The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls: The ... - josephprestonkirk

CHARLESWORTH AND MCSPADDEN 335
Through the retelling of history, the pronouncement of prophecy, and
the yearly liturgical cycle, Psalm Pesher 1 becomes a speech-act that
expresses a particular discourse—a unique “socio-religious vocabulary”
that defines the community as such. 56
As Psalm Pesher 1 moves from text through speaker to hearer, the
Qumranites receive a revelation of identity. That is, from this “vocabulary”
a sociology of identity emerges. And as the community repeats the
text over and over, the vocabulary encounters and conditions each member
into this solidarity as “a brother” (cf. 1QS 6.10, 22). 57 In this final
section, then, we will explore the contours of identity by attending to the
three most prominent elements of the sociological vocabulary found in
Psalm Pesher 1—where, why, and whom.
At the outset, however, we should make some comments on the
proper means to employ sociology in studying ancient texts. 58 First, sociologists
are not trained to work with texts and text experts cannot also
be sociologists. Second, the sociologists who launched the new discipline,
Auguste Comte and Henri Saint-Simon, sought a methodology for studying
social phenomena that would replace the religious (or spiritual)
means that had been regnant for over a millennium. Thus, in the attempt
to be nonsubjective sociologists have often judged religion harshly. 59 Any
sociological method to be employed now, therefore, must be pruned of
such a negative prejudice. Third, we should be self-critical of thinking
analogically and using analogy when there are no clear analogies between
our world and the world of Qumran. 60
56. Shemaryahu Talmon, “Between the Bible and the Mishna,” in The World of Qumran
From Within (Jerusalem: Magnes; Leiden: Brill, 1989), 41; repr., in Jewish Civilization in
the Hellenistic-Roman Period (ed. S. Talmon; JSPSup 10; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991).
57. Wayne A. Meeks rightly points out that at Qumran the concept of “brother” was “restricted
to members of a purist sect” (The First Urban Christians [New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983],
87). Appropriate also in a world in which fratricide continued to shape society (e.g.,
with Hyrcanus II and Aristobulus II) are reflections on such phenomena in the biblical
world from Abel through Josephus’ brothers, Abimelech, and Absalom to the last
of the Hasmoneans (and of course the palace intrigues of Herod the Great). See esp.
Frederick E. Greenspahn, “Every Brother a Supplanter,” in When Brothers Dwell
Together (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994), 111–27.
58. For some important reflections on problems and prospects of using sociology
when studying the past, with comments concerning the work of Weber, Rodd, Elliott,
Gottwald, and Theissen, see Bengt Holmberg, Sociology and the New Testament
(Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 6–12.
59. Bryan R. Wilson rightly asks, “how might sociology maintain a neutral attitude
towards religion when, at the same time, it sought to discredit it?” (idem, Religion in
Sociological Perspective [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982], 5).
60. For judicious reflections on the danger of analogy, see Ian Hodder, The Present
Past: An Introduction to Anthropology for Archaeologists (New York: Pica Press, 1982), 11–27.