A Cautionary Tale:The Damascus Document and the

Dating of Biblical Texts David Z. MosterBar-Ilan University

Outline

1. The Damascus Document

2. The Dating of Biblical Texts

3. Implications

Part I: The Damascus Document

Solomon Schechter and the Cairo Genizah

Discovery: 1896Printed: 1910

Schechter and Moore

•Date: the Second Temple Period, ca. 176 BCE

Schechter’s and Moore’s Argument

1. External source: Jacob al-Kirkisānī describes the details of Zadok’s books

2. Internal source: The Damascus Document dates itself to approximately 176 BCE

3. No mention of later peoples, places, or events

George Margoliouth

• Date: Early Christianity, ca. First or Second Century CE

Margoliouth’s Argument• “Love thy neighbor as thyself” (Damascus

Document, 5:17) ≈ Matthew 7:12 and Luke 6:31

• “The root” is John the Baptist

• “The man of scoffing” is Paul

• “The teacher of righteousness” is Jesus

• “The new covenant” is the New Testatment

Adolf Büchler, Louis Ginzberg, and Solomon Zeitlin

•Date: The Geonic Period, ca. 600-800 CE

Büchler’s, Ginzberg’s, and Zeitlin’s Argument

•Talmudic-like laws

•Talmudic-like writing style

•Late language, e.g., ”wise one“ ,מׂשכיל

•Rabbinic chronology

Dating Summary

• Schechter and Moore: 176 BCE

• Margouliouth: First to Second Centuries CE

• Büchler, Ginzberg, and Zeitlin: Seventh to Eighth Centuries CE

Key Question

Can ideas and

language be dated?

Approximate Dates for the Qumran Manuscripts: 56 and 87 BCE

Part II: Dating Biblical Texts

14

Standard Method

1. Identify the ideas and writing styles of a period.

2. Biblical texts with similar ideas and writing styles are matched to the corresponding period.

Baruch Levine’s Date for Leviticus: The Persian Period of the Second

Temple Era, ca. 538-331 BCE

Argument

• Exile in Leviticus 26

• Focus on priests

• Mixed population

• Language:,קום אסר, דגל, עדה

Jacob Milgrom’s Date for Leviticus The First Temple Period,

ca. 1000 – 586 BCE

Argument

• Exile in Leviticus 26

• Language: ,מטה אלף, נשיא, אשם

Summary for LeviticusLevine Milgrom

Benjamin Sommer“Dating Pentateuchal Texts and the Perils of Pseudo-Historicism”

Leviticus 26 According to Sommer

Part III: Implications for Future Research

Implications

• Dating ideas and language is highly subjective

• The traditional method is not controlled, reliable, or repeatable

Dating of Job• Patriarchal period, ca.

1500 BCE

• Mosaic period, ca. 1200 BCE

• Solomonic period, ca. 950 BCE

• Assyrian invasion, ca. 740 BCE

• Late eighth century, ca. 700 BCE

• Exilic period, ca. 550 BCE

• Early fifth century, ca. 480 BCE

• Fourth century, ca. 350 BCE

• Hellenistic Period, ca. 188-170 BCE

Limitations

• One test case

• There are no other similar cases

• Conclusions are preliminary and future research is welcome

Conclusion

• Traditional method was off by 300-1000 years

• Those who did not date ideas and language were most correct

• The Damascus Document should serve as a cautionary tale for the dating of biblical texts

Thank YouDavidMoster@gmail.com