DOCSLIB.ORG

A Textual Analysis of Pseudo-Ezekiel (4Q385 and 4Q386): Rewritten Or Merely Copies of Each Other

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Textual Analysis of Pseudo-Ezekiel (4Q385 and 4Q386): Rewritten Or Merely Copies of Each Other Chapter 6 A Textual Analysis of Pseudo-Ezekiel (4Q385 and 4Q386): Rewritten or Merely Copies of Each Other Jana Coetzee 1 Introduction Before the discovery of the Scrolls, our understanding of the history and de- velopment of the Hebrew Bible (HB) was based upon comparisons made between three ancient textual traditions: the Masoretic or rabbinic tradition, which later emerged as the authoritative text in Judaism, the Samaritan tradi- tion, being a version of the Torah that was later adopted by the Samaritan com- munity as their canonical Scriptures, and the Septuagintal tradition, which is a version of the Hebrew scriptures that served as the basis for the Septuagint— the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures.1 Unfortunately, the only sur- viving copies of these traditions were from late antiquity and the middle ages.2 The discovery of the manuscripts in the caves at Qumran filled a void in our knowledge of the development of textual traditions.3 Although the discovery of the Scrolls provided the scholarly community with much more data on the development and history of the HB, it seems that the most significant aspect of the discovery could well be the dating of the scrolls. It would, however, be erroneous to assume that the manuscripts found at Qumran all date from the same time period. Matthias Henze, for example, states that the Scrolls predate the Leningrad Codex by a full millennium, with a scroll of Daniel (4QDanc) dating from about 125 BCE.4 1 Casey D. Elledge, The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2005), 89: Emanuel Tov suggested that the manuscripts discovered at Qumran cannot always be identified with any of these three traditions. 2 Elledge, Bible, 88. 3 Elledge, 88. According to Tov and Cross most of the manuscripts from Qumran resemble the later Masoretic or rabbinic tradition. These are therefore often described as “proto-Masoretic” or “proto-Rabbinic”; Emanuel Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001), 115: Tov suggests that thirty-five percent of all Qumran biblical manuscripts represent a proto-Masoretic form of the Hebrew Bible. 4 Matthias Henze, Biblical Interpretation at Qumran. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 2. Henze cites Professor Frank Moore Cross on the relevance of the date of the Daniel scroll: “It is no © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2019 | doi:10.1163/9789004410732_008 A Textual Analysis of Pseudo-Ezekiel 109 According to Casey Elledge, Pseudo-Ezekiel (4Q385–388, 391) “portrays a creative retelling of Ezekiel’s chariot visions and the valley of dry bones that reflects the influence of apocalyptic motifs, including resurrection.”5 Pseudo-Ezekiel also forms part of what we may refer to as a collection of re- written texts,6 with some of the writings portraying minimal alterations and differences when compared with the Hebrew Bible; however, in other instanc- es this is not always the case. The textual authority these rewritten texts held for the Qumran community and later Judaism is unclear, although according to Elledge it may be safe to assume that the Qumran community regarded them as authoritative.7 According to Brooke, “in 1988, D. Dimant and J. Strugnell considered that there were at least five and possibly six copies of this work (4Q385–90).” Brooke himself suggests that there may possibly be only three or four copies of this work.8 The best-preserved manuscript evidence for Pseudo-Ezekiel is that of 4Q385 and consists of eight fragments.9 more than about a half century younger that the autograph of Daniel. It is thus closer to the original edition of a biblical work than any other biblical manuscript in existence.” 5 Elledge, The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls, 93. 6 Michael Segal, “Between Bible and Rewritten Bible,” in Biblical Interpretation at Qumran, ed. M. Henze (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 10. These texts contain additions, deletions, changes and reordering of material that differs from the later Masoretic or proto-rabbinic traditions; Geza Vermes dubbed this phenomenon “rewritten Bible”: Geza Vermes, “Biblical Midrash,” in The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ, by Emil Schürer, revised and edited by G. Vermes, F. Millar, and M. Goodman (Edinburgh: Clark, 1986), vol. 3, 326. 7 Elledge, The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls, 93. Anders K. Petersen, “Textual Fidelity, Elaboration, Supersession or Encroachment? Typological Reflections on the Phenomenon of Rewritten Scripture,” in Rewritten Bible after Fifty Years: Texts, Terms, or Techniques?: A Last Dialogue with Geza Vermes, ed. J. Zsengeller (Leiden: Brill, 2014), 14. According to Petersen these manuscripts were not meant to replace their antecedents, but to reflect their meaning in a new context in a form of applied hermeneutics. But there are also scholars such as Ben Zion Wachholder who argue that these rewritten manuscripts were meant to replace the original text. 8 George J. Brooke, “Ezekiel in Some Qumran and New Testament texts,” in The Madrid Qumran Congress: Proceedings of the International Congress on the Dead Sea Scrolls, Madrid, 18–21 March, 1991, ed. Julio Trebolle Barrera and L. Vegas Montaner (Leiden: Brill, 1992), 321–22. 9 Brooke, “Ezekiel,” 322. It is difficult to determine the order of these fragments, and the num- bering of fragments 2–4 may be misleading. As an example, Brooke refers to H. Stegemann’s calculation that 4Q385 fragment 2 represents the last preserved column of 4Q385, while frag- ment 3 may be placed 4 columns before that. Brooke states that if this allocation is correct, then the placing of the climactic vision of the dry bones at the end of the text may be highly significant. On the other hand, Devorah Dimant states that fragments 2 and 3 both belong to a column that deals with the biblical vision of the dry bones (Ezek 37:1–14; Parabiblical Texts, Part 4: Pseudo-Prophetic Texts, vol. 21 of Qumran Cave 4, DJD 30 [Oxford: Clarendon, 2001], 7–8). 4Q386 fragment 1i partly overlaps that of 4Q385 fragment 2, and Dimant suggests that .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Frank Moore Cross's Contribution to the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Faculty Publications, Classics and Religious Studies Classics and Religious Studies Department 2014 Frank Moore Cross’s Contribution to the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls Sidnie White Crawford University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/classicsfacpub Part of the Classical Archaeology and Art History Commons, Classical Literature and Philology Commons, and the Jewish Studies Commons Crawford, Sidnie White, "Frank Moore Cross’s Contribution to the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls" (2014). Faculty Publications, Classics and Religious Studies Department. 127. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/classicsfacpub/127 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Classics and Religious Studies at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications, Classics and Religious Studies Department by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Frank Moore Cross’s Contribution to the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls Sidnie White Crawford This paper examines the impact of Frank Moore Cross on the study of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Since Cross was a member of the original editorial team responsible for publishing the Cave 4 materials, his influence on the field was vast. The article is limited to those areas of Scrolls study not covered in other articles; the reader is referred especially to the articles on palaeography and textual criticism for further discussion of Cross’s work on the Scrolls. t is difficult to overestimate the impact the discovery They icturedp two columns of a manuscript, columns of of the Dead Sea Scrolls had on the life and career of the Book of Isaiah .
    [Show full text]
  • Freeing the Dead Sea Scrolls: a Question of Access
    690 American Archivist / Vol. 56 / Fall 1993 Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/american-archivist/article-pdf/56/4/690/2748590/aarc_56_4_w213201818211541.pdf by guest on 30 September 2021 Freeing the Dead Sea Scrolls: A Question of Access SARA S. HODSON Abstract: The announcement by the Huntington Library in September 1991 of its decision to open for unrestricted research its photographs of the Dead Sea Scrolls touched off a battle of wills between the library and the official team of scrolls editors, as well as a blitz of media publicity. The action was based on a commitment to the principle of intellectual freedom, but it must also be considered in light of the ethics of donor agreements and of access restrictions. The author relates the story of the events leading to the Huntington's move and its aftermath, and she analyzes the issues involved. About the author: Sara S. Hodson is curator of literary manuscripts at the Huntington Library. Her articles have appeared in Rare Books & Manuscripts Librarianship, Dictionary of Literary Biography Yearbook, and the Huntington Library Quarterly. This article is revised from a paper delivered before the Manuscripts Repositories Section meeting of the 1992 Society of American Archivists conference in Montreal. The author wishes to thank William A. Moffett for his encour- agement and his thoughtful and invaluable review of this article in its several revisions. Freeing the Dead Sea Scrolls 691 ON 22 SEPTEMBER 1991, THE HUNTINGTON scrolls for historical scholarship lies in their LIBRARY set off a media bomb of cata- status as sources contemporary with the time clysmic proportions when it announced that they illuminate.
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Studies in the Judaean Desert Isaiah Scrolls and Fragments
    INCORPORATING SYNTAX INTO THEORIES OF TEXTUAL TRANSMISSION: PRELIMINARY STUDIES IN THE JUDAEAN DESERT ISAIAH SCROLLS AND FRAGMENTS by JAMES M. TUCKER A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Master of Arts in Biblical Studies We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard ............................................................................... Dr. Martin G. Abegg Jr., Ph.D.; Thesis Supervisor ................................................................................ Dr. Dirk Büchner, Ph.D.; Second Reader TRINITY WESTERN UNIVERSITY Date (August, 2014) © James M. Tucker TABLE OF CONTENTS Abbreviations and Sigla i Abstract iv Chapter 1: Introduction 1 1.0. Introduction: A Statement of the Problem 1 1.1. The Goal and Scope of the Thesis 5 Chapter 2: Methodological Issues in the Transmission Theories of the Hebrew Bible: The Need for Historical Linguistics 7 2.0. The Use of the Dead Sea Scrolls Evidence for Understanding The History of ! 7 2.1. A Survey and Assessment of Transmission Theories 8 2.1.1. Frank Moore Cross and the Local Text Theory 10 2.1.1.1. The Central Premises of the Local Text Theory 11 2.1.1.2. Assessment of the Local Text Theory 14 2.1.2. Shemaryahu Talmon and The Multiple Text Theory 16 2.1.2.1. The Central Premises of the Multiple Texts Theory 17 2.1.2.2. Assessment of Multiple Text Theory 20 2.1.3. Emanuel Tov and The Non-Aligned Theory 22 2.1.3.1 The Central Premises of the Non-Aligned Theory 22 2.1.3.2. Assessment of the Non-Aligned Theory 24 2.1.4.
    [Show full text]
  • 4Qreworked Pentateuch to 4Qpentateuch (?)
    FROM 4QREWORKED PENTATEUCH TO 4QPENTATEUCH (?) Emanuel Tov 1. Background The name “4QReworked Pentateuch” was conceived in 1992 when I was working on this composition at the Annenberg Institute for Advanced Studies, at first alone, and later together with Sidnie White Crawford.1 The texts were assigned to me in the 1980s by John Strugnell, who had identified the manuscripts and had done some work on them. Beyond Strugnell’s initial philological work on these texts, we are indebted to him for assembling the fragments that he assigned to the four manu- scripts of 4Q364–367 from among the many thousands, identified by their handwriting and content. This was not an easy task because of the great similarity of the assumed text of this composition to the canonical books of the Torah. As a result, doubts remained as to whether specific fragments assigned to 4QRP indeed belonged to that composition, or were part of a regular biblical manuscript. In addition, the following six fragments or groups of fragments, although given different names, could have been part of 4QRP: 2QExodb (containing several exegetical additions), 4QExodd (omitting the narrative section of 13:17–22 and all of chapter 14), 6QDeut? (possibly to be named 6QparaDeut because of its unclear character), 4QDeutk2 (containing a mixture of chapters) and 11QTb 11:21–24 (previously described as 11QDeut [Deut 13:7–11] by Johannes van der Ploeg, but identified as part of 11QTb by Adam van der Woude and Florentino García Martínez).2 1 The texts were published as: E. Tov and S. White, “363–367: 4QReworked Pen- tateuchb–e and 365a: 4QTemple?” in Qumran Cave 4.VIII, Parabiblical Texts, Part 1 (H.
    [Show full text]
  • PART 1 Exegetical and Literary Studies
    Contents Moshe Greenberg: An Appreciation . ix Bibliography of the Writings of Moshe Greenberg . xxiii Abbreviations . xxxix PART 1 Exegetical and Literary Studies Love of Zion: A Literary Interpretation of Psalm 137 . 3 Shimon Bar-Efrat The Meaning of Amos’s Third Vision (Amos 7:7–9) . 13 Alan Cooper On Reading Genesis 12:10–20 . 23 Barry L. Eichler Harvesting the Biblical Narrator’s Scanty Plot of Ground: A Holistic Approach to Judges 16:4–22 . 39 J. Cheryl Exum Proverbs 2 and 31: A Study in Structural Complementarity . 47 David Noel Freedman Reading Rahab . 57 Tikva Frymer-Kensky Psalm 8 on the Power and Mystery of Speech . 69 Walter Harrelson Two Aspects of the “Tent of Meeting” . 73 Israel Knohl The Firstfruits Festivals of Grain and the Composition of Leviticus 23:9–21 . 81 Jacob Milgrom What Did Laban Demand of Jacob? A New Reading of Genesis 31:50 and Exodus 21:10 . 91 Jonathan Paradise v vi Contents A Lover’s Garden of Verse: Literal and Metaphorical Imagery in Ancient Near Eastern Love Poetry . 99 Shalom M. Paul Nehemiah 9: An Important Witness of Theological Re˘ection . 111 Rolf Rendtorˆ Naboth’s Vineyard Revisited (1 Kings 21) . 119 Nahum M. Sarna The “Aramean” of Deuteronomy 26:5: Peshat and Derash . 127 Richard C. Steiner “He Begot a Son in His Likeness after His Image” (Genesis 5:3) . 139 Jeˆrey H. Tigay Diˆerent Editions of the Song of Hannah and of Its Narrative Framework . 149 Emanuel Tov PART 2 Historical, Thematic, and Methodological Studies On the Use of Traditional Jewish Exegesis in the Modern Literary Study of the Bible .
    [Show full text]
  • The Meaning of the Phrase ציר המקרש in the Temple Scroll
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Faculty Publications, Classics and Religious Studies Department Classics and Religious Studies September 2001 IN THE TEMPLE ציר המקרש THE MEANING OF THE PHRASE SCROLL* Sidnie White Crawford University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/classicsfacpub Part of the Classics Commons .(IN THE TEMPLE SCROLL*" (2001 ציר המקרש Crawford, Sidnie White, "THE MEANING OF THE PHRASE Faculty Publications, Classics and Religious Studies Department. 6. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/classicsfacpub/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Classics and Religious Studies at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications, Classics and Religious Studies Department by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. THE MEANING OF THE PHRASE IN THE TEMPLE SCROLL * SIDNIE WHITE CRAWFORD University of Nebraska-Lincoln A minor point of contention in the interpretation of the Temple Scroll has been the meaning of the phrase found in the laws concerning the purity of the ideal sanctuary envisioned by the Temple Scroll. This phrase is not a biblical phrase; therefore we can- not fall back on a biblical meaning to help us determine its meaning. The problem is compounded by the fact that the Temple Scroll uses a variety of terms to refer to the Temple building itself, the various buildings and courts which surround it, and the wider area around it; these terms overlap and a clear distinction in terminology is not dis- cernible. These terms include , , , , , , , and the phrase presently under consideration, (see Appendix 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Dead Sea Scrolls Fragments in the Museum Collection Publications of Museum of the Bible
    Dead Sea Scrolls Fragments in the Museum Collection Publications of Museum of the Bible General Editor Michael W. Holmes volume 1 Semitic Texts Editor Emanuel Tov Managing Editor Jerry A. Pattengale The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/pmb Dead Sea Scrolls Fragments in the Museum Collection Edited by Emanuel Tov Kipp Davis Robert Duke leiden | boston Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Tov, Emanuel, editor. | Davis, Kipp, editor. | Duke, Robert R., editor. Title: Dead sea scrolls fragments in the Museum collection / edited by Emanuel Tov, Kipp Davis, Robert Duke. Description: Leiden ; Boston : Brill, [2016] | Series: Publications of Museum of the Bible, ISSN 2214-2797 ; volume 1 Identifiers: LCCN 2016015778 (print) | LCCN 2016016485 (ebook) | ISBN 9789004321489 ((hardback) : alk. paper) | ISBN 9789004322868 (e-book) Subjects: LCSH: Dead Sea scrolls. Classification: LCC BM487 .D44957 2016 (print) | LCC BM487 (ebook) | DDC 296.1/55074753–dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016015778 Want or need Open Access? Brill Open offers you the choice to make your research freely accessible online in exchange for a publication charge. Review your various options on brill.com/brill-open. Typeface for the Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic scripts: “Brill”. See and download: brill.com/brill-typeface. issn 2214-2797 isbn 978-90-04-32148-9 (hardback) isbn 978-90-04-32286-8 (e-book) Copyright 2016 by Koninklijke Brill nv, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill nv incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Hes & De Graaf, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Rodopi and Hotei Publishing. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher.
    [Show full text]
  • “Reworked Pentateuch” (4Q158, 4Q364–367)
    The Problem of Characterizing the 4QReworked Pentateuch Manuscripts: Bible, Rewritten Bible, or None of the Above?1 Molly M. Zahn University of Notre Dame The group of texts from Qumran known as 4QReworked Pentateuch (4Q158, 4Q364– 367) has since its official publication in the mid-1990s eluded precise characterization by scholars. Already before its publication John Strugnell had referred to the texts as a “rogue” or “wild” Torah,2 and Yigael Yadin had identified several fragments of one of the manuscripts as belonging to a copy of the Temple Scroll.3 But the touchstone of the debate in recent years has been the issue of whether the 4QRP texts should be regarded as expanded editions of the Torah or as nonbiblical works of the category “rewritten Bible.” The manuscripts largely contain the text of the Pentateuch that is familiar to us from the ancient versions (the Samaritan in particular), but also at times incorporate substantial new material or present the text in a new sequence. As a result of their deviations from the known versions, the initial editors, Emanuel Tov and Sidnie White Crawford, classified the 4QRP texts as nonscriptural, non-authoritative, interpretive works.4 This assessment has been challenged separately by Eugene Ulrich, James VanderKam, and Michael Segal, on the basis of the rich variation in versions of the biblical text that the Qumran discoveries have revealed. In their minds, precisely the sorts of exegetical additions and reorganizations that prompted the original editors to classify the 4QRP texts as nonscriptural
    [Show full text]
  • The Essence and History of the Masoretic Text
    БОГОСЛОВЉЕ 1 • 2017 7–26 Оригинални научни рад Emanuel Tov УД К: 27-242-235-277=14 26-246/-247-277=14 Hebrew University ПРИМЉЕНО: 19. 5. 2017. Jerusalem ОДОБРЕНО: 7. 6. 2017. [email protected] The Essence and History of the Masoretic Text Abstract: In the presented paper author presents an extensive and multilayered explanation of what Masoretic Text (MT) is. Having located MT in the core of great majority of the Bible editions, the author firstly presents the MT as the only text used by organized Judaism from the first century CE onwards. Since it is a medieval text with roots in antiquity, but capable enough of reflecting a thousand year old an- cient tradition, a relationship between the forerunners of the medieval MT and the medieval text is further explained. A particular attention is given to the work of the scribes, especially with the reference to the proto-MT. The presentation continues with a respective but condensed presentation of the nature of MT and finally ends with a hermeneutical comparison of MT with the other texts, like Septuagint (LXX), Samaritan Pentateuch (SP) and Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS). ▶ Key words: Masoretic text, Bible, Torah, translation, spelling, scribe 1. Where do we find the Masoretic Text? In modern times, the Masoretic Text (MT) is found all over. Even if one thinks that one does not know what MT is or where to find it, one cannot miss it, so to speak, because MT is found in multiple sources. All the printed editions of the Hebrew Bi- ble and most of its modern translations present a form of MT.
    [Show full text]
  • Qumran Pesharim and the Pentateuch: Explicit Citation, Overt Typologies, and Implicit Interpretive Traditions
    Dead Sea Discoveries 16 (2009) 190–220 brill.nl/dsd Qumran Pesharim and the Pentateuch: Explicit Citation, Overt Typologies, and Implicit Interpretive Traditions Shani Tzoref Department of Hebrew, Biblical and Jewish Studies, University of Sydney, Room 623, Brennan MacCallum Building, NSW 2006, Australia [email protected] Abstract Qumran pesher is characterized as contemporizing exegesis of poetic/prophetic biblical texts. Previous research has focused upon pesher exegesis of works which later canonical tradition designates as “Latter Prophets” and of the book of Psalms, the dominant base-texts in pesharim. The current study surveys the use of the Penta- teuch in Qumran pesher, examining instances of explicit citation, overt Penta- teuchal typology, and implicit interpretive traditions. The most noteworthy attributes that emerge are the prominence of Deuteronomy and a strong reliance upon pre-existing exegetical traditions. Keywords Deuteronomy; Pesher; Pentateuch; Thematic Pesharim; Scriptural Interpretation Among the defining characteristics of Qumran pesher is the use of poetic/ prophetic biblical texts as the bases for contemporizing interpretations.1 1 My working definition of pesher is “a form of biblical interpretation peculiar to Qumran, in which biblical poetic/prophetic texts are applied to postbiblical historical/eschatological settings through various literary techniques in order to substantiate a theological conviction pertaining to divine reward and punishment.” See S. L. Berrin, “Qumran Pesharim,” in Biblical Interpretation at Qumran (ed. M. Henze; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2005), 110–33 at 110. Some schol- ars oppose the inclusion of Qumran provenance as a defining feature of pesher, pointing to instances of similar types of exegesis in other compositions.
    [Show full text]
  • Emanuel Tov, FBA and Fellow of the Israel Academy J. L. Magnes Professor of Bible Emeritus Dept
    Emanuel Tov, FBA and Fellow of the Israel Academy J. L. Magnes Professor of Bible Emeritus Dept. of Bible Hebrew University of Jerusalem Jerusalem 91905 Israel TEL: ++972-2-5883514 (o), 5815714 (h) E-MAIL: [email protected] FAX: ++972-2- 5815714 (h) WEBSITE: www.emanueltov.info CURRICULUM VITAE Education 1959 Classical gymnasium, Amsterdam, Netherlands. 1964 B.A. (Bible, Greek literature). Hebrew University. 1967 M.A. (Bible). Hebrew University. 1973 Ph.D. (summa cum laude). Hebrew University. 1967–1969 Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA. Teaching Positions Hebrew University, Dept. of Bible 1964–1967 Teaching Fellow 1969–1974 Instructor 1974–1980 Senior Lecturer 1980–1986 Associate Professor 1986–2009 Professor 1990 received J. L. Magnes chair in Bible 2009– Teaching voluntarily Harvard University, Dept. of Near Eastern Languages and Literatures 1967–1969 Teaching Fellow Hebrew College, Boston, MA 1967–1969 Instructor Haifa University, Dept. of Bible 1969–1970 Instructor University of Pennsylvania, Dept. of Religious Studies 1980–1981 Visiting Associate Professor 1985–1986 Visiting Professor Dropsie University, Philadelphia 1980–1981 Visiting Professor Oxford University 1982–1988 Grinfield Lecturer on the Septuagint University of Stellenbosch, South Africa 1988 Visiting Professor Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia 1989 Visiting Professor Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam 1995 Visiting Professor Sydney University, Sydney, Australia 1999 Visiting Professor Harvard University, Center for Jewish Studies 2000 Visiting Professor Uppsala University 2003 Visiting Professor Tokyo Women’s Christian University 2006 Visiting Research Professor Doshisha University, Kyoto 2006 Visiting Professor Pontificial Gregorian University, Rome 2009 Visiting Professor Lanier Theological Library, Houston, Texas 2012, 2103 Visiting Professor Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Germany 2014 Visiting Professor Protestants Theologische Universiteit, Amsterdam 2017 Visiting Research Professor Awards and Appointments Various scholarships from the Hebrew University for B.
    [Show full text]
  • The Book of Numbers at Qumran: Texts and Context
    Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Faculty Publications 1996 The Book of Numbers at Qumran: Texts and Context Dana M. Pike Brigham Young University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/facpub Part of the Biblical Studies Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Pike, Dana M., "The Book of Numbers at Qumran: Texts and Context" (1996). Faculty Publications. 4374. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/facpub/4374 This Book Chapter is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. The Book ofNumbers at Qumran 167 While reviewing these plates I noticed a fragment assem­ blage on PAM 43.679 that contained the first few verses of Numbers 4, but I could find no previous mention of a fragment The Book of Numbers at Qumran: of Numbers on this plate. It did not take long to discover that Texts and Context this fragment was a portion of 4QLev-Numa that has recently been published by Professor Eugene Ulrich in DID 12, in which it is designated as fragment 35.1 Neither Ulrich nor anyone else DANAM.PIKE seems to have been aware that this fragment, along with an additional small piece that was not published in DJD 12, was on PAM 43.679, a photo that was taken later than the plates cited Brigham Young University for this fragment in DJD 12. This small fragment contains the lower 90 percent of the letters of two words, the tops of which are preserved on the fragment to which it joins.2 Ulrich was happy to learn that he had restored the text correctly at this point! In this paper I examine the significance of the book of Num­ These fragments are no longer physically located on PAM bers for the covenant community at Qumran.
    [Show full text]