Christianity
The Sermon on the Mount and the Renewal of the Covenant
Abstract
© Dr M D Magee
Contents Updated: Friday, November 20, 1998
Precedence and the Annual Festival of Renewal
Hierarchy was strictly enforced. Each year all the camps—the village communities—assembled probably at Qumran for the Feast of the Renewal of the Covenant, the principle holy day of the year, to renew the covenant and to allow initiates to be regraded. It was held at Pentecost, the feast of the new wheat, the Jewish feast of weeks, in about the beginning of June. It was the chief of the agricultural festivals which were held every 50 days (whence “pentecontads” from the Greek for fiftieth). Unfortunately the parts of the Damascus Rule describing it have been “lost” or exist only in fragments. In the gospels it is depicted as the feeding of the five thousand—the feeding was spiritual.
The annual convention at Qumran probably explains the animal remains found there and the graves of a few women and children. The animal remains, once thought to have been remains of sacrifices, are now thought to be remains of the meals provided for the faithful—actual food not spiritual food! The women and children buried there were unfortunate enough to have died during the holy celebrations.
The Essene organization was arranged to reflect the nation of Israel as a whole whence the distinction between Israel and all Israel in the scrolls. They had castes of priests, Levites, lay people and converts—the four ranks of membership spoken of by Josephus. At the Renewal Ceremony, priests and levites respectively relate God’s kindness to Israel and Israel’s failings before God. Sectaries pledged themselves anew to the principles of the sect and confessed their sins—the origin of the Catholic Confession. Acknowledgment of guilt is followed by public repentance. The confessions having been heard the Priests call upon God to bless the congregation, to “preserve them from evil” and to grant them wisdom and knowledge. Lastly Belial—the name the Community preferred for the Devil—is cursed and apostates of the sect equally cursed, the congregation calling out Amen to each blessing and curse.
Lay Essenes were divided into twelve tribes, Israel historically having been split into twelve tribes. The Community Rule prescribes a council of twelve men and three priests, without being absolutely clear whether the three are included in or excluded from the twelve, or whether the Mebaqqer is himself included or stands above the other members:
There shall be in the council of the community twelve men, and there shall be three priests who are perfect in all that has been revealed of the whole law. They shall practise truth and righteousness and justice and lovingkindness and walking humbly each with his neighbour; preserve faithfulness in the land with steadfastness and meekness; atone for sin by the practice of justice and by suffering the sorrows of affliction; walk with all by the standard of truth and by the rule of the time.
Interestingly in Micah 5:5 fifteen leaders are prescribed to assist the messiah in defeating the gentiles but it consists of seven shepherds and eight principal men. A scroll fragment clarifies the constitution of the council of the community—it also refers to a council of fifteen men. This will have been the Nazarene set up too, Jesus having twelve apostles, the gospel writers not knowing or admitting that there were three additional priests. Yet when the Jerusalem Church is founded Paul says three apostles are special, the pillar apostles—Peter, James and John. In the gospels more than twelve apostles are mentioned, and in Acts 1:20-26 an apostle is appointed to replace the dead Judas, proving that the apostles were not peerless but were fulfilling an office and could be replaced.
One can guess that the higher echelons of the Essenes were ranked thus: 1 Nasi (Messiah), 3 priests, 4 levites, 8 principal men. The 3 priests and 4 levites were the shepherds, and the 4 levites and the 8 principal men were the Twelve. The War Rule indirectly supports an apparent Council membership of sixteen, including the messianic leader. It says the prince of the congregation has inscribed on his battle shield, his own name, the names Israel, Levi and Aaron and the names of the twelve tribes—sixteen names reflecting the full Council.
Within each rank, everyone had his place, which was reassessed annually. If ten or more Essenes met then a priest, learned in the “Book of Meditation”, had to be present and the priest said grace at the common meals. The priesthood regarded themselves as the perfect priests of Ezekiel’s heavenly temple, sons of Zadok, the keepers of the covenant. In the village situation, if there were no priest available, a Levite could be substituted when the ten gathered.
Priests, levites, the men of Israel and the proselytes to be enrolled by name and inscribed by name, in order. The Damascus Rule tells that they assembled in their ranks, the priests, then the Levites and after them:
all the people one after another in their thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens, that every Israelite may know his place in the Community of God.
This description of the ranks, which follows Exodus 18:25, is reminiscent of that used in the mass feedings of Mark’s gospel but which gets edited down or out in the others:
And he commanded them to make all sit down by companies upon the green grass. And they sat down in ranks, by hundreds, and by fifties.Mk 6:39-40
The War Scroll even refers to groupings of myriads—ten thousands. The Essenes could never have been so numerous that there were divisions of myriads because Philo tells us there were only 4000 all together. Scholars reckon that there could never have been more than 200 Essenes in permanent occupation at Qumran. Yet, the number of people saved in Revelation is 144,000. They are plainly Essenes, and indeed monastic ones, for they were not defiled with women—they were virgins. The conclusion is that they were providing for bigger numbers than they ever achieved, but numbers they expected to achieve in the last days.
The men of perfect holiness in the desert will have attracted lay support from quite early in their existence and it is possible that pious converts of the simple of Ephraim—Jews who had been led astray by the smooth things of the Pharisees—became village Essenes. The Commentary on Nahum explains that the ranks of the sectaries would be expanded, prior to the battle with the sons of darkness, by the conversion of the simple of Ephraim. As the kingdom drew nigh the numbers of such converts were expected to explode as the new covenant attracted back to the fold the lost sheep of the house of Israel. The Rule of the Congregation is written specifically for all the congregation of Israel that will join the community in the last days. The phrase, “all the congregation of Israel”, implies that many Jews were expected to return to the fold by the end time. Rankings of myriads would then have been justified.
Then the Master, the leader of the monastic community, questioned everyone on all matters to assess their progress and regrade them, according to the perfection of their spirit. All of the sectaries had their progress checked and their rank for the following year recorded. No one could alter their registered rank except by being re-graded and registered in a new rank at the renewal.
After the regrading, the Master would have given an exhortation, an example of which is provided in the Damascus Rule. Matthew’s sermon on the mount is an evangelical attempt at recording the speech.
Essene rankings were evidently extremely strictly enforced but they must have been quite dynamic because the obedience of the ordinances needed to maintain a ranking was also strict. Essenes were to be perfectly versed in the law, truth, righteousness, justice, lovingkindness, mercy to his fellows and humility, and be ready to suffer the sorrows of affliction. If anyone strayed in these qualities he would be downgraded in rank.
The key was humility. Humility was an important virtue to the Essenes. They called themselves the meek and the poor. Precedence for them depended on each Essene’s fulfilment of their ordinances and these were heavily weighted in favour of humility. First in order for them did not imply standing above but standing below, putting service to God and his brethren before anything else and especially personal ambitions, as it did to Jesus. Ambition and pride were sins which were punished by relegation to the bottom of the hierarchy. Thus the first were last and the last first. Matthew has the Essene idea of precedent perfectly expressed:
He that is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.Matthew 23:11-12
Thus we can be sure that there was no room at all for ambition or pride in the ranks of the Essenes. If a priest were sanctimonious or boorish he would be reduced to the ranks, or expelled. For the Essenes precedence seemed to mean exactly what Jesus was teaching, whereas outside the Essene movement precedence was much as we take it to be.
Mark knew of the Essene rules of precedence based on this dictum and wanted to get it into his narrative. In Mark 9:33-35, Jesus’s converts, the disciples, want to know who was superior among them. No one seemed to have any idea who was first among them, seemingly implying that they had all been treated as equals. Jesus’s answer, as expressed above, seems to us to deny the strict rules of precedence of the Essenes, but in fact it does not, once the humility principle upon which they were built is understood.
Evidently the Master was also Mebaqqer of all the camps, the leader of the organization at large because he presided over this annual gathering, and carried out the spiritual examination of the sectaries. The priest who called the gathering—the titular head of the organization—had to be between 30 and 60 and the Mebaqqer had to be between 30 and 50. In Luke Jesus was about 30 at his baptism and in John it is observed that Jesus was not yet 50—he had to be under 50 if he were to be the Master or Mebaqqer of all the Nazarene camps. Plainly, Jesus was a Mebaqqer. He is called, Master and evidently his disciples were concerned with precedence.
In Mark, Jesus gives James and John a mini-tutorial on precedence, which, from the questions he asks, seem to pertain to them joining the sect.
Can ye drink of the cup that I drink of? and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? And they said unto him, We can. And Jesus said unto them, Ye shall indeed drink of the cup that I drink of; and with the baptism that I am baptized withal shall ye be baptized.Mark 10:35-45
This is obviously part of an initiation, referring to baptism and the messianic meal (the cup is the wine—breaking bread has been omitted to disguise it from the last supper which has no precedents in Christian tradition, but the importance of bread is constant elsewhere in the gospels). In the context of the approach to Jerusalem these words look prophetic—Christians having been led to believe that “the cup I drink of” was a metaphor for Jesus’s death—but this is the skill of the compiler not anything intrinsic in the words, which are quite innocuous.
Jesus also gives a non-rebuking answer to the brothers’ request to be alongside him in the kingdom. The simple answer is it is not for Jesus to decide. In the final judgement all rankings will be God’s decision, but a sentence which has been conjoined suggests that He will have already made his choice. This ties in well with Essene fatalism. In the coming kingdom, hierarchies, like gentile kings lording it over their administrators and these over their subjects will not apply. For the Nazarenes, greatness is service—and so it will be in God’s kingdom. The communism of the Essenes will extend into the kingdom, not surprisingly since they considered that they had already started to build it on earth.
This story in the gospels is not remembered as the actual calling of James and John but is used to suggest that they had overweening pride. In fact, as Jesus’s pillar apostles, John and James had significant roles at the Pentecostal festival of the renewal of the covenant. They were two of Jesus’s priestly assistants who always seemed to be present on ritual occasions. They must have participated in the ceremony of precedence at the festival—possibly as antagonists, like Peter in his ceremonial role as Satan. The tradition came to Mark in the form of their seeking some advantage, and he has used bits of it in several different places as it suited him. The two are really participating in a ritualized drama showing to the simple of Ephraim that in the Essene way of things precedence depends on service.
One scroll fragment is an excommunication test. According to this fragment, the purpose of Pentecost was not the Christian one of celebrating the descent of the holy spirit, but to curse those who depart from the law. Evidently those suspected of transgressing had to undergo a ritual purification. This is exactly what James required of Paul at his final Pentecostal visit to Jerusalem to prove that he was still walking in the way and keeping the law. Paul believed and taught that the curse of departing from the law had been lifted by Jesus having been hung on a tree, a debasing punishment.
Offending Limbs
For Essenes the ideal state was chastity and members of the monastic order were celibate. In Mark 9:43-49, Jesus tirades against carnal sin by recommending that various bits be torn out rather than allow them to cause sin. Of course, he did not expect people to go about castrating themselves because they might be lustful as Origen did—and he was not alone—making himself a Christian equivalent of the Galli of the Great Mother Goddess Cybele, foot being a euphemism for the penis. The three sins highlighted are plainly masturbation, unlawful sex and even looking upon someone lustfully.
Curiously, this speech is presented as a call and response litany, suggesting it was part of a ritual, and could preserve a genuine tradition of the Essenes, who were fond of this sort of chanting, and takes the line to be expected of an apocalyptic sect. The point as ever is that the kingdom might arrive at any moment. No one should be tempted to do anything sexual, using any part of their body to commit a sin, lest they be left with no time to repent anew before the salting with fire. Entry into God’s kingdom requires spiritual wholeness not physical wholeness.
Why is it presented as a litany? It serves no obvious purpose for the early church and we must conclude that it is presented in that way because that is how it came to Mark. It must therefore have been part of a Nazarene ritual. It must be a recollection either of an initiation ceremony or of the Festival of the Renewal of the Covenant, the main festival of the Essene year, the one when the membership were regraded. It involves the determination of precedence, and all the gospel references to precedence must have come from the annual regrading.
At one time, in rational explanation of the gospel story, the theory was proposed that it was not a real event but consisted of recollections of a religious drama, a sort of mystery play. It now seems that the idea was not far off the mark. Chunks of the gospels seem to be memories of Essene liturgy and ritual, parts of which might have been dramatized. The source of them will largely have been the annual renewal festival.
Jesus’s speech in Mark concludes with a reference to seasoning with fire, the judgement which accompanies the kingdom and which is only unpleasant for the unrighteous—an echo of John the Baptist’s announcement of one who will baptize with fire.
For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt. Salt is good: but if the salt have lost his saltness, wherewith will ye season it? Have salt in yourselves, and have peace one with another.Mark 9:49-50
The ending of the speech seems incoherent. The sense of salt has changed from a metaphorical purification to something else. Yet salt cannot mean “salt” because “salt” does not lose its saltiness, and prelates’ appeals to the interesting but irrelevant properties of the Dead Sea deposits are desperate.
The end of Mark 9:49 is missing in many old manuscripts. It refers to temple sacrifice from Leviticus 2:13 though many Christians will assume it is some arcane reference to Jesus’s death. It seems to have been included in some codices as a pseudo explanation of what salt is in Mark 9:50, an explanation that the followers of Jesus would not have needed. Leviticus uses the metaphor “the salt of the covenant of thy God”. Salt means God’s Covenant.
The New Covenant ordains that no one is first. All are judged equally in the fire of judgement. You would cut off a hateful limb or pluck out a lustful eye, if necessary, to enter the kingdom. So it is with those who do not uphold God’s covenant. God’s covenant is good but, if no one upholds it, then there is no other good. The implication is that they must put the covenant in their hearts, as Jeremiah wanted, and have peace with each other. The ending is an obvious exhortation to unity—an essential of successful rebellion.
The Sermon on the Mount
Matthew and Luke in the sermon on the mount (Mt 5:1-7:27; Lk 6:20-49) are drawing a picture of this spectacle—whether Essene or proselyte, they must have seen it.
The Rule of the Congregation directs that, in the last days, when all the congregation of Israel joins the community to walk according to the law of the sons of Zadok, the priests and the men of their covenant who have turned aside from the way of the people, then the men of His council keeping His covenant and offering expiation for the land amidst iniquity shall summon them all when they come, the little children and the women also and they shall read into their ears the precepts of the covenant and shall expound to them all their statutes, that they may no longer stray in their errors. This is precisely what Jesus is doing in the sermon on the mount. He is reading to the simple of Ephraim, who have repented and joined the new covenant, the precepts and statutes that they have to obey until the appointed day of the Lord.
There seems no obstacle to restoring the speech here, but we shall be content merely to indicate points of similarity between the sermon and the disciplines of the Essenes. Even though most of the original words are lost, it has much in common with the books of rules of the Essenes, as would be expected if the newly baptized Nazarene followers were being read the rules. Matthew’s sermon is much fuller than Luke’s, possibly because Matthew was an Essene. It begins with nine blessings, but originally there were probably only seven. The reward of the poor in spirit in verse 3 and the persecuted in verse 10 is the same because verse 10 has been added, and the slightly different blessing in verse 11 has also been added. Luke adds woes to his blessings and is more likely to be authentic, Matthew having omitted the woes to try to keep Jesus in character.
5:3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 5:4 Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted. 5:5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. 5:6 Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled. 5:7 Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy. 5:8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God. 5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. 5:10 Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessings in the scrolls are quite common though usually the elect are blessing God, but one of the scrolls has a set of beatitudes similar in form to these. The words used in Matthew are purely Essene even to the use of “poor in spirit” which occurs for example in the War Scroll but otherwise is unknown in old scriptures. We find “the poor”, “the meek”, those “hungering” and “thirsting for righteousness”, “the merciful”, “the pure in heart”. The reward of those who are blessed is to “inherit the earth” or to “enter the kingdom of God”—the very expectations of the apocalyptic Essenes. Note also that in Matthew 5:9 Jesus is calling his followers, the “children of God”. When he talks about children in the gospels, he means—as here—the repentant, or the children of Israel. The Essenes were fond of calling themselves “children” also, though the word is usually translated in the masculine making them “sons”. No one can deny the common origin of these verses and the Dead Sea writings.
Suddenly the next two verses (Mt 5:11-12) are directed at the audience when previously they had been impersonal blessings, and Jesus loses his normal modesty, blessing those who suffer for “my sake” when the real Jesus would only have spoken of “God’s sake”. They have been Christianized, emphasisng persecution—a later phase of the development of the religion. Matthew 5:12 was probably:
Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so rewarded were the prophets which were before you.
The next verses (Mt 5:13-16) have been taken from a different context in Mark. However the expression “Ye are the light of the world” must be genuinely Nazarene.
This liturgy was probably followed by the Essene creed given in Matthew 25:31-36 in the form of a final judgement. The judge is introduced as the Son of man who comes with the angels in glory and judges all nations, dividing them into sheep and goats. The king announces to the sheep, the righteous at his right hand:
Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
The righteous do not understand but the king tells them:
Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
Then in typically Essene fashion the wicked on the left hand are cursed and sent into everlasting punishment, but the righteous are sent into everlasting life. This passage is singularly Essene in words and form, matching the litanies of the Community Rule in the initial part when the novice was being introduced to the order! This passage should be restored to here.
It is relevant to note that very similar phraseology to this in Matthew appears in the Testament of Joseph in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, where we find:
I was beset by hunger and the Lord himself nourished me. I was sick and the Lord visited me. I was alone and the Lord comforted me.
The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, though Christianized, are considered to have been adapted from Essene originals dating from about 100 BC. It seems likely that Matthew draws upon an Essene tradition for this litany.
In the next verses of the sermon (Mt 5:17-20) Jesus explains why he is not come to destroy the law. But why should anyone think that Jesus had come to destroy the law? Either this passage is out of context or part of the speech has been omitted. In the Damascus Rule the price of departing from the law is death, which means everlasting death—no admission into God’s kingdom. Jesus tells the simple of Ephraim that they need not think that because they have repented and been baptized that they were absolved from God’s laws, saying:
Ye are forgiven and baptized as repentant sinners but think not that the gates of the kingdom are wide open to you all; think not that the glory of God’s kingdom meaneth an end to the law. This son of man is come not to destroy the law but to fulfil it.
Later (Mt 5:19) those who break the law or cause others to break it are merely called the least in the kingdom of heaven—the work of a Christian editor. Such people would not enter the kingdom! The Essenes (Damascus Rule) said anyone teaching apostasy will be treated as if they are possessed—the punishment (Lev 20:27) was death. Having vowed to keep the law, anyone who broke it was punished by death, and anyone who vowed to break the law was punished by death. For the Essenes, everlasting death was meant—they would be turned away from God’s kingdom.
Now follows a set of assertions introduced by “You have heard that it was said” and linked to their rebuttal by “but I say to you”. This form of argument is paralleled in the scrolls. One Qumran document, apparently a letter, lays out a set of 22 false interpretations of law and their rebuttal. A series of assertions are prefaced “You say” and are answered by arguments preceded by “but we think”—in essence the same as Jesus does in his sermon.
The first proclaims that no one should bear malice against a brother but should be reconciled with him as quickly as possible. Matthew also handles this elsewhere (Mt 18:15-20) laying out rules for handling disputes.
Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.
The Essene rule books are equally concerned that those in the order should not bear malice but settle disputes. They were to follow Leviticus 19:17:
Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him.
In both the Community Rule and the Damascus Document they are commanded to bring bad feelings into the open by telling the elect to rebuke one another in truth, humility and charity. In other words, rather than letting a grievance fester, it should be brought out.
let him rebuke him on the very same day lest he incur sin because of him. And let no man accuse his companion before the congregation without having first admonished him in the presence of witnesses.
The aggrieved person must rebuke his brother before witnesses, and not, through anger, take the law into his own hands, or even think evil. If a grievance is confronted, witnesses being present, and there not being satisfaction, the problem could then be taken to higher authorities, and ultimately to the council of the community. The procedure in Matthew is practically identical. In Hebrew the word “congregation” here is the word which was habitually translated into Greek as “ecclesia” and thence “church” in English. It literally means “the called”. Thus the two passages are directly equivalent.
Note that in the sermon on the mount (Mt 5:22) a hierarchy is mentioned one step of which was the council. This was not the Great Sanhedrin but the Essene council of the community. Finally Jesus seems to regard bearing malice as equivalent to murder, the punishment being the ultimate sanction of death and hell-fire. The Damascus Rule tells us that to speak against another in the heat of anger is a capital matter. Now it is true that the whole question must have been more complicated, certainly for the monastic sectaries who had lesser punishments prescribed for various violations of this rule. But the ultimate sanction was everlasting death, and Jesus and the Nazarenes must have felt that a punishment such as exclusion from the sacred meal for a year was superfluous and could never atone for the sin because the kingdom would have arrived within a year. Verses 5:23 to 5:26 in Matthew have been added for the benefit of orthodox Jews and gentiles.
Matthew 5:27 to 5:32 on adultery appear in a different context in Mark and are dealt with there. It is not to say that Matthew added them out of context here—perhaps Mark did—but that Jesus must have warned against adultery on different occasions.
Next Jesus teaches that oaths are unnecessary because no one should ever tell lies (Mt 5:33-37). We have seen the concern of the community for truth. The Community Rule calls the group the “community of truth”. They rail against “the lie”. Josephus says they refused to swear on oath and were excused from taking the oath of loyalty to Herod. The sermon on the mount includes the duty to turn the other cheek towards an aggressor and this too is an Essene precept. The Essenes hated their enemies without compunction, an apparent significant difference with what Jesus was teaching. But the Essenes had to love each other, and the Nazarenes had to show mercy to any Jew willing to repent. Matthew has lost something in the speech that would have put the statement in context. If Jesus were really telling the Jews to love their Roman oppressors, it would be equivalent to a German Jew in 1944 telling his fellows to love the Nazis, or a Palestinian Arab today being told to love the Jews. It is absolutely incredible! Jesus wanted Jews to love Jews not the foreign tyrants. The proof is that he does not say “Even Romans do the same”, but “Even publicans do the same”. He is talking only about Jews.
In Matthew 5:48 Jesus says:
Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.
This is purely Essene! Some fragmentary texts convey to us that perfection language is important to the community. Thus the scrolls and fragments have “the perfect of the way”, “perfection of the way”, “walking in perfection” and “perfect holiness” (cf 2 Cor 7:1). The way terminology also illustrated in these expressions and very common in the scrolls is similarly echoed in Acts (see 16:16, 18:24f, 24:22).
The whole feeling of Essene writings is one of immense—perhaps excessive—modesty. In Matthew 6:1 to 6:8, Jesus tells the recruits that they should not offer alms or pray flamboyantly but do these things quietly—even secretly. The sentiments of 6:16 to 6:19 on fasting are the same. Essenes did not believe in self-praise. They were “the poor”, “the meek” and “the downtrodden”—they believed in being humble. They dressed in simple clothes which they wore to rags. Grandeur and conceit were the opposite of their ideals. So Jesus’s homily against flamboyant prayer and alms-giving was quite in character, though nothing explicitly seems to match them among the Qumran writings. The warning about vain repetitions might seem odd in the context of the Qumran material where it is clear that the litany therein was repeatedly used, but Jesus was speaking of private prayer. Ceremonial necessarily involves repeated procedures and prayers, otherwise it is another of the many injunctions of Jesus that the Christians happily flout.
The prayer which Jesus offers in Matthew 6:9 to 6:13, known as “The Lord’s Prayer”, is thoroughly Essene—a prayer for God’s kingdom to come on earth as it was in heaven, and for the righteous to keep righteous until it came. In Matthew 6:19 to 6:21 and 6:24 we can hear the words of the Ebionim. Treasure on earth is worthless but the righteous store up treasure in heaven. Matthew 6:22 and 6:23 are about the dualistic theory of light and dark being metaphors for good and evil—thoroughly Essene, who call themselves “the sons of light” and their enemies “the sons of darkness”. Christians were ever after fond of the same imagery. The Epistle of Barnabas is a second century Christian but non-canonical work full of Qumran expressions such as “the way of light”, “the way of darkness”, “the way of holiness”, “the way of death”, “the last judgement”, “uncircumcised heart”, “dark Lord” and such.
Matthew 6:25 to 6:31 are again saying that Essenes have no care for personal adornment, adding to it the idea that God will provide food for the righteous. The kingdom would shortly be here and so there was no need to have to store up anything. But Christian editors have seen the opportunity to introduce apparent rejection of the food taboos once more. Jesus could never have expected Jews to eat anything.
Next Matthew adds in a battery of proverbs, some of which might have been Essene but will probably not have been part of the original speech, at any rate in this simplistic form. Then at Matthew 7:24 to 7:27 Jesus concludes with more plainly Essene material, talking of building houses with sound foundations. The Essenes regarded themselves as masons. The Greek word translated “carpenter” in the gospels is “tekton” meaning a builder whence the word “architect”. Essenes were fond of building metaphors. Their council of the community was the foundation of the kingdom of heaven on earth.
The Christian Reply
Christians are desperate to pretend there is no point of connexion between the Sermon and the scrolls. Some self-appointed Christian guru on the web wheedles thus:
There are points of similarity between the Sermon on the Mount and various known teachings and phrases in use at Qumran, but there is no single document that comes even remotely close in content/structure to the Sermon on the Mount.
Note the way the point at issue changes. No one is suggesting that the Sermon on the Mount appears even “remotely” in the Dead Sea Scrolls. If it had been found there, you can be sure the Christian curators of the scrolls over the last six decades would have “lost” it somehow. The whole point is that there are points of similarity and they are too close to be accidental. James C VanderKam, a Qumran scholar notes in The Dead Sea Scrolls Today that Qumran word usage appears in the Sermon on the Mount:
Another section that offers several Qumran-sounding words and phrases is the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5-7. One of these expressions is “poor in spirit” (Mt 5:3; War Rule 14.7). Among the attitudes encouraged in the Sermon are avoiding the use of oaths (5:33-37), which, according to Josephus (Antiquities 15.371), was an Essene trait, and the duty to turn the other cheek (5:38-39; Manual of Discipline 10.17-18). Moreover, the antitheses in the Sermon remind one of the… legal letter…
The Christian guru fatuously comments:
It should be readily apparent that “Qumran-sounding words and phrases”, “Essene traits”, and “reminds one of…” formulas do NOT encourage you to equate the Sermon on the Mount with a specific Qumran document! “Similarities” and “points of contact” between the Dead Sea Scrolls and Christianity mean very, very little.
Note the cheat again—specific document? It is typical Christian dishonesty to constantly change the point at issue in this way and it is quite hard for the unwary to keep track of what is going on. The accumulation of similarities means a “very, very” great deal and it is purely Christian dishonesty that denies it and tries to gloss over it.
Christians, used to taking everything they know from the “authoritative” books called the bible have a habit of quoting biblical authorities too, as if it settled the argument. This guru quotes Theodore Gaster who wrote one of the earliest books on the scrolls The Scriptures of the Dead Sea Sect, seemingly regarding Gaster’s view as final:
Just as many ideas and phrases in the Dead Sea Scrolls as can be paralleled from the New Testament can be paralleled equally well from the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament—that is, from the non-canonical Jewish “scriptures” that were circulating between 200 BC and 100 AD—and from the earlier strata of the Talmud. Moreover, many of them find place also in the ancient doctrines of such sects as the Mandaeans of Iraq and Iran and the Samaritans, so that even if they have not come down to us through Jewish channels, we can still recognize in them part of the common Palestinian thought and folklore of the time. Accordingly, to draw from the New Testament parallels any inference of special relationship is misleading.
What Gaster could not know despite his typically confident tone is that the many Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, the Mandaean religion and the New Testament Samaritans all had their roots in the exclusiveness of the sects in the late Hellenistic period, and possibly specifically the Essenes. The Maccabees aligned themselves with the Hasids who were the same or a related sect to the Essenes, and between them they manufactured scriptures to justify the Jewish free state.
There are simply too many metaphorical allusions of the Sermon on the Mount which match the Essenes’ philosophy to be merely serendipitous.
