James the Brother of Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls II (188 page)

5. CD I.11–12.

6. 4QD266, Fragment 11, Lines 11–13. Also see 1QpHab VII.17–VIII.3.

7. 1QpHab VI.6–8.

8. See the points I first made in my conclusion to
MZCQ
in 1983, pp. 35–38.

9. 4QpNah III.2–3 and 8.

10. 4QpIs
c
Frag. 23, II.10–14.

11. 4QpMic (4Q168) I.5–10.

12. Cf. CD I.19–20.

13. 1QpHab VI.12–13.

14. Cf. 1QpHab VII.7–14 with CD IV. 3–10.

15. 1QpHab VII.4–5.

16. 1QpHab VII.7–8.

17. 1QpHab VII.10–12.

18. 1QpHab VII.14–16.

19. 1QpHab VIII.1–3.

20. 1QpHab XII.2–4.

21. Cf. 1QpHab XII.14 with 1QpHab VIII.2 and, among numerous examples in Paul, see Romans 5:9, 11:14, 1 Corinth
i
ans 9:22, 15:2, etc.

22. 4QpPs37 II.4–5 and cf. III.3–5.

23. 1QS VIII.3–4.

24. 1QpHab XI.15–XII.3.

25. 1QS VIII.4–5.

26. 1QpHab X.11–12.

27. 1QpHab X.13.

28. 1QpHab X.9–10.

29. 1QpHab X.12–13.

30. 4QpNah III.1–2, here identified with
‘the City of Ephraim
’.

31. 4QpNahII.2–4.

32. 4QpNahII.2–III.8.

33. 1QpHab X.9–10.

34. 4QpNah II.1, literally referring to ‘
Apostles to the Gentiles
’ – here ‘
Go’im
’.

35. 4QpNahIII.2–4.

36. 4QpNah III.8–9.

37. 4QpNahIII.2–4.

38. CD XX.19–20.

39. CD III.8.

40. Cf. Matthew 26:27–9 and
pars
.

41. Cf. CD I.16, III.10, IV.6–10, VI.2, VIII.15–18, XX.8–9, and XX.30–32.

42. Cf. CD IV.8–10.

43. Cf. CD VI.2, CD III.10, and IV.9.

44. 1QpHab II.2–10.

45. See 1QpHab X.5–12 and cf. 1QpHab XII.1–10.

46. 1QpHab X.9–12 and cf. James 2:20 on ‘
the Man of Emptiness’.

47. 1QS VIII.1–10.

48. See, for instance, 1QS II.26–III.1, III.25, V.5, VI.26, VII.17, VIII.7–10, IX.3–4, CD II.7–8, IV.21, X.6, 1QpHab V.1, 1QH IX.12, XII.7–8, etc.

49. Cf. 4QpNah III.9 and IV.5.

50. 1QS VIII.6–9.

51. See also the whole ethos in 1 Peter 2:5, 2 Corinthians 5.1, Galatians 2.18, Colossians 2.7, and Hebrews 3.3–4.

52. Cf. 1QH VII.7–12.

53.
Ibid
.

54. Cf. 1QpHab VI.16–VII.6.

55. Cf. 1QpHab X.11–12.

56. 1QpHab X.12.

57. 1QpHab X.11–13.

58. Cf. CD VII.9 and XIII.24 among numerous other allusions to such ‘
Visitations
’.

59. Cf. 1QpHab VIII.8–IX.12.

60. 1QpHab VI.9–11.

61. 4QpNah III.4–9 and cf.
War
5.3–25 and 5.252–308 and variously.

62. See 1QpHab V.5–6 and cf.
Ant
. 20.100–103, but also see
War
2.220–3; for his role as Governor of Egypt, see
War
2.309; as Commander after Vespasian departed for Rome and along with Titus at crucial points in the siege of Jerusalem,
War
4.616–18 and 6.237–43.

63. 1QpHab XII.10–14.

64. 1QpHab XIII.1–4.

Chapter 23

1. See
The Holy Qur’an: Arabic Text with English Translation and Short Commentary
, Midrat Mirza Tahir Ahmad, Islam Intern
a
tional Publications Ltd., 1994, nn. 995–99 on 7:66–85; but also see comments in commentaries below on 11:61–66, 26:124–60, 41:13–18, 46:22–26, 51:41–45, 69:4–6, etc.

2. See
The Holy Qur’an: Text, Translation, and Commentary
by A.Yusuf Ali, Beirut, 1968, p. 360.

3. See
The Holy Qur’an: Arabic Text with English Translation and Short Commentary
by Midrat Mirza Tahir Ahmad above, n. 998, p. 341 on 7:74.

4. See my article ‘
Who were the Koranic Prophets
‘
Ad, Thamud, Hud, and Salih
?’,
Journal of Higher Criticism
, vol. XI/n. 2, 2005, pp. 96–107, and and A. Yusuf Ali,
The Holy Qur’an
, n. 1048, p. 362 on
Surah
7:79 above.

5. See
JBJ
, pp. 191–3 and 883–8 and Moses of Chorene 2.30–35, who calls her ‘
the first of Agbar’s wives
’, to whom (not insignificantly) he gave the town of Haran.

6. This comes through both Mandaean (‘
the
Subba
‘
of the Marshes
’) emigration accounts and lists of ‘Jewish
heresies
’ such as in Eusebius and Epiphanius – e.g., ‘
the Masbuthaeans
’ in
E.H.
4.22.5; in
Apost
.
Const
. 6.6 ‘
the Basmuthaeans
’, an evident verbal reversal; and
Haeres
. 19.2.10, 20.3.2–4, 30.3.2, etc., ‘
the Sampsaeans
’, another evident corruption but obviously part and parcel of ‘
the Elchasaites
’ who are in effect what Muslims are calling ‘
the
Subba
‘’ or ‘
Sabaeans
’; and for Hippolytus, ‘
the
Sobiai
’; cf. the
Haran Gawaita
and pp. 90–92 and variously.

7. See, for instance
Annals
6.44 and 12.12, but also see Strabo,
Geography
16.1.28; for Juvenal, for instance,
Satire
1.33, A
l
exander or Demetrius, the Jewish ‘
Alabarch
’s of Alexandria are, rather, ‘
Arabarch
’s –
thus
.

8. See
Annals
12.12 above.

9. See
E.H.
1.13.6, Moses of Chorene,
History of Armenia
2.30–35, J.B. Segal,
Edessa ‘The Blessed City
’, pp. 62–82 above, and the Syriac
Doctrine of Addai
which, not surprisingly, has strong relations to the document known as
The Acts of Thaddaeus
. In Syriac, ‘
Uchama
’ or ‘
Ukkama
’ means ‘
the Black
’.

10. Also cf. Josephus
Ant
. 1.220.

11. Cf.
Ant
. 20.38–45.

12. See
JBJ
, p. 882 and 890;
Ant
. 20.25.

13. See Benjamin of Tudela,
Travels
: Years 1163–1165.

14. See, for instance, the Babylonian
Targum
on Jeremiah 51:27 and Ezekiel 27:23, Gen
R
. 37.1–4 (on the location of Adiabene and Corduene),
Yeb
. 16b on the legitimacy of converts from there (also echoed in the Jerusalem
Talmud
in a tradition ascribed to R. Nahman b. Jacob),
Kid
. 72a, j.
Meg
. I.71b, and
Yalqut
Daniel 1064.

15. See Koran 7:59–67, 9:70, 11:25–69, 14:9, 22:42, 26:106–159, 29:14–38, etc. These are all passages where Noah or ‘
the Land of Noah
’ are mentioned in the same breath as ‘Ad, Thamud, Salih, and Hud.

16. For references such as this about ‘
minim
’, see
Ber
. 9a,
San
. 37b–39b, j.
San
. 105b,
Hul
. 13ab,
Tos
.
Hul
. 2.24, but, in pa
r
ticular, the ‘
Birkat ha–Minim
’ (‘
Cursing of
Minim
’), which includes ‘
Saddukim
’, Ber. 28b–29a,
Shab
. 116a and
Tos
.
Shab
. 13.5; for ‘
Saddukim
’ also see
Ber
. 7a, 10a, 56b, 58a,
San
. 38b, 90b, 106a,
Git
. 45b, 57a,
Ket
. 112a,
Shab
14b, 88a,
A.Z
. 40b,
Ned
. 49b,
Suk
48b,
Hul
. 87a,
Yeb
. 63b, etc., and Eccles.
R
. 1.8.

17.
Haraes
. 19.2.10, 20.3.2–4, 30.3.2, and 53.1.1–2.2 (which identifies them as ‘
the Elchasaites
’ – an obvious equivalence).

18. See Benjamin of Tudela,
Travels
: Years 1163–1165.

19. See Muhammad ibn al-Nadim,
Kitab al-Fihrist
9.1.

20. 4QTest I.5–8.

21. 1QS IX.11 – the allusion is to ‘
the Prophet
and the Messiah of Aaron and Israel
’.

22. See, for instance, Koran 2.82, 2.277, 3.114 (on a ‘James’-like Community Muhammad both recognizes and is familiar with), 84.25, etc.

23. Cf. Koran 2.173, 5.3, 6.146, 16.115, etc.

24. That is, ‘
strangled things
’ was probably a way of rendering into Greek a rather technical Hebreo-Arabic usage like ‘
ca
r
rion
’, particularly as it had something to do with carnivorous animals preying on more ‘
cud-chewing
’ ones usually via choking at the windpipe; cf. Ps.
Hom
. 7.3–4, 7.8, and 8.19 which make it very clear we are talking about ‘
carrion
’ and even describe it.

25. See J.B. Segal,
Edessa ‘The Blessed City
’, pp. 62–82; and note, too, the Greek
Acts of Thaddaeus
and the Syriac
The Doctrine of Addai
.

26. Moses of Chorene 2.26–29.

27. Cf. Koran 9.70 and its reference to the ‘
disasters which came upon them
’, 29.38, 41.15–19 (‘
loosening upon them a raging wind in Evil days
’), 41.41–45, 54.18–21, and 59.4–7; also see 14.9, 22.40–42, 46.21, and 26.123–50.

28. Cf. the Syriac
Doctrine of Addai
.

29. This matter has been widely discussed, but perhaps the best-known book detailing these origins and, in effect, starting the whole series of subsequent investigations was IanWilson’s
The Turin Shroud: The Burial Cloth of Jesus Christ
?, London, 1979.

30. See Gospel of Thomas 1.1.

31. Cf.
The Acts of Thomas
1.1,
The Doctrine of Addai
,
The Acts of Thaddaeus
,
The Teaching of the Apostles
, etc.

32. Though Eusebius himself only calls Thomas, ‘
Thomas
’, in
E.H.
1.13.4, in the actual correspondence he includes, there the sentence reads ‘
Judas who was also called Thomas, sent to himThaddaeus an Apostle, one of the Seventy
’, (1.12.10) and here the confusion between ‘
Apostle
’ and ‘
Disciple
’ is manifest.

33. Cf.
Apost. Const
. 8.25. A note identifies a variant manuscript as reading: ‘
Thaddaeus, also called Lebbaeus and who was surnamed Judas the Zealot, preached the Truth to the Edessenes and the People of Mesopotamia when Abgarus ruled over Edessa and was buried in Berytus of Phoenicia
’.

34.
E.H.
2.23.7.

35. Cf.
E.H.
1.12.1–4, which gives way to the ‘
Agbarus
’ story in 1.13; but also see Papias, Fragment X, who is totally co
n
fused about all these matters, falling on the horns of the dilemma (as it were) of how ‘
Mary the wife of Cleophas
’ could be the sister of her own sister ‘
Mary
’.