Δikaioi as a Quasi-Technical Term

David Hill

doi:10.1017/S002868850001780X

Δikaioi as a Quasi-Technical Term

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 February 2009

David Hill

Show author details

David Hill: Affiliation:
Sheffield, England

Article contents

Abstract
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Type: Short Studies
Information: New Testament Studies , Volume 11 , Issue 3 , April 1965 , pp. 296 - 302

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S002868850001780X [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1965

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

^{page 297 note 1} Cf. Kilpatrick, G. D., The Origins of the Gospel according to St Matthew (Oxford University Press, 1946), pp. 110 ff., 126Google Scholar; also Strecker, G., Der Weg der Gerechtigkeit (Göttingen, 1962), pp. 37–8. Matt. xiii. 52 confirms the view that the Christian ‘scribe’ had a teaching function. Acts xiii. 1 and Didaché xv. i f. link ‘teachers’ (δıδασκαλοı) with ‘prophets’.Google Scholar

^{page 297 note 2} B.J.R.L. XXXIX (1956–1957), 463–84.Google Scholar

^{page 297 note 3} Ibid. p. 469.

^{page 297 note 4} The term may have an even more direct reference to ‘teachers’. Lagrange, M.J., Évang. selon: St. Mt. (Paris, 1941), p. 449Google Scholar, observes that the only tomb which was an object of popular veneration was that of Simeon the Just, and it is he who is first named of the great teachers of the Law in Pirke Aboth 1, 2.

^{page 298 note 1} Cf. Manson, T. W., Sayings of Jesus (S.C.M., 1949), p. 80.Google Scholar

^{page 298 note 2} E.g. McNeile, A. H., Commentary on St Matthew (Macmillan, 1915), p. 149Google Scholar; Micklem, P. A., St Matthew, Westminster Commentary (Methuen, London), p. 108.Google Scholar

^{page 298 note 3} Manson, , op. cit. p. 183Google Scholar; cf. Allen, W. C., St Matthew, ICC (3rd ed. 1912), p. 112.Google Scholar

^{page 299 note 1} Thus προφήτου and δıκαιου are interpreted as genitives originis, rather than as objective genitives. The latter construction is more usual, but the genitive of origin is found with μıσθος in LXX Isa. xl. 10; lxii. 11 and Rev. xxii. 12.

^{page 299 note 2} The verb δήχεσθαı in the Greek Bible and in the N.T. can mean ‘to receive a person’ and ‘to receive a message, teaching, instruction’. Cf. Lagrange, , op. cit. p. 215.Google Scholar

^{page 299 note 3} The parable and its interpretation, as a whole, owe their inspiration to Zeph. i. 3 (cf. McNeile, , op. cit. p. 201Google Scholar; Schmauch, E. Lohmeyer-W., Das Evangelium des Matthäus, Göttingen, 1958, p. 224Google Scholar; and Filson, F. V., Commentary on the Gospel according to St Matthew (A. and C. Black, London, 1960), p. 163).Google Scholar, πάντα τά σκάνδαλα και ποıουντος τήν άνομιαν in Matthew may be equivalent to a Hebrew phrase so difficult that emendation is frequently suggested (the original text of the Washington papyrus of LXX reads at this point σκάνδαλα συν τοίς άσεβέσıν). οι συνıήντες in Dan. xii. 3 represents Is there an underlying word-play in the original tradition between (Aramaic ) = δικαıοı and (Aramaic ) = σκάνδαλα?

^{page 299 note 4} The word δίκαıος appears in Theod.'s rendering of . This phrase is probably based on Isa. liii. 11 where it is prophesied that the Suffering Servant will make the many righteous. The burden of suffering belongs also to the in Dan. xii: see xi. 33, 35.

^{page 299 note 5} B.D.B. , sub. 4 records that Ewald, Hitzig and A. A., Bevan interpret in Dan. xi and xii as ‘the teachers’.

^{page 299 note 6} Cf. the use of σοϕος in Matt. xxiii. 34, which we have interpreted above as implying a teaching function.

^{page 299 note 7} Montgomery, , Daniel, ICC (Edinburgh, 1927), p. 471 (italics mine).Google Scholar

^{page 299 note 8} Interpreter's Bible, vi, 532Google Scholar, on Dan. xi. 33 (italics mine).

^{page 300 note 1} The likelihood that the Similitudes section is post-Christian is increased by the fact that only of this part of Enoch have no fragments appeared at Qumran.

^{page 300 note 2} Leszynsky, , Die Sadduzäer (1912), pp. 253 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 300 note 3} For the discussion of the Jubilees (Enoch) calendar and its possible relation to the documents of the Qumran sect, see Jaubert, A., ‘Le Calendrier des Jubilés et de la Secte de Qumrân: ses origines bibliques’, V.T. iii (1953), 250–64,Google Scholar and ‘Le Calendrier des Jubilés et les fours liturgiques de la semaine’, V.T. VII (1957), 35–61Google Scholar; Morgenstern, J., ‘The Calendar of the Book of Jubilees: its origin and its character’, V.T. v (1955), 34–76Google Scholar; Obermann, J., ‘Calendaric Elements in the Dead Sea Scrolls’, J.B.L. Lxxv (1956), 285–97Google Scholar. The last-mentioned study warns against a too ready identification of the Jubilees and Qumran calendars.

^{page 300 note 4} In his Sayings of Jesus, p. 295Google Scholar, T. W., Manson suggested that the group referred to as υμείς έστε οίδıκαıουντες έαυτους ένωπıον άνθ. at Luke xvi. 14 f. is wrongly identified by Luke as Pharisees: they are more probably Sadducees, the people who call themselves . More recently Black, M. has put forward the view that the presence of δıκαıωσαı έαυτον at Luke x. 29Google Scholar (the lawyer who wishes ‘to justify himself’) may illuminate the historical situation assumed in the parable of the Good Samaritan, viz. the feud between Sadducean Jew and Samaritan (see ‘The Parables as Allegory’, B.J.R.L. XLII (1959–1960), 273–87, esp. p. 287 and note I).Google Scholar

^{page 301 note 1} In his discussion of the name Sadducee, Manson, T. W.claimed that the explanation from and connexion with the root was made by the Sadducees themselves (see ‘Sadducee and Pharisee-The Origin and Significance of the Names’, B.J.R.L. xxii, 1938, p. 153)Google Scholar. This popular word-play probably underlies Ass. Mos. vii. 3-et regnabunt de his homines pestilentiosi et impii, dicentes se esse iustos: these were most probably Sadducees (Charles, R. H., Apoc. and Pseudepig. II, 419)Google Scholar; it was also well known to the Fathers.

^{page 301 note 2} This designation is found at Enoch xci. 3 and xciii. 2 and at Jub. x. 6 (MS. A) and it provides us with one of the most important links between 1 QS and the Pseudepigraphal literature. The pious circles (Hasidic) behind Enoch called themselves by this name, as did the circles behind the Manual of Discipline.

^{page 301 note 3} See Wernberg-Møller, P., in the Zadokite Fragments, the Manual of Discipline and the Habakkuk Commentary', V.T. III (1953), 310–15, andGoogle ScholarThe Manual of Discipline, Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 1 (Leiden, 1957), 90 ffGoogle Scholar. Burrows' transcription was altered by Brownlee (following Ginsberg, H. L., B.A.S.O.R. Supp. Studies 10–12, p. 37)Google Scholar to , since an expression descriptive of the community as a whole suits the context best. But an emendation is hardly necessary when the transcription is corrected to (= ). In the LXX (e.g. Ps. lxxii. 7; Prov. xi. 30, xx. 7) has been understood by the translators as equivalent to : this is due to a pronunciation of the segolates differing from that of the Massoretes by the retention of the original vowel in the second syllable.

^{page 301 note 4} In his study ‘The Patristic Accounts of Jewish Sectarianism’ ( B.J.R.L. XLI (1958–1959), 285–303Google Scholar, reprinted in The Scrolls and Christian Origins (1961), pp.48 ff)Google ScholarBlack, M. has suggested as ‘a possibility worthy of serious consideration’ (p. 290)Google Scholar that the Sadducees mentioned by Justin in his list of Jewish ‘heretics’ (Dial. c. Tryph. 80) were the Zadokites, the Bene Zadok or Qumran Essenes. The identity of name was likely to produce confusion, and something like Justin's error appears in Rabbinic sources when the Saddoukim are placed among the Minim and equated with the Qaraite Jews.

^{page 302 note 1} See the Manual of Discipline, p. 92Google Scholar. He suggests that the expressions parallel to in 1 QS v. 2, 9 are such as may make the apparent reference to two groups merely rhetorical. He admits, however, that the view which sees a reference to the priesthood alone in in the two passages is more natural. The expression may imply a literal understanding and application of Ezek. xliv. 15 at this point in the Manual, whereas it is used interpretatively in CD with reference to the whole community. Wernberg-Møller is certain that on either view the designation ‘Sons of Zadok’ is not to be taken in any of the passages as the actual name of the society: the self-designation of the community was ‘sons of righteousness’ and this was read out of .