pp. 414-31 (422).
29. Kobelski, Melchizedek, p. 54; Milik, Milk-sedeq, p. 138; Flusser, Judaism,
p. 188; Puech, Notes, p. 512; Aschim, Melchizedek and Jesus, p. 136; cf. also Heb.
7.15, 24.
30. Though the nature of this act of expiation is not clear, the biblical notion of CA) suggests that the MT has been altered to remove the identication of the Anointed One as Yhwh Sabaoth.
40. 11QMelch 2.9-10 (twice); 2.23. Cf. Horton, Melchizedek Tradition, pp. 74-75;
Manzi, Melchisedek, p. 66 esp. n. 182.
41. As Flusser (Judaism, p. 190) has noted, the role of eschatological judge itself
implies immortality.
42. Miliks restoration of 11QMelch 2.14 with the citation of Mal. 3.1-2 concerning
the Angel of the Covenant follows the same line of thought. Milik held that 11QMelch is
part of a larger document on the Ages (cf. CD 16.3-4) which included 4Q180 2-4 and
5-6, dealing with the theophanies to Abraham (Milk-sedeq, pp. 106, 119, 122-25). See
J. Starcky, Le Matre de Justice et Jsus, MDB 1.4 (1978), p. 57; F. Garca Martnez,
Two Messianic Figures in the Qumran Texts, in D. Parry and S. Ricks (eds.), Current
Research and Technological Developments on the Dead Sea Scrolls (STDJ, 20; Leiden:
E.J. Brill, 1996), pp. 14-40 (22-24); A.F. Segal (Rebeccas Children: Judaism and Chris-
tianity in the Roman World [Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1986], p. 89)
exemplies current dependence on apocalyptic literature, explaining this attribution of
divinity as participation granted to some principal angels.
43. Starcky, Le Matre, p. 57; Flusser, Judaism, pp. 188, 191; M.A. Knibb, Messi-
anism in the Pseudepigrapha in the Light of the Scrolls, DSD 2.1 (1995), pp. 165-84
(173). For a list of parallels between Melchizedek of 11Q13 and the one like a son of
man in Dan. 7.9-14, cf. Kobelski, Melchizedek, p. 133. See also the Angel of the Lord in
Zech. 3.
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. by Ilie Chiscari on November 13, 2007 http://jsp.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
VAN DE WATER Michael or Yhwh? 83
on high (Ps. 7.8) in 11QMelch 2.11 also parallels the ascent of the one
like a son of man to the heavenly throne (Dan. 7.13-14). Even the dual
image of Melchizedek as God judging (11QMelch 2.11), yet distinct
from God as the executor of his judgments (2.13), resembles the OG ver-
sion of Daniels gure who is distinct from, yet like (XK) the Ancient of Days (Dan. 7.13).
Return on high (11QMelch 2.11) implies, moreover, that Melchi-
zedek is a celestial being who has been to earth. The nature of that visit
to earth is suggested by the assertion that he is the Anointed One foretold
by both Isaiah and Daniel (2.6, 18). That identication implies that he is
human.44 That he is said to be the Anointed One cut off (Dan. 9.26),
moreover, implies his death. Since the cutting off of Daniels Messiah
is associated with atonement for sin (*HCA) with
44. Cf. P. Rainbow, Melchizedek as a Messiah at Qumran, BullBibRes 7 (1997),
pp. 179-94.
45. See 1QMelch 2.7 (his act of expiation in the tenth jubilee); 2.18 (he is the
[A]nointed of the Spiri[t] of whom D[aniel spoke..]. For the restoration, cf. Fitzmyer,
Further Light, p. 29.
46. A parallel concept can be seen in 1QIsaa 52.14, where the anointing of the
suffering Servant casts him as a Messiah who suffers in expiation to establish a universal
covenant (52.15) and who will be exalted (52.13b).
47. J.H. Charlesworth, From Messianology to Christology: Problems and Prospects,
in idem (ed.), The Messiah (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992), pp. 3-35 (7).
48. Cf. Garca Martnez, Two Messianic Figures, pp. 18-24.
49. Cf. E. Puech, Une apocalypse messianique (4Q521), RevQ 15 (1992), pp. 475-
519 (486). Garca Martnez (Two Messianic Figures, p. 39 n. 40) notes that frag. 2 of
4Q521 speaks of a Davidic messiah, frags. 8-9 of a priestly messiah, and frags. 5-6 of an
eschatological messiah.
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. by Ilie Chiscari on November 13, 2007 http://jsp.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
84 Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 16.1 (2006)
the oil of the kingdom.50 Still another example is the Davidic rst-born
son in 4Q369 (Prayer of Enosh) 1.2.6, for whom God sets apart his
inheritance (2.1). In 4Q174 1-2.1.7-8, the explanation of 2 Sam. 7.11 as:
he will give them rest from a[ll] the sons of Belial, is strikingly similar
to 11QMelch 2.13. Expectation of Melchizedeks coming also recalls the
coming of B549CHJ (CD 6.11) and the Messiah of Aaron and Israel (CD 20.1). Yet another parallel is the expiation made for those of Melchi-
zedeks lot on the day of atonement and the suffering servant I>D J53in Zech. 3.8-9, through whom the iniquity of the land would be removed
in one day. The latter gure is a possible source for numerous references
to 5JH5I>4 in Qumran sectarian documents.51 Another gure referred to as =J59C3 and *HJ=C3 in 4Q246 2.1 has actually been proposed to be Melchizedek.52 Those two titles and other
details of the gures description allude to the prophetic heir to Davids
throne.53 Other details suggest his identication as the one like a son of
man in Daniel 7.54 This combination of a heavenly gure with a human
one parallels the dual image of Melchizedek. That 2 Sam. 7.14 is com-
bined there with Dan. 7.13 shows, moreover, that the one like a son of
man in Daniel 7 could be interpreted messianically and referred to as
son of God.55 Thus it is not surprising that the gure in 4Q246 has been
50. C. Evans, A Note on the First-Born Son of 4Q369, DSD 2 (1995), pp. 185-201
(198 n. 38).
51. 4Q174 1-2.1.11; 4Q252.1.3; 4Q161.10.17; 4Q285 5 2-3.
52. Garca Martnez, Qumran and Apocalyptic, p. 173; idem, Two Messianic
Figures, pp. 27-28, who argues that 4Q246 is compatible with other Qumran sectarian
writings, and that the concept of a heavenly messiah does occur elsewhere; cf. Knibb,
Messianism, 177. For summaries of various hypotheses for the gure in 4Q246, cf. J.
Fitzmyer, 4Q246: The Son of God Document from Qumran, Bib 74 (1993), pp. 168-
70; E. Puech, 4QApocryphe de Daniel ar, DJD 22 (1996), pp. 178-80.
53. In addition to the titles, the reference to him as great and the verb 9?
-
VAN DE WATER Michael or Yhwh? 85
referred to as an almost divinized Messiah.56 He is both judge (2.5) and
bringer of eschatological peace (2.4).57 His eternal rule is likewise
associated with the reign of the people of God in a kingdom with cosmic
dimensions (2.9).58 Given these striking parallels, the proposal that he is
Melchizedek is by no means unreasonable.
These similarities between the gure called Melchizedek and descrip-
tions of exalted gures in other scroll fragments raise the legitimate
question as to whether those various exalted gures are not actually one
gure under different titles. As A. Dupont-Sommer pointed out in the
early days of Qumran research, different designations can be used for
one and the same person, depending on the context and specic roles
being highlighted.59 The constant weaving of biblical themes and images
in the sectarian writings makes this point particularly pertinent. In the
comparable eld of christology, caution has been advised against
attempting to unravel the web of christological titles into independent
or even conicting concepts.60 Could not the same be said with respect to
titles and descriptions in the fragmentary texts from Qumran?
Conclusion
It has been argued above that the way in which Melchizedek is presented
in 11Q13 is best explained, not in terms of a created angel (Michael or
otherwise), but rather in terms of belief in two Powers in heaven, com-
parable to that of Philo and the Magharians.61 The author of 11QMelch
uses Pss. 7.8; 82.1; 110.1; Isa. 52.7; 61.1; Dan. 7.13; 9.26 to portray
Melchizedek as Yhwh and at the same time as Gods intermediary.
Melchizedek embodies the high-priestly Messiah, the suffering Ser-
vant, the herald of peace, Yhwh reigning in Zion and the eschatological
judge, or Son of Man. This collage of biblical images resembles Philos
56. Garca Martnez, Two Messianic Figures, p. 30.
57. The blank in l. 4 argues that =J59C3 is the bringer of peace, rather than the peo-ple of God, the object of the preceding phrase (Garca Martnez, Two Messianic Figures,
p. 29).
58. Garca Martnez (Two Messianic Figures, p. 29).
59. A. Dupont-Sommer, Nouveaux aperus sur les manuscrits de la Mer Morte
(Paris: Maisonneuve, 1953).
60. Hengel, Son of God, pp. 21-46.
61. This is essentially the view held by M. Barker (The Great Angel: A Study of
Israels Second God [Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press; London: SPCK,
1992], pp. 88-89, 224).
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. by Ilie Chiscari on November 13, 2007 http://jsp.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
86 Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 16.1 (2006)
presentation of the divine Logos, including his assertion that as inter-
mediary and intercessor, the Logos is the true High Priest, Melchizedek.62
The application of several messianic titles to one person can be seen as a
natural development of their seminal overlapping in biblical tradition.
That overlapping encourages seeing some of the Qumran son of God
texts as further descriptions of the same gure, despite the absence there
of the title Melchizedek. He exhibits most clearly the belief of the
Qumran covenanters in two Powers. This conclusion is made all the
more conceivable by the dating of 11QMelch to the Herodian period,
according to current paleographic theory.63
That Melchizedek represents belief in what the early rabbis called a
second Power in heaven, on the other hand, does not contradict Miliks
convincing equation of him with = in 1QM 17.6. What has been seen above is that in 11QMelch, a literary play on the name of a biblical
gure has transformed the title Melchizedek into Gods designation for
the sharer of his throne. It is worth considering that literary play is like-
wise present in the case of = in 1QM. Rather than a mere reference to the archangel Michael, it can be seen as another title for Melchizedek
who is like God. It thus constitutes another conceptual parallel to the
OG interpretation of Dan. 7.13, where the one like a son of man is said
to be like (XK) the Ancient of Days. Though space does not allow pur-suing in more detail this proposed interpretation of the gure = in 1QM, it is worth further consideration in regard to the issue at hand.
A nal question also remains to be answered: If Melchizedek is
indeed presented as a heavenly being who visited earth as Daniels
Messiah cut off and is invited to return on high to judge, then who
would the Qumran covenanters have seen as his earthly embodiment?
That too must be relegated to a further study.
62. Philo, Migr. 102; Som. 2.231-3; Her. 205-206; Leg. All. 3.25-6, 79-82.
63. Van der Woude, Melchisedek, p. 357.
2006 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. by Ilie Chiscari on November 13, 2007 http://jsp.sagepub.comDownloaded from
/ColorImageDict > /JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict > /JPEG2000ColorImageDict > /AntiAliasGrayImages false /DownsampleGrayImages true /GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /GrayImageResolution 300 /GrayImageDepth -1 /GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeGrayImages true /GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterGrayImages true /GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /GrayACSImageDict > /GrayImageDict > /JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict > /JPEG2000GrayImageDict > /AntiAliasMonoImages false /DownsampleMonoImages true /MonoImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /MonoImageResolution 1200 /MonoImageDepth -1 /MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeMonoImages true /MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode /MonoImageDict > /AllowPSXObjects false /PDFX1aCheck false /PDFX3Check false /PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false /PDFXNoTrimBoxError true /PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox true /PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfile () /PDFXOutputCondition () /PDFXRegistryName (http://www.color.org) /PDFXTrapped /Unknown
/Description >>> setdistillerparams> setpagedevice
top related