FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   >>  
of the Messianic expectation, which hardly permit us to suppose that the book was a product of our sect, however highly it may have been esteemed by it. The sect gives especial honor to the sons of Zadok, the ancient priesthood of the temple in Jerusalem (Ezek. 44 15, 2 Chron. 31 10, Sirach 51 12 Heb.); they are the chosen ones of Israel, men designated by name, who arose in the latter times (4 3); it was Zadok who brought to light the Book of the Law which no one had seen since the death of Eleazar and Joshua (5 5). The context of the latter passage would suggest that Zadok the contemporary of David is meant, who after the deposition of Abiathar became Solomon's chief priest.(72) The precedence given to the sons of Zadok may possibly have a side reference to the illegitimate high priests of Seleucid creation, such as Menelaus, though, if this were the intention, we should expect it to be emphasized. The passages quoted are the only places in the book in which the name Zadok or the sons of Zadok appear, and they are certainly a very slender reason for describing the body which produced the book as a "Zadokite" sect, whatever meaning may be attached to the term. On the contrary, one of the outstanding things in the constitution of the sect is the predominance of the lay element. The Supervisor is a layman; laymen form the majority in every court; the Messiah is the "Anointed from Aaron _and Israel_." Whether the external testimony upon which Dr. Schechter relies for justification of the name is more adequate will be considered below. Zadok and the sons of Zadok suggest the Sadducees,(73) whose name, according to the most probable explanation, designates them as descendants (or followers and partisans) of Zadok. Here again it is a question whether Zadok of David's time is meant, so that the Sadducees were the Zadokite aristocracy of the priesthood, as most modern scholars think, or whether the name of the Sadducee sect is derived from a heresiarch of much later times, as the Jewish legend represents which makes Zadok, from whom the sect descends, a recalcitrant disciple of Antigonus of Socho, about the middle of the second century B.C., contemporary, if we rightly interpret our texts, with the origin of the sect we are studying. With the Sadducees, as we know them from the New Testament, Josephus, and rabbinical sources, our sect cannot well be identified. There is, however, a sect sometimes associated with the Sadd
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   >>  



Top keywords:

Sadducees

 

suggest

 

Israel

 

contemporary

 

priesthood

 
Zadokite
 

considered

 

designates

 

partisans

 

followers


descendants
 

probable

 

explanation

 

laymen

 

majority

 

layman

 

Supervisor

 
constitution
 

predominance

 

element


Messiah

 

Anointed

 

Schechter

 

relies

 

justification

 

testimony

 
Messianic
 
Whether
 

external

 
adequate

origin

 

studying

 

interpret

 
century
 

rightly

 

Testament

 

identified

 

Josephus

 
rabbinical
 

sources


middle

 

Sadducee

 

derived

 

heresiarch

 

things

 

scholars

 
aristocracy
 
modern
 

Jewish

 

disciple