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

CHARLESWORTH AND MCSPADDEN 333
The Qumranites, however, were not the first group to draw upon the
liturgical value of the Psalter. As “Sons of Aaron” and “Levites” they inherited
centuries of traditions and customs that surrounded and defined the
Psalter. Before the destruction of the First Temple and the Exile of the
Israelites, the Psalter—or at least some of the early psalms—was already
being used liturgically. One clear example is Psalm 68. 49 On special feast
days and the principal Jewish festivals, the priests and often numerous
Levites would chant the Psalms. 50 This communal activity in the Temple
has numerous purposes; for example, it elevates and commemorates the
leaders of Israel (at one time honoring priest and king), celebrates the people’s
presence in the Land, and fundamentally “centers on God’s rule of
the world, including Israel, the nations, and the whole of creation.” 51 Thus,
the liturgical shaping and use of the Psalter reminded the Israelites of God’s
sovereign and faithfully gracious (dsx) rule over them. In light of this phenomenological
and liturgical importance of the Psalter, it seems obvious
that the Qumranites, as former leaders in the Temple cult, inherited this
usage, perhaps via the Righteous Teacher, who may have earlier served as
High Priest. 52 There is every reason to assume that by choosing to compose
a commentary upon the Psalter in Psalm Pesher 1, the Qumranites took
up, embodied, and carried forward the liturgical value of the Psalter.
By commenting upon Psalm 37, the scribe further enhanced the liturgical
value of Psalm Pesher 1. In the MT, Psalm 37 appears in the Psalter
as an acrostic poem. 53 A close examination of Psalm Pesher 1 shows that
49. See James H. Charlesworth, “Bashan, Symbology, Haplography, and Theology
in Psalm 68, ” in David and Zion: Biblical Studies in Honor of J. J. M. Roberts (ed. B. F.
Batto and K. L. Roberts; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2004), 351–72.
50. Although controversial and dated at points, Sigmund Mowinckel, The Psalms in
Israel’s Worship, 2 vols. (trans. D. R. Ap-Thomas; New York: Abingdon Press, 1962),
deftly explores the public character of the Psalms. The bulk of his work seeks to show
specifically how and where different types of Psalms functioned in Israel’s history.
51. Patrick D. Miller, “The Ruler in Zion and the Hope of the Poor: Psalms 9–10
in the Context of the Psalter,” in David and Zion: Biblical Studies in Honor of J. J. M.
Roberts (ed. B. F. Batto and K. L. Roberts; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2004), 187.
52. See 4QPs a frags. 1–10, 3.15–16 and the discussion in Charlesworth, “The
Righteous Teacher was a Priest,” in The Pesharim and Qumran History: Chaos or Consensus?
(ed. J. H. Charlesworth; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 88–89. Charlesworth is
here influenced by the insights of Hartmut Stegemann and Jerome Murphy-
O’Connor [see the works and pages noted].
53. It should be noted that Hebrew poetry at Qumran looks different from Hebrew
poetry found in the MT and later rabbinic writings. At Qumran, poetic convention
is streamlined, so that features like parallelism and strophic arrangement appear with
less frequency. Because of this, Qumran documents can often possess poetic elements
without assuming a poetic form. The lack of parallelismus membrorum in 1QH, in contrast
to the Psalms of Solomon, and the complex mixed poetic forms that look like prose
are good examples of this shift.