JBL1321

J OU R N A L OF
BIBLICAL
LITERATURE
2013
1
3
2

1

2
0
1
3
VOLUME 132, NO. 1
US ISSN 0021-9231
A Vision of Divine Justice: The Resurrection of Jesus
in Eastern Christian Iconography
John Dominic Crossan 532
Four Inner-Biblical Interpretations of Genesis 49:10:
On the Lexical and Syntactic Ambiguities of as
Reflected in the Prophecies of Nathan, Ahijah, Ezekiel,
and Zechariah
Richard C. Steiner 3360
The in Ezekiel 13 Reconsidered
Jonathan Stkl 6176
The Problem of Time in Joel
Ronald L. Troxel 7795
Already/Not Yet: Eschatological Tension in the Book
of Tobit
Jill Hicks-Keeton 97117
Can Ahiqar Tell Us Anything about Personified Wisdom?
Seth A. Bledsoe 119137
Ben Sira, the Genesis Creation Accounts, and the
Knowledge of Gods Will
Shane Berg 139157
P.Duk. inv. 727r: New Evidence for the Meaning and
Provenance of the Word
David M. Moffitt and C. Jacob Butera 159178
Markan Discipleship according to Malachi: The
Significance of in the Story of the
Rich Man (Mark 10:1722)
Richard Hicks 179199
J
O
U
R
N
A
L

O
F

B
I
B
L
I
C
A
L

L
I
T
E
R
A
T
U
R
E
Visit us at AbingdonAcademic.com
to learn more and request an
exam copy today
AbingdonPress.com | 800.251.3320
Te Dead Sea Scrolls
9781426771071, $17.99
Te Apocrypha
9781426742354, $15.99
How Israel
Became a People
9781426754876, $37.99
Te Ancient Near East
9781426765506, $15.99
To All Nations
from All Nations
9781426771378, $49.99
Tank God
Its Tursday
9781426771392, $15.00
JBLcover1321_JBLcover2007.qxd 2/26/2013 6:34 PM Page 1
JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE
PUBLISHED QUARTERLY BY THE
SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE
(Constituent Member of the American Council of Learned Societies)
EDITORS OF THE JOURNAL
General Editor: ADELE REINHARTZ, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada
Assistant Editor: TIMOTHY PETTIPIECE, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada
Managing Editor: BILLIE JEAN COLLINS, Society of Biblical Literature, Atlanta, GA 30329
EDITORIAL BOARD
Term Expiring
2013: JO-ANN BRANT, Goshen College, Goshen, IN 46526
BRIAN BRITT, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061-0135
JOHN ENDRES, Jesuit School of Theology at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94709
MICHAEL FOX, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706
STEVEN FRAADE, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520-8287
MATTHIAS HENZE, Rice University, Houston, TX 77251
STEPHEN MOORE, Drew University, Madison, NJ 07940
LAURA NASRALLAH, Harvard Divinity School, Cambridge, MA 02138
EMERSON POWERY, Messiah College, Grantham, PA 17027
THOMAS RMER, Collge de France, Paris, and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
SIDNIE WHITE CRAWFORD, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68588-0337
DAVID WRIGHT, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA 02454
2014: WILLIAM ADLER, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695
ELLEN B. AITKEN, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec H3A 2T5 Canada
FRANCES TAYLOR GENCH, Union Presbyterian Seminary, Richmond, VA 23227
JENNIFER GLANCY, University of Richmond, Richmond, VA 23173
ROBERT HOLMSTEDT, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 1C1 Canada
ARCHIE C. C. LEE, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin New Territories, Hong Kong SAR
ANNEMARIE LUIJENDIJK, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08540
MARGARET Y. MACDONALD, St. Francis Xavier University, Antigonish, NS B2G 2W5 Canada
CHRISTL M. MAIER, Philipps-Universitt Marburg, 35032 Marburg, Germany
SHELLY MATTHEWS, Furman University, Greenville, SC 29613
MARK REASONER, Marian University, Indianapolis, IN 46222
KONRAD SCHMID, University of Zurich, CH-8001, Zurich, Switzerland
BARUCH J. SCHWARTZ, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem 91905, Israel
CLAUDIA SETZER, Manhattan College, Riverdale, NY 10471
YVONNE SHERWOOD, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, G12 8QQ, United Kingdom
2015: DAVID L. BARR, Wright State University, Dayton, OH 45435
COLLEEN CONWAY, Seton Hall University, South Orange, NJ 07079
MARY ROSE DANGELO, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556
GEORG FISCHER, Leopold-Franzens-Universitt Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
J. ALBERT HARRILL, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210
PAUL JOYCE, Kings College London, Strand, London WC2R 2LS, United Kingdom
JENNIFER KNUST, Boston University, Boston, MA 02215
ELIZABETH STRUTHERS MALBON, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,
Blacksburg, VA 24061-0135
JEAN-PIERRE RUIZ, St. Johns University, Queens, NY 11439
ERIN RUNIONS, Pomona College, Claremont, CA 91711
CAROLYN SHARP, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520
BENJAMIN D. SOMMER, The Jewish Theological Seminary, New York, NY 10027
DAVID TSUMURA, Japan Bible Seminary, Tokyo 205-0017, Japan
President of the Society: Carol L. Meyers, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708; Vice President: Fernando F.
Segovia, The Divinity School, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37240; Chair, Research and Publications Committee:
John T. Fitzgerald, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556; Executive Director: John F. Kutsko, Society of
Biblical Literature, 825 Houston Mill Road, Suite 350, Atlanta, GA 30329.
The Journal of Biblical Literature (ISSN 00219231) is published quarterly by the Society of Biblical Literature, 825
Houston Mill Road, Suite 350, Atlanta, GA 30329. The annual subscription price is US$45.00 for members and
US$190.00 for nonmembers. Institutional rates are also available. For information regarding subscriptions and mem-
bership, contact: Society of Biblical Literature, 825 Houston Mill Road, Suite 350, Atlanta, GA 30329. Phone: 866-727-
9955 (toll free) or 404-727-9498. E-mail: sblservices@sbl-site.org. For information concerning permission to quote, edi-
torial and business matters, please see the first issue of the year, p. 2. Periodical postage paid at Atlanta, Georgia, and at
additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Society of Biblical Literature, 825 Houston Mill
Road, Suite 350, Atlanta, GA 30329. Copyright 2013 by the Society of Biblical Litera ture.
The Hebrew and Greek fonts used in JBL are SBL Hebrew and SBL Greek; they are available from www.sbl-
site.org/Resources/default.aspx.
PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Available in bookstores or by calling 800.877.2665. Subscribe to
E-Notes, Baker Academics electronic newsletter, at bakeracademic.com.
New from
Baker Academic
L
978-0-8010-3916-4 192 pp.
$21.99p
Brilliantly conceived and ac-
cessibly written. Carters seven
events serve as doors through
which to enter into and explore
the cultural complexities of the
early church.
David deSilva
978-0-8010-4875-3 624 pp.
$45.00p
NOW IN PAPERBACK
Displaying jaw-dropping
acquaintance with primary evi-
dence and the oceanic body of
scholarship on Jesus, a sweet
reasonableness toward the
complexities involved, and just
plain good judgment time after
time on controverted issues,
Constructing Jesus is essential
reading for anyone concerned
with the scholarly approach to
the Jesus of history.
Larry W. Hurtado
978-0-8010-4910-1 304 pp.
$40.00p
This book is to be highly
recommended, both for the
insights it offers into Pauls
scriptural exegesis and as
a model for other studies,
demonstrating what can be
achieved by focusing on a later
authors interpretation of a
biblical book as a whole.
Susan E. Docherty, JSNT
incov revedit_incov.qxd 2/26/2013 2:52 PM Page 1
Journal of Biblical Literature
Volume 132
2013
GENERAL EDITOR
ADELE REINHARTZ
University of Ottawa
Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5
A Quarterly Published by
THE SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE
EDITORIAL BOARD
Term Expiring
PAUL JOYCE, Oxford University, Oxford, OX1 3LD, United Kingdom
JENNIFER KNUST, Boston University, Boston MA 02215
Assistant Editor: Tim Pettipiece, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada;
Managing Editor: Billie Jean Collins, Society of Biblical Literature, Atlanta, GA 30329
Articles are indexed in Religion Index One: Periodicals; book reviews in Index to Book Reviews in Religion,
American Theological Library Association, Evanston, Illinois. Both indexes are also found in the
ATLA Religion Database on CD-ROM.
EDITORIAL MATTERS OF THE JBL
1. Contributors should consult the Journals Instructions for Contributors (http://www.sbl-site.org/Publications/
PublishingWithSBL/JBL_Instructions.pdf).
2. If a MS of an article is submitted in a form that departs in major ways from these instructions, it may be returned
to the author for retyping, even before it is considered for publication.
3. Submit an electronic copy of an article to JBL.submissions@sbl-site.org.
4. Communications regarding the Journal should be addressed to Adele Reinhartz at the address given on the pre-
ceding page (or correspondence only at the following e-mail address: areinhar@uottawa.ca).
5. Permission to quote more than 500 words may be requested from the Rights and Permissions Department, Soci-
ety of Biblical Literature, 825 Houston Mill Road, Suite 350, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA (E-mail: sblexec@sbl-site.org).
Please specify volume, year, and inclusive page numbers.
BUSINESS MATTERS OF THE SBL
(not handled by the editors of the Journal)
1. All correspondence regarding membership in the Society, subscriptions to the Journal, change of address, renewals,
missing or defective issues of the Journal, and inquiries about other publications of the Society should be addressed
to Society of Biblical Literature, Customer Service Department, 825 Houston Mill Road, Atlanta, GA 30329. Phone:
866-727-9955 (toll-free) or 404-727-9498. E-mail: sbl@sbl-site.org.
2. All correspondence concerning the research and publications programs, the Annual Meeting of the Society, and
other business should be addressed to the Executive Director, Society of Biblical Literature, The Luce Center, 825
Houston Mill Road, Atlanta, GA 30329. (E-mail: sblexec@sbl-site.org).
3. Second Class postage paid at Atlanta, Georgia, and at additional mailing offices.
3
Presidential Address
by
John DoMinic Crossan
President of the Society of Biblical Literature 2012
Annual Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature
November 17, 2012
Chicago, Illinois
Introduction given by Carol L. Meyers
Vice President, Society of Biblical Literature
If youve read the announcement of this session in the SBL program bookand I
suspect many of you have, or else you wouldnt have decided to come to this lecture room
at this timeyouve read the biographical summary providing the basic facts about SBL
president John Dominic Crossan. And even if you havent read that summary, you still
probably know many of those basic facts. You are well aware that he is arguably the worlds
foremost historical-Jesus scholar. (In fact, a local taxi driver, in fnding out that the John
Dominic Crossan was a passenger in his cab, exclaimed that he wanted to put a plaque
there to show where the famous Crossan had sat during the cab ride!) You probably also
know that he is a native of Ireland, that he was educated in both Ireland (where he earned
his doctorate of divinity at the theological seminary of the national University of Ireland
in Kildare) and in the United States, and that he also did postdoctoral work in Rome at
the Pontifcal Biblical Institute and in Jerusalem at the lcole biblique et archologique
franaise. You may also know that he was an ordained priest for many years, that he lef the
priesthood in 1969, and that he was on the faculty of DePaul University here in Chicago
until he became professor emeritus in 1995. And if youre not familiar with all the twists and
turnstransitions, he calls themin his long, distinguished, and fascinating career, you can
read about them in his touching memoir, published in 2000: Its a Long Way from Tipperary:
What a Former Monk Discovered in His Search for the Truth, a book that, he quips, some
might call chicken soup for the soul but would more accurately be characterized as Irish
stew for the mind.
Tose of you in New Testament studies, and many Hebrew Bible scholars too I suspect,
know Dom to be a prolifc writer. He is the author of a long list of articles, book chapters,
and reviews as well as twenty-seven books, including his 1991 blockbuster Te Historical
Jesus: Te Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant, in which he engages textual analysis,
social anthropology, and historical research (including the use of ancient documents and
also archaeological materials) to reconstruct the life of Jesus. He wrote Historical Jesus, as
he explains in his memoir, with his academic colleagues in mind as his readers. How wrong
he was. We academics were hardly the only readers. Te book became a religion best-seller,
4 Journal of Biblical Literature 132, no. 1 (2013)
for it is not only scholarly but also comprehensible by and appealing to nonspecialistsat
least those willing to take on the challenge of reading a book that is more than fve hundred
pages long and contains a fair amount of technical analysis. Despite all the publicity, Dom
expected this best-seller status to be feeting. Again, how wrong he was. Te Historical
Jesus, along with the shorter version, Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography, which appeared a
few years later, had and still has wide appeal to a range of intellectually curious people in
the general public, many of whom are unhappy with various aspects of denominational
Christianity. Indeed, the appeal of his books has hardly subsided. And it has led to a number
of unexpected, unplanned, but enthusiastically welcomed developments in Doms career.
As I mentioned, Dom became professor emeritus in 1995. He may bear the title
emeritus, but that title doesnt really apply. Derived from Latin, the term emeritus signifes
one who has fnished or completed ones service, or, as it is used in academia, one who has
lef active professional service. Tese defnitions could hardly be further from the truth for
Dom. For him, leaving the university meant the freedom and the time to follow his personal
and scholarly passions in other ways than as a member of a university community. What
are those ways?
Te popularity of his work on the historical Jesus, in his writings and as a member
of the Jesus Seminar, has meant that he is in demand as a speaker. He lectures widely
and tirelesslyso far this year at sixteen events at churches and pastors schools all
over this country and abroad too.
He regularly leads tourspilgrimages, he calls themto various sites of Christian
interest in Turkey, Israel, Greece, and even, drawing on his Irish roots, Celtic Ireland.
He is a frequent guest on radio and television talks shows, and he is ofen featured
in articles in the popular press as well as in documentaries about Jesus and early
Christianity. In so doing, he has taken on the role of a leading public intellectual in
the feld of religion, an articulate spokesman for the ofen provocative positions he
has taken on a wide range of issues.
He still fnds time to continue his academic scholarship, his most recent book, this
year (2012), being Te Power of Parable: How Fiction by Jesus Became Fiction about
Jesus.
He remains a member of several learned societiesserving now as president of our
organizationand continues to participate in academic conferences.
John Dominic Crossans work and career are admirable in many ways. Because my
own work seeks to establish context for Hebrew Bible materials, I fnd his emphasis on
context, his insistence on reconstructing the sociopolitical dynamics and lifeways of the
frst few decades of the frst century c.e., especially important. More than that, however, he
has succeeded in what perhaps we all should strive to doconnect our lives and work in
the academy with the world outside the academy. In doing so, he courageously refuses to
gloss over or whitewash controversies and debates that his work has sparked, nor does he
hesitate to present his views about Jesus, God, and Christianity, even though he realizes that,
although many fnd those views compelling, others may consider them blasphemous. It is
no wonder that he has received many awards, among them the Albert Schweitzer Memorial
Award for Outstanding Accomplishment in the Critical Study of Religion.
We are fortunate that Dom remains vigorous in his many and varied pursuits, and we
are grateful that he has served the SBL so well in his term as president. Im sure that you
are as eager as I am to hear him to speak on A Vision of Divine Justice: Te Resurrection
of Jesus in Eastern Christian Iconography. Please join me in welcoming John Dominic
Crossan.
Icon from Cypruss Panagia tou Kykkou Monastery Museum. With gratitude to
Director Athanassoulas, for permission to photograph it, and to Father Agathonikos,
for permission to publish it here. (See p. 31 below.)
A Vision of Divine Justice:
Te Resurrection of Jesus
john dominic crossan
jdcrosn@earthlink.net
DePaul University, Chicago, IL 60604
Nothing that has ever happened should be regarded as lost for history. To be
sure, only a redeemed mankind receives the fullness of its pastwhich is to say,
only for a redeemed mankind has its past become citable in all its moments.
Walter Benjamin, On the Concept of History, III
Tis article involves, with regard to the resurrection of Jesus, a very deliberate
and remedialmovement from text to image; from biblical literature to bibli-
cal iconography; from Western Christianity through Eastern Christianity back to
Jewish Christianity; and from actual, factual, and literal interpretation to sym-
bolic, metaphoric, and parabolic understanding.
I. Questions
My subject could be presented as a verbal and textual problem with these two
questions:
First, who are those who have slept ( ) in 1 Cor 15:20; the
saints who had slept ( ) in Matt 27:52; and those raised from
the dead () in Ignatius, Magn. 9.2?
JBL 132, no. 1 (2013): 532
5
Te oral presentation of this address was primarily images with commentary. Tis written
version must, perforce, be commentary without images. But, on the one hand, I will indicate
where a color reproduction of any cited image is available to the readerin a book or on the
Web. On the other, over the last decade, Anna D. Kartsoniss Anastasis: Te Making of an Image
(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986) has been, for Sarah [Crossan] and myself, Bible
and Baedeker combinedfrom Nevsky to Nile and Tiber to Tigris. Tat magnifcent volume
contains eighty-nine black-and-white reproductions on its fnal (unnumbered) pages. Whenever
I mention an image that is in that repertoire, I reference it in the text as, for example, (K24), and
so on.
Second, what was proclaimed [] to the spirits in prison in 1 Pet
3:19; gospelled [] to the dead [] in 1 Pet 4:6; proclaimed
[] to those sleeping [ ] in Gos. Pet. 10.41?
My intention, however, is to present it as a visual and iconographic problem
with these two alternative questions: (1) Why is Easter depicted with such radi-
cal diference in Eastern Christian iconography, where it is a communal resurrec-
tion for Jesus and a host of others (henceforth: Anastasis), in contrast to Western
Christian iconography, where it is individual for Jesus alone (henceforth: Resur-
rection)? (2) Is Eastern Christianitys communal Anastasis of Jesus or Western
Christianitys individual Resurrection of Jesus in closer continuityeven granted
its radical paradigm-shifwith pre-Christian Jewish tradition about bodily res-
urrection in, for example, Pharisaic circles?
To illustrate the East/West diference immediately, I frst cite two representa-
tive examples of Jesus individual Resurrection in Western iconography from the
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. I then contrast that pair with two representa-
tive examples of Jesus communal Anastasis in Eastern iconography from much
earlier in the eleventh and twelfh centuries.
Two Western Examples.
1
Te frst example, the Polyptych of the Resurrection
by the Venetian painter Titian (152022), shows two armed guards gazing upward
at Jesus as he ascends on dawn clouds above the city (Brescia!). He wears a billow-
ing loincloth, his wounds are visible, and his right hand holds a white banner on
which is emblazoned a red cross.
Te second example, Te Resurrection of Christ, a triptych by the Flemish
painter Rubens (161112), has at least six awakened guards cowering before Jesus
as he emerges from the darkened tomb. He has a radiating halo, his nude and well-
muscled body is draped discreetly at the loins with a cloth, and his lef hand holds
a frond and his right a red banner.
In both of these paintings, Jesus is muscular and magnifcent, glorious and
transcendent, but also very, very much alone.
Two Eastern Examples.
2
Te frst example is a back-and-front diptych icon
with Jesus crucifxion on one side and his Anastasis on the other.
2
It was origi-
1
Both images are available by entering Titians Polyptych of the Resurrection and
Rubens Te Resurrection of Christ in Googles Search window.
2
(1) Tere are beautiful color reproductions of both sides of the diptych in Te Treasures
of the Monastery of Saint Catherine (ed. Corinna Rossi [text], Araldo de Luca [photographs],
Valeria Manferto di Fabianis [director], and Clara Xanotti [layout]; Vercelli: White Star, 2010).
See pp. 16869 for the Anastasis and 17073 for the crucifxion. See also Kurt Weitzmann,
Tirteenth Century Crusader Icons on Mount Sinai, Art Bulletin 45 (1963): 179203 (discussion
of the diptych is on pp. 18385, with black-and-white images in fgs. 56); and Jaroslav Folda,
Te Figural Arts in Crusader Syria and Palestine, 11871291: Some New Realities, Dumbarton
Oaks Papers 58 (2004): 31531 (black-and-white images are in fgs. 78).
(2) A color reproduction of the Torcello mosaic and the complete wall of which it is the
middle part is in Google under Torcello Anastasis (images). Note that the Torcello mosaic is
Crossan: Te Resurrection in Eastern Iconography 7
nally part of an iconostasis screen, with the crucifxion looking outward toward
the congregation and the Anastasis looking inward toward the sanctuary. It is in
St. Catherines Monastery, Mount Sinai, Egypt, dated between 1250 and 1275.

Christ moves to viewer lef, haloed, within a multilayered mandorla of tran-
scendent light derived from that of heaven above. He has a jeweled
3
cross in his lef
hand, and his wounds are prominent. As Christ grasps Adams limp wrist, an aged
Eve holds onto Adam. With them, to viewer lef, is John the Precursor, shaggy-
haired and bare-shouldered, alongside an older Abel with his usual shepherds
staf. To viewer right are the two kings, David, crowned and bearded, and Solo-
mon, crowned and beardless. Behind David is another fgure identifed by the oil
horn he carries. Tis unusual fgure is presumably Samuel, who anointed David as
king (1 Sam 16:1, 13). Gatekeeper Hades, however, is entirely absent and, instead,
Christ stands on the broken bifold gates of Hades, which are set one atop the other
as an equal-armed cross.
Te second example is a mosaic on the inside rear wall of Santa Maria
Assunta Cathedral on the island of Torcello in the northern Venetian Lagoon,
dated to the eleventh century (K58). In its center is a monumental-sized Christ,
cruciform-haloed, with no wounds evident, with the standard patriarchal cross
raised in his lef hand. He is standing not only on the bifold gates with locks, and
so on, all around, but on the extremely diminutive, bearded, and loin-clothed fg-
ure of Hades, the Gatekeeper of the realm of Death. Christ, striding forcibly to
viewer right, looks back to Adam, whose right hand he grasps in his own right to
lead him out. Behind Adam, once again, is Eve with hands raised in cloak-covered
supplication. Behind them, to viewer lef, are David (haloed, crowned, bearded)
and Solomon (haloed, crowned, unbearded). John the Precursor points to Christ
at viewer right. Behind John are many others already out of Hades, and, on either
side below, several others are coming out.
Before continuing, I have four points about these two Eastern images of the
Anastasis. In terms of development, the Mount Sinai mosaic is in Raising Up for-
mat, while the Torcello mosaic is in Leading Out format. Tese will be identifed
below as, respectively, Type 1 and Type 2, the two earliest and ever-basic styles of
the Byzantine Anastasis tradition.
Second, a trampled Gatekeeper Hades was absent in the Mount Sinai icon
but present in the Torcello mosaic. Hades, unlike Adam, is a fgure that can come
and goand will eventually go rather than stay permanentlyas the Anastasis
develops across six types and fve hundred years.
Tird, the Torcello mosaic has only HANA still extant to lef of Christs
located between a smaller-sized crucifxion above it and a larger-sized last judgment below it, but
still the huge Christ of the Anastasis dominates and overpowers the entire wall. Irena Andreescu
(Torcello: III, La chronologie relative des mosaques paritales, Dumbarton Oaks Papers 30
[1976]: 247341, here 259) dates that west-wall complex to la seconde moitie du XIe sicle et les
environs de lan 1100.
3
Italicized details represent Western/Crusader infuence on this Eastern scenario.
head. Despite the clear identifcationsthere and elsewherethe Anastasis image
is usually and inexcusably described in English as Te Harrowing of Hell or Te
Descent into Hades, Hell, or Limbo.
4
Fourth, that icon and that mosaic stand quite adequately as an introductory
representation of the entire sweep of Eastern Christianitys Anastasis vision. Tat
communal-style Anastasis appears on cloth, ivory, and metal; as icons, frescoes,
and mosaics; among scenes from the life of Christ and images of the Twelve Great
Feasts; in traditional or liturgical settings in churches; and in the less ofcial illus-
trations of monastic or aristocratic psalters. It is, quite simply and emphatically,
the Easter vision of Eastern Christianity.
II. Origins
Te origins of the image of a communal resurrection might seem quite sim-
ple. It is derived, one might think, from the Descent into Hell section of the Gospel
of Nicodemus.
5
It is, one might say, a visual aid for that textual datum. Tis solution
is chronologically possible since, however one dates that text,
6
it is certainly prior
to the frst extant image of the Anastasis from around the year 700.
Furthermore, as just seen, Christs hand grasping Adams to pull him from
the tomb is the essential core of the image. Tis feature is present from 700 to
1200 in all save one of the six Anastasis types that develop successively across that
half-millennium, and the hand-to-hand element is emphasized also in the texts
narrative:
Te King of glory stretched out his right hand, and took hold of our forefather
Adam and raised him up. . . . Tus he went into paradise holding our forefather
Adam by the hand, and he handed him over and all the righteous to Michael
the archangel.
7

4
Tis is no minor point, and all such labeling on the walls of museums or in the catalogues
of exhibitions is seriously misleading. Kartsonis (Anastasis, 4) notes immediately that any
designation of the subject matter of this iconography as the Descent or Harrowing of Hell
misrepresents and distorts the message of the chosen label Anastasis. Te title and subject matter
of this image refer, not to the Descent of Christ into Hell, Hades, Limbo, or Inferno, but to the
raising of Christ and his raising of the dead. Te concepts of rising and descending are obviously
antonymous and therefore not interchangeable. It is quite usual, for example, to have the Greek
title Te Anastasis at the top of icon, fresco, or mosaic, and still have a separate identifying and
abbreviated title JESUS // CHRIST on either side of Christs head below.
5
See Felix Scheidweiler, Te Gospel of Nicodemus: Acts of Pilate and Christs Descent into
Hell, in New Testament Apocrypha (ed. Wilhelm Schneemelcher; Eng. trans. ed. R. McL. Wilson;
rev. ed.; 2 vols.; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1991, 1992), 1:50136.
6
G. C. OCeallaigh, Dating the Commentaries of Nicodemus, HTR 56 (1963): 2158.
7
New Testament Apocrypha, 1:525. In the iconography, it is actually the limp wrist rather
than the hand of Adam that Christ grasps. Tat deliberately emphasizes his rising-from-death
status.
Adam, as representative of the entire human race, is so important that the resur-
rection could even be describedalbeit idiosyncraticallyas Te Anastasis of
Adam.
8

Apart, however, from Christ grasping Adams hand, similarities between text
and image are strikingly absent. For example, the six names mentioned in the
textual tradition are, in this literary sequence, Abraham, Isaiah, John the Precur-
sor, the frst father Adam, Seth, and David. But the six individuals in the image
tradition are, in this historical sequence, Adam and Eve (from 700), David and
Solomon (from 850), John the Precursor (from 950), and Abel (from the 1000s).
Te Anastasis image did not derive from the Nicodemus text as its visual sum-
mary.
9
But what is the alternative solution?
Tree diferent images from Byzantine coinage of the fourth and ffh centu-
ries formed the original matrix for those earliest images of the Anastasis of Jesus
in Eastern Christianity. Tese coin types all proclaimed imperial victory, but we
may diferentiate them depending on how exactly that victory is portrayed. For
purposes of promotion, publicity, and public relations, it could be imaged as Tram-
pling Down the conquered enemy, Raising Up the liberated people, or Leading Out
newly created citizens from forest to city, barbarism to urbanism.
My examples for the three victory models of Trampling Down or Raising Up
or Leading Out are taken from the coins of Teodosius I the Great, who ruled
from 347 to 395.
10
He was the last emperor to rule over the combined western and
eastern halves of the Christian world and the frst emperor to decree that Nicene
Christianity was to be their ofcial religion.
Trampling Down
Te emperor, holding symbols of triumph and authority, places his foot on a
tiny prostrate fgure who personifes the vanquished foe.
8
Kartsonis (Anastasis, 5) draws attention to the following two inscriptions in the Chludov
Psalter (see n. 39 below): (1) the image on folio 63r to illustrate the verse Let God rise up, let
his enemies be scattered; let those who hate him fee before him (Ps 67:2 LXX [68:1 NRSV]) has
this inscription: ; (2) the image on folio 63v to illustrate
the verse God gives the desolate a home to live in; he leads out the prisoners to prosperity, but
the rebellious live in a parched land (Ps 67:7 LXX [68:6 NRSV]) has: .
9
Kartsonis (Anastasis, 16) concludes: [T]he assumption that the text of Nicodemus is
the breeding ground for the Anastasis has to be rejected. For example: the text distinguishes
Hades from Satan, while the image does not. Indeed, the image emphasizes the trampling of the
defeated Hades, which is not even mentioned in the Greek text.
10
My complete database is the last four volumes of Te Roman Imperial Coinage (ed.
Harold Mattingly et al.; 10 vols. in 13; London: Spink, 192324 [hereafer RIC]; vols. 7 [1966]
and 8 [1981], ed. C. H. V. Sutherland and R. A. Carson; vol. 9 [1951], ed. Mattingly, Sutherland,
and Carson; vol. 10 [1994], ed. Carson, J. P. C. Kent, and A. M. Burnett). Te dates are, in round
numbers, 300500.
Example. Gold solidus of Teodosius from the Nicomedia mint (39495).
Obverse has him facing right, pearl-diademed, draped, cuirassed, and surrounded
by the legend D[ominus] N[oster] THEODOSIUS P[ius[ F[elix] AUG[ustus].
Reverse has the Emperor standing right, holding standard and Victory on
globe, and trampling on captive. Te legend reads: VICTORIA AUGGG (for
Augustorum).
11
Raising Up
Te emperor, holding symbols of triumph and authority, raises with his hand
a genufecting fgure who personifes a freed people or city.
Example. Bronze aes of Teodosius from the Lyons mint (37883). Obverse as
in the preceding gold solidus. Reverse has Emperor standing, facing, head lef with
right hand raising kneeling turreted woman, and holding Victory on globe in lef
hand. Te legend reads: VICTORIA AUGGG (for Augustorum).
12
Leading Out
Te emperor, holding symbols of triumph and authority, leads away by the
hand a fgure behind him who personifes a liberated people or city.
Example 1.

Silver miliarense of Teodosius from the Rome mint (37883).
Obverse as in (1) and (2). Reverse has Victory advancing right, head lef, dragging
captive with right hand, and holding trophy in lef. Legend reads: VICTORIA
AUGUSTORUM.
13
Te phrase dragging captive might not seem very promising as an imperial
victory model for Eastern Christianitys Anastasis image (despite Eph 4:8) and
my term, Leading Out, may sound too neutral. But, in terms of imperial promo-
tion, the captive was not being led away to slavery or death but being led away
from forest barbarism to urban civilization and liberated from darkness into light.
Tis benign interpretation of the Leading Out image was established earlier by
Constans I, emperor from 337 to 350, the youngest son of Constantine I the Great.
Example 2. Bronze aes of Constans I from the Heraclea mint (34851).
Obverse has emperor facing lef, diademed, draped, cuirassed, and holding globe.
Legend reads: D[ominus[ N[oster] CONSTANS P[ius[ F[elix] AUG[ustus]. Reverse
has Helmeted soldier, spear in lef hand, advancing right, head turned to lef;
11
RIC 9:84 and plate 6.10. Other examples from Teodosius in RIC 9 are on pp. 133 with
plate 8.12, 160, 186, 197, 233.
12
RIC 9:48 and plate 4.16. Other examples for Teodosius in RIC 9 are on pp. 83, 98, 100,
126, 150, 181, 222, 284, 300.
13
RIC 9:124 (with plate 8.7). Other examples for Teodosius in RIC 9 are on pp. 13334,
185, 188, 24647, 198, 293, 234 (with plate 16.17), 246, 262 (with plate 16.18), 303.
with his right hand, he leads a small bare-headed fgure from a hut beneath a tree.
Te spear points downwards, between the soldier and the fgure or between the
soldiers legs. Legend reads: FEL[icis] TEMP[oris] REPARATIO.
14
(Recall FDRs
Happy Days Are Here Again in 1932.) On these coins, certainly, the fgure is
taken from hut and forest to house and city with urbanization advertised as impe-
rial gif. Dragging Captive should be read as Leading Out the next generation
from rural barbarism to urban civilization!
III. Models
Tese three imperial victory images were combined to create two major image
types for Christs resurrection in Eastern Christian iconography. First, Trampling
Down was combined with Raising Up to create the frst and earliest model (by
700). Second, Trampling Down was combined with Leading Out to create a second
and later model (by 850). Tese two types can be considered foundational for all
later developmental variations.
Type 1. Trampling Down and Raising Up
In Type 1, Eastern Christianity combined the two imperial victory images
Trampling Down OR Raising Up in order to create the earliest model of the Anastasis
image as Trampling Down AND Raising Up, with Christ approaching Adam either
to viewer lef or viewer rightwith Eve usually beside Adam.
15
Jesus tramples down
Hades, Gatekeeper and Symbol of Human Death, with his foot, and raises up Adam,
Ancestor and Symbol of Human Life, by the hand. I give two cases of this Type 1
Anastasis: in the frst case the fgures are, as usual, combined in a single image; but
in the second, as is most unusual, they are separated over two twin imagesa rather
clear proof of their original separation on imperial victory coinage.
14
RIC 8:434 and plate 21.71. For other Hut coins of Constans I, see the indexes for
Legend/Type under FEL TEMP REPARATIO on RIC 8:567. Te image may refer to Constans
pacifcation of the Franks in 342 (RIC 8:35).
15
See Andr Grabar, Lempereur dans lart byzantin: Recherches sur lart ofciel de lempire
dOrient (Publications de la Facult des Lettres de lUniversit de Strasbourg 75; Paris: Belles
Lettres, 1936). I used the reprinted version, Lempereur dans lart byzantin (London: Variorum
Reprints, 1971), 4245, 23739, and esp. 24449 and plate XXIX, no. 11 (but his no. 10 is not a
Raising Up image). He proposed the origins of the Anastasis image as a combination of deux
pisodes . . . deux actes . . . deux motifs (pp. 24647), which Kartsonis (Anastasis, 9) summarized
as: two contradictory motifs which existed separately in imperial iconography. Te one involved
the emperors trampling the defeated enemy, and the other lifing the personifcation of the
liberated province. See also Andr Grabar, Christian Iconography: A Study of Its Origins (trans.
Terry Grabar; Te A. W. Mellon Lectures in the Fine Arts 10; Bollingen Series 35; Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1968), 126.
Example(s) 1
All three earliest examples of Type 1two frescoes and a mosaicare from
the pontifcate of Pope John VII at Rome (7057) and are a western import from
Byzantine Constantinople.
16
Te two frescoes are still extant in the Church of Santa Maria Antiqua,
17
but
due to deterioration in situ, they are best seen now in color photos from 1916.
18

Te mosaic was in Old St. Peters Basilica, which was built in the fourth century
but demolished to make room for the present St. Peters Basilica in the sixteenth
century.
19
Te mosaic is therefore no longer extant and is known only from draw-
ings contemporary with its destruction. In itself it adds nothing to the two pre-
ceding frescoes, but it is very signifcant that it was depicted as the fnal part of a
complete life-of-Christ series and not just as an isolated image (K15).
20
For here
and now, however, I focus only on the frst two frescoes as the frst still-extant
example of Type 1 of the Anastasis tradition.
Te Church of Santa Maria Antiqua is in the southeast section of the Roman
16
See J. D. Breckenridge, Evidence for the Nature of Relations between Pope John VII
and the Byzantine Emperor Justinian II, ByzZ 65 (1972): 36474. Te acceptance of Byzantine
artistic infuence from Constantinople over Rome was accompanied by resistingcarefully
total Byzantine political and religious control of emperor over pope. Images are not just about
form and style but even more about content and intention.
17
See Per Jonas Nordhagen, Te Frescoes of John VII (A.D. 705707) in S. Maria Antiqua
in Rome (Acta ad archaeologiam et artium historiam pertinentia 3; Rome: LErma di Bret-
schneider, 1968). Since those earliest extant examples were already fully formed by 7057,
Kartsonis (Anastasis, 81) suggest[s] a date in the last quarter of the seventh century for the
invention of the image of the Anastasis.
18
See Josef Wilpert, Die rmischen Mosaiken und Malereien der kirchlichen Bauten vom IV.
bis XIII. Jahrhundert (4 vols.; Freiburg i. B.: Herder, 1916). My copies of Wilperts reproduction,
as well as of their present in situ condition, are due to the collegial courtesy of Michele Chiuini,
professor of architecture at Ball State University in Muncie, Indiana, who obtained them for me
from Professor Viscontini in Italy.
19
See Ann Karin van Dijk, Te Oratory of Pope John VII (705707) in Old St. Peters
(Ph.D. diss., John Hopkins University; Ann Arbor: University Microflms International, 1995;
PDF bought and downloaded October 31, 2011); see also eadem, Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome,
and Constantinople: Te Peter Cycle in the Oratory of Pope John VII (705707), Dumbarton
Oaks Papers 55 (2001): 30528.
20
See Giacomo Grimaldi, Descrizione della basilica antica di S. Pietro in Vaticano: Codice
Barberini latino 2733 (ed. Reto Niggl; Codices e Vaticanis selecti quam simillime expressi iussu
Pauli PP. VI 32; Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1972). I have been unable to see that
book but have worked with copies of the mosaic in these two sources: (1) Stephan Waetzoldt, Die
Kopien des 17. Jahrhunderts nach Mosaiken und Wandmalereien in Rom (Rmische Forschungen
der Biblioteca Hertziana 18; Vienna: Schroll-Verlag, 1964), 60 (for catalogue items ##894 and
895), and ##477 and 478 (for images); (2) Per Jonas Nordhagen, Te Mosaics of John VII (705707
A.D.): Te Mosaic Fragments and Teir Technique (Institutum Romanum Norvegiae: Acta ad
archaeologiam et artium historiam pertinentia 2; Rome: LErma di Bretschneider, 1965) has a
full-page copy of Grimaldis drawing of the complete mosaic in plate XVIII.
Forum at the base of the Palatine Hill and was originally part of the christianiza-
tion and papalization of both those archetypal imperial Roman locations. In the
sixth century a pagan building became a frescoed church; monuments to martial
heroes outside were countered by images of martyred saints inside; and, above on
the hill, an imperial palace became a papal residence. Ten, in the ninth century,
the church was buried under the debris of imperial Palatine palaces by an earth-
quake. Rediscovered in 1900, it is now closed to undergo a complete restoration
with public access promised for 2013.
21
Both of the churchs Anastasis images are
locatedbe it accidental or deliberateat main doors, either from the Roman
Forum or from the Palatine Hill.
22
Te First Fresco. At the lef of the Forum entrance to Santa Maria Antiqua is
a small oratory or martyrion dedicated to a group of Christian soldiers from the
Legio XII Fulminata who were executed in 320 under Licinius and traditionally
known as the Forty Martyrs of Sebastia (now Sivas in east-central Turkey).
23
On
the outside right wall of the chapels entrance is one of those two earliest extant
Anastasis frescoes (K14b).
24
At present, the upper half of the image is destroyed
and the lower half is obliterated, but a color reproduction by the Jesuit archaeolo-
gist Josef Wilpert shows how much more was discernible in 1916. Tere are only
the three fundamental protagonists in this image, Christ, Adam, and Hades.
Christ, cross-haloed, strides forcibly to viewer lef with his cloak billowing
behind him. He is encircled by a mandorla of light, an aureola of divine status and
heavenly origin. He holds a scroll (not yet a cross) in his lef hand and grasps the
limp wrist of Adam with his extended right hand. Eve is not present. But here is what
21
Sarah and I were permitted a brief visit inside the closed church in July 1993 but were
unable to gain access in July 2011. For the restoration process, see Werner Schmid, Finding
Sanctuary: An Early Christian Wonder in the Heart of the Roman Forum (PDF text under that
titlewith color photosdownloadable from the World Monuments Fund, http://www.wmf
.org/project/santa-maria-antiqua-church).
22
Per Jonas Nordhagen, Te Harrowing of Hell as Imperial Iconography: A Note on Its
Earliest Use, in his Studies in Byzantine and Early Medieval Painting (London: Pindar, 1990),
34655 and fgs. 26. He suggests that they were used there as portal iconography.
23
On the relationship between, on the one hand, the martyrion and the main church and,
on the other, between both and their location in the ancient Forum, see, respectively, Some
Iconographic Aspects of the Relationship between Santa Maria Antiqua and the Oratory of the
Forty Martyrs and Topographical Transitions: Te Oratory of the Forty Martyrs and Exhibition
Strategies in the Early Medieval Roman Forum, in Santa Maria Antiqua cento anni dopo: Atti
del colloquio internazionale, Roma, 56 maggio 2000 (ed. John Osborne, J. Rasmus Brandt, and
Giuseppe Morganti; Rome: Campisano Editore, 2004), 18798, 199211. Tere is a very clear
plan of martyrion-chapel, main church, and the entire Forum in Amanda Claridge, Rome:
An Oxford Archaeological Guide (Oxford Archaeological Guides; Oxford/New York: Oxford
University Press, 1998), 6162.
24
Wilpert has the color image in Mosaiken, vol. 4, plate 167.1. Nordhagen (Frescoes, 86) has
a detailed description of it with a black-and-white reproduction of Wilperts color image (plate
103[b]).
is most striking: Appropriately, Adams hand is allowed to enter the mandorla. His
reentry to paradise is imminent. In fact, his admission to the sphere of the divine has
already begun and his deifcation (along with the deifcation of mankind) is already
under way in this miracle of re-creation, as the Anastasis came to be known.
25
Hades is lying fat below Christ, whose lef foot presses down on his head
outside the mandorla! Satan attempts to sit up using his lef hand in order to pull
Adam back with his right. Below his raised torso some locks, bolts, and broken
doors are (I think) visible.
Te Second Fresco. Afer you pass from the atrium through the nave toward
the apse of the church, there is a doorway to a ramp onto the Palatine Hill. Te
second Anastasis imagedamaged by age and exposure but not nearly as badly
as was the previous exampleis on the right doorpost as you leave the church
(K14a).
26
It is almost an exact duplicate of the frst fresco Anastasisbut with one
very important diferenceit includes Eve alongside Adam.
Christ is cross-haloed, within a mandorla, striding strongly to lef with bil-
lowing garments. His right foot is on the head of Hades, whose right hand seeks
to restrain Adams liberation. Eve is to Adams lef with her hand reaching toward
Christ in supplication. Because of its better preservation, we can still see more
details surrounding those main protagonists. Below them, to lef, the sepulchre of
Adam is evident, as is one of the gates of Hades. Above them, to lef, two white-
clad fgures are discernible, but they are too partial to be identifable (angelic help-
ers? resurrected saints?).
Example 2
Te heart of the Easter Vigilitself the heart of Christianitys liturgical year
was the lighting of the Easter candle and the deacons chantingin Latinthe
exultation of heaven and earth, angels and peoples, at the resurrection of Christ,
Light of the World. Te chant was called the Exultet hymn afer the frst word of its
opening Latin line: Exultet iam turba angelica coelorum . . . .
In southern Italy, between the tenth century and the fourteenth, that exultant
chant was written on ancient-style scrolls with elegant calligraphy and beautiful
illustrations in order to emphasize its climactic importance. Such special scrolls
were sung not from lef to right but from top to bottom. As it scrolled down over
the front of the pulpit, the musical text had to be right-side-up for the deacon to
chant, but the illustrations had to be reversed and right-side-up for viewers to see.
And, of course, as distinct from most liturgical texts, these precious scrolls were
used only once a year, for about ffeen minutes.
27
25
Kartsonis, Anastasis, 73.
26
Wilpert has the color image (Mosaiken, vol. 4, plate 168.2). Nordhagen (Frescoes, 82) has
a detailed description of it with a black-and-white reproduction of Wilperts color image (plate
100[b]).
27
Exultet: Rotuli liturgici del medioevo meridionale (ed. Guglielmo Cavallo, Giulia Orofno,
Tere is, however, one very important point about how the Anastasis is por-
trayed in several of the Exultet scrolls. Normally, as we have already seen, that
Trampling Down of Hades appears in a single composite image either with the
Raising Up or with the Leading Out of Adam and Eve. Te only source that I have
seen where the two imagesTrampling and Raising or Leadingappear separately
is in several of the medieval Exultet rolls. Tis tends to confrm, for me, the pro-
posed origins on separate imperial coin types.
I deliberately cite such a case as my second example of Type 1 in the Byzan-
tine Anastasis tradition. It is one of the three Exultet rolls preserved in the Biblio-
teca Casanatense in Rome and is dated to the twelfh century.
28

In the Trampling Down image, Christ stands between two angels and uses
both hands to plunge a long spear (no cross) between the jaws of a seated and
bound Hadeswith broken doors and locks beside him so that, in this example,
Trampling Down is actually Spearing Down and Christ does not touch Hades even
with his foot.
29
Te Raising Up image has only three fgures: Christto viewer rightwith
cross in his lef hand, grasps Adams right wrist with the otherto viewer lef.
Eve is behind Adam to farther lef, and, again, broken doors and locks are beside
them. However, in this westernized Byzantine image from southern Italy, there
are also fames around Adam and Eve. Eastern Hades-place and deliverance from
the prison/captivity of death become Western Hell-place and deliverance from the
pain/punishment of sin. Te Hades fgure is becoming the Satan fgure.
Type 2. Trampling Down and Leading Out
In Type 2, Eastern Christianity combined the two imperial victory images
Trampling Down OR Leading Out in order to create the second model of the Anas-
tasis image as Trampling Down AND Leading Out, with Christ leading Adamand
and Oronzo Pecere; Ufcio Centrale per i Beni Librari e gli Istituti Culturali: Biblioteca
Apostolica Vaticana, Abbazia de Montecassino, e Universit degli Studi di Cassino; Rome:
Istituto Poligraphico e Zecca della Stato, Libraria dello Stato, 1994). Tis magnifcent volume,
published for the Bimillenario di Cristo, has descriptions and color facsimiles of thirty-one extant
Exultet rolls. For detailed commentary (on ffy-six Exultet scrolls), see Tomas Forrest Kelly, Te
Exultet in Southern Italy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996).
28
Tis is Cas. 724 (B I 13): see Cavallo et al., Exultet: Rotuli, 327 and 333, for images; and
Kelly, Exultet, 23739, for general comments.
29
Margaret English Frazer, Hades Stabbed by the Cross of Christ, Metropolitan Museum
Journal 9 (1974): 15361. A tenth-century ivory shows the crucifxion with the base of the cross
bloodily penetrating the belly of a prostrate Hades. Frazer (Hades, 158) cites from the sermon
by Ephraem the Syrian (d. 373) on Te Precious and Life-giving Cross: With this precious
weapon Christ tore apart the voracious stomach of Hades and blocked the treacherous fully
opened jaws of Satan. Seeing this, Death quaked and was terrifed, and released all whom he held
beginning with the frst man. Te multitudes of the dead have passed through the open jaws and
into the hugely enlarged stomach of Hades.
Evealmost always to viewer right.
30
Jesus tramples down Hades, Gatekeeper and
Symbol of Human Death, with his foot, and leads out Adam, Ancestor and Symbol
of Human Life, by the hand.
I give two cases of Type 2: the frst is, again, the earliest still-extant image of
that type and, again, it is from papal Rome; the second is another instance of an
Exultet roll that separates Trampling Down from Leading Out into two images.
Example 1. Te frst still-extant example of the Type 2 Anastasis dates from
the early ninth century, that is, a full hundred years afer the frst example of Type 1
in Santa Maria Antiqua. It is a silver reliquary belonging to Paschal I and therefore
dated 81724 (K21).
31
Tat pope had welcomed to Rome Byzantine monks and
artists exiled during the iconoclasm controversy in the East.
Christ and Adam take up the full frontal panel, are almost of equal size, and
are the only two fgures present. Christ, to viewer right, holds the cross in his lef
hand and up over his lef shoulder. His right hand clasps the right hand of Adam,
whom he draws behind him toward a long narrow door to their right. Christ is
looking back slightly toward Adam, but his body is striding forcibly forward with
both lef and right foot.
Example 2. For this example, I return to the Exultet rolls of southern Italy,
but now to one of the earliest of that group. It is also another example of that pro-
cessunique to themin which the Trampling Down can appear as a separate
image from, in this case, the Leading Out.
32
It is one of two Exultet rolls in the
Vatican Library and is dated 98187 (K20ab).
33

30
Ellen C. Schwartz (A New Source for the Byzantine Anastasis, Marsyas 16 [1972]:
2934 and plates 14) notes that the captured barbarians . . . were brought . . . into the light
of civilization (p. 33). Te one being led out is clearly a child that represents precisely such
deliverance and salvationinto a new family and a new world.
31
My copy of this image is from Wilpert, Mosaiken, 2:895, fg. 420. It was obtained through
the Premium Research Department, from the Art & Architecture Collection, Miriam and Ira D.
Wallach Division of Art, Prints and Photographs, Te New York Public Library, Astor, Lenox
and Tilden Foundations. Wilpert titled it Christi Hllenfahrt and located it Aus Sancta Sanc-
torum, that is, the private papal chapel in the Lateran Basilica. It is now in the Museo Sacro of
the Vatican Museums.
32
Tere are only six examples of such separations among the thirty-two scrolls in Cavallo
et al., Exultet: Rotuli. Besides the four mentioned, there are two eleventh-century examples of
Trampling/Spearing Down separated from Leading Out preserved in the Cathedral Treasury at
Gaeta, on the coast between Naples and Rome (Cavallo et al., Exultet: Rotuli, 34162; and Kelly,
Exultet, 22023). In both, Christ pierces the jaws of Hades with a long spear (no cross). In one
other Exultet roll, from the early twelfh century, now in the Diocesan Archives at Velletri in the
Alban Hills near Rome, the single Anastasis image includes both Trampling/Spearing Down and
Leading Out. Christ pierces the jaws of Hades with a long cross-spear from his lef hand while
simultaneously raising Adam up and leading him of, right hand to right hand (Cavallo et al.,
Exultet: Rotuli, 270; and Kelly, Exultet, 25354).
33
Tis is ms Latin 9820; see Cavallo et al., Exultet: Rotuli, 109, 113, for images; and Kelly,
Exultet, 25053, for general comments.
In the Trampling Down image, Christto viewer right, in full mandorlais,
again, accompanied by two angels, one on either side. His right hand is raised
in admonition. But now his long thin spear has morphed into a long thin cord
extending from a noose around the neck of Hades to the backward-pulling lef
hand of Christ. Hades is accompanied by another demonic fgureSatan?and
both are engulfed in fames. We have moved from Trampling Down through Spear-
ing Down to Noosing Down of Gatekeeper Hades.
Te Leading Out image is a splendid example of that type. Christ strides forc-
ibly to viewer right; the cross in his lef hand is held horizontally over his lef
shoulder; and he is looking straight ahead and upward. His right hand is extended
backward and draws Adamwith Eve behind himfrom a faming tomb. Four
other unidentifable fgures look out from opened sarcophagi at top lef. Christs
wounds are very visible.
IV. Options
Te several examples just seen for Types 1 and 2 might seem to invite the
following general conclusions. On the one hand, whether from Byzantine infu-
ence fowing westwardthink of the frescoes in Romes Santa Maria Antiquaor
Crusader invasion fowing eastwardthink of the diptych icon in Egypts St. Cath-
erines Monasteryyou might expect that the Byzantine Anastasis image would
become traditional for all of Christianity, Western as well as Eastern. But that is
not what happened. As you know, and as we saw above, the individual resurrection
of Jesus became the normative Resurrection of Western Christianity.
On the other hand, you might think that the Byzantine vision was fully nor-
mative for Eastern Christianity and that, while allowing developments and adap-
tations of Types 1 and 2, no completely divergent images were to be expected. But
that also is not what happened. As we see in this section, other options and alter-
natives were explored. It was not that the Byzantine imagination never glimpsed
other possibilities, never thought of radically diferent images. It was simply that
none of them ever took hold and became normative and traditional for public wor-
ship as the ofcial image and content of Easter Sundays Anastasis.
Tose alternative possibilities are still clearly visible in the illuminated Psal-
ters used in communal monastic or individual aristocratic prayer.
34
Monks, for
example, chanted the entire Psalter every week and, in some of their Psalters, verses
were interpreted by adjacent images. Te text-and-image combinations chosen as
34
Tose Psalters are ofen termed marginal Psalters. I avoid that term for two reasons: one
is that marginal seems a slightly derogatory expression; the other is that not all the illuminations
are in the marginsthey can be across the top, down the margins, or across the bottom. For the
earliest Greek Psalters, I am very much dependent on and appreciative of Andr Grabar, Essai
sur les plus anciennes reprsentations de la Rsurrection du Christ, Monuments et Mmoires,
Acadmie des inscriptions et belles-lettres, Fondation Eugene Piot 63 (1979): 10541.
prophecies of Anastasis indicate clearly how monastic prayer understood the con-
tent and meaning of that tradition. I emphasize that last point because I watch very
carefully what verses were chosen by monastic theologians giving interpretive con-
tent to the Easter Anastasisand what images were deemed appropriate for those
verses. Tis is where I see most precisely what the communal Anastasis meant for
Eastern Christianity.
My database for this section is the fve illuminated Psalters from the ninth
centurytwo in Latin and three in Greek: the Stuttgart Psalter (StPs), with one
Anastasis example;
35
the Utrecht Psalter (UtPs), with one Anastasis example;
36

the Paris Psalter (ParPs), with one Anastasis example;
37
the Pantocrator Psalter
(PanPs), with fve Anastasis examples;
38
and, facile princeps, the Chludov Psalter
(ChPs), with seven Anastasis examples.
39
I will emphasize four major points con-
cerning the text-and-image combinations of these earliest illustrated Psalters.
35
StPs is Biblia Folio 23 in the Wrttemberg State Library, Stuttgart, and is dated 820830.
I am most grateful to Ms. Popp-Grilli and Ms. Arit for a color reproduction of the resurrection
image (folio 29v for Psalm 24:7). For black-and-white facsimile pages with only the crucifxion
leaf (folio 27r for Ps 21:1819) in color, see Ernest T. DeWald, Te Stuttgart Psalter: Biblia Folio
23, Wrttemburgische Landesbibliothek, Stuttgart (Illuminated Manuscripts of the Middle Ages;
Stuttgart: Published for the Department of Art and Archaeology of Princeton University, 1930).
Te description of folio 29v is on pp. 2627.
36
UtPs is Utrecht Universiteitsbibliotheek, ms Bibl. Rhenotraiectinae I, Nr 32, and is
dated 820835. For facsimile pages, see Ernest T. DeWald, Te Illustrations of the Utrecht
Psalter (Illuminated Manuscripts of the Middle Ages; Published for the Department of Art
and Archaeology of Princeton University with the Cooperation of the University of Utrecht.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1932). Te Anastasis image is folio 8r (plate 13, no. 16).
DeWald comments: [T]he beardless Christ is trampling Hades and is raising Adam and Eve out
of the pit of Hell (p. 10).
UtPs also contains an illuminated Symbolum Apostolorum or Apostles Creed with
multiple images all across folio 90r (DeWald, plate 142), with this commentary from DeWald:
At the extreme right, Christ, beardless and nimbed, is trampling Hades and is delivering Adam
and Eve from the fery gates of Hell (p. 71). It is, in other words, an exact if smaller version of
that even-handed illustration folio 8r on Ps 16:10, but with Hades in fames as Hell.
37
ParPs is ms Grec 20 in the Bibliothque nationale de France, Paris. See Suzy Dufrenne,
LIllustration des psautiers grecs du Moyen Age, vol. 1, Pantocrator 61, Paris Grec 20, British
Museum 40731 (Bibliothque des Cahiers Archologiques; Paris: Klincksieck, 1966). Tere is a
black-and-white photo of folio 19v on plate 43 and a description of it on p. 45.
38
PanPs is Codex 61 from the Pantocrator Monastery on Mount Athos in Greece. See,
again, Dufrenne, Psautiers grecs. Photos and descriptions are as follows: folios 24v, 26v, and 30v
are on plates 4 and 23; folio 109r is on plates 16 and 30.
39
ChPs is ms D.129 in the State Historical Museum, Moscow. It is from Constantinople via
Mount Athos and is named afer its fnal donor. Its images celebrate triumph over iconoclasm
around 840850. I am grateful to Ms. Svetlana Goryacheva, chief librarian of the Russian State
Library, Moscow, for helping me with Russian sources for this Psalter. To see the images in color,
copy this site (as is) into Googles Search (not URL) slot: vk.com/album-8523990_90683481. You
can fnd the eight Anastasis images as follows: 6r is #10; 9v I #82; 26v is #99; 44r is #117, 78v is
#22; 63r is #143, 63v is #145, 82v is #27.
First, I divide all the Anastasis images into two sets: one set with divergences
from the standard Anastasis tradition; the other set with variations on the standard
Anastasis tradition.
Second, with regard to the verses chosen as Anastasis references, I ask
whether they emphasize the individual Anastasis of Christ alone or the communal
Anastasis of Christ with others. (I give all psalm references according to the NRSV
enumeration).
Tird, with regard to the images depicted, I ask the same question but also
whether text and image agree on individual or communal empasis. Could, for
example, an individual verse receive a communal imageor vice versa?
Fourth, when verses and/or images refer to the communal Anastasis, I note
that the risen community is ofen described not just as the righteous in general
but as the oppressed or the poor or the needy, in particular.
Divergences from the Tradition
What I term divergences are not just isolated cases. Many of them establish
a radically diferent Anastasis tradition that involves not Christ, Adam, Eve, and a
Hades fgure (as seen above and again below) but Christ, David, prophecy, and a
tomb monument.
Psalm 7:6: Rise up, O Lord, in your anger; lif yourself up against the fury of
my enemies; awake, O my God; you have appointed a judgment (ChPs 6r).
Te accompanying image involves a radically diferent vision from anything
seen so far in the Anastasis tradition. It imagines, as its legend says, how
. David, at viewer lef, bows down before
the half-opened door of an elegantly rounded, pointed, and red-painted tomb
monument with two well-armed soldiers sleeping in front of it. But Christ is not
represented directlyalthough the title Lord is here applied to him. Te text is
communal (my enemies), but the image is individual.
Psalm 10:12: Rise up, O Lord; O God, lif up your hand; do not forget the
oppressed (PanPs 24v; ChPs 9v). Both accompanying images are in the David-
the-Prophet tradition, but now Christ is explicitly depicted.
In PaPs 24v David, to viewer lef, gestures toward the pointed tomb monu-
ment from which Christwith cruciform halois shown actually emerging (half-
in and half-out) with his right hand raised in blessing or teaching fashion. Legend:
[] .
In ChPs 9v David, again to viewer lef, bows toward an even more elegant
round-topped, top-draped, and frontless tomb monument on whose internal sep-
ulchre Christ is seated. Here the legend reads:
. Once again the images are individual, but the verse is
communaland specifcally pointed to the Anastais of the oppressed.
Psalm 12:5: Because the poor are despoiled, because the needy groan, I will
now rise up, says the Lord; I will place them in the safety for which they long
(PanPs 26v; ChPs 26v). Both accompanying images are once again in the David-
the-Prophet mode with Christ depicted explicitly in both.
PanPs 26v is a duplicate of the image in the preceding 24v except that David
is standing upright rather than bowing. Legend: [].
ChPs 26v shows the pointed tomb monument opened and the door on the
ground to viewer lef. Te cruciform-haloed Christ stands at its right side with
(presumably) Davids head barely visible between them. Two well-armed soldiers
sprawl sleeping on the ground in front. Legend:
. Tese images point to the individual Christ,
but the text is communaland specifcally pointed to the poor and the needy.
Psalm 24:89: Who is the King of glory? Te Lord, strong and mighty, the
Lord, mighty in battle. Lif up your heads, O gates! and be lifed up, O ancient
doors! that the King of glory may come in (StPs 29v).
Tis is the only instance in this set that does not involve the tradition of
Davidic prophecy and tomb monument. Te full-across-the-page image shows a
closed and locked gate in the center. Above it and to lef (that is, inside it) are
winged, fre-breathing demons and a dark-brown Hades cowering at bottom lef
all within the fickering fres of Hell. To right, Christ, accompanied by an angel,
strides so forcibly toward the gate that he looks as though his right foot intends to
kick it down. His right hand holds a cross-topped staf (no spear point); he moves
within a kelly-green mandorla, and no wounds are visible. Verse and image are
both individual.
Psalm 31:4: Take me out of the net that is hidden for me, for you are my
refuge (PanPs 30v).
Te image shows the cross-haloed Christ standing to viewer right in front
of the tomb monument half-visible behind him to viewer lef. He is looking up to
heaven with his right hand raised in blessing or teaching syle. Te usual two sol-
diers are farther to viewer lef with the legend: []. David is
not depicted. Both verse and image could be either individualwith Christ praying
to Godor communalwith others praying to Christ.
Psalm 44:26: Rise up, come to our help. Redeem us for the sake of your
steadfast love (ChPs 44r).
A series of images flls both the entire right margin and bottom quarter of
the leaf. At top and bottom are scenes of martyrdom such as racking and behead-
ing, themes appropriate for all of Psalm 44. In between are three other images.
Below, one starts the life of Christ with a vision of the incarnation, and, above,
the other two consummate it with the two Marysfrom Matt 28:1at the closed
and round-topped tomb monument. In the upper one, David stands to viewer
lef of the tomb with the two women seated to viewer right of it. Legend:
. Te lower of the two images has
the women standing to viewer lef and touching the same tomb monument to
viewer right. Christ is not depicted. Verse and images-in-context are communal and
addressed to Christ as risen redeemer.
Psalm 78:65: Ten the Lord awoke as from sleep, like a warrior shouting
because of wine (PanPs 109r; ChPs 78v). Te images are somewhat divergent, but
both are closer to the Christ, David, Prophecy, and Tomb mode than to the Christ,
Hades, Adam, and Eve style.
In PanPs 109r, Christ stands frontally to the right of a rather tomblike monu-
ment with a book in his hands. To viewer right, the two Marys prostrate them-
selves at his feet while, to viewer lef, the two soldiers sleep on the ground holding
their long spears. Te inscription reads: . David is not
depicted.
In ChPs 78v there is another perfect example of the David tradition. At
viewer lef, Christ stands outside the pointed tomb monument looking toward
David at viewer right. He holds a scroll or book in his hands. David, with both
hands upraised in orant style, looks toward Christ while the inscription reads:
. Verse and image are
individual rather than communal.
Psalm 80:2b3: Stir up your might, and come to save us! Restore us, O God;
let your face shine, that we may be saved (PanPs 112r). Te image has neither
David nor Christ but two women sitting to right of the usual pointed tomb monu-
ment. Te caption reads: .
40
Variations on the Tradition
What I term variations all operate within the general contours of the stan-
dard tradition (see above and below), but they do so with creativity and originality.
Indeed, they ofen seem ahead on the traditions developmental trajectory.
Psalm 16:10: For you do not give me up to Sheol, or let your faithful one see
the Pit (UtPs 8r).
Te adjacent image is quite traditional in content but quite unique in format.
It is traditional in picturing the four protagonists, Christ, Hades, Adam, and Eve,
and in having Christs cloak futter behind him as he stands atop a fattened Hades
and bends down fully to viewer right. But what is unique is that Christ reaches out
40
Grabar (Essai, 114) adds PanPs, folio 112r, to this tradition of David prophesying the
Anastasis. Dufrenne (Psautiers grecs, 30) describes the image given on plate 16 thus: Marthe et
Marie devant le tombeau de Lazare. On the one hand, the imaged tomb is the same one used
for Christs Anastasis elsewhere in PanPs. On the other, elsewhere in PanPs Dufrenne describes
a very diferent tomb and resurrection of Lazarus on plate 4 (p. 23). Grabar, therefore, seems to
be more correct; perhaps the inscription named the women incorrectly for an Anastasis image.
both his hands, one for Adam and one for Eve, who are on the same side to viewer
right. Tey are emerging from a grave in the ground or else a rounded sepulchre
with covers behind it. It is a Type 1, Raising Up, but such evenhandedness for
Adam and Eve will not be seen again for about four hundred yearsand never, as
far as I know, in that precise both-on-one-side style (see Type 6 below). Te verse
is individual, but the image is communal.
Psalm 68:1: Let God rise up, let his enemies be scattered; let those who hate
him fee before him (ChPs 63r).
With this image, the Chludov Psalter rejoins the standard Anastasis tradition
with the core emphasis on Christ, humanity, and Hades fgure rather than Christ,
prophecy, and tomb edifce. Christ stands cross-haloed in a perfectly oval man-
dorla with scroll in lef hand. He is looking to viewer lef, and his extended right
hand draws the lef of Adam into that heavenly aureola. Behind Adam, to viewer
lef, is Eve. But even though Christ looks to lef, his legs are already moving to
right. It is already a Type I, Raising Up, in transit to Type 2, Leading Out. All three
fgures are standing on the stomach of a grossly obese Hades fgure whose head is
vertically below them (recall n. 29). Four winged demons fee away from him to
viewer lef. Verse and image are communal.
Psalm 68:6: God gives the desolate a home to live in; he leads out the prison-
ers to prosperity, but the rebellious live in a parched land (ChPs 63v).
Te image is but a slight variation on the preceding one. Te oval mandorla is
rayed, and Christ is both looking and moving to viewer lef in classical Type 1 style
(no hint of Type 2). Once again, all three fgures stand on the monstrous stomach
of a grossly large Hades fgure, but he is now horizontal rather than vertical to their
stance. Verse and image are communalwith a specifcation of the prisoners over
against the rebellious.
Psalm 107:13: Ten they cried to the Lord in their trouble, and he saved
them from their distress (ParPs 19v).
In the accompanying image, Christ, turning slightly to viewer right, looks at
and extends his lef hand toward two unidentifable fgures emerging from a small
sepulchre whose door is on the ground. Christ, however, does not touch either of
them. Haloed and with a mandorla of several radiant beams, Christ stands atop
Hades. His right hand grasps that of Adam to viewer lef and, although Eve is no
longer visible behind Adam in the leaf s damaged lef margin, the legend names
both Adam and Eve. Tey have emerged from an even larger sepulchre at extreme
viewer lef. Verse and image are both communal.
Psalm 107:1316: Ten they cried to the Lord in their trouble, and he saved
them from their distress; he brought them out of darkness and gloom, and broke
their bonds asunder. Let them thank the Lord for his steadfast love, for his won-
derful works to humankind. For he shatters the doors of bronze, and cuts in two
the bars of iron (ChPs 82v).
Te image is a very early example of a combination of Type 3, where Christ
looks out directly at the viewer, and Type 5, where Adam and Eve are on opposite
sides of Christ but he touches only the hand of Adam. Still, and unusually, Eve is
to Christs right (viewer lef) and is blessed by his right hand, while Adam is to
Christs lef (viewer right) and is raised up by Christs lef hand. Christ stands on
the head of a now almost totally erased but originally quite monstrous Hades fg-
ure (lef leg and right hand still barely visible). Te inscription down the lef side
read simply: ANASTACIC. Verse and image are both communal.
Finally, the basic point of this section is to remind ourselves that, in the cre-
ative matrix of monastic prayer, divergent options and alternative possibilities
of Anastasis imagery were always present. Te relatively homogeneous develop-
ment of the next sections sixfold typology for Anastasis iconography might have
been altered signifcantly by monastic experimentationbut it was notand that
emphasizes this traditions consistency of choice and continuity of content.
V. Types
I classify the Byzantine tradition of the Anastasis within a sixfold typology
and developmental trajectory across a half-millennium from, in round numbers,
700 to 1200.
41
Allowing for what has been lost to time and chance, the six types are
also, in general, successive chronological stages. We have, of course, already seen
examples of both Types 1 and 2, but I repeat them here within the full typological
repertoire of which they are the foundational types.
Type 1. Raising Up
In Type 1, as we have seen, Christ moves to viewer lef or right and, stand-
ing or bending, grasps Adams wristwith Eve beside Adamto raise them from
death. Here is just one more example over the others seen above.
Example. Te Church of Saint Barbara is a twin of the Church of Saints
Sergius and Bacchus (Abu Serga) in Old Cairo. An eighteenth-century icon beam
had originally topped the choir screen across the churchs full width in front of the
sanctuarys iconostasis. When it was removed at the start of the twentieth century,
its sixteen icons were preserved along the churchs south wall. Among those scenes
depicting the life of Christ and the great feasts is an Anastasis.
42

41
Tese six types expand on the four types proposed by Schwarz (New Source, 30) in 1972;
and Kartsonis (Anastasis, 89) in 1986.
42
Tere is a color reproduction of all sixteen icons in Gawdat Gabra, Gertrud J. M. van
Loon, and Darlene L. Brooks Hedstrom, Te Churches of Egypt: From the Journey of the Holy
Family to the Present Day (ed. Carolyn Ludwig; photographs by Sherif Sonbol; Cairo/New York:
American University of Cairo Press, 2007), 121.
Christ stands on the bifold gates of Hades-place with fames below, but no
fgure of Hades-Gatekeeper is present. In his lef hand, Christ holds a long slim
cross with three cross-beams at the top. No wounds are visible. He bends down
to viewer lef and grasps the wrist of Adamright hand to right hand. Behind
Adam is Eve with Abel behind her (no staf, unbearded). To viewer right are the
standard fgures of David, Solomon, and John the Precursor. Only Abel and John
are haloed. In addition, there are Arabic phrases identifying (I presume) Christ,
Adam, Eve, John, and Hades.
Type 2. Leading Out
In Type 2, again as we have already seen, Christ, having grasped Adams wrist
is leading him from Hades, almost always moving to viewer right. He looks for-
ward or, more usually, backward to Adam, followed by Eve.
Example. Tis is from the Aya Sofya Museum (olim Church) in Trabzon on
Turkeys southern Black Sea coast, dated 123863.
43

On the one hand, it has the standard protagonists: Adam, Eve, and Abel, to
viewer right; John the Precursor, David, and Solomon, to viewer lef. On the other
hand, Christ is in the center carrying a large patriarchal cross in his right hand.
But, while his lef hand grasps the lef hand of Adam, they are moving forcibly to
lef, and it is extremely rare to have a Leading Out in that directionas distinct
from to right. (It is actually the only such image I have ever seen.)
Type 3. Facing Front
In Type 3, Christ looks neither forward where he is going nor backward to
look at Adam but, standing or moving, looks straight out at the viewer with a you
too aspect to the composition. It is as if the Leading Out motion of the Type 2
Anastasis were frozen for a moment so that Christ could include the viewer in the
event.
Example. Tis is on the now slightly cracked silver cover of a Gospel Book
preserved in the Monastery of the Mother of God at Hah, within Syriac-Christian
Tur Abdin, in southeastern Turkey.
44
It is, to my knowledge, quite unique and I
43
For a color reproduction of the fresco, see http://e-turkey.net/trabzon_ayasofya_
muzesi/trabzon_ayasofya_3200. Tere are four triangular pendentives between the four arches
supporting the main dome that display the nativity (NW), the baptism (SW), the crucifxion
(NE), and Anastasis (SE).
44
For the church and its Magi legend, see Mark DelCogliano, Syriac Monasticism in Tur
Abdin: A Present-Day Account, Cistercian Studies Quarterly 41 (2006): 31149, here 33435.
Sarah and I are very grateful to Timotheos Samuel Akta, Metropolitan/Archbishop of Tur Abdin,
at Mor Gabriel Monastery near Midyat, for helping us locate and see this Gospel Book in situ.
can only guess at its datemaybe eighteenth century?
45
It is also the only example
I know where this Type 3, Facing Front, is a variation not of Type 2, Leading Out,
but of Type 1, Raising Up.
At viewer lef, Christs right hand holds a long, cross-topped spear/staf. He
looks out at the viewer, but his feet are turned toward Adam and Eve to viewer
righthence my Raising Up rather than Leading Out designation. Adam and Eve
are under a stylized tree, coming out of a sepulchre, and Christs lef hand grasps
Adams wristwith Eve behind Adam. Six female and male fgures (two of the lat-
ter with crowns) fll the top tier. Under Christs feet are the crossed bifold gates of
Hades, and under Adams is what looks like a dog but may represent a lion, from
the promise that you will tread on the lion and the adder, the young lion and the
serpent you will trample under foot (Ps 91:13).
Type 4. Showing Wounds
In this type, Christ, facing frontally to the viewer, displays his wounded
hands, which are lowered toward but not touching either Adam or Eve. Christ is
centrally located and is quite stationary, without the forcible movements so char-
acteristic of the three preceding types. Furthermore, Adam and Eve, who have
been together either to viewer lef or right in the three preceding types, can now be
either in the same connected on-one-side position or else separated one on either
side of Christ. Te presentation of one on either side will be characteristic of the
next and fnal two typesbut there touching will return.
Example. Te earliest still-extant example is on a single vellum leaf from a
pocket-size Byzantine Psalter in the Princeton University Art Museum, dated to
10901100.
46

45
For the Anastasis image on the Gospel Books cover, see Hans Hollerweger, Turabdin:
Lebendiges Kulturerbe. Wo die Sprache Jesugesprochen wird/Turabdin: Living Cultural Heritage.
Where Jesus Language Is Spoken (Linz: Freunde des Tur Abdin, 1999), 168. For the whole cover,
see Gertrude Bell Archive, Newcastle University Library (UK): open Photographs, go to
Album M (1909) Iraq, Turkey, and select #239 (http://www.gerty.ncl.ac.uk/photos_in_album.
php?album_id=13&start=240). I am grateful to Professor Mark Jackson of Newcastle University
for sending me high-resolution images from the Bell Archive.
Te 1999 Hollerweger image and the ones taken by Sarah Crossan on June 3, 2010, indicate
that the cover has seriously deteriorated since 1909. Not only are there cracks in the silver, but
the ornamentation surrounding the central image and the bottom right fgure within the images
(dog? lion?) is badly abraded. A Syriac inscription plate has been added below the Anastais image
sometime afer Bells photos.
46
My color image comes from the Princeton University Museum. It is described as a Leaf
from a Psalter: Crucifxion and Anastasis, the gif of Ida Farnum in 1930. No further provenance
is cited. I am very grateful to Laura M. Giles and Calvin D. Brown in the Museums Department
of Prints and Drawings for permission to use this image, and to Bruce M. White and Karen E.
Richter for getting high-resolution copies to me.
It is a diptych, split evenly between a crucifxion above and an Anastasis
below. Each has three fgures: at top a crucifed Jesus between Mary to viewer
lef and John to right; at bottom a frontal-facing Christ, above the crossed bifold
gates of Hades, displaying his wounded hands to Adam at viewer lef and Eve at
right. Each extends a hand toward Christ, but there is a clear non-touching space
between them. Adams hand is uncovered, but, as so ofen, Eves is covered in her
cloak. Above Christs head is the remnant of the word [].
Type 5. Doubling Sides
In the preceding Type 4, Adam and Eve could be separated on either side
of JesusAdam to his right and Eve to his lefbut neither was grasped by the
hand of Christ. Type 5 maintains the separation of Adam and Eve to either side of
Christ, but now once again, as in the tradition of Types 13, Christ grasps Adam.
In other words, and despite her equalized if lef-side position, Christ does not
grasp Eve by the wrist.
Example. On a beam above the iconostasis in the Church of the Holy Virgin,
Harat Zuwayla, Cairo, Egypt, are icons depicting the Seven Major Feasts of the
Coptic tradition, dated to around 1200.
47
Tey illustrate from Nativity to Pente-
cost with the Anastasis as ffh in the sequence. Christ, centrally poised and facing
the viewer, grasps Adam by the wrist, to viewer lef, but holds a slender cross in
his lef hand and does not touch the hand of Evewhose hands are covered by her
cloak. Tis is also an unusual composition in that the two kings are separated, with
David behind Adam to lef and Solomon behind Eve to right.
See Kurt Weitzmann, Aristocratic Psalter and Lectionary, Record of the Art Museum,
Princeton University 19, no. 1, Special Number in Honor of the Director Ernest Teodore
DeWald on the Occasion of His Retirement; Princeton, NJ: University Art Museum (1960): 98
107. Te article was reprinted with unchanged pagination in his Byzantine Liturgical Psalters and
Gospels (Collected Studies series 119; London: Variorum Reprints, 1980). Figure 1 (p. 100) is a
black-and-white reproduction of the leaf: On purpose, the author seems to have placed Christ
above physical contact, in this way avoiding a purely narrative and temporal interpretation and
stressing the aspect of eternal truth. Tis type may, therefore, be termed dogmatic, in contrast to
the narrative type (p. 99). Tere seems to be little doubt that the miniature was on the verso of
a page, following the end of Psalm VIII and facing, like a title miniature, the beginning of Psalm
IX (p. 104). In other words, it illustrated this verse: Have mercy on me, Lord, look upon my
afiction from my enemies; You who raise me from the gates of death (Ps 9:14 LXX; see 9:13
NRSV).
Tere is a fne example of this Type 4, originally from Mount Athos, now in Russias State
Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg. A color reproduction is in Te Glory of Byzantium: Art and
Culture of the Middle Byzantine Era A.D. 8431261 (ed. Helen C. Evans and William D. Wilson;
New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1997), 123 (#68B).
47
Tere are color reproduction of all seven icons on foldout pages in Gabra et al., Churches
of Egypt, 13637. I already mentioned the earliest still-extant image of this Type 5 from the
Chludov Psalter 82v for Ps 107:16 in section IV above.
Type 6. Doubling Hands
In this type, Adam and Eve are again on either side of Christ, but now he
grasps both of them by the wrist, with Adam usually to his right (viewer lef) and
Eve to his lef (viewer right). We have, fnally, an equal-opportunity Anastasis.
Although my example is not the earliest evidence of this type,
48
it is the image that
must be chosen as the climactic perfection of the entire Anastasis tradition.
Example. Te eleventh-century Church of the Holy Savior in Chora became
frst a mosque as the ffeenth-century Kariye Camii, and then a museum as the
twentieth-century Kariye Mzesi. In the parekklsion or burial-chapel along its
south side is possibly the most famous Anastasis in the world, dated 131521.
49
Christin a magnifcent starred mandorlamoves forcibly to viewer lef,
striding across the separated bifold gates of Hades-place and looking out at the
viewer. Under them is a prostrate and bound Hades fgure with broken locks
and shattered bolts all around him. Christs right hand grasps the lef wrist of
Adam, to viewer lef, and the right wrist of Eve, to viewer right. He pulls them
from their sarcophagi. Behind Adam, in viewer right-to-lef order, are John
the Precursor, Solomon, and David. Behind Eve, and rising from the same sar-
cophagus, is Abel with his shepherds staf. Tere are several others on both
sides, but all are male. Above Christs abbreviated identifcation as is the
word .
VI. Conclusions
Te frst of my two initial questions asked why there was such a radical difer-
ence between Easter as communal for Jesus-and-others in Eastern Christianity but
as individual for Jesus-alone in Western Christianity? Or, put more precisely, why
did the West not continue to accept the Easts Anastasis vision when its earliest
still-extant examplesfrom papal chapels to Exultet rollswere Western imports
from Constantinople into Italy?
48
Afer the destruction and occupation of Constantinople by the Fourth Crusade, the
earliest example of a Type 6 Anastasis was brought back to Europe from the citys Latin Kingdom
(120461). Several parts of an apparently monumental image were copied onto separate pages
of a model book for artists, dated to about 1240. See Hugo Buchthal, Te Musterbuch of
Wolfenbttel and Its Position in the Art of the Tirteenth Century (Byzantina Vindobonensia 12;
Vienna: Verlag der sterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschafen, 1979). See also Glory of
Byzantium, 48284 (#319).
Tere are Type 6 images more or less contemporary with the Chora Church in Aghios
Nikolaos Orphanos Church, Tessaloniki (131020); in King Milutins Church of Studenica
Monastery, Serbia (131314); and in Holy Savior Church, Beroia (1315).
49
Tere is a color image in the Wikipedia article on the Chora Church.
West and East
Te West eventually preferred its own individual (for Jesus only) vision of
Easter because, in my opinion, that Anastasis image raises problems for doctrine
that theology cannot solve. It is not that theology, doctrine, and dogma are an
exclusively Western concern but that the East seems more capable than the West of
accepting the principle that humanity proposes but divinity disposes. Here, then,
are three main aspects of that image-versus-doctrine challenge that may have
moved Western Christianity to avoid the Eastern vision.
Baptism: Present or Absent? From very early, there was an obvious clash
between the vision of an Anastasis where baptism was not even mentioned and
the Christian doctrine of baptisms absolute necessity for salvation. On the one
hand, were Adam, Eve, and all those others baptized and, if so, how so, and why
is it not mentioned? On the other hand, if before-Christ unbaptized people were
saved, might not afer-Christ unbaptized people have equal access to the Christian
heaven? Tis problem was recognized in Similitude 9.16 of the Shepherd of Hermas
at the start of the second century.
50
It asks two questions: Were those who came
up from the deep baptized; and, if so, by whom?
Te frst answer is quite absolute: they had need to come up through the
water that they might be made alive, for they could not otherwise enter into king-
dom of God. . . . Tose who had fallen asleep [ ] received the seal
of the Son of God (9.16.13). But surely Christ did not baptize them allso who
did?
Te second answer is that [t]hese apostles and teachers . . . having fallen
asleep in the power and faith of the Son of God, preached also to those who
had fallen asleep before them (9.16.5). We must then imagine enough baptized
Christian sleepers who died before Christ and were available in Hades to baptize
the unbaptized sleepers. Still, regardless of whether those statistics and logistics
are credible, image still challenges doctrine,
51
and maybe it were betterfor the
50
Kirsopp Lake, trans., Te Apostolic Fathers (2 vols.; LCL; Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 1976), 2:26065. In the section on Christs Descent into Hell in the Gospel of
Nicodemus, the sons of Symeon who narrate the Anastasis story are told, frst to go to the Jordan
and be baptized. Tere also we went and were baptized with other dead who had risen again
(Schneemelcher, New Testament Apocrypa, 1:526).
51
Dante (Inferno 4.5254) saw that doctrinal problem clearly. Virgil tells him, I was still
new to this estate of tears when a Mighty One descended here among us, crowned with the
sign of His victorious years. Christ then liberates Adam, Abel, Noah, Moses, Abraham, David,
Israel, Rachel and many more He chose for elevation . . . [and] salvation (4.6163). Tere is no
mention of baptism, so, much later, Dante asks what about one born in sight of Indus water
where none there speak of Christ. If such a person does not sin in either word or deed [and]
dies unbaptized, what justice is it damns him for what is not his fault? (Paradiso 19.7078).
See Te Divine Comedy: Te Inferno, the Purgatorio, and the Paradiso (trans. and ed. John Ciardi;
New York: New American Library, 2003), 40, 76263.
Westnot to accept it at all? But even if a get-out-of-Hades baptism were pos-
tulated, the Anastasis imagery raises the next and even more pressing doctrinal
challenge.
Liberation: Some or All? Who were raised by and with Christ? Was it only the
Jewish just ones or also the Gentile just ones? Was it only just people or all people,
and, in either optionbut especially in the latterhow was that to be doctrin-
ally defended? Did Christ preach (better: proclaim) the gospel about liberation or
enact the gospel by liberation?
Intractable doctrinal issues were raised by a question such as this: Did
[Christ] descend in order to bind Satan and release all the souls imprisoned there,
to preach the gospel to those who had died before the Incarnation, or to lead
the Old Testament Fathers triumphantly into heaven?
52
Answers to that ques-
tion formed along the axis of many-or-more versus few-or-fewer, for example,
respectively: (1) Origen of Alexandria (185254) versus Augustine of Hippo (354
430); Peter Abelard (10791142) versus Bernard of Clairveaux (10901153); and
Tomas Aquinas (12251274) versus Dante Alighieri (12651321).
53

In Ireland, the ffeenth-century Book of Fermoy summed up the debate on
the liberation of all versus some by Christ from Hades by noting, Tere are some
among distinguished men of learning who tell us that the brown curly-haired One
brought forth no men but those who merited it. Others, who have not perfect
faith, tell us that there is no man white or black that He did not bring out forth,
one and all, out of Hell.
54
But Adam and Eve were there from the earliest to the latest Anastasis images.
So, if Adam and Eve were liberated, who was not? Surely they were chosen to rep-
resent all of humanity?
55
But how, then, was liberation from Hades in the past to
be reconciled doctrinally with punishment in Hell for the future? And what, then,
about judgments and sanctions, rewards and punishments, Heaven and Hell? If all
52
Ralph V. Turner, Descendit ad Inferos: Medieval Views on Christs Descent into Hell and
the Salvation of the Ancient Just, JHI 27 (1966): 17394, here 173. See also Constance I. Smithy,
Descendit ad InferosAgain, JHI 28 (1967): 8788.
53
Martin F. Connell, Descensus Christi ad Inferos: Christs Descent to the Dead, TS 62
(2001): 26282.
54
Ann Dooley, Te Gospel of Nicodemus in Ireland, in Te Medieval Gospel of Nicodemus:
Texts, Intertexts, and Contexts in Western Europe (ed. Zbigniew Izydorczyk; Medieval and
Renaissance Texts & Studies 158; Tempe, AZ: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies,
Arizona State University, 1997), 361401, here 395.
55
Kartsonis (Anastasis, 6) notes that the inscription Anastasis . . . is a twin reference
to the bodily rising of Christ and his raising of mankind. . . . the narrative component of this
iconography, far from concentrating on Christs own rising, is instead concerned with the rescue
of Adam from the land of the dead (p. 5). Tus in the image of the Anastasis, Adam stands
for Everyman. . . . Anastasis . . . refers simultaneously to the Resurrection of Christ, Adam, and
mankindbut not just Adam; it is almost always Adam-and-Eve, to be exact.
that was skipped once, why not again, or always? But this next question was pos-
sibly a more sweeping problem even than that one.
Meaning: Literal or Metaphorical? When Christs resurrection is envisaged
as his individual triumphant vindication, a single empty tomb could become an
actual, factual historical question. One could ask quite literally: Was Christ bur-
ied, and by whom? Was his tomb known, and where? Was it found empty and by
whom? Doctrine could then extrapolate to an equally literal general resurrection
and fnal judgment in the futurefor all.
But that Anastasis visioneven for only the righteous ones of the OT, let
alone for all of previous humanity personifed in its frst parentscan hardly be
imagined literally or historically. How many simultaneously empty tombs need
to be envisaged for the Eastern Anastasis on that frst Easter Sunday morning? It
seems to me that the Eastern Anastasis with its permanent presence of Adam-and-
Eve has to be taken metaphorically, parabolically, symbolicallyand, if metaphor-
ical in the past for some, is it metaphorical in the future for all? Doctrine shudders
at those cosmic implications.
Still, of course, metaphor and symbol must point to somethingeven if that
something is gloriously multivalent. What, in my opinion, is that something? It is
the ascendancy of vision over doctrine and religious imagination over theological
tradition. It does not concern Hell and its punishment but death and its liberation,
that is, not from the fact of death but from the fear of death. It concerns Gods great
Peace and Reconciliation Commission with the human race.
What good, you may object, does a communal but metaphorical Anastasis
do for humanitys past injustice? How can metaphor change the past, the fate of
the dead, and especially the leaden normalcy of civilizations violence? What can
Anastasis-as-metaphor actually do? Nothingand everything. You cannot pro-
claim present justice or promise future justice and ignore past injustice. If it is true
that justice, that is, the fair distribution of all the earth for all its people, is not a
novelty but a necessity, that admission changes historypast, present, and future.
Anastasis is the poetry of transcendent justice, and, for me, its loss as Easters
Western meaning leaves a chasm in the landscape of its faith.
Clearly, the East took that traditional image of its central liturgical event
seriously and functionally, but did it take it literally and factually? Doctrineor
thoughtin the West, has never been good at such questions because they raise
this most fundamental question. How does a post-Enlightenment mind decide
whether a pre-Enlightenment image was originally understood literally or meta-
phorically? What if we ask but they did not articulate that disjunctive question?
Finally, I said above that the West preferred the individual over the com-
munal vision for Easter Sunday, but that term is too benignly polite for what actu-
ally happened. On the one hand, the West renamed Anastasis as Harrowing of
Hell and/or Descent into Hades, Hell, or Limbo. By that renaming, it separated
the former from the latter eventand Holy Saturday from Easter Sunday. So sepa-
rated, they could appear in the creed, if at all, as he descended into Hell // on the
third day he rose from the dead. Resurrection is about he not he and they.
On the other hand, the East all too ofen concursor at least allowsWestern
separation of Harrowing/Descent and Resurrection/Easter rather than insisting
on its own identifcation of those events. Again and again in my experience, icons
internally entitled are externally described not as Christ Rising
but as Christ Descending.
56

I illustrate that point with one magnifcently ambiguous example (see color
icon between pages 4 and 5 above). It is a nineteenth-century icon in the Museum
of the Panagia tou Kykkou Monastery on the northwestern side of Cypruss
Troodos Mountains.
57
Most of the icon is a classic Type 5 Anastasis. At bottom
lef, two angels bind Hades amid broken locks and scattered bolts. Christ stands
centrally on the crossed bifold gates of Hades within a blue golden-rayed man-
dorla. Adam, David, Solomon, and John the Precursor are to viewer lef, with Eve
to viewer right. Behind her is (I think) Luke holding his painting of Mother and
Child. Christ, looking at Adam, grasps his limp lef wrist with his right hand. But
Christs lef hand holds a tiny scroll and does not touch the cloak-covered hands of
Eve. Above Christ twin angels gold the implements of his crucifxion.
All of that isapart from Lukea quite traditional Type 5 Eastern Anastasis.
But then comes the extraordinary novelty. A line extends from mid-bottom to
mid-right of the icon, and inside it is an equally traditional Western Resurrection.
Christwithout mandorlaclimbs out of his sarcophagus holding a long, slim
cross in his lef hand. At his feet are a mass of fully armed but sleeping soldiers.
And this Western Christ looks up and his right hand points upward toward the
Eastern Christ in the icons center.
Furthermore, as expected, the title split on either side of the central man-
dorlas peak reads: // . But, as not expected, another title at the
very top of the icon, split on either side of those twin angels, reads:
// .
58
Te icon raises these questions for me: Which image, which title,
which tradition, which vision dominates in that double-imaged icon? Is the West
overcoming the East or is the East marginalizing the West?
56
For example, two sixteenth-century icons in Tessalonikis Museum of Byzantine
Culture, a Type 1 and a Type 6, are internally named Anastasis but externally described as
Descent into Hades (in Greek) or Descent into Limbo (in English).
57
I know of no published picture of this unique icon and am very grateful to Museum
Director Demetrios Athanassoulas for inviting Sarah Crossan to photograph it on Sunday, April
19, 2012.
58
Te museums description beside that icon is given in Greek and English. Te latter reads:
DESCENT INTO HELL (Orthodox Resurrection) AND THE RESURRECTION (Western
Type).
Judaism and Christianity
Te second of my two initial questions asked which of those two visions of
Easter wasmutatis mutandis and recognizing all necessary paradigm shifs in
greater continuity with the original Jewish matrix? At frst, the answer seems all too
obvious. Judaism knew that an individuallike Enoch, Moses, or Elijahcould be
taken up to God. But that was assumption, ascension, maybe even apotheosis, not
resurrection. Bodily resurrection was a collective, corporate, and communal event. It
wasfor Pharisees and their followersthe public vindication of the righteous dead
at Gods eschatological transformation and justifcation of the earth.
59
Even if Christian Jews announced the eschaton as present process rather than
future moment and proclaimed Jesus resurrection as the start of the general res-
urrection, they could hardly have intended that for Jesus alone. Any Jewish sage
would have responded that ascension could be individual but resurrection was
communal. How was God justbut only for Jesus? What about all the other righ-
teous ones and especially the martyrs who had lived justly and died unjustly all too
ofen and all too long before Jesus? An individual resurrection for Jesus alone
sounded like transcendental nepotismor, if one preferred, divine fliotism.
Still, if Jesus communal Anastasis is far closer than his individual resurrec-
tion to the original resurrection tradition of frst-century Judaism, it is also pro-
foundly at odds with both earlier Judaism and later Christianityin terms of the
last judgment. Where, across all that Eastern iconography of Anastasis, is there
any hint of a judgment in which some were liberated and others condemned? Who
departs from and who stays in Hadesespecially when morphed into Hell? No
wonder that the Ansatasis is sometimes shown in close iconographic conjunction
with the last judgment (from Matt 25:3133).
60

Be that as it may, since you cannot get around Adam-and-Eve as symbolic
of all humanity, the Anastasis iconography poses these most basic questions to
biblical tradition: Is the grace of the biblical God to be understood from a past
Anastasis or a future judgment? Is the power of the biblical God to be imagined as
punishing some for evil or freeing all from evil? Is the biblical God a God of sanc-
tion or of vision?
59
George W. E. Nickelsburg (Resurrection, Immortality, and Eternal Life in Intertestamental
Judaism [HTS 26; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1972], 107) noted concerning
2 Maccabees 7 that [r]esurrection is not simply individual vindication. . . . Tere is a restoration
of community. He also drew attention to this communal aspect of resurrection . . . in Daniel 12.
Richard C. Miller (Marks Empty Tomb and Other Translation Fables in Classical Antiquity, JBL
129 [2010]: 75976, here 770 n. 19) correctly generalized Nickelsburgs comment: In early Jewish
thought resurrection never functioned to exalt the individual, distinguishing an exemplar of
heroic achievement. . . . Instead, Jewish resurrection resided within larger eschatological mythic
schemata as a function of an awaited collective day of judgment at the end of the age.
60
I am thinking of what the congregation saw on the back wall as it lef Torcellos cathedral
or saw on the front ceiling as it entered the Choras parekklsion: Anastasis on top, last judgment
below. But Adam and Eve still get a place of exalted honor even in those judgment scenarios.
Four Inner-Biblical Interpretations of
Genesis 49:10: On the Lexical and Syntactic
Ambiguities of as Refected
in the Prophecies of Nathan, Ahijah,
Ezekiel, and Zechariah
richard c. steiner
rsteiner@yu.edu
Bernard Revel Graduate School, Yeshiva University, New York, NY 10033
Te lexical and syntactic ambiguities of the word in Gen 49:10, the third
verse of Jacobs blessing to Judah, have helped to make that verse one of the
most difcult cruxes in the Hebrew Bible. Ancient and medieval interpreters of
the verse took as equivalent to English (1) ever (in the phrase not ever),
(2) forever (in the phrase not forever), (3) until (indicating a point of cessa-
tion), and/or (4) until (not to mention afer) (indicating a point of culmination).
Tese four interpretations of correspond to three diferent ways of bracketing
the word with the neighboring words in the verse. Two of the interpretations are
joined together in an ancient double interpretation of that is refected in Tar-
gum Onqelos and possibly also in 4Q252 (4QCommGen A) and the Testament of
Judah.
Tese ambiguities did not go unnoticed in the biblical period. During the
course of that period, they gave rise to a number of distinct interpretations of
the oracle, interpretations that are refected in the prophecies of Nathan, Ahijah
the Shilonite, Ezekiel, and Zechariah. Each interpretation corresponded to a dif-
ferent historical development: the rise of the Davidic dynasty in the time of
Nathan; the decline of the Davidic dynasty in the time of Ahijah; the fall of
the Davidic dynasty in the time of Ezekiel; and the limited renewal of Davidic
leadership in the time of Zechariah. Tus, they allowed the oracle to adapt to the
changing fortunes of the House of David, making it possible for each generation
to adopt an interpretation that was suited to its own time.
JBL 132, no. 1 (2013): 3360
33
I

am indebted to Profs. David Berger, Aaron Koller, S. Z. Leiman, Adina Mosak Moshavi,
Yosef Ofer, Jordan S. Penkower, Mark J. Steiner, and Jefrey H. Tigay for their help in improving
this article. Te errors that remain are my own. I would also like to thank Mary Ann Linahan, of
the Yeshiva University Libraries, for her extraordinary patience and unfailing assistance.

(Gen 49:10)
Menasseh Ben Israel, ofen said to be the teacher of Benedict Spinoza, begins
his discussion of Gen 49:10 with the following refection:
Ambiguities [los equivocos] have really caused great mischief and controversy in
the world, and as there are in the Law many ambiguous [ambiguas] and equivocal
[equivocas] words that admit in themselves of diferent interpretations, so as to
involve various mysteries, they ofen cause doubt and lead into error. Tis is
clearly seen in the frst verse [Gen 49:10].
1
He then proceeds to show that almost every word in Gen 49:10 is ambiguous.
Some scholars believe that the ambiguity of Gen 49:10 was discussed already
by Josephus:
Josephus applied this verse to Vespasian when he predicted that the Roman
general would be proclaimed emperor in Judea, although, as he himself pointed
out, the Jews interpreted an ambiguous oracle . . . found in their sacred scriptures
to the efect that . . . one from their country would become ruler of the world
[Bell. VI, 5, 4 (312f); ibid. III, 8, 9 (400f.)]. Tis is confrmed by Tacitus (Hist. I,
10; V, 13), Suetonius (Vesp. 45) and Dio Cassius (Epitome LXVI: 1)proof that
the Shilo prophecy as interpreted by Josephus was included among the omina
imperii of the Flavian dynasty.
2
It should be noted, however, that this identifcation of Josephuss ambiguous
oracle ( ) is only one of many that have been proposed. And
even if Josephus was alluding to our verse, the ambiguity that he had in mind
was probably the one he manufactured to persuade Vespasian that the oracle
applied to him.
In this article, I shall focus mainly on one of the ambiguous words discussed
by Menasseh Ben Israel: . Te contribution of this word to the ambiguity of the
verse goes well beyond the lexical ambiguity noted by Menasseh Ben Israel (hasta,
until, and siempre, forever),
3
for it is also at the heart of a three-way syntactic
ambiguity. I shall attempt to show that recognition of this syntactic ambiguity is
crucial for an understanding of the inner-biblical interpretations of Gen 49:10,
1
Menasseh Ben Israel, Conciliador o De la conveniencia de los Lugares de la S. Escriptura,
que repugnantes entre si parecen (4 vols. in 2; Francofurti: Auctoris impensis, 163251), 1:119. I
have revised the translation from Te Conciliator of R. Manasseh Ben Israel: A Reconcilement of
the Apparent Contradictions in Holy Scripture (2 vols.; London: Duncan & Malcom, 1842), 1:93.
2
Te Aramaic Bible: Te Targums (ed. Martin McNamara et al.; Wilmington, DE: Michael
Glazier, 1987), 6:163 n. 25; also in Moses Aberbach and Bernard Grossfeld, Targum Onqelos on
Genesis 49: Translation and Analytical Commentary (Aramaic Studies 1; Missoula, MT: Scholars
Press, 1976), 14 n. 24; and in eidem, Targum Onkelos to Genesis: A Critical Analysis together with
an English Translation of the Text (Denver: Center for Judaic Studies, University of Denver, 1982),
286 n. 22.
3
Menasseh Ben Israel, Conciliador, 1:120; Conciliator, 1:94.
Steiner: Four Inner-Biblical Interpretations of Genesis 49:10 35
interpretations refected in the prophecies of Nathan, Ahijah the Shilonite, Ezekiel,
and Zechariah:
Nathan: A. Te scepter shall not depart from Judah . . . ever [ ]; rather
[ ] tribute shall come to him [ = = ]
4
and
the homage of peoples shall be his.
B. Te rod [> the sword] shall not depart from Judah . . . ever
[ ] . . . .
Ahijah: Te scepter shall not depart from Judah . . . forever [ ]; rather
[ ] tribute shall come to him and the homage of peoples shall
be his.
Ezekiel: Te scepter shall not depart from Judah . . . until [ ; point of
cessation] the coming of him [= Nebuchadnezzar] to whom
tribute [> judgment] belongs and to whom the homage of peo-
ples belongs.
Zechariah: Te scepter shall not depart from Judah . . . until (not to men-
tion afer) [ ; point of culmination] the coming of him [= the
Messiah] to whom tribute belongs and to whom the homage of
peoples belongs.
In short, I shall argue that, far from causing mischief, the lexical and syntactic
ambiguities of the oracle enabled it to adapt to the changing fortunes of the House
of David. Tey allowed each generation to adopt an interpretation that was appro-
priate to its time.
Menasseh Ben Israels discussion of the ambiguity of is not original. As he
himself makes clear, it rests on important insights of Jewish exegetes of the Middle
Ages. Some of these insights were later to become part of the conventional wisdom
of modern biblical scholarship,
5
but others are virtually unknown today. It will,
therefore, be useful to begin by citing some of the medieval discussions. Tose
discussions will make it possible for us to understand the less explicit ancient
exegesis, both inner-biblical and postbiblical.
I. Three Bracketings of Genesis 49:10
In medieval exegesis of our verse, three syntactic analyses can be discerned.
First of all, although most exegetes read together with the following words, in
4
For the history of this interpretation, which takes as a combination of two words
(like , and woe unto him, in Qoh 4:10), and for as a poetic form of , tribute, see
Richard C. Steiner, Poetic Forms in the Masoretic Vocalization and Tree Difcult Phrases in
Jacobs Blessing: (Gen 49:3), (Gen 49:4) and (Gen 49:10), JBL 129
(2010): 21926.
5
See at nn. 1213 below.
accordance with the masoretic accents, a few read it with what precedes, ignoring
the accents. Te two interpretations correspond to the following bracketings:
1.] [ ,] [
2.] [ ,] [
Bracketing 1 takes to mean until:
1. Te scepter shall not depart from Judah . . . , until . . . .
Bracketing 2 takes as equivalent to , to eternity, forever, and allows for two
distinct interpretations:
2a. Te scepter shall not depart from Judah . . . ever . . . .
2b. Te scepter shall not depart from Judah . . . forever . . . . = If the scepter
departs from Judah, it shall not do so forever . . . .
Some readers may prefer to think of this second ambiguity as an extension
of the aforementioned lexical ambiguity, with now having three relevant mean-
ings: until, forever, and ever. Such a formulation can make it easier to fol-
low the discussion below, and I shall indeed use it for that purpose. Technically,
however, it is more accurate to say that the diference between interpretations 2a
and 2b is syntactic rather than lexical. It is a diference that will be familiar to
those readers who have studied elementary logic. Te collocation of a word mean-
ing not with a word meaning to eternity, forever (i.e., for all time, with an
implicit universal quantifer) creates ambiguity, as seen in the following bracket-
ings of the main clause:
2a.] [ ] [
2b.] [][
2a. [Te scepter shall not depart (= shall avoid departing) from Judah . . .]
[forever] = Te scepter shall not depart from Judah . . . ever.
2b. [It is not the case that] [the scepter shall depart from Judah . . . forever] =
If the scepter departs from Judah . . . , it shall not do so forever.
It will be noted that is rendered as forever in both of these translations;
the diference between them is purely syntactic. In bracketing 2a, not has nar-
row scope (modifying shall depart), while forever has wide scope (modifying
shall not depart); in bracketing 2b, forever has narrow scope (modifying shall
depart), while not has wide scope (modifying shall depart forever).
6
Put dif-
6
Cf. the scope ambiguity of Shakespeares All that glisters is not gold, discussed by Willard
Van Orman Quine, Word and Object (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1960), 139. According to
Quine, Shakespeare intended not to be an outside operator governing the whole; we may
paraphrase this interpretation as it is not the case that each thing that glisters [= glitters] is gold.
ferently, in bracketing 2a the meaning is forever not, while in bracketing 2b the
meaning is not forever. Te illusion of lexical ambiguity is created by the fact
that, in English, forever not is semantically equivalent to not ever and never.
7
Bracketing 1
Bracketing 1 (shall not depart until) is the one aligned with the masoretic
accents (since the etnahi is under the word that precedes ) and the one assumed
by most medieval and modern exegetes. Tanks to the importance of our verse
in JewishChristian polemics,
8
the precise nuance of in this interpretation
has been the subject of discussion since the Middle Ages. In the twelfh century,
Abraham Ibn Ezra argued that it does not imply the cessation of Judahs dominion
at the time specifed.
9
In the thirteenth century, Solomon b. Abraham Ibn Adret
(henceforth: Rashba) asserted that the word does not (always) indicate ces-
sation of a thing from some point on; rather, at times it promises that a thing
will occur (until the specifed point) and, a fortiori, continue thereafer.
10
Tis
certainly applies to one of the examples he cites:
, no man shall stand up to you (at any point), until (not to mention afer) you
destroy them (Deut 7:24). Te same goes for , (he
trusts in the Lord . . .) he will not be afraid (at any point), until (not to mention
afer) he sees the downfall of his enemies (Ps 112:8). In both of these cases, Gods
(negative) promise expires only in the sense that it becomes superfuous at the
time specifed by the -phrase. Put diferently, is sometimes used to indicate a
point of culmination rather than a point of cessation.
11

Contrast the Wikipedia article entitled All that glitters is not gold: [F]ools gold . . . refects
substantially more light than authentic gold does. Gold in its raw form appears dull and does
not glitter. Tis explanation assumes that Shakespeare meant: Anything that glitters (in its raw
form) is perforce not gold.
7
For a similar illusion of lexical ambiguity, involving allegedly disjunctive -, see Richard C.
Steiner, Does the Biblical Hebrew Conjunction - Have Many Meanings, One Meaning, or No
Meaning At All? JBL 119 (2000): 26163.
8
See, e.g., David Berger, Te JewishChristian Debate in the High Middle Ages: A Critical
Edition of the Niziziahion Vetus with an Introduction, Translation, and Commentary (Judaica, Texts
and Translations 4; Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1979), 315; and Robert
Chazan, Barcelona and Beyond: Te Disputation of 1263 and Its Afermath (Berkeley/Los Angeles:
University of California Press, 1992), 61, 1058, 113, 151.
9
See his two commentaries on this verse in (ed. Menachem Cohen;
Ramat Gan: Bar-Ilan University, 1992).
10
(Piotrkw, 1883), 4:53 col. 1 last 2 lines (#187). For discussion,
see Robert Chazan, Daggers of Faith: Tirteenth-Century Christian Missionizing and Jewish
Response (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989), 143. Chazan asserts that Rashba
breaks with the general pattern of explication of this key verse that we have encountered thus
far, an assertion that seems to overlook Ibn Ezras exegesis.
11
Tis is particularly clear in , his illness
became very bad until (not to mention afer) [or: to the point that] he had no breath lef in him
In the nineteenth century, this idea was adopted by a number of scholars,
including Wilhelm Gesenius, E. W. Hengstenberg (who provided an extensive
Latin translation of one of Ibn Ezras discussions), Franz Delitzsch, and Samuel
Davidson.
12
It was subsequently accepted by BDB (725, s.v. , meaning II1b),
GKC (503, 164f), and many commentators down to the present day.
13
Despite the widespread acceptance of bracketing 1, it is not without prob-
lems. As noted by Nahum M. Sarna, the problems reside in the combination :
Hebrew ad ki is rare and is otherwise used only in narrative prose to express the
leading up to a climactic passage. Te present usage is exceptional in that it takes a
verb in the imperfect and refers to the future, making its signifcation uncertain.
14
In short, the use of is unparalleled in this context, that is, in poetry
15
and
(1 Kgs 17:17). More generally, we may say that there are factors other than cessation that may
lead a speaker to specify a terminus. Aaron Koller informs me (e-mail communication) that
digital highway signs in New York with messages of the form trafc moving well until exit X
do not imply that there are trafc jams beyond exit X. Te signs mention exit X, he says, only
because no information is available about the trafc beyond that point.
12
Gesenius, Hebrisches and chaldisches Handwrterbuch ber das Alte Testament (2nd
ed.; Leipzig: F. C. W. Vogel, 1823), 551 s.v.; Hengstenberg, Christologie des Alten Testaments und
Commentar ber die messianischen Weissagungen der Propheten (Berlin: L. Oehmigke, 1829),
7172; Franz Delitzsch, Die Genesis (Leipzig: Drfing & Franke, 1852), 370; and Davidson,
An Introduction to the Old Testament: Critical, Historical, and Teological (3 vols.; Edinburgh:
Williams & Norgate, 186263), 1:207.
13
See, e.g., John H. Bennetch, Te Prophecy of Jacob, BSac 95 (1938): 424; Hans-Jrgen
Zobel, Stammesspruch und Geschichte: Die Angaben der Stammessprche von Gen 49, Dtn 33 und Jdc
5 ber die politischen und kultischen Zustnde im damaligen Israel (BZAW 95; Berlin: Tpelmann,
1965), 13; J. A. Emerton, Some Difcult Words in Genesis 49, in Words and Meanings: Essays
Presented to David Winton Tomas on His Retirement from the Regius Professorship of Hebrew in the
University of Cambridge, 1968 (ed. Peter R. Ackroyd and Barnabas Lindars; Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1968), 86 n. 1; Andr Caquot, La parole sur Juda dans le testament lyrique de
Jacob (Gense 49, 812), Sem 26 (1976): 19; Hermann Gunkel, Genesis (1901; trans. Mark E.
Biddle; Mercer Library of Biblical Studies; Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1997), 456; Jean-
Daniel Macchi, Isral et ses tribus selon Gense 49 (OBO 171; Fribourg: Editions Universitaires;
Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1999), 98; and Kenneth A. Mathews, Genesis, vol. 2, 11:27
50:26 (NAC 1B; Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2005), 895.
14
Sarna, Genesis : Te Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation (JPS
Torah Commentary; Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1989), 336; cf. John Skinner, A
Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Genesis (2nd ed.; ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1930),
520 note.
15
Te use of with a subordinating conjunction (be it or ) is normally restricted to
prose; in poetry, is almost always followed immediately by a fnite verb: (Exod 15:16),
(Num 23:24), (Josh 10:13), (Isa 26:20), (Isa 42:4), (Isa
62:1), (Isa 62:7), (Hos 10:12), (Ps 57:2), (Ps 71:18),
(Ps 110:1), (Prov 7:23), (Job 8:21), (Prov 14:6),
(Lam 3:50). Te only exception is (Ps 112:8). Apart from our verse, none of the
occurrences of (Gen 26:13; 41:49; 2 Sam 23:10; 2 Chr 26:15) is in poetry.
surrounded by verbs in the imperfect.
16
Te evidence presented below will suggest
that this double dose of uniqueness stems from the fact that bracketing 1 is
secondary.
17
Bracketings 2a and 2b
In bracketings 2a (shall not ever depart) and 2b (shall not forever depart),
is the last word in the frst half of Gen 49:10, separated from at the beginning
of the second half. In that position, it is not a preposition/conjunction but a noun
used adverbially. As a noun, is a synonym of and with the meaning
eternity, as can be seen, for example, in , , the
eternal mountains shattered, the everlasting hills sank low (Hab 3:6).
18
When
used adverbially, these nouns normally take a preposition, as in = =
(to eternity);
19
= = (until eternity); and =
(from eternity). However, the poetic dialect ofen dispenses with the preposition
(to), employing a construction reminiscent of the Arabic adverbial accusative:
(Isa 57:15),
20
(Pss 45:7; 48:15; 52:10; 104:5),
21
(Amos 1:11; Ps 13:2).
Hence the meaning to eternity given above.
Tese interpretations are discussed by several medieval exegetes. One north-
ern French commentary, Daat Zeqenim, cites a certain Rabbi Isaac as taking in
16
By contrast, the number of occurrences of surrounded by perfects (thirteen) is
smaller than the number of occurrences surrounded by imperfects (twenty).
17
Tis is not to say that the use of with subordinating is a late development in Hebrew.
If pre-Islamic Arabic dky (bis, solange) and Lihyanite dky (bis zu) (Walter W. Mller, Das
Altarabische der Inschrifern aus vorislamischer Zeit, in Grundriss der arabischen Philologie [ed.
Wolfdietrich Fischer; 3 vols.; Wiesbaden: Reichert, 198292], 1:34) are cognates of , the
combination must be descended from the common ancestor of Hebrew and Arabic.
18
Etymologically, (eternity) may be derived from the root *-d-y (pass away,
disappear), attested in Aramaic, e.g., , an everlasting dominion that will
not pass away (Dan 7:14); and (Tg. Onq. Gen 49:10). If so, it
would appear to refer to a time so far into the future that even the heavens and heavenly bodies
will have passed away. For the idea, expressed with prepositional , see , until the
moon is no more (Ps 72:7), and , until the heavens are no more (Job 14:12).
Te phrase from Daniel may contradict this conception, or it may be elliptical: an everlasting
dominion that will not pass away (until everything else does).
19
E.g., . . . , , trust in the Lord until eternity, for . . . (Isa 26:4); note the
following and separated from it.
20
Translating as dwelling forever; cf. NJPS. Others translate inhabiting eternity;
cf. Davidson, Introduction, 1:205: It is true that as a noun ofen means eternity; but we are not
aware of its being used for unto eternity, forever, without the preposition before it.
21
In the second word, the expected patahi has shifed to segol: > *. Tis shif is
called an unclear development in Hans Bauer and Pontus Leander, Historische Grammatik der
hebrischen Sprache des Alten Testaments (Halle: M. Niemeyer, 1922), 548 69z. In my view, it
is a mirror-image variant of the shif of patahi to segol that is conditioned by a following qamesi
separated from it by (e.g., > *), hi (e.g., > *), etc. (ibid., 216 21no; GKC,
91 27q); in other words, it is conditioned by a preceding qamesi separated from it by .
our verse to mean (forever) and to mean (since).
22
Te com-
ment is too brief to distinguish between bracketings 2a and 2b. In Spain, we fnd
longer discussions that do make it possible to distinguish. Bracketing 2b (shall
not forever depart) is represented in a discussion by Rashba:
Te true interpretation of the verse is as follows: Te scepter shall not depart
from Judah forever, because in the end Shiloh, who is descended from him,
will come and kingship will return to him. And the reason
23
for this is that all
of the tribes had a king or judge [b. Sukk. 28], and there was not one of them
that did not rule as a king or a judge, but since this was not hereditary, when it
departed, it did so forever. However, the rule of Judah is hereditary . . . , and if
it departs from him, it will not do so forever, as it did from the other tribes. . . .
And the word in this place is like . . . as in dwelling forever
[Isa 57:15] . . . which is like . And that is what the translator [Onqelos]
translated: , ,
.
24
Bracketing 2a (shall not ever depart) is refected in the commentary of Rashbas
student, Bahiye b. Asher of Saragossa:
Te master, my teacher, Solomon [Ibn Adret] . . . commented that the word
in this place is like . And so the [disjunctive yetiv] accent under comes to
teach that it is not connected with . And because of this, Onqelos
translated , and he translated as ; and he who
translates errs. Te meaning of the verse is that, once the Mes-
siah comes, kingship shall never be cut of from Judah. Tat is in accordance with
what it says in Daniel (2:44): [the God of Heaven will establish a kingdom] that
shall never be destroyed.
25
Te diference between Bahiyes 2a (shall not ever depart) and Rashbas 2b
(shall not forever depart) corresponds to a diference in the referent of the verse.
According to Rashba, it refers to the period of Judahs decline beginning with
Rehoboam: the loss of dominion over the ten tribes will not last forever. According
22
(Jerusalem: Lewin-Epstein, 1967), section 1,
p. , lines 2324. Te same comment is published in (ed. Jacob Gellis; Jerusalem:
Mifal Tosafot Hashalem, 1982), vol. 5, p. , col. 2 bot. For a slightly diferent version, see
(ed. Ezra Korach and Zvi Leitner;
Jerusalem: Julius Klugmann and Sons, 1992), vol. 1, p. , lines 57.
23
Reading for .
24
, 4:53 col. 2 lines 2539 (#187).
25
: (ed. Charles B. Chavel; Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook,
1966), vol. 1, p. , last linep. , line 4. Te appeal to the [disjunctive yetiv] accent under
is difcult to understand, given the presence of a stronger disjunctive, etnahi, under the
previous word. Yosef Ofer notes (e-mail communication) that the use of disjunctive accents with
is very common in the Bible; thus, no special signifcance should be attached to that usage in
our verse.
to Bahiye, it refers to the messianic period: once the Messiah comes, kingship shall
never depart from Judah.
Tanks to Bahiye, bracketing 2a enjoyed some popularity in the seventeenth
century. Samuel Archivolti writes in his grammar (1602) that the yetiv under the
word comes to disjoin it (from what follows) and to clarify what (it was that)
Onqelos translated as , in the sense of .
26
Menasseh Ben
Israel writes something similar in Conciliador (1632):
Also in the same book of Rabot (Be[reshit] Ra[bba] cap. 99), another interpre-
tation is given to it, understanding the staf as the staf of kingship; and so the
translation would be, Te scepter shall not be withdrawn from Judah, eternally
[eternamente], when [quando] he shall come to whom will be (the kingdom)
27
and
the gathering of peoples. Te musical accent greatly favors this interpretation, for
the adverb has a yetiv which is disjunctive and separative. Accordingly, this
means, Te scepter shall not be withdrawn from Judah, nor a legislator from
between his feet, eternallyand here is a pause; and then it declares that this shall
be when [quando] the Messiah shall come, whom all nations will gather to, and
obey; as Isaiah (11:10) says, To him will the nations seek.
Onqelos the proselyte [Anquelos aguer] gives this same declaration; and so,
as R. Bahye notes, what one fnds written in correct codices and copies is (not
, , but) , until eternity [hasta
siempre], when [qudo] the Messiah shall come, (the Messiah) to whom [= to
whose kingdom] Daniel (2:44) afrms eternal duration, saying: [the God of
Heaven will establish a kingdom] that shall never be destroyed.
28
So too the anonymous Jewish scholar from Amsterdam with whom Johann
Stephan Rittangel corresponded (in Hebrew) in 1642:
Onqelos, the translator . . . said:
. He interprets the word in the aforementioned verse like (the
one in) (Ps 132:14), and its meaning is that the kingship shall
never depart once the Messiah comes.
29
In modern times, these bracketings (or something close to them) have been
rediscovered by a handful of scholars.
30
Tey have been ignored by most scholars,
26
Samuel Archivolti (Arkevolty), (Venice, 1602), p. . For his appeal to the
yetiv accent, see n. 25 above. I am indebted to Evelyn Ocken of the Columbia University Libraries
for supplying a photograph of the discussion in the frst edition. (A scan of this edition is now
available on the website of the National Library of Israel.)
27
Tis parenthetical insertion, unlike the ones below, is found in the original Spanish.
28
Menasseh Ben Israel, Conciliador, 1:122; I have revised the translation from Conciliator,
1:9596.
29
Johann Christof Wagenseil, Tela ignea Satanae (Altorf: J. H. Schnnerstaedt, 1681),
3:331.
30
Arnold B. Ehrlich, Randglossen zur hebrischen Bibel: Textkritisches, sprachliches und
sachliches (7 vols.; Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1908), 1:246; Hermann Kornfeld, , BZ 8
but they have much to recommend them. Tey produce a remarkably regular
meter:

:
And they create perfect antithetical parallelism between , the
scepter shall not depart from Judah, and ) = =( , rather
tribute shall come to him, with asseverative/adversative used to contradict a
preceding clause introduced by the negative particle .
31
Bracketings 2a and 2b can each be supported with unambiguous parallels in
the Bible. Bracketing 2a (shall not ever depart) is paralleled by [
] [ ], [you shall not see them again] [forever = ever] (Exod 14:13);
] [ ] [, [they shall not marry into
32
the congregation
of the Lord] [forever = ever] (Deut 23:4); ] [ ] [, [I shall
not break my covenant with you] [forever = ever] (Judg 2:1); [
] [ ] , [You shall not cut of your kindness from my house] [for-
ever = ever] (1 Sam 20:15); ] [ ] [, [the sword shall
not depart from your house] [forever = ever] (2 Sam 12:10); [
] [ ], [it shall not be uprooted or destroyed again] [forever = ever] (Jer
31:39/40); ] [ ] [, [it shall not be settled again] [forever = ever]
(1910): 13031; W. A. Wordsworth, Until Shiloh come (Genesis xlix. 10), ExpTim 49 (1937
38): 14243. For some reason, Ehrlich felt the need to emend to . He has been followed
in this by Raymond de Hoop, Genesis 49 in Its Literary and Historical Context (OtSt 39; Leiden:
Brill, 1999), 141. Wordsworth difers from the others in taking as the predicate of a nominal
sentence: And the Lawgiver between his feet is forever. Kornfeld compares the position of
in Gen 49:27, and de Hoop (n. 347) compares the position of in Gen 49:26 according to BHS.
31
See Steiner, Poetic Forms, 221, comparing , I shall not die; rather I
shall live (Ps 118:17), etc.
32
In my view, the expression (in . . . ) means marry into, with the
object of the preposition being a noun that refers to a family or ethnic group rather than a
woman (contrast , enter the bedroom of [a woman]). Evidence for this interpretation
comes not only from rabbinic tradition but also from comparison of
, and (if) you intermarry with themyou marrying into them and they into you (Josh
23:12), with , and intermarry with usyou
shall give us your daughters and you shall take our daughters for yourselves (Gen 34:9), and with
, and you shall not intermarry with them
you shall not give your daughter to his son and you shall not take his daughter for your son
(Deut 7:3). In all three verses, the reciprocal nature of (intermarry with) is spelled
out by means of a two-part appositional explanation. Te appositional explanation in Josh 23:12
should also be compared to 1 Kgs 11:12: . . .
, King Solomon loved many foreign
women . . . from the nations of which the Lord said to the Israelites: You shall not marry into
them and they shall not marry into you.
(Jer 50:39); ] [ ] [, [you shall not be found again] [forever =
ever] (Ezek 26:21); ] [ ] [, [My people shall not be shamed] [for-
ever = ever] (Joel 2:26, 27); ] [ ] [, [he will not be shaken] [forever =
ever] (Ps 15:5). Bracketing 2b (shall not forever depart) is paralleled by ][
] [, [It is not the case that] [My spirit shall abide in any human
forever] (Gen 6:3); ] [ ][, [It is not the case that] [I remain angry
forever] (Jer 3:12); ] [][, [It is not the case that] [He retains his
anger forever] (Mic 7:18); ] [][, [do not] [reject forever] (Ps 44:24);
] [][, [do not] [forget forever] (Ps 74:19); ] [ ][, [It is
not the case that] [He rejects forever] (Lam 3:31). Te existence of unambiguous
parallels for each of the two interpretations is conclusive proof that we are dealing
with a genuine syntactic ambiguity.
33

II. The Ambiguity of
Te words are always read as a blessingthe scepter
[= dominion] shall not depart from Judahand this is obviously what the con-
text demands. Te disambiguating efect of the context is so strong that the ambi-
guity of the words has not been noticed. Taken in isolation, the words
can quite naturally be understood as a curse: the rod [= punishment] shall
not depart from Judah.
Te validity of this second interpretation can be seen by comparing Jobs plea
for relief from divine punishment: , let him take his rod away from
me, or, more literally, let him cause his rod to depart from over/upon me (Job
9:34). Te wording implies that Job has a divine rod over/upon him, a rod being
used to beat him, probably on the back ( ; cf. Prov 10:13; 26:3). Based on this
parallel, the words can be easily be construed as elliptical
for something like *, the rod shall not depart from Judahs
back, rather than for *, the scepter shall not depart from
Judahs hand.
In the frst of these interpretations, refers to a rod of punishment and
discipline, the of Prov 22:15; in the second, it refers to a royal scepter,
33
On the other hand, when the adverbial and the negative particle are adjacent, the word
order disambiguates. When the adverbial precedes (as in English forever not), the bracketing of
the clause parallels 2a, e.g., [ [ ] ], [it shall not be rebuilt] [forever = ever] (Isa 25:2);
[ [ ] ], [he shall not be shaken] [forever = ever] (Ps 112:6); [ ] [
] , [I shall not forget your precepts] [forever = ever] (Ps 119:93). When the negative
particle precedes (as in English not forever), the bracketing parallels 2b, e.g., [ ][
] , [It is not the case that] [I become angry forever] (Isa 57:16); [ []], [Do
not] [remember iniquity forever] (Isa 64:8); [ [ ]], [It is not the case that]
[the needy shall be forgotten forever] (Ps 9:19); [ [ ]], [It is not the case that] [He
remains angry forever] (Ps 103:9).
the of Ps 45:7.
34
Te Bible speaks of the departure of the latter type
of in , and the scepter of Egypt shall depart (Zech 10:11),
and the departure of the former type of in . In short, the entire
clause, , is ambiguous. Tis ambiguity appears to play a role in
Nathans prophecies to David.
III. Nathan and Bracketing 2a
At least one inner-biblical interpretation of Gen 49:10 is found in Nathans
oracle. Tis can be seen most clearly in 2 Sam 7:1416, the climax of the promise
to David,
35
where we fnd striking echoes of the promise to Judah:
34
It is by no means certain that we are dealing here with lexical ambiguity (more specifcally,
polysemy). It is quite possible that this noun had only a single general meaning, viz. staf, with
a variety of applications, rather than a variety of meanings; cf. Menasseh Ben Israel, Conciliador,
1:120; Conciliator, 1:94: Sebet, according to R. David Kimhi, does not mean anything other than
rod [verga] or staf [vara] . . . and because of that it applies to various things. I am aware of no
compelling reason to distinguish the use of the as an instrument of punishment from its use
as a symbol of authority. Te point is clear in rabbinic comments on , such
as , this is the Babylonian exilarch, who punishes
Israel with a rod (b. Hor. 11b); for the use of -- to refer to corporal punishment in Mishnaic
Hebrew, see Jastrow, 1451, s.v. . Greek , used by Aquila to render in Gen 49:10,
may also have a single general meaning, if one may judge from the defnition in LSJ (1609a, s.v.):
staf or stick, used by the lame or aged . . . staf or baton, esp. as the badge of command, sceptre
. . . used as a stick or cudgel to punish the refractory. For Akkadian hatitiu, CAD (6:15355) gives
(1) scepter, (2) staf, (3) stick, (4) branch, twig . . .; it is unclear how many of these are distinct
meanings.
35
Some scholars believe that these three verses go back to the time of the united
monarchy, e.g., Tomoo Ishida, Te Royal Dynasties in Ancient Israel: A Study on the Formation
and Development of Royal-Dynastic Ideology (BZAW 142; Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 1977),
9899; Antti Laato, Second Samuel 7 and Ancient Near Eastern Royal Ideology, CBQ 59 (1997)
268; William M. Schniedewind, Society and the Promise to David: Te Reception History of
2 Samuel 7:117 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 34, 36; and Griphus Gakuru, An
Inner-Biblical Exegetical Study of the Davidic Covenant and the Dynastic Oracle (Mellen Biblical
Press Series 58; Lewiston, NY: Mellen, 2000), 4950 (with literature), 93. Others believe that
they are Deuteronomistic, e.g., Steven L. McKenzie, Te Typology of the Davidic Covenant, in
Te Land Tat I Will Show You: Essays on the History and Archaeology of the Ancient Near East
in Honor of J. Maxwell Miller (ed. J. Andrew Dearman and M. Patrick Graham; JSOTSup 343;
Shefeld: Shefeld Academic Press, 2001), 177; and Omer Sergi, Te Composition of Nathans
Oracle to David (2 Samuel 7:117) as a Refection of Royal Judahite Ideology, JBL 129 (2010):
272. For surveys of the various views, see Nahum M. Sarna, Psalm 89: A Study in Inner Biblical
Exegesis, in Biblical and Other Studies (ed. Alexander Altmann; Philip W. Lown Institute of
Advanced Judaic Studies, Brandeis University, Studies and Texts 1; Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 1963), 3940; Tryggve N. D. Mettinger, King and Messiah: Te Civil and Sacral
Legitimation of the Israelite Kings (ConBOT 8; Lund: Gleerup, 1976), 4850; P. Kyle McCarter,
II Samuel: A New Translation with Introduction, Notes and Commentary (AB 9; Garden City, NY:

:
:
:
I shall be a father to him, and he will be a son to mea son that, when he
does wrong, I shall chastise with the rod of men and the blows of humans. But
my favor shall not depart from him as I caused it to depart from Saul, whom I
caused to depart from before you. Your house and your kingdom/kingship shall
be secure before you until eternity; your throne shall be established until eternity.
Te phrase is, of course, common to 2 Sam 7:15 and Gen 49:10; the
echo is amplifed by the repetition of the root -- (depart) twice more in 2 Sam
7:15. Moreover, the phrase (7:16) is a prosaic counterpart of poetic in
Gen 49:10, as understood in bracketings 2a (shall not ever depart) and 2b (shall
not forever depart); here too the echo is amplifed through repetition.
36
In this
case, the second iteration has special prominence thanks to its position at the very
end of the oracle.
37

Tese echoes can hardly be accidental; Gen 49:10 is a promise of eternal king-
ship to Judah, and 2 Sam 7:1516 is a promise of eternal kingship to one of Judahs
descendants. Te main diference in formulation is that the subject of is
in the former but in the latter. Tis diference is trivial, since in the
former refers to the scepter of kingship and in the latter refers to the con-
tinuing divine favor that will maintain the grant of kingship in efect.
38

It should be noted also that the word is by no means absent in Nathans
oracle; it occurs in 2 Sam 7:14, albeit with a diferent referent. Adding that verse
to the two following ones yields a text that has interspersed within it a sequence of
echoes, . . . . . . , a sequence that is at least outwardly similar to
Gen 49:10 according to bracketings 2a and 2b. We shall return to this point below.
Each of these echoes functions as what Benjamin D. Sommer, following Z.
Ben-Porat, calls a marker, an identifable element or pattern in one text belonging
Doubleday, 1984), 21017; and Petri Kasari, Nathans Promise in 2 Samuel 7 and Related Texts
(Publications of the Finnish Exegetical Society 97; Helsinki: Finnish Exegetical Society, 2009),
1419.
36
Te repetition of has been noted by Andr Caquot, Brve explication de la
prophtie de Natan (2 Sam 7,117), in Mlanges bibliques et orientaux en lhonneur de M. Henri
Cazelles (ed. Andr Caquot and Mathias Delcor; AOAT 212; Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker, 1981),
68; and Donald F. Murray, Divine Prerogative and Royal Pretension: Pragmatics, Poetics and
Polemics in a Narrative Sequence about David (2 Samuel 5.177.29) (JSOTSup 264; Shefeld:
Shefeld Academic Press, 1998), 194, 195, 197. According to Murray, it maximizes the impact of
the words (p. 194) and is highly emphatic (p. 195). In my view, it is designed to call attention
to the allusion.
37
Murray, Divine Prerogative, 194.
38
McCarter, II Samuel, 208.
to another independent text.
39
According to Sommer, an abundance of markers
pointing back to the older text makes clear that [the author] borrowed from that
text, unless both [texts] utilize stock vocabulary, exemplify a literary form such
as a lament, or treat a subject that calls for certain words.
40
Based on this criterion,
it is reasonable to conclude that the dynastic oracle (2 Sam 7:1516) alludes to
Jacobs blessing to Judah (Gen 49:10).
41
Te repetition of in 7:15 is, in the words of S. R. Driver, not an
elegancy.
42
Te shif of person and verb stem from to is also awkward.
If these stylistic infelicities are intentional, designed to make the audience stop
and think, modern scholarship on the verse testifes to the efectiveness of the
technique. Petri Kasari, for example, writes:
Verse 15b repeats in a slightly clumsy and keyword-like manner the main verb
of v. 15a. Tis probably caused the textual problems related to this verse.
In v. 15a the subject changes from I to my love and returns in 15b to I.
Te change of subject may point to literary-critical problems. Some cumulative
evidence may also be found in the fact that the verb is used in both Qal and
Hiph. without any semantic diference. Chronicles noticed this and corrected
both verbs to the Hiph. (2 Sam 7:15b // 1 Chr 17:13).
43
In this passage, Kasari observes that a verbal root is repeated in a keyword-like
manner but fails to consider the implications of his observation. Had he done
so, he might well have seen that this is, indeed, an excellent example of one use of
keywords in the Bible, viz., the linking of texts.
44
In other words, repetition is used
here to call attention to an allusion.
Despite this evidence, references to Gen 49:10 are rare in the vast scholarly
literature dealing with Nathans oracle.
45
Te reason for this is not difcult to fnd:
39
Sommer, A Prophet Reads Scripture: Allusion in Isaiah 4066 (Contraversions; Stanford:
Stanford University Press, 1998), 11.
40
Ibid., 22, 32.
41
For more on allusion and the criteria for distinguishing it from accidental similarity,
see Robert Klapper, Gavy Posner, and Mordy Friedman, Amnon and Tamar: A Case Study
in Allusions, Nahalah: Yeshiva University Journal for the Study of Bible 1 (1999): 2333 (with
literature); Paul R. Noble, Esau, Tamar, and Joseph: Criteria for Identifying Inner-Biblical
Allusions, VT 52 (2002): 21952; Jefery M. Leonard, Identifying Inner-Biblical Allusions:
Psalm 78 as a Test Case, JBL 127 (2008): 24165 (with literature).
42
S. R. Driver, Notes on the Hebrew Text and the Topography of the Books of Samuel (2nd ed.;
Oxford: Clarendon, 1912), 276.
43
Kasari, Nathans Promise, 2728. Cf. Georg Hentschel, Gott, Knig und Tempel: Beo-
bachtungen zu 2 Sam 7,117 (ETS 22; Leipzig: Benno, 1992), 19, and the literature cited there.
44
See, e.g., Yairah Amit, Te Multi-Purpose Leading Word and the Problems of Its
Usage, Proofexts 9 (1989): 106; Frank Polak, (Jerusalem: Bialik, 1994), 9193;
and Robert Alter, Te Art of Biblical Narrative (2nd ed.; New York: Basic Books, 2011), 118. All of
these discussions are based on Martin Bubers studies of what he called Leitwortstil.
45
Te only reference I have found is in Schniedewind, Society and the Promise to David,
16364: 4QpGen
a
column 5 (4Q252 5) begins with a quote from Genesis 49:10 and alludes to
modern scholars are almost universally unaware of the bracketings of Gen 49:10
that take to mean . As a result, they have ofen opted to emend away the
awkward formulations in 2 Sam 7:15, with the LXX and 1 Chr 17:13.
46

I noted above that the interspersed sequence . . . . . . in
2 Sam 7:1416 is at least outwardly similar to Gen 49:10 according to bracketings
2a and 2b. But if the of 2 Sam 7:14 alludes to the of Gen 49:10, what are
we to make of the fact that the latter is a scepter wielded by a king while the former
is a rod wielded against a king?
47

In the previous section, we saw that can be interpreted
as either a blessing or a curse. It now appears that 2 Sam 7:1416 alludes to both
of these interpretations. Te keyword sequence . . . . . . ,
where (in the context of v. 14) symbolizes the punishment of Davids dynasty
rather than its dominion, appears to be a veiled warning to Davids descendants
that Jacobs blessing to Judah can easily be transformed into a curse.
Similar echoes of Gen 49:10 can be discerned in another one of Nathans
oracles, 2 Sam 12:10:

:
And now, the sword shall not depart from your house until eternity, because you
spurned me, taking the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own wife.
Here, too, we have an allusion that collocates shall not depart with until eternity,
refecting bracketing 2a (shall not ever depart) or 2b (shall not forever depart).
In this case, the allusion makes the negative interpretation of
far more prominent than it was in 2 Sam 7:1416. Tat interpretation is no longer
a veiled warning, lurking in the background of a promise of divine favor; it is now
front and center in Nathans announcement of Davids punishment.
the Promise in the course of its elaboration of the lemma. . . . It is clear from this text that Genesis
49:10 was regarded by the Qumran community as part of the literary horizon of the Promise.
Schniedewind says nothing about the basis for the Qumran communitys view, but, if the relevant
passage in 4Q252 takes in Gen 49:10 to mean (see the appendix below), it is
not surprising that it also takes the dynastic oracle (2 Sam 7:1416) as alluding Jacobs blessing to
Judah (Gen 49:10). For the possibility that 4Q252 5.7 mentions Nathan (and perhaps even alludes
to 2 Sam 7:14), see Daniel R. Schwartz, Te Messianic Departure from Judah (4Q Patriarchal
Blessings), TZ 37 (1981): 26566; George J. Brooke, Te Deuteronomic Character of 4Q252,
in Pursuing the Text: Studies in Honor of Ben Zion Wacholder on the Occasion of His Seventieth
Birthday (ed. John C. Reeves and John Kampen; JSOTSup 184; Shefeld: Shefeld Academic
Press, 1994), 127 n. 17; and Juhana Markus Saukkonen, Selection, Election, and Rejection:
Interpretation of Genesis in 4Q252, in Northern Lights on the Dead Sea Scrolls: Proceedings of the
Nordic Qumran Network 20032006 (ed. Anders Klostergaard Petersen et al.; STDJ 80; Leiden:
Brill, 2009), 76.
46
See, e.g., Driver, Samuel, 276; McCarter, II Samuel, 19495; and M. Tsevat, Te Steadfast
House: What Was David Promised in II Sam 7:11b-16? HUCA 34 (1963): 72.
47
I am indebted to Jefrey H. Tigay (e-mail communication) for raising this problem.
It is obvious that the allusions to Gen 49:10 in Nathans prophecies exclude
bracketing 1 (shall not depart until) by paraphrasing poetic with a prosaic
equivalent, . Closer examination reveals that 2 Sam 7:16 disambiguates
further. In that verse, the words . . . are paraphrased twice: once by
. . . , shall be steadfast . . . forever, and a second time by
. . . , shall be established . . . forever. Tese paraphrases disambiguate
by eliminating the wide-scope negative particle that makes bracketing 2b (shall
not forever depart) possible; only bracketing 2a (shall not ever depart = shall
be forever steadfast/established) remains.
IV. Ahijah and Bracketing 2b
Echoes of Nathans dynastic oracle have been discerned throughout the
Bible,
48
but for our purposes the most important ones are found in Ahijahs
prophecy to Jeroboam (1 Kgs 11:3839):

: :
Mordechai Cogan notes that one text alludes to the other:
38. If you obey all that I command you . . . then I will be with you and I will
build a lasting dynasty for you as I did for David. Te phraseology of Nathans
prophecy to David (cf. 2 Sam 7:9a, 16a) is here strikingly adapted to Jeroboam,
legitimizing the founding of a rival kingdom in the North. . . . Tis verse is the
strongest case for an original, pre-Dtr prophecy, of Northern origin, legitimizing
Jeroboams rule. . . .
39. and, in view of this, I will humble Davids descendants, but not forever. Te
phrase in view of this . . . has no clear antecedent and, because vv. 38b39 are
lacking in LXX, the entire sentence is ofen seen as the interpretation of a late
reader. . . . But the ideas expressed here need not be altogether secondary. Just
as Nathans promise is refected in v. 38ab, so in the present verse, a refex of
that same promise may be seen.
49
Ahijahs prophecy alludes directly to Nathans prophecy and only indirectly to
Jacobs blessing; nevertheless, it can be viewed as resolving the syntactic ambiguity
48
See the many examples discussed in Michael Avioz, Nathans Oracle (2 Samuel 7) and
Its Interpreters (Bible in History 5; Bern: Peter Lang, 2005), and add the one in Richard C.
Steiner, Stockmen from Tekoa, Sycomores from Sheba: A Study of Amos Occupations (CBQMS 36;
Washington, DC: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 2003), 9394. Particularly relevant
here is the thesis of Sarna (Psalm 89: A Study in Inner Biblical Exegesis, 2946), who argues
that Psalm 89 is not another recension of Nathans oracle but rather an exegetical adaptation of it
to a new situation in a later period.
49
Mordechai Cogan, 1 Kings: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB
10; New York: Doubleday, 2000), 342. Cf. Avioz, Nathans Oracle, 1023.
of Gen 49:10. According to Ahijah, the more favorable interpretation, 2a (Te
scepter shall not depart from Judah ever), is henceforth of the table. Only inter-
pretation 2b remains: If the scepter departs from Judah, it shall not do so forever.
Ahijah says as much in v. 39: . . . , I will humble
Davids descendants . . . but not forever.
Ahijahs prophecy exhibits a signifcant anomaly in 1 Kgs 11:3032, 3536
indeed, a blatant internal contradiction:
30. Ahijah took hold of the new robe he was wearing and tore it into twelve pieces.
31. Take ten pieces, he said to Jeroboam. For thus said the Lord, the God of
Israel: I am about to tear the kingdom out of Solomons hands, and I will give
you ten tribes.
32. But one tribe shall remain his. . . .
. . . . . . . .
35. But I will take the kingdom out of the hands of his son and give it to youthe
ten tribes.
36. To his son I will give one tribe. . . .
50
It is obvious that something does not add up when a symbolic representation
of twelve tribes being divided between two recipients (vv. 3031a) is twice
interpreted as a promise of ten tribes to one recipient but only a single tribe to the
other. Te various explanations that have been ofered since the Middle Ages are
almost beside the point. Te anomaly, repeated to underline its deliberate nature,
was apparently designed to draw attention toand exaggeratethe enormity of
the impending reversal. Te descendants of David and Solomon would no longer
have dominion over any tribe worth mentioning other than their own; they would
be reduced to something like the status of glorifed tribal leaders; the scepter would
depart from Judah. Solomons sins had resolved the ambiguity of Jacobs blessing
to Judah.
V. Ezekiel and Bracketing 1
Another direct allusion to Gen 49:10 is found in Ezekiel 21. In vv. 3031, the
prophet turns to the chief of Israel and issues a series of commands, including
take of the crown. In v. 32, he says that this will not come about
, until the coming of him [= Nebuchadnezzar] to whom judgment [= pun-
ishment] belongs.
51
It is widely accepted that this phrase, occurring in the con-
text of Judahs king removing his crown, alludes to the second half of Gen 49:10,
.
52
Kenneth A. Mathews calls it the frst known
50
NJPS, with one change.
51
Cf. Moshe Greenberg, Ezekiel 2137: A New Translation with Introduction and
Commentary (AB 22A; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1997), 434.
52
See the literature cited in Steiner, Poetic Forms, 225 n. 95.
interpretation of our text.
53
For William L. Moran, the allusion serves to con-
trast . . . the hope of the past with the reality of the present and to create a mood
of bitter irony.
54
According to Moshe Greenberg, Moran . . . sees the blessing of
Genesis transformed here into a curse.
55
Daniel I. Block expands on this theme:
Te oracle concerning Nebuchadnezzar, the wielder of the divine sword against
Judah . . . , ends with a sinister reinterpretation of Genesis 49:10. . . . Ezekiel
has taken an ancient word, on which his audience had staked their hopes, and
transformed it into a frightening prediction of doom. To Ezekiel Genesis 49:10
is not about tribute and subordination of the world to Judah, but the judgment
of Judah by that worlds principal representative.
56
Ezekiels allusion makes sense only if Gen 49:10 means Te scepter shall
not depart from Judah (cf. take of the crown) . . . until the coming of him
[= Nebuchadnezzar] to whom tribute belongs and to whom the homage of peoples
belongs. Here indicates cessation rather than culmination; the scepter would
depart from Judah upon Nebuchadnezzars coming.
From a linguistic point of view, this interpretation of Gen 49:10 is very difer-
ent from its predecessors. Take, for example, Ahijahs interpretation: Te scepter
shall not depart from Judah . . . forever [ ]; rather [ ] tribute shall come to him
and the homage of peoples will be his. Assuming for the moment that Ahijahs
interpretation gave rise to Ezekiels, we may say that the shif was characterized by
fve changes, which afected:
1. the bracketing of : bracketing 2b > bracketing 1.
2. the meaning and syntactic function of : to him, an adverbial modifer
of > belongs to him, a predicative modifer of = .
57
3. the syntactic category of ) = =( : independent
clauses (tribute belongs to him, and the homage of peoples belongs to
him) > substantivized asyndetic relative clauses (him to whom tribute
belongs, and to whom the homage of peoples belongs).
58
53
Mathews, Genesis 11:2750:26, 895.
54
Moran, Gen 49,10 and Its Use in Ez 21,32, Bib 39 (1958): 424.
55
Greenberg, Ezekiel 2137, 43435.
56
Daniel I. Block, Bringing Back David: Ezekiels Messianic Hope, in Te Lords Anointed:
Interpretation of Old Testament Messianic Texts (ed. Philip E. Satterthwaite, Richard S. Hess, and
Gordon J. Wenham; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995), 16970.
57
Te shif makes agree with the immediately following (and to him belongs),
which functions as a predicative modifer of . For the word order of
(with subject second), cf. (Gen 26:20), (Deut 21:17), and
(Hag 2:8). For the word order of = (with subject frst), cf.
(Deut 29:28).
58
To clarify the interpretation, we may paraphrase the second half of the verse as
; cf. substantivized syndetic relative clauses such as
(Lev 14:35) and . . . (Lev 27:24). Cf. also the interpretation of
4. the referent of the sufxed pronouns of and : Judah > a king
(= Nebuchadnezzar).
5. the referent of the subject of : tribute > a king (= Nebuchadnezzar) to
whom tribute and homage belong.
Te extreme linguistic transformation of Gen 49:10 inherent in Ezekiels interpre-
tation is a faithful refection of the extreme political transformation of his time.
VI. Zechariah and Bracketing 1
It has ofen been suggested that a messianic interpretation of Jacobs blessing
to Judah is refected in Zech 9:9:
: , Lo, your king will come to yourighteous and victori-
ous, humble, riding on an ass, on a donkey foaled by a she-ass.
59
As recognized
already in antiquity, by Jews and Christians alike, the phrase in Zech
9:9 cannot be separated from . . . in Gen 49:11.
60
Intertwining of the
two verses has been noted in Matt 21:2-7:
the name as , him to whom peace belongs, in ,
48 line 13. For substantivized asyndetic relative clauses in biblical poetry, see Raphael Sappan,
(Jerusalem: Kiryat-Sefer, 1981),
164, 16970. Examples include , to (him who has) no strength // , to the weary
(Isa 40:29), , like (those who have) no eyes // , like the blind (Isa 59:10), and
, into the hands of (those before whom) I am not able to stand (Lam 1:14; cf.
Josh 7:13 , you will not able to stand before your enemies). All of these
examples exhibit more radical ellipsis than (him) to whom tribute belongs, and to whom the
homage of peoples belongs.
59
See, e.g., John M. Allegro, Further Messianic References in Qumran Literature, JBL 75
(1956): 175; Joseph Blenkinsopp, Te Oracle of Judah and the Messianic Entry, JBL 80 (1961):
57; Wilhelm Rudolph, Haggai Sacharja 18 Sacharja 914 Maleachi (KAT 13.4; Gtersloh:
Gerd Mohn, 1976), 17980; Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford:
Clarendon, 1985), 5012; Katrina J. A. Larkin, Te Eschatology of Second Zechariah (Kampen:
Kok Pharos, 1994), 7072; Iain Duguid, Messianic Temes in Zechariah 914, in Satterthwaite
et al., Lords Anointed, 26768; Deborah Krause, Te One Who Comes Unbinding the Blessing
of Judah: Mark 11.110 as a Midrash on Genesis 49.11, Zechariah 9.9, and Psalm 118.2526, in
Early Christian Interpretation of the Scriptures of Israel: Investigations and Proposals (ed. Craig A.
Evans and James A. Sanders; JSNTSup 148; Shefeld: Shefeld Academic Press, 1997), 144, 148
49; Adrian M. Leske, Context and Meaning of Zechariah 9:9, CBQ 62 (2000): 67273; and
Curt Niccum, Te Blessing of Judah in 4Q252, in Studies in the Hebrew Bible, Qumran, and the
Septuagint Presented to Eugene Ulrich (ed. Peter W. Flint, Emanuel Tov, and James C. VanderKam;
VTSup 101; Leiden: Brill, 2006), 252. Others are less certain about the allusion; see, e.g., Bringing
Out the Treasure: Inner Biblical Allusion in Zechariah 914 (ed. Mark J. Boda and Michael H.
Floyd; JSOTSup 370; London: Shefeld Academic Press, 2003), 38, 21718; and Anthony R.
Petterson, Behold Your King: Te Hope for the House of David in the Book of Zechariah (Library
of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 513; New York: T&T Clark, 2009), 140 (with literature).
60
For some of the ancient sources, see Krause, One Who Comes, 14950; and Maarten
In the account of the preparation for the triumphant entry, Zech 9:9 forms a
fulflment citation, referring to the eschatological appearance of a king, coming
upon an ass and the foal of an ass. In the latter, the Matthean quotation difers
from both the Septuagint and the Hebrew text of the prophet, but combines
vocabulary found in the LXX version of Gen 49:11. . . . Te disciples fnd an ass
tied [] and her foal with her, a scene also described in Gen 49:11, using
the same vocabulary.
61
A connection between understood by both Jews and Chris-
tians as a reference to the coming of a messianic kingand , has
also been posited.
62

Is there any connection between and
(Ezek 21:32)? Katrina Larkin implies that there is an indirect relationship:
Whilst there is probably no direct relationship between Ezekiel 21:32 and Zech
9:9 (although the fact that there is a comparison has been noted by Rudolph:
1976, 179), the very fact that Ezekiel seems to have subverted the promise of
Gen 49:1011 could provide the ground for supposing that Zechariah wished to
reinstate it in an eschatological context.
63
I would go a step further. In my view, Zechariahs messianic interpretation of Gen
49:1011 is based, in part, on Ezekiels reading of ,
viz., until the coming of him to whom tribute belongs and to whom the hom-
age of peoples belongs. It is only in that reading that the subject of in Gen
49:10, like the subject of in Zech 9:9, refers to a king. In the earlier readings,
it was tribute ( = )not a kingthat was expected to come to Judah. Te two
prophets difer, of course, in their identifcation of the king (Nebuchadnezzar vs.
the Messiah). Accordingly, they also difer in their interpretation of . For Zecha-
riah, unlike Ezekiel, it indicates culmination rather than cessation; the scepter will
not depart from Judah at the time specifed.
Zechariahs messianic interpretation may well have been inspired by the
appointment of Zerubbabel, a descendant of David, as governor of Judah.
Zerubbabel served in that capacity during the last two decades of the sixth century,
and it has recently been suggested that Zech 9:9 dates to that period.
64
A slightly
later date is also possible. Davidic leadership continued for one more decade at the
beginning of the ffh century, under the joint rule of the new governor, Elnathan,
J. J. Menken, Old Testament Quotations in the Fourth Gospel: Studies in Textual Form (CBET 15;
Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1996), 8889 including n. 35.
61
Lena Lybk, New and Old in Matthew 1113: Normativity in the Development of Tree
Teological Temes (FRLANT 198; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2002), 8081.
62
Rudolph, Haggai, 179; Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation, 502; Larkin, Eschatology, 70
(with literature); Krause, One Who Comes, 147.
63
Larkin, Eschatology, 72.
64
Paul L. Redditt, Zechariah 914 (International Exegetical Commentary on the Old
Testament; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2012), 5052.
and Zerubbabel's daughter, Shelomith (1 Chr 3:19).
65
According to one plausible
suggestion, the compilation of Zechariah 914 dates to that time.
66
Perhaps this limited renewal of Davidic leadership created the sense that the
scepter had not departed from Judah afer all. In any event, Zechariahs messianic
interpretation added a new dimension to Jacobs blessing of Judahone that had
previously been hidden. To be sure, other prophets had promised that Israels
sovereignty would eventually be restored by a worthy scion of David, but Zechariah
went a step further, giving the promise more weight by pushing its origin all the
way back to patriarchal times.
VII. Another Ambiguous Patriarchal Oracle
Te idea that syntactic ambiguity in patriarchal oracles can help them adapt
to changing circumstances is not a new one. It is found in traditional Jewish exege-
sis of (Gen 25:23), a clause whose ambiguity is preserved in the
translation and the elder shall the younger serve.
67
As noted by several medieval
exegetes,
68
either or can be the subject of the verb, with the other one serv-
ing as its object. For as the subject, one exegete compares , a son
65
Carol L. Meyers and Eric M. Meyers, Te Future Fortunes of the House of David: Te
Evidence of Second Zechariah, in Fortunate the Eyes Tat See: Essays in Honor of David Noel
Freedman in Celebration of His Seventieth Birthday (ed. Astrid B. Beck et al.; Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1995), 208.
66
Ibid., 216.
67
It is striking that, with rare exceptions, modern commentators make no mention of this
ambiguity. Tus, J. P. Fokkelman (Narrative Art in Genesis: Specimens of Stylistic and Structural
Analysis [SSN 17; Assen/Amsterdam: Van Gorcum, 1975], 89) introduces the verse with the
words: Now, too, God gives an unambiguous answer. I have found only two exceptions: Eduard
Knig, Stilistik, Rhetorik, Poetik in Bezug auf die biblische Litteratur komparativisch (Leipzig:
Dieterich, 1900), 122; and Richard Elliott Friedman, Commentary on the Torah with a New
English Translation (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 2001), 88, citing David Noel Freedman.
Both of these works compare the ambiguity of the Delphic oracle. Te comparison is reasonable
for the third clause of Rebekahs oracle ( , a people shall be mightier than a
people), which exhibits referential ambiguity. Te ambiguous replies attributed to the Delphic
oracle are virtually all of that type (e.g., if you make war on the Persians, you will destroy a
great empire); see Joseph Fontenrose, Te Delphic Oracle: Its Responses and Operations, with
a Catalogue of Responses (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978), 5869, 302. Te one
syntactically ambiguous reply attributed to the Delphic oracle is in Latin and believed to be
Enniuss invention (ibid., 343).
68
See the commentary of David Qimhii on this verse in . See also
Joseph Ibn Kaspi, (ed. Isaac Last; Cracow: J. Fischer, 1906), 67; and Aaron b. Joseph
ha-Kohen, (ed. J. M. Orlian; Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook, 2009), p. , where the
phrase should read , as in , vol. 3, p. , col.
2 top.
should honor a father (Mal 1:6); for as the subject, another exegete compares
, water wears away stone (Job 14:19).
Such ambiguities (called case ambiguities by modern linguists) are charac-
teristic of biblical poetry, where (one of the so-called prose particles) is used
sparingly, and the rules of word order are relaxed, e.g., , for
Jacob has the Lord chosen for himself (Ps 135:4), and , a
murderous, deceitful man does the Lord abhor (Ps 5:7).
69
In our case, the absence
of the accusative marker is correlated with the absence of another prose particle,
viz., the defnite article: neither nor is marked as defnite.
Genesis Rabbah (63) is the earliest rabbinic source to note the two inter pre -
tations:
If he [= Jacob, the younger] merits, he [= Esau, the elder] will serve, but if not,
he [= Esau, the elder] will be served.
70
According to the midrash, the contradictory interpretations of the oracle will be
fulflled at diferent times, depending on the merits of Jacobs descendants. An
underlying assumption of the midrash is made explicit by Elijah b. Solomon, the
Gaon of Vilna: the ambiguity of the oracle leaves room for freedom of choice (
).
71
In other words, the tension between predictive prophecy and free will
can be resolved by means of ambiguity.
Te two ambiguous patriarchal oracles complement each other; their ambigu-
ity carries the same message. Although Jacob and Judah were destined to rule over
their brothers in the long term (cf. Gen 27:29, 37 and 49:8), their dominance at
any given point in time was not preordained. It could be suspended temporarily if
their descendants were not worthy of their destiny.
VIII. Conclusions
Among the many ambiguities that have helped to make Gen 49:10 one of
the most difcult cruxes in the Hebrew Bible, the lexical and syntactic ambigui-
ties of the word are second to none. Ancient and medieval interpreters of the
verse took as equivalent to English (1) ever (in the phrase not ever), (2) for-
ever (in the phrase not forever), (3) until (indicating a point of cessation) and/
or (4) until (not to mention afer) (indicating a point of culmination). Tese four
69
Te former example is discussed in (ed. David Hofmann;
Berlin: H. Itzkowski, 1909), 7374. Te latter example is noted by Ysuf Ibn Nhi (Geofrey
Khan, Te Early Karaite Tradition of Hebrew Grammatical Tought Including a Critical Edition,
Translation and Analysis of the Diqduq of Ab Yaqb Ysuf Ibn Nhi on the Hagiographa [Studies
in Semitic Languages and Linguistics 32; Leiden: Brill, 2000], 100, 21011). Both examples are
ambiguous in isolation but disambiguated by the context.
70
(ed. J. Teodor and C. Albeck; Berlin: M. Poppelauer, 1927), 686.
71
Elijah b. Solomon of Vilna, (Tel Aviv: Sinai, 1969), 12.
interpretations of correspond to three diferent ways of bracketing the word
with the neighboring words in the verse.
Tese ambiguities did not go unnoticed in the biblical period. During the
course of that period, they gave rise to a number of distinct interpretations of the
oracle, interpretations that are refected in the prophecies of Nathan, Ahijah the
Shilonite, Ezekiel, and Zechariah. Each interpretation corresponded to a diferent
historical development: the rise of the Davidic dynasty in the time of Nathan; the
decline of the Davidic dynasty in the time of Ahijah; the fall of the Davidic dynasty
in the time of Ezekiel; and the limited renewal of Davidic leadership in the time of
Zechariah. Tus, they allowed the oracle to adapt to the changing fortunes of the
House of David, making it possible for each generation to adopt an interpretation
that was suited to its own time.
Appendix: as a Shared Word in Targum Onqelos, 4Q252
(4QCommGen A), and the Testament of Judah
Tere are ancient sources that seem to interpret as if it occurred twice
once at the end of the frst half of the verse and again at the beginning of the sec-
ond half of the verse. I shall call a word that belongs to two separate constituents,
one before it and the other afer it, a shared word.
72
Although such words need
72
I am coining this term based on the term shared consonant, for which see Wilfred G. E.
Watson, Shared Consonants in Northwest Semitic, Bib 50 (1969): 52533; and idem, More on
Shared Consonants, Bib 52 (1971): 4450. Such words, which need not be ambiguous, are most
easily recognized in short symmetrical constructions of the form ABA , such as
(Gen 27:5), (Gen 30:31), (Deut 32:14),
(Isa 43:17), (Isa 46:7), (Ps 93:1),
(1 Chr 10:13), etc. Hebrew terms for this usage are found in a few medieval commentaries from
northern France, commentaries that take at the beginning of Gen 36:12 as belonging to
the end of 36:11 as well. In the commentary of Joseph Bekhor Shor (
[ed. Yehoshafat Nevo; Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook, 1994], pp. -), the term is
, responding this way and that way. It is apparently based on the talmudic term
, reckoned this way and that way, referring to a day, year, and so on, sandwiched
between two consecutive periods of time and considered as belonging to both; that term, too,
appears in Bekhor Shors commentary (at Lev 25:12; p. last line). Aaron b. Joseph ha-Kohen
( , p. ) uses a similar term: , relating [lit., standing] this way and
that way. Another term that may be relevant here is , verses that have
no resolution, in rabbinic literature, e.g., (ed. H. S. Horovitz and I. A.
Rabin; Frankfurt am Main: J. Kaufmann, 1931), 179 lines 915;
(ed. Menahem I. Kahana; Jerusalem: Magnes, 2005), 83 top and bottom;
(ed. J. Teodor and C. Albeck; Jerusalem: Wahrmann, 1965), 95758; b. Yoma 52a; etc. For the
view that this term refers to verses containing a word that belongs to the preceding constituent
and (not: or) the following constituent, see Yochanan Breuer, , in
Israel: Linguistic Studies in the Memory of Israel Yeivin (ed. Rafael I. [Singer] Zer and Yosef Ofer;
Jerusalem: Hebrew University, 2011), 5363.
not be ambiguous, this one is, and it has a diferent meaning in each half-verse.
73

Tis is, of course, a literary device, but it has a linguistic underpinning. In our
case, it implies that two consecutive occurrences of , with diferent meanings,
are found in the underlying structure of our verse and that they are reduced to one
in its surface structure.
Te interpretation of as a shared word is clearly refected in Targum
Onqelos:
,
74
.
Here is rendered twiceonce as , until eternity, and a second time as
, until (not to mention afer). In the words of S. Pinsker, Onqelos vacillates in
his translation between two opinions ( ).
75

Te connection between Onqeloss and MT was discussed time
and again by Jewish scholars (and at least one Christian scholar) from the Middle
Ages to the early twentieth century.
76
It is, therefore, surprising to fnd that the
connection is barely mentioned in contemporary scholarship. James L. Kugel,
for example, writes: Te word forever here does not correspond to any word
in the Hebrew original of this verse.
77
Even scholars who searched for examples
73
Tis feature makes our example similar, albeit not identical, to the so-called pivot in
Janus parallelism. For the term pivot, see Gene M. Schramm, Poetic Patterning in Biblical
Hebrew in Michigan Oriental Studies in Honor of George G. Cameron (ed. L. L. Orlin et al.; Ann
Arbor: Department of Near Eastern Studies, University of Michigan, 1976), 17879; and Scott B.
Noegel (Janus Parallelism in the Book of Job (JSOTSup 223; Shefeld: Shefeld Academic Press,
1996), 13. Schramm referred to the ambiguous word in Song 2:12 as the pivot of a false
syllogism, and entitled his discussion Parallelism of Ambiguity. Te term Janus parallelism
appeared two years later in a similar but less detailed discussion of : Cyrus H. Gordon,
New Directions, in Studies Presented to Naphtali Lewis, special issue, BASP 15 (1978): 5960.
Another term used by Noegel and others is polysemous parallelism. Tis would be an excellent
choice were it not for the fact that the parade example, , exhibits homonymy rather than
polysemy; thus, a term such as homonymous parallelism might be more accurate. Noegel (p.
29) notes that the frst scholar to recognize this literary device was David Yellin.
74
Te Bible in Aramaic (ed. Alexander Sperber; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1962), 85. Te Cambridge
Genizah fragments that have this verse (T-S B1.25, T-S B11.48, T-S 288.183) exhibit few signifcant
variants. T-S B11.48 reads with in the margin; T-S 288.183 is the opposite. T-S
B11.48 reads for . For an example of taken by Onqelos as a shared word with not only
a diferent meaning in each half-verse but also a diferent vocalization (Exod 22:12), see Jordan S.
Penkower, 6 , , Studies in Bible and
Exegesis, vol. 5, Uriel Simon Jubilee Volume (Ramat Gan: Bar-Ilan University Press 2000), 33839.
75
S. Pinsker, (Vienna: Adalbert
della Torre, 1860), 180 note.
76
See immediately above and n. 87 below.
77
James L. Kugel, Traditions of the Bible: A Guide to the Bible as It Was at the Start of the
Common Era (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998), 470.
of double translation of this type or in this place have failed to note it. Michael
Carasiks list of shared words translated twice in the targums includes an example
from Genesis 49, but it is (v. 7) rather than .
78
Roger Syrns list of double
translations in the targums to Genesis 49 includes an example from v. 10, but it is
rather than .
79

Te disconnect between modern targum scholarship and traditional targum
scholarship is particularly striking in the following comment by Moses Aberbach
and Bernard Grossfeld:
TO not in MT . . . Textually, there may be some connection between
MT (( )( and TO (( , and the combination may have
been suggested in part by the Heb. ; cf. B. Z. J. Berkowitz, ,
Wilna, 1874, p. 54.
80

It is difcult to reconcile the frst two clauses of this comment with the reference
at its end, because Berkowitzs book cites Bahiyes view that (a) Onqeloss
renders , and (b) is not connected to . One gets the impression that
Aberbach and Grossfeld did not understand Berkowitzs note; if they were looking
for a connection between MT (( )( and TO (( , they missed the
point entirely.
As we have seen, Rashba and Bahiye cite a diferent version of Onqeloss ren-
dering in support of bracketings 2b (shall not forever depart) and 2a (shall not
ever depart) respectivelywithout any double rendering of . Rashba omits the
second in citing Onqelos ( , ), implicitly rejecting it. Bahiye
makes the rejection explicit: And because of this, Onqelos translated ,
and he translated as ; and he who translates
errs.
81

Te reading , is not well attested in manuscripts and
printed editions of Onqelos. In Sperbers critical edition, it is attributed to a single
source, a Bible printed in Spain (Ixar, 1490).
82
Adolf Posnanski lists three witnesses
to that reading, as against forty witnesses to the reading , .
83

78
Michael Carasik, Syntactic Double Translation in the Targumim, in Aramaic in Post-
biblical Judaism and Early Christianity: Papers from the 2004 National Endowment for the
Humanities Summer Seminar at Duke University (ed. Eric M. Meyers and Paul V. M. Flesher;
Duke Judaic Series 3; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2010), 22224.
79
Roger Syrn, Te Blessings in the Targums: A Study on the Targumic Interpretations of
Genesis 49 and Deuteronomy 33 (Acta Academiae Aboensis, Ser. A, Humaniora 64.1; bo: bo
Akademi, 1986), 1719.
80
Aberbach and Grossfeld, Targum Onqelos on Genesis 49, 1314 n. 23; eidem, Targum
Onkelos to Genesis, 28586 n. 21. Similarly, is called an insertion by Bernard Grossfeld
in McNamara et al., Aramaic Bible: Te Targums, 6:163 n. 24.
81
See at nn. 24 and 25 above.
82
Sperber, Bible in Aramaic, 85.
83
Posnanski, Schiloh: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Messiaslehre (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1904),
2728. Posnanskis Editio Sora is now known to be from Ixar, Spain.
Te latter is also the reading of the three Cambridge Genizah fragments of Onqelos
that have this verse,
84
including one written in Spanish semicursive script.
85
Tis
suggests that , was the reading in Spain before Rashba and
Bahiye. Tus, the reading , in the Ixar Bible may simply refect
the infuence of these two leading scholars.
A diferent reading in Onqelos was found in a manuscript owned by Abraham
Firkowitsch: , , until eternity, for the Messiah will come.
86

Tis unique reading, accompanied by a variant reading in the MT (etnahi under
), is cited by A. Berliner, S. R. Driver, Posnanski, and others.
87
However, it has
long been known that Firkowitsch was a forger who tampered with the manu-
scripts and tombstones that he collected, and it remains a difcult if not impossi-
ble task to determine the original text from the emendations and interpolations.
88

In 1860, S. Pinsker reported that Firkowitsch had shown him a very old manu-
script with etnahi under , and he conjectured that that is what Onqelos had in
mind when he wrote , even though Onqelos vacillates in his translation
between two opinions.
89
In 1871, afer Pinskers death, Firkowitsch revealed that
he owned a wondrous manuscript (no. 128 in his catalogue) with the reading
instead of the standard .
90
Tis reading, he implied, supported the
interpretation of an early French Rabbanite
91
and undermined the Christian claim
that Judah, once it lost dominion, would never regain it.
92
He added that had Pin-
sker seen this precious manuscript, he would not have attributed any vacillation
to him [Onqelos] at all, because he would have realized that the hands of others
had tampered with it [Targum Onqelos].
93
It is noteworthy that, while Firkow-
itsch supplied the catalogue number of the wondrous manuscript and the num-
bers of seven other manuscripts with etnahi under ,
94
he was vague about the
84
See n. 74 above.
85
T-S B11.48. For a description of the manuscript, see Michael L. Klein, Targumic Manu-
scripts in the Cambridge Genizah Collections (Genizah Series 8; Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press), 21.
86
Abraham Firkowitsch [on title page: Firkowitz], (Vienna: J. Holawarth, 1871),
14.
87
Targum Onkelos (ed. A. Berliner; Berlin: Gorzelanczyk, 1884), 2:18; Posnanski, Schiloh,
28; S. R. Driver, Genesis XLIX. 10: An Exegetical Study, Journal of Philology 14 (1885): 6: Tere
are traces of another reading which omits before shall not depart for ever, when
Messiah, &c. . . . So R. Bechai: and one of the Firkowitsch MSS. reads also for ,
with athnach in the text at .
88
EncJud 6:1306, s.v. Firkovich, Abraham.
89
Pinsker, , 180 note.
90
Firkowitsch, , 14.
91
Te interpretation he cites is similar to that found in our editions of Daat Zeqenim; see
at n. 22 above.
92
Firkowitsch, , 13, 14.
93
Ibid., 14.
94
Firkowitsch was referring to manuscripts of what is now known as his frst collection.
Te collection, described in the printed German catalogue of Harkavy-Strack (1875), is avail-
manuscript that he had shown Pinsker ffeen years earlier, identifying it only as
a very old manuscript.
95
One cannot rule out the possibility that the manuscript
shown to Pinsker by Firkowitsch was no. 128, and that Pinskers comment about
Onqeloss vacillation convinced Firkowitsch to make the relatively simple change
from to .
96

Two ancient paraphrases of our verse may also refect the interpretation of
as a shared word. One is found in 4Q252 (4QCommGen A), col. 5, lines 14:
] [ ][
][

97

98
. . . .
A ruler shall not depart from the tribe of Judah. While Israel has sovereignty,
David shall not cease to have someone sitting on the throne (because the
is the covenant of kingship and the clans of Israel are the ) until the
coming of the Messiah of Righteousness, the Branch of David, for to him and his
seed has been given the covenant of kingship over his people until eternity [lit.,
until the generations of eternity].
Tis is a free paraphrase in which the verse has been rearranged and inter-
woven with other biblical verses (esp. Jer 33:15, 17); even so, it is difcult to avoid
the conclusion that and correspond to Onqeloss
able on microflm in the Institute for Microflmed Hebrew Manuscripts of the National Library
of Israel. Te wondrous manuscript is now known as ms St. Petersburg, RNL Evr. I Bibl 128. It
consists of four folios from a medieval Ashkenazi masoretic codex, with Targum Onqelos follow-
ing every Hebrew verse. Te seven other manuscripts with etnahi under are mss St. Petersburg,
RNL Evr. I Bibl 48, 49, 54, 68, 83, 87, and 110. I owe all of this information to Jordan S. Penkower
(e-mail communications).
95
Firkowitsch, , 14.
96
Afer reading this conjecture, Jordan S. Penkower examined the microflm of this manu-
script and sent me digital images of the passage, which is stained and difcult to read. Neverthe-
less, he was able to ascertain that both the aleph of and the etnahi under show signs of
being secondary; they are noticeably diferent from other examples of those signs on the same
page. He also examined microflms of six of the other seven manuscripts cited in n. 94 above (mss
48, 49, 54, 68, 83, and 87) and reported that the alternative accentuation that Firkovitch men-
tions (etnahita under , instead of ; and with ti iphia, instead of etnahita) is secondary,
probably corrections by Firkovitch himself (e-mail communication). I am greatly indebted to
him for this confrmation of my conjecture.
97
Note the initial dalet, agreeing with the reading of the Samaritan Pentateuch:
. Te word is followed by a vacat.
98
Qumran Cave 4.XVII: Parabiblical Texts, Part 3 (ed. G. J. Brooke et al., in consultation with
James C. VanderKam; DJD 22; Oxford: Clarendon, 1996), 2056; Te Dead Sea Scrolls: Hebrew,
Aramaic, and Greek Texts with English Translations, vol. 6B, Pesharim, Other Commentaries, and
Related Documents (ed. James H. Charlesworth et al.; Princeton Teological Seminary Dead Sea
Scrolls Project; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1994), 21617; La bibliothque de Qumrn (ed. Katell
Berthelot et al.; 9 vols.; Paris: Cerf, 2008), 1:30811.
and , respectively. Te correspondence was recognized
already in the editio princeps.
99
What has not been recognized is the possibility
that this may be based on a double interpretation of . Te possibility is greatly
enhanced by the double interpretation of in ][,
pointed out by several scholars.
100
Te other paraphrase of our verse that may be relevant here is put into the
mouth of Judah in the Testament of Judah (22:13):
. . . and among men of other nations my kingship will be brought to an end,
until the coming of [ = ] the salvation of Israel. . . . For the
Lord swore to me with an oath that my kingship will not fail from my seed [
; cf. LXX
] all the days, until eternity [ = ].
101
Here again, the correspondence with Onqelos has been recognized,
102
but not the
possibility that it refects the interpretation of as a shared word.
Tese sources appear to refect a combination of bracketings 2a and 1 (shall
not ever depart, until [not to mention afer]). Te comment in 4Q252 seems to
point to bracketing 2a rather than 2b (shall not forever depart) when it suggests
that Jacobs blessing to Judah has an unstated condition: the scepter shall not ever
depart from the tribe of Judah as long as Israel has sovereignty. Tat condition was
presumably needed to reconcile bracketing 2a of the blessing with many warnings
in the Bible (e.g., Deut 28:36), not to mention historical events; it was not needed
for bracketing 2b. Something similar may be true of Onqeloss rendering, which
seems to downgrade the referent of to anyone exercising authority (
)
103
and the referent of to a scribe. Such a rendering makes good sense
in the context of bracketing 2a but not in the context of bracketing 2b.
104

99
Allegro, Further Messianic References, 175 nn. 89.
100
Martin G. Abegg, Te Messiah at Qumran: Are We Still Seeing Double? DSD 2 (1995):
134; Charlesworth, Pesharim, 217 n. 59.
101
M. de Jonge, Te Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: A Critical Edition of the Greek Text
(PVTG 1.2; Leiden: Brill, 1978), 75; H. W. Hollander and M. de Jonge, Te Testaments of the
Twelve Patriarchs: A Commentary (SVTP 8; Leiden: Brill, 1985), 221 (with minor changes). Cf.
Anders Hultgrd, Leschatologie des Testaments des Douze Patriarches (2 vols.; Acta Universitatis
Upsaliensis, Historia religionum 67; Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1977, 1981), 1:170.
102
Kugel, Traditions, 470.
103
Perhaps anyone with the legal authority to mete out corporal punishment; cf. n. 34 above.
Pace Kugel (Traditions, 470), it is unlikely that here refers specifcally to kingship. Targum
Onqelos seems to use here in contrast to later in the verse (authority vs. kingship;
cf. Tg. Onq. Gen 37:8), just as it uses in contrast to in the previous verse (49:9) (an
authority vs. a king; cf. Tg. Onq. Deut 33:20). Symmachus renders in our verse with
(power, authority), the Greek noun that is regularly used by the LXX and Teodotion to render
Aramaic in Daniel.
104
Contrast Kugel, Traditions, 470: Te real meaning must . . . have been that it [= kingship]
would not depart forever, that sometime it would be restored. But see n. 103 above.
Te in Ezekiel 13 Reconsidered
jonathan stkl
j.stokl@ucl.ac.uk
University College London, London WC1H 0AG, United Kingdom
In this paper I suggest a new interpretation for the background of Ezek 13:1723.
Until recently, most interpreters have viewed the women in this pericope as
witches and therefore evil; more recently a number of interpreters have stressed
that it is only Ezekiel who regards these women as bad and that they should
really be understood as female prophets who competed with Ezekiel. In con-
trast, I point out that the history of growth of the pericope has to be taken into
account. As the text stands, the women are accused of being false prophets, like
their male counterparts in vv. 116. But in an earlier layer of the text we fnd the
women connected with some form of communication with the dead; this, in
turn, fts with the munabbitu found in the Emar texts. Because of the biblical
prophets, they had been interpreted as female prophets as well, but the use of
the verb nubb in the context of caring/communicating with the dead suggests
that they are religious specialists either communicating with or caring for the
dead. Tis and the openness with which they are addressed in the Emar texts
suggest that they were highly skilled specialists held in considerable regard. It is
likely that the Hebrew originally had a similar function and therefore
high social status. Te textual history of the book of Ezekiel turns them into
female prophets at odds with Ezekiel; reception history turned these women
into witches. In their own lifetimes they were probably well-respected religious
specialists.
Ezekiel 13:1723 is part of Ezekiels polemics against false prophets. Unlike
most other words against false prophets in the Hebrew Bible, such as Ezek 13:116,
these verses are addressed not to male prophets but to women who are described
as , the hitpael participle in the feminine plural of the root (to proph-
esy). In the past, most interpreters have taken this term to mean sorceresses
JBL 132, no. 1 (2013): 6176
61
Tis paper was frst read at the 2009 meeting of the OTSEM network at Gttingen. I would
like to thank the members of that workshop for their questions and contributions. I would like
to thank Professors Reinhard G. Kratz, Pernille Carstens, Hugh G. M. Williamson, and Esther J.
Hamori as well as the anonymous JBL reviewers for their comments on drafs of this paper.
or female soothsayers, following the Bibles negative value judgment against
such activities in contrast to positively received proper prophecy.
1
In the recent
debate, however, the majority of scholars understand the daughters of your people
who as female prophets.
2
Tis more recent view is ofen related to an open
attack on the paradigms and value judgments of earlier interpreters who shared
the Hebrew Bibles concept that prophecy is good while magic and divination
are bad. It has become clear that this view is apologetic and untenable in the schol-
arly community.
3
Te diference between good (or white) magic and bad (or
black) magic and the clear-cut division between (negative) magic and (positive)
religion are emic judgments; they are valid within the culture that makes them, but
they are not based on objectively observable data.
In this article I will present and review the two main interpretations of the
pericope in Ezek 13:1723: (1) the women are not really good prophets but evil
witches; and (2) the women are (good) prophets and magicians. Adducing evi-
dence from Emar, I will then suggest a third reading, which combines elements of
the frst two: the daughters of your people are involved in necromancy of some
sort, but this should not be taken to mean that they are of lower status than either
the male prophets of Ezek 13:116 or Ezekiel himself. Tis solution is closer to the
more traditional reading, but it does not carry the moralistic baggage imposed
on the text by earlier exegetes. A corollary of this argument is that 13:116 and
13:1723 were probably not composed as a coherent whole in the frst instance,
but carefully put together at a later point.
1
See, e.g., William Hugh Brownlee, Exorcising the Souls from Ezekiel 13:1723, JBL 69
(1950): 36773; Walther Eichrodt, Der Prophet Hesekiel (ATD 22; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1959); Walther Zimmerli, Ezechiel (2nd ed.; 2 vols.; BKAT 13.12; Neukirchen-Vluyn:
Neukirchener Verlag, 1969), Eng. trans.: Ezekiel: A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel
(2 vols.; Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979); Henry W. F. Saggs, External Souls in the
Old Testament, JSS 19 (1974): 112; Karl-Friedrich Pohlmann, Das Buch des Propheten Hesekiel
(Ezechiel): Kapitel 119 (ATD 22.1; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1996); and Daniel I.
Block, Te Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 124 (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997).
2
See, e.g., Renate Jost, Die Tchter deines Volkes prophezeien, in Fr Gerechtigkeit
streiten: Teologie im Alltag einer bedrohten Welt. Fr Luise Schottrof zum 60. Geburtstag (ed.
Dorothee Slle; Gtersloh: Kaiser, 1994), 5965; Nancy R. Bowen, Te Daughters of Your
People: Female Prophets in Ezekiel 13:1723, JBL 118 (1999): 41733; Irmtraud Fischer,
Gottesknderinnen: Zu einer geschlechterfairen Deutung des Phnomens der Prophetie und der
Prophetinnen in der Hebrischen Bibel (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2002), 22134; Paul Joyce,
Ezekiel: A Commentary (Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 482; New York/London:
T&T Clark, 2007), 12022; and Wilda Gafney, Daughters of Miriam: Women Prophets in Ancient
Israel (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2008), 1079. Somewhat surprisingly, Klara Butting (Prophetinnen
gefragt: Die Bedeutung der Prophetinnen im Kanon aus Tora und Prophetie [Erev-Rav-Hefe,
Biblisch-feministische Texte 3; Knesebeck: Erev-Rav, 2001], 18283) comments only in passing
on this pericope.
3
E.g., John G. Gager, Curse Tablets and Binding Spells from the Ancient World (New York/
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992).
Stkl: Te in Ezekiel 13 63
I. The Text
Before approaching the content of the text it is necessary to make some pre-
liminary comments on the structure and vocabulary of the pericope. I will frst
defne the pericope and then comment on some particularities of the text. Tere
is a plethora of obscure terms in this text, and in spite of numerous attempts to
improve our understanding of these terms, uncertainties still abound.
4
Never-
theless, there are few signifcant variants in the versions, apart from where the
Hebrew text is either corrupt or difcult to understand.
Delimitation of the Pericope
As early as 1840, Heinrich Ewald remarked that Ezek 12:2114:11 formed a
larger group of literary oracles about true and false prophecy.
5
It is well known that
this group is divided into fve subsections, in which the frst two (12:2125 and
12:2628) and the third and fourth (13:116 and 13:1723) form pairs.
6
Addition-
ally, there are two themes that hold this larger text together, that of false visions
in 12:2113:16 (and vv. 2223) and that of consulting the deity in 13:1714:11. It
is difcult to say whether this arrangement is original or was established by later
redactors. Because it is so competently arranged, I tend toward the latter option.
7

Te pericope itself is of a composite nature. Tis is supported by the changes
in grammatical gender in the middle of v. 19 and again in v. 20 from feminine
plural to masculine plural without any apparent reason for such a change. Tis is
an issue known from elsewhere in the book of Ezekiel (e.g., ch. 1) and, in my view,
is the result of the redactional processes that shaped the entire prophetic book.
8

4
See, e.g., Saggs, External Souls, 112; Graham I. Davies, An Archaeological Commentary
on Ezekiel 13, in Scripture and Other Artifacts: Essays on the Bible and Archaeology in Honor
of Philip J. King (ed. Michael D. Coogan, J. Cheryl Exum, and Lawrence E. Stager; Louisville:
Westminster John Knox, 1994), 10825; and Marjo C. A. Korpel, Avian Spirits in Ugarit and
in Ezekiel 13, in Ugarit, Religion and Culture: Proceedings of the International Colloquium on
Ugarit, Religion and Culture, Edinburgh, July 1994. Essays Presented in Honour of Professor John
C. L. Gibson (ed. N. Wyatt, W. G. E. Watson, and J. B. Lloyd; Ugaritisch-biblische Literatur 12;
Mnster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996), 99113.
5
Ewald, Die Propheten des alten Bundes (2 vols.; Stuttgart: Adolph Krabbe, 184041),
2:25457. See also Leslie C. Allen, Ezekiel 119 (WBC 28; Dallas: Word, 1994), 193; and Block,
Ezekiel 124, 38486.
6
Tis pentapartite structure is reminiscent of several such structures in Amos and
elsewhere.
7
I share Daviess interpretation that vv. 1723 were modeled to correspond to vv. 116, and
that vv. 2223 are written for that purpose (Davies, Archaeological Commentary, 110).
8
Contra Vladimir Orel (Textological Notes, ZAW 109 [1997]: 40813), who thinks that
the women put the bands on the arms of men only. While it is true that in modern Judaism
In my view, vv. 1719a and 20*21 are the original oracle of doom. Tis is
supported by the fact that vv. 20*21 consist mainly of vocabulary from 1719a.
Verses 2223 are a refection on vv. 1721*, and 19b is inserted in order to
improve the connection between vv. 2223 and the preceding verses. Indeed,
similar developments can be identifed also in vv. 116. Tese verses consist of
at least two unrelated oracles, each with an announcement of doom. Te second
oracle (vv. 1016) is itself preserved in two versions (vv. 1012 and 1316). Both
of these versions show lexical links between initial criticism and announcement
of doom, which are similar to the links in vv. 1721. Because the prophets in
vv. 1016 are condemned for what coulddepending on perspectiveeither be
called sign acts or sympathetic magic, and because of the similarity of the
links in vocabulary, it seems plausible that vv. 1016 and vv. 1721 represent
the frst combination of the oracles out of which ch. 13 grew. It follows that the
original oracles are aimed at technical diviners or magicians. If this is the case, it
is possible that the root initially referred not only to prophecy but to divina-
tion in general, possibly including some forms of magic. If so, the reduction of
the meaning of the root to refer only to prophecy is a later development, traces
of which may be detectable in vv. 69 and 2223. Tis profle is more akin to
verbal prophecy, and there can be no doubt that the scribes who wrote vv. 89
and 2223 regarded both the and the as diviners who were not
among the true prophets of Yhwh.
Text-Critical and Lexical Remarks
From a text-critical point of view, our pericope does not present any major
difculties; most of the evidence for diferent textual traditions exhausts itself in
the adding or leaving out of before the tetragrammaton (vv. 18 and 20). More
interesting is the relative density of possible Akkadian loanwords. Te most con-
vincing case is (v. 20; plural of , band), which in all likelihood is a loan
of Akkadian kastu (bondage; derived from the verb kas, to bind).
9
Te other candidate is (v. 18; plural of ). It should probably
be connected to Arabic safhi (robe of coarse material), etymologically related to
Akkadian saphu (to loosen, scatter).
10
Te strong connection of the pericope to
Tefllin are worn only by men, there is no reason to assume that the bands here are truly the direct
predecessors of Tefllin; and even if they were, it is by no means sure that they would have been
worn (only) by men at this stage.
9
Tis solution is considerably easier than Korpels suggestion to link with Akkadian
katmu (to cover), which is etymologically entirely unrelated to the root (Korpel, Avian
Spirits, 103). Te LXX translates as (cushion) here, following the normal
postbiblical meaning of (e.g., Saggs, External Souls, 2).
10
I do not follow Saggss suggestion, adopted by Korpel, that ultimately relies on Carl
Brockel mann to relate to Akkadian musahhiptu (net) with a metathesis of /h/ and
Mesopotamia, expressed in words that appear only in this pericope and nowhere
else in the entire Hebrew Bible, supports Nancy Bowens recent reappraisal of
the structural link between the pericope and the incantation list Maql.
11
In her
reading of the pericope, Ezekiel is using a structure reminiscent of anti-witchcraf
incantations, which means that in efect he is using magic while arguing against
the women whom he accuses of using magic.
Te last expression on which I want to comment is the mysterious
at the end of v. 20. Contrary to Walther Zimmerli, I do not think that the
infnitive earlier in the verse is a later addition on the basis of the similar
expression at the end of the verse.
12
Instead, I suggest that the last three words are
the result of a simple mistake (aberratio oculi) of a scribe coming upon
(hunting).
13
One fnal remark is necessary. Te following is based on the assumption, for
which I argued above, that vv. 2223 and the additions with masculine sufxes
in vv. 19 and 20 were added later to vv. 1721*. In its fnal form, ch. 13 accuses
both the male prophets of vv. 116 and the female prophets of vv. 1723 of false
prophecy. In the following discussion I will focus on vv. 1721 and will for the
time being ignore vv. 2223; only in the conclusion will I refer to the text in its
entirety, as this article is initially interested in the frst women accused by the text,
and only secondarily in the women whom the book of Ezekiel accuses as it now
stands. It is important to be clear at the outset: Ezekiel 13 does not portray the
women positively nor does the reconstructed oracle underlying the text. Tis does
not, however, mean that we have to follow the assessment of the biblical authors.
/p/ (Saggs, External Souls, 67; Korpel, Avian Spirits, 103; Brockelmann, Kurzgefasste ver-
gleichende Grammatik der semitischen Sprachen: Elemente der Laut- und Formenlehre [PLO 21;
Berlin: Reuther & Reichard, 1908], 60 e ). Labials and laryngeals are at times metathesized, and
Saggss suggestion would make good sense of the passage. Te vocalization, however, seems to
make such a derivation less likely. Further, as Davies points out (Archaeological Commentary,
121), binding and loosening form a logical pair that is found also in magical texts. Some
interpreters return to a suggestion to understand the as an early form of Tefllin/
Phylakteria, e.g., Orel, Notes, 41113; and Jost, Tchter, 60. As far as I can see, the suggestion
goes back to Godfrey Rolles Driver, Linguistic and Textual Problems: Ezekiel, Bib 19 (1938):
6069, 17587.
11
Bowen, Daughters, 42123. See already G. A. Cooke, A Critical and Exegetical Com-
mentary on the Book of Ezekiel (ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1936), 14449; and Alfred Bertholet,
Hesekiel (HAT 13; Tbingen: Mohr, 1936), 49.
12
Zimmerli, Ezechiel, 28485.
13
Zimmerlis solution is based on evidence from the LXX and the Peshitta, which do
not have the expression the frst time but do note it the second time. Speculatively, one could
surmise that the frst scribe added following a slip of the eye (aberratio oculi).
A subsequent scribe added a second masculine plural sufx, resulting in , which in turn
was shortened to in a further mistake. Tis would ft well with the assumption that vv.
19b, 20a, 20b were added later. In the absence of evidence, however, this theory must remain
speculative.
II. The Status Quaestionis
Afer these preliminary remarks, we may approach the central topic of the
article: What are the role and function of the ? Are they good
prophets or are they evil witches? How do we distinguish between these inter-
pretations? Are prophets by defnition good, while witches are evil?
In earlier scholarship, exegetes argued that the women in Ezekiel 13 perform
magic, playing with the souls of the Israelites. Te rhetoric used by these exegetes
implies that they thought that the women perform some lower and despicable
form of magic, that they are pretending to be prophets and do not deserve the title
prophet.
14
According to these interpreters, this is why the hitpael is employed
here: it allegedly implies that the women are just pretending to be prophets. Wilda
Gafney has recently shown that the neat distinction between the niphal and the
hitpael of cannot be upheld.
15
Indeed, Renate Jost points out that, if
carried such negative connotations, the use of the hitpael by Ezekiel to describe
his own actions in 37:10 would be rather problematic.
16
Additionally, the use of
the participleindeed, the feminine participle occurs only here
17
instead of the
feminine noun (female prophets) is ofen interpreted negatively; it is also
used to argue that the are not really prophets.
18
Traditionally, scholars have distinguished between magic and religion on the
grounds that religion is supposedly characterized by submission to a/the divine
will whereas magic seeks to coerce that divine will.
19
Te term magic has ofen
14
See, e.g., Katheryn Pfsterer Darr (Te Book of Ezekiel: Introduction, Commentary, and
Refections, NIB 6:10731607), who describes the women as female exiles who are accused of
playing the prophet; and Fritz Dumermuth (Zu Ez. XIII 1821, VT 13 [1963]: 22829), who
speaks of the womens niedere Mantik. Darr does allow for the fact that the distinction between
magic and religion is emic and even within one society people may not agree whether a certain
practice is religious or represents magic.
15
Gafney, Daughters of Miriam, 3647, contra Klaus-Peter Adam, And He Behaved Like a
Prophet Among Tem (1Sam 10:11b): Te Depreciative use of Hitpael and the Comparative
Evidence of Ecstatic Prophecy, WO 39 (2009): 357. I do not out of hand deny the possibility
that the hitpael of is at times used with negative undertones, but Gafney shows that this is
not a coherent principle.
16
Jost, Tchter, 59. Te form with assimilated is unusual, and some manuscripts
have the uncontracted form ( ). BHS suggests reading niphal , as in v. 7. I see no
reason for the change other than to avoid a difcult form. Te form found in the MT is rare. To
my knowledge assimilates the only here and in Jer 23:13. For the assimilation of in
the hitpael to both and , see GKC 54c and Joon-Muraoka 53e.
17
Te masculine participle occurs fve times in the plural (Num 11:27; 1 Sam 10:5; 1 Kgs
22:10; 2 Chr 18:9; Jer 14:14) and four times in the singular (three times without the article:
2 Chr 18:7; Jer 26:20; 29:26; once with the article Jer 29:27).
18
See, e.g., Davies, Archaeological Commentary, 110.
19
Tis view is criticized already by Islwyn Blythin, Magic and Methodology, Numen 17
been used to describe unofcial rites, ofen hidden and regarded as negative, while
religion is open and regarded as positive.
20
But because one persons magic can
be anothers religion, scholars of religion in general view the distinction as suspect;
it is more a value judgment than a description of objective diferences. Terefore,
recent studies of magic and religion have come to the conclusion that it is impos-
sible to develop objective criteria by which to distinguish between the two.
21
Tis
means that the terminology of magic and religion does not help to distinguish
diferences in social function.
In a similar development, the distinction between prophecy and divination
has become blurred as well. Te biblical opposition between divination and
prophecy has infuenced scholars for a long time, but one of the most important
conclusions of recent research into ancient Near Eastern prophecy is that this
distinction is based on a misunderstanding of the data. Martti Nissinen has
summarized the debate on the relation between ancient Near Eastern prophecy
and (technical) divination: Tere is a growing tendency in the study of biblical
and ancient Near Eastern prophecy to consider prophecy, rather than being in
contrast with divination (i.e., consulting the divine world by various means), an
integral part of it.
22
(1970): 4559: Tis misconception also fnds expression in the familiar distinction between
Magic and Religion in terms of coercion of divine power and submission to the divine will, and
in the recurring use of the phrase ex opere operato.
20
In his edition of witchcraf texts, Daniel Schwemer (Rituale und Beschwrungen gegen
Schadenzauber [WVDOG 117; Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2007], 3) expressed this presentation
as follows: Man darf deshalb davon ausgehen, da die Beteuerung, der Abwehrzauber werde
fentlich durchgefrt, die gelegentlich in den zugehrigen Gebeten begegnet, of nicht mehr als
eine fromme Redefgur war.
21
See, e.g., Gager, Curse Tablets, 2425; Gabriella Frantz-Szab, Hittite Witchcraf, Magic,
and Divination, in CANE 3:200719; and, in the same volume, Jean-Michel de Tarragon,
Witch craf, Magic, and Divination in Canaan and Ancient Israel, 207181; and Walter Farber,
Witchcraf, Magic, and Divination in Ancient Mesopotamia, 18951909.
22
Nissinen, References to Prophecy in Neo-Assyrian Sources (SAAS 7; Helsinki: Neo-
Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 1998), 6. See also Lester L. Grabbe, Priests, Prophets, Diviners,
Sages: A Socio-Historical Study of Religious Specialists in Ancient Israel (Valley Forge, PA: Trinity
Press International, 1995), 15051; Beate Pongratz-Leisten, Herrschafswissen in Mesopotamien:
Formen der Kommunikation zwischen Gott und Knig im 2. und 1. Jahrtausend v. Chr. (SAAS 10;
Helsinki: Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 1999); Karel van der Toorn, Loracle de victoire
comme expression prophtique au Proche-Orient ancien, RB 94 (1987): 6397; Maria de Jong
Ellis, Observations on Mesopotamian Oracles and Prophetic Texts: Literary and Historiographic
Considerations, JCS 41 (1989): 12786; Tomas W. Overholt, Channels of Prophecy: Te Social
Dynamics of Prophetic Activity (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1989), 14047; Hans M. Barstad, No
Prophets? Recent Developments in Biblical Prophetic Research and Ancient Near Eastern
Prophecy, JSOT 37 (1993): 3960; James C. VanderKam, Prophecy and Apocalyptics in the
Ancient Near East, in CANE 3:208394, esp. 2083; and Eva Cancik-Kirschbaum, Prophetismus
und Divinationein Blick auf die keilschriflichen Quellen, in Propheten in Mari, Assyrien und
Te presentation of his argument has led to the rather bizarre situation in
which some scholars identify biblical characters as prophets precisely because they
perform technical divination. In a recent article, Nissinen has clarifed his posi-
tion, arguing that there is a diference between prophecy and technical divina-
tion but that prophecy and technical divination are two sides of the same coin:
divination.
23
I prefer the terms technical divination and intuitive divination
instead of divination and prophecy, as this terminology helps to clarify the issue.
Neither is of an inherently better value than the other: the terms describe diferent
modes of acquiring information from the divine sphere:
divination
technical divination intuitive divination
dream interpretation augury dreaming prophecy
Te diference between the two types of divination is in the mode of inter-
pretation of the information and not in its acquisition. Tus, a person who dreams
a clear message dream is an intuitive diviner, while someone whose dream needs
to be interpreted by a dream interpreter is no diviner at all; (s)he is like the liver
of the haruspexs sheep: paper on which a deity can write their message. Tis
distinction explains how an intuitive diviner might have a technique to induce
an altered state of consciousness.
On the basis of these realizations, a new wave of interpreters has frmly estab-
lished a consensus that the women in Ezekiel 13 are prophets and that their behav-
ior as soul-catchers is part of their intermediary prophetic role between humans
and the divine. One opinion of this new wave of scholarship is that the women
in Ezekiel 13 are involved in magic connected to pregnancy and childbirth. As
far as I can see, the suggestion goes back to Bowen, who argues in favor of this
view because Ezekiel 13 uses the language of binding and because the women
work for barley. Barley and the language of binding play a role in Mesopotamian
magic related to pregnancy and childbirth, and Bowen contends that they must do
so here too. However, the language of binding is commonly used in spells and
literature that mentions magic, and barley is included as one of the materials in
lists of expenditures for many rituals.
24
Israel (ed. Matthias Kckert and Martti Nissinen; FRLANT 201; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 2003), 3353.
23
Nissinen, What Is Prophecy? An Ancient Near Eastern Perspective, in Inspired Speech:
Prophecy in the Ancient Near East. Essays in Honour of Herbert B. Hufmon (ed. John Kaltner and
Louis Stulman; JSOTSup 378; London/New York: T&T Clark, 2004), 1737.
24
Bowen, Daughters, 42327. Her theory has since been adopted by Ziony Zevit (Te
Further, Bowen and others argue that the women in Ezekiel 13 must be
prophets because magic, divination, and religion are indistinguishable. Bowen
calls these women prophets, it seems, because she wants to interpret them in a
positive light and calling them sorcerers might put them in a negative light. Tis,
however, relies precisely on the argument of earlier scholarship that she and others
rightly criticizedonly in reverse. In simplifed terms, the old argument says that
these women are sorcerers, therefore they are bad. In equally simplifed terms the
new argument is: they are good, therefore they cannot be sorcerers. Tus, Bowen
and others fall into the very same trap into which earlier generations of scholars
have fallen.
III. A New Suggestion
One point that has yet not yet been brought to bear on this particular ques-
tion is the strikingly close parallel between Ezek 13:17 and the occurrences of
*munabbitu in four texts from twelfh-century b.c.e. Emar.
25
Indeed, while most
scholars take the Emar occurrences of nominal forms of the root as referring
to prophecy, and female prophecy in particular, I am aware of only one scholar,
Mayer Gruber, who explicitly links the Emar munabbitu to the Hebrew .
26

However, he does not develop the similarity, perhaps because he regards it as too
self-evident:
27
female prophets in Ezekiel, female prophets in Emar.
Religions of Ancient Israel: A Synthesis of Parallactic Approaches [London: Continuum, 2001],
56162) and Gafney (Daughters of Miriam, 12).
25
Te asterisk in front of munabbitu is to indicate that the term is attested only in the
oblique plural.
26
Mayer I. Gruber, Women in the Ancient Levant, in Womens Roles in Ancient Civili-
zations: A Reference Guide (ed. Bella Vivante; Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1999), 11552. Te
texts were introduced into the debate on the etymology by Daniel E. Fleming (L and ME
in
l
na-bi-i
me
and Its Mari Brethren, NABU 1993: 4; Nb and Munabbitu: Two New Syrian
Religious Personnel, JAOS 113 [1993]: 17583; Te Etymological Origins of the Hebrew nab:
Te One Who Invokes God, CBQ 55 [1993]: 21724), who on their basis argued for an active
understanding of Hebrew . John Huehnergard (On the Etymology and Meaning of Hebrew
NB
, EI 26 [1999]: 88*93*) criticized their use for determining whether is active or

passive, but he did not deny that the two are etymologically linked. Fleming (Prophets and
Temple Personnel in the Mari Archives, in Te Priests in the Prophets: Te Portrayal of Priests,
Prophets, and Other Religious Specialists in the Latter Prophets [ed. Lester L. Grabbe and Alice
Ogden Bellis; JSOTSup 408; London/New York: T&T Clark, 2004], 4464) ofers a thoughtful
reply.
27
Gruber writes: In the published texts from Emar, the feminine plural munabbitu
appears to be a clear cognate of the Hebrew mitnabbet (women who prophesy; e.g., Ezekiel
13:17). It is mentioned four times, three of them in the phrase Ishkhara, the divine patroness of
the prophetesses. Te fourth reference in an Emar text to a munabbitu occurs in what appears
to be a list of portions of meat distributed among various ofcials including a male diviner and a
male scribe (Women, 129).
But are matters quite that straightforward? Ezekiel has a feminine plural par-
ticiple of the root in the hitpael (tD-stem). Te Emar texts have *munabbitu,
a D-stem participle (the equivalent of the Hebrew piel) in the feminine plural. If
we understand the Hebrew hitpael (tD-stem) as a modifed D-stem with a t-prefx,
both forms are to be understood as feminine plural participles of the root n.b. in
the D-stem.
Te four texts in question are (1) Emar 406:5, (2) Emar 373:97, (3) Emar
383:10 and (4) Emar 379:1112. Te frst text mentions meat rations for *munabbitu,
while the other three texts (24) are virtually identical and say that the *munabbitu
are related to the goddess Ihara:
1. Emar 406:5 []bu-uq-q-ra-tu
4
a
f.me
mu-na-bi-ia-ti
[](a kind of) meat of/for the *munabbitu
28
2. Emar 373:97
d
i-ha-ra a
f.me
mu
x
-nab-bi-ia-[ti]
29
Ihara of the *munabbi[tu]
3. Emar 383:10
d
i-ha-ra a
f.me
mu
x
-nab-b[i-ia-ti]
30
Ihara of the *munabb[itu]
4. Emar 379:1112
11 d
i-ha-ra a
12
mu
x
-na-bi-ia-ti
31
Ihara of the *munabbitu
In the frst instance, the link between Akkadian *munabbitu and Hebrew
appears to be based solely on morphology. Until James Barrs critique of the
confusion of etymological with semantic/functional equivalence, etymology alone
would have been regarded as enough proof that the Emarite and the Judean women
were fulflling the same function in their respective societies, and many scholars
believe that the Emarite terms refer to female prophets.
32
Instead of reading a
28
Daniel Arnaud, Recherches au pays dAtata: Emar VI, Textes sumriens et accadiens,
vol. 3, Texte (Paris: Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations, 1986), 4023.
29
Ibid., 353, 360; and Daniel E. Fleming, Time at Emar: Te Cultic Calendar and the Rituals
from the Diviners Archive (Mesopotamian Civilizations 11; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns,
2000), 24445 (line 107). Te reading mu
x
for the a sign was suggested by Wolfram von Soden,
Kleine Bemerkungen zu Urkunden und Ritualen aus Emar, NABU 1987: 46.
30
Arnaud, Emar VI/3:377.
31
Ibid., 375.
32
James Barr, Te Semantics of Biblical Language (London: Oxford University Press, 1961).
Among scholars who believe that the Emarite term refers to female prophets, see Akio Tsukimoto,
Emar and the Old Testament: Preliminary Remarks, AJBI 15 (1989): 324; Patrick D. Miller, Te
Religion of Ancient Israel (Library of Ancient Israel; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2000),
17778; Gruber, Women, 129; idem, Womens Voices in Micah, lectio difcilior 1 (2007),
online at http://www.lectio.unibe.ch/07_1/mayer_gruber_womens_voices.htm; Richard S. Hess,
Israelite Religions: An Archaeological and Biblical Survey (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007),
89; and Fleming, Mari Brethren; Fleming, Munabbiatu; Fleming, Etymological Origins.
Robert P. Gordon (From Mari to Moses: Prophecy at Mari and in Ancient Israel, in Of Prophets
biblical understanding of prophecy into the texts from Emar, I suggest interpreting
both sets of texts in their own context frst, before then comparing them with each
other. Rather than understanding both terms as referring to female prophets, I
understand both as referring to female technical diviners. It is important to note
that this is the result of my analysis and not an a priori understanding.
To that aim I suggest looking at the root in Akkadian in general and in
Emar in particular. According to the Chicago Assyrian Dictionary, the verb nab
normally means to call in the G-stem and to wail in the D-stem (nubb) in
Standard Akkadian. Emar, however, was at the edge of the Akkadian speaking
and writing world, and words ofen had a slightly diferent meaning in what is
called peripheral Akkadian. To the best of my knowledge, the verbal root n.b.
occurs only eight times at Emar afer excluding names, exclusively in the context
of adoption deeds.
33
Te idiom in which it occurs is to nubb my gods and my
dead (ilni u mtiya nubb). Te context makes it likely that the verb refers to
some form of interaction with the dead, be it invoking them, caring for them, or
talking to them.
34
1. RA 77 1:8 dingir.me-ia me-te-ia
lu
- tu-na-bi
35
She shall invoke/mourn (?) my gods and my dead
2. RA 77 2:1112
11
dingir.me-ia me-te-ia
12
lu- tu-na-ab-bi
36
3. Emar 185:23
2
dingir.me-ia me-te-ia
3
lu- <tu>-na-ab-bi
37
Visions and the Wisdom of Sages: Essays in Honour of R. Norman Whybray on His Seventieth
Birthday [ed. David J. A. Clines and Heather A. McKay; JSOTSup 162; Shefeld: JSOT Press,
1993], 6379, esp. 65) is careful to point out the weakness of the argument.
33
Progetto Sinleqiunnini: Te Emar Cuneiform Archive, online at http://www.pankus.com/
(accessed May 16, 2008). Te Emar-related part of the project is now the Middle Euphrates
Digital Archive, at http://virgo.unive.it/emaronline/cgi-bin/index.cgi (accessed January 9, 2012).
34
For studies on the terminology of necromancy, see Karel van der Toorn, Gods and
Ancestors in Emar and Nuzi, ZA 84 (1994): 3859; Wayne T. Pitard, Care of the Dead at Emar,
in Emar: Te History, Religion, and Culture of a Syrian Town in the Late Bronze Age (ed. M. W.
Chavalas; Bethesda, MD: CDL, 1996), 12340; and, in the same volume, Brian B. Schmidt, Te
Gods and the Dead of the Domestic Cult at Emar, 14163. See also Akio Tsukimoto (review of
Gary Beckman, Texts from the Vicinity of Emar in the Collection of Jonathan Rosen [History of the
Ancient Near East/Monographs 2; Padua: Sargon, 1996], WO 29 [1999]: 18490) points out that
in RE 94:2527 the same expression occurs with the verb kunnu instead of nubb.
35
John Huehnergard, Five Tablets from the Vicinity of Emar, RA 77 (1983): 1143.
36
Ibid., 1617. Texts 12 were also published as ASJ 13 2526 (Akio Tsukimoto, Akkadian
Tablets in the Hirayama Collection (II), Acta Sumerologica Japan 13 [1991]: 275333).
37
Arnaud, Emar VI/3, 19798. Jean-Marie Durand (Tombes familiares et culte des
Anctres Emr, NABU 1989: 112, p. 88) emends the frst singular construct D-precative
lunabbi to a third person D-durative + lu: lu tunabbi. As an alternative Durand suggests correcting
the text to read luu tu
!
nab
!
bi.
4. AuOr 5 13:67
6
dingir.me-ia
d
it[ar.me-ia]
7
lu- tu!-nab-bi-mi
38
She shall invoke my gods and my goddesses
5. CM 13 3:2324
23
dingir.me u me-te-ia la-<ah>-te-ia
24
a-bi-u-nu
lu-na-ab-bu
39
May they invoke the gods and the dead of Lahteya,
their father
6. Sem 46 2:2021
20
dingir.me-ia
21
u mi-ti-ia -na-bu
40
Tey will invoke my gods and my dead
7. RE 23:1617
16
dingir.me-ia
me
-te-
ia

lo.e.17
lu-
tu
4
-na-ab-b[i]
41
May she invoke my gods and my dead
8. RE 30:57
5
dingir.me
!
-ia m-e-te
6
a
m
tu-ba-a a-b[i-u]

7
-na-ab-bi
42
He will/shall invoke my gods and the dead of
[his] father Tub
Admittedly, the amount of evidence is somewhat meager, so conclusions
from this presentation of data have to remain necessarily preliminary. However,
as it stands now, the evidence from Emar points to some form of interaction with
the dead, rather than prophecy. Tis is further supported by the connection to
the multivalent deity Ihara, who appears as a chthonic but also a fertility deity
whose main area of responsibility appears to have been the swearing and enforc-
ing of oaths.
43
Tis would leave a wide feld for possible duties of the *munabbitu.
Te examination of the meaning of the verbal root n.b. at Emar is important in
this context as it ofers us at least one avenue by which to attempt to understand
what these specialists connected to the deity Ihara were doing. It must remain
open whether the *munabbitu were necromancers proper, that is, diviners who
received their information by interaction with the dead, or whether they fulflled
another function to do with Iharas responsibilities. Because of the connection
of the verb nubb with the dead, it seems most likely that they were linked to
the dead as well. It is clear, however, that the munabbitu were not witches, and
38
Daniel Arnaud, La Syrie du moyen-Euphrate sous le protectorat hittite: contrats de droit
priv, AuOr 5 (1987): 21144. Durand (Tombes, 88) suggests correcting the verb form from
ta-nab-bi-mi (G-durative) to tu-nab-bi-mi (D-durative).
39
Joan Goodnick Westenholz, Cuneiform Inscriptions in the Collection of the Bible Lands
Museum Jerusalem: Te Emar Tablets (Cuneiform Monographs 13; Groningen: Styx, 2000), 912.
40
Daniel Arnaud, Mariage et remariage des femmes chez les Syriens du moyen-Euphrate,
lge du bronze rcent daprs deux nouveaux documents, Sem 46 (1996): 716.
41
Gary M. Beckman, Texts from the Vicinity of Emar in the Collection of Jonathan Rosen
(History of the Ancient Near East Monographs 2; Padua: Sargon, 1996), 3940.
42
Ibid., 4951.
43
Doris Prechel, Die Gttin Ihara: Ein Beitrag zur altorientalischen Religionsgeschichte
(ALASP 11; Mnster: Ugarit, 1996).
therefore the negative connotations that are apparent in Mesopotamian texts (just
as they are common to many Western societies) did not apply to them.
44
At this point we can return to the women of Ezekiel 13 and the question of
how their behavior and social role should be understood. We do not know much
about the behavior of female prophets elsewhere in the Hebrew Bibleor indeed
that of male prophetsbut it does not seem to include the catching of souls either
for benefcial or for malevolent actions (whatever that expression refers to). It is
true that using magic, and particularly black magic, is one of the more common
accusations leveled against women throughout history, ofen without any indica-
tion that such magic was used. It may be the case that the women in Ezekiel 13
are therefore unjustly accused of magic. But if the description of their behavior is
accurateand for reasons that will become clear I think that it isthese women
behave in ways that are diferent from those of prophets in the Hebrew Bible and
other ancient Near Eastern sources.
Taking Ezekiels description of these womens behavior seriously, Marjo
Korpel has recently compared the language and imagery of bird catching and
the depiction of the dead. Since the dead can be depicted throughout the ancient
Near East with birdlike features such as feathers, she concludes that it is likely
that the language of bird catching expresses the catching of dead souls and thus
provides good reasons to understand the in Ezekiel 13 as interacting
with the deceased.
45
Because of the link with the divining root , it seems most
likely that 13:1721 was initially addressed to female necromancers.
46
Te Emarite
*munabbitu and Hebrew should in all likelihood both be taken as refer-
44
For the negative reputation of witches in Mesopotamia, see, e.g., Sue Rollin, Women
and Witchcraf in Ancient Assyria (c. 900600 BC), in Images of Women in Antiquity (ed.
Averil Cameron and Amlie Kuhrt; London: Croom Helm, 1993), 3445; and more recently
Daniel Schwemer, Abwehrzauber und Behexung: Studien zum Schadenzauberglauben im alten
Mesopotamien unter Benutzung von Tzvi Abuschs Kritischem Katalog und Sammlungen im
Rahmen des Kooperationsprojektes Corpus of Mesopotamian Anti-Witchcraf Rituals (Wiesbaden:
Harrassowitz, 2007).
45
Korpel, Avian Spirits, 1029. She relies on Klaas Spronk, Beatifc Aferlife in Ancient
Israel and in the Ancient Near East (AOAT 219; Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker; Neukirchen-
Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1986), 16196. However, contra Saggs (External Souls), I do
not agree that the concept of an external soul already existed. Instead, large parts of the
ancient Near East believed that there was a land where the dead existed and whence they
could return to haunt the living. Tis means that there was a concept of some form of a
continued existence, but it was corporeal and shadowy, rather than spiritual and ofering a
reward. Pohlmann (Hesekiel 119, 192) points toward the fact that the idiom (to
hunt a soul) is used only in this context and in Prov 6:26, where it describes a married woman
as seducing a mans precious soul. It is, further, curious that bread is mentioned as a price/
gif, both in Ezek 13:19 and in Prov 6:26.
46
Tat necromancy was known in the West-Semitic world in general and in Israel
in particular can be seen also in 1 Samuel 28. See Esther J. Hamori, Te Prophet and the
Necromancer: Womens Divination for Kings, JBL, forthcoming.
ring not to prophets but to necromancers.
47
If this interpretation is correct, these
women should not be understood as witches, at least not in the frst instance.
Nonetheless, I agree with Bowen that the structural similarities with Maql are
intentional and that this structure is consciously used in order to denigrate the
by comparing them to witches.
Tis interpretation of the and the *munabbitu as necromancers has
implications for our understanding of the development of the Hebrew root in
general. I am not aware of a single eighth-century text that describes what a
does; we have no access to direct information that could decide this question. Te
situation is further complicated by the fact that, in their literary forms, the reports
of technical and intuitive oracles can be virtually indistinguishable. It could well be
that some of the great prophets of old, for example, Nathan, should more aptly be
described as the great technical diviners of old who were turned into prophets
in the proper sense when the meaning of the word changed.
48
Clearly, we end up
with a situation in which means prophet. Has it developed from a generic
term of diviner to this rather more specifc meaning? We cannot determine the
meaning of the term in Israels early history with any certainty, but the evidence
adduced here supports Alex P. Jassens view.
49
IV. Conclusions
In this article, I have presented the two standard interpretations of the role
of the daughters of your people in Ezekiel 13. I argued that both are defcient
47
In most ancient Near Eastern societies, technical diviners would have been of a higher
social standing than prophets. Terefore, by recognizing the function that these women per-
formed, we attribute a higher social standing to them. However, necromancy did not leave traces
in Mesopotamias textual record, so we cannot know whether it was practiced and what the status
of the specialists involved would have been.
48
Tat the faces of technical and intuitive divination changed over time has recently been
reafrmed, albeit not explicitly, by Alex P. Jassen, Mediating the Divine: Prophecy and Revelation
in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Second Temple Judaism (STDJ 68; Leiden: Brill, 2007). Jassen shows
that scriptural interpretation became the new prophecy at Qumran. Tis would form a true
bridge between technical and intuitive divination, as both sets of abilities, charisma, and skill
are required to perform this form of divination: training in scribal and interpretative skills and
inspiration by the spirit. It is this form of prophecy that is intuitively familiar to many of us and
that creates all the problems for distinguishing various kinds of divination in earlier periods.
But before the advent of the scribal prophet-scholar-diviner, technical divination and intuitive
divination were distinct, albeit very similar in appearance and identical in function.
49
See the preceding note. It is, of course, also possible that the noun always had
the meaning prophet, while the hitpael participle retained the meaning diviner, or, more
specifcally, that the feminine participle retained the meaning necromancer, which is otherwise
attested only in Emar, six hundred kilometers farther north and six hundred years earlier. Tis
avenue, however, is dangerously close to the arguments refuted above that the hitpael of had
a depreciative aspect that is absent in the niphal.
because they ultimately rely on the biblical model that prophecy is good and what
is good must be prophecy. In particular, Korpels reading of the pericope is vital
for my interpretation of the meaning of in Ezekiel 13, but in her rhetoric
she follows the traditional prejudice against diviners. My reading strategy of this
pericope is therefore twofold. On the one hand, it is necessary to accept the result
of recent studies on magic and religion showing that the two are not opposed to
each other. As I have shown, by slightly adapting Nissinens understanding of the
relation between intuitive divination (prophecy) and technical divination, I can
explain their connection to each other as part of a wider enterprise, while they still
remain distinct forms of divinehuman communication.
On the other hand, I have adduced the Emar texts, in which the term
*munabbitu occurs. According to my preliminary interpretation, these texts refer
not to female prophets but to necromancers. It is important to note here that both
the Emar term *munabbitu and the Hebrew designation are isolated
words and we should be cautious about drawing too many conclusions. However,
the connection between the Emar occurrences and Ezekiel 13 is based not only on
the fact that both are feminine plural participles in the D-stem/hitpael, but also on
their social functions, which as far as we can tell appear in both cases to be linked
to necromancy or caring for the dead in some way. Tis suggests that, while the
more traditional exegetes are correct in stating that the women in Ezek 13:1721
are not prophets, they are wrong in their negative evaluation of these women. To
the contrary, in the societies of the ancient Near East, the status of the women as
technical diviners would have been higher than if they had been prophets.
50
Te
authors of Ezekiel competed with other religious specialists for authority, and, as a
direct competitor, Ezekiel did not portray the female diviners positively.
51
Originally, the author of Ezekiel 13 condemned the for their form of
divination. However, the picture drawn above changes radically once vv. 2223 are
added: they understand the root as referring exclusively to prophecy, and with
these verses the text accuses the of false prophecy. Tere can be no doubt
50
As a by-product of this reading, we can now refute Hermann Spieckermanns theory that
Neo-Assyrian infuence caused there to be more women among the prophets (Juda unter Assur
in der Sargonidenzeit [FRLANT 129; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1982], 296303). For
the apparent lack of female prophets, see now Jonathan Stkl, Itars Women, Yhwhs Men? A
Curious Gender-Bias in Neo-Assyrian and Biblical Prophecy, ZAW 121 (2009): 87100. See also
the arguments against Stkl in Nissinen, Gender and Prophetic Agency in the Ancient Eastern
Mediterranean, in Prophets Male and Female: Gender and Prophecy in the Hebrew Bible, the
Eastern Mediterranean and the Ancient Near East (ed. Corinne L. Carvalho and Jonathan Stkl;
Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, forthcoming).
51
On female diviners and women who divine in the Hebrew Bible and beyond, see
Esther J. Hamori, Womens Divination in Biblical Literature: Prophecy, Necromancy, and Other
Arts of Knowledge (Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library; New Haven: Yale University Press,
forthcoming); and eadem, Childless Female Diviners in the Bible and Beyond, in Carvalho and
Stkl, Prophets Male and Female.
that the scribes and theologians who took that step considered the women to be
prophets who were as guilty of falsifying divine messages as their male colleagues
were. Tis, in turn, means that, as the text stands, it refers to female prophets. Tis
view is corroborated by the inclusion of references to ch. 13 in 22:25, 28:
25
Her gang of prophets is like roaring lions in her midst, rending prey. Tey
devour human beings; they seize treasure and wealth; they have widowed many
women in her midst.
And again:
28
Her prophets, too, daub the wall for them with plaster: Tey prophesy falsely
and divine deceitfully for them; they say, Tus said the lord Yhwh, when
Yhwh has not spoken.
Tus, the women who were initially necromancers, respected for their abilities to
interact with the nonhuman sphere, are frst accused of abusing their power and
are then turned into false prophets who are accused of prophesying lies.
52
52
Interestingly, W. Robertson Smith suggested something similar already in 1885 in
On the Forms of Divination and Magic Enumerated in Deut. XVIII. 10, 11. Part I, Journal of
Philology 13 (1885): 27387.
Te Problem of Time in Joel
ronald l. troxel
rltroxel@wisc.edu
University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706
Scholarship on the book of Joel has long been vexed by the wayyiqtol verb forms
in 2:1819a. Ibn Ezra suggested that they are analogous to the prophetic per-
fect, expressing certainty about the outcome, while Adalbert Merx suggested
that they should be read as simple ww + jussive, and Julius Bewer argued that
the imperative forms in 2:1516 should be read as simple qatal forms, enabling
vv. 1517 to be read as a report of the peoples response to the exhortation of
vv. 1214. More recent studies of Joel 2 have found it difcult to explain the
interchange of qatal and yiqtol verbs in vv. 211. Some have explained these
as signaling the intrusion of redactional materials, while others have sought to
accommodate them under a tense or aspectual understanding of the verbal sys-
tem. Still others have despaired of fnding a solution and have adopted readings
of the verbs based solely on the context. Both of these problems are, however,
amenable to rather straightforward solutions. On the one hand, the wayyiqtol
verbs of 2:1819a come into focus once we recognize the narrative structure of
the book. Te wayyiqtol verbs are embedded in speech by the narrator, whose
voice was last heard in 1:4. On the other hand, the qatal and yiqtol verbs in 2:311
follow typical morphosyntactic and morphosemantic patterns, once we take
into account their discourse settings, particularly the pragmatics of their clauses.
Verbal forms in the second chapter of Joel have long vexed interpreters.
Te abrupt narrative report created by the four wayyiqtol verbs in the MT of Joel
2:1819a is a perennial crux. More recently, questions have arisen about how to
explain the mixed yiqtol and qatal forms in vv. 311. Te ambiguous tense value
of verbs in Joel led John Barton to conclude, Little notice was taken of the tenses
in prophetic books, since it was assumed that everything, even narrative, had
also a future reference.
1
Although one can sympathize with Bartons frustration,
I

am grateful to Mr. Aaron West for his incisive criticisms and editorial comments as I
honed this article.
1
Barton, Joel and Obadiah: A Commentary (OTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox,
2001), 88.
JBL 132, no. 1 (2013): 7795
77
consideration of these verbs within their discourse settings demonstrates that the
intersection of morphology and tense value is more regular than his statement
allows. Indeed, I will argue that the temporal and modal values of the verbs in
question follow typical morphosyntactic and morphosemantic patterns.
Because the wayyiqtol forms of 2:1819a have troubled interpreters the
longest and have produced the most discussion, I will briefy recount the types of
solutions that have been proposed for them, endorsing an explanation that I will
fortify by showing how it accords with a literary device that appears elsewhere
and, thus, provides the discourse setting for these verbs.
I. The wayyiqtol Forms in Joel 2:1819
Te verbal forms in question are pointed in the Hebrew text below and
italicized in the subjoined translation:

19
.
18

.
And the Lord became jealous for his land and spared his people. And the Lord
answered and said to his people, Behold, I will send to you the grain, the new
wine, and the oil, and you will be sated with it. And I will not again make you a
disgrace among the nations.
Te announcement that the Lord has taken up the cause of his land and his people
appears unwarranted, since there is no report of the people assembling to seek
divine mercy as they were urged in vv. 1217. A frequent explanation is that this
book, while reporting historical events, simply assumes that the assembly was
held.
2
Others who consider the book a historical account are less sanguine that
such an important assembly would have gone unreported. Some propose that
the prophets exhortation ends with v. 14, leaving vv. 1517 to report the peoples
actions, once the imperatives of vv. 1516 are repointed as qatal forms.
3
Others
regard the wayyiqtol verbs of vv. 1819a as analogous to the prophetic perfect,
2
Julius Wellhausen, Die kleinen Propheten (4th ed.; Berlin: Georg Reimer, 1892), 210; Karl
Marti, Das Dodekapropheton (KHC; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1904), 114; Wilhelm Rudolph, Joel,
Amos, Obadja, Jona (KAT 13.2; Gtersloh: Mohn, 1971), 23; Leslie C. Allen, Te Books of Joel,
Obadiah, Jonah and Micah (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976), 86; James L. Crenshaw,
Joel: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 24C; New York: Doubleday,
1995), 14748.
3
Julius A. Bewer, John M. Smith, and William H. Ward, A Critical and Exegetical
Commentary on Micah, Zephaniah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Obadiah, and Joel (ICC; Edinburgh:
T&T Clark, 1911), 107. Cf. Ferdinand Hitzig, Die zwlf kleinen Propheten (4th ed.; Kurzgefasstes
exegetisches Handbuch zum Alten Testament; Leipzig: S. Hirzel, 1881), 88.
Troxel: Te Problem of Time in Joel 79
expressing certainty about the outcome, once the convocation is held.
4
Still others
repoint the wayyiqtol forms as simple ww + jussive (that the Lord might become
zealous for his land and take compassion on his people and say to his people),
permitting a smooth subordination of vv. 1819 to vv. 1517.
5
Undergirding each
of these proposals is the assumption that the book is a record of oracles delivered
by a prophet named Joel to a specifc community facing agricultural calamity.
Although books like Hosea, Amos, and Isaiah preserve oracles that appear
traceable to their eponymous prophets, there are reasons to doubt that the same
is true of Joel. In fact, according to the exordium (1:23), the only role for the
Joel introduced in 1:1 is to recount a crisis that lies beyond contemporary (or
even prior) experience, so as to warn of the calamitous Day of the Lord.
6
Tis
recounting, as well as the book in which it is set, is largely constructed of allusions
to earlier written traditions, thereby revealing itself as a work of scribal prophecy.
7

If, then, the book is preeminently a literary construct, the problem of the wayyiqtol
verbs of 2:1819a must be addressed on the literary plane rather than under the
rubric of historical reports.
One proposal has been to view the abrupt shif in tense as a sign of editing.
Jakob Whrle explains the wayyiqtol forms by judging vv. 1820, along with vv. 25
4
Barton, Joel and Obadiah, 87; Martin Beck, Der Tag YHWHs im Dodekapropheton:
Studien im Spannungsfeld von Traditions- und Redaktionsgeschichte (BZAW 356; Berlin/New
York: de Gruyter, 2005), 192; Erich Bosshard-Nepustil, Rezeptionen von Jesaia 139 im Zwlf -
prophetenbuch: Untersuchungen zur literarischen Verbindung von Prophetenbchern in babylo-
nischer und persischer Zeit (OBO 154; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1997), 280, 281
n. 86; Marvin A. Sweeney, Te Twelve Prophets (2 vols.; Berit Olam; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical
Press, 2000), 1:169. Tis explanation was adopted already by Ibn Ezra (Joon-Muraoka 112h
n. 23) and likely stands behind Teodotions translation of v. 18a with , ,
as reported by the Syrohexapla.
5
Adalbert Merx, Die Prophetie des Joel und ihre Ausleger von den ltesten Zeiten bis zu den
Reformatoren: Eine exegetisch-kritische und hermeneutisch-dogmengeschichtliche Studie (Halle:
Verlag der Buchhandlung des Waisenhauses, 1879), 38 (cf. Karl Budde, Der Umschwung in Joel
2, OLZ 22 [1919]: 1067).
6
Ferdinand Deist, Parallels and Reinterpretation in the Book of Joel: A Teology of the
Yom Yahweh? in Text and Context: Old Testament and Semitic Studies for F. C. Fensham (ed.
Walter T. Claassen; JSOTSup 48; Shefeld: JSOT Press, 1988), 75; Beck, Der Tag YHWHs,
200; Jrg Jeremias, Gelehrte Prophetie: Beobachtungen zu Joel und Deuterosacharja, in
Vergegenwrtigung des Alten Testaments: Beitrge zur biblischen Hermeneutik. Festschrif fr
Rudolf Smend zum 70. Geburtstag (ed. Christoph Bultmann, Walter Dietrich, and Christoph
Levin; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2002), 1014.
7
So already Merx, Die Prophetie des Joel, 73; cf. Hans Walter Wolf, Joel and Amos: A
Commentary on the Books of the Prophets Joel and Amos (trans. Waldemar Janzen, S. Dean
McBride, Jr., and Charles A. Muenchow; Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977), 11; Deist,
Parallels and Reinterpretation, 63; Siegfried Bergler, Joel als Schrifinterpret (BEATAJ 16;
Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1988), 32; Crenshaw, Joel, 36; Anna Karena Mller, Gottes Zukunf: Die
Mglichkeit der Rettung am Tag JHWHs nach dem Joelbuch (WMANT 119; Neukirchen-Vluyn:
Neukirchener Verlag, 2008), 15.
and 26b27, to be secondary expansions to ch. 2, since they are distinguished by
frst person divine speech and include yiqtol and we-qatalt forms, with future
tense value.
8
However, his dissection of these verses into redactional layers relies
too heavily on formal criteria.
9
Another literary tool that has been used to accommodate the wayyiqtol
verbs is form criticism. Noting symmetries between 1:42:17 and 2:184:17, Hans
Walter Wolf suggested that these units ofer alternative scenarios for the Day of the
Lord: one that threatens Israels destruction (1:42:17) and another that envisions
its deliverance (2:184:17). Te deliverance scenario is signaled by v. 19s oracle
declaring that the Lord has heard their complaint (Erhrungsorakel).
10
Preceding
this, v. 18 is an independent piece of narrative analogous to 1:4.
11
Tis dissection
of v. 18 from the Erhrungsorakel isolates it artifcially from its context.
Siegfried Bergler likewise applies form criticism, identifying 2:1827 as the
frst of two phases of a divine response (the second starts with 3:1).
12
Central to
2:1827 is a promise of salvation (Heilsverheiung) (vv. 2124, 26a), with
which is intertwined a salvation oracle (Heilsorakel) (vv. 1920, 25, 2627).
13

Te combination is a literary artifce, to which v. 18 provides a subtle transition,
within which the wayyiqtol forms are of no consequence.
14
Like Wolf, Bergler
marginalizes v. 18 to the point that he dismisses it rather than explains it.
Tose who view the Book of the Twelve as a unifed composition argue
that the wayyiqtol forms of 2:1819a are best comprehended within the literary
sequence from Hosea to Amos, either as a promise of clemency if the people
respond to Hoseas previously unheeded call to repent,
15
or as echoing Hoseas
8
Whrle, Die frhen Sammlungen des Zwlfprophetenbuches: Entstehung und Komposition
(BZAW 360; Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 2006), 403. Rather than judging vv. 2124, 26a to
be a tradition blended with vv. 1820, 25, and 26b27 during composition, he regards their
vocabulary links to ch. 1 (e.g., , , , , ) as evidence that they are part of
the books original layer.
9
Whrle argues that the original subject of 2:111* (vv. 12 [minus . . . ], 3,
6, 10) was the , to which were later added phrases referring to an army, while vv. 1214
represent a still later addition (Die frhen Sammlungen, 39394, 399). Correlatively, vv. 1517,
2124, and 26ac (through ) continue the theme of the (as agricultural disaster)
lef behind afer v. 10, while vv. 1820, 25, 26d ( ), and 27 were added by the
same scribe who supplied the motif of the army in the earlier additions (ibid., 407, 431). Te
assumption that we can confdently dissect a text that was created by reuse of earlier materials
into successive redactional layers is tenuous.
10
Wolf, Joel and Amos, 7, 12.
11
Ibid., 57, 60.
12
Bergler, Joel als Schrifinterpret, 86.
13
Ibid., 8994. Te salvation oracle is distinguished from the promise of salvation by its
format as divine speech, over against the commands addressed to the people in vv. 2124 (p. 89).
14
Ibid., 88.
15
James D. Nogalski, Redactional Processes in the Book of the Twelve (BZAW 218; Berlin/
New York: de Gruyter, 1993), 4, 26; idem, Joel as Literary Anchor for the Book of the Twelve,
reports of the Lord unilaterally reversing his plans for judgment (11:811; 14:5).
16

Whatever the merits of reading the Twelve as a single work, the claim that 2:1819
is best comprehended in its canonical setting is disputable. In fact, Jrg Jeremias
provides, from within the boundaries of the book of Joel, a simpler and more
convincing literary explanation for these verses.
Jeremias regards the wayyiqtol forms of 2:1819a as preterit tenses that echo
the books initial call to recount extraordinary events to subsequent generations
(1:23).
17
Just as 1:23 viewed these events as past,
18
so 2:18 presupposes that the
promises of salvation announced for the future in vv. 1920 and 2527 have already
been fulflled.
19
Accordingly, 2:18 resumes the narrative perspective introduced in
1:23,
20
marking the pivot point of a story that ofers a model for later generations
seeking to escape the Day of the Lord.
21
Tough Jeremias regards v. 18 as assuming
that the peoples repentance triggered divine mercy,
22
his recognition that Joel is
a literary production, not a historical report, implies that this assumption is part
in Reading and Hearing the Book of the Twelve (ed. James D. Nogalski and Marvin A. Sweeney;
SBLSymS 15; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2000), 97.
16
Aaron Schart, Die Entstehung des Zwlfprophetenbuchs: Neuarbeitung von Amos im
Rahmen schrifenbergreifender Redaktionsprozesse (BZAW 260; Berlin/New York: de Gruyter,
1998), 267; Paul-Gerhard Schwesig, Die Rolle der Tag-JHWHs-Dichtungen im Dodekapropheton
(BZAW 366; Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 2006), 119, 127, 290.
17
Jeremias, Die Propheten Joel, Obadja, Jona, Micha (ATD 24.3; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck
& Ruprecht, 2007), 34.
18
Ibid., 12; Wolf, Joel and Amos, 57, 60.
19
Jeremias, Die Propheten, 35; cf. H. P. Mller, Prophetie und Apokalyptik bei Joel, TViat
10 (196566): 240.
20
Tis resumption parallels the way in which 2:2 reprises the emphasis on the uniqueness
of events introduced in 1:2, whose initial (hear this) looks ahead to the events
recounted in 1:42:27, while its (has this occurred in
your days or the days of your ancestors) implied the unique character of the events. Nogalski
protests that reading in 1:2 as though it had the preposition in front of it () unjustly
infers the infrequently attested comparative construction and presume[s] two diferent
antecedents for the same pronoun (Nogalski, Redactional Processes, 1516; emphasis his). While
a demonstrative pronoun can be anaphoric or cataphoric, its primary function is deictic (Joon-
Muraoka 143). Te use of the demonstrative to emphasize quality (of this sort) is a matter of
lexical pragmatics, subject to the demands of context rather than mathematical probability (see
Gene L. Green, Lexical Pragmatics and Biblical Interpretation, JETS 50 [2007]: 799812). For
examples of / implying quality, see HALOT, s.v. , and compare Joel 4:9a ( ),
where is decidedly cataphoric.
21
Jeremias, Die Propheten, 6.
22
Ibid., 34. While Mller (Gottes Zukunf, 152) concurs that v. 18 presupposes the peoples
repentance, she argues that the wayyiqtol forms carry future tense value (p. 157). Te instances
of the wayyiqtol that she claims have future tense value succeed qatal forms, embedded in
discourses about hypothetical situations (Ezek 33:46) or ones already set in the future (Mic
2:13). Te discourse context of 2:1819a is best defned by the narrative sequence established
implicitly in 1:23.
of an artifce.
23
Unfortunately, he does not tease out this implication, nor does he
provide justifcation for positing this role for vv. 1819a.
24
However, this gap can
be flled by noting parallels in narrative reports in two other prophetic books.
Wilhelm Rudolph rightly observed that biblical narrators frequently expect
readers to infer that mandated actions were executed, even though they go
unreported.
25
A prime example is the story of Jeremiahs confrontation with
Hananiah in Jeremiah 28. In 27:211 the prophet reports that the Lord com-
manded him to strap a yoke on his neck and deliver specifed words to the kings of
Edom, Moab, Ammon, Tyre, and Sidon. Hananiahs removal and breaking of the
yoke in 28:10 implies that Jeremiah enacted the sign act, even though he is never
reported to have done so.
26
More strikingly, following this the Lord commands
that Jeremiah tell Hananiah that he has replaced the wooden bars of the yoke
with iron bars, signaling a solidifcation of Nebuchadnezzars rule over the
nations (28:1314). Surprisingly, however, the succeeding verses have Jeremiah
delivering diferent words to Hananiah (vv. 1516):
Hear now, Hananiah: Te Lord has not sent you, and you have inspired this
people to trust in falsehood. Terefore, thus says the Lord, I am dismissing you
from the face of the earth. Tis year will you die, for you have spoken rebellion
against the Lord.
Although Jeremiahs words are not those prescribed in vv. 1314, it would be inapt
for a reader to suppose that Jeremiah, who is commissioned to speak whatever I
command you (1:7), autonomously substitutes these words for those assigned in
vv. 1314. Rather, the report in v. 16 of Hananiahs death leaves the reader to assume
that Jeremiahs words were authorized and, concomitantly, that he delivered those
prescribed in vv. 1314, even though that is not reported.
Te character of the dispute between Hananiah and Jeremiah points to this
narrative as a purely literary construct,
27
meant to afrm the validity of Jeremiahs
23
Jeremias, Gelehrte Prophetie, 100105.
24
While Nogalski likewise considers 2:1819 to presume an act of repentance as a feature
of the books artifcial scenario (Literary Precursors to the Book of the Twelve [BZAW 217; Berlin/
New York: de Gruyter, 1993], 265), he regards the entire book as fashioned as a step in composing
the Book of the Twelve as a literary unit.
25
Rudolph, Joel, Amos, Obadja, Jona, 62. For discussion of this as a narrative device, see
Jerome T. Walsh, Old Testament Narrative: A Guide to Interpretation (Louisville: Westminster
John Knox, 2009), 85.
26
William L. Holladay, Jeremiah 2: A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Jeremiah,
Chapters 2652 (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1989), 117. Holladay compares Jer 19:12,
where the Lords command for Jeremiah to break a potters jug in the valley of Hinnom is not
followed by a report that Jeremiah did so.
27
Hendrik Leene, Blowing the Same Shofar: An Intertextual Comparison of Represen-
tations of the Prophetic Role in Jeremiah and Ezekiel, in Te Elusive Prophet: Te Prophet as a
Historical Person, Literary Character and Anonymous Artist (ed. Johannes C. de Moor; OtSt 45;
Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2001), 17398.
proclamation.
28
Te absence of a specifc order to deliver a death sentence to
Hananiah permits the reader to move directly from the declaration of the invalidity
of Hananiahs forecast to his punishment for speaking falsely in the Lords name,
thereby vindicating Jeremiah and his forecast. Te omission of a report that
Jeremiah delivered the words assigned in vv. 1314 is a literary shortcut.
A similar but subtler maneuver is evident in the relationship between
Ezekiels vision of dry bones (37:110) and the message he is commissioned to
speak (vv. 1214). Ezekiel receives no instruction to report his vision to the people
but is told to announce to them that the Lord will bring them out of their graves,
infuse them with his , and restore them to their land (vv. 1214). However,
these words have little meaning apart from the vision and the rationale for it that is
revealed in v. 11. In efect, Ezekiels readers merge with the audience the prophet is
to address and, therefore, assume that the contents of the vision were known to the
addressees. As in Jeremiah, the omission of an explicit report that words spoken
to the prophet were conveyed to his audience permits the reader to focus on the
crucial actions in the story.
Te use of this narrative device in other prophetic books allows us to judge that
the report of the Lords response in Joel 2:1819a leaves readers to infer that the
people obeyed the admonition of 2:1517, so as to move directly to the outcome.
Because the point of relaying this story is to ofer the audience a path of escape
from the Day of the Lord through desperate petition (vv. 1217), presuming that
those in the narrative complied spotlights the prophetic exhortation as key to
deliverance,
29
thus allowing that appeal to ring in the minds of those expected to
fnd guidance in the story.
Tus, the wayyiqtol forms of vv. 1819a can bear their expected temporal value
within the narrative initiated in 1:24, tacit in 1:517, and raised to consciousness
again in 2:1819a.
II. The Discourse Structure of Joel 2:127
Te juxtaposition of yiqtol and qatal forms in vv. 311 presents a particular
challenge to sustaining a claim that the verbs in Joel 2 have regular tense and
modal values. But here again, recognizing the discourse structure of the passage
afords clarity.
While the qatal verbs in ch. 1 speak of events past,
30
consistent with the
28
Holladay, Jeremiah 2, 126.
29
Jeremias, Gelehrte Prophetie, 102.
30
Tis is in respectful contrast to Bartons argument that either chapter 1 may in any case
be a prediction . . . despite the use of perfect forms, or that ch. 2, despite its yiqtol forms, might
be a report of a past event, since nothing can really be said about the time references in Joel
on the basis of the verb forms used (Barton, Joel and Obadiah, 6970). Te assertion in 1:16
that this devastation stands before our eyes ( ), with the adverbial
adjunct frontpositioned for focus, makes it improbable that these verses foresee calamity. Tat
repeated exhortations to lament what has been lost, the call to sound the horn
(2:1) signals that another disaster is imminent.
31
Nevertheless, some scholars posit
that the qatal forms (e.g., and alongside , in v. 3) look back to the
calamities of ch. 1, while only yiqtol forms foresee a new threat.
Jeremias, for example, divides 2:111 into a frame (vv. 12, 1011) and a
midpoint (vv. 39) that is dominated by yiqtol forms.
32
In his view, the abrupt
shif in v. 10 to qatal shows that the divine command to attack has been executed,
der Kosmos ist schon in Aufruhr (Perfekte).
33
He does not, however, apply this
distinction to the yiqtol and qatal forms in v. 3 ( )
and v. 6 ( ), each of which he translates in the
present tense: , frisst; , lodert; , winden sich; , verlieren.
34

Accordingly, his explanation of the shif to qatal verbal forms in v. 10 seems special
pleading.
Martin Beck recognizes the mixture of verbal forms in ch. 2 and concludes
that the qatal forms signal that many of the efects reported have already been
experienced, while the yiqtol forms bear einen iterative-durativen Aspekt that
is as applicable to the past or present as it is to the future.
35
Since the allusions
to locusts in ch. 2 project the local, contemporary experience attested in ch. 1
into a universaler und endzeitlicher Schau, these verses integrate past experience
into an eschatological scenario to speak of the future.
36
Although this explanation
attempts to hold together reminiscences of locust plagues past and the warning of
a looming, more ominous specter, Becks distinction between the qatal forms as
purely temporal and the prefxed forms as primarily aspectual appropriates from
grammar books one possible function for the qatal and one for the yiqtol, and
then applies them to decode the function of these forms, without considering their
discourse context.
Wolf ofered a purely aspectual explanation of the verbal forms, with the
dominance of imperfect forms in 2:49 detailing an event as it unfolds, while
the qatal forms state facts.
37
As an issue of descriptive grammar in the abstract,
conclusion is supported also by 1:4, which arranges the instances of locusts devouring plants in
a chain, with each direct object front-positioned (What survived the , the ate; what
survived the , the ate; what survived the , the ate). Lacking any indication to
the contrary, the portrayal of this as successive stages of a past event is the most plausible reading.
31
Cf. Jeremias, Die Propheten, 22; Crenshaw, Joel, 15. For blowing the as an alert to
danger, see Jer 4:5; 6:1; Hos 5:8; Amos 3:6.
32
33
Ibid., 26.
34
Ibid., 2021. In fact, he also translates the verbs of v. 10 in the present tense: Vor
ihm erzittert die Erde, erbebt der Himmel; Sonne und Mond werden Schwarz, und die Sterne
verlieren ihren Glanz. Jahwe aber erhebt seine Stimme vor seinem Heer (p. 21).
35
Beck, Der Tag YHWHs, 166.
36
Ibid., 173.
37
Wolf, Joel and Amos, 4142. Te underlying German asserts that the yiqtol forms describe
ein in Gang befndliches Geschehen, while the qatal forms die Fakten konstatieren (Hans
this could be accurate, but it fails to elucidate a rationale behind the choice between
qatal and yiqtol forms in this discourse, since it is difcult to see why, for example,
v. 6 should distinguish between people writhing before this force as an ongoing
activity ( , from before him peoples are writhing) and their
visages having changed as a fact ( , all faces gather redness).
If we are to make sense of the alternation of qatal and yiqtol verb forms in
ch. 2, we need to evaluate them within the discourse structure of the passage,
considering morphosyntax, morphosemantics, and pragmatics.
Ambiguity over verb forms arises already in v. 1, where ( ) could
be parsed as a masculine singular participle ([the Day of the Lord] is coming)
or a third masculine singular perfect ([the Day of the Lord] has come).
38
A
decision hinges on several observations. First, the pattern of a series of imperatives
( . . .
39
) followed by an explanatory clause headed by appears already
in ch. 1 (1:56, 11, 13), in each case explaining a call to lament as a response to
a disaster that has already occurred. One might similarly construe the clause
of 2:1 as announcing the past arrival of the Day of the Lordevidenced in the
calamities of ch. 1as the reason for alerting the people to the army that will bring
the day in full force: Sound the rams horn . . . because the day of the Lord has
come, because it (has come) near!
Before settling on that option, however, we must note the close semantic
parallel with 1:15, which shares with 2:1 the words , , and . Verse
15 opens with an interjection that focuses the audiences attention,
(Alas for the day),
40
thereby establishing the day as the discourse active topic.
41

While the defnite article in might point cataphorically to ,
42
two
observations undermine this. First, vv. 1618 recall the calamities summarized in
vv. 513, so that the current situation remains solidly in view in vv. 1520. Second,
because the words of vv. 1520 provide the lament the priests are to utter in the
assembly they are to convene (v. 14),
43
and because those summoned include the
Walter Wolf, Dodekapropheton 2: Joel und Amos [BKAT 14/2; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener
Verlag, 1969], 48).
38
See Beck, Der Tag YHWHs, 166.
39
Of course the yiqtol form has volitive force, even though it is not an imperative.
40
For the similar deictic force of interjections and imperatives, see Joon-Muraoka 105.
41
Te discourse active topic of a clause is that entity a speaker wants to say something
about (C. H. J. van der Merwe and E. R. Wendland, Marked Word Order in the Book of Joel,
JNSL 36 [2010]: 113).
42
Tis certainly seems to be the case with )( in Ezek 30:2:
, Tus says the Lord God, Wail: Alas for
the day, for near is a day, near is a day for the Lord; a day of cloud and a time for the nations will
it be. Tere, however, is not a technical term but simply designates a day for the Lords
action against the nations, much like in Isa 2:12.
43
Pace Jeremias (Die Propheten, 17), who contends that the mandate of the priests to act
is broken of until 2:15 and replaced by the prophets own cry, which transposes this agricultural
calamity in eine andere Dimension. Te fact that these words lack the explicit appeal for action
groups admonished to bewail disasters in vv. 513,
44
the introductory
refers to this communal lament of the calamities: Alas for this day!
45
Yet a fuller
signifcance of this day is disclosed by the two explanatory clauses that follow.
When the frst clause takes up the topic of the Day of the Lord, it does not
equate it with this day but speaks of it as near (). Because the standard word
order in nonverbal clauses is subjectpredicate,
46
the position of ) (
marks what is salient about the topic: its nearness.
47
Te fnal clause does so equally:
and just like destruction from the Almighty it shall come.
48
Te front-positioned
simile serves as an adjunct to the subject implied in the verb, , highlighting the
destructive character of the Day of the Lord.
49

Just as signifcantly, the verb is the frst yiqtol form in the chapter. Every
fnite verb form to this point has been qatal, used to speak of calamities past. Te
only other yiqtol forms in ch. 1 express a petitioners resolve ( ,
v. 19) and impute intention to cattle as co-petitioners ( ,
v. 20). Accordingly, the distinctive indicative yiqtol form, , looks to the Day
of the Lord as yet future, making the events recounted to this point precursors of
it. Te force of this exclamation is to draw attention to the appropriate inference:
the unusual concatenation of calamities that has brought the people to this day
is not just a run of bad luck; much more ominously, it presages the arrival of the
Day of the Lord.
50
Te word , which expresses fright,
51
evokes the appropriate
emotional response to this imminent peril.
urged in 2:17 does not make them any less a lament to be ofered on behalf of the people as an
appeal to end their sufering (pace Rudolph, Joel, Amos, Obadja, Jona, 47).
44
Te fact that the priests were among those groups individually instructed to lament
(v. 13) suggests that the assembly they are to convene (v. 14) encompasses all these groups.
45
Rudolph, Joel, Amos, Obadja, Jona, 47; Barton, Joel and Obadiah, 5859. For the use of
the article with demonstrative force in expressions of time, see Joon-Muraoka 137f.
46
Adina Moshavi, Word Order in the Biblical Hebrew Finite Clause: A Syntactic and
Pragmatic Analysis of Preposing (Linguistic Studies in Ancient West Semitic 4; Winona Lake, IN:
Eisenbrauns, 2010), 17.
47
Te use of marked word order for identifying topic and focus has been much discussed.
Helpful is Randall Buths defnition of focus as a specially signaled constituent for highlighting
salient information (Word Order in the Verbless Clause: A Generative-Functional Approach,
in Te Verbless Clause in Biblical Hebrew: Linguistic Approaches [ed. Cynthia L. Miller; Linguistic
Studies in Ancient West Semitic 1; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1999], 81). As Buth argues,
however, functional pragmatics must be paired with generative grammar so as to identify
unexpected word order. All the clause-initial prepositional phrases in these verses are extraposed
by this metric.
48
49
Te marked position of the second and third clauses in this sentence is noted also by van
der Merwe and Wendland, Marked Word Order, 120.
50
Rudolph, Joel, Amos, Obadja, Jona, 47; Jeremias, Die Propheten, 17; Wolf, Joel and Amos,
33.
51
HALOT, s.v. ; Wolf, Joel and Amos, 22.
Similar to 1:15, 2:1 explains its summons to an audience with two statements
about the Day of the Lord, each using a predicate found in 1:15, but in reverse
order:
2:1
1:15
Te initial explanatory clause in 2:1 takes up a form of , reserving for
the predicate in the next clause. Tis displacement of by spurs two related
observations. First, the fact that this clause is followed by in the same way
that is followed by in 1:15 makes it likely that
is a participle expressing imminence rather than a qatal preterit. Correlatively,
although verb-frst word order characterizes fnite verbal clauses,
52
the fact that
can occupy the same slot in the phrase as the marked in 1:15 suggests that it
is also marked and, therefore, is a front-positioned qotel predicate. Te emphasis,
therefore, is on the Day of the Lord as impending.
Te two initial phrases of v. 2, in apposition to in v. 1, switch from
emphasizing the proximity of the Day of the Lord to suggesting its ominous
character as a day of darkness and gloom, a day of cloud and thick darkness.
Each of these phrases is composed of a noun () qualifed by two conjoined
nouns. Similar is the phrase appearing later in the verse: a people numerous and
mighty.
53
Between these, however, stands a phrase whose role is ambiguous: like
dawn spread out on the hills. Te accents of the MT link this phrase to the frst
two, so that the darkness is compared to the way dawn covers the hills.
54
Although
likening the as a day of darkness to the spread of the dawn could be ironic,
given the following extended description of the , the simile seems
more likely an image of a force massing on the hills in preparation for attack.
55

Te phrase is front-positioned for focus, as predicate of the
52
Te order VSO is statistically dominant (Joon-Muraoka 155k), although there is
debate over whether this imbalance is due to the accident that sequential narratives, which are
disproportionately frequent, require this order (see Robert D. Holmstedt, Word Order and
Information Structure in Ruth and Jonah: A Generative-Typological Analysis, JSS 54 [2009]:
11139; C. H. J. van der Merwe, Towards a Better Understanding of Biblical Hebrew Word
Order, JNSL 25 [1999]: 277300; and Randall Buth, Word Order Diferences between Narrative
and Non-Narrative Material in Biblical Hebrew, in Proceedings of the 10th World Congress of
Jewish Studies, Division A: Te Bible and Its World [ed. David Assaf; Jerusalem: Magnes, 1990],
916).
53
Te obvious distinction is that the frst two phrases consist of a noun in construct with
two subjoined nouns, whereas this phrase comprises a noun modifed by two adjectives.
54
If one adopts this phrasing, an emendation of (like dawn) to (like
something black) would be sensible, since it would bespeak the pervasiveness of the darkness
that characterizes the Day of the Lord.
55
So also Kutsch, although he considers the transparent to the locusts of 1:4 (Ernst
Kutsch, Heuschreckenplage und Tag Jahwes in Joel 1 und 2, TZ 18 [1962]: 83).
verbless clause.
56
At the same time, the people numerous and mighty becomes
discourse active, the embodiment of the foreboding Day of the Lord.
Accordingly, the following (like it, v. 2d) is front-positioned to
highlight this topic,
57
while the subsequent clause-initial (and afer it)
denies prospects for an analogue in the future as much as in the past. Te preterit
tense value of the qatal () and the future tense of the yiqtol () semantically
match the adverb phrases and . . . , respectively.
58

Emphasis on the incomparability of the refocuses attention on the
claim of unprecedented calamity in 1:2, which was not entirely fulflled by the
compounding of agricultural disasters all too common in Israels world. Te
horrors of locusts and drought recalled in 1:420 were but warm-up acts to the
main event constituting the Day of the Lord. Emphasizing the incomparability
of the Day of the Lord in either the past or the future refocuses attention on the
reason the audience was engaged at the outset of the book.
Verses 2d11, which describe the horrifc army poised for attack, contain
the fuctuations between yiqtol and qatal forms that have recently perplexed some
scholars. Te path to understanding these variations begins with the adjunct
phrases positioned at the head of each clause. Correlative to the front-positioned
in v. 2d are front-positioned adjunct phrases in vv. 37,
59
spotlighting either
space (//) or similarity (). Te frst two adjuncts of v. 3 topicalize
space before and behind, evoking a sense of movement. Te opposition of
to echoes the contrast in v. 2 of to , although there the contrast
was temporal. Nevertheless, the use of and in v. 3 likely derives from
v. 2d, which is itself modeled on Exod 10:14:
(Before it has there been no locust of this sort, and afer it will there be
none similar).
60
Accordingly, the lexical opposition / lay close at hand
for the author.
61
Te next two clauses concretize the destruction the force leaves in its wake,
the frst front-positioning the predicate ( ) to spotlight the original state
56
Van der Merwe and Wendland, Marked Word Order, 122.
57
Te third person masculine singular sufx is anaphoric to the discourse active
.
58
Te tense value of verbs always hinges on semantics in a discourse setting (see Max
Rogland, Alleged Non-Past Uses of Qatal in Classical Hebrew [SSN 44; Assen: Van Gorcum,
2003], 2).
59
Adjuncts are modifers (adjectives, adverbs, and prepositions) not required as semantic
complements to the subject or the predicate (Holmstedt, Word Order and Information
Structure, 114).
60
Bergler, Joel als Schrifinterpret, 262. Similarly, 1:3 draws on the language of Exod 10:2
to speak of relating events having to do with locusts to coming generations (Bergler, Joel als
Schrifinterpret, 256; Jeremias, Die Propheten, 12).
61
Cf. Arndt Meinhold, Zur Rolle des Tag-JHWHs-Gedichts Joel 2,111 im XII-Propheten-
Buch, in Verbindungslinien: Festschrif fr Werner H. Schmidt zum 65. Geburtstag (ed. Axel
Graupner et al.; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2000), 212 n. 27.
of the land, and the second front-positioning the adjunct to focus on the
contrasting conditions in the armys wake. Te human efect of this is stipulated in
the fnal clause, which not only fronts but gives it special focus via prefxed
: not even one survivor does it leave.
62
Te two clauses of v. 4 accent physical characteristics of the
by front-positioning the predicate for focus (cf. , v. 2), with
horses providing a model for appearance, and anaphoric highlighting their
swifness.
63
Te front-positioning of the adjunct phrases headed by in the
frst two clauses of v. 5 shifs the topic to the noise made by the army, and the fnal
clause, (like a mighty people arrayed for war), draws on
the audiences familiarity with the sound of an army readied for battle.
64
Te front-positioning of at the start of v. 6 retains as the discourse active
subject (by means of the third person masculine singular sufx) but, in tandem
with , focuses on the terror engendered by this force,
65
a theme reinforced by
the second clause. In v. 7ab, adjunct constituents are front-positioned to describe
the manner of the assault, while vv. 7c8b highlight the disciplined behavior
of the forces individuals (/) as a way of characterizing the whole (cf. Isa
5:27). In v. 8cd, the armys success in dodging defeat is emphasized, with the frst
clause front-positioning the weapons they evaded and the second clarifying what
it means to fall through the weapons.
66
In v. 9, a series of clauses with front-
positioned adjuncts pictures stages in the successful breach of a citys defenses.
67
Te front-positioned in v. 10 topicalizes space as a means of highlighting
62
Cf. van der Merwe and Wendland, Marked Word Order, 122. Berglers observation
(Joel als Schrifinterpret, 303) that is eine Rckprojektion aus 3,5b leads
Meinhold (Zur Rolle des Tag-JHWHs-Gedichts, 211) to posit that the clause is a secondary
addition. Tis is an attractive proposal, since the talk of no survivors departs from the focus on
the before and afer efects of the horde in the four preceding hemistiches. On the other hand,
we must recall the books tendency to reuse phrases, as in the reprise of from v. 20
at the end of v. 21. (Although Barton [Joel and Obadiah, 85] urges striking the phrase in v. 20 as
a dittograph of v. 21c, the contrast via paronomasia is likely deliberate [cf. Crenshaw, Joel, 152]).
63
64
Tere is progressive elision of elements in these clauses, with the second omitting the
discourse active subject and the third eliding also .
65
66
is a long-standing crux that has spurred some to fnd in a reference
to the Siloam tunnel (cf. , Isa 8:6), through which the army is described making its
assault (e.g., Crenshaw, Joel, 124). Not only are there problems with the identifcation of
as the Siloam tunnel (see HALOT, s.v. ), but the verb would be peculiar for the act of
entering (cf. , v. 9). More likely, designates weapons (cf. Gs
) and the phrase is intentionally ambiguous (since can mean to fall in battle),
with immediately clarifying it. Only here and in v. 10b, among these verses, is an initial
verbal phrase not preceded by ww, and in that case also the phrase is closely linked to the
preceding one (contrast in v. 7d).
67
the efects of the assault, much as did in v. 3 and in v. 6.
68
However, the
third person masculine singular sufx of lacks a clear antecedent, given that
the discourse active subject has been described with grammatically plural verbs
since v. 4b.
69
Tis ambiguity is resolved through the front-positioned subject in
v. 11a: (And the Lord sounds his voice before his army).
70

Just as Isa 5:6 foreshadows the revelation of the identity of the vineyard owner
(in v. 7) in his prohibition of the clouds raining upon the vineyard, so Joel 2:10
elevates the attackers to a superterrestrial level in anticipation of the revelation of
their leader in v. 11.
71

In the remainder of v. 11, we fnd the adjectives of v. 2c ( ) distributed
across the frst two clauses, bringing into focus the image of the as the
Lords great army ( ),
72
obedient to his command (
).
73
Te fnal clause relates this characterization to the warning about the
approaching in vv. 12b.
74
Tese clauses coordinate with vv. 12c to form
brackets around vv. 2d11a,
75
making clear why the Day of the Lord outstrips any
68
Te retention of VS order in v. 10b ( ) befts the close pairing of and ,
while the SV word order of v. 10cd allies the luminaries in withholding light.
69
70
Jeremias, Die Propheten, 26; Crenshaw, Joel, 125; Wolf, Joel and Amos, 4647. Cf. Kutsch,
Heuschreckenplage, 8788.
71
Te tactic of building suspense by delaying identifcation of the referent appeared in 1:2c,
3a, 5c, 11b (van der Merwe and Wendland, Marked Word Order, 125).
72
See Jeremias, Die Propheten, 26.
73
For a diferent proposal see Wolf (Joel and Amos, 48), who concludes that
probably means here performance of the word which had come to prophets in earlier times . . .
rather than obedience to the command actually being issued by a commander (as in v 11a). Te
latter interpretation better suits the context.
74
See Kutsch, Heuschreckenplage, 83; Meinhold, Zur Rolle des Tag-JHWHs-Gedichts,
21011.
75
See Crenshaw, Joel, 49; Jeremias, Die Propheten, 22; Beck, Der Tag YHWHs, 164. I
include vv. 1011a in the description because they are implicitly embraced by the third person
masculine singular sufx of and in the summary that begins in v. 11b. Van der Merwe
and Wendland (Marked Word Order, 125) view these two clauses as grounding the Lords
need to be at the head of this horde in its tremendous size. However, there is no implied rival
candidate for commander-in-chief to motivate this focus. Given the close lexical links with v. 2c,
these clauses more likely encapsulate what was in fact presupposed from the beginning: the
numerous and mighty people . . . is Yahwehs military camp and the executor of his word (Wolf,
Joel and Amos, 48). Wolf, however, follows Kutschs analysis that vv. 10c11a are circumstantial
clauses, so that the clauses in v. 11bd are the syntaktisch und logisch . . . Fortsetzung of
v. 10ab (Kutsch, Heuschreckenplage, 88; Wolf, Joel and Amos, 38, 4546). Circumstantial
clause has proved a generalizing misnomer. Indeed, and
represent typical examples of shifs that are associated with the listing of diferent entities that
are involved in a more global event (van der Merwe and Wendland, Marked Word Order, 124),
while v. 11a discloses the referent of the third person masculine singular sufx of (v. 10).
other calamity (including those of ch. 1): it entails the Lord leading the charge
of a vicious and horrifying force against his people.
76
Whereas in 1:6 the Lord
lamented a denuding of his land and foliage by others, in these verses he is the
patron of destruction.
Te frame formed by vv. 12c and the three clauses of v. 11 isolates vv. 2d11a
as a unit, and two features within that unit mark it as singular in the book. First,
only these verses contain the peculiar mix of yiqtol and qatal verbal forms. Second,
and even more striking, is the plurality of clauses whose frst constituent is an
adjunct.
77
Although one is hard-pressed to identify another passage that uses this
structure so prominently, we can gauge its efects by comparing Ps 19:57, which
front-positions adjuncts in similar ways and ofers other examples of word order
that shed light on Joel 2:2d11a by way of contrast.
Afer vv. 24 of Psalm 19 state that the heavens inaudibly recount the glory of
the Lord, v. 5ab emphasizes the extent of their witness:

5b

5a
5a
In all the earth goes forth their line,
5b
and throughout the world their words.
Te previous statements are about proclaiming the Lords glory, so that what is new
here is the reach of that proclamation, which the front-positioned adjunct phrases,
and , make the topic of the clauses. Tis is comparable to the
way and in Joel 2:3ab topicalize space, creating, by their semantic
opposition, before and afer images, made more specifc by the following clauses
(v. 2cd), thereby describing the efects of the on the march.
Te front-positioned adjunct in Ps 19:5c shifs the focus to the sun
as benefciary of the Lords action, while the front-positioned pronoun in v. 6a
topicalizes the sun as actor, and v. 6b clarifes the meaning of the simile by front-
positioning an emotive verb:

6b

6a

5c
5c
For the sun he assigns a tent in them,

6a
and it is like a bridegroom who comes out from his wedding chamber;

6b
it rejoices like a mighty man in running (its) course.
Te illumination of Joel 2 through these clauses is by way of contrast: neither
comparative adjunct in Ps 19:6a () nor 6b () is front-positioned; the
focus is on the sun as actor. On the other hand, the numerous clauses with initial
in Joel 2 (vv. 4a, b; 5a, b, c; 7a, b) characterize the rather than report its actions.
Finally, while remains discourse active in Ps 19:7a, the front-positioning
of the adjunct phrase topicalizes space, while the front-positioning
76
Pace H. P. Mller (Prophetie und Apokalyptik bei Joel, 23637), who reduces the threat
of 2:111 to a locust plague that has already begun.
77
See Meinhold, Zur Rolle des Tag-JHWHs-Gedichts, 21011.
of in v. 7b creates focus by contrast with , afer which v. 7c reinforces
the merism by exempting nothing from the suns impress:

7c

7b

7a
7a
From the end of the heavens is its exit,

7b
And its circuit is to their ends,
7c
And nothing is hidden from its heat.
Although there is no precise analogue to this tricolon in Joel 2, v. 6 is illuminated
by it:

6b

6a
6a
Before it writhe nations;
6b
all faces gather redness.
78
As noted earlier, the third person masculine singular sufx of the front-positioned
adjunct in v. 6a retains as discourse active, while the use of as the
complement to accents the fear they inspire among the nations. As for v. 6b,
much as Ps 19:7c makes concrete the efect of the suns course through the sky,
so this clause concretizes the fear described in v. 6a by refecting it in the peoples
visages, thereby indicating the fearful might of the .
What arises from these observations is that Joel 2:2d11a develops the image
of the unparalleled . Although some cite the comparison of this force
to a people (v. 5), to , and to (v. 7) as evidence
that the are, in reality, locusts,
79
making this inference the capital issue is
reductionist. In fact, by v. 8 comparisons of the to a military force have given
way to descriptions of it acting as an invading army, so that in v. 9 its entrance
through a window (while redolent of insects) can be compared to another actor:
a thief. In the end, the establishment of its identity as an army becomes the basis
for identifying it as the Lords and (v. 11). Te central issue is not the
(undeniable) specter of locusts behind vv. 39 but the unfolding characterization
of the of v. 2 as an incomparable army under the Lords command.
80
78
Tis idiom is ambiguous, since it could mean either drawing color into the face in
excitement or draining it, in white-faced fear (see HALOT, s.v. ).
79
Crenshaw (Joel, 129) describes the similes as momentary images behind which lies
the pervasive force of locust imagery (see Barton, Joel and Obadiah, 44; and Beck, Der Tag
YHWHs, 166). Bartons claim (p. 44) that the comparison of the force to an army shows that it is
actually locusts is overdrawn, since Jer 6:23 describes the (6:22) as
, without implying that it is not human.
80
Te semantics of both and oscillate between numerous and mighty (Norbert
Lohfnk, , TDOT 11:292). Even though can connote an army in certain contexts
(e.g., Deut 20:1; Josh 11:4; Judg 7:4; Ezek 26:7), it can also connote a throng (e.g., Gen 5:20; Josh
17:1417; 2 Sam 13:34; 1 Kgs 3:8). Similarly, the only occurrence of (Ps 35:18) stands
as a synonym for (cf. Zech 8:22 and Prov 7:26, where and are synonyms). Te
only other appearances of the phrase (or ) are in Exod 1:9; Deut 7:1; 9:14; 26:5,
Given this function of vv. 2d11a, the initially perplexing interchange of
yiqtol and qatal verb forms becomes intelligible. Not only do vv. 3 and 6 already
juxtapose these verb forms, but they, as well as vv. 1011, use language typical of
theophanies,
81
in which diverse verbal forms (not only yiqtol and qatal forms, but
also qotel forms) are ofen juxtaposed (e.g., Pss 18:89; 29:58; 68:811; 77:1719;
97:37; Nah 1:28).
However, mixed verbal forms appear also outside theophanies, such as in the
description of the menacing army in Isa 5:2729:

27

.

28

.
.
82

29
27
None is faint, nor does any in it stumble. (No one) slumbers or sleeps, nor is
his loincloth loosed, or the thong of his sandals broken.
28
Such a ones arrows are sharp and all his bows are taut. Te hooves of his horses
are comparable to fint, and his (chariot) wheels are like a tempest.
29
He has a roar like a lion, and roars like young lions. And he growls and seizes
prey, and secures it, and no one snatches (it) away.
Although the word order of these clauses is unmarked, they (particularly v. 27)
contain an interchange of verbal forms like that in Joel 2:2c11a. In this they
exploit a semantic overlap that occurs frequently in poetry, in which the yiqtol
form denotes habitual activity with no specifc tense value, parallel to which the
qatal form conceives of a universal state or event as a single event.
83
In fact, Joon-
Muraoka notes cases in prose where an action marked as repeated or continuous
by use of the yiqtol in one context is represented in another context in a global
way . . . as if it were unique or instantaneous, through use of the qatal.
84
It is this
functional overlap of the yiqtol and qatal verb forms within a characterization of
this army that best explains their juxtaposition in Joel 2.
Te discourse function of 2:2d11a is to fesh out the warning about the
impending Day of the Lord by describing the divinely led force that brings it.
Within this setting, the yiqtol and qatal verb forms are not comprehended well
where it is unclear if each word is semantically independent or if is elative, underscoring the
force of (see Lohfnk, , 290). Cf. Joel 1:6, where could be taken as a quasi-
defnition of (Lohfnk, p. 292). Of course, populous was likely tautologous with mighty,
since military power depended primarily on the number of warriors (ibid.). Nevertheless,
invites greater defnition.
81
Beck, Der Tag YHWHs, 168; Crenshaw, Joel, 16, 120, 122; Jeremias, Die Propheten, 26.
82
Te qere given by the massorah qetiannah is .
83
IBHS 31.33e.
84
Joon-Muraoka, 111e.
under the rubric of tense. And even if Wolf was right to say that the prefxed
forms detail an event in the course of its happening, his contraposition of those
to the qatal forms as statements of fact mischaracterizes them.
85
Viewing the
morphosyntactic and morphosemantic functions of these verbs as attributes of
a discourse setting rather than as abstract grammatical categories explains the
interchange of yiqtol and qatal forms. Tey cooperate as predications that describe
holistically the import of the Lord leading his armys assault.
In this light, we can account without difculty for the remaining verbs of
ch. 2. Certainly those in vv. 1217 show regular tense or modal values. Te
imminence of the Day of the Lord underlies v. 12s plea to repent, with
front-positioned to stress that the hour is late (Even now).
Te radical action required in light of this impending attack is detailed in v. 13
and buttressed by assurances of the Lords proclivity to relent from the calamity
he has planned. Te possibility that the Lord might act in favor of the addressees
(v. 14) is the foundation for a renewed call to sound a warning that summons
everyoneold and young, and even those celebrating marriageto gather so that
the priests can ofer an appeal for divine clemency (vv. 1517).
Te report that the Lord changed course to act favorably toward his land
and his people (v. 18) is followed by a pledge to restore crops and expunge shame
(vv. 1920). Te participial clause of v. 19c ( ) sets this in the future, from
the vantage point of the oracle of salvation, a perspective that the following clauses
maintain by their use of we-qatalt and (afer nonverbs) yiqtol forms.
86
In these
verses the focus of ch. 1s opening call to recount events is reached. For it is not the
story of disaster that is at its heart but the model of deliverance from the threatened
Day of the Lord, based on the peoples obedience to a call for repentance.
Verses 2123 depart from the oracular form, exhorting the soil, beasts, and
the children of Zion to rejoice in prospects of prosperity. Tese exhortations are
buttressed by clauses using qatal verb forms (culminating in the wayyiqtol
form, ) to highlight the Lords accomplished deeds.
87
Remarkably, however,
85
Wolf, Joel and Amos, 4142.
86
Te fnal independent clause of v. 20 contains the curious form . Elisha Qimron
has analyzed this and similar ww + apocopated yiqtol forms, showing that they are especially
common in Late Biblical Hebrew and are semantically equivalent to ww + yiqtol verb
(Consecutive and Conjunctive Imperfect: Te Form of the Imperfect with Waw in Biblical
Hebrew, JQR 77 [198687]: 15361).
87
Whrle (Die frhen Sammlungen, 403 n. 33) rightly rejects analyzing the qatal verbal
forms in vv. 2123 as prophetic perfects. While a clause afer a prohibition of fear can cite
actions in the past (using the perfect, as in Gen 21:17; 43:23; Isa 43:1), the present (via verbless
predication, e.g., Isa 41:10; 43:5; Jer 1:8), or the future (using the imperfect, e.g., Isa 54:4; Jer 10:5),
this would be the only occurrence of a prophetic perfect in this construction. And if the odds
are against the qatal forms of vv. 2123 being prophetic perfects, then the suggestion that
is analogous to a prophetic perfect likewise falters (pace Joon-Muraoka 118s; Sweeney, Twelve
Prophets, 17172).
v. 24 shifs to we-qatalt forms, promising abundance of grain, wine, and oil in the
future. Tus, even if, on form-critical grounds, the commands of vv. 2123 are
spoken while the calamities yet prevail, their promises of bounty experienced are
comprehended within the oracles promise for the future.
Verses 2527, which resume frst person divine speech, again portray the
main action in the future, via we-qatalt forms at the head of clauses and yiqtol
forms when the verb is preceded by nonverbal constituents.
III. Conclusion
Te verbal forms in Joel 2 are readily understood within their discourse
settings according to regular morphosyntactic and morphosemantic patterns, so
that the mixture of qatal, yiqtol, and wayyiqtol forms need not be attributed to
an indiscriminate use of verbal forms in prophetic literature. Te interchange of
qatal and yiqtol forms in vv. 210 conforms to gnomic functions for these forms
in characterizing this unique force under the Lords command. Te MTs pointing
of the verbs in vv. 1819a is equally intelligible within the discourse setting of chs.
12. Joel 2:111 provides a warning and description of the horrifc Day of the
Lord to incite remedial action before it is too late (vv. 1217), while vv. 1819a
adopt the literary device of assuming that an explicit directive was fulflled.
Because ch. 2 is introduced by reinforcing the call of 1:23 to hand down the story
of deliverance to the coming generations, there is good reason to accept that the
sequence . . . . . . . . . in vv. 1819a deliberately positions the
action in the past as part of that report, in accord with the emphasis on a narrative
of an extraordinary event, as highlighted again in 2:2.
One implication of this study is that we must pay closer attention to the nar-
rative structure of 1:12:27. Te resurfacing of the narrators (Joels) voice in 2:18
19 reminds the narratees (and us) that Joel relates a story,
88
raising more pointedly
the question of its purpose as rhetoric. And in turn, it raises the question of the
distinctive form of Joel as a prophetic book. Both of those questions I will take up
in subsequent publications.
88
See Walsh, Old Testament Narrative, 100.
READING THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS, 2ND EDITION
A Students Introduction
Clayton N. Jefford
978-0-8010-4857-9 224 pp. $29.99p
Praise for Previous Edition:
[A] succinct but comprehensive introduction to
Christian literature of the sub-apostolic age.
Harold W. Attridge
A PEACEABLE HOPE
Contesting Violent Eschatology in
New Testament Narratives
David J. Neville
978-0-8010-4851-7 304 pp. $24.99p
Neville is historically honest, hermeneutically
sophisticated, and personally candid. This is New
Testament theology at its best and most helpful.
Dale C. Allison Jr.
SCRIPTURE AND TRADITION
What the Bible Really Says
Edith M. Humphrey
978-0-8010-3983-6 160 pp. $19.99p
Elegantly written and exegetically compelling, this
book reveals how biblical tradition takes us beyond
the impasse of the Scripture versus tradition
debates that have beleaguered Christianity since
the Reformation.
Bradley Nassif
L
New from
Baker Academic
Already/Not Yet: Eschatological Tension
in the Book of Tobit
jill hicks-keeton
jill.hicks-keeton@duke.edu
Duke University, Durham, NC 27708
Te book of Tobit presents eschatological hope as paramount to life in Dias-
pora. As the title character nears his death, Tobit reasserts the prophets expecta-
tions that God will return Israel from exile. Yet in both the characters and the
readers experience of the story, there is tension between these as-yet-unrealized
hopes for the future and Gods present activity in fulflling these expectations.
Tus, I argue, the book of Tobit does not merely echo prophetic hopes for the
future. Te narrative modifes prophetic eschatology by holding future expec-
tation in tension with the notion of present fulfllment. Tis tension between
the already and the not yet reveals what is distinctive about the narratives
eschatological vision and is the proper lens through which to understand Tobits
primary theological and ethical agenda in its third- or second-century b.c.e. his-
torical context. Te narratives answer to the apparent problem that the proph-
ets hopes have not been realized is that these expectations have already begun
to be fulflled.
A hapless father loses his sight to a birds strategic droppings. A magical fsh
frees a woman of her jealous supernatural tormentor. An angel in clever disguise
drives a dangerous enemy to a faraway land. Te book of Tobit is an amusing and
at times fanciful story. Yet Tobit is also an acutely theological work of literature.
Tough it is set in the Israelite Diaspora afer the Assyrian deportation of the
northern tribes of Israel, the tale provides third- or second-century b.c.e. Jews
with advice about how to live in the Dispersion and with theological tenets that
remain true outside the homeland. While the narratives ethics and theology have
received much consideration in scholarship, its eschatology has not yet received
the attention it deserves. Toroughly shaped by biblical tradition, the book of
Tobit ofers eschatological expectation as paramount to life in Diaspora. As we
JBL 132, no. 1 (2013): 97117
97
I

thank Joel Marcus and Anathea Portier-Young for their helpful comments on earlier
versions of this article.
will see, the foundational theological principle that the narrative promotes is the
hope that God will heal a broken Israel. Tobit thus afrms that the present reality
will be changed dramatically.
Yet, I contend, the book of Tobit holds this expectation in tension with a
conviction that it is presently fulflledinasmuch as the process of altered history
has already begun. Te eschatological tension that thereby emerges encourages
Tobits reader that the hope for a restored Israel is already being realized, though
it is not yet fulflled. In this essay, I argue that this already/not yet tension is the
proper lens through which to understand Tobits primary agenda and that this
tension renders the narratives eschatological vision unique among Second Temple
Jewish texts.
I. Tobits Eschatological Expectations
Tobits eschatological expectations emerge most clearly in his testament in
ch. 14.
1
Te dying character expresses full confdence that God will act in history
according to the word that was spoken through Nahum and, more generally,
the prophets of Israel. His instruction to his son Tobias to leave for the safety of
Media evinces Tobits utter certainty in his claims. Afer Tobit characterizes his
eschatological expectations as fulfllments of prophecy, he makes them explicit
(vv. 47):
2
1
Appropriate here is a word about the text of Tobit. Te narrative survives in both Greek
and Latin manuscripts. Yet because the Qumran fndings comprise fragments of four Aramaic
manuscripts and one Hebrew, scholars generally agree that the book was originally written in
a Semitic language, though an original is not recoverable. Of the Greek versions, there are
two primary recensions: a shorter form preserved in Codices Vaticanus and Alexandrinus (G
I
)
and a longer form preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (G
II
). Scholars usually attribute priority to G
II

because this recension corresponds more readily to the fve Qumran manuscripts and because it
includes frequent linguistic Semitisms, as Joseph A. Fitzmyer has demonstrated (Te Aramaic
and Hebrew Fragments of Tobit from Cave 4, CBQ 57 [1995]: 65575). See Fitzmyers survey of
the manuscripts in his commentary (Tobit [Commentaries on Early Jewish Literature; Berlin: de
Gruyter, 2003], 315). I follow the majority of recent Tobit scholars in regarding G
II
as the earlier
Greek version. It is this recension whose eschatological vision I outline in this essay.
2
Some scholars have doubted that chs. 1314 are original to the book of Tobit. Yet, as
Fitzmyer points out, their partial presence in the Qumran fragments demonstrates their inclu-
sion in Tobit by the second and frst centuries b.c.e., if not their originality (Tobit, 4245).
Furthermore, no extant manuscript lacks chs. 1314. Based on this evidence, I agree with
Fitzmyer that there is no serious reason (ibid., 45) to doubt the integrity of the book as we
have it today (though, as will become evident, I disagree with his description of 14:315 as an
Epilogue [ibid., 321]). Tis conclusion is consistent with Irene Nowells rhetorical analysis of
Tobit, which suggests (on the basis of internal evidence) that Tobit is the work of a single author
(Irene Nowell, Te Book of Tobit: Narrative Technique and Teology [Ph.D. diss., Catholic
University of America, 1983]).
Hicks-Keeton: Eschatological Tension in the Book of Tobit 99
1. All the inhabitants of Israel ( ), whom Tobit
calls our brothers ( ), will be scattered and taken captive
( ) from the good land (
) (14:4).
2. Te whole land of Israel will be desolate (), including Samaria and
Jerusalem (14:4).
3. Te temple of God ( ) will be desolate and will be burned
down until a time ( ) (14:4).
4. God will have mercy () on them and will bring them back (
) to Israel (14:5).
5. Tey will rebuild both the temple ( ), though not
like the frst one ( ), and the city of Jerusalem, just as the proph-
ets of Israel have spoken (
) (14:5).
6. All the nations in the whole earth ( ) will turn
() and will fear () God (14:6).
7. Tey will all abandon their idols ( ) and
praise the eternal God in righteousness ( ) (14:6).
8. All the Israelites who are saved ( ) in those days (
) will go to Jerusalem and will live forever ( ) in the land of
Abraham (14:7).
9. Tose who love God in truth ( ) will
rejoice; those who sin and commit injustice will die () (14:7).
Tobit does not here pioneer new hopes for Israels future. His expectations re assert
those of the classical Hebrew prophets, some of whom would have been alive dur-
ing the narrative setting. Te biblical prophetic corpus reveals the expectations
that the exiles will be returned to the land of Israel and that Jerusalem, along with
the temple, will be rebuilt (Jer 23:18; 29:1014; 31:710; 32:37; Ezekiel 3437; Isa
11:12; 43:57; 51:1752:3; 54:7, 1114; 65:1825). Inasmuch as Tobits expecta-
tions hope for a point in time in which God will restore Israel to its former posi-
tion, Tobit replicates the sixth-century prophets restorationist eschatology. Yet
even Tobits expectations that exceed straightforward restorationist eschatology
fnd parallels in the prophetic corpus. His belief that Gods new salvifc act will
overshadow the old (#5) is paralleled in Jer 23:78 and Isa 43:1819. Te expecta-
tion that Gentiles also will come to worship the God of Israel (#6) fnds parallels in
Isa 2:23 and 60:23. Tobits expectations are those of Israels prophets.
Tobits eschatological convictions are also grounded in two biblical traditions
outside of the prophetic canon: the patriarchal promise tradition (Gen 15:5,
1821) and the Sinai covenant tradition, expectations that national weal or woe
is fundamentally dependent on Israels obedience or disobedience to the covenant
forged with God at Sinai (Exodus 1920). Tis latter tradition is developed further
in Deuteronomy 2830, which describes the blessings and curses resulting from
Israels obedience or disobedience.
3
Deuteronomic theology as expressed in these
chapters is particularly signifcant for its infuence on Tobits theological outlook:
it suggests that Israels idolatry will incite Gods anger against them (28:2527),
that their abandoning the covenant will culminate in exile (28:28), and that God
will restore the people to their land when Israel repents (30:110). As David A.
deSilva notes, Tobits theological contributions are thus mainly conservative,
reinscribing the theology found in Deuteronomy and the eschatology announced
by the prophets.
4
Tobit is not innovating doctrines of eschatology. Tey are rooted
in long-standing biblical traditions and are echoes of Israels prophetic voices.
DeSilvas observation, however, must be qualifed. Within the book as a
whole, this eschatological conservatism describes only the beliefs of Tobit the
character. Te book of Tobit is another matter.
5
As a narrative, the book of Tobit
employs conventions of narrative to communicate its theology. In order to discern
the eschatological expectations that the book of Tobit advocates, then, one must
examine its title characters eschatology in light of the dual-level feature of narrative.
Te narrative-critical distinction between story and discourse is helpful here.
6

Whereas story comprises the plot of the narrative, the events, the characters,
and the settings, discourse signifes how the story is told, identifed through such
literary features as structure, point of view, narration, and symbolism.
When determining the eschatology of the narrative as a whole, one must
examine the book of Tobit from both perspectives. At the level of the story, do
the narrated plot events confrm, defy, or ignore Tobits expectations? At the level
of discourse, how does the readers engagement with the narrative difer from
the experience of the characters, and what diference does that make? Te two
following sections deal with these questions in order to draw conclusions about
the eschatology of the book of Tobit as a whole. I argue that tension between
the already and the not yet emerges on both levels. We will see that the book
conceives of Tobits expectationswhich are also those of Israels prophetsas
having already begun to be realized. Stated otherwise, at the level of the story,
the book of Tobit reasserts the prophets eschatological hopes through its title
character; also at the level of the story, and more elaborately at the level of discourse,
the book of Tobit insists that these expectations have already begun to be fulflled.
3
Alexander A. DiLella notes nine similarities between Tobits fnal testament and the
speeches of Moses in Deuteronomy (Te Deuteronomistic Background of the Farewell Dis-
course in Tob 14:311, CBQ 51 [1979]: 38089).
4
DeSilva, Introducing the Apocrypha: Message, Context, and Signifcance (Grand Rapids:
Baker Academic, 2004), 80.
5
Te error of identifying, without argumentation, the views of a character with those of
the author or of the narrative as a whole is neither new nor uncommon. With respect to Tobits
eschatology in particular, see as another example Moses Rosenmann, Die Eschatologie im
Buche Tobit, in Studien zum Buche Tobit (Berlin: Mayer & Mller, 1894), 2327.
6
See the chapter Story and Discourse in Mark Allan Powell, What Is Narrative Criticism?
(GBS; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 2334.
II. Already/Not Yet Tension at the Level of Story
Te level of story comprises what the characters themselves do, say, hear,
and see in the narrative. Te interpreter must imagine the story as the characters
experience it, in the order in which they experience it, and with their limited
knowledge. Blind and exiled, Tobit does not experience tension with respect to his
own predicament because he sees no signs of present fulfllment in his miserable
circumstances. Within the story world of Tobit, then, the already/not yet tension
occurs with respect to the nation of Israel. Tis eschatological tension, I contend,
emerges from Tobits interpretation of his own healing as the beginning of Gods
healing of Israel, a point that I develop through an analysis of Tobits language in
selected prayers and hymns. We will see that there is an intimate connection
indeed almost a fuiditybetween Tobit the individual and Israel as a nation.
7
Tobits frst prayer (3:16) reveals a Deuteronomic theology of sin and pun-
ishment. Lamenting his personal sorrow and yet speaking about the people of
Israel, Tobit woefully addresses God: Tey sinned against you, and disobeyed
your commandments. So you gave us over to plunder, exile, and death (3:34).
8

His prayer continues as a personal, and therefore individual, appeal for release.
He pleads, Command, O Lord, that I be released from this distress; release me
to go to the eternal home (3:6). Almost in the same breath, Tobit laments Israels
misfortunes and his own: he interprets his present circumstances through a lens of
national relations with God.
Once Tobit has been miraculously healed, he prays again. Tis time he blesses
God for the merciful restoration of his sight (11:1415). Te prayer reveals Tobits
understanding of his personal sufering/restoration within a pattern of Gods
7
Tough I arrived at this conclusion independently and on the basis of the evidence
cited here, scholars have noted the ambiguity of Tobit as individual and Israel as collective.
George W. E. Nickelsburg comments that Tobits situation is paradigmatic for the exiled
nation and points to Tobits predictions about Israel in ch. 14 as [i]n keeping with the authors
parallelism between the individual and the nation (Tobit, in HarperCollins Bible Commentary
[ed. James L. Mays et al.; rev. ed.; San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 2000], 719, 730). See
also his comments in his Jewish Literature between the Bible and the Mishnah: A Historical and
Literary Introduction (2nd ed.; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005), 3233. Beate Ego suggests that 14:5
indicates that Tobit and Sarahs salvation has also to be regarded as representing the fate of
the people of Israel at large (Te Book of Tobit and the Diaspora, in Te Book of Tobit: Text,
Tradition, Teology. Papers of the First International Conference on the Deuterocanonical Books,
Ppa, Hungary, 2021 May 2004 [ed. Geza G. Xeravits and Jozsef Zsengeller; JSJSup 98; Leiden:
Brill, 2005], 52). In the same volume, Stefan Beyerle notes the close connection between Tobits
I and the we of Israel ( Release me to go to my Everlasting Home . . . [Tob 3:6]: A Belief in
an Aferlife in Late Wisdom Literature? 8288). Te principal innovation of my argument is the
claim that the Tobit/Israel connection produces tension between future expectations and present
fulfllment.
8
Quotations from the book of Tobit are from the NRSV, which translates G
II
.
aficting/showing mercy: Tough he aficted me, he has had mercy upon me
(11:15a). God has dealt with Tobit according to the Deuteronomic paradigm
of punishment/relief, just as Tobit understands Gods dealings with the nation.
Tobits fnal hymn in ch. 13 (esp. vv. 2, 56, 9) broadens the paradigm of afict/
show mercy to apply not only to Tobit himself but also to the nation. Tough
God aficts the people for their iniquities (the exile), God will show mercy to
them when they turn back (the ingathering of the exiles and the restoration of
Jerusalem). Tobit proclaims, He will afict [] you for your iniquities,
but he will again show mercy [] on all of you (13:5). He also states that
God will afict and then have mercy on Jerusalem (13:9).
While George W. E. Nickelsburg claims mercy and to have mercy as
the authors most frequent terms for Gods saving activity, I would add the
qualifcation that the pattern of scourge/have mercy always appears on the lips
of Tobit the character and thus is his understandingwithin the story worldof
Gods relations with him.
9
But, as Nickelsburg rightly points out, Tobit, in light
of his own recent healing, consistently uses this paradigm to understand Gods
relations with the nation as well (13:2, 5, 9; cf. 13:14; 14:5). Indeed, in parallel
literature, the formula scourge/have mercy occurs most frequently with regard to
the nation (Ps 89:3234; Wis 12:22; Pss. Sol. 7:810; 10:14; 18:47).
10
Nickelsburg
argues furthermore that this pattern of diction suggests that the problem of exile
and dispersion and hope for a regathering of the people are of foremost concern to
the author and that its application to Tobits own sufering is secondary.
11
In the
story world, however, Tobits sufering/healing is far from secondary: it is central
to his understanding of Gods relationship to the whole nation.
12
Te experiences
of his own life are the lens through which Tobit now expects Israels impending
restoration. What is signifcant here, then, is that Tobits own healing has become
evidence for him that God will deal likewise with the people of Israel.
Indeed, Tobits last testament (ch. 14) further reveals that his healing has
given him confdence of a future ingathering of the exiles. More signifcantly,
though, Tobit now interprets Gods mercy toward him and his family as the begin-
ning of the fulfllment of his future expectations. Afer he states his eschatological
expectations (outlined above), Tobit immediately instructs his son to act. He urges:
9
Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, 32.
10
Ibid.
11
Ibid.
12
Anathea Portier-Young has argued that, by portraying the intertwined resolution of
Tobits and Sarahs sufering, the narrative ofers community as a solution for individual sufering
(a problem the Deuteronomic paradigm does not address) (Alleviation of Sufering in the Book
of Tobit: Comedy, Community, and Happy Endings, CBQ 63 [2001]: 3554). It is important to
bear in mind, though, that Tobit never loses sight of his fate as intertwined with that of the people
of Israel. As we have seen, his fnal prayer and his second testament (13:117; 14:311), now
informed by his own healing, center on Gods relations with the people as a whole.
My son, take your children and hurry of to Media, for I believe the word of the
God that Nahum spoke about Nineveh, that all these things will take place and
overtake Assyria and Nineveh. . . . So it will be safer in Media than in Assyria
and Babylon. (14:4)
Te fulfllment of the prophetic word, for Tobit, has begun in his and his familys
relations with God. For Tobit, his own storyand that of his extended familyis
intricately connected with that of Israel.

Te close identifcation of the individual with the communityand of their
intertwined fatesis not without biblical precedent; this notion resonates, for
example, through Israels psalms. In Psalm 77, an individual in a time of trouble
calls on God and connects his personal predicament to the experiences of the
nation. As a lament for the exile, the psalm casts the exodus as the paradigm by
which the psalmist can hope for return from exile (i.e., a new exodus). Tough the
speaker is undoubtedly an individual, he envisions a God who is responsive to him
as an individual just as God has dealt with the nation in the past. Gods dealings
with this individual, then, are wrapped up in Gods dealings with all of Israel.
Gregory M. Stevenson suggests that the communal imagery of this individually
voiced psalm functions to inspire hope for Gods faithfulness to the individual in
the future (despite present dire circumstances) on the basis of Gods faithfulness
to Israel in the past (in this case, the exodus).
13
Te same individual/collective
dynamic appears on Tobits lips, but with reverse logic: since God has been faithful
to an individual Israelite, God will be (and is) faithful to all of Israel.
Psalm 137, an exilic lament, is another example.

Te very grammar of this
psalm indicates fuidity between an individual and a corporate speaker.
14
Assuring
the remembrance of Zion and requesting revenge against Israels captors, the
speaker begins as the community, becomes an individual, and then shifs back to
the community. All of the frst-person verbs and pronouns in vv. 14 are plural
(e.g. we sat [], we wept [], we hung []). In vv. 56, the frst-
person verbs and pronouns become singular (e.g., I forget you [], my
right hand [], I remember you []). Verse 8 shifs back to frst person
plural: to us (). Te individual and the community are bound up together in
their devastation, in their vocal lament, in their determination to remember Jeru-
salem, and in their plea for revenge.
13
Stevenson, Communal Imagery and the Individual Lament: Exodus Typology in Psalm
77, ResQ 39 (1997): 21529.
14
Sigmund Mowinckel, who infuentially argued that many of the I-psalms are actually
national laments in which an individual (the king) speaks on behalf of the broader community,
points to Psalms 44, 60, 74, 83, 89, 123, and 144 as examples of this grammatical phenomenon
(Te Psalms in Israels Worship [trans. D. R. Ap-Tomas; 1962; 2 vols. in 1; Biblical Resource
Series; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004], 1:225; see also 4246 and 22546). For a summary
of major scholarly proposals of the identity of I in the lament Psalms, see Amy C. Cottrill,
Language, Power, and Identity in the Lament Psalms of the Individual (Library of Hebrew Bible/
Old Testament Studies 493; New York/London: T&T Clark, 2008), 1018.
Te Psalms of the Righteous Suferer are further examples of the inextricable
connection of the fate of the individual with that of the nation.
15
In Psalm 28,
for example, a sufering individual pleads with God for deliverance from enemies
(vv. 15), praises God for divine mercy and help (vv. 67), and then concludes
with pleas on behalf of Gods people (vv. 89). Psalm 62 follows a similar pattern.
Te individual speaker frst asserts that salvation has come to his soul from God
(vv. 12) and instructs his soul to continue waiting for God (v. 6). Te imperative
then becomes plural () as the speaker exhorts the people to trust God as well.
An additional example, Psalm 69, begins as an individual lament (vv. 131), moves
into an exhortation to the oppressed community to be glad (v. 32), and ends with
the afrmation that God will save Zion, rebuild Judah, and restore the people to
their land (vv. 3536). Following in the tradition of these psalms, Tobit believes
that his experience with God is inseparable from Gods relationship to Israel. Te
result is that, for Tobit, his own healing is the beginning of national restoration.
Within the story world, the narrative confrms Tobits interpretation by
narrating events just as Tobit had said they would occur. In its concluding
detail, the book of Tobit notes that before Tobias dies, he hears of and rejoices
over Ninevehs destruction (14:15). At the end of the narrative, then, not only
has Tobit been healed and come to understand his healing as the beginning of
national restoration, but his expectation of the destruction of Israels oppressors
comes to fulfllment. Te restoration of Israel has already begun, though it is not
yet complete. Tus, at the level of the story, the already/not yet tension derives
from the individual healings anticipating national restoration, which is already in
progress with the concluding detail of the narrative.
III. Already/Not Yet Tension at the Level of Discourse
Beyond the level of the story world is the level of the readers engagement
with the narrative: the level of discourse. In contrast to the characters in the story,
the reader is in a privileged position to locate and to be infuenced by the books
literary techniques and rhetorical strategies. Te more elaborate already/not yet
tension in the book of Tobit occurs on this level. Te narrative creates for the reader
the sense of both expectation and present fulfllment by its use of dramatic irony,
15
For useful discussions of the communal dimensions of the Sufering Servant in the
context of NT study, see Morna Dorothy Hooker, Jesus and the Servant: Te Infuence of the
Servant Concept of Deutero-Isaiah in the New Testament (London: SPCK, 1959), 4152; and Joel
Marcus, Te Way of the Lord: Christological Exegesis of the Old Testament in the Gospel of Mark
(Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1992), 18486. Teir studies have infuenced my discussion.
See also Marcuss discussion of the individual/communal dimensions of the Isaian Sufering
Servant, the shepherd in Zechariah 914, and the one like a son of man in Daniel 7 (pp. 163,
16970).
character names, structure, and narration. Te tension at the level of discourse
develops with respect both to the characters in the story and to Israel as a whole.
We begin with the characters.
Tobit cannot see his healing coming, but the reader of this tale has more
knowledge about Tobits fate than he does. Tough suspense is typically considered
a literary merit because it creates pleasurable anticipation as one reads, the book
of Tobit employs its opposite: it spoils the surprise. Tat is, the narrator tells the
reader what is going to happen before it happens. Tis phenomenon, I suggest,
heightens the tension between the already and the not yet with respect to plot
events. Tere are two illustrative moments.
First, afer Tobit and Sarah each ask God for death, their prayers are heard
simultaneously ( ) in heaven (3:16). In the very next sentence, the
narrator reveals Gods intention to heal them and the means by which healing will
be conferred, thereby eliminating suspense (3:17).
16
Te description is detailed:
God sends Raphael to [remove] the white flms from [Tobits] eyes, so that he
might see Gods light [ ] with his eyes. In fact, this is exactly what
happens, confrmed by Tobits exclamation upon the peeling away of the white
flms: I see you, my son, the light [ ] of my eyes! (11:14). Te repetition of
lightthough now Tobias has become the light of his fathers eyesreinforces
that the plan expressed in 3:17 has been executed well. Te arrangements in 3:17
for Sarahs healing are likewise detailed: Raphael is sent to give her in marriage to
Tobias and to set her free from Asmodeus. Te narrator subsequently relates these
precise events (7:118:14).
Second, the narrator reveals to the reader what will happen before it happens
during the journey of Tobias and Azariah/Raphael to Media. Before Tobias knows
why Azariah instructs him to bring the fsh along, the narrator tells the reader that
the fsh will be the vehicle of both the exorcism and the restoration of sight (6:78).
Once again, the narrators predictions become true later in the story: burning the
fshs liver and heart causes Asmodeus to fee (8:23), and blowing the gall into
Tobits eyes allows the white flms to be peeled away (11:1213). Terefore, the
reader knowsbefore it happens in the story worldthat Tobit and Sarah will be
healed, the precise means by which they will be healed, and the way in which their
stories of restoration will be intertwined.
Rather than literary clumsiness, this feature of the narrative is an efective
rhetorical device. As Meir Sternberg points out, the narrator of a story has options.
One is to sequence the storys telling so as to imitate (or even to worsen) the
conditions of our suspenseful advance from present to future in life.
17
Just as
16
See Irene Nowell, Te Narrator in the Book of Tobit, SBLSP 27 (1988) 2738, here 28.
Cf. the treatment of Sabine Van Den Eynde, One Journey and One Journey Make Tree: Te
Impact of the Readers Knowledge in the Book of Tobit, ZAW 117 (2005): 27380.
17
Sternberg, Te Poetics of Biblical Narrative: Ideological Literature and the Drama of
Reading (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985), 265.
readers cannot anticipate the future in their own lives, so they cannot anticipate
what lies ahead for the characters in this narrators story. Te potential literary
advantages of this sequencing strategy are many: the narrator may multiply gaps,
pit hope against fear, and delay the resolution to the last possible moment.
18
An
alternative sequencing strategy, Sternberg explains, is for a narrator to use his
retrospective posture in order to turn the natural opacity of the future into
artful transparency: to play down suspense by revealing at an early point some
normally inaccessible information about what lies ahead, whether by way of
explicit or implicit forecasting.
19
Te key word here is artful. Forecasting is not
a mistake; it is a deliberate device that leads to dramatic irony. Tis choice with
respect to suspense, whether it is shaped or shattered, contributes to a narratives
overall rhetorical strategy.
Te lack of suspense in Tobit serves an important role in the readers
experience of the story. It creates dramatic irony whereby the reader knows
more than the characters, who cannot transcend the level of the story world.
Because the reader knows that Raphael has been sent to heal Tobit, the reader can
understand why Raphael greets Tobit (amid his apparently dire circumstances)
with an exultant Joyous greetings to you! (5:10). Te reader may also appreciate
the irony when Tobit, not recognizing that a heaven-sent healer is the one who
greets him, responds with pessimism and despair: What joy is lef for me any
more? (5:10). Labeling this phenomenon double perspective, David McCracken
identifes another moment of dramatic irony as Tobit sends Tobias on the journey
to Media with Raphael/Azariah as his guide.
20
As Tobit blesses his son, he says,
And may [Gods] angel travel with you (5:17). Neither realizes that God has
already provided an angel to travel with Tobias (5:4). While McCracken points to
this scene principally to claim it as one example of the books comedic elements, I
argue that the dramatic irony functions as more than amusement; it contributes to
the readers experience of the tension in the narrative between what will happen
and what is happening.
Tobits narrator invites the reader into the already in 3:1617 and 5:10, since
from these points forward, the reader expects the healingsbut also knows that
they are already under way because of Raphaels presence as Gods representative/
mediator. Yet, in narrative time, because they have not been healed, the characters
are still in the not yet. Te audience must continue reading for the realization of
Tobits and Sarahs healing in the story world. Tus, the lack of suspense and the
discrepancy between the readers knowledge and the characters knowledge add to
the already/not yet tension in the narrative.
Another feature of the book of Tobit may serve to enhance (at least for the
astute reader) this tension between the characters present and future: their very
18
Ibid.
19
Ibid.
20
McCracken, Narration and Comedy in the Book of Tobit, JBL 114 (1995): 410.
names. Carey A. Moore points to the ironic nature of the characters names in
the narrative.
21
At his introduction, Tobiah (Yahweh-is-my-good) has received
no evidence in his life of God as his good. Hannah (Grace) caustically berates
her husband; she is apparently not gracious. Raguel (Friend-of-God) despairs
at his inability to marry his daughter, a circumstance divergent from friendship
with God. Te demon Asmodeus is more in control of Sarahs (Mistress) life
than she is, depriving her of the ability to be a proper mistress. Edna (Pleasure)
endures family troubles that are far from pleasurable. Indeed, at the moment
these characters frst appear in the narrative, their names mock their present
circumstances.
Moore rightly recognizes that the character names in Tobit are appropriate
by the end of the narrative, given Gods restorative actions in their lives. But, to
the attentive (or perhaps repeat) reader, these names are ftting throughout the
narrative, since the reader knows (at least afer ch. 3) that God is going to inter-
vene. Te names may function, then, as clues that the healing of sufering, though
not yet recognizable by the characters, has already begun, though it is not yet
complete.
In similar fashion, Nickelsburg illumines the signifcance of two minor
characters names. Tobit mentions them as proof of Azariahs good lineage (5:14):
Ananiah means Yahweh-has-had-mercy, and Shemaiah means Yahweh-has-
heard. While Nickelsburg notes that these names hint at the salvation yet to
be revealed through Raphael, he overlooks the reality that even Raphaels initial
presence is a result of Gods hearing (3:16) and responding mercifully (3:17) to
Tobits pleas (3:27).
22
Because of their position in the narrative afer the heavenly
court scene but before the healings come to fulfllment, these names remind the
reader that the process has already begun.
Moore comments that, in contrast to the humans names, the angels names
are appropriate descriptions throughout the narrative: Raphael means God-
has-healed, while his alias Azariah means Yahweh-has-helped.
23
Yet an irony
lurks here. When the narrator initially introduces Raphael (3:17), in the story
world, God has not yet healed. When Tobias and then Tobit are frst introduced to
Azariah (5:4, 10, 13) in the story world, God has not yet helpedat least to Tobits
knowledge. Teir names stand in tension with the situations of Tobit and Sarah.
By introducing names that afrm that God has healed and helped before Tobit
can see again and before Sarah and Tobias marry, the narrative signals that the
healing/helping is already becoming a reality: Raphael/Azariahs very presence is
the beginning of Gods healing and help for Tobits (and Sarahs) family, a course of
action that has begun but is not yet complete.
21
Moore, Tobit: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 40A; New York:
Doubleday, 1996), 25.
22
Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, 349.
23
Moore, Tobit, 25.
Tus far I have argued that the book of Tobit develops tension for the reader
between the already and the not yet with respect to the characters circumstances.
I will next ofer two features of the narrative that build eschatological tension with
respect to the nation of Israel: frst, the structure of the narrative, and, second, its
split narration. Te structural markers of location provide a literary paradigm for
understanding the already/not yet tension with regard to the expected return to
the land. Te references to Jerusalem at the beginning (1:313) and near the end
(13:918; 14:57) frame the narrative in terms of Israels dwelling and relating
to God in the land. Furthermore, Tobits mention of recurring pilgrimages to
Jerusalem (1:6) sets up a pattern of return that becomes paradigmatic for a future
return. Te bulk of the story, however, occurs between these frames and is set
outside of Palestine.
24
Although the Jerusalem/exile/Jerusalem frame structurally
suggests a return to the holy city, the books attention to Nineveh at the end of
the story refects the not yet part of the expectation. Tough the ingathering
is assured, the return is not complete. Te very structure of the narrative, then,
refects its afrmation that God will return the exiles to a restored Jerusalem and
its recognition that Gods work is as yet unfnished.
Tobits geographical structure is straightforward. One of the most puzzling
features of the book, on the other hand, is its shif in point of view. Te story
moves from third-person narration (1:12) to frst-person narration from Tobits
perspective (1:33:6), and then back to third-person narration for the remainder
of the story (3:614:15). Tough scholars have posited a variety of explanations for
this narration split, there is no consensus. Afer surveying leading suggestions, I
will ofer a new reading of the narration shif in the context of the broader argument
of this article. I propose that the shifs rhetorical efect is the heightening of the
eschatological tension by blurring the boundaries between Tobit and the nation
of Israel.
Afer his extended consideration of the issue, Norman R. Petersen concludes:
Perhaps the best answer is that this [ego-narration] is one of the few compositional
defciencies in his story.
25
Yet that scholars continue to wrestle with the issue
illustrates that presuming authorial blunder or lack of skill is a solution of last
resort. Opting for a source-critical solution, James E. Miller suggests that a redactor
produced a bi-narrative text from a partially preserved pseudepigraphic text
of Tobit that he considered autographical. Miller posits that the redactor salvaged
as much of the original version as possible, using the abundant third-person texts
for the rest of the text.
26
Millers hypothesis is unnecessarily complex, and while
his explanation is possible, it is highly speculative. It does not allow for creative
agency, literary artistry, or theological agendas on the part of the author/redactor.
24
Cf. Ego, Book of Tobit, 4244.
25
Petersen, Tobit, in Te Books of the Bible (ed. Bernhard W. Anderson; 2 vols.; New York:
Scribner, 1989), 2:37.
26
Miller, Te Redaction of Tobit and the Genesis Apocryphon, JSP 8 (1991): 56.
McCracken analyzes the split narration from a rhetorical standpoint, arguing
that the change in perspective is a device used to create comedy. By his reading, the
frst-person narrator, Tobit, is a comic narrator who, although pious, embodies
the ludicrous through his limited perspective, a perspective that the third-person
narrator and the reader transcend.
27
By depicting the title character as an unreliable
narrator and focusing solely on Tobits comedic tenor, McCrackens reading does
not take into full account the narratives theological gravity and ethical urgency.
Additionally, as Irene Nowell has shown, the frst- and third-person narrators
share a remarkably similar perspective.
28
Tobit as frst-person narrator even tells his
portion of the story from an omniscient perspective. Perhaps the clearest example
is when Tobit narrates that Anna was paid for her work and given a goat; he then
quotes the character Tobit, who accuses his wife of thef, making a judgment without
the omniscient knowledge that Tobit the narrator has just displayed (2:13). Both the
frst-person and third-person narrators share Tobits inner thoughts and feelings
(1:19; 2:6, 10, 14; 3:1; 4:2; 10:23). Furthermore, both narrators tell the story via
impersonal observation, without personal refection. Nowell notes that the sim-
ilarity in stance between the narrator in 1:33:6 and the narrator in the rest of
the book can be seen by substituting he for I in the frst section.
29
In fact, the
history of interpretation confrms her proposition, as evidenced by the Vulgates
third-person narration throughout. Tough Nowell ofers an excellent analysis of
the narration in Tobit, she does not venture an explanation for the narration shif.
Yet her observations point toward the fruitfulness of asking questions about the
narrator from a narrative-critical perspective.
Moore insists that the shif from frst-person narration to third is prompted
by literary considerations, namely, that the narrator had to describe actions
and thoughts to which Tobit himself was not privy at the time of the action.
30

Employing third-person omniscient narration is indeed an excellent way for
an author to allow the reader to know things that would not be known from a
frst-person perspective. Yet Moores explanation does not address why Tobits
author includes the frst-person narration at all. Indeed, the narrator had to
describe the necessary information that Tobit would not have known,
31
but
with this explanation, the author did not have to employ frst-person narration.
If Moore is right, it would better serve the authors purpose to use a third-person
omniscient narrator throughout. Te question must be addressed: What is gained
by employing both frst-person and third-person narration?
32
27
McCracken, Narration and Comedy, 410.
28
Nowell, Narrator, 2738.
29
Ibid., 29.
30
Moore, Tobit, 22. Fitzmyer ofers a similar explanation (Tobit, 44).
31
Moore, Tobit, 22 (emphasis added).
32
Te phenomenon of frst- to third-person (and vice versa) narration shifs occurs also in
Ezra-Nehemiah and in Daniel, a fact that raises the interesting question of whether the author
It is my suggestion that the narration shif functions rhetorically to mimic
at the level of discourse Tobits own conviction at the level of story that his fate is
inextricably bound up with that of Israel. Te third-/frst-/third-person confgura-
tion structurally frames Tobits own story inside that of the community. Beginning
with third-person narration, the book of Tobit opens with the basic plot premise
that Tobit was taken into captivity. Te introduction places Tobit in his long line of
Naphtalite ancestors. As soon as the narration shif in 1:3 begins (I, Tobit . . .), the
reader realizes that this book is indeed the story of Tobiteven told from his point
of view. Te frst-person narration brings the reader into the story of an individual,
functioning as a rhetorical invitation to encounter Tobits experiences from his
own, very personal perspective. Tobit recounts his exile to Nineveh, his individual
sufering there, and his private prayer for release. His plea for death concludes with
ultimate despair (3:6).
Yet, at the height of Tobits hopelessness, in which the reader has been com-
pelled to share through his frst-person narration, the story suddenly changes.
With a jarring shif to third-person narration, the reader is taken to events that
occur on the same day ( ; 3:7) but in distant Media and to
diferent characters. Tobits self-expression of sufering is met with Sarahs (and
her familys) story of sufering. Tough Tobit feels utterly alone, Tobits reader now
knows that he is not. Sufering marks other exilic Israelite lives as well.
Tobits story is (part of) Israels story, here illustrated to the reader through
a juxtaposition of Tobits own narration and a third-person narrators account
of the broader Israelite family. Tus, just as Tobit envisions his own sufering/
healing as inextricably connected to the nation, so the narration split draws
Tobits individual story into that of Israel more broadly. Tis feature at the level
of discourse, then, further confrms for the reader Tobits own notion that his
healing is a sign of the beginning of national restoration. Eschatological tension
of Tobit might be deliberately invoking a literary convention (though Daniels fnal form likely
postdates Tobit). My aim in this instance, however, is not to decipher the authors intentions.
Rather, I seek in this section to describe the books literary dynamics in order to ofer a conjecture
for the rhetorical efect of the narration shif (on the reader) based on evidence from the story
world: that is, that Tobit himself sees a blurring of boundaries between himself and Israel. Any
attempt to compare/contrast the literary dynamics of the narration in Tobit with that of Ezra-
Nehemiah and Daniel, or to ofer a global thesis about narration shifs in biblical and postbiblical
literature, must therefore wait for a diferent project. On the shifs in Ezra-Nehemiah, see esp.
Sigmund Mowinckel, Ich und Er in der Ezrageschichte, in Verbannung und Heimkehr:
Beitrge zur Geschichte und Teologie Israels im 6. und 5. Jahrhundert v. Chr. Wilhelm Rudolph
zum 70. Geburtstage (ed. Arnulf Kuschke; Tbingen: Mohr, 1961), 21133; H. G. M. Williamson,
Ezra, Nehemiah (WBC 16; Waco: Word, 1985), 14549; and Tamara Cohn Eskenazi, In an Age of
Prose: A Literary Approach to Ezra-Nehemiah (SBLMS 36; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988), 12953.
On the shifs in Daniel, see esp. Danna Nolan Fewell, Circle of Sovereignty: A Story of Stories in
Daniel 16 (JSOTSup 72; Shefeld: Almond, 1988), 97110; and Tim Meadowcrof, Point of
View in Storytelling: An Experiment in Narrative Criticism in Daniel 4, Did 8 (1997): 3042.
emerges here as Israels future healing has broken into the present in the story of
Tobit and his (extended) family.
IV. Tobits Eschatology in Context
Tus far we have seen that Tobits eschatological hopes are grounded in
Israels prophetic tradition and that the book of Tobit endorses its title characters
expectations while at the same time holding future hopes in tension with present
fulfllment. Yet, while Tobit maintains the eschatological expectations of Israels
prophets, one important disparity between this book and the prophetic corpus
demands attention: its date of composition. Tobit, although set during the exile,
postdates the event by nearly four centuries. Since Tobits author had prophetic
texts from which to draw, it is not surprising that the book advocates eschatology
similar to that of Israels prophets. It becomes interesting, however, when one
con siders an alternative eschatological paradigm characteristic of other Second
Temple Jewish texts: apocalyptic eschatology.
Because the prophets expected the direct intervention of God to take place in
history, in this world, their eschatology (prophetic eschatology) is ofen contrasted
with apocalyptic eschatology, which expects a defnitive end of history wrought
by the otherworldly, extrahistorical salvifc activity of God.
33
Te scholarly debate
surrounding the specifc characteristics of prophetic and apocalyptic eschatology
demonstrates that there is no consensus regarding defnitions.
34
Te historical
relationship between prophetic and apocalyptic eschatology is also uncertain.
35
As
I cannot solve these problems here, these distinctions are necessarily preliminary
and provisional. Tey are intended only to provide a broad interpretive framework
in which we may attempt to historicize Tobits eschatological paradigm.
What is most important in this project is the acknowledgment that a diferent
kind of eschatological outlook developed in Jewish thought in the centuries afer
33
John J. Collins, Apocalyptic Eschatology as the Transcendence of Death, CBQ 36
(1974): 30.
34
See especially the essays in Knowing the End from the Beginning: Te Prophetic, the
Apocalyptic, and Teir Relationships (ed. Lester L. Grabbe and Robert D. Haak; JSPSup 46;
London/New York: T&T Clark International, 2003), and particularly Grabbe, Prophetic and
Apocalyptic: Time for New Defnitionsand New Tinking, 10733; and John J. Collins,
Prophecy, Apocalypse and Eschatology: Refections on the Proposals of Lester Grabbe, 4452.
See also Job Y. Jindo, On Myth and History in Prophetic and Apocalyptic Eschatology, VT 55
(2005): 41225; and Lorenzo DiTommaso, History and Apocalyptic Eschatology: A Reply to
J. Y. Jindo, VT 56 (2006): 41318.
35
See, e.g., the divergent conclusions of Paul Hanson (Te Dawn of Apocalyptic [Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1975]) and John J. Collins (Te Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish
Apocalyptic Literature [2nd ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998], esp. 24).
the exile of 587/586 b.c.e. Indeed, apocalyptic eschatology was a widespread
approach for envisioning the future in Second Temple Judaism.
36
Regardless of
its temporal relationship to the historical prophets, apocalyptic eschatology was
certainly an available pattern for viewing the future by the time Tobit was written
in the late third or early second century b.c.e. More satisfactory precision may
be garnered from a comparison of specifc texts as a means of demonstrating
eschatological alternatives (rather than any attempt to classify texts according
to preestablished defnitions). Tobits eschatology is radically diferent from, for
example, the apocalyptic Enochic writings, in particular the Apocalypse of Weeks.
Tough nearer than the prophets to Tobits date of composition, these writings
ofer a radically diferent understanding of Gods impending activity on behalf of
Israel, one that diverges signifcantly from Israels prophetic tradition.
37

Nickelsburg has argued compellingly that Tobit and 1 Enoch (confned to chs.
136 and 91105) refect a common tradition.
38
He ofers as evidence impressive
similarities in cosmology, angelology, demonology, eschatology, wisdom and
ethical teaching, and liturgical vocabulary. Indeed, Tobit displays strong hints of
familiarity with the apocalyptic worldview and the conventions of the apocalypse
genre as evidenced in these portions of 1 Enoch. Like 1 Enoch, Tobit employs a
fctive setting from Israels past. While Tobit does not claim to be transmitting a
divine revelation, as does 1 Enoch (1:2; 93:2), it does imagine an active spiritual
world. God dwells in the heavenly world and is attended by angels (Tob 8:15; 11:4).
Te archangel Raphael appears in both texts as intercessor and healer (Tob 12:12
15; 1 Enoch 10:48; 20:3). Even the wording of Raphaels binding of the demonic
villain Asmodeus (8:3) is similar to that of 1 Enoch 10:4, which describes the duel
between Raphael and Azazel.
39

36
See Collins, Apocalyptic Imagination, 1112.
37
Te Enochic writings, like many Second Temple Jewish texts, are notoriously difcult to
date. Nickelsburg states that chs. 136 of 1 Enoch can be dated (in various stages) between 320
and 200 b.c.e. He notes that the only safe statement that may be made regarding the date of the
Epistle of Enoch and the Apocalypse of Weeks (1 Enoch 92105) is that they could have been
written as early as the beginning of the second century b.c.e. but no earlier (Tobit and Enoch:
Distant Cousins with a Recognizable Resemblance, in George W. E. Nickelsburg in Perspective:
An Ongoing Dialogue of Learning [ed. Jacob Neusner and Alan J. Avery-Peck; JSJSup 80; Leiden/
Boston: Brill, 2003], 23536). Te reason these texts have been chosen is because of Nickelsburgs
suggestion (explored more fully in subsequent paragraphs) that Tobit and portions of 1 Enoch
share a common tradition.
38
Nickelsburg, Tobit and Enoch, 21739. It is because of the uncertainty of dates for both
1 Enoch and Tobit that Nickelsburg opts for understanding their similarities as due to a common
tradition rather than literary dependence. Te comparison/contrast between the texts is useful
in the present project as a means of showing alternative ways to frame such a common tradition:
while 1 Enoch posits an otherworldly cosmic judgment and an eschatological temple, Tobit
envisions a new temple within history and without special divine revelation apart from Israels
prophets. In my judgment, then, Fitzmyers claim that there is a trace of apocalyptic expectation
in Tobits hope for a New Jerusalem is not accurate (Tobit, 4849).
39
In private conversation, Anathea Portier-Young pointed out to me that Tobit shares with
With respect to eschatology, Nickelsburg notes that in both texts Gods mercy
for Israel lies in the future.
40
More than in any other features that Nickelsburg
examines, though, the eschatology of Tobit diverges from that of 1 Enoch. He
points out the present-time, this-worldly orientation of Tobits message in contrast
to 1 Enochs future-time, otherworldly eschatological stance:
[I]n an emphasis very diferent from 1 Enoch, the author of Tobit focuses
on the presence of God and the activity of Gods healing angel here and now.
Raphaels mission is placed neither in primordial times nor at the eschaton; it is
in historical time that he descends to heal the sufering of human beings. . . . Tis
focus on Gods presence now in the lives of individuals distinguishes Tobit from
1 Enoch, where Gods benefcent, saving will, which is being done in heaven, will
be realized on earth only in an eschatological denouement.
41
While Nickelsburgs project is to demonstrate eschatological similarities, it is the
diference he observes that is most signifcant for the present study: Tobit envisions
eschatological fulfllment in history in a recognizable world in which Israel will be
returned to the land and the temple will be rebuilt. Te Apocalypse of Weeks,
by contrast, imagines that from among the corrupt (but distinct from them), a
remnant of Israel must be chosen whose gif of revealed saving knowledge and an
eschatological sword equips them to be Gods agents of judgment on their wicked
contemporaries.
42
Such eschatological expectation departs from the hopes found
in the prophets and reasserted by Tobit. Tus, Tobits prophetic eschatology is all
the more striking in its historical context precisely because the narrative displays
hints of familiarity with noneschatological apocalyptic features but does not
embrace an apocalyptic eschatological paradigm.
43

1 Enoch an additional relevant characteristic: Tobit is also ahistorical. Yet, whereas 1 Enoch is
ahistorical because of its mythic setting outside of history, Tobit is so because of its (well-known)
temporal and geographical mix-ups that rip it from its chronological moorings. For example,
the tribe of Naphtali was taken into exile by Tiglath-pileser III (2 Kgs 15:29), not Shalmaneser V,
as Tobit claims (Tob 1:2) (for a complete list, see Moore, Tobit, 10). While scholars ofen point to
such errors as evidence for dating Tobit later than its historical setting, we may also speculate as
to the rhetorical efect of the errors (whether intentional on the part of the author or not): they
make Tobits story accessible to new generations such that Tobits now may also be the (third-
or second-century b.c.e.) readers now. Te book of Tobit thereby dehistoricizes itself enough
so that its theological and ethical agenda may be relevant to readers living afer the narratives
historical setting.
40
Nickelsburg, Tobit and Enoch, 224.
41
Ibid.
42
Ibid., 228.
43
Another Second Temple Jewish text that refects prophetic eschatology is Baruch, a
book that, like Tobit, is attributed to an exilic fgure who expresses that God will restore Israel
and return the exiles to Jerusalem. Baruch 4:55:9 employs Deuteronomic and Deutero-Isaian
language and imagery to express hope for the restoration of Zion. Tis text, which was likely
written during the Hasmonean period, postdates Tobit, but it is noteworthy here because it
stands in the same tradition of dealing with present confict/sufering by reasserting the prophets
Yet, as we have seen, Tobit does not merely echo prophetic hopes for the future.
Te narrative modifes prophetic eschatology by holding beliefs of future expectation
in tension with the notion of their present fulfllment. What circumstance might
have precipitated such a modifcation? In 1976, Paul D. Hanson posited that
apocalyptic eschatological thinking arose as a result of unrealized prophetic hopes:
[T]he perspective of prophetic eschatology yielded to that of apocalyptic escha-
tology. Gradually Gods fnal saving acts came to be conceived not as the ful-
fllment of promises within political structures and historical events, but as
deliverance out of the present order into a new transformed order.
44
With Hansons thesis in mind, I suggest that Tobit advocates an alternative answer
to the unrealized prophetic hopes. Whereas the texts that endorse apocalyptic
eschatology, such as the Apocalypse of Weeks, answer the unrealized expectations
of the prophets by picturing a fnal eschaton and judgment that will alleviate the
sufering of the righteous, Tobit reasserts the prophetic hopes. Yet, both at the level
of story and at the level of discourse, there is tension between the hoped-for future
and its breaking into the present. Tis eschatological tension therefore encourages
the reader: the prophets hopes are already being realized, even though they are
not yet fulflled.
Te historical circumstance of the author, and by extension that of the original
audience, here becomes especially signifcant. Tobit was written centuries afer
the sixth-century b.c.e. destruction of Jerusalem, the exile, and the subsequent
rebuilding of the temple and return of some of the exiles. Tus, in contrast to the
characters in the narrative, the author of Tobit, and thus presumably its original
audience, lived during a time when the Jerusalem temple had already been rebuilt,
though there were still Jews living (and thriving) outside of Palestine. While one
expectation the narrative develops had already been fulflled in the authors time
(the restoration of Jerusalem), one had not yet come to completion (the full
ingathering of the exiles).
V. Tobits Eschatologically Motivated Ethics
Tat the book of Tobit is deeply concerned with the return of the exiles to their
homeland is confrmed by its Israel-centric ethics and the telos of the narratives
hortatory message, which is intimately connected to the narratives eschatological
expectations. As a model diasporic Israelite, Tobit regularly performs acts of
charity, including almsgiving (1:3, 1617a; 2:2) and burying the dead (1:17b18;
hopes for restoration rather than positing an apocalyptic judgment or end of history. Yet, in
contrast to Tobit, the book of Baruch does not display hints that its expectations for the future
have broken into the present.
44
Hanson, Apocalypticism, IDBSup, 2834, here 30.
2:4), and he instructs his son to do likewise (4:611, 1617; 14:2, 911). It is
signifcant that Tobits charity is restricted to fellow Israelites (1:3; 2:2; 4:6b7).
Far from arbitrary, the ethical exhortations in Tobit are purposeful; the composite
conduct they promotefaithfulness to the Israelite communityestablishes a way
of maintaining Israelite identity in the Diaspora.
45

Similarly Israel-centric, perhaps the most conspicuous ethical tenet in Tobit
is that of endogamy. Te narrative takes care to note that Tobit is married to a
kinswoman (1:9) and that he instructs his son to do likewise (4:12). Te plot itself
endorses endogamy through Sarahs faithful persistence in marrying kinsmen
(3:15) and through Azariah/Raphaels locating the command in the book of
Moses as he facilitates Tobiass marriage to a kinswoman (6:13, 16).
Familial language further develops the theme of endogamy.
46
Te pervasive-
ness of fraternal vocabulary to describe nonfraternal relationships throughout the
narrative is striking, particularly in instances of direct address: Tobit and Tobias
address Azariah/Raphael as twelve times (5:10, 11 [twice], 12, 14 [twice],
17; 6:7, 14; 7:1, 9; 9:2); Azariah/Raphael addresses Tobias as four times
(6:11, 13 [twice], 16); and fnally, Raguel and Edna each address Tobias as
once (7:10; 10:13). Sarah is called Tobiass sister () (7:9, 12; 8:7), and
Raguel describes their marriage in fraternal terms, telling Tobias, Now you are
her brother [] and she is your sister [] (7:12).
47
Tis literary feature
binds the Israelite characters as family and further highlights endogamy as a means
of group identity preservation in a foreign land.
Te imperative to maintain Israelite identity is, signifcantly, based on escha-
tological expectation. In his frst testament, Tobit exhorts Tobias: First of all, marry
a woman from among the descendants of your ancestors; do not marry a foreign
woman (4:12). Tobit assures his son that, by practicing endogamy, Tobias will fol-
low the example of Noah, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, whose descendants will inherit
the land ( ; 4:12). As Amy-Jill Levine observes,
for Tobit, the telos of endogamy is the ingathering of the exiles.
48
Te land is the
result, rather than the origin, of community self-defnition.
49
Te hope of Israels
restoration grounds Tobits practical advice. Tobias should conduct himselfas
45
For a similar formulation, see Ego, Book of Tobit, 4651.
46
See Vincent Skemp, and the Teme of Kinship in Tobit, ETL 75 (1999):
92103.
47
Fitzmyer points to Cant 4:9, 10, 12; 5:1 and to 1QapGen 2:9 as parallel usages of forms
of (Tobit, 219). For a discussion of ancient Israelite kinship structures in the context of
a study on Tobit, see Robert J. Littman, Tobit: Te Book of Tobit in Codex Sinaiticus (Septuagint
Commentary Series; Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2008), xxxviixli.
48
Levine,Diaspora as Metaphor: Bodies and Boundaries in the Book of Tobit, in Diaspora
Jews and Judaism: Essays in Honor of, and in Dialogue with, A. Tomas Kraabel (ed. J. Andrew
Overman and Robert S. MacLennan; South Florida Studies in the History of Judaism 41; Atlanta:
Scholars Press, 1992), 108.
49
Ibid., 1089.
Tobit hasin a way that will preserve Israelite identity so that they will be returned
to the promised land. Tis relationship between the theological afrmation and the
ethical exhortations therefore emerges: Israelites in the Diaspora should act in a way
that both expects and engenders Gods faithfulness in the ingathering.
In Tobits fnal hymn, in which he describes the exile and the ingathering
of Israel, the subject of these events is our brothers ( ; 14:45).
Vincent Skemp points out that the use of the Leitwort here is remarkable, given
that the author has used other phrases to refer to the Israelite people:
(5:5; 13:3; 14:7) and (11:17).
50
Pushing further his claim that
this choice is made because is a key word, I suggest that the repetition
here does more than simply promote kinship as a value; rather, it underscores
Tobits assertion in 4:12 that it is the family of Noah, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob
the integrity of which he desires to protect through endogamywho will return
to the land. Near the end of the book, then, the theme broadens the nar-
ratives scope from the individual characters in the immediate story to the people
of Israel as a whole.
Tobits ethical tenets, which the book as a whole endorses by narrating his
eventual reward for piety, derive from his expectations of what is to come for Israel.
Since, as we have already seen, the book of Tobit conceives of these expectations as
having already begun to be fulflled, it is reasonable to suppose that a primary goal
of the narrative is to encourage exilic Jews to be loyal to Israel and its God so that
these eschatological expectations may be brought to completion.
Perhaps the book of Tobit, then, was intended as a narrativized ethical treatise
for diasporic Jews, but one that primarily reminded them that they were not at
home, that Gods dealings with them were as yet incomplete, and that their conduct
should refect the belief that God is bringing all of the people back to Israel. Many
scholars posit a diasporic provenance for Tobit because of its familiarity with
Dispersion living; if the above analysis is correct, however, it is conceivable that
the work was written by a Jew living in Palestine whose focus on the exiles return
infuenced his theological vision for those living outside the land.
51

VI. Conclusion
As we have seen, Tobits eschatology is deeply entwined with the traditions
found in Israels Scriptures, with the ethics the narrative promotes, and with
50
Skemp, Kinship, 101.
51
Tough this suggestion is speculative, it may be supported by the fact that fragments of
Tobit were found at Qumran. Tere was one community, at least, in Palestine who thought Tobit
important and relevant enough to preserve alongside other authoritative texts. Tobits notion that
the future has broken into the present would have been consistent with the Qumran communitys
conviction that they were living in the age of eschatological fulfllment.
the books theological agenda. Trough literary means, the book of Tobit insists
that the eschatological expectation of Gods mercy is foundational to life in the
Diaspora. By employing a story of individual sufering/healing, the narrative
points toward the national situation: exile/ingathering. Tat the book envisions
eschatological tension between the future and the present, along with the endorse-
ment of prophetic rather than apocalyptic eschatology, is extremely signifcant.
Te book of Tobits answer to the apparent problem that the prophets hopes have
not been realized is that these expectations have already begun to be fulflled.
Te theological innovation of the book of Tobit, then, is this hortatory message
grounded in eschatological tension: be faithful to the covenant even in Dispersion,
for God is even now fulflling the promises in our midst. Te already/not yet
tension that the narrative builds serves to encourage Jews in the Diaspora to live
in a way that both expects Gods ingathering (the not yet) and that afrms that
Gods saving activities are in play in the present (the already). Tobit/Israels God
will be faithful; Tobit/Israels God is faithful.
Outstanding Scholarship from Cambridge
Prices subject to change.
An Ancient
Commentary on the
Book of Revelation
A Critical Edition of the
Scholia in Apocalypsin
Edited and translated by
P. Tzamalikos
$200.00: Hb: 978-1-107-02694-0: 456 pp.
The New Cambridge
History of the Bible
From the Beginnings
to 600
Edited by
James Carleton Paget and
Joachim Schaper
New Cambridge History of
the Bible
$190.00: Hb: 978-0-521-85938-7: 936 pp.
Riches, Poverty, and
the Faithful
Perspectives on Wealth in
the Second Temple Period
and the Apocalypse of John
Mark D. Mathews
Society for New Testament
Studies Monograph Series
$99.00: Hb: 978-1-107-01850-1: 304 pp.
Augustus
Introduction to the
Life of an Emperor
Karl Galinsky
$90.00: Hb: 978-0-521-76797-2: 220 pp.
$27.99: Pb: 978-0-521-74442-3
Divination, Prediction
and the End of the
Roman Republic
Federico Santangelo
$99.00: Hb: 978-1-107-02684-1: 368 pp.
Paul the Apostle
His Life and Legacy in
Their Roman Context
J. Albert Harrill
$80.00: Hb: 978-0-521-76764-4: 220 pp.
$24.99: Pb: 978-0-521-75780-5
Reinhold Niebuhr
and His Circle of
Influence
Daniel F. Rice
$85.00: Hb: 978-1-107-02642-1: 264 pp.
$29.99: Pb: 978-1-107-65309-2
Russian Bible Wars
Modern Scriptural
Translation and
Cultural Authority
Stephen K. Batalden
$99.00: Hb: 978-1-107-03211-8: 360 pp.
Sacrifice and Gender
in Biblical Law
Nicole J. Ruane
$95.00: Hb: 978-0-521-87724-4: 275 pp.
Syrian Identity in the
Greco-Roman World
Nathanael J. Andrade
Greek Culture in the
Roman World
$110.00: Hb: 978-1-107-01205-9: 448 pp.
2 Volume Hb Set!
The Cambridge History
of Religions in the
Ancient World
General editor
Michele Renee Salzman
$250.00: 2 Hb bks: 978-1-107-01999-7:
1,002 pp.
www.cambridge.org/us
@CambUP_Religion
Can Ahiqar Tell Us Anything about
Personifed Wisdom?
seth a. bledsoe
sab08j@my.fsu.edu
Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306
Bezalel Porten and Ada Yardenis third volume of Textbook of Aramaic Docu-
ments (TAD:3) provides a highly regarded edition of the Aramaic Ahiqar nar-
rative and proverbs that has implications for how scholars of wisdom literature
incorporate Ahiqar into discussions of personifed Wisdom. Te most intrigu-
ing result of the new arrangement centers on the two lines of what was tradi-
tionally called Saying 13 (TAD:3 lines C1.1.79 and C1.1.189). Te two lines of
Saying 13 have been crucial for the view that personifed Wisdom is in Ahiqar.
Te unity of the saying has been disrupted, and it seems clear that the respec-
tive lines have very diferent meanings. Based on this evidence, it is my conten-
tion that personifed Wisdom cannot be found in Ahiqar. I argue, therefore,
that Ahiqar no longer has a place in discussions of personifed Wisdom and
that the relationship between Ahiqar and the biblical wisdom literature must be
re assessed in light of this new evidence.
Te Aramaic Ahiqar, a ffh-century b.c.e. document from the Jewish military
colony at Elephantine, has fascinated scholars of wisdom literature for nearly a
century.
1
Many of Ahiqars sayings share formal and thematic similarities with the
biblical wisdom literature, especially the book of Proverbs.
2
Among the parallels,
Tis paper was presented in the Wisdom in the Israelite and Cognate Traditions section
at the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature in Atlanta, Georgia, in 2010. I would
like to thank Matthew Gof and Amanda Davis Bledsoe for their valuable insight and feedback.
1
Unless otherwise specifed, references to Ahiqar passages are from text C1.1, Words of
Ahiqar, in Bezalel Porten and Ada Yardeni, Textbook of Aramaic Documents from Ancient Egypt,
vol. 3, Literature, Accounts, Lists (Texts and Studies for Students; Jerusalem: Hebrew University
Press, 1993). For convenience, I will provide only the line numbers, e.g. Ahiqar 79 = TAD:3, C1.1.79.
2
As in Proverbs 1031, most of the individual sayings employ some form of parallelism.
Tere are also a number of my son (Ar. ) sayings, which are paralleled by the presumed
social setting of Proverbs 19 (e.g., Prov 6:20). Ahiqar has one example of a numerical saying
JBL 132, no. 1 (2013): 119137
119
perhaps the most outstanding is a hymn that seemingly praises a divinely exalted
and possibly personifed Wisdom. Scholars of wisdom literature, therefore, have
drawn on Ahiqar to make claims about the origins and character of personifed
Wisdom, and some have even pointed to Ahiqars personifed Wisdom as evidence
for a direct relationship between Ahiqar and the biblical Proverbs.
Te papyri, though, are highly fragmentary and the reconstruction is not
certain. In 1993, Bezalel Porten and Ada Yardeni published the third volume of
Textbook of Aramaic Documents (TAD:3), which provides a new reconstruction
of the Ahiqar text, as well as a diferent arrangement of the columns. Tis highly
regarded edition of the Ahiqar narrative and sayings has serious implications for
how scholars of wisdom literature incorporate Ahiqar into their discussions. Te
most intriguing result of the new arrangementat least for scholars of wisdom
literaturecenters on the two lines of what was traditionally called Saying 13.
3
In
their new edition, the unity of the saying has been disrupted, and it seems clear
that the respective lines have very diferent meanings. Based on this evidence, it is
my contention that personifed Wisdom cannot be found in Ahiqar.
I argue, therefore, that Ahiqar no longer has a place in discussions of per-
sonifed Wisdom and that the relationship between Ahiqar and the biblical
wisdom literature should be reassessed. In this article I will frst briefy review
(187188), which can be compared to Prov 6:1619 and those in the Words of Agur (Prov
30:1819, 2131). Te following are a just a few examples of thematic correspondence: discipline
of children (Ahiqar 175177; Prov 13:24; Sir 30:113); behavior around/obedience to a king
(Ahiqar 8487; Prov 20:2; Sir 7:5); and the righteous vs. wicked (Ahiqar 103104; Prov 2:2122;
Sir 32:1617). Two of the sayings have even been identifed as almost exact parallels with their
biblical counterparts: Ahiqar 176 = Prov 23:1314 and Ahiqar 206b = Jer 9:22. H. L. Ginsbergs
comments about the frst pair are worth noting: Tough parental discipline and the desirability
of corporal punishment are common enough themes in wisdom literature, the close verbal
similarity . . . is greater than could be accounted for by similarity of theme alone. It cannot
be claimed that either saying is borrowed from the other, but it is likely that some common
oral or written tradition underlies both (Te Words of Ahiqar, ANET, 487). Although the
conclusion is missing, the narrative portions of Ahiqar are reminiscent of the court tales genre
found in both Egyptian and biblical literature, especially the Joseph narrative. One may also
compare Job, Daniel, Esther, Tobit, and Nehemiah. Te Egyptian Demotic text Te Instruction of
Ankhsheshonq may also be likened to these. For comparison between Ahiqar and Ankhsheshonq
see Miriam Lichtheim, Late Egyptian Wisdom Literature in the International Context: A Study of
Demotic Instructions (OBO 52; Freiburg, Schweiz: Universittsverlag, 1983).
3
Saying 13 consists of lines 94b95 (= 189 and 79 in TAD:3) in James M. Lindenbergers
edition (Te Aramaic Proverbs of Ahiqar [Johns Hopkins Near Eastern Studies; Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press, 1983]). Te Proverbs of Ahiqar were frst divided into lines by A.
Cowley (Aramaic Papyri of the Fifh Century B.C. [1923; repr., Osnabrck: Otto Zeller, 1967]),
and most have followed this convention. In 1961 Pierre Grelot applied a numbering system to
just the proverbs papyri, which was followed by Lindenberger (et al.), hence Saying 1, 2, 3, etc.
(Les proverbes aramens dAhiqar, RB 69 [1961]: 17894). Further discussion of the numbering
systems will be made below in the section on the arrangement of the fragments.
Bledsoe: Ahiqar and Personifed Wisdom 121
how Ahiqar has been used by scholars of wisdom literature, focusing primarily
on discussion surrounding the fgure of personifed Wisdom. Ten I will present
Porten and Yardenis arrangement of the columns and their reconstruction of the
lines in question. Here I will ofer some analysis and interpretation of each line
and its importance for understanding the concept of wisdom in Ahiqar. Finally, I
will conclude by summarizing what can be said about Ahiqars relationship to the
personifed Wisdom tradition.
I. Scholarly Discussion of Ahiqar and Personified Wisdom
Over the past century a great deal of scholarship on the biblical wisdom
literature has centered on the fgure of personifed Wisdom.
4
Much of that efort
has been to search for her origins among the Canaanite, Egyptian, or Assyrian
pantheons.
5
Others avoided talk of divinity or hypostatization and have taken
rhetorical or even sociological approaches to the text, suggesting that Wisdom
is merely a metaphor or that she is modeled on real, wise women.
6
Some have
4
Namely, the character in Prov 1:2033; 8:19:11 and the similar fgures in Job 28, Sirach
24, Baruch 3, and Wisdom of Solomon 78.
5
W. F. Albright at one time claimed that Wisdom was a hypostatization of the Canaanite
god El (Te Goddess of Life and Wisdom, AJSL 36 [1920]: 25894). Bernhard W. Lang
connected the image of Wisdom in Proverbs with a Syrian/Israelite goddess who was the patron
saint of scribes (Wisdom and the Book of Proverbs: A Hebrew Goddess Redefned [New York:
Pilgrim, 1986], 131). See also Lang, Wisdom, DDD (2nd ed.), 16921702. Christa Kayatz saw
the Egyptian Maat as the model of Wisdom (Studien zu Proverbien 19: Eine form- und motiv-
geschichtliche Untersuchung unter Einbeziehung gyptischen Vergleichsmaterials [WMANT 22;
Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1966]). W. J. Knox (Te Divine Wisdom JTS 38
[1937]: 23037) drew parallels between the hellenized Isis and Wisdom in Proverbs, and the
same was done with the Wisdom fgure in the Wisdom of Solomon (John S. Kloppenborg,
Isis and Sophia in the Book of Wisdom, HTR 75 [1982]: 5784) and Sirach (Martin Hengel,
Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in Teir Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period
[Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974], 15760). Mark Smith suggested the goddess Asherah as the model
of Wisdom (Te Early History of God: Yahweh and Other Deities in Ancient Israel [Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2002], 13337).
6
See, e.g., Claudia V. Camp, Woman Wisdom as Root Metaphor: A Teological Considera-
tion, in Te Listening Heart: Essays in Wisdom and the Psalms in Honor of Roland E. Murphy
(ed. Kenneth G. Hoglund et al.; JSOTSup 58; Shefeld: JSOT Press, 1987), 4576; or Christine
Roy Yoder, Wisdom as a Woman of Substance: A Socioeconomic Reading of Proverbs 19 and
31:1031 (BZAW 304; Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 2001). Te examples here and in the
previous footnote are only a few of the theories concerning the fgure of personifed Wisdom.
For a lengthier discussion of these examples and others, see Michael V. Fox, Proverbs 19: A New
Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB:18A; New York: Doubleday, 2000), 33145;
Alice M. Sinnott, Te Personifcation of Wisdom (SOTSMS; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2005),
1052; or Judith Hadley, Wisdom and the Goddess, in Wisdom in Ancient Israel: Essays in
Honour of J. A. Emerton (ed. John Day, Robert P. Gordon, and H. G. M. Williamson; Cambridge:
maintained that personifed Wisdom is a uniquely Israelite phenomenon.
7
While
there is still much debate about the fgure in Proverbs 8 and her origins, many of
those discussions have relied, to some extent, on the Aramaic Proverbs of Ahiqar
from Elephantine.
Te two lines that make up Saying 13 in Ahiqar have been crucial for the
view that there is a personifed or hypostatized Wisdom fgure independent of the
biblical wisdom tradition.
8
J. M. Lindenbergers translation of Ahiqar in James H.
Charlesworths Old Testament Pseudepigrapha is the most accessible and continues
to be infuential. His translation of Saying 13 reads as follows:
From heaven the peoples are favored;
Wisdom is of the gods.
Indeed, she is precious to the gods;
her kingdom is et[er]nal.
She has been established by Shamayn;
yea, the Holy Lord has exalted her.
9
While scholars have debated exactly what this text is saying about Wisdom, most
have understood the fgure here to be comparable to Woman Wisdom of Proverbs
Cambridge University Press, 1995), 23443. As is evident, there is no consensus on the matter.
Part of the problem is the lack of evidence for a wisdom fgurewhether divine, hypostatized, or
personifedoutside the biblical texts.
7
Michael D. Coogan argues that personifed Wisdom is an Israelite phenomenon and repre-
sents the legitimization of goddess worship in Israel and Judah (Te Goddess WisdomWhere
Can She Be Found? in Ki Baruch Hu: Ancient Near Eastern, Biblical, and Judaic Studies in Honor
of Baruch A. Levine [ed. Robert Chazan, William W. Hallo, and Lawrence H. Schifman; Winona
Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1999], 20310). In response to Coogan, Hadley says, It is my opinion
that the apparent apotheosis of Lady Wisdom in the biblical literature is not a legitimization of
the worship of established goddesses, but rather is a literary compensation for the eradication of
these goddesses (Wisdom and the Goddess, 236).
8
Saying 13, as it stands in Lindenbergers edition, does not exist in Porten and Yardenis
reconstruction. When I mention Saying 13 I am referring to Lindenbergers edition.
9
Lindenberger, Ahiqar, OTP 2:499. Tis was (and, in some respects, continues to be)
the standard English translation on which most scholars have relied since 1985. Many also rely
on Lindenbergers monograph Te Aramaic Proverbs of Ahiqar, which has the same translation.
Before the publication of OTP, the most accessible English translation was by Ginsberg (ANET,
498507), and some still use it. Cowleys Aramaic Papyri of the Fifh Century B.C was the classic
edition. Still, some have relied on their own reconstructions and translations based on Eduard
Sachaus facsimiles of the manuscripts, whose quality is such that they are still useful today. Te
standard edition in French scholarship has been Grelots (1961). Grelot has since published two
revisions, in 1972 (Histoire et sagesse dAhiqar lAssyrien, in idem, ed., Documents aramens
dEgypte [LAPO 5; Paris: Cerf, 1972], 42752) and in 2001 (Les Proverbes dAhiqar RB 108
[2001]: 51128), the latter edition following TAD:3 closely. German scholarship has been heavily
infuenced by Ingo Kottsiepers monograph Die Sprache der Ahiqarsprche (BZAW 194; Berlin/
New York: de Gruyter, 1990). See also Kottsiepers important article Die Geschichte und die
Sprche des weisen Achiqar, TUAT 3.2 (1991), 32047.
8 (et al.). Te correspondence becomes increasingly signifcant if the ffh-century
Elephantine text faithfully represents the supposed eighth-/seventh-century
Syrian original.
10
Tus, not only would we have an extrabiblical Wisdom fgure,
but one that is not Israelite/Jewish and may even predate Proverbs.
11
Te presence
of such a fgure outside the Israelite or Jewish wisdom traditions has infuenced
scholarly constructions of personifed Wisdom and has shaped the way scholars
understand the relationship between Ahiqar and the biblical wisdom literature.
A. Scholarly Analysis of Wisdom in Ahiqar
before Publication of TAD:3 (19111993)
Almost immediately afer its frst publication by Sachau in 1911, scholars of
wisdom literature have brought Ahiqar into their discussions about personifed
Wisdom.
12
In 1920, W. F. Albright referenced the Ahiqar passage before remarking,
Aramaic Hokmeta wisdom, is evidently the source of Jewish Hokma.
13
Herbert
Donner, in 1957, was the frst to make a strong argument for a direct connection
between the wisdom fgure in Ahiqar and the one in Proverbs 8. He understood
the Ahiqar fgure to be the connecting link between the Egyptian Maat and the
fully developed personifed Wisdom in Proverbs.
14

Later, Bernhard Lang suggested that the fgure in Proverbs referred to an
Israelite patron goddess of wisdom who was one among many in the early Israelite
pantheon. His thesis was heavily criticized because he ofered little solid evidence
for this claim, except he did suggest that the Ahiqar text refers to a goddess who
bears the same name [as the one in Proverbs, and] perhaps the Aramaic-speaking
scribes shared the cult of Wisdom with their Hebrew-speaking colleagues.
15
10
Te provenance and original language of Ahiqar have been heavily debated. Recently,
however, consensus is building around Aramaic as the original language (as opposed to Akkadian
or Hebrew) and probably a Syrian (or, perhaps, western Assyrian) provenance in the late eighth
or early seventh century. Kottsiepers works are signifcant (Die Sprache and Die Geschichte).
See also discussion in Lindenberger, Aramaic Proverbs of Ahiqar, 1620; Jonas C. Greenfeld,
Te Wisdom of Ahiqar, in Day et al., Wisdom in Ancient Israel, 4352; and Kottsieper, Te
Aramaic Tradition: Ahikar, in Scribes, Sages, and Seers: Te Sage in the Eastern Mediterranean
World (ed. Leo G. Perdue; FRLANT 219; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2008), 10924.
11
Tis latter point depends on ones date of Proverbs. Most date the prologue (chs. 19) to
the postexilic period.
12
Sachau, Aramische Papyrus und Ostraka aus einer jdischen Militr-Koloni zu Ele-
phantine (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1911).
13
Albright, Goddess of Life and Wisdom, 285. He also noted that Ahiqars depiction of
Wisdoms exaltation resembles the mythological ascent of Wisdom in 1 Enoch 42.
14
Donner, Die religionsgeschichtliche Ursprnge von Prov. Sal 8, ZS 82 (1957): 818.
15
Lang, Wisdom and the Book of Proverbs, 12931. For examples of criticism of Langs
thesis, see J. A. Emerton, review of B. Lang, Wisdom and the Book of Proverbs, VT 37 (1987):
127; and John Day, Foreign Semitic Infuence on the Wisdom of Israel, in Day et al., Wisdom
in Ancient Israel, 69.
In 1983, Lindenberger published the frst monograph-length English trans-
lation of Ahiqar with commentary. Shortly thereafer his translation with a brief
commentary appeared in OTP, wherein he said the following:
Te saying is evidently a hymn in praise of wisdom, praising her divine origin,
her benefts to mankind, and her exaltation by the gods. Tough the saying does
not go so far to personify wisdom explicitly, it is nevertheless the closest non-
Jewish parallel to the biblical and post-biblical poems in praise of wisdom and is
probably older than any of them.
16

Lindenbergers assumptions about the nature of Wisdoms description, her foreign
origin and the texts early dating have been very infuential on subsequent
scholarship and consensus about Ahiqar.
17

B. Scholarly Analysis of Wisdom in Ahiqar
afer Publication of TAD:3 (1994Present)
A decade later Porten and Yardeni published the third volume of the Textbook
of Aramaic Documents from Ancient Egypt. In this volume they included the
Aramaic Ahiqar, but their arrangement of the papyri and their reconstructions of
the text were quite diferent from Lindenbergers edition.
18
Te problem, however,
is that very few wisdom scholars have adopted Porten and Yardenis edition and
have continued to rely on Lindenbergers presentation of Saying 13. Consequently,
scholarly assumptions about Ahiqar and personifed Wisdom have changed very
little. Te consensus in recent scholarship seems to be that Ahiqar has a Wisdom
fgure that is at least somewhat related to personifed Wisdom in Proverbs. Te
implications of this assumption are signifcant.
On the one hand, some scholars presume that personifed Wisdom is not
unique (or even indigenous) to Israel. John Days statements are telling: since
Wisdom appears to be already personifed outside Israel in the Wisdom of Ahiqar,
lines 94b95, one may perhaps envisage it as an appropriation and development of
the West Semitic Wisdom tradition.
19
Utilizing Lindenbergers edition, Day takes
for granted that personifed Wisdom is in Ahiqar and, therefore, is not original to
Israel.
16
Lindenberger, Ahiqar, OTP 2:485.
17
For other notable references to Ahiqar in discussions of personifed Wisdom, see Roland E.
Murphy, Te Tree of Life: An Exploration of Biblical Wisdom Literature (ABRL; New York:
Doubleday, 1990), 159; and Nili Shupak, Where Can Wisdom Be Found? Te Sages Language in
the Bible and in Ancient Egyptian Literature (OBO 130; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
1993), 269.
18
See discussion of these diferences below.
19
John Day, Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan (JSOTSup 265; Shefeld:
Shefeld Academic Press, 2000), 67. For his thesis about a West Semitic Wisdom tradition, see
Day, Foreign Semitic Infuence, 6270.
Moreover, the assumption that Ahiqar contains personifed Wisdom has
infuenced scholarly opinion about Ahiqars relationship to the biblical wisdom
literature. Michael V. Fox suggests a direct relationship between Ahiqar and
Proverbs.
20
He identifes four thematic and literary features that were unique to
these two texts (i.e., features that he does not fnd in Egyptian wisdom literature
and that are not present/common in Mesopotamian wisdom literature).
21
Te
very frst element Fox presents is the personifcation of Wisdom.
22
Ten, afer
listing some of the strongest parallels between individual Ahiqar sayings and
corresponding passages in Proverbs, Fox draws this conclusion: Some of the
above are less clearly instances of dependency, but overall the evidence indicates
that the sages of Proverbs knew the book of Ahiqar.
23

In sum, for the past century, most scholars have confdently assumed that
Ahiqar has a personifed or hypostatized Wisdom that is parallel to the biblical
fgure, and this notion has even led a few scholars to suggest a direct literary or
traditionsgeschichtliche relationship between Ahiqar and Proverbs.
24
Moreover,
regardless of how strong or weak her/his conclusions, each scholars arguments
about the fgure of personifed Wisdom in Ahiqar depend on Saying 13 according
to Lindenbergers edition. Te problem, however, is that if we look at Porten and
Yardenis edition critically, there is no Saying 13.
II. Arrangement, Reconstruction, and Interpretation
of the Ahiqar Papyri
Eleven sheets of papyri containing fourteen columns of the Ahiqar text are
extant. Four of the sheets (AD) and fve columns (15) contain narrative portions;
20
Fox, Proverbs: 1031: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (A[Yale]B
18B; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009), 761. Fox also attributes the high frequency of
Aramaisms in the biblical Proverbsespecially in the Words of the Wise (22:1724:22)to
infuence from Ahiqar. He suggests that the author of the Words of the Wise compiled sayings
from various sources including Ahiqar (pp. 505, 706).
21
Fox is informed by the infuential article by Day (Foreign Semitic Infuence), who drew
heavily from Ahiqar, Ugaritic material, and the biblical Proverbs to suggest a West Semitic
Wisdom tradition. Day relies on Ahiqar as support for arguing a Semitic origin for personifed
Wisdom, and he compares the Ahiqar fgure with Sir 24:4 and 1 En. 42:12; 6970. See also Bryan
Estelle, Proverbs and Ahiqar: Revisited, Biblical Historian 1 (2004): 119.
22
Fox, Proverbs 1031, 767. Te other features are the address to my son (Egyptian
literature uses only son; Babylonian literature also has my son), the graded numerical
sequence and the righteouswicked antithesis. For his view on personifcation of Wisdom in
Ahiqar, Fox refers readers to the frst volume of his commentary (Proverbs 19, 33233).
23
Fox, Proverbs 1031, 767.
24
For further comment on the relationship between Ahiqar and the biblical wisdom
literature, see n. 2 above and section IV below.
seven sheets (EL) and nine columns (614) have sayings.
25
Te conclusion to the
narrative is missing, and so also is the beginning of the sayings. Much of the text
is fragmentary, which has led to debate throughout the past century concerning
arrangement of the Ahiqar papyri. Although the content of the narrative columns
makes their order certain, the arrangement of the sayings columns is problematic.
Consequently, almost every new edition had a diferent order of the sayings
columns. As result, scholarship on the Aramaic Ahiqar can be challenging. Michael
Weigl aptly describes the situation:
One of the most annoying aspects of dealing with the Aramaic sayings is the wide
range of diferent reference systems. Virtually every new edition introduced a
new numbering of the proverbs, partly because of the diferent views about the
sequence of the columns on the papyrus, partly because of a new syntactical
segmentation of individual proverbs.
26
For this reason, on the next page I provide a synoptic chart with the editions of
Ahiqar pertinent to this discussion.
Although the editions difer widely, two features have been consistent
throughout each edition. First, every arrangement places sheets H and L last among
the sayings. Both sheets are heavily deteriorated, indicating that they were among
the outermost sheets and thus contain the last sections of the text.
27
Second, and
most important for our discussion, every edition (except for Porten and Yardenis)
positioned sheet E immediately afer J thereby maintaining the unity of Saying 13,
which is made up of the last line of J and the frst line of E.

25
When the Aramaic documents arrived in Berlin, Hugo Ibscher, the restorer of papyri at
the Berlin Museum, arranged and alphabetized the sheets with little consideration of content.
Sachau reordered the sheets as follows: AD, J, EG, K, H, L (there is no sheet I). Except for the
narrative portions and the sheets with multiple columns, there was little textual basis for the
arrangement of the remaining columns. Details in this section are drawn primarily from TAD:3
(23); Michael Weigl, Compositional Stragegies in the Aramaic Sayings of Ahikar, in Te World
of the Aramaeans (ed. P. M. Michle Daviau, Paul-Eugne Dion, and Michael Weigl; 3 vols.;
JSOTSup 32426; Shefeld: Shefeld Academic Press, 2001), 3:2632; Grelot, Les Proverbes
(2001), 51128; and Kottsieper, Aramaic Tradition, 10924.
26
Weigl, Compositional Strategies, 30 n. 16.
27
Also, the Ahiqar text is a palimpsest, but the erased text is not found on either H or L;
that is, the scribe used clean sheets of papyrus. So the thought goes: the scribe began his thrify
undertaking by erasing the previous text (or buying used papyri); however, much to his chagrin,
the scroll was not long enough. He had to purchase and attach a new scroll. He could not use
the other sides of the papyri because apparently this was his second attempt at transcribing the
Ahiqar story! He had started copying the Ahiqar text on the verso, but he stopped afer three
columns then switched to recto. Grelot guessed that it could be on account of an orthographic
mistake in line 19 of the third column. Te copy text is the same on the recto as verso with the
mistake corrected. For further discussion, see Grelot, Les Proverbes (2001), 516; and below.
Chart 1. Synoptic Table of Numbering Systems for Sayings Columns
TAD:3
Line #
TAD:3
Col.
Lindenberger
Saying #
Lindenberger
Line #
Kottsieper
Col.
Sachau
Papyrus
Sachau
Page/Col. #
7994 6 13b28 95110 X E 54/45
95108 7 6877 159172 VII K 57/48:1
109125 8 7892 173190 VIII K 57/48:2
126141 9 3953 126141 V G 56/47:1
142158 10 5467 142158 VI G 56/47:2
159173 11 2938 111125 XII F 55/46
174189 12 113a 7994 IX J 53/44
190206 13 93109 191207 XV H 58/49
207222 14 110(125) 208223 XVI L 59/50
In fact, by 1983 Lindenberger had been so accustomed to reading the end
of J with the beginning of E that, when discussing the arrangement of the papyri,
he considered their sequence to be confrmed, even though he admitted, in
the case of the proverbs . . . the arrangement is largely arbitrary.

With respect
to J and E specifcally, he said, their juxtaposition is based solely on similarity
of content.
28
Because of the fragmentary nature of the sayings, however, using
content to determine the order is largely speculative and can be unhelpful. On the
other hand, using textual evidence was problematic because there did not seem to
be any clear pattern of foldings and almost every margin was missing.
In 1993, Porten and Yardeni ofered, in their Textbook of Aramaic Documents,
a textual basis for arranging the Ahiqar papyri: they had uncovered and recon-
structed the text that underlies Ahiqar.
29
Scholars had long known that Ahiqar was
a palimpsest, but until the publication of TAD:3 virtually none of the underlying
text had been deciphered.
Porten and Yardeni, with the aid of various advanced images of the papyri
such as infrared photography, were able to trace out the erased text beneath
Ahiqar. Te underlying text is a customs account that lists the duties collected on
both the exports and imports from ships over a ten-month period in 475 b.c.e.
Yardeni summarizes their modus operandi and fndings:
Te reconstruction of the scroll was based on several factors: the chronological,
papyrological, and textual datathe months order on both sides of the scroll,
28
Lindenberger, Aramaic Proverbs of Ahiqar, 11, 69.
29
Sachau had identifed a few words on both the recto and verso of the papyri, but eforts
to decipher the rest were unfruitful until Porten and Yardeni began the arduous task in the late
1980s. At that time, all that was known about the erased text, according to Lindenberger, was that
it appeared to have been a commercial document (Aramaic Proverbs of Ahiqar, 1314).
the width of the papyrus sheets, and the repeated formulaeas well as on
arithmetical calculations of the duty collected from the diferent items in com-
parison with the total summation preserved almost intact at the end of the list.
Tis made it possible to estimate the original size of the scroll as well as the sizes
of damaged and missing columns of both the list and the Ahiqar text. As the
result of the reconstruction the order of the Ahiqar columns has been changed.
30
Given the consistency of the formulae describing the arrival/departure dates of
imports/exports and the frequency of their movement, Porten and Yardeni were
able to establish the original length and order of the scroll and even estimate the
number of missing columns and their locations.
31
In other words, because the
order of the erased customs account can be determined, so also can the Ahiqar
text. Te new order is as follows: AD (columns 15), then four missing columns,
E (6), K (78), G (910), one missing column, F (11), J (12), one missing column,
H (13), L (14) and one possible, fnal missing column.
32

Porten and Yardeni appear to have provided a resolute answer to the century-
long question about the proper order of the Ahiqar columns. Signifcantly, with
the exception of H and L still being at the end, their arrangement is almost entirely
diferent from any previous edition. Most notably, for the frst time since Sachaus
1911 edition, sheets J and E are no longer juxtaposed. According to Porten and
Yardeni, E is frst among the extant sayings papyri and J is ffh. Tus, Saying 13,
which was made up of the last line of J and the frst line of E, no longer exists.
Because the unity of the saying has been disrupted, the two lines (189 and 79)
must be reassessed independently of each other.
A.1 Reconstruction and Translation of C1.1:187189
] [ ][
(187)
] [ ][ *
(188)
] [ ] [ ][ ] [ ] [ ] [
(189)
(187)
Two things are beautiful but the third is cherished by Shamash: one who
dr[inks] wine and pours a libation; one who grasps wisdom and []
(188)
And he who might hear a word but will not make (it) known Behold! Tis
is precious be[fore] Shamash! But he who might drink wine and does not []
30
Ada Yardeni, Maritime Trade and Royal Accountancy in an Erased Customs Account
from 475 BCE on the Ahiqar Scroll from Elephantine, BASOR 293 (1994): 68.
31
For examples of the formulae and a more detailed discussion of the length of the original
scroll, see Yardeni, Maritime Trade, 6971; and Grelot, Les Proverbes (2001), 51315.
32
It cannot be determined where the narrative ends and the proverbs begin in the four
missing columns afer plate D. H and L do not contain the erased customs account. Because of
Ls deterioration, they assume that it was very close to the end (i.e., outside) of the scroll. Hence,
they conservatively suggest only one more column at the end, though it is possible there could
have been more.
(189)
And whose wisdom fails and [] who declares [...] from the skies (or
Shamayn) [] the people and [their wi]sdom, the gods the []
33
A.2 Brief Commentary on C1.1:187189
Lines 187189 are the fnal three lines of column 12 (sheet J).
34
Although
only the second half of line 189 was considered to be the beginning of Saying 13
(= line 94b in Lindenbergers edition), lines 187189a provide a context, which is
important for understanding the reconstruction and interpretation of 189b.
Te type of saying beginning in line 187 is a numerical proverb, a recognized
proverbial form in ancient literature, including the Hebrew Bible.
35
Te saying
has two parts divided by a lapidary or archaic aleph.
36
Each half contains three
elementswine, wisdom, wordwhich are repeated in the same order, providing a
sound parallel structure. Although parts of the lines are fragmentary, reconstruction
and subsequent interpretation are aided by the parallelism.
37

33
Te reconstruction and translation here are an emended version of TAD:3, 4849.
34
Te subsequent comments are by no means a thorough analysis of the textual, philological,
thematic, or literary issues involved with these lines. My remarks will deal primarily with the
implications for understanding the passage in light of a discussion about personifed Wisdom
in Ahiqar.
35
In the Hebrew Bible, most of the numerical sayings are among the Words of Agur in
Proverbs 30. Te closest parallels to Ahiqar 187189a are Prov 6:1619 and a Ugaritic text (KTU
1.4.III.1721; for translation, see Day, Foreign Semitic Infuence, 64). Notably, all three have
to do with the things a deity hates/cherishes. Some other numerical sayings not found in the
wisdom literature are Hos 6:2 and Amos 1:32:8. For a lengthy discussion of numerical proverbs
in ancient literature, see Riad Aziz Kassis, Te Book of Proverbs and Arabic Proverbial Works
(VTSup 74; Leiden: Brill, 1999), 23440.
36
Te aleph, designated in TAD:3 by an asterisk, is the scribal sign primarily used to divide
the end of one saying and the beginning of another in the middle of a line. As Kottsieper points
out, the aleph is in one sense a real commentary (Aramaic Tradition, 115). Te authorial
intent of the scribe is plain: he is telling us where he pauses his thought. Te aleph in line 188
functions as the divider between two parallel sets of ideas. Each half begins with an appeal to the
things that are favorable to Shamash. Tus, and in line 187 are parallel to in
line 188. Note also that the name of Shamash is also repeated, further reinforcing the parallelism.
Lindenberger understands this repetition to be looking back and summarizing the previous
positive points. He therefore takes the latter half of the passage in a negative sense, thereby
making the alephs present location awkward. Instead of suggesting an alternate interpretation of
the evidence, he accuses the author of making a mistake and supposes that the dividing mark was
meant to be placed immediately afer (Aramaic Proverbs of Ahiqar, 67). Such a suggestion
is unwarranted without strong evidence, which, in light of the fragmentary nature of the text, we
do not have.
37
For example, only a is present in the frst strophe of the frst saying in line 187 followed
by the word wine. We can reasonably reconstruct the verb (in participle form) by
comparing the parallel strophe in the second half, where the imperfect form of the verb is visible
with wine as its object. Te repetition of language and the parallelism, as Ginsberg points out,
are frequently found in biblical and ancient Near Eastern literature (ANET, 499 n. t).
Wisdom is the middle element between wine and words, but the sense of the
message about wisdom is not entirely clear. In the frst list, wisdom is preceded
by the verb . Te verb is unattested in earlier forms of Aramaic except here
and again in Ahiqar (line 152).
38
Scholars have suggested numerous meanings
such as one who restrains, one who keeps, or one who hides. Lindenberger
recommends one who masters, referencing the pael form of the later Syriac
verb, which is used of taming animals and of subduing ones own body.
39
Grelot
suggests to hold, but adds that it may also convey the sense of to grasp or even
to acquire.
40
While the exact meaning is obscure, the sense of the saying at least
implies that wisdom is something that should be cherished. It can be gained but
can also be lost.
Te topic of wisdom in lines 18788 afects the reconstruction of line 189,
which is much more fragmentary than the preceding lines. Conspicuously, the
word wisdom in 189b has been almost completely reconstructed. Tere is no
trace of the supposed or . Te are almost certain, and the is probable.
In addition, part of the fragment is freestanding. Te similar fbers make place-
ment here unquestionable, but the piece could be shifed a few millimeters either
direction.
41
Presently I ofer no other suggestions for this lacuna and am satisfed
with reading wisdom here. It is not surprising, given the scribes penchant for
clustering sayings around certain themes and/or catchwords, that line 189b would
be the beginning of another saying related to the topic of wisdom.
42

Te deterioration of the papyrus leaves little hope for understanding what
line 189b is saying about wisdom, however. Tere is a short lacuna between the
words wisdom and gods, making it difcult to determine how the two func-
tion syntactically.
43
Te word is nearly certain, but it is noticeable that this
would be an extremely rare (in fact, only the second) appearance of in its
38
In line 152 the direct object of is missing, but some have suggested in light of
line 188.
39
Lindenberger, Aramaic Proverbs of Ahiqar, 232 n. 125. As an example, Lindenberger
quotes Pirqe Avot 4:1, Who is mighty man? He who subdues his evil nature (his translation).
Porten and Yardeni also suggest to master (TAD:3, xxxvii).
40
Grelot, Les Proverbes (2001), 525.
41
Lindenberger, Aramaic Proverbs of Ahiqar, 233 n. 133.
42
For a detailed analysis and bibliography on compositional strategies in Ahiqar, see
Weigl, Compositional Strategies, 2382. See also Andreas Scherer, Vielfalt und Ordnung:
Komposition in den biblischen Proverbien und in den aramischen Ahiqarsprchen, BN 90
(1997): 2845.
43
Lindenberger supplies , but there is hardly room and virtually no textual basis.
According to my observation there are two very small ink spots that may in fact be the twin
downstrokes of the and a faint mark of the downstroke of an . Incidentally, there is far less ink
here than those traces in the earlier lacuna between and , which Lindenberger
pointed out but made no suggestions (Aramaic Proverbs of Ahiqar, 69, 233 n. 130).
absolute rather than emphatic state () in either Old or Biblical Aramaic
(see KAI 266:3).
44
Another lacuna follows, wherein two or three letters could ft.
Te text picks back up with the ending of what is most likely a plural verb: .
Lindenbergers suggested reading, following Grelot, are favored (the peil of )
is a complete guess.
45

To sum up, the evidence in line 189b is unclear. We can identify most of the
parts, but how they function together is uncertain. At the very best we can say that
wisdom is associated with the gods and the people, but we know little to noth-
ing of how they relate. Most importantly, there is no evidence in line 189b or in the
previous lines for the personifcation of Wisdom. In the previous line, wisdom is
indeed precious to the deity Shamash, but it, as a concept, is no more outstand-
ing than discretion in speech.
B.1 Reconstruction and Translation of C1.1.79
][ ] [ ] [ ][
(79)

] [
(79)
Also to the gods she is precious [] to [] the kingdom is placed in the skies
for the Lord of Holiness lifed []
B.2 Brief Commentary on C1.1.79
According to Porten and Yardeni, this column is frst among the extant
sayings columns. Tere are probably four missing columns between the narrative
and this one, but on which column the narrative ends and the sayings begin is
unknown. Line 79 begins the column but is incomplete. Te outstanding problem
has to do with the sayings subject, which is not identifed and can presumably
be found in the beginning of the saying on the previous missing column.
46
Te
feminine personal pronoun indicates that the subject of the text is female, but
to whom or to what the pronoun refers is unspecifed in the extant portions of
the saying. Because of the lines earlier connection to line 189, interpreters have
traditionally understood wisdom to be the subject; however, as Weigl correctly
44
Alternatively it has been suggested that it is a form of the verb (to place).
Lindenberger points out the rarity of Shamayn/heaven in the absolute (Aramaic Proverbs of
Ahiqar, 68). For further discussion, see Takamitsu Muraoka and Bezalel Porten, A Grammar of
Egyptian Aramaic (HO 1, Te Near and Middle East 32; Leiden: Brill, 1998), 61.
45
Lindenberger, Aramaic Proverbs of Ahiqar, 68.
46
Yet we cannot rule out that the subject is in the lacuna afer . According to Weigl, the
scribe seems to dislike carrying a saying over from one column to the next (Compositional
Strategies, 3132).
points out, without a direct juxtaposition between the end of column 12 and the
beginning of column 6 there is no indication as to the subject of the hymn in
6.79 (1) whatsoever.
47
If the subject is not wisdom, then who is it? Te present
text provides little help.
Over 80 percent of line 79 is extant, but the lacunae come at some critical
points. Te frst words ][ are mostly undamaged. Te following
segment is most troublesome. Te manuscript breaks of afer an and what is
probably a .
48
A three to four cm lacuna follows, but there is a foating scrap
of the manuscript on which is clearly a . Lindenberger provides a speculative
reconstruction in his translation, but it has no textual basis and probably could
not ft in the lacuna.
49
Weigl, following Kottsieper, suggests the following reading:
With her master she shares kingship.
50
Again, the reading is purely conjectural,
and to ofer another reading seems unwise and misleading. Te papyrus resumes
with the emphatic/determinate noun (kingdom), with the remainder of
the line mostly intact.
51
Regardless of the reconstruction or translation, the lofy language of this
line is not typical to most of the sayings of Ahiqar. Weigl, on the basis of a stylistic
analysis, has suggested that line 79 may be compared to the sayings about the king
(lines 91/92) found at the bottom of the same page, which read: A king is like the
Merciful; moreover, his voice is high. Who is there who can stand before him,
but he with whom El is? // Beautiful is the king to see like Shamash and precious
47
Weigl, Compositional Strategies, 33.
48
Lindenberger, following Cowley, reads the partial letter as a , possibly in parallel with
the in the line below. As alternatives he suggests either a or a (Aramaic Proverbs of Ahiqar,
69). In my opinion, the downstroke, which extends below the line, is more similar to that of a ,
or even a .
49
Tis should be taken as a warning to all scholars or casual readers who consult OTP
without looking at the Aramaic themselves. See Lindenberger, Ahiqar, OTP 2:499.
50
Weigl, Compositional Strategies, 33; see also Kottsieper, Die Sprache, 12.
51
Although the is absent and the is partial, the reading is likely. Te margin ends
with the majority of the present. As for the suggested fnal , if it is indeed a third masculine
singular peal verb, then it would need an object to work syntactically, and, given the small
amount of space on the lost margin, a pronominal sufx is both practical and could ft the context
of the sentence. Te word regularly appears as a causal conjunction in Ahiqar but is rare in
Imperial Aramaic, where the usual (among others) is to be expected, or perhaps as in
the narrative portions of Ahiqar. For discussion of the use of causal conjunctions in Ahiqar and
the Achaemenid period, see M. L. Folmer, Te Aramaic Language in the Achaemenid Period: A
Study in Linguistic Variation (OLA 68; Leuven: Peeters, 1995), 735 (n. 120 also provides a list of
occurrences of in the proverbs of Ahiqar). See also Muraoka and Porten, Grammar of Egyptian
Aramaic, 94. Lindenberger, in pointing out this peculiarity, proposes the following: Te use of
the word here may correspond to a specialized usage in Ug and Heb poetry, the emphatic k, in
which the word introduces a stressed clause whose verb comes at the end (Aramaic Proverbs of
Ahiqar, 70).
is his glory to those who tread the earth.
52
Besides sharing similar vocabulary,
both these lines and line 79 have a hymnic quality. Perhaps the subject of line 79
is the kingdom/kingship of the king, which is cherished by the gods because it
has been established by the Lord of Holiness. Or, alternatively, the passage may be
the fnal words from a catalogue of praises toward a deity or monarch and his/her
attributes, as we fnd in 91/92.
53
Weigls most recent discussion of this passage is unique and deserves comment.
He follows the order of TAD:3, ackowledging that lines 79 (= Weigls saying 1) and
189 (= Weigls saying 97) are separated, yet he still makes a case for wisdom as the
subject of line 79. Based on some verbal and thematic correspondences between 79
and biblical wisdom literaturein particular those passages related to personifed
Wisdom such as Job 28; Ben Sira 1; 24; and Proverbs 3; 8Weigl argues: Vor dem
Hintergrund alttestamentlicher Rede ber die Weisheit liee sich also die Aufi -
sung der verlorenen Refernz von (1) (= line 79) sachlich plausibel rechtfertigen.
54

His primary example of a verbal link lies with the term . Granted, wisdom
is described as precious (Hebrew ; Greek ) in the biblical wisdom
literature; however, in Ahiqar functions more broadly.
55
In the numerical
saying in lines 187189a, wisdom is among the elements that are considered
precious to Shamash, but wisdom is the middle of three and no special emphasis
on wisdom is apparent. Most notably the other appearance of in Ahiqar is
found on the same page as line 79. Tere it describes the glory of the king (line
92). Te combination of the term kingdom or kingship with precious in both
sayings is noteworthy. A handful of sayings on this column speak to the concept
of kingship, a motif that, as Weigl admits, is not prominent in the personifed
Wisdom tradition.
56

Weigl then focuses on the locational and temporal aspects of Wisdom.
He takes to mean that Wisdom, as the missing subject, is lifed up and
established in heaven. Te function of in the heaven is not clear, and it is just
as likely that is the subject of . Nevertheless, Weigl compares this
locational qualifer with similar statements concerning personifed Wisdom in
Prov 8:2231; Ben Sira 1:1; 24:18; and Job 28:1228. Te problem with these
comparisons is that in Ahiqar 79 it appears as if Wisdom starts among humans
and later is raised up to the heavenly sphere. In the biblical wisdom texts, the
movement is consistently downward. Weigl counters by pointing to line 189b,
52
My adapted translation from TAD:3, 37.
53
Weigl, Compositional Strategies, 3334.
54
Weigl, Die aramischen Achikar-Sprche aus Elephantine und die alttestamentliche Weisheits-
literatur (BZAW 399; Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 2010), 79.
55
For examples of / as a quality of wisdom in the wisdom literature, see Prov 3:15;
8:11, 19 LXX; Job 28:16.
56
See Weigl, Die aramischen Achikar-Sprche, 7879.
where Wisdom, according to his reading of this line, originates from heaven.
Still, even if wisdom is a reliable reconstruction in 189band it is far from clear
that it isthe sense of the line is completely unknowable without a reconstruction
of the missing verb(s) by the interpreter.
57

It becomes clear that Weigls evaluation of Ahiqars concept of Wisdom and
its resonances with the biblical tradition relies heavily on reading both 79 and
189 together, without ofering justifcation for continuing to do so and despite
acknowledging their textual separation. Moreover, his analyses are based on
earlier unfounded and reaching reconstructions of the Aramaic texts by scholars
who saw a unifed saying and presumed a connection to the personifed Wisdom
tradition.
58
Weigls evidence for suggesting wisdom as the missing subject for line
79 becomes scarce if we take away 189b and any presumption about reading 79
with the personifed Wisdom traditions in the biblical texts.
59
At present, there is no clear or compelling evidence to posit wisdom as
the missing subject, and continuing to think so would seem to be the result of
scholarly inertia. One wonders whether anyone would have suggested wisdom
had the two lines never been juxtaposed. Perhaps with more analysis a defensible
proposal will be made, but for now we are lef with uncertainty.
C. Te Reception of Porten and Yardenis Edition
Porten and Yardenis edition of the Ahiqar text has become the standard for
almost every paleographer, Aramaicist, and Ahiqar specialist.
60
Notable Ahiqar
scholars like Grelot, Herbert Niehr, and Weigl have all followed Porten and
57
See the discussion above concerning the extant parts of line 189.
58
Te excessive reconstructions have led to unwarranted claims about what the Ahiqar
passage conveys about wisdom. For example, Weigls argument that die Ofenbarung der
Weisheit durch die Gtter an die Menschheit das zentrale Tema darstellt (emphasis original)
completely overstates the textual evidence. See n. 43 above and Weigl, Die aramischen Achikar-
Sprche, 78 n. 30.
59
To be sure, Weigl has provided an immensely important commentary on Ahiqar and has
considerably widened the conversation. All future discussions of Ahiqar must begin with him.
60
Te esteemed linguist and Aramaicist Jonas C. Greenfeld is a good example of a scholar
who adapted his continuous research into Ahiqar according to the most current edition. In 1971
Greenfeld relied on the standard editions of Ginsberg (English, ANET) and Grelot (French, RB)
for his comments on Ahiqar (Te Background and Parallel to a Proverb of Ahiqar, in Andr
Dupont-Sommer, Hommages Andr Dupont-Sommer [Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1971],
4960). In a later article (Two Proverbs of Ahiiqar, in Lingering over Words: Studies in Ancient
Near Eastern Literature in Honor of William L. Moran [ed. Tzvi Abusch, John Huehnergard, and
Piotr Steinkeller; HSS 37; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990], 195202), Greenfeld conferred with
the then standard translation of Lindenberger; however, in an article that was published only two
years afer the release of TAD:3 Greenfeld engaged the Ahiqar text as represented by Porten and
Yardeni (Te Wisdom of Ahiqar, in Day et al., Wisdom in Ancient Israel, 4352).
Yardenis arrangement of the papyri for their respective translations/editions.
61

Weigl, for example, has called TAD:3 the fnal and unquestionably authoritative
edition.
62

Porten and Yardenis volume should have become the standard edition among
wisdom scholars as well. Yet most scholars of wisdom literature have not taken the
(not-so-new) edition into consideration, and the transition away from Lindenbergers
now-outdated edition has been slow.
63
While TAD:3 is bulky, inaccessible to many,
and lacks the (still) valuable textual and philological commentary that one fnds
in Lindenberger, the problem remains that Lindenbergers translation, though
convenient, does not represent the latest scholarship from the Aramaicists and
paleographers. Tis creates a particular problem with respect to personifed
61
See the following: Grelot, Les Proverbes (2001); Herbert Niehr, Aramischer Ahiqar
(JSHRZ n.F. 2.2; Gtersloh: Gtersloher Verlagshaus, 2007); and Weigl, Die aramischen Achikar-
Sprche.
To my knowledge, only Kottsieper has seriously challenged the arrangement of Porten
and Yardeni. In a recent article he comments, Tough [Porten/Yardenis] readings are
ingenious, they still are ofen uncertain or ambiguous and leave the possibility that, before
eliminating the original text, the papyrus may have been split into smaller sections, which
would have been more easily washed of, and aferwards joined together again in a new order
(Aramaic Tradition, 10911). He also contests some of the readings of dates and points to a
couple of textual oddities. One oddity is the presence of an upside-down word in the middle
of a sheet. He uses this as evidence to argue that the scribe frst split up the customs account
and, afer erasing the text, used the papyri as notes on his desk. Te scribe later erased his notes
sloppily before transcribing the Ahiqar text. Te most notable result of his arrangement has
to do with the narrative. He maintains that it provides a frame for the sayingsas in the later
editions. Kottsieper refers to the height of the columns as well as the sequence of folding to
argue for such an arrangement.
Te problem, however, is that Kottsiepers analysis primarily applies to the narrative
portions and not the sayings columns. Moreover, his interpretation of the evidence concerning
the narrative sections is questionable. One might take into consideration that the dates on the
erased text of the narrative sections are consistent with the order of the Ahiqar narrative. It would
be quite a coincidence if the scribe just happened to use consecutive papyri from the customs
account for the Ahiqar narrative but split them up and arbitrarily inserted between them the
remaining erased papyri and at least two brand-new sheets. (Tis latter point raises the question:
Why would the scribe use two brand-new sheets before using all of the older ones?) Te fact that
the chronological sequence of the erased customs account matches the narrative order of the
Ahiqar text can hardly be coincidental.
62
Weigl, Compositional Strategies, 30 n. 16. See also the review of TAD:3 by Joseph A.
Fitzmyer, JAOS 115 (1995): 71011.
63
Some have made the switch, but most wisdom scholars still use Lindenberger, e.g.,
James L. Crenshaw, Old Testament Wisdom: An Introduction (rev. ed.; Louisville: Westminster
John Knox, 1998); Richard J. Cliford, Proverbs: A Commentary (OTL; Louisville: Westminster
John Knox, 1999); and Fox, Proverbs 19. Note that Fox did switch to using TAD:3 in his 2009
commentary on Proverbs 1031 (see discussion of Foxs commentaries on Proverbs below).
Wisdom, since, as we have seen, Lindenbergers Saying 13 and lines 79 and 189 in
TAD:3 tell completely diferent stories.
Even among the few wisdom scholars who have adopted Porten and Yardenis
edition, references to personifed Wisdom in Ahiqar continue. Fox is a revealing
example. In his commentary on Proverbs 19, published in 2000, he relied
exclusively on Lindenberger when dealing with Ahiqar. In the section Origins
of Personifed Wisdom he included a segment titled A Foreign Personifcation
of Wisdom. Afer providing Lindenbergers translation, he remarked, Only once
in foreign wisdom literature is wisdom personifedin the Aramaic Ahiqar, ll.
94b95.
64
Ten years later, in the second volume of his commentary (on Proverbs
1031), Fox says, For the present volume, I use the defnitive edition of Porten and
Yardeni.
65
He professes to have made the transition from Lindenbergers edition
to Porten and Yardenis. Later in that volume, when Fox discusses the relationship
between Ahiqar and the biblical Proverbs, he still identifes a personifed Wisdom in
Ahiqar and simply refers the reader to his observations in the earlier commentary.
III. Summary: Ahiqar and the Biblical Wisdom Tradition
Porten and Yardenis arrangement of the Aramaic Ahiqar columns has
serious implications for understanding Ahiqars conception of wisdom. Saying
13, according to Lindenbergers edition, was crucial for attesting the view that
personifed Wisdom is in Ahiqar. However, as result of the new order of the
columns in TAD:3, the two lines that made up Saying 13 are no longer juxtaposed.
Te now-separated lines 79 and 189 in TAD:3 do not provide any evidence for
a personifed Wisdom fgure. Yet, since the publication of Porten and Yardenis
edition, the majority of wisdom scholars have continued to use Lindenbergers
edition. Even the most recent scholarship on the biblical wisdom literature has
been infuenced by the continuing assumption that Ahiqar contains personifed
Wisdom. Te near ubiquitous presence of Ahiqar and Saying 13 in conversations
about personifed Wisdom belies the ambiguity of the reconstructed text and the
supposed images it portrays.
As a result, scholarly consensus about personifed Wisdom being present
in Ahiqar has not signifcantly changed, and this assumption has shaped the way
scholars discuss personifed Wisdom and Ahiqars relationship to the biblical
wisdom literature. Part of the problem, though, is that the exact relationship
between Ahiqar and the biblical wisdom literature is still vague. Te question of
their connection remains uncertain because until very recently it had not been
64
Fox, Proverbs 19, 33233.
65
Fox, Proverbs 1031, xvii (emphasis mine). Notably in the very next line, Fox says that he
will continue to use Lindenbergers numbering system! Granted, this may have been an efort to
maintain some continuity with the frst volume of the Proverbs commentary.
seriously taken up at length.
66
In the past few years new and important publications
have appeared that will certainly change our understanding of Ahiqars place in the
ancient wisdom literature tradition, and it is clear that this wisdom text has much
more to ofer than has been previously realized. Nevertheless, in light of the new
data and a fresh assessment of the material, it seems evident that the Aramaic book
of Ahiqar cannot tell us about personifed Wisdom.
66
Weigls 2010 publication is the frst monograph-length volume that purports to take up
the issue about the relationship between Ahiqar and the biblical Wisdom literature directly. His
comments about the state of afairs on Ahiqar scholarship up to that point are telling: One
noted admittedly there were certain selections in some cases very close parallels with the
Old Testament Wisdom literatureabove all to the book of Proverbsbut a more substantial
comparative analysis has not yet come up. Te research continues to stand across a long stretch
around the discussion of the philological, lexical and paleographical problems, and it pushed
forward from there only rarely and rudimentarily toward over-reaching literary questions (Die
aramischen Achikar-Sprche, 32 [my translation of the German]).
Ben Sira, the Genesis Creation Accounts,
and the Knowledge of Gods Will
shane berg
shane.berg@ptsem.edu
Princeton Teological Seminary, Princeton, NJ 08542
Ben Sira renarrates the story of creation and the primal sin of humanity found
in Genesis 23 in a striking and provocative fashion. He elides the story of the
tree of the knowledge of good and evil and instead insists that the human is cre-
ated with the full knowledge of good and evil. In a bold collapsing of creation
and the giving of the law at Sinai, Ben Sira even suggests that God makes the law
available to the human. What seems to be at stake for Ben Sira is establishing
forcefully that there is no basis for claiming that in creation God lef the human
without crucial knowledge of any part of Gods will as expressed in the law. Ben
Sira may well be aware of sectarian claims to exclusive divine revelation that are
legitimated by interpretations of the Genesis creation accounts. Te Dead Sea
Scroll wisdom text known as 4QInstruction provides an example of the sort of
exclusivist religious epistemology that Ben Sira is seeking to refute.
I. The Universal Knowability of Gods Will
Ben Siras Unique Approach to Wisdom
It is tempting to regard Ben Sira as a rather traditional, and perhaps even
stodgy, fgure whose book of wisdom represents an attempt to undergird the
religious and political status quo of Judean society. It would be a mistake, however,
JBL 132, no. 1 (2013): 139157
139
I would like to thank John Collins, Loren Stuckenbruck, Ben Wright, and Ross Wagner
for reading and commenting on various drafs of this article. Teir insights and constructive
criticisms have strengthened the argument at every point. I had the distinct honor and privilege
of reading this study in its earlier form as a paper at the Biblical Studies Seminar at the University
of Edinburgh (October 22, 2010) and at the New Testament Research Seminar at Durham
University (October 25, 2010). In both delightful settings I received much valuable feedback.
I am especially grateful for the hospitality of Timothy Lim, Larry Hurtado, Lutz Doering, John
Barclay, and Francis Watson during my time with them. Finally, I would like to thank the two
anonymous readers of this article, who saved me from several errors and made a number of
helpful comments and suggestions.
to regard Ben Sira as some sort of conservative and rigid defender of the wisdom
tradition. Tough he indeed stands in the tradition of Israelite wisdom teachers,
his approach to this tradition is anything but conservative. He is in fact a bold
theological innovator who transforms wisdom in surprising and even radical ways.
One of the most important and thoroughly studied examples of his sapiential
innovation is the way Ben Sira relates wisdom to Israel. At the heart of the Israelite
wisdom tradition is a profound concern with the human condition and the way
in which its challenges can best be negotiated. Te authors of Proverbs and
Ecclesiastes describe the pitfalls and the joys associated with human existence
and recommend a way of life in accord with wisdom that will result in true
happiness, fulfllment, and satisfaction. While these texts are certainly in some
sense religious and their authors regard the God of Israel as the ultimate source
of wisdom, it is nevertheless the case that their emphasis on practical advice for
human thriving refects a broadly humanistic outlook. Te teachings do not refer
to the great fgures or events from Israels history, and the authors do not claim to
have received divine revelation. Rather, the insights of the sages are derived from
human experience or inferred from the created order. Teir instruction refects
the attempt to contextualize Israelite piety within a framework that relates to the
whole of humanity.
Ben Sira, however, represents a major departure from this natural theology
of the wisdom tradition.
1
Not only does Ben Sira refer to characters and events
from Israels history,
2
he radically redefnes the notion of wisdom such that
it includes Torah.
3
In this respect Ben Sira is part of a growing trend in Jewish
sapiential circles of the Hellenistic period toward understanding wisdom in the
context of the particular identity and textual traditions of Israel. Ben Siras desire
to relate wisdom and Torah results in the wedding of the wisdom tradition to the
Deuteronomistic tradition of covenant obedience. Tis close association between
law and wisdom represents a profound recasting of the wisdom tradition.
To be sure, the equating of law obedience and wisdom is suggested at some
points in the biblical tradition.
4
A prime example can be found in Deut 4:58, in
1
For a treatment of the Israelite wisdom tradition as natural theology, see John J. Collins,
Te Biblical Precedent for Natural Teology, JAAR Supplement B 45/1 (1977): 3567; see also
his treatment of natural theology in the thought of Jewish authors of the Hellenistic period,
Natural Teology and the Biblical Tradition: Te Case of Hellenistic Judaism, CBQ 60 (1998):
115. Job 28 may stand as an exception to the natural theology of the Israelite wisdom tradition.
2
For example, Ben Sira 44:151:12 is a long hymn in praise of the great heroes of the
Israelite tradition that includes selected fgures from the antediluvian period, the patriarchs, the
kings, and the prophets.
3
See especially the excellent treatment of the relationship between wisdom and Torah in
Ben Sira in Greg Schmidt Goering, Wisdoms Root Revealed: Ben Sira and the Election of Israel
(JSJSup 139; Leiden: Brill, 2009), 120.
4
Tis point is noted by John J. Collins in his discussion of Ben Sira (Jewish Wisdom in the
Hellenistic Age [OTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1997], 54).
Berg: Ben Sira, the Genesis Creation Accounts 141
which Moses exhorts the people to fulfll all the statutes and ordinances so that
their wisdom and discernment will be manifest to all peoples (4:6). However,
Ben Sira stands out among Jewish writers of the biblical or postbiblical periods
because he relates wisdom to law so thoroughly.
5
If you desire wisdom, keep
the commandments writes the sage (1:26), a theme that will crop up repeatedly
in the work.
6
Another of-repeated refrain concerns the importance of the fear
of the Lord,
7
which is equated with both wisdom (e.g., 1:14, 16, 18, 20, 27) and
observing the law (e.g., 2:15, 16; 10:19; 23:27). In a few passages the three are
mentioned together such that one can essentially place an equal sign between the
terms; fear of the Lord = keeping the commandments = wisdom (e.g., 15:1; 10:20;
21:11).
8
By far the most striking instance of the identifcation of wisdom with the
law in Ben Sira, however, comes at the end of the famous hymn of ch. 24. Afer
a personifed Wisdom has described her settlement among the nation of Israel,
the author breaks in at 24:23 and announces sweepingly that all this (i.e., the
preceding description in 24:122) is the book of the covenant of the most high
God.
9
Te result of this close identifcation between wisdom and law transforms
both in major ways, though articulating just how they have been transformed is
a bit tricky. It is not the case that wisdom has been subordinated to the law,
10
nor
that wisdom overshadows the law.
11
In a recent and important work, Greg Schmidt
Goering has approached the relationship of law and wisdom quite fruitfully by
arguing that Ben Sira is frequently attempting to negotiate the universal and
5
For comprehensive lists of Ben Siras vocabulary for law and all the passages in which
law and wisdom are linked, consult Eckhard Schnabel, Law and Wisdom from Ben Sira to Paul
(WUNT 2/16; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1985), 2963.
6
Ben Siras treatment of the law is fairly general. He speaks frequently of the command-
ments, which seems to be used interchangeably with the law.
7
Te standard work on this important theme is Josef Haspecker, Gottesfurcht bei Jesus
Sirach: Ihre religise struktur und ihre literarische und doktrinre Bedeutung (AnBib 30; Rome:
Pontifcal Biblical Institute, 1967).
8
See the treatment of 19:20 in the important article by Pancratius C. Beentjes, Full
Wisdom Is Fear of the Lord: Ben Sira 19,2020,31. Context, Composition, and Concept, EstBb
47 (1989): 2745. Te assertion that keeping the commandments represents wisdom does not
necessarily mean that wisdom consists exclusively of keeping the commandments. In Ben Sira
the law is a major source for wisdom but not the only one. Like other wisdom writers, Ben Sira
draws on life experience, nature (i.e., the created order), and common sense in defning wisdom.
9
No Hebrew is extant here; Greek: .
10
Tis is the view of Gerhard Maier, Mensch und freier Wille: Nach d. jd. Religionsparteien
zwischen Ben Sira und Paulus (WUNT 12; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1971).
11
Gerhard Von Rad argues that, since the didactic material in Ben Sira does not arise
directly from Torah, the only diference between Ben Sira and his predecessors in the wisdom
tradition is his use of nomistic terms to express the fear of the Lord (Wisdom in Israel [London:
SCM, 1972], 24447).
the particular in his book of instruction. Here is how Goering summarizes the
problem Ben Sira is attempting to solve:
If Wisdom represents the teachings of the ancient Near Eastern sages, which
were considered universally applicable to all human beings, and if Torah denotes
the particular teachings of Israels God, which were intended for Jews alone, in
what sense could Ben Sira possibly relate these two seemingly disparate entities?
To state the problem abstractly, how does the sage correlate the universal and
the particular? By universal I mean something that is thought to apply to all
humanity. In contrast, something is particular if it is considered applicable only
to a subset of humanity. More concretely, the problem involves the relation of
two authoritative bodies of literature, which Ben Sira inherited: the corpus of
international wisdom literature, on the one hand, and the national literature of
ancient Israel, on the other.
12
So according to Goering, in bringing together Torah and wisdom, Ben Sira is
trying to reconcile two major streams of traditionthe sapiential and the legal
that approach the world in diferent ways. Tis helpful insight about Ben Siras
theological agenda helps to make sense of the way that he reads and interprets the
Genesis creation accounts.
Wisdom and Law in Creation
Ben Sira grounds the connection between law and wisdom in Gods creation
of the world. Creation is a familiar theme in the wisdom tradition, and so Ben Sira
is by no means an innovator because he deals extensively with creation. His book
of instruction opens with a hymn that demonstrates that wisdom is an integral
part of the creation of the world (1:110).
13
It is itself the frst thing created by God
and is described metaphorically as water poured out over the whole creation.
14

Tis entire hymn incorporates citations of and allusions to several wisdom and
other scriptural texts that are subtly fashioned by Ben Sira into his own novel
composition.
15
Wisdoms work in creation is suggested also at the outset of the
12
Goering, Wisdoms Root Revealed, 45.
13
Tat is, the opening of Ben Siras work proper and not the grandsons prologue. Leo G.
Perdue helpfully points out that three major poems that discuss wisdom in the context of
creation1:110; 24:134; and 42:1543:33come at key junctures in the frst two sections of
Ben Sira (beginning of frst part, end of frst part, end of second part) (Wisdom and Creation: Te
Teology of the Wisdom Literature [Nashville: Abingdon, 1994], 248).
14
Ben Sira 1:4:
, wisdom was created before all things;

1:9c: , and [the Lord] poured her out over all his
works.
15
For instance, wisdom as a product of Gods initial act of creation is suggested by Job
28:27 ( , Ten [God] saw [wisdom] and proclaimed it, and
he prepared it and also searched it out) and especially Prov 8:22 (
, Te Lord generated [or acquired] me at the beginning of his way, the earliest of
hymn in ch. 24. Afer coming forth from the mouth of God (24:3), wisdom spreads
out over the entire world (24:36). Tough there are many unique and innovative
features in Ben Siras teachings about wisdoms role in creation, in placing wisdom
squarely in the center of creation Ben Sira is following a path that had already been
established in the wisdom tradition by his predecessors.
Ben Sira is unlike most other wisdom writers, however, in that he collapses
creation and the giving of the law into a seamless narrative.
16
Tis innovation
requires some creativity on Ben Siras part when it comes to narrating the creation
account, as he does in 16:2417:14 and 15:1120. In the service of his particular
vision of God, the creation, the human, and the law, Ben Sira paraphrases and
rewrites parts of the creation accounts found in Genesis 12 and along the way
also incorporates details from other places in the primeval history in Genesis.
In 16:2417:14, Ben Sira systematically describes the creation of the cosmos
and everything in it in a literary fashion that is indebted to Genesis 1. In the
course of this orderly description, Ben Sira asserts that the newly created human
is made aware of the commandments by God. At frst blush it might appear that
in fashioning his own narrative of creation Ben Sira has simply tacked on excerpts
from Deuteronomy to a paraphrase of Genesis 1 and paid only feeting attention
to the creation account in Genesis 2. A closer inspection, however, reveals that Ben
Sira has in fact paid careful attention to Genesis 2 in 16:2417:24.
17
He has defly
taken key words and phrases and woven them subtly into his renarration. Te end
result is that in Ben Siras skillful wordsmanship the plot of Genesis 2 has been
suppressed and some of its most important vocabulary has been taken over and
redeployed in the service of Ben Siras emphasis on obedience to the law.
Te command to obey the law presupposes that the human is capable of free
moral choice. Te question of human free will in Ben Siras distinctive reading of
the creation accounts in the book of Genesis is a well-plowed feld.
18
In particular,
his accomplishments long ago). Te LXX version of Prov 8:22 makes Gods creation of wisdom
explicit with its use of : . For a succinct
and helpful treatment of the citations and allusions in Ben Sira 1:110, see Alexander A. Di Lella
(introduction and commentary), and Patrick W. Skehan (translation and notes), Te Wisdom of
Ben Sira: A New Translation with Notes [AB 39; New York: Doubleday, 1987], 13739).
16
In this confation of creation and law, Ben Sira is like Jubilees, where the laws and
practices related to the Sabbath, purity afer childbirth, and other matters are in place in the
Garden of Eden (see Jubilees 24). For an excellent treatment of the similarities between Ben Sira
and Jubilees, see Benjamin G. Wright, Jubilees, Sirach and Sapiential Tradition, in Enoch and the
Mosaic Torah: Te Evidence of the Book of Jubilees (ed. Gabriele Boccaccini and Giovanni Ibba;
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 11630.
17
As will be seen below, he also draws material from Genesis 3 and 6.
18
Te most important discussions of Ben Siras treatment of the human will in light of
the Genesis creation accounts are Rudolf Smend, Die Weisheit des Jesus Sirach (Berlin: Reimer,
1906), esp. 15259 and 21624; Gerald T. Sheppard, Wisdom as a Hermeneutical Construct:
A Study in the Sapientializing of the Old Testament (BZAW 151; Berlin/New York: de Gruyter,
1980), 1983; Johannes Marbck, Weisheit im Wandel: Untersuchungen zur Weisheitstheologie
scholars have carefully examined Ben Siras use of the term in his discussions
of the human ability to choose good rather than evil, an ability that Ben Sira vigor-
ously defends.
19
It is unlikely that Ben Siras emphatic assertion that humans are fully capable
of obeying Gods commands was formulated in an intellectual vacuum. Both
internal
20
and external
21
evidence suggests that such afrmations of human free
will might have been actively questioned in some circles in the sages day. Ben
Siras use of the Genesis creation accounts to assert the freedom of the human to
obey Gods law may well be a response to readings of those accounts that yield
deterministic views of human action.
22
While human volition in Ben Sira has received considerable scholarly atten-
tion, the way that knowledge of the law is also defended by Ben Sira has not been
as carefully examined. Ben Sira not only claims that the human is capable of
choosing good and evil but also afrms that prior to doing good or evil, humans
are able to know good and evil. In other words, religious epistemologywhether
the commands of Gods law can be knownis as great a concern for Ben Sira as
human volition and actionwhether the commands of Gods law can be obeyed.
23

bei Ben Sira (1971; repr., BZAW 272; Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 1999), 13453; Jean Hadot,
Penchant mauvais et volont libre dans la Sagesse de Ben Sira (Brussels: Presses universitaires de
Bruxelles, 1970); Luis Alonso Schkel, Te Vision of Man in Sirach 16:2417:14, in Israelite
Wisdom: Teological and Literary Essays in Honor of Samuel Terrien (ed. John G. Gammie et
al.; Homage Series 3; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1978), 23545; Crispin H. T. Fletcher-Louis, Te
Cosmology of P and Teological Anthropology in the Wisdom of Jesus Ben Sira, in Of Scribes
and Sages: Early Jewish Interpretation and Transmission of Scripture, vol. 1, Ancient Versions and
Traditions (ed. Craig A. Evans; Library of Second Temple Studies 5051; London/New York:
T&T Clark, 2004), 69113; Perdue, Wisdom and Creation, 24390; Randal A. Argall, 1 Enoch
and Sirach: A Comparative Literary and Conceptual Analysis of the Temes of Revelation, Creation,
and Judgment (SBLEJL 8; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995), 13564; and throughout in many of the
works of John J. Collins cited in this article; but see especially his Interpretations of the Creation
of Humanity in the Dead Sea Scrolls, in Biblical Interpretation at Qumran (ed. Matthias Henze;
Studies in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Literature; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 2943.
19
See pp. 15254 below for a discussion of this term.
20
Tis conclusion can reasonably be drawn from a passage such as 15:1120; see pp. 152
54 below for a discussion.
21
See, e.g., the kind of determinism on display in texts from Qumran such as 4QInstruction,
the community hymns of the Hodayot, and the Discourse on the Two Spirit of 1QS.
22
Collins has described in some of his writings what he calls the Hellenistic Jewish debate
concerning the origin of sin and evil (e.g., Jewish Wisdom, 8095; see also his Te Origin of Evil
in Apocalyptic Literature, in Congress Volume: Paris 1992 [ed. J. A. Emerton; VTSup 61; Leiden:
Brill, 1995], 2538). Te debate that Collins outlines is tied up in important ways with competing
interpretations of Genesis 16. I suggest that a related but distinct debate in the Hellenistic and
early Romans periods centered on knowledge claims arising from creative interpretations of
Genesis 13, a claim this article is attempting to illustrate.
23
To speak of an authors epistemology does not imply that the author self-consciously
constructs a philosophical framework for knowledge claims. In this study the term is used in
Tere are two major passages in Ben Sira that draw on the Genesis creation
accounts in connection with discussions of the law.
24
In this article, I attempt to
show that in one of these passages, 16:2417:14, Ben Sira is concerned primarily
about the knowledge of the law, while in the other, 15:1120, he is occupied more
with the possibility of obeying the law. A fnal section of the article will explore Ben
Siras emphasis on the knowability of the law in light of claims that can be found
in some texts from the Dead Sea Scrolls. A brief consideration of an important
passage from 4QInstruction demonstrates that Genesis 13 could be appropriated
in the service of claims that Gods law is not universally knowable.
II. The Genesis Creation Accounts in Ben Sira
Creation and the Knowledge of Law: Ben Sira 16:2417:14
Te most extensive example of Ben Siras appropriation of the Genesis cre-
ation accounts is found in 16:2417:14.
25
He begins in 16:2425 by enjoining his
hearer to listen to him so as to gain insight

26

Listen to me and grasp my insight, and place your heart upon my words;
I will pour out [] my spirit by measure and I will declare my knowledge
carefully.
As Rudolf Smend points out, is the same verb (in nearly the same
phrase) that is used of personifed Wisdom in Prov 1:23 ( ,
a sociological and rhetorical way to denote the claims about knowledge made by humans and
the convictions, strategies, and assumptions that lie behind such claims. Te term religious
epistemology is thus heuristic and refers to the sum total of all that can be discerned in a given
text about religious knowledge and how one acquires it. As Michael V. Fox helpfully puts it:
Epistemology asks: How do we know what we know? Everyone who claims to know something
has at least a latent epistemology answering this question (Qohelets Epistemology, HUCA 58
[1987]: 13755).
24
Te other creation passages (33:815 and 42:1543:33) deal with theodicy, not law obe-
dience.
25
Unfortunately the original Hebrew is lacking for all but the frst three verses of this section.
At some points in this article, the Greek, Syriac, and Latin versions will be used in the attempt to
establish the basic contours of the missing Hebrew. At all points the complicated textual history
of Ben Sira will be in view and thus uncritical, simplistic retroversion will be avoided and all
claims about the non-extant Hebrew portions will be provisional. All verse references to Sirach
follow Joseph Zieglers system found in his Gttingen Septuaginta edition (Sapientia Iesu Filii
Sirach [Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum graecum 12.2; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
1965]), which has been adopted by most scholars.
26
Te meaning of the root is unclear (see HALOT, 1039, s.v.); it is rendered in Greek by
the phrase (carefully or accurately).
See, I will pour out for you my spirit).
27
But the speaker here is not personifed
Wisdom but the sage himself. Tis bold assertion not only signals the importance
of what is to follow but also suggests that Ben Sira claims for himself a unique role
in dispensing knowledge. Tough Ben Sira does not claim special revelation in
the way that one fnds in some Dead Sea Scrolls texts, he does in fact rhetorically
represent himself, via this subtle appropriation of personifed Wisdoms own voice,
as playing a central role in defning and disseminating wisdom.
28
In 16:2630, Ben Sira elegantly describes the orderliness and goodness of
Gods creation of the cosmos, which is characterized by a harmony among all
its constituent parts and the obedience of all things to the divine plan. Tis brief
account clearly alludes to, and is a summary of, the frst creation account (the
Priestly account) of Gen 1:12:3. Te frst colon of the opening verse of this
section (16:26a), (When the Lord created his works from
the beginning), evokes the opening phrase of the book of Genesis:
(In the beginning God created . . .). Te emphasis on the assignment of
every created thing to its task and its circumscription to its own role and place in
16:26b28 resonates with the systematic unfolding of creation described in Gen-
esis 1. Upon surveying the creation, God flls it with his good things.
29
Ben Sira
ends this portion of his description of the creation by noting the mortality of all
living things,
30
a detail not found in Genesis 1 that will be repeated when he moves
on to the creation of the human.
In turning to the creation of the human, Ben Sira begins to read Genesis in
more surprising ways.
31
In 17:15 he gives a brief narrative of creation that not
only incorporates elements of both creation accounts in Genesis, but in a most
subtle fashion also draws from Genesis 3 and 6. Te reference to the creation of the
27
Smend, Weisheit, 153.
28
Benjamin G. Wright compellingly demonstrates that Ben Siras own perception of his
instruction is that it can be regarded as both revelatory and prophetic. See his From Generation to
Generation: Te Sage as Father in Early Jewish Literature and Ben Sira on the Sage as Exemplar,
both in idem, Praise Israel for Wisdom and Instruction: Essays on Ben Sira and Wisdom, the Letter of
Aristeas, and the Septuagint (JSJSup 131; Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2008), 2547 and 16582.
29
Ben Sira 16:29: . . . . Michael Segal simply
retroverts the phrase into Hebrew as (Te Complete Book of Ben Sira [in Hebrew;
2nd ed.; Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1958], 102); however, the Syriac reads (he
blessed all its fruits, i.e., the earths fruits), which suggests that HTI/HTII contained something
like (so Smend, Weisheit, 15455).
30
Ben Sira 16:30: /
. See n. 33 below for a discussion of the allusion to Gen 3:19 in the passage.
31
From this point on in the passage there is no extant Hebrew. Te arguments that follow
concerning the interpretation of Genesis, however, are not dependent on subtle features of
the Greek text that might not have been present in the Hebrew original. Rather, the argument
depends on which verses from Genesis are incorporated and in what order, elements of the
original Hebrew that the Greek text would have no problem communicating despite diferences
in style and other small alterations.
human from the earth in 17:1a paraphrases Gen 2:7. In itself it is not remarkable.
32

In 17:1b, however, Ben Sira ventures beyond the creation narratives proper and
alludes to the return of the human to the earth in death, which is found in Gen
3:19.
33
Te result of the juxtaposition of Gen 2:7 and 3:19 in Sir 17:1 is signifcant. In
their new literary relationship in Ben Siras creation narrative they describe a facet
of human existencemortalitythat is built into the created order. Just as people
are created from the ground, so too do they return to it in death.
34
Genesis 3:19 in
its own literary context, of course, is in fact one of the curses that follow on Adam
and Eves disobedience in the garden and thus represents a tragic departure from
the created order. Ben Sira passes over this crucial narrative element completely
and instead benignly suggests that human mortality is a natural feature of the ebb
and fow of Gods plan for creation.
In constructing his own creation account, then, Ben Sira is drawing on the
Genesis material in a way that is far removed from a pedestrian paraphrase. His
incorporation of Gen 3:19 into his description of creation undercuts the thrust of
the story that is told in Genesis 3. He outfanks the narrative context of Gen 3:19
by means of a surgical extraction and redeployment of one of its details.
35

A similar reading strategy can be found in the next verse (17:2) in which
the life span of the human is described as fxed. For Ben Sira this limitation on
32
Ben Sira 17:1a: ; Gen 2:7a:
. Tere is no reference to the creation of the human from the earth in the creation
account in Genesis 1.
33
Ben Sira 17:1b: ; Gen 3:19:
,
. n the reference to the return to the earth by the human, Ben Sira has made transitive,
with God as the acting subject, what is intransitive, with the human as the subject, in Gen 3:19
(Ben Sira: he [God] returns him [the human] to the earth; Gen 3:19: until you [the human]
return to the earth). He is perhaps infuenced here by Ps 90:3 ( , You return
humans to dust) or Job 10:9 ( , You made me like clay and you will
return me to the soil).
34
References to humans as creatures made from earth who will return to the soil or dust
can be found in Pss 90:3; 103:14; Job 34:15; and Eccl 3:20; 12:7.
35
Richard Hays argues that Paul incorporated echoes of and allusions to the Scriptures
of Israel with a full awareness of the larger literary context in which they were found in order
to create a rich depth of meaning in the intertextual space between the text of origin and the
new text (Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul [New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989],
1421). Hays points out that sometimes Pauls intertextual echoes and allusions have the purpose
of subverting the narrative to which they refer (pp. 15660). J. Ross Wagner clearly highlights
this type of subversive Pauline reading in Rom 10:68, in which Paul selectively cites phrases
from Deut 30:1114 in order to undercut the assertion made in that passage that the law is able
to be kept (Heralds of the Good News: Isaiah and Paul In Concert in the Letter to the Romans
[NovTSup 101; Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2002], 15968). Along these same hermeneutical lines, Ben
Sira cites and alludes to specifc verses of the Genesis creation accounts in an attempt to subvert
and blunt their larger context.
the duration of human life is established by God as part of the orderly creation.
36

However, the imposition of a limit on the duration of human life does not appear
in the Genesis narratives until 6:3, where it is instituted by God to respond to the
dangers posed by the intermarriage of humans and divine beings. Once again Ben
Sira has suppressed one of the narratives of Genesis that falls outside the creation
stories by appropriating one of its details and employing it in the context of his
own description of an orderly creation.
In 17:2b4 the dominion of the human over the rest of the creation is
addressed in terms that allude to Gen 1:2628 in fairly straightforward ways.
Humans are given authority over every living thing on earth,
37
which comes as a
result of having been made in the image of God and imbued with some of Gods
own strength.
38

Human faculties are described by Ben Sira in 17:610.
39
In 17:6 he lists the
sensory and cognitive faculties that God bestowed on humans in creationspeech,
sight, hearing, reasoning, and understanding.
40
Tere is no explicit reference to
such faculties in the Genesis account, but they are certainly implicit, especially in
the notion that the human is created in the image of God (17:3). Tis is an important
verse because of its position. By listing these faculties immediately before a bold
claim about the knowledge of good and evil (17:7), Ben Sira underscores the idea
that humans are created without any kind of cognitive lack or defect.
41

With 17:7, Ben Sira begins to stretch the Genesis creation narrative to the
breaking point by asserting that God in creation flled humans with under-
standing and showed them good and evil things.
42
In the context of the cre-
ation account of Genesis 2, a reference to good and evil would certainly evoke
36
Ben Sira 17:2a: , [God] gave them numbered
days and a season (cf. Ps 90:910).
37
Ben Sira 17:2b: (the antecedent of is ,
which occurs at the end of 17:1); 17:4: /
. Although the naming of the animals by Adam in Gen 2:1920
implies authority, the more detailed descriptions of Gen 1:26 and 28 lie behind these succinct,
periphrastic renderings of 17:2b and 4.
38
Ben Sira 17:3: / .
Te allusions to Gen 1:2627 are unmistakable.
39
en Sira 17:5 also lists sensory and cognitive faculties, but it is a later gloss.
40
Ben Sira 17:6: , /
. Te word is used by Ben Sira in 15:14b to translate and seems
to mean free will (Di Lella, Wisdom, 282); here in 17:6 it would appear to mean something
more like reasoning or deliberating. See pp. 15254 below.
41
Samuel L. Adams points to these verses as a prime example of Ben Siras attempt to
provide a sapiential reading of the Genesis creation traditions (Wisdom in Transition: Act and
Consequence in Second Temple Instructions [JSJSup 125; Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2008], 18687).
42
Ben Sira 17:7 Greek: . Tere is no Hebrew extant for
17:7, but in 11:14 and 37:18 the phrases and translate Hebrew
, so it is reasonable to assume that the original Hebrew of 17:7 was also , as Segal
reconstructs (Ben Sira, 103).
associations with the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, which is mentioned
in Gen 2:9 and 17 and fgures largely in the story of primal disobedience in ch.
3.
43
Te way in which Ben Sira uses the phrase good and evil, however, is quite
surprising. Te creation account in Genesis 2 suggests that the knowledge of good
and evil was withheld from Adam; in fact, God tells him that he will die if he eats
of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. But Ben Sira boldly claims that
humans were shown good and evil. Although there is no extant Hebrew for this
passage, the Greek verb used here, , likely translated the Hebrew verb
in the original,
44
which in Ben Sira usually implies a revelation of some sort.
45

Once again, Ben Sira cites a phrase from Genesis 2 in a way that obscures its sig-
nifcance in its original literary context; knowledge of good and evil is not a forbid-
den fruit but rather something that is bestowed by God on the human in creation.
But to what does good and evil refer in Ben Siras creative rereading? Te
pair / occurs six times in Ben Sira.
46
Two of these occurrences are quite
intriguing vis--vis the present passage (17:7). In 11:14, the sage asserts that good
and evil, life and death, poverty and wealth are from the Lord.
47
Many commen-
tators point to passages in the psalms, prophets, or wisdom literature as parallels
for both good and bad things originating in God.
48
Te collocation of good and
bad with life and death, however, immediately calls to mind Deut 30:15, in which
Moses, in reference to the statutes and ordinances of the law he has laid out before
the Israelites, says, See, this day I set before you life and good, death and evil.
49

Te same grouping of life and death with good and evil occurs in Ben Sira 37:18,
43
Genesis 2:17: ; LXX:
, .
44
Although Segal reconstructs (Ben Sira, 103) for and Smend suggests
or (Weisheit, 156), apart from the rather free translation of 3:23 (where
translates ), in Ben Sira translates
(14:12; 46:20; 48:25; 49:8). Te suggestion of Segal and Smend is also rendered difcult by the
fact that is rare in Ben Sira and does not occur in the hiphil.
45
Ben Sira 14:12 (decree of Sheol not made known to a person); 46:20 (Samuel, from beyond
the grave, makes known the kings fate); 48:25 (Isaiah reveals future events); 49:8 (Ezekiel relates
the chariot vision)all four of the preceding examples are rendered in Greek by . Te
other three occurrences of connote informing or showing more generally: 11:27 (translated
by ), 16:22 (translated by ), and 37:14 (translated by ).
46
Ben Sira 11:14 ( ); 17:7 (no extant Hebrew); 18:8 (no extant Hebrew); 33:14
( ] ); 37:18 ( ); 39:4 (no extant Hebrew).
47
Ben Sira 11:14: ; , ,
.
48
For example, Di Lella cites Isa 45:7 (I form light and create darkness, I make weal and
create woe; I the Lord do all these things); Job 1:21 ([Job] said, Naked I came from my mothers
womb, and naked I shall return there; the Lord gave, and the Lord has taken away; blessed be the
name of the Lord ); and Job 2:10 (Shall we receive the good at the hand of God, and not receive
the bad?) (Wisdom, 239).
49
Deuteronomy 30:15: ; LXX:
, .
where they are said to be four rods that proceed from the heart of a person.
50
As
Alexander Di Lella points out, in 37:1620 not only is there a connection with
Deut 30:15 based on the two pairs of opposites, but there is also a clear Deuter-
onomistic logic at work in which wise speech brings life and good things while bad
speech brings death and evil things.
51
Tese two passages (11:14 and 37:1718) suggest that the pair /
, in addition to its association with Genesis 23, is for Ben Sira also related
to Deut 30:15. Tis point is a key to understanding what Ben Sira is doing in 17:7.
In the context of the description of creation in Ben Sira 16:2417:14, the reference
to / in 17:7 is frst and foremost an allusion to Genesis 23.
But there is also a connection between / and Deut 30:15,
and it can therefore be no accident that immediately following on 17:7 are sev-
eral verses about the law (17:1114). So in claiming that God showed or made
known to humans / , Ben Sira is not only suppressing the
plot of Genesis 23 but also creating a bridge between creation and the giving of
the law. Tere are no further references to the Genesis creation accounts afer 17:7
in this section; instead, Ben Sira will cite and allude to texts from Deuteronomy
and Exodus that are related to the giving of the law. Te following chart of citations
and allusions helps to highlight this transition.
Passage in Ben Sira 17:114 Scriptural Citation or Allusion
17:1a Gen 2:7
17:1b Gen 3:19
17:2a Gen 6:3
17:3b Gen 1:26, 28
17:4 Gen 1:28
17:7b Gen 2:9, 17
Deut 30:15
17:11b Deut 30:1120
17:12 Deut 5:122
Exod 19:220:17
17:13 Exod 19:1619, 24:1517
17:14a Deut 5:615
Exod 20:111
17:14b Deut 5:1621
Exod 20:1217
50
Ben Sira 37:1718a: / ;
37:17b18a: , , (37:17 in Greek does not
refect the Hebrew Vorlage). Note that Ben Sira reorders the list just as does LXX Deuteronomy.
51
Di Lella, Wisdom, 436. In other instances such as 33:1015 and 42:24, Ben Siras treatment
of good and evil is somewhat more dualistic and deterministic.
Notice that Goerings observation about Ben Siras attempt to reconcile the
universal and the particular is on display in this passage. Te chart clearly shows
that in discussing the creation of humanity, Ben Sira moves from a creative
rereading of Genesis, in which he makes an argument about the capacity for
knowledge in humans generally, to a rehearsal of themes about covenant obedience
from Deuteronomy and Exodus, in which the particular knowledge of the law of
God for Jews is asserted. Ben Siras implicit argument seems to be: humans are
capable of knowledge in their created state, and so it follows that the Jews are
capable of knowing the law given specifcally to Israel.
Ben Sira passes over many of the narrative details of the creation accounts
references to Adam and Eve, the Garden of Eden, the serpent, the curses, and
the expulsion from the garden, to name a fewand it would certainly have been
possible for him simply to ignore the matter of the tree of the knowledge of good
and evil altogether. But it is not difcult to imagine why a sage committed to the
Deuteronomistic tradition might not be able to ignore the fact that Gen 2:17 could
be construed to suggest that the knowledge of good and evil is withheld from the
human in the original architecture of creation. Such readings would pose a danger
in the eyes of someone like Ben Sira, because the ability to know good and evil is
a key presupposition of covenant obedience. Te inability of the human to know
what the law commands would represent an insurmountable obstacle to living a
life in accord with Gods will.
Furthermore, the idea that knowledge of the law is not available to every
Jewish person would threaten not only Ben Siras theology but also his social
position.
52
It is the purview of the sage to provide wise counsel to society regarding
how to live in accord with the law that has its foundation in wisdom itself. Tere
is therefore something at stake socially for Ben Sira in making particular kinds of
claims about religious knowledge. Te passage just discussed (16:2417:14) shows
clearly that Ben Sira found it necessary to construct his own creation narrative in
order to bolster his convictions about religious epistemology. In putting forward
this dramatically rewritten version of Genesis 12 free of the narrative elements
that lend themselves to provocative interpretations, Ben Sira helps to ensure that
knowledge of the law is not an esoteric possession of some select group but rather
is available to serve the public good of Judea.
52
Te social location of Ben Sira has been thoroughly explored in a series of important
articles, essays, and papers by Wright, many of which have now been gathered together into
volume of his collected works (Praise Israel for Wisdom and Instruction). In addition to the
pieces from this volume noted in n. 28 above, see also Fear the Lord and Honor the Priest:
Ben Sira as Defender of the Jerusalem Priesthood, 97126; and Wisdom, Instruction, and
Social Location in Ben Sira and 1 Enoch, 14782. One fnal essay by Wright that should be
mentioned here is Putting the Puzzle Together: Some Suggestions concerning the Social
Location of the Wisdom of Ben Sira, in Conficted Boundaries in Wisdom and Apocalypticism
(ed. Benjamin G. Wright III and Lawrence M. Wills; SBLSymS 35; Atlanta: Society of Biblical
Literature, 2005), 89112.
Creation and the Possibility of Law Obedience:
Ben Sira 15:1120
In this important passage, Ben Sira engages hypothetical interlocutors con-
cerning the question of culpability for sin. While it is impossible to prove that Ben
Siras rhetorical opponents in 15:1120 represent actual opponents in contemporary
theological circles (although it is perfectly likely), it is quite clear that Ben Sira is
eager to reject the notion that humans are not responsible for their actions. Tis
eagerness stems from the centrality of covenant obedience in his thoughtfor the
logic of the covenant to work properly, humans must be responsible for their sinful
actions. If humans are absolved of such responsibility by recourse to extrahuman
causality, then the governing principles of the covenantal relationship between
God and Israel are called into question.
In 15:1113, Ben Sira counters claims that God is responsible for human sin
by employing the literary controversy form (do not say . . .).
53
His argument is that
God hates sinful behavior and therefore would have no part in causing or allowing
humans to engage in it. He supports this contention by appealing in 15:14 to the
fact that God created humans in the beginning with the ability to choose their
actions freely.

54

God created the human in the beginning,
and placed him in the power of his inclination.
Tere is no doubt that 15:14 is meant to evoke the Genesis creation accounts;
55

what is not as immediately clear is what the second bicolon means. Te noun
does not occur in the creation accounts, although the verbal form is used in Gen
2:7, 8, and 19 with reference to the creation of the human, where it simply refers
to Gods acts of creating.
56
Te noun is found, however, in Gen 6:5 and 8:21,
53
Collins (Jewish Wisdom, 81) notes that this form is common in Egyptian wisdom litera-
ture but rare in the Hebrew Bible.
54
Tere is an extra bicolon in this line in both mss A and B: , and [God]
placed him in the power of his pursuer. In the translation notes in Di Lellas commentary, Skehan
(following Di Lellas Te Hebrew Text of Sirach; A Text-Critical and Historical Study [Studies in
Classical Literature 1; Te Hague: Mouton, 1966], 12729) argues that this bicolon is spurious,
having been based on a verbal resemblance of the actual 15:14b to Syr of 4:19b. He concludes
that it is fagrant nonsense in its current location in 15:14 (Di Lella, Wisdom, 269).
55
E.g., Gen 1:1 ( ); 1:27 ( ).
56
For a very helpful discussion of the term in Sirach and other texts, see John J. Collins,
Wisdom, Apocalypticism, and the Dead Sea Scrolls, in Jedes Ding hat seine Zeit . . .: Studien
zur israelitischen und altorientalischen Weisheit. Diethelm Michel zum 65. Geburtstag (ed. Anja A.
Diesel et al.; BZAW 241; Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 1996); repr. in Seers, Sibyls, and Sages in
Hellenistic-Roman Judaism (JSJSup 54; Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2001), 36983.
where it seems to mean simply tendency.
57
Te only other occurrence of in
Sirach comes in 27:6b, where it said to be revealed in ones speech,
58
just as the
tending of a tree is made known by its fruit.
59
From this reference one would con-
clude that can be either good (which would be shown by fair speech) or bad
(which would be revealed by foul or ignorant speech).
Given the way that the root is used in Ben Sira and in Genesis, it would
appear that in Ben Sira implies that the power of human choice is neutral and
thus can be cultivated for good or bad. Tis understanding of the term makes
perfect sense in the present passage in which Ben Sira is emphasizing human and
not divine responsibility for sin. Tat humans have free will is implicit in the cre-
ation accounts in Genesis 12 but is never made explicit in any way. As has already
been shown in 16:2417:14, however, Ben Sira is perfectly comfortable with re-
presenting the creation narrative in ways that suit his purpose. It is very clear that
his main thrust here is insisting on human responsibility for sin, and accordingly
he writes it into the creation.
In 15:1517 this human responsibility is explicitly placed in the context of
covenant obedience: If you choose,
60
you can keep the commandment (15:15a).
Te fundamental human obligation to choose good over evil is rhetorically
emphasized in the presentation of opposites in 15:1617, a passage that evokes
Deut 11:2628 and 30:1520. Te section is rounded out by assertions of Gods
omniscience and eternal vigilance as well as Gods refusal to sanction sinful
behavior (15:1820).
Once again note that Ben Sira moves in this passage from the universal
(humans can choose) to the particular (Jews can obey the commandments of
God)from creative rereading of Genesis to underscore a point about humanity
generally, and then to citations and allusions to Deuteronomy to make a particular
point about the Jews and covenant obedience. Ben Sira seems to regard Genesis as
57
In both cases is modifed by another noun ( in Gen 6:5, in Gen 8:21) and
is associated with a tendency toward evil. Collins, citing F. C. Porter and Roland E. Murphy,
observes that this association of with evil is typical of biblical usage with a few notable
exceptions (Wisdom, Apocalypticism, 373).
58
While the word is usually translated reckoning or reasoning, this word here in
its context appears to refer to ones speech; see Di Lellas discussion (Wisdom, 356).
59
Di Lella translates in 27:6b as human nature (Wisdom, 272). Te word
may also have stood in the original (but missing) Hebrew of 17:6, where one of the faculties
bestowed by God upon humans in creation is , which is the word that translates
in 15:14. Segal retroverts into , and Smend states that ohne Zweifel
translates an original (Weisheit, 156). Te only other occurrence of outside of
15:14 and 17:6 comes in 44:4, where it translates (discretion, prudence, but this
word can also be used pejoratively [e.g., scheme] [HALOT, 566, s.v. ]).
60
; Ben Sira will use the same verb two more times in 15:1617, thereby driving home
the human responsibility for law obedience.
a promising source of afrmations about human capacities and competencies, but
only afer he bowdlerizes Genesis 23 of its questionable narrative details.
III. Knowledge of Good and Evil in 4QInstruction
Before drawing this study to a close, it is helpful to pause briefy to consider
another sapiential text whose treatment of the knowledge of good and evil stands
in stark contrast to what we fnd in Ben Sira. A consideration of a passage from
4QInstruction (4Q415418) provides an interesting backdrop against which to
read Ben Siras insistent claims about knowing Gods will.
4QInstruction is a text from Qumran that belongs to the wisdom tradition
but possesses a number of distinctive features, perhaps most notably that it exhibits
a decidedly apocalyptic outlook.
61
It likely was written in the latter half of the third
century b.c.e. or the frst half of the second century b.c.e., but it is impossible
to fx even these rough dates with any certainty.
62
4QInstruction makes for a
fascinating comparison with Ben Sira because it is roughly contemporaneous, is
in the wisdom tradition, contains teachings that stand in tension with Ben Sira on
the issues under examination, and employs the creation accounts of Genesis to
ground its claims.
63
4QInstruction and Ben Sira are examples of what seems to be
a debate within Jewish wisdom circles of the Hellenistic period concerning basic
notions of human knowledge and agency before God.
64

Te passage from 4QInstruction that has received the most scholarly atten tion
61
For helpful overviews of the relationship between 4QInstruction and the biblical and
postbiblical wisdom tradition, see John J. Collins, Wisdom Reconsidered, in Light of the Scrolls,
DSD 4 (1997): 26581; Daniel J. Harrington, Te Qumran Sapiential Texts in the Context of
Biblical and Second Temple Literature, in the Dead Sea Scrolls Fify Years afer Teir Discovery:
Proceedings of the Jerusalem Congress, July 2025, 1997 (ed. Lawrence H. Schifman, Emanuel
Tov, and James C. VanderKam; Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society/Shrine of the Book, Israel
Museum, 2000), 25662; and Armin Lange, Die Weisheitstexte aus Qumran: Eine Einleitung,
in Te Wisdom Texts from Qumran and the Development of Sapiential Tought (ed. C. Hempel, A.
Lange, and H. Lichtenberger; BETL 159; Leuven: Leuven University Press/Peeters, 2002), 330;
and the conclusion to Matthew J. Gofs Discerning Wisdom: Te Sapiential Literature of the Dead
Sea Scrolls (VTSup 116; Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2006).
62
For a succinct and helpful discussion of the difculty of dating 4QInstruction, see
Matthew Gof, Te Worldly and Heavenly Wisdom of 4QInstruction (STDJ 50; Leiden/Boston:
Brill, 2003), 22832.
63
In a recent article, Samuel L. Adams undertakes an impressive comparative analysis of
4QInstruction and Ben Sira (Rethinking the Relationship Between 4QInstruction and Ben Sira,
RevQ 24 [2010]: 55583). He rightly cautions that the interesting similarities between the two
texts do not necessarily imply that the author of either text knew the other (Rethinking, 583).
64
Adams argues that Ben Sira is quite aware that other sages and groups are questioning the
wisdom tradition in fundamental ways on issues like divine and human agency, the origin of sin
and evil, and mortality (Wisdom in Transition, 183).
is 4Q417 1 i 218. It contains a description of the predetermined nature of all
human deeds (lines 213)
65
followed by a section that echoes the creation of
the human and the primal disobedience of Adam and Eve in Genesis 13 (lines
1318).
66
Of particular signifcance is a distinction that is made between two dif-
ferent groups of people. Te frst group is called , a people with spirit
(= spiritual people) while the second is called (metonymically) , a spirit
of fesh (= feshly people). Here is the context in which these two groups are
distinguished:
][ \/ 16
17
][ ][ 18
He [God] bequeathed it [i.e., meditation] to humanity as well as to the spiritual
people, for its [i.e., humanitys] fashioning is afer the pattern of the Holy Ones.
He no longer
67
gives meditation to the spirit of fesh, for it did not know the dif-
ference between good and evil according to the judgment of its spirit.
Some of the specifcs of this passage are a bit opaque, but the overall contours are
clear enough. In the context of the creation and subsequent primal disobedience
of humanity, God grants one group of humans (the spiritual people) medita-
tion (), a term that the passage makes clear is related to the knowledge of
good and evil.
68
Te other group, the feshly people, are denied this gif on the
65
For a discussion of this section of the passage, see Shane Berg, Religious Epistemologies
in the Dead Sea Scrolls: Te Heritage and Transformation of the Wisdom Tradition (Ph.D. diss.,
Yale University, 2008), 5168.
66
Collins ofers an important and distinctive reading of this section of the passage in In
the Likeness of the Holy Ones: Te Creation of Humankind in a Wisdom Text from Qumran,
in Te 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), 60919. See also Gofs helpful extended discussion of the passage along the same lines in
Worldly and Heavenly Wisdom, 80115. Te basic contours of Collinss and Gofs interpretation
provide the basis for the reading found in Berg, Religious Epistemologies, 6885.
67
Te translation no longer is not typical for , but in this difcult phrase it is the
best available option and so is adopted by the editors of 4QInstruction, Daniel J. Harrington
and John Strugnell (Qumran Cave 4, XXIV: Sapiential Texts, Part 2. 4QInstruction (Musar le
Mevin): 4Q415f. with a Re-edition of 1Q26 [ed. John Strugnell, Daniel J. Harrington, Torleif
Elgvin, with Joseph A. Fitzmyer; DJD 34; Oxford: Clarendon, 1999], 166). See the discussion of
the translation of in Gof, Worldly and Heavenly Wisdom, 99.
68
Te noun is related to the verb , which occurs a few lines earlier in the column.
Tere the sage exhorts his pupil: Day and night meditate [[ on the mystery of existence, and
study (it) continually, and then you will know truth and falsehood, wisdom and foolishness . . .
(4Q417 1 i 67). In light of this use of to mean meditate or study, it is plausible and makes
sense in context to take as a reference to meditation. Te object of such meditation is not
quite clear, but what is clear is that those who possess the capability to meditate are those who
are able to know good and evil.
grounds that they did not know the diference between good and evil, language
that evokes the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in Genesis 2 and 3.
Tis dense text is flled with all manner of provocative elements, but what
is signifcant for the purpose of this study is that the diference between the two
groups concerns the ability to know good and evil. Te passage is essentially a set
of assertions about religious epistemology in narrative form. An elect group is able
to know the diference between good and evil, while the other is precluded by God
from such discernment.
Te legitimation for this epistemological division within humanity is grounded
rhetorically in a creative interpretation of Genesis 13. Tis interpretation takes
Genesis 1 as describing the creation of humans who are patterned afer the angels and
understands Genesis 23 as the creation of a second group of creaturely humans
who are subsequently expelled from the garden for failing to discern between
good and evil. Te author and his addressees are part of the spiritual people,
who stand in distinction from those with a feshly spirit. In the rhetorical world
of the text, the insiders are able to know good and evil, while for outsiders this
knowledge is inaccessible. Tis sectarian claim about the restricted availability of
the knowledge of good and evil stands at odds with Ben Siras emphatic assertion
that such knowledge is available to everyone.
Restricted Knowledge as a Sectarian Strategy
in the Hellenistic Period
Te restriction of divine knowledge to an elect group in 4QInstruction seems
to refect signs of a sectarian consciousness.
69
A similar strategy is found more
robustly on display in unambiguously sectarian documents found at Qumran such
as the Discourse on the Two Spirits (1QS 3:134:26) and the Hodayot.
70
It seems,
then, that one of the ways that sectarian identity can be created and maintained
is through the construction of a religious epistemology that excludes important
kinds of knowledge from those deemed outside. Te Dead Sea Scrolls give us
evidence that such sectarian claims about knowledge were prominent within the
community that produced them.
69
Collins, following Carol Newsom, would regard sectarian consciousness as a rhetorical
feature of a text in which there is self-conscious reference to separation from a larger group.
See his Sectarian Consciousness in the Dead Sea Scrolls, in Heavenly Tablets: Interpretation,
Identity, and Tradition in Ancient Judaism (ed. Lynn LiDonnici and Andrea Lieber; JSJSup 119;
Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2007), 17792; and Carol Newsom, Sectually Explicit Literature from
Qumran, in Te Hebrew Bible and Its Interpreters (ed. William Henry Propp, Baruch Halpern,
and David Noel Freedman; Biblical and Judaic Studies 1; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990),
16787.
70
For a sustained examination of the relationship between sectarian consciousness and
religious epistemology in the Discourse on the Two Spirits and the Hodayot, see Berg, Religious
Epistemologies, 95241.
Against such a backdrop, Ben Siras afrmation of a more traditional religious
epistemology is quite comprehensible. By employing the Genesis creation accounts
to defend the universal knowability of Gods law, he is using the very texts that
those with sectarian outlooks used to claim that Gods law is available only to elite
or select groups. But while Ben Siras attitude toward the possibility of knowing
and doing the law is relatively traditional, Ben Siras approach to Genesis 13 is
quite creative and even provocative.
71
IV. Conclusion: Ben Siras Reading of Genesis 12
Tis examination of Ben Siras interpretation of the Genesis creation accounts
demonstrates that he was concerned not only about the human competence to
do Gods law (15:1120) but also about the human capacity to know Gods law
(16:2417:14). In arguing that Gods law can be fully knownand that indeed
such knowledge was bequeathed to humans by God in creationBen Sira may well
be responding to claims that some special revelation was required to have full,
sufcient access to the law. Whether Ben Sira in fact knew a text like 4QInstruction
is impossible to prove, but what seems clear is that the Genesis creation accounts
had become contested ground in Jewish wisdom circles in the Hellenistic age. Teir
suggestive and puzzling narrative features allowed scholars with very diferent
motivations to fnd in them legitimation for their theological agendas.
Ben Sira insists that Gods law is part of the orderly creation of the world and
is fully knowable by humans; there is no defect in human faculties or in the law as
given by God that would require some extra act of divine agency beyond creation
for humans to comprehend the law. But there is no such clear and unambiguous
portrait of creation in the narratives of Genesis 12 as they stand, and so in a
bold act of literary creation, Ben Sira renarrates them to produce an elegant and
straightforward account that better serves his purposes.
71
Tough Ben Sira insists that the law is universally knowable, he seems to regard wisdom
from a distinctly elite perspective. In chs. 3839, he argues that the scribes devotion to wisdom
puts him on an entirely diferent plane than physicians, tradesmen, and crafsmen. I am grateful
to one of my anonymous readers for this important insight.
WABASH CENTER
Teaching and Learning in Theology and Religion
wabashcenter.wabash.edu
Funded by Lilly Endowment Inc. and located at Wabash College
Small Grants Available up to $2500
Te Wabash Center is accepting small grant proposals for activities
that enhance teaching and learning in religion and theology.
Proposals:
Improve practical application of teaching and learning methods
Create a supportive environments for teachers
Promote sustained conversations about pedagogy
Support research and study of pedagogical issues
Rolling Deadline
P.Duk. inv. 727r: New Evidence for the
Meaning and Provenance of the Word
david m. moffitt
mofttd@campbell.edu
Campbell University Divinity School, Buies Creek, NC 27506
c. jacob butera
jbutera@unca.edu
University of North Carolina Asheville, Asheville, NC 28804
While it was common in the nineteenth century to interpret the word
in the LXX as referring to a foreigner, stranger, or sojourner
in a place (meanings that cohere well with the contextual sense of the Biblical
Hebrew word , the term that consistently renders in the LXX),
many scholars in the twentieth century argued for the view that the word was
created by Jewish Diaspora communities, or perhaps even by the LXX transla-
tors themselves, as a technical term to name Gentiles who came over to (i.e.,
converted to) Jewish practice and belief. While some today take issue with this
latter view, the debate over the provenance and meaning of contin-
ues. Tis article reviews and assesses this debate. It then examines the presence
of the word in a recently published papyrus that likely dates from the
mid to late third century b.c.e.P.Duk. inv. 727r. Tis new evidence lends sup-
port to the position that the term was not coined by LXX translators
or their wider Jewish community to name the experience of Gentile converts
living among them. Rather, the word was probably selected to render the bibli-
cal term by virtue of the fact that it was already in use in Ptolemaic Egypt to
denote a foreigner or sojourner in a region.
JBL 132, no. 1 (2013): 159178
159
We are grateful to Joel Marcus and Joshua D. Sosin for their encouragement and advice
with respect to various elements of this project. Tanks are also due to Matthew Tiessen, the
participants in the Papyrology and Early Christian Backgrounds section of the annual meeting of
the Society of Biblical Literature in New Orleans, Louisiana, in 2009, and the participants in the
meeting of the International Organization of Septuagint and Cognate Studies in Helsinki in 2010
for their insightful and helpful comments on early drafs of this article.
I. Introduction
Te Anchor Bible Dictionary (ABD) entry on the word proselyte begins with
the claim that [i]n antiquity the term proselyte was used only in the context of
Judaism.
1
Te article explains,
Te LXX translated Heb gr with Gk proslytos 77 times, but only in those cases
where the context suggested a religious meaning, employing the terms xenos
and paroikos elsewhere. Tis narrowing of the defnition [of gr] was a result
of the Jews altered circumstances in the Diaspora. Te translators of the LXX
appropriated the OT concern for resident aliens on behalf of the gentiles who
adopted the religion and customs of Judaism, thereby providing a biblical basis
for a practical reality.
2
Tus, the translators of the LXX retrojected an element of their own theologi-
cal and sociological realitythe existence of Gentile convertsinto holy writ by
rendering the Hebrew term for a foreigner sojourning in Israel () in terms of a
proselyte to Judaism ().
Te ABD article nicely summarizes the opinion of many, though certainly
not all, scholars during the last century regarding the original meaning and prov-
enance of the word . Some have gone even further, arguing that the
term probably originated as a Jewish neologism.
3
While exegetical observations
have been profered to bolster the case, the cornerstone of this widely held position
is an argumentum ex silentiono early occurrence of this word exists in extant
ancient literature that is independent of the LXX or of social contexts that were
infuenced by the LXX.
4

We here present and assess a fresh piece of evidence that is especially germane
to the meaning and provenance of . Te recto of a papyrus in the Duke
University Rare Book, Manuscript, and Special Collections LibraryP.Duk. inv.
727contains the earliest, non-septuagintal attestation of the word discovered to
date.
5
Apart from the word itself, nothing in the fragment indicates a
Jewish provenance. As a text roughly contemporary with the initial translation of
1
Paul F. Stuehrenberg, Proselyte, ABD 5:5035, here 503.
2
Ibid.
3
We discuss this position in detail in section III below.
4
Excluding P.Duk. inv. 727, the LXX contains the earliest use of the word followed by some
occurrences in the frst century c.e. (Philo, the Gospel of Matthew, and Acts).
5
Te papyrus most probably dates from the mid to late third century b.c.e. For a detailed
defense of this conclusion, see our critical edition of P.Duk. inv. 727 in C. Jacob Butera and
David M. Moftt, P.Duk. inv. 727: A Dispute with Proselytes in Egypt, ZPE 177 (2011):
2016. Images of the recto and verso of the papyrus may also be viewed at the following URLs:
http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/papyrus/records/727r.html and http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/
papyrus/records/727v.html.
Moftt and Butera: P.Duk. inv. 727r and 161
the Torah from Hebrew into Greek in Alexandria,
6
P.Duk. inv. 727 ofers a new,
external point of reference by which to reevaluate the signifcance and meaning of
the use of in the LXX to render the Hebrew word .
In what follows we briefy trace the historical shif from the opinion held by
several nineteenth-century scholars, that likely denoted a stranger or
foreigner in the LXX, to the view epitomized in the ABD entry cited above, which
was prominent in the twentieth century. We then ofer a critical assessment of the
various positions surveyed. In particular, we highlight some of what we take to
be the methodological and exegetical weaknesses in the arguments that defend
the conclusion that was originally a technical term for a convert. Fol-
lowing this survey we provide a transcription, translation, and discussion of the
contents of P.Duk. inv. 727r.
Apart from bringing this papyrus to the attention of biblical scholarship, we
argue that the evidence it contains, particularly when coupled with the interpre-
tive problems inherent in views such as the one presented in the ABD, tips the
balance of probability in favor of the view that refers in the LXX to
newcomers or sojournerspeople who have recently arrived in, and thus are
relatively foreign to, a particular area. Te poor state of the papyrus, the pres-
ence of Jewish communities in the Fayum, and the complexities of discerning
the Jewish provenance of a papyrus
7
make an absolute conclusion impossible. At
the very least, however, the existence of P.Duk. inv. 727 lays to rest appeals to the
terms lack of early, non-septuagintal attestation in future arguments about the
meaning of .
II. Views on in the Nineteenth Century
In his 1857 study, Urschrif und Uebersetzungen der Bibel in ihrer Abhngig-
keit von der innern Entwickelung des Judenthums, Abraham Geiger argued that,
like its Hebrew counterpart , generally refers to a foreign immigrant
in the LXX. Geiger was aware that the meaning of the Biblical Hebrew word
6
While clearly embellished, the core account in the Letter of Aristeas to Philocrates (a
similar tradition is also attested by Aristobulus) that the initial translation of the LXX occurred in
Alexandria under the auspices of King Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285247 b.c.e.) seems likely. See
the helpful discussions of Karen H. Jobes and Moiss Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint (Grand
Rapids: Baker Academic, 2000), 3337; and Joseph Mlze Modrzejewski, Te Jews of Egypt:
From Ramses II to Emperor Hadrian (trans. Robert Cornman; Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 1997), 100102.
7
Modrzejewski illustrates this point with CPJ 1 23 (182 b.c.e.). Te papyrus is a mortgage
contract. Te loan is given by Apollonios to Sostratos. Apart from the fact that each of these
individuals is identifed as , nothing in the papyrus, least of all the Greek names of the
persons involved, gives any indication that Apollonios and Sostratos are Jews (ibid., 11314).
shifed from sojourner to convert in the Hebrew of later rabbinic literature.
8

He allowed that in later portions of the LXX (i.e., books translated afer the Penta-
teuch) the Greek word was similarly developing toward the meaning convert. For
the Alexandrian translators of the Pentateuch, however, did not have
the technical meaning proselyte.
Geiger noted, frst, that pentateuchal translators used to translate
the word at almost every place where the latter occurred. Tese translators, he
observed, bedienen sich dieses Ausdruckes nicht blos, wo von dem Neujuden
im spteren Sinne die Rede sein kann, sondern auch wo nothwendig von dem
ausserhalb des Judenthums stehenden Fremdling die Rede ist.
9
Te word, that
is, does not show up exclusively in contexts where one could interpret it to mean
a proselyte; it also occurs in contexts in which Geiger judged that the word must
mean a foreigner.
Geiger argued, second, that the few instances in which the LXX renders
with terms other than especially, (stranger) and
(sojourner)support the inference that was not understood by
the translators as a technical term for a convert. He reasoned that in cases when
, which normally translates , represents the word (e.g., Gen 15:13;
Exod 2:22; Deut 14:21), the translators choice of cannot have occurred
because he hier den Proselyten im sptere Sinne, den Neujuden ausschliessen
will, sondern weil ihm im Ganzen beide Wrter synonym sind.
10
Te translator
opted for in these instances because for him was synonymous
with .
Moreover, in the case of Exod 12:19, in which might have been more
8
Geiger, Urschrif und Uebersetzungen der Bibel in ihrer Abhngigkeit von der innern
Entwickelung des Judenthums (Breslau: Julius Hainauer, 1857). Tat the absolute use of could
bear the meaning convert is already clear in the Mishnah. See, e.g., m. eb. 10:9; m. Hi al. 3:6;
m. Bik. 1:45. Nevertheless, the word does not appear to be properly technical, since one ofen
fnds rabbinic texts that qualify the with (dweller, for the alien/sojourner) and with
(righteous, for the convert). In addition to these distinctions, George Foot Moore discusses
two other qualifers of intended to clarify that the individual is a convert (truth) and
(son of covenant) (Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era: Te Age of the
Tannaim [2 vols.; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1927], 1:33841).
9
Geiger, Urschrif und Uebersetzungen der Bibel, 353. As evidence that the translators
intended some uses of to refer to immigrants, he cited Exod 22:20 (22:21 LXX);
Exod 23:9; Lev 19:34; 25:47; Deut 10:19; and 28:43. In Exod 22:20, for example, the Israelites
are themselves labeled while residing in Egypt. Te word could not, in Geigers view,
mean convert here. Moreover, in Deut 28:43 the is depicted as being elevated above
the Israelite. Te context of this verse, which depicts the horrifc curses that will fall upon the
Israelites if they stray from the Lords commands (see v. 15), suggests to Geiger that
must refer to foreigners residing in the land. (Presumably Gentiles who decided to become
members of Israel, worship the Lord, and follow the precepts would be subject to the same
judgment as the native-born Israelites if the nation disobeyed the Lord.)
10
Ibid.
obviously understood as denoting a convert, the translator setzt . . . nicht -
, das fr ihn diese prgnante Bed[eutung proselyte] noch nicht hat, sondern
den neuhebr. und aram. Ausdruck (cf. Isa 14:1).
11
Tis verseone place
in the Pentateuch in which Geiger thought the person referred to as a was a
member of the congregation of Israelis telling for Geiger precisely because
the word is not used. Te translator chose instead to employ a trans-
literation of an Aramaic term for convert.
12
If the word had the
technical meaning proselyte for the translator, he would have used it here (one
might have expected the translator of Isa 14:1 to have used it as well). Instead, he
imported an Aramaic term. Te implication appears to be that, while was in
this context understood to mean convert (and therefore may have already been
thought to carry this meaning in some cases), did not commend itself
to the translator as the most appropriate term to capture that nuance.
Positions similar to Geigers are well attested in subsequent German schol-
arship in the nineteenth century. Emil Schrer claimed in the second edition
of his highly infuential Geschichte des Jdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi
(published in 1886) that [i]m Alten Testament, sowohl in der hebrischen als in
der griechischen Bibel, sind die resp. nichts anderes als was im
attischen Staat die Metken
13
sind, nmlich Fremde, die im Lande Israel dauernd
wohnen, ohne aber zur Gemeinde Israels zu gehren.
14

In the fnal decade of the nineteenth century Alfred Bertholet, in his study on
the development of the meaning of , considered the possibility that
was already a technical term for convert in the LXX.
15
He nevertheless cautioned,
Es wre nun aber ein voreiliger Schluss, daraus die Konsequenz ziehen zu wollen,
sie fr die Uebersetzer tatschlich schon t. t. gewesen. Tat this was
not in fact the case followed, in his opinion, from passages such as Exod 22:20 and
from the observations of Geiger noted above regarding the presence of
in the LXX.
16
Bertholet therefore concluded that, while the term could bear the
sense of convert for the translators of the LXX, it had not yet become a terminus
technicus.
17
11
Ibid., 354.
12
Notably, however, Jastrow lists stranger as another possible meaning for the term, citing
Tg. Onq. Exod 23:9, b. Qam. 42a, and b. Yoma 47a (Jastrow, 236).
13
Te word denotes an alien resident in a foreign city (LSJ).
14
Schrer, Geschichte des Jdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi (2d ed.; Leipzig:
Hinrichs, 1886), 566.
15
Bertholet, Die Stellung der Israeliten und der Juden zu den Fremden (Freiburg: Mohr
Siebeck, 1896), 25961. Bertholets arguments for the term already refecting the technical
meaning proselyte in the LXX are remarkably similar to those advanced in W. C. Allens
important article of 1894 (see section III below). Bertholet knows of the existence of Allens essay
but claims, Leider ist mir [die] Artikel . . . unzugnglich geblieben (ibid., 259 n. 4).
16
Ibid., 260.
17
Similarly see, e.g., J. H. B. Lbkert, Die Proselyten der Juden, TSK 8 (1835): 681700;
and A. Paumier (Proslytes, Encyclopdie des Sciences Religieuses [13 vols.; Paris: Sandoz et
A similar opinion existed in English-language scholarship of the period.
Some of the most infuential GreekEnglish lexicons of the nineteenth century
(e.g., Liddell and Scott; Tayer)
18
appealed to the LXX as evidence that the term
could mean stranger, sojourner, or newcomer. In 1898, F. J. A. Horts posthu-
mously published study on 1 Peter contained an extended note in which he argued
that, though undocumented in any early classical sources, the meaning of -
in what seems to be its original sense [is] hardly distinguishable from the
classical , .
19
He further speculated, Te adoption of the Jewish
faith by many sojourners in the land of Israel led ultimately to a natural extension
of the term, so that and came to mean what we now call a proselyte.
20
A number of signifcant scholarly voices in the nineteenth century therefore
maintained that , though not attested earlier than the LXX, probably
denoted a stranger residing in a foreign land and came to mean convert only at
a later point.
21
Terefore, they reasoned, the word served for the initial translators
of the LXX as a suitable Greek equivalent for the Hebrew term . A substantial
shif in this consensus, however, began toward the end of that century when W. C.
Allen published an article that would be widely cited and ultimately contribute to
the creation of a new majority position in the twentieth century.
22
III. The Shift of from Sojourner to Proselyte
W. C. Allens 1894 essay on the meaning of in Te Expositor
directly challenged the opinions of Geiger and Schrer.
23
Allen argued that the
LXX used to denote a Gentile convert to Judaism (i.e., a proselyte), not
to refer to a sojourner. He began his case by noting that the evidence usually cited
to support the view that the word could mean stranger or foreigner depended
Fischbacher, 187782)], 10:77677), who states that the word means foreigner, but that these
foreigners desired some kind of connection with the Mosaic economy.
18
Both are based on German lexicons published in the nineteenth century.
19
Hort, Te First Epistle of St. Peter I.1II.17: Te Greek Text with Introductory Lecture,
Commentary, and Additional Notes (New York: Macmillan, 1898), 154.
20
Ibid. (italics original).
21
So also Carl Ludwig Wilibald Grimm and Christian Gottlob Wilke, , Lexicon
Graeco-Latinum in Libros Novi Testamenti (3rd ed.; Leipzig: Hofman, 1888), 381; Franz Kaulen,
Proselyt, Wetzer und Weltes Kirchenlexikon (2nd ed.; 12 vols.; Freiburg: Herder, 18891903),
10:47075; Steiner, Proselyten, Bibel-Lexikon: Realwrterbuch zum Handgebrauch fr Geistliche
und Gemeindeglieder (5 vols.; Leipzig: Brockhaus, 186975), 4:62932, esp. 629.
22
Tis position was never universal (see, e.g., Leyrer, Proselyten, RE 12:23750);
Edward Hayes Plumptre, Proselytes, Dr. William Smiths Dictionary of the Bible: Comprising
Its Antiquities, Biography, Geography, and Natural History (4 vols.; Boston: Houghton, Mifin,
1881), 3:26027, here 2603. Plumptre is heavily dependent on Leyrer (ibid., 2607).
23
W. C. Allen, On the Meaning of in the Septuagint, Expositor IV/10
(1894): 26475.
on three primary sourcesthe LXX, Philo, and the Scholiast on Apollonius of
Rhodes 1.834.
24

Allen quickly dismissed appeals to Philo because an examination of Philos
use of the word proves clearly that he is in some cases simply paraphrasing a pas-
sage from the LXX, in others using the word in the sense proselyte.
25

Allen admitted that the text of the Scholiast, who wrote centuries afer the ini-
tial translation of the LXX, does use to mean stranger or foreigner.
But, he concluded, this lone instance is too isolated a case to bear much weight.
26

Moreover, employing logic exactly the reverse of the scholarship surveyed above,
Allen reasoned, [I]f . . . the word originally meant proselyte, it would be natural
that it should soon draw to itself something of the meaning involved in such words
as stranger, advena, alien; a proselyte generally being, as a matter of necessity, a
stranger in a strange land.
27
Te LXX, then, contains the earliest use of the word.
Any determination of the terms original meaning, therefore, rests solely on the
LXXs evidence. Allen set himself the task of interpreting that evidence.
We here examine two main lines of argument that Allen ofered in support
of his position that means convert in the LXX.
28
First, while in the
biblical period the word most ofen referred to a stranger or alien sojourning
in a place, evidence from early rabbinic sources such as the Mishnah proves that
the term was being applied to converts to Judaism.
29
Moreover, while the Mishnah
is much later than the LXX, this shif in the meaning of can already be seen
to be taking place in the Priestly code in Leviticus.
30
Given these circumstances,
Allen thought that the translators use of likely indicates that they
understood the meaning of along the lines later attested in rabbinic literature.
In his opinion, the fact that frst-century c.e. texts such as the Gospel of Mat-
thew (23:15), Acts (2:11; 6:5; 13:43),
31
and Philo
32
use the term to refer to converts
strengthens this assertion.
24
Ibid., 265.
25

Ibid.
26
Ibid.
27
Ibid.
28
For additional discussion of Allens argumentation, see Matthew Tiessens article
Revisiting the in Te LXX, forthcoming in JBL 132.
29
See n. 8 above.
30
Allen, Meaning, 265. On this point Allen cites William Robertson Smith (Te Old
Testament in the Jewish Church: Twelve Lectures on Biblical Criticism [2nd ed.; London: A. & C.
Black, 1892], 342 n. 1), who claims, In the Levitical legislation the word Gr is already on the
way to assume the later technical sense of proselyte (cf. Karl G. Kuhn, TWNT 6:72930).
31
Some challenge the idea that refers to a full convert to Judaism in Acts.
For a recent discussion of this view, see Matthew Tiessen, Contesting Conversion: Genealogy,
Circumcision, and Identity in Ancient Judaism and Christianity (Oxford/New York: Oxford
University Press, 2011), 13536.
32
In some cases, Philos use of the term occurs merely as a result of his citation of a LXX
passage. In other instances, however, he provides additional commentary that proves that he
Second, in most of its occurrences, the translators of the LXX rendered
with one of two words: or .
33
Of these, they preferred
in the vast majority of cases. While Geiger took this to imply that the
Greek terms were synonymous, Allen claimed, [T]he [LXX] version itself, when
carefully examined, tells a very diferent tale.
34
As noted above, passages such as
Gen 15:13; Exod 2:22; and Deut 14:21 use to render . According to
Allen, in such passages cannot mean a proselyte, but must denote members
of a tribe or nation sojourning in a strange land.
35
In a large number of texts in
which translates , however, the idea of a convert made perfect sense
to Allen. He found texts in which, for example, the / is permitted or
required to participate in festivals and practices in accordance with the Mosaic
Law (e.g., Exod 12:48; Lev 16:29) to be particularly clear.
36
In these passages -
must, in Allens opinion, refer to a convert. Te use of these two difer-
ent words for led Allen to infer that the translators consciously distinguished
between instances in which meant convert and instances in which it meant
foreigner. In Allens words, [I]n the great majority of cases where occurs in
could think of the as a convert. In Spec. 1.5153, he describes the as a
person who has embraced Judaism by leaving country, kin, and friends. Because of this, the
are now united with a new and God-loving commonwealth (
), share equally in the benefts granted to the native-born ( ), and afrm
with the other citizens the honor of the one God ( ). For additional examples
in Philo in which the idea of conversion seems apparent, see Somn. 2.273; Spec. 1.3089; and QE
2.2.
33
See Exod 12:19 and Isa 14:1, where occurs, and Job 31:32, where (stranger)
is used. As noted in section II above, Geiger appealed to the two former verses and the term
as proof for the synonymous meanings of and . Allen, however,
responded by pointing to what was in his view the nearly perfect correlation between usage of
in contexts in which a convert to Judaism cannot be imagined and usage of
in contexts in which the idea of a convert is implied. Tis suggested to him that it is surely
more simple to assume that the use of . . . is due to some exceptional cause, than to be
forced to the conclusion that and are synonymous terms. Tis supposition
makes the distribution of the two terms an insoluble enigma (Allen, Meaning, 274). Of course,
the enigma vanishes if one does not assume that there must be a pattern in the distribution of
the two terms. Indeed, as Tiessen demonstrates (Revisiting), the expectation of a consistent
pattern founders on Allens faulty methodological assumptionsspecifcally, his failure to take
the diversity of translators and translational approaches into account (a faw that is plainly more
obvious today in light of the discoveries at Qumran than it would have been in Allens time).
34
Allen, Meaning, 266.
35
Ibid. Te full list of Hebrew verses he presents is as follows: Gen 15:13; 23:4; Exod 2:22;
18:3; Deut 14:21; 23:8; 2 Sam 1:13; 1 Chr 29:15; Pss 39:13; 119:19; and Jer 14:8.
36
Allen lists Exod 12:4849; 20:10; 22:20; 23:9, 12; Lev 16:29; 17:8, 10, 12, 13, 15; 18:26;
19:10, 33, 34; 20:2; 22:18; 23:22, 35, 47; Num 9:14; 15:1416, 26, 29, 30; 19:10; 35:15; Deut 1:16;
5:14; 10:1819; 14:29; 16:11, 14; 24:14, 17, 1921; 24:1113; 27:19; 28:43; 29:10; 31:12; Josh 8:33,
35; 20:9; 1 Chr 22:2; 2 Chr 2:16; 30:25; Pss 94:6; 146:9; Jer 7:6; 22:3; Ezek 14:7; 22:7, 29; 47:2223;
Zech 7:10; Mal 3:5.
the Hebrew text, the Greek translators have not simply translated into the exact
Greek equivalent [i.e., ], but have read into the word [] the later mean-
ing which it has in the Mishna.
37
Tey accordingly translated these instances of
with .
Allen does note four verses that appear to complicate his thesis: Exod 22:20;
23:9; Lev 19:34; and Deut 10:9. In each of these texts, Israel is commanded not
to mistreat the residing among them because they themselves were in
Egypt. Precisely these passages underwrote the conclusions of scholars such as
Geiger (and reference works such as that of Liddell and Scott) when they posited
that could not have been a technical term denoting convert. In the
context of the biblical account, the Israelites were clearly sojourners in Egypt, not
converts.
38
Allen, however, countered that in each of these instances the sense of
proselyte [i.e., convert] has immediately preceded [the identifcation of Israel as
], and the sense involves the use of the same word [i.e., ].
39
Accord-
ing to Allen, the point of these verses is therefore something like the following:
[F]or ye [Israelites] were proselytes, not of course in the technical sense of the
word, but ye were in the land of Egypt in the same position of homeless strang-
ers as are the proselytes [in the technical sense of convert] amongst yourselves.
40

Te septuagintal translators therefore hammer home a moral point when render-
ing these passages, a point apropos for Jews in the Diasporatreat converts well
because you were like proselytes once.
In sum, Allen concluded that because (1) can be shown to mean convert
in early rabbinic Judaism, and (2) the translators of the LXX, which contains the
earliest instances of , consistently rendered with when
obviously referred to a stranger, but selected in contexts in which
could mean convert, it follows that the original meaning [of ], so far
as the extant literature enables us to judge, was proselyte.
41
Allens view was not without detractors in the twentieth century. In 1912,
H. Lestres brief survey of this question in the LXX and Vulgate led him to
state, [D]ans les versions de lAncien Testament, ce mot [] signife
simplement tranger.
42
Nevertheless, the ABD entry quoted at the beginning
37
Allen, Meaning, 26972. He identifes a similar pattern with respect to the translation
of the related words and .
38
Several centuries afer the initial translation of the LXX, some rabbinic texts appear to
interpret these passages to mean that the Israelites were converts in Egypt (e.g., Mek. Nezikin 18;
Exod. Rab. 19.5).
39
40
Ibid. (emphasis added).
41
Ibid., 266.
42
DB 5:758. Similarly, Strack and Billerbeck claimed of the LXX translators, [I]hnen ist der
noch daselbe, was der im AT ist: der unter Israel wohnhafe heidnische Beisasse
(Str-B 2:716). In the English-speaking world the essay by Frank Chamberlain Porter (Proselyte,
A Dictionary of the Bible Dealing with Its Language, Literature and Contents Including the Biblical
of this article refects the fact that the arguments made by Allen largely won the
day. Indeed, they became a staple in some of the most signifcant and infuen-
tial reference works for biblical scholarship produced in the twentieth century.
43

Teology [ed. James Hastings et al.; 5 vols.; New York: Scribner, 18981904], 4:13237) was
highly critical of Allens analysis. James F. Driscolls comment in 1911 is particularly noteworthy.
He suggests that the term [] seems to have passed from an original local and chiefy
political sense, in which it was used as early as 300 b.c., to a technical and religious meaning in the
Judaism of the N.T. epoch (Proselyte, Te Catholic Encyclopedia [15 vols.; New York: Appleton,
190712], 12:481). As we discuss in section V below, this logic appears sound to us and seems to
be supported by the evidence of P.Duk. inv. 727. A few decades later, Frederick Milton Derwacter
also commented that in the LXX [o]bviously . . . does not have the technical
religious connotations of later times. It expresses the original meaning of the word ger, that is,
a resident alien (Preparing the Way for Paul: Te Proselyte Movement in Later Judaism [New
York: Macmillan, 1930], 22). See also more recent works such as Moise Ohana, Proslytisme et
Targum palestinien: Donne nouvelles pour la datation de Nofti 1, Bib 55 (1974): 31732, here
322 n. 2; John A. L. Lee, Equivocal and Stereotyped Renderings in the LXX, RB 87 (1980): 104
17, here 11213 n. 27; Michael Tilly, Teologisches Begrifslexikon zum Neuen Testament (Neu
Ausgabe; Wuppertal: Brockhaus, 1997), 2:1027; Irina Wandrey, Proselyte, Brills New Pauly:
Encyclopaedia of the Ancient World. Antiquity (16 vols.; Leiden/Boston: Brill, 200210), 12:45
46; Johannes Lust, Eric Eynikel, and Katrin Hauspie, , A Greek-English Lexicon of the
Septuagint (2 vols.; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaf, 1992, 1996), 2:402; Takamitsu Muraoka,
, A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint (Walpole, MA: Peeters, 2010), 59495;
Alain Le Boulluec and Pierre Sandevoir, LExode: Traduction du texte grec de la Septante (La Bible
dAlexandrie 2; Paris: Cerf, 1989), 5152; and Gille Dorival, Les Nombres: Traduction du texte
grec de la Septante (La Bible dAlexandrie 4; Paris: Cerf, 1994), 274 (both the volume by Boulluec
and Sandevoir and that by Dorival argue that in the LXX the term refers to Jewish immigrants
living in the Diaspora who have returned to Palestine). Notably, too, A New English Translation
of the Septuagint and the Other Greek Translations Traditionally Included under Tat Title (ed.
Albert Pietersma and Benjamin G. Wright; New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008)
consistently renders the term as guest.
43
We make special note here of the highly infuential work of Karl G. Kuhn. In his article in
TWNT 6:72745, Kuhn argued, Die durch Beschneidung ganz zum Judentum bergetretenen
heien mit dem griechisch-jdischen terminus technicus . Dieser Ausdruck tritt
an die Stelle des alttestamentlichen und entspricht ihm hinsichtlich der religisen Stellung
des , aber nicht der soziologischen (p. 731). Later, in an article co-authored with Hartmut
Stegemann (Proselyten, PW Supplement 9:124883), he further speculated that [a]ls tech-
nische Bezeichnung fr Leute, die der jdischen Kultgemeinschaf beigetreten sind, bildet das
nachexilische Judentumund zwar hchstwahrscheinlich zuerst die Diasporasynagogeden
Begrif (p. 1249; emphasis original). Horst Kuhlis article (Exegetisches Wrterbuch
zum Neuen Testament [ed. Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider; 3 vols.; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer,
198083], 3:41013), largely following Kuhn and Stegemann, made similar claims. Te pertinent
text in the English translation states that was a technical designation for men
and women whowithout descending from Jewish parentagehave become members of the
Jewish cultic community or have joined it on the basis of a legally binding acceptance
process. . . . [T]his term is documented only in Jewish and Christian literature and probably
originated in the Hellenistic Diaspora. . . . Te term served to diferentiate actual converts from
mere sympathizers, the God-fearers (EDNT 3:170). Kuhli refers to the word as a Jewish Greek
Accordingly, one ofen fnds Allens arguments and conclusions reproduced in
scholarly works that engage the issue.
44

Some scholars have even pushed beyond Allens stance. Emanuel Tov, for
instance, has argued that serves as an example of a Hebraism caused
by a stereotyped representation in the LXX.
45
Tov claims that the term is a Greek
neologism employed by the LXX translators as a mere symbol or stereotyped
equivalent of the Hebrew word . In his words, Te Greek translators repre-
sented in accordance with the linguistic reality of their own times almost exclu-
sively by , a word which apparently was coined to denote the special
meaning of in post-Biblical times. Consequently, the of the LXX
was bound to misrepresent many of the occurrences of the of the O.T.
46

On Tovs view, the rendering of with was simply an equation
that the translators employed in a one-size-fts-almost-all way. As he states, [Te
words] inappropriateness is felt particularly in a verse such as Ex., xxii., 20. . . . In
this verse the Israelites are called in the Hebrew text sojourners in Egypt, but in
neologism and suggests, curiously, that Josephuss complete avoidance of the term may have
been out of consideration for his Greek readers (p. 171; cf. Kuhn, TWNT 6:732). For other
examples of scholars and reference works that basically accept the main lines of this position,
see Walter Bauer, , Griechisch-Deutsches Wrterbuch zu den Schrifen des Neuen
Testaments und der brigen urchristlichen Literatur (2nd ed., revision of Erwin Preuschens
Vollstndiges griechisch-deutsches Handwrterbuch zu den Schrifen des Neuen Testaments und
der brigen urchristlichen Literatur [Giessen: Tpelmann, 1928]). All the subsequent German
and English editions of Bauer to date maintain this position. See also U. Becker, Teologisches
Begrifslexikon, 2:61213.
44
For just a few examples, see James Donald, Proselyte, Dictionary of the Apostolic Church
(ed. James Hastings; 2 vols.; New York: Scribner, 1916, 1918), 2:284; Louis H. Feldman, Jew and
Gentile in the Ancient World: Attitudes and Interactions from Alexander to Justinian (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1993), 298, 338; Martin Goodman, Mission and Conversion: Prose-
lytizing in the Religious History of the Roman Empire (Oxford: Clarendon, 1994), 7273 (though
he notes a few exceptions that suggest the word is not yet a technical term); Kirsopp Lake,
Proselytes and God Fearers, in Te Beginnings of Christianity, part 1, Te Acts of the Apostles,
vol. 5, Additional Notes to the Commentary (ed. F. J. Foakes Jackson and Kirsopp Lake; London:
Macmillan, 1933), 7496, here 8384 (with reservations); Marvin H. Pope, Proselyte, IDB
3:92223 (with reservations); Emanuel Tov, Tree Dimensions of LXX Words, RB 83 (1976):
52944; Christiana van Houten, Te Alien in Israelite Law (JSOTSup 107; Shefeld: JSOT Press,
1991), 17983; Edouard Will and Claude Orrieux, Proslytisme juif ? Histoire dune erreur
(Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1992), 5155.
45
Tov, Tree Dimensions, 537. Jacob Milgrom, who cites Tov, also thinks that the word
has been coined by the LXX translators (Leviticus 1722: A New Translation with Introduction
and Commentary [AB 3A; New York: Doubleday, 2000], 1501); cf. Moore, Judaism, 3:107 n. 97;
and the discussion of Kuhli in n. 43 above.
46
Tov, Tree Dimensions, 537. Cf. Kuhn, TWNT 6:732; and Kuhn and Stegemann,
who state, Von der Basis = aus hat das Judentum dann auch ltere literarische
berlieferung interpretiert, in der ursprnglich eine andere Bedeutung hatte (Proselyten,
PW Supplement 9:1249).
the LXX they are, as it were, proselytes in Egypt.
47
He further faults LSJ for not
taking the mechanical approach of the translators
48
into account when appealing
to Exod 22:20 as evidence for stranger or sojourner as one of the meanings of
. To cite him again, It seems that such a meaning cannot be supported
by evidence from the LXX because within that translation was merely
a symbol for .
49
While Tovs essay has not gone unchallenged,
50
many scholars continue to
assume that the word refects the interpretation of the LXX translators
that the of the Hebrew text should be understood as converts to Judaism. In
this way, Greek-speaking Jews inscribed a signifcant component of their Diaspora
experience in their Bible. Jews who daily lived with the reality of Gentile truth-
seekers and converts in their midstthat is, pagans who were coming toward
() Judaismfound that God gave them guidance in their Scripture
for how to treat these who had arrived among them.
IV. Assessing the Debate
At the heart of the positions assayed in section III above lies an argument ex
silentioto date, no uses of prior to the LXX have been found, nor is
the word attested at an early point in ancient literature outside Jewish and then
Christian circles, contexts likely to be infuenced by septuagintal translations. On
the one hand, those who think that the term accurately captures the older, bibli-
cal sense of as a sojourner in the land appeal to the plausibility that the LXX
translators used because the word denoted a stranger or a foreigner in
a given region. Te lack of the terms attestation in non-Jewish texts likely stems
from the accidents of the survival of historical evidence. Moreover, the idea of
a foreigner in an area works in the LXX (just as does in Hebrew) and makes
good sense of passages such as Exod 22:20, in which the Israelites are depicted as
in Egypt. In cases in which the meaning of shades into convert, the
translators opt for the transliterated Aramaic word .
On the other hand, Allens position gained ascendancy via three primary lines
of argument. First, he placed emphasis on the fact that the word appears to denote
convert in Hellenistic Jewish and Christian texts of the frst century c.e., and that
the meaning of in early rabbinic sources has clearly shifed toward this same
meaning. Second, based on the occasional use of to render he pressed
the plausibility of interpreting passages in the LXX in which the term could mean
convert into evidence that the word did mean that for the Greek translators.
Tird, he leaned hard on the absence of the word in ancient, non-Jewish literature.
47
Tov, Tree Dimensions, 53738.
48
Ibid., 538.
49
Ibid.
50
See esp. Lee, Equivocal and Stereotyped Renderings, 11213.
Te silence of ancient literature served for him as proof of the likelihood that an
original, nonreligious usage never existed.
Te frst point just noted is beyond dispute. In the context of early rabbinic
Judaism, the word could be applied to Jewish converts.
51
Additionally, the term
can be shown to bear this meaning in Hellenistic Jewish and Christian
texts from the frst century c.e.
52
Tere is little doubt that by the end of the Second
Temple period could refer to a Gentile convert to Jewish practice and
belief. But does this mean that those translating the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek
rendered as because they already understood to mean convert
and either created to refect this assessment
53
or borrowed it from the
larger world of the Jewish Diaspora? Tis is a diferent question entirely.
54
Tis last point raises the issue of when the term can be understood
to have become a terminus technicus for a Jewish convert. Te second and third
arguments noted above become particularly important for addressing this prob-
lem. Te lack of attestation of the term prior to the LXX and outside of literature
likely infuenced by Greek biblical translations, coupled with the arguments made
by Allen regarding the distinction between and in the LXX,
has persuaded many that the word was likely coined by Jews to denote converts.
A closer examination of Allens arguments, however, suggests a high degree of
circularity in his reasoning. Beginning with a lack of evidence for the term outside
51
See n. 8 above for a few examples from the Mishnah.
52
See esp. Matt 23:15 and n. 32 above.
53
Much is sometimes made of the etymology of the term (a cognate of the future stem of
). Te idea of coming to a place is taken as a ftting metaphor for someone who
wants to come to the Jewish religion. James A. Loader (An Explanation of the Term Proslutos,
NovT 15 [1973]: 27177) argues that the etymological link may be seen in the LXXs use of
to translate certain instances of the verb . To make the point he frst asserts that
the verb , the cultic meaning of which was to approach the holy place/sphere, was used
metaphorically at Qumran as technical language for bringing new members into the sect (thus
the community has become the holy sphere). He then notes that rabbinic literature attests the
use of to refer to Gentiles who were brought into the community of Israel. In such cases
the verb must therefore mean to make a proselyte. In view of these uses of he concludes,
We can . . . contend that this Jewish use of the qrb-concept is the explanation of the Hellenistic
Jewish term proslutos (p. 276). Specifcally, the LXXs occasional use of to render
explains the connection. Tus, [t]he conclusion is near to hand: proslutos, a derivative of
this verb, is used to render the idea of qrb as a new member of Israel. Tis is also why proslutos
is found nowhere in Greek except in Jewish circles (ibid.). Loader does not, however, ofer an
account of how has become so closely linked with . Tis oversight probably follows
from his assumption that already has the technical meaning proselyte in the LXX
(an assumption once again grounded on the argument from the lack of early attestation of the
word in non-Jewish sources).
54
See the pithy discussion of this larger point in Shaye J. D. Cohen, Te Beginnings of
Jewishness: Boundaries, Varieties, Uncertainties (Hellenistic Culture and Society 31; Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1999), 121.
of the LXX,
55
he goes on to assume that originally meant convert and
then fnds that such a meaning can usually make sense in the septuagintal contexts
in which the word occurs.
56

Two examples from the seemingly impressive list of cases Allen ofers as proof
that the translators selected because it denoted proselyte (as opposed
to using )
57
demonstrate this point especially wellExod 12:4748 and
22:20.
58
Allen refers to Exod 12:48 with the terse comment that the
must be circumcised to keep Passover.
59
Tat this passage uses and
that this individual intends to participate in the Passover feast and must be cir-
cumcised to do so implies for Allen that the here must be a convert.
Tis assessment of the LXX text, however, is far from obvious.
We translate the Gttingen edition of Exod 12:4849 as follows: Now if any
might come to you in order to do the Pascha to the Lord, you should
circumcise each of his males, and then he may come in order to do it. And he
shall be just as the native-born of the land. Any uncircumcised person shall not
eat from it. Tere shall be one law for the resident and for the who has
come among you.
Clearly, as Allen states, the must be circumcised to participate
in the Passover feast. Tese verses, however, do not obviously support the view
that the is already a convert. In fact, the implication seems to be that
the is not already circumcised, nor is he expected or required to keep
the Passover with the Israelites. On the contrary, if (a third class conditional) a
should come to the Israelites in order to keep the Passover, then all the
males of his household must be circumcised. As Exod 12:49 explains, there is one
law for natives and : both must be circumcised in order to participate
in the Passover. Tere is no exception for the . Notably, however, once
the males of the household of the (and presumably the
himself) are circumcised, the becomes equal to the Israelite residents
of the land, at least with respect to Passover observance.
60

55
56
We have chosen not to address the question of the particular textual witness equated
by Allen with the LXX in this article. Tiessen (Revisiting) presents an excellent discussion
of this issue, in which he ofers additional criticisms of Allen. Tiessen focuses special attention
on Allens fawed assumptions regarding the precise form of the Hebrew Vorlage and of the
consistency of the translation practices and vocabulary throughout the various translations of
the texts in the LXX.
57
See nn. 35 and 36 above.
58
For additional discussion of the relevant texts, see Tiessen, Revisiting.
59
60
Whatever the original status of the , once the word was understood to refer to a con-
vert, the statement in Exod 12:49 regarding one law for the and the native-born Jew could
be expanded beyond the Passover regulations to encompass equality under the entire law.
All of this suggests that the qua is not eligible to
participate in the Passover feast. When it comes to celebrating Passover, neither
he nor his household is excluded from the requirement of circumcision (there
is one law for observing Passover for the native-born and the alike).
Only afer that requirement has been fulflled may the and those of his
household participate in Passover. If this interpretation is correct, then the term
is not likely to refer to a convert. Tis follows from the fact that a con-
vert would already have been circumcised and would thus be required to observe
Passover. Te individual referred to here must be an outsider to the religious com-
munity who nonetheless desires to participate in the Passover feast since, unlike the
Israelites who are obligated to observe Passover, he has the option of participating
or not doing so. Exodus 12:4849 therefore explains that, in such cases, outsiders
who desire to participate must, together with all the males in their household, be
circumcised. Afer this, they are welcome to participate in the Passover mealbut
then their status relative to native-born Israelites changes so that they can partici-
pate (cf. Num 9:14).
To put the matter diferently, Allens claim that the translators carefully dif-
ferentiated between the and the suggests that they should
have opted for in Exod 12:4849. As it is, they have put the cart before
the horse and referred to the convert as a convert/proselyte before he has been con-
verted.
61
If, however, Geiger and others are correct and and
were synonymous terms for the translators, the text is intelligible. Te sojourner,
who is not otherwise obligated to share in the Passover, can choose to participate
in the festival if he desires to do so. In such a case, he and his household must be
circumcised and become like the Israelite residents. Once that happens, these for-
For example, Mek. Pisha 15.13841 specifes that the one law of this verse refers to all the
commandments in Torah ( ). Equality for the is evident in
Philo, who thought conversion entailed complete parity between the new member of the Jewish
commonweal and the native-born members. Tus, he refers to the convert as having ,
, and with the native-born Jews (Spec. 1.5253).
61
To push the point from yet another perspective, Allens position would seem to imply
that Exod 12:4849 means something like the following: If the convert among you desires to
participate in the Passover feast, then he and his household must convert by being circumcised.
Once they have converted, then they can perform the obligations required of them as converts.
For no nonconvert shall eat of the Passover because there is one law for both the native and
the convert. But on such a reading, the contingency in the text becomes hard to maintain. If
the is someone who has already converted, how can there be any question of his
participating in Passover? If Allen is correct, these verses simply relay a tautology. Given that,
according to Allen, the translators carefully distinguished instances in which meant convert
from instances in which it meant resident alien (by using ), the tautology created by
Allens interpretation is all the more curious. Te contingency actually present in the text makes
perfect sense, however, if the is a resident alien (as the original in the passage
would suggest) who desires to align himself more closely with the native Israelites.
mer non-Israelites are like native-born residents and thus are bound by the same
laws as the Israelites.
Allens appeal to Exod 12:4849 appears, therefore, to have begged the ques-
tion. Te claim that the translators took the to be a convert and used
to indicate that interpretation is not proven by pointing to a passage such as Exod
12:4849 unless one presupposes that means proselyte.
62
As it stands,
the Greek text, and particularly the conditional construction, efectively captures
the biblical meaning of the resident alien must be circumcised if he wants to
keep Passover. Tus, these verses actually refute Allens thesis and confrm Geigers
position and appear to be roughly synonymous for the
translators of the LXX.
Exodus 22:20 (22:21 LXX), already referred to above as evidence for Geigers
position that likely denotes a sojourner for the LXX translators, fur-
ther demonstrates the circularity in Allens argument. Te passage reads, And you
shall not mistreat the , and you shall certainly not oppress him, for you
were in the land of Egypt.
63
Allen concedes that this text is one of the
few cases which could cause doubt
64
for his larger thesis. On his account, one
should have expected to fnd the word here. He nevertheless insists that,
while it is strange that the Israelites should be referred to as converts in Egypt, this
rare, nontechnical use of the word can be seen to make sense given the technical
use of the word in the immediate context. Te command not to mistreat the con-
vert/ fnds as its rationale the empathy the Israelites ought to have for
the convert because, in a way, they were like converts when they were in Egypt.
65
Te logic of Allens interpretation here is echoed in comments by other schol-
ars to the efect that the mechanical translation of with leads to
the strange, almost incoherent renderings of passages such as Exod 22:21 LXX.
66

Again, however, such explanations appear to be highly circular. Tey insist that
the word must have been a technical term for the Greek translators, even when the
context suggests otherwise.
As has been shown above, the assertion that does not occur in
62
See also Exod 20:10, 23:12. Te Sabbath laws apply to many things besides the Israelites
(e.g., their beasts of burden). Te fact that the is mentioned in these passages afer
the family and animals of labor may itself indicate how far removed these individuals are from
the Israelite community. In any case, many of the texts Allen cites as positive evidence for his
conclusion that means convert occur in contexts in which little or no evidence,
apart from the fact of the words occurrence, necessitates such an interpretation. In verse afer
verse one could as easily interpret the term to mean foreigner or sojourner as to mean
proselyte.
63
Similarly, Exod 23:9; Lev 19:3334; Deut 10:19; 24:20; cf. Lev 25:23, 35.
64
65
Ibid. Allen himself slips into the language of homeless strangers when paraphrasing the
use of to describe the Israelites.
66
E.g., Tov, Tree Dimensions, 538.
ancient literature apart from the LXX and texts infuenced by the LXX until long
afer the initial work on that translation had begun has contributed in no small
way to the widely held conclusion that was a technical term coined
to denote Gentile converts to the Jewish faith. We turn now to an examination of
P.Duk. inv. 727r. Tis papyrus breaks the silence of the ancient sources and, in our
opinion, tips the balance of probability in favor of the conclusion that
was a word already in circulation in Egypt around the time that the Pentateuch
was being translated in Alexandria.
V. P.Duk. inv. 727r
For commentary and a full discussion of the dating of and critical issues
relating to P.Duk. inv. 727 see the edition of P.Duk. inv. 727 we recently published
in ZPE 177.
67
We here cite the transcription and translation of the thirteen lines of
text on the recto of the papyrus as presented in that edition:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1 [ ]
2 [ ]
3 vacat
[]
4
5
6

7a
`
7
8a
`
8 ()
9
10
11a
`
11 [ c. 4 ] [ ]
12 [ ]
13 [ ]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Te frst two lines and the last two are almost entirely missing and cannot
be recon structed. We translate lines 310 as follows: . . . the distribution and this
komarch. Tereafer, certain ones of the newcomers ( ) (have) caused
a commotion. With the approval of Haryts, the/my/our payment of 5 talents ____
the elders. And taking possession of the land for themselves. . . .
As is ofen the case with papyrus fragments, one wishes for a few more lines
67
See n. 5 above.
of context to clarify the picture. Nevertheless, in view of the preceding discussion,
the reference to certain ones in line 5 is remarkable. Te prob-
able date range for the production of the papyrusbetween 260 and 220 b.c.e.is
established on paleographic grounds. Te lack of an explicit date in the extant
document precludes a more specifc dating. To be sure, the possibility of a date as
late as the mid second century cannot be decisively dismissed. Yet, whether the
papyrus comes from the mid to late third century or from a point in the early to
mid second century, P.Duk. inv. 727 contains an occurrence of the term -
that can be dated to the general time period in which the initial portions of the
LXX were being produced.
Given this fact, it should be noted that, apart from the word
itself, nothing in the context of the papyrus indicates a Jewish provenance. Te
text refers to some sort of village dispute. Te matter apparently concerns a trans-
action of fve talents and the acquisition of a parcel of land. A number of individ-
uals have some connection to the matter. One is named Haryts, but a village
komarch, the village elders,
68
and some are all also involved.
Te elders probably accepted or approved the fve-talent payment mentioned
(though only one letter [] remains of the word that might be an infnitive speci-
fying the relationship between the payment and the elders). Moreover, it appears
that the commotion
69
caused by the precipitated the payment, the
68
Te mention of together with the presence of is
interesting, given the use of both terms in the LXX. Te word , however, is common
in the papyrological record and refers to village elders (LSJ). A. Tomsins detailed study of this
village institution has shown that, in the third century b.c.e. (and beyond), the village elders
were respected individuals who helped maintain civil order in their communities by settling
local disputes and making judicial rulings. In his words, these individuals were des notables qui
jouissent auprs des leurs dune autorit fonde sur lge et la situation sociale et qui possdent
une exprience tendue des afaires et des gens du village. Capables darbitrer les confits clatant
entre leurs concitoyens, de dfnir les droits de chacun, habilits prendre des dcisions qui
seront respectes de tous, ils constituent llment local dirigeant auquel les fonctionnaires lagides
eux-mmes nhsitent pas faire appel dans certains cas (Tomsin, tude sur les
des villages de la gyptienne, Bulletin de la Classe des Lettres et des Sciences Morales et
Politiques, 5
e
Srie 38 [1952]: 95130, here 98). Jewish communities in the Diaspora naturally
employed this language for their own elders (e.g., P.Polit.Iud. 6.1213 [134 b.c.e.]; 19.1 [141
131 b.c.e.]; 20.2 [ca. 143/142 b.c.e.]), but the presence of the term here in no way demands a
Jewish provenance for the papyrus. Rather, in the context of P.Duk. inv. 727r, the
appear simply to be des notables qui jouissent auprs des leurs dune autorit fonde sur lge
who were such a common and signifcant fxture of village life in Ptolemaic Egypt.
69
Te verb can mean to revolutionize, form a party (LSJ). Nevertheless,
here does not appear to carry this more revolutionary connotation, particularly
since the verb seems to relate to a (see P.Duk. inv. 727r line 8). Examples of the word
from the Zenon archive suggest that it could also be applied to more mundane disputes, usually
over property or trade (e.g., P.Cair.Zen. III 59368.3, 15 ; P.Cair.Zen. III
59484.4, 59499.87 ).
elders involvement, and the taking possession of the parcel of land by the -
.
70
Presumably, these events have prompted a person or group to commis-
sion the drafing of this papyrus in order to support or procure a legal judgment
regarding the situation.
While the picture that emerges from this summary remains faded and blurry,
a plausible interpretation of the chief elements that one can make out is that a local
villager or group is registering a complaint against some who have
caused a disturbance and, as a result, have been allowed (perhaps with approval of
the village elders, a payment of fve talents, and some kind of aid from Haryts)
to acquire a piece of property. Te idea that the are newcomers who
live in or near the village fts very well with this reconstruction. Tis is not to say
that the idea of converts can be defnitively ruled out; but because (1) apart from
the word nothing in the fragment suggests a Jewish provenance,
71
and
(2) the idea of newcomers causing a commotion and coming into possession
of some land makes good sense, the presumption must be that here
denotes a foreigner or newcomer who has moved into the area.
In addition to these observations, the exegetical points made in section
IV above indicate that in Ptolemaic Egypt the word meant roughly
what the word meant in Biblical Hebrewa foreigner sojourning in a partic-
ular region. Te fttingness of this meaning in the reconstruction of P.Duk. inv.
727r just noted, coupled with the exegetical points made above,
72
commends the
validity of this conclusion. Both pieces of evidence, that is, suggest that the word
was in use in Egypt in the third century b.c.e. to mean something
like sojourner or newcomer. Tis implies that, as scholars such as Geiger and
Hort already suspected in the nineteenth century, the term took on the technical
70
While the translation given above links the approval of Haryts with the payment
and the elders, and thus does not clearly specify the sequence of events just outlined, this is
not the only way to interpret the text. Notably, line 7 of the draf has been marked for deletion.
If the deleted line is restored as originally written, lines 310 read . . . the distribution and
this komarch. Tereafer, certain ones of the newcomers (have) caused a commotion, with the
approval of Haryts they have caused a commotion so that afer these things the/my/our
payment of 5 talents ____ the village elders. And taking possession of the land for themselves. . . .
Te inclusion of the deleted line makes two points clear: (1) the commotion, not the payment,
took place with the approval of Haryts, and (2) the payment and taking possession of the
land occurred afer the commotion and, one assumes, afer the other related events (i.e., afer
these things). Obviously the deletion of line 7 disturbs the syntax assumed here (i.e., +
infnitive), but the correction of that possible disruption could explain the scribes now illegible
interlinear insertions in lines 7a and 8a. Without a plausible reconstruction of lines 7a and 8a, a
frm conclusion remains a desideratum. While it would be natural to delete line 7 on account of
its repetition of the content of the preceding lines, we cannot rule out the possibility that the line
was deleted because it misconstrued the events being recounted.
71
Tough we must bear in mind Modrzejewskis word of caution. See n. 7 above.
72
In addition to our discussion, see Tiessens compelling analysis of usage of
and throughout the LXX (Revisiting). His fndings further substantiate our conclusion.
meaning proselyte only at a later point, and in all likelihood this occurred in Jew-
ish circles because of the infuence of the LXX and the connection made therein
between and .
VI. Conclusion
Adolf Deissmanns Licht vom Osten (1908) defnitively demonstrated the
impor tance of Greek papyri and inscriptions for interpreting the NT.
73
Te papyri
have not ceased to produce valuable information for locating the Greek Bible
within the language and idiom of its time.
In our opinion, P.Duk. inv. 727r provides a new perspective on an old debate.
Te term can no longer be said to be absent from ancient texts outside
of the LXX. Te evidence of this papyrus shows that the word was in use (1) in
Egypt, (2) in a context that does not obviously appear to be of Jewish provenance,
and (3) at a point in time roughly contemporary with the initial translation of
the LXX in Alexandria. Insofar as scholars have relied on the words lack of early
attestation to argue that the term was a terminus technicus coined in the Jewish
Diasporaperhaps by the initial translators of the LXX themselvesto represent
converts to Jewish practice and belief, the appearance of in P.Duk. inv.
727r. calls this argument into question. It seems on the whole more likely that the
term naturally formed part of the vocabulary of Jews living outside of Palestine,
just as was the case with any number of other words (e.g.,
74
), sim-
ply because many of these Jews spoke Greek. In the case of , we con-
clude that the word initially came into the LXX because, in all probability, it meant
something like newcomer or resident alien. Tus, like ,
proved an especially suitable Greek term for representing the Hebrew word .
73
Deissmann, Licht vom Osten: Das Neue Testament und die neuentdeckten Texte der
hellenistisch-rmischen Welt (Tbingen: Mohr, 1908).
74
See n. 68 above.
Markan Discipleship according to Malachi:
Te Signifcance of in the
Story of the Rich Man
(Mark 10:1722)
richard hicks
richardhicks@fuller.edu
Vanguard University, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
In Marks story of the rich man, an unnamed character asks Jesus, What must I
do to inherit eternal life? (10:17) Jesus, in reply, appeals indirectly to the Deca-
logue with the curious addition of (do not defraud/deprive/
rob). I propose that alludes specifcally to Mal 3:5 as part of
a broader intertextual relationship with Malachi that reinforces not only key
themes of Jesus preaching (viz., repentance, faith, and eschatological reversal)
but also his prophetic ability to detect inconspicuous wrongdoing. I will demon-
strate a precedent in Mark for such a claim of intertextuality; the ensuing exami-
nation of the intertextuality of 10:1722 will help inform a hermeneutic for its
reading in Mark. Jesus loving glare notwithstanding (10:21), this hermeneutic
will illuminate the interlocutors guilt throughout the story. Like Malachis com-
patriots, who cannot stand in the Lords presence, Jesus questioner attempts to
deprive the Lord and the poor of what is rightfully theirs.
Mark establishes early that the top priority of Jesus mission is to proclaim the
good news of God (1:1415). Driven by the desire to expand his preaching tour
(v. 38), he refuses to return immediately to the fervent townspeople of Capernaum
(though they continue to seek him [v. 37]). Jesus eschatological announcement
about the nearness of the kingdom of God has present implications for its
hearers: repentance and faith (v. 15). Brian Blount points out that repentance in
Mark presupposes the baptism of repentance (1:45) and ultimately amounts
to a change in behavior; this is evident in Jesus calling the frst disciples, when
Peter and Andrew immediately () leave their livelihood to follow him
(,1:17; cf. 1:20).
1
As the narrative unfolds, the cost of following Jesus
1
Blount, Go Preach! Marks Kingdom Message and the Black Church Today (Bible and
JBL 132, no. 1 (2013): 179199
179
comes into sharper focus. Amid several predictions of his passion (8:3132; 9:31;
10:3334), he extends the invitation to a broader audience when he calls the crowd
to follow (8:34, ).
2

Te story of the rich man (10:1722) continues the strong emphasis on
discipleship in 8:2710:52. While Jesus is en route to Jerusalem (presumably; cf.
vv. 17, 32),
3
an unnamed character (, one) dramatically interrupts him, asking,
What must I do to inherit eternal life? Te discourse moves quickly from a
conversation about the law (vv. 1820), including the interlocutors claim to perfect
obedience, to an invitation for discipleship (v. 21, ). Essentially, Jesus
ofers two sets of commandments. First he appeals indirectly to the Decalogue (its
second table predominantly), but with the curious addition of (do
not defraud/rob/deprive [v. 19]).
4
Te second set of commands comes directly
from Jesus with stipulations for joining his mission. Unlike the frst disciples, who
follow without hesitation (1:1620), this man declines and leaves dejected (10:22).
Tis is the only time in Mark when someone rejects Jesus personal invitation to
follow him, and it leads to a tense conversation with the disciples (vv. 2432).
Scholarship is divided on the interpretation of (10:19).
Some commentators speculate that it expands or applies the eighth and/or ninth
commandments (do not steal; do not lie).
5
Others imagine that it restates the
tenth commandment (do not covet) in a manner more relevant for a rich man.
6

A few scholars suggest that it may allude to any of several passages outside of the
Liberation; Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1998), 47: It is the afrmation and acceptance of a new
life of fshing discipleship.
2
Morna D. Hooker, Te Gospel according to Saint Mark (BNTC; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson,
1991), 239.
3
See, e.g., Ernest Best, Uncomfortable Words: VII, Te Camel and the Needles Eye (Mark
10:25), ExpTim 82 (1970): 84 (he notes the repetition of ).
4
See BDAG, 121, s.v. . Te verb does not appear in the Decalogue or
the Synoptic parallels (cf. Matt 19:1819; Luke 18:20); it is not surprising, then, that some scribes
omit it (see Bruce Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament: A Companion
Volume to the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament [4th rev. ed.; Stuttgart: United Bible
Societies, 1994], 89). A few modern scholars also omit it: see Reginald H. Fuller, Te Decalogue
in the New Testament, Int 43 (1989): 244; W. D. MacHardy, Mark 10:19: A Reference to the
Old Testament? ExpTim 107 (1996): 143. MacHardy believes that was originally a
marginal note that was eventually assimilated into the text by a scribal hand.
5
E.g., R. T. France, Te Gospel of Mark: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 401; William Lane, Te Gospel of Mark (NICNT; Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1974), 366.
6
E.g., James K. Bruckner, On the One Hand . . . On the Other Hand: Te Twofold Meaning
of the Law against Covetousness, Covenant Quarterly 55 (1997): 99; Craig A. Evans, Mark 8:27
16:20 (WBC 34B; Nashville: Nelson, 2001), 96 (he also entertains the possibility of an allusion
to Exod 21:10); Joel Marcus, Mark 816: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary
(Anchor Yale Bible 27A; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009), 722.
Hicks: Markan Discipleship according to Malachi 181
Decalogue.
7
Despite these diferences, however, many scholars agree that Mark
initially presents the rich man in a positive light.
8
In this essay, I propose that
Marks use of alludes specifcally to Mal 3:5 as part of a broader
intertextual relationship between Malachi 3 and Mark 10:1722; specifcally I
will show that the precursor text appears to shape the passage as well as clarify
the signifcance of its setting and players.
9
In contrast to scholars who think
favorably of the rich man, I argue that the proposed intertextuality illuminates his
wrongdoing throughout the story. Namely, like many of Malachis compatriots, he
defrauds or deprives the poor and God of what is rightfully theirs.
I begin by noting Marks use of Malachi 3 (from the MT and LXX) in
preceding portions of his Gospel, establishing precedent for the claim of such
intertextuality in 10:1722. Te ensuing examination of the intertextuality of
10:1722 will help inform a hermeneutic for my reading in Mark. I will show that
Marks ongoing intertextual relationship with Malachi reinforces key themes of
7
E.g., Adela Yarbro Collins, Mark: A Commentary (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress,
2007), 478 (she notes Mal 3:5; Sir 4:1; and Lev 6:17); cf. Hooker, Mark, 244. Joachim Gnilka
suggests an allusion to Sir 4:1 (which features ) or the variant reading of Deut 24:14
(Das Evangelium nach Markus [EKKNT 2; Zurich: Benziger, 1989], 2:87).
8
Emerson B. Powery, for example, sees an impressive candidate for discipleship who stirs
up unusual emotion in Jesus (Jesus Reads Scripture: Te Function of Jesus Use of Scripture in the
Synoptic Gospels [Biblical Interpretation Series; Leiden: Brill, 2003], 54). Cf. Robert M. Fowler,
Reader-Response Criticism: Figuring Marks Reader, in Mark and Method: New Approaches in
Biblical Studies (ed. Janice Capel Anderson and Stephen D. Moore; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992),
71; France, Mark, 403; Collins, Mark, 479.
9
By intertextual relationship I refer to the relationship between the fnal text of the
Gospel of Mark and precursor . . . texts (W. S. Vorster, Te Production of the Gospel of Mark:
An Essay on Intertextuality, HvTSt 49 no. 3 [1993]: 394). For Malachi 3 in particular, I also
note below the programmatic nature of Marks intertextual relationship. My use of the term
intertextuality in this essay, then, is not merely a stylish way of referring to isolated textual
allusions, but mainly it denotes a process whereby Mark faithfully attempts to adapt the essential
(embedded) story line of Malachi 3 for his story about Jesus and the rich man. Deborah Krause
coins the phrase narrated prophecy to describe a similar phenomenon in Mark 11:1221
vis--vis Hos 9:1017 (i.e., it is infused with prophetic imagery and form), and she fnds a
precedent for this in Michael Fishbanes observation of units of mantological midrash in the
OT (Krause, Narrated Prophecy in Mark 11.1221: Te Divine Authorization of Judgment, in
Te Gospels and the Scriptures of Israel [ed. Craig A. Evans and W. Richard Stegner; JSNTSup
104; Shefeld: Shefeld Academic Press, 1994], 236, 23940; cf. Michael Fishbane, Biblical Inter-
pretation in Ancient Israel [Oxford: Clarendon, 1985], 44346). I hesitate, however, to adopt the
terminology of narrated prophecy (or mantological exegesis) outright because for Krause it
primarily denotes the dynamic by which an author transforms a prophetic text from one
genre (oracle) to another (narrative) (Krause, p. 236). Te larger question to consider within this
type of intertextual relationship (in addition to the role of narrative in the OT generally), then, is
the degree of adaptation involved and whether it would rightly qualify as transformation to a new
situation (see Krause, p. 240) from the authors perspective.
the Markan Jesus preaching (e.g., repentance, faith, and eschatological reversal/
reward) and illuminates the focal passage in at least three ways: frst, it draws
attention to the fallacy of the rich mans profession of obedience (v. 20); second,
it clarifes Jesus love (v. 21); third, it accentuates the Markan Jesus prophet-like
insight that allows him to detect the specifc area of the law wherein the rich man
fails and, subsequently, to expand the Decalogue accordingly as a means of setting
up repentance and discipleship.
I. The Importance of Malachi for Reading Mark
In his watershed work on Pauls OT use, Richard B. Hays defnes intertextuality
as the imbedding of fragments of an earlier text within a later one, and he ofers
several helpful tests for detecting it.
10
For Hays, an overt allusion or even a subtle
echo of Scripture usually refects a larger intertextual web that is necessary to
comprehend in order to avoid an impoverished reading.
11
Te phenomenon
of intertextuality, nevertheless, does not operate only at the level of conscious
10
Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press,
1989), 14 (emphasis added); see pp. 2931 for seven tests. More recently, Hays has restated
and clarifed his conception of intertextuality, noting specifcally the evolution of the term vis-
-vis (what he labels) the original intention of Julia Kristeva, who coined the French term
intertextualit about twenty years before Echoes: It is clear that intertextuality is no one thing
. . . it was itself transformed intertextually [in the academy] and put to various uses (Reading
the Bible Intertextually [ed. Richard B. Hays, Stefan Alkier, and Leroy A. Huizenga; Waco: Baylor
University Press, 2009], xii, xiii). Kristevas readers are quick to point out that her understanding of
intertextuality has little to do with recognizing an authors sources or infuences (see, e.g., Leon S.
Roudiez, introduction to Julia Kristeva, Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature
and Art [ed. Leon S. Roudiez; trans. Tomas Gora et al.; New York: Columbia University Press,
1980], 15; Christine Wilkie, Intertextuality, International Companion Encyclopedia of Childrens
Literature [ed. Peter Hunt; New York: Routledge, 1996], 128). Nevertheless, I am unsure whether
Hayss own understanding of Pauls intertextuality is always as far from Kristevas theory as his
statement above suggests, for example, in her description of text as a productivity (see Kristeva,
Desire, 3638, 5155).
11
Hays, Echoes, 20, 23, 46. I question how necessary this competence is among readers,
and whether Hays gives sufcient consideration to the socioeconomic limitations of Pauls
original audiences. Hays acknowledges that cultural concerns give shape to a writers intertextual
practices, yet he appears to sidestep this topic neatly by equating Pauls social context with the
world of Israels Scripture (p. 15). Were the majority of Pauls original recipients literate? Did they
have the necessary time and resources to trace Pauls intertextuality? See further Christopher
Stanley, Pearls before Swine: Did Pauls Audiences Understand His Biblical Quotations? NovT
41 (1999): 12644. I do not assume that Marks readers must know Malachi 3 in order to see the
rich mans wrongdoing, but only that to entertain the proposed intertextuality will illuminate
aspects of Marks story that may suggest the connection on their own strength.
refection.
12
Narratologists suppose further that all communication naturally involves
intertextuality and creativity, and that in reading, hearing, or viewing precursor texts
there is a continuum of adding, tracing and shaping.
13
Irrespective of the texts
familiar to an original audience, therefore, identifying any signifcant precursor texts
can conceivably help bring out the complex embeddedness of a narratives meaning
in the culture from which it comes.
14

Echoing Hayss seminal study, Markan scholars now generally assume that
the Gospel of Mark does not allude to OT texts atomistically.
15
As W. S. Vorster
writes, [A]llusions and quotations . . . are usually absorbed into Marks story in
such a manner that [they] form part of the story stuf, and intertextual codes
. . . helped him to communicate his own point of view.
16
Deborah Krause, who
herself fnds the absorption of an OT prophetic text in Mark 11, to wit, shaping
the narratives form, does not overstate the potential implications: Te placement
of [prophetic] traditions in [Mark] functions as an implicit commentary on the
characters and situations in the Gospel story.
17
Among Hayss guidelines for
detecting intertextuality, then, I agree with Holly J. Carey, who notes that the
criterion of satisfaction is the most subjective, and yet the most . . . helpful for
discussing allusions in Mark.
18
A proposed reading simply must make good sense
and generally illuminate the focal passage.
19
Establishing a Precedent for Malachi
With only one editorial citation in Mark (1:2), determining the origin of OT
allusions is challenging. Tere is (prior to 10:19), however, evidence to suggest that
12
I like Hayss suggestion that scriptural images were in Pauls bones (Echoes, 4243), and
I wonder why he does not develop it further.
13
H. Porter Abbott, Te Cambridge Introduction to Narrative (2nd ed.; Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press, 2008), 108. On intertextuality as the impossibility of living outside
the infnite text, see Roland Barthes, Te Pleasure of the Text (trans. Richard Miller; New York:
Hill & Wang, 1975), 36.
14
Abbott, Narrative, 101.
15
Whereas Hays concludes that Pauls hermeneutic is functionally ecclesiocentric rather
than christocentric (Echoes, xiii), Mark does not appear to use Scripture primarily to address the
needs of his community (see Joel Marcus, Te Way of the Lord: Christological Exegesis of the Old
Testament in the Gospel of Mark [Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1992], 3). For a brief survey
of research on Marks OT use, beginning with Alfred Suhl (Die Funktion der alttestamentlichen
Zitate und Anspielungen im Markusevangelium [Gtersloh: Mohn, 1965]) through the early
1990s, see Marcus, Way, 25.
16
Vorster, Mark, 39192.
17
Krause, Prophecy, 236 (emphasis added).
18
Carey, Jesus Cry from the Cross: Towards a First-Century Understanding of the Intertextual
Relationship between Psalm 22 and the Narrative of Marks Gospel (Library of New Testament
Studies 398; London/New York: T&T Clark, 2009), 40.
19
Hays, Echoes, 3132.
Malachi not only is a signifcant precursor text but also plays a programmatic role
in the narrative.
Mark 1:23. Te opening lines of Mark imply that Jesus story shares a
dynamic relationship with Scripture. Robert A. Guelich argues that Marks lone
editorial citation, just as it is written in the prophet Isaiah (1:2a), corresponds
to the preceding heading, Te beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ the Son
of God (1:1), and that Isaiah is programmatic for the prologue in several ways.
20

More recently, Rikki E. Watts has gone further to claim that the citation is pro-
grammatic for the prologue and therefore the whole gospel.
21

What follows immediately in v. 2b, however, is not an Isaian text but
apparently a confation of two other sources, Mal 3:1 and Exod 23:20. Te
quotation of Isa 40:3 in v. 3 is straightforward (A voice crying out in the
wilderness . . .), but whether Mark 1:2 (Behold, I will send my messenger
ahead of you who will prepare your way) better refects Malachi or Exodus is
debatable. Several scholars place greater emphasis on, or even argue exclusively
for, Malachi (drawing out the link between John the Baptist and Elijah [cf. Mal
4:56; Mark 1:45; 9:13]).
22
Joel Marcus, conversely, notes a precedent in Mark
for confating scriptural passages and, in postbiblical Judaism specifcally, Exod
23:20 and Mal 3:1, which he fnds natural enough because both texts feature
Gods promise to send a messenger.
23

Indeed Mark 1:2a ( ) agrees
verbatim with Exod 23:20 (except Mark leaves out ), but Mal 3:1 is not far of
( . . . ). Evidence that Malachi
may factor more prominently than Exodus comes in the phrase about the work of the
messenger in Mark 1:2b, who will prepare the way ( ). Tis
does not appear to refect the LXX of Exod 23:20 (he may guard you [] in
the way) or the LXX of Mal 3:1 (he will survey [] the way), but it parallels
Mal 3:1 in the MT, (and he will make clear the way). Tus, Mark 1:2b
may represent an independent translation of Mal 3:1 (MT), which closely parallels Isa
40:3 ( ).
24
Tis should not suggest that Exodus is without ongoing signifcance
in Mark, only that the programmatic confation should be understood primarily
in a prophetic rather than a Pentateuchal context, as its attribution to Isaiah the
20
Guelich, Mark 18:26 (WBC 34A; Dallas: Word, 1989), 10.
21
Watts, Isaiahs New Exodus and Mark (WUNT 2/88; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1997), 56;
see also 5560. Cf. Marcus, Way, 1347.
22
E.g., A. W. Robertson, El Antiguo Testamento en el Nuevo (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1996), 75; Larry W. Hurtado, Mark (NIBC 2; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1989), 23; Robert G.
Bratcher and Eugene A. Nida, A Translators Handbook on the Gospel of Mark (Helps for Trans-
lators 2; Leiden: Brill, 1961), 5. Cf. Collins, Mark, 136.
23
Joel Marcus, Way, 13; cf. Watts, New Exodus, 74.
24
See BDB, 815, s.v. : turn away things scattered about, make orderly. See Marcus,
Way, 13.
prophet might imply (1:2a).
25
As Watts also points out, Mal 3:1 itself refers in
particular to the Isaianic expression of the hope of Yahwehs New Exodus coming.
26

Mark promptly follows the confation by introducing John the Baptist (v. 4),
who proclaims [] a baptism of repentance [] and directs the
readers attention to the superiority of Jesus and his baptism (v. 7). Tis move
essentially prepares readers to repent () in view of Jesus preaching about
the kingdom of God (, vv. 1415). Both Malachi and Isaiah emphasize the
theme of preparation, but repentance as a primary concern of the Elijah fgure is
arguably more pronounced in Malachi (Mal 3:23; cf. 3:1, 7).
27
R. T. France further
observes, Te idea of Gods appointed herald is more explicit in Mal 3:1, while
the more allusive language of Isa 40:3 forms an appropriate comment on it.
28
As
important as Isaiah is to Marks work overall (see 7:6; 11:17), Malachi seems no less
signifcant to the prologue, and the entire confation may have been attributed to
Isaiah more or less arbitrarily.
29

Te programmatic signifcance of the confation for the entire narrative is
implied not only in its strategic placement in the prologue but also in the way its
introductory formula plays out in the narrative. Hereafer (9:13;
14:21) comes only on the lips of Jesus and indicates that Scripture essentially
foretells a program of events about Elijah and himself (Elijah has come, and they
did to him whatever they wish, just as it is written about him [9:13; cf. v. 12, it is
written that the Son of Man . . .]; the Son of Man will go just as it is written about
him [14:21]). Only Jesus and the narrator (presumably) know the authors in view
here, yet these writings, which conceivably include the earlier prophecies from
25
Marcus, Way, 25. On the exodus wilderness motif in Mark, for instance, see Ulrich
Mauser, Christ in the Wilderness: Te Wilderness Teme in the Second Gospel and Its Basis in the
Biblical Tradition (SBT 39; Naperville, IL: Allenson, 1963), 3452, 8283, 100. Marcus, however,
fnds that Mauser too ofen emphasizes the frst exodus (i.e., under Moses) over the second (i.e.,
the eschatological expectation of the prophets for Yhwhs deliverance).
26
Watts, New Exodus, 73. He further notes the similarity between in Mal 3:1 and
in Isa 57:14, 62:10 (i.e., postexilic texts).
27
See ibid., 59, 62.
28
France, Mark, 63.
29
Perhaps Isaiah was simply the more recognizable (prophetic) text. See further Collins,
Mark, 136. Hooker suggests that v. 2 was a later addition (Mark, 3435), but the evidence is not
compelling (see Lane, Mark, 4647 n. 30). Mark may also recognize the author of Malachi 3 not
as a prophet by the proper name Malachi but, as in the LXX, by the title the Lords messenger
( [Mal 1:1]). In that case, it might have been too cumbersome to cite the work
directly, and Marks confation conceivably begins with an indirect allusion to the author of
Malachi (i.e., my messenger). Te meaning of the superscription (Mal 1:1 [MT]) is still debated
as to whether represents a common noun (messenger) or a name (Malachi). See
Douglas Stuart, Malachi, in Te Minor Prophets: An Exegetical and Expository Commentary (ed.
Tomas Edward McComiskey; 3 vols.; Grand Rapids: Baker, 199298), 3:1278. Te LXX renders
it as a common noun (my messenger) while a couple of the major revisions (Teodotion,
Symmachus) take it as a proper noun (of Malachi).
Malachi and Isaiah, apparently pertain to events as they unfold in the narrative.
30

Nevertheless, Malachi would not have to be cited explicitly to be programmatic
for Mark.
Mark 9:1113. Te possible connection between John the Baptist and Elijah
and/or Jesus usually dominates scholarly treatment of this section.
31
Asked why the
teachers of the law say that Elijah must come frst (v. 11, ), Jesus tells his dis-
ciples, Elijah [] must come frst/before [] and restore []
all things (v. 12). Tis description of Elijah is founded on Mal 3:2223, evidenced
by at least two catchword links: See I will send you the prophet Elijah []
before [ (LXX); (MT)] that great and dreadful day. . . . He will restore
[] the hearts of the fathers to their children, and the hearts of the
children to their fathers.
32
Irrespective of the Elijah fgures identity, it is notable
that the Markan co-texts of here (9:13) and in 1:2 likely share
allusions to Malachi 3.
Mark 10: Te Lord Approaches the Temple. In Jesus teaching against divorce
(Mark 10:68), his quotations from the creation story (Gen 1:27; 2:24) qualify
and trump the Pharisees allusion to the provision for divorce given by Moses in
Deut 24:14. In contrast to these religious leaders (Mark 10:4), Jesus essentially
denounces divorce and remarriage as a breach of Gods covenant (vv. 1112). His
use of Scripture here further testifes to his authority (cf. 1:22, 27) as he approaches
Jerusalem (10:1), where at the temple he will again use Scripture to censure another
form of covenantal unfaithfulness (11:17).
In view of the preceding allusions to Malachi, it is not unreasonable to think
that Mark would interpret several aspects of Jesus story in terms of Malachi, and
so it is notable that Mal 2:15a also opposes divorce by apparently alluding to the
creation story (Gen 1:27 and/or 2:24).
33
Further, the allusions co-text in Malachi
30
See Morna Hooker, Mark, in It Is Written: Scripture Citing Scripture. Essays in Honour
of Barnabas Lindars, SSF (ed. D. A. Carson and H. G. M. Williamson; Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1988), 220. Hooker also specifcally recognizes the importance of Malachi 3
elsewhere (e.g., Mark, 35, 21920). Powery attributes the absence of citations to the Markan
Jesus characterization as the defnitive authority on all matters pertaining to life and belief
(Where Are the Quotations: Citation-less Introductory Formulae in the Gospel of Mark,
Journal of Biblical Studies 4 [2004]: 22).
31
See Hugh Anderson, Te Old Testament in Marks Gospel, in Te Use of the Old
Testament in the New and Other Essays: Studies in Honor of William Franklin Stinespring (ed.
James M. Efrd; Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1972), 295.
32
Ibid.
33
Stuart fnds an allusion in Mal 2:15 highly likely (Malachi, 1341), and some (non-
Markan) commentators recognize a parallel with Mark, e.g., W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allision,
A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to Saint Matthew (3 vols.;
ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 198897), 3:1112; Elizabeth Achtemeier, NahumMalachi
(Interpretation; Atlanta: John Knox, 1986), 182; cf. Peter A. Verhoef, Te Books of Haggai and
Malachi (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 28081. Watts appropriately critiques Markan
resembles Marks story in several ways: it constitutes a warning against breaking the
covenant (Mal 2:15b, 16b), follows an indictment against religious leaders (2:19),
and helps to set up the Lords judgment at the temple (2:173:5). In addition, the
motif of godly children appears here in both booksthe ofspring whom God
(presumably) seeks (2:15b)

and the little children whom Jesus embraces and
associates with the kingdom of God (Mark 10:1416)which logically follows the
discussions about the sanctity of marriage.
34

Similar to Jesus dynamic use of Scripture regarding divorce is his authoritative
expansion of the Decalogue in Mark 10:19.
35
Te instruction is
the only commandment in v. 19 that is missing from the lists in Exod 20:1216
and Deut 5:1620, and this conceivably indicates that a diferent precursor text is
in view. A hapax legomenon in Mark, is also infrequent in the LXX (see
below) and the rest of the NT (1 Cor 6:7, 8; 7:5; 1 Tim 6:5; Jas 5:4), but it usually
involves causing vulnerable people to sufer loss by taking away through illicit
means [i.e., rob, steal, despoil, defraud] or to prevent someone from having the
beneft of something (i.e., deprive).
36
Rather than meaning a generic thieving
or robbing in Mark 10:19, as the prior appearance of (do not steal)
in v. 19 might itself imply, I suggest below that the proposed intertextuality
illuminates the meaning of here as denying benefts to those who
rightfully deserve them, for personal gain (cf. 1 Cor 7:5; Jas 5:4).
What distinguishes Malachi 3 from all other LXX contexts featuring
(cf. Exod 21:10; [Deut 24:14 (A)]; Mal 3:5; Sir 4:1; 34:21; 34:22; 4 Macc 8:23) is that,
in addition to Marks prior intertextuality, its placement in v. 5 comes (as it does in
Mark) among several allusions to the Decalogue and within a co-text that touches
on poverty.
37
Malachi warns that the Lord will testify swifly against adulterers,
liars, and those who defraud/deprive [] the hired workers [] of
their wages [; cf. Jas 5:4] . . . and do not fear the Lord(Mal 3:5).
38
Tus,
between Mark 10:1722 and Mal 3:5 there is already a thematic link of poverty (cf.
Mark 10:21), and three catchword links that follow in the same order: adultery (cf.
[Mark 10:19]; [Mal 3:5]; [Decalogue, Exod
scholarship for overlooking the potential programmatic role of Malachi (New Exodus, 60), but he
himself essentially limits its infuence to Mark 11 outside the prologue, for example, the cursing
of the fg tree, which refects the threat of the Lords judgment at the temple (pp. 31018).
Working independently of Watts, I observed something similar both here and in Mark 10:1722
(see below). In section II, I will also note a few parallels between vv. 2331 and the latter verses
of Malachi 3.
34
Ultimately, Mal 2:15 (MT) is ambiguous as to whether God or Israel seeks godly of-
spring (Stuart, Malachi, 1340).
35
See Powery, Jesus Reads Scripture, 53, 55.
36
See BDAG, 121 (cf. 1 Cor 7:5); cf. EDNT, 142, s.v. .
37
See Hooker, Mark, 244. Sirach 4:1 condemns defrauding the poor, but it lacks allusions
to the Decalogue and Malachis dual emphasis on depriving the poor and God (see below).
38
Stuart illustrates the laborers poverty: Tey were people without land of their own . . .
and were to be paid at the end of each workday . . . (Lev. 19:13; Deut. 24:1215) (Malachi, 1358).
20:13; Deut 5:17]), lying ( [Mark 10:19]; [Mal 3:5];
[Exod 20:16; Deut 5:20]), and defrauding (
[Mark 10:19]; [Mal 3:5]; absent from the Decalogue).
39
By refusing Jesus command to give to the poor (10:21) the rich man becomes
the only character in Mark to reject Jesus personal invitation to discipleship; thus,
he ultimately deprives not only the poor but the Lord of the proper devotion
and service (see the last section). Te theme of depriving God is arguably more
pronounced near Mal 3:5 than in other septuagintal co-texts of .
40

Specifcally in Mal 3:8, the MT thrice uses (deceive, rob),
41
a rare term
that the LXX here renders as (deceive), to describe Israels attempt to
withhold tithes and oferings from God. Te meaning of and in this
co-text, therefore, compares to that of and its LXX counterpart
in Mal 3:5, where laborers are denied their wages.
42
In fact, three major revisions
of the LXX (Aquila, Symmachus, and Teodotion) have three times
each in place of in Mal 3:8. Tus, Mark conceivably knew a version of
Malachi 3 that had four times, or Marks could refect his
own independent translation of .
43

In the sequel, I will unpack the intertextual relationship between Mark 10:17
22 and Malachi 3. Several allusions via catchword links and thematic/behavior
parallels will help illuminate Marks story of the rich man.
II. Reading Mark 10:1722 alongside Malachi 3
Te Approach of the Rich Man (v. 17a)
Te story begins abruptly as Jesus embarks on the way with a man running
up to him () and falling on his knees before him (). A leper
39

Besides not stealing ( ; cf. Exod. 20:14; Deut 5:19 [ ]), the only
other item in Mark 10:19 not paralleled explicitly in Malachi is honor your father and mother
( [verbatim with Exod 20:12; Deut 5:16). Still, Malachi notes
fathers (, v. 7; cf. Mal 1:6, a son honors his father) following his other allusions to the
Decalogue (v. 5), and the command including likewise comes last in Mark (i.e., the reverse
of its respective position in the Decalogue). Te allusions to the Decalogue are obviously more
pronounced in Mark, but the majority of the sins in Malachis list, as Ralph L. Smith observes,
are violations of the covenant or Decalogue (MicahMalachi [WBC 32; Waco: Word, 1984], 330).
40
Other co-texts almost exclusively concern defrauding ones wife (Exod 21:10) or
defrauding creditors (Sir 29:6, 7); depriving oneself of delight (4 Macc 8:24); or defrauding the
poor (Sir 4:1; 34:2, 3; [Deut 24:14]).
41
William L. Holladay, A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament Based
upon the Lexical Work of Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1971), 311, s.v. ; cf. BDB, 867.
42
BDB, 79899, s.v. : oppress, extort, wrong.
43
Teodotion may date to the frst century b.c.e. (see Melvin K. H. Peters, Septuagint,
ABD 5:1098).
previously approached Jesus in a similar way, begging (, 1:40) and
possibly kneeling (, v. 40 [omitted in several mss including B D G
W]). Later a demoniac also ran () and submitted () to him
(5:6). Te father of a demon-possessed child also runs () to greet him and
desires healing for his son (9:1524). Likewise, another father fell [] at Jesus
feet (5:22) and begged him (, v. 23) to save his ill daughter. While
there is obviously precedent in Mark for the rich mans approach, his running and
kneeling do not appear to be warranted in this instance.
44

In the cases of the fathers, the leper, and even the demoniac, their impassioned
pleas are justifed by an immediate need (i.e., failing health); this mans approach,
by contrast, sets up a reverent question: Good teacher, what must I do to inherit
eternal life? (10:17). While many commentators describe his approach and
manner as urgent and/or reverent, they ofer little explanation. Robert H. Gundry,
for example, speculates that his running exhibits the magnetism of Jesus, and
France notes that his urgency refects a serious spiritual quest . . . that is borne out
by his words.
45
Tese suggestions may be correct, but Craig A. Evans points out
that kneeling is not usual for greeting a teacher.
46

Considering Malachi as a precursor text for this story opens a new avenue of
interpretation. In Mal 3:1, the way () will be prepared for the Lord ()
to approach the temple (). Tough Malachis interlocutors seek the Lord,
questions remain about who can endure the day of his coming (v. 2a) and who
can stand [] in his sight (v. 2b). Malachi explains that those who
remain faithful to the covenant will stand with the Lord; for the Lord comes as fre
and lye (v. 2c), which are both agents of purifcation and separation.
47
In Mark,
Jesus (who is ofen designated Lord [], e.g., 1:3; 2:28; 12:36) is also on his way
[ ] to the temple in Jerusalem, where he will judge corruption (cf. 10:17, 32;
11:11 []).
48
Moreover, like the Judeans, the rich man pursues the Lord (evidenced
by his running); nonetheless, he does not stand in his sight.
49
Malachi 3 complements the urgency of the Markan Jesus preaching in
44
Tough Jesus is depicted as going on his way, this probably says more about the urgency
of his mission than the need for the man to run. Jesus is typically seen in motion when he calls
disciples (Ernest Best, Following Jesus: Discipleship in the Goepsl of Mark [JSNTSup 4; Shefeld:
University of Shefeld, 1981], 110).
45
Gundry, Mark: A Commentary on His Apology for the Cross (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1993), 552; France, Mark, 401.
46
Evans, Mark, 95.
47
Stuart, Malachi, 1353.
48
Jesus way () was prepared earlier in the prologue (1:2), which alludes to Mal 3:1.
49
Teir hope to see the God of justice (Mal 2:17) prepares for the eschatological/apoca-
lyptic material in Malachi 3 (see Stuart, Malachi, 1346); the rich mans desire to inherit eternal
life, by comparison, reveals an eschatological focus (see France, Mark, 401). On the eschatological
connotations of (inherit, Mark 10:17), see J. H. Friedrich, , EDNT
2:29899.
general. Te prophet announces that Gods justice (2:17) will come near (3:5) in
sudden fashion (, 3:1; cf. Mark 13:36 [ is a hapax legomenon in
Mark]), and then in preparation for that event focuses mainly on repentance or
returning to God (vv. 710, 24). Jesus proclaims the nearness of the kingdom
of God (1:15a; cf. 1:38; 4:29) and then prompts hearers to repent and follow him
(Mark 1:15b20). Te proposed intertextuality in Mark 10:17a thus brings the
theme of repentance to the forefront of this section by evoking the imagery of
the Lords imminent judgment from Malachi. Te characterization of unfaithful
Judeans also is recast upon Marks rich man; his inability to stand indicates
wrongdoing and foreshadows an opportunity for repentance.
In the next section I will appeal to several thematic and catchword links
to show that Mark continues to adapt the behavioral patterns of the Lord and
unfaithful Judeans from Malachi. Te intertextuality will further illuminate his
characterization of Jesus and the rich man.
Te Commandments and Jesus (Un)Emotional Response
(vv. 17b21a)
As the man continues to kneel (v. 17), a posture reminiscent of a lawbreaker
in Malachi, he asks, Good teacher ( ), what must I do to inherit
eternal life? Jesus reply seems unexpected: Why do you call me good? No one is
good except God alone (v. 18). Perhaps Joel F. Williams is correct to describe this
as a harsh reply, because Jesus immediately challenges the mans understanding
of goodness; but, as France notes, it appears that the reader is lef to guess what
the objection was.
50

I suggest that Marks adaptation of the Lords unexpected behavior from
Malachis fourth disputation (2:17a3:5) is still in view here, and that the scene
foreshadows Jesus aggressive response to covenantal unfaithfulness at the temple
(Mark 11:1517).
51
Malachis compatriots approach the Lord with seemingly
legitimate concerns, Where is the God of justice? (Mal 2:17b), yet their words
have wearied the Lord (2:17a); and Malachi describes a threatening response
when God fnally arrives at his temple (3:2).
52
Elizabeth Achtemeier explains that
50
Williams, Other Followers of Jesus: Minor Characters as Major Figures in Marks Gospel
(JSNTSup 102; Shefeld: JSOT Press, 1994), 143; France, Mark, 402 n. 24. Williams claims that
the man was in violation of the Ten Commandments; France believes, conversely, that he was
obedient to the commandments but simply not aware of their far reaching implications (p. 403).
51
On the relationship between 2:17 and 3:5 as bookends for Malachis fourth disputation,
see Stuart, Malachi, 135659.
52
Stuart notes that such reversal language commonly characterizes prophetic speech
about the Day of the Lord (Stuart, Malachi, 1352). Tough they want justice, when that
intervention takes place it will not be what they expect (p. 1348). Cf. Lena-Sofa Tiemeyer,
Giving a Voice to Malachis Interlocutors, SJOT 19 (2005): 187. On the infuence of Malachis
threatened cursing of the land in Mark 11, see Watts, New Exodus, 31037.
the Judeans expect a consuming fre, but instead God comes as a refning fame
(cf. 3:6). God will call into account the Judeans who fail to keep the law (v. 5),
separating some from the community and transforming others who accept the
invitation to repent (cf. vv. 3, 7).
53

Te emphasis in Malachi 3 clearly falls on repentance (vv. 710, 1924), and
the Markan Jesus appears to follow Malachis practice here of using Scripture as a
means of promoting repentance. First he appears to echo the idea of Gods oneness
in the Shema ( , v. 18; cf. Deut 6:45), but obedience to the Shema in Mark
only brings someone close to the kingdom of God ( , 12:34; cf. 10:23,
24).
54
Ten, like Malachi, Jesus references several commands drawn predominantly
from the Decalogue (v. 19). Some scholars interpret this as a direct answer to the
rich man, that is, keeping the true spirit of the law brings eternal life.
55
Te notion
of gaining eternal life by Torah observance, however, makes better sense in the
Matthean parallel (Matt 19:1622). Tere Jesus states unequivocally, If you would
enter life, keep the commandments (, 19:17 [an imperative verb]). Te
Markan Jesus, on the other hand, introduces the commands indirectly, You know
[] the commandments (v. 19), and then only summarizes the Decalogue
with no further explanation.
Unlike in Matthews account, there are no imperatives in the Markan Jesus
frst reply (Mark 10:1819); this hardly represents a complete answer to the rich
mans probing question. It is the next set of commands (v. 21), conversely, which
come directly from Jesus (all in the imperative mood) and provide a defnitive
answer, culminating in the invitation to follow him (v. 21b).
56
Te use of Scripture,
therefore, hints at what the man lacks (, v. 21), and it is Jesus authoritative
proclamation (which comes later in v. 21) that reveals the means to atone for the
defciency (i.e., what he can do to inherit eternal life).
Te apparent expansion of the Decalogue with a new commandment
57

against defrauding in Mark 10:19b foreshadows the storys climax in v. 21. If the
rich man is well acquainted with the demands of the Decalogue (presumably he was
[vv. 1920]), he also would recognize that is the only item foreign
to it. It is not surprising, then, that directly following his profession of innocence
(v. 20) Jesus says he lacks one thing ( is in a position of emphasis [v. 21]). Te
53
Achtemeier, Malachi, 18687.
54
Powery notes the Shema allusion in 10:18 (Jesus Reads Scripture, 54). In Mark 12:2931,
Jesus explicitly cites the Shema as the most important commandment, but he implies that the
scribe who obeys it (and Lev 19:18) is still not ready to enter the kingdom of God (v. 34).
Repentance and discipleship could be in view (cf. 1:15; 11:18 [scribes plot to destroy Jesus]).
55
Evans thinks that Lev 18:5 captures the intent of the Markan Jesus here (Mark, 95). See
also Lane, Mark, 36667; Ulrich Luck, Die Frage nach dem Guten: Zu Mt 19, 1630 und Par.,
in Studien zum Text und zur Ethik des Neuen Testaments: Festschrif zum 80. Geburtstag von
Heinrich Greeven (ed. Wolfgang Schrage; BZNW 47; Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 1986), 283.
56
Delaying an authoritative answer to a straightforward question is not uncommon
behavior for the Markan Jesus (cf. 2:2327; 10:23; 12:1516).
57
I like Powerys designation (Jesus Reads Scripture, 55).
addition of is a stark reminder of the authority of Jesus spoken
word (cf. 1:14, 15, 22, 27; 2:10).
58
It may also testify to Jesus prophet-like power of
discernment, which enables him to recognize what others are thinking and need
to hear. Tis insight was demonstrated earlier in his confrontation with accusing
scribes (2:68).
59
In other instances he detects the hardened hearts of religious
leaders and disciples (cf. 3:5; 8:1721).
60
When he addresses the rich man, his
insight is again notable because Mark does not reveal the mans economic status
until late in the pericope (v. 22); Jesus new command with particular relevance
for the rich comes three verses prior (v. 19).
61

Even if the rich man sincerely believes that he is innocent in view of the com-
mandments (v. 20), this does not necessarily indicate that he is, or that Jesus believed
him. Tough Emerson B. Powery appeals to the rich mans testimony (All these I
have kept, v. 20) and does not detect any implication of defrauding in the text
(contra Marcus [below]),
62
Mark clearly has demonstrated Jesus keen ability to
detect inconspicuous wrongdoing. Tis ability in particular, the power of prophet-
like insight, mirrors the characterization of the Lord throughout Malachi (see 3:2,
5, 78, 13).
By reviewing the law and expanding it to include , Jesus reveals his
interlocutors transgression, One thing fails you ( , v. 21). In the LXX,
can connote a violation of Gods decrees.
63
Twice in Numbers 9, for
instance, it concerns unclean men () who worry about failing to honor
the Passover feast as God had commanded Moses (vv. 7, 13). Daniel, likewise, rebukes
Belshazzar, You have been weighed on the scales and found lacking (5:27 [TH]).
New Testament writers also occasionally use as a spiritual defciency
(see Rom 3:23; 1 Tess 3:10; Heb 4:1; 12:15). In Marks story of the rich man,
furthermore, Marcus observes a phonological relationship between (10:21)
and (v. 19), by which he suggests that the mans spiritual lack may relate
to a violation of this specifc command.
64
Te proposed intertextuality of the Markan
co-text thus far supports Marcuss assertion, and thus probably refects Jesus
prophet-like insight to detect one () area of unfaithfulness (v. 21).
In Malachi, the necessary course of action for those who defraud ()
58
Ibid.
59
See France, Mark, 127.
60
As Jefrey B. Gibson shows, Jesus rebuke in 8:21, Do you not yet understand?, echoes
prophetic polemic against apostasy; it says more about the disciples unwillingness to accept
Jesus mission rather than their unwillingness to comprehend it intellectually (Te Rebuke of
the Disciples in Mark 8:1421, JSNT 8 [1986]: 3435, n. 38).
61
On most occasions when Jesus displays supernatural insight, Marks implied reader is
already aware of his discovery before it comes to light (cf. 2:68; 3:2, 5:30; 12:15).
62
Powery, Jesus Reads Scripture, 54.
63
See James D. Ernest, , NIDNTT 3:428; Horst Balz, , EDNT 3:409.
64
Marcus, Mark 816, 722.
is repentance/turning (LXX: ; MT: [twice in Mal 3:7]). Discipleship
in Mark, likewise, presupposes repentance (see 1:45, 15), and Jesus expansion of the
Decalogue to include probably attempts to move the rich man in
that direction. It prepares readers for Jesus instructions in v. 21, which will become
for the rich man an opportunity for repentance.
65
Te rich man, however, regards
himself as blameless: all these things I have guarded from my youth (v. 20).
Given his dramatic entrance (v. 17), and now his profession of obedience, most
interpreters (with whom I disagree) are inclined to accept the sincerity of his
claim because Jesus looked at him and loved him (v. 21). France concludes, for
example, that he is proving himself to be altogether a most attractive recruit for
the kingdom of God.
66

Frances observation raises an important question: Is there a right candidate
for discipleship in Mark? Jesus has already implied that the invitation to follow
him is open to anyone who desires (8:34). Earlier in his ministry Jesus raised
eyebrows among the Pharisees by commanding a tax collector to follow him
(2:14). Mark implies, further, that many tax collectors and sinners followed him
(2:15). Te Markan Jesus does not seem inclined to call someone because they are
obedient to the law; rather, he calls those who recognize their defciencies (see 2:17;
8:3538).
Tough the rich mans profession of perfect obedience frst draws a stare
from Jesus (, v. 21a) and then elicits his love (, v. 21a), this may
not be a positive response. C. E. B. Cranfeld speculates, for example, Tat look of
love was not a look of approval. . . . Te mans nave reply makes it only too clear
that he has not understood the commandments nor ever taken them seriously.
67
Jesus look conceivably signals more a moment of prophetic-like intro-
spec tion than a glare of admiration. Again, it is notable that the Markan Jesus
is characterized by supernatural insight that allows him to detect inconspicuous
wrongdoing and dishonesty. Once, on the Sabbath, when the Pharisees watched
Jesus lurkingly [] . . . in order to accuse him (3:2), Jesus perceived
their stubborn hearts and looked at them with anger (
, 3:5).
68
Whereas the Pharisees want to destroy him (3:6), the rich mans
65
See C. E. B. Cranfeld, Riches and the Kingdom of God, SJT 4 (1951): 308.
66
France, Mark, 403; cf. Collins, Mark, 479.
67
Cranfeld, Riches, 3078; cf. Lane, Mark, 365. Cranfeld compares the rich man to Job,
who before his conversion . . . is so sure of his own righteousness. Unfortunately his main
argument hinges tenuously on a diachronic analysis of .
68
On God versus human desire as the origin of heart hardening in the OT and the
same curious duality in [Mark], see Marcus, Mark 18: A New Translation with Introduction
and Commentary (AB 27; New York: Doubleday, 2001), 253. Other recipients of the Markan
Jesus look ( ) also appear in a negative light. Te disciples, for example, demonstrate
incomprehension as they speak among themselves (10:26 [, v. 27]; cf. 10:23). Previously
when they doubted Jesus power to discern the one among many in a crowd who touched him
reverence and eagerness to learn (10:17) may now cause love to replace anger
in Jesus stare (, 10:21). Regardless, as several commentators suggest,
it is probably inappropriate to conceive of Jesus love here as akin to a modern
(popular) understanding of love as an inward (positive) emotion or feeling of
admiration.
69
Indeed, the co-text itself suggests that Jesus loves him (
, v. 21a) by immediately recognizing his defciency (v. 21b) and then detailing
an appropriate course of action for joining his company.
Te interpretation of Marks becomes less
ambiguous when understood within the framework of Malachi 3. Te theme of
Gods covenantal love for unfaithful Israel underlies the entire book of Malachi.
70

Tough from the start Israel questions Gods love (1:2a), to prove this love (/
) God recalls love for Jacob (/, 1:2b), whom God did not hate
() or make his inheritance desolate like Esaus (1:3). Later, in 3:6, the love
motif implicitly returns afer Gods indictment against covenantal infdelity (3:5):
I the Lord do not change []. So you, O sons of Jacob [/ ], are not
destroyed.
71
Instructions then follow about how to repent and restore communion
with God, Return to me, and I will return to you (vv. 710). Additionally, though
the LXX apparently mistranslates v. 9 (You are cursed with a curse [MT]; You
look away from me [LXX]),
72
it notably includes a cognate of . Tus,
the deceptive lawbreakers look away () from the Lord who loves
them (Mal 3:9), which may explain why Jesus would have to look (directly) at
() the dishonest rich man. By his prompt departure (v. 22), the rich man
once again resembles the unfaithful Judeans from Malachi who cannot stand in
the [Lords] vision (, Mal 3:2).
(5:31), he also looked around (, v. 32) until a woman confessed the whole truth
(v. 33).
69
Contra Powery (Jesus Reads Scripture, 54), love does not have to suggest an inner
emotion (Evans, Mark, 98), and Gundry notes that love here could mean simply putting his arm
around him . . . or doing some other such thing in physical demonstration that he loved him
(Apology, 554). Furthermore, I have not found in frst-century lists of emotions outside
the NT or in earlier classical lists (e.g., Aristotle, Rhet. 2; De an. 403a), and so I question if
qualify as an emotion in Greco-Roman thought (see further David Konstan, Te Emotions
of the Ancient Greeks: Studies in Aristotle and Classical Literature [Robson Classical Lectures;
Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2006], 169). In a Hellenistic society that places a premium
on tracing behavior to the guidance of emotion (which frst-century moralists typically associate
with a lack of virtue) or its opposite, reason (cf. Epictetus, Diatr. 2.18.30; Marcus Aurelius 8.43;
Plutarch, Adul. amic 61f; Cohib. ira 459; Konstan, p. 31), love in Mark 10:21 probably refects
nonemotional or rational behavior (e.g., covenantal love).
70
See Verhoef, Malachi, 18084.
71
See Achtemeier, Malachi, 18687. Ryan E. Stokes further reads the in as a in
rather than a hin, which if accurate makes the root (I hate; cf. 1:2) and strengthens
the literary continuity of the love motif (see I, Yhwh, Have Not Changed? Reconsidering the
Translation of Malachi 3:6; Lamentations 4:1; and Proverbs 24:2122, CBQ 70 [2008]: 26669).
72
Most commentators mention this (e.g., Stuart, Malachi, 1368).
Te special ability to discern the truth in Malachi allows the Lord to detect the
Judeans inconspicuous wrongdoing. Following the vice list in v. 5, which includes
indictments against adulterers, liars, and those who defraud (), Malachi
directly accuses them in v. 8a of depriving God, yet they maintain their innocence in
v. 8b, How do we deprive you? Again, when accused of saying harsh things against
the Lord (v. 13a), they reply, What have we said against you? (v.13b).
73
Ten in v. 14
they completely disregard the Lords former indictment that they pervert [Gods]
decrees and do not guard [] them (v. 7); they still stubbornly maintain their
innocence, What did we proft by guarding [] his precepts? (v. 14).
The verb appears only in the story of rich man in Mark (10:20),
and it forms a vivid catchword link with Malachi 3. Whereas Marks rich man
claims to have guarded () all the commandments () from
his youth (10:20), Malachis audience is charged with not having guarded (
) the laws () from the days of their forefathers (Mal 3:7); still
they believe they have guarded them (, v. 14). Te Lords prescribed
course of action, nevertheless, is repentance (vv. 78). In view of the proposed
intertextuality, Marks rich man has not guarded the commandments as he
claims, and thus he too must repent.
Summary. Te Gospel of Mark characterizes Jesus in terms of the Lord in Mala-
chi, who recognizes unfaithfulness on the way to the temple and holds the lawbreaker
accountable. Like lawbreakers in Malachi, Marks rich man implicates his guilt when
he cannot stand in the Lords sight (vv. 17, 22), yet he too falsely maintains his inno-
cence (via the catchword link of ). Tus, his statement is promptly over-
turned by Jesus reply that he fails one thing, which points back to Jesus one addition
to the Decalogue () and forms a phonological relationship with it.
In the fnal section below, I will demonstrate that Mark continues the adap-
tation of the Lords behavior (i.e., covenantal love) from Malachi when Jesus sets
the terms for repentance and promises a heavenly reward for obedience (forging
two more catchword links to Mal 3:10). Te conficting responses to the Lords
gracious ofer there not only shape Marks characterization of the rich man, but
now Marks adaptation extends also to Jesus faithful followers.
Jesus Commandments and the Rich Mans Response
(vv. 21b22)
In contrast to Jesus initial reply (vv. 1819), he now speaks directly to the
opening question, laying down four commands (all imperatives): Go [], sell
[] all that you have and give [] to the poor and you will have treasure
73
See Tiemeyer, Malachis Interlocutors, 188: the counterquestions testify to the peoples
surprise in the face of the accusations and their ignorance of any wrongdoings. See also
Achtemeier, Malachi, 18687.
in heaven, and come follow me! [] (v. 21). Jesus calls for a radical
re orientation of [his] life.
74
Te commands intensity notwithstanding, however,
the addition of in v. 19 would have helped prepare the rich man
to receive it.
Jesus commands likely envision something other than a good deed for the
poor and/or the renunciation of wealth. Later in Mark 14:17, it is notable that
helping the poor is not a priority for Jesus when he welcomes a lavish gif. Amid
criticism, he still allows a woman to anoint his feet with an expensive fragrance
rather than sell it and give the proft to the poor (v. 5). He answers her critics,
Te poor you will always have with you (14:7). Jesus, further, does not require
other followers to give to the poor as a prerequisite for discipleship (cf. 1:1620;
2:1417);

yet it is reasonable to assume that he would not allow disciples to crave
riches to the extent of making others poor by defrauding or depriving them of
what is rightfully theirs.
Ceasing to defraud/deprive the poor and ofering restitution are the necessary
prerequisites for the rich man to join the company of Jesus.

Te command does
not refect disdain for wealth; rather, it is an opportunity for the rich man to
correct his one failure ( ) so that he can be eternally wealthy.
75
Indeed,
it is equally an opportunity to demonstrate faith in Jesus promise (cf. 1:15), that
by divesting all of his wealth he will have treasure in heaven (v. 21). But the rich
man does neither; instead, he leaves dejected (v. 22), devoid of all the zeal that
characterized his arrival (v. 17). Despite the rich mans profession of faith (v. 20),
his actions speak louder than words to reveal the callousness of his heart. Just like
the guilty Judeans, he cannot stand before the Lord.
Te reference to defrauding () in Mal 3:5 helps set the stage for the
accusation that the Judeans have not kept Gods laws (v. 7). When the defrauding/
depriving motif recurs thrice in v. 8, it reinforces the Judeans need for repentance.
Te emphasis in Malachi 3 ultimately falls on turning or repentance as a means
of restoring relationship with God and Gods people (twice in v. 7; cf. v. 23), and
this frst requires a radical behavioral change. Judah must stop denying God the
resources that are rightly Gods according to the covenant (v. 8) and, as restitution,
bring the whole tithe into the treasury/storehouse (, v. 10a). Te call to
repent further includes the Lords promise to honor such obedience: See if I will not
open to you the foodgates of heaven [] and pour out my blessing on you until
you are satisfed (v. 10b).
74
Collins, Mark, 480.
75
Contra James G. Crossley (Te Damned Rich, ExpTim 106 [2005]: 398), Mark gives no
indication that Jesus despises wealth. Crossley appeals to 1QS 11:12 and CD 4:1519, but these
texts only condemn zeal for wealth and being entrapped by the desire for wealth respectively
(i.e., they promote self-mastery; cf. CD 6:1216]). In Rich Mans Salvation (ca. 200 c.e.), Clement
of Alexandria notably quotes Mark 10:1731 to extol wealthy persons who divest themselves of
sinful emotions rather than riches.
Jesus requirements for discipleship in Mark 10:21 closely resemble Malachis
terms of repentance. Just as the Judeans can turn to God by giving the whole [/
] tithe, Jesus instructs the rich man to give up all [] that he has in order to
join his company (v. 21). In return for such obedience, furthermore, Jesus promises
a treasure box in heaven ( ). Heaven and treasure constitute
vivid catchword links between Mark and Malachi.
Te response to the gracious ofer of divine communion is also similar in both
books. Some Judeans in Malachis day conclude that they are better of to reject
Gods ofer (vv. 1315). Tough they have not kept the Lords decrees (v. 7), they
still persist in ignorance, What did we proft by guarding his precepts and going
about as suppliants [] before the Lord Almighty? (v. 14b; cf. vv. 78). Where
the LXX has suppliants the MT uses the term darkened ( , darkened/
gloomy).
76
Mark, analogously, depicts his dejected rich man as darkened/gloomy
(, 10:22).
77
Te verb is rare in the NT and a hapax legomenon in
Mark. Te proposed intertextuality illuminates Marks colorful description of the
rich man, who also does not consider worthwhile the terms of the Lords service. Like
many unfaithful Judeans, he stubbornly resists repentance and therefore cannot stand
before the Lord (cf. Mal 3:2, 1824).
Mark further echoes Malachis joint emphasis on present and eschatological
blessings/reversal. In Malachi, those who repent by tithing faithfully (3:710),
fearing the Lord (, v. 16), and serving God (v. 18) will prosper both
in this life and in the eschaton. Te Lord will make their stunted felds thrive (vv.
1011, e.g., with rain) and they, not evildoers, will be saved on the Day of the Lord
(vv. 1624).
78
Conversely, the crooks who defraud the poor (3:5) and refuse to
repent will eventually be trampled down by the righteous when the Lord comes
(cf. vv. 1821). Mark, likewise, juxtaposes Jesus faithful followers who fear him
(10:32 []; cf. 10:24, 26; 16:8) with one who refuses repentance in return for
economic security.
79
It is also notable that both groups of fearful followers, unlike
their unfaithful counterparts, can withstand the sight of the Lord (cf. Mal 3:2,
16 []; Mark 10:27 []), and though they talk specifcally among
themselves, the Lord nevertheless appears to perceive their thoughts (cf. Mark
10:2627; Mal 3:16). Furthermore, Jesus message of hope, which consoles them,
parallels Malachi closely by promising immediate and eschatological blessings (cf.
Mal 3:1721; Mark 10:2930). Tey will receive many times what they have sacrifced
76
See BDB, 871; cf. Stuart, Malachi, 1378: in darkened mourning clothes; lit. darkened.
77
See BDAG, 949, s.v. .
78
Tough some argue that the agricultural imagery in Mal 3:1011 is strictly eschatological
(e.g., Verhoef, Malachi, 309) or not at all (e.g., Smith, Malachi, 334), Stuart observes that both
material and eternal blessings accompany covenantal faithfulness here (Malachi, 136971; cf.
Achtemeier, Malachi, 189, 195).
79
Jesus later exhorts them to be servants (Mark 10:4345; cf. Mal 3:18).
for the Lord in this life and salvation in the kingdom of God, that is, a new position of
superiority: [T]he last will be frst (Mark 10: 2931).
Te Markan Jesus command against defrauding signals the rich mans ill-
gotten gain, that is, his many possessions ( , v. 22). Te noun
is a hapax legomenon in Mark designating possessions of any kind, or specifcally
a plot of land.
80
Marcus appropriately suggests that landed property fts better
with the basic meaning of from v. 19 (i.e., to take away illegitimately)
to depict the rich man as a landowner who exploits his laborers (cf. Jas 5:4).
81
Te
proposed intertextuality notwithstanding, this conceivably explains why Jesus
commands him to give all of his wealth to the poor as a prerequisite for following
him (Mark 10:21).
82

By not giving up as much as he has [ ] in order to follow Jesus
(v. 21), the rich landowner will not only continue to deprive poorer people of their
wages, but he also deprives the Lord of the highest possible devotion and the service
that rightfully belong to God (cf. Mark 12:17). Jesus, for instance, accepts that some
disciples will have to leave everything [] to follow [him] (v. 28), including
felds (, Mark 10:29, 30). Tough it appears that Jesus has similar expectations
for the rich man, he refuses because [] he had much land (v. 22). Tus, as Adela
Yarbro Collins concludes, unlike Peter and the others he is a negative example for
Marks audience.
83
Inasmuch as the rich mans economic practices adversely afect
God and the poor, Marks use of conceivably functions as a double
allusion to Mal 3:5, 8, in which some who withhold the laborers wages (v. 5) also
continue to deprive God of tithes by not repenting (vv. 810).
Summary. Te imperatives to give up wealth in Mark 10:21 and Mal 3:10 under-
score the importance of serving the Lord wholeheartedly. In both cases fnancial giv-
ing is tantamount to a form of repentance that will bring divine communion and
heavenly blessing (cf. Mal 3:7, 10; Mark 1:15; 10:21b). Jesus does not ordinarily seem
concerned with redistributing wealth to the poor, and this stipulation does not apply
to others who follow him, even tax collectors (2:14). Compared to the calling of the
frst disciples (1:1620), whom Jesus indirectly commands to abandon their fshing
businesses, his requirements for the rich man seem more demanding. Te proposed
intertextuality suggests that the rich man has defrauded the poor, yet the primary
emphasis in both contexts concerns depriving God of proper devotion. Tus, Mala-
chi 3 illuminates Mark 10:21 as an opportunity to make economic restitution and
return to God, which subsequently goes unheeded. Te emotive parallels are impres-
sive, encompassing the gloominess of those who reject the terms of the repentance
and, conversely, the fear of faithful servants.
80
EDNT, 2:324.
81
Marcus, Mark 816, 72123.
82
See J. A. Draper, Go, Sell All Tat You Have . . . (Mark 10:1730), JTSA 79 (1992): 66.
83
Te implicit comparison between the rich man and the other disciples becomes
explicit in v. 28 (Collins, Mark, 481).
III. Conclusion
Jesus use of (10:19) sets up an opportunity for repentance,
which is the prerequisite for Markan discipleship. I argued that Malachi 3 has
a programmatic role in Mark prior to 10:19, and that alludes
specifcally to Mal 3:5 (and possibly 3:8 as a double allusion). It further signals
a broader intertextual relationship wherein Malachi 3 shapes Marks entire story
of the rich man. Tere are a host of catchwords, common themes, and behavioral
parallels that connect Jesus and the Lord, and the interlocutors in both passages:
for example, inability to stand before the Lord who approaches the temple, people
who claim to guard the commandments, the Lords covenantal love, the ofer
of divine communion/turning to God, a heavenly treasure for obedience, fear
of faithful followers, and the gloominess of lawbreakers.
Defrauding or depriving others of their legitimate benefts appears to represent
the climax of the Lords indictment against the Judeans in Malachi 3 (vv. 511).
Te proposed intertextuality, therefore, illuminates portions of Mark 10:1722
that on their own strength can imply that the rich man is guilty of depriving and
defrauding God and the poor: for example, Jesus abrupt reply in v. 18 and the
potential connotations of as a spiritual defciency (in Jesus second reply).
Jesus insight about the rich man lacking one thing (v. 21) points backwards
to and reveals exactly how he fails to keep the commandments. Like
Malachis compatriots, the rich man is probably not forthright when he claims
perfect obedience (v. 20). Jesus discerns his guilt with prophetic insight, evinced
by his stare (v. 21), and demonstrates love by ofering a means to make amends for
his one failure in the law, but still the rich man cannot stand in the Lords sight,
which again clearly implies guilt vis--vis Malachi 3.
As a refection of Gods covenantal love in Malachi, however, Jesus ofers the
rich man an opportunity to repent by paying back those whom he defrauds (v. 21).
Verse 21 is ultimately a more direct answer to the rich mans question about eternal
life (v. 17) than Jesus summary of the Decalogue in v. 19. For Mark and Malachi a
right relationship with the Lord is second to none (cf. Mal 3:7; Mark 3:34-35), and
this comes only by repentance.
Available wherever books are sold or
800-328-4648
fortresspress.com
Caiaphas The High Priest
ADELE REINHARTZ
D. MOODY SMITH, Editor
Studies on Personalities of the New Testament Series
Who was Caiaphas really? Reinhartz offers a
thorough reconsideration of Caiaphas in the Gospels
and other ancient texts as well as in subsequent
visual arts, literature, lm, and drama.
978-0-8006-9940-6 264 pp Paperback $39.00
Soundings in Cultural Criticism
Perspectives and Methods in Culture,
Power, and Identity in the New Testament
GREG CAREY, FRANCISCO LOZADA JR., Editors
Succinct essays by some of the foremost scholars
in New Testament studies. Questions of historical
reconstruction, textual interpretation, and present
cultural deployment are addressed in an ideal
second textbook for New Testament courses.
978-0-8006-9800-3 240 pp Paperback $49.00
History of
New Testament Research
Volume Three, From C. H. Dodd
to Hans Dieter Betz
WILLIAM BAIRD
Baird continues his insightful, balanced, and
accessible survey of the major developments in
New Testament scholarship. This volume charts
the dramatic discoveries and breakthroughs in
method and approach that characterized the
mid- and late twentieth century.
978-0-8006-9918-5 688 pp Hardcover $70.00
New Testament Studies
Available wherever books are sold or
800-328-4648
fortresspress.com
Matthew
NICOLE WILKINSON DURAN,
JAMES P. GRIMSHAW, Editors
Sheds new light from new perspectives on
themes in the Gospel and challenges us to
consider how we deal with cultural differences
between ourselves and these ancient writings.
978-0-8006-9934-5 336 pp Hardcover $49.00
1 and 2 Corinthians
YUNG SUK KIM, Editor
Sheds new light on themes and dynamics in
Pauls most intriguing letters to a complex church.
These essays de-center the often homogeneous
rst-world orientation of much biblical scholarship
and open up new possibilities for discovery.
978-0-8006-9935-2 232 pp Hardcover $49.00
Leviticus and Numbers
ATHALYA BRENNER, ARCHIE CHI CHUNG LEE, Editors
Focuses attention on practices and ideals of
behavior in community from a variety of global
perspectives and postcolonial and feminist
methods.
978-0-8006-9936-9 272 pp Hardcover $49.00
Joshua and Judges
ATHALYA BRENNER, GALE A. YEE, Editors
How do these books represent conquest, war,
trauma, violence against women and their
marginalization? How does God appear to
relate to these realities? And what do we do with
biblical ambivalence?
978-0-8006-9937-6 328 pp Hardcover $49.00
NEW in
texts@contexts series
WWW. HE NDR I CK S ON. COM
GLOBAL VOICES
Reading the Bible in the Majority World
CRAIG KEENER & M. DANIEL CARROLL R., EDITORS
Part of the signicance of listening to global readings of Scripture is to
learn from the perspective of other people in other cultures and spaces.
Sometimes we need to hear their voices and see the things they notice that we
do not. Sometimes we need to understand their processes of interpretation.
Sometimes, though, we need to be corrected by them in ways big and small.
Nijay Gupta, Assistant Professor of NT, Eastern University
This volume contains a rich selection of interpretations from rst-rate biblical
scholars from a variety of backgrounds from around the world. We offer these
essays as a taste of the fruitful work and constructive conversations that can
be generated when the Bible is read with different lenses but with a common
commitment to Scriptures unique role in communicating Gods message.
From the Introduction
144 pages - 5 x 8 inches - Paper - 978-1-61970-009-3 - RetaiI $17.95
Frances Back
Gott als Vater der Jnger im
Johannesevangelium
2012. X, 239 pages (WUNT II/336).
ISBN 978-3-16-152262-8 sewn paper
eBook
Niclas Frster
Jesus und die Steuerfrage
Die Zinsgroschenperikope auf
dem religisen und politischen
Hintergrund ihrer Zeit mit einer
Edition von Pseudo-Hierony-
mus, De haeresibus Judaeorum
2012. XI, 418 pages (WUNT 294).
ISBN 978-3-16-151841-6 cloth
eBook
Marianus Pale Hera
Christology and Discipleship
in John 17
2013. XIV, 206 pages (WUNT II/342).
ISBN 978-3-16-152219-2 sewn paper
eBook
Iuppiter Dolichenus
Vom Lokalkult zur
Reichsreligion
Hrsg. v. Michael Blmer u.
Engelbert Winter
2012. VII, 306 pages (ORA 8).
ISBN 978-3-16-151797-6 cloth
Menschenbilder und
Krperkonzepte im Alten
Israel, in gypten und im
Alten Orient
Hrsg. v. Angelika Berlejung,
Jan Dietrich u. Joachim F. Quack
2012. XI, 695 pages (ORA 9).
ISBN 978-3-16-151828-7 cloth
Mohr Siebeck
Tbingen
info@mohr.de
www.mohr.de
N
e
w

f
r
o
m

M
o
h
r

S
i
e
b
e
c
k
Information on
Mohr Siebeck eBooks:
www.mohr.de/ebooks
Papyrologie und Exegese
Die Auslegung des Neuen
Testaments im Licht der Papyri
Hrsg. v. Jens Herzer
2012. XXIII, 237 pages
(WUNT II/341).
ISBN 978-3-16-151991-8 sewn paper
eBook
Claire S. Smith
Pauline Communities as
Scholastic Communities
A Study of the Vocabulary of
Teaching in 1 Corinthians,
1 and 2 Timothy and Titus
2012. XIV, 555 pages (WUNT II/335).
ISBN 978-3-16-151963-5 sewn paper
eBook
Theokratie und
theokratischer Diskurs
Die Rede von der Gottesherr-
schaft und ihre politisch-sozialen
Auswirkungen im interkulturel-
len Vergleich
Hrsg. v. Andreas Pear u.
Kai Trampedach
2013. 540 pages (est.).
ISBN 978-3-16-151987-1 cloth
115.00 (est.) (February)
Thomas Witulski
Apk 11 und der
Bar Kokhba-Aufstand
Eine zeitgeschichtliche
Interpretation
2012. XII, 355 pages (WUNT II/337).
ISBN 978-3-16-152182-9 sewn paper
eBook
Evangelically Rooted. Critically Engaged.
NEW FROM I VP ACADEMIC
Follow us on Twitter Join us on Facebook r
800.843.9487 ivpacademic.com
COMMENTARY ON JOHN
Volume 1
Cyril of Alexandria
Trans. David R. Maxwell; Ed. Joel C. Elowsky
New in the Ancient Christian Texts series!
David Maxwell renders a service to
students of patristics and New Testament
studies alike with this rst complete
English translation of Cyril of Alexandrias
Commentary on John since the nineteenth
century. The volume unveils one of the
brightest lights in the Alexandrian tradition.
xxxii + 375 pages, hardcover, 978-0-8308-2911-8, $60.00
PAULS MISSIONARY METHODS
In His Time and Ours
Edited by Robert L. Plummer
and John Mark Terry
Robert L. Plummer and John Mark Terry
edit this collection of entry points into the
missionary methods of the apostle Paul.
Conducting a major reappraisal of Roland
Allens Missionary Methods: St. Pauls or
Ours? Michael Bird, Eckhard Schnabel and
others reconsider the relevance of Pauls
missionary activities for the church today.
253 pages, paperback, 978-0-8308-5707-4, $22.00
PREACHING THE NEW TESTAMENT
Edited by Ian Paul and
David Wenham
You will nd in this collection of essays a
treasure trove of convictions and insights
about preaching the New Testament that
can nourish, challenge and enrich any
pastors sermons. I read it eagerly and
thankfully, in agreement and disagreement,
but with gratitude throughout.
Mark Labberton,
Fuller Theological Seminary
263 pages, paperback, 978-0-8308-3990-2, $26.00
Evangelically Rooted. Critically Engaged.
JESUS IS THE CHRIST
The Messianic Testimony
of the Gospels
Michael F. Bird
Entering the fray of a
hotly debated issue,
Michael Bird argues
that the title and role
of Messiah ascribed
to Jesus is not a late
addition to the four
Gospels but their
structural and semantic
foundation. Stressing
that Christianity is itself
a messianic movement,
Bird argues that the
messianic testimony
is the mother of all
Christology.
Bird counters the
trend in modern
Gospels scholarship to
relegate Jesus messianic identity
to later layers of tradition. . . .
Solid evidence for an early and
pervasive understanding of Jesus
as Messiah.
Jeannine Brown, professor of
New Testament, Bethel Seminary
WOULD JESUS DENY CHRIST?
xii + 207 PAGES, PAPERBACK,
978-0-8308-2823-4, $18.00
Follow us on Twitter Join us on Facebook r
800.843.9487 ivpacademic.com
New and Recent Titles
Seciety el i||ica| literature l.0. ex !!+| vi||isten, \J c+)-!!+|
lhene. S-!-|||+ (te||-lree) er Sc!-Se+-eJS lax. Sc!-Se+-e!e
0rer en|ine at www.s||-site.erg
PAUL AND SCRIPTURE
Extending the Conversation
Christopher D. Stanley, editor
Jhese essays exj|ere uestiens, such as the histerica|
|ackgreuns el lau|'s interjretire jractices, lau|'s laithlu|-
ness te the centext el his |i||ica| relerences, the jresence el
Scrijture in |etters ether than the Hauptbriefe, an the re|e
el Scrijture in lau|'s thee|egy, threugh new |enses te arance
the e|ate in new irectiens.
Paper $44.95 978-1-58983-694-5 368 pages, 2012 Code: 064509P
Early Christianity and Its Literature 9
GREGORY OF NYSSA: HOMILIES ON THE SONG OF
SONGS
Translated with an Introduction and Notes by
Richard A. Norris Jr.
Jhe Seng el Sengs' inisjuta||e imjertance in the histery
el |i||ica| recejtien is ence again cenhrme |y 8ichar \er-
ris's sujer| intreuctien an trans|atien el 6regery el \yssa's
Homilies on the Song of Songs.-0ari v. K|ing, auther el
The Bible in History: How the Texts Have Shaped the Times
Paper $59.95 978-1-58983-105-6 572 pages, 2012 Code: 061613
Writings from the Greco-Roman World 13
IDEOLOGY, CULTURE, AND TRANSLATION
Scott S. Elliott and Roland Boer, editors
Jrans|atien is a lunamenta| asject el |i||ica| sche|ar-
shij an an erer-jresent rea|ity in a g|e|a| centext. Jhese
essays, |y means el critica| engagement with the trans|atien,
trans|atien jractices, an trans|atien histery el texts re|erant
te the stuy el i||e an ancient an meern thristianity,
exj|ere theeretica| imensiens an centemjerary imj|ica-
tiens el trans|atiens an trans|atien jractice.
Semeia Studies 69
New and Recent Titles
Seciety el i||ica| literature l.0. ex !!+| vi||isten, \J c+)-!!+|
lhene. S-!-|||+ (te||-lree) er Sc!-Se+-eJS lax. Sc!-Se+-e!e
0rer en|ine at www.s||-site.erg
ARMENIAN APOCRYPHA RELATING TO ABRAHAM
Michael E. Stone
Jhis re|ume intreuces steries a|eut \|raham as jre-
serre in hlteen unju||ishe, |ate meiera| manuscrijts in
\rmenian, ju||ishe here in lng|ish ler the hrst time with
cemmentaries, annetatiens, an critica| ajjaratus. lm|e-
ing [ewish, thristian, Is|amic, an ether ancient traitiens,
these texts emenstrate mutua| |errewing an inhuence erer
centuries.
Paper $38.95 978-1-58983-715-7 290 pages, 2012 Code: 063537
Early Judaism and Its Literature 37
NEW INSCRIPTIONS AND SEALS RELATING TO THE
BIBLICAL WORLD
Meir Lubetski and Edith Lubetski, editors
Jhis ce||ectien leatures ana|yses el seme el the archaee|eg-
ica| treasures lrem 0r. Sh|eme Meussaiell's ce||ectien. Jhese
centri|utiens signa| lresh ajjreaches te the stuy el ancient
artilacts an unerscere the re|e el archaee|egica| erience
in recenstructing the |egacy el antiuity, esjecia||y that el the
|i||ica| jerie.
Archaeology and Biblical Studies 19
PROCLUS THE SUCCESSOR ON POETICS AND THE
HOMERIC POEMS
Essays 5 and 6 of His Commentary on Platos Republic
Translated with an Introduction and Notes by
Robert Lamberton
Jhis hrst meern trans|atien inte lng|ish, with 6reek
text lacing an |imite cemmentary, makes it jessi||e te
ajjreciate the imjertance el lrec|us in the histery el |eth
hermeneutics an semietics.
Writings from the Greco-Roman World 34
Don't Miss It
The SBL International Meeting is held an-
nually outside North America. It provides a
unique Iorum Ior international scholars who
are unable to attend the North American
meeting. Each meeting showcases the latest
in biblical research, Iosters collegial contacts,
advances research, and Iocuses on issues oI
the proIession.
Program Highlights
Authority and Infuence in Biblical Texts
Book Production in Israel and Its Context
Canones: Scipture between Jews and
Christians
Christology, Creation, and Eschatology:
Papers in Honor oI Richard J. Bauckham
Elephantine Studies
Ezekiel in International Perspective: The
Current State oI Research
Database Ior the Analysis oI Anonymous
and Pseudepigraphic Jewish Texts oI
Antiquity
Ritual Innovation: Phenomena oI Ritual
as Found in the Hebrew Bible and Second
Temple Texts
Scottish Translations oI the Bible
The More Old Testament Pseudepigra-
pha Project
2013 International Meeting
St. Andrews, Scotland 1uly 7-11
Register Aow at sbl-site.org and Save!
JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE
PUBLISHED QUARTERLY BY THE
SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE
(Constituent Member of the American Council of Learned Societies)
EDITORS OF THE JOURNAL
General Editor: ADELE REINHARTZ, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada
Assistant Editor: TIMOTHY PETTIPIECE, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada
Managing Editor: BILLIE JEAN COLLINS, Society of Biblical Literature, Atlanta, GA 30329
EDITORIAL BOARD
Term Expiring
PAUL JOYCE, Kings College London, Strand, London WC2R 2LS, United Kingdom
JENNIFER KNUST, Boston University, Boston, MA 02215
President of the Society: Carol L. Meyers, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708; Vice President: Fernando F.
Segovia, The Divinity School, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37240; Chair, Research and Publications Committee:
John T. Fitzgerald, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556; Executive Director: John F. Kutsko, Society of
Biblical Literature, 825 Houston Mill Road, Suite 350, Atlanta, GA 30329.
The Journal of Biblical Literature (ISSN 00219231) is published quarterly by the Society of Biblical Literature, 825
Houston Mill Road, Suite 350, Atlanta, GA 30329. The annual subscription price is US$45.00 for members and
US$190.00 for nonmembers. Institutional rates are also available. For information regarding subscriptions and mem-
bership, contact: Society of Biblical Literature, 825 Houston Mill Road, Suite 350, Atlanta, GA 30329. Phone: 866-727-
9955 (toll free) or 404-727-9498. E-mail: sblservices@sbl-site.org. For information concerning permission to quote, edi-
torial and business matters, please see the first issue of the year, p. 2. Periodical postage paid at Atlanta, Georgia, and at
additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Society of Biblical Literature, 825 Houston Mill
Road, Suite 350, Atlanta, GA 30329. Copyright 2013 by the Society of Biblical Litera ture.
The Hebrew and Greek fonts used in JBL are SBL Hebrew and SBL Greek; they are available from www.sbl-
site.org/Resources/default.aspx.
New from
Baker Academic
L
978-0-8010-3916-4 192 pp.
$21.99p
Brilliantly conceived and ac-
cessibly written. Carters seven
events serve as doors through
which to enter into and explore
the cultural complexities of the
early church.
David deSilva
978-0-8010-4875-3 624 pp.
$45.00p
NOW IN PAPERBACK
Displaying jaw-dropping
acquaintance with primary evi-
dence and the oceanic body of
scholarship on Jesus, a sweet
reasonableness toward the
complexities involved, and just
plain good judgment time after
time on controverted issues,
Constructing Jesus is essential
reading for anyone concerned
with the scholarly approach to
the Jesus of history.
Larry W. Hurtado
978-0-8010-4910-1 304 pp.
$40.00p
This book is to be highly
recommended, both for the
insights it offers into Pauls
scriptural exegesis and as
a model for other studies,
demonstrating what can be
achieved by focusing on a later
authors interpretation of a
biblical book as a whole.
Susan E. Docherty, JSNT
incov revedit_incov.qxd 2/26/2013 2:52 PM Page 1
J OU R N A L OF
BIBLICAL
LITERATURE
2013
1
3
2

1

2
0
1
3
VOLUME 132, NO. 1
US ISSN 0021-9231
A Vision of Divine Justice: The Resurrection of Jesus
John Dominic Crossan 532
Four Inner-Biblical Interpretations of Genesis 49:10:
On the Lexical and Syntactic Ambiguities of as
Reflected in the Prophecies of Nathan, Ahijah, Ezekiel,
and Zechariah
Richard C. Steiner 3360
The in Ezekiel 13 Reconsidered
Jonathan Stkl 6176
The Problem of Time in Joel
Ronald L. Troxel 7795
Already/Not Yet: Eschatological Tension in the Book
of Tobit
Jill Hicks-Keeton 97117
Can Ahiqar Tell Us Anything about Personified Wisdom?
Seth A. Bledsoe 119137
Ben Sira, the Genesis Creation Accounts, and the
Knowledge of Gods Will
Shane Berg 139157
P.Duk. inv. 727r: New Evidence for the Meaning and
Provenance of the Word
David M. Moffitt and C. Jacob Butera 159178
Markan Discipleship according to Malachi: The
Significance of in the Story of the
Rich Man (Mark 10:1722)
Richard Hicks 179199
J
O
U
R
N
A
L

O
F

B
I
B
L
I
C
A
L

L
I
T
E
R
A
T
U
R
E
Visit us at AbingdonAcademic.com
to learn more and request an
exam copy today
AbingdonPress.com | 800.251.3320
Te Dead Sea Scrolls
9781426771071, $17.99
Te Apocrypha
9781426742354, $15.99
How Israel
Became a People
9781426754876, $37.99
Te Ancient Near East
9781426765506, $15.99
To All Nations
from All Nations
9781426771378, $49.99
Tank God
Its Tursday
9781426771392, $15.00
JBLcover1321_JBLcover2007.qxd 2/26/2013 6:34 PM Page 1

JBL1321

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

JBL1321

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

J OU R N A L OF

, EI 26 [1999]: 8893) criticized their use for determining whether is active or

, wisdom was created before all things;

Potrebbero piacerti anche