Communal Participation in the Spirit: the Corinthian Correspondence in Light of Early Jewish Mysticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls

COMMUNAL PARTICIPATION IN THE SPIRIT: THE CORINTHIAN CORRESPONDENCE IN LIGHT OF EARLY JEWISH MYSTICISM IN THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS

A thesis submitted to The University of Manchester for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

in the Faculty of Humanities

2013

Christopher G. Foster

This research was carried out at Nazarene Theological College, Manchester

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Abbreviations 5 Abstract 12 Declaration and Copyright Statement 13 Dedication 14 Acknowledgements 15 The Author 16

Chapter 1: Introduction 17 1.1 Jewish Mysticism and the Dead Sea Scrolls: Towards a Working Definition 19 1.2 Paul and Jewish Mysticism 30 1.3 Paul, Mysticism, and Participation 36 1.4 Method of Investigation 43 1.5 Thesis Outline 46

Part I Early Jewish Mysticism and the Dead Sea Scrolls

Part I: Introduction 49

Chapter 2: The Spirit of God in Hodayota: Revealing, Cleansing, and Union 2.1 Introduction 50 Hodayota: Preliminary Matters 50 Hodayota: a Mystical Text 52 2.2 The Epistemological Spirit of God in Hodayota 53 2.3 Mystery and Mysteries in Hodayota 57 2.4 Holy Spirit as Cleansing Agent in Hodayota 60 2.5 Union with the Angels in Hodayota 62 2.6 Summary 69

Chapter 3: A Temple Community Worshipping with the Celestial Temple in Rule of the Community and Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice 3.1 Introduction 70 Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice: Preliminary Matters 70 Songs: a Mystical Text 72 3.2 Qumran Community as a Temple in Rule of the Community 73 3.3 The Relationship between Heavenly and Earthly Temples at Qumran 78 3.4 Co-participation with the Angelic Priesthood and Angelic Tongues in Songs 82 3.5 Summary 86

Chapter 4: The Significance of Sinai and Moses-Δόξα Traditions in the DSS 4.1 Introduction 87 4.2 4QDiscourse on the Exodus/Conquest Tradition 89 4.3 Ezekiel the Tragedian 90 4.4 Apocryphal Pentateuch B 92 4.5 Moses’ Ascent? 1QWords of Moses, 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b, and 4QApocryphon of Joshuaa 94 4.6 Summary 95

Chapter 5: Heavenly Ascent Texts in the DSS 5.1 Introduction 96 5.2 Enoch’s Ascent in 1 Enoch (4Q202; 4Q204) 96 5.3 Levi’s Ascent in Aramaic Levi Document (4Q213–214b) 99 Via Mystica and Levi’s Visions 100 5.4 The Maśkîl’s Ascent in 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and Parallels. 102 5.5 Summary 105

Part I: Summary and Conclusions 107

Part II Communal Participation in the Spirit in the Corinthian Correspondence

Part II: Introduction 110

Chapter 6: Communal Participation in the Spirit in 1 Cor 2:1–16, 6:11, and 2 Cor 13:13 in light of the Spirit of God in Hodayota 6.1 Introduction 111 6.2 A Corporate Epistemology of the Spirit in 1 Cor 2:1–16 112 6.3 Mystery and Mysteries of God in 1 Cor 115 6.4 Holy Spirit as Cleansing Agent in 1 Cor 6:11 118 6.5 Communal Kοινωνία in the Spirit in 2 Cor 13:13 119 6.5.1 Context and Translation of ἡ κοινωνία τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος in 2 Cor 13:13 120 6.5.2 Communio Mystica 122 6.5.3 Corporate Experience and Corporate Effects 124 6.6 Conclusions 127

Chapter 7: Extended Meaning of the Temple Metaphor in 2 Cor 3:16, 6:19, and 2 Cor 6:14–16 in light of 1QS and Songs 7.1 Introduction 129 7.2 Temple as a Metaphor 129 7.3 A Corporate Temple of the Spirit in 1 Cor 3:16; 6:19; and 2 Cor 6:14–16. 132 7.4 Paul’s Temple Metaphor and the Heavenly Sanctuary 136 7.5 Presence of Angels in the Corinthian Ekklesia (1 Cor 11:10) 138

7.6 Tongues of Angels in the Corinthian Ekklesia (1 Cor 13:1) 143 7.7 Conclusions 146

Chapter 8: Communal Beholding, Transformation, and Theosis in 2 Cor 3:18 in light of Moses-Δόξα Traditions in the DSS 8.1 Introduction 147 2 Cor 3:7–4:6 and Early Jewish Mysticism 147 2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6: Summary and Context 149 8.2 Shine on the Face of Many 150 8.3 Glory of Adam 154 8.4 Enochic Perspective of Moses and Sinai in Paul 160 8.5 Portrayal of Moses 162 8.6 Parallel Transformation by Vision 164 8.6.1 Mystical Visionary Background 165 8.6.2 Inward Transformation 168 8.6.3 Same Image 170 8.6.4 Communal Theosis? 172 8.7 Conclusions 179

Chapter 9: Paul’s Heavenly Ascent in 2 Cor 12:1–12 in light of 1 Enoch, Aramaic Levi Document, and 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and Parallels 9.1 Introduction 180 2 Cor 12:1–12: Context 181 Paul’s Personal Experience 182 9.2 Paul’s Heavenly Ascent and Early Jewish Mysticism 183 9.2.1 Vision of the Throne? 183 9.2.2 Method/Via Mystica 185 9.2.3 Cosmology 188 9.2.4 Danger and Opposition 192 9.2.5 Visions and Revelations 196 9.3 Conclusions 203

Chapter 10: Summary and Conclusions 10.1 Summary 205 10.2 Contribution to Research 207 10.3 Areas of Further Research 211

Bibliography 212

Final word count (including footnotes): 81,328

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Primary Sources

Abbreviations of Dead Sea Scrolls

1Q21 TLevi ar 1Q22 Dibre Moshe or Words of Moses 1Q34 LitPra or Liturgy Prayersa 1QHa Hodayota or Thanksgiving Hymnsa 1QM Milḥamah or War Scroll 1QpHab Pesher Habakkuk 1QpIsad Pesher Isaiahd 1QS Serek Hayaḥad or Rule of the Community 1QSa 1Q28a or Rule of the Congregation 1QSb 1Q28b or Rule of the Blessings 4Q158 4QRPa or 4QReworked Pentateucha 4Q171 pPsa 4Q174 Florilegium or Eschatological Midrash 4Q175 4QTest or Testimonia 4Q180 Ages of Creation A 4Q181 Ages of Creation B 4Q202 Enb ar 4Q204 Enc ar 4Q212 Eng ar 4Q213–214b Levia–f ar 4Q216 Jubileesa 4Q259 4QSe or 4QRule of the Communitye 4Q266 4QDa 4Q267 4QDb 4Q286–290 4QBera–e Berakhota–e 4Q374 4QDiscourse on the Exodus/Conquest Tradition 4Q377 Apocryphal Pentateuch B 4Q378 Apocryphon of Joshuaa 4Q385 4QpsEzeka or Pseudo-Ezekiel 4Q394 4QMMTa or Miqṣat Maʿaśê ha-Toraha 4Q400-407 Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice or Songs 4Q400 4QShirShabba or Songs of the Sabbath Sacrificea 4Q401 4QShirShabbb or Songs of the Sabbath Sacrificeb 4Q402 4QShirShabbc or Songs of the Sabbath Sacrificec 4Q403 4QShirShabbd or Songs of the Sabbath Sacrificed

4Q404 4QShirShabbe or Songs of the Sabbath Sacrificee 4Q405 4QShirShabbf or Songs of the Sabbath Sacrificef 4Q406 4QShirShabbg or Songs of the Sabbath Sacrificeg 4Q407 4QShirShabbh or Songs of the Sabbath Sacrificeh 4Q416 4QInstruction or Instructionb 4Q417 4QInstruction or Instructionc 4Q418 4QInstruction or Instructiond 4Q427 4QHa or 4QHodayota 4Q270 4QDe or Damascus Documente 4Q440 4QHodayot-like text C 4Q471b 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna 4Q491 War Scrolla 4Q491c 4QSelf-Glorification Hymnb 4Q503 4QDaily Prayers or Daily Prayers 4Q504 DibHama or Words of the Luminariesa 4Q510 Songs of the Sagea 4Q511 Songs of the Sageb 4Q547 Visions of Amrame 4QHa–f 4QHodayota–f 4QS 4QRule of the Community 11Q5 11QPsalmsa or Psalms Scrolla 11Q13 11QMelch or Melchizedek 11Q17 ShirShabb or Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice 11Q19 11QTa or Temple Scrolla CD-A Cairo Damascus Documenta CTLevi ar Cairo Geniza Testament of Levi Mas1K ShirShabb or Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice

Abbreviations of other ancient texts

A.J. Antiquitates judaicae Abraham On the Life of Abraham ALD Aramaic Levi Document Ant. Jewish Antiquities Apoc. Ab. Apocalypse of Abraham Apoc. Mos. Apocalypse of Moses Apoc. Zeph. Apocalypse of Zephania Ascen. Isa. Mart. Ascen. Isa. 6–11 As. Mos. Assumption of Moses b. Babylonia Talmud 2 Bar. 2 Baruch (Syriac Apocalypse) 3 Bar. 3 Baruch (Greek Apocalypse) Bod. Bodleian 1 En. 1 Enoch 2 En. 2 Enoch (Slavonic Apocalypse) 3 En. 3 Enoch (Sefer Hekhalot)

Ezek. Trag. Ezekiel the Tragedian L.A.B. Liber antiquitatum biblicarum (Pseudo-Philo) L.A.E. Life of Adam and Eve Leg. 1, 2, 3 Legum Allegoriae I, II, III LXX Septuagint Ḥag. Ḥagigah Jub. Jubilees m. Mishnah Mos. De vita Mosis MS(S) Manuscript(s) MT Masoretic Text Pss Sol Psalms of Solomon Sir Sirach/Ecclesiasticus Sobriety On Sobriety Spec. De specialibus legibus t. Tosefta T. Ab. Testament of Abraham Tg. Targum T. Job Testament of Job T. Levi Testament of Levi Wis Wisdom of Solomon y. Jerusalem Talmud

Secondary Sources

AB Anchor Bible ABD Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by D. N. Freedman. 6 vols. New York, 1992 ABG Arbeiten zur Bibel und ihrer Geschichte ABRL Anchor Bible Reference Library AcB Academia Biblica AGAJU Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums AJS Review Association for Jewish Studies Review ALUOS Annual of Leeds University Oriental Society AnBib Analecta biblica AOS American Oriental Series APH Augsburg Publishing House ARW Archiv für Religionswissenschaft ATDan Acta theologica danica BAGD Bauer, W., W. F. Arndt, F. W. Gingrich, and F. W. Danker. Greek- English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 2d ed. Chicago, 1979 BBB Bonner biblische Beiträge

BDB Brown, Francis, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament. Oxford, 1976 BDF Blass, F., A. Debrunner, and R. W. Funk. A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago, 1961 BECNT Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament BETL Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologicarum lovaniensium BHT Beiträge zur historischen Theologie Bib Biblica BibInt Biblical Interpretation Series BIP Biblical Institute Press BJRL Bulletin of John Rylands University Library of Manchester BJS Brown Judaic Studies BJSUC Biblical and Judaic Studies from the University of California, San Diego BRLAJ The Brill Reference Library of Ancient Judaism BRS The Biblical Resource Series BU Biblische Untersuchungen BZ Biblische Zeitschrift BZNW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft CBAA Catholic Biblical Association of America CBET Contributions to Biblical Exegesis and Theology CBQ The Catholic Biblical Quarterly CBQMS Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series CEUP Central European University Press CEV Contemporary English Version CH Church History CRINT Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum CSCO Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium CUP Cambridge University Press CurBR Currents in Biblical Research DBCI Dictionary of Biblical Criticism and Interpretation DCH The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew. Edited by D. J. A. Clines. Sheffield, 1993-2011 DJD Discoveries in the Judaean Desert DSD Dead Sea Discoveries DSSP The Dead Sea Scrolls: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek Texts with English Translations DSSSE Florentino García Martínez and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar. The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition. 2 vols. Leiden, 1997 ECDSS Eerdmans commentaries on the Dead Sea Scrolls EDNT The Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament EDSS Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls E.P.I.B. Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico ErJb Eranos-Jahrbuch ETL Ephemerides theologicae lovanienses EvQ The Evangelical Quarterly

GKC Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar. Edited by E. Kautzsch. Translated by A. E. Cowley. 2d. ed. Oxford, 1910 GTJ Grace Theological Journal Hen Henoch HSM Harvard Semitic Monographs HTR Harvard Theological Review HTSTS HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies HUCA Hebrew Union College Annual ICC International Critical Commentary ICS Illinois Classical Studies IES Israel Exploration Society IVP InterVarsity Press IVPNTC The InterVarsity Press New Testament Commentary JAAR Journal of the American Academy of Religion JAOS Journal of American Oriental Society JETS Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society JJS Journal of Jewish Studies JOTT Journal of Translation and Textlinguistics JPTSup Journal of Pentecostal Theology Supplement Series JQR Jewish Quarterly Review JSJ Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman Periods JSJSup Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism JSNTSup Journal for the Study of the New Testament: Supplement Series JSOTSup Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series JSP Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha JSPSup Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha: Supplement Series JSQ Jewish Studies Quarterly JSS Journal of Semitic Studies JTI Journal of Theological Interpretation JTS Journal of Theological Studies KAIROS KAIROS Religionswissenschaftliche Studien KEK Kritisch-exegetischer Kommentar über das Neue Testament (Meyer- Kommentar) LCL Loeb Classical Library LDDS The Literature of the Dead Sea Scrolls LHB Library of Hebrew Bible LLJC Litman Library of Jewish Civilization LNT Library of New Testament Studies LSJ Liddell, H. G., R. Scott, and H. S. Jones, A Greek-English Lexicon, with a Supplement. 9th ed. Oxford,1976 LSTS Library of Second Temple Studies MNTS McMaster New Testament Studies NA27 Novum Testamentum Graece. Nestle-Aland. 27th ed. NAC The New American Commentary NCB New Century Bible

NCBC New Cambridge Bible Commentary NIB The New Interpreter’s Bible NIBCNT New International Biblical Commentary on the New Testament NICNT New International Commentary on the New Testament NIGTC New International Greek Testament Commentary NIV New International Version NovT Novum Testamentum NovTSup Novum Testamentum Supplements NRSV New Revised Standard Version NSBT New Studies in Biblical Theology NTL New Testament Library NTOA Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus Numen Numen: International Review for the History of Religions OTL The Old Testament Library OTP Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Edited by J. H. Charlesworth. 2 vols. London, 1983–1985 OUP Oxford University Press PAS Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society PNTC The Pillar New Testament Commentary PRS Perspectives in Religious Studies PrTMS Princeton Theological Monograph Series PTMS Pittsburgh Theological Monograph Series PUP Princeton University Press QC Qumran Chronicle RevQ Revue de Qumran RTL Revue théologique de Louvain SAP Sheffield Academic Press SBL Society of Biblical Literature SBLDS Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series SBLMS Society of Biblical Literature monograph series SBLSP Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers SBLSymS Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series SBT Studies in Biblical Theology SDSSRL Studies in the Dead Sea Scrolls and related Literature SHBC Smith & Helwys Bible Commentary SHR Shrine of the Book, Israel Museum, Jerusalem SJ Studies in Judaism SJC Studies in Judaism and Christianity SJJTP Supplements to the Journal of Jewish thought and philosophy SNTSMS Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series SNTW Studies in the New Testament and its world SP Sacra pagina SR Studies in Religion/Sciences religieuses SSU Studia Semitica Upsaliensia STDJ Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah STJHC Studies and Texts in Jewish History and Culture

STNJT Studia theologica—Nordic Journal of Theology SubBi Subsidia biblica SUNT Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments SUNY State University of New York Press SUP Standford University Press SVTP Studia in Veteris Testamenti pseudepigrapha TANZ Texte und Arbeiten zum neutestamentlichen Zeitalter TBNJCT Themes in Biblical Narrative Jewish and Christian Traditions TDNT Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by G. Kittel and G. Friedrich. Translated by G. W. Bromiley. 10 vols. Grand Rapids, 1964–1976 TS Theological Studies TSAJ Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum TynBul Tyndale Bulletin UBS4 The Greek New Testament. United Bible Societies. 4th ed. UCP The University of Chicago Press UTPSS University of Texas Press Slavic Series VC Vigiliae christianae VCSup Supplements to Vigiliae christianae VTSup Supplements to Vetus Testamentum WSup The Way Supplement WTJ Wesleyan Theological Journal WUNT Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament YUP Yale University Press ZNW Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche

Other

2TJ Second Temple Judaism 2TP Second Temple period DSS Dead Sea Scrolls JM Jewish mysticism MM Merkabah mysticism N.B. nota bene, note carefully NT New Testament

ABSTRACT

This thesis identifies Jewish mystical elements in the Dead Sea Scrolls and compares them with analogous elements in the Corinthian Correspondence, to illuminate through differences and similarities how Paul advocates a mystical and communal participation in the spirit. After defining early Jewish mysticism and introducing methodology—heuristic comparison—in chapter 1, Part I identifies and investigates mystical elements in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Chapter 2 explores how the spirit facilitates a liturgica mystica with angels in Hodayota. Chapter 3 shows from 1QS and Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice that the Qumran temple community, in an archetypal relationship, shares in the priestly service of the angels. Chapter 4 argues that Moses-Δόξα traditions in the Scrolls portray Moses as an exalted, angelic-like mediator with supernatural authority—an ideal model for the Qumran priesthood. The ascent texts surveyed in chapter 5 reveal the conceivability of heavenly ascent at Qumran. In light of these studies, the Qumran community’s worship praxis and apperception of divine transcendence can be characterised as a liturgical and communal mysticism. Part II compares these findings with corresponding elements related to participation in the spirit in 1 and 2 Corinthians. Chapter 6 shows how Paul advances an epistemology of the spirit and participation (κοινωνία) in the spirit that is communal. Chapter 7 analyses angelic presence and angelic tongues as extensions of the spirit-enabled temple metaphor. Chapter 8 demonstrates how Paul democratises the spirit-facilitated, mystical encounter with the glory of the Lord and supports an ongoing, christomorphic and theotic transformation of the community. Chapter 9 examines how Paul’s heavenly ascent functions rhetorically to build up and instruct the ekklesia with a cruciform perspective of communal participation. Chapter 10 draws final conclusions showing the fruitfulness and validity of heuristic comparison. Paul appropriates Jewish mystical traditions and reinterprets them to promote the ongoing Christological and mystical transformation of the Corinthian community in and by the spirit. This reveals the predominantly corporate tenor of participation in the spirit for Paul. Overall, this investigation builds upon and contributes to studies of Jewish mysticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls, Paul and Jewish mysticism, Corinthians, spirit, and notions of communal participation and theosis.

DECLARATION

No portion of the work referred to in the thesis has been submitted in support of an application for another degree or qualification of this or any other university or institute of learning.

i. The author of this thesis (including any appendices and/or schedules to this thesis) owns certain copyright or related rights in it (the “Copyright”) and he has given The University of Manchester and Nazarene Theological College certain rights to use such Copyright, including for administrative purposes.

ii. Copies of this thesis, either in full or in extracts and whether in hard or electronic copy, may be made only in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (as amended) and regulations issued under it or, where appropriate, in accordance with licensing agreements which the University has from time to time. This page must form part of any such copies made.

iii. The ownership of certain Copyright, patents, designs, trade marks and other intellectual property (the “Intellectual Property”) and any reproductions of copyright works in the thesis, for example graphs and tables (“Reproductions”), which may be described in this thesis, may not be owned by the author and may be owned by third parties. Such Intellectual Property and Reproductions cannot and must not be made available for use without the prior written permission of the owner(s) of the relevant Intellectual Property and/or Reproductions.

iv. Further information on the conditions under which disclosure, publication and commercialisation of this thesis, the Copyright and any Intellectual Property and/or Reproductions described in it may take place is available in the University IP Policy (see http://documents.manchester.ac.uk/DocuInfo.aspx?DocID=487), in any relevant Thesis restriction declarations deposited in the University Library, The University Library’s regulations (see http://www.manchester.ac.uk/library/aboutus/regulations) and in The University’s policy on Presentation of Theses.

Dedicated to the love of my life

Sarah Lynn Foster

“Two are better than one”

“A threefold cord is not quickly broken”

Ecclesiastes 4:9–12

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks are due for the support of many, through whom the completion of this thesis has been possible. First, I would like to express my earnest appreciation to Dr Kent Brower for his consistent encouragement, warm hospitality, and collegial supervision throughout the research. I am also thankful for the helpful feedback of Dean Flemming. Financial support made this overseas undertaking possible. I would like to honour my parents, Tom and Mary Ann Foster, not only for their financial support at various stages of my academic life, but also for their constant love, prayers, and encouragement. I also thank Nazarene Theological College for bursaries (including the MWRC Junior Fellowship), awards, and teaching opportunities, and the Church of the Nazarene Council of Education for scholarships. Two communities have been particularly influential in my research. First, I am grateful for the formative community of the Ehrhardt Seminar at the University of Manchester, whose biblical scholarship and collegiality has spurred me on and sharpened my research. I have presented at the Ehrhardt Seminar and three of the Durham, Manchester, Sheffield Postgraduate Conferences through which I received valuable comments. Conversations with Prof. Philip Alexander initially sparked interest in Jewish mysticism and the method of heuristic comparison. Thanks are also due to Prof. George J. Brooke, Peter Oakes, Todd Klutz, and other Manchester students. Second, I am deeply thankful for the Nazarene Theological College community. I received worthwhile feedback from presentations at the Postgraduate Research Seminars, the One Day Theological Conference, and the MWRC Colloquium. The friendship, support, and care from faculty, staff, and students over five years sustained this project. My appreciation also goes to my fellow postgraduates and friends: Sarah Whittle, Arseny Ermakov, Dick Eugenio, Un Tae Park, Svetlana Khobnya, Gabi Markusse-Overduin, Joseph Kisoi, the Dercks, the Hughes, the Hammonds, Graham Meiklejohn, Peter Rae, Rob Fringer, James Ramano, Jim Moretz, and many others. Finally, my deepest gratitude goes to my wife, Sarah, without whom I would not have started this journey. Her patient endurance, loving support, and faithful parenting of our two boys, Phineas and Jonas, helped bring this study to completion.

THE AUTHOR

Christopher Grant Foster, born 1977; biblical studies and research in Manchester, U.K.; 2010–2013 PhD research at University of Manchester and Nazarene Theological College; 2010–2012 visiting lecturer in Biblical Studies at Nazarene Theological College, Manchester, U.K.

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

In the 1960s, the highly influential Gershom Scholem traced Jewish mysticism’s development back to biblical, pseudepigraphic, and apocalyptic traditions1 and suggested early Jewish mysticism provided a background for understanding Paul’s epistles.2 Scholars ever since have had to wrestle with the Scholemian Paradigm3 of Jewish mysticism (hereafter JM) and in particular JM’s relationship with late Second Temple Judaism (hereafter 2TJ). Over the last two decades, JM has been recognised in the Dead Sea Scrolls4 (hereafter DSS) through the identification of Jewish mystical elements5 and mystical praxis.6 JM has also proved fruitful to the study of

1 Gershom Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism (3d rev. ed.; New York: Schocken Books, 1961; repr.,1995), 40, 43. He notes two esoteric doctrines taught in 2TJ: Genesis 1, “the story of Creation (‘Maaseh Bereshith’), and the first chapter of Ezekiel, the vision of God’s throne-chariot (the ‘Merkabah’)” (42). He identifies the main theme of earliest JM as “throne mysticism.” “Its essence is not absorbed contemplation of God’s true nature, but perception of His appearance on the throne, as described by Ezekiel, and cognition of the mysteries of the celestial world” (43). 2 Gershom Scholem, Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, and Talmudic Tradition (2d ed.; New York: The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1965), 14–19. Scholem was not the first but the most influential to propose a connection. For earlier links, see Wilhelm Bousset, “Die Himmelsreise der Seele,” ARW 4 (1901): 136–69 and 229–73, esp. 147–48; Hans Windisch, Der zweite Korintherbrief (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1924), 368–98, esp. 375–76; and Hans Bietenhard, Die himmlische Welt im Urchristentum und Spätjudentum (WUNT 2; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1951), 91–95 and 161–68. 3 The Scholemian paradigm suggests early JM, specifically Merkabah mysticism, began in first century B.C.E., reflects actual mystical practice, and developed in three stages: (1) apocalyptic stage, (2) Merkabah speculation of mishnaic teachers, and (3) Hekhalot literature. For more on Scholem’s legacy, see Philip Alexander, “Mysticism” in The Oxford Handbook of Jewish Studies (ed. Martin Goodman et al.; Oxford: OUP, 2002), 705–706, 729; Ithamar Gruenwald, “Major Issues in the Study and Understanding of Jewish Mysticism,” in Judaism in Late Antiquity: Part Two: Historical Synthesis (ed. Jacob Neusner; Boston: Brill, 2001), 1–49; Peter Schäfer, The Origins of Jewish Mysticism (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009), 1–33. 4 The DSS are documents from Qumran and related texts from Masada and Cairo Genizah. Translations will be from Martínez and Tigchelaar’s DSSSE unless otherwise noted. 5 Jewish mystical elements are ideas and technical terminology of JM, such as heavenly ascent, merkabah exegesis, descriptions of the heavenly realm, visions of God’s throne, enthronement, and angelic transformation, which correspond to later Merkabah mysticism. For an example, see n. 66 below. 6 Mystical praxis or via mystica is the means to mystical experience (e.g., heavenly ascent). 17

Paul’s Christology and his heavenly ascent in 2 Cor 12. What has not been considered, however, is how JM relates to or illuminates the broader context of the Corinthian correspondence and the worship practice of the Corinthian ekklesia. Since JM in the DSS primarily concerns the pre-Christian, sectarian Jewish community7 at Qumran and its liturgical practices, this provides a rich and illuminating source for comparison to the Corinthian correspondence. For this reason, a heuristic approach that identifies mystical elements in Jewish mystical texts among the DSS (e.g., Hodayota, Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice, Self- Glorification Hymna–b) and then compares them with converging phenomena and concepts in the Corinthian correspondence (e.g., 1 Cor 2:6–16; 3:16; 6:19; 11:10; 2 Cor 6:14b–16a; 12:1–12; 13:13) will illuminate how Paul draws upon Jewish mystical traditions and reinterprets them to promote the ongoing Christological and mystical transformation of the Corinthian community in and by the spirit.8 The theme of participation in the spirit, which correlates with the mystical elements in the Corinthian correspondence, will guide this comparative investigation. The comparison will show in particular Paul’s largely communal orientation. The rationale for this comparison is threefold. First, the communities have a common relationship. The Qumran community and the Corinthian ekklesia are both sectarian groups9 with an eschatological orientation in 2TJ and draw upon the same biblical traditions, which provide adequate grounds for comparison.10 Moreover, the DSS are “unaffected by the post-Jamnia consolidation of ‘normative’ Judaism and uninfluenced by Christianity or anti-Christian polemic.”11 As such, they sufficiently represent the diversity of Judaism in the late 2TP. The DSS, thus, hold particular relevance in the study of early Christianity communities.

7 There is an ongoing debate over the connection between the community located at Qumran, the DSS, and communities associated with the DSS over time. For this study, the Qumran community will refer to the sectarian community or communities at Qumran self-identified as the yaḥad, who used the DSS from 170 B.C.E to 70 C.E. 8 Since ‘spirit’ references in Second Temple Jewish literature are often ambiguous, lower case ‘spirit’ will be used throughout. 9 Albert Baumgarten defines sect as “a voluntary association of protest, which utilizes boundary marking mechanisms – the social means of differentiating between insiders and outsiders – to distinguish between its own members and those otherwise normally regarded as belonging to the same national or religious entity,” in The Flourishing of Jewish Sects in the Maccabean Era: an Interpretation (JSJSup 55; Leiden: Brill, 1997), 7. 10 On the relationship, see George J. Brooke, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament: Essays in Mutual Illumination (London: SPCK, 2005), 94. 11 Meeks, Wayne A. The Prophet-King: Moses Traditions and the Johannine Christology (NovTSup 14; Leiden: Brill, 1967), 164. 18

Second, the DSS are of noteworthy importance for the study of the spirit in the Corinthian correspondence. Unlike the relative paucity of references to the spirit of God in Second Temple Jewish literature, the abundant references to God’s spirit in Hodayota and 1QS considerably expand the role of the spirit in the life of the maśkîl and in the Qumran community. Comparative study of the spirit in Paul in light of the DSS has not been fully explored, especially in light of recent study of the Qumran community’s worship practices. Third, evidence suggests the Qumran community practised a communal and liturgical mysticism. This grants the DSS an early place in the history of JM and may disclose widespread Jewish mystical traditions in 2TJ drawn upon by Paul, early Christian communities, and later Christian mysticism. This offers a compelling reason to investigate Paul’s relationship with early JM found in the DSS. Additionally, the functions of the spirit in the Qumran community’s communal mystical practice will need further examination and clarification in this study. Paul’s similar communal orientation concerning participation in the spirit warrants a fresh comparison of the mystical elements in the DSS to those corresponding to the spirit in the Corinthian correspondence. To begin, this chapter will first briefly survey the history of interpretation on the relationship between JM and the DSS. This will establish a working definition of JM for this study and a foundation for further exploration of JM in the DSS for Part I. Second, the history of interpretation on the relationship between Paul and JM will be considered. This will locate the specific contributions of Part II on the Corinthian correspondence within the broader scholarly discussion of JM and Paul. Third, a brief consideration will explain how communal participation in the spirit—the central theme of this thesis—relates to scholarship on mysticism, participation, and study of the spirit in Paul. Afterward, methodology, working assumptions, and the thesis structure will be laid out.

1.1 Jewish Mysticism and the Dead Sea Scrolls: Towards a Working Definition A survey of the scholarly discussion on JM in the DSS will lay the groundwork for Part I and help construct a working definition of JM for this study. The question of whether JM appears in the DSS or to what extent the Qumran community practised JM is a matter of definition, debate, and perspective. The question has primarily

concerned the historical relationship between early JM in the DSS and Merkabah mysticism12 (hereafter MM) in Hekhalot literature.13 Some, such as Philip Alexander,14 argue that mysticism and mystical elements in the DSS are the historical precursor to Hekhalot texts, others,15 a historical predecessor with traditions that eventually appear in Hekhalot literature, and, some,16 part of wider, apocalyptic worldview in 2TJ. Still others, such as Elliot Wolfson,17 Esther Chazon,18 and Peter Schäfer,19 refrain from using the term mysticism to describe the DSS because of the significant differences with Hekhalot texts and the ambiguity and difficulty of the term mysticism. A comparison, however, between these two textual groups shows remarkable affinities in style and content that must be reconsidered and differences that need to be further explicated. How and why did scholars begin to associate the DSS with MM in Hekhalot texts? The connection first began with the publication in 1960 of fragments of “The Angelic Liturgy”—later called Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice, in which John

12 Merkabah mysticism (MM) comes initially from rabbinic traditions on maʿaseh merkabah— the work of the divine chariot—found in both Talmudic and midrashic literature that develops an esoteric tradition of exegesis of Ezek 1. See Christopher R. A. Morray-Jones, “Paradise Revisited (2 Cor 12:1–12): The Jewish Mystical Background of Paul's Apostolate. Part 1: The Jewish Sources,” HTR 86 (1993), 182 n. 14, 183. For example, see m. Ḥag. 2.1, which says, “It is not permitted to expound . . . the merkabah with an individual, unless he were wise and understands [understood] from his (own) knowledge” (trans. Morray-Jones, “Part 1,” 185). 13 Hekhalot ‘palaces/temples’ is a literary collection of Jewish mystical texts: Hekhalot Zutarti, Hekhalot Rabbati, Ma‘aśeh Merkabah, 3 Enoch (Sefer Hekhalot), Shi‘ur Qomah, and Sefer Yeṭirah. For information and translations, see Peter Schäfer, Synopse zur Hekhalot-Literature (TSAJ 2; Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1981); idem, The Hidden and Manifest God: Some Major Themes in Early Jewish Mysticism (trans. Aubrey Pomerance; SUNY series in Judaica; Albany: SUNY, 1992); idem, Geniza-Fragmente zur Hekhalot-Literatur (TSAJ 6;Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1984); Ithamar Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism (AGJU 14; Leiden: Brill, 1980); James R. Davila, Descenders to the Chariot: The People Behind the Hekhalot Literature (JSJSup 70; Leiden: Brill, 2001); idem, Hekhalot Literature in Translation: Major Texts of Merkavah Mysticism (SJJTP 20; Leiden: Brill, 2013); Ra’Anan S. Boustan, “The Study of Heikhalot Literature: Between Mystical Experience and Textual Artifact,” CurBR 6 (2007): 130–60. 14 Philip S. Alexander, Mystical Texts: Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice and Related Manuscripts (LSTS 61; London: T&T Clark International, 2006), vii., 46. 15 See for example, James R. Davila, “Exploring the Mystical Background of the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Dead Sea Scrolls (ed. Timothy H. Lim and John J. Collins; Oxford: OUP, 2010), 449–51. 16 For instance, see Gruenwald, Apocalyptic, 29–72. 17 Elliot R. Wolfson, “Mysticism and the Poetic-Liturgical Compositions from Qumran: A Response to Bilhah Nitzan,” JQR 85 (1994): 185–202. 18 Esther Chazon, “Human and Angelic Prayer in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in Liturgical Perspectives: Prayer and Poetry in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium of the Orion Center for the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Associated Literature, 19–23, January, 2000 (ed. Esther G. Chazon; STDJ 48; Leiden: Brill, 2003), 36. 19 Schäfer, Origins, 112–53. 20

Strugnell pointed out some parallels to MM.20 In 1965, Scholem also detected in these excerpts a relationship “between the oldest Hebrew Merkabah texts preserved in Qumran and the subsequent development of the Merkabah mysticism as preserved in the Hekhaloth texts.”21 Scholars have drawn more links between the DSS and the Hekhalot corpus as publications and evaluations of Hekhalot literature came out concurrently with remaining DSS fragments. For example, in 1982, Schiffman added 1 Enoch 14, the War Scrolla and 11QPsalmsa to the mystical content of the DSS and cited common technical terminology with Hekhalot literature. He wrote:

Among the most prominent are: the notion of the seven archangels, the idea that the angelic hosts praise God regularly, the notion of the gevurah, kavod, or dynamis, the heavenly sanctuary and cult, the ‘gentle voice,’ association of fire with the angels, the variegated colors, the ‘living God,’ the multiple chariot- thrones, and the military organization of the heavenly hosts. Further, the language, terminology, and style of our text are very similar to what we encounter in the later Hekhalot literature.22

From this he concluded, “merkavah mysticism had its origin at Qumran or in related sectarian circles.”23 Schiffman redacted the relationship in 1987 to exclude a direct link.24 His study, nonetheless, identified the presence of mystical elements in the DSS, which is important for this discussion. Carol Newsom’s 1985 critical edition of the Songs of the Sabbath Songs (hereafter called Songs)25 “set the tone for” the trend in scholarship to connect Qumran with MM.26 Newsom describes the thirteen week cycle of songs as a “quasi-

20 John Strugnell, “The Angelic Liturgy at Qumran-4Q Serek Šîrôt ʿOlat Haššabbāt,” in Congress Volume Oxford 1959 (VTSup 7; Leiden: Brill, 1960), 318–45. 21 Scholem, Gnosticism, 128. 22 Lawrence Schiffman, “Merkavah Speculation at Qumran: The 4Q Serekh Shirot ʿOlat ha- Shabbat,” in Mystics, Philosophers, and Politicians: Essays in Jewish Intellectual History in Honor of Alexander Altmann (ed. Jehuda Reinharz and Daniel Swetschinski; Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1982), 45. 23 Schiffman, “Speculation,” 46. 24 Lawrence Schiffman, “Sifrut Ha-Hekhalot ve-Kitve Qumran” [“The Hekhalot Literature and Qumran Writings”], Meḥqere Yerushalaym Be-Maḥshevet Yisrʾel 6 (1987): 121–38 cited by James Davila, “The Dead Sea Scrolls and Merkavah Mysticism,” in The Dead Sea Scrolls in their Historical Context (ed. Timothy H. Lim et al.; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000), 263. 25 Carol Newsom, Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice: A Critical Edition (HSS 27; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985). 26 Schäfer, Origins, 142–46. 21

mystical liturgy,” which includes “the praxis of something like communal mysticism” and “the cultivation of a mystical communion with the angels.”27 She explains:

The mysteries of the angelic priesthood are recounted, a hypnotic celebration of the sabbatical number seven produces an anticipatory climax at the center of the work, and the community is then gradually led through the spiritually animate heavenly temple until the worshippers experience the holiness of the merkabah and of the Sabbath sacrifice as it is conducted by the high priests of the angels.28

She notes, like Schiffman, the influence of Ezek 1, 10, and 40–48 as well as references to “esoteric knowledge and the revealing of secrets,” the formation of a temple community, and a mystical communion with the angels as a “shared priestly service.”29 While the sectarian origin of Songs remains unknown,30 textual evidence clearly indicates that they played an essential part in the Qumran community’s literary and liturgical practice.31 This thesis builds upon Newsom’s communal identification of JM in Songs, but notes differences from other DSS. Furthermore, the comparison with Paul’s communal orientation in the Corinthian correspondence should prove illuminating. After Newsom’s seminal work, scholars have re-evaluated the relationship. Newsom, Deborah Dimant, and Strugnell, among many others, see exegesis of merkabah texts from Scripture as the primary commonality between the two.32

27 Newsom, Songs, 19, 59, 71. 28 Newsom, Songs, 19. 29 Newsom, Songs, 59, 63. For implicit exegesis of Ezekiel in Songs, see idem, “Merkabah Exegesis in the Qumran Sabbath Shirot,” JJS 38 (1987): 11–30. 30 Newsom originally proposed a Qumran origin, Songs, 4. She now argues for pre-Qumran origin, “‘Sectually Explicit’ Literature from Qumran,” in The Hebrew Bible and Its Interpreters (ed. William H. Propp et al.; BJSUC 1; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1990), 184. 31 Newsom, “‘Sectually,’” 185; Henry W. Morisada Rietz, “Identifying Compositions and Traditions of the Qumran Community: The Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice as a Test Case,” in Qumran Studies: New Approaches, New Questions (ed. Michael Thomas Davis and Brent A. Strawn; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 29–52; Strawn and Rietz, “(More) Sectarian Terminology in the Songs of .in Qumran, 53–64 ”,תמימי דרך the Sabbath Sacrifice: The Case of 32 Merkabah exegesis includes Ex 24:9–11; 25–40; 1 Kgs 6–7; 19:12; 1 Chr 28–29; 2 Chr 3:12; Pss 24; 68:18–19; Isa 6; Ezek 1, 10, 40–48; and Dan 7:9–14. Newsom, “Exegesis,” 11–40; Schiffman, “Speculation,” 15–47; Joseph M. Baumgarten, “The Qumran Sabbath Shirot and Rabbinic Merkabah Traditions,” RevQ 13 (1988): 199–213; Devorah Dimant and John Strugnell, “4QSecond Ezekiel,” RevQ 13 (1988): 45–58; idem, “The Merkabah Vision in Second Ezekiel (4Q385 4),” RevQ 14 (1989): 331–48; Alexander, Mystical, 66–68; Christopher Rowland and Christopher R. A. Morray- 22

Others, like Jey J. Kanagaraj33 and Michael Swartz,34 have continued with direct comparison and contrasting of the two types of literature. Some, like Schiffman, have been more judicious in their conclusions and use of the terms mystical and mysticism. Bilhah Nitzan,35 James R. Davila,36 Philip Alexander,37 and others argue for the validity in designating certain DSS as mystical, recognising the practice of a JM by the Qumran community, and seeing this as part of the early history of JM. Building upon Newsom’s work, Nitzan in 1994 contended for mystical characteristics in poetic and liturgical texts such as the Hodayota, Songs of the Sagea–b, and Songs. She describes Qumran mysticism as “an experience of harmony and communion between the chosen earthly and heavenly worshippers” that is “reached through hymns recited by his pure and perfect worshippers.”38 For Nitzan, the typological use of the number seven in Songs, “the descriptions of heavenly sanctuaries, the chariots, the Throne of Glory, and the angelic hosts may be considered as mystical.”39 She continues, “They are described in sublime and numinous wording and style, related mostly to the merkavah vision of Ezekiel, thereby reflecting the mysterious exalted atmosphere of the heavenly kingdom of God.”40 For Nitzan, Songs are “not analogous to that of the mystic experience of the later ‘descenders to the merkavah,’” but “they may have been considered as a medium for creating an experience of mystic communion between the earthly and heavenly worshippers.”41 Since study of MM and the multifarious and polymorphic Hekhalot texts is ongoing, scholars have not always agreed on what mystical elements must be present

Jones, The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament (CRINT 12; Leiden: Brill, 2009), 308–11. 33 In light of Hekhalot literature, Jey J. Kanagaraj identifies three ‘mystical’ elements in the Qumran community: (1) angelology around the throne-chariot, (2) “God as the glory and king who is seated on the royal chariot-throne” with hints at heavenly ascent, and (3) esotericism (103).‘Mysticism’ in the Gospel of John: An Inquiry into its Background (JSNTSup 158; Sheffield: SAP, 1998), 89–103. 34 Michael D. Swartz cites a stylistic affinity between Songs and Maʿaśeh Merkavah, a Hekhalot text, as “evidence for the mystical character of Qumran literature and spirituality” in “The Dead Sea Scrolls and Later Jewish Magic and Mysticism,” DSD 8 (2001): 186. 35 Bilhah Nitzan, “Harmonic and Mystical Characteristics in Poetic and Liturgical Writings from Qumran,” JQR 85 (1994): 163–83. 36 Davila, “Exploring,” 433–54. 37 Alexander, Mystical. 38 Nitzan, “Harmonic,” 168. 39 Nitzan, “Harmonic,” 178. 40 Nitzan, “Harmonic,” 178. 41 Nitzan, “Harmonic,” 183. 23

to qualify something as JM. In 1994, Elliot Wolfson adduced that the two essential elements of JM, heavenly ascent and enthronement with “ontic transformation,” are missing from the DSS on which Nitzan bases her conclusions about mysticism at Qumran.42 Although Wolfson observes “the importance of Qumran material in the history of Jewish mysticism,” he refrains “from using the word mystical to describe any of the Qumran texts” because in his opinion “no mystical praxis is related explicitly in the Qumran material.”43 In 2004, however, Wolfson revised his contention with Nitzan admitting that further study of the Sabbath hymns “has convinced me that some such [mystical] experience may indeed be alluded to in some critical passages.”44 Davila responds to Wolfson’s supplementary criteria and specifies six heavenly ascent traditions present at Qumran; ascent and enthronement coexist in 4QSelf- Glorification Hymna–b and parallels (4Q491; 4Q471b, 4Q427 frag. 7, and 1QHa 45 XXVI), and possibly with the figure of Moses in 4Q374. Moreover, Christopher Morray-Jones,46 Morton Smith,47 Crispin Fletcher-Louis,48 and Michael O. Wise,49among many others,50 argue for some type of angelification, enthronement, and/or apotheosis in certain DSS. These claims, in relation to Moses, will be re- examined in chapter 4.

42 Wolfson, “Poetic-Liturgical,” 194. For challenges to Scholem’s taxonomy, see Alexander, “Mysticism,” 705–32; David Halperin, Faces of the Chariot: Early Jewish Responses to Ezekiel’s Vision (Tübingen: Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1988); Schäfer, Origins; Martha Himmelfarb, “Heavenly Ascent and the Relationship of the Apocalypses and the Hekhalot Literature,” HUCA 59 (1988): 99. 43 Wolfson, “Poetic-Liturgical,” 201–202. 44 Elliot R. Wolfson, “Seven Mysteries of Knowledge: Qumran E/sotericism Recovered,” in The Idea of Biblical Interpretation: Essays in Honor of James L. Kugel (ed. James L. Kugel et al.; Leiden: Brill, 2004), 191 n. 53. 45 James R. Davila, “Heavenly Ascents in the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in The Dead Sea Scrolls After Fifty Years: A Comprehensive Assessment (ed. P. W. Flint and J. C. VanderKam; 2 vols.; Leiden: Brill, 1999), 2:461–85; Morton Smith, “Ascent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QMa,” in Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls (ed. L. H. Schiffman; JSPSup 8; Sheffield: JSOT, 1990), 181–88; Wolfson, “Poetic-Liturgical,” 200–201. 46 Morray-Jones, “The Temple Within: The Embodied Divine Image and its Worship in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Early Jewish and Christian Sources,” in Mystery, 303–39; idem, “Transformational Mysticism in the Apocalyptic-Merkabah Tradition,” JJS 48 (1992):1–31. 47 Smith, “Ascent,” 181–88. 48 Crispin H. T. Fletcher-Louis, All the Glory of Adam: Liturgical Anthropology in the Dead Sea Scrolls (Leiden: Brill, 2002). 49 Michael O. Wise includes a comprehensive survey of scholars, such as Stegeman, Eshel, and A Study of 4Q491c, 4Q47b, 4Q427 7 מי כמוני באלים“ ,Dimant, who argue for deification in these texts and 1QHA 25:35–26:10,” DSD 7 (2000): 173–21. 50 For example, see Esther Eshel, “4Q471B: A Self-Glorification Hymn,” RevQ 17 (1996): 175– 203. 24

Despite these responses to Wolfson, some support his earlier assessment. Esther Chazon also “refrains from applying the term ‘mystical’ to these ancient Jewish texts.”51 She concludes that multi-faceted human-angelic praise at Qumran is part of a broader religious phenomenon in Judaism and may only relate to Merkabah mystics at the “highest level of joint praise, that which unites human beings to the angels most closely, elevating them to angelic heights.”52 Even Newsom seems to have stepped away from the function of Songs as mystical praxis and offered the alternative function of a “priestly self-understanding” instead.53 In 2009, Schäfer put forth another minimalist assertion. While some Qumranic texts contain angelomorphic transformation, Schäfer argues they do not unequivocally also have heavenly ascent or emphasize unmistakeably enough the vision of God on his glorious throne. 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and parallels, he claims, are missing an ascent journey. In this vein, he concludes that Qumran texts are not the prototype for MM and should not be categorised as mysticism.54 Schiffman’s, Chazon’s, Newsom’s, and Schäfer’s cautious assessments disclose the methodological question of whether literary accounts of religious praxis in texts at Qumran must fully comply with later MM as defined in the Hekhalot corpus to be considered mystical or a form of JM. This approach employs an indicative definition of mysticism derived from general characteristics found in Hekhalot literature.55 On the one hand, those scholars, who require sameness with later MM, often cannot prove a direct connection. Thus, they abstain from using the term mysticism or mystical to describe Qumran texts or religious practice. This may partially derive

51 Chazon, “Human,” 36. 52 Chazon, “Human,” 46–47. 53 Carol Newsom agrees with Johann Maier’s (Vom Kultus zur Gnosis (KAIROS 1; Salzburg: Otto Müller, 1964)) proposed priestly function of Songs, “‘He Has Established for Himself Priests’: Human and Angelic Priesthood in the Qumran Sabbath Shirot,” in Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls (ed. L. H. Schiffman; Sheffield: JSOT, 1990), 114–15. See also Johann Maier, “Shîrê ʿÔlat hash-Shabbat. Some Observations on their Calendric Implications and on their Style,” 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 Luis Vegas Montaner; 2 vols.; STDJ 11; Leiden: Brill, 1992), 2:543–60. 54 Schäfer, Origins, 151–53, 348–50. He does acknowledge the presence of a unio angelica and a communal unio liturgica, but his narrow definition of mysticism as unio mystica with God prohibits a mystical designation (153). 55 Philip Alexander, “Qumran and the Genealogy of Western Mysticism,” in New Perspectives on Old Texts: Proceedings of the Tenth International Symposium of the Orion Center for the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Associated Literature, 9–11 January, 2005 (ed. Esther G. Chazon et al.; STDJ 88; Leiden: Brill, 2010), 218–19. 25

from occasional pejorative connotations56 and dissimilar definitions of mysticism. Furthermore, some, like Schäfer, understandably want to avoid an anachronistic reading of the DSS. On the other hand, many scholars, such as Philip Alexander,57 James R. Davila,58 Christopher Morray-Jones,59 and Crispin Fletcher-Louis,60 allow an expanded use of the noun mysticism to characterise themes and motifs in the DSS. These aspects not only reflect later MM but also reveal the development of early Jewish mystical traditions and exegetical speculation on throne related texts, including Ezek 1, 10, Isa 6, and Ps 68.61 For instance, Ithamar Gruenwald derives his similar list of mystical elements not from Hekhalot literature, but from the theophanies/visions in 2 Kgs, Isa, Ezek, and Dan and in apocalyptic literature (e.g., 1 En.). These elements become central features of later Merkabah visions of Hekhalot texts but derive from the shift towards apocalyptic in 2TJ.62 This should satisfy Schäfer’s concern to avoid anachronism and further validate a mystical designation. The work of Davila exemplifies how many scholars, in light of growing body of evidence, now see that the DSS contain mystical elements and are part of JM. He has contributed much to the understanding of mystical elements and mystical traditions in the DSS. In various articles and books, he refers to mystical traditions, ascents, and background of MM in Qumran texts, points out extensive connections with Hekhalot literature, and even sees 4Q535 as “a prototype of the Merkavah mystics.”63 Despite all of the connections, he still refused to identify the DSS with mysticism. He said, the term is “too vague and subjective to be much use for serious analysis,” and there are as many differences between Qumran and MM in Hekhalot writings as there are similarities.64

56 John Ashton proposes three reasons for an aversion to mysticism (1) systematic theology assumptions, (2) protestant dislike of the mystical, and (3) presupposition that mysticism is Hellenistic not Jewish, The Religion of Paul the Apostle (New Haven: YUP, 2000), 240–41. 57 Alexander, Mystical. 58 Davila, “Exploring.” 59 Morray-Jones, Mystery, 303–39. 60 Fletcher-Louis, Glory. 61 DeConick calls it vision mysticism. Morray-Jones calls it transformational mysticism. Fletcher-Louis calls it communal mysticism. 62 Gruenwald’s list includes: “God is sitting on the throne”; “He has the appearance of a man”; “God is sitting in a palace”; “Fire occupies an important position in the vision”; “God is accompanied by angels”; and “the angels recite hymns,” Apocalyptic, 31. 63 James R. Davila, “4QMess ar (4Q534) and Merkavah Mysticism,” DSD 5 (1998): 379. 64 Davila, Descenders, 32. 26

In a pivotal 2010 article, however, Davila accedes to the term’s appropriateness and the growing scholarly consensus. After surveying scholars,65 who use mysticism in reference to the DSS, Davila employs and defines JM as follows: “the use of ritual practices to experience an ascent to heaven in which one undergoes a temporary or permanent transformation into an angelic being who may be enthroned on high or who may participate in the angelic liturgy. An aspect of this experience is a fascination with detailed descriptions of the heavenly realm.”66 Davila then examines mystical elements of the DSS in two modified categories of Alexander:67 texts with merkabah exegesis68 and interest in the celestial realm (Songs, Pseudo-Ezekiel, Berakhota–e, and Songs of the Sage) and those with ascent (4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and parallels, 1 Enoch, ALD, 11QMelch, Genesis Apocryphon, and possibly Songs). He lists extensive parallels between Qumran and Hekhalot literature.69 While also acknowledging significant differences, he concludes that the relationship may not necessarily be direct. Enough similarities, though, indicate a degree of genetic influence either through vision mysticism of 2TJ, as argued by April DeConcick,70 and/or priestly mysticism from Qumran sectarianism, as proposed by Rachel Elior.71

65 Nitzan, DeConick, Wolfson, Gruenwald, Morray-Jones, and Alexander 66 Davila, “Exploring,” 434. 67 Alexander, Mystical, 10–11. 68 See n. 29. 69 Davila writes, “These elements include a sevenfold heaven with seven palaces containing the divine throne-chariot at the top or innermost level; a celestial liturgy in the macrocosmic sanctuary; multiple chariots; a tabernacle; thrones; pillars; glowing coals of fire; the curtain of the holy of holies; wheels (galgalim); the ; ‘portals’; a heavenly ephod and breastpiece; divine ‘effulgence and adornment’ (hod ve-hadar); ‘variegated’ or ‘colourful’ elements; God as the Mighty One, ‘King of Glory,’ and ‘King of Kings’; groupings of seven angels and angels in military formations (‘mustered’ and in ‘divisions’); angelic ‘princes’ and ‘attendants’; angelic ‘camps’; ‘chief’ angels; cherubim and ophannim; ‘ophannim of light’; and ‘angels of glory,’” “Exploring,” 444. 70 DeConick suggests that the Qumranites “textualized” mystical, exegetical traditions and communally practiced ascent and vision mysticism through “the esoteric Temple by means of liturgy,” Voices of the Mystics: Early Christian Discourse in the Gospels of John and Thomas and Other Ancient Christian Literature (JSNTSup 157; Sheffield: SAP, 2001), 50, 64; idem, Seek to See Him: Ascent and Vision Mysticism in the Gospel of Thomas (VCSup 33; Leiden: Brill, 1996), 33–34. 71 Davila, “Exploring,” 480–83. Elior sees mystical and merkabah traditions in the DSS “as the missing link between the priest-prophet Ezekiel and the foundation of the biblical chariot tradition, on the one side, and the hekhalot literature chariot tradition, on the other side” (87) and similarities between Qumran and Hekhalot literature derive from their common origins in priestly ideology (86), “The Emergence of the Mystical Traditions of the Merkabah,” in Paradise Now: Essays on Early Jewish and Christian Mysticism (ed. April D. DeConick; SBLSymS 11; Atlanta: SBL, 2006), 83–104; idem, The Three Temples: On the Emergence of Jewish Mysticism (trans. David Louvish; Oxford: LLJC, 2004); idem, “From Earthly Temple to Heavenly Shrines: Prayer and Sacred Song in the Hekhalot Literature and Its Relation to Temple Traditions,” JSQ 4 (1997): 217–67; idem, “The Merkavah Tradition and the Emergence of Jewish Mysticism: From Temple to Merkavah, from Hekhal to Hekhalot, from Priestly Opposition to Gazing upon the Merkavah,” in Sino-Judaica: Jews and Chinese in Historical Dialogue (ed. Aharon Oppenheimer; Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, 1999), 27

Thus, Davila goes beyond a general definition of JM and reinforces it through parallel ideas, common technical terminology, and mystical practice indicative of Hekhalot literature. Davila’s article builds upon Alexander’s groundbreaking book, The Mystical Texts (2006). Through a history-of-religions approach, Alexander utilizes a combination of abstract and indicative definitions of JM to create a heuristic device from which to identify a Qumran “Mystical Corpus.” Alexander divides the texts into two similar groups: those dealing with angelic praise in a celestial temple (Songs, 4QBlessings, 4QWords of the Luminaries, 4QpsEzeka, 11QMelch, Songs of the Sagea–b, 4QDaily Prayers, Hodayota, and so on) and those dealing with ascent to the heavenly temple (4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and parallels), to which he adds ascent accounts of Enoch, Levi, and others. He explains that Qumran mysticism “appears to be an early – perhaps the earliest – example of the angelikos bios type of mysticism, well known from later Jewish and Christian examples.”72 Conjointly, he proposes with Elior that Qumran mysticism originates in the “priestly circles” of the Jerusalem temple and possibly is “the historical forerunner” to Hekhalot mysticism.73 Alexander and Davila have made important contributions to the field by broadening the scope and dating of JM to include the DSS. Thus, Alexander extends Scholem’s date of JM back to the DSS. This also corrects the false dialectical tension of Scholem’s taxonomy that JM was a reaction to constraints of halakhic Judaism

(Mishnaic development 200 C.E.). For the Qumran community, rather, meticulous observance of priestly law created the possibility of mystical participation in angelic worship.74 Morray-Jones,75 DeConick,76 Fletcher-Louis,77 along with Davila, in support of Alexander, propose not only that mystical traditions were present at Qumran but also were more widespread in 2TJ than many scholars acknowledge,

101–58. For a critical evaluation of Elior, see Martha Himmelfarb, “Merkavah Mysticism since Scholem: Rachel Elior’s The Three Temples,” in Wege mystischer Gotteserfahrung (ed. Peter Schäfer; Munich: Oldenburg, 2006), 19–36 and Schäfer, Origins, 15–17. 72 Alexander, Mystical, 11. He explains angelikos bios as “a mysticism in which the angels are seen as exemplars of the supreme relationship to God to which a creature can attain. The mystic’s aim is, through a process of elevation and transformation, known in some later Christian texts as theosis, to join the choirs of angels, and so share in their nearness to God,” “Genealogy,” 218 n.12. 73 Alexander, Mystical, 129, vii. 74 Alexander explains how “philologists and literary historians tend to be more suspicious of the term [mysticism] than historians of religion,” “Genealogy,” 218. 75 Morray-Jones, Mystery, 308–11. 76 See n. 67. 77 Fletcher-Louis, Glory, 266, 392, and 434. 28

especially since the DSS mystical corpus includes sectarian and non-sectarian compositions. In this regard, discerning the relationship between JM and Paul becomes even more compelling. Based upon these conclusions and in support of them, Part I will re-examine Jewish mystical elements and praxis in the DSS that parallel mystical elements and worship practice in the Corinthian letters. A correspondence in mystical ideas, phenomena, and practice will substantiate the wider dissemination of JM in 2TJ and illuminate its influence upon early Christian theology and practice—especially in Paul. In light of this scholarly discussion, a working definition of JM can now be constructed. Scholars often utilise an abstract definition of mysticism, as a particular religious phenomenon.78 Three parts are necessary for this definition, according to Alexander and others.79 First, “mysticism arises from religious experience, the experience of a transcendent divine presence which stands behind the visible, material world.”80 In Jewish tradition, the divine presence is God. Second, the mystic becomes aware of the divine presence and seeks to draw close to God. Since Judaism generally sees “an unbridgeable ontological gap between the Creator and the created, this consummation will be described as communion.”81 Third, the mystic has a via mystica or praxis, by which he or she attempts to unite or commune with the divine presence.82 The term mysticism is not semantically emic (i.e., Paul does not use the term to describe the phenomena) but etic, a modern semantic description.83 Nonetheless, the term helps identify particular religious phenomenon so that it can be examined for new insights.84 Since mysticism does not exist outside of a religious system, the mysticism examined here has characteristics specific to Judaism and biblical traditions, as Davila’s definition shows. This abstract definition of JM

78 Alexander, “Genealogy,” 218–19. 79 See Ulrich Luz, “Paul as Mystic,” in The Holy Spirit and Christian Origins: Essays in Honor of James D. G. Dunn (ed. Graham N. Stanton et al.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 131–43; Daniel Marguerat, “Paul le mystique,” RTL 43 (2012): 478–80. 80 Alexander, “Genealogy,” 219. 81 Alexander, “Genealogy,” 220. 82 Alexander, “Genealogy,” 220. 83 DeConick explains how modern scholarship has imposed the etic term mysticism upon ancient religious experience described “emically” as revelations, “waking visions, dreams, trances, and auditions that can involve spirit possession and ascent journey” in “What Is Early Jewish and Christian Mysticism?” in Paradise, 2. 84 Alexander, “Genealogy,” 218; idem, “The Qumran Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice and the Celestial Hierarchy of Dionysius the Areopagite: A Comparative Approach,” RevQ 22 (2006): 350. 29

combined with indicative criteria (i.e., Jewish mystical elements) mentioned above will be employed throughout the thesis.

1.2 Paul and Jewish Mysticism It is important to examine briefly how scholars have interpreted the relationship between Paul and JM to situate the specific contributions of Part II. Scholem, who set the stage for the relationship of JM and Paul, argued that Paul was familiar with early MM, which extended it into the first century.85 He compared the Tosefta and talmudic stories of the “Four who entered the pardes” (m. Ḥag. 2:1; t. Ḥag. 2:3–4; y. Ḥag. 2:1; b. Ḥag. 14–15) with Paul’s ascension to paradise (2 Cor 12:2–4).86 Through similar terminology (pardes/paradise) and parallel stories in 1 En. 8, L.A.E. 25, T. Levi 2, and Apoc. Zeph., he suggested Paul and the Corinthian community were not only familiar with ecstatic journeys in apocalyptic literature but also brought these Jewish mystical ideas and terminology into the Christian community. In Scholem’s history of religions paradigm, “Paul’s testimony is a link between these older Jewish texts and the Gnosis of the Tannaitic Merkabah mystics.”87 Since Scholem’s initial postulations, examinations of relevant parallel passages from Jewish Apocalypses, Pseudepigrapha, early rabbinic (Tannaitic) midrash,88 and even Hekhalot literature have shown that early Jewish mystical traditions in these texts illuminate Paul’s Christology, his account of heavenly ascent (2 Cor 12), and his visions and revelations of Christ. Some, like John Bowker and Alan Segal, even claim that Paul was a practicing mystic.89 While not everyone supports this assessment90 or the claims of mystical influence,91 these studies, especially those

85 See n. 2. 86 Scholem, Gnosticism, 16–20. 87 Scholem, Gnosticism, 18. 88 Gruenwald traces mystical speculation on the merkabah from Rabban Johannan ben Zakkai to Rabbi Aqiva among Tannaim sages of the Mishnah, Apocalyptic, 73–97. 89 J. W. Bowker, through parallels to Johannan b. Zakkai, speculatively claims, “Saul practiced Merkabah contemplation as an ordinary consequence of his highly extended Pharisaic training,” “‘Merkabah’ Visions and the Visions of Paul,” JSS 16 (1971): 172. Alan Segal, Paul the Convert: The Apostolate and Apostasy of Saul the Pharisee (New Haven: YUP, 1990), 34. Christopher R. A. Morray-Jones, “Paradise Revisited (2 Cor 12:1-12): The Jewish Mystical Background of Paul's Apostolate. Part 2: Paul’s Heavenly Ascent and Its Significance,” HTR 86 (1993): 284. James D. Tabor, Things Unutterable: Paul’s Ascent to Paradise in its Greco-Roman, Judaic, and Early Christian Contexts (SJ; Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1986), 32–34. 90 Seyoon Kim and Christopher Rowland belie Bowker’s claims, Rowland, “The Influence of the First Chapter of Ezekiel on Jewish and Early Christian Literature,” (Ph.D. Thesis, Cambridge, 30

who favourably support Scholem’s proposal,92 demonstrate the need for continued exploration of Paul’s epistles in light of early JM. While many of these studies elucidate Paul’s conversion and Christology (including the New Religionsgeschichtliche Schule),93 the spirit in Paul has not been fully explored in light of JM. Finny Philip attempts to address this relationship in The Origins of Pauline Pneumatology. First, he observes the scarcity and ambiguity of references to “Spirit” in a survey of early Jewish mystical literature.94 He endeavours, along with Kim, to bring the two together by tenuously reconstructing a role for the spirit in Paul’s “mystical-revelatory experience at Damascus.”95 Through

1974), xxii n. 59 cited by Seyoon Kim, The Origin of Paul’s Gospel (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981), 224 n.3. 91 Michael Goulder unconvincingly argues, “Paul was suspicious of, and resistant to, claims of visions” (cf. Col 2:18) and had no visionary ascent to heaven, “Vision and Knowledge,” JSNT 17 (1995): 53. 92 For example, see John Ashton, Religion (New Haven: YUP, 2000); Bowker, “‘Merkabah,’” 157–73; Timo Eskola, Messiah and Throne: Jewish Merkabah Mysticism and Early Christian Exaltation Discourse (WUNT 2/142; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001), 379. Larry W. Hurtado critiques Eskola’s inadequate historical leap in Judaism from these exalted merkabah figures to cultic devotion of Jesus’ exaltation as God in How on Earth did Jesus become a God? Historical Questions about Earliest Devotion to Jesus (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 22–25. Jarl E. Fossum, The Image of the Invisible God: Essays on the Influence of Jewish Mysticism on Early Christology (NTOA 30; Freiburg, Schweiz: Universitäsverlag; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1995). Larry W. Hurtado, One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism (2d ed.; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1998). Morray-Jones, “Part 1,” 177–217; idem, “Part 2,” 269–92. Seyoon Kim observes many who “emphasize the understanding that the throne-theophany tradition of Ezek 1 in Jewish apocalyptic and Wisdom literature which later developed into the merkabah mysticism of rabbinic Judaism provides important background for Paul’s thought and that Paul’s terms such as δόξα, εἰκών, and μορφή must be understood against this background,” Paul and the New Perspective: Second Thoughts On the Origin of Paul’s Gospel (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 176. Carey C. Newman, Paul’s Glory-Christology: Tradition and Rhetoric (NovTSup 69; Leiden: Brill, 1992). Gilles Quispel, “Ezekiel 1:26 in Jewish Mysticism and Gnosis,” VC 34 (1980): 1–13. Rowland, “Influence” cited by Kim, Origin, passim; idem, The Open Heaven: A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early Christianity (London: SPCK, 1982); idem and Morray-Jones, Mystery. Alan F. Segal, “Heavenly Ascent in Hellenistic Judaism, Early Christianity and their Environment,” in ANRW II (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1980), 1333–94; idem, Convert; idem, “Paul and the Beginning of Jewish Mysticism,” in Death, Ecstasy, and Other Worldly Journeys (ed. John J. Collins and Michael Fishbane; Albany: SUNY, 1995), 95–122; idem, “Paul’s Thinking about Resurrection in Its Jewish Context,” NTS 44 (1998): 400–19. James M. Scott, “Throne-Chariot Mysticism in Qumran and in Paul,” in Eschatology, Messianism, and the Dead Sea Scrolls (ed. C. A. Evans and P.W. Flint; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 101–19; idem, “The Triumph of God in 2 Cor 2.14: Additional Evidence of Merkabah Mysticism in Paul,” NTS 42 (1996): 260–81. 93 Jarl E. Fossum, “The New Religionsgeschichtliche Schule: The Quest for Jewish Christology,” in Society of Biblical Literature 1991 Seminar Papers (ed. Eugene H. Lovering; SBLSP 30; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991), 638; Larry W. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 11–18. 94 Finny Philip, The Origins of Pauline Pneumatology: the Eschatological Bestowal of the Spirit upon Gentiles in Judaism and in the Early Development of Paul’s Theology (WUNT 2/194; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005), 176–82. 95 Philip, Origins, 182; Kim, Perspective, 115–27. Morray-Jones criticises Kim for this “false assumption,” Mystery, 415–17 nn. 249 and 250. 31

an exegesis of 2 Cor 3, he concludes somewhat speculatively that Paul’s Damascus experience “probably transformed his pre-Christian convictions regarding the role of the Spirit and the significance of the Spirit.”96 Overall, his treatment of the relationship between the spirit in Paul and early JM is cursory and leaves the topic needing a fuller investigation. The focus of this thesis on the DSS and the use of heuristic comparison will advance the study of JM and the spirit in Paul. Philip, like many others, did not adequately incorporate DSS in his research of JM. This study will show from Hodayota and 1QS the important connection between God’s spirit and mystical praxis for the Qumran community. Furthermore, mystical texts do not necessarily have to speak of God’s spirit to illuminate comparable mystical elements that relate to the spirit in Paul. The absence of the spirit in comparative texts discloses the expanded role Paul grants to God’s spirit in the Corinthian community. Indeed, when mystical elements are compared, the theme of communal participation in the spirit in the Corinthian correspondence comes to the forefront. Additionally, this thesis differs from some of the above studies in three ways that relate to criticisms of Scholem’s hypothesis.97 First, the relationship of Paul to later MM and Hekhalot literature may include a dating problem.98 Paula Gooder summarizes three approaches: (1) those who “ignore the dating problem and pretend that there is no difficulty”; (2) those, like Scholem and Segal, who “postulate a line of tradition” from post-biblical apocalypses to Hekhalot texts with Paul as a link in the middle; and (3) those, like Morray-Jones, who date the texts to “an earlier period than is normally proposed” to interpret Paul legitimately.99 After demonstrating that only parts of 1 En, T. Levi, Songs, and Berakhota–e are pre-Pauline, Gooder

96 Philip, Origins, 193. 97 For initial criticism on Scholem’s hypothesis, see Peter Schäfer, “New Testament and Hekhalot Literature: The Journey into Heaven in Paul and in Merkavah Mysticism,” JJS 35 (1984): 19–35. In response, Fossum argued that Morray-Jones’ two-part defence of Scholem (“Part 1” and “Part 2”) “vindicated the Bousset-Scholem hypothesis,” Image, 10. The debate, however, continues. Alon Goshen-Gottstein questions Morray-Jones’ methodology, “Four Entered Paradise Revisited,” HTR 88 (1995): 69–133. James Davila responds to Goshen-Gottstein, “The Hodayot Hymnist and the Four Who Entered Paradise,” RevQ 17/65–68 (1996): 457–78. Goshen-Gottstein rejects Davila’s criticism in The Sinner and the Amnesiac: The Rabbinic Invention of Elisha Ben Abuya and Eleazar Ben Arach (Standford: SUP, 2000), 304 n. 36. Morray-Jones answers Goshen-Gottstein, Mystery of God, 421–98. 98 Halperin, Faces, 6. 99 Paula Gooder, Only the Third Heaven? 2 Corinthians 12:1–10 and Heavenly Ascent (LNTS 313; London: T&T Clark, 2006), 158–60. 32

concludes that the remaining, late ascent texts “cannot be seen to offer a ‘background’ to Paul; nor can they be used as ‘evidence’ that Paul knew of them.”100 A Christian or anti-Christian perspective and the post-Jamnia consolidation of Judaism could also affect later Jewish texts.101 Conversely, the DSS, as pre-Christian and pre-Jamnia, circumvent these problems and appropriately represent the diversity of Jewish mystical traditions in the late 2TP. For this reason, this study avoids the dating problem by limiting the comparison to mystical texts among the DSS in Part I. Additionally, this study neither presumes a line of tradition with Paul as the main link between Qumran and MM nor assumes a direct link between Paul and the DSS. Second, Schäfer questions Scholem’s methodology and calls it an example of Sandmel’s “parallelomania.”102 Schäfer sees the terminological comparison of pardes/παραδεισος as inadequately supporting Scholem’s genetic connection between Paul and MM.103 He also insists that a comparison of whole literary systems is necessary before comparison of individual motifs is possible.104 Although Schäfer may be overly cautious regarding the latter, connections, especially genetic ones, drawn through comparison of divergent texts require prudence. Some of the studies above have compared Paul’s ascent with a wide range of texts from Jewish apocalyptic and Hellenistic texts, to Nag Hammadi codices and Hekhalot literature. Unfortunately, broad comparisons often deduce only “superficial similarities”105 and imply a closer relationship than truly exists between texts. James Tabor’s Unutterable Things exemplifies this problem.106 Notwithstanding Tabor’s helpful classification of ascent in antiquity, his surface analysis largely ignores detailed literary contexts and comparative differences with 2 Cor 12.107 In contrast, this thesis has a singular focus upon mystical texts in the DSS in Part I with a consideration of the literary context and the community’s use of each text. The complexity of the DSS and the extent of the material require this dedicated treatment. Likewise, the comparison in Part II will concern the larger context of the Corinthian correspondence, not just Paul’s ascent, and will note differences as well

100 Gooder, Third, 161. 101 Meeks, Prophet-King, 164. 102 Schäfer, “New,” 34; Samuel Sandmel, “Parallelomania,” JBL 81 (1962): 1–13. 103 Schäfer, “New,” 32–33. 104 Schäfer, “New,” 35. 105 Gooder, Third, 19. 106 Tabor, Unutterable. 107 See Gooder’s criticism, Third, 27–28. 33

as similarities. Methodologically, this thesis employs heuristic comparison and seeks illumination mostly through differences rather than arguing for a direct relationship. This avoids “parallelomania” and at the same time should satisfy the concern of Schäfer that whole, literary system analysis precedes comparison of motifs. By limiting Part I to the study of JM in the DSS, this study aims to make a timely contribution by drawing upon the valuable and enlightening resources of this growing field of study. Only since the 1990s and the final publication of the DSS have comparative studies of JM and Paul begun to incorporate or seriously consider aspects of JM in the DSS.108 Even then, the mystical texts of the DSS have not received a sustained and single-focused treatment in comparison with Paul. The recent research on JM in the DSS warrants comparative study with NT, especially Paul. The third criticism—a sticking point in scholarship—revolves around whether mystical texts are rooted in mystical experience or simply literary or exegetical inventions. While some, such as David Halperin, Schäfer, and Martha Himmelfarb side with a purely exegetical derivation,109 care must be taken not to impose restrictive modern categories onto ancient texts.110 Wolfson, among many others,111 contends this false dichotomy has not served scholarship well.112 It is impossible to demarcate ancient religious experience of God from an isolated literary exercise. The ancient mind linked religious writings to their religious feelings, hopes, expressions, and experience.113 Essentially, exegesis and experience go hand-in-hand for ancient mystics. This thesis presupposes then that the texts examined among the DSS and Corinthian correspondence relate and express the religious experiences and perceptions of their respective communities. While many of the above studies examine portions of Paul’s letters, especially 2 Cor 12, none have attempted to investigate key mystical elements in the Corinthian

108 For example, see the works of Segal, Rowland, Morray-Jones, and Scott. 109 Halperin, Faces, 34–37 and 199–208; Schäfer, Origins, 338–39; Martha Himmelfarb, Ascent to Heaven in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses (New York: OUP, 1993), 113–14. For a more comprehensive list, see Morray-Jones, “Part 1,” 184 n. 20 and Boustan, “Heikhalot,” 143–45. 110 For a critical response to Schäfer, see Morray Jones, “Part 1,” 192 and Brad H. Young, “The Ascension Motif of 2 Corinthians 12 in Jewish, Christian and Gnostic Texts,” GTJ 9 (1988): 73–103. 111 For example, see Rowland, Heaven, 214–40 and DeConick, “Mysticism,” 5 n. 14. 112 Elliot Wolfson, Through a Speculum That Shines: Vision and Imagination in Medieval Jewish Mysticism (Princeton: PUP, 1994), 121–24. 113 DeConick, “Mysticism,” 7 34

correspondence as a whole. Two recent contributions demonstrate the need for further study in this area. First, Gooder, in Only the Third Heaven, provides a strong impetus for further study of JM in the Corinthian correspondence. She writes:

Reading Paul’s writings through the lens of a belief in the reality of heavenly ascent and mystical experience but scepticism about the advantage of it, sheds light onto many different Pauline passages. It can be seen to be underpinning much of Paul’s discourse with the Corinthian community (such as 1 Cor. 13 or 2 Cor. 3) as well as in other epistles but that must be left to be the subject of another study.114

This study attempts to examine these mystical underpinnings in the Corinthian correspondence through the lens of JM in the DSS. Second, Christopher Rowland, in Mystery of God, argues that 1 Corinthians demonstrates the “coexistence of the mystical and experiential on the one hand—the immediate experience of, and indwelling of the divine—and, on the other, the externally organized, communally responsible, in which authorities legislate for and direct the life of a group, ensuring its coherence and continuity.”115 Paul is a “broker between two different religious impulses.”116 He writes, “These two dimensions are brought together in the Corinthian correspondence in which the role of the apostolic person becomes the decisive mediator of the revelatory experience and the arbitrator of its trustworthiness.”117 Rowland’s provocative statements challenge the marginalisation of JM in study of Paul. This thesis attempts to correct this neglect in scholarship by reinvestigating how Paul employed comparative mystical terminology to guide their communal experience of the spirit and advocated communal and cruciform participation in the spirit during the Corinthian worship gatherings. Key passages of this investigation will include 1 Cor 2:1–16; 3:16; 6:11, 16–17; 10:11; 12; 13:1, 12; 14; 15:45; 2 Cor 3:17–18; 4:4–6; 12:1–12; and 13:13.

114 Gooder, Third, 215. 115 Rowland, Mystery, 207. 116 Rowland, Mystery, 207. 117 Rowland, Mystery, 208. 35

1.3 Paul, Mysticism, and Participation One segment of Pauline study that brings together mysticism (not necessarily Jewish) and Paul’s participation language, apropos of ‘spirit,’ is early twentieth- century religionsgeschichtliche Schule studies. These examinations of Paul’s ‘Christ- mysticism,’ generally understand mysticism broadly and abstractly as a religious phenomenon without the indicative criteria of JM (i.e., heavenly ascent, vision of the merkabah, enthronement, and transformation). In fact, Adolf Deissmann118and Wilhelm Bousset,119 among others,120 argued that Paul appropriates Hellenistic mysticism. Conversely, Albert Schweitzer121 argues that Paul draws upon Jewish eschatology for his mysticism rather than Hellenism. While these studies pre-date the discovery of the DSS and do not relate Paul’s mysticism to JM, they still made significant and lasting contributions to the study of Paul and mysticism—despite their methodological fallacies, erroneous presuppositions, and discordant definitions of mysticism.122 A brief explanation of the contributions of Deissmann, Bousset, and Schweitzer will show how their work on mysticism and Paul justifies the current undertaking. In 1892, Deissmann explained all 164 occurrences of “in Christ” in Paul’s epistles as depicting a “Christ-mysticism,” i.e., a mystical, intimate union between believers and Christ.123 While he may have overstated his case,124 Deissmann made two lasting contributions that challenged the scholarship of his day. First, Paul’s religious experience of Christ drove his theology not systematic thought. This countered “dogmatists” who too narrowly defined mysticism and neglected the study

118 Adolf Deissmann, in Paul: A Study in Social and Religious History (trans. William E. Wilson; 2d ed.; London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1926). 119 Wilhelm Bousset, Kyrios Christos: A History of the Belief in Christ from the Beginnings of Christianity to Irenaeus (trans. John E. Steely; 1921; Nashville: Abingdon, 1970). 120 For example, see Richard Reitzenstein, Hellenistic Mystery-Religions: Their Basic Ideas and Significance (trans. John E. Steely; PTMS 18; Pittsburgh: Pickwick Press, 1978). 121 Albert Schweitzer, The Mysticism of the Apostle Paul (trans. William Montgomery; 2d ed.; London: Adam & Charles Black, 1953). 122 For other studies, see Martin Dibelius, “Glaube und die Mystik,” Botschaft und Geschichte: Gesammelte Aufsätze (Tübingen: Mohr, 1956), 2:94–116; idem, Paulus und die Mystik (Munich: Reinhardt, 1941), 134–59; Alfred Wikenhauser, Pauline Mysticism: Christ in the Mystical Teaching of St. Paul (Edinburgh: Nelson, 1960); Hans-Christoph Meier, Mystik bei Paulus (TANZ 26; Tübingen: Francke, 1998), 20, 268–71; Celia Kourie, “Christ-Mysticism in Paul,” WSup 201 (2001): 71–80. 123 Adolf Deissmann, Die Neutestamentliche Formel “In Christo Jesu” (Marburg: N. G. Elwert’sche, 1892). 124 See Wikenhauser’s critique, Pauline. 36

of mysticism (religious experience) in Paul.125 Second, Deissmann argued that the focus on the “doctrine of Justification” led to the neglect of the central expression of Paul’s Christianity, which was “in Christ.”126 Since Deissmann broadly defined mysticism as the “religious tendency that discovers the way to God direct through inner experience without the mediation of reasoning,” then Paul’s “in Christ” expression was mystical and a form of mysticism.127 Although Deissmann made a case for Hellenistic influence on Paul’s mysticism,128 Paul’s “Theo-centric” mysticism differs from Hellenism in initiative and aim and remains consistent with earliest Christianity. Thus, Paul was “a reacting mystic and a communio-mystic” instead of an acting and unio-mystic.129 For Deissmann, faith is the means to this mystical communion not baptism and the Lord’s Supper.130 Despite Deissmann’s intuitive contribution, he did not show clearly how he arrived exegetically at the communio-mysticism in Paul’s letters. He needed greater explanation and evidence for some of his conclusions, especially the Hellenistic origin of mysticism. He also seemed to ignore Jewish sources besides Philo and John. The careful exegesis that will be undertaken with the Corinthian correspondence in this study will supplement Deissmann’s argument for a reacting and communio-mysticism in Paul, but differs significantly in the appropriation of Jewish texts rather than Hellenistic ones. In 1913, Bousset rightly attempted to correct through historical analysis the separation of NT theology from both the history of the early church and its wider religious environment in the Greco-Roman world. He concluded that the cultic veneration of Jesus as kyrios in early Christianity derived from Hellenised Judaism and pagan influences, like the mystery cults. Bousset also interpreted Paul’s phrase ἐν Χριστῷ εἶναι as Christ mysticism but for him this comes in baptism. Paul developed Christ mysticism out of the cultic mysticism of the Hellenistic worshipping community. While connected to Greek mysticism, Bousset notes that

125 Deissmann, Paul, 154. 126 Deissmann, Paul, 155–56. 127 Deissmann, Paul, 149. 128 Deissmann follows Reitzenstein’s too simplistic Hellenistic derivation on this issue. See Wikenhauser on the fundamental differences between Paul’s and Oriental-Hellenistic mysticism, Pauline, 163–242. 129 Deissmann, Paul, 152. 130 Deissmann, Paul, 145. 37

Paul’s mysticism is communal and retains a distinction between believers and Christ.131 Bousset’s influential approach, however, had several problems. He presumed a doubtful pre-Christian redeemer myth to support his main thesis, which was successfully debunked. He unnaturally and too simplistically separated Palestinian and Hellenistic influences as well as early Christian communities. He seemed guided by a liberal protestant German version of the Christian faith and, unlike Deissmann, placed Paul’s Christianity in direct opposition to Judaism. His argument that the Christ cult came from Hellenistic communities and that Paul imposed foreign ideas upon the gospel could not be substantiated.132 Notwithstanding their weaknesses and flaws, both Deissmann and Bousset recognised the inextricable connection and effectual relationship of God’s spirit to Paul’s “Christ-mysticism,” which is important for this study. Deissmann characterised “in Christ” and “in the Spirit” as parallel “mystical formulae” that encapsulated Paul’s mystical Christian expression.133 The believer experiences Christ as the spirit. For Bousset, the spirit of Christ is seen as kyrios and forms a correlating spirit-mysticism. The two formulas ἐν Χριστῷ and ἐν πνεύματι interchangeably describe not just “the living experience of Kyrios Christos present in worship and in the practical life of the community” but the whole of the Christian life.134 This creates a Pneuma-Kyrios doctrine. Deissmann and Bousset, however, simplistically drew upon tenuous parallels to Oriental-Hellenistic sources to support a Hellenistic derivation to Paul’s Christ mysticism and spirit mysticism.135 For this reason, the recent study of Jewish mysticism in the DSS, in addition to the abundance references to the spirit in them, warrants a reinvestigation of the spirit

131 Bousset, Kyrios, 153–210. 132 For a critique of Bousset, see Larry W. Hurtado, “New Testament Christology: A Critique of Bousset’s Influence,” TS 40 (1979): 306–17 and idem, A New Introduction to Kyrios Christos: A History of the Belief in Christ from the Beginnings of Christianity to Irenaeus, by Wilhelm Bousset (trans. John E. Steely; repr., Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2013), v–xix. 133 Deissmann, Paul, 138. 134 Bousset, Kyrios, 154–57, esp. 156. 135 William David Davies, in Paul and Rabbinic Judaism: Some Rabbinic Elements in Pauline Theology (3d ed.; London: SPCK, 1970), cogently debunks Deissmann’s, Bousset’s, and Reitzenstein’s case that Paul’s spirit references point to the influence of “the pneumatic element in Hellenistic religion” (200). The pneumatic in Hellenism cannot be seen as having “too great or too widespread significance” and the pneumatic influence upon post-Christian texts could, in fact, be the “influence of Christian pneumatology” (200). Moreover, the distinction between creator and creature in Paul’s mysticism and the mystics among the Pharisees denote a Jewish root. 38

and mystical elements in Paul’s letters in light of these findings. This challenges several of Bousset’s and Deissmann’s conclusions including the Hellenistic source of Paul’s mysticism and pneuma doctrine. Furthermore, this study will reinforce Deissmann’s emphasis upon the role of Paul’s religious experience and lend support to the communal dimension to the “Spirit mysticism in Paul” (especially in 2 Cor 3:18) highlighted by Bousset.136 Concerning Schweitzer’s contribution, in 1930 he swam against the theological currents of his day for the concept of mysticism in Paul, for participation as an alternative to justification by faith, and, in contrast to Deissmann and Bousset, for the shift away from Hellenism as a source for Paul’s thought. On the latter, Schweitzer characterized Paul’s Christ-mysticism as “un-Hellenistic” noting significant disparities (e.g., lack of deification and the dying and rising with Christ) and, instead, suggested “Late-Jewish Eschatology” as Paul’s plausible source.137 He did not, however, relate Paul’s mysticism to apocalyptic throne-theophany traditions, esoteric practice of rabbinic Judaism, or MM. Schweitzer explained Paul’s Christ- mysticism as “being in Christ,” a “physical union,” where the Elect, not just metaphorically, but in reality, share in Christ’s death and resurrection and in the mystical, corporeity of Christ’s body.138 He divided mysticism into two categories: primitive and intellectual. Paul’s unique Christ mysticism is primarily intellectual and centred in his thinking rather than mystical experience (contra Deissmann).139 For Schweitzer, Christ mediated the mystical union for there is no God mysticism in Paul.140 Although primarily eschatological, this relationship includes ongoing, ontological transformation (“the resurrection mode of existence”) realized in efficacious, mystical sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s supper (congruent with Bousset).141 Like Deissmann and Bousset, Schweitzer understood possession of the life- giving spirit as a proof or sign of being in Christ. Thus, he tied together Paul’s mysticism and the spirit. He explained: “For being in the spirit is only a form of

136 Bousset, Kyrios, 163. 137 Schweitzer, Mysticism, 16–23, 36–37, 140. 138 Schweitzer, Mysticism, 96–97, 115–16, 125. 139 Ashton submits that Schweitzer centres his mysticism on Paul’s thinking rather than on Paul’s visionary experience, and, in this sense, stops short of portraying Paul as a true mystic, Religion, 143–51. 140 Schweitzer, Mysticism, 3, 12. 141 Schweitzer, Mysticism, 127. 39

manifestation of being-in-Christ. Both are descriptions of one and the same state.”142 The spirit is “the form of manifestation of the power of the resurrection” and acts as the “assurance” and “vehicle” of the resurrection.143 He sees the spirit, who is the spirit of Christ, as more of a life principle, now transcendental, a spiritual and ethical principle, phenomenon of revelation, and “the power which communicates the resurrection mode of existence.”144 Since Schweitzer, the diversity of 2TJ, particularly esoteric and mystical aspects, has come to light. In this regard, Schweitzer did not go far enough in examining the Jewish background (e.g., apocalyptic throne-theophany traditions) to mystical concepts in Paul’s theology. This diversity, as evident in the DSS, justifies a reconsideration of these aspects in light of that those found in the DSS. Furthermore, this study can supplement Schweitzer’s work on the effectual role of the spirit in the corporal participation in Christ’s death and resurrection by the worshipping community of believers at Corinth. This may also challenge his peculiar categorisation of Paul’s mysticism as intellectual and his unqualified exclusion of deification as a possibility in Paul. The use of mysticism in Pauline study waned in the face of criticism, the twentieth-century intellectual context, and Protestant distaste of the term.145 This led to the sidelining and fragmentation of the subject in scholarship.146 As a result, participation language has largely replaced the designation Christ mysticism.147 The shift can be traced back to the influential E. P. Sanders. He further develops Schweitzer’s ‘Christ mysticism’ but renames it “participationist eschatology” to

142 Schweitzer, Mysticism, 167. 143 Schweitzer, Mysticism, 166. 144 Schweitzer, Mysticism, 166. 145 For example see, Günter Bornkamm, Paul (trans. D. M. G. Stalker; New York: Harper & Row, 1971), 155; Hans Conzelmann, An Outline of the Theology of the New Testament (trans. John Bowden; NTL; London: SCM Press, 1969), 184; and Ernst Käsemann, Commentary on Romans (trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley; London: SCM Press, 1980), 220–21, who contend that mysticism is an inappropriate description of Pauline thought. 146 James D. G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul the Apostle (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1998), 390– 412; Marguerat, “le mystique,” 475. 147 For example, Rudolf Bultmann, through his existentialist orientation, proposes that ‘in Christ’ is an “ecclesiological formula” which is not ontological, magical, or mystical, but a continuous demand for a decision (311). Thus, participation is primarily ethical, starts at baptism and has been adapted by Paul from the Hellenistic mystery cults and Gnostic myths to the gospel, Theology of the New Testament (trans. Kendrick Grobel; 2 vols.; London: SCM, 1952; repr., 1956), 1:140–51, 299–311. E. P. Sanders rightly argues that Bultmann’s reduction of “being one with Christ” into a “revised self-understanding” does not do justice to participation in Paul, Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977), 522. 40

avoid problems with the diffuse term mysticism.148 He argues extensively for participation to be the centre of Paul’s soteriology through an examination of various passages with participation language, e.g. one body, one spirit, in Christ, Christ’s, κοινωνία, etc. (Cf. 1 Cor 6:13–18; 10; 12:12; 2 Cor 13:13; Gal 3:25–29; Rom 8:9–11). Participation in the ‘Spirit’ and participation in Christ is an eschatological expectation and a present reality.149 Sanders describes this as a real participatory union. This ‘union with God’ precludes JM in Sanders’ view.150 Despite extensive use of the etic term ‘participation,’ Sanders is not satisfied with “participationist eschatology” and confesses that scholars lack a category of “reality” to express well “real participation in Christ, real possession of the Spirit.”151 With Sanders proposal for the need of language or a category (other than mysticism) to delineate real participation in Paul’s soteriology, various scholars, such as Morna Hooker,152 Richard Hays,153 James Dunn,154 N. T. Wright,155 Douglas

148 Sanders sees participation as dual—Christ participates in all of humanity (sin and death) and humanity participates in Christ’s death, resurrection, and vindication by faith, Palestinian, 435 n. 19, 548–49. 149 Sanders writes, “Thus we see here that having the Spirit as guarantee and salvation by participation in the Spirit or in Christ (or participation with the Spirit or Christ by having them in one) are not separate themes. The force of the guarantee, in other words, goes beyond having charismata which demonstrates the presence of the Spirit. Having the Spirit results in (or is) real participation in the Spirit and the resurrected Lord, which participation provides the best guarantee of all: Christians are sons of God (Rom. 8.16; Gal. 4.7)” (460), Palestinian, 460–72. 150 Sanders follows Scholem (Trends, 5) while noting, “no form of Jewish mysticism has to do with achieving union with God,” Palestinian, 220 n. 50; Moshe Idel has argued otherwise, Ascensions on High in Jewish Mysticism: Pillars, Lines, Ladders (Budapest: CEUP, 2005). If Scholem’s assertion is incorrect, then potentially Jewish mysticism and Pauline ‘Christ mysticism’ could be seen together or at the least, Paul, if in the trajectory of Jewish mysticism may have taken it further with a participatory union in Christ through the spirit. Additionally, Marguerat makes a distinction between Christ mysticism and God mysticism and argues Paul only advances “mystique du Christ,” “le mystique,” 489. 151 Sanders explains, “Christians really are one body and Spirit with Christ, the form of the present world really is passing away, Christians really are being changed from one stage of glory to another, the end really will come and those who are in Christ will really be transformed,” Palestinian, 522. 152 Morna Hooker explains participation as an “interchange,” where all the giving is on Christ’s part and all the receiving is by the believers, From Adam to Christ: Essays on Paul (Cambridge: CUP, 1990); idem, Pauline Pieces (London: Epworth, 1979), 26. 153 Richard B. Hays explains participation as ontological and real, “a mysterious personal union with Christ” (Gal 2:2; 3:26–29), and participation is in the narrative pattern of Christ’s story, The Faith of Jesus Christ: The Narrative Substructure of Galatians 3:1–4:11 (BRS; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 210–15. Hays considers participation neither as analogous to the magical transformation of mystery religions nor a mythological new “self understanding” like Bultmann proposes. 154 In Dunn’s survey of participation theology, like Sanders, he dismisses the term mysticism. He sees real power and transformation for believers through participation in Christ, but cautiously leaves a conceptual definition of participation to others. Concerning the spirit, Dunn writes, “And it is equally clear from the overlap of Christ mysticism and Spirit possession, as in Rom. 8.9–10, that the 41

Campbell,156 Gordon Fee,157 and M. David Litwa158 have offered their suggestions. Generally, these scholars see the term mysticism as problematic and prefer participation to describe the relationship between Christ and believers in Paul. Most acknowledge the important role of the spirit in this participation. Participation advocates, like those of Christ-mysticism, are “loosely organized” and sometimes disagree with each other.159 As Sanders noted, participation does not adequately explain the mysterious relationship between believers and Christ. For this reason, scholars, such as Ulrich Luz160 and Daniel Marguerat,161 are still utilising the term mysticism to explain in part this relationship in Paul. While the appropriateness

two went together for Paul: to be ‘in Christ’ and to have the Spirit indwelling were two sides of the same coin” (414), Theology, 390–412. He further explicates the same “experiential reality” of the spirit and Christ and denotes the “Spirit” as the “medium of union” between a believer and Christ, Jesus and the Spirit: a Study of the Religious and Charismatic Experience of Jesus and the First Christians as Reflected in the New Testament (London: SCM Press, 1975), 323. 155 N. T. Wright defines participation in Paul as the “mutuality of Christian living which, arising from a common participation in the body of Christ, extends beyond mere common concern into actual exchange” (51). He reads Paul’s ‘in Christ’ as ‘incorporative’ Messiah; he explains, “Jesus is the Messiah, he sums up his people in himself, so that what is true of him is true of them” (48). Although he borrows Hooker’s “interchange,” he argues it does not explain the whole meaning of participation (κοινωνία), Climax of the Covenant: Christ and the Law in Pauline Theology (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), 41–52. 156 Douglas Campbell explains Paul’s ‘in Christ’ as “spatial imagery” or “a metaphor for being or ontology, and its radical transformation”; moreover, he writes, “this process is real and concrete, radically transformational, unconditional, relational—and quite intimately so—and trinitarian” (41). In concert with his Participatory Pneumatological Martyrological Eschatological model of Paul’s gospel, he submits “participatory eschatology.” He also acknowledges the enabling role of the spirit in the participation in Christ’s death and resurrection, The Quest for Paul’s Gospel: A Suggested Strategy (London: T&T Clark, 2005), 41. 157 Gordon Fee prefers κοινωνία and exegetically explains how participation in Christ is “created and sustained” through the power and ministry of the Holy Spirit. He sees participation as the formation and transformation of the people of God individually and corporately by the Spirit. Paul’s imagery of God’s family, Christ’s body, and God’s temple brings this to light, God’s Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1994), 872. Unfortunately, Fee has little comparison and contrast with Second Temple literature and does not mention JM. 158 M. David Litwa argues ‘participation’ language remains vague and uses a qualified deification to express the reality, We Are Being Transformed: Deification in Paul's Soteriology (BZNW 187; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2012), 21–22. 159 Campbell, Quest, 38. For a critique of the use of ‘participation’ to describe Paul’s soteriology, see David A. Brondos, Paul on the Cross: Reconstructing the Apostle's Story of Redemption (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2006), 151–90. 160 Luz carefully defines mysticism abstractly and even notes methodological concerns regarding its etic use. His interpretation that Paul democratises mysticism to all in 2 Cor 3:18 highlights Paul’s communal focus. Luz, however, does not consider the relationship of JM to the spirit in Paul letters. He associates Paul’s mysticism with participation in Christ, “Paul,” 131–43. 161 Marguerat’s two articles consider how Paul’s experience and theology are mystical or a form of mysticism. He includes JM in his evaluation of Paul’s heavenly rapture, “La mystique de l'Apôtre Paul,” in Paul de Tarse: Congrès de l'ACFEB (ed. Jacques Schlosser; Paris: Cerf, 1996), 307–29 and “le mystique.” 42

of mysticism has been questioned and on occasion been misused, misunderstood, and mischaracterised, these studies show that the solution is not to discard it. With this in mind, this thesis will contribute to the understanding of participation in Paul through the lens of JM. Since the comparative elements that will be examined disclose the theme of communal participation in the spirit in the Corinthian correspondence, the spirit’s effective role in this participation within the community will be considered. This brings a rather different mystical focus to Paul, one concerning historic JM in the DSS. Hopefully, the illumination, especially concerning the community of Corinth, will shed light on what Paul means and add to past and current discussions. There may yet be a way to demystify mysticism and participation in Paul.

1.4 Method of Investigation Early studies that examined Paul’s letters in light of the DSS, among other texts, attempted to create genetic links between the two by merely citing parallel passages as evidence of a direct relationship. These speculative links could be characterised as “parallelomania.”162 Sometimes they assumed Paul depended upon or directly borrowed from these texts (e.g., 2 Cor 6:14–7:1).163 Gooder notes how various commentators, who approached Paul and Jewish apocalyptic, refer only fleetingly to similarities in texts and cite these as “evidence” of Paul’s background or even mystical practice. These treatments fail to deal with the complexities of the texts in question and the scholarly assumptions that these types of links are “unproblematic.”164 Pauline scholars should be more careful in this regard. An alternative approach, heuristic comparison, avoids these questionable assumptions and offers greater illumination. Alexander has convincingly demonstrated its value in illuminating comparative studies dealing with JM.165

162 Sandmel, “Parallelomania,” 1–13. For a guide to comparison, see James Davila, “Perils of Parallels (Lecture),” University of St. Andrews, April 2001, (10 November 2010); idem, The Dead Sea Scrolls as Background to Postbiblical Judaism and Early Christianity: Papers from an International Conference at St. Andrews in 2001 (STDJ 46; Leiden: Brill, 2002), x n. 3. See also Robert A. Segal, “In Defense of the Comparative Method,” Numen 48.3 (2001): 339–73. The whole issue of Numen 48.3 focuses on comparative method. 163 See ch. 7 n. 28. 164 See Gooder’s discussion on this issue, Third, 14–30. 165 Philip S. Alexander, “Orality in Pharisaic-rabbinic Judaism at the Turn of the Eras,” in Jesus and the Gospel Tradition (ed. Henry Wansborough; Sheffield: SAP, 1991; repr., London: T&T Clark International, 2004), 182–84; idem, “Dionysius,” 349–72; idem, Mystical, 7. 43

Heuristic comparison sidesteps genealogical comparison, i.e., determining a direct relationship of dependency, borrowing, and origins. Instead, heuristic comparison, akin to analogical comparison advocated by Jonathan Z. Smith,166 seeks to learn by perceiving similarities and dissimilarities between two texts through comparing certain phenomena. In this study, the heuristic focus will be early JM. Although the employment of mysticism to describe Paul’s epistles and other literature has been problematic at times, as noted above, this does not eliminate its usefulness. The etic concept of mysticism, as an “analytic category,”167 comes from “the phenomenology or history of religion.”168 When properly defined and appropriately used,169 mysticism, helps categorise and “describe a distinctive type of religious experience commonly known as mystical.”170 The aforementioned working definition of JM properly roots it within the historical and cultural context of 2TJ. Since JM extends through the middle ages, this study will use “early JM” to situate it within the late 2TP. Early JM then becomes a heuristic tool from which to identify and group together particular religious phenomena and ideas across a diversity of literary types. This lens will help look at the texts examined in new ways and moves beyond the limitations of philological and literary-historical studies.171 The current comparison will be between the DSS and the Corinthian correspondence. This study will identify and examine DSS texts that contain mystical elements and can be categorised as mystical texts consonant with early JM. The choice of texts will be guided in part, by whether or not they contain a similarity to mystical elements (ideas) in the Corinthian correspondence. In order to avoid the previous pitfalls of comparative study, the parallels or phenomena will first be examined

166 Jonathan Z. Smith Smith notes that comparison is “never dyadic, but always triadic.” Triadic comparison may be appropriately expressed through the formulation: “‘x resembles y more than z with respect to . . .’” (51). Thus, for heuristic comparison in this study, phenomena textually described in DSS and in the Corinthian correspondence are compared on the basis of their resemblance to an element/aspect with respect to Jewish mysticism. This will help “‘re-vision’ phenomena as our data in order to solve our theoretical problems,” Drudgery Divine: On the Comparison of Early Christianities and the Religions of Late Antiquity (London: University of London, 1990), 52 167 Alexander, “Dionysus,” 350. 168 Alexander, “Genealogy,” 218. 169 Mikhail Bakhtin explains the legitimacy of using modern constructions for ancient texts this way, “semantic phenomena can exist in concealed form, potentially, and be revealed only in semantic cultural contexts of subsequent epochs that are favourable for such disclosure,” Speech Genres and Other Late Essays (trans. Vern W. McGee; UTPSS 8; Austin: University of Texas Press, 1986), 5 cited by Michael Gorman, “The First Christian Treatise on Theosis,” JTI 5 (2011): 18. 170 Alexander, “Dionysus,” 350. 171 Alexander, “Genealogy,” 218; idem, “Dionysus,” 350. 44

within their respective contexts.172 The contexts of each DSS text will be examined in Part I and form the foundation for comparison with the Corinthian correspondence. Part II will exegetically examine analogous passages in 1 and 2 Corinthians to determine what ways they are similar to or different from the DSS. The goal is mutual illumination and a greater understanding of both texts and, in particular, an illumination of how Paul advocates communal participation in the spirit for the Corinthian community.173 This comparative process will help describe how Paul understood participation in the spirit in the Corinthian ekklesia and why he employed mystically related terminology in his descriptions of the community. Additionally, it may help reveal the degree to which Paul’s a posteriori symbolic universe is founded upon a Jewish mystical worldview that includes God’s glory, heavenly ascent, angelic presence in worship, God’s people as the temple of God, revealed mysteries, divine contemplation, participation in the heavenly realms, among others. If mystical elements are present in the Corinthian correspondence, which the author argues they are, the comparative analysis will assist in determining whether it is early JM, an early Christianised form of JM, just part of early Christianity, or simply mystical language bereft of mystical experience (though unlikely).174 This study has five working assumptions: (1) the Corinthian correspondence are two holistic and coherent literary works; (2) Paul writes from a particular kind of Roman-era Jewishness;175 (3) the Corinthian correspondence credibly speaks of Paul’s and the Corinthians’ religious experiences, theology, perceptions, and practice;176 (4) likewise, the DSS, in general, speak to the Qumran community’s religious experiences, theology, perceptions, and practice; (5) while attempting to examine the DSS independently of the Corinthian correspondence, Pauline questions and concerns in part will guide the comparison.

172 Timothy H. Lim, “Studying the Qumran Scrolls and Paul in their Historical Context,” in Background, 135–56. 173 For more on comparison, see Sanders, Palestinian, 12–20 and Ashton, Religion, 6–28. 174 For inferences drawn from parallel ideas, see Davila, “Perils.” 175 This is not disregarding Hellenistic influences, but merely a limitation of this modest study on JM. Martin Hengel has already noted the complexity of Hellenistic influences on Judaism, Judaism and Hellenism. Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period (trans. John Bowden; 2 vols.; London: SCM Press, 1974). 176 Rowland calls this a “principle of credulity” rather than skepticism, Mystery, 7. 45

1.5 Thesis Outline The current comparison will consist of two parts. Part I will investigate Jewish mystical elements in the DSS. This will affirm the aforementioned discussion and the modified Scholem hypothesis that selected DSS warrant a designation as mystical, and that the Qumran community can be considered to have practised a communal mysticism. More specifically, Chapter 2 will look at Hodayota to determine the role of the spirit of God in the community’s epistemology of God and his mysteries. The cleansing work of the spirit prepares the sectarian for mystical union with the angels. Chapter 3 will consider the Qumran community’s temple identity in 1QS and Songs and how this informs their mystical worship praxis. The community sees itself as mirroring the heavenly and co-participating with the angelic priesthood in the celestial temple. Chapter 4 will take up the significance of Sinai and Moses-Δόξα traditions in the DSS. The inquiry will consider to what extent the DSS advocate a mystical transformation of Moses as found in other Second Temple Jewish literature. Chapter 5 will analyse heavenly ascent texts in the DSS including two non-sectarian apocalypses. The confluence of the celestial journeys will reveal the currency of mystical traditions in 2TJ and in the Qumran community. In implementing the methodology, Part I forms the foundation for the heuristic comparison of Part II. Each mystical aspect considered will have corresponding mystical elements for comparison in the Corinthian correspondence. The goal of this endeavour will be to explore how Paul advocates communal participation in the spirit for the Corinthian ekklesia. This thesis will argue that participation in the spirit is corporate and implicitly mystical, which previous generations of scholars acknowledged but without consideration of JM in the DSS. This will contribute to recent discussion on participation in Paul as well as JM and Paul. In Part II, chapter 6 will examine Paul’s communal participation in the spirit in 1 Cor 2:1–16, 6:11, and 2 Cor 13:13. The comparison with the role of God’s spirit in Hodayota will show Paul’s corporate epistemology of the spirit in 1 Cor 2 and the cleansing work of the spirit in 1 Cor 6:11. The latter section will explore how communal κοινωνία in the spirit in 2 Cor 13:13 can be understood as an implicit corporate communio mystica, which has corporate effects in the ekklesia. Chapter 7

will analyse the extended meaning of Paul’s temple metaphor in 2 Cor 3:16, 6:19, and 2 Cor 6:14–16 in light of 1QS and Songs. The inquiry will look at the relationship between Paul’s temple metaphor and the heavenly sanctuary. Two aspects in this relationship will be explored: the presence of angels (1 Cor 11:10) and speaking in the tongues of angels (1 Cor 13:1). Chapter 8 will examine 2 Cor 3:7–4:6 in light of Moses-Δόξα traditions and related motifs in the DSS. This will determine that Paul envisions communal beholding and christomorphic transformation by vision in 3:18. This study will ascertain if this can be aptly understood as theosis. Chapter 9 will re-examine Paul’s heavenly ascent in 2 Cor 12:1–12 in light of 1 Enoch, ALD, and 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and parallels. This comparison will show how this mystical account fits rhetorically in Paul’s argument and speaks to the theme of communal participation in the spirit. Additionally, this comparison will evaluate evidence for Paul’s awareness of early JM and the possibility of being a mystic. Chapter 10 will summarise the findings and contributions of this study and note further areas of research.

Part I

EARLY JEWISH MYSTICISM AND THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS

Part I

INTRODUCTION

As chapter 1 has shown, the DSS are an important source for understanding early Jewish mystical traditions present in the late 2TP. For this reason, Part I of this comparative study of the Corinthian correspondence has been feasibly limited to early Jewish mystical texts in the DSS. In this case, Jewish mystical elements and the community’s related worship practice will be investigated in Hodayota, the Rule of the Community, Songs, 4QDiscourse on the Exodus/Conquest Tradition, Apocryphal Pentateuch B, Apocryphon of Joshuaa, 1 Enoch, Aramaic Levi Document, and 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and parallels. The results of each chapter in Part I will form the foundation for heuristic comparison with corresponding mystical elements in the Corinthian correspondence in Part II.

Chapter 2

THE SPIRIT OF GOD IN HODAYOTA: REVEALING, CLEANSING, AND UNION

2.1 Introduction In light of the three abstract criteria of the phenomenological model of JM proposed by Alexander, Hodayota offers a glimpse into the mystical liturgical practice of the Qumran community. These hymns disclose the maśkîl’s “experience of a transcendent divine presence,” in which the community liturgically shares and aspires. The maśkîl reveals the reception of divine knowledge, mystery of wisdom, and secret counsel through the rûaḥ of God. The purpose of this gift of rûaḥ1 and divine revelation is to prepare and enable the community to unite mystically with the angels into one community (yaḥad) before God’s throne. This investigation will form a foundation for heuristic comparison with the epistemology of the spirit in 1 Cor 2:1–16, cleansing of the spirit in 1 Cor 6:11, and corporate participation in the spirit in 2 Cor 13:13 in chapter 6.

Hodayota: Preliminary Matters 1QHa is a large, twenty-eight columned, scroll of Hebrew psalms from Qumran cave one.2 The palaeography indicates three scribes compiled 1QHa in a Herodian hand

1 range in meaning, not all unequivocally, from the spirit of a רוח The eighty-three references to person, spirit as a disposition, to spirit as the holy spirit of God, and spirits as angelic or demonic see A. A. Anderson, “The Use of “Ruaḥ” in 1QS, 1QH and 1QM,” JSS 7 ,רוח beings. For studies on (1962): 293–303; Arthur Everett Sekki, The Meaning of Ruaḥ at Qumran (SBLDS 110; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989); Alex R. G. Deasley, “The Holy Spirit in the Dead Sea Scrolls,” WTJ 21 (1986): 45–73. This study will be limited to parallels to the Corinthian correspondence. 2 These thanksgiving hymns of 1QHa will be referred to as Hodayota and will follow the numbering system of Stegemann completed posthumously in Hartmut Stegemann, Eileen Schuller, and Carol Newsom, 1QHodayota with incorporations of 1QHodayotb and 4QHodayota–f (ed. Emanuel Tov; DJD XL; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2009). For numbering, see Hartmut Stegemann, “The Material Reconstruction of 1QHodayot,” in The Dead Sea Scrolls: Fifty Years after Their Discovery. Proceedings of the Jerusalem Congress, July 20–25, 1997 (ed. L. H. Schiffman et al.; Jerusalem: IES in cooperation with the SHR, 2000), 272–84 and Émile Puech, “Quelques aspects de la restauration du Rouleau des Hymnes (1QH),” JJS 39 (1988): 38–55. For a discussion on classification, see E. L. Sukenik, The Dead Sea Scrolls of the Hebrew University (Jerusalem: The Magnes Press, 1955), 39; 50

3 (30–1 B.C.E.). The scroll in its current form is almost seventy-five percent complete with twelve well-preserved columns and seventy fragments. The latest material reconstruction in DJD XL incorporates overlapping material from 1QHb and 4QHa–f and only has sixteen unplaced fragments.4 1QHa is a collection of twenty-eight to thirty-four psalms in three major sections: (1) at least eight Community Hymns in columns I–VIII; (2) fourteen Teacher

Hymns in columns IX–XVII.36; and (3) approximately six Community Hymns in 5 columns XIX.6–XXVIII.42. Authorship is unknown, but diversity of content and language indicates multiple authors from different times—conceivably sectarian and non-sectarian.6 While the “I” of some hodayot may be the author or even a community leader (e.g., maśkîl), the “I” may also represent the members of the community as a whole.7 This may have involved the Yaḥad corporately projecting “onto itself the Teacher’s achievements and experiences.”8 The psalms give poetic expression to the faith of the Qumran community and reflect a theological perspective and worldview. At times, sectarian language appears denoting compilation and even some composition by the Qumran community, and eight

Svend Holm-Nielsen, Hodayot Psalms from Qumran (ATDan 2; Aarhus: Universitetsforlaget I, 1960), 13; Denise Dombkowski Hopkins, “The Qumran Community and 1QHodayot: A Reassessment,” RevQ 10 (1979–1981): 324–31; and Eileen M. Schuller, “The Classification of Hodayot and Hodayot-like (with particular attention to 4Q433, 4Q433A and 4Q440),” in Sapiential, Liturgical and Poetical Texts from Qumran: Proceedings of the Third Meeting of the International Organization for Qumran Studies Oslo 1998 (ed. Daniel K. Falk et al.; STDJ 35; Leiden: Brill, 2000), 182 n.4. 3 Eileen Schuller, “Recent Scholarship on the Hodayot 1993–2010,” CurBR 10 (2011): 123. 4 Stegemann, Schuller, and Newsom, DJD XL:1–49. 5 This follows Hartmut Stegemann’s numbering, “The Number of Psalms in 1QHodayota and Some of their Sections,” in Liturgical, 191–234. 6 For a discussion on authorship, see Michael C. Douglas, “Power and Praise in the Hodayot: A Literary Critical Study of 1QH 9:1–18:14” (Ph.D. diss., The University of Chicago, 1998), 1–85; idem, “The Teacher Hymn Hypothesis Revisited: New Data for an Old Crux,” DSD 6 (1999): 239–66; Eileen Schuller, “Hodayot,” in Qumran Cave 4: Poetical and Liturgical Texts, Part 2 (ed. Emmanuel Tov; DJD XXIX; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1999), 69–254, esp. 178–81 and 210–12, the ‘Hymns of the Teacher’ include (X.6–XVII.36) (75) and ‘Hymns of Community’ (I–VIII and XXI–XXVI) (74); Stegemann, “Number,” 191–234; Hopkins, “Reassessment,” 331–36. 7 Holm-Nielsen, Hodayot, 50; Hopkins, “Reassessment,” 336–37, 355. Seth Sanders suggests the “I” of the text becomes the reader or sectarian worshipper reliving the religious experience in the psalm, “Performative Exegesis,” in Paradise, 75. See also Carol A. Newsom, “Apocalyptic Subjects: Social Construction of the Self in the Qumran Hodayot,” JSP 12 (2001): 13. Wise argues that the .Conversely, John J .17–216 ”,באלים“ ,community spoke some hodayot in the first person like a creed Collins sees a distinction between the speaker’s exalted experience and those reciting the psalms, “Amazing Grace: The Transformation of the Thanksgiving Hymn at Qumran,” in Psalms in Community: Jewish and Christian Textual, Liturgical, and Artistic Traditions (ed. Harold W. Attridge and Margot E. Fassler; Atlanta: SBL, 2003), 84. 8 Chazon, “Human,” 45. 51

copies (including distinct collections of hodayot) suggest regular communal use.9 Opinions vary on the function of the hodayot at Qumran.10 Eileen Schuller suggests, along with others, that the sectarians likely sang and read the psalms of 1QHa in communal worship and in daily private devotion.11

Hodayota: a Mystical Text While most scholars note clear ties in Hodayota with apocalypticism and realized eschatology,12 few until recently made a connection to early Jewish mysticism. An increasing number of studies propose that Hodayota and hodayot-like texts contain mystical elements, and even categorise the hymns as mystical texts.13 The most prominent mystical components are the revelation of mystery (rāz), wisdom (ḥokmâ), and knowledge (daʿat) through God’s spirit (rûaḥ), union (yiḥud) and community (yaḥad) with the heavenly assembly (or angels) in liturgical worship, the presence of a heavenly ascent motif, and angelomorphic transformation (especially a a–b 14 in 1QH XXV.35–XXVI.10 and other parallels of 4QSelf-Glorification Hymn ). This chapter will focus upon the epistemological and cleansing (transformative) roles of God’s spirit and how this gift enables the hymnist and community members to

9 Angela Harkins details sectarian language in 1QHa, “The Community Hymns Classification: A Proposal for further Differentiation,” DSD 15 (2008): 121-54. See Carol Newsom, “‘Sectually,’” 167– 87; and Esther G. Chazon, “Liturgical Function in the Cave 1 Hodayot Collection,” in Qumran Cave 1 Revisited: Texts from Cave 1 Sixty Years after Their Discovery: Proceedings of the Sixth Meeting of the IOQS in Ljubljana (ed. Daniel K. Falk et al.; STDJ 91; Leiden: Brill, 2010), 135–49. 10 Holm-Nielsen suggests “liturgical prayers and songs of praise” in Hodayot, 348. Eileen Schuller agrees, “Some Reflections on the Function and Use of Poetical Texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in Liturgical, 173–89. Esther G. Chazon adds private devotional use in “The Function of the Qumran Prayer Texts: An Analysis of the Daily Prayers (4Q503),” in Fifty, 218. 11 Schuller, “Reflections,” 173–89. 12 David Edward Aune, The Cultic Setting of Realized Eschatology in Early Christianity (NovTSup 28; Leiden: Brill, 1972), 29–44; H. W. Kuhn, Enderwartung und gegenwärtiges Heil: Untersuchungen zu den Gemindeliedern von Qumran (SUNT 4; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966); John J. Collins, Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls (LDDS; London: Routledge, 1997). 13 Alexander, Mystical, 89–102; idem, “Genealogy,” 215–35; Kanagaraj,‘Mysticism,’ 73 DeConick, Voices, 63; Fletcher-Louis, Glory, 104–12; Bilhah Nitzan, Qumran Prayer and Religious Poetry (ed. F. Garcia Martinez and A. S. van der Woude; trans. Jonathan Chipman from Hebrew; STDJ 12; Leiden: Brill, 1994), 274–78; idem, “Harmonic,” 164–67; Rowland and Morray-Jones, Mystery, 160. For opposition to a mystical designation, see Wolfson, “Poetic-Liturgical,” 185–202; and Chazon, “Human,” 36 n. 4. 14 ,Davila ;219–173 ”,באלים“ ,For a survey of those who argue for human deification, see Wise “Hymnist,” 457–78; idem, “Heavenly,” 2:461–85; idem, “Exploring,” 435–54; Rowland, Heaven, 117–20. 52

fulfil God’s mysterious plan—a communio mystica with angels. Chapter 5 will examine the ascent and transformation in 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and parallels.

2.2 The Epistemological Spirit of God in Hodayota a A part of the third hodayah of final Community Hymns section (1QH XX.13b–16) reveals much about the understanding of spirit of God and has at least four facets in common with 1 Cor 2:6–16: spirit of God as the means of knowing (knowledge), mystery, wisdom, and power.15

13b 14 P ForP the God of knowledge P hasP established it, and there is none other with 15 him. And I, the maśkîl, I know you, my God, by the spirit P thatP you have placed Faithfully have I heeded your wondrous secret .(ברוח אשר נתתה בי) in me 16 ו P ) P Pyou have [o]pened up knowledgeדשכה Pברוח ק) counsel. By your holy spirit within me through the mystery of your wisdom and the fountainhead of [your] a 16 pow[er ]h in the midst. (1QHP P XX.13b–16)P191F

.belongs to God, comes from God, and is holy (רוח) The maśkîl clarifies that spirit grants spirit an instrumental function for how the maśkîl knows ,ב ,The preposition 17 God.P192F P The spirit of God is a way the hymnist describes the activity of God—the spirit is an agent of God. The second ‘by the holy spirit’ has the qualifier of ‘holy.’ This spirit referent, which is an exposition of the first in line 15, enables him to heed faithfully to “your wondrous secret counsel.” As he goes on, “through the mystery of your wisdom,” implies that the holy spirit of God has also opened this mystery of wisdom to him and “the fountainhead of [your] pow[er].” This holy spirit of God, then, reveals God’s secret counsel, wisdom, and knowledge. It opens up the source of power, and enables faithful obedience. a 18 P193F P is רוח This hodayah corroborates evidence from HodayotP P that the singular ברוח אשר נתתה בי given as a special gift to the maśkîl or God’s servant. The phrase

15 Heinz-Wolfgang Kuhn, “The Wisdom Passage in 1 Corinthians 2:6-16 between Qumran and Proto-gnosticism,” in Sapiential, 248. 16 English translations are from Stegemann, Schuller, and Newsom, DJD XL unless otherwise noted. 17 .DCH 7:430”, ר וּ �ַ “ 18 Sekki notes the two most common references to God’s spirit occur as “the singular of ruaḥ as referring (ו or כה/ך) plus the pronominal suffix קודש a nomen regens in construct with the singular of to God” and “the singular of ruaḥ without qualifying expressions.” In a conservative assessment, the 53

a occurs four times in 1QHP P V.36; VIII.20; XX.14–15; and XXI.34. An additional phrase in IV.29 has an enigmatic “by the spirits which you have given to me,” which a 19 in HodayotP P can sometimes be uncertain.P194F P רוח demonstrates how the use of Nonetheless, in three of the four instances: V.36, VIII.20, and XX.14–15, “the spirit placed in the speaker is the means by which the speaker comes to a special 20 knowledge of God.”P195F P The hymnist(s) does not distinguish between knowing God and having knowledge of God. Thus, the hymnist(s) knows God by the spirit which God gave to him, and, thus, he possesses knowledge of God’s ways, truth, mysteries, secret wonders, Torah, judgements, etc. Indeed, God is a God of knowledge. The spirit of God, then, has an epistemological function concerning religious matters in the community. How does one interpret the phrase “which you have given to me”? Did God give a spirit to the person at a particular time, such as upon entrance to the community, or is the hymnist referring to the spirit given to him at birth—the inborn spirit of Gen a 2:7? While each person has a spirit (VII.35; IX.17, 34) created by God (1QHP P VII.34–

35; IX.10–11, 17; XII.32; XVIII.24), in many cases it is portrayed as perverted, erring, or depraved until God in his goodness, mercy, and by his spirit strengthens and purifies it (V.31–36; VIII.22–35; IX.33–35; XV.20–38; XIX.13–17). This even applies 21 to the predetermined elect.P196F P The hymnist often pessimistically describes himself as follows: “Yet I am a creature of clay and a thing kneaded with water, a foundation of shame and a well of impurity, a furnace of iniquity, and a structure of sin, a spirit of

a former occurs in 1QH IV.38; VI.24; VIII.20, 21, 25 and 30; XV.10; XVII.32; XX.15; XXIII.29, 33 and the latter appears in V.36; VIII.20; XII.32; XX.14–15; XXI.34, Ruaḥ, 72. 19 John W. Yates, The Spirit and Creation in Paul (WUNT 2/251; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, a 2008), 79. Spirits may refer to dispositions/gifts, like spirit of compassion (1QH VIII.27), spirit of a does not always mean the רוח קודש ,holiness, spirit of knowledge (1QH VI.36). Nonetheless disposition “spirit of holiness” or “principle of obedience” as Barry D. Smith predominantly assumes in “‘Spirit of Holiness’ as Eschatological Principle of Obedience,” in Christian Beginnings and the Dead Sea Scrolls (ed. John J. Collins and Craig A. Evans; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006), 75– 100. Smith incorrectly contends this phrase does not refer to God’s spirit. Conversely, see Erik Sjöberg, “Neuschöpfung in den Toten-Meer-Rollen,” STNJT 9 (1955): 135 and Robert W. Kvalvaag, “The Spirit in Human Beings in Some Qumran Non-Biblical Texts,” in Qumran between the Old and New Testaments (ed. Frederick H. Cryer and Thomas L. Thompson; JSOTSup 290; Sheffield: SAP, 1998), 159–80. 20 Yates, Spirit, 80. 21 a The spirit of the person can be predetermined to be righteous or wicked (1QH VII.27–32). The relationship of this to the dualism of the two spirits discourse in 1QS III.13–IV.26 is outside the scope of this chapter. For a discussion, see Sekki, Ruaḥ, 194–219, and Eugene H. Merrill, Qumran and Predestination: Theological Study of the Thanksgiving Hymns (STDJ 8; Leiden: Brill, 1975), 25– 32. 54

error, and a perverted being, without understanding, and terrified by righteous judgements” (IX.23b–24b). The hymnist touts an anthropology of depravity for all— a degradation of the spirit of Gen 2:7—no matter whether one is predetermined to salvation or judgment.22 Even for the elect, the awareness of sinfulness, understanding of God’s wisdom, and faithful obedience only come through God’s spirit and grace.23 Sekki cogently asserts, “there is in the scrolls no clear reference in which the sectarian regards his own spirit (whether inborn or acquired in the community) as the source of his divine knowledge.”24 He continues, “It is God, rather, who acts, and He acts through a rûaḥ consistently identified as His Spirit on behalf of the sectarian who is repeatedly described as sinful and helpless within himself.”25 The evidence suggests that the holy spirit of God is a separate, external force a that God sheds or places on the sectarian (1QH IV.38; XV.10; XXIII.29–33) and in a whom the sectarian takes delight (XVII.32). For example, the hymnist says in 1QH

XV.10, “you have spread your holy spirit upon me, so that I am not shaken,” and states, in XXIII.29–30, 33, “And over the dust you have spread [your holy] spirit.” The hymnist believes that God has fulfilled Ezek 36:26–27 and given each sectarian a a new spirit by which he or she listens to God (1QH XX.14–15) and strengthens him 26 or herself (VIII.25). This spirit does not appear to be the inborn spirit of Gen 2:7, but rather the reception of God’s spirit on a specific occasion, which may be entrance into the community.27 A few passages among the hymns may indicate that those who enter the a community are given divine knowledge and God’s spirit (1QH VI.19–33; XI.20–24; 28 XIX.12–24; XXI.31–35). Erik Sjörberg’s pivotal article, “Neuschöpfung in den

22 The psalmist’s grim portrayal of human depravity may not be typical of the rest of the DSS, a Yates, Spirit, 78. See also 1QH VII.30–32; IX.23–25; XX.20, 27–29. Holm-Nielsen interprets the idiom “creature of clay” as “technical terms in DSS for man’s sinfulness as contrasted with the divine character,” Hodayot, 24 n. 43. 23 Holm-Nielsen, Hodayot, 279, 282. 24 Sekki, Ruaḥ, 86. 25 Sekki, Ruaḥ, 80. 26 Sekki, Ruaḥ, 86; John R. Levison, Filled with the Spirit (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 188. 27 Levison argues for a re-creation by the spirit and reception of the spirit upon “incorporation into the community,” Filled, 185–89, 205–208, 254, 271–72. 28 Sjöberg, “Neuschöpfung,” 135. 55

Toten-Meer-Rollen,” convinced many scholars that the Hodayota hymnist espouses a new creation by the spirit, which took place when a person entered the sect.29 Scholarly consensus has since confirmed this spiritual transformation or new creation concept in Hodayota.30 Some, like Alex Deasley, corroborate the idea with evidence from other sectarian scrolls (e.g., 1QS III.6–9): God gives his holy spirit as a present eschatological gift upon those who join the community.31 Deasley explains, “they believed that through their community alone the spirit could be received” and this is why they speak of the holy spirit as “the holy spirit of the community.”32 Through full membership into the community, one received the holy spirit who cleansed from sin, enabled walking in the way of perfection, and revealed divine knowledge.33 This further justifies a communal application of the maśkîl’s pneumatology.34 Even with this present realization of eschatology (Ezek 36–37), however, there appears to be a final visitation of the spirit with complete cleansing at the end of days a in which the sectarian also receives the “all glory of Adam” (1QS IV.20b–23b; 1QH a 35 IV.27; cf. CD III.20; 4QpPs III.1-2). This is for an appointed end and ‘the new creation’ (1QS IV.25). Here the extent of the transformation is to a pre-fallen adamic state and, according to 1QS, seems to be reserved for the eschaton.36 The extent of this transformation, however, remains somewhat ambiguous in Hodayota. The only reference to the glory of Adam implies a present reception.37

29 Sjöberg, “Neuschöpfung,” 131–36. 30 Sekki, Ruaḥ, 7–69, 126–28;Yates, Spirit, 64–83; Levison, Filled, 208–17. 31 Levison, Filled, 253, 269; Alex R. G. Deasley, The Shape of Qumran Theology (Carlisle: Paternoster, 2000), 231–32; Aune, Cultic, 33–34. 32 Deasley, Shape, 231. 33 Levison, Filled, 211. 34 Pneumatology refers to how the hymnist portrays the spirit of God. This does not presume a theologically coherent understanding of the spirit of God or equate to a Christian pneumatology. 35 Deasley, Shape, 233–39. For transformation in Hodayota and the glory of Adam, see Fletcher- Louis, Glory, 104–112. Levison discusses how the spirit given by God makes the difference between a “creature of clay” and those “who inhabit an Eden of glory” (1QH V.32–34; IX.31–35; XI.20–24; XIX.6–7; XVI.21), Filled, 313. Benjamin L. Gladd examines adamic transformation as a part of the mysteries revealed in Hodayota, Revealing the Mysterion: the Use of Mystery in Daniel and Second Temple Judaism with Its Bearing on First Corinthians (ed. James D. G. Dunn et al.; BZNW 150; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2008), 67. 36 While Kuhn argues for present eschatology of 1QS XI.2–9 (“Wisdom,” 251–53) as the reception of the “goods of salvation,” the passage has more to do with liturgical communion and mystical participation in heavenly worship (see §3.3). 37 Alexander Golitzin, “Recovering the ‘Glory of Adam’: ‘Divine Light’ Traditions in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Christian Ascetical Literature of Fourth-Century Syro-Mesopotamia,” in Background, 275–308. 56

The hymnist says, “And [their] na[mes] you have raised up [ ] transgression and casting out all their iniquities and giving them an inheritance in all the glory of Adam a 38 for long life” (1QH IV.26b-27a). The glory of Adam for long life speaks of “a renewal of a prelapsarian state” now.39 Other hodayot, however, suggest the incompleteness of the transformation and cleansing due to depravity, transgressions, and the spirit of the flesh (e.g., VIII.29–36). a Thus, spirit reception and transformation in HodayotP P coincide with the gift of divine knowledge, including God’s mysteries, to the elect. The possession of divine knowledge appears dependent upon having been given the spirit of God, and this a knowledge is part of the requirement for entry into the community (1QHP P VI.28-29; a XVIII.29-31; cf. 1QS V.7-11, 20-22). In the prayer of 1QHP P XX.13b–16, God is the the sectarian is the ;(ברוה) actor and initiator of this revelation through his spirit 40 receiver of and responder to this gift.P215F P The holy spirit of God functions epistemologically to disclose providential knowledge, wisdom, and understanding to 41 the maśkîl and, likewise, to the community.P216F P

a 2.3 Mystery and Mysteries in HodayotP Clearly, the hymnist sees the spirit of God, received upon entrance to the community, as the means of divine knowing and transformation. While the descriptions of content: mystery, wisdom, secret counsel, and power are similar to 1 Corinthians 2, the nature of the content is strikingly dissimilar. What then does the hymnist mean and to what is he referring when he says, “you have [o]pened up knowledge within me through the mystery of your wisdom and the fountainhead of a [your] pow[er ]h in the midst” (1QHP P XX.16)? The mode of revelation at Qumran is an on-going debate among scholars who suggest intellectual insight gained from exegesis of Scripture by the pesharist (1QHab VII.5), to inspired exegesis, sapiential apocalyptic revelation, and even direct revelation from God characterised as

38 For more on the glory of Adam, see §8.3. 39 Matthew J. Goff, “Reading Wisdom at Qumran: 4QInstruction and the Hodayot,” DSD 11 (2004): 285. 40 For a discussion on divine and human agency in Hodayota see, Jason Maston, “Divine and Human Agency in Second Temple Judaism and Paul: A Comparison of Sirach, Hodayot, and Roman 7–8” (Ph.D. thesis, Durham University, 2009), 138–43. 41 Newsom, “Apocalyptic,” 20. 57

prophecy.42 While the mode of revelation in line 16 is not explicit, the hymnist(s) leaves hints. a depending on the context, is translated as mystery or secret. In ,רז In HodayotP ,P a 1QHP P V.17–19; XXIV.28 and 4Q440 3 I.23 “the mysteries of your insight” appears to be “the act of God establishing a new creational environment” or “end-time 43 a transformation of the cosmos.”P218F P In 1QHP P IX.13–17, the hymnist describes mysteries apocalyptically as the order of creation including stars, heavens, angels, and weather 44 by God’s laws, design, and will.P219F P These mysteries include truth and knowledge of a God’s dualistic predestination of humankind (1QHP P IX.17–35). In a descriptive, a means (רז) Eden-like hymn, 1QHP P XVI.3–12, Benjamin Gladd suggests mystery allegorically “God’s hidden redemptive purpose with the Qumran community,” which is ensured by God through the protection of “the mystery of mighty heroes” or 45 angelic hosts.P220F P Davila reads this hymn as “a metaphorical union” of the Qumran 46 community with the Garden of Eden or celestial temple;P221F P thus, the human community “sprout” or “eternal planting” resides “spiritually in the heavenly 47 temple.”P222F P The community’s purpose, then, is to join with the angels in the celestial a a temple (see §§3.2–3.4). In another hymn 4Q427 (4QHP )P 7=9 I.13–21=1QHP P

42 David E. Aune, “Charismatic Exegesis in Early Judaism and Early Christianity,” in The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation (ed. J. H. Charlesworth and C.A. Evans; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 126–50; James E. Bowley, “Prophets and Prophecy at Qumran,” in Fifty 2:354– 78; R. Glenn Wooden, “Guided by God: Divine Aid in Interpretation in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament,” in Beginnings, 110–13; George J. Brooke, “The Place of Prophecy in Coming Out of Exile: The Case of the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in Scripture in Transition: Essays on the Septuagint, Hebrew Bible, and Dead Sea Scrolls in Honour of Raija Sollamo (ed. A. Voitila and J. Jokiranta; Leiden: JSJSup 126; Brill, 2008), 535–50; idem, “The Silent God, the Abused Mother and the Self- Justifying Sons: A Psychodynamic Reading of Scriptural Exegesis in the Pesharim,” (paper presented at the University of Manchester Ehrhardt Seminar, Manchester, 30 September 2010), 1–20; Martti Nissinen, “Transmitting Divine Mysteries: The Prophetic Role of Wisdom Teachers in the Dead Seas Scrolls,” in Scripture, 513–33; Alex P. Jassen, Mediating the Divine: Prophecy and Revelation in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Second Temple Judaism (STDJ 68; Leiden: Brill, 2007); idem, “Prophets and Prophecy in the Qumran Community,” AJS Review 32 (2008): 299–334. 43 Gladd, Mysterion, 63. 44 Gladd, Mysterion, 63. 45 Gladd, Mysterion, 63; cf. Holm-Nielsen, Hodayot, 151. 46 Davila, “Heavenly,” 476; cf. Yates, Spirit, 72–76. 47 Davila relates this to MM, “Hymnist,” 465. Julie A. Hughes through allusions to Isa 60:13– 61:3 interprets “the planting metaphor as the community of God’s righteous people, the garden of the Lord, and the temple sanctuary,” Scriptural Allusions and Exegesis in the Hodayot (STDJ 59; Leiden: Brill, 2006), 168. See also Shozo Fujita, “The Metaphor of Plant in Jewish Literature of the Intertestamental Period,” JSJ 7 (1976): 40–44 and Paul Swarup, The Self-Understanding of the Dead Sea Scrolls Community: an Eternal Planting, a House of Holiness (LBS 59; London: T&T Clark, 2006), 15–49. Cf. Gen 2:8–10; 3:22–24; Isa 11:1; Jer 17:5–8; Ezek 31:1–18, 47:1–12; 1QS VIII.4–6; CD-A I.3–8; Pss Sol 14:3; 1 En. 25–32; T. Levi 18:11. 58

XXVI.14–16 God is the one who “shows the might of his hand sealing up the 48 confirming majestic mysteries.”P223F P . . . (נסתרות) mysteries and revealing hidden things Here, there are definite allusions to Dan 2:22 where God “reveals profound and 49 hidden things.”P224F P These mysteries, hidden in Scripture, can only be deciphered and 50 interpreted with divine aid of a holy spirit (Cf. 2:18, 19, 27, 29, 30, 47; 4:9).P225F P In a sum, mysteries in 1QHP P are primarily truth, wisdom, and knowledge about cosmic and communal eschatology, order of creation, and the hidden purposes of God’s sovereign plan for humankind. a To whom does God reveal mysteries in HodayotP ?P Gladd and Fletcher-Louis both contend that those who have undergone adamic transformation (or new 51 creation) receive revelation of the mysteries.P226F P A passage (XIX.9–17) of hodayah two of the final Community Hymn section confirms the revelation of the mystery to the 52 transformed. The hymnist “will recount your glory among the sons of Adam”P227F P

(XIX.9). He says of God: “your goodness is abundant forgiveness, and your compassion is for all the children of your good favour. For you have made known to of your truth, and given them insight into your (בסוד) them the secret counsel ,XIX.12–13 italics added; cf. XIX.19–20). In VI.23–24) ”(וברזי) wonderful mysteries for the elect divine understanding, nearness to God, comes with the gift of God’s holy spirit: “And as for me, I know from the understanding that comes from you that through your goodwill toward a p[er]son you mul[tiply his portion] in your holy spirit. Thus you draw him closer to your understanding.” Besides those who undergo this transformation, the maśkîl, who claims specific reception of the mysteries, is a “banner for the elect of righteousness and an expert a .(for the community (1QHP P X.15–17 ”(ברזי פלא) interpreter of wonderful mysteries a The hymnist receives revelation of God’s mysteries in various hymns (1QHP P XII.28;

XIII.27–28; XV.29–30; XVII.23). These mysteries are truths that have been hidden until the ordained time of revealing, which is now for the community (XVII.24; cf. Dan 8:26; 12:9). The maśkîl does not conceal these mysteries, but declares:

48 Gladd, Mysterion, 64. 49 The eight scroll fragments of Daniel and citations in 11QMelchizedek and 4QFlorilegium intimates its Scriptural status at Qumran. 50 Collins, Apocalypticism, 12. 51 Gladd, Mysterion, 65–66; Fletcher-Louis, Glory, 105–6. See also Levison on spirit and new creation, Filled, 208–17. 52 Trans. Martínez and Tigchelaar, DSSSE 1:189. 59

“Through me you have illumined the faces53 of the many, and you have increased them beyond number. For you have made me to understand your wonderful mysteries. . . in order to make known to all the living your mighty deeds” (1QHa

XII.28–30). The maśkîl’s role to receive and mediate revelation from God in the hymns mirrors that of the righteous teacher in 1QpHab VII.4–5; 1QS V.9; IX.12–14, 54 18–20; and XI.3. As consonant with the rest of the DSS, the maśkîl’s primary mode of revelation appears to be inspired Scriptural interpretation by God’s spirit rather than ecstasy—notwithstanding the claim to heavenly ascent in parallels (XXVI.2–16) to 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b.55 Thus, the holy spirit of God opening up knowledge within the maśkîl may suggest inspired interpretation and reinforces a spirit-aided epistemology.

2.4 Holy Spirit as Cleansing Agent in Hodayota In addition to the means of revelation, the spirit of God in Hodayota fosters an adamic transformation or new creation of covenanters by cleansing, purifying, and atoning so that they may unite with the angels before God’s throne. While many prayerful passages speak of God as the one who cleanses and purifies,56 Hodayah eight (VII.21–VIII.41) speaks of the spirit’s agency in this purification. The hymnist claims to have already had God’s holy spirit placed in him (VIII.20) and to be predetermined for the glory of God (VIII.26). He, nonetheless, still recognizes his own transgression and ongoing dependency upon God being gracious and compassionate, patient and kind, and forgiving (VIII.34). The psalmist cleanses his 57 own hands (VIII.28), which may have ritual implications, and strengthens himself through God’s holy spirit (VIII.25). While the psalmist has some personal

53 Or “face.” 54 John J. Collins notes how direct communication between God and the teacher is implied with these passages, The Apocalyptic Imagination: an Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature (2d ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 151. 55 Levison, Filled, 188–89. 56 a ”in 1QH : “you pardon iniquity thus clean[se] a person from guilt (טהר) God purifies/cleanses XII.38; “purify them from guilt” XIV.11; “cleanse them from their transgressions” XV.33; “you have purified a mortal man from sin so that he may sanctify himself” XIX.13; “purify me by your righteousness” XIX.33–34. 57 Joseph M. Baumgarten, “The Purification Liturgies,” in Fifty, 2:200–212; Fletcher-Louis, Glory, 109. Holm-Nielsen argues against ritual and cultic and suggests the cleansing is God’s forgiveness, Hodayot, 68. Levison rightly notes how the external purification must include the internal purification of the heart (See 1QS III.4–5), Filled, 216 n.19. Cf. 1QS III.7–9; IV.20–21; Jub. 1:23. 60

responsibility in being clean and of a perfect heart before God, he remains dependent upon God to complete the cleansing.58 He emphatically pleads, “I know that no one can be righteous apart from you, and so I entreat you with the spirit that you have given to me that you make your kindness to your servant complete [for]ever, cleansing me by your holy spirit and drawing me nearer by your good favour, according to your great kindness [wh]ich you have shown to me” (VIII.29–31 italics added). The purification by God’s holy spirit enables one to stand in “the whole station of [your] good fa[vour],” yet this again is because God has chosen this “for those who love you and for those who keep [your] commandments [that they may take their stand] before you forever and [atone for iniquity]” (VIII.31–32). The hymnist ties the cleansing to keeping God’s commandments, drawing nearer to God, and, according to the reconstruction, atoning for iniquity. While the hymnist calls upon God for a complete and eternal cleansing, he does not appear to have reached this place yet due to his depravity and the spirit of the flesh. Concurrently, the hymnist does advocate a degree of purification through reception of the spirit of God and greater strength by God’s spirit to resist sin and to love and serve God. A tension exists and the text seems to advocate both a present realisation and a future, eschatological completion.

In a short hodayah in IV.38–40, the author similarly associates heart purification with the pouring out of God’s holy spirit upon his servant; he writes, “[Blessed are you, God Most High, that ]you have spread your holy spirit upon your servant[ and you] have purified m [ ]t his heart” (line 38). In the preceding hodayah in column

IV.29–37, the author, who describes himself as a spirit of flesh, gives thanks for God’s assistance in an ongoing struggle against sin. Yet, here, in lines 38–40 the author clearly denotes a present reception of God’s holy spirit and present purification of his heart so that he can keep the “whole covenant of Adam” (line 39). Thus, the holy spirit spread upon God’s servants purifies and enables obedience. Beyond the sectarians being cleansed or purified by the holy spirit, the holy spirit makes atonement; the hymnist writes: “[ ] your [h]oly [spirit] you have spread a or pardons (כפר) for guilt” (1QHP P XXIII.33). God atones (כפר) forth in order to atone iniquity (XII.38). The word of God through the hand of Moses removed iniquity and sin and atoned for transgression and unfaithfulness (IV.24). Although the holy spirit

58 Maston, “Divine,” 144. 61

of God makes atonement in only one passage in Hodayota, its significance should not be discounted. The holy spirit of God again appears to be the active agent of God’s will—the hymnist’s explanation of God’s holy action. God spreads forth his holy spirit to atone for guilt.

Further down column XXIII, the holy spirit is spread “over the dust” (XXIII.29). The context suggests that this cleansing by the spirit enables the sectarian “to unite with the children of heaven” (XXIII.30) and to “s]erve with your host and walk [ ] bwt from before you” (XXIII.34–35). Again even this atonement passage points towards uniting with the heavenly community and serving with God’s host (angels), and this is possible only through the actualization of atonement by God’s holy spirit in the community.

2.5 Union with the Angels in Hodayota a As this investigation has determined, the “I” of HodayotP P articulates the belief that 59 P234F P with the(גורל) the psalmist and the community are called to share a common lot 60 holy ones before God’s presence in heaven.P235F P This constitutes part of the mysterious purpose of God for the community. The goal of their praise is to join with the angels in their liturgy before God’s face—to create “one worshipping community 61 (yaḥad).”P236F P This union and communion with the angels are “concretized” by their 62 praise.P237F P Proper praise after cleansing and transformation by the spirit of God is the via mystica to union and communion with the angels. At times, the hymnist envisions this union as in the celestial temple. Apropos this union/communion, Esther Chazon proposes that “praising God together, yaḥad, with the angels” forms a “unifying theme” across the three groups a of psalms in 1QHP :P in VII.12–20 of the first section of eight Community Hymns (I–

VIII); in XI.20–37 and XIII.22–XV.8 among the section of fourteen Teacher Hymns

(IX–XVII.36); and in XIX.6–XX.6, XXIII.1–XXV.33, and XXV.34–XXVII.3 of Community

59 .means the assigned portion of human destiny is in common with the angels גורל ,In context DCH 2:337. Moshe Weinfeld ”, גּ וֹ רָ ל“ They are to join the angels in praise before God’s throne. See sees common lot functioning in three ways in sectarian DSS texts: joint praise, common fate in eternal life, and holy war together, Normative and Sectarian Judaism in the Second Temple Period (LSTS 54; London: T&T Clark International, 2005), 49. 60 Chazon, “Human,” 43. 61 Alexander, “Qumran,” 221. 62 Chazon, “Human,” 43. 62

63 Hymns II (XIX.6–XXVIII.42). This may reveal clues of “editorial intent and liturgical purpose.”64 Chazon notes a difference between mystical experience, ascent and angelification, and simply uniting together with the angels to praise God.65 She makes a case that a recurring theme of communion with angels through the three sections of 1QHa and the structure and ordering of psalms indicates a liturgical function.66 An investigation of the various expressions of yaḥad with angels in the three sections of Hodayota, as proposed by Chazon, with additions on ascent from

VII.21–VIII.41, XII.6–XIII.6, and XV.29–36 will provide a foundation for our comparison. a In Community Hymns I (1QHP P I–VIII), a possible reference to human worship with angels emerges in the seventh psalm (VII.11–20). The hymnist writes, “And as of those gathered and with those who have (ביחד) for us, in the community may refer to in the Qumran יחד of place, with the noun , בְּ knowledge” (line 17). The community specifically, or those gathered are joining in a community or forming a 67 union with those who have knowledge—i.e., angels.P242F P The next line mentions “with your warriors” another reference to angels, but due to manuscript damage, literary 68 context remains unclear.P243F P The latter part of line 18 describes a recounting in unison presumably with these warriors in the knowledge of God (VII.18). In this (נסגרה יחד) community hymn (lines 11–20), this communion with the ones who know occurs through praise to God Most High, proclamation of his wonders (lines 12, 15, 16), and may involve choral recounting in unison. Line 19 begins with a reference to “in the assembly of[ ],” which could have identified whether it was heavenly or earthly but damage leaves it unidentifiable. Thus, in this hodayah “the ones who know” possibly angels are with the gathered human worshippers during praise— possibly on earth and may form a joint choir.

The eighth hodayah (VII.21–VIII.41) in section one, has an incomplete reference that may describe a human being united with the host of eternal warriors. It follows a call to praise: “A source of light you have opened[ ] and for your council you have

63 Chazon, “Function,” 137. 64 Chazon, “Function,” 137. 65 Chazon, “Function,” 139. 66 Chazon, “Function,” 149. 67 Maxwell J. Davidson, Angels at Qumran: A Comparative Study of 1 Enoch 1–36, 72–108 and Sectarian Writings from Qumran (JSPSup 11; Sheffield: SAP, 1992), 155, 192. 68 Angela Kim Harkins, “Thinking about 1QHA Sixty Years after its Discovery,” in Sixty, 112. 63

called me to praise your holiness by the mouth of all your creatures, for you have with the host of eternal [wa]rriors” (VIII.15). The (להו] ח̊ ד) don[e to be un]ited could either be a Hitpael infinitive construct “to be united” or a יחד reconstruction of Niphal infinitive construct “be united, added or joined.” If a Niphal, as reconstructed the hymnist may be stating that the aim of the praise is for God to unite ,ו with the 69 him with the host of eternal warriors (i.e., angels).P244F P If the Niphal verb retains a 70 reflexive aspect, the hymnist would then allow himself to be united with the angels.P245F P The passive sense of the verb indicates this union cannot take place through an 71 attempt of human flesh alone, but requires divine aid.P246F P

In section one, the two references (VII.17 and VIII.15) have literary ambiguity concerning the union. Textual lacunae hinder the certainty of a union with angels into one congregation that becomes more explicit in the last two hymn sections of a 1QHP .P Angela Harkins may be correct in her assessment that in section one “human worshippers remain distinct from the angelic assembly” and do not describe heavenly experiences; this may signify a literary distinction between these hymn 72 blocks.P247F The joining with heavenly beings is more evident and includes the hymnist’s a experience in the central section of Teacher Hymns (1QHP P IX–XVII.36). In the sixth hodayah (XI.20–37), the speaker ties the goal of union with the angels to God’s providential purpose of ‘common rejoicing,’ common inheritance, and joint holy war:

20 P vacatP I thank you, Lord, that you have redeemed my life from the pit, and that 21 from Sheol-Abaddon P Pyou have lifted me up to an eternal height, so that I walk 22 about on a limitless plain. I know there is hope for one whom P Pyou have formed from the dust for an eternal council. And a perverted spirit you have purified 23 with P theP host of the (להתיצב במעמד) from great sin that it might take its place with the congregation of the (לבוא ביחד) holy ones and enter into the community

69 GKC §114. 70 Paul Joüon and Takamitsu Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (rev. ed.; SubBi 27; Rome: E.P.I.B., 2006), 139. 71 Joüon and Muraoka, Hebrew, 140. 72 Harkins, “Thinking,” 122. An earlier, Hasmonean version of the latter two sections appears in fragments of 4Q428, may indicate the Community Hymns I was a separate collection added to 1QHa (130–34). 64

with the (גורל עולם) children of heaven. And you cast for the man an eternal lot 24 spirits P ofP knowledge, that he might praise your name in common rejoicing a –and recount your wondrous acts before all your works. (1QHP P XI.20 (ביחד רנ̊ח̊ ) 24)

The one purified by God can take his place (station) with the host of the holy ones and enter into community, into union, or in communion with the congregation of the children of heaven. In the latter part of this hymn the voice (seemingly united praise) of the host of heaven (line 36), which men join, leads to the “full consummation” of the war of the champions of heaven sweeping through the world (line 37). It is unknown whether the hymnist is only speaking metaphorically about walking on the heights and joining the angels in common rejoicing or if he may be referring to a conviction held by the sectarian community that their holy praise, in actuality, not only united them with the host of heaven, but also instigated the coming consummation and judgement. The description of Sheol-Abbadon possibly points toward hyperbolic language—although the hymnist may have felt his depravity and 73 position outside the community left him in the pit spiritually speaking.P248F P Either way this does not discount the perception by the psalmist in his theophanic imagination in line 24 יחד that they are to join the angels in praise to God. For instance, the use of to express “singing in unison” or a “choir of rejoicing” signifies joint (ביחד רנ̊ח̊ ) praise of men and angels (XI.24; XIX.17, 28; VII.18; XIII.32; cf. Job 38:7; Isa 52:8; Ps 74 98:8).P249F P The singular ‘voice’ of the host of heaven in line 36 reinforces the “collective character” of the common praise offered by the union of earthly and 75 heavenly groups.P250F P

In the eighth hodayah (XII.6–XIII.6) of the Teacher Hymns, the psalmist writes: “You have not covered in shame the faces of all who have been examined by me, for your covenant. Those who walk in the way of (יחד) who have gathered together your heart listen to me, and they marshal themselves before you in the council of the holy ones” (XII.25–26). These members of the covenant, who have passed the

73 Collins, “Amazing,” 80–81. 74 Moshe Weinfeld, “The Heavenly Praise in Unison,” in Meqor  Festschrift für Georg Molin zu seinem 75. Geburtstag (ed. Irmtraut Seybold; Graz: Akademische Druck-u., 1983), 428; Nitzan, Prayer, 278. 75 Nitzan, Prayer, 278. 65

teacher’s scrutiny, are gathered before God, potentially in God’s throne room, and in the council of the holy ones (angels).

In the tenth hodayah (XIII.22–XV.8), God, it seems, has already brought “all with the angels of the (ובגורל יחד) people of his council, and in a common lot without an intermediary between lq[ to] reply according to the ,(פנים) presence spirit” (XIV.16–17). This explicit union with the angels of the face or “of the presence” from before God’s throne is a notably close union that has no intermediary and includes all people of his council. The psalmist may share his personal experience of this union in XIV.8: “You brought me into the council of holiness”

In the twelfth hodayah (XV.29–36), the psalmist expresses God’s initiative in bringing his children before him: “But all the children of your truth you bring before you in forgiveness to cleanse them from their transgressions through your great them (להעמידם) goodness, and through your overflowing compassion to station before you forever and ever” (lines 32–34). Context again appears to be contemplating the “wondrous great works” of God (line 35), which may indicate a liturgica mystica. Overall, among the Teacher Hymns the stationing before God with the angels becomes more apparent and the joining appears to transcend limitations of 76 time and space—a transcendental eschatology.P251F

In the final block of Community Hymns (XIX.6–XXVIII.42), the union with angels before God’s throne becomes the most explicit. An analogous example to 77 XI.20–24 occurs in the second hodayah (XIX.6–XX.6).P252F P The psalmist writes:

13 P ForP the sake of your glory, you have purified man from offence, so that he 14 may sanctify himself P toP You from every abominable uncleanness and guilty wi[th] the sons of Your truth and in the lot of (להוחד) wickedness, to be united 15 P YourP holy ones, to raise from the dust the worms of the dead, to an 16 ever[lasting] assembly, and from a depraved spirit to knowledge [of You], P soP with the (לפניכה) before Your face (במעמד) that he can take his stand in station everlasting host and [Your holy] spirits, to renew him with everything that

76 Stephen F. Noll argues for transcendental eschatology rather than “the realization of historical eschatology” at Qumran, “Angelology in the Qumran Texts” (Ph.D. thesis, The Victoria University of Manchester, 1979), 192–97. 77 Stegemann, “Number,” 216–17. 66

17 .of jubilation (ביחד רנח) exists, P andP with those who know, in a community a 78 (1QHP P XIX.13–17)P253F P

The purpose of the man’s sanctification and purification is to glorify God by being united with the everlasting assembly and standing with the everlasting host to rejoice together before God. The phrase “he can take his stand in station before Your face” (line 16) may refer to a shared position around the God’s throne as in 1 En. 60:2 (cf. a a 79 in) ,במעמד ,1QHP P XI.22; XXVI.7, 36; 4QHP P 7 I.11; 7 II.17).P254F P The hymnist’s use of a 1QHP P XI.22; XIX.16), which describes the Levites’ post or place of service in the 80 Temple in 1 Chr 23:28 and 2 Chr 35:15,P255F P places this joint praise in the celestial temple. Man then has an assigned place of heavenly service with the divine beings. The hymnist(s) uses multiple appellations to describe these beings “sons of your truth,” “holy ones,” “everlasting host,” and “your holy spirits” with which these sanctified men are to unite; this reflects the expansion of the divine echelon in Second Temple Jewish literature and particularly in the angelology of the Qumran 81 sectarians.P256F P Furthermore, the praise of the “I” of the hymn in line 26, “I will sing יחד ) upon the lyre of salvation” leads to all proclaiming together with joyous voice lines 28–29): “Blessed are you” Lord (lines 30, 32, 35). The repeated) (בקול רנה benediction formulae also reveal the hymn’s design for liturgical use in the 82 community to foster the union.P257F

A reconstructed fragment in the fourth hodayah (XXIII.1–XXV.33) of Community with the (להחיד) Hymns II has the damaged line “[ ] in the mud[ ] gods to unite could either be a Hitpael infinitive ,להחיד ,children of heaven” (XXIII.30). The word 83 84 P259F P The context.ל be united with”P258F P or a noun “for the community” with preposition“ of the phrase describes God spreading his holy spirit over the dust (human beings) perhaps to unite them with the children of heaven (angels as in 1 En. 6:2; 1QS XI.7– 8). The spreading of the spirit, as discussed in §2.4, transforms depraved human beings into cleansed worshippers who can be united with the children of heaven. The

78 Trans. Alexander, Mystical, 101. 79 Chazon, “Human,” 43. 80 .BDB, 765 ”, ﬠֲ מָ ד מַ “ 81 Mark Adam Elliot, The Survivors of Israel: a Reconsideration of the Theology of pre- Christian Judaism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 393–96. 82 Chazon, “Function,” 143. 83 .DCH 4:195 ”,יחד“ 84 .DCH 4:196 ”, ַ י הַ ד“ 67

commonly refers to angelic beings in the sectarian texts of the ,(אלים) word, gods cannot be אלים DSS. Unfortunately, what it specifically says regarding the reasonably deciphered here. a In summary, HodayotP P in all three sections undoubtedly advocates and progressively builds up a liturgical union of the cleansed sectarian and even the whole Qumran council with the angels of the heavenly assembly before God’s face in worship. Chazon distinguishes further between three types of yiḥud (joint prayer/praise) in the DSS: (1) “harmonizing with the universe in praise to God” (Ps 148); (2) two choirs: praying exclusively with and like the angels Daily Prayers

a–e (4Q503); BerakhotP ;P point/counterpoint approach); and (3) humans and angels form 85 one congregation.P260F P The descriptions of union between angels and humans in a HodayotP P exemplify Chazon’s third option. She writes, “The distinction between human and angelic praise is dropped, the veil between the realms is removed, and the human worshippers conceive of themselves as actually present with the angels, 86 apparently experiencing a sense of elevation to angelic heights.”P261F P Angelic heights represent the celestial throne room. As advocated above, the spirit of God, who purifies the perverted spirit, enlightens the understanding with God’s knowledge, and transforms the community members to enable a union. Additionally, the parallels a a a–b (1QHP P XXV.34–XXVII.3; 4QHP P 7 I.6–23; 7 II.3–23) to 4QSelf-Glorification HymnP P (4Q491c; 4Q471b) further illustrate the claim to be not only in the angelic community but also to be transformed into one of them—an exemplary climactic 87 account (see §5.4).P262F a While direct union with God is not espoused in HodayotP ,P the author(s) may see 88 an “unbridgeable ontological gap between the Creator and the created.”P263F P The highest or closest that human worshippers may come to God is through a union with the angels of God’s face that serve before the throne of God. This threefold union of joint praise, common eternal inheritance, and joint holy war is God’s purpose for the community. Since this purpose is a union/communion with the transcendent reality

85 Chazon, “Human,” 35–47. 86 Chazon, “Human,” 43. 87 Chazon, “Human,” 45. 88 Alexander, “Genealogy,” 220. 68

before the celestial throne, this can be characterised as mystical and more specifically early Jewish mysticism.89 Nitzan further characterises the joint communion as a mystical, communionist approach. She explains, “an experience of harmony and communion between the chosen earthly and heavenly worshippers is reached through hymns recited by his pure and perfect worshippers.”90 Moreover, in corroboration of abstract mystical criteria (§1.1), she states that the recitation of these hymns helps worshippers attain “the experience of closeness to God through the performance of the law of his worship.”91

2.6 Summary While one cannot derive a comprehensive or systematic understanding of the spirit in Hodayota, the hymns disclose in part an understanding of God’s spirit as an epistemological and transformative gift to the maśkîl and community entrants. God’s spirit fosters a spiritual transformation of the sectarian by cleansing, atoning for sin, enabling obedience, and granting divine (angelic) knowledge. The mode of this revelation, while not explicit, seems to be endowed scribal wisdom rather than ecstatic or direct. The revelation of God’s mysteries by the spirit reveals God’s purpose for the community, which includes a common inheritance and union with the angels before God’s throne in a liturgica mystica. In essence, a whole connective process from entrance into community, reception of God’s spirit, divine instruction in the knowledge of God, purification, new creation, atonement, enables them to live out priestly purity regulations and meet Torah obedience requirements. Consequently, through hymn recitation, they can, like the maśkîl, be united with the angels. Liturgical praxis is the via mystica to drawing near, becoming one congregation with the angels, and communing with God. This fulfils the purpose of God for the community—a revealed mystery. Through their joint worship with the heavenly cohort they can make atonement through the spirit for the land and the people—a true remnant in the desert preparing the way for the Lord.

89 Alexander, Mystical Texts, 103; Nitzan, “Harmonic,” 165; Luz, “Paul,” 134–35; Meier, Mystik, 20. 90 Nitzan, “Harmonic,” 168. 91 Nitzan, “Harmonic,” 183. 69

Chapter 3

A TEMPLE COMMUNITY WORSHIPPING WITH THE CELESTIAL TEMPLE IN RULE OF THE COMMUNITY AND SONGS OF THE SABBATH SACRIFICE

3.1 Introduction The Qumran community not only conceived of itself as having a priestly function and operating as a holy house for Aaron, but also as sharing this priestly service with the angels in the celestial temple. After a review of the Qumran community’s self- identification as a temple in Rule of the Community, an investigation of Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice will disclose the mystical praxis of this temple community as one of liturgical synchronisation with the angelic priesthood in the celestial temple. This analysis will form a basis for a heuristic comparison in chapter 7 with Paul’s temple metaphor in 1 Cor 3:16; 6:19; and 2 Cor 6:14–16 that will illuminate neglected temple associations with the celestial archetype, the presence of angels, and the tongues of angels for the Corinthian ekklesia.

Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice: Preliminary Matters Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice (4Q400–407) is a liturgical and poetic text1 consisting of thirteen songs, one for each Sabbath in the first quarter of the sectarian solar calendar.2 The text is preserved in ten fragmentary copies of the same composition written on leather: eight manuscripts from cave 4 (4Q400–407), one from cave 11 (11Q17), and one from Masada (Mas1k). Partial material reconstruction is possible

1 James R. Davila questions whether Songs is poetry or prose, Liturgical Works (ECDSS; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 87–88. 2 Nitzan, Prayer, 284. 70

due to parallel copies.3 4Q405, the most complete copy, possibly had twenty columns of twenty-five lines each.4 Paleography varies with the fragments from a formal hand of the late Hasmonean period (ca. 75–50 B.C.E.) of 4Q400 to a late 5 developed Herodian script (ca. 25–50 C.E.) of Mas1k. The orthography is characteristic for Qumran. While this unquestionably indicates the Qumran community preserved, copied, and used Songs, internal evidence limits certainty of the texts’ provenance.6 Newsom currently argues for a pre-Qumran origin, possibly from a priestly milieu like those who wrote Jubilees and Aramaic Levi Document.7 The influence of Songs on Berakhota–e (4Q286–290) and Songs of the Sagea–b (4Q510–511) further strengthens the argument for a pre-Qumran origin.8 Songs describe worship performed by the angelic priesthood on the Sabbath in 9 P275F P;למשכיל (the celestial sanctuary. Each song begins with four standard elements: (1 ,a date formula; and (4) an invocation for angels to praise (3) ;שיר אולת השבת(2) 10 –God.P276F P The only preserved ending in Song 6 has a benediction (4Q402 1 I.28 ,הללו 11 29).P277F P Style features and content suggest the layout of three sections: Songs 1–5, Songs 6–8, and Songs 9–13. A pyramid structure, suggested by Newsom, may best explain the songs with a climax in the seventh song, although some argue for eleven, 12 twelve, or thirteen as the pinnacle song.P278F P Songs 1–5 depict the angelic priesthood, duties, and praise. Songs 6–8 contain repeated praises and blessings with the (דביר) ”prominence of the number seven. Song 7 possibly portrays the “inner room and chariot throne of God. Songs 9–13 describe the celestial temple, angelic high

3 For reconstructions, see Newsom, Songs; James H. Charlesworth and Carol A. Newsom, eds., Angelic Liturgy: Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice (DSSP 4B; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999). Carol Newsom, “Shirot ʿOlat Hashabbat,” in Esther Eshel et al., Qumran Cave 4 VI: Poetical and Liturgical Texts, Part 1 (DJD XI; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998), 173–401. Davila, Liturgical, 83–167. All Songs translations will be taken from DJD XI unless otherwise noted. 4 Newsom, DJD XI:31. 5 For dating, see Newsom, Angelic, 2. 6 .or a righteous teacher, Newsom, DJD XI:173–74 יחד Songs lacks references to 7 Newsom has changed her hypothesis from a Qumran origin (Songs, 4, 61) to non-Qumran origin due to the use of ʾĕlōhîm for God, but admits the evidence is not conclusive, Angelic, 4. 8 Newsom, Angelic, 5. Contra Strawn and Rietz, “Sectarian,” 53–64 and Morray-Jones, Mystery, 312–13. 9 This means ‘for the instructor,’ the priestly, prayer-leader of the Qumran assembly, Alexander, Mystical, 48. 10 Newsom, Songs, 6. 11 Davila, Liturgical, 87. 12 Davila argues for Songs eleven and twelve as the climax around Shavuʿot, Liturgical, 90. Morray-Jones (Mystery, 321–25) and Alexander (Mystical, 49) see twelve as the climax—the Festival of the Renewal of the Covenant. Fletcher-Louis argues for the thirteenth, Glory, 356–94. 71

priests, the divine glory on the merkabah, multiple chariots, and concludes with a sacrifice and priestly vestments in Song 13.13 The function of Songs could be a liturgy to complement a sacrifice (2 Chr

29:27–28; 11Q5 XXVII.7), “a substitute for the additional () sacrifice of the Sabbath,”14 or a liturgy designed for additional reading with the merkabah passages from Ezek 1 and 3:12 on Shavuʿot (the Festival of Weeks preceding the community’s annual covenant renewal ceremony).15 Function, however, remains somewhat speculative. Newsom proposes along with Sabbath recitation that Songs function “as the praxis of a communal mysticism,” which helps validate “the Community’s claims to be true priests of God.”16 Additionally, the use of Songs reinforces the community’s temple identity.

Songs: a Mystical Text Songs is one of the earliest examples of merkabah exegesis and merkabah hymns.17 The numinous descriptions of the celestial temple may have given the liturgy a “quasi-mystical” function.18 As Newsom writes, “the sophisticated manipulation of religious emotion in the songs would seem to have increased the possibility of ecstatic experience among some worshippers.”19 Alexander categorises Songs as a mystical text, which, like Newsom suggests, offers a liturgical via mystica for the worshippers reciting the hymns. It brings them into communion with the angels before God’s celestial throne—the closest possible communion with God in monotheistic Judaism—and gives divine illumination of heavenly knowledge and Torah.20 Nitzan proposes, “they may have been considered as a medium for creating an experience of mystic communion between the earthly and heavenly worshippers.”21 Davila has also noted the striking similarities and some differences

13 Newsom, Angelic, 3. 14 Nitzan, Prayer, 93 n. 67. Contra Newsom (Angelic, 3) who notes only 13 songs rather than 52 for the whole calendar year (cf. Num 28–29). 15 David J. Halperin, “Origen, Ezekiel’s Merkabah, and the Ascension of Moses,” CH 50 (1981): 271; idem, Faces, chs. 4 and 8; Davila, Liturgical, 90. 16 Newsom, Angelic, 4; Carol A. Newsom, “‘Priests,’” 113–18. 17 Halperin, “Merkabah Midrash in the Septuagint,” JBL 101 (1982): 353–55; Newsom, “Exegesis,” 11–30; Schiffman, “Speculation,” 15–47; Baumgarten, “Shirot,” 199–213. 18 Newsom, Songs, 59. 19 Newsom, Songs, 17. 20 Alexander, Mystical, 49–61. 21 Nitzan, “Harmonic,” 183. 72

in comparison to later Hekhalot literature, possibly indicating its place in the history of early JM.22 In this regard, these scholars and others23 give credence to Songs being categorised as a mystical text, merkabah exegesis, and an example of early JM at Qumran. As April DeConick writes, “Through the performance of this liturgy, the participant is taken into the Holy of Holies in order to join the angelic worship before God’s throne,” i.e., the merkabah.24

3.2 Qumran Community as a Temple in Rule of the Community The Qumran community identifies itself as a temple in the Rule of the Community 25 through temple symbolism, cultic imagery, and priestly function.P291F P In 1QS V.5–6, the community of the eternal covenant lays “a foundation for truth” and makes “atonement for all who freely volunteer for holiness in Aaron and for the house of truth in Israel and for those who join them for community, lawsuit, and 26 judgement.”P292F P The descriptions of “a foundation of truth,” “holiness (or sanctuary) in Aaron,” and a “house of truth in Israel” all point to a self–conception of a (קודש) 27 temple.P293F P In VIII.4–10, the temple identification and function are more explicit. The priestly purpose of the community council is “to be an everlasting plantation, a holy house for Israel and the foundation of the holy of holies for Aaron. . . . to atone for the land. . . . the most holy dwelling for Aaron . . . to offer a pleasant/aroma/; and it will be a house of perfection and truth in Israel in order to establish . . . a covenant.” According to Paul Swarup, the combination of “everlasting plantation” with “a holy house” discloses two key identifications of the community. On the one hand, “everlasting plantation” is a metaphor for a holy nation in biblical traditions and stands for the righteous people of God. On the other hand, “a holy house” points 28 toward a temple and priestly function (cf. Exod 19:6).P294F P This distinction, however, is

22 Davila, “Exploring,” 444–54; idem, Liturgical, 83–167. 23 Morray-Jones, Mystery, 303–38; Nitzan, Prayer, 273–318; idem, “Harmonic,” 163–83; Baumgarten, “Shirot,” 199–213; Strugnell, “Angelic,” 318–45. Contra Wolfson, “Poetic-Liturgical,” 185–202 and Schäfer, Origins, 112–53. 24 DeConick, Voices, 63. 25 in 4Q174 I.6–7. Bertil Gärtner, The Temple and the (מקדש אדם) ”,See “temple of men Community in Qumran and the New Testament (SNTSMS 1; Cambridge: CUP, 1965), 30–42. Newsom contends this was not “a matter of spiritualization of the cult” but an anticipation of the restoration and reconstitution of the cult in the eschatological age, Songs, 62. Cf. 1QM III.1–9. 26 Trans. Martínez and Tigchelaar, DSSSE 1:81. 27 Bertil Gärtner, The Temple and the Community in Qumran and the New Testament (SNTSMS 1; Cambridge: CUP, 1965), 23–24. 28 Swarup, Self-Understanding, 4. 73

notwithstanding the association of “everlasting plantation” with Eden and paradise— a “prototype for the sanctuary”29 or a reference to the ideal, celestial temple. The Qumran community certainly perceives itself as functioning as priests in a holy of holies for the rest of Israel to establish the covenant, institute divine retribution on the wicked, and atone for the land. The cultic imagery and priestly themes reoccur with greater clarity in 1QS IX.3–6. The community is:

3bto establish the spirit of holiness in truth 4eternal, in order to atone for the guilt of iniquity and for the unfaithfulness of sin, and for approval for the earth, without the flesh of burnt offerings and without the fats of sacrifice – the offering of 5the lips in compliance with the decree will be like a pleasant aroma of justice and the perfectness of behaviour will be acceptable like a freewill offering at that moment the men of 6the Community shall set apart a holy house for Aaron, in order to form a most holy community, and a house of the

community for Israel, for those who walk in perfection. (1QS IX.3b–6)

While the purpose of the priestly function is to atone for guilt and sin for all of Israel, the offerings are not animal sacrifices as in the Jerusalem Temple cult but “offerings of the lips” and “perfectness of behaviour” through being set apart as a holy house 30 for Aaron (cf. VII.4–10; X.8). The Qumran community saw the Jerusalem Temple as defiled and corrupt with regard to cultic practices, the cultic calendar, and 31 halakoth (CD–A XI.18–21; XVI.13; 1QpHab VII.8–13; IX.3–7; XII.7–14). The community appropriates the mediatorial functions of the temple and priesthood, and identifies itself as temporarily supplanting the Jerusalem temple until proper, pure 32 service is re-established (cf. 4QFlor I.3–7; 1QM II.1–9).

29 Swarup, Self-Understanding, 5. 30 See Jodi Magness, The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 105–33. Qumran had sacred meals but no animal sacrifice. Daniel Falk shows how Qumran prayers reflect temple practice, “Qumran Prayer Texts and the Temple,” in Sapiential, 106– 26. 31 Gärtner argues for temple replacement, Temple, 16–20; Newsom, Angelic, 9. 32 Carol A. Newsom, The Self as Symbolic Space: Constructing Identity and Community at Qumran (STDJ 52; Leiden: Brill, 2004), 157–60. Since portrayal of the Jerusalem Temple and priestly cult is inconsistent within the Scrolls, there is ongoing debate over whether the Qumran community replaces, competes with, or complements the Jerusalem Temple. For interim temple in 4Q174, see George Brooke, “Miqdash Adam, Eden and the Qumran Community,” in Gemeinde ohne Tempel (ed. Beate Ego et al.; WUNT 118; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999), 285–301. 74

The authors of 1QS grant the spirit of God a part in this temple identity and priestly function. 1QS III.6b–8a says,

For it is by the spirit of the true counsel of God that are atoned the paths of man, all his iniquities, so that he can look at the light of life. And it is by the holy spirit of the community, in its truth, that he is cleansed of all his iniquities. And by the spirit of uprightness and of humility his sin is atoned. And by the compliance of his soul with all the laws of God. (italics added)

This spirit is an agent by whom true counsel of God is given, iniquities are atoned,33 sight of light is enabled, and iniquities of members are cleansed.34 Apart from the community, one cannot receive cleansing and atoning of this holy spirit, walk in the way of perfection, or know the truth of the community. In 1QS IX.3–6 just before an extensive priestly description of the community as a separate holy house for Aaron (a holy of holies), the purpose of the community’s regulatory life is to “establish the spirit of holiness in truth eternal,” atone for the guilt of iniquity and sin, and be like a pleasant aroma and freewill offering. This is not by individuals but by obedience of the community that a holy spirit is established for eternal truth and atonement is 35 made for Israel. The holy spirit as the spirit of truth (IV.21) establishes the 36 foundation of eternal truth. In light of III.6–8 and IX.3–6, the Qumran community appears to envision the establishment of a holy house as “a habitation for the holy spirit,”37 whose foundation of truth is a holy spirit and a holy community. The identification as the remnant people and priesthood of God in a temple community of the holy spirit correlates to the liturgical practice and function of communing with angels in Songs, Hodayota, and other liturgical texts.38 Not only

33 Dealsey notes that atonement for the sectarians “can be wrought only by God through the working of the holy spirit,” Shape, 228. Cf. 1QSa I.1–3; 1QM II.5; 1QS IX.4. 34 For discussions on spirit in DSS, see George Johnston, “‘Spirit’ and ‘Holy Spirit’ in the Qumran Literature,” in New Testament Sidelights: Essays in Honor of Alexander Converse Purdy (ed. Harvey K. McArthur; Hartford, Conn.: The Hartford Seminary Foundation Press, 1960), 27–40; Sekki, Ruaḥ. 35 In 1QS IV.21, God cleanses with the spirit of holiness and sprinkles “over him the spirit of truth.” A. A. Anderson sees it as possible to identify “spirit of truth” in 1QS III.6–7 and IV.21 with the holy spirit, as in John’s Gospel, because the spirit of truth and the holy spirit represent “two different aspects of God’s work,” “Use,” 301. 36 Gärtner, Temple, 29. 37 F. F. Bruce, “Holy Spirit in the Qumran Texts,” ALUOS 6 (1966/1968): 55. 38 Newsom, Angelic, 9. 75

does the Qumran community claim a common inheritance with the holy ones (angels) but sees a union of their assembly “to the sons of the heavens in order (to form) the council of the Community and a foundation of the building of holiness to be an everlasting plantation through all future ages” (1QS XI.5b–9a). This union creates a foundation of an eternal holy structure that is both a present and an eschatological reality, and yet points to “a return to the primeval paradise.”39 The community is to lay the foundation of truth for Israel (V.5). The truth concerns their revelatory hermeneutic, which penetrates the divine mysteries of Scripture.40 The community members also make up “the foundation or habitation for the holy of holies for Aaron.”41 In a sense, they realise “the Imago Templi proclaimed by the prophets” particularly Ezekiel and Isaiah.42 As Morray-Jones states, “Incorporation into the structure of the temple confers ‘advance membership’ of the world to come and is, at the same time, a return to humanity’s original state of angelic purity.”43 An important textual variant may indicate that the community acquired this self- understanding overtime. In 1QS VIII.11 (100–75 B.C.E.), the men of the community e are set apart as ‘holy ones.’ 4QSP P frag. 1 III.1, a later version (50–25 B.C.E.), has a themselves, instead of ‘holy (מקדש) ’textual variant, in which the men are a ‘temple This may suggest a chronological history of recensions of the Rule of .(קודש) ’ones the Community, in which the self-conception shifts from opposition to the Jerusalem Temple cult to being a temple community themselves and possibly the holy of 44 holies.P310F P

39 Fujita, “Metaphor,” 45; Björn Frennesson, “In a common rejoicing”: Liturgical Communion with Angels in Qumran (SSU 14; Uppsala: University of Uppsala Press, 1999), 65–66. 40 a Gärtner, Temple, 27, 29; Devorah Dimant notes from Jubilees (4Q216=4QJub ) 1 IV.6–8, the importance of the Angel of the presence who reveals God’s purpose in history and mysteries of the Mystery‘ (רז נהיה) Torah, Moses, and the Qumran community, which may have something to do with of Being,’ “Men as Angels: The Self-Image of the Qumran Community,” in Religion and Politics in the Ancient Near East (ed. Adele Berlin; STJHC; Bethesda, Md.: University Press of Marlyand, 1996), 103. 41 Davila, Hymnist, 467. 42 Henry Corbin, Temple and Contemplation (trans. Philip Sherrard; London: KPI in association with Islamic Publications, 1986), 315–18. 43 Morray-Jones, Mystery, 327–28. 44 Philip S. Alexander, “The Redaction-History of Serekh ha- Yaḥad: a Proposal,” RevQ 17 (1996): 437–56; James H. Charlesworth and Brent A. Strawn, “Reflections on the Text of Serek ha- Yaḥad found in Cave IV,” RevQ 17 (1996): 416–19. See discussion by Albert L. A. Hogeterp, “Paul and God’s Temple: a Historical Interpretation of Cultic Imagery in the Corinthian Correspondence,” (Ph.D. diss., University of Groningen, 2004), 88–89. 76

Further support for the Qumran community being the temple themselves can be 45 found in related DSS texts.P311F P For example, in 4QFlor 1 I.3–11, the commentator explains through interpreting 2 Sam 7:10–13 and Exod 15:17–18 that God will build 46 ,in the last days.P312F P The eschatological temple (מקדש אדם) ”a “sanctuary of man/men built by God’s hands is, then, a sanctuary of people. The sanctuary of Adam links to 47 the idea of the Garden of Eden as a sanctuary.P313F P The Qumran community, then, considers God to have “inaugurated the reestablishment of Eden, the sanctuary of 48 Adam” in their midst (cf. Jub. 8:19).P 314F P Since they have a common inheritance with the holy angels, the community through offering bloodless offerings of prayers, angelic liturgy, thanksgivings, works of torah (perfect behaviour), and priestly purity actually conforms itself to pure 49 angelic worship in heaven.P315F P This enables the community to be an exceptional temple substitute and gives it spiritual value. Even lay Israelites could participate in Levitic, mystical experience of this spiritualised temple, receive revelation, and have 50 communion with God and his angels.P316F P This is part of their purpose as a community and reflects what Alexander calls a “sophisticated sacramental theology, which sees the earthly, material sacrifices as symbolizing in a form appropriate to our embodied 51 state the spiritual offerings of the true sanctuary in heaven.”P317F P Therefore, as a holy, spiritual temple with right priestly function the community can participate in 52 heavenly worship in the heavenly sanctuary. Songs,P318F P then, functions to reinforce and

45 Building/plantation combo occurs in 4Q4174 1–2 I.2–6 and in 4Q511 35, 2–5, “And some of the holy ones God will sancti[fy] for himself as an eternal sanctuary and (as) purity among the cleansed. They shall be priests, his righteous people, his host and ministers, the angels of his glory.” Note the analogizing between humans and angelic appellations. Cf. 4Q418 81 4–5. See also Joseph L. Angel, Otherworldly and Eschatological Priesthood in the Dead Sea Scrolls (STDJ 86; Leiden: Brill, 2010), 91–93 and Swarup, Self-Understanding. 46 Brooke, “Miqdash,” 286–291. 47 Torleif Elgvin argues for the connection between garden-temple, eschatological temple, and the yaḥad as a temple of people on earth, “Temple Mysticism and the Temple of Man,” in The Dead Sea Scrolls: Texts and Context (ed. Charlotte Hempel; STDJ 90; Leiden: Brill, 2010), 229. 48 Brooke, “Miqdash,” 291; idem, “Ten,” 419–21. For more on Eden as a sanctuary of God’s presence, see Robert Hayward, The Jewish Temple: a Non-biblical Sourcebook (London: Routledge, 1996), 89–91. 49 Alexander, Mystical, 59; Dimant says the community understands its “existence as analogical to that of angels,” which provides a framework for all they do, “Men,” 96–97. 50 Elgvin, “Temple Mysticism,” 241. 51 Alexander, Mystical, 59. 52 Songs presents the temple structure as animate, quasi-angelic beings, who praise God. Morray-Jones suggests the praise and “utterances” of the angels and worshippers form the heavenly courts and debirim of the temple—it is “composed of living sound,” Mystery, 327 and n. 101. While the Qumran community on earth constitute the parts of the temple (1QS), the celestial animate temple 77

to validate experientially this shared-priestly service with the angels and the community’s temple function.

3.3 The Relationship between Heavenly and Earthly Temples at Qumran Before examining the use of Songs at Qumran, an overview of the complex relationship between heavenly and earthly temples will set the groundwork from which to move forward carefully. In the Hebrew Bible the earthly temple is seen as 53 “the embodiment of a celestial archetype,”P319F P based on the idea that the earthly pattern or blueprint) of the heavenly) תבנית temple/tabernacle was built on the temple and throne room (Exod 25:40; 1 Chr 28:19). In Second Temple Jewish literature, the correspondence assumes “cosmological significance”—the cosmos 54 becomes a temple (cf. T. Levi, Jub., 1 En.).P320F P The temple on earth becomes the omphalos or “navel of the world,” the link between heaven, earth, and the sub- 55 terrestrial world.P321F P Exegetical, temple traditions as evident in Songs exemplify the coalescing and homogenising of biblical temple imagery and traditions in its portrayal of the heavenly temple and angelic priesthood. Rather than a reductionist reading, however, that reduces Songs to a simple exegetical exercise, a more complex picture emerges. Songs does not provide a straight-forward exegesis of biblical temple passages, as 56 Newsom acknowledges,P322F P but has innumerable allusions to biblical and Second Temple Jewish literature that reflect an ongoing oral tradition concerning “the nature and minutiae of the cosmic Temple” (cf. Exod 19; 25:40; 1 Kgs 6–8; 19:11–18; 22:19–23; 1 Chr 28–29; Isa 6; Ezek 1, 3, 11, 40–48; Dan 7:9–27; 1 En. 14–15; T. a–f 57 Levi; Jub. 16:21; 31:14; Levi P P ar; Pseudo-Ezekiel).P323F P Additionally, the distinctive poetic quality and uncommon, yet highly detailed, angelic-temple descriptions of the

forms part of the heavenly community (4Q400–700). Angel calls this “the reversibility of community and temple,” Otherworldly, 90. 53 Morray-Jones, Mystery, 338. 54 Morray-Jones, Mystery of God, 338; Corbin, Temple, 292–309; James R. Davila, “Macrocosmic Temple, Scriptural Exegesis, and the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice,” DSD 9 (2002): 1–19; Fletcher-Louis, Glory, 61–68; Newsom, Songs, 60–61. 55 Corbin, Temple, 291. 56 Songs, 58. 57 Davila, “Macrocosmic,” 19. 78

holy and most holy place in the second half of Songs disclose the unique contributions of Songs to Jewish celestial-temple traditions.58 The relationship of the earthly and heavenly temple in Songs and in the Qumran community can be explained in three ways: (1) projection, (2) angelomorphic, or (3) reflective.59 The community of Qumran understood their conception of the priesthood and the temple as derived from the ‘real’ heavenly temple and celestial angelic priesthood. Regardless, scholars predominantly make the historical and psychological assumption that Songs and indeed the Qumran community in actuality projects its vision from the ‘real,’ material temple/tabernacle on earth into the imaginary heavenly temple. The second position, as proposed by Fletcher-Louis, presumes that the angelic priesthood portrayed in Songs is not angels but in fact, the angelomorphic priesthood from Qumran operating in the complex microcosm of interconnected space and time between heaven and earth. Namely, either the celestial temple does not exist or the angelomorphic Qumran community inhabits the heavenly realm existentially.60 While Fletcher-Louis rightly questions the simplistic parallelism of heaven and earth as the worldview of the Qumran community, his interpretation of Songs as representative of an angelomorphic Qumran community living a realised eschatology on earth has been seriously questioned by Alexander, Joseph Angel, Newsom, and others.61 Since Songs maintains a clear ontological distinction between humans and angels (4Q400 2 6–8) as does 1QHa and 1QS, Fletcher-Louis’ angelomorphic explanation remains suspect.

58 Ra‘anan Boustan contends that Songs’ “multiplication and animation of celestial structures challenges the conventions for describing an ordered and stable celestial sphere” (200), “Angels in the Architecture: Temple Art and the Poetics of Praise in the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice,” in Heavenly Realms and Earthly Realities in Late Antique Religions (ed. Ra‘anan S. Boustan and Annette Yoshiko Reed; Cambridge: CUP, 2004), 197; Alexander, Mystical Texts, 55. 59 This roughly follows Angel’s three categories, Otherworldly, 98–105. 60 Fletcher-Louis does not see an early Jewish belief in a celestial temple, Glory, 391–94, 472– 75. 61 Alexander critiques Fletcher-Louis on five major points questioning his anomalous interpretation of Songs, Mystical, 45–47; Carol A. Newsom contends he these fails to account for “various functions that language may have (e.g., poetic analogy, hyperbolic flattery)” and tendentiously interprets all cases as angelomorphism, “Review of C. H. T. Fletcher Louis, All the Glory of Adam: Liturgical Anthropology in the Dead Sea Scrolls,” DSD 10 (2003): 431–35; Dimant, “Men,” 93–103. 79

A third proposal drawn from Henry Corbin’s Temple and Contemplation allows for the earthly temple to be a reflection of the imaginal heavenly temple.62 Elliot Wolfson applies Corbin’s imaginal temple concept to Songs and the Qumran community. He questions the projection position that “the heavenly mirrors the earthly reality. It is equally plausible. . . to suggest the reverse is the case, the earthly mirroring the heavenly, the veridical reflecting the imaginal.”63 The projection view presumes a one-dimensional universe in which the heavenly temple is imaginary or fictional—a reductionist view of Qumran thought.64 A projection view has at times stemmed from a literary and exegetical approach that can offer only a limited picture of religious history. Often literary and exegetical studies look for how the depiction of the celestial temple in a text has been created through literary/exegetical endeavours rather than considering the liturgical experience and apperception of the community. This can intimate an anachronistic, false distinction between the liturgical and exegetical, which the piety of the maśkîl or priest of Qumran blended.65 History of religions and in particular the temple phenomenology of the imaginal as proposed by Corbin and applied by Wolfson,66 Angel, and Eibert Tigchelaar67 can

62 According to Corbin, imaginal means the image of the temple is “perceived on the level of the in between. . . ‘the meeting place of the two seas’” (303) or “the world situated midway between the world of purely intelligible realities and the world of sense perception” (265), e.g., the opening of the heavens (Ezek 1:1) and the vision of temple (Ezek 40–48). This symbolic image informs the material temple rather than the reverse. He explains, “the case of the Imago Templi at ‘the meeting-place of the two seas’ implies a situation which is above all speculative, in the etymological sense of the word: two mirrors (specula) facing each other and reflecting, one within the other, the Image that they hold. The Image does not derive from empirical sources. It precedes and dominates such sources, and is thus the criterion by which they are verified and their meaning is put to the test” (267). This is beyond psychology and historical criticism. Rather it concerns “sacred history or hierohistory” as in celestial visions of the soul (268). The Imago Templi manifests when one’s inner being is at “the meeting-place of the two seas.” “This is the Imago Templi as it was manifested to the visionary perception of the prophet Ezekiel, and on which the community of Essenes at Qumran was to model its entire theology of the Temple and the new Temple,” Temple, 269. Wolfson ties the esoteric perception of the Imago Templi to the Qumran maśkîl, a pure heart, and the liturgical recitation of Songs, “Seven,” 187–193. Songs creates the opportunity of a “meeting between the two seas”—a theophanic apperception of the imaginal temple and angelic priesthood. 63 Wolfson, “Seven,” 185 n. 25. The social-scientific method favours the projection view. 64 Angel, Otherworldly, 101. 65 Wolfson, “Seven,” 187. 66 Elliot R. Wolfson, “‘Imago Templi’ and the Meeting of the Two Seas: Liturgical Time-Space and the Feminine Imaginary in Zoharic Kabbalah,” RES: Anthropology and Aesthetics 51 (2007): 121–35. 67 E. Tigchelaar, “The Imaginal Context of the Visionary of the Aramaic New Jerusalem,” in Flores Florentino: Dead Sea Scrolls and other early Jewish studies in honour of Florentino García Martínez (ed. A. Hilhorst et al.; JSJSup 122; Leiden: Brill, 2007), 257–70. 80

grant a fresh look at the Qumran community’s conception of the celestial temple in Songs and its relationship to the terrestrial temple. As Angel suggests, “the celestial temple archetype may be located within the framework of the community’s imaginal experience of hierohistory.”68 In this regard, the piety conveyed in Songs is “liturgical synchronism or what may be called reciprocal reciprocity, double mirroring of heaven and earth, Jerusalem Temple and celestial throne.”69 This is why, “we find an emphasis on the embodiment of the temple archetype in the structure of the community as a whole.”70 The community below (Qumran) modelled itself on the symbolic heavenly realm above—an “archetypal relationship.”71 As a reflection of the imaginal heavenly realm and angelic priesthood, the practice of an angelic liturgy, like Songs, infuses the Qumran community in the late Hasmonean and Herodian periods with liturgical life, possibly compensating for not partaking in the ‘defiled’ worship of Jerusalem temple.72 Following the cyclical and repetitive liturgical calendar, the community mirrors the angelic priesthood in the celestial temple and liturgically communes with the angels in a seemingly ongoing and repetitious manner. The maśkîl then “illumined by the holy spirit and thereby conjures theophanic images of the heavenly chariot (merkavah) the ‘holy dwelling’ (maʿon qadoš) described in graphic detail in several of the Sabbath hymns, reaching an ocular crescendo in the last three.”73 This “poetic envisioning renders what is above within and what is within above, a fundamental tenet of theophanic imagination,” while still requiring a pure heart, priestly purity, and the way of perfection on the part of the worshipper.74 In practice of the liturgy, the inspired maśkîl leads them through the heavenly toward the kābôd Yahweh. The community tastes and participates (דבירים/היכל) halls in the ideal temple, building a foundation, not yet fully realised, and at the same time establishing the ideal temple (Ezek 40–48) in their midst (1QS XI.7–9). Liturgical time, then, is not linear, and liturgical synchronism renders the future present, an

68 Angel, Otherworldly, 101. 69 Wolfson, “Seven,” 182–83. 70 Morray-Jones, Mystery, 339. 71 Corbin, Temple, 299. 72 George J. Brooke, “The Ten Temples in the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in Temple and Worship in Biblical Israel (ed. John Day; London: T&T Clark, 2007), 428–29. 73 Wolfson, “Seven,” 191. 74 Wolfson, “Seven,” 213. 81

imaginal spanning of time.75 Correspondingly, an imaginal spanning of space renders the conjoining of human and angelic congregations in the inbetween. The earthly and heavenly temples temporarily conjoin in sacred space. Thus, the Qumran community liturgically realises the eternal, eschatological temple of Ezekiel 40–48, by itself being the new, spiritual temple and inaugurating the new aeon through its spiritual worship and revelatory hermeneutic.76 While the community anticipates “in its own existence the eschatological sanctuary,” it does not deny “belief in a future rebuilding of the temple.”77 Hence, the community does not retain a completely realised eschatology, but through liturgical synchronism participates in the imaginal celestial temple and angelic community—a transcendental eschatology. Through liturgical communion, the barrier between heaven and earth temporarily breaks down, but ontological distinctions between human and angelic remain. The eschaton has been tasted and participated in, but is still to come.78 They are forming a foundation to be an everlasting plantation and a holy of holies. As Angel comments, “The heads of the Qumranites may have been in the heavens, but they were equally aware that their feet were at least for the moment still firmly rooted on the ground.”79 Consequently, the picture appears more complex than a simplified exegetical projection or an angelomorphic humanity with a fully realised eschatology. This intricate relationship begs the question of Paul’s temple metaphor, which will be addressed in chapter 7: how does it relate to the heavenly temple?

3.4 Co-participation with the Angelic Priesthood and Angelic Tongues in Songs While Songs predominantly portrays the angelic priesthood serving in the heavenly temple, evidence discloses the co-participation of the human priesthood with the angelic praise in the liturgy. First, each song begins with instructions to the maśkîl, a

75 Wolfson, “Seven,” 193. 76 Corbin, Temple, 314. 77 Wolfson, “Seven,” 193. 78 Wolfson’s article, “Seven,” offers insights into the imaginal temple and the intersection of mystery and knowledge in Songs and appears to have conceded somewhat to Nitzan’s argument for mysticism or “such experience” as “alluded to in some critical passages” (191 n. 53). His proposal for complete ontological transformation—an angelomorphic human community in Songs, however, is tenuous. 79 Angel, Otherworldly, 105. 82

human Qumran official, whose invocation calls divine beings to praise God. 80 A human initiates angelic praise in heaven—a liturgical invitation.81 Song 2 has the following reflective statements: “how shall we be considered [among] them? And how shall our priesthood (be considered) in their habitations? And our ho[lines— how can it compare with] their [surpassing] holiness? [What] is the offering of our mortal tongue (compared) with the knowledge of the el[im?...] […] our [s]ong, let us exalt the God of knowledge […]” (4Q400 2 6–8).82 First person plural forms “we,” “our priesthood,” “our holiness,” “our mortal tongue,” and “let us exalt” reveal not only the shared-priestly service and co-participation in worship, but also the self- conceived holiness gap between human praise and angelic offerings. The questions: “how shall we be considered [among] them?” and “in their habitations?” may divulge that the human worshippers with great modesty are either about to enter the imaginal celestial temple through this joint liturgy or will in the future.83 In Songs, angels are considered to reveal mysteries of heaven, priestly torah, and knowledge to 84 the human community (e.g., 4Q400 1 I.17; 4Q401 14 II.17). The epithets of those whom the seven chief angelic princes bless in 4Q403 1 I.10–27, Song 6, may refer to a united worshipping community of humans and angels.85 The co-participation in the Sabbath liturgy appears to have the additional benefit of divine/heavenly illumination, blessings for the Qumran worshippers, and the potential of “gazing mystically” upon the merkabah-throne of God.86 Participation by the Qumran community in angelic praise through the Sabbath liturgy not only discloses a broader correspondence to common worship with celestial beings in ancient sources and in the Hebrew Bible, but also reveals the community’s sacramental adaptation.87 The Qumran community sees itself as a community of priests whose shared-priestly service is not through animal sacrifices as in the Jerusalem temple cult but through prayers, praise, and perfect Torah

80 Newsom, Songs, 59. 81 Nitzan, Prayer, 183–89, 195–200. 82 Trans. Newsom, Songs, 111–12. 83 Despite some ambiguity, Songs generally maintains a distinction between humans and angels contra Woflson’s and Fletcher-Louis’ angelomorphism. 84 Newsom, Songs, 30. 85 Newsom, Songs, 28. 86 DeConick argues for an implied vision because of the descriptive detail given of the sanctuaries, Voices, 63; Morray-Jones, Mystery, 311–38. 87 For example, see Pss 29; 89:6–8; 148:1–3. 83

obedience—a sacramental participation. Bloodless sacrifices build upon the prophetic critique of the temple system and sacrifices made with disobedient hearts (e.g., Pss 40:6; 51:6; 1 Sam 15:22; Jer 7:22–23; Isa 1:10–20; Mic 6:6–8). The council of the community reinforces Torah obedience with a correct attitude and heart. The priestly community can offer “adequate praise” because they have knowledge of God’s mysteries and appropriately mirror the worship of the angelic priesthood in heaven.88 The angelic activities in Songs correspond with the central activities of the Qumran community in the following ways: form a special community, covenant with God, special laws, bloodless sacrifices, perfect purity, no sin in their midst, praise God, expiate, possess divine wisdom, and teach.89 The communion with angels in Songs invites the participant to observe the angelic priesthood through the seven sanctuaries and surprisingly the focus is upon the angelic worship rather than the vision of God upon the throne. Songs divides angels into two classes: general angels “eternal holy ones” and angelic priests “holiest of the holy ones.” The angelic priests in Songs are organized into seven groups corresponding to seven sanctuaries of the celestial temple. The angelic hierarchy consists of angelic high priests (4Q405 23 II), deputy princes, seven chief 90 princes who bless (4Q403 1 II.10–27), and seven councils.P356F P Songs possibly refers to in the ordination service, but the text fragments are only (מלכי צדק) a Melchizedek 91 partial (4Q401 11 3; 22 3).P357F P The angels have various appellations including ʾĕlîm and ʾĕlōhîm (gods), angels, holy ones, holiest of holy ones, spirits, priests, ministers, princes, chiefs, and messengers. In the midst of the angelic descriptions, a theme important for our comparison is occurs in total twenty-seven times (לשון) (repeated: tongues of angels. Tongue(s among the fragments of Songs with some occurrences overlapping. In the minutiae of the angelic praise and architectural descriptions, the angels have “tongues of knowledge” (4Q405 23 II.12; 4Q400 2 11) and “tongue of purity” (4Q400 3 I.2). In Song 8, the angels offer a litany of the tongues from seven chief princes to God

88 Newsom, “Priests,” 116. 89 Dimant, “Men,” 100–101. 90 Newsom sees “seven hierarchically ordered priesthoods in the seven sanctuaries, presided over by seven chief princes and the seven deputy princes, one pair for each sanctuary,” which compares with the two high angelic priestly groups “angels of the face/presence” and “the angels of sanctification” (holy ones) who keep the Sabbath with God in heaven and on earth (Jub. 2:2, 18–19; 15:27; and 31:14). The rest are undifferentiated, Songs, 35. 91 Newsom, Songs, 23–37. 84

(4Q403 1 I.2, 3, 4–5, 6, 36; 4Q403 1 II.26, 28–29; 4Q405 11 2–5; 4Q406 3 3; Mas1k

II.12, 14, 16). The “offering of their tongues” (4Q403 1 II.26) concern the “seven mysteries of knowledge in the wondrous mystery of the seven territories of the holine[ss” (line 27) and psalms of lauding (4Q403 1 I.2) and seven wondrous thanksgivings (lines 3, 4). The offering of the tongues grows sevenfold with each chief prince. The tongue refers to a psalm of praise (4Q404 1 1) and a “tongue of blessing” (4Q405 14–15 I.2). The praise-offerings of angelic chiefs are tongues of knowledge blessing God with all of his works (23 II.12). In contrast to these angelic tongues, the human community has only one reference to “tongues of dust” (4Q400 2 7). The description of tongues reveals that the Qumran community and the author of Songs elevate angelic tongues to a higher status than human tongues because of the angels’ most holy priestly service in heaven, knowledge of God, and their vision of God’s throne. This begs the question: did they perceive the angels to have a heavenly language through which they utter mysteries of God? The references to a tongue or tongues refer clearly to the speech of the angel in 26 out of 27 references. The angels utter knowledge and mysteries of the seven heavenly sanctuaries. The text does not divulge the content and the human worshippers do not repeat what the angels say. Whether or not the angels have an esoteric language distinct from humans remains a mystery. The DSS do not speak of a special angelic language.92 This, however, does not preclude the usefulness of these tongue references for this comparative study. תהלת שבח John C. Poirier notes a minority interpretation of the Hebrew phrase

in the litany of Song 8 (4Q403 1 I.1–29) that might mean different languages בלשון 93 spoken by each of the seven chief princes in each sanctuary.P359F P Instead of “Psalm of praise by the tongue of the fou[rth],” it could mean “A psalm of praise will be 94 spoken in the language of the four[th],” as translated by Wise, Abegg, and Cook.P360F P The litany repeats this phrase with each chief prince. Nonetheless, James Davila makes a more plausible contextual argument for united praise based on each chief’s

92 Alexander, Mystical, 113. Hebrew is the language of heaven in Jub. 3:28 and 7:25–27. 93 John C. Poirier, The Tongues of Angels: the Concept of Angelic Languages in Classical Jewish and Christian Texts (WUNT 2/287; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010), 118. 94 Michael Wise, Martin Abegg Jr., and Edward Cook, The Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Translation (London: HarperCollinsPublishers, 1996), 365, 369. 85

praise amplifying the previous chief’s praise by seven times (cf. 2 En. 19:6).95 The answer to whether angels utter different languages or the same language as humans remains unknown.96

3.5 Summary In light of the abstract definition of JM, the Qumran community’s recitation of pre- sectarian Songs provides a via mystica for joint praise and shared priestly service in the celestial temple. The function of Songs discloses the temple phenomenology of Qumran as a reflection of the imaginal heavenly temple—an archetypal relationship. The use of Songs grants liturgical life and sacramental validation to the community’s temple identity. While community members through their theophanic imagination envision the celestial temple and co-participate in the worship of the angelic priesthood, there remains ontological distinction as evident with angelic tongues. The community through their priestly practice temporarily supplants the Jerusalem temple until its restoration, while they simultaneously birth and form the foundation of the eschatological, eternal temple—a liturgical bridging of space and time. The emerging complex picture reveals how central the presence of angels and the mirroring of the angelic priesthood were to the community’s temple identification and priestly practice. The association of angelic presence and angelic tongues with a temple identity, including a holy spirit of the community, provides a foundation for a heuristic comparison with Paul’s temple identification of the Corinthian ekklesia in chapter 7.

95 Davila, Liturgical, 134. 96 Poirier concludes the question remains open, Tongues, 120. 86

Chapter 4

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF SINAI AND MOSES-ΔΟΞΑ TRADITIONS IN THE DSS

4.1 Introduction The Sinai event, mediated by Moses and his reception of the law, holds great significance for the identity of the sectarian community, who not only obey the Torah of Moses, but also interpret the hidden revelation within it. Jubilees, which 1 has important influence on sectarian thought, shows the insertion of the EnochicP363F P perspective concerning primeval history, cosmic secrets, and division of days into 2 Moses’ Sinaitic event.P364F P Thus, while Moses received the Torah, he obtained additional knowledge on heavenly tablets from the angel of the presence: “what is first and what is last and what is to come . . . in the weeks of their jubilees until 3 eternity” (Jub. 1:26; cf. 1Q22).P365F P For the community of Qumran and in light of niglot and hidden laws or (נגלות) Jubilees, Torah then contains revealed laws nistarot that can be discovered through “inspired (נסתרות) prophetic revelation

1 In 1 En. 18:8–9, Enoch sees the throne of God on top of the mountain like the theophany on Mount Sinai, Gruenwald, Apocalyptic, 38. On Enochic Judaism, see David R. Jackson, Enochic Judaism: Three Defining Paradigm Exemplars (LSTS; London: T&T Clark International, 2004), 14, 220–21; Helge S. Kvanvig, “Enochic Judaism—a Judaism without the Torah and the Temple?” in Enoch and the Mosaic Torah: the Evidence of Jubilees (ed. Gabriele Boccaccini and Giovanni Ibba; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 163–77. 2 Fourteen Hebrew manuscripts of Jubilees were found among the Scrolls (1Q17, 1Q18, 2Q19, 2Q20, 3Q5, 4Q176a, 4Q216, 4Q217, 4Q218, 4Q219, 4Q220, 4Q221, 4Q222, 4Q223–4Q224, 4Q482?, 4Q483?, 11Q12). See J.C.VanderKam, Textual and Historical Studies in the Book of Jubilees (HSM 14; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1977), on these manuscripts (18–97) and on the similarities and differences to sectarian texts (258–82); cf. idem, The Book of Jubilees (CSCO 511; Lovanii: E. Peeters, 1989), vi–xi; George J. Brooke, “Moving Mountains: From Sinai to Jerusalem,” in The Significance of Sinai: Traditions about Sinai and Divine Revelation in Judaism and Christianity (ed. George J. Brooke et al.; TBNJCT 12; Leiden: Brill, 2008), 73–75; Helge S. Kvanvig, “Jubilees—Between Enoch and Moses: A Narrative Reading,” JSJ 35 (2004): 243–61; Michael A. Knibb, Jubilees and the Origins of the Qumran Community: An Inaugural Lecture in the Department of Biblical Studies (London: King’s College, 1989). Jubilees influence can be seen in Words of Moses (1Q22). Moses ascending like Enoch and Levi (T. Levi 8:16–17) could be a means of validating scribal-halakic tradition among some Second Temple Jewish groups. 3 Trans. VanderKam, Jubilees, 6. 87

exegesis” and proper priestly interpretation and transmission (1QS V.7–12; CD A 4 III.12–17).P366F P The giving of Torah at Sinai played an important role in the sectarian’s annual covenant renewal ceremony of Shavuʿot when new members were inducted into the Qumran community (Jub. 6:17; Exod 34:22). Entrants not only swore “to revert to the Law of Moses,” but also to keep the particular revelation and new 5 interpretation of it by the sons of Zadok (1QS V.8–9).P367F P During the festival of weeks, the association between Ezekiel’s vision of the divine throne chariot and Moses’ Sinaitic theophany appears in the associated readings, such as Ezek 1, Pseudo-

a–e 6 Ezekiel, Ps 68, BerakhotP ,P and Songs.P368F P Some temple traditions, aforementioned in §3.3, tie Moses’ celestial theophany to the building of the temple after the pattern of the heavenly (Exod 25:40; 1 Chr 28:19). For Qumran, the maśkîl (התבנית) liturgically led the community into the divine throne room through reading Songs 11–12—possibly reliving Moses’ theophany of God’s throne on Sinai (Exod 19). In this regard, the teachers of the community embodied mediatorial and prophetic 7 functions like Moses.P369F P The Qumran priesthood was also to illumine the community with glorious light of God’s knowledge, like Moses shining his face upon the people of Israel (e.g., Sir 45:17; T. Levi 4:3; 18:3–4; 4Q547 4 6; 4Q504). Moses, for these 8 reasons, is exalted in the DSSP370F P and perhaps even deified. Traditions concerning Moses’ Sinaitic experience constitute part of the Jewish mystical traditions found in the DSS. On Sinai, Moses has a theophany of God’s throne, a possible heavenly ascent, receives divine mysteries, and possibly undergoes a supra-human transformation. Moses exemplifies a mediatorial and esoteric elite to which the community’s priesthood aspires. An examination of Moses-Δόξα traditions in 4QDiscourse on the Exodus/Conquest Tradition (4Q374), Ezekiel the Tragedian, a–b Apocryphal Pentateuch B (4Q377), Words of Moses, 4QSelf-Glorification HymnP ,P

4 Marcus Tso, “The Giving of Torah at Sinai and the Ethics of the Qumran Community,” in Significance, 122–23. Daniel Falk writes, “This too is tied up with the idea of Moses as prophet and recipient of all revelation: inherent in his Torah are the ‘hidden things’ that are discernible only by inspired exegesis,” “Moses,” EDSS 1:577. 5 The new covenant of the covenant renewal ceremony was the same as the old covenant except with new interpretation, Meeks, Prophet-King, 171–72. 6 Halperin, “Midrash,” 351–63; idem, Faces, chs. 4 and 8; idem, The Merkabah in Rabbinic Literature (New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1980), 55–59, 132–33; Newsom, “Exegesis,” 29; Davila, Liturgical, 41–47. 7 Meeks, Prophet-King, 171–75. 8 For all the references to Moses in the DSS, see Daniel Falk, “Moses, Texts of,” EDSS 1:577– 81. 88

and Apocryphon of Joshuaa will set the stage for a heuristic comparison with Paul’s use of Moses-Δόξα traditions in the beholding and transformation in 2 Cor 3–4.

4.2 4QDiscourse on the Exodus/Conquest Tradition Two texts, 4Q374 and 4Q377, bring together Second Temple Jewish traditions on

Moses and Sinai. The first text, 4Q374 2 II.2–10, says:

1together and . . . [ 2And nations were lifted up in anger [ 3by their deeds and by the pollution of the acts of .[ 4And [you] will have neither remnant nor survivor; but for their descendents . . . [ 5And he made a planting for [u]s, his chosen, in the land which is the most desirable of all the lands . . . [ 6And] he made him as God to the mighty ones and a cause of reeli[ng] to Pharaoh. . . [ 7[] they melted and their hearts trembled and th[ei]r inward parts dissolved. [But] he had compassion upon..[ 8And when he caused his face to shine upon them for healing, they strengthened [their] hearts again, and knowledge[ 9And though no one had known you, they melted and tre[m]bled. They staggered at the s[ound of 10[ ]to them [ ] for deliverance. . .9

Newsom rightly suggests the text is “a discourse on the exodus/conquest 10 traditions.”P372F P The context points to Sinai—explicitly in 4Q374 2 I.7 along with several hints: ‘for fine gold’ in frag. 2 I.2 (Exod 32:20; Deut 9:21), mediator and clouds in frag. 7 lines 2–3 (Exod 20:18–20), and Yahweh speaking to him in frag. 9 line 2 (Deut 4:10). In the only non-Sinai reference of 4Q374 2 II.6, the author to Pharaoh with Exod ְ נ תַ תִּ ֥ י � ֱ א � הִ ֖ י ם combines Exod 7:1, where Moses is made god The text further adds “to the mighty .( לֵ ֽ א � הִ ֽ י ם) where Moses is like or as god 4:16 ones,” which may be the Israelites. The author, according to Fletcher-Louis, may be 11 linking Moses’ god-like status to the Sinai event.P373F P In line 8, the referent ‘he’ plausibly refers to God who caused Moses’ “face to shine upon them” in the context of their trembling, an echo of Exod 34:30–31. Moses, then, appears as god to the

9 Trans. Carol Newsom, “4Q374: A Discourse on the Exodus/Conquest Tradition,” The Dead Sea Scrolls: Forty Years of Research (ed. Devorah Dimant and Uriel Rappaport; STDJ 10; Leiden: Brill, 1992), 42. 10 Newsom, “4Q374,” 40. 11 Crispin Fletcher-Louis, “4Q374: A Discourse on the Sinai Tradition: The Deification of Moses and Early Christology,” DSD 3 (1996): 239. 89

Israelites and to Pharaoh. Fletcher-Louis proposes that 4Q374 is an “important witness to the belief in divinization of Moses at Sinai.”12 If 4Q374 recounts Moses’ shining face to the Israelites with the resultant healing of the heart, does it really imply a deified Moses as Fletcher-Louis and Jan 13 Willem van HentenP375F P surmise or just an exalted one? Moses does acquire some divine characteristics. In line 7, their hearts melted and they trembled at his presence. Line 9 could be understood as the people not recognising Moses, “you,” after his “angelic” transformation (the shining face symbolising the apotheosis) (cf. L.A.B. 14 15 12:1).P376F P His shining face heals themP377F P and strengthens their hearts (line 8). The shining face of Moses (as opposed to God as the subject; cf. Num 6:24–26) may also represent a divine impartation of knowledge from Moses to the people. These divine characteristics, however, are not explicit enough to warrant an unequivocal case for could mean Moses is only like a אלהים of ל Moses’ deification, especially when the 16 god.P378F P Other Second Temple Jewish literature may provide more clarity on Moses’ exaltation.

4.3 Ezekiel the Tragedian 17 18 Moses-ΔόξαP379F P traditions in the 2TP found in Jubilees, in Philo,P380F P and Ezekiel the Tragedian have expounded upon Moses’ Sinaitic experience, some indicating ascent 19 20 and deification.P381F P Ezekiel the TragedianP382F P offers the earliest post-biblical example of

12 Fletcher-Louis, “4Q374,” 236. 13 Jan Willem van Henten, “Moses as Heavenly Messenger in Assumptio Mosis 10:2 and Qumran Passages,” JJS 54 (2003): 226–27. 14 Newsom only sees two possibilities Israel or God, “4Q374,” 47, but Fletcher-Louis suggests Moses as a possibility, “4Q374,” 239. 15 .4Q374,” 47“ ,(שׁלום) Newsom sees the healing as metaphorical for wholeness 16 Davila does not see this as ascent or apotheosis either, “Heavenly,” 2:462, 472–73. Henten counters that since other early Jewish writings describe Moses’ ascent and apotheosis then one can support Moses’ deification in 4Q374, “Moses,” 227. 17 Linda L. Belleville argues for a Moses-Δόξα tradition as a possible pre-Pauline tradition, which he used in 2 Cor 3, Reflections of Glory: Paul's polemical use of the Moses-Doxa traditions in 2 Corinthians 3.1–18 (JSNTSup 52; Sheffield: SAP, 1991). 18 Philo writes of Moses: “Again, was not the joy of his partnership (κοινωνίας) with the Father and Maker of all magnified also by the honour of being deemed worthy to bear the same title? For he was named god [θεὸς] and king of the whole nation, and entered, we are told, into darkness where God was, that is into the unseen, invisible, incorporeal and archetypal essence of existing things. Thus he beheld what is hidden from the sight of mortal nature, and, in himself and and his life displayed for all to see, he has set before us, like some well-wrought picture, a piece of work beautiful and godlike[θεοειδὲς], a model for those who are willing to copy it,” Mos. 1:158; cf 155–57 (Colson, LCL); cf. Meeks, Prophet-King, 100–29. 19 Joseph P. Schultz, “Angelic Opposition to the Ascension of Moses and the Revelation of the Law,” JQR 61 (1971): 282–307. 90

Moses as a mystic who ascends in a dream vision to the throne of God and is himself enthroned.21 This story echoes Ezek 1 and resembles later merkabah literature.22 It exemplifies the incorporation of Enochic and Ezekiel material into the Sinaitic account and illustrates the literary background potentially available to Qumran and Paul. Wherefore, Moses recounts:

On Sinai’s peak I saw what seemed a throne so great in size it touched the clouds of heaven. Upon it sat a man of noble mien, becrowned, and with a sceptre in one hand while with the other he did beckon me. I made approach and stood before the throne. He handed o’er the sceptre and he bade me mount the throne, and gave to me the crown; then he himself withdrew from off the throne. I gazed upon the whole earth round about; things under it, and high above the skies. Then at my feet a multitude of stars fell down, and I their number reckoned up. They passed by me like armed ranks of men. Then I in terror wakened from the dream. (Ezek. Trag. 68–82)23

The dream implies Moses’ divinisation or angelification.24 He is seated upon the God’s throne (cf. Ezek 1; Dan 7), receives God’s sceptre and crown, and God temporarily withdraws. Moses has divine sight of the cosmos and even counts the stars (as God does in Ps 147:4 (LXX 146:4); cf. Gen 15:5). Moses’ father-in-law

20 Second century B.C.E., R. G. Robertson, “Ezekiel the Tragedian,” OTP 2:806. 21 Peter. W. van der Horst, “Moses’ Throne Vision in Ezekiel the Dramatist,” JJS 34 (1983): 21– 29; idem, “Some Notes on Exagogue of Ezekiel,” Mnemosyne 37 (1984): 264–65; Gruenwald, Apocalyptic, 127–29. 22 Horst, “Moses’,” 27–28; idem, “Notes,” 264. 23 Trans. R. G. Robertson, OTP 2:812. 24 Horst, “Moses’,” 25; Fletcher-Louis, “4Q374,” 242–47. Instead of angelification, Silviu N. Bunta argues for an anthropomorphic identification as the kābôd, “Moses, Adam and the Glory of the Lord in Ezekiel the Tragedian: on the Roots of a Merkabah Text” (Ph.D. diss., Marquette University, 2005). 91

interprets the dream (vv. 83–89) as a future event of Moses sitting in judgment of mortals and seeing “what is, and what was before, and what will be hereafter” (v. 89). This means Moses receives revelation of all time like in Jub. 1:26. What is more, the content resembles Enochic material with ascent, enthronement, and 25 transformation (1 En 55, 61, 62, 69, 70–71; 2 En. 22; 3 En. 9–15),P387F P but with some differences. In Enochic accounts, an ideal human figure, Enoch, becomes a chief angelic mediator, e.g., son of man or Metatron, or a god (lesser YHWH in Enoch’s case). In the Tragedian, only one throne exists, on which Moses sits. Moses’ merkabah dream in Ezekiel the Tragedian demonstrates a concurrent Moses-Δόξα tradition in the 2TP, in which Moses at Sinai envisions the heavenly 26 throne of God, is given authority, and appears deified.P388F P Looking back at 4Q374 in light of this drama, Moses’ deification can be read into the text. The fragmented piece, however, only alludes to it and the pivotal line 6 once again may be read as 27 “comparative agency” rather than deification.P389F P Therefore, Moses may be exalted, 28 but not necessarily deified as some claim he is in the Tragedian.P390F P The purpose, rather, of 4Q374’s narrative may be to demonstrate that access to God only comes through Moses, God’s chief agent.

4.4 Apocryphal Pentateuch B The second text 4Q377 2 4–12 provides another account of an exalted Moses at Sinai:

4 5 P CursedP is the man who will not stand and keep and d[o ] P allP m.[ ].. through the and to follow YHWH, the God of our ,(משיחו) mouth of Moses his anointed one 6 fathers, who m.. [ ] P toP us from Mt. Sin[ai ] vacat And he spoke wi[th] the 7 assembly of Israel face to face as a man speaks P withP his friend and a[s ] r ..š.[ ]r 8 He showed us in a fire burning above [from] heaven vacat [ ] P andP on the earth; he stood on the mountain to make known that there is no god beside him

25 Notwithstanding vast differences between 1, 2, and 3 Enoch. 26 See also Halperin, Merkabah, 128–33; Meeks, Prophet-King; Belleville, Reflections, 20–79. 27 Brooke, “Moving,” 82. 28 H. Jacobson counters the Tragedian is a case against deification and throne-mysticism because Moses’ dream vision, whereas Num 12:6–8 says Moses sees God’s form plainly—not in a vision, “Mysticism and Apocalyptic in Ezekiel the Tragedian,” ICS 6 (1981): 272–93. Contra Horst, “Moses’,” 27–28; idem, “Notes,” 365–67. 92

9 and there is no rock like him [ ] P theP assembly {the congrega[tion}]they answered. Trembling seized them before the glory of God and because of the 10 wondrous sounds, [ ] P andP they stood at a distance. vacat And Moses, the 11 man of God, was with God in the cloud. And the cloud covered P himP because he would speak from (וכמלאכ) when he was sanctified, and like a messenger[ ]. 12 his mouth, for who of fles[h ]is like him, P aP man of faithfulness and yw.[ ].m 29 who were not created {to} from eternity and forever.P391F P

The unknown speaker to the congregation in line 3 recounts events on Mt. Sinai and speaks of the illustrious Moses in the third person. The speaker calls Moses his messiah or “his anointed one” (line 5). “Moses, the man of God,” who was with God in the cloud (line 10), is “like a messenger” (or angel), incomparable to other humans (line 11), and faithful (line 12). Moses is not called ‘anointed’ in the Hebrew Bible, but general prophets are. This may be an allusion to his status as a prophet (CD-A

V.21–VI.1; CD-A II.12; 1QM XI.7; Deut 18). The “in a fire burning above [from] heaven” could be a veiled reference to the throne of God (Ezek 8:2; Dan 7:9) or the pillar of fire in the wilderness. This leaves the question of whether Moses is also in the fire as in the theophanic cloud (Exod 24:18; 33:9, 10; 34:5). While the speaker highlights Moses’ exclusive, exalted status (lines 10–12), the passage extends Moses’ face to face encounter with God in Exod 33:11 to the whole congregation (cf. Deut 5:4). While the mountain and the people are sanctified in Exod 19:10, 23, Moses alone is sanctified (line 11). Moses functions as the mouth of God and is, therefore, comparable with an angel; although, he is not called one explicitly. In other Second Temple Jewish literature, Moses becomes an angel (cf. Sir 45:2–3; As. Mos. 10:2; 11:17). In the Animal Apocalypse, Moses is transformed c 30 from a lamb to a man, indicating angelification (1 En. 89:36=4QEnP P ar frag. 4 10).P392F P

Likewise, the blessings in 1QSb IV.25–27 are for the priests to be “like an angel of . . . in the holy residence for the glory of the God of Hos[ts (כמלאך פנים) the face casting the lot with the angels of the face in the holy residence for the glory of God” and “like a luminary [ . . . ] for the world in knowledge, and to shine on the face of

29 James C. VanderKam and Monica Brady, “377. 4QApocryphal Pentateuch B,” in Wadi Daliyeh II: The Samaria Papyri from Wadi Daliyeh and Qumran Cave 4 (ed. Douglas Marvin Gropp et al.; DJD XXVIII; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2001), 213–14. 30 VanderKam and Brady, DJD XXVIII:215–16; Henten, “Moses,” 216–27. 93

the Many.” Brooke rightly notes that the priest and Moses are not actually transformed into angels, “but likened to one in a functional analogy.”31 Moses, as God’s representative to the people, then acts as God’s special messenger who reflects God to the people and functions like an angelic mediator. The intention may be for the priest at Qumran to be like Moses at Sinai. In light of Moses and Sinai references in the DSS, Brooke concludes, “the worship experience of the priestly community becomes a substitute for a return to Sinai; it is in worship that there can be renewed commitment to the covenant and a sense of the presence of divine glory.”32

4.5 Moses’ Ascent in Words of Moses, 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b, and 4QApocryphon of Joshuaa While 4Q374 and 4Q377 describe Moses’ exaltation and could possibly hint at his deification, although not unequivocally, do any Qumran texts acknowledge Moses’ ascent to heaven akin to the Tragedian? Henten suggests that three texts presuppose 33 Moses’ ascent: 1Q22 IV; 4Q491; and 4Q378 26. In Words of Moses (1Q22), however, the fragmentary nature of column IV presents a speculative connection between line 1, “in the congregation of the gods [and in the council of the ho]ly ones, and in their [..., in favour of the sons of Isra]el and on behalf of the la[nd]” and Moses in line 3, “[And] ta[ke] from [its blood and] pour (it) on the earth [...] ... [and atone]ment [shall be made] for them by it [...And] Moses [spoke saying:] Observe [...].” The lacunae obscure who is/was in the council of the gods and whether this includes Moses. Furthermore, the communion with angels does not necessarily mean heavenly ascent in Qumran; the angels could be in their midst or meeting in the “inbetween” (see §3.3). a b In War Scroll 4Q491 11 I (=4QSelf-Glorification Hymn 4Q491c frag. 1) a human being is enthroned and glorified. Henten, in light of the Assumption of Moses, suggests this is Moses.34 The fragmented hymn, however, does not mention Moses or have enough markers to identify Moses as the subject (see §5.4). In Apocryphon of Joshuaa 4Q378 26 1–8, the likelihood of Moses’ ascent to the heavenly realm has more veracity. The text appears to expound upon Sinai events:

31 Brooke, “Moving,” 87. 32 Brooke, “Moving,” 89. 33 Henten, “Moses,” 227. 34 Henten, “Moses,” 227. 94

1[…] having the knowledge of the Most High and [seeing] the vision [of Shaddai …] 2[…] the man of God an[no]unced us, according […] 3[…] and the assembly of Elyon; they pa[y]ed attention to the voice of Mo[ses …] 4[…] … […] God Most Hig[h …] 5[…] great signs; and in anger he restrained […] 6[… m]an of the [pi]ous ones and until its ages remember […].”35

Here, Moses, the man of god and perhaps the man of the pious ones, sees the vision 36 of ShaddaiP398F P and even announces the people of Israel to the assembly of Elyon (Most likely means angelic beings. The angelic group (עדת) High). This unusual assembly listened to Moses’ voice—indicating Moses’ superhuman authority. In this case, either Moses ascends to heaven or the assembly of Elyon comes down to Mt. Sinai.

4.6 Summary This investigation has shown the great significance that the Sinai event and Moses- c Δόξα traditions hold for the Qumran community. 4Q374, 4Q377, 4Q378, 4QEnP P ar frag. 4 10, and Jubilees grant Moses divine characteristics, a merkabah dream, a vision of Shaddai, and other Enoch-like experiences. An unequivocal case, however, cannot be made for ascent and deification of Moses in the DSS. Overall, Moses appears as an exalted, angelic-like or god-like mediator, with supernatural authority, who acts as a representative and mediatorial model for the Qumran priesthood (1QSb

IV.25–27). The depiction of Moses in these texts and the mystical elements ascribed to him provide a foundation from which a heuristic comparison will be made with Paul’s distinctly Christian utilisation of Moses-Δόξα traditions in 2 Cor 3–4 in chapter 8.

35 The ascription of a vision of God to Moses may reveal Enochic influence. Contra Moses not having visions but seeing God face to face (Num 12:6–8). 36 Carol Newsom also notes a correspondence to Balaam in Num 24:16, “Apocryphon of Joshua,” in Qumran Cave 4 XVII. Parabiblical Texts, Part 3 (ed. George Brooke et al.; DJD XXII; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), 262. 95

Chapter 5

HEAVENLY ASCENT TEXTS IN THE DSS

5.1 Introduction Beyond the liturgical participation of the community with the angelic priesthood in the celestial temple, as expressed in Songs (§§3.3–3.4) and communal union in the Hodayota (§2.5), the DSS contain accounts of heavenly ascent by human intermediaries in 1 Enoch, ALD, and 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna-b and parallels.1 A brief examination of each of these and how they may have been perceived by the Qumran community should provide relevant background of early JM for a heuristic comparison with Paul’s ascent and the context of 2 Cor 12:1–12 in chapter 9.

5.2 Enoch’s Ascent in 1 Enoch (4Q202; 4Q204) Among the cave 4 Aramaic manuscripts, seven preserve portions of 1 Enoch from chapters 1–36; 85–90 and 91–107 and four preserve parts of The Book of the Luminaries (chs. 72–82) and corresponding calendrical content.2 In The Book of 3 Watchers (chs. 1–36) (ca. 250 B.C.E.), the figure of Enoch from Gen 5:18–24 has a heavenly ascent to the throne of God. The treatment of the Enoch MSS here will be limited to this heavenly ascent in 4Q202 and 4Q204. 4Q202 VI.1–4 preserves 1 En. 4 14:4–6 and palaeography dates it to the first half of the second century B.C.E., and

4Q204 VI.1–30 contains 1 En. 13:6–14:16 and is dated to the last third of first

1 Other ascent passages may include: 4Q534 I.6–8; 4Q529 1–15; 4Q286 frag. 1 II.1–12; 11Q13; and 1QApGen II.23. For discussion, see §1.1. 2 George W. E. Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001), 9. For an overview of 1 En., see Michael E. Stone, “Apocalyptic Literature,” in Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period: Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, Qumran Sectarian Writings, Philo, Josephus (ed. Michael E. Stone; CRINT 2/2; Assen: Van Gorcum, 1984), 395–406. 3 On dating, see J. T. Milik, The Books of Enoch: Aramaic fragments of Qumrân Cave 4 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976), 141; Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch, 7; James C. VanderKam, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition (CBQMS 16; Washington, D.C.: CBAA, 1984), 111–13; and VanderKam’s critique of Milik’s early date for chs. 6–19, From Revelation to Canon: Studies in the Hebrew Bible and Second Temple Literature (JSJSup 62; Leiden: Brill, 2000), 354–65. 4 Milik, Enoch, 165. 96

5 century B.C.E. Reconstructions of lacunae among the fragments including the last seven verses of chapter 14 come from later Greek and Ethiopic texts.6 The preservation of non-sectarian 1 Enoch by the Qumran community coincides with its 7 a 8 influence on sectarian texts, particularly Songs, 4Q180–181, and 1QH XII.30–41, and the community’s use of its astronomical and calendric material.9 The author elaborates on Enoch’s disappearance and having “walked with ʾĕlōhîm” or angels in Gen 5:22–24 as a mission to the fallen watchers of Gen 6 (1 En. 12).10 Enoch intercedes for them by the waters of Dan (1 En. 13:6–7; 4Q202

VI.2–3). He falls asleep and has dreams and visions. Enoch receives God’s reprimand to the watchers—their banishment from heaven (14:1–7)—and experiences a heavenly journey (14:8–23; 4Q204 VI.19–30). His ascent begins: “In the vision it was shown to me thus: Look, clouds in the vision were summoning me, and mists were crying out to me; and shooting stars and lightning flashes were hastening me and speeding me along, and winds11 in my vision made me fly up and lifted me upward and brought me to heaven” (1 En. 14:8; 12 4Q204 VI.19–21). Upon entering, he describes buildings of hailstones encircled by tongues of fire, a large house with a roof like stars and lightening, cherubim of fire, a heaven of water, doors blazed with fire, and areas of hot and cold. Enoch precariously travels with great fear through two increasingly greater heavenly chambers. He then peers into the climactic third. He recounts: “I saw a lofty throne; and its appearance was like ice, and its wheels were like the shining sun, and the voice (or sound) of the cherubim, and from beneath the throne issued rivers of

5 Milik, Enoch, 178–79. 6 Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch, 3. 7 Alexander, Mystical, 79. 8 George Nickelsburg shows the use and modification of the theophany of judgment in 1 En. 1–5 by the author of 1QHa, “The Qumranic Transformation of a Cosmological and Eschatological Tradition (1QH 4:29–40),” 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 Luis Vegas Montaner; 2 vols.; STDJ 11; Leiden: Brill, 1992), 2:649–59. 9 Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch, 11, 77. On Qumran texts that “Employ, Recast, or Comment on Enochic Traditions,” see idem, “The Books of Enoch at Qumran: What We Know and What We Need to Think About,” in Antikes Judentum und frühes Christentum: Festschrift für Hartmut Stegemann zum 65. Geburtstag (ed. Bernd Kollmann et al.; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1999), 99–113. For overarching similarities and dissimilarities, see Davidson, Angels, 320–22. 10 VanderKam, Enoch, 114. 11 .possibly are angelic beings who facilitate the ascent (ורוחיא) The winds 12 Trans. of 1 Enoch comes from George W. E. Nickelsburg and James C. VanderKam, 1 Enoch: a New Translation (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2004), 34. 97

flaming fire. And I was unable to see. The Great Glory sat upon it; his apparel was like the appearance of the sun and whiter than much snow” (1 En 14:18–20).13 Enoch falls prostrate and God calls and commissions him to reprimand the watchers (14:24–16:4). He continues his celestial tours with fiery angelic guides in various directions learning cosmological secrets about the earth, the heavens, the great abyss, and even the future (1 En. 18:8–12; 30:1–32:1, 35; 4Q204 VIII.27–30; XII.23–26). Enoch’s ascent and description of the heavenly realm has many similarities and parallels with Ezek 1–2, 40–44, Isa 6, 1 Kgs 22:19–22, and Dan 7, 14 and, in this regard it is like a prophetic call; however, dissimilarities disclose a transition towards “later Jewish Merkabah mysticism.”15 For instance, Enoch actively participates in the vision. He experiences heaven and even travels alone to God’s throne, unlike Ezekiel’s call and spirit-assisted journeys. Following Scholem, Nickelsburg concludes, “it contains many of the major components and essential elements of later Jewish Merkabah mysticism attributable to Ezekiel.”16 Indeed, the description of the three houses of heaven arguably depicts the eternal, celestial temple culminating in the holy of holies with a possible angelic priesthood.17 God is a transcendent, holy king who is enthroned in heaven. The oracle of God delimits a cosmological separation of realms: spirits belong in heaven and humans and evil spirits belong on earth (15:7–10). Enoch as a “righteous man and scribe of truth” (15:1) becomes a special, paradoxical case with angelic and human role-reversal.18 God chooses him to enter heaven, come into his very presence (when some angels cannot 14:21), and commissions him as a mediator to the fallen angels.19

13 Nickelsburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch, 35. 14 For a fuller comparison, see Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch, 254–56. Jonathan R. Trotter argues against a direct literary dependence and instead for various developing oral traditions on throne theophanies, “The Tradition of the Throne Vision in the Second Temple Period. Daniel 7:9–10, 1 Enoch 14:18–23, and the Book of Giants (4Q530),” RevQ 25 (2012): 451–66. 15 Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch, 259. For more on the transition and comparison, see idem, “Enoch, Levi, and Peter: Recipients of Revelation in Upper Galilee,” JBL 100 (1981): 575–87. 16Some mystical characteristics are dangers and fear on the journey, various houses one inside the other, and a vision of the ‘Great glory’ on the throne with many angels. Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch, 260; Scholem, Trends, 40–79. For the connection to JM, see VanderKam, Enoch, 134 esp. n. 85. Gruenwald considers it as a “model-vision of Merkavah mysticism,” Apocalyptic, 36. Enoch’s account, in 1 En. 14, however, differs from later MM in its lack of an angelic guide. 17 Nickelsburg argues for a celestial temple through (1) the abode of the Deity, (2) an “eternal sanctuary” 12:4 and 15:3, and (3) the approach of angels as priests, 1 Enoch, 256. See also Angel, Otherworldly, 27–32. 18 Gooder, Third, 45. 19 Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch, 260; VanderKam, Enoch, 130–31. 98

Since 1 En. 14 is the first clear account of heavenly ascent vision in Judaism, it has exemplary significance for the Qumranites.20 A righteous scribe can possibly enter the celestial temple, see the Great Glory on the divine throne, commune with angelic beings, hear God’s oracles, receive transcendent mysteries (revelation), and holy commissions.21 These Enochic traditions reappear in various Qumran writings and fit within their worldview.22 Crucially, access to the celestial sanctuary and exaltation to angelic-like function are deemed possible. The nature of Enoch’s heavenly ascent could be a dream vision, an out-of-body soul excursion, or a bodily ascent. One can rule out bodily ascent because this does not appear until 2 Enoch 1:3–9; 3:1; 22:8–10 and the text does not describe a bodily transformation or give place for human flesh in heaven. The most likely choice is a dream vision, especially since the ascent happens after he falls asleep.23

5.3 Levi’s Ascent in Aramaic Levi Document (4Q213–214b) The Aramaic Levi Document (ALD) is a compilation of Aramaic manuscripts in first person about the patriarch Levi. ALD consists of the ninth century C.E. Cairo Geniza Testament of Levi (CTLevi ar) Bodleian and Cambridge manuscript fragments and seven fragmentary scrolls (1Q21; 4Q213; 4Q213a; 4Q213b; 4Q214; 4Q214a; 4Q214b) from Qumran Caves 1 and 4. These closely correspond and overlap with additions after 2:3 and 18:2 in the eleventh century C.E. Mt. Athos Greek manuscript (Codex 39) of the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, upon which reconstructions rely. Palaeography of the Qumran fragments range from late Hasmonean (the earliest ca. 150 B.C.E) to early Herodian dating. Due to the fragmentation and the absence of an introduction or conclusion, the provenance and purpose are difficult to discern. ALD is a non-sectarian, pseudepigraphic composition from the early Hellenistic or rd nd 24 Persian period (3 –2 c. B.C.E.)—a precursor to T. Levi. The Qumran community

20 Alexander, Mystical, 76–79; Nickelsburg, “Qumran,” 99–113; Gruenwald, Apocalyptic, 36. 21 Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch, 260–61. 22 Nickeslburg, “Qumran,” 109–111. 23 Alexander, Mystical, 76–77; VanderKam, Enoch, 135. 24 Michael E. Stone (“Aramaic Levi Document and Greek Testament of Levi,” in Emanuel: Studies in Hebrew Bible, Septuagint and Dead Sea Scrolls in Honor of Emanuel Tov (ed. Emanuel Tov et al.; VTSup 94; Leiden: Brill, 2003), 429–37) and Marinus de Jonge (“The Testament of Levi and ‘Aramaic Levi,’” in Jewish Eschatology, Early Christian Christology and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: Collected Essays of Marinus de Jonge (ed. H. J. de Jonge; Leiden: Brill, 1991), 246) rightly argue for ALD as a source for T. Levi. Conversely, H. C. Kee disputes a literary relationship, “Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,” OTP 1:776–77. 99

likely preserved ALD for its legitimisation of priestly practice, solar calendar, two- spirits theology, wisdom, and scribal education.25 Moreover, Jubilees relies upon ALD, and Damascus Document cites it.26 Levi’s ascent also reinforces the synchronisation of liturgical worship at Qumran as originally derived from the angelic priesthood and mirrored by Levi in earthly practice.27 The significance of ALD for this study concerns the pre-Christian mystical themes of visionary ascents to heaven, a via mystica for the ascent, possible priestly investiture in heaven, heavenly mysteries, and descriptions of the third heaven.28 The lack of biblical precedent for Levi’s ascent corroborates the conceivability of a heavenly ascent experience in 2TJ.29

Via Mystica and Levi’s Visions

The focus of Levi’s prayer (cf. T. Levi additions Mt. Athos MS to 2:3), as he gazes heavenward (cf. Ps 123:1), is to be righteous and of the holy spirit rather than of the spirit of injustice (two-spirit theology). Levi expresses his desire to be brought near to God—possibly hinting at his forthcoming ascension. He washes his clothes and body with pure, living water. He stretches out his hands and arms in a special way— toward the angels, and he prays for disclosure of the holy spirit, counsel, wisdom, intelligence, and strength. All of these actions could be seen as a via mystica—

25 Henryk Drawnel, An Aramaic Wisdom text from Qumran: a New Interpretation of the Levi Document (JSJSup 86; Leiden: Brill, 2004); Jonas C. Greenfield, Michael E. Stone, and Esther Eshel, The Aramaic Levi Document: Edition, Translation, Commentary (SVTP 19; Leiden: Brill, 2004); Michael E. Stone, “Levi, Aramaic,” EDSS 1:486–88; Michael E. Stone and Jonas C. Greenfield, “Aramaic Levi Document,” in DJD XXII:1–72; Jonge, “‘Aramaic,’” 244–62; Joseph A. Fitzmyer, “The Aramaic Levi Document,” in The Provo International Conference on the Dead Sea Scrolls: Technological Innovations, New Texts, and Reformulated Issues (ed. Donald W. Parry and Eugene Ulrich; STDJ 30; Leiden: Brill, 1999), 444–64; George W. E. Nickelsburg, Jewish literature between the Bible and the Mishnah: a Historical and Literary Introduction (2d ed.; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005), 159–65. 26 Esther Eshel, “The Aramaic Levi Document, the Genesis Apocryphon, and Jubilees: A Study of Shared Traditions,” in Enoch and the Mosaic Torah: the Evidence of Jubilees (ed. Gabriele Boccaccini and Giovanni Ibba; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 82–89; Ursula Schattner-Rieser, “Levi in the Third Sky: On the ‘Ascent to Heaven’ Legends within Their Near Eastern Context and J. T. Milik’s Unpublished Version of the Aramaic Levi Document,” in The Dead Sea Scrolls in Context: Integrating the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Study of Ancient Texts, Languages, and Cultures (ed. Armin Lange et al.; VTSup 140; Leiden: Brill, 2011), 805; Jonas C. Greenfield, “The Words of Levi Son of Jacob in Damascus Document 4.15–19,” RevQ 13 (1988): 319–22. 27 Alexander, Mystical, 84–85. 28 Alexander, Mystical, 79–85. 29 John J. Collins, “A Throne in the Heavens,” in Death, 47. 100

comparable to mystical praxis revealed in the Hekhalot texts, which prepare Levi for a visionary ascent:30

6[… And then] I 7[washed my clothes and I purified them with pure water, and] I [washed myself completely in living water] and all 8[my paths I made straight. And then] I lifted [my eyes and my face] to heaven 9[And I opened my mouth and began to speak,] and the fingers of my hands and my arms 10[I stretched out in the right way, towards the holy ones, and I prayed and] said: «My Lord, you 11[know all hearts, and all thoughts of minds y]ou alone know. 12[Now, then, my children are with me. Grant me all the] paths of truth; remove far 13[from me, Lord, the spirit of injustice and] evil [thought] and fornication; turn away 14[pride from me. Show me the holy spirit, counsel, wi]sdom, intelligence and [grant me] strength 15[to do your will, to] find your compassion before you, 16[to praise your deeds towards me, and to do] what is beautiful and good before you 17[… and] may no adversary31 rule over me 18[to lead me astray from your path. Have compassion wi]th me, my Lord, and bring me near to be to you. (4Q213a

frag. 1 I.6–18)

In column II, the entreaty asks for a share in God’s words (revelation), service before God for all eternity, and then silent praying and laying down. Levi then sees two visions; the first (T. Levi 2:5–5:2) of which is described as follows: “15Then I saw visions […] 16in the appearance of this vision, I saw [the] heav[en opened, and I saw a mountain] 17underneath me, high, reaching up to heaven […] 18to me the gates of heaven, and an angel [said to me: «Enter Levi» …]” (4Q213a frag. 1 II.15–18). Clearly, an angel tells Levi to enter the gates of heaven. The Qumran fragments include the end of the second vision comparable to T. Levi 8:18–19: “1 [. . . ] . . . I have preferred you above all flesh 2[. . . and those seven departed from me, and] I awoke from my dream. Then 3[I thought: «This vision is like the other one. I am amazed that the whole vision is to come ». And] I [hid] (this vision) too, in my heart and to no-one 4[did I reveal it” (4Q213b 1–4a=Bodleian

30 Ritual techniques include “fasting and dietary restrictions, temporary celibacy, cultic purification, and isolation and sensory deprivation” and prayer (306). For how these relate to Shamanism, see Davila, Descenders. 31 Satan. 101

Cairo Genizah ms Col. a). The vision concerns Levi’s heavenly elevation. He is made “greater than all” (Bodleian Col. a 7–8=4Q213b) and invested by seven men (likely angelic beings) as the specially chosen earthly high priest of the Lord (T. Levi 8:1–10). Afterwards his father, Jacob, tithes to him and clothes him as head of the priesthood, and Levi declares “I became priest to Go]d of eternity” (4Q213b 6b). Levi then receives divine revelation of the laws of the priesthood, judgement, purity, and cultic rites (4Q214; 4Q214b). He also teaches wisdom to his brothers (4Q213; 4Q214a). A reference to Levi’s vision of third heaven implies there are plausibly more than three heavens: “1[And the angel led me into] the thir[d hea]ven, [(which was) higher, and I saw there] the heavenly [ligh]t, [(which was) much brighter than (that)] 2[of the (first) two heav]ens and there was no limit . . . 3[and I asked] what is the [signi]fication of th[ese] heavens?” (1Q21 32–33+37 1–3).32 While the connection to paradise or garden in the extant ALD texts is not clear, a connection exists in T. Levi of which ALD forms a base text.

5.4 The Maśkîl’s Ascent in 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and Parallels. a b In 4QWar Scroll 4Q491 11 I (=4QSelf-Glorification Hymn 4Q491c frag. 1) a human being is enthroned in the celestial temple, which presupposes a heavenly ascent. The exalted individual’s claim is as follows:

5[… et]ernal; a mighty throne in the congregation of the gods above which none of the kings of the East shall sit, and their nobles no[t …] silence (?) 6[…] my glory is in{comparable} and besides me no-one is exalted, nor comes to me, for I reside in […], in the heavens, and there is no 7[…] … I am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy congregation; [my] des[ire] is not according to the flesh, [but] all that is precious to me is in (the) glory (of) 8[…] the holy [dwel]ling. [W]ho has been considered despicable on my account? And who is comparable to me in my glory? Who, like the sailors, will come back and tell?

32 Trans. Schattner-Rieser, “Third,” 807. Schattner-Rieser shortens J. T. Milik’s corrected reading from “Traduction continue du Testament de Lévi [Précédée d’une note de l’editeur Z. J. Kapera],” QC 15 (2007): 5–24. For Milik’s original reading, see “Testament de Lévi (Pl. XVII),” in Qumran Cave 1 (ed. D. Barthélemy et al.; DJD I; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1955), 91–96. Émile Puech independently confirms the corrected reading of “three firmaments” in “Notes sur le Testament de Lévi de la grotte 1 (1Q21),” RevQ 21 (2003): 297–310. 102

9[…] Who bea[rs all] sorrows like me? And who [suffe]rs evil like me? There is no-one. I have been instructed, and there is no teaching comparable 10[to my teaching …] And who will attack me when [I] op[en my mouth]? And who can endure the flow of my lips? And who will confront me and retain comparison with my judgment? 11[… friend of the king, companion of the holy ones … incomparable, f]or among the gods is [my] posi[tion, and] my glory is with the sons of the king. (4Q491c 1 5–11)

4Q491c is the first, shorter recension of two; the second recension appears in 4Q427 a 7 I + 9; 4Q471b 1–3; and 1QH XXVI. Paleographic and orthographic evidence evince the late Hasmonean or early Herodian period.33 Maurice Baillet first assigned 4Q491c to the War Scroll and identified the speaker as the archangel Michael (1QM 34 35 XVII.6). Morton Smith, among others, corrects Baillet’s misidentification of the speaker and makes a strong case for a human who is glorified or deified in the heavens.36 Martin Abegg and others have also reassigned 4Q491c as an independent hymn of Hodayot, like its parallel 4Q427 7.37 For Smith, the text exhibits “speculation on deification by ascent towards or into the heavens, speculation which may have gone along with some practices that produced extraordinary experiences understood as encounters with gods or angels”; moreover, he suggests this could be an early witness to Hekhalot mysticism.38

33 Devorah Dimant, “A Synoptic Comparison of Parallel Sections in 4Q427 7, 4Q491 11 and 4Q471B,” JQR 85 (1994): 157–61; Alexander, Mystical, 85; Eshel, “4Q471B,” 175–203; Eileen Schuller, “A Hymn from a Cave Four Hodayot Manuscript: 4Q427 7 I + II,” JBL 112 (1993): 605–28; idem, “The Cave 4 Hodayot Manuscripts: A Preliminary Description,” JQR 85 (1994): 147–50; John J. Collins and Devorah Dimant, “A Thrice-Told Hymn: A Response to Eileen Schuller,” JQR 85 (1994): 151–55; Martin G. Abegg Jr., “4Q471: A Case of Mistaken Identity?” in Pursuing the Text: Studies in Honor of Ben Zion Wacholder on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday (ed. J. C. Reeves and J. Kampen; Sheffield: SAP, 1994), 65–69. 34 Maurice Baillet, Qumrân Grotte 4, III (4Q482–4Q520) (DJD VII; Oxford Clarendon, 1982), 12–68. 35 Abegg, “4Q491,” 72–73; Dimant, “Synoptic,” 161; J. C. O’Neill suggests Melchizedek (11Q Melchizedek) and a Davidic messiah (4Q246 II), “‘Who is Comparable to Me in my Glory?’ 4Q491 ;219–173 ”,באלים“ ,Fragment 11 (4Q491c) and the New Testament,” NovT 42 (2000): 24–38; Wise Alexander, Mystical, 85–86 36 Smith, “Ascent,” 181–88; idem, “Two Ascended to Heaven-Jesus and the Author of 4Q491,” in Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls (ed. James H. Charlesworth; ABRL; New York: Doubleday, 1992), 290–301. 37 Abegg, “4Q471,” 136–47; idem, “Who Ascended to Heaven? 4Q491, 4Q427, and the Teacher of Righteousness,” in Eschatology, Messianism, and the Dead Sea Scrolls (ed. Craig A. Evans and Peter W. Flint; SDSSRL 1; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 61–73. 38 Smith, “Ascent,” 187–88; Alexander, Davila, and Nitzan concur with a mystical designation. 103

Taking a seat in heaven certainly has mystical implications, but 4Q491 differs from Hekhalot literature. The extant text lacks a via mystica and does not describe a vision of God.39 While one cannot rule out potential religious and mystical experience of the ‘I,’ the ascent traditions concerning Enoch, Levi, and Moses in Second Temple Jewish literature undoubtedly serve as a background to the ascent and enthronement found in 4Q491c.40 In 4Q491c, the highly exalted speaker, whose glory is incomparable, is enthroned among the angels in heavens and “counted among the gods.” The eloquent speaker claims to have incomparable teaching and judgment. This individual is a friend of the king, companion of the angels, “among the gods,” and whose “glory is with the sons of the king” (king means God). Certainly, the speaker has changed status from not being in the heavens or reckoned among the gods, ʾelîm, to being so. This is a clear case of ascent, conceivable enthronement, and transformation of a 41 human.P439F P Enthronement is a reasonable assumption because “a mighty throne in the ,אני ישבתי ,congregation of the gods” is mentioned and the ambiguous phrase 42 translated here “for I reside in” could mean, “I have taken a seat” in the heavens.P440F P Interestingly enough, enthronement does not occur in the extant passages of 4Q427 7 or 4Q471b. The depth of the glorious transformation appears to be at the least angelomorphic, but may even be apotheosis. The speaker avows incomparable glory. He states, “besides me no-one is exalted” (line 6), and he maintains a place with the king’s (God’s) sons. In 4Q471b, the speaker appears to go a step further and boastfully asks, “who is like me among the gods?” While this may show a scribal addition to the second recension, the idea is still present in 4Q491c line 11 and 4Q427 line 10 and suggests 43 the speaker is superior to the angels.P441F P The context of the holy congregation could be the human community. Therefore, the speaker is incomparable in both the angelic 44 and human groups.P442F P

39 Schäfer notes the neglected vision aspect at Qumran in general, Origins, 30. 40 Collins lists texts, which promise heavenly ascent and enthronement after death (4Q521 frag. II.7; 1 En. 108:12; Ascen. Isa. 9:24–26), but 4Q491c seems before death, Apocalypticism, 145–46. 41 Wolfson, “Poetic-Liturgical,” 199. 42 Alexander, Mystical, 86. 43 John J. Collins, The Scepter and the Star: the Messiahs of the Dead Sea Scrolls and other Ancient Literature (ABRL; New York: Doubleday, 1995), 138. O’Neill questions this assessment, “4Q491,” 26–27. 44 O’Neill, “4Q491,” 27. 104

Because of the many similarities to the author of Hodayota, especially the communion with angels, Smith toys with this identification, but then notes major differences: explicit heavenly ascent with present enthronement; counted as one of the ʾĕlîm; no mention of cosmic secrets, role of the spirit, or distinction between one God and the ʾĕlîm.45 Besides the author of Hodayota, Abegg, John J. Collins, and Alexander propose the teacher of righteousness (though unlike the Hodayot teacher) and a teacher or maśkîl of the Qumran community; they rule out personified wisdom, Melchizedek, the archangel Michael, a Davidic messiah figure (Ps 110), and God himself.46 Alternatively, Esther Eshel proposes that the speaker is the “Eschatological High Priest”—formerly known as the teacher of righteousness.47 Evidently, no consensus exists concerning the speaker’s identity. Collins does note that the best parallel is to Moses in the Tragedian.48 In this regard, 4Q491 has three characterisations like Moses: incomparable teaching, glorification, and the exceptional exaltation (“in degree rather than kind”) of the ‘I.’49 These aspects are not enough to identify the speaker as Moses. The content, nonetheless, does betray an awareness of “heavenly exaltation” traditions and the possibility of human ascent, enthronement, and angelomorphic transformation.50 One wonders, phenomenologically, if the community members, through liturgical recitation, identified with the exceptional ‘I’ of this hodayah, perceived with their theophanic imagination access to divine revelation and communion with God in the celestial temple.51

5.5 Summary Of the three ascent accounts examined, 1 Enoch and ALD, as pre-sectarian, demonstrate the significance of heavenly ascent figures in 2TJ. The ascent and divine revelation help legitimise religious teaching and practice of respective traditions

45 Smith, “Ascent,” 187. 46 Abegg, “Who,” 72–73; Collins, Scepter, 146–49; idem, “Throne,” 43–58; Alexander, Mystical, 85–90. 47 Esther Eshel, “The Identification of the ‘Speaker’ of the Self-Glorification Hymn,” in Provo, 619–35. 48 Collins and Dimant, “Thrice-told,” 155; Collins, Scepter, 144–49. 49 Collins, Apocalypticism, 148. 50 Collins, Scepter, 145, 149. The clear differentiation between heaven and earth in the Hebrew Bible appears blurred in the Hellenistic age, even at Qumran (cf. 2 Bar. 50–51). 51 Elgvin, “Temple,” 241. 105

(Enochic and Levitical). In 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and parallels, an extraordinary leader of the community relays an account of enthronement and glorification among and even above angelic companions in the heavenly realm. This shows how the Qumran community understood the potentiality for humans to ascend to heaven and to co-participate with angels in worship and become like the angels. If the hymn was recited corporately and in personal devotion, community members may have perceived through their theophanic imagination a similar experience of conjoining with the angels in heaven or in the “inbetween.” Thus, this investigation has shown the presence of a heavenly ascent motif in the DSS and broader 2TJ, to which Paul’s heavenly ascent in 2 Cor 12 will be compared in chapter 9.

106

Part I

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

In the foregoing investigation, Jewish mystical elements appear in a range of texts from the DSS. In Hodayota, the gift of God’s spirit to the maśkîl and the community members cleanses, enlightens, and transforms them so that the community can unite in a liturgica mystica with the angels before God’s throne. The theme of a common inheritance and union of human and angelic communities appears throughout Hodayota and constitutes the purpose of the community. In 1QS, the Qumran community identifies itself as a temple community of the holy spirit that reflects the imaginal heavenly temple in an archetypal relationship. As such, Songs discloses the mystical praxis of liturgical synchronisation with the angelic priesthood in the heavenly temple. In this way, 1QS and Songs add shared-priestly service with the angelic priesthood before God’s throne to the union espoused in Hodayota. In 4Q374, 4Q377, 4Q378, 4QEnc ar frag. 4 11, and Jubilees, Moses-Δόξα traditions portray Moses as an exalted, angelic-like mediator with supernatural authority, who exemplifies the ideal model for the Qumran priesthood. Despite the mystical elements ascribed to Moses, ascent and deification are not explicit. Accounts of human heavenly ascent, however, appear in 1 Enoch, ALD, and 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and parallels. The Qumran community through preservation and use of 1 Enoch, ALD, and through recitation of the hymns disclose the conceivability of human heavenly ascent and perhaps a liturgical re-enactment of the teacher’s ascent. These findings clearly show the value of approaching the DSS through the lens of early JM. The Qumran community discloses an apperception of God’s transcendent presence given through his spirit personally in Hodayota and corporately in 1QS. The Qumran community also perceives the presence of angels in their midst and seeks to draw close to God through liturgical synchronisation and co- participation with angels. In a sense, the members are participating in an

107

eschatological, transcendent reality while still on earth (transcendental eschatology). They have a liturgical via mystica. All three aspects of an abstract definition of JM are evident. Moreover, elements of an indicative definition of JM (e.g., ascent, enthronement, angelic transformation, divine revelation) built on Ezekiel and Enochic traditions and found in later Hekhalot texts take centre stage in some of the pre/non-sectarian and sectarian texts surveyed. The results of this foray into these Jewish mystical texts can now be applied through heuristic comparison with mystical elements in the Corinthian correspondence to illuminate how Paul’s advocates communal participation in the spirit for the Corinthian ekklesia in Part II.

108

Part II

COMMUNAL PARTICIPATION IN THE SPIRIT IN THE CORINTHIAN CORRESPONDENCE

109

Part II

INTRODUCTION

Previous studies of JM and Paul (see §1.2), have largely focused on Paul’s heavenly ascent in 2 Cor 12 and whether Paul was a practicing Jewish mystic. Attempts to discern Paul’s mystical praxis or those of his opponents, while noble, appear beyond certainty. This study has a rather different focus that brings into consideration the larger pieces of the Corinthian correspondence and the corporate worship practice of the Corinthian community. Part I has shown that early Jewish mystical elements in various texts among the DSS evince the community’s worship praxis and apperception of divine transcendence, which can be characterised as a liturgical and communal mysticism. These findings form the backdrop for a heuristic comparison of converging mystical phenomena and concepts in the Corinthian correspondence. Part II will compare these two and attempt to illuminate how Paul advocates a communal participation in the spirit and Christological transformation of the community by the spirit. Unlike previous comparisons, this approach will seek to highlight differences as well as similarities. The fruit of this endeavour will hopefully bring mutual illumination and demonstrate the value of using early JM as a heuristic tool for study of the DSS and the NT.

110

Chapter 6

COMMUNAL PARTICIPATION IN THE SPIRIT IN 1 COR 2:1–16; 6:11; AND 2 COR 13:13 IN LIGHT OF THE SPIRIT OF GOD IN HODAYOTA

6.1 Introduction Examination of Hodayota in chapter 2 disclosed that the maśkîl and community entrants, at points, speak of their experience of God in terms of the instrumentality of God’s spirit. This spirit functions epistemologically by revealing God’s mysteries, wisdom, and knowledge, and functions in a transformative manner by cleansing, atoning for sin, and enabling obedience. These functions of the spirit prepare the community member for mystical union with the heavenly assembly. The agency of God’s spirit to foster this mystical, liturgical participation will be compared heuristically with analogous portrayals of God’s spirit in the Corinthian correspondence. The focus upon mystical aspects here provides a different approach and focus from previous studies comparing the spirit in Hodayota with the spirit in Paul.1 For example, the function of the spirit to enable union with the heavenly assembly in Hodayota has not been compared with the spirit’s function in the Corinthian correspondence. In contrast to the maśkîl’s personal reception of the spirit, Paul envisions a corporate participation in the spirit. The mode of revelation and the mystery of God when viewed side by side will show the different modes and divergent content of revelation in Hodayota and in Paul, especially 1 Cor 2:6–16. The spirit’s role in cleansing, purification, and atonement in Hodayota offers another aspect of comparison with 1 Cor 6:11, which will highlight how the spirit, for Paul, mediates Christ’s work. The communion/union with angels in Hodayota as a

1 Levison, Filled; Yates, Spirit; Kuhn, “Wisdom,” 240–53. 111

communio mystica provides a dissimilarity to the communal participation in the spirit Paul advocates in his benediction in 2 Cor 13:13.

6.2 A Corporate Epistemology of the Spirit in 1 Cor 2:1–16 a in HodayotP P is made with first Corinthians, a (רוח) When a comparison of spirit similarity is found with ‘the spirit’ (τὸ πνεῦμα) as the means by which Paul, his ministry team, and the ekklesia receive revelation from God. In 1 Cor 2:1–16, “God’s wisdom, secret and hidden” (v. 7) and “the mystery of God” (v. 1) are 2 “revealed to us through the Spirit” (v. 10) and “taught by the Spirit” (v. 13).P451F P Paul defines spirit, here, as the spirit of God: “In this manner also the things of God no one has known except by the Spirit of God” (v. 11). Paul distinguishes God’s spirit from the human spirit. He denotes that they have received the spirit from (ἐκ) God in order to know the gifts of God: “Now we received not the spirit of the world but the spirit who is from God, in order that we may know the things which are freely given by God to us” (v. 12). People who are soulish (ψυχικὸς) do not receive the things of the spirit (τὰ τοῦ πνεύματος) (v. 14), which seem to be the same as the things of God (τὰ τοῦ θεοῦ) (v. 11). Things of the spirit may be gifts of God, knowledge of God, mysteries, or God’s secret and hidden wisdom. The spirit’s epistemological function a is similar to how the HodayotP P hymnist expresses the epistemological function of God’s spirit. The spirit of God for Paul, nonetheless, has a qualitative difference in terms of a agency from that of HodayotP .P In 1 Corinthians, the spirit “searches everything, even the depths of God” (2:10), comprehends (v. 11), reveals (v.10), and teaches (v. 13). In chapters 12 and 14, the spirit of God activates and allots manifestations of the 3 spirit “as he determines” (καθὼς βούλεται) (12:11).P452F P Thus, the spirit has “personal 4 traits.”P453F P Fee explains, “Through the analogy of the human spirit, the Spirit is

2 Translations of NT are from NRSV or the author. 3 The following contend for spirit as the antecedent of βούλεται, Charles Kingsley Barrett, A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians (2d ed.; London: Adam & Charles Black, 1971), 286; Hans Conzelmann, I Corinthians: a Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians (ed. George W. MacRae; trans. James W. Leitch; Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975), 209; William F. Orr and James Arthur Walther, I Corinthians: a New Translation (AB 32; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1976), 280; Fee, Corinthians, 599; Anthony C. Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians: a Commentary on the Greek Text (NICGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 989; David E. Garland, 1 Corinthians (BECNT; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003), 587. 4 Volker Rabens, “The Development of Pauline Pneumatology,” BZ 43 (1999): 177; Levison, Filled, 229. 112

understood as the interior expression of God’s own being; yet the Spirit is clearly 5 distinct from the Father.”P454F P In contrast, the hymnist(s) predominantly refers to the which emphasizes God’s action ,ברוח spirit of God with the compound word 6 through, with, or by his spirit. God is the actor and the spirit is his agent.P455F P This action by God enables the hymnist to know, understand, listen, and heed. The hymnist does not portray the spirit as distinct from God, like Paul, but rather the spirit of God represents God’s activity in an instrumental sense or as his agent—an impersonal 7 8 power.P456F P For the hymnist(s), the spirit is “an extension of God’s being.”P457F P Hence, Paul evinces a significant development in pneumatology beyond the development a 9 exhibited in HodayotP .P P458F a HodayotP P primarily gives personal expression to the reception and revelation of God’s spirit. The hymnist personalises the national promise of spirit-infilling from 10 Ezek 11:19; 36–37 for himself and his experience of sanctification.P459F P At times, the hymnist speaks in the third person of what God does for a chosen individual. In 1 Corinthians, Paul speaks of the spirit and revelation principally in corporate terms— notwithstanding personal, pneumatic expressions shared in the assembly (1 Cor 12:1–11; 14:1–40). Even there, Paul prioritises corporate upbuilding over personal edification. Furthermore, Paul speaks of the revelation from the spirit with a corporate tenor. In 1 Cor 2:10, Paul writes, “these things God has revealed to us (ἡμῖν) through the spirit.” These things concern God’s secret and hidden wisdom— the mystery of God revealed in Christ crucified. He continues with the inclusive, corporate reception of the spirit and concomitant revelation in v. 12: “Now we

5 Fee, Empowering, 98. Cf. Volker Rabens, The Holy Spirit and Ethics in Paul: Transformation and Empowering for Religious-Ethical Life (WUNT 2/283; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010), 177. 6 Maston, “Divine,” 142. 7 F. Nötscher writes, “Dieser Geist erscheint zunächst unpersönlich als Kraft, in jedem geplanten Werk.” [“The spirit emerges initially as an impersonal power in every scheduled work.”] Zur theologischen Terminologie der Qumrantexte (BBB 10; Bonn: Hanstein, 1956), 42. Sekki supports Nötscher and states “God’s Spirit was not regarded by the sectarians as a personal being distinct from god (e.g., as an angel) but as an impersonal power,” Ruaḥ, 71–72. Conversely, James H. Charlesworth states, “At Qumran ‘the Holy Spirit’ is angelic and a separate being (hypostasis); it is not the holy spirit of God but ‘the Holy Spirit’ from God” (21). He does distinguish between “God’s Spirit” and “a separate hypostatic being from God” (60 n.195), “The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Historical Jesus,” in Jesus, 1–74. 8 Mehrdad Fatehi, The Spirit’s Relation to the Risen Lord in Paul: an Examination of its Christological Implications (WUNT 2/128; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000), 72. 9 While Scriptures ascribe personality to the spirit (e.g., Isa 63:7–14; Hag 2:5; Ps 143:10; and Neh 9:20), Paul goes beyond this with a distinction between the spirit and God. 10 Levison, Filled, 205–8. 113

(ἡμεῖς) have received . . . the Spirit that is from God, so that we may understand the gifts bestowed on us by God.” Paul concludes the section by connecting the spirit’s revelation to the mind of Christ, which is also corporate: “we (ἡμεῖς) have the mind of Christ” (v. 16). Paul, like the Qumran community, understands reception of the spirit to come with incorporation into the ekklesia. A person enters and receives the spirit by belief in the gospel of Jesus Christ, which Paul preaches, and a personal turning to the Lord (2 Cor 1:21–22; 3:16–18; 11:4; 15:1–9; cf. Gal 3:2–3, 5, 14). Paul claims his kerygma comes “with a demonstration of the spirit and power” (1 Cor 2:4), which indicates the spirit’s convicting role in gospel reception.11 He characterises this admission as a spirit baptism into the body and a drinking of the one spirit. He writes, “For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and we were all made to drink of one Spirit” (12:13). God has anointed and sealed them by giving the spirit in their hearts as a guarantee (ἀρραβών) of what is to come (2 Cor 1:21–22; 5:5). The divine spirit concretely embodies believers personally and corporately (1 Cor 3:16; 6:12–20) and engrafts entrants “in a process of personal transformation” within the community that will be fulfilled eschatologically (1 Cor 15).12 This is an outworking of baptism into the death and resurrection of Christ (cf. Rom 6). In Paul’s estimation, the common experience of the spirit of God in spirit baptism with gospel reception is a uniting factor for the Corinthians. Paul provides more clarification in Romans 8. He explains that those who have the spirit of God and the spirit of Christ dwelling in them belong to God (v. 9). Furthermore, he speaks of the co-witness of the spirit of God with our spirit that confirms we are children of God (v. 16). Even here, Paul maintains the corporate aspect of this spirit reception, indwelling, leading, and life giving in/among you (ἐν ὑμῖν). The person, who does not have the spirit of Christ, does not belong to him (v.9)—and remains unincorporated and untransformed. Thus, for Paul, Spirit reception comes with gospel reception and is inherently communal and transformative.

11 Thiselton, Corinthians, 215–22. 12 Marguerat writes, “mais comme l’entrée dans un processus de transformation personelle par l’action de l’Esprit divin sur soi,” [‘but as grafted in a process of personal transformation by the action of the divine spirit in yourself’], “le mystique,” 490. 114

Even though both communities speak of spirit reception upon entrance to the community, membership requirements differ significantly. The Qumran sectarian must believe the teaching of the maśkîl; the Corinthians must believe Paul’s gospel concerning the crucified Christ. The sectarians required additional rigorous adherence to the community rules, keeping of the law, priestly purity regulations, as a well as having intelligence (knowledge of God) before entrance (1QH VI.28–29;

XVIII.29; 1QS V.7–11, 20–22). In contrast, Paul expressed freedom for gentiles from having to become Jewish (e.g., circumcision) through the new covenant of the spirit that brings life rather than death (2 Cor 3; Gal 3:2–5; 6:15).13 In this Christian community, communal participation in the spirit builds up the community members to walk in holiness and love as bearers of Christ (1 Cor 3:16–17; 6:19; 13; 2 Cor 6:16–7:1; 13:13). Both authors appear to build their understanding of spirit reception and new creation on the spirit’s role in sanctification and revelation from Ezek 11:19; 36:26– 27; and 37:14, which can be attributed to a common Jewish eschatological background in 2TJ.14 For Paul, Christ has inaugurated the new age and new covenant—an eschatological fulfilment of Ezekiel’s promise of the spirit (2 Cor 5:5). The Qumran community understands only a partial fulfilment of Ezekiel and still awaits the full eschatological outpouring of the spirit. Both advocate an expansion of the divine encounter of the spirit to the whole community. Paul more explicitly democratises the experiential revelation15 of and mystical communion with the spirit (13:13).16

6.3 Mystery and Mysteries of God in 1 Cor In comparison to mystery and mysteries of God in Hodayota, what does mystery of God mean in 1 Corinthians 2 and who has received this mystery? In 1 Corinthians,

13 For the differences between Paul’s communities and the Qumran community, see Levison, Filled, 269–72. Paul advocates the law of Christ rather than laws specific to ethnicity, gender, and citizenship. 14 Levison, Filled, 188, 307; idem, The Spirit in First-century Judaism (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 201. 15 Marguerat clarifies that knowledge of God is experiential, not just intellectual or speculative, “le mystique,” 479. 16 Marguerat, “le mystique,” 489. 115

mystery (μυστήριον) occurs six times (1 Cor 2:1,17 7; 4:1; 13:2; 14:2; 15:51). Paul claims to have proclaimed the mystery of God to the Corinthians (2:1), and this kerygma is Christ Jesus and him crucified (1:23; 2:2). This mystery describes the secret wisdom of God, which has been hidden from the rulers of this age for the Corinthians’ and Paul’s glory; these rulers would not have crucified Jesus, the Lord of glory had they understood this mysterious wisdom (2:7–8). Paul cites a conglomeration of Isaianic texts (64:3; 52:15) to substantiate that the mysterious wisdom concerns God’s plan for those who love him (1 Cor 2:9). The mystery includes the fact that Christ Jesus became the wisdom of God and righteousness, sanctification, and redemption through the cross (1:30).18 Paul sees himself and his fellow workers, Apollos and Cephas, as servants of Christ and stewards of God’s mysteries (4:1). In 1 Cor 13:2, Paul does not define the term mysteries but pairs it with knowledge and acknowledges that human understanding is partial and imperfect. Love is more important than understanding all mysteries. In 1 Cor 14:2, Paul describes speaking in a tongue as speaking mysteries in the spirit to God. The text does not explain what these mysteries are only that they edify the speaker and build up the congregation when interpreted. In 15:51, Paul defines eschatological bodily resurrection, mortality putting on immortality, as a mystery. Thus, the mystery of God for Paul is predominantly a Christological mystery that concerns God’s wisdom.19 How does this compare with mystery of God in Hodayota? Both see the mystery of God as concerning the hidden purpose of God with his people revealed by God’s spirit. They radically differ, however, in content, despite both having to do with cosmic and communal eschatology. Both interpret the mystery of God as having been hidden and secret until an appointed time. This may derive from a similar Jewish apocalyptic and Danielic background as both have a number of “apocalyptic topoi.”20 For the hymnist the time of revealing is now but also appears to be ongoing

17 NA27 prefers μυστήριον in î46vid * A C pc ar r syp bo etc., over μαρτύριον in 2 B D F G Ψ 33. 1739. etc. 18 Gladd defines hidden wisdom as ℵthe cross, Mysterion, 119. ℵ 19 Marguerat, “le mystique,” 329. 20 According to Gladd the apocalyptic topoi are “hidden wisdom,” “mystery,” “this age,” “rulers of this age,” “Lord of glory,” “Spirit,” “revelation,” and “depths of God,” Mysterion, 127. Gladd fails to mention JM and mystical elements, which grew out of Jewish apocalypticism. See Markus N. A. Bockmuehl, Revelation and Mystery (WUNT 2/36; Tübingen: Mohr, 1990) and Rowland, Mystery, 210; idem, Heaven, 304. 116

in the Qumran community. For Paul, the time for revealing the mystery of God came in Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection—a onetime event. Christ Jesus became the wisdom of God. Paul’s identification of Jesus—the crucified messiah—as the revealed mystery of God is poles apart from Qumran. At Qumran, the messiah has not yet come, and as Pierre Benoit notes the sharing of the spirit in Hodayota “is not the effect of any new act of God in the history of salvation.”21 For Paul, Jesus, the messiah, has created a new context.22 The outpouring of the spirit is an eschatological fulfilment of the messianic promise. The mystery of God in Corinth made a way for gentiles through Christ to be sanctified and join the holy ekklesia. Qumran would probably have never conceived of such an inclusion into its strict, law-abiding community—only judgment awaits the unrighteous outside the community. Both Paul and the maśkîl claim to have received esoteric revelation of God’s mysteries by the spirit of God, and both claim a mediatorial role as teachers of these mysteries to their respective communities.23 Paul, however, adds Apollos, Cephas, and others to the stewardship list and even notes that the mystery of God has been made manifest to the holy ones (saints). Thus, Paul moves from esotericism to open proclamation of these secrets to the whole community through the mediation of the spirit (1 Cor 2:9–10) and a demonstration of the spirit and power (2:4).24 The community through the spirit receives the revelation of God’s mystery in Christ—the gospel. In 1 Cor 2:6, the mystery of God’s wisdom, not human or of this age, is specifically spoken to the spiritually mature (τελείοις)25 and revealed by the spirit to believers (v. 10). Paul distinguishes between babes in Christ and those who are ready for solid food concerning this revelation (3:1–3). Even comprehension (ἔγνωκεν) of

21 Pierre Benoit, “Qumran and the New Testament,” in Paul and Qumran: Studies in New Testament Exegesis (ed. Jerome Murphy-O’Connor; London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1968), 27. 22 Benoit, “Qumran,” 27. 23 Gary Selby argues that Paul presents himself as an “apocalyptic visionary” or seer, “Paul, the Seer: The Rhetorical Persona in 1 Corinthians 2.1–16,” in Rhetorical Analysis of Scripture: Essays from the 1995 London Conference (ed. Stanley E. Porter and Thomas H. Olbricht; Sheffield: SAP, 1997), 361–73. 24 Russell P. Spittler, “The Limits of Ecstasy: An Exegesis of 2 Corinthians 12:1–10,” in Current Issues in Biblical and Patristic Interpretation: Studies in Honor of Merrill C. Tenney. Presented by his Former Students (ed. Gerald F. Hawthorne; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 264 n. 33. 25 Roy E. Ciampa and Brian S. Rosner explain, “The message of wisdom is the full scope of the teaching on salvation and the Christian life, which only ‘the mature’ digest and appropriate,” The First Letter to the Corinthians (PNTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), 123. 117

the things of God only comes by the spirit of God (v. 11). The wisdom even when proclaimed remains hidden to the “rulers of this age” (v. 8). Participation in the direct revelatory function of the spirit continues in corporate gatherings through speaking ἐν πνεύματι utterances of wisdom, knowledge, prophecy, and in tongues with interpretation (1 Cor 12:1–11). Conversely, while the Qumran community understands itself as the receptor of the mysteries, they do not espouse charismatic manifestations spoken by the spirit as the means of ongoing revelation. Instead, revelation comes by the spirit primarily through endowed scribal wisdom—of the pesherist and maśkîl—a revelatory hermeneutic.26

6.4 Holy Spirit as Cleansing Agent in 1 Cor 6:11 The spirit of God as the means of washing in Paul provides a close similarity to God purifying the hymnist by his holy spirit. Paul describes the spirit as holy in 1 Cor 6:19; 12:3; 2 Cor 6:6; 13:13 and elsewhere.27 In 6:11, Paul speaks of the spirit of God as the means to washing, sanctifying, and justifying believers—making them holy. The spirit effects Christ’s work in believers. Paul writes, “you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in [by]28 the Spirit (ἐν τῷ πνεύματι) of our God.” Unlike Hodayota, however, the spirit for Paul not only cleanses (washes), but also makes holy (sanctifies) and justifies. Paul reiterates the spirit’s role in sanctifying (1 Thess 4:7–8; Rom 15:16) and justifying (2 Cor 3:8–9).29 Why does Paul add the agency of the spirit to the work of Christ? The spirit for Paul not only effects or appropriates Christ’s work in believers at conversion, but also facilitates their ongoing spiritual transformation and represents God’s presence at work in them personally and corporately. In 3:16, the Corinthians are portrayed as God’s temple in which the spirit dwells and that temple is holy, and 6:19 their body is a temple of the holy spirit. In these two temple-related passages, the temple or body of the Corinthians is to be holy because the holy spirit indwells it. This implies again that the holy spirit makes them holy.

26 Levison suggests that revelations for the Qumran community come through scribal wisdom as a spirit, charismatic endowment following Sir 39:6–7, Filled, 125. 27 Holy spirit occurs in Rom 1:4 ‘spirit of holiness’; 5:5; 9:1; 14:17; 15:13, 16; 1 Thess 1:5, 6; 4:8; Eph 1:13; 3:5; 4:30; 2 Tim 1:14; and Tit 3:5. 28 Context implies an instrumental translation rather than a locative. See Fee, Empowering, 129. 29 Fee, Empowering, 130. 118

a Another difference between the Corinthian correspondence and HodayotP P is the a spreading forth of God’s holy spirit in order to atone for guilt (1QHP P XXIII.33). In a in HodayotP P with Paul, a semantic problem (כפר) comparing atonement or atone which does not occur in ,(כפר) arises. The LXX generally uses ἐξιλάσκομαι in place of the NT. The closest word ἱλαστήριον (mercy seat, expiation, or propitiation) appears 30 once in Paul’s epistles.P479F P Paul writes: “whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement (ἱλαστήριον) by his blood, effective through faith. He did this to show his righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed” (Rom 3:25). God brings about atonement of sins, according to Paul, through the sacrifice of Christ and the shedding of his blood on the cross. In the Corinthian letters, atonement is implied in certain contexts. For example, 1 Cor 15:3–4 says, “Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures and that he was buried and that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.” Certainly, 31 this is an expression of atonement—the death of Christ is for people’s sins.P480F P In 2 Cor 5:21, Paul depicts a sinless Christ becoming sin on our behalf, plausibly for the 32 Day of Atonement.P481F P Paul, however, does not explicitly denote a role for the spirit of a God in atonement, like in HodayotP P and in 1QS (see §§2.4, 3.2). Nonetheless, the ongoing appropriation of God’s salvation in Christ comes through God’s spirit.

6.5 Communal Kοινωνία in the Spirit in 2 Cor 13:13 a (יחד) While poetic passages in HodayotP P advocate a liturgical communio mystica with angels, Paul advances a communio mystica (κοινωνία), not with angels, but with 33 a the holy spirit in 2 Cor 13:13.P482F P HodayotP P does not speak of the relationship with God’s spirit this way. Despite the difference in the objects, both seek to engender the religious experience of communion with a perceived transcendent reality in their respective communities. These describe attempts to close the human-divine gap and commune with God. Union/communion with angels before God’s throne is the closest proximity for the covenanters. For Paul, participation in God’s spirit implies an indirect communion with God through the indwelling of the spirit and communal

30 For a discussion on ἱλαστήριον, see Dunn, Theology, 213ff. Cf. Heb 9:5; 1 John 2:2; 4:10. 31 Fee, Corinthians, 724. 32 Dunn makes a case for Christ to be both the scapegoat and the atoning sacrifice, Theology, 216, 221. 33 and κοινωνία are not terminological equivalents, they share the meaning of יחד Although communion. 119

spiritual practice. Heuristic comparison of these two religious expressions, which can be characterised as elements of JM, will shed light upon the communal and relational aspects of Paul’s concept of participation in the spirit and the corporate effects of this participation in the Corinthian ekklesia.

6.5.1 Context and Translation of ἡ κοινωνία τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος in 2 Cor 13:13 What did Paul mean contextually by this phrase? Paul is speaking to everyone in the church of Corinth and the all saints throughout Achaia—μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν (2 Cor 1:2). Did he intend the benediction to be a blessing (a prayer or wish for them) or a declaration of what will (should) be? Since the phrase does not contain a verb, some form of εἰμί may be understood. If the implied verb is εἴη (optative) or ἔστω (imperative), then this supports a blessing. Paul uses the optative in his blessings in Rom 15:5; 15:13; 1 Thess 3:11, 12–13; and 5:23. Hellenistic farewells were often written with ἔρρωσο in the imperative mood. Since Paul writes his blessings in the optative, then Paul is likely writing a blessing in the optative or imperative, rather than expressing a declaration with the indicative ἐστίν or ἔσται.34 A blessing or a prayer fits the context, and the added ἡ κοινωνία τοῦ ἁγίου35 πνεύματος is “the Pauline amplification of the ordinary conclusion of letters,”36 which is specific to the contingencies of 2 Corinthians.37 Before examining how this κοινωνία relates to Paul’s address, one needs to consider which genitive—subjective, objective, or a combination of both—most appropriately translates τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος. This interpretative crux has implications for how one understands the spirit in Paul and the possibility or quality of ‘participation in/of/with the holy spirit.’ What support does each case have? A subjective genitive would mean the quality of κοινωνία brought about or made possible by the holy spirit.38 Murray Harris notes three arguments for a subjective genitive reading: 1) the first two genitives in 2 Cor 13:13 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ are both subjective, therefore, if one extends the

34 Margaret E. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (2 vols.; ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000), 2:916. 35 The omission by î46 does not significantly change the meaning. 36 Alfred Plummer explains that Ἡ χάρις is everywhere followed by μέτα, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians (ICC; Edigburgh: T&T Clark, 1915; repr. 1975), 383. 37 Fee, Empowering, 362–65. 38 “κοινωνία,” BAGD, 439. 120

parallelism τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος should also be subjective; 2) a subjective genitive fits the context for unity among the believers in Corinth (v. 11; cf. Eph 5:15–21); and 3) the “concept of believers’ personal communion with the Spirit is an unparalleled notion.”39 An objective genitive, preferred by most commentators,40 would have the spirit as the object in which one partakes, participates, or shares.41 The four major arguments for objective, according to Harris, are: 1) κοινωνία when it is followed by a genitive is often tantamount to μετοχή or μετάληψις and “means ‘participation (in),’ ‘a partaking of,’ and the genitive specifies the object in which one partakes” (cf. 1 Cor 1:9; 10:16; 2 Cor 8:4; Phil 3:10);42 2) 1 Cor 12:13 provides a “conceptual parallel to this phrase” with an “inward participation in the spirit”; 3) a verbal parallel in Phil 2:1 “in all probability means ‘if any participation in the spirit’”;43 and 4) an objective genitive fits the context, in which mutual participation in the spirit would likely promote unity among believers.44 The majority prefer to translate the objective genitive as “participation in the holy spirit” instead of “fellowship with.”45

39 Murray J. Harris, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians: a Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 939. For subjective genitive preference, see Ralph P. Martin, 2 Corinthians (WBC 40; Waco, Tex.: Word Books, 1986), 91, 505; Linda L. Belleville, 2 Corinthians (IVPNTC 8; Downers Grove; IVP, 1996), 338; Paul Barnett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 618 n. 14; Plummer, Second, 383–84; Rudolf Karl Bultmann, The Second Letter to the Corinthians (trans. Roy A. Harrisville; Minneapolis: APH, 1985), 251; Frederick Fyvie Bruce, 1 and 2 Corinthians (NCB; London: Oliphants, 1971; repr. 1978), 255. 40 For an objective genitive interpretation, see H. Seesemann, Der Begriff ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ im Neuen Testament (BZNW 14; Geissen: Töpelmann, 1933), 70–73; J. Y. Campbell, “ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ and Its Cognates in the New Testament,” JBL 51 (1932): 378–79; Hans Windisch, Der zweite Korintherbrief (KEK 6; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1924), 428–29; F. Hauck, “κοινός, κοινωνός, κοινωνέω, κοινωνία, συγκοινςνός, συγκοινωνέω, κοινωνικός, κοινόω,” TDNT 3:807; A. R. George, Communion with God in the New Testament (London: Epworth, 1953), 178; C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1973), 344; Victor Furnish, II Corinthians (AB 32A; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1984), 584; Thrall, Corinthians, 2:914–20. 41 George explains, “[κοινων-] words refer primarily. . . to participation in something rather than to association with others: and there is often a genitive to indicate that in which one participates or shares,” Communion, 133. 42 See also Josef Hainz, Koinonia. ‘Kirch’ als Gemeinschaft bei Paulus (BU 16; Regensburg: Pustet, 1982), 47–51. 43 The emphasis in Phil 2:1 with an objective genitive is upon partaking in the spirit that results in having the same thinking, love, mind, and purpose as a community (v. 2, 27). 44 Harris, Corinthians, 940. 45 Barrett, Second, 341–44; Fee, Empowering, 363; Furnish, Corinthians, 581–84; Campbell, “ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ,” 379–80; George, Communion, 180–81; Hauck, TDNT 3:807. Windisch explains, “Geminschaft mit dem heiligen Geist, also Anteil an ihm und an feinen Gaben” [‘Communion with the Holy Spirit, also share in it and fine gifts’], Korintherbrief, 428. H. Seesemann writes, “innige Anteilnahme am heilegen Geist” [‘intimate participation in the holy spirit’], KOINONIA, 71. 121

Paul, on other occasions, advocates for κοινωνία as mysterious participation in a particular person, Jesus Christ; this Christian union is “not the sharing of a thing, but a relationship with the divine person” (1 Cor 1:9; 10:16; Rom 6:1).46 Since the κοινωνία τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος in 2 Cor 13:13 indirectly implies participation in Christ—a “most profound union of life with the Father mediated by the Holy Spirit,”47 Paul means participation in the holy spirit as a relationship with a divine agent.48 Since both subjective and objective genitive explanations fit 2 Cor 13:13 and even complement each other, some49 argue for “a plenary (or full) genitive”50 with a combination of meanings. Among these, usually an objective genitive reading guides the meaning. Rather than arguing for two grammatical functions,51 Rabens explains the combination of two meanings as “a relationship of cause and effect.”52 This would “implicitly” give κοινωνία in 2 Cor 13:13 “both a receptive and a dynamic meaning.”53 Thus, Paul’s desire for the Corinthians to continue “in their common participation in the Spirit’s life, power, and gifts,” if practised, would lead to “an ever-deepening fellowship among believers.”54 This third option with an objective genitive guiding the interpretation is preferable.

6.5.2 Communio Mystica In JM, the mystic yearns for a closer relationship and experience of the divine presence through communion (communio mystica) and sometimes union (unio mystica) (see §1.1).55 For the Hodayota hymnist(s), the poetic language describing the three-fold union of joint praise, common lot, and joint eschatological war with

46 Michael McDermott, “The Biblical Doctrine of ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ,” BZ 19 (1975): 70. 47 McDermott, “ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ,” 71. 48 George Panikulam, Koinonia in the New Testament: a Dynamic Expression of Christian Life (AnBib 85; Rome: BIP, 1979), 66; Rabens, Spirit, 241; Dunn, Jesus, 261; idem, Theology, 561–62. 49 Dunn, Jesus, 261; Harris, Corinthians, 941; Martin says since the options are not “mutually exclusive,” “possibly both ideas are to be understood,” 2 Corinthians, 491 n. i; Panikulam, Koinonia, 70; Hainz writes “Gemeinschaft durch (gemeinsame) Teilhabe” [‘fellowship through (shared) participation’ (54), Koinonia, 54, 61; McDermott, “ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ,” 223–224; Eduard Schweizer, “πνεῦμα, πνευματικός,” TDNT 6:434. 50 Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament; With Scripture, Subject and Greek Word Indexes (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 120. 51 Thrall objects to dual grammatical functions, Corinthians, 2:919. 52 Rabens, Spirit, 241. 53 McDermott, “ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ,” 223–24. 54 Harris, Corinthians, 941. 55 Alexander, “Genealogy,” 219. 122

the host of heaven engenders in the Qumran community’s theophanic imagination a sense of transcendence (see §3.3). This perceived liturgical union, while relational, does not denote indwelling, absorption, or fusion with the angels or with God. The communion, rather, is one of joint worship, united as one community before God’s throne—a choral union, where the human worshippers become like the angels in knowledge and shared inheritance. Only in 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and parallels does one become an angel (see §5.4). For Paul, ἡ κοινωνία τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος speaks of a communion and potentially a union with the divine presence. In the triadic benediction of 2 Cor 13:13, Paul grants the holy spirit divine agency along with Jesus and God.56 Paul, at other points, hints at the divineness of πνεῦμα but again not as explicitly as Nicene Christianity.57 For Paul, the holy spirit is more than an angel; it is the spirit of God (θεοῦ)58 and of Christ (Χριστοῦ)59 and has divine status. In Paul’s free and flexible use of God, Christ, and πνεῦμα, roles often overlap (e.g., both Christ and πνεῦμα indwell believers).60 Paul does maintain a distinction between God and Christ (1 Cor 1:3; 8:6; 15:24; 2 Cor 1:2, 3; 11:31). While he speaks of the spirit in tandem with Jesus and God, he does not explicitly say the spirit is God, just Lord (3:17–18) and from God.61 Likewise, he does not deny the spirit’s divinity. While the κοιν- word group in Hellenistic Greek may refer to an ‘association’ and semantically may describe a union of a group of people, most scholars rightly prefer communion, fellowship, or participation for Paul’s usage. Paul is not speaking of a uniting together with the holy spirit, but an abstract and spiritual meaning— “participation in the spirit.” Following the primary meaning of an objective genitive, Paul advocates a communion with or participation in the divine spirit as an

56 David E. Garland, 2 Corinthians (NAC 29; Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1999), 196–202; James D. G. Dunn, “2 Corinthians III.17—‘The Lord is the Spirit,’” JTS 21 (1970): 309–20; Furnish, Corinthians, 588; Thrall, Second, 1:274; Scott J. Hafemann, Paul, Moses, and the History of Israel: the Letter/Spirit Contrast and the Argument from Scripture in 2 Corinthians 3 (WUNT 81; Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1995), 399; Belleville, Reflections, 257–62. Contra David Greenwood, “The Lord Is the Spirit: Some Considerations of 2 Cor 3:17,” CBQ 34 (1972): 467–72. 57 The question if Paul meant the triune God of Nicene Christianity may lead to an anachronistic reading of 2 Cor 13:13, since Paul does not employ “Father” or “Son” here. Fee, however, calls the prayer “unmistakably Trinitarian,” Empowering, 365. Thrall, following Barrett (Second, 345) suggests a proto-trinitarian reading instead, Corinthians, 2:915–21. 58 Rom 8:9, 11, 14; 15:19; 1 Cor 2:11; 3:16; 6:11; 7:40; 12:3; 2 Cor 3:3; and Phil 3:3. 59 Rom 8:9–11; Phil 1:9; and Gal 4:6. 60 Furnish, Corinthians, 587. 61 1 Cor 2:12; 6:19; 2 Cor 5:5; Gal 3:5; and 1 Thess 4:8. 123

expression of a believer’s experience of God’s ongoing presence, transformative power, and manifestation of love and grace in his or her life in the community of faith. Hauck clarifies that Paul nowhere mentions an unmediated κοινωνία θεοῦ; Christ mediates through the spirit.62 Thus, no absorption, fusion, or union with God explicitly appears in Paul.63 Nonetheless, in 2 Cor 13:13, Paul describes participation in or communion with the holy spirit as a transcendent divine being. Thus, κοινωνία implies a relational and intimate participation in the divine spirit.

6.5.3 Corporate Experience and Corporate Effects Despite the analogous experience of transcendence, the phenomenological locus diverges between Hodayota and Paul. For Hodayota hymnist(s), communion with the angels, on the one hand, appears to be wholly transcendent at points, “in the eternal host,” at least with those angels of the face (XIV.15–17) and those passages which describe walking in angelic heights or standing in the holy place (XI.21–24; XIX.13– 17). On the other hand, the union with angels appears to be on earth among the worshipping yaḥad of Qumran in Community Hymns I (VII.17–18). The variance in the locality of the perceived mystical experience may mean spatial dimensions are either not a concern of the community,64 or space and time are bridged in the theophanic imagination of the worshipper through liturgical synchronism between heaven and earth (see §3.3).65 Additionally, the hymnist(s) describes the union either with the personal “I” or in third person (VIII.15–17; XI.20–37; XIX.13–17). Only VII.12–20 has a clear communal expression with first person plural—“we” are gathered in community with those who know (angels). First person plural is “anomalous in the scroll.”66 The

62 Hauck, TDNT 3:804 n. 51. 63 Marguerat argues there is no “mystique de Dieu” in Paul but “mystique du Christ,” which is a “communio mystica” not fusion, “le mystique,” 489. See Wikenhauser, Pauline, 183–84 and George, Communion, passim, esp. 236. Reitzenstein portrays Greek mystery religions and Paul (inaccurately) as having a union without distinction of a god and a person, Hellenistic, 34, 370, 455, 458. Deissmann, who like Reitzenstein characterizes unio (union) as “transformation into the deity” with a “loss of the human personality in God,” sees Paul as a “communio-mystic” rather than a unio-mystic, Paul, 150–51. For more on communion and union, see Litwa, Transformed, 10–20 and Constantine R. Campbell, Paul and Union with Christ: an Exegetical and Theological Study (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012). 64 Alexander, “Genealogy,” 226. 65 This supports Nitzan’s choice of communionist over celestial, “Harmonic,” 166–68. See also Wolfson, “Seven,” 193 and Corbin, Temple. 66 Harkins, “Thinking,” 114. 124

hymnist(s), however, expresses this union as God’s providential purpose for the 67 people of the council—the elect of the community in XIV.15–17. As such, personalisation of the “ideal model” by liturgical participation allows the maśkîl’s union to be appropriated by chosen members of the yaḥad.68 In contrast, Paul explains κοινωνία in the holy spirit as the abiding presence and power of God within believers and in the corporate assembly on earth.69 The κοινωνία has both personal and communal facets, although in 2 Cor 13:13 the emphasis is on communal participation. Paul does not reserve this κοινωνία for the elite few, but wishes all (πάντων ὑμῶν) of those holy ones (τοῖς ἁγίοις) in the Corinthian congregation and the whole of Achaia to participate in the spirit (1:1; 13:13). In the Corinthian correspondence, Paul speaks of the initial anointing of the spirit and sealing in Christ as a gift given personally “in our hearts as a first instalment” (1:22). The spirit co-testifies (συμμαρτυρεῖ) with the spirits of believers that they are children of God (Rom 8:16). This speaks of the believers’ personal experience of and identification with the spirit of God as a new member of God’s family. The spirit is also a deposit or guarantee for glorious, bodily transformation at the resurrection (1 Cor 15:42–54; 2 Cor 5:5). The indwelling is continual and believers through grace can live according to the spirit, or fleshly, unspiritual lives (1 Cor 3:1–3). Paul clarifies that the spirit also dwells (οἰκεῖ) in/among them corporately as God’s temple (1 Cor 3:16; 6:19) and manifests through them in the corporate body (chs. 12–14). The spirit continually transforms the community of believers from glory to glory following the pattern of Christ (2 Cor 3:18). Thus, the transcendent reality of the heavenly, Christ himself, indwells the personal bodies and corporate body of believers on earth through the spirit of God. Participation in the spirit, while personal, cannot be divorced from incorporation and participation in the community of the ekklesia. While τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος has an objective genitive meaning, participation in the holy spirit has communal implications—a subjective genitive effect.70 The community shares the common experience of participation in the holy spirit and lives

67 Chazon, “Function,” 140. 68 Alexander, Mystical, 85–86, 90–91; Newsom, Self, 197–98. 69 Marguerat sees the descent of the spirit as “un correctif” [a corrective] facing the mystical Corinthian, “le mystique,” 483. 70 Rabens, Spirit, 241. 125

out participation in the spirit in fellowship with one another in the ekklesia. Paul addresses corporate participation in the spirit in 1 Cor 12–14 and in parts of 2 Cor. In 1 Cor 12, Paul informs the Corinthians about proper use of πνευματικῶν. In v. 7, the manifestation of the spirit (ἡ φανέρωσις τοῦ πνεύματος) is given to each one (personally) for the common good (πρὸς τὸ συμφέρον). Manifestations of the spirit appear as divinely-inspired speech acts of wisdom, knowledge, prophecy, tongues, interpretation of tongues, discernment of spirits, as well as acts of power including faith, gifts of healing, and working of miracles (vv. 8–10). The divine speech acts reinforce the corporate epistemology of the spirit. Individuals speak what the spirit has revealed to them for the corporate edification of the church. Apart from corporate function, the pneumatika and charismata are incomplete.71 The practice of pneumatika, as allotted by the spirit, exemplifies corporate participation in the spirit. Through the body metaphor in 1 Cor 12:14–28, Paul further illustrates how individuals participate corporately in the spirit to build up the ekklesia. Since incorporation into the body comes through baptism in and drinking of the one spirit (v. 13), members share a common experience of the spirit.72 This shared experience by both Jews and Gentiles provides what Dunn calls a “unifying bond” of “Christian communal life.”73 Thus, a corporate effect of this participation should be the unity and mutual honouring of community members. In chapter 14, Paul encourages the pursuit of love (ch. 13) and pneumatika that edify the ekklesia. Paul argues that in the assembly personal participation in the spirit should give priority to intelligible speech acts that build up the ekklesia (ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖ) (v. 3, 5, 12, and 26). If the personal participation in the spirit is tongues speaking, this should be interpreted to edify the community or the speaker should remain silent. Unintelligible speech acts have no meaning for others. Paul sees those who practise pneumatika that build up the community as greater (μείζων) than those who only seek personal edification (v. 5). The deference to corporate edification is a demonstration of the love and presence of God in their midst and a sign of mature understanding (φρεσὶν τέλειοι) (vv. 20, 25; cf. 2:6). Paul extends here the argument from 10:23–24 that participation in the spirit should include a concern for the

71 James D. G. Dunn, “The Spirit and the Body of Christ,” in Pneumatology (Vol. 2 of The Christ and The Spirit: Collected Essays of James D. G. Dunn; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1998), 347. 72 Dunn, Jesus, 261. 73 Dunn, “Spirit,” 346. 126

spiritual welfare of others, especially the weak and inferior (12:14–27). Another corporate effect then of κοινωνία in the holy spirit should be the demonstration of love in the exercise of pneumatika and care for one another in the corporate body. This gives chapters 12–14 a “spirit-enhanced emphasis on interpersonal dynamic.”74 Communal participation in the spirit, according to Paul, should follow this exhortation: “When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up” (v. 26). Another corporate effect of participation in the holy spirit appears in 2 Cor where Paul advocates a cruciform pattern of living as a community. Paul’s preaching and life follow the pattern of Christ crucified, and the community is to do likewise. In 3:18, the spirit is transforming the community into the image of God, i.e., Christ. This image for Paul means carrying about the death of Christ in the body so that the life of Christ may be manifest in their bodies (4:7–12). In chapters 10–13,75 Paul will only boast in his weaknesses for the sake of Christ, so that the power of Christ may rest on him. His climactic revelation from Christ is that Christ’s power rest on those who are weak for the sake of Christ (12:7). He ties this suffering and weakness to doing everything for the building up of the ekklesia (12:18). Paul is correcting an over emphasis upon personal strength and self-boasting in spiritual experiences by false apostles and, therefore, emphasises the need for genuine humility and an already-not-yet tension in the eschatology of the Corinthians (cf. 1 Cor 1:25–29). The new age has dawned with the eschatological pouring out of the spirit on all flesh, but the gift of the spirit is only the first fruits and guarantee of what is to come for the Corinthians in eternity. Communal participation in the spirit consists of a shared experience of the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the demonstration of the power in the weakness of human flesh. The Corinthian ekklesia needs to participate as a community in the holy spirit to receive and live the grace of Christ and the love of God with fellow believers in a communal cruciform reflection of their Lord.

6.6 Conclusions The agency of the God’s spirit in the Corinthian correspondence, when compared with Hodayota, shows that Paul speaks of the spirit in Christological terms. The

74 Rabens, Spirit, 239. 75 See also ch. 9. 127

indwelling gift comes through belief in the crucified messiah, whom Paul preaches, and incorporation into the community through spirit baptism. The holy spirit washes, justifies, and sanctifies through the work of Christ, but does not atone. While Paul and his colleagues are stewards of the mysteries of God, like the maśkîl, Paul speaks predominantly in corporate terms about the spirit’s ongoing revelation in the ekklesia. He democratises the mystical experience of the spirit’s revelation into a corporate epistemology of the spirit. Paul’s distinction between the spirit and God and the ascription of personal characteristics to the spirit denote a remarkable development and interpretation of the eschatological fulfilment of Ezek 36–37 through Christ’s inauguration of the new covenant and ministry of the spirit. The spirit’s revelation of the mystery or mysteries of God concern God’s purposes for his people, but unlike Hodayota, concerns not a union with angels before God’s throne, but the new covenant community’s transformation into Christ-likeness and the outworking on earth of the baptismal participation in the death and resurrection of their crucified Lord. Revelation for Paul continues through ongoing, spirit-inspired utterances of participants in the worship of Corinthian assemblies, so that they can be transformed and continue spreading the gospel and reconciliation to God through a demonstration of the spirit and power. Paul advocates communal participation in the holy spirit in 2 Cor 13:13. Like the union with angels in Hodayota, this implies a communio mystica with a transcendent divine being. Neither Paul nor Hodayota advocate an absorption, fusion, or union with God. While Hodayota speaks of communion with angels by a few, Paul includes all Christians on earth in this corporate, relational participation in the spirit. This participation should foster unity and mutual honouring of community members, corporate upbuilding through pneumatika characterised by love, and a cruciform pattern of living as a Christian community.

128

Chapter 7

EXTENDED MEANING OF THE TEMPLE METAPHOR IN LIGHT OF 1QS AND SONGS

7.1 Introduction While previous studies have compared Paul’s temple metaphor with the Qumran community’s temple identity in 1QS and other DSS texts, these generally have not considered the relationship of Songs to the community’s temple phenomenology.1 The Qumran community understood its temple identity as a reflection of the heavenly archetype, whose members through liturgical synchronisation shared in the priestly service of the angels in the celestial temple. In light of the findings of chapter 3, a revisitation of Paul’s temple metaphor through heuristic comparison with 1QS and Songs will illuminate some neglected temple associations including the relationship to celestial archetype, the presence of angels, and the tongues of angels for the Corinthian ekklesia. This will show lines of continuity and discontinuity between Paul and 2TJ regarding a temple identity and the Corinthians’ communal participation in the spirit.

7.2 Temple as a Metaphor Paul’s identification of the church as a temple has often been called a metaphor. Michael Newton, however, questions scholars who presume the temple concept is “merely metaphorical.”2 For Newton, Paul expands the temple theme through God’s indwelling presence, purity requirements, holy living, and Paul as a priest. These disclose the “deep reality” of the church as temple and “dispels” it being mere

1 Gärtner only briefly covers the relationship to Cave 4 documents (95–99), Temple, 4–44; Michael Newton, The Concept of Purity at Qumran and in the Letters of Paul (SNTSMS 53; Cambridge: CUP, 1985), 4–66. 2 Newton (Purity, 58 n. 49) questions Conzelmann, Corinthians, 77; Archibald Robertson and Alfred Plummer (A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St Paul to the Corinthians (2d ed.; ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1912; repr., 1975), 66; and L. Cerfaux, The Church in the Theology of Paul (trans. by Geoffrey Webb and Adrian Walker; New York: Herder and Herder, 1959), 241–42. 129

metaphor.3 Newton rightly challenges those who limit the temple identity to linguistic decoration, but he and those he is critical of misunderstand metaphor and the distinction between linguistic and metaphysical statements. What then is a metaphor? Metaphor concerns an expression of language with a transfer of meaning.4 I. A. Richards identified the parts of metaphor as vehicle (the modifying term) and tenor (the primary subject).5 The vehicle is “the thing to which the word normally and naturally applies, the thing from which it is transferred, and tenor the thing to which it is transferred.”6 Gestalt theorists (metaphor expresses what can be expressed no other way) contend against the traditional substitutionist viewpoint (a metaphor says in another way what could be said literally) that metaphors create new and extended meaning.7 Janet Soskice’s definition that a “metaphor is that figure of speech whereby we speak about one thing in terms which are suggestive of another” will be employed here.8 Paul, then, speaks of the community of Corinthian believers, their bodies, and the whole church (tenor) in terms which are suggestive of another—a temple (vehicle) and all the ramifications9 of being the ναός of God (1 Cor 3:16; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:14–16). According to David Aaron, metaphors have degrees of ambiguity on a continuum from a “literal meaning” (binary) to “nonsense” (non-literal). More points of convergence between the tenor and vehicle make the metaphor less figurative. This may help evaluate the figurative meaning of Paul’s temple metaphor and the inappropriateness of the phrase “merely metaphorical.”10

3 Newton, Purity, 59. 4 Janet Martin Soskice, Metaphor and Religious Language (Oxford: Clarendon, 1985), 16. 5 I. A. Richards, The Philosophy of Rhetoric (New York: OUP, 1936), 96. See also Janet M. Soskice and R. Harré, “Metaphor in Science,” in From a Metaphorical Point of View: a Multidisciplinary Approach to the Cognitive Content of Metaphor (ed. Zdravko Radman; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1995), 291. 6 G. B. Caird, The Language and Imagery of the Bible (London: Duckworth, 1980), 152. 7 Soskice and Harré, “Metaphor,” 290. 8 Soskice examines three types of theories of metaphor (substitution, emotive, and incremental) and prefers a philosophical perspective on metaphor with incremental theory, Metaphor, 15. 9 Max Black builds upon Richards with principle (tenor) and subsidiary subjects (vehicle), Models and Metaphors: Studies in Language and Philosophy (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1962), 236. Cf. Caird, Language, 152. 10 David H. Aaron, Biblical Ambiguities: Metaphor, Semantics, and Divine Imagery (BRLAJ 4. Leiden: Brill, 2001), 111–24. He critiques Lakoff, Johnson, and Turner’s thesis that “our ordinary conceptual system is metaphorical in nature,” Metaphors We Live By (Chicago: UCP, 1980), 4. 130

The temple metaphor has both a high development and high correspondence in 1–2 Corinthians.11 It appears three times, and twice with οὐκ οἴδατε: “Do you not know.” Paul nourishes the metaphor with temple imagery and symbolic language. In 1 Cor 3:5–17, Paul piles up successive metaphorical images in Hebraic style with planting, building, master builder, Christ the foundation, and finally the temple in v. 1612—all of these could allude to a temple or tabernacle.13 This elaborate development indicates the seriousness, which Paul places upon being a temple community, and leads to less-immediate associations such as priestly service, angelic presence, worship, holiness, defilement, the celestial archetype, and the eschatological temple. The creation of new and unique meaning and multiple points of interest between vehicle and tenor render the “merely metaphorical” description unacceptable. Linguistically, Paul’s temple metaphor appears less figurative and closer to a literal meaning. This, however, does not adequately address the metaphor’s theological significance, which is Newton’s main concern. Soskice suggests “Theological realism” as a way to evaluate appropriately the theological significance of a religious metaphor. Realism, an empirical theory, is grounded in experience and “accommodates figurative speech which is reality depicting without claiming to be directly descriptive.”14 The metaphorical language is “forged in a particular context”—“experience, community and an interpretative tradition.”15 For Paul the referential context is primarily 2TJ and the experiences, convictions, and traditions of the early Christian communities. The temple metaphor’s similar application at Qumran (§3.2) and as a prophetic fulfilment of Hebrew Bible passages16 especially Ezek 36–37 makes it “freighted with meaning.”17 Moreover, Paul’s temple metaphor goes beyond linguistic concerns.

11 Caird, Language, 153–59. 12 Caird, Language, 190. 13 G. K. Beale, The Temple and the Church’s Mission: a Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place of God (NSBT 18; Leicester: Apollos, 2004), 245–52. 14 Soskice, Metaphor, 148. 15 Soskice, Metaphor, 149. 16 God indwells the people in Exod 25:8; 29:45; Lev 26:11–12; Ezek 11:16; and Ps 114:12. 17 Soskice, Metaphor, 158. Soskice writes: “From the literary observation we return to the philosophical one, for the touchstone of these chronicles of faith is experience, experiences pointed or diffuse, the experience of individuals and of communities which are believed to be experiences of the activity of a transcendent God. The language used to account for them is metaphorical and qualified, 131

Paul extends the meaning of the temple beyond a building of stone to reshape the community’s “imagination” and transfer theological concepts concerning orderly worship and appropriate behaviour to the whole Christian community. 18 This chapter will go beyond linguistic concerns to the way Paul’s metaphor speaks to the Corinthian community’s experience of divine transcendence (God’s spirit) in corporate worship and how Paul’s temple metaphor extends to the community’s theophanic imagination in the areas of angelic presence and the practise of tongues speaking.

7.3 A Corporate Temple of the Spirit in 1 Cor 3:16; 6:19; and 2 Cor 6:14–16 Paul characterises the Corinthian congregation as a temple in 1 Cor 3:16–17; 6:19; and 2 Cor 6:14b–16a. In 1 Cor 3, Paul reminds the Corinthians that they corporately are God’s temple and the spirit of God dwells in/among them: “Οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ναὸς θεοῦ ἐστε καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ θεοῦ οἰκεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν;” (v. 16). The temple metaphor Paul uses is not an ad hoc argument but a known metaphor (Οὐκ οἴδατε) for the church community. This may be an early church concept (cf. 1 Pet 2:5; Eph 2:21), which Paul taught.19 In 1 Cor 1–3, Paul admonishes the Corinthians for the divisions, quarrels among them, and urges them to “be united in the same mind and purpose” (1:10). He castigates them as infants in Christ because of their fleshly jealousy and factious quarrelling based on mere human ways (3:1–3). Paul metaphorically describes the community as a plantation20 (vv. 5–9), and then as God’s building (οἰκοδομή), another sanctuary metaphor (3:9–15), whose foundation (θεμέλιον) is Jesus Christ. The fire of God’s judgment will test what each person has built on the foundation. The acceptable building materials of gold (χρυσόν), silver (ἄργυρον), and

it stands within a tradition of use and is theory laden, yet in so far as it is grounded on experience it is referential, and it is the theological realist’s conviction that that to which it refers, the source of these experiences, is God who is the source and cause of all that is” (159). Indeed, the temple metaphor for Paul is theocentric and expresses an experience of the God’s transcendence in the midst of the community of faith. See R. J. McKelvey, The New Temple: the Church in the New Testament (Oxford: OUP, 1969), 180. 18 Nijay K. Gupta, Worship that Makes Sense to Paul: a New Approach to the Theology and Ethics of Paul’s Cultic Metaphors (BZNW 175; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2010), 1, 4. 19 John R. Levison, “The Spirit and the Temple in Paul's Letters to the Corinthians,” in Paul and His Theology (ed. Stanley Porter; Leiden: Brill, 2006), 189 n. 2; I. Howard Marshall, “Church and Temple in the New Testament,” TynBul 40 (1989), 213. Fee mistakenly contends that Οὐκ οἴδατε is simply a rhetorical device, Corinthians, 146 n. 4. 20 For the connection between the temple, plantation, and paradise, see Gärtner, Temple, 28, Fujita, “Metaphor,” 30–45; Beale, Temple, 81–87, 245–68. 132

precious stones (λίθους τιμίους) resemble the building materials of the tabernacle and temple (v. 12). The building up of the metaphors culminates in the temple metaphor. Paul, then, warns them: “If anyone destroys (φθείρει) God’s temple, God will destroy (φθερεῖ) that person. For God’s temple is holy, and you are that temple” (3:17). Paul uses this “casuistic form of legal discourse” to drive home his point that their disunity and childish behaviour are destroying or defiling21 God’s temple (the church community), and those who do this will face God’s destruction—talionic justice (cf. Josh 7:25). Paul may also be setting the stage to address the defiling nature of porneia to the Corinthian ekklesia in 5:1–13 and other concerns after 4:18. Paul characterises the Corinthian community, you (plural), as a temple in 1 Cor 3:16. They are a temple of God corporately because the spirit of God dwells ‘in’ and/or ‘among’ them (ἐν ὑμῖν). The dwelling spirit of God is an expression of God’s holy presence (Isa 63:9–14; Ps 106:33) that fits well with contemporary Jewish temple-theology traditions22 and Hebrew Bible temple-holiness traditions (Deut 23:2–9; Num 1, 3, 4, and 19).23 For Paul, the promised indwelling of the spirit of God from the Scriptures (Ezek 36:26–27; 37:14; Joel 2:28–29) had come in the new covenant with Christ’s crucifixion on the cross and the subsequent giving of the spirit by God (1 Cor 2:12; 3:16; 6:16; 12:13; 2 Cor 3:3–6; Gal 5:25; Rom 2:29). Moreover, Paul argues that since God’s temple is holy and they are that temple corporately, then they should be a holy community. His contextual emphasis on corporate unity and explicit reference to communal holiness is unequivocal. In light of Paul’s ethics, they are to become as the ekklesia who they already are—God’s holy people indwelt by the spirit (1:2).24 Paul again reminds the Corinthians that they are a temple in 1 Cor 6:19: “Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God, and that you are not your own?” This time, Paul clarifies that their individual bodies are the temple of the indwelling holy spirit from God; therefore, they are not their own and should glorify God in their bodies (v. 20). The context of

21 Paul J. Sampley, NIB 10:831. 22 1QS VIII.4–7; Sobriety 66; Abraham 56. For the spirit of God dwelling in the temple, see Ant. 8:114. See Hogeterp, “Temple,” 306–307; Ciampa and Rosner, Corinthians, 158. 23 Brian S. Rosner, “Temple and Holiness in 1 Corinthians 5,” TynBul 42 (1991): 140–45. 24 Ciampa and Rosner, Corinthians, 158–61. The Corinthian church, then, has value to God as a temple. 133

chapter 6 concerns immoral behaviour (listed vv. 9–10) and specifically fornication with prostitutes—potentially sacred prostitution in pagan temples (vv. 12–18).25 While the temple metaphor speaks to individual bodies here, this does not preclude the continuance of the communal aspect of the metaphor from 3:16. Levison explains, “This is not exclusively a private matter between the Lord and the physical body of the individual; this is a matter as well between the Lord and the body of the Church.”26 Unholy unions with prostitutes pose a real defiling danger to the body of Christ, the church.27 Therefore, they should use their bodies as members of the ekklesia in a holy way and glorify God. The temple metaphor reappears in 2 Cor 6:16b in a Qumran-like section of the letter 6:14–7:1.28 Paul states, “For we are the temple of the living God.” Paul broadens the temple metaphor here to incorporate the whole church, “we,” as the temple, not just the Corinthian congregation “you” in 1 Cor 3:16 (cf. Eph 2:21–22).29

25 Brian S. Rosner, “Temple Prostitution in 1 Corinthians 6:12–20,” NovT 40 (1998): 336–51. 26 Levison, “Spirit,” 202–205. The words ‘body’ and ‘members’ has communal application to the church in 1 Cor 12–14 and in 3:13 body can refer to both the individual and the community. See also Dale Martin on the permeation of sexual sin into the whole church body, The Corinthian Body (New Haven: YUP, 1995), 175–79. Paul may evince a Jesus saying (Jn 2:19–22; Mk 14:58; Mt 26:61). 27 Martin, Body, 175–79. 28 While a full examination of the integrity and authenticity of this section is not possible here, there does not appear to be sufficient evidence to argue convincingly for a non-Pauline interpolation. Harris summarises the discussion and concludes the section came “in toto from Paul’s own hand,” Corinthians, 25. For those who make a Qumran connection, see Joseph A. Fitzmyer, who argues for a non-Pauline interpolation “a Christian reworking of an Essene paragraph,” “Qumran and the Interpolated Paragraph in 2 Cor 6:14–7:1,” in Essays on the Semitic Background of the New Testament (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1971), 216–17; repr. from CBQ 23 (1961); Nis Dahl, “A Fragment and its Context: 2 Corinthians 6:14–7:1,” in Studies in Paul: Theology for the Early Christian Mission (Minneapolis: APH, 1977), 62–69; Ralph Martin, Corinthians, xliv; and Joachim Gnilka, “2 Cor. 6:14–7:1 in Light of the Qumran Texts and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,” in Paul and Qumran (ed. J. Murphy-O’Connor; Chicago: Priory, 1968), 67; trans of “2 Kor. 6,14–7,1 im Lichte der Qumranschriften und der Zwolf-Patriarchen-Testamente,” in Neutestamentliche Aufsätze. Festschrift für Prof. Josef Schmid zum 70. Geburtstag (ed. Josef Blinzer et al.; Regensburg: Pustet, 1963). In agreement with Harris, Gärtner contends it is not an interpolation but in line with temple symbolism, Temple, 49–56. Margaret E. Thrall suggests that Paul digresses and does not take “adequate precautions against misunderstanding” with previous statements on separation from believers in 1 Cor 5:9–13, “The Problem of II Cor. VI.14–VIII.1 in Some Recent Discussion,” NTS 24 (1977/1978): 148. Barrett argues there is not sufficient evidence this is a non-Pauline, Essene paragraph and explains affinities to Paul’s use of Old Testament, Second, 195–99. Gordon Fee, contends the hapax legomena argument insufficiently weighs against Pauline authorship and the burden of proof lies upon non-Pauline hypotheses, which remains unconvincing, “II Corinthians VI.14–VII.1 and Food Offered to Idols,” NTS 23 (1976): 140–61. 29 Although υμεις . . . εστε appears in î46 (ℵ2) C D2 F G Ψ (0209) Û lat sy; Tert, Bruce Metzger plausibly suggests υμεις was an attempt to parallel 1 Cor 3:16, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (2d ed.; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1994), 512. Thus, ἡμεῖς found in B D* L P 6. 33. 81. (104). 326. 365. 1175. 1881. 2464 pc co; Or is preferred. 134

He adapts a threefold promise from LXX Lev 26:11–12 to confirm the Corinthians are the temple of God: God dwells in them, walks among them, is their God, and they are his people (cf. Ezek 37:26–27).30 The “living God” reference recalls “the spirit of the living God” from 2 Cor 3:3, in which Paul argues they are the letter of Christ written “with the Spirit of the living God.” This alludes to promised new covenant and corresponding gift of the spirit (Jer 31:31–33; Ezek 36:26–27; 2 Cor 1:18–22; 3:3, 6, and 18). Like in previous uses of the temple metaphor the purpose of it in 6:14–7:1 is “to support an ethical appeal.”31 The presence of God walking in their midst like with the tabernacle in the wilderness requires purity and perfecting holiness. The temple metaphor has a clear connection to the indwelling of God’s spirit— the eschatological fulfilment of the new covenant promise (cf. Ezek 36–37). The indwelling of the spirit may imply that the glory of God no longer dwells in the Jerusalem temple, but now in those who are in Christ.32 Naturally, this corresponds to the idea of God dwelling, living, and walking with and among his people. They are to be holy and pure, both as called, sanctified ones and as spirit and grace enabled.33 The result of appropriately exhibiting manifestations of the spirit in corporate worship is a recognition by others that “God is truly among you” (1 Cor

14:25). Paul use of ναός for temple instead of ἱερόν may maintain a distinction in LXX between sanctuary and the whole temple complex; thus, they are the sanctuary or most holy dwelling place of God—a holy alternative to the pagan temples in Corinth.34 In all three uses of the temple metaphor Paul makes either an explicit or implicit connection with the indwelling spirit of God in or among them as a community. This may be his underlying theological justification for a temple identity, notwithstanding, the temple metaphor’s rhetorical function to prescribe corporate unity, holiness (personal purity), and glorification of God.

30 Barnett, Corinthians, 352; Hans Dieter Betz, “2 Cor 6:4–7:1: An Anti-Pauline Fragment?” JBL 92 (1973): 94–95. 31 Furnish, Corinthians, 373. 32 Gärtner, Temple, 58. Paul’s notion of ‘the Spirit of God’ rather than simply ‘God’ dwelling in the Temple reflects a Second Temple Jewish background as found in Josephus’ account of Solomon’s temple (Ant. 8:114). 33 Gärtner, Temple, 60. 34 O. Michel, “ναός,” TDNT 4:880–90; Gärtner, Temple, 53. 135

7.4 Paul’s Temple Metaphor and the Heavenly Sanctuary The first part of this heuristic comparison will consider how Paul’s temple metaphor relates to the reflection of the imaginal heavenly temple in the Qumran community. In the Corinthian correspondence, Paul does not overtly link the temple metaphor to the heavenly sanctuary neither does he intimate an archetypal relationship. Paul’s successive temple-like metaphors in 1 Cor 3:5–17, however, may allude or have a background in a Garden-like temple from the Hebrew Bible and could imply the building of the eschatological temple of God. As at Qumran, Paul’s temple metaphor may allude to the restoration of the perfect human temple of Eden—the sanctuary of Adam (Exod 15:15–17). The field metaphor could be taken this way, although only as an echo and not an unequivocal link. G. K. Beale cogently contends for the metaphors of a cultivated field, architects, and builders in 1 Cor 3:5–15 to be linked together through their allusions to the temple. The Solomonic temple has numerous references to plant-like items in its design (1 Kgs 6:18, 29, 32; 7:18–20, 24–26, 42, and 49–50). These reflect “the primeval sanctuary of the Garden of Eden” and are combined with precious metals used in the temple construction (1 Kgs 5:17; 6:20–21; 1 Chr 29:2; 2 Chr 3–4).35 Ps 92:12–15 corroborates the concept of the righteous flourishing as trees planted in the house of the Lord. Paul employs similar ideas and similar language, particularly

“wise master builder” σοφὸς ἀρχιτέκτων (cf. Exod 35:31–32), to build ἐποικοδομεῖ, and precious metals, which echo the temple and tabernacle construction.36 These temple/tabernacle allusions and echoes suggest Paul may have seen the ekklesia as a garden-temple. The allusions and echoes, however, do not necessarily mean a restoration or return to Eden, but may point instead toward the new eschatological temple. Christ is the last Adam and the first fruits of the new creation. The new age has already dawned, a new humanity has been created through the spirit, and the old is passing away (1 Cor 10:11). In 1 Cor 3:10–15, when Paul speaks of the foundation of the building as Jesus Christ, this has connotations of being an eternal eschatological

35 Beale, Temple, 248. 36 Beale, Temple, 245–50. 136

temple (cf. Eph 2:20; Ps 118:22; Isa 28:16; Zech 10:4; Luke 20:17–18; Matt 21:42; Mark 12:10; Acts 4:11).37 The scriptural background of vv. 12–13 elicits the eschatological dimension of being a temple community. Paul warns how the fire on the day (ἡμέρα) will test the work of each builder. Paul’s language closely resembles Malachi 3–4 where the Lord comes to his temple on the day (4:1) and like a refiner’s fire and purifier of silver and gold refines the sons of Levi (3:1–3). Paul adapts the imagery to the believers who form the temple of God; their work, which may include bringing up new believers, is refined in the fire—preserving what is the true, eschatological temple of God.38 In this sense, the believers who form the temple of God are part of the latter day, eschatological temple—not made with hands (Exod 15:17–18). Although the idea of forming a foundation of truth is similar to the Rule of the Community, Paul does not see the foundation as the community. Christ is the foundation. Pauline literature, particularly Ephesians 2:18–22, makes explicit Christ Jesus as the cornerstone of the holy temple of the Lord composed of saints and members of God’s household; Christ holds the structure together; the temple is the dwelling place of God; those in Christ have access to the Father through the spirit as part of the temple (Eph 2:18–22).39 In Ephesians, the temple concept exhibits an analogous imaginal spanning of space and time, like the Qumran community, whereby saints of old are concurrently joined with members present on earth meeting with God as an eschatological temple—not fully realised. In the Corinthian correspondence, Paul does not expound upon his temple theology to this extent, but the conception of Christ as the cornerstone and the one who holds the structure together is not far off. Paul’s temple metaphor corresponds to the reflection of the imaginal heavenly temple among the Corinthians in three important aspects. First, respecting liturgical synchronism with the celestial temple, Paul does advocate some order in worship as a temple community (1 Cor 14:40). This order, however, is not expressly synchronized with or reciprocal to angelic worship—notwithstanding the implications of διὰ τοὺς ἀγγέλους in 1 Cor 11. The order of the Corinthian worship is

37 Christ as the rock (1 Cor 10:4) may implicitly relate to foundation and cornerstone. 38 Beale, Temple, 250–51. 39 Andrew T. Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet: Studies in the Role of the Heavenly Dimension in Paul’s Thought with Special Reference to his Eschatology (SNTSMS 43; Cambridge: CUP, 1981), 150–169. 137

one of communal participation in the spirit. The spirit orders worship by allotting spiritual manifestations to participants (1 Cor 12-14), which should prioritise the building up of the community through selfless love. Second, while the archetypal relationship appears in the Hebrew Bible background and much of Second Temple Jewish literature, Paul does not clearly portray the Christian community as one modelled after the heavenly temple. Paul’s temple focus is more on the dawning of the new age and how the new temple, embodied by believers, discloses the fulfilment of covenant promises through Christ. Third, Paul, however, does mirror the celestial temple in two aspects: the presence of angels and angelic tongues may be reflection of the imaginal heavenly temple and participation in the heavenly realm. This may presume the existence of a paradigmatic celestial community of angels. This next section will investigate these two areas.

7.5 Presence of Angels in the Corinthian Ekklesia (1 Cor 11:10) In light of chapter 3, comparison of the presence of angels in Songs and 1QS will shed light on the possibility of the presence of or even communion with angels in the Corinthian correspondence. This investigation will consider whether Paul’s understanding of angels corresponds to his portrayal of the community as a temple of God. In light of Songs functioning in the Qumran community as a reinforcement of communion with the angels and a shared priesthood with the angels, διὰ τοὺς ἀγγέλους in 1 Cor 11:10 may mean angels40 are present during worship. Looking through the lens of the temple metaphor here can provide more insight into this enigmatic phrase. As a temple community, they are to remain united, pure, and holy. The reason for “a symbol of authority”41 on the head of a woman praying or

40 Scholars have long debated this passage interpreting τοὺς ἀγγέλους as human messengers (J. Lightfoot; J. Murphy-O’Connor), bishops, presbyters and clergy (Ambrose; Ephraem; Primasius), evil angels (Tertullian; M. Dibelius; J. Héring; H. Lietzmann; Hans Conzelmann; James Dunn), and good angels (Henry Cadbury; Robertson and Plummer; Joseph Fitzmyer; Morna Hooker; George Brooke; Antoinette Wire; C. B. Caird; F. F. Bruce; Michael Newton; Anthony Thiselton). Good angels fits the context and Paul’s Jewish background best. 41 Ciampa and Rosner prefer “a symbol of authority on her head” over “have authority over her own head,” Corinthians, 532–33. Francis Watson sees the authority as granting her freedom to proclaim God’s word, Agape, Eros, Gender: Towards a Pauline Sexual Ethic (Cambridge: CUP, 2000), 44. 138

prophesying in the assembly might be similar to Qumran’s priestly exclusion of the 42 blind, lame, those with a visible blemishP566F P because of the presence of angels in the camp. Conversely, the Qumran community would have excluded women from the camp for this same reason (1QM VII.3), and the mothers cannot have a sign of e 43 in the congregation (4QDP P 7 I.13–15).P567F P The presence of God and (רוקמה) authority angels also prohibited the exposure of nakedness in the camp (4Q158 7–8 8; 1QM

X.1; VII.4–7). Paul’s reason “because of the angels” could allude to a broader Second Temple Jewish background concerning purity during worship, the presence of angels, and the conception of being a temple community of God’s presence (Exod 20:26; 28:42; Rev 3:8). For Paul, the veil may be a “mark of respect” for the presence of angels, covering of possible bodily defects (a woman with shorn hair), or prevention of 44 angels worshipping man whose glory she reflects.P568F P The exhortation, then, encourages women to worship in a way that “respected the proper decorum expected in the presence of God and his angelic attendants, such that the community’s full attention was on the glory of God without being distracted by either human glory or 45 shame” (1 Cor 14:40).P569F P Most remarkable is how Paul, contrary to Jewish convention, gives women a place and a voice in this new temple of God in light of the new creation and oneness in Christ (Gal 3:28). Prophesying women full of God’s spirit fulfils Joel 2:28 where “your sons and your daughters” (οἱ υἱοὶ ὑμῶν καὶ αἱ θυγατέρες ὑμῶν) prophesy, because God has poured out his spirit on all flesh (cf. Acts 2:17). For Paul, the dawning of the new age and the pouring out of the spirit upon all people has opened

42 For a comprehensive list of exclusions, see Brooke, “Miqdash,” 296 n. 39. Cf. 4Q174 1 I.3–4; 4QMMT B 39–49; 1QSa II.3–8; 4Q266 8 I.7–9; 4Q267 17 I.6–9; CD-A XV; 11Q19 XLV.12–14; 1QM VII.4–6. 43 means, they agree the mothers do not have the same רוקמה While scholars debate what authority as men. See George J. Brooke, “From Qumran to Corinth: Embroidered Allusions to Women’s Authority,” in The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament: Essays in Mutual Illumination (London: SPCK, 2005), 195–214; Sidnie White Crawford, “Mothers, Sisters, and Elders: Titles for Women in Second Temple Jewish and Early Christian Communities,” in Background, 177–83; in mystical texts in the DSS including Songs may disclose a רוקמה Cecilia Wassen argues that the use particular function the Fathers had in the spiritual practices of the community to create “a sense of communion with the heavenly sphere” (193). Women did not or should not have this function according to 4QDe (193), Women in the Damascus Document (AcB 21; Atlanta: SBL, 2005), 185–97. 44 Brooke, “Embroidered,” 212–213. For loosened hair as unclean (Num 5:18), see Newton, Purity, 109. 45 Ciampa and Rosner, Corinthians, 531. 139

the doors of the ναός, the inner sanctuary, for all in Christ, including the radical inclusion and active participation of women. Paul’s temple metaphor, then, appears to be more than a rhetorical illustration, especially with this extended meaning. Angelic presence provides validation to the idea of being a temple community. The community has become the habitation of God and his angelic cohort and potentially the place where heaven and earth meet in imaginal sacred space. Paul, if not the Corinthians, perceives with theophanic imagination angels of God to be present observing his ministry (1 Cor 4:9), guarding the honour and glory of God, and perhaps participating in the worship of the ‘in Christ’ community. Paul, however, does not make the worship activities of angels a pronounced focus nor does he use a celestial archetype or a mystical liturgy like the Qumran community.46 Pauline literature in Col 2:18 bears out the disinterest in angelic worship: “Do not let anyone disqualify you, insisting on self-abasement and worship of angels (θρησκείᾳ τῶν ἀγγέλων), dwelling on visions, puffed up without cause by a human way of thinking.” Paul’s understanding of the relationship between humans and angels differs significantly from Songs and the DSS. In the highly developed angelology of Qumran,47 the DSS generally see angels as higher beings and humanity retains a depraved status (creatures of dust) far below angelic perfection and in great need of God’s grace, election, and cleansing. Songs maintains this ontological dissimilarity.48 In fact, “Human inadequacy . . . might be the reason for the omission of the angels’ precise words” in Songs.49 This is also why “human praise is like but not equal to angelic praise.”50 Conversely, for Paul, believers through Christ become sons and daughters of God and are called holy ones (ἁγίοις) (1 Cor 1:2; 6:1, 2; 14:33; 16:1, 15; 2 Cor 2:2; cf. 1 Thess 1:13). In this way, the Corinthian believers are elevated above angels—to status as children of God. Conversely, unqualified ‘holy ones’ predominantly means angels in the DSS, and particularly in Songs.51 Many DSS

46 Corbin, Temple, 330–32. 47 See Davidson, Angels. 48 Angel, Otherworldly, 87–106. 49 Esther G. Chazon, “Liturgical Communion with the Angels at Qumran,” in Sapiential, 99– 101. 50 Chazon, “Communion,” 105. 51 Newsom, Songs, 25. In the Hebrew Bible, holy ones as angels occurs in Deut 33:2–3; Ps 89:6; Job 5:1; 15:15; Zech 14:5; Dan 4:10, 14, 20; 7:27; 8:13; holy ones for humans unequivocally occurs 140

designate angels as sons of heaven. This notwithstanding, the rare occurrences of angelomorphic transformation in the DSS, such as 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and related texts (see §5.4) and disputed appellations which might mean angels or humans. In contrast to this angelomorphic transformation, the Corinthians will be changed and be re-made in the image of the heavenly, i.e., Christ (1 Cor 15:39). Paul postulates a christomorphic transformation (2 Cor 3:18; Rom 8:29) rather than angelomorphic.52 Paul’s statement in 1 Cor 6:3, “Do you not know that we are to judge angels—to say nothing of ordinary matters?” not only has a rhetorical function regarding judgement of matters in the church, but also reveals the eschatological elevation of those in Christ over angels—albeit fallen ones (Rom 8:38; Gal 1:8; 1 En. 1–14). Overall, Paul seems to demote angels in light of salvation and glorification in Christ. For instance, angelic ordination makes the law inferior (Gal 3:19).53 Angels only have a secondary, diminishing importance in comparison with Christ and believers’ corporate participation in the new creation through the spirit. So, looking back to 1 Cor 11:10, one can now ask the question, does this passage place humans (and in particular women) above or below angels? John Paul

Heil, Roy Ciampa, and Brian Rosner make a case through the allusion to LXX Ps 8:4–5 in 1 Cor 11:10 that at the present the Corinthians are just below the angels, but will one day be glorified above them.54 Ciampa and Rosner suggest Heb 2:7–9 supports their interpretation that the life of Christ and Christians is “below the status of angels for a limited time, until their glory would be fully realized.”55

in Ps 34:9 and plausibly in Ps 16:3 and Dan 7:25. For use in the DSS, see Davidson, Angels, 336–37, 341. 52 N.B.: The Gospel saying, in the resurrection they will be ὡς ἄγγελοι ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς (Matt 22:30; Mark 12:25) or ἰσάγγελοι (Luke 20:36). 53 Jean Héring questions whether Paul’s angel references refer to bad angels just because they may be in the process of falling while trying to account for the complexity of Paul’s angelology, The First Epistle of Saint Paul to the Corinthians (London: Epworth Press, 1962), 108. Cf. Poirier, Tongues, 55 n. 32. 54 The convergence of ἄνθρωπος, ἄνθρωπος, δόξα, and τιμή in v. 10 alludes to LXX Ps 8:5–6, in LXX παρ᾽ ἀγγέλους); and crowned with glory and) מֵ אֱ � הִ י ם which humans were “made a little lower honour.” John Paul Heil understands this to mean “the woman should take account not only of her creational status as the glory of man, but also of the creational status of both men and women as having a glory and honor that approaches that of the angels,” The Rhetorical Role of Scripture in 1 Corinthians (SBLMS 15; Atlanta: SBL, 2005), 183. So, by having a symbol of authority on her head, she maintains her “lofty creational status” just below the angels (184), Ciampa and Rosner, Corinthians, 529–33. 55 Ciampa and Rosner, Corinthians, 533 n. 118. 141

Despite their ambiguity about the meaning of status, their suggestion seems plausible at first. On closer inspection, however, Paul seems more ambiguous and Christ has already risen. Undoubtedly, Paul argues for respect and decorum in 1 Cor 11:10 and for the proper place of human glory in worship. If the veil keeps angels from worshipping the glory of man, then their lower status claim cannot be sustained. The worship of man’s glory by angels though is uncertain. For Paul what is undeniable is that the old order under angelic beings, rulers of this age (1 Cor 2:6– 8; 15:24), and elemental spirits (Gal 4:3, 9; cf. Col 2:8, 20) is passing away and the new order has been inaugurated with the new creation (2 Cor 5:17). For Paul the glorious transformation of believers, both male and female, into the image and glory of God by the spirit has begun (2 Cor 3:18; cf. Rom 8:29), and they are now becoming the righteousness of God (5:21). Furthermore, the ἐξουσίαν on the woman’s head does not mean subordination to man or to angels but her authority under God to prophesy and pray in the assembly.56 Francis Watson’s proposal seems more likely: “The veil is prophetic sign to the angels that the new creation has dawned and that their jurisdiction has passed away.”57 As part of the new creation in Christ, her ἐξουσίαν is greater than the angels’ authority and is a sign to them of her fitting participation in the worship of the temple community.58 Thus, all those in Christ are part of the new creation, have authority, reflect the glory of God and of Christ, and will eventually judge the angels. Paul’s use of κρίνω in 1 Cor 6:3 implies divine elevation of believers in Christ over angels as the ones judging have authority over ones being judged—just as the context mentions judging of the κόσμος, of which angels are part, and of life matters 59 (βιωτικά) (v. 2).

56 Morna D. Hooker, “Authority on her Head: An Examination of 1 Cor. xi. 10,” NTS 10 (1964): 413–16. 57 Watson, Agape, 71. 58 Watson, Agape, 71. 59 While κρινω could have a broader sense of rule as in the LXX (see “κρινω,” BAGD 451–52 and V. Herntrich, “κρινω,” TDNT 3:923), Paul M. Hoskins argues contextually for a “strictly judicial sense” in 6:2–3 (295). He states, “Paul is not merely adapting a common Jewish eschatological belief; he is making, instead, a unique claim that is more closely tied to his Christology and ecclesiology than to his Jewish background.” Believers through their unity with Christ “will share in the judging activity of Christ at the Last Judgment. Even angels will fall under the jurisdiction of believers, since they also fall under Christ’s” (297), “The Use of Biblical and Extrabiblical Parallels in the Interpretation of First Corinthians 6:2–3,” CBQ 63 (2001): 297. Likewise, Thiselton connects “Christian corporeity” of being in Christ with sharing in Christ’s acts and pronouncements of judgment, Corinthians, 425–31 (cf. Dan 7:22; 1QpHab V.4). Whether this includes good and evil angels is unclear. 142

Paul appears to be separating himself from traditional Jewish conceptions of angels and humans. Paul also advocates ongoing transformation through a union with Christ into the image and glory of God that implies divinisation in Christ (2 Cor 3:18; 5:21). Unlike the angels and quasi-angelic beings in Songs who make up the celestial temple, the Corinthian community through Christ becomes the dwelling place of God’s spirit, personally and corporately—a spiritual, living temple of humans, a temple not made with hands. The body of Christ metaphor reinforces this union and glorious transformation as believers are united together into a corporate “mystical body” (1 Cor 12:12–27).60 This mystical corporeity provides a radical contrast with the Qumran community, in which communion with angels in the celestial temple provided the closest proximity to God.

7.6 Tongues of Angels in the Corinthian Ekklesia (1 Cor 13:1) While the presence of angels in worship reinforces the temple concept in the Corinthian community, another area of extended meaning concerns the “tongues of angels” and angelic-like praise. In 1 Cor 13:1, Paul proceeds with a conditional statement to correct the Corinthians by reprioritising love and the building up of the community through appropriate practise of the manifestations of the spirit. Paul writes, “If I speak in the tongues of humans and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal” (1 Cor 13:1). The protasis taken at face value is a confirmation by Paul that tongues (ταῖς γλώσσαις) can be of humans (τῶν ἀνθρώπων) or of angels (τῶν ἀγγέλων) 61 and assumes angels have their own languages.62 He is referring to tongues as a manifestation of the spirit (12:7, 10). These tongues speak63 to God mysteries in the spirit and include prayer (προσεύχομαι) in the spirit, singing praise (ψαλῶ) in the spirit, blessings (εὐλογέω), and thanksgiving (εὐχαριστία) (14:2, 14–17). If interpreted, the tongue will contain words of the spirit, which will build up and instruct (v. 19) the church; edification may come in the form of revelation, knowledge, prophecy, or teaching (14:6).

60 Corbin, Temple, 330. 61 Could this refer to joint praise? See Poirier on interpreting this as earthly-heavenly counterparts or community, Tongues, 57. 62 Donal Fraçois Tolmie, “Angels as arguments? The rhetorical function of references to angels in the main letters of Paul,” HTSTS 67 (2011): 5; l7 June 2011, (20 April 2013). 63 Fee argues for the idea of communion with God through tongues since the believer is edified, Corinthians, 656. 143

The tongues of angels in Songs offer a striking correspondence to Paul’s tongues of humans and angels. Both phenomena include speaking to God, singing praise, blessings, thanksgiving, and mysteries in worship. Songs has two additions: the tongue of purity and the tongue of knowledge. One wonders if the tongues of humans and of angels may be referring to joint human and angelic praise, like Qumran, or earthly-heavenly counterparts. This would fit with a common understanding of the temple as a place of joint praise. Paul’s use of the hypothetical “I,” however, delineates humans who speak by the spirit either the tongues of humans (other human languages like in Acts) and/or the tongues of angels.64 What illumination does the similar correspondence in angelic tongues bring to the Corinthian community and Paul’s temple metaphor? Songs, as a pre-sectarian text with a copy found at Masada, reveals that joint angelic praise and praise like the angels was a broader concept in 2TJ.65 Moreover, Songs links angelic tongues with the heavenly sanctuary. The Corinthian community may have understood themselves as praying like the angels by speaking in tongues.66 Rather than ascend to the celestial realm and join the angels in worship in heaven, the holy spirit enabled angelic tongues in the worshipping community on earth.67 This could be a reflection of the imaginal heavenly temple in the Corinthian community. Angels joined or watched them in this temple (ναὸς) gathering. Some in the community may have taken this angelic-like conception too far. Potentially, Paul may broaden tongues to include angelic and human to correct a narrower angeloglossic model of tongues in Corinth.68 Tongues speaking could have been an indicator of spiritual status.69 The Corinthians boastfully conceived of

64 Thiselton, Corinthians, 1033; Martin, Body, 267 n. 263. 65 Chazon, “Communion,” 104–105; Elgvin, “Temple,” 227–42. Cf. Apoc. Zeph. 8:4–5. Job’s three daughters speak in angelic dialects, Hemera sings angelic hymns to God, Kasia praises God, and the third speaks in the dialect of the cherubim (T. Job 48:1–50:2). 66 Brooke, “Embroidered,” 213. 67 Notwithstanding, Paul ascends to heaven and hears unutterable things in 2 Cor 12:1–4. 68 Poirier cites λαλεῖν γλώσσαις from proto-Aquila Isa 28:11–12 as a model independent of Paul, which he follows instead of an angeloglossic model, Tongues, 56. Could accounts of tongues being different human languages from accounts of the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1–11) have reached Paul’s ears and influenced his inclusion of human tongues along with angelic? 69 Martin, in Body, 86, 91–92 and “Tongues of Angels and Other Status Indicators,” JAAR 59 (1991): 547–89, and Ben Witherington, in Conflict and Community in Corinth: a Socio-rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 282, suggest a self-interested practice of tongues speaking to increase one’s spiritual status in front of others. Thiselton reasons for both a positive or negative use depending on the way an individual appropriates the gift, Corinthians, 1095. 144

themselves as πνευματικοί, who were above the present world (1 Cor 14:37). One can see how the practise of spiritual manifestations, especially speaking angelic tongues, could have been considered proof of their participation in the heavenly world70 and angelic-like spirituality. This may be a “realised eschatology”71 or better yet an “overspiritualized eschatology.”72 In response, Paul admonishes them for their boasting, overemphasis on tongues speaking in the assembly, and neglect of holy behaviour with the physical body. His corrective reminds them that they are a holy temple of God: personally and corporately. Unlike the elevation of angelic tongues in Songs, Paul questions the usefulness of tongues in public gatherings unless articulated into intelligible words. The Corinthians need God’s true wisdom and love found in the cross of Christ. They should build up and instruct others through intelligibility in the gathered assembly.73 They need to demonstrate self-less deference to others,74 and they need to honour God with their bodies, which are the temple of God’s spirit. Paul maintains an eschatological tension and reminds them of their mortality. They have yet to be raised imperishable (1 Cor 15:50). They only see in a mirror dimly, not face to face with God on his throne as at the eschaton (1 Cor 13:12). How does tongues speaking work as an extension of the temple metaphor? Intriguingly, Paul contends that when the Corinthians properly use tongues with interpretation and prophecy in public worship, the hearts of unbelievers will be exposed. They will bow down in worship exclaiming, “God is truly among you” (1 Cor 14:25)—an allusion to the temple metaphor. Recognition of God being ‘in’ and ‘among’ them ἐν ὑμῖν comes from worship that prioritises building up of the community in love rather than selfish personal edification through speaking tongues angelic or human in a public gathering without interpretation. Tongues speaking, appropriately exercised, then, are a manifestation of the community being a temple of the living God.

70 Meier sees glossolalia as participation in the heavenly realm “der Teilhabe an der himmelischen Welt,” which brings the speaker near to angels through heavenly prayer: “Für die Glossolalie besteht die Nähe zu den Engeln darin, daß die Betenden am himmlischen Gebet teilnehmen,”Mystik, 224–25. 71 Anthony C. Thiselton, “Realized Eschatology at Corinth,” NTS 24 (1978): 510–26. 72 Fee, Empowering, 83. 73 Thiselton, Corinthians, 1081–1107. 74 On cruciform deference to the weak, see Michael J. Gorman, Cruciformity: Paul’s Narrative Spirituality of the Cross (Cambridge, U.K.: Eerdmans, 2001). 145

7.7 Conclusions Through this heuristic comparison the correspondence between angelic presence and tongues of angels between Songs and Paul’s temple metaphor, indicate Paul’s temple identification has extended meaning for the Corinthian ekklesia and draws upon the broader 2TJ background. While the temple metaphor has a rhetorical function to prescribe corporate unity, holiness, and glorification of God, the metaphor also speaks to the Corinthian community’s experience of divine transcendence associated with the ναός—a communal participation in the indwelling spirit of God. When they gather as a temple community, the Corinthians perceive angels present through their theophanic imagination of being a temple community—a possible reflection of the imaginal heavenly temple. Unlike Qumran, however, Paul breaks with some traditions concerning a temple identity and angels. Angels only have secondary importance to Christ and believers’ corporate participation in the new creation. Rather than synchronising with angelic liturgy, order is one of communal participation in the spirit. Those in Christ have greater authority than the angels, and women have authority and a voice in the worship practice of this temple community. For Paul and the Corinthians, the indwelling spirit enables the people to speak tongues of humans and of angels, not in the heavenly temple, but in an earthly, embodied one, while they anticipate transformation into Christ-like immortals. Thus, appropriate participation in the spirit as a community demonstrates the Corinthian ekklesia is the new dwelling place of God.

146

Chapter 8

COMMUNAL BEHOLDING, TRANSFORMATION, AND THEOSIS IN 2 COR 3:18 IN LIGHT OF MOSES-ΔΟΞΑ TRADITIONS IN THE DSS

8.1 Introduction In the overview of Paul and JM in §1.2 the themes of Christ as the glory of the Lord, beholding of this glory, and the resulting transformation and glorification appear as key mystical ideas in Paul. These ideas converge in 2 Cor 3 where Paul refers to Moses’ radiated face as a model for transformation by vision. The foregoing examination in chapter 4 of Moses-Δόξα traditions1 in 4Q374, 4Q377, 4Q378, 4QEnc ar frag. 4 10, and Jubilees evinces early Jewish mystical ideas concerning Moses in 2TJ. Moses at Sinai envisions or ascends to the heavenly throne of God, receives supernatural authority, and assumes angelic-like or god-like characteristics (akin to deification). Moses-Δόξα traditions and related themes of ‘shine on the face of the many,’ ‘the glory of Adam,’ and ‘transformation by vision’ in the DSS in comparison to 2 Cor 3 will illuminate Paul’s Christian utilisation of Moses-Δόξα traditions and how he advocates a communal beholding and transformation that could be described as communal theosis. This too will speak to communal participation in the spirit.

2 Cor 3:7–4:6 and Early Jewish Mysticism Joseph Fitzmyer criticises W. C. Van Unnik for presuming that the mystical ideas in 2 Cor 3:17-18 illustrate Paul’s “non-Jewish mode of thinking.”2 Fitzmyer demonstrates through Qumran parallels that Paul could have drawn upon a Jewish

1 Belleville notes multiple Moses-Δόξα traditions, Reflections, 79. 2 W. C. Van Unnik, “‘With Unveiled Face’, an Exegesis of 2 Corinthians II 12–18,” NovT 6 (1963): 154. 147

Palestinian background for his mystical ideas—including transformation by vision.3 Studies since suggest Paul reflects a variety of types of JM in 2 Cor 3, such as DeConick4 (vision mysticism), Scott5 (Jewish hydromancy), Segal6 (catoptromancy), and Karl Sandnes and Kim7 (throne-vision mysticism). While some of these refer to comparative passages in the DSS, they have not exhausted this area of study nor adequately accounted for Paul’s communal emphasis and the relationship to participation in the spirit. Among the mystical elements present in 2 Cor 3:7–4:6, there are two examples of transformation by vision: Moses’ face is transformed (glorified) by beholding the glory of God, and all believers are transformed through the spirit by beholding8 the

3 Joseph A. Fitzmyer, “Glory Reflected on the Face of Christ (2 Cor 3:7–4:6) and a Palestinian Jewish Motif,” Theological Studies 42 (1981): 643–44. 4 DeConick points to Moses Traditions and the roots of vision mysticism in Hellenistic Piety among mystery religions such as Hermeticism (39–44) (questioned by Kim, Origin, 141–42 n. 1) and in Second Temple texts including in the DSS (62–64). She argues the salvific mystical pattern appears “in 2 Cor 3:18 where Paul states that the vision of the Glory initiates a metamorphosis into divine likeness” (64). She concludes, “It is obvious that this text belongs to one of the oldest strata of vision mysticism in early Christianity” (65–66). She sees the transformation by gaze found in 2 Cor 3:18 as a combination of Greek mysteriosophy and eschatology, Voices, 66. For a critique of DeConick, see Litwa, Transformed, 221–22. 5 Scott, Corinthians, 100. 6 Segal points out Paul’s mystical vocabulary in 2 Cor 3:18–4:6 and suggests Paul’s mystical experience as the background (2 Cor 12:1–4). Paul’s comparison with Moses’ experience of the glory of God mirrors Jewish mysticism where beholding God’s glory precedes transformation. He sees Paul’s “ecstatic conversion and mystical ascension experience” as not necessarily the norm, but Paul likens the believers knowing Christ and ongoing transformation to his experience. The face of Christ is the glory of God; Christ is the morphe and eikon of God and believers are transformed into his image (cf. Col 1:15–20), which points to Christ’s pre-existence. Christ as Lord has received the divine name (Phil 2:5–11). Texts with similar themes include Dan 12, Enoch’s transformation into the son of man 1 En. 37–71. Paul’s “ecstatic conversion and mystical ascension experience” forms the basis of his theology. Segal’s four major points are: (1) language of vision informs Paul concept of Christ’s divinity with Jewish mystical tradition and as characteristically Christian, (2) Jewish mystical vocabulary expresses transformation of believers and warrants immortality (transformed with/like saviour), (3) transformation language from JM-apocalyptic ecstatic conversion to discuss ultimate salvation, and (4) fleshly v. Spiritual distinction (70). He also notes 2 Cor 3:18’s similarity to catoptromancy (bowl divination) from Magic Papyri (323–24 n. 94), Convert, 58–71; idem, Life after Death: a History of the Afterlife in Western Religion (New York: Doubleday, 2004), 399–440. Cf. A. T. Hanson, “The Midrash in II Corinthians 3: A Reconsideration,” JSNT 3 (1980): 2–28. 7 For Kim, 2 Cor 3:18–4:6 refers to Paul’s Damascus Christophany and he sees echoes of the throne-traditions associated with Ezek 1, Origin, 194–99, 209–10, 231–35. His section on Tradition- Historical considerations of the Throne-theophany visions follows O. Prochsch (1920) with the connection to Ezek 1 and Rowland’s “Influence,” (239–52), whom Kim cites. Kim updates his bibliography in Paul, 174–76. Karl Sandnes also concludes that Paul’s application of throne-vision language to 2 Cor 4:6 derives from this Damascus vision and Paul’s self-understanding as a prophet, Paul—One of the Prophets? A Contribution to the Apostle’s Self-Understanding (WUNT 2/43; Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1991, 137–45; Segal, Convert, 59–61. 8 Scholars are divided on translating κατοπτριζόμενοι (2 Cor 3:18) as either ‘beholding’ or ‘reflecting.’ Slightly more favour ‘beholding.’ See arguments by Hafemann, Paul, 411 n. 239; Harris, Corinthians, 314; Furnish, Corinthians, 214, 221; Jan Lambrecht, Second Corinthians (SP 8; 148

glory of the Lord9 as in a mirror. As the transformation is into the same image, the possibility of theosis exists in this passage and may reflect Moses-Δόξα and glory of Adam traditions.

2 Corinthians 3:7–4:6: Summary and Context In 2 Cor 3:7–4:6, Paul attempts to reconcile his apostolic relationship with the Corinthian ekklesia. Paul did not visit again after the severe letter to spare them another painful visit (2 Cor 1:15–2:4; 12:14; 13:1). He wrote 2 Corinthians in response to the positive report by Titus of how the Corinthians received his letter (7:11–16; 1:13). Paul offers them comfort (1:3–7), shares his afflictions in Asia (8– 11), and reiterates his love and intentions toward them (1:12–2:4). He encourages forgiveness of the one, who has been punished, and reminds them of the triumph and fragrance of Christ (2:5–17). Paul defends the sincerity and truthfulness of his service to them, his proclamation of God’s word, and the valid origin of his and Timothy’s work as “sent from God” (3:17).10 Paul counters a maligning of his ministry and implies his rivals, like the hardened Israelites, are ones who cannot see.11 In chapter three, Paul addresses the question of self-commendation and letters (ἐπιστολών) of recommendation. Paul counters that they are his letter of recommendation—a corporate letter of Christ, prepared by Paul and Timothy, and written by the spirit of God on human hearts (vv. 1–3). Indeed, the presence of the spirit of God in the community legitimately confirms Paul’s ministry.12 Paul, through

Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 1999), 55; idem, “Transformation in 2 Cor 3,18,” Biblica 64 (1983): 247–48; Rabens, Spirit, 178–90; Martin, Corinthians, 71; Paul B. Duff, “Transformed ‘from Glory to Glory’: Paul's Appeal to the Experience of His Readers to 2 Corinthians 3:18,” JBL 127 (2008): 769; Thrall, Corinthians, 1:291–92; and Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: YUP, 1989), 220–21 n. 65. As a middle passive most add “as in a mirror” following Philo, Leg. 3:101; “κατοπτρίζω,” LSJ 929. For reflecting among others, see Van Unnik, “Unveiled,” 208–209; Belleville, Reflections, 273–86; and Wright, Climax, 185. For both meanings, see Kim, Origin, 237; Carol Kern Stockhausen, Moses’ Veil and the Glory of the New Covenant: the Exegetical Substructure of II Cor. 3,1–4,6 (AnBib 116; Roma: E.P.I.B., 1989), 90 n. 11; and Hooker, “Beyond the Things,” 308 n. 12. 9 In line with JM traditions, Paul seems to have identified Christ with the humanoid figure (kābôd) above the throne in Ezek 1:28. See Segal, Convert, 10–11, 52–61; Kim, Origin, 223–37; idem, Paul, 165–213; Sandnes, Paul, 139–45; Philip, Origins, 176–81; Hafemann, Paul, 420 n.266. 10 For suspicions of the Corinthians, see Furnish, Corinthians, 369. 11 Paul B. Duff, “Glory in the Ministry of Death: Gentile Condemnation and Letters of Recommendation in 2 Cor. 3:6–18,” NovT 46 (2004): 333. 12 Duff, “Ministry,” 332. 149

“inference by analogy” of letter(s) (ἐπιστολῶν/ἐπιστολὴ) to the letter(s) (γράμμασιν/γράμμα) of the old covenant, draws a contrast to the ministry of the spirit 13 of the new covenant (vv. 4–6). Paul then picks up in a midrashic-like manner Exodus 34 and the glory on Moses’ face. He contrasts the temporal/fading glory of the ministry of death/condemnation with the permanent/surpassing glory of the ministry of the spirit/justification (vv.7–11). The external veiled face of Moses, an exclusive relationship with God, Paul freely associates with the remaining internal veil on the heart (ἐπὶ τὴν καρδίαν) of the people of Israel, who also have hardened minds (v. 15). For everyone in Christ, the veil is permanently removed (vv. 12–16). Through the freedom of the spirit and corporate beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, believers experience ongoing transformation into the same image (v.17–18). Paul, after another short defence and explanation of the openness (boldness) of his ministry by God’s mercy, associates the gospel he proclaims to the glory and the veiled gospel to Satan’s work—blinding the minds of unbelievers (4:1–5). The gospel, he explains in a possible section climax is “the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” which God has “shone (ἔλαμψεν) in our hearts” (v. 6).

8.2 Shine on the Face of Many Fitzmyer in his comparison of 2 Cor 3 with the mystical ideas in DSS notes the prevalence of “a motif of divine illumination of the face or the heart of the members 14 a of the [Qumran] community.”P612F P Two passages from HodayotP P illustrate how this a “motif” stems from Moses-Δόξα traditions. In 1QHP P XII.5–7, the hymnist speaks of 6 the Lord in terms of light and as having illumined his face for his covenant: “P PI thank 7 you, Lord, that you have illumined my face for your covenant and m[ ] P [P ] I seek you, and as sure as dawn, you appear to me as early [li]ght.” The covenant is the renewed understanding of the Mosaic covenant conceived of by the sectarian a community (1QS V.8; CD-A V.1; VI.19). This theme reappears in 1QHP P XII.28a. The 15 ,(פני רבים) hymnist proclaims, “Through me you have illumined the facesP613F P of many

13 Fitzmyer, “Glory,” 634–35. 14 Fitzmyer, “Glory,” 643. 15 Or ‘face.’ 150

and you have increased them beyond number.” In lines 28b–30, the author explains what this illumination means, “For you have made me understand your wonderful 29mysteries, and in your wonderful council you have shown yourself strong to me and doing wondrously before many for the sake of your glory and in order to make known 30to all the living your mighty deeds.” The maśkîl, whose face God has illumined through an understanding of God’s mysteries and deeds, can then illumine the face of others, likely in a corporate gathering, by teaching God’s law (Mosaic covenant) and the esoteric interpretation of it made by the teacher of righteousness

(1QpHab VII.1–5; 4QTest 17–18).

According to 1QSb IV.24–28 this luminary, Mosaic-like function “to shine on the face of the many” corresponds to the purpose of the priests of the community to function like an angel of the face (from before God’s throne in heaven). They are to 16 i.e., the community members.P614F P Line 28 ties the illumination to—(רבים) ’teach ‘many functioning like an angel in the holy of holies: “[… And may he make you] a diadem of the holy of holies, because [you shall be made ho]ly for him and you shall glorify his name and his holy things.” The priestly blessing in 1QS II.2–4 shifts the illumination from the face to the heart: “May he illuminate your heart with the discernment of life and grace you with eternal knowledge” (line 3). This heart illumination consists of proper discernment with eternal knowledge, two concepts 17 central to the identity of the yaḥad and similar to 2 Cor 4:6.P615F P The examination of the shining/illumination of the face motif in the DSS discloses Paul’s nuanced use of the Moses-Δόξα traditions in 2 Cor 3–4. First, while the LXX describes Moses’ face as being glorified (Exod 34:29), Paul takes it one step 18 further, possibly following some Second Temple traditions,P616F P and ascribes glory 19 directly to Moses’ shining face.P617F P This glory, for Paul, represents the glory of the Mosaic covenant or law, which is being set aside. The context of Exodus 33–34 implies that the rays sent out from Moses’ face come from his encounter with God, who reveals his goodness to Moses and speaks with him face to face. The DSS do not grant Moses’ face glory, although they do speak of the illumination, brightness,

16 J. Jeremias, “πολλοί,” TDNT 6:538–39. 17 For the Scriptural background of illumination, see Num 6:24–26; Pss 31:17; 67:2; Isa 60:1–2, 19–20. Cf. G. Vermès, “The Torah is Light,” VT 8 (1958): 436–38. 18 Belleville, Reflections, 20–78. 19 .(קרן) The Hebrew text says the skin of Moses face shone 151

and shining on the face that knowledge and understanding of the law of Moses or even knowledge of God’s glory brings.20 The DSS appear to maintain a distinction between glory and illumination, whereas Paul makes a direct correlation between the glory of God and illumination of the gospel. Both 1Q34 and 2 Cor 3 connect God’s spirit and glory together. In 1Q34 frag. 3

II.7–8, renewal of the covenant comes “in the vision of glory” with the words of God’s spirit, possibly meaning the revelation (nistarot) of the law. They may both draw upon Ezek 36 and 37. For the Qumran community, the words of the spirit and the renewal of the covenant partially fulfil the promises of Ezek 36:26–27; 37:1–14. In contrast, for Paul, the new covenant is the ministry of the spirit, written on human hearts by the spirit not on stone tablets (2 Cor 3:3, 6). Paul radically calls the old covenant a ministry of death (v. 8). The content is not the renewed Mosaic covenant, but “the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God” (2 Cor 4:4) and “the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (v. 6). In addition, the content of illumination for Paul is more than just inspired pesher (interpretation) of Moses’ words, like at Qumran. Christ is the mystery and wisdom of God himself, which has been hidden and is now revealed through the crucifixion (1 Cor 1:30; 2:1, 7). Christ is the fulfilment—the ‘Amen’—of all the promises of God in scripture (2 Cor 1:20). Hooker further clarifies here that Christ is not “the passive content of scripture” but “the active agent” and life-giving spirit “who writes in men’s hearts the truth to which scripture bears witness.”21 Illumination, for Paul, comes through encounter with Christ, the Lord of glory, in the community of God’s people through the spirit. In 2 Cor 3:18, the often overlooked singular participial phrase ἀνακεκαλυμμένῳ προσώπω may disclose the communal nature of this unveiling and beholding (encounter). Since ἀνακεκαλυμμένῳ is a singular and modifies the singular προσώπῳ, the plain translation should be “with unveiled face.” Translators, though, frequently use “with

20 Belleville suggests Hodayota alludes to the association between the illumination of Moses’ face and the glory of the law, Reflections, 46–47. Fitzmyer, however, contends as do the passages examined above that no direct connection is made between the light from Moses’ face and glory in the DSS, “Glory,” 78. 21 Hooker, “Beyond,” 306. 152

unveiled faces” (e.g., NRSV, NIV, CEV, Harris). Harris, for example, defends his choice by calling it a “distributive singular”—meaning true for all Christians.22 A plural, however, potentially obscures a communal aspect to the beholding and illumination. The Israelite community beheld Moses’ face in a corporate setting. At meaning the ,(פני רבים) ”Qumran, the maśkîl illumines “the face of the many 23 corporate face of the assembly (1QSb IV.27).P621F P Likewise for Paul, the glory of the Lord is mediated or shines from the face of Christ (2 Cor 4:6) and all those ‘in Christ,’ i.e., in the community of Christ, behold this glory corporately. Paul uses an abundance of corporate metaphors such as the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:3, cf. 12:12, 27; Rom 12), the temple of God (1 Cor 3:16; 2 Cor 6:16), and the mind of Christ (1 Cor 2:16; Phil 1:27; 2:2). Paul also speaks in corporate terms in the context of 2 Cor 3. They corporately are a letter of Christ (v. 3) and they have moved from the veiled old covenant community to the unveiled new covenant community. These metaphors and the covenantal context reinforce that Paul speaks of the corporate unveiled face of the Christian community, who beholds the glory in v. 18. Who receives the illumination? For Paul the glory on Moses’ face appears exclusive, and the Israelites’ hardened minds (2 Cor 3:14) leave their singular, corporate heart veiled (κάλυμμα ἐπὶ τὴν καρδίαν αὐτῶν κεῖται) (v.15). This 24 hermeneutical veil prevents a true understanding when reading Moses.P622F P Paul’s description of the blind Israelites is similar to those who do not understand the covenant, even in the DSS (Rom 11:7–32; 4Q271 frag. 4 II.4–5; CD-A XVI.1–18). This comes from a common scriptural background (e.g., Isa 6:9–10; 29:10–12; 25 63:17; Deut 29:2–4).P623F P Paul further attributes the veiling to cosmic opposition: “the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel” (2 Cor 4:4). Paul states the one (ἐὰν ἐπιστρέψῃ) who turns toward the Lord will have the veil removed. In context, the antecedent appears to be “the heart of them” (τὴν καρδίαν 26 αὐτῶν), i.e., the Israelites (2 Cor 3:15).P624F P Paul parallels those who turn to the Lord with Moses, himself, who removed the veil when he spoke with the Lord (Exod

22 Harris, Corinthians, 313. 23 .DCH 6:714. Martinez and Tigchelaar translate the construct as singular, DSSSE 1:107 ”, פָּ נִ י ם“ 24 The old covenant=Moses=the Pentateuch, Harris, Corinthians, 305. 25 See Stockhausen on the “scriptural matrix” Paul uses to interpret Exod 34, Veil, 147. 26 Stockhausen’s translation, “whenever it turns toward the Lord,” Veil, 89. 153

34:34). Thus, the person receives illumination by turning to the Lord, not to Moses. 27 Paul goes on “but we all” (ἡμεῖς δὲ πάντες ), Jews and Gentiles in Christ, with unveiled face are seeing as in a mirror, κατοπτριζόμενοι, (present middle participle) the glory of the Lord (2 Cor 3:16, 18).28 Again, Paul has a communal aspect in mind with we all. When one personally encounters God’s glory in Christ through the spirit, one becomes part of the new, unveiled people of God and part of the new creation. Through participation in the assembly of saints and the same spirit (in pneumatika, preaching, Scripture reading, baptism, and Eucharist), one beholds “with unveiled face” (ἀνακεκαλυμμένῳ προσώπῳ) in the community the glory of the Lord. The “unveiled face” contrasts contextually to the veiled face/heart of the Israelites (vv. 14–15).29 Therefore, the beholding is primarily with the heart—envisioning the unseen (cf. 4:18).30 So, God

“has shone” in their hearts (4:6). Likewise, the blessing of the priests, in 1QS II.3, ties illumination to the heart. For the Christian community, all believers have “direct access” through the spirit rather than relying upon a mediator like Moses to the glory of the Lord found in Christ. Nonetheless, this beholding takes place in community for the yaḥad and for the Corinthian assembly. Despite Paul’s own personal revelation of Christ, here he democratises the mystical beholding beyond the esoteric of the elite to the exoteric—the whole community. The beholding, then, can be characterised as communal participation in the transforming work of the spirit.

8.3 Glory of Adam Paul links εἰκών ‘image’ of the Lord to mystical transformation into δόξα ‘glory’ in 2 Cor 3:18. In 1 Cor 15, Paul uses again εἰκών and δόξα, this time to speak of the eschatological bodily change into the εἰκών of the last Adam, who is Christ. So, Paul makes a clear connection between image, glory, and Adam (cf. Gen 1:26; 5:1; 9:6).

27 The omission of πάντες and the variants of οἱ κατοπτριζόμενοι and μεταμορφούμενοι in î46 may indicate one tradition that sees transformation occurring only with an elite few or Jews who turn to the Lord, i.e., Christ. The majority reading, however, is preferred. 28 See Stockhausen, Veil, 89 n. 10 on “we all” referring to the whole Christian community; Thrall, Corinthians, 1:282. 29 Furnish, Corinthians, 213–14. 30 John Koenig suggests the seeing is “God’s future for the world,” “The Knowing of Glory and Its Consequences (2 Corinthians 3-5),” in The Conversation Continues Studies in Paul & John In Honor of J. Louis Martyn (ed. Robert T. Fortna and Beverly R. Gaventa; Nashville: Abingdon, 1990), 166. 154

What Paul does, however, and how 2 Cor 3:18 explicates believers’ transformation into the image of the glory, can be illumined through a comparison to a similar likeness’ of God’s glory in 4Q405 frag. 8 and the glory of‘ דמות linkage between a Adam in CD-A, 1QS, and 1QHP .P a 31 In 4Q504 Words of the LuminariesP P (c.150 B.C.E.),P629F P a weekly liturgy of prayers, the only reference in the DSS to the likeness of God appears. Adam is fashioned in the likeness of God’s glory rather than the image and likeness of God (Gen 1:26). This connects the adamic likeness of God motif in the creation account and prelapsarian life in the Garden of Eden with God’s glory—a connection not found in Gen 1:

4 32 יצרתה ) P […P Adam,] our [fat]her, you fashioned in the imageP630F P of [your] glory 5 P […P the breath of life] you [b]lew into his nostril, and […] (בדמות כבוד[כה 6 intelligence and knowledge […] P […P in the gard]en of Eden, which you had 7 planted. You made [him] govern […] P […]P and so that he would walk in a glorious land … […]. (4Q504 frag. 8 4–7)

This passage might indicate an exegetical connection between Adam made in the (מראה דמות כבוד־יהוה) likeness of God’s glory and the divine, adamic figure of glory 33 in Ezek 1:26, 28.P631F P Other passages in the liturgy of 4Q504 suggest the author understood the Qumran community, as the true Israel, to be created “for your glory”

(frags. 1–2 III.4) so others nations would “see your glory” (frags. 1–2 IV.8–9). Frag. 6 infers a present expectation, like in the wilderness, of God’s glory being “in [our] midst” (line 11). Since frag. 6 speaks of God’s glory, the column of fire and cloud, and the face of Moses (lines 10–12), Orlov suggests the parallels between Adam’s glory and Moses’ glory evince an Adam/Moses connection with the renewal of God’s glory upon the human body demonstrated with Moses as found among the

31 Baillett, DJD VII:137. Alexander identifies 4Q504 as a mystical text, Mystical, 10. 32 ’.should be rendered as “likeness, appearance, form, or substance” rather than ‘image דמות .DCH 2:449 ”, דְּ מ וּ ת“ 33 Baillett, DJD VII:162–63; Crispin Fletcher-Louis, “Some Reflections on Angelomorphic Humanity Texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls,” DSD 7 (2000): 292–312. Fletcher-Louis calls the reciprocal relationship between the humanity’s divine image and God’s human likeness “divine anthropology,” Glory, 92. Cf. Quispel, “Ezekiel,” 1–13. 155

DSS.34 Orlov’s reading, while based upon hints and concepts drawn mostly from later texts (cf. 3 Bar. 4:13; T. Ab. 11:8; Ps 104:1–2), when compared with Paul will show a slightly similar Adam/Christ connection in 2 Cor 3 and 1 Cor 15. The elect among the Qumran community and possibly earlier concomitant Essene groups expected to receive ‘all the glory of Adam’ mostly in the eschatological future (e.g., 4Q171). In 4QInstruction, the elect will receive the inheritance of Adam and glory (4Q416 frag. 2 I.6; frag. 2 III.12; 4Q417 frag. 1 I.11; frag. 2 I.13; 4Q418 frag. 9 12), which is a restoration (frag. 2 III.9). In CD-A III.20, the promise says, “Those who remained steadfast in it [a safe home in Israel] will acquire eternal life, and all the glory of Adam is for them.” This exceptional, eschatological endowment in CD-A is reserved for priests, Levites, and the sons of

Zadok only, as its exposition of Ezek 44:15 delimits (III.20–IV.4). The “safe home in Israel” is the Qumran community raised up by the Teacher of Righteousness 390 years after the Babylonian exile (I.5–11). The reception of the glory of Adam in some DSS oscillates between future, as noted above, and present.35 As mentioned in §2.2, the author(s) of Hodayota has the a elect receive all of Adam’s glory in this life (1QH IV.27). Yet in Animal Apocalypse of 1 Enoch (4Q205–207), the restoration into pristine adamic likeness occurs when “an eschatological figure is born as a white bull—as Adam was in this vision’s allegory (1 En. 90:37; cf. 85:1)—and all humanity is transformed into white bulls (90:30).”36 The community still awaited this figure’s birth. This same oscillation between future and present reception of glory can be seen with the sevenfold shining 37 a of the righteous—a parallel to the glory of Adam. In 1QH XV.27, the hymnist declares, “I shine forth with sevenfold light b [ ] you have established (me) for your a glory.” While Hodayot has a present expectation, 4Q212 IV.24–25b (=1 En. 91:16)

34 Andrei Orlov, “Vested with Adam’s Glory: Moses as the Luminous Counterpart of Adam in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Macarian Homilies,” in L’Église des deux Alliances. Mémorial Annie Jaubert (1912–1980) (ed. Basil Lourié et al.; Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2009), 135–52. See also Bunta, “Moses,” 86–92. 35 Fletcher-Louis, Glory, 96–97. 36 Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch, 85. 37 For heptadic light traditions of the righteous in early Judaism and the NT, see W. F. Smelik, “On Mystical Transformation of the Righteous into Light in Judaism,” JSJ 26 (1995): 135. He writes, “The representation of the light of creation by a multiple of seven and the participation in the splendour of the Shekhinah by identifying the number ‘seven’ with the righteous and with the increase of light seem to indicate a transformation of the righteous that goes far beyond metaphorical descriptions of material bliss” (144). 156

has an eschatological sevenfold shining after judgment: “In it the first heaven will pass away and [there will appear a new] hea[ven and all the forces of] heaven will ri[se] and shine throughout all eternity, [seven times more.” This sevenfold light comes directly from God the everlasting luminary. This shining may be a conceptual reference to the righteous becoming angels at the eschaton (1 En. 51:4). Does Paul envision glorification as at the same time present (already) and eschatological (not yet)? In 2 Cor 3:18, the metamorphosis into the same image of a the glory of the Lord is an ongoing process from glory to glory. Like 1QH IV.27, Paul unequivocally advocates a present expectation of glorious transformation. This transformation in 2 Cor 3–4 appears mostly to be internal (ἔσω) by the spirit into Christ likeness—the image of God (cf. Rom 12:1–2).38 The outward body is wasting away (4:16). Paul ostensibly postpones bodily change until the resurrection (1 Cor 15:50–54). Since Paul understands the glory of God to be disclosed in the “incarnation and the cross,” inward transformation includes sharing in Christ’s sufferings, death, and resurrection.39 For Paul, the ongoing, inward transformation is by God’s spirit. In a similar comparison, the author of 1QS promises ‘all the glory of Adam’ to the elect: “For those God has chosen for an everlasting covenant and to them shall belong all the glory of Adam” (1QS IV.22b–23a). The fulfilment of the promise comes after the cleansing of a holy spirit, reception of the spirit of truth (lines 20–21), instruction in “knowledge of the Most High,” and wisdom of angels (“sons of heaven”) (line 22). Members of the yaḥad who walk in the spirit of holiness and truth with a right heart receive Adam’s glory, a crown of glory, and raiment of eternal light as an eternal reward (lines 6–8).40 This theme has two distinctions from Paul. The spirit mentioned primarily concerns cleansing of the chosen rather than the present transformation into glory

38 Geurt Henrik van Kooten, Paul’s Anthropology in Context: the Image of God, Assimilation to God, and Tripartite Man in Ancient Judaism, Ancient Philosophy and Early Christianity (WUNT 232; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008), 325, 338–39; idem, “Why did Paul include an exegesis of Moses' shining face (Exodus 34) in 2 Corinthians 3? Moses’ strength, well-being and (transitory) glory, according to Philo, Josephus, Paul, and the Corinthian scriptures,” in Significance, 161–79. Hafemann, contends mostly for a moral transformation in 2 Cor 3:18, Paul, 419–24. 39 Morna D. Hooker, “Conformity to Christ,” Theology 116 (2013): 88. 40 Note the connection between walking with a right heart and in the spirit in 1QS that is similar to 2 Cor 3–4. Robes of light at times are equated with knowledge of God in Second Temple Jewish and Rabbinic literature, Golitzin, “Recovering,” 279. 157

that Paul ascribes to the spirit. In addition, this spirit of holiness and truth cannot be falsely equated with Paul’s understanding of God’s spirit, because 1QS IV appears in the so-called Two-Spirit Treatise (III.13–IV.26), which discloses a complex “dual anthropology.”41 God placed two spirits in human hearts—the spirits of truth and 42 deceit—which are at enmity with one another (III.17–19; IV.23). Two more spirits, the prince of lights and the angel of darkness, rule humanity—even the elect. Only the righteous with God’s assistance will receive the new creation (IV.25) at the appointed end, when “the spirit of injustice” will be eradicated from “the innermost part of his flesh” (IV.20–21). God does the cleansing “with a spirit of holiness” and by sprinkling over “him the spirit of truth like lustral water” (line 21). In a Second Temple Jewish context, the spirit of holiness and truth was likely understood as a divine entity with a resulting holy and truth-filled disposition. Clearly, in 1QS, God’s chosen are still waiting for the fullness of Ezekiel’s promised divine spirit, but according to Paul, the eschatological spirit has already been poured out in fulfilment of Ezek 37:26–27. He alludes to this in 2 Cor 3:3, and in 5:17, the new creation already occurs in Christ. This may be one reason Paul sees the glorious transformation as present, while in the 1QS it is eschatological. Bodily transformation, according to Paul, will occur at the resurrection—a future event. In 1 Cor 15, Paul makes a distinction between the glory of the heavenly bodies and earthly bodies (v. 40). The mortal, physical body, which is perishable, will be sown in dishonour and weakness, but raised in glory and power (vv. 42–43). Paul distinguishes between the first Adam and the last Adam, who is Christ. He writes, “‘The first man, Adam, became a living being’; the last Adam became a life- giving spirit” (v. 45), and “the second man [last Adam] is from heaven” (v. 47). The first Adam left humanity in dishonor (ἀτιμίᾳ), weakness (ἀσθενείᾳ), corruptible (φθαρτὸν), and mortal (θνητὸν). Paul, then, depicts a difference of images. He does not envisage a return to the image of Adam or even the glory of the prelapsarian Adam, but conceives of a new, heavenly image. He explains, “Just as we have borne the image of dust, we will bear (φορέσομεν) the image of the heavenly” (v. 49). The aorist subjunctive variant φορέσωμεν, which has stronger textual support, offers an

41 Kooten, Anthropology, 20. 42 Kvalvaag, “Spirit,” 159–80. This duality has been compared to Paul’s σάρκος πνεῦμα dichotomy. 158

alternative translation of “let us bear.”43 This implies that believers have an ongoing participatory role in bearing the heavenly image, possibly meaning the inward aspects of the image as seen in 2 Cor 3–4 and Rom 8:29. Context clarifies the bodily change, ἀλλαγησόμεθα, from corruptible to incorruptible will only occur at the last trumpet (1 Cor 15:52; cf. Phil 3:20–21).44 Why does the last Adam supersede the first Adam? The first Adam brought death (cf. Rom 5:41) for all humanity and the last Adam, Christ, makes alive. In Paul’s Adam-Christ antithesis, he negatively assesses the first Adam because of his transgression and its pejorative effects on humanity, like later Jewish apocalyptic literature (4 Ezra; 2 Bar.; Apoc. Mos. 14–30), whereas in Jubilees, an influential book among the DSS, an exonerated, priestly Adam virtuously obeys the Law as the first Patriarch (3:1–35).45 Jubilees, like wisdom literature (e.g., Wis; Sir), does not identify Adam’s transgression as the source of death. The DSS largely follow wisdom and Enochic traditions46 and remain reticent on the negative effects of Adam’s sin.47 Fletcher-Louis also rightly clarifies that the glory of Adam is “rooted, not in the Endzeit, but the Urzeit: because the true Israel are the true Adam and the Qumran community are the true Israel they possess all that Adam possessed before his departure from paradise.”48 Thus, all the glory of Adam might be called “protological”49 or prelapsarian, but for Paul the glory is Christological—clothed with Christ (Rom 13:14; Gal 3:27; Phil 3:21 σύμμορφον τῷ σώματι τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ) and tied to the Endzeit.50 Christ as the

43 N.B.: UBS4 and NA27 cite φορέσωμεν as a textual variant despite substantial support î46 ℵ A C D F G Ψ 075. 0243. 33. 1739 Û latt bo; Irlat Cl. Only B I 6. 630. 945v.1. have φορέσομεν. See Thiselton’s discussion, Corinthians, 1288–89. 44 1 Cor 11:7 brings up the question of whether only believing men bear the image and glory of God and if this image is who they are becoming as in 2 Cor 3:18 and Rom 8:29, or if it is the remnant of the image of God from the prelapsarian Adam. 45 For the “diverse and unique” views of Adam in 2TJ, see John R. Levison, Portraits of Adam in Early Judaism: from Sirach to 2 Baruch (JSPSup 1; Sheffield: JSOT, 1988), 96–97, 158–61. 46 In 1 En., the disobedient Watchers are to blame for the origin of evil in the world rather than Adam and Eve. In the dualistic view of the Qumran community, some DSS portray Belial as responsible for evil in the cosmos. See Davidson, Angels, 321. 47 Levison, Portraits, 158. Wisdom traditions, Philo, and Josephus do not portray Adam’s transgression as the origin of death, but apocalyptic traditions, like 4 Ezra and 2 Bar., do. 48 Fletcher-Louis, Glory, 97. 49 Golitzin, “Recovering,” 279. 50 Douglas A. Campbell argues for a creational framework whereby old humanity (in Adam) has been executed in Christ’s death and new creation given in resurrection (now in Christ) “Reconciliation in Paul: The Gospel of Negation and Transcendence in Galatians 3.28,” in The Theology of Reconciliation (ed. Colin E. Gunton; London: T&T Clark, 2003), 39–66. 159

image of God is the Adam of the new eschatological humanity51—new creation in Christ (2 Cor 5:17). The old humanity has died in Christ (5:14) and those now in Christ are being transformed (inwardly) into the image and glory of God through the resurrection life of Jesus (4:10–18). Christ, then, is the agent of new creation.52 At the eschaton, the glorious bodily change from ψυχικόν to πνευματικόν will happen corporately. Paul clarifies that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, but all must undergo a change. He calls this change a μυστήριον. At the last trumpet, “we will all [believers] be changed, in a moment” and the mortal and perishable body will put on immortality and imperishability (1 Cor 15:51–54). Thus, the resurrection for Paul includes a mysterious bodily change into the image and glory of the heavenly, the second man or last Adam, who is Christ. Paul’s ascription of εἰς πνεῦμα ζῳοποιοῦν ‘a life-giving spirit’ to the last Adam (v. 45), may imply the spirit of God has some role in the physical change.

8.4 Enochic Perspective of Moses and Sinai in Paul Does Paul demonstrate an awareness of the Enochic perspective in his depiction of Moses, the veil, and the glory of the old covenant? Paul does not present Moses as having received on Sinai further revelation on heavenly tablets of primeval history, cosmic secrets, division of days, or a vision of heavenly ascent, enthronement, and transformation. In Galatians 3:19, however, Paul says the law was ordained through angels by the hand of a mediator (διαταγεὶς δι᾽ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου), which is similar to the angel in Jub. 1:27, 29; and 2:1, who revealed primeval history to Moses. Paul draws upon this Second Temple Jewish tradition to demonstrate the superiority of the new covenant’s mediation by Jesus Christ. In 2 Cor 3, instead of bringing in an Enochic perspective, Paul presents a contrast between the old covenant/ministry of death, condemnation with the new covenant/ministry of the spirit, justification that has come through Christ and the life-giving spirit from God. New covenant revelation has come through Christ and the spirit, not through Moses. This could be described as nistarot of what was originally given to Moses, but it is more than interpretation (pesher). Paul, himself, has become a mediator and steward of God’s mysteries, like Moses and the teacher

51 Kim, Origin, 265–66. 52 Kim, Origin, 268. 160

of righteousness. In fact, Paul’s ministry of the spirit is superior in glory to Moses’ ministry.53 Those in Christ read Moses without a veil and thus have spiritual understanding of God’s mysteries revealed in Christ. Furthermore, unlike the Enochic perspective, Paul does not see God revealing his final purposes at Sinai. Instead, Sinai, for Paul, points to the revelation of Christ—God’s secret wisdom hidden from creation.54 The only possible allusion to an Enochic perspective of Moses by Paul in this passage is to transformation by vision of Moses’ face (cf. 1 En. 12–14; Ascen. Isa.

9:30–38). Paul draws upon the context of the old covenant narrative story in LXX Exodus 34:29, 30 and 35 and enhances the glory of Moses’ face.55 Moses’ face was transformed as he spoke with God face to face and saw the glory of the LORD

(33:18–23; 34:6–7, 29–35). This allusion becomes stronger in light of the parallel Paul draws in 2 Cor 3:18 where those who turn to the Lord behold the glory of the Lord (as in the face of Christ (4:6)) and are being transformed (μεταμορφούμεθα) into the same image from glory to glory. Moses then becomes the paradigm for the believers’ experience of the spirit.56 While Paul does not disclose an Enochic perspective of Moses and Sinai, 2 Cor 3:18–4:6 does resemble 1 Enoch in several ways. Believers gaze upon the glory of the Lord, which Paul identifies as Christ. The gazer is “transformed into a more divine state, which would be fully realized after his death.”57 Segal notes, “Like Enoch, Paul claimed that this vision and transformation was somehow a mystical identification with the Son of Man figure. Like Enoch, Paul claimed to have received a calling, his special status as intermediary, which also came through the spirit.”58 Yet for Paul this special calling has meaning for all believers, and as previously stated, he democratises the beholding and transformation by the spirit to all in Christ and gives it a communal focus.

53 Stockhausen, Veil, 122. 54 Hooker notes rabbinic traditions that tied wisdom and torah together, “Beyond,” 302–3. 55 LXX translates Moses’ face shining as “δεδόξασται” in Exod 34:29, 30 and 35. See Stockhausen, Veil, 97; Harris, Corinthians, 99, 276–77. 56 Hays, Echoes, 144. 57 Segal, Life, 413. 58 Segal, Life, 413. 161

8.5 Portrayal of Moses Both Paul and the Qumran texts surveyed have a high view of Moses. Paul’s portrayal of Moses, however, is more circumspect than 4Q374 and 4Q377. Although Paul ascribes glory to Moses’ face, the glory is fading and far less than the glory given by the ministry of the spirit. Paul does not exalt Moses to angelic or god-like status or give his shining face healing powers as in 4Q374. Paul qualifies (אלהים) Moses’ glory and writings as waning and temporal in contrast with the glory of the new covenant. He may also be countering opponents, who perchance held an overly 59 exalted view of Moses in comparison with what believers have in Christ.P657F What is the purpose of the veiling of Moses’ face for Paul? In 2 Cor 3:7, the sons of Israel were not able to gaze (μὴ δύνασθαι ἀτενίσαι) because of the glory (διὰ τὴν δόξαν). The reason why is because the old covenant, according to Paul, came as a ministry of death and condemnation (vv. 7, 9). Thus, Paul negatively assesses the effects of Moses’ ministry. Contrastively, the ministry of spirit brings life, righteousness, and surpassing glory. Since Exodus 34:31–32 does not explicitly explain why Moses veiled his face, Paul concludes, in v. 13, that Moses 60 “habitually”P658F P veiled his face to keep the Israelites from seeing the end of what is fading. An ambiguity with v. 13, however, remains. If what is fading τοῦ καταργουμένου is neuter, then its referent cannot be the feminine δόξα, διακονία, or 61 διαθήκη.P659F P It must instead be either the neuter τὸ καταργούμενον in v. 11 or τὸ 62 γράμμα in v. 6.P660F P Either way, Paul seems to mean Moses’ veiled his face to hide all 63 that was ending, which the glory on his face epitomizes.P661F P In Exodus 20:18, the people “trembled and stood at a distance,” when God revealed himself through thunder, lightening, and smoke on the mountain (20:18). They pled with Moses to speak to God for them: “but do not let God speak to us, or 64 we will die” (v. 19).P662F P The veil in Exodus protects the people from the precarious

59 Kooten, “Why,” 176. 60 The imperfect ἐτίθει implies ongoing veiling. See Garland, 2 Corinthians, 183 n. 391. 61 The NRSV assumes ‘glory’ is the referent. 62 Hooker, “Beyond,” 299. 63 Lambrecht, Corinthians, 52. Hooker questions whether it is a Jewish audience because Jewish tradition says the glory did not fade until Moses’ death, “Beyond,” 299–300. Paul, however, implies that the glory did fade and one can conceive of this from Exodus for Moses only took it off to mediate what the Lord said to him for the people. He veiled himself until he spoke with the Lord again. Kooton argues too for the fading of glory on Moses’ face, which is renewed through encounters with God, Anthropology, 324. 64 Textual variant for ‘afraid’ in v. 18 as ‘saw.’ 162

glory of the Old Covenant (death and condemnation) and the veil makes an exception for their inability to gaze even upon the reflected glory on Moses’ face— due to hardened minds and hearts and unwillingness to turn to the Lord. In Exodus

32:9 (not in LXX); 33:3, 5; 34:9 the people are described by the LORD as “stiff- LXX τὸ λαὸν σκληροτράχηλόν) and prone to evil and) ( ﬠַ ם ־ קְ שֵׁ ה ־ ֹ֖ ﬠ רֶ ף) ”necked disobedience. With each “stiff-necked” ascription, the Lord threatens to destroy them utterly (ἐξαναλώσω). Aaron in the narrative, likewise, describes them as having a bent for evil or being full of evil impulses (τὸ ὅρμημα) (v. 22). In Exodus, Moses’ veil is not the problem, and for Paul, the real problem is the hardened minds (ἐπωρώθη τὰ νοήματα) of the people of Israel (2 Cor 3:14). Since a primary theme of vv. 14–18 concerns veiling and unveiling of groups of people, the antithesis is not between Moses and all believers but between the hardened Israelites and all believers. Contextually, Paul begins with Moses’ veil in v.13, but shifts to a metaphorical veil over the reading of the old covenant in v. 14. Paul calls this the same veil (τὸ αὐτὸ κάλυμμα) because Moses becomes both the 65 man and the Torah.P663F P The veil is due to the hardening of the Israelites minds. In v. 15, when Moses (=Torah) is read, the veil lies over the collective heart of the Israelites. Those who turn to the Lord have the veil permanently removed (v. 16). Therefore, context points to the metaphorical veil on the Israelites’ heart as the true 66 antithesis of the unveiled face of believers.P664F P The believers actually become like 67 Moses by turning to the Lord.P665F 68 The veil, for Paul, becomes a symbol of “a refusal to see the truth.”P666F P In Exodus, Moses intercedes on their behalf and the Lord relents and continues with them on the journey, but this does not change the heart of the people. The hardened Israelites misunderstand the temporary nature of the old covenant and fail to perceive the glory of the new covenant being unveiled (ἀνακαλυπτόμενον) in Christ. If the people of Israel, like Moses, turn to the Lord, (i.e., Jesus Christ v. 14), the veil would be removed and they would receive not condemnation and death, but justification, the spirit, freedom, permanent glory, knowledge of the gospel, and glorious transformation. Reading Moses with a hardened mind or heart leaves one blinded

65 Hays, Echoes, 145. 66 E.g., Bultmann, Corinthians, 93–94; Martin, Corinthians, 60; Furnish, Corinthians, 213–14. 67 Martin, Corinthians, 71. 68 Hooker, “Beyond,” 300. 163

(ἐτύφλωσεν) by the god of this age and veiled to the knowledge of the gospel truth (4:4). Paul and believers read Moses and understand who Christ is through the illumination of the gospel and the revelation of the spirit of God. His ministry is the full disclosure of this truth (τῇ φανερώσει τῆς ἀληθείας)—all scripture speaks of Christ. Unveiling and freedom comes through turning to the Lord, the spirit (v. 16). The spirit again has an epistemological and transformative role in this revelation.

The spirit writes on the hearts of the people in Christ (3:3)—a fulfilment of LXX

Ezek 36:26–27, 11:19–20 and LXX Jer 38:31–33. Furthermore, the emphasis in these texts is on internal change—law written on the heart. According to Richard Hays, this expresses an “ecclesiocentric,” hermeneutical transformation by the spirit.69 The healing of spiritual blindness and transformation comes not from Moses and law (4Q374), but by turning and gazing upon the glory of the Lord in the face of Christ. Moses’ ministry is ending. Hooker writes, “Moses was a minister of the Law, Paul is a minister of Christ; Moses’ ministry was temporary, not because the Law was temporary, but because the Law’s true role is to be a witness to Christ—this is why, when Christ comes, the Mosaic ministry is superseded. At that stage it is abrogated because the Law takes on its true role.”70

8.6 Parallel Transformation by Vision In 2 Cor 3:18, Paul parallels Moses’ transformation by vision (albeit an external one) with the believers’ glorious metamorphosis by vision. The pentateuchal narrative of Moses’ encounter with God’s glory in Exod 33–34 and Num 12:5–8 most likely provides the source for Paul’s transformational concept rather than a Hellenistic one.71 Both Moses and believers have access to and vision of the glory of the Lord, though in Paul’s case, it comes through the face of Christ (cf. 2 Cor 8:19, 23).72 The

69 Hays, Echoes, 122–53. 70 Hooker, “Beyond,” 304. 71 This does not rule out this possibility, but only looks at the immediate parallel available with Moses. See Kooten on metamorphosis in Greek sources, Anthropology, 90; Rabens, Spirit, 184–86 esp. n. 57 and 62. 72 For Thrall, Paul’s “idea of transformation through vision” plausibly came from the “Moses- narrative,” where Moses saw God (LXX Exod 33; 34; Num 12:8 τὴν δόξαν κυρίου εἶδεν) and was “transfigured,” Corinthians, 1:295. According to Segal in Jewish mystical and biblical tradition, the “Glory is itself a way of safeguarding the actual appearance of God,” Convert, 52. For Paul, the vision of the glory of the Lord is as in a mirror, who is Christ, “the Lord of glory” (1 Cor 2:8). The indirectness of the glory and the mediation of Christ and the spirit safeguard the appearance of God. 164

glory in both is indirect: Moses sees the backside of God’s glory and Paul uses the hapax legomena κατοπτριζόμενοι to retain a sense of indirectness “in a mirror” much like the seeing δι᾽ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι “in a mirror, dimly” (1 Cor 13:12) and walking οὐ διὰ εἴδους “not by visible form” (2 Cor 5:7).73

8.6.1 Mystical Visionary Background In light of early JM, Paul has congruency with Moses’ visionary encounter of the Lord’s glory (Exod 33:18–23; 34:6–8; Num 12:8b) and Moses’ “mouth to mouth” 74 auditory reception from God (LXX Num 12:8a). Paul has a vision of Christ, the Lord of glory (Gal 1:12, 16; 1 Cor 2:8; 9:1; 15:8; 2 Cor 4:6), and auditory revelation of the gospel.75 In 2 Cor 3, Moses becomes a “model of the change.”76 If Paul draws upon his personal, visionary experience, does the text mean that all believers are to have a similar visionary encounter of Christ?77 The answer depends upon the interpretation of “beholding as in a mirror,” which traditionally splits along these two lines: a metaphor for understanding (revelation) of Christ and the gospel or a visionary encounter (experience).78 Paul could be referring to his visionary encounter with Christ and his calling (and “conversion”),79 and ἐπιστρέφῃ

Conversely, Furnish argues that the glory of the Lord refers to God not Christ, Corinthians, 214. Cf. Jean-François Collange sees it as God’s glory only on the one face of Christ, Énigmes de la deuxième épître de Paul aux Corinthiens: etude exégétique de 2 Cor. 2:14–7:4 (SNTSMS 18; Cambridge: CUP, 1972), 118–19. 73 Lambrecht argues cogently for indirect vision with the mirror motif, despite open face and steady growth (glory to glory), “Transformation,” 250. 74 Thrall writes, “the transformation which in Exod 34:29 derives from speaking with God can be seen also as the result of having beheld the divine glory,” Corinthians, 295; Rabens, Spirit, 183– 84. 75 Windisch suggests Paul saw Christ “Angesicht zu Angesicht,” Korintherbrief, 128. Philip argues for 2 Cor 3:6, 18; 4:6 to refer almost exclusively to Paul’s “experience of the Spirit at Damascus” (167), Origins, 167–93. Segal, Convert, 59–61. Kim sees Paul in 2 Cor 3:18 making an antithetical typology of Moses’ Sinai event with his Damascus Christophany, Origin, 237. F. Back, cited by Rabens (Spirit, 183 n. 47), discounts a visionary interpretation of 2 Cor 3:18, Verwandlung durch Offenbarung bei Paulus: Eine religionsgeschichtlich-exegetische Untersuchung zu 2 Kor 2,14– 4,6 (WUNT 2/153; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002), 135–46. 76 Lambrecht, “Transformation,” 251; Duff, “Transformed,” 769. 77 Both Kim and Segal understand Paul to be referring to his visionary experience—but not intending everyone to have a visionary experience too. Kim argues not for the same visionary experience of Paul for all Christians, but they experience “essentially the same as his Damascus experience, namely turning to the Lord and seeing the perfect revelation of God in Christ,” Origin, 231; Philip, Origins, 191–93. Segal writes, “Paul does not say that all Christians have made the journey [seen the Kavod or Glory of God] literally but compares the experience of knowing Christ to being allowed into the intimate presence of the Lord,” Convert, 60–61. 78 See discussion in Rabens, Spirit, 184. Among those who argue for gospel proclamation and revelation include Hafemann, Paul, 425. 79 Kim, Origin, 229–30; Newman, Glory-Christology, 220–21, 229–35. 165

“one who turns” certainly indicates the “conversion” of the Israelites.80 Turning to the Lord unveils the beholder. Most likely, his visionary experience of the glorious Christ did influence his understanding and interpretation of Christ as the Lord of glory, who transforms those who behold him.81 The present participle κατοπτριζόμενοι, however, suggests ongoing beholding rather than a one-time event (like the Damascus Road) and μεταμορφούμεθα describes a continual process rather instantaneous transformation into glory. Thrall and Duff are correct that the beholding the glory indicates more than just listening to gospel kerygma.82 Additionally, Paul extends the beholding beyond personal experience to a communal beholding with an unveiled face for πάντες “all” τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ. Despite Paul’s special calling, heavenly ascent, stewardship of God’s mysteries, and claims to the true gospel, he readily extends glorious transformation to all in Christ. Again, Paul moves beyond the one-time esoteric event of an elite mystic to the continuously exoteric—all ἐν Χριστῷ behold—a corporate theophany shared through the experience of the divine spirit.83 Paul universalises the vision of the glory of the Lord—incorporating the participation of all believers into “the mystical and apocalyptic core of Christianity.”84 He democratises mysticism and makes it communal.85 Like the cleansing holy spirit of the community being granted only to the members of the Qumran community, corporate participation through the spirit in the glory of the Lord appropriately illuminates those in Christ beholding the glory and fosters glorious transformation in 2 Cor 3:18.86 As in Moses’ encounter, both

80 Paul’s “conversion” is from Pharisaic Judaism to an apocalyptic, sectarian group of Judaism, for whom Jesus is the resurrected messiah, Segal, Life, 401. Hooker also argues for Paul’s “conversion,” “Conformity,” 83–86. 81 Duff suggests Paul references his christophanic experience of the glory of the Lord (Gal 1:15– 16), “Transformed,” 770 82 Thrall, Corinthians, 2:248; Duff, “Transformed,” 771. 83 Segal, Life, 418. 84 Segal, Convert, 155. 85 Marguerat bases the democratization of mysticism in baptism rather than ongoing, communal participation in the spirit, “La Mystique,” 327. Ulrich Luz, cited by Marguerat, “le mystique,” 489 n. 36) states, “Paulinische Mystik ist demokratisch und kommunitär, nicht individualistisch und elitär,” [‘Pauline mysticism is democratic and communitarian, not individualistic and elitist’] (89), “Paulus als Charismatiker und Mystiker,” in Exegetische und theologische Studien: Gesammelte Aufsätze II (ed. Traugott Holtz; ABG 34; Leipzig: Evangelische, 2010), 75–93. 86 Rabens, Spirit, 178–90; Annette Weissenrieder, cited by Rabens (Spirit, 186 n 64), makes a case that in the ancient understanding seeing in a mirror meant participation in the mirror image and transformation by vision, “Der Blick in den Spiegel: II Kor 3,18 vor dem Hintergrund antiker Speigeltheorien und ikonographischer Abbildungen,” in Picturing the New Testament: Studies in 166

transformation and revelation are present. Since Paul’s use of δόξα in 2 Cor 3 reflects

LXX usage for kābôd, then as such it refers to, in Duff’s words, “God’s powerful presence” mediated through Paul’s and Moses’ ministries.87 In this manner, Scott Hafemann explains 2 Cor 3:18 as “an expression of real participation in the presence of God in Christ mediated through the Spirit.”88 The Corinthians have experienced the surpassing glory mediated through Paul’s ministry (and proclamation) by the spirit which continues in their midst, and they participate in the presence of Christ through corporate participation, such as in the new covenant Eucharist (1 Cor 10:16– 17; 11:23).89 Additionally, in the context of 2 Cor 4, beholding includes reciprocal illumination of the heart and mind. By turning to the Lord, minds τὸ αὐγάσαι “see” “the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ” (v. 4) and God shines upon the hearts “the light of the knowledge (τῆς γνώσεως) of the glory of God” (v. 6).90 This τῆς γνώσεως is not merely cognitive,91 but relational knowledge that comes from knowing God, as 2 Cor 2:14 attests: τὴν ὀσμὴν τῆς γνώσεως αὐτοῦ.92 The gospel is not just cognitive either but an amalgamation of the whole Christian life including its proclamation and experience.93 In contrast, Qumran knowledge of God has to do with understanding God’s purpose for the community rather than a relational knowing; God is mostly beyond relational knowing in the DSS.94

Ancient Visual Images (ed. A. Weissenrieder et al.; WUNT 2/193; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005), 315, 321, 342–43. 87Duff, “Transformed,” 770; idem, “Ministry,” 318. Contra Koenig, who argues for a “materialistic notion of glory” following George Boobyer’s concept “God’s light substance,” “Knowing,” 163. 88 Hafemann, Paul, 419. 89 Thrall, Corinthians, 1:284–85. Hafemann adds to the glory encountered in the gospel proclamation, “but also in the worship of the gathered community where Christ’s death is repeatedly proclaimed and embodied in the sharing of the Lord’s Supper, as well as in the songs, Scriptures, teachings and revelations that surround it,” Paul, 426. 90 Paul alludes to Isa 60:1–2, 19–20. 91 Cognitive revelation has much support from Belleville, Reflections, 285, 293; Furnish, Corinthians, 242. For a bibliographic list, see Rabens, Spirit, 177 n. 26. 92 Rabens, Spirit, 182. “γνῶσις,” LSJ 355. 93 Lambrecht writes, “‘Gospel’ means certainly proclamation and listening. But the mirror-type reflection of Christ’s glory is equally present in the whole richness of authentic Christian life: liturgy, prayer, and the inner experience of the Spirit, meditation on Scripture, goodness and holiness, and all kinds of charisms and ministrations,” “Transformation,” 250. 94 In a conversation, Philip Alexander made this distinction. 167

8.6.2 Inward Transformation In light of the exalted Moses who functions like an angel and his possible apotheosis in 4Q374, 4Q377, 4Q378, or angelification in 4QEnc ar frag. 4 10, what kind of transformation does Paul mean in v. 18? The type and degree of transformation by vision in 2 Cor 3 corresponds to the type of glory and covenant. Paul differentiates between the lesser glory of the old covenant and the surpassing, abounding glory of the new covenant. Paul states, “what had glory did not have glory in this case on account of the glory which surpasses” (καὶ γὰρ οὐ δεδόξασται τὸ δεδοξασμένον ἐν τούτῳ τῷ μέρει εἵνεκεν τῆς ὑπερβαλλούσης δόξης) (v.10). With the surpassing glory, the former glory appears dim or non-existent. Indeed, the LORD revealed to Moses the back of his glory, not the glory of his face (Exod 33:18–23). In contrast, Christ, who is the crucified Lord of Glory (1 Cor 2:8), not only emanates the glory of God, but also is the image of God, himself (2 Cor 4:4). Thus, the glory of God is in the face of Christ (4:6)—the “glorious Christ.”95 The lesser glory has an external glorification of one man’s face—limited by the Israelites’ hardened minds—and pales in comparison (3:10). The greater glory of the new, permanent covenant fosters ongoing transformation of ‘all believers.’ The marked difference in glory, according to Paul, comes from the ministry of the spirit—the fulfilment of the eschatological promise. Yet, the spirit is also the guarantee of what is to come; therefore, Paul maintains an already-not-yet tension in the midst of the fulfilment. If one takes Paul’s parallelism with Moses to its logical conclusion, then the brightness of the glory on the face of believers would be even greater and many would not be able to gaze upon it. Paul, however, does the opposite.96 The ongoing transformation is not an outward one with light streaming from the face of believers, but rather an inward transformation of the heart and mind into the same image.97 In 2 Cor 4:4, Paul implies that minds can see the light of the gospel in contrast to the veiled or blinded minds of the Israelites, and in 4:6 hearts are illuminated. Both imply inward illumination and transformation. In 2 Cor 4:16, the transformation is explicitly inward: “Even though our outer nature (ὁ ἔξω) is wasting away, our inner

95 Lambrecht, “Transformation,” 245. 96 Hooker, “Beyond,” 297. 97 Kooten, “Why,” 179–81. 168

nature (ὁ ἔσω) is being renewed day by day”—from glory to glory (3:18). This inward transformation can and should have a visible effect on one’s outward behaviour (ethical transformation), but not necessarily a physical radiation of the face.98 The shining of 4:4–6, however, is not necessarily metaphorical, but seen through the eyes of faith. The inward transformation includes boldness and freedom for direct (unveiled) access to the glory of the Lord provided by the ministry of the spirit through Christ. The contrast is not to Moses’ veiled face,99 but to the hardened (πώρωσις) sons of Israel’s inability to gaze at the glory on Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:14–16).100 Believers have direct access to the glory and, like Moses (v. 12), have unveiled their face corporately as they turn to the Lord (v. 18). They differ from Moses, however, in that they do not veil their face anymore,101 but with boldness and without secrecy proclaim the truth of the good news (2:17; 4:1–6)—a reiteration of “freedom of access to God” and “freedom from veiling.”102 The perfect dative participle ἀνακεκαλυμμένῳ προσώπῳ denotes the permanent manner of the corporate unveiling.103 The unveiling ensures “recognition” of that glory and “enables participation in that glory.”104 This is a corporate participation by the spirit. The presence of the spirit of the Lord, in those who belong to Christ, grants the freedom to shine the glory and truth through their open, unashamed hearts, a clear conscience, and proclamation of the gospel (4:1–6).105 Paul potentially counters those who have used the word of God for personal gain like sophists, who boast “in outward appearance and not in heart” (5:12).106 His opponents may have proffered present somatic glorification, which pales in

98 Thrall, Corinthians, 1:285. Glorification in other passages comes through suffering with/for Christ. Rabens rightly argues for a “relational work of ‘unveiling’” connected to “the (religious- ethical) transformation which is a consequence of the beholding,” Spirit, 176. 99 Van Unnik, “‘Unveiled,’” 159–68. 100 Martin, Corinthians, 60. 101 Moses’ veil, for Belleville, symbolises “a lack of openness,” Reflections, 78. 102 Harris, Corinthians, 313. 103 Harris, Corinthians, 313; Thrall, Corinthians, 1:282 n. 654. 104 Harris, Corinthians, 313–14. 105 Craig S. Keener, 1–2 Corinthians (NCBC; Cambridge, UK: CUP, 2005), 169. 106 Kooten, following Bruce Winter (Philo and Paul among the Sophists: Alexandrian and Corinthian Responses to a Julio-Claudian Movement (2d ed; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 167– 68) and Dieter Georgi ( The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians (SNTW; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1987), 234), argues Paul is readdressing sophist-like behaviour and perceptions of his opponents in Corinth, “Why,” 154–81. See also Martin, Corinthians, 50. 169

comparison, according to Paul, with the future bodily resurrection.107 Moreover, for Paul, participation in the glory of the Lord presently means partaking in the suffering and death of Christ rather than the glory and riches of kings.108 In light of this inward transformation, do believers acquire an exalted, angelic- like status similar to Moses? What Paul means by “same image” may elucidate this aspect.

8.6.3 Same image If beholding the glory comes from the Spirit-induced encounter with God’s presence found in Christ and illumination of the heart and mind found in the gospel proclamation, what does Paul mean by the τὴν αὐτὴν εἰκόνα μεταμορφούμεθα? Paul clarifies in 2 Cor 4:4 that Christ is the image of God (ὅς ἐστιν εἰκὼν τοῦ θεοῦ). To what, however, does the ‘same’ (αὐτὴν) adjective refer in the preceding context? Paul does not mention image before v. 18. Turning back to 1 Corinthians, in 11:7 man is the image (εἰκὼν) and glory (δόξα) of God and in 15:49 believers (men and women) will acquire (at the last trumpet) the image (εἰκόνα) of the man of heaven, i.e., Christ. In 2 Cor 3:18, it may be, as Lambrecht suggests, that the verb κατοπτριζόμενοι, which has the concept of ‘mirror’ in its meaning, expresses “the 109 idea of mirror-image.”P707F P The connection of τὴν αὐτὴν εἰκόνα to the present passive verb μεταμορφούμεθα indicates “both the manner and the goal of the 110 transformation.”P708F P Since κατοπτριζόμενοι is a transitive verb, the direct object is τὴν δόξαν κυρίου, and this is the same image into which they are being transformed. Lord 111 .P709F P Christ, or the spirit,(יהוה in “the glory of the Lord” could refer to God (Num 12:8 112 An argument can be made for each.P710F P It seems most likely though to refer to Christ in v. 18, since Christ is the Lord of glory (1 Cor 2:8), the Lord (2 Cor 4:5), the image 113 (εἰκὼν) of God and Paul has the parallel phrase τῆς δόξης τοῦ Χριστοῦ (4:4).P711F P This is notwithstanding the phrase τῆς δόξης τοῦ θεοῦ in 4:6 because, for Paul, Christ is God’s glory and Christ’s glory comes from God. So, believers are being transformed

107 Koenig, “Knowing,” 163–64. 108 Hooker, “Conformity,” 87–88. 109 Lambrecht, “Transformation,” 245; cf. “κατοπτρίζω,” LSJ 929. 110 Furnish, Corinthians, 215. 111 In LXX Num 12:8, Moses saw τὴν δόξαν κυρίου as opposed to the form, likeness of the Lord .in MT תְ מֻ נַ ֥ ת ְ י הוָ ֖ ה 112 Paul specifically mentions ὁ θεός in 4:2, 6. 113 See Lambrecht, “Transformation,” 244–46. 170

into the same image, which they see in a mirror—δόξα, i.e., the glory of Christ, the image of God.114 This metamorphosis into the image and glory of Christ is a present ongoing process ἀπὸ δόξης εἰς δόξαν by the spirit.115 This will have an eschatological completion, Paul calls an “an eternal weight of glory beyond all measure” (2 Cor

4:17; cf. 1 Cor 15:40–54; Phil 3:20–21; Col 3:9–10). By the singular image, Paul may be hinting at the corporate community as the image of Christ. Certainly, God’s glory in Christ “makes itself visible in fleshly communities.”116 This is akin to the body of Christ metaphor (1 Cor 12–14), but more explicitly here, “Christ is the glory-bearing eikon into which the community is being transformed.”117 M. David Litwa, then, in a noteworthy contribution on this passage, rightly calls the same image an “ecclesiological image” of redeemed humanity.118 A plural transformation into a singular image has a parallel in Rom 12:1. Paul beseeches them to present their bodies (plural) (τὰ σώματα ὑμῶν) as a living sacrifice (singular) (θυσίαν ζῶσαν) holy and pleasing to God. This singular sacrifice of many bodies is their spiritual worship (τὴν λογικὴν λατρείαν ὑμῶν). The context of Rom 12 concerns functioning as one body (vv. 4–5) and denotes corporate worship and participation. Rom 12:5 states, “so we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.” The singular sacrifice is a corporate, collective one. In the same regard, the singular image in 2 Cor 3:18 can be seen as a corporate, collective one since the context concerns veiled and unveiled covenantal communities. Other passages lend further support for reading the same image communally. In 1 Cor 10:16–17, Paul speaks of the mystical participation (κοινωνία) in the blood and body of Christ through the Eucharist and reminds them how “we are one body” because we partake of the one loaf (cf. 12:12–27; Eph 4:4). Furthermore, in 2 Cor 4:10–11, when Paul speaks of “we” carrying about in our body the death of Christ so

114 Furnish rightly suggests that image has “both a christological and a theological dimension simultaneously,” Corinthians, 215. 115 N.B.: The aorist subjunctive variant cited above for 1 Cor 15:49 implies they already bear the image of the heavenly. See Harris, Corinthians, 316. 116 Hays, Echoes, 146. 117 Hays, Echoes, 153. 118 M. David Litwa, “2 Corinthians 3:18 and Its Implications for Theosis,” JTI 2 (2008): 120. 171

that the life of Christ might be made manifest in our body,119 he may mean the collective body of Christ. Paul undoubtedly also sees his walk as paradigmatic for others. Philippians 3:21, a related text, also mentions the eschatological corporate transformation: “He will transform (μετασχηματίσει) the body of our humiliation that it may be conformed (σύμμορφον) to the body of his glory (τῷ σώματι τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ), by the power that also enables him to make all things subject to himself.”120 A corporate image, therefore, coheres with Paul’s other corporate metaphors and the corporate and paradigmatic context of 2 Cor 3–5. Thus, the beholding and metamorphosis happens in community and the people as a community are becoming the image of God corporately. This does not eliminate a personal transformation into the image of God, but highlights a communal dimension and the “ecclesiocentric character of Paul’s hermeneutic,” which is not always noted.121 This christomorphic transformation differs from the angelic- likeness and exalted status of Moses. Since the mirroring of Christ’s image includes both Christ’s suffering (death) and glory (resurrection), then suffering for the sake of Christ fosters the glorious transformation, as Paul concedes in 2 Cor 4:11–12.122 The transformation of mind, heart (inward), and practice (ethical) comes through a revelation of the knowledge of gospel and intimate encounter of God’s glory by the Spirit in the ‘in Christ’ community. In light of our discussion of the possible apotheosis of Moses (ch. 4), could this corporate beholding and transformation of the ‘in Christ’ community into the same image be called theosis123—or more specifically a communal theosis?

8.6.4 Communal Theosis? Can the transformation in 2 Cor 3:18 be characterised as theosis or deification? M. David Litwa, Michael Gorman, Stephen Finlan, Ann Jervis, and Ben C. Blackwell represent an emerging discussion among Western scholars who argue for the appropriate use of the eastern, etic terms deification and theosis to describe Paul’s

119 The plural variant τοις σωμασιν that appears in ℵ 0243. 326. 1739. 1881. pc r t vg syp bopt; Or may be an attempt to make the statement unequivocally universal, but the singular with ἡμῶν can also mean the collective body. 120See M. Bockmuehl on the Jewish mystical background to the context of Philippians, “‘The Form of God’ (Phil 2:6): Variations on a Theme of Jewish Mysticism,” JTS 48 (1997): 1–23. 121 Hays, Echoes, 151. 122 Marguerat, “le mystique,” 492. 123 Bousset, Kyrios, 203. 172

participationist soteriology, particularly in 2 Cor 3:18. A brief survey of how these scholars define and use theosis or deification to describe the transformation in 2 Cor 3:18 will set the context from which to evaluate the terms’ usefulness for this comparative discussion with the DSS texts on Moses’ exaltation. Litwa has recently argued that transformation into the same image (i.e., Christ) in 2 Cor 3:18 can, as “an aspect of Paul’s soteriology,” be called “deification,” which he defines as “sharing in God’s reality through Christ.”124 In particular, the transformation in 2 Cor 3:18, according to Litwa, substantiates a form of moral deification through a vision of Christ, which he entitles “moral assimilation to God.”125 Litwa disagrees with Hafemann’s argument that believers are transformed only into Christ’s humanity in a moral sense.126 Litwa sees in Hafemann’s assessment an unnatural separation of the natures of Christ and instead, contends the transformation includes both sharing of Christ’s anthropological (human) and theological (divine) image (cf. 2 Cor 4:4); this “participation in Christ’s divinity” means a “deifying transformation” into “divine glory.”127 This is not a fusion of a believer with Christ, but “union in distinction.”128 The moral transformation occurs along with a material transformation, which is concurrently present and eschatological.129 Moreover, Litwa notes this transformation takes place in community130 and is expressed primarily through “the self-subordinating virtues of Christ”131 in “joyful obedience” and “ethical acts.”132 Litwa’s qualified definition of deification as “the participation in the divine identity of (a particular) God”133 allows him to ascribe a “peculiar (Pauline) form of deification” to the transformation in 2

124 Litwa, “Corinthians,” 117. 125 Litwa makes an analogous case for moral assimilation to God as deification in Greco-Roman literature, Transformed, 192–222. He takes the identification in Paul a step further than Kooten who concludes that moral assimilation to God as divinization is “not yet (fully) drawn in . . . Paul,” Anthropology, 181. 126 Hafemann, Paul, 407–34. 127 Litwa, Transformed, 220 esp. n. 62. 128 Litwa, “Corinthians,” 125. For Litwa’s longer discussion of the fusion model improperly construed see, Transformed, 20–27. The fusion idea partially stems from Protestant angst over Roman Catholic unio mysticism and a mischaracterization of mystery religions. See Smith, Drudgery. 129 Assimilation includes becoming like Christ in his divine character through “self-subjugating humility” and “Christic sufferings” so as to partake of immortal life (divine power) of the spirit, Transformed, 212–20. 130 Litwa, Transformed, 222. 131 Litwa, Transformed, 223. 132 Litwa, “Corinthians,” 128–29. The ethical interpretation finds widespread support from Hooker, “Beyond,” 301; Rabens, Spirit, 191–202; and others. 133 Litwa, Transformed, 32. 173

Cor 3:18 and its outworking in 5:21, where believers become the righteousness of God.134 Michael Gorman, following lines of Sanders’ participation and Hooker’s “interchange,” argues that theosis in Romans theologically extends “the embryonic theotic, or transformation, themes of justification and glorification” in 2 Corinthians 3:18; 5:21; and 8:9.135 He defines theosis as “‘becoming like God by participating in the life of God,’ with the caveat that the term and the reality it describes always maintain the creature-Creator distinction, even when a phrase like ‘becoming gods’ is used to describe theosis.”136 On the question of which divine attributes humans take on: he argues for holiness and immortality. While theosis is continuous, it happens in two stages: temporal and eschatological. Gorman is right to highlight the already-not-yet tension in Paul’s meaning, especially in 4:16. He further defines theosis as “transformative participation in the kenotic, cruciform character of God through Spirit-enabled conformity to the incarnate, crucified, and resurrected/glorified Christ.”137 He also offers incarnational designations of “Christification” and, following Ben C. Blackwell, “Christosis.”138 The same image is a cruciform one, noting the context of 2 Cor 3–4.139 He cites Mikhail Bakhtin to justify the use of the etic term “theosis” to describe retrospectively “transformative participation.”140 Paul desires to cover the earth with “communal cruciform theosis.”141 Gorman’s communal descriptor is a welcome clarification.

134 Litwa, Transformed, 223–25. 135 Gorman builds on the work of Wrede, Bonhoeffer, Hooker, Campbell, and Ann Jervis, “Theosis,” 15. 136 Gorman, “Theosis,” 17. 137 Michael J. Gorman, Inhabiting the Cruciform God: Kenosis, Justification, and Theosis in Paul's Narrative Soteriology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 162 quoted in Gorman, “Theosis,” 18. 138 Gorman, “Theosis,” 18. 139 Stephen Finlan adds anastiform to Gorman’s cruciform language, by which he means not only the future destiny of being with Christ, but also benefits already experienced in this life: discerning God’s will, Christlikeness, a new creation (2 Cor 5:17), and becoming the righteousness of God (5:21). While Finlan’s additional emphasis is helpful for balance, Gorman’s language adequately incorporates participation in the crucified and the resurrected/glorified Christ, “Can We Speak of Theosis?” in Partakers of the Divine Nature: The History and Development of Deification in Christian Traditions (ed. Michael J. Christensen and Jeffery A. Wittung; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008), 68–80. 140 Gorman, “Theosis,” 18; Bakhtin, Speech, 5. 141 Gorman, “Theosis,” 19. See also Koenig for the cosmic implications of glory: God’s righteousness and reconciliation, “Knowing,” 158–69. 174

Stephen Finlan argues for “divinization” in 2 Cor 3:18 since believers experience Christ’s mind and subsume God’s character.142 He expands upon Gorman’s cruciform language and adds anastiform: “living as though already in the kingdom of God and receiving eternal life and truth.”143 Finlan characterises theosis as “gaining an ability to discern the will of god, and being transformed into Christlikeness.”144 He also clarifies that “the believer does not become Christ” only “Christlike in substance and character.”145 Ann Jervis notes how themes of being “in Christ,” “crucified with Christ,” “dying with Christ,” “living with Christ,” and more, “have also often been classed under the category of ‘mysticism,’ albeit of Paul’s own brand of mysticism.” 146 She questions a ‘mystical’ designation because Paul does not envision union with God’s being, but a believer’s union is “with Christ in his death and his resurrection life.”147 Jervis prefers the emic description “conformity to Christ,” which she describes as “a concern to be like God.”148 In discipleship, this primarily concerns becoming like God in his righteousness (2 Cor 5:21) in the community of faith, and very similar to Gorman emphasises “continual participation in the death of Christ” to be glorified with him (Rom 8).149 As can be seen, if one describes the transformation as ‘theosis’ or ‘deification,’ it must be a qualified ascription. Litwa clarifies that poor definitions of ‘deification,’ which include the fusion model improperly construed, rightly led to the denial of deification in Paul.150 However, if a definition maintains, as Gorman argues, a “creature-Creator distinction,” then theosis or deification, even as etic terms, can appropriately be applied to the metamorphosis in 2 Cor 3:18.151 The passage in question certainly does not imply a fusion of believers with God or Christ—although

142 Finlan, “Theosis,” 75. 143 Finlan, “Theosis,” 77. 144 Finlan, “Theosis,” 78. 145 Finlan, “Theosis,” 79. 146 Ann L. Jervis, “Becoming Like God through Christ: Romans,” in Patterns of discipleship in the New Testament (ed. Richard N. Longenecker; MNTS; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 152. 147 Jervis, “Becoming,” 152. Jervis defines Pauline mysticism following A. Schweitzer, A. Wikenhauser, and the ontological union proposed by R. Reitzenstein, which she rightly rejects. She appears to then use a qualified ‘mystical’ designation to describe 2 Cor 5:21 and argues against comparmentalisation of Paul’s hermeneutic of Christ’s death between mystical and juridical. Ultimately, she prefers the emic “conformity to Christ” rather than mystical or even theosis. 148 Jervis, “Becoming,” 154. See Hooker for more support, “Conformity,” 83–92. 149 Jervis, “Becoming,” 161. 150 Litwa, Transformed, 14. 151 Gorman, “Theosis,” 17. 175

a union may be implied.152 Rather the transformation is into the same-mirrored image—meaning a reflection or likeness of the glory of Christ. Paul and believers remain distinct from Christ, yet equally dependent upon God’s sufficiency, throughout 2 Cor 3–4 (esp. 4:7–11).153 Transformation into the image comes about by participation in the death and life of Christ, though not in a triumphalistic manner put forth by Paul’s opponents. Ben Blackwell, along similar lines to Gorman’s cruciformity, clarifies they are “transformed into this christoform narrative of death and life.”154 Blackwell and Litwa rightly emphasise both the inward and somatic dimensions to this transformation, which in Blackwell’s words is “nothing other than the embodiment of the dying and rising of Christ.”155 In light of this study, this includes a communal embodiment. The union with Christ and the transformation into the same image consists of what Paul calls a “bearing in the body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be made visible in our body (ἐν τῷ σώματι ἡμῶν)” (4:10)156—namely, the corporate body of believers.157 The present participle περιφέροντες ‘bearing’ of the death of Jesus indicates an ongoing process. Support for this present transformation can be found in the aforementioned variant of 1 Cor 15:49: “Let us bear the image of the heavenly” (see §8.3). This denotes a continuous process, and again, this appears to be all of redeemed humanity together bearing the image of the heavenly. The image of the heavenly, the glorified Christ is also a crucified Christ. A parallel follows in 2 Corinthians, “For while we live, we are always being given up to death for Jesus’ sake, so that the life of Jesus may be made visible in our mortal flesh” (4:11). For Paul, Jesus’ death goes hand in hand with the life-giving spirit, which is at work in the believers in the community. This develops what Litwa calls “self-subordinating virtues of Christ”158 and Gorman’s emphasis upon cruciform living. This is more, however, than just a mirroring of Christ-like character. Paul is speaking of corporate participation ‘in Christ’ through the spirit in

152 See Litwa, “Corinthians,” 117–33. 153 Ben C. Blackwell, Christosis: Pauline Soteriology in Light of Deification in Irenaeus and Cyril of Alexandria (WUNT 2/314; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011), 196. 154 Blackwell, Christosis, 196. 155 Blackwell, Christosis, 196. 156 NRSV follows the plural variant “bodies.” See n. 118. 157 While this passage most likely refers to apostles, Paul uses this to instruct the Corinthians that the life of believers should mirror their crucified Lord. 158 Litwa, Transformed, 223. 176

the community, such that believers corporately experience an ongoing, theotic transformation into and embodiment of the image of Christ by the spirit. While some of the recent discussion on theosis in 2 Cor 3:18 by Jervis, Litwa, and Gorman mention a communal aspect of the transformation, the corporate nature of the beholding has not been emphasised enough. Furthermore, a communal understanding of the transformation could imply that becoming the righteousness of God in 5:21 not only happens in community, but also as a community. In 5:14, all have died in Christ and in 5:17 the phrase “If anyone is in Christ” is followed by “new creation” (καινὴ κτίσις) without a verb. The better translation would be “there is a new creation” (NRSV) rather than “he is a new creation” (NIV). This implies “something more inclusive than the new being of individual believers”—i.e., something more corporate with all of creation (consonant with apocalyptic Judaism).159 Theosis or “conformity to Christ” for Paul, then, does not happen as isolated individuals but through an integral incorporation and cruciform participation in the ‘in Christ’ community by the spirit, which has been permanently unveiled and is being transformed as a community from glory to glory into the same image. As much as the discussion emphasises the soteriological aspects of this transformation, the theotic transformation in 2 Cor 3:18 must equally be characterised as “pneumatological” participation.160 The transformation is from the Lord, the spirit (ἀπὸ κυρίου πνεύματος). The beholding includes a corporate communion with God’s glorious presence. Support for this comes from the fact that face in Hebrew can signify presence or intimate communion, which can be seen in 1 Cor 13:12 and in the aforementioned DSS texts. Paul’s prayer in 2 Cor 13:13 confirms this communal participatory notion: ἡ κοινωνία τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν (see §6.5). This is a communal communion in the holy spirit, which enables ongoing beholding and transformation from glory to glory. The communal communion in the spirit coheres well with the broader context of the Corinthian correspondence. If the transformation in 2 Cor 3:18 can be characterised as a qualified communal theosis, then how does this relate to Moses’ exaltation? Within the accounts from the DSS, Moses certainly acquires divine-like characteristics and functions as angelic

159 Furnish, Corinthians, 314. 160 Campbell’s terminology, Quest, 24–25. 177

brings healing through his ,לאלהים mediator. In 4Q374, Moses, who is called transformed shining face and likely imparts knowledge to the people. In 4Q377, Moses is a messiah (anointed one), man of God, with God in the cloud, like an angel, speaks for God, and is incomparable to other humans. In 4Q378 26, Moses sees a vision of Shaddai and the assembly of Elyon (plausibly angels) listen to him denoting his superhuman authority. In the allegorical Animal Apocalypse, Moses c even undergoes an angelomorphic transformation (1 En. 89:36=4QEnP P ar frag. 4 10). While this is not unequivocally apotheosis, Moses is certainly exalted, functions as an angel, and undergoes a transformation acquiring a supra-human mediatorial role. Moreover, Moses appears to have a special relational status with YHWH and the assembly of Elyon. The implications for the Qumran community are significant. If the priests of the Qumran community, following the model of Moses, are to function “like an angel of the face” with the angels in the holy place to God’s glory and mediate knowledge by shining “on the face of the many” (1QSb IV.25–27), then certainly “the worship 161 experience of the priestly community becomes a substitute for a return to Sinai.”P759F P In this regard, they can renew the covenant and experience “the presence of divine 162 glory.”P760F P However, Moses remains an exceptionally exalted figure unlike any human—despite the angelic imitation to which Qumran priests aspire. 163 While Paul is not advancing an angelomorphic transformation in 2 Cor 3:18,P761F P he is describing a Christomorphic one. Communal participation by the spirit in the death and life of Christ, while it may be from glory to glory, does not imply the same exalted status as Moses. Context clarifies that those in Christ are part of the new creation, who function, not as angels, but as ambassadors of Christ with a ministry and message of reconciliation (2 Cor 5:17–19). Like the priests at Qumran, they do mediate, but the message concerns reconciliation to God made available in Christ. The ultimate purpose is to become the righteousness of God in him (δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ ἐν αὐτω) (v. 21). Since the old covenant has been surpassed, the inauguration of new covenant through the death and resurrection of Christ means more than a substitute for a return to Sinai. Moses is a transformation model for Christians for beholding

161 Brooke, “Moving,” 89. 162 Brooke, “Moving,” 89. 163 Segal incorrectly calls this angelification, Life, 419. Segal interprets believers shining like stars as angelification too, “Heavenly,” 110–15. 178

Christ, not for angelic function.164 Instead of following Moses, however, believers are to follow the example of Christ and of Paul (1 Cor 11:1). They have died in Christ and the new creation has begun (5:11–17). The Corinthian community can now behold through corporate worship the glory of the Lord and experience an ongoing, glorious transformation through the spirit into the image of messiah. Paul does not retain a privileged status, but includes all those in Christ in this ongoing christomorphic transformation.

8.7 Conclusions Heuristic comparison of similarities and differences of Moses-Δόξα traditions, themes of ‘shine on the face of many,’ ‘glory of Adam,’ and ‘transformation by vision’ in DSS texts to corresponding mystical elements in 2 Cor 3 highlights an overlooked corporate aspect to the encounter, beholding, and transformation. Paul democratises the mystical encounter and extends the esoteric to the whole ‘in Christ’ gathering. The glorification is both present and eschatological, like receiving all the glory of Adam at Qumran; nonetheless, Paul’s is not ‘protological’ but Christological and has more to do with the messianic Endzeit rather than the adamic Urzeit. The new creation has already happened through union with Christ. Moses parallels the transformation by vision for Paul through both encounter and revelation; the people, however, turn to Christ for a heart and mind illumination rather than a physical radiation of the face. The Qumran community’s knowledge of God lacks the relational knowing that Paul advocates. The continuous transformation is predominantly inward, producing boldness and freedom; yet mysteriously it has a somatic element, in which the death of Christ produces life in the body now and in the future. This metamorphosis can be described as a qualified communal ‘theosis’ brought about through participation in the spirit. Communal theosis means the ‘in Christ’ community is becoming the righteous of God with the goal being in the words of Michael Gorman: “to spread communal cruciform theosis, the divine dikaisyne and doxa throughout the world.”165

164 Duff, “Transformed,” 767. 165 Gorman, “Theosis,” 19. See Koenig for the cosmic implications of glory: God’s righteousness and reconciliation, “Knowing,” 158–69. 179

Chapter 9

PAUL’S HEAVENLY ASCENT IN 2 COR 12:1–12 IN LIGHT OF 1 ENOCH, ARAMAIC LEVI DOCUMENT, AND 4QSELF-GLORIFICATION HYMNA–B AND PARALLELS

9.1 Introduction Since 2 Cor 12:1–12 is the only first-century autobiographical account of a heavenly ascent, it is a key mystical text, as noted in §1.2, for the study of Paul and early JM in 2TJ.1 Several notable examinations of Paul’s ascent (e.g. Tabor,2 Gooder,3 Wallace4) have offered comparisons with a broad range of Greco-Roman and 2TJ ascent accounts. Some5 of these only briefly examine ascent in the DSS and others6 do not mention them. As this study is limited to heuristic comparison with mystical texts among the DSS, this chapter offers a narrower comparison with three accounts of heavenly ascent by human intermediaries in 1 Enoch, Aramaic Levi Document (hereafter ALD), and the 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and parallels. These early accounts provide additional veracity for mystical traditions and possibly mystical praxis in 2TJ and among the Qumran community (see ch. 5). While some consideration will be given to Paul and mystical praxis, the primary focus and contributions of this chapter will be to illuminate the often overlooked aspect of how Paul’s ascent account functions rhetorically in chapters 10–13 to advance his themes of power in weakness and the priority of communal upbuilding. These themes

1 Scott, “Triumph,” 279–81. While Scott provides valuable insights from JM, he overstates the connections between Paul and MM in 2:14–17 and 12:1–10, and often uses later ascent texts as evidence, 2 Corinthians (NIBCNT 8; Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1998), passim, esp. 64, 221–31; Bowker, “‘Merkabah,’” 157–73; Scholem, Gnosticism, 14–18; Segal, “Paul,” 95–122. For differences between Paul and MM, see Schäfer, “New,” 32–35. 2 Tabor, Unutterable. 3 Gooder, Third. 4 Wallace, Snatched into Paradise (2 Cor 12:1-10): Paul’s Heavenly Journey in the context of Early Christian Experience (BZNW 179; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2011). 5 For example, see Gooder, Third. 6 Tabor does not include the DSS, Unutterable. 180

reinforce the corporate effects of communal participation in the holy spirit noted in §6.5.3.

2 Cor 12:1–12: Context In 2 Cor, Paul changes his style and tone from conciliatory (chs. 1–9) to harsh (chs. 10–13). Scholars offer an array of hypotheses, including partition theories, for these sometimes-overstated differences.7 The letter’s integrity, however, need not be suspect, as recent scholarship supporting the traditional hypothesis (e.g., Harris, Gooder, Lambrecht, and Barnett) has shown.8 If Paul writes in stages, he may have received distressing information about strong opposition in the Corinthian church after writing chapters 1–9. He then adds chapters 10–13 to address these concerns, and sends chapters 1–13 as one letter.9 Since 2 Cor 12:1–12 fits within Paul’s apostolic apologia of 10:1–13:10, the identity of his opponents will establish the context for his unprofitable boast in visions and revelations.10 Paul identifies his opponents as Jewish Christians (11:22– 23) with recommendation letters (3:1) who claim to be of equal apostolic status to Paul (11:12). Paul sees them as false apostles (ψευδαπόστολοι), deceitful workers, boasters, and even ministers of Satan (11:12–15), who preach a different gospel, give a different spirit, and teach another kind of righteousness (11:4, 15). They commend themselves and compare themselves with one another (10:12). They contend Paul is strong in his letters but his bodily presence is weak and speaking ability poor (10:10). Paul threatens to exercise his God-given authority, expressed in his weighty letters, while in person (10:7–11; 13:2, 10). His rivals, Paul claims, took financial advantage of Corinthians, while he self-sufficiently refused the Corinthians’ monetary patronage (11:7–11, 20; 12:13–15).

7 For a summary of arguments, see Harris, Corinthians, 30. 8 Harris puts forth nine explanations, Corinthians, 30–31, 42–51, 104–5, 661; Gooder, Third, 168; Lambrecht, Corinthians, 8–9; Barnett, Corinthians, 16–23. 9 Harris, Corinthians, 661. 10 Thrall (Corinthians, 2:926–45), Lambrecht (Corinthians, 6–7), and Wallace (Snatched) question the identification of Paul’s opponents with certainty. Contra Georgi, Opponents, 281–83; Kooten, Anthropology, 316–39; Ernst Käsemann, “Die Legitimität des Apostels. Eine Untersuchung zu II Korinther 10-13,” ZNW 41 (1942): 41–57). Paul discloses part of their identity in chs. 10–13. 181

Paul appears to take up their apostolic claims, which possibly include “visions and revelations,”11 to defend his apostolic legitimacy, even reminding them of the apostolic signs and wonders he performed among them (12:11–13). He, however, discloses the futility of conceited boasting and will only boast in his weaknesses, his assigned field (i.e., the Corinthian assembly), and in the Lord (10:13–17; 11:30). Thus, the whole section is ironic and is often called “Die Narrenrede” or “fool’s speech.”12 He uses these rivals as “foils” to reveal the true nature of his Christ-like ministry and to edify the Corinthians.13 Paul intends not only to win back the Corinthians’ trust and obedience (10:6), but also desires Christ to be proven in them (13:5–9) and for them to become perfect and built up through Christ as a community (12:20; 13:10). They are to test themselves, repent, and do good14 (13:5–11).

Paul’s Personal Experience Paul, as the current consensus confirms, is speaking autobiographically in vv. 2–4 about his heavenly ascent experience.15 Five aspects of the ascent, according to Harris, support a case for Paul’s personal experience. First, Paul gives exact time of

11 Many argue for Paul’s opponents to have made visionary claims, Thrall, Corinthians, 2:773 n. 10. Contra Windisch, Korintherbrief, 368. Whether or not these are Merkabah visions, as Michael Goulder argues, is speculative, “Vision and Revelations of the Lord (2 Corinthians 12:1–10),” in Paul and the Corinthians: Studies on a Community in Conflict. Essays in Honour of Margaret Thrall (ed. Trevor J. Burke and J. Keith Elliott; NovTSup 109; Leiden: Brill, 2003), 306–8. 12 Windisch, Korintherbrief, 349. 13 Wallace, Snatched, 235. 14 Furnish understands doing good as obeying God’s will, Corinthians, 578; Windisch, Korintherbrief, 422. 15 For the consensus, see Thrall, Corinthians, 2:776–832; idem, “Paul’s Journey to Paradise: Some Exegetical Issues in 2 Cor 12, 2–4,” in The Corinthian Correspondence (ed. R. Beiringer; BETL 125; Leuven: University Press, 1996), 347–51; Frank Matera, II Corinthians: A Commentary (NTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2003), 276–77; Scott, Corinthians, 222–23; Garland, 2 Corinthians, 511; Segal, Convert, 34–71; William Baird, “Visions, Revelation, and Ministry: Reflections on 2 Cor 12:1–5 and Gal 1:11–17.” JBL 104 (1985): 658–59; Andrew T. Lincoln, “‘Paul the Visionary’: The Setting and Significance of the Rapture to Paradise in II Corinthians XII.1–10,” NTS 25 (1979): 206–10. Conversely, Jeremy W. Barrier has revived a modified argument of Hans Dieter Betz (Apostel Paulus und die sokratische Tradition. Eine exegetische Untersuchung zu seiner Apologie 2 Korinther 10–13 (BHT 45; Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1972), 72–95). Barrier argues unconvincingly for parody and the account being of someone they all know—not Paul. He does not fully account for v. 7, “Two Visions of the Lord: A Comparison of Paul's Revelation to His Opponents' Revelation in 2 Corinthians 12:1–10,” in Finding a Woman's Place: Essays in Honor of Carolyn Osiek, R.S.C.J (ed. David L. Balch and Jason T. Lamoreaux; PrTMS 150; Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2011), 272–90. Goulder argues the account to be Paul’s colleague and for Pauline opposition to visions, “Visions,” 303–12. Goulder, like Barrier, does not account for vv. 6–7. He also makes a false distinction between visions and revelations in v. 1 and Paul’s other revelations of Christ. Paul is not opposed to ecstasy (cf 2 Cor 5:13), as Goulder supposes, but the inappropriate use of it in the church. For more critique of Goulder, see Morray-Jones (“Part 2,” 272) and Thrall (Corinthians, 2:779). 182

fourteen years ago. Second, he knows what was heard. Third, he recalls an uncertain bodily state. Fourth, the thorn is direct consequence of the ascent, and, fifth, the account is irrelevant if it is not Paul.16 Moreover, Paul identifies himself with the ascent in vv. 6–7. Paul explains that if the boast refers to him he would be speaking the truth (v. 6)—implying his opponents were liars. The thorn, then, was given to him (μοι) because of extraordinary (ὑπερβολῇ) revelations—including the heavenly ascent—so that he would not become too elated.

9.2 Paul’s Heavenly Ascent and Early JM An exegetical examination of 2 Cor 12:1–12 and its context in light of the ascent texts from ch. 5 will prove illuminating. The following areas related to mystical elements will be compared: vision of the throne, method/via mystica, cosmology, danger and opposition, and visions and revelations.

9.2.1 Vision of the Throne? JM has often been characterised as throne mysticism because the object of a successful ascent vision is seeing the glory of God upon the merkabah throne (cf. Dan 7:9; Ezek 1).17 Merkabah exegesis in 2TJ connects God’s heavenly throne of

Ezek 1 with the merkabah chariot (e.g., 4Q385 frag. 4; 4Q405 20 II.21–22; 11Q17 18 VII.1–15; Sir 49:8). Do the DSS ascent accounts include a throne vision? In one of the earliest ascent accounts, Enoch sees in the third chamber of the celestial temple a “lofty throne” with wheels and the “Great Glory sat upon it” (1 En. 14:18–20). The extant fragments of ALD do not contain a vision of the throne of God, but a throne vision is clear in later texts. In T. Levi 5:1, which resembles 4Q213a frag. 1 II.15–18, the angel opens the gates of heaven, and, in the additions, Levi sees the holy temple (τὸν ναὸν τὸν ἅγιον) and the Most High upon a throne of glory (ἐπὶ θρόνου δόξης).19 T.

16 Harris, Corinthians, 834. 17 Scholem argues this is the goal of Jewish mysticism Trends, 44. Conversely, Schäfer argues this is not consistent enough to be the primary characteristic of Jewish mysticism, “The Aim and Purpose of Early Jewish Mysticism,” in Hekhalot-Studien (TSAJ 19; Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1988), 277–95. 18 Dimant and Strugnell, “Merkabah,” 333–36; Newsom, “Exegesis,” 11–30; Morray-Jones, “Temple,” 308–11. 19 Greenfield, Stone, and Eshel, Levi, 68–69. 183

Levi 3:1–8 shares details similar to 1 En. 14:19 and 102:3,20 where “in the uppermost heaven of all dwells the Great Glory in the holy of holies superior to all holiness” (v. 4).21 4QSelf-Glorification Hymnb does not mention the glory upon the merkabah throne, but describes the glorious transformation and enthronement of a human. Transformation and enthronement are common to later MM. The transformation here may be a result of a vision of God’s glory on the throne; thus, the vision may be presumed.22 Other DSS texts support a gazing possibly through contemplation upon

God’s glory. For example, in 1QS XI.5–7b says, “my eyes have gazed on that which is eternal on wisdom concealed from men, on knowledge and wise design [hidden] from the sons of men, on a fountain of righteousness and on a storehouse of power, on a spring of glory [hidden] from the assembly of flesh.”23 The variety in these ascent visions shows the fluidity and diversity of early mystical accounts yet to be formulated into an expected journey. In 2 Cor 12, Paul sees something by which he is able to identify the third heaven and paradise. His identification of these places demonstrates an awareness of early Jewish mystical texts, biblical and pseudepigraphic. Naturally, one can presume Paul was aware of the climactic vision of the throne in some heavenly ascents and theophanies, like 1 En. and Ezek 1. Does Paul then hint at a visionary apex in his account? Support for an affirmative answer lies in v. 1 and corresponding phrases in Paul’s letters. He identifies only one figure κυρίου in v. 1, who is either the content or the originator of the εἰς ὀπτασίας καὶ ἀποκαλύψεις.24 Paul, most likely, means an objective genitive with Lord as the content, which his other Christophanic revelations corroborate.25 The Lord Jesus Christ is the object of the seeing in 1 Cor 9:1 and 15:8 and the object of the revelation in 1:7 and Gal 1:12. God may be seen as the author and the Lord as the content (e.g., Gal 1:15–16). Other objective genitives occur with ἀποκάλυψις in Rom 2:5 and 8:19. Since the preposition εἰς in 2 Cor 12:1

20 For more on the similarities between T. Levi 2–7 and 1 En. 12–16, see Nickelsburg, “Enoch,” 588–600 and Wallace, Snatched, 114–18. 21 Trans. Kee, OTP 1:788. 22 Morray-Jones, “Transformational,” 18–19 and 26–31. 23 Trans. Géza Vermès, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English (rev. ed.; London: Penguin, 2004), 92–93. 24 Matera argues for both originator and content, Corinthians, 277. 25 Scholars debate this point. Baird, for instance, argues for a genre distinction between Paul’s heavenly ascent (apocalypse) and his conversion revelation (prophetic call), from which he contends for an objective genitive rather than a subjective, “Visions,” 659. 184

directs both ὀπτασίας and ἀποκαλύψεις, the objective genitive κυρίου implies both a vision of the Lord Jesus and a revelation (audition) of the Lord in v. 1 and in the superlative, representative example that follows.26 The linguistic evidence, the correspondence to Paul’s other27 visionary experiences of Christ (Acts 18:9–11; 22:17–21; 2 Cor 5:13), and the background of Jewish mystical tradition make a convincing case for Paul to have seen a vision of the Lord whom he would identify as Jesus Christ during his ascent.28 The identification of παράδεισος could indicate the place of God’s presence, angelic cohort, and throne as will be seen in §9.2.3, but Paul gives neither specifics nor the visionary goal of the ascent. Thus, one cannot ascertain with certainty whether he saw a throne. What might be the rhetorical purpose of this omission? Paul may have either intentionally omitted this detail or was prohibited by God from doing so (12:4). The omission defers the expected peak to the Lord’s audible response in vv. 7–9.29 Thus, he maintains his theme of boasting in his weaknesses—centring his identity instead on cruciform living,30 and the vision appears unprofitable because it has no public revelation with which to build up the community—unlike his other revelations of Christ.

9.2.2 Method/Via Mystica The definition of mysticism necessitates a via mystica or method of ascending to the heavenly realm (see §1.1). As an esoteric practice, the evidence, though scant, must be carefully considered—conversely, mystical praxis cannot be presumed from silence.31 The DSS surveyed, provide early ascent texts, which, apart from ALD, do not articulate a clear method. Thus, narrative details preceding each ascent will be understood as the via mystica.

26 Thrall, Corinthians, 2:774. 27 While some have attempted to connect Paul’s revelation of Christ (Gal 1:11–17) with his ascent, the proscription of disclosure with the latter denotes a separate event, Baird, “Visions,” 652. 28 Quispel, “Ezekiel,” 8. 29 Marguerat, “le mystique,” 484. 30 Marguerat sees boasting as an ontological category rather than a moral one, “le mystique,” 484. Paul will not base a believer’s identity, or his own, on a heavenly journey, but on cruciform living. 31 Martha Himmelfarb, “The Practice of Ascent in the Mediterranean World,” in Death, 121–37. 185

The three accounts relate the following methods. In 1 En., Enoch’s method is to sit by the waters of Dan, pray through a list of petitions, and then sleep (13:4–10).32 ALD discloses Levi’s prayer, gaze heavenward, expressed desire to ascend, ritual ablutions of clothes and body with pure, living water, and positioning of the arms toward the angels (4Q213a frag. 1 I.6–18). Even though a method can be deduced, Levi’s access comes from his special calling as high priest and his holy consecration from all impurity. He has to be holy because he has access to God and the holy ones (angels) (Bod. b 14–18). Enoch’s access contrastively is a mediatorial role-reversal of humans and angels. The common sequence of Enoch and Levi, then, is prayer followed by vision (cf. Dan 9). In 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and parallels the ascent, however, is assumed and relays no method. Likewise, Paul’s sparse account gives no method, and contrary to Bowker’s speculation, Saul/Paul, as a Pharisee, cannot be said with any certainty to have 33 practised merkabah contemplation.P796F P In fact, Paul employs the aorist passive participle ἁρπαγέντα “was caught up” (v. 2) and the aorist passive indicative ἡρπάγη “he was caught up” (v. 4) of ἁρπάζω (cf. Acts 8:39; Rev 12:5). These connote a 34 sudden,P797F P passive—almost involuntary—catching up of the man rather than a 35 planned or prepared for ascent.P798F P Paul also uses ἁρπάζω in 1 Thess 4:17 to describe the involuntary snatching away of believers. Paul’s use of ἁρπάζω may draw upon the word’s association with Enoch being caught up to heaven. In Gen 5:24, God 36 or transfers (LXX μετέθηκεν) Enoch.P799F P The author of Wis 4:10–11 (לָ קַ ח) takes associates μετατίθημι with ἁρπάζω: “some who pleased God . . . were taken up (μετετέθη). . . . They were caught up (ἡρπάγη) so that evil might not change their understanding or guile deceive their souls.” This obvious allusion to Enoch may draw upon Jub. 4:23, which states: “Enoch was snatched away into paradise

32 N.B.: Ezekiel’s vision occurs by the river Chebar (1:1, 3). 33 Bowker’s fruitful investigation of merkabah contemplation as a possible part of Saul’s pharisaic training has much to offer besides the overstated connection, “‘Merkabah,’” 171. 34 Harris, Corinthians, 837. 35 “ἁρπάζω,” BAGD 109; Andrew T. Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet: Studies in the Role of the Heavenly Dimension in Paul’s Thought with Special Reference to his Eschatology (SNTSMS 43; Cambridge: CUP, 1981), 81; Rowland, Heaven, 385. 36 For translation developments, see Stephen Pfann, “Abducted by God? The Process of Heavenly Ascent in Jewish Tradition, from Enoch to Paul, from Paul to Akiva,” Hen 33 (2011): 113– 20. 186

(παρὰδεισον ἡρπᾶσθαι).” Thus, Paul’s use of ἁρπάζω avoids the ambiguity of μετατίθημι and implies a passive action.37 Paul does not reveal who takes him, but he may mean θεὸς like in Gen 5:24 and Wis 4:11, the spirit of God, or an angelic being. In contrast to Enoch, Levi, and the maśkîl, Paul characterises his experience, as a distinctly Christian one with ἄνθρωπον ἐν Χριστῷ.38 Paul, however, does not make this a method for ascent. Paul has one similarity to Levi’s method, he desires to depart and be with the Lord (2 Cor 5:8; Phil 1:23); while noteworthy, Paul does not associate his desire with the ascent. Thus, Paul divulges no via mystica for his visionary and revelatory experience despite its correlation to JM. Paul, then, can boast of the ascent following his 39 boasting parameters because he did not bring it about. The nature of the ascent may prove helpful here. As previously stated, Enoch most likely has a dream vision. Levi definitely has a dream vision. 4QSelf- Glorification Hymna–b and parallels presuppose a bodily ascent due to the implied angelomorphic transformation, although equally it could be spiritual since he has no fleshly desire. Paul either has a bodily or non-bodily ascent—not a dream vision. This ascent is only one of his visions and revelations of the Lord (2 Cor 12:1). Twice Paul reiterates the ambiguity of his embodied state during the ascent. First, he says, “whether in body I do not know, or out of body I do not know, God knows” (v. 2). Then he writes, “whether in body or apart from the body, I do not know, God knows” (v. 3). The place of corporeal ascent in the first-century Judaism is ambiguous40 and a modern distinction should not be imposed; nonetheless, Paul demonstrates an awareness of corporeal ascent in Jewish tradition and its disembodied counterpart (soul/spirit excursion) often associated with Greco-Roman traditions.41 The reason for Paul’s disorientation could be the overwhelming nature of the experience,42 a polemical purpose, or both. Paul may be countering visionaries

37 Pfann, “Abducted,” 120. 38 For more on the significance of the ‘in Christ’ designation, see Wallace, Snatched, 256–57 n. 76. See also Campbell, Union. 39 Matera, Corinthians, 282. 40 Bodily ascent takes precedence in second century. Cf. 2 En. 1:3–9; 3:1; 22:8–10; T. Ab. 8:1–3 B Recension. 41 For this distinction and examples, see Martin, Corinthians, 400–401; Windisch, Korintherbrief, 374; Furnish, Corinthians, 525. 42 Harris, Corinthians, 840; Rowland, Heaven, 383; Wallace, Snatched, 259. For the physiology of ecstatic experiences, see Colleen Shantz, Paul in Ecstasy: The Neurobiology of the Apostle’s Life 187

who emphasise one or the other type, though this has little textual support.43 Paul’s disorientation, along with the date of the fourteen years ago, gives veracity to his account (cf. 2 Cor 5:13).

9.2.3 Cosmology The cosmology of the ascent accounts surveyed is by no means uniform. Nonetheless, all three denote the plurality of the heavens44 and the existence of a celestial temple. In 1 En. 14, Enoch travels through two structures of the celestial temple to see the Great Glory upon the throne. His extended celestial journeys discover a heavenly expanse beyond the temple including the three realms: earth, the heavens, and the abyss. Whether the heavens are only one or have three distinct areas (wall and two chambers) and possibly represent a three-tiered cosmology is in dispute.45 Nonetheless, three areas of the heavenly temple would not only correspond to the celestial levels but also to the Jerusalem temple (1 En. 14; 32:3; 77:4).46 In Levi’s vision, the gates of heaven appear on a high mountain connecting earth with heaven (ALD). The heavens consist in ALD of at least three gradations, maybe four, with a limitless heaven beyond the third (1Q21). T. Levi, which builds upon ALD, has two cosmological depictions in 2:7–10 and 3:1–8; a second recension expands 3:1–8 to seven heavens, but most scholars argue for three (from the α-text) as the earlier tradition.47 In 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and parallels, the plural heavens

and Thought (Cambridge: CUP, 2009), 98. Alternatively, Barrett suggests indifference, Corinthians, 308. 43 Lincoln, Paradise, 82; Rowland, Heaven, 384. 44 .were understood spatially as multiple heavens שָׁ מַ ִ י ם By the 2TP, οὐρανοί and 45 See discussion by Morray-Jones, who contends Himmelfarb’s suggestion (Ascent, 9–31) of only a single heaven is incorrect, A Transparent Illusion: a Dangerous Vision of Water in Hekhalot Mysticism: a Source-Critical and Tradition-Historical Inquiry (JSJSup 59; Leiden: Brill, 2002), 30– 31; idem, “Part 1,” 203–5. Adela Y. Collins also mistakenly interprets the Greek phrase “τοῦ οὐρανοῦ τῶν οὐρανῶν” in 1 En. 1:4 as hyperbolic, “The Seven Heavens in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses,” in Death, Ecstasy, and Other Worldly Journeys (ed. John J. Collins and Michael A. Fishbane; Albany: SUNY, 1995), 62. 46 Morray-Jones, “Temple,” 315; idem, “Part 1,” 203–5; Milik, Enoch, 40–41 and 231–36; Rowland, Heaven, 83–84; Nickelsburg, “Enoch,” 580. 47 In the α-text, Levi “stands near the Lord” in the third heaven making it the highest. See Kee, OTP 1:778–89. For a detailed discussion of the recensions and the redaction of seven heavens, see M. de Jonge, “Notes on Testament of Levi II–VII,” in Studies on the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: Text and Interpretation (SVTP 3; Leiden: Brill, 1975), 247–60. Jonge argues for the “non-α” as priority, which has an earlier three-tiered cosmology (259). For the Greek text, see R. H. Charles, The Greek Versions of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (London: OUP, 1908; repr., Hildesheim: Olms, 1960), xxviii. For the consensus on the third heaven as earlier, see generally 2 Corinthians commentaries and Gooder, Third, 53–54; Adela Yarbro Collins, Cosmology and 188

depict a heavenly congregation—possibly the meeting place of the earthly and heavenly congregations. The speaker takes up a throne in this celestial temple. What does Paul’s scant description of his journey ἕως τρίτου οὐρανοῦ and then εἰς τὸν παράδεισον reveal about his cosmology? Three main interpretations exist of the parallel descriptions in 2 Cor 12:2–4: (1) Paul has two ascents; (2) one ascent in two stages; or (3) one ascent with added details.48 Two separate ascents have few recent advocates.49 For this reason, one ascent will be presumed for Paul’s cosmology. Two stages denote a distinction between the third heaven and paradise, whereas one stage equates them. In a two-stage ascent, Paul ascends as far as50 the third heaven in part one and then continues further in part 2 into the paradise.51 This, of course, presumes a multiplicity of heavens based solely upon Paul’s spatial designation of a “third heaven’’ and consonant accounts in 2TJ.52 If Paul has a two- stage ascent, as Tabor,53 Gooder,54 and others55 contend, then there may be more than three heavens in Paul’s cosmology. Assuming a seven-heaven cosmology, Tabor speculates that Paul’s journey to paradise was to the seventh (highest) heaven.56 Conversely, Gooder, who also assumes seven heavens, contends Paul’s ascent was a true boasting in weakness since he failed to ascend beyond the third heaven—presuming paradise is located somewhere in the third heaven.57 Gooder’s creative proposal relies primarily on her interpretation of ὑπεραίρω in v. 7 as a literal rising up rather than a metaphorical exaltation of oneself. Wallace rightly suggests the “logic of the passage” goes against her proposal.58 Even though a seven-level cosmology is common in the first-century, Paul, 1 En. 14, and ALD conceivably

Eschatology in Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism (JSJSup 50; Leiden: Brill, 1996), 21–54; idem, “Seven,” 62–93. Contra Himmelfarb, Ascent, 126–27 n. 7. 48 For summary, see Harris, Corinthians, 841. 49 Plummer, Second, 344. 50 “ἕως,” BAGD 335 (II.2). 51 Gooder, Third, 174; Tabor, Unutterable, 115–21; Rowland, Heaven, 381–82. 52 For Jewish cosmologies from two to ten heavens, see H. Traub, “οὐρανός,” TDNT 5:511–12; Lincoln, “Visionary,” 212–213. 53 Tabor, Unutterable, 115–21. 54 Gooder, Third, 174. 55 For example, see Rowland, Heaven, 381–82. 56 Tabor, Unutterable, 119 57 Gooder, Third, 187, 195–201. Ashton follows Gooder, Religion, 116–21. 58 Wallace, Snatched, 18. If the ascent supports Paul’s apostolic claim, then three of seven heavens does not fit Paul’s point. See Morray-Jones, “Part 2,” 277. 189

denote a three-tiered cosmos.59 If the ascent is one stage, as the majority support and evidence confirms, then the poetic-like parallelism locates paradise in the third heaven.60 Can the cosmology of our ascent texts illuminate Paul’s cosmology? All four texts maintain multiple heavens with the existence of a celestial temple. If the celestial gradations are levels of the heavenly temple, does Paul hint at the third being a holy of holies or the place of God’s dwelling? While Paul does not explicitly mention the celestial temple, he may imply one. Upon entry to paradise he hears (ἤκουσεν) “ineffable words” (ἄρρητα ῥήματα) which a mortal is both not permitted to speak nor able to speak (οὐκ ἐξὸν) (2 Cor 12:4).61 The word ἄρρητος has the sense of something “too sacred”62 to be expressed, like the secrets of the mystery religions;63 they are divine or angelic words (1 Cor 13:1) from God’s holy dwelling place. In apocalyptic and early Jewish literature, ἄρρητος characterises heavenly glory.64 In light of the celestial temple in the DSS’s ascents and the angelic tongues in the seven chambers of the celestial temple in Songs, one can surmise that Paul too heard these utterances in the holy, celestial temple, which he lawfully (ἐξὸν) cannot repeat.65 The content of the inexpressible is unknown. Nonetheless, Paul at times does reveal mysteries (Rom 11:25; 1 Cor 2:1, 7; 4:1; 15:51) and speaks of unspeakable experiences of God (Rom 8:26; 1 Cor 14:1–33; 1 Cor 2:6–16).66 Even here, he

59 Martin, Corinthians, 401–2. This is notwithstanding the seven-heaven cosmology of Songs (4Q403 1 I.41–44; 4Q405 6 I.3–5), where “the firmament of the uppermost heaven” is the holy of holies, Morray-Jones, Transparent, 31; idem, “Temple,” 315, 329; Collins, “Seven,” 81–87. 60 Thrall, “Journey,” 256–58; idem, Corinthians, 2:790–93; Martin, Corinthians, 401–5; Barrett, Second, 310; Harris, Corinthians, 840–42. 61 Thrall, Corinthians, 2:794; Lincoln, Paradise, 82; Harris, Corinthians, 843. 62 “ἄρρητος,” BAGD 109. 63 Windisch, Korintherbrief, 377–78; Tabor, Unutterable, 122. 64 For a survey, see Bert J. Lietaert Peerbolte, “Paul Rapture: 2 Corinthians 12:2–4 and the Language of the Mystics,” in Experientia: Volume 1: Studies in Religious Experience in Early Judaism and Early Christianity (ed. R. Werline et al.; SBLSymS 40; Atlanta: SBL Press, 2008), 164– 69. 65 for a chamber of the temple in Songs designates the דביר Morray-Jones notes how the word to“ דבר holy of holies in the Hebrew Bible and could have a “verbal association” from the root speak.” The living celestial temple, then, could be composed of living sound from the speech or “utterances” of the angelic and human worshippers, “Temple Within,” 326–27. Käsemann proposes Paul hears “die Sprache der himmlischen Sphäre,” “Legitimität,” 65. Wallace following Lincoln (“Visionary,” 216) argues Paul does not share details because Pharisaic training, as expressed in m. Ḥag. 2:1, forbids expounding upon the merkabah or the story of creation before three people, Snatched, 261. 66 For more on inexpressible experiences, see Wallace, Snatched, 259–63. 190

speaks of his heavenly rapture fourteen years afterwards.67 Ineffable words point toward a celestial temple, but is there more evidence? Paul’s use of παράδεισος may strengthen the case for a celestial temple. The

the Garden of Eden ,גן term is used in the LXX, as an equivalent of the Hebrew a (παράδεισον ἐν Εδεμ) (Gen 2:15; 3:8–9, 23–24; Ezek 36:35; 4QJubP P I.63; 4QDib a HamP P VIII.6) or the garden of God (ὁ παράδεισος τοῦ θεοῦ). In Second Temple Jewish literature the use shifts to an eschatological return to Paradise, which becomes “a transcendent place of blessedness”; ὁ παράδεισος τῆς δικαιοσύνης; sometimes a place of judgment; or God’s heavenly dwelling place (Luke 23:43; Rev 2:7; 22; 4 Ezra 68 4:7–8; L.A.E. 25:3; 2 En. 8; 10:1–6; Apoc. Mos. 37:5; 40:1).P831F P Paradise is located in 69 the third heaven in L.A.E. 25:3, Apoc. Mos. 37:5; 40:1, and 2 En. 8:1–8.P832F P In 1 En. 20:7, Gabriel guards the Garden of Eden and in 31:2–32:3 (4Q206 frag. 3 21) Enoch passes by the “Paradise of Justice.” Frag. 4 describes the trees in the garden and 70 paradise’s location in the north—on earth.P833F P The extant fragments of ALD do not mention paradise or the garden despite having similar gradations of heaven and potentially being a base text for T. Levi. Paradise, in T. Levi, is part of heaven and the messiah will “open the gates of paradise . . . and grant to the saints to eat of the tree 71 of life” (18:10).P834F P Other evidence from the DSS may corroborate the identification. The Qumran community’s self-understanding as a temple and “eternal plantation” makes a self- identification with the restoration of the Garden of Eden. For example, in the a allegorical Hymn of the Garden (1QHP P XVI.5–27), the hymnist speaks of the eternal planting, i.e., the Qumran community, in an eternal Garden of Eden in heaven (ll. 7,

14, 21; cf. XIV.17–20). The hymnist cultivates and waters the planting with his teaching. Biblical allusions and parallels in other DSS help identify Eden as

67 Rowland, Heaven, 383. 68 See J. Jeremias, “παράδεισος,” TDNT 5:765–73; “παράδεισος,” BAGD 614; J. H. Charlesworth, “Paradise,” ABD 5:154–55; Furnish, Corinthians, 526. 69 Not all recensions of 2 En. 8:1 locate Paradise in the third heaven. Paradise seems to be on the same level as earth in [J] the longer recension where Enoch looks downward from the third heaven and sees Paradise. See F. I. Anderson, “2 (Slavonic Apocalypse of) ENOCH,” OTP 1:114–115, esp. n. 8b. 70 See Milik, Enoch, 41. Cf. Jub. 4:22. 71 Trans. H. C. Kee, OTP 1:795. Christian interpolation cannot be ruled out here. 191

representative of the celestial temple (Jub. 3:9–13; 8:19).72 In a similar manner, in Rev 2:7, the tree of life is situated in the paradise of God, and in this same place with the tree of life is God’s presence and God’s throne (22:3). Paul, reflecting early Christianity and 2TJ, associates paradise with heaven and adds the hearing of inexpressible words to his picture of paradise. From this external evidence, it seems highly plausible that the paradise Paul mentions could be considered part of the celestial temple and a place of God’s presence and possible throne (cf. Col 3:1). In this case, the Corinthian community’s temple identification would mirror the heavenly, where the spirit reveals mysteries of God through worshipping participants.

9.2.4 Danger and Opposition Heavenly ascent journeys are, at times, fraught with danger and angelic opposition.73 Do the DSS ascent accounts or even Paul testify to this opposition and danger?74 Enoch’s precarious journey alone through the paradoxical celestial chambers elicits great fear. He exclaims, “Fear enveloped me, and trembling seized me, and I was quaking and trembling, and I fell upon my face” (1 En. 14:13b–14). While this holy fear precedes his vision of the Great Glory, it could come from the fiery cherubim in the second house and feeling of “no delight of life in it” (v. 13). Later in the vision, Enoch’s trembling occurs before the throne of the Great Glory and with the hearing of God’s voice (14:24–15:1). Thus, Enoch does not identify unequivocally angelic opposition to his ascent; in fact, his calling is to mediate between God and fallen angels. 75 In ALD, Levi’s preparatory prayer includes an apotropaicP838F P request: “and] may no adversary rule over me [to lead me astray from your path” (4Q213a frag. 1 I.17– could mean satan. Is Levi’s prayer for protection שטן The word for adversary .(18 from a satan, which might oppose his visionary ascent to heaven or is it a general

72 Davila notes the biblical allusions and argues, “as far back as the Second Temple period there was a cluster of motifs centered around the mystical experience of the celestial temple and the heavenly Paradise” (477), “Hymnist,” 457–77. 73 The theme of danger appears in early rabbinic (b. Ḥag. 14b) and Hekhalot texts, Morray- Jones, “Transformational,” 1–31, esp. 25; Scholem, Trends, 51–53. For the origin and tradition of angelic opposition to Moses’ ascent, see Schultz, “Angelic,” 282–307. 74 Spittler sees a link between the angel of Satan and angels in apocalyptic journeys, “Limits,” 265. 75 For the apotropaic nature of the prayer, see Nickelsburg, Jewish, 160. 192

prayer reflecting the two-spirits theology of 1QS? Two-spirits theology separates humanity into two lots. Belial or the angel of darkness rules the wicked, and the prince of light rules those in the covenant (1QS I.22–III.26). It is unknown if ALD is advocating here a two-spirits theology. The prayer for no satan to rule over him, however, is more likely a general prayer for help from God to keep Levi on the true path rather than a prayer for protection from angelic opposition to his forthcoming ascent. Moreover, an angel instead of hindering his ascent entreats him to enter heaven. In 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and parallels, the exalted instructor is already in the heavenly temple when he reflectively claims that he suffers more evil than others do. He writes, “Who bea[rs all] sorrows like me? And who [suffe]rs evil like me? There is no-one” (4Q491c 1 9). The sorrows and evil seem related to his exceptional instruction, judgments, and the resulting opposition from unidentified attackers and potentially could be as a result of his great exaltation. While 4Q491c does not disclose angelic opposition or fear from the vision of glory, it implies a connection between exaltation and suffering. While Paul does not speak of fear during his ascent, does the angelic opposition in 2 Cor 12:7 come during his ascent and prevent him from ascending further?76 In understanding v. 7’s relationship to vv. 2–4, two important exegetical questions must be considered: (1) did the opposition come during the ascent or afterwards? (2) what is this ἄγγελος σατανᾶ? Gooder and Ashton makes a tenuous case for vv. 7–10 to have taken place during Paul’s ascent, and through a seven-tiered cosmological assumption argue for Paul to have been prevented from ascending further by this angel of Satan.77 Thus, Paul fails to ascend to the highest heaven. This interpretation has several exegetical problems. Gooder’s non-metaphorical interpretation of μὴ ὑπεραίρωμαι, while possible, seems forced.78 The metaphorical

76 For those who see the angelic opposition as similar to the danger and opposition to heavenly ascent in Jewish apocalyptic and mystical texts, see Windisch, Korintherbrief, 385–88; Spittler, “Limits,” 265; Robert M. Price, “Punished in Paradise (An Exegetical Theory of II Corinthians 12:1– 10),” JSNT 7 (1980): 33–40; Baird, “Visions,” 659–60. 77 Their argument presumes Paul’s and the Corinthians’ awareness of ascension motifs. Ashton, Religion, 116–21; Gooder, Third, 190. See also M. David Litwa, “Paul’s Mosaic Ascent: An Interpretation of 2 Corinthians 12.7–9,” NTS 57 (2011), 240–41. 78 In 2 Thess 2:4 ὑπεραίρω clearly refers to metaphorical exaltation not a literal rising up, and Paul uses the same root ἐπαίρω to describe his self-exalted opponents. 193

meaning of ὑπεραίρω as “an undue sense of one’s self-importance”79 fits the context of vv. 5–6 and the problem of boasting better. While his opponents ἐπαίρω in 11:20, Paul has more reasons to become ὑπεραίρω, overly exalted, above them.80 Gooder’s incorporation of vv.5–10 in the ascent obscures the rhetorical weight of Paul’s switch from third to first person. Why would Paul be willing to boast of “such a one” in v.5 and call these revelations extraordinary (τῇ ὑπερβολῇ) if the ascent was a failure?81 If plural revelations (τῶν ἀποκαλύψεων) refer back to v. 1, then he is referring to more than just the heavenly ascent, which shows the thorn is a separate event. Even if revelations refer to ῥήματα of v. 4, the thorn is still a post-revelatory event.82 The affliction of the thorn, therefore, likely began shortly after and because the revelations. Furthermore, the ἄγγελος of satan beats (κολαφίζῃ) Paul, which the present subjective suggests in a continuous or recurrent manner.83 If the ἄγγελος prevents him from rising higher, as Gooder proposes, Paul would not have implied an ongoing torment. For these reasons, Gooder’s proposal of an angel halting Paul’s ascent must be dismissed.84 Paul’s weakness derives from a thorn85 in the flesh (σκόλοψ τῇ σαρκί) so that he would not exalt himself. Scholars propose many interpretations of the thorn. The answers can be generally categorised into a relational opposition, spiritual/psychological anxiety, or a physical ailment.86 Relational opposition appears to have some contextual support. If one takes the meaning of κολαφίζῃ, to strike or beat with the fist87 literally, then Paul may be speaking of recurrent human opposition guided by Satan. His other use of κολαφίζω describes human opposition as do other New Testament texts (1 Cor 4:11; cf. Matt 26:67; Mark 14:65).

79 “ὑπεραίρω,” BAGD 839. 80 Wallace, Snatched, 269. 81 Wallace, Snatched, 18. 82 Price argues the revelations refer to v. 4, “Punished,” 35. 83 Harris, Corinthians, 855–57; Ulrich Heckel, “Der Dorn im Fleisch Die Krankheit des Paulus in 2Kor 12,7 und Gal 4,13 f.” ZNW 84 (1993): 71. 84 Wallace notes the late connection between ascent and angelic opposition, Snatched, 269–70 n. 113. 85 Septuagintal usage suggests thorn rather than stake. The thorn could metaphorically refer to an affliction or trouble. See Gerhard Delling, “σκόλοψ,” TDNT 7:409–10; Harris, Corinthians, 853– 54. In contrast, David M. Park argues that stake better stresses the severity of the affliction than thorn, which suggests superficiality, “Paul’s ΣΚΟΛΟΨ ΤΗ ΣΑΡΚΙ: Thorn or Stake? (2 Cor. 12:7),” NovT 22 (1980): 179–83. Cross as a potential meaning cannot be substantiated. 86 For summaries, see Thrall, Corinthians, 2:809–18; Furnish, Corinthians, 548–49; and Harris, Corinthians, 858–59. 87 “κολαφίζω,” BAGD 441. 194

Conversely, the striking could be like Satan afflicting Job with physical ailments (Job 2:7). A physical malady based on a locative dative τῇ σαρκί has many proponents and makes more sense exegetically, especially if the identity of the ἄγγελος is in fact an angel.88 Support for a physical affliction comes in a parallel passage in Gal 4:13. Paul cites a ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς, which caused him to stay and preach the gospel in Galatia. Since he was a trial to them ἐν τῇ σαρκί μου (v. 14), a physical infirmity is implied. Paul also admits a weak bodily presence, which could be the result of a physical affliction (2 Cor 10:7–10). The third case of anxiety is difficult to maintain and has little scholarly support. For clarification of the thorn, is Paul’s appositional phrase ἄγγελος σατανᾶ human or angelic?89 Since Paul does not speak of a single oppressing person who attacks him over a fourteen-year period and the angel and Satan in 2 Cor 11:13–15 do not form an adequate parallel, a human ἄγγελος is implausible.90 Furthermore, demonic induced illness is frequent in Second Temple Jewish literature (Luke 13:10– 17; Mark 3:22; T. Job 20).91 Thus, Paul speaks of an angelic being of Satan, which strengthens the case for the thorn to be a physical affliction. In light of Levi’s apotropaic prayer, satanic opposition fits the 2TJ background. The “theological passive”92 (ἐδόθη) and the remedial purpose of the thorn, suggest God or the Lord (Christ) is the giver. Paradoxically, Paul simultaneously suggests the thorn is a gift from God and an instrument of Satan. He implies the ἄγγελος acts by God’s permission and for God’s higher purpose.93 Paul’s prayer reveals that, at first, he could not see the benefit of the thorn, satanic buffeting, but after auditory clarification from the Lord, he sees the protective purpose which he emphatically recalls is to prevent excessive elation (ἵνα μὴ ὑπεραίρωμαι). Paul does not disclose the angel’s awareness of its remedial use by God (cf. 1 Cor 2:8).

88 Harris argues for physical illness, which he also interprets as θλίψεως in Asia 2 Cor 1:8–11. His detailed reconstruction of three occasions when Paul prays for relief, however, is tenuous, Corinthians, 164–82 and 851–58. On physical illness and supporters, see Harris’ summary (858–59); Thrall, Corinthians, 2:809–18; Heckel, “Dorn,” 76–92; and Wallace, Snatched, 273. 89 For an angelic identification, see Price, “Punished,” 33–40; Morray-Jones, “Part 2,” 282–83; Gooder, Third, 197–202; Scott, Corinthians, 228. Price, however, argues for the thorn itself to be a demon or angel of Satan. Contra Furnish, Corinthians, 550 and Thrall, Corinthians, 2:817. 90 Heckel, “Dorn,” 74–75; Thrall, Corinthians, 2:813; Furnish, Corinthians, 549–50. If a human, Paul probably would have used διάκονος rather than ἄγγελος as in 2 Cor 11:15. 91 Heckel, “Dorn,” 77–78. 92 Harris, Corinthians, 855. 93 Harris rightly notes that the second ἵνα μὴ ὑπεραίρωμαι speaks to God’s role not Satan’s, Corinthians, 856–57. 195

In this way, Paul is like Levi in ALD. He prays for deliverance from a satan, but later Paul learns, like Job 2:1–7, that Satan can be an effective instrument in God’s hands for further revelation of God’s character and purpose. This shows Paul understood Satan and his angels as subservient to God, and essentially needed God’s permission to touch those in Christ. The remedial nature for self-exaltation also leads one not to rule out a secondary meaning of τῇ σαρκί as for the flesh, that is, debased passions and desires commiserate with Gal 5:19–21.94 This fits too with Satan’s destruction of the flesh for a salvific purpose in 1 Cor 5:1–5. The connection between suffering and revelations corresponds to the ongoing suffering of evil, which the speaker of 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and parallels shares. The speaker experiences suffering because of his exceptional instruction and judgment, but not necessarily as remedial or preventative to pride. The speaker appears beyond desires of the flesh95 and in no need of humbling. Indeed, the speaker appears to be boasting excessively. Paul, in contrast, identifies his suffering as part of his apostolic calling to emulate his crucified Lord and as a consequence of revelations—a mystical suffering.96 Thus, Paul differs from later mystical accounts, where the opposition comes during the ascent; Paul sees opposition and suffering coming after and as a result of the extraordinary revelations to prevent self- exaltation.97

9.2.5 Visions and Revelations Each of the DSS ascent texts discloses some kind of revelation. In 1 En., Enoch sees the Great Glory and hears divine speech, which commissions him as a mediator to the watchers, who receive judgment (1 En. 14; 4Q204 VI.13–19; 4Q204 VI.4–10). Enoch records the vision. Enoch’s observations reveal the paradoxical makeup of the celestial temple and God’s throne (4Q204 VI.20–29; VIII.27–30). His cosmic journey reveals cosmological mysteries about the heavens, earth, and abyss (XII.23–30;

XIII.23–28). In ALD, Levi receives a divine commission, investiture as the priest of

94 Wallace, Snatched, 271. For a broader meaning, see Eduard Schweizer, Friedrich Baumgärtel, and Rudolf Meyer, “σάρξ, σαρκικός, σάρκινος,” TDNT 7:98–151. 95 This could also mean the speaker had a spiritual ascent rather than an embodied one, Alexander, Mystical, 88. 96 Marguerat writes, “On comprend que la mystique qui s’annonce ici est une mystique de la souffrance” [‘It is understood that the mysticism which appears here is a mysticism of suffering’], “La mystique,” 319, 236; idem, “le mystique,” 486. 97 Wallace, Snatched, 269–70 n. 113. 196

God, priestly lore on cultic practice not in the Torah, and divine wisdom. In 4QSelf- Glorification Hymnb the exalted individual claims, “I have been instructed, and there is no teaching comparable [to my teaching. . .]” (4Q491c frag. 1 9–10). The speaker receives divine knowledge, “his truth and the mysteries of his wisdom” (ll.1–3), which he teaches to his community, “the council of the poor,” and to Israel (ll. 3–4). This hymn functions, then, like a prophetic commissioning as a divine teacher and worship leader. The speaker’s elevation to angelic status implies he has angelic, 98 esoteric knowledge since angels are “angels of knowledge” (cf. 1QS IV.22). Paul gives the appearance that he is going to boast in an extraordinary example of a heavenly ascent. He gives a concise, parallel description of his experience in third person with no details of what he saw. He, then, notes the man in Christ cannot share the inexpressible utterances—possibly sealed up for a later time.99 When one looks back to v. 1, the reason for the restraint becomes clear. Paul follows “it is necessary to boast” with οὐ συμφέρον μέν.100 Since μέν ties the statement with what follows (δὲ) rather than what proceeds,101 Paul emphasises that going on to εἰς ὀπτασίας καὶ ἀποκαλύψεις κυρίου is not profitable—more specifically for self- acclamation and boasting.102 Paul at other occasions does not hesitate to relate his personal revelation of Jesus Christ (1 Cor 9:1; 15:8; Gal 1:12; 2:2).These autobiographical confidences generally substantiate his proclamation of the gospel and have a Christological and soteriological function. Paul, however, in the end, refuses to use an extraordinary visionary experience for apostolic legitimacy. He feigns a boast for apostolic credibility—not discounting its truthfulness (v. 6)—but then divulges a weightier revelation—Christ’s power perfected in weakness. The lack of profitability of sharing visions and revelations seems to have a two- fold purpose for Paul. First, Paul does not want the Corinthians to think more of him than what is seen or heard from him (2 Cor 12:6). This recalls Paul’s appearance as both weak and rhetorically unskilled (10:10) as well as the demonstration of the spirit and power through his preaching of Christ crucified (1 Cor 2:1–5). He should

98 Alexander understands the speaker’s claim to counted one of the angels as “like one of the high angels in his knowledge of God,” Mystical, 87. Knowledge at Qumran often means revealed knowledge. 99 Lincoln, Paradise, 84. For more on the reluctance of recounting aspects of heavenly journeys, see Scott’s notes, Corinthians, 240. 100 Despite textual variants, î46 ℵ B F G etc. make a strong case for the current reading. 101 BDF §447. 102 Wallace, Snatched, 285. 197

not need to tell them more visions and revelations because they have already seen his apostleship. Indeed, their existence as a Christian community came from Paul’s ministry (2 Cor 9:1–2); he first preached the good news to them (10:14). Second, Paul may not see any profitability toward the community’s edification. This parallels his argument concerning tongues speaking and the building up of the ἐκκλησία in 1 Cor 14, and using the gifts of the Spirit for the common good (12:7).103 Additionally, Paul acknowledges he was prohibited from sharing revelation from his ascent, from which he might build up the church.104 The sharing of personal visions and revelations does not necessarily build up the community either, unless it has a Christological or soteriological function. In fact, it could be problematic. The one sharing could become too elated and others might think of him or her too highly, which would draw focus away from Christ crucified. Likewise, a congregation prone to factions, concerned with status and comparisons, like Corinth, could easily be abused and misused by false apostles “propagandistic”105 boasting and putting on airs, which they already have (2 Cor 11:1–20, esp. 20). Of the many reasons for his inclusion of the ascent account, two are significant for this study. First, Paul ironically relates the ascent to demonstrate his relinquishing of a rightful claim to a boast so that he can exemplify his refusal to boast except in what is for the sake of Christ, i.e., weaknesses.106 Secondly, the ascent account sets up the resulting thorn in the flesh and satanic buffeting—a weakness consonant with some ancient ascent accounts, which the false apostles appear not to have claimed.107 The auditory revelation he then receives forms the climax of Paul’s argument, which is the sufficient grace for weakness through which the Lord’s power is perfected. Paul uses the three-part scenario to teach the Corinthians about Christ-like weakness, true apostleship, Christ-centred identity, and the perfecting of Christ’s power at work in them through weakness and sustaining grace. This paradoxical Christ-centred instruction counters the culturally conditioned perspective of the Corinthians, who

103 Matera, Corinthians, 277. 104 Matera, Corinthians, 281. 105 Spittler, “Limits,” 264. 106 Wallace, Snatched, 282. 107 Young, “Ascension,” 81. 198

were more concerned with status and egotism than a cross-shaped ministry and faith.108 While scholars often focus upon Paul’s defence of his apostolic authority,109 this is not his main point. Instead, Paul is primarily instructing the Corinthian community about the Christological—Christ crucified, grace-reliant pattern and where the power of Christ truly lies—in weakness for the sake of Christ. He writes, “All along you have been thinking that we are defending ourselves to you. It is before God, in Christ, we are speaking; and all, beloved, for the sake of your edification/building up” (12:19). This fulfils the purpose of Paul’s God-given apostolic authority to build up the community (10:8; 13:10). Thus, Paul is speaking to the Corinthians’ situation.110 Paul’s boasting in weakness offers a Christ-centred and cruciform antithesis to their opposing, human—typically Greco-Roman—outlook that prizes self-boasting, physical strength, rhetorical skill, and patron-client relationships.111 The Corinthians, it seems, do not understand that Christ crucified means that weakness ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ is both a prerequisite and the facilitation of the Christ’s power resting upon them. This power is a present reality, enables labour for the sake of Christ, and is a grace gift.112Paul delights in weakness, because then Christ dwells in him and he is powerful—living in the fullness of grace (12:9–10). Paul substantiates the pattern of Christ in 13:4: “For he was crucified in weakness,113 but lives by the power of God.” Paul through his union with Christ follows the same Christological pattern: “For we are weak in him, but in dealing with you we will live with him by the power of God.” Thus, Paul’s weaknesses in Christ make him powerful in Christ to speak to them. He threatens to be severe (ἀποτόμως) with his gifted authority (13:10), which would further humble him before God (12:21). Paul, however, wants to remain meek and gentle towards them.

108 Timothy B. Savage, Power through Weakness: Paul’s Understanding of the Christian Ministry in 2 Corinthians (SNTSMS 86; Cambridge: CUP, 1996), 99, 185–86. 109 Käsemann argues that Paul is boasting to defend his apostleship, “Legitimität,” 48, 69–70. 110 Wallace, Snatched, 283. 111 Savage rightly points out that Paul’s boasting in Christ is meant to challenge their opposing worldly outlook and to edify the Corinthians with a Christ-centred perspective, Power, passim, esp. 62–64, 99, 185–86. For a reconstruction of a Greco-Roman and Corinthian outlook, see 19–53. 112 Wallace, Snatched, 276. 113 Thrall understands ἐξ ἀσθενείας to mean Christ’s “weakness essentially inherent in mortal human existence,” Corinthians, 2:883. Cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:7. 199

The way Paul uses the ascent account to instruct the community in some ways resembles the purpose of the three ascent accounts from the DSS. Each helps legitimise through heavenly ascent the mediator and his divine teaching in the respective communities.114 Since the Qumran community uses 1 En., ALD, and 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and parallels, each reinforces particular aspects of the community’s belief and practice. Levi’s ascent legitimises, as eternal and divine, the priestly institutions, priestly lore, and scribal education inherent within the priestly orientation of the Qumran community. Enoch’s ascent underlines their cosmology, angelology, and hamartiology to a certain degree, notwithstanding differences, and reinforces the promise of God’s justice in the world.115 The maśkîl of the Self- Glorification Hymn lends divine authority to his sectarian teaching and establishes an expectation among the worshipping community that communion with the angels is possible through his liturgical guidance. The maśkîl, who has gone before them, can lead them into the celestial temple before God’s throne. Each account also grants hope of eternal, celestial rewards for the faithful and provides exemplary lives to follow. At the same time, Paul’s boasting in his weakness provides a remarkable contrast to boastful self-exaltation of the ascended maśkîl. A brief comparison will help further illuminate Paul’s polemical point. The maśkîl boasts in triumph about his incomparable glory, boasts of his place in heaven, and claims, “besides me no- one is exalted” (4Q491c 1 6). He asks a series of rhetorical questions, which no one can answer. Most of the references to glory include the first person possessive pronoun “my.” Only in line 7 does the maśkîl seem to refer to the glory of another, but a lacuna leaves this indecipherable. One can suppose this glory relates to the holy dwelling and possibly God, which could have caused the glorious transformation. The maśkîl does boast like Paul in regard to his suffering of evil, but not for the sake of Christ. In general, the maśkîl is boasting and commending himself—claiming no equal. In this sense, he mirrors Paul’s opponents more than Paul. Paul begins to boast like the maśkîl in 2 Cor 11:11–30 with a series of rhetorical questions; after two boasts on lineage, however, he shifts to his labors and hardships

114 Collins notes two functions: the figure’s legitimacy as an intermediary between earth and heaven and divine revelation, Septer, 140. 115 For what T. Levi and 1 En. might legitimise circumstantially, see Segal, “Heavenly,” 1359– 62. For how the Qumran community used 1 Enoch, see Davidson, Angels. 200

for the sake of Christ. He concludes with his determination to boast in his weaknesses not his strengths. Paul’s prescribed boasting only includes the Lord, his assigned field, and his weaknesses endured for the sake of Christ—this is his apostolic witness and legitimacy. He refuses to glory in himself or claim he is incomparable. In fact, he sees comparison as without understanding (2 Cor 10:12). He does not boast in his teaching, but admits his lack of rhetorical skill as a weakness, which allows for the demonstration of the spirit and power and the proclamation of Christ crucified (1 Cor 2:1–5). Paul even claims the opposite of maśkîl: “I am no one” (οὐδέν εἰμι) (2 Cor 12:11). He does this to follow the power in weakness model demonstrated by Christ. If he claims to be no one, he can then be through Christ’s power “not in the least inferior” to the super (ὑπερλίαν)-apostles (11:5).116 While Paul has similar elements to the DSS ascents,117 his account and its rhetorical purpose provide a striking contrast to the triumphalism and detail given in the other accounts. His Christological perspective circumvents the disclosure of unnecessary details outside its illustrative point to reinforce the Christ-crucified pattern of his own ministry and instil this pattern of pathos in the lives of the Corinthian believers (13:4). As a fool’s speech, Paul maintains this paradoxical pattern with irony. He cannot utter his heavenly revelations. His thorn is not healed, and power is in weakness.118 By playing the fool, Paul becomes a fool of Christ, and remarkably discloses “the paradoxical nature of existence ‘in Christ,’” which is παθήματα Χριστοῦ (cf. 2 Cor 1:5–7).119 The heavenly ascent—a rightful boast— works rhetorically to legitimise Paul’s auditory revelation from the Lord that power comes in weakness and that Paul indeed bears this power (cf. 2 Cor 4:12).120 In this manner, while Paul bemoans his foolish behaviour for not being profitable to the Corinthians, in reality he has built them up through his climactic revelation and

116 Morray-Jones, “Part 2,” 271. 117 Baird notes five parallels with heavenly ascent motif: (1) “transported by supernatural power”; (2) “journeys through plurality of heavens”; (3) “sees various hidden things” for Paul “visions and revelations”; (4) “journey discloses secrets”; and (5) “meaning of the revelation is interpreted by an angel,” which the communication is implied for Paul, “Visions,” 658–59. 118 See Betz, Paulus, 69–100. 119 Laurence L. Welborn illuminates chs. 11–13 through Greco-Roman mimes, “The Runaway Paul,” HTR 92 (1999): 161. 120 Wallace centres Paul’s irony in v. 6b: “By reinterpreting his own weakness, Paul has simultaneously demonstrated that what appears to be weakness in fact points to the divine power he bears,” Snatched, 283. 201

sustained modelling of weakness for the sake of Christ. Paul’s experience and revelation are distinctly Christian and are shaped by Paul’s Christology concerning his crucified Lord. The pattern of Christ for Paul reverses the status quo of the Corinthians, and to a certain extent the boasting and self-exaltation found in other ascent accounts in 2TJ. Paul maintains with early Christianity, Christ as the “unique and definitive mediator,” who has risen, ascended, resides in heaven,121 is seated on the throne, and announces revelation in response to Paul’s prayer.122 In Paul’s ascent, he does not assume the place of a mediator, as with Enoch, Levi, or the maśkîl, but follows the weakness model of his Lord. As in Phil 2:6–11, God highly exalts (ὑπερύψωσεν) Christ after his obedience unto death on a cross. Paul, therefore, prefers not to exalt himself, but to be obedient in suffering through God’s grace so that (ἵνα) God can exalt him and the power of Christ can tabernacle (ἐπισκηνώσῃ) in him (2 Cor 12:9). Paul’s proof of power in weakness is the signs, wonders, and miracles he has already performed in their midst by the power of the spirit (v. 12). This provides an example for the bewildered Corinthians to follow, and whether Paul intends it or not, the ascent does give heavenly endorsement to his teaching and the promise of immortality for believers who follow his cruciform version of the gospel. This becomes the interpretative backdrop of the whole section of the letter and has immediate Christological and soteriological value for Paul’s polemic and self- understanding and the identity formation of the Corinthian community. Paul’s weaknesses experienced for the sake of Christ, his mission, and ministry to the Corinthians proves Paul is a true apostle of the crucified Christ, who is the Lord.123 Paul’s intent is to destroy those arguments in the community, which are proud obstacles against the knowledge of God (10:5). He warns them that he will use this authority when he arrives, if they have not repented. This for Paul would be another humbling experience—further evidence of his mirroring of Christ. This punishment would be a hardship for the Corinthians—a potential experience of weakness—and a negative experience of Christ’s power exercised by Paul (13:2–5).124 Although the

121 Christ is the man from and of heaven. See 1 Cor 15:47–49. 122 Segal, “Heavenly,” 1369–77. 123 Lincoln, Paradise, 85. 124 Thrall notes how the power exercised by Paul could be “to their disadvantage when he arrives,” Corinthians, 2:881. 202

Corinthians have experienced Christ as powerful in them (δυνατεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν) (v. 3) through pneumatika, charismata, revelations, and more, they exhibit contrary behaviour to the way of Christ—even pride (φυσιώσεις) (12:20). Likewise, they need to recognise their weaknesses and hardships already experienced at the hands of the pseudo apostles (11:19–20). If they respond appropriately, they too will experience the power of Christ being perfected in and among them through weaknesses experienced for the sake of Christ.

9.3 Conclusions This heuristic comparison of Paul’s ascent in 2 Cor 12:1–12 with three ascent accounts of 1 En., ALD, and 4QSelf-Glorification Hymna–b and parallels has proven fruitful for illuminating not only mystical elements of Paul’s ascent, but also how this ascent account functions rhetorically in chapters 10–13 and relates to communal participation in the spirit. Each comparative mystical element examined contributes to the understanding of Paul’s argument and purpose. Paul does not divulge a vision of God’s throne common to JM, which reinforces his own point that visions and revelations with prohibited revelation are not profitable for building up others. Communal upbuilding, a corporate effect of communal participation in the spirit, remains a litmus test for what personal revelations should be shared in the community. Paul gives no via mystica and intimates the involuntary nature of his snatching into paradise so that he can boast in the Lord. Paul’s three-tiered cosmology may allude to a paradisial, celestial temple, which corresponds well with 2TJ and Qumran. If so, the Corinthian community’s temple identification could mirror the heavenly temple. When considering danger and opposition in heavenly ascent, Paul was not prevented from ascending higher, but the angel of Satan was, in fact, God’s protective and remedial action to inhibit self-exaltation. Paul differs from later mystical accounts, where opposition comes during the ascent; angelic opposition for him comes afterward and because of revelations to inoculate against pride. In the final section on visions and revelations, Paul’s rhetorical purpose for communicating the ascent appears and clearly relates to communal participation in the spirit. Paul shares the sparse heavenly journey to set up the thorn in the flesh and his key revelation that Christ’s divine power is made perfect in the weakness of fragile

203

flesh. Paul’s rhetorical purpose is not, however, his apostolic defence as so many have focused upon. Rather, he seeks to build up the community with a cruciform perspective. His three revelatory experiences in 12:1–12 model and reinforce this key revelation to the bewildered Corinthian community, who are being taken advantage of by triumphalist false apostles. Paul’s rivals, then, become foils for this greater revelation. Paul potentially has learned to live with the ongoing affliction and to rely upon sufficient grace for 14 years. If the Corinthians will come to understand that the Lord’s power “tents” on those who acknowledge their weaknesses, then they too will find sufficient grace to follow the paradoxical Christ-crucified pattern of power in weakness in the community. This can be characterised as a corporate effect of Paul’s desire for communal participation in the holy spirit (2 Cor 13:13). By being weak for the sake of Christ, the power and grace of Christ and the love of God will be evident in the fellowship of the community and its participation in the spirit. Neither Paul nor the three accounts from the DSS consistently employ typical aspects of heavenly journeys as found in later MM. This shows the early development of these mystical traditions, which have yet to be formulated or standardised. The most striking contrasts from Paul’s perspective, however, are the distinctly Christian nature of his visions and revelations, how radically the crucified messiah has transformed his perspective, and continuous concern for the upbuilding of the Christian community. The auditory revelation given by his crucified Lord in v. 9 colours his evaluation of ecstatic experiences and the execution of his ministry with a paradoxical delight in weaknesses for the sake of Christ so that the power of Christ can transform the communities to whom he ministers into Christlikeness.

204

Chapter 10

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

10.1 Summary This study has examined communal participation in the spirit in the Corinthian correspondence in light of early JM in the DSS. In order to illuminate how Paul advances the ongoing christomorphic transformation of the Corinthian ekklesia in and by the spirit, the thesis employed early JM as a heuristic tool for comparison and illumination. The introduction defined early JM and reviewed its place in DSS research and Pauline studies. Part I investigated Jewish mystical elements in mystical texts among the DSS. The results confirmed that the Qumran community practised a liturgical and communal mysticism. The particular findings from each chapter in Part I were then compared heuristically with converging phenomena and concepts in 1 and 2 Corinthians in Part II. In the first of these heuristic comparisons, chapter 6 compared the agency of the spirit of God in Hodayota with the spirit’s agency in the Corinthian correspondence. The comparison determined that Paul primarily speaks of participation in the spirit in corporate and, unlike the DSS, in Christological terms. The spirit mediates the work of Christ to Corinthian community in various ways: indwelling, incorporating, washing, sanctifying, justifying, and revealing. Paul democratises the mystical experience of the spirit’s revelation to the whole community of Christ—a corporate epistemology of the spirit (1 Cor 2). Revelation continues through ongoing, spirit- inspired utterances of participants in the worship of the Corinthian assembly (chs. 12–14). For Paul, personal participation in the spirit cannot and should not be divorced from the community. In light of JM, Paul advances an implicit corporate communio mystica with a transcendent divine being (the holy spirit), not in heaven, but on earth (2 Cor 13:13). Paul desires that this intimate and relational corporate participation in the spirit foster three corporate effects: (1) unity and mutual honouring of community members, (2) corporate upbuilding through pneumatika

205

characterised by love, and (3) a cruciform pattern of living as a Christian community by the spirit. This way the new covenant community can be transformed into Christ- likeness and fulfil God’s mysterious purpose for his people (Ezek 36–37). In chapter 7, the heuristic approach compared Paul’s temple metaphor with the Qumran community’s temple identity in 1QS and the liturgical outworking of its temple phenomenology in Songs. The Qumran community understood its temple identity as a reflection of the heavenly archetype, whose members through liturgical synchronisation shared in the priestly service of the angels in the celestial temple. A correspondence between angelic presence and tongues of angels indicated that Paul’s temple metaphor has extended meaning for the Corinthian ekklesia and draws upon the wider 2TJ background. While the temple metaphor has a rhetorical function to prescribe corporate unity, holiness, and glorification of God, the metaphor also speaks to the Corinthian community’s experience of divine transcendence associated with the ναός—a communal participation in the indwelling spirit of God. When assembled, the Corinthians perceive angels present through their theophanic imagination of being a temple community. Angels, however, have only secondary importance to Christ and believers. Instead of synchronising with an angelic liturgy, order is one of communal participation directed by the spirit. People in Christ have been given authority over angels, and women have authority and a voice in worship practice. The indwelling spirit enables believers to speak in the tongues of men and angels, not in the heavenly temple, but in an earthly, embodied one, even as they anticipate an eschatological completion of their ongoing, christomorphic transformation. Thus, communal participation in the spirit demonstrates that the Corinthian ekklesia is the new dwelling place of God. In chapter 8, Moses-Δόξα traditions and the themes of ‘shine on the face of many,’ ‘glory of Adam,’ and ‘transformation by vision’ in the DSS were compared with analogous mystical elements that converge in 2 Cor 3. The comparison found in Paul’s Christian utilisation of the Moses-Δόξα traditions and related themes an overlooked corporate aspect to the encounter, beholding, and transformation by the spirit in 3:18. Paul democratises the mystical encounter with the Lord’s glory and extends the esoteric to the whole ‘in Christ’ gathering (exoteric). The resulting glorification is not only both present and eschatological, for Paul, but also christomorphic. Paul advocates a transformation by vision, whereby one turns to

206

Christ for a heart and mind illumination in the community. The transformation, while predominantly inward, has a somatic element in which the death of Christ produces life in the body now and in the future. Since the community is being transformed into the same image of Christ and is becoming the righteousness of God, this metamorphosis can be characterised as a qualified communal theosis. Moreover, the spirit’s facilitation of the mystical encounter and transformation make 2 Cor 3 crucial to understanding the mystical and transformative aspects of Paul’s communal participation in the spirit. The final chapter of this investigation examined Paul’s personal account of heavenly ascent (2 Cor 12:1–12) in light of the three accounts of heavenly ascent by human intermediaries in the DSS. Heuristic comparison of mystical elements (vision of the throne, via mystica, cosmology, danger and opposition, revelation) showed how Paul’s sparse account functions rhetorically in chapters 10–13. While the account is unprofitable—due to prohibited revelation, it sets up Paul’s thorn in the flesh and Christ’s audition that divine power is perfected in weakness. Paul’s account then functions, like those at Qumran, to build up and instruct the community. The crucified messiah has transformed his perspective. Paul edifies the community with a cruciform perspective by an example of cruciform living—ongoing weakness for Christ’s sake and for the sake of the community. He desires for the ekklesia to follow suit and become perfect. Paul thereby prioritises communal upbuilding over personal edification and self-boasting. The corporate effects of appropriate communal participation in the spirit become like a litmus test for what visions and revelations should be shared in the community. The Corinthians, Paul argues, need to be weak for the sake of Christ so that they too can experience Christ’s power, grace, and the love of God working in their community. In this respect, cruciform living and corporate edification exemplified in 2 Cor 12:1–12 should characterise the communal participation in the spirit Paul prays for in 13:13.

10.2 Contributions to Research The results of this thesis have made important contributions. First, this study has made a methodological contribution through a fruitful use of heuristic comparison. Second, the findings contribute to the study of early Judaism, particularly in the areas

207

of early JM and the DSS. Third, the comparative examination has contributed to Pauline studies in various areas. The appropriation and application of heuristic comparison as a method allowed this study to compare the DSS and the Corinthian correspondence through the lens of early JM. This study identified common mystical elements in corresponding texts by using JM as a heuristic device. The study compared these elements to illuminate how Paul advocates communal participation in the spirit for the Corinthian community. Heuristic comparison avoided some of the previous comparative pitfalls of ‘parallelomania’ and erroneous claims to Paul depending upon or borrowing from the DSS. This comparative endeavour contributed to the mutual illumination of both the DSS and the Corinthian correspondence by focusing upon both similarities and differences. Previous comparisons have mostly highlighted similarities while neglecting differences. The following contributions of this study testify to the fruitfulness of this method. In the area of early JM, this investigation into sectarian and non-sectarian DSS and the Pauline Corinthian correspondence showed the currency of Jewish mystical elements in 2TJ. Employing the work of Henry Corbin on the imaginal has helped move the understanding of Jewish mystical practice at Qumran forward—beyond the limitations of philological and exegetical studies.1 This also avoided the false dichotomy assumed by some scholars between text and experience. The research in Part I demonstrated the presence of Jewish mystical elements, both abstract and indicative, as well as the praxis of a liturgical and communal mysticism at Qumran. This supported a modified Scholem hypothesis that dates JM back to the time of the Qumran community. It did not contend, however, for a direct literary relationship between the DSS to the Hekhalot texts. Rather, the DSS and even the Corinthian correspondence are evidence of the wider dissemination of early JM traditions in 2TJ that form antecedents to MM. The lack of standardised heavenly ascent journey highlighted the diversity of the voices concerning early Jewish mystical traditions.

They were suppressed and marginalised after 70 C.E. This research confirmed a clear connection between Jewish mystical elements, the heavenly temple archetype, and the earthly and angelic priesthood. This corroborated Elior’s thesis that the Jewish

1 See §3.3. 208

mystical traditions in the DSS perhaps originated with “theosophical speculation” of the Jerusalem temple priesthood.2 Part I determined that the mystery of God for the Qumran community is union, joint inheritance, and joint holy war with the angels. This central theme of Hodayota, 1QS, and Songs needs to be more prominent in the depiction and consideration of the Qumran community and its liturgical practice. Furthermore, the analysis clarified how prominent the celestial archetype of the temple and priesthood is to the Qumran community’s temple identity. The Qumran community amalgamated these mystical themes with halakic concerns. In Part II, heuristic comparison between the Corinthian correspondence and the DSS made an important contribution to establishing Paul in his Jewish background. While this study focused exclusively on the early Jewish mystical background and did not consider the possible influence of a Hellenistic mystical background, the thesis ascertained that mystical elements in Paul’s theology and ecclesial practice derive from Jewish influence. Both Paul and Qumran appropriated Jewish mystical traditions from the “Jewish matrix”3 of 2TJ and the Scriptures. This comparison mostly disclosed significant differences between the Paul’s Corinthian ekklesia and the Qumran community. Paul drew upon his personal revelatory experience of Christ and early church traditions to reinterpret these Jewish mystical traditions in light of Christ. He then appropriates some of these mystical elements to advance the ongoing Christological and mystical transformation of the Corinthian community in and by the spirit. Like the Qumran community, Paul integrates the mystical and juridical rather than unnaturally or anachronistically separating the two. Paul, the research proved, evaluated mystical experience by its benefit to the whole community. Paul, as an apostle, became “the decisive mediator of the revelatory experience and the arbitrator of its trustworthiness” to the community.4 This study has also shown how Paul employs Jewish mystical elements in his letters to the Corinthians. While Paul shares private mystical experience, a heavenly ascent, he does not divulge a mystical praxis that would correlate to MM. Contrary to what Segal, Bowker, and others have presupposed, Paul cannot be said with

2 Alexander, “Mysticism,” 724; Elior, “Emergence,” 86. 3 Bernard McGinn, The Foundations of Mysticism (vol. 1 of The Presence of God: A History of Western Christian Mysticism; New York: Crossroad, 2000), 19. 4 Rowland and Morray-Jones, Mystery, 208. 209

certainty to have practised Merkabah speculation. Neither does he reveal a passing on of mystical praxis to the Corinthian ekklesia. Nonetheless, Paul still fits within the scope of early JM, meets most abstract and indicative qualifications of JM, and further corroborates the presence of mystical traditions in 2TJ and early Christianity. The investigation of this thesis into participation in the holy spirit in light of early JM has revealed the largely communal conception of this participation or κοινωνία in the Corinthian correspondence—a clear contribution to studies on participation and confirmation of the communal dimension highlighted by Bousset. Scholarship has generally neglected this communal dimension possibly due to an individualistic Western worldview or the Protestant penchant for individual salvation. In contrast with the spirit of God in Hodayota and 1QS, Paul exhibits a remarkable development of the spirit of God. The spirit is distinct from God, has personal traits, and is relational (as opposed to impersonal). The exegesis of the overlapping spirit and mystical passages showed that Paul conceived of a communal epistemology of the spirit in 1 Cor 2. Paul discloses the corporate indwelling of the spirit in the community through the temple metaphor (1 Cor 3:16; 6:19). The ongoing revelation through spirit-inspired speech comes through personal participation in corporate worship gatherings of the Corinthian ekklesia (1 Cor 12– 14). In 2 Cor 3, the beholding of the glory of God happens in the community and has a corporate tenor. The christomorphic transformation by the spirit points toward the transformation of the whole community into the same ecclesial image. Paul’s benediction in 2 Cor 13:13 also corroborates corporate participation, κοινωνία, in the holy spirit. The analysis determined that Paul maintained corporate effects of participation in the spirit. Paul evaluated the appropriateness of participation in the spirit by whether or not it builds up the community in Christ and fosters unity among the community members. This participation, as modelled by Paul’s cruciform pattern of life and ministry, should promulgate a cruciform perspective and practice in the Corinthian ekklesia. In line with his corporate emphasis, Paul democratised the mystical encounter with the divine transcendence (the holy spirit of God). He extended the esoteric of Jewish mystical tradition to the exoteric—the whole “in Christ” gathering. They all experience the presence of God and the mediation of the work of Christ through the

210

indwelling spirit of God on earth. Participation takes place in the community, not in isolation. Paul, therefore, maintained a largely communal orientation, akin to Judaism, and contended with the self-exalted focus of the Corinthians steeped in Greco-Roman culture. Since Jewish mystical traditions include a transformation by vision, this study made another contribution to the area of theosis or deification and Paul. In agreement with recent studies by Litwa and Gorman, among others, the designation of theosis in Paul must be a qualified ascription. This offers a correction to the unqualified exclusion of deification in Paul by Deissmann and Schweitzer. The ongoing theotic transformation is christomorphic, cruciform, pneumatological, and communal. The community itself is undergoing a metamorphosis by participating in the life and death of Christ. The community is becoming the righteousness and glory of God by the spirit. Communal and pneumatological aspects need greater emphasis in studies of theosis in Paul.

10.3 Areas of Further Research The approach of heuristic comparison through the lens of JM in the DSS can be applied to the rest of the Pauline corpus. This may prove beneficial to an investigation of Colossians 2 where Paul dissuades the believers from the worship of angels or the enigmatic statements in Ephesians 2:6 about being seated in heavenly places with Christ. This may show how Jewish mystical elements were common among early Christian communities. Equally, this same approach could illuminate Johannine literature and Hebrews, which have corresponding Jewish mystical facets. Since this thesis concentrated upon participation in the holy spirit, other areas in Paul need further examination with early JM in the DSS, especially Paul’s Christology. Previous studies of Paul and JM have not had a singular, contextualised focus upon the DSS. Likewise, this same study, but with a focus on mystical elements in Philo, instead of the DSS, could further clarify the extent to which Hellenistic JM might have influenced Paul and his use of pneuma.5

5 See Quispel, “Ezekiel,” 10, 13. 211

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Sources

Aland, Kurt, Barbara Aland, and Erwin Nestle, eds. Novum Testamentum Graece. 27th ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1993.

Charles, R. H. The Greek Versions of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. London: Oxford University Press, 1908. Repr., Hildesheim: Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1960.

Charlesworth, James H., ed. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. 2 vols. London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1983–1985.

Charlesworth, James H. and Carol A. Newsom, eds. Angelic Liturgy: Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice. Vol. 4B of The Dead Sea Scrolls: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts with English Translations. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999.

Davila, James R. Hekhalot Literature in Translation: Major Texts of Merkavah Mysticism. Supplements to the Journal of Jewish thought and philosophy 20. Leiden: Brill, 2013.

Drawnel, Henryk. An Aramaic Wisdom text from Qumran: a New Interpretation of the Levi Document. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 86. Leiden: Brill, 2004.

Elliger, Karl, and W. Rudolph, eds. Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. 5th ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1997.

García Martínez, Florentino and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar, eds. The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition. 2 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1997–1998.

Greenfield, Jonas C., Michael E. Stone, and Esther Eshel. The Aramaic Levi Document: Edition, Translation, Commentary. Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha 19. Leiden: Brill, 2004.

Holm-Nielsen, Svend. Hodayot Psalms from Qumran. Acta Theologica Danica 2. Aarhus: Universitetsforlaget I, 1960.

Milik, J. T. “Testament de Lévi.” Pages 91–96 in Qumran Cave 1. Edited by D. Barthélemy, O. P. Milik, and J. T. Milik. Discoveries in the Judean Desert I. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1955.

212

———. The Books of Enoch: Aramaic fragments of Qumrân Cave 4. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976.

Newsom, Carol A. “4Q374: A Discourse on the Exodus/Conquest Tradition.” Pages 40–52 in The Dead Sea Scrolls: Forty Years of Research. Edited by Devorah Dimant and Uriel Rappaport. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 10. Leiden: Brill, 1992.

———. “Apocryphon of Joshua.” Pages 237–38 in Qumran Cave 4 XVII. Parabiblical Texts, Part 3. Edited by George Brooke J., J. Collins, P. Flint, J. Greenfield, E. Larson, C. Newsom, É. Puech, L. H. Schiffman, M. Stone, and J. Trebolle Barrera. Discoveries in the Judean Desert XXII. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996.

———. “Shirot ʿOlat Hashabbat.” Pages 173–401 in Qumran Cave 4 VI: Poetical and Liturgical Texts, Part 1. Edited by Esther Eshel, Hanan Eshel, Carol Newsom, Bilhah Nitzan, Eileen Schuller, and Ada Yardeni. Discoveries in the Judaean Desert XI. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998.

———. Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice: A Critical Edition. Harvard Semitic Studies 27. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985.

Nickelsburg, George W. E. 1 Enoch: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001.

Nickelsburg, George W. E. and James C. VanderKam. 1 Enoch: a New Translation. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2004.

Philo. Translated by F. H. Colson. 9 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1935.

Ralphs, Alfred. Septuaginta. 2 vols. Stuttgart: Württembergische Bibelanstalt, 1935.

Schäfer, Peter. Synopse zur Hekhalot-Literatur. Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum 2. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1981.

Stegemann, Hartmut, Eileen Schuller, and Carol Newsom. 1QHodayota with incorporations of 1QHodayotb and 4QHodayota-f. Edited by Emanuel Tov. Discoveries in the Judean Desert XL. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2009.

Stone, Michael E. and Jonas C. Greenfield. “Aramaic Levi Document.” Pages 1–72 in Qumran Cave 4 XVII. Parabiblical Texts, Part 3. Edited by George Brooke J., J. Collins, P. Flint, J. Greenfield, E. Larson, C. Newsom, É. Puech, L. H. Schiffman, M. Stone, and J. Trebolle Barrera. Discoveries in the Judean Desert XXII. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996.

213

Vermès, Géza. The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English. Rev. ed. London: Penguin, 2004.

VanderKam, James C. The Book of Jubilees. Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 511. Lovanii: E. Peeters, 1989.

VanderKam, James C. and Monica Brady. “377. 4QApocryphal Pentateuch B.” Pages 205–18 in Wadi Daliyeh II: The Samaria Papyri from Wadi Daliyeh and Qumran Cave 4. Edited by Douglas Marvin Gropp, Moshe J. Bernstein, James C. VanderKam, and Monica Brady. Discoveries in the Judean Desert XXVIII. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2001.

Wise, Michael, Martin Abegg Jr., and Edward Cook. The Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Translation. London: HarperCollinsPublishers, 1996.

Secondary Sources

Aaron, David H. Biblical Ambiguities: Metaphor, Semantics, and Divine Imagery. The Brill Reference Library of Ancient Judaism 4. Leiden: Brill, 2001.

Abegg, Martin G. Jr. “4Q471: A Case of Mistaken Identity?” Pages 136–47 in Pursuing the Text: Studies in Honor of Ben Zion Wacholder on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday. Edited by J. C. Reeves and J. Kampen. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994.

———. “Who Ascended to Heaven? 4Q491, 4Q427, and the Teacher of Righteousness.” Pages 61–73 in Eschatology, Messianism, and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by C. A. Evans and P. W. Flint. Studies in the Dead Sea Scrolls and related Literature 1. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997.

Alexander, Philip. Mystical Texts: Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice and Related Manuscripts. Library of Second Temple Studies 61. London: T & T Clark International, 2006.

———. “Mysticism.” Pages 705–732 in The Oxford Handbook of Jewish Studies. Edited by Martin Goodman, Jeremy Cohen, and David Sorkin. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.

———. “Orality in Pharisaic-rabbinic Judaism at the Turn of the Eras.” Pages 159– 84 in Jesus and the Gospel Tradition. Edited by Henry Wansborough. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991. Repr., London: T&T Clark International, 2004.

———. “Qumran and the Genealogy of Western Mysticism.” Pages 215–35 in New Perspectives on Old Texts: Proceedings of the Tenth International Symposium

214

of the Orion Center for the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Associated Literature, 9–11 January, 2005. Edited by Esther G. Chazon, Betsy Halpern Amaru, and Ruth Clements. Studies in the Texts of the Desert of Judah 88. Leiden: Brill, 2010.

———. “The Qumran Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice and the Celestial Hierarchy of Dionysius the Areopagite: A Comparative Approach.” Revue de Qumran 87 (2006): 349–72.

———. “The Redaction-History of Serekh Ha-Yaḥad: A Proposal.” Revue de Qumran 17 (1996): 437–56.

Anderson, A. A. “The Use of ‘Ruaḥ’ in IQS, IQH and IQM.” Journal of Semitic Studies 7 (1962): 293–303.

Anderson, F. I. “2 (Slavonic Apocalypse of) ENOCH.” Pages 91–213 in volume 1 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. 2 vols. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1983–1985.

Angel, Joseph L. Otherworldly and Eschatological Priesthood in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 86. Leiden: Brill, 2010.

Ashton, John. The Religion of Paul the Apostle. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000.

Aune, David Edward. “Charismatic Exegesis in Early Judaism and Early Christianity.” Pages 126–50 in The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation. Edited by J. H. Charlesworth and C. A. Evans. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993.

———. The Cultic Setting of Realized Eschatology in Early Christianity. Novum Testamentum Supplements 28. Leiden: Brill, 1972.

Back, Frances. Verwandlung durch Offenbarung bei Paulus: Eine religionsgeschichtlich-exegetische Untersuchung zu 2 Kor 2,14–4,6. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe 153. Tübingen: Morh Siebeck, 2002.

Baillet, Maurice. Qumrân Grotte 4, III (4Q482-4Q520). Discoveries in the Judean Desert VII. Oxford Clarendon, 1982.

Baird, William. “Visions, Revelation, and Ministry: Reflections on 2 Cor 12:1–5 and Gal 1:11–17.” Journal of Biblical Literature 104 (1985): 651–62.

215

Bakhtin, Mikhail. Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Translated by Vern W. McGee. University of Texas Press Slavic Series 8. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1986.

Barnett, Paul. The Second Epistle to the Corinthians. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997.

Barrett, Charles Kingsley. A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians. 2d ed. London: Adam & Charles Black, 1971.

———. A Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1973.

Barrier, Jeremy W. “Two Visions of the Lord: A Comparison of Paul's Revelation to His Opponents' Revelation in 2 Corinthians 12:1–10.” Pages 272–90 in Finding a Woman's Place: Essays in Honor of Carolyn Osiek, R.S.C.J. Edited by David L. Balch and Jason T. Lamoreaux. Princeton Theological Monograph Series 150. Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2011.

Baumgarten, Albert I. The Flourishing of Jewish Sects in the Maccabean Era: an Interpretation. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 55. Leiden: Brill, 1997.

Baumgarten, Joseph M. “The Purification Liturgies.” Pages 200–12 in volume 2 of The Dead Sea Scrolls after Fifty Years: A Comprehensive Assessment. Edited by Peter W. Flint and James C. VanderKam. 2 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1999.

———. “The Qumran Sabbath Shirot and Rabbinic Merkabah Traditions.” Revue de Qumran 13 (1988): 199–213.

Beale, G. K. The Temple and the Church's Mission: a Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place of God. New Studies in Biblical Theology 18. Leicester: Apollos, 2004.

Belleville, Linda L. 2 Corinthians. The Inter Varsity Press New Testament Commentary 8. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1996.

———. Reflections of Glory: Paul's polemical use of the Moses-Doxa traditions in 2 Corinthians 3.1-18. Journal for the study of the New Testament: Supplement Series 52. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991.

Benoit, Pierre. “Qumran and the New Testament.” Pages 1–30 in Paul and Qumran: Studies in New Testament Exegesis. Edited by Jerome Murphy-O’Connor. London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1968.

216

Betz, Hans Dieter. “2 Cor 6:14–7:1: An Anti-Pauline Fragment?” Journal of Biblical Literature 92 (1973): 88–108.

———. Der Apostel Paulus und die sokratische Tradition. Eine exegetische Untersuchung zu seiner Apologie 2 Korinther 10-13. Beiträge zur historischen Theologie 45. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1972.

Bietenhard, Hans. Die himmlische Welt im Urchristentum und Spätjudentum. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1951.

Black, Max Models and Metaphors: Studies in Language and Philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1962.

Blackwell, Ben C. Christosis: Pauline Soteriology in Light of Deification in Irenaeus and Cyril of Alexandria. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe 314.Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011.

Blass, F., A. Debrunner, and R. W. Funk. A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961.

Bockmuehl, Markus N. A. Revelation and Mystery. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe 36. Tübingen: Mohr, 1990.

———. “‘The Form of God’ (Phil 2:6): Variations on a Theme of Jewish Mysticism.” Journal of Theological Studies 48 (1997): 1–23.

Bornkamm, Günter. Paul. Translated by D. M. G. Stalker. New York: Harper & Row, 1971.

Bousset, Wilhelm. “Die Himmelsreise der Seele,” Archiv für Religionswissenschaft 4 (1901): 136–69 and 229–73.

———. Kyrios Christos: A History of the Belief in Christ from the Beginnings of Christianity to Irenaeus. Translated by John E. Steely. 1921. Nashville: Abingdon, 1970.

Boustan, Ra‘anan S. “Angels in the Architecture: Temple Art and the Poetics of Praise in the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice.” Pages 195–212 in Heavenly Realms and Earthly Realities in Late Antique Religions. Edited by Ra‘anan S. Boustan and Annette Yoshiko Reed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

———. “The Study of Heikhalot Literature: Between Mystical Experience and Textual Artifact.” Currents in Biblical Research 6 (2007): 130–60.

217

Bowker, J. W. “‘Merkabah’ Visions and the Visions of Paul.” Jewish Semitic Studies 16 (1971): 157–73.

Bowley, James E. “Prophets and Prophecy at Qumran.” Pages 354–78 in volume 2 of The Dead Sea Scrolls after Fifty Years: A Comprehensive Assessment. Edited by Peter W. Flint and James C. VanderKam. 2 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1999.

Brooke, George J. “From Qumran to Corinth: Embroidered Allusions to Women’s Authority” Pages 195–214 in The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament: Essays in Mutual Illumination. London: SPCK, 2005.

———. “Miqdash Adam, Eden and the Qumran Community.” Pages 285–301 in Gemeinde ohne Tempel. Edited by Beate Ego, Armin Lange, and Peter Pilhofer. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 118. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999.

———. “Moving Mountains: From Sinai to Jerusalem.” Pages 73–90 in The Significance of Sinai: Traditions about Sinai and Divine Revelation in Judaism and Christianity. Edited by George J. Brooke, Hindy Najman, and Loren T. Stuckenbruck. Themes in Biblical Narrative Jewish and Christian Traditions 12. Leiden: Brill, 2008.

———. The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament: Essays in Mutual Illumination. London: SPCK, 2005.

———. “The Place of Prophecy in Coming Out of Exile: The Case of the Dead Sea Scrolls.” Pages 535-50 in Scripture in Transition: Essays on the Septuagint, Hebrew Bible, and Dead Sea Scrolls in Honour of Raija Sollamo. Edited by A. Voitila and J. Jokiranta. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 126. Leiden: Brill, 2008.

———. “The Silent God, the Abused Mother and the Self-Justifying Sons: A Psychodynamic Reading of Scriptural Exegesis in the Pesharim.” Paper presented at the University of Manchester Ehrhardt Seminar. Manchester, September 30, 2010.

———. “The Ten Temples in the Dead Sea Scrolls.” Pages 417–34 in Temple and Worship in Biblical Israel. Edited by John Day. London: T&T Clark, 2007.

Brondos, David A. Paul on the Cross: Reconstructing the Apostle’s Story of Redemption. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2006.

Brown, Francis, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs. A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976.

218

Bruce, Frederick Fyvie. 1 and 2 Corinthians. New Century Bible. London: Oliphants, 1971. Repr., 1978.

———. “Holy Spirit in the Qumran Texts.” Annual of Leeds University Oriental Society 6 (1966/1968): 49–55.

Bultmann, Rudolf Karl. Theology of the New Testament. Translated by Kendrick Grobel. 2 vols. London: SCM Press, 1952. Repr., 1956.

———. The Second Letter to the Corinthians. Translated by Roy A. Harrisville. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1985.

Bunta, Silviu N. “Moses, Adam and the Glory of the Lord in Ezekiel the Tragedian: on the Roots of a Merkabah Text.” Ph.D. diss., Marquette University, 2005.

Caird, G. B. The Language and Imagery of the Bible. London: Duckworth, 1980.

Campbell, Constantine R. Paul and Union with Christ: an Exegetical and Theological Study. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012.

Campbell, Douglas Atchison. “Reconciliation in Paul: The Gospel of Negation and Transcendence in Galatians 3.28.” Pages 39–66 in The Theology of Reconciliation. Edited by Colin E. Gunton. London: T&T Clark, 2003.

———. The Quest for Paul’s Gospel: A Suggested Strategy. London: T&T Clark, 2005.

Campbell, J. Y. “ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ and Its Cognates in the New Testament.” Journal of Biblical Literature 51 (1932): 352–80.

Cerfaux, L. The Church in the Theology of Paul. Translated by Geoffrey Webb and Adrian Walker. New York: Herder and Herder, 1959.

Charlesworth, James H. “The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Historical Jesus.” Pages 1–74 in Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. Anchor Bible Reference Library. New York: Doubleday, 1992.

Charlesworth, James H. and Brent A. Strawn. “Reflections on the Text of Serek ha- Yaḥad found in Cave IV.” Revue de Qumran 17 (1996): 403–33.

Chazon, Esther G. “Human and Angelic Prayer in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls.” Pages 35–48 in Liturgical Perspectives: Prayer and Poetry in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by Esther G. Chazon. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 48. Leiden: Brill, 2003.

219

———. “Liturgical Communion with the Angels at Qumran.” Pages 95–105 in Sapiential, Liturgical and Poetical Texts from Qumran: Proceedings of the third meeting of the International Organization from Qumran Studies Olso 1998. Edited by Daniel K. Falk, Florentino García Martínez, and Eileen M. Schuller. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 34. Leiden: Brill, 2000.

———. “Liturgical Function in the Cave 1 Hodayot Collection.” Pages 135–49 in Qumran Cave 1 Revisited: Texts from Cave 1 Sixty Years after Their Discovery: Proceedings of the Sixth Meeting of the IOQS in Ljubljana. Edited by Daniel K. Falk, Sarianna Metso, Donald W. Parry, and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 91. Leiden: Brill, 2010.

———, ed. Liturgical Perspectives: Prayer and Poetry in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium of the Orion Center for the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Associated Literature, 19–23, January, 2000. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 48. Leiden: Brill, 2003.

———. “The Function of the Qumran Prayer Texts: An Analysis of the Daily Prayers (4Q503).” Page 217–25 in The Dead Sea Scrolls: Fifty Years After their Discovery, Proceedings of the Jerusalem Congress, July 20–25, 1997. Edited by L. H. Schiffman, E. Tov, and J. C. VanderKam. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society in cooperation with the Shrine of the Book, Israel Museum, 2000.

Ciampa, Roy E. and Brian S. Rosner. The First Letter to the Corinthians. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010.

Clines, David J. A. The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew. 8 vols. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993–2011.

Collange, Jean-François. Énigmes de la deuxième épître de Paul aux Corinthiens: etude exégétique de 2 Cor. 2:14–7:4. Society for New Testaments Studies Monograph Series 18. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972.

Collins, Adela Yarbro. Cosmology and Eschatology in Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 50. Leiden: Brill, 1996.

———. “The Seven Heavens in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses.” Pages 59–93 in Death, Ecstasy, and Other Worldly Journeys. Edited by John J. Collins and Michael A. Fishbane. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995.

Collins, John J. “Amazing Grace: The Transformation of the Thanksgiving Hymn at Qumran.” Pages 7–85 in Psalms in Community: Jewish and Christian Textual, Liturgical, and Artistic Traditions. Edited by Harold W. Attridge and Margot E. Fassler. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003.

220

———. Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Literature of the Dead Sea Scrolls. London: Routledge, 1997.

———. “A Throne in the Heavens.” Pages 43–58 in Death, Ecstasy, and Other Worldly Journeys. Edited by John J. Collins and Michael A. Fishbane. Albany: State University of New York Press 1995.

———. The Apocalyptic Imagination: an Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature. 2d ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998.

———. The Scepter and the Star: the Messiahs of the Dead Sea Scrolls and other Ancient Literature. Anchor Bible Reference Library. New York: Doubleday, 1995.

Collins, John J. and Devorah Dimant. “A Thrice-Told Hymn: A Response to Eileen Schuller.” The Jewish Quarterly Review 85 (1994): 151–55.

Conzelmann, Hans. I Corinthians: a Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians. Edited by George W. MacRae. Translated by James W. Leitch. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975.

———. An Outline of the Theology of the New Testament. Translated by John Bowden. The New Testament Library. London: SCM Press, 1969.

Corbin, Henry. Temple and Contemplation. Translated by Philip Sherrard. London: KPI in association with Islamic Publications, 1986.

Crawford, Sidnie White. “Mothers, Sisters, and Elders: Titles for Women in Second Temple Jewish and Early Christian Communities.” Pages 177–91 in The Dead Sea Scrolls as Background to Postbiblical Judaism and Early Christianity: Papers from an International Conference at St. Andrews in 2001. Edited by James R. Davila. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 46. Leiden: Brill, 2003.

Dahl, Nis A. “A Fragment and its Context: 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1.” Pages 62–69 in Studies in Paul: Theology for the Early Christian Mission. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1977.

Davidson, Maxwell J. Angels at Qumran: A Comparative Study of 1 Enoch 1-36, 72- 108 and Sectarian Writings from Qumran. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 11. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992.

Davies, William David. Paul and Rabbinic Judaism: Some Rabbinic Elements in Pauline Theology. 3d ed. London: SPCK, 1970.

221

Davila, James R. “4QMess ar (4Q534) and Merkavah Mysticism.” Dead Sea Discoveries 5 (1998): 367–81.

———. Descenders to the Chariot: the People Behind the Hekhalot Literature, Supplement to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 70. Leiden: Brill, 2001.

———. “Exploring the Mystical Background of the Dead Sea Scrolls.” Pages 433– 54 in The Oxford Handbook of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by Timothy H. Lim and John J. Collins. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.

———. “Heavenly Ascent in the Dead Sea Scrolls.” Pages 461–85 in volume 2 of The Dead Sea Scrolls after Fifty Years: A Comprehensive Assessment. Edited by P. W. Flint and J. C. VanderKam. 2 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1999.

———. Liturgical Works. Eerdmans Commentaries on the Dead Sea Scrolls. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000.

———. “Macrocosmic Temple, Scriptural Exegesis, and the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice.” Dead Sea Discoveries 9 (2002): 1–19.

———. “Perils of Parallels (Lecture).” University of St. Andrews, April 2001. (20 November 2010).

———. “The Dead Sea Scrolls and Merkavah Mysticism.” Pages 249–64 in The Dead Sea Scrolls in their Historical Context. Edited by Timothy H. Lim, Larry W. Hurtado, A. Graeme Auld, and Alison Jack. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000.

———. The Dead Sea Scrolls as Background to Postbiblical Judaism and Early Christianity: Papers from an International Conference at St. Andrews in 2001. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 46. Leiden: Brill, 2003.

———. “The Hodayot Hymnist and the Four Who Entered Paradise.” Revue de Qumran 17/65–68 (1996): 457–78.

Deasley, Alex R. G. “The Holy Spirit in the Dead Sea Scrolls.” Wesleyan Theological Journal 21 (1986): 45–73.

———. The Shape of Qumran Theology. Carlisle: Paternoster, 2000.

DeConick, April D, ed. Paradise Now: Essays on Early Jewish and Christian Literature. Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series 11. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2009.

———. Seek to See Him: Ascent and Vision Mysticism in the Gospel of Thomas. Supplements to Vigiliae christianae 33. Leiden: Brill, 1996.

222

———. Voices of the Mystics: Early Christian Discourse in the Gospels of John and Thomas and Other Ancient Christian Literature. Journal for the Study of the New Testament: Supplement Series 157. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001.

———. “What is Early Jewish and Christian Mysticism?” Pages 1–24 in Paradise Now: Essays on Early Jewish and Christian Mysticism. Edited by April D. DeConick. Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series 11. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006.

Deissmann, Adolf. Die Neutestamentliche Formel “In Christo Jesu.” Marburg: N. G. Elwert’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1892.

———. Paul: A Study in Social and Religious History. Translated by William E. Wilson. 2d ed. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1926.

Dibelius, Martin. “Glaube und die Mystik.” Pages 94–116 in volume 2 of Botschaft und Geschichte: Gesammelte Aufsätze. Tübingen: Mohr, 1956.

———. Paulus und die Mystik. Munich: Reinhardt, 1941.

Dimant, Devorah. “A Synoptic Comparison of Parallel Sections in 4Q427 7, 4Q491 11 and 4Q471B.” The Jewish Quarterly Review 85 (1994): 157–61.

———. “Men as Angels: The Self-Image of the Qumran Community.” Pages 93– 103 in Religion and Politics in the Ancient Near East. Edited by Adele Berlin. Studies and Texts in Jewish History and Culture. Bethesda, Md.: University Press of Maryland, 1996.

———. “The Merkabah Vision in Second Ezekiel (4Q385 4).” Revue de Qumran 14 (1989): 331–48.

Dimant, Devorah and John Strugnell. “4QSecond Ezekiel.” Revue de Qumran 13 (1988): 45–58.

———. “The Merkabah Vision in Second Ezekiel (4Q385 4).” Revue de Qumran 14 (1989): 331–48.

Douglas, Michael C. “Power and Praise in the Hodayot: A Literary Critical Study of 1QH 9:1–18:14.” Ph.D. diss., The University of Chicago, 1998.

———. “The Teacher Hymn Hypothesis Revisited: New Data for an Old Crux.” Dead Sea Discoveries 6 (1999): 239–66.

Duff, Paul B. “Glory in the Ministry of Death: Gentile Condemnation and Letters of Recommendation in 2 Cor. 3:6–18.” Novum Testamentum 46 (2004): 313–37.

223

———. “Transformed ‘from Glory to Glory’: Paul's Appeal to the Experience of His Readers to 2 Corinthians 3:18.” Journal of Biblical Literature 127 (2008): 759– 80.

Dunn, James D. G. “2 Corinthians III.17—‘The Lord is the Spirit.’” Journal of Theological Studies 21 (1970): 309–20.

———. Jesus and the Spirit: a Study of the Religious and Charismatic Experience of Jesus and the First Christians as Reflected in the New Testament. London: SCM Press, 1975.

———. The Theology of Paul the Apostle. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1998.

———. “The Spirit and the Body of Christ.” Pages 343–57 in Pneumatology. Vol. 2 of The Christ and The Spirit: Collected Essays of James D. G. Dunn. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1998.

Elgvin, Torleif. “Temple Mysticism and the Temple of Man.” Pages 227–42 in The Dead Sea Scrolls: Texts and Context. Edited by Charlotte Hempel. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 90. Leiden: Brill, 2010.

Elior, Rachel. “For Earthly Temple to Heavenly Shrines: Prayer and Sacred Song in the Hekhalot Literature and Its Relation to Temple Traditions.” Jewish Studies Quarterly 4 (1997): 217–67.

———. “The Emergence of the Mystical Traditions of the Merkavah.” Pages 83– 104 in Paradise Now: Essays on Early Jewish and Christian Mysticism. Edited by April DeConick. Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series 11. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006.

———. “The Merkavah Tradition and the Emergence of Jewish Mysticism: From Temple to Merkavah, from Hekhal to Hekhalot, from Priestly Opposition to Gazing upon the Merkavah.” Pages 101–58 in Sino-Judaica: Jews and Chinese in Historical Dialogue. Edited by Aharon Oppenheimer. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, 1999.

———. The Three Temples: on the Emergence of Jewish Mysticism. Translated by David Louvish. Oxford: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2004.

Elliot, Mark Adam. The Survivors of Israel: a Reconsideration of the Theology of Pre-Christian Judaism. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000.

Eshel, Esther. “4Q471B: A Self-Glorification Hymn.” Revue de Qumran 17 (1996): 175–203.

224

———. “The Aramaic Levi Document, the Genesis Apocryphon, and Jubilees: A Study of Shared Traditions.” Pages 82–89 in Enoch and the Mosaic Torah: the Evidence of Jubilees. Edited by Gabriele Boccaccini and Giovanni Ibba. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009.

———. “The Identification of the ‘Speaker’ of the Self-Glorification Hymn.” Pages 619–35 in The Provo International Conference on the Dead Sea Scrolls: Technological Innovations, New Texts, and Reformulated Issues. Edited by Donald W. Parry and Eugene Ulrich. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 30. Leiden: Brill, 1999.

Eskola, Timo. Messiah and the Throne : Jewish Merkabah mysticism and early Christian exaltation discourse. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe 142. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001.

Falk, Daniel K. “Moses.” Page 576–77 in vol. 1 of Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by Schiffman, Lawrence H. and James C. VanderKam. 2 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

———. “Moses, Texts of.” Page 577–81 in vol. 1 of Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by Schiffman, Lawrence H. and James C. VanderKam. 2 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

———. “Qumran Prayer Texts and the Temple.” Pages 106–26 in Sapiential, Liturgical and Poetical Texts from Qumran: Proceedings of the Third Meeting of the International Organization for Qumran Studies Oslo 1998. Edited by Daniel K. Falk, Florentino García Martínez, and Eileen M. Schuller. Studies on the Texts of the Dessert of Judah 35. Leiden: Brill, 2000.

Fatehi, Mehrdad. The Spirit’s Relation to the Risen Lord in Paul: an Examination of its Christological Implications. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe 128. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000.

Fee, Gordon D. “II Corinthians VI.14–VII.1 and Food Offered to Idols.” New Testament Studies 23 (1976): 140–61.

———. God’s Empowering Presence: the Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 1994.

———. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987.

Finlan, Stephen. “Can We Speak of Theosis in Paul?” Pages 68–80 in Partakers of the Divine Nature: The History and Development of Deification in Christian Traditions. Edited by Michael J. Christensen and Jeffery A. Wittung. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008.

225

Fitzmyer, Joseph A. “Glory Reflected on the Face of Christ (2 Cor 3:7-4:6) and a Palestinian Jewish Motif.” Theological Studies 42 (1981): 630–44.

———. “Qumran and the Interpolated Paragraph in 2 Cor 6:14-7:1.” Pages 205–17 in Essays on the Semitic Background of the New Testament. London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1971. Repr. from Catholic Biblical Quarterly 23 (1961): 271–80.

———. “The Aramaic Levi Document.” Pages 444–64 in The Provo International Conference on the Dead Sea Scrolls: Technological Innovations, New Texts, and Reformulated Issues. Edited by Donald W. Parry and Eugene Ulrich. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 30. Leiden: Brill, 1999.

Fletcher-Louis, Crispin H. T. “4Q374: A Discourse on the Sinai Tradition: The Deification of Moses and Early Christology.” Dead Sea Discoveries 3 (1996): 236–52.

———. All the Glory of Adam: Liturgical Anthropology in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Leiden: Brill, 2002.

———. “Some Reflections on Angelomorphic Humanity Texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls.” Dead Sea Discoveries 7 (2000): 292–312.

Fossum, Jarl E. The Image of the Invisible God: Essays on the Influence of Jewish Mysticism on Early Christology. Novum Testamentum Et Orbis Antiqus 30. Freiburg. Schweiz: Univertäsverlag; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Reprecht, 1995.

———. “The New Religionsgeschichtliche Schule: The Quest for Jewish Christology.” Pages 638–46 in Society of Biblical Literature 1991 Seminar Papers. Edited by Eugene H. Lovering. Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers 30. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991.

Freedman, David Noel, ed. The Anchor Bible Dictionary. 6 vols. New York: Doubleday, 1992.

Frennesson, Björn. “In a common rejoicing”: Liturgical Communion with Angels in Qumran. Studia Semitica Upsaliensia 14. Uppsala: University of Uppsala Press, 1999.

Fujita, Shozo. “The Metaphor of Plant in Jewish Literature of the Intertestamental Period.” Journal for the Study of Judaism 7 (1976): 30–45.

Furnish, Victor Paul. II Corinthians. Anchor Bible 32A. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1984.

226

Garland, David E. 1 Corinthians. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003.

———. 2 Corinthians. The New American Commentary 29. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1999.

Gärtner, Bertil. The Temple and the Community in Qumran and the New Testament. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965.

George, A. R. Communion with God in the New Testament. London: Epworth, 1953.

Georgi, Dieter. The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians. Studies in the New Testament and its World. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1987.

Gladd, Benjamin L. Revealing the Mysterion: the Use of Mystery in Daniel and Second Temple Judaism with Its Bearing on First Corinthians. Edited by James D. G. Dunn, Carl R. Holladay, Hermann Lichtenberger, Jens Schröter, Gregory E. Sterling, and Michael Wolter. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 150. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2008.

Gnilka, Joachim. “2 Cor. 6:14-7:1 in Light of the Qumran Texts and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.” Pages 48–68 in Paul and Qumran. Edited by J. Murphy-O’Connor. Chicago: Priory, 1968. Translation of “2 Kor. 6,14–7,1 im Lichte der Qumranschriften und der Zwolf-Patriarchen-Testamente.” Pages 86– 99 in Neutestamentliche Aufsätze. Festschrift für Prof. Josef Schmid zum 70. Geburtstag. Edited by Josef Blinzer, Otto Kuss, and Franz Mussner. Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet, 1963.

Goff, Matthew J. “Reading Wisdom at Qumran: 4QInstruction and the Hodayot.” Dead Sea Discoveries 11 (2004): 263–88.

Golitzin, Alexander. “Recovering the ‘Glory of Adam’: ‘Divine Light’ Traditions in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Christian Ascetical Literature of Fourth-Century Syro-Mesopotamia.” Pages 275–308 in The Dead Sea Scrolls as Background to Postbiblical Judaism and Early Christianity: Papers from an International Conference at St. Andrews in 2001. Edited by James R. Davila. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 46. Leiden: Brill, 2003.

Gooder, Paula. Only the Third Heaven? 2 Corinthians 12:1-10 and Heavenly Ascent. Library of New Testament Studies 313. London: T&T Clark, 2006.

Gorman, Michael J. Cruciformity: Paul's Narrative Spirituality of the Cross. Cambridge, U.K.: Eerdmans, 2001.

227

———. Inhabiting the Cruciform God: Kenosis, Justification, and Theosis in Paul's Narrative Soteriology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009.

———. “The First Christian Treatise on Theosis.” Journal of Theological Interpretation 5 (2011): 13–34.

Goshen-Gottstein, Alon. “Four Entered Paradise Revisited.” Harvard Theological Review 88 (1995): 69–133.

———. The Sinner and the Amnesiac: The Rabbinic Invention of Elisha Ben Abuya and Eleazar Ben Arach. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2000.

Goulder, Michael. “Vision and Knowledge.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 17 (1995): 53–71.

———. “Visions and Revelations of the Lord (2 Corinthians 12:1–10).” Pages 303– 12 in Paul and the Corinthians: Studies on a Community in Conflict. Essays in Honour of Margaret Thrall. Edited by Trevor J. Burke and J. Keith Elliott. Supplements to Novum Testamentum 109. Leiden: Brill, 2003.

Greenfield, Jonas C. “The Words of Levi Son of Jacob in Damascus Document.” Revue de Qumran 13 (1988): 319–22.

Greenwood, David. “The Lord Is the Spirit: Some Considerations of 2 Cor 3:17.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 34 (1972): 467–72.

Gruenwald, Ithamar. Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism. Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 14. Leiden: Brill, 1980.

———. “Major Issues in the Study and Understanding of Jewish Mysticism.” Pages 1–49 in Judaism in Late Antiquity: Part Two: Historical Synthesis. Edited by Jacob Neusner. Boston: Brill, 2001.

Gupta, Nijay K. Worship that Makes Sense to Paul: a New Approach to the Theology and Ethics of Paul's Cultic Metaphors. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 175. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2010.

Hafemann, Scott J. Paul, Moses, and the History of Israel: the Letter/Spirit Contrast and the Argument from Scripture in 2 Corinthians 3. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 81. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1995.

Hainz, Josef. Koinonia. ‘Kirch’ als Gemeinschaft bei Paulus. Biblische Untersuchungen 16. Regensburg: Pustet, 1982.

228

Halperin, David J. “Origen, Ezekiel's Merkabah, and the Ascension of Moses.” Church History 50 (1981): 261–75.

———. “Merkabah Midrash in the Septuagint.” Journal of Biblical Literature 101 (1982): 351–63.

———. The Faces of the Chariot: Early Jewish Responses to Ezekiel's Vision. Tübingen: Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1988.

———. The Merkabah in Rabbinic Literature. New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1980.

Hanson, A. T. “The Midrash in II Corinthians 3: A Reconsideration.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 3 (1980): 2–28.

Harkins, Angela Kim. “The Community Hymns Classification: A Proposal for further Differentiation.” Dead Sea Discoveries 15 (2008): 121–54.

———. “Thinking about 1QHA Sixty Years after its Discovery.” Pages 101–34 in Qumran Cave 1 Revisited: Texts from Cave 1 Sixty Years after Their Discovery: Proceedings of the Sixth Meeting of the IOQS in Ljubljana. Edited by Daniel K. Falk, Sarianna Metso, Donald W. Parry, and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 91. Leiden: Brill, 2010.

Harris, Murray J. The Second Epistle to the Corinthians: a Commentary on the Greek Text, The New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005.

Hays, Richard B. Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989.

———. The Faith of Christ: An Investigation of the Narrative Substructure of Galatians 3:1–4:11. The Biblical Resource Series. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002.

Hayward, Robert. The Jewish Temple: a Non-biblical Sourcebook. London: Routledge, 1996.

Heckel, Ulrich. “Der Dorn im Fleisch Die Krankheit des Paulus in 2Kor 12,7 und Gal 4,13 f.” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 84 (1993): 65–92.

Heil, John Paul. The Rhetorical Role of Scripture in 1 Corinthians. Society of Biblical Literature: monograph series 15. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2005.

229

Hengel, Martin. Judaism and Hellenism. Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period. Translated by John Bowden. 2 vols. London: SCM Press, 1974.

Henten, Jan Willem van. “Moses as Heavenly Messenger in Assumptio Mosis 10:2 and Qumran Passages.” Journal of Jewish Studies 54 (2003): 216–27.

Héring, Jean. The First Epistle of Saint Paul to the Corinthians. Translated by A. W. Heathcote and P. J. Allcock. London: Epworth Press, 1962.

Himmelfarb, Martha. Ascent to Heaven in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.

———. “Heavenly Ascent and the Relationship of the Apocalypses and the Hekhalot Literature,” Hebrew Union College Annual 59 (1988): 73–100.

———. “Merkavah Mysticism since Scholem: Rachel Elior's The Three Temples.” Pages 19–36 in Wege mystischer Gotteserfahrung. Edited by Peter Schäfer. Munich: Oldenburg, 2006.

———. “The Practice of Ascent in the Ancient Mediterranean World.” Pages 121– 37 in Death, Ecstasy, and Other Worldly Journeys. Edited by John J. Collins and Michael Fishbane. Albany: State University of New York, 1995.

Hogeterp, Albert L. A. “Paul and God's Temple: a Historical Interpretation of Cultic Imagery in the Corinthian Correspondence.” Ph.D. diss., University of Groningen, 2004.

Hooker, Morna D. “Authority on her Head: An Examination of 1 Cor. xi. 10.” New Testament Studies 10 (1964): 410–16.

———. “Beyond the Things that are Written? St Paul's Use of Scripture.” New Testament Studies 27 (1981): 295–309.

———. “Conformity to Christ.” Theology 116 (2013): 83–92.

———. From Adam to Christ: Essays on Paul. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.

———. Pauline Pieces. London: Epworth Press, 1979.

Hopkins, Denise Dombkowski. “The Qumran Community and 1QHodayot: A Reassessment.” RevQ 10 (1979–1981): 323–64.

Horst, P. W. Van der. “Moses’ Throne Vision in Ezekiel the Dramatist.” Journal of Jewish Studies 34 (1983): 21–29.

230

———. “Some Notes on Exagogue of Ezekiel.” Mnemosyne 37 (1984): 354–75.

Hoskins, Paul M. “The Use of Biblical and Extrabiblical Parallels in the Interpretation of First Corinthians 6:2-3.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 63 (2001): 287–97.

Hughes, Julie A. Scriptural Allusions and Exegesis in the Hodayot. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 59. Leiden: Brill, 2006.

Hurtado, Larry W. A New Introduction to Kyrios Christos: A History of the Belief in Christ from the Beginnings of Christianity to Irenaeus, by Wilhelm Bousset. Translated by John E. Steely. Repr., Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2013.

———. How on Earth did Jesus become a God? Historical Questions about Earliest Devotion to Jesus. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005.

———. Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003.

———. “New Testament Christology: A Critique of Bousset’s Influence.” Theological Studies 40 (1979): 306–17.

———. One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism. 2d ed. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1998.

Idel, Moshe. Ascensions on High in Jewish Mysticism: Pillars, Lines, Ladders. New York: Central European University Press, 2005.

Jacobson, H. “Mysticism and Apocalyptic in Ezekiel the Tragedian.” Illinois Classical Studies 6 (1981): 272–93.

Jackson, David R. Enochic Judaism: Three Defining Paradigm Exemplars. Library of Second Temple Studies. London: T&T Clark International, 2004.

Jassen, Alex P. Mediating the Divine: Prophecy and Revelation in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Second Temple Judaism. Studies of the Texts of the Desert of Judah 68. Leiden: Brill, 2007.

———. “Prophets and Prophecy in the Qumran Community.” Association for Jewish Studies Review 32 (2008): 299–334.

Jervis, L. Ann. “Becoming Like God through Christ: Romans.” Pages 143–62 in Patterns of discipleship in the New Testament. Edited by Richard N. Longenecker. McMaster New Tesament Studies. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.

231

Johnston, George. “‘Spirit’ and ‘Holy Spirit’ in the Qumran Literature.” Pages 27–42 in New Testament Sidelights: Essays in Honor of Alexander Converse Purdy. Edited by Harvey K. McArthur. Hartford, Conn.: The Hartford Seminary Foundation Press, 1960.

Jonge, Marinus de. “Notes on Testament of Levi II–VII.” Pages 247–60 in Studies on the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: Text and Interpretation. Edited by Marinus de Jonge. Studia in Veteris Testamenti pseudepigrapha 3. Leiden: Brill, 1975.

———. “The Testament of Levi and ‘Aramaic Levi.’” Pages 244–62 in Jewish Eschatology, Early Christian Christology and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: Collected Essays of Marinus de Jonge. Edited by H. J. de Jonge; Leiden: Brill, 1991.

Joüon, Paul and Takamitsu Muraoka. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Rev. ed. Subsidia biblica 27. Roma: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2006.

Kanagaraj, Jey J. ‘Mysticism’ in the Gospel of John: An Inquiry into its Background. Journal for the Study of the New Testament: Supplement Series 158. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998.

Käsemann, Ernst. Commentary on Romans Translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley. London: SCM Press, 1980.

———. “Die Legitimität des Apostels. Eine Untersuchung zu II Korinther 10–13.” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 41 (1942): 33–71.

Kautzsch, E. ed., Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar. Translated by A. E. Cowley. 2d. ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910.

Kee, H. C. “Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.” Pages 775–828 in volume 1 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. 2 vols. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1983–1985.

Keener, Craig S. 1-2 Corinthians. New Cambridge Bible Commentary. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

Kim, Seyoon. Paul and New Perspective: Second Thoughts on the Origin of Paul’s Gospel. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002.

———. The Origin of Paul’s Gospel. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981.

232

Kittel, G., and G. Friedrich, eds. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Translated by G. W. Bromiley. 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964–1976.

Knibb, Michael A. Jubilees and the Origins of the Qumran Community: An Inaugural Lecture in the Department of Biblical Studies. London: King's College, 1989.

Koenig, John. “The Knowing of Glory and Its Consequences (2 Corinthians 3–5).” Pages 158–69 in The Conversation Continues Studies in Paul & John In Honor of J. Louis Martyn. Edited by Robert T. Fortna and Beverly R. Gaventa. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1990.

Kooten, Geurt Hendrik van. Paul's Anthropology in Context: the Image of God, Assimilation to God, and Tripartite Man in Ancient Judaism, Ancient Philosophy and Early Christianity. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 232. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008.

———. “Why did Paul include an exegesis of Moses' shining face (Exodus 34) in 2 Corinthians 3? Moses’ strength, well-being and (transitory) glory, according to Philo, Josephus, Paul, and the Corinthian scriptures.” Pages 149–81 in The Significance of Sinai: Traditions about Sinai and Divine Revelation in Judaism and Christianity. Edited by George J. Brooke, Hindy Najman, and Loren T. Stuckenbruck. Themes in Biblical Narrative Jewish and Christian Traditions 12. Leiden: Brill, 2008.

Kourie, Celia. “Christ-Mysticism in Paul.” The Way Supplement 201 (2001): 71–80.

Kuhn, Heinz-Wolfgang. Enderwartung und gegenwärtiges Heil: Untersuchungen zu den Gemeindeleidern von Qumran. Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments 4. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966.

———. “The Wisdom Passage in 1 Corinthians 2:6-16 between Qumran and Proto- gnosticism.” Pages 240-53 in Sapiential, Liturgical and Poetical Texts from Qumran: Proceedings of the Third Meeting of the International Organization for Qumran Studies Oslo 1998. Edited by Daniel K. Falk, Florentino García Martínez, and Eileen M. Schuller. Studies on the Texts of the Dessert of Judah 35. Leiden: Brill, 2000.

Kvalvaag, Robert W. “The Spirit in Human Beings in Some Qumran Non-Biblical Texts.” Pages 159–80 in Qumran between the Old and New Testaments. Edited by Frederick H. Cryer and Thomas L. Thompson. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series 290. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998.

Kvanvig, Helge S. “Enochic Judaism—a Judaism without the Torah and the Temple?” Pages 163-77 in Enoch and the Mosaic Torah: the Evidence of

233

Jubilees. Edited by Gabriele Boccaccini and Giovanni Ibba. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009.

———. “Jubilees—Between Enoch and Moses: A Narrative Reading.” Journal for the Study of Judaism 35 (2004): 243–61.

Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1980.

Lambrecht, Jan. Second Corinthians. Edited by Daniel J. Harrington. Sacra Pagina 8. Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 1999.

———. “Transformation in 2 Cor 3,18.” Biblica 64 (1983): 243–54.

Levison, John R. Filled with the Spirit. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009.

———. Portraits of Adam in Early Judaism: from Sirach to 2 Baruch. Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha: Supplement Series 1. Sheffield: JSOT, 1988.

———. “The Spirit and the Temple in Paul's Letters to the Corinthians.” Pages 189– 215 in Paul and His Theology. Edited by Stanley Porter. Leiden: Brill, 2006.

———. The Spirit in First Century Judaism. Leiden: Brill, 1997.

Liddell, H. G., R. Scott, and H. S. Jones. A Greek-English Lexicon, with a Supplement. 9th ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976.

Lim, Timothy H. “Studying the Qumran Scrolls and Paul in their Historical Context.” Pages 135–56 in The Dead Sea Scrolls as Background to Postbiblical Judaism and Early Christianity: Papers from an International Conference at St. Andrews in 2001. Edited by James R. Davila. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 46. Leiden: Brill, 2003.

Lincoln, Andrew T. Paradise Now and Not Yet: Studies in the Role of the Heavenly Dimension in Paul’s Thought with Special Reference to his Eschatology. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 43. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981.

———. “‘Paul the Visionary’: The Setting and Significance of the Rapture to Paradise in II Corinthians XII.1–10.” New Testament Studies 25 (1979): 206–10.

Litwa, M. David. “2 Corinthians 3:18 and Its Implications for Theosis.” Journal of Theological Interpretation 2 (2008): 117–33.

———. “Paul’s Mosaic Ascent: An Interpretation of 2 Corinthians 12.7-9.” New Testament Studies (2011): 238–57.

234

———. We Are Being Transformed: Deification in Paul's Soteriology. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 187. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2012.

Lodahl, Michael E. Shekhinah/Spirit: Divine Presence in Jewish and Christian Religion. Studies in Judaism and Christianity. New York: Paulist Press, 1992.

Luz, Ulrich. “Paul as Mystic.” Pages 131–43 in The Holy Spirit and Christian Origins: Essays in Honor of James D. G. Dunn. Edited by Graham N. Stanton, Bruce W. Longanecker, and Stephen C. Barton. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004.

———. “Paulus als Charismatiker und Mystiker,” Pages 75-93 in Exegetische und theologische Studien: Gesammelte Aufsätze II. Edited by Traugott Holtz. Arbeiten zur Bibel und ihrer Geschichte 34. Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2010.

Magness, Jodi. The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002.

Maier, Johann. Vom Kultus zur Gnosis: Studien zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte der “jüdischen Gnosis.” Bundeslade, Gottesthron und Märkabah. KAIROS Religionswissenschaftliche Studien 1. Salzburg: Otto Müller, 1964.

———. “Shîrê ʿÔlat hash-Shabbat. Some Observations on their Calendric Implications and on their Style.” Pages 543–60 in volume 2 of The Madrid Qumran Congress Proceedings of the International Congress on the Dead Sea Scrolls, Madrid 18–21 March 1991. Edited by Julio Trebolle Barrera and Luis Vegas Montaner. 2 vols. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 11. Leiden: Brill, 1992.

Marguerat, Daniel. “La mystique de l’Apôtre Paul.” Pages 307–29 in Paul de Tarse: Congrès de l’ACFEB. Edited by Jacques Schlosser. Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf, 1996.

———. “Paul le mystique.” Revue théologique de Louvain 43 (2012): 473–93.

Marshall, I. Howard. “Church and Temple in the New Testament.” Tyndale Bulletin 40 (1989): 203–22.

Matera, Frank J. II Corinthians: A Commentary. New Testament Library. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2003.

Martin, Dale B. The Corinthian Body. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995.

235

———. “Tongues of Angels and Other Status Indicators.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 59 (1991): 547–89.

Martin, Ralph P. 2 Corinthians. Word Biblical Commentary 40. Waco, Tex.: Word Books, 1986.

Maston, Jason. “Divine and Human Agency in Second Temple Judaism and Paul: A Comparison of Sirach, Hodayot, and Roman 7-8.” Ph. D. thesis, Durham University, 2009.

McDermott, Michael. “The Biblical Doctrine of ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ.” Biblische Zeitschrift 19 (1975): 64–77, 219–33.

McGinn, Bernard. The Foundations of Mysticism. Vol. 1 of The Presence of God: A History of Western Christian Mysticism. New York: Crossroad, 2000.

McKelvey, R. J. The New Temple: the Church in the New Testament. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1969.

Meeks, Wayne A. The Prophet-King: Moses Traditions and the Johannine Christology. Novum Testamentum Supplements 14. Leiden: Brill, 1967.

Meier, Hans-Christoph. Mystik bei Paulus: zur Phänomenologie religiöser Erfahrung im Neuen Testament. Texte und Arbeiten zum neutestamentlichen Zeitalter 26. Tübingen: Francke Verlag, 1998.

Merrill, Eugene H. Qumran and Predestination: Theological Study of the Thanksgiving Hymns. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 8. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1975.

Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. 2d ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1994.

Milik, J. T. “Traduction continue du Testament de Lévi [Précédée d’une note de l’editeur Z. J. Kapera],” Qumran Chronicle 15 (2007): 5–24.

Morray-Jones, Christopher R. A. A Transparent Illusion: a Dangerous Vision of Water in Hekhalot Mysticism: a Source-Critical and Tradition-Historical Inquiry. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 59. Leiden: Brill, 2002.

———. “Paradise Revisited (2 Cor 12:1-12): The Jewish Mystical Background of Paul's Apostolate. Part 1: The Jewish Sources.” Harvard Theological Review 86 (1993): 177–217.

236

———. “Paradise Revisited (2 Cor 12:1-12): The Jewish Mystical Background of Paul's Apostolate. Part 2: Paul's Heavenly Ascent and Its Significance.” Harvard Theological Review 86 (1993): 269–92.

———. “Transformational Mysticism in the Apocalyptic-Merkabah Tradition.” Journal of Jewish Studies 48 (1992): 1–31.

Newman, Carey C. Paul's Glory-Christology: Tradition and Rhetoric. Supplements to Novum Testamentum 69. Leiden: Brill, 1992.

Newsom, Carol A. “Apocalyptic Subjects: Social Construction of the Self in the Qumran Hodayot.” Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 12 (2001): 3– 35.

———. “‘He Has Established for Himself Priests’: Human and Angelic Priesthood in the Qumran Sabbath Shirot.” Pages 101–20 in Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by L. H. Schiffman. Sheffield: JSOT, 1990.

———. “Merkabah Exegesis in the Qumran Sabbath Shirot.” Journal of Jewish Studies 38 (1987): 11–30.

———. “Review of C. H. T. Fletcher Louis, All the Glory of Adam: Liturgical Anthropology in the Dead Sea Scrolls.” Dead Sea Discoveries 10 (2003): 431– 35.

———. “‘Sectually Explicit’ Literature from Qumran.” Pages 167–87 in The Hebrew Bible and Its Interpreters. Edited by William Henry Propp, Baruch Halpern, and David Noel Freedman. Biblical and Judaic Studies from the University of California, San Diego 1. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1990.

———. The Self as Symbolic Space: Constructing Identity and Community at Qumran. Edited by F. García Martínez. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 52. Leiden: Brill, 2004.

Newton, Michael. The Concept of Purity at Qumran and in the Letters of Paul. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 53. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985.

Nickelsburg, George W. E. “Enoch, Levi, and Peter: Recipients of Revelation in Upper Galilee.” Journal of Biblical Literature 100 (1981): 575–600.

———. Jewish Literature between the Bible and the Mishnah: a Historical and Literary Introduction. 2d ed. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005.

———. “The Books of Enoch at Qumran: What We Know and What We Need to Think About.” Pages 99–113 in Antikes Judentum und frühes Christentum:

237

Festschrift für Hartmut Stegemann zum 65. Geburtstag. Edited by Bernd Kollmann, Wolfgang Reinbold, and Annette Steudel. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1999.

———. “The Qumranic Transformation of a Cosmological and Eschatological Tradition (1QH 4:29 - 40).” Pages 649–60 in volume 2 of The Madrid Qumran Congress Proceedings of the International Congress on the Dead Sea Scrolls, Madrid 18-21 March 1991. Edited by Julio Trebolle Barrera and Luis Vegas Montaner. 2 vols. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 11. Leiden: Brill, 1992.

Nissinen, Martti. “Transmitting Divine Mysteries: The Prophetic Role of Wisdom Teachers in the Dead Seas Scrolls.” Pages 513–33 in Scripture in Transition: Essays on the Septuagint, Hebrew Bible, and Dead Sea Scrolls in Honour of Raija Sollamo. Edited by A. Voitila and J. Jokiranta. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 126. Leiden: Brill, 2008.

Nitzan, Bilhah. “Harmonic and Mystical Characteristics in Poetic and Liturgical Writings.” The Jewish Quarterly Review 85 (1994): 163–83.

———. Qumran Prayer and Religious Poetry. Edited by F. García Martínez and A. S. van der Woude. Translated by Jonathan Chipman. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 12. Leiden: Brill, 1994.

Noll, Stephen F. “Angelology in the Qumran Texts.” Ph.D. Thesis, The Victoria University of Manchester, 1979.

Nötscher, Friedrich. Zur theologischen Terminologie der Qumran-Texte. Bonner biblische Beiträge 10. Bonn: Peter Hanstein Verlag G.M.B.H., 1956.

O’Neill, J. C. “‘Who is Comparable to Me in my Glory?’ 4Q491 Fragment 11 (4Q491c) and the New Testament.” Novum Testamentum 42 (2000): 24–38.

Orlov, Andrei. “Vested with Adam’s Glory: Moses as the Luminous Counterpart of Adam in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Macarian Homilies.” Pages 135–52 in L'Église des deux Alliances. Mémorial Annie Jaubert (1912--1980). Edited by Basil Lourié, Andrei Orlov, and M. Petit. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2009.

Orr, William F. and James Arthur Walther. I Corinthians: a New Translation. The Anchor Bible 32. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1976.

Panikulam, George. Koinonia in the New Testament: a Dynamic Expression of Christian Life. Analecta Biblica 85. Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1979.

Park, David M. “Paul’s ΣΚΟΛΟΨ ΤΗ ΣΑΡΚΙ: Thorn or Stake? (2 Cor. 12:7).” Novum Testamentum 22 (1980): 179–83.

238

Peerbolte, Bert J. Lietaert. “Paul Rapture: 2 Corinthians 12:2-4 and the Language of the Mystics.” Pages 159–76 in Experientia: Volume 1: Studies in Religious Experience in Early Judaism and Early Christianity. Edited by R. Werline, F. Flannery, and C. Shantz. Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series 40. Atlanta: SBL Press, 2008.

Pfann, Stephen. “Abducted by God? The Process of Heavenly Ascent in Jewish Tradition, from Enoch to Paul, from Paul to Akiva.” Henoch 33 (2011): 113–28.

Philip, Finny. The Origins of Pauline Pneumatology: the Eschatological Bestowal of the Spirit upon Gentiles in Judaism and in the Early Development of Paul's Theology. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe 194. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005.

Plummer, Alfred. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians. The International Critical Commentary. Edigburgh: T&T Clark, 1915. Repr., 1975.

Poirier, John C. The Tongues of Angels: the Concept of Angelic Languages in Classical Jewish and Christian Texts. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe 287. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010.

Price, R. M. “Punished in Paradise: An Exegetical Theory on 2 Corinthians 12:1– 10.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 7 (1980): 33–40.

Puech, Émile. “Notes sur le Testament de Lévi de la grotte 1 (1Q21),” Revue de Qumran 21 (2003): 297–310.

———. “Quelques aspects de la restauration du Rouleau des Hymnes (1QH).” Journal of Jewish Studies 39 (1988): 38–55.

Quispel, Gilles. “Ezekiel 1:26 in Jewish Mysticism and Gnosis.” Vigiliae christianae 34 (1980): 1–13.

Rabens, Volker. The Holy Spirit and Ethics in Paul: Transformation and Empowering for Religious-Ethical Life. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe 283. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010.

———. “The Development of Pauline Pneumatology.” Biblische Zeitschrift 43 (1999): 161–79.

Reitzenstein, Richard. Hellenistic Mystery-Religions: Their Basic Ideas and Significance. Translated by John E. Steely. Pittsburgh Theological Monograph Series 18. Pittsburgh: Pickwick Press, 1978.

239

Richards, I. A. The Philosophy of Rhetoric. New York: Oxford University Press, 1936.

Rietz, Henry W. Morisada. “Identifying Compositions and Traditions of the Qumran Community: The Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice as a Test Case.” Pages 29–52 in Qumran Studies: New Approaches, New Questions. Edited by Michael Thomas Davis and Brent A. Strawn. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007.

Robertson, Archibald and Alfred Plummer. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St Paul to the Corinthians. 2d ed. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1912. Repr., 1975.

Robertson, R. G. “Ezekiel the Tragedian.” Pages 803–819 in volume 2 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. 2 vols. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1983–1985.

Rosner, Brian S. “Temple and Holiness in 1 Corinthians 5.” Tyndale Bulletin 42 (1991): 137–45.

———. “Temple Prostitution in 1 Corinthians 6:12-20.” Novum Testamentum 40 (1998): 336–51.

Rowland, Christopher and Christopher R. A. Morray-Jones. The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament. Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum 12. Leiden: Brill, 2009.

Rowland, Christopher. “The Influence of the First Chapter of Ezekiel on Jewish and Early Christian Literature.” Ph.D. Thesis, University of Cambridge, 1974.

———. The Open Heaven: A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early Christianity. London: SPCK, 1982.

Sampley, J. Paul. “The First Letter to the Corinthians.” Pages 771–1003 in Acts, Introduction to Epistolary Literature, Romans, 1 Corinthians. Vol. 10 of New Interpreter's Bible. Edited by Leander E. Keck. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2002.

Sanders, E. P. Paul and Palestinians Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977.

Sanders, Seth L. “Performative Exegesis.” Pages 57–79 in Paradise Now: Essays on Early Jewish and Christian Mysticism. Edited by April D. DeConick. Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series 11.Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006.

Sandmel, Samuel. “Parallelomania.” Journal of Biblical Literature 81 (1962): 1–13.

240

Sandnes, Karl Olav. Paul—One of the Prophets? A Contribution to the Apostle's Self-Understanding. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe 43. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1991.

Schäfer, Peter. Geniza-fragmente zur Hekhalot-Literatur. Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum 6. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1984.

———. “New Testament and Hekhalot Literature: The Journey into Heaven in Paul and in Merkabah Mysticism.” Journal of Jewish Studies 35 (1984): 19–35.

———.“The Aim and Purpose of Early Jewish Mysticism.” Pages 277–95 in Hekhalot Studien. Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum 19. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1988.

———. The Hidden and Manifest God: Some Major Themes in Early Jewish Mysticism. Translated by Aubrey Pomerance. State University of New York Press Series in Judaica. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1992.

———. The Origins of Jewish Mysticism. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009.

Schattner-Rieser, Ursula. “Levi in the Third Sky: On the ‘Ascent to Heaven’ Legends within Their Near Eastern Context and J. T. Milik’s Unpublished Version of the Aramaic Levi Document.” Pages 801–19 in 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, Matthais Weigold, and in association with Bennie H. Reynolds III. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 140. Leiden: Brill, 2011.

Schiffman, Lawrence. “Merkavah Speculation at Qumran: The 4QSerekh Shirot ʿOlat ha-Shabbat.” Pages 15–47 in Mystics, Philosophers, and Politicians: Essays in Jewish Intellectual History in Honor of Alexander Altmann. Edited by Jehuda Reinharz and Daniel Swetschinski. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1982.

Schiffman, Lawrence H. and James C. VanderKam, eds. Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls. 2 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Scholem, Gershom Gerhard. Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, and Talmudic Tradition. 2d ed. New York: The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1965.

———. Major Trends in Jewish mysticism. 3d Rev. ed. New York: Schocken Books, 1961. Repr., 1995.

241

Schuller, Eileen. “A Hymn from a Cave Four Hodayot Manuscript: 4Q427 7 i + ii.” Journal of Biblical Literature 112 (1993): 605–28.

———. “Hodayot.” Pages 69–254 in Qumran Cave 4: Poetical and Liturgical Texts, Part 2. Edited by Emmanuel Tov. Discoveries in the Judean Desert 29. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1999.

———. “Recent Scholarship on the Hodayot 1993–2010.” Currents in Biblical Research 10 (2011): 119–62.

———. “Some Reflections on the Function and Use of Poetical Texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls.” Pages 173–89 in Liturgical Perspectives: Prayer and Poetry in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Proceedings of the Fifth International symposium of the Orion Center for the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Associated Literature, 19-23 January, 2000. Edited by Esther G. Chazon. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 48. Leiden: Brill, 2003.

———. “The Cave 4 Hodayot Manuscripts: A Preliminary Description.” JQR 85 (1994): 137–50.

———. “The Classification of Hodayot and Hodayot-like (with particular attention to 4Q433, 4Q433A and 4Q440).” Pages 182–96 in Sapiential, Liturgical and Poetical Texts from Qumran: Proceedings of the Third Meeting of the International Organization for Qumran Studies Oslo 1998. Edited by Daniel K. Falk, Florentino Garía Martínez, and Eileen M. Schuller. Studies on the Texts of the Dessert of Judah 35. Leiden: Brill, 2000.

Schultz, Joseph P. “Angelic Opposition to the Ascension of Moses and the Revelation of the Law.” The Jewish Quarterly Review 61 (1971): 282–307.

Schweitzer, Albert. The Mysticism of the Apostle Paul. Translated by William Montgomery. 2d ed. London: Adam & Charles Black, 1953.

Scott, James M. 2 Corinthians. New International Biblical Commentary on the New Testament 8. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 1998.

———. “The Triumph of God in 2 Cor 2.14: Additional Evidence of Merkabah Mysticism in Paul.” New Testament Studies 42 (1996): 260–81.

———. “Throne-Chariot Mysticism in Qumran and in Paul.” Pages 101–19 in Eschatology, Messianism, and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by C. A. Evans and P. W. Flint. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997.

Seesemann, H. Der Begriff ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ im Neuen Testament. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 14. Geissen: Töpelmann, 1933.

242

Segal, Alan F. “Heavenly Ascent in Hellenistic Judaism, Early Christianity and their Environment.” Pages 1333–94 in Aufstieg und Neidergang der Römischen Welt II. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1980.

———. Life after Death: a History of the Afterlife in Western Religion. New York: Doubleday, 2004.

———. “Paul and the Beginnings of Jewish Mysticism.” Pages 95–122 in Death, Ecstasy, and Other Worldly Journeys. Edited by John J. Collins and Michael Fishbane. Albany: State University of New York, 1995.

———. “Paul’s Thinking about Resurrection in Its Jewish Context.” New Testament Studies 44 (1998): 400–19.

———. Paul the Convert: The Apostolate and Apostasy of Saul the Pharisee. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990.

Segal, Robert A. “In Defense of the Comparative Method.” Numen: International Review for the History of Religions 48.3 (2001): 339–73.

Sekki, Arthur Everett. The Meaning of Ruaḥ at Qumran. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 110. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989.

Selby, Gary S. “Paul, the Seer: The Rhetorical Persona in 1 Corinthians 2.1–16.” Pages 351–73 in Rhetorical Analysis of Scripture: Essays from the 1995 London Conference. Edited by Stanley E. Porter and Thomas H. Olbricht. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997.

Shantz, Colleen. Paul in Ecstasy: The Neurobiology of the Apostle’s Life and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.

Sjöberg, Erik. “Neuschöpfung in den Toten-Meer-Rollen.” Studia Theologica— Nordic Journal of Theology 9 (1955): 131–36.

Smelik, W. F. “On Mystical Transformation of the Righteous into Light in Judaism.” Journal for the Study of Judaism 26 (1995): 122–44.

Smith, Barry D. “‘Spirit of Holiness’ as Eschatological Principle of Obedience.” Pages 75–100 in Christian Beginnings and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by John J. Collins and Craig A. Evans. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006.

Smith, Jonathan Z. Drudgery Divine: On the Comparison of Early Christianities and the Religions of Late Antiquity. London: University of London, 1990.

Smith, Morton. “Ascent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QMa.” Pages 181–88 in Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls: The New York Yigael Yadin.

243

Edited by L. H. Schiffman. Journal for the Study of Pseudepigrapha: Supplement Series 8. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1990.

———. “Two Ascended to Heaven-Jesus and the Author of 4Q491.” Pages 290–301 in Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. Anchor Bible Reference Library. New York: Doubleday, 1992.

Soskice, Janet Martin. Metaphor and Religious Language. Oxford: Clarendon, 1985.

Soskice, Janet Martin and R. Harré. “Metaphor in Science.” Pages 289–374 in From a Metaphorical Point of View: a Multidisciplinary Approach to the Cognitive Content of Metaphor. Edited by Zdravko Radman. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1995.

Spittler, Russell P. “The Limits of Ecstasy: An Exegesis of 2 Corinthians 12:1–10.” Pages 259–66 in Current Issues in Biblical and Patristic Interpretation: Studies in Honor of Merrill C. Tenney. Presented by his Former Students. Edited by Gerald F. Hawthorne. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975.

Stegemann, Hartmut. “The Material Reconstruction of 1QHodayot.” Pages 272–84 in The Dead Sea Scrolls Fifty Years after their Discovery Proceedings of the Jerusalem Congress, July 20–25, 1997. Edited by Lawrence H. Schiffman, Emanuel Tov, and James C. VanderKam. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society in Cooperation with the Shrine of the Book, Israel Museum, 2000.

———. “The Number of Psalms in 1QHodayota and Some of Their Sections.” Pages 191–234 in Liturgical Perspectives: Prayer and Poetry in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by Esther G. Chazon. STDJ 48. Leiden: Brill, 2003.

Stockhausen, Carol Kern. Moses’ Veil and the Glory of the New Covenant: the Exegetical Substructure of II Cor. 3,1-4,6. Analecta Biblica 116. Roma: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1989.

Stone, Michael E. “Apocalyptic Literature.” Pages 383–441 in Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period: Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, Qumran Sectarian Writings, Philo, Josephus. Edited by Michael E. Stone. Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum. Section 2: The Literature of the Jewish People in the Period of the Second Temple and the Talmud 2. Assen: Van Gorcum, 1984.

———. “Aramaic Levi Document and Greek Testament of Levi.” Pages 429–37 in Emanuel: Studies in Hebrew Bible, Septuagint and Dead Sea Scrolls in Honor of Emanuel Tov. Edited by Emanuel Tov, Shalom M. Paul, L. H. Schiffman, with E. Ben-David, and W. W. Fields. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 94. Leiden: Brill, 2003.

244

———. “Levi, Aramaic.” Page 486–88 in vol. 1 of Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by Schiffman, Lawrence H. and James C. VanderKam. 2 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Strawn, Brent A. and Henry W. Morisada Rietz. “(More) Sectarian Terminology in Pages 53–64 in ”.תמימי דרך the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice: The Case of Qumran Studies: New Approaches, New Questions. Edited by Michael Thomas Davis and Brent A. Strawn. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007.

Strugnell, John. “The Angelic Liturgy at Qumran-4Q Serek Šîrôt ʿOlat Haššabbāt.” Pages 318–45 in Congress Volume Oxford 1959. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 7. Leiden: Brill, 1960.

Sukenik, E. L. The Dead Sea Scrolls of the Hebrew University. Jerusalem: The Magnes Press, 1955.

Swartz, Michael D. “The Dead Sea Scrolls and Later Jewish Magic and Mysticism.” Dead Sea Discoveries 8 (2001): 182–93.

Swarup, Paul. The Self-Understanding of the Dead Sea Scrolls Community: an Eternal Planting, a House of Holiness. Library of Biblical Studies 59. London: T&T Clark, 2006.

Tabor, James D. Things Unutterable: Paul's Ascent to Paradise in its Greco-Roman, Judaic, and Early Christian Contexts. Studies in Judaism. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1986.

Thiselton, Anthony C. “Realized Eschatology at Corinth.” New Testament Studies 24 (1978): 510–26.

———. The First Epistle to the Corinthians: a Commentary on the Greek Text, The New International Critical Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000.

Thrall, Margaret E. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. 2 vols. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000.

———. “Paul’s Journey to Paradise: Some Exegetical Issues in 2 Cor 12, 2-4.” Pages 347–63 in The Corinthian Correspondence. Edited by R. Beiringer. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 125. Leuven: University Press, 1996.

———. “The Problem of II Cor. VI.14–VIII.1 in Some Recent Discussion.” New Testament Studies 24 (1977/1978): 132–48.

245

Tigchelaar, Eibert. “The Imaginal Context of the Visionary of the Aramaic New Jerusalem.” Pages 257–70 in Flores Florentino: Dead Sea Scrolls and other early Jewish studies in honour of Florentino García Martínez. Edited by A. Hilhorst, Émile Puech, Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar, and Florentino García Martínez. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 122. Leiden: Brill, 2007.

Tolmie, Donal Fracois. “Angels as arguments? The rhetorical function of references to angels in the main letters of Paul.” HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 67 (2011): 1–8. 7 June 2011. (20 April 2013).

Trotter, Jonathan R. “The Tradition of the Throne Vision in the Second Temple Period. Daniel 7:9–10, 1 Enoch 14:18–23, and the Book of Giants (4Q530).” Revue de Qumran 25 (2012): 451–66.

Tso, Marcus. “The Giving of Torah at Sinai and the Ethics of the Qumran Community.” Pages 117–28 in The Significance of Sinai: Traditions about Sinai and Divine Revelation in Judaism and Christianity. Edited by George J. Brooke, Hindy Najman, and Loren T. Stuckenbruck. Themes in Biblical Narrative Jewish and Christian Traditions 12. Leiden: Brill, 2008.

Van Unnik, W. C. “‘With Unveiled Face,’ an Exegesis of 2 Corinthians II 12-18.” Novum Testamentum 6 (1963): 153–69.

VanderKam, James C. Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition. The Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series 16. Washington, D.C.: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1984.

———. From Revelation to Canon: Studies in the Hebrew Bible and Second Temple Literature. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 62. Leiden: Brill, 2000.

———. Textual and Historical Studies in the Book of Jubilees. Harvard Semitic Monographs 14. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1977.

Vermès, Géza. “The Torah is Light.” Vetus Testamentum 8 (1958): 436–38.

Wallace, Daniel B. Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament; With Scripture, Subject and Greek Word Indexes. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.

Wallace, James Buchanan. Snatched into Paradise (2 Cor 12:1-10): Paul’s Heavenly Journey in the context of Early Christian Experience. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 179. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2011.

246

Wassen, Cecilia. Women in the Damascus Document. Academia Biblica 21. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2005.

Watson, Francis. Agape, Eros, Gender: Towards a Pauline sexual ethic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Weinfeld, Moshe. Normative and Sectarian Judaism in the Second Temple Period. Library of Second Temple Studies 54. London: T&T Clark International, 2005.

———. “The Heavenly Praise in Unison.” Pages 237–47 in Meqor Hajjim: Festschrift für Georg Molin zu seinem 75. Geburtstag. Edited by Irmtraut Seybold. Graz: Akademische Druck-u. Verlagsanstalt, 1983.

Weissenrieder, Annette. “Der Blick in den Spiegel: II Kor 3,18 vor dem Hintergrund antiker Speigeltheorien und ikonographischer Abbildungen.” Pages 313–43 in Picturing the New Testament: Studies in Ancient Visual Images. Edited by. A. Weissenrieder, F. Wendt, and P. von Gemünden. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe 193. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005.

Welborn, Laurence L. “The Runaway Paul.” Harvard Theological Review 92 (1999): 115–63.

Wikenhauser, Alfred. Pauline Mysticism: Christ in the Mystical Teaching of St. Paul. Translated by Joseph Cunningham. Edinburgh: Nelson, 1960.

Windisch, Hans. Der zweite Korintherbrief. Kritisch-exegetischer Kommentar über das Neue Testament 6. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1924.

Winter, Bruce W. Philo and Paul among the Sophists: Alexandrian and Corinthian responses to a Julio-Claudian Movement. 2d ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002.

A A Study of 4Q491c, 4Q47b, 4Q427 7 and 1QHP P מי כמוני באלים“ .Wise, Michael O 25:35-26:10.” Dead Sea Discoveries 7 (2000): 173–219.

Witherington, Ben, III. Conflict and Community in Corinth: a Socio-rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995.

Wolfson, Elliot R. “‘Imago Templi’ and the Meeting of the Two Seas: Liturgical Time-Space and the Feminine Imaginary in Zoharic Kabbalah.” RES: Anthropology and Aesthetics 51 (2007): 121–35.

———. “Mysticism and the Poetic-Liturgical Compositions from Qumran: A Response to Bilhah Nitzan.” The Jewish Quarterly Review 85 (1994): 185–202.

247

———. Through a Speculum That Shines: Vision and Imagination in Medieval Jewish Mysticism. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994.

———. “Seven Mysteries of Knowledge: Qumran E/sotericism Recovered.” Pages 177–214 in The Idea of Biblical Interpretation: Essays in Honor of James L. Kugel. Edited by James L. Kugel, Hindy Najman, and Judith H. Newman. Leiden: Brill, 2004.

Wooden, R. Glenn. “Guided by God: Divine Aid in Interpretation in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament.” Pages 101-20 in Christian Beginnings and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by John Joseph Collins and Craig A. Evans. Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006.

Wright, N. T. Climax of the Covenant: Christ and the Law in Pauline Theology. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991.

Yates, John W. The Spirit and Creation in Paul. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe 251. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008.

Young, Brad H. “The Ascension Motif of 2 Corinthians 12 in Jewish, Christian and Gnostic Texts.” Grace Theological Journal 9 (1988): 73–103.

248