Jonathan Klawans, Impurity and Sin in Ancient Judaism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 75. The first to identify this conflation was Jacob Neusner, The Idea of Purity in Ancient Judaism (Leiden: Brill, 1973), 54. Other scholars who have echoed this idea include: Michael Newton, The Concept of Purity at Qumran and in the Letters of Paul (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985); and Florentino García Martínez, “The Problem of Purity: The Qumran Solution,” in The People of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Their Writings, Beliefs, and Practices, ed. Florentino García Martínez and Julio Trebolle Barrera (Leiden: Brill, 1995), 139–57. Hannah Harrington offers a modified position in that she argues that the sect regarded sin as ritually impure, but did not view ritual impurity as sinful (“The Nature of Impurity at Qumran” in The Dead Sea Scrolls: Fifty Years after Their Discovery, 1947–1997, ed. L.H. Schiffman, E. Tov, and J.C. VanderKam [Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 2000], 610–16). The main dissenting view is found in Martha Himmelfarb, “Impurity and Sin in 4QD, 1QS, and 4Q512,” dsd 8:1 (2001): 9–37. Himmelfarb acknowledges a conflation of purity and sin, but sees it as a metaphorical innovation, not an actual legislative one. A very thorough overview of all of these views appears in Haber, “They Shall Purify Themselves,” 47–71.

Jonathan Klawans, Impurity and Sin in Ancient Judaism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 75. The first to identify this conflation was Jacob Neusner, The Idea of Purity in Ancient Judaism (Leiden: Brill, 1973), 54. Other scholars who have echoed this idea include: Michael Newton, The Concept of Purity at Qumran and in the Letters of Paul (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985); and Florentino García Martínez, “The Problem of Purity: The Qumran Solution,” in The People of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Their Writings, Beliefs, and Practices, ed. Florentino García Martínez and Julio Trebolle Barrera (Leiden: Brill, 1995), 139–57. Hannah Harrington offers a modified position in that she argues that the sect regarded sin as ritually impure, but did not view ritual impurity as sinful (“The Nature of Impurity at Qumran” in The Dead Sea Scrolls: Fifty Years after Their Discovery, 1947–1997, ed. L.H. Schiffman, E. Tov, and J.C. VanderKam [Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 2000], 610–16). The main dissenting view is found in Martha Himmelfarb, “Impurity and Sin in 4QD, 1QS, and 4Q512,” dsd 8:1 (2001): 9–37. Himmelfarb acknowledges a conflation of purity and sin, but sees it as a metaphorical innovation, not an actual legislative one. A very thorough overview of all of these views appears in Haber, “They Shall Purify Themselves,” 47–71.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

See also Eibert J.C. Tigchelaar, “ ‘Spiritual People’, ‘Fleshly Spirit’, and ‘Vision of Meditation’: Reflections on 4QInstruction and 1 Corinthians,” in Echoes from the Caves: Qumran and the New Testament, ed. Florentino García Martínez (stdj 85; Leiden: Brill, 2009), 103–18. Tigchelaar understands the fleshly spirit in Hodayot to refer generally to humanity (110). Matthew Goff understands the term in Hodayot as having a “biological” sense that denotes human mortality and bodily existence (“Being Fleshly or Spiritual: Anthropological Reflection and Exegesis of Genesis 1–3 in 4QInstruction and First Corinthians,” in Christian Body, Christian Self: Concepts of Early Christian Personhood, ed. Clare K. Rothschild and Trevor W. Thompson [Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011], 45). In contrast, Frey understands the “spirit of flesh” in Hodayot as referring “to the human spirit, which is characterized as fleshly, i.e. not capable of grasping God’s counsel and his wondrous deeds” (“Flesh and Spirit,” 379).

See also Eibert J.C. Tigchelaar, “ ‘Spiritual People’, ‘Fleshly Spirit’, and ‘Vision of Meditation’: Reflections on 4QInstruction and 1 Corinthians,” in Echoes from the Caves: Qumran and the New Testament, ed. Florentino García Martínez (stdj 85; Leiden: Brill, 2009), 103–18. Tigchelaar understands the fleshly spirit in Hodayot to refer generally to humanity (110). Matthew Goff understands the term in Hodayot as having a “biological” sense that denotes human mortality and bodily existence (“Being Fleshly or Spiritual: Anthropological Reflection and Exegesis of Genesis 1–3 in 4QInstruction and First Corinthians,” in Christian Body, Christian Self: Concepts of Early Christian Personhood, ed. Clare K. Rothschild and Trevor W. Thompson [Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011], 45). In contrast, Frey understands the “spirit of flesh” in Hodayot as referring “to the human spirit, which is characterized as fleshly, i.e. not capable of grasping God’s counsel and his wondrous deeds” (“Flesh and Spirit,” 379).)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Goff, “Being Fleshly or Spiritual,” 44.

Goff, “Being Fleshly or Spiritual,” 44.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Hyatt, “The View of Man,” 281.

Hyatt, “The View of Man,” 281.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Trans. Lawrence H. Schiffman, Eschatological Community of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989), 37–38.

Trans. Lawrence H. Schiffman, Eschatological Community of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989), 37–38.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Trans. Schiffman, Eschatological Community, 46.

Trans. Schiffman, Eschatological Community, 46.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Trans. Schiffman, Eschatological Community, 51.

Trans. Schiffman, Eschatological Community, 51.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Trans. Schiffman, Eschatological Community, 38.

Trans. Schiffman, Eschatological Community, 38.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Trans. Schiffman, Eschatological Community, 48.

Trans. Schiffman, Eschatological Community, 48.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Trans. Schiffman, Eschatological Community, 50.

Trans. Schiffman, Eschatological Community, 50.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Trans. Schiffman, Eschatological Community, 50.

Trans. Schiffman, Eschatological Community, 50.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Alexander, “Physiognomy,” 390.

Alexander, “Physiognomy,” 390.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Kvalvaag, “The Spirit in Human Beings,” 160–61.

Kvalvaag, “The Spirit in Human Beings,” 160–61.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Dorman, The Blemished Body, 79.

Dorman, The Blemished Body, 79.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Klawans, Impurity and Sin, 41.

Klawans, Impurity and Sin, 41.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Klawans, Impurity and Sin, 76.

Klawans, Impurity and Sin, 76.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Klawans, Impurity and Sin, 85–87.

Klawans, Impurity and Sin, 85–87.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Kvalvaag, “The Spirit in Human Beings,” 172.

Kvalvaag, “The Spirit in Human Beings,” 172.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Stiebert, “Shame and the Body,” 826.

Stiebert, “Shame and the Body,” 826.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation