Book Of Enoch, Applied To These Latter Days.

looking forward to your next post OP

hope all is well with you

; )

Now a more baffling question from me. What does "SL?" mean? I checked around but have not found its meaning.

Don't worry waterman, you could never teach anything of importance of your own understanding. However appreciate the "SL" explanation. Not privy to many of the abbreviations of these times...lol. Makes sense though, now that I see it.

Of course, I learn new things every day and hope to continue until I die. I am not too prideful to admit that, just like you, or maybe not..lol. Look at your "Elijah returns 4th of July 2012" thread. I once again try to explain why your theory about the witnesses is all wrong..lol.

We are encouraged to know the Word. You claim scripture makes no difference more or less, yet, Jesus came knowing the Word, and exampled it so. You seek after the ways of the world and not the ways of Christ. Your only objective is your own deceitful means of promotion thru any means including lies and falsehoods and teaching contrary to God's desires! Although Israel, the nation must remained blind until the fulness of the gentiles has come. However, this isn't necessary applicable to the man/prophet/Israel/prince. Unless, of course you can show the word man in the passage of the Word. Otherwise again it is but your theory/philosophy/interpretation/imaginative thoughts. You like adding words that are never spoken in the Word. Good thing you was not responsible for interpreting the scripture verbatim in the past. We would have a mess that would have never prepared us toward the correct way of salvation!

Bend down and pick-up the leftovers. Ruth was not an example of God's abundance or blessing, but His means only for her survival thru poor disregarded leftovers, nothing more. To pick-up that which you have not toiled for in its beginning is far less revealing in its reward/satisfaction. Without scriptural understanding of the deep things unrevealed, the abundance of understanding is null in the minds of the seekers of the leftovers. Such men are not the seers of the meaning of the Word, but the blind, seeking survival off the thoughts and often poor understandings of others! Waterman, yours is a philosophical view-point, as most of your theories are. Philosophy is contrary to the Word:

[Col.2:8kjv] Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

Grow-up waterman, and get a life. Take your own advice and read the Word. Stop making excuses for why you don't necessarily need the Word. Because you only need to pick-up the leftovers of others way of thinking, or you have a computer to do the work, or your favoritism gives you an excuse to by-pass the Word. Only having the Word within you brings forth blessings of surprise, through your own toil/reward, not that of another. Without experiencing the Word thru much study how could God otherwise approve of another means.

[2Tim.2:15kjv] Study to show thyself approved unto the Lord.

Will the two Witnesses will preach about the Book of Enoch and what really happen on those ancient times?

Will the two Witnesses will be two males from the Earth that will share a portion of the spirit of two Prophets, similar to John the Baptist sharing the spirit of Elijah within his own spirit?

Does Jesus refused to teach about the Book of Enoch because those times the people would be easily confused and become worshipers of angels rather than God?

Are we now better prepared to understand how an angel can impregnated a woman, by correctly explaining the term "overshadowing" that is a similar process as the incarnation of Jesus?

There is one that is raised up in the end days know as "The Teacher of Righteousness", whether it be an office or a title we do not know, but he will raise up in these last days!!:



The Teacher of Righteousness and the End of Days

Sarah Klitenic

Introduction: Purpose and Methods

The Exhortation that begins the Damascus Document of the Dead Sea Scrolls prefaces the theology of the Qumran community. Namely, it explains how God leaves the Temple and sends the Babylonians to punish those who have polluted the Sanctuary and abandoned the Temple. However, God leaves a remnant who will one day return to the land of Israel once the people learn to correctly follow Mosaic Law. But the true mark of God’s benevolence is in the guide he sends: "And God observed their deeds, that they sought Him with a whole heart, and He raised for them a Teacher of Righteousness to guide them in the way of his heart."1 Here, God raises this Teacher from the remnant of Israel and makes him a guide for the people. For the Teacher must not only guide the remnant through the desert, but he must show it the path of Righteousness to bring about the end of days: the end of days comes with proper ordering of society and return of Israel to her rightful descendants. But who is this Teacher of Righteousness? He is a prophet with God-given ability to interpret the Law. In this paper, I will try to provide a basic description of the Teacher by looking at references to him in the Scrolls and by paying close attention to the Pesherim and Hodayot. I will then explore the nature of his apocalypticism. I hope that by progressing in this manner I will shed light on the nature of this elusive character, the Teacher of Righteousness.

References to the Teacher in the Dead Sea Scrolls

As E.P. Sanders begins his quest for the historical Jesus,2 he explains that the best place to begin is with the facts. Likewise, as we try to understand the Teacher of Righteousness (T of R), it is preferable to begin with what we know about the Teacher from the Dead Sea Scrolls themselves. Authors of the scrolls know the Teacher as Teacher, Teacher of the Community, Teacher of Righteousness,3 Interpreter, Interpreter of the Law,4 Priest,5 The Priest.6 He is never explicitly referred to as prophet, but descriptions, context, and tradition lead one to believe that the Teacher is in fact a prophet. The Damascus Document (CD), the Commentary on Micah, the Commentary on Habakkuk, and the Commentary on Psalms use the titles Teacher, Teacher of the Community, and Teacher of Righteousness. From such passages, we learn that the Teacher is the founder of the community7 and that the present generation of the community looks to him as an historical authority. In all of these references, the Teacher, Teacher of the Community, and Teacher of Righteousness is a figure divinely chosen to expound the Law and set Community members on the righteous path for the end of days.8 His words help prepare for the end:

Who have listened to the voice of the Teacher of Righteousness and have not despised the precepts of righteousness when they heard them; they shall rejoice and their hearts shall be strong, and they shall prevail over all the sons of the earth. God will forgive them and they shall see His salvation because they took refuge in His holy name. (CD XIII, 30-5)

Here, the Teacher of Righteousness is one who dispels the ‘precepts of righteousness’ which one must follow in order to reach salvation. God speaks through the Teacher so that those listening to the Teacher follow God’s words and receive His salvation. Moreover, the Teacher speaks God’s words when he interprets divine scripture; the DSS knows the Teacher as ‘Interpreter of the Law’ in documents such as The Community Rule, the Damascus Document, the Commentary on Habakkuk, and Midrash on the Last Days. The fact that the Teacher is the authority on the Law reflects his role in the community because the Law is pivotal to the Community. In the Thanksgiving Hymns, for instance, the Teacher refers to himself as having the waters of the Covenant confirmed in his heart for those who seek it, for God has ‘hidden Thy Law [within (him)].’9 In this passage, the Teacher of Righteousness not only knows the Law, but his knowledge of the Law is given to him by God. As in Numbers 12:6-8 when Moses receives the Law mouth to mouth from God, the Teacher also receives the law from the mouth of God in 1 Qp Hab II 2-3. The community respects the T of R’s legal understanding and uses his interpretations for redemption:

But all those who hold fast to these precepts and coming in accordance with the Law, who heed the voice of the Teacher and confess before God, saying, ‘Truly we have sinned... by walking counter to the precepts of the covenant’...; they shall rejoice and their hearts shall be strong. (CD 28-30)

Here, members of the CD Community that listen to the T of R and follow his teachings will rejoice in the eschaton. Lastly, the teacher is referred to explicitly as a priest in the pesher on Ps 37:23-24. These references to the Teacher in the DSS as a Teacher of Righteousness, an Interpreter of the Law, and a Priest paint the most general, most undeniable portrait of the Teacher.

Pesherim: Interpretations of the Law

The pesherim10 are interpretations of written prophetic texts that can be understood as ‘unraveling of mysteries.’11 J. Carmignac broke the pesherim into two categories: continuous, which interpret a single book section by section, and thematic, which consist of certain citations grouped around a thematic idea.12 Both of these forms of pesherim are characterized by raz, a term taken from the notion of the ancient prophets being introduced in their visions into the heavenly assembly of special knowledge.13 However, the pesherim take the idea of divine prophetic revelation a step further, because they claim to contain the mystery of things hidden even to the prophets themselves who wrote the words now interpreted. Horgan points to 1 QpHab 7:4-5 as an example of this:

and God told Habakkuk to write down that which would happen to the final generation, but He did not make known to him when time would come to an end. And as for that which He said, That he who reads may read it speedily: interpreted this concerns the Teacher of Righteousness, to whom God made known all the mysteries of the words of His servants the Prophets.

In this pesher, the Teacher understands what is to come because God allows him to unravel the mystery of Habakkuk’s prophecy; namely that within the words, God buries his plans for the founding of the community, the rise of the Teacher, and the end of days. Once God gives the Teacher prophetic understanding, the Teacher unravels the mystery in scripture and he uses that new knowledge to create rules which will regulate the Community. In this manner, the entire Community order, every rule, every hierarchical position, is governed by the Teacher’s interpretation of scripture in anticipation for the end of days.

Moreover, because the Teacher is the Interpreter of the Law, the pesherim provide additional insight into the Teacher. That is, these pesherim are the Teacher’s mode of divine revelation via interpretation of scripture. By carefully examining how the Teacher interprets scripture, one can learn even more about the figure. For instance, in the Commentary on Habakkuk:

[Behold the nations and see, marvel and be astonished; for I accomplish a deed in your days, but you will not believe it when] told. They, the men of violence and the breakers of the Covenant, will not believe when they hear all that [is to happen to] the final generation from the Priest [in whose heart] God set [understanding] that he might interpret all the words of His servants the Prophets, through whom He foretold all that would happen to his people and [His land]. (1QpHab II, 5-10)

In the passage, the Teacher is a priest who has the divine power to interpret Scripture, namely the Prophetic Books. Moreover, the Teacher prefers the Prophets because God imparted them with the knowledge of what is to come in the generation of the Teacher. The Teacher is given knowledge by God to understand these prophets so he can likewise teach the people righteousness and prevent their destruction at the end of days. This passage reveals much about the Community’s theology of prophecy. The Teacher was chosen long ago by God to prepare the remnant for the end of days; the prophets were likewise sent generations ago to prepare for this event.14 When the Teacher interprets the Law, he is more similar to the biblical Prophets in his mode of revelation than a scribe or a midrashic rabbi. Unlike the rabbis, the Teacher does not rely on the peshat or derash. His interpretations are more than mere allegories of text, but at the same time, they are not visions as the ancient prophets experienced them. Additionally, the Teacher is different from other exegetes because he does not merely apply scripture to his situation, but rather claims that scripture is written with him in mind. Based on the manner in which he interprets scripture, we can generalize that the Teacher is similar to the prophets, but also unique in his own right.

Claims of authorship

Just as one could learn about the Interpreter of the Law by reading the pesherim, one can learn about the Teacher by reading passages he supposedly wrote. Scholars believe that portions of the Hodayot (Thanksgiving Psalms) are actually written by the Teacher. Being able to identify material written by the Teacher is valuable because it tells us how the Teacher saw himself, his mission, and his relationship to the community and God. In this section of the paper, I will first discuss scholarship concerning the Teacher’s authorship of the Hodayot and then I will analyze various passages from the Thanksgiving Hymns. By examining the Hodayot, it seems that the material most filled with historical specifics and most charged with human emotion is likely to have been written by the Teacher. Additionally, scholars also claim that other scrolls were written by the Teacher. Recently, for example, the Temple Scroll (TS) has garnered attention as having been written by the Teacher. However, there are a number of reasons why TS cannot be the product of the Teacher. By first exploring why select Hodayot must have been written by the Teacher and then discussing why the Temple Scroll cannot possibly be the work of the Teacher, I hope to shed light on the Teacher and his role in the Scrolls.

The Hodayot

Among German scholars, there are three basic theories regarding authorship of the Hodayot: 1. the text is a literary unity and was written by the Teacher of Righteousness, 2. the text is not a unity and was written by anonymous authors. 3. the text is not a unity but within the Hodayot there is a core of hymns that were written by the Teacher of Righteousness.15 The first claim, although popular in the early days of Hodayot scholarship, has become less popular in recent years. It explains that the author of the entire scroll was the Teacher of Righteousness.16 Such an account, however, does not explain stylistic, linguistic, and content differences between hymns. The second theory, that the text is not a unity and is written by anonymous authors, has support from those believing that the works could have been written by the Teacher of Righteousness’ disciples.17 Moreover, the linguistic character of these hymns dictates that they could only have been written by one disciple modeling himself after the Teacher of Righteousness, rather than many disciples. The third theory is more widely recognized. It says that the text is not a unity, and that within the Hodayot there is a core of hymns written by the Teacher of Righteousness.

This third theory of German scholarship seems the most plausible because it best appreciates the stylistic features of the hymns. By examining stylistic features such as use of the first person pronoun, content, and linguistic uniformity, three German scholars derived a criteria that distinguishes hymns written by the Teacher from those written by the community at a later date. Gert Jeremias, Jurgen Becker, and Heinz-Wolfgang Kuhn18 individually note the following: that in many of the hymns, the use of ‘I’ speaks passionately about personal experiences; that these hymns often deal with individual accounts of dire need or use the motif of the mediator of revelation;19 and that these hymns are historical and specific, rather than theological and general, with regard to language. These scholars then designated such hymns as written by the Teacher of Righteousness himself; they are ‘Teacher hymns’ as opposed to Community hymns or didactic hymns. But such an explanation cries out for an example. Take the following passage:

They have banished me from my land
like a bird from its nest;
all my friends and brethren are driven far from me
and hold me for a broken vessel.

And they, teachers of lies and seers of falsehood,
have schemed against me a devilish scheme,
to exchange the Law engraved on my heart by Thee
for the smooth things (which they speak) to Thy people.
And they withhold from the thirsty the drink of Knowledge, and assuage their thirst with vinegar,
that they may gaze on their straying,
on their folly concerning feast-days,
on their fall into their snares.
(1 QH IV, 7-12)

Jeremias, Becker, and Kuhn agree that this wrathful passage must have been written by the Teacher of Righteousness. By reading this passage line by line, we can better understand the Gottingen criteria.

In the above passage, the author prominently uses certain vocabulary, syntax, and content to show how he is set apart from the others both literally, by his unjust banishment, and metaphorically, by his God-given knowledge. Here, the Teacher’s use of the first person pronoun stands opposite the third person pronoun: ‘They have banished me from my land.’ By speaking in the first person, the Teacher’s account of the injustices he suffers become personal and moving. Regardless of whether we are able to accurately name that third party, there is nothing general about this verse: the Teacher clearly blames a group of people for his woes. Moreover, a few lines down, he refers to ‘they’ in more specific language: they are ‘teachers of lies and seers of falsehood.’ From this line, the reader learns more about who ‘they’ are and the reader also learns more about the identity of the Teacher. In contrast to ‘teachers of lies and seers of falsehood’, the Teacher is a teacher of truth and a seer of righteousness. The Teacher’s truth, which is ‘engraved on his heart’ by God, is emphasized by the fact that those who are able to receive knowledge do so by drinking it. The reader also learns about the concerns of the Teacher from his final charge against the teachers of lies: the author of the hymn worries about the timing of the feasts.20 For the following reasons, this passage fulfills the description of the typical Teacher hymn as set out by Jeremias, Becker, and Kuhn: 1. the Teacher uses the first person to relay his personal situation; 2. the Teacher, who is set apart because God engraved truth in his heart, is full of woe; 3. the Teacher uses specifics, such as his calendar concerns, that do not speak to the general problems of mankind. Because this hymn is so personal, so moving, and so specific, it does not seem likely that it could have been written by anyone other than the Teacher.21 Moreover, once we recognize the components of this hymn as characteristic of the Teacher, we get a better sense of his agenda and how he views himself. Based on the facts of the hymn, God grants the Teacher divine understanding of the Law for the imparting of this Law to those ‘thirsty’ for righteousness.

The Temple Scroll

Although scholars are the most confident concerning the authorship of the Hodayot, some wrongly attribute the Temple Scroll to the Teacher. They claim that the TS, like Deuteronomy, gives a description of God’s covenant with Israel. 22 There are two main claims that attempt to show that the Teacher wrote the TS: 1. Other documents in the Scrolls regard the Temple Scroll as Law and the Teacher of Righteousness as the Lawgiver. The Teacher of Righteousness can be compared to Moses as the author of the Law for a sectarian community. Hence, some suggest that the Teacher of Righteousness must be the author of the TS. 2. The Teacher is the most eminent figure in the DSS; only he is important enough to have written the Law. Both these reasons are defeated once one realizes that the Teacher is not the Lawgiver, but rather the Interpreter of the Law. Instead of creating his own law, the Teacher uses his divine power to understand biblical scripture. Furthermore, the Temple Scroll cannot be the law for the end of days because its edicts are not written for a righteous audience. The fact that the Teacher is not the author of the Temple Scroll makes it easier to understand how the Teacher does not write the Law for the end of days, but that another figure is to come.

Some wrongly claim that the Teacher is the author of TS because they misunderstand the relationship between the Teacher and the Law.23 Namely, throughout the Scrolls, the T of R is referred to as ‘the Interpreter of the Law’ and the TS is commonly referred to as the Law. However, the previous section explains that the Teacher interprets the Law, rather than writes a new Law, because of the pre-eminence of the Mosaic Law in the scrolls. Only by properly understanding the Mosaic Law can the Community help bring about the end of days. Moreover, some scholars argue that the TS is a an eschatological law. They primarily use the description of measurements for a Temple in (TS XXX-XVII) and claim that based on its size, the Temple in TS is eschatological. However, the Temple is possibly utopian rather than eschatological. Based on a comparison to the Temple in the Florilegium, it seems that the eschatological temple is one that God will create on ‘the day of creation.’24 Also, it is apparent from the nature of many laws, including laws on adultery and rape, that the TS is not meant for the end of days .25 Based on the textual evidence, the Teacher cannot be the author of the TS, the New Torah; instead, the Teacher creates guidelines for a way of living from the interpretation of the Torah. He explains the Law to help order society and prepare for the end of days. He himself is not the fulfillment of eschatological expectations.

Who is the Teacher of Righteousness?

Difficulties arise when one tries to describe the Teacher of Righteousness; however, the complexity that most affects the description deals with whether to place the figure in the past or in the future. Many point to this ambiguity in a midrash of Num 21:18 that is in the Damascus Document.26 Unlike other passages in the same document, the figure mentioned here is in the future.

The well is the Law, and those who dug it were the converts of Israel who went out of the land of Judah to sojourn in the land of Damascus....The Staff is the Interpreter of the Law of whom Isaiah said, He makes a tool for His work; and the nobles of the peoples are those who come to dig the well with the staffs with which the staff ordained that they should walk in all age of wickedness- and without them they shall find nothing- until he comes who shall teach righteousness at the end of days. (CD, VI)

Here, confusion arises because the titles ‘Interpreter of the Law’ and ‘Teacher of Righteousness’ are interchangeable.27 The Teacher must have a role in both the past and the future: he is a figure of the community’s past as its founder and writer of its law. But, the law he writes is pertinent to the eschaton, for by following this law as divinely interpreted by the Teacher, community members can bring about the endtime. This ‘dual’ nature of the Teacher, however, should not be overexaggerated. The Teacher himself is in no way a messianic figure. He will not return at the endtime, but he does anticipate the arrival of his eschatological counterpart.28 It should also be made clear in the initial stages of this inquiry what the Teacher of Righteousness is not: he is not John the Baptist, he is not Jesus Christ, and we cannot attribute a specific, personal name to him.29 But, the reader can paint a general portrait of the Teacher. Based on the way the Teacher interprets the Law in the Pesherim and the way he describes his experiences in the Hodayot, it seems that he is priest who writes divinely inspired interpretations of the Law. He is a figure in the past who prepares his community for the imminent end.

The Teacher as the Community’s Founder

The passage mentioned earlier offers several assumptions about the historical Teacher:

The well is the Law, and those who dug it were converts of Israel who went out of the land of Judah to sojourn in the land of Damascus...The Staff is the Interpreter of the Law of whom Isaiah said, He makes a tool for His work.... (CD, VI)

This offers possibilities for the identity of the Teacher by putting the Teacher in the context of his own Community. Here, it can be assumed that the founding of the Community has a great deal to do with the Law itself; the founders left Judah and went into Damascus for this "well," the Law. The metaphor of the well as the Law is powerful: the well offers essential water that cannot be found in Judah. Ironically, the water is found in the desert. Of further irony is that even though the converts themselves dig this well in Damascus, they are still not able to find the well, the Law. Only the Staff, the Interpreter of the Law, finds the water. We now have a full picture of the Teacher: the Teacher helps found a community that left Judah because the Law is not able to ‘exist’ there. The Teacher interprets the Law for the community, thus making it ‘drinkable.’ Here, the reader is offered a number of roles for the Teacher. In this section, I will build on this portrait. I will explain how the Teacher and the community see the Teacher as a priest and a prophet who experiences revelation in the mode of divine interpretation of Law.

Teacher as Priest

The evidence clearly shows that the T of R is a priest: this is explicit in textual evidence and suggested contextually based on the T of R’s concerns. For instance, in the pesher on Ps 37:23-24 (4QpPs 1-10 iii 15):

The steps of the man are confirmed by the Lord and He delights in all his ways; though [he stumbles, he shall not fall, for the Lord shall support his hand] (23-4). Interpreted, this concerns the Priest, the Teacher [of Righteousness] whom God chose to stand before Him, for He established him to build for Himself the congregation of...

Here, the Teacher is a priest who establishes the Community based on the will of God: the priest is chosen by God. As a priest, the Teacher is concerned with purity and the proper ordering of the Temple. Moreover, he behaves as a priest when the reader sees him on a more personal level. This is evident throughout the Thanksgiving Hymns, many of which can be typed as introspective confessions in the style of the priest-prophet Jeremiah. It is also clear that the Teacher is a priest based on the way priests are regarded throughout the Dead Sea Scrolls. Members of the Council of the Community (the elect of Israel) are known as sons of Zadok, the Priests; the Law of Moses has been revealed to these men.30 God raises these priests and they will be called by name at the end of days.31 The priests act as God’s counsel, so that ‘the man who does not listen but acts arrogantly without obeying the priest who is posted there to minister before [God]...that man shall die.’32 Clearly, the priests are the authority in the community. It is then logical to assume that the Teacher, as the eminent authority figure who most probably wrote this passage, would also be a priest. Although this piece of information helps the reader better understand the Teacher, it begs the question: how is the Teacher different from the other priests in the community? The next section addresses just that point.

High Priest?

The question has also been raised as to whether the Teacher was the High Priest of the Temple before escaping into the desert. On this question, scholars point to historical reconstruction and passages discussing the Teacher’s struggle with the Wicked Priest . Indirect evidence here leads many to conclude that the Teacher is a High Priest and that the Scrolls are primarily concerned with restoring a legitimate priest. However, this evidence is not conclusive. Based on the text, it is more reasonable to say that the Teacher struggles with the High Priest over purity rules, rather than for a power position or restoration of a ‘legitimate’ High Priest. More likely, the T of R was at one time a prophet in the Temple who was not popular with Temple authority because of his views on contentious issues of the day; this authority most likely drove him into exile. The Teacher thus laments over the Temple because Temple authorities do not follow the purity laws as dictated by God through Moses.

By reconstructing a seven year gap in history, some attempt to show how the Teacher could have been the designated high priest until his exile. After the High Priest Alkimos dies in 159 B.C, no High Priest has been attested in literature of the period as having taken his place.33 Josephus,34 however, explains that an intersacerdotium lasted seven years until Jonathan usurped power in 152 B.C. Because a High Priest is necessary to lead Yom Kippur Services, someone must have filled the role of High Priest, at least temporarily.35 J. Murphy-O’Connor speculates that his man may have introduced unpopular reforms so that when his position is usurped by Jonathan in 152, he is driven into the desert where he goes only by the title ‘Teacher of Righteousness’ so as not to draw attention to his identity.36 Murphy-O’Connor argues that the pesherim promise a High Priest from the Davidic line because the Teacher criticizes Jonathan with being an ‘illegitimate’ priest. Scholars believing that the Teacher is the High Priest, then, wrongly argue that the major debate between the sect and Jerusalem is over the High Priesthood.

The argument explaining why the Teacher was at one point High Priest of the Temple is based on speculation after speculation; it is historically implausible and it misunderstands the Teacher’s message. A better understanding of the Teacher can be achieved through the Scrolls. For instance, 1 QpHab 11:4-8 describes how the Wicked Priest pursues the Teacher to his place of exile and then attempts to disrupt his Day of Atonement. Of note, this passage shows that the Wicked Priest and the Teacher observe different calendars. It is unlikely that the Teacher was the High Priest if he was observing his own cultic calendar, because he would not have switched calendars in Qumran and Jonathan would not have introduced a new calendar in 152 BC.37 Moreover, there is no evidence in the text even to support that the Wicked Priest is not legitimate. The Teacher, however, repeatedly shows concerns over other issues of impurity. Notably, the Teacher names three types of impurity that profane the land: fornication, riches, and profanation of the Temple. Included among those things that profane the Temple are menstrual blood, incestuous relationships, and a breach of the Mosaic Covenant.38 It seems that the legitimacy of the priesthood is not one of the contentious issues between the sect and Jerusalem. Rather, the issues in the sectarian community are purity as understood by Mosaic Law. More likely, the relationship between the T of R and the Wicked Priest is that of Temple prophet, with a large following, exiled by the High Priest because of his unpopular views. This charismatic figure blames the Wicked Priest for polluting the Temple through the priest’s inappropriate behavior. In 1 QpHab 12:1-10, the Wicked Priest plots the destruction of the poor, commits abominable deeds, and defiles the Temple. Rather than planning an insurrection or attempt to overthrow the High Priest, the T of R condemns the Wicked Priest to an eschatological punishment. In this manner, the T of R fits the model of a prophet acting outside of the court.

Teacher as Prophet

Although the Teacher does not share many of the traits that the ancient prophets hold in common, he is clearly a prophet; his visions can be understood as a correct understanding or ordering of words through divine revelation of scripture. In this sense, the Teacher sees more. On the most basic level, the Teacher is unlike the other prophets because he does not have visions that come in the form of dream-like scenes—he is not a seer with a ‘third eye.’ However, a deeper understanding of the meaning of prophecy shows that the Teacher is similar to the biblical prophets. Otto Betz compares the Teacher’s divine revelation of scripture to Daniel’s interpretation of dreams and concludes that pesher and apocalypse are quite similar.39 Moreover, Betz notes that both the Teacher and Daniel use the term raz to help describe the mystery of their interpretations. A clear parallel can be seen when Daniel interprets the writings on the wall at Belshazzar’s feast.40 Here, only Daniel is able to interpret the writings of a supernatural author. Moreover, he dissects the inscription so as to give an interpretation based on each word, similar to the Teacher’s manner of interpreting the prophets.

The Teacher is similar to the other prophets both in his manner of interpretation and the reasons behind his revelation. In the following passage, the Teacher is similar to the prophets in a number of ways:

And they, teachers of lies and seers of falsehood,
have schemed against me a devilish scheme,
to exchange the Law engraved on my hear to Thee
for the smooth things (which they speak) to Thy people.
And they withhold from the thirsty the drink of Knowledge, and assuage their thirst with vinegar...
(1 QH IV, 8-10)

Like the Staff, the Teacher is needed by those thirsty for knowledge. In this passage, we also see that the Teacher’s righteousness is not fully human; because the Law is engraved on his heart by God, his interpretation of the Law is a divine interpretation.41 God has given the Teacher the power to ‘interpret all the words of his servants the prophets’42 and then God feeds the Teacher His words by which to prophesy.43 Here, the relationship between God and the Teacher is inextricably close; like the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel, the Teacher cannot escape his righteousness, despite the distress it causes him.44 Moreover, the Teacher is similar to the other prophets in his impetus for making the interpretations. Like Amos, Ezekiel, and Daniel, the Teacher writes at a time of serious social turmoil. He attempts to solve this turmoil by urging a new world order.

The Teacher’s Role in the End of Days

When the question concerning the identity of the Teacher of Righteousness was initially asked, the following passage was used as an example:

The nobles of the peoples are those who come to dig the well with staffs with which the staff ordained that they should walk in all age of wickedness- and without them they shall find nothing- until he comes who shall teach righteousness at the end of days. (CD, VI)

The eschaton cannot take place until there is a proper ordering of Society in the World:45 namely, Jerusalem must be the religious capital of the world (Isaiah 7, 9, 11); Temple Worship must be correct; Israel must not be dominated by foreign oppressors; and society must have just ownership of land.46 Evidence throughout this paper seems to show that the Teacher of Righteousness extracts principles to regulate the Community as God aids him in interpreting scripture. Through these regulations, a proper order is established and the eschaton is realized.

But, the Teacher of Righteousness does not take part in the end of days himself. Instead, he prepares the way for the eschatological messiahs. He sets the standard for interpretation of scripture which the Priestly Messiah, who takes the Teacher’s place in interpretation of the Law, relies on at the end of days. The following passage will first help the reader understand the messianic expectation of the community:

The king is the congregation; and the bases of the statutes are the Books of the Prophets whose saying Israel despised. The star is the Interpreter of the Law who shall come to Damascus; as it is written, A star shall come forth out of Jacob and a scepter shall rise out of Israel (Num xxiv, 17). The scepter is the Prince of the whole congregation and when he comes he shall smite all the children of Seth (Num. xxiv, 17). [CD VII, 15-20]

Here, two messiahs emerge at the end of days: the Interpreter of the law, or Priest-Messiah, and the Prince of the whole congregation, the Davidic Messiah.47 These figures are also referred to throughout the DSS as the messiahs of Aaron and Israel. They are not equal counter-parts: the Priest-Messiah has precedence over the Davidic Messiah in all legal matters: ‘As they teach him so shall he judge’.48 This precedence can be seen in passages from the community rule; ‘When the table has been prepared for eating, and the new wine for drinking, the Priest shall be the first to stretch out his hand to bless the first-fruits of the bread and new wine.’49

Here, the Messiah of Aaron takes precedence because he is the eschatological high priest who teaches righteousness at the end of days.50 Although the Prince of the Congregation presides over the battle liturgy (1 QM XV, 4; XVI, 13; XVIII) and the eschatological banquet (1 QSa II, 12-21),51 the Messiah of Aaron is more important for understanding the Teacher of Righteousness because he is the one who continues the Teacher’s message. The arrival of the Messiahs Aaron and Israel marks the eschatological turning point; once they arrive, the Messiah of Aaron interprets the Law.52 His legacy in the community is the basic interpretation of the Law that functions at the end of days.

Is the Teacher an Apocalyptic Figure?

An analysis of all the literature that has ever been regarded as ‘apocalyptic’ was printed in Semeia 14 to show the extent and limits of the category ‘apocalyptic literature.’53 The following features were identified as common to apocalypses: a narrative framework that describes the revelation; the main means of revelation as visions and otherworldly visions; presence of an angel who interprets the vision; disclosure of a transcendent reality which is temporal (eschatological salvation); transcendent reality which is spatial (involves another, supernatural world).54 Based on these criteria, it would appear that the Teacher does not write apocalypses. That is, the T of R is not a visionary.55 Unlike many figures in apocalypses, he does not resort to using a pseudonym. Such a phenomenon can be explained based on the charismatic nature of the Teacher: the Teacher is able to rest on his own authority. Also, the Teacher bases his interpretations on older scripture which gives htotal idiot spammerer authority. Rather than an apocalypse, it may be more accurate to say that the Qumran community is apocalyptic. According to John Collins in ‘The Apocalyptic Genre,’ Qumran fits the criteria for apocalypticism as the ideology of a movement: it shares the conceptual framework of the genre and endorses a world view in which supernatural revelation, the heavenly world, and eschatological judgement play essential parts.

Summary and Conclusion

Although we cannot say a great deal concerning the Teacher of Righteousness in the Dead Sea Scrolls, we are able to paint a general portrait of this Teacher. Based on references to the Teacher throughout the Scrolls, we learn that he is a priest and the interpreter of the Law. Moreover, by reading the pesherim, or interpretations of the Law, and the Hodayot actually written by the Teacher, it becomes clear that the Teacher is a prophet whose mode of revelation is divine interpretation of scripture. Within this mold, the Teacher has a role in both the Community’s past and future: he is a figure of the Community’s past as its founder, but his interpretation of the Law helps order society in anticipation for the two Messiahs and the eschaton.











every rule, every hierarchical position, is governed by the Teacher’s interpretation of scripture in anticipation for the end of days....his interpretation of scripture is correct regardless of anybody elses opinion!



...what does every rule and every hierarchical postion mean...lol...I guess it means what he says is what goes...lol

...


Waterman, as I said, believe as you will, but you like most of your understanding, of the meanings of of the purpose of such a one, have totally no conception/comprehension of the Teacher of Righteousness. And of course he is part of the end days, contrary to what is being taught in your article.. And the reason interpreters do not recognize the Teacher of Righteousness as not being there (in the end days,) is because for a small period of time he is taken-up/away from the scene on the earth to the throne room in heaven, as the man-child [Rev.12:5kjv.]

This therefore is not taken into account by those interpreters beholding his disappearance at that time, but they only assume (assumption never correctly corresponds with prophecy, only scriptural explanation reveals the truth of a purpose,) he died, and left the scene permanently.

However, afterward, when the Teacher is returned to earth in the end days, from the Throne Room [Rev.12:5kjv] in God's time. After he is therefore delivered from the jaws of the dragon [Rev.12:4kjv,] and delivered from that same pit [Job.33;18kjv.] He (that Teacher,) is afterward somewhat transformed as Job [Job.33:18-25kjv,] declares, back to his youth once again. Something never demonstrated by an act of God toward a man in the flesh.

Therefore, he (the Teacher) finishes up his commission unrecognized in his transformation from old age, to his youth as that hidden witnesses of the two. Otherwise what would be the purpose toward the restoration of his youth, if he was of a moderate age, and could travel about in his own strength. Therefore I believe this is demonstrating that in reality one of the witnesses will actually be an old man, but transformed to his youth, literally reflecting God's glory (light) from his very being,)[Job.11:15-17kjv.]

Therefore, that is why he can no longer be recognized at that time afterwards. Therefore, God even keeps him from being recognized by interpreters, as even being in existence in the end days, as that dual Teacher and Witness properly. They just assume he (the Teacher) died because they no longer see the same old man on the scene in the writings about him, but only another man/Witness/child.

For he is always hidden in his duties/commission [Isa.49:2kjv,] by the Shadow of the Lord's hand (works.) Even as the Teacher of Righteousness/the hidden Witness of the Two Witnesses. As Enoch is the scribe of Righteousness. So he who is (the Scribe of Righteousness & Teacher of Righteousness) shall be of binary roles after the same order, and the same man, and that is of the directive of Righteousness. So not only will he correctly write (scribe) right directives (Righteousness), but he shall also (teach) right directive (Righteousness,) also!

However, waterman I know you refuse to believe this. Therefore, believe as you will, or should I say as you believe what other scrips you are reading from..lol.

Remember the true Teacher of Righteousness, comes up with his own understanding of scripture, not something taught him by others and their interpretations. For only the Teacher of Righteousness knows the true path of understanding for the last days. Therefore anyone who would comprehend the Teacher's true nature would know he would never believe any interpretations about and the understanding of him. For he is the one according to the prophecy about him, that shall lead us to the well of understanding and secret waters that shall quench the thirst of the truly thirsty.

For it would contradict exactly what is declared about him. He will not go along with the interpretations of others Scholars/Theologians/Interpreters/etc. For the description of him reveals and makes it clear, no one but himself can correctly recognize that all others haven't the correct meaning/foresight/discernment of him. Why? Because the prophecy reveals all wrongly understand him and the direction he shall lead.

You see the Teacher will teach differently against the concepts of mans understanding/teachings. Man teaches complicity produces simple results. However his ways will reveal the simple thing brings forth and induces the complex manifestation. Something like simple faith bringing forth mighty miracles made manifest.

Therefore, only he would never quote or coincide with any interpretation of the Teacher. For he is aware as it is written, only he understands the meaning of himself. Why then would anybody believe what is written about him when we are foretold he is the only one that will correctly guide us in the end days. Therefore, wisdom is known by her own children. Anyone who follows the paradigm and understanding about the Teacher from others understanding, has already fulfilled the wrong example already warned about beforehand.

Thus they themselves are misdirected, because it clearly indicated only the Teacher has that knowledge and the secret to the well. Why then believe the reports/interpretation of others when we are told ahead of time they are already wrong about the Teacher. For we are warned only the Teacher understands his placement, timing, appearance, reappearance and direction.

I know its a little deep, and hard to grasp what I am seeking to reveal to you waterman. But what you are demonstrating by agreeing with these writings, about the Teacher of Righteousness. Is like being forewarned about believing something that has already been confirmed is impossible to understand its meaning by any other. Until the very subject matter ( the Teacher) appears. Then he shall correctly explain the falsehood of all other understandings, for it is given to him, by God.

For the understanding of the depths needful for the end times rest in him. In other-words to believe the interpretations of the meaning of the Teacher is incorrect beforehand, according to the prophecy, of discovering the meanings of the secrets (in the deep well.) And especially the understanding about that very Teacher. This is why many will be sprinkled (actually the word SPRINKLED was meant to read STARTLED in the Hebrew,) [Isa.52:15kjv,] by his appearing in those end times.

Nevertheless, as I said beforehand continue to believe/teach as you will. It isn't exactly a novelty these days that false teachings, misinterpretations, and misdirection of scriptural meanings manifest themselves continually. Thus feeding the body of Christ the now decaying crumbs of the once morsel delight upon a table from a different time/past.

What you are not seeing is Elijah. The other blessings are that of one man combined. That is why David says of that servant, is this the manner of a man, the head of the household.. meaning given dominion of the kingdom [2Sam.7:19kjv.] That is why Balaamn addresses the singular man (I see HIM) as both the star and the scepter,) [Num.24.17kjv.] He is therefore given total dominion in the end, as it is pleasing to God to do so [Num.24:19, Dan.7:13, Rev.14:14kjv etc.]

It's complicated but it will be explained/revealed in more clarity in the end. This is one of the many new things God will perform [Isa.43:19kjv.] This is why Jacob/Israel is addressed as one man, singular (thee,) as he is but one man, [Isa.42:1,] but revealing dual offices. Just as Jesus was of a combination of a dual blessing in one man, so also shall God make of that singular man. These individuals you speak of are tribal disagreements reflecting individual analysis symbolically spoken of as individuals. For that hidden Witness represents all Israel, and Elijah (the other Witness) is God's messenger for the end days.

Nevertheless, believe as you imagine, its allowed, its spring..lol.

I explained in the post above how you are not Jacob. You are not even one of the witnesses, you just think you are, as so many do. Calm down waterman we still love you regardless of who you are..lol. I don't see you as an enemy waterman. I only see you as a misguided relatively new Christian not quite grasping the full meaning of prophecy. That doesn't make you my enemy, only a naive friend in the Lord. I would be very happy to see you on my birthday, but it appears any who disagree with you on any subject matter becomes your enemy until they repent..lol. God bless and have a wonderful day.

you're forgetting you backslid 10 of those 17 years, and wanted nothing to do with the Lord, because of jealousy against others, and pouting, drinking yourself finally into an important place in your own calling..lol. So yes you are a relatively new Christian in comparison to most others in this field of study.

I've been in a few hellish pits myself over a combination of years. Try for one being hauled off to war for years the first month of your marriage, no fun. Or the loss of many of your close loved ones. Oh you haven't experienced that yet have you, you well. Or seeing your buddies blown into little pieces, you were meant to ride with in the same vehicle. Or the years of hell in my break-up, after 30 years of marriage. Or experiencing the pain of three heart attacks, and 4 major surgery's on my back/heart.

Please, we all have our hell pits. You just like to believe yours was the worst. Try praying yourself out of them, instead of drinking yourself out of them; that's when the real battle/hell begins. So, yea I can comprehend along with billions of others, who/has been/will be/ in that same situation (their hell pits.) It wasn't/isn't only a test, but life, just like for us all in this world!

Listen I have company visiting so must end for today. Thanks for the happy birthday wish in your previous post.

Forget the priesthood office, Jesus already fulfilled that position at his sacrificial offering at his first coming.

Elijah is the messenger for the end times to draw the fathers to the children and the children to the fathers. Read the Word, Elijah's commission in the Word for the end days is not complicated. He won't be at some temple mount sacrificing innocent animals and burning them for the offering of sin, as a priest. Jesus took care of all that long ago. Allow Elijah to do his duty, as the Word describes. Not the one you envision he must perform as a priest. The task of Elijah running around the country side when he does appear, chasing down innocent animals to slaughter..lol. Just doesn't seem to fit his role or the need to offer such sacrifices any longer.

Yes, to almost all your questions, except perhaps the last question. Nevertheless, very good insightful questions on your part my friend. Some very discerning reasoning as well.

Also, you may be right in part concerning the lack of the teaching of the Book of Enoch, by Jesus. I believe Jesus didn't teach the book of Enoch because he simply understood it was not meant to be of its proper understanding at that time/generation. Being that certain events within its contents is not understandable until the latter/end days.

Nevertheless, on the last question. The displace of the different actions of the overshadowing of God's Spirit, toward the impregnation of Mary. Is not of the same comparison on any level to the vicious task of rebellious angels thrusting their lustful influence upon the ignorance of silly women of the flesh. One action consisted of the spiritual benefit of all mankind. While the other actions was toward its destruction, minus but eight!