James the Brother of Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls II (145 page)

It is for this reason that this allusion to ‘
it will not Lie
’ in the underlying text of Habakkuk 2:3 is so important to the ex
e
getes, meaning that the eschatological exegesis that is to follow will not be a ‘
Lying
’ one. Furthermore, because it seems to r
e
strict the exegesis to ‘
the Men of Truth who do the
Torah
’
, the implication is that
it does not apply to those who do not
. One cannot stress the emphasis on ‘
Torah
-doing
’ here too much. It will reappear four columns later in 1QpHab XII.4–5 in the d
e
scription of the ‘
conspiracy to destroy the Poor’
, described there too as ‘
the Simple of Judah who do the
Torah
’.

We have already delineated many of the allusions to ‘
Doers
’ and ‘
doing
’ (in Hebrew, based on the same root as ‘
works
’) throughout the Qumran corpus. The same is true in James, where we also heard about ‘
the Doers of the word
’ and ‘
the Doers of the word of Truth
’ (1:18–22), not to mention ‘
boasting and Lying against the Truth
’ (3:14) and ‘
straying from the
Truth
’ (5:19). For its part, the
Pesher
in its exposition of Habakkuk 2:3 goes one better, repeating this word ‘
Truth
’ as if for emphasis: ‘
This concerns the Men of Truth
,
the Doers of
Torah
,
whose hands shall not slacken from the Service of Truth
,
though the Last Age be extended
.’
17
This is the same construct, ‘
Last Age
’ or ‘
End Time
,’ used in the previous
Pesher
in VII.5–8 first evo
k
ing this ‘
Delay of the Last Era’
. It now continues somewhat formulaically: ‘
For all the Ages of God come to their appointed End as He determined
(
them
)
in the Mysteries of His insight’
.
Again, it would not be without profit to compare this to Paul in Romans 16:25 on ‘
the revelation of the Mystery kept secret in the Times of the Ages’
.

But there is another usage we have been following which is introduced here: ‘
labor
’ or ‘
work
’ – not ‘Jamesian’ works, which in Hebrew is based on a different root – but ‘
works
’ in the sense of
Service
or
Mission
. We have been observing this usage, both in Paul’s Letters and at Qumran, in documents like the Community Rule and Damascus Document.

Not only is this used in excommunication texts at Qumran, banning having anything to do with such a person either ‘
in service or purse
’; but two columns later in 1QpHab X.9–12, it will have important ramifications in the evaluation of
the Lying Spouter
’s ‘
labor
’ or ‘
Service
’ and the ‘
worthlessness’ of
the ‘
Service
’ with which he ‘
tired out Many
’ (by ‘
instructing them in works of Lying
’ – these now proper eschatological ‘
works
’) and ‘
the Assembly he erected upon Lying
’ for his own ‘
Glorific
a
tion’
. This, too, is something of the thrust of Paul’s contemptuous reference in 2 Corinthians 11:15 to ‘
the Servants of Righ
t
eousness
’ – only reversed – whom he really thinks are ‘
Servants of Satan
’ and ‘
whose End
(in another satirical play and reve
r
sal)
shall be according to their works
’!

In the
Pesher
in VII.10–14 about ‘
not slackening in the Service of Truth though the Last Age be prolonged before them’
, the sense is reversed to that of ‘
Truthful Service
’ not, as three columns later, the ‘
worthless Service
’ of
the Lying Spouter
. But 1QpHab X.10–12 restricts the application of Habakkuk 2:3 only to ‘
the Servants of Righteousness
’ or ‘
the Men of Truth who do the
Torah
’
. That is to say, it is only to such persons that
the Righteous Teacher
’s exegesis about the
Delay of the Last Age
or
End Time
(
the
Parousia
) applies. This will have particular relevance now for the exegesis of Habakkuk 2:4 that follows and its clear anti-Pauline thrust.

Since we are at the end of Column Seven, the text is again fragmentary, but the
Pesher
is quite clear. It has to do with the first phrase from Habakkuk 2:4: ‘
Behold
,
his soul is puffed up and not Straight
(or ‘
Upright
’)
within him’
. Paul, of course, is also playing on this imagery of being ‘
puffed up
’ and uses it to introduce his observations about the ‘
weak
’ brothers whose ‘
consciences are defiled
’ and ‘
stumble
’ over the issue of ‘
meat
’ and dietary regulations in general in 1 Corinthians 8:1–13. His attacks are clearly directed against the Jerusalem Leadership, parodying two of their favorite pretenses: superior
Knowledge
and ‘
loving God
’ (i.e., piety). As Paul expresses this in his own inimitable way, ‘
Knowledge puffs up
’ whereas ‘
loving God
’ – which they ought to espouse (again more contemptuous reversal) – ‘
builds up’
. Put in another way, if they followed his pr
e
scriptions, then their ‘
weak consciences
’ would ‘
be built up enough to eat things sacrificed to idols
’ (8:10) not
vice versa
. The
Pesher
(1QpHab X.10), too, will presently use this ‘
building
’ imagery when it comes to describing the activities of
the Liar
.

The exposition of this in the
Pesher
in VII.14–16 also plays on the allusion to ‘
puffed up
’ (a homophone in Hebrew of the word ‘
doubled
’). Pregnantly, this is expressed in terms of how ‘
their Sins will be doubled upon them and they will not be pleased with their Judgement’
.
18
That it has to do with
Judgement
– ‘
the Last Judgement
,’ which Paul too is evoking in his a
s
persion about ‘
the End
’ of the ‘
Servants of Righteousness
’ in 2 Corinthians 11:15 – is undeniable and will have decisive mea
n
ing for the
Pesher
that now follows on the second part of Habakkuk 2:4, the most important one of the whole Commentary and perhaps all the literature at Qumran.

That the
Pesher
on Habakkuk 2:4 is
eschatological
is clear from everything that has gone before and the repeated references to
the Final Age
/
Last End
in the exposition of Habakkuk 2:3 preceding it. This idea of
Judgement
having to do with the kind of ‘
tarrying
’ and
extension
/
delay of the End Time
/
Final Age
and the counseling of ‘
patience until the coming of the Lord
’ and ‘
seeing the End of the Lord
’ is also part and parcel of the last Chapter of the Letter of James (5:7–11). There it
is accompanied by allusion to ‘
the Judge
’ who ‘
is able to save and destroy
’ (4:12) ‘
standing before the door
’ (5:9) – also the imagery of the I
s
lamic ‘
Imam
’
.

The Exposition of Habakkuk 2:4 in the Habakkuk
Pesher

We are now at the most crucial
Pesher
of all, the interpretation of Habakkuk 2:4, ‘
the Righteous shall live by his Faith’
, at Qu
m
ran. Unlike Paul’s citation in Galatians 3:11 and Romans 1:17, the possessive pronoun has not been dropped from ‘
live by his Faith
’ and the phraseology is correct. It reads: ‘
Its interpretation relates to
all the Doers of the
Torah
in the House of Judah
.’ The phraseology ‘
‘
Osei ha-Torah
,’ from the previous
Pesher
on Habakkuk 2:3, is actually picked up and repeated again. Nor is there any doubting the meaning of the usage ‘
House of Judah
’ here; it is simply a way of saying ‘
Jews’
. It is also paralleled by another expression, also involving ‘
doing the
Torah
’, that follows four columns later in the
Pesher
in exposition of ‘
the dumb beasts’
, as in XII.3-5, ‘
the Simple of Judah doing the
Torah
’
, identified with the
Ebionim
or
the Poor
, whom – along with
the Righteous Teacher
–
the Wicked Priest
also
destroys
.

Now we can take the thrust of this expression, ‘
House of Judah
,’ to be double-edged or doubly attributive. Just as the James-like recommendation of ‘
patience
’ – in the eschatological exegesis preceding it relating to ‘
the Delay of the
Parousia
’ in VIII.9–12 – is circumscribed to ‘
the
‘
O
sei ha- Torah
’ or ‘
Torah
-Doers
,
whose hand would not slacken in the Service of Truth though the Final Age would be extended beyond anything the Prophets foretold
’; here the efficacy of Habakkuk 2:4 is not only circumscribed to ‘
the Doers of the
Torah
’
, but now there is an additional qualification:
these must be native-born Jews as well
.

The thrust of this is explosive. To state the contrapositive: Habakkuk 2:4
does not apply to non-
Torah
-doing non-Jews
, that is,
non-
Torah
-doing Gentiles
. It does not even apply to
non-
Torah
-doing
Jews
. This
Pesher
is stating that Habakkuk 2:4
should not be applied to Gentiles at all
, as Paul does. This qualification in its applicability would appear to be purposefully i
n
serted in the exegesis and
directed against someone
. There can be little doubt
whom
. In addition, it clears up a lot of misu
n
derstandings about the way Scripture is used in the rather free and eclectic manner of Paul. Nor can this limitation in the scope of the applicability of the
Pesher
on Habakkuk 2:4 be thought of as being accidental. It would appear to be framed precisely with foreknowledge of the position of ‘
the Man of Lies
’ or the Pauline position on these passages and issues in mind and,
a priori
, to
disqualify them
– the only disqualification possible given the manner and style of Pauline argumentation as we have reviewed it. It is a very powerful argument indeed and just what one would have expected from a
native-born Jewish Comm
u
nity
interested in the apocalyptic and eschatological interpretation of Scripture as well.