I realize now that I've been confused. I've been taking you to mean that the princes of Judah were foreign kings, and I've been assuming that the "kings of the peoples" and "kings of Greece" referred to the princes of Judah (rather than to their ways). The first part is what I was pointing to Baumgarten for, that he thinks the princes of Judah were Jewish kings.
I was also confused by Baumgarten's statement that "the author of the Damascus Document explained that the serpents were the kings of the nations, and wine their ways (i.e., the ways of the gentile kings, adopted by the Jewish rulers)." I didn't take "their ways" as applying to "the kings of the nations" part and saw "the kings of the nations" as referring to "the Jewish rulers" (i.e., "the princes of Judah").
I don't know why I was stuck on the idea that the "kings of the peoples" were the same as the "princes of Judah," but at the end of the day, it doesn't change much, since I still think the "princes of Judah" are Jewish kings (Hasmoneans or Herodians) who engaged in behavior that is said of Herodians and not of Hasmoneans and associated with the Pharisees (the "builders of the wall").
Somewhere along the line I think you suggested that the "princes of Judah" could be the Pharisees, but in any event, the fornication being criticized in CD is applied elsewhere (5.1-2) to Jewish kings ("Concerning the Leader it is written ‘he shall not multiply wives to himself’ [Dt. 17:17]") and David is mentioned as an excused example of a king that did this. So for me, actual Jewish (or at least Torah-observant) kings appear to be tied up in CD's condemnation of fornication and the "builders of the wall."
I was also confused by Baumgarten's statement that "the author of the Damascus Document explained that the serpents were the kings of the nations, and wine their ways (i.e., the ways of the gentile kings, adopted by the Jewish rulers)." I didn't take "their ways" as applying to "the kings of the nations" part and saw "the kings of the nations" as referring to "the Jewish rulers" (i.e., "the princes of Judah").
I don't know why I was stuck on the idea that the "kings of the peoples" were the same as the "princes of Judah," but at the end of the day, it doesn't change much, since I still think the "princes of Judah" are Jewish kings (Hasmoneans or Herodians) who engaged in behavior that is said of Herodians and not of Hasmoneans and associated with the Pharisees (the "builders of the wall").
Somewhere along the line I think you suggested that the "princes of Judah" could be the Pharisees, but in any event, the fornication being criticized in CD is applied elsewhere (5.1-2) to Jewish kings ("Concerning the Leader it is written ‘he shall not multiply wives to himself’ [Dt. 17:17]") and David is mentioned as an excused example of a king that did this. So for me, actual Jewish (or at least Torah-observant) kings appear to be tied up in CD's condemnation of fornication and the "builders of the wall."
Statistics: Posted by John2 — Wed Jan 01, 2025 12:40 pm