the-bible-and-the-dead-sea-scrolls

GORDON M. ZERBE 349
we note one major area of commonality: both are politically and economically
marginalized from the ruling class and the temple establishment.
In connection with this, we observe a perspective shared by the
Jesus movement and the broader Essene movement in the area of economic
rhetoric against the ruling class and the temple establishment.
Both use Isa 5:1–7 for this purpose (4Q500; Mark 12:1–11). 90 The similar
attack on the misuse of “vows” and “devoted things” is also noteworthy
here (cf. “Corban,” Mark 7:11). Although the Essene movement and
the Jesus movement were alienated from the ruling priestly establishment
for different reasons and historical causes, the combined rhetoric by these
two politically marginalized groups lends considerable support for the
presence of a real situation of structural economic injustice in Judea, a
prime basis for a widespread perception of structural injustice. 91
In this connection, we also note a corresponding self-understanding of
the community as “poor” or at least in solidarity with the “poor,” who are
God’s special clients. 92 Likewise found in both movements is the theme
of “preaching to the poor” based on Isaiah 61 as a sign of the dawning
kingdom and the arrival of the Messiah. 93 Furthermore, in both there is
a common suspicion about the insidious character of “property” and
“wealth,” a shared attitude of renouncing wealth (Nwh, Nwmm; cf. Matt
6:19–24; 13:22). Indeed, the scrolls have significantly illuminated the
very usage of Nwmm (“mammon”) in the first century, whose otherwise
first manifestation outside the Gospels is in the Mishnah. 94 Nevertheless,
whereas in 1QS and CD “wealth” is treated as a major “purity” question
among many others, in the Gospels we find the stress on economic matters
90. See Craig A. Evans, “Opposition to the Temple,” 235–53; idem, “Jesus and the
Dead Sea Scrolls from Qumram Cave 4,” in Eschatology, Messianism, and the Dead Sea Scrolls
(ed. C. A. Evans and P. W. Flint; SDSSRL; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 97–99.
91. For example, Richard A. Horsley, Jesus and the Spiral of Violence: Popular Resistance
in Roman Society (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987), 1–145; Sanders, Judaism,
182–89, tries to exonerate the priests, claiming that the invective represents the rhetoric
of religio-political debates, comes from legal disputes, and is based on isolated,
specific circumstances. While he correctly cautions not to take all the charges at face
value, his discussion focuses on the moral integrity of individual priests and overlooks
the structural dimensions of the conflict, even in matters of Law interpretation.
92. See also James H. Charlesworth, “The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Historical
Jesus,” in Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls (ed. J. H. Charlesworth; New York: Doubleday,
1992), 13–14. The Judean church is designated as “poor” in Rom 15:26; Gal 2:10.
93. On 4Q521, see, e.g., Evans, “Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls from Qumram
Cave 4,” 96–97.
94. See above, n31. On the usage of “mammon of unrighteousness” in Luke
16:9–10 and its possible Essene background, see David Flusser, “The Parable of the
Unjust Steward: Jesus’ Criticism of the Essenes,” in Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls (ed.
J. H. Charlesworth; New York: Doubleday, 1992), 176–97.