This article engages the problem of whether the five manuscripts classified as 4QReworked Pentateuch (4Q158, 4Q364–367) should be considered extrabiblical compositions or simply expansive copies of the Pentateuch. Since similar methods of reworking scripture appear in both types of text, focusing on the ways scripture is reworked in the 4QRP manuscripts cannot solve the problem. Other criteria such as the literary voice, scope, and coverage of a work are more promising. The fragmentary state of the texts, however, precludes a definitive solution and requires that multiple possibilities be considered.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 331 | 40 | 2 |
Full Text Views | 129 | 1 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 72 | 4 | 0 |
This article engages the problem of whether the five manuscripts classified as 4QReworked Pentateuch (4Q158, 4Q364–367) should be considered extrabiblical compositions or simply expansive copies of the Pentateuch. Since similar methods of reworking scripture appear in both types of text, focusing on the ways scripture is reworked in the 4QRP manuscripts cannot solve the problem. Other criteria such as the literary voice, scope, and coverage of a work are more promising. The fragmentary state of the texts, however, precludes a definitive solution and requires that multiple possibilities be considered.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 331 | 40 | 2 |
Full Text Views | 129 | 1 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 72 | 4 | 0 |