4Q390 and the Second Temple Apocalypse Redux
Abstract
This chapter answers the question (does 4Q390 qualify in a similar sense as a text tied to the same founder, Jeremiah the prophet, even in his absence?) through undertaking a thorough analysis of 4Q390 in two parts. In the first part, Dimant's assertion that 4Q390 is another copy of the Apocryphon of Jeremiah C is scrutinised in the course of the following three investigations: her claim is subjected first, to a re-consideration of the material reconstruction of the text; second, to a brief survey of the handling of verbal future expressions in 4Q390. 4Q390 is more accurately designated as a redux of the Temple Apocalypse that appears in the Apocryphon C, Second Temple Apocalypse II. The chapter produces a comprehensive understanding of the relationship between 4Q390 and the other manuscripts of the Apocryphon of Jeremiah C.Keywords: 4Q390; Apocryphon of Jeremiah C; ideological distinction; Temple Apocalypse Redux; theological distinction
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
- Authors
- Davis, K.
- Corresponding author
- Davis, Kipp
- Venue
- The Cave 4 Apocryphon of Jeremiah and the Qumran Jeremianic Traditions
- Publisher
- BRILL
- Published
- 2014-01-01
- Pages
- 175-233
- OpenAlex
- W852679589
- Semantic Scholar
- b4a051dd458cfd6a610cdec87ee76a9aeec100e4
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- BRILL eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Biblical Studies and Interpretation
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Historical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Religion, Theology, History, Judaism, Christianity
- Keywords
- textual reconstruction, Jeremiah, Qumran, Second Temple Judaism
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
