The Communal Identity As Israel in 1QS and 1peter

The Communal Identity as Israel in
1QS and 1 Peter
by
LEUNG CHUN HO BERNARD (95032)
A Thesis Submitted to
China Graduate School of Theology
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
the Degree of Master of Theology
September, 2006
Abstract
Some characteristics shared by 1 Peter and 1QS have long been recognized (e.g. the
identity of the elected and priesthood, the images of stone and sanctuary etc).
The resemblance of the communities behind these two literatures indicates an
in-depth comparison of them is needed. This paper examines and compares the
communal identity as understood in 1 Peter and 1QS around three shared features: 1)
the identity of sole covenant partner of God, 2) with a specific priestly function that
somehow played the cultic role of temple/sanctuary, and 3) an ahistorical tendency
disregarding the presence of ethnical and national Israel. The result of comparison
suggests that the resembling features are mainly formal regarding their common use
of OT and Jewish tradition. At a closer look to these common features, the two
communities display greater discontinuity which we seldom notice before.
1)
2)/
3)
Table of Content
page
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Study of early Judaism and the New Testament
1.2 The Jewishness of 1 Peter
1.3 Diversity of Second Temple Judaism(s)
1
1
4
1.4 The Unity of early Judaism

1.5 Israel in Early Judaism
1.6 The Aim of this Study
7
12
13
Chapter 2 Textual History of 1QS and its Relationship with CD

2.1 Classical theory on the group(s) behind Dead Sea Scrolls
2.2 The History of the Texts and its Groups
15
16
2.2.1 The relation between S and D

2.2.2 New Light from the Cave 4 manuscripts
2.2.2.1 The Complicate Situation
17
18
19
2.2.2.2 Methodological Limitation

2.2.3 Structural division of 1QS
2.2.4 Textual development of 1QS in comparison with 4QS
20
23
26
Chapter 3The Communal Identity in 1QS

3.1 Communal-identity as Israel
3.1.1 Redaction emphasizing the identity of Israel
3.1.2 The use of larvy that does not directly refer to dxy
3.1.3 Preliminary Conclusion
3.2 Communal Identity as Sanctuary
3.2.1 Sanctuary in 1QS VIII 4-10
3.2.2 The atoning function of the Community in 1QS
3.3 Ahistorical Identity of Israel in 1QS from the perspective of CD
28
28
33
35
36
37
43
47
48
3.3.1 Covenant and History

3.3.2 CD as a reference to the historical dimension of covenant
3.3.3 The historical awareness in CD
48
49
49
3.3.4 Absence of covenant history: The ahistorical identity in 1QS

3.3.5 Cosmic Dualism and Ahistorical Identity
52
54
59
Chapter 4 Covenant and Communal Identity in 1 Peter

4.1 The framework of covenant in establishing the identity of Christian
in 1:1-2:10
60
4.2 Christian community as the Israel

4.2.1 The Four Epithets in 1 Peter 2:9
4.2.2 Other languages denoting the identity of Christian community
as Israel
65
65
4.2.3 The eschatological dimension of Communal identity in 1 Peter

4.3 Christian community serving as the Priest and Sanctuary
4.3.1 The structure of 1 Peter 2:4-10
72
73
73
4.3.2 Languages and Images referring to the Temple in 2:4-10

4.3.3 The images of Levitical Priesthood in 2:4-10
4.3.4 The Two Priesthoods in 1 Peter
4.3.5 The meaning of the Spiritual Temple and Priesthood
75
76
77
78
70

4.4 Christian community exists as Israel ahistorically
4.4.1 The problem of ahistorical Israel in 1 Peter
80
81
81
4.4.2 Historical awareness in Roman 9-11

4.4.3 Ahistorical identity of Israel in 1 Peter
4.4.4 The Exception of ahistoricity: 1:10-12
81
82
85
87
Chapter 5 Conclusion: A comparison of Communal Identity as Israel

in 1QS and 1 Peter
88
Abbreviations
93
Bibliography
94
ii
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Study of early Judaism and the New Testament
New Testament scholars today take no denial that the early Jesus movement
emerged from the Jewish context of Palestine in the first century A.D. 1 This
statement claims that we cannot rightly understand the words and deeds of Jesus and
his followers unless we put them against the Jewish background. At a deeper level, it
refers to the continuity between the movement and her parent group at large and more
significantly between their religious systems.
We can see the fruitful contribution of the study of Jewish background and
the early Judaism to certain New Testament areas in the second half of the last
century.2 However, this still does not reach some New Testament books. 1 Peter is
apparently one of them. Before the mid-twentieth century, form and tradition criticism
dominated Petrine study, focusing on the use of Christian traditions in 1 Peter,
especially catechetical and liturgical materials. The epistle was treated either as a
composite letter literally dependent on other New Testament Epistles or a creative
synthesis of various traditions.3 In the near recent, Greco-Roman literary study,4
compositional analysis,5 social-scientific6 and rhetorical7 methods were applied to
the study of 1 Peter. Most of these approaches threw new light to our reading of 1
Peter8 but few of them took the study of early Judaism very seriously as an approach
to evaluate the Jewishness of 1 Peter.
1.2 The Jewishness of 1 Peter
Two commentators on 1 Peter considered the Jewishness in 1 Peter not
1
Dunn (1991, 11-14) listed the historical reasons in the last few decades for this renewed interested in
the Jewish context of early Christianity. They are 1) the discovery of Dead Sea Scrolls, 2) accessibility
of the texts and study of apocrypha and pseudepigrapha, 3) development of traditional-historical
analysis of the rabbinic traditions, 4) recent significant reappraisal of the character of the early Judaism,
and 5) recognition of Christian anti-semitism within NT scholarship.
2
Pauline study witnessed the paradigm shift of understanding Rabbinic Judaism, beginning with W. D.
Davies and later by E. P. Sanders and J. D. G. Dunn. Another area that felt the impact of Jewish study
of the so-called Third Quest of historical Jesus (Neill & Wright 1988, 379-403).
3
See Elliott 2000, 20-37.
4
Balch 1981 and Martin 1992.
5
Schutter 1989.
6
Elliott 1981 and 2000. For a concise summary of applying this method to 1 Peter, see Elliott 1993,
70-100. Other studies employing social-scientific approach include Bechtler 1998; Campbell 1998.
7
Thuren 1990; 1995.
8
Especially the social-scientific approach pioneered by J. H. Elliott (1981). But Elliott tended to force
the data to fit into this model, overlooking the metaphorical aspect of the language and the theological
implication
-1-
only as another way of speaking about the abundance of the Old Testament allusion,9
but part and parcel of the epistle. Michaels (1988, xlv-lv) discussed the genre and
audience of 1 Peter in association with the tradition of Diaspora letter in Judaism. He
noticed that the author not only treated the predominantly Gentile Christian audiences
as the people of God, but also simply ignored the actual Jewish community (xlix) and
bypassed entirely the issue of the Jews salvation (li). This interesting insight becomes
an important point of contact with the contrasting treatment of the same issue in
Roman 9-11, and in turn a significant starting point of understanding the communal
identity in 1 Peter in relation to early Judaism. An important clue to this comparison is
the self-understanding of the community as Israel in early Christianity and in early
Judaism. 1 Peter does mention the readers as Gods People (2:9-10) but not Israel,
either in its ethnical or religious sense. However, Michaels suggestion of 1 Peter as a
Diaspora epistle following the tradition of Jeremiah 29 (also 2 Apoc. Bar. 78-87 and 2
Macc 1-2), just as the cases in James and the letter of Jerusalem Council (Acts 15),
entails the recipients in dispersion to be a Jewish community as a collective entity, i.e
Israel. 10 To Michaels, the Jewishness of 1 Peter indicates a shared selfunderstanding because:
The author sees himself and his readers as a community situated in the
world in much the same way the Jews are situated, and sharing with the
Jews a common past. This tendencywhether we call it judaizing or
philosemiticis based on the hearing and acceptance of certain Jewish
stories, both biblical and extrabiblical. (Michaels 1988, l)
In agreement with Michaels, Achtemeier (1989; 1996) appropriates Israel
in 1 Peter from another perspective: the use of metaphor. The author of 1 Peter
adopted various languages and concepts from the Old Testament to describe the
Christian community. Each image is directly related to the experience of the historical
or biblical Israel: the exodus, the exile, covenant making, election, sacrifice, suffering
etc. Achtemeier calls for an overarching controlling metaphor, which may be useful
to organize all these diverse individual metaphors or themes. He claims that:
Israel as a totality has become for this letter the controlling metaphorIn 1
Peter, the language and hence the reality of Israel pass without remainder
into the language and hence the reality of the new people of God
9
For example, Brown & Meier 1983, 133-34.

See Michaels 1988, xlvi-xlix. It does not indicate that diaspora (diaspora/j) in 1 Pet 1:1 has to be
understood literally referring to the Jewish Diaspora. The author of 1 Peter only followed the tradition
of Diaspora epistle as a genre which helps to establish the collective identity of the readers as Israel.
10
-2-
(Achtemeier 1996, 69)

If metaphor is a way of understanding and experiencing one thing in terms
of another experience,11 the author of 1 Peter, in Achtemeiers view, is articulating
the Christian community in terms of Israel with all its properties, nothing more and
nothing less. Jewishness in 1 Peter means possession of this very identity of Israel
in its totality.
Achtemeier takes one more step further in his argument beyond what
Michaels has done. For Michaels, the self-understanding of Christian community is
based on a shared common past with other Jews which is constituted by accepting the
Jewish stories as their own. The self-affirmative designation of Israel by the Jewish
people to distinguish themselves from other peoples is not the point made by the
author.12 But for Achtemeier, Christian community and Israel are two congruent
ideas in 1 Peter. He correctly establishes the identity of Israel for the audience of 1
Peter despite the absence of this term, which is an important point that I will confirm
in this study, but it is an exaggeration to claim that the reality of Israel pass without
remainder intothe new people of God (italic mine). His claim contains at least two
drawbacks. First, the images, themes, metaphors and language appropriated from OT
in 1 Peter are representative but not exhaustive. Some important experiences of Israel
are missing in 1 Peter, e.g. giving of the Law to Moses, establishment of monarchy etc.
It is invalid to equate the sum of a few themes with their totality.13 Moreover, some
elements from OT had been transformed or Christianized to fit into the authors
theological scheme, e.g. the OT prophets had the Spirit of Christ in them (1:11); the
women of the past used to put their hope in God (3:5), just as the Christians (1:3, 13,
21); Noah being saved through water prefigured Christian baptism (3:20-21) etc.14
Israel is not a static or unchangeable concept simply borrowed and applied by the
author to the Christian community. The reality of the Christian community
transformed the authors understanding of Israel.
Second, this claim overlooks the distinction and tension between the Jewish
people and the Gentile Christianity community. The community identifies itself with
11
Lakoff & Johnson 1980, 5.

See Dunn 1995, 234-35: Israel is the name which the people uses for itself, whereas Jews is the
non-Jewish name for it. In other words, Jews is more the term used, by (Hellenistic) Jews (Philo,
Josephus, Aristeas, Eupolemus, Artapanus, Hecataeus) as well as other, to distinguish the people so
designated from other people; whereas Israel is a self-affirmation by reference to its own distinctively
apprehended heritage.
13
Brown & Meier (1983, 133-34) also treated the OT citation in 1 Peter as outline of the history of
Israel.
14
These examples come from Michaels 1988, l.
12
-3-
Israel and neglects the actual Jews who also claim to be Israel. In other words, the
separated group (i.e. the sect) claimed the true identity of its parent group but at the
same time dismissed the historical role of and their continuity with that parent group.
This is a very unique mode of communal self-understanding in the New Testament
regarding the relationship between Gentile Christian and Jews. Achtemeier (and also
Michaels) tends to include the Gentile Christian and Jewish people under the same
umbrella of one chosen people, i.e. the Israel, and harmonize their tension as what
Paul did in Roman 9-11 with the image of one olive tree.15 This inferred view of
resolving the tension caused by the communal self-understanding as Israel is not
attested in 1 Peter.
In sum, both Michaels and Achtemeier rightly valuated 1 Peter for its
Jewishness, and noticed this Jewishness as identifying the community with the
Israel, the chosen people of God, and at the same time disregarding the actual Jews
who also claimed themselves as the legitimate Israel. However, they not only lost
sight of the peculiar characteristics and implication of that designation in 1 Peter, they
also did not pay much attention to the meaning of Israel as an identity term within
second Temple Judaism.
1.3 Diversity of Second Temple Judaism(s)
There were diverse Jewish groups16 existing in the land of Palestine in the
second Temple period, not to mention numerous others in the Diaspora. Josephus
introduced only three of them by names: Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes.17 He
also attested the Fourth Philosophy and other revolutionary groups, such as Sicarii
and Zealots.18 Dunn (1995, 240-42) further suggested the existence of more Jewish
groups in Palestine known in NT, including Christians (or the sect of the Nazarenes
(Acts 24:5)), Samaritans, Hellenists (Acts 6:1, 9), Herodians (Mark 3:6; 12:13) and
some possible baptismal sects etc.19
15
Achtemeier 1996, 72: If anything, the implication appears to be that Jews and Gentiles alike have
now been taken up into one chosen people. Cf. Michaels 1988, l: Although he does not use the
metaphor, Peters vision is fully consistent with Pauls notion of one olive tree representing one people
of God.
16
Group, according to sociological use in Saldarini (2001, 311), means in its most general definition,
any collectivity of humans. More specifically, any collectivity bound by principles of membership and
a set of rights and duties. In this study, group refers inclusively to any such collectivity of people.
17
War 2.8.14 162-66; Ant. 13.5.9 171-72; 18.1.3 4-23; 18.1.5 18-22; Life 2 10-12.
18
The Fourth Philosophy (Ant. 18.1.1, 6); Sicarii (Ant. 20.8.8 186-87 etc.); Zealots (War
4.3.3-9 135-61 etc.).
19
See further Grabbe 1992, 463-554 on the issue of sects and movements in this period. He includes
more groups. The problem of Grabbes detail analysis on various groups is that he (and Dunn) makes
no distinction between classes or parties, which carry political tones, and those groupings which
concern more with religious matters. The variety of these groups demands further categorization
-4-
Most of these groups had left no literature for us to investigate their natures
and beliefs.20 We have only obscure knowledge of them from very limited external
sources.21 This pluralistic and difficult situation is further complicated by the vast
corpus of Jewish writings belonging to this period. 22 These writings and the
ideological trends or theological themes represented by some of them (e.g.
apocalyptic, priestly or cultic, revolutionary or messianic, and sapiental etc.) open the
possibility of the existence of some social entities behind them. We have no idea of
any connection between these literature and those groups we know of, except the
Essene group at Qumran and the early Christian communities. However, scholars are
tempted to postulate some new groups (and corresponding Judaism) to fill in the
role that we expect to have behind any writing. This kind of argument is common in
NT study, e.g. each Gospel written with a corresponding community (the Matthean,
Markan, Lucan, and Johannine communities) and with a distinct theology.23 If this
argument is applied to the situation of second Temple Judaism, similar conclusion
results: every Jewish writing (or set of writings) represents part of the Judaism of the
group that produced it, and the implication is clear: we have no single second Temple
Judaism but a plenty of distinct Judaisms in the plural.
However, this argument on the relation between documents, social groups
and religions is disputable because we are not sure whether any feature found in a
writing (or a set of writings) is originated from one Jewish group or under the
influence of a shared thought or style (e.g. apocalyptic writings) which was quite
common at that period among various groups. So the basic problem is the question of
how representative and influential these writings were.24 Moreover, there is nothing
unusual for a group to create writings with variations in the interpretation of their
beliefs, or for several writings in different perspectives to be read by the same group
without causing any controversy. Such various interpretations or profiles of the same
religion do not necessarily represent different Judaisms.25 Conversely, a document
might be received by several different groups as a common literature without the
beyond the general concept of group.

20
E.g. The Essene groups in Qumran (Dead Sea Scrolls), the Christian communities (NT), and the
Samaritans (Samaritans chronicles) are the clearest exceptions. Further connection between other
groups and existing literature is an unknown to scholars.
21
Mostly from the historical account of Josephus and the attestation of apocrypha, pseudepographa
and Rabbinic literature.
22
Including apocrypha, Jewish pseudepigrapha, Philo, Josephus and even the NT etc.
23
Another example is scholars construction of the Q community.
24
Dunn 1995, 244.
25
See Bauckham 1993, 137 and Barclay 1996, 401.
-5-
feeling of another Judaism not their own inherited in that literature.26 In short, the
three levels of the problem, the literary level of the documents, the social level of the
groups, and the ideological level of Judaisms, are not easily related.
To ensure the working of social group behind any Judaism and the related
literatures, Chilton & Neusner (1995, xii) define religion as a composite of worldview
(or belief), way of life (or religious practice), and social entity (or people).27 More
importantly, since social order is the basic concern of religion, they set priority not in
doctrine (their writings) or rite (their practice) but in the community (the social entity).
This approach highlights the essentiality of the community and hence the diversity of
Judaism because the communities are diverse. The Jewish writings are still the
starting point of studying Judaisms, but the focus has been shifted from studying all
writings of a given time (e.g. first century AD) in order to discover a single universal
Judaism out of them, to one writing (or a specific set of similar writings) clearly
related to a community through which a particular Judaism can be identified.28 This
approach distinguishes documents speaking for an individual (i.e. the writers) from
those making a statement on behalf of a delineated community. In this way, they deny
the validity of studying Judaism(s) in Enochic writings, Philo, Josephus or even
some books of NT (1995, 17). However, individual author expresses a perspective
representative to a social group/class which he belongs. So their writings are still a
window to the thought world of that social group/class. Also, we do find clear social
perspective of a communal identity (us) defined against the enemy (them) in many
Jewish writings of this period. This consciousness of a social identity indicates the
existence of social group behind such texts. For example, the sons of light against
the sons of darkness in the Qumran literature and the righteous against the sinners
regarding the calendrical matter in Enochic corpus etc. 29 Whether a document
displays an individual view on certain matters or a corporate view of communal
identity, the social dimension of the religious thought world is always presupposed.
In sum, we should recognize the pluralistic nature of the second Temple
Judaism. However, this plurality does not necessarily require us to express this
phenomenon of religion as Judaisms in the plural, consisting of various different
26
Bauckham (1993, 138) named Pseudo-Philos Biblical Antiquities as an example for a possible
common literature among various group to be read with interest and profit, without identifying it
belonging to another Judaism.
27
This definition is typical of Neusners treatment of Judaism and Christianity, and in fact the chapter
introducing this definition in Chilton & Neusner 1995 is firstly drafted by Neusner (xix).
28
Chilton & Neusner 1995, 7. It is exactly the point that Neusner accused of Sanders notion of
common Judaism in Sanders 1992. According to Neusner, Sanders premise is the existence of
universal common denominator Judaism at a period time. But it seems a misunderstanding to Sanders.
29
See the examples in Dunn 1995, 242-44.
-6-
freestanding Judaic systems. The keystone of this plurality is the particularity of

Judaism according to a specific writing (or set of writings), within which a
corresponding social entity is always presumed. On the one hand, this perspective of
plurality emphasizes the study of documents in its own historical and literary context
before extrapolating to a religious system (Grabbe 1992, 527). On the other hand, it
allows comparison of particular religious system according to different documents.
The refusal of employing Judaisms to describe the pluralistic situation of Judaism
entails a unity of Judaism within its diversity, and universality in the particularity.
1.4 The Unity of early Judaism
The unity of early Judaism is an abstraction to describe the
commonalities among various forms of Judaism. In principle, it is justifiable to search
such theoretical construct by comparing, extracting, and synthesizing the similarities
of all the particular Judaic systems from the whole Jewish documents. It is an
inductive approach to search the essential elements among the diverse religious
systems. But in practice, it seems unavoidable for one to be selective and subjective in
this process, especially facing such a huge amount of Jewish writings. Sanders (1977)
had been accused of comparing the essences between Judaism with Paul
(Charlesworth 1985b, 51), but the most disputable part in his study is the problem of
being selective in his use of sources30 and his pattern of religion posited from
somewhere else rather than observation on the texts. There is no reason to discard
totally the value and possibility of searching these common factors in Judaism.
Similarly, Sanders model of common Judaism was also challenged as suggesting a
single Judaism that encompasses all other Judaisms (Chilton & Neusner 1995, 49).
The problem with the notion, common Judaism i.e. what the priests and the people
agreed on (Sanders 1992, 47), is the association of the common elements of Judaic
religion with a concrete historical mass of Jewish people. Sanders gives fresh to the
spirit of the universal features of a religion, making this common Judaism like
another real Judaism, and even a normative one. However, a classification defined
by some common factors does not itself constitute a member. Boccaccini describes
this relation in terms of genus and species,
Judaism properly denotes the genus, that is, the whole family of
monotheistics systemsTo denote the many species of which the genus
Judaism is composedwe should use only more specific terms, such as
30
See Charlesworth 1985, 52. Sanders overemphasized the role of Rabbinic Judaism and overlooked
the significance of Jewish pseudepigrapha.
-7-
Samaritan Judaism rabbinic Judaism and Christian Judaism (1991,

19).
While finding it neither necessary nor helpful to refer to Judaisms, Barclay
also (1996, 401) highlights social identity (esp. the ethnic bond) as the core of
Diaspora Judaism,
If Judaism is defined-as it should be-as a social and not just an intellectual
phenomenon, it is hard to see how the plural Judaisms could apply to the
Diaspora. (Italic original)
And obviously this claim to Diaspora also applies to Palestine. Similarly,
Davies (1994, 71 n.2) distinguishes the public and intellectual aspects of Judaism,
with the former denoting the commonalities of Judaism, and the later its variety:
It (Judaism) is not necessarily a single religious system; perhaps it is better
defined as a genusif Judaism is not necessarily a single system, it may
have comprised a largely homogeneous set of public practices, as Sanders
has argues. It seems to me that at the level of history of ideas or of
intellectual systems, the notion of Judaisms is preferable, while at the level
of religion as a public activity, Sanders account works better.31
Grabbe (1992, 465) is more straightforward in using the term Judaism:
I use the term Judaismto refer to the umbrella religion, with all its
subvarietiesparallel to the usage of the term Christianity to include
everything from Jehovahs Witnesses to the Armenain Orthodox
Churchreaders should be aware that Judaism in this book covers all the
various Jewish systems (Judaisms) and implied no monolithic or
orthodox view of the religion. What I emphasize here is the variety.
In other words, Judaism becomes a generic category with various specific
31
Davies further employed the model of Christian denomination as an analogy to this relation in
Judaism: Both forms of description could be applied with equal validity to twentieth-century
European or North American Christianity: Catholicism, Calvinism, fundamentalism are different
intellectualsystems, while as a public religion, Christianity in all of these forms exhibits a certain
homogeneity. Bauckham (1993, 138-39) argues that this denominational model does not fully apply
to the partings of the ways suggested by Dunn. And Barclay (1996, 401) thinks that this model may
lead the historian astray to consider that the difference between social and intellectual aspect of
Judaism is necessarily different in social reality. However, I find the denominational model still a
useful analogy/model to describe the relation between unity and diversity of early Judaism.
-8-
forms of religious system. This distinction allows us to study the nature and relations
of commonalities of Judaism and compare their various manifestations in different
particular forms of Judaism.
Scholars propose various sets of common features that are representative of
the Second Temple Judaism;32 the most significant of them is Dunns four pillars,
i.e. Monotheism, Election (covenant people and promised land), Covenant focused on
Torah, and Land focused in Temple (Dunn 1991, 19-35). These four are the
axiomatic convictions round which the more diverse interpretation and practices of
the different groups within Judaism revolved (35). The aim of his proposal is to
recognize the Jewish context and characters of earliest Christianity by inquiring the
partings of the ways between Christianity and Judaism, i.e. where the Jesus
movement found it necessary to question and redefine each of these four axioms in
greater or less degree--at any rate, to a degree unacceptable to mainstream
Judaism(35). Under this agenda, Dunns description of the four pillars follows the
historical development of the controversies between the Jesus movement and Judaism,
basically in four waves of breach corresponding to the common features of Judaism.
However, Dunns historical treatment puts less weight on the theological relationship
between the four pillars as such within the context of early Judaism. The most
obvious theme that associates election and Torah is covenant. Dunn makes a
concluding remark on this relation: God had make a special covenant with Israel to
be his own, and as integral to that covenant had given Israel the law to provide Israel
with the means of living within that covenant (1991, 25; italic original). This
statement captures the essence of the classic statement covenantal nomism by
Sanders (1977), further summarizes by Dunn: Torah as given to Israel as part of
Gods covenant with Israel, obedience to the law of Moses as Israels response to
Gods choice of Israel to be his people, nomism as the way of living within the
covenant, maintaining and manifesting status as the people of Yahweh (1991, 24;
italic original).
We need a wider theological framework that may embrace and explain the
32
Cohen (1987): The focal points for Jewish sectarianism are Law, Temple and Scripture. Grabbe
(2000): Jewish identity was bound up by institution of Temple and cult, the land, monotheism, belongs
to the chosen people, rejection of images in worship, Torah and circumcision. However, in a earlier
work, Grabbe mentioned briefly that There was a center to the religion: worship at the Jerusalem
temple. Most Jews accepted the sacredness of the temple and the general teachings of the Torah. But
there was no official orthodoxy (in Christian sense), for it is clear that there were many interpretations
of the Torah and many different views about hoe to apply the law outside the temple (within the temple,
the priests were in control) (1996, xii. Italic mine). For Davies (2000a, 2000b): Israel, Temple, Torah,
Messiah, and land; Davies (1999): Torah, Land, the People, and the Messiah; Sanders: Temple, People,
Law Theology, Hopes (1992).
-9-
four pillars so that the notion of Israel in our study may find a place. Wrights
(1992) outline of the First Century Jewish worldview is very useful. Worldviews are
like the foundations of a house: vital, but invisible (125). They are embodied in four
elements: (1) stories through which human beings view reality; (2) answers to the
basic questions that determine human existence; (3) cultural symbols expressing the
stories and answers; (4) praxis, a way-of-being-in-the-world (122-26). It is elements
(2) and (3) with which we are concerned in the discussion of the four pillars. For (2),
the basic questions (i.e. who are we? where are we? what is wrong? and what is the
solution?) and the solutions belong to the task of theology, which normally come into
sight in sets of beliefs and aims (125). The three major beliefs of first-century Jews
are monotheism, election and eschatology (248-79). For (3), the four key symbols that
anchored the first-century Jewish worldview are: Temple, Land, Torah, and Jewish
ethnicity. Two comments should be made on Wrights treatment. First, it is wise to
make a distinction between beliefs and symbols, i.e. between ideology and
material/culture, because the former provides theoretical foundation for the latter,
and the latter makes the former concrete. The two seem confusing in Dunns four
pillars scheme. Second, while Israel was understood as including both the people
and the land for Dunn (1991, 22), Wright emphasized Israel as an object of Gods
election (ideological) as well as an peculiar identity constantly needed maintenance
through various identity markers (cultural), i.e. through the symbol of Jewish
ethnicity.
It should be reminded that not only the four symbols and the three beliefs
are interrelated. It is the Israels stories that inform and support them (Wright 1992,
124-25). Israels basic story line runs like this (216-23): God created the world but it
suffered from the power of evil, He intended to rescue and restore it through Israel.
However, Israel fails in history and itself needs Gods deliverance. This long waited
expectation found no fulfillment in the second temple period and caused a major
problem of God for the presence of evil in the world. Various Jewish groups
attempted to provide their own version of solution to complete that story. However,
they generally missed the initial aim of God to make a wise rule over humanity
through Israel.
We can see a two-level story here: firstly, the call of Israel has as its
foundational objective the rescue and restoration of the entire creation, and secondly,
since Israel was in its own sin and suffering, God has to remake and restore Israel
from the state of exile (268). This basic double story line already reflects the structure
of the beliefs and symbols. Monotheism entails Gods creation and providence of the
- 10 -
world, but the reality of evil directly called Gods sovereignty into question. For the
Jewish people in the second temple period, the question is not about the origin of evil
but what God is going to do about it. It is covenant theology that provides an answer
to it:
If creational monotheism entails an eschatology (the creator must
restore that which he made), covenantal monotheism intensified this
eschatological entailment: the creator remains committed to giving order
and peace to his world, and as the covenant god he remains committed to
doing so through Israel (Wright 1992, 252. Italic original.)
In other words, monotheism, covenant and eschatology are closely linked in
the story of Israel. Gods creational and providential oneness (monotheism) brings
him to deal with the evil and restore the creation (eschatology). Gods covenant with
Israel becomes the way to accomplish this target and the focus of the redemptive
history of Israel (election/covenant). It is these core beliefs of early Judaism that
embrace the four symbols of Temple, Land, Torah, and racial identity in a tight way.
Wright explicates the relation of them in details (1992, 260-79) and we do not have to
repeat everything he argues about. What is important and relevant to our study can be
summarized as follow:
(1) Torah is embedded in Gods covenant with Israel as a condition which Israel may
demonstrate its covenant fidelity to God.
(2) The consequence of Israels fidelity to God through obeying the Torah is the gift
of the Promised Land in its blessing and peace.
(3) Otherwise, disobedience results in the curse of exile. However, the sin of the
Israel can be undone through the sacrificial system of the Temple.
(4) After the Exile, the covenant will be renewed: the Temple will be rebuilt, the
Land cleansed, the Torah perfectly kept by a new-covenant people with renewed
hearts (280).
We can see the Torah is the operative core among the symbols. It regulates
the living of Israel in the Land and the sacrificial system in the Temple. Torah also
guides the daily life of Israel to maintain its ethical and ritual purity in distinction
from the gentile. This distinction is explicitly expressed in ethnic terms: endogamy,
circumcision, Sabbath keeping, and food laws etc. In other words, Torah provides
identity markers that Israel may stay within their ethnic boundary. In the situation of
exile or Diaspora (i.e. without the Temple and the Land), studying and practicing the
- 11 -
Torah even substituted the status of the Temple and the Land. Torah becomes a
portable Land, a movable Temple (Wright 1992, 228).33
This complicated but fruitful treatment by Wright also illustrates the notion
of the unity of early Judaism and is best articulated in a cluster of interrelated
concepts rather than in a few prepositions or even in a few terms. This concept cluster
is best designated with a master kernel concept, the covenant-relation. This insight
makes the number of the common features summarized by various scholars less
significant. It is not very crucial for one to claim that there are four, three or six
pillars of early Judaism, but how they are interrelated within the kernel
covenant-relation. So the description of early Judaism by Wright is not incompatible
with that of Dunn and others. But for the sake of simplicity, in this study I will follow
Dunns four pillars description with Wrights analysis in mind. The
covenant-relation or covenant context of understanding the common features of
early Judaism is so important that it gives the orientation of approaching various
Jewish groups in this period to us in viewing their past, understanding the present and
hoping for the future.
1.5 Israel in Early Judaism
Many early Jewish writings employed the term Israel explicitly as their
communal self-designation, or addressed their audience on the premise that they
formed the Israel implicitly.34 This awareness of belonging to a people chosen by
God reflects the covenant that YWHW made with Israel is valid to them. It is
significant that the epithet Israel is appropriated for the group rather than other terms
like Jews. For Jews (from vIoudai/oi) denotes a group identified by the ethnic
origin (people from Judea) and religious practice (worshipping God in the Jerusalem
Temple) distinct from other groups around in the Second Temple Period.35 So Jews
is a term primarily used for the people from the perspective of outsider, i.e.
non-Jewish people.36 But Israel is the epithet which the people used for themselves,
33
From another perspective, Wright employs Griemas diagrams to represent the basic narratives in a
heuristic way to relate God, Israel, Torah, and Temple (1992, 221-23). Israel is the receiver of Gods
rescue with the Torah as agent and pagans as opponent (221). When the rescue was delayed and the
Torah was intensified (with the help of new leadership through new teachings), the new groups
found their places as helpers to the Torah (to give new interpretation) and identified other renegade
Jews as opponents (222). Finally, in the larger story, Israel is the agent with the help of Torah and
Temple to bring the world under Gods rule (223). The important clue missed by Wright is that the
new leadership sometimes belonged to the new groups and viewed themselves as the true Israel. It
is just the case in Dead Sea Community.
34
Dunn 1995, 246; Chilton & Neusner 1995, 7.
35
Dunn 1991, 144.
36
Kuhn, Karl G. 1964. VIsrah.l, VIsrahli,thj, VIoudai/oj, VIoudai,a, VIoudai?ko,j, VIoudai/zw, VIoudai/smo,j,
- 12 -
from an insiders perspective. They define themselves in relation to God, His election
and covenant promise rather than by relating to the land and by differentiating from
people of other lands.37
1.6 The Aim of this Study
As we have already mentioned, 1 Peter displays a peculiar communal
identity of Israel in particular and certain Jewishness in general. This
Jewishness and the respective communal identity make comparison of a peculiar
communal identity within respective Jewish contexts between 1 Peter and other
early Judaism a meaningful exercise. This approach avoids doing comparison
only at a lexical level, searching some occurrences of key terms rather than
dealing with ideas and concepts within a Jewish religious system.38
The candidate among Jewish literatures of second Temple period that
suits our purpose of comparison is the Community Rule of Cave 1 from Qumran
(1QS). Since the discovery and early publication of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1950s,
New Testament scholars already noticed the similarity in various aspects between
this mysterious Jewish sect and the early Christianity. The major issue that brings
1QS (with other Qumran literatures) and 1 Peter together under scholars attention
is their common use of cultic language, especially when they both consider
themselves constituting the temple. 39 Also, 1QS exhibits a deep-seated
self-understanding as the true Israel which further favors a comparison of the
similar identity found in 1 Peter. Final, a less discussed feature shared by both
1QS and 1 Peter is their communal identity of Israel characterized by an
ahistorical or unethnical tendency, i.e. each community claiming the identity
of Israel in covenant with God while ignoring their continuity with the historical,
ethical or biblical Israel.
~Ebrai/oj, ~Ebrai?ko,j, e`brai/j, e`brai?sti,. TDNT 3.359-65.

37
Dunn 1991, 145; 1998, 505.
38
For example, studying the concept of covenant in Pauls letters is different from doing word study
on the key word covenant. Similarly, that the word Israel is absent in 1 Peter should not restrict us
from comparing its concept with other Jewish literature that has more frequent occurrence of it.
39
For the cultic language in Qumran and in 1 Peter, see Schssler Fiorenza 1976 and Betz 1982.
David Flusser (1958. The Dead Sea Sect and Pre-Pauline Christianity. Pages 215-66 in Scripta
Hierosolymitana 3. Quoted in Elliott 1966, 210-12) undertook the comparison between 1 Peter and
1QS, and suggested 1 Peter 2:4-6 represents a quotation from a Hebrew prototype resembling 1QS
8:4-11. See also Snodgrass 1977, 101-102. For the discussion on Temple in 1 Peter and Qumran, see
Best 1969 and esp. Grtner 1965. The insight of Flusser is followed by Goppelt (1993, 36) who stated
that Behind the first part (1:3-2:10), in which the author expresses his understanding of the essence of
being a Christian, stands a complex of tradition that proceeds from the self-understanding of the
Qumran community.
- 13 -
It is the aim of this study to investigate the peculiar traits of these three
common features found in both 1QS and 1 Peter. We will begin with the feature of
communal identity as Israel, an important covenantal identity which constitutes
the covenant-relation with God. Embedded in the identity of Israel is the
self-designation as temple with specific function. We will explore the
significance and meaning of atonement of this priestly function in 1QS and the
Christianized missiological function in 1 Peter. Finally, the ahistorical feature of
that identity will be surveyed in 1QS and 1 Peter with respective to other
literatures in the broader contexts (i.e. CD in the Qumran literature, and Rom 9-11
in early Christianity) which display a more substantial historical framework.
- 14 -
Chapter 2 Textual History of 1QS and its Relationship with CD

2.1 Classical theory on the group(s) behind Dead Sea Scrolls
Soon after the discovery of Dead Sea Scrolls, scholars quickly associated
the scrolls with the Essene party attested in ancient sources of Pliny the Elder,
Josephus and Philo.1 In the following half-century of Dead Sea Scrolls studies, other
theories had been proposed to explain the origin of the documents and the
archaeological sites at Qumran,2 however the Essene hypothesis is still dominating
the academic discussion. The classical understanding of this hypothesis is that the
Qumran community was identical to the Essenes. Any discrepancy in the description
of the sect within the scrolls and ancient literary sources,3 and between the scrolls and
the external sources, 4 are explained by the factors of (1) various stages of
development, (2) varying reliability of the witnesses, and (3) the diversity of the
readership addressed (Vermes 1999, 125-26).
Other hypotheses of the Qumran community generally accepted by most
scholars are basically modifications of the Essene hypothesis, especially further built
on the argument that the Qumran community was formed as a sect breaking away
from its Essene parent movement when the Teacher of Righteousness entered the
scene. This two steps theory of Essene-Qumran formation is a sound way to resolve
the internal contradiction between different Sitz Im Leben of the group(s) described in
CD and 1QS, which is not easily explained away as reflection of different stages of
The first scholar who identified the Essene background of the scrolls was Eleazar Sukenik at 1948
(Vanderkam 1994, 5, 71; Vermes 1999, 230 note 14).
2
In the early years of Qumran studies, many possible groups had been suggested as associating with
the scrolls, e.g. mediaeval sect of Karaites (Zeitlin), zealots (Driver), Pharisees (Rabin), Sadducees
(North). See Garca Martnez and Barrera 1995, 64. More recently, the theories of Judaeo-Christian
origin had been suggested by J. L. Teicher, Y. Baer, B. Thiering, and R.Eisenman, but it was abandoned
by most scholars, especially after the radiocarbon tests of 1990-91 and 1994 that confirmed the earlier
dating of the manuscripts. See Vermes 1999, 115. Other theories include identifying the Qumran
community with Sadducees (mostly advocated recently by Schiffman 1994) or totally not relating the
documents from the caves to the Qumran archaeological sites (Golb 1995). Golb suggested the
manuscripts were from Jerusalem and hided in the caves at the time of First Jewish Revolt, while the
Qumran site was a military fortress having no connection with the caves.
3
Discrepancies within the scrolls and the ancient sources include: (1)1QS envisages common
ownership, but CD legislates in matters of private property, (2) Pliny, Philo and Josephus emphasize the
Essenes were celibate, while Josephus hints elsewhere there were also married members, (3) Philo and
Josephus state that Essenes were opposed to slavery but CD prohibits the sale of a slave converted to
Judaism to a Gentile, implying the ownership of such slave to the Qumran members. See Vermes 1999.
125.
4
Contradictions between the scrolls and the ancient sources include: (1) absence of the title Essenes
in the scrolls, and (2) the oath is the first act in the initiation procedure at Qumran, but it is the last in
the record of Josephus. See Vermes 1999, 125.
15
the same group. For example, whereas in 1QS, the group lived in the Qumran desert,5
the members of the group in CD XXII 19, 23 lived an urban or village life with their
families in cities (ry[) and camps (hnxm cf. CD XXIII 7; XXIV 3) among other
Jews and Gentile neighbors. The debate then turned to focus on when and where the
Essene movement originated from. Murray OConnor (followed by Davies 1983)
pushes the beginning of Essene movement back to sixth century B.C. at Babylon (the
Damascus). They became a sect soon after returning to Judea at the period of
Maccabees. The Groningen hypothesis (Garca Martnez 1995, 77-96), on the other
hand, proposes Essenes movement being originated from the apocalyptic tradition of
Palestine in the third century B.C. and the schism occurred at the time of John
Hyrcannus (late first century B.C.). More subversively, Stegemann (1992) reverses
the status of Essene to the main Jewish Union6 (dxyh) led by the Teacher of
Righteousness at the mid-second century B.C. The splinter groups were the
Hasmonean rulers who resisted the organizational pattern of dxyh and claimed the
position of official Judaism while condemning the dxyh as non-conformist group of
the time. The Qumran settlement was just a study center for all members, wherever
they usually lived, without any connection to the politics of the time.7
It is important that the Essene hypothesis and its variances lead scholars to
reconsider the people related to the Qumran texts and ruins not constituting a
homogeneous community. The manuscripts from the caves clearly reflect the
dynamics of the group(s) behind the texts. At the social level, there were groups
co-existing at the same time with their members living in different life situations. We
simply cannot simply designate them as the Qumran community or Essene/Qumran
sect in the singular. Comparison of some foundation documents (e.g. CD (with
1QSa) and 1QS) can easily display this plurality of social grouping. However, at the
historical level, each group experienced development or evolvement in their
organization, thoughts and practices during their long history. This group evolvement
can be detected in the development of some of their important texts, such as CD and
1QS again. The early studies on these texts already observed their composite nature
with a long history of complicated editions and redaction. Recovering this literary
process surely allow us to have a glimpse on the groups history.
2.2 The History of the Texts and its Groups
Except the section 1QS vi 1c-8a which seems addressing to a wider Essene movement: In these
(ways) shall they all walk in all their dwelling-places (acmnh)(See Knibb 1987, 115).
6
A term for dxyh which Stegemann renders in his study.
7
Collins (2003) holds similar view as Stegemann.
16
The dynamics of the groups behind CD and 1QS, and the development of
each document over time had already been noticed among scholars of the scrolls in
the past. They can rather confidently establish various theories and project the
respective coherent outlooks of the people related to Qumran and Essene in broad
brush. However, the full publication of the cave 4 materials on early 90s not only
brings new data to the discussion, confirming some fundamental consensus, but also
complicating and challenging the accepted scenario of the social organization behind
the scrolls.
2.2.1 The relation between S and D
First of all, we should note that other than cave 1, there are 11 more
manuscripts related to 1QS in cave 4 (4QSa-j=4Q255-264) and cave 5 (5Q11).8 All
these fragmentary manuscripts contain variant readings of the most complete text of
the Community Rule (dxyh krs), i.e. 1QS. These 12 manuscripts form a family of
texts designated by the letter S (stands for SerekRule). Another family of texts
designated by D (stands for Damascus Document) constituted of 12 manuscripts
excavated at cave 4, 5 and 6 (4QDa-h= 4Q266-273; 5Q12; 6Q15) plus two incomplete
medieval copies (CDA and CDB) already found half a century before the discovery of
the Qumran scrolls, in a storeroom (genizah) of an old Cairo synagogue, and hence
the name Cairo DamascusCD.9
The relation between S and D raises a very difficult question to Qumran
scholars over the last few decades. Joseph Fitzmyer once made a statement, about two
decades before the full publication of the cave 4 manuscripts, This (i.e. the
relationship of S and D) is probably the most difficult question to handle in the
discussion of Qumran literature today. It complicates the identification of the Jewish
group from which the documents have come.10
It is not the place here to summarize the similarities and differences
between the two groups of manuscripts in detail, but we can highlight a few
significant points of contact between the two most representative documents of S and
D, i.e. 1QS and CD. First of all, they share many general features, such as genre (e.g.
penal code and regulations), terminology (e.g. terms for the community and the
8
Another manuscript 5Q13 may be inspired by 1QS and CD, quoting 1QS iii 4-5 (Garca Martnez
1994, 514). Also 4Q502 fr.16 may include a quotation from 1QS iv 4-6 (Vermes 2004, 97).
9
CD was also named Zadokite Fragments, Damascus Covenant or Damascus Document
(Vanderkam 1994, 55-56).
10
Prolegomenon to the reprint of S. Schechter, Documents of Jewish Sectaries. Vol. 1: Fragments of a
Zadokite Work (New York: Ktav.). Quoted in Hempel 1999, 69.
17
leaders), organizational pattern (e.g. gathering of 10 persons with a priest, 1QS vi 3;

CD xiii 1-2), themes (e.g. admission procedures), and theological ideas (e.g.
covenant). Their differences are also plenty and significant, especially when one
investigates in detail into what seems similar between them at first sight. For
examples, while 1QS describes three groups of people in the community (priests,
elders/Levites and rest of the people, see 1QS VI 8-10; II 19-22), CD has a fourth
group called rg (alien CD XIV 4). The organizational terminology in the two
documents also has different uses and functions at a closer look, e.g. both rqbmh
(mebaqqerthe inspector) and ~ybrh (rabbimthe many) are found in 1QS and
CD, but they have different tasks. Also, 1QS employs dxyh (yahiadthe community)
as its self-designation, but CD uses (mahianeh) instead. The terms dyqph vyah
(paqidthe instructor) and lykfmh (miskilthe wise leader) are only found in 1QS
but not in CD. The mostly debated discrepancy between 1QS and CD is certainly their
different life situations (living in camps, cities(CD) or in the desert (1QS)) and
practice of celibacy (with women and child (CD, cf. 1QSa) or men only (1QS)).11
In the years after Fitzmyer made his comment, scholars tended to simplify
the problem and propose that there were two communities at the time (both belong to
the Essene party), one associated with S and the other with Da view now becoming
a consensus. The S community centered at Qumran to live a stricter live of celibacy
and the D community spread around Palestine residing in towns with their family
among other Jews and gentiles. According to Vermes (1999), the two communities
co-existed at the same time in harmony, but he provides no convincing explanation for
their different life forms.12 Other sees D as somehow earlier than S and the S
community probably made a transformation of the D materials into S (Davies 1983;
2000)
2.2.2 New Light from the Cave 4 manuscripts
New evidence from more recently published cave 4 manuscripts
dramatically altered the picture of the relation of S and D discussed above. The cave 4
copies of 1QS and CD confirm the composite nature of the two documents. So when
one investigates the textual history of S and D (e.g. by comparison of 1QS and 4QS,
CD and 4QD), one should pay more attention to individual section of the works than
the whole document as a final redactional product (Metso 1998, 188). And various
studies found that the penal code section is the key to understand the relation between
11
12
For a fuller comparison of 1QS and CD, please read Rowley 1952, Burrows 1955 and Hempel 1999.
Cf. Knibb 1984, 115
18
S and D (Hempel 1997b, 337).

2.2.2.1 The Complicate Situation
There is basically no direct parallel passage between 1QS and CD,13 but
some cave 4 manuscripts seem to form a bridge to them. First of all, some 4QD
materials have parallels in 1QS, e.g. the fragments 4QDa 10 II 2-15 and 4QDe 7 I 1-11
shared similar penal codes with 1QS VII 8-21 (Metso 2000, 88 note 6).14 This section
concerns misbehaviors within the community, e.g. speaking foolish thing (vii 9),
falling asleep during a session (VII 10), spitting in a session (VII 13) etc., and the
codes are expressed in the format of case law, i.e. beginning with the condition
whoever and followed by the period of penalty. 15 Most of the parallel
transgressions and punishments shared by 1QS and 4QD are nearly identical in
wordings and order, but while both 4QD and 1QS have fining as punishment or
penance,16 it is only the 4QD manuscripts that consistently have an extra punishment
of exclusion from the community for each offence. Also 1QS has a few additional
offences in the penal codes that shared in common with 4QD, including retaliating
(VII 11), spitting in the session (VII 15) and murmuring against community (VII 19).
An even more difficult textual variant in 1QS VII 10b-11a and 4QDa 10 ii is the
different positions of the term ~ybrh (the Many) in the two documents.17 All these
similarities and differences indicate that either direct literal dependency or sharing of
common literal source may explain their similarities whereas continuous updating and
contemporizing of each text according to new situation may explain their
13
Except the end of CD XIV which indicates a new section on penal code but it is absent in the
genizah Damascus Document.
14
For the description and translation of 4QDa,e, see Vermes 2004, 146, 152-54.
15
For a full lists and comparison of the 16 parallel penal codes in 1QS and 4QD, please see Appendix
A in Metso 2004, 335. For the verbal comparison of the Hebrew texts of 1QS and 4QDa,e, please see
Hempel 1997b, 339-41, where she added CD XIV 20 for comparison.
16
From vn[, means indemnity, fine (BDB 778), so does Knibbs translation (1987). Since 1QS VI
25 has the verb form with complement a quarter of his food, this specific kind of penalty may be
implied in the following context (Wise et al 2004 consistently translates the word to be punished
by (a period) reduced rations; cf. Knibb 1987, 126). Vermes (2004) interprets it more mildly as
penance. Other English translations have a neutral one punish(ment) (Garca Martnez 1994;
Qimaron and Charlesworth 1994)
17
In the case of unreasonably leaving a session trice. 1QS VII 10b-11a: and the same (applies) to the
man who goes away at a session of the Many without permission (hc[b) (Qimron and
Charlesworth). 4QDa [and likewise, whoever has] left [without he consent of the Congregation (~ybrh
tc[b] and gratu)itously as many as three ti[mes in] one session (Vermes 2004). Hempel claims that
this variant reading indicated that it seems most unlikely, therefore, to suppose that a reference to the
many that was present in an earlier version of the penal code came to be left out in 1QS. It seems
more probable to me that the reference to the many in 4QDa has been added to an earlier version of
this offence. (Hempel 1997b, 343) But she missed the similar redaction that in the very same phrase of
Hebrew text, there is another variant reading in which 1QS has ~ybrh bvwmb (session of the Many)
while 4QD left it out. This is a typical case that no definite evidence may help one to side with either
position.
19
differences.18 For example, the rule governing the offence of spitting in the session
in 1QS VII 15 may be added to address the new problem in the community. However,
there is no convincing evidence and argument that a definitive judgment can be made.
Similar complex situation occurs in other cave 4 manuscripts. The most
interesting example is the hybrid Serek Damascus or 4QSD (4Q265), which contains
features of 1QS (i.e. some specific penal code), CD (i.e. Sabbath regulations, mention
of women and children) and 4QD (i.e. double punishment of fine and exclusion).
4QSD also shared the introductory formula of biblical quotation and organizational
terminology used in 1QS and CD. 19 Other examples include: Rebukes by the
Overseer 20 (4Q477) which contains rebukes of misbehavior listed in 1QS and
organizational terms ynxm (camp) particular to CD (Metso 1998, 205); Communal
Ceremony (4Q275) and Order of Assembly (4Q279), 21 the former has words
resembling the description of entry into covenant in 1QS I-IV and the latter lists a
hierarchical order parallels to CD XIV 3-6 and 1QS II 19-25 (Metso 1998, 205-7).
Any resemblances between the texts are usually explained by that hypothesis that
either one text depends directly on the other or they draw materials from the same
source. Any discrepancy is viewed as a result of peculiar application of the tradition to
specific context. All these fragmentary cave 4 manuscripts indicate some links
between S and D, but also wreck that simple picture of the community(ies) postulated
by scholars, because the data from cave 4 substantially complicates the situation in
view. No balanced judgment can be made on that either/or option. The relation
between S and D, as viewed from the limited but new light of the cave 4 materials,
remains unclear.
2.2.2.2 Methodological Limitation
The methodological implication from the new light of 4Q materials is
18
Hempel (1997b, 343) tends to prefer S depends on D literally, but Metso (2004, 322) states that it is
more probable both S and D had reworked independently on an earlier version of the penal code. I
think the option of Metso is more convincing when one takes the complexity of data seriously.
19
Introductory formula bwtk rvak rpsb and bwtk rvak in 1QS and CD are also found in 4QSD,
indicating the present of biblical quotation in the lost part of the fragmentary document (Metso 1998,
203). Also the shared organizational terminology includes: ~ybrh bvwm (session of Many), dxyh
tc[ (council of Community) and ~ybrh l[ rqbmh fyah/dxyh l[ rqbmh ~ybrh/bfwm l[ rfa
rqbmh(Overseer/Examiner) (Metso 1998, 204).
20
A title given by Esther Eshel who published the manuscript in JJS 45:111-22 (Metso 1998, 204). She
considered 4Q477 as a list of rebukes carries out in the public by rqbmh (the Overseer) in the form of
They rebuke X because he It is more likely that the rebukes originated with witnesses of the
offences reported to the Overseer who was to make a record based on CD IX 16-20 (cf. CD IX 2-4).
See Vermes 2004, 244.
21
4Q275 and 4Q279 were named formerly as 4QTohotot Ba and 4Qtohotot D?, see Garca
Martnez 1994, 496. 4Q275 is also called Order of Initiation
20
significant to the Qumran studies. The studies of Sarianna Metso, an expert on the
textual history of 1QS, stimulate us to raise two reflections on the methodological
issue. First, the habitual reasoning of scholars in reconstruction of community history
from the texts needs revision. The literary dependency of one on the other vs
common source dichotomy no longer serves as an appropriate model for linking up
texts and history. Metso observed that there exists a huge gap between text and history
in Qumran studies, as she put a doubt on the accepted base of historical
reconstruction:
If various groups may have used common sources and borrowed material
from each other, how can the groups behind the manuscripts be identified
and categorized? If large parts of the material included in various
manuscripts are borrowed and modified, what is the criterion that enables
us to assign whole manuscripts to particular groups (e.g. a celibate
community versus a community in which marriage was a common
practice)? (1998c, 202-3)
The basic problem was embedded in the scholars earlier treatment of the
two Qumran rules, 1QS and CD, which were later conceptually developed into two
independent types of texts, S and D. This apparent neutral convention of scholarship
to categorize and label one type of texts against another actually links texts (or type of
texts) to hypothetical groups and their history implicitly. It also sets up normative
categories to evaluate the fragmentary cave 4 manuscripts and describe them either
belonging to the known categories or a new hybrid of unknown origin. What would
the picture of Qumran community look like if the copy of Community Rule were not
found in cave 1 but badly preserved in cave 4 while the copy of, say, 4QSe were firstly
discovered in cave 1 in good condition? What if the Damascus Document of Cairo
had never been found and that we have very little knowledge of this document except
the fragmentary 4QD? Metso raised the similar question when she found that 4QSh
and 5Q13 shared so many features that they may be the same document.
Both manuscripts contain hymnic or poetic material, and both have a
passage parallel 1QS. Why is one manuscript assigned as a copy of the
Community Rule, while the other is seen as quoting itif we were to
approach the covenant ceremony from the direction of 5Q13 and 4Q262,
and not from that of 1QS as we normally do, how would it change our
views concerning the liturgical details of the ceremony?(2004, 330)
21
If a whole document does not associate with a group (with its history) in
a direct or simple way, and 1QS and CD specifically are no longer the
coordinates to describe the Qumran community (communities) and their
theology (theologies), the second methodological adjustment in Qumran studies
(especially in studying 1QS) is to focus on the smaller unit and its redactional
history. It is an inevitable step as one notices the internal discrepancy22 of 1QS
and its composite nature through comparison with 4QS materials. So, it is
methodologically misleading and practically impossible to reconstruct the history
of a group out of a complete manuscript. Metso highlighted the difference
between a groups redaction of a part and the groups adaptation of the whole
document:
This (editorial activity) probably means that one group
formulated the material, which presumably matched the activities of that
group. When a different group borrowed that material because they
thought it was valuable, it is not necessary to conclude that the new group
acted out every detail of the passage; thus it would be misleading to make
the direct connection between that groups texts and its historical
activity.(2004, 331)
What we can properly do is to study the redactional activities detected in

individual unit that reveal a small piece of history of that unit and the tradition behind
the text rather than the history of a group. This allows us to determine the intended
emphasis made by the scribe through that redactional activity. However, the relation
between various sections/units in a document is not so securely established because,
just as Metsos comment indicated above, the readers of a document do not
necessarily treat every part of it possessing the same level of importance and
relevancy.
These two reflections are heuristic to the following study on the communal
identity in 1QS. We cannot investigate an idea in 1QS on its own, without consulting
its textual resemblance, i.e. 4QS. The primary focus should be upon the redaction
activities in individual units made by the scribe of 1QS that reveal the theological
emphasis. This does not exclude the importance of two things: 1) the received and
unaltered idea from 4QS, and 2) the relation between larger blocks of section in 1QS.
For 1), not every received material has the same importance and relevancy as the
22
1QS incoherently contains three penal codes and two admission procedures
22
redacted unit. Discernment should be made on individual case. For 2), although the
structure of 1QS does not display a clear flow of thought, the preservation of some
larger sections does indicate the hidden theological rationale of the scribe.
2.2.3 Structural division of 1QS
The relatively intact copy of Community Rule, 1QS, had been considered
with certain unity in the past. For example, Devorah Dimant (1984) treated the
doublets (of penal code) in 1QS not necessarily the result of editorial process but a
literay characteristic of the Rule, unobserved up to the present (501). She suggested
that 1QS is characterized by chiastic pattern (502)23 and hence implying that a master
plan was in the mind of the final editor. An earlier scholar Pierre Guilbert, after doing
structural analysis on 1QS, viewed this document as a homogeneous and coherent
whole.24 They both did not dismiss the possibility of borrowing by the author of
1QS but these borrowings were recast into a new whole. However, it is undeniable
that incoherence does exist in 1QS.25 We should not accept unity of document as a
prior understanding of the nature of ancient literary before we find any convincing
clue to explain that incoherence or even contradiction. For the aim of making division
on 1QS, the structural analysis of Guilbert (1959) is still a very useful approach which
virtually laid the foundation of later studies on 1QS (e.g. Leaner, Vermes, Knibb,
Charlesworth etc.). The recent publication of cave 4 manuscripts and the respective
study on the textual development of Community Rule did not alter the basic
agreement on the division but only further confirm it. Most of the divisions become
consensus among scholars except the section 8.1-9.11, which reflects most
complicated redactional and scribal activities in the textual transmission process.
Guilbert observed three textual indicators and scribal marks and a clear
23
Dimant observed 1QS IX, 12-26 appears to parallel III, 13-IV, 26, and proposed the following
chiastic pattern (1984, 502):
Introductiongeneral aims, I, 1-15
Entrance into the covenant, I, 16-III, 12
Ideologyto the Maskil, III, 13-IV, 26
The life of the community, V, 1-VI, 23
The penal code, VI, 24-VII, 25
The model community, VIII, 1-IX, 11
Instructionsto the Maskil, IX, 12-26
Hymns, X, 1-XI, 22
24
Guilbert, Pierre. 1959. Le plan de la Rgle de la Communaut. RevQ 1: 343-44. Quoted in
Gagnon 1995, 73.
25
For example, 1) the designation of community members shifted from the men of the Community
(V 15) to the men of holiness (VIII 17, 20, 23); 2) the doublets of penitential codes in VI 24-VII 25
and VIII 16-IX 2; 3) the authority given to the priest in IX 7 in contrast to V 2-3, 9, in which the Sons
of Zadok shall rule with the multitude of the men of the Community.
23
division can be made26: (1) introductory formulas addressing to the maskl (I, 1(?);
III, 13; V, 1 (in 4QS ms.); IX, 12, 21), or beginning with demonstrative pronouns this
is (hz) or these are (hla) (IV, 2; V, 1, 7; VI, 8, 24; VIII, 20; IX, 12, 21), or
beginning with the preposition b followed by an infinitive construct, denoting a
temporal clause (I, 18; VIII, 4, 12; IX, 3). (2) Paragraph indentations and blank spaces
(I, 21; II, 4, 11; coinciding the introductory formulas III, 13; V, 1; VI, 24; IX, 12). (3)
Signs (a small hooks or other symbols) on the right margins of the texts for unit
recognition (III, 18; VII, 25; XI, 15).
A
B
Based on these division indicators, 1QS is structurally divided as follows:

I 1-15---General introduction
I 16-III 12---Entry into the Community
a. I 16-18---Prolegomena
b. I 18-II 18--- The ritual of the covenant entry ceremony
c. II 19-III 12---Rules regarding covenant entrance
i)II 19-25a---order of precedence in the ceremony

ii)II 25b-III 12---sincerity of the converts
III 13-IV 26---The doctrine of the two spirits
a. III 13-15a---Introductory Summary
b. III 15b-IV 1---Two spirits, two humanities and two angels
c. IV 2-14---The two ways and two visitations
d. IV15-26---Eschatological destiny of the two spirits
V 1-VII 25---The internal regulation of the Community
a. V 1-VI 8a---General and personal rules
i) V 1-7a---basic obligation of community members
ii) V 7b-20a---Covenant binding oath
iii) V 20b-VI 8a---instructions for community interaction
b. VI 8b-23---General rules of the session of the Many

i) VI 8b-13a---rules for session of the Many
ii) VI 13b-23---rules for full membership
c. VI 24-VII 25---The penitential code
VIII 1-IX 11
a. VIII 1-16a---definition and aim of the community
i) VIII 1-4a
ii) VIII 4b-8a
iii) VIII 8b-12a
iv) VIII 12b-16a
26
See Gagnon 1995, 69-73.

24
b. VIII 16b-IX 11---regulations for the community
i) VIII 16b-19
ii) VIII 20-IX 2
iii) IX 3-11
IX 12-XI 22---Rules for personal training of new members
a. IX 12-21a---the maskls role as instructor of candidates and members
b. IX 21b-XI 22--i) IX 21b-26a---what maskl should love and hate
ii) IX 26b-X 8---the times of prayer
iii) X 9-XI 22---final hymn
Murphy OConnor further explicated the formation of 1QS in terms of
literary growth in four stages, which somehow are correlated with the periods of
occupation of Qumran known from archaeological evidence. 27 The literary
evolvement through history is basically around a core part of earliest stage in the
pre-Qumranic period, called by Murphy OConnor a Manifesto (1QS VIII 1-10a,
12b-16a, IX 3-X 8a), which is thought of being composed by the Teacher as a
blueprint for the community consisting of fifteen men (twelve layman and three
priests) (Davies 1987, 60). The next stage of the growth of 1QS includes two pieces
of non-homogeneous penal legislation (VIII 16b-19 and VIII 20-IX 2) plus an
interpolation (VIII 10b-12a). This stage was the beginning of the Qumran Community
of relatively fewer members in the archaeological period 1a (pre-100 B.C.).28 The
third stage, represented by the section 1QS V-VII (except V 13b-VI 8a)29 which
composed of more detailed regulation of the community, marched well with Period 1b
when extensive rebuilding took place at Qumran apparently to accommodate larger
size of membership, indicating a marked transition to institutionalization,
democratization and heightened self-definition in the community (Gagnon 1995,
79-80). The final stage composed of 1QS I-IV and X 9-XI 22, plus the interpolation V
13b-VI 8a. This last stage of edition is characterized by the desire to rekindle the
decreasing fervor of the community.30
This fourfold literary development of 1QS allows us to grasp the
27
See Gagnon 1995, 76. The major thesis of Murphy-OConnor is found in Murphy-OConnor,
Jerome. 1969. La gense littraire de la Rgle de la Communaut. RB 76:528-49. It was followed
closely by Pouilly (Pouilly. 1976. La rgle de la Communaut de Qumrn: Son evolution littraire.
Cahier de la Revue Biblique 17. Paris: Gabalda) with minor revision. The following discussion is
mainly based on Gagnon 1995 and Davies 1987.
28
See Gagnon 1995, 79; Garca Martnez and Barrera 1995, 51.
29
Murray OConnor originally considered within 1QS V-VII, only V 13b-15a belonging to last stage
of formation of 1QS. But he later extended the section to VI 8a. See Gagnon 1995, 80-1.
30
Pouilly 1976, 537 quoted in Gagnon 1995, 81.
25
relation of various sections with respect to the history of Qumran community as

suggested by the archaeological findings. Although the articulation of the literary
growth seems too tidy that some may put doubt on its textual ground, it provides a
basic scheme of development for us to correlate roughly the chronological sequence.
The basic agreement among scholars is that VIII 1-X 8 (i.e. the stage 1 and 2
materials) is the oldest part.31 The new light from cave 4 materials also confirms that
scheme of development in a broad way. Firstly, 4QSd and 4QSe, which are both dated
to be composed earlier than 1QS, have a beginning that parallels 1QS V 1ff.,
indicating that col. I-IV of 1QS is a younger section.32 Secondly, 4QSe does not end
with the hymn of 1QS X 9-XI 22,33 but a calendric text 4QOtot,34 indicating col.
X-XI are also of later period. However, the inclusion of col. X-XI to 4QSb,d and col.
I-IV to 4QSb independently occurred at different stages and Sitz Im Leben. Their final
abridgement into 1QS does not necessarily imply that at the time of its composition,
the two section 1QS I-IV and X-XI refer to the same situation of covenantal renewal
ceremony to evoke the same kind of emotional remembrance of a once intense
commitment as suggested by Murphy-OConnor (Gagnon 1995, 83). Also, no cave
4 materials displayed evidence that 1QS V-VII and VIII-IX did ever exist separately,
although the two sections are apparently of different natures (Metso 1996, 108-9). It
only proves that an earlier combined version of the middle block of 1QS (col. V-IX)
was already formed well before the editions of 4QS material that are available to us.
2.2.4 Textual development of 1QS in comparison with 4QS
The literary criticism by Murphy OConnor was mainly built on detail
textual analysis of the single copy of 1QS to investigate its stages of formation. As we
have briefly discussed above, the basic result of Murphy OConnor concords with the
preliminary comparison with 4QS. A full study on the relation of 1QS and 4QS allows
us, on the one hand, to trace the textual traditions in 1QS as represented by some 4QS
31
Knibb 1987, 77-8. For other modifications on and opposition to Murphy-OConnors thesis, please
see Gagnon 1995, 83-4; Metso 1996, 109 note 4. It is worthy to mention theory proposed by Peuch
(Peuch, E. 1979. Recesion: J. Pouilly, La Rgle de la Communaut de Qumran. Son evolution littraire.
RevQ 10:103-111) that 1QS developed in 3 stages (against the 4 stages of Murphy-OConnor): 1) col.
VIII-IX, 2) col. V-VII, and 3) col. I-IV and X-XI (See Metso 1996, 148; Gagnon 1995, 83).
32
4QSb contains materials parallel to both section of 1QS I-IV and V-X. Metso believes that it belongs
to the same tradition of 4QSd and originally begins at 1QS V 1ff. It is only at a later time that an earlier
version parallel to 1QS I-IV was added to 4QSb.
33
The exact beginning of the final section (the hymn) is controversial. It depends on whether one
treats IX 26-X 8 as a part of the former or later unit. See Metso 1996, 108 note 2. Alexander and
Vermes (2004, 66-7) believe that the extremely fragmentary 4QSe Col. IV (Frag. 4a-d) line 1-8
followed 1QS IX 20-25, and then at line 9 the text of 4QOtot begins. So it may indicate that the section
corresponding to 1QS IX ends at IX 25 rather than X 8.
34
Vermes (2004, 123) argued the other way round, considering it is the editor of 4QSe who replaced
the section parallel to 1QS X-XI with 4QOtot.
26
manuscripts, and on the other hand, to recover the redaction of 1QS, which directly
concerns our investigation of the communal identity of 1QS.
Metso observed that out of the ten 4QS manuscripts related to 1QS, 4QSb,
4QSd and 4QSe are especially important for plotting the lines of textual tradition
behind 1QS. One of the traditions behind 1QS is represented by 4QSb and 4QSd that
are a shorter version loosely parallel to 1QS V-IX35 plus the hymns closely parallel to
1QS X-XI.36 This tradition lacks the biblical citations (e.g. Zeph 1:6 in V 11; Lev
22:16 in V 14; Exod 23:7 in V 15; Isa 40:3 in VIII 13-14 etc.), various phrases and
key words found in 1QS, especially having the title Many instead of the sons of
Zadokite (1QS V 2, 9; 4QSb 5 3, 7; 4QSd 1 I 2, 7). Another line of tradition is
represented by 4QSe that is a version parallel to 1QS VII-IX, with some minor verbal
variants but missing the whole section 1QS VIII 15b-IX 11 just after the citation and
interpretation of Isa 40:3 at 1QS VIII 14-15a. In other words, if 1QS is a compilation
based on these two traditions, the redactor on the one hand followed the tradition of
4QSb,d to include the hymnal section (1QS X 26b-XI 22) instead of the calendrical
text 4QOtot, and inherited the liturgical and theological text parallel to 1QS I-IV from
4QSb. The redactor also had the intention to provide scriptural legitimation for the
regulations of the community and to reinforce the communitys self-understanding
(Metso 1996, 105). On the other hand, the redactor included the insertion 1QS VIII
16b-IX 11 (two penal codes with a duplicate of VIII 1-1137) as 4QSb,d and made some
minor alternation to the length of penalty to bring the text of 1QS up to date. He also
made some adjustments to the text to strengthen the communitys self-understanding.
35
As we have explained above, 4QSb, with the addition parallel to 1QS I-IV, belonged to later period
in this tradition.
b,d
36
Actually, the sections near the end of both 4QS follow closely 1QS X 1ff.
37
the duplicate themes includes: expiation for the land (VIII 6,10; IX 4; grounding of the community
in truth (VIII 5; IX 3), the holy house for Aaron and Israel (VIII 5-6, 8-9; IX 6), the offering of a
ssoothing odour (VIII 9; IX 4-5), separation of those who walk in the way of perfection (VIII 10-11, 13;
IX 5-6, 9). The third unit of the insertion, IX 3-11, became a fulfillment of the of the ideal in 1QS VIII
1-11 (Metso 1996, 72).
27
Chapter 3 The Communal Identity in 1QS

3.1 Communal-identity as Israel
The first feature of self-understanding of the community in 1QS is their
identification to Israel as the covenant partner of YHWH. Our task here is to
investigate the occurrence of this name and its specification in 1QS V-IX.
3.1.1 Redaction emphasizing the identity of Israel
larvy occurs 16 times in 1QS,1 four of them in col. I-IV and the remaining
twelve in col. V-IX. larvy refers either to the covenantal people of God as a whole,
i.e. the Israel, or more specifically to the laity, in contrast to the priestly group, i.e. the
sons of Aaron.2 In the Jewish cultural map, the national Israel as Gods possession is
sacred in the sense that a social boundary is set up between the Israel and gentiles.
Within the Israel, the holiness associated with the priestly group is significantly
different from the relatively profane lay people that another social boundary is set up
within Israel, i.e. between the priests and the general Israelites. This differentiation is
reflected on the spatial boundary between the area of sanctuary (Holy of holies)
limited to the priests and the court area where common Israelites, the laity is
accessible.
Through this scheme, we may be better in understanding the presentation of
the self-identification of the community with Israel in 1QS V-IX. For example, in 1QS
V 5b-6, after a long characterization of the dxy (community), the l+infinitive pattern
is resumed: They shall lay a foundation of truth for Israel, for the Community of the
eternal covenant. They shall atone for all those who devote themselves, for a
sanctuary in Aaron and for a house of truth in Israel, and for those who join them for a
Community.3 The underlined phrase and words are absent in the parallel 4QSb,d texts.
The exegetical question is how we can understand the series of prepositional phrases
beginning with l after the predicative infinitive dsy (to lay (a foundation)). For the
sake of clarity, the phrases are arranged according to the parallel structure without the
1QS I 22, 23; II 22; III 24; V 5, 6, 22; VI 13; VIII 4, 5, 9, 11, 12; IX 3, 6, 11. (see Abegg et al 2003)
Knibb 1988, 21, 107, 114, 131. This understanding of Israel is typical of post-exilic social structure,
occurs in later biblical book (Qimron 1986, 91).
3
Translation followed Qimron and Charlesworth 1994. They shall lay (dsyl) resumed the last
infinitive in line 2 in order to become a Community. This predicative use of infinitive (modal) is
especially frequent in 1QS. The succession of infinitives in 1QS I 1ff.; VIII 2ff.; IX 12ff. is interpreted
in this way (Qimron 1986, 71).
2
28
insertion in 1QS, i.e. the more original text of 4QSb,d is as follows4:

(lamed=for)
larvyl5c
(lamed=that is)
dxyl
5c
(lamed=that is)
~ybdntmh lwbl
6a
(lamed=as)
!wrhab vdwql
6b
(lamed=as)
(lamed=to)
larvyb tmah tyblw

dxyl ~hyl[ ~ywlnhw
6c
6d
Though we cannot assume the lamed here follows the usage of classical
(biblical) Hebrew, it is still necessary to make the most from the context and the
relevant knowledge of Hebrew syntax. Four specific uses of lamed fit mostly the case
here: the lamed of advantage (5c, for), apposition (5c and 6a, that is), purpose
with regard to altered status (6b, 6c, as), and direction of motion (6d, to).5 The
two participles ~ybdntmh (6a, those who willingly offer themselves) and ~ywlnh
(6d, those who join themselves), joined by w, form a pair that shared the lamed in 6a,
which is in parallel with the lamed in 5c, indicating an appositional relation with
Israel: for the Israel, that is a community, that is all those who freely offer
themselvesand those who join themselves.6 The other two lameds in 6b and 6c
indicate a purpose of altered status (as) associating with the first participle: those
who willingly offer themselves as a sanctuary in Aaron and as a house of truth in
Israel The last lamed in 6d marks object (the community) the motion (join) leads
toward: those who join themselves to a community. Of course the two usages of
lamed, apposition and purpose of altered status, seem indistinguishable from each
other in this case. However, we can notice clearly that the community (dxy), even in
their more original version reflected in 4QSb,d, identifies themselves to the Israel by
(1) direct reference, and by (2) claiming themselves to be constituted of the priestly
group (as a sanctuary in Aaron) and the laity (as a house of truth in Israel).7
4
b,d
b,d
Two minor variant readings exist in 4QS except the underlined word: 4QS have in a house of
truth for Israel rather than for a house of truth in Israel in 1QS. This may be explained as a
correction to the syntax by the scribe of 1QS.
5
For these usages and their biblical examples, please see Waltke and OConnor 1990, 205, 207, 209,
211.
6
Vermes (2004, 104) interprets there are three groups that benefit from the atonement: They shall
atone for all those in Aaron who have freely pledged themselves to holiness, and for those in Israel who
have freely pledged themselves to the House of Truth, and for those who joined them Similar
division into three groups is found in Wise et al (2004, 23) except the third group is strangely
designated as Gentile proselytes, which may be influenced by CD XIV 4 or the use of ~ywlnh in Isa
56:6.
7
The two phrases Holy of holiness in Aaron and house of truth in Israel together not only denote
the communitys self-understanding as the whole Israel comprising of the priests and laity, it also
reflects the self-understanding of the community as the temple (sanctuary, house) where the
covenant God, YHWH, dwells and expiation of sin found possible. This important notion will become
clear in 1QS VIII 1-10. We will also discuss it in the next part.
29
1QS inserted three words,
rpkl ~lw[ tyrb
((a community) of eternal
covenant. They shall atone (for)) in the series of lamed between line 5 and 6. The
insertion of the verb rpkl altered the function of lamed (6a) associated with the two
substantival participles (6a, 6d) from introducing a relation of apposition to
advantage. 9 More importantly, the theological intention of this redaction is to
emphasize the identity of dxy as the covenantal partner of YHWH with particular
cultic or priestly function to expiate the members, a character of the community that
will be made more explicit in col VIII.
Another similar passage is 1QS V 20c-22 which highlights the dual
authority of the priests and laity in examination of new members:
And they shall examine (l.21) their spirits within the Communityunder
the authority of the Sons of Aaron who dedicate themselves within the
Community to establish (l.22) his covenant and to observe all his statues
which he commanded to do, and upon the authority of the multitude of
Israel who dedicated themselves to return to his covenant through the
Community.
In the earlier 4QSd, the conjunction w is absent at the beginning of the second
phrase of line 22, rendering a difficult construction which he commanded to do upon
the authority of. But the duplicated wordings ~ybdntmhyp l[(under
the authority of who dedicate themselves) in lines 21 and 22, even as
understood in 4QSd, clearly indicates the parallel authority of the priests and laity, that
the addition of w in 1QS aims to clarify this (cf. 1QS V 2). The dual authority of Sons
of Aaron and multitude of Israel confirms the self-understanding of dxy as the
whole Israel. The establishment of covenant relation by the Sons of Aaron is already
attested in the earlier 4QSd but 1QS further strengthens this relationship by inserting
wtyrbl and dxyb at the end of line 22 and 21 respectively. In this way, both the
authorities of the priests and laity over the community are based on that same
covenant with YHWH within the same community. Actually, the establishment of the
covenant in the community and the return to the covenant through the community
The l+infinitive construction again indicates predicative use.

The term ~ybdntmh (those who willingly offer themselves) occurs mainly in S: 1QS I 7, 11; V 1, 6, 8,
d
g
10, 21, 22; VI 13; 4QS I 1, 5; II 1, 2; 4QS 1a-b, 2 etc. It clearly refers to the general members of the
community with the characteristic of a voluntary movement based on individual decision. This term is
limit to the section 1QS I 1-15 and V-VII echoes the thesis of Murphy OConnor that the later
development of 1QS have the aim to rekindle the initial enthusiasm of the members.
8
9
30
basically remind the readers that the dxy and the tyrb are inseparable.
The balanced authorities of the priests/laity and their identities in close
association with the covenant are extensively elaborated in 1QS V 1ff 10 in
comparison with the beginning of 4QSb,d. While 4QSb,d has a very short reference to
the authority in the community (answerable to the authority of the Many about),
1QS V 2-3a replaces the title Many with a whole block of sentences describing the
identity of the community:
the Sons of Zadok, the priests who keep the covenant, according to the
multitude of the men of the Community who hold fast to the covenant.
According to their order shall go forth the determination of the lot
The parallel syntax is again apparent in connecting Sons of Zadok and
multitude of the men of the Community in 1QS V 2b-3a:
Tyrbh yrmwv ~ynhwkh Qwdc ynb yp l[

Tyrbb ~yqzxmh dxyh yvna bwr yp l[
The sons of Zadok, which is interchangeable with sons of Aaron, is
explicitly explained as the priests who keep the covenant. The multitude (bwr V 9,
22; VI 19) is used in the same sense as the many(mbrh), referring to the whole
member of the community.11 This insertion greatly reaffirms and strengthens the
peculiar combination of priests and laity (as already attested in the 4QSb,d (para. 1QS
V 6, 21-22)) that constitute the dxy as the Israel who keeps (rmv) and holds fast
(qzx) to the covenant. The theological innovation at this redaction is emphasizing the
Zadokite link of the leader and the dxy as the true keeper of the covenant (See
Bockmuehl 2001, 405).
Similar redaction skill is found in 1QS V 9-10. The receiver of the
revelation from the Torah is originally limited to the [multitude of] Council of the
men of the Community(dxyh yvna tc[ [bwrl] 4QSb Frag. 5 line 7-8; 4QSd 1 I 6-7)
but in 1QS V 9-10, it is greatly expanded:
10
The requirement of shared authority of priests and laity on decision about practical and
theological matter required in col 5 does not match with the case in col 9. In IX 7, it is only the Sons
of Aaron, i.e. the priests, who shall command on matters concerning judgment, property and rules of
the men of the community. The joined rule of priests and laity may represent a later practice and the
situation in col 9 belongs to earlier stage of the community (Knibb 1988, 139).
11
For the OT background of the use of the term Zadok, please see Knibb 1988, 105-6; Leaney 1966,
91-95..
31
to the Sons of Zadok, the priests who keep the covenant and seek his
will, and according to the multitude of the men of their covenant who
devote themselves together to his truth and to walking in his will. He
shall take upon his soul by covenant
This insertion includes nearly every element in 1QS V 2-3a with two
additional elements. First, the men of the Community in V 2 is altered to the men of
their covenant (~tyrb). Second, the will (!wcr) of God is emphasized in relation to
both the Sons of Zadok and the Multitude. The first element seems not surprising in
the context as we have already discussed the intrinsic affinity between dxy and tyrb,
but their equivalency is clearly reflected in 1QS V 7b-8a which again shows the
intention of the redaction hand:
every one who enters into the Council of the Community (dxyh
tc[l
abh lwb), shall enter into the covenant of God (la tyrbb awby) in the
sight of all those who devote themselves.12(cf. V 20)
More interestingly, every member has to return (bwvl) to the Torah of
Moses (V 8b), just as the multitude of Israel who dedicate themselves to return to his
covenant through the Community (wtyrbl dxyb bwvl) 13 (V 22b). This final
observation hints a deep-seated self-understanding of the community that they are the
sole group who are faithful keeper of the covenant as reflected concretely in their
faithfulness in keeping the Torah. In other words, the boundaries that were originally
found separately in social grouping, in the privileged covenant relationship with
YHWH and in the observance of Torah, now converge to a single boundary
represented by the membership in the dxy. The single boundary coincides with the
observance of the Torah equivalent to the second element (i.e. Gods will) of redaction
in 1QS V 9-10, which relates closely to what God commanded (V 9, 10. cf. V 1).14
12
b,d
Underlined parts are absent in 4QS . Alexander and Vermes (2004, 23) reads Every initiant into
the Council of the Yahad is to enter the covenant in full view of all the volunteers. The almost
equivalent relationship of dxy and tyrb is widespread in 1QS, especially in the interchangeable use of
the verbs cross over (rb[]) and enter (awb) in describing the admission into the community and
covenant(e.g. I, 16, 18b, 20, 24; II, 10, 12, 18, 25; V, 7-8 etc.)
13
Note the exchange of preposition l and b preceding dxy and tyrb in V 7b-8a and V 22b. This also
indicates the two terms overlap semantically.
14
!wcr (will/favor) occurs 13 times in 1QS (V 1, 9, 10; VIII 6, 10; IX 4, 5, 13, 15, 23, 24; XI 17, 18). It
has a little variance in meaning in different part of the document. In the context of VIII 6, 10; IX 4, 5, it
associates closely with the role of the community as atonement. In IX 13, 15 ,23, 24, Gods will is
again related to His commands to which the Master shall seek. But in XI 17, 18, it may refer to the
eternal plan of God for the world.
32
3.1.2 The use of larvy that does not directly refer to dxy
It should be noted that in 1QS,
larvy
does not always refer to the
community. Beside the occurrences in col. V (3 times, that we have just discussed
above) and in col. VIII-IX (4 times),15 when Israel representing the laity is paired up
with the priestly group to denote the whole Israel, i.e. the community, there are a few
cases that its reference is less certain, and in some other cases, it is quite probable that
the community is not in mind.
In III 21b-25a, the sons of Light sin under the dominion of the Angel of
darkness, but they also have the help from the God of Israel and his Angel of Truth
(line 24b). It seems not intended in the immediate context that the Israel specifically
refers to the dxy, but the salvic action of God to help all the Sons of Light approves
the covenantal relation between God and the community. Therefore it does make
sense that the phrase God of Israel also denotes the same covenantal relationship
between God and the community. In other words, the helping of God to the Sons of
Light implies they have taken the identity of Israel.
(larvyb
In the threefold introductory clause, When these become in Israel

hla twyhb) (VIII 4, 12; IX 3),16 the demonstrative pronoun these could
be these men, i.e. the fifteen person mentioned in VIII 1-4a, or these things, i.e. the
details described in line 1-4a concerning their characters. Although it makes no
significant difference between the two meanings, the contexts of VIII 12 and IX 3
point to the core fifteen members (twelve men and three priest) being intended here
(Knibb 1988, 130). These twelve men and three priests are best understood as
representing the twelve secular tribes and the three Levites clans respectively (i.e.
Gershon, Kohath and Merari, Num 3:17. Leaney 1966, 212; Knibb 1988, 130). In
other words, if we follow the source critical study of Murphy OConnor that VIII
1-16a+IX 3-X 8a belongs to the earliest part of 1QS, the author of this section
foresees the establishment of a community in the future under the condition that the
Israel of fifteen core person is formed. So the phrase when these (fifteen) men
become in Israel implies the consciousness that, on the one hand, the earliest
members are themselves Israel in the miniature (Knibb 1988, 130), and on the other
15
E.g. VIII 5, 9; IX 6, 11, which will be discussed later. In 1QS II 19-22, the precedence of the annual
ceremony is arranged in threefold order: The priests first, followed by the Levites, finally the people.
The purpose of this order is provided: so that every single Israelite (lit. every man of Israel) may know
his standing in the Community of God The identity of the community members as Israelite is
clear here.
16
In VIII 12b, the scribe made two corrections above the line: Then these become as a community in Israel
in accordance with these rule
33
hand, they are different from the Israel as such. This phrase represents the moment
when the embryonic community comes into being, its existence alongside with the
historical Israel brings tension in their identity. But in this formative period of the
community, i.e. either just before or after the schism, this tension is necessary and the
explicit mention of Israel in the phrase does not aim to highlight the communitys
historical origin (i.e. continuity), or its geographical location, but its seclusion (i.e.
discontinuity). It is the maintenance of their holiness as the sanctuary to atone for the
people/land (VIII 5-10; IX 4-5a) and separate from the wickedness (VIII 13; IX 5b,
8-9) that is the main concern of their existence.
Other sharper distinction of the historical Israel and the community are
found in VIII 11b-12a and VI 13b-14a. In VIII 11b-12a, there is no restriction for
every new member after two years of probation to receive the secret teaching, which
is hidden from Israel but discovered by studying the Torah in the community. This
sectarian understanding of the community as the privileged heritor of secret teaching
put their identity against the mainstream Israel who does not share in that secret.
Once again we see the community establish their identity as the true receiver of Torah
by highlighting the discontinuity with the historical Israel. In VI 13b-14a, we find the
distinction between dxy and larvy to be sharpest: Anyone who willingly offers
himself from Israel to join the council of community (Knibb 1988, 119). It should
be noted that (1) the context concerns the admission of individual into the community
(voluntarily self offering and the singular pronominal suffixes), and (2) the
admission process involves two motions: separation from (the wicked Israel) and join
to (the community). In other words, although the parent group, i.e. the historical Israel,
is mentioned together with the community, the emphasis is the individual decision to
choose the right way. We can see the parallel description of the doublet of motions in
line 14b-15a: If he (the new member) is suited to the discipline he (the Officer) shall
permit him to enter into the covenant to turn to the truth and depart from all deceit.
The contrast of the truth and all deceit parallels to council of community and
Israel. So the function of employing Israel here is not likely to recall their ethnical
identity of historical Israel before conversion, but to highlight the ethical distinction
between the pass and the present status based on individual decision.
The last occurrence of Israel that we have to consider is in I 21-23 where
the priests and Levites are to recount Gods gracious acts toward Israel and the
iniquities of the sons of Israel in the context of the covenant entry ceremony. This
short section (I 21-II 1) ambiguously makes mention of a historical dimension in very
brief format. The salvation history of Israel seems in the background, especially we
34
find the phrase we and our fathers twice at the fragmentary ending of the column.
The we and our fathers become the only linkage in 1QS that connects the
community and the historical Israel directly. However, the phrases actually follows
biblical theme of confession, e.g. the iniquity of the sons of Israel and all their guilty
transgression and their sins from Lev 16:21; we and our father before us is adapted
from Psalm 106:6. 17 More importantly, the recital of history in terms of Gods
wondrous deeds interwoven with Israels sins forms a major part of the covenant
ceremony in Neh. 9:6-37. From this perspective, the recounting of the past in 1QS I
21-II 1 does not aim to bring out the historical consciousness of the community, but to
recall the biblical tradition of covenant ceremony in which history reveals the
contrasting faithful love of God and the iniquity of His people. This becomes the
theological basis of the necessity to confess ones own sin and become converted to
the covenant. In other words, history and the historical Israel become the symbols and
the language that the community employed to express their identity in the covenant
ceremony.
After investigating the self-understanding of the Qumran community(ies),
Sanders concluded that they generally refrained from calling themselves Israel.
They seem to have retained the consciousness of being a specially chosen part of
Israel18 (1977, 247). Sanders may be correct in his first statement because the more
frequent self-designation in 1QS (and other scrolls) is not Israel but the Many,
Council of Community, Multitude of men or simply the community etc. However,
his second statement simply overlooks the periphrastic expression of communal
identity as covenant partner of YHWH. We find that even in the earlier version of S,
i.e. 4QSb,d, the community already described themselves as the Israel directly (para.
1QS V 5b). This version also declares the identity of the community in symbolic way
as the Israel constituted of the priestly group and the laity (para. 1QS V 21b-22). The
redactor of 1QS not only preserves this self-understanding but also greatly reaffirms
and elaborates extensively this peculiar identity by firstly, highlighting the covenant
17
Cf. 1 Kings 8:47; Jer. 3:25; Ezek. 2:3; Dan. 9:5; CD XX 28b-30a. See Knibb 1988, 85; Leaney 1966,
128.
18
The scope of Sanders study is not limited to 1QS, he includes CD, 1QM, 1QH and certain pesherim.
His main thesis is that the community does not think of themselves as the whole Israel exclusively, but
only being part of it in the present age. His exegesis on a few key passages tend to overemphasize the
partitive understanding of election and conversion, e.g. the phrases those of Israel who repent or turn
back in CD IV 2; VI 4f.; VIII 16; the phrase elect of Israel in CD IV 3f.; 4Qflor I 19; 1QM XII 1;
and the phrase multitude of Israel in 1QS V 22 etc. This interpretation is influenced by the believe
that the eschatological Israel would be formed by the conversion of the rest of Israel to the way of the
sect (Sanders 1977, 247). The present study focuses mainly on the communal identity of 1QS, so there
exists differences in the conclusion with Sanders.
35
of God with the community (insertion of
tyrb
and
dxy
in V 5b-6, 21b-22), and
secondly, recasting the titles of the community to more theologically loaded sons of
Zadok and multitude of the men of the community /their covenant, both titles being
tightly associated with the fidelity to the covenant (V 1f., 9-10). In the redaction of
1QS, the identity of dxy and tyrb is further established that entering into the
community is identical to entering into the covenant relation with God and implying
genuine observance of the Torah (V 7b-8a, 8b, 22b).
It is hard to claim that the identity of Israel in 1QS is exclusively
belonging to the community, but the representative expressions of fifteen people in
the formative group and the combination of priestly group and laity point to the
conclusion that they take up the totality of Israel as the covenantal partner of YHWH.
The existence of the title Israel in 1QS not referring to the community does not
devastate this conclusion, because we find that the term Israel though refers to the
historical and national Israel, its function is to highlight the discontinuity between the
community and the Israel at large. The historical/national Israel in 1QS is consistently
described negatively in association with the language such as wickedness, iniquity
(VIII10), men of deceit (VIII 13; cf. VI 15a), sinful unfaithfulness (IX 4), being
concealed form revelation (VIII 11). The linkage with Israel and its history in I 22-II 1
is metaphorical that the community found the theological base to participate in the
covenant ceremony. This discontinuity with the historical Israel and history (i.e.
ahistorical tendency) is important in this study and we will further investigate this
feature of 1QS in comparison with the historical awareness in CD.
3.2 Communal Identity as Sanctuary
The ten occurrences of the words
~yrpK/~yrwpK
rpK
(to cover, to atone, also

atonement) are evenly distributed in the major sections, col 1-IV,
V-IX, X-XI, of 1QS.19 In II 8, III 4, 6, 8, 11 and XI 14, God as the agent of atonement
is clearly implied,20 while in V 6, VIII 6, 10 and IX 4, the community is specially
appointed to play that atoning function as their very purpose of existence. Moreover,
the contexts of the occurrences in V 6, VIII 6, 10 and IX 4 also describe the
community as holiness (vdwq), holy of holies (~yvdwq vdwq) and house (tyb),
which are doubtlessly designation to the sanctuary or the temple. The community as
sanctuary is the second major feature of their communal identity. We will consider
firstly the theologically loaded section VIII 4-10 to investigate the idea of being
19
20
1QS II 8; III 4, 6, 8, 11; V 6; VIII 6, 10; IX 4; XI 14.

For the discussion on atonement in 1QS with God as the agent, see Garnet 1977, 57-81.
36
sanctuary for the community. Then we will discuss its atoning function indicated
more generally in 1QS.
3.2.1 Sanctuary in 1QS VIII 4-10
VIII 4b-10a, which is introduced by the first of the three formulas When
these become in Israel, has the fullest expression for the identity of the community
as sanctuary. This unit includes a list (a-h) of significant designations and
terminology for the community:
t[jm) (4QSe has ~]lw[ jpv[ml (eternal judgment)21

b.House of Holiness for Israel (larvyl vdwq tyb),
c.Most holy assembly/foundation for Aaron (!wrhal ~yvdwq vdwq dwsw)22,
a.eternal plant (~lw[
d.Witness of truth for judgment chosen by his will

y
(!wcr yr x[y]bw jpvml tma yd[),
e.the tested wall (!xbh tmwx),
f.Costly cornerstone (lb dqy tnp),
g.Most holy dwelling for Aaron (!wrhal ~yvdwq vdwq !w[m) and
h.House of perfection and truth for Israel (larvyb tmaw ~ymt tyb).
A few observations should be made: 1) the two pairs b/c and g/h are the
typical coupling of Aaron and Israel. Also, each pair is joined by a conjunctive waw. 2)
e/f together (with line 8a) formed an allusion to Isa 28:16, which is specifically put in
that line with two blank spaces at both ends of the allusion. Similar blank space is also
put at the beginning of g. 3) All titles and descriptions (besides the pair Aaron/Israel)
stand on its own with only the first one (the eternal plantation) preceded by a lamed of
purpose with regard to altered status, i.e. as, a situation quite different from the
21
A black dot above Hebrew letters indicates poor preservation of that letter and recognition not
totally certain. The square blanketed letters are scholarly reconstruction. See Qimron and Charlesworth
e
1994, 86. It is interesting that the reconstruction of line 12 in 4QS frag. 1 col.2 causes much
controversy. It is not only hard to identify the letters in this fragmentary piece of col. 2, a few words at
the middle of this line are also missed, bringing scholars to provide various guess to fill this place. Both
Garca Martnez (1996) and Vermes (2004) follow the version in 1QS VIII 5: an] everlasting
[plan]tation, [a holy house for Israel and the foundation (or assembly) of the] holy of holies for
Aaron. Alexander and Vermes (2004), Metso (1996) and Qimron and Charlesworth (1996) read
etern[al ju]dgment /[ju]stice (~)lw[ jpv[ml] rather than eternal plantation. The former two
translations fill the middle gap with the same line as that in 1QS: [a house of holiness for Israel and a
assembly] of holy of holiness for Aaron, but Qimron and Charlesworth (1996, 87) supplies line 12 as
[in truth for] etern[al ju]dgment [and as (an) eternal planting, the House] of the Most Holy for
Aar[on].(Italic mine) In other words, this reconstruction breaks the pairing of Aaron/Israel and
complicates the problem.
22
Because of the similarity of waw and yod in shape, dwsw (and assembly) may be read as dwsy
(foundation).
37
sequence of lamed in V 5b-6.

The main questions on this collection of title are twofold. First, how do the
titles a/d/e/f relate to b/c/g/h (i.e. those clearly displaying the communal-identity as
sanctuary) and how do they contribute to the communal identity as sanctuary in a
specific way? Second, what do the redaction and scribal activities in these few lines
indicate?
At first sight, the plantation imagery (title a) seems inconsistent with the
function to atone for the land as what the sanctuary does. However, its association
with the other title d, witness of truth for judgment chosen by his will, on the one
hand, and with the overall theme of sanctuary, on the other hand, is rather strongly
established. Actually, title a and d may be viewed as a single allusion to an early
Jewish tradition in 1 Enoch. In the Apocalypse of the Weeks (1 Enoch 93:1-10. cf.
Jub . 1:16; 16:26; 21:24; 36:6),23 Enoch speaks concerning the sons of righteous and
concerning the chosen of the world and concerning the plant of righteous and
upright. (93:1-2. Hereafter in the translation, italic mine) At the end of the third week,
Abraham and his sons are also designated as plant of righteous: in the third week,
at its end, a man will be chosen as the plant of righteous judgment; and after him will
come the plant of righteousness for ever. (93:5) Finally at the end of seventh week,
the chosen righteous from the eternal plant of righteousness will be chosen
(93:10a). The Aramaic version is significant to our discussion: [At its close] the
chosen ones will be selected as witnesses of justice from the plant of everlasting
justice (4QEnochg=4Q212 IV 12; tr. Garca Martnez 1996, 258; see Knibb 1988,
131). The Aramaic word justice/just (jvq) can be translated as truth (BDB 1112),24
just as the restored translation by Milik: [And with its end] the elect shall be chosen
to be witness of the truth from the eternal plant of truth.25
1 Enoch 93:1-10 provides a strong linkage to the key words plant,
witness of truth, and chosen in titles a and d. What still seems unclear is the
meaning and relationship of witness of truth and righteous in 1 Enoch. The
repeated metaphor of righteous plant in the Ethiopic 1 Enoch recalls the same
imagery in Isaiah 60:21; 61:3, which symbolizes Gods redeemed people (Lee 2001,
101). In 1 Enoch 93:5, the plant of righteous specifically designates the national
23
Here translation mainly follows the Ethiopic Apocalypse of Enoch by Knibb (1984). The Aramaic
version at Qumran is fragmentary that it will be quoted where it is appropriate.
24
See LXX Danial 2:47 and LXX (Theodotion) Daniel 4:37. Both Greek texts rendered avlhqino,j
/avlh,qeia to the Aramaic jvq. Also see the Hebrews equivalence in Pro 22:21.
25
Pages 265-66 in Milik, J. T. 1976. The Books of Enoch. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Quated in Tillar
1997, 320.
38
Israel, i.e. the descendent of Abraham, who are the righteous. Out of this righteous
plant, according to 93:10, an elect will be further chosen with a purpose: to be witness
of truth for judgment. The eschatological role of the witness is expressed most plainly
in 1 Enoch 91:12-15, which continues the Apocalypse of the Weeks. The translation
of the parallel Aramaic 4QEnochg IV 15-23 is quoted in full here:
After this, the eighth week will come, the one of justice, in which [a
sword] will be given to all the just, for them to carry out just judgment
against the wicked who will be delivered into their hands... And after that,
the ninth week. [In it] will be revealed jus[tice and just judgment] to all
the sons of the whole earth. All those who ac[t wickedly will vanish] from
all the whole earth and they shall be hurled into the [eternal] well. All
[men will see] the just eternal path. And after [that, the tenth week. In its
seventh part] there will be eternal judgment and the moment of the great
judgment [and he will carry our revenge in the midst of the holy ones.]
(Garca Martnez 1996, 258-59)
This text is an important clue to our understanding of the phrase witness of
truth for judgment in 1QS VIII 6a. In the eighth, ninth and tenth week, we find three
stages of judgment on the wicked people. The righteous/just people will somehow
involve in the process, acting as witness for the judgment (at least clearly stated in
the first stage and implied in the next two stages), i.e. to carry out the just judgment
with the sword (See Nickelsburg 2001, 448). So the titles a and d are further linked by
the relation of the righteous people as righteous plant in 1 Enoch 93:1-10, and the
righteous people as witness involved in the final judgment in 1 Enoch 91:12-15.
Moreover, in 1 Enoch 93:10a, the elect as witness of truth are chosen from the
plant (note the partitive !m in the Aramaic 1 Enoch. See Tillar 1997, 320-21), but in
1QS, these two groups merged to become one in the community. The distinction of
the plant and the elect vanished, and the community is both the (eternal) plant and
the chosen witness (note their appositional relation). Also, the purpose of being
chosen in 1 Enoch is to participate in the final judgment as a witness of truth. This
purpose is differently stated in 1QS VIII 6 that the community thought themselves
being chosen as a witness of truth to atone for the land. Apparently, the two purposes
are different intrinsically, but we will soon see that in 1QS VIII 4-10 the purpose of
atonement is actually expressed in participating at the eschatological judgment on the
wicked.
The plant/witness/chosen (righteous) cluster of concept in title a and d as a
39
whole also has a connotation of the sanctuary or temple. The association of

planting (a plant) and building (a temple) is suggestive in Jub. 1:16-18,
And with all my heart and with all my soul I shall transplant them as a
righteous plant And I shall build my sanctuary in their midst, and I shall
dwell with them. And I shall be their God and they will be my people truly
and rightly...because I am the LORD their God.26
The promise of dwelling among His people is supplemented with a
covenantal formula which alludes to the Sinai event (Exod 25:8; 29:45; Lev 26:12),
where the Israelites were instructed to build the tabernacle. The imagery of planting
seems loosely connects with the sanctuary to be built among them, but the point is
that the presence of God in the sanctuary is no longer limited to the past. The title
righteous plant points to a future restored people (Jub 1:15) and the building of
sanctuary indicates the new creation (Jub 1:29). This eschatological dimension of
plant and sanctuary is distinctively expressed in 1QS XI 7b-8,
Those whom God has chosen he has set as an eternal possession. He has
allowed them to inherit the lot of the holy ones. With the sons of heaven he
has joined together their assembly for the Council of the Community. (Their)
assembly (is) a House of Holiness for the eternal plant (vdwq tynbm dwsw
~lw[ t[jml) during every time to come.

The eternal plant is in apposition (note the lamed) to the sanctuary
(House of Holiness). The cultic character of the plant is further marked by 1) the
phrase during every time to come, i.e. the cycles of days in the solar calendar (cf
1QS X 5, Leaney 1966, 242), and 2) the assembly joined with angels (holy ones and
Sons of Heaven, see Leaney 1966, 253-4. cf. 1QH XIV 13). In other words, the
community regards themselves as the temple because of their participation in the
Heavenly angelic worship, a theme also attested in other Qumran literature e.g. 1QH
and 4QFlorilegium etc (See Lee 2001, 105-22).
More importantly, the image of plant is intrinsically related to the
sanctuary through the early Jewish tradition that associates Eden with the plant on the
one hand, and with the sanctuary on the other. The first picture of trees in the Garden
of Eden watered by streams is obviously drawn from Gen 2. This picture is elaborated
eschatological in 1QH XIV 15-17 and XVI 6-8, 20-22 that the community identifies
themselves as the eternal plant which grows from a shoot into a huge plant covering
26
Translation by Wintermute, O. S. 1985 Jubilees. Pages 35-142 in Charlesworth 1985.

40
the whole world.27 The second picture that the Eden as the first sanctuary is also
attested in early Judaism.28 Conversely, the construction of the sanctuary/tabernacle/
temple is somehow parallel to the creation of the world/Eden, as reflected in the
Priestly writing,29 i.e. the sanctuary/temple is a microcosm of the world that the new
creation of the world is a recapitulation of the Eden as an expanded temple.30
It should be noted that 4QSe has ~]lw[
j
jpv[ml (eternal judgment) rather
than the ~lw[ t[ ml (eternal plant) in 1QS VIII 5. More interestingly, Metso (1997,
j
101) has investigated the handwritings of the word t[ ml in 1QS and concluded that
it was made by two scribes (She called them A and B) in two successive stages. In
earlier stage, scribe A has originally written ~lw[ t[b (eternal time), then scribe B
made three alternation on t[b: added an lamed before it, changed the shape of b to m,
and put a j above the line, i.e. resulting the ~lw[
t[jml (that is, the eternal plant).
If the reconstruction in 4QSe is correct (since the text here is broken) and the redactor
of 1QS directly made an alternation from judgment of 4QSe to plant, his aim is to
fully borrow the metaphors in the tradition of 1 Enoch (as discussed above), so that
the association of the communal identity with the temple and its atoning function is
further strengthened by the powerful image of plant. However, if the scribes of 1QS
made the change independent of 4QSe and as the way described by Metso, scribe B of
1QS might have wanted to actualize the text, which originally indicated the
communal identity as Israel, the sanctuary, and the witness of truth for judgment
to be still in the future (Metso 1997, 101). Again, the actualization of the identity is
skillfully achieved by putting an additional image of plant which effectively
embraces and links up all three concepts. In both situations, the implication of
producing the title plant is the same that the identity of the community is greatly
strengthened with the tremendous image already familiar in the early Jewish tradition.
It also explains the leading position of plant in that collection of titles.
27
See Beale 2004, 154-57 and Tiller 1997, 329-33. Similar combination of imageries is found in 1
Enoch 26:1-5. The combination of to plant and to build is found in the OT (Jer 1:10; 18:9; 24:6;
31:28; 45:4). Grtner (1964, 28) suggest that in the later Jewish exposition on the rock of the temple,
four images always come together: rock/temple, paradise, water, and tree of life. Cf. 1 Enoch 26:1-6.
28
With Adam as priest (e.g. Jub 3:9-12, 27). The Eden Garden as the sanctuary (Jub 8:19; Testament of
Levi 18:6; 1 Enoch 24-27 etc). For other comparison and association of sanctuary with the Eden, See
Beale 2004, 66-78.
29
God had seven acts in creating the world (And God said, Gen 1:3, 6, 9, 14, 20, 24, 26) and in
tabernacle building (the LORD said, Exod 25:1; 30:11, 17, 22, 34; 31:1, 12). Also Moses working in
the building of tabernacle and finally rest from the work also patterned after Gods creation (Exod
39:43, 32; 40:33 parallel Gen 1:31; 2:1, 2, 3). See Beale 2004, 60-61.
30
See chapter 3 and 4 of Beale 2004. In 4QFlorilegium (4Q174), the phrase ~da vdqm may better be
understood as sanctuary of Adam rather than sanctuary (constituted/made) of man. In this way, the
community refers themselves as anticipating the eschatological temple and as an Adamic sanctuary of
Eden restored (Brooke 2005, 245; Lee 2001, 118-22).
41
1QS VIII 7b-8a is clearly an allusion to Isa 28:16.
rqy tnp !xbh tmwh

hayh
dS'Wm ds'Wm tr;qy. I tN:Pi !x;B o!b,a, !b,a' !AYciB. dS;yI
whytwdwsy
~mwqmm wvyxy lbw w[z[dzy lb
vyxiy" al{ !ymiaM} h; ;
1QS VIII 7b
Isa 28:16a
1QS VIII 8a
Isa 28:16b
In comparing 1QS VIII 7b-8a and Isa 28:16, we can see three groups of
words in parallel: tested stone/wall (!xb!ba/tmwh),31 precious conerstone (trqy
tnp) and he will not haste32 (vyxy al/lb). The supralinear word whytwdwsy (Its
foundations) in 1QS VIII 8a also resembles the dS;y (lay) and dsWm (foundation) in
Isa 28:16. The basic meaning of w[z[dzy (shatter) in 1QS VIII 8a is also semantically
close to wvyxy (stumble/stir) in the same line. This lexical and semantic affinity
between them is sufficient for us to claim the allusion of Isa 28:16 in 1QS VIII 7a-8a.
The architectural terminology (lay, stone, tested stone, sure foundation,
cornerstone) in Isa 28:16 (cf v.27) doubtlessly points to the image of building of
temple at Zion.33 The original context of Isaiah 28 is a warning against the rulers of
Jerusalem who made alliance with the Sheol/death and thought that they would be safe
in the refuge of falsehood from the scourging flood (v.14-15). But YHWH reminded
them that they would surely be destroyed by the storm (vv.17-18). And He would lay a
foundation, a tested stone, and a precious cornerstone, i.e. rebuilding the temple, which
is strong enough to secure in safety those who trusted (v.16). The Qumran community
apparently consider themselves as the fulfillment of this promise of rebuilding the
temple 34 and it opens a deeper meaning of being the sanctuary/temple. The
immovability and permanence of the stone/ cornerstone/ foundation/ community in
contrast to the collapse of the wicked (i.e. the eschatological judgment) fits well to the
context of 1QS VIII 4b-10a that the role of the community is to be witness of truth for
judgment(line 6a), to repay the wicked their reward (line 6b-7a), with
31
The original tested stone (!xb !ba) in Isa 28:16 was replaced by tested wall (!xb tmwh) in line
7b. Since the earlier tradition in 4QSe has the same reading as 1QS, we cannot attribute this variant
reading to the redactor of 1QS. The term wall (tmwh) is a favorite symbol of security and protection
in Qumran literature (e.g. 1QSb V 23; 1QH XI 37; XIII 37; XIV 25; XV 8,9). The use of this term in
1QH XV 8-9 and its use in combination with the tested stones in 1QH XIV 25-26 suggested that
there is no significant difference between them. Grtners view that the unshakable faithfulness of God
signified by wall might explained why it replaced the stone in Isa 28:16 seems unnecessary (1965,
27). The view that the concept of wall, like stones in 1 Pet 2, meant collectivity of the community
is also improbable (ibid).
32
By metonymy, the meaning of vyx (usually translated as haste) can be rendered by stumble, as
the consequence of hurry. See Hillyer 1971, 64.
33
All these keys words recall its similar use in, say, 1 Kings 5:31; 6:37; Isa 8:14. cf. Hag 2:18; Zech 4:9;
8:9 etc.
34
The same self-designation as temple through the language of architectural terminology is also found
in 1QH 14:25-27 (also alluding Isa 28:16) and the commentary on Isaiah 54:11-12 (4QpIsad )
42
all-encompassing knowledge of the covenant of judgment (line 9a) and to decide

judgment over wickedness (line 10a).
3.2.2 The atoning function of the Community in 1QS
It is important that the function of the community as sanctuary/temple is
more universal than just to atone for the Qumran community themselves (cf. 1QS V 6a),
but for the land (#rah d[b rpkl (lines 6b, 10b(supralinear)), i.e. the land of Israel or
the Israelites. The meaning of this universalism of atonement is obscure in 1QS, unless
we read the following two lamed+infinitive constructions as epexegtical (Waltke and
OConnor 1990, 608):
1QS VIII 6b-7a ~lwmg
~y[Xrl bXhlw #rah d[b rpkl
to atone for the land by repaying the wicked their reward

1QS VIII 10a h[Xr jpXm #wrxlw #rah d[b rpkl
to atone for the land by deciding judgment over wickedness
The lamed+infinitive construction lwmg
bvhl
(to repay reward/
recompense, see VIII 7a) clearly connote taking revenge on the wicked for Israel in
OT (e.g. Psa 28:4; 94:2; Lam 3:64; Joe 4:4, 7; Obah 1:15 etc.). Also the same phrase of
1QS VIII 7a is found in 1QM XI 13-14a,
For you will deliver into the hands of the poor the enemies of all the
countries, and by the hand of those prone in the dust you shall fell the
powerful ones of the peoples, you shall give the wicked their reward, on the
head of [] (( a Xarb ~y[Xr lwmg byXhl]) you shall carry out
justice by your truthful judgment on every sons of man (Garca Martnez
1996)35 (Italic mine)
Hence 1QS VIII 6b-7a and 10a are best understood in the context of
eschatological judgment already attested in lines 4-10, and it indicates a peculiar
dimension of atonement in the community for the land as participation of the righteous
(i.e. the community) in the eschatological judgment on the wicked (i.e. the
non-members). Leaney (1966, 218) considered in practice this punishment of the
wicked would bewrought by God through their agency as a holy army in the final
35
cf. Vermes (2004, 177) translation For Thou wilt deliver into the hands of the poor the enemies from
all the lands, to humble the mighty of the peoples by the hand of those bent to the dust, to bring upon the
[head of Thine enemies] the reward of the wicked , and to justify Thy true judgment in the midst of all
the sons of men (Italic mine).
43
war, a comment concords with the cited 1QM text above (cf. Knibb 1988, 131). The
link between atonement and punishing the wicked in 1QS looks obscure at first. But
judgment on the wicked could be understood as a way to undo the defilement on the
land by their abominations. We can see the similar concept of atonement for the
polluted land by lethal punishment in Num 35:33 and Deut 32:43 (Garnet 1977, 66).36
The second half of the phrase ~lwmg
~y[Xrl bXhlw
(repaying the
wicked their reward) in line 6b-7a also finds parallel in line 3b-4a,
@rcm
trcw jpXm yXw[b !ww[ tcrlw
to pay for iniquity by works of judgment and suffering affliction

(Qimron and Charlesworth 1994).
The lamed+infinitive construction
!ww[ tcrl in line 3b can be translated
literally as to make acceptable, satisfy (by payment) with iniquity (BDB 953), hence
some scholars render this construction to atone37. The problem is what the meaning of
works of judgment and suffering affliction should be. Most scholars translate jpXm
yXw[ as practice of justice, a reading reflecting the influence of in 1QS IX 4-5.38 But
the participle construction jpXm yXw[ could also mean bringing/executing judgment
(1QS V 12) or making legal decision (1QS IX 15).39 Another combination of doing
(yXw[) and judgment (jpXm) in 1QS occurs in I 5, V 3-4 and VIII 2, where the
participle yXw[ is followed by a virtue list including jpXm:
#rab jpXmw hqdcw
I 5-6
tma twX[lw
to do truth, righteous and justice in the land
V3-4
tkl [nchw dsx tbhaw jpXmw hqdc hwn[w dxy tma twX[l
to do truth of community, humility, righteousness, justice, merciful love, circumspectly walking...
VIII 2
tkl [nchw dsx tbhaw jpXmw hqdcw
tma twX[l
to do truth, righteousness, justice, merciful love, circumspectly walking...
The association of
jpXm
and
36
hqdc
(justice and righteousness) is
Leaney (1966, 217) suggested pollution had been brought upon the land partly by the association of
Hasminaean rulers with heathen women and other sexual transgressions. But the wickedness should
be more general, which is characteristic of the nonmembers in the eye of the community.
37
Garca Martnez (1996), Vermes (2004) and Abegg, Cook and Gordon (2004).
38
Leaney (1966), Knibb (1988), Vermes (2004) and Abegg, Cook and Gordon (2004). See the similar
understanding in Sanders 1977, 302, 326-27. Cf. Mic 6:8. See also BDB 1048 2.b. Actually, in English
practice of justice is ambiguous because it could mean both doing righteous behavior, or keeping
justice by executing right judgment.
39
See BDB 1048 1.e-f. In 1QS, the participle construction jpXm yXw[ occurs only in V 12; VIII 3 and
IX 15.
44
common in OT.40 The two words, together with tma (truth), are probably identical in
meaning (see BDB 842, 1-5, cf. Jer 4:2), emphasizing the righteous act required of the
members. However, this act of righteousness has nothing to do with atonement in
1QS I 5, V 3-4 and VIII 2. Therefore 1QS VIII 3b-4a cannot be interpreted on the base
of VIII 2 or IX 4-5 as atonement by righteous behavior or blameless way. jpXm
yXw[ in VIII 3b-4a is best understood as working judgment on the base of V 12 and
IX 15.41 Moreover, the two key words hcr and !w[ in line 3b are an allusion to Lev
26:41, 43, where the restoration of covenant were promised if Israel pay their iniquity
(~nw) [
O -] ta, Wcry> , v.41, 43, i.e. being exiled) because of their resistance to Gods
ordinances (Wsa'm'
yj;P v' .mBi ,. v.43). The context of Lev 26:40ff. suggests that in 1QS
VIII 3b-4a, the community atones for their own sins by executing judgment upon one
another, and submitting to this, as an exile in the desert, to endure suffering as
mentioned in Lev 26 (Garnet 1977, 66). The word @rcm (trial/suffering) means a
furnace or refiners fire (Prov 17:3; 27:21, cf. 1QS I 17) to purify the righteous (cf.
Mal. 3:2f. See Leaney 1966, 126). Ambiguity still presents for we do not know
exactly what the content of that trial is.42 However, all these observations suggest
that atonement in 1QS VIII 3b-4a is done by their execution of judgment within the
community as a way to purify themselves.43
The community behind 1QS takes up the identity of the sanctuary with the
atoning function for themselves (besides for the land, in which they are a part, see VIII
6b-7a, 10a) is also attested in V 6,
They shall atone for all those who devote themselves, for a sanctuary in
Aaron and for a house of truth in Israel, and for those who join them for a
Community. (Qimron and Charlesworth 1994)
On what way does the community execute such atonement? Knibb (1988,
107) comments that it is through their right behaviour the members of the community
make expiation for the sins committed by those who belong to it, a comments clearly
40
See Jer 9:23; 22:3,15;23:5; 33:15; Eze 18:5,21,27; 33:14,19; Mic 7:9 etc.
Chamberlain (Toward a Qumran Soteriology. Pages 305-13 in Novum Testamentum 3 (1959).
Quoted in Sanders 1977, 326) translates VIII 3b-4a as expiate the sins of the Community by judging
and punishing sinners, i.e. the selected fifteen having a juridical role.
42
The content of trial could be either being exile only, as mentioned in Lev 26:40ff. or other
forms of punishment resulting from executing judgment among themselves (cf. VI 24-VII 25). The
latter option is more favorable to the context of 1QS.
43
Against Sanders (1977, 304), who considers that it is the suffering of the elected fifteen which
atones for the sin. I find no indication of vicarious or redemptive suffering in 1QS VIII3b-4a. However,
Sanders argument is ambiguous concerning the cause and content for such suffering, In one sense, all
the punishments for transgressions which are specified in 1QS and CD indicate that atonement is
achieved by suffering, in which case suffering means accepting the prescribed penalty. (304-305)
41
45
indicating influence of IX 4-6.44 However, the following sentence in line 6 gives us a

clue to the question, In a lawsuit and judgment they shall pronounce guilty all those
who transgress the statute. It seems more natural to interpret the atonement by the
community for themselves is executed through participating in the trial and sentencing
of wrongdoers within the community, following the penitential code mentioned in VI
24-VII 25.
Finally, the communitys spiritualized sacrifice is clear stated in IX 4-5:
(l.4) they shall atone for iniquitous guilt and for sinful unfaithfulness, so
that (Gods) favor for the land (is obtained) without the flesh of
burnt-offerings (twlw[ rXbm) and without the fat of sacrifices (xbz
yblxmw). The proper offerings of (l.5) the lips (~ytpX tmwrtw) for
judgment (is as) a righteous sweetness (qdc xwxynk), and the perfect of
the Way ($rd ~ymtw) (are as) a pleasing freewill offering (!wcr txnm
tbdnk) (Qimron and Charlesworth 1994)
texts.
!m
The two sets of prepositions, !m and k, is important in this section of

is best understood as privative use (without) rather than comparative
(more than) or instrumental (by means of) (Lichtenberger 1980, 161-62. cf. Hos
6:6; Amos 5:21-24). The preposition k draws an analogy between offerings of lips/
perfect of ways and the whole sacrificial system, denoting that they represnt a more
spiritualized form of sacrifice. The phrase Offerings of lips appears again in X 6,
clearly designating the praise giving to God. Perfect of the way refers to the
righteous behaviour of the members. The contrast between the actual sacrifices in the
temple and the spiritualized form of sacrifices in the community reflected the
rejection of the Temple and its cult in Jerusalem by the community because of its
defilement, and their replacement and fulfillment of it as required by the law because
of their sole identity of Gods chosen people living in purity.
An observation concerning scribal activities in 1QS VIII 7-10 should be
addressed. The word whytwdwsy (line 8a) and the whole line 10b (hlw[ !yaw!wcrl
wyhw) were written above the line by a later scribe. These inserted words were
probably already present in the source of the scribes of 1QS, 45 indicating no
44
Leaney (1966, 168) also comments similarly, Here it appears that the sect is conceived of as
making atonement by its pure life (pure both morally and ceremonially) for all who join
45
According to the reconstruction of 4QSd,e by Metso (1997), the whytwdwsy was probably absent in
4QSe but present in 4QSd, while the line 10b (hlw[
both 4QSd,e (44, 52).
46
!yaw!wcrl wyhw) was thought to be present in
intentional redaction were made in the transmission of the text but some corrections
were made to errors caused by faulty eyesight and hasty reading.46 However, the
vacats (which are absent in 4QSd,e) that isolate the allusion of Isa 28:16 at the middles
of lines 7 and 8 are clearly intentional. The intention is twofold: to emphasize the
isolated words as allusion, and to allow amendment by other scribes in the future
when needed.47 This openness to adjustment on the text, especially near the allusion
of Isa 28:16, by reserving extra spaces reflects the consciousness that the community
as sanctuary/temple was firmly based on the prophetic words which were in the
process of fulfillment.
1QS VIII 4-10 is the most important section in 1QS that describes the
peculiar identity of the community as sanctuary. It displays an extraordinary
richness and complexity in images that were drawn from OT and early Jewish
tradition. The eight designations in the collection (with the twice occurrences of the
verb atone) clearly denote the image of sanctuary or temple and its atoning function,
especially the two pairs of Aaron-Israel construction associated with the terms
Holiness, Hoy of holies and house.
The remaining two pairs of designations provide the most distinctive
characterization on the nature and function of the intended image of sanctuary/
temple. The pair eternal plant-chosen witness of true for judgment is drawn from
Enochic tradition (1 En 93:1-10; 91:12-15 and para. Aramaic version) which locates
the cluster of identities, plant/witness/righteous/chosen, in an eschatological context
to participate in the final judgment on the wicked. The pair tested wall-costly
cornerstone, an allusion from Isa 28:16, presents another (prophetic) angle to
understand the communal identity as an eschatological fulfillment of the survivors (i.e.
the rebuilt temple) among the wicked in the judgment. This overlapping of the
eschatological judging role and the identity of sanctuary/temple is further enhanced
by the repeated assertion of atoning for the land by taking revenge on the wicked in
the judgment (line 6b-7a and 10b). The leading role of eternal plant does not only
point to the eschatological judgment on the wicked, as suggested by its Enochic
background, but also indicate a new creation as a recapitulation of the lost Eden
Qimron and Charlesworth 1994, 35 note 205. E.g. a former scribe might jump from ~lw[ to !wkhb
in his source, leaving out a whole line of 10b because he might had misread the last word of 10b (hlw[ )
as the last word of 10a (~lw[].
47
The last few words of line 7, lb rqy tnp (the costly cornerstone, not), had different handwriting
by a later scribe B, who also amended above the line 8 the word whytwdwsy. See Metso 1997, 101-102.
46
47
which symbolizes an expanded eschatological Temple and the eternal present of God.
We also see that the communal-identity as the eternal plant, that is also the
eschatological Temple, is grounded (at least partly) on the belief that they already
joined the Heavenly assembly with the angels. It does not imply that they denied the
Jerusalem Temple explicitly, which is not mentioned as a historical reality in 1QS, but
the efficacy of the temple was exclusively and totally transferred to a new entity, the
community (dxy) itself.
Against some interpretations on VIII 3b-4a, I suggest that it does not
indicate an atonement of the community through practice of justice and vicarious
suffering. Rather it is best to interpret the lines in coherence with the context of 1QS
that the community had to purify themselves by working of judgment on the members
according to their statutes.48 Similar interpretation could apply to the meaning of
atonement in V 6, but we should not press the point to far, because at least in IX 4-6,
we find a spiritualized sacrifices of praise and right behaviour taking the place of
Levitical sacrificial system.
3.3 Ahistorical Identity of Israel in 1QS from the perspective of CD
3.3.1 Covenant and History
The communal-identity of dxy in 1QS is deeply associated with covenant
(tyrb) that entering the community is basically equivalent to entering the covenant.49
Covenant is a relational term that indicates a historical dimension which was
somehow manifested in the biblical history of Israel: God initiated that relationship in
calling the patriarchs and delivering the Israel in exodus, and the Israel was obligated
to keep the stipulations of the covenant so that they would be blessed (with the Land
and offspring), otherwise cursed. However, the Israel in history showed her
unfaithfully that resulted in the exile. The breached covenant could be renewed if they
repent, so that their sins were forgiven and the covenantal relation restored (Deasley
2000, 140; Nickelsburg 2003, 32-33). Within this structure of covenant relation, all
48
Wrights articulation of covanental Monotheism also attests to this interpretation: The creator calls
a people through whom, somehow, he will act decisively within his creation, to eliminate evil from it
and to restore order, justice and peaceAbrahams people are to be the means of undoing primeval sin
and its consequences.(1992, 251-52)
49
The language of entering (awb) and crossing over (rb[ ] the covenant is frequently used in the
admission process (1QS I 16, 18, 20, 24; II 10, 12, 18; V 8, 20; VI 15). This terminology may be
reminiscent of the tradition of Israel crossing the Jordan River and entering the Promised Land (Deut
9:1; 11:8, cf. 11:31; 27:3; 30:18; Josh 1:11). See Evans 2003, 63. The inseparability and commutability
of the two terms community and covenant is also attest by the phrases covenant of the everlasting
community (1QS III 12) and community of the everlasting covenant (1QS V 5-6).
48
the members of the community were expected to enter the covenant annually (1QS
II 19-23), implicating the covenant was kept being renewed. But a significant
characteristic of the covenant in 1QS is that it no longer connects to the past. The
covenant history vanished and covenant of God in 1QS stands for a timeless
principle validated by the theology of two spirits and predestination (Christiansen
1998, 86). The covenanter, i.e. the dxy, on the one hand claims the identity of Israel
exclusively and on the other hand dislocates such identity from history. It is this
ahistorical feature of the communal identity in 1QS that we now turn to.
3.3.2 CD as a reference to the historical dimension of covenant
It is risky to establish a thesis based on the absence of some expected
features. The case of ahistorical community identity in 1QS faces the similar problem
of argument from silence. However, we find that there are good reasons to believe that
from the angle of the dxy, the absence of historical dimension in 1QS is a significant
one when 1QS is read against another sectarian literature, the Damascus Document
(CD). As we have discussed above, we do not know exactly the relationship of 1QS
and CD in their formation process and uses in dxy. Whether the two documents
representing two groups coexisting in different Sitz Im Leben with certain contact
(Vermes 1999, 111-13), or as Davies emphasized, the Judaism of S being a
transformation of D (Davies 2000, 36), 1QS and CD are so close in ideological and
compositional aspect that it is hard to deny their historical connection. This historical
correlation between them justifies our highlight on the historical dimension of
covenant in CD as a reference point to investigate the absence of this feature in 1QS.
Moreover, scholars had noted a tendency of narrowing down the covenantal
belonging in the OT and early Judaism from national/ethnical criteria to a more
restricted membership, based on personal decision and ethics.50 CD displays a tension
of both aspects of covenant 51 but in 1QS the more particularistic personal
commitment to the covenant by accepting the legal obligation dominates the scene.
The evolvement of the historical dimension of covenant embedded in this tendency
allows us to place 1QS and CD side by side and highlight the change.
3.3.3 The historical awareness in CD
50
Lohmeyer, Ernst 1913. Diatheke: Ein Beitrag zur Erklrung des neutestamentlichen Begriffs,
Leipzig: I. C. Hinrich, page 119, quoted in Christiansen 1998, 71 note 9 and 1995, 109 note 28.
51
in CD there is a tension between ethnic identity with a strong awareness of the past and a
particularistic self-understanding which limits membership to those who belong by choice and
subscribe to voluntarist group conditions. (Christiansen 1998, 72).
49
The admonition of CD (col. I-VIII, XIX-XX) is strongly conscious of their

continuity with the history of Israel52 and their role as the remnant with whom God
established a new covenant. In the review of history in I 3-12 (cf. III 5-16; V 20-VI 2),
the past of historical/biblical Israel and the community basically formed a continuum.
However, the historical Israel had continuously gone astray in the past, resulted in the
exile: For in their treachery in leaving him, he hid his face from Israel and from his
sanctuary, and gave them up to the sword53 (I 3-4a. cf. III 14; IV 16; V 21; VI 1).
Interestingly the dramatic intervention by God was located historically after 390 years
of exile under Nebuchadnezzar (I 5b-6), when God recalled the covenant with the
first ones, left a remnant of Israel, turned his attention to them, caused to grow
out of Israel and Aaron a root of planting, and raised up for them (the) Righteous
Teacher (I 4b, 7, 11) after 20 more years of wandering. The emergence of the
community is directly attributed to Gods recalling of the covenant with the first ones
(~ynvar tyrb wrkzbw) (I 4; VI 2), an allusion to Lev 26:45 (Knibb 1988, 69) and an
important historical linkage of the community to the historical Israel. The first ones
refers to the Israels ancestors54 and the covenant is clearly the one made with
Moses at Sinai. In CD, this covenant with Moses has no difference to the covenant
with the patriarchs that the community is the only inheritor to it: by Gods love for
the first ones, who witnessed after him, he loved those who came after them. For
theirs (is) the covenant (with) the fathers (twbah tyrb) (VIII16b-18a). The first
ones here were the initial members of the movement, and those who came after
them were the members joined later. The love of God towards the current members
is patterned on Moses words to the Israelite: Not by your righteousness and your
uprightness of heart do you come to dispossess these nations, but rather from his love
for your fathers and his keeping of the oath (VIII 14-15). The love of God, that was
the base of the election and salvation (Deu 7:8; 9:5) and the covenant identity, was
extended from the patriarchs to the former members and then the later members of the
community under the same covenant validated by national/ethnical linkage (i.e. the
past).55
52
There are four accounts of the community origin in CD: I 3-11a; II 8b-13; III 12b-IV 12a; V20-VI
11a (Hempel 1999b, 2000). The contents are somehow repetitive in part caused by the fact that it is
composite (Knibb 1988, 16). The section II 14-VI 11a forms the nucleus of the admonition.
53
English translation of CD follows Baumgarten and Schwartz 1995 hereafter.
54
First ones refers to the members of the first covenant in CD III 10 and the first members of the
new covenant in IV 8-10 and VIII 17a. See Baumgarten and Schwartz 1995, 13 note 3.
55
CD emphasized the historical linkage of the community with the historical Israel as the base of the
covenant validity. In other words, ethnical/national criteria constituted the identity of the community as
Gods covenant partner. However, CD also consistently emphasized obedience to Gods commandment
that determined Gods establishment of covenant with them (e.g. II 14-16; V 20-21; XX 2 etc). So
covenant in CD is both unconditional because of Gods covenant with the patriarchs of the past, and
conditional based on individual faithfulness to God. This kind of tension also exists in 1QS. The
conditional aspect of human commitment is still present but the predestination of the elected and the
struggle of two spirits replaced the historical/ethnical validity. Ethical criteria are prominent in 1QS.
50
Gods remembering of the covenant with the patriarchs secures the

historical continuity of the community with the past. But the remnant (tyryav/
hjylp) chosen by God (I 4b-5a; II 6b-7a, 11) highlights the discontinuity between
them. Under the awareness of the breached covenant and the need for its renewal, CD
is concerned with covenant in its continuation hoping the remnant will inherit past
promise through obedience (Christiansen 1998, 78). Obedience becomes a boundary
within the historical Israel that distinguishes those observing the ordinance of God
from those not doing so. The examples of the patriarchs as the model of such
obedience actually demonstrated what the remnant should be. After recounting
briefly the wantonness of the antediluvian and their being cutting off (II 17-III 1),
three exceptions were given: Abraham did not walk in it (=wantonness of hearts II
17-18) and he was acce[pted as a lo]ver, for he kept Gods ordinances and did not
choose (that which) his (own) spirit desired. And he transmitted (his way) to Isaac and
Jacob; and they observed (them) and were registered as lovers of God and parties to
(his) covenant forever (III 2-4a).
It should be noted that, firstly, the people after Jacob throughout the
period of the kings returned to the former sin of wantonness (III 5-12a), and such
historical pattern of wickedness had already been stated in II 17, For many have
failed due to them (i.e. the guilty inclination and licentious eyes)from the earliest
times and until today (hnh d[w ~ynplm). The temporal phrase conclusively
described the wickedness of human nature throughout history without exception.
Secondly, at the time of the community, i.e. after the Exile, they considered
themselves as the new remnant chosen by God for this age, But with those who held
fast to the commandments of God, who were left over from them, God established his
covenant with Israel for ever, revealing to them the hidden things in which all Israel
had gone astray(III 12-14a. ET by Knibb 1988). The choosing of the community is
actually a particularization of a historical pattern stated in II 11, But during all those
(years), (God) raised up for himself those called by name so as to leave a remnant for
the land. Other version has the phrase ~v yayrq (called by name) translated as
renowned men (Knibb 1988; Garca Martnez 1996), an allusion to Num 16:2. The
more literal translation highlights the individual election by God rather than the
statues of the called. This particular and individual election is a manifestation of
another pattern in history: but in all those (~lwkbw), (God) raised up, i.e. God
preserved his faithful remnant throughout the ages. The community, like the three
patriarchs in history, belongs to this particular election as the remnant. In short, the
history of humanity in CD was patternized into two groups with obedience as the
51
criteria: the majority who acted wickedly and rejected by God (II 7, i.e. the Israel in
the past and the enemies or apostates of the present community (Christiansen 1998,
79)) and the minority who lived according to Gods ordinance, the remnant. The
community highlighted their discontinuity with the wicked by identifying with the
remnant who was elected by God and was obedient to his ordinance, but the overall
identity of remnant was still defined with respect to the historical enemy in the past or
present.
3.3.4 Absence of covenant history: The ahistorical identity in 1QS
In view of the above observation on the historical continuity of the
communal identity in CD, we can see that 1QS significantly lacks the continuity with
the past. It has no interest in maintaining that the covenant was established with Israel
at Sinai. Not only the review of history is absent in 1QS, there is no mention of Gods
recalling the covenant, covenant with the fathers/first one or the individuals such as
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The other individuals of OT found in 1QS include Moses
(I 3; V 8; VIII 15, 22), Aaron (V 21; IX 7 etc) and Zadok (V 2, 9). Moses was viewed
as the mediator of the law in the phrase he (God) commanded through Moses
(1QS I 3; VIII 15). Another phrase to return to the Torah of Moses in V 8 and VIII
22 represents the legal content of the covenant. All these occurrences of Moses point
to the legal focus of the covenant rather than the historical figure or covenantal event.
The legal and obligatory aspect of the covenant is further enhanced by priestly linkage
of the community indicated by the two other names Zadok and Aaron. The titles
sons of Zadok and sons of Aaron may both refer to a priestly origin of the leaders
in the community, who share their authority with the Many, i.e. the full members, on
certain matters over the community (V 3-4). However, no solid internal evidence is
found in 1QS that supports this historical linkage. More importantly, these two titles
indicate a priestly function (beside the atoning function discussed above) shared by all
members to study and interpret the Torah (V 20-21; VI 6-8; VIII 11-16). This
exegetical activity is an ongoing revelatory process (revealed from time to time
(t[b t[ hlgnh) VIII 15; IX 13; cf. V 9) that the halakhah in 1QS might be the result
of that growing corpus of this divine disclosure (Deasley 2000, 151). Hence, all the
individual historic figures named in 1QS actually serve the purpose of establishing a
legal principle, rather than history that validates the covenant.
In comparison with CD, the communal identity in 1QS was no longer built
around a framework of history, closely associating with the past of Israel on the one
hand, and establishing a distinctive identity of remnant with respect to the generally
52
wicked Israel on the other. The community in 1QS was never rendered by the term
remnant,56 nor described themselves as the chosen or elected from any other
group (e.g. from the plant in 1 Enoch 93:10a). They were simply the chosen and
the plant (1QS VIII 4-10) defined absolutely without historical reference frame.
Obedience to God and election by God, the two principles already embedded in the
criterion of the identity boundary of remnant in CD, were greatly strengthened and
developed in 1QS to validate the covenant and to define the identity boundary,
virtually replacing the role of history in CD. The legal and obligatory aspect of the
covenant requires personal commitment, while the unconditional aspect is represented
by the theology of two spirits and predestination in 1QS III 13-IV 26. It is necessary
for us to investigate how these two principles function in establishing the ahistorical
communal identity in 1QS
We have already illustrated the legal principle and its relation to the priestly
function of sons of Zadok and sons of Aaron in 1QS. It is the very purpose of the
sons of Zadok to keep the covenant and seek Gods will (V 9). The Torah as
interpreted by the community dominates their ideology and behavior in this
faithfulness to covenant and to God (e.g. V 9-10). Admission to the covenant and to
the community is basically coincident with their submission to the laws (I 3; V 8-11).
The significant implication of this legal principle for the ahistorical identity is that
ethnical criteria of the covenant give way to an individual and ethical one. The
clearest indication of this change is the emphasis on personal decision and
commitment to join the community (VI 13b-16). The keyword such as bdn (to freely
offer) in participle form who freely offers/devotes/dedicates themselves/himself
(bdntm/~ybdntmh) is frequently used, as in I 7, 11; V 1, 6, 8, 10, 21, 22; VI 13, to
designate the willing dedication required of the members. The annual examination
and classification of the members, whether the full or the new one, is taken according
to their insight/spirit and deeds/perfection of the way (V 24 cf. II 19; VI 13-18).
These conditions of reception and promotion in personal base are essentially ethical,
just as the members were also described as the perfect of the way ($rd ~ymth) or
who walked perfectly (~ymt ~yklwhh).57 Also, the expression their covenant in
the phrase the priestand the multitude of the men of their covenant (V9; VI 19)
does not mean a covenant consisting of priests, rather a covenant based on priestly
commitment (Christiansen 1995, 150; Knibb 1988, 109). Norbert Ilg suggested this
The term remnant (tyrav) occurs in 1QS IV 14; V 13 with a negative without (!yal). This
usage of the phrase is probably taken from Ezra 9:14 (cf. Jer 42:17; 44:7) to describe the total
destruction of the wicked.
57
For the perfect of the way, see 1QS IV 22; V 24; VIII 10, 18, 21, 25; IX 2, 5, 9 etc. For who walk
perfectly, see I 8; II 2; III 9; IX 8, 19 etc.
56
53
expression referring to an OT tradition in which priestly functions are accorded to

such as Levi and Phineas, not on the basis of descent, but on the basis of rectitude of
conduct.58 Furthermore, when the ethnical base of covenant was diminished, the
covenantal blessings of possessing a land and collective existence were turned into an
individualized eschatological reward in the future: The visitation of all those who
walk in it (will be) healing and great peace in a long life, multiplication of progeny
together with all everlasting blessings, endless joy in everlasting life, and a crown of
glory together with a resplendent attire in eternal light (IV 6b-8). Such eternal
blessings are parallel to the eternal punishment on those who walk in the spirit of
deceit (IV 9-14). The concept of retribution in 1QS IV 2-14 (cf. III 14b-15a) further
confirms the individual and ethical aspect of the legal principle, which draws the
boundary of the ahistorical communal identity in 1QS.59
The Torah as interpreted by the community does not always connote a
concrete body of revealed laws. The will of God and the Law of Moses are frequently
expressed in overwhelmingly esoteric languages (Davies 2000, 38), e.g. knowledge
(t[d]), insight (lkf), truth (hma), and counsel (hc[]). 60 The Master
(lykfm) (1QS III 13; IX 12, 21)61 takes the role of instructing the community these
esoteric teaching and knowledge. Such terminology of the legal principle not only
adds ethical elements to the communal identity as discussed above, it also plays a part
in the dualistic worldview behind 1QS, e.g. the contrasting pairs of truth and deceit
(lw[h]) (III 19), wisdom (hmkx) and vileness (tlwa) (IV 24), spirit of
knowledge and spirit of fornication (twnz) (IV 4, 10), and most of all spirit of light
and spirit of darkness (III 25). The esoteric legal principle defines the ahistorical
identity in a dualistic way.
3.3.5 Cosmic Dualism and Ahistorical Identity
Dualism believes that there is a conflict in this world between the opposing
forces of good and evil.62 It is presented in an explicit way in 1QS III 13-IV 26
58
Ilg, Norbert. 1978. Uberlegungen zum Verstndnis von Berth in den Qumrntexten. Pages 257-63
in M. Delcor, Qumr: Sa Piete, sa Theologie et son milieu. Louvain: Leuven University. Quated in
Deasley 2000, 148.
59
The ethical and individual aspects of the covenant in 1QS do not eliminate the deep-seated
communal and ethnical dimension. The community members were still real Israelites living together.
60
Knowledge (e.g. I 11, 12; III 1; IV 4, 6, 22; VIII 9 etc), insight (e.g. IV 3, 22; V 21, 23, 24; VI
14, 18; IX 13, 15, 20 etc), truth (e.g. I 11, 12; III 7; IV 5, 6, 17, 19, 20, 21, 23; V 3, 5, 6; VIII 17 etc.),
counsel. (e.g. I 8, 10, 23; II 23, 25; III 2, 6; V 7; VI 3, 4, 9, 10, 12, 14; VII 2, 11 etc).
61
Other English translation have Instructor (Leaney 1966), Wise Leader (Knibb 1988) or wise
man (Garca Martnez 1996). The connotation of this title with wisdom (lkf) makes Davies
suggested 1QS adapted a wisdom worldview (2000, 38).
62
This simple definition is from Knibb 1988, 95. Charlesworth (1990, 76 note 1) also presented briefly
54
without parallel in early Judaism. This passage is absent in some Cave 4 versions of
1QS, 4QSb,d, indicating that it (or together with the entry into the community in I
16-III 12) belongs to a later stage of redaction than column V ff..63 The lateness of
this theological section suggests that it was not just the teaching shared by every
member. It served a specific function to sustain and legitimate the identity of the
community, dialectically interacting with the members and constituting the
worldviews (or symbolic universe) of the community.
The beginning and prominent part of the theological section (III 13-IV 26)
is the predestination of all events by God (III 15b-17a).64 God determined the design
(or plan, hnvxm) of all events before they occur, and when they come into being in
the present or the future, they happen according to that design (III 15-16). Such
determinism is absolute because nothing can be changed (line 16b). In this
perspective of predestination, the nature of all humanity, their virtues and vices, and
their visitations were explained and understood. Humanity was divided into two
mutually exclusive camps, the Sons of Righteous and the Sons of Deceit, each was
respectively under the dominion of the spirit of truth (or Prince of Light) and spirit
of deceit (or Angel of Darkness). Ultimately all people were assigned by God to
walk in one spirit or the other (III 17b-21a), that their behaviour and destiny were
determined dualistically (IV 2-14). However, in this age all people are under the
influence of both spirits (IV 23b-25a) that the Angel of Darkness is the cause of the
wicked behaviour of the Sons of Righteousness (III 21b-22). All people have a
mixture of the good and evil struggling within them (i.e. a certain kind of
psychological dualism), and the overall reward for their deeds depends on whether
each mans portion in their two divisions is great or small (IV 15b-16a. ET by
Vermes 2004). God will put an end to the spirit of deceit at the appointed time for
judgment and purify the righteous with the spirit of holiness and truth (IV 18b-23a).
Charlesworth (1990, 77-89) concluded the dualism of III 13-IV 26 in seven
various types of dualism: psychological (two inclinations within the human), physical (absolute
division between matter and spirit), metaphysical (opposition between God and Satan), cosmic (two
opposing celestial spirits of two distinct and present division of the universe), ethical (bifurcation of
mankind into two exclusive groups according to virtues or vices), eschatological (rigid division of time
between the present aeon aand the future one), and soteriological (division of mankind caused by faith
or disbelief in a saviour). Cf. Wright 1992, 252-56.
63
See Metso 1996, 146-47. The compositional hypothesis of Murphy-OConnor also thought that
column I-IV (and X-XI) belonged to the latest stage of the work. See Garca Martnez and Barrera 1995,
51.
64
III 13-15 is a prologue to the whole section, basically summarizing the main points of what follow:
concerning the nature of sons of man (IV 15-18a, 23b-26), kinds of their spirits (III 17b-IV 1),
their distinctions for their works in their generations (IV 2-6a, 9-11a), and the visitation of their
affliction and times of peace (IV 6b-8, 11b-14, 18b-23a).
55
salient features, which may be summarized as (1) monotheistic (the two spirits were
created by and subjugated to one God), (2) Light vs Darkness (the dominant metaphor
describing the opposite forces), (3) ethical (good and evil according to virtues and
vices), (4) absolute deterministic (everything works out according to Gods design), (5)
ultimate responsibility upon God, (6) eschatological (the division of the present and
the future), and (7) cosmic (the struggling spirits not limited to human heart but has
cosmic dimension). Feature (5) is actually the logical consequence of (1) and (4). In
the words of Charlesworth, features (2), (3), (6) and (7) can be related as a modified
cosmic dualism (7), under which is a subordinate ethical dualism (3), and whose most
conspicuous characteristic is the light-darkness paradigm (2), and most pervasive
feature is the eschatological dimension (6) (1990, 89). In my view, the
light-darkness paradigm is just a metaphorical language that characterizes the
dualistic worldview of the community, so I will dismiss it as an essential component
of the dualism.65 The eschatological dualism is present in IV 6b-8, 11b-14, 18b-23a,
especially in terms of visitation (hdwqp), end (cq) and appointed time (d[wm),
but the distinction of the two aeons, i.e. the present and the future, seems blurred both
in the immediate context of III 13-IV 26 (i.e. IV 22-23) and in the 1QS as a whole (e.g.
XI 7-9). Such mixture and tension of the realized and future eschatology does not help
establishing the identity of the community in an explicit way, so I will also treat it a
minor feature of the dualism. Charlesworth (1990, 82-85) eagerly argues against
Wernber-Mller about the existence of an entirely psychological dualism, but I find
the cosmic dimension of dualism outside (though dominate the scene) does not
exclude the psychological dimension inside (e.g. IV 23b). I will rephrase the dualism
in III 13-IV 26 in two aspects: monotheistic determinism which emphasizes Gods
ultimate dominion,66and cosmic dualism which is entirely ethical with psychological
implication.67
The clearest intention to establish such cosmic duality in 1QS is to identify

the community with the good side of the cosmic struggling forces. In III 13, the
recipients of the teaching are called Sons of Light. They play a part in the narrative
of the teaching in III 24-25a: And all the spirits of his (i.e. the Angel of Darkness) lot
cause to stumble the Sons of Light; but God of Israel and his Angel of Truth help all
the Sons of Light. The Sons of Light, i.e. the community members, are actually
65
Charlesworth was clearly highlighting this feature for the sake of comparison with the Gospel of
John.
66
I use the term ultimate dominion to avoid the Christian term sovereignty in describing Gods
predestination and His election of the community.
67
I will continue to term this second aspect of the dualism as cosmic dualism for the sake of
simplicity.
56
also the Sons of Righteousness because the stumbling of the Sons of Light is stated
differently in III 21b-22a: by the Angel of Darkness comes the aberration of all the
Sons of Righteousness. This identity of the community with the good side of the
cosmic dualism is further confirmed in IV 22, when God ends the dominion of the
deceit and wicked men, He will purify the works of man and the sons of man (i.e.
the members of the community, see Knibb 1988, 103), so that the upright ones
(~yrvy) and the perfect (ymymt) may have knowledge, wisdom and understanding.
This pair of titles, upright ones and the perfect, clearly refers to the members of the
community when their uses in III 1, 3 are considered.
Not only the good side of the dualism is identified with the community, the
opposition between the good and evil is already set up, involving the community in
the struggle, at the very beginning of 1QS. In column 1, line 3b-4 and 9b-10, the
double commands is repeatedly stated as the purpose of the community: in order to
love (bwhal) all that he has chosen, and to hate (awnvl) all that he has rejected,
in order to love (bwhal) all the Sons of Lightand to hate (awnvl) all the Sons of
Darkness Such requirement and purpose of the community contain two features
parallel to the dualism in III 13-IV 26. Firstly, the community faces a two-ways ethics:
keeping away from the evil and adhering to all good works, and in order to perform
truth and righteousness and justice upon the earth; to walk no longer with the
stubbornness of a guilty heart, and (no longer with) lustful eyes doing all evil (I
4b-7a). This two ways instruction for the community is expanded into a lengthy list
of virtues and vice in IV 2-6a, 9-11a. Secondly, the love and hate towards the two
groups and their behaviors are also the attitude of God towards the two parallel parties
in the cosmic dualism: He loves (bha) the one everlastingly and delights (hcry) in
its works for ever; but the counsel of the other He loathes (b[t]) and for ever hates
(anv) its ways (III 26b-IV1, Vermes 2004. Cf. IX 16, 21). We see clearly that how
the social identity and behavior was built with the help of constructing a dualistic
worldview. It is not enough to side the community with the good, the social boundary
is also carefully drawn by an ideology of dualism to set up an opposition between the
community and an evil opponent. The story and struggle of the community with its
opponent find its generalized pattern in the struggle of spiritual powers at a cosmic
level.
Who was the evil opponent to the community in 1QS? We have discussed it
briefly in the previous section concerning the meaning of Israel in VI 13-15. We
found a parallel double motion of separation from Israel/all deceit and joining to
the dxy/truth. We have concluded that the use of Israel here is not a way to recall
57
the ethnical identity of historical Israel, but to highlight the ethical distinction between
the pass and the present status based on individual decision. More importantly, the
parallels between Israel and all deceit, dxy and truth are heuristic for us to
understand how the cosmic dualism contributed to establish the ahistorical identity for
the community. In the case of CD, the community is clearly distinct from and being
part of the wider historical/ethnical Israel, which includes two categories: Israel of the
past, and enemies and/or apostates of the present community (Christiansen 1998, 79).
However, in 1QS, both the term dxy and Israel are polarized and abstractized to
two opposing ethical categories (truth and all deceit). In this way, the community
finds its identity not in historical and particular group of people, but ahistorical and
universalized categories, which are fully spelled out by the cosmic dualism in the
teaching.68 In other words, the social boundary coincides with the cosmic boundary
of the good and evil spirits.
Finally, in 1QS III 15-17 the theology of predestination69 precedes the
articulation of the cosmic struggle of the two spirits and the involvement of the
community among them. The absolute determinism placed an unconditional criterion
to the identity of the community that the divine action precedes historical human
conditions, e.g. ethnicity. The ultimate and primacy of Gods predestination even
surpassed human decision, apparently contradicting the freedom presumed in the legal
principle to obey Gods will. However, it does not bring any problem to the
self-understanding of the community because they belong to the Sons of Light who
receive the help from the God of Israel and his Angel of Truth (III 24b). For the
community, such absolute determinism is less important in explaining why they were
included in Gods elect than identifying who they are. Actually, the earlier section on
entry into the community (I 16-III 12) already deals with the issues of how (the
ceremony, i.e. I 16-II 18) and why (the attitude of sincerity, i.e. II 25-12) on being
included into the community. For those who have already been admitted into the
community, the theology of predestination no longer functions to set any criteria for
admission to the community but establish a worldview where the community finds its
place by emphasizing the unconditional and eternal (i.e. beyond history) dimension of
their identity.
68
Davies (2000, 37) observed that the similar transformation of ethical level from CD to 1QS is also
found in the final chapter of Daniel, where the nationalistic perspective of chapter 2 and 7 is replaced
by a righteous/wicked dichotomy.
69
Predestination and determinism are two faces of the same coin. The former focuses on the
perspective of divine action and the latter on the limited vision of the cosmos.
58

We have seen that entering the covenant with YHWH is equivalent to
entering the community and submission to the laws in 1QS. The triad (covenant,
identity and laws) are closely related that the validity of the covenant directly affect
the understanding of identity and the role of obedience in drawing the boundary. This
relation is clearly illuminated with a reference to another sectarian literature, CD. The
covenant in CD is structured within the framework of history. The strong awareness
of continuity with the past (i.e. ethnicity and history) and Gods remembrance of that
past formed the base of the covenant validity and the communal identity. However,
Gods special election of a group out of the nation and the obedience of that group to
Gods ordinance put new factors to the covenant validity, making obedience a
boundary that separate the group from those not following Gods will. The identity of
the group as the remnant is defined in relation to history: ethnical association of the
past, Gods election out of a nation, and obedience to the law contrary to the enemy.
The situation of 1QS is not so. Covenant history is replaced by covenant theology
which emphasizes legal principle and the teaching of the two spirits. The legal
principle results in a particularistic voluntarist community, focusing on personal and
ethical commitment. Such legal and ethical principle finds its supporting worldview in
the cosmic dualism which abstractizes and universalizes the community and its
opponent in ahistorical ethical terms. The covenant in 1QS is validated by the
personal and ethical decision on the one hand, and Gods eternal predestination on the
other, both factors define the communal identity ahistorically.
59
Chapter 4 Covenant and Communal Identity in 1 Peter

4.1 The framework of covenant in establishing the identity of Christian in 1:1-2:101
The Jewishness of 1 Peter has been rendered by various scholars, e.g.
Brown and Meier (1983), Michaels (1988) and Achtemeier (1996) (see previous
discussion), but little has been discussed on the significance of covenant and its
relation to the identity of Christian in 1 Peter. Pryor (1986a; 1986b) is exceptional to
this comment because he observed that the author subtly made use of the richness of
new covenant in 1 Peter to address the crisis of status and identity in the situation of
hostility.2 This is an important approach to avoid isolating the idea of communal
identity by placing it within the framework of covenant thinking, a term coined by
Pryor (1986b, 49), as presupposed by the early Judaism.
The author of 1 Peter did not employ the word covenant (diaqh,kh), but the
concept can be detected nearly everywhere in the epistle. The most significant
indication of such covenant thinking in 1 Peter is the corresponding relationship of
1:2 with 2:9, which strategically brackets the body opening and alludes to the Mosaic
covenant to establish the communal identity of Christian in a powerful way.
The epistle opening (1:1-2) begins with three prepositional phrases in 1:2
providing theological foundation for the divine chosen-ness of the readers (1:1a):
1a,2a
evklektoi/jkata. pro,gnwsin qeou/ patro.j
The structure of 1 Peter basically follows the epistolary convention of Hellenistic period, just as the
case of Pauline epistles. 1 Peter comprises of Opening (1:1-2), Thanksgiving or Blessing (1:3-12),
Body (Body-Opening (1:13-2:10), Body-Middle (2:11-4:11) and Body-Closing (4:12-5:11)),
Paraensis (somehow equivalent to 5:1-11), and Closing (5:12-14). See Schutter 1989, 19-32;
Achtemeier 1996, 73-4. The Thanksgiving/Blessing section is tightly connected to the
Body-Opening by the transition 1:13 (particularly by dio.) which shifts the mood from indicative to
imperative, and indicates that the Body-Opening grows directly out of 1:3-12 (Achtemeier 1996, 73).
There is actually inclusion in 1:3 and 2:10 (e;leoj/hvlehme,noi and evlehqe,ntej) which reminds the readers
that they were the recipients of Divine compassion, and through this their identity as Gods elect was
firmly established, forming the basis of Christian obligations which are displayed in the following
sections. Inclusions were also found in 1:1/5:13 (evklektoi/j and suneklekth.) and 1:3/5:10 (ovli,gon
luphqe,ntej/ ovli,gon paqo,ntaj) (see Schutter 1989, 28-9). In fact, the words ca,ritoj and kale,saj in 5:10
recalls the words ca,rij, evklektoi/j in 1:1-2, and katarti,sei in 5:10 also contrasts the beginning
description of believers, parepidh,moij diaspora/j in 1:1. However, we will focus on 1:1-2:10 as the
major section which concerns the identity of Christian community, upon which the argument of
Christian obligation follows (2:11ff). The eschatological dimension of Christian communal identity,
which concerns other part of 1 Peter outside 1:1-2:10, will be discussed later.
2
Pryor unpacked the crisis of identity into three (or four) questions: what is the ultimate destiny of
these Christians? What is happening to them now in their troubled existence? (i.e. what is its cause and
what explanation can be given for it?); How should they live in a society whose values they no loner
share? (1986, 44, 49).
60
2b
evn a`giasmw/| pneu,matoj
2c
eivj u`pakoh.n kai. ràntismo.n ai[matoj VIhsou/ Cristou/
The major exegetical problem occurs in the third prepositional phrase (2c)
regarding the following questions: What is the sense of eivj (telic or causal)? What is
the sense of the genitive, VIhsou/ Cristou/ (subjective, objective or possessive), and
which noun does it modify (u`pakoh.n, ràntismo.n or both)?3 What is the relationship of
u`pakoh.n to ràntismo.n (sequential, independent or hendiadys) 4 and what is the
tradition behind them (baptismal or covenant making ceremony (Exod 24))? Recently,
scholars come to a general recognition (with different forces) that the exegetical clue to
2c is the background of covenant making ceremony in Exod 24:3-8.5 This position
does not automatically resolve all the exegetical questions mentioned above. Also, in
my opinion, no scholar has yet provided a convincing solution that may explain every
difficult grammatical detail. 6 However, the allusion to Exod 24:3-8 in 1:2c is
persuasive because they shared similar elements and arrangement. The most common
elements shared by 1 Peter 1:2c and Exod 24:3-8 is the juxtaposition of two key
concepts, obedience and sprinkling of blood in both texts. Although the wordings in
the two texts are not exactly the same (u`pakoh, corresponds to poih,somen kai.
avkouso,meqa, ràntismo,j to kateske,dasen), they have almost exactly overlapping
meaning. The actual ritual of making the covenant in Exod 24 is more complicated than
the two-parts in 1 Peter:
The two questions are closely related that the following possible combinations are proposed: 1)
subjective genitive modifying ràntismo.n only, which stands as the further result of Gods plan and
power, for obedience, and for sprinkling of blood of Jesus Christ (esp. Achtemeier 1996, 88). 2)
Subjective genitive modifying both nouns, for Christs obedience that leads to sprinkling of blood by
Him (i.e. Christs sacrifice on the cross) (e.g. Elliott 2000, 319-20). 3) Objective genitive modifying
u`pakoh.n and possessive genitive modifying ai[matoj, for obedience to Christ and sprinkling of his
blood (most ET, e.g. NIV, TNIV and NRSV etc.). Option 3 is less possible for it is implausible that a
genitive serving two purposes at one time.
4
1) Sequential means the obedience leads to sprinkling (Eliott). 2) Independent means
sprinkling is independent and the fourth result/purpose of divine election (Achtemeier). 3)
Hendiadys means expressing a single idea by two terms. In this case, the two words refer to the new
covenant made by God with his people (Jobes 2005, 72).
5
E.g. Michael 1988, 12; Achtemeier 1996, 88; Elliott 2000,320; Jobes 2005, 72. Goppelt (1993)
acknowledged the parallel passage of 1QS III 6-8 on the one hand, and the baptismal tradition on the
other hand, suggested that 1 Pet. 1:2 derives perhaps from a Palestinian-Syrian baptismal catechesis
prompted by Essene precedent (72). This suggestion overstated the connection of the epistle with
Qumran literatures and the liturgical/catechetical tradition of baptism.
6
For example, most scholars considered eivj in 1:2c with a telic sense indicating the purpose of the
divine election (or sanctification by the Spirit). But the meaning of 1:1-2 translated as the electedfor
the purpose of obedience and sprinkling of blood of Jesus Christ remains obscure, and most scholars
did not explicate it well. The suggestion by Agnew (1983), followed by Elliott (2000, 319), renders eivj
with causal relation (the electedbecause of Jesus obedience and the sprinkling of his blood)
apparently makes good sense than with the telic one, but this option violates the normally telic sense of
eivj in 1 Peter.
61
(3a) recounting words of God/ ordinances

(3b) expression of obedience
(4a) writing down the laws
(4b-5) preparation and sacrifices
(6) sprinkling of blood on the alter
(7a) recounting book of covenant
(7b) expression of obedience
(8a) sprinkling of blood on the people
It is tempting to regard that the author of 1 Peter refers here only to the last
two actions of the process (i.e v. 7b-8a) because of the exact order (cf. Achtemeier 1996,
88 note 122). The sacrificial blood was divided into two parts for each of the covenantal
parties, YHWH (symbolized by the alter) and the Israelite. The sprinkling of blood
upon both parties signifies the mysterious cementing effect that binds them into the
covenant (Sarna 1991, 152). It should be noted that blood is such a vital body fluid
which conveys holiness. The sprinkling of blood (especially on the Israel) consecrated
Israel as YWHW's holy people (Nicholson 1982, 83). Since the preparation and
execution of the sacrifices is closely associated with the sprinkling of the blood (cf. Lev
3:2; 7:14),7 the whole process described in Exod 24:3-8 actually consists of three basic
elements: reading the laws, expression of obedience, and the covenant making by
sprinkling the sacrificial blood. 8 These three elements represent respectively the
covenantal obligation required by YHWH, the response expressed by the people, and
the cultic action symbolizing the seal of the covenant. The situation in 1 Peter 1:2
apparently coincides with the later two elements, but leaving out the role of law. It is
not easy to explain why the obligatory element (i.e. law) is absent in 1:2c, but the
element of the law is indeed present in the rest of the epistle with a new look. The telic
force of eivj is shared by both obedience and sprinkling of blood but the genitive
VIhsou/ Cristou is best understood as qualifying ràntismo.n (sprinkling) exclusively
(Achtemeier 1996, 88).
The significance of covenant making as a clue to interpret 1 Peter 1:2 is
strengthened when one turns to 1 Peter 2:9 and finds that it again alludes to the
beginning of the same Sinai pericope (Exod 19-24), i.e. the covenant formula in Exod
19:5-6. 1 Peter 2:9-10 is a climax that closes the body opening (1:3-2:10). It identifies
7
It is not sure whether the sprinkling of blood on alter conveys atoning or purifying effect. Childs'
reading that the sprinkling of blood on the alter in place of a sacrifice speaks of God's gracious
forgiveness in accepting this as an offering is misleading, although it is possible that the first half of
the blood has atoning effect while the second half binds them in a blood oath (1976, 506).
8
The repetition of reciting the law (3a, 7a) and the expression of obedience (3b, 7b) is a way to
reassure the importance of these two elements.
62
the readers with the elected people of God by applying four epithets for Israel to them.
All these epithets are collected from the LXX of Exod 19:5-6 and Isa 43:20-21 (also
Mal 3:17).
1 Peter 2:9
Exod 19:5-6 (LXX)

Isa 43:20-21 (LXX)
...e;sesqe, moi lao.j
u`mei/j de. ge,noj evklekto,n( periou,sioj ...u`mei/j de. e;sesqe, ...to. ge,noj mou to. evklekto,n
basi,leion ièra,teuma(
moi basi,leion ièra,teuma kai.
e;qnoj a[gion(
e;qnoj a[gion ...
lao.j
...lao,n mou
o]n periepoihsa,mhn
ta.j avreta,j mou
eivj peripoi,hsin( ...

o[pwj ta.j avreta.j
evxaggei,lhte
dihgei/sqai
1 Peter 2:9 bears a striking resemblance with Exod 19:5-6 (LXX). The
pronoun (u`mei/j) with the two middle epithets (basi,leion ièra,teuma...e;qnoj a[gion)
follows closely the order and content of the alluded text. The first and last epithets
(ge,noj evklekto,n...lao.j eivj peripoi,hsin) are most likely adapted from Isa 43:20-21
(LXX), though Exod 19:5 (LXX) also contains lao,j as the head term (see the
parallel e;sesqe...u`mei/j de. e;sesqe in v.5 & v.6).9 The idea of readers as the chosen
(evklekto,j) is not new in 1 Peter (cf. 1:1;2:4,6) and the term ge,noj in Deutero-Isaiah
identifies the missionary role of Israel towards the nations (42:6; 43:20; 49:6).10 This
specific task of the people of God is the most possible reason why Isa 43:20-21 is
adopted here because the author of 1 Peter did not only make clear the identity of
the readers but also their purpose to announce the excellent deeds (ta.j avreta.j
evxaggei,lhte (2:9), cf. ta.j avreta,j mou dihgei/sqai (Isa 43:21)) 11 of God. More
interestingly, the missionary statement about Israel as the light to the nations
9
Peripoi,hsin (possession, property(BGAD 804),1 Peter 2:9) is basically derived from peripoie,omai
(to obtain, preserve(Ibid), Isa 43:21). It indicates the direct allusion in 1 Peter 2:9 is from Isa 43:21
rather than other sources. Periou,sioj, which always associates with (and follows behind) lao.j (Exod
19:5; 23:22; Deu 7:6; 14:2; 26:18; Tit 2:14), could either mean private possession (LN 57.5, cf. the
semantic domain of peripoie,omai (LN 57.61)) or peculiar (LN 58.48)). The phrase lao.j periou,sioj in
Exod 19:5 is also found in Deut 7:6, another version of the Sinaitic covenant formula. Elliott (1966, 40
note 2) observed that Isa 43:20f. shows a greater affinity to Deut 7:6 than Exod 19:6 but it was the
Exodus version being combined with Isa 43:20-21. This rather strange decision is understandable
because the author alluded to the beginning and end of the Sinai pericope (Exod 19-24) to set the
epistle opening (1 Peter 1:2-2:10) in the context of covenant making.
10
The lexical studies on Greek favors the meaning of common origin/ancestor for ge,noj (Goppelt
1993, 148. See also Elliott 2000, 435). However, this meaning disregards the specific context of the
word in both 1 Peter 2:9-10 and deuteron-Isaiah. Also, most scholars highlighted the theme of
election in this first epithet and missed the overall sense of the epithet in the immediate context of
2:9-10 which helps to post the purpose of the community by alluding to Isa 43:20-21.
11
evxagge,lw (1 Peter 2:9) and dihge,omai (Isa 43:21) belong to the same semantic domain (LN 33.201
and 204 respectively, inform, announce).
63
described in LXX version of Isa 42:6 and 49:6 (where the two other occurrences of
ge,noj are found) also highlights Gods will to make them into a covenant of race
(diaqh,khn ge,nouj, cf. Isa 49:8).12 The universal purpose of God to bring salvation to
the nations through His servant is understood as a covenant relationship extended
beyond Israel.13
Besides this allusion to Isa 43 in the first epithet, Exod 19:5-6 also connotes
the covenant relation between YHWH and Israel. Vv.5-6 comprises of three elements:
the YHWH's promise to Israel to be his own people (v.5b-6a), the history of YHWH's
gracious deliverance of Israel from Egypt (v.4), and the condition of Israel's obedience
to Him by keeping the covenant (v.5a). It is God's history of salvation and Israel's
obedience that validates their status as God's elected people. The overarching concept
behind this relation is the covenant which binds the two parties, YHWHwho elects
and saves Israel, and Israelwho obeys the laws.14 The requirement for Israel to
keep the covenant (diaqh,kh) and their response of obedience recall the establishment
of covenant in Exod 24:8 and the same response in Exod 24:3, 7.15
The allusions to the beginning and end of the Sinai pericope (Exod 19-24)
in 1 Peter 1:2 and 2:9 formed a frame that enclosed the epistle opening (1:2-2:10)16
which describes the communal identity of the readers. This subtle arrangement allows
the author of 1 Peter to put his discussion of Christian identity within the context of
covenant making at Sinai by alluding only the inclusio of the Sinai pericope, which is
12
The LXX of Isa 42:6 and 49:6 has e;dwka,/te,qeika se eivj diaqh,khn ge,nouj eivj fw/j evqnw/n (I have
given/ placed you for a covenant of a race, for a light of nations). Although in MT of Isa 42:6, the word
~[;; on the one hand clearly refers to the people on earth in general as in v.5, and on the other hand
parallels structurally to yAG (nation) later in the same verse, its translation into ge,noj here and in other
place in LXX Isaiah (Isa 22:4; 42:6; 43:20; 49:6) certainly refers to Israel See Ekblad 1999, 74.
13
The community called and upheld by God, by discharging the patient faithful witness assigned to
the Servant, becomes the instrument through which the nations are drawn into the covenant relationship
marked by God's reign of justice, the covenant relationship of which Israel already had been a part
because of God's graciously activity on Israel's behalf and which now was to be extended to the wider
family of the nations. (Hanson 1995, 46-47). Although Hanson, like most of OT scholars, considered
the ~[;; to be the inhabitants of the earth, his interpretation of the purpose of the Servant is still valid.
14
Elliott stated it clearly, When Isreal is faithful to the covenant then she shall be a kingdom of
priests, that is, a holy nation sharing the holiness of her holy God and enjoying the access to Him which
is typical of priests. Isreal is to be a kingdom of priests on the basis of the covenantin virtue of her
election and her obedience. (1966, 62)
15
LXX Exod 19:8 pa,nta o[sa ei=pen o` qeo,j poih,somen kai. avkouso,meqa
LXX Exod 24:3 pa,ntaj tou.j lo,gouj ou]j evla,lhsen ku,rioj poih,somen kai. avkouso,meqa
LXX Exod 24:7 pa,nta o[sa evla,lhsen ku,rioj poih,somen kai. avkouso,meqa
16
The inclusio of the epistle opening of 1 Peter and the Sinai pericope of Exodus are not exact, e.g.
The epistle opening actually ends with 2:9-10, which includes an allusion to Hos 2:23, but the link
word lao.j binds the different sources together to highlight the peculiar identity of the readers as the
chosen people. Also, Exod 19:5-6 and 24:3-8 are only roughly located at the beginning and end of the
Sinai pericope, which are embedded within a complicated narrative framework running throughout the
pericope.
64
performed by associating the inclusio of the alluded text with the inclusio of the target
text.17
4.2 Christian community as the Israel
Within the context of covenant thinking in 1 Peter, especially 1:2-2:10, the
readers are clearly endowed with an identity of the people of God. This is most
evident in the climax of the epistle opening, 2:9-10, where the four significant epithets
of ancient Israel are applied to the Christian community. The approaches employed by
the author of 1 Peter in establishing the identity of Christian community do not limit
to direct application of a few terminology and concepts from OT to this new
community. The connotation to the identity of the Christian community is much more
far reaching than only literal quotation or allusion. Although the term Israel is not
employed, the author of 1 Peter has a total appropriation of the language of Israel for
the Christian communities (Achtemeier 1993, 187). Moreover, an implicit inclusion
of a transformed version of the four pillars in early Judaism is found in 1 Peter,
further identifying further the peculiar identity of covenant partner of God, i.e. Israel,
with the Christian community.
4.2.1 The Four Epithets in 1 Peter 2:9
We have briefly discussed above the missiological connotation of the first epithet,
ge,noj evklekto,n, especially within the context of Deutero-Isaiah. In NT, ge,noj always
refers to Jewish people (Gal 1:14; Phil 3:5; 2 Cor 11:26; Act 7:19 etc) in the sense of
people, but it is used for Christians only in 1 Peter 2:9 (Bchsel 1964, 685). The
author of 1 Peter now intentionally makes a term originally dedicated to Israel a
Christian one. More importantly, the transference of such missiological identity to the
readers matches with their election: they are elected with a purpose. Just as the exiled
people in Babylon were elected to tell fully (dihgei/sqai) Gods wondrous deeds (Isa
43:20-21), the Christian community is also elected to declare (evxaggei,lhte) the
wondrous deeds of the same God. Such election of the people does not relate to the
imminent salvation in the exile (e.g. Elliott 1966, 39-40) as much as to their mission
towards the nations.
The fourth epithet (lao.j eivj peripoi,hsin) is derived from the same context as the
first one. The author did not employ the more popular phrase lao.j periou,sioj
17
1 Peter 1:1-2 echoes with 2:9-10 that we may say that the two texts forms an inclusio, e.g. evklektoi/j,
a`giasmw/| in 1:1-2 matches with evklekto,n, a[gion in 2:9.
65
(peculiar people Exod 19:5; 23:22; Deu 7:6; 14:2; 26:18; Tit 2:14), which frequently
accompanied with another phrase avpo. pa,ntwn tw/n evqnw/n (Exod 19:5; 23:22; Deu 14:2)
or para. pa,nta ta. e;qnh (Deu 7:6) to indicate an ethnic identity differentiated from the
gentiles (ta. e;qnh). Hence the author of 1 Peter does not emphasize such peculiarity in
relation to other groups (against Elliott 2000, 439). The laovn at the beginning of Isa
43:21 is clearly in apposition to to. ge,noj in v.20 so that both terms denote the
missiological role in the Deutero-Isaiah to tell the wondrous deed of God. The author
changed the original phrase in LXX to be more future-oriented by replacing the
demonstrative pronoun with eivj, which is characteristic in various eschatological
expressions in 1 Peter 1:3-5 (Michaels 1988, 109). Although the prepositional phrase
eivj peripoi,hsin in other NT occurrences aims to complete the concept of salvation
by adding a genitive (swthri,a 1 Thess 5:9; do,xa 2 Thess 2:14; yuch, Heb 10:39) after
it, the absolute substantive in 1 Peter more naturally refers to the future status of
Christian community as Gods possession (i.e. objective substantive) rather than the
specific state of salvation possessed by them (i.e. subjective substantive cf. Michaels
1988, 109).18 The situation here is similar to the temporal clause in Mal 3:17 (LXX)19
eivj h`me,ran h]n evgw. poiw/ eivj peripoi,hsin (in the day when I make them my
possession (translated by George E. Howard, NETS)) which modified the traditional
covenant formula at the beginning of the same verse kai. e;sontai, moi (and they
shall be mine).20 If the fourth epithet is also influenced by Mal 3:17 and the
expectation of restoring the covenant relation in it, the author of 1 Peter altered the
Isaian text slightly to include a concrete eschatological identity of being Gods
covenantal possession without diminishing the missiological tone of Isa 43:20-21.
We have seen that the interpretation of the first and fourth epithets should be
controlled primarily by their alluded OT texts, Isa 43:20-21 and Mal 3:17. However,
the lexical analysis of the terms ge,noj and lao,j in LXX and NT should also be briefly
noted. As we have discussed above, ge,noj often refers to Jewish people in LXX
Deutor-Isaiah and NT.21 LXX also has an inclination to use lao,j when the reference
is Israel (Strathmann 1967, 32-35) while lao,j in NT predominantly refers to people of
God, i.e. the Jewish people.22 In 1 Peter 2:9-10, both terms originates from OT with
18
The meaning of saving/keeping safe can be derived from the concept of preserve (cf. BGAD
804.1). But it is an overstatement to claim that peripoi,hsij could be plausibly understood as a
synonym for swthri,a by simply comparing the eivj swthri,an in 1 Peter 1:5; 2:2 (Michaels 1988, 109).
19
The phrase eivj peripoi,hsin occurs in LXX twice. The other one is in Hag 2:9 which does not relate
to the thought of being Gods possession.
20
Cf. the phrase e;sontai, moi eivj lao,n kai. evgw. e;somai auvtoi/j eivj qeo,n in Zech 8:8; Jer 24:7; 39:38; Eze
11:20; 14:11.
21
E.g. Act 7:19; Cor 11:26; Gal 1:14; Phil 3:5; 2.
22
See BGAD 586-87; Frankomlle 1990, 341. And it is use for Christian community in Act 15:14;
18:10; Rom 9:25f.; 2 Cor 6:16; Tit 2:14; Heb 4:9; 8:10; 10:30; 13:12; Rev 18:4; 21:3 etc.
66
Israel in mind but they are now applied to the same people, the Christian community,
so we may safely conclude lao,j and ge,noj are synonymous here. However, we also
clearly see that lao,j is usually in antithetical position to e;qnh in LXX, with the former
being used in the sense of Gentiles while the latter in the sense of the chosen people.23
The problem is whether this antithesis continues in NT when lao,j is applied to
Christian community. Frankomlle (1990, 340) prefers lao,j as a designation of the
Christian church(es)with the termination of the opposition to e;qnoj. I suggest the
case is different in 1 Peter, especially the two other occurrences in 2:12; 4:3 (both in
plural). However, the singular e;qnoj of the third epithet for Christian community,
following the use in LXX Exod 19:6, denotes a nation or a body of persons united by
common kinship, culture and traditions (BGAD 276), which is not distinguished from
lao,j and hence basically synonymous to it and ge,noj (Elloitt 2000, 435). The third
epithet e;qnoj a[gion is in apposition to the second one, just as they both belong to Exod
19:5-6, so that we need to consider them together.
The interpretation of the phrase basi,leion ièra,teuma had not been fully
settled for the past few decades. The debate focuses on whether basi,leion should be
taken with substantive or adjective force. If it is interpreted as a noun, basi,leion and
ièra,teuma should be separated as two independent epithets. Otherwise, basi,leion
becomes an adjective modifying the neuter singular noun ièra,teuma, just as the other
three epithets consisting of a noun-modifier structure. The strongest evidences
supporting the substantive sense are the majority of ancient sources indicating this use,
including the occurrence of basi,leion in other LXX texts24 and the tradition of Exod
19:6 interpreted in LXX, other Jewish literatures,25 and NT.26 Another important clue
to read it as a noun is the syntactical preference in 1 Peter to put the modifying
23
Especially when emphasizing the election of Israel among the nations in Exod 19:5; 23:22; Deu 7:6;
14:2. See Strathmann 1967, 52; Bertram 1964, 365-66; Frankomlle 1990, 341. This differentiation
was developed in history of translating the words m[;/~yMi[; and ywOG/~yiwGO into Greek. In LXX, we find a
tendency m[;/~yMi[ is rendered by lao,j to indicate Israel and ~yiwGO by e;qnh to Gentiles.
24
1 Chr 28:4; 2 Macc 2:17; Wis 1:14; 5:16; Dan 4:34, 37; 5:23, 30; 7:22; 2 Sam 1:10; 2 Chr 23:11; 1
Esdr 4:40; 4:44; Pro 18:19 and 4 Macc 3:8.
25
LXX 2 Macc 2:17 has to. basi,leion kai. to. ièra,teuma. Most Old Greek versions understand them in
Exod 19:6 as two nouns with different forms either in coordinate relation (kingdom and
priests/priesthood) or genitival relation following MT (kingdom of priests, cf. MT ~ynIh
K] o
tk,l,m.m)(Elliott 1966, 78 note 1). Other important Jewish writings drawing the tradition of Exod 19:6
include Philo, Sobr. 66; Abr. 56 (which further identifies basi,leion with o` basile,wjoi=koj, a point
which Elliott employed to support the interpretation of oi=koj in 1 Peter 2:5 as house, palace (1966,
152-53; 2000, 416)); Jub 16:18; 33:20 (Elliott 1966, 78-85) and Targumim (Elliott 1966, 76-78). For
detail arguments in support on this interpretation, see Elliott 1966, 63-101; Selwyn 1946, 165-66; Best
1969, 288-91; 1971, 107-108.
26
The two nouns in Rev 1:6; 5:10 (basilei,an and ièrei/j) have different forms from those of 1 Peter
2:9 (basi,leion and ièra,teuma). Toi/j basilei,oij in Luke 7:25 also clearly has substantive sense.
67
(adjective) component after the noun.27 In this way, basi,leion, within the context of 1
Peter 2:9, may mean the material structure of Kings living place, i.e. the royal
residence or palace,28 or collective concept of kingship, i.e. a body of kings.29
The interpretation of basi,leion as royal palace, residence or house is
dubious and unconvincing because it does not fit well to the parallel concepts of
people consistently employed in other epithets, i.e. ge,noj, e;qnoj and lao,j, in 1 Peter
2:9, a context which is not found in Rev 1:6 and 5:10. It is possible for the author to
identify the Christian community with certain building for certain function, e.g. the
temple or sanctuary in 2:5, but the emphasis in 2:9 is clearly focus on personal and
relational aspect of Christian identity through application of OT epithets. Elliott (1966,
152-53; 2000, 415) advocates the interpretation of 2:9 in the light of 2:5, and
highlights the correspondence between the key words in the two verses, i.e. oi=koj,
ièra,teuma, a[gion (v.5) vs basi,leion, ièra,teuma, a[gion (v.9). This insight, supported by
Philos interpretation in Abr. 56, allows him to claim that oi=koj means house(hold) of
God and hence basi,leion refers to the royal residence. However, the pitfall of this
argument is the loosely hold meaning of oi=koj, which shifts between physical building,
i.e. house, and the community living within that building, i.e. household. Elliott
finds the twofold meanings helpful to facilitate the shift from the notion of
believers-as-stones being built up (oikodomeisthe) to their identification as house(hold)
of the Spirit (2000, 417). Moreover, the meaning of oi=koj as household, in Elliotts
view, corresponds with the domestic motif in 2:13ff. (1966, 155), and the meaning of
oi=koj as house links the term with basi,leion, which is interpreted as royal house in
2:9. This flexibility of meaning overlooks the different emphasis in 2:5 and 2:9. In 2:5,
the architectonic sense (oivkodomei/sqe) is so clear that a physical building is intended
as a metaphor for describing the Christian community.30 However, the personal and
covenantal oriented epithets ge,noj, e;qnoj and lao,j in 2:9 link more naturally to
ièra,teuma than basi,leion. In short, the different context of 2:5 and 2:9 does not allow
the fluidity of meaning of oi=koj and confines the meaning of epithets to be more
people oriented.
Best suggests that basi,leion, if understood with substantive force, parallels
27
Selwyn 1946, 166; Elliott 1966, 151; Best 1969, 288

This follows the understanding of Philo Abr. 56; Luke 7:25 etc. see Selwyn 1946, 166; Elliott 1966,
50-128; 2000, 437.
29
This understanding follows Targumic tradition and makes basi,leion in parallel with the next term
ièra,teuma, which means a body of priests. Cf. Rev 1:6; 5:10. See Best 1969, 290-91.
30
Elliott (1966, 159) himself noticed this remark by Selwyn: Though oi=koj can mean household its
proximity to oivkodomei/sqe shews that house is the meaning here; and the context is not domestic but
religious and sacerdotal. (Selwyn 1946, 159-60).
28
68
ièra,teuma in their communal sense and means body of kings based on the Targumic
interpretation of Exod 19:6 and Rev 1:6; 5:10 (1969, 290-91; 1971, 108), especially
when the concept of believers reigning with Christ in the future is found in Rev 20:4,
6, 22:5 (cf. 1 Cor 4:8; 2 Tim 2:12). However, the kingship of believers is obscure in
1 Peter, and the election of a people denotes a sovereignty which attributes such
kingship to God instead.31 The most appropriate interpretation of basi,leion in 1 Peter
2:9 is to take the adjective sense (i.e. royal) modifying ièra,teuma (clearly a noun of
neuter singular). The two words together indicate priesthood in the service of the King,
namely God. This interpretation is consistent with the noun-adjective construct of the
four epithets,32 and keeps the balance between divine and human aspect implicit in
each epithet. In words of Michaels, basi,leion is best understood (along with the
other two adjectives, and ) as reinforcing at every opportunity the notion that the
believing communitybelongs uniquely to God. Without mentioning God directly, he
portrays a race chosen of God, a nation holy as God is holy (cf. 1:15-16), and a
priesthood belonging to God the King. (1988, 109).33
Once the basic meaning of basi,leion ièra,teuma is determined, the third
epithet e;qnoj a[gion can easily be handled. Since the second and third epithets come
together as couple directly derived from Exod 19:6, the holiness here relates to the
separateness inherited in the priesthood (2:5), which is initiated by Gods election
through the work of Holy Spirit (1:2). The ethical implication of being holy because
of Gods holiness is not implied here.
In sum, the author of 1 Peter applied the four epithets from two main LXX
passages, Exod 19:5-6 and Isa 43:21-22, with the addition Mal 3:17, to heighten the
implied identity of Christian community as Israel. This identity is characterized
through this direct application of epithet in two ways: 1) the readers serve a priestly
function for God the King as a peculiar (holy) people (the middle two epithets
basi,leion ièra,teuma and e;qnoj a[gion). Such peculiarity is understood within the
covenant context of both the Sinai periscope of OT (Exod 19-24, esp. Exod 19:5-6)
and the epistle opening of 1 Peter (i.e. 1 peter 1:2-2:10). 2) The covenantal relation is
not a status designated for or possessed by them only, the priesthood implies a
mediating function to extend the covenantal relation to other people through their
31
The neuter singular basi,leion indicates an attribute of kingship. It is too far to claim that from the
kingship of the nation to the conception of its members as kings is not a great step (Best 1969, 291).
32
Elliott objected the existence of a pattern of substantive combined with adjective within each epithet
because the last one, lao.j eivj peripoi,hsin, contains two nouns (1966, 151). But it is easy to see that the
prepositional phrase eivj peripoi,hsin serves a modifying function just as other adjectives.
33
And Michaels missed the similar articulation of the last epithet, lao.j eivj peripoi,hsin, i.e. a covenant
people which will fully become Gods possession.
69
proclamation of wondrous deeds of God.34 It is the very purpose of their election that
only through this their ultimate status as Gods possession will be fulfilled in the end
(lao.j eivj peripoi,hsin).
4.2.2 Other languages in 1 Peter denoting the identity of Christian community as
Israel
The author of 1 Peter not only described Christian community as Israel
possessing the elected status with a mission, he extensively employed multiple images
and languages of OT to illustrate that the community shared various experiences of
the historical/biblical Israel.35 Such appropriation of the historical experiences of
Israel (which somehow run from exodus, desert wandering and promised land motif
from the Pentateuch, see Brown and Meier 1983, 133) further confirms the basis of
their identity as Israel indirectly. Brown and Meier (133-34) drew the parallelism of
Israel and Christian community in this regard:
Israel
Christian community of 1 Peter
Gird up their loins for quick departure Gird up their mind to hope for the future
from Egypt (Exod 12:11)
grace (1:13)
Murmured and wanted to go back to the Not to be conformed to the passions of

fleshpots of Egypt (Exod 16:2-3)
your former ignorance (1:14)
Obligated to be Holy (Lev 19:2, cf Obligated to be Holy (1:15-16)
11:44, 45; 20:7, 26)
Gods liberation of His people from Redeemed from the futile ways inherited
Egypt by paying ransom36 (Exod 6:5-6; from their fathers (1:18)
Deut 7:8; Isa 52:3)
Hebrews were saved from the plagues by They were ransomed not by silver or
the blood of the unblemished Passover gold but the precious blood of Christ,
lamb (Exod 11:2; 12:5-7). However, the like that of lamb without blemish or spot
silver and gold taken from Egypt were (1:18)37
34
Steuernagel (1986) highlights the important of mission and identity conveyed in 1 Peter 2:9-10:
the letter is a document that helps to get balance between identity and mission: chosen, yes, but not
closed to outsiders. Chosen for witness, in word and deed (15).
35
See the analysis of Schutter 1989, 35-43. He suggested seven categories of OT references, including
Quotation (explicit and implicit, a total of 9 instances), Allusion (explicit, implicit, incipient and
iterative, more than 35 instances), and Biblicism (some 20 instances). Cf. Elliott 2000, 12-7.
36
The redeemed status (evlutrw,qhte (1:18)) recalls the laws regarding ransom paid for family
member in Lev 25 and 27.
37
The lamb (avmno,j) may not refers to the Passover lamb (commentators supporting this reading
includes Kelly 1969, 74. Goppelt (1993, 116) and Senior (2003, 44)). Michael (1986, 66) and Elliott
(2000, 374-75) tended to view the lamb as a blending of three imageries (Passover lamb in Exodus,
the sacrificial lamb prescribed in the Sinai or the Suffering Servant in Isa 53:7) with greater cohesion
70
made into a calf they worshipped

(32:1-4).
Besides these experiences of exodus, the author also reapplied the
experience of exile to the readers. They were identified as strangers in diaspora
(parepidh,moij diaspora/j 1:1; cf. 1:17; 2:11) under the shadow of the rule of Babylon
(5:13). The Babylonian exile as the collective experience of Israel shared by the
Christian community is more notable when we advert to the allusion of
Deutero-Isaiah in 1 Peter, which viewed restoration from Babylonian exile as second
Exodus.38 The theme of exile/restoration is recapitulated in 5:10 by the fourfold
future indicative verbs (atarti,sei( sthri,xei( sqenw,sei( qemeliw,sei) related to
eschatological rebuilding of the temple and the nation (Dubis 2002, 53-6). The
metaphor of astray sheep returning to the Shepherd (1 Peter 2:25) also echoes the
regathering of Israel in Isa 53:6 and Ezek 34.
Exodus and exile are significant experiences to the historical Israel, and the
author of 1 Peter made greatest use of them to further confirm the basis of Christian
communal identity as Israel. However, the major theological agenda of the author is
already subtly placed in 1:10-12 and further expanded throughout the epistle,
especially in the section concerning submission of slaves in the household code
(2:18-25). The theme of suffering-glorification exemplified by the experience of
Christ (ta. eivj Cristo.n paqh,mata kai. ta.j meta. tau/ta do,xaj 1:11) becomes the
principle and life model of Christian community when facing social hostility. Just as
Christ being predestinated (elected/chosen), suffered and glorified, the Christian
Community has to follow in his steps (evpakolouqh,shte toi/j i;cnesin auvtou/ 2:21), i.e.
recognizing their predestinated identity, they has to suffer for the righteousness (3:14,
18; 4:14, 16) with good conduct (2:12, 15, 20; 3:6, 17), and hoping for the future
reward of glorification (1:4-5, 7, 13, 4:13-14; 5:4, 6, 10). This is the very purpose of
being called by God to be His people (ga.r/o[ti eivj tou/to evklh,qhte 2:21; 3:9, cf. 1:15;
5:10). The theme of suffering-glorification is supported by the free allusion to Isa
53:4-12 in 1 Peter 2:22-24 (a pesher-like hermeneutic see Shutter 1989, 143-44)
which has already been prophesized in the OT (1:10-12). In other words, the fate of
Christ as prophesized in OT will be followed by the chosen people of God. A new
element has now been incorporated into their identity of Israel, i.e. let him
with Isa 53:7 (because of 1 Pet 2:25). Cf. Dubis (2002, 50-3). It is possible that both the Exodus and
Exile motifs appear in 1 Peter 1:13-22 because they both represent a pattern of subjugation followed by
liberation that had repeated itself in the history of Israel (51).
38
Allusion to Deutero-Isaiah includes 1 Peter 1:18 (Isa 52:3); 1:24-25 (Isa 40:6-9); 2:9 (Isa 43:20-21);
2:21-25 (Isa 53); 3:13 (Isa 50:9) etc. Other allusions to Isaianic texts includes 1 Peter 2:7 (Isa 28:16);
2:8 (Isa 8:14); 2:12 (Isa 10:3); 3:14 (Isa 8:12); and 4:14 (Isa 11:2). See Dubis 2002, 48.
71
sufferas a Christian (pasce,tww`j Cristiano,j 4:15-16). The title Christian

(Cristiano,j with a suffix -iano,j, also in Acts 11:26; 26:28 only) denotes a partisan,
adherent, or client of the one named with a denigrating overtone designated by
outsiders (Elliott 2000, 789-91). This title identifies the readers as the people of God
who suffered the insult for the name of Christ, which is a blessing to them (4:14).
Suffering for Christs sake and the resultant title Christian become the prominent
identity markers for the readers in addition to their self consciousness of being
Israel.
4.2.3 The eschatological dimension of Communal identity in 1 Peter
The identity of Christian community as Israel entails an inheritance
promised by God to His people in the future. The author of 1 Peter retained this
language of inheritance (klhronomi,a) in 1:4 to develop the eschatological dimension
of their communal identity. The inheritance parallels the hope (1:3) into which they
were born anew.39 The rich expressions of this eschatological reward in 1 Peter
include glory (do,xa 1:7; 4:14; 5:1, 4, 10), salvation (swthri,a 1:5, 9; 2:2), grace
(ca,rij1:13; 3:7) etc. However, the fulfillment of this hope had already been
inaugurated when the end (e;scatoj) arrived in the advent of Christ (1:20). The Spirit
of glory now rests upon the readers (4:14)40 as they suffer for Christs name, which
is an anticipation of the eschatological glory of Christ (4:13). Their salvation is also a
present reality (nu/n sw,z| ei) through the baptism (3:21, cf. 1:9), just as the grace of
God in which the readers were exhorted to stand fast (5:12; cf. 4:10 as good steward
of Gods grace). This articulation of the present vs future rewards is a direct
empowerment to the readers in their life situation of suffering. The identity of
Christian community is not only built upon the scheme of suffering-glorification
exemplified by Christ, the anticipation of exultation (avgallia,w 1:6, 8; 4:13) in the
present of suffering (with Christ, 4:13) provides a new perspective 41 for the
community to understand the present situation and themselves. The present suffering
is actually the beginning of the final judgment on all peoples (4:17, see Achtemeier
1996, 315; Selwyn 1954, 399). The Christian community is the house of God (o`
oi=koj tou/ qeou/ 4:17)42 who suffers earlier in this final judgment and only barely
39
The parallelism includes the preposition phrases eivj evlpi,da (1:3) and eivj klhronomi,an (1:4). The eivj
denotes a purpose which directs to future fulfillment of the reward.
40
The author of 1 Peter adapted the future avnapau,setai of Isa 11:2 into present tense avnapau,etai, and
inserted the phrase to. th/j do,xhj to modify the attribute of Gods Spirit. See Michaels 1988, 253-5.
41
Note the exhortations of not be surpriseas something strange were happening to you (mh.
xeni,zesqew`j xe,nou u`mi/n sumbai,nontoj) in 4:12, and not be ashamed (mh. aivscune,sqw) in 4:16.
42
It should be rendered temple of God in view of 1 Peter 2:5, cf. Isa 10:11-12; Jer 25:29; Ezek 9:6;
Zech 13:7-9; Mal 3:1-6. See the discussion on 3.3 below.
72
saved (o,lij sw,z| etai, 4:18). Those who are ungodly and sinners, rejecting the
gospel of God (and responsible for the present suffering of the readers), will certainly
have a worse end (to. te,loj) in their suffering than the Christian (4:17b, 18b). In other
words, the Christian community and their opponents are moving towards very
different ends, though both are now situated in the same period of final judgment in
different stages. The imminence of this end (4:7a) further strengthens the certainty of
this division between Christian and non-Christian, and becomes an encouragement to
the Christian community to resist the temptation to denial their faith because the
present suffering will last for only a little while (ovli,goj, 1:6; 5:10) (see Achtemeier
1996, 317).
4.3 Christian community serving as the Priest and Sanctuary
We have briefly touched on the issue of priesthood when considering the
identity of the readers as Israel. The author of 1 Peter also appropriates the
cultic-institutional language of Israel to the Christian community. 43 The whole
cultic system, including the temple, the priest and the sacrifice, is transferred to the
Christian community in a metaphorical way (2:5). We need to do a detail exegesis on
the relevant terms, oi=koj pneumatiko.j, èra,teuma a[gion and pneumatika.j qusi,aj, before
we can understand the kind of priesthood that the Christian community has.
4.3.1 The structure of 1 Peter 2:4-10
1 Peter 2:4-10 is a piece of thematic midrash on two groups of OT texts: the
li,qoj-theme (Isa 28:16, Psa 118:22, Isa 8:14) in vv.6-8, and the lao,j-theme44 (Isa
43:20-21, Exod 19:5-6, Hos 2:23) in vv.9-10, with vv.4-5 as the introductory
statement of both themes.45 The comparative study of interpretation and expansion of
OT in NT by Bauckham (1988, 309-312) correctly arranges the structure of 2:4-10
according to the catchwords which link the introductory statement (A & B) to the two
43
See Schssler Fiorenza (1976, 174). She avoids the term spiritualization because it presupposes
the dualistic distinction between cultic institution and religious-ethical disposition of the worshipper
(159-61). She prefers a more descriptive term transference which indicates the cultic concepts were
shifted to designate a reality which was not cultic (161).
44
The lao.j -theme is clearly attested through the association of the last epithet (lao.j eivj peripoi,hsin)
in v.9 and the ouv lao.j nu/n de. lao.j qeou/ in v.10. Since the nouns in other three epithets indicate the
identity of the people (ge,noj, ièra,teuma, e;qnoj), it is justified to include them under the same title of
lao,j-theme, which has no way to do with lao,j complex or testimonia of early Christian tradition
hypothesized by some scholars (See Elloitt 1966, 138-41).
45
Elliott (1966, 33-49) advocates vv.4-5 to be an interpretation on the vv.6-10 because the lao.j theme
(rather than complex, i.e. a preexisted tradition, as suggested by him) in vv.6-8 provides the terms and
the formulation for vv.4-5a, i.e vv.4-5 is later than vv.6-8, and v.5b parallel strikingly with v.9-10 (a
compilation by the author, see 1966, 47). In other words, vv.4-5 holds the key to interpret the whole
midrashic piece vv.4-10.
73
thematic midrashim (A & B), and link the OT texts to their interpretation in the
midrash:
Verses
4-5
Introductory statement of theme
4
5
A Jesus the elect stone

B The church the elect people of God
Midrash
6a
6-8
Introductory formula
A The elect stone
6b+7a Text 1 (Isa 28:16)+interpretation 1
7b+7c Interpretation 2+Text 2 (Psa 118:22)
6-10
8a+8b
9-10
B
9
10
Text 3 (Isa 8:14)+interpretation 3

The elect people
Text 4 (Isa 43:20-21)+Text 5 (Exod 19:5-6) conflated,
the expansion of Text 4
Text 6 (Hos 2:23) paraphrased
The catchword li,qoj in A (v.4) links up all the OT texts (Text 1, 2, 3) in A.

Similarly, avpodedokimasme,non, evklekto.n and e;ntimon in A are pick up in Text 1, Text 2
and interpretation 1 in A. The repeated keyword evklekto,n at the beginning of Text 4
in B makes the overarching theme of election more prominent.46 The word pisteu,w
and its cognates link together various texts and interpretation within A. Also,
ièra,teuma and a[gion in B (v.5) are pick up again in Text 4 of B, which is in turn
linked to Text 5 and Text 6 by another catch word lao,j.47 This analysis indicates the
special function of vv.4-5 in the interpretation of vv.4-10, whether it contains a
condensation and reformulation (or midrash) of the longer and more original material
inherited in vv.6-10 (Elliott 1966, 19-20; Selwyn 1946, 280) or alternatively, vv.6-10
is intended to justify and explain the statement in vv.4-5 (Achtemeier 1996, 150;
Michaels 1988, 100-101; Best 1969, 278). The latter option is more preferable,
especially for the close association between v.5 and vv.9-10, because the purpose
clause o[pwj ta.j avreta.j evxaggei,lhte in v.9b is better viewed as an elaboration or
explanation to the phrase and clause eivj ièra,teumaavnene,gkaiqusi,aj in v.5. Also,
the architectonic and material metaphors employed in v.5 to describe the readers are
46
The theme of election is strengthened by omission of polutelh/ and the choice of ti,qhmi instead of
evmbalw/ from LXX Isa 28:16 so that evklekto,n becomes the head description and the connotation of
appoint is also implied in Text 1. See Bauckham 1988, 311.
47
The lao,j of v.9 represents both the lao,n mou o]n periepoihsa,mhn of Isa 43:21 and the lao.j periou,sioj
of Exod 19:5 (Bauckham 1988, 311).
74
made more literal in v.9 as a people of God chosen for a purpose. Under this broad
picture of 2:4-10, we may go deeper to investigate the priesthood articulated in 1
Peter.
4.3.2 Languages and Images referring to the Temple in 2:4-10
The tone of designating a priesthood to the readers may begin with the
participle proserco,menoi(v.4) because it is used frequently to describe the approach to
God made by the priest rather than by the people in the sacrificial cultus.48 This
participle (which could carry imperative force of the main verb, e.g. 1:14) depends
grammatically and semantically on the main verb oivkodomei/sqe (v.5), which may be
either imperative passive or indicative passive. The indicative mood of the context
and the emphasis on Gods action in 2:6, 8, 9 favors the latter option (Elliott 2000,
412). The participle and the main verb are also linked together thematically by the key
word li,qoj, which changes from accusative singular in v.4 to nominative plural in v.5.
In v.4, it is the object of the participle and refers to Christ who was rejected by men
but chosen by and precious to God. Such identity is transferred in v.5 to the Christian
community as a collective entity who shares the election of God and rejection by men
in their secular life (1:6; 2:12; 3:9, 16; 4:14; 5:9). The developments of the
li,qojtheme in vv.6-8 and v.5 also indirectly introduce the theme of
temple/sanctuary. In vv.6-8, the significances of Christ the living stone to the
believers (i.e. the readers (u`mi/n in v.7a)) and non-believers (v.7b, i.e. the unbelieving
neighbors and authorities who evoke the social harassment, see Achtemeier 1996, 161;
Michaels 1988, 105) are illustrated by three OT allusions (v.6b=Isa 28:16; v.7c=Psa
118:22; v.8a=Isa 8:14). The cornerstone to the believers (v.6b) is also the stumbling
stone to the non-believers (v.8a). In between these two loosely quoted LXX Isaianic
texts is the citation of LXX Psa 117:22 in full, which illustrates to the non-believers,
how the rejected stone was vindicated by God to become the head corner (v.7c). More
importantly, all three OT allusions indicate that an image of temple was in mind. The
keywords foundation (ta. qeme,lia), cornerstone (avkrogwniai/on) etc in LXX Isa
28:16 recalls the image of building the temple in OT (LXX of 1 Kings 6:1=MT 6:37;
7:46=MT 7:9; Hag 2:18; Zech 4:9; 8:9 etc). In the beginning of LXX Isa 8:14 (which
the author of 1 Peter omitted), the one who is the stumbling stone is a temple to those
who trust him (evan. evpV auvtw/| pepoiqw.j h=j| e;stai soi eivj a`gi,asma), which identifies the
stone to be a part of the temple building. The LXX Psa 117:22 is also situated within a
cultic context (v.19ff. and v.26ff., so is Best 1969, 283) that the head corner may
48
See Best 1971, 100. C.f. Heb 10:1. This point should not be pushed too far because it is also used for
the approach of the general people to God in Heb 4:16; 7:25; 10:22; 11:6; 12:18, 22 etc.
75
belong to the temple building. In other words, Christ the cornerstone is actually
understood according to a bigger picture of temple and cultic image.
The identity of Christ as the living stone is transferred to the Christian
community, and the image of temple now involve the believers as the living stones. In
v.5, the Christian community as living stones were built by God (oivkodomei/sqe,
reverential passive). The nominative phrase oi=koj pneumatiko.j may either be an object
complement to the verb (i.e. God is constituting you (to be) an spiritual house,
Achtemeier 1996, 155) or a predicate nominative with the presupposed subject (you)
of the verb (i.e. You are a spiritual house whoare being built. See Michaels
1986, 100).49 The former interpretation makes better sense about the relationship of
living stones to spiritual house because it implies a logical process from stones
(the building material) to building (cf. Eph 2:20-21). The living stone metaphor links
the Christology with ecclesiology and the two have actually merged under the same
image of temple.
Oi=koj could mean household, i.e. the group of people living in the house,
but the metaphorical and architectonic sense in stones and build makes it more
properly to indicate a physical building rather than the people within it (cf. 2:9).
Although nao,j is the usual term for temple in the NT (Elliott 2000, 415), the thick
milieu of OT allusion in vv.4-6 naturally allows the meaning of temple denoted by
oi=koj in LXX to be employed here. The general meaning of house does not fit to the
cultic language eivj ièra,teuma a[gion avnene,gkaiqusi,aj in the next phrase. Moreover,
the kairo.j tou/ a;rxasqai to. kri,ma avpo. tou/ oi;kou tou/ qeou/ in 4:17 is verbally close to
LXX Ezek 9:6b avpoktei,nateavpo. tw/n a`gi,wn mou a;rxasqe (Schutter 1985, 37-38. Cf.
Jer 25:29; Mal 3:1). This resembling readings suggest tou/ oi;kou tou/ qeou simply
means Gods sanctuary in the authors mind.
4.3.3 The images of Levitical Priesthood in 2:4-10
The building of the temple is followed by a phrase with a telic force (eivj)
and introduce a hitherto new concept, ièra,teuma a[gion. The continuity that links
stones to temple through the action of build finds no parallel in the transition
from temple to priesthood.50 However, if we consider together the purpose clause
49
Elliott suggests the nominative phrase is part of an ellipsis with the verb you are implied, just as
other cases of ellipsis in 1 Peter (2000, 414). This interpretation is less preferable because it makes the
phrase independent from the preceding argument and the nominative phrase (you are) a household of
the Spirit becomes another epithet.
50
Nelson (1993, 163-66) tries to resolve the discrepancy between oi=koj and ièra,teuma by
interpreting oi=koj as a genealogical unit (i.e. familial unit) that bridge the non-Jewish believers to the
76
nene,gkaiqusi,aj that comes after it, the temple being built is intended for cultic
function executed by a certain group of priests.51 It is in concord with the philological
study on words with -euma suffix by Elloitt. He concludes that ièra,teuma identifies
collectivity of persons exercising a specific function (1966, 64-70; 2000, 420). Also,
the threefold aspect of the cultic system (temple, priests and sacrifice) recalls a
levitical priesthood52 in OT tradition. Just after the giving of law and the covenant
making ceremony at Sinai (Exod 24), the construction of the tabernacle/ sanctuary
and dressing of the Aaronic priests were commanded (Exod 25-31) and executed
(Exod 35-40). Immediately following the establishment of the tabernacle/ sanctuary
(Exod 40:17), the sacrificial function of the sanctuary was instructed in detail (Lev
1-7). When everything was prepared according to the law, Aaron and his sons were
ordained as priests (Lev 8) and the first series of sacrifices were offered before the
sanctuary (Lev 9). At this moment, the cultic system, including the institution of the
priesthood and its function to sacrifice in the sanctuary, was launched in full that the
glory of God appeared to the people and marked a historic moment for Israel (Lev
9:23-24). The duty of levitical priesthood is not limited to sacrifice,53 but cultic
activity and the maintenance of holiness are the most prominent part of their job.
4.3.4 The Two Priesthoods in 1 Peter
If the Christian community is built into a temple which eventually is also a
group of priests offering sacrifice to God, this exclusive identity of levitical
priesthood appears not easily harmonized with the inclusive generalized priesthood
indicated by the third epithet royal priesthood in 2:9. Elliott (1966, 208-212) insists
1 Peter 2:4-10 depends on tradition of lao.j Exod 19:6, li,qoj-complex and election
formula rather than any cultic background. He objects to the comparison made
between Qumran and 1 Peter because no trace of quotation to Exod 19:6 is found at
Qumran. On the contrary, Best (1969, 283-86) maintains that the priesthood in Exod
19:6 could co-exist with levitical conception in Qumran because Exod 19:6 was
lineage of Jewish priesthood.
51
The literal meanings of avnafe,rw and qusi,a doubtlessly refer to cultic setting (Exod 24:5; 30:9; Lev
4:10, 26, 31; 6:8; 14:20; 17:5; Num 5:26; Deut 12:27 etc), but it is another thing when we interpret
what they meant metaphorically to the author of 1 Peter with the preceding ièra,teuma. However, there
is an internal linkage between the three terms that we have to consider what their literal meaning as a
whole is before we can investigate the intended metaphorical meaning. Elliott (2000, 421-22) seems
jumping to the metaphorical level of moral aspect too quickly and denial any cultic elements in the
terms.
52
We cannot overlook the influence of Leviticus on 1 Peter, esp. Lev 19 (Schutter 1989, 95-98), but it
seems too far to claim the primitive Church as a neo-levitical community with a tradition based on
Holiness code (Lev 17-26) (Selwyn 1946, 404-13).
53
Their jobs include delivering oracle (Lev 8:8; cf. Deut 33:8), teaching (Lev 10:10-11), blessing and
declaration (Num 6:24-26), administration (Exod 30:7-10; cf. Num 18:3), installation and vestments
(Lev 8). See Nelson 1993, 40-52.
77
quoted twice in Julilees (16:18; 33:20), which was exceptionally well known and
appreciated there (285). Also, Best observes the co-existence of Exod 19:6 and
levitical concepts in Test. Levi (11:4-6; cf. 3:6), Revelation (1:6; 5:10; cf. 3:12; 5:8;
6:9; 8:3-5 etc), and Philo (de Sobr. 66; de Abrah. 56; cf. de Gigant. 61; de Abrah. 98
etc.) (286). I see no reason to reject the application of both priesthoods to the
Christian community in a harmonious way. The cultic-institutional language in 2:5
indirectly establishes the identity of Israel through the building of temple (with its
personnel and operation implied), which is one of the pillars that mark the common
features of early Judaism.54 This is also the function of the allusion Exod 19:6 and Isa
43:20-21 in the four epithets to identify the readers as Israel but with different
articulation on its purpose. The cultic purpose of levitical priesthood in 2:5 is
elaborated with a missiological orientation in 2:9. However, when we investigate the
meaning of the purposes of the priesthood in 2:5 and 2:9, we should note that 1) the
cultic-institutional language in 2:5 is metaphorical in nature (clearly indicated by the
repeated adjective pneumatiko.j modifying oi=koj and qusi,a), 2) the cultic function is
accomplished christologically (euvprosde,ktouj tw/| qew/| dia. VIhsou/ Cristou/), 3) the
parallelism between 2:5 and 2:9 is mainly grammatical and structural (i.e. statement
of identity followed by purpose clause), royal priesthood is only one of the four
epithets, all of which point to the telling of Gods wondrous deeds. We cannot
exaggerate the importance of royal priesthood in the interpretation of the levitical
priesthood in 2:5.
4.3.5 The meaning of the Spiritual Temple and Priesthood
The temple and sacrifice are spiritual in the sense that the divine Spirit has
a role to play in the identity making and the living purpose of the Christian
community (cf. 1:2; 4:14).55 The activity of the Spirit includes sanctification of the
readers (a`giasmo,j, 1:2) that makes their priesthood holy (a[gioj).56 I suggest the
three adjectives (pneumatiko.j, a[gion, pneumatika.j) attached to the three respective
54
1 Peter 1:2-2:10 exhibits some variances of the four pillars which characterizes early Judaism:
Law, Land, Temple and Israel. I owe this observation to Dr. Luke Cheung in a private conversation in
early 2005.
55
The Christian community as the dwelling place of the Spirit is not emphasized here (as Elliott 1966,
153-54, who reads oi=koj as royal palace). Elliott understands the second pneumatiko,j differently as
sacrifice prompted by the Holy Spirit (2000, 421). The translation of oi=koj pneumatiko.j as Gods
true temple is also not necessary (Selwyn 1946, 291) because no polemic claim against any false
temple was in mind here. The adherence between pneumatiko.j and logiko,j of 2:2 (cf. Rom 12:1)
should also not be overstated except their common function to indicate employment of metaphorical
language (cf. Michaels 1988, 87, 101).
56
The holiness of the priesthood does not necessary relate to ethical conduct required in 1:15-16 based
on Gods holiness (cf. Lev 19:2). The holiness is better associated with Gods election (or separation)
of a people for His own purpose (cf. e;qnoj a[gion in 2:9) which is achieved by the Spirit of God. Gods
election and his sanctification are closely related (cf. 1:2).
78
cultic-institutional terms (oi=koj, ièra,teuma, qusi,aj) remind the readers on the one
hand of a metaphorical reading is intended here,57 and on the other hand a specific
Christian transformation of multiple Jewish conceptions is at work. Such
transformation is not likely a spiritualization which presupposes a dichotomy of the
nonmaterial/metaphysical against the material/physical, although a metaphorical tone
of nonmaterial cultic language is so common.58 The transformation is Christian in the
sense that it is mediated through Jesus Christ (dia. VIhsou/ Cristou/).59
The major issue is the meaning of spiritual sacrifice acceptable to God
(pneumatika.j qusi,aj euvprosde,ktouj tw/| qew/)| . The clue to this question is partly offered
by the context of 1 Peter, esp. 2:9, but mainly dependent on similar figurative use of
sacrificial language prevalent in NT. NT reflects the primitive tradition of the
Christian sacrifices with different understandings, including prayer (Rev 8:3-4), praise
and thanksgiving (Heb 13:15), almsgiving (Phil 4:18), martyrdom (2 Tim 4:6),
conversion of Gentiles (Rom 15:16), self-surrender (Rom 12:1), faith (Phil 2:17) and
good work of love (Hen 13:16).60 None of these understanding of Christian sacrifice
can be ruled out in the case of 1 Peter 2:5, but among these texts, Rom 12:1 (qusi,an
zw/san a`gi,an euvar, eston tw/| qew/) and Heb 13:15-16 (avnafe,rwmen qusi,an
aivne,sewjqusi,aij euvarestei/tai o` qeo,j) show greatest verbal resemblance with 1 Peter
2:5, suggesting that self-giving in toto (Rom 12:1), praise (Heb 13:15) and good
works (Heb 13:16) maybe the most possible meanings at issue. 1 Peter 2:9 elaborates
the purpose of the community through the phrase (o[pwj ta.j avreta.j evxaggei,lhte
tou/u`ma/j kale,santoj). Michaels (1986, 101) reads a Godward reference of the
phrase, i.e. announcing Gods excellence and goodness (avreth,), which may implicitly
include praising Gods deeds and salvation. Moreover, in 2:9 the action of
proclaiming (evxaggei,lhte) by the Christian community with a missionary role
57
Just as the author favors supplying an adjective to signify metaphorical reading in 1:4 (imperishable,
undefiled, unfading (inheritance));1:13 ((gird up the lion) of your mind); 2:4 (living (stone)); 2:9
(the four epithets) etc.
58
See the critic of Elliott 1966, 154-56. Nonmaterial elements of sacrifice were already present in OT,
emphasizing the necessity of ethical relationship (i.e. obedience) accompanied with cult, e.g. Hosea 6:6;
Amos 5:20-25; Prov 21:3; Psa 39:7-9 etc. Early Judaism also has the same focus, e.g. Sir 34:18-35:11;
Judith 16:16; 2 Enoch 45:3; Jubilees 2:22, and the foremost significant text from Qumran is 1QS 9, 4-5.
See Ferguson 1980, 1156-62.
59
The prepositional phrase (dia. VIhsou/ Cristou/) modifies the entire act of offering acceptable
sacrifices to God (Achtemeier 1996, 158). Such Christological transformation also occurs in 1) the
initiation of the believers through the resurrection of Jesus Christ (1:3), that the believers are describe
as avnagennh,saj (born anew), 2) the hoping for the klhronomi,a (inheritance) which is in the heavens
(evn ouvranoi/j) (1:4, cf. 1:21), 3) the living and abiding word of God (lo,gou zw/ntoj qeou/ kai. me,nontoj)
which is the life-bringing gospel (1:25b) concerning suffering and glorification of Christ (1:11-12).
60
See Selwyn 1946, 161; Achtemeier 1996, 157; Ferguson (1980, 1163-65) groups the various
interpretations in NT under five titles: Praise and Thanksgiving (Heb 13:15), Benevolence (Heb 13:16),
Preaching (Roman 15:15-21, Phil 2:17), Financial Support of Preaching (Phil 4:18), Life (Body or Self)
(Rom 12:1).
79
prescribed in Isa 43:20-21 for Israel indicates their outward duty of witnessing to the
non-believers. The specific content of this proclaiming is abstention from freshly
lust and good conduct (2:11) so that the Gentles may glorify God in the day of
visitation (2:12, cf. 3:1). So the evangelistic duty of Israel is twofold: making known
Gods excellence by good conduct. Selwyn coins the meaning of Christian sacrifice
in 2:5 within the entire 1 Peter this way:
his (the authors) emphasis on the imitatio Christi in 2:21ff., 3:18ff., and
on brotherly love as the highest expression of holiness in 1:13ff., and his
exposition of the social code governing the relationships of Christians
towards one another and towards their non-Christian neighbours in
2:11-3:12, suggest that the sufferings incidental to the Christian life and the
duties of meekness and avgaqopoii<a were chiefly in his mind. (1946, 161).
The priesthood in 1 Peter is not an isolated concept having nothing to do
with its function and institution. It is established firstly through the articulation in 2:5
which contains the major cultic-institutional language and represents a full cultic
system including temple, priesthood and offering sacrifice. This levitical cultic
system is built indirectly through identification of Christian community (as the stones)
with Christ (the cornerstone). Secondly, the parallelism of 2:9 helps elaborating the
priesthood in 2:5 by emphasizing the generalized priesthood embedded in the identity
of Israel through the employment of epithets. However, the purpose of being Israel
(with the role of royal priesthood) clearly designated in 2:9 explicates only part of the
rich meanings of offering sacrifice in 2:5. The mission of Israel is to make God and
His salvation known to the world (2:9), but this does not seem to be the only
interpretation on offering a sacrifice acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. In
view of the NT tradition related to Christian sacrifice in general and the context of 1
Peter in particular, for the readers in Asia Minor, to offer such sacrifice is to follow
the footsteps of the suffering Jesus, so that they may live a life in good conduct even
in face of hostility.
4.4 Christian community exists as Israel ahistorically
4.4.1 The problem of ahistorical Israel in 1 Peter
By ahistorical I mean the identity of Israel dislocated from the past or the
80
present of the historical Israel, i.e. the ethnical, national Israel. For the community
associated with 1QS, we have discussed their absence of historical consciousness with
respect to CD, and the discontinuity between their identity as Israel and the historical
Israel. The covenanters at Qumran were actual Israel, i.e. Jews, in ethnical term, and
they were also the Israel, the sole covenant partner of God in their self-understanding.
However, the situation in NT is very different. When gentiles are included within the
people of God through the faith in Christ, Gods covenant with the ethnic Israel is
called into question because the Jewish people are rejected on the basis of their lack
of faith. Moreover, the historical development of Jesus movement pushes the dilemma
to an extreme: while the missionary works of the apostle were very successful among
the gentiles, the majority of Jews still rejected Jesus Christ as the Messiah. Paul raised
the issue in Rom 9-11 and right at the beginning he stated the theological problem at
stake: whether the word of God had failed (9:6a), i.e. faithfulness of God to his
covenant relationship with Israel is severely challenged (11:1). If the promise that
God made to Jewish people failed, what can guarantee that the promised salvation to
the Gentile will be fulfilled by the same God? It is not the place to investigate Pauls
handling of the issue here,61 but when one reads 1 Peter against Rom 9-11, the
communal identity as Israel in 1 Peter is characterized with the absence of
consciousness of the historical Israel in the present, and barely retains a historical
awareness and continuity with the past.
4.4.2 Historical awareness in Roman 9-11
The theological problem that Paul tried to tackle in Rom 9-11 is
simultaneously a historical one. His concern is the destiny of both the Jews and the
believing gentiles with respect to the promise of God working out in the past and the
future. For Paul, his kinsmen are Israelite (just as he himself (11:1)) who shares the
blessings of Israel (9:4). However, being descendants of Israel does not guarantee the
status of the people of God (9:6). Such identity of real Israel transcends the identity
defined by ethnicity because another principle is at work throughout history, Gods
promise to those who receive the mercy of God, and Gods will to those who do not
(being harden, see 9:18, cf. 11:7, 25). The examples are plenty within the OT history,
e.g. Ishmael vs Isaac, Esau vs Jacob, Pharaoh vs Israel (9:7-17). Moreover, this
election/promise of God is a calling that includes both some Jews and some Gentiles
(9:24). The former group is understood as the remnant (u`po,leimma, lei/mma) (9:27;
11:5), which was prophesized by Isaiah (9:27-29) and demonstrated by the seven
61
For the general introduction to the problem, see Barth 1983, 29-49; Campbell 1993; Dunn 1998,
500-532. Especially see the bibliography in Dunn 1998, 497-99.
81
thousand not bowing the knees to Baal (11:3-4). In the vision of Paul, the historical
reality (the present) of the non-believing majority of Jews does not deny the promise
of God (the past), it is instead a missiological point of departure so that all Israel will
be saved (the future). The rejection of the gospel by the Jews is only temporal for the
acceptance of it by the gentiles, which makes Israel jealous and finally to receive the
mercy at the end (11:11, 25-26, 30-31).
In this vision of Paul, Church is not contrary to Israel, nor replacing it
with an identity of spiritual Israel against the freshly Israel (cf. Gal 4:29). Actually
the concept of Israel becomes blurred due to the shift of focus from ethnical criteria
to Gods promise for those receiving his mercy/ grace. The Christian community,
without distinction between Jewish and gentile, originates from Gods will. It is an
eschatological continuation of the historical Israel that reveals the will of God in full.
Even for the Gentile Christian within this community, they are the wild olive grafted
in place of the branches broken off (11:17). The metaphor is heuristic that the sharing
of the covenant privilege is not based on nature (kata. fu,sin, 11:21,24) but on faith
(11:20, 23). Gods kindness to the believing Gentile and severity to the unbelieving
Jews (11:22) is a predestinated condition, but human faithfulness may affect their
actual status. The natural branches can be grafted back to the olive tree because of
their faith or the grafted branches cut off because of their lack of faith. The promise of
God and the faith of people work together (cf. Rom 4:18-22) within a historical frame
pointing towards an eschatological fulfillment that all may have mercy (11:32).62
4.4.3 Ahistorical identity of Israel in 1 Peter
In comparison with Rom 9-11, the articulation of the Christian community
as Israel in 1 Peter is much less historically orientated. This parallel reading between
the two texts of the early Christian communities does not presuppose any literary
dependence of one upon the other. 63 However, the absence of historical
62
It is beyond dispute that Paul could not have envisaged eschatological Israel that contained none of
the historical Israel. Pauls thinking is much more concrete and historical oriented than subsequent
Gentile-Christian understanding makes it out to be. (Campbell 1993, 443)
63
See Elliott 2000, 20-40, esp. 37ff. The so-called Paulinism has no solid ground on textual base
(40). It is most probably that the similar features (e.g. The allusion to LXX and Isa 8:14; 28:16 in 1
Peter 2:7-8 and Rom 10:33, Hos 2:23 in 1 Peter 2:10 and Rom 9:25 etc) common to Roman and 1 Peter
are the result of broad stream of early Christian tradition. If 1 Peter was composed at Rome (cf. 5:13),
the author might know Roman, just as the 1 Clement knew both of them (Elliott 2000, 134), and their
affinity in certain terminology and themes with each other and with other early Christian writings (e.g.
Hebrews, Mark, Hermas etc) may be explained by a common reservoir of tradition in Rome (see
Brown and Meier 1983, 134-139). This suggestion should not be pressed but this insight allows us to
view 1 Peter as a document which presupposed Roman with its own theological innovation, just as the
case of 1QS and CD respectively.
82
consciousness and emphasis of predestination in 1 Peter with respect to the communal

identity as Israel are worth noting.
Based on the description of the life before conversion in 1:14, 18 and 4:3,
most commentators agree that the recipients of 1 Peter are predominantly gentiles,64
and probably with a certain number of Jewish members. However, the actual ethnical
identity of the readers is not significant to the rhetoric of the epistle. The former life
of ignorance (1:14) and emptiness inherited from fathers (1:18), doing what the
gentiles desire to do (4:3), may possibly refer to the historical lifestyle of the readers
before they are converted. However, nowhere in the epistle explicitly indicates the
readers were gentiles as such. Instead, they are rather described metaphorically as
aliens and exiles (paroi,kouj kai. parepidh,mouj) living among the gentiles (evn toi/j
e;qnesin) (2:11-12, cf. 1:1, 17),65 a picture immediately following the epistle body
opening (1:2-2:10) concerning the identity of the Christian community as Israel. The
combination of the two terms, paroi,kouj and parepidh,mouj, is found only in LXX Gen
23:4 and Psa 38:13 and other early Jewish and Christian literature alluding to them.66
The author appropriated the experience of Abraham (which was also the experience of
Israel in the exilic period) to the Christian community (Achtemeier 1989, 217-18;
1996, 174). In this perspective, the language of the past wicked life characteristic of
the gentiles (4:3) also does not necessarily suggest whether the readers were gentiles
or not. The desire of gentiles (to. bou,lhma tw/n evqnw/n, 4:3) actually parallels and
explicates the human desires (avnqrw,pwn evpiqumi,aij), which are in contrast to the
will of God (qelh,mati qeou/) in 4:2.67 The readers are exhorted to behave not
according to human desires, just as their former lives performing the will/desires of
Gentiles, but live according to the will of God. In short, the ethnical categories are not
implied in the language of the author; rather two value systems and lifestyles are
contrasted: the former immoral life and the present Christian living of obedience and
suffering for the good.
This emphasis on the temporal dimension in 1:14, 18 and 4:3 with respect to
morality indicates a thread of historical awareness in 1 Peter. The conversion of the
64
The argument is that the vices listed in 4:3 and the former life in 1:14, 18 are hardly the usual
description for Jewish way of life. Jobes (2005, 24) considers whether the readers were pagan or Jews
is irrelevant to the theme of redemption in 1 Peter.
65
Against the interpretation of Elliott (1966, 2000) that the terms describe the social-political statues
of the readers before their conversion.
66
Philo Conf. 79 (referring to Abraham in Gen 23:3), Clement of Alexandria Strom. 4.26 (referring to
LXX Psa 38:13), for other references to the two terms in early Christian literatures, see Achtemeier
1996, 174 note 30.
67
Bou,lhma (4:3, desire LN 25.4 or intention LN 30.57) and qe,lhma (4:2, desire LN 25.2 or
purpose LN 30.59) belong to the same semantic domain, LN 25.1-11 desire, want, wish and LN
30.56-74 to intend, purpose, plan. Cf. evpiqumi,a (4.2, deep desire LN 25.12 or lust LN 25.20).
83
readers is an actual historical experience accomplished by the salvation of God in

history through Christ. However, the identity of the Christian community as Israel
articulated in 1 Peter (esp. in 1:2-2:10) does not clearly point to an awareness of the
historical Israel. The Jewish people in the past and present are not mentioned except
the activities of prophets in 1:10-12, and the OT figures such as Sarah and Abraham in
3:6, and Noah in 3:20.68 Instead, when the Christian community is assured of full
covenantal blessings and identity that God promised for Israel, the author does not
register the difficult problem faced by Paul in Rom 9-11. For the author of 1 Peter,
there is simply no place for the former covenantal statutes of the historical Israel, or
put it simply, he neglects the existence of Jews (including her history, the present
relationship with the Church and her destiny in the future) all together. The author
repeatedly stated that the readers are Israel without hesitation by appropriating the
images, blessings and languages of OT Israel totally to the readers, especially by the
identification of these elements to the relative pronoun, you.69
We have no idea about the reason why the author of 1 Peter did not care
about the status of historical Israel in the salvation plan of God. It is possible that the
social and religious situation of the recipients was quite different from those in Rome,
or that Paul and the author of 1 Peter have different theological concerns and pastoral
agendas. But the direct attribution of the identity of Israel to the Christian community
regardless of the historical Israel unavoidably evokes the problem of legitimacy, i.e.
how to justify the possession of covenantal status which is apparently not endowed to
them. The author of 1 Peter validates the sole covenantal identity of Christian
community by theology of predestination, i.e. they are electedaccording to the
foreknowledge of God Father (evklektoi/jkata. pro,gnwsin qeou/ patro.j , 1:1-2, cf.
2:9). Faith in 1 Peter is not emphasized as an individual decision of Christian
initiation into that covenantal relation but described as a present reality (1:21) being
tested and maintained (1:7; 5:9), which will lead to future salvation (1:5, 9). The
theology of predestination places the Christian community to a special status and
mission determined by the will of God transcending any historical contingency.70
This special identity through election is always coupled with the commitment of
68
The appropriation of OT languages of Israel to Christian community does not hint such historical
awareness because the languages are employed metaphorically.
69
1 Peter is populated with the words u`ma/j, u`mw/n, u`mi/n etc, a total of 53 times. 16 times are directly
related to the images, languages and blessings of OT Israel, e.g 1:4, 10, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18, 20, 25; 2:7, 9,
21; 3:15, 21; 4:14; 5:10 etc. The most significant of these you are in 2:9 and 1:10-12 which directly
links up the readers with the languages of OT Israel. See Michaels 1988, 22; Achtemeier 1996, 96-97.
70
Whether the status of Christian community as Gods elected covenant partner, i.e. Israel, will be lost
because of unbelief is not discussed explicitly in 1 Peter (or only implicitly in 1:13-21). The author
asserts their elected status to exhort them standing firm in the true grace in face of hostility (5:12). The
apparent contradiction between predestination of God and the responsibility of the people is not a
problem here (cf. Rom 9:19-20).
84
suffering and doing-good (avgaqopoiou/ntaj, avgaqopoii<a,| 2:15, 20; 3:6, 17; 4:19 etc. cf.
2:9), which is the will of God (to. qe,lhma tou/ qeou/ 2:15; 3:17: 4:2, 19 etc.). Moreover,
the election and duty of the Christian community is actually modeled after the pattern
of Christ. God has predestinated and chosen Christ (1:20, 2:4). Just as Christ had
suffered in obedience, so the Christian community has to suffer and doing-good (2:21;
3:17-18; 4:1). Also, just as the rejected and suffered Christ was raised by God into
glory, the Christian community will receive glory in the future (1:7; 5:4, 10). The
predestination of Christian living is prefigured by the experience of Christ. The
legitimacy of the covenantal identity as Israel and the corresponding responsibility of
Christian community are firmly established through the predestination of God which
was also at work in Christ. We do not find a historical pattern of Gods election in 1
Peter which overrides the ethnical criteria in successive cases throughout history as
the patriarchs mentioned in Rom 9:9-13. Instead, election of believers in 1 Peter is
modeled only on the unique case of Christ. Conversely, it is the Christology in 1 Peter
that informs and legitimates its ecclesiology. The predestination of God is basically an
ahistorical principle but in actuality the predestinated identity and mission of
Christian community is linked closely with the historical fate of Christ.
4.4.4 The Exception of ahistoricity: 1:10-12
1:10-12 implies an explicit historical and temporal dimension that links up
the past with the present. We have a glimpse of the activities of OT prophets71 who
prophesized for the benefit of the NT readers.72 The interest of the prophets was
prominently the time of the fulfillment rather than who the person of Messiah would
be.73 It is the clearest section in the epistle that indicates the role of historical Israel
(including the OT prophets and their implied audiences) and her association with the
71
Since the verb evrauna/n (1:11, cf. evxerau,nhsan in 1:10) is also used in John 5:39 and 7:52 in the phrase
search the Scripture, and the phrase (1:11) could mean Christward suffering rather than Christs
suffering (Selwyn 1946, 136, 263-65), it was argued that the subject should include NT prophets
rather than exclusively OT prophets (Selwyn 1946, 134). However, it plausibly points to OT prophets
because they preceded Christ (1:11) and their words are distinguished from those of the evangelists
(1:12). See Achtemeier 1996, 108. Also the phrase ta. eivj Cristo.n paqh,mata is better rendered as the
sufferings of Christ (Jobes 2005, 99-100).
72
The readers are the beneficiaries of the salvation and witnesses to the fulfillment of Gods purpose.
It is demonstrated by the repeatedly uses of relative pronoun you: th/j eivj u`ma/j ca,ritoj 1:10, ouvc
eàutoi/j u`mi/n de. dihko,noun auvta,, a] nu/n avnhgge,lh u`mi/n, dia. tw/n euvaggelisame,nwn u`ma/j 1:12.
73
It depends on whether we interpret ti,na (1:11) as masculine singular accusative interrogative
pronoun (i.e. what person or time, e.g. Best 1971, 81) or adjective (i.e. what time or what sort of time,
e.g. Michaels 1988, 42). The latter option is supported by some OT prophets, e.g. Dan 9:2, 12:6-13; 4
Ezra 4:33, 51; Hab 2:1-4 (42-43). It reflects a greater interest among the prophets concerning when
their visions of the future would be realized, with specific focus to whether the prophets and his
generation would still be alive at the time of fulfillment (Jobes 2005, 102). Jobes prefers to parse ti,na
as neuter plural accusative interrogative pronoun, i.e. what things or what circumstances, a reading
again not emphasizing the person but the timing of the events (2005, 103).
85
Christian community. What the OT prophets were expecting and searching about the
time of fulfillment concerning the suffering and glorification of Christ was actually
indicated (evdh,lou) by the Spirit of Christ. The rare phrase Spirit of Christ (pneu/ma
Cristou) occurs only here and in Rom 8:9 where Spirit, Spirit of God, Spirit of
Christ are interchangeable.74 Cristou may be an objective genitive (referring to the
Holy Spirit testifying of Christ or Messiah), or a possessive genitive (referring to the
pre-existence of Christ).75 Achtemeier argues for the latter case on the basis of
pre-existing Christ implied in 1 Peter 1:20 (1993, 186; 1996, 109-111, cf. Best 1971,
81), but he does not consider the relation of the Spirit of Christ and the Holy Spirit
in 1:12. Elliott (2000, 346) has similar view on the pre-existence of Christ and
distinguishes between Cristou as Messiah or (Jesus) Christ specifically.76 It is not
easy to resolve the questions about the identity of Spirit of Christ in 1:11 and its
relation to Holy Spirit in 1:12. The interchangeable use of the phrases related to
Spirit in Rom 8:9 does not necessarily means that Spirit of Christ and Holy Spirit
amount to the same thing (against Michaels 1988, 44) in 1 Peter, but it implies the
continuity of their activities among the OT prophets and NT evangelists
respectively.77 If it is the pre-existing Christ who indicated within the OT prophets
the suffering and glorification of Christ, and they inquired about the timing of this
prediction, the realization of this prediction is now proclaimed to the community of 1
Peter by the NT evangelists through the Holy Spirit. The continuity of the past and
present focuses on the role of Christ, which shifted from the Spirit inspiring the OT
prophets to the suffering and glorified Christ being proclaimed by the NT evangelists.
The benefit of the revelation also exhibits a switch of the target people, they (OT
prophets) were not serving themselves but you (ouvc eàutoi/j u`mi/n de. dihko,noun auvta,).
This switch may explain why the role of historical Israel (represented by the OT
prophets and their audiences) was totally suppressed in 1 Peter and the language of
Israel was totally appropriated for the Christian community.78
74
Cf. Spirit of Jesus Acts 16:7; Spirit of His Son Gal 4:6; Spirit of Jesus Christ Phil 1:19.
Shutter (1989, 103ff.) suggests there are four plausible meanings of Spirit of Christ if prophets
refers to OT agent of revelation: 1) the exalted Lord in his spiritual being, 2) the Holy Spirit, 3) some
spirit of other whose task is to testify to Christ (cf. Rev. 19:10), and 4) the preexistent Christ in his
spiritual being. Option 2) and 3) interpret the genitive as objective genitive, while option 1) reads it
appositional. Option 1 and 4) presuppose the pre-existence of Christ and I see no fundamental different
between the two. Option 2) and 3) emphasize the testifying function of the spirit. I follow Michaels
(1988, 44. Cf. Elliott 2000, 346) to simplify these four options into two.
76
I think the distinction is unnecessary, just as Elliott himself states that from the authors perspective,
Jesus Christ is in fact the long-expected Messiah (2000, 346).
77
I prefer understanding Spirit of Christ as referring to the pre-existing Christ, though this
interpretation should not be pressed. In other words, allowance should be made for two different agents
at 1:11 and 1:12 (Shutter 1989, 104, esp. note 63). Dunn (1980, 159) recognizes that the association of
spirit with Christ occurs only after the resurrection, except possibly the case of 1 Peter 1:11.
78
See the insight suggest by Achtemeier 1993, 186-88. His argument is not totally clear and
convincing, i.e. the association of the passion of Christ with the witness of Isaiah 53 to the suffering
servant is not solely due to the development of the concept that Christ was present and inspiring the
75
86

The absence of historical awareness in 1 Peter is in evidence when it is
read against Rom 9-11. While Paul shows a clear consciousness of the problem of
apparent dilemma between the covenantal status of Gentile Christian and the
unbelieving Jews, the author of 1 Peter simply ignores the existence of
contemporary Jews. Pauls argument in Rom 9-11 presupposed the covenant
history that connects the past, present and future. However, the author of 1 Peter
only barely hints at such historically awareness with the past, i.e. the ministries of
OT prophets and NT evangelists concerning the suffering and glorification of
Christ. Paul tries to resolve the dilemma by employing the principle of Gods
promise and human faithfulness, the author of 1 Peter solely highlights the
predestination/ election/ will of God as a way to justify the ahistorical identity of
the Christian community as the people of God. The covenant boundary in 1 Peter
is temporal in nature rather than ethnical because the covenantal status is initiated
through conversion (or born anew through Christs resurrection 1:3), which
sharply distinguishes the sinful life style in the past and the obedient life in the
present. Finally, Christ is a historical model in Gods will so that Christians have
to follow, and through Christ both the historical Israel (represented by the OT
prophets and the implied audience) and the Christian community (represented by
the evangelists and the implied audience) are connected.
OT prophets at the time of the author of 1 Peter.

87
Chapter 5 Conclusion: A comparison of Communal Identity

as Israel in 1QS and 1 Peter
We have investigated the communal identity exhibited in 1QS and 1
Peter respectively. Both documents consider their addressed community as the
sole covenant partner of God (i.e. Israel or people of God in theological term)
with a specific priestly function that somehow played the cultic role of
temple/sanctuary within the covenant thinking. Moreover, such communal
identity as Israel displays an ahistorical tendency disregarding the presence of
ethnical and national Israel. These common features of the communal identity in
the two documents do not cover up their dissimilarities. We have to make a
comparison between them in this final section of the study.
When we claim that both 1QS and 1 Peter identify the addressed
community as Israel, we should clarify how such identity is being established and
the implication of this identity in them. In 1QS, Israel is an ambiguous term because
the occurrences of the term refer to both the community themselves (1QS V 5, 22)
and the nonmember of the community (1QS I 21-23; VI 13b-14a; VIII 11b-12a, cf.
VIII 4, 12b; IX 3). Such ambiguity reflects that the community behind 1QS
experienced various stages of development, including the formative stage when they
were emerging from its parent group as a sect (e.g. the earlier section 1QS VIII-IX),
and the later stage when a more solid self understanding as the sole Israel was
established (e.g. 1QS V 1ff.). The resulting document 1QS retains such tension of
identity in the usage of Israel. However, when Israel does not refer to the
community, the historical Israel was not necessarily in mind. Instead, the community
shows a consciousness of differentiation from another group portrayed negatively in
morality, so as to maintain its unique covenantal identity by emphasizing the abstract,
ahistorical and ethical criteria of the covenantal boundary. They draw a covenantal
boundary not on social or ethnical criteria, but an ethical and legal ground. Actually
the community defined their membership equivalent to covenantal relationship with
God and sole inheritor of His revelation, i.e. the Torah.
However, the employment of the term Israel in 1QS to establish its
identity is less powerful than the persistent representation of themselves as the people
of God by setting an internal boundary, i.e. highlighting the shared authority over the
community by their constitution of priestly class (Sons of Aaron/Zadok) and laity
(multitude of Israel/men) (1QS V 1ff., 9-10, 20c-22. Cf. VI 18). Similar technique is
found in the anticipation of twelve men and three priests (1QS VIII 1) where an Israel
88
in embryo is in view. Such internal boundary indicates the parallel authority of the
priestly group and the laity on legal and admission issues (with the leading role of
former group in mind because it always comes first) and hence not a way to
emphasize the distinction of the two parties or the domination of the priestly class
(except IX 7). Instead, it is a way to convey the sense of integrity of the community
by alluding to the binary social structure of Israel. More importantly, the introduction
of the title Sons of Zadok to 1QS V 1ff. at a later time (cf. 4QS) and the elevated
role of priests suggests the communitys polemic against the legitimacy of the
Jerusalem priesthood at the time of Hasmonean usurpation of the Zadokite high
priesthood, especially under the rule of Alexander Jannaeus (103-76 B.C.) (see
Bockmuehl 2001, 405). In other words, the communitys sectarian development
strengthened its covenantal identity as the ideal social structure of Israel was
implemented among them because of rejecting the national and political Israel and her
priesthood at large.
The claim for communal identity as Israel in 1QS does not dependent on
the number of times the term Israel is being applied to them. It depends on the
covenant thinking working underneath, which places the addressed community in a
special status in relation to the covenant God. So is the case in 1 Peter where no such
words as Israel or covenant are found, but their communal identity as the covenant
partner of God is still firmly established. Firstly, the author of 1 Peter framed the
discussion of communal identity (1:2-2:10) in the opening and ending (1:2 and 2:9)
which clearly alludes to the occasion of covenant making at Sinai (Exod 19-24).
Secondly, and more importantly, the author applied four epithets originally designated
Israel a peculiar covenant identity in Exod 19:5-6 and Isa 43:20-21 to the Christian
community. The covenant boundary is marked by the process of born anew through
the resurrection of Jesus Christ and living word of God (1:3, 23), which is received by
faith (1:21; cf. 1:7-9). This direct attribution of a covenant identity to Christian
community is accompanied with a mission to extend the covenantal privilege to other
people. At this point, we find the fundamental difference between the communal
identity in 1QS and 1 Peter. The community of 1QS is an isolated group which is
properly described as a sect, but the community of 1 Peter, who lives among the
Gentiles (2:12 which is theologically opposite to Israel), has constant
communication with the world. In the scheme of Wilsons typology of sects (1963),
1QS predominantly reflects an introversionist mentality, while 1 Peter fits well with
the type conversionist sect (cf Elliott 1993, 83-83). The covenant boundary in 1 Peter
is much more open than the case in 1QS. Obedience is not a criterion to this covenant
boundary of the community (just as the legal/ethnical criteria in 1QS), but an
89
imitation of Christs obedient suffering through which the nonmembers may respond
positively to the word. No significant internal boundary is found in 1 Peter (except the
hierarchy implied in 5:1-4), and the community as a whole is holy (1:2, 15-16) with
priestly function (2:4-10). The case in 1QS is different. While the community as a
whole is priestly (self designating as sanctuary/ temple), the priestly class may be real
priests claiming descent from Zadok or Aaron, especially in the late recensional
development of the text.
The priestly identity of the communities behind 1QS and 1 Peter is the
mostly recognized feature that brings the two documents together for comparison. It is
also the point where they both alluded the same OT text, Isa 28:16, to support the idea
that they themselves constituted the temple of God (1QS VIII 7b-8a, 1 Peter 2:6b). In
fact, they both considered themselves as a whole possessing a priestly function to
offer sacrifices in a spiritualized or metaphorical way. The three basic elements of
levitical cultic system (the sacrifice offered by the priests in the temple) are important
in both documents. The two communities were both conscious about their identity of
being the personnel and building which together are necessary for the function of
sacrificial offerings.
In establishing the identity of priesthood and temple/sanctuary, both 1QS
and 1 Peter directly applied the OT and Jewish designations to their addressed
community. 1QS employed a list of theologically loaded designations in VIII 4b-10a.
Half of the eight designations (House of Holiness for Israel, Most holy assembly
for Aaron, Most holy dwelling for Aaron, House of perfection and truth for Israel)
clearly refer to an identity of the sanctuary. The other half (eternal plant, witness of
truth for judgment chosen by his will, the tested wall, costly cornerstone) are
derived from Enochic tradition and Isa 28:16, emphasizing the elected to be the
witness of truth for judgment in the eschatological age. The plant imagery is also
closely related to the building of sanctuary in early Judaism. Therefore there is not
doubt that in 1QS, the community viewed themselves as constituting the true temple
vis--vis the temple in Jerusalem. However, they never directly claimed the identity of
priesthood as a whole to replace the official priests in Jerusalem. In other words, the
community was the sanctuary where the priestly function was executed but they did
not explicitly state that their members were all priests. The priesthood of the
community in 1QS is only an implied one. The very identity of priesthood was
retained for a special class of leaders within the community. They might be originated
from a priestly line once serving in the Jerusalem temple but broke with it and started
the community for certain reasons.
90
The case in 1 Peter is different. They were clearly designated with an

identity of living stones being build into a spiritual house/temple which will
become a holy priesthood (2:5). The identity is accompanied with another
description of priesthood, a royal priesthood (2:9). The two priesthoods are
employed to establish different aspect of their identity. Functionally, the former one
(holy priesthood) cannot be separated from its cultic setting, indicating a levitical
priestly identity of Christian community. The latter one (royal priesthood) denotes
the elected identity of Gods covenantal people inheriting the privileges and mission
of Israel. Moreover, the two priesthoods are not unrelated. Parallelism places v.5 and
v.9 to be read side by side. The cultic purpose of levitical priesthood is somehow
elaborated and explained in terms of missiological orientation of general priesthood.
However, the two priesthoods overlap with their distinctions. The general priesthood
in 2:9 has not exhausted the full meaning of offering sacrifice in 2:5. Actually, the
general priesthood constitutes only one of the four epithets in 2:9 that clearly establish
the elected identity of the community on the one hand, and their mission towards the
world embedded in it on the other hand.
This leads to the discussion concerning the purpose of priestly function
described in 1QS and 1 Peter. For 1 Peter, the offering of sacrifice by the holy
priesthood most probably refers to good conducts, praise, and foremost
self-giving. The social situation of the community in 1 Peter made this spiritual
sacrifice with special significance to the non-believers. The priesthood, just as their
identity of being a chosen race, a holy nation, and God's own people, serves a
mediating function that their good conduct may be a way to proclaim Gods
salvation and bring positive response from the non-believers. No atonement is
brought about by this sacrificial function, and its efficacy clearly aims to increase
ingroup cohesiveness (by mutual love, 1:22; 4:8-11) and to fulfill the missiological
intension of election, extending the covenantal relation with God beyond the group
themselves.
Contrarily, atonement is clearly the very purpose of being the sanctuary in
1QS. The sectarian mentality is reflected in their understanding of atonement
executed by them in the desert. Their hatred towards the sons of darkness and love
towards sons of light(I 9-10; cf. I 3-4; III 26-IV 1) not only parallel their ideology of
dualism, but their hostile attitude towards the wicked is also displayed in their
theology of atonement. The imageries and languages related to their identity as
sanctuary/ temple in VIII 1-10 point to their participation in the judgment of the
91
wicked in the eschatological age. Atonement is a way to purify the land which was
defiled by the sins of the wicked. In the same way, they also have to atone for
themselves, i.e. executing judgment among the members to purify their sins. Finally,
the idea of spiritualized atonement did present in 1QS which means giving praise
and doing justice or right behavior. And this unique interpretation of sacrifice in 1QS
mostly resembles that in 1 Peter (2:5).
Both 1QS and 1 Peter considered the addressed communities possessing of
an identity of Israel but disregarding the role of historical Israel and her covenantal
history. This ahistorical understanding of identity is more apparent when the 1QS and
1 Peter are compared with other closely related literatures (i.e. CD and Romans) in the
same tradition. Ethnicity is relatively not at issue in defining the identity of Israel or
covenantal boundaries of the two communities. The initiation of the members in 1QS
is strongly emphasized and understood as a voluntary action based on ethical and
legal principle. This conditional criterion of covenantal boundary is coupled with the
unconditional criteria of Gods predestination and the teaching of two spirits, which
function to legitimate the validity of the ahistorical identity claimed by the
community. Similar method of legitimation is found in 1 Peter, that the unconditional
criterion of Gods predestination predominates the scene with much lesser attention
given to the voluntary and initiative faith of the believers. Christs death and
resurrection (or suffering and glorification) in history becomes the important linkage
point which clearly open a historical dimension of the communal identity in 1 Peter.
The election of Christian, their suffering in obedience to doing good, and their
subsequent glorification at the end are all actually patterned on the same historical
experience of Christ according to Gods will. Moreover, it is Christ whose Spirit
inspired the OT prophets that their prediction found fulfillment in the preaching of the
NT evangelists about the suffering and glorification of Christ. These infuse the
ahistorical identity of Christian community with a salvation historical awareness
focusing on Christ.
92
Abbreviations:
AB
ANRW
Anchor Bible
Aufstieg und Niedergang der rmischen Welt: Geschichte und Kultur
Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Edited by H. Temporini and
W. Haase. Berlin, 1972-
BDAG.
Bauer, Walter. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and

Other Early Christian Literature. 3rd ed. Edited and revised by
Frederick William Danker. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
BJB
CBQ
DSD
2000.
Brown Judaic Studies
The Catholic Biblical Quarterly
Dead Sea Discovery
JSNTSup
Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament Edited by Horst Balz and

Gerhard Schneider. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. 1990.
Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series
JSOTSupp
JSPSup
NSBT
NT
Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series

Journal for the Study of Pseudepigrapha Supplement Series
New Study of Biblical Theology
Novum Testamentum
NTS
RSB
RTR
SBL
New Testament Studies

Religious Studies Bulletin
Reformed Theological Review
Studies in Biblical Literature
SNTSMS
ST
TDNT
VT
Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series

Studia Theologica
Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by G. Kittel and
G. Friedrich. Translated by G. W. Bromiley. 10 vols. Grand Rapids,
1964-1976.
Vetus Testamentum
WUNT
Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament
EDNT
93
Bibliography:
Abegg, Martin G, James E. Bowley and Edward M. Cook, in consultation with
Emanuel Tov. 2003. The Dead Sea Scrolls Concordance. Volume one: The
Non-Biblical Texts from Qumran. Part 1 and 2. Leiden; Boston: Brill.
Achtemeier, Paul J. 1989. Newborn Babes and Living Stones: Literal and Figurative
in 1 Peter. Pages 207-236 in To Touch the Text: Biblical and Related Studies in Honor
of Joseph A. Fitzmyer S.J. Edited by M. P. Horgan and P. J. Kobelski. New York:
Crossroad.
----------------------. 1993. Suffering Servant and Suffering Christ in 1 Peter. Pages
176-88 in The Future of Christology: Essays in Honour of Leander E. Keck. Edited by
A. J. Malherbe & W. A. Meeks. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
----------------------. 1996. 1 Peter: a Commentary on First Peter. Hermeneia. Edited
by E. J. Epp. Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress Press.
Aland, Barbara, Kurt Aland, Johannes Karavidopoulos, Carlos Martini, and Bruce
Metzger. 1993. Novum Testamentum Graece. 27th ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche
Bibelgesellschaft.
Alexander, Philip S. and Geza Vermes (tr.). 2004. 4Q255-264 (4QSa-j). Pages 8-21,
42-79 in The Dead Sea Scrolls Reader Vol. 1: Texts Concerned with Religious Laws.
Edited by D. W. Parry,. and E. Tov. Leiden: Brill.
Balch, David L. 1981. Let Wives be Submissive: The Domestic Code in 1 Peter.
Chico,Calif.: Scholars Press.
Barclay, John M. G. 1996. Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora: From Alexander to
Trajan (3223 BCE 117 CE). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Barth, Markus. 1983. The People of God. JSNTSup 5. Sheffield: JSOT Press.
Bauckham, Richard. 1988. James, 1 and 2 Peter, Jude. Pages 303-317 in It is Written:
Scripture Citing Scripture: Essay in Honor of Barnabas Lindars, SSF. Edited by D. A.
Carson and H. G. M. Williamson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
94
-----------------------. 1993. The Parting of the Ways: What Happened and Why. ST 47:
135-51.
Baumgarten, Joseph M. 1990. The Qumran-Essene Restrains on Marriage. Pages
13-24 in Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The New York University
Conference in Memory of Yigael Yadin. Edited by L. H. Schiffman. JSPSup 8.
Sheffield: JSOT Press.
Baumgarten, Joseph M. and Daniel R. Schwartz (tr.). 1995. Damascus Document
(CD). Pages 4-57 in The Dead Sea Scrolls: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek Texts with
English Translations. Volume 2. Damascus Document, War Scroll, and Related
Documents. Edited by J. H. Charlesworth. Tbingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck).
Beale , Gregory K. 2004. The Temple and the Churchs Mission: A Biblical Theology
of the Dwelling Place of God. NSBT 17. Leicester: Apollos.
Bechtler, Steven R. 1998. Following in His Steps: Suffering, Community, and
Christology in 1 Peter. Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press.
Bertram, Georg. 1964. e;qnoj, e;qniko,j. Pages 364-373 in vol. 2 of TDNT. Edited by
G. Kittel and G. Friedrich. Translated by G. Bromiley. 10 vols. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1964-1976.
Best, Ernest. 1969. I Peter II 4-10A Reconsideration. NT 11: 270-93.
Betz, Otto. 1982. Early Christian Cult in the Light of Qumran. RSB 2: 73-85.
Boccaccini, Gabriele. 1991. Middle Judaism: Jewish Thought 300 B.C. to 200 C.E..
Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
Bockmuehl, Markus. 2001. 1QS and Salvation at Qumran. Pages 381-414 in
Justification and Variegated Nomism: Vol. 1-The Complexities of Second Temple
Judaism. Edited by D. A. Carson, P. T. OBrien and M. A. Seifrid. Tbingen: Mohr
Siebeck.
Boissevain, Jeremy. 1974. Friends of Friends: Networks, Manipulators and
Coalitions. New York: St Martins Press.
95
Brooke, George J. 2001. 4Q500 1 and the Use of Scripture in the Parable of the
Vineyard. Pages 235-60 in The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament. Minneapolis:
Fortress.
Brown, Raymond E. and John P. Meier. 1983. Antioch and Rome. New York: Paulist.
Bchsel, Friedrich. 1964. gi,nomai, ge,vesij, ge,noj, ge,nhma, avpogi,nomai, paliggenesi,a.
Pages 681-89 in vol. 4 of TDNT. Edited by G. Kittel and G. Friedrich. Translated by
G. Bromiley. 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964-1976.
Burrows, Millar. 1955. The Dead Sea Scrolls. New York: Viking Press.
Campbell, Barth L. 1998. Honor, Shame, and the Rhetoric of 1 Peter. Atlanta, Ga.:
Scholars Press.
Campbell, William S. 1993. Israel. Pages 441-46 in Dictionary of Paul and His
Letters. Edited by G. F. Hawthorne et al. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press.
Charlesworth, James H. 1985a. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Vol.1 & 2. New
York: Doubleday.
----------------------------. 1985b. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha and the New
Testament: Prolegomena for the Study of Christian Origins. SNTSMS 54. London:
Cambridge University Press.
----------------------------. 1990. A Critical Comparison of the Dualism in 1QS
3:13-4:26 and the Dualism Contained in the Gospel of John. Pages 76-106 in John
and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by J. H. Charlesworth. New York: Crossroad.
Childs, Brevard S. 1974 (1976 3rd reprinted). The Book of Exodus: A Critical,
Theological Commentary. OTL. Louisville: Westminster.
Chilton, Bruce and James Neusner. 1995. Judaism in the New Testament: Practices
and Beliefs. London: Routledge.
Christiansen, Ellen J. 1995. The Covenant in Judaism and Paul: A Study of Ritual
Boundaries as Identity Markers. Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und
des Urchristentums, 27. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
96
------------------------. 1998. The Consciousness of Belonging to Gods Covenant and

What it entails According to the Damascus Document and the Community Rule.
Pages 69-97 in Qumran between the Old and New Testaments. Edited by F. Cryer and
T. L. Thompson. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Cohen, Shaye J. D. 1987. From the Maccabees to the Mishnah. Philadelphia:
Westminster.
Collins, John J. 2003. Forms of Community in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Pages 97-111 in
Emanuel: Studies in Hebrew Bible, Septuagint and Dead Sea Scrolls in Honour of
Emanuel Tov. Edited by S. M. Paul et al. Leiden: Brill.
Cross, Frank L. 1954. I Peter, a Paschal Liturgy. [Lecture Delivered in the Chapter
House, Christ Church, Oxford, on Thursday, 21 January, 1954]. London: Mowbray.
Dalton, William J. 1965. Christ's Proclamation to the Spirits: A Study of 1 Peter
3:18-4:6. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute.
Davids, Peter H. 1990. The First Epistle of Peter. Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans.
Davies, Philip R. 1983. The Damascus covenant: an interpretation of the "Damascus
Document". Sheffield: JSOT Press.
--------------------. 1987. Behind the Essenes: History and Ideology in the Dead Sea
Scrolls. Brown Judaic Studies 94. Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars Press.
--------------------. 1994. The Damascus Sect and Judaism. Pages 70-84 in Pursuing
the Text: Studies in Honor of Ben Zion Wacholder on the Occasion of His Seventieth
Birthday. JSOTSupp 184. Edited by J.C. Reeves & J. Kampen. Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press.
--------------------. 2000. The Judaism(s) of the Damascus Document. Pages 27-43 in
The Damascus Document: A Centennial of Discovery. Edited by J. M. Baumgarten et
al. Leiden: Brill.
Deasley, Alex. 2000. The Shape of Qumran Theology. Carlisle; Cumbria: Paternoster.
97
Dimant, Devorah. 1984. Qumran Sectarian Literature. Pages 483-550 in Jewish

Writings of the Second Temple Period. Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, Qumran
Sectarian Writings, Philo. Compendia rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum
section 2: The literature of the Jewish people in the period of the Second Temple and
the Talmud. Vol. 2. Edited by Y. Aschkenasy et al. Philadelphia: Fortress.
--------------------. 1995. The Qumran Manuscripts: Contents and Significance. Pages
23-58 in Time to Prepare the Way in the Wilderness: Papers on the Qumran Scrolls/
by Fellows of the Institute for Advanced Studies of the Hebrew University, Jerusalem,
1989-1990. Edited by D. Dimant and L. H. Schiffman. Leiden: Brill.
Dubis, Mark. 2002. Suffering and Eschatology in 1 Peter 4:12-19. SBL 33. New York:
Peter Lang.
Dunn, James D. G.. 1980. Christology in the Making : a New Testament Inquiry into
the Origins of the Doctrine of the Incarnation. London: SCM.
---------------------.1991. Partings of the Ways: Between Christianity and Judaism and
Their Significance for the Character of Christianity. London; Philadelphia: SCM;
Trinity Press International.
---------------------. 1995. Judaism in the Land of Israel in the First Century. Pages
229-61 in Judaism in Late Antiquity. Part 2. Edited by Jacob Neusner. Leiden: Brill.
---------------------. 1998. Theology of Paul. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Ekblad, Eugene R. 1999. Isaiahs Servant Poems According to the Septuagint: An
Exegetical and Theological Study. Leuven: Peeters.
Elliott, John H. 1966. The Elect and the Holy: An Exegetical Examination of 1 Peter
2:4-10 and the Phase basileion hierateuma. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
-----------------. 1981. A Home for the Homeless: A Sociological Exegesis of 1 Peter, its
Situation and Strategy. Philadelphia : Fortress.
-----------------. 1993. What is Social-Scientific Criticism? Guides to Biblical
Scholarship: New Testament Series. Edited by Dan O. Va, Jr.. Minneapolis: Fortress.
98
------------------. 1995. The Jewish Messianic Movement: From Faction to Sect. Pages
75-95 in Modelling Early Christianity: Social-Scientific Studies of the New Testament
in Its Context. Edited by P. F. Esler. London; New York: Routledge.
------------------. 2000. 1 Peter: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary.
AB. New York: Doubleday.
Evans, Craig A. 2003. Covenant in the Qumran Literature. Pages 55-80 in The
Concept of the Covenant in the Second Temple Period. Edited by S. E. Porter and J. C.
R. De Roo. Leiden; Boston: Brill.
Ferguson, Everett. 1980. Spiritual Sacrifice in Early Christianity and its Environment.
ANRW 2.23.2:1151-89.
Frankomlle, Hubert. 1990. lao,j. Pages 339-44 in vol. 2 of EDNT. Edited by Horst
Balz and Gerhard Schneider. 3 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. 1990-1993.
Gagnon, Robert A. J. 1995. How Did the Rule of the Community Obtain Its Final
Shape? A Review of Scholarly Research. Pages 67-85 in Qumran Questions. Edited
by J. H. Charlesworth. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Garca Martnez, Florentino. 1996. The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran
Texts in English. Second Edition. Translated by W. G. E. Watson. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans.
----------------------------------. 1998. The History of the Qumran Community in the
Light of Recently Available Texts. Pages 194-216 in Qumran between the Old and
New Testaments. Copenhagen International Seminar 6. Edited by F. H. Cryer & T. L.
Thompson. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Garca Martnez, Florentino and J. T. Barrera. 1995. The People of the Dead Sea
Scrolls: Their Writings, Beliefs and Practices. Translated by W. G. E. Watson. Leiden:
Brill.
Garnet, Paul. 1977. Salvation and Atonement in the Qumran Scrolls. WUNT: Reihe 2:
3. Tbingen: Mohr.
Grtner, Bertil. 1965. The Temple and the Community in Qumran and the New
99
Testament: A Comparative Study in the Temple Symbolism of the Qumran Texts and
the New Testament. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Golb, Norman. 1995. Who Wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls? The Search for the Secret of
Qumran. New York: Scribner.
Goppelt, Leonhard. 1993. A Commentary on 1 Peter. Translated by J.E. Alsup. Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans.
Grabbe, Lester L. 1992. Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
--------------------. 2000. Judaic Religion in the Second Temple Period. Belief and
Practice from the Exile to Yavneh. London: Routledge.
Grudem, Wayne A.. 1988. The First Epistle of Peter: An Introduction and
Commentary. Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press.
Hempel, Charlotte. 1997a. Qumran Communities: Beyond the Fringes of Second
Temple Society. Pages 43-53 in The Scrolls and the Scriptures. Edited by S. E. Porter
and C. A. Evans. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
----------------------. 1997b. The Penal Code Reconsidered. Pages 337-348 in Legal
Texts and Legal Issues. Edited by F. Garca Martnez and J. Kampen. Leiden: Brills.
----------------------. 1999. Community Structures in the Dead Sea Scrolls: Admission,
Organization, Disciplinary Procedures. Pages 67-92 in The Dead Sea Scrolls after
Fifty Years. Vol.2. Edited by P. W. Flint and J. C. Vanderkam. Leiden: Brill.
Hillyer, Norman. 1971. Rock-Stone Imagery in 1 Peter. Tyndale Bulletin 22:58-87.
Hanson, Paul D. 1995. Isaiah 40-66. Interpretation. Louisville: John Knox Press.
Kelly, John N. D. 1969. A Commentary on the Epistles of Peter and of Jude. Black:
London.
Knibb, Michael A. 1987 (rep. 1988). The Qumran Community. Cambridge
Commentaries on Writings of the Jewish and Christian World 200 BC to AD 200. Vol.
2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
100
---------------------(tr.). 1984. 1 Enoch. Pages 169-319 in The Apocryphal Old

Testament. Edited by H. F. D. Sparks. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kuhn, Karl G. 1964. VIsrah,l, VIsrahli,thj, VIoudai/oj, VIoudai,a, VIoudai[koj, Ioudai/zw,
VIoudai/smoj, ~Ebrai?ko,j, e`brai-j, e`brai?sti, Pages 359-369 in vol. 3 of TDNT. Edited by
G. Kittel and G. Friedrich. Translated by G. Bromiley. 10 vols. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1964-1976.
Lakoff George and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live by. Chicago: Chicago
University Press.
Leaney, A. R. C. 1966. The Rule of Qumran and Its Meaning: Introduction,
Translation and Commentary. London: SCM Press.
Lee, PilChan. 2001. The New Jerusalem in the Book of Revelation: A Study of
Revelation 21-22 in the Light of Its Background in Jewish Tradition. WUNT 129.
Tubingen: Mohr.
Lichtenberger, Hermann. 1980. Atonement and Sacrifice in the Qumran Community.
Pages 159-171 in Approaches to Ancient Judaism Vol. 2. Edited by W. S. Green.
Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press.
Martin, Troy W .1992. Metaphor and Composition in 1 Peter. Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars
Press.
McKelvey, R. J. 1969. The New Temple: the Church in the New Testament. London :
Oxford University Press.
Metso, Sarianna. 1997. The Textual Traditions of the Qumran Community Rule.
Pages 141-47 in Legal Texts and Legal Issues: Proceedings of the Second Meeting of
the International Organization for Qumran Studies, Cambridge, 1995: Published in
Honour of Joseph M. Baumgarten. Edited by M. Bernstein et al. Leiden: Brill.
-------------------. 1998. Constitutional Rules at Qumran. Pages 186-210 in The Dead
Sea Scrolls after Fifty Years: A Comprehensive Assessment. Vol.1. Edited by P. W.
Flint and J. C. Vanderkam. Leiden: Brill.
-------------------. 1999. In Search of the Sitz Im Leben of the Community Rule. Pages
101
306-15 in The Provo International Conference on the Dead Sea Scrolls Technological
Innovations, New Texts and Reformulated Issues. Edited by D. W. Pany & E. Ulrich.
Leiden: Brill.
--------------------. 2000. The Relationship between the Damascus Document and the
Community Rule. Pages 85-93 in The Damascus Document: A Centennial of
Discovery: Proceedings of the Third International Symposium of the Orion Center for
the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Associated Literature, 4-8 February, 1998.
Edited by J. M. Baumgarten et al. Leiden: Brill.
--------------------. 2004. Methodological Problems in Reconstructing History from
Rule Texts Found at Qumran. Dead Sea Discoveries 11: 315-35.
Neill, Stephen, and Tom Wright. 1988. Interpretation of the New Testament
1861-1986. 2nd ed.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nelson, Richard D. 1993. Raising Up a Faithful Priest: Community and Priesthood in
Biblical Theology. Louisville, Ky. : Westminster/J. Knox.
Neusner, James. 1992. The Redefinition of Israel: Judaism and Its Social Metaphors.
Pages 211-252 in Sources of the Transformation of Judaism: From Philosophy to
Religion in the Classics of Judaism: A Reader. Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press.
Nicholson, Ernest W. 1982. The Covenant in Exodus XXIV 3-8. VT 23: 74-86.
Nickelsburg, George W. E. 2001. 1 Enoch: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch Vol.
1 Chapter 1-36, 81-108. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress.
-------------------------------. 2003. Ancient Judaism and Christian Origins: Diversity,
Continuity, and Transformation. Minneapolis: Fortress.
Qimaron, Elisha and J. H. Charlesworth. 1994. Rule of the Community (1QS; cf. 4QS
MSS A-J, 5Q11). Pages 1-51 in The Dead Sea Scrolls: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek
Texts with English Translations. Volume 1. Rule of the Community & Related
Documents. Edited by J. H. Charlesworth. Tbingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck).
Qimron, Elisha. 1986. The Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Harvard Semitic Studies
29. Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars Press.
102
Pearson, Sharon C. 2001. The Christological and Rhetorical Properties of 1 Peter.

Lewiston, N.Y.: E. Mellen Press.
Pryor, John W. 1986a. First Peter and the New Covenant, 2 parts. RTR 45:1-4.
-----------------. 1986b. First Peter and the New Covenant, 2 parts. RTR 45:44-50.
Rowley, Harold H. 1952. The Zadokite Fragments and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Oxford:
Blackwell.
Saldarini , Anthony J. 2001 (1988). Pharisees, Scribes and Sadducees in Palestinian
Society. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans (Originally published by Wilmington: Michael
Glazier).
Sanders, Ed P. 1977. Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of
Religion. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
-----------------. 1992. Judaism: Practice and Belief, 63 BCE-66 CE. Philadelphia:
Trinity Press International.
Sarna, Nahum M. 1991. The JPS Torah Commentray Exodus: The Trditional Hebrew
Text with the New JPS Translation. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society.
Schiffman, Lawrence H. 1983. Sectarian Law in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Courts,
Testimony and the Penal Code. BJS 33. Chicago, CA: Scholar Press.
----------------------------. 1994. Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls: The History of
Judaism, the Background of Christianity, the Lost Library of Qumran. Philadelphia:
Jewish Publication Society.
Schrer, Emil, Vermes, G.., & Millar, F. 1973, 1979, 1986, 1987. The History of the
Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ. Vol. 1, 2, 3.1, 3.2. Edinburgh: T & T Clark.
Schssler Fiorrenza, Lisabeth. 1976. Cultic Language in Qumran and in the NT. CBQ
38: 159-77.
Schutter, William L. 1989. Hermeneutic and Composition in 1 Peter. Tubingen: J, C,
103
B. Mohr.
Selwyn, Edward G. 1947. The First Epistle of St. Peter: the Greek Text with
Introduction, Notes and Essays. London: MacMillan.
------------------------. 1954. Eschatology in 1 Peter. Pages 394-401 in The Background
of the New Testament and its Eschatology. Edited by W. D. Williams and D. Daube.
Cambridge: University Press.
Senior, Donald P. 2003. 1 Peter. Sacra Pagina.15. Edited by D.J. Harrington.
Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press.
Snodgrass, Klyne R. 1977. I Peter II. 1-10: Its Formation and Literary Affinities. NTS
24: 97-106.
Stegemann, Hartmut. 1992. The Qumran Essenes-Local Members of the Main Jewish
Union in Late Second Temple Times. Pages 83-166 in The Madrid Qumran Congress:
Proceedings for the International Congress on the Dead Sea Scroll, Madrid 18-21
March 1991. Vol. 1. Edited by J. T. Barrera & L. V. Montane. Leiden: E J Brill.
Steuernagel, Valdir R. 1986. An Exiled Community as a Missionary Community: A
Study based on 1 Peter 2:9, 10. Evangelical Review of Theology 10:8-18.
Strathmann, Hermann. 1967. lao,j. Pages 29-57 in vol. IV of TDNT. Edited by G.
Kittel and G. Friedrich. Translated by G. Bromiley. 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1964-1976.
Thuren, Lauri. 1990. The Rhetorical Strategy of 1 Peter: With Special Regard to
Ambiguous Expressions. Finland: Abo Academy Press.
------------------. 1995. Argument and Theology in 1 Peter: The Origins of Christian
Paraenesis. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Tillar, Patric A. 1997. The Eternal Planting in the Dead Sea Scrolls. DSD 4: 312-35.
Trebilco, Paul. 1991. (Reprinted 1994). Jewish Communities in Asia Minor. SNTSMS
69. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
104
Vanderkam, James C. 1994. The Dead Sea Scrolls Today. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Vermes, Geza. 1999. An Introduction to the Complete Dead Sea Scrolls. Minneapolis:
Fortress.
Vermes, Geza (tr. & ed.). 2004. The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English. Revised
edition. London: Penguin.
Waltke, Bruce K. and OConnor, Michael P. 1990. An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew
Syntax. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns.
Wernberg-Mller, P. 1957. The Manual of Discipline: Translated and Annotated with
an Introduction. Studies on the Texts on the Desert of Judah. Vol. 1. Leiden: E. J.
Brill.
Wilson, Bryan R. 1963 (1987). A Typology of Sects in Archives des Sciences Sociales
des Religions, 16. Translated by J. M. Robertsion. Reproduced in Pages 297-311 in
Religion and Ideology (Reprinted edition). Edited by R. Bocock and K. Thompson.
Manchester: Manchester University.
Wise, Michael, Martin Abegg and E. Cook (tr.). 2004. Serekh ha-Yahiad, 5Q11 (5QS),
Serekh leanshey ha-Yahiad. Pages 3-9, 20-43 in The Dead Sea Scrolls Reader Vol. 1:
Texts Concerned with Religious Laws. Edited by D. W. Parry and E. Tov. Leiden: E. J.
Brill.
Wright, Nicolas T. 1992. New Testament and the People of God. Vol 1 of Christian
Origins and the Question of God. Minneapolis: Fortress.
Online Resource:
NETS (New English Translation of Septuagint) http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nets/edition/
105

The Communal Identity As Israel in 1QS and 1peter

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Communal Identity As Israel in 1QS and 1peter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Communal Identity as Israel in

1QS and 1 Peter

LEUNG CHUN HO BERNARD (95032)

1.4 The Unity of early Judaism

Chapter 2 Textual History of 1QS and its Relationship with CD

2.2.1 The relation between S and D

2.2.2.2 Methodological Limitation

Chapter 3The Communal Identity in 1QS

3.3.1 Covenant and History

3.3.4 Absence of covenant history: The ahistorical identity in 1QS

Chapter 4 Covenant and Communal Identity in 1 Peter

4.2 Christian community as the Israel

4.2.3 The eschatological dimension of Communal identity in 1 Peter

4.3.2 Languages and Images referring to the Temple in 2:4-10

4.3.6 Preliminary Conclusion

4.4.2 Historical awareness in Roman 9-11

Chapter 5 Conclusion: A comparison of Communal Identity as Israel

For example, Brown & Meier 1983, 133-34.

(Achtemeier 1996, 69)

Lakoff & Johnson 1980, 5.

beyond the general concept of group.

freestanding Judaic systems. The keystone of this plurality is the particularity of

Samaritan Judaism rabbinic Judaism and Christian Judaism (1991,

~Ebrai/oj, ~Ebrai?ko,j, e`brai/j, e`brai?sti,. TDNT 3.359-65.

Chapter 2 Textual History of 1QS and its Relationship with CD

leaders), organizational pattern (e.g. gathering of 10 persons with a priest, 1QS vi 3;

S and D (Hempel 1997b, 337).

What we can properly do is to study the redactional activities detected in

Based on these division indicators, 1QS is structurally divided as follows:

i)II 19-25a---order of precedence in the ceremony

b. VI 8b-23---General rules of the session of the Many

See Gagnon 1995, 69-73.

b. VIII 16b-IX 11---regulations for the community

relation of various sections with respect to the history of Qumran community as

Chapter 3 The Communal Identity in 1QS

insertion in 1QS, i.e. the more original text of 4QSb,d is as follows4:

larvyb tmah tyblw

1QS inserted three words,

rpkl ~lw[ tyrb

((a community) of eternal

The l+infinitive construction again indicates predicative use.

Tyrbh yrmwv ~ynhwkh Qwdc ynb yp l[

does not always refer to the

In the threefold introductory clause, When these become in Israel

of God with the community (insertion of

in V 5b-6, 21b-22), and

(to cover, to atone, also

1QS II 8; III 4, 6, 8, 11; V 6; VIII 6, 10; IX 4; XI 14.

t[jm) (4QSe has ~]lw[ jpv[ml (eternal judgment)21

a.eternal plant (~lw[

d.Witness of truth for judgment chosen by his will

sequence of lamed in V 5b-6.

whole also has a connotation of the sanctuary or temple. The association of

~lw[ t[jml) during every time to come.

Translation by Wintermute, O. S. 1985 Jubilees. Pages 35-142 in Charlesworth 1985.

jpv[ml (eternal judgment) rather

t[jml (that is, the eternal plant).

1QS VIII 7b-8a is clearly an allusion to Isa 28:16.

rqy tnp !xbh tmwh

all-encompassing knowledge of the covenant of judgment (line 9a) and to decide

~y[Xrl bXhlw #rah d[b rpkl

to atone for the land by repaying the wicked their reward

(to repay reward/