Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered - The Preterist Archive

person, where it would appear to become more of a pseudo-Ezekiel than a pseudo-Jeremiah
composition, though one could even opine this for the curious historical information presented in
Fragment 1.
Of course, in this context, the very term 'pseudo' is perhaps inappropriate, as many people have
doubted that the Biblical Jeremiah is entirely the work of a single individual by that name. Presumably
after Jeremiah died many of his disciples continued to revere his words and gather his
pronouncements, and many people believe they actually arranged or composed some of the portions
found in the Biblical book. We do not know how long this process continued, but at a certain point it
has to be considered pseudepigraphic. It would be difficult to know where the historical prophet left
off and tradition began, and therefore where this fragment fits in. Indeed the present work may have
been considered an authentic one, and in fact it does contain many interesting historical details.
In the second and third fragments, not only do we have what appears to be the 'son of Man'
terminology from Ezekiel, but also a probable parallel to Dan. 11:2's allusion to resurrection. Again,
this is consistent with the ethos of other Qumran documents. In this context, one should note the
positive attitude to David, paralleled, for instance, in Column v of the Damascus Document, as well as
in Lines 28ff. of the Second Letter on Works Righteousness in Chapter 6 below, where David is
referred to as a man of 'pious works', whose sins were 'forgiven' him. Another interesting reference is
to 'the land of Jerusalem' in Line 2 of Fragment 1. This greatly enhances the sense of historicity of the
whole, since Judah or 'Yehud' (the name of the area on coins from the Persian period) by this time
consisted of little more than Jerusalem and its immediate environs.