University of Connecticut

OpenCommons@UConn
University Scholar Projects University Scholar Program

Spring 5-1-2015

Embodying God's Final Word: Understanding the

Dynamics of Prophecy in the the Ancient Near
East and Early Monotheistic Tradition
Naila Z. Razzaq
University of Connecticut - Storrs, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: https://opencommons.uconn.edu/usp_projects

Part of the Ancient History, Greek and Roman through Late Antiquity Commons, Biblical
Studies Commons, Near Eastern Languages and Societies Commons, and the Other Classics
Commons

Recommended Citation
Razzaq, Naila Z., "Embodying God's Final Word: Understanding the Dynamics of Prophecy in the the Ancient Near East and Early
Monotheistic Tradition" (2015). University Scholar Projects. 11.
https://opencommons.uconn.edu/usp_projects/11
 Razzaq 1

EMBODYING GOD’S
FINAL WORD:
Understanding the Dynamics of Prophecy in the
Ancient Near East and Early Monotheistic Tradition

University Scholar + Honors Thesis

Naila Razzaq
May 2015
 Razzaq 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 3

CHAPTER 2: WHAT IS PROPHECY? ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN AND BIBLICAL

PERSPECTIVES 8

CHAPTER 3: PROPHECY IN TRANSITION: CLASSICAL BIBLICAL PROPHETIC TITLES TO

POST-EXILIC PROPHECY 30

CHAPTER 4: MODERN SCHOLARLY CONCEPTIONS OF PROPHECY (AND ITS CESSATION)

IN THE SECOND TEMPLE PERIOD 40

CHAPTER 5: RE-INTERPRETING PROPHECY IN THE PESHARIM 57

CHAPTER 6: INSPIRED INTERPRETATION-DYNAMICS OF LITERARY PROPHECY IN

ANCIENT NEAR EAST AND DEAD SEA SCROLLS 80

CHAPTER 7: ON THE STATUS OF THE TEACHER OF RIGHTEOUSNESS 93

CHAPTER 8: PROPHECY IN JOSEPHUS 103

CHAPTER 9: REVELATION OF JOHN: AN INQUIRY INTO THE CHANGING NATURE OF

PROPHECY 121

CHAPTER 10: CONCLUSION 133

BIBLIOGRAPHY:
 Razzaq 3

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

This thesis will study the dynamics of prophecy in the Ancient Near East and Second

Temple period in Palestine. Broadly speaking, I am interested in understanding the patterns of

continuity and change of revelation and prophecy from eighteenth century BCE Mesopotamia to

first century CE Palestine. The spatial and thematic restraints of this thesis do not allow for an in-

depth study of every aspect of prophecy and prophetic literature in this period, and I will instead

focus on several important primary sources from the late second temple period.

One of the most intriguing issues about prophecy in this period is the changing nature of

prophecy after the closing of the Tanakh canon with Malachi. Michael Floyd writes: “Not too

long ago many scholars would have regarded the phrase ‘Second Temple prophecy’ as nearly a

contradiction.”1 It is true that prophecy and prophetic texts were thought by scholars to be

dissolved by the post-exilic Second Temple period until relatively recently. The closing of the

“Old Testament” canon was seen also as the end of the steady stream of prophecy. As I will

argue throughout this thesis, prophecy never ceased but rather the nature of prophecy and the

methods of prophesizing changed.

As I will discuss in chapter 4, nineteenth century scholarship overwhelmingly argued for

the cessation of prophecy and prophetic texts beyond the biblical canon were cast aside. The

surprising discoveries of the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran and the Nag Hammadi library in

southern Egypt in the mid-twentieth century, however, initiated an explosion of scholarly works

on scriptural canonization, exegesis, prophecy and transmission of theological ideas in the

Ancient Near East. The study of these fields is still in its infancy and lots of new and exciting

1
Floyd, Michael, “Introduction,” in Prophets, Prophecy and Prophetic Texts in Second Temple Judaism, T&T Clark
International, 2006 (1).
 Razzaq 4

scholarship has been undertaken as scholars delve deeper into various aspects of Second Temple

Judaism and its interactions with its surrounding cultures.

The theological situation in Palestine at this time might be best understood through the

paradigm of “complex common Judaism,” a concept attributed to Professor Stuart Miller. Miller

argues that there were many different expressions of Judaism in the late Second Temple period,

each group or trend sharing elements with another. Compartmentalizing and attempting to neatly

categorize every sect and trend in Ancient Palestine often misses the larger thematic changes that

were occurring in this period. The socio-religious transitions before and after the Babylonian

exile as well as the destruction of Jerusalem and the Second Temple and the emergence of the

early (Jewish) Jesus movement had great repercussions and initiated what we could call a

theological crisis. One of the important issues at the center of this theological crisis was

prophecy and the continuation of inspired revelation.

In a hope to better understand the many complexities of prophecy in this transitional

phase, I will analyze several primary texts and figures from the late Second Temple and first

century CE. Before delving into issues of the changing nature of prophecy, I will discuss

monotheistic Israelite prophecy in its Ancient Near Eastern milieu in chapters 2 and 3. How were

different prophetic roles similar or different from those found in Ancient Near Eastern sources

from Mesopotamia? What are the ‘prophetic types’ in ancient Israel and how did these prophetic

roles change with surrounding socio-political changes?

As mentioned previously chapter 4 will briefly discuss the various scholarly trends in the

study of prophecy and prophetic literature in the post-exilic period.

This introductory section will be followed by three case studies of primary texts and

figures from the late Second Temple period. The first case study will include the pesharim and
 Razzaq 5

the Dead Sea Scrolls. In chapter 5, I will analyze the pesharim, the interpretive commentaries on

classical prophetic books from the Tanakh. Questions I will be discussing in this chapter include:

how do the pesharim contribute to the diverse writings of post-exilic Palestine? Is there evidence

of prophetic inspiration in the pesharim? How do the pesharim embody the changing nature of

prophecy?

Chapter 6 will continue the analysis of the pesharim with a special focus on its exegetical

techniques. Are the interpretive techniques and the inspired exegete found at Qumran based on

or similar to any other inspired exegetical texts from the Ancient Near East? I will discuss the

possible correlations between Mesopotamian commentaries of canonical religious and literary

works and the techniques of the pesharim and also the important differences between the two.

Following this discussion of the pesharim, I will discuss whether or not the Teacher of

Righteousness, the apparent inspired exegete of the pesharim should be considered a prophet in

chapter 7. It is extremely difficult to figure out whether or not he was considered to be a prophet

by the community members. What is the relation (if any) between the interpretive role of the

Teacher of Righteousness and the earlier classical biblical prophets? Can the inspired exegete be

considered a prophetic type?

The second case study in this thesis will be of the renowned first century historian

Josephus. Josephus is an intriguing figure with many different aspects and I will only be

touching upon his interactions and experiences with prophecy. Josephus belonged to the priestly

class and had extensive knowledge of the classical biblical prophets. As we will see in chapter 8,

Josephus’ relationship with prophecy is extremely complex. Josephus imagines the classical

prophets to be the only true historians in one sense and he sees himself continuing the history of

the Jewish people where the prophets had left off with Daniel in the Persian exilic period. While
 Razzaq 6

this may indicate that Josephus saw himself as part of this prophetic line, he simultaneously

distances himself from the classical prophets. The question of whether Josephus can be

considered a prophet or not is one with many correct answers. Even more than this question,

though, I am interested in analyzing the simultaneous continuity and change in Josephus’

conceptions of prophecy and prophets throughout his works.

Finally, for the last case study of this thesis, I will be analyzing the book of Revelation

and its author John of Patmos. Chapter 9 will analyze Revelation and its relation to other Jewish

literary genres, most notably the apocalyptic literature. With this analysis of Revelation, I hope to

argue against the simplistic scholarly view that prophetic literature fizzled out with the

emergence of apocalyptic literature written by anonymous authors. Revelation does not fully

belong to the Jewish apocalyptic genre not is the author of Revelation unknown. There are

several other factors that distinguish it from other literature of first century CE Palestine and

these will be discussed in chapter 9.

There are certainly many other primary texts from the late Second Temple and early

Christian periods that I could have chosen to analyze. Due to the practical constraints of this

thesis, however, I have chosen several texts that I thought were representative of a “complex

common Judaism.” Each of the texts or figures I have chosen for this thesis embody a mesh of

many genres and traditions from the Ancient Near East and each make a unique contribution to

the ongoing scholarly debate on the changing nature of prophecy from the second century BCE

through the first century CE.

The longest portion of this thesis is dedicated to the Dead Sea Scrolls and the pesharim as

this is my main academic interest and I hope to pursue it my future graduate studies. The

pesharim have been studied through a number of different perspectives, but very little has
 Razzaq 7

actually been written about how they contribute to our understanding of prophecy and how

prophecy was perceived in ancient Palestine.

I chose to also discuss Josephus because his writings are a testament to the important

socio-political and religious changes taking place in the first century CE Palestine. It is

interesting to note that most of the writings of Josephus were maintained and kept alive through

the Church fathers. In this way, then, Josephus serves as our metaphorical transition from

“Jewish” prophetic texts to early “Christian” prophetic texts (if the categories “Jewish” and

“Christian” can even be applied to this period).

Finally, I chose to discuss Revelation as the final chapter of this thesis because it captures

the various ways early Christians conceived classical biblical prophets and the emergence of a

new type of prophecy. John of Patmos perfectly embodies what Homi Bhaba has called “in-

between” or hybrid identity. While Bhaba’s hybrid identity was aimed at conceptualizing the

post-colonial subject who neither belongs to the colonial culture or his own, I have applied this

to first century Palestine. John was a visionary “prophet” of sorts who neither belonged to the

Jewish literary culture nor did he fit into the New Testament Jewish-Christian literary culture.

These three case studies are, then, representatives of the changing nature of prophecy in

the late Second Temple period.

CHAPTER 2: WHAT IS PROPHECY? ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN AND BIBLICAL

PERSPECTIVES
 Razzaq 8

Before delving into a discussion on the dynamics of prophecy in the Second Temple

period, it is essential to first arrive at a working definition of prophecy more generally. The

understanding and conceptualization of Israelite prophecy undoubtedly changed over time and

varied amongst different Jewish communities, especially in the post-exilic period. In this chapter,

I will discuss ancient Israelite prophecy in its Ancient Near Eastern milieu to better understand

how Israelite prophecy was distinct from and similar to its Near Eastern counterpart2. Following

this initial comparison I will focus on the post-exilic period and the different manifestations of

prophecy and perceptions of its potential cessation amongst the various Second Temple Jewish

communities.

Preliminary Definition:

According to Martti Nissinen, prophecy is the “transmission of allegedly divine messages

by a human intermediary to a third party.”3 This definition is very useful as it highlights several

key features of prophecy, which distinguish and differentiate it from other forms of divination.

Prophethood does not only entail a solitary relationship between an individual and the divine.

Rather, what sets prophecy apart from various other forms of divination is the special status of a

prophet as a ‘spokesperson’ to a larger group of people.

While Near Eastern prophecy more generally includes diviners who were capable of

calling on God(s) to elicit answers to specific questions, Israelite prophecy relies mainly on the

will of God to call upon a chosen individual as his spokesperson. As James Kugel explicates, a

prophet in the Israelite sense is “a messenger sent by God to speak on His behalf” 4 and one who

relays a particular message from God. A prophet is usually sent to remind, warn, exhort, or

interpret the will of God for a group of people. The exact mode of transmission through which
2
As Jonathan Stokl notes in his introduction to Prophecy in the Ancient Near East, comparing evidence from
different cultures is unavoidably subjective, but I believe it can ultimately be productive. (Stokl, 5)
3
Nissinen, Martti. Prophecy in Its Ancient Near Eastern Context: Mesopotamian, Biblical, and Arabian
Perspectives. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2000 (preface).
4
Kugel, James. How to Read the Bible: A Guide to Scripture Then and Now. New York: Free Press, 2007 (439).
 Razzaq 9

the prophet receives God’s message and revelation is not always clear and varies amongst

different Biblical and post-biblical prophets. I will be discussing the mode of transmission of

prophecy5 in greater detail later in the paper as I take a closer look at particular Jewish

communities in the post-exilic period.

Along with the essential messenger aspect of a prophet, there are several other important

distinguishing factors of prophecy and prophets. Prophets must of course publicly proclaim to be

sent by God and must somehow demonstrate their special relationship with the divine. The

intended audience must also validate the prophet’s divine message by acknowledging the various

signs that the prophet claims have occurred on his or her behalf.

In addition, prophets disclose God’s mandated laws and announce God’s judgments and

punishments for various beliefs and behaviors using characteristic formulae such as “Thus says

the Lord” or some similar variation.6 These divine judgments are often conveyed as new codes of

religious and social law. Prophecy is therefore as much about social interaction as it is about

sacred religious knowledge.

It is also important to understand the differences between ancient magic and divination

and (monotheistic) prophecy. While these phenomena do share certain elements, and some

scholars have suggested that they even share a common heritage, there are undoubtedly integral

differences sprouting perhaps from the integral differences between “monotheistic” Israelite

religion and the pagan Near Eastern worldview.7

As I mentioned earlier, Israelite prophets are selected exclusively by God and serve as a

mouthpiece for the divine. Ancient Near Eastern magicians are not selected by a divine being nor

do they relay messages to a larger public. In fact, magicians manipulated physical environments
5
i.e., whether the prophecy was ecstatic, through a dream…, etc.
6
Kugel, How to Read the Bible
7
As Rudiger Schmitt describes, the Tanakh may not have in fact banned all forms of magic, but only prohibited the
illegitimate pagan forms of magic. This complicates the distinctions between prophecy, magic and what is permitted
versus what is prohibited. “The Problem of Magic and Monotheism in the Book of Leviticus” JHS 8, Article 11
 Razzaq 10

and exhibited powers capable of changing natural laws.8 Prophets are only capable of performing

these physical “miracles” through the hand of God. Therefore not every magician is a “prophet”

and not all prophets are capable of practicing magic.

Running parallel to the magic-prophecy comparison is the relationship between prophecy

and divination. Divination is a vast term referring to various forms of consultation of the divine.

While divination, like prophecy, involves revealing the divine will to humans, divination has

different means of acquiring the divine will. Many scholars have accepted at least in part the

ancient distinction between two types of divination, one involving a technique and the other

involving nature (i.e., non-inductive). Nissenin explains that prophecy belongs to non-inductive

intuitive divination because prophets do not “employ methods based on systematic observations

and their scholarly interpretations,” like technical diviners, rather prophets act as direct

mouthpieces of the God(s) whose messages they communicate.9

Other aspects of prophecy, including the socio-religious context, the personal qualities of

the prophet him/herself, the possibility of predictive or eschatological knowledge embedded in

divine messages and the specific modes of transmission and redaction of prophetic messages are

essential to understanding prophecy as a phenomena distinct from other forms of divination, yet

these aspects are subordinate to the basic and crucial understanding of prophecy as a process of

transmission.

Near Eastern Prophecy10

With this preliminary definition of prophecy in mind, we can now take a closer look at

prophecy as a phenomenon in the Ancient Near East. In this section I will briefly outline the

major sources on Ancient Near Eastern prophecy and briefly discuss some important aspects of
8
Borghouts, J.F. “Witchcraft, Magic and Divination in Ancient Egypt” in J.M. Sasson, Civilizations of the Ancient
Near East, New York: Scribner, 1775-1785.
9
Nissinen, Martti, Robert Kriech Ritner, C. L. Seow, and Peter Machinist. Prophets and Prophecy in the Ancient
Near East. Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003 (1).
10
By “Near Eastern” I will mainly be speaking about Assyrian and Babylonian prophecy.
 Razzaq 11

prophecy as it is appears in the sources. I will not be delving into great detail about the sources as

this section mainly serves as an introduction and contextualization for Biblical prophecy.

The archives of Mari, a major collection of texts from the ancient Mesopotamian city-

state, have been particularly useful for scholars interested in prophecy in the Ancient Near East.

The first letters recognized as prophetic were found during excavations in the eighteenth century

and the first letters were translated and published by George Dossin by 1950.11 The introduction

of these new sources led to a wave of scholarly literature and for several decades the Mari letters

formed the basis for the study of extra biblical prophecy in the Ancient Near East. Other

“prophetic” sources including Ancient Egyptian texts like The Prophecy of Neferti, the

Wenamun travelogue, the Memphis and Karnak stele and The Divine Nominations of the

Ethiopian King Aspelta along with the Aramaic Zakkur inscription and Deir ‘Allah inscription

also contributed to the scholarly discussion on the presence of extra-biblical prophecy in the

Near East.

Many scholars have written on the subject of prophecy in the Ancient Near East from a

variety of perspectives. It may be informative to mention some important works that have

emerged from the last few decades of scholarship and a few of the scholars whose work I have

found to be useful and helpful.

There are several older book-length studies comparing certain aspects of biblical

prophecy and prophecy at Mari in particular, all of which were in German. More recently there

have been many articles comparing various aspects of biblical prophecy and Neo-Assyrian and

Babylonian prophecy.

Martti Nissinen, among others, has been particularly prolific in the field of Near Eastern

prophecy. In Prophets and Prophecy in the Ancient Near East Nissinen translates some of the

11
Nissinen, Martti, Robert Kriech Ritner, C. L. Seow, and Peter Machinist. Prophets and Prophecy in the Ancient
Near East. Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003 (intro)
 Razzaq 12

major prophetic texts from Mesopotamia in particular, but also from Syria, Canaan and Israel

into English. Nissinen provides a useful introduction outlining a short history of twentieth

century scholarly work on prophetic texts and inscriptions from the Ancient Near East, ranging

from the twenty-first to the second century BCE. Prophecy in its Ancient Near Eastern Context,

another of Nissinen’s books, is a compilation of essays by scholars in differing fields on various

topics relating to prophecy from Ancient Near East including Arabia, Assyria, Mari and Israel.

This work provides some important methodological insights for comparative scholars, especially

those comparing Biblical and extra-Biblical prophecy12 along with interesting anthropological

and socio-political analyses of Ancient Near Eastern prophetic institutions.

Johnathan Stokl’s Prophecy in the Ancient Near East has also been a very useful book for

the study of Biblical and Israelite prophecy as it emerged in the milieu of a broader tradition of

Ancient Near Eastern prophecy. Stokl calls his study a “philological and sociological

comparison”13 and directs much of his attention to delving for more profound connections

between different manifestations of prophecy in the Ancient Near East. Stokl discusses and

analyzes prophecy from Old Babylonian sources, Neo-Assyrian sources and finally Hebrew

prophecy of the Tanakh. Stokl’s thorough descriptions of the technicalities, messages, and social

role of prophets in the Old Babylonian and Neo-Assyrian context are very enlightening and

provide excellent fodder for comparison with classical Biblical prophecy.

Herbert B. Huffmon has long been considered an authority on Ancient Near Eastern

Prophecy and has written prolifically about the Mari prophetic texts along with many topics

relating to ancient Israelite culture and literature more broadly. Inspired Speech: Prophecy in the

Ancient Near East, Essays in Honor of Herbert B. Huffmon, a collection of essays from different
12
Especially chapter 1, the article by Hans Barstad, “"Comparare necesse est? Ancient Israelite and Ancient Near
Eastern Prophecy in a Comparative Perspective", Prophecy in its Ancient Near Eastern Context. Mesopotamian,
Biblical, and Arabian Perspectives. Ed. by. M. Nissinen (SBL Symposium Series, 13). Atlanta, Georgia (2000) 3-
11.
13
From the sub-title of the book.
 Razzaq 13

scholars about prophecy in the Ancient Near East including Mesopotamia, Israel/Canaan and

Biblical prophecy, and even some more contemporary prophetic interpretations and discussions

in the Christian and Muslim traditions. This book, and especially the first two parts, has also

been very helpful in delving deeper into the question of the meaning of prophecy in the Ancient

Near East. Part II focuses mainly on Hebrew and Biblical prophecy and there are many

intriguing discussions on Biblical prophets and their ancient near eastern counterparts.

Old Babylonian (2300-1600 BCE) Prophecy:

The first Old Babylonian prophetic text to be found was a letter from the important

ancient city-state Mari which contained a prophetic oracle from the eighteenth century BCE and

was published in 1948 by Jean-Marie Durand who has remained an important scholar in the field

of Mari texts. Similar prophetic texts have also been found in the cities of Ešnunna, Uruk, and

Kiš.14 Though the picture of Old Babylonian prophecy is far from complete, scholars have been

amassing what material they can from the approximately 90 available texts in the prophetic

corpus. The main focus of scholarly attention has undoubtedly been Mari as the greatest numbers

of texts have been found from this site.

In Old Babylonian prophetic texts there appears to be a distinction between lay prophets

and professional prophets. The professional prophets, known as the ā pilum are people whose

primary social role (or job) is to prophesy. Along with this class of professional prophets, there

are also some ordinary people and temple workers, whose main role in society is not as a

prophet, who may occasionally prophesy. Stokl includes the example of an ecstatic cult

performer, known as the assinu, as an illustration of an incidental lay-prophet. The mu•••m is

also a cult-official who sometimes goes into an ecstatic trance, often in cultic settings during the

recitations of different laments. The mu•••m is another type of incidental or lay-prophet, whose

14
A complete list of available prophetic texts and materials from the Old Babylonian Period can be found in Stokl’s
introductory chapter to Babylonian Prophecy. Prophecy in the Ancient Near East, pgs. 29-34
 Razzaq 14

main function in society is not to prophesy.15 As the evidence aforementioned has illustrated,

there is indeed an important distinction between professional technical diviners and prophets and

lay intuitive prophets in Mari.

The exact definition of the professional ā pilum remains disputed amongst scholars of

Akkadian. While many scholars believe the title to mean “answerer,” some, including Stokl,

have suggested the term be understood as “spokesperson.”16 Regardless of the exact definition of

the title, it is evident from various Mari texts that the social function and role of the ā pilum, the

professional spokesperson, was different than the more ecstatic prophetic experiences of the lay

prophet groups mentioned above. This difference does not imply the superiority of the ā pilum

over other forms of diviners, but simply asserts that the ā pilum had a more technical role as a full

time prophet. In fact, it may be argued that lay diviners and prophets were more authentic since

they received prophecies passively as opposed to the ā pilum who sought out prophetic messages

and experiences. None of the ā pilu attested in the existing texts ever claim to have come from a

deity. Sometimes ā pilu would be summoned by kings and sent to inquire different things from

the gods (at various temple locations).

One example of this type of professional ā pilum prophecy a letter between Sammetar and

Zimri-Lim documented in ARM17 26 199. The letter is fragmented and incomplete but it tells the

story of Lupa•um, a spokesperson sent to Dagan-a deity located in the city of Terqa. The

“prophecy” Lupa•um receives from Dagan warns Zimri-Lim of swearing a treaty with the King

of Ešnunna before consulting a god.18 There are two different versions of this story with different

roles assigned to the prophet Lupa•um, and it is not clear what exactly the correct interpretation

15
Although Jean-Marie Durand, Herbert Huffmon and others have categorized the mu•••m as a professional prophet,
Stokl argues that seeing the mu•••m as a lay prophet actually opens new possibilities for understanding prophets in
Mari.
16
I will not here go into the philological and linguistic reasons for suggesting the word means one thing of another.
For a discussion about the roots of the word ā pilum and the connotation of each morpheme, see Stokl pgs. 39-43
17
ARM=Archives Royales de Mari.
18
Stokl, 46-47
 Razzaq 15

of this incident should be. It is clear, however, that each individual ā pilum had a special

relationship with a specific deity. It is also apparent that the ā pilu were bestowed with

remunerations by the King for their professional prophetic work. For example, Lupa•um is given

a donkey and the ā pilum Qišatum is given two bronze votive weapons for his service.19

The ā pilum, it seems, is thus a court official of some sort whose primary function it was

to retrieve answers from the gods in their different temples regarding the King’s queries. The

ā pilum is not tied to one single deity unlike the temple officials, who also appear to sometimes

experience ecstatic lay-prophecy. Rather the ā pilum is tied to one King and is capable of

traveling and communicating with various gods in their various temple locations. There is no

conclusive evidence regarding the ecstatic experiences of the ā pilum and whether or not they

were self-induced through intoxication (i.e., alcoholic substances, etc.). This question remains

open and debated amongst scholars.20

Despite the giving of remunerations by the King, it is interesting that the prophecy of the

ā pilum is not always authoritative. In fact, Zimri-Lim agrees to a treaty with Ešnunna while the

prophecy of Lupa•um the ā pilum advised the complete opposite.21 The authority of prophecy is

further undermined by evidence of manipulation on the part of the prophets. As Stokl explains,

sometimes the “different messengers of the oracle added their own interpretation to the oracle”

and manipulated the prophetic message which they delivered to the king. It is very difficult to

separate the authentic from the invented words of the divine messages and it is unclear how

many prophecies were not reported to the king and whether or not there was some sort of

hierarchy of prophecy22 even existed.

19
ARM 9, 22 (these stories can be found in Nissen’s Prophets and Prophecy in the Ancient Near East, pg. 15-70)
20
See Stokl’s discussion 49
21
Stokl ,73
22
Though it does not seem that the ā pilum actually had too much authority, since many times their prophetic
guidance would not be followed.
 Razzaq 16

Along with the ā pilum there a number of lay prophets who experience random and

occasional ecstatic prophesies. They do not instigate the prophetic ecstasy but it overcomes them

at times and their primary role in society is separate from their occasional prophecy. There are

three different types of cult officials attested in the Mari archives. The mu•••m, the most famous

of the cult-officials known to have prophesied, were of a lower social status and were previously

associated with witchcraft, as Ringren asserted some decades ago, but most scholars now have

debunked this belief.23 The specific etymological origins and connotations of the word mu•••m is

complicated but it appears that the title most probably has some connection to the word

“ecstatic” and most of the documented actions of the mu•••m reflect this type fervent prophetic

ecstasy and accompanying verb mu•• most closely signifies “to rave.” The mu•••m are

undoubtedly less powerful than the central ā pilum but they still seem to have a relatively active

role in the royal court since the king often invited them to take part in the monthly ritual of

Istar.24

Another cult-official participant in lay-prophecy is the assinnu. The assinnu often appears

with another court official, the Kurgarru. Both of these cult officials are attested to have

performed dances and music at times during ecstatic experiences. Mari scholars still have not

come to a consensus on whether or not the form of ecstasy experienced by the assinnu can be

called prophecy per se. There are some ambiguities about the genders of the assinnu and there is

one text that purports that the goddess Istar turned the male assinnu into females and vica versa.25

The assinnu also apparently had the capacity to permeate beyond the living world and

communicate with the dead. The qammatum is yet another cult-official associated with

prophesies. The qammatum are only attested at Mari and the meaning of their title remains
23
Ringren, Helmer. Religions of the Ancient Near East. London: SPCK, 1973 (95) Stokl and others have debunked
the idea of associating witchcraft with the mu•••m.
24
This is attested in the Florilegium Marianum documents. See Nissinen Prophets and Prophecy in the Ancient Near
East, pg 81, for a translation of the Ritual of Istar.
25
Stokl 59
 Razzaq 17

cryptic and whether or not they were actually considered prophets or just diviners of some sort is

still debatable.

Now that the main prophetic figures in the Babylonian context have been defined, a note

about the actual transmission of the prophecies may be helpful. The redaction and transmission

of Old Babylonian prophecies a vast topic which cannot full be covered in this paper, but I will

outline some issues scholars studying the Mari archives face since some of these questions may

be relevant to studying the redaction and transmission of Biblical prophecy. Many of the

prophecies found in the Mari archives contain introductory phrases like, “Thus said/speaks [the

deity]…” However, some prophecies do not include introductory phrases and directly dive into

the words of the prophecy, presumably the words of the deity. All of the prophecies that have

been found, though, are written in the first person.

Usually prophecies would not be sent directly to the king and an intermediary would

deliver the message. Whether the prophecies were redacted verbatim immediately or whether

they were passed orally through an intermediary. Most scholars would agree that the prophecies

in the Mari Archive are probably not written down verbatim, but they may be relatively close to

the original. Sometimes censorship of prophecies was necessary especially if there was

information in the prophecy which may be threatening to the king’s power for example, it would

most likely be removed26.

Whether or not dreams and visions can also be regarded as prophecies is another point of

contention for scholars. The term šuttam has been used ambiguously for both dream and visions

in the Mari archives. This initiates an internal philological and linguistic debate between the true

meanings of “dreams” on the one hand and “visions” on the other and whether or not they can be

approached in the same manner. Sally Butler offers several different classes of dreams. There

26
See the example of the prophecy sent to King Zimri-Lim regarding the superiority of a god over the power of
Zimri-Lim. (Nissinen, Prophets and Prophecy in the Ancient Near East 18-20)
 Razzaq 18

can be “prognostic dreams” which can be subdivided into clear ‘message dreams,’ somewhat

coded ‘symbolic-message dreams’ and completely coded “dream omens’ which must be

interpreted professionally. There are also ‘clairvoyant dreams’ and ‘diagnostic dreams.’27 Butler

categorizes visions as another sub-group of somewhat or completely coded dreams.

Martti Nissinen believes that dreams and visions of prophets can be distinguished from

the prophecies of prophets because the dreams of prophets have conventionally been counted as

prophecies in their own right.28 It is interesting to note, however, that no professional ā pilum has

been found to have had a dream which was reported or redacted and most of the dreams found

from Mari have been from the occasional lay prophets. Dreams and visions seen by people other

than prophets are more difficult to assess. Nissinen makes clear that “not every dreamer qualifies

as prophet in Mari society”29 and not every dream was thought to be worthy of redaction and

report.

The typical redaction structure of dream includes an announcement of the dream

(šuttam), followed by a citation formula, an opening formula, and then the dream itself.30 Usually

the dream will be described as a šuttam, or dream, but sometimes the text simply mentions

someone “seeing” something in the temple, for example. Since “seeing” and “dreaming” are

inherently different actions, it follows that perhaps the texts which report someone “seeing”

should be understood as vision texts and texts which report “dreaming” should be considered

separate dream texts. This distinction has interesting parallels in Biblical prophecy as well.

Another interesting aspect regarding the authority of Old Babylonian prophecy is the

method for checking whether or not a prophet is lying or speaking his/her prophecy in good

faith. Several different tests for the prophets and their prophecies have been attested. One of the

27
Butler, Sally. Mesopotamian Conceptions of Dreams and Dream Rituals. AOAT 258, Munster: Ugarit-Verlag
28
Nissinen, Prophets and Prophecy in the Ancient Near East, 14
29
Ibid., 14
30
As sited in Stokl 80, from Annette Zgoll’s study in German on Mesopotamian dreams.
 Razzaq 19

more popular tests to check the prophet appears to be the ‘Hair and Hem’ test. William Moran

first wrote about the significance of sending the hair and the hem of the prophets’ to the king.

Moran describes that the hair and hem were used to assert the identity of the prophet and also to

“guarantee [the prophet’s] veracity.”31 The phrase, “Hereby, I give you my hair and my fringe.

Let them declare ‘clean,”32 has been cited in ARM 26, 204 and provides evidence for the testing

of the hair and hem of the prophet. Hepatoscopy and extispicy (i.e., the reading and interpreting

of various animal organs as a form of divination) were also employed to check the veracity of a

prophet.

It is not entirely clear whether or not all prophets were tested in this way and some

scholars, Andre Finet in particular, have argued that only the lower status lay prophets had to

send their hair and hem to prove themselves. Other scholars have also argued that requiring the

hair and the hem of prophets insinuated that magical spells could be cast on the prophets if they

were caught lying or not actually being true prophets. Both of these theories have been disproven

by new evidence drawn from the Mari archives. For example, there is one text, ARM 26 237,

which relates the story of the queen mother Addu-duri having a dream and the related oracle of a

mu•••tum. Addu-duri sends her own hair and hem to be tested rather than the mu•••tum who was

a lay-prophet despite the fact that she was of royal status.33 It is clear, then, that the hair and hem

test for veracity is more to confirm the message of the prophet or dreamer rather than check the

veracity of the individual diviner or dreamer.

The public versus the private nature of the prophecy may or may not have had an impact

on the necessity to check the veracity of a prophet. Many prophecies were revealed publically

while some other prophecies, especially oracles, were given in a more private context. There

31
Moran, William L. “New Evidence from Mari on the History of Prophecy” Bib 50, 19-20 (through JSTOR).
32
Stokl, 82
33
The whole story is translated by Martti Nissinen, but is also cited in part by Stokl, pg 84.
 Razzaq 20

does seem to be a difference between how dreams and oracles were treated in terms of testing.

Dreams appear to be much more apt to the hair and hem test while oracles and other more

‘public’ prophecies were not as apt to be tested this way.

The importance of a prophet’s conscious awareness of being sent by a god and the mental

state of the prophet while experiencing revelation have been important issues discussed in

biblical and more generally monotheistic prophecy. Jean-Marie Durand believes that Mari

prophets actually did have a conscious awareness of their being send by a deity since the word,

rum, which means ‘to send’ is used in the relevant texts.34 This is
or some form of the word šapā rum

interesting because there is no abstract term in Akkadian for ‘prophecy’ and no abstract concept

of prophecy is available. Stokl notes that not a single professional ā pilum prophet claims to be

sent by a deity explicitly and there only three cases of lay prophets who claim to have been sent

by a deity35. Durand also assumes ecstasy is a part of prophecy, while many would argue that

ecstasy is in fact not a crucial component of prophecy.

Extreme forms of ecstasy were usually not part of the prophetic experience at Mari since

the prophecies were redacted often without intermediaries by the ‘prophets’ and diviners

themselves. There were multiple types of prophecies attested in Mari, some oracles were against

certain nations, some were admonitions and some were warnings for the king. The king is at the

center of many prophecies and the phenomenon of prophecy in Mari itself is closely linked and

dependent upon the existence of a king. Prophets would receive divine messages which they

would then convey to the king, after being checked, through a system which was supposed to

help prevent the king from acting in a way which would upset the gods.

34
Durand as cited in Stokl. 92
35
Stokl 99
 Razzaq 21

There are many other aspects of Old-Babylonian prophecy which I have not described in

detail or may not have mentioned at all, but this serves as an outline of the important popularities

of Old Babylonian prophecy.

Neo-Assyrian Prophecy (8-7th Century BCE):

The study of Neo-Assyrian prophecy has in some ways been overshadowed by the study

of the abundant Mari Archives, though the Neo-Assyrian prophetic sources are rich in their own

right. Neo-Assyrian prophetic texts, mostly from Nineveh, were discovered in the mid nineteenth

century but little scholarly attention was given to these sources until relatively recently. Simo

Parpola and Karlheinz Deller reintroduced the importance of Assyriology in the 1960’s; Simo

Parpola in particular has written extensively about Assyrian prophecy in particular.36 After the

preliminary work of Parpola and Deller, Manfred Weippert, Manfried Dietrich, and Herbert

Huffmon contributed and revived the study of Neo-Assyrian sources over the next several

decades. Parpola published an influential collection of Assyrian oracular texts and prophecies a

few years later. Parpola’s ideas were very controversial since believed that Judaism, Christianity,

Zoroastrianism, Platonic Philosophy and Islam were all based on reconfigurations of the Neo-

Assyrian understanding of the nature of the gods. The Neo-Assyrian prophetic sources come

from a range of genres including oracular letters, oracles on tablets, royal inscriptions, ritual texts

and various lists.37

The central distinctively Neo-Assyrian term for prophet is raggintu. The term raggintu

can mean “to call, to call out”, or “to summon” or “to lodge a claim, to sue, etc.” It is probable

that this term refers to the public nature of Neo-Assyrian prophecy, much similar to the public

nature of the Old Babylonian prophecy. There seem to be both male and female prophets as the

36
See Parpola, Assyrian Prophecies (1997), Neo-Assyrian Letters from the Kuyunjik Collection (1979), Letters fro
Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars (1993), “Monotheism in Ancient Assyria” in One God or Many? Concepts of
Divinity in the Ancient World (2000), etc.
37
A complete list of the existing Neo-Assyrian prophetic texts can be found in Stokl, pg. 104-109
 Razzaq 22

masculine plural raggimu along with the feminine plural raggintu are attested in SAA 9, a letter

from Beel-ušezib to Esarhaddon.38 This is interesting because the feminine singular of the word,

raggintu has only been found in one text.

As a brief but important caveat, it is also unclear whether the Assyrians believed that the

deities spoke directly through the mouths of the raggimu or whether the deities transmitted their

messages to the raggimu first and then the raggimu transmitted the divine message to the

intended audience after.

Parpola suggests that the raggintu is identical to the Neo-Assyrian ma••• and the Old

Babylonian mu••um mentioned earlier in the paper. This is probably not the case since there is a

clause in Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty which states, “if it [the message which the person who

swears the oath agrees to transmit to the king] is the mouth of raggintu-prophets or ma••u-

ecstatics, or ‘askers of god’…”39 Parpola suggests that the two terms raggintu and ma••u are

synonomous here since the raggintu is a type of ecstatic prophet. Matthijs de Jong does not agree

with Parpola’s suggestion and argues that the raggintu is not in fact an ecstatic prophet since

there is no evidence of a raggintu delivering oracles in an ecstatic state. The raggintu, therefore,

is inherently different from the explicitly ecstatic ma••u prophetic figure.40

Most of the oracular letters in the Nineveh collection are letters addressed to Esarhaddon,

with a few also addressed to Assurbanipal. Some texts deliver and report prophecies and oracles

to the king, other letters quote from prophecies to prove or make a political point and some

letters are used as royal epithets. It appears that Neo-Assyrian prophecy was taken more

seriously than Old Babylonian prophecy sometimes was. For example, there is a letter with a

short oracle from Nabu and Marduk, two of the most powerful Assyrian gods, announcing
38
SAA=State Archives of Assyria (can be accessed online through the University of Helsinki). Stokl 113
39
SAA 9, 10 (quoted partially in Stokl 114. Also see Parpola, Neo-Assyrian Treaties and Loyalty Oaths (1988) for
the complete treaty).
40
Je Jong, Matthijs, Prophecy in Context: An Exploration of the Prophecies from Seventh Century Assyria. Master’s
Thesis, Oriental Institute, Oxford University. Cited through Stokl 115.
 Razzaq 23

Esarhaddon’s rule over the entire earth.41 This prophecy is clearly used as a proof-text to

legitimize the position of Esarhaddon as ruler.

Another similar oracular letter to Assurbanipal by his harupex Marduk-šummi-u•ur

quotes an oracle originally addressed to Esarhaddon. For Maruk- šummi-u•ur, the oracle to

Esarhaddon is also valid for Assurbanipal on his campaign against Egypt.42 There are many

similar examples of times when Esarhaddon or another king or his advisor uses an oracular letter

or a prophecy as legitimizing proof for their arguments or political actions. This royal

propaganda is well attested in the Assyrian prophetic text collections, though the exact speakers

of the prophecies are not always recognized.

While it was rare in the Old Babylonian prophetic sources to find an ā pilum or even a lay-

prophet claiming to be sent by a god or deity, there is a text like this in the Neo-Assyrian

collections. SAA 3 47 is a prophetic text which claims to be written by someone who has been

‘sent’ by Ninutra to deliver a message to the prince. The text is double sided. One side of the text

contains an oracle by the god Ninutra to a royal figure and the other side seems to suggest that

that royal figure (and the author of the text) is Assurbanipal. There is still debate amongst scholar

about whether or not Assurbanipal was actually literate or not.43 Regardless of the fact of the

authenticity or validity of the actual prophet and his words, the prophecy was undoubtedly very

convenient for the royal advisers and intellectuals to cite when legitimizing or making a point

about the actions of the king. This is very interesting since Old Babylonian prophecy was often

used to achieve the opposite effect, namely to warn the king before he acted in a way that would

upset the gods.

41
Stokl, 115
42
Nissinen, Martti. References to Prophecy in Neo-Assyrian Sources SAAS 7, Helsinki: Neo-Assyrian Texts Corpus
Project, 1998, pg 123
43
Interesting discussion of whether or not Assurbanipal was literate can be found in Alasdair Livingstone,
“Assurbanipal: Literate or not?” ZA 97, 98-118.
 Razzaq 24

Like its Old Babylonian counterpart, it is clear that lay-prophets existed in Neo-Assyrian

society along with the more exclusive royal prophecy. There are two specific texts in the

Nineveh collection that testify the presence of lay-prophecy. Both of the texts seem to be letters

or reports to the king Esarhaddon. The first letter is sent by three people: Issā rr-šumu-ē reš,
reš, Adad-
Adad

šumu-u•ur and Marduk-šā kin

kin-šumi to Esarhaddon. The letter relates a story in which two

servants intervene in the return of the statue of Bē ll to

to Babylon.
Babylon. One
One of
of the
the servants
servants claims
claims that
that

Bē ll and
and his consort •arbanitu have ‘sent’ him.44
his consort

The second text is of the female servant of Bē ll-a•u-u•ur who prophesizes in favor of the

rival political contender to the throne Sasi. No details about the woman are mentioned except

that she was a servant. It is interesting then that the king Esarhaddon’s official who transmits and

records the prophecy should advise the king to perform an extispicy to inspect the possible

effects of the prophecy. The female servant’s prophecy is understood as being inherently

powerful, despite the low social standing of the woman.

While there were few female prophets in the Mari archives of Old Babylon, there seems

to be a greater number of female or at least ambiguous and effeminized actors in the Neo-

Assyrian prophetic texts. Bā ia,

ia, Il•ssa-ā
Il•ssa mur
mur and
and Issā
Issā rr-lā -tašia• are three prophets which appear to

be female prophets though there is still much debate about whether Issā rr-lā -tašia• is even a

woman since the female version of the name would probably end in “•i” since that is how a

masculine word is made feminine in Akkadian (and most other Semitic languages). Parpola has

argued that Issā rr-lā -tašia• is a female since the female determinative is used on the tablet, though

it was superimposed by the masculine determinative.45 The evidence is not precise enough to

come to any solid conclusions, but it can be agreed that both Bā ia

ia and
and Il•ssa
Il•ssa-ā mur
mur were
were female
female

prophets.

44
Stokl , 117
45
Parpola, Assyrian Prophecies (1997) pg 5
 Razzaq 25

Briefly explaining the basic physical structure of the prophetic material form Neo-

Assyria may also be useful here. Two types of tablets containing prophetic material can be found

in the Neo-Assyrian collections. There are vertical tablets which contain more than one oracle

presented in multiple columns. These types of tablets are used as archival copies of smaller

scraps of prophetic material onto a larger single tablet. There are also horizontal tablets which

contain notes and reports apparently for immediate use. These categorizations do not always hold

true, but are helpful on a more basic level.

The problems of the redaction of prophecies which I discussed in the Old Babylonian

Mari context are also relevant here in the Neo-Assyrian context. Were prophecies and oracles

written down immediately following the events? Did the ‘prophet’ redact or dictate his/her

prophecy or was there an intermediary scribe who redacted the prophecies? These questions are

important to consider when analyzing prophecies since they are vulnerable and easily

manipulated by external sources, such as scribal creation/invention. Regardless of how the

prophecies were redacted, the written forms of prophecies were essential for the king and the

relationship of the prophet and the king was solidified through the written medium.

Editing or manipulating prophetic material can have differing degrees of impact on the

actual veracity and authority of the prophecy itself. The issue of whether or not there was a

scribal phase in the redaction and transmission of prophecies in the Babylonian and Assyrian

contexts is also extremely relevant in the case of the Biblical prophets of the Tanakh. The

vertical tablets from Nineveh contain collections of prophecies that have been amassed and

redacted on a single tablet (presumably they were previously written down on smaller

tablets/texts). This in essence creates a series of prophetic writings.

In some ways this can be compared to the redaction and transmission of the prophetic

books of the Tanakh. Though the vertical tablets are supposedly only amalgamated copies of
 Razzaq 26

smaller prophetic texts, there is undoubtedly some editing and embellishment involved in the

process, which may or may not impact the original core message of the prophecy. In fact, de

Jong argues that the vertical tablet collections should be considered compositions in their own

right, “in which the texts have transcended their original historical setting.”46

Since the prophetic oracular texts had transcended their original historical setting, they

obtained a certain type of authority. As I mentioned earlier, kings and advisers in the royal court

often re-appropriated prophetic texts while making an argument in favor of some decision or to

give legitimacy. This reinstatement of the prophetic texts in settings beyond the original does

point to the great amount of authority accorded to the oracles and prophecies themselves. In

other words, the authority of prophetic texts and oracles was not restricted to the original context

in which it appeared and in fact could and was widely applied in different settings.

Prophetic material is also found in royal inscriptions, especially for propagandistic

purposes and political arguments. Some prophetic references are found in treaties and political

documents, like Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty, in which prophets and ecstatics are described

as possible sources of information integral to the security of the kingdom. There are multiple

examples of this kind of political power given to the prophets and ecstatics by the king in order

to maintain some legitimacy.

There are also other types of prophetic materials in royal inscriptions which may be

compared to some predecessor of ‘fulfillment prophecy’ as seen in the Dead Sea Scrolls and

other Second Temple Jewish pseudopigrapha. There are two references to words of deities which

were spoken long ago and which were manifested in Assurbanipal’s actions. The first of these

texts was found in Prism vi 113-118, and refers to Nan•’s return from Elam to Eanna in Uruk.

46
De Jong, Isaiah Among the Ancient Near Eastern Prophets: A Comparative Study of the Earliest Stages of the
Isaiah Tradition and the Neo-Assyrian Prophecies (VT.S 117, Leiden: Brill) 2007, 395-400. Specific examples of
embellishments of the original prophecies and oracles can be found in Stokl, 136-7 (a very helpful discussion of two
specific examples).
 Razzaq 27

Some scholars do not include this text in their Neo-Assyrian prophetic writings since there is no

way to prove the genuineness of the prophecy. Yet regardless of if the prophecy was invented or

genuine, the way it was used and employed by the king is what is truly interesting.

A similar oracle is attributed Sin who is reported to have ordered Assurbanipal to restore

his temple in Harran. Assurbanipal’s restoration of the temple is depicted as the fulfillment of an

old oracle that foresaw the restoration of the temple. Assurbanipal seems to be the first king to

employ prophetic texts and oracles in this manner, most probably in order to legitimize his re-

building program, as Stokl contends.47

Assurbanipal employs another prophetic text in a votive inscription to the god Marduk. It

is not of great importance at this point whether or not the text is genuine because it is an example

of the power and legitimacy accorded to prophecy. The text cites an oracle by Marduk addressed

to Assurbanipal in which he assures the king that the succession in a vassal-kingdom took place

in a way favorable to Assurbanipal and that Marduk would help the successor of Assurbanipal.

The king responds to this ‘prophecy’ by praising Marduk.48 If this is an invention on the part of

king, it would not be the first literary creation of prophecy since there is a much older famous

example of this same phenomenon in the Egyptian ‘prophecy’ of Neferti. In fact there is a whole

list of such literary prophecies including the Šulgi prophecy, the Uruk prophecy, the ‘Dynastic

Prophecy’ and passages from the Akkadian epic Erra Epos.

It is clear then that Neo-Assyrian prophetic sources were employed in multiple ways and

the oracles and prophecies themselves were often manipulated for political or royal advantage. It

would not be surprising if prophecies were refashioned every time they were used in a different

setting and the texts that have been found at Nineveh and other sites may be the original

prophecies or they may be twisted versions. The process of literary redaction and maintenance of

47
Stokl 136
48
Cited in Stokl, 136
 Razzaq 28

Neo-Assyrian prophecy is also important in understanding the process of the composition and

canonization of the prophetic books of the Hebrew Bible and the Tanakh itself.

Surely there is much still to be learned about Neo-Assyrian prophecy and still many

theories and propositions to be discussed. I have only attempted to sketch a basic outline of some

of the important aspects of Neo-Assyrian prophecy and discuss some issues that will become

important and relevant in the following section on Biblical prophetic literature of the Tanakh.

The eventual cessation of Old Babylonian and Neo-Assyrian prophecy cannot be traced

exactly but can be presumed to have dwindled as their kingdoms diminished. Both Babylonian

and Assyrian prophecies were intricately tied to kingship. Every prophecy and oracle that has

been found has been described in a letter addressed to the king and every king has called on

prophets, whether professional prophets or lay-ecstatics, to prophesy. The institution of kingship

essentially relied on prophecy and the authority accorded to it to survive. The opposite is also

true. It can only logically follow that will the demise of the Ancient Near Eastern kingdoms, the

institution of prophecy also dwindled. It must be kept in mind while speaking of ‘cessation’ of

prophecy that prophecy never truly ‘ceases.’ Prophecy simply takes on new forms in an

unending cycle of transmission of divine knowledge.

CHAPTER 3: PROPHECY IN TRANSITION-CLASSICAL BIBLICAL PROPHETIC

TITLES TO POST-EXILIC PROPHECY

Let us turn finally to the world of the early and classical biblical prophets of the Tanakh.

There are several prophetic types and designations for prophets in the Tanakh including ‫נָבִיא‬

‫ חֹזֶה‬and ‫האר‬. Each prophetic title has its nuances and will be discussed below. It is important to

realize that the nuances of the Hebrew prophetic titles were lost with the Greek Septuagint

translation. The ambiguous Greek term π ρ ο φ ή τ η ς (prophet) was inserted in place of the various
 Razzaq 29

titles from the Hebrew. Not only did “π ρ ο φ ή τ η ς ”” replace

replace the
the ‫נָבִיא‬, ‫ זֶהה‬and ‫רֹאֶה‬, but it was also used

to translate ‫( ךאלמ‬i.e., messenger of God) in several places.49

I will begin the discussion of classical Israelite and Hebrew prophecy with a brief

discussion of the etymology and significance of the word nabi’(‫)נָבִיא‬. ‫ נָבִיא‬is the most common

prophetic title in the Tanakh and is used over 200 times. Many scholars have worked extensively

on the etymology of this word and have proposed various hypotheses on the origins and cultural

history of the Hebrew word ‫נָבִיא‬. I will briefly outline a few scholarly views below.

In Akkadian, the verb nabu means ‘to name, to nominate or to decree’ and is present even

in Old Akkadian sources onwards. There is also the standard Akkadian adjective, nabu, which

means ‘I called’ or authorized person x, and it is often attested as an honorific title for

Mesopotamian kings or other royalty. The verb form of the Akkadian nabu was found in a

bilingual lexical text in Ebla and early Biblical scholars concluded that the presence of the

Akkadian nabu indicated the presence of prophecy at Ebla in the middle of the third millennium

BCE and even began categorizing different types of prophets. However, as the Ebla lexical text

and others have been studied and uncovered, the evidence for the presence of prophecy at Ebla

has become less and less convincing.

Scholars have also drawn parallels between the Hebrew nabi and the munabbiatu found

in texts from the city of Emar. Daniel Flemming, for example, has attempted to draw

comparisons and has argued that there is a connection between the prophetic role of the Israelite

nabi and the Emarian diviner munabbiatu. Stokl, Durand and others have resisted such quick

comparisons since it is very difficult to convey any lines of “influence” between the prophetic

titles.

49
See 2 Chron. 36:15
 Razzaq 30

There is also some limited evidence for nabi in ancient Near Eastern epigraphic record

found during the excavations at Tell ed-Duweir (ancient Lachish) and date to the early sixth

century BCE. There are three relevant sources within this archive which mention or present

context for the nabi. According to some scholars, most prominently Seow, argue that Lak (6):

1.3 uses formations reminiscent to of Jeremiah 38:4 and that there may be a connection between

the “prophetic figure” being spoken about in the fragment and the Prophet Jeremiah.50 Stokl,

however, argues that the syntax of the fragments Lak (6): 1.3 indicate that ‘the prophet’ is

actually Tobiah who is mentioned in the fragment, “As for the letter of Tobiah, the king’s

servant, which came to Sallum, son of Yaddua…”51 Whether the identity of the figure being

discussed is Tobiah or Jeremiah, it is clear that the fragment is speaking of something from ‘the

prophet.’

The prophetic title ‫ איבנ‬is attributed to many different figures and does not denote any

specialized prophetic role, though some scholars have argued otherwise. D.L. Peterson, for

example, argues that ‫ איבנ‬should be seen as a specialized “morality prophet” yet this does not

seem to be true for all the ‫מיאיבנ‬. While it is certainly true that there are central morality prophets

in the Tanakh, many of the ‫מיאיבנ‬, like Elijah, or Abraham, do not fit this categorization.

It is also interesting to note that in the later books of the Tanakh, namely the Book of

Chronicles and the Deuteronomistic history found in 1 and 2 Kings, many figures appear to have

more than one prophetic title. Samuel, for instance, is designated as both ‫ איבנ‬and also as ‫ האר‬in 1

Chronicles 9:29 and 2 Chronicles 35:18. Elijah is called both ‫ איבנ‬in 2 Chronicles 21:12 and

“man of God” in 1 Kings 17:18. There may be various reasons for this conflation, one of the

simplest being that ‫ איבנ‬eventually became the accepted general prophetic title as the later

histories were being redacted.

50
Stokl, 170
51
Ibid., 169
 Razzaq 31

There are also two more major prophetic titles referring to “seers.” I will first discuss

‫חֹזֶה‬. The title ‫ חֹזֶה‬occurs a total of 16 times throughout the Tanakh, with more than half of the

occurrences appearing in Chronicles. The disproportionate number of occurrences in Chronicles

is often explained by the fact that ‫ חֹזֶה‬is an Aramaic loan word, yet there is again no hard

evidence for such claims. An inscription from 8th century BCE Dier ‘Alla describes Balaam (the

same Balaam who appears in Numbers) as a “‘seer (‫ )חֹזֶה‬of the gods.’”52 This inscription

suggests a close connection between ‫ חֹזֶה‬and the king. The Zakir inscription, also from the 8th

century BCE, similarly describes a close relation between the ‫ חֹזֶה‬and King Zakir in regards to

an attack by another kingdom.

In the Tanakh as well, the ‫ חֹזֶה‬is often closely linked to the King. Gad, for example, in 2

Samuel 24:11 is called the prophet, the ‫ חֹזֶה‬of King David. The royal connotations of ‫ חֹזֶה‬appear

to continue in the Tanakh. The concentrated usage of ‫ חֹזֶה‬in Chronicles expands beyond the

royal seer. In fact, William Schniedewind argues that, at least in Chronicles, the title ‫ חֹזֶה‬also

indicates the seer’s role in writing historical records.53

The other “seer” prophetic title in the Tanakh is ‫האר‬. ‫ האר‬occurs a total of 12 times

throughout the Tanakh. The book of Isaiah employs the label ‫ האר‬twice in highly rhetorical

contexts when Isaiah speaks about “seers” who ‘cannot see.’ These highly rhetorical uses of the

prophetic title make it difficult to arrive at any conclusions about the distinctive roles of this type

of seer. In the books of Chronicles, ‫ האר‬seems to be associated with the figure of Samuel (and to

a lesser extent, Hanani). It is still not clear exactly what features distinguish the ‫ האר‬from the

‫חֹזֶה‬, besides the greater emphasis on the redactor side of ‫ חֹזֶה‬discussed earlier.

52
Schniedewind, William M. The Word of God in Transition: From Prophet to Exegete in the Second Temple
Period. Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic, 1995 (38)
53
Ibid, 41
 Razzaq 32

There are also other less precise prophetic titles used in the Tankah including ‫אִיׁש אֱלֹהִים‬

(“man of God”) and “servant of God/YHWH.” ‫ אִיׁש אֱלֹהִים‬is used a total of 71 times in the

Tanakh and is attributed to a variety of figures from Moses to Elija, Elisha, David and even Ezra.

There is still some debate as to whether the “man of God” title should even be considered a

prophetic title. It seems convincing that ‫ אִיׁש אֱלֹהִים‬was at some point used to designate a holy

man (who may or may not have been some sort of prophet) who performed miracles. Moses, for

example is simultaneously called ‫ איבנ‬and ‫אִיׁש אֱלֹהִים‬. Yet Samuel and David are also called

‫“ אִיׁש אֱלֹהִים‬men of God” and they do not perform any great miracles. Moses is also called

“servant of God” in Deuteronomy and throughout the book of Joshua. “Servant of God” can be

seen as a deuteronomistic prophetic title.54

Discerning the semantic relationship between the various prophetic labels in the Tanakh

can be difficult as all of the titles and terms are interconnected in some way. Rather than

attempting to compartmentalize each of the prophetic titles with a specific definition, it may be

best to image the prophetic titles as fluid concentric circles, overlapping in many places and

remaining distinct in others. It can be concluded, however, that there were various prophetic

titles used to describe the many types of “holy” men or women who in some way communicated

with the divine and delivered their messages to the appropriate audiences. As the Tanakh was

redacted and edited by various scribes throughout the exilic and Second Temple Period, the

various prophetic titles were simplified and ‫ איבנ‬became the major and most common and widely

used prophetic title.

I have not yet described the gender of prophets here and this is a much-debated topic that

I will only lightly dust for sake of the special and thematic constraints of this thesis. Jonathan

54
For more on the various prophetic titles, please see the bibliography of; Schniedewind, William M. The Word of
God in Transition: From Prophet to Exegete in the Second Temple Period. Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic,
1995
 Razzaq 33

Stokl’s book Prophets Male and Female is an excellent resource for further study of this topic.

While it is clear from earlier in this chapter that there were many female prophets in Ancient

Mesopotamia and Assyria, the same kind of distribution is not true in the Tanakh. There

certainly are female prophets in the Tanakh including Deborah, Hannah, Hulda and Mariam. The

gender of prophets seems to be less of an issue in the Tanakh and the actual social role of the

individual prophet in society and their contribution to society seems to be the more important for

the redactors of the Tanakh.

There is also the important discussion on the differences between prophets, messengers,

inspired messengers and inspired exegetes. A “prophet” should be understood as more of a

permanent ‘occupation’ while a messenger has more of a transient role. Anyone can be a

messenger of God as long as he or she is called upon. Both prophets and messengers, at least in

the Tanakh, tend to be humans. All prophets are also messengers of God but not all messengers

are prophets per se. As I will discuss in the coming chapters, a new prophetic type emerged in

the Second Temple period, namely the “inspired exegete” or the “inspired messenger.” These

new figures were not necessarily prophets in the classical sense, yet they thought themselves to

possess special powers to interpret and unlock the true meanings of the earlier prophets. These

interpretations were then applied to the changing face of Israelite life and religion. This

hermeneutical technique would eventually lead to the development of the rabbinic movement in

which rabbis became the main authority who could interpret the words of God and translate them

into rules and laws that would govern daily life.

A word about Scribalism and Prophecy in the Post-Exilic Era:

Here I will briefly discuss the crucial relationship between the scribes and the canonical

or legal texts they redact. Not only is this issue important for understanding Mesopotamian

exegetical techniques as we have seen, but it is also becomes increasingly important in the
 Razzaq 34

Second Temple period. In fact, as Martti Nissinen notes, “everything we know about prophetic

activity [in the post-exilic era] in concrete historical terms comes to us through the filter of

scribal activity.”55 It is important to remember that the prophetic books of the Tanakh primarily

document how earlier prophecy was chosen, edited, interpreted, and rewritten to correspond to a

form of prophecy that would conform to the understanding of the scribal class. As we saw earlier

in the first chapter, the various pre-exilic prophetic titles were simplified to the overwhelming

use of nabi in the Deuteronomistic histories and books of Chronicles.

All pre-exilic and even to some extent post-exilic “prophetic” literature and especially

prophetic books were filtered through scribes, distorting and simplifying our understanding of

the very institution of prophecy itself.56 Most post-exilic prophets mentioned in the Tanakh

belong to the non-believing peoples and are often associated with apostasy and are warned

against.

Even in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, the only major biblical books that actually deal

with the Second Temple period, there is almost no mention of contemporary prophecy. Other

than the brief mentions of Zechariah and Haggai in Ezra 5:1-2, prophets are largely mentioned as

figures of the past. Other than these brief moments, Ezra and Nehemiah are silent on the subject

of prophets or inspired exegetes or any other divinely inspired messenger figure. Still most

scholars remain convinced that certain forms of prophecy still continued (and new forms

emerged) well into the second temple period.

Deuteronomy 13:2-6 warns the Israelites against false prophets who call them away from

the one God. While there has been much scholarly discussion of these verses from Deuteronomy

in regards to the parallels between these warnings and the Succession Treaty of Esarhaddon, I
55
Nissenen, Martti, “The Dubious Image of Prophecy” in Prophets, Prophecy and Prophetic Texts in Second Temple
Judaism Eds. Michael Floyd and Robert Haak (26)
56
Please see Ehud Ben Zvi’s chapter, “Writings, Speeches, and the Prophetic Books-Setting an Agenda” in Writings
and Speech in Israelite and Ancient Near Eastern Prophecy (ed. E. Ben Zvi and Michael Floyd; SBL, 2000) for a
more detailed discussion on the impact of scribalism on prophetic books and writings.
 Razzaq 35

will focus instead on the implications this verse might have for understanding the perceptions of

true versus false prophecy in the Tanakh. Other passages in Deuteronomy acknowledge the

necessity for true prophecy, a phenomenon that was elevated far above all other forms of

divination.

While it is clear that classical biblical prophets were seen as successors of Moses and

were often compared with Moses, this literary parallelism appears to have disappeared in the

post-exilic period. Perhaps prophecy in the post-exilic Second Temple period posed a political

and social threat to the authorities who tried to implement a certain interpretation of the Tanakh

or what was by then at least the Torah.

The harsh criticism of prophets and prophecy in Zechariah 13:2-6 further exemplifies

how prophecy posed a threat to the socio-political authorities. A lot has been written on these

particular versus and one of the most convincing arguments seems to be that these few verses

reflect the position of the scribal redactors who thought themselves to be the only true prophetic

figures in the Second Temple period and did not regard other contemporaneous prophetic claims

to be true.

Two interesting questions emerge from the brief discussion about false or bad prophets:

firstly, which forms of divination were discerned to legitimate and how? Secondly, how can one

truly distinguish true and false prophets with accuracy? In the Ancient Near Eastern context,

these questions about legitimacy and accuracy instigated the convergence of the scribal and the

diviners. Whereas prophecy used to be a purely oral affair, the redaction of prophetic words or

omens added both to their legitimacy and accuracy. Just as astronomy and astrology had become

instruments of knowledge production for the ruling class, so divination was also used to assert

power. More specific examples from the Ancient Mesopotamian context will be provided in

chapter 3.
 Razzaq 36

Before the emergence of full length prophetic books in the Tanakh, Israelite prophets

presumably spoke their words directly to their intended audience. For example, in 1 Kings 22,

King Ahab of Northern Israel and King Jehoshaphat of Judah seek prophetic guidance before

finalizing their decision to attack Aram. Ahab calls Micaiah and while at first Micaiah tells

Ahab of his success, he later admits that Ahab will actually not succeed. The actual imagery of

Michaiah’s vision of God is very striking. Yahweh sits on a throne surrounded by his heavenly

host, just like a human king sitting surrounded by his army. There are other prophets present in

these verses as well and they rival Michaiah and assure success for Ahab. It is not entirely clear

until after Ahab has actually lost which of the prophets is true, though Micaiah is eventually

correct57. No scribes seem to be involved in this example, but it was ultimately redacted in the

Tanakh later.

Records of prophecies could either be made to facilitate their communication to a certain

audience or even for pupils to study the prophecies for theological and other reasons. When a

King refuses to listen to a prophet, the act of writing the prophecy down may be the only way to

communicate the message. Only the most useful or important prophetic words were redacted and

preserved, though there were surely other prophetic figures whose words have not been

preserved in writing.

The post-exilic period following the destruction of Jerusalem undoubtedly saw a major

shift in the Israelite worldview, including the role of prophecy and prophets. After such a

catastrophic experience, prophecy as it had occurred in pre-exilic times was no longer viable.

Prophecy most probably became concentrated in scribal circles since scribes handled and kept all

the prophetic records from the pre-exilic period. This would also explain the growing

authoritativeness of the various pre-exilic prophets and the birth of a new kind of “inspired”

57
See: Floyd, Michael, “The Production of Prophetic Books in the Early Second Temple Period” in Prophets,
Prophecy and Prophetic Texts in Second Temple Judaism for more detailed discussion of this particular example
 Razzaq 37

exegetical prophet in the Second Temple Period. Prophecy morphed from a purely oral to a

largely written phenomenon and scribes and redactors of prophecy became powerful and

important figures in society, even more so than they had been since now they often played the

part of both redactor and diviner.

To conclude, I have tried in this chapter to briefly outline the various prophetic titles in

Ancient Mesopotamian and Assyrian contexts as well as the Tanakh and the emergence of a

largely written form of prophecy from the earlier oracular forms. I have certainly skipped over

some important issues in this short chapter, and a separate thesis could have been written solely

on the controversies of various prophetic titles and possible etymological and semantic

intersections between the pre-monotheistic Ancient Near Eastern titles and the early Israelite

prophetic titles. My purpose in this chapter, however, was only to make the reader aware of the

many ambiguities of prophetic titles in the Tanakh and the important role of scribes in our

understanding of the prophetic phenomenon. Prophecy is not a monolithic institution as it has

oftentimes been rendered, even in the scholarly world. In fact, it should be noted that the very

conceptions of prophecy in the Second Temple post-exilic period morphed significantly,

allowing for new prophetic figures closely intertwined with interpreting the earlier (arguably)

more authoritative prophetic words.

 Razzaq 38

CHAPTER 4: MODERN SCHOLARLY CONCEPTIONS OF PROPHECY (AND ITS

CESSATION) IN THE SECOND TEMPLE PERIOD

It is essential to understand the general scholarly attitudes on prophecy in the post-exilic

period before looking more closely at some specific texts. Stephen Cook rightly notes that the

past several decades have “witnessed a virtual explosion of studies examining various aspects of

Second Temple Judaism.”58 New archaeological evidence paired with a renewed and growing

interest in this crucial transitional phase from Ancient to Rabbinic Judaism and more generally

from Antiquity to Late Antiquity have initiated important scholarly discussions on prophecy and

more specifically the “cessation of prophecy.”

There are many different theories on the exact date of the cessation of prophecy and

whether there even ever was a cessation of prophecy in Ancient Judaism. The array of scholarly

perspectives mirrors the diversity of Jewish thought and practices during the Second Temple

Period and shortly thereafter, making the question all the more fascinating and exciting. The

presence of multiple sects, ideas and conceptions of how exactly scripture was to be understood

and applied to daily life has left a rich collection of resources (albeit often incomplete or cryptic)

for scholars to speculate and attempt to reconstruct the ancient ideologies and practices. The four
58
Cook, L. Stephen. On the Question of the "Cessation of Prophecy" in Ancient Judaism. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck,
2011 (1)
 Razzaq 39

hundred or so years between the prophet Malachi and the appearance of John the Baptist is of

particular interest for this paper and much of the scholarship discussed will deal with this period.

This chapter will focus on the following several questions discussed in scholarship

regarding the “cessation of prophecy”: a) when did prophecy “end” in Ancient Judaism and how

was it explained in the works various groups? b) Why did prophecy cease and what implications

did it have for the perpetuation of the divine message, especially in regards to scripture? c) How

was prophecy itself conceptualized in the beliefs of various groups and how did this affect their

understanding of the “cessation” of prophecy? d) Is there evidence of continued prophetic

activity during the Second Temple period and how have scholars interpreted this data? How has

the approach to the question of the “cessation of prophecy” evolved throughout the past two

centuries as scholars have adopted new methods of reading and understanding data?

Stephen Cook’s book On the Question of the “Cessation of Prophecy” in Ancient

Judaism provides a very useful survey of the primary and secondary sources that discuss the

cessation of prophecy (or lack thereof). Beginning with an outline of Ancient texts, namely the

Tanakh, Apocryphal works and Pseudepigrapha, texts from the Dead Sea Scrolls, Josephus,

Philo, Rabbinic texts, and early Christian sources, Cook outlines some major trends in

scholarship from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. This overview is followed by a more

detailed discussion of several sources including fragments from the Dead Sea Scrolls and

Josephus in the next several chapters.

There seems to have been a general consensus in pre-twentieth century scholarship that

prophecy had ceased after Malachi and few scholars actually pursued the question further,

assuming there was a prophetic void until John the Baptist and the appearance of Jesus. Some

scholars, however, placed great emphasis on the cessation of prophecy as having specific

importance for the closing of the scriptural canon. H. A. C. Hävernick, for example, explains that
 Razzaq 40

the most important factor in establishing the scriptural canon was the long period of absence of

prophecy following Malachi (which he attributes to the fact there was no other person deserving

of prophet hood and thus the necessity to conserve the tradition).59 Hermann Gunkel, another

prominent biblical scholar from the nineteenth century, agrees that John the Baptist was the first

prophet since the Persian period, but does also realize that there were multiple traces of the

Spirit’s activity during the Second Temple Period. Gunkel notes that the Essenes, for example,

were among those said to have possessed the prophetic gift along with the High Priest (some

believed that the High Priests received the Spirit upon ordination).60 Though Gunkel does

acknowledge the presence of prophetic activity in the Second Temple period, after the official

end of prophecy in the Persian period he does not believe these points contradict each other.

The canonization61 of the Torah was accompanied by the rise of the written Torah,

beginning with Eza’s public reading as described in Nehemiah 8. The written Torah, according

to most of the prominent scholars from the late nineteenth century, gradually became the

principal source of religious and divine authority. As Julius Wellhausen writes, “With the

appearance of the law came to an end the old freedom…there was now in existence an authority

as objective as could be; and this was the death of prophecy.”62 According to Wellhausen, then,

whether Ezra and Nehemiah had foreseen it or not, their reforms and the initiation of the written

Torah ultimately ushered the end of the era of the prophets. In other words, the written law and

Torah replaced the necessity for prophets.

59
H. A. C. Havernick (trans. T. & T. Clark) A General Historico-Critical Approach to the Old Testament, 1852 (24-
25). Havernick mentions this as he is discussing the reasons for the modes of conservation after the return from the
exile. The cessation of prophecy is stated as the most important factor to finalizing the canon.
60
Gunkel, Hermann. The Influence of the Holy Spirit: The Popular View of the Apostolic Age and the Teaching of
the Apostle Paul: A Biblical-theological Study. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979. (70)
61
It is important to note, however, that scholars are also not in agreement about the particulars (process, dates, etc)
of the canonization of the Torah and Tankah.
62
Wellhausen, Julius, Prolegomena to the History of Israel, (402) as cited in Cook, L. Stephen, On the Question of
the "Cessation of Prophecy" in Ancient Judaism. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011 (13)
 Razzaq 41

Carl Cornill also presents an interesting argument in The Prophets of Israel. Cornill

describes a general decline in the quality of prophecy until eventually there are no more

prophets. “Whilst the older prophets feel themselves one with God, who is ever present and

living in them, God now grows more transcendent…direct personal intercourse with God

ceases,” and this change in the means of attaining prophecy are a “clear witness to the growing

deterioration of prophecy.”63 The distinctions amongst the various types of prophecy will become

an increasingly interesting theme in the scholarship of the twentieth century. It can nonetheless

be concluded that most nineteenth century scholars agreed that prophecy did in fact cease though

the exact date at which it did was not agreed upon unanimously. The belief that prophecy ended

after Malachi had already been criticized in nineteenth century scholarship as it became

increasingly clear that some books of the Tanakh including Daniel and Jonah were compiled

after Malachi and that there were also several examples of prophetic activity in the Second

Temple Period.

Among the first to disagree with the notion that prophecy had ceased in Ancient Israel

was Adolf von Harnack. In his two volume The Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the

First Three Centuries, Harnack argues that prophetic types were present in the milieu in which

John the Baptist emerged (and also that John the Baptist himself was a prophet). Harnack cites

passages from the gospels and Acts in particular which mention and condemn false prophets like

Barjesus, among others. In addition to the presence of false prophets attested in the New

Testament, Harnack also points to prophetic activity as recorded by Josephus, along with the

abundant apocalyptic and oracular material that indicates that prophecy was in fact “in luxuriant

bloom, and also that prophets were numerous.”64

63
Cornill, Carl Heinrich, and Sutton F. Corkran. The Prophets of Israel. Chicago: Open Court Pub., 1899 (152-3)
64
The Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries, 2 vols. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons,
1908 Vol. 1 (332)
 Razzaq 42

Harnack is not in complete opposition to previous scholarship since he does

acknowledge, as Cornill had previously pointed out, that there was a difference in the type of

prophets and prophetic works which appeared in the Second Temple post-exilic period.65 Despite

Harnack’s discussions on the presence of prophetic activity following canonization, some

scholars remained convinced that the canonization of scripture and the initiation of “the law” as

the primary access to the divine marked an end for legitimate prophecy. R. H. Charles writes,

“the law has not only assumed the function of the ancient pre-Exilic prophets, but it has also, so

far as law in its power, made the revival of such prophecy an impossibility.”66

The association of prophets and law and the distinction between the pre-exilic and post-

exilic “prophets” is echoed in the claims of many other scholars, and there does indeed seem to

be a hierarchy of prophets. It has been argued that the prophets of the post-exilic period strictly

dealt with ritualistic rites and practices rather than introducing any profoundly original ideas as

the pre-Exilic and classical prophets had. Most of the discussion of the cessation of prophecy

through the nineteenth and early twentieth century was often part of larger scholarly works about

Ancient Judaism more generally and few scholars devoted longer pieces to the cessation of

prophecy specifically.

Perhaps the first significant article specifically dealing with the cessation of prophecy

was E.E. Urbach’s “When Did Prophecy Cease?”67 Urbach amassed and analyzed all the

previously discussed evidence (rabbinic, Biblical, sectarian and later historical sources) and

concluded that it was inappropriate to speak of a total cessation of prophecy in Ancient Israel,

though undoubtedly prophecy following the exilic period had declined in value and power, as

65
Daniel, for example, is not included with the Prophets in the Tanakh along with some other apocalyptic writings
which did not make it into the canon.
66
Charles, R. H. Religious Development Between the Old and New Testaments, London: Williams and Norgate,
1914 (40) as cited in Cook, Stephen, On the Question of the Cessation of Prophecy (17).
67
The Original was published in Hebrew, but I will be using Cook’s useful summary of the article in English ( Cook,
On the Question 20-1) Urbach, Ephraim E, “Why Did Prophecy Cease?” Tarbiz 17 (1946)
 Razzaq 43

Cornill and others had argued before him. For Urbach, what distinguishes the prophets from the

other apocalyptic writings and Pseudopigrapa is the public character of the prophet and his

relationship with the people. Anonymous authors composed the apocalyptic writings as well as

much of the pseudopigrapa and Urbach argues that a prophet would not have hidden his identity

in this manner.

Rather than viewing law as the major factor in the decline of prophecy, Urbach saw the

destruction of the Temple and the emergence of Christianity in the first few centuries as the

major turning points in the history of Jewish prophecy since it was around this time that the

rabbis, according to Urbach, began to lose faith in prophecy. It is a convincing argument that the

rise of Christianity and the fall of the second Temple may have initiated a loss in prophecy and

certainly indicated a decline in the power of the prophetic institution as noted in the rabbinic

literature (which will later be discussed). David Aune and others shared Urbach’s belief that

prophecy did continue into the Second Temple period but was nonetheless distinct from the

classical prophecy of the Tanakh.

Thomas Overholt adopts a separate approach to the question of the cessation of prophecy.

Rather than focusing on the inherent dynamic of prophecy, Overhalt proposes to study the social

dynamic of prophecy, since as other scholars have similarly noted, prophecy requires certain

social preconditions to exist. The most obvious necessity for the existence of prophecy is its

acknowledgement from society (i.e., that prophecy be recognized as such from the society in

which it appears).68 For Overholt, prophecy has never truly “ceased” or ended, it has simply run

out of fashion within the surrounding society in which it appears.

A similar and more particularized claim can be heard from Frederick Greenspahn’s

discussion in his article, “Why Prophecy Ceased.” At the very opening of the article, Greenspahn

68
Overholt, Thomas W. Channels of Prophecy: The Social Dynamics of Prophetic Activity. Minneapolis: Fortress
Press, 1989 and "Commanding the Prophets: Amos and the Problem of Prophetic Authority," CBQ 41 (1979)
 Razzaq 44

asserts, “it is in fact virtually impossible to identify a specific point at which prophetic figures no

longer emerged.”69 It is essential to distinguish what actually occurred from what is later believed

to have occurred since both do not always correspond with one another. The first part of

Greenspahn’s article engages the work of Yehezkel Kaufmann. Kaufmann turned to Biblical

passages that threatened an end to prophecy as a punishment for Israel, concluding that the

absence of prophecy was to be understood as the result of Jewish sinfulness; only the

eschatological excitement in the post-exilic Second Temple period revives some prophetic

activity.

Greenspahn dismantles Kaufmann’s position by criticizing his treatment of prophecy as a

phenomenon controlled by popular consensus since most prophets did not often hesitate to

oppose popular sentiment. Greenspahn also finds Kaufmann’s treatment of rabbinic literature

regarding prophecy to be skewed since the rabbis never actually state that prophecy ended; rather

they simply imply the departure of the Holy Spirit from Israel, and perhaps due to political

opposition to an expanding Christian claim to legitimate prophecy. Greenspahn’s major criticism

of scholarship on the “cessation of prophecy” is the mistake of reading too far into ancient texts

from the exilic and post-exilic periods individual preconceptions on the subject. Without giving

much attention to the various levels of prophecy, Greenspahn seems convinced by the numerous

mentions even of “false prophets” in sectarian works like the hymn scroll from Qumran and

multiple examples from Josephus, biblical tradition and early Christian texts indicating the

presence (or at least possibility) of prophecy during the Second Temple period. An important

contribution of the Greenspahn article draws on Urbach’s earlier theory about the polemical

nature of rabbinic literature regarding prophecy, though not without criticism.70

69
Greenspahn, Frederick, “Why Prophecy Ceased,” JBL 108, 1989 (37)
70
Ibid., 42
 Razzaq 45

It is not inconceivable to imagine why the rabbis may have wished to assert the

canonization of prophecy as a protection against early Christian claims to continuing and

inheriting true Israelite prophecy. This assertion runs the risk of being overly simplistic in terms

of diminishing the work of the rabbis which is in fact much more complex than may be gleaned

from Urbach’s assertions. Greenspahn discusses some of the rabbinic excerpts and writings of

Hillel, Gamliel, Akiba and others in greater detail intentionally problematizing the concept of the

“Holy Spirit” which was sometimes applied to being responsible for everyone’s actions,

exclusively for the prophets or for no one at all.71 Greenspahn concludes the article by

highlighting the significance of the rabbinic claim that the Holy Spirit had departed from Israel

as a mainly polemical attempt to secure their role in explicating past revelation.

Benjamin Sommer also presents a thorough critique of Greenspahn’s evaluation in an

article published several years later. Sommer reevaluates the conclusions found in previous

scholarship and proposes to rephrase the question at hand. Rather than simply asking whether or

not God (through the Holy Spirit or not) stopped communicating with the Jews through prophets,

the question should rather be, “Did Jews in the Second Temple period tend to accept the

possibility that God still communicated with the Jewish people by speaking directly to certain

individuals?”72 This restated question may actually prove to be very useful when actually

engaging with the primary sources. Sommer is interested in revisiting the actual primary sources

from the post-exilic period to see if the ancient texts themselves assert the decline of prophecy

and why people stopped believing in the continued existence of prophecy.

Sommer is in complete opposition to Greenspahn’s claim that none of the sources

explicitly state the cessation of prophecy. In fact, Sommer claims “the notion of the end of

71
Greenspahn is clarifying the point that though the Holy Spirit may have initially been associated with prophecy
they were not one in the same thing. It is also interesting to note that the spirit has been said to have departed Israel
at various times, even in the times of the earlier prophets. (Greenspahn 46-7)
72
Somme, Benjamin D, “Did Prophecy Cease: Evaluating a Reevaluation,” JBL 115:1, 1996 (32)
 Razzaq 46

prophecy was known and widespread in antiquity.”73 1 Maccabees and 2 Apocalypse of Baruch

certainly state an absence of prophecy in the post-exilic period. While Greenspahn argued the

distinction between “holy spirit” and “prophecy,” Sommer asserts that they are synonymous in

rabbinic Hebrew. Sommer quotes an excerpt from b. Sanh. 11a that states that Haggai, Zechariah

and Malachi were the last prophets and that the Holy Spirit withdrew from Israel following their

death.74

Sommer also quotes from S. ‘Olam Rab. 86b, “Alexander of Macedonia reigned for

twelve years. Until that time prophets spoke prophecies through the holy spirit; from that time

on, ‘Incline your ear and listen to the words of the Sages.’”75 Sommer’s literal reading of this

passage clearly establishes the cessation of prophecy, though Greenspahn may have read this

same passage in a more polemical sense (i.e., as a way to reassert the theological power and

prominence of the rabbis themselves).

Sommer’s second major assertion that the methods and types of prophecy changed during

the post-exilic period from the methods and types of prophecy attested in the Tanakh is more

convincing. The prophetic activity of the Second Temple Period was understood as distinct from

classical Biblical prophecy for several reasons: most importantly, the prophetic activity during

this period was not synonymous with classical biblical prophecy. It was a distinct and mostly

inferior form of divine communication that may have intended to revive the dormant prophetic

experiences of the past but was certainly not a continuation of it. A vivid example of this is the

practice of Jewish mystics continuing well into the medieval era. Sommer explains how many

mystics, like Abraham Abulafia, sought to experience prophecy through ecstatic techniques such

as chanting and number arrangements, practices which clearly distinguished themselves from the

73
Ibid., 32
74
Ibid., 33
75
Ibid., 34
 Razzaq 47

biblical prophetic experiences. As I discussed in chapter 1, prophets had to be formally called on

by God before they called themselves “prophets.”

For Sommer, the rabbinic sources evidently make claim to the absence of prophecy in

the post-exilic period and understand it to be one of the things that were hidden away when the

Temple was destroyed. The stream of prophecy would only to be reinstated with the appearance

of the Messiah. This is one way of explaining the appearance of various prophetic figures

preceding both the Maccabean revolt and the revolt of 66 CE. Greenspahn’s testament to the

presence of prophetic activity and prophecy in the post-exilic Second Temple period may be

legitimate but Sommer sets a precise distinction between the Holy Spirit proper, which was

responsible for transmitting prophetic messages through the prophets, and the “daughter of the

voice,” which indicates a lesser form of divine communication and is a mere “echo” of the voice

of God, as opposed to the true voice of God.76

Finally, Sommer proposes a new theory to explain the decline of prophecy that counters

the scholarship of Greenspahn, Aune, Overhalt and others. The termination of kingship may have

been a leading factor to the decline of prophecy in the post-exilic period. Sommer argues that the

institution of prophecy was so intricately connected to kingship and so much so that when

kingship terminated, its prophetic counterpart could no longer serve its original purpose. This

seems to be an attractive theory on explaining the absence of prophecy, yet it is still more

convincing that prophecy in fact perpetuated in the Second Temple period, albeit in a different

form, since kingship was not necessary for all types of prophetic activity to continue.

Despite Sommer’s strongly argued case about the cessation of prophecy, many scholars

remained unconvinced and tended to support the view that some kind of prophecy was indeed

present in the post-exilic period. John R. Levison expands the work of Greenspahn and Overhalt,

76
Ibid., 39
 Razzaq 48

discrediting the traditional view that Sommer had attempted to rescue. Rather than reading the

sources to be true literally as Sommer did, Levison approaches the texts from a critical angle,

supporting Greenspahn’s claim that “interestamental”77 authors never explicitly state that

prophecy had come to an end.

The sources from this period including 1 Maccabees, Psalms, 2 Apocalypse Baruch,

Josephus, and rabbinic texts refer to prophets variously as predictors, leaders, decision-makers

and legitimators of theocracy, writers of history and intercessors.78 This wide array of prophetic

activity testifies to the complexity of the post-exilic period both socially and theologically.

Levison continues with a close reading of Tosefta Sotah 10-15, which establishes a pattern of the

deaths of certain rabbis accompanied by the loss of various gifts and ideas from the world.

The significance of this pattern, according to Levison, is not in the literal disappearance

of specific objects and characteristics, but the fact that the death of righteous people or things

leads to a loss of good until someone else appears and brings with him the presence of good.

Levison applies this theory to the apparent absence of prophecy. The recorded “withdrawal” of

the Holy Spirit should therefore not be seen as a permanent cessation to the gift of prophecy,

rather a temporary lapse until another righteous person appeared, in the case of the examined

excerpt, Hillel’s righteousness made the return of the Holy Spirit possible.79 This approach seems

to echo the earlier scholarship but the manner in which Levison presents his argument is rather

innovative.

An important additional piece should be mentioned. It may be useful here to discuss this

piece at greater length since its approach is so unique. Alex P. Jassen’s article “Prophecy after

the Prophets,” along with his other works, has been greatly helpful and especially interesting

77
This word is used by Greenspahn and then repeated in Levison, John R. “Did the Spirit Withdraw from Israel? An
Evaluation of the Earliest Jewish Data” NTS 43, 1997 (45)
78
Levison, “Did the Spirit Withdraw From Israel?” (45)
79
Ibid., 52
 Razzaq 49

since he explores the concept of the prophecy more generally and also the “cessation of

prophecy” more specifically in the Dead Sea Scrolls, which many scholars have not discussed in

their work. Jassen draws on the theories of both Greenspahn and Sommer, expanding their

assertions and comparing their findings to the prophetic activity in the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Jassen stresses the importance of looking beyond the strict terminology of a written work

or group to uncover what was actually occurring. In other words, just because the Qumran

community restricted its use of explicit prophetic terminology to ancient prophets does not mean

that the community does not regard prophecy as a live institution. Jassen proposes to study the

Qumran scrolls to emphasize the presence of prophetic-revelatory phenomena and the possibility

of new modes of “transformed” prophetic activity.80

The Qumran community, as Sommer suggested, recognized a distinction between ancient

prophecy and contemporary prophetic-like phenomenon that were also considered prophecy

proper (unlike Sommer’s assertion about the post-exilic communication with the divine not being

considered prophecy proper).

Jassen begins with a close reading of the hymn scroll (the Hodayot) in which the hymnist

repeatedly condemns the “enemies” for being false and lying prophets and for trying to modify

the law. The hymnist is clearly a recipient of divine revelation but it is interesting that prophetic

terminology is never used to describe the hymnist’s experiences yet the enemies are always

described as false “prophets.” Through a series of repetitive verses about the hymnist receiving

revelation from “the Lord,” and the false peoples not accepting him, a kind of inclusio is formed

with the repetition and anaphora of “revelation.” This allows for the emphasis to be the fact that

80
Jassen, Alex P. Prophecy after ‘The Prophets’: The Dead Sea Scrolls and the History of Prophecy in Judaism”
Pages 577–93 in volume 2 of The Dead Sea Scrolls in Context: Integrating the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Study of
Ancient Texts, Languages, and Cultures. Edited by Armin Lange, Emanuel Tov, Matthias Weigold, and Bennie H.
Reynolds III. Vetus Testamentum Supplements 140. 2 vols.; Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2011. (579). Jassen
also discusses Ben Sira as will be discussed later.
 Razzaq 50

the hymnist alone is the one who has received true revelation. Jassen also notes a sort of

evolution of revelation throughout the hymn. The hymnist begins by thanking God for making

his face “shine” by the covenant, an experience not quite prophetic.

Several verses later, in line 27, the hymnist writes, “by me you have illumed the face of

many…”81 The progression from just having his own face shine through the Lord (individual) to

the faces of others being illumined through the him (public), essentially establishes the hymnist

as a prophet.82 It is also essential to understand the accusation by the hymnist to the “false”

prophets attempting to incorrectly modify the law. This espouses the important concept of

“progressive revelation of the law”83 which may be understood as an aspect of proper prophecy

and was undoubtedly an essential belief of the Qumran community as articulated in the Rule of

the Community text.

The idea of progressive revelation is explicitly described in the hymn several times, the

revelation of the Torah to Moses and then through certain other individuals and groups

throughout time.

In the Qumran sense, then, the prophets are conceptualized as “possessing the proper

understanding of the Torah of Moses and empowered to share this knowledge…this juridical

knowledge is intimately connected with their prophetic status.”84 The identification of lawgiving

as a prophetic duty is a unique perspective since other texts and authors including the rabbis

conceived of a one-time complete revelation at Sinai in which the total law and its future

amplifications are communicated to the prophet. The assignment of juridical functions to a

81
Ibid., 583
82
This is also in line with Urbach’s requirement for prophets to be public figures (i.e., the hymn scroll is different in
this way from other written pseudepigrapha)
83
This was the belief that God revealed the original law to Moses at Sinai and continued to reveal the interpretation
and amplification of the Torah to special individuals throughout each generation. The Qumran community saw itself
as the next chosen interpreters to whom God would continue to reveal the true meaning of the Torah.
84
Jassen, “Prophecy after the Prophets” (587)
 Razzaq 51

prophet as the hymn scroll demonstrates is evidence for the presence of prophecy in the post-

exilic period, though it is certainly a transformed type of prophecy.

Similar evidence for an altered understanding of prophecy in the Second Temple Period

can be gleaned from two “wisdom” works, namely the Psalms scroll and Ben Sira. In the Psalms

scroll, David’s prophetic capabilities are a direct result of the “sapiential revelation”85 from God.

In other words, David is not just a wise man capable of producing the psalms; he is in fact a

prophet of God, receiving the words to be written directly from God. This represents an

interesting and unique blending of the office of the sage and the prophet. A similar phenomenon

occurs in the work of Ben Sira. In chapter 39, the path to becoming a sage is described.

The ultimate goal of a sage is to become a “conduit” through which knowledge can be

transmitted to the community. The sage receives the divine word from God, just as the ancient

prophets had, to be transmitted to the people but unlike the ancient prophet, “the revelation for

the sage is a thoroughly sapiential experience.”86 This revelatory experience of the sage, then,

also attests to the presence of prophecy in the post-exilic period.

Jassen states gracefully at the end of the article that “it is equally true that prophecy

continues and that prophecy ceases,”87 and indeed prophetic activity is attested in the Second

Temple period in various sectarian and theological texts yet it is sometimes different than

classical biblical prophecy.

It is clear by now that the question of the “cessation of prophecy” in ancient Judaism may

not be appropriately fashioned. There have been numerous arguments in favor of the traditional

view that prophecy ended following the destruction of the temple and the death of Malachi yet

there have also been numerous arguments made in favor of the presence of prophecy and

85
Ibid., 591
86
Ibid., 592
87
Ibid., 592
 Razzaq 52

prophetic activity well past the exilic period and in Second Temple Judea as documented in

various sources described above.

Rather than necessarily adopting one view or the other, it seems more conducive to move

beyond the limitations of such a question and, as Jassen appealingly proposes, to examine

prophetic phenomenon in the post-exilic period as conceptualized by the community (or

individuals) themselves. Much like the discussion on prophetic titles in chapter 1, it is crucial to

realize the intricacies of prophetic phenomenon itself, as there are evidently various distinct

manifestations that should not be lumped together into one monolithic “prophecy.”

To state that prophecy merely ceased to exist after a specific point would be to ignore the

attested trends of human behavior and patent affirmations of prophecy. Equally erroneous would

be to oversimplify and embrace the opposite extreme that the prophecy continued uninterrupted

from the ancient prophets through the post-exilic period.

As scholarship on the “cessation of prophecy” and prophecy more generally evolved

from its first appearances in the nineteenth century, scholars have generally begun to realize that

prophetic activity is not so easily present or absent at any given time. The Second Temple period,

like other theologically transitional phases, was in fact teeming with myriad manifestations of

scripture and “law” as well as a variety of practices some of which embraced prophecy as a

means of legitimate understanding of the divine and others that honored the classical prophecy of

old.

In the next few chapters, I will discuss several post-exilic primary sources to better

understand how exactly various Israelite and later “Jewish” groups conceived of prophecy and

how these various new conceptions of prophecy interacted with classical conceptions of

prophecy.
 Razzaq 53

CASE STUDY 1: PESHARIM AND THE DEAD SEA

SCROLLS
 Razzaq 54

CHAPTER 5: RE-INTERPRETING PROPHECY IN THE PESHARIM

The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls more than half a century ago provided Biblical

scholars and archaeologists with a vast amount of new and exciting, albeit often cryptic material

that has since completely altered the study of Second Temple Judaism and Biblical history more

generally. Indeed, as Stephen Cook notes, the past several decades following the discoveries

have “witnessed a virtual explosion of studies examining various aspects of Second Temple

Judaism.”88 Amongst the wide range of scholarly topics lies the question of the “cessation of

prophecy” and the role of Biblical and extra-biblical prophecy89 in the Second Temple Period as

related to the literary sources produced in this time. The previously widely held notion that

Israelite prophecy came to an end after Malachi is now considered an anachronistic

88
Cook, L. Stephen. On the Question of the "Cessation of Prophecy in Ancient Judaism. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck,
2011 (1)
89
When I say “prophecy” I mean any revelatory experience that grants an individual special insight for
understanding or knowing something that others are not capable of without inspiration.
 Razzaq 55

oversimplification as scholars have realized the diversity of Second Temple Jewish sources

which seem to indicate a continuation of prophecy well into the first millennium (though not all

are in complete agreement on the matter). The pesharim, a collection of seventeen previously

unknown commentaries on scriptural prophetic books found amongst the Qumran scrolls, are

especially intriguing as a case study of mantic prophetic inspiration and exegesis in the latter half

of the Second Temple period.

There has been much scholarly discussion regarding the presence of prophecy in the

Pseudepigrapha, Apocryphal texts, the writings of Josephus and Philo, rabbinic texts, early

Christian sources and the Dead Sea Scrolls.90 I am particularly interested in how the Dead Sea

Scrolls community understood “prophecy” and how this understanding may have been connected

to theological developments and literary trends within the broader Second Temple and Ancient

Near Eastern milieu.

The argument of this essay is twofold. I will argue first that a new perception of

prophecy involving the interpretation of scripture emerged in the Second Temple period as can

be evidenced most explicitly in the pesher writings from the Qumran sect. By comparing and

contrasting the elements of pesher literature from Qumran with other Second Temple writings,

including some pseudepigraphal texts, later rabbinic Midrash, Near Eastern dream and omen

literature, and even various sections of the Gospels, it will become clear that pesher

interpretation shares many aspects with its neighboring literary trends yet simultaneously

maintains a uniquely Qumran eschatology and inspired mantic exegesis.

Before delving into a discussion of pesher literature and its particular characteristics, it

may be useful to briefly highlight some of the caveats regarding the genres of various writings

from Second Temple Literature that rely heavily on texts and themes related to the “Hebrew

90
See Cook’s overview of the scholarly discussions regarding prophecy in these various sources and how the
outlook of scholars has changed over the centuries. Cook, On the Question, (11-42)
 Razzaq 56

Bible.” Though there seems to be a general understanding amongst the ancient authors of most of

these sources as to which of the Biblical texts were more or less authoritative (i.e., Pentateuch,

The Prophets), there is still much scholarly debate about which texts were considered canonical

at certain points throughout the Second Temple period and what exactly constituted the “Hebrew

Bible” at any given point. This question becomes important when trying to distinguish the

“authoritative texts” from those compositions that interpret them. It is also important in

understanding how scholars have studied certain texts that fall into this category and how their

readings have shaped the texts themselves. Yet the distinctions between genres and writings from

the Second Temple period are far less precise than some scholars have purported.

Recalling Jacque Derrida’s Law of Genre, “every text participates in one or several

genres, there is no genreless text; there is always a genre and genres, yet such participation never

amounts to belonging.”91 No single text can define a genre and no one genre can completely

satisfy all the elements of a given text. With this in mind, the genres of texts in the Second

Temple period, especially the rather vague category of “Rewritten Bible” become much more

problematic and less concrete. The “Rewritten Bible” genre, a coin termed by Geza Vermes, was

used in its early years to describe the vast majority of pseudepigraphal works, but the limits of

this title soon became clear. While texts including The Book of Jubilees and Genesis Apocryphon

have been (and continue to be) understood as belonging to the Rewritten Bible genre, there are

many other writings from the Second Temple whose genres are much less definitive.

Whether or not the pesharim should be understood as Rewritten Bible or whether they

constitute genre on their own has been widely debated.. Though it is beyond the scope of this

essay to attempt to concretely classify the pesharim into any one-genre category, discussing

some possibilities may shed light on how the pesharim relate to other works in the Second

91
Derrida, Jacques and Avital Ronell, “The Law of Genre” Critical Inquiry, Vol. 7, No. 1, Autumn 1980 (65)
 Razzaq 57

Temple period. It should be remembered that the genre of a text should not overshadow the

contents of the text itself.

For George Brooke (and others), the pesharim do not necessarily follow the pattern of the

Rewritten Bible genre because the purpose of the pesharim is to uncover the mysteries of the

future as predicted by the earlier Prophets while the Rewritten Bible texts often focused on “how

authoritative texts that spoke to the past could be brought into the present,”92 with special

attention paid to projecting contemporary laws and practices onto the earliest patriarchs. The

Book of Jubilees, for example, inserts its own calendar system of 49 years and even presents

Adam and Eve observing the ritual purity rites in the Garden of Eden. These additions and

insertions are undoubtedly mechanisms through which to assert legitimacy and primacy of later

laws and to advocate a certain type of Jewish identity as pure and original. This approach to

understanding, reading and re-reading the Biblical authoritative text meshes the original words

and the contemporary additions so well that the distinction between the original and the

contemporary are hardly discernible.

The pesharim, on the other hand, explicitly differentiate the contemporary commentary

and interpretation from the original prophetic text. The foundational basis of the pesharim lies in

the belief that the ancient prophets and their words do not refer to the specific time in which they

were spoken, rather, “the words of the prophets are hidden ciphers that allude to the historical

circumstances,”93 and eschatological anticipations of the community of the Dead Sea Scrolls. The

true meaning of the ancient prophecies can only be known and explicated by the contemporary

inspired exegete who possesses the tools to decipher God’s message.

92
Brooke, George. “Genre Theory, Rewritten Bible and Pesher” Dead Sea Discoveries 17, 2010 (379)
93
Jassen, Alex P. “The Pesharim and the Rise of Commentary in Early Jewish Scriptural Interpretation” Dead Sea
Discoveries 19:3, January 2012 (364)
 Razzaq 58

One of the most telling statements from the pesharim comes from Pesher Habbukuk,

“And God told Habakkuk to write down that which would happen to the final generation, but He

did not make known to him when time would come to an end. And as for that which He said,

that he who reads may read it speedily: interpreted this concerns the Teacher of Righteousness,

to whom God made known all the mysteries of the words of His servants the Prophets.”94 This

significant passage not only highlights the Qumran and specifically pesher understanding that the

message of the prophets was one for the future, but it also inaugurates the Teacher of

Righteousness as the one who is the inspired contemporary of the prophets.

A variety of exegetical techniques are applied to the scriptural text and the prophetic

words are “re-contextualized” to apply to the new historical reality of the Qumran community

through the inspired interpreter (i.e., fulfillment prophecy). The Teacher of Righteousness is the

one whose divine revelation allows him to communicate God’s indented message as uttered by

the earlier prophets.

The pesher on Psalms also reiterates the important prophetic role of the Teacher of

Righteousness as interpreter; the second verse of Psalm 45, “and my tongue is the pen of a ready

scribe” is interpreted in the following manner, “[its interpretation] concerns the Teacher of

Righteousness who…before God with purposeful speech…”95 The scribal role is here reassigned

to the Teacher of Righteousness as he inherits the special ability to properly interpret the divine

message encoded in the prophetic words of scripture. Thus the Teacher of Righteousness

becomes a new sort of “prophet” guiding his community with his divine insight.

The pesharim also follow a strict formula of citation of the lemma from the prophetic text

followed by its pesher (interpretation), which often begins with “this is an interpretation…” or

94
Vermes, Geza. The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English. New York, NY, USA: Allen Lane/Penguin, 1997 (481)
95
Ibid., 491
 Razzaq 59

“interpreted...” as can be seen in the excerpts noted above.96 This explicit distinction between the

prophetic words and the interpretation stands in stark contrast to the Rewritten Bible

interpretations that drastically rework the scriptural text altogether. Rather than the prose style of

the Rewritten Bible genre in which the reworked parts become part of the narrative, the pesharim

consciously separate the scripture and prophetic words from their interpretation. For most

scholars the various pesharim represent Qumran exegesis as a whole and have clearly been

extremely important for the development of interpretive practices within Judaism and even for

later Christianity.

The pesharim are also amongst the oldest explicit biblical commentaries. As Markus Bockmeuhl

writes, “seemingly without precedent, the world’s oldest biblical commentaries emerge among

the Dead Sea Scrolls fully formed around the end of the second century BCE.”97 While it is true

that the formulaic and structured interpretive method of the pesharim does not appear earlier in

the biblical tradition, it should be noted that “inner-Biblical exegesis,” a concept first elaborated

by Michael Fishbane, was very much a part of the compilation of the Torah and Tanakh itself.98

That being said, the question still arises as to why this apparently new method of interpretation,

which separates the lemma from the commentary, appears in the Qumran corpus.

Is the interpretation style found in pesher uniquely sui generis or does it share and inherit

elements from other forms of Jewish scriptural commentary? Most scholars agree that the

process of canonization of the Tanakh influenced the shift from an open approach to scripture in

96
Jassen, Alex P. “The Pesharim and the Rise of Commentary in Early Jewish Scriptural Interpretation” Dead Sea
Discoveries 19:3, January 2012 (366).
97
Bockmuehl, Markus “The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Origins of Biblical Commentary,” in Text, Thought and
Practice in Qumran and Early Christianity. Ed. R.A. Clements and D.R. Shwartz, Leiden: Bril, 2009 (3)

98
See Fishbane, Michael A. ""Inner Biblical Exegesis"" The Garments of Torah: Essays in Biblical Hermeneutics.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana UP, 1989. Also see Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1985 or the chapter “Inner-Biblical Exegesis,” in Hebrew Bible/Old Testament: The History of Its
Interpretation, Volume I 1996, pg 33–48.
 Razzaq 60

which words, events and ideas can be reworked, to a more conservative approach in which the

original scripture maintains its integrity and separation from the commentary; yet canonization

does not seem to be the only or even the primary influence for the pesharim, especially since the

process of canonization was probably still taking place in the first century BCE.

In the next section of the paper, I will discuss the similarities and differences between

Qumran pesher exegesis and other interpretive models and literature in the Ancient Near East

and Second Temple Judaism along with later rabbinic and Gospel writings to try and uncover

any lost parallels or lines of convergence that may indicate a shared heritage. I am aware of the

dangers of falling prey to an exaggerated ‘parallelomania’ in which scholars have been known to

overdo and exaggerate the supposed similarities of various passages of biblical texts taken out of

context, yet it is nevertheless necessary and important to discuss any significant points of

intersection.99 By discussing various significant parallels between the pesharim and surrounding

literature, we may better understand the genealogy of a certain interpretive method rather than

simply explaining away the pesharim as completely sui generis.

Many scholars have noted the similarities between the exegetical techniques from

Qumran writings including some pesharim and later rabbinic Midrash. Paul Mandel has

suggested studying the similarities between the exegetical techniques of literature from the Dead

Sea Scrolls and rabbinic midrash by exploring three questions: How is the biblical material

presented in each corpus, what type of content does the text containing the biblical interpretation

exhibit, and what exegetical stance does the text take to Scripture?100 While there are several

different styles of presenting the Biblical text in the writings of the Qumran library, the pesharim

directly cite the scriptural text with the interpretation following. For Mandel, “the modes of

99
See: Sandmel, Samuel, “Parallelomania” Journal of Biblical Literature, March 1962
100
Mandel, Paul. “Midrashic Exegesis and its precedents in the Dead Sea Scrolls” Dead Sea Discoveries 8:2, June
2001 (150-1)
 Razzaq 61

commentary accompanying citations of verses”101 in the Qumran corpus, including the pesharim,

would be very familiar to the later rabbinic scholar as a parallel to his Midrash. Most Midrashic

literature does not completely rework the scripture as the Rewritten Bible commentators did;

rather rabbinic scholars explicitly made clear which Biblical verse was being interpreted. As with

the different forms of interpretation found at Qumran, there are several different hermeneutic

stances to the biblical text within the rabbinic Midrashic literature-namely the Tannaitic and

Amoraic.

The Tannaitic Midrash, mainly associated with Rabbi Ishmael, in which the later books

(often wisdom literature) are interpreted as referring to earlier Biblial events, most notably the

Exodus, may have some parallels to the pesher technique of interpretation.

In fact, George Brooke asserts that the pesharim should be called “Qumran

midrashim.”102 It is highly unlikely that such a bold claim can hold true but it is worthwhile

nonetheless to discuss any parallels. The passages in this particular type of Midrash are marked

by a specific formula (“[It is] to him that the verse refers…), which introduces the citation of the

verse. This is similar to the lemma separation from the interpretation in the pesharim. Rather

than the usual Midrashic derivations of meaning, these Tannaitic Midrashim from Rabbi

Ishmael’s collection declare the real meaning and significance of the cited verses, comparable to

the declarations of the Teacher of Righteousness in the pesharim.

There are also major differences, however, between the Midrashic literature of the rabbis

and the Qumran pesher exegesis. The greatest difference is perhaps the lack of an explicitly

prophetic or inspired exegete in the Midrashim. The difference in purpose and intention of the

two interpretative methods also account for their distinctness. While the purpose of the pesharim

is to unravel the true meaning of the divine eschatological words of the Prophets as they apply to

101
Ibid., 155
102
Brooke, “Pehser” (503)
 Razzaq 62

the contemporary times of the Qumran community103, the purpose of the Tannaitic Midrashim is

the opposite. In other words, the midhrashim are written to portray all biblical texts as “adjuncts

to the earlier pentateuchal” narrative.104

It is therefore not accurate to draw any direct connection between the pesharim and the

Tannaitic midrashic sources and it is almost impossible to prove the direction of any stated

parallel between the Midrash and the pesharim. As Azzan Yadin argues, there are undoubtedly

“legal hermeneutics"105 from Rabbi Ishmael’s Tannaitic Midrashim that find some parallels in the

techniques of Qumran exegesis including the pesharim, but the parallels go no deeper than the

technical formulae employed. It is clear then that the rabbinic Midrashim do not inherit the

interpretive perspective of the Qumran community, nor are the rabbinic scholars comparable to

the prophetic figure of the Teacher of Righteousness. Parallels between the Midrashim and the

pesharim are to be expected since the various Jewish movements in the Second Temple and later

periods existed simultaneously in the same context and milieu and reflected broad overlapping

ideas that could be found to be parallel or similar among many or most of the texts.

Other scholars have suggested, more convincingly perhaps, the connections between the

form and content of the pesher approach to the scriptural Prophets, namely the belief in

fulfillment prophecy, and an apparently parallel approach to the scripture found specifically in

the Fourth Gospel. In fact, scholars like Richard Longenecker have argued that the Fourth

Gospel uses “a pesher type”106 of interpretation. The pesharim employ a lemmatic structure of

interpretation to the scripture described above in which specific verses from scripture are cited

and interpreted using a unique linguistic formula and then identified with a contemporary figure

103
i.e., Fulfillment prophecy
104
Ibid., 163. Also see Kugel, James L. In Potiphar’s House: The Interpretive Life of Biblical Texts Cambridge, MA
and London: Harvard University Press, 1990 (262)
105
Yadin, Azzan. “4QMMT, Rabbi Ishmael and the Origins of Legal Midrash” Dead Sea Discoveries 10:1 2003
(149)
106
Witmer, Stephen E. “Approaches to Scripture in the Fourth Gospel and the Qumran Pesharim” Novum
Testamentum, 48:4, 2006 (314)
 Razzaq 63

or situation. The Pesher Habakkuk provides a clear example of this structure: “For behold, I

rouse the Chaldeans, that [bitter and hasty] nation…Interpreted, this concerns the Kittim [who

are] quick and valiant in war…all the world shall fall under the domination of Kittim…they shall

not believe in the laws of [God].”107

As described earlier, this lemmatic structure is necessary in a text to be considered

pesher, but does not define it completely on its own. In terms of content, the pesharim primarily

focus on contemporizing the texts from the Tanakh through a divine exegete. Saeed Hamid-

Khani notes that the there are obvious similarities between the pesharim and the Fourth Gospel

yet concludes, “The similarities are more of an appearance than reality.”108 Hamid-Khani’s main

contention is that the Gospel of John does not necessarily purport to be a divinely inspired

exegete.

Stephen Witmer suggests, howeber, that John 6:45 can actually be read as an inspired

meaning of the Biblical scripture as Jesus, the inspired exegete, explicates the meaning of a

citation from the Tanakh about bread and manna during the wilderness years. The evangelists

seem to have more in common with the pesharim as they depict Jesus as being the only one with

the divine instruction to fully understand and contextualize the “Old Testament.”

Specific references and citations from the Tanakh are also included in John’s Gospel,109

similar to the strict citation of Scripture in the pesharim. In fact there are even seven explicit

Scriptural citations, which are introduced with a ‘fulfillment formula’ further highlighting the

eschatological contemporizing present in the Gospel.

The second key feature of the pesharim is the eschatological or ex-eventu reading of the

prophetic books of the Tanakh. Witmer seems to be convinced that there is an analogous

107
Vermes, Complete Dead Sea Scrolls (479)
108
As cited in Witmer, “Approaches to scripture” (319)
109
A list of all the explicit Scriptural statements found in the Fourth Gospel are provided by Witmer: 1:23, 2:17,
6:31, 45, 7:37, 42, 8:17, 10:34, 12:13-15, 34, 38, 40, 13:18, 15:25, etc. (Witmer 321)
 Razzaq 64

approach in the evangelist understanding of the meaning of the Tanakh in terms of Jesus’ life.

Psalm 69:9-10, for example, has been interpreted as refering to (and fulfilled through) Jesus’

cleansing of the Temple after he finds it turned into a place of commerce in John 2:17.110 There

are also references to the Tanakh and the theme of the “suffering servant” mentioned in Isaiah

53:10-12, Hosea 6:2 and Psalms 16:10 at the end of the passion narrative in John’s Gospel. For

instance, John 20:9 implies that the aforementioned verses referring to the revival of the

‘suffering servant’ are correctly understood as references to Jesus’s’ resurrection from the dead:

“for as yet they did not understand the Scripture, that he must rise from the dead.” In other

words, the belief that Moses and the prophets wrote of Jesus, and that the scriptures bear witness

to and predictions of Jesus can be compared to the eschatological understanding of the prophets

depicted in the pesharim quoted above. The same authoritative stance is adopted to assert the

correctness of the Teacher of Righteousness, in the case of the pesharim, or Jesus, in the case of

the Fourth Gospel of John. For the author of John, the full meaning of the Scripture is revealed

only when its reference to Jesus is uncovered.

The structure of the pesher exegesis has also been compared with the structure of

exegesis in the Fourth Gospel, and in particular 6:31-58. As noted by Peder Borgen, these verses

from chapter 6 of John paraphrase words and citations from the Tanakh and combine them with

haggadic traditions and sequential explanations of the cited verses.111 For example, the heavenly

manna from Psalm 78:24 is cited in John 6:31 “He gave them bread from Heaven to eat.” Verses

32-48 discuss and paraphrase the first part of the citation and verses 49-58 discuss and explain

the last verb of the citation and what it means “to eat the bread.” Jesus then explains that he is the

‘bread of life’ and even while explaining to the people what he means by claiming to be the

110
See Beale G. K. and D. A. Carson. “John” Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (431-
434)
111
As cited in Witmer, “Approaches to Scripture” (322)
 Razzaq 65

bread of life, Jesus cites from the Tanakh again to enhance his discussion. These verses of

Tanakh citations followed by explanations of the new interpretation resemble the lemmatic

structure of the Qumran pesharim.

Witmer argues that there are even deeper parallels between the two forms of exegesis.

The terminology in John verses 6:32-58 is used to identify and explain various parts of the

scriptural citation. Specifically, the formulae “I am/this is…” and “this [the citation] is…” are

used either by Jesus himself or in the explication. The first formula, “I am/this is” associates a

contemporary figure back to Scripture. In John 6:35, 41, 48, and 51, Jesus claims to “be the

bread” from Heaven. The second formula associates the Scripture to a contemporary figure or

event. Both formulae are employed to declare and depict the eschatological fulfillment of the

Scripture cited in the figure of Jesus.

Similar formulae are used in the pesharim to reveal the eschatological interpretation of

Scripture. 9:3-4 of Pesher Habukkuk directly cites Habakkuk 2:8, “Because you have plundered

many nations, all the remnant of the people shall plunder you.”112 This citation is contemporized

and the pesher interpretation associates the verse to the last priests of Jerusalem: “interpreted this

concerns the last Priests of Jerusalem, who shall amass money and wealth by plundering the

peoples…booty shall be delivered into the hands of the army of the Kittim, for it is they who

shall be the remnant of the peoples.”113 The cited verse from Habukkuk is broken down and the

first part is explained first and then the last part is explained to be a reference to the Kittim114. It is

112
Vermes, Complete Dead Sea Scrolls (483)
113
Ibid., (483)
114
“Kittim” was commonly used to designate the specific enemy at the time; at times it has been a reference to the
Greeks or the Romans, though it is unclear what exactly the pesher is referring to. Kittim has also just meant any
foreign nation that will bring destruction to Israel.. There is also debate amongst scholars as to whether the reference
to Kittim is speaking of something which will happen since the verb proceeding it in the Hebrew is in the imperfect
tense or whether the passage should be understood as speaking of the present time of the interpreters. See Neujahr,
Matthew, "Ex-Eventu Prediction in the Dead Sea Scrolls." Predicting the past in the Ancient Near East Mantic
Historiography in Ancient Mesopotamia, Judah, and the Mediterranean World. Providence, RI: Brown Judaic
Studies, 2012. 182-91 for a concise discussion of the scholarly debates particularly about the “Kittim” as referred to
in the Habakkuk Pesher.
 Razzaq 66

interesting to uncover the similarities between the pesharim and the Gospel of John in particular.

Not only do the two exegetical methods employ the same lemmatic structure, they also share

similar identification and interpretive formulae to explicate the eschatological significance of

given verses from the Tanakh.

Despite the apparent and significant similarities between the pesharim and the Gospel of

John as have been discussed by Witmer and others above, there are also important differences to

keep in mind. Some scholars have daringly ventured to claim a direct link between the pesharim

(and therefore the Qumran community itself) and the Christian movement. This hasty conclusion

does not appear to acknowledge the significant divergences between the two sources. The Gospel

of John does not sustain any continuous commentary of an extended section from the Tanakh;

rather specific verses and words are selected often out of context to best illuminate and reveal

their fulfillment in the words or flesh of Christ. Another obvious difference is the lack of the

word “pesher” or “interpretation” in the Gospel while the repetition of the word “pesher” is

undoubtedly one of the important criteria for the pesher genre as discussed above. The Fourth

Gospel does not present itself as an “interpretation,” rather it claims to be revealing the ultimate

truth of the Scripture as fulfilled in and by Jesus.

The verses from John discussed above are not representative of the entire Gospel. Though

both the pesharim and the Gospel partake in fulfillment prophecy, the Gospel connects all the

citations from the Tanakh to the figure of Jesus himself while the Teacher of Righteousness is

not usually the main subject of his interpretation, simply the divine transmitter. Jesus proclaims

to be the bearer of a new revelation that overrides the previous Scripture while the pesharim do

not claim to replace the Scripture, only to uncover the mysteries of the prophetic revelation. The

differences between the pesharim and Gospel are enough to discourage referring to John as

“pesher exegesis” as some may have hastily assumed. That the Gospel of John shares some
 Razzaq 67

commonalities with the pesharim and employs a form of “charismatic exegesis”115 may be more

accurately concluded.

It is clear that pesher exegesis shares some basic elements with later rabbinic Midrash as

well as parts of the Johannine Gospel yet there is not enough to prove any solid “influence” of

any one over the other. In fact, it is still not clear whether the lemmatization structure found in

the pesharim is to be attributed to an independent factor within the sect (beyond the canonization

or assumed authority of the Scripture) or whether there were prior interpretation techniques in

the Ancient Near Eastern and Greco-Roman milieus which may have influenced the form and

method of the pesharim.

Already in the 1950’s, scholars studying the pesharim began suggesting various texts that

shared the exegetical techniques of the pesharim. These theories and ideas remained relatively

cursory until recently when scholars have again begun to realize the parallels between the

pesharim and various Near Eastern and ancient Greco-Roman sources, particularly dream and

omen interpretations and poetic commentaries. In the following section of the essay I will briefly

outline some noted parallels between the methods and techniques of the pesharim and a series of

non-Jewish and Jewish works written before or contemporaneous with the pesharim that may at

least provide important background in the genealogy of the pesharim (if not unveil pathways of

influence).

I will begin by discussing some Ancient Near Eastern texts that seem to share many

interpretive characteristics with the pesharim. Michael Fishbane, Markus Bockmuehl, Daneil

Machiela, and Alex Jassen, among others, have searched for similarities between pesher and

other Ancient Near Eastern interpretations. Fishbane searches for isolated exegetical techniques

115
Witmer, “Approaches to Scripture” (328)
 Razzaq 68

used in the pesharim (some of which I discussed earlier while defining the “genre”) that may

have been anticipated in earlier ancient Near Eastern literatures.116

Dream manuals from Mesopotamia and Egypt contain rigidly arranged lists of individual

items and various schemes that usually have an introductory protasis followed by an apodosis.

On one side of the page a particular item is listed, for example, “if he eats earth,” followed by the

interpretation and meaning of that particular item in a dream, for example, “confusion, he will

become decrepit.”117 This, for Fishbane resembles the lemma structure of citation from the

Tanakh followed by commentary seen in the pesharim. The Mesopotamian and Egyptian texts

appear to be technical guidebooks for professional dream interpreters.118 One of the main

divergences from the pesharim in these texts would be the fact that the lemma or the initial

protasis is not a fixed revelatory statement by a prophet or an oracle already in existence.

There are ancient texts, however, that do interpret previously existing dreams and oracles.

Commentaries on an “Address of Marduk to the Demons,” a work composed centuries before the

pesharim recounting Marduk’s119 apocalyptic speech, employ interpretive methods very similar

to those contained in the pesharim. In fact, in one commentary, each line of the original text is

followed by an interpretation introduced by various introductory terms like “he meant.” For

example, the lemma cites a verse from the original text: “The same one who is clothed with

dreadful fearfulness,” is followed by the commentary, “he meant the lord, who from the month

of Shebat to the month of Adar…”120 This resembles very closely the form and structure found in

the pesharim.

116
Fishbane as quoted in Machiela, Daniel, “Qumran Pesharim as Biblical Commentary” Dead Sea Discoveries 19:3,
2012 (328)
117
Ibid., 329
118
Ibid., 328-9
119
Marduk is the patron deity of Babylon and an important storm god.
120
Ibid, 330
 Razzaq 69

Another example can be found in the Sumerian dream report of the shepherd king-deity

Dumuzi. Dumuzi recounts his dream to his sister Geshtinanna and she interprets the dream. As

Geshtinanna interprets her brother’s dream, she breaks down each sentence and interprets the

dream line by line. The dream line: “The rushes rising up for you, which kept growing for you”

is then interpreted, “[the rushes] are bandits rising against you from their ambush."121 The lemma-

structure is visible in this interpretation as well. It is important to keep in mind, though, that the

report of Dimuzi’s dream is an oral, not a written text, and therefore does not contain specific

formulae to introduce the dream elements or its interpretation.

A more precise comparison may be made with Akkadian omen and dream interpretations that

specifically use the verb “to interpret” (i.e., pašā ru

ru- ‫ )ורשפ‬to introduce explanations for omens.

Take an astrological omen about Scorpius. It begins: ”In the night of the 10th of Tammuz, the

constellation Scorpius approached the moon.” This line is immediately followed by “Its

interpretation is as follows: if the appearance of the moon….”122 In this case, the introduction of

the interpretation is identical to the introduction of the interpretation found in the pesharim

discussed above, both etymologically and functionally.

Another example of successive commentaries on a written oracle is the Egyptian Demotic

Chronicle that was composed around the second century BCE, almost contemporaneous with the

composition of the pesharim. The exegetical formula for introducing the interpretation in the

case of the Demotic Chronicle can roughly be translated to “that is to say.” The lemma, or the

original quotation from the omen: “Yesterday-that which has passed by” is followed by the

exegetical interpretation “that is to say the first ruler, who came after the foreigners, which are

121
As cited in Jassen, Alex P. “The Pesharim and the Rise of Commentary in Early Jewish Scriptural Interpretation”
Dead Sea Discoveries 19:3, January 2012 (390).
122
Machiela, Daniel, “Qumran Pesharim…” (332)
 Razzaq 70

the Medes…”123 As the interpretation of successive verses of the omen continues, it becomes

apparent that the commentary is contemporizing the oracle to be identified with characters,

events and kings in the time of the interpreter. This feature adds another line of convergence

between the pesharim and certain forms of ancient Egyptian oracle interpretation.

These ancient Near Eastern texts reveal that forms of interpretation very similar

structurally and methodologically to the pesharim were already in existence well before the

Qumran community composed their pesharim. Though not every feature of the two matches up

completely in the several examples discussed above124, the overall structures undoubtedly align.

In the last Demotic example the interpretive method was more developed and even incorporated

its own variation of fulfillment prophecy by contemporizing the lines of the successive omens to

signify events in the present time of the interpreter, as a form of ex eventu prophecy. These Near

Eastern texts certainly served as an important background for the interpretive methods and

developments within the Israelite and later Qumran contexts.

The impacts of the ancient Near Eastern sources may also be seen in the “inner-biblical

exegesis” within the Tanakh itself. There are several variations of this inner-biblical exegesis

which may be as simple as clarifying simple geography or names as in Genesis 36:1, for

example, “These are the descendants of Esau; that is, Edom” or more complex as in the dream

interpretations within the Tanakh. Joseph’s dream interpretations in Genesis follow very similar

patterns as the ancient Near Eastern dream and omen literature. The Pharaoh recounts his dream

to Joseph beginning in Genesis 41:15. Joseph follows with an interpretation, “The (double)

dream of Pharaoh concerns one thing: God has told Pharaoh what he is…” Each element of

123
Ibid., 333
124
There are many more examples of Ancient Near Eastern dream and omen interpretive texts that share structural
and functional elements with Qumran pesharim that I have not discussed here.
 Razzaq 71

Pharaoh’s dream, “The seven good cows,” for example, are interpreted separately, “The seven

good cows; they are seven years…”125

There are several factors which make identifying the lemma plus structure within the

Biblical narrative more difficult. There have been multiple translations of the Biblical texts that

have eroded the lemma structure for smoothness of reading. Still, the original Hebrew and

Aramaic text illustrates an acute awareness of Ancient Near Eastern dream and omen

interpretation as can be evidenced in the cited verses above. Without necessarily arguing for a

direct line of influence, it is essential not to forget that the pesharim did emerge from the Ancient

Near Eastern milieu that produced both the dream and omen literature previously discussed as

well as the Tanakh and extra-biblical writings as well.

The dream interpretation structure in the book of Daniel may in fact be the closest in

structure and content to the pesharim, as parts of the Aramaic text linguistically resemble the

pesher language, including the use of the word “pesher” (‫ )ורשפ‬itself. Daniel recounts the dream

of Nebuchadnezzar in chapter 2 along with an interpretation. Daniel retells an element of the

dream, “You saw the feet and the toes, part potter’s clay and part iron,” and immediately

interprets, “it shall be a divided kingdom; it will have only some of the stability of iron…”126

Several chapters later in Daniel 4, Nebuchadnezzar recounts another dream to Daniel which he

then interprets element by element. In these particular dream interpretations early in the book of

Daniel there is no specific introductory phrase before the interpretation is presented. In the

second half of Daniel, the more eschatological half clearly containing ex-eventu prophecy,

specific introductory phrases and words are used before the interpretation of dream or vision.

Also in the latter half of Daniel, Daniel’s dreams and visions are interpreted in an eschatological

125
Genesis 41:25-27
126
I’m using the text of Daniel as it is cited in Jassen, “The Pesharim and the Rise of Commentary in Early Jewish
Scriptural Interpretation” (391). The translations may diverge but the overall structure remains the same.
 Razzaq 72

manner as has been agreed upon by most scholars. The author(s) of the book of Daniel, or at

least the author of the second half of Daniel, employs ex-eventu prophecy by contemporizing the

supposedly earlier visions of the prophetic Daniel to signify events that are occurring in the

authors’ own time, namely the Macabbean Revolt127. The writing on the wall omen in chapter 5

has also been analyzed and placed in the lemma plus interpretation genre.

The Book of Giants from the Qumran scrolls may provide an additional example of the

type of dream interpretation found in Daniel. The two giants Hahyah and Ohyah have troubling

dreams. Hahyah’s dream involves the destruction of a garden and Ohyah’s dream regarding the

“ruler of heaven descending to earth”128 and the divine judgement. None of the giants are able to

interpret the dream but the giant Mahawai succeeds in enlisting Enoch’s help in interpreting the

dream. Though Enoch’s actual interpretation of the dreams is not fully preserved, the narrative

itself may provide some helpful insight. Jassen notes that the verb “pesher” (‫ )רשפ‬is repeatedly

used to refer to the interpretation of the giants’ dreams. Scholars, including Jassen, have noted

the parallels between Daniel’s vision in chapter 7 and Ohyah’s divine throne dream. The main

issue in studying the Qumran fragments, especially linguistically, is that oftentimes many of the

words from the text are missing, as in The Book of Giants, which makes it difficult to draw any

firm conclusions about parallels with Daniel 7 and the pesharim, though it is not unreasonable to

imagine the connection between the apocalyptic dreams of the giants and Daniel’s apocalyptic

vision. The presence of the same structure of dream interpretation in Daniel and The Book of

Giants indicates that the Qumran community would have been very familiar with the particular

lemma plus exegetical structure that also appears in the pesharim.

127
For more about the ex-eventu prophecy of Daniel in terms of the Maccabean Revolt, see: Neujahr, Matthew,
Predicting the past in the Ancient Near East Mantic Historiography in Ancient Mesopotamia, Judah, and the
Mediterranean World. Providence, RI: Brown Judaic Studies, 2012, or Collins, J.J A Commentary on the Book of
Daniel 1997. There are many other works on Daniel, these are just two that have helpful bibliographies.
128
Vermes, Complete Dead Sea Scrolls (516)
 Razzaq 73

Other ancient commentaries including Greco-Roman commentary traditions and the

allegorical works of Philo have also been suggested for comparison, particularly by Markus

Bockmuehl and Reinhard Kratz.129 The earliest surviving verse-by-verse Greek commentary is

that of a poem attributed to Orpheus from the Derveni papyri dated to the late fourth century

BCE. There is a clear lemma plus outline in the poem’s interpretation. The lemma of “Zeus then,

when from his father the prophesized rule and power in his hands had taken, and the glorious

daimon”130 is followed by an interpretation which reworks the original sentence to iron out any

confusing references. It is also clear that the interpreter believed the original poem to be an

authoritative text and approaches the text much like the pesharim approach the prophetic

Scripture. Though Lange and Plese have recently published a study comparing this particular

poetic commentary to the pesharim and have found many parallels in the exegetical method and

what they deem, “transpositional hermeneutics,” there is no real evidence of any correlation

between the Orphic interpreters and the Qumran exegete. Returning to Sandmel’s precautionary

note on parallelomania discussed at the beginning of the paper, and taking into consideration

Michael Satlow’s argument for a more organic understanding of Ancient Near Eastern and

Israelite culture, it is really very difficult to prove any direct line of “influence” and it may not be

the most fruitful approach. Still, it is important to become aware of the cultural and literary

background in which the pesharim emerged and this necessarily involves discussing the

significant parallels between certain Biblical and non (or extra)-Biblical texts.

Various Greek commentaries on Homer and other canonical Greek poets composed by

the scholars and librarians of Alexandria have been studied in comparison to the pesharim as

well, and there are several sources found amongst the Oxyrhynchus and Derveni papyri that

129
Bockmuehl, Markus “The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Origins of Biblical Commentary,” in Text, Thought and
Practice in Qumran and Early Christianity. Ed. R.A. Clements and D.R. Shwartz, Leiden: Bril, 2009 (3-29), Kratz
in German.
130
Machiela, 345
 Razzaq 74

resemble certain aspects of the pesher commentaries. I will briefly discuss one such example. A

commentary on Aristophanes’ play Anagyros appears to follow a lemma plus pattern. The

introductory interpretive phrase for this particular commentary is “this means to say.” Each line

or verse from the play is followed by an explanation. The Lemma: “As it is right to throw down

these young [comedy] directors immediately” is followed by the interpretation: “this means to

say that the young…”131

There are multiple other ancient Greco-Roman texts including Philo’s commentaries on

the Torah, Greek Homeric commentaries and many other dream manuals that share

characteristics with the structure, form and techniques of pesher exegesis that have not been

discussed here due to space limitations.

The most realistic genealogical source for the method and content of the pesharim lies in

ancient Near Eastern dream and omen interpretations since dreams and omens, especially ones

that were pre-existent were contemporized, re-contextuaized, and interpreted by specially gifted

individuals using very specific linguistic formulae to apply to the historical moment of the

interpreter. This formulaic structure seems to have influenced the dream interpretations within

the Tanakh, most evidently in the stories of each Joseph and Daniel. The characters embodied

prophetic access to interpretive knowledge from the divine that they in turn used to interpret the

dreams of various rulers piece by piece using very careful linguistic formulae. Finally from the

dream traditions in the Tanakh, the interpretive techniques are found in various Qumran scrolls

including most notably the pesharim. The divinely inspired Teacher of Righteousness possesses

the exclusive insight to interpret the words of the earlier prophets as they apply to the

eschatological end of days in which the Qumran community believes itself to be.

131
Ibid., 348
 Razzaq 75

The meticulous and exclusive eschatology, interpretive techniques, and ex-eventu

prophecy in the pesharim do not only embody a re-interpretation of prophetic Scripture, but also

a re-interpretation of prophecy itself as the Teacher of Righteousness inherits the prophetic gift,

carrying vibrant prophecy well into the first century BCE. The belief that prophecy somehow

ceased to exist after Malachi is inaccurate. Prophecy simply refashioned itself in the Second

Temple period to be identified with inspired interpretation, a prophetic task with a profound

genealogy in ancient Near Eastern dream and omen interpretations.

Due to space restrictions I have only briefly outlined some of the Ancient Near Eastern

texts that served as the essential context for the Qumran pesharim. There are many elements of

Ancient Near Eastern dream and omen interpretations as they relate to or differ from the

pesharim that I have left out of this study. An intriguing question remains regarding the orality of

some of the Mesopotamian and Assyrian dream and omen interpretations and what impact this

orality has on its interpretation. How well did the written remnants retain the oral message being

interpreted and what can the orality of various prophecies and oracles tell us about the

understanding and perception of prophecy as a phenomenon of divine communication? While the

oral versus written aspect of prophecies, dreams and oracles may seem insignificant,

understanding the modes of transmission and translation from the original to the final written

piece are essential in understanding divination in the Ancient Near East.132 A more detailed close

reading of several Ancient Near Eastern divinatory texts side by side with an analysis of a pesher

may be a worthwhile exercise to be explored in the next installment.

To conclude, in this paper I have argued first that the seemingly sui generis appearance of

pesher exegetical techniques and linguistic structures in fact belong to a long history of similarly

132
For a more detailed discussion on the transmission process from the oral to the written in Mesopotamian
divination and prophecy, see: Van Der Toorn, Karel. "From the Oral to the Written: The Case of Old Babylonian
Prophecy." Writings and Speech in Israelite and Ancient Near Eastern Prophecy. Ed. Ehud Ben Zvi and Michael H.
Floyd. N.p.: Society of Biblical Literature, 2000. 219-34.
 Razzaq 76

meticulous commentaries on various “authoritative” texts throughout the ancient Near Eastern

and, to a lesser extent, Greco-Roman worlds. I have also argued that prophecy sustained itself

after Malachi in the form of a divine interpreter, possessing powers reminiscent of Daniel’s role

in Nebuchadnezzar’s court. The new manifestation of prophesy as divine interpretation in an

eschatological (and ex-eventu) scheme illustrated through the explanations and interpretations of

the pesharim continued to influence later Jewish and even Christian exegetical methods and

techniques well into the Common Era.

CHAPTER 6: INSPIRED INTERPRETATION-DYNAMICS OF LITERARY

PROPHECY IN ANCIENT NEAR EAST AND DEAD SEA SCROLLS

 Razzaq 77

In the previous section133, I analyzed various aspects of the Qumran pesharim as they

related to other literary and prophetic productions in their Ancient Near Eastern milieu. I

discussed possible correlations with previous inner-biblical exegesis, later rabbinic Midrash and

New Testament interpretive techniques, and Ancient Near Eastern dream and omen

interpretations. Two issues quickly became evident. Firstly, it is almost impossible to prove any

direct line of influence between two literary or prophetic texts as there are bound to be

similarities due to a shared cultural context. The difficulty in proving any solid “influence” leads

to the second issue: constructing a genealogy of the pesharim is extremely subjective, though it

is clear that the claim of the sui generis appearance of the pesharim is not accurate. The question

of whether or not the Teacher of Righteousness embodied a new variety of prophecy was also

discussed but will be revisited in greater detail below.

In this section I will delve more deeply into the revelatory and divine nature of the

pesharim, their composition and what we can learn, if anything, from Mesopotamian

commentary sources. Can the pesharim be understood as prophetic texts, and if so, how do the

pesharim contribute to the changing face of prophecy in the Second Temple Period? If the

pesharim are prophetic, should the Teacher of Righteousness be considered a prophet? Is this

new type of “prophecy” limited to Qumran and why is this significant?

Revisiting Mesopotamian Commentaries:

First, let us return to the question of the Ancient Near Eastern literary and cultural context

of the pesharim. While the pesharim may not have exact genre parallels in the extant and

deciphered Ancient Near Eastern sources, there are certainly technical and thematic similarities

that are worth discussing.

133
See previous paper Re-Interpreting Prophecy in the Pesharim.
 Razzaq 78

While some scholars have found little to compare between Ancient Near Eastern sources

and the pesharim and have argued that there are no real correlations or similarities between the

two, the reality is that there is still very limited research on Assyrian and Mesopotamian

commentaries and their relations to various divinatory texts.134 Though tablets containing

commentaries have been known since the beginning of Assyriology as a discipline, many of

these tablets have not yet been published, due in part to the difficulties in editing and

reconstructing these texts. Most of the Mesopotamian commentaries are on omens and medical

texts, with fewer commentaries on lexical texts and literary texts.135

A process of canonization of Sumero-Akkadian texts, roughly similar to the canonization

of the Biblical corpus, also took place in the Neo-Assyrian context between the eighth and first

centuries BCE.136 After this process of canonization had been completed, there was much less

freedom to create new texts and adjust the canonized ones so the scholarly and scribal focus

shifted to the study and interpretation of the corpus. The Mesopotamian scholarly and scribal

tradition had always been closely intertwined with politics and the period of canonization was no

exception. In fact, scholars were very much dependent on political powers and politics would

often dictate what was being studied. Letters from scholars to kings were ubiquitous and there is

much textual and material evidence for this.137

Commentaries on this Sumero-Akkadian corpus continued after the fall of Babylon (i.e.,

the fall of Neo-Assyrian political power) during the Achaemenid period and continued even into

the Hellenistic period under the Seleucids. These later commentaries were more sophisticated

134
Gabbay, Uri. “Akkadian Commentaries from Ancient Mesopotamia and Their Relation to Early Hebrew
Exegesis” Dead Sea Discoveries 19:3 (2012) 267-312.
135
Ibid., 269
136
I will not go into detail about the Neo-Assyrian canonization process, but for a well round discussion, see: Eckart,
Frahm, Babylonian and Assyrian Text Commentaries: Origins of Interpretation (Münster: Ugarit, 2011), 317–32 for
a more detailed discussion regarding the canonization and canonicity of cuneiform texts.
137
See: Gabbay, “Akkadian Commentaries” footnote 10 (pg. 270) for a helpful list of sources about letters from
scholars to kings in this period (specifically during the reign of Assurbanipal).
 Razzaq 79

and used a fixed terminology to discuss a series of designated hermeneutic issues from the

corpus. After the fall of Babylon and the decline of Neo-Assyrian political power, scholars were

no longer required to commit to the hermeneutical interests of the king. This scholarly

“independence” allowed scholars to create their own community in which they were able to

study, harmonize and interpret the canonical corpus of religious texts.

The main origin of the Akkadian exegetical tradition is divination. However, as Eckart

Frahm describes, Sumero-Akkadian bilingualism and the attempt to find Akkadian equivalents to

Sumerian words and grammatical forms also involved interpretive procedures and contributed to

the exegetical tradition beginning in the third millennium BCE.138 There was a long tradition of

creating two-column lists of Sumerian and Akkadian words and there were also many interlinear

Akkadian translations of earlier Sumerian literature from the corpus. Because of this tradition

and the preoccupation with translations, one of the basic concerns of Mesopotamian

commentaries was lexical, as can be evidenced by the philological sâtu commentaries.139 These

sâtu commentaries are continuous lexical commentaries interpreting the words from a Sumerian

base text that can often have religious and political significance.

The more relevant Akkadian exegetical tradition is the divinatory commentary from the

second millennium BCE. The mulkallimtu commentaries are usually thematic commentaries (as

opposed to continuous) on various divinatory texts and omens. These commentaries claim to

reveal the most accurate meaning of the omens and are therefore referred to as mukallimtu

(“revealer”). Unlike the sâtu commentaries that were arranged continuously, the mukallimtu

commentaries collect different texts that are relevant to a certain phenomenon (i.e., astrology,

etc.) from a specific chapter or part of a base text.

138
Frahm, 13-22
139
The word sâtu, as Gabbay explains, is the a plural of sītu which is derived from the verb (w)asû, meaning “to go
out.” It is not entirely clear how this word is connected to the designation of a genre of commentaries. See Gabbay
pg. 272 footnote 13 for more references/discussions on the linguistic connection of this word to a type of
commentary.
 Razzaq 80

The divine manifestation in the Mesopotamian tradition is present through a divine

message. This divine word is regarded as powerful and incomprehensible. It is apparently

manifest through various signs in nature (i.e., internal organs of lambs/other sacrificial animals,

various human body parts, etc.). The incomprehensibility of divine word in its original state is

commented on multiple times in Mesopotamian lamentations. The following excerpt

encapsulates the incomprehensibility: “His Word touches earth like day, its meaning (heart) is

unfathomable…His Word which makes heavens thunder above, His Words which makes earth

shake below!”140 The only way to truly understand the divine message is through divination and

human interpretation.

The ‘catalogue of texts and authors’ from Nineveh discussed above consists of a

composition of Babylonian literature according to authorship. Most of the compositions are

attributed to prophetic sages, kings and scholars. There are also divine texts from Ea, the god of

wisdom. There are also lists of commentaries usually associated with a particular scholar, sage or

diviner (most commonly associated with extispicy). The commentaries on the epic of Gilgamesh,

for example, are attributed to the scholar Sîn-lē qe ni.141 The gods Šamaš and Adad were in
qe-unnī ni.

charge of extispicy and they seem to have revealed the secrets of divination to the legendary king

Enmeduranki, who in turn revealed the secrets to the citizens of Nippur, Sippar and Babylon.

The scholars then proceeded to transmit this divine knowledge through generations.142

There are also other commentaries on different theological or wisdom texts including the

Babylonian Theodicy. There is also a commentary on the famous Code of Hammurabi from the

first millennium BCE. Though Hammurabi’s code appears to be simply a legal text, it is actually

a theological text since it begins with a glorification and dedication to Marduk and it was

140
Gabbay, 274
141
W. G. Lambert, “A Catalogue of Texts and Authors,” JCS 16 (1962): 66.
142
Gabbay, 277
 Razzaq 81

probably seen as a proof of the divine political rule of Babylon under Hammurabi and can be

seen as a quasi-divine text.

A note on Ancient Mesopotamian divine texts might be useful here. There were many

different types of texts that were considered divinely inspired and canonical including legal texts,

various religious liturgy or prophecies as well as astrological writings and literature. Though the

designation “divine text” is broad and vague, it appropriately captures the difficulties in

categorizing much of the canonical Mesopotamian writings that were interpreted. My purpose in

discussing these Mesopotamian religious and political texts here is to argue that a lot can be

learned about the supposedly new forms of prophecy that emerged in the Second Temple Period

by studying the exegetical techniques and approaches in Ancient Mesopotamian and Near

Eastern texts. Just as classical biblical prophetic titles and social roles should be situated in their

Ancient Near Eastern milieu, so the figure of the inspired exegete should also be situated in the

context in which it emerged. Though the comparison between Mesopotamian literature and

Second Temple semi-canonical works (including the Qumran scrolls) may not be exact, it is

extremely important to understand the genealogy of the tradition of inspired commentaries and

exegetes.

Several important aspects of attributing base texts to divine authorship should be noted.

Firstly, the commentaries that are based on divine texts emphasize the perceived difference

between the “closed” canonical corpus of divine texts and the new written commentaries. In a

sense this realization and emphasis also shifts the textual authority from the original divine

author to the scholarly interpreter. This process is actually very similar to the pesharim at

Qumran, since there clearly seems to be an understanding and distinction between canonized

scripture and the newer texts and the commentaries on the canon. While Mesopotamian omens

and divine messages were often not part of a related and ongoing narrative as are (most of) the
 Razzaq 82

writings from the Tanakh, the notion that the commentaries were interpreting divinely inspired

base texts made it seem as though the otherwise unrelated base texts were part of a one harmonic

composition. In fact, scholars who commented on and interpreted the divine base texts often

searched for ties and correlations between the texts which they could expound in their

commentaries.

Despite these similarities, there are also significant differences between the pesharim and

the Akkadian exegetical tradition. The most important of these differences relates to the status

and nature of the interpreters. While the Teacher of Righteousness is thought to be the sole

divinely inspired being to interpret and unveil the true eschatological meaning of the divine

prophetic words, the Mesopotamian commentators are usually scholars and priests and are not

considered divinely inspired. The Mesopotamian commentaries were regarded as scholarly

interpretations that were separate from the base texts and the authority to interpret and even re-

interpret a canonical text was in the hands of the ummânū ,, the

the scholars.
scholars.

Scholars and scribes were in charge of managing all forms of Mesopotamian knowledge,

including the interpretations of divine messages and knowledge from the time it was revealed to

the mythological divine sages (apkallu) and then transmitted orally through the generations by

scholars, a process known as šū t pî,

pî or oral lore. This divine knowledge from their ancestors

aided scholars in revealing the true meaning of the divine texts that they were interpreting (thus

acting as a kind of “inspired exegete”). In fact, these scholars were the only ones who would

have permission to access and interpret the divine texts that would have otherwise been

incomprehensible without the special knowledge. Many times the scholarly study of divine

canonical texts and their interpretations were used to teach younger scholars how to understand

divine texts according to the interpretation. Younger scholars would either copy commentaries

verbatim to study them or they would copy commentaries while listening to it orally.
 Razzaq 83

As mentioned above, there are three main concerns of the Mesopotamian commentaries:

lexical, thematic, and harmonizing. I will briefly discuss each and then transition to how we can

use this information to possibly better understand the pesharim.

The most basic concern of the sâtu commentaries is lexical and grammatical since

Mesopotamian writing can have meaning both syllabically and logographically.143 The second

type of commentary deals with a phenomenological or thematic concern. Sometimes the same

divine text or omen can be interpreted using the linguistic techniques and the descriptive

thematic techniques as well. For example, if an omen describes the shape of an organ of a

sacrificial lamb as a plum, it can be interpreted in several different ways. A sâtu commentary

would explain the lexical forms and syntactic construction of the sentence. On the other hand a

descriptive commentary would consider and explain the thematic significance of the shape of the

organ.

Finally, the more elaborate and more prevalent hermeneutic concerns of the interpreters

is the harmonization of the corpus. Usually these commentaries seek a correlation and

connection between the protasis and apodosis of an omen text. For example, a commentary from

the medical diagnostic texts deals with predictions regarding the health of a patient and the

healer’s observations.144 There are three successive interpretive entries regarding this text which

try to harmonize the protasis and apodosis by connecting the episode to others in the diagnostic

texts and attempting to arrive at the cause of the sickness from which the patient is suffering.

Several different stories and omen texts are weaved together to create a sophisticated

commentary in which the demon Šulak is thought to have initiated the sickness.

143
Ibid., 288
144
A. R. George. “Babylonian Texts from the Folios of Sidney Smith, Part Two: Prognostic and Diagnostic Omens,
Tablet I,” RA 85 (1991): 144
 Razzaq 84

Along with this type of harmonization of texts, another form which tries to harmonize

apparent textual contrasts or contradictions are also important. One omen is interpreted and

explained as not to contradict the other omen or divine text. Most of these types of harmonizing

commentaries come from extispicies (of various organs, usually livers). Uri Gabbay describes an

interesting type of commentary in which a master-scholar asks various questions following the

actual text of the extispicy. These questions are then answered through an explanation of the

interpretation of the master-scholar. Usually when there are conflicting accounts of omens or the

meanings of certain divine signs, the scholars will harmonize the conflicting reports and interpret

the texts in a way that does not seem contradictory. Another type of harmonization in

Mesopotamian exegetical tradition is the treatment of variants in the base text, in which each of

the different variants of the base text is understood to be for specific different situations.

Pesharim in Light of Mesopotamian sources:

This canonization process and the development of a more sophisticated and independent

class of scholars in the Mesopotamian context may be compared, at least in part, to the

canonization process of the Hebrew Scriptures (i.e., Tanakh) following the destruction of the first

Temple and exilic periods through the Second Temple Period. Undoubtedly there was a group of

scribal scholars and elite who worked on “canonizing” parts of scripture, though the process was

much more complex and spanned a greater amount of time than the Neo-Assyrian canonization.

As more of the scripture became authoritative, there was a greater emphasis on various forms of

interpretation, some overt and some more implicit. This can easily be evidenced by the vast array

of pseudepigraphical books and writings that have not been included in the canon. As I discussed

in the previous section, the “interpretation” of supposedly canonized scripture took many

different forms including Rewritten Bible (i.e., Book of Jubilees), other pseudepigrapha, later

rabbinic and Midrashic texts, and even the fulfillment prophecy approach of the New Testament
 Razzaq 85

can be seen as a form of interpreting the Hebrew Scriptures. Despite the general assumption of

an unchanging biblical canon, there is still much scholarly debate on how early the canon was

actually fixed.145 The pesharim, therefore, belong to this tradition of organized and technical

interpretation of authoritative base texts in the Second Temple Period.

Now I will delve a little deeper into more specific areas of thematic or historical

intersection between the Mesopotamian sources and techniques I discussed above and what we

can learn from them.

As has been made clear earlier, perhaps the most obvious parallel between the

Mesopotamia and early Hebrew sources is the divine origin of their base texts. The majority of

the Mesopotamian tradition was attributed to Ea, god of wisdom and the Tanakh was ultimately

attributed to the divine revelation of YHWH. The pesharim in particular treat the texts that they

interpret as divine words delivered through the prophets (or David in the case of Psalms146),

though some scholars including Timothy Lim would argue that “the pesharite method of

interpretation was applied to texts other than prophetic ones.”147

The issue of the status of the interpreters in both settings is more complicated than the

status of the divine base texts which they interpret. In the Mesopotamian tradition as we have

seen, the interpretation of the texts was the duty of the ummânū scholars who, as I described

earlier had inherited the knowledge of the divine messages and words from the mythological

sages (the apkallu). The perception of the scholar interpreters in Mesopotamian tradition is closer

to the perception of rabbis as scholars of the textual and oral tradition of the Torah since it was

145
The limits of this paper do not allow me to get into too much detail about this process of canonization and the
scholarly debates about around it. Lots of work has been published on this topic, and I will only mention a few here.
For a recent and useful starting place, see: Satlow, Michael L. How the Bible Became Holy, Yale UP, August 2014.
146
There is much scholarly debate on whether or not David was considered a prophet at Qumran and whether, in
turn, the Psalms were considered prophetic. See: T. H. Lim, “‘All These He Composed through Prophecy,’” in
Prophecy after the Prophets? The Contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls to the Understanding of Biblical and Extra
Biblical Prophecy (ed. K. De Troyer and A. Lange; Leuven: Peeters, 2009), 61–73.
147
Lim, “All These He Composed through Prophecy,” 65
 Razzaq 86

revealed to Moses and the rest of the Hebrew Scripture as well. Much like the Mesopotamian

tradition, much of rabbinic literature is presented in the format of a dialogue or scholarly

teaching.

However, there is also an important difference between the rabbis and the Mesopotamian

scholars. While the rabbis did not necessarily believe that the knowledge of the Hebrew

Scripture was secret and restricted only for themselves, the Mesopotamian conception was that

the knowledge to interpret and understand was secret and strictly limited to the scholars. In this

sense, the Mesopotamian tradition is closer to Qumran since the knowledge to interpret the

Scriptures correctly was only available to the Teacher of Righteousness. Still the comparison is

not exact. While the Mesopotamian ummânū scholars have inherited their special interpretive

skills, there is still an important distinction between the scholarly authority to interpret based on

social status and the divine authority of the texts that they study and interpret. The Qumran

pesharim do not achieve their interpretation through scholarly discourse or philological analysis

itself, rather it is achieved through the divine inspiration of the Teacher of Righteousness: “the

Priest [in whose heart] God set [understanding] that he might interpret all the words of His

servants the Prophets, through whom He foretold all that would happen to His people and [His

land],” (1QpHab 2:9-10).148 The question of the real status of the Teacher of Righteousness will

be addressed at greater length in the next section of the paper.

Before delving further into the questions of prophecy at Qumran, let us finish the

comparison between Mesopotamian commentaries and the pesharim and more specifically

philological similarities. The first and most obvious linguistic similarity between the

Mesopotamian sources and the pesharim is the use of the Akkadian noun pišru in scholarly

interpretations of natural phenomenon and the Hebrew use of ‫רשפ‬. In Akkadian, the root pšr can

148
Vermes, Geza. The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English, New York, NY, USA: Allen Lane/Penguin, 1997: 479
 Razzaq 87

have several meanings when used in relation to divination. These are outlined by Martti

Nissinen: (1) the release or annulment of a bad omen, fate, or dream, (2) the release or solution

of a prediction from an enigmatic divine message, or (3) the release of a dream from the mind of

the dreamer through the dream interpreter.149

The second meaning of the root as a noun is relevant to the context of the pesharim. In

the Mesopotamian tradition, omen entries are composed of a protasis, a conditional sentence

describing a possible phenomenon, followed by an apodosis providing the prediction the

phenomenon foretells. The apodosis is called the pišru, or interpretation. The term pišru is also

used when the protasis of the omen or divine text is considered cryptic and needs to be explained

or clarified. An example of this is provided in an astronomical text describing the conditions in

which a lunar eclipse can occur: “When Coma Berenices culminates, and a moon eclipse should

begin, (and) Coma Berenices, Virgo and Regulus (are present in the sky) until the sun reaches

Virgo—its interpretation: (piširša): the eclipse will not begin.”150 The use of the word pišru in

this context explains the correct understanding of the phenomenon of the lunar eclipse that was

otherwise undecipherable from the omen. The pišru, interpretation of the omen or divine text

links the text to a present and earthly reality, as can be exemplified in the excerpt above. The

conditions for the alignments of various constellations in the omen were interpreted to mean that

there would not be a moon eclipse that could be witnessed and experienced in the interpreter’s

present reality. The scholars studying the canonical omens, whether astronomical, medical or

divine, must arrive at the correct link between the phenomenon being predicted and a present

situation being described to interpret or explain the prediction. Many omens are considered to be

149
See: M. Nissinen, “Pesharim as Divination: Qumran Exegesis, Omen Interpretation and Literary Prophecy,” in
Prophecy after the Prophets?
150
Gabbay, 299
 Razzaq 88

cryptic and need interpretation in order to fully understand their consequences in the present

time.

Now that the role of the word pišru has been briefly explained in the Mesopotamian

context, we can return to the pesharim from Qumran. The Akkadian noun pišru and the Hebrew

noun ‫ רשפ‬are not only related etymologically, but they also serve a similar purpose, as both are

used to indicate an interpretation of a hidden divine message. In an article on the pesharim from

1973, Isaac Rabinowitz even characterized the pesharim as interpretations or solutions to

ominous messages.151

The relationship between the two traditions may not be so transparent though, since

pesharim are not exactly solutions or interpretations of ominous messages. The biblical

occurrence of the root ‫ רשפ‬and its cognate ‫ רתפ‬often appear in relation to dreams and the

Akkadian pašaru is also used in relation to dreams. This linguistic similarity has led some

scholars have tried to draw exact parallels between the Mesopotamian dream and omen tradition

and the approach of the pesharim, the analogy should not be taken too far. The pesharim seem to

be engaging in a much more complex process of interpretation and with a different objective

than many of the Mesopotamian dream and omen interpretations. Still, an important connection

between the two remains; namely that both processes involve exegesis and oftentimes specific

elements in the protasis must be associated with material reality in the present. For example, in

the Mesopotamian context, Lyra in the protasis of the aforementioned astronomical omen is

equated with Venus in the present reality of the interpreter; the mention of the Chaldeans in the

pesher on Habakkuk is equated with the Kittim (Romans?) in the present reality of the Qumran

community.

151
I. Rabinowitz, “‘Pē sher/Pittā
sher/Pittā rōrō n’:
n’: Its
Its Biblical
Biblical Meaning
Meaning and
and Its
Its Significance
Significance in
in the Qumran Literature,”
the Qumran Literature,” RevQ
RevQ 8/30
8/30
(1973): 219–32
 Razzaq 89

Another important difference to keep in mind is the distinction between oral and literary

nature of the things being interpreted and the interpretation itself. Ancient Near Eastern and

Mesopotamian divination, including omens, dreams, and other sources, were heavily oral in

nature. The implications of these difference has already been discussed in chapter 1 of this thesis.

CHAPTER 7: ON THE STATUS OF THE TEACHER OF RIGHTEOUSNESS

Let us now return to the question that was posed earlier in the chapter on the apparent

pseudo-prophetic nature of the Teacher of Righteousness and whether or not he was considered a

prophet at Qumran. Before attending to the complexities of the question at hand, it should be

noted that there is still debate about the Teacher of Righteousness and whether or not he was a

historical figure, though these scholars are becoming the minority. I agree with Lawrence

Schiffman, James VanderKam, George Brooke and others that the Teacher of Righteousness was

indeed a historical figure who was active more or less in the middle of the second century

BCE.152 Hartmun Stegemann was amongst the first to put forward the idea that the Qumran

community was settled (probably) after the death of the Teacher of Righteousness in the late

152
See: Schiffman, Lawrence. Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls, Philadelphia, Pa: The Jewish Publication Society,
1994), VanderKam, James, The Dead Sea Scrolls Today, Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 1994.
 Razzaq 90

second century BCE or even first century BCE.153 This means that the Teacher of Righteousness

was not actually the founder of the Qumran community per se, though he was undoubtedly at the

center of their beliefs.154

Perhaps the best way to begin the discussion is by organizing the information that is

known about the Teacher of Righteousness and a rough chronology. The Teacher of

Righteousness is mentioned explicitly in the Damascas Document, and in four pesharim:

Habbaukuk Pesher(1 QpHab), the Micah Pesher (1Q14), in one version of the Isaiah Pesher

(4Q163) and two copies of the Psalms Pesher (4Q171; 4Q173 and possibly 4Q172).155 The

Damascus Document was probably composed sometime in the second century and the pesharim

were most probably composed later in the first century.

Let us begin with the Damascus Document. There appear to be several stages in the

construction of the Damascus Document. The first stage, according to Philip Davies, is relatively

early and fits the description of a “missionary document.”156 This stage involves the author

writing of the emergence of the movement and its hope for one who would teach righteousness

in the end days and insinuates that the Teacher of Righteousness had not yet actually arisen in

this stage (i.e., that the community was anticipating a figure in the future). Some scholars, as

John J. Collins and others, had proposed that the community looked for the resurrection and

return of the Teacher after his death, but this view has since not remained very popular.157

153
See Brooke, George, “Was the Teacher of Righteousness Considered to be a Prophet?” in Prophecy after the
Prophets, footnote 9 pg. 80.
154
There are of course scholars who disagree with this notion. See, for example, Wise, Michael, “Dating the Teacher
of Righteousness and the Floruit of his Movement” JBL, 122 (2003) 53-87.
155
Brooke, 81
156
Davies, Philip R. The Damascus Covenant: An Interpretation of the ‘Damascus Document’ Sheffield, UK: JSOT,
Dept. of Biblical Studies, U Sheffield, 1983: 119-25
157
See John J. Collins, The Scepter and the Star: The Messiahs of the Dead Sea Scrolls and other Ancient Literatre,
Anchor Bible Reference Library; New York, NY: Doubleday, 1995: 113-14. This is an earlier work of Collins and
he has refined his view in more recent scholarship which will be cited below. Many scholars tried to prove the
similarities between the Teacher of Righteousness and the figure of Jesus as Messiah, but the comparison does not
hold for reasons that will be discussed.
 Razzaq 91

It may be worthwhile to ask what the status was of this anticipated Teacher in this early

stage. As an eschatological figure, it is not unreasonable to assume that he may qualify for some

sort of a messianic status. Philip Davies contends that the Teacher was indeed seen as a

messianic figure, “it emerges that this era will come to an end with the arrival of the Messiah and

this raises the suspicion that the phrase ‘teacher of righteousness’…designates no other than a

(priestly?) ‘Messiah’.”158 Though the idea of the Teacher of Righteousness as the Messiah is

appealing, it may not be the best association. The view that the Teacher of Righteousness was to

be a kind of anointed prophet has in fact been more of a popular view.

The next logical question to ask would be whether or not the community accepted the

role of Teacher of Righteousness (once he had arrived), either in non-eschatological terms or as

an anointed messiah or eschatological prophet. The surviving sources are disappointingly silent

in terms of any clear answer. In fact, it is not clear that the Teacher of Righteousness referred to

himself as such and that he wanted others to know him by this title. According to James

Charlesworth, the Teacher of Righteousness is really neither a messiah nor a prophet, but a Priest

and even of a High Priestly family, but this will be discussed in greater detail later.159

There is a possibility that the Hodayot (Thanksgiving Hymns) are autobiographical to

some degree and that we may be able to learn something of what the Teacher thought of himself.

Yet there is really not enough overt evidence to prove that the Teacher of Righteousness claimed

to be a prophet. It can be argued that the allusions to earlier writings of prophets, as in the

prophetic servant from Isaiah and the very act of composing hymn poetry like the Hodayot

indicate the prophetic inclinations of the Teacher of Righteousness. Undoubtedly the Teacher

was a charismatic figure and wanted to be seen that way, but charismatic figure does not equal a

prophet.

158
Davies, The Damascus Covenant, 125.
159
Charlesworth, James. The Pesharim and Qumran History: Chaos or Consensus? 31
 Razzaq 92

The second stage of the composition of the Damascus Document appears to be a first

edition of the document, which was most probably composed in the forty year period after the

death of the Teacher, as would be logical after the apparent mention of his demise in CD XX,

14.160 This stage also seems to predate the actual settlement at Qumran. The role of the

anticipated figure has now been fulfilled in the person of the Teacher of Righteousness, “and

God observed their deeds, that they sought Him with a whole heart, and He raised for them a

Teacher of Righteousness to guide them in the way of His hear.”161

Was the Teacher of Righteousness seen as an eschatological prophet by the community at

this point in the composition of the Damascus Document? It is again a complicated question with

a complicated answer, but generally speaking, the community probably did not understand the

Teacher to be an eschatological prophet. There is no explicit mention of any prophet in the

document, yet it would seem only natural for the community to commemorate a prophetic figure

after his death. In fact, CD XIX, 35-XX, 1 speaks of the Teacher separately from the Messiah

who “shall arise from Aaron and from Israel.”162

Whatever the case may be for the absence of the prophetic label, ‫איבנ‬, from the title and

literary designations, and the seemingly cautious avoidance of prophetic labels, we may also

need to loosen the rigid standards of biblical prophecy by which we evaluate the status awarded

to the Teacher of Righteousness. As Alex Jassen reminds us, “the exclusive reliance on biblical

prophetic terminology ultimately misses a much wider and variegated world of prophecy in the

Dead Sea Scrolls.”163

The third stage of the composition and editing of the Damascus Document appears to be

when the community is solidifying its identiy and separating itself as a sect. The earliest
160
See Brooke, 85
161
Vermes, Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, CD I, 11, pg. 127
162
The Zadokite Documents, 36 as cited in Brooke, 86.
163
Jassen, Alex P. “Prophets and Prophecy in the Qumran Community.” Association for Jewish Studies Review 32:2
(2008): 309
 Razzaq 93

manuscript copy of the document comes from the first half, maybe even first quarter of the first

century BCE.164 The Teacher was to continue to play an important role in the life of the

community, even after his death, but more the role of a Teacher perhaps than that of a prophet.

A note here on the conceptions of prophecy in the Qumran community will be inserted

before moving on to discussing the pesharim as they depict the Teacher of Righteousness. If the

Qumran sectarian writings are read carefully, it becomes evident that the sectarians in fact

recontextualized the classical biblical prophets in the mold of their own conceptions of prophets

as mainly lawgivers and prophecy more generally. In fact, the theme of recontextualizing and re-

signifying classical biblical prophecy was a prevalent phenomenon is Second Temple society and

there were myriad ways through which to understand prophecy. In the case of Qumran biblical

conceptions of prophecy and prophetic figures are adapted to their new social reality. The next

section of this paper will discuss the notion of prophecy at Qumran at much greater length. For

now, it is important to see that the absence of the word ‫ איבנ‬does not indicate the absence of

prophecy from Qumran in any sense, and I am not just referring to the debate on the status of the

Teacher of Righteousness.

Along with the Damascus Document, the Teacher of Righteousness is also mentioned in

the pesharim as well as the Hodayat hymns several times. The pesharim in fact seem to be

dependent on the insights and approach of the Damascus document. Again in the pesharim the

title of Teacher of Righteousness is never explicitly identified as that of a prophet. It is rather

curious that prophetic titles are actually used to describe the community’s opponents. Though

there can be many explanations for this, it is clear that the distinction in the labels and the

application of prophetic titles to outsiders and opponents of the community is a deliberate

164
Brooke, “The Pesharim and the Origins of the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in Methods of Investigation of the Dead Sea
Scrolls and the Khirbet Qumran Site: Present Realities and Future Prospects, ed. Michael O. Wise, Norman Goib,
JJ Collins, and Dennis Pardee; Annals of the New York Academy of sciences 722; NYC, NY, 1994; 339-48
 Razzaq 94

technique in the sectarian writings as a way to distinguish and differentiate themselves. Each

reference to an outside prophetic figure has weighty implications regarding sectarian relations

with “others” and probably also indicates competing conceptions of prophecy and claims to true

access to the divine.

For example, in column 12 of the Hodayot, places the Teacher of Righteousness opposite

false prophets; “I seek Thee, and sure as dawn Thou appearest as [perfect Light] to me. Teachers

of lies [have smoothed] Thy people [with words], and [false prophets] have led them astray;”165

This excerpt outlines a bitter dispute between the leader of the community-Teacher of

Righteousness-and his opponents who claim to be [false] prophets while employing very polemic

language. Other places in the Hodayot, the enemies of the Teacher are described as “visionaries

of deceit and error” (‫ יזוח ה‬and ‫ )יזוח תועת‬and “lying prophets” (‫)יאיבנ בזכ‬.166 It would be logical to

predict that since the opponents of the sect and Teacher are labeled false and deceiving prophets

that the Teacher himself would be identified as a “true” and “honest” prophet, but this is not the

case. The specified use of prophetic language in the hymn is most probably meant to generate an

antagonistic and polarized relationship between the community, its leaders, and its enemies.

The Teacher of Righteousness (and the sect more broadly) are the only legitimate

mediators of the divine and there is no need to use a prophetic label, in contrast to the so-called

prophets and deceiving leaders whom the sect opposes. The mention of the “perfect light” in the

opening of the hymn can be read as an affirmation of the hymnist’s (Teacher of Righteousness?)

receiving of true revelation and apparent unmediated access to the divine “Light.” While many

scholars would argue that these subtleties are not enough to conclude that the Teacher of

Righteousness was considered (or considered himself) to be a prophet, I am more inclined

towards Jassen’s reading of the presence of a nuanced and polemically aware prophetic

165
Vermes, Complete DDS, 263 (1QH 12:5-10)
166
Jassen, 312
 Razzaq 95

consciousness, though I am not sure if there is enough clear evidence that the Teacher thought of

himself as a prophetic figure.

Let us return now to the pesharim and their mentions of the Teacher. The exegete of

Pesher Habakkuk comes very close to calling the Teacher a prophet, but refrains from taking the

final step. Again the conflict between the Teacher, who has apparently received knowledge from

the mouth of God, is portrayed and the Teacher is contrasted from the Wicked Priest and the

Man of Lies. Brooke argues that this phraseology echoes that associated with Jeremiah (2 Chr

36:12) and “seems indirectly to mark the Teacher out as functioning like a prophet.”167 The Man

of the Lie appears to have rejected the Law that the prophets brought. 1QpHab VII, 1-4 also

indicates some prophetic relationship between the Teacher and God: “and God told Habakkuk to

write down that which would happen…but He did not make known to him when time would

come to an end…interpreted this concerns the Teacher of Righteousness, to whom God made

known all the mysteries of the words of His servants the Prophets.”168

The Teacher is also the inspired interpreter, like Daniel, whose interpretations were as

much a matter of divine revelation as the prophetic texts he was interpreting. The office of

inspired interpreter would appear to merit the label of a prophet. There is also another important

aspect of the Teacher’s prophetic role which Hakan Ulfgard expounds. The Teacher’s

importance as the “prophetic herald of the secrets of the end of days” also indicates his other

role, namely that through their fidelity towards the Teacher and his ways of interpreting the

Torah and prophetic scriptures of the Tanakh, the members of the sectarian community will be

saved.169 This also poses an interesting distinction between the Teacher and other Tanakh

167
Brooke, “Was the Teacher of Righteousness Considered…” 92, my emphasis.
168
Vermes, 481
169
Brooke, 93, see footnote 52.
 Razzaq 96

prophets, certainly the classical biblical prophets whose words and prophecies often regarded the

present and near future, not the “end of days” as the Teacher of Righteousness claims.

Another passage from Pesher Habakkuk speaks of the Teacher of Righteousness as an

object of faith for those who practice the Law, and the role of the Wicked Priest in offending the

Teacher and his community. 1QpHab XI, 5 also describes the pursuit of the Teacher of

Righteousness by the Wicked Priest on the Teacher’s Day of Atonement: “interpreted this

concerns the Wicked Priest who pursued the Teacher of Righteousness to the house of his exile

that he might confuse him with his venomous fury…And at the time appointed for rest, for the

Day of Atonement, he appeared before them to confuse them, to cause them to stumble on the

Day of Fasting.”170 The polemical conflict between the Teacher and the Wicked Priest are again

brought to the foreground.

There are also three references to the Teacher in the Pesher Psalms (4Q171). The first

reference is an interpretation of the geber, the figure of Ps. 37:23-24. While the commentary

identifies the geber with the Teacher (as a priest), it is possible that the reference may also

indicate an eschatological figure, probably that of a prophet of some sort. The other two

mentions within the pesharim are too fragmentary to arrive at any solid conclusion.

It is also important to discuss the role (if any) or a sort of legal code of the Teacher of

Righteousness by which the community members lived. This brings into question the

interpretation of the technical terms nigleh and nistar. Lawrence Schiffman describes DSD 5:7-

12 as mentioning these two terms.171 The niglot are presented as the opposite of nistarot. Nigleh

(pl. niglot) is often understood to signify the revealed laws or knowledge of the Torah and nistar

(pl. nistarot) the hidden laws or knowledge of the Torah. An interesting paradox is at play in the

way the Qumran sect sees itself in relation to the hidden and revealed divine knowledge. Since

170
Vermes, 484
171
Schiffman, Lawrence H. The Halakhah at Qumran. Leiden: Brill, 1975 (23)
 Razzaq 97

the sect sees itself as being the true Israel, the knowledge that is otherwise hidden, nistarot, is

actually nigleh, revealed to the sect. Moses is the only one who knows all the secrets of the

Torah, and the Qumran sect sees itself and the Teacher of Righteousness the direct successors of

Moses and the classical prophets.

To begin the Qumran community, it was necessary, as it is recorded in DSD 8:1-16, for

the first 15 members (12 men and 3 priests) to have perfect knowledge of the nigleh, revealed

law of the Torah. The Teacher of Righteousness was designated as the community’s inspired

exegete who would expound and interpret the prophetic words beyond the Torah and would

make the nistar, hidden knowledge and law, known to the rest of the community members.

Because they belonged to the chosen community and were the true successors of Israel, the

Teacher of Righteousness was able to divinely and accurately interpret and decode the words of

the pre-exilic prophets for the rest of his community as can be evidenced in the previously

discussed pesharim and other sectarian texts.

The question naturally arises; does all of this make the Teacher a prophet? It is

impossible to know for sure. It is certain, however, that the Teacher of Righteousness was

definitely a diviner and was probably considered to be a prophet or a prophetic figure at least by

the community in whose memory and writings he survives.

 Razzaq 98

CASE STUDY 2: Josephus

 Razzaq 99

CHAPTER 8: PROPHECY IN JOSEPHUS

In the previous chapter, we saw how the pesharim exemplify a type of literary and

interpretive prophecy as they project the experiences of their community onto the biblical text

and we also dealt with the complexities of trying to categorize the Teacher of Righteousness as a

prophetic figure, whether similar to or distinct from earlier prophets.

In this chapter, I will discuss the concept of prophecy in the writings of Josephus, the

great prolific Jewish historian apologist of the first century CE. Despite the fact that there are

many interesting aspects of prophecy in Josephus, not many full-length studies exist on this

topic. Though Louis Feldman lists several scholars who have written about Josephus and

prophecy including Erich Fascher, Joseph Blenkinsopp, Rudolf Meyer, and Gerhard Delling,

Horsley and Hanson, most of these studies either focus on the relationship of prophecy to the

priesthood or only focus on the classical Biblical prophets.172 Rebecca Gray’s study on prophetic

figures in the late Second Temple is perhaps the only book-length study of the various aspects of

prophecy in Josephus173.

This section will address the following questions: (a) what is prophecy according to

Josephus and what is its purpose? (b) How did Josephus understand the Biblical prophets and

how does he view their continuation or culmination? (c) What other contemporary Second

172
Feldman, Louis. “Prophets and Prophecy in Josephus” Journal of Theological Studies, NS, Vol. 41, Pt. 2, October
1990.
173
Gray, Rebecca. Prophetic Figures in Late Second Temple Jewish Palestine: The Evidence from Josephus. New
York: Oxford UP, 1993.
 Razzaq 100

Temple prophetic figures does Josephus mention in his writings and what is their relationship to

the Biblical prophets? And finally, (d) did Josephus see himself as a prophetic figure and why is

this important? Due to the practical constraints of this paper, I will not be able to discuss each of

these questions in great detail, but it is nonetheless important that I discuss prophecy in the

writings of Josephus since his works serve as the primary testimony of attitudes of prophets and

prophecy within some Judean circles of the late Second Temple period. It would be wrong to

assume Josephus as a spokesperson for all Jews, but his writings nonetheless serve as an

important primary source. I will use all three major works of Josephus, namely Jewish

Antiquities, The Jewish War, and Against Apion, throughout the paper.

The best place to begin this study on prophecy and Josephus would be to understand what

exactly Josephus meant by “prophecy.” The answer to this question is unfortunately rather

unclear. Though Josephus speaks of prophecy and prophets multiple times throughout his works,

especially Antiquities and even in Against Apion, he never explicitly defines these terms.

Josephus does not seem distinguish between “prophets” and other “diviners” like ecstatic wise

men, apocalyptists, or prognosticators. Many of these categories are modern scholarly

impositions attempting to organize and categorize various figures in the Second Temple period.

It is essential to realize the ambiguities of prophetic identities and to broaden the classical

conception of prophecy to include such diverse figures and practices as we see in this period.

Not only does Josephus fail overtly define prophecy, he is also often inconsistent in his

discussions and views on prophecy as we will see later in the paper. Still, certain aspects of his

understanding of prophecy can be deduced from his writing. In a very broad sense, it can be

assumed that Josephus shared the general view that prophets received direct revelation from God
 Razzaq 101

and they relayed this revelation to their people. All prophets must have had some direct

encounter with God.

Beyond this basic point, Josephus’ writings imply that he believed that prophets had three

major functions, corresponding temporally. According to Feldman, the three functions are as

follows: a prophet was a contemporary mediator between God and the people and conveyed the

divine message of God to the people; a prophet also interpreted the past and created the Scripture

that recorded the past (i.e., Torah), and a prophet predicted the future.174

It is noteworthy that Josephus uses the prophetic label (π ρ ο φ ή τ η ς )) mostly

mostly in
in accordance
accordance

with the use of the Hebrew ‫ איבנ‬in the biblical text. For Josephus, the most important of these

prophets is Moses, who he calls “the prophet” (Ant. 2.15.4, 4.8.49). Prophets like Nathan, Elijah,

Elisha, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and others are also referred to as “prophets” (as they are in the

biblical text). Some references, which are not entirely clear in the biblical text, are also

interpreted by Josephus to indicate prophets. For example, Josephus understands the “man of

God” reference in 1 Kings 13 as referring to a prophet. Josephus even labels Daniel as a

“prophet” (Ant. 10.11.4, 10.11.4, 11.7.6),175 and he repeatedly speaks of him.

In addition to these, Josephus also calls Phinehas, Joshua, Samson, Samuel, and a number

of others “prophets” despite the biblical text giving them no such label.176 There are a total of 169

instances in which Josephus deliberately introduces the words “prophet” or “prophesy” where it

is not in the original text.177

174
Feldman, “Prophets and Prophecy” (394)
175
Note that I am using an online source for Antiquities, but exact page numbers may be found in Grabbe, Lester
“Thus Spoke the Prophet Josephus…” in Prophets, Prophecy and Prophetic Texts in Second Temple Judaism (241)
176
Feldman actually provides a full list of figures Josephus labels as “prophets” but who are not labeled as such in
the Tanakh. See Feldman, “Prophets and Prophecy” (389-90).
177
Begg, Christopher T. “The Classical Prophets in Josephus’ Antiquities” Louvain Studies, 1988, 343.
 Razzaq 102

I will give a few examples here. When there is a famine in 2 Sam 21:1, King David seeks

“the face of God” directly (‫ )דודו שקיב תא וינפ הוהי‬and God answers him directly without the

presence of a prophet. Josephus, however, inserts a prophet in his retelling of the story; “David

besought God to have mercy on the people…and when the prophets answered, that God would

have the Gibeonites avenged…” (Ant. 7.12.1).

Similarly when God is angry with David in 2 Sam 24:10, David beseeches God directly

without the intervention of a prophet (…‫יְהוָה ָחטָאתִי‬-‫ ;)וַּיֹאמֶר ָּדוִד אֶל‬yet Josephus inserts a prophet,

“Now when the prophets had signified to David that God was angry at him, he began to entreat

him…” (Ant. 7.122). Josephus continues this pattern of inserting prophets where there are none

mentioned in the biblical narrative throughout Antiquities. There may be several reasons for this,

but one obvious reason may be Josephus’ desire to present prophets as the sole intermediaries

between God and the eventual recipient. To stay constant with this assertion and belief, prophets

must be inserted whenever God speaks to the people or a King.

The question of how exactly Josephus understood the concept of prophecy remains an

open one and will be incorporated throughout the remainder of the discussion.

It may be useful now to ask how Josephus saw the classical biblical prophets and their

relation to the Second Temple period. What was the role of the classical prophets and what

significance did they have for the period in which he lived? From the outset, it is reasonable to

accept that Josephus was well acquainted with the biblical text both in Hebrew as well as the

Greek Septuagint and therefore would have had a well-grounded understanding of the prophets.

This appears to be the case since Josephus repeatedly paraphrases prophets like Jeremiah and
 Razzaq 103

makes reference to the teachings of various prophets including Haggai and Zechariah (Ant. 10.84

or 11.96).178

One important aspect of the classical biblical prophets for Josephus is their role as

historians. In Against Apion, Josephus gives a brief description of the books of the Jews: “Of

these, five are the books of Moses, comprising the laws and the traditional history from the birth

of humanity down to his [Moses’] death…From the death of Moses until Artaxerxes, who

succeeded Xerxes as king of Persia, the prophets subsequent to Moses wrote the history of the

events of their own times in thirteen books,” (Against Apion 1.39-40179).

This description is followed by a further comment in the next section, where Josephus

compares the history of the classical prophets until the time of Artaxerxes to his own time:

“From Artaxerxes to our own time the complete history has been written, but has not been

deemed worthy of equal credit with earlier records, because of the failure of the exact succession

of the prophets” (Against Apion, 1.41). This passage is usually cited as evidence that Josephus

believed that prophecy, or at least “true prophecy,” according to Horsley and Hanson, had ceased

in Israel sometime in the Persian period.180 It is convincing that Josephus probably thought that

classical prophets had ceased because the divinely inspired history ended in the Persian period

and these prophets were responsible for recording the divinely inspired history (Against Apion,

1.37). The process of the canonization of scripture of course plays a crucial role in determining

how far the “divinely inspired history” is allowed to continue.181

178
Despite his familiarity with the classical prophets, Feldman notes that Josephus rarely makes mention of the
minor prophets in any of his work. See Feldman, “Prophets and Prophecy,” (393, footnote 40).
179
The chapter references here are for the Greek original text, the English equivalent is: Against Apion 1.8. I am not
including page numbers since various editions may have differing pages.
180
Horsley, Richard A., and John S. Hanson. Bandits, Prophets, and Messiahs: Popular Movements in the Time of
Jesus. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988 (146).
181
I will not delve into the topic of canonization at this time as it would grow into a cumbersome digression, but its
importance should be noted.
 Razzaq 104

However, the statement that history is no longer at the same level as the history written

by the classical prophets does not necessarily suggest that there were no longer “prophets” or

“prophetic figures” during the Second Temple period. As Rebecca Gray aptly notes, Josephus

wrote Against Apion in response to critics doubting his account of the origin of the Jews and

about the claims of the extreme antiquity of the Jews and the fact that Jews are not mentioned in

the best-known Greek historians of antiquity. In response to this, Josephus argues that the

Greeks are not reliable historians of the earliest history and therefore fail to mention the Jews.

While the Greeks have contradictory and inconsistent sources and the oldest sources (i.e.,

Homer) were originally transmitted orally only to be written down much later, Jewish history is

firmly based in a tradition of divinely inspired prophets to whom God provided exact knowledge

of the most ancient periods of history (Against Apion, 1.28-41).

At one point Josephus explains that the priests are in charge maintaining and preserving

the written records of the prophets while later in the next few chapters he emphasizes the unique

role of the prophets in actually composing the records. The role of priests in relation to

composing and or preserving the sacred histories and Scripture is difficult to establish based on

the words of Josephus alone since there are many inconsistencies in his own descriptions.182

There is undoubtedly evidence, however, that Josephus believed that high priests also

practiced some form of divination involving their vestments. Antiquities 2.102-187 recounts the

construction of the tabernacle and its provisioning. While describing the tabernacle, Josephus

describes the significance of each of the vestments of the high priest, including the blue tunic, the

ephod, the breastplate and the headdress. Priests were often practiced various types of divination

182
To read further about this issue see: Mason, SN, “Priesthood in Josephus and the ‘Pharisaic’ Revolution” JBL,
Vol. 107, No. 4, Dec. 1988, or Blenkinsopp, Joseph, “Prophecy and Priesthood in Josephus,” JJS 25, 1974.
 Razzaq 105

especially by means of Urim and Thummim, each of which were associated with a particular

vestment.

Without going into too much detail, I will just mention here that Josephus believed this

sort of priestly divination came to an end after John Hyrcanus. Josephus explains that the stones

on the breastplate and the sardonyx on the ephod had both “ceased to shine two hundred years

before I composed this work” (Ant. 3.218). It is difficult to determine whether Josephus carefully

calculated the years so that it would correspond to the reign of John Hyrcanus or whether he was

using two hundred as an approximation.

Most scholars have assumed the statement is referring to John Hyrcanus, since Josephus

later writes of Hyrcanus that “so close was he in touch with the Deity, that he was never ignorant

of the future” (War 1.69). The end of priestly prophecy is not elsewhere related to John Hyrcanus

and Josephus probably chose John Hyrcanus because he was known to be a successful military

leader and priestly divination is associated with the oracular consultation with Yahweh through

the high priest to determine whether a battle should be fought during a war.183

We return now to the question of what Josephus meant by the “exact succession of

prophets” and why this apparent succession had come to an end in the Persian period. Apart from

this one mention, there are no other references to an exact succession of prophets in Josephus. It

is clear that Josephus knew generally the chronology of prophets that Joshua came after Moses

and that Elisha had succeeded Elijah, but there is no evidence that he had an elaborate theory on

the succession of prophets. Gray suggests that this conception of prophetic succession was

derived from the fact that Josephus believed that only prophets who were inspired by God could

write perfect and accurate history and since there existed an exact history from the beginning of

183
For more detail on priestly prophecy see Gray, Prophetic Figures in Late Second Temple, 20, especially notes 47
and 48.
 Razzaq 106

humanity (recorded by Moses) through Artaxerxes I (in the Book of Eshter), there must have

been a prophet in each successive generation to record the inspired history. This logic is

convincing yet hypothetical. It is more likely that the belief in the failure of the exact succession

of prophets was due to the lack of written history or other evidence available to Josephus at the

time of his writing.

Though Josephus did write that the exact succession of prophets had ceased, it does not

mean that he thought that no more prophets at all were capable of writing history or that

prophecy in general had ceased. Since he states that his history begins where the prophetic

history left off (War 1.18), how does Josephus see himself in relation to the classical prophets

and in relation to prophecy in general? Whether or not Josephus saw himself as a prophet in the

sense of writing an inspired and accurate history is hard to tell. Josephus never explicitly calls

himself a prophet and never defends the accuracy of his history of the Jewish Revolt through

prophecy. Rather than prophetic knowledge, Josephus defends the accuracy of his account on the

basis that he was eyewitness to most of the events (Against Apion 1.47-55). While there were

other ways in which Josephus may have claimed prophetic capabilities and which will be

discussed later, it can be concluded that he did not see himself as a prophet-historian in the sense

of a successor in the exact line of succession of prophets.

Though Josephus mainly uses the term “prophet” (π ρ ο φ ή τ η ς )) to refer to figures from the

past, he mentions a number of contemporary figures whom he depicts as prophets without calling

them such. Rather than distancing these contemporary figures from the prophets of old, he draws

on their similarities through prophetic inspiration and predictive prophecy (which he himself

claims to possess!).
 Razzaq 107

Dreams are paramount to understanding Josephus’ conception of prophetic inspiration. In

his own autobiography, Josephus describes how he had once received a wonderful dream that

encouraged him early in the revolt to release his fears and holdfast to what he believed (Life,

208-10). The famous prediction that Vespasian would be emperor also apparently appeared to

him in several dreams that were interpreted according to the prophecies of the scriptures (War,

3.351-4). Josephus also believed that other groups and people in the Second Temple period could

receive divine messages through dreams and then interpret their dreams. These groups, including

the Essenes, will be discussed below. The idea that the ability to interpret dreams and to foretell

the future will very much have an impact on later New Testament like John of Patmos and others

who claim to be “prophets” and possess skills to interpret the future.184

Interestingly enough, it appears that Josephus believed that received most of their

revelations in dreams. In fact, he often adds a reference to a dream where there is none in the

actual text. John Barton’s Oracles of God: Perceptions of Ancient Prophets in Israel after the

Exile is an important work on perceptions of prophecy in the Second Temple Period more

broadly and has been immensely helpful in shedding light on Josephus as belonging to a

prophetic world as well.

It is interesting that in his close paraphrase of the biblical text, Josephus omits the

passage form Num. 12:6-8 in which God tells Aaron and Miriam that he will speak to other

prophets in dreams but he will speak to Moses mouth to mouth (Ant. 3.2). Compare this with the

paraphrase of 2 Sam. 12:1 in which God appears to Nathan and communicates his displeasure

with King David for the affair with Bathsheba. Not only does Josephus add the label “prophet”

to Nathan, but he also adds that God appeared to Nathan in a dream (Ant. 7.147). Josephus also

184
This is a really interesting topic that will be discussed at greater length in the subsequent chapter. See Feldman,
“Prophets and Prophecy” for more details, esp. pg. 404-7.
 Razzaq 108

adds a dream to the story from 1 Kings 9:2 when God reassures Solomon that he would abide in

the new Temple provided that the Jews remained righteous (Ant. 8.125).

As already mentioned, Josephus also calls Daniel a prophet several times.185 Josephus

appears to have a special admiration for Daniel, perhaps because he was devoted to interpreting

dreams and communicated with God this way. Josephus was probably aware of the Greco-

Roman belief that divine revelation usually came through dreams and may have read this view

back into the biblical “prophets.” Rebecca Gray argues that Josephus may have instead been

reading his own experience with dreams back into the revelations of the prophets, but Josephus

was more than aware of his cultural surroundings so the truth probably lies somewhere between

these two points.186

Developing the thesis of Barton, it may be observed that the concept of prophetic

revelation and inspiration through dreams places Josephus more in accord with pagan Greco-

Roman understandings of revelation as opposed to the “stricter” Jewish tradition. For example,

in Ben Sira 34:1-5 dreams are considered foolish; “A man of no understanding has vain and false

hopes and dreams give wings to fools.” The passage continues to portray dreams as a false,

“Divinations and omens and dreams are folly.” Rabbinic and Talmudic sources also share a

general skepticism of dreams while other rabbinic sources placed credence in dreams. Though a

lot has been written on this subject of dreams and prophecy, I will not discuss it here.187

Prophetic inspiration also causes individuals to act irrationally and ecstatically as a

method of communication and oftentimes enables them to perform superhuman tasks. Josephus

narrates a story in Antiquities 6.56 where Saul encounters an assembly of prophets at Gibeath-

185
See Feldman, 408 for exact references in the texts of Josephus.
186
Cf. Gray, 28
187
Cf. Ackerman, Susan, “Transformation of Prophecy”
 Razzaq 109

elohim. Samuel predicts that Saul will meet an assembly and he will prophesy with them

(presumably a sort of mantic prophesy). A similar encounter is mentioned in Antiquities 6.221-3

when Saul loses his reason “under the impulse of the mighty spirit” and strips his clothes and

prostrates on the ground for a whole day. In terms of superhuman strength, Josephus describes a

“divine inspiration” that helped Saul to dismember a team of oxen to rally against the

Ammonites (Ant. 6.76) and a similar divine inspiration that enables Elijah to outrun Ahab’s

chariot from Mt. Carmel to Jezreel (Ant. 8.346).

This same “divine inspiration” was present when the kings of Israel, Judah and Edom

came to consult Elisha. Elisha requests a musician and upon hearing the music, he becomes

‘divinely inspired’ and is able to give the kings the advice they came to seek (Ant. 9.35).

Josephus even refers to himself as being divinely inspired to understand his dreams and

predict that Vespasian would become emperor (War 3.353). Josephus must have understood

himself to be divinely inspired in the same way he described the earlier prophetic figures as

divinely inspired. It is again difficult to interpret whether Josephus was drawing a parallel

between himself (and other contemporary figures that experienced divine inspiration) and earlier

biblical prophets or whether he is distinguishing between two types of prophecy.

Another key feature of prophecy is the predictive element that presumably must come

true. Josephus emphasizes the fulfillment and truth of prophecies in his retelling of prophetic

stories, even when the biblical narrative does not necessarily emphasize this point. For example,

Josephus stresses and emphasizes the truth of Elijah’s prophecy of the death of the Samarian

king from 1 Kings 22:38 (Ant. 8.417). Josephus repeatedly draws attention to the truth of the

biblical prophets and prophetic accuracy and labels those who oppose the prophets, like
 Razzaq 110

Zedekiah, who refused to believe the predictions of Ezekiel and Jeremiah or Micaiah, who’s

prediction of Ahab’s death opposed Elijah, as “false prophets”.

Not only did Josephus find false prophets in the stories of the opponents of the biblical

prophets, he also believed in a type of fulfillment prophecy. He believed that the ancient biblical

prophets had already predicted many of the events in his own day. According to Josephus, many

prophets including Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel had already forseen the destruction of the Temple

in 70 CE long before it actually happened (Ant. 10.79 and 10.276).

Daniel was specifically noted for having many long-range predictive prophecies of events

that remained long into the future, even for Josephus. He interprets Daniel 2:34-5 as an

indication that the Roman Empire would one day be overthrown by the Jews. Josephus esteems

Daniel’s prophecy so much that he calls him one of the greatest prophets who was honored by

kings. According to Josephus, Daniel’s writings are a convincing testament that he “spoke with

God, for he was not only wont to prophesy future things, as did the other prophets, but he also

fixed the time at which these would come to pass,” (Ant. 10.266-7).188

In a more contemporary context, Josephus does not hesitate to accuse various groups of

false prophecy leading up to and during the Revolt against Rome, and these are specifically

called the ‘sign prophets.’ Theudas, for example, asserted that he was a prophet around the year

45 to 46 CE and led a large number of followers to the Jordan River, which he claimed would

part at his command (Ant. 20.97). Theudus’ decision to go to the Jordan River probably reflects

his desire to recall Moses at the Red Sea and Joshua at the Jordan as a sign of the deliverance of

188
As an aside, I think it’s very interesting that Josephus sees Daniel as an ancient prophet like the earlier classical
prophets, when most modern scholars would date the book of Daniel somewhere in the second century BCE
(especially the second half, chapters 7-12, which are presumed to be written after the Maccabean revolution). This
also shows the discrepancy between Josephus’ understanding of prophets and the modern conception and critical
approach.
 Razzaq 111

the people. Howevr, Fadus, the Roman prefect at the time, captured many of Theudus’ followers

and even Theudus himself was captured and immediately beheaded. Josephus considers Theudus

a false prophet and calls him an “imposter” since he deceives a large group of people to

believing in a miracle that never occurred. Interestingly Theudas also appears in the Book of

Acts 5:6, but is not labeled as a prophet, but rather Josephus simply states that he “claimed to be

somebody.” Josephus adds Theudus to his list of false sign prophets.

Another self-proclaimed prophetic figure in Josephus under the “procuratorship” of Felix

is the Egyptian. Josephus describes how The Egyptian gains the reputation of a prophet by

deceiving the people. Josephus calls him a false prophet (ψ ε υ δ ο π ρ ο φ ή τ η ς )) and

and an imposter (•ν υ ρ ω π ο ς ).
an imposter ).

The Egyptian declared that he was a prophet and led masses of people to the Mount of Olives

and claimed that the walls of Jerusalem would fall down (Ant. 20.169). This prophetic claim is

reminiscent of the story of the conquest of Jericho under Joshua and there is almost no doubt that

the Egyptian had modeled his “prophetic” claims on this story.

There are several different accounts of the actions of The Egyptian within Josephus and it

is not entirely clear what actually took place. The Egyptian and his followers apparently headed

to the Mt. of Olives to witness the miraculous toppling of the city walls, but before anything can

be seen the Romans arrive and capture most of the followers. The Egyptian escapes and his end

is not known. A version of the story of someone claiming that the walls of Jerusalem will fall is

also told in Acts 21:38, however, there is no mention of the Egyptian as a prophet. The version in

Acts conflates The Egyptian with the violent revolutionary group of the Sicarii.

There is another unnamed prophet who witnesses the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE

and Josephus describes the figure and other prophets like him who “were planted among the

people by the tyrants to announce that they [the followers] should wait for help from God…”
 Razzaq 112

(War 6.286-7). The exact signs that this unnamed prophet was supposedly promising his

followers are never alluded to in the narrative.

As was mentioned earlier, Josephus claims that he is the beneficiary of divine dreams and

predictive capabilities. We can distinguish two different, but interconnected prophetic roles in

Josephus:

Firstly, Josephus presents himself as a “Jeremiah-like” figure, to use Shaye Cohen’s

terminology.189 There are some striking similarities between the lives of the prophet Jeremiah and

the priestly “prophetic” Josephus. Both Josephus and Jeremiah denounced sin and argued that it

was God’s will to submit to foreign rule (as a collective punishment). In the early sixth century

BCE, when the Babylonians besieged Jerusalem, Jeremiah encouraged the Jews to surrender

much like Josephus would do in the first century during the Jewish Revolt against Rome. Both

Josephus and Jeremiah are accused of deserting to the enemy and bringing down the morale of

the people against foreign invaders. Both Jeremiah and Josephus also had to deal with prophetic

figures that promised the Jewish people victory and deliverance. Jeremiah must confront false

prophets who claim that Jerusalem will be saved from the Babylonians and Josephus must

confront the various sign prophets who make false promises of victory against the Romans.

Josephus also denounces false prophets, some of which have been noted earlier and attempts to

preserve the Temple (War 5.362-419 and Ant. 10.113).190

Josephus is clearly familiar with the story of Jeremiah and even the Greek Polybius who

also predicted the rise of Rome and the fall of his own Greece and condoned surrender to Rome

189
See: Cohen, Shaye J. D., “Jospheus, Jeremiah, and Polybius” History and Theory, Vol. 21, No. 3, (Oct. 1982)
190
See Gray, Rebecca, 78 for reference.
 Razzaq 113

as God’s plan. The question still remains whether or not Josephus based his own experiences on

these two previous stories. Even if he did base his perspective in these stories, was he trying to

campaign his prophetic status by comparing himself to Jeremiah? It is not entirely clear.

Josephus’ knowledge of God’s plans and his prophecy about Rome are apparently based

on what he sees in his dreams. His ability to interpret these dreams is based on his priestly

expertise and his extensive knowledge of the prophecies in the Tanakh. As Cohen writes,

Josephus’ divinely inspired dream “is not a case of reading sacred scripture and awaiting its

divinely inspired interpretation, a procedure we find elsewhere in ancient Judaism, but a case of

remembering dreams and interpreting them in light of Biblical prophecies.”191 This is an essential

difference to keep in mind. In part 1 of this thesis, I discussed the emergence of the “inspired

exegete” and the role of the pesharim and the Teacher of Righteousness as the divinely inspired

interpreter of the prophetic words. Josephus’ prophetic dream is distinct from this inspired

exegetical process and rather involves memory of earlier prophetic words rather than necessarily

divine inspiration to interpret them.

Throughout his autobiography, Josephus also interestingly compares himself to Daniel.192

The comparison with Daniel emphasizes the point that both Daniel and Josephus interpret

dreams with divine help. Josephus interprets dreams and omens not only with divine insptiration,

but also because of his deep knowledge of the prophecies in the Tanakh. Like Daniel, Josephus

rose to power under a foreign ruler as a result of his prophetic gifts of interpretation, and most

importantly, he also came to know God’s plans for the future through his various dreams as well

(Life 422-3).

191
Cohen, Shaye J. D., “Jospheus, Jeremiah, and Polybius” (370)
192
Gray, 74-76
 Razzaq 114

It can be concluded, then, that the classical prophets were held in high esteem and as a

source of authority. Each of the prophetic and pseudo-prophetic figures discussed above draw in

some way on the actions and words of earlier classical prophets to solidify their legitimacy. Even

Josephus presumably draws heavily from Jeremiah and interprets his dreams with extensive

knowledge of the imagery and terminology of the classical prophets. Was Josephus a prophet

then? Yes and no. It is extremely difficult to discern which parts of his experience he drew from

earlier prophetic works and which parts have some bearing in reality. It is not unlikely that

Josephus would have had dreams, but whether these dreams contained special prophetic material

is another question altogether.

The purpose of discussing the case of Josephus after the Dead Sea Scrolls is to draw the

reader’s attention to the diverse examples of prophetic or pseudo-prophetic activity in the Late

Second Temple period and first century CE. The purpose of this thesis is not to explain every

example of prophetic activity and writing in the post-exilic period, but rather to provide the

reader with a taste of the various conceptions of prophecy that were present in this transitional

formative period for Judaism.

The emergence of other prophetic figures like John the Baptist is thus simply another

example of the types of prophets that were present and their relations to the canonized scripture.

Whether the Tanakh was fully canonized in the first century CE is not my concern here, but it is

clear, as I have discussed in earlier chapters, that the Pentateuch and certain prophetic books had

certainly gained an authoritative status. This is most overtly evidenced in the explosion of

exegetical works on prophetic books.

This world of diverse exegetical perspectives on prophetic books and massive amounts of

Pseudepigrapha form the context in which early Christianity emerged. In a very similar manner
 Razzaq 115

to earlier Jewish movements, early Christianity followed interpretations of Tanakh by the

charismatic Jesus. Prophetic inspiration allowed Jesus to interpret the prophetic books of the

Tanakh in a way that was simultaneously new while also being firmly rooted in the fulfillment

prophecy of earlier Jewish movements including the Qumran community. For sake of space, I

will not discuss the gospels in greater detail since I already outlined important parallels ad

distinctions with the pesharim in chapter 5. In the next chapter, we will skip ahead to the figure

of John of Patmos and the changing face of prophecy in the Book of Revelation.
 Razzaq 116

CASE STUDY 3: JOHN OF PATMOS AND

BOOK OF REVELATION

CHAPTER 9: REVELATION OF JOHN: AN INQUIRY INTO THE CHANGING FACE OF

PROPHECY

The previous two parts of this thesis have looked at the various manifestations of prophecy in the

early and late Second Temple Period, more specifically the pesharim in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the

writings of the first century Jewish historian Josephus. We have seen the undulations between the

continuations of select pre-exilic prophetic themes in Josephus as well as the rupture of and creation of

new ways to understand the function and forms of prophetic experience in the Dead Sea Scrolls.
 Razzaq 117

The pesharim not only embodied a new form of prophetic exegesis but also a new type of

prophetic message in which the words of the earlier prophets were applied to the present and imbued with

eschatological significance. In this way the pesharim represent a kind of rupture for the classical forms of

prophecy193. Though Josephus’ writings may be understood and interpreted in many different ways, the

very act of writing his history reflects his desire to continue the work of the pre-exilic prophets, whom he

depicts as divinely inspired historians and the only true intermediaries between the divine and the people.

We have also seen other prophetic types appear in the late Second Temple Period as messianic fervor

arose in an increasingly complex Roman Palestine.

The emergence of Jesus and his Jewish followers in the first century undoubtedly had an impact

on the understanding of prophetic roles and the immediacy of pre-exilic prophetic utterances. Though the

Dead Sea Scrolls already exhibit an appropriation of earlier prophets, the systematic fulfillment prophecy

that surfaces in the sayings and message of Jesus indicate a significant shift. The differences between

“Jewish” and “Christian” prophecy may be debated, but it is important to remember that distinguishing

between first or second century Jews and first or second century Jewish followers of Jesus is much more

difficult than most have imagined.

In this chapter, I am interested in taking a closer look at the changing nature of prophecy after the

emergence of the Jesus movement and destruction of the Second Temple. There are many ways to

approach this question, and I will be focusing on the prophetic and apocalyptic aspects of the Book of

Revelation,194 presumably written by John of Patmos in the late first century. Unlike any other book in the

New Testament canon, the eccentric imagery of the Book of Revelation has captivated the interest of so

many scholars and readers throughout the ages. What kind of book is Revelation and what is its relation

to earlier Second Temple Jewish writings? Can Revelation be understood solely as apocalyptic or are

there other prophetic features as well? How does Revelation make use of earlier prophets and does it

embody a new prophetic consciousness? Can an argument be made for the emergence a uniquely

193 These prophetic types were discussed in the second chapter of this thesis. Definitions of prophecy are in the
introduction.
194 I will refer to the Book of Revelation simply as “Revelation” for the remainder of the essay.
 Razzaq 118

“Christian” prophecy and how is this different from previous prophetic types? These questions can help

us better understand the dynamics of prophecy in the late first century and also to locate a transition, if

any real transition can be discerned, from earlier Jewish prophecy to a newer Christian prophecy.

Before identifying and problematizing the genre of Revelation, it would be useful to briefly

discuss the history and definition of “apocalyptic” literature and how, if it all, it is related to prophetic

literature. The words “apocalypse” and “apocalyptic” have become synonymous with a grand cosmic

catastrophe and oftentimes the end of the world. The title and imagery of the Book of Revelation or the

Apocalypse of John have undoubtedly influenced the popular notion of the word. However, the word

“apocalypse” actually comes from the Greek apokalypsis, meaning “to uncover” or “to reveal.”

The study of apocalyptic literature gained great interest in the nineteenth century amongst

German Biblicists like Freidrich Lucke, who published the first comprehensive study of the subject in

1832.195 Lucke’s work was perhaps inspired by the recent translation and publication of the Ethiopic book

of Enoch and he included 1 Enoch along with 4 Ezra and the Sibylline Oracles to reconstruct a literary

context for Christian apocalyptic (i.e., Book of Revelation). The corpus of apocalypses was enlarged in

the twentieth century as more ancient apocalypses were discovered in a range of languages. The almost

contemporaneous discoveries of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi Library of Gnostic gospels

revealed many new apocalyptic pieces. These discoveries renewed scholarly interest in understanding

apocalyptic literature and trying to delineate its boundaries.

Yet despite this interest, there was (and still is) a great ambivalence amongst scholars as to the

role and significance of apocalyptic literature. On the one-hand scholars like Ernst Kasemann declared

that “apocalyptic was the mother of all Christian theology.”196 On the other hand, many scholars have

been perplexed- if not ashamed of Christian apocalyptic writings as Klaus Koch described in his 1972,

The Rediscovery of Apocalyptic. Though both views convey the exaggerated extremes, there is some truth

195 As stated in: Collins, John J. "What Is Apocalyptic Literature?" The Oxford Handbook of Apocalyptic Literature. Ed. John J.

Collins, 2014, (1-16).

196 Kasemann, Ernst, “The Beginnings of Christian Theology,” JTC 6, 1969 (40)
 Razzaq 119

in them. Many authoritative biblical scholars of nineteenth century, including Julius Wellhausen, Emil

Schurer and others did not see apocalyptic literature as worthwhile to study and considered it to be a
197
product of “‘Late Judaism,’ which was greatly inferior to the prophets.” This attitude was perhaps due

to the confusion and conflation between “apocalypse” as a literary type and apocalypticism as an

historical millenarian movement.

In his famous Dawn of the Apocalyptic, Paul Hanson proposed distinctions between “apocalypse”

as a literary type, “apocalypticism” as a social ideology and “apocalyptic eschatology” as a set of ideas

and motifs. In 1979, John J. Collins published a definition and morphology for the genre of “apocalyptic”

literature written between 250 BCE and 250 CE. The definition was as follows: “a genre of revelatory

literature with a narrative framework, in which a revelation is mediated by an otherworldly being to a

human recipient, disclosing a transcendent reality which is both temporal, insofar as it envisages
198
eschatological salvation, and special insofar as it involves another supernatural world.” Collins further

distinguished between two major types of apocalypses, namely ‘historical’ apocalypses, such as Daniel, 4

Ezra or 2 Baruch, in which elaborate and broad views of history are presented through prophecy, and

‘otherworldly’ journey apocalypses, like 2 Enoch, in which the central plot is the journey. Of course these

two types many times overlap, but most apocalypses are predominantly one or the other.

Klaus Koch’s definition of apocalyptic literature differs from Collins. Koch identified six typical

features of the genre: discourse cycles, spiritual turmoils, paranetic discourses (usually with or through

some angelic or other-worldly figure), pseudonymity (usually by inserting the name of a venerable

patriarch or figure from distant past), mythical imagery, and composite character.199 Not every apocalypse

necessarily has all six of these elements, but they serve as useful tools to organize and deconstruct

apocalyptic writings, at least literarily.

197 Collins, John J. The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature. Grand Rapids, MI: William

B. Eerdmans, 1998 (1)

198 Collins, “What is Apocalyptic Literature” (2).
199 Russell, D.S. The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic, Philadelphia: Westminister, 1964 (103-39).
 Razzaq 120

While many aspects of these classifications and definitions have been accepted, scholarly debate

continues about whether it is even appropriate to speak of an apocalyptic genre, or any genre at all200 that

claims to unify a group of writings from Second Temple Judaism and early Christianity. Carol Newsom,

for example, rejects the idea of a distinct genre of apocalyptic literature and prefers to speak of these

writings as participating in some of the same themes and narrative structure, but never belonging together

to one genre. This approach “accommodates better not only the mulitgeneric nature of many apocalypses

but also their irreducible particularity.”201

There is a great risk of rigidly compartmentalizing various “apocalyptic” writings and projecting

the rise and fall of these genres onto a linear understanding of history. The concept of delineating a

distinct apocalyptic ‘genre’ often stems from what Hindy Najman calls the “chronological thesis,” namely

the idea that as prophecy came to end, apocalypse increasingly flourished. In this way, apocalypse is
202
depicted as the successor of prophecy or, as H.H. Rowley states, “the child of prophecy.”

The prophetic genre, as opposed to the apocalyptic genre, is identified with prophetic speech,

which can either be unmediated revelation from God, or through oracles and inspired speech, often

reported by the attached phrase, “thus says the Lord.” Other features of the prophetic genre include

prophetic announcements and dialogues with God. The main figure of prophetic literature is always the

divinely appointed Navi’ and depending on the content of the revelation, different subcategories can also

be distinguished. The features of the apocalyptic genre described above are often and usually depicted in

deliberate contrast with the features of the prophetic genre.

As I have argued earlier in this thesis, there was probably not yet any generally accepted

canonical scripture known as “the Bible/Tanakh” in the Second Temple period and to speak of the

canonical Bible in distinction to apocryphal books (many of which are in some way “apocalyptic”) is

200 Recall the discussion about the problems of delineating genres and the discussion on Jacques Derrida’s ‘law of genre’ in
section 2 of this thesis, “Re-Interpreting Prophecy in the Pesharim: An Inquiry into the Genealogy of a Tradition. ” Please
see pages 1-2 of this earlier section for more detailed discussion on genre.
201 As quoted in Collins, “What is Apocalyptic Literature?” (3)
202 Najman, Hindy, “The Inheritance of Prophecy in Apocalypse,” in The Oxford Handbook of Apocalyptic Literature. Ed.

John J. Collins, 2014, (37).

 Razzaq 121

inaccurate. Florentino Garcia Martinez has described the Second Temple literary situation in terms of

“pluriformity.”203 Though the argument for “pluriformity” was made in the context of the texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls, the concept also applies to the wider array of Jewish texts in the Second Temple period.

In my discussion of the pesharim, I argued that while there was a wide range of writings and

Pseudepigrapha at Qumran and elsewhere, there was also a sense of at least the Pentateuch being

authoritative, since parts of the Torah was often quoted or imitated in the Pseudepigrapha.

It is also interesting that of the many Jewish writings of the Second Temple period, none of the
204
authors proclaim to be prophets in their own right, nor are the names of any new prophetic figures. Yet

many texts were written in the name of, or at least attributed to, earlier prophets. The attribution of a text

to an earlier prophet is undoubtedly a method to claim authenticity and authority. Writers could claim

authority either by writing in the name of an established prophet, or by recasting an established textual

tradition in a way that incorporated the author’s preferred legal and theological position. Revelation

arguably belongs to this tradition of claiming authority through pseudonymity.

While we have seen throughout this thesis that there is no rupture marking the “cessation of

prophecy,” there is certainly a discernable trend toward a kind of mediated prophecy that involved angels,

or otherworldly figures as intermediaries, rather than the classical biblical prophecy in which direct

revelation was the standard method of communication between God and the prophet. The prophetic

project in which human prophets served as the mouthpiece of God continued through the Second Temple

Period, but as Hindy Najman convincingly argues, these prophetic texts increasingly relied on “strategies

of inheritance.”205 It is in the context of this transition that the relation between prophecy and apocalypse

should be understood.

203 Garcia Martinez, Florentino, “Parabiblical Literature from Qumran and the Canonical Process,” Review de Qumran,
2013 (25)
204 Even when we do hear of new prophetic names and figures as we saw in the earlier Josephus section, none of the so-

called prophets have any writings.

205 Najman, Hindy, “The Inheritance of Prophecy in Apocalypse” (49)
 Razzaq 122

The relation between prophecy and apocalypse is intertwined with the emergence of Christianity

and the relation between Christian apocalyptic tradition and prophecy and Jewish apocalyptic tradition

and prophecy. In the next part of the essay, I will discuss these relationships as they appear in Revelation

and what we can learn about conceptions of early Christian prophecy.

First, let us return to the question of problematizing the genre of Revelation. Can we categorize

Revelation as a Jewish apocalypse or understand it as a prophetic book, or perhaps a combination of both?

The definition and features of Jewish apocalyptic writings discussed earlier can be useful in

understanding Revelation as well. There are many similarities in literary form and revelatory content

between Revelation and the Book of Daniel chapters 7-12, 1 and 2 Enoch, 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch. In each of

these works the revelation is delivered in the form of a heavenly vision (or ascent) and it is always

mediated by a heavenly figure, usually an angel, who interprets the vision. In terms of content, each of

these writings is eschatological and expresses the hope of cosmic transformation. The combination of this

method of revelation and the eschatological content of the revelation is the basic foundation for works

that can be seen as apocalyptic.

The opening verse of Revelation, “The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show

his servants what must soon take place; he made it known by sending his angel to his servant John…”206

(Rev. 1:1) immediately highlights the eschatological expectation of what will soon transpire as well as the

method of revelation through an intermediary angel. This opening line connects Revelation to the Jewish

apocalypses.

There are also important differences between Revelation and the Jewish apocalypses. Most

Jewish apocalypses, like Daniel or 2 Baruch indulge in lengthy ex-eventu prophecies, in which

supposedly distant future events are predicted through earlier revelations. While Revelation does refer to

206 Revelation 1:1, I’ll be using the NRSV translation.

 Razzaq 123

earlier history and future events to come, there is no explicit ex-eventu prophecy.207 Unlike the Jewish

apocalypses that had to argue for the proximity of the end days, there was already a widespread belief in

Early Christian writings that the last days had been initiated by the death and resurrection of Christ. The

second coming of Christ was not assigned to some distant future, but was fast approaching. Paul assures

the Corinthians, for example, that “We will not die, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the

twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet” (1 Cor. 15:51). In Mark 13:26-31, as well, the imminent second

coming is emphasized; “Then they will see ‘the Son of Man coming in clouds’ with great power and

glory. Then he will send out the angels…. truly, I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all

these things have taken place.”

The mostly widespread belief regarding the imminent nearness of the second coming in the first

centuries of Christianity made the technique of ex-eventu prophecy largely superfluous. Still, there is no

lack of historical review in Revelation. In Rev. 17:9-12, the reader is told that the seven heads of the beast

are seven kings of whom five have fallen, the sixth is living and the seventh is yet to come and will only

last a short time. The kings are presumably Roman emperors, as John challenges the evil empire.208

History as presented here in Revelation is predetermined; in other words, God has already planned the end

and it is very near.

Rev. 12:10-11 also refers to the past, “Now have come the salvation and the power and the

kingdom of God and the authority of his Messiah, for the accurses of our comrades has been thrown

down…they conquered him by the blood of the Lamb.” Though the passage is rather vague, it is

relatively clear that it is referring to the crucifixion of Christ (i.e., the blood of the lamb) and the early

martyrs and the assurance that Satan will be overcome since God already cast him down from Heaven in

the past. Though Revelation does repeatedly make use of historical events, there is no explicit ex-eventu

prophecy as in the Jewish apocalypses.

207 See Collins, John j. “Pseudonymity, Historical Review and the Revelation of John,” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 39:3,
1977, 338. Collins presents a much more detailed discussion on this topic.
208 See Pagels, Elaine, Revelations: Visions, Prophecy and Politics in the Book of Revelation, Penguin Group: New York, 2012,

especially chapter 1, “John’s Revelation: Challenging the Evil Empire, Rome” for a more detailed discussion of the politics
and historical review of Rome in Revelation.
 Razzaq 124

There are several other distinguishing factors between Revelation and many of the Jewish

apocalypses listed above.209 One of the most notable differences is, perhaps, the lack of pseudonymity in

Revelation. Many scholars regard pseudonymity and the accompanying esotericism an essential feature of

the Jewish apocalyptic tradition. P. Vielhaeur also claimed that the issue of pseudonymity is important as

a distinguishing factor between Revelation and other apocalypses. Vielhaeur further distinguished these

apocalypses by the fact that John is “a genuine prophet” who is presenting his visions in the form of a

letter rather than someone from the scribal class writing prophecies of supposed future events after they

have already occured.210 While pseudonymity may have been part of many Jewish apocalypses, it was by

no means peculiar to apocalyptic literature. In fact, pseudonymity was a widespread phenomenon in the

Hellenistic world and often simply indicated the desire to increase the authority of the work by attaching

the name of a prophetic or authoritative figure. Therefore it would not be correct to use the lack of

pseudonymity as a reason to not identify Revelation as part of the Jewish apocalyptic tradition.

Determinism in Revelation can also be seen in the idea that the plan of God has unalterably been

laid down in the book with seven seals, and, once the Lamb has opened this book, the divine plan is

unfolded without obstruction. This determinism can be seen as a “Christianized” version of a theme

already found in earlier Jewish apocalypses. The dualism between heaven and earth, believers and

pagans, good and bad, and the insistence on the imminence of the end (for John, “the End” is when the

Kingdom of heaven will descend) is also a common feature of apocalypses.

But the fact that Revelation shares these features with other apocalyptic writings does not

necessarily mean that the whole book is apocalyptic. Indeed there are clearly important “prophetic”

aspects as well. The importance of prophecy is already visible in the first chapter, Rev. 1:3, in which John

writes, “Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of the prophecy, and blessed are those who hear

209 I am referring to Daniel, Enoch, 2 Baruch, 4 Ezra, etc. I realize that these books are not all identical and each has its
particular nature, I am placing them in the same group because they do share many aspects.
210 See Collins, John j. “Pseudonymity, Historical Review and the Revelation of John,” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 39:3,

1977, 330.
 Razzaq 125

and who keep what is written in it; for the time is near.” Clearly John sees himself as a recipient of

revelation and therefore a prophet, at least in a general sense of the term.

Prophecies from the Tanakh seem to be fulfilled in Revelation in a variety of ways. None of these

prophecies are necessarily introduced with any kind of fulfillment formula and this can be understood as

“informal direct prophetic-fulfillment uses.”211 In Rev. 1:7, for example, the promise of Christ’s return is

stated, “Look! He is coming with the clouds; every eye will see him…” This passage appears to be a

reference to and fulfillment of Zech. 12:10. There is an interesting universalization to the prophecies in

Revelation that is not present in the earlier prophetic books of the Tanakh, since the earlier prophets

prophesied for an Israelite Jewish audience, whereas John seems to be speaking to the multiple nations of

God.

In chapter 10 as well, John appears to be the recipient of a prophetic call. The appearance of an

angel in the interlude between the sixth and seventh trumpets and the symbolic account of the “little scroll

open in his hand” (Rev. 10:2) is reminiscent of the commissioning of Ezekiel as prophet in Ezek 2:9, “and

when I looked, behold, a hand was put forth unto me; and lo, a roll of a book was therein” though verse 5

of chapter 3. John’s proclamation of the oracles of God on the nations also resembles Jeremiah 1:10,

“See, I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms…”

What is the purpose of recalling previous prophets and fulfilling their prophecies? On the one

hand it can be argued that this is a method of gaining authenticity by basing the text in the language of

authoritative prophets (a method we saw used by earlier apocalyptic works). On the other hand, recalling

the classical prophets of the Tanakh may indicate, as some have argued, a renewal of prophecy.212 I will

return to this question later when I discuss whether there is such a thing as uniquely “Christian” prophecy

and whether John can be understood as being part of this new system of prophecy.

211 Beale, G. K., and D. A. Carson. Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, Baker Academic: Grand
Rapids, 2007 (1085)
212 See Hill, David “Prophecy and Prophets in the Revelation of John” New Testament Studies, 18:4, 1972, (403-18) for

more detailed discussion of John as a genuine prophet.

 Razzaq 126

Undoubtedly prophets and prophecy have a major role in Revelation. There appears to be a direct

line of transmission of prophecy to which John belongs at least for the duration of his vision in

Revelation. The message of the impending end and the second coming appears to descend from God to

Christ who transmits it to an angel and finally to John, making his words authentic. This can be seen in

Rev. 22:6, “And he said to me, ‘These words are trustworthy and true, for the Lord, the God of the spirits

of the prophets, has sent his angel to show his servants what must soon take place.” A few verses later in

Rev. 22:8, John proclaims to be the one “who heard and saw these things,” presenting himself as a

prophetic figure with access to the divine realm through an intermediary angel.

There is an interesting warning at the end in Rev. 22:18-19, “I warn everyone who hears the

words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to that person the plagues

described in this book.” This warning ensures that no one will alter the words of his prophetic visions and

the words will remain authentic. This warning also has its precedent in the Torah. Deuteronomy 4:1-2

and 29:19-20 express similar warnings, “Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither

shall ye diminish from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord.”

Now let us turn to the question of whether a uniquely “Christian” prophetic consciousness can be

determined from Revelation. It is clear that prophetic formulas and references are present in Revelation

and that the classical Tanakh prophets are seen as authoritative. I will argue that an independent prophetic

consciousness does exist in Revelation, though it may not be uniquely “Christian.”

The very act of composing a book like Revelation indicates that its author is a visionary figure,

not necessarily a prophet. John does not write Revelation in his capacity as a prophet per se, but rather at

direct command from God. This direct line of communication with God assumes an authentic prophetic

consciousness. John employs certain aspects of classical Tanakh prophecy, like the prophetic formula

“Thus said the Lord,” and yet clearly does share everything with the classical prophets. Though early

Christian prophetic figures existed when John is presumed to have written Revelation, he does not share

much with this kind of prophet. Most church prophets in early Christianity were limited in their social and
 Razzaq 127

political impact to the to the Church itself. John, on the other hand, does not appear to be bound to any

particular location in this way.

John may be seen as a distinct sort of in-between hybrid prophetic figure since he does not belong

to any particular prophetic tradition. David Hill has drawn a parallel between the Teacher of

Righteousness at Qumran and John of Patmos as both were understood to be prophetic figures in the end-

days and as the legitimate successors of the ancient prophets.213 This comparison is not compelling

because the prophetic aspects of the Teacher of Righteousness were present in his inspired interpretation

and exegesis of the words of the classical biblical prophets. John, on the other hand, composes an entirely

separate book of visions and prophecies that is not solely dependent on the classical biblical prophets.

This is not to say that John does not possess exegetical abilities since he clearly applies fulfillment

prophetic techniques to selected words of classical prophets as I have discussed earlier in this chapter.

Rather than focusing on the predictive aspects of his visions, John focuses on the immediate

consequences of the described eschatological events for the church of his time. John witnessed the

devastating destruction of Jerusalem and the establishment of Rome in the Levant. These events must

have worried John and the real focus of his prophetic visions should be seen as a commentary on the

contemporary events during his lifetime and the changing nature of Judaism and an increasingly distinct

“Christianity.” This emphasis on the present situation and its presumed close connection to the second

coming of Jesus in the visions of John is distinct from other New Testament prophets who had a largely

pedagogical function to interpret the Tanakh for daily use.

The book of Revelation is undoubtedly an enigmatic text and its author, John of Patmos, even

more allusive. As the case is for many of the other texts in the Late Second Temple early Christian period,

it is extremely difficult to pinpoint how exactly prophecy was conceived and which figures were

identified as prophets. While it is important to try to understand conceptions of prophecy and the different

213
Hill, David “Prophecy and Prophets in the Revelation of John” New Testament Studies, 18:4, 1972, (415)
 Razzaq 128

types of prophets, it is also important to understand that many figures and writings cannot be neatly

categorized into “types.”

John of Patmos is a visionary prophet of some sort who is reacting to the fast changing world

around him and writes the fantastical book of Revelation as a method of drawing people’s attention to the

consequences of the destruction of Jerusalem, the rise of Rome and the fulfillment of earlier prophecies.

Revelation appropriates elements from Jewish apocalyptic tradition, classical biblical prophets, Qumran

sectarian writings and other New Testament prophetic and pedagogical texts. Revelation is one of the

most complicated books to understand and categorize and this is precisely why I chose to end my thesis

with it. The complicatedness of John’s visions reflects the diverse and volatile perceptions of prophecy

and prophetic words in the first century by various Jewish and early Christian groups.

CHAPTER 10: CONCLUSION

In this thesis, I have tried to argue for the simultaneous continuation and change of

prophecy from the pre-exilic classical biblical period to the first century CE. Through analyzing

various primary documents from the late Second Temple to early Christian period, we have seen

the changing natures of prophecy and how various Jewish and early “Christian” groups in

ancient Palestine conceived and perceived prophecy.

There was a significant shift from oral and ecstatic prophecy in the early Israelite periods

to more classical written prophecy in the eighth to the sixth centuries BCE. Finally, as we saw

with the pesharim, Josephus and Revelation, the Second Temple period initiated another

significant shift in the nature of prophecy. This time, the writers of scripture and the interpreters

of scripture became prophets.

The complex common Judaism of the Second Temple period cultivated a vast array of

literature and Pseudepigrapha. The explosion of anonymous Pseudepigrapha and apocalyptic

 Razzaq 129

writings and prophecies reflected the volatile socio-cultural and religious tensions in post-exilic

Palestine. Conceptions of prophecy and revelation varied widely, and the social roles of

prophetic figures changed from public figures to inspired exegetes of previous scripture. Various

theological groups made claims to prophetic legitimacy and produced a number of texts

seemingly containing prophecies. This makes it extremely difficult for scholars to make any

conclusions on the nature and status of prophecy in the last few centuries BCE.

Issues of the canonization of scripture also affected perceptions of prophecy. Various

groups including those from scribal and priestly classes endorsed different beliefs about the

continuation, change, or complete cessation of prophecy. I have tried to focus on the relations of

different Second Temple texts with the classical prophets and the emergence of new forms of

prophecy in the aforementioned writings. There are many texts that I have not discussed in this

thesis and many issues that I have not touched upon due to the practical restraints of this thesis.

It is important to note that I have only briefly problematized the issue of continuity and

change of prophecy in the late post-exilic period. This thesis is just the beginning of what I hope

will be a long-term study of the transition of prophecy in Late Antiquity as I pursue my graduate

studies.
 Razzaq 130

BIBLIOGRAPHY (Please also See Footnotes)

A R. George. “Babylonian Texts from the Folios of Sidney Smith, Part Two: Prognostic and
Diagnostic Omens, Tablet I,” RA 85 (1991)

Beale, G. K., and D. A. Carson. Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament,
Baker Academic: Grand Rapids, 2007

Begg, Christopher T. “The Classical Prophets in Josephus’ Antiquities” Louvain Studies, 1988

Bockmuehl, Markus “The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Origins of Biblical Commentary,” in Text,
Thought and Practice in Qumran and Early Christianity. Ed. R.A. Clements and D.R. Shwartz,
Leiden: Bril, 2009

Borghouts, J.F. “Witchcraft, Magic and Divination in Ancient Egypt” in J.M. Sasson,
Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, New York: Scribner, 1775-1785.

Brooke, George. “Genre Theory, Rewritten Bible and Pesher” Dead Sea Discoveries 17, 2010

Brooke, “The Pesharim and the Origins of the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in Methods of Investigation of
the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Khirbet Qumran Site: Present Realities and Future Prospects, ed.
Michael O. Wise, Norman Goib, JJ Collins, and Dennis Pardee; Annals of the New York
Academy of sciences 722; NYC, NY, 1994;

Butler, Sally. Mesopotamian Conceptions of Dreams and Dream Rituals. AOAT 258, Munster:
Ugarit-Verlag
 Razzaq 131

Charles, R. H. Religious Development Between the Old and New Testaments, London: Williams
and Norgate, 1914

Cohen, Shaye J. D., “Jospheus, Jeremiah, and Polybius” History and Theory, Vol. 21, No. 3,
(Oct. 1982)

Cook, L. Stephen. On the Question of the "Cessation of Prophecy" in Ancient Judaism.

Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011

Collins, J.J A Commentary on the Book of Daniel 1997

Collins, John J. The Scepter and the Star: The Messiahs of the Dead Sea Scrolls and other
Ancient Literatre, Anchor Bible Reference Library; New York, NY: Doubleday, 1995

Collins, John J. "What Is Apocalyptic Literature?" The Oxford Handbook of Apocalyptic

Literature. Ed. John J. Collins, 2014

Collins, John j. “Pseudonymity, Historical Review and the Revelation of John,” The Catholic
Biblical Quarterly, 39:3, 1977

Cornill, Carl Heinrich, and Sutton F. Corkran. The Prophets of Israel. Chicago: Open Court Pub.,
1899

Davies, Philip R. The Damascus Covenant: An Interpretation of the ‘Damascus Document’

Sheffield, UK: JSOT, Dept. of Biblical Studies, U Sheffield, 1983:

De Jong, Isaiah Among the Ancient Near Eastern Prophets: A Comparative Study of the Earliest
Stages of the Isaiah Tradition and the Neo-Assyrian Prophecies (VT.S 117, Leiden: Brill) 2007

Derrida, Jacques and Avital Ronell, “The Law of Genre” Critical Inquiry, Vol. 7, No. 1, Autumn
1980

Ehud Ben Zvi’s chapter, “Writings, Speeches, and the Prophetic Books-Setting an Agenda” in
Writings and Speech in Israelite and Ancient Near Eastern Prophecy (ed. E. Ben Zvi and
Michael Floyd; SBL, 2000)

Feldman, Louis. “Prophets and Prophecy in Josephus” Journal of Theological Studies, NS, Vol.
41, Pt. 2, October 1990

Fishbane, Michael A. ""Inner Biblical Exegesis"" The Garments of Torah: Essays in Biblical
Hermeneutics. Bloomington, IN: Indiana UP, 1989

Floyd, Michael H., and Robert D. Haak. Prophets, Prophecy, and Prophetic Texts in Second
Temple Judaism. New York: T & T Clark, 2006.

Gabbay, Uri. “Akkadian Commentaries from Ancient Mesopotamia and Their Relation to Early
Hebrew Exegesis” Dead Sea Discoveries 19:3 (2012)
 Razzaq 132

Garcia Martinez, Florentino, “Parabiblical Literature from Qumran and the Canonical
Process,” Review de Qumran, 2013

Gray, Rebecca. Prophetic Figures in Late Second Temple Jewish Palestine: The Evidence from
Josephus. New York: Oxford UP, 1993

Greenspahn, Frederick, “Why Prophecy Ceased,” JBL 108, 1989

Gunkel, Hermann. The Influence of the Holy Spirit: The Popular View of the Apostolic Age and
the Teaching of the Apostle Paul: A Biblical-theological Study. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979.

Hans Barstad, “"Comparare necesse est? Ancient Israelite and Ancient Near Eastern Prophecy in
a Comparative Perspective", Prophecy in its Ancient Near Eastern Context. Mesopotamian,
Biblical, and Arabian Perspectives. Ed. by. M. Nissinen (SBL Symposium Series, 13). Atlanta,
Georgia (2000)

H. A. C. Havernick (trans. T. & T. Clark) A General Historico-Critical Approach to the Old

Testament, 1852

Hill, David “Prophecy and Prophets in the Revelation of John” New Testament Studies, 18:4,
1972

Horsley, Richard A., and John S. Hanson. Bandits, Prophets, and Messiahs: Popular Movements
in the Time of Jesus. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988

Jassen, Alex P. Prophecy after ‘The Prophets’: The Dead Sea Scrolls and the History of
Prophecy in Judaism” Pages 577–93 in volume 2 of The Dead Sea Scrolls in Context:
Integrating the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Study of Ancient Texts, Languages, and Cultures. Edited
by Armin Lange, Emanuel Tov, Matthias Weigold, and Bennie H. Reynolds III. Vetus
Testamentum Supplements 140. 2 vols.; Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2011

Jassen, Alex P. “The Pesharim and the Rise of Commentary in Early Jewish Scriptural
Interpretation” Dead Sea Discoveries 19:3, January 2012 (364)

Jassen, Alex P. “Prophets and Prophecy in the Qumran Community.” Association for Jewish
Studies Review 32:2 (2008):

Je Jong, Matthijs, Prophecy in Context: An Exploration of the Prophecies from Seventh Century
Assyria. Master’s Thesis, Oriental Institute, Oxford University.

Kugel, James. How to Read the Bible: A Guide to Scripture Then and Now. New York: Free
Press, 2007

Kugel, James L. In Potiphar’s House: The Interpretive Life of Biblical Texts Cambridge, MA
and London: Harvard University Press, 1990

Mason, SN, “Priesthood in Josephus and the ‘Pharisaic’ Revolution” JBL, Vol. 107, No. 4, Dec.
1988, or Blenkinsopp, Joseph, “Prophecy and Priesthood in Josephus,” JJS 25
 Razzaq 133

Moran, William L. “New Evidence from Mari on the History of Prophecy” Bib 50, 19-20

Najman, Hindy, “The Inheritance of Prophecy in Apocalypse,” in The Oxford Handbook of

Apocalyptic Literature. Ed. John J. Collins, 2014

Nissinen, Martti. Prophecy in Its Ancient Near Eastern Context: Mesopotamian, Biblical, and
Arabian Perspectives. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2000

Nissinen, Martti, Robert Kriech Ritner, C. L. Seow, and Peter Machinist. Prophets and Prophecy
in the Ancient Near East. Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003

Nissinen, Martti. References to Prophecy in Neo-Assyrian Sources SAAS 7, Helsinki: Neo-

Assyrian Texts Corpus Project, 1998

Neujahr, Matthew, Predicting the past in the Ancient Near East Mantic Historiography in
Ancient Mesopotamia, Judah, and the Mediterranean World. Providence, RI: Brown Judaic
Studies, 2012

Overholt, Thomas W. Channels of Prophecy: The Social Dynamics of Prophetic Activity.

Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1989

Pagels, Elaine, Revelations: Visions, Prophecy and Politics in the Book of Revelation, Penguin
Group: New York, 2012

Parpola, Simo. Assyrian Prophecies. Helsinki: Helsinki UP, 1997.

Parpola, Simo. Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars. Helsinki, Finland: Helsinki UP,
1993.

Parpola, Neo-Assyrian Treaties and Loyalty Oaths (1988)

Rabinowitz, “‘Pē sher/Pittā

sher/Pittā rōrō n’:
n’: Its
Its Biblical
Biblical Meaning
Meaning and
and Its
Its Significance
Significance in
in the
the Qumran
Qumran
Literature,” RevQ 8/30 (1973)

Ringren, Helmer. Religions of the Ancient Near East. London: SPCK, 1973 (95)

Russell, D.S. The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic, Philadelphia: Westminister,
1964

Sandmel, Samuel, “Parallelomania” Journal of Biblical Literature, March 1962

Schniedewind, William M. The Word of God in Transition: From Prophet to Exegete in the
Second Temple Period. Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic, 1995

Schiffman, Lawrence. Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls, Philadelphia, Pa: The Jewish
Publication Society, 1994
 Razzaq 134

Schiffman, Lawrence H. The Halakhah at Qumran. Leiden: Brill, 1975

Somme, Benjamin D, “Did Prophecy Cease: Evaluating a Reevaluation,” JBL 115:1, 1996

Stökl, Jonathan. Prophecy in the Ancient Near East: A Philological and Sociological
Comparison. Leiden: Brill, 2012.

T. H. Lim, “‘All These He Composed through Prophecy,’” in Prophecy after the Prophets? The
Contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls to the Understanding of Biblical and Extra Biblical
Prophecy (ed. K. De Troyer and A. Lange; Leuven: Peeters, 2009

Urbach, Ephraim E, “Why Did Prophecy Cease?” Tarbiz 17 (1946)

VanderKam, James, The Dead Sea Scrolls Today, Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 1994

Van Der Toorn, Karel. "From the Oral to the Written: The Case of Old Babylonian Prophecy."
Writings and Speech in Israelite and Ancient Near Eastern Prophecy. Ed. Ehud Ben Zvi and
Michael H. Floyd. N.p.: Society of Biblical Literature, 2000

Vermes, Geza. The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English. New York, NY, USA: Allen
Lane/Penguin, 1997

Wise, Michael, “Dating the Teacher of Righteousness and the Floruit of his Movement” JBL,
122 (2003)

Witmer, Stephen E. “Approaches to Scripture in the Fourth Gospel and the Qumran Pesharim”
Novum Testamentum, 48:4, 2006

W. G. Lambert, “A Catalogue of Texts and Authors,” JCS 16 (1962):

Yadin, Azzan. “4QMMT, Rabbi Ishmael and the Origins of Legal Midrash” Dead Sea
Discoveries 10:1 2003