Institute for Biblical Research: BBR 5 (1995)

Member Info Login

Navigation

List Articles/Studies

Bulletin for Biblical Research (BBR) 1995

4Q246

EDWARD M. COOK

COMPREHENSIVE ARAMAIC LEXICON

HEBREW UNION COLLEGE

CINCINNATI, OHIO

The Aramaic text 4Q246 (the "son of God" text) is recognized as a document

of first-rate importance, but scholars have not been able to agree on its in-

terpretation. The present study offers new readings, translation, and com-

mentary, and suggests that a proper understanding of the fragment's

internal poetic structure and of its affinity to the Akkadian prophecies leads

to the conclusion that the text represents the "son of God" as a negative

figure. The probable historical background of 4Q246 is the Seleucid period,

especially the struggle against Antiochus IV Epiphanes.

Key Words: Son of God, 4Q246, Mark 14:64, Luke 1:35, Akkadian proph-

ecies, Antiochus Epiphanes

The Aramaic text 4Q246 was acquired by J. T. Milik from the antiqui-

ties dealer Kando in 1958. J. A. Fitzmyer published part of the text

based on a lecture of Milik's, and a number of discussions appeared

based on this partial publication.¹ Recently Emile Puech has pub-

lished the full text with commentary; Fitzmyer has also returned to

the text with a full commentary and interpretation.² The availability

of the complete fragment will undoubtedly initiate a new phase in

the discussion of this fragmentary document.

1. Fitzmyer's original article was "The Contribution of Qumran Aramaic to the

Study of the New Testament," NTS 20 (1974-75) 382– 407; reprinted in Fitzmyer. A Wan-

dering Aramean: Collected Aramaic Essays (SBLMS 25; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1979) 85-

113, esp. 92-93. References to this article use the pagination of the latter publication.

Other early articles on this text are David Flusser, "The Hubris of the Antichrist in a

Fragment from Qumran," Immanuel 10 (1981) 31-39, and F. García Martiez, "The Es-

chatological Figure of 4Q246," Qumran and Apocalyptic: Studies on the Aramaic Texts from

Qumran (Leiden: Brill, 1991) 162-79, an English translation of "¿Tipo del Anticristo o

Libertador escatológico?" El Misterio de la Palabra. Homenaje a L. Alonso Schökel (ed. V. Col-

lado and E. Zurro; Madrid: Cristianidad, 1983) 229– 44. Milik's original transcription of

the text can be retrieved from the Preliminary Concordance to the Hebrew and Aramaic Frag-

ments from Qumran Caves II–IX (Arranged for Printing by H.-P. Richter; Göttingen, 1988).

2. Emile Puech, "Fragment d'une apocalypse en araméen (4Q246 = pseudo-Dan^d)

et le 'Royaume de Dieu'," RB 99 (1992) 98-131; J. A. Fitzmyer, "4Q246: The 'Son of God'

Document from Qumran," Bib (1993) 153-74. Two other treatments of the entire text

have appeared: Robert Eisenman and Michael Wise, "The Son of God (4Q246),"

44 Bulletin for Biblical Research 5

4Q246 contains two columns of nine lines each. The first column,

having been torn approximately through the middle, is missing the

first half of each line, but the second column is complete. It is of

course impossible to estimate exactly how long the complete scroll

may have been, but the column length is only about half that of a

normal size scroll. Paleographically, the text was said by Milik (ac-

cording to Fitzmyer) to date from the latter third of the first century

BCE, a judgment with which Puech agrees.³ The letter forms are those

of "early formal Herodian" script, although Milik's and Puech's dates

may be too narrow.

Linguistically, the text, as luck would have it, contains few of the

diagnostic features typically used to place Palestinian Aramaic in a

typological series. There is one example of non-assimilated nun: (Ntny,

II, 8) and one of elided aleph ()tt, I, 4). The preformative of the third

masculine singular imperfect of the verb ywh is lamedh (hwhl, I, 7),

typical of Qumran Aramaic. The orthography is conservative, with

few indications of vowels by matres lectionis: the third masculine

plural suffix is Nh-, not Nwh-; lk ("all") not lwk, as is usual at Qumran;

once +w#$q (II, 5) but also +#$q (II, 6); #$wdy (II, 3) but also Psy (II, 6); and

so on. The text could fit almost anywhere in a typological series from

Daniel to the Genesis Apocryphon.

In the essay that follows, I will first offer a transcription of the

text that differs in some respects from Puech's. Afterwards I give a

stichometric translation and a commentary on the text, followed by a

summary and conclusions.

TRANSCRIPTION

Column I

)ysrk Mdq lpn tr#$ yhwl[(. . . . . . . . ] .1

Kyn#$w zgr ht) )ml(l )k [ . . . . . . . ] .2

)ml( d( ht) )lkw Kwzx )[. . . . . .] .3

)(l) l( )tt hq( Nybr[br . . . . . ] .4

)tnyd[ml] br Nwry#$xnw[. . . . . . . .] .5

Nyrc[mw] rwt) Klm[ . . . . . . . ] .6

)(r[)]l( hwhl br[w . . . . . . ] .7

The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered (Shaftesbury, Dorset: Element, 1992) 68-71; and John J.

Collins, "A Pre-Christian 'Son of God' Among the Dead Sea Scrolls," BibRev 9/3 (June

1993) 34-38, 57. Collins' longer treatment of the text was published after the present

article was written ("The Son of God Text from Qumran," From Jesus to John: Essays on

Jesus and New Testament Oiristology in Honour of Marinus de Jonge [ed. M. C. De Boer;

JSTNSup 84; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993] 65-82).

3. Puech, "Fragment," 105.

COOK: 4Q246 45

Nw#$[m]#$y )lkw Nwdb([t#$y. . . . . . ] .8

hnkty hm#$bw )rqty )b[r . . . . .] .9

Column II

)yqyzk hnwrqy Nwyl( rbw rm)ty l) yd hrb .1

l( Nwklmy Nyn#$ )wht Nhtwklm Nk )tyzx yd .2

h[ny]dml hnydmw #$wdy M(l M( Nw#$dy )lkw )(r) .3

brx Nm xwny )lkw l) M( Mwqy d( .4

[N]ydy +w#$qb htxr) lkw Ml( twklm htwklm .5

Psy )(r) Nm brx Ml#$ db(y )lkw +#$qb )(r) .6

hly)b )br l) Nwdgsy hl )tnydm lkw .7

Nhlkw hdyb Ntny Nymm( brq hl db(y )wh .8

ymwht lkw Ml( N+l#$ hn+l#$ yhwmdq hmry .9

NOTES ON THE TRANSCRIPTION

Column I, line 2: Puech reads xml(<<m>>{{ l}} Puech thinks that the

lamedh was to be replaced by a sublinear mem. There is a crude circle

underneath the ayin that could be taken to be a cursive mem. It does

not resemble the other mems in the document, however, and sublin-

ear corrections are unexpected. Puech's reading is therefore unlikely,

although the circle is unexplained. Collins reads )ml([l], Eisenman

and Wise )ml(. The photograph clearly shows a faint lamedh before

the ayin.

Line 2: Milik read zygr, but the yodh he thought he saw is simply

a spot of ink where the scribe initially put down the pen for the gimel.

Line 2: Kyn#$w: so also Puech and Eisenman and Wise. Collins

reads, less probably, Kwn#$w.

Line 3: Kwzx )[. . .]. So also Collins. Eisenman and Wise restore

Kyzx )b[r l)], an unlikely restoration grammatically; Fitzmyer also

sees a beth, but restores Kyzx )b[yl(]; however, the word wzx "vision"

(not "face"!) is masculine, not feminine. Puech restores Kwzx )r[#$/q)].

The trace of the letter before the aleph is too small for identification.

Line 4: Milik read Nybrb[r]; there is a trace of a letter before the

resh, but it cannot be identified with certainty. Puech, Fitzmyer, and

Collins unwarrantedly read an unquestioned beth.

Line 5: )tnyd[ml] br Nwry#$xn Puech, Fitzmyer, and Collins read

)tnydmb, with no brackets, but the beth and mem are not visible in

the photograph. Eisenman and Wise read )tnyd[m] wbr Nyry#$xn, but the

Ny- ending of the first word is unlikely for grammatical reasons (see

below), while the waw of wbr is not visible and is again prima facie

unlikely. There are traces of at least one letter between the beth of br

and the daleth of )tnyd[m]; there is also a trace of ink above the line

that seems to be the remnant of the upper shaft of a lamedh.

46 Bulletin for Biblical Research 5

Column II, line 2: )tyzx: so also Collins and Eisenman and Wise.

Puech's and Fitzmyer's )twzx is unlikely both paleographically and

grammatically (see below).

Line 2: )wht: so also Eisenman and Wise (Collins omits!). Puech

and Fitzmyer read hwht, but the "K" shape of the final letter is clear

enough to make the identification with aleph probable.

Line 6: +#$qb: Collins erroneously reads +w#$qb.

Line 6: Ml#$: Collins erroneously reads Ml#$l.

Line 7: Nwdgsy: Collins erroneously reads Nydgsy.

Line 8: db(y: so also Collins and Eisenman and Wise. Puech and

Fitzmyer read, less probably, db(w.

Line 8: Nhlkw: Eisenman and Wise erroneously read Nhlk.

Line 8: ymwht: Eisenman and Wise erroneously read ymwxt.

Since the first column is damaged, one must rely on the second

column for information about the arrangement and composition of

the text. It is evident that the text is arranged in parallelistic bicola,

with generally three stresses to a line. This 3+3 stress pattern is occa-

sionally broken for a two-stress second line (3+2). The fragmentary

sentences of the first column must be construed to fit this pattern..

I now offer my reconstruction of the stichometry and structure

of the text, followed by a translation and commentary on the text by

bicola. The siglum | | indicates the caesura between bicola.

Column I—Stichometric reconstruction

tr#$ yhwl[( l) xwr] | | [ ] A

)k[lm ] | | )ysrk Mdq lpn B

[ ] Kyn#$w | | zgr ht) )ml(l C

)ml( d( ht) )lkw | | Kwzx )[ ] D

)(r) l( )tt hq( | | Nybr[br ] E

Nwry#$xnw[ | | [ ] F

[ ] | | [Mwqy] )tnyd[ml] br G

[ ] | | Nyrc[mw] rwt) Klm H

)(r) l( hwhl br | | [ ] I

[hl] Nw#$[m]#$y )lkw | | Nwdb([t#$y ] J

hnkty hm#$bw | | )rqty )[br hrb Nk] K

Column II—Stichometric division

hnwrqy Nwyl( rbw | | rm)ty l) yd hrb A

)wht htwklm Nk | | )tyzx yd )yqyzk B

Nw#$dy )lkw | | )(r) l( Nwklmy Nyn#$ C

h[ny]dml hnydmw | | #$wdy M(l M( D

brx Nm xyny lkw | | l) M( Mwqy y( E

COOK: 4Q246 47

+w#$qb htxr) lkw | | Ml( twklm htwklm F

Ml#$ db(y )lkw | | +#$qb )(r) [N]ydy G

Nwdgsy hl )tnydm lkw | | Psy )(r) Nm brx H

brq hl db(y )wh | | hly)b )br l) I

yhwmdq hmry Nhlkw | | hdyb Ntny Nymm( J

[hl )(r)] ymwht lkw | | Ml( N+l#$ hn+l44#$ K

TRANSLATION

Column I

A [ ]

[the spirit of God] rested upon him

B He fell before the throne

[ ki]ng

C To the world (?) wrath is coming

And your years [ ]

D [ ]your vision

And all is coming to the world (?)

E [ ]great

Tribulation will come upon the land

F [ ]

[ ] and slaughters

G A prince of nations [will arise]

[ ]

H The king of Assyria and Egypt

[ ]

I [ ]

He will be chief over the land

J [ ] will be enslaved

And all will serve him

K [Likewise his son] will be called The Great

And by his name he will be designated.

Column II

A He will be called the son of God,

And the son of the Most High they will call him.

B Like the meteors that you saw,

So will be their kingdom.

C (A few) years they will reign over the land,

And they will crush everyone (or everything)

D People will crush people,

Nation (will crush) nation.

48 Bulletin for Biblical Research 5

E Until the people of God shall arise,

And all will have rest from the sword.

F His/their kingdom is an eternal kingdom,

And all his/their ways are in truth.

G He/they shall judge the land in truth,

And all will make peace.

H The sword will cease from the land,

And all the nations shall do homage to him/there.

I The Great God is his/their help

He himself will fight for him/them.

J He will put the nations in his/their power,

And all of them he will place before him/them.

K His dominion is an eternal dominion,

And all the deeps of [the earth are his].

COMMENTARY

tr#$ yhwl[( l) xwr] | | [ ]

A [ ] | | [the spirit of God] rested upon him

The verb yr#$, when used intransitively in the Pe^cal as here,

means "to rest, stay." It is often used of a quality or presence coming

to rest on or to endue a person, as for instance, in Tg. Num 11:26:

h)wbn xwr Nwhyl( tr#$w, "and a spirit of prophecy rested on them." It

seems likely that the word xwr or something similar should be re-

stored. Puech, followed by Fitzmyer, suggests tr#$ yhwl[( hbr hlxd]

"une grande frayeur (?) demeura sur lui." Besides yielding an over-

long four-stress line, the word hlxd or the like is never used with

yr#$.⁴ Eisenman and Wise restore tr#$ yhwl[( hxwr ydkw] "and when the

Spirit came to rest upon him." This is possible, but it is doubtful that

the writer would have referred to "the spirit" without qualification.

The probable context is that of a vision interpreter receiving the

power or knowledge to understand a symbolic vision.

)k[lm ] | | )ysrk Mdq lpn B

B He fell before the throne

[ ki]ng

Eisenman and Wise take the first line above to be paired with the

second line of bicolon A: "And when the Spirit came to rest upon him

he fell before the throne." Such a reconstruction is unlikely, because,

4. A check of Targum Onqelos, Targum Jonathan, and Targum Neofiti shows that

words for fear (hxy), hlxd, etc.) are never used with yr#$, but "spirit" (Tg. Isa 11:2, Tg. Ezek

11:5, Tg. Neof. Gen 41:38), "glory" (rqy, Tg. Onq. Exod 19:2, Tg. Isa 6:1) and "presence"

(hnyk#$, Tg. Neof. Exod 32:32, Num 14:42) occur often. An examination of the Syriac Dem-

onstrationes of Aphrahat reveals that only "spirit" is used with the collocation šry ^cl.

COOK: 4Q246 49

on the evidence of Column II, the poet avoids subordinate clauses,

preferring the paratactic style. He also prefers to begin the second

colon with waw. The line beginning with lpn is therefore probably

the first of a bicolon.

At the reception of divine inspiration, the interpreter falls before

the throne, implying that the figure requiring his divinely given in-

terpretive powers is a king or other royal figure. The situation, then,

is similar to the biblical stories about Daniel or Joseph. In view of the

link between some of the text's phrases and the book of Daniel, several

commentators restore a reference to Daniel in the second line. Puech

produces a nicely balanced )k[lml l)ynd rmxw], "et Daniel dit au roi."

Fitzmyer's restoration )ml(l )kl[m yyx )klml rm) Nyd)] "Then he said to

the king, ‘Live, O King, forever’ is far too long for the available space,

and is moreover not consistent with the poetic style of this text.

[ ] Kyn#$w | | zgr ht) )ml(l C

C To the world(?) wrath is coming

And your years [ ]

Previous commentators have differed widely on how to construe

these lines. Almost every word is problematic. All agree, however, in

understanding them to be referring to the putative king's state of

mind. Puech restores the line [Nh hlxdb] Kyn#$w zgr ht) )ml(<<m>>{{l}},

"{Pour} <Depuis> toujours to t'irrites et tes années [se derulent dans

la crainte!]." Eisenman and Wise read [qrxm] Kyn#$w zgr ht) )m l(,

"Why are you angry; why do you [grind] your teeth?" Collins gives

no restoration after Kwn#$w, but translates "[for]ever you are angry, and

[your features] are changed," apparently construing Kwn#$w as form of

the verb yn#$. Fitzmyer, as already seen, construes )ml( with the pre-

vious sentence, and renders the present words as wyz] Kyn#$w zgr ht),

[Kypn) "you are vexed, and changed is the complexion of your face."

All of these suggestions are unlikely, because ht) is not the

proper Aramaic form of the second person singular masculine pro-

noun "you." In Qumran Aramaic, the form is always htn). In other

dialects, the form varies between t) and tn); ht) is never found. The

words zgr ht) must mean something like "wrath is approaching,"

vocalizing zgar; ht')f (compare the Peshitta New Testament at Matt 3:7,

rugzā d’âtē, "the coming wrath").

As for )ml(l, it makes little sense to understand it temporally

("forever") with a present participle, whether the participle is con-

strued as zgr or htx. And there is clearly no space between the

lamedh and the mem, as would be expected of )m l(, "why," with

Eisenman and Wise. The best solution is to take Ml( as an early ex-

ample of the meaning "world" for this lexeme. The line would then

mean "wrath is coming to the world."

50 Bulletin for Biblical Research 5

The second line must remain mysterious; all the previous resto-

rations are based, as is apparent, on a misunderstanding of the first

line. Collin's Kwn#$ is grammatically impossible. The verb yn#$, intransi-

tive in the Pe^cal, cannot take a direct object, as here; and the transi-

tive Pa^cel would be spelled Kwyn#$. Fitzmyer apparently understands

the text as Collins does and attempts to avoid the solecism by a ref-

erence to the forms yhwn#$ yhwyz in Dan 5:6. But there the text is cor-

rupt, as most Aramaists have recognized.⁵

The correct reading then is Kyn#$ and likely refers to the years of

the king being either lengthened or shortened, depending on whether

we feel that the approaching wrath will affect him: perhaps Kyn#$,

[Nycqty, "your years will be shortened," or [Nkr)y] Kyn#$w, "but your

years will be long."

)ml( d( ht) )lkw | | Kwzx ) [ ] D

D [ ] your vision

And all is coming to the world

The word Kwzx, "your vision," refers to the vision being inter-

preted. The third letter actually looks more like a yodh than a waw,

that is, Kyzx, the Pe^cal masculine singular participle of yzx: "sees you,

seeing you." Yet in the context the king has seen something (II, 2),

not vice versa. Another possibility is to join the preceding aleph to

this sequence of letters to yield Kyzx), "he has shown you" (Aph^cel):

yet the gap between the aleph and the heth is too definite to allow

this. Eisenman and Wise read Kyzx but translate "has revealed to

you," presumably parsing the form as Pa^cel; but the Pa^cel of yzx does

not have this meaning.

The following line is difficult to construe. Collins simply has "and

you forever," giving no account of the word )lk. Puech divides the

cola differently, restoring [yyx] )ml( d( ht) | | )lkw Kwzx )r[#$/q)],

"Je vais interp[reter /expl]iquer ta vision et toute chose. Toi, à jamais,

[vis!]" This is exceedingly clumsy; the expression "ta vision et toute

chose" is peculiar, since one would expect "all your vision" (Kwzx lk or

hlk Kwzx). The placement here of a wish for the king's welfare is also

odd; it would be expected at the beginning of the speech (e.g., Dan 2:4).

The word )lk probably refers to the vision: "all, the whole

thing." ht), as in the previous line, is probably to be understood as

the participle ht') "approaching, about to come (true)." If the verse

division given here is correct, then )ml( ends a line, and probably

should be taken to mean "world."

5. Hans Bauer and Pontus Leander, Grammatik des Biblisch-Aramäischen (Hildes-

heim: Olms, 1981, orig. pub. 1927) §47n, 154.

COOK: 4Q246 51

)(r) l( )tt hq( | | Nybr[br ] E

E [ ]great

Tribulation will come upon the land.

Eisenman and Wise restore Nybr[br Ny#$)bw hwhl smx], "There will be

violence and great evils," an overlong four-beat line. (One would ex-

pect, in any case, the feminine Nbrbr N#$y)b for "great evils.") Puech's

Nybrb[r Nyklmb wr)] is a better balanced line, but purely hypothetical.

More likely is some kind of reference to something in the vision that

portends tribulation: Nybr[br Nyt)] "great signs," or the like. The inter-

preter is beginning to give details of the vision.

Nwry#$xnw[ ] | | [ ] F

[ ] | | [Mwqy] )tnyd[ml] br G

F [ ]

[ ] and slaughters

G A prince of nations [will arise]

[ ]

My construal of the text differs from previous expositors in that I

take Nwry#$xn to be the end of a bicolon instead of the first word of

a colon. Eisenman and Wise, for instance, read [brq Nwdb(y Nymm(]

)tnyd[m] wbr Nyry#$xnw, "Peoples will make war, and battles shall multi-

ply among the nations." Besides erring in some material readings

(see above), this sentence cannot mean what it is said to mean: the

past tense wbr cannot be translated "shall multiply."

Puech, on the other hand, understands Nwry#$xn (the proper read-

ing) as a singular, principally because he takes the singular as an

attributive adjective modifying it.⁶ He reconstructs the whole line as

)tnydmb br Nwry#$xnw [Nymm( Nyb hwhl brq], "Il y aura la guerre entre les

peuples et un grand massacre dans les provinces" (similarly Collins).

The problem with this is that there is no such word as Nwry#$xn

"slaughter," described by Puech as "une forme nouvelle avec affixe

-ôn."⁷ In fact, the word is the plural of the normal Aramaic form

wry#$xn: forms ending in -û take the plural -wân, thus Nwfry#$xn.

If Nwry#$n is plural, then br syntactically must belong to another

line. There is room to restore an entire bicolon before br. perhaps

Nwry#$xnw[l+q P) brq db(y )lk], "All shall make war, even killing and

slaughters," or the like. The next line introduces a new bicolon, and a

new figure appears: "a prince of nations." The Akkadian prophecy

texts,⁸ which 4Q246 so much resembles, commonly speak in this way

6. Puech, "Fragment," 111.

7. Ibid.

8. The Akkadian prophecy texts are the so-called "Text A," the Marduk Prophecy,

the Shulgi Prophecy, the Uruk Prophecy, and the Dynastic Prophecy. Bibliographical

52 Bulletin for Biblical Research 5

of a "prince" (rubû) "arising" to rule over the land (ellâ rubû), "a

prince will arise" or "a king will arise" (šarru ellâ).

[ ] | | Nyrc[mw] rwt) Klm H

)(r) l( hwhl br[w] | | [ ] I

H The king of Assyria and Egypt

[ ]

I [ ]

And he will be chief over the land

These are the remnants of two bicola. Previous commentators

have taken the mention of the "king of Assyria and Egypt" to be the

second colon in the stich and have reconstructed accordingly. Puech

restores the line Nyrc[mw rwt) Klm[ Nwbrqyw N/)yklm Nwmwqy] "Les rois se

dresseront, et se ligueront/feront la guerre le roi d'Assyrie et (le roi)

d'Égypte." This is neither good poetry nor good Aramaic (the verb brq

does not mean "make war"!) and can be safely rejected.

Eisenman and Wise restore very differently: l) M( Klm Mwqy d(]

Nyrc[mw] rwt) Klm [hwhlw, "until the King of the people of God arises.

He will become the King of Syria and Egypt." They identify this king

with the "Son of God" mentioned later in the text. For reasons that

will be explained below, this suggestion must also be rejected. Here I

will only note that the four-beat lines they propose are out of keep-

ing with the style of the document.

There is in fact no good reason to see a change in the referent of

this line from the previous line. The "prince of nations" previously

introduced is further characterized as "King of Assyria and Egypt."

The following line, after a missing colon, predicts that this king will

be "prince/leader over the land."

Fitzmyer chooses this line to introduce the "Son of God" figure.

The "great carnage" of line 5—which we have had reason to reject as

a translation—Fitzmyer sees as part of a following clause: ydwdg Nwdb(y

rwt) Klm, "which the bands of the king of Assyria will cause." Then the

text continues this way, as Fitzmyer sees it: P) Mrb Nwhm( hwhl] Nyrcmw

)(r) l( hwhl br [Krb, "and Egypt shall be with them. But your son shall

also be great upon the earth." This reconstruction must be rejected for

two reasons. The first is paleographical. Fitzmyer's proposed restora-

tion for line 6, consisting of 15 letters and spaces, is too short to fill

in the necessary space—about 20 spaces—before the word Klm. This

is evident in Fitzmyer's reconstructed Column 1⁹ where his line 6

is much shorter than the following line, whereas in the photograph

references to them will be given below; for a general survey, see John H. Walton, An-

cient Israelite Literature in Its Cultural Context (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1989) 217-27.

9. Fitzmyer, "4Q246," 157.

COOK: 4Q246 53

they both appear to be about the same length. The reverse is the prob-

lem with his line 7, where he proposes to put 22 letters/spaces

(Krb . . . hwhl) in an area that would allow 17 or 18 at the most. The sec-

ond reason is that his restored text is prose, not poetry.

Puech also chooses this line to introduce the "Son of God" figure:

)(r) l( hwhl br[)whw Nrx) Klm Mwqy], "Se lévera un autre/dernier roi,

et lui, it sera grand sur la terre." This reconstruction is better than

Fitzmyer's both as poetry and as paleography, but there is no reason

to introduce the "Son of God" at this point. This will become plain in

the discussion below.

Further similarities to the Akkadian prophecy genre can be de-

tected in these lines. In the Uruk prophecy, for instance, on two occa-

sions it is stated of a future king that he shall "become master over

the land" (kibrāti erbetti ibêl).¹⁰ Another text mentions a prince, rubûm,

who shall not "become master over the land," lā ibêl māta.¹¹

[hl] Nw#$[m]#$y )lkw | | Nwdb([t#$y ] J

J [ ] will be enslaved

And all will serve him

Previous studies have seen in the description here the dawning

of a new age of peace and prosperity, in keeping with the prevailing

view that the reference is to the "Son of God." Fitzmyer reconstructs

the prosaic [hl] Nw#$m#$y )lkw Nwdb([y hm( Ml#$ )ymm( lkw] "and all the

peoples shall make peace with him, and they shall all serve him."

This is too long for the available space by about four letters. Puech

similarly restores [hl] Nw#$m#$y )lkw Nwdb([y hm( Ml#$ )yklm/)ymm(], "Les

peuples/rois feront la paix avec lui et lous le serviront." Eisenman

and Wise's reconstruction is along the same lines.

However, I understand this portion of the text to belong to a

comprehensive description of the appearance of a powerful ruler.

This appearance is introduced by tribulation and war. The leader (br)

is, or is connected in some way with, the "king of Assyria and

Egypt"; he will become master over the entire land. The consequence

of this mastery is described in the present bicolon: The lands or peo-

ples of the land shall be subdued or enslaved and they shall serve the

world ruler. The restoration of nwdb(t#$y is simply a guess, of course;

it is no more certain than the Nwdb(y, restored by almost everyone else.

(The word Nydb(, "slaves," is also a possible restoration: hwhl )lkw

Nydb(, "all shall become slaves," or the like.) Similar statements are

10. H. Flunger and S. A. Kaufman, "A New Akkadian Prophecy Text," JAOS 95

(1975) 372. The sentences referred to are in lines 10 and 16 of the reverse.

11. "Text A" in A. K. Grayson and W. G. Lambert, "Akkadian Prophecies," JCS 18

(1964) 13-14.

54 Bulletin for Biblical Research 5

made in the Akkadian "Dynastic Prophecy" of a king who shall "op-

press the land" (eli māti idannin) and to whom the lands will have to

bring tribute (mātāti kalašina biltum x[ . . . . . ].¹²

hnkty hm#$bw | | )rqty )b[r hrb Nk] K

K [Likewise his son] will be called The Great

And by his name he will be designated.

This couplet is crucial for the construal of the whole but is unfor-

tunately broken. Most previous commentators have opted to recon-

struct it on the model of II, 1. Thus Fitzmyer: )rqty )b[r l) rb )whw],

"he shall be called son of the great God." This reconstruction is too

long by about four spaces: Eisenman and Wise's )rqty )b[r l) rb] is

almost identical, but a better fit. Puech's )rqty )b[r )rm rb], "le fils de

Grand Souverain it sera appelé," is similar.

Obviously the understanding of this line is governed by the un-

derstanding of the text as a whole. Previous commentators, interpret-

ing the text to deal almost exclusively with the "Son of God," have

virtually ignored the context. Woe and tribulation precede and follow

the introduction of the personage in this line. There are incomplete

references to at least one ruler in Column I, who may be the "king of

Assyria and Egypt"; but then, in II, 2 there is a reference to "their

kingdom." What is the antecedent of the pronoun? I propose that the

text deals with the rise of one world ruler, who is then succeeded by

another, his son. The son shall be designated by his father's name. It

is their kingdom (Nhtwklm) that is referred to in II, 2.

The mention of a successor to a king is also a feature of the Akka-

dian prophecies. The son is characterized in the same way as the

father. The "Dynastic Prophecy" mentions an anonymous king who

will "exercise sovereignty" for three years; and "after his death, his

son will ascend the throne . . . but he will not be master of the land."¹³

Even closer to our text, but with a positive spin, is the Uruk prophecy:

A king will arise in Uruk who will provide justice in the land. . . .

After him his son will arise as king in Uruk and become master over

the world. He will exercise rule and kingship in Uruk and his dynasty

will be established forever. The kings of Uruk will exercise rulership

like the gods.¹⁴

Further comments on this interpretation of the text will be found

in the section "Interpretation" below.

12. A. K. Grayson, Babylonian Historical-Literary Texts (Toronto: University of

Toronto Press, 1975) 32-33.

13. Ibid.

14. Hunger and Kaufman, "A New Akkadian Prophecy," 372-73.

COOK: 4Q246 55

hnwrqy Nwyl) rbw | | rm)ty l) yd hrb A

A He will be called "The Son of God,"

And the son of the Most High they will call him.

This, the most famous line of the text, presents no particular

problems of translation. The interpretation, of course, is an entirely

different matter (see "Interpretation").

Fitzmyer's translation of the first colon, "he shall be hailed as the

Son of God," is too highly colored. The meaning of rm)ty, in this

context is simply "be called." Fitzmyer's reference to Luke 1:32, 35

also involves an inaccuracy. "The absence of definite articles in the

Lucan usage," he says, " is indicative of the Semitism involved, which

is now clearly manifest in this Aramaic text."¹⁵ In fact, the Aramaic

expressions are definite, not indefinite: l) yd hrb is the genitive con-

struction with the anticipatory pronominal suffix, which can only

mean "The Son of God," while Luke 1:35 has anarthrous ui(o_j qeou=.

Nwyl( rb also should be taken as definite, since Nwyl( is a quasi-proper

name. The proper Aramaic adjective for "high, highest" is yl(; the

use of the Hebraic form indicates that a title is being used.

)wht Nhtwklm Nk | | )tyzx yd )yqyzk B

B Like the meteors that you saw,

So will be their kingdom.

Puech, Milik, Garcia-Martinez, and Fitzmyer all read )twzx in-

stead of )tyzx, with translations such as "like comets of the vision."¹⁶

Although yodh and waw are quite similar in this text, the yodh has a

slightly larger head. In any case, the emphatic state of the word wzx,

"vision," is )wzz, not )twzx. Eisenman and Wise and Collins correctly

read )tyzx, "you saw."

The line confirms that the framework of the text is the interpre-

tation of a vision and gives some information about the content of that

vision. The visionary, probably a king, saw "meteors." It is interesting

that the Akkadian prophecies have strong links to astrological omens.

In one text, a series of prophetic announcements is introduced by an

astrological omen protasis, "[If the star(?)] . . . rises and passes over

[from] east to west, . . . there is a sulphur [fire] with . . . going along

beside it. . . . "¹⁷ Another prophecy is introduced by "If a torch (i.e., a

meteorite) flashes from the height of the sky to the horizon, [. . .] shines

very brightly . . . " The prophecy of 4Q246 seems therefore to include

a divinatory interpretation of a vision of astrological phenomena, like

some of the Akkadian prophecies.

15. Fitzmyer, "4Q246," 162.

16. Fitzmyer, "4Q246," 163; Puech, "Fragment," 167.

17. R. D. Biggs, "More Babylonian Prophecies,' " Iraq 29 (1967) 117-32.

56 Bulletin for Biblical Research 5

In this couplet, the rapid passage of the meteor serves as a token

of the short duration of "their kingdom," that of the "Son of God"

and his father.

Nw#$dy )lkw | | )(d) l( Nwklmy Nyn#$ C

C (A few) years they will reign over the land,

And they will crush everyone (or everything).

The joint (or successive) rules are contrasted with the eternal rule

of God to follow: they shall reign only a few years over the land. The

expression Nyn#$ "years" is an antonym of Ml(, as in the Mishnaic

Hebrew phrases Nyn#$ Nynq "temporary possession" and Mlw( Nynq "eternal

possession."

A standard feature of the Akkadian prophecies is an indication

of the length of the reigns of the anonymous kings whose rule is pre-

dicted: "A prince will arise and rule for eighteen years. . . . A prince

will arise and rule for thirteen years. . . . A prince will arise but his

days will be short and he will not be master of the land," and so on.¹⁸

In 4Q246, no time is specified, but the implication is that the reign

will be short.

Despite the transitory nature of their reign, it will be marked by

violence and strife. The placement of this couplet and the next one is

crucial: it comes after the introduction of the "son of God" and be-

fore the description of the reign of peace that accompanies the mani-

festation of the people of God. The "son of God" does not usher in

the kingdom of God, but belongs to the description of the woes pre-

ceding it. He must be a negative figure.

hnydml hnydmw | | #$wdy M(l M( D

D People will crush people,

Nation (will crush) nation.

Previous scholars have translated hnydm as "province," a meaning

it has in some Aramaic contexts. In Jewish Aramaic, however, it

gradually broadens its reference to mean "land, nation," and the

like, as here.¹⁹

Puech and Fitzmyer have quite properly referred to the parallels

to the expressions used here: Isa 19:2 (city against city and kingdom

against kingdom), Mark 13:8 par. (nation will make war upon nation,

kingdom upon kingdom), 4 Ezra 13:31 (people against people and

kingdom against kingdom). This sort of expression may have a Meso-

18. Grayson and Lambert, “Akkadian Prophecies,” 13-14.

19. There are many instances in Tg. Jon., e.g., Isa 37:10, Jer 16:15; 23:3; 27:6; 40:11;

Ezek 21:24; 22:23; 36:24; 39:27, etc.

COOK: 4Q246 57

potamian background and is found in one Akkadian prophecy, which

says that during one king's rule "city [will rebel] against city, tribe

against tribe" (alu iti alī bitu iti bitī [inakkir]).²⁰

brx Nm xwny )lkw | | l) M( Mwqy d( E

E Until the people of God shall arise,

And all will have rest from the sword.

II, 4 begins with a slight vacat, the usual Qumranian signal for

the beginning of a paragraph. Here it signals a change in the direc-

tion of the narrative. David Flusser has discerned the importance of

this change in topic, that is, that the pivot of the entire prophecy

turns on the entity now being introduced, the "people of God."²¹ In

this couplet, and in those which follow, the future blessings all attend

the rise of the people of God. It is the people's appearance that is cru-

cial, not that of the "Son of God."

The "rise" of the people of God is formally similar to the "rise" of

anonymous kings in the Akkadian prophecies, which are structured

around sentences beginning "a prince/king shall arise," followed by

characterization of the reign.

+w#$qb htxr) lkw | | Ml( twklm htwklm F

F His/their kingdom is an eternal kingdom,

And all his/their ways are in truth.

The phrase Ml( twklm htwklm, "his kingdom is an eternal king-

dom," appears also in Dan 3:33 and 4:31 in Nebuchadnezzar's praise

of God, as well as in Dan 7:27, where the antecedent may be "God,"

or possibly "the people of the saints of the Most High." The question

of antecedent also arises here: Is it God, or the people of God, or the

"Son of God"? Fitzmyer takes the third masculine suffixes h- to refer

to the redeemer Son of God. Of all possibilities, that one is the most

remote, since the antecedent is four lines away. In II, 7 the suffix on

hly) clearly refers to someone other than God, and probably all the

suffixes up to II, 9 refer to the people of God.

It would be easy to take the reference to the "eternal kingdom" as

purely hymnic, but it too is formally similar to time references of the

Akkadian prophecies. Usually, after mentioning the rise of a future

prince, the duration of his reign is given. In this case, the duration is

eternal, as in the climax to the Uruk prophecy: "He will exercise rule

and kingship in Uruk and his dynasty will be established forever"

(belûtu u šarrûtu ina aereb Uruk ippuš adi ulla palušu ikānu).

20. Grayson and Lambert, "Akkadian Prophecies," 17.

21. Flusser, "Hubris," 33.

58 Bulletin for Biblical Research 5

Ml#$ db(y )lkw | | +#$qb )(r) Nydy G

G He/they shall judge the land in truth,

And all will make peace.

The rule of redeemed Israel over the land and its beneficent

effects are described. The first line of the bicolon is very close to the

climax of the Uruk prophecy (Reverse, I, 17): "he will provide justice

in the land, he will give right decisions for the land" (dīna māti idānu

purussē māti iparras).

Nwdgsy hl )tnydm lkw | | Psy )(r) Nm brx H

H The sword will cease from the land,

And all the nations will bow down to him/them.

The blessings of the future age continue to be described. The

"golden age" of righteousness also comes forth in the Akkadian proph-

ecies, as in "Text A": "The land will rest secure, fare well, (and its)

people will [enjoy] prosperity: (mătu aburriš uššab libbi māti itāb nisu

nuhša imman).²²

The second colon gives one pause; could the people of God legit-

imately receive the act of prostration? And yet the following bicolon

could only refer to the people of God. There is a parallel in Dan 2:46

where Nebuchadnezzar is said to have fallen down and worshiped

Daniel, or prostrated himself before him.

brq hl db(y )wh | | hly)b )br l) I

I The Great God is his/their help,

He himself will fight for him/them.

The sentences have been divided differently by others. Eisenman

and Wise translate, "As for the Great God, with His help he will make

war." They evidently take )br l) as the head of a casus pendens

construction, with )wh referring to the "Son of God." Such an under-

standing ignores the poetic structure of the text and also leaves hl

untranslated. Fitzmyer and Puech read db(y, as db(w and therefore

must read )wh as the copula of the first colon: "The great God is him-

self his might, he shall make war for him."²³ This bicolon produces an

unlikely 4 + 2 stress pattern: it is also unclear why the poet should re-

sort to a participle (db() when the rest of the verbs in the passage are

imperfect.

The word lyf)v, "help," is found in Ps 88:5 and a related form is

found in Ps 22:20 (twly)). The only early attestation in Aramaic of this

word is in a proper name appearing on an Aramaic endorsement:

22. Grayson and Lambert, "Akkadian Prophecies," 12, 14.

23. Fitzmyer, "4Q246," 165.

COOK: 4Q246 59

yly)nmr, "Rimmon is my help" (Akkadian ^dKUR-a-a-li).²⁴ Neverthe-

less, because of the vocalism of the word and the occurrences in Syr-

iac, the Hebrew instances have always been considered Aramaisms.²⁵

Fitzmyer notes that the beth on hly)b is beth essentiae, denoting

identity.²⁶ A similar phrase in Hebrew occurs in Exod 18:4: yb) yhl)

yrz(b, "the God of my father is my help"; and Aramaic instances are

common in the targumim, for example, Tg. Onq. Gen 21:20: hyd(sb

hwh ywyd )rmym, "the command of the Lord was his help" (translating

Heb. r(nh t) Myhl) yhyw).

The pronoun )wh is emphatic: "it is he who shall fight for him/

them."

yhwmdq hmry Nhlkw | | hdyb Ntny Nymm( J

J He will put the peoples in his/their power,

And all of them he will place before him/them.

The expression dyb Ntn is especially frequent in biblical Hebrew

with the meaning "to deliver into the power of." The verb hmry here

may have the meaning "throw down in defeat," or, more likely, "put,

place" before someone at their disposal. God will put the Gentile na-

tions into the power of his people, making of them a kind of gift.

[hl )(r)] ymwht lkw | | Ml( N+l#$ hn+l#$ K

K His dominion is an eternal dominion,

And all the deeps [of the earth are his].

The phrase Ml( N+l#$ hn+l#$ finds an exact parallel in Dan 4:31

(referring to God), and 7:14 (referring to the "son of man").

The second colon is restored variously. Puech suggests ymwht lkw

[hl Nw(m#$y )(r)], "tous les abîmes de la terre lui obéiront."²⁷ This is

overlong for the style of this text, as is Fitzmyer's )l )(r)] ymwht lkw

[hnm Nwpqty, "and none of the abysses of the earth shall prevail against

it."²⁸ Since the style favors a three-stress line, the best alternative

would be something like [hl )(r)] ymwht lkw, "all the deeps of the

earth are his."

The question of the antecedent of the pronouns comes up again

in this colon. Since God's action has been the focus of the preceding

two bicola, it is likely that the pronouns refer to him in this one. The

24. M. Maraqten, Die semitischen Personnenamen in den alt- und reichsaramäischen

Inschriften aus Vorderasien (Hildesheim: Olms, 1988) 125.

25. M. Wagner, Die lexikalischen und grammatikalischen Aramaismen im alttesta-

mentlichen Hebräisch (BZAW 96; Berlin; Töpelmann, 1966) 23-24, §§11-12.

26. Fitzmyer, "4Q246," 165.

27. Puech, 'Fragment," 109.

28. Fitzmyer, "4Q246," 166.

60 Bulletin for Biblical Research 5

reference to "deeps" also makes more sense as an allusion to the

scope of divine power.

INTERPRETATION

4Q246 has been of particular interest to New Testament scholars, be-

cause of its likeness to the words of the Annunciation in Luke 1:32-33:

He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High; and

the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he

will reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there

will be no end [RSV].

Although there is indeed a prima facie likeness between the pas-

sages, the study of 4Q246 has suffered from a tendency to read it in

the light of the Gospel passage, as a bit of hitherto unknown Jewish

messianic lore that prefigures New Testament christology. According

to Collins, "The Son of God may be identified with confidence as a

messianic figure."²⁹ Fitzmyer, although resisting the use of the term

"messiah," also endorses the idea that the Son of God is a "coming

Jewish ruler . . . who [will] be a successor to the Davidic throne."³⁰

But Flusser and García Martínez have identified the major prob-

lem with this interpretation, that is, that the reign of the “Son of

God,” far from being a time of blessing, ushers in a time of warfare

and strife.³¹ The true pivot of the text is the mention of the "people

of God," introduced after a vacat in II, 4. Flusser's solution is to con-

strue the Son of God as an evil figure, indeed as the Antichrist. Milik

too sees the Son as a negative character.

The text then climaxes not in the appearance of the "Son of

God," but in the people of God. Proponents of the "messianic" inter-

pretation have responded to this criticism differently. Collins appeals

to the repetitiveness of apocalyptic literature to explain why the rise

of the Son of God and the rise of the people of God is interrupted by

a description of war.

It is typical of apocalyptic literature that it does not tell its story in

simple sequential order, but often goes over the same ground again

and again to make its point. For example, Daniel 7 recounts a famous

vision in which "one like a son of man" comes on the clouds of heaven

(verse 13) and is given a kingdom. An interpretation follows, which

says that "the holy ones of the Most High" receive the kingdom (verse

18). Finally, there is an elaboration of this interpretation, according to

which the kingdom is given to "the people of the holy ones of the Most

29. Collins, "Pre-Christian 'Son of God'," 35.

30. Fitzmyer, "4Q246," 174.

31. Flusser, "Hubris," 33, 35.

COOK: 4Q246 61

High" (verse 27). The giving of the kingdom, then, is narrated three

times, but these are not three separate events.³²

The analogy with Daniel is misconceived. As is plain even from

Collins' summary, the giving of the kingdom in Daniel 7 is not nar-

rated three times; it is narrated once, and interpreted twice. Every

mention of it is in a different context. The events Collins sees as

beneficent in 4Q246—the rise of the Son of God and of the people of

God—are discrete events separated by tribulation, not reiterations

or reinterpretations of the same event.

García Martínez recognizes that it is "incomprehensible that, af-

ter an apparent peace-making arrangement [in I, 8] . . . the text con-

tinues to talk of one people crushing another people and one city

another one [II, 3]."³³ His solution is to interpret the Son of God as an

angel, named in other Qumran texts as Michael or the Prince of

Light, whose "intervention unleashes the final stages of the eschato-

logical confrontation . . . [which] ends in a final and definitive

period of peace and in the eternal reign of Israel."³⁴ But there is no

indication in this text that the "son of God" intervenes to help the

people of God; instead, the rise of the people is decisive. The "people

of God" are never brought into any relation to the "son of God." Fur-

thermore, as already noted, after the introduction of the "son of

God," the text speaks of "their kingdom" (Nhtwklm) lasting only a

short time (II, 1-2); in such a context the antecedent of "their" can

only be the son of God and his predecessor(s).

In the end, then, the "positive" interpretation of the son of God

fails to survive a close reading of the text.

The principal "negative" interpretations of 4Q246 are those of

Flusser and Milik. Flusser construed the text as an early Jewish at-

testation of the Antichrist myth. The "son of God" is an eschatologi-

cal figure, the wicked ruler of the last kingdom, and his claim to

divine status is blasphemous hubris. His disappearance coincides

with the rise of the people of God.

Flusser's analysis has been properly faulted for its uncritical reli-

ance for parallels on Christian or post-Christian texts as the parallels

to 4Q246.³⁵ If the Antichrist is called "son of God" in those texts, that

is more likely to be a reverse image of the Christian confession of Jesus

as Son than any independent Jewish tradition. And yet, as we shall

show, if the "son of God" is a negative figure in this pre-Christian text

32. Collins, "Pre-Christian 'Son of God'," 36.

33. Garcia Martinez, "Eschatological Figure," 170.

34. Ibid. 178-79.

35. Such as 2 Thess 2:1-12, Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-26, Didache 16:4, Assumption of

Moses, the Oracle of Hystaspes.

62 Bulletin for Biblical Research 5

we have at once both an authentic Jewish source for the growth of the

legend of the Antichrist (in this context admittedly an anachronistic

term) and a possible background for the condemnation of Jesus as

blasphemer.³⁶

Milik understands 4Q246 as an ex eventu prophecy speaking of

the rise of Alexander Balas (the "Son of God") whose coins bore his

image with the legend qeo/patwr or Deo patre natus.³⁷ "God," in this

case, is Antiochus IV Epiphanes, whose son Balas claimed to be.

Milik claims that Balas's assumption of the title "son of God" was

meant to honor Antiochus's pretensions, and that Balas also desig-

nated himself the successor of Alexander the Great. Milik restores

I, 9 as hnkty hm#$bw )rqty )b[r )klm tplx], "he shall style himself suc-

cessor of the Great King and call himself by his name." All this seems

overingenious; nothing else in 4Q246 points to the reign of Balas, al-

though Milik is right to see the Seleucid period as the most probable

background of the text. The Hellenistic rulers of the Near East all in

varying degrees adopted the language of divinity for themselves and

all accepted divine honors, as did their Roman successors. If the re-

construction given here is correct, the historical referent must be

sought in a king of both Assyria (= Syria) and Egypt who is suc-

ceeded by a arrogant son of the same name.

The Akkadian prophecies provide the most convincing back-

ground for 4Q246. In attempting to reassess its purpose and nature,

they must be given a prominent role. A summary of the traits they

have in common with 4Q246 shows the general similarity.

4Q246 Akkadian Prophecies

"tribulation will come upon the land" "there will be a hard time in the land"

(I, E) (Uruk, obv., line 9)

"confusion, disturbance, and disorder

in the land" (Text A, first side, ii:13)

"a prince of nations [will arise]" (I, G) "a prince will arise" (common to all)

"the people of God will arise" (II, E)

"he will be master over the land" (I, I) "he will become master over the

land" (Uruk, rev., 10, 16; Marduk

Prophecy III:20')

oppression and submission "he shall oppress the land" (Dynastic

Prophecy, ii:14)

36. Gregory Jenks briefly discusses Flusser's reading of 4Q246 in his Origins and

Early Development of the Antichrist Myth (BZNW 59; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1991) 180-82.

He is not convinced that the text reflects a pre-Christian Jewish belief in the Anti-

christ but allows that it may contain beliefs about the "endtyrant" a figure who

influenced later Christian belief about the Antichrist.

37. Milik briefly summarizes his view in "Les modeles arameens du livre d'Esther

dans la grotte 4 de Qumrân," RevQ 59 (1992) 383-84.

COOK: 4Q246 63

4Q246

"[his son] will be called Great, and by

his name he will be designated" (I, K)

"like the meteors that you saw, so will

be their kingdom" (II, B)

"people will crush people, nation will

crush nation" (II, D)

"the sword" as symbol of violence (II,

E, H)

"(a few) years they will reign over the

land" (II, C)

"his/their kingdom is an eternal

kingdom" (II, F)

"he/they shall judge the land in

truth" (II, G)

"The Great God is his help, he himself

shall fight for him" (II, I)

Akkadian Prophecies

"the lands will be given together to

the king of Babylon and Nippur"

(Shulgi Prophecy, III:1')

"after him his son will arise as king in

Uruk and become master over the

world" (Uruk, rev., 16)

"after him his son shall sit on the

throne" (Dynastic Prophecy ii:9)

Astronomical omens of Text B

"city against city, tribe against tribe"

(Text B 15)

"friends will cast one another to the

ground with the sword, comrades

will destroy one another with the

sword" (Shulgi V)

"he shall reign for X years" (common

to all)

"his dynasty shall be established for-

ever" (Uruk, rev., 17)

"he will provide justice in the land,

he will give right decisions for the

land" (Uruk, rev., 17)

"Enlil, Shamash, and Marduk will go

at the side of his army" (Dynastic iii:

15-16)

"I [Marduk], god of all, will befriend

him, he will destroy Elam" (Marduk

21'-22')

Besides these common elements and expressions, 4Q246 shares

the method of the Akkadian prophecies, that is, to "foretell" history

in terms of the rise of a series of unnamed rulers, their reigns

characterized as either disastrous or propitious. The final ruler in the

series (where it is preserved) always inaugurates an era of prosper-

ity, peace and true worship. The prophecies—and, we may assume,

4Q246—are designed as political propaganda to support and justify

the final reign. The Uruk prophecy, for instance, was apparently

composed to muster support for the fragile reign of Awel-Marduk,

son of Nebuchadnezzar II (6th century BCE).³⁸

38. Hunger and Kaufman, "New Akkadian Prophecy Text," 374-75; Tremper

Longman III, Fictional Akkadian Autobiography: A Generic and Comparative Study (Winona

Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1991) 149.

64 Bulletin for Biblical Research 5

The similarities must not be exaggerated. The Akkadian texts

emphasize the restoration or rebuilding of temples or the return of

cultic objects to their proper location as crucial elements in the re-

turn of prosperity. This feature is completely absent in 4Q246. The

final "ruler" in 4Q246 is a group, "the people of God," which is with-

out comparison in the Akkadian prophecies. The Aramaic text is an

adaptation of the Akkadian genre for a particular purpose.

What is that purpose? If we assume that 4Q246 is to be charac-

terized broadly as political propaganda, then the Maccabean revolt

immediately suggests itself as the true referent of "the rise of the

people of God." The "son of God," in that case, would be Antiochus

IV Epiphanes, and his father would be Antiochus III the Great, a sup-

position that fits our textual reconstruction ("[also his son] shall be

called Great, and by his name [Antiochus] he shall be designated").

The extension of the Seleucid realm under Antiochus III to include

Palestine might be referred to in the fragmentary first column, and

the continual battles with the Ptolemies could accurately be de-

scribed as "people against people, nation against nation." This recon-

struction has the added advantage of placing 4Q246 within the same

putative time frame as Daniel, the canonical text most similar to it.³⁹

A reasonable guess about the origin of 4Q246 may be hazarded.

Its message is almost a reversal of the Akkadian prophecy it most

resembles, the Uruk prophecy. The conclusion of that text prophesies

the rise of a benevolent ruler, who is succeeded by a son who, as

world ruler, inaugurates an eternal dynasty "like the gods":

A king will arise in Uruk who will provide justice in the land and

will give the right decisions for the land. . . . He will fill the rivers and

fields with abundant yield. After him his son will arise as king in Uruk

and become master over the world. He will exercise rule and kingship

in Uruk and his dynasty will be established forever. The king of Uruk

will exercise rulership like the gods. (Reverse, 11, 15-19)

4Q246 reflects a similar scenario of the rise of a decisive father and

son, who gain power over the entire land; but their dynasty will be

transitory. The eternal kingdom belongs to the "people of God," as do

the blessings of peace, justice, and prosperity. It seems probable that

39. See Puech, "Fragment," 127. Scholars have also noted the influence of the

Akkadian prophecy genre on Daniel, such as Joyce Baldwin, "Some Literary Affinities

of the Book of Daniel," TynBul 30 (1979) 77-99. She argues that the influence of the

Akkadian genre on Daniel 8-12 points to a sixth century BC date for that book, since

Daniel is "related not only to the second century pseudepigrapha but also to Babylo-

nian writings of great antiquity" (p. 99). If 4Q246 is a second-century adaptation of the

Akkadian prophecy genre, this argument is invalidated, since it demonstrates the vi-

tality of the Akkadian genre in Palestine in the second century. It is possible of course

(but not, to my mind, likely) that 4Q246 is to be dated before the second century.

COOK: 4Q246 65

the advent of the Seleucids was accompanied by the dissemination of

propaganda, including ex eventu prophecies of the Akkadian type. The

Judean opposition may well have produced counter-"prophecies" of

its own undercutting the Seleucid ones. 4Q246 would have been one

of them. The Danielic literature, especially Daniel 8-12, would also fit

well here.

But the particular spin placed on the "prophecy"—understand-

ing the "son of God" in a negative sense—is best understood as an

inner-Jewish development. A counter-prophecy to a Seleucid broad-

side along the lines of the Uruk prophecy need not have employed the

same divinizing language. Why might the writer of 4Q246 have done

so? Possibly because polemic against the divine pretensions of foreign

rulers was already a feature of Israelite literature. Such a critique

finds expression primarily in Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28, but also, I be-

lieve, in Psalm 82. In Isaiah 14 the king of Babylon (perhaps originally

Assyria) is addressed as the "son of Dawn," a divine being:

Once you thought in your heart, "I will climb to the sky;

Higher than the stars of God I will set my throne.

I will sit in the mount of assembly,

On the summit of Zaphon:

I will mount the back of a cloud—I will match the Most High".

(Isa 14:13-14, NJPV)

The same kind of heaven-storming arrogance is attributed to the

king of Tyre in Ezekiel 28:

You have been so haughty and have said, "I am a god [or: I am El];

I sit enthroned like a god in the heart of the seas," whereas you are

not a god but a man, though you deemed your mind equal to a god's.

(Ezek 28:2, NJP V)

Lastly, Psalm 82 is usually taken today as a myth of the coming

supremacy of Yahweh among the gods; but in fact the psalm is an-

other example of the Israelite critique of the divine kingship ideol-

ogy, as the reference to "princes" (Myr#&) may indicate.

I had taken you for divine beings (Myhl)); sons of the Most High, all

of you; but you shall die as men do, fall like any prince (Myr#$h dx)k).

Arise, O God, judge the earth, for all the nations are your possession.

(Ps 82:6-8, NJPV)

All these passages highlight the contrast between the grandiose

pretensions of the "divine" kings and their inevitable fall into ruin.

The same contrast lies at the foundation of 4Q246. The world ruler

and his "divine" son, despite their superhuman power, pass away,

only to be replaced by the people of God, who alone are favored with

divine blessings. The Qumran composition exploits the traditional

66 Bulletin for Biblical Research 5

Israelite disdain for "divine" kings in a pastiche of a genre generally

used to support that ideology. Seen from this perspective, 4Q246 is a

sample of Jewish counter-propaganda to Seleucid claims, turning the

Mesopotamian prophecy genre against itself, and utilizing a power-

ful Israelite aversion to human claims to divinity.

Whether 4Q246, understood in this light, can still make some

contribution to understanding the New Testament's use of the phrase

"Son of God" to describe Jesus remains to be seen. It has long been an

axiom with one school of New Testament exegetes that the early Pal-

estinian church used the phrase in an unremarkable "adoptionist"

sense that no Jew would have objected to; it was the later Hellenizing

Gentile party that elevated it into a title with overtones of divinity.

Yet in the Palestinian 4Q246, "the Son of God" is used as a title,

indeed—if the above exegesis is correct—with overtones of (spuri-

ous) divinity that the author implicitly censures. The early Aramaic

speaking church could not have been unaware of the implications (di-

vinity), or the dangers (blasphemy), of using the phrase as a title. If it

did so, it must be supposed that it was willing to face the dangers of

the title for the sake of its implications. The confession of Jesus as

"the Son of God"—and the Jewish reaction to this claim with charges

of blasphemy (e.g., in Mark 14:64)—may belong to an earlier stage of

New Testament development than some scholars have been willing to

admit. In any case, as Fitzmyer said in the same context two decades

ago, "much remains to be discussed."⁴⁰

40. Fitzmyer, "Contribution of Qumran Aramaic," 107.