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

JAMES H. CHARLESWORTH 111
found in Greek, Roman, or Egyptian ideology. The dualism and terms
are not found in Philo, Josephus, the Apocrypha, and the
Pseudepigrapha (with the exception of the early Jewish portions of the
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, which, in the judgment of many scholars,
is related to or influenced by Essene thought). Terms and phrases,
known for centuries as “Johannine,” have turned up in the Dead Sea
Scrolls, precisely in the section of their book of rules that was probably
memorized, namely, the Rule of the Community, columns 3–4.
Observe John 12:35–36, a passage once cherished as the product of
the Evangelist’s creativity:
Jesus said to them, “The light is with you for a little longer. Walk while you
have the light, lest the darkness overtake you; he who walks in the darkness does not
know where he goes. While you have the light, believe in the light, that you
may become Sons of Light.”
Why did the Evangelist use such symbolism, such phrases and terms,
and from what source did he inherit the technical term “Sons of Light”?
The most probable explanation is that he, and perhaps those in his own
group, were influenced by the light/darkness paradigm, developed only
in the Rule of the Community. 50 In that scroll we find an explanation of who
are the “Sons of Light” (see 3.13, 24–25), and we are introduced to the
phrase, “and they shall walk in the ways of darkness” (3.21; cf. 4.11).
One passage in the Rule contains phrases and words that seem
“Johannine” to many who do not know that this scroll antedates John by
about two centuries:
In the hand of the Prince of Lights [is] the dominion of all the Sons of
Righteousness; in the ways of light they walk. But in the hand of the Angel
of Darkness [is] the dominion of the Sons of Deceit; and in the ways of
darkness they walk. By the Angel of Darkness comes the aberration of all
50. Bauckham denies any Qumran influence on the Fourth Gospel, but he repeatedly
refers to dualistic “imagery.” He thereby misses the main point of my work and
that of others. The crucial point is to see the unique termini technici and the dualistic
paradigm. It is found only in Qumran sectarian writings and the Fourth Gospel; outside
of Judaism it is found only in Zurvanism. Bauckham rightly states, “Only if the
development in the two cases exhibited extensive similarities not attributable to common
roots in the common Jewish tradition would there be any reason to postulate a
connection” (107). Only in the Fourth Gospel do we find a developed dualistic paradigm
and termini technici that are part of the paradigm. The Fourth Evangelist did not create
this paradigm; he inherited it. Within Judaism, it is found only at Qumran. It
follows that he most likely was influenced by Qumran concepts and terms, but not
the theology. As I have been stressing, the Fourth Evangelist was a genius with creative
skills. See R. Bauckham, “The Qumran Community and the Gospel of John.”