Good point, I wasn't aware of it. Thank you.
- the Teacher of Righteousness was raised 390+20 after Nebuchadnezzar conquered Judea which was around the year 177 BCE (587-410)
There is some debate though over whether or not the 390 years in the Damascus Document is literal. Given the references to Ezekiel elsewhere in the Damascus Document, I agree with the idea that it refers to Ez. 4:5 ("For I have assigned to you 390 days, according to the number of years of their iniquity. So you shall bear the iniquity of the house of Israel"). As noted here:Scholars realized that the number 390 echoed a prophecy of Ezekiel, and was therefore probably symbolic, but nonetheless they supposed that it was approximately correct. Frank Cross admitted, "the scriptural number 390 (Ezek. 4.5) cannot be used for precise calculation. It was a round number of prophecy put to Essene use ..."
But if the number 390 was symbolic, as everyone admitted, then it was very doubtful that it could be manipulated to yield reliable chronological information at all. There is no reason to believe that the 390 years of CD is a more reliable chronological indicator than the 490 years of Daniel 9 (which ostensibly refers to the time from the fall of Jerusalem to that of Antiochus Epipjanes). As Geza Vermes pointed out, "all the extant evidence proves that Jews of the early post-biblical age possessed no correct knowledge of the length of the duration of Persian rule" ...
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Th ... frontcover
And here:The 390-year interval is thematic rather than the result of precise calculation, based as it is on Ezekiel's sign-act ...
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Op ... frontcover
This is not to say that this rules out the idea that Onias was the Teacher, but I don't think the 390 years in the Damascus Document should be taken as a precise calculation.
But it's interesting that 20 years were added to this symbolic number so this could be interpreted as a manipulation to fit the real chronological date. Also, this narrative is similar to Daniel which is from the time of Antiochus IV as well. Of course, it's not a strong piece of evidence on its own but as Vermes wrote:
Yet even if the literal figure of 390 is rejected, there are still compelling reasons for placing the ‘age of wrath’ in the opening decades of the second pre-Christian century. Only the Hellenistic crisis which occurred at that time, and which is recalled in various Jewish literary sources from the last two centuries BCE, provides a fitting context for the historical allusions made in the sectarian writings (cf. Daniel ix–xi; Enoch XC, 6–7; Jubilees XXIII, 14–19; Testament of Levi XVII; Assumption of Moses IV–V). Also, it is the Hasidim of the pre-Maccabaean and early Maccabaean era who best correspond to the earlier but unorganized group as it is described there (cf. pp. 51–2).
The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English, p. 96
The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English, p. 96
Statistics: Posted by AdamKvanta — Fri Nov 29, 2024 11:42 pm