Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen

zum Neuen Testament

Herausgeber I Editor
JörgFrey
Mitherausgeber I Associate Editors
Friedrich Avemarie · Judith Gundry-Volf
Martin Rengel · Otfried Hofius · Hans-Josef Klauck

163
 Daniel Stökl Ben Ezra

The Impact of
YomKippur
on Early Christianity
The Day of Atonement
from Second Temple Judaism
to the Fifth Century

Mohr Siebeck
DANI'EL STöKL BEN EzRA, bom 1970; studied Theology in Bochum and Bern; Comparati-
ve Religion and Jewish Studies in Jerusalem; 2002 Ph.D.; since fall 2003 Mandel Fellow
at Scholion- Interdisciplinary Research Center in Jewish Studies, the Hebrew University
of Jerusalem.

ISBN 3-16-148092-0
ISSN 0512-1604 (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Thstament)
Die Deutsche Bibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie;
detailed bibliographic data is available in theInternetat http://dnb.ddb.de.

© 2003 by J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), P. 0. Box 2040, D-72010 Tübingen.

lbis book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that pennitted
by copyright law) without the publisher's written permission. This applies particularly to
reproductions, translations, microfilms and storage and processing in electronic systems.
The book was printed by Gulde Druck in THbingen on non-aging paper and bound by
Spinner in Ottersweier.
Printed in Gennany.
 to my dear parents and parents in law

Andreas StiJkl and Herzeleide StiJk/, born. v. Schlabrendorff

Joe Ben Ezra and Corinne Ben Ezra, born Shabtai
 Preface

This study presents my doctoral dissertation "The Impact of Yom Kippur

on Eady Christianity," accepted by the Hebrew University of Jeru.salem in
May 2002. I have reworked many arguments, included further Observations
and updated the bibliography.
Having come to Jerusalem from the rather intellectual religions of Prot-
estant Northern Germany and Calvinistic Switzerland, the ritual expres-
sions of the numerous denomioations a.ssembled in the Holy City have
attracted my curiosity. Reading Origen•s Homilies on Leviticus, I stumbled
upon the amazing sentence: Die propitiationis indigent omnes qui pecca-
verunt,l ("All who have sinned require a Day of Atonement."), and th.e
principal question oftbis bookjumped into my mind irresistibly.
Th.at tbe work disregards the customary borders of academic disciplines,
integrating Comparative Religion with Jewish Histocy, New Testament.
Church History and Liturgical Studies bas undoubtedly resulted in many
flaws that will not escape the eyes of specialists in these aceas. I bope,
however, that the broad scope and the peiSpective of longue duree bring
with it the advantage of bringing together a eoherent eollage of arguments
otherwise seattered among discrete fields.
To cast so wide a net was possible only tbanks to num.erous scholars
who were most generous with their time, advice and encouragement, and
taught me to read closely and widely. Many scholars have read tbroug.h
various parts of the work, pointed out errors and inaccuracies, and helped
me to improve extensively on the overall argumeni. All remaining mis-
takes are of course my own.
I .am most grateful to the dissertation's three judges. my Doktorvater
Guy Stroum.sa, my Doktoronkel David Satran and Jobn Gager. Their writ-
ten and oral conunents before and after submission have enhanced count-
less aspects of this book. lbrough many years, they bave been most
generous with their time and kind advice helping .me to ove,rcome ma.ny
academic and personal hardships. What a privilege to have had them as
teachers and now as eolleagues. I have also benefited much from the guid-

1 Orlgen, Homily on LBYitiCUS 9:1:1 (SC 287:70).

vm Pre/iJce

ance of Racbel Elior and Oded Irshai, the remaining members of the dis-
sertation committee.
My dearly toved wife, Dina Ben Ezra, has pored over the chapters ofthe
book and enlumced numerous arguments with her keen intellect. I owe her
more than words can express.
Clemens Leonhard was never too exhausted tobe a discussion partner,
from the beginning of the task to its completion. In COU1ltless cases he
helped me marshat material not available in Jerusa1em.
Part 1, on early Judaism, bas profited from the meticulous readershipof
Gary Anderson, Liora Elias, Martha Himmelfarb and Günter Stemberger.
Jörg Frey, Lukas Mübletbaler and Serge Ruzer reviewed and refined
part 2, on Cbristianity in the ftrSt and second centuries.
Peter Brown was so generaus as to review part 3, on Cbristianity from
the third to the tifth centu.ries, and made most belpful suggestions.
Stephane Verbeist commented in extenso on the chapter on Christian
autumn festivals and kindly sent me parts of bis book on early Christian
and Jewish liturgy before its publication.
Comments by Daniel R. Schwartz on m.y M.A. thesis much irnproved
those sections of parts 1 and 2 that grew out of it.
I also wish to thank: the participants and organizers of worbhops and
conferences in Aachen. Brussels, Jerusalem, New York, Ox.ford, Princeton
and Toronto, who responded most helpfully to some ofthe ideas now con-
tained in this book. In particular, Albert Baumgarten has been most gen 4

erous and kind time and again.

At different stages of writing I consulted with many other people, and
the book has protited immeasurabJy from these discussions. Am.ong them,
I must mention at least: Ra'anan Abusch, Anders Aschim, Jan Assmann,
Daniel Bailey, Giovanni Bazzana, Adam Becker, Nicole Belayche,
Jonathan Ben Dov, Jonathan Benthal!, Katell Bertbelot, Christine Beshar,
Hans-Dieter Betz, Brouria Biton-Ashkelony, Daniel Boyarin, Susan Boyn-
ton, Rudolf BrändJe, Georg Braulik, Sarah Brooke, Harald Buchinger,
Carsten Claussen, Yaron Zwi Eliav. Daniel Findikyan. Jonah Frae:nlcel,
Guy Geltner, Ze'ev Gotthold, Yehoshua Granat, Moshe Greenberg,
Cristiano Grottanelli, Paul Hallsall, Galit Ha:zan-Rokem, William Horbury,
Jared Hudson, Josef Kaplan, Steve Kaplan, Wolfram Kin:zig, Avner Kfir,
Sergio La Porta, Herrman Lichtenberger, Amnon Linder, Basil Lourie,
Christoph Marlcsebies, Jason Moralee, Ronit Nikolsky, Lorenzo Perrone,
Gerard Rouwhorst, Seth Sanders, Jonathan Schofer, Shunit Shahal-Porat,
Stephen Shoemaker, Epbraim Shoham Stciner, David Shnlman, Gregory
Sterling, Helene Stökl, Michael Stone, Evelyne Patlagean, Michael Signer,
Gregory Sterling, Michael Swartz, Stefano Tampellini, Abraham Terian,
Timothy Thomton, Caes van der Freugd, Jan Willem van Renten, Katla
 Preface IX

Shira Veblow, Evelyn Vitz, Ewald Volgger, Zwi Werblowsky, Annette

Yoshiko Reed and Norman H. Young. This book would not have been
possible without them.
Amoag my teachers at the universities of Bochum and Bem, I would
like to thank most of all Martin Leutzsch and Mare van Wijnk:oop Lüthi, as
weil as Magdalene Frettlöh, Christian Link, Ulrich Luz, Konrad Raiser and
Klaus W engst, who led me into the world of academic argumentation.
I have used many libraries whose staffs have been most helpful, in
particular, the libnuy of the Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, the EcoJe
Biblique, the BJoomfield Library of the Hebrew University and the Israel
National Library, all in Jerusatem; Princeton Theological Seminary,
Princeton University Library, the British Library in London and Cam-
bridge University Libracy.
I wish to express my gratitude to Jörg Frey, Martin Heugel and Ottfried
Hofius for accepting the dissertation for inclusion in the series of
Wi3senschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, and to the staff
of the Mohr-Siebeck Verlag, Tiibingen, for tbeir friendly and efficient
assistance in the production process.
The English has been thoroughly revised and improved by Evelyn
K.atrak: to whom I owe a great deal. W orking with her has been a pleasure
and an honor. It goes without saying that I alone am responsible for all
mistakes, inaccuracies or deficiencies that may remain in my work.
Finally, work: on the thesis would not have been possible without the
very generaus and long-term funding of the Dr. NeUy-Hahne Foundation,
Stuttgart. Germany (1997-1999), and the Minerva Foundation, Germany
(1999-2001). Many individuals have supported me financially, among
them my parents Andreas and Herzeleide Stökl, Dieprand and Eva von
Schlabrendorff. Jost (t) and Sabine Schramm, and Ruth Roberta Heck-
scher, ?''r.
The dissertation was awarded the Shlomo Pines '1'rize by the Prof.
Shlomo Pines Foundation, and the Kennedy-Leigh Award for an outstand-
ing dissertation by the Hebrew University. I deeply appreciatc both. The
publication of the book has been generously supported by a grant from the
Charles W olfson Research Fund of the Institute for Jewish Studies at the
Hebrew University for which I am very grateful.

Jerusalem, Pentecost 2003 I Shavuot 5763 Daniel Stöld Ben Ezra

 BriefTahle ofContents

Preface .. .. .. . ............. .. ...•................. ....... ................ ....... ....... ................ VII

BriefTable ofContents ....................................................................... XI
Detailed Table of Contents .... ................................... ...................... ..... XIII
List of Abbreviations ........................................................................... XIX

lntroduction.............................. ................................ ........................... 1

PartOne
Yom Kippurin Early Jewish Thought and Ritual
Intro<hu~tion......................................................................................... 13
Chapter 1: The Names of Yom Kippur ................................................ 15
Cbapter 2: The Rituals of Yom Kippur ................................................ 18
Chapter 3: Imaginaires of Yom Kippur ............................................... 78

Part Two
The Impact of Yom Kippur on Early Christianity
in tbe First and Seeond Centuries
Chapter 4: Yom Kippur in the Early Christian Imaginaire ................. 145
Chapter 5: Yom Kippur Imagery in Gnosticism and in Early
Christian Mysticism .....................................:................... 228
Cbapter 6: Yom Kippur in Jewisb Christian Legends ........................ 244

PartTiuee
The Impact ofYom Kippur on Early Christianity
from the Third to the Fifth Centmies
Chapter 7: Christian Exegesis ofLeviticus and the Polemies against
the Contemporary Yom Kippur .......................................... 261
Chapter 8: Yom Kippur and the Christian Autumn Festivals ............... 290

General Conclllsions ............................................................................ 329

Appendix: Yom Kippur and Bastern Anaphoras .................................. 335

XII Brie{Toble ofContent~

Bibliography ... ............................ ............... .. ..... .. ...... ....... ................... 345

Index of Soun::es................................................................................. 397

Index ofModem Autho.rs.................................................................... 425
Index ofNames and Subjects .............................................................. 432
 Detailed Table of Contents

Preface ..................................... ........................................................... VII

BriefTahle ofContents ....................................................................... XI
Detailed Table of Contents .................................................................. XIII
List of Abbreviations ........................................................................... XIX

Introduction .................................................................., ..................... .

1. The Topic and the Research Question......................................... 1
2. Methodological Remalles and Definitions................................... 4
2.1 Different Types oflnfluence................................................ 4
2.2 Rite and RituaL.................................................................... 6
2.3 Myth and Mytbology . .................... ...................................... 7
2.4 The imaginaire ........ ............................... ....................... ...... 8
2.5 Christian Judaism ................................................................ 10
PartOne
Yom Kippurin Early Jewish Thought and Ritual
Introduction ...................... ................ ....... .... .................. ...... .. .............. 13
Cbapter 1: The Names ofYom Kippl.ll'................................................. 15
Chapter 2: The Rituals of Yom K.ippur ................................................ 18
1. Tbe Question ofthe Historicjty ofthe Mishnaic Version ofthe
Temple Ritual............................................................................. 19
2. The Temple Ritual...................................................................... 28
2.1 The Preparation Rites ... .. .................................. ................... 28
2.2 The Entrances to the Holy of Ho lies .......................... .......... 30
2.3 TheSending Away oftbe Scapegoat ..............~..................... 31
2.4 The Closing RituaJs ............................................................. 31
3. The Ritual ofthe People ............................................................. 33
3.l Between Aftlictions and Joy ................................................ 33
3.2 Prayers................................................................................. 36
3.2.1 Yom Kippur Prayers in Palemne: Qumran.................. 37
3.2.2 Yom Kippur Prayers in the Diaspora: Philo................. 46
3.2.3 Yom Kippur Prayers a.fter the Destruction of the
Temple........................................................................ 49
Conclusion: Prayers in and outside tbe Temple.................... 64
3.3 A Controvcrsial, Popular Blood Sacrifice: kapparot ............ 65
XIV Detailed Table ofContent~

3.4 Pagan and Christian Descriptions ofContemporacy Yom

Kippur Rites ....................................................................... 68
3.4.1 Pagan Texts................................................................ 68
3.4.2 Christian Texts........................................................... 70
Chapter 3: Imaginaires ofYom Kippur............................................... 78
1. The Apocalyptic Imaginaire ofYom Kippur.............................. 79
1.1 High-Priestly Visions of God 1: Apocalyptic Texts............. 79
1.2 The Mythologization of'Az'azel........................................ 85
1.2.1 Allusions to the Myth of'Az'azel in IEnoch 10......... 85
1.2.2 11 QMelchizedek: Getting Explicit... ....... ....... ............. 90
1.2.3 The Apocalypse ofAbraham: ZeChariah 3 Meets the
Demonology of'Az'aze1............................................ 92
Concluding Thoughts on 'Az'azel in the Apocalyptic
Literature ........ ....... ..... .......... ........ ..... ....... .. ..... ....... ... 94
1.3 Etiologies..... ........... ....... ....... ......... ..... .. ..... ......... ....... ..... .... 95
1.4 Qumran: The Current Period of Persecution as Yom Kippur 97
Conclusion................................................................................. 100
2. Yom Kippur in the Greek Diaspora............................................ 101
2.1 The Septuagint: Conservatism and Enculturation................ 102
2.2 Philo's Allegorization ofYom Kippur ................................ 107
2.2.1 The Rationale ofthe People's Yom Kippur Rituals.... 107
2.2.2 The Allegorizations ofYom Kippur's Temple Ritual. 109
Conclusion.......................................................................... 114
2.3 The Viearious Atoning Death in 4Maceabees 17 and the
Imaginaire ofYom Kippur.................................................. 115
Excursus: The Scapegoat as Backgroundfor J1icarious Atoning
Suffering in Isaiah and Josephus? .... .......... ...... .. ...... ...... ..... 116
Conclusion: Yom Kippur in the Greek Diaspora........................ 117
3. The Christian Jewish Imaginaire ofYom Kippur....................... 118
4. Aspects ofthe Rabbinie Imaginaire ofYom Kippur................... 118
4.1 Mythologieal Events Conneeted to Yom Kippur ................. 121
4.2 Rabbinie Interpretations ofthe Temple Ritual..................... 124
4.2.1 The High Priests......................................................... 124
4.2.2 Goats ......................................................................... 127
4.2.3 Red Ribbons............................................................... 130
4.3 Rabbinie Interpretations ofRitual ofthe People.................. 132
5. High-Priestly Visions of God III: Aspeets of Yom Kippur in the
Hekhalot Literature.................................................................... 134
Coneluding Thoughts to Part One....................................................... 139
 Detailed Table ofContents XV

PartTwo
The Impact ofYom K.ippur on Early Christianity
in the First and Second Centmies
Chapter 4: Yom Kippurin the Early Christian Jmaginaire .................. 145
1. Christ and the Scapegoat: Barnahas, Matthew and Galatians..... 147
1.1 The Tradition of Barnabas.................................................. 148
1.1.1 The First Picture (Barnabas 7:3-5) ............................ 150
1.1.2 The Second Picture (Barnabas 7:6-11) ...................... 152
1.1.3 The Interpretation ofthe Proto-Typology in Justin,
Tertullian and Hippolytus........................................... 155
Excursus: Did the Scapeg0t;1t Rite lnjluence the Earliest
Account ofthe Passion? John D. Crossan's Thesis..... 161
1.2 Barabbas as Scapegoat in Matthew 27:15-23 ...................... 165
Excursus: The Catalytic Function ofthe Pharmakos and the
Scapegoat .... ......... ..... ........ ...... ....... ........ ........ ......... ........... 171
1.3 The Redemptive Curse: An A11usion to the Scapegoat in
Galatians 3? ........................................................................ 173
1.4 The Scapegoat as Catalyst? John I :29 and 1Peter 2:24 ........ 176
1.4.1 John 1:29 ................................................................... 176
1.4.2 1Peter 2:22-24 ........................................................... 178
2. Christ as High Priest: Hebrews .................................................. 180
2.1 The Setting......................................................................... 181
2.1.1 Sacred Time: The Present Eschaton as Yom Kippur... 181
2.2.2 Sacred Space: The Heavenly Sanctuary ...................... 182
2.2 The High Priest and His Actions ......................................... 184
2.3 The Participation of the People ........................................... 190
2.4 Conclusions Regarding the High Priest in Hebrews............. 193
2.5 History ofTradition: The Role of Zechariah 3 in the Justifi-
cation ofthe Hjgh-Priestly Christology before Hebrews...... 194
3. Christ as kopporet (i.l.aa'tfJpwv): Romans 3:25-26...................... 197
3.1 The Influence ofYom Kippur on Romans 3:.25-26 ............. 198
3.2 Interpretation ofRomans 3:25-26....................................... 202
3.3 Paul's Predecessor: The Pre-Pauline Formula Romans
3 :24/25-26a* ...................................................................... 204
4. Christ as Atonement (i.l.aa116<;): Uohn........................................ 205
5. Yom Kippur as Background to Early Christological Hymns? ..... 206
5.1 Colossians 1:12-20............................................................. 207
5.2 Philippians 2:6-11 .............................................................. 211
6. Historical Synthesis ................................................................... 212
6.1 The Observance of Yom Kippur by First-Centuxy Christians 213
6.2 The Abolition ofYom Kippur by First- and Second-Centuxy
Christians... .. ......... ..... .... ............ .......... ................. ......... .. ... 219
XVI !Htailed Tobte ojCo'llttnb

6.3 The History of Traditions.................................................... 223

Concluding Thoughts ................................................... .................. 225
Chapter 5: Yom Kippur lmagery in Gnosticism andin Bady Christian .
Mysticism ..•.. ....... .. ...................... ....... .................... ....................... 228
1. The High Priest's Entrance in Valentiman Soteriology .............. 229
2. Thc High Priest's Entrance and the Ritual ofthe Bridal Chamber 232
3. Philonic and Valentinian Mystieism as Merged in Clement of
Alexandria................................................................................. . 23 7
3.1 Stromaleis 5:6:39:3-40:4 .................................................... 238
3.2 Excerptsfrom Theodohls 21................................................ 240
Conclmions and Implications......................... ................................ 243
Cbapter 6: Yom Kippurin Jewish Christian Legends.......................... 244
1. James, the Permanently Interceding High Priest......................... 246
2. Zeebariah's Revelation on Yom K.ippur ............................. ........ 250
Ezcursus: Simeon and John as High Priests ................................... 255
Conclusion .... ......... ... ..... .............. ........ ..................... ..••.. ............... 257

PartTbree
•
The Impact of Yom K.ippur on Early Christianity
from the Third to the Fifth Centuries
Chapter 7: Christian Exegesis of Leviticus and the Polemies against
the Contemporary Yom K.ippur ...................................................... 261
1. Christian Exegesis ofLeviticus and the Templli:ation ofthe
Liturgy ....................................................................................... 262
2. Cbristian Participation in tbe Jewish Fast................................... 273
3. Christian Polemies against the Contemporary Yom Kippur ........ 277
4. Anti-Christian Polemies in Yom Kippur Texts........................... 283
Conclusion .................. :.................................................................. 288
Chapter 8: Yom Kippur and 1he Christian Autumn Festivals............... 290
1. The Encaenia, the Exaltation ofthe Cross and Yom Kippur ....... 290
2. The Fast of the Seventh Month (Ember Day of September) and
Yom Kippur ............................................................................... 303
2.1 The Origin ofthe Solemn Fasts........................................... 304
2.2 Leo's Sermons on the Fast ofthe Seventh Month and Yoxri
Kippur ................................................................................ 312
2.3 The Readings ofthe Fast ofthe Seventh Month and Yom
Kippur ................................................................................ 317
Conclusion................................................................................. 321
3. Bastern Commemoraiion of Gabriel's Annunciation to Zechariah 322
General ConchlSions........................................................................... 329
 Detailed Table ofCo1Uents XVII

Appendix: Yom K.ippur and Eastem Anaphoras.................................. 335

Bibliography .......................................:............................................... 345
Index of Sources................................................................................. 397
Index ofModern Authors.................................................................... 425
Index ofNames and Subjects .............................................................. 432
 List of Abbreviations

I tried to avoid abbreviations. Exceptions are the Septuagint, the Bible in English
translation. rabbinicalliteraton:, Qum.ran texts and Patristic series:

LXX Septua&int.
NRSV The Holy Bible containing ihe Old ond Nf!W Tutament1 with the Apocryphal I
Det~tuocanonical &Jolrs. N- Revised StandOI'd Yeralon. (New York, 1989).

Rabbinical.Literature
Tractate uames are abbreviated as follows:

AZ .A.vodah Zarah RH Rosh Ho.Shanah

.A.bol .A.vot Sanh Sanhedrin
BB BtwaBaua Sabb Shobbat
Ber BeroJehol Seqal Sheqalim
Bet~ah Belzah Sebu Shevu'ot
Git Gittin Sotah Sotah
Hag Hagigah $/l/ckah Suklwh
Mak Makkot Ta'an Ta'tmit
Meg Megillah Tamid Tamid
Men Menahot Tem Temurah
MQ Mo'edQatan Ter Tenmrot
Ned Nedorim Yebam Yevamot
Parah Parab Yoma Yoma
l'e'ah Pe'ah Zebah Znahim
Pq Puahlm

The eolleetiollll are signified by a prmx to tbe abbreviation of the tractate (as in the
Standard GenDill .sy.stem without periods aft:er the c:ollection and the IJac:llltc names):

m Mishnah
t Tosefta
y Palestinian 1 Jerusalem Talmud
b Babylonian Talmud
XX List ofAbln11Vlatlom

Name:s of Qumran Writi"gs

1QPuhv Habaldtuk
lQS Rvle oflhe Commrmiry
1QSb Rute ofBJessings
lQWord.r ofMotw.r
4QI6l Pf.f8hu l1aiah
4Q171 Ptslwr on Psalms
4QEnoch Giants•
4QEnocho.b.c
4QSong• of the Sage
4QTargzmr of L11Vilicus
4Q YisiOIIS ofA.Mran,.
11 QMelchizedek
11 QTempJs Scroll
DaMa.rcr~.s lJ«;vMent
Fttstlva/ Prayers
Songs af the Sabbalh Sacriflce
War Sero//
IQpHab
lQS (d. 4Q2:56-264, 5Q12)
lQ2Bb
lQ22
4Ql61 (cf. 4Ql62-l6S)
4Ql7t (cf. 4Ql73)
4Q203 (cf. 1Q23, 1Q24, 2Q26, 4QS30-S31, 6Q8)
4Q201, 202, 204 {cf. 4Q207, 212)
4QSJO and 511
4Ql56
4Q544 (cf. 4Q.543, 4Q:545-S48)
11Q13
11QI9-20
CD (CD-A, CD-B, 4Q266-273)
1Q34, 4QS08, :509 and .S07
4Q400-407; 11Q17
tQM (cf. IQ33, 4Q28S, 4Q471, 4Q491-497)

DSST F. Garc:la·.Martlnez. (ttansl.). Tlte Dead Sea Scrolls Translated. TM Qumran

Tt!!XtS in Engli.rh. (Leiden, 1~95).

Series oj'Church Father:s and Cla3sical Literature

ANF The Ante·Nicene Fathers: Tnmslations ofthe Writillgs oftbe Fathers down to
A.D. 325; Grand Rapids [Mich.], 1986-1989, repr. orEdinburgh 1885-1896.
CCSL Corpus Cbri.Jtianorum Sories Latinll; Turnhout, 19.54ff.
CSCO Corpus Scriptorum. ChristiaBorum Orientalium; Paris, Rome and Louvain,
1903ff.
CSEL Corpus Scriptonnn Ecclesiasticorum Latillorum; Vienna, 1866ff.
GCS Die griechischen christlieben Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhuuderte; Berlin,
I 897ft:
LCL Loeb Classical Libnuy.
NPNF A Select Library of the Nicc:ne and Post-Ni~oe Fathers of the Cbristian
ChurclJ. First Series. (14 vols; Grand Rapid:~ [Mich.), Edinburgh, 1988, repr.
ofEdiubuz&h 1886-1890). A Seleet Library oftb.e Niceoe and Post-Niceoe
Fathers oftbe Cbristian Church. Secood Series. (14 vols; Grarul Rapid.s
[Mich.], Edinburgb, 1988, repr. ofEdinburgh 188:5-1896).
PG Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series GraeQ; 161 vols; Paris, 1857-1866.
PL Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series Latina; 221 vols; Paris, 1841-1864.
PO Patrologia Orientalis> Tumhout. 190Jff.
SC Sources Cbretiennes; Paris, 1941 ff.
TLG Thesaurus Linguae Graecae [version 8].
 Introduction

1. The Topic and the Research Question

In recent years, much scholarly effort has been devoted to understanding

the em.ergence of Christianity from Judaism and their subsequent inter-
action. Following Marcel Simon's groundbreaking study Yerus Israel,
scholars began to reconsider the impact of Judaism on Christians and
pagans after the Bar Kokhba revolt. 1 The peroeption of early Christianity
and early Judaism as two homogeneaus blocks has shifted toward a more
differentiated perspective of a variety of competing Judaisms and Chris-
tianities with various modes of interaction. 2
I would lik:e to argue that the study of ritual, as opposed to traditional
theological concems alone, provides a helpful vantage point for this new
understanding of Judaism and Christianity. The "multifaceted sensory
experience" attained through the performance of rituals involves the whole
human being: body, mind, senses and emotions.3 More precisely, religious
consciousness and behavior culminate particularly in festivals. 4 The

1 M. Simon, Yenu Israel. A Stu4Y ofthe Relations between ClrTistians and Jews in

the Roman Empire AD 135-425 (Littman Library of Jewish CivilW.:ion; London, 1996;
French original: Paris, 2 1964, 1 1948). Lately, tbe intluencs oflate antique Cbristianity on
Juda.ism bas been takeu more seriou.sly into coDSideration: sec e.g. I. Yuval, "Eastcr and
Passover As Early Jewisb·Cbristian Dialogue," in: P. Bradshaw and L. Hoffinan (eds.),
Passowr anti Easter. Origin and Hi!J:tory to Mode", Times (2 vols; Two Liturgical
TraditiobS S m:l6; Notre Dam.e {lnd.], 1999; vol. 2, pp. 93-124).
1 E.g. D. Boyarin, "Semantic Differenees; or, 'Judai.,m'/'Cbristillllity\" in: A. Becker
and A. Yoshiko Reed, The WQ}'s That Nner Parted. Jews and Cltrl1tians in Late
A.ntiquity and the Early Middle Ages (Texts and Studies in Anc:ient Judaism 9S; TU-
bingen, 2003; pp. 65-86); and R.A. Kraft, "The Weigbing of rhe Parts. Pivotsand Pitfalls
in lhe Srudy ofEady Judaisms and their Early Christian Offspring." in the sam.e volume
pp. 87-94. Fortbs study oflhe emergence ofC.hri5t.iuity, Jolm Gager has underlined the
importente in studying those groups and individuals whose identities lie in between wbat
beeame "the" Jewish and "the"' Christian (and tbe papu) mainstrum.s: Judai~, Jewish·
Christians and God·fcarers: see J. Gager, "Jcws, Christians and the Daogerous Ones in
Between," in: S. Biderman aDd B. Scharfstein (eds.), lnterpretalion i11 Religions
(Pbilosophy and Religion, a Comparative Yearboolc. 2; Leiden 1992; pp. 249-257).
3 C. Bell, Ritlllll. Perspectfvu anti Dimensions (Oxford, 1997), pp. 1:59-164.
4 Bell, Ritval, pp. 120-128.
2 Introduc/ion

cyclical repetition of rituals shapes the conceptions of time and place of

the participants; the recurring commemoration and reenactment of myths
embed them more deeply in life. "In fasting and feasting rites, there [is] ...
a great deal of emphasis on the public display of religiocultural
sentiments."5 In collective ritual perfonnances, therefore, the individual
has to negotiate between bis private conceptions and behaviors and those
ofthe group. Moreover, the participation in collective rituals- particularly
rituals observed by almost everybody betonging to a certain group - can
render the generally invisible boundaries of the collective identity
perceptible to observers. 6 Festivals, then, are an appropriate focus also to
elucidate the gradual separation process of two religions such as the
emergence of Christianity from Judaism. Indeed, the friction caused by
Christians keeping Yom Kippurin Antioch is one of Simon's central case
studies.7 Surprisingly, however, the impact of Yom Kippur on early
Christianity has not until now been studied comprehensively. 8
This study is a first attempt to fill this gap. It investigates the impact of
Yom Kippur on early Christian thought and ritual from the first to the fifth
centuries of the Common Era. In this epoch, Yom Kippur was doubtless
the most important Jewish festiyal in the diaspora and in Palestine. It
would seem, therefore, that it had a fundamental status also in the life of
the first generations of Jesus' followers. Yet unlike Passover, Pentecost or
the Sabbath, this festival did not become part of the Christian liturgical
calendars. In following the traces of a Jewish institution rather than the
prefiguration of a Christian one, the present work should be seen as an
attempt to pose a "Jewish question" to a Christian coxpus oftexts.
My central thesis is that Christian atonement theology and its festal
calendar not only emerged under the influence of Yom Kippur (part 2} but
also continued to develop in light of the ongoing challenge that the con-
tempocary Yom Kippur posed to Christians (part 3). To addcess this issue I
bad to develop an approach that would make possible the study of a fes-
tival's impact on a different tradition or religion. Consequently, the guid-
ing questions are as follows: What is Yom Kippur, and what are the
concepts and rituals connected to it? Where can traces of Yom Kippur's

' Bell, Ritval, p. 120 (emphasis added).

6 For example, "fasting [during Ramadan) sets Muslimsoff as a distinct community

(umma) in cantrast to their non-Muslim neighbors." Bell, Ritual, p. 124; cf. pp. 23-60.
As we shall see, the penneability of these borders, can become visible, too, e.g. if
Christians observe Jewish festivals.
7 Simon, Verus Israel, pp. 217-223 and 326-328.
8 Research has been conducted on su(;h topics as the presence of Yom Kippur

theology in the New Testament or the exegesis of the scapegoat; but so far nobody has
tried to view these phenomena as parts of a whole.
 Introduction 3

impact on early Christianity be detected in Christian Iiterature and Iiturgy?

Which Christians observed Yom Kippur? Why did others abandon Yom
Kippur? And finally, how did Yom Kippur influence Christianity after the
fast ceased tobe observed?
To determine the most important areas of impact, and because no one
has previously investigated the impact of Yom Kippur as a complex of
rituals, institutions, myths and theology, I wanted to spread my net as
widely as possible. I therefore considered the Greek, Latin, Syriac and
Armenian traditions as weil as the Georgian, Coptic and Arabic,9 mainly
from the frrst five centuries CE. To find the relevant texts and passages, I
relied largely on the indexes of the editions in the main series of Christian
texts (CCSL, CSEL, CSCO, GCS, PO, SC) for references to Leviticus 16.
In addition, I searched the digitalized libraries of the Thesaurus Linguae
Graecae and the online Patrologia Latina for key terms (Day of
Atonement, fast, high priest, scapegoat, kapporet). Similarly, I checked
Menahem Stem's and Amnon Linder's collections of references concem-
ing Jews and Judaism.in pagan Iiterature and in Christian legislation 10 The
further I progressed, the more amazed I was by the volume and variety of
Christian sources on Yom Kippur. While I have to a certain extent focused
on the digitalized corpora (Greek and Latin) and there may be untouched
treasures hidden in the libraries of the Christian Orient, I hope to have
uncovered a promising field for further investigation.
The structure of my argument takes the following form: Part I is de-
voted to a detailed reconstruction of Yom Kippur, its rites and its imagi-
naires in the Second Temple and rabbinie periods, with the help of a broad
range of Jewish and non-Jewish texts from Palestine and the diaspora. This
analysis is the basis for the comparisons in the parts that follow, which
proceed chronologically.
Parts 2 and 3 deal with the impact ofYom Kippur on early Christianity.
Part 2 (chapters 4 to 6) covers the formative period, the frrst two hundred
years, while part 3 (chapters 7 and 8) covers the development of early
Christianity in the years 200 to 500. Part 2 begins w~th an investigation
into the impact ofthe temple ritual and the Jewish myths and concepts as-
sociated with it (especially the high priest and the scapegoat) on the
ernerging Christian mythology about the atoning death of Christ (chap-
ter 4). Chapter 5 deals with the influence of the Jewish apocalyptic-mystic

9 Being ignorant of Georgian as weil as of Coptic and Arabic, I could consult only

translations. The same is true for the sources in Slavonic and Ge'ez.
10 A. Linder, The Jews in the Legal Sources of the Early Middle Ages (Detroit and
Jerusalem, 1997); M. Stem, Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism. Edited with
Introductions, Translationsand Commentary (3 vols; Jerusalem, 1974-1984).
4 lntroduction

imagery ofthe high priest's entran.ce into the holy ofholies on Valentiman
Christian soteriology and on the Valentiman ritual of the bridal chamber.
Valentiman concepts in turn extensively influenced Clement of Alexan-
dria's mysticism. Chapter 6 provides a close reading of Jewish-Christian
legends that depict James the Just and Zechariah, John the Baptisfs father,
as high priests. These legends give some hint of Jewish-Christian attitudes
toward the continuing observance ofthe Jewish fast.
Part 3 analyzes the impact of Y om K.ippur on Christianity in the years
200 to 500, the second stage of literary production, after the foundational
texts of the New Testament bad been written and most of them bad
achieved canonical Status. Cbapter 1 analyus the Cbristian exegesis of
Leviticus in relation to Christian polemies against the contemporary Jew-
ish fast. Leading Cbristian theologians perceived contemporary Yom Kip-
pur's continuing attraction for Christians as a threat to Christian identity
and to ehe exclusivity of Christ•s once-and-for-all atoning death. They re-
sponded not only with polemies but also with an exegesis of Leviticus (the
bib!ical Yom Kippur); they developed further the sacrificial atonement
theology ofHebrews and instituted new festivals to fül the fallow fall sea-
son. Accordingly, chapter 8 inve;;tigates the impact of Yom Kippur on
three Christian festivals, the Jerusalem Encaenia/Exaltation of the Cross,
the Roman Fast of the Seventh Month (Ember Day of September) and the
Annunciation to Zechariah in the Bastern churches, all three of which are
approximately contemporary with 10 Tishri and show some affinities with
Yom Kippur. I decided to focus on Christian autumn festivals mainly for
pragmatic reasons, to keep the book to a reasonable length; also because an
influence might here be most clearly perceptible.
Before launehing into the research itsel:f. I would like to clarify some
tenns regardlng the methodology followed, in particular, the meaning of
"impact," the different types of influence, my understanding of rite, ritual,
myth and mythology, and the meaning of imaginaire and of Christian
Judaism.

2. Methodological Remarks and Definitions

2.1 Different Types ofInjlwmce
Judaism influenced Christianity in various modes, which can be distin-
guished by mediator and period. The accompanying list is divided into two
parts: the first two modes (apostolic. biblical) refer only to Cbristianity and
Judais.m, the other three (adoption, compulsion, reaction) refer to the influ~
ence of any religion on another.
 l1ttroductio11 5

The frrst mode is connected to the collective memocy of Judaism. Jew-

ish "converts19 to Christianity brought with them their imaginaire, their
rituals, their texts, their myths and their conceptions, especially in the
formative stage of Christianity in the fust century. Since most of the
Jewish a.dherents of Christ probably "converted" in the apostolic period, I
have called tbis mode ofinfluence ..apostolic."
The second mode is connected to the Hebrew Bible, the written founda-
tion of Jewish culture that in its various translations influenced Christian-
ity at all times andin all places. Waves ofmore intense biblic:al inspiration
can be perceived, e.g. during the Christianization of Palestine (see nex:t
paragraph) but also in the Carolingian epoch, when kings modeled their
image after David and temple tcrminology was u.sed in churches. I call this
mode of influence "'biblical"; where influence by Jewish Iiterature goes
beyond the canon, I call it "bookish."
A co.mbination of the ..apostolic,. and the ..biblical" forms of influence
appeared in the fourth century during the Christianization of Palestine~
when Christianity bad to cope with the new situation of Christians ruling
the land ofthe Bible. This bad two contradictocy effects. On the one band,
the Christian rulers wcre now responsible for deciding the way of com-
memorating tb.e symbolic world of the Old and the New Testament in the
country where the events related in these books took place. On the other
band, Christianity had to leam the local symbolic Ianguage in order to take
over control ofthe Holy Land. Christians were influenced by the traditions
and practices of the Jewish inhabitants re1ating to the location and com-
memoration of events sacred to botb religions. Arehitecture, calendar, Iit-
urgy, administ:Iation - thcse are only a few of the areas affected. As I shall
argue in chapter 8, ..The Impact of Yom Kippur on Christi an Festivals,••
tbis influence encompasses not only holy places such as the tombs of
propbets but also, for example, ways of celebrating the dedication of a
sanctuary according to biblical models. I have called this kind of influence
Orrsgeist paralleling Zeitgeist: the Ort (the land of the Bible) has a Geist
tbat exerts an intluence over its rulers, here its Christian rulers. 11 Conquer-
ing the land of thc Bible oonfers new power and authority on the Bible, its
land and its surrounding traditions as foundational stories. The Bible be-
oomes the raison d'etre not only tobe in the land ofthe Bible but also to
rule it. i.e. to determine its future, to "make" it as close as possible to one' s

II I mean something different from tbe appropriation ofparts ofthe Jewish collective
memory as developed by M. Halbwachs, La lopographie Iegendaire de:r nangile:r en
terre sainttt. Emde d8 mimolre ro/lectl'fle. Prij'ace de Fernand DwiiOJtt (Paris, 21971 ).
6 Introduc/Ion

understanding of the biblical stories. And vice versa. the new rulers bave
to play according to the rules of the mythical country. 12
Apart :from these two (and a half) modes, two religions can, in a more
general way, mutually influence each other by three further modes, which I
have called "adoption" (voluntacy), ..compulsion" (forced) and "reaction"
(polemical). Adoptiontakes place when one religion observes a practice or
becomes aware of an exegetical tradition or a myth of the other religion
and voluntarily adopts it. Compulsion occurs when the adherents of one
religion control the life of followers of the other and impose measures on
them, such as Justi:nian's edict that Jews would henceforth read the Bible
only in Oreek. The third mode, reaction. responds with polemies or self~
restriction to a certain exegetical or Hturgical tradition of the other religion
being perceived as a threat.
2.2 Rite and Rit11al
Ritual and rite are repeated religious behavior. The difference between rit-
ual and rite is the Subordination of the latter to the fotmer, i.e. a ritual is
composed of several rites. 13
By its definition as "repeatedt behavior," rituals~ especially collective
rituals, belong to the most conservative religious institutions. 14 Collective
institutions are more conservative than are those of individuals; and a rit-
ual, which involves the body and the senses, is more conservative than a
conception, since frequently repeated movements are stored in the parts of
the brain responsible for subconscious movements and will continue un-
changed in this form until consciously changed or stopped. For example,
one is less likely to forget how to ride bicycle than to forget how to read.
Finally, it is easier to begin observing a new rite than to cease observing an
old one. This, too, is valid for any religion or religious transformation.
Unlike the continuation of a behavior, it is the break with it that lea.ves
historical traces. Our working assurnption should therefore be that most
Christian Jews continued to observe the same festivals after hearing about
Jesus as before- unless we have evidence to the conb:ary.
I try to distinguish as much as possible between ritual and its interpre-
tation. Ritual acts are more or less fixed and allow for only minor changes

11 In a sense, this process resembles a development in modern Zionism after thc 1967

conque!lt ofthe Old City and thc ancicmt heanlands of Judea and Samaria tbat eaused a
shift in the modern state oflsrael toward a more religious character.
1 ~ Obviously, this distinctlon is relative, since one may often break up rites into sub-
rites.
14 See C. Bell, Ritual, p. 211; ''Despite •.. evldenee for change, it is nonetheless quite

true that ritnal a:ctivmes generally tend to resist change and often do so more effectively
than other forms of social custom."
 lntrodllction 7

(especially if our subject is the ritual of tbe most sacred space, day and
person); the int.er"~Rtations of rituals, however, can be manifold. Contra-
dietory explanations maydrculate in the same group, even in the same
time and space, end be used according to which is more useful fol' eluci-
dating a certain aspect. Only wben dealing with verbal rituals such as
prayers will the distinction obviou.sly fall away.
The interpretation of a ritual may express a variety of different attitudes
toward the ritual itself. For example:
a) Interestin and support for the ritual (by proposing a new rationale)
b) Disinterest in the realities, sometimes in favor of a more spiritual-
ized Ievel
c) Substitution of the ritual on account of temporary constJ:aints
d) Substitution of the ritual on account of theological or sociological
dissent
None of the above attitudes - end the Iist is not exhau.stive - necessarily
entails aboHtion of the ritual. Modem Cbristian interpreters of ritual ra~
tionaJes tend to generalize the last of the above-listed alternatives. For ex-
ample, Paul Hanson argues that the existence of the eschatological inter-
pretation of the scapegoat ritwd in 1Enoch 10 entails a polemical stand
against the temple ritual. 15 Yet, as I will argue, JEnoch 10 more strongly
reflects the first alternative, interest in and support of the ritual by
proposing a rationale. Philo's allegorical exegesis ofthe temple and its in-
stitutions does not entail a complete disregard for the temple ritual, though
he rather fits the second group. The third attitude is the centrat one ex-
pressed in the rabbinie writings. Foreach Christian writing we will have to
assess which attitude it demonstrates.
2.3 Myth and Mythology
A mythology is the ensemble of myths of a certain collective. 16 A myth is a
narrative that bas a foundational status for this coUective. 17 With this defi-
nition, myths are o~y myths in a certain sociological constellation v.ith

1' See P.D. Hanson, ..Rebellion in Heaven. Azazel, and Eubemeristic Heroes in
l Enocb 6-11," Journal ofBibllcal Literature 96 (1977) l9S-233, here p. 226.
' 6 For a rieb and interesting introduction 10 various defmitio!IS and approacbes, see A.
aud J. Assmann, "Mythos," Hondlnu;h religionswisaemchaftlicher Gn~ndbegriffe 4
(1998) 179-200. R.. Bultmann, "Mythos UDd Mythologie IV (im NT)," Religion in Ge-
schichte und Gegenwart~ 4 (1960) 1278-1282, is a clas.sic. On myth in tbe New Testa-
ment, see now the !ntroduction and first part of G. Theissen, Tlre. Religion ofthe Earllest
Churches. Creating a Symbollc World (Minneapolis, 1999), pp. 1-13 and 19-60, and bis
references to further literature on p. 323.
17 For such a sociological defmition, see e.g. B. Ba.ezko, Le.s imaginalre.s sociaiiX. Me-
moires Bt espoirs co/lectfft (Critique d.e Ia politique; Paris, 1984), pp. 11-63.
8 lntrodllction

hlstoricallimits otherwise they are narratives. I have chosen to work with

such a functionalist sociological defmition of myth because the distinction
commonly drawn between history, legend and myth is itself a product of
Christian culture and therefore an emic definition, which is not very
helpful for comparing Christianity to other religions (but has its use in
other realms). 18 According to the emic definition, we have to distinguish
Christianity, whlch is based on (salvation) history, from paganism, whlch
is based on myth, a priori. For the scholar of comparative religion who
uses the sociological definition, legend, history and "myth" (in tbe old
sense) are only different subcategories with the shared function of estab-
lishlng the collective identity. A historicat event. fiction or legend with a
historical nucleus becomes part of the mytbology of a group the moment it
is accepted as foundational for its identity, worldview and Iifestyle. The
foundational status is paired with the impossibility of questioning the truth
of the myth without incun:ing social sanctions. 19 Chronologically, m)1hs
are often formulated in the fo:tmative period of the group and adapted to
subsequent times by henneneutics and exegesis, whieh in turn refo:tmulate
and recreate the myth. He:tmeneutics and exegesis also have the task of
systematizing contradictions between myths.
2. 4 The imaginaire
Studying collective concepts and their relation and transmission to other
collectives, I found the term imaginaire very useful. Tbe termwas devel~
oped in French philosophy and historiography .as one referti.ng to an en-
semble of conceptions of a given collective.20 Since the definition ofthe
tenn often remains amorphous, I want to define my use of this term more
specifically. By the imaginaire of X in Y, I mean the collective repertoire
of motifs of a certain collective (Y) regarding the element X, from which
an author of this collective {Y) derives the items with which to weave his
text onX.21

18 For such a definition. see P. Ricoeur, "Myth and History," Encyc/opedia o[R~Iigion
10 (1987)273-282.
1; Consequently, the scholar wbo investigates any given narrative as a myth in the

sense of this definition takcs an etic view.

10 See e.g. J. Le Golf, L'lmaginaire midieval (Paris, 1985); 1!. Patlagean, "L'histoire

de l'imaginaire." in: J. Le Go.ff, R. Cbartier and l. hvel (eds.), La NOIIWllle. Hiatoire

(Paris, 1978; p. 249-269). In no case do I intend a ~Oflllettion to Iungian ar~hetypes, on
which the wolk of Gilbert Durand was formulated. See his Lcs .stnJ.clUTes anlhUJpolo-
giques de l'imaginaire (Paris, 12 1992- 19S9).
21 D. StOkl, "Yom Kippurin the Apocalyptic Imaginalre aod thc J.oots of Iesus' High

Priesthood. Yom Kippurin Zechariah 3, JEMCh 10, IIQMelkizedeq, Hebrews and the
A.pocalypse of Abxaham 13," in: 1. Assmann and G.G. Stroumsa (eds.), Tr(111$formations
 lntroduction 9

The imaginaire differs from mythology in being a collection not only of

narrative, but of unsequenced motifs with a much wider variety (including
sensual impressions such as scents, songs, feelings. etc.) and of the asso-
ciations between them.
All members of the collective share a basic group of elements, and in
order to communicate with bis Iistener the speaker 1u:u to use the common
imaginaire. AB.y member of the collective can play around with the ele-
ments of the imaginaire of a concept and even add new elements that will
slowly become part of the comm.on imaginaire. This concept of a common
imaginaire can help explain aspects of the process of creativity and its re~
Iation to tradition. While the collective a.~pect of the imaginaire makes it
conservative and traditional, the new associations by individuals continu-
ally broaden it. The imaginaire defines the boundaries of possible associa-
tions between concepts; in other words, it is the Iangue of the collective,
while the concrete expression of the individual is his parole. Or, as for-
mulated by Philippe Desan:
Il ne faut toutefois pas~;:onfondre imagination et imaginaire. L'imagination releve
d'une performao.~;:e individuelle et se dtcele au niveau de Ia <parole>, alors que
t•imagi.naire res:sort du collectif et ne se con\)Oit qu'en tant que <langue>."12
We can re<:onstruct parts ofthe Iangue by assembling the paroles. The ad~
vantage of this approach to the conventional hlstory of tra.ditions lies in its
ability to reconstruct the potentia1 paroles of a certain historical collective,
rather than be limited by extant paroles. This process is similar to Claude
Uvy-Strauss' higbJy controversial approach to myth.23 However, unlike
Uvy~Strauss, I do not cross the cultut'al boundaries of the group investi~
gated. Neither d~ I claim to reconstruct a myth that supposedly once ex-
isted. The imaginaire defines the possibilities of expression and thought of
a certain collective.
For example, the "German imaginaire of Christmas" may include such
motifs such as Christmas tree, snow, Santa Claus, gifts, "Silent Night,"
family, scent of cinnarnon cookies, solitude, frostiness, sledge, church,
heated house, frosted windows, holidays, coziness, etc. Some elements,
such 8s Santa Claus or the Christmas tree, are more closely associated with
and refer unequivocally to Chri..<~~tmas, while others, such as church, soli·
tude, presents or cinnamon cookies, are more arnbiguous and may be as-
sociated with numerous other concepts. Contradietory elements such as

ofthe lnnw Self in Ancienl Religions (Studios in lhe History of Religions (Numen Book
Series) 83; Leiden, 1999; pp. 349-366), p. 349.
12 P. Desan, L 'imoginaire iconomiq~e de Ia Renaissawce (Paris, 1993), p. 9.
23 C. Uvy-Strauss, "La gesre d'Asdiwal," in: idem, Anthropologie structurale 11

(Paris, 1973; p. 175-233).

10 .bttroduction

coziness and solitude can be part of the same imaginaire depending on the
Situation of the speakcr.
Any Gennan can evoke Christmas in the head of another German by
mentioning just a selection of these elements, which do not necessarily
belong to the ..close., part, i.e. snow, church and cinnamon cookies may al-
ready be enough. Different groups of Gennans may associate some ele-
ments more closely and dissociate others, e.g. secular Germans migh.t
associate cinema or discotbeque rather than church.
2.5 Christian Judaism
I pon.dered for a long time which term to use for the German Urchristen-
tum, i.e. the Christian groups of mainly Jewish origin with some Gentile
fellow travelers in the first two generations. "Early Christianity" is too im.-
precise. "Primitive Christianity» imports notions of beginning from zero.
For some time I considered "proto-Christianity" as best manifesting the
element of transition. but it too ean be understood as close to a beginning
from zero and imply an ideal conception ofthe first Christians. Eventually,
I decided in favor of "Christian Judaism," a term that expresses adequately
the relation an.d different Ievel of importance of tbe Jewish origin and the
new Christian direction. Still, it remains difficult to determine the exact
point of transition from Christian Judaism to early Christianity. I suggest
coJmecting tbe point of traosition to a self-definition of the collective
identity over and against Judaism itself. Depending upon the place, this
occurred at different times and paces. In comparison, the tenn "Jewish
Christianity" presupposes that there is also a "non-Jewish Christianity"
distinct from it, which in the first generation is not very meaningful.
"Christian Judaism," however, defines itself as distinct from "non-
Christian Judaism," whicb makes more sense in tbe first century.
Moreover, the inversion "Jewish Christianity" does not give the same
weight to the Jewish origin and sets Christianity as main category. In addi-
tion, tbe term "Jewish Christianity" is a set expression (if ambiguous and
hotly disputed) fot a phenomenon enduring wdl into the second, third and
fourth centuries. l prefer to consider "Jewish Chri.stianily" as one of tbe
developments deriving from "Christian Judaism" after this defined itself as
distinct from "Judaism," as exemplified by Ignatius of Antioch.
 PartOne

YomKippur
in Early Jewish Thought and Ritual
 Introduction

Any invcstigation of the impact ofYom Kippur on carly Christianity has to

begin with a close look at the ritual of Yom Kippur and its Jewish imagi-
naire in tbe Sccond Temple and rabbinie pcriods (antiquity and late antiq-
uity). One bas to know the realia to be aware of the temple ritual and the
rites outside of the temple, as weil as the various concepts and mytbs oon-
nected to Yom Kippur, to discem where each of these dimensions of Yom
Kippur might have iilfluenced early Ch:ristianity. One has tobe able to dis-
tinguish between biblical concepts, the ritual of the Second Temple and of
the synagogues, rabbinie imagination, priestly traditions, and apocalyptic
mythology to evaluate the exact impact ofYom Kippur. Unfortunately, a
oomprehens.ive and critical examination oftbis question has not yet been
undertak:en. Existing studies on Yom Kippur arc, for the most part, nmow
in their scope or conservative in their approach to th.e rabbinie sources, ac-
cepting them as "normative Judaism" without taking into account tb.c vari-
ety of way.s it was possible to celebrate and imagine Yom Kippur. This
lacuna is too vast to be :filled by thc pages that foUow; thcy can be no rnore
than a preliminary investigation, particularly with regard to the rabbinie
and liturgical sources. Many questions could be dealt with only scantily.
and the theses offered are often no more than sketches in need of further
elaboration. To avoid a Billcrbeck-like approach. one tbat would view Ju-
daism through Cbristian eyes, I did not restriet myself to noting only those
details of rituals and imaginaires tbat bad an impact on early Christianity. I
wanted to present as many motifs as possible tbat are oonnected to Yom
Kippur in early Judaism, and only then examine what indeed had an impact
on early Ch:ristianity. As a result, the present part is not only very long but
also slightly lexicon-like, with DJan.Y loose ends that I will not take up in
the chapters on early Christianity. Nevertheless. I hope to have thrown
some new light on the developm.ent of the Yom Kippur ritual an.d its
imaginaires in ancient Judaism.
A study of the shift in Jewish ritual from antique (before 70) to late an-
tique (after 70) Judaism has to cantend with the state ofthe soun:es before
and after the destruction of the temple. On th.e one band, theJ:e is the varl-
ety of Seoond Temple sources, from very different provenances and extant
in many languages and traaslations; on the other, the corpus of rabbiDie
texts; and in between the Christian-Jewish texts, whieh, while still a part of
Jewish culture, already manifest the stirrings of a new religion.
14 Yom Kippu1' in Early Jewilh Thought and Rillfal

I decided against drawing a shaip distinctioo between the Second

Temple and rabbinie periods. To do so would have emphasized the revo-
lutionary aspect of the results of the temple•s destruction. Clearly, the
demise of the temple and its institutions bad an important effect on Jewish
worship. I was surprised, however, at the great degree of continuity in the
communal ritua.ls -· in the diaspora as wen as in Palestine - as between the
Second Temple period and the rabbinie period. Already in th.e Second
Temple period, Yom Kippur was celebrated in Palestine and in the dias-
pora with prayer assemblies, and the development of the prayer service on
the Day of Atonement ftom the Second Temple period to the rabbinie
period is closer to an evolution than to a revolution. The same is true ofthe
abstinences. Another reason for not separating the analysis into two dis-
tinct periods was that the character of the sources is suited to an integrated
analysis. Some "Second Temple" sources- e.g. 4Maccabe.es or the Apo-
calypae of Abraham postdate the destruction, while post-temple sources
such as the Mishnah include essential infonnation on the period before the
destruction.
Part 1 proceeds from the generat to the specific and from the conerete to
the abstrac:t. Chapter 1 dwells briefly on the various names given to Yom
Kippur and the general theoJogical conceptions behind these names. Chap-
ter 2 deals with aspects of the rituals in tbe temple and in the communities.
The first section dealing with a reinterpretation of the historical value of
the mishnaic description of the temple ritual is probably the most tecb-
nical, more easily understood after read.ing the rest of part 1. Chapter 3
analyzes the different rationales for the ritual of Yom Kippur and the
imagi71aires connected to this feast in various ancient Jewish groups, in
particular apocalypticism and Qumran (secdon 1), the Septuagint and Philo
(section 2), rabbinie sources (section 3) and Hekbalot Iiterature (section 5).
While Christian Judaism is dealt with only in part 2, 1 have included a
paragraph (section 4) on the Cbristian Jewish sources here, where they in
fact belong. The Cbri.stian Jewish sources of the New Testament in some
Apocrypha and Gnostica should be used - albeit with due care - in every
investigation ofthe imaginaire of Yom Kippur in early Judaism, sinee they
sometimes coostitute a missing link in the development from the Second
Tetnple to the rabbinie period as I hope to show in part 2.
 Chapter 1

The Names of Yom Kippur

The three principal name form.s for Yom Kippur describe its pmpose
(atonement). its common practice (fasting) and its solemnity.
The Ilebtew Bible and the Tannaitic and Am.oraic sources usually call
the holiday tl'1l!l'J:l c,• (Yom Ha-K.ippurim = Day of Atonements), refer-
riug to its purpose. 1 Tbe Hebrew name current today. Cl" (Yom Kip- ,,,,:>
pur = Day of Atonement) appears only in the high Middle Ages. In Greek.
however, the singularform {1\) i)J.lipa ('toiJ) il;ll.aGIJ.Oü (Day of Atonement)
ex.ists already in the Septuagint.2 This ruune is sometimes used in other
Greek. Jewish and Christian sources. such as Philo, Origen. Eusebius,
Pseudo-Athanasius, Basil and Theodoret of Cyrus. 3 Philo sometimes uses
simply U.a.oiJ.Ö; (atonement). 4 It depends on the author ifthe Greek word
for atonement is more in the sense of expiation (Septuagint) or propitiation
(e.g. Philo). In early piyyutim the name iln•?c z:n• (day of forgiveness) ap-
pears.s Wbat these names have in common is 1hat they indicate the pmpose
(expiation, propitiation, atonement, forgiveness) ofthe festival.
Another fonn of the name, Dl!C or vqat&\a., emphasizes the practice of
fasting. The earliest attestation might be in the Septuagint of lsaiah 1:13-
14.5 In the late Second Temple period, VTtat~::ia bad become the most

I Lev 23:27.28; 25:9.

2 Lev 23:27; 25:9 LXX.
3 E.g. Philo, De plantatione 61; Eusebius, DemoliStratio EvangelictJ 1:3:2; Pseudo-
Athanasius, On Sabbaths and Circumci1ion (PO 28:137A-C); Basil, Homlly 011 Fruting
1:3 (PG 31:165C); Theodoret, Commentary on lsaiah 1:14 (SC 276:163-171).
4 De ~ngr&:~"u ervditionis gratw 8!U07; Qltis ren~m divi'flal'flm heres.slt 179; De

posteritate Caini 48.

' See e.g. the Seder A:vodah ·• 'Azkir Gevurot 'Eloah" {ill'11C nnm '1':ltlt) ("I remember
God's mighty decds") in A. Miislcy (ed.). Ymse ben Yo.rse Poems. Edited with an lntro-
duction, CommelJtary and Notes [iu Hebrew] (Jerusalem, sl991, 1977), p. ISO,Iine 133.
6 This text gives a list of festal days including a fast (tcio; VOVJ.LflY~ i~Ji&v ~ea.l 1:G.
CIÖ.~10. KGi -iiiJCpoY foi.Efal,flv OOK llvi:tOJ.LO.\' VI}O'tti4v ICO.t cip-y\ay ICI&i 't~ YOUjllJVi~J.C; V,..lfiV Klli
t~ eop'li~ VlllllY IUO(i iJ V 'lll1i
JlOU). 1be only Single fast in the row of OT festivals,
however, is Yom Kippur.
16 Yom Kipp11r in Early Jewish Thought and Rihlal

common Greek nam.e for Yom Kippur.7 The Hebrew and Aramaie equiva-
lents are used in Qumran and in the Palestiman rabbinie sources.8 Some
Qumranic texts em.phasize tbe affiiction. using ll'lltll 1VI1l (period of affiic-
tion)9 and ll'lll'llil C1' (day of aflliction), 10 which may have a more general
significance (not only fasting, but also aftliction) or be moving in the
direction of Jubilees, emphasizing the austere character of the day. "The
Fast" becomes a common name for Yom Kippur also in the writings of the
Church Fathers. 11 Finally, the Libtr Anriquitatum Biblicarum combines t1w
first and the second meaniags (atonement and fast) in calling tbe holiday
ieiunium misericordiae, the fast that evokes meroy, which emphasizes that
divine merey is achieved primarily through the fast. 12
The third name underlines the importance of the holiday. The biblical
flll:l!U .n.::1111 might be understood in the same way as the Septuagint tnmsla-
tion "the Sabbath of Sabbatbs" demonstrates. 13 Forthis reason. Philo calls
Yom Kippur ioptctJv ttiv J.l.6')'lCS"tflV (tlw highest holiday). 14 One of the later

1 E..g. Acts 27:9; 1osephus, Antiquitatu}•daicae 17:165-166; 18:94; Philo, De spe-

cialtbslegibus 1:168.186; 2:41.193.194.197.200; Legatio ad Gahlm 306; De vita Mmis

2:23; De decalogo 159. Yet VJtOteio is ,sed also forother fasts -see e.g. Josephus, A.nti·
q11itatesjvdaicae 5:166; 11:134.
1 ln the faJnous passage in lQPeshu Hahaüuk xi:7-8, Y0111 Kippur is described a.s

tllll Dl'. In the Palestinian rabbinie soun:es, Yom Kippur may he called the fast (xznx) or
tbe great fast (10"1 ltlll!')- yBer4:1, 7b, 7c; yPe'ah1:4, 20b, 8:9, 2lb; yTrr8:.S, 4Se =
yAZ 2:3, 4la. In the Babylonian Talmud I follJld only one pessage (bTem 29a) using thu
form.
' 4QS08 2 3; cf. 4Q171 Pesher on PsaJms ii:9-IO; iii:2-3 (quoted below, pp. 98-99).
On all formulatious connected to n•l»n in Qumr.m, see N. Hacham, "Com.munal Fa.sts in
the Jndeaa Desert Scrolls and Assomated Literature," in: D.M. Goodblatt, A. Pinnick and
D.R. Scllwartz (eds.), Hls.torical Perspectives: From the Ha8monean:s to Bar Ko/cltba in
Light of the Dt!ad Sea SC1'o/ls: Proccedings ofthe F ourth International Symposlvm ofthe
Orion Center far the Shldy of Dead Sea Scrolls anti A:rsociated Literahlre, 17-31 JDml-
ary, 1999 (Studies on the Texts ofthe Desert of Judah, 37; Leiden: Brill, 2001; pp. 127-
145}, who claims that in Qnmran ll"llln always refers to Yom Kippur. I hllve reservations
about bis iDclusion of 4QS1 0 and 4QS 11 Songs of the Srsge, whicb use mDn in lbe plural.
10 D0111asC11S Dot:r~ment vi: 19.
11 E.g. Aets 27:9; Barnoba3 7:3; Jnstin, Dialogue with Trypho 40:4; Origeo, Homlly

on Jeremiah 12:13; Eusebins, Demonstratio Evangellca 1:3:2; Ephrem. On Fasting 1:12;

Ba.sil, Homily on Fr.rstlng 1:1 (PG 31:164AB); JobnCbrysostom, AgaiNt theJews 1 (PG
41!:8S4B).
12 Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarvm 13:6. In a similar way 4QS08 2 3 calls Yom. Kippur
lhe appointed time of your mercies 1'l>n, 1Y11l. Later rabbinie sources ~ givcn in the
commentasy on this pessage by H. Jacobson, .A Commentary on Paeudo-PhiJo':s Liber
.4.1Jtiquitahlm Biblicarii/JI with Latin Tut ond English Tr411Siation (2 vols; Arbeiten zur
Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Un:hristentums 31; Leiden, 1996).
13 Lev 16:31.
14 Despecialibus legibus 2:19J-194.
 Tlr« Name1 of Yom .Kippur 17

titles of the rabbinie tractate for Yom Kippur, tml'- the day -evidences
tbis attitude. The same title also expresses the idea that jt is primarily the
day that atones.u
In swn. three principal names are used for Yom Kippur) expressing its
purpose (atonernent, propitiation. expiation, forgiveness), its general prac-
tice (fast, aftliction), or its solemnity. Tbe Old Testament and the Babylo-
nian Talmud use only names based on the pu.rpose, whereas Greek sources,
Qumran, Palestiman rabbinical texts, and the Church Fathers also use
names based on the principal practiee of the people and sometimes on the
solemn aspect, too. Each group has its terminological preferences. Qummn
prefers to addtess the affliction, Greek: sources primarily the fast and rab-
binie sources mostly the purpose, atonement.

1' Rabbi Yehudah ba-Nasi in bYoma SSb.

 Chapter 2

The Rituals ofYom Kippur

The bibücal account of the ritual of Y om Kippur in Leviticus 16 is the

most detailed description of any ritual in the Bible. This cbapter is supple-
mented by Leviticus 23:27-32 and 25:9--10, Exodus 30:10, Numbers 29:7-
11, and many soun:es from the Second Temple period as well as rabbinie
accounts, in particular Mishnah Yoma. The early history of Yom Kippur,
the exact date of its establishment and the origin of some of its rites - all
are hotly debated. 1 An in...depth analysis of the biblical cbapters on Yom
Kippur is beyond the scope oftbis study, as is a complete reconstruction of
the ritual and its historical development in the Second Temple period; the
following pages are to be understood as merely a preliminacy sketch. I
have tried to use all available material, the Bible, apocalyptic and Greek
diaspora sources, Qumranic, Christian and rabbinie texts. Therefore, al-
thougb not a comprehensive treatment of the subject, tbis chapter might
constitute a step in furthering understanding of the development of Yom
Kippur's rituals.
The Yom Kippur rituals can be divided into two main groups; those per-
forrned in the temple and those performed in the community or at home.
The ftrst section oftbis chapter investigates the historical value ofthe main
source of tbe temple ritual, the mishnaic tract Yoma, arguing that some of
its features can be plausibly explained as projections from rabbinie exege-
sis and synagogue services into memories of the temple ritual. Discussion
of these introductory matters is followed by a rewnstruction of the generat
aspects ofthe temple ritual. Section 3 is devoted to an investigation ofthe
rituals performed outside of the temple - at home, in the community or in
the synagogue during the Second Temple period and after the destruction
ofthe temple. While the destruction Qfthe temple entailed an abrupt end to
the blood sacri:fices, I argue for a certain continuity (and l was surprised at
this discovery) of the community-oriented cult, the prayers and the

1 On the diS<:ussion of biblical texts, see the fascinating Levitleus coiilll!entuy by

1. Milgrom, LniiiCII: 1-16. A New Trarulot;on with lntrQJuaion and Commentary (An-
chor Bible JA; New Y ork, 1994). See also G. Deiana, IJ giorno dell'?.fpiazione. Il kJppur
nella tradizione biblica (Supp!etnenti all Revista Biblica 30; Bologna, 1994), who argues
for the fast as tbe original nucleus of the festival.
 The Rihlou of Yom Kippr.rr 19

afflictions. As tbis chapter is confined to deaJing with ritual details, the

summaries that end the sections arc brief. Additional conclusions follow in
tbe next chapter, wbich deals with the intexpretations, the imaginaires and
tbe myths of thc rituals.

1. The Question ofthe Historicity ofthe Mishnaic Version ofthe

Temple Ritual

Mislmah Yoma contains a very detailed discussion of the rituals in and out-
side of tbe temple. 2 The redaction of tbe Mishnah is usually dated to the
time ofRabbi Yehudah HaNasi, around 220 CE. Despite such a late date of
redaction, about 130 years after the destruction of tbe temple, some ofthe
misbnaic traditions may come :from the time the temple was still standing.
The methodological crux is to fmd out which of its traditions reflects a
histo.rical memory of the actual Second Temple .ritual and which are post-
temple developments, exegeses derived :from the biblical text only, resem-
bling the practice of the Christian Church Fathers. Those temple rites that
are confirmed by independent Second Temple sources are almost certainly
bistoric. T o this group belong most of the details conceming the scapegoat
ritual,3 the high-priestly prayer in tbe sanctuary4 and the bowl- tbe a:rtif.act
that holds the sacrificial blood until it is sprinlded. s

,_ I u$011 1he critical editions by Y. Roseo.berg, ..Mishoa 'KipiU'im' (Yoma)- A Criti~

cal Editio11. with Introduction. Volum.e 1: lntToduction. Volum.e 2: Edition,'' [in Hebrew
with English summ.vy] (2 vols; Ph.D. dissertation, Thc Hebrow Univcrsity of Jerusalem,
1995}, for the Mislmah; for the Tosefta: G. Larsson, Der Toseftatralr.tal Jom ha*-Kippu·
rim. Tut, Obersetnmg. KtJmmentQl'. I. Tei( KapitelflUid 1 (Luod, 1980); for 1he Pales-
tiDian (Jerusalem) Talmud: P. Sdilfer and H.-J. Bcclter (eds.), Synopse zum Talmvd
Yerushalmi (Texts and Studies iD Aßcient Judaism 31, 33, 3S, 47, 61, 82, 83; 7 vols;
Ttlbingen, 1991-2001); tbe German translati011 ofthe Pales.tiDian l'almud ment:ioua vari-
ant readings as weil: see F. Avemarie (Irans!.), Yoma- Jlersöhmmg~tag (O'benetzuog des
Talmud Yerushalmi 2:4; TtlbiDgen, l99S); for tbe Babylonian Talmud: variant readings
in R. Rabbinovtcz, Diqduqey Soferim. Jlariae Lectione& in Mischn01fl elln Talmud Baby-
ltmiC'UM qur.rm c oliu librl.r antiqui:rsimis et scripti& et imptasis hlm e Codice Mona-
ceMi JWDB&tantisslmo collectae, amwtationibus instructae. Pars 4. Tract. Rosch Hascha-
nah et Joma (Mua.ieh, 1871) andin the biliDgual edition of Lazarus Goldsehmidt, Dllr
Babylonf:rche Ta/ITUid (9 vols; Berlin, 1897-193')- See also J. Meinhold, Joma (Der
YersDhn11ngnag). Tut, Obersetnmg und Erklärung (Giessen, 1913).
3 The red rlbbou. (Barnabas1:8.I1; mYoma4:2; 6:6); the scapegoat's abuse (Bar-

nabas 7:8-9; mYoma 6:4); the scapegoat's fllllin& (JEnoch 10:4-8; Pl!.ilo, De plantatione
61; mYoma6:6) and its similarity to the sacrificial goat (Barnobas1:6.10i Justin Dia-
Jope with Trypho 40:4; Tertullian Agamal Mtll'cion 3:7:7 and Agair~~t llae Jews 14:9;
20 YDm Kippur in Earl}l Jewish Thought (llld Ritual

Yet the whole tract of Yoma is often attributed to a certain figure

(Sbim'on Ish Mitzpeh or Zechariah ben Qabutar) dated to the Second
Templeperiod or shortly after it, with only minor exceptions regarding this
or that tradition.6 Four arguments are raised to support this contention.
First, the contents of Yoma deal with temple acts that were supposedly
more important in the time of the temple. Second, some scholars regard a
Tannaitic Statement in the first person or an Amoraic ascription of the first
redaction of this tract to an authority from before 70 CE as trustworthy.
Third, some expressions seem to belong linguistically to an older stratum
than the rest of the mishnaic tracts. Fourth, Mishnah Yoma is quite uni~
form, with few deviations from the topic. Most of the Mishnah is anony-
mous; few of the authorlties cited lived a.fter 70 CE.
With regard to the first argument: that there is a detailed discussion of
the Mishnah in the Gemara of the Talmudim shows that interest in tbe de-
taiJs of tbe temple cu1t continued even after the temple was destroyed; that
such interest did not depend on the existence of a temple. The second ar-
gument seems very unlikely. Recent research has rendeted attributions of
traditions to named rabbis highly suspect.1 The authority speaking in the
first person, Zechariah ben Qabuf.il,r, is mentioned only once,1 and bis short
statement appears as an appendix to a geneml statemenl and Iooks very
much lik:e a later addition. He bimself is described in the third person and
is not mentioncd anywhere eise in Yoma. The attribution of the tract to
Shim'on Ish Mitzpeh appea.rs late in Amoraic sources.t The third, lingui~
tic. argument merely suggests a formulation of the ttact at an eadier time
tban 220 CE, not the historicity of some traditions prior to 70 CE.
Tbe only a.rgumem requiring a more detailed refutation is the fourth
one, pointing to the formal differences between roma and otber tracts.
Admittedly, Yoma contains relatively few disputes and rarely deviates

Cyrll G/aphyrorum in Lwiticum liber [PG 69:588AJ); • the place name Belh Hadudu
(or something similar) (IEnoch 10:4).
• See mYoma 5; 1 aod Pbilo, Legatio ad Gai11m 306.
' Sec mYoma 4:3 and llQTemple Scroll XJCV:6.
• Honoch Albeclc accepts tbe suggestion of1he Babylonian Taln1.1ad, whicb attributes
the lract to Shim'oa lsh Mlttpeb (hYoma 14b); see H. Albeck,lntroductlon to the Mish-
nah [in Hebrew] (Jerusalem, 1959), p. 71. Y.N. Epstein, Prolegomli!lfa ad Litteras Tan-
naitlcns [in Hebrew] (Jerusalem, 1957), p. 37, ascribes IlD Urf()rm of Misbna.b Yoma to
Zeebariah ben Qabutar. He is followcd by S. Safrai, "Der Versohnungstag in Tempel UJJd
Synasoge,'' in: H.-P. Heitlz (ed.), Jlersöllnung in der jSdfschen und cltrhtliclwn Liturgie
(Quaestiones Di~putatae 12.4; Freiburg i.Br., 1990; pp. 32-55), p. 33.
7 As 11 result oftbe sl\ldies by Jacob Neusncr.

s mYoma 1:6.
9 bYoma 14b.
 The Ritllal& ofYom KipJ111r 21

from the sequence of the ritual in the sanctuary described in Leviticus 16-
unlike other tracts from Seder Mo'ed such as Sulclw or Pesachim, which
deal mostly with the ritual(s) of tb.e people outside the temple. However,
these fonnal divergences of Misbnah Yoma from other mishnaic tracts do
not necessarily imply that Yoma is more ..historical" than other tracts- the
formal differences may simply stem from tb.e dissimilarity of Yom
Kippur•s ritual from other ritu.als, and from the dissimilarity ofthe Bible's
description of the ritual in Leviticus 16 from other biblical festival de-
scriptions. Leviticus 16 itself is very detailed and chronologically weil
structured; it can be easily adapted and amplified - much more so than the
biblical passagcs for Sukkot or Pesach. Though more detailed, the eight
chapters of Yoma follow the same structure asthat ofLeviticus 16.10 Tbe
fmt seven chapters describe the high-priestly .service; the eighth and last
deals with the prescriptio.ns for the people's ritual and includes some
theological deliberations, paralleling the division of Leviticus 16 into
verses 1-28 and 29-34. 11
On the other band, four Observations mitigate the blind acceptance of
the historicity of the misbnaic details. Whereas some Statements are based
on reliable sources and are therefore historical, others are defmitely the
fruit ofrabbinic exegetical creativity. First and most strikingly~ the Mish-
nah seems to live in tb.e world ofthe Bible in presupposing the existence of
tbe ark ofthe covenant in the holy of holies. 12 The mention of this artifact
has to derive from Leviticus 16, i.e. it depends on exegesis and not on
knowledge of the Second Temple practice, from which it was absent.
Mishnah Yoma in.serts a note to the effect that in the Second Temple the
il'nttr.r pN (foundation stone) bad replaced tbe ark. 13 This scems to be an ex
post facto correction of the biblical atmosphere. If the Mishnah were a
faithful recounting oftb.e Second Temple ritual, the ark would not appear

10 Some scholan claim tlutl cluspters 1-7 deal wilh tbe ritual befure tbe destru.ction of
the temple and c;bapter 8 with the ritual after that. However, it is more correct to cbarac-
terize the distirlction between 1-7 and 8 as ritual iMide and out1ide of the temple. 1t Ui
the stru.cture ofLev 16 thal determined tbe Mishnt.h's $tructure.
11 The seven chapters ofthe high-priestly ritual are divided as follows; (l) week-tong
preparation of the higb priest; (2) the l.oltery among his adjut10ts about the rigbt to per~
form c:ertain s•erifices; (3) tbe moruing Tamid and the high priest's c:onfession over his
buU; (4) the lottei)' oftbc goats and the high priest's second confeasion over bis buU and
its slaugbter; (S) the three mtrances of the high priest into the holy ofholie.s -· first with
the incense and prayer. then with the blood of tbe bull and flnally wilh the blood of the
sacrificial goat - and the pwging of tbe altars; (6) thc scapegoat ritual; and (7) the con-
chading Tituals - includi'llg readings, prayer, a founh entrance to remove tbe incense, ad-
ditional bumt sac:rlfic:es and a celebration.
IZ See mYoma S:J.4.
13 mYoma 5:2.
22 Yom Kippurin Early J~ish Thought and Ritual

at all (as e.g. in Josephus) and such an explanatory note would not have
been necessary. 14 However, if the Mishnah is understood as an exegeticaJ
tract, then the mention ofthe ark is easily comprehensible.
Second, some of the misbnaic details contradict Second Temple
sources. For one thing, Qumran, Philo and Josephus all disagree with the
Mishnah about the number of rams for the sacrifices described in Nuro-
bers 29:8-11. Since the ram sacrifices were central rites, such a discrep-
ancy is hardly imaginable for a well-informed source. 15 For another, a
secend mishnaic detail, a high-priestly vigil on the night before Yom Kip-
pur, is contradicted by Josephus. 16 Josephus relates an anecdote about a
high priest who in the night before Yom Kippur slept, dreamt, had a semen
emission and had to be replaced by another high priest. It is hard to ima-
gine that Josephus would have related this anecdote had he known about a
vigil. While Josephus is not a comprehensive halakhic compendium, he
came from a priestly family and his anecdote lacking mention of a vigil is
conspicuous. One could claim that the anecdote is historical, that the vigil
did not (yet) exist in 4 BCE, the year of the incident, but was instituted as a
reaction to this incident to prevent further similar cases and that the Mish-
nah reflects this later stage. How~ver, Josephus writes the story in 90 CE,
after the destruction of the temple, without referring to any institution of a

14 Moreover, the rabbis disagree about various architectonic features, such as the own-
ber ofthe curtains (mYoma 5: 1) or the number ofthe bases for the censer (mYoma 5:4).
15 IlQTemple Scroll xxv:I4-16, PhiloDe Specialibus legibus 1:188 and Josephus

Antiquitates judaicae 3 :240-242 agree on the number of rams being three, only the
Mishnah says it is two (mYoma 7:3).
16 See mYoma 1:4-7; Josephus, Antiquitates judaicae 17:165-166. On the contrary,

Mishnah Avot reports that one of the ten miracles in the temple was that the high priest
never had a semen emission before Yom Kippur (mAbot 5:5). Josephus refers to Yom
Kippur in several further passages: Antiquitates judaicae 3:240-243 (on the ritual) and
18:94 (on the golden garments ofthe high priest that were kept under Roman authorlty);
Bellumjudaicum 5:236 (on tbe white gannents); Contra Apionem 2:282 (on the universal
observance ofmany festivals and the fast). On Josephus and Yom Kippur (especially the
blood sprinkling), see W. Kraus, Der Tod Jes-u als Heiligt-umsweihe. Eine Untersuchung
zum Umfeld der SOhnevorstellung in R(jmer 3,25-26a (Wissenschaftliche Monographien
zum Alten und Neuen Testament 66; Neukircllen-Vluyn, 1991), pp. 72-73; J.P. Scullion,
"A Traditio-Historical Study ofthe Day of Atonement" (Ph.D. dissertation, Washington,
Catholic University, 1990), pp. 187-193; N.H. Young, "Tbe Impact ofthe Jewish Day of
Atonement upon the Thought of the New Testament" (Pb.D. dissertation, Manchester,
1973), pp. 127-132. Being ofpriestly descent and writing shortly after the destruction of
tbe temple. Josephus is valuable mostly for rec:onslruc:ting details ofthe temple ritual. His
interpretations are mucb shorter than those of Philo; I have therefore not devoted a sepa-
rate section to Josepbus but have included the relevant Observations in the appropriate
places. Here, the generat observation may suffice that the wording of Josepbus' explana-
tioo ofthe Yom Kippur ritual clearly reveals that be was addressing a Gentile audience.
 The Rilllals of Yom Kippur 23

vigil. It is therefoi"e difficult to bring the Mishnah into alignment with

Josephus. One has to assume that there never was such a vigil.
Third, some of the rites were supposedly secret priestly knowledge. The
Mishnah however portrays (high) priests, its presumed informants, as a
deteriorated class. 17 If the Mishnah indeed had access to esoteric priestly
traditions one would have expected a more sympathetic portrayal of its in-
formants, especially in a description of the most solemn ritual of the high
priest. their former Ieader. This antipathetic attitude becomes even more
apparent when compared to the praises of Sirach or of the poetic Sidrei
Avodah, which were probably composed by priests.
Fourth, the Mishnah does not resolve a crucial point, one that the bibli-
cal accounts of Numbers 29 and Leviticus 16 leave open: Rabbi EHezer
and Rabbi Aqiva disagree about the moment of offering the sacrifices
mentioned in Nurobers 29:8-11. 18 If, for the sake of the argument, we
accept the attribution ofthe sayings to these sages ofthe second generation
ofTannaites, it follows that only one generation after the destruction ofthe
temple the specialists are disputing a centrat question of ritual practice.
This confinns the impression that exegetical skills rather than ritual mem-
ory played a significant role in the formation ofMishnah Yoma. It is highly
unlikely that the most important temple ritualleft these questions open. to
be decided by that year•s high priest. Again, the moment of offering must
have been obvious to any insider who knew the actual temple ritual, and
even to observers - but not so for someone struggling primarily with the
biblical account, which leaves these questions open. Even if one of the
rahbis was historically right, the redactors of the Mishnah did not know the
ritual well enough to decide between these opinions or to decide which
was the better-informed source. Exegetically, both opinions are possible,
and this is the stage of information the Mishnah conveys.
1n sum. some mishnaic details can be plausibly explained as rabbinie
inventions derived from exegesis or from an analogical deduction from
similar rituals, among them: the existence of two instead of three rams. the
discussion about the right moment to sacrifice the ram ofNumbers 29, and
the high priest>s abstention from sleep the night before Yom Kippur.

Having discussed the historicity of those mishnaic details that can be veri-
fied or COntradieted by Second Temple sources, we are left with a tbird

17 This negative attitude is apparent in the following details, among others: the high
priest is obliged to vow obedience before a rabbinie court (mYoma l:S); the rabbis con-
sider the possibility that the high priest might be unintelligent or illiterate (mYoma 1:6);
at the lottery bis adjutant has to instruct him on what to do (mYoma 4:1).
11 mYoma 7:3; cf. tYoma 3:19.
 Yom Kip]I'Ur irr Eorly Jewish. Tho11gh.1 and Rih4al
24
group - those whosc historicity can be neither con:firm.ed oor contradicted,
either because they appear only in the Mishnah or because Second Temple
sources axe ambivalent. some agree.ing with the Mishnah, somc not. Tothis
set belong (among others): the exact direetion ofpassing sround the altar; 1!il
the existence of a paravent to cover the naked high priest;:zb the place of
ligbting the incense;21 the number of sprinkliogs in the holy of holies;22 tb.e
fourth entrance to remove the incense pan;23 and the high~priestly readings,
the prayer of eight benedictions and the two confessions on the bull.24
It is to the last tluee - tbe high-priestly readings, tbe prayer of eigbt
benedictions and the two confessions on the bull- that I now wish to turn.
An investigation of their bistoricity is c:r:ucial to UDderstanding the am.ount
of reinterpretatioo in the rabbinie tract and the transition from the temple
to the synagogue ritual. since these three rites are the main basis for lsmar
Elbogen•s and Josef Heinemann's claim that the synagogue service in the
ti~ ofthe Sec:ond Temple influenced and spiritualized the temple ritual. 2s
The bigh-priestly prayer after the scapegoat rirual includes eighl: bene-
dictions: Torah. temple service, thanksgiving, forgiveness of sins, temple.
the people of Isracl,26 the priests and a last benediction.21 Reinemann

19 111 Yoma S:S.

» mYOIIItl 3:4.6.
ll mYo"'" S:l.
zz "'Yoma j;3-C.
%1 mYoms 1:4.
N See mYoma 7:1-3 and mYoma 3:8; 4:2.
zs Blbogm even spealcs of "einer valligcn SpiritualisieiUOg": see bis Studie." zur
Geschich'e des jtiduclten G()ttesdienstu (Schriften der Lcbranstalt fiJr die Wissenschaft
des Juda~mums 1/1-2; BcrliD,. 1907), pp. .52-.53. Elbogen gives the following reasons:
CoJ14;cntiDg tbe sl~Qifices, lhe addfessee, God, is empha.sized, and the proc:ess of slaugb-
teriag recedes to tbc baekground. The scapegoat is sent to the desert, Dot to a demon •Az-
, aal. With an increasc in tbe DllD1bcr of confessions, tbe verbal part of the sac:rific:es
becomes IPOI'C imporunt. The bigh priest prays in Ibo boly of holies and aftet rmiJhing
the sac;rificcs be reads from tbe Torah and prays. The people participate by observio.g tbe
high-priesd.y act, by respond..ing when the high priest mentions die divine name and by
re,e.ivillg the bigh·priestly blessing. Tbe overall focus is uo lonpr dte sacrifice but its
purpose, alonemftl, whk:h can be rcathed also through pl'&yc:rs, co:ufessions and
repeDtance·
;JIII Some manuscripls of the Bahylonlan Talmud .inc.lude here a benediction about
JeJUSalem, whic:h was not part of the misl:maic prayer.
11 MaDU$cript Kaufinarm does .not read "mn ~· for the benedictions "temple," "Is--
rael" and "priests," but &ives a homogeneous Iist as tbe parallel in mSotah 7;7: sec
Y. J.Qscnberg, "Mislula 'Kipurim'," vol. 2. p. 80. The eommon reading with "mu 1111:1"
probably eutered via t~o~a 3:18 and Mishnah readings in the Babylonian Talmud. The
topic of the last benedu;ttoo u not clcar, as can be seea lhrough the various solutions
proposed in the commentaries.
 The Rituals of Yom Kippur 25

observed that the form a.nd content ofthe benedictions are similar to syna-
gogue prayers,18 and he suggested that the temple service was influenced
by "popular worship." prayer and readings by the spectators in the syn.a-
gogues of the Second Temple period, which intruded into temple worship,
as portrayed in Sirach.29 On the one hand, if Reinemann could explain the
existence ofthe high~priestly prayer by assum.ing an inßuence ofthe syn.a-
gogue on the temple ritual, it is only a small step further to suppose tha:t
this influence took place "post mortem" - i.e. after the destruction of the
temple; that 1t was not an influence on the temple ritual itself but only on
its literacy description. On the other band. the benedictions in Mishnab
Yoma fail to agree in detail with those of the seven-benediction Amidah of
Yom Kippur.~0 A complete invention of the high-priestly blessings by rah-
bis after the destroction ofthe temple. then, seems unlikely but some ofthe
benedictions may have been retrospectively introduced.
The readings by the high priest i:rnmediately after the performance of
the ritual just described therein. seem somewbat excessivc. 31 Indeed, tbe
Palestinian Talmud notes thls oddness and provides a scriptural justifica-
tion for it. 32 Of course, such a reading in close jux.taposition to actual sacri-
:fice is possible and is practiced in other religions. Brahmans accompany
the sacrifices with a recital of the instructions, to ensure that the sacrifice
is perfonned perfectly, lest the actual sacrificer, G<Jd forbid, should slip. 33
However, the mishnaic account leaves one major difficulty in the ritual
unexplained. The high priest received the Torah just after having handled
the entrails of some sacrifices, so his hands were probably bloody.
Centamination of a Torah scroll through bloodstained bands is UD-
imaginable. That the high priest washed his hands and the rabbinie souoces
omit tbis washing is also unlikely, considering the meticulous attention
devoted to band washing elsewhere in Mishnah Yoma, the Tosefta and

28 His thoughts on tbese matten .are collected in I. He.ineiiWlll, Prayer in the Pericd of
the Tanna'i111 and the Amora'tm. /ts Nature: and !ts Patterns [in Hebrew, with Englisb.
summary) (Public:ations of tbc Perry Foundation for Biblical Research in the Hebrew
University of Jerusalem; Ierusalem, 2 1966), pP. 7~7. On the similarity of the ti.rst
benediction, See also tYoma 3:13.
29 Sir SO: 19. Heineman:n rejects the possibility of a:n influence in the opposite dire<:-

tion, of tbc temple service on thc syaagogue. .His main argwnent for this is that if the
dramatic changc of the concept of worship toward p:rayer and iectioos bad indeed origi-
nated in the temple, we would find examples in otber rituals as weil, Heinemann, Prayer
in the PttriQd ofthe Tanna'im anti tlul Amora'im, p. 84.
:!II The numbers and sorne ofthe name$ oftbe blt:ssings differ,
n mYomo 7:1-3.
32 yYoma 1:1, 44a..
n See the stndy by J.C. Heesterman, The Broken World o[Sacrifi.ce (Chi.cago, 1993).
26 Yom Kippurin EarlyJewish .Th(JUghJ and Ritual

Sifra. 34 The high-priestly reading. therefore, seems to be a projection of

synaogal practice onto the description of the temple ritual.
Did the high priest twice lay both bis hands on the bull and confess bis
sins, or istbis an embellishment of the Mishnab?35 Leviticus 16 mentions
only the confession over the scapegoat, but a confession might bave been
patt of any guilt offering. 36 Sifra suggests the repetition of Levitleus 16:6
in Levitleus 16: 11 as a scriptural prooftext for an act of atoning before the
slaugbter, i.e. a confession.37 Analogously, from the "superfluous" mention
of two hands in Leviticus 16:21 the Tannaites deduced that alllaying on of
hands was to be performed with both bands.38 Both of these details may
have been part of the temple ritual. But. equally, it may have b~ the
redactors of the Mishnah who increased the number of confessions :trom
the biblical one to three, as tbis verbal act becomes much more frequent in
the prayer of the synagoguel9 and takes the central place in the service.
The high num.ber of confessions in the prayers of Yom Kippur40 appears
more justified if even the high priest confessed more than once. Moreovet,

:M One could llf&lle that differences • between the readings for the temple a.nd for the
synagogue service make such a reflection of synagogue practices bal;k into the temple
ritual description unlikely. The reading of Lev 23:27-32 is missiog among the synagogue
Jections (mMeg 3:7; tMeg 3:7; yMeg 3:7, 74b; bMeg 31a). But we cannot be sure tbat
there really was such a difference in the readings in mishnaic times (or before). E.g., thc
Tosefta gives more lections than the Mishnah for about tbe same time a.nd place. It is
highly feasible that the readings ofmYoma 7:1 represent a form of the readings of some
synagoguc, earlier or f'rom a different area/tradition t1w1 the synagogue ofthe community
behiDd bMeg 31 a. Most prolxtbly, these lections were for a long time not faed and
mYom11 1; 1 and bMeg 3la 8fe on.ly examples of some possibilities. Moreover, the dif-
ferences could be easily explained: A reading ofLev 23:27-32 could easily be cotu:eived
of as superfluous, u the contenlll mostly repeat what has just been read iD Lev t 6:29-34.
FinaDy, those scholan who accept Blbo,gen's and Heinemann's theory that the readißg of
the temple ritual was intluenced by the contemporary synagogue ritual would have to
assume that Lcv 23:27-32, too, was one of the leewes in s)'llagogues of the Second
Temple period, i.e. that mYoma 7:1 reflects some .synagogue service.
35 mYoma 3:8 a.ad 4:2.
36 Lev 5:5; cf. also Num S:7.
37 Sifra, Ahare Mat 2:1 (to Lev 16:6), cf. bYoma 36b. It deduces f'rom a guera sluw-
l'ah that the bull is simllar to the scapegoat; ,,,., is .sa.id oftb.e scapegoat in Lev 16:10 as
weil as ofthe bull in Lev 16:6 and 16:11. A second solutionlies in the observatioo that
Lev 16:6 speaks of atonement whib: the bull is still alive; sinc:e it is only slaughtered in
Lcv 16:11, the ato.nement must have been effected by somethiog other than blood. The
confession onr the bull is referred to also in mMeg 2:5; and mSebat. l :7.
38 Sifra Ah11n Mot 4:4 to Lev 16:21; aud mMenah 9:1.

" Altogether six sea of confessions: one set in each ofthe tive prayen and another at
home before Yom IGppur.
40 The Tosefta already mentions six confessiODS (tYoma 4:14).
 The Rituals ofYom Kippur 27

the "biblical" confession over tbe scapegoat is a collective confession; the

"Tannaitic" confession over the bull is by an individual for bis personal
sins and that of bis relatives. Tbis transition corresponds well witb the
move toward a more personal aspect in the synagogue prayer, which in-
cludes collective as well as individual eonfessions.
Ifthe readings, tbe prayers andlor the two extra confessions belonged to
the temple ritual as Elbogen and Heinemann claim, a spiritualization ofthe
temple ritual itself took place before 70 CE: blood sacrifices were amended
by readings of their prescriptions and by prayers containing a request for
tbe vezy same purpose as the sacrifices, forgiveness of sins. This would
have been the fust step to a türtber spiritualization of the. Yom Kippur
ritual in the synagogue. which replac:ed the actual soorifices with Iiturgical
poems. According to this conceptualization, the readings. prayers and
multiple confessions continue the high-priestly ritual rather than replace it.
However. in light of the contradictions by other mishnaic rites of Seo-
ond Temple sources. and in light of the late time of redaction of the Mish-
nah (about one and a half centuries after tbe last Yom Kippur in the
temple), we cannot simply aecept all of these traditions as historical. The
proximity of the readings and confessions to the ritual of the synagogue
raises the suspicion that they may be projections of the synagogue ritual
onto that of the temple after the destruction of the temple, rather than accu-
rate historical memory .'11 It might be impossible to prove that these two
rites are inventions of the Tannaites, but it is equally impossible to prove
that they were practiced in the temple. Their character is bctter suited to
the context of the synagogue service - as is presupposed also by Elbogen
and Heinemann, who asswne an influence of synagogue worship on the
temple - and the rabbis bad an excellent motive for introducing their own
ritual into the era of the temple. The burden of proof lies, therefore, on
those who consider them to be temple rites. It is also possible that the
readings and the two extra confessions originated in the Second Temple
period and were practiced in some synagogues but were not part of the
temple ritual. In this case, too, the Tannaites thought it necessary to justify
some of their rituals by contextualizing them in tbe temple, and the read-
ings and multiple confessions, portmyed as continuing the high-priestly
ritual in foot replace it. ·
ln sum, each detail of the mishnaic account has to be carefully
compared with all the sources available. Wbile some mishnaic traditions
faithfully describe the temple ritual, others can be explained as rabbinie
inventions based on exegesis. Some ritual details matehing later synagogue

41 For a similn eonclusion, see D.J. Silver, "The Shrine and the Scroll," Journal of
Reformed Judaism .31 (1984) 31-42, whose arguments, however, ne not substantial.
28 Yom Kippur ;,. Early Jewish Tlro~~ght and Ritual

service may have been proje<;ted into tbe memory of tbe temple service in
order to justi:ty these practices and reinforce the inlpression of a continuity
between temple and synagogue. In any case, reciting. studying and dis-
cussing the Mishnah became one of the forms of reenacting the temple
ritual. As will be shown below, Mishnah Yoma itself was considered
suitable for liturgical purposes. In fact, thc closcness of the earliest extant
Seder Avodah to the Misbnah suggests tbat the Mishnah itself might have
developed out of similar needs and precisely for this Hturgical purpose -
albeit at different times and different places in slightly different versions.

2. The Temple Ritual

For reconstruction of the temple ritual, I confine myself to the basic as-
pects of the ritual and to commenting on tbe main differences amon,g the
sources. The rites of Yom Kippur include many cultic acts tbat are also
performed elsewhere42 or that are similar to those of other rituals." 3 Still,
Yom Kippur has several "unique" features and is a sort of acme of all
temple rituals. Only on this dayt.is the holy of holies, the most sacred pre-
cinct of the Jerusalem temple, entered. Only on t.his day does a ritual have
to be performed by the high priest. the "holiest" person. Ooly on this day
does the high priest ch.ange bis golden garments for special white linen
ones. The ritual can reasonably be broken down into four parts: (1) the
preparation rites, (2) the entrances to the holy of holies with incense bum-
ing, prayer and blood sprinkling, (3) the sending away ofthe scapegoat and
(4) the closing rites. I will discU5s the ritual according to these parts.
2.1 The Preparation Rites
The introduction to Leviticus 161ists the conditions for the entrance to the
holy of holies: preparing certain animals.44 washing the body and putting
on linen garments. 45
Going weil beyond the biblical regulations, the first chapter of Mishnah
roma describes a week of preparation during which the high priest is
isolated (to avo_id contamination) and carefully schooled so that he will to

..:r E.g., the sin otrcring aod lhe bumt offeriDg or blood sprlDJdin.g.
43 E.g.• tfle affering ofthe two goats is similv to the two birds in Lev 14.
44 Lev 16 lists a bull, two goats and two rams. Num 29:7-11 li1ts a bull. a ram aod

seven lambs, and a thlrd goat. On the different au.swers to the question of wb.ethtr this
ram is o.ne ofthe rams of Lev 16, see below, p. 31.
4$ Tbe linen giiillents are destribed in l.ev 16:4 (tunk, Ieggings, sasb. tutban) aod
their value is discussed in mYowuz 3:7.
 The Ritllal& of Yom Kippwr 29

be able to perform bis complicated task. The character of this preparatory

wcek as investiture is underscored by tbe purification sprioklings with the
ashes of the Red Heifer on the third and seventh da.ys.46 The mishnaic
statement that durlog the last night before Yom Kippur thc high priest is
not aiJowed to sleep is most probably not bistorically accurate..f?
Yom Kippur itself starts with the otrering ofthe Tamid. whlch tbe high
priest performs in bis festal garments after having been washed.48 Having
completed the moming Tamid, the high priest takes a purification bath,411
puts on tbe white linen garmentsso and offers a bull as a sin offering {na1:1n)
on his own behalf.51 He then makes a lottery between tbe two goats of the
people.51 One ofthem, tbe goat for YHWH (the sacrificial goat) will be
sacrificed and its blood sprink.led in the holy of bolies. The other, tbe goat
for 'Az'azel (the scapegoat), is p1aced in front of the sanctuary, tobe sent
away after the blood rites in the sanctua:ry have been completed. The two
goats have tobe equal. 53 The scapegoat is marked with a red ribbon. 54

46 Phüo, Duomniis 1:214; mParah 3:1, sec Y. Baer, Wfhe ServiceofSacrifice in Sec-
ond Temple Times," [in Hebrew] Zion 40 (1P6S) 95-153, here p. 112.
07 See p. 22, uote 16, above.
41 mYoma 3:4-S.
411 mYoma 3:6. Tbe Bible asks for two washings: at the beginuing of t.he ritual
(Lev 16:4) md after tbe sendiag away of lhe sawpegoat (Lev 16:24). The extant ftag·
ments of llQTemple Scroll xxvi:IO mention washing of bands and feet between si:n of-
ferillg and confession over the scapegoat. The rabbinie lrac:ts mention fiVe co.mplete
wasbings and ten ablutions of bands and feet (mYoma 3:3) oacb time the clothes are
c:banged - (1} before the momiDg Tamid, (2) after the morning Tamid md before the
Yom Kippur sacrifices, (3) afler the sending away of the scapegoat and bc:fore the bumt
offerings, (4) after the bumt afferings and before the removal of the cemer and PJII, and
{5) before the evening Tamid. See Milgrom, .LniliC14 1-16, p. 1047.
50 mYoma 3:6.
51 Lev 16:6.1 L Literally, the buU see1n11 to be slaughtered twice. The rabbis explain
this duplication by assuming a twofold c:onfession over the bull: see mYoma 3:8 md 4:2.
:u Lev 16:7-lO; mYoma3:9; 4:1. The Muhnah states, two temple officials helped him.
SJ The earliest extant soun:e is Btzmabos 7:6.Hl (beautifui md similar). Cf. also Iustin
Dialogue witlt Trypho 40:4 (similar) md TertulJian Against Moreion 3:7:7 md Agaimt
the Jews 14:9 (alike and $Unilar in appearance); mYoma~i:l (alike in appearao.ce, size,
\'alue aud buying date). Cf. also Cyril of Alexandria, wbo states: ..Two goats, beautiful
(1e.u1.o\) a.ad oflhe same heigbt (i.e~o~ietac;} and streqth (~u:ac;) and ofthe same c:olor
{o}lbxpoot)" (my translation of Glap/ryrOI'IIIII in Lniticwn libel', PG 69:S88A). This is
close to Bamabas but not dose enough to provo dependence. It mipt also hint at a d~
col1l8Ct of Cyrll with a Jewish exegetical tradition. On BlH'nalxu and the temple. see es-
pecially thc analysis by G. Alon, "The Halakhah in the Epistle of Bamabu,.. in: idcm,
Studies in Jewfslr History {in Hebrew] (2 vols; Tel Aviv, HIS7; vol. 1, pp. 293-312), here
pp. 302-305; rmd sc:e the sectioo. on Bat'raalxu on pp. 148-l61, below.
14 Tbe earllest source is agaia Bamabtls 7:8.11. See atso the patristic texiS depellding
on the same Cnditioo md mYoma 4:2; 6:6.
30 Yom Kippvr in Early Jf:Wish Thovght Olfd Rihlal

2.2 The Entrances to the Holy ofHolies

The holy ofholies is entered three or four times. 55 During the ftiSt entry,56
the high priest bums especially fine incense.57 The rabbinie sources dispute
at length the question of where the high priest was supposed to light the
incense, inside or outside the sanctuary.s8 The latter is presented as the
position of the Sadducees (Sifra, Talmudim) and Boethusians (Tosefta),
while the fonner opinion is connected to the Pharisees, who are clearly
presented as superior. Philo's description ofthe rite might support the Sad-
ducean case. 59 Given that the high priesthood was mostly in the hands of
Sadducees, they probably k:new the ritual better and represented the ori-
ginal performance, whereas the Pharisaic position is either an innovation
or theoretical polemics. Philo and the rabbinie sources add that the high
priest also says an intercessionary prayer in the sanctuary.60 Fot the second
entry the high priest, taking part of the blood of the bull in a goiden
bowl,61 enters and sprinkles it with bis ~gets on and before the
kapporet.62 He then leaves. slaughters the sacrificial goat and takes its
blood for the tbird entrance and further sprinkling as before. 63 He similarly
sprinkles the sanctua.ry64 and daubs and sprinkles the incense and the sacri-
ficial altars with a mixture ofthe bull's and the goat's blood. 65 According

55 Philo and Hebrews empbasize that the holy of bolies was entered only once a year.
This has to be understood in context as an intensification of their polemical and typologi-
cal arguments.
56 According to a Christian or Gnostic tradttion, wbich may weil be based on Jewish
tiaditions, tbe high priest woR ther:son entering the sanctwuy, removing it only for en-
tering the boly of holies. See Clement of Alexandria, bct~rpts from Theodobls 21 (dis-
cussed below on pp. 240-243); and N. Bezalel, "Ciement of Alexandria on an Unknown
C11stom in the Temple Service of the Day of Atonement" [in Hebrew] Sinai 103
(1989) 177-178.
51 Lev 16:12-13; mYotna 5:1.
58 tYoma 1:8; Slfra, A.hare Mot 3; yYoma 1:5, 39a-b; bYoma S3a. See J.Z. Lauterbach,

'"A Significan.t Coottovmy betwcen the Sadducees and tb.e Pharisee:s," Hebrew Union
College Annual4 (1927) 173-205; Milgrom, Leviticusl-!6, pp. 1028-1031.
n De specialllms leg;bws 1:72. This would supPort the thesis that Philo was of priestly
descent: D.R. S<:hwartz., "Philo's Priestly Descent," in: F.B. Grcenspahn. B. Hilgert and
B.L. Mact (eds.), NOJUishedwith Peace (Chico, 1984; pp. lSS-171).
.,. Leg<~tlo ad Gaiatn 306; mYoma 5:1.
61 This item i9 mentioned by ll QTemple &roll xxv:6 and mYoma 4:3; 5:4, tbough the
Tannaitic sources do not describe it as golden.. This may perhaps be concluded from the
description ofthe golden ineense pan (mYoma 4:4), cf. Y. Yadin (ed.), The TempleScroll
(3 vols; Jerusalem, 1983), p. 116.
6Z Lev 16:14; mYomo 5:3. On this item, see below, pp. 104-105.
63 Lev 16:15; mYoma 5:4.
64 Lev 16:16. Jn the Mishnah thls has become the altar.

<i' Lev 16: 18--19; cf. Exod 30:10; tnYoma 5:5-6.

 The Rlt11als ofYom Kippur 31

to the Mishnah, a fourth entry took place after the scapegoat ritual in order
to remove the censer, which was supposed to have been left there during
the blood-sprinkling rite.66
2.3 The Sending Away ofthe Scapegoat
After the lottery between the people's two goats and the three entries to tb.e
holy of holies, 67 the high priest retums to the scapegoat, lays both bis
hands on its head and delivers a collective confession.61 He then hands the
scapegoat over to an adjutant, who escorts it to the desert. 69 The scapegoat
is maJtreated on its way out of the city70 and ultimately killed by being
thrown from a precipice jn the desert,11 at a place called something Hke
Bet Haduri.n
2.4 The Closing Ritllals
After sending the scapegoat away the high priest takes a bath and changes
into the golden gannents. 73 He then offers two rams for bimself and for
the people as bumt o.fferings."4 At this moment, he probably also offers the
offerings mentioned in Numbers 29:7-11, a buU. another ram,75 and seven

8 mYoma 7:4. Ancient ea.stem parallel$ make such an entrance probable: see Mil-
grom, L1111itiCIIS 1-16, pp. 101S and 1068.
(;T llQTemple Scroll xxvi:IO n:ports that the bigh priest wa.shed his bands and feet

from the blood ofthe sa<:rifi<:ial goat before approacbing the s<:apegoat.
68 Lev 16:21a; mYoma 6:2.
Lev 16:2lb; mYoma 6:3.
69
'10 Barnabas 7:8 "spit on it, and piorce it," eursing; Tertullian: "cursed, spit upon,
pulled around. and pierced, and driven by the people out of the city" (Against Mareion
3:7:7-Againsl tlle Jews 14:9). ~r~Yoma 6:4: pulling hair, cursing "bear (our sins] and be
gone!"
11 Forthe fall, see JE"och 10:4-8; Philo, De plantatione 61; mYoma6:6. For tbe kill-
ing, see m Yoma 6:6; Justin, Dtafope wilh Trypho 40:4. From the nde that the higb. priest
could c:ontinue the ritual upon the message that tbe scapegoat had reaehed the desCJt (and
not tbat tbe scapegoat was lrilled), Milgrom ded~~ees that the killing was not essential:
Milp:om, Leviticm 1-16, p. 1045.
'll For the name, seealso J&och 10:4 aud the diseussion ofthis passage p. 88, note
44, below. On the variaut readings ."-n,, n•::~/nn., 11"':1/ ,.",il n•J 11"'111:~ n•J I Tn1<1 n•.J in
the Mishnab and the Talmudim, see Rabbinovicz, Diqduqey Soforim, vol. 4 pp. 193-194;
and Yehoshua Rosenberg's eritlcal edition ofthe Mishnah trac:tate Yoma, vol. 1, p. 76.
73 Lev 16:23-24a.
74 Lev 16:24b. The Mishnah has the burning of the remains ofthe sac.rificilll goat and

the high priest's bull before the wa.sbing and cbaugjng of clothes (mYoma 6:7; 7:2). Such
a sequence is possible: see Milgrom, Leviticvs 1-16, pp. 1046-48.
15 From the Bible it is not clear ifNum 29:8 refers to the same tam as Lev 16:3.5 or to
a third mB. The sac:rific:e of this tbkd ram is confirmed by all relevant Seco.ad Temple
soun;;es (llQTemple Sero// xxv:l2-16; Josephus, Antlqvitales jvdaicae 3:240-243;
32 Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Thought and Ril'llal

lambs. 76 A third goat is eaten by the priests as a sin offering.77 The

carcasses of the bull and the sacrificial goat, whose blood was sprinkled in
the hoty of holies, are then burned by an adjutant at a special boly place
outside the temple. 78 The Mishnah includes a higb-priestly Torah reading
and prayer, but the former may have been added later to justify existing
synagogue practice. 79
The long series of sacrifiees ends with the evening Tamid. 80 Sirach
gives a quite detailed description of the evening Tamid that migbt be tbe
end of the temple service of Yom Kippur. 81 He refers to the bumt sacri-
fice82 and its libation.83 On hearing the sound oftbe trumpets84 the people
prostrate themselves, 85 the high priest blesses the congregation86 and the
people fall down again. 87 According to Sirach, at least this part of the ser-

Philo, lk specialibu.J legibv1 1:1&8). Tbe discussion in the rabbinie sourc:es leaves both
possibilities open (h Yoma 70b; Sifra Ahare. Mot 2:2). This c:ase demonstrates how c:arrid
one has to be when using rabbinie sources for rec:onstruc:ting the temple ritual, wbeD llli·
merous traditions may be simply based on exegesis and developed from (later) ideas aad
regulations. See abovc. pp. 21-28.
111 Num29:&-10. The rabbink so:p..-ces contain a dispute over tbe conect IDOIIlent to
offer the burnt afferings mentilllled in Num 29:&-lO. Tbe opinion atcepted here isthat of
Rabbi Eliezer, who agrees with llQTemple Scroll xxvii:3-4. Rabbi Aqiva claims that
they were offued during the moming Tamid, while the two nuns were bumt offerings
during the even.ing Tamid (mYoma 7:3-4). See abo"e, p. 23.
Tl Num29:11; the lectio dfjficilior in Philo, De $J'6Ciali~ legibu 1:190; BamabtJJi
7:4-S; mMe11ah 11:7; bMenah lOOa. Mislmah Yoma sldps tbe sin offering of lhe third
goat.
111 I..ev 16:24b-2S.27•
." See above, pp. 25-26.
10 mYomo 7:4. See above, p. 32, note 76 for the deviant opinion ofRabbi Aqiva.
81 While Sir SO:S-21 has i'Mquendy been explained as depicting Yom Kippurin the
temple, espeeially for its closeness to piyywtim in the synagogue service (C. Roth,
"Ecclesiasticus in the Synagogue Service," Journal o/Biblica/ Literature 71 [19S2J 171-
178), Shmuel Safrai and alter him F. O'Fearghail ~ed the conc:lusion that Siraeh re-
fers to the daily o«eri11g and not to Yom Kippur. See S. Safrai, uon lhe History ofthe
Service in the Seco.nd Temple" [in Hebrew] Mehkare Eretz Ylsrael (l9SS) 3~1;
F. O'Fearghail, ..Sir. 50:5-21: YOlll Kippur or tbe Daily Wbole Offering," Biblica 69
(1978) 301-316. However, a Tamid was affered also on Yom Kippur and the description
ofSirach ha5 an espec:ial!y soleum aura. which migbt well point to the evening Tamid at
the end of ehe Yom Kippur celebrations. I use Sirach oaly with rc•ervations.
u Sir 50:12-14; mTamid 1:3•
., Sir SO: lS; mTamid 7:3.
14 Sir SO: 16; mTomid 7:3 .
., Sir 50;11. Mishnah Tamidmentions tlumpet playing and prostrations in every break
ofthe Leviticat singing (mTamid7:3).
116 Sir 50:20; cf. 'Asappu Gedolot (ed. Mirsky, p. 202, line 197).
t1 Sir 50:21; mYoma 7:3.
 The Rilflal$ ofYom Kippur 33

vice was accompanied by songs of thc si.ogcrs and prayers o( tbe people. 88
The mishnaic description of tbe temple ritual closes with a celebration or-
garW:ed by the high priest for bis friends after "leaving the holy of bolies
in peace. nl9

3. The Rituals of the People

The rituals of the people mainly comprise various sorts of afflictions and
long communal pmyers. This is the samein the diasporaandin Palestine
before and after the destruction of the temple. The afll.ic:tioD$ differ alDong
the communities. As weshall see, some choose a more active direction
with mowning (Jubilees. Festival Prayers) or a vigil (Jubilees. Pirqe
Rabbi Eliezer) or standing (Philo, Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer); others are more
lenient.
Some communal Yom Kippur prayers of the Second Temple period
have survived in Philo and the Festival Prayers found in Qumran. Daniel
Falk has convi.ocingly argued tbat most of the Qumran Festival Prayers
were probably used outside the sect. Yet the Festival Prayers that can be
pJausibly identified as betonging to Yom Kippur number more than the
five determined by Falk. That manna is used both in a Yom K.ippur prayer
by Pbilo and by the Festival Prayers may point to an early common
traditioo in the communal prayers of Yom Kippur in the land of Israel and
the diaspora.90
It is not clear to wbat extent Second Temple J udaism. already performed
ritual reenactments of the temple ritual outside the temple. The prayer ser-
vice included supplications, praises and most probabty confessions. A lit-
urgical .reenactment of the higb-priestly ritual by reading the biblical
descriptioos or related texts is possible io thc Second Temple period,
though decisive evidence for this is stiU missing. In rabbinie times. the
temple ritual is solemnly reenacted by the Seder Avodah in the synagogue
liturgy and by the popular sacrifice oftbe kapparot at hom.e.
1.1 Between Aßlictions and Joy
The Bibie commands the people to do only two things: to abstain from
work arad to "affiict their souts•• (!U!ll "'J'll') without specifying wbat is

81 S.ir 50:18-19, ~f. mYoma1:l (bigh-prie:stly reading); tYoma 3:18 (people reading).
89 mYoma 1;4.
911Or to the same exegetical tndition ~:ombining Lev 16:29.31 aud Deut 8:.3. See
bYom.a 74b; and see the pages 41, 47, 97, below.
34 Yom Xipp#r ;" Early Jewish Thought and Rihial

meant by the latter.9l The Second Temple sources interpret this as fast-
ing.92 The Mishnah gives a detailed list of six abstentions: food, drink. sex,
sanda1s, washing and oiling.93 Most of them were probably practiced
already in the time ofthe Second Temple. Tbe fust three are part ofmost
religious abstention rites,94 and the last two belong to the rneasures pole-
micized against in Matthew 6:16-18, i.e. they were practiced on some fast
days. The fourtb rite is a typical ancient mourning rite. 9S
Some may wear sacke1oth and place ashes on the head;96 they abstain
from sleep,97 induce tears and cry,98 stand for long hours during the
prayer, 99 or suffer more extreme aftlictions.100 The fact that active forms of

91 Lev 16:29-31; 23:27-32; Num 29:7. The Septuaginl undentands tbe construction
I:D'nlll9l n1:111»n as an inner affliction, translating t~ '~!'VX&,; ~v, i.e. Maffiict your souls."
llQTemple SCTOll xxv:IQ-12 understood l/191 as a reflexive, as in the Aramaie meaning,
and ttanslates "afflict yourselves....
n This is refl"ted also by lhe most conunon Greek name for Yom Kippur, "tbe fast."
The earliest source is.lsa 1:13-14 LXX. Otberwise, tbe earliest reference is probably in
the P:oalms of Solomon 3:8 "[Tbe rigbteousl atones for (sins of) lgnorance by fasting ud
humbling the 3oul and tbe l.ord will cleanse every devout person and his house.•• These
songs have been dated to approximaa-Jy 70-45 BCE. See R.B. Wright, "Psalms of Solo-
mon." in: J.H. Charlesworth (ed.), The 0/d Testami1ft Pseudcpigrapha 1 (New Yor.k,
1985; pp. 63~70). p. 640.
" mYoma 8.:1; cf. mTa'an 1; cf. m&bb 9:4.
114 Pregnant women and the sick did not have to fast, childfen bad to get accustomed to
the fast from about the age of ten, probably connected not only to the capability of fast·
ing but also to taking responsibility for lheir deeds. Other Palestinian communities Iet
even younger children fast, as statements by Sbammai (tYoma 4:2 and SQ/erlm 18.:7) and
a legend in Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer 46 reveal. See J. Ta.bory, Jewuh Festivals in tJre Time of
the Mi:~hnah and Talmud. [in Hebrew] (Jerusalem, 1995), pp. 279-280. On tbe legend in
Pirqe Rabbi Eliezu 46, see below. In Samaritan and K.araite commuuities the fast is
eompulsory for everybody, including ehildren.
o,s E. Marbach, "Nudipedalia," P011li-Wissowa 17/l (1936) 1239-1241.
" See e.g. Jonah 3; Isa 58:3-5; mTa'an2:l.
n bYoma19bandJ.,hllees34:13.
• Cf. e.g. the mourning in JflbiJI!.u 34 and in the Futival Prayers as weU as the
lamenting mood in suc;h piyyutim as 'Ein Lana Kohl!.lf Gadol (jm J:T.> u? l'K} (ed. Mißky,
pp. 210-216) :and Mah 'Anu flMah Hayyenu (11"11 ili'Jl lllt ;m) (bYoma 87b; Seder Rav
Sa'adia Ga'on {ed. Davidson, Asafand Yoel, p. 262]).
911 D11. specialibuslegibus 1: 186; Pirqe Rabbi Elil!.ze.r 46.
100 Foi' a mueb later period the Shulkhan 'Aruklr mentloos such prac;tices as wbipping
oneself in order to receive the mercy of God (Orah Hayyim 607:6). ne Sbi'ite 'Asbura
is famous for its self-a:ftlictions with daggers and whips during dances and processions.
On connections between the 'Ashura and Yom Kippur, see G. Vajda, "'Jeline m1111ulmane
et jeßne juif," Hebrew Union Col/l!.ge Amrua/ 12-13 (1937-38) 367-385, esp. pp. 373-
379; S.O. Goitein, "Ramadan, the Muslim Month offasting," in: idem, Sbidies in lslamic
HistM)' and Institutions (Leiden, 1966; pp. 90-110); G.R. Hawting, "The Tawwabun,
Atonemcnt and Ashura," JewisJr Sbidie.s in Arabic anrl it111m 17 (1994) 166-181. See
 The Riwals of Yom Kippw 35

asceticism are objected to in a long discussion in the Babyloni.an Talmud

may mean that stricter forms of aftlictioos were indeed observed. 10 l
These stricter aftlictions are often considered as sectarian and ascribed
to marginal groups such as the conununity of Jubilees, Qumran and later
the Karaites. 102 This probably originates in too simple a differentiation into
"mainstream versus the other," perhaps under the infiuence of this talmu-
dic discussion. Qumran's Festival Prayers, which speak of sorrow and
mouming, were most probably not sectarian. 103
After the destruction of the temple, one might have expected an increase
in the severity of the aftlictions, but this does not seem to have been the
case. Instead, some traditions connect aspects of the temple ritual to the af-
flictions of the people. Abstention from slecp is presented as an imitation
of the high prlcst's vigil. However, this custom was controversial, since
the redactors of the Babylonian Talmud criticized it as providing the op-
portunity for unehaste deeds. 104
When did the custom of wearing white garments begio? In Pirqe Rabbi
Eliezer, people are described as bare-footed, not eating or dtinking. stand-
ing and praying. 1os Notably, Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer does not mention white
garments, which therefore seem to be a later custom. In Pseudo-Philo's
sennon On J()71tJh, the young women an: told to wear white garments. 1011
Such a commandment would make sense only ifthe white garments ofthe
young women distinguished them from the other people; in this case, the
older women and all men apparently did not wear white ganncnts.
These white garments hintat a second, contrasting aspect of Yom Kip-
pur. Several sources ascribc ajoyous character to Yom Kippur; an e:xample
is tbe famous passage from Mishnah Ta 'anit 4:8:

also below, p. 325,note 154. K. Sindawi, ... Ashwa' Oay and Yom Kippw," A.ncient Near
Eastern Stildies 38 (2001) 200-214, doe5 not add anything significantly new.
101 See lhe beginning ofthe eighth chapter in bYoma.
1112 See J.M. Baumganen, "Yom Kippw in the Qlllllr8ll Serolls and Second Temple
Sources,"' Dead Sea Discovuie:s 6 (1999) 184-191; N. Wieder, TM. J11dean Scro/ls and
Karaism (London, 1962); I. Blbogen, Der jtidbche Gotle.rdien:Jt in seiner geschichtlichen
Eni'Wicklung (Hildesheim, 1967= repr. of' 193 1).
Jll) See below, pp. 37-46.
104 bYoma 19b. nis critique cannot however be used as an argument for the existence

of a higll-priestly vigil in the time of the temple,. as the idea for such a vigil migJit have
developed out of the need for a sta~ of purity for l.be fast. Cf. p. 29, note 46, above.
uas Pirqe Rabbi Eliezu 46.
106 F. Siegert (transl.), Drsi hellenistisch-jiidische Predigttm. Ps.-Ph11on, 'Ober Jona',
'llber Sjmson • und 'Ober die Gottesbezeichm111g 'wohltätig veneirrendes Feuer· (2 vols;
Wissenschaftliche UntersuchUilgen zum Neuen Testament 20, 61; Tübingen, !980, 1992),
here vol. 1. p. 38..
36 YQm Kippur in Early Jewish Tho11ght a"d Ritual

lbere were DO happier dayJ for Israel tban the I 56 of Ab and thc D.,- of Atone·
ment, for on lbem tbe daughters of Jorusalem u.sed to go fortb in white tai-
ments .••• And the daughtcrs of Jerusalem wellt forth to danu in the vineyanls. And
what did they say? 'YoliDg man, Iift up lbine eyes and see what thoa wouldest
choose for thyself. ' 107
Festal garments are mentioned by Tertullian, too. 108 Joy appears also in
Plutarch and Theodoret. 109 The dancing is confirmed by Chrysostom,
Theodoret and Pseudo-Philo On Jonah. 110 We cannot be sure if thls was
already a custom in the time of the temple~ but it is possible. Some com-
munities it seems celebrated Yom Kippur with an ambivalent mix of af~
flictions and joy, while others dem.anded the observance of slricter
aftlictions, including active asceticism. Some may have tended more to a
conception of Yom Kippur as a day of wrath and feac, others as a day of
forgiveness - without necessarily linking either conception to a specific
community. After all, both tendencie.s are in<;luded in the conception of
Yom Kippur as judgment day.' 11
3.2 Prayers
The biblical prescriptions for Y1>m Kippur and even their translation in the
Septuagint do not in<;lude prayers among the obligations of Yom Kippur.
The high priest's t~ple ritual stands at the center. Yet it would be diffi-
cult to explain the immense importance of Yom Kippur already in thc time
of tbe Second Temple if people bad bad no patt in the liturgy. lt is clear
that people did participate in the high-priestly acts by observing them.
Sirach describes people watehing the daily temple ritual and participating
with supplicatory prayers and prostrations. m The Mishnah confirms the
popular ob.servation of the high priest c:onducting the Yom Kippur
service. m However, the number of people who could actually view the
high priest was limited. How did the remaining people spend their Day of
Atonement, on which aJmost eveeything was prohibited - eati.ng. drinking,
cobabitation, work and, according to some, sleep? .Philo and the Festival
Prayers from Qumran provide ample evidence for extensive Yom Kippur
prayers in the Alexandrian diaspora as weU as in Palestine already in the

107 Tr:an.sl. Danby.

1118 Tertulli1111, On Fasting 16:6. For discussion oftbis text, see below, p. 71-72.
1011 Plutarch, QuDe.stionu Convjvales 4:6:2, 67lD; Theodoret, Qr~autione.s in Octa-
teuchum, in Leritie11m 32. For dilcussion oftbese texts, see below, pp. 68--69 aud 280.
110 See below, p. 74. and On Jonah (transl. Siegen 1:41), bu.t ef. mBetzah 5:2.
111 On Yom KippuriRosh HaShanah as judgment day, see Liber Antl(fllitatum Biblica-
rr.m l3:S-6; cf. mRH 1:2; bRH l6b; Pseud~Pbilo, On Jonah (IIllnSI. Siegert 1: 11).
112 Sir 50:19.
113 mYoma 7:2.
 The. Rituals ofYom Kippur 37

Second Temple period, i.e. at least from the second century BCE in Pales-
tille and the first Qentury BCE in Alexandria.
3.2.1 Yom Kippur Prayers in Palestine: Qumran
On Yom Kippur, some Jews in Palestine engaged in commuoal prayer. In
addition to what appears in the Mishnah conceming the prayer toward the
end of tb.e temple service, 114 snatches of prayer services from the land of
Israel have been preserved in the Festival Prayers, which were found in
Qumran but most probably used outside of the Dead Sea community. 115
The earllest copy, 1Q34, was written ca. 70--60 BCE, the others during the
fll'St century CE.1u; In bis recent, very detailed investigation of the Qumran
prayers, Da.niel Falk reached the conclusion that the Festival Prayers do
not betray an ideology specific to the Qumran sect and that they contradict
the calendar and the benediction forms usually employed in Qumran. 117
According to him, tbe Festival Prayers belong to a "broad tradition" of
Jewish liturgical texts attesting to the emergence of fixed prayer in the
Second Temple period. 118 Following suggestions by Bilhah Nitzan, 119 Falk
draws attention to some oonspicuous analogies between QUIIU'a1l Yom IGp-
pur prayers and much later piyyutim.120
The four scrolls of Festival Prayers (1Q34, 121 4QS07, 4Q508, 4QS09)
provide us with a set of prayers for several festivals. Only two fragments

u• See above, pp. 24-26.

m These praye13 have been investigated mainly by J.T. Milik., "[Q] 34. R.eeueil de
prieres liturgiques," and "[Q) 34bis. Rec:ueil de prieres liturgiqnes," in: idcm and 0. Bar-
tbelomy (ed.s.), Quml"an Cave 1. (Disc:overies iu the Judaean Desert 1; Oxford 19SS;
pp. 136 and lS2-5); M. Baillet, Qumrän Grotte 4. II/ (4Q482-4QJ10) (Discoveries in the
Jodaean Desert 7; Oxford, 1982); in lhe typology ofB. Nitzan, Quml"an Pl"ayer and Reli-
gioua P061ry {Studies on lhe Texts ofthe Desert of Judab 12; Leiden, 1994); and lllOSt
recently in tbe analysis and reedition by D.K. Falk, Daily. SabbDtll, ond FutiPal Prayers
in tlre Dead Sea 3c:roll~ (Stu.dies on the Texts ofthe Desert of Judab. 27; Leiden, 1998).
Cf. R.A. Werline, Penilential Prgyer in Sec~md Temple J11dt:Jilm. 11re Development of a
R.eligima Institution (Society ofBiblic:al Litenture, Early Judaism and lts Literature 13;
Atlanta (Georgia), 1998).
116 Falle. Daily, Sabbath, .and FuthlaJ Prayer& in the Deflli Sea Scrolh, pp. 155-1S6.
111 Falk, Daily, Sabbath, and Festival Prayers inthe Dead SeaScrolls, pp. U~-lj7.
*
11 Falle, Daily, Sabboth, and Festival Prayen it~the Dead Sea Scrolls, pp. 200-207.
119 Nitzan, Qumran Prayer and ReligiOMS Poetry, p. 100, note 43, remarked that Qum-
ran's Yom Kippur prayers are el0$C to later "mainstream" prayors.
Ja Falle does not, alas, presume a generic conoection, but he notes the p~let between
4QS08 2 4-5 and the public .recitalion of the Amidah on Yom Kippur: see Falk:, Daily,
Sabbath, and Festival Prayet~ in the Dead Sea Scrolls, pp. 212-213.
121 Following Falle, Dai/y, Sabbatlr, and Festival Prgyers in ths Dead Sea &:rolls,
p. lSS, note 3, I will use the abbrevation 1Ql4 fbr all ftagmenu oftbis scroll, inclading
tllose published under IQ34bis.
38 Yom KippMr in Early Jewi11h Thought and Ritual

can be associated beyond aoy doubt with a specific festival, since they
mcmtion it explicitly. One of these Festival Prayers belongs to Yom Kip-
pur. 122 Which of the other prayers can be associated with Yom Kippur is a
matter of debate, as evidenced by the greatly differing views of the inves-
tigators of the Festival Prayer.t: Joseph Milik, Maurice Baillet, Bilbah
Nitzan and Daniel Falk. The discussion that follows proceeds according to
the degree of probability of the prayers' association with Yom Kippur,
from practically certain to only probable.
Daniel Falle ascribes the fewest number of prayers to Yom Kippur,
namely five: 1Q34 2+1 6-7, 4QS08 2 1-6. 4Q509 S-6 ii, 4QS09 7 and
4Q509 8 1 (whicb he identifies with 4Q508 22+23 1).1 23 Of these, two
prayers are too fragmentary to convey theological contcmt. 1Q34 2+1 6-7
is the only one to be explicitly named ·~a praytr for Yom Kippur,.. but it
contains only the :first line ofthat prayer; 4Q509 8 l II 4Q508 22+23 I
contains the end of a Yom Kippur prayer, but without any further helpful
infonnation. 124 Two otber prayers are also very fragmentary: 4Q509 5-6 ii
quotes Deuteronomy 31:16;11' the equally fragmentary 4QS09 7 refers to
the last days. 126
The least fragmentary and mo# interesting prayer is 4QS08 2 1-6:
(... J And yo11 dwelt in our midst [... ] Remember, 0 Lord, the appoinled time of
your mercies (-pmn), and the time of repenta.ace (:llW) ( ••• ] aod you have estab-
lished it for us (as) an appointed time of aftliction (n•lm u1o), a stat\lte {yln)
fore(ver •.• J and you know 1he hidden thiugs and the revealed thing[s ... ] ( ;!llll:l
[m]?mt nnnal.1 ;mll1') you [k]now our inelination [ .•. ou]r [rising] and our lying
down you [ .. .}.'27

tn 1Q34 2+1 6.
121 Falk, Daily, Sobbath, and Festival Pruyer1 in the Dead Sea Scroll1, p. 165-9.
04 IQ34 2+1 6-7 reads "Prayer for the Day of Atonement. Remem[ber 0 L)ord [ ... )."

4Q509 8 l//4QS08 22+23 1 rcads ~[ ... ]the work (:1111~:'1} [ .•. ] you and {... Blessed be
the Lord, w]bo had compassion on us (1mn1) in the ti[me of ...]." Transl. by Falk, Daily.
Sabbath, and Fatival Pruyen i1l the. De.ad Sea Scroll1, pp. 165 and 167.
IZS The ftagments relld: ilnlll' D[.•• ]:J[... )'~ll llJlll1i?'7 m .. [...] Xi?J mn ;~(... )D'Il' ... w[
)'1[ ...:'1:l'n'I)::JK m ::IJ1V1 ;o3{:1... ]:uro1 "111110 u[::~ ...]n-i7K:t '.n[::>... ]1ll'l1 ilnl.,.!l [ ••• )'71::1:1.
116 Contrary to Baillet, Qumrtin Grotte 4.111, p. 185, who regards both fragmeu.ts as
belonging to a Rosh. Hashanllh prayer, Falk righ.tly points out that this attribution does not
match their positionqfter4QS09 3 l-91/1Q34 2+1 1-4 (whlch mclv.des the begiuning of
a Yom Kippur pra)'er in 1Q34 2+1 6): Falle, Doily, Sabbath, and Festival Prtzyer:s in the
Dead Sea Sero//:., p. 165. 4QS09 7 reads: 'r'n• [ .••] ;m10111 D'nlll:l '::J [ ••• ] .,,:>:n nWliln:l[l]
]1!••• [.••]'1[ ...}J 11.l!D'n'.l anf...}l D{ ]llvn{'f}i? lb{ •.. ]D'Il':'lll''mll:l[•••). •.:o•l!l'7D.
127 4QS08 2 1-6; I have slightly modified the transllticm by Falk in Doi/y, Sabbath,
and Festival Praye.n in the Dead Sea Scrolls, p. 168.
 TM Rituals of Yom Kippwr 39

Tbis prayer connects God's presence and compassion to the human repen-
tance and self--affiiction. 128 Ood's compassion has appointed time (1lnD).
The prayer speaks of God's omn.i$cience even regarding such secret mat-
ters as the inclination of the people. 129 in a formulation remarkably similar
to the talmudic confessionon Yom Kippur called 'Attah Yodea' Ra:zey
'Olam. 130 This idea appears also in the Delos steles and in Pseudo-Philo. 131
The prayer may be part of a confession, for the Ood who knows tbe secrets
of the heart knows also the sins committed.
Baillet and Nitza.n connect also 4Q509 12 i + 13 to Yom Kippur: 132
tb.e exiles who wander (D'Jln11), without ('.,::ITJ) [someone tobring (tbem) back /1]
[ ... ] [w}itbout strength;
tbose who fall (D'.,!IU11), without {someone to raise (them); //}
[ ... ] witbout someone to give (them) understanding;
tbe broken (D',»'l:!), wilhout [someone to bind (them) up; II]
[ •.. )in [their] iniq11ity ([tl]lllll:l), [and] tbere is no (l'IC[l]) one to heal (M!ln);
[ ••. ) [and tbere is no one II to] comfort (anm);
stumbling in tbeir transgressions {Döl'liV"J), {aod tbere is no one to ... ]

118 Baillet, Qumrdll Grotte 4./11, p. 178-179, regards 4QS08 2 l as the end of a Rosh
Hashanab prayer and the fotlowing lines as the begiRDing of a Yom Kippur prayer. How-
ever, for the atgwnCDt that the first line belongs to the Yom Kippur prayer, too, see Falk,
Dal/y, Sabboth. and Festival Proyen in the Dead Sea ScroUs, p. 168.
lzt See M. Weinfeld, "Prayer and Liturgical Practice in tbe Qwnran Sect,'' in: D. Dim-
ant and U. Rappaport (eds.). The Dead Sea Scro/Js. F()Tty Year.s of Research (Studies on
the Texts oftheDesert ofJudah JO; Leiden,Jerusalem, 1992; pp. 241-258), p. 247; Falk,
Dai/y, Sahboth, and Feati:llal Prayus 111 the Dead Sea Scroll1, pp. 212-213.
130 'Attah Yodea' Razey 'OI.,m (D.,1Y •r, llll' :tM) ("You know the mysteries of tbe
world"). Nitzan, Q1111tran Prayer and Religious Poetry, p. HJO, note 43. 'Attah Yodea'
RGey '0/am is quoted incipit in bYoma 87b, and is tberefore probably very early. The
full text appea.rs for tbe first time in Seder Rav Sa'adia Ga'on, q110ted below, p. 52,
note 199 andin Eng1ish translatiDn in tb.e appendix. For tbe terminology, see Deut 29:28
and Ps 103;14, and compare the Jarer prayer HQ!..o KolltoNistarot vehaNiglot 'Attak
Yodea' (ll'l'l" i'lnK rn'nl;n nnmu.1 .,, K?n, "Don't you know all the bidden and the revealed
thiugs?") in Seder Rav 'Amram G.,'ott (ed. Goldschmidt, pp.l61, 166). The combination
of the two biblical veßes, however, and tbeir use in a prayer for tbe Day of Atonement in
both periods show "thar we are dealing with an element of festival prayer tradition." See
Falle, Daily, Sabhath, and Festival Praysrs in the Deod Sea Scrolls, pp. 21l.
131 See bclow, p. 48, oote 172.

I» Baillet, Q11mrän Grotte 4.111, p. l85; Nitzan, Qumran Prayer and Religiou PO#Jtry.
pp. 100-101, note 43. Falle prefer.s to associate 4QS09 12 i + 13 tentatively with Silkkot
because ofthe prayer's position on the scroll (4QS09 11 i + 13 is part ofa uew prayer,
whicb follows tbe Yom Kippur prayer) and its content (the expression na., nl\l:m in
4QS09 8 4 I/4Q508 22 + 23 3 appears in Lev 23:39 in the con.text of Sukkot andin an
Amidah for Sukkot from the Geuizah). At some time duriDg tbe worlc on his book he
seems to bave cha.Dged his mind, ascribjng the prayer tentatively to Yom Klppur: see
Falle, Daily, Sabbath, and FestiPol Prayers ;n tlw Dead Sea Scrolh, pp. 168·172 and209.
40 Yom Kippu,. in Eorly J-ish Thoaght muJ Ritual

( Re]member //1he: sonow (111') and the weeping (':ll). You are tbe companiOD of
prisoner[s]m
Some tenninology is l'eminiscent of Yom Kippur: iniquity, transgression,
healing and (ifNitzan's reading is cor:rect) Iiberation ofprisoners. 134 Sor-
row and weeping match the Yom K.ippur as depicted in Jubilees 34 and
early piyyutim. In addition, Nittan recognized a :remarka.ble similarity con-
cerning content and form to a much later acrostic piyyut of Yom Kippur•s
Mussafservice, VeHen 'Anu 'Atah keTo•im ye'Ein Levaqesh: 135
Behold we are now:
like snayers (o'WD), with none (fKl) to seek;
li.ke captives (o>'l:lW,), with none to retum;

like fools. with non.e to teach;

lilce weary ones (EI'!I'lr.l), with none to refresh;

like bent ones (D'!I10:I:J), witb none to straigbten;

like mol!TDers. with noue to cODSole tb.em;1341

Falk, who takes up Nitzan's observation, suggests that this points to the
existence of "a post-biblical pruyer tradition - albeit d.rawing on biblical
resources - which is reflected in the Dead Sea Scrolls but also in medieval
liturgical poetry." 131

ln 4QS09 12 i + 13; translalion in Fa1k. Doily, Sabbath, and Festival p,.ayers in the
Dead Sea Scrolls, p. 170, nota~ ac:cording 10 tbe struc:tu.re of the poem. From the con·
text, Nib:an unde.rstands the last line as "release !he imprison(ed]": see, Qvm,.an P~r
anti ReligitnU Poetry, p. 100, note 42.
134 See pp. 85~92, bclow, on JEnach 10 and llQMelchiudek.
13! rt~:l'l l'K'I D'ill1:l Mll mc r.n (..
Behold, we are now lite stra.yers witb 11011e to seek").
See Nitzan, Qumran Prayer aml Religiow; Poetry, pp. 100-101; cf. Fa!k, Daily, Sablxlth,
Qnd Festival Prayers in the Dead Sea Saolu, pp. 211-212.
1341 Traustation based on N.N. Schermao, The Cumplete AnSeroll Mach:or Yom KippiiT
Nw:uzclr Ashkenoz. A N- TrQifSliJ/ion and Anthologized Commentary (ArtScroll Mesoralt
Series New York, 1986), p. S79; for the Hebrew, see D. Goldsc.bmidt (ed.), Mohzorfor
the Days of Awe. According to the Ashktrnazy Rite of All Cutoms Inclu.ding the Western
Ashkenazy Rite, the Polish Rite, and the A:ncient Fl'ench Rite. Yolu111e 2: Yom Kippur (Jo-
rusalem, 1970), p. 49S.
m Falle, Dolly, Sabbath, a71d Festl'lal Prayers in the Dead Sea Scrolls, pp. 209-212.
 Thß RiJua/s ofYom Kippur 41

1 would argue that 4Q509 16, another fragment from the same scroll,
may also belong to a Yom K.ippur prayer.
[ ••. }in all [their] pain[~; ..• ) Have pity 011 them bec.ause oftheir aftlictian (» C."ll!lm
an•lli11) [ •.. ] !he sorrow (11l1) of our elders aud [our] noble[s..•] 1be youths taunted
111e.m [ ••• ) t.bey bave {n}ot considered that Y{ou ... ] our wisdom [ ..•J iUid we [ ... ]. 136
Falk prefers to associate this prayer with Sukkot, 139 but "Have pity ou
them because of their aftliction.. (!:1ll'l17ll .,31 Ci12:1n1) and the ..sorrow of our
elders" mateh Yom Kippur better.
Baillet regards f\uther tex:ts as Yom .Kippur prayers. among them 1Q34
3 i //4Q508 1 l-3: 140
( ... ] and [he] comman[ded... ] in the Iot (",u) of the rigb.[teJous but for the wic:lced
the l[o)t ( .••] in their booes a disgrace to alt tlesh; but tbe rigbteous [ ...] fat by the
cloud$ of beaven and the produce of the earth, to distinguish [between the
righ]teous and the wicked. And you give the wicked (for) our [r]ansom (ln!ll(:l]),
andfbut the tr[eacher]ous ones ( ...] the extennination of all our oppcesson. Aod
we will praise your n.ame forever [and ever,} for il is for tbis tbat you c;reated us,
and (it is for) this (reason) tha[t we say) to you: Blessed [bc the Lord wb.o ... ]. 14 '
UnfortunateJy, the position of 1Q34 3 i 114Q508 1 on the scroll is unc.lear
and the contents are the only basis for any association to a festival. Falk is
WlSW'C ifthis prayer belongs to Passever or to Yom Kippur. 142 Yet two of
the motifs that he explains against the background of Passever appeat as-
sociated with Yom Kippur. First, the phrase «fat by the clouds ofheaven"
c:learly refers to tbe beavenly manna. Manna and Yom K.ippur are link.ed in
lQWords of Moses and Philo. 143 Second. Falk associates the distinction
between rigbteous and wick.ed with the (wieked) generation ofthe exodus.
Yet the motifappears in llQMelchizedek in eonnection with Yom Kippur.
Also tbe eschatological (?) extennination of the oppressors and the term
U,!ll[:l] (ransom) evoke the imagery ofYom. K.ippur.

151 4QS09 16; tramlalioo in I-"alle, Daily, Sabbath, and Festival Prayers in the Dead Sea
Scroll&, p. 173. Nitzan. Qvm7an Prayer and Rellglt>J~J Poetry, pp. 108-9. also assllJMs
tbat tbis fragment is part ofa Yom Kippur prayer, albeit without provid.ing arguments.
J:w See Falk, Dtsily, Sabbath, and Festhai Prayttrs in the De(ld Sea Scrolls, pp. 172-
173. Baillet, too, assoeia~s the fragment with Sukkot for reasons of position on the
$CI"OII: Qwl7dn Grotte4.fii, pP. 185 and 191.
1411 Baillet, Qvmrdn Grotte 4./ll, pp. 177-178 and llS.
141 1Q34 3 i II 4QSOB 1, tr~~nSlated by Falk in Daily, Sabbatlr. and Festhai Prayen in
the Dead s~a ScrtJll;,, p. 178.
1 ~ Falk,. Daily, Sabbath, and Fe$/ival Prayer: in the Dead Sea Scrolls, p. 178.
143 See pages 47 and 97, below; seealso bYoma 74b.
42 Tom Kippur in Early Jewish Thought and Ritual

ßaiJlet also considers 1Q34 3 ii //4Q509 97+98 i, whicb follows IQ34

3 i//4QS08 l.just discussed, as Yom Kippur prayer:
( ... ] lhe grea[t) light for the appointed tiJ:ne of [day, and the little tigbt for the
night ... ] and one must not transgress their laws, and all of them [... ) and their
dominion in aU the world. But the seed of ma[n] did not perceive all lhat you
caused hlm to i.nherit, and they did not know yo11 [in a]ll your words, but lhey
acted more wickedly than alt (others) and they did not pereeive your great might.
Therefore you rejected tbem for you take no pleasure in iniquity, and the wieked
wiU not be establ~hed before you. But you chose for yourself a people in the time
of your favor for you remembered your covenant and you [granted] tbat they
should be set apart for yourself as holy from all the peoples, and renewed your
covenant for them by a vision of gl[or]y and lhe words ofyour [spirit] ofholiness,
by the works of your hands and lhe writing of your right hand, to malte tlwn .lmow
the iJorious instruction and the etemal works. [ ... you :raised up] for [th}em a
failhful $hepberd ( ... ] poor and [ .• .].1<14
Falk. does not .rule out Yom Kippur as the liturgical Sitz im Leben, but be
tentatively associates the prayer with Shavuot because it addresses the re~
newal of the covenant and the giving of the Torah. 145 In favor of an attribu-
tion to Yom Kippur it may be ~tated that a juxtaposition of the giving of
the covenant and the covenant sacrifice with Yom Kippur is found in the
Epistle to the Hebrew.s 9:18-21. 146 The election of the Jewish people and
the teaehing of the commandment.s to them is the main theme of lhe
ancient prayer 'Attah Bahartanu. ao addition to the fourth benediction of
the Amidab (the ..I:Ji":'' nlli'l'Ti''') on festivals and especially on Yom
Kippur. 147 Finally, in the biblical nanative and in rabbinie Jiterature the
second giving of the Torah is connected to Yom K.ippur.14' While l Q34 3

144 1Q34 3 ii II 4Q509 97+9& i, translated by Falk in Doily. Sabb4tl!, and Festival

Prayus in the Dead Sea Scrolls. p. 1?9.

1"-' Falk, Daily, &:lbbath, ond Felllllal Prayers in the Dead ~ Scrolls, pP. 178-180.
146 A call to God to remember the covenant is the central topic ofthe Zekhor Lanu ( mr
lJ"), a prayer ending the Zikhronot from lhe Mussaf service of Yom K.ippur. See Oc>ld-
.sehmidt, Maltlor for tlre l)Qy.Y ojA.we, vol. 2, pp. 574-576.
1" 7 'A.ttah Bahartanu (mnn:l ;unc, "Y ou bave c:bosen us"), quoted iltcipft .iD bYoma 87b.

Seder Rov Sa'adia Oa'on (ed. Davidson, Asaf and Yoel, pp. 259·-260), gives a Cull
Babylonian version, and Genizab. frasments provide a Palestinian version begioning 'At-
tah Baharta heYisrael (7K,III'::I n'ln::l MK): see E. Fleis~bet, Eretz-lsrael Prayu and
Prayer Rihlals a:~ Portray•d in th~ Oeniza Doct1111enu [in Hebrew] (Publications of the
Peny Fo11ndation in the Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Jerusalem, 1988), pp. 95-96.
The parallel was first noted by Nitzan, Qumran Prayer and Religiou3 Poetry, pp. 103-
104.
148 According to the traditional reading of Rashi this concept stands behind Mekilta,
Amalek4 to Exod 18:13 (ed. Horovilz, p. 196; ed. Lauterbach vol. 2, p. 179). Seealso tbe
Baraita in bTa'an 30b and hBB J21a.
 The Rituals of Yorn Kipprn 43

ii //4Q509 97+98 i mentiorJ.S the writing ofthe hand of God and therefore
the flrst giving, the ideas are related. l49
Yeho5bua Grintz suggest.ed viewing 1Q34 3 ii as the remains of an early
Seder Avodah pointing to the connection of creation with the bistory of 5in
in a Yom .Kippurprayer."0 We do not, however, know ifthe fragmentcon~
tinued with the main part of 1he Seder Avodah. the high-priestly setvice.
Therefore, even if 1Q34 3 ii II 4Q509 97+98 i belongs to Yom Kippur, it
does not have to be a Seder Avodah fragment.
According to Baille~ 4Q508 3, too. could have belonged to Yom IG~
pur. 151 It mentions Noah, Isaac and Jacob and could have been part of a
prayer retelling the bistory and therefore even part of a Seder Avodah.
Moshe Weinfeld points to the use of 1Jl11U1fl ("we were lawless") - a rare
form in the Hebrew Bible- in the Yom Kippur prayer 'Aval Hatanu} 52
Unfortunately, the context of 1lVVl,il in 4Q508 3 is missing; the text is
therefore too fragmentary to permit certainty.

148 Weinfeld, "Prayer and Liturgical Practice in the Qumnm S"ct," p. 247, points to a
parallel motive of"God not desiring" in the prayer ve'Attah Hivdalta (;,n"l1::1.'1 :TnRl), part
of the Ne'ilah servite (cf. Sedu Rov Sa'adia Ga'on, [ed. Davidson, Asaf and Yoel,
p. 262)). However, this resemblmce seems to me superficial, sincc in I Q34 God does not
desire iniqllity while in the Ne'ilah prayer God does not desire the destruction <(the
world or the death o{tlre wlcked.
~ Y.M. Grinlz, "A Seder Avodah fur Yom Kippur ti:om Qumran" (in Hebrew] in:
Chapttrs tn the History ofthe Second TtliJiple (JetuSalem, 1969; pp. 155-158). Nitzan
see!Ds to accept this thesis: Qurnran Prayer and Religiow Poetry, p. 98, note 33. Fora
discussion of the emergence of Seder Avodah, see below pp. 59-04.
lSI Ba.illt:t, Qurnran GrOlle 4.111. p. 177. The extant text of 4QS08 3 ~ds:
]'!IP ;rn-p; :t( ...:t]jnJr.lll :npr"n pn[l'?•..] ml7 oyn[1 )m"Jllt[ .•.}l»'IU"l;r R{
Baillet further suggests tbat the liny fragments 7, 30 and 3941 of 4QS08 m.ay also have
be.en Yom Kippur prayers. Their texts read:
7: ]Zll [ ... ?]:v i!l:l[
30: ]'l[ ... ] TTY'Io:J 1"11C ...m :O'l!l?D[..•] 'm[ '?]ll l'[?ll ]i~J.., n::~.., 1[
39: j'J{ .•. ] ll"nll'lllU rn[...Dlll]' lll' ::1..,::1 U"'Jl Ult1 (
40: ].. '10 D[ ••• ]Ol::I'Klll'~llnl 7[...]:"1., OlTinl iWK(
41: ]ll.::l'n u ... [... ]n'l•'l1 !ltll' m[ ... )1lmc"n 'm "lll I
Nitzan, Qumran Prayer ond Religiorur Poetry, pp. 100 and 109, agrees on the association
offragmeuts 30 and 39 with Yom Kippur.
IS2 'IJI(Cn '?:llc ("'But we sinnßd"). M. Weinfeld, ßPrayer and Liturgical Practice in the
Qumran Sect,'' p. 247; the prayer quote.s Neh 9:33; the form 13!1W1<1 appears also in
Ps 106:6 and Dan 9:5. The prayer 'A.vaJ Hotanu is first attested in bYorn 87b (incipit) and
in its full version as an addition to the fourtb benediction of Yom Kippur's Amidah
(OT'il n!lmp) in Seder Rav Sa'adia Ga'on {ed. Davidsou, Asaf 110.d Yoel, pp. 261-262).
see below, p. 53, note 204.
44 Yom Kippv in Ear/y Jewish Tlroaglat onJ Rlhlal

Manfred Lebmann, folJowed by Nitzan, associates with Yom Kippu.r

also IQ34 2+1 l-4- whose text can now be improved with the overlap~
ping tex:t of 4Q509 3 2-9: 1S3
[ •.. ] and her sorrow [ •.. ) lbe appointed time of our peace [ •.• For you made us re-
jok:e] from our distres.s, and you gather together [our exiles for the time of ... ] and
our seattered ones {for {the age of} you] as[semhle for the age of ...] ycur
(me}rcies upon our as.semhly liko dr{ops of water upon tbe eanh in seed time lilce
rain upon the fi]eld in the time of grass1J4 and [ ... And we, we will siog ot] your
[w}onders trom genention to gencral{ion. ... Bless)ed be the Lord, who made [us}
rejoice ([l]lJID0) [ .•. ].ISS

Lebmann draws attention to a similar use of Deuteronomy 32 in a Samari-

tan Yom Kippur prayer. 1s6 Baillet and Falk prefer to associate the prayer
with Rosh Hashanah because of its emphasis on rejoicing (n~) and t1:1e
position of the prayer just before the clear Yom Kippur prayer 1Q34 2+1
~7, discussed above.m However, the mention of M7J!U does not excludc
Yom Kippur since many Palestiman Yom Kippur prayers :from the Genizah
include the expression iiMI!Illl' .,,1113.1ss
f:inally, Menahem Kister has suggested seeing a Seder Avodoh in
SQ13. 1S9 The reconstruction bf him and Elisha Qimron thc highly frag- of
mentary 5Ql3 is congenial, 160 and the parallels betwcen the historical

ISl M. Lebmaun. '"Yom Kippur' in Qumran," Revu11 de Qumrtm 3 (1961/1962) 117-

124, here pp. 120-121; Nitzan, Qumron Prayer and Religious Poetry, p. 102.
1s. Quoting Deut 32:2b.
155 My traoslation based on DSST.
1 ~ Lehmann, '"Yom K.ippur' in Qumran," pp. 120-121; A. Cowley, The SamaritDII
Lihlrgy (Oxford, 1909), vol. 2, pp. S06-.508. The Samaritan Yom Kippor litur&y bas bccn
investigated by J. Macdottald, A Critical Edition ofthe Text ofthe Samarita" Yom Ha-
Kipplll'{im) Liftlrgy. with Tronslation tlaereof and ComptJriJon wirh th11 CorrUptNidütg
Jewi:sh Litrugiu (Leeds, 1958), which, regrettillly, was unavailable to me.
1" Fallt, Daiöo, Sobbath, and Fe:rtivol Prayers in lhe DetHI Sea Scrolls, pp. 163-164.
l!8 E.g. Fleischer, Eretr-!Jroel Prii)JCF ond Prayer RltualJ os PoriFOJied in the Genizo
.DoC'IImems, pp. IJ9-140, numbers l, Ia, 2, 9, 10, 14.
'" Menahem Kister, "SQ13 and the 'Avodah: A Historical Survey md Its Signifi-
cance," Dead Sea Discov~ie~ 8 (2001) 136-148.
lto In particular the suggestion to put 11.1n on fragmeot 3 next to line S and the recon-
struction ofpns• in line 7 and 1nmt in IiDe 9. Ki.ster's and Qimron's reconstructi.on reads;
"God of all [ ... who ... ] and founded [ es]tablished[ed ... )treasl.ll'es[•.• ) as [you] made
( ••. ]Enoch ('??)[ l have you dlosen ftom a.moog the sons of A(d]am, md you [ ..• ]
forever? [ ..• ]Alld Noah bave you preferred from amo;og lbe so[ns of... ]. Alld Abraham
( ... Isa]ac you have selected out and [ ... ]. You (madeJ yourselfknown to Jacob at Sethel
( ...aud you ... bim .•. ] to UDderstand [your] wodcs. Aod Levi bave you se[paratJed and
you appointed hisn to bind [ ... ]service of[ ... and Aaron you have cb]osen (from] Levi to
go out [ ... and c;ome io ... to maJlc:e hidden thiDg[s] bown (... in] lbeir covenant before
 The Rit"als ofYom Kippw 45

survey of the Seder Avodllh 'Attah Bara'ta and 5Q13 are interesting.l61
However, in the extant parts of5Q13, there is no allusion to the main part
of any Seder Avodoh. the Yom Kippur service of the high priest. 162
In sum, the material disc;:ussed suggests that the following extant prayers
should be categorized as Yom Kippur prayers: 1Q34 2+1 6-7, 4Q508 2 1-
6, 4Q509 5-6 ii, 4Q509 7 and 4Q509 8 1 II 4Q508 22+23 1; probably
4Q509 12 i + 13, 4Q509 16 and 1Q34 3 i II 4Q508 1; and possibly 1Q34 3
ii//4QS09 97+98 i, 1Q34 2+11-4//4Q509 3 2-9, 4Q508 3 and 5Ql3.1f
Falk' s attributions to the festivals are correct, the Yom Kipp ur prayers did
not exceed one and a half columns. In this case. either the services of the
communities using these prayers were shorter than Philo's or relatively lit-
tle of them have survived. Falk states that other Yom Kippur prayers
probably existed, but he prefers to associate the rest ofthe extant Festival
Proyen with events other than Yom Kippur. According to the arguments
discussed abovc, however, probably four more fragments belong to the
solemn day of awe. I 63
The Yom K.ippur prayers associate the conceptions of divine indweUing
and omniscience, a special season for God's mercy and human repentance.
Beyond Ibis. they probably mention the brokenness of human existence,
afflictions, sorrow and weeping evo.ldng divine mercy, dle manna, punish·
ment of the wicked. and perhaps also creation, history of sin. election and
covenant renewal. .A.lnlost all motifs appear also in late antique piyyutim.
The comparable material in Philo is very scant It is thus even more sig-
nificant that the motif ofthe manna appears in the Festival Prayers as weH
as in Philo - raising the question of whether there was some form of com-
mon prayer tradition extending from Palestine to Egypt.
We do not have any hard evidence for a reenactment of the temple ritual
in the Yom K.ippur service ofthe Qumran community or any other Second

you (... eve].r:y year and you commanded hittl to admon[ish? ... ) and afterwa:rds they [will]
ded~~~e ( .•. ]to eve.r:y mau of Israel( .•. bis] pat[h] conceming... "
1' 1 'Attah Barata (:tnll,:l 01n1t, '"You created"). Both begin wilh the ereation and give a
Iist ofseveral eleeted people of God from Adam to Aaron concluding with Aaron'$ ser·
vice. That neitb.er of them mention Moses or the To.rah is a wealc argument for SQ13
bcing a Seder Allod4h. 5Q13 is highly fcagmenta.y. f'l.lrtbermore, Moses and the To.rah
aJe mentioned in otber early Süirei Avo®h, so, the laclc of Moses or the Torah seems to
bc not a distinct fealure of Si<lrei Avodah but it is an fndication of priestly propaganda.
161 As noted by Kister on p. 147.
10 4Q509 12 i + l:l; 4QS09 16; lQ34 3o i //4QS08 1; 1Q34 3 ii//4QS09 97+98 i. Falk
dismisses out of ba.ad the possibility that the verao of 4QS09 c:ontained the complete tcxt
oftbe Wa,. Sero//- 'if it did, the colleetion of Festival Puryen wowd bave been implau-
sibly long": D&u1y, Sabhath, and Festival P,.t1J1ers in tiH Dead Sea Scrolls, p. 158, note
17.
46 Yam ICippur in Ear/y Jewish 7'/wugltt ond Ritual

Temple community. ls it possible that they recited othe.r material, e.g. Le-
viticus 16 or 4QTargum of Leviticus or (in Qumran) the relevant passage
from llQTemple Scroll or llQMelchizedek? 164•
3.2.2 Yom Kippur Prayers in the Diaspora: Philo
For the diaspora, impressive evidence has been preserved in Philo's writ-
ings, which have been all but ignored in previous research on Yom Kippur
prayers. The service attracts the participation even of those who usually
are less religious or non-religious:
On the tenth day is the fut, which is carefully observed not only by the zealous
for piety aod boliness but also by those who never act religiously in tho rnt of
their life. For all stand in awe, iJvercome by the sanctity of the day, and for the
moment the worse vie wilb the better in self-denial and vinue. II!$
The day-long prayers bave a propitiating :function and include supplica-
tions and praise of God •s gracious nature.
The boly-day is entirely devoted to prayers and supplications (l.L"tll~ .:cri b:"iuv;),
and men from mnm to eve employ cheir Ieisure in nothing else hllt otrering peli-
tions ofhumble Mtreaty (6.tnrllKwtti-ra<; ri:f.ti:<;} in wllieh 1bey seek: eamestly to pro-
pitiate God (tev kov ~EVJ1tvltlo8cu) and ask for remission (11opa:i'tTJcnv) oftbeir
sins, voluntary and involuntary, and entertain bri&flt hopes looking not to tbeir
own meriu but to tbe gracious nature of Him Wbo sets pardon before d\astise-
mentliSCI
The placating effect of prayers for forgiveness is even more explicit in the
following sentence, where the root iM1<Jl<:- appears:
But in our fut men may not put food and drink to their lips, in orderthat with pure
b.earts, Ulllroubled and untrammeled by any hodily passlon. such as is the common
outcome of repletion, they may keep tbc boly-day, propitiatiDg (il.co~c:O!levoa) the
Father of All with fittiog prayers, in whieh they are wont to ask that tbeir old sins
may be forgiven (aJ&YYJcniav) and new blessillgs gained and enjoyed. 167
The afflictions are purification rites providing the necessary conditions for
the propitiatoxy effect of the prayers. The prayer se.rvice in Philo's Alex-
andrian community must have been highly developed and high!y regarded.

l6t Further poiots are discussed below, pp. 49~4. in the section on Yom Kippur
prayers a:fter lhe destruttion of th.e temple.
161 D~ specialibWJ l'gibr.rs 1:186; transl. by F.C.L. Colson in LCL, Philo 7:20!1-206.

Tbis statement is reminisccnt ofRudolf Otto's Das Heilige.

tt!<l De .specialih~ts legihu:s 2: l96; transl. by F.C.L. Colson in LCL, Pbilo 7:429.
167 De vita Mo:si$2:24; mmsl. F.C.L. Colson in LCL Philo 6:461.
l4S8 De .speciolihus legibus 2:198-199; transl. F.C.L. Colson ia LCL, Philo 7:431. Cf.
De :rpecilllibus legibu:s 2:203.
 The Rihlah of Ycm Kippur 47

At one point, Philo actually quotes a prayer for Yom Kippur. The formula~
tion in the plural makes clear that the Yom Kippur prayer is communal and
not private.
They say, "'We have gladly received and are storing the boons ofnature, yet we da
not ascribe our pre$ervation to any conuptible tbing, bui to God the Parent and
Father and Saviour of the world and all tbat ia tberein, Who has the power and the
right lO nourish and sustain us by means of these or without these. See, for exam-
pte, how the many thouS3Jlds of our forefathers as they ttaversed the trackless and
aU-barren desert, were for forty years, the life of a generation, nourished by Him
as in a land of riebest and most fertile soil; how He opened fountains unknown be-
fore to give them abWldance of drink fof their use; how He raincd food from
heaven, neitber more nor less than what sufficed for cach day, !hat they might
conswne wbat they needed without hoarding, nor barter for the prospect, but tak-
ing little thought ofthe boWlties received rather reverence and worsbip the bounti-
ful Giver and honour Him witb. the b.ynms and benedictions that are His due." 1o;a

Besides giving tb.a.nks for p.reservation, the prayer includes an allusion to

the wandering tbrougb the desert and being sustained by tbe manna (ExQ-
dus 16) and Moses' water miracles (Exodus 15:22-26; 17:1-7). Mannais
also connected to Yom Kippurin the Festival Prayers and lQWords of
Moses from Qumran. 169 This connection may point to a common liturgical-
exegetical tradition linldng the affl.ictions of Yom Kippur with
Deuteronomy 8:3, combining manna and afflic.tion. Philo expHcitly links
Yom Kipp ur and Deuteronomy 8:3 in a tradition that also combines the
two main acts of the people on Yom Kippur, self-affliction and prayer. 170
Abstention from food and renunciation of passions frees the human being
to re«;ive the true divine food. Similar combinations of self-affliction and

169 See p. 41, above ~~nd p. 97, below; sec aha bYoma 74b.
110 "He says in Deuteronomy also: 'And He affiicted {t~CO.JCmae:) thee ~~nd made thee
weak by hunger. and fed tbee with manna, which thy filtbers knew not, that He might
proclaim ro thee, !hat not on bread alone sball man live, but on every word that goeth
forth through tbe mouth of God' (Deut. viii. 3). This afilicting is propitiatlon (ft d~~:ma~<;
ain11 il.ao~t~ i<J-tt); for on the tenth day also by afflicting our souls He makes propitiation
(xa~~:ibv in1mv 'tri~ '!IVX.;.<; l:l.n<lJ<t'tat) (Leviticus x.vi. 30). For when we are being deprived of
pleasant things, we think we are being aftlicted (1CfliCOUGtlat), but in reality thereby we
have God propitious (i).trov) to us. He oecasions famine also to us, not a famine of virtue,
but a famine of the creations of passion and wickedness,. (Legum allegoriae 3:174;
transl. F.C.L. Colson in LCL, Philo 1:419). Notably, active and passive affiictions are
equated here.
48 Yom Kippur m Early Jf/Wish Thovght and Rihw/

prayer can be found in the Apocalypse of Elijah111 and two steles ftom.
Delos.l 12
Concerni.ng the contents of the day-long prayers. Philo speaks of
prayers for forgiveness, supplication and praise of God.m One passage of
Philo may be understood as alluding to a confession of sins. l 74 The early
association of repentance with Yom Kippur in Jubilees makes such a con-
fession of sios as part of the prayer service highly probable for Palestine in
the second century BCE. 11S A recitation of biblical passages, though not al-
lW:led to, is quite likely, given the need to fill the lengthy service.

17 ' Apoc<IIyplt~ of Elijoh 1:15-21: "u Remember that from tbe time when b.e created
the heaveus, the Lord ereated the fast for a benefit to men on aceowtt of tbe passions and
desires which fight agaiDst you so tbat the evil will not iDtlame you.. 16 'But it is a pure
fast whic;h I bave ereated,' said tbe Lord. 11 The one who fasts eontinually will not sin
although jealousy !Uld $trlfe m witbin him.. 11 Let the pure one fast. but whmever the one
who fasts is not pure be has aogered (he Lord aad also tbe angels. 19 .And be has srieved
bis soul, gatheriDg up wrath for bimself for the day of wrath. 20 But a pure fa&t is what I
c:reated, wilh a pure beart and pure hao.ds. Zl lt releases sin. It heals diseases. Jt casts out
demoD!I. 22 lt is eft'cctive up to the thrQGe of God for an ointment and for a r.lease liom
sin by means of a pure prayer." Translatiou in O.S. Wintennute, ..Apoc:alypse of Eliju,"
in: l.H. Charlesworth (ed.), The Old Testament Pandeplgrapha I (New York, 1983;
pp. 721-753).
m Two Jewisb or Samaritan steJes from tbe c:emecvy of .Delos datin& to aroi!Dd
100 BCE may refer to Yom Kippur, Corptu Inscriptionum Jxdalcarruft I, 72!i (ed. Frey).
See J. Gager, Curse Tabletsand Btndi11g Spe/h from the A11cietd W'orld (New York.
1992), p. 186; A. ~issmmn, Licht vom OsteiL Da~ Neue Tntame"t und die nqentdeck-
ten Texte der hellertistiach-r<Jmischen Welt {Tilbingeu, •1923), pp. 315ft'; and item.s 197
and 198 in Nicole Belayc:he's Wlpublisbed Ph.D. dissertation witb very ric:h references 0.11
furtber literature. The teJrt of the steles is ideDtical, cursing tbose responsible for the pre-
mature death of the YOIIDg Heraklea I Marthine and evokillg ''the God, wbo sees every-
thing, and the angels of the God, before wbom every soul humbles itself on this day with
supplication." The three elements of supplicatiou, aftlic:tion and OI'DJliscience, wbich
appear herein the context of"this day." aze fi'equently found conuected to Yom Kippur
in later texts. The formulati0.11 reCa.lls the Septuagint of Lev 16. I would liko to express
my warmest gratitude to Ni.c:ole Belaycbe for drawing my atteution to the in.scriptions
and providing me with the relevant pages of her aualy$is beforc publicatioo. See also
N. Belayche, Ivdaea- Palantina. The Pagan Cults in Roman Palestine. Secrmd to
Fourth Century(Rellgion der RömischenProvinzen I; Tübingen, 2001).
l1l IH speclalibus legibus 2: 196-199.203; De vlta Mosi12:24.
114 De posteritate Caini 1o-12.
17' Possibly, oue oftbe prayers ofQumran, which is similill" to a confession ofthe rab-

binie period, may bave served as eonfessioo (sec above, pp. 38-39, tbe d.iscussioa. on
4Q5082l~).
 The Ritva/1 of Yom Kippur 49

3.2.3 Yom Kippur Prayers after the Destmction ofthc Temple 176
The earllest Tannaitic sources mention an exceptional number of five ser~
vices for Yom Kippur: on top of Aravit, Shah.arit and Minhab, not only
Mussaf - the "additional.. offer/prayer as on the Sabbath and other festi-
vals - but also the Ne'ilah (the "'closing"), a special prayer for the end of
Yom Kippur are added. 177 This matches the length of the anonymous ser-
mon On Jonah and the statements by Philo on the prayers filling the whole
day.l18
Tosefta Deralehot prescribes seven benedictions for each of the prayers
of Yom Kippur, as for Sabbath and other holidays. 119 Yom Kippur excep-
tionally bad four priestly blessings. 1so
Few complete prayer texts have been prescrved from the Tannaitic or
Amoraic periods; most rabbinie sources quote inctpit. The earliest extant
Siddur, the Seder Rav 'Amram Ga 'on, is from the niath century. 111 lt in-
cludes numcrous prayers and is extremely valuable for understanding the
geneial sequence of the prayers; but the textual evidence is too corrupt to
permit reconstruction ofthe actual wording ofthe prayers. 182 Among other

176 See the uaeful survey in Tabory, Jewi1h Festivals in the nme ofthe Mi1ltnah ontl
Tolmutl, pp. 282-293; J. Maier, "SOhne und Vergebung in der jlldisehen Liturgie,'' Jahr-
buchfiir Biblilcl~e Theologie 9 (1994) 145-171; Goldschmidt, Mahzor for tha Days of
Awe, vol. 2, pp. ~:u; Fleiscber, Eretz-lsrael Prayer and Prtzyer Rituals as Portrayed in
the Geniza DOCilmelll'l, pp. 93-155, esp. pp. 120-147; I. Elbogen, "Die Tefilla tur die
Festtage" Monat.sschrfft/iir Geschichte 11nd Wisse.nschqft des Jude11111ms 55 (1911) 426-
446,:586-:599.
l'TI Cf.mTa'an4:1;yBer4:1, 7c;yTa'an4:l, 67e.
111 See p. 46. abo\'e and pp. 51-59, below.
179 tBe.r 3:12; bYoma 88a. Tbese benedic:tions comprise nT.IK (the Patriarchs), :nm
(God's migbt), 1:1111:1 nvrnp (the saactity oftb.e namc), J:ll>:J nwnp (tbe sanctity ofthe day),
:m:lll (the temple service), tl'llll (thaoks&iviDg) and 1:11'711.1 (peace). ln additi011, the same
additicms as lhe belledictions on Rosh Hashanab (the so-caUed Zilrhronot (nnn:n,
memories), Mol/chuyol (m>J')Il, kingdoms) and Shofarot (nmmu, Shofars or trumpets),
were at some poillt included in the Amidah ofYom Kippur (bTa'on 16b-17a; &ferim
19:6; cf. mRH 4:5-6; mTa'4n 2:2-S}. Cf. H. Maek, "The Source of the MalkhvyyQI
Benediction," Jewish Shldiu Qri11rter/y 9 (2002) 205-21.8; J. Heillem&Dil, "Tbe Ancient
'Orders of Benedictions' foJ' New Year and Fasts," (in Hebrew] Tlll'bü 45 (1976) 25&-
261; N. Wieder, "The Form ofthe Third Benediction ofthe 'Amida on Rosh Hashsluma
and Yom Kipp•r' [in Hebrew] Tarbü 34 (1964) 43-48; L. Liebreich, "The Insertions in
the Tbird Beuediction of the Holy Days," Hebrew Union Co/fege AnnJIQ/35 (1964) 79-
10 l; I. Elbogeo, "Die Tefilla fllr die Festtage," Monatsschrift ZfiF Geschichte vnd Wilsen-
&chaji des Judentf4nu SS (1911) 426-446, 586-599.
1111 mTa'an4:l;yBer-4:1, 1c;hTa'4rn26b.

1&1 D. Goldschmidt, Setler R(N 'Amram Ga'on. Edited according to Manuscripls and
Prints wlth A.dditiOPIS. Variant Lectit»U and lntrotluction [in HebrewJ (Jcrusalem, 1971 ).
l&;l Goldschmidt,Setle.r Rav "Amrom Ga'on, p. 10.
so Yom Kippur in &frly Jewish Thouglrt and Ritvol

tbings, theSeder Rav 'Amram Ga'on mentions an Amidah of scven bene-

dietions with additions, confessions and supplication prayers. readings of
the Bible, and (at least) for Mussafthe acme ofthe serviee in th.e liturgical
reenactment, the Seder Avodah. 181 The text of the Seder Rav Sa 'adia
Ga'on, written half a century after the Seder Rav 'Amram Ga'on., is
commonly perceived to be more faithful to the original. I!-4 It lists
confessions, 18:~ some additions to lhe seven-blessing Amidah 186 and many
piyyutim for Sidrei Avodah and Selihot prayers. Wbile the two Siddurim.
the Seder Rav 'Amram Ga 'on and the Seder Rav Sa 'adia Ga 'on, gi.ve
essentially :Babylonian prayers, m.any prayers from the early medieval
Palestinian rites have been published from Geni2ah manuscripts. 111
A fuU investigatio.n of the early medieval Yom Kippur liturgy would re-
quire its own detailed treatment. I will however deal briefly with general
aspects of the eady development ofthe confessions, readings and the Seder
Avodah in the Tannaitic and Amoraic periods (before theSeder Rav 'Am-
rom Ga'on and theSeder Rav Sa'adia Ga'on).

113 Seder R(lll '.AIIVmn Ga'on (ed. Goldschm.idt, pp. 166-172). From Gaonic: responses
wc lelltll that there were mauy c:olllDIIIIlities in which it was customary to read a Seder
Avodah in each scrvice. See the discussion iu L.A. Hoffinan. The Canonuation of th11
Synagogue Service (Uuivcrsity of Notre Dame, Ceuter for the Study of Judaism and
Christimity in Autiquity 4; Notro Dame {Ind.) and London, 1979), pp. 107-110. Tluee of
Yose ben Yose's SirJ,e; ;bO/Ülh were used in three different services.: 'Attah Konanta
(:IIUI'O iTnlt) for Shaharit, 'Adil' GW11.1'ot 'Eioah {:n"JR nrn:u 1'.':1JM) for Mus:taf and
'Asa~ Gedolot (m?111 ,Dalt) for Minbah. Mussaf was finally chosen, sinc:e it was
supposed to be at the same timt: as the temple service. This e!evates the status of the Se-
der Avodah as a conscious reenactmcnt ofthe ll;tUa1 sacrificial ritual.
184 Y. DavidSOA. S. Asaf and Y. Yoel (eds.), Siddur R. Sa'adjtJ Ga'on [in Hebrew]
(Jerusalem., 1941).
lU 'Attah Yodea' Razey 'Olam with a briefversion of '.AJ Het (MI:In 'nt); 'Aval Hatanu;
and a special CODfcssion for lhe Ne'ilah prayer Mah Ne 'emar Lefaneikho Yo11hw baMa-
rom (ll11%r.l ::uut• 1•m 11:lltl :11.1) Seder R(lll Sa 'aditJ Ga'on (ed. Davidson, Asaf and Yoel,
pp. 259-264).
1" &pecially 'Attah Bahm-tanu (nn111l ölnK), 11eTiuen Lamt (13'1 1M1) aad 'Eloheittu
ve 'Eiohei 'Avoteinu MehoJ ('nno U'llllK •i1'1Klll":!'nc ).
m See the ttxts of tbc additions to the ADiidab (esp. 'Attah Baharta beYI.uael- :lnK
'1JC1111'::1 n11C; veTinen Lamt -1i'llJ'Ill\; 'Eloheinu v.r 'Elohei 'Avotetnu Galleh - ':'1'1Kl 1l':'I"N
:!'1lll'~IC; 'Ana 'Elohelnu Ya'alelr veY(l!IO- K'O"' ':'i'li> 11~ ~t:m; 11eHasi'enu-llK'W<n)
aod the referen«S to earlier Iiterature a.uembled in Fleischer. Ereb·lsrael Prayer and
Prayer Ritual$ as Portray11d in the GenJza DOCIIments, pp. 93-159. For the confession
published by Israel Abrahams, sec p. 5.3, note 200, below. It is noteworthy that uvd:hen
Ten Pahdelcha (1'm!llJI}':I.l) lhe addition to the tbird beu.edicti.on ofthe Amidab does uot
appear bere in the Genizah ß:agments nor in Seder RfA' Sa'adia Ga'on: see Fleischer,
pp. 12S-l32.
 The Rituals of Yom Kippur 51

CONFESSIONS: The status and number of confessions and their contents

vary greatly from the Bible toSeder Rav ~mram Gtz'on and Seder Rav
Stz'adia Ga'on. The biblical account in Leviticus 16 mentioos one confe.s·
sion - that of the high priest "for all the iniquities of the people of Ismel,
and all their transgressions, all their sins."18& This is a vicarious confession
by an individual representating the collective. The biblical descriptions of
the people's ritual do not include confessions. For the rabbinie period,
Targum Pseudo-Jono.than clearly dem.onstrates the increased importance
of confession over and against sacrifice. To each "atones" in Leviticus 16
the translator(s) added a "by confession." Moreover, Targum Pseudo-
Jonathan Leviticus 16:30 includes a Ionger reference to confession and its
power to atone.
When did the confessions become centrat to the individual prayer ser-
vice (and not only in the high-priestly vicarious confession)? This might
have occwred when repentance became the foca.l idea of Yom Kippur, an
association fust made explicit by Jubilees in the second century BCE. One
of Qumran's prayers (4Q508 2 1-6) is close to the talmudic confession
'Attah Yodea' Razey 'Olam and might tberefore have been part of a con-
fession.189 Philo, too, alludes to a personal confession. 190
The mishnaic account of the temple service has two more confessions
than Leviticus 16. The first i.s a personal confession by the high priest for
hirnself and for his house. 1~1 The second again covers the high priest and
his house but also the other priests. 192 St:J.11, it is fonnnlated in the first per-
son singular. We do not know if these two extra confessions took place
only in tbe synagogues or also in tbe temple. In any case. they clearly indi-
cate a shift from tbe coUective toward the individual. ftom the vicarious to
the personal. Whoever recites tbe confession contained in the Misbnah or
in aSeder .Avodah becomes bimself (or herself) the high priest reading the
high priest's confessions as a verbal reenactment. lfthe whole community
recites theSeder Allodah, tbe high priest's confession becomes the private
prayer of every individual.
The early rabbinie sources on the synagogue prayer speak of yet other
confessions. The Tosefta teports that a confession is included in all five
prayer services and that an additional confession was pronounced before

111 Lev 16:21.

1111 See above, p. .39.
190 Philo, De pMteritate Caini 10-12. Was it part of his Alexandrim .service?
191 mYo111a 3:8.
192 111Yoma4:2.
52 Yom Kippurin EarlyJewi!ih Thought and RihuJI

the beginning of Yom K.ippur. 193 The confessions secm to have been
extraordinarily long. 194 According to one tradition the words were fixed,
according to another they varied and were strictly personal in order to
match the sins committed in the previous yeac. 195 A non-tixed confession
undencores the shift from the vicarious confession by the high priest on
behalf of the collective to the personal and individual confession of a per-
son praying for himlherself befo.re God's judgment.
Early on, several fonnulas developed tbat were initially the personal
c:onfessions of influential rahbis and then became co.mmon usage. 196 The
Palestin.ian Talmud gives a confession in the name of Rabbi Ba bac Bina:
Ribboni llatati uMura · 'A.siti (•n'Vlll ll11Z2, •nKe~n ~n:l,). 1 rn The Babylonian
Talmud menrions several additional confessions, some of which match
confessions still in use: 198
Rab: 'Attah Yodea • Razey '0/am (c;w '" ,", ;m~) 1 99

l!n The mdividual spoke the C:Oilfession after the Amidah, whereas iD thc repetition tbe
prayer leadcr included it in the fourth beoediction, the 01':1 n111lli' (t.Yonto 4:14, c:t:
bYoma 87b).
194 The Tosefta emphasizes the extrt!lle leogth ofwhat it calls tbe order of the coms.-

sion ('n"'il "1,0) (tBer 3:6).

1" tYonta4:14-JS. Seo Hoffinan, The Cononization of the Synagogw Senice,
pp. 102-107.
1915 For various ancient versions fi"om the Talmudim and the Genizab, see Elbogen, Der
jiJdische Gottttldlei'/Si in seiner guchichtlichen Entwiddrmg, pp. 149-lSl; and Gold-
sclunidt, Mah2or for the Days ofAwe, vol. 2, pp. '-::!'. On post-talmudk: coomssions from
the Geniz:ah, sec al$0 the brid diS$Crtatiotl. by G. Onnann, Dos Sündmbe/umntni8 du
llersöhnungltagu, ISein All/ball wul seine Enlwickl11ng. in Yerbimlurrg mit Gmiza-Ttullllf
untersucht (Fnmkfurt a.M., 1934}.
197 yYoma 8:9, 45c, gives the text in full: 11'l"1ll' 'll"il ;nn nro1 '""'' J1ll)l •n~mn 'l1J1
'JIII'!l '1::~ ?1 '? "l!IJnllt) ·n~ '" 1'19'm ll!1 ':!' .rnuu1 'l'K •n•nw cvr.n 1'1;"1.'l •n":t :Jinn, ",~
•n111m ?:> » .", f.'i'l111'.lnl] n'lom •nuw 'r.I.,J •'1 '?Win{l. The first band of manuscript Leideo
did oot wri~ the words in parentheses ( ) but included the words in square brackets [ ].
Tbe second hliDd adapted both to the printed text. Cf. wo the second part of 'Attah Yo-
dea' Razey '0/Qnt in Seder Rav Sa'adla Ga'<m (ed. Davidson, Asafand Yoel, p. 259): 'i1'
"'!l:ln1 1l'nlllll ?:177n'1'mmnw u•:J'?K "' 1'l9'1ll nr~. And see the appendix. below.
1 ~ bYonta 87b.

"' See Sedu Rav Sa'adia Oo'on (ed. Davidson, Asaf and Yoel, p. 258) aives the
followill8 wording: m•'J::~ ;m,,, ~:I ~'lln '1::1 lll!lln MK •'" '?.:1 ..,nD n1PJ1'1'llm a."ll 'l"' :n1• <mlC
u•nm11 ;;, 'J11 u') .,lr'll>n!lt l3'i1':1K "' T'l!I.,D 111:1 1:t" •1'1'11 'fllZ) "'nol l'lfl 1zm a?il ill ');, 1"11 .:~'n
lJig~D!J ~ '111 u'J "'!I::Jm. For a full translation, see the appeodbc.. Ma'QSelr Merkavah
cootains a similar p.-ayer: see below, pp. 137-138. Michael Swartz suggests that "the
author adapced a genre of c:onressional prayers recited on Yom Kippur f.or bis purposes."
See M. Swanz, Mystlcal Prayer in Ancient Judai:snt. An Analysia of Ma'aseh Merkwoh
(Texts aud Silldies iD AIH;ient Judaism 28; T1lbingen, 1992), pp.ll6-118. For the text,
see P. Schäfer, M. Scblllter and H.G. von Mutius (eds.), Synopse :~ur Heklralot-Literalllr
(Tfibingen, 1981) §548 {Mo'QSCJh Merkavah].
 The Rihlal$ of Yom Kippw 53

Mar Shmuel: MiMa'amaqei Lev (:J.'? 'ii'll»tl!:l)

or 'Attah Yotka "Omqo shel Lev (::a'? '?11 '!PZ),Y Y'Tl' illlM)
or 'Allah Yodea 'Mo 'amaqei Lev (.::l'?il 'P7J:I17.l rn" i1l1M)200
Levi: UveToratelcha Katuv Lemor (,i'.nt':l ::nn;, 1n,m:n)201
Rabbi Yonathan: Ribbon Ha'Olamim (t'l'b':I~Yi111~)w.
Rabbi Yehudab: /(j 'Avonoteinu Rabu miLemanot veHatoteino 'Atsmu
miLesapper (,,071!1 11.l31l1ll'lllttlnl l11lll71:l '::."' u•nm:r •::~)203
Anonymous: 'A.val Halanu (UICDM [Unl11:]"?~)204
Rabbi Hamuuna/Rava: 'Eiohai 'ad shelo Notsarti (,n,!ru ~':1111 1Y "i1'1tti0s
'A.val Hatanu is defined in the Gemara as the minimum to fulfill the obli-
gations.206 • Elohai 'ad shelo Notsarti was also the daily confession of
Rava.201

200 For the two last incipits 'A.ttah Yo.cka' Mo'amaqei Let~ and 'A.ttalr Yodea' 'Omqo
3hel L11v attested by ancient witne.sses, see RabbiDovicz, Diqdllqey Soferim, vol. 4,
p: 309. Israel Abrahams clai.ms to bave found the lost version ofShmuel's confession in a
(lost?) Oenizah fragment reading: 1'l!l'> nn:J ''IS' •1"Jll <JnK m>'):;, •1no1 ~'I 'i'n11J :nt• nnK
.;'R)"' 1311',fiKVl :111l' <!11111&1 U";J'm " K'l;'l j'lllK illllnpll117!1l!1Y Kll1ll .l11Dlll., ,l:l!l ll'nlllll!WI D'1.,l
'm unwp:2'> lllK :'111., u•:T:nc ,. 1'l!l') D'111M lllt U'llll1131' "Tbou .knowest the dcptbs of lhe
heart, and an cognisant of the mysteries of the reiDs. The imaginations of (all) aeatures
are revealed before Thee and our device.s are not bidden from Thee. Forgiver of iDiquity
and transgression wast Thou c:alled. Thou art He, 0 Lord our Ood wbo knowest that our
end is the worm. Our ia.iquiti.es we eonfess before Thee, 0 Lord our Ood. iDclino Tbine
ear to our eatreaty." Though there is a brcak: here, the confession seems to colltimle much
longer. See I. Abraltsm$. "Tbe Lost 'Confess.ion' of Samuel," Hebrew Union College
A.llflllal 1 (l924) 377-85. However, the Genizah manuscript may well be an elaboratioo
oftbe enigmatic talmudic incipits ftom the Middle Ages.
201 Cf. bRH 35a. Manuscript Oxford coatinues with a quotation from Lev 16:30. Tbc
text of this c:onfessiou. is lost.
1112 lt is impossible to discem wbich of the many surviving prayers that begin wilh this
formula is the talmudic p.myer ofRabbi You.atban.
:118 Cf. E2n19:6. Manuscript Oxford reads u•nmWI\1 instead of U'llll:tiRl: see
Rabbinovicz, Dlqduqey Soft~rlm, vol. 4, p. 309. This confession appears in St!.dtr Rav
Sa'adia Ga'on (ed. Davidson, Asaf and Yoel, p. 262) a.s pa.rt of a long eonfession for rhe
Ne'ila iD lieu of 'A.ttah Yodea' Ra:ztty 'Oiam.
201 The best Talmud manuscripts and Seder IWv Sa'odla (Ja'on (ed. Davidson, Asaf
and Yoel, p. 261} do not read nn:uc: see R.ahbinovü:z, Diqduqey Soferim, vol. 4, pp. 309-
310. PeJiqta Rabbali 3S has a loag version of the oonfession very close to lhat in Seder
Rav Sa'adia Ga•Oit (additions in square bra<:kets, omissiou in parentheses): [lllllK]'>JI!
l!llln .11., ;'11!1? R'n (D'lltl:l) 1'1:1Dlii'Zl(l.))l 1'msZIZ! mot (ll''llll) 1l111J UIJWD ["l.inl"111) ll'lr.l 'llKliR
\Jnnjl 1l!Uin lJ'In MIC ':I ll'.,l11C::r.J .,, 'TJJ P''JI.
2Q.f The text is given in full: .'ll1lnl Jt1 t?•IIC 'II'IJUV1l'V1.lll' .•tn:> 'l'll 'll,:!llllt'll/1 "7ll '11'111
,!ll1
:Ull ltlll'lll 11.,171 1'l!l.,l.) 1111 ':'!" .,,Z),.,.)l 11111'1::1 IÖ!l ..,:ll 1'l!l~ 'lK ,,;t ,•nn•!)J ,ZilRl '/p "RJ ':liC
1.,10, ,,, '"~' 11? 'r.IK 1"DR"t:l i'l"ll:: •nxanw.
:106 bYomt~S1b. ·
201 For tbe daily confession, see bßu 17a.
54 Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Thought and Ritual

The great number and variety of confessions indicate on the one band
that this part of the service was not fixed until the early Middle Ages. On
the other band, the Babylonian Talmud's listing ofthe various confessions
reveals an interest in preserving and canonizing prayers. 208 The increased
number and length of the confessions in comparison to the Bible indicate a
higher Ievel of spiritualization. However, we should not underestimate
their outward aspect as a perceptible manifestation ofthe otherwise invisi-
ble repentance. When the dearth of outward aspects of the temple ritual
came to be acutely feit, the role of confessions may have increased as a
suitable SUpplement to the temple rituals.

THE READINGS: Sources on the early readings are scarce, and even where
we have a source, it does not necessarily mean that the readings prescribed
in it were read everywhere- in Palestine as well as in the Babylonian and
Mediterranean diasporas. 209 I would expect people in the Second Temple
period who pray througb the whole day to start with texts that are highly
respected and at the same time easily to band and not having to be com-
posed, such as the biblical descriptions Leviticus 16 and 23:27-32 and
Numbers 29:7-11. 210 4QTargu'll of Leviticus, the only Aramaie fragment
of the five books of Moses in Qumran, could have served such a liturgical
purpose. 211 Reciting the biblical pericopes on Yom Kippur is a reenactment
of the high-priestly ritual and · may well have been performed in
synagogues even at the time of the temple for people who could not attend

2118 Did the attitude of the communities behind the Palestinian Talmud differ _in this

aspect?
209 For Iiterature on the development ofreadings, see E. Fleischer, "Annual and Trien-

nial Reading of the Bible in the Old Synagogue" [in Hebrew with English summary]
Tarbiz 61 (1992) 25-43; idem, "lnquiries Conceming the Triennial Reading ofthe Torah
in Ancient Eretz-Israel" [in Hebrew] Hebrew Union College Annual61 (1991) 43-61;
J. Offer, "The Masoretic Divisions (Sedarim) in the Books of the Prophetsand Hagio-
grapha" [in Hehrew with English summary] Tarbiz 58 (1989) 155-189; A. Shinan, "Ser-
mons, Targwns, and the Reading from Scriptures in the Ancient Synagogue," in:
L. Levine (ed.), 11reSynagogue in LateAntiquily (A Cente[IJ]ial Publication ofthe Jewish
Theological Seminary of America; Philadelphia, 1987; pp. 97-110). C. Perrot, La Lee-
Illre de Ia Bible dans Ia Synagogue. Les anciennes lectu.res palestiniennes du Shabbat et
des fetes (Publications de l'institut de recherche et d'histoire des textes, section biblique
et massoretique, collection massorah Serie I. Etudes Classiques et Textes 1; Hildesheim,
1973), esp. pp. 154-157, 195-199 and 265-270.
210 See also z. Malachi, "The 'Avoda' for Yom Kippur" [in Hebrew], (Ph.D. disser-

tation, The Hehrew University of Jerusalem, 1974), p. 151.

211 Randy Buth has expressed a similar idea in a paper given at the Second Colloquium
on the Rabbinie Background of the New Testament, Jerusalem, July 2002.
 The Ritual:r of Yom KippiiF 55

tbe temple service.212 Mishnah Yoma 7:1 places the reading ofthe biblical
descriptions from Leviticus 16 and 23:27-32 and Numbers 29:7-11 in the
temple ritual, perhaps a projection from a synagogue service. 213
Otber lections were included early without it being possible to point to a
specific century. According to the Babylonian Talmud, Leviticus 18 (on
incest) is the Torah reading in the Minhah service,214 while Isaiah 57:15ff
(probably 57:15-58:14) and Jonah are the Haftarot for Shaharit and
Minhah, respectively.m Leviticus 18 may have been read simp1y as a con-
tinuation of Leviticus 16.216 Instead of Leviticus 18, Exodus 32:11-14
(Moses interceding on behalf of the people after the incident of the golden
calf) and perhaps also Exodus 34: lff (the second giving of the Law) might
have been read in some Palestinian communities.217 The contents of Jonah
and Isaiah 57:15-58:14 are closely connected to the ritual ofthe peop1e on
Yom Kippur. Pseudo-Philo On Jonah can be regarded as the first evidence
for the reading of Jonah on Yom Kippur, but its date of origin is uncer-
tain.218 In Palestine, however, Jonah might not have been the Haftarah;
some Jews might have preferred to read 1Kings 18:36ff (Elijah and the
prophets ofBa'al).219

212 Baer, "The Service of Saerifice in Second Temple Times," p. I 12.

213 Cf. mMeg 3:7; yMeg 3:7, 74b; only the ineeption is given. While Mishnah Megillah
and the Palestinian Talmud mention only Lev 16 as a reading, the absence ofLev 23:27-
32 and Num 29:7-11 here does not mean that these texts were not part ofthe ritual in the
Tannaitic period, given that the Tosefta does include Nwn 29:7-11 among the readings
(tMeg 3:7; again, only the inception is given). Cf. also the seetion on tbe historicity of
Misbnah Yoma, above, particularly p. 2S-26.
214 bMeg 31a; see Elbogen, Der jiiduche Gotte:rdienst in seiner geschichtlichen Ent-
wickl."ng, p. 167.
21 ' bMeg 3 Ja; see Elbogen, Der jiiduche Gotte:rdienst in seiner geschichtlichen Ent-

wicklllng, pp. 182-183.

216 The rabbinie texts indicate only the beginning of tbe reading in Lev 16. In the

yearly reading cycle, this section goes as far as Lev 18:30. In tbe Ionger cycles in Pales-
tine, the section roight have been shorter. See Tabory, Jewish Fe:rtivals in the Time ofthe
Mishnah and Talm11d. p. 292, on alternative traditional explanations for the choice oftbis
reading.
217 Ezra Fleischer, "Piyyut and Prayer in Mahzor Eren Israel," [in Hebrew} Kiryat
Sefer 63 (1990) 207-262, here p. 24S.
218 For a discussion of the relation of Pseudo-Philo On Jorrah and Yom Kippur, see
below, pp. 57-S9; see also tbe reference to Jonah in De solstitiis et aeq11incx:tiis,
discussed below, p. 2S3.
219 Fleischer, "Piyyut and Prayer in Mahzor Eretz Israel,"' P- 246. Jonah is absent from

Genizah founds of Qerobot to Yom Kippur. A more frequent connection could be

expected between Jonah and Yom Kippur in rabbinie texts if it was a widespread reading
on Yom Kippur, as suggested by Ganter Sternherger in a much appreciated e-mail com-
munication observing that the only major discussion of Jonah is Pirqe Rabbi Elierer 10.
56 Yom Kipp!l,. in ElJ,.Iy J.wilh Thought ~md Ritual

The frequent allusions to Isaiah 58 in Christian texts on Yom Kippur,

beginning with Justin Martyr. may also point to an early association in
Jewish ritual, but I cannot preclude tbat Christians alluded to this chapter
for its contents without knowledge of Jewisb liturgical traditions,l20 I sog-
gest that some synagogues may bave read the passages aJready in Tannaitic
times. or even earlie.r even ü they are attested to only in Amoraic tradi-
tions.
Furthennore. long discussions of Hosea 14 in the Babylonian Talmud
and of Psalm 27 in Leviticus Rabbah malc:e it probable that in certain syna-
gogues these texts bad some furaction in thc Yom Kippur service or during
the days before, such as Sabbath Shuva. 221
In the Gaonic period in Babyloniao academies~ the first five verses of
Genesis were also read during tbe Minhah or Ne'ilah service.222 Seder RDll
'A.mtom. Go'on also mentions Obadiah and Mic:ah 7:18-20 for Minbah.223
Yet I want to stress again that we caonot be sure about the provenance of
most of these readiugs. Until the lections were unified, many different or-
ders may have been in use in different places.

In addition, Jonah is part of a bomily for Sabbatb Shuva: Pe:Jiqta Rav Kahana 24:11 (ed.
Mandelbaum, pp. 361-364) and Mishnah T11 'anit 2:1 c:onaects Jonah to public fasts.
220 Morgenstern even suggests the prophecy preserved in Iu 58 was made on Yom
Kippur: I. Morgeostem, "Two Prophecies of the Fourth Century B.C. and the Evolution
ofYom Kippur,'" Hebrew Union College Allnual24 (1952-1953) 1-74, here pp. 38-39.
On lsa 58 in Ju.stiu Martyr's Yom Kippur passage, see below, pp. 1S6. According to
PerTot, La L8f:tu,.e t.k Ia Bibfe. dans Ia Synagope, pp. 195-204, Luke4:18-l9, which
oombines Isa 61:1 with lsa 58:6, is based on an old Jewish Iectionary tradirio.n. Pcnut's
positioo is accepted by e.g. F. Bovon, Das Ewmgellum nath Lukas. 1. Te.ilb~md. Lkl.l-
9,j0 (EvMgelisch-X.Ubolischer Kommentar zum Neucn Testament :3: 1; Zllric:h ud Neu-
kircb.en·VIu)'ll, 1989), pp. 211-212.
:nt Sabbatb Shuva is the Sabbath between Roih Hashanah alld Yom KippUf. For
Hos 14, see bYomDI6a-b; Pesiqta Rav K4hana 24:1-t2.17-19 (ed. Mandelbaum,
pp. 347-3:58, 369, 375-78); and the incürcct evidenee M' the early Cbristian lloman
lectionaries (.see pp. 317-321). On Ps27 and Yom K.ippur, see Lnitica Rablxzh2l:l
{cd. Margulies, pp. 473-474). Naomi Goldstein Coben, ..Earliest Bvidcnu of tbe
Haftsrah Cyc:Je for the Sabbaths betwecn the 171h of Tammuz ud Sukkolh in Philo,"
JOJlrnal of Jewish Shulie.s 48 (1997) 225-249, sees evidenc:e in Philo tbat the traditi011al
Haftarot from 17 Tammuz until Sukkot wero faxed already in the first century.
m See Elbogen, D11r jiidiache Gone.sdienat ilr &einer- geschichtlichen .Entwicklung,
p. 167.
l2J for the readings of Obacliah ud Mic:ah in Sedu ~ 'A.mram Ga'on, see ed.
Goldschmidt, pp. 166 and 168. For Mic 7:18-20 in Pale$tinian usage, see Fleischer,
E,.eu-J&,.ael Praye,. ond Prayer Rihtals os Po,.trayed in the Geniza Docullf~ta, pp. 134-
135 8.lld 143. Mic: 7:18 is quoted in a Yom Kippur/Sabbath Shuva homily in Pulqta Rav
Kahan~:~ 2S:2 (ed. Mandelbaum, p. 381). In Puiqro ~ KahaR~:~ 25, Num. 14:18-20 plays
a centrat role, bm this text is never quoted in bYoma.
 The Rituoh ofYom Kippur 57

A long sermon On Jonah survived under the auspices of Philo. 224 Origi-
nally composed in Greek, it has reached us in an Arrnenian translation.
Folker Siegert, who made a detailed investigation of thls setmon., suggests
it was written sometime between the second centw:y BCE and the fourth
century CB, in a Hellenistic city. He suggests Alexandria225 befure the tbird
century CEP6 teaving open othcr options. among them Antioch in the
fourth century. While we cannot be surc tbat Jonab was read on Yom Kip-
pur in other communities than the ouc behind Megil/ah 31a,227 some hints
in the text make it probable for the community of Pseudo-Philo, too, in
wbich case On Jonah is tbe earliest extant Yom K.ippur sermon. The diffi-
culty lies in deciding if this is a depiction of the Yom Kippur ofthat pe-
riod, of some other fast, or of the fast of Jonah. The description of the
Ninevites' fast mentions most of the usual affl.ictions of a public fast like
Yom Kippur. but this can be explained as merely the bookish intluence of
Jonah, without any connection to Yom Kippur. People repent and pray and
abstain :f'rom food, drink, sex and adornment.2211 They walk around in .sack-
cloth and ashes and sleep on the floor.229 The latter features are not evi-
dence against Yom Kippur despite the fact that they do not match the
rabbinie tracts of Yoma, since Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer seems to know of such
practices on Yom Kippur. Yet neither do they support an association with
YomKippur.
I would like to draw attention to two rites tbat match Yom Kippur but
no otber public fast. First, the people put oo their festal garments in the
fuint hope that the judgment may be delayed,230 and at tbe end of the day
they dance. 231 These practices match the descriptions of Chrysostom,
Theodoret and Misbnah Ta 'anil 4:8. 232 The mention of festal garments

224 Cf. F. Siegort (transl.), Drei hellenlsti.Jch-jüdtsclre Predigten. Ps.-Philon, 'Ober

}IJlla', 'Ober Simson' rmd 'Ober die Gone1bneiclurllng 'wohltlitig wtnehrende:s Ff111er ••
Jlol. J: OberseU.llllg aus da A.nnenilchen wnd :tprachliche Ef'/4uterungen. J'ol. 2: Kom-
mentQJ' nebst Beobachtwngen liur hellenistischen Yorgeschichte der Bibelhermenel'lik
(2 vols; Wia$ensebaftlicbe Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 20, 61.; Ttlbingen,
1980, 1992).
;w Siegen,. Drei hellenlltisch-jildi:sche Predigten, vol. 2, pp. 49-51.
226 Sieg«t, Drei hellenistlsch-jiidische Pnuligten, vol. 2, pp. 40-46.
m Jonah ia never- quoted or even allnded to iD Philo: sec Y.·M. Duval, Le Iivre de
Jot~a:J dans /o lllteratl.ll'e chrltümne gf'fcque et latine. Sources et influence du
CommentaiN! 3flr Jontts de 1olnt Jbome. (2 vols; Paris, 1973). p. 77.
m See Pseudo-Philo, Orr .lont~h, (tl'all$1. Siegen I :30, 3~. 37, 48).
229 S~<~e Paeudo-Philo, On Jonah, {ttansl. Siegort 1:37).

%ölt See Pscudo-Pbilo, On Jonah, (tnmsl. Siegert l :38).

:DI See Pseudo-Pbilo, On Jonah, (transl. Siegert J :4l).
Dz Tbis seems more logical to me than the recursion on a distinction betweeo pagan
and Jewish moumiug practice.s as Siegort proposes.
58 Yom Kippur in Ear/y Jewish ThOflghf fJIId Rittlai

expücitly contradicts thc biblical book of Jonah, so this speaks against a

merely ..bookish" intluence. Its source can plausibly be seen in contempo-
rary Iewish practice on Yom Kippur. Moreover. the author uses the Arme-
nian equivalent for tautvdl, to humble oneself.233 which plays so strong a
role in the Septuagint descriptions of Yom Kippur. ''They humbled them-
selves to that extent and exercised such self-control according to tbe
Scriptures that even their animals became intercessors of their prayers."234
Besides these ritual aspects, two conceptual motifs are interesting; God's
position as judge is emphasi1..ed.23s and God is depicted as knowing every-
thing, including sins committed secretly and not admitted in confession. 236
"But all (secret) human knowledge was rnanifested to the (captain) with
complete clarity and put before his eyes by that One, whö alone cannot be
deceived." 237 The latter motif appears explicitly also in the Delos stetes,
the Qumran Yom Kippur prayer 4QS08 2 1-6 and the talmudic 'Anah Yo·
dea' Razey 'Oiam. 238 Regarding these observations. it seems plausible that
Pseudo-Philo's sennon On Jonah is not only the earliest scrmon on Jooah
but also the earliest evidence for a readiog of the prophet on Yom K.ippur
and the earliest extant Yom Kippur sennon. even before Pirqe Rabbi
Eliezer 10.239 ~
Regarding the ritual status of the reading. the Misbnah reports that the
high priest in the temple bad the choice of performing the readings and the
prayers in the holy linen garments or in a simple white stole. Why does the
Mislmah mention such freedom in the most sacred ritual? If the description
reflects actua) practice, some of the high priests apparently considered the
reading and the prayer as part of the avodah. i.e. the obligatory and effec-
tive part of the main liturgy of the day, while others did not.240 On the

m See Pseudo--Philo, On Jonah, (trausl. Siegert 1:37).

224 See Pseudo-Philo, On Jonah, (tnnsl. Siegert 1:37). Siegert tmnsl.ates: "Sie
erniedrigten sich aber dennaßen und llbten schriftgemaß solche Selbstbcbm-schung, daß
(sogar) ihre Haustiere zu Verteidigern ihrer Gebete wurden."
» 5 E.g. P$eudo-Philo, On Jon.ah, (tnmsl. Siegert 1:11 ).
236 See Pseudo-Philo, On Jonah, (transl. Siegert I: II and 23}.
217 See Pseudo-Philo, On Jf»>tth, (tnlnsl. Siegen l: 11). Siegert tfaDslates: "Doch alles
(geheime) menscbliche Wissen brachte derjenige, der allein unhintergehbar ist. dem
{Kapitäll} zu uotrO.g)icher Klarheit und stellte es (ihm) vor Augen."
:as See above pp. 39 and 411, note 112.
m Cf. Friedlander (p. 66, note S); Duval, Le Iivre de Jon.os dans Ia littirDturu
chriiienne grecq11.e et Imine, p. 98, note 146.
7MI Most commentators (incl. the Talmudirn) consider the ficedom to wear or not to
wear the white gannents as a sign that the prayer and the readings. did noJ belong to the
avodah. Butthis would have been tbe case only ifthe high priest had always cbanged to
the white garments or if one applies tbe logi.cs of later {supposedly etemally valid)
~:ationales to earliu rltuals. lf a high priest opted to continue reading in the holy l.inco
 Thlt Ritaals of Yom Kipp'IJ.,. 59

other band, if the description does not reflect actual practice, this choice
might reflect two Trumaitic attitudes to the relation between the verbal re-
enactment in the synagogue and the high~priestly avodah in the temple -
stressing more strongly either the continuous or the substitutive aspect.

THE SEDER AYODA.H: The most peculiar part of the prayers of Yom Kippur
is the reciting of a Seder Avodah.241 Today, Seder Avodah is the term for
very sophisticated religious poems (piyyutim ), which usually have thcee
parts - an account of the creation, a history of men from Adam and Eve
until Aaron. and a description of the high-priestly ritual on Yom Kippur.
For our survey of early post-temple practices. the Sldrei Avodah are very
interesting rituals, heilig complete verbaJ reenactments combined with such
liturgical gestures as prostratior;t. Some key passages appear in aJmost all
Sidrei Avodah and are so impo'rtant that they even influenced the text of
the Misb.nah. 2112 They mark those rites of the temple ritual that the high
priest (supposedly) perfonned with words: the three confessions with the
responses of the people and the two countings that accompanied his sprink-

gannents, he probably did this to indicate the continuity. It is often more reasonable to
asswne a conceptual change behind a change in practice than to reconstmct a common
rationale for both.
241 Oo Sidrei A.vodah, see Malachi, "The 'Avoda' for Yom Kippur''; Mirsky, Yo.r.re ben

Tosae Poe1'111; M. Zulai (ed.), Piyyutey Yannoi [in HebrewJ (Berlin, 1938); Z.M. Rabi-
novitz (ed.), Mahzor Piyyutey Rabbi YannalleTorah vleMo'adi1'1 [fu Hebrew] (2 vols;
Jen~salem, 198H7); J. Yahalom (ed.), Pricstly Pale.rtinitm Poetry. A Ntm'ative Liturgy
for the Day of A.tont~1'1ent (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem. 1996); idem, Poetry and Society in
Jewish Galilee of Late A.ntiquity {in Hebrew) (Tel Av.iv, 1999), esp. pp. 107-136; M.
Swartz, "Ritual about Myth lllbout Ritual: Towards an Underslllnding o{ the AYodah in
the Rabbinie Period," Jownal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy 6 (1997) 135-lSS;
idetll, '"Sage, Priest, and Poet. Typologies of Religious Leadersbip in lhe Ancient Syna-
gogue," in: S. Fine (ed.), Jews, Cluistiana, l11Jd Polylheist.r in the A.ncienf .s)nogog~te.
Cvltural Interaction dvring the Grec:o.Roman Period (Baltimore Stildies in the History
of Judaism; London and New York, 1999; pp. 101-117). M. Swartz and J. Yahalomhave
prepared an English tran.slation of some Sidrci Avoaah.
242 The prostration ofthe peopte in response to the mention ofthe Tetragnumu.aton in

the higb priest's confessio11 was not part of the original reading of the Mishnah. lt does
not appear in the most reliable liUlnuscripts nor is it cornmcnted upon in the Talmudim.
Apparently, the liturgical formulations of the Sid,.ei A.vodah entered so deeply into tbe
heads ofthc pcople that their elaboratcd form infiuen~:ed lhe copiers ofthe Mishnah. See
Rabbinovic:z, Diqd11qey Soferim, vol. 4, p. 183; also the discussion in Rosenberg,
"Mishna 'Kipurim'," vol. 1. pp. 126-142, e.specially 139-142. This becomes importaut in
the disCIISS.ion of the Helchalot texts, demonstnrting a closer relationship of the Iader to
the (priestly?) piyyutim than to the rabbinie tra<:ts. See pp. 134--139, beJow.
60 Yom KippUI' in Eorly Jewi4h Thought and RltJIQ/

ling of the blood.243 These sentences, distinguisbed from the rest of the
poems by their prose fonn (and at least today by raising the voice), mark
the central actions of the higb-priestly ritual, the confessions on bul1 and
scapegoat, the mention of the ineffable name, and the sprinkling of the
bull' s and the sacrificial goat' s blood in the holy of holies. This matcbes
the obligation expressed in Seder Rav 'Amram Ga 'on to read aSeder Avo.
dah "with sprinkli.ng.<J and confessions."244 Today, the Seder Avodah is
read only during the Mussaf service. This is an achievement of the
Gaonim, wha challenged the common custom to recite a Seder .A:vodah in
each of the three prayers of the Day of Atonement. The Mussaf be.41t
matches a liturgical reenactment of the temple service, since both are set at
the sametime and since in the temple tbe special festival sacrifices are of-
fered during the Mussaf. 24S
The practice ofreading a Seckr .Avodah has two roots~ first, the transi-
tion ofthe temple cult from a one-man performance to one-man show with
participation of the people; second, the interest in implemeating the bibli-
cal prescriptions and the temple cult in the synagogue.
Regarding the first root, the transition from the purely cul.tic concept of
a rite petformed in a secret b.oly place by a special person to a more col-
lective ritual may already be perceived in the temple. Sirach describes the
presence of spectators at the high-priestly sacri:fices in the temple. 246 EI-
bogen has rigb.tly noted tbat such observation by outsiders who get in-
volved by praying on the outskirts of the temple changes the purely cultic
concept oftemple worship into a m.ore edifying one.247 1n othe.r words, not
only the cultic perfonnance itself is important. but also the participation
(by observation) of those gathered. This change bad already taken place at
the time of Sirach, i.e. around 200 CE, at lhe latest.148 Sirach's evidence is
supported by Mishnah Yoma, which emphasizes the equal importance of

w Malachi, "Tbe 'Avoda' for Yom Kippur,'" p. 154, states that the reenactment ofthe
sprinldings beloogs to a later stage, since they are aot included mmost Sidrei Avodah.
However, they an: included in Shrv'at Yamim (D"':l' nlr.lw) andin Yose ben Yose's 'Azkir
Grnuot 'Eioah (n17lt m,ul 1':JTK) for Mussaf and 'A..rapper Gedolot (m',m 1!10K) for
Minhah. Yose's 'Attah Konanta (nn:m::. :lliR) (for Sbaharit) does not includc the formula.
The cwo Sdarim edited by Yahalom ('..U be'Ein Kol and 'A.romem le'E() have lacunae at
these parts.
:IA4 Goldscbmidt, &eder Rav 'Amrom Ga'on, p. 168:7-8.
14' Hoffinan, The Canonizotion ofthe Synagogue &II"Vice, pp. 103-110.
w SirSO:l?-21.
:z,c7 Eli)Ogeo, Snulien zur Geschieht• des judischen Goltelldienster, p. 52.
2"' Despile the grea1 iDfluenc:e of the end of Sirach 011 Sidrei AWJdah aud other Yom
Kippur piyyutim in language, c:ontent and Jtnlc:ture, it is not in itselfaSeder Avodah: sec
Rotb, ..Ecclesiaaricus io the Synagogue Service.''
 The Rttwa/.s ofYom Kippur 61

observing either the high-priestly reading and prayer or the buming of the
sin offerings. "Who sees the high priest reading does not see the bull and
the goat buming, and who sees bull and goat buming does not see the high
priest reading- not because he is not allowed to, but because tbe distance
is great ond the work of both is equal. ,.249 From this key sentence we can
conclude that in the opinion of tbe editors of the Mishnah the watehing of
the temple liturgy was as important as tbe participation in it. Furthermoxe,
the Mislmah considers the reading to be as important as the buming of the
sacrifices, sinee the Misbnah underscores that it does not matter which of
tbe two rites one sees. This oomparison of the Iiturgie importance of tbe
word and of the sacrifices presupposes that both rites belang to the same
category, but the determination that the two are equal goes even beyond
tbat. 2so If watehing the high priest reading the prescriptions for Yom Kip-
pur was as important as watehing the performance of tbe prescribed sacri-
ftoes, this is the frrst step to a virtual verbal rcenactment of the whole
temple sen'ice, lik.e the Seder A.vodah.zsl
The second root of the custom of reciting a Seder A.vodah was almost
certainly the early custom of reading biblical Yom Kippur passages.252
None of the ex.tant Second Temple sources proposes any reenactment of
the temple ritual. This does not preclude the possibility that such a reen-
actment was part of the liturgies in Qumran or Alexandria. However, the
theories that see a Seder A.vodah in 1Q34 3 ii II 4QS09 97+98 or tbe influ-
ence of a Setkr A.vodah behind Pbilippians 2:6-11 or Colossians 1:12-20
need more suppOrting evidence. ~3 The same is true for the recent sugges-
tionofMenahem Kisterto seeaSeder Avodah in 5QI3.2S4
In Philo's account of the prayers. he is very brief regarding bis explicit
.statement about the enonnous length of tbe Yom Kippur service. 255 We can
only speculate about the rest of the prayers of bis community. Philo
betrays a detailed acquaintance with tbe Halakhah of the temple ritual
beyond the bibiical sources. His information may stem from a Seder
Avodah.15' Similarly. it is not improbable that JJarnabas is basedonsuch a

:lAI mYoma 7:1, my translation, with emphasis added.

~ Cf. Sir 4:14, wbicb compares the study ofTorah to temple !Lturgy.
151 Even if the statement does not reflect the Secoad Temple period, it elucidatcs. the
rationale behind the m::ilation ofthe biblical passages in tbe synagogue service.
152 See also Malachi, "Tbe 'Avoda' ror Yom Kippur," p. 151.
:w 1Q34 3 ii has Ileen :seen as a Seder Avodah by GriDt:z. Fora diseussion. see abovc,
p. 43. For a brief dileussion of a Seiler Avodah as a possible baclcgroWJd to Philippians
md Colossians, see below, pp. 206-212, below.
1j4 Kister, "SQ13 aud lbe 'Avodah." See above. p. 44-4S.

1ß s" above, p. 46.

1341 See bclow, p. 112, note 166.
62 Yom Kippw' mEarlyJNilh Th()Ughl and Rirval

Seder Avodah.251 Its author is acquainted with details of the Ha.lakhah and
speaks of a written sourcet which might perhaps have been of a liturgical
nature.
It is only around 400 CE that we reach safe ground. The Babylonian
Talmud alludes to the recitation ofa Seder Avodah in the prayer. 2S8 More-
over, two tiny fragments, most probably of Sidrei Avodah from around
400 CE, were unearthed in Oxyrhynchus.m
In the nine1eenth centuxy, scholars proposed that if one takes out a few
ofthe disputes and some thematic digressions, Misbnah Yoma migbt once
have served as such a liturgical text. Some even tried to reconstruct such
an ••ur-"Seder A.vodah.2~ This hypothesiswas conoborated when, in 1907,
Blbogen published some Oenizah fragments with a prose Seder Avodah
Shiv'at Yamim261 remarkably similar to Misbnah Yoma with the necessary
adaptations and sorne additionallines frorn the Bible, Tosefta and Mishnah
Tamid.14l Blbogen does not give a date for the fragment, but it is likely to
be ear1ier than the earliest poetic Sidrei Avodah of the fourth or fifth
century by Yose ben Yose and his companions.263 Shiv'at Yamim seems to
have been kept in use for a long time, as theSeder Rav 'A.mram Go'on

257 See below, p. 161, note 69.

)!B While the subject of bYoma 36b might have been a simple confession without an
elaborate Seder Avodah, bYoma S6b clearly alludes to the transition from the sprinkling
in the holy of holies to the sprinkling of the veil. Raba corrects the leader of tbe prayer
who mingles the majority opinion with the apinion of Rabbi Yehudah. Elbogen's frag-
ments display the reading accordiog to Raba 's correction (fragment A, p. 19, lines 13-14:
Elbogen, Studien zur Geschiclrte da jüdischen Gortesdiensles, p. 108).
m In 191S. Cowley publish.ed two very tiny Hebrew papyrus fragmenls from
Ox:yrttynchus tbat clearly deal with Yom Kippur and might weil have been part of a
Seder A.11odah (A. Cowley, Journal for Egyptian A.rcheology (1915] 211-212). Having
little mar:erial for comparison (even less before the fmdinp of Qumran, Mezada and
Muraba'at), he suggesls the broad period from the third to the fifth century CE, opting for
400 CB. The f'U'St fragmentreads: ..•]lZJll1 '"( •••]11111 ~!lll1( ...) U"TJ '1'J!II[..•]lM'R ":l'm[••• The
second fragments reads: 'l!17( •••n]mn:17 1"1 111[...]:1 7ll c[...]'Vll!m O!lr.l [ •••1]1:1tm ("] 'l!i"1[...
..•]? ?111.1\'~ll [•..]ni"111l
260 J. Oere:obowg, "Essai de reslitution de l'ancienne r~dac:tion de Masslchet Kip-
peturim,"' Ret~lle des etudesjuiltes 6 (1882) 41-80; and H. Strack (ed.), Joma. Der Misch-
natralr.tat 'Yersöhnungstag' (Scbriften des Institutwn Judaicwn iD Bcrlin 3; Leipzig,
2 1904).
261 This Seder Avodoh is caJied Shlv 'at Yamtm (D'IJ' nliJW) ("Seven Oays") after its
inception.
2& Elbogen, Srvdien zur Geschichte lks jf.ldl1chm Gottesdienstes, "Anhang 1," pages
102-117.
261 The Palestinian Talmud ca11s the reading11 trom Lev 16 and Lev 23:26--32 '7Vl mo
1:1'1' (yMeg4:S,7Sb).
 11re R.ituo/s of Yom Kippllr 63

(ninth centu:ry) refers to it as one ofthe customary Sidrei Avodah,-w. highly

honored by occupying fir.st place on the Iist of Seder Rav 'Amram Ga 'on.
With regard to Shiv 'at Yamim, we cannot simply suppose that the pre-
sent wording is the same as that used when it was fust written in th.e sec-
ond, third or fourth ccntury, since the manuscript includes later
traditions. 265 Nevertheless, we can still deduce two important arguments
from it. First, the invention of reciting a Se der A:vodah does not necessarily
demand a priestly origin. 266 Second, if Shiv 'at Yamim originally began di-
rectly with the preparatory week of the high priest and was circulated
without a poetic preface ftom Genesis to Aaron's ordination. this is quite a
strong argument against any attempt to suppose that connections to Yom
IGppur underlie some New Testament hymns combining creation aod
atonement.267 Usually, the argument is based on the connection of these
elements in the poetic Sidrei Avodah, but it neglects tbat the earliest Seder
Avodah, Shiv 'at Yamim, does not reflect this combination. Of course, it is
possible in principal that the connection between creation, histocy of sin,

264 Goldschmidt, Seder R~ ~mram Ga'o11, p. 168:5-8. The other oplioll$ referrcd to
are: "Azkir Sela (i!'!o ,'Jlll), 'Attah Konanta (:TnD'D ilnK). 'At.saltsel {?!;:sK) and "A.shanm
(JlfllC).
265 E.g. the higb-priestly prayer in the holy o{holies. See bYomo S3b.
2f4 YOBef Yahalom and Michael Swartz have suggested that many of the early poetic
Sidrei Avodah were written by priests. The poetic Siefrei Avodah reßect a different
conception of priesthood and atonement from the rabbinie texts, which are usually quite
critical toward priests. However, I cannot identify a priestly attitude already in Shlv 'ot
Yamim, whicb is much more focused on the Mishnah than are the later Sidrei Avndah.
One gloss may point to a slightly pro-priestly attitude.: a Statement regarding the high
priest that "Israel's purity depends on you" (fragment p. 14 line 8-9: see Elbogen,
Studielf mr Geschichte des jüdischen GottesdiensteJ, p. 104). Oll the other band, Shiv'at
Ya,.,im does not skip the embarrassing passage on the high priest who has to swear
loyalty to fhe rabbinie practice ofYom Kippur, but even anbellishes it (fragmeat p. 13,
lines 1-13: see Elbogen, Studitm z11r Geschichte dujiidischen Gottesdienstes, pp. 103-
104). Furthermore, it changed thc passage about people readi.Dg before the high priest to
'"lhey n:ad before him the 'Seder llaYom• and teach him the "Seder Yom HaKippruim',"
thus reinforcing the intellectual inferiority oftbe hi&h priest. On the other band, Elbogeo
inc:luded a preface to Shiv'at Yamim i1.1 his appendix, a short alpbahetic poem 'Attah
Baro1a covering the crcatioo of the world to the appointment of Aaron and his soos
(Eibogen, Studiet~ zt~r Gachichte desjüdischen Gottesdiem:les, pp. 116-117). We do not
know when this pret'ac;e was added to Shiv'at Yamim, but here Aaron is cleuly the hero
ofYom Kippur and notdie inferior clerk ofthe rabbinie tracts.
267 Cf. the sectionon Phil2:6-ll and Coll:l3-20 onpp. 206--212, below. On tbe basis

tbat these hymns c:ombine atoneJnent wirh creation, the eommon ftrst part of poetic Sidrei
A.)'odah, a number of scbolars bave assumed a cOilllection to Yom Kippur. Grintz, "A
Seder Avodoh for Yom Kippur from Qumran," proposed one of Qumran's Festival
Prayers (1Q34 3 ii) as the earliest Seder Avodah (see above, p. 43 note 150).
64 Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Thought and Ritual

bistory of the forefathers of Aaron and Yom Kippur was made as early as
the Second Temple period, but then we would have to assume that Shiv'at
Yamim skipped the combination of creation and atonement.
Josepb Yahalom and Michael Swartz perceive a more positive descrip-
tion ofthe high priest in the Sidrei Avodah, in Opposition to the rabbinie
portrayals.2611 The Tannailic literature, which describes the high priests as
little more than stupid clerks, tried to bolster the position of the non-
priestly sages·. The Amoraic literatme reflects two conflicting tendencies:
like the Tannaites, a further diminution of the historical. (high) priests; and
a reappraisal, as in the piyyutim. Yaha1om and Swartz explain the differ-
ence between piyyutim and parts of the rabbinie Iiterature by supposing
that priestly groups, who have a stronger position in the liturgy of the
synagogues, are responsible for the composition of these Sidrei Avodah.
We know that priestly circles remained very important after the transition
of the spiritual centers of Judaism :from Jerusalem to the Galilee. Th.ey
lived in organizcd neighborhoods and kept records on wbich watch was to
serve in the temple.
I do not think that we can regard the increasing importance of priests as
being dis1inct from the parall~l rise of priesthood and bigh-pricstly Chris-
tology in Christianity of the third and fourth centuties. Thc argument of
Yahaiom and Swartz can be supplcmented by a further factor, one tbat is
not intracultural but intercultural: the reappraisal of the ideal historical
high priests can be understood as a Jewisb reaction to the evolving bigh-
priestly Christology. The inclusion ofJong praises of Levi and bis sons and
th.e complete silence about bis rival, Melchizedek, in the Sidrei Avodah is
only one example. I will discuss this question further in the discussion of
Jewish-Christian polemics.269
Conclusion: Prayers in and outside the Temple
Qumranic, Philonic and rabbinie praycrs share several motifs, whlch. how-
ever, are not closc and numerous enough to point to an extensive continu-
ous tradition. In the Secend Temple period, prayers became a roajor focus
ofthe ritual ofpublic fasts in and outside the temple. According to Philo as
weil as rabbinie sta:temcnts, they fi1led the entire day. In a certain sense,
prayers also connected the rituals in and outSide the temple. The high
priest prayed at the end of his sacrificial ceremony, and some see in this
the origin of Qumran's Festival Prayers- although, u.nlik:e e.g. the Songs

268 See the :introduction io Yabalom, Priestly Palesti11ian Poetry; and Swartz, "Sage,

Priest, aDd Poet," p. J 58, oote 68, with reference to tne earlier works by Goitein and
Mirsky.
~ See pp. 283-288, below.
 1'11~ Rituols ofYotrt Kippur 65

ofthe Sabbath Sacrijice, the text ofthe Festival Prayers does not display a
particularly close affiliation to the temple rituaL An intluence of the
:synagogal prayers on the high priest•s concluding prayer seems more
Jikely. Ritual reell&ctments ofthe high priest's ritual were probably part of
the service in some synagogues of the Seeond Temple period. especially in
the form of reading the biblical descriptions (or a translation or a para-
pb.rase of them). We can only speculate if some Second Temple com-
munities even used a kind of Se<kr A.vodoh. Mostlikely. confessions were
part ofthe ritual in the communities usjng Qumran'sFestival Proyers, and
in Alexandria, long before they became the main part of the rabbinie
Iiturgy. Tbis points to a certain "individualization" of Yom K.ippur in the
time ofthe Second Temple: private confessions were added on top of the
high priest's vicarious confession.
3.3 A Controversial, Popular Blood Sacrifice: kapparot
Probably the most famous rite ofpost-temple Yom K.ippur is the kapparot.
We do not know exactly how old this rite is. 110 It is mentioncd eK.plicitly
for the first time only in the eady Gaonic age in Persia by R.av Sheshna
(ca. 650 CE), but he already refers to it as ancicnt.m His quite detailcd de-
scription of the ritual goes as follows:
The agent who pedorm.s it !akes hold of the rooster and places (n•z) bis hand
upon its bead. Then, removing bis haDd from the head ofthe rooster, he plac:es it
upon lhe head of tlle pe:rson for wbom the ceremony is perfonned (,!l:mll) a11d
says. "This (rooster1 shall be itlstead oftbis (peawn); this rooster shall be the sub.
stitute ("Jl7'n) for this peawo; this rooster shall be the ransom (')lnD) for thi.s person
[or, this person is tobe redeemed (v. lcct. 'tnntl) by this rooster.J"m

210 The early witnesses for this ceremony have been investigated by J.Z. Lauterbach,
Rabbinie Es:says (Cincinnati, 1951), pp. 354-378. He also pursued developments in the
eeaturies following Sbesbna: see idem, "111e Ritual for the Kappatot Ceremony," ln:
idem. Studies in Jt~Wish Law, Custom and Folielore (New York. 1970; pp. 133-142). Y.
Garmer,· uThe Histury of lhe kapporot Rite Regarding the Custom of Marseilles," (i:u
Hebrew] Sinai 114 (1994) 19&-217, published anolller text for the rite ofMarseilles. See
also I. Scheftelowitz. Da.J stellvmetende Hvhnopfor. Mil be$0nduer ßericksichtipng
du jtidischen Yolbglauben8 (ReligiOllllgesehichtliche Versuche und VorarbeiteD 14/3;
Giessen, 19l4}.
m See the Ietter of Rav Sheslm.a from Sura, quoted in Lauterbach, &bbinic E811ays,
pp.:m-357.
m Today a different formula is used, e.g. the falber of the fam.ily takt:s the bird and
swings lt arOIIJld bis head or that of the "benefited" saying something lüee: "This is
mylyour excbange (öl!!''m), tbis is mylyour substitute (imnn), this is my/your atolleflleut
(;,1!1::1). This ro0$terlhen will go to its death while Ilyou will enter and proceed to a good
long life, and to peac;e." Quoted after thc modern rite in Schennan, The Complete
.btScroll Machzor Yotrt Kippur NM!ach ,bhA:enaz. pp. 2-S, here 2-3.
66 Y~m Kip]1'117' in Ea,.ly Jewish Tho11gh1and Riiflal

He then swings tbe rooster around the head of lhe person for whom it is to be a
substitute, while nc:iting the following words:m "A life for a life." He does this
seven t.im.es.
He then plac:es bis band upon lhe head of the rooster, saying, "This rooster
shall go out to death instead of this pefl!oa."' 'fhen he places his band upon the
head of tbe person who is to receive atonement by tllis ceremony, saying. "Thou,
so and so, tbe son of so and so. shalt enter into life and thou shalt not die." This be
does tb{ee times.
Then the penon for whom tbe substitute is offered plaees bis band upon the
head ofthe rooster, as a sort of;'I:J'ZIQ [the ceremony oflaying tbe hands upon the
&acrificial animal]. He lays bis band (1D'ID1} upon it [Ehe raoster] and slaugb.tm it
im:mediately, tbns in a manner following tbe rule prescribed for sacrifices, viz.,
that the slaughtering of the sacrifici.al victim must follow immedia~ely the cere-
mony ofthe laying on ofbands.174
The ritual includes gestures and a benediction expressins substitution.:m
Some elements are repeated three or seven times. a feature often associated
with magi(; rituals. The entrails are commonly thrown onto the street or the
roof, where the birds feed on them, and the meat is given to the poor.276
Both rites are common methods of obtainins release from some kind of sin
or impurity. Rav Sheshna does not give the exact time ofperfonnance for
this ritual, but traditionally iNs during the night or the moming preceding
Yom Kippur. Not only roosters were used.217 Rav Sheshna mentions rieb
families using rams (c•7•K). "The essential thing - according to these
people ·- is that the animal should be of the kiod that has homs. like the
ram that was offered instead of our father lsaac." 278 He bimself prefei.'S
roosters because they areeheaper and, symbolically, the Hebrew ,:u can
mean rooster as ....vell as man.l'19
Jacob Lauterbach suggested that a background to the kapparot, e~
cially that with homed animals, is provided by identification of two
mythological sacrifices with the scapegoat: the ra:m that Abraham sacri-

:ro I omit a long quotation ofPs 107:10-21; Job 33:24.

214 TranstatioD by J.Z. Laute:rbach. Stadiea in Jtnt~ish Law, Cu3tom and Folklore
(Edited by Bemard 1. Bamberger; New York. 1970), pp. 356-357. The words in
pareutheses ( ) are ad~tions by Lauterbacb, those in square bracket$ [ ] are additions
ft'om tbe text given in a note oo. tho previous page.
275 Usually tbe pater famili.a.t bv.ys a beo for eacb. female and a to<:k for each male
family member. See the Ietter of'Rav Sheshna from Sura, quoted in Lauterbac:h, Robbtnie
Essay:~, p. 356. Today, white ls tbe preferable color.
m Lauterbach, Studies in Jtnt~ish Law, C113tom and Folklore, p. 369.
177 Mueh later llasbi speaks of the poor using saeks of beans (on b&lbb 81b): see
Lauterbacll, St&lliiu inJewish Law, Cv:stom and Folklore, pp. 370-373.
271 Rav Sheshna from Sura, quoted in Lauterbach, Rabbinie Es:say1, p. 356.

m See Lauterbacb, Rabbinie &say.r, p. 356.

 The Rituals ofYom KipJ718 67

ticed instead of Isaac280 and the male goat wi1h whose blood Joseph's
lnothers colored his coat and tried to fool their father.l 11 He refers to a
passage from Targum Pse.ut:W-Jonathan Leviticus for a combination of
these ideas tagether wi1h tbe golden calf.l82 The kapparot with a ram com-
bines the functions of an apotropaic sacrifice to satanJ•Az'azel and a re-
minder to God ofthe forefathers' merits. Tbat sacrifice of a ram ca.n also
be seen as sacrifice to the evil powers alone ca.n be leamed from the
Midrash. preserved in the late collection Yalqut Shim 'oni.213
To what extent is the kapparot a substitution for the scapegoat rite'P84
Sheshna's description and bis sacrificiaJ tenninology demonstrate amply
that the kapparot is a ritual killing of an animal for an expiatory purpose.
Rav Shesbna uses sacri:ficial terminology such as ;JJ"llO and regulations for
sacrifi.ces (tbe slaughtering follows immediately aftcr the laying on of one
hand). Unl.ike the scapegoat ritual, however, no confession is spoken and
only one band is laid on the animal. Still, the performance does look like a
sacrifice intended for Satan, a revival oftbe scapegoat, especially ifhomed
animaJs are used. 285 It was precisely this mis.Ieading closeness to sacrifices
that was one of the reasons for medieval halak.hic authorities objectlng to
the rite.286 Yet, despite the fact that tbe kapparot were strongly opposed by
numerous great authorities like Nachmanides, Rashba and Rabbi Y osef
Qaro, it remained popular throughout tbe ages. This is probably due to the
deep psychological impression the ritual makes on the performer and the
spectators and the need to perform some act ensuring atonement. Ritual
blood spilling and detachment of the entrails embodying the sins fulfilled
these psychological needs better and more visibly than a mere verbal re-
counting of the temple ritual.

210Gen 22:13.
211Gen 37:31-33.
2u Targum Pt~eudo-JoMthan Leviticus 9:3.
m See the discussion ofthis passage 011 pp. 128-129, below.
2M Ia modern prayer books one often f"mds tbe argument to use a rooster, because it is
an aaimal that c:ould not be .sac:riticed in the Jcrusalem temple and does not raise the
su.spicion tbat the hipparat CO!IId be mistalcen for a probibited sacrificial rhe outside the
sanctuary. This argument is much more recent than Sheslma. Fwthenn<~te,. this argumen-
lation is true on!y J.br the theologiau, not for the antbropologist or the performer of the
rite.
215 Lauterbach, Rabbinie Essay:~, p. 365.

~ Lauterbach, Studi11 irr Jewi.sh Law, Cwtom and Folklore, pp. 3S7-3S8, note 77.
 Yom Kippur in Early J..."ish Thought a11d Rihlol

3.4 Pagan and Christion Descriptions ofContemporary Yom Kippur Ritea

3.4.1 Pagan Texts
Jewish festivals, with the exception of the Sabbath. arenot very prominent
iD pagan tex.ts. Menahem Stern in the index to bis magnificent Greek and
Roman A:u.thors on Jews and Judaism lists only two passages for Yom Kip-
pur.287 and he rejeets them in bis commentary- unjustiflllbly, as wc sb.all
see.
In an attempt to portray Judaism as a variant cnlt ofDionysus. Plutarch
(ca. 40-120 CB) tums to some of the Jewish festivals, amo.og them Yom
Kippur and Sukkot;
Tbe time aud charaaer ofthe greatest. most sacred holiday ofthe Jews clearly be-
fit Dionysus. Wheu they celebrate their so-called Fast (,:J1v ylip MYOfi.CvrtY
VIIG'Eiav). at the height oflhe vintage, tbey setout lables of all sorts offtuit 111leh:r
tents and huts plaited for lbe most part of vines and ivy. They call lhe first of the
days oftbc feast Tabemacles (c1C1Jvr):v) ••• 211
According to Stern, Plutareh's usc of Yom Kippur is a mistake and he is
really referring only to Suk:k.ot. Yet Plutarch may well reßect the impres-
sion of an outside observer of the festivals of Yom Kippur ond Sukkot.
Philo. too. empbasizcs thc time of the fast in the middle of the harvest pe-
riod. Authors more a.cquainted with Judaism than Plutarch who certainly
were fusthand observers confused Sukkot and Yom Kippur, among them

:a7 Stem, Greek o.nd Lotin Autltars on Jews and Judaism. In addition to the two
passages discussed herc, onc should mention the passage of Hecateus of Abdera rcfi:tnd
to below (see p. 109, note 149), whose description of the Iewish high priest may have
been influenced by the temple ritual of Yom K.ippur witb its entranc:e to the holy of
bolies au.d the proslration of the peop!e. A fowth passage, a Ietter of Augustus to
Tiberius, probably confuses Sabbath and Yom Kippur: "Not even a lew. my dear
Tiberius, fasts so scrupulously ou. Jtis Sabbaths (dillgenttr sabbotis f«iwnivmsenat) as 1
have to-day; for it was not until aftu U.e f",.;st hour of the .oigbt !hat I ate two mouthfuls
of bread in the batn before I began to be anoinled." (Suetonius, Divu.v Augusttu 16:2,
translation by J.C. Rolfe in LCL). Stem, Greelc and Latin Authors on Jews o.nd Judai1711,
vol. 2, p. 110, eornments that othcr classica.l autbors express the same notioo of a fast on
the Sabbatb. Heinricll Lewy observed that it may bave been oae of the names of Yom
Kippur, Sabbath of Sabbatlu that caused this confusion: see H. Lewy, "Pb.ilologisches
aus dem Talmud," Philolops 84 (1929) 317-398, ~ pp. 39G-391. For the possibilicy
that in Romc, Yom K.ippur was kept on a Sabbatb. see D. Stök.l Ben Eua. ..Whose Fa.st ls
lt7 The Ember Day and Yom K.ippur," in; A.H. Beeker aud A. Reed (eds.), The W(I)IS
That Never Parted: Jews ond Christians Irr Antiquil)l and tht Early Middle Ages (Tem
and Studies in Aneient Judaism 9S; TUbingen: Mollr Siebeck, 2003; pp. 259-282).
288 Plutarch. Quaestiones Ct»Wi11ales 4:6:2, 671D, translation by H.B. Hoffleit in. LCL;
cf. Stern, Greelr. and Latin Authors 011 Jews and hdaism, vol. 1, p. 557.
 The Rituals ofYom Kippvr 69

Eusebius, Chrysostom,. Cyril of Alexandria and Jocob of Sarug.239 For

outsiders, th.is unity of the drree autumn festivals is amply demonstrated by
an explicit statement o{the ninth-century Syriac cxegete Ishodad: "In the
seventh lunar month, first TiShri, there is a festival from the beginning
until the twenty-first day.'Q90 This misapprehe.osion illustrates that for the
non-Jewish observer the festivals, being so close chronologicalJy, might
appear to be one long festival. Moreover, two dctails of Plutarch's
deseription match not only Sukkot but also Yom Kippur: the joyful eontex.t
ofthe dances in the vineyards and the festive meal as breaking ofthe fast
after sunset.291 It is therefore quite plausible to see Plutarch's description
as a firstband outside observation that is slightly confused.
The sathist Juvenal (ca. 60-130 es) wrote the most delightfullines on
YomKippur:
[This diamood) was given as a present long ago by the barbarian Agrippa to bis
incestuous sister, in that country where kings celebtate fesul Sabbatbs with bare
fect, aod where a loog-established clemency suffers pigs to attain. old age.m
Again, Sternrejects that this passage reflects Yom Kippur and, following a
suggestion by Friedländer, refers to the generat obligation to remove tbe
shoes on entering the Temple Mount. Heinrich Lewy, however, suggests

219 EW~ebiu.s, Demon.strutio Evungelica 1:3:2 (Yom Kippur a.s one of the three
pilgrimages); Chrysostom, Aguin$ the Jews 1: I (wro.ng order); even more so on page
12Ja ofthe ncwly found manusa:ipt of Agotnst the Jews 2, where he speaks of a fast on
Suldcot; see also Cbryso$t0m, Christmas Homlly S (PG 49:357BC); Cyril of Alexandria,
Commtmtary on Jsoiah 1:14 (PG 70:36C); Jaeob of Sa.nag, Homily on the Scf1Pegoat, io
P. Bedjan, Homiliae Se/ectae Mar-Jacobi Saf'llgeruir {Leipzig and Paris. 1907), vol. 3,
pp.2S9,263,267,275.
~ Did Ishodad know neither Shemini •Azeret on Tishri 22 oor Simhat Torah? The text
continues: "At the beginDing of the monlh i.s the festival of thanksgiviDg, that of tbe
ha.n'est; and on tbe tenth is the day of expiation [.:c.____], on which they fa.sl and are
idle; .and ftom t:he fifteenth to the twenty-first is [the festivaJ} of booths. On the day of
expiation, the priest expiatcs and sanctifies the holy of holies and the altar in order that
they be no Ionger nmdered ilbpure because of the fault afthose who were not proper to
serve as priests. Regarding this God issued tbe reproaeh: 'Thcy have defilod my name
and m:y altat' ."My translatioo oflshodad, Commtu~tury on LeviliCIIS 23:23-26, following
c. van den Eynde (ed.), Com~r~ttntaire d'l3o'dad de Merv SIIT I'A"cien Tatoment. n.
üode-Devtlroname (CSCO 176, S~:riptores Syri 80; Louvain, I9S8), p. 84 (cf. his
Fnmch triWilation in CSCO 81, p. 112}. On lshodad., see C. Leonhard, 18/totlad ofMenv's
Eugu.ls ofthe Psolm.r 119 and 119-147. ..4 Study ofHis /fflerpretatton in tlte Light ofthe
S"iac Translation ofTheodore of Mopsuestia's Commtntary (CSCO S8S; Subsidia 1Q7;
Leuveo, 2001).
291 Cf. mTa•an4:8 and mYoma 1:4.
m Jovenal, Satrtrae 6:1S7-160, translatioo by G.G. Ramsay in LCL; c:f. Stern, Gre11.k
ond Latin Author3 on Jew:r and Juda/sm, voJ. 2, p. 100.
70 Yom Kippur in Early Jewüh Thought ond Ritual

tbe custom ofwalking barefoot on Yom K.ippur. 293 Four arguments suppon
Lewy's suggestion over Stem's and Friedlinder's. First. the rite of walk.ing
publicly with bare feet on Yom K.ippur attracted the attention of other ob-
servers, too.194 Second. the mention of the Sabbath is more reasonably
associated with a special day such as Y om K.ippur than is the prohibition
against entering the temple witb shoes, which is vaJid every day. More-
over, the Sabbathis confused with Yom K.ippur also in other passages-
for example, in Augustus' letter.m Tbird, JuvenaJ was more likely to have
heard about the king walleins barefoot on a Yom K.ippur in Rome than
about the king's barefoot entry to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Fourtb,
the moment of absurdity (in Roman eyes) lies in the concept that a king
would celebrate a festival barefooted - i.e. with a mouming custom -
rather than in the common practice of removing the shoes before entering a
sacred precinct. The latter would not be considered amusing.
In sum, none of the pagan references to Yom K.ippur is a straightfor-
ward description; all are problematic, especially the ftrSt. We can consider
this result as a cup baJf full or half empty. The cup is half empty because
pagans seem to have taken little notice of Yom Kippur. On the other band
it is half full because in the pagan texts Yom Kippur is the "most famous"
festival after the Sabbath.296
3.4.2 Christian Texts
Christian lcnowledge of Jewish Yom Kippur rites was faidy general
(though much more specific than the pagan texts), mentioning the date arul
the rites of praying. fasting. walking barefoot. dancing and assembling in
open places as well as various mouming practices. Most descriptions
appear, however, in a polemical context susceptible to fabrication. 297 It is
therefore crucial to distinguish between imaginary descriptions Alld
references to actual Jewish ritual. Only those Christians who refer to non-
biblical rites other than fasting and mouming can be considered eyewit·
nesses.2llll Refer:ences to sacke1oth and ashes in the mouming rites may
reflect polemical topoi based on Isaiah 58. Jonah and Matthew 6:17 rather
than personal observation of Jewish celebrations. Those Christian authors

m Lewy, "Philologisches aus dem Talmud," pp. 396-391.

2')0 Su the discussion 0111111dipedalia in the Cbristian texts, below, pp. 74-75.

m s" above, p. 68, note 287.

2" Accortling to the index in Stern, Greek and Latln Authors on Je'll/3 and Judaism,
Passover and Shavuot do not scem to bave becn me.ntioned at all, and Sukkot is rcferred
to only in the passage quoted above.
m For ful'lher analysis of passages by the Chun:h Fathers on Yom Kippur, see
pp. 262-289, below.
291 Fora discus.sion oftbis question, see pp. 277-2&3. below.
 Tlte R1"tuals of Yom Klppur 71

who mention the practice of fasting and mouming might be using exegeti~
ca1 deduction from the juxtaposition of "humbling" and "fasting., in
Psalms 34:13 or lsaiah 58:4-5 with Levitleus 16 and Jonah. Wb.ile for
many, ..the fast" is the name for the Day of Atonement iostead of the bibH~
cal Yom .Kippur, this notioo may be derived from the descriptioos of
Pbilo.299
Praying, the central rite, is mentiooed only by Tertullian and Ephrem.
Was prayer perbaps too private to be noticed in closed synagogues? The
earliest Christian description of Yom K.ippur outside the temple - that by
Tertullian, On Fasting 16, suggests the opposite location, open space:
A Jcwis.h fast (Iudaicum leiunium), at all events, is "lebrated evei)'Where; while,
negleeting the temples (templis), throughout all the shore, in every open plac:e, at
length they send prayer{s) up to beaven. And, albeit by the dress and omamenta-
tion they disgrace the duty of m.ouming, still they pn:tend loyalty to abstinence
and slgh for dMl anlhority ofthe liD.gerillg star [to sauction tbeir eating}.300
To my knowledge Samuel Krauss was the first to use this passage for re-
constructing the Jewish customs of Yom K.ippur.301 Krauss was followed
notably by Claude Aziza.302 Against both, Hillel Newman bas argued that
Tertullian describes the fast of a pagan group that fasts as ifthey were
Jews, as suggested by the adjective Iudaicum. 303 Newman•s mein argument
is that it is difficult to explain the term. templis in the plural in a Jewish
context.304 Yet Steven Fine's recent study shows that the "templi7.atioo" of

li'P Cf. note 1 on p. 16, above.

* Sligbtly cbanged translation of On Fasting 16:6 by S. Thelwall in Ante·Nicene
Fathers 4: 113; text in A. Gerlo (ed.), Qutnti Septim/ Florentit Tertulliani Opera. Pars ll
Opua Mtmtanistica (CCSL 2; Tumhout, 1956), p. 1275.
JOI SeeS, .Krapss, Synagogale AltertUmer (Berlin, Viellll&, 1922), p. 272.
Jlll C. Aziza, Tertullien et le jrldatsme (Publications de Ja Fac:ult6 des Lettrcs et des
Seiences Humaines de Nice 16; Nice, 1977).
:m See H. Newman, "Jerome and !he Jews" [in Hebrew with Englisb swnmary) (Ph.D.
dissertation, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1997), bere p. 167. Newman oompares
!he Iudaicu111 of this pwage with the Ninilllticum in the imm.ediately precediog P*fa-
graph, which clearly refers to pagans (sacriticial altar fire, idols). Yet it is by no m.eans
clear tbat the two paragraphs are about tbe same group illld ritual. In fa41t, in the first
paragraph, the people wear sackclodl aud ashes while in lhe second pamgraph they are
dresscd omately, which in Tertulliilll's eyes distmbs the mouming ambienc:e. Thi5 5igni-
ficaut point has been tumed 11psW. down by S. Thelwall's translation.
lM The expression l:JJ!l W'Ti'13 ls very rarely used for synagogues and teaehing halb, aud
then only quite late (only in bMeg 29a). On the tetm, see Krauss, Synagogale Alte~tf}mer,
pp. 17-18 and 28, note 6; and Stem, Greek and Latin ,(utltors on Jews and J11dai~m,
p. 43. Two early non-Jewish authors use "t:emples" to refer to "synagogues..: Tacitus,
Historia 5:5:4 (ig;t.,. nulla simulacnl urbihwt sais, nedum templis s[ist]wnt), see C.H.
Moore in L<-"'L Tacitus 2; Stern, uumber 281, vol. 2, pp. 17-63; Agatharchides of Cnidu.s
72 J'om Kippur in Etll'ly Jf1'Wi$h Tlu,ugflt and Ritual

the synagogue began to occur already in the Tannaitic period. 305 That
Tertullian refers to pagans who followed Jewish practices {including fast~
ing) elsewhere, and that the custom of fasting until the end of the day is
attested in pagan texts, too, makes a pagan provenance as possible as a
Jewish one, but not more likely. 306 In either case, I still consider it the
earliest detailed non-Jewish description ofYom Kippur outside the temple,
notwithstanding that the depietion might concem a Yom Kippur observed
by pagans - for even in this case, the oom.pa:rison with the Jewish fast re-
veals how Tertullian imagined a Jewisb Yom Kippur and what he knew
about it.
Tertullian chooses to characterize this "Jewish fast" by depicting the
people as engaged in prayer and abstinenc:e, dressing in solemn clothing
and congregated in open places until the setting of the sun and the appear-
anc:e of stars. All these non-biblical details and also the nota:ble length of
the prayers can be verified by other evidence.307 The omate dressing is par-
ticularly significant, since it matches the rabbinie descriptions of joy and
dancing only on Yom Kippur and not on any other Jewish fast. 308 Con-·
sidering that the Old Testament (Isaiah 58 and Jonah) and the New
(Matthew 6) describe the opposite custom. Tertullian probably observed
with bis own eyes not only the pagan fast but also the Jewish Yom Kippur.
While Tertullian, when engaged in directly anti-Jewish polemies, con-
trasts the fast with tbe Eucbarist and considers participation in the fast
bannful,309 in 0" Fasting hc only disregards the joyful aspeet without a
demonization ofthe Jewish fast (as e.g. Chrysostom wiJl do), and he even
prefers it to psychic - i.e. Catholic Christian - fasts.

apud Josephus, Contra Jtpionem I :209; au· ev wtt; Uipott; 81Ct~Cl.:Ot&; TAl; J.afpelc; dJxllG8rl•
p~~~ seeStem, numberlOa, vol.l, pp. 106-108.
:lOS S. Fine, This Holy Place. On tlle Sanctity of lhe Synagogve during the Greco-
Roman Period (Cbris.tian.ity aod Ju.daism mAntiqoity Series 11; Notre Dame (Ind.1
1997), pp. 41-SS (quoting e.g. mMeg 3:3 and tMeg 3;21-23), and cf. pp. .55-59 on the
limitatiOilS.
• Ad noliont3 1:13:4 (CCSL 1:32). M. Simon. "Le Judaisme berbere daJis l'Aiiique
ancienne," in: idem, Rßcherclrcs d'hi.stoire Jvdeo-ChritiVInt (Etudes Juives 6; .Paris,
1962; pp.l0--87), p. 61, takes tbis as prooffor his tbesis of Jewish intluence on local
Semitic peoples around Cartbage.
301 Open. places are menrioued for the prayer asscmblies on public fasts by rnTa'an 2: 1,
cf. Krauss, Synagogale AlttrtiiMer, p. 269. Cluys0$tom states that people daD<:ed in
marketplaces (A.gaiiiSt the Jews 1:2; 1:4). Does tbe beach ill.dic:ate tbe qibla to Jerusalem?
301 The elaboraw clothing mab;hes the joyful aspect of Yom Kippur mentioned in

mTa'an4:8.
l~ er. the passages in Jtgainst Mareion 3:7:7 and Against the Jfi'WS 14:9-10. discusaed
oo pp. 156-158, bClow.
 171e Rit11ols of Yom Kippur 73

Three of the details observed by Tertullian appear also in other nona

Jewish sources: prayer, a.ssembling outdoors and the joyful aspect. Re-
gfltding the Jewish preoccupation with prayer on Yom Kippur, I found
OIJly one other Cbristian author, Ephrem, in bis Homily on Fasting:
Thercfore, on tb.e day or its fut, thc blind people rushed in mogaw::e and .in error
tbC fast ill it$ !DOUth, [but] the idOl i11 its heart,
thc praycr 011 its lips, [but) sorcery in its mi.nd,
its stomach empty of bread., but fUU of lie[s],
its huds washed every day, but their onseen blood calling out against thcm.310
The last line could eitner be an exegetieal device to underscore the pollut-
jng effect of the murder of Christ, or it could reflect Jewish purification
rites- presumably before Yom Kippur as suggested by Didymu.s the Blind
(d. 398) in bis Commentary on Zechariah:
"The word ofthe almlgbty Ood came to me." says tbe prophet, "and ordered {mc)
to fast on the fourth and tbe tifth and the seventh and tbe teuth•-lll_ obviously [tbe
tenth day] of lhe month, since therc is :no te:nth (day) of the week, as we dom-
onstrated before. And tbe almighty God ordercd these {fasts] u an image for thc
seventh month according to the {compulation of tb.e] Hebre'Ws, on which the so-
called Day of Atonement and humiliatio.n (i~IMGjl()(i "cd TGliC\vdlac<»<; ..;pipa) is
perfonned, 'Which Jews observe publiely (i1111ouläic;), calling it fast, puricying pn~­
viously (11POill'Vi.I;Ofl6Y«JV) on thc fourtb aod the fifth and tbe seventh of the [days]
coming before tbe pubüc fast (tOiv i11:l <tl}v Ö'lllon:l.fl YllGU:io.v SPXOJISvmY.)m
Didymus emphasizes the public cbaracter of the fast. Thls terminology is
remjniscent of the Hebrew expression "11.::1'! n,D11" ("public fast")~ thougb
it is a publicly observed fast rather tban a fast of the public. What does
Didymus mcan by ••purification" and wh.at is the source ofhis description?
Is he referring to the ten "days of awc.. before Yom Kippur? The context
gi.ves no hint. Didymus is one of tbe few Christian authors with a neutral
attitude toward Yom Kippur, perhaps because be wishes to use it to inter-
ptet the enigmatic prophetic veue.
The joyful aspect appears also in Theodoret of Cyrus (ca. 393-466):
He [Ood} ordered fast.ing on the tenth oftbe month. lberefore, he c:alled this day
the Day of AIOncment. He said "Hwuble your souls from the eveui.ng ofthe llinth

310 Epbrem, Hymn 011 Fasting 1:12; my traoslation of the Syriac in E. Beck, Des

1/eiliglln EphraBm des Sytllrl Hymnen de leirmio (CSCO 246; Scriptores Syri 106;
LouvaiD, 1964), p. 4. It is norewortby that the Hymn on Fo$ting 2 begins with Iss 58:1-5;
Hymrr on Ft1$li.ng 10 speaks about Moses' fast as atouement for the sin ofthc golden ca1f
aad mocb the Jews wbo c.:omplained abour eating thc manna.
311 Zech 8:1!>.

m My trao.slation of Commentarii in Zachariam 3:32; for the Greek text and Freu.ch
translation see L. Doutreleau, Didyme I'Aveugle. Sw Zachorltt. l11t1'oductiorr, lale
aitiqlle, troduction et 1101e1 (3 vols; SC 83-85~ Paris, 1962), VQl. 84, pp. 628-(;30.
74 Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Thought and Ritllal

of the month"313 and "every soul, which will not be humbled on that day, that sout
will be destroyed from your people."314 Yet the Jews, who undisguisedly fight
against the law, do not Iook sad on Ibis day, but laugh and play and dance lllld
practice unehaste words and deeds ("yd.&ol Kai 1t11il;oum Kai xopsiJOuo\ xo.i ciKo~­
cn:otc; Ptj,J.acn Kll.i n:pciyllii.OIICtxPTJnat).m
Dancing matches Mishnah Ta 'anit 4:8316 and is mentioned also in John
Chrysostom. In bis notorious Sermons Against the Jews, which are directed
against Christians who participate in the Jewish Yom K.ippur celebrations,
he gives a vivid description of some contemporaneous Jewish practices:
e.g. he complains that "they dance with bare feet on the market place."317
While the state of barefootedness is usually explained as pagan nudipeda-
lia,318 it matches well the rabbinical prescription~ since abstaining from
wearing sandals appears as one ofthe six basic abstinences ofYom Kippur
in Mishnah Yoma 8:1.319 lt also appears in the sermons of Leo the Great
(440-461) on the Fast ofSeptember in Rome.
When, therefore, dearly beloved, we encourage you toward certain matters set out
even in the Old Testament, we are not subjec:ting you to lhe yoke of Jewish obser-
vance, nor are we suggesting to you the custom of a worldly (carnalis) people.
Christian self-denial surpasses their fasts, and, if there is anything in common
between us and them in cbronological circumstances (temparibus), the customs
(moribus) are different. Let them have their barefoot processions (nudipedalia),
and Iet their pointless fasts (ieiunia) show in the sadness oftheir faces (in tristitia
uultuum). We, however, show no change in the respectability of our clothes. We
do not refrain from any right and necessary work. Instead, we control our freedom

313 Lev 23:27.32.

314 Lev 23:29.
3" My Iranstation of Quaestiones in Octateuchum, in Leviticum 32 in: N. Femandez
Marcos and A. Saenz-Badillos (eds.), Theodoreti Cyrensis Quaestiones in Octoteuchum
(Textos y Estudios "Cardenal Cisneros" de Ia Biblia polliglota matritense 17; Madrid,
1979), p. 183:12-19. For further discussion, see below, pp. 280-281. As the diffenmt
choice of vocabulacy reveals, the statement is not literally dependent on the formulations
of lohn Chrysostom. Tbere may theoretically be an indirect dependence, but it is muc:h
more likely that John and Theodoret, who lived in such close proximity - geographic:ally
as chronologically - witnessed the same festivities on different occasions.
316 Quoted above, p. 36.
317 •••flljlVOic; tot~ nooiv in:i tflc; ciyopii~ c)pxotillt:VOI (Against the Jews 1:4; PG 48:8460).

See in the same section: yv11vo~ ßG,lit~s tote; nooiv ai tfl~ ciyopdc;.Kai Konmvtl tflc; aeJXTJIIO-
ativl)c; ainoi~ ICCli toii yil..mt~ (Against the Jews 1:4; PG 48:849C).
318 See the conunentary to this passage by R. Brlndle in idem and V. Jegher-Buc:her

(eds., transl.), Acht Reden gegen Juden (Bibliothek der griechischen Literatur 41;
Stuttgart, 1995).
319 Campare also Juvenal's parody ofthe barefoot Agrippa mentioned above, p. 69-70.
 Tlre Rituals ofYom Kippur 75

in eating by simple ftugality, limiting the quantity of our food, but not con-
deJillling what God has created. 320
Here, the commentators explain the nudipedalia against the background of
Manichean practices. 321 Regarding the fact lhat Chrysostom and Leo both
claim to describe Jewish Yom Kippur practices, and considering that this
roatches the rabbinie prescriptions, we have to consider the Statements of
these Church Fathers as eyewitness accounts. 322 In the chapter on liturgy
this deduction will be important in assessing the historical connection of
Leo and the Christian Fast ofthe Seventh Month to the Jewish fast. 323 Be-
sides walking barefoot, Leo mentions sadness, less respectable clothes,
total fast and idleness as characteristics of Yom Kippur. Sadness and
shabby clothing may be polemical topoi rooted in Matthew 6, Isaiah 58

:no My translation of Sermon 89:1 of the Latin in A. Chavasse (ed.), Sa~~cti Leonis
Magni Romani Pontiftcis Tractatus Septem et Nonaginto (Hom 39-95) (CCSL 138A;
Tumhout, 1973), p. SS1. Cf. the translation of A.J. Conway and J.P. Freeland, St. Leo the
Greot: Sermo~~& (The Fathers ofthe Church 93; Washington, D.C., 1996). The trans1ation
of Freeland and Conway ("if there is anything in common between us and them in cir-
cumstances, there are great differences in our character'') misses some aspects of the
comparison. Dolle's French translation goes in lhe same direction as mine. Mores is the
headline for the five customs that follow.
321 Conway and Freeland, St. Leo the Great: Sermo~~&, p. 368.
32Z Blaise's dictionary gives two meanings for nudipedolia, one pagan and one Jewish.
Jerome uses the term nudipedalia to describe an explicitly Jewish practice accusing Paul
"n11dipedalia exercueris de caerimoniis ludaeorum." - Letter 112: 10; I. Hilberg (ed.),
Sancti EIISebii Hieronymi Epistll/oe (CSEL 54; SS; 56:1-2; Vienna, 2 1996), here vol. SS,
p. 379:15-16. Cf. lhe same incident in Again.rt Joviniamu 1:15 (PL 23:234C); Com-
mentary on Galatians I; 2:8-9 (PL 26:339A, 37SD). This may possibly reflect Jerome's
acquaintance with lhe contemporary Jewish practice as weil, but does not necessarily
refer 1.0 Yom Kippur.
The textual basis for the Roman practice of barefoot processions rests on quite a
fragile foundation: three passages by Tertullian and Petronius, much earlier than Leo's
time, Leo being closer to Jerome: see Marbach, "Nudipedalia." Petronius refers to
women who walle barefoot to a hill (the Capitol?) to pray for rain (Satyricon 44).
Perronius, however, uses the past tense (antea ibant), which may mean "that the cere-
mony bad been abandoned in the speaker's own time," as suggested by M.H. Morgan,
"Greek and Roman Rain-Gods and Rain-Channs,'' Transactionsand Proceedings ofthe
A.merican Philological Association 32 (1901) 83-109, here p. 100; or "daß er [der
Brauch] nicht mehr so allgemein und so gewissenhaft wie früher durchgefiihrt wurde": E.
Samter, "Altrfimischer Regenzauber," Archiv filr Religionswissenschaft 21 (1922) 317-
339, here p. 321. Tertullian about ISO years later describes a similar rite, the nudipedalia
oflhe people, who intimes of drought pray to Jupiter for rain on the Capitolian hill (Apo-
logia 40). In a second passage he speaks of several communities (quastklm uero colo-
nias) who follow this practice (On Fasting 16). In general, walking barefoot is a sign of
mouming (Terence, Phormio 106-107; Suetonius, Divus Augustus 100:4; bPesah 4a).
323 See below, pp. 312-317.
76 Yom KJppur in .Early Jewish Thought <znd Ritual

and Jonah, but it may also describe Roman Jewish practice, since the ra~
binic data are not univocal on this issue.
How much did ancient Cbristian scholars know about the detaUs of the
prayer service? Jerome. Chrysostom and Hesycb.ius mention the sound of
Shofarot in close juxtaposition with Yom K.ippur descriptions associating
eschatological concepts to it.324 Yet it is di:fficult to decide whether these
Sbofar blasts refer to Rosh Hashanah or to Yom Kippur, and whetller the
Christian authors heard the Shofarot or only read about tbem in the festival
calendar of Levitleus 23. Were Christian authors familiar with the Jewish
readings? Some readings of the Roman Fast of the Seventh Mouth are con-
spicuously close to the readings of Yom K.ippur, Hosea 14, Micah 7,
Exodus 32 and Leviticus 23.325 Furthermore. Isaiah 58, one of the Haftamt
for Yom K.ippur; appears very often in Christian texts on Yom Kippur or in
close juxtaposition to passages on the fast. 316 Yet it is impossible to
discem if this juxtaposition is the result of a Christian polemical pun on
the cita:tion of Isaiah 58 in tbe Jewish prayer in some communities, or if
some Jewish communities introduced Isaiah 58 as a reading in on:ler to
counter Christian attacks. Most likely is a third possibility, that lsaiah 58
entered the Jewish liturgy aQd the Cb.ristian polemies independently merely
because its content was weil suited to both.
Two results of the analysis swprised me. First, with the exception of
Theodorct of Cyrus' portrayal of Yom Kippur, the most detailed
descriptions of the Jewish Yom Kippur- Tertullian, Ephrem, Didymus,
Chrysostom and Leo - do not appear in exegeses of Leviticus 16. The
reason for this discrepancy between extensive exegesis and detailed ritual
description is probably the different orientation of the exegetical genres,
with concepts having a certain primacy over ritual. For example, Protestant
exegesis explains the Protestant understanding of the biblical text and
probably justifies Protestant liturgy and ritual. In the times of Protestant-
Catholic polemics, Protestants devalued Catholic liturgy by attacking
Catholic concepts and the interpretation of their canonical prooftexts. Tbe
Protestants did not need to describe, analyze and counter the details of
Catholic ritual itself, since they bad already ex:tractcd ..its roots!' On the
othet band, descriptions of Catholic ritual appear as circumstantial
evidence in letters, diaries. newspapers, etc. Accordingly, the

324 Jerome, Letter 52:10 (CSEL 54:432-433); Cbrysostom, A.gainat the Jews I:S.8;
Hesychius, Commentary on Leviticw 23 (PG 93:1091BC).
l:U See the section on rhe Roman Cbristian fast in September, below, pp. 317-321.
326 E.a. Justin, Dialogue with Trypho 40:4; Origen, Homily on Leviticus 10:2:4 (SC
287:136); Ephrer.n, Hymn on Ftuting 2;l; Basil, Homily on Fa.'Jiing 1-2; Leo, Se171101'1
92:2.
 Tht! Rimals of Yom f(jppar 77

preponderance of noo~exegetical texts over the ritual descriptions and the

relative disinterest of Christian exegesis in contemporary Jewisb ritual are
"normal." l:z?
Second, I was surprised by the fact that Origen does not refer explicitly
to the specific Yom Kippur pra.ctices of bis Jewisb contemporaries, tbough
be clearly Hved in a town with a dense Jewish popu1ation, fought Chris-
tians participating in Yom K.ippur fasts expressis 11erbis, and was ac.-
quainted with some exegetical traditions. Given bis provenance and tbe
specific situation of tbe battle a.gai.nst Christian Judaizers, it is bighly
unlikely that Origen did not know at least the main visible features of tbe
popular Yom Kippur rituals. We can therefore use tbe case of Origen to
deduce that an argumentum e silentio cannot be applied to other authors
with regard to Yom Kippur: if Cbristian authors do not explicitly specifY
Jewish ritual practices, this does not mean that they were not aware of at
least tbeir basic elements.
In sum, aJmost all Christian authors were acquainted with tbe fac.t tbe
Jews ta.sted on Yom Kippur; some were also familiar with the joyful as-
pects of the rites such as dancing or beautiful clothes, and outdoors gath-
erings; few mention prayer or purification rites. Some may have known of
the use of Sbofarot in the prayer service or the reading of Isaiah 58 or
Jonah, but it is impossible to prove. I did not find any Christian witness for
the Jewish custnm of wesring specifically white clothes or performing the
ktlpparot sacrifice, wbicb is quite suitable as an object of polemics. lt is
difficult to point to any conclusions conceming time and place. Neither is
it possible to ascribe certain Jewish customs to specific communities.
Ephrem, Cbrysostom a.nd Theodoret do not seem to be informed more pre-
cisely, nor do they relate ra.dically different facts tban Leo or Tertullian.
Texts from Alexandria. Jerusalem and Caesarea are less informative than
Leo from Rome and Tertullian from North Africa, and less than I expected
them tobe. Certainly, some oftbe great exegetes ofLeviticus such as Cyril
and Hesycbius lived in towns with considerable Jewish minorities, just as
Origen did.32s Clearly based on eyewitness accounts are the descriptions of
Epbrem, Chrysostom, Theodoret and Leo, 8lld most probably also
Te.rtullian; they g:ive detailed extra-biblical infonnation that tallies with
rabbinie regu[ations. .

:m kl a test case, it would be intcresting to c;ompare Yom Kippur to, for example,
Pussover. How much did Cbrlstiens lmow about !hc Jewisb post-temple Passover prac-
tiees, md in wbat contexts and geores do thes~: desc:riptions appear? I am not aware of
sudl a study, but the limiied ftamc: ofthe prescnt one prec:ludes my undenalcing it at this
point
:m These authors are discussed below, pp. 262-265.
 Chapter 3

lmaginaires ofYom Kippur

The different Jewish groups attached various rationales to the ritual of

Yom Kippur and variously used its imagezy to explain theological ideas.
Tiris section investigates these imaginaires according to the major sources.
I sball begin (section 1) with 1he apocalyptic texts of different provenance
(including Qumran) that use similar imagery based on Yom Kippur to
describe the primordial and the eschatological figbt against evil, and the
vision of God. This discussion is crucial for understanding the emergence
of early high-p.riestly Cbristology and of Valenti.nhtn and Clement of
Alexandria's mysticism.
I shall tben (section 2) deaJ with Greek diaspora texts. The Septuagint
demonstrates the enculturafion of Jewish conceptions in a pagan wortd.
Phllo shows how allegorlzation can serve the needs of the temple-less
diaspora. Tbe portion on 4Maccabees 17 uses Yom K.ippur imagery in
post-temple ]ewish martyrology, a phenomenon parallel to Cbristian
Jewish thought. The same phenomenon may be the background to a pas·
sage in Josephus.
The brief passage on Cbristian Jewish texts (section 3) was inserted
mainly to remind the reader that many of the texts to be investigated in
parts 2 and 3 in fact belong here. in the analysis of the Jewish material.
The next two sections deal with aspects of two corpora of post-temple
Judaism oflate antiquity: the rabbinie texts (section 4) and Hekhalot Iitera-
ture (section 5), with an emphasis on the irrst corpus. The Hekhalot texts
resume the use of the imagery of the high p.riest's entrance to the holy of
holies for the description of the mystical ascent. resembling Philo and the
apocalyptic sources. All o{ these corpora are essential for unde:rstanding
the development of this imagery in early Cbristian mysticism, especially
the Valentinian sources. 1 will retum to aspects of pi;yyutim and the rab-
binie texts in the section on Christian-Jewish polemics. 1
I tried to investigate each group in its own right. Yet this chapter has to
be understood within the Iimitation of the frame of this work as a. tool for
addressing the primary issue - the impact of Yom Kippur on early Christi-

1 See below, pp. 277-283-

 l•aginairtll of Yom Kippur 79

anity. i.e. the compara.tive aspects determine the foeus and scope. Despite
these Iimitations, I hope to have added some new observations and inter-
pretations. espec.ially regarding the apocalyptic material and 4Maccabees.

1. The Apocalyptic lmaginaire of Yom Kippur

Tbe mythopoetic potential of Yom Kippur finds one of its deepest expres-
sions in two major elements in the ancient Jewish apocalypses:
1. Some descriptions of heavenly ascents employ the high-priestly entry
into the presence of God in tbe holy of holies (Testament of LBv(} or
allude to it (Isaiah 6; Zechariah 3; JEnoch 14, Apocalypse of Abra-
ho.m).z
2. In some cosmological myths of Urzeit and Endzeit about the genesis
and termination of sin. the •Az'azel goat serves as imagery for the
leadets of the evit powers (Apocalypse of Abraham; JEnoch 10).
So:metimes the 'Az'a:zel goat ritual is used to describe the eschato-
logical end of sin (JEnoch 10). Often thc protagonist of the good
forces is portrayed as a (high) priest (I Enoch, Zechariah 3. ll QMel-
chizedek, Apocalypse ofAbraham).3
I wiJJ start with a briefanal ysis of tbe fust and continue with the second. A
final section deals with the etiological aspects of another tradition con-
tained in Jubtlees. Jubilees is not apocalyptic, but it has many traditions in
common with 1Enoch. and it deals with Yom K.ippur in a mythological
time and from a priestly perspective.
1.1 High-Priestly Visions ofGod I: Apocalyptic Te;;;ts
The high-priestly entrance to the holy of holies served as imagery for
apocalyptic texts to describe heavenly ascents to God. Similu pictures ap-
pear also in Philo, Valentinian Gnosticism, early Christian mysticism and
Hekhalot texts. The heavenly ascents adopt the language of Leviticus 16.
Schotars have frequently investigated these texts and their interconnec-
tions. This section treats only the apocalyptic texts; the othcr texts will be
dealt with separately. I focus on the connection of the sources to Yom
K.ippur and mainly ask two questions: With l'egard to the bistory of tradi-
tion, which text.s reinforce what kinds of elements of the Yom Kippur

2 The two main e-Iements may be eonnected, as for example in the A.pocalypse of

Abraham. 1n tlte Book of the Watchers (IEnoch 1-36) and in the Testame11t of Levi the
two moments appear in different chapters of the book.
3 A previons version of these thoughts has been published as Stökl, "Yom Kippur in
lhe Apocalyptic: lmaginaire and the Roots of Jesus' High Prie~ood."
80 Yom KippW' ln Ear/y Jewlsh ThoMght ßlfd Rihlal

imagery? And, what mystic ritual lies behind tbis conception of the
visionary as high priest entering the holy of bolies?
The prophetic vision.s of Isaiah 6 and Ezekiel 1 and l 0 use terms and
motifs alluding to the temple and the holy of holies without aUuding to
motifs specificaJly connected to Yom Kippm.4 Although Ezekiel envisages
God's throne placed on the cherubs (i.e. above tbe kopporet on the ark in
the holy of holies) surrounded by figures clothed in (priestly) white linen,
he does not directly refer to the kopporet. s
Zechariah 3 describes a vision of the high priest Joshua standing before
the heavenly tribunal.6
:t:l Then he showe4 me tbc high priest Josbua (nn:~•IIIJOOOI;;) staoding before tbc
angel of tbc LoRD, and Satan (lOW;r/o lll<illo'-os) standiog at hi.s rigbt band to aceusc
him. 2 And thc LORD said tu Satan, "May the LoRD rebuke you, 0 S•tao! May tbc
LORD wbo has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you (1=1 '1lu.•/t~tt't'lJ'JjauL tv aoi)! Is not this
a brand plucked from the fiie?"
3 Now Jasbua was dresse4 io filtby clothes (D'RlS D'1lJiil'ri"La j)vgpti) u he
stood before tbe angel. 4 And [tbe mgel] answered and said to those who were
standing before him, "Take ofTbis filthy clothcs." And to him he said, "See, l have
taken your guilt (1ll1t ,...,!7D'n1::W:'Ifciop'iJ'1Jm 'l.lit; civop.itU; Gou) away from you. C!othe
you with fescal apparel (n~'mwxo&tlPn)!" s And I said, "Let lhem put a clean

4 lsa 6 mentions God dnssed in robes sitting an a throoe in the palace ('):)•:1) (6:1),

surrounded by wi.oged seratim (6:2), who glorify him with the threefold 1anctus (6:3).
lsaiah does not state cleady whetber tbc building sUinds in heaven or on eerth and,
tberefon, wbetber Isaiah ascends to heaven or enters tbe earthly 'I:J':T. Tbe lal1er is more
probable. The throne and tbe palace evolce a king's council (cf. 1Kg.s 22:19; lob 1:6; 2:1;
Zeeb 1:8; 3:1; 6:1-3), but the liturgy with the cultic-military appellation l11K:J! :Tl:'!', the
alw, the smoke, the exceptional puritication an4 tbe atonement of lsaiah's sios belong to
a cultic temple context: see H. Wildberger, Jesaj'a. I. Teilhand Jesaja /-12 (Biblischer
Kommentar XII; Neulcir<:hen·VIuyu, 1972), pp. 243-253; J. Bleokiusopp, lsaiah 1-39
(Ancbor Bible 19; New York, 2000), pp. 222-226. The nnoke and tbe allllr in the house I
temple (ml) are remlniscent of an incense sacrifice. Isaiah ls purified and bis sius (lnv,
nR!II'I) are atoned (,!IT.)ll) (6:S-7). No mention is made of a separation of tbe sa.netuaJy
ioto severa.l parts, 1 veil, a holy of holies, or a b1ood ritual.
s Ezelc I de•cribes Ezekiel seeing 7nvm in the open heaveu, out of which emerges a
cbariot wilh wheels and four fiery winged animals, and above them a fiery hwnan tigure
seated on a throne. Ezek 9-10 descn'bes the exit ofGod's glory from the throne above the
eherubs in the temple (10:1). This vision was very influential, tnst it does not include
~ltic elements relevant to lhe Yom Kipp11r ritual. See the commCJrtaries on tbis verse:
W. Zimmcrli, E:;echiel. 1. Teilband: Ez:echiell-24 (Bibli.$cher Kommentar XIIJ/1; Neu-
ldrche.n-VIuyu, 1969); M. Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-10. A New Translation wilh lntrod.cti(IIJ
and Commgntary (Anchor Bible 22; Garelen City, N.Y., 1983). The &aDle i$ tn1e for the
vision of final judgment in Dan 7:9-10. See 1.1. Collins, Daniel (Hermeneia; Minnea-
polis, 1993), pp. 299-303.
6 The scene has also some elements in common wilh lsa 6: see R. Hanhart. SacharjtJ

(Biblischer Kommentar. Altes Testament 14:7; Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1990ff), pp. 205-206.

 lmaginoires of Yom Kippur 81

turban on bis bead.,. So they put a clean tuJ:ban on bis head, and clothed him; and
the IlDgel ofthe LORD was staD.diog by.
6 Then the qel of the LORD assured Joshua, saying 1 "'''bus l!ays the LORD of
hosts: lfyou will walk in my ways aad keep my requirements, then you shall rule
my house. and have cllarge ofmy c;ourts, and I will give you ac;c;ess to tbose who
are standing here. a Now Iisten, Ioshua, higb priest, you and your colleagues who
sit before you! F or they aR people of evidente [an Omen of thiogs to come): I am
goiog to bring my servant "Braoch." 9 For on tbe stone tbat I have set before
Jo$bua, on a single stone witb seven facets, I will engrave its inscription, says tbe
LoRD of hosts, aad I will remove the guilt ofthat land in a single day ( llS' M '11V1Zil
1nK Zll':l IC':l:'l f"llt:"l/qrl!Aa.'llliiiQ) lllillllV uJY Win:ia.v 'tfl<,: Y~ tJteiVI)(; Sv iJIIiPIJ !1\4). I& On
!hat day, says the LORD of hosts, you shall invite eaeh other to come under }'Our
vine and fig tree."'7
Robert Hauhart has discemed some elem.ents connecting the scene of
Zechariah to Yom Kippm. 8 The protagonistisahigh priest. He stands at a
special place where only he, God, a defendiog angel and the accusing
Satan are present. The right of access to this place is dependent on obser-
vance of certain regulations and a moral code. This evokes the holy of
holies. The centrat act is a symbolic change of vestments. The soiled high
priest's vestments sym.bolize bis sins. Exchanging these soiled elotbes for
clean ones signifies atonement. 9 The "single day" of purification of the
land evokes Yom Kippur and gives it an eschatological ring. The cultic
scene alluded to could be the picture of a high priest who changes bis lioen
vestments, which have become stained from spriakling the blood on Yom
Kippm.to
Regayding the number of corresponding elements, a connection to Yom
Kippur is probable. Later reade:rs of Zechariah (at least those behlnd the
A.pocalypse of Abraham araund 100 CE) undoubtedly viewed Zechariah 3
as being connected to Yom Kippur, as will be shown in the ensuing sub-
section on 'Az'azel in apocalypticism.lfLeviti<:us 16 is one ofthe texts in
the background of Zechariah 3, the prophet is the earliest evidence for a

7 Zecb 3; my tnmslation based on the NRSV.

1 Hanhart" Saclrarja, pp. 166-240, especially pp. 184-189. See also H. Blocher,
"Zacbarie 3. Josu6 et Je Gnmd Jour des Expiations," Etudu Tlrlologl~ts et Religieuu
54 (1979) 264-270. Most c:ommentators empbasize tbe differences in tbe two situations
and discard any relationsbip. Haubart underscorea; ihe amount of reinterpretation of the
priestly ritual.
9 Tbe rare Greelc term for the vestment, «ol!ipJK, will be discussed below, in 1he
section on BOJ'nabOI and tbe proto-typology, p. 160.
10 Hanhart, in coatrast, under$tauds the change of ves1111ents in Lev 16 as sign.ifying
two aspeets ofthe ritual, purification ofthe sanctu;uy (Lev 16:20) and atonement for the
sins of priest and people (Lev 16;24), witbout drawing Gn tbe rabbinie tradition of the
rihlal and the cbanges ofvestments: see Hanhart, SachOJ'jtJ, p. 186.
82 Yom Kipp111' in Early )I!Wilh Thowght anti Ritual

conception of Yom IGppur as a day of judgment, of historical and es-

chatological atonement.
Apocalyptic sources from. the Second Temple period develop these cul-
tic e1ements in the prophetic texts into an ascent vision of approachins
God in the holy of holies of the heavenly temple. lEnoch 14:8-25, :from
around 300 BCE, is the earliest extant description of an ascent to Ood
seated on hls throne in the heavenly holy of holies.11 Enoch js described as
subsequently entering three areas of increasing sanctity. matehing the
structure of Jerusalem's temple with its a'111C, 'n:IT and i'::il. 12 God sits in
white gannents on a throne sUITounded by angels praising him and by a
fiery sea with fiery rivers flowing out :from below bis throne. 13 Upon en-
coimtering this scene, Enoch is frightened; he prostrates himself, and God
asks him to draw near to the area tbat even the angels cannot enter - just as
regular priests cannot ente.r the holy of hoHes, only the high priest may do
so. 14 Here, Enoch is supposed to deliver his intercession on behalf of the
Watchets. 15 Many details attest to a major priestly component in the apoca-
lyptic thought of JEnot:h 14.16 The white garment is best understood as
referring to the linen vestments wom daily by the priests17 - and wom, too,

11 Chapter 14 is part ofthe so-called Book ofWatchers, which is dated to at least tbe
tbird century BCE: see tbe extensive eommentary by G.W.E. Niekelsburg, 1 Enoch 1. A
Comme:ntory on the Book. of I Enoch, Chapters 1-36; 81-108 (Hermeneia; Mi:wteapolis,
2001), pp. 7, 229-275; M.E. Stone, "The Boo"- of Enoch and ludaism in the Third
Ceni:W:y B.C.E.," Catholic Bibllcal Quart~r/y 40 (1978) 479-492; M. Black (ed.), The
Book. of Enoch or I Enoch. A New English Edition with Commentary and Textwal Noles
(Studia in veteris testamenti pseudepigrapha 7; Leiden, 198S), here pp. 149-IS2. The
inftuence ofthe biblical vision scenes (or, in the case of Daniel, tbeir sources) i' .strildDg:
see M. Himmelflu-b, Asce:nt to HraveJT in Jewi:sh ond Christion Apocolypses (0l(ford,
1993), pp. 10, 13, 16, referring to Ezekiel for the throne witb the cherubs, wbich did not
stand in the Second Temple, its useless wheels, aud the visionary's prost.ration; au.d to
Isa6 and lKgs 22:19-22 for the angels snrrounding God and tbe vision&l}''s fear.
Dan 7:9-10 is very close, but since the Boolo: of lhe Watchers is earlier tban Daniel, it is
not clear ifthe latter was influenced by the fonner or ifboth rely on a common Vorlage.
12 lEnoch 14:9.10.14.
13 JEnach 14:14-23.
14 JEnach 14:24 and 14:21.
1' /Enoch 1S:2-16:4.
16 Himmelfarb, Äscent to Heaven in Jewish and Christion Apocalypses, pp. 27, 28. It
is this priestly group that c:ooceals a criticism of the Jerusalem priestly establlshment
bebind the fulmi.uatioos apillst the Watchers. ·
11 Cf. Himmelfarb, .A.scent to Heaven ln Jewi&h anti Christion Apocalyp3u, pp. 18-20.
 Jmagi11alres of Yom Kippur 83

by the high priest. on Yom Kippur. Enoch's intercessory prayer on behalf

ofthe Watchers matches the high priest's actions on Yom Kippur. 18
The Testament ofLevi 19 describes a vi.sionary ascent of Levi to the holy
of holies in the sanctuazy in the highest heaven.10 The language vividly
paints the litu.rgical scene. 21
J:-' In the uppamost heawnZZ of all dwells tbe Great Glory in tbe holy of holies (tv
ily~ ä yimv), superior to all holiness. 5 There with him23 ue the angels of the
Lord's face, who serve (l.la~oupyoiiw~) aad atone (t~\l.o.o~eojlevo\) before the Lord
for all the sins of ignorauce ofthe righteous (~) aud offer (gpoG!ptpOVOl) to the Lord
a pleasing ftagrance, a rational aad bloodless oblatioo.:u
After crossing a series of heavens, Levi enters the .higbest heaven, which is
explicitly called holy of holies. God's Gloty is suuounded by archangels
whose main liturgical funetion is to atone on behalf of the righteous. In
other words, the main cultic function of the heavenly holy of hoHes is
atonement. Some of the central cultic elements mentioned in IEnoch are
missing. such as the fear and the prostration. Himmelfarb ascribes this ab·
sence to a Cluistian redactor. 25 Yet the preservation of such texts as
JE110ch and the Testament of Levi by Christian scribes, and their transla-
tion into various languages, demonstrates the interest of Christian readers

" Himmelfarb, AsctUJt to HellYen ;" Jewish (ll'ld Christian ApocalypaQ, p. 2S. Inter-
cession may be, amoog other things, prophetic, but a priestly intercession matehes best
the Olher priesUy eleme.ots aad lhe sactal geograpby ofthe ~:hapter.
1' Even if one considers the Testament of the Patriarchs a Cbrislian work that draws
on Jewish sourccs, we can, with care, use tbe Testament of Levi for reconstructing Jewisb
thought of tbe Second Temple period, since we bave fragments of one of its sources or
traditions, lhe Aramaie LBPi from Qumran. a fragm.e.ot from the Cairo Genizah as weil as
a .fi:agmeut of a Greek cr.mslatioo in a maauscript from Mount Athos.
111 In fact, there are two asceots (Teata",ent of Levi 2:5-S:7; 8: 1-18), but lbe fll'St
contains all the motifs relevant to our issue. The secend vision, in chaptet: 8, includes a
detailed investiture of sorts in seven (!) priestly garmenls, conferring qualllies and
powers on Levi, such as priesthood. prophecy, judgment, righteousness, understanding,
truth aad faith. Obviously, this investiture deviates widely from the biblical prescriptions
for priestly vesrments. On the ascenta in TeaJament af Levi, sec Himmelfarb, Aacent ta
He~Zt~en in Jewish and Clu'utum Apocalypses, pp. 30-37.
21 E.g. the use of eiGtpx<JI.Ult for crossing into another heaven (2:6-7); o-Vverrut;;

leLt011pyo.; (2: 10).

21 lt is not completely clear if the numbet: of lteavena i:s three or seven, Appareatly,
two eonceptions have been mixed.
13 M. de Jonge aud H.W. Hollander, The Testaments ofthe Twelve Patriarclu (SIUdia
iu Veteris Testameoti Pseudepigrapha 8; Leiden, 198S), eonsider the Sentences that
follow to be descriptiom of heavens four to six, and consequently translate here "in tbe
(heaven) next to it" (p. 1315).
N Testame171 ofLevi 3:4-6; my traaslation.
l5 See Himmelfarb, A.1cent to HeiZtJen mJew~h and Christian Apocalypse:s, p. 33.
84 Yom Kippw in EaP'/)' Jewi.Jh Tho11ght and Ritual

io this cosmological and theosophical material.26 And, as ~e sball see in

the section on the Valentinians and Clement of Alexandria, early Christian
mysticism used the same imagery io its descriptions ofa vision of0od.Z7
Allusions to Yom Kippur are fewer tban in Philo or in Valentiman
Christianity. The sacred geography of Yom Kippur (i.e. the entry to the
holy of holies) attracts most attention in the visionary descriptions. The
dimension of time (the entry is annual) is eliminated by empbasizing the
etemity ofthe angelic cult and the pennanence ofthe ascending person's
participation in it. Explicit allusioos to the spedfic ritual of Yom Kippur
(incense, sprinkling, atonement, intercession) are quite rare. The first to
make an ex.plicit connection between a vision of God and Yom Kippur's
high-priestly entrance is Philo. 21 Hebrews and Valentinians depict the vi-
sion of God in tenns closcr to the apocalYPtic texts; probably all are
drawing on the same esoteric tradition of priestly origin.
To imagine the high-priestly entry is to imagine an encounter with t.be
divine, and an encounter with the divine may be weil mhrored in the high.
priestly entry to the holy of holies. Scholars are divided about the basis of
these depi<:tions. Are they solely the fruit of literary imagination, or do
they reflect induced visions?~
In this context, the evidence provided by the Songs oj the Sabbath
Sacrifice becomes important.30 Despite the fact that the Songs ofthe Sab-
bath Sacrifice were found at Qumran, they "M:re probably in use in a
community outside Qumran, since the texts do not contain any "sectually

u 2EtJOCit describes Encx:h's metamorphosis into an angel on the asc:ent to the highest
beaven in terms of a priestly investiture. The arehangeI Michael briags Blloch to the tend:l
heaven, where Enoch slmds before the indescn"bable face of the Lord, who is seaWd on
his throu.e surrounded by sillging chcxubs and seraphs. Enoch p.roslrates himself and is
bidden oy God to stand up. God orders Michael to anoint Enoeh and c:hange bis clothes,
and Eooch is ordained by Michael, a membcr of the order of angelic priests (eh. 22). See
Himm.elfarb, A..Jcent to HeiZlien in Jewislt tu1d Chri$titul Apocalypsu, pp. 37-44, espe-
cially 4()-41. The cbange or clothes bas D.O atooing connotation. The stru.eture of ten
heavens clearly prosumes a hierarehical sac:red geography. The orctiaation talces p • in
the holiest space. See Himmelfarb, •bcent to Heaven in Jnflsh and Clvistian Apoca·
l)'pses, p. 42. Cherubs and tbrone are remiDiscent of dle holy of holies of tbe First
Temple. The prostration may point to the priestly cult
rr See below, pp. 223-237.
28 See below, pp. 110-112.
29 Tbe fll'St view is expt"e$Sed by Himmell'arb, Ascent to Heoven in Jewialt and
ChP'i:rtian Apocalypsea; tbe second by, among otber.s, M. Stone, "Apocalyplic- Vision or
Hallu~ination?" Milla wa-Milla 14 (1974) 47-56. Many illtermediate positioos are dis-
cussed in Hirrunelfarb's flfth chapter.
30 4Q400-407 and 11 Q17 edited in C. Newsom (ed.), Songs ofthe Sabbatlt Sacrifice.

Ä Critical Edition (Harvard Semitic Studies27; Atlanta [Ga.]. 19&5}.

 Imaginaires ofYom Kippur 85

explicit" features. 31 The Sitz im Leben of these fragments on the angelic

cult of the heavenly temple is communal prayers.12 They describe a
heavenly liturgy that takes place in the seven heavens which contains
several bolles of hoHes (1•:n), some of tbem with a throne and a veil,
where angeJs (a-'1K) offer pure and perfect heavenly sacrifices. These
scenes are built on the same imagery as the apocalyptic ascent visions.
Esther Chazon has worked out the various levels of correspondence be-
tween the heavenly and the earthly liturgy, up to human participation in the
heavenly prayer, Le. ritualized mysticism in communal prayer. 33 This
ritualization will be important when we come to the Valentiuian ritual of
the bridal chamber. As we shall see in part 2, the Yom Kippur temple ritual
does not become a fixed part of the depiction but continues to serve as a
;~liVing" source of inspiration in the Cbristian Jewish texts. The Christian
Jewish textsnot only use motifs derived from the apocalyptic tradition of
the vision but also add elements from their imaginaire of Yom Kippur.
Yom Kippur, then, remained a powerful influence.
/.1 The Mythologization of 'Az'azel
1.2.1 Allusions to the Myth of 'Az' u.el in 1Enoch l 0
Yom Kippur•s scapegoat rite influenced JEnoch 10 - at least from the
second century BCE onward, JEnoch 10 was understood against the
background ofYom Kippur.:u JEnoch 6-11 is the part ofthe Book ofthe

)I The tenn :is Carol NewsQlll's in '"Seetually exp!icit' Iiterature from Qumr.m," in:

The llebrew Bible afld Jts Interpreters (1990) 167-187.

n C.R.A. Morray-Jones, "The Temple Witbin. The Embodiment ofthe Divine Image
aud lt$ Worship in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other·Early Jewisb. and Christian Sourees,"
S<Jciety cfBiblical Literalwe Stzmin(JJ" Papers 31:1 ( 199&) 400-4.31.
13 E. Cbazon, "Human a.nd Angelic Prayer in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls" (paper
delivered at the Fifth Orion International Symposium, 19-23 January 2000, The Hebrew
University, Jerusalem).
1' A nwnber of scholars have previously dealt with thls question. See the notes in A.
Geiger, "Zu den Apokryphen," Jüdische Zemchrift für Wissenschaft und Leben 3 ( 1864)
196-204, bere pp. 200-201; R.H. Charles (ed.), The Apocryplra ähd Pseu.depigropha of
the Old TeJtament in Engll:rh (2 vols; Oxford, 1913); idem, The Bnok of Enoch or 1
Enoch. Trarulatedfrom the Editor's Ethiopic Te:xt (Jerusalilltl, 1973=1912); D. Dimant,
'"l'he Fallen Angels iD the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Related Apocryphes and Pseud-
epigrapha" (in Hebrew] (Ph.D. dissertation, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1974);
D. Dimant, "1 Enoch 6-11: A Methodological Perspective," Socldy of Biblical
.Lireralll!'e Seminar Papers {1978) 323-339; Hanson, "Rebellion in Heaven"; R. Rubin-
kiewitz, Die Eschatologie von Henoch 9-11 u11d dQ!l Neue Testament ( ÖSterreichische
Biblische Studir:n 6; Vienna, 1984). L.L. Grabbe, "Tbe Scapegoat Tradition: A Study in
Eariy lewish Interpretation," Journal for the Sludy of JuckJism 18 (1987) 152-167, I
found very helpful; R. Helm, "Auzel in Early Jewish Tradition." Andrew: Unh>ersity
86 Yom Kippur in Early J~~tvilh Tho11ght and Rihlal

Watchers (!Enoch 1-36) that teils the myth of the fallen angels who de·
ceive humanity and introduce sin into the world. 35 These chapters (6-11)
are usually regarded as being composed of two different layers named after
the two Ieaders of the evil angels, 'Asa'el and Shemihaza. 36 The eenttal
passage pertaining to our question appears in lEnoch 10, in the 'Asa'el
layer:
4 And further lhe Lord said to Raphael, "Bind [' Asa'el}n by bis bands and bis feet,
and tbrow him into the dadcness. And split open the desert which is in Dudael, end
throw him tbe~. 1 And throw on him jagged and slwp stones and cover him with
darkness; and let him stay there for ever, au.d cover his face, that he may not sec
light. 6 aod that on the great day ofjudgment he may be hurled into the fire.1 And

Seminary Siudies 3:Z (1994} 217-226, however, added nothing significantly new. Most of
my thoughts on IEnoch lO, the Apocalyp1e of Abraham aud llQ.Meiclrizedek can be
faund in Stökl, "'Iom Kippurin the Apocalyptic Imaginaire and the Roots of Jesus' High
Priesthood."
iS On !Enoclr 6-ll, see now Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch 1, pp. 165-228.
36 George Nkkelsburg and Paul Hanson proposed two contradictory tbeorjes for tJae
relationship between these layers and their backgroWids: see G.W.B. Niclrelsburg,
"Apocalyptic and Myth in I Enoc~ 6-11," Jo"rnal ofBiblical Literatlire 96 (1977) 383-
40S; Nickelsburg, I Enoch J, pp. 165-228, esp. pp. 191-193 au.d21S-228; Hanson, "Re·
hellion in Heaven." Hanson argued that lhe Shemihaza Iayer follows an anc:ient Semitic:
pattem (1( a "rebellioo in heaven"myth tbat in turn inflnenced the 'Asa'el stratum,. wbicb
was fonnulated according to Lev 16. Nickelsburg claimed that Prometheus influenced the
Shemihau layer, originally buih on Gen 6:1~. This is not the context in which to try to
resolve fhi~ thomy question. On the bighly intere$ting melhodologic:al issues involved,
see J.I. Collins, "Melhodologicallssucs in tbe Study ofl Enoch: Refl~ions on the Arti-
cles of P.D. Hansou and G.W. Nickelsburg," Society of Biblical Literatlire Semimu
Paperll (1978) 315-322, especially pp. 319-320, and the responses ofNkkelsburg and
Hansan in tbe same volume. See also J. VanlkrKam, Enoch and the Growth of an
Apocalyptic T1aditfon (Catholic Bihlical Quarterly, Monograph Series 16; Washin&ton,
D.C., 1984), pp. 122-130; aod E.J.C. Tigehelaar, Prophets of Old and the Day of tlre
End: Zechariah. ths Book ofWatcherl tmd Apocalyptic (Oudtestamentiscbe Studien 3S;
Leiden, 1996), pp. 165-182. I do not !hink that the either/or approacb is necessarily oor-
~t here. In other words, an influence by the Prometheus myth on the Shemihaza layer
does not necessarily rule out an influence by Lev 16 on lhe fmal stage. Nickelsburg •
futed Hanson's argwnents, partly because Hanson built bis thesis solely on tbe cor-
respondences between I Enoch and Targum Pse11do-Jo1U11han and did not use other
sources !Tom the Second Temple (Philo!) or the rabbinie period,
n M. Knibb translates the Ethiopic versioo~~. whieh reads 'Azaz'el: see M. Knibb, The
Ethiopic Book ofEnoclr. A New Edition in the Light ofthe Aramaie Dead Sea Fragments.
Vol. 1: Text and Apparatlls. Yol. 1: lntrod'llction, Translation and Commentary {in ccm-
sultatioll witlr Eilward UllendorfJJ (2 vols; Oxford, 1978). Tbis is "an accommodation to
the bibJical traditioa": see L.T. Stuckcnbruck, Tlle Book of Gtants from Qi.lmran. Te:t:ts,
T,.anslation, and Commentary (Texte und Studien twn antiken Judentum 63; Tllbingen,
1997), p. 79. The Greek version reads M«lil.. or i\~Gl~fJl... 4QEnoclt- (4Q201) iii 9 :reads
;Koll; 4QEnoclf(4Q204) li 26 rcad5 ['1]KV1J.
 Jmagi11airu ofYnm Klppur 87

restore the earth which the mgels have ruiaed, and iiDßounce the mroration of the
earth. for I sball restore tbe earth, so that not all tbe sons of men sball he destroyed
tbrOugb the mystery of everything which the Watchers made latown'• and taugilt
to tbeir sons. & And cbe whole earfl:l has been ruined by tbe te84;bing of tbe works
of [' Asa'el], and write upon him an siu."
And the Lord said to Gabriel: "Proceed ag-,;inst the baslards and the reprobates
and aaainst tbe sons of the fomicators, and destroy the $Ons of the fornicators and
the soos of the Watcbers from amongst mea. Aud send thenJ. out, and send them
agalost one another, aod let them destroy thomselves in hattle, for they will not
bave lengtb of days. 10 And they will all petition you, but their fathers will gaia
nothing in mpecl of tbem, for they bope for etemal life, and that eacb of lhem
willlive life for five bundred years. • st
Acolll'lection between lEnoch 10 and Yom Kippur has long been noted.40
The closeness of 'Asa'el to 'Az•azel is strilcing41 and was certainly per-
ceived in the second century BCE by the authors of 4Ql80, 4Q181 and
4QEnoch Giants•, who teil the myth of the fallen angels and call the Ieader
oftbefallen angels 'Azaz 'el (_;mr11), i.e. the demoni:zed form of his name.42
At least in these texts the two demons •Asa'el and •Az'azel were equated.
Yet a nwnber offurther points of resemblance make an earlier influence of
the scapegoat ritual on the formulation of 1Enoch probable. The punish-
ment of the demon resembles the treatment of the goat in aspects of
geography, action, time and purpose.43 First, the name ofthe place ofjudg·

· M On tbis obvious emendation of the commentfll)l, sce Black, The '!Jook of Enoch or
I E'lloclr.
" This is Knibb's tnnstation ofthe Etbiopic text of JEnoch 1();4-10. See Knibb, The
Ethiopic Book of&roch, whicb I sllgbtly a<lju.sted to the Greek. Only 4a and Sb are extant
in .Aramaic.
411 See note 34 on p. 85, above.
41 While the extra K does not play a role, the variant o I VI w l is important. Precisely
lhis diffenmce between 7wll/ ?KOJ and 'mm• I ?KtfJ is one of'Nickelsbmg's main argu-
mcnts against an influcnce of Lev 16: see Nickelsburg, "Apocalyptic aad Myth in
1 Fnoch 6-11," pp. 401-404, especially note 83 on p. 404.
-«l 4Ql80 1 7-8; 4QEnoch Giant3" (4Q203) 7 i 6. Jewish tradition often interpreted the
Ma8oretic •Az'azel (?tKTY) as 'Ar.az'el (.'7Kt11'): see DimaDt "1 Enoch 6-11," p. 336, note
37. For lhe discussion of 4Ql80, 4QI8l and 4QEnodr Gianf;f' see also J.T. Milik, The
BooJcs of Er~och. Aramaie Fragmenu of Qumr6n Cave 4 [with thll collabwatio11 of
Manhew Black.j (Oxford, 1976), pp. 248-252 and )12-314; Dimint, "The Fallen Angels
ill the Dcad Sea Scrolls and the R.clated Apoccyphes and Pseudepigrapha,~ pp. IS3-l58,
175--176; Grabbe., ''The Scapegoat Tradition," pp. 155-lS6; Rubinkicwicz, Die Escha-
tologie von Henoch 9-ll, pp. 97--101; and now especially Stuckenbruck, TM Book of
Gümts from Qumrarr, pp. 79-82. For tbe pros and cons of viewing Azazel as a demo11,
see B. Jauowskl, "Azazel," in K. van der Toont, B. Becking and P.W. van der Horst
(eds.}, Dictionary of Deili~ and Demo17S ln the Bible (Leiden, 199.5; col. 240-248).
: •J DiJDaat recognized the woight oftbis argument, not mentiol\ed by Hanson: "ln my
jodgment such an identific:ation (of'A=!a'el and 'Az'aul) is already assumed in tbe adap--
88 Yom Kippru in Early Jewi!lh ThDuglrt and Ritval

ment (Dudael - nl'r:l 11•:::1) is conspicuously similar in both traditions aod

can likely be traced to a common origin.44 Bothin the deseription ofthe
prison of the dernon in JEnoch andin traditiollll about the precipice oftbe
scapegoat ritual an element of ruggedness appears.45 This ruggedness
could reflect an early Midrash on the meaning of1u (cut, split up) in ru~
;t1Tl (Leviticus 16;22) andlor historical memoty of the actual cliffs in the
mountains of Jerusalem.46 Second, the sins are literally put on the scape-
goat and written on the demon.47 Both are mistreated (though in different
ways),48 brought to the desert, and hurled down. 49 Third, the reference to
'"the great day" (ofjudgment) can be oonnected to Yom Kippur, sinee tbis
is one ofits names in later tradition.~ Fina:Uy, the restoration ofthe earth
by removing the sin (10:7-8) and the destruction ofthe evil forces in a war
incited by Gabriel (10:9-10) allude to the cathartic rationale behind Yom
Kippur.

tion of the material in ehap 10, where the punishments are commanded." See Dimant,
"1 Enoch 6-ll." p. 327.
44 For tbe interpretation of the si,milar ru~me~ of the strange location Äallov!jA I Aou8a~J.

in 1Enoch and the rabbinie ,".", f m1;T ,,,,nI I 11n;, I rmn n•::~, seo alleady Geiger, "Zu
den Apokryphen," pp. 206-201. Soe also Milik's different explanations ln Disc011eries of
thll Judaean Deser't 2 (1901), pp. 111-112; Milik, Tlre Boola of Enf)Ch, pp. 29-30; and
Hanson, "Rebellion in Heaven," pp. 195-233; C. Moleobetg, "A Study ofthe Rotes of
Sbemihaza and 'Asa'elln 1 E.noch 6-11," JQI/rnal f1j' Jewish Studies 35 (1984) 136-146,
bere p. 143, note 34; Blaclc, The BDDk oiEnoch or I Enoch, p. 134; Grabbe, "The Sc:ape-
goat Tradition," p. 155, note 6. Hanson's main argument seems tobe a pun on 113D as tbc
Aramaie traoslatlon of rr'1v1 in Lev .16:22-23 be!ow the mystcrious saying "open. tlle
desert" in /Enoch 10:4. But Grabbe's Jong note 6 in, ..The Sc:apegoat Tradition,"
pp. lS4-15S, is a quite definite response.
45 Targum Pseufio.-JOMthan Lov 16 (•v;ry1 'I'Pn 1nK,Yill); and Philo, De plamatlone 61
(tic; Ii& tißo.tt Kai llil'lllu xai päpdpa i~t~tllt"tlllV).
"' Campare ÜlkJ.'la with IC'TI "'lliC in Targ~~m Psudo-Jorrathan Lev 16:22. Aoother
theory raised is a COOllection between m'rn ll'l c:oming ftom the root 11n (sharp, pointed}.
Dimant, "1 Enoch 6-11," p. 327.
47 This is the limal mcaning of the Greek of JEnoc1110:8 ~~:oi in' t~in:fi! ypayov tic;

fiJ&a~tiac; !tUcrac;. Cf. Lev 16:21 "puttlng them (the sins) upon tbe head ofthe goat" ( tnl1
1'liV1:1 1'1.0 ?» nn11t) and tbe rabbinie description of the people's exclamations when die
scapegoat is Iead out of the town "Take and go! Take and go!" (KJ'I ?tD KJl '110}:
mYoma 6:4.
... We have oo evide.nce for a binding of the scapegoat. nor for its being covered
dem.on is; neither is the demoll treated as the scapegoat is on bis leavin8 Jerusalem.
as-
0 IEnoch 10:4-8 strongly emphasizes this point by mentio.ning four timesthat the
dernon is b.urled down.
,., Cf. e.a,. bRH 2la. The Etbiopic rcacb as the equivalent for ..great day." 4QEnoch"
(4Q202) iv 11 reads 10"'1 ltlll'. The extaot Oreek has no equivalent for Kl"l, but the cltation
of JEnach 10:6 i.o Jude 6 reads llf;!'call'; llJI(pac;.
 lmtzginairu ofYom Kippur 89

The Shemihau Iayer juxtaposes an eschatological destruction of the

evil forces and the Iiberation of their p:risoners achieved by the archangel
Michael with the •Asa•eJ tradition.'1 Following the termination of sin, Mi~
cbael introduces paradise-like conditions.52 The choice of wotds for the
different types of sin in 10:20 slrongly resembles Leviticus 16:21.'3 The
references to fligbt and Sabbath rest in 1Enoch 10: 17 can be seen as remi-
niscent ofthe Jubilee. And the purpose behind the narrative is an eschato-
logica.l day ofpurification ofthe whole earth from sin. Again, Yom Kippur
may have bad some influence, especially considering tbat the later tradi-
ti~n depicts Micbael as a heavenly high priest. Finally, 1Enoch 13:1 ("be-
fo:re these tbingsj shows that Enoch's ascent vision of the entrance to
God's throne in chapter 14 took place before the events of lEnoch 10, i.e.
the stiUCture of lEnoch 1~14 matches the ritual of Yom Kippur with its
high-priestly entrance before tbe scapegoat rite.
These argnments corroborate the claim of an intluence of Leviticus 16
and the Y om IGppur temple rite on 1Enoch 10, or at least on its formula-
tion aod reception from the second centw:y BCE onward, if not on the
original version of the narrative. The primordial and eschatologica.l history
of sin become part of Yom Kippur•s imaginaire in Jewish apocalyptic
groups. and the myth also reveals one of the rationales behind the ritual.
The annual Yom K.ippur was perceived, at least by some, as a ritual antici-
pation of the eschatological puritication of God's creation from sin. The
goat originally sent to 'Az'az.el was seen as the personification oFAz'azel,
the demonie source of sin. This explains why the people mistreated the
scapegoat oo its way out ofthe city.54 Hanson follows 1he wrong track by
arguing for a sec:tarian origin of this tradition in a group opposing the
temple because, b.e claims, "the normalmeans provided by the Temple cult
for dealing with defilements is implicitly judged ineffectual...ss The myth

51 IEnoch 10:11-17.
~2 IEnoch 10:18-11:2.
" This has been independently ooted by :Rubinkiewitz, DjiJ &clratologie von Henoch
9-11 und da.$ Neue Te.ttgmerrt, pp. 88-39, and even by the ..Opponent" ofa Yom Kippnr
i.ntluence,. Nickelsburg himself~ see Nickelsburg, • Apocalyptic and Myth in 1 Enoch 6-
11," p. 403. Lev 16:21 reads l) Jlll!l; 2) 1111n; 3)fl". lbis is traD5IIsted bythe LXX with I)
®u:ia; 2) GJlllp'ria; 3) livo11ia:. IEnoch reads slightly differe11tly: 1) ilöuda; 2) u)laptia:; 3)
~ia. However, the LXX can ttaDslate lllJ not only as livoJLiG but also as aoqkia
(Ezek. 33;9; Ps 32 [31}:5). The importanc:e i.s the tlu-eefold distinction aod the order of
words. Cf. Exod 34:7; Num 14:18: 1) li'IQflia. 2) 46\~tia; 3} 11JtGVtia.
54 BarnabQS 7:8 and mYoma 6:4.
$5 Hanson, ":Rebellion in Heavea," p.l26.
90 Yom Kippru in Early Jewish Thought an4 Ritual

is not arguing against the temple~ it is illustrating the yearly cult as a pre-
enactmc:nt of the final eschatological decision. 56
The impact of this myth of the punisbment of the fallen angels on sub-
sequent generations is difficult to overestimate.57 It affected Jubilees as
weil as the Testame"t of the Twelve Patrial'chs, Jude, l I QMelchizedek and
the Apocalypse ofAbraham.51 The following pages investigate the two lat-
ter texts, both of which intensify the references to Yom Kippur.
1.2.2 11QMelchizedek: Getting Explicit
This section focuses on the role of Yom K.ippur in the famous
llQMelchizedek scroll.!9 Tbe scroll prophesies that at the end ofthe tenth
Jubilee, ·Melchizedek, the heavenly Ieader of the forces of light, will lib-
erate the prlsoners of Belial, the Ieader of the evil forces. Melchizedek will
then expiate the sins of the people of bis lot and take .revenge on the adhe-
rents of Belial. The extant fragments of the story resemble the punishment

S6 For lhB following cbapters (12-16), Himm.elfa~b uses a similar aJgument stating that
they "'involve a critique of lhe JC(USalem priestly establishmc.nt that takes seriously thc
priestbood's claims for i1Self and tbe importance of priestly duties and categories. This
attitude is at once critical of the reality it sees in the temple and deeply devoted to ehe
ideal Df the temple understood in a quite concrete way." See Himmclfarb, Ascent to
Heaven in Jewish anti Christi an Apoca/ypses, p. 27.
n The history of this myth has been investigated by Dimant, "The Fallen Angels in
the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Related Apoayphes and Pscudepigrapha."
51 For the Apocolypse ofAbraham, see among others, Rubjnkiewitz, Die Eschatologie

von HellOCh 9-11 rmd das N~e Testamenl, pp. 52-55. On the relation to JIQMelchl-
zadek, see Grabbe., "Tbe Scapegoat Tradition," pp. 160-161; J.'f. Milik, "Milki-sedeq et
Milki-re..~a· dans tes anciens ecnts ju!fs et c:bretiens," Jqvrnat for the Study ()I Judaüm in
the Pers;on, Hellenistic and Roman Period23 {1972) 95-144.
59 See the final edition ill F. Garcia-Man.IDez, E.J.C. Tigchelaar and A.S. van der
Woude (eds.), "llQMelcbizedek,." in: idem (eds.), Qumran Cave 1 J. Vol. II: 1JQ2-18,
JJQ20-11 (Discoveries in the llldaean Desert 23; O:xford, 1998; pp. 221-241), witb bib-
liograpby on p. 22l. Mon: rec:ent bibliosraphy 4ritii be fo.md in F. Garcla-Martilll:z, "Lu
tradiciones ilobre Melquisedec en los manuscritos de Qumrin,,. Biblica 81 (2000) 70-30;
and A. Aschim, "The Genre of 11QMelchizede.k,., in: F.H. Cryer and T.L. Thompson
(eds.). Qumran between the. Old and Ne.w Testfllllena (Sownal for thc Study of tbe Old
Testa.m.c.nt, Supplement Series 290; Sheffield, 1998; pp. 17-31). For the older works. see
also E. Puec:h, "Notcs sur le ma.nuscrit d.e XIQMetklsc!deq," R~ue de Qumran 12 (1987)
483-513. MO&t sc:holars date the fragmen1S ofthe scroll to SO BCE :1: 2S years. The story
may be older {ifthe rceonsm..ction in ii 18 is correet, the book ofDaniel is terminuspost
quem), but the extant text is possibly the autograph.lts train ofthought, if$ teuninology
and its genre as a pesher make a sectarian origin prac:tically certain. See tbe recent rein-
·vestigation by Aschim, "Tbe Genre of 11 QMclcbizedek." The texts of tbe Hebrew Bible
used by l!QMelchi:edek include Lev 25:9-13; Deut 15:2; lsa S2:7; 61 :1-3; Ps 7:8-9;
32:1-2; and probably Dan 9:2s-26. The relationship to Hebrews is discussed below.
 liNlginaires of Yom K.ipp11r 91

of Shemihaza by Michael.60 but in 11 QMelchizedek tb.e connection to Yom

Kippur beoomes even more explicit:
p11 (':ll?ll 'nll (')Wl!C(l 11~)'1:1 .",.,, 'C 1!!l:l? '1"11n':1 7::1[1'}01 {"!l]D ö1[1C1);"1 D'"11{!!::1<1 D1)'1
And the D[ay of Atone)me.nt1 i[.s] the e(nd ot] tbe tenlh [iulbilee in wbich atonement
will be made for all the SOllS of [light and for) tbe men [of] the Iot ofMel{chi]zedek.
(11 QMelch!:edek ii 7-8).
It is evident fro.m the extant text that the author of 11 QMelchizedek con-
sidered to be Melchizedek a high priest, since he is described as an indivi-
dual performing a collective atonement on Yom Kippur.r.2 This might have
been stated expticitly in a line of tbe text no Ionger extant. Melchizedck is
the incumbent ofthe high priesthood in Targumic sourees,63 and bis role is
very close to that of Michael. the heavenly high priest in Second Temple
and rabbinie sources.64 Furthennore. it is quite probable that 4QVisions of
Amram6 2:3 identifies tbe two as heavenly opponents ofBelial. 65
Witb regard to the imaginaire of Yom Kippur in the Book of the
Watchers, the most important development isthat llQMelchiutfek has
embeJlished the dctails of the proximity of the eschatological purification
to the high-priestly ritual on Yom Kippu.r. Melchizedek explicitly atones,
and the day of judgment is explicitly called Yom Kippur. Does 11QMel-
chizetlek also reinforce tbe elements depicting the evil Opponent in term.s

60 Grabbe, "The Scapegoat Tradition," p. 166.

61 Tbis universally recognized reconsttuction is based on the context of the Jubilee,
which according to Lev 25:9-10 begins on Yom Kippur, and by lhe mention of1!1J?. See
Garcfa-Martinez, Tigchelaar and van der Woude, "11 QMelcbizedek," p. 231.
a This was fust asseJted by Emile Puech, "Notes sur le manuscrit de XIQMel-
kis6deq." p. 512: "En llQMelkis~deq, ee personnage est clairement consid6r6 comme le
graad pr6tre de Ia Iiturgie celeste au Yom Kippiir puisque executant les jugemcnts divins,
il fait l'Expiation defmitive ... signifWlt le pardon divin des transgressions pass6es pour
ceux de son lot, ..• Dans le contexte de l'epöque, la fo~on saeerdotale d'expiation ttait
le propre du grand pratre au jollf de Kippur. n
e M. McNalllaJ8, ,.Melcbi.zedek: Gen 14,17-20 in the Targums, in Rabbinie and Early
Christian Litel'llture," Bibllca 81 (2000) 1-31, here pp. 22-26.
61 011 the xelatioos between Miebae1 and Melchizedck, see e.g. J. Davila, "Melcbi-

.zedek, Michael, and Wa~ in Heaven," in: Soctety ofBiblical Lituature. 1996 Seminar Pa-
perJ (35; Atlanta [Ga.], 1996; pp. 2S9-272); P.J. Kobelski, Melchizedek and Mefchirda
(Citbolic Biblical Qu~erly, Monograph Series 10; Washington. 1981). On Mic::.hael, see
the clasiic by W. Lueken, Michael. Eine Darstellung und Jlerglelcharng der jiidisclten
.und der morgmltJndisch-chriatlichen Traditloo vom Erzengel Michael (Göttingen, 1898).
Carol Newsom has suggested that Melcbi'Udek be recollStructed as the name of a hea-
venly aogel in the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice (4Q401 ll 3; 22 3): Newsom, So• of
the Sabbath Sacrijlce, pp. 134 and 143-144.
65 The ingenious reconstruction was suggested by Milik and is ac:cepted by most

sc.b.olars, see Kobelslti, Melchizedek and Melchirda, pp. 24-36.

92 Yom Kipprtr in Early Jewish Tlroughl ond Rlwal

of tbe scapegoat? Belial js devoured by frre and not tbrown into a pit in dJ,e
desert. 66 llQMelchizedek is closer to the Shemihaza layer of lEnoch (in-
fluenocd by Yom K.ippur in a general fashion) than to the Asael layer
(influenced by the scapegoat ritual). However, the extant text is far too
short and too fragmentary to resolve this question. 67
1.2.3 The Apocalypse ofAbraham; Zechariah 3 Meets the Demonology of
'Az•azet
The narrative of the Apocalypse ofAbraham includes a heavenly journey
by Abraham, set in the scene ofthe sacri:fice ofGenesis 15.68 A bini lands
on the halved animals and tries talking to Abraham:
13'' And it cune to pass when I saw the bird speaking I said thill to tbe angel:
"Wbat is this, my lord?" Ancl he said, "This is disgrace,e this is Azazel!" 1 Aad he
said to him, "Shame on you, Azazel!'JI) For Abnmam's portion11 is in .heaven, aud

~ 11QM~chiudek iii 7; on the bumillg, I hoch 10:13-14.

6i E.g. Belial may have been hurled down in the desert later in the text, in a line that
clid not survive the troubles oft~.
61 The tex:t i.s extant only in a Slavonic tnnslatiCIJl, its original l.anguage was Semitic,
either Hebrew or .Aramaic. I u.sed the tntnslation and commentary by A. Kulik, "Apoea-
lypse of Abraham. Towards the Lost Original,'' (Ph.D. dissertation, The Hebrew Univer-
sity of Jerusalem, 2000); and the two translarions by R. Rubinkiewicz: "The Apocalypso
of Abraham," in: l.H. Charleswonh (ed.), The Old Tutommt Paeudeplgrapho. I (New
York., 1983; pp. 681-705), and L'Apocalypatl. d'Abraltom en viera ;sl(lVe. lntrod~tctlcm.
texte crilique, traducti011 et commentaire (Zr6dla i monografie 129; Lublin, 1987); and
compared them to the translatiCIJls by B. Philonenko-Sayar and P. Man: (eds.), "VApo-
calypse d' Abraham. lntroduction, toX1e slave, trad\1Ction et notes," Semitica 31 (J 981) 7--
117; and 8. Pbilonenko-Sayar md M. Philonenko, Die Apocalypse Abrahams (Jadische
Schriften aus hellenistischer und römischer Zeit 5:5; Gnterslob, 1982).
Tbe Apoca/iFe of Abraham has been dated to uound IOO CE :1!: 20 years, whicb
makes it contemponmeous with the later writings of the New Testament. See Rubin-
kiewicz. "The Apocalypse of Abraham," p. 683. His evidence in L 'Apccalyple d'Abra-
ham en viera: slave for aa even more exact dating (between 79 and 81 CE) is not
convlncing.
~ Rubinkiewicz's Greek reconstruction is O.ocße:i.a. In bis French translation Rubin-
lciewicz reads iniqviti. He postu1ates :11Tlr.l or N"l a.s tbe original Hebrew reading {L 'Apo-
calypse d'Abroham en vinu: 1/ave, 143-147). Philoneoko-Sayar's French 1J:aDSiation
reads impititi and her German veBion reads Gottloligk4Jt. Kulik, "Apoc;alypse of
Abraham," pp. 89-!10, translates "iniquity" and suggests a.s additional pOS$ibilities "dis-
grace," ( tin)ltt~/ll':lp I :tll..,:J), "impiety" (äos~da) /"wickedness" (ß71) I "transgress{ion]"
(ll'111!l) /"iniquity" (llllf).
'IQ Rubinkiewicz suggests 'P ,lfl' u the original reading. the saure reading as Zech 3:2.
Kulilc:, "Apocalypse of Abraham," p. 90, d.oes not disc:uss this possibility. He translates
"reproach is on you" and lllgge&ts oveüi~ as the Greek and "'," as the Hebrew readins.
He proposes that bebind tbe two terms "iniquity" and "reproa.ch" in 13:6-7 stood n1111:1
 Imaginaires ofYom Xippur 93

your.l is on euth, ' for you have sclected here, (and) become enamorcd of thc
dweilins place of your blem.ish. Therefore rhe Etemal .Ruler, the Migbty One, has
given you a dwelling on eartb. 9 Through you the all-evil spirit (is) a liar, and
tbrough you (are} wrath and trials on the generations ofmen who live impiously.
10 For the Etemal, Migbty One did not [send}n the bodies ofthe righteous tobe in
your hand. so tbrough thom tbe righteous life is affirmed and the destruction of
ungodliness. 11 Hear, counselor, be shamed by me! Vou have no pennission to
tempt all the righteous. 11 Depart from thi5 man! 13 You cannot deceive mm. be-
eause be is the enemy of you an.d of those who foUow you ~d wbo Iove what you
w:isb. 14 For behold, the garment which in heaven was formerly yours bu been set
uide for bim. and the corruptionn whicb was on him bas gone over to you."
14:l And the an.gel $aid to me. "Abraham!" And 1 said, ..Hete I am, your servanl."
lAnd he said, "Know from this that the Etemal One whom you have loved has
chosen you. 1 Be bold and do througb your authority wbatever I order you against
him wbo reviles justice. " wm J not be able to J'evile hlm who ha$ scattered about
the C811h tbe secrets of heaven and who has tak:en anmsel against the Migbty Ooe?
s Say to him, "May you be tbe firebrmd ofthe fumace ofthe eartbl Go, Azazcl.
into the u.otrodden parts of the eartb. 74 6 For your beritage is over those who are
with you, with the stars and with the men. bom by the clouds, whose portion you
are, i.Ddeed they exist lhrough your bei.ng. 1 Enmity is for you a pious act. 'There-
fore through your own destruetion bo gone from me!" a And I said the words as the
aogel had taugilt me. t And he said, "Abraham." And I said, "Here I arn, your
servant!" 10 And the angel said to me, "Answer bim not!" ll And be spoke to me a
second time. 12. And the angel said. "Now, whatever he says to you, answer him
not, lesthiswill run up to you. u For the Etemal, Mighty One gave him the grav-
ity md the will. Answer him not.,. 14 And I did what the angel had comm.anded me.
And wbatever he &aid to mc about the desc:ent, I aoswered bim not.75
Tbe name of the chief of the demons, Azazel, reveals the influence of the
demonology of IEnoch and Leviticus 16. Beyond that, several formula-
tioos allude to the imaginaire ofYom K.ippur. Mare Philonenko and Belkis
Pbilonenko-Sayar translate the Slavonie equivalent for "portion'' in 13:7 as
"Iot,,. wbich may reflect the dualisti.c anthropology of two lots, one evil

11!>1n1 (lsa 30:5) or li!I1M1l'ln (Ps 15:3; Neh 1:3) as the original Semiticreaditig. Prov 18:3
reads li'liiJ.~ II:~Ji 6v•dio<; I :1!111l 11':1~.
71 On this word and its allusion to Yom Kippur, see the following paragraph.
n lbis is Kulik's translation. On thi$ word and its allusion to Lev 16, see the follow~
ing pamgraph.
73 Tbc Greek reeonstruction is ,eOt:la; in his French ttanslation Rubinkiewicz uses

pechi, wbile Philonenko-Sayar and Philonenko choose poul'l'~re and Y«nHßUI'g. The
Hebrew equivalent snggested by Rubinkiewicz (nrc) is defmitely misspelled and prob-
ably should be read as nn111, see Ps 102 (103):4; Jonah 2:7.
74 On this word aDd its allusion to LXX Lev 16 and Pbilo on Vom Klppur, see the
following paragraph.
.. » ApocoiYJMe uf Abroht!m 13-14 according to Rubinkiewicz. "Tbe Apocalyplie of
:. ·Abraham."
94 Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Thoaght and Ritual

and oue good. 7fi Alexander Kulik translates "send" in 13:10 and connects
the Sla-vonic word to ä.n:ootßUoo/n;!r1. 77 Tbis may allude to thesendingout
of the scapegoat. Also the formulation "Go, .Azazel, into tbe untrodden
parts ofthe earth" (14:5) i.s remiuiscent ofthe Septuagint version's trans--
lation ofLeviticus 16:22 to El'ö yfiv Uflu,;ov78 and the expression chosen by
Philo in his description of Yolll Kippur sie; ö:rptflfi mi t'iß«tov &ptJI.ttuv EIC-
~&~txetv i!p' tautcp ICO!lir;;ovta tÜ'ö irmlp t&v KÄ11111'EÄ11CJUV't01V cipci.!f.19
Ryszard Rubinkiewicz has shown that Zechariah 3 was also a source of
inspiration for the Apocalypse oj Abraham.80 The basic scene in the two
texts is very similar. A single human being stands before two angels, a
good defender and a satanic accuser. The good angel rebukes the bad
one.81 And, most i.mportantly, the central act is the same: the cbange of
gannents symbolizing the change from an i.m.pure to a pure state. This
shows that even though the author of Zechariah might not have bad Yom
Kippurin mimt, h.is readers perceived his text as alluding to Leviticus 16.
Compared to Zechariah 3, the Apocalypse oj Abraham embellishes tlie
Yom Kippur imagery. The high priest does not put bis unclean clothes
aside, as in Zechariah 3 or in Leviticus 16. but bis corruption is put on
Azazel, as on the scapegoat in the temple ritual. llQMelchizedek, too,
makes the connection ofthe escbatological myth to Yom Kippur moreex.
plicit. Both texts show that even in groups tbat could not (any langer)
celebrate Yom Kipp ur in the temple the scapegoat ritual served as a sow-ce
of inspiration to describe the cosmological struggle against evil.
Concluding Thoughts on 'Az'azel in the Apocalyptic Literature
The mythopoetic power of Yom Kippur in apocalypticism is impressive.
Wehaveseen that the myth ofthe origin and the escbatological end ofsin
and Satan in lETlOch 10 was formulated with the ritual ofthe scapegoat in
mind. Tbis myth was bighly influential in Second Temple Judaism and
Christian Judaism. llQMelchizedek picked up this myth and depicted the
Ieader ofthe good in high-priestly terms, and the day ofjudgment as Yom
Kippur. Tbe Apocalypse ojAbraham employs the demonology of'Az'azel,

76 Phllonenko-Sayar and Philonenko translate Iot (Frencb) and Las (Genmm). In his

Frencll translatio.._ Rubinkiewicz translates "ear Ia gloire d' Abraham est dans le ciel et ta
gloire est sur Ia tem." He posmlates ,1:1:1 as tbe original reading.
17 Kulik, "Apocalypso of Abraham." p. 90. Rubinkiewic:t translates "allow."
11 Kulik, "Ap~ypse of Abraham." p. 90.
79 De spllcialibvs legilnls 1:188.
fll Rubinkiewitz, Die &chato/ogie von Henoch 9-/1 und das Neue Testament,
pp. 101-l and 110-113.
81 Rubillkiewia goes so far as to asswne behind the extant Slawllic 1:2 ,lU' the same
Hebrewwording as in Zech 3.
 lmaginalres ofYom KfpJNr 95

coxnbining elements from the scapegoat ritual in Leviticus with the scene
of Zecbariah 3. I sball argue below that it is through this association of
\'om K.ippur with Zechariah 3, with its high priest Joshua/Jesus. that
christian Jewish thinkers before Hebrews justified the high priesthood of
the non-Levite Jesus. 82
1.3 Etiologies
Several etiologies for Vom Kippur ex.isted side by side in Second Temple
JudaisJD. The biblical account has Levitleus 16 as part of the revelation of
Mount Sinai after the sin ofthe golden ca1f(Exodus32-33), the covenant
ienewal (Exodus 34), the construction of the tabemacle (Exodus 35-40).
ihe consecration of Aaron {Leviticus 8-9), and the death of the two sons of
Aaron. Nadav and Avihu (Leviticus 10), and before the census (Num-
bers 1). Leviticus 16:1 explicitly links the preparations for Vom K:ippur to
the death of Aaron's sons. JEnach and 11QMelchizedek perceive Yom
Kippur as an eschatological day of liberation of the good prisoners ftom
the vanquished powers of evil.83
Jubilees mentions two etio1ogies of Yom K.ippur. According to cbap-
ter S: 17-18, Noah' s tepentance before the flood was the pr:ecedent for or-
dering an annual day of repentance to achieve God's mercy:
5:17 And for tbe children of Israelit has beel:! written and ordained, "lfthey retwn
to bim in rightcousness, he will forgive all of their sins and be will pardon all of
their transgressions." 11a lt is writteo and it is ordained, "He will have mcr~ on all
wbo retum ftom all tbeir error, once each year."14
This passage is the earliest evidence for an association of Yom Kippur
with repentance.
The other passage explains Yom Kippur as punishment for Jacob's sons,
wbo caused their father to suffer and Bilhah and Dinah even to die, out of
sorrow for Joseph: 8s
Andin the seventh ycar oftbis week be seot Joseph fi'om his bouse to the land
:l4:1D
of Sbecbem in order that he might know about the welfäre of his brothers, and he
found tbem in tbe land of Dotbao. 11 And lhey acted fi'audulently and made a plot
against bim to kill bim, but they ropented aod sold him to a band oflsbmaelites.
ADd they took him down to Egypt and sold him to Potiphar, a eunuch of Pharaoh,
the chief guard, the priest .ofthe city of Heliopolis.

12 See pp. 194-197, below.

~- .., See pp. 85-·92, above .
. . _. ·Jubilull 5:17-18, translation by O.S. Wintermute, "Jubilees," in: J. Charles.worth
(ed.), 'l'lw Old Testament Pseudepigrapho .2 (New Yo:rk, 1985; pp. 35-142). Ou this
.• ~$sage, see Kraus, Der Tod Jen als Heilighlmsweihe, pp. 71-72, note 1.
·· ,,,. "· The death ofthe women is not funher induded in the etiol.ogy in Jubil~e~~ or in mo-
.dem ~es. See .Jubilees 34:18 itself.
96 Yom Kippu.r in Early Jewuh Tho11ght and Ritwal

34:1:2 And tbe sons of Jacob slaughtered a ldd 1.11d dipped Joseph's garment into
the blood 1.11d sent (it) to Jaoob, their fatber, 0.11. the tenth of the seveath moniiJ..
13 And he lameuted all of that nigbt, because they bad brougbt it to him in f11e
evening.
l.f:Jlb And he became fe'lerl$h in JamentiDg his death, and said that, "A cruel
beast has eaten Joseph.'' And all of the men of his house lamented with hi.m on
that day. And it happened as they were mourning and lamenting with 1lina all that
day 1c that bis sons and bis dangbters rose up to comfort bim but he was oot com-
forted concil'IUing bis son.
15 And on that day Bilhah heard that Joseph bad perished. and she died wbüe
mouming for bim. And she was dwclling in Qaftatef. And Dillah, his d8ugbter,
also died after Joseph perished. And these three lamentatio.ns c:ame 11pon Israel in
a single monrb. t4 And they buried Bilhah opposite the tomb of Raehel. and rhey
also buried Dinah, his ~er. there. 11 And it happened, as they lamenled for
Joseph one year, tbat he was not consoled, b~e he said, "I will go down to the
grave lamenring for my son."
11 Tberefore it is decreed for the children of Israel tbat they moum on tbe Wath
(day) oftbe seventh montb- on the day when tbat which c:auscd him to weep for
Joseph came to Jac:ob. bis father- so that they might atonc for them(selves) with a
young leid on the tentb (day) ofthe seventh month, once a year, on aecounc oftheir
sin because lhey caused the affection of tlleir &.ther to grieve for 1o.seph, llis so.n.
And this day is decreed so._that they migbl moum on it on account of tb.eir sins and
on account of all their lnnsgressious end on account of all their erron in order to
purify themselves on this day, onee a year.16
Jubilees does not use the term. Yom Kippur. but the date identifies tbe fes-
tival beyond doubt. According to Jubilees it is mouming that purifies from
all kinds of sins. The wording evokes the three kinds of sins of Leviti-
cus 16:21. lnterestingly, from a ritual point of view, is tbe emphasis on
mouming in the night.81 Moreover, as in Jubilees 5:17-18. Jubilees 34:10
also connects repentance to Yom Kippur, albeit in a less explic:it way. Re-
pentance prevents the brotben. from killing Joseph. Measure for measure,
each year tbe descendants suffer for what tbeir ancestors caused. Similarly,
the atoning sa.crifice of a young leid takes up the sl.aughtering of tbat kid
whose blood colored Joseph•s garmcnt.aa Twice Jubilees emphasizes tbat
the sin was the transmission of the bloody garment. 19 A remnant of this tra-
dition appears again in post-temple Palestinian traditio.n..90 In its descrip-
tion of the highMpriestly garments the Palestinian Talmud mentions that tbe

• Jabilets 34:12.13a.l3, transl. WiJrtennnte.

*' Jt.hilus 34:13.
11 Both ltids could be alluded to. The brothen dip the prment in blood and tben HNf

it to tbe filtbel" (J•bilee.s 34: 12).

1t Jubilee.s :34:13 (brougbt it} and 34:18 (came that which).
110 Pbilo mentions Joseph's coat conspicuously c1ose to an allegorization ofthe higb-

priestly <:oat of tbe festive gannents, albeit without allusion to Josepb's death. See De
solffnlls 1:220, and 213-219.
 IIIIIJf,inaires of Yom Kippur 91

n~lnJ ofthe high priest atones for bloodshed according to Genesis 37:21,
wbile some early Sidrei Avodah even embellish the allusion to Joseph and
dle atonement for the faked murder.91
<: Quntran associates other mythological events with Yom Kippur without
being an etiology in the stritt sense of the word. According 1o the higbly
fragmentary lQWords ofMose$, Yom ~ppur is somehow connected to the
crossing of the Jordan, i.e. the end of forty years of distress, the depen-
dence on manna and the beginning ofhappier times in the land oflsrael:92
(BecauseJ your (fathen.) wandcred [in the wilderoess] umil tbe. te[utb.] day oftbe
ruooth ... {a correctlon} [on tbe te]nth (day] ofthe montb {All work sh}aJI be for-
biddeu md on the t[entb] day [ofJ the montb will be atoned ... "
üsually, this event is dated to 10 Nisan,!U but it seeans quitc certain that it
Spc:aks of Yom Kippur as the references to abstention from work and
•muement reveal. Unfortunatcly, tbe rest ofthe text (iii:I2- iv:ll) is too
fraginentary. The connection between Yom Kippur and mannaalso appears
in the Fesfilial Prayers andin Philo. 9' This parallel may point to a common
uadition or to a common biblical source - the juxtapo.sition of manna with
the root ;'I:W in Deuteronoroy 8:3~ which the three texts used independently
:.: a less likely possibility."
JA Qumran: The Current Period ofPersecution as Yom Kippur
Despite the fact that so many ofthe Second Templesources on Yom Kip-
pur were found in Qumran. it is difficult to formwate a synthesis of the
conception of Yom K.ippur in the commun.ity.97 Often it is impossible to

91 · See e.g. 'Yose ben Yose's 'Aslir Gev~~rot 'Eioah (ed. Minlcy, p. 156, line 160); and
.·'Ättah Konanta (ed. Mirsky, p. 192, line 98). See M. Swartz, ..The Semiones of the
Priestly Vestments in Ancient Judaism" in A.l. Baumgarten (ed.), Socrifiu in Religim~~
üperience (Studies in the History of lleligiom [Numen Book Series] 93; Leiden,
Boston, and Cologne, 2002; pp. 57-80), pP. 72-76.
9.\1 I would like to tbank Jan Willcm van Heuten for kindly dn.wing my attention to Ibis
teXf.
·~ 91 IQ22WordJ of Moses iii:9-ll - my translatioa of the text in Milik, Discqveries in
th11 Jordani1111 Daert 1 (1955) 94-95. See also Perrot, La Lt~cmrt de Ia Bible dans Ia
$ynagogve., p. 156, note 27 and p. 268, note 4.
" Josh 4:19 da~ this event to the tenth day of tb.e fi.tst month.
.· ft See pp. 41 and 47. above, and .see bYoma 74b.
' "' Flll11Jer on, in the sec:tion on rabhini~ thougbt, I wiU refer to additional mythologiRl
:~wnts uaociated with Yom Kippur. See pp. 1:21-124, below.
:. ~.J't Iu this short survey I have profited from tbe previoll!l suggestions by Baumgarten,
.~·vom Kippur in the Qumran Scrolls and Second Temple Sources"; Hacham, "Communal
]?asts in tbe Judeall Desert Scrolls and Associated Literature"; Falk, Daily, Sabhath, 1111d
F~n.al P-,.qyus in the Dead Sea Sc,.olb; Grintt, "A Seder Avodah for Yom Kippur from
.Qumran"; Wieder, The Juderm Scrolls al!d Koraism; Lehmann, '"Yom Kippur' in
98 Yom Ktppur in Early Je:wlrh Tlr.oaght o.nd Ritual

establish the Sitz im Leben of a certain text in the life of the community.
The demonoJogy of llQMelchizedek, 4Q180 and 4Q181, which is con-
nected to Yom Kippur, has already been briefly mentioned. These three
texts indicate that even in the community of Qumran, which did not attend
services in the temple and did not experieru:e the scapegoat ritual as an an.
nual preenactment of the final victory over evil, the influence of Yom Kip-
pur's temple ritual was persistent enough to Iead to creative Iiterary
activity and produce myths. As in one ofPhilo's interpretations, the people
from Qumran understood their own existence through the image of the two
lots - they themselves are the people of God's Iot in opposition to the lot
of Belial led by the wicked priest.98 •Az' azell' Azaz' el was clearly undet-
stood as a demon and purveyor of evil (4Q 180. and 4Q 181 ). Considering
tbat it was probably on a Yom Kippur that the group's persecution
started,9t this typology of Yom Kippur as a fight between the good and the
evil forces must have reinforced the importance of tbe annual festival in
detennining the identity ofthe community of Qumran. Yom Kippur had an
ambivalent cbaracter. On the one hand, it recalled the beginning ofthe per-
sec.ution and gave some meaning to current afflictions during tbe perseeu-
tion; on the other hand, the end of this persecution was expected to mark
the beginning of the eschatological period of bliss and Iiberation from Be-
lial's prison by the high priest Melchizedek. Such a perception ofthe suf-
ferings ('1l'Y) of the current period (iYln) of persecution as affiictions of an
ongoing Yom Kippur (n•Jl!n) is supported by two passages in 4Q171
Pesher on Psalms:
"And the poor shall inherit theland and enjoy peace in plenty." (Psalms 37:l J) !11
interpretation concerns the c:ongregation of the poor who will tolerate the period of
distress (n•Dtn;'l l:lllT.I) and will bc: rescued from all the snarc:s of Belia1. 100
..And in lhe days of farnine tltey shall be re[plete]; for the wicked shall die."
(Psalms 37: 19-20) lts interpretation: he willlteep them alive during the fitmioe of

Qwm:an"; L. SchiffiDan, ''The C11se of the Day of Atonement Ritual,.. Biblical Pers~c­
tives (1998) 181-188, whose worll: is direotly concemed with Yom Kippur in Qumran.
\1t ll QMelchizedelc; Philo, Le.pm a11Bgoriae 2:5l; cf. Quis ru-um dit>inorum heres slt
179-187.
" "'Woe to anyane making his companion drunk, spilling out hil anger! He evm
makes him dnmk to Iook at their fcstivals!' {Hab 2:15)- lU interpretation concerns the
Wiclced Priest who pursued the Teacher of Righteousness to consume him with the fero.
city of bis anger in the place of bis banishment, in fcstival time, during the rest of lhe
Day of Atonement. Ho paraded in front of them, to consume them and malte them fall on
the day of fastiog, the Sabbath of their rest": lQPesher Habakkuk xi:2-8, transl. ili
DSST.
100 4Q 171 ii:9:_11; transl. in DSST.
 Jmaginaire.J ofYom Kippur 99

the time of [dis]tress (ll'lltn;z 1!1'1D), when mauy wiU die because of famine and
pJap; all wbo did not leave [dlerel w:ith the COtlgRgation ofhis chosen ones. 101
In alllikelihood, the end oftbis period of affliction was viewed as the final
victory of the powers of the good Iot against their opponents; some ex·
pected that Melchizedek and the Qumranites would fight against their op-
pressors.1P2 The affiictions by the persecutors were probably perceived as a
kind of jlagella Dei. 103 Such a perception of the current time as an ex-
tended Yom K.ippur is quite similar to that of Hebrews. 104
Joseph Bawngarten has revived Wieder's thesis that the Yom Kippur
controversy between the Qumranites and the priests incharge ofthe temple
concerned not only the date but also the character of the festival. 1os
Accordingly. the Qumranites celebrated Yom Kippur as a day of mourning
and aftliction, whi1e the more popul.ar Pbarisaic-rabbinic festival had an
ambivalent character, including joy and moral purification. He provides
two arguments for this. First. the tenn n•Jlln.i 1lll1J/Dl' (day/time of affiie-
tion) appears only in souroe5 from Qumran. Second. Jubilees with its em-
pbasis on mourning and suffering probably had canonical status in Qwn-
ran. Wbile Baumga.rten's and Wieder's thesis is possible, there remains a
methodological crux. The sources for the Jemsalem Yom Kippur at the
time oftbe temple are few in number and rather complex. Baumgarten uses
PhHo, the Mislmah and the inclusion of Leviticus 18 in the rabbinie read-
ings of Yom Kippur. None of them descrlbes the attitudes of seeond· and
first-century BCF. Pharisees. Putting a diaspora source together with post-
temple destruction sources for a reconstruction of Yom Kippur in Jerusa-
\em at the time of the temple against the evidenee from the Qumra.n scrolls
·presupposes Qumran to be distinct from all the rest. Yet some of its scrolls
are certainly closer to the Mishnah than is Philo. Furthennore) some Qum-
ran texts seem to contradict Baumgarten's sharp distinetion. As Baumgar-
ten hirnself remarks, 11QMelchizedek adds the ex:pectation of escbatolo-
gical bliss and Iiberation of the Jubilee year to the demonie struggle on
Yom Kippur. The inclusion of mouming in some piyyutim also contradicts
such a sharp distinction into joyful, Pbarisaic, mainstream Yom KippLU
aru:l sad, Qumranic~ sectarian Yom K.ippur.1osa

101 4Ql7! üi:2-S; tnmsl. in DSST.

Jo:zSee pp. 41 and 90-92, above .
.: 103 See Baumgarten, "YoUI Kippur in the Qumrao Scrolts a.nd Second Temple
· Sources," p. 188.
· d01 Se~:p. 181, below.
)05 Baumgarten, "Yom Kippur in the Qumran Scrolls a.nd Second Temple Source$,..
p.l91.
105• See above, p. 34, note 98.
100 Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Tlwught and Ritual

Fast and prayer determine the Yom Kippur worship of Qwnran, as iu

Philo's diaspora and the land of Israel. For example, 1QPesher Habaklcuk
describes Yom Kippur primarily as a day of fasting and abstention from
work (xi:6-8). The place of fasting is underscored in llQTemple Scroll,
which places Leviticus 23:27-32 before Leviticus 16 in its Yom Kippur
rulings and therefore starts and ends with the precept of fasting. 106 Some of
the motifs mentioned in the Festival Prayers on Yom K.ippur appear also
in other texts fo!llld in Qumran that are connected to Yom Kippur: repen..
tance (Jubilees 5:17-18); sorrow and weeping causing divine mercy (Ju.
bilees 34); the man.na (I QWords of Moses); punishment of the wicked
(llQMelchizedek); and humankind divided into two lots (llQMelchize-
dek).
There is no explicit connection between the temple cult and Qumran's
Yom K.ippur prayers. Hli The extant fragments do not mention priestly or
hlgh-priestly sacrifices, incense, blood, animals or the temple. Yet thls
does not mean that the Yom Kippu.r prayer service did not include texts
with such practices or objects. An argumentum e silentio is weak: for Qum-
ran and its fragmented library. Furthermore, we should not exclude the
possibility of a solemn litllfgi.cal recital of Leviticus or of other texts con-
nected to Yom Kippu.r in the temple, especially 4QTargum of Leviticus or
llQTemple Scroll.
Conclusion
Some apocalyptic sou.rces depict the vision of God as an ascent of the
visionary to the heavenly holy of holie.s., using allusions to the entrance of
the high priest on Yom Kippur (lEnoch 14, Testament of Levi). These
visions may have been partially ritualized, as the Songs of the Sabbath
Sacriflce suggest. We shall see below that Valentinian theologians and
subsequently Clement of Alexandria adopted this imaginaire, reinforcing
the Yom Kippur elements and, in the case of Valentinian Christianity, de-
veloping a ritual, too.
Some apocalyptic sou.rces depict the demonie learler of the fallen an~
gels, the evil forces, in terms of tbe scapegoat. These evil forces are to be
conquered by the Ieader of the good forces (I Enoch), who can be described

lO& ln his commentary, Milgrom has integrated explanatio!l.'l of the smaller digressions
of IIQTem.ple Scroll from Leviticus.
107 The most important inform.ation about the Yom Kippur ritual in Qumran comes
!Tom the Festival Prayers discussed above. Some ofthe concepts mentioned in the Yoot
Kippur prayers are not found in connection with Y om Kippur in the Yom Kippur
passages of the othet scrolla: God'!i omniscience, Yom Kippur as a special seasoo for
God's mercy and indwelling, and the brokenness of human existence.
 lmagilloiru of Yom Kippw 101

:With bigh-priestly imagery (11 QMelchizetkk). Expectations of such an es-

chatological, redeeming bigh priest, who conquers evil and liberates its
prisoners, becom.es one of the messianic conceptions of Second Temple
Judaism. Below, I analyze traces of this conception in Hebrews. I also
argue that the association of the vision in Zechariah 3 with the imaginaire
of y om Kippur bad a decisive influence on the early high-priest Christo-
Jogy before Hebrews.
Many etiologjes in addition to these apocalyptic myths were corutected
to Yom Kippur. Jubilees explains the fast as pu.nishment for the sins ofthe
forefalhcrs entailing an obligation to cry and moum. Jtlbilees is also the
first witness for the association of repentance with Yom Kippur, evidence
fot a certain individualization of -the cult. Qumran probably connected the
demonological mythology to a perception ofthe current time as Yom IGp-
pur. and the aftlictions by the persecutors as suffering to achieve atone-
ment. The creation of rationales for a ritual could take pl.ace independently
of participation in the actual ritual, as is demonstrated by 11QMelchizetkk,
4Q180 and 4Ql81. wbich were written by Qumranites who most probably
did not take part in the temple ritual, or by the Apocalypse ofAbraham, at
which time the temple no Ionger existed. This does not mean that the apo-
calyptic Yom Kippur mythology implies the temple ritual was void in the
eyes of its writers. On the contrary, existing ritual was given a deeper
·cosmological and eschatological meaning (IEnoch), the two main theo·
logical intere.sts of apocalypticism.

2. Yom Kippurin the Greek Diaspora

This section investigates Yom Kippur in tbe Septuagint, in Philo and in

4Macc.abees. These three Greek diaspora texts come from periods as dif-
ferent as the tbird century BCE, the fust century CE and tbe second to fourth
centwies CE. The decision to group together texts that emerged over such
wide a time span as 400 to 600 years was made mainly for pragmatic rea-
sons. First, I did not want to fragment too severely the section on the
imaginaire.s. Second, the three texts present three different attitudes to
Yom Kippur in the Greek Mediterranean diaspora and therefore reflect the
pluralism of diaspora Judaism., often seen in too monolithic: a perspective.
The Septuagint translates Leviticus in a way that makes Jewish ritual un-
derstandable to pagans and Jews living in a pagan environment, without
spiritualizing or allegorizing and, surprisingly, without taking into consid-
eration the way Yom Kippur was celebrated in the diaspora. In this, tbe
Septuagint differs from the Targumim. About 250 to 300 years later, Philo
eompletely spiritualizes the temple ritual. Yom. K.ippur becomes the ..open
102 Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Thought and Riillal

day" presenting the true Iifestyle of the wise man, who Jives evexy day as if
it were Yom Kippur. Philo does not reject the temple ritual, but in his
descriptions of the liturgy he focuses on the diaspora ritual of afflictions
and prayers. 4Maccabees was written at a time when the temple no longer
functioned and uses the temple ritual to explain the idea of vicarious
atonement by martyrs.
2.1 The Septuaginl: Conservatism and Enculturation
The earliest diaspora interpretation of Yom Kippur is the translation of Le-
viticus from the tbird century BCE. By comparing its vocabulary to the
non-Jewish context and to the Masoretic Text we can learn much about the
translators' ideology. Did they want to preserve the "uniqueness" or "dis-
tinctiveness" of Jewish religion by choosing distinct terminologies for
Jewish and non-Jewish religions as e.g. Ji11:J and "lt.l1!1 in the Targumim? In
her dissertation about the cultic vocabulary of the Septuagint, Su2.anne
Daniel came to the opposite conclusion...Les traducteurs alexandrins, on le
voit, n'eprouvent aucune difficulte a puiser largement dans le vocabulaire
des Parens pour rendre les notions propres a Ia religion juive." 108 Accord-
ing to Daniel, most Septuagint neologisms can be explai.ned by means
other than iso1ationism. In the following section I will briefly discuss the
translations of 7nm7, 1!l:l and n11!J:J, three words central to the ritual of
Yom Kippur, which were not included in Daniel's study. 109

'" S. Daniel, Recherehes :S'Ilr le vocabrdalre du culte dam lo Septanie (Etudes et wm·
mentaires 61; Paris, 1966), p. 36S.
109 The thinkiug ofthe tnmslators is apparent also in the following instante$, whith, of
eOUfSe, is far from being a eomplete Iist:
a) Difficult words: •nll in Lev J6:2l a.s an attribute oftbe man leading away tho
scapegoat is translated as itoip.oc; (ready, prepared), just a.s in the Targumim and in
rabbinie sources. ':11n f1K '111: is translated as l!i.c; yqv iilla:1ov, i.e. "to an impassable I un·
trodden land" (Lev 16:22). In Lev 16:31 the translator simply transcribed 11n:lV1 mw as
~1:o crolijloi-reilv, adding the trmslatlon ciwm~:\usto; (rest, repose}.
b) Small glosses: At, in the Targumim and iD the opinion of Rabbi Aqiw_ the
approacb of 1he sons of Aaron is specified a& arising from evil intern with "alien fire"
(Lev 16:1; cf. Lev 10}. Tbe same adaption oec;urs in the Pesbitta to this verse. DJ. Lane,
The Pe:Jhitta of Lwiticus (Monogmphs of the Peshitta Institute Leiden 6; Leiden, 1994 ),
p. 115, Rfers to Num 3:4. The SeptuagiDt also specifies that the higb priest washes bis
whole body (Lev 16:4).
c) SJigbt changes: The gannent of the high priest is sanctified {frrwoJlhoo;) rather
than sacred (iy1ocj (Lev 16:4). The Septuagint uavaryingly chooses O'IJ\IO.~ for the
three different Hebrew terms for the collective (Lev 16:5.17.33). The traDslation O"tqco~~:l
probably reflects a factitive vcx:alization of1Z>ll' (Lev 16:10). In Lev 16:15 the tnmslators
limit the amount of blood used by writing d;ro to1l <liJaatO<; (from the blood) for the
Hebrew "'"' /IH (the blood). In the same verse, "bis band" has become "bis hands.'" The
Septuagint empbasizes the purification of the priestli, adding it in two instances
 lmagirrairea of Yom Kipp11r 103

1n Leviticus 16:8 and 16:10 7TIUY is translated as O.no1t0~uw.i.o<; and c'tno-

nop.'ltft. In their important commentary on Leviticus in the Septuagint, Paul
Harle and Didier Pralon regarded this as a conscious avoidance of the
widespread Greek religious teons ci'ltotflO'to.ioc; and O.nmpoxl«GJ.lÖf;. 110 I am
not so sure. The tenn li1t01t0lf.'ltii. is attested for the first time in J.Socrates in
the fourth century BCE as a rite to drive away pagan chthonic gods. 111
ApoJlodorus of Athens (second ccntury BCE) is claimed to bave called
sorne gods O.~tonOJ11W.tm. 112 He i.s, of course, not eadier than the translation
of Leviticus, but in this instance it is much more conceivable that the Sep-
tuagint adopted pagan religious tenns than vice versa. i\'ltOO:OJutaio~ and
ä.nono111t~ are rare tenns, but as Renate Schlesier points out, the reason for
this rarity lies in the ritual itself. "Kerutteichncnd ist dabei [for the ritual],
daß die deskriptiven Wörter apopompe, apopompein usw. fast immer ver-
mieden werden." 113 Both words, U'ltOltOlf."Tt and ci'ltotpo'lttO.OJLÖ<;, describe the
same religious concept. I do not think an attempt to distinguish Judaism

(Lev 16:20.24). ln Lev 2S:9-l0, the translation of:lnD'l77J as 1!1l~pi3a reflects a larger scale
of geography - the slaves retum to their homeland, i.e. they bave wodced outside !heir
coonlly.
110 0. Pralon and P. Harl~ (transl.), Le Livitique. Traductiort du tate grec de Iu
Septanie, introd!lcticm eJ flotes (La Bible d'Alexandrie 3; Paris, l988), p. 151. A search
in the TLG 8.0 gave about 8 pagan, 1 Jewish, and 16 Christian occunences of ii110tpo-
'uauJ,I.6o;; and 53 pagan, 2 Jewish aud 70 Christian instauces of lillOtfJOl'llliot; (without tbe
lexicographers). Of the former, only one is prior to the Septuagint (Aesop, FDbulae
S6;3). This, however, does not include inscriptions aad papyri. Ofthe lattcr, many iostan-
ces are prior to the Septuagint, the most famous be!ng probably the passage in Plato,
Nomoi 8S4b.
111 "Nay, in the ease of th.e gods also we invoke as the 'Heavenly Ones' those who

bless as with good things, wbile to those who are agents of calamilies and punishments
we apply more hateful epithets; in bonour ofthe former, both private persoos and states
erect temples and altars, whertll$ we honour the latter neither in our prayers nor in our
sacrifices, but practice rites to drive 11way their evil presonce (to~ Ii' criit' tv ttttc; t\lxal<;
oiiT' tv nt<; 8ucnCJu; T\1&~& vov.;, Ql.l.' ciKOxo~o; ttVt'«tv iJI!ftl; 11ot~ivov.;). lsocrates,
Philippru (orQJio 5) 117; tnnsl. by 0. Norlin (ed.), l1ocraJU I (LCL 209; Cambridge
{Mass.] and London, 1966).
112 Apollodorus of Athens, Peri Theon 6, fragment S apud Harpocration the Gram-
marian (flrst to second amtmies CE): ci~toxop1lll1oi nvEo; i:Kal.OO~~to eeot. ltlipi div i\xoUO&w-
poc; av h:l'(l) ltq)i 8EmV 6u:ilo.enatj see K. Mfiller, Fragmenta historicon~m Graecontm
(S vols; Paris, 1841-1370; vol. 1, pp. 428-469); or W. Dindod, Harpocrationis laicon
in decem oratores A.lticos (Oxford, 1853; repr. Groningea, 1969), p. 49. The late antique
lexitogJapher Hesychius (probably fifth century CE} knows of days called ci:n:O>COII!tUi, on
which the people pe.rformed sac:rifices to divinities called ci1toxOJut..rot. See K. Latte,
HeS]!chli A./erQIIdrini laicon (A-0) (2 vols; Copenhagen, 1953, 1966), alph11 6552:
li1t01t0pmJ\: T)pipllt nvto;. h t~lo;;th.'Oilll t~tl.oVvto 'fOl~ a1tOif()fAaiou,; 88ott,;.
m R. Schlesier, ~Apopompe." Handbuch religionswiss~I'Uchqftlicher Gnurdbegriffe 2
{1990) 38-41, here p. 39.
104 Yom Kippur i11 Early Jewlslr Thortght aJfd Ritual

from Greek re1igions was the reason for UJtO!tot.nr:lli.ot; being pi'eferred.
Rather, it retlects the Hebrew n.,w (pi'el) mueh better. Ä:n:otpon:a~, is
eloser to ::11111 and :"'l!l.ll4
Only in Leviticus 16:26, do the translations deviate from the root
ci:n:orcoJ.l:n:l] for 'mmr. The Hebrew 'mcl117 .,.!I!Uit is translatcd as 't'Öv :xiJ.lapov
töv Su;;cn:dJ.levov ei~ a~(ll V - "the goat, which was designated for the
release." What are the reasons for this deviation? What does ei~ lirpootv
mean here? In the Septuagint of Leviticus the word Q:q>itu.n usually implies
the metaphysical rdease of sins. 11 s In Leviticus 16:10, G.epiru.n signifies the
physical release of the goat. Paul Harte and Didier Pralon have suggested
that the gloss in Leviticus 16:10 - citftoe• a.mov (Eit; tftv ipfJJ.lov) ~ m.ay
have been added to prepare the reader for CicpS<nt; in verse 26. 116 In Le-
viticus 16:26, the word acpeo"\~ was probably chosen to combine the two
meanings, i.e. the physical sending away of the goat and the metapbysicaJ
release of sins.
The difficult tenn n1l9:.l is conneeted to ,,,, "to atone.•• The translators
chose to reflect this proximity by selec.ting the relatcd tcrms iMCJ'tiJplov
and (s~)tlacn:oJ!«t, and not a transcription. In pagan sources (t~)tlclGXOJ.l«l
means priJnarilyl11 "to appease" or ..to propitiate" - mosdy applied to
god(s).ll 8 The compositum tl;tlitcn:oJ.lUt is mucb rarer than tbe simple form
i.lcioteOJ.ltlt. Forthis verb, the idiolect of the Septuagint deviates from the
pagan use. First, in tbe Septuagint the compositum. is morc com.mon than
il.aaKolla.t. Adding b: usually indieates an intensification. Perhaps it was
added here to better signify also the removal of tbe impurity. The same is
truc for the neologism ß~tlO.GJ.L()'(i in fl iuui:pa; 1:oü t~t)..aapoü. 119 Second, God
is almost never the object of (s~)IJ.4a1COJ.L0.1, 120 but he may be the subjecl
This new meaning, "'God expiates sins,"' was coined by the Septuagint by
translating literaJiy the Hebrew syntax of 19J (pi 'el). 121 The prepositions

114 See .Hatcb lmd Redpath's eoneordance, s.v.

ns E.g. in Lcv 4:20. In the conteXt of Vom .Kippur, ~ bears a second "social'"
meaning, the release of slaves (,n,) in the Jubilee: Lelf 2S: I 0.
116 Pralon and Harl~. Le Livitlq11e, pp. 152 and 1S4.
117 Por other meanings, see Liddeli and Seott, s.v.; and F. Bfiebsel and I. Hemnann,
"Hileos, bilaskom.ai, hilasmos, bilasterion," TlreologiscJrea Jffilrterbuch zum Neuen Teata-
ment 3 (1938) 306-324, bere pp. 314-3lS.
111 ~e gods wore not necessarily angry, neither did they have to be appeased be-

cause a human had previously committed a sin. Bücbsel and Henmann, "Hileos, llüas-
komai, bilasmos, hilasterion," here pp. 314-315.
119 Lev 23:27.28.
12° For the exc:eptions, see Bachsei and HeJ:Tl1181liL. "Hileos, bilaskomai, hilasmos. hila-
steriou," here p. 315.
m Bfiehsel and Hernnann, "Hüeos, hilll.Skomai, hilasmo&, bilasterion," here pp. 316--
317.
 /IIIQg/nairill o{Yom Kipplll' 105

with (~)t).G.axoJ,uu refleet the Hebrew use. too. The resulting Semitisms
roust bave been quite strange to the regular Greek speak.er. BUchsei states
that this syntaxwas adopted by the readers ofthe Septuagint,'22 but Philo's
and Josephus' use is closer to the regular pagan idiom with God as
object. 123
The word for n11D:I, ilcxa'tt1ptov, is a neuter a.djective (functioning as a
substantive) meaning ..the propitiating" or ''the expiating." 124 Outside of
Jewish and Cbristian texts, the word is extremely rare. The use of ilatnft·
ptov in Romans 3:25 caused a long and sometimes bitter discussion on its
exact meaning - more generally "propitiatinglexpiating place or means" or
specifically terminus technicus for l'l11,::J. In some instances, l~actrunov
tnm.Slates words other tban m'!I::J. primarily in Ezekiel43:14-20, where it
stands fi.ve times for :1,Tl1, a place at which atonement is achieved by pour~
ing blood. Here, therefore, it means gene:rally ••pJace of atonement." But
for the reader of the Bible, the Torah was its center. On its first appearance
in Exodus 25:17, \J.ac:n;ftptov appears as i).aati}ptov b:i&eJlU, "propitiating I
expiating cover. 9 In the following twenty instances. ilaCJ'tfJplov is used
exclusively for the cover of the ark.llS Tbis use of i).ao'tftp\.ov as terminus
technicus is also reflected by PhiJo. the Testament of Solomon and
Hebrews. Only 4Maccabees 17 and Josephus deviate from this use (and
then only once). 126 Nevertheless, the Septuagint's translation of a specific
cultic instrument by using an abstract adjective instead of a transliteration
is the fast step toward a spiritualization, as will be seen in thc discussion
of Romans 3:25 and 4Maccabees 17. Yet the choice of such a rare word as
i).ttcm1ptov, wbich does not change the cbaracter of the word as distinct
terminu.r technicus, mak.es this step a small one.
Unlike the Targumim, the Septuagint did not specify balakhic regu"
lations of the people's ritual (1i7Dlil mc mlY?). For ex.ample, it is unclear

· 122 Büchseland Hemnann, '"Hiteos, bilaskomai, hi1asmos, hilasterion."

m Sec IC..H. Rengstorf {ed.), ..4 CompJt# Concordance to Flavills Jmeplnl3 (Leiden,
1968-1983), vol. 2, pp. 123 and 382.
lU Knw.s, Der Tod Jes~~ als Heiligtumsweihe, pp. 21-32, has the most extensive
lillguistic ualysis of U.ao'(iJp\Ov. Now also Daniel P. Bailey, "Jesus as the Mucy Seat:
The Semautks and lbeology ofPaurs Use ofHilasterion in RDID&Ils 3:25," (Ph.D. dis-
sertation; University ofCambridge, 1999} (non vid1}; dissertation summary: "Jesu• as lhe
Merc:y Seat: 1be Semanlies aod 'Ibeology ofPaul's Use ofHilasterion in Romans :3:25,"
'J)mdal• B11lletin Sl (2000) l.SS-158. [ would like to tltank Daniel Bailey for lchldly
providing me with a copy of his bandout for lhe IeelUre ''Grtek Heroes Who Happen to
Be Jewlsb: Tbe Meaning ofi.lllCtl:tjp\Ov in 4 Maccabees 17:22" be gave at tlte SBL 2002.
111 See especially Ex:od 25: 17-22; 38:S-3 LXX.
126 Fora disc:ussion oftlte non-Torah passages, see pP. 198-200, below.
106 Yom Kippur in Early Jewish ThOfl.ghi and Rirual

what stands behlnd 'tax~nv4aa't&127 and xcuc:mGil'tll 128 - fasting, mouming,

sacke1oth and ashes, active asceticism? They could have written VfJO''t&ii-
aa't&, but chose the more literal equivalent.
Finally, the Septnagint introduces a distinction between the cloud in
which God will show himself(vecpii.TJ) and the smoke cloud ofthe incense
sacrifice (cit1.Li<;), where the Masoretic Text twice uses llll. 129 In Exodus
vetpsi.TJ refers to the divine cloud; citf.l,tt; usually signifies the smoke of frre
or of bumed incense. 130 Thus according to the Septuagint God dwells in
the divine cloud hovering on the iA.aatiJplov, and the smoke cloud of the
incense sacrifice hides the divine appearance, whereas the Masoretic Text
can also be understood in the sense that God dwells in the smoke cloud of
the incense ~rifice. ConsequentJy, the Septuagint translation agrees .more
closely with the Sadducee-Boethusian opdon to begin tbe incense sacrifice
outside tbe sanctuary. 131
In sum, the Septuagint makes the biblical ritual intelligible to the Greek
reader, Jewish and non-Jewish alike. Almostall the teuns are part of Greek
religious tradition and therefore perfeetly comprehensible to outsiders. The
purification of the san<.:tuary and the scapegoat ritual were most probably
conceived of as analogous te various non·Jewish rituals refleeted by the
Greek religious terms cbtOltOJ.utaioc; and ci1t07tOJlmi. However, the syntax,
especially the syntax of the prepositions attached to s~t~aGJCOj.lllt., must
have seemed odd to thc Greek reader and, consequcntly, also the theo-
logical conception of atonement as a divine act of expiation. A first step
toward spiritualization may lie in the translation of the terminus technicu~·
n11!l::l as the abstract adjec.1ive lÄ.aO'tTJPLOv instead of a transliteration.
Finally, what is absent is also notable. Tbere is neither a demytho-
logization ofthe scapegoat (as in Philo or in the Mishnah), for whom voca-
bulary from the Greek world of cbthonic gods is used, nor a significant
embedding of diaspora ritual (fasting, praying), as in the Targumim.

121 Lev 16:29; 23:27.29.32.

121 Num 29:7.
119 Lev 16:2-3.
130 Lev 16:13; Sir24:15; Ezek8:11.
131 See above pp. 30. On the understanding of Leviticus and on the rabbinie
controversy, see Milgrom, LevitiCilS J-16, pp. 1014-1015 and 1028-103l; the classic
article by Lauterbach, "A Significant Controversy between the Sadducees and the Pha-
risees"; and the more recent Iiterature listed in Tabory, Jf!llli.rh Ft.Gtil'al.r in t~ Time of
iM Ml8hnoh and Talmvd, pp. 264-267.
 lmagl11airu ofYom Kippur 107

2.2 Philo's Allsgorization ofYom Kippur

1 will begin by analyzing the two detailed descriptions of the Yom Kippur
iitual112 that are clearly written from a diaspora perspective, focusing on
the ritual of the people. 133 I will then turn to allusions134 that allegorlze tbe
temple ritual and reveal the mystical heights of Philo's theology in the
figure of the high priest, who is simultaneously a symbol of the mediating
Logosand ofthe rnystic•s soul, which ascends to heaven to view God.m
2.2.1 The Rationale ofthe Peopte•s Yom Kippur Rituals
The two extensive descriptions of Yom Kippur are part of ds specialibu&
legibus, Philo's interpretation ofthe laws ofthe Torah arranged acwrding
to the Ten Commandmcnts. Tbe fll"St description is found in the context of
the probibition of idolatzy, which occupies the whole of the first book with
an analysis ofthe sacrificial cult and its institutions. 136 It is remarkable that
in this context ofthe sacrificial cult, the way to celebrate Yom Kippurin
the diaspora clearly dominates tbe text. Yom Kippur is "thc fast, .. not ''the
day of propitiation"' as one would have expected from the Vorlogs of the

1:1:1 D11 specialifiJis legibru 1:186-188; 2:193-203.

,., How does this tally with Schwartz' thesis ("Philo's Ptiestly Descent") tbat Philo
was of pdestly descent?
I" De glgantibu.s 52; Despecialibus IBgibu.s 1:72.84.168; 2:41; Dt ebrietate 86; 135-
136; De somnils l:21S-216; 2:189.231; Qui.rrerum divinDI'ltm her4!.!" sit82-&4; 112; 179;
187; leg~~m allegorlae 2:52. 56; 3: 174; De plantatione 61; De posteritate Caini 48; 70-72;
Legatio ad Gaium 306-307; De vita Mosis 2:23-24; De congressu en~ditionis gratia 89;
107-108; De decalogo 159.
13' On Yom Kippar in Philo, see J. Leon.hardt, Jewish Worship tn Philo of Alexandria
(Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 84, Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck 2001), pp. 43-45,
127-135, 224-228, 230--233, 278-282; G. Deiana, "ll Oiorno del Kippfir in Filone di
Alessandria," in: F. Vattioni (ed.). Sangut e antropologia. Riti e Clillto. A.tti della J' Setti-
m.ma Roma, 26 nCl'lembre -I dicembre 1984 (Sangue e antropolos;ia. 5/2; Rome, 1987;
pp. 891-905}; Scullio.n, "A Traditto-Historical Study of tb.e Day of AloDement," 1.52-
.186; J. Lapo~. "Sacrifice ~t~~d Forgiveoess in Philo of Alexandria,.. Studia Phi/unica
Anmtal I (1989) 34-42, here pp. 36-38. Young, "The Impact of the Jewish Day of
Atonement upon the Thought of the New Testament," 114-126; Baer, "The Secvice of
Sa""rifice iD Second Temple Times," passim; H. Wenschkewitz, Die SpiritvolisiBrung Ihr
Kultwhegriffc. Tttnpel, Priester und Opfer im Nnen Testamenr (Angelos - Arehiv filr
neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte und Kulturkunde 4; Leipzig. 1932), pp. 67-76;
0. Schmitz, Ditt OP.f•ramchouung du sp4ten Jvdefltums vnd di• Opferaussagen du
Neuen Tutaments (TObingen, 1910}, pp. 143-152.
136 This patt includes a short description of the temple (De specioltbus legibus 1:66-

78), two very detailed analyses ofthe priesthood (79-161} and tb.e sacrif~ees (162-256),
l!ld a section about the sacrificers (257-298). The part about sacrifices deals witb the
animals (162-167), the festivals (168-193)- among tht111 Yom Kippur (186-188)- and
lhe different lypes of sacrifices (194-2S6).
108 Yom Kippur fn Early Jewish Tho11ght and Ritual

Septuagint. 137 The central features of the temple ritual, the high priest, the
holy of holies and the blood sprinkling rites are complctely absent ftom
this description. The high pricst's absence is especia1ly noteworthy, since
he is so central to PhiJo's theology. 138 Philo preferred to emphasize otber
actors, the less or non-religious people, 139 who were apparently more im-
portant in Philo's diaspora community than was the high priest in distant
JelUsalem. Even the repentance of those "juifs d'un jour," 140 is equal to
sinlessness, 141 the quality characterizing the high priest. EyKpatt>l4, cipetl}.
and Jl~•avma evoke divine forgiveness and come before the selective refer-
ences to certain sacrifices, mainly the additional sacrifices from Nurobers
and the two goats. Conceming these sacrifices, the numbers one and seven
(from the one ram, one bull and seven lambs sacrificed) are allegorized
and connected to the begi.nning and end of creation. This may be one of
those rare eschatological expressions in Philo, reminiscent of the cosmo-
gonic eschatological interpretation of Vom K.ippur i.n apocalyptic texts of
the Second Temple period, that teil about the beginning and end of sin.
Moreover, an inner process, repentance. is the decisive factor in the (out-
ward) scapegoat ritual. The goat bears the curses of "those wlw changed
for the better,"142 not those~who did not show repentance.
Philo's second description of Yom Kippur appears under bis exposition
of the commandment to honor the holidays.143 Vom Kippur is the nintb of
ten holidays discussed. 144 All festivals are presented in their diaspora fonn.
Consequendy, blood, sacrl:fice, inc:ense, the temple and the Aaronic pricst-
hood play no rote in this kind of Yom Kippur. Abstinence and prayer are
.its principal features. Vom K.ippur is a window on the life ofthe wise man
who displays eyKp•he14 every day (193-195). JnteiTUpting material intake
enhances the flow of spiritual nourishment (200-202). Moreover, such an

137 N11o,;~icr: retlects Philo's common usage. Someti!Pes he employs i).oop6c;. Unlikc in
the Septuagint the word "group," (~)llAia~~:oJ.lat, appears mely and most or the pusages
speak of humQm propil!'ating God iastead of a divinely instigated purification. Conso-
qumtly we would have to translate "day ofpropitiation."
' 311 See below, pp. 109-112.
139 Pbilo names them oi acoT4 "t"ov iiU.ov Piov süu.ys.; miM11 5pö:ccn (De specia/ibw legilms
1:186).
140 See the nom to this passage in Suzanne Daniel, De specialibiiS legilnls I et ll (Les
<Euvres de Phil.o.n d' Alexandrie 24; Paris, 1975).
141 Sins, however, Ieave sc:;ars ou the soul.
142 Cf. Deiana, "11 Gi0010 del Kippilr in Filone di Alessandria," p. 894.
141 De.specialibiiS legibus 2:39-222.
1 ~ De specitJltbus /egibus 2:193-203. The ten festivals are every day (!) (42-SS),

Sabbatb (SI>-70), New Mooa (140-144), Passover (145-149), Mazzot (l.S0-161), Omer
(162-175), Shavuot (176-187), Rosh Hashanab (188-192) and Suc:cot (204-213).
 Imaginairu ofYom Kippur 109

jnterruption reminds us of its potential lack and thereby reinforces grati~

tude for its availability (203).
2.2.2 The Allegorizations ofYom Kippur's Temple Ritual
The most interesting passages on Yom Kippur are to be found among the
more than twenty allusions to its institutions, foremost among them being
tbe high priest. 145 We may distinguish two Ievels of allegorization: a
macrocosmic, cosmological Level and a microcosmic, psychological le-
vel.t46 On a cosmological level, Philo interprets the temple as world and
the high priest as divine Iogos. 147 On a psychological level, he compares
the high priest to the man of truth (o ttp~ ai..r'!Setav O.vepcono<;) and the
temple to the rational soul (7..oyuc:ft I!IUXT)).
For there are, as is evident, lWo templcs of God: one of them thls universe, in
whom there is also as High Priest His .First-born, the divine Word, and the otber
the rational soul, whose Priest i.s the real man; the outward and visible irnage of
wbom is he who offers tbe pra.yers md sacrifices handed down from oor fathers, to
wbom it bas bee.o committed to wear the aforesai<l tnnic, which is a copy and
replica ofthe whole heaven, the intention of this being tbat the universe may join
with man in the holy riles aod man with the universe. 141

Philo concentrates on the mediatory aspect of the high priest as an ambas·

sador between God and humans. 149 Free from physical disabilities, he is
also free from pathos, the origin of sins. In an idealized form, he is
sinless. 150 Perhaps because of this exceptional purity, only the high priest
can bear the view of the holy of holies.m These ideal qualities may have
triggered the identification ofthe high priest with the heavenly logos. Con·
versely, the human being who has these ideal qualities also becomes a high
priest. This tums the wise men, fulfillers of the Torab, into high priests.
Wenschkewitz described this as an oscillating movement between ideal-
ization of the priests and spiritualization of the priesthood}52 This highly

14s For Iiterature on Philo's spiritualization of rhe temple and its colt, see note 135,
.above. See also V. N.ildprowetzky, "La spiritualisation des sacrifices et le culte sacrificie l
111.1 Temple de Jbusalem eh~ Phiion d'Alexandrie,.. Semitica 11 (1967) 97-116.
146 See J. Laporte, "'The High Priest in Philo of Alexandria," Studia Philonica Annual 3

(Earle Hilgert Festschrift) (1991) 71-82.

147 DevitoMoais2:95-13:5.
· 1"'De aomniis 1:215; transl. F.C.L. Colson in LCL, Pbilo 5:413.
149 Cf. the pagan writer Hecateu.s in bis A.egyptlco quoted by Diodoill5 Siculus 40:3:5-
6, who describe$ the Jewisb high priest as a messenger (iiyyti.ov) of God's command-
ruents to ehe pcople: $ee Stern, Gnelc and Lotin Authors on Jf!Ws and JudaiSm, vol. 1,
number ll, pp. 2S and 31-32.
uo De specialilnts legibus I :230.
m De ebrietate 136•
.n Wenschkewitz, Die Spiritt.laiiaienmg der Kultusbegrif{e, p. 76.
110 Yom Kippur in Ear/y Jewish Tlrought and Ritual

important mystical interpretation is tht: subject of the paragraphs lbat

follow:
.....
HJGH-PRIESTLY VISlONS OF GOD IT: PHIL0: 153 Philo is the frrst to refer ex-
plicitly to Yom Kippur and quote Leviticus 16 in order to depict the mysti-
cal ascent ofthe soul to God in bis heavenly abode. Almost every passage
conceming the high priest or the boly ofholies mentions bis entry, oftetus
an encounter ofthe wise man's souJ with the divine; 134 this may have the
character of a vision 1 ~ 5 or even of a meeting with the di vine. 156
Such an encounter includes a transfonnational element. Those who
enter the holy of holies abandon their human nature and become god-
like.IS7 This transformation is based on a textvariant in Leviticus 16:17, it
recurs wi1h slight variations in all tbree citations of this verse in Philo.
Dropping a xd<;, Philo scates "when the priest enters into the boly ofholies,
he will 110t be o man until he teaves,.. instead of the regular text of the
Septuagint "when the priest enters into the holy ofholies, there will not be
any (other) ma11, until the priest leaves." All three instances lead Philo to a
deification of the high priest or the wise and perfect man. 158 No extant
Septuagint manuscript knt~wn to me Iw this reading, but we find it in
Origen and most interestingly in Leviticua Rabbah. m
Again, acc:ording to Moses, th.e priest when he goes into the Holy of Holies "'will
not bB a man until he comes out" (Lev. xvi. 17); oo man, that is, in the movements
of his soul thougll in the bodily sense he is still a man. For when then mind is
ministering to God in purity, it is not human hut divinc. But when tt minister.s lo
aught that is human, it tums ils c:ourse and descending from heaven, or rather fal-
ling to eanh, comes fonh. even though his body still remains within. 11l0
When he [the higb priest] is in line with otbers he is one of a few, but whm he
stands alone he is a "many," a whole judgme.nt-court, a whole senate, a whole
people, a whole multitude, a whole hlllDIUl race, or rather, to tell the real tntth, a
belng whose nature is midway between {man and] God, less than God, superior to

" 3 See C.R. Holladay, 'Theios A.ner' in Hellenistic-Judaism: a Critique ofthe Un oj

this Category ;" New Testamenl Christoloii)' (Society of BiblicaL Literature Dissertation
Serie; 40; Mis.soula, 1977), bere pp. 170-173; E.R. Goodenough, "Literal Mystay in
Hellenistic Judaism," in: P. Casey, S. Lake, A.K. Lake {eds.), Quantulacumque: Stvdies
Presented to K. Lake by P~~pllJ, Colleagrzes ond Friends (London, 1937; pp. 227-241).
1-" De gigantibus 52; De specialibus legibus 1:72; De ebrietare 135-136; Qais rentm

divinan~m heru sit 84.

1's De specialilnls legilniS 1:72; De ebritttate 136.
l:!<i Quis rerum divinarum hecs sit 84.
" 7 Qui.J rerum divinan~m heres slt 84, De som'niis 2:189.231.
I5J See especially De somniis 2:230--231.
1'9 See p. 125, nole 243, below.
160 Quil ren~m divlnarum heres sil 84; transl. F.C.L. Colsou in LCL Philo 4:325.
 Imagin(lif'U of Yom Kippur 111

man. "For when the high priest enters the Holy of Holies he sholl not be a mori''
(Lev. xvi. 1?). Wbo then, if he is not a man? A God? I will not say so, for this
uune is a prerogative, assigued to tbe c:bief prophel, Mose.s, while he was still in
Egypt. where he is enlitled tbe God of Pharaoh (Ex. vii. 1). Yet 110t a man either,
but oo.e contiguous with both extremes, which form, as it we.re, one his head, the
other his '*- 161

But indeed so vast in its excess is the stability ofthe Dcity that Heimparts to cho-
sen nlltllRs a sban: of His steadfastness to be tbeir riebest posses&ion.•.• See what
is said of wise Abraham, how he was "standing in front of God (Gen. xviii. 22.),
fur when should we expect a mind to .stand and no Ionger sway as on the balance
save when it is opposite God, seeing and being seen.... [HeJ wbhes to indicate
that the mind ofthe Sage, released fi'om storms and wars, with calm, still weather
and profound peace around it, is superior to men, but Jess tbaD God .... Tbc good
man indeed is on the border-line, so that we may say, quite properly, that he is
neither God nor man, but bounded at either end by the two, by monality because
of his manhood, by incorruption becau$e of his vinue. Similar to this is the OJacle
given about tbe high priest: "When be enters," it says, ..into the Holy of Holies, he
willnot be a man until he c:omes out" (Lev xvi. 17}. And if ho rben beeome.s no
man, dearly neither is be God, but God's mini$ter, through t.he mortal in him in
affmity with c1:11ation, through tbe immortal with the UDCreated, and ho retaios thiJ
midway place until he comes out again to the realm of body and flesb. That it
should be so is true to nature. When the mind is mastered by tbe Iove ofthe divine,
when it strains its powers to reach the inmost sbrine, when it puts forth every ef-
fon and ardour on its fonvard march. 'llii.der tbe divine impeU ing force it forgers all
eise, forgers itself, and .fixes il$ thoughts and memories on Him alone Whose at-
tendant and servant it ls, to whom it dedicates not a palpable offerin&, but incense,
the incense of consecrated virtues. But when the Inspintion is stayed, and the
strong yeaming abates, it hastem baek fi:om the divine and becomes a man and
meets the human intere$ts whicb lily waiting in the vestibule ready to seize upoa it,
should it but shew its fa~ for a moment from within. 1Q
Yom Kippur becomes the mystical experience of the wise who have
reached the high-priestly state of O:mi8Eta. The sentence "when it rninisters
to augbt that is human, it tums its coUISe and descending from heaven, or
rather falling to earth. comes forth, even though his body still remains
within" 163 demonstrates tbat Philo is speaking of a heavenly ascent ofthe
soul. Just as ascent is the entry into the holy of holies, so is descent the
retum to the vestibule. 164
Tbe spiritual process of tuming away from the world and focusing on
God is compared to the changing of clothes by the high priest.

161 D11. solltnii$ 2:188-189; transl. F.C.L. Colson in LCL Philo 5:529.
lfil De somniis 2:223-233; transl. F.C.L. Colson in LCL Philo 5:547-549.
Ml Quis rerum divintU11111 lu!.res sit 84.
N4 Desomnifs 2:233.
112 Yom Kippur ;,. EtUly Jewi:rh Thought and Ritual

The soul tbat loves God. havi.Dg disrobed itself of the body and the objects dear to
the body aud fled abroad tar way from these, gains a fixed aud assured settlemeot
in the perfect ordinances of virtue .••• This is why tbe high priest shall not enter the
Holy of Holies in his robe (LeY. xvi. 1 ff), but laying aside the gumen.t of opin-
ions aad impressions ofthe soul, and lea~ it behind for those that Iove outward
things and value semblaru::e above reality, shall enter nabd with no coloured bor-
ders or sound ofbells, to pour as a libati011 the blood oftbe souland to offer as in-
cense the whole mind. to God our Saviour and Benefactor.16S
The temple ritual is tumed upside down: The priest leaves bis clothes and
enters naked instead of changing bis clothes, the blood is not sprinkled but
poured, and the blood rite is performed before the incense rite and not after
it. Rather than ignorance - Philo seems to be well infonned about the
temple service 166 and may even have been a priest 167 - this transformation
of the temple ritual demonstrates that Philo does not derive bis mysticism
from the imagery of Yom Kippur. He merely uses the high-priestly en~
trance - a well-known image - to illustrate his ideas.
Despite certain parallels, it is unlikely tbai Philo adopted this imagi-
naire from apocalypticism. First, he i.s quite anti-eschatological. Second~
wbile there are some par~ls bctwcen Pbilo's interpretation of Yom Kip-.
pur and tbe apocalyptic imaginaire of the Day of Atonement, 168 thc differ-
ences in the imagery are signiticant: e.g. heaven is not surrounded by a
fiery river, nor is there a fiery throne. The mystic is not accompanied by
protecting angels. Philo is closer to Platonic idealism than to apocalyptic
mythology.

ALLEGORIZATlONS OF THE SACRIFICIAL RITES: Of the sacrificial rites of

Yom Kippur. only tbe incense sacrifice 169 and the scapegoat170 play a role

I6S Legum allegoriae 2:SO-S6; transl. F.C.L. Colson in LCL Philo I. This passage has
been negleeted hy previoua investigators. It is the ooly allegoriz.ation of Yom Kippur' s
blood rites known to me. However, it does Dot greatly change the general picture of Phi-
lo 's attitude to blood sacrifice.
1" Philo S"-ll'IS to bave ha.lllldü.c kDow!edge of the temple rites in the following cases:
the high priest ligb.tiug the lnteii.Se before entering tbe holy of holies (De :rpecialilnu leg-
ibu.r 1:72; but cf. .De ebrietflle 13S-136); ths prayer of the high priest in the holy of
bolifls (Legatio ad Gaium 306); the existence of a third ram (.De specialibus legibuJ
1: 18&); tbe throwing down of the scapegoat (De plantatione 61 ).
167 See Schwartz, "Philo':~ Priestly Descent-

•• Philo has at lea&t three intetpretations in cODllDOn with the apocalyptic imagii'II'Jire:
the interpretarion oftbe higb-priestly entry as transformation and mysrical encollllterwith
God; the two lots as two opposed classes of people; aod Ehe fall of the scapegoat.
169 lncense is mentioned a mw times: De speclalibiiS legibu3 1:72.84; legum allegoriae
2:S6; Legatio ad Goium 306-307; De somnii:r 2:232.
1711 Tbe scapegoat rite is mendoned four timea: Q11i.s ruum dMfU11'um heru Jil 179-
187; legvm allegoriae 2:S2; De plantatione 61; De posteritate Caini 70-72.
 113

among Pbilo's allegorizations. The bloodless sacrifice is superior to the

sprinkling rites, w'hich Philo almost completely neglects. 111 This tendeocy
can be demonstrated by the (apologetic) description of Yom Kippurin the
Embassy to Gaius, in which incense and
a universal supplication prayer are
the only rites in the holy of holies to be mentioned. 112
Agreeing with the Sadducean interpretation, the high priest carries tbe
aheady-lighted incense into the holy of holies to conceal its beauty. 113 Yet
it is unlikely tbat he knows about the dispute between Sadduceans and
Pharisees. Philo does not attribute the divine presence to the material in-
cense, and bis exegesis can be explained as being based on the Septuagint's
distinction between vecpElll and Ö.tf1~. 174
The lots of the scapegoat and the sacrificial goat are interpreted as being
images of two kinds of humans. The lot of the scapegoat stands for the
people wbo a.re not free of pathos; the Iot of the sacrificial goat, for Iovers
of God who inherit the lot of Levi, i.e. the spiritualized and democratized
p.riesthood. 115 On the cosmological level, he connects the scapegoat with
the creat.ion and the sacrificial goat with God. 176
The sendingout of the scapegoat becomes a metaphor for the inner fight
agaiDSt the passions, the motto of the wise man's figbt. The source of evil
js in the bearts of men, but confessing their passions hclps banish them.:
For "'o make atonement over" (tl;tltio•ctat) lhem (madnesses and infirmities,
whicb are to be send away ('tel 6.-xOKOp-14 YOCI'i)pll'to: il.:ai oippmactito.1:CL}] is to con-
fess (öpo).orJIOIJt) tbllt altho\lgh we have lhem li'\liug and persisting in our soul, we
do not give in, but fight energetically and persistently, until weshall bave send
them away (literally: ''to ZellS") (i.diOnOpltlJCKil!&Efla:) completely. m

The Iifestyle of the wise, the practice of iyKpch:sto: and d:1tci6eUl are of pri-
mary importance for Philo. One could even say that Yom Kippur is Jike an
"open da.y" providing a glimpse of this life. One should live one's whole
life without passion, humbling the soul- as one does on Yom Kippur, and
as the wise person does all bis life. 17 *

· 171 t!.br/etate 87.

/)t!.
I7Z " •••in the inmost part of the temple in fhe special sanctuary itself, into whicb the
Gr.uld Priest enten once a ye~ar only on the Fast as it is called to offer incense and to pray
acc:ording m ancestral practice for a Cull supply of hlessin~ and prosperity and peace for
aU mallkiod": Legatio ad Gafum 306; tnmsl. F.C.L. Colson in LCL Philo 10:155.
· m De spec:ialilnu legilms 1:72.
· 1 ~ See p. 106, above.
. 175 Lepm allegoriae 2:52. cf. Quu rerum divinantm herusit119--181.
116 De plantatiom~ 61.
177 De posteritale Caini 1G-12, my traaslatioo.
. lil /)t!. specialilnd legibus 2:195.
114 Yom Kippur in Eorly Jewish Thought and Ritual

Atonement is not an important factor in Philo's theology. Atonement by

sacrifice is usually spiritualized. The confession atones, 179 as do repent-
ance,180 aflliction181 and prayer. 112 He prefers to look to the future instead
of the past and regards repentance more higbly than atonement.
Philo betrays knowledge of the tradition describing the fall of the
scapegoat. 183 His source may perhaps be an early liturgical reenactment of
the Yom Kippur ritual. Another possible derivation is narrative sources
close to the apocalyptic traditions previously discussed.
Conclusion
In sum, Philo presents a Yom Kippur that is in almost every respect
adapted to the religious life of the diaspora. In the detailed descriptions of
Yom Kippur, the people's service with fasting and p~aying is a central
feature. Yom Kippur's temple ritual merely serves as a prooftext and as an
illustration of Philo's mysticism and cosmological speculations. While he
clearly prefers Yom Kippur's symbolic meanings, it is amazing to note that
as a Platonist he holds on to the literal meanings and does not abolish Yom
Kippur and its institutions. 184
Philo "de-Levitizes" the high priest so that every wise man can become
a high priest, but he sets high moral and spiritual standards. Only he who
lives the life of a wise man, i.e. who lives every day free from passions
("a-pathetic''), as on Yom Kippur, can qualify. In this state of apatheia the
man embarks on his mystical joumey into the holy of holies, the transfor-
mation into a superhuman and the encounter with God. Yom Kippur is no
Ionger connected to a particular date but to a special state. Philo spiritual-
izes the office and service of the high priest and tums them into symbols of
the wise man and his soul's ascent to God.

179 De po~teritote Coini 70-72.

110 De specialibw legibus 1:188.
111 Legum Allegoriae 3:174; De congressu eruditionis gratia 107: "[On Yom IGppuc,
God] becomes propitious (i:U61<;), and propitious even at once without supplication {oiv&v
i~eF:teillc;), to those who affiict and belittle themselves (1oic; i11V1oUc; ICO.ICOW\ ~eai avott7o..·
>..ovcn) and arenot puffed up hy vaunting ;md self-pride."
182 De vita Mo.sis 2:24.
113 De plontatione 61.
184 I owe this point to Martha Himmelfarb.
 Imaginaires ofYom Kippur 115

2.3 The Vicarious Atoning Death in 4Maccabees 17 and the Imaginaire of

YomKippur
Tbe book of 4Maccabees ends its story ofthe martyrdom ofthe seven sons
and their mother with a theological interpretation of their deaths, in which
several terms recall Yom Kippur: 115
11:20 These then, having consecrated (ayUlo&ivuc;) themselves for the sake of God,
are now honored not only with this distinction but also by the fact that through
them our enemies did not prevail against our nation, 21 and the tyrant was punished
and our land purified (Ka8Gpl.otilvcu), since they became, as it were, a ransom
( liv~ivuxov) for the sin of our nation. 22 Through the blood of these rigbteous ones
and through their propitiating (U.o.o'tl)piov) deatb 116 the divine providence rescued
Israel, which bad been shamefully treated (xpoKatcm&iV'ta). 181

God, angry because of the sins of Israel, is placated by the atoning death of
the righteous ones. The idea of the death of a martyr as vicarious atone-
inent appears already in 6:28-29, and several key terms (~ea9apotov, a{J.ui
lind avti'!I"UXOV) appear in both passages. The use of iÄacnftpt~ has long
drawn attention to exegetes of Romans 3:25. Notwithstanding that in
4Maccabees iÄaotiJpto~ is probably used attributively and has the specific
sense not of n,1!1:> but more generally of ''propitiating," the extremely rare
word is very close to the terminus technicus and appears together with alJ.La
and liJ.Laptia.l11 Moreover, two other ideas are reminiscent of the apocalyp-
tic imaginaire of Yom K.ippur. The purification of the country motif (tiJv
mtpilia Ka9apto9ijvat) plays an important role in the eschatological myth of
JEnoch as an interpretation of the ritual of Yom Kippur. 189 Similarly, the

Jas E.g., Klauck remarks that "Die Übernahme von Konzeptionen aus der atl.
Opfertheologie und Opfersprache liegt auf der Hand.... i1..Gcn~pl0c; ln 17,22 zielt zusatz-
lieh auf das Ritual des jährlichen großen Versöhnungstags." See H.-J. Klauck (transl.),
4. Makkabäerbuch (Jüdische Schriften aus bellenistisc;her und römischer Zeit 3:6;
Glltersloh, 1989), p. 671. Cf. E. Lobse, Märtyrer und Gottesknecht. Untersuchungen zur
urchristlichen Jlerlciindigung vom Siihnetod Jesu Christi (Forschungen zur Religion und
Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 64; Göttingen, 2 1963), p. 71.
116 lf one takes the reading of the Sinaiticus (with the article), the translation is:
-''through the propitiation oftheir death," see Lohse, Märtyrer und Gotteslurecht, p. 71.
117 4Maccabees 17:20-22 in the translation of H. Anderson, "4 Maccabees," in: J.H.

Charlesworth (ed.), The 0/d Testament Pseudepigrapha 2 (New York, 1985; pp. 531-
564).
· 181 [f we follow the reading of the Sinaiticus (with the article before ibo'ti!p\ov) and
lranslate "through the propitiation of their death" and i1..aoTiJpwc; has the more generat
meaoing, the terminus technicus must bave jumped into the head of every reader
acquainted with the Torah.
_:,., JEnach 10:20; Milik also reconstructed the purification of the land motif for
aliothertext connected to Yom Kippur, IQ22Word.s ofMoses iv:l, see DiscUIIeries in the
Jorda~ian Desert 1 (1955) 95-96.
116 Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Thought and Ritual

victory over the evil Lord recalls the victory of the eschatological high
priest over the forces of evil, which appears in 1Enoch 10, 11 QMel-
chizedek and Hebrews 2:14-15. More tentatively, the term npo1Catc:ro9tvt11
for the mistreatment of tbe people recalls terminology for the afflictions of
Yom Kippur, which can be tc:atc:oo as well as tanEtvoro.
In sum, tbe combination of tbree terms from Leviticus 16 and two con-
ceptions connected to Yom Kippur makes it very likely that the author
wished to allude to the Day of Atonement. 190
Recent scholarship rejects tbe earlier dating of 4Maccabees to the first
century BCE and favors a date after the destruction of the temple, in the
second century CE or even later. 191 This new dating removes one of the
most important texts from the hands of those scholars who used this pas-
sage to explain Romans 3:25 against the background of Jewish martyr
theology. Both passages seem to be independent solutions for the same
question: what significance does the death of innocent people have for
their religious conviction? Both use sacrificial imagery to explain the
vicarious atoning effect achieved by divine providence.

Excursus: The Scapegoat as._Background for Vicarious Atoning Suffering

in lsaiah and Josephus?
Was Yom Kippur's sacrificial tenninology used to express vicarious atoning suffering in
two other, non-Christian texts? Some scholars have suggested that tbe image ofthe sur-
fering servant of God in Isaiah 53, which draws on some kind of sacrifice, 191 is based on

190 Contra Bailey, "Greek Heroes Who HappentoBe Jewish."

191 Jan Willem van Heuten inan oral discussion in Jerusalem ofhis paper, ..Martyrdom
and Persecution Revisited: The Case of 4 Maccabees," in: W. Ameling (ed.), Milrtyrer
und Märtyrerakren (Aitertumswissenschaftliches Kolloquium 6; Stuttgart, 2002; pp. 59-
75).
192 See e.g. J. Scharbert, "Stellvertretendes Sillmeteiden in den Ebed-Jahwe-Liedem

und in altorientalischen Ritualtexten," Biblische Zeitschrift [N.F.] 2 (1958) 190-213; and

the Iist of other scholars in 8. Janowski, "Er trug unsere Silnden. Jesaja 53 und die Dra·
matik der Stellvertretung," Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 90 (1993) 1-24, here
p. 20. Janowski proposes a non-sacrificial baclcground ofthe servant. On Isa 53 in gener-
at in early Judaism and early Christianity, see e.g. the papers in B. Janowski and P. Stuhl-
macher (eds.), Der leidende Gotte.s/cnecht. Jesaja JJ und seine Wirkungsgeschichte mit
einer Bibliographie zu Jes JJ (Forschungen zum Alten Testament 14; Ttlbingen, 1996)-
in particular M. Hengel, "Zur Wirlcungsgeschichte von les 53 in vorchristlicher Zeit,"
pp. 49-91; P. Stuhlmacher, "Jes 53 in den Evangelien und in der Apostelgeschichte,"
pp. 93-105; 0. Hofius, "Das vierte Gottesknechtslied in den Briefen des Neuen Testa·
mentes," pp. 107-127; and J. Adna, "Der Gottesknecht als triumphierender und interzes-
sorischer Messias. Die Rezeption von Jes 53 im Targum Jonathan untersucht mit beSOD·
derer Berücksichtigung des Messiasbildes," pp. 129-158.
 /maginaires of Yom Kippur 117

,the scapegoat. 193 Even ifthis allusion seems far-fetched, it makes a strict distinction be-
.tween either sacrifice, noble-death or the suffering servant in explanations for the back-
ground to tbe vicarious atonement of lesus difticult and subject to personal theological
' ferences. 194
preA passage in Josephus' Bellum judaicum, proposed by Michel and Bauemfeind,
:seems more c:onvincing. 195 The high priest Ananus states: "If I was alone and, as it were,
in the desert, I would offer my life for God." 196 This might allude to the sc:apegoat, wbo
'dies alone in the desert. Such an interpretation is supported by two further Observations
.in the context. Directly before this episode, Josephus relates that lots are cast for the of-
~fic;e ofthe high priest197 - as for the two goats on Yom Kippur. Since such a custom for
die election of high priests is unknown. the theological background seems noteworthy.
Furthermore, Ananus is tortured and bears the pain silently as Isaiah's servant of God. 198
This passage is one ofthe few texts using the scapegoat as positive image. 199

Conclusion: Yom Kippurin the Greek Diaspora

The Septuagint of Leviticus translates the Jewish terminology of Yom
K.ippur into pagan religious language; the demonology connected to the
. scapegoat is equated with pagan terminology of sacrifices to chthonic
gods. Until then, no spiritualizing tendency is evident and the ritual ofthe
.'diaspora has not yet surfaced in the Greek version of Leviticus 16. The
·,focus on the temple ritual remains unchanged, the Septuagint of lsaiah pro-
:viding the fiiSt evidence for a shift from the temple to the Iocal com-
munities by calling the day "the fast."

· 193 See J.D.W. Watts, Isaiah 3446 (Word Biblical Commentary 25; Waco [Tex.],
1987), p. 231; J.N. Oswalt, The Book of/saiah. Chapters 40-66 (New International Com-
mentary to the New Testament; Grand Rapids [Mich.] and Cambridge [UK], 1998),
p. 377. Isaiah compares the servantto a lamb (:1111) led to tbe slaughter (53:7). The servant
.bears the sicknesses and aftlictions vicariously for the c:ommunity in language
reminiscent of the descriptions of the scapegoat carrying the sins of the community. The
terminology for sins 'l7V1!1 (53:5.8.12), ]1'!7 (53:6.11), llli7K (53: 10) and Ktln (53:12) is similar
t(l the three tenns of Lev 16 (iV1!1 , 1111 ,KDn). Like the scapegoat, the servant is tortured
b~fore bis death. The formuJation D"n f1Kil "lTll (lsa 53:8) recalls :1111 Y1K (Lev 16:22).
See e.g. D.R. Schwartz, "Two Pauline Allusions to the Redemptive Mechanism of the
Ciucifixion," Journal of Biblical Literature 102 (1983) 259-283. Yet sacrific:ial concepts
Cam.ot explain everything, since other tenninology in lsa 53 c:omes fi-om a rather non-
c.idtic medical background. Is the ritual ofthe people perhaps alluded to by the mention
· of :I:W (lsa S3:7)? Did the Septuagint reinforce tbis allusion by the use of ICEKcuc:41o11clt and
'tQ~~QvliKIEt in two successive verses {lsa 53:7-8)?
:: ~ 94 On Isa 53, see the discussions ofGal3:I3; Jobn 1:29; 1Pet 2:22-24 below.
' ·195 0. Michel and 0. Bauernfeind (eds., transls.), Josephus, Fltniw, De bello Judaico.
·•f?er jüdische Krieg. Griechisch und deutsch. Hrsg. und mit einer Einleitung sowie mit
iAiJmerkurrgen. (3 vols; Municb and Darmstadt, 1962-1969).•
.,,.,!111 Bel/umjudaicum 4:164.
\ 197 Bellumjudaicum 4:153.
' 11111 Bellumjudaicum 4:165 .
.\')9!1 See the passage on Ravya bar Qisi discussed on p. 130, below.
118 Yom Kippurin Early Jewish Thought and Ritual

Philo focuses on the diaspora way of celebrating Yom K.ippur, allego-

rizing the temple ritual to higher truths and spiritualizing priestly concepts
to the ascetic life of the wise. He is the frrst to use the high-priestly en-
trance ofLeviticus 16 explicitly to describe the mystical ascent of the wise
man's soul to God. His theology strongly influenced later Alexandrinians
such as Clement and Origen. Philo's concept of Yom Kippur as an "open
day" to the wise man's Iifestyle will be adopted by Christians such as Ori-
gen.
Finally, 4Maccabees 17 and probably Josephus draw on the imaginaire
of Yom Kippur to explain the rationale of vicarious suffering. Josephus
might even be a rare example of a Jewish (non-Christian) text comparing
the seapegoat to a positive figure.

3. The Christian Jewishlmaginaire ofYom Kippur

Many of the texts discussed in parts 2 and 3 in fact belong here. Among
them are Barnabas and Hebrews (despite their fierce anti-Jewish stanee)
and Romans (and thdr sourees), lJohn, Matthew, Galatians and perhaps
the Christological songs of Colossians and Philippians. The texts of Valen-
tinian Christianity that are based on lost Jewish apocalyptic sources -
which were a bridge between the descriptions of ascent visions in apoca-
lyptie and Hekhalot texts - also belong into this diseussion.

4. Aspects ofthe Rabbinie Imaginaire ofYom Kippur

Any investigation of Judaisw in late antiquity (i.e. from the second to the
fifth centuries) has to contend with a methodological dilemma: on the one
hand, the rabbinie sources are almost the only extant textual evidence; on
the other band, they frequently do not mateh the pieture that emerges from
archaeological data, such as the findings of Dura Europos.200 How broad is
the prism of Judaism represented in the rabbinie sources; i.e. how many
different opinions and styles of life found their way into the rabbinie eol-
leetions, and how many did not? To what extent are texts Iike the later
parts of the Jewish Sibyllines, 4Maccabees and Pseudo-Philo On Jonah
evidenee of alternative traditions not contained in the rabbinie eorpus?
How can we evaluate non-Jewish sources that do not fit the rabbinie data
for our reconstruction? How ean we evaluate the eredibility of their de-

200 Cf. G. Stemberger, Einleitung in Talm11d 11nd Midrasch (Munich, 1 1992), pp. 55~5.
 Imagi11aires ofYom Kippur 119

scriptions? What is the position of Christian Judaism? In a few instances,

extra-rabbinical data confum minority opinions or deviant opinions in the
rabbinie sources,201 but often no such deviant opinion is extant. 202
Furthermore, the original Sitz im Leben of each rabbinie source is not
clear. Did it serve a certain community as a law codex or as a textbook for
teaching purposes, or was it simply a collection of statements?203 The
Mishnah received canonical status with its redaction around 200 CE - in
certain circles of Palestine and in some Babylonian academies. The devel-
opment from rabbinie Judaism to normative Judaism was a long process.
We cannot simply presuppose that the ritual and thought in the commwli-
ties of the Westem diaspora in Mediterranean Iands, or even in Palestine
and Babylonia, followed the rulings of the sages of the Mishnah, or the
Palestinian or Babylonian Talmud. We have to bear these unresolved
methodological questions in mind during the brief analysis of rabbinical
thought on Yom Kippur.
I shall begin this outline of some generat aspects of the rabbinical
imaginaire of Yom Kippur with mythological events linked to Yom Kip-
pur, to give an impression ofthe general theological ideas connected to the
festival. I shall then go on to analyze some part of the conceptions of the
temple ritual, especially the high priest, the goats and the red ribbon. Fi-
nally, I shall turn to some general theological concepts ofthe people's rit-
ual that received special attention in the rabbinie sources, primarily
repentance.
ldeally, each rabbinie tract should be allocated its own section. Such a
detailed investigation of the concepts of Yom Kippur, the high priest, the
scapegoat, the sacrifices, the high-priestly entrances, the afflictions, the
synagogue service, etc., for each of the rabbinie tracts would be an inter-
esting undertaking, but it goes far beyond the scope of this work. I have
tried to avoid a monolithic presentation by referring to the collection (e.g.

201 This might be the case wilh Church Fathers, who polemicized against the sad

character ofthe Jewish fast.

202 Judith Lieu has employed the portrayal of Trypho, the Jew, in Justin Martyr's

Dialogue with Trypho for reconstructing the Judaism of Asia Minor in the second cen-
tury. Leaving one henneneutical circle she entered another. On the one band she rebels
against using only or even primarily rabbinical sources for reconstructing the late antique
Judaism of Asia Minor. On the other band her approach involves the methodological
danger of giving up the only extant critetion for a countercheclc, since in the realm of
concepts and prayers, archaeological evidence can only rarely help, and then only ~der
fortunate circumstances. See J. Lieu, Image a11d Reality. The Jews i11 the World ofthe
ChristiallS ;" the Seco11d Ce11tury (Edinburgh, 1996), pp. 103-1.54.
2113 See G. Stemberger, Ei11leitung i11 Talmud rmd Midrasch, pp. 140-143, regarding the

different opinions about the Sitz im Leben ofthe Mishnah.

120 Yom Kippr~r in Ewly Jewi11h Tho11ght Q'fld Rihlal

Misbnah, Babylonian Talmud) with which, andin some instances to tbe.

rabbi with whom. a certain statement is associated. Regarding the unre-.
solved questions ofthe pseudepigraphy in the attribution of certain say.ings
to certain sages, of redaction and of form history, and in view of the un-
certainties caused by the lack of critical editions for most of the material, J
have re:frained from advancing more concrete theses on the history.204 This
is a task for future investigators.
Despite his conservative approach. Ioseph Tabory's survey on Yom
Kippür in the rabbinie period is a helpful collection of statements and
scholarship.w On the conceptual backgtound of the sacrifices, Yitzhak
Baer and Naftali Goldstein have done some promising pioneering work.lll6
Yet most aspects of the rabbinie theology of the temple ritual still await
critical investigation, principaUy on the pereeptions of the role and figure
of the high priest. The most interesting works on the rabbinie Yom Kippur
liturgy are still the general models of the development of the ritual from
the temple to the synagogue by Elbogen and Heinemann. 201
In popular opinion, Yom Kippur was the most important festivai.•
When Yom Kippur fell on a Sabbath it was awarded a special sanctity, and
the gravest sins were those eommitted on this day. 209 The special charactcr
of Yom Kippur is demonstrated also by the fact that it is described as the

21M Even the most basic m.ethods are disputed among the main approaches. I follow the
gea.eral lines pointed ou.t by Stemberger in bis Einleitr~ng in 1'almud und Midratclr,
pp. SS-65 an.d 66-72, with refereru:es to further Jiterature.
m> Tabory, Jewi1h Festiva/3 in the Time of the Mishnah and Talmud, pp. 259-306;
Most or the secondary Iiterature accepts thc Mishnah and other rabbinie sources at face
value without redaetion crities or form critics: Saftai, "Der Versöhnungstag io Tempel
und Synagoge"; idem, "The Service ofYom Kippurin the Second Temple" [in Hebrew}
Mahanayim 49 (1961) 122-125; idem, "On the History of the Service .in the Second
Temple"; E.E. Urbach, The Sages. Tlreir Concepts fmd Belieft (2 vols; Jenw.lem, 1987"'
2 1979), especially pp. 420-436 and 462-471; K. Hruby, .. Le Yom Ha-Kippurint ou Jour

de l'Expiation,... Orient Syrien 10 (196S) 41-74, 161-192, 413-442; A . .8tlchlcr, Struliu

in Sin and A.tonement (Lon<lon, 1928).
11111 .8aer, "The Sen-ice ofSacrifiee in Second Temple Tintes"; N. Goldstein, "Worsbip
at the Temple io Jerusalem- Rabbinie Interpretation ll8d Influenec" [in Hebrew) (Pb.t).
dissertat.ion, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1fY/7).
207 Elbogen, St11dien •11r Geschichte des jfldi:Jchen GotteadieMies; Heinemann, Prayu
in the Period qfthe Tanna'im Qlld the Amora'im. See also Elbogen, Der jidi$CM Gotta-
dienst ln seiner geschichtlichen Entwicklamg. .
201 But tcchn.ically speaking, the Sabbath has a higber status than Yom Kippur.

Trespassing the Sabbath comma:ndment is punishable by death through stoniag

(mSanh 7:4), trespassing Yom Kippur by eating is punishable "only" by scourging
(mMok 3:2). Furthennore. Sukkct is frequently called the restival (lO;r).
2Df See Tabory, Jewish Festivals in the Time ofthe Mishnoh and Talmud, pp. 297-298,
witb e:xamples.
 lmoginoil'es ofYom Klpp•r 121

oolY fes1ival that will be observed in the eoming world.210 While Jubilees
describes Yom Kippur as a festival of sadness and Phito•s Yom Kippur
vacillates between a.ftliction and festival, th.e rabbinie sources tend more to
the festival side. Yet the aspect of sadness surfaces here and there in the
rabbinie sources and might have been the custom in some communities.211
4.1 Mythological Events Connected to Yom Kippur
The association of Yom Kippur witb redemption and judgment
(llQMelchizedek) continued in rabbinie thought. Yom Kippur is not only
an eschatological occasion but an annual day of divine judgment, con-
cludi.ng the period of repentance during the ten day.s of awe from Rosh Ha-
shanah, ascribed clearly in the Babylonian Talmud to Rosh Hashanah . ..All
are judged on Rosh Hashanah and their sentence is signed on Yom K.ip-
pur...:atz Yom Kippur and Rosh Hashanah are the days when God sits on bis
judpent throne.211 In tbis heavenly judgment Satan is the accuser. Two
traditions exist about the power of Satan on Yom Kippur. According to the
Babylonian Talmud, Satan has power on all days but Yom Kippur.214 Ac-
oording to Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer 46, Yom Kippur is the only day when the
dcvil Samma'el has power over atl siDDers among Ismel (a disappointing
experience. sinee Israel becomes sinless on just this day). The apocalyptic
legend of the introduction of sin by the fallen angels and their Ieader -
'Azaz'el, Samma'el, She.mihaza, etc. - is still (or again) told and the
names appear in connection with Yom Kippm-215 but without explicitly
dating the event to the fast.
The earliest rabbinie text to connect a mytbological event to Yom K.ip-
pur may be the Mekilta Rabbi Yishmae/. 216 Moses is said to have judged
the pcople ..after the day" (Exodus 18:13), to whlch the Mekilta adds "(af·
ter the day) ofatonement." It i.s not completely clear what event feil on the

210 Pirqe. Rabbi Elia(lr 46. This is a st:r.mge concept, since it assllnle$ the continuity of
sin in tbe world to tome.
211 lbe extra-talmu.dic tracl Sofe.rim 19:4 prohibits lncluding the term "a good day" in

tbe praycr of Yom Kippur, sincc a täst c:ao.not be ..a good day." Hence, a strict separarion
.into sectari:aus and rabbis on lhis aspect is not possible. See the sourees IU1d the
discussion oo p. 99, above.
112 bRH 16a by Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehudah states !hat the moment of each one's
sentence is set indiYidually.
113 bRH 32b. Cf. also thc statement in Avot of Rabbi Nothan (A) 2S that it is a bad

omen to die at the beginning ofYom Kippur and a good one to die at its eod.
114 bYoma 20a.
·. 2" See below, pp. 128-130.
· 216 Meld/ta Rabbi Yishmael Amalek 4 to E:x:od 18:13 (ed. Horovitz, p. 196; ed. Lautez-
bacb, vol. 2, pp. 179).
122 Yom Kippurin Early Jewish Tho!4ght and Ritual

Day of Atonement. According to the traditional explanation,ll7 the events

of the biblical narrative are out of order, and the judgment happened after
Moses returned from Mount Sinai.m Yom K.ippur coincided with the giv-
ing of the Torah. This tradition is otherwise attested only in a (probably
late) Baraita in the Babylonian Talmud.119 But is this the only possible
reading of the Mekilta and Exodus 18? If we interpret the Mekilta on its
own, and understand "after the day" in the context of its narrative, the pre-
vious event- the coming of Jethro and perbaps also the battle with Amalek
- happened on the day (of atonement) prior to Moses' judgment The latter
version matches the Melcilta, according to whicb the battle with Amalek is
said to have tak:en place during a fast (1l'J!7n). 220
Jn both cases, the exegesis ofthe Melcilta is strange. Exodus 19:1 dates
tbe giving of the Torah to the third month after the exodus, i.e. before Yom
Kippur, and Jethro (Exodus 18) is supposed to bave arrived earlier, i.e.
between Pesach and Shavuot. There must have been a special reason to de-
viate from the biblical chronology, either a conceptual reason or the weight
of an existing tradition connecting some part of the narrative to Yom Kip-
pur.221 Was it the moment of judgment? Was it the fight against evil, i.e.
Amalek? Is it the association of Moses, the just judge, with collaboration
in the creation? The idea of COIUlecting Yom Ki.ppur to salvation from the
ultimate evil (Amalek) seems the most suggestive and matches the
Mekilta's characterization of tbe battle as ta1dng place during a fast. The
traditional interpretation is not drawn froru the Mekilta alone, bot rather
interprets the Mekilta in the sense of the Baraita.
A Baraita in tbe Babylonian Talmud reports in the name ofShim'on ben
Gamliel that the second giving of tbe Torah took place on Yom Kippur,
connecting the renewal of the covenant (Exodus 34) to Yom Kippur and
perceiving Yom Kippur as atonement for the sin of the golden calf.222
Three traditions seem linked to this association of the golden calf and the
second giving of the Torah with Yom Kippur. First, the high priest is not
allowed to serve in golden garments in order not to remind God of the sin

217 E.g. Ruhion Exod 18:3.

1.l&Rasbi sugcsb this order: battle witb Amalek, Ton.h-gjving (on Yom Kippur).
BITival of Jetlu:o, Moses' judgment; instead of the biblical order: battle with Amalek,
BITival of Jethro, Moses• judgment, Tora.h·giving,
21 ~ Cf. the traditiun of bTa;a11 JOb, discussed below. The mixture of Hebrew and
Aramaie raises some suspicion about the age ofthe Baraita.
120 Mekilta Rllbbi Yi&hmael Amalek 1 to Exod 17:12 (ed. Horovitz, p. 180; ed. Lauter-
bach, vol. 2, pp. 145).
Dl Migbt there be a guua shavvczh to BJCod 32:30? ln that ease the passage of the
Mekilta refers to the golden calf.
m bTa'an 30b. Pirqe Rabbi Elierer 46 malc:es this into a full story.
 llnGginoires ofYorn Kippul' 123

of the golden calf. 223 Second, God's thirteen middot (Exodus 34:6-7),
which were revealed on tbis occasion. play an important role in the liturgy
of Yom K.ippur and, togetber with Leviticus 16:21, have the power to
transform deliberate transgressions into unintended sins.224 Third, Exo-
dus 32:11-14 and 34:1ffwere read in some Palestiniancommunities.:w
The biblical account ofthe consecration ofthe First Temple can be un-
derstood as that part of the consecration wbich coincided with Yom Kip-
pur. This interpretation depends on whetber the week of the dedication of
the temple was celebrated hefore Sukkot or coincided exactly witb Suk-
kot.226 Thls point is discussed in Mo 'ed Qoton in the Babylonian Talmud,
which asserts that tbe week of dedication indeed included Yom Kippur,
celebrated not as a fast but as a feast227 Like the consecration of tbe
temple, the Ordination of the priests is also associated witb Yom Kippur.
The Talmudlm compare the week ofthe high priest's preparation with the
ordination of Aaron and bis sons. and make the preparation week into one
of (re-)ordination.221
According to tbe Jate Midrasb Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer, 229 the circurnci.sion
of Abraham. which is described as having a vicarious atoning function,
also took place on Yom Kippu.r.230 Earlier sources indicate tb.at it took
plaec on Passover, bringing it into line with other events, which according
to Genesis Rabboh and tbe Talmudim occurred either in Nisan or in Tishri.
Genesis Rabbah and the Palestinian Talmud do mention the creation ofthe
world,ll 1 and the Babylonian Talmud includes the birth and deatb of the
forefatbers, and redemption. 232 However, these sources most probably have
Rosh Hashanah in mind and not Yom Kippur. The vacillation between Ni-

m yYoma 7:3, 44b; cf. Leviticw Rabbah 21:10 (ed. Margulies, pp. 489-490). See also
!he discuasion on tbe prooftexts for individual or general confessions iD yYoma 8:9, 45c.
324 yYoma 3:1, 40d; cf. bYoma 36b.
w See above, p. SS.
1'llfi lKg~~ 8; 2Chr 6--7, especially 7:&-10.
2l'l bMQ 9a.- Cf. yMQ 1:7, 80d; Genesis Rabbah 35:3 (ed. Tbeodor/Albeck, p. 332),
which discusses 2Chr 7 only with regard to an eventual collision of the consecration of
the temple with Suk.kol $ans Vom Kippur.
m yYoma l:l, 3Sa-c; bYorna 2a-6a. See also I. Knohl and S. Naeh, "Millu'im voKip-
purim" {in Hebrew] Tarbiz 62 (1993) 17-44. ·
229 Unlike othcr carly .rabbinic lile.rature, this Mid.rash is usually considered thc work of

a sing,te author, probably in Palestille in the eighth or nioth ceo.tw-y CE but contalning
older t.raditions: Slemberg,er, Einleitflng in Talmvd 1111d MidrMch, pp. 3:21-323.
ZJO Gen 17:23-27; Pirqe Rabbi Eliu:er 28.
231 Genesis Rabbah 22:3 to Gen 4:3 (ed. Thoodor/Aibeclt, p. 207). Cf.yRH 1, .S6b and

bRH IOb-llb.
m bRH lOb-llb.
124 Yom Kippur in EMly Jewlsh Thowght and Riwal

san and Tishri might perhaps be a readio.n to the Christia.n linkage of these
events to Easter.
Tbe Aqedah is usually dated to Pas.sover, but some sources link it with
Rosh Hashanah and the blowiug of the Shofar. 2, 3 A late kahhalistic
tradition dates the Aqedah happened to Yom Kippur. 234 Earlier, the ram is
connected with the imaginaire of Y om Kippur by being depicted as ha.ng"
ing from the bush with a red ribbon - resembling the scapegoat. 2l$
In sum, various rabbinie traditions (mostly Amoraic) date great events
in the history of salvation (the circumcision of Abraham, the second giv.ing
of the T orah and renewal of the covenant, and the consecration of the First
Templef36 to Yom Kippur. Seoond Temple traditions are partially con-
tinued - for instance, the notion of Yom Kippur as a day of judgment aod
redemption. 231 Is there a common denominator? The consecration of the
temple, the giving ofthe Torah and circumcision are tbree cssct:ltial means
of salvation and identity for Judaism. The golden calf signifies collective
sin and repentance, botb ofwhich can be connected to judgment, whereas
Abraham's circumcision and the second giving of the Totah mark tbe
covenant and its renewal.
~

4..1 Rabbinie Interpretations of the Temple Ritual

This .section deaJs with the area lell5t researched. I will touch on only a few
points, for the sake of comparison (mainly the high-priestly entrance. the
scapegoat and the red ribbon), having to neglect others that in a fuU-scale
analysis of the rabbinie understanding of Yom Kippur would desetve much
more attention.
4.2.1 The High Priests
In the Tannaitic sources, the high priests are portrayed as having a history
of corruption. The high priests of the First Temple and beginnings of the
Second, wbo were still hereditary, are praised, especiaUy Simon the Ju.st.

23 ' See L. Gin.zberg, The Legelids of the JewJ, (7 vols; Philadelphia, 1909-1938,

reprinted 1967-68}, hcre vol. :S, p. 252, notes 246-48.

234 see Gimberg, The Lagend:t of the JewJ, voL 5, p. 2Sl, note 248 for fw1her
literature. Ginzberg himselfwrites that Pirqe .Rabbi Eliezer 3llet tbe Aqedah hsppen oo.
Yom Kippur. Butthis does not appear expli.citly in the text thougb it may be deduced:
Abraham is likened to the bigh priest and the heavenly voice comes from betwc:en the
two Cherubim (on the ark ofthe covenant), Le. in the holy ofbolie.s.
vs See p. 129, below. Fora link: betwccn the Aqedah and Yom Kippurin Bamabas, see
p. 1S2, below.
236 And perhaps the battle witb Amalek.
m I did not fmd rabbinie texts acco.rding to wbich the selling of Joseph, the cea.sing of
the manna, and the entry iD.to the land of Israel bappened on Yom Kippur.
 lmaginair~$ of Yom Kippur 125

Few in number, their justice is evidenced by constant miraclcs. 238 In con-

trast, thc numerous high priests after Simon, especially those of the
Herodian period, arc portrayed as being stupid, conupt and ''selfish unto
death...239 The Mishnah reflects tbis contcmptuous attitude by adding "lfbc
[tbe high priest) was learned" to various rituaJs. The apparent superiority
of rabbinie institutions over tbe priesthood is manifested in the heart·
breaking scene of the high priest who has to swear loyalty to the court of
the eiders. 240
This perception of the high pricsts as cJerks is COntradieted by those tra~
ditioos in Amoraic sources co.mparing the (high) priests to angels241 or
their garments to those of angels. 2.u According to Leviticus Rabbah, the
high priest became a superhuman figure on entering the holy of holies.243
The high-priestly entrance into the holy of holies is greatly mystified - as
in the traditions of the apocalypses, Philo, the Valentinian texts and the
Hekbalot. In the holy of hoUes, the high priest may encounter angelic
figures, or even God.:M4 For example, Simon the Just was always accompa-
nied by a mysterious figure, who was either an angel or God.24s The

m yYomo 1:1, 38c; cf. also yYoma 1:4, 39a; bYoma 8b.
m See especially the rclativization ofthe praise of tYoma 1:6 in yYoma 1:3, 39a and
bYoma 18a; ct: mYoma 1:3.6; tYoma 1:'1.12; bYoma23a.
<MO mYoma 1:.5 and Talmudim m this passage; IYoma 1:8.
241 Aln:ady in Mal2:7.
2<12 yYoma 7:3, 44b; Levilicus Rabbah 21:11 (ecl. Marguli~s, p. 492). A different tladi-
tion compares tbe people of Israel, who affiict their souls, to angels (Pil'qe Rabbi Eliezer
46), see above. p. 35.
w LnftiCTII Rabbah 21:12 {ed. Mal'Julies, p. 493). The same tradition is found in
Pbilo and Origen, based on a variant readi.og ofthe Septuagint to Lev 16:17. Perhaps. the
rabbis adopted a Hdlenistlc Jewish exegetical tradition through the mediation ofOrigen
or, as Yib:b.ak Baer has sugcsted. Philo retlects an earlier rabbinie tradition (Baer, "Tbe
Service ofSacrifice in Sec<tnd Temple Times," p. I IJ);IDdeed, the maut Masorctic Text
of Lev 16:17 "no man s.ball be in the tent" could be understood as includi.Dg the high
priest, i.e. DO man, and even the high priest is no Ionger a man. See the eommentary of
Margulies. ln principle, the variant reading of the Septuagint can also appear in Heblew
or it could have read "ti1K 1" or "D1K l'l" instead of"o-m 'T.n," i.e. "and a man! and like a
man ho shall not be upon entering into tenl.." In fact, such a reading could have been one
of ehe factors for the angelization of the high priest in thc apocalyptic and early mystical
litcrature. ln any case, the variant reading did not survive in extant manuscripts of thc
Septuagi11t or !he Masoretic Text (apart from the quotatioos in Philo and Origen).
244 1be opposite opinion, that upon ehe high priest' s c::otry even angels have lo leave tbe

boly of holies, is ex:pressed in lhe name of Rabbi Abbahu (VYoma 1:5, 39a; yYoma 5;3,
42c; Leviticus Rabbah 21:12 (ed. Margulies, pp. 492-493).
245 tSotah 13:8; yYoma .5:3, 42c and Levilicus Rabbah ll:ll (ed. Margulie.s, pp. 492-

493); and the slightly different tradition in hYoma 39b and bMenah J09b. Many more
126 Yom Kippur in Eal'ly Jewish Tllo11ght and Ritu<ll

Talmudim underscore the possible deadly consequences of this spiritual

encounter. 246 lt is very likely this beliefthat lies behind the mishnaic ritual
of giving a party upon exiting from the holy of holies.247 Lauterbach at-
tempted to explain the famous Pharisees-Sadducees dispule over whether
the incense should be Icindled inside or outside the holy of hoHes. He sug-
gested that the Pharisees were contesting the Sadducees' ''primitive'' con-
ception of the incense as a means of protection from directly witnessing
thc presence ofOod who resides in the holy ofholies. 244 A further possible
interprctation of the danger is the perception of the holy of holies as a
divine bridal chamber where the cherubs make love - a sight that is
prohibited to outside world. 249
What effected the atonement: the high priest hlmself, bis words, bis
deeds, or the sacred artimcts he was using, i.e. ex opere operandi, ex opere
operato or ex opere "instrumentorum"? All did; but according to tradition.'
about Simon the Just. it was the priest's saintly nature 1hat bad special
efficacy, and it was the com1pt nature of the last high priests before the
destruction of the temple tbat spoiled the ritual. zso On the otber band,
discussions of the temple ritual tend to attribute the atonement either to
repentance and confessions or 10 the sacrlfices, with a preference for the
fonner. 2s1 The Palestinian Talmud endows each of the high-priestly gar-
ments with the power to expiate a partiewar sin.252 For example, the
priestly tunic (nl1n:>) atones for bloodshed.253 Finally, the focus on the

examples from the Talmudim were collected by J..auterbacb, '"A SignifiC8Jlt Coutroversy
between the Sadducees and the Pharisees."
246 The "hen~tic" practice ofthe Sadducees/Boethusians ofkindling the inc.:enae before

enteriiJg the holy of holies is regarded l1$ having a lethal outcome: see yYoma l:S, 39a;
bYomo 19b.
247 mYoma 7:4.
24 Thc Sadd.ucees are therefore reponed to bave lighted the incense befol'e enteriDg.
24' bYoma .S4a. See also A. De Coninck. ...Bnter.iJlg God's PreseD<:e. Sacramentalism in
the Gospel of Pbüip," Society of8iblicol Literatlire SemintlJ' Papers 3"1: 1 (Atlanta [Ga.],
1998; pp. 483-523), pp. 505-509 and 510-S21, who assembled a few early texts and
many late ones on this tradition to argue for its influenc:e on the Valentinian ritual ofthe
brida.l cllamber.
2511 hYoma 39a-b; yYoma S:4, 42c; 6:3, 43c.
251 Cf. above pp. Sl-54; and below, pp. 132-134.
m yYoma 1:5, 44b-c; cf. tbe comm.ent in Avemarie, Yoma- Versöhnungstag, pp. 192-
195 for parallels.
:w lo this context, the tradition of JN.bileu surfaces with a reference to Gen 37:31,
where Josef's mm::~ is dipped into the blood of a male goat. The sa.me tradition appears
also in Targ~~.m Pseudo-Jonathan Gen 37:31 (see aLso above, pp. 6S-67).
 lmaginoira uf Yom Kipplll' 127

blood sprinkling ritual in the Mishnah as weil as in the Sidrei Avodah

un.derlines the importance ofthe kapporet and ofthe blood.254
4.2.2 Goats
The first chapter of Mishnah Shevu 'ot distinguishes sharply between the
sprinkling ofthe sacrific::iaJ goat's blood and the scapegoat ritual. The for-
mer rite purges the sanctuary from the impurities caused by sins and then
reconsecrates it; the latter expiates the sins ofthe people. 255 The very next
saying in Mishnah Shevu 'ol states that the confession over the scapegoat
and the sprinkling of the blood of the sacrificial goat atone for the sins of
Israel, while the confession over the calf and the sprinkling of its blood
atone for the priests.2S6 Some modem scholars see these mishnayot as
representing the system hehind tbe priestly souroe.257 Others go beyond
that and apply it to non~rabbinical sources.251 Yet it was not the only ratio-
nale behind the ritual of the two goats.259 Conceptually, one would expect
that the blood-sprinkling rite would be considered unnecessary in the ritual
reenactments of the synagogue, since tbere is no longer a temple to be
purified. Yet tbe verbal enactment of "sprinklings and confessions" is con·
sidered equally important, and both are empbasized in tbe earliest liturgical
reenactments. 260
Tbe mishnaic tracts Shevuot and Yoma seem to consider God as the
addressee of both goats. God. however, is not always regarded as the
addressee of the scapegoat, wbom we have seen associated witb tbe
demonie Ieader of the evil furces in apocalyptic souroes. In Hebrew, male
goats are ..good to tbink ~itb" Satan and the demons. since both are called

254 The exact way of sprinkling and nurober of movements is described in great detail

in mYoma 5:2-4. For the blood sprinkllnp in Sidrei A.vodah see above, pp. ~9-60.
m mSebu 1:3-1;bYoma61a,SifraA.hareMct4:S, heremS~bu 1:6. ·
156 mSsbw 1:1.
257 Most notably, Jacob Milgrom, who adopted it in numerous instances iD his seminaL
commentaty on Le\liticus.
N Wolfgang Kraus. Der Tod Jesu a(;s Httiligtllmsweihe, applied this rabbinie
distinction to the proto-Christian interpretations of the blood sprink:ling rite in Hebrews
and Romii!IS. B. Hudson McLean used it in bis investigarioo of the scapegoat in Pauline
soteriology: The Cll.t"s'd Christ. Medüerranea" ~11lsion Rit11als and Pauline
Soleriology {IOUI"Il$! for tbe Study of the New Testament, Supplement Series 126; Shef·
field, 1996). .
1S9 Tbc more general methodological problern with this approach is the gencralization
of the rabbinie interpretation's applicafion to Judaism of all times, streams and places,
wbich overlooks that ritual can havc one meaning/rationale, none or multiple simulta-
neaus meanings/rationales {see e.g. Bemard Lang's critiquc on Milgro1n in Lang's entry
on 1!t:! in the TheologiJche.s WiJrtttrbuch nm Alten Te.sttJment 4 (1984] 303-318).
2dQ See Goldschmidt, Sedv R(lt) 'Amr1m1 Ga'on, p. 168;7-8, and pp. 59-60 above.
128 Yom Kippurin Early Jewish Thought and Ritual

l'l1lU. 261
Yet in the spiritualizing Tannaitic sources there are no traces of a
demonology behind the scapegoat. There, the scapegoat is no Ionger sent
to 'Az'azel but to a cliffin the desert; it is no Ionger called ?iMil.l? l'l.llll but
n?nllln l'l7TV. 262
The demonological concept must have survived in the rabbinie back-
yards during the Tannaitie period, since it reappears in later sourees. A
passage of the Babylonian Talmud presents 'Az'azel as a dernon who
atones for the :sins of 'Uzza (MTll.l) and 'Aza'el (?Mil.l), without going into
further details. 263 Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer identifies 'Az'azel with the Ieader of
the demons, Samma'el, and the seapegoat as a saerifiee to him.264 Ap-
parently, some form of the myth from JEnach was familiar to some
rabbis.265 In a passage in the late medieval collection Yalqut Shim 'oni,2 66
Shemihaza and 'Aza' eU' Az' azel appear in a form related to 1Enoch and to
Yom Kipp ur. Shemihaza repented, and as penitence hanged hirnself upside
down between heaven and earth.
'Aza'el [sie!] did not repent, and he still stands in bis conuption (l'nr?i':J) to incite
humans to !ransgressions in the colorful garments ofwomen, and, therefore, Israel
offered sacrifices on Yom Kippur. One ram (!) to God that he may atone for Israel
and one ram (!) to 'Az'a.Zel [.tief] that he may bear the sins of Israel, and this is
'Az'azel oftbe Torah. 267

Notably, it is a ram that is saerifieed to 'Az'azel, not a male goat. Rams

and male goats are not always sharply distinguished. This point is impor-
tant for understanding the ritual of the kapparot; the demonie Ieader was
assoeiated with rams and goats, with Yom K.ippur, and with the Aqedab.
So for example in Targum Pseudo-Jonathan Levitieus 9:3 on the afferings
for Aaron's ordination:
And you shall spea.k to the children of Israel, saying: 'You also are to ta.ke a male
goat and offer it as a sin offering, lest Satan who is comparable to it speak.s with a
s/anderous tongue against you over the affair ofthe male goat which the rribes of

261 Demon: Lev 17:7; 2Chr 11:15; Isa 13:21; 34:14.

261 Sifra presents tbe cliff in the desert as exegesis of the difficult words "' Az' azeJ'•
and "Gezera": Sifra, Ahare Mot, eh. 2:8: "D'1;J:J ;,wp Olj;>Zl" and "?lliJ." A similar tradition
entered Targum Pseudo-Jonathan Lev 16:10 "'111P1 'J'j;ln 11111" and 16:2lb-22 "ll'i::l 1l1K."
263 bYoma 67b attributed to tbe Tannaite Rabbi Yishmael.
264 Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer 46.

265 Cf. the (late) additions to Deuteronomy Rabbah 11:10 (ed. Mirkin, pp. 157-160; not
in ed. Liebermann); Seder Eliyahu Zuta 25; see also Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer 22; Rasbi on
bNid 6la; Yalqut Shim 'oni, 1:44.
266 Steroberger dates this collection of Midrasbim to the thirteenth century. lt contains
an abundance of old traditions that would otherwise bave been lost, Stemberger, Einlei-
tung in Talmud und Midrasch, pp. 341-342.
267 My translation of Yalqut Shim 'oni 1:44.
 lmaginairu ofYom Kippur 129

Jacob sloughtered in order to deceive their father. (Take) as a bumt offering a calf
- because yort worshiped the calf- and a lamb, a yeac old, that the merit ofIsaac,
whose father tied him liu a lamb, may be remembered on your behalf. Both of
them (shall be) without blemisb.768
While Targum Pseudo-Jonathan Leviticus 9:3 is not directly linked to
Yom Kippur, all ofthe traditions contained in this passage are sometimes
associated with the Day of Atonement. First, the male goat is sacrificed to
the Iord of the evil powers, Satan, to keep him from accusing Israel in the
heavenly court for the vending of Joseph. Tbe vending of Joseph was con-
nected with Yom Kippurin Jubilees,269 but it also appears in the Palesti-
nian Talmud as a rationale for the atoning power of the high priest's
tunic.270 Second, a calf is offered to atone for the sin of the golden calf. As
noted above, Yom Kippur commemorates the second giving of the Torah
on a day of repentance after the sin of the golden calf and the breaking of
the first tablets. 211 Finally, a lamb is sacrificed to evoke God's mercy by
reminding him of the merits of the lamb-like Isaac. The latter is strange,
since it was a ram that was offered in Isaac's stead, not a lamb. Christian
interpretations may be responsible for this irregularity. An early identifi-
cation of the ram of the binding of Isaac and the scapegoat may be inferred
from the fact that in the mosaics of the synagogues of Beit Alfa and Sep-
phoris the ram is banging from the tree with a reddish rope, reminiscent of
the red ribbon ofthe scapegoat.272

2'1 Targum Psertdo-Jonathan Lev 9:3, translation of M. Maher, "Targum Pseudo-

Jonathan: Leviticus. Translated with Notes," in: M. McNamara (ed.), The Aramaie Bible
(Edinburgh, 1994); the italics indicate the Aramaie additions as compared to the Ma-
soretic Text.
269 "And the sons of Jacob slaugbtered a kid and dipped Joseph's garment into the
blood and sent (it} to Jacob, their father, on the tenth of the seventh month. And he la-
mented all ofthat nigbt, because they bad brougbt it to him in the evening.... Therefore
it is decreed for the children oflsrael that they moum on the tenth (day) ofthe seventh
month - on tbe day when that wbich caused him to weep for Joseph came to Jacob, his
father - so that tbey migbt atone for them(selves) with a young ldd on the tenth (day) of
the seventh month, once a year, on account oftheir sin because they caused the affection
oftheir father to grieve for Joseph, bis son." (Jrtbilees 34: 12.13a.18, transl. Wintennute).
210 yYoma 7:5, 44b. This traditionwas taken up in the anonymous 'Az be'Ein Kol (ed.

Yabalom, p. 124, line 553) and embellished by Yose ben Yose.

271 See also bYoma 86a.
272 See Z.E. Weiss and E. Netzer (eds.), Promise and Rer:kmption. A Synagogue

Mosaic from Sepphoris (Jerusalem, 1996), p. 31; and E.L. Sukenik. The Ancietrt Syna-
gogrte of Beth Alpha. An Account ofthe ExctiVatlons Concmcted on Behalf of the Hebrew
Universil:)l, Jerusalem (Jerusalem and London, 1932), plate XIX. I would like to express
my gratitude to GUnter Stemberger, wbo drew my attention to these mosaics. Also Bar-
nabas 7 migbt have known a tradition connecting the binding of lsaac to Yom Kippur.
See also the Yom Kippur homily on Gen 22 in Levitleus Rabbah 20:2 (Margulies,
130 Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Thought and Ritual

Also the death of righteous men can atone vicariously as Yom Kippur
sacrifices. Leviticus Rabbah quotes the farnaus rabbinical saying that "just
as Yom Kippur atones, so does the death of the righteous."273 Targum
Pseudo..Jonathan and Genesis Rabbah compare the blood ofthe male goat
to human blood. 274 Men could become scapegoats, too, as a passage from
the Babylonian Talmud demonstrates: "On that day Ravya bar Qisi died,
and they erected a sign: Ravya [bar] Qisi achieves atonement like [or: as]
the goat that was sent away.'ms This must mean that the death ofthe right-
eous Ravya bar Qisi effected atonement vicariously. While the Statement
remains in the realm of comparison, not identification, it demonstrates that
as with Josephus' portrayal of Ananus, the idea of comparing the vicarious
atonement of men to the ritual of the scapegoat was not foreign to rabbinie
Judaism. 276
As Lauterbach has suggested, it is probably a similar complex associa-
tion of ram and male goat, man and Satan, Joseph and Isaac, merit and
apotropaic sacrifice, that stands behind the kapparot, especially if perfor-
med with a ram. 277
In sum, in the sources from the Amoraic period, there are two parallel
rationales. The addressee of the scapegoat can be God (Tannaitic and
Amoraic sources) or Satan {Amoraic sources). 278
4.2.3 Red Ribbons
According to Mishnah Yoma, a red ribbon was tied to the head of the
scapegoat to distinguish it from the sacrificial goat, and before the scape-
goat was pushed offthe cliff, half ofthe ribbon was bound to a rock. 279 Al-
ready in the Mishnah, the rite is prooftexted with lsaiah 1: 18 ("though your
sins are like scarlet they shall be [white] as snow"). 280 Though this Mish-

pp.445--451, esp.447--451), which ver:y similar to Pesiqta Rav Kohana26:3

(Mandelbaum, pp. 389-390).
27] Leviticus Rabbah 20:12 (ed. Margulies p. 472): tnn•ll 1::1 1!1Jil ll'11!l'::l;"' !:11'171 !:1171::1
n1!lJil ll'P'1ll'1171. This saying appears also in Pesiqta Rav Kahana 26: II (ed. Mandelbaum,
p. 399).
274 Targum Pseudo-Jonathan Gen 37:31; Genesis Rabbah 84:31 (ed. Theodor/Albeck:,

p. 1024) on the sa.me verse.

27' My translation of bYoma 42a (n'1nl71ml 1'l1171J 1!lJll 'C? [1::1] K':l1).
276 See above, pp. 117.

m See pp. 66-67, below.

271 Was there a transition from the fust to the second interpretation? The Babylonian
Talmudattributes the demonological interpretation to Rabbi Yishmael, and ifthis is cor-
rect, the demonological interpretation survive not in esoteric Tannaitic circles but in the
school of a major teacher.
279 mYoma 4:2, 6:6.
280 mSabb 9:3.
 Imaginaires of Yom Kippur 131

nah does not explicitly refer to the whitening of the scapegoat ribbon, this
seems to be assumed. The Babylonian Talmud hands down a different tra-
dition. According to a Baraita in the name of Rabbi Yishmael evoking Isa-
iah 1:18.,281 the red ribbon was publicly displayed on the outside of the
sanctuary door, signifying the transition to a sinless state when the scape-
goat reached the desert. Another Baraita, in the name of "the rabbis," sets
the two rites in a chronological sequence. First the red ribbon was bound to
the outside ofthe door ofthe sanctuary; but it did not always turn white, so
they decided to put it on the inside of the door, and only when it did not
turn white was it bound to the scapegoat.282 The Palestiman Talmud has a
similar Baraita.283 Here, people began by banging the red ribbon on the
windows nf private houses, then they hung it on the door of the sanctuary
and finally attached it to the rock (before pushing the scapegoat oft). In
both traditions, the red ribbon on the scapegoat was presented as a final
stage, after the wondrous oracle of the red ribbon tuming white began to
fail. Regardless of whether the Baraitot reflect a historical development, 284
the change reflects a transition from a public to a secret act in the Pal-
estinian Talmud, also from a popular to a personal ritual. Furthermore, it
demonstrates the rabbinical opposition to a visible proof that atonement
was indeed achieved. In addition, the red ribbon is associated with apotro-
paic powers in healing magic, attested in the Tosefta and in non-Jewish
sources ofthis time.285

281 bYoma 68a. The tradition on the red ribbon on the door of the sanetuary, whieh in

the printed editions ofthe Misbnah appears at the end ofthe sixth chapter, is not included
in the best manuscripts: Rosenberg. "Mishna 'Kipurim','' vol. 2, p. 77; Goldstein, "Wor-
ship at the Temple in Jerusalem- Rabbinie Interpretation and Influenee,'' p. 125.
282 bYoma 67a.
283 yYoma 6:5, 43d. However, in tbe Leiden manuseript, these lines are an addition

written in tbe margins. For the tradition, seealso Psalms Rabbah (on Ps 86:8; ed. Buber,
p. 375), which explieitly connects this tradition to tbe effieacy of prayer, i.e. more in a
post- or extra-temple context.
214 Three bistorieal seenarios can explain the Baraitot. They may refleet ritual ehanges

during the Second Temple period: see Goldstein, "Worship at the Temple in Jerusalem-
Rabbinie Interpretation and lnfluence," 114-123. Ortbey may be a polemie against a
contemporary popular eustom of the rabbinie period, which the rabbis preferred be per-
formed only on the scapegoat (i.e. nowhere). Or they may be an etiology for the strange
eombination of Isa 1: 18 and the red ribbon of the scapegoat as proposed by m~abb 9:3.
:as See tSabb 6:1; ~abb 7:11; bSabb S3a; bGit 68b-70b; John Chrysostom, Twelfth
Homily on First Corinthians, 7 (PG 6l:IOSD-106A), whieh uses ltOitiC\VCJC; ari)p.CDV;
G. Veltri, Magie und Halalcha. Ansäl%e zu einem empirischen Wissefl&chaftsbegriffim
spätantiken und frtlhmittelalterlichen Judeni'Um (Texte und Studien zum Antiken
Judentum 62; T1ibingen 1997), pp. 104-106, 145-146, 248. Cf. also tSotah 14:9 and
bSotah 49b (Vellri, Magie und Halakha, pp. 145-146).
132 Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Thought and Ritual

4.3 Rabbinie Interpretation ofthe Ritual ofthe People

Some rabbinie traditions connect the afflictions ofthe people to the temple
ritual. E.g., abstention from sleep is presented as an imitation of the high
priest's vigil. 286 And as (high) priests could be portrayed as angels, the
afflictions to which people were submitting themselves could also be oon-
ceived of as making them angelic. In Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer, Samma'el ex-
presses his admiration and disappointment that the self-affliction of the
people makes them angelic - they are barefooted, do not eat or drink,
stand, have peace among them, are sinless, and pray. 287
The four prayer times correspond to the times of sacrifices in the .
temple. The explanation for the additional prayer ofthe Ne'ila, however, is
disputed. According to a "Caesarean tradition" in the Palestinian Talmud,
Rav suggested that the Ne'ilah designates the time of closing of the doors
ofheaven, while Rabbi Yohanan connects the prayer to the time of closing
of the temple doors.288 The historical solution of Rabbi Yohanan is prob-
ably as purely theological as is the cosmological proposal by Rav.
In rabbinie literature, in the absence ofthe temple ritual, repentance was
regarded as highly significant,289 having been accorded a status akin to a
hypostasis; it belongs to the thirlgs created before the world. 290 But already
in Jubilees repentance had been one of the great, key elements of Yom
Kippur. 291 The word il:mun is attested for the firsttime in Qumran. 292 Philo
considers repentance a virtue and attributes great powers to it. 293 It is the
central theme of Pseudo-Philo's sermon On Jonah. The Babylonian Tal-

286 bYoma 19b.

21? Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer 46.
288 yBer 4:1, 1c;yTa'an4:l, 67c.
189 Among the vast Iiterature on repentance in rabbinie literature, see Büchler, Studies

in Sin 011d Atonement; Urbach, The Sages, pp. 462-471.

290 bPesah S4a; bNed 39b.
291 See above, pp. 9S-97.
292 On repentance iD Qumran, see B. Nitzan, "Repentance in the Dead Sea Scrolls," in:

P.W. Flint and J.C. Vandedcam (eds.), The Dead Sea Scrol/s after FiftY Year.s. A Compre-
hei'ISive A.s.ses.sment (Leiden, 1999; vol. 2, pp. 14S-170); S.J. Pfaon, "The Essene Yearly
Renewal Ceremony and the Baptism ofRepentance," in: D.W. Pany and E. Ulrich (eds.),
The Provo International Conference on the Dead Sea Scrolls. Technological /nnoYation.s,
New Tats, and R.eformulated Issues (Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 30;
Leiden, 1999; pp. 337-352). The overview by Bell is tendentious but useful as a
collection of sources: see R.H. Bell, "Teshubah: The Idea of Repentance in Ancient Iu-
daism," The Journal ofProgressive Judai.sm S (1995) 22-52.
293 On repentance in Philo, see D. WiDston, "Philo's Doctrine of Repentance," in: I.P.

Kenoey (ed.), The School o[Mo.ses. Studies in Philo and Helleni.stic Religion in Memory
of HOI'st R. Moehring (Studia Philonica Mo.nographs I; Brown Iudaic Studies 304;
Atlanta [Ga.], 199S; pp. 29-40).
 lmaginaires of Yom Kippvr 133

mud of Yoma includes several instances of praise for repentance and its
universal and cosmological effects of healing, often connected to
Hosea 14.294 They culminate in Rabbi Meir's statement: ''GTeat is repent-
ance that for one who repents, the whole world is forgiven"- i.e. the revol-
utionary idea of vicarious repentance, which did not become mainstream
thought. In another of these passages, repentance is equated with sacri-
fices, using for the firsttime the Masoretic Text ofHosea 14:3: "And we
will offer the bulls with our lips," the text that will become the standard
prooftext for the substitution of sacrifice by prayer. According to a similar
statement in Cantieies Rabbah, Hosea 14:3 refers directly to the bull and
the scapegoat. 29s These two are the only early usages of this verse, and
both appear in the context of Yom Kippur. Apparently, the need to fmd a
theological solution for substituting sacrifices with prayer was most ur-
gently feit for the Day of Atonement.
So high a status of repentance raises questions about the importance of
Yom Kippur and its afflictions. Does one need a Yom Kippur ifthe repent-
ance of one member can vicariously achieve forgiveness for the whole
world? Other rahbis discuss the opposite question. Does Yom Kippur
achieve atonement ez opere operato, or is an inner attitude such as repent-
ance an indispensable element ofYom Kippur? An (anonymous) Mishnah.
gives repentance the power to atone for minor transgressions only, while
graver transgressions need the atoning power of Yom Kippur, too. Still,
repentance is indispensable for the atoning power of Yom Kippur and
death. 296 Accordingly, in Tannaitic sources, Yom K.ippur and repentance
are mutually dependent. The Talmudim include a more radical Statement,
attributed to Rabbi297 that Yom K.ippur or death may effect atonement even
without repentance- ez opere operato or even ez die. 298 Despite both Tal-
mndirn continuing the discussion and disregarding Rabbi's option, the
Babylonian Talmud may be understood to agree with him.
The Tosefta and the Talmudim contain a tradition according to which
Rabbi Yishmael distinguishes between four different kinds of sins and

m bYoma 86a-b.
m Cantieies Rabbah on Cant 4:4, sign 9. The Statement is in the name of Rabbi
Abhahu (d. ca. 309). Similar ideas ofsubstituting verbal acts for sacrifice can he found in
bMenah 106b; bMeg 3lb; bTa'an 27b.
296 mYoma 8:8. The Tosefta goes in the same direction as the Mishnah, with the

exception that Rabbi Yehudah states ambiguously that death is like repentance: see
tYoma4:9.
197 Albeit with problems in the attribution and the contents in the Palestinian Talmud:
see Avemarie, Yoma- Yersllhnungstag, pp. 225-226.
191 yYoma 8:6, 45b; bYoma B.Sb.
134 Yom Kippurin Eorly Jew&IJ Thougbt ond Ritual

their corresponding atonement.299 Repentance atones (without Yom Kip-

pur) only for the transgression of minor commandments. It delays the
punishment for transgressing minor prohibitions until Yom Kippur7 which
atones. Deliberate transgressions of grave commandments are partly
atoned for by repentance and Yom Kippur, and partly by tonnents during
the year. 300 Blaspherny, however, is atoned for one third by repentance and
Yorn Kippur, one third by the tonnents (during the rest of one's life) and
one third by death. Here again the concept is closer to tbat of the Tannaitic
sources (Yorn Kippur and repentance are mutually interdependent), with
the a.ddition oftbe atoning function oftheflagella Dei. Finally, in addition
to repentance, death and suffering, cbarity and good deeds bave an atoning
effect. 301
In sum. tbe singular importance of repentance does not make Yom Kip-
pur superfluous, because the Day of Atonement is conceived of as having
an intrinsic atoning power for major sins, in some cases even witbout
repentance. God's meroy is the all-deciding factor.

5. High-Priest.J.y Visions ofGod III:

Aspects of Yom Kippur in the Hekhalot Literature

Jewish mystical texts collected under the heading "Hekhalot literature" use
the high-priestly entrance as an image to describe the mystical ascent
vision. 302 Regretfully, the unresolved chronological problem impedes a
sa.tisfactory discourse on their exact relationship to Second Temple and
early Christian and Gnostic literature. The dates proposed for these tex:ts
range from the Second Templeperiod to the Gaonic period and later.303

299 t.Yoma4:6-&;yYoma 8:6, 4Sb-e; bYonra 86a.

• One could say tbat the hardships cause tbe other days of tht year to bec:ome like
Yom Kippur with its afflictioos.
301 See e:.g. bBer 5b.
lill I quote: the various texts oftbis genre according to section numbers in Scbafer,
Schiliter and von Mutius, Synopu :t.ur Helchalot-Literatur.
lOJ G.G. Scholem, Jr.vi8h Gn0$tlci8m, Merkaboh Mjsticism, and Tolmudic Tradition.
Basedon the Israel Goltbtein Lect11res, Delivereil at the Jr.vi3h Theologico/ Seminary uf
A.111erica, New .York (New Yorlc, 1960). See also R. Elior, "From Earthly Temple to
Heavenly Sbrines. Prayer and Sacred Song in the Hekhalot Literature and 11:8 &llation to
Temple Traditions,'' Jewi3h Studies Quarterly 4 (1991) 217-167, for tbe more recent
literatiD'Il, especially note:s 3, 9, 12, 13, 22. And see idcm, "The Merkavah Tradition and
the Emergence of Jewish Mysticism," in: A. OppeRheimer (ed.), Sinf)-Judaica. Jews rmd
Chinese in Historkai D;alogw. A" lnternalional Colloqult~m Ntmjing. 11-19 October
1996 (Tel Aviv, 1999; pp. 101-158}.
 lmGginairu ofYotrr Kippur 135

In the 1960s, Johann Maier deduced early Jewish mysticism from

priestly speculations on the Jerusalem temple cult.304 Rache! Elior has
picked up tbis line of thought and developed it further, suggesting a close
relationship between the upsurge in the output of early Jewish mysticallit-
erature, priestly circles and visions evoked by acute distress after the de-
struction of Jerusalem's temple and the cessation of its cult.305 Notably.
Elior does not make any explicit claim about the specific influence ofYom
Kippur but is eoncemed with alt motifs in the Hekhalot Iiterature that
evoke the temple service and priesthood. Our conce.tn is only with those
motifs related to Yom Kippur.
Tbe Helchalot Iiterature contains various ascent deseriptions, with nu-
merous detaits corresponding to the bigh-priestly entrance on Yom Kippur.
The two protagonists of the Helchalet texts, Rabbi Yishmael (ben Elisha}
and Metatron, axe ftequently porttayed as high priests or as executing
bigh-priestly functions.~ The heavenly sanctuary is described in rough
analogy to Jerusalem's temple, with areas of increasing sanctity, usually
seven. In the heavenly prayerl07 the heavenly creatures (and the participat-
ing mystics) have -like priests or high priests- to prepare themselves for
the presence ofGod's glory by protection rites: sanctification, purification
and the wearing of special gmnents.308 The center ofthe heavenly ritual is
the pronoWlcing of God's name, often jn the fonn of the Qedusha, upon
which the heavenly creatures answer "Blessed be the name of the glory of
His kingdonl to all etemity,"309 andin some cases. the heavenly hosts react
by prostrating themselves;310 trumpets may be blown and a benediction
said.311

104 J. Maier, Vom Kultus zur G11osis. BtAn.deslade, Gottesthron und M4r'kabah (Salz-
burg, 1964).
305 Elior, ..From. Eanhly Temple to Heaveoly Sbrioes."
306 Elior, ''From Eartbly Temple to Heavenly Sbrines," pp. 227-230.
X17 Elior distingui:sbes between three k:inds of prayer, heaveoly, sbared and lll)'$i:ieal,
according 10 the performer, the firSt being by far the mos:t ftequeutly desaibed.
* Elior, "from Earthly Temple to Heavenly Shrines,.. p. 243, referring to JEnach 36
(Synopsis §§54); Hekhalot Rahball §§181.184-185; Hrtkhalot Rabbati §2~~; Hekhalot
Zutarli §424; SBder Rabba d•Ber1 '.thit §§811.814-816.
309 Elior, "From Eartbly Temple to Heavenly Shrines," pp. 261-263, referring toShi'ur
Qomah §384; Metafron §390; Ma'fl$th Merkavah §SSS; and 3Enoch 39 (Synopsis §S7).
A glance at Schilifer's concordance reveals that the benediction , ..,O::I17:::t appears vcry
often, about 30 times according to the synopsis.
310 Elior, "from Earthly Temple to Heavenly Shrines," p. 263, refening to 3Enoch

(Synops~ §S7).
m Elior, "From Barthly Temple to Heavenly Sbrines," pp. 23S-242, refettlng to
Hekhalot Zutarti §411; Hekha/Qt.Rabbati §192.
136 Yonr KipJNF in Early Jewish Th021ghl and Ritaal

A tradition in Hekhalot Zutarti explicitly linlcs the mystics' ascent prac-

tices to Yom Kippur:
Rabbi Aqiva said: "Bverybody who wanr. to study tbis Mishnah and intequet lhe
Name in Its interpretarionm sball sit fastiDg for 40 days and lay his head betwceu.
bis thigbs Wltil the f'.ist controls him.... And he shall be acquainted with it from
month to month and from year to year, 30 days before Rosh Hashanah begianing
with the New Moou of Elul until Yom Kippur so that Satan migbt not lay blame
on him and spoil the whole year. 313
References to 40 days of fasting arefrequent in the Hekhalot literature.314
However, Yom K.ippur and the period of repentance preceding it are par-
ticularly effective in protecting the mystic from evil powers. Th.e Uturgical
custom ofpronouncing the divine name opeoly only on Yom Kippur and
the apocal)'pti.c/proto-mystic tradition connecting the vision of God to tbe
high priest's encounter with God in the ho1y of hoHes may have been tac-
tors in thls development.
To what extent do these motifs refl.ect priestly knowledge of the histo-
rical temple ritual or the influence of the contemporary ptayer service of
Yom Kippur? To what extent are they the heritage of the apoeal:yptic
imaginoire of Yom Kippur, ud to what extent did the mystics behind
these texts recognize a connection to the high priest's entrance and add
further allusion.s?
Descriptions of mystic visions in the Hekhalot Iiterature and Second
Temple ascent texts share the following motifs: allusions to the high-
priestly function of the ascending; a heavenly sanctuary with increasing
levels of sanctity; a heavenly liturgy by angels; prostration, sanctification
and purification; and the putting on of special, ftesh gannents. 315
Three motifs - the pronounciation of God's na.me, the benediction
"Blessed be the name of the glory of His kingdom to all etemity" and tbe
prostration of tbe people - are not contained in the apocalyptic ascent de-
scriptions. According to Elior. they recall the descriptions of the high
priest's performance in Sirach 50 and Misb.nah Tomid 7, and his confes-
sion with the people's answers in the common text of Mishnah Yomo. 316
However. Sirach 50 and Tamid 7 describe the daily ritual. In the temple.
God's namewas pronounced not only on Yom Kippur but every day. 317

m Or: "pronounce the Name openly."

m My translation of Hdhalot Zutarti §424 (ms Oxford I S31 ).
314 E.g. Hekhalot Rabb<lll §§313-314.
315 See e.g. JE110ch 14; 2Enoch22; TutamentofLe~~i3; S; 8.
316 Trumpets: Sir 50:16 and mTamid1:3; prosrration: Sir 50:17.21 and mTamid7:3;

benedictiou. mentioning God's DSme: Sir 50:20 and mTamld1:2.

m .E.g. Sir 50:2~.
 I111aginafru ofYom KippUI' 137

Furthermore. the pronunciation of God' s n.ame accompanied by prostration

by the people appears for the fliSt time in the early Sidrei A.vodah and ftom
there appears to havc entered the Mishnah Yoma 6:2, ·since it is missing in
tbe best manuscripts and not commented upon in the Talmud.im.318 I do not
k:now of a Second Temple ascent tradition focusing on the pronunciation of
God's name with the CWJtomary answer benediction,319 neither do I know
of such a tradition mentioning trumpets or a concluding benediction.
Although these elements were probably not part of the actual Yom Kip-
pur ritual, they were regarded as such by many paytanim who wrote the
fll'St Sidrei Avodah. Compared to depictions of Philo, Hebrews and the
Valentinians, which add specific Yom Kippur elem.ents, the Hekhalot seem
tobe less influenced by the historical Yom Kippur temple ritual but more
by its imagi111Jire mixed with that of the daily temple cult.
Michael Swartz has analyzed prayers from the high holidays found in
the Hekhalot tradition Mo 'oseh Merlcavah. '.Attah Yodea' Razey 'Oiam, for
example, appears only slightly tran.c;formed in §548 as part of a long
mystical prayer.320 The mystical prayer is too Jong to be quoted here in
fuU. 321 lt calls on God using a divine name,322 pnüses God's might, king-
ship and esoteric knowledge, describes the heavenly court and emphasizes
God's mercy. The tablethat follows cornpares the version of 'A.ttah Yodea •
Razey 'Olam in &der Rav Sa'adia Ga 'on with the relevant part of the
mystical prayer according to two manuscripts of Ma 'aseh Merkavah §548,
New York JTS 8128 and Munich Codex Hebr. 22:
MunichCQd.
Hebr. zjJZ$
You know You know Youknow
the mysteries of the universe the mysteries of the universe
and the de.pest seuets of all
the livfng.
and examine wisdom and hid· and examine the
den ways. wisdom of ltiddeu.
ways.
You Who is like you, who Who is like you,
who

* See p. 59, !lOte 242. above.

11
119 In Tllata111ent of Levl 5:5, Levi asks God to teach him his name.
320 See Swartz, .A()'.rtical Prayer in A.ncient Judai&m, pp. 111·-llS, esp. pp. 115-118.
321 Ma'aseh Merkavah §548-549.
m '7K1V1' ":'''JK :lr.l' •n, (New York 8128). Tlris name is definitdy connected to the root
11 ("mystery'').
lU S11der Rav Sa 'odia Ga 'on (ed. Davidson, Asaf and Yoel, p. 258), my translation.
124 Ma'aseh Merkavah §54&, m.anuscript NY 8128, my translation.
311 Ma'aseh Mukavah §548, manuscript M22, my translation.
138

ehedes checks
se.areh alllhe inner bowel.s
bearts hearts
and aud and
examines
see
kidneys kidneys? kidneys?
andheart.
Among the thoughts
Nothing is eoncealed from there is nothing coneealed from
you aad nothing is hidden you and nothing is bidden from
from ure es. s.
Contrary to the accent on human secrets in sa•adia's confession. the .mys-
tical prayer empbasizes esoteric divine knowledge.32' The New York
manuscript is closer to 'Attah Yodea ' R.azey 'Oiam in Seder R.av Sa 'adia
Ga 'on than the other manuscripts. Swart2 concludes that the scribe ofthe
New York manuscript was influenced by the Yom Kippur liturgy. 327 Using
a confession as a mystical prayer is probably grounded in the coneeption
that the mystic has to ..cleanse hlmself of iniquity and falsehood, and of alt
evil"na to approach God, and inclusion of the divine name is supposed to
protect the mystic.329 Moreover: almost certainly, the traditional concept of
the holy of holies as the place and of Y om Kippur as the day to directly
encounter God was an important factor in this development.
Interestingly, the ritual of the sacrificial goat fmds its .mythological
echo in an eschatological passage in Hekhalot R.ahbati. ..He [Samael] will
be slaughtered and killed, he and all ministers of the kingdoms in the
heights, like the Ieids (C"'ll) and lambs (CI'!ll::l:l) of Yom Kippur.":no Samael
is punished for having killed ten righteous men to avenge the vending of
Josef by their forefathers. As the name of the dernon indicates. this is a
transfonned version ofthe 'Asa'el mytb. The 'Asa'el myth, however, ty-
pologizes the scapegoar.J'Jl This story with the Josef motiv as ftame

J» Swartz, Mystical PrtlJ!u irr A.rrcient Judaism, p. 116.

m Swa.rtz, Mystlcal Prayer in A.ncient Judalsm, pp. 116-J 17.
m Ma't13ehMerkiw1Jh §547.
329 Swa.rtz, M}lsrical Prayer in A.ncient Judaism, pp. 117-11& and p. 218.
330 Hekhalot RabbtJti §108. Why does llekhalot R11bbati talk of kids and lambs, which

allud.es to Passover, instead of goau? ls this a polomical reectioo. to Christian traditioos

as in Joha I :29? J would likc to thank Ra'auan Abusch tor this observation and sug-
gestion.
~ 1 Beyond tbis, lhe legend of 'Uzza', 'Azza' and 'Aza'el appears in 3Enoch 4-S
(Synopsis §§5-8). Oo the history ofthe tradition from JEnach to JE11och, set~ A.Y. Recd,
"From Aueland Sn~ihazah to U:z:zah, Az2ab, and Azael: 3 Enoch 5 (§§ 7-8) and Jewish
Reeeption-Hmory of I Enocb," Jewish Stildies Qrlarlerly 8 (2001} lOS-136, wbo
 Imaginairu of Yom KippMT 139

appears also in the medieval Midrash The Story of the Ten Martyrs ( ii,W
nl:)?1l 'l11i1). the poetic torm of which. 'Eleh Ezkerah, became part of the
Yom Kippur service in some communities.332 In several recensions, (the
eve ot) Yom Kippur was the execution day of Eli•ezer ben Shammua333 or
Rabbi Aqiva. 334 Here, tbe execution ofthe righteous (not Samael) serves as
a Yom Kippur sacrifice for the original sin of the forefathers who kitled
Josef.m
In sum, the paylanim and the writers ofthe Hekhalot texts may have the
same priestly provenance. However, 1 hesitate to oonclude that the
traditions in the Hekhalot Iiterature retlect esoterical priestly knowledge of
the historical temple ritual. As the secondary adaption of 'Attah Yodea'
Razey 'Olam in manuscript New York and of the benediction "Blessed be
the name of the glory of His kingdom to all etemity,. in the Mishnah show,
new motifs oonnecti.ng the mystical .experience with Yom Kippur but not
appearing in Second Temple ascent texts can be the result ofthe influence
of the oontemporary prayer ritual of Y om Kippur on the mystic's
imagination: "How it should have been" rather than the historical memory
of ''How it was ... The question remains open as to whether the scribes of
the Hek:halot texts were actual priests or merely wanted to be priestlike.

Concluding Thoughts to Part One

Wbile the destru.ction of the temple brought the high priest's ritual to an
abrupt end, the prayers and affiictions of the people oontinued. To be sure.

proposes that 3Enodl S is dependent ou I Enoch 6-ll, perhaps via Christian sources such
as Syncell\1$.
332 'Eleh 'Ezkerah (:n:m~: :1'1K, wrhese I sball recall"). Althougb the story is not apart

of the texts traditioaaUy regardod as Helchalot literature, there are &ome interconnections.
These Midrasbilll bave been convenieotly published in synoptic form by G. Reeg, Die
Gßchichte 110n den Zehn Mlirtyrem (Texts and Swdies in Anclent Judaism 10; TO.-
bi.agen, 198.S). This tradition has been serutiniT.ed by R. Abusch, ..Rabbi Isbmael's Mira·
culous Ccncoption. 1ewish Redemption History in Anti-Christian Polemic," in: A.H.
Bec;ker and A. Reed (eds.), The Ways That Never Parted: Jews ond Cluistion:r '" Anfi-
t.ptll)J and the Early Middle Agil$. (Texts and Studies in Ancient J'udaism 95; Tllbingen,
2003; pp. 307-345). I would like to express my appreciation to R,a•anan Abusch for
sending mc a copy of his paper prior to it.s publication. A poetic form of the story, 'Eleh
'Ezkerah, became part oftbe Ashkenazy Yom Kippur liturgy: see Ooldachmidt, Mahz:or
for the Day:r ofAwe, vot 2, pp. 56&-:574.
' 33 The Story of the Ten Martyr~ I S 1:2.7.
'1!4 The Story ofthe Ten Martyrs JII 33:12; Vn 31:34; IX 31:33.
335 Cf. tbe rabbinic:al statemcnt f'I1D:Iia l:!·~·u'>w lM'tl 1' "1!1:11.> D"1l!l.,:l al'W D111:1,
Ufiticus Ro.bbah 20:12 (ed. Margulies, p. 472): see above p. 130, note 273.
140 rom Kippur in Eorly JiTWish 111oughl and Ritual

the rituals in and outside the temple were affiliated. The high priest prayed
at the end of his ceremony (possibly being the forerunner of Qumran's
Festival Prayers). In addition, ritual reenactments ofthe high priest's ritual
were probably aiready part of the service in some synagogues of the Sec-
ond Temple period, especiaUy as readings ofthe biblical descriptions or a
translation or a parapb.rase of them. There is a sligbt possibility that some
Second Temple communities used a kind of Setkr Avadah. lhe motifs
shared by Qumranic, Philonic and rabbinie prayers, bowever, are neither
close nor numerous enough to point to a geographically extensive and
chronologically continuous com.nron tradition.
Beyond that, the emergence, spread and success of the kt:lpparot against
all the learned rabbis' objections manifest the extent of the psychological
pressure and the pe<>ple's attachment to the idea of atonement through the
blood and death of an animaL Prayer, afflictions such as fasting, and re-
pentance, which had become the means of atonement (e.g. Philo, Qumran
and the rabbis), were apparently not enough for some people.336 Aspects of
the ritual encounter with the divine in the high-priestly entrance to the holy
of holies were transformed into a kind of ritual in some forms of mysti-
cism, especially among the group that produced the Songs of the Sabbath
Sacrifice and, as we shall see, in Valentinian Gnosticism; perhaps also
among the apocalyptic visionaries and in Hekhalot mysticism.
Etiological legends connect Yom Kippur to the mythological events of
its biblical context (the giving ofthe Torah at Mount Sinai, the golden calf,
the ordination of Aaron), to the consecration of the First Temple, and to
events in the Iives of the forefathers (Noah's repentance, Abraham's
cil:cumcision, Joseph's vending).
The central ideas of the rabbinie imaginaire of Yom Kippur - the day of
judgment and eschatological redemption - had already emerged in Second
Temple Judaism, especiaUy in apocalyptic circles. The scapegoat was usu-
ally ronsidered an embodiment of sin or of the evil forces. Its ritual killing
is linked to the myth of the fallen angels and the punishment of their de-
monic leader. Scant evidence exists for associating the scapegoat with
positive figures (Ananus, Ravya bar Qisi).
The high priest's entrance into the holy of holies was widely used for
describing the encounter with God. Prophetie, apocalyptic and Hekhalot
texts (and Hebrews) hint at a scene that Philo and the Valentinian Christian
texts describe more explicitly. While all texts except those of Philo are de-
pendent on some sort of common tradition, they also draw independently
on Yom K.ippur as a source of inspiration.

336 An anthropologic:al study ofthe motivation for performing the kapparot today could
perhaps help to hypothesize abaut the reasons for its success in the Middle Ages.
 lmaglnaire.s ofYom Kippur 141

Conversely, these conceptions served as a rationale for the Yom Kippur

rituals. The bigh-priestly entrance was unde:rstood as a dangerous encoun-
ter with God, demanding spiritual and ritual preparation. Tbc scapegoat
ritual was conceived of as an expiation of the demonie powers, annualy
pr:eenacting tlte eschatological destruction of the evil forces and Iiberation
oftheir good prisoners by an angeHe, high-priestly redeemer. Accordingly,
eschatological expectations must have been particularly high around Yom
K.ippur. A related form of the eschatl)logical atmosphere comes to the fore
in Qumran's conception of the current period of persecution as a prolonged
Yom Kippur that would end with the coming ofthe high-priestly redeemer
and the destruction of evil.
The myth of JEnach 10 served among other purposes as a rationale for
the temple ritual in a priestly group interested in Jerusalem's temple cult.
The creation of such texts as 4Q180, 4Q181 and IlQMelchizedek in a
temple-less envirooment attests that the myths around •Az'azel and the
••combat" between scapegoat and high priest could develop even in a group
not necessarily participating in the te.mple ritual but living (in) the same
imaginaire. While Qumran disregarded the contemporaneous Jerusalem
temple, it did not consider the idea of a material temple and blood sacri-
fices invalid but waited for tbe retum to lerusalem.
 Part Two

The Impact ofYom Kippur

on Early Christianity
in the First and Second Centuries
 Chapter 4

y om Kippur Imagery in the Early Christian lmaginaire

Part 2 investigates the impact of the rituals and concepts of Yom K.ippur
on early Christian beliefs and practices. The Christian myth par excellence
(i.e. nanative with foundational status) is the account ofthe death of Jesus
and the various meanings attached to it. especially vicarious atonement. 1
The earliest myths of Cbristianity were formulated by Christian Jews. who
used their collective (Jewish) memory, their collective repertoires of
motifs, to understand the death of their leader. For them, Yom K.ippur was
one of the principal features of their religious life. A number of Jewish
rnyths about a messianie redeemer were coonected to the imaginaire of
Yom Kippur, and at a very early stage Iesus' death was understood as
baving the same pwpose as Yom Kippur: the atonement ofthe collective.
Regarding this constellation., it would have been odd if the most important
festival of Second Temple Judaism and the essential theological concepts
coanected to it bad not influenced the inte.rpretations of Jesus' death.
ln the pages that follow. I will investigate several passages from the lit-
eratute of earliest Christianity tbat have been explained against the back-
ground of Yom Kippur and provide evidence for the extensive impact of
that festivaL The imagery of the temple ritual of Yom Kippur inspited not
only typologies of Christ. but also the fonnulation of the Matthean Passion
narrative, being used in partiewar to illustrate the atoning power of bis
death. Some of the passages discussed below emerged in the earliest, pre-
Pauline circles (the traditions used by Paul in Romans 3:25-26, the high
prlesthood before Hebrews, an.d perhaps the proto-typology used by
Barnabas). Several tex.ts belong to the most central and influential verses
of the New Testament. among them Romans 3:24-26. Galatians 3-4.
Hebrews 9 and Matthew 27:15-26.
Many of these passages, but not all, have been discussed in the earlier,
llltpllblished works ofNonnan H. Young and J.P. Scullion.2 Young's work,

1 For the sodological definitions of lmaginaire myth aad mythology used here, see
above pp. 7-10.
· ·.. 2 YoUDg, "The Impact of the lewish Day of Atonement upon the Thought of the New
Testament"; ScuUion, '"A Traditio-Historica1 Study ofthe Day of Atonement." See also
now the generat investigation of atoa.ement in the New Testament by T. Kn6ppler, Sihne
146 The Impact ofYom KippiiT on ChTistianity in the First ond Second Centuries

in particular, laid the foundations for future research. The work of Wolf-
gang Kraus suggests interesting interpretations for Romans 3:25 and He-
brews.3 Yet all these studies disregard, either partially or completely, the
non-canonical texts. Barnabas and the Gospel of Peter, which date to
around tbe sa.me time as such late canonical texts as 2Peter and even bad
canonical status in some places. 4 The work:s of Helmut Koester and John
Dominic Crossan are important in filling this gap. 5 The integration of this
recent resea:rch on the non-canonical sources into a comprehensive analysis
of the influence of Yom Kippur on early C~tianity is one of the main
pmposes of tbis chapter. I ·will also offer a number of fresh read.ings of
New Testamentpassagesand will especiaUy relate to Matthew's Barabbes
episode. 6
In my analysis I focus on four guiding questions: Which elements of
Yom Kippur can be pe:rceived as having bad an influence, and where?
What kind of Yom Kippur (apocalyptic imoginaire, ritual, Leviticus 16)

im Neuen Testament. Studien :;11m urchristlichen Yerstlindnis der Heilsbede11hmg desTo-

des Jesu (Wissenscllaftllche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament 88; Neu-
kirc:hen-Vluyn, 2001). ,
l Kraus, Der Tod Jesu als Heiligtum:sweihe, passim.
4 R.E. Srown, AJt lntroduction to the New Testament (New York, 1998), p. 767,
suggests tb.e years t2o-140 CE as most Iikely for 2Peter. For the dates dis~ussed for Bor-
nabas, see note ll, below.
Signific:antly, Young, "The Impact of the Jewish Day of Atonement upon the
Thought ofthe New Testament," and Kraus, Der Tod Jesu als Heiligtums-weihe, relcgate
their quite brief discussions of Barnabat to the appendlx and in tbeir conclusions do not
really pay heed to its implications. Even such an outstanding expert on Apocrypha u
Klaus Berger docs not indude Barnabas in bis recent Theologiegeschichte des Ur-
christentunu. The subtitle, Theologie des NT, comc:s closer to the contents. Knöppler,
Stlhne im Neuen Testament, does not deal with non-canonical early Chrlstian literature.
' See H. K.öster [Koester}, Synapti$che Obuliefentng bei den Apostoli$chen Yaterlf
(Texte und Untersuchungen 65; Berlin, 1957); H. Koester, "Apocryphal and C4nonica1
Gospels," Ha,-..ard Theological Review 73 (1980) 105-130; idem, lntroduction ID the
New Tuta".ent. Jfolume One: History, Cuit11re, and Religion of the He/leni$tic Age.
Yolume Two: History and Lituature of Early Christianity (Berlin, New York. and Phila-
delphia, 1982); idem, Ancient Chri.,tian Gospels. Their Hittory and Development (Phila-
delphia and London, 1990); J.D. Crossan, Four Other Gospels (Minneapolis, 198S); J.D.
Crossao, ''The Cross That Spote. The Barliest Narralive of tbe Passion aud Resur-
reccioR," FORUM 3/2 (1987) 3-12; J.D. Crossan, The Cros:~ That Spoke. Tlte Origlns of
the Passion Narrat~e (San Francisco, 1988}. See my criticism of bis theory, below,
pp. 161-165.
' The suggestion of K.A. Strand, "An Overlooted Old-Testament Background to
Rev 11:1," AfUirewa Univer.JitySemillar Studles 22 (1984) 317-325, to see Lev 16 against
the background of Rev 11:1 has been rightly rejected by D. Aune, Re11elation (3 vols;
Word. Bibli.cal Commentary 52A-C; Nash~ille [Tenn.], 1997-1998), vol. 2, p. 604, as too
subtle and imprecise.
 Yom Kippur lmagV)I in tlte Early Cltristian Imogillaire 141

influenced the Christian text? What function does Yom K.ippur have in the
Christian teKt'l What is the bistorical Sitz im Leben of this text?
The investigation is structured in the following way: The first four sec-
tians deal with the typologica.l passages. those that compare Jesus to (1)
certain animals (sacrificial goat, scapegoat) ofthe Yom Kippur temple rite,
(2) its central sacrificer (the high priest), (3) its central cultic object (the
kapporet; iAUOt~ptov) and (4) its aim (i.Ao.o~Oc;). The fifth section briefly
discusses the theses of scholars who link two early Christian hym.ns to the
ritual of Yom K.ippur. The final section places these investigations in his-
torical context and provides a synthesis.

1:· Christ and the Scapegoat: Barnabas, Matthew and Galatians

The imagery of the scapegoat rite of Yom Kippur bad a tremendous i.m.pact
on the devclopment of the early narratives and interpretations of Jesus•
death. The Epistle of Barnabas explicitly compares Jesus' Passion and
Parousia to the scapegoat and the sacrificial goat. Implicit allusions are
probably bebind the scapegoat in the Barabbas episode ofMatthew27:15-
23 and behind Galatians 3:10.13. The scapegoat probabiy influenced also
the ••tamb of God.. in John 1:29 and the Christological interpretation of
the suffering servant in 1Peter 2:24. Here, an influence, if any, can be dis-
cerned only through a very wide understanding of the scapegoat rite and
the Mediterranean rite ofthe pharmalws as catalysts.
I will refer also to the theories of two other ~holars who attributed an
especially strong influence to the scapegoat. John Crossan claims that the
imagery of the scapegoat rite influenced an earlier form of the Gospel of
Peter !hat was the source for all canonical passion accounts. 7 And accord-
ing to A.H. Wratislaw, alt four canonical versions ofthe Barabbas episode
were in:fluenced by tb.e scapegoat rite. 8
The section proceeds from the explicit to the implicit. I start (1.1) with a
discussion of Barnabas and its proto-typology and an excursus on Cros-
san's thcory; an analysis of Matthew 27:15-23 follows (1.2); tb.en comes
an excursus on the pharmakos and an interpretation ofGalatians 3-4 (1.3);
and the section ends with an investigation of those passages in which there
are few traces of the scapegoat rite' s influence: John 1:29 and lPeter 2:22-
24 (1.4). The first two cover the passagestbat come closest to being narra-
tives, while the last three refer to theologoumena.

See bclow, pp. 161-165.

See pp. 165-171, below.
148 The Impact of Ycm Kipprtl' on ChristiDnity in the First and Second Ctml.uriu

1.1 The Tradition ofBarnabas

'Ibe Epistle of Barnabas has a special place in this inquiry, since it inter-
pret.s. extensively and in depth, the link between Jesus' death and Yom
Kippur. 9 It is no surprise that Bultmannchose the typologies of Barnabas
and Hebrews as the foremost exa.mples of eady Christian mythology. 141 No
other text better exemplifies the crisis of the sc:andal of a messiab' s death
on the cross and the central role of typological interpretation in overc:om-
ing this calamity. Unfortunately, the central questions of authorship, place
and time are points of controversy. 11 &me ofthe historical implications
ilierefore remain hypothetical. Yet, since the Christian myth is .still typo-
logical exege.sis, not yet a narrative, its form. points to an early time of
composition, earlier than the earliest Passion Narrative (i.e. before 65).
According to Helmut Koester, Barnabas 7 reflects the earliest stage of

' In recent years. Barnabas has been intensively studie<l. See R. Hvalvik, The
Strvggle for ScriptiiN ond Co11enant. The Pwpo$1! ofthe Epinle ofBarnabaJ and Jewish-
Cirristian Cotnpetition in the Second Century (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum
Nenen Testament, second $Crics 82; :,rubingen, 1996); J. Carleton Pagel, The Epistle of
Barnabos. Outlook and BDcigl'ollnd (Wissenscbaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neoen
Testament, second series 64; TUbingen, 1!1!14); W. Horbury, "1ewlsh-Christiaa Relations
in Barnab(J.j aud Justin Mlll1:}'r," in: l.D.G. Dmm (ed.), Jtlllls and Christiam: The Parting
of the W'Q)'s A.D. 70 to 135 (Wissenscbaftlicbe Untersuchlmgen zwn Neuen Testament
fli'St series 66; Tlibingen, 1992; pp. 315-345}; K. Wengst, Tradition urrd Tlreclogie da
Bamabasbriefes (.Aroeiten zur Kirchengeschichte 42; Berlin, New Yorlc, 1971};
P. Prigent, Les t8Stimonia dans le christianlstn.r primitif L'tpitre de Barnabe 1-XY/ e1
ses so11rcu {Etades Bibliques 47; Paris, 1961); the COIIIlDentaries by H. Windisch, Die
apostoli$Chen YtJter I/1. Der Barnabasbrief (Handbuch ZIID1 Neuen Testament, Ergln-
zungsband; Tübingen, l920); P. Prigent and R.A. Kraft (eds., transls.}, Epitre de Barnabi
(SC 172; Paris, 1971); K. We.ugst (ed.), Dldache (A.po.stellehre), BarrrDbasbriej. Zweltu
Klememhriet Schrift an Diognet. Eingeleitet, her.QIJ.Jgegebm, tlbertragen tmd erläutert
(Scbriften des Urchristentums 2; Daxmscadt, 1984); anil now also F.R. Prostmeier, Der
Barnab~Mhrief Oberamt und erld4rt (Kommentar m den Apostolischen Vltem 8; GM-
tingen, 1999). pp. 285-317. Prostmeier's impressive commentaty is excellent for tbe
Greek passages, bul suffers from unfortu.a.ate errors on Hebrew matters and on Jewis.b
sources (e.g. p. 308 and .note 37).
10 Bultmann, ''Mythos und Mythologie IV (im NT)," here p. 1279.
u Carleto.a. Paget, The Episile of Barnabas, dates BMnabDI to early in Nerva's time
{pp. 27-25), prefening Alexandria witbout ruling out other plates in Syria!Paleatine and
Asia Minor (pp. 36-42). Hvalvik, The Stl'llggle for Scripillre and C011enant, pp. 70-190,
gives a broader range of time and does not spetil)r any place. Prostmeier, Der Barna-
basbrie/, pp. lll-119, prcfers Alexandria in the years 130-131 CE. On thesetting of Bar-
nabas, seealso Horbury, "Iewish-Christim Relatio.as in Barnabas and Justin Martyr."
Some misunderstandings and distortions p.rcclude the conclusion that the author of Bar-
nabas was him.self a halakhic expert, i.e. a rabbi, a priest or the Levite Barnabas. Prigent
and Hva.lvi.k suppose he was a Gentile writing for Gentiles.
 Yom Kippur Imagery in the Early Christian Imaginaire 149

Christian (Jewish) attempts to develop a narrative of Jesus' death with the

help of exegesis.
One can assume tb.at thc ouly lüstorical infollDation about Icsus' suffering, cruci-
fixioll, and death was that he was condemned to death by Pilate and crucified. The
details and individual scenes cftbc n3.!7ative do not rest on historical memory, but
were devdoped on the basis cf an aliegorical Interpretation of Scripturc. The ear·
liest stage and, at the same time, the bc$t examp Ie of such scriprural interpretation
is pn~served in the Epistle of Bornabas. 12
Koester is countered by such scholars as Douglas Moo, Joel Green and
Raymond Brown, who argue that the impact of exegetical-Iiturgical crea-
tivity on the invention of "facts" in the earliest Passion narratives was
rn.inimal. 13
The interpretation of Yom Kippur in ßarnabas 7 appears in the first part
( chapters 2-16), which starts by elaborating the futility of the Jewish cult
of .sacrifice and fasting (cbapters 2-3) and continues with a number of in-
t.erpretations of the Passion ( chapters 5-6). The suffering of the messiah is
also the topic of chapters 7 and 8, which give a typological interpretation
of the goats of Yom Kippur and the Red Reifer. Yet while the common
topic connects chapters 5-8, the perspective and method of exegesis
change as between chapters 1--6 and 7-8. In chapters l-6. Barnabas has
usoo variou:r Old Testament prooftexts to expound on a single theme. In
chapters 7 and 8, he uses a sing/e prototype from the Jewish temple on
which to base a broad Christologicai exegesis. In chapters 1-6, Barnabas
argues from the books ojrhe Bible; in chapters 7 and 8, he draws onrituals
as text-like, interpretable units, ä Ia Cliffurd Geertz. This is hlghly remark-
able, since the use ofpost- or un-biblical Jewish tradition endows the Jew-
ish cultic and literal interpretation of the Bible with prophetic qualities,
and this stands in diroot opposition to Barnabas' anti-Jewisb henneneutics.
whlcb repudiate attaching any soteriological significance to IsraeL 14 On

12 Koester, ll.ncient Christirm Gospels, p. 224.

n D.I. Moo, The Old Testament in the Gospel Passion Narratives (Shefi"reld, 1983};
J.B. Green, "Tbe Go$pel of Peter: Source for a pre-canonical Passion Narrative?," Zeit-
schrift ftir die nelttestamentliche WisseMchaft und di11 K11nde du älteren Kirche 1&
(1987} 293~30!; idem., The Death of JeSIJ.S. Tradition and Interpretation in the Passion
Narrative (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Ncuen Testament, second series 33;
Tllbingen, 1988); R.E. Brown, The De.ath ofthe Messiah. From Gethse.mone tc the Grave
(The Anchor Bible Reference Libra:ry; New Yor.k,. 1994),
14 On the lieJllleneutics of Bllrnabas, sec Hvalvik, The Struggle for Scriptime and

Covenanl:, pp. 103-131; Horbury, "Jewish-Christian Relations in Barnabas and Justin

Martyr"; and PT~ent and Kraft, Epltre de Barnabe, pp. 30-33. Contrary to Paul or He-
brews, for Barna/xu the people of braellost their coven.ant already with the golden calf
at Mount Sinai. Barnabas maintains that the authority of the Bible is timeless an.d
150 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Chrisrianity in the First and Second Centuries

this basis, the primary investigators of Barnabos' traditions, Pierre Prigent,

Robert Kraft, and, more recently, James Cadeton Paget, concluded that
Barnabas implemented an already existing typology. 15 I call tbis preM
Bamabian typology the "proto-typology" to distinguisb it fi:om the extao.t
typology in Barnabas. Use of this proto-typology is attested in Justin
Martyr, Tertullian, Hippolytus and perhaps some later exegetes, a point
tbat wiU be investigated below.
1.1.1 The First Pietute (Barnabas 7:3-5)
Barnabas 7 contains two distinct pictures, with minor digressions. which
are constructed as question and answer like a cateche.sis: 16 Vlhy did X hap-
pen? -In order to prophecy Y. The first picture starts with a goat, which is
sacrificed on Yom Kippur for all the sins (7:4a). While the people moum
and fast, the priests alone eat tbis goat, "unwashed with vinegar." This
goat, most probably the third goat sacrificed for the sins, had to be eaten
by the priests. 17 The preparation with vinegar. however, is not mentioned
elsewhere. 18

unchanging, a literal interpretation of'the commandments regarding tbe tabernaele and

lbc sacriflcial cult has ne~~er been conect. The con$lruction of the temple and the main-
tenanc:e of its sacrifieial cult were a misinterpretation. Tlle only function orthe Old Tes-
tament is to prophl:$}' the advent of the messiah. The typologies of Barnabas differ lhere-
fore from the usual concept of typology, in that the question or lhe historicity of the
prolOtype is c:ompletely irrelevant. Bven if the protoeype may in some instances be con-
sldered historically, its only signiflQilce lies in its prophetic dimension.
" Prigent, Les testimonia daiU le chriiJtianisme primirif, pp. 99-110; R.A. Kraft, "1be
Epistle of Barnaba:s: lts Quotations and Their Source$," (Ph.D. dis5ertation, Harvard
University, 1961) (nopr vidi); Prigeat and Kraft, ipitre de Barnabe on this verse; aud
Carleton Paget, Ths Epistle qf Barnabas, pp. 133-140. See also 0. Slwsaune. The Proof
from Prophecy (Supplements to Novum Testamentum S6; Leiden, 1987), 307-313.
Countering their approach, Wc:ngst, Tradition und Theologie du Bornabasbri;ifu, sug-
gests a :u:hool tradition, bot he negleccs the disparity of attitudes amoog the various tradi-
tioD$. James Carleton Paget combines both lheSe$, elaborating the cf'eati'Wl theology of
the compiler Bornabas.
16 On Barn.abas 7, see Cadeton Paset, The Epistl• ofBornabas, pp; 134-140; Prigeut,
Les testimonia dan1 le christianisme primitif. pp. 99-110; Wengst, Tradition und
Thflologie des Barnabasbriflfos, pp. 29-32; Crossan, Tht. Cro$.t That Spoke, pp. 115-233;
and tbe commentaries, e.g. Prostmeier. However, the important article by Alon, "The
Halakhah in tbe Epistle of Barnabas," appears in Prostmeier's bibliograpby, but not in
his exposition of Bornabos 7. Also, Prostilleier notes similarities to the G011pel of Peter,
but he does not reftlr to tbe important implic:ations of Crowm's thesis.
17 Nwn 29:11; mMenah 11:7 aod Philo, De specialibus Jegibll3 1:190 (lectio diffi-
cilior), see p. 32 note 77, above.
18 Cf. the suggestions by Windisch and by Prigent, Les testimo11ia .:kln.t le chri:stia-
nJsme primitif, p. 102, referring 10 tbe paschallamb.
 Yom Kipplil' Imagery in tlte Ear/y Christian lmaginaire 151

la But moreover when he was crucified he was given to drink vinegar aod gall
(öt;E1 ni xot11). 3b Listen how the priest$ of the temple foretold this. Despite1' the
fact that a commandmcnt was wriltu rhat ''whosoever does not keep the fast shall
die tbe death," (cf. Lev 23:29]3c the Lord commandcd this (i.e. to eat), because b.e
hirnself was going to oflcr thc vessel of the spirit as a sacrifice for our sins, :ld in
order that the type established in Jsaac, wbo was offercd upon the altar, mighl be
•a
. fulfilled. What then does be say in the Prophet? ..And Iet tlaem eat ofthe goal
which is olfered in tlre fast for alltheil' 11ins!' ~b Attend carefully,- "and Iet alltht
priest11 alone ellt thil illllrails unwuhed witlr <g/negar (i1tlv,;ov jiStu ~o~)."
"' Why? Because you are going to give to me gall and vinegar to drink when I am
on the point of offering my flesh for my new people, therefore you alone shall eat,
while tbe pcople fast and moura in sacke1oth and ashes. 5b To sbow tbat he must
suffer by them..211
The following table demonstrates the corresponding elements of the
typology:
Cullic prototv11e ChrutitJR Mvth
3b Whosoever does not keep the fast Deatb. of Jesus
shall die the tleath
4 .And let tbem eat of the gost whic:b is Jesos driuks ~>inegar and galP1
offered in the fast fur all their sins. ••.
And Iet all the priests alo.ne eat the
entrail~ 1mwashetl with vinegar.
4 ADd Iet them eat of the goat which is Je.sus' death as vicarious alonemilltl
affered in thejiZ!Itfor a/1 thelr sms.
. .• And Iet alt the priests alone eat the
enttails unwashed with vinegar.
4 And Iet them eat ofIM goat which is Eating qf Juus 'flesh, most probably
offered in the fast for alt their sins.•.. the Eucharist22
And Iet alt the pricsts alone eat the andfor not fas1ing on Yom Kippor
entrails unwashed with vinegar.
··:---
4 And let them eat of the goat which is Eating only by the new (priut/Y)

19 The adversative meaning of the G«ttltivlls Ab~oiiiM was rigb.tly remarked. by

Wengst, Didache (Apostel/ehre), Bamabasbritif, Zweiter Klemensbrie/. Schrift an Diog~

net; and Prostmeier, Der Bamaba.llbrief, in their c:o.mmentaries on this vuse.
211 Slightly adapted tr.msl. of Kirsopp Lake in LCL; I made use of the Ofeek in Prigent
and Kraft, Epitre. de BfR'nabi.
ll This typology agrees with its prototype only under the condition that the unwashed
Status of the entrails implies that they still contain the gall: see L. Helln. Studien nr
typologischen Schriftau!llegung im zweiten Jahrhundert. BartuJbas 11nd Justin (Heidel-
berg, 1971), p. 12 (fl(}n l'idi), quoted in Wengst. DidQche (Ap01tellehre), Barnabosbrief.
Zweiter Klemensbrief, Schrift a11 Diogttet, p. 199, note 113. The same strong allusion to
Ps 69 (68):22 is containcd only in the Go1pcl ofPeter .5:16.
zz Tbi.s c:onclusion is draw.u also by Carleton Paget, The Eputle of Barnabas, p. 136,
an.d Prige.nt, .Les te!ltimania rkm le christiani:sme primitif, pp. 109-llO. See tbe
interpretation ofTertullian, below, pp. 1.56-JSS.
] 52 The Impact of Yom Klppul' on Chr&tianil)' in the Fir.JI and Second Centul'ies

people, i.e. the Christians

The eating of the flesh of the goat by the priests - i.e. probably the
Eucharist - has a twofold funclion here. On the one band, it commemo-
rates the atoning effect of Jesus death as a sjn offering. thus fulfilling the
function of Yom Kippur. On the other hand. it distinguishes the identity of
Barnabas' priestly conununity, which eats the Eucharist, from that of the
fasting people (Jews), wbich does not. This picture would be impossible if
Barnabas' community (still) observed the fast of Yom Kippur. We can,
thcreforet understand this passage as a poletnie against Jews or Cbristi.an
Jews observing Yom Kippur. This impression is confirmed by the oam.e
Barnabas uses for Yom Kippur, "the fasf' and not "the Day of Atone-
ment," as would be appropriate for a typology ofthe temple ritual).
The reference to the Aqedah (7:3d) Iooks like an interpolation into an
earlier tradition. 24 Nevertheless, it is important, being one ofthe few early
links between Yom KiPPur and the Aqedah.l$
~

1.1.2 The Second Picture (Barnabas 7:6-11)

The second picture (7:6--11) identifies Jesus with the scapegoat and with
the sin-offering goat whlch is mixed up with the sacrificial goat. The com-
parison is one~sided, since the typology of the scapegoat is of much greater
import.
6a Notic:e wbat was commandcd: "Take two goats, beautiM and similar, and offer
them, and Iet rhe priest takc tb.e one as a burnt offering for sins." 6b(7) Bat wbat are
they to do with the other? ..The other," he says, "is acc:ursed (m~~:a"tli,lu'toc;) ...
1 Notice how the type of Jesus is manifestcd: aa "ADd do ye alt spit (ipntOOv.-re) on
it, and pierc:c: (ICm"taiCE\I'tlloan) it, and bind the scarlct wool (to lptov "to Ko..:a:tvov)
about is head, and so Iet it be cast into the desert. '" And when it is so done, he
who talces thc goat into the wildemess, drives it forth, and takes away the wool,

23 G03pel of Peter 7:25-27; Luke 23:48.

24 Jt interrupts the flow of the text, and the question in 7:4a conti11ues the atoning
death themo of 7:3c. The Aqedab could bc droppod without causing a break. The text
would then be: "The I..ord commanded this because he bimself was going to offer tbe
vei!el of the spirit as a saerifice for our si.as. ~ What then does be say in thc Propbet?
•And Iet tbem eat of the goat wh!ch is offered in the fast fur all their sins.'" Also, the
Aqedah does not appear in the olber witnesses to the pre-Bamabian traditlon. Howevc:r, it
may bave been the author of Bamabas who insertcd it iDto hi!l tradition, and not a later
intetpolator. Even ifTertullian is dependent on Barnabos, he bad good reason to skip this
line, which distwbs the flow.
2S See p. 129, above, espe<:ially note 272.
 Yonz Kipprtr lm~ry in the Ewly Chl'illian /m(lginaire 153

and puts it upon a shrub which is called Racl1el,2' of whicb we are accustomed to
eat the shoots when we imd them in the countryside: thus only the ftuits of Racbel
are sweet."9& What does tbis mean? Notice, "that the fust (gaat) is for the altar, bot
tho olher is acci.U'Sed, and that the one tbat is acc11tsed is crowned ... 911 Because
then they will see him on tbat day with the scarlet (high·priestly) robe (dljp11) on
bis body, and they will say, ''Is not this he whom we om:e crucified and rejected
(~01141cVllo11VIEIO) and pierced and spat upon? Truly, it was he wbo then said that he
hiJJtselfwas the Son ofGod." 1oa But how is be like (to the goat}? Fortbis reasoa;
"lbe goats shall be similar, beautilul, and equal (o11oioV<; t:oU.; 'tptiyO"UI; JCai JCllM!1i<;.
i~)," in orderthat when tb.ey see him come at that time tbey may be astonisbed
at tb.e similarity of the goat. 1Gb See tben the type of Jesus destined to suffer.
llo But why is it that they put the wool in the middle ofthc thoms (b:cntiY}i 1t is
a type of Jesus ptaced in the Church, beeause whoever wishes to take away the
.seulet woo[ must suffer mucb because tbe thorns are tem"ble and be can gain it
only through pain. m Thus be says, "those who will sec me, and attain to my
kingdom must lay hold of me through pain and suffering.,."
The typology is again best grasped in a table:
Cultic oroto~e Christi(Jif Mvth
6a Take two goats, boauti.ful and s~ilar, {9a the tirst (goat) is for tbe altar}
and offer tbem, and let tlte priesttake the (refers back to the previous typology
01111 a.!J a bw'nt offering for .silrs. . of tbe sin-offering goat and viearious
atonementl
6b The other is acC111'sed (&~~:uttttä.pa<DQ 9b Is not Ibis he whom we once
8a And do ye all1pit (epzrllaan;) on lt, crucifled (6o-.:aupmaa11av} and
and goad it (ranztrevrliuarE), and bind reje~;led (tl;ookviJoaY't~) and
the scarlet wool about ils head, and so Iet pien:ed (Ktnatrevn7orzvt$"~ and 1pat
it be cast into the desert. . .. !,2011 {t~tm.~oans-}?
9a But the other is ateursed, and the one 9b Because then they will see ltim on
tbat is accursed is crowned ... that day with the long scarlet
(oriestlv) robe on his body •.•
6a Take two goats, beautiful and similar, l Oa in order tbat whell they see him
and offer tbem, ... come at tbar time tbey may be
lOa The goats sball be similar, beautiful, 8$l0nished at the similarity of ihe
and equal. goat.
8h And when it is so done, be who takes lla It is a type of Jesus placed in the
the goat i.nto the wildemess. drives it Chutch, becau&e whoever wishes to
forth. and takcs away tbe wool, and puts take away the scarlet wool must au:ffer
it upon a shrub which is c:alled Rac:hel, of mucb because the tboms arc terrible
which we are accustomed to eil tbe aud he ean gain it only through pain.
$hoots when we rmd tbem in tbe couotry; J l b Thus be says, "Tbose wbo will
tbus of Radlei alone is the fruit .sweet. see me, and attain to my kingdom
must lay hold of'me tb.rough pain and
sufferinf;."

~ There are many variant rcadings for this word.

11 Sligbtly altered !ranslation by Lake in LCL, based oa SC.
1S4 The Impact afYom Kippw" on Christionily in thcr First ond Second Centuries

Barnabas compares Jesus' way of suffering to that of the scapegoat. The

goat is accursed (inuc:o:ttipc11<>t;), which reflects Jesus being cursed by
dying on the cross. 28 Both suffer the same torments - spitting and pierc-
ing.29 The scarlet wool placed on the scapegoat' s head represents the high-
priestly scarlet rohe of Christ at bis Second Parousia.
The role of the sacrificial goat is marginal. lts sole signiticance lies in
its similarity to the scapegoat, througb w'bich it will be recogni:zed at the
Second Parousia as identical to the one sacrificed. Here the author seems
to have mixed tv.'O recognition motifs: by the sc-arlet robe and by simil-
arity.30
The end of the chapter is an. ec:clesiological typology of the scarlet wool
placed in the thomy sbrub. which refers to the suiTering and martyrdom of
those who choose to follow Jesus. The scarlet wool therefore connects
Yom Kippur, the atoning death of Jesus, martyrdom and the future
ldngdom.

As can be seen from tbe table, some of the details of tbe cultic prototype
mentioned in the typology are not connected explicitly to a specific
element of the Passion narrative. On the one band, the presence of uninter-
preted cultic elements - such as the fact that the goats have to be xa:A.oi -
demonstrates that Barnabas did not invent his cultic knowledge in order to
match bis interpretation. In some instances, such uninterpreted cultic
elements may mean that their interpretation was assumed to be self-evident
to educated readers and they were therefore "included implicitly." The
more obvious an association, the slighter the allusion can be. For example,
the curse of the goat is uninterpreted, but the crucifixion of Christ also
does not have a prototype. Both are "loose ends," most probabJy presum-
ing tbat the readers Icnew tbe connection between curse and cross and the
interpretation of Deuteronomy 21:23 and 27:26. Another example is tbe
casting of the scapegoat into the desert, which could easily have been
interpreted by Jesus• suffering on Golgotha, outside of the city, as in
Hebrews and Hippolytus, an Interpretation not mentioned by Barnaba.s.
Moreover, Barnabas does not exploit the death of the scapegoat, although
this would have stressed the proximity to Jesus. Perhaps the way the

28 Cf. Deut 21:23 and 27:26; and Gal 3:10.13. Barnabas most probably did not kllow

Galati.ans: see oote 93, p. 164, betow.

19 This is n:flCi:ted in the parallel use 8~tnt\loa~e 1 tp.J<-ti!Oavt~ and xa-rax~ijao.te I
ICa'taQvn'!oavt~ for Jesus and the scapegoat.
30 Prigent has suggested that Bornabos mixes two t:ypologies, one of which can be

found in Justin (Passion plus Parousia) and the other in Tertullian (Passion plus
Eucbacist). TertuUian also mentions both typologies, but bis depictio.o is clem:r.
 Yom Kippur lmagery in the Early Chrilllan /rnaginaire 155

scapegoat met its death - by bcing hurled over a precipice - was too
dissimilar from Jesus' form of death on the cross. Nevertheless, pagan and
Jewish readers knew that the scapegoatlpharmakos bad to die, as Jesus did.
But, probably for the sa:me reason that bis readers presumed this anyhow,
Bornabos does not choose to explicitly connect such notions as vicarious
atonement to the picture ofYom Kippur.
1.1.3 The lnteipretation ofthe Proto-Typology in Justin, Tertullian and
Hippolytu."
The following analysis heads simultaneously in two directions on the time
scale: chronologica.lly forward to the intetpretations of Barnabas' tradition
in the second century, and chronologically backward to the proto-typology,
Barnabas' source. Histo-ry of impact and history of tradition will then com-
plement each other.

Jusmo~: Justin refers to the typology in his Dialogue with Trypho, a v.'Ork
written around 160.31 Jn the context of chapter 40, Trypho asks Justin for
proofs that Jesus was the Messiah, who had to suffer and is expected to
retum gloriously (39). Justin answers with a typological exegesis of the
Passover sacrifice (40) and the goats of Yom Kippur (40) and continues
with typologies on the shewbread as Eucharist (41) and the twelve bells on
the high-priestly vestment as apostles (42).
40:4 And the two goats of the fast were ordered to be similar. One- of thern was the
scapegoat (u~ronoiiRO.t~). the other was to be an offering. They were prophec:ies
for tbe two appearances (11111pD'IIO'Idiv) of Christ. For the fust appearancc, at whicb
the elders of yow- [Jewish] people and the priests sent him away u a scapegoat,
laid hllllds an him and killed him; and for his second appearanee, since you will
rec:opize at this very place of Jerusalem him wbo was dishonored by you a.nd
[made] an otfering for all those sitmei$ who want to repent and fast wbat Isaiah
calts a fast and tear asuo.der the strangling of ellforced contra.c:ts [Isaiah S8: 6], and
obseTVe the other things that are simiiar to those that have been reckoned by llim,
which also I myself inquired abou1, {and) those things that the believers in Jesus
do. s And Icnow that eveo the offeriug of the two goats, which had to be otrered on
the wt, similarly took place ll(lwhere except in Jerusalem!'2
Justin's Yom Kippur typology is clearJy more c:oncise than that in Bar-
nabas, better organized and less ambiguous. The referenee to the two ap-
pearances of Christ is unmistakablet and the typology gives equal attention

'1 On Justin and Judaism, see Slcarsaune, The Prooffrom Prophecy.

31 My tra.nslation of Dlalope with Trypho 40:4-S; Greek text in M. Marcovich (ed.),
lustini Martyris Dialogus cunr Tryphone (Patristische Texte und Studien 47; Berlin, Ncw
York, 1997). Justin refers back to this typology in Diologue with Trypho 46:2 and 111: I.
Dialoptt with Trypho 15 includes a long pessage from Isa SS on the fast.
156 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Christianit}' ln the First and Second Ce11hlries

to both goats. The scapegoat refers only to the Passion. the saerificial goat
to the Second Parousia. Some motifs from Barnabas are missing, e.g. thc
eating of the goat and the scarlet wool. Apparently, Justin's text is not a
reworking of Bamabas but depends directly on the proto-typology. This is
shown, for exa:mple, by the reference to the death of the scapegoat, a fact
Justin could not have learot from the Bible or from Barnabas, but only
from Jewish tradition. 33 Justin explicitly intcrprets the theological implica-
tions of the sacrificial goat typology of Christ as vicarious atonement for
all sinners. This is somewhat strange considering the association of the
scapegoat, not the sacrificial goat, with the Passion. The ceference to Jeru-
salem as merely a sacrificial place is a favorite idea of Justin's and was
therefore most probably inserted by him. 34 Furthennore, Justin refers to
lsaiah 58 in the context of Yom K.ippur and is the earllest text to do so.
Was Isaiah 58:6 a.lready part ofthe Jewish Haftarah, at least in some syna-
gogues?35 Finally. compared to Barnaba3, Justin inverts the role of tbe
priests and the fasting. The priests are the evil faction, 36 whereas the peo-
ple who fast are oounted a:mong the repenting believers. Yet Justin under-
scores that these believers fast a real fast - i.e. oile of the kind Isaiah de-
scribed and not one aooording to the common Jewish practice - a fact
suggesting that this reference is not only a typology of past rituals but also
ajibe at the observance ofYom Klppur's fast.by Justin's Jewish and Jew-
ish-Christian neighbors.

TERTULLIAN: In Against Marcion, the Yom Kippur tradition (3:7:7-8) is

part of a long complex of Christological typologies of the Otd Testament.37
The same passage also appears, almost word for word, in .Against the
Jews 14:9-10. Both works were written in the first decades of the third
century, and most scholars agree that the two are mutua.lly dependent; but
they disagreee as to which ofthe two deserves priority.311 For our purposes,
this dispute is less relevant.
In both books Tertullian's aim is to prove that Jesus is the Messiah of
the Old Testament. While Mareion argues that Jesus could not be the Mes-
siah ofthe Old Testament because the Jews. the experts in understanding
the Old Testament, still expect the glorious coming of a Messiah, Tertul-

" See all couuncntators besides We.ngst.

,. Skan.aune, The Prooffrom Prophecy, P- 310.
~ Cf. Justin, Dialogue witlt Trypho l5; and see tbe section on the readings, above,
pp. '4-59, especially p. SS-S6.
36 Do the elders in this contm rcflect an oral tndition similar to Matt 27:20?
37 Tertullian, A.gain$t Mareion 3:~24.
38 H. l"rlnkle (ed.), Edition de QSF TerhtlUani Ad~ersii.S lwda11os (Wiesbaden, l964).
pp. xlix-liii, favors the priority of Againrt tlle Jews, dating it before 207/S.
 Yom KippiD' lmogery in the Eorly Chrls.tian lmaginaire 157

tian claims that the Messiah came and died in a humble way, but that he
will come again, gloriously.
lf I may, moreover, give an interpretatiou of the two goats, which were offered on
lhe fast, do they not also prefigure the two modes of Christ? Thcy were alike
(paru}, and very similar (colfSimiles) to the appearance of lhe Lord, since he will
not come in any otber form. having to he recognized by those by whom he bad
been woo.nded (/auw e.rt).
One of these [goats], however, was bound witlt scarJet (cirCr.t.mdatw coccirro),
cursed (maledi~)., spat upon (conspr~tatw), pulled around (com~adsus), and
pierced (comprmctus), and driven by ·the people out of the city into perdition
(perditionem), being thus marlced with the visible signs of the Lord's pa.ssioo.39
Yet the other [goat], by being otfered up for sim a.ad given to lhe priests ofthe
temple for food (pabulvm), signiti•d indications ofthll second appearance, wbea-
after aii sins bave been. expiated- the priests of lhe spiritual temple, i.e. the church
- feast as a sort of flesh offering (fi*tul r~ist:t:l'atione} of the Lord's grace, wltile tbe
otbm fast from• salvation.41
The identity of a humble and tb.en glorious Messiah is proven for Tertu1-
lian by the similarity of the two goats. The maltreated, expelled scapegoat
:represents the Passion of Jesus; the sacrificial goat, eaten by the priests,
symbolizes simultaneously the eschatological meal at the Second Parousia
as well as its ritual anticipation, tbe Eucharist.42 Like Barnabos, Tertullian
polemicizes against participation in the Jewish fast an.d enjoins participa-
tion in the Christian Eucharist instead. Ritual, here, has the :function of de-
fming the borders ofthe collective.
Tertullian certa.inly knew Justin's writings and used them. However,
scholarship is divided over the question of whether Tertullian was ac-
quainted with Barnabas or with the proto-typology. Their typologies are

" The parallel tradilion in AgQiMt tlrs Jew:s 14:9 adds: "qui coccinea circumdatus
ucste ct conspulatus et omoibus contumeliis adßic:tus extra ciuitatem cruc:ift.Xus est."
40 An important manuscript of the parallel ttadition in Agalnst the Jew:s 14:9 reads "ad
salutem" ("for sa1vation") instead of "a salute;+ as given in Against MQrciOI'I. The Jatter
matche:s the context better, the former may bave entered tbe text lhrougb a sc:ribe in
Tertullian's rigoristic traditioll..
41 My translation of the text .from R. Braun (ed.), .T111111.IIien Contre Marcion. Tome 11/

(LiW'e 111) (SC .399; Paris, 1994). Oo this pa.ssagc, and its relation to Barnabas and Justin,
see the notes in the te-xt Nitions aad the discussiom in Windisch, Die apostCJii:schen
Y6ter 111. Der Barnabasbrief, pp. 346-347; Prigent. .l..es te.tilimonia dans le christianismfl
primmf, pp. 107-108; and Carleton Paget, Tbe Epütle of Barnabtu, pp. 13&-140; A.
Lou( "Caper emissarius ut typus Redemptoris apud Patres," Yerbum Domini 38 (1960)
262-277, bere pp. 26S-270, and CrOisan, The Cross That Spoke, pp. 131-133.
~~ See V.A. Gramaglia, "Visceratio: semantica eucaristic:a in Tertulliano?," in; .F.
Vattioni (ed..), Sanpe e antropo/ogica nella tsologia. Atti della Yl settimana, RomD 2J-
28 nov. 1987 (Rome, 1989; vol. 3, pp. 138S-1417), p. 1416, wbo invcstigated the
collective, sacrificial ud eschatological connotations of this pagan tedmical term.
15 8 The Impact of Yom Kippur 011 Christianity in the First and Second Cenlllries

very similar and the relevant differences are few in nurnber. 43 Tränkle
assumes that Tertullian knew Barnabas. Against this, Prigent and (more
hesitantly) Carleton Paget argue that Tertullian is based on the proto-
typology and on Justin. 44 We cannot exclude a third possibility - that
Tertullian knew all tbree- the proto-typology, Justin and Barnabas.

HIPPOLYTUS: Hippolytos of Rome (d. 235) was one of the most prolific
Christian authors of his time. A fragment in the Catenae on Proverbs con-
tains bis interpretation of Proverbs 30:3lb (LXX), which views "the goat
leading the flock" simultapeously as sacrificial goat and as scapegoat, and
both as types of Christ: 45
lind a goat as Ieader oftheflock
Since, it says, this is
who was slaughtered for the sins of the world
and affered as a sacrifice
and sent away to the Gentiles as in the desert
and crowned with scarlet wool on the head by the unbelievers
and made to be a ransom for the humans
and manifestedas life for a!L 46
~

The mention of the "scarlet wool" (K6utvov &ptov) makes very plausible
that it is a variety ofthe Yom Kippur typology known to Barnabas, Justin
and Tertullian; however, the poetic form and the brevity of the fcagment
render an exact comparison difticult. Two elements of the interpretation

4:1 Tertullian has two further details: (a) conuulsus (tornlpulled); and (b) the mention
of perditio as the destination ofthe scapegoat. Tertulliao Iacks two other elemeots: (a) an
Interpretation of the scarlet ribbon (the ribboo itself is iocluded); and (b) details of the
Eucharist (unwashed entrails with vinegar). Finally, Tertullian inverts the order of
presentation (f"II'st Passion/scapegoat, then Parousia/Eucharistlsacrificial goat).
44 Tränkle, Edition de QSF Tertulliani Aduersus Iudaeos, pp. lxxvi-lxxxii; Prigent,

Les testimonia dans le christianisme primiti/. p. 108; and Carleton Paget, The Epistle of
Barnabas, pp. 139-140.
4s Hippolytus, fragment 75. The fll'st to connect this passage to the Yom Kippur

typology was A. Zaoi, "Tracce di un'interessante, ma sconosciuta, esegesi midra!ica giu-

deo-cristiana di Lev 16 in un frammento di ippolito," Bibbia e Oriente 24 (1982) 157-
166, whose perceptive article escaped the meticulous bibliographical reseai-ches of"
Carleton Paget and Hvalvik. ·
46 My translation of Kai TpQYO(; ljrorlpevor; aitroAlOII. 06-to<; ytip. cp1JO\v. todv o Vrtip

ci11ap·tiac; I!:OOI.LO'U acpays~ teai eile; ev11a 11poaaxes~ ~~:ai. eile; EP~IolfP sie; f&YT) u~o~cpOsic; teai. ICOIC·
KlYOV ipcov abd ~~:ecpal!lv im:o 1:1ö" ci11iotm" crn:cpavCJJ&Eic; teai aivepcilKCD" 1.ircpov YEVYT)kic; Kai
·r;mit miv'tGlV lietxeEic;. Text in M. Richard, "Les fragments du commentaire de S. Hippolyte
sur les Proverbes de Salomon," Le Mweon 79 (1966) 65-94, here p. 94. Cf. also the
shorter version preserved in Pseu~Anastasius: T pciyac; tiYoV)IEVO<; ai!lol.iou ö mp 'tWY
ai)lapnlllv 'tov KOa)lov a cpllytaakic; (quoted ibidem). The same tradition is also printed
under the name of Cluysostom, Fragmenta in Prouerbia (PG 64:737C-D).
 Yom Kippur Jmagery inthe Early Christianlmaginaire 159

are not found in Barnabas. Justin or Tertullian and may from the pen of
Hippolytus himself: (a) the explanation of the scapegoat as ransom for
humankind; and (b) the sending away as the mission to the Gentiles. 47 As
in Hebrews 13:11-13 the "sending away" is based on an inversion ofthe
conception that abandoning the camp entails ritual pollution. In the new
epoch of salvation history. salvation is no Iongerinside the camp but in the
previously impure desert among the previously impure Gentiles.

THE PROTO-TYPOLOGY AND lTS INTERPRETATION OF YOM KIPPUR: After

this brief survey of the history of the proto-typology's impact, I want to
retum to its pre-history. A reconstruction of the extent and content ofthe
Christian Jewish proto-typology brings us back to an earlier period, before
the composition of Bornabos. Barnabas refers to a source that its author
calls "the prophet." Another reference to a source may be entailed in the
expression "the priests of the temple foretold this." 48
It is relatively easy to reconstruct the elements of the (Jewish) halakhic
regulations for the ritual, which were part also of the Christian Jewish
proto-typology. Since acquaintance with halakhic traditions is more likely
for the Christian Jewish proto-typology than for later generations, those
elements that go beyond Leviticus 16 and exist in later Halakhah are most
probably ancient. 49 If this supposition holds, then the following elements
form parts ofthe proto-typology:
a) the similarity between the goats50
b) their beautiful appearance 51
c) the mistreatment of the scapegoat52
d) the cursing of the scapegoat53
e) the killing of the scapegoat54
f) the red woolen ribbon placed on the scapegoat's head 55

47 The former comes ftom Mark 10:45. The idea ofChrist the scapegoat being sent on

a mission to the Gentiles appears in Origen, Homily 011 Leviticus 9:3:2 (SC 287:80-82);
cf. also the positive interpretation of the desert in Homily on Levitleus 9:4:1 (SC 287:84).
48 Barnabas 7:4a and 7:3b; but 7:3b is a much more ambiguous phrase and could refer

to the content ofthe sentence rather than its speakers.

4' See especially Alon, "The Halakhah in the Epistle of Barnabas," pp. 302-305.
~ Barnabas 7:6a.10a; Justin, Tertullian; mYoma 6:1.
51 Barnabas 7:6a; yYoma 6:1, 43bc.
s2 Barnabas 7:8a (spitting and piercing}; Tertullian (spitting, piercing, pulling
around); mYoma 6:6 (pulling hair). Zech 12:10; Isa 50:6 and Gospel of Peter 5:16.
Sl Barnabas 7:6b(7).9a; Gal3:10.13; mYoma 6:4.
54 Justin; mYoma 6:6; cf. Tertullian (driven into perdition).

ss Barnabas 7:8a; Tertullian; Hippolytus; mYoma 4:2.

160 The Impact of Yom Kippur on Chrilltianity in the First and Sec()nd Centuries

g} before pushing the scapegoat over tbe precipice, the ribbon is put on
something eise~
h) the eating of the sin-offering goat, probably in a special manner7
In addition, elem.ents in one or two traditions. wbich appear in the biblical
descriptions, are probably part of.the proto-typoJogy:
i) the offering of the sacrificial goat58
j) the sending out of the scapegoats9
k) the fasting of the people60
Perhaps the motif of the people's mouming, which is missing the Bible, m
but appears in some early Jewish traditions, was also patt of the proto-
typology.61
In addition, a reference to Zechariab 3 seems to have been part of tbe
proto-typology.62 Barnabas mentions the high priest's -no8itJ'lK appearing
in Zechariah 3.63 Tertullian interprets Zecbariah 3 extensively in direct
juxtaposition to the Yom Kippur passage. Justin k:nows it as well.64 An
assoeiation of Zechariah 3 and Yom K.ippur also exists in Jewish (non-
Christian) sources. '~ As we shall see, tbis point is extremely important to
understand the earliest stage ofthe high-priestly Christology.66
It is more difficult to detennine the interpretations that the Christian
Jewish proto-typology connected to the halakh.ic regulatio:ns of Yom Kip-
pur, since the interpretation.~ of Barnabas and Ju.<~t.in are very different. and
since Tertullian might be acquainted with Justin and perhaps Barnabas and
therefore not be an independent witoess. However, we can be sure that the
link between the abused scapegoat and the Passion was part of the proto-
typology. The motif of the similarity between the goats was definitely
connected to the Second Parousia, yet it is unclear wbich goat. 67 The tie

so Barnabas 7:8b.ll a; mYoma 6:6.

57 Bar11abas 7:4b; Tertullian; Nwn 29:11; mMenab 11:7; De speciallbus legilms 1:190
(lectio difficilior).
" Lev 16:15; Ius.tin, Tertullian. .
59 Lev 16: 10.20-22; mYoma 6; Bart~abtu Sa; Justin, Tertullian.
6G Lev 16:29-34; 23:27-32; Barnab08 7:5a; Justin; Tertullian.
111 Bamaba.Y 7:Sa; Justin (repenting, fasting, lsa 58:6); on 1he mouming, see Jubi-
lees 34; Jonith; IUld see above, p. 34, note 98.
GZ Sk.arsaune, The Prooffrom Prophecy, p. 309.
413 Barnabas 1:9.
111 Tertullian. A.gai~~SI Mareion 3:7:8; Iustin, Dialogue with Trypho 116-1.17.
., See pp. 92-94, above.
116 See pp. 194-197, below.
61 BarnahM seems to link the scapegoat and the red ribbon not only witb the Passion
but also witb the Second Parousia; Justin clearly refers to the Sil(;ri.ficial goat, wbile Ter-
tulli8Jl may be iDterpreted as referring to the third, sin-offering goat. wbich was eacen
(a:nd wbich according to Halathah did not bave tobe similar to tbe other two).
 Yom K.ippur /magery in the Early Christialt lmaginaire 161

betWeen the intriguing consumption of another (specially prepared) goat

and the Eucharist, mentioned by Barnabas and Tertullian, may belong to
the origioal strand, especially if Tertullian is independent of Barnabas. Be-
cause the proto-typology shows an intimate knowledge ofthe detaHs ofthe
scapegoat ritual. it is possible that bis source used an eyewitness account6'
or even an early sort of Seder Avodah. 69
E:xcursus: Did the Scapegoat Rite lnjluence the Earliest A.ccount ofthe
Pas.fiora? John D. Crosaan's Thesis
In his jngenious and hlghly eontroversial "The Cross Spoke" (1988), lohn Dominic Cros-
san implies tbat the scapegoat ritual influenced tbe canonical Passion narratives, via what
he calls tbe "Cross Gospel," tbe earliest Passion a~ount, which he has rccoastructed, a
redacled venion of which is conmned in the Gospel of Peter. 70 According to Crossan's
theory, tbe formati.on oftbis Cross Gospel proueded in four stages." 'lbe starting point
(stage I) is that the commuoity does not know details beyond the generai1Uiderstanding
that people are scourged and tortured before being crudfied. This understallding is eon-
firmed and further enhanced by such propheti.c texts as lsaiah 50:6 aud Zechariab 12:10,
which add some derans (c.g. &triking, spitting, and piercing) to the description cf the

61 Grabbe, "'lbe Scapegoat Tradition,,. p. 16S.

19 This idea was suggested to me by Timothy Thomton at the 13..., Oxford Patristic
Conference 1999. I he.silated for a Ion& time before adopting the suggesti011, but it is
difficult to account otherwise for the wealth of precise halakhic regulations in BartmiHis.
Sil:nllarly, Pbilo betrays an intriguing acquaintanee with the halukhic: rules of Yom Kip·
pur. In gcnentl, the need to occupy the fasting people with prayers makes some type of
liturgic:al reea.ac:tmcnt probable. K.ister's recent article "5Ql3 and lbe '.A:11odah," poiats in
the same direction. See the discussion above, p. 44-45. The po:ssibility of an eyewilness
for the rite of l.'emoving thc red ribbon ftom tbe scapegoat and binding it to something
eise is less likely.
10 For introductory questions to this work. see the introductiOJl to the edition of M.G.
Mara, Evangile. de Pierre. (SC 201; Paris, 1973); the appendix in Brown, The De.ath ofthe
MUJi(lh, pp. 1317-1349, wbooo bibliography .includes older works; and c:f. Crossan,
Four Other Gospels, pp. 124-181. The urmfnus ad quem of lhe Gospel of Peler is the
time ofSerapion of Antioch around. 200 CE. A date arouod l00-150 is opinio commrmis:
see Brown, The Dealh ofthe Meuialt, pp. 1341-43; 1.D. Crossan, The. Historica/ JuJis.
17te Life of a Mediterranean Je.wish Peasant (Sau Franciseo, 1991), pp. 433-434. Some
scbolars date it even earlier, to lbe tirst century: see Koester, ..ApoCI)'phal and Canonical
Gospels." For the plac:e, Anlioch is favored by Brown, while Mara, Evangile de. Plerre,
pn::fers Asia Minor. The papyrl usually come ftom Egypt.
71 Crossan follows earlier suggestioos of Martia Dibtllius, 11lrgen Denker and Helmut
Koester. See M. Dibetius, "Die alttestamentlichen Motive in der Leide.nsge.scb.ichte des
Petrus- und loha!lDesevangeliums,'' Beihefte nn Zeitschrift fiJr die tlbte~taMenlliche
Wiuentchaft 33 (1918) 125-150; J. Dellker, Die. theologieg&sclr.lchtliche Snll1111g des
Petnuwangeliuwu (Europäische Hoc:hschulscbriften, 23. R.cihe, 36; Bern, Franld\ut am
Main, 197S); Koester, "'Apocrypbal an<1 Canonical Gospels," pp. 126-130.
162 The Impact of Yom Kipp'IH' cm Chrillianlty in the First ond Secemd Cmturies

turtvres (stage 2). 71 Jn tho third stage, the rite ofthe two Yom Kippur goatsjoins th~ pro-
phetie sources with further deraib and adds a primary narrative sequenee. This stage is
the first to be preserved in an extant text of Barnabas.73 In the fourtb stage, a fully·
fledged narr-cttive is formed aud the sceae ofthe mocked king wilh the motifs ofwearing
a robe and being crowning are included. However, the explicit allusions to Jes\lt as
sca.pegoat 11re dropped. This slage is reflec::ted in the Cross Gospel,74 which was used by
the pre-Marlc:an Passion Nanative. Both were used by the other c:anonical Gospels
(stage 5). Crossan's claim that all c::anonical and extra-eanonical Passion narratives are
ulthnately dependent on 8Jl exegeti<:al reworking of Yom Kippur's ritual is probably the
most far-reaching thesis proffered to date regarding the influence of Yom Kippur on
early C.hdstianity.
Crossan's theory has sparlced mainly critical responses.75 His aitics concentrate on
ret\J.ting the priority accorded to the Cross Gospel over the canonical Passion narratives,
i.e. the transition from the fourth to a fifth stage. Their argumentation is based on the
contention that the similarities between the Go3peJ of Peter and Mark (only these two)
are too few to suppose that they share a direct literary dependency (in either dir«tioo). 76
The vocabulary and word order of no c:anonical gospel follows t.he Gospel of Petu for
more tban two or tbree words.17 Furthennore, Mark, Manhew and Jotm preserved the
"primitive traditions" of Barnafxls, which arenot ~ of Crossan's Cross Gospet. 11 On
the other band, roany details of the Gospel of Peter that would suit t.he narratives of the

•
12 This Stage contmued into the time ofthe formation ofthe Canonic:al Gospels. For an-
analysis of some selected passages, see already Moo, The 0/d Testament in tlre Gospel
Passion Narrattves, esp. pp. 139-144, who objecl$ to Kocster's and Crossan's approacb.
13 CrosSIJl, The Cross ThatSpoke, pp. ll4-159.208-217.
74 Crossan, The Cro.'s That Spoke, pp. 122 and 157, and see the tables on p. 143 and

p. 158. A short ve.rsion ofhis theory, albeit withou.t reflection on Barnabas, ean be found
in Crossan's article, "The Cross That Spuke."
" See the discussion of CrosS8Jl's theory iD Brown, The Dealh of the Messiah,
pp. 1317-1348, especially 1332-3&. Cf. A. Kirk, "Examinin8 Priorities: ADother Look at
the Gospel of Peter's Relationship to t.he New Testament Gospels," New Testament
St11dies 40 {1994) 572-595; G.W. NickelsbW'g, "Review of: lohn Dominic: Crossan, The
Cross that Spolce. Tbc Origins ofthe Passion Narrative (San Francisco: Karper and Row,
1988)." Jqurntll ofdte Ämeric(lll Academy af Religion 59 (1991) 15~162; R.H. Fuller,
..Review of: lohn Dominic Crossan, The Ctou That SJWA:e. The Origins of the PaSifon
Narrative (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1988)" lnlerprelation 45 (1991} 71-73; J.C.
Treat, "Tbe Two Manuscript Witnesses to the Gospel of Peter," in: D.J. Lull (ed.).
Society of Biblical Literalrtre 199() Seminar Papers (Atlanta {Ga.). 1990; pp. 391-399);
Green, ..Tbc Gospel of Pe.ter: Source for a pre-c:anonical Passion Narrative?"; alld.
F. Neirynck, "Review of: Jobn Dominic Crossao. Who Killed Jesus'l Exposing the Roots
of Anti-Scmitism in the Gospel Story of the Deatb of 1esus (San Francisco, CA:
HapetCollins, 1995)," Ephemeridtls Theologicae Lovanienses 71 (1995) 455-4.57. There
are far fewer voices in favor of Crossan's theory, most notably Koester, A.nc:ient
Christfan Gospels, pp. 216-240, but note his critique on pp. 219-220.
76 Brown, Tlre Death ofthe Mes&i(lh, pp. 1327-2&.
11 Brown, The Death ofthe Messiah, pp. 1332-33.
711 Nickelsburg, "Review of: John Dominic Crossan, The Cross that Spolce,'' here

p. 161.
 Yom Kippur lmagery in the EtJF/y ChrisltGJI!maginaire 163

eanonical gospels are omitted by all of them. '19 Finally, if Matthew, Luke and John had
indeed used the Go1pel of Peter in addition to Mark. one would have expected SOJ'Dll
agreement between two of the canoc.ical gospels against Marle (in the style of Q), but
thcre is none. 811
These argwnents undermine Cmssan's thesis of an influence ofthe scepegoat rite on
every early Passion account. 'f et what is the relationship between the 'f om Kippur typol-
ogy in Bornabtu and the Gospel of Peter? Sehola.n have long recognized a conspicuous
proximity between Barnabas Sand 7 and two scenes in the Gospel ofPeter: the mocking
(3:6-9) and the drinking on tbe eross (5:15-16}. 81 l'he f!J'st pa.ssage reads:
u But having taken the Lord, lllllDing {tpf;xoYtE~). they were pushing (oo6ouv) him
and saylng, "Let us drag along (oopwJ.I.tv) the Son of God now tbat we bave power
over him!' 1 And tbey clothed him with purple (1ropcpilpav) and sat him on a chair
of judgment, saying, "Judge justiy, King of Israel." s And a certain one of them,
having brought a thomy crown (at*vov a~eciv&tvov), put it oo the head of dte
Lord. 9 And otbers who were standing there were spitting (6vkltruov) in his face,
and others slapped (~amoav) bis cheelcs. Others were jabbiD& him with a reed
(.:~ iY\JOoov); and some scourged (~u;ov) hiOl, saying, "Widt such l!onor
let us honor the Son of God.'' 112
Most of the details of the moc:king of Jesus as reconnted in the Gospel ofPetu appear in
Barnaba!l.rl Matthew and John each bring only part oftbe traditions, which are common
to Barnabas and the Gospel of Peter.&~ Mark and Lukeare cven more different ti:om
Barnabcu and the Gospel of Peter. Therefore, Koester can co:nclude: "lt is evident that
the mocking scene in this gospel [tbe Gospel of Peter} is a narrative version !hat is di-
rectly dependent upon the exegetical tradition which is visible in Barnaba.f."M
Beyond the elear correspondences, John Doininic Cro$san snggests tbree further con-
nections between motifs in the Gospel of Peter and Barn.abas. The Yom Kippur tradi-
tions of Bamabas were transfomed by the Gospel of Pcter. First, the scarlet wool ofthe
scapegoat was combined with tlte priestly cloak (1t0til)p11~) from Zechariah 3:1-5 and be-
came the purple robe of the mocked k:ing." Second, the scarlet wool on the head of the

79 Brown, Tha Death ofthe Messiah, p. 13 33.

10 Browo, The Deoth oftht~ Messiah, p. 1333.
tt E.g. Mara, E11anglle de Piure, p. 21, note 2.
n Slightly chaoged translation from Brown, The Deoth ofthe Mu:;iah, pp. 1318--19;
Greek text in Mara, Evonglle de Pierre.
• 3 a) spitting [if!m:\Jw) Go.sJH!I o/ Peter 3:9, Barnabcu 7:8a; b) piercing [vtiaaco] Gospel
of Peter 3:9, [uTa:avtiw] Btlrnabas 7:8a; c) crowning Gospel of Petu 3:8, Barna-
bas 7:8; d) clothing in (red) robe Gospel of Peter 3:7; Bornabos 7:9; e) slapping the
cheeks {Pani~"' 1i1<; omyov.xo;] Gospel of Peter 3:9; Barnobas 5: 14; scourging [J.I.Il<nil;l'il]
Go:rpel of Peler 3:9; Bm-»abas 5:14. See Koester, Ancient Christian Gospels, pp. 222-
227,
&~ Matt and Jolm: crowning with crown ofthoms (lohn: thomy crown), clothing with
searlet cloaklpurple robe. Matt: spitting (Matt 27:30). John: piercing, slapping, scourg.ing
(John 19:1.3.34.37). But uote also the dissimilarities: Matt and not Gospel of Peter:
giving reed as scepter, hitting witb reed, mocking, lesding away (Matt 27:2S-31).
u Koest.er,Ancient Christion Gospels, p. 227.
16 Gospel of Peru 3:7; Barnabas 7:9.
164 The Impact of Yom KippJU on Chri11tianity irr the Fi,.at and Second CelllJJP'iu

scapegoat, whieh was put on the thorns in the bnsh, became the crown ofthoms on the
head of the moeked king.'1 Finally, Crossan hypothesizes that th~ P'eed piercißg the side
of Jesu.s rettects the instrummt in the bistorical temple rituaL with which the scapegoat
wu pierced." Helm11t Koester ac;cepts Crossan's two fo:rmer points aad, more besitantly,
also Crossan's interpretation of the reed, yet he wams that the two m.anuscripts of the
Gospel of Peter show great variation" and any philological arguments with respect to tbe
text bave tobe viewed with reservations.90
Parallelsexist also in the !<:el!.e of giving gall and vinegar to Jesus on the cross (Go.r-
pel of Peter 5:15-16);
s:u But it was midday, and darlaiess held fast all Judea; and tbey were distreased
and arucious lest the sun bad set, sinu he was still liviug. [ForJ it is wri.tte.n for
them; "Let not the sun set on one put to death... 16 And som.eone of them said,
"Give him to drink: pll witb vinegar (aotioo-ct: o.inov xo11\v !1810: ~ou.;}." Alld
baving made a mixture, tbey gave to drink:. ' 1
Again, tbe Gospel of Peter and Barnabi'JS are more similar to each otber than to tbe ca-
nonical gospels. First, JesWI is given gall am/vinegar, matehing Psalm 69 (61):22 only in.
the Gospel of Peter and in Burnabas, not in lhe (:8JIODical gospels. Pli Second, Deutero-
oomy 21:23 is quoted only in Peter's Passion nam~tive. not in tbe canonical Passion
narratives. Barnahas does not quote Deuteronomy 21:23, but he refers to tbe conse-
quence ofthe dealh on the wood- tb.e curse. Galadans 3:10-13 mentions both expJicitly, ·
hut it is unlikely that either the Go.spel of Pcter or Bornabos depended on Galalians.
Probably, all three knew independently tbe tradition of the crucified as clllSed
scapegoat."
Crossan 's own ohservation that "explic:it allusions to Jesns as scapegoat do not remain.
in the tradition as it pr~eds and develops- impedes $C11ltinizing his argurnent for
evidence ofthe Yom Kippur traditions. The details of tbe abuse in tb.e Gospel of Peter
are based on prophetic passages. None of them necessarily depend$ on the seapegoat

87 Gospel ofPeter 3:8; Santaboa 7:8.11.

81 Ba,.rrabas 7:8 mentio.IIS only lhe act not the Instrument. Crossan bases bis elaim on
the Sibylli1ttt Oraclts 1:360-75 and 8:285--309, independc:m: of the canonical Passion
namttives, but drawing 011 lhe earliest Christian Passion traditions conneeted to lhe
scapegoat rite. Ac:cordingto Crossan,. Sibylline Oracles I :360-75 depends on &:28$-309.
Since the fonner passage was written before 150 CE, the latter has to be earlier than
1~0 CE: see Crossan, Tlte c,.oss That Spoke, pp. 133-139, espeaally 135.
19 Treat, '"'Ibe Two .Manusllript Witne.sses to the Gospel ofPeter."
110 Koester, Ancient Christiall Go.sp1ls, pp. 224-225.
91 Slightly changed translatiOB from Brown, The JJeath of the Mes11iah, p. 1319; Oreek
text in Mara. EvtJtrgi/e de Pleme.
92 Gospel ofPete,. 5:16; BMnabtZJ 7:3.5.
93 J. Carleton Paget, "Paul and die Epistle of BarnabM," Nfllntlm Testamemum 38

(1996) 359-381, does not discuss this specific passage but concludes tbat Barnabas bad
no knowledge of Paul. It is not impossible that the view of crueified saints as cursed
scapegoats is pre-Christian and was applied to other crucifixio.os before Jesus. Tbe
polemical weight of tbe argument against proto-Christianity would bave been slighter but
the existence of a counterargument does not silence the argume.nt.
94 Crossan, Th• c,.oss ThatSpofce, p. 142.
 Yom Kipp11r lmagery 111 the Early Christfan Jmaginaire l6S

ritll!ll." Crossan's theoxy coucemiug the transfonnation of the three motifs of the scarlet
ribbon, tbe thorns aad the reod is too speculative. For example, regarding the association
ofthucadet ribboa with the cloak oftb.e soldiets, Matthew is closer to Barnabas than to
bis presumed soun:e, the Cross Gospel, -as weshall see in the following section. 96 Cros-
Sall suggests that the scapegoat ritual introduced a flfllt narrative sequence into the vari-
ous propbetic passages. Yet tbe sequence ofthose details ofthe scapegoat rite mentioned
in the proto-typology (abuse, leadiog out of the city, killing) is very similar to those basic
fac:ts that could be ltuown historically. As I show in the seclion that follows, Matthew
probably pen:eivcd exactly rbe same prox:imity of the hi5torical evenu as ginn in his
soun:e, Marle, to the ritual sequence of the scapegoat rite and decided to formulate the
Barabbas episode aloog the llne5 of the ..lottery"!l7 between the goatt that constitutes the
mtraduction to the Yom Kippur rituaL
The ritual of Yom Kippur did not inttuence nery early Passion account, as Crossan
suwsted.91 Tbe Yom Kippur typology or Barnabas is one of the b~cbes in the de-
wlopment of the canonical Passio:n narratives, rather than their root. However, it is a
very early branch and it displays a great sim.ilarity to the Gospel of Pe.ter, yet wirbout
eDtailing a direct ioterdependence between them. The evidence suggests that the relation-
sllip to the canonical gospels and to the Gosp11l of Pete.r was based on sh~nd oral tradi-
rions ofpropbet.ic: typological exege.sis, not on the Yom Kippur typology.

1.2 Barabhas as Scapegoat in MaJJhew 27:15-23

27:1~ Now at the festival the govemor was acc:ustomed to release a prisoner for the
crowd, whom they wanted. 16 At that time they bad a notorious pri50ner, called
Jesus Barabbas. 11 So after they bad gathered. Pilate said to them, "Whom do you
want me to release for you, Jesut Barabbas or Jesus who is called tbe Mess.iah?"
18 For he reali:r:ed that it was out of jealousy that they bad handed him over.
t9 Whüe be was sitting on the judgment seat, his wife sent word to him, "Have
nothing to do with that innocent man, for today I have suffi:ml a ~at deal
because of a dream about him." 20 :Now tbe c.hief priests and rbe elders persuaded
the crowds to ask: for Barabbasand to bave ]eSU$ killed. 21 'The govemor again
5aid to them, ..Which of the two do you want me to release for you?" And they
said. "Banlbbas." n Pilate said to them, 14Then what should I do with Jesus who is
called the .Mcssiah?" All of them said, "Let him be crucifiedl" 23 Then he asked,
"Why, what evil h-as he done?" .But they shouted an the more, ".Let him be
crucified.!" ~4 So when Pllate saw that he could do nothin& but rather that a riot

" lsa 50:6: spitting, scourging, slapping the cheeks..Zech 3: clothing with the robe
{thollgh not red). The Heh~w text of Zech 12:10 mentions pien:ing (Vf). While the
LXX misread (1p,), the other Greek: versions traJislated ,p1. Gospel of Peter and Banra-
fxu reflect two different translations. John 19:34.37 givcs hoth Greek verbs.
" Matt 27:28 Iabels the red of the cloak that the soldiers put aro1111d Jesus .co~e•d.v11,
like rbe crim.son of Banrabas' scapegoat, while the Gospel of Peter uses purple (lMp-
~). Manhew is closer to &rnabas than is the Gospel ofPeter.
" Interestingly, Crossan does not regard the scapegoat lottery 1111 background to the
Barabbas epi50de, tho11gh this could bave embellished bis thesis fu.rther.
" For different reasons, I object to Ren~ Girard's highly reductionist theses, e.g. in
The Scopegoat (Baltimore, 1986), that see the scapegoat in ptaetically every realm of
life.
166 The Impact of Yom Kippur on Christianity in the First and Second Centuries

was beginning, he took some water and washed his hands before the crowd,
saying: "I am innocent of this man's blood; see to it yourselves." 2s Then the
people as a whole answered, "His blood be on us and on our children!" 26 So he
released Barabbas for them; and afterflogging Jesus, he handed him over tobe
crucified. 99

The episode ofBarabbas in the Matthean version gains depth when under-
stood vis-ä-vis the lottery of the goats in the Yom K.ippur ritual. 100 The
release of Barabbas has caused some trouble for historians as well as
exegetes. 101 On the literary Ievel, the change in the people's attitude to-
ward Jesus from the exulta.tions upon his entry to the release of Barabbas
seems too abrupt, and the explanation that the high priests and scribes
brought about this conversion with only a few words seems flimsy. The
brevity of the exposition is disconcerting; the people are manipulated too
easily. Matthew abolishes the careful distinction regarding the
responsibility for the death ofthe Messiah that he had kept up to this point,
between the neutral disposition of the people and the evil inclination of its
Ieaders. The notorious statement: "His blood be on us and on our
children!" transfers the responsibility to the whole people. With this invol-
vement of the bystanders, the ~arrator accuses them of being of the same
party as the active perpetrators.
On the historical Ievel, apart from what is related in the Gospels, no
evidence for a privilegium paschalis, the release of prisoners before festi-
vals, especially Pesach, has yet been found. Even such conservative schol-
ars as Raymond Brown, who want to preserve the historicity of the story,
state: "There is no good analogy supporting the historicallikelihood ofthe
custom in Judea of regularly releasing a prisoner at althe feast [of Pass-
over]."102 Brown suggests a historical nucleus behind the story: a certain
Jesus Barabbas, who was subjected to similar claims of revolt, was re-

99 Matt 27: 15-26, NRSV.

100On generat questions relating to the Barabbas epi.sode I used the commentaries by
Brown, The Death ofthe Messiah; U. Luz, Das Evangelium nach MatthällS (Mt 26-28)
(Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament 114; Neukirchen-VIuyn,
2002); D.C. Allison and W.D. Davies, A Critical and begetical Commentary on the
Gospel According to Saint Matthew. Yo/. 111 Commentary on Matthew XJX-XXY/11 (In-
ternational Christian Commentary; Edinburgh, 1997}; and D.A. Hager, Matthew 14-28
(Word Biblical Commentary; Dallas [Tex.], 1995).
101 On this passage, see the artic1es by H.A. Rigg, "Barabbas," Journal of Biblical

Literatlire 66 (1945) 417-456; and H.Z. Maccoby, "Jesus and Barabbas," New Testament
Studies 16 (1969/70) 55-60; and the long discussion in the commentary by Brown, The
Death ofthe Messiah. See also J. Merke), "Die Begnadigung am Passahfeste," Zeitschrift
fiir die neutestamentliche Wi33enschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 6 (1905) 293-
316.
102 Brown, The Death ofthe Me3siah, pp. 818 and 819.
 Yom Kippur lmagery in the Early Christion Imaginaire 167

}eased at the same time as the crucifixion of Christ. 103 Against this,
skeptical scholars such as John Crossan object that so isolated an incident
would be higbly improbable under Pilate, who was well known to be rig·
orous in pursuing his activities against the religious authorities and would
not have retreated in the face of local powers. Crossan gives theological·
literary reasons for the emergence of the story of Barabbas. For him, the
scene illustrates a double mistake - of the Romans on the political Ievel
and ofthe high priests on religious Ievel. "The Jewish authorities chose the
(religiously) wrong person to release. The Roman authorities chose the
(politically) wrong person to crucify. n104
More than a hundred years ago A.H. Wratislaw proposed an exegetical
basis for the Barabbas episodes, 10' a typology that is based on the two
goats ofYom Kippur. He enumerates these points ofsimilarity:
a) Two "victims" are presented {Jesus-Barabbas).
b) They are similar to each other (both are named Jesus and Son ofthe
Father).
c) They symbolize opposed powers (Jesus, the peaceful Messiah of
God; Barabbas, the murderer, as Messiah ofthe people).
d) There is a lottery/election between the two as to who is to be re-
leased and who is to be killed.
e) A "confession" is pronounced ("His blood be on us").
Wratislaw's theory of an exegetical genesis for the Barabbas storywas not
accepted in the commentaries and fell into oblivion. 106 However. if one ap-
plies the typology not generally to all passion accounts but only to
Matthew, the quality of the argument improves considerably. A
comparison between Matthew and its Vorlage, Mark, reveals some highly
interesting redactional changes. Only in Matthew do the people choose

103 The same unconvincing conclusion is drawn by Allison and Davies, A Critical ond
Exegetica/ Commentary 011 the Gospel According to Saint Matthew, vol. 3, p. 583. The
data about amnesties in ancient Assyria and Greece in R.L. Meritt, "Jesus Barabbas and
the Pascha! Pardon," Journal of Biblical Literature 104 (1985) 57-68, are too early to be
relevant historically but may still have been influential as a literary model.
104 J.D. Crossan, Who Killed Je:sw? Exposing the Rools of Antisemitism in the Gospel
Story ofthe Death ofJesw (San Francisco, 1995), p. 112.
105 A.H. Wratislaw, "The Scapegoat·Barrabas," Expo:sitory Times 3 (1891/92) 400-
403.
106 In fact, Wratislaw was not the III'St to interpret the Barabbas episode against the

background ofthe scapegoat rite. Origen had already made this connection: see Homily
011 Levitleus 10:2:2 (SC 287:134). This exegesis is also found in Pseudo·Jerome's
seventh-century Commentary on Mark 15:11 (CSL 82:71): see the translation and notes
in M. Cahill (transi.), The First Commentary on Mark: An Annotated Translation (New
York, Oxford, 1998). On the medieval influence of this exegesis, see Louf, "Caper
emissarius ut typus Redemptoris apud Patres,'' p. 274.
168 The lmpDCt of Yom Kippur 011 Cltri!tianity in the First r.rnd Second C1nturiu

between two figures with the same first name, Jesus of Nazareth and Jesus
Barabbas. This reading, put in parentheses in Nestle-Alan~ 7 , is preserved
by important witnesses and is accepted as original in most commen-
taries. 107 The identity of tbe ruunes of Christ and Barabbas, preserved only
by Matthew and not in thc other Gospels, has two mutually exclusive
explanations. Bither he bad access to an original tradition about the histor-
ical Jesus Barabbas and the other Gospels kept silent about the identity of
the names because it was offensive to thetn- as it was, for example, to the
copyists and to Origen 108 (the objections against the historicity of the story
have already been mentioned}, or Matthew embellished his Vorlage by
introducing na.mes foc the muneless. 109 He thereby deliberateiy reinfotced
the similarity between the two opposed prisoners.
Three further Gbanges by Matthew, compared to bis Vorlage, foster tbi:
impression that he wanted to emphasize the choice: eilher Jesus of Naz-
areth or Jesus Barabbas (see lable). While he usually followed closely 1h.e
wording of Mark in the Passion account, here he changes tbree sentences.
He reformulates {1) the question by Pilate; (2) the description of the
propaganda of the high priests and the elders~ and (3) the repetition ofthe
question by Pilate: ~

Mark lS Matthew27
9: &C:4u aMloow-ilp.'iv tov llclaaU. 1:1'l>v 17: Ti vo eiJ..~:u liMJ..Vom \lt&lv· 1'1fTOi1v
'lov&li111V; r6v &tpa/Jfltiv lj Iquofiv'töv 1\ey~v
XpLOtov;

Do you want me torelease for you the King Whom do you want me to releaee for
ofthel"ews? you, JeSU$ Barabbo& or Jesus who is
called the Messiah?
U: ivo..-.öJ..).ov rov Ba:paJIIlilY UMÄilo:nj CL~Oll; 20: iv11 a.i·ti\Clt:oVCou nhrBapaflflü:v niv
&'lllolriiY cim;,llo(I)Cilv
(But the chiefpriest3 stirred up tlle crowd) to
have him release Barabbas for them inscead. (Now the chief priest3 arul the eldm
persuaded the crowds) to ast for
BCirobbaJ and to bave J.sus killed.
-·
. 21:'rlvllti:tv;t li.~rJ -rdlv 6do im4iiom
vp.tv.
Whidl of 1111! two do you want m.c to
relcase f'or you?

107 The appar.ttus of Nestle-AJand27 gives the foltowing witnesses: the Old Syriac, 0,

tbe ferrara-group, 700• and some other uaeials in Mau 27: 16; also some manuscrlpes of
Origeo ofMatt 27:17, who COßlnlents on this.
•• E.g. AJiison and Davies, Commentary on Matthew, vol. 3, p. 584, !lote 20.
1~ He does this also in other instances, e.g. Matt 9:9; 26:3.57.
 Tom KipJNrlmagery in tlte EDrly Christion lmaginalre 169

In so doing, Matthew underscores the contrast between the two homony-

maus mcn (both called Jesus) and the choice bctween two si:rnilar entities.
The pcople choose between Jesus A and Jesus B, who are very si:rnilar in
na.me but extremely difterent in character. This description agrees with the
halaldüc ruling regarding the two goats on Yom Kippur. On the one band
the Misbnah dernands similarity in look and value, on the other band the
ritual destin.ations ofthe two goats are totally different. Whilc the one goat
is slaughtered and its blood brought into the holy of holies, the other go.at
is sent from lhe sanctuary into the desert.
Of the three further Matthean additions to hls Markan Vorlage (the
dream of Pilate's wife; Pilate washing bis hands at the end of lhe act; and
the double confession, announcing Pilate•s innocence and the guilt of the
people), the Iatter two may be · connected to Yom Kippur.U0 Usually,
Pilate's washing of hands and the confession are explained against the
background of the ritual of the heifer in Deuteronomy 21:1-9. On the
detection of a murder by unknown persons, representatives of 1he suspec-
ted villagc have to wa.sh their hands and announce a confes.sion of
innoce.nce similar to that of Pilate: "Our bands did not shed this blood, nor
were we witnesses to it. Absolve. 0 Lord, your people Israel, whom you
redeemed; do not let the guilt of innocent blood remain in the midst of
your people Iscael.'' 111 Yet, like the heifer ritual of Deuteronomy 21:1--9,
the sc;apegoat ritual, too, ends with a confession and a subsequent wasb~
ing. 112 Among the biblical descriptions of temple rituals, Yom Kippur
stands out as the only ritual with a washing tifter the procedures.m Re-
ganfing the distinct connections between the Barabbas story and the scape-
goat ritual, and presuming that Yom K.ippur was an important event and
conception for every Jew, I suggest that these features of the Matthean
Barabbas story were formed not only by Deuteronomy 21 but also bad the
ritual ofthe goats ofYom K.ippur as a catalyst.
In view of this evidence I also suggest that :five halakhic prescriptions
of Yom Kjppur played a role in Matthew' s formulation of the passage:
a) The lottery of the two goats
b) The similarity of tbese goats
c) Their contrasting destinations
d) The confession over the scapegoat
e) The washing ofthe hands at the end ofthe ritual

110 Tbe dream ofPilate's wife has no meauing against the backgr:ound ofthc ritual of
YomKippur.
111 Deut 21:7-8.
112 Lev 16:21-24.
113 In reaHty, of course, priests would bave wasbed themselves after the temple servicc.
170 The Impact ofYom Kippr.rr on Christianity in th• First and Second Centurles

The reasons for connecting the fust three prescriptions are much stronger
tban for the last two, which may be explained by referring to Deutero-
nomy 21 but closely match the typology of the Yom K.ippur ritual. When
set against tbe historical reading by Brown, it illustrates most of the Mat-
thean Sondergut and redactional changes in the Batabbas stocy. 114
In addition, Koester suggests there is an allusion to the scapegoat rite in
Mattbew's version of the mocking of Jesus, which follows the Barabbas
episode. Matthew 27:28 changes Mark's term for the red cloak the soldiers
put around Jesus> from xopcpupa {pwple) to tconiV'fl (scarlet). Koester pro·
poses that Matthew wanted to allude to the scarlet wool tied around the
scapegoat, which in Bornabos 7 is called tO eptOV tO ICQICIC1VOV. 11 s In gen-
erell. xoxteivl'lhlli' carries a notion of atonement. 116 Commentaries usually
refer to the eheaper price of scarlet, wbich is made from worms and not
snails and matches better the mocking by simple soldiers and not rieb gen-
erals. However, a search for the expression ;tl.aJ.1iJI; lCOtCdVl'\ in TLG 8
yielded only Matthew 27:28 and its commentaries. It is therefore an
exceptional combination of words. Date C. Allison suggests a third ex.pla-
nation, referring to Targum Onkelos Genesis 49:11) where the messianic
gannent is made from scarl.et (t'11i1T SJ:J.:!). 117 The three interpretations ar:e
not mutually exclusive. Yet Koester's thesis implies a transition from the
typology of Jesus with the sacrificial goat in the Barabbas episode to a
scapegoat typology in the mocking.
What theological idea did Matthew wanl to convey witb bis allusions to
the scapegoat rite in the mocking scene? I suggest tbat he embellished his
Vorlage in order to include aspects of the people's guilt and how the be-
lievers achieve atonement. The Iabels Jesus of Nazareth and Jesus Barab-
bas symbolize two aspects of the historica!Jesus. Jesus of Nazareth is the
Messiah, as God wants him to be, while Jesus Barabbas is the Messiah as
the people want him to be. The people uswp the role of God on Yom

114 For thi$ reading, the question of historicity is almost irrelevant- with the exc::eption
of a po»ible historical tradition of the namc Jesus Barabbas. While the conclusions sug-
gest that the cpisode is not historical, the theory - that Matthew reformed his tradition on
tbe basis of the Iottory between the goat$ 011. Yom Kippur - is not dependent on 8ßY ahis--
torieity of the story.
m Koester, Ancient Christiarr Gospttll, pp. 225-226.
116 See R. Gt:adwohl, Die Farben Im A.hen Testament (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift filr die
alttestamentliche Wissensc:haft 83; Berlin, 1963), pp. 73-73; 0. Michel, "Kokkinos,"
Theologüches Wörterbuch :r~m Neuen T.stoment 3 (1938) 812-815; and K.-M. Beyse.
"•w" Theologisches WorJerbuch zgm Alten Testament 8 (1995) 346-342; and Gen 38:30;
Lev 14; Num 19. Also ~topp:\Jpa has cultic connotatloi!S iB.cluding lhe high-priestly gar-
ments (Exod 25:4; 26:1.31, etc.; Sir 45:10}, but not atonement.
11 , Alluon and Davies, Co~t~~~tentary on Saint Manhew. vol. 3, p. 602.
 Yom Kipp11r Jmoq.9 i11 the Early Chrillian Imaginaire 171

Kippur in choosing betvveen the two goats. Jesus of Nazareth and Jesus
Barabbas. As scapegoat tbey choose the wrong goat, Jesus Barabbas, who
is released in their midst (and consequently pollutes them). an.d bence as
sacri.ficial goat, tbe wrong goat, Jesus ofNazareth, whose blood, spilled at
the wrang place, also pollutes them. Matthew mocks tbe temple ritual, and
tbe people disregard the atonement in Jesus. 111
Excursus: The Catalytic Function ofthe Pharmakos and the Scapegoar
.Many Greek cities bad collective purification rites- which scholars term "phDl'mukcn
rites"- showirlg some parallels to the biblical scapegoat rite. 11 ~ Usually, the rite inclwles
the expulsion {somerimes even the ldllin&) of a marginal member of soeiety, ideally a
king or a virgin, in reality more lilrely a betgar or a stranger.' 20 In Athens af the festival
of Tbargelion and in thnes of distress, two ugly meQ were fud for a certain time - one
witb blac:k figs as purification for the women, the other with white figs as puritication for
tbe men - tben killed or driven across tbe border. In Massilia in cascs of epidemic, a poor
man was fed and elothed expensively for one year and then led round the walls of the city
and thrown from a prec:ipice or c:based away. Similar ricuals existed in Abdera, Lellkas
and other c:ities of the Meditertanean and the Middle East. B. Hudson McLean suggests
that this eommon Mediterranean rationale stands behind thtee Pauline passages, Ro-
mans 8:3, Galatians 3:13 and 2Corinthiil115 5:2.1.121 Sinee he dou not claim spceifically
influence by Vom Kipp11l, I will not delve further into hi$ thesis.
_Some Chw-ch Fathers indeed provide evidence for an awarenes:s by Christians of ehe
plrarm.aios rituals ftom at least tbe second century. 122 They compare Jesus' death not

118 .For the salre of comprehensiveness, l wouJd like to rne:ntion another thesis regarding
Matthew and Vom Kippur, put forward by J. Massingberd Ford. She suggests seeiq the
whole Sermon on the Mount and partieularly tbe Pater Noster as a composition "on the
occasiQQ ofVom Kippur." However, her arguments are insubstantial: see J. Massingberd
Ford, "The Forgiveness Clause in the Matt.hean Form ofthe Our Father," Zeiuchriftfiir
die neutestamentliche Wisunschqft t~nd die Kunde der iille"n Kirche 59 (1968) 127--·
131. At the end ofthe short artide she sunnnarizes tlte arguments of, "Vom Kippur and
the Matthean Form ofthe PaterNoster," Worship 41 (1967) 609-619 (raon vidi).
119 See I. Bremmer. "Seapegoat Rituals in Aneient Greece," HQ71!a'd St11diu ;"
Clossical Philology 81 {1983) 299-320; and McLean, The C11rsed Christ, pp. 6S-104.
120 "In historical reaUty the community sacriticed the least valuable members of the
polis. who were represented, however, as very valuable persons. In the mythic:al tal.es ••.
we always fmd beauliful or important persons, although even then tbese scapegoats
remain marginal flgures: young men and women, and a king": Bremrocr, "Scapegoat Rit-
uals in Ancient Greece," p. 307. Moreover, most heroes of rhe Greek myths oft'er them·
selves volUlltarily. For a eomparison with earlier studies of tbe scapegoat see bis
extensive bibliography in note 2, p. 299. It may be inten:stinß that an opposite relation-
ship between myth and ritual practice exists between the Misbnah Yoma ("the ritual")
and l.ev 16 ("the myth'').
111 See McLean, The Cursed Chrin, pp. 105-145.
121 A fully elabomc versionoftbis argument can be found in D. St!lkl, "The Christian
Ex.egesis of tbe Scapegoat between Iews and Pagans," in: A.l. Baumgarten (cd.),
172 The Impact of Yom Kipp11r on Christianity 111 the Prlr.st and Secon.d Cent~wies

only to the sc:apegoat and all other biblical sacrific:es but also to legends about lcinp sac-
rificing their lives to •vett epidcmics or natural catasttophies, i.e. to avert eviJ. These
mythical tales are closely connec:ted to the pharmako: ritw1ls. 1n Clement of Rome writes:
Let us also bring forward examples from the heathen. Many kinp aud rulcrs_
when a time of pesti)encc has set in, have followed tbe couuseJ of otacles, and
given themselves up w death, tbat they might rescue their subjec:ts through tfleir
own blood. Many h•ve gone away ft"om their own cities, th.t scdition might ha\'e
ancnd •••• 1214
Origen answers Celsus:
They {the disciples) dared not only to show to the Iews from tbe s.ayings of rhe
propbets tbat he was the one to whom tbe pr-ophets referred, but also showed to the
o!her nations tbat he who was crucifled quite recently accepted this death williagly
for the human mc:e, like those wbo have died for their country to checlc epidcmics
ofplague, or fami.nes, or sto.rmy sea.s. For it is probable tbat in thc nature ofthinp
there are c:ertain mysterious causcs which are hard for the rnultitude to underslarui,
wbicb are responsible for the fact that one righleous mm dymg voluntarily for the
community may avert the aetivities of evil d~ons by expiation, siace it is they
wbo bring about plagues, or famines, or stormy seas, or anything simUar. Let pco.
ple therefore who do not want to believe that lesus died on a c:ross formen, teU us
whether tbey would not aooe_pt the many Greek and barbarian stmies about some
wbo have died for the commÖnity to destroy evils that bad taken hold of cities aod
nations. Or do they think !hat, whilc !hese stories are bistorically true, yet there is
nothiug plausible about this man {as people suppw; him to be) to suggest that he
dted to destroy a great daemon, in fact tbe ruler of daemons, who held in Sllbjec-
tion all the souls of men tbat havc come to eartb? 1~
Alexander of Lycopolis coofums llüs line of tbought ftom a p11gan perspective in Egypt
around 300 CE:
For to maintain, according to tbe Chwc:h doctrine, tbat be {Jesus] gave bimself up
for the remission of sins gains some belief in the eycs of many people iu view of
the stories told among the Greek.s about some persans wbo gave themselves op 10r
the safety of their citics.174
I bave argued elsewhere that thc rise of the sc:apcgoat-ty:pology was probably fostered by
the f•r.:l that its rationale was easily llßderstan.dable to non-Jewish converts betause of its

Sacriftce in Religious E.xperience (Studies in tbe Histoey of Religions [Numen Book Se-
ries}93; Leiden, SostoD and Cologne, 2002; pp. 207-232).
123 See Bremmer, "Scapegoat Rituals in Ancient (hee(:e," pp. 300-307.
U4 lCJement SS:l - Kirsopp Lake'~ ttanslatiön in LCL. lt was H.S. Versnel's
fascinating article "Quid Atbenis et Hierosolymis," in: J.W. van Henten (ed.), Die
Entstehtmg der fildl#chen Mizrtyriologie (Leiden, 1989; pp. l62-l96), that drsw my
attention to these passages.
•zs Origen, A.goinst Cel;sus l :3l.
1211 Alexander of Lycopolis. Contra Manichaei Opinlon.u Disputatio 24, quoted ac-
eording to Stern, Greek and Latirt Authors 011 Jews cmd Judai'sm, vol. 2, pp. 486-487.
 Yom KipP"r Jmaguy in the EIW/y Christion lmaginaire 173

comparability to their own cultural institution of pharmakos rites and the etiological tales
connected to these rites. 127
].3 The Redemptive Curse: A.n A.llusion to the Scapegoat in Galatians 3?
In the eyes of ancient Jews, evcry person crucified was cursed: Deuteron-
omy 21:23 states ••anyone hung on a tree is under Ood's curse." 128 Accord·
ingly, the earliest followers of Jesus bad to find an answer to the cognitive
dissonance of a cursed Messiah: How can a cursed Messiah bring sai'IJQ·
tion? Paul ad.dresses this question only in Oalatians 3, e.specially in verses
13-14:129
3:U1For all who rely on the works ofthe law are under a eurse (~eo"~:ä,:Hrv}; for it is
written, "Cursed (EKtiCaNpu1'0<;) is everyone wbo does not observe and obey all
tbe things written in the book of the law." (Deut 27:26 LXX) 130 11 Now it is evi-
dent that no one is justified before God by the law; for "The one wbo is righteous
wiU live by faith ... {Hab 2:4]12 But thc law does not rest on wtb; on the contnuy,
"Whoever does the works of the law will live by tbem." [Lev 18:_.5) ll Christ
bought w; free ftom thc eurse (tar:täpu~) oftbe law by becowiog a curse {KO~apu)
for (wip) us- for it is wrltten, 'Cursed (Enu:cmii)CitO<;) is everyone wbo hangs on
a tree' [cf. Deut 21:23]- 14 in orderthat in Christ leSilS tbe blessirlg of Abralwn
might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promise of tbe Spirit
tbrougb faith.lll

Paul does not explicitly answer the "how" question oftbe salvific curse of
Christ. Some (mostly e.arlier) commentators exp:ress the opinion that bc:-
hind Galatians 3:13 stands tbe concept of Jesus as a scapegoat. 132 The
point of dcparture is the paradoxical description of Christ having bewme
In See Stak!, "The Cbristian Bxegesis oflhe Scapegoat between Jews and Pagans."
111 LXX: Kn:o·nlpcq.tboc; ;"ro 8EoO !!4~;; KpeJ.lG~~-&voc; t.n ~vlml.
rl!l A number of exegetes see a parallel ia the concept expressed in 2Cor 5:21. Fora
survey of interpreters who saw bere m Illusion to the scapegoat, see Young, "The Impact
of tbe Jewish Day of Atonement upon the lb.ought of the New Testament," pp. 344--349;
and L. Sabouri11, "Christ made 'sin' (2 Cor .5:21). Sacrifice and redemption in the history
of a fomwla," in: idew and S. Lyonnet, Sin, Redemption anti SQt:rijice. A Biblical arrd
Patrlstic Shldy (Azralecta Biblica 48; Rome, 1970; pp. 187-296), especially pp. 269-289.
Among new exegetes are McLean, Thte Crsed Christ, 103--113; and 1.D.G. Dunn, The
'l'lleology ofPaul the A.postle {Grand Rapids [Mich.] and Cambridge (UK], 1998}, p. 217.
I do not see :my philol<~gieal basis for endoning this elaim and rder to the discussion in
YoWlg. Even if &paptia is understood e.gainst a cultic. bac.lcground, i.e. naull'l, the c;on-
oection is to Lev 4 rather tbm to Lev 16.
130 Note, that P•ul changes the verb slightly and !hat be omits the explieit referenee um
8co11, sinc;e this would notmatchbis understanding of Christ fulfilling God's will.
131 NRSV, slightly altered.
JJZ See the Iist in McLean, Tlre Ctt.rsed ChriJt, pp. 111-19, and add, most impoiUDtly
for their extemive interpretation, Young, "The Impact ofthe Jewish Day of Atoaemeat
upon tbe Thought of the New Testall\ent," pp. 344--349; and Schwanz, "Two Pauline
Allusions to the Redemptivc Mec:hanism of the Crucifixion." Il.D. Betz, Galatimu. A
174 The lmpacr of Yom Kippllr on Chrisli'onlty in the First and Second Centuries

of departure is the paradoxical description of Christ having become x:atQ.pa

as a substitute "for us" (imsp ijj16)v). Yet these comrnentators do not offer
philological explana.tions beyond the general similarity in the theological
ideas. Almost 20 years ago, Daniel Schwartz proposed an ingenious phi-
lological argument, which regrettably has not been awarded due attention
in subsequent commentaries. 133 He based bis claim on Paul's pecutiar use
of the verb ~a1tOG'ts>.Ä6l in Galatians 4:4-7, a passage related to Gala-
tians 3:13-14. 134
4:• But wh~Sn tbe fu.llneu oftime bad come, Ood sent ((~ulrion:l1ev) his Son, bom.
of a woman, bom under the law, s in order to redeem (i~ayoplioiJ) those who were
under the law, so that we might receive adoption as children. 115 ' And because you
are cltildren, Ood has sent (il;.ultiO"ttl.An) the Spirit ofhis Son into our hearts, «y-
ing.. ..Abba! Father!" ; So you are no Ionger a slave but a chitd, and if a child then
also an heir, through Ood.
Only here (Galatians 4:4 and 4:6) does Paul Use kt;o:1tOG'ts~>.ro. It proclairns
two different paths to Salvation for Gentiles and for Jews by the sending
Christ. God saved the Gentiles by sending Christ to declare that the furmer
slaves (Gentiles) have becoxne sons and co-heirs. Paul does not expound
(to the Galatian Gentile audience?) on how the Jews were saved by the
sending of Christ. Schwartztpoints to Paul's peculiar use of E:l;anoott~>.lD
fo.r expressing sending. whereas in all other instances Paul employs

Commentory on PQJI/'s Letur to the Churchu in Golotia (Hermeneia; Philadelphia,

1979}, p. ISl, suggests an intermediate solu1io11: "Most likely, the Statement is based
upon apre-Pauline intcrpn:tation of Jesus' deaih as a self-sacrifice aDd atonement (see
also Gall :4; 2:20) .... Jesus death interpreled by means of the Jewish concept of tbe
meritorious death of tbe righteous and its atoning benefits."
m Among the more recent connnentaries, I cheeked J.L. Martyn, Galatiam. A New
Tram/ation with Jntroducrion a11d Commentary (AIIc:hor Bible 33A; New York., 1997);
J.D.O. Dunn, The Epist/e to the Galatians (Biack's New Testament Commentary Pea-
body [Mass.), 1993); R.N. Longenecker. Oalatians {Word Bibikai Commentary 41; Dal-
las [Tex.], 1990). Only R. Y.K. Fung. Tht. Epistle to the Ga/atian.t {The New Intematioaal
Com.mentary on lhe New Testament; G.nmd 1\apids [Mich.], 1988), refers to Schwanz-
io a note, witho1.1t Mtber discussion. Also McLean, The Cwsed Christ, does not refet to
Schwanz. though he would have supported bis thesis. Tbe only S)'Dlpathetic referl!llcc I
found was R.G. Hamerton.-Kelly, "Saered. Violence and the Curse of the Law (GalaliaDS
3.13). The Oeatb of Christ as a Sacrifidal Traversy," New Testament Stud;es 36 (1990)
93-118, bere pp. 114-115.
134 Themarlcally and stylistically 3:13-14 is cannected to 4:4-S: Jesus buys the Jews

free; tbe verb ~ayopcll;l'il appears only bete in Paul; the Sl!lltenc:c has a parallel stfucture
(double iY~t). SM Schwartz, ''Two Pauline Allusions to the Redemptive Mec:hanism ofthe
Crucifixion''; and e.g. Dunn, The Epliltle Ia the OalatiaM, p. 216.
1" The NRSV tnmslaces vi.Oc; as child and the plural as children.
 Yom Kippur lmagery in the Early Christion lmaginaire 175

1tliJ.L'lC(I)I36 or a1tOOtSU(I). 137 Schwartz suggests that Paul is alluding to the

Septuagint, where AJ;u:rwcnsA>.a:~ appears frequently. althongb only twice in
a siDlilar context to Galatians 4 (the sending ofX redeems Y): Leviticus 14
(the sending of the bird in the purification of the leper) and Leviticus 16
(tbe sending of the scapegoat), two rituals that are intimately connected.
'fhis context may have triggered Paul's choice of E<;curocn&U.(I). "Paul. does
not need to explain how sending forth Christ saved the Jews, for already
tbe word t#;o.X.Sotetlev. at least in his own mind ifnot in that ofhis readers,
carried the meaning: Christ's actionwas that of a scapegoat." 138 A percep-
tive reader of the Septuagint and of Paul may notice this connotation of
~a.noG'til.l(l) in the context of salvation. ,
· McLean ten1atively suggests another philological connecti.on to Yom
IGppur. Paul's use of S1ttKC:t6.po.to<; in:stead of 'ICS'KO.'tTJP«JlS\IOC; in the quo-
tation ofDeuteronomy 21:23 might refer to the scapegoat, since Barnabas
uses this word in his deSGription of the scapegoat and this verse probably
belonged to his halakbic source. 139 Although. as McLean bimself states,
Paul's choice of ~1m;:.a:tclp1noc; may be strongly influenced by Deutero-
11oroy 27:26, the independent references to this tradition in Barnabas and
in the Gospel ofPeter speak for Paul using an existing tradition. 140
I would like to add a third suggestion: tbat the use of f.l;f\yopaoev in
Galatians 3:13 might perhaps be a pun on the similar sound of the rare verb
~ayopö'i10e:t in Leviticus 16:21.

t.ev 16:21 !AaPQJv) ~llyopricn::l tl<• «VtO'O (Tpliyov mi<r«:;tcci.c; tlilv villtv
cltuco;ripo:Toul BYIJilLa<; lopcz.1Jl
Gall:l3 Xpuni)c; &!iTtTOpO:Of;V to: t'ljc; mTiipar:; 'tOi! VÖjlOU 1\l'd<;

In the first covenant, Aaron confesse.s, 011 the (cursed) scapegoat, the
iniquities of the children of Israel. In the second covenant, Christ redeetns
the (Jewish) sinners; he renders them free frotn the curse of the law and
tums bimself into their scapegoat. While I hesitate to interpret the release
ofthe believers as a higb-priestly act. the language suggests that Paul used
this inverting pun.

136 Paul nses :~~i;pl!O) elc:vell times in lhe authentic letters: Rom 8:3; lCor 4:17; 16:3;
2Cor 9:3; Phil2:19.23.2S.28; 4:16; lTh~ 3:2.5; threc: timu in tbe epistlc:s of doubtful
authenticity: Eph 6:22; Col4:S; 2Thess 2:! 1; and the composita in lhe fullowing vmes:
1tpo:dp11•: Rom lS:24; lCor 16:6.11; 2Cor 1:16 (four times); ooJl~l(Q) 2Cor 8:18.22
(twice); G;valrip-in Phlm 12 (om:e).
m Rom 10:15; lCor 1:17; 2Cor 12:17.
131 Schwart:z, "Two Pauline Allusions to the Rcdemptive Mt(:hanism of the Cruci-
fixion," p. 26l.
199 See pp. 159-160, above.
140 McLeiln, 1'he C11rsed Christ, p. 136.
176 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Chrilltian1iy in the First tmd Second Centuries

Schwanz bimself remar.k.s that bis thes.is works only with respect to
those readers who are weil acquainted with the Greek Bible. Galatians is
addressed to a completely Gentile community, however, Paul clearly pre-
sumes in other parts of the Epistle that bis addressees are able to
understand a quite complex exegetical argumentation. 141 McLean's argu.-
ment for a cross-cultural apotropaic rite as background to this passage sup-
ports Schwartz. in that most Mediterranean people, pagans and Jews, knew
some form ofthe widespread concept that the sending ofX (a "scapegoaf'
or pharmakos) provides a relea.se from impurity, sin and/or divine punish-
ment.142 In any case, the alternative explanations to Gal.atians 3:10.13 do
not explain the strange idea of a curse havi.ng a redemptive function.
References to the vicarious deaths ofmartyrs explain neither Paul's use of
a curse at this point nor the question of how a curse could possibly bave a
salvific function. If Paul bad wanted to refer to the concept of vicarious
atonement in Jewish martyrdom ideology. he would probably have prefer-
red other concepts than a curse. Tbe suggestion of Schwartz and bis prede~
cessoJ:S, slight as the basis for lheir argument is. looks the most plausible.
1.4 The ScapegOQt as Catalyst?,John 1:29 and lPeter 2:24
In two other New Testament passages, the Lamb of God in John 1:29 and
the Servant Song in IPeter 2:24, the idea of Jesus expiating sin by its re.
moval has been explained by some against the background of the scape-
goat rite. 143
1.4.1 John 1:29
Three backgrounds have been suggested for the origin of the concept of the
"Lamb ofGod who takes away the sin ofthe world" 144 - the suffering ser-
vant, Passover and the scapegoat. 14S Each has its merits and demerits. The

141 U. Sehnelle, Einleitung i11 das Neue Testament (UTB fiir Wissenschaft: Uni-

Taschenblicher 1830; Göttingen, 1 1996), p. 123 {mainly Gentile Christians; probably Hel-
lcnistic citizens).
1012 A more definitive answer can be given after an eKtensive disc\lssion about the im-
portance of sacrificial connotatiMs. There is bardly an issue, more hotly discussed in
Pauline studies. See examples of lhe opposing views - in favor of tbe saerificial aton.e-
ment concept is Dwm, The Theology of Pt:nll the Apostle. pp. 212-223; against it are
C. Breytenbach, YentJhnung. E;ne Studie zvr paulinüchen Soterlofogie (Wisse.oscllaft-
liche Monographien :zum Alten und Neueo Testament 60; Neukirchen, 1919), passim;
and McLean, The Cursed Christ, pp. 22--64.
°
1 For aaother possible 1lllusion in Uohn 4:10, see p. 206, below.
144 1St 6 G:iJ.vOc.: "loii 8aoCI ö ~Jip(ov njv Ö.J.laptitlv too KD<IflOU (Jolm I :29, NRSV).

su Dodd has suggested a fowth background: an apocalyptic ruler as in Revelation:

C.H. Dodd, The lntel'pretation ofthe Ft:llll'th Gospel (Cam.bridge [UK}, 1953), pp. 230-
238. This suggesrion bas beeu refuted by C.K. Barrett, "The Lamb of God," New
 Yom Kippur Jmogery iiJ the Early Ch1'istitmlmt~gintzl1'e 177

5utTering servant of Isaiah 53 is compared to a lamb (5.3:7), whieh vicari-

ously bears (53:5.8.10-12) the sins (5.3:4) and :finally dies (53:12). C.F.
:Burney has suggested tha.t an Aramaie version of Isaiah 53 using tc•'ro,
wbich means servant as well as lamb miglrt bc responsible for the term.
"Lamb of God."146 According to the second theory, the Passover Lamb
plays a centml role in John's description of the death of the Messiah in
19:36. However, the question of an expiatory function of the paschallamb
i.s highly controversial. 1~7 The third suggested background is the scape-
goat.148 Tbe scapegoat is said to bear the sins. Yet the scapegoat is not a
lamb, and furthermore, any specific reference to sending out or cursing is
missing in John 1}~9

Testament Studies I (1954-55) 210-21&; and see idcm. Das Evangelium nach Jolra111ta
(Kritiseh-exegetischer Konunentar Ober das Neue TestamCJJt; Göttingeo, 1990), p. 200.
See J. Frcy, "Die 'tbeologia cruciflXi' des Johaonesevangeliums," in: A. Dettwiler and J.
Zamstei.n (eds.), Kre11Ze1theologie im Nerten Testament (Wisseoscbaftliche Uotersu-
chungCJJ Zllm Neue.n Testament lSl; Ttlbingen 2002; pp. 169-238), e$pecially pp. 208-
209, for the reasoos against a fift:h background, the Tamid, a theory recently revived by
P. Stuhlma.cher, "Das Lamm Gottes - eine Skizze," io: H. Caoeik:, H. Lichteuberger u.d
P. Scblfer (eds.), GeschiChte- Tradition- Rtiflexion (FS M. Hengel) (Titbingen, 1996;
vol. 3, pp. 529-542).
1"' C.F. Bumey, The Aramale Origin of the Fourth GOJpel (Oxford, 1922), pp. 104-
108); ~;f. J. Jeremiu, "Amnos, srCo, amion," Theologisches W6rterbta:h Jum Newen
TeJ:tament I (1933) 342-345.
1' 7 The blood ot the paschal lamb has an apotropaie fimetion in Jubüees 49:3 aad
Heb 11:28. Some refer to 2Cbr 30:15--20, Josephus, Anliquitatesjlldaicae 2:312 and the
late Midrasll Exotba Rabhah J5: 12 ( od. MirkiD 174) as eonceiviog ofthe paschallamb as
atoniog but only the last passage ftom &odus Robbah elearly mekes this association. For
arguments against the existence of this eonception in the first eenrury, see Stnhlmadwr,
"Das Lamm Gottes - eine Skiu:e," pp. .529-531. Frey, "Die 'theologia cnrcifixi' des
Jobannesevangeliums," p. 210, points out that Jobn might be the earliest iostaoee of ao
atoning understanding of the .Passover sacritice.
1" On this argumentatioo, see Young, "Tbe lmpaet of thc Jewish Day of Atonement
upon the TI1ought of tbe New Testament," pp. 352.-256 and lhe eommentaries quotcd
there. Barrett, Dm Evangelium nach Johtmnes, is more hesitant. Among newer
coJDIIICnt.aries K. Wengst, DU$ Johanneswangelfum (Theologischer Kommentar Zllm
Neuen Testameot 4/1; StuUgart; Berlin; Köln. 2000), pp. 83-84, assumes that the
scapegoat, the .Passover lamb, and lsa 53 stand io the background.
lA9 R.. Sebnacke.oburg, The Gospel.4.&cof'ding toSt. John (4 vols; Herder's Theologic:al
Commeo.tary on the New Testament I; Kent, 196&), vol. 1, p. 300 (explicitly); and R.E.
Brown, The Gospel According to John (i-'Xii). lntroduction, Trorr:slation, and Hore~
(Anchor Btble Guden City, N.Y., 1966), pp. 58-63 (implidtly) do not regard tbe
scapegoat u bei.ng among tbe motits in the badtground. However, the philological
arguments, that the verbs 115ed in Lev 16:22 (l.aJIIIä.M) and Isa 53:4.12 (Qtpl.il, üv~) do
not match ulpm in John I :29 and that tbe Passover lamb was c:aUed not allvo.;; but ltpÖ~
jknov, are not very strong, eoosidering tbe Aramaie background of tbe author of the
178 The Impact o[Yom Kippur on Christianity in the First and Second Cenlllries

In sum, Isaiah 53 explains best the JobanDine tradition. The paschal

lamb and especially the popular scapegoat rite may have served as cata-
lysts. Unless we find an early Jewish source connecting Isaiah 53 to the
imaginaire of Yom Kippur, the assumption of such a catalytic function re-
mains completely hypothetical. That later Johannine tradition conceives of
Jesus' death as atoning, probably with Yom Kippur looming in the back-
ground, becomes clearer in lJohn 2:2 and 4:10, as is discussed below. 150
1.4.2 1Peter 2:22-24
Admonishing bis community in their own time of affliction to take Jesus'
suffering as an example, the author of 1Peter reworks the fourth song of
the Servant ofGod in Isaiah 53:
2:22He committedno sin
and no deceit was found in bis mouth. [Isaiah 53 :9bJ
23 When he was insulted ().o\liopoiljL~oc;), he did not retum insult (avtsl.ol&ipEt);
when he suffered (maxliiV), he did not tbreaten (~i4t);
he entrusted bimself to the one who judges justly.
24 He himself carried (avl\vsro:sv) our sins
in his body upon the wood [cross] (iKi'to !;vl.ov) [lsaiab 53:4.11.12],
so that ftee ftom sins, ~
we might live for righteousness;
by his wounds you have been healed [lsaiab 53:5].
Some exegetes have connected the Christological song in lPeter 2:22-24
to the imagery of the scapegoat, referring to the mention of insu1t, vicari-
ous suffering, and the strange notion of Jesus carrying sins "upon the
wood." 151 Furthennore, some see a connection to Deuteronomy 21:23 in
the use or••wood" to refer to the Cross (as in Galatians 3: 13). 152

Gospel. See Schnackenburg, The Gospel According toSt. John, vol. 1, pp. 105-111, on
the various theories on the exact character oftbis Aramaie background.
150 See pp. 205-207, below.
1' 1 See the Iist of exegetes wbo see here an allusion to the scapegoat, in Young, "The
Impact of the Jewisb Day of Atonement upon the Thought of the New Testament,"
pp. 349-352; also K.H. Schelkle, Die PetriiSbriefe, der Judasbrief(Herden theologischer
Kommentar zum Neuen Testament 1312; Freiburg, Basel, Vie.ona,__ I96I); and, more
hesitantly, N. Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief (Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar 21;
Zürich, Einsiedeln, Köln, Neukircben-Vluyn, 2 1986), p. 138 "Vielleicht ist auch das Bild
vom ehrlosen, verfluchten, aber schuldlosen Sllndenbock (Lev 16,2()-.22) im Spiel,
jedenfalls aber der Gedanke der SOhne."
m E.g. C. Bigg, Critical and Ezegetica/ Commentary on the Epistles of St. Peter and
St. Jude (International Critical Commentary; New York, 1901), p. 147.
 Yom Kippur lmagery in the Early Christian Imaginaire 179

However, there is no indication here of a direct influence of the scape-

goat imagery.m The correspondence to the scapegoat imagery stems from
the passage being a reworking oflsaiah 53, which in turn may be based on
the scapegoat ritual. 154 This pertains to the motif of the silence, the vicari-
ous suffering and the bearing of sins upon the wood.
In the peculiar formulation that Jesus carried the sins in bis body upon
the wood ( tdc; UJ.Laptiac; iJ11rov uirt~ civitwrttv iv tcp OOI!«n o.irtaü im 'tÖ ~1)..
lov), lPeter employs a word with a cultic notion, civa.cpSpco, usually alluding
to an offering on an altar. It was adopted from the Greek oflsaiah 53:12.
Since a presentation of sins is unimaginable, the author is most likely
referring to Jesus' body as offering. Unlike Barnabas or Galatians, how-
ever, IPeter 2:22-24 does not inention the sending or the curse.lSS While in
Acts 5:30 and 10:39 and Galatians 3:13 the use of~ulov for "cross" clearly
alludes to Deuteronomy 21 :23, this is not so in all passages, as its
occurrence in Acts 13:29 shows. In lPeter 2:24, any connotation of curse
is missing (lot&opouJ.Levoc; in Greek has no undertone of curse); I do there-
fore see an allusion to Deuteronomy 21:23 as a possible but not necessary
conclusion. While "insult" does not appear in Isaiah 53, I do not see any
reason to suppose that the author included it in order to allude thereby to
the scapegoat. It is probably based on a Passiontradition and Jesus' ethical
message of non-retaliation in Matthew 5:38-48, in connection with the
silence ofthe lamb in Isaiah 53:7. 156
In sum, the scapegoat ritual may, at most, have served as a catalyst for
applying Isaiah 53 to Christ, similar to the instance of the Lamb of God in.
John I :29. 157

ISJ Against the scapegoat as background, see e.g. J.H. Elliott, 1 Peter. .4. New Trans-
lation with lntroduction and Commentary (Anchor Bible 378; New York, 2000), p. 352;
P.J. Achtemeier, 1 Peter (Henneneia; Minneapolis, 1996), p. 202; L. Goppelt, Der Erste
Petrwbrief(edited by Ferdinand Hahn; Kritisch-exegetischer Kommentar Uber das Neue
Testament 12/1; Göttingen, 1978), p. 210, note 71.
154 On the scapegoat ritual behind Isa 53, see above, pp. 116-117. The connection of

IPet 2:22-24 to lsa 53 is clear: lPet 2:22- Isa 53:9 ön O:voJ.ltav oi11c t~~:o\J106Y o1i8& cilpteJt
6öl.oc; tv •i; o'tOJ.lll'tl a.ütoo. 1Pet 2:24- Isa 53:4: oitoc; •O:c; cipa.p'tiac; fJpcliv ~pf:pet. lsa 53:11:
•ac; opop'tiao;aütö>v aütoc; ävoton. lsa 53:12: a.,ncic; ciJ.lap•i~ xoUö>v äYI\veyxev. lPet 2:25-
Isa 53: S: •ci 11ml.<an:t a.ütoü iJpei<; la8TJII&V.
1" As P.J. Achtemeier,l Peter, p. 202, conf'lrms.
156 Achtemeier, I Peter, p. 200, referring to Mark 14:61; 15:5; Matt 26:62-63; 27:12;
27: 14; Luke 23:9; John 19:9.
157 Cf. Young, "The Impact of the Jewish Day of Atonement upon the Thought of the

New Testament," p. 356: "lt must be stressed that this is far from saying that the scape-
goat was a type of Christ; the evidence is such as to leave open the possibility that the
language of taking away of sin in John 1:29 and 1Pet 2:24 may have hehind it the lan-
guage ofthe scapegoat ritual" (emphasis in the original).
180 The Impact cfYom Kippur on Clrrißtianity in tbe First and Second Cent/Q'iu

2. Christ as High Priest: Hebrews

A quick glanoe at the Epistle to the Hebrews makes it obvious that this is a
Yom Kippur typology. The high priest entering the holy of holies with
blood once a year undoubtedly refers to Yom Kippur. I soggest tbat some
additional motifs may be connected to Yom Kippur, in particular the high
priest's victory over the powers of evil, and his confession, intercession
and exit from the holy of holies. Moreover, I argue for an apocalyptic
background to some Yom Kippur motifs. In the final subsection, I propose
a new explanation for the development of the earllest stage of the high~
priestly Christology- namely, that it derives from apocalyptic conceptions
of Yom Kippur in connection with Zecbariah 3.
Rather than writing its myth in a narrative sequence. Hebrews evo.kes
several scenes in a typological exegesis. The character of Hebrews• myth
differs from the texts hitherto discussed, as a comparison with BornabtU
reveals. Barnabas fleshes out earthly events with typologized ritual; H~
brews ventures into cosmological dimensions. While Barnabas and Mat~
thew use the scapegoat ritua! to elaborate details of the earthly aspects of
Christ•s Passion and again hi's Parousia on earth, Hebrews employs the
entrance ofthe high priest into the holy ofholies to develop the twin con-
cepts of Jesus' destruction of the devil and his ascent to the presence of
God in the heavenly sanctuary. For this, Hebrews uses several acts of the
high priest's ritual from the biblical Yom K:ippur: the entrance. the blood
sacrifice and sprinkling, and perhaps the confession. Othet aspects refer
rather to the temple ritual, such as the high priest's intercession and per-
haps the role ofthe people as spectators of the high priest's rite. The basic
setting, however, is apocalyptic: the heavenly temple, the eschatological
concept of time and the motif of the high-priestly redeemer who destroys
the Lord of the evil powers. liberates bis good prisoners an.d ascends to
God.
The first part of these inquiries outlines the chronological and geo·
graphical frame. The second patt investigates the high priest and his vari~
ous works. ISS The third part explores the rote of the people as spectators of
the high priest's performance and finally as his eschatological imitators.

Ist Deslrucdoh of the evil powers, confessloo, enirance, blood sacrifice md spriukling,
and intercession.
 Yom Kippur Imagery i11 the Early Christian lmaginaire 181

2.1 The Setting

2.1.1 Sacred Time: lbe Present Eschaton as Yom K.ippur
Hebrews cleacly distinguishes between its own, esehatological time, IS9
which is close to the end of world, 160 and the period preceding it. The es-
chaton begins with the high priest's self-sacrifice on Golgotha, (z~p}iina~ 161
coonects Christ's sac.rifice once in history to the Yom K.ippur ritual per-
formed once a year162 and characterizes Chri.st's sacrifice as an act accom-
plished in tbe past163 rather than as a ritual continued in the present in the
beavenly sanctuary. It is not the sacrifice that continues but Cbrist's heav-
enly intercession for his followers in the presence of God {7:2S). The
writer admonishes the community, asking them to wait for the Second
Parousia (9:28), whose delay causes some discontent among the address-
ees. Some exegetes suggest that the author is refening to the Parousia in
tenns ofthe high priest's exit from the holy ofholies. 164 Thls intetpretation
is appealing, especially in the frameworlc of a Yom Kipput typology. In
tb.is escbatological oonception of time, the author does not refer explicitly
to a special (future) Day of Atonement. rather the final time period ofthe
universe has arrived. 16s Considering that the comniunity is prese1ltly suf-
tering and ex.pecting the high priest to reappear, the whole eschaton has
bwome a period of atonement, analogaus to the period of affliction at
Qumran.I66

159 E.g., wvi in 8:6 and vuvi 54 inaf; itti <n,JY1tl.eiq. '"'"'' a.icilvcmr in 9:26.
Jlill Heb 10:25.
1'1 Heb 7:27; 9:(7).12.26.28; lO:lQ .
. te Heb 9:7; Lev 16:34.
l6l All instances are in the perfect or aorist tense.
- 164 Cf. lhe Greek: 6 Xpun{x; ä.mf; KPOGI:V8X8d~ ~\<; to 'IOU.Z.v av8VIl}'1C6iv c}U!Pfia.<; b: liE11-
1:ipo1.1 XGIP~ cjiGp"C\o.; 0.81\Gctcu Wl<; a.inöv ciua:6qOji.SYOL.; si.; G(l)'l!l')piuv. W.L. Lane, He-
IR-ews 9-13 (Word Biblical Commentary 47B; Dall~ {Tex.), 1991), p. 250 (following
wrious predecessors), refe11> to Lev 16:17 and Sir SO:S-10.24-28; contrary to H.W.
_Attridge, The Episrle to the Hebrews (Hermenda; .Philadephia, 1989), p. 266, note 72.ln
· iiiy opiniou, Lane's case is much stronger, since Yom K.ippur is the main topic ofthe
·tcintext.
·_,~ '" Heb 9:9-10 seems to distinguisb between the present and tbe eschatological future,
·. bUt tbe rest of 1he Epistle makes clear thal the author conside11> bi:mse1f and his addres-
._.~ tobe in the escbaton: see Attridge, Tlre Epistle to tlul Hebnws, p. 241.
•- ;1!!1 For the sld'ferings, see e.g. 10:32-39; 12:1-12; 13:13. For the expectation of
';Cbrist's retum, see 9:28, md cf. p. 99, abow:.
182 The lm[Jßct ofYom Kippur on Chfiltianil)l in the First and Second Centuries

2.2.2 Sacred Space: The Heavenly Sanctuary

Hebrews uses geographical aspccts of Yom Kippur in its typology: a
sanctuary with a holy of bolies, and the camp and area outside it. 167 Schot-
ars are divided about the background oftbis conception of a heavenly
sanctuary, especially about the comparison of the earthly tabemacle to its
heavenly counterpart. Wbile a number of scholars opt for a Platonic back-
ground, 168 the conception seems to be closer to apocalyptic thought. 169
Only this would explain tbe heavenly sanctuary being the place of God's
fiery presence, where he is SUlTounded by angels, the righteous and
Jesus. 170 lt is the place of a superior liturgy .171 Corresponding roughly172 to
tbe eartbly sanctuary, the heavenly sanctuary has two parts 173 separated by

161 See Attridge, The Epin/e to tlre Hebrews, pp. 222-224; C.K. Barrett, '"''ho Esc;ba-
tology of the Epistle to tbe Hebrews," in: D. Da\lbe and W.D. Davies (eds.), The Back-
ground of the New Testament and lt!l &chotology. Festschrift for C.H. Dodti (Cambridge
[UK], 1956; pp. 363-393), pp. 383-390. C.R. Koestec, Tlte Dwelling ofGod. 17Je Taber-
nacle in th• 0/d Testament, /nterteatamental Jewi.Jh Literature and the New Testamertt
(Catbolic Biblical Quanerly, Monograph Series 22; Washington, D.C., 1989); 0. Hofius,
Der Jlorhllng vor dem Thron Gotte!I.,Elne exegetlsch-religio11$geschichtliclre Untersu-
chung zu HebriJer 6,19 f. und 10,19f. (Wissenschaftliche Untersuehungen zum Neuen
Testament 14; Tübingen, 1972), pp. S0-72. Unfortuoately, A. Cody, Heavenly S1171CIIIQI)'
and Liturgy in the EpistJe to the Hebrews (St. Meinrad, 1960) was not available to 111r1.
1" Most notably C. Spicq, L ·tpitre aw: Hebreux (2 vots; Etudes Bibliqucs; Paris,
1952/53); and Koester, The JJwelling ofGod, passim. C. Koester has a(ljusted bis views
bis recent commentary, Hebrew:s. A New Translation with Introduction anJ Commentory
(Anchor Bible 36; New York, 2001}1 pp. 97-100.
10!9 The main promoters of apocal}'Pricism as baekground are Barrett, "Tbe Eschatology

of the Epistle to the Hebrews"; 0. Michel, Der Brief an die Hebr4er (Kritisch-exege-
tischer Kommentar ü.b&r das Neue Testament 13; Göttingen, 1960); and especially L.O.
Hurst, Tlre Epistle to tlre Hebrr:ws. lts Backgro~~nd of 1'1wught (Society for New Tes-
tament Studies, Monograph Serie& 65; Cambridge [UK), 1990), who overstates the evi-
dence in denying any Platonic influence.
110 Heb 10:12; 12:22-24.29.
111 Heb 8:2.6 aad Attridge, The Epistle to the HBbrews, p. 262.
112 See Himmelfarb, Ascent to Heaven in Jewish qnd Christian Apocalyp:su, p. 16, for
the suggestion tbat the superior heavenly sanctua.ry cannot be an exact model of tbe
earthly one.
113 See W.R.G. Loader, Sohn und Hoherpriester (Wissenschaftliche Monographien
zum Alten und Ne~~en Testament 53; Neuki.rchen-Vluyn, 1981), p. 183; and M. Rissi,Die
Theologie du Hebräerbrieft (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchua_gen zum Neuen Testameat
41; Tilbingen, 1981), pp. 37-41. Heb 9:11-12 describes Jesus passing through the tent
(~,a. 't1\>ll&i.l:ov~ Jtai 'CE1.Elo-rlip~t<; oa:T(vflc;) and entering the boly ofbolies (d.; -cO. 4y~a). The
same imagery probably stands behind the two expressions in Heb 8:2 ('tmv ci-rlow
Mlto\lj)Yoc; ~rai tl\.; GltT(vi\1; tf\t; Ü1J8lvfl.;}. Hofius, ~r J'orh11ng vor dem Thron Galtes,
pp. 59-60, bas demonstrmd tbat tbe mention ot' the holy of bolies before tbe sanctuacy
retlects the same order as in tbe purificatioll of the tabemacle on Yom Kippur.
 Yom Kippur Jmogery in th~ Early Chriltian Imaglnaire 183

a veil.l 74 These features appear in such apocalyptic texts as 1Enoch and

Testament of uvi. 115 A Platonic conception would demand an exact cor-
respondence between the earthly type and its heavenly idea.
Hebrews• terminology certainly bas a (midd.le-)Platonic ring. 176 On tbe
otber band, the use of other terms is not consistent with conventional
(middle-)Platonism. 177 Hebrews may even use a word with the opposite
meaning, such as vno21Etrl111 for the earthl:y copy instead of the heavenly
idea, 178 causing Gregory Sterling to comment: "lts use would force a phi-

Lev 16: 16.20 even uses the same pect1liar words, m iiyux, for the holy of holies. This
explanation is mach ·more cogent thau is interpreting ihd in 9:11 lnsrrwnentally and 8:2 as
a hendiadys.
!7<1 On the veil, see the classi.c by Hofias, Der Yorhong YOI' dem Thron Gottes; Rissi,
Die Th4ologie des Hebriierhrieft, pp. 41-43; Loader, Solmund Hoherpriutel', pp. 174-
178; and the commentaries to Heb 6:19-20; 10:1~20.
m See above, pp. 82-84. However, it is unclear how many heavens exist in the cosmo-
logy of the author of Hebrews. and whether or not the sanctuazy is Jocated in a speeific
place. i.e. the highest heaven. This was suggested by Hotius, Der YorbQ11g vor dem
Thron Gotte1, pp. 70-71, basing his proposition on the sudden use of the singular of
~.,.~ in 9:24, similaT to Testament of Levi 5:1. Otherwise Hebrews uses the plural
(1:10; 4:14; 7:26; 8:1; 9:23; 12:23.25). The two other uses ofthe singular are euily ex-
plained: Heb 11:12 may reßect that the stars belong to a certain beaven, while 12:26 is a
qootation of Hag 2:26. 8oth passage.s consider this heaven to be part of lower lrausitory
creation ("der vergänglichen &höpfung"). However, it is more difficult tn explaia the
pllll'al in 8:1, where Christ, the bigh priest and minister of the true h':nt, slts to the right of
God, i.r:. supposedly in the highest heaven.
176 The earthly tabemacleis a shadow ofthe image ofthe things (aircliv njv ehcovucliv

1q)IE1'1l•how), s.k:etc::h and shadow (imoaah!IC'Ct .:o.i ox:tif.) of the true hcavenly tent (o~tllvft
1U.""vil), or a man-made anti-type of the true (O.vd.tvltll ti&v ilT\~hvillv), divinely
constructed model ( nm~). Cf. the cxpressions o:Vtd tci iurovpö.vto: and e~inov töv 01ipav0v
(Heb 8:1-5; 9:23-24; 10:1). Seo Attridge, Tlur Epiltle to tlre Hebrews, pp. 261-263. For
similarlti~s to Philonic Platonism, see e.g. H.-F. Weiss, Dt:r Brief an die H"brt'Ju
(Ktitiseh-exegetiscber Kon:uneutu Ober das Neue Testament 13; 6öttingen. 1991),
p.438.
177 See Hurst, The Epi1tle to the Hebrew1, pp. 7-42, especially 13-21. He pointsout

e.g. that ill19~VI) is not neccssarily Platonie (20-21) and that inro&elr1111 is not ased in this
sense by Philo or Plato, the cOinJDon word being 11:Dpli&tYflll (13) (see next note).
111 Heb 8:5; 9:23. Platonists may use -imo&hflo to describe tbe heavenly idea ratber

than tbe earthly shadow. The LXX prefers MpliktYWl wben taJicing of the heavenly
pattem (Exod25:9 [2*], see David's "'plan" in 1Cbr2S:Il.l2.18.19) or t~ (Ex-
od 25:~). 8oth terms are more coo.sistent with Platonic tmninology. On the other band,
wo8eiypa in Hobrews may r11tleet E1.ek 42:15, who speab in bis vision ofmeasuring the
escbatological modelt example of the temple (&tq.~t•pqomr TÖ im63etyf1a toll oi~r::011). See
6.E. Sterling, "Oatology versus Eschatology: Tettsions between Author and Comm.unity
in Hebrews," Silldia Philonica A.nnual 13 (111 the Spirit of Failh. Studiu i11 Philo arrd
EIJ1'ly Christianity in Honor of Dtwid Hay) (Leiden, 2001; pp. 190-211) (1 only had a
184 The Impact of Yom K.lppur on Cnri3tianity in the First (llt.d Sec01td Centurin

losopher to grimace." 119 If llcbrews' use of ilno&li:yJ.UI was influenced by

the Septuagint (Eze.ldel42:1.5), then this is simply another argwnent for
thc influcnce of apocalyptic conceptions of a heavenly temple, E7..ekiel's
vision. Moreover, the statement that the beavenly sanctuary was pitcbcd by
God and bad to he cleansed speaks against tbe PJatonic conception of eter-
nal ideals. 180 In sum, llebrews' concept of a heavenly sanctuary can be
cbaracterized as apocalyptic thought disguised as the lan.guage of popular
Platonism.
2.2 The High Priest and His A.ctions
The central argument of Hebrews 7 is the superiority of Christ's high
priesthood ..according to the order of Melchizedek" over the Levitical high
priests. Christ is thc one and etemal bigh priest.111 as opposed to the great
nurober of mortal Levitical priests and high priests, wbo change frequently.
Christ the high priest is holy, blameless, undefiled (7:26). Other chapters
add further attributes: Christ is merciful and trustful (2:17), sinJess (4:15),
and perfect (5:8). While he has been tempted like other humans and been
subjected to painful affiictions, he resisted and has no part in sin (5:8).
..

pre-published versi011 availableJ. But al$o in E.zekiel imo3e:iTI1« sigoifie!l the envisaged
escbatological sanctuary not an existing buildi.ng.
J"/j) Sterling, "Ontology versus Eschatology."
110 See Heb 8:2 tbr the pitching and 9:23 for the clcansing. It ls W!.Clear wllen exactly it
was erected. It bad ex.isted at least .sinc:e Moses (8:5). 1he elcansing is a strange idea, but
only if one considers the heavenly holy of holies perfect and unc:ballgeable. lbe ooly
reason for defilement'ofthe heavenly sanctuary can be human sins. Ifsins cao defile the
earthly holy of holies, which is never e.ntered other than to be purified, the concept that
sins can equally defile a heavenly holy ofholies is only a small step further. Accordingly,
Christ's sacrifice purifies not our earthly bodies but our couscienee. which equa.lly
cannot be reached by blood. ondthe true sanctuary {1:3; 9:14).
111 Christ's lügh pdeslhood is e;~ Tov q.ifbvtr (5:6), but not titro ..:tilv G.irl!YCDv, i.e. bis high
priesthood is not preexistent, since he was appointed (3:2; 5:5} - a aux in lhe Arian
eontroversy. Wheo did it begin? With his incamation (see lhe Iist of scholars give11 by
Loader, SO'hn und Hoherpriester, p. 246, note 24, including himselr, p.247), or wilh his
death(11ee tbe list ofscholars given by Loader, Sohn und Hoherpriuter, p. 24S, note II)?
Loader and Attridgc, The Epi5tle to the Hebrews, p. 146, arcne agai.J:tst the widely be!d
opinion that the exaltation was the begilming. We cannot reach a definite answer.
Possibly, Hebrews combined contradic:ting traditions. Moreover, if Christ is high priest
after the order of Melcbizedek, this presupposes, fhere once was a (high) priest Melchi-
zedek, iE~ si!; TÖ litl}vtK~ I d~ -.:ov ciGivu (Heb 7;3.17; Ps 110:4). Was a Michael-li.ke
Melchlzedek serving in the heavcmly sanctuary? lf not he, who elsc, if anyone at all?
Before Enoch entered the holiest area ofthe heavenly sanctuary, there does not seem to
bave bcen an earlier high priest.
 Yom Kippur ImQgery in the Early Cbrislian lmaginaire 185

Hebrews describes this high priest as performing five acts that can be
associated w.ith Yom Kippur: (1) victory over the forces of evil, 182 (2) the
confession, {3) the one-time atoning and purifying offering183 of hls own
blood and its sprinkling, 184 (4} the entry into the heavenly holy ofholies 135
and (5) the permanent intercession for bis followers.U'' Acts 3 and 4 appear
in all commentaries as high-priestly works, acts 2 and 5 in some, and act 1
i!l mY addition.

1. Earlier, we investigated tbe apocalyptic myth of an esc.hatological Yom

Kippur in I Enoch and 11 QMe/chizedek. 181 A similar pictu.re of a redeemer
who defeats the Iord of the evil forces and liberates bis prisoners is founcl
in Hebrews: 118
14 Since, therefo~, tbe chilcben share ftesb and blood, he bimself li.k.ewise shared
the sam.e lhings, so that through death he might destroy (a:ltTIIPYiJcru) the one wbo
has the power of deatb, that is, the devil (tov 61.0Po7..ov), 15 and fi:ee (ällol.).ci~~)
those wbo all their U'\'cs were held in slavery by lhe fear of deatb. 1u

Of course, the generat concept of an esc.batological conquest of evil u

wiclespread in Jewish apocalyptic circles. 190 and similar ideas appear else-

m Heb 2:14-I.S; aud probably 9:26.

W Heb 7:27; 9:14; 9:25; IO:ll-1&, cf. also e.g. 10:10.
IM Heb 10:22; cf. 9:13.19.21; 12:24.
1" Heb 6:19; 9:24; 10:19.
IM Heb 7:2S; aod more subtle 2:18; 4:14; 9:24.
1" See above, pp. S.S-92.
•• Otto Michel asswnes that Hebrews adopted a tradition in 2:14-lS (&5) without
greatly refonnuladD& it. He gives two reasons for this a.sumption. There are a nwnber of
words Hebrews does not use elsewhere. aJid tbe exact "b.ow" of the Iiberation renwias
i)paque. (Michel mentioas xctapyic.> and 6uijk)lo.;; and one could add 4inuJ.lo.oioow, iovl.&ia
aad lqllito.;;. But of course this is not a certain indication, since Hebrews eould be usillg a
special voc:abulary to express a spedal idea.)
119 Heb2:14-15;NRSV •
.190 Lohse, Märtyrer und Gottesknecht, pp. l63-167; Loader. Sohn und Hoherpriester,
pp. 112-llS, espccially p. 113; and Attridge, '111e Episrle to the .Hebrews, p. 92. Tes-
t(llllllnl ofSirrton 6:6; Tatament of Levil I; Testament ofDan S: l D-11; Turament fJ/ 2e-
bulon 9:8; lEnoclr 10:13; llQMelchizedek; Will' Scroll i:ll-17. I do not see any reason
to suppose a Gnostic background for these verses, as has been suggosled by E. Kase-
marm, Dfl!l 'IWJndemde GottesvolA;. Eine Unters11chtmg Zlllfl Hebräerbrief (Forschungen
zur Religion und Literatur des Alten uud Neuen Testaments 5S; GöUingcn, 3 1959).
pp. 99-100, and as Erich Grässer has reeently stressed Mew: see E. Grässer, An die
Hrrbrifer. Yol. I; Hebr J-6 (Evangeliach-Kat.bolischer Komm.eatal 17/1; Neukircben-
VIuyn and ZGrich, 1990). Any proximity to Gnostic text.s rather points to the Jewisb.
apocalyptic backgroUDd, whicb inßuem:ed Hebrews as weil as Gnosticism.
186 The /1t1pact ufYon~ Kipp11r on Chri4tianity ilf the First and &cond Cenhtries

where in tbe New Testament. 191 The closest parallels to Hebrews, however,
which talk of destruction of the dark forces and liberation of their
prisoners, ale 1Enoch 10 and 11 QMelchizedek. In Hebrews as weil as in
the latter two texts the redeemer is a high priest and the act of redemption
is connected to an eschatological Yom Kippur .192 The central difference
between 1Enoch 10 and 11 QMelchizedek on the one band md Hebrews on
the other is that in the former two it is not the death of the redeemer .figure
that destroys the Iord of evil and liberates his prisoners, but bis military
power. The idea of the high priest sacrificing bimself is a development of
Hebrews, which clothed the traditional imagery of an eschatological Yom
K.ippur in the Christianproprium of a messia.nic self-sacrifice.
The situation of the addressees of Hebrews makes it clear that the battle
has onJy just begun and victory over the forces of evil is not yet com-
plete. 193 The community faces the danger of apostates, who have no
opportunity for a second repentance, have lost my chance of salvation. and
are counted among the adversaries (oi i>JtEvav'tio\) of Christ. 194 T:be heav"
enly Christ is still awaiting the time in which "bis enemies" (o\ EX,9poi
amoü) wilJ be made a footstool for his feet. 19s This ambivalent already-be"
gun-but-not-yet-resumed redemption resembles tbe eschaton in the past of
JEnach 10.

2. Some exegetes see in Hebrews 5:7, where Christ implores God to save
him from death, a reference to the high priest's confession of his own sins
on Yom Kippur. 196
Jn the days of bis ßesh, Jesus oft'ered up ( xpoatvtr~~:o.~;) prayers and supplications
(8Et'!t~~:lc;
'fE mi lKE111Pin~, w.ith loud cries and tears, to the one who was able to
save him from death, aud he was heard because of bis revereot submission. 197

191 The destruction of sin without Iiberation appears with quite similar wording (a com-
bination of ICU1"CIJI'I'ia~ and ecal'li~CH;) in ·acor 15:26 and 2Tim I: 10.
," Hebrews' verses would align even better witb Yom Kippur if t'he destructi011 of evil
included the destruction of sin as for example in JEnoch 10:1~16. Some exegetes see
"death" io Heb 2:14-15 as a kind ofPa.uline metaphorforsin. Attridge, TheEpütls ro the
Ht.brews, pp. 92-93, tums against this reading. Hebrews connccts lhe destruction of sin
to his self-saerifice, as he st.ates later: "B ut as it is, he ·~ appeared onc.c for all at the end
ofthe agc to put away (e~ ii.eit'lalv) sin by the sacrific:e ofhintseU" (9:26b).
1" Michel, Der Briefon die Hebrtier, pp. 226-227.
194 Heb 10:27; cf.lsa 26:11 LXX.
1" Heb 10:13; er. Ps 11 0: 1. Paul, too, uses Ps 110:1 to describe the eschatological
victory (lCor 15:25); for him bowcver, the battle is yct to begin.
196 See the Iist of scholars in Attridge, The Epi$tle to the Hebrew&, p. 149, note lS2.
and add Grasser, An die Hebräer, vol. l, p. 298.
• 97 Heb S:7, NRSV.
 Yom Kippvr Imagery in the Eariy Chrislian lmaginaire 187

According to this view, Christ actually performed a hlgh-priestly action on

eartb before hls crucifixion. This inter:pretation is explicitly denied in
Hebrews 8:4a, which states: ''Now if he were on earth, he would not be a
priest at all.,. Nevertheless, the high-priestly figure wen matches the con-
text ofHebrews 4:15-5:10, wh.ere the author juxtaposes the Levitical high
priest with Cluist. We should not measure the consistency ofthe Epistle to
the Hebrews by the standards of a systematic theologian. The verb 7tpoo-
tjt€poo, which often appears in a cultic context, invites a cultic inter~
pretation. By depicting Christ as sinless, Hebrews amplifies the polemical
overtones in the juxtaposition of Christ with Aaron. 19~ The imagery of the
high-priestly action may hover in the background, yet Jesus (before bis
death) was most probably not conceived a high priest.

3 and 4. Christ's blood sacrifice (re)inaugurates the sanctuary and purifies

and atones tbc believers. However, purification and atonemcnt seem to be
"only" the means for achieving the •'real" plll])ose, entry into the holy of
hoHes. The special blood rite in the holy ofholies, central to Second Tem-
ple Judaism. has been completely transformed and con:flated with other
rites involving the sprinkling of blood. Christ's high-priestly, purifying
self-sacrifice is merely preparation for the opening of the previously con-
cealed entrance to God's presence in the real holy of hoHes. 199 This will
purify the believers, enabling them to follow their rcpooro~-to<; Christ into
the holy of holies.zoo
Rather than alluding to Yom Kippur's sprink:ling on the veil and on the
kapporet, Hebrews typologizes a con:flation of four rituals or events: Yom
Kippur (Leviticus 16), the Red Reifer (Numbers 19), the institution ofthe
covenant (Exodus 24), and the ordination ofthe priests (Leviticus 8). 201
19 For when every commandmeot bad been tr:>ld to all the people by Moses in
accordance with the law, he took the blood of calves and goata, with water and
scarlet wool and.bys~op, i.nd sprinkled bolh lhe scroll itself and alllhe people, 20
sayiog, "Thi.s is the blood oftbe CO>'enant !hat God has ordai~d for you." l1 And
in the same way he sprinlded with the blood both tbe tent and alllhe vessels used
in worship. 22 lDdeed, under lhe law abnost everything is purified wilh blood, and
without the shedding ofblood there is no forgiveness ofsius.

198 Grässer, An diß Hebraer, vol. 1, p. 298 contl'l:l Attridge, The Epistle: w the Hebrews,
p. 149.
rw Heb 9:9; 10:19-
200 Heb 1:3.13; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2; see below, p. 189.
101 Heb 9:15-22, cf. 9:13.19.21; Heb 10:22; 12:24. Cf. Ezek 36:25-26, which reflects a
similar mixture of Lev 16, Num 19 and Exod 24: see Zimmerli, E:echiel, p. 879; Young,
"The Impact of tb.e Jewish Day of Atonement upon the Thought of the New Testament,"
pp. 214-242.
188 The Impact of Yom Kippur on Christi®lty in the First ond Second Centvries

Some exegete.s have accused Hebrews of displaying ignnrance, but Hor-

bury, in particular, has argued convincingly that the author often uses Sec-
ond Temple traditions.202 The Red Reifer, the institution of thc covenant,
and thc ordination of Aaron and his sons were often associated with Yom
Kippur. 203 In the temple ritual, the high priest was sprinkled with water
mixed with the ashes ofthe Red Heifer during the preparation week. 204 The
Red Heifer appears as a high-priestly ritual in close juxtaposition with
Yom K.ippur,205 and was probably perfonned by the high priest.206 Qumran
and the rabbinie texts connect the ordination ofthe priests and Yom Kip-
pur,107 while in Tannaitic sources the renewal of the covenant after the
golden calf was clearly associated with Yom Kippur.l08 Deviation from the
ritual of Yom Kippur is therefore only relative. The motifs connected to
the ritual are not detennined solely by Hebrews' theological exigencies,
but they do reflect Yom Kippur traditions present in Second Temple
Judaism.
There are further deviations from the temple ritual. For instance, He-
brews does not specify the place in which the blood is sprinkled. It is not
the holy of holies. The sprinkling is perfotmed neither by the high priest
nor by Moses, but by the ~ believers themselves. Tbe object of this
sprinlding is spirituali.zed as the conscience of the believers (10:22bc):
"having sprinkled our hearts from an evil conscience and washed our
bodies with pure water." This passage almost certainly links the sprinkling
of the blood to baptism, the initiation ritual of the new covenant. 200 The
new people are prepared by a purification ritual that cleanses body, hearts
and conscience prior to entering the holy of hoJies and the presence of God
(see below).
From the opening verses of the Epistle, which refer to the purification
of the incense altar on Yom Kippur as described in Exodus 30:10, it
becomes clear that for Hebrews tbe entry into the ho.ly of holies is

~ W. Horbury, "The Aaronie Priesthood in the Epistle to the Hebrews," Jo~~mal ft>r
the Shldy ofthe New Testament 19 (1983) 43-7L
m On the R.ed Helfer and Yom Kippur. see espeeially Horbury, "The Aaronic
Priesthood in the Epistle to tbe Hebrews," pp. S l-52.
1V4 mParah 3:1, cf. p. 29 note 46.
2115 E.g. Bamaba.! 7-8.
* See 1osephus, A.ntiquitates juda/cae 4:79; and Philo, De .specia/ibu.s Iegtbus I :268,
who ascribe different parts of the ritual to the high priest. According to Josephus he slays
the heifer aru:l according to Philo hc sprinkles its blood.
N'l See Knohl and Naeh, "Milu'im veKippurim."
201 See above, p. 122.

20!1 Attridge, The Epistle to the Hebrew.s, p. 289; Lane. Hebre'wk 9-13, p. 287.
 Yom Kippt~,. Imagery in the Early Chri:ttian Imagir~aire 189

secondary to the purification of the sanctuary and the followers by the

blood rlte:210
1 Long ago God spoke to our ancestors in many and various ways by the prophets,
2 but in these last days he has spolcen to us by a Son, whom he appointed heir of alt
things, througb wbom he also created the worlds.
3 He is the refleetion of God's glory and tbe ex.act imprint ofGod's very beiDg,
and he suslains all things by his powerful Wßrd. When he had mtJtk purlfiC4t10fl
for sins (Kilhptopov 't'oitV dpapn&v AOilJaG~Jt:YtM;), he sat down at the right haod of
the Majesty on high (sKii8t"." i.v ~11;. 't'1K pr:ya~ iiv mr'l).ot.;), • having be-
oome as muc:h superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent
tban tbeirs. 211
The purification of the incense altar signities the end of the purification
rites.l 12 The use ofthe aorist 1t:Ott}OÖ.f.L&Vo<; underscores this. 213 Accordingly,
the puri.fication was completed before Christ sat down in the holy of
holies.214 This tums upside dnwn Leviticus 16, where the entry is the
precondition :tor the purification sprinkling. Also, the intercessiona.ry
prayer does not follow the order of the temple ritual. lt is supposed to take
pJace in the last act ofthe frrst entrance before the blood rites in the second
and thitd en1Iances.21s Both inversions of the ritual sequence demoostrate
that the typology is subject to the main aim of Hebrews, the entrance into
the presence of God in the heavenly holy of holies.

5. In the holy of holies, the lenoupy(K; Christ performs a beaven1y litmgy

(8:2.6) and intercedes pennanently for his followers. 216 Intercession was

11• Cf. B. Helninger. "Sundenreinigung (Hebr ],3). Christologische Anmerkungen zum

Exordium des Hebrkrbriefs," Biblische Zeitschrift [N.F.] 41 (1997) S4~8, especially
p. 61; Attridge, '11tll Epistle to the Hebrew:s, p. 46, note 132. It may also mean tlult the
people were ordained as priests ofthe prlestly people, as perhaps in lPet 1:2; 2:4-S?
211 Heb 1:1-4, NRSV.
311 On Yom Kippur, t'he purification ofthe inc:ense altar, which is usuall;y eonceived of
as standin,g outside the holy of bolies, happens tJftO' the entnmce to a:nd pmification of
the holy ofholies (Lev 16:18-20). In Hebrews, the alter of .incease stands in the holy of
holies (Heb 9:3-4). This may be based on tnJdition - 2BtJrllch 6:7, 2Ma<:c: 2:5 and the
Samaritan Pentateuch, which places Exod 30: I-10 between venes 35 and 36 ofExod 26.
!bis caused some scholars 10 assume a Samarita:n origin of tbe Epistle; against this see
the c:hapter on possible Samarium iufluences in Hurst, 71te Eplstle to the Jlebrews.
zn While in Exod 30:10 the object of purification is clearly tbe altar of incense.
Hebrews doe.s not in this sentem:e mention a spec:ific: objec:t of purification, i.e. tbe
people or the sanctuary. This purification includes both: seeHeb 9:23 and 10:22.
214 See Young, "The Impact ofthe Jewish Day of Atonement upon the Thougbl ofthe

New Testament," pp. 217-218.

215 See above, p. 30.

l16 "When:fore, he [Christ} is able also to save completely those who apptoach <iod
through him. since he lives always, to inten:ede on their behalf." Heb 7:25; less explicit
190 The [mpllct qfYom Kippur on Chrlstianity in the First fllfd Second Centurle1

not ex:clusively connected to Yom K.ippur since many religious actor~ 1 -~·8·
prophets and martyrs, could intercede before God. But intercession' be-
longed primarily among the hlgh-priestly acts and especially to Yom
Kippur. "C'est surtout autour de laliturgie de Kippur, et cela probablemeilt
deja a date ancienne, que se developperon1 les themes de l'intercession
sacerdotale." 211 Moreover, the generat fi:amework. of the Epistle makes the
Yom K.ippur connection highly probable. This permanent intercession
complements the once-and-for-all atonement sacrifice. Since it is not
stated anywhere that the intercession is for the sins, it does not entail a
contradiction to the once-and-for-all atonement by sacrifice. Thus Christ's
intercession may be concemed with divine support of the community in its
present suffering and suppression.:lll
2.3 The Participation ofthe People
Three s:cenes express th.e involvement of the community in the high-
priestly ritual: the spectators waiting for the high priest's exit from the
holy ofholies., a second, escbatological, entiy ofthe people into the holy of
holies, and the imitation of the assistant who leaves the camp to burn the
remains of the cow and the goat.

1. Hebrews describes the Second Parousia, evok.ing the imagery of the

people waiting for the exit of the high priest from the holy of holies: ..so
Christ ... will appear a second time ... to save those who are eagerly wait·
ing for him ('tote; ain:öv ciltEXÖtlXOf.levOt<; E\t; oc:ot11Pl.«v)."219 In this instance.
Hebrews used extra-biblical knowledge about Yom Kippur. 22()

2. A main concem of Hebrews is to describe the people joining the high

priest in his entrance.221
10:19 Therefore, brothers, slnce we bave the boltiness (m:LPP'IIG~v) for an entrance
into the holy of holies (ti!v dooaov t"tilv ayi~Dv) by means of the blood of Jeaus, 20
which he inaugurated for us as & new and livi.ng way tbrough tbe curtain, i.e. his
ßesh, 11 and [since we have] a great priest {ttpiu pi-yo.v) ovet tbe bouse (olEov) of

also in 2:1&; 4: 14-16; 9:24. For the tradition of Christ u heavenly advocate, seealso
Rom 8:34; 1John2:1.
117 R. Le Deaut, "Aspec:ts de l'intm;ession dans le judaisme ancien," Jo11rnal for tlte
Study ofJud4ism l (1970) 35-57, hcre p. 46.
211 Loader, Sohn. vnd Hoherpriester, pp. !42-15 l, especially 147.
219 Heb 9:28; Sir S0:5. This obsenoation wasmadealso by Lane, Hebrtows 9-13, p. 2SO.
210 The author al$o exhibirs elsewbere acquaintance witb extra-biblical tRditions, even
about Yom Kippur, e.g. the high-priestly intetcession (Heb 7:25) or the victory over tbe
ruler ofthe foroes ofdarkness (Heb 2:14-JS).
221 Heb 4:16; 6:20: 10:22.
 Yom Kippur lmagery in the Earty Christian lmaginaire 191

God, 12 (tberefore] Iet us approach (l<p(l<Jei)XIil)&da) with a ttue heart in fullnes& of

faith, having sprinkled our hearts fi"om an evil conscience a.nd washed oor bodiC$
with pure water.m
Jesus represents both the way (~) to the holy of hoHes and the curtain
(teu'tan:e-taoJJ.a.)m before it. As the way, Jesus has a "positive," opening
function. while the curtain, bis flesh, obstructs or conceals. The enttance
opened by Jesus' blood helps to overcome the obstacle of the flesh,2:z4 in
order to enter into the p.resence of God. The atonement is therefore only a
neces.sa.ry preparatory step to tbe true aim, the entrance to the presence of
God in the heavenly sanctua.ty. The cultic cbaracter of the picture is sup-
ported by two words, oh:~ and n:pooep:x.IDJ.&E8u, which point to a cultic
context.225
The author exhorts the baptized/ordained to participate in the worship
led by the high priest Christ and to "not neglect the common meetings"
(10:25). Does tbe worship oftbis Christian Jewish community encompass
a ritual symbolizing the joining of the community of Christ in bis approach
to God?226 Tbe interpretation tbat the approach is effected by Chrlstian
Jewish ritual already in present time is countered by an eschatologicalline
as proposed by Heb.rews 6:19-20:
6:19Wehave tbis bope, a sure and steadfast anc:bor oftbe soul, a hope that euters
the inner sb.r iDe behind the curtain (eir; to i;QQrr:tiJ)Ov toil 1auu11Ctao!14.:ot;), 20 where
Jesus, a forerunocr on our behalf. has entered, having ber.;ome a high priest forever
according to the order of Melchizedek.m
Jesus is the forerunner of the community, which is to follow later on. A
similar oscillation between present mystic ritual and eschatological
redemption also appears in the Valentinia.n texts di.scussed below. As we
sball see, the alternatives need not be mutually exclusive.

3. A third depiction of the community is the exit of the assi.stant who

bumed the fat of the sin offerings outside the camp (13:13), which is
transferred to Jesus and the people.

m My translation ofHeb 10:19--22 b1$ed onNRSV and Atttidge.

223 Has tbe liui to be understood instnunentally to the verb (a way inaugurated by
means of the c:urtain) or !ocally to the noun (a way across tbe curtain)? The usual
interpretation is tbc fonner. See tbe commcntaries oll tbis passage.
224 A word also associated elsewbere in Hebrews with negative tenns: seeHeb 2:14;

5:7; 7:16; 9:10. Few exegetes tak.e ~o11'f ~ttv 1:11t; G~Zpx:Ot,; ainoG tobe an apposition to oobl;;
instead of~t(JT<llu:tOIJllu. See Lane, Hebr11W& 9-13, p. 275.
m Attridge, The Epistle ro the Hebri1Ws, p. 288.
226 WM tbis done in a way similar to tbe Songs ofthe Sabbath Sacriflce1
m Heb 6:19-:20, NRSV.
192 The Impact ojYQm Kippur Qn Christianil)l in the First and Second Centuries

11 For the bodies of tholli! ani.mals whose blood is brought into the holy of holies
(ail; 1:a iyur) by the high priest as a sacrific:e for sin (lti!Pi liJlaptl~) are bwned
outside the camp (f!;m 'tflr; MpeJlßol.i\1,;). ·~ Therefore Jesus also suffend outside lhe
city gate in order to sauctify the poople by his own blood. u Let us then go to him
oußide the camp(~ Ti!<; ~~~~~~ol.fl;;) and bear bis insult (1:ov o~lOIIirllttinoO 'PE·
povr~}- 1~ For he.re we have no Iasting city, but we an: loolcing for the city tbat is
tocome.m

A(:cording to Leviticus 16:27, the remains of the sacrijicial goat are

bumed outside the camp in order to preserve its sanctity. Hebrews applies
this to Jesus, who sanctified the people (in the camp) by suffering outside
it. Yet, as Helmut Koester poi.nted out, this also refers to Leviticus 16:28,
which speaks of the person wbo bad to leave the camp in order to bum
those bodies. 229 Anybody who left tbe camp became unclean and could
return only after being sanctified by washing his clothes and his body.
Hebrews inverts these categories. The author exhorts his readers to leave
the camp after Jesus sanctified tbem by his suffering outside tbe camp. Tb.e
sanctification is no longer a condition to entet the camp but to leave it.
Such a rentrifugal concept of sacred space is a parody of tbe conventional
wtderstanding of sacred geograpby built on centripetal increase.
What does the author meari by "leaving the camp..? Most commentaries
mention two possible interpretations: a) leaving Judaisrn or b) leaving the
sensual world. In my opinion, the next verse (13:14), with the admonition
to wait for the wtworldly city, makes a th.ird option possible, allowing for
the possibility that the addressee of tbe Epistle was tbe C<lmmunity of
Jerusalem: that the author is asking his audience in a concrete, geograph-
ical sense to leave Jerusalem and its temple and wait for the real, future
sacred space. 230

121 Heb 13:11-14, NRSV, slightly altered.

~ H. Koester, "'Oulside the Camp': Hebrews 13:9-14," Harva1d Theological Rniew
SS (1962) 299-317. Cf., in contrast, M.E. Isaacs, "Hebrews 13.9-16 Revisited," New
Testament Studies 43 (1997) 268-284.
230 Anolher question is whether ~epxoii11.c~ ~ a:btov f~CD 1:1\; napc)lßolll~ 1ov

ovllt5ttti1Öv o.iotoo 'l'iJ!ovre~ has to bc undetstood as imitation of Cbrist as a sacrifi~ial goat

or is a typo!ogy of the scapegoat_ The Iatter interpmation may be valid, but there are few
indica.tions of it other than tbe man:h outside the camp carrying <ov öv~:t8lo-pov aV.oü,
which could refer to the cursiug of the scapegoat. The march outside the camp matcltes
the scapegoat better than the sacrificial goat, which is a.lready dead when its remains are
carried out. However, the LXX uses :14pjlftvw and not opi:pm for expressing "to caJry." In
sum, if the author of Hebrews wante4 to allude to Lev 16 he did not establish sufficient
Ieads to it. The proximity to tbe suffering of Jesus outside the camp in the previous verse
make:~ it more probable that Heb 13:13 is an ecclesiological imitatiq. of Christ as
sacrificial goat.
 Yo~tr Kippur l"'oguy in the EQrly Christian Imagi11aiTI 193

2.4 Conclusions Regarding the High Priest in Hebrews

According to tbe myth of Hebrews, by his death, tb.e high priest Christ
conquered the devu,:m "passed tbrough the heavens,"232 a.ud somehow
purified the heavenly sanctu.al'y233 on entering with his blood the heavenly
holy of hoHes.234 There he took his place to the right of God and intercedes
on behalf of his followers.l35 He is expected to come back at the end of
days in the not too distant future, 236 in order to resume the fight against the
evil powets and to liberate bis affiicted comrnunity,2.37 purified by baptism,
and lead them into the presence of God in the holy of bolies. 231
The author of Hebrews employs various sources in creating bis typo-
logical myth. He is inspired by the Bib)e, as can be seen in the focus on the
tabemacle (and not the temple) andin formulations imitating Leviticus 16.
Yet the Bible is by no means the only fount of his wisdom.239 Tbe inter-
cession, the solemn exit from the holy of holies and the conflation of the
sprinklings belong to Second Temple ritual and the imaginaire of Yom
Kippur. and he probably borrowed the victory over the Iord of evil and the
liberation of his good prisoners from the apocalyptic imaginaire of Yom
Kippur. As in Qumran, Hebrews sees the current period of afDictions as a
Mo'ed Klppur, a period of atonement, which began with Jesus' death and·
will end with his Parousia.
Despite the extensive use of Yom Kippur typology in Hebrews, it is
clear that its author did not intend to provide a complete typology of Yom
Kippur. 2<141 Central issues of Yom KippUl' are absent: there is no mention of
the incense sacrlfice,241 the scapegoat or the high priest's changing of
clothes. The Old Testament tim~ rarely caused Hebrews to add a biblical
detail to its myth.Z42 The author ofHebrews has chosen those elements that

231 Heb 2:14-IS.

n 2 Heb4:14.
:z:JJ Heb 9:23.
ZM Heb9.
D' Heb 7:2.5.
:136 Heb 9:28.
:z:J1 Heb 2:14-lS.
m Heb 10:19-22.
m Many scbolars accused the author of Hebrews of ignorance of Jewish matters, but
most of hia peculiar material is based on S«ond Temple traditions. See HorbUlj', 1"he
Aaronic Priesthood in the Epistle to the Hebrews."
240 Loader, Soh11 ""d Hoherpriester, p. 244.
" 1 Does the unusual menrion ofthe iDcense altar among the fumishings ofthe holy of
holies (Heb 9:4) allude to tbe high·priestly inunse sacrifice (Lev 16: 12-13)?
242 Weiss on Heb 9:23: "Daß im Rahmen dieser EntsprechUJJg von irdischen und

himmlischen Dingen b~. im Rahmen der Ent$prednmg von Urbild und Abbild unter der
Oberschrift du A. YUY"'l oilv {muv} aucll die oi;novp(t~rUl 1einer ,.Reinigung" bedürfen, ist in
194 The Impact of Yom Kippur on Cluistianity i'n the Firzt Dlld Second Crmhlrtes

suit his aims: to comfort thc affiicted community by revealing that the
period of suiTering is a temporary one of awaiting the retum of the high
priest after he has completed bis intercessionacy prayer in the presence of
God.
2. S History ofTradition: The Role ofZechariah 3 in the Justification ofthe
High-Priestly Christology before Hebrews
In this section I want to suggest that Zechariah 3 and its connection to the
apoc::alyptic imaginaire of Yom Kippur was one of the key texts in the ear-
Iiest stage in the development of the concep1 of a high-priestly Christology
before Hebrews.l'n In bis detailed analysis of the tradition of the high
priesthood. William Loader suggested tb.at Yom Kippur entered this tradi-
tion at a late stage and then served as a frame for binding tagether atone-
ment and the interceding high priest.244 In contrast. I propose that Yom
Kippur played a fonnative role for the high-priestly Cbristology already
before Hebrews.
Two observations strongly suggest that the high-priestly Christology
was not invented by the author of Hebrews but adopted from tradition.24'
First. Hebrews introduces Christ as a high priest in 2:17-18 without
previous preparation or explanation. The concept seems therefore to have
been known to its readers, most probably as part of a creed formula (3:1).
Second, a nwnber of passages in early Christian texts that are independeut
from Hebrews mention or allude to Christ as (high) priest,l'16 which is not
surprising, since it was not uncomm.on for Jews of the Second Temple
period to envisage a redeemer in (high) priestly terms. 247 Yet how could
Jesus, a Davidide, possibly be a high priest? Hebrews states explicitly: "It

der Tat ein eigenartiger Gedanke, als solcher am Ende nur von daher zu verstehen, daß
auch hier noch die Darstellung des irdischen ,Abbildes' in den VV. 19-22 die Aussagen
über das ,Urbild' bestimmt, Anzeichen zugleich dafilr, daß der Autor des Rebr dettt
logischen Zwang eines lconsequ~nt durchgeftlhrten EniSprechungsgedankens unterliegt."
(Weiss, Der Briefan die Hebr4er, pp. 483-484).
20 Forthis argument, see StOkl. "Yom K.ippur in the Apocalyptic lmaginaire and the
R.oots of Jesus' High Priestbood." pp. 362-366.
m Loader, Sohn vrrd Holterpriester, pp. 200-202.
'"' Cf. Attt:idge, The Epistle to the Hebrew1. p. 102.
146 lgnatius, .To the Philade/phians 9:1; Polyearp, To the Philippians 12:2; Mtutyrdorn
oj Polycarp 14:3; JClement 36; 61:3; 64. Some consider IClement 36 and 61:3; 64 tobe
dependent on Rebrews. According to Loader they are fixed liturgical formulae, which re-
fer back to the same backgrOUJid a.s Hebrews: Loader, Sohn und Hoherpriester, p. 237.
Usually, Rev 1:13 and Barnabaa 1:9 are conceived ofas alluding to the high priesthood:
see e.g. Prostmeier, Der Bamabasbrie/, pp. 310-311. .
t-~? See the passages and Iiterature discUS$ed in Attridge, 1'he Epistle to the Hebrews.
pp. 97-101.
 Yom Kippw Imagery in the Early Christian lmaginalre 195

is manifest that our Lord has been sprung out of (the tribe of) Judah..
(7:14) and a.s Hebrews immediately goes on to say, tbis was a major
obstacle to any priestly career: "in regard to which tribe Moses said
nothingabout priests." One ofthe main pwposes of Hebrews is to resolve
this difficulty and to justify Jesus' high priesthood by "de-Levitizing" it-
the author simply inventcd another priesthood JCil-tci tftV ta~tv Ms)..xu,EiiE~~:.
This ingenious solution solved the problern for the author of Hebrews.
But how did those Christian Jews before Hebrews justify the high priest·
hood of Jesus? Hebrews' ..de-Levitization" was a.s yet unknown. Another
possibility would have been to introduce a Levitical element into Jesus'
pedigree., i.e. to "Levitize" Jesu.s. This approach was indeed taken. e.g. by
Hippolytus,248 but it was not yet suggested in the time of Hebrews and is
found only from the end oftbe second centucy.
I suggest that a third possible justification ex:isted: a namesake of Jesus
in the Bible who is a high priest - such as Jesus/Joshua son of Jehozadak,
builder of the Second Temple in tbe time of Zerubbabel - could have been
used. Just as Jesus/Joshua son of Nun conferred characteristics and
functions on his namesake lesus of Nazareth, the high priest lesus son of
Jehozadak could also have conferred bis qualities and functions on him.249
The high priest Jesus/Joshua son of Jebozadak, the only other important
Old Testament namesake of Jesus,250 is mentioned in several Old
Testament passages. 2s1 Yet certain details suggest that among all the texts
mentioning Jesus son of Jehozadak, it was the third chapter of Zecharlah
that was used as a high-priestly Christological prooftext before Hebrews.
Had only the similarity of name been important, other passages meotioning
Joshua son of Jehozadak would have been referred to more often in the
New Testament However, it is particularly the third chapter of Zechariah
tbat is alluded to or quoted in early Christian literature. Being the ollly
biblical sourc:e for a priesdy Messiah, it must have had a special signi-
ficance for Christians Jews interest.ed in a priestly Christology. 252 This cao.
be supported by further arguments.

lAi See ehe Iiterature given in Stökl, ..Yom Kippur in the Apocalyptic Imaginaire and
the Roots of Jesus' High Priesthood," p. 364, note 36.
z41) See e.g. G.G. Stroumsa, "Tbe Early Cbristian Fish SymbolReconsidcred," in: idem.
I. Omenwald and S. Shaked (eds.), .Me.ssioh and Chrutos. StJtdi~s in the Jewish Origins
o/Christianity [Festschrift D. Flflsser] (TObingen, 1992; pp. 199-205).
~ In the f1rst century CE, Jesu.s was a vccy eouunon uame. See Stükl, "Yom Kippur in
the Apocalyptic Jmaginaire and the Roots of Iesus' High Priesthood," pp. 364-365,
note 58, for other Old Testameat namesalces of Jesus having mere "walk-on parts. n
z.!l Zech l; 6:9-15; Hag 1-2; Ezra 3-S.
:u2 The significance of the Jesus/Joshua son of Jehomdak type has long been
acknowledged. However, scholars often asswne that the earliest ezplicit and utended
196 The Impact of Y(lm Kippw on Christitznity in the First and Suond CentUTies

First, among the other New Testament passages alluding to Christ's

high priesthood, the Apocalypse of John 1:13, which mentions 11:<>atipJt<;;,
has the widest support. 253 Usually Zechariah 3 is reclconed to be one of the
texts that form the background to tbis complex passage.154
Second, the Yom Kippur typology in Bornabas, too, mentions 11:oOftpTJc;
and alludes to Zechariah 3 and Jesus' high priesthood.255 Thls allusion bad
most probably already appeared as pa.rt of the proto-typology, since in
Tertullian, Zechariah 3 is found in directjuxtaposition to the Yom K.ippur
typology. and in Justin closely connected to it.25' Wbile the evidence for
the use of Zechariah 3 from the Apocalypse dates only as far back as the
end of the first century, the proto-typology emerged before the destruction
ofthe temple, perhaps as early as the tbirties or forties. 257
Third. if Christian Jews imagined Christ as high priest, this was alm.ost
certainly within the categories customarily a.ssociated with tbe rolc of a
messianic high-priestly figure, a redeeming high priest close to 1Enoch,
11 QMelchizedek and the Apocalypse of Abraham on an eschatological
Yom Kippur. At. we have seen, the scene of the Apocalypse of Abraham

.
meutions in Justin an.d Tertullian Ol{e also the earliest evidence of all. See J. Lecuyer,
"J6sus, fils de Jos6dec, et le Sacudoc:e du Christ," Recltuches de Sci«nce Iüligieuse 43
(1955) 82-103; and C.·K. Woug. "The Interpretation of Zechariah 3,4 and 6 in the New
Testament aod Early Christianity" (Ph.D. dissertation, Westininster Tb.eological
Seminary, 1992). Tbe only scbolar Jcnown to mc who co1111ects Hebrews and Zechariab is
F.C. Synge, Hebrew1 andthe Scriptrires (Londou. 1959), pp. 19-21.
2SJ Loader, Sohn und Hoherpriester, p. 226.
1S4 The strengest case against a ptiestly influen<:e on Rev 1:1:3 has been made in tbe
recent commenta.ry b)' David Aune. He raises the following points: The Septuagint
translates 110lliwt\10 with five different items, ':I•J!), ,:1, "!»t, nls;nl3, }vnn; therefore, it is not
a tenni~JUS technicus. Second Templesources (Testament of Le~~/8:2-10; Philo, De 111ita
Mosis 2:109-110) use other Greek tenns also to signify the priest's gannent. Against
Aune, 1 would point out that all five Hebrew words bellind the Septuagint 110~~ refer
to a prlestly item. The Sec:ond Temple 5011n:es refened to do not sustain his. vgument
Te.stament of Ll111i 8:2-10 does not seem to understand mtlch about the aetual priestly
"estments, and Philo usually prefers mJ3qp1)1;, as Aune bimself states. There are Yery few
eases in Jewisb texts where •rollljpqc; does not refer to a priestly garment or artifact.
Then:fore., the allll$iOD to the high priesthood was clear for aoy Greek reader of the
Septuagillt. See now also B. Lupieri. "Apocalisse, sacerdozio e Yom Kippur,"' Annali di
Storia delf' E,;egesi 19 (2002) 11-21.
us BarnabQJI 7:9; see especially the excellent pages in Prostmeier, Der /J(II'flabasbrief.
pp. 310-31 l; or e.g. Carleton Paget.. The Epist/e ofBanrabos, p. 140.
256 Skarsauoe, The Proofftom Propllecy, pp. 309-310.

m See above, pp. 159·-161. The names :nr- and )1V1'1;'1' are close enough to be asso-
eiated with eaeh other evea in Hebrew. There is therefore no support for the assumption
that this association of Jesus ofNUIU"eth and Jesus son of Jehozadak was. ftrst perc;eived
in Greek writi~ (and therefore pemaps Jater).
 Yorn Kippur Image#')' ln lhe Eorly Christian Imaglnaire 191

links Zeehariah 3 to the a.pocalyptic imaginaire of Yom Kippur. 258 If we

consider therefore that (non-Christian) Jews who belonged to an apoca-
lyptic stream of thought used Zechariah 3 in association with Yom Kippur,
then a usage for typological purposes by Christia.n Jews, who betray an
influence of apocalypticism.~9 becomes even more likely.
In light of these argwnents, we ca.n return to the central question of this
investigation. At what time did Yom Kippur become associated with the
high-priestly Christology. and what was the function of this association?
Against Loader's model, which argues for a Iate point and a subordinate
framing function, my investigation suggests that Yom K.ippur lies at the
root of Cluist•s high priesthood, wbich belongs to the Jewish tradition of
the eschatological bigb-priestly redeemer.

3. Christ as kapporet (il.«CJ'tTJplov): Romans 3:25-26

Romans 3:21-26 are among the mo.st influential verses not only of Paul
but of the whole New Testament. Protestant exegesis. especially, regard.s
tbem as tbe apex of the theology of justification.uo There are few verses in
the New Testament about which mote ink has been spilled.

:zsa See above, pp. 92-94.

"" E.g. the remains of die apo~::alyptic: image of the higb~priestly tedeemer, who con·
quers thepowers ofeviJ (sec above, pp. 185-185, on Heb 2:14-IS).
260 My main sourc.es for this section have been Kraus, Der Tod Jem als Heiligtums-
weihe; idem, "Der Jom Kippur, der Tod Jesu und die 'Biblische Theologie'. Ein Versuch,
die jildische Tradition in die Auslegung von ROm 3,2Sf einzubezidlen," in: I. Balder-
mann (ed.),lllles Testament und christlicher Glaube (Jahrbuch fllr Biblische Theologie
6; Neukireben-VIuyn, 1991; pp. 157-172}; Breytenbach, YersiJhnung, pp. 166-169; H.
Merklein. "Der Stl!metod Jesu nach dem Zeugnis des Neuen Testaments," in: H.P. Heinz
(ed.), Ve,..ti11mung in der jiidischen ul'fd dtrisllichen Liturgie (Quaestiones Disputa..e
124; Freiburg im Breisgau, 1990; pp. 155-183); H. Merklem, "Der Tod Jesu a1s
stellvertreteoder Slihnetod," in: id.em, Stvdien Ju Jes'lls und Paulus (Wissenecbaftliche
Untermchuqen zum Neu.en TC$tament 43; TübiDgeu, 1987; pp. 181-191); idem, "Die
Bedeutung des Kreuzestodes Christi fllr die paulinische Ge~btig.lceits- und Gesel:zesthe-
lll&tik," in: idem, Stildien zu Juw und Pau.lu (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen ZIID'l
Neuen Teslament 43; Tllbingen, 1987; pp. 1-106); P. Stuhlmach.er, «zw neueren Exegese
von Riim 3,24-26," in: idem, Yer.siJimung, Gesetz •I'MI Gerechtigbit. Aufratte :Z'IIr
biblischen Tluologie (Göttinge.o, 1981; pp. 117-135) {who disousses all older readings);
Young, "The ImplWt of tbe Jewish Day of Atonement upon the Thougb.t ofthe New Tes-
tament," pp. 274-339; Lohse, Mlirtyrer vnd GottrJsknecht. See also D. Moo, The Epi.stle
to the Rornant (New Intematio.nal CollllllCDtary to tbe New Testament; Grand Rapids
[Mich.], 1996); now also K.llOppler, Sfihne im Noen Testament, pp. 112-172 and 314.
198 The. lmpaci o[Yom Kippur on Christianily in the First and Second Centuries

R- 3,21 But now, apart from the law, the rigb.teousness of God ha.s been disclosed
and is attestcd "Y the law ao.d the prophets, 22 the righccoume.ss of God through
faith inJoP" Jesus Christ fcr alt who believe. For there is no distine~ion, 21 since
all have slnned and fall short o{ the glory of God; 24 tbey are justified by bis graee
as a gift, through the redemption tb.at is in Christ Jesus, 2S whom God put forward
as atoning [cover of the ark ofthe covenant] (l:l.ncm]plov) by his blood, effective
through [the]m faith. He did this to show his righteousness, 26 because in his
divine forbca:ranu he had passed over the sin' previously eornmitted; it was to
prove at the present time that he bimself is righteoWI and that he justifies the one
who has filith in Jesus. 16'
Wolfgang Kraus devoted a dissertation to these verses. 264 Therefore, much
of my discussion will engage with hls work. My discussion focuses on the
arguments for an association with Yom Kippur, especially via an analysis
of the meaning of tlao-nlptov. Unlike most exegetes, who favor reading
this passage against the background of Yom Kippur, I do not see com-
pelling reasons for understanding the passage as postulating an anti-temple
attitude or the abolishment of Yom Kippur by Paul. Yet it isanother de-
monstration of the immense influence of Yom Kippur on the development
of the early Cbristian imaginaire of Jesus• death and its atoning function .
• on Romans 3:2)-16
3.1 The Injluence ofYom Kippur
Two opposing views have been proposed to explain the background of Ro-
mans 3:25-26. The first assumes a fonnative role for Leviticus 16,
referring to the cluster of kapparet, blood and sin (i.J..a.cr·n1ptov, atJ.Ia. and
«t-uiptf1J.1Cl.), which evokes the blood sprinkling in the holy of holies. The
second view rejects any involvement of "cultic" concepts and suggests as
background the idea of a vicarious atoning death of rnart)Ts as expressed in
4Maccabees. This debate centers around two different interpretations of

261 lt is po.ssible t~ Interpret the genitive as eilher suhjeclivu$ ( of) or objecti'llttS (in).

The context, however, malces the objectivus more probable.

w The evidence is equally good for both readings. With the article: Pa~ 40 (third
century), Vaticao.us {B, fourth cent.), and probably also 0219 (fourth to fifth. unt.), the
third corrector of Codex Epbraemi rescriptus (C), the second eorrector of the Claro-
montanus (D}, Codex Athous L11urensis ('1', eightb-nintll cent.).llld the minuscel 33 and
the majority text. Without the article: Sinaiticus (fourth cent.), the fmt hands of the
Codices Ephraemi rescriptus (C, fifth cent.) and Claromontanus {D, sixth cent.), the Co-
dices Augiensis (F, ninth cent) and Boemerianus (0, ni.nth cent.), aod a munber of
minuscels (among them 1739). 1 would add the important find at Tura (Papyrus Cair.
88748) of Origen's commentary on Romans. written at the beginning of the seventh
century, but an indirect witness to Origen' s text in the third century, which is strangely
missing in Nestle--Aland27 •
263 Rom 3 :21-26; my translation.
264 Kraus, Der Tod Jesu als Heiligtumsweihe. Now also Bailey, "lesus as the Mercy

Seat'' (non ~idi).

 Yom Kipp11r lMagery in the Early Chri&tialllmaginalrc 199

i).a.CJ-r;f!ptov. The fxrst perceives it as a terminus technicus referring to the

kapporet from the holy of holies. 26.5 The second interprets it more generally
as "atoning sacrifice,. (Lohse). 266 I will therefore start with a discussion of
the meaning of ilaotiiptov, arguing strongly for the first group of scholars,
those who understand it as lw.ppore:t. 261
The word i.bottiptov is quite rare. Kraus lists five examples in pagan
texts and 40 in Jewish ones. The pagan texts include one passage each in
Dio Chrysostomus and Aelius Herodianus, two inscriptions, and one
papyrus.268 The two inscriptions and Dio use iA.aottiptov with the meaning
of a propitiating votive offering. The meaning in the papyrus and in Hero-
dianus is unclear.269
Ofthe 40 ..Jewish" instances, U.CXo>liPtov appears 21 times in the Torah,
five tilnes in Ezekiel 43, once in Amos, six times in Philo, once in 4Mac-
cabees, twice in Symmachus. once in Josephus and once in the Testament
of Solomon. In Jewish-Cbristian Iiterature (which I included under Jewish
literature), it appears twice, onee in Hebrews and once in Romans.
All 21 instances in the Torah are translations of kappQret:of these, seven
appear in Leviticus 16; and all six instances in Philo plus the one in the
Testament ofSolomon and the one in the Epistle to the Hebrews clearly :re-
fer to the lwppQret, totaling 29.270 In three further instances l.J.aa"ti]pwv re-
fers most probably to the kapporet: In two of them, Symmachus translates
n19.:n ("you will make watertight") not as a verb but as a noun in
appositjon to "the ark of Noab," and therefore makes Noab's ark into a
kapporet (Genesis 6:15.16). Amos 9:1 translates 11n!l;) with l).aott)ptov, re-
ferring to some place in the temple. 8oth authors probably read (or wanted
to read) rm!l::l or n1!>;) in their Vorlage. 211
The instances in Jewish texts where ii..aG'ttlJnov clearly does not refer to
lrappQret are few; altogether seven times in tbe works of three authors:

216 See the Iist of exegetes in Moo, The Epittle to the RomQns, p. 232, notes 66 and 67.

'" For the reterem;es,see ~ The Epistle to the Romrzns,. p. 234.

267 The most recent and most melic:ulous analy:si:s of all occurrences o( \1acst'I1P10v was
undertakeu by Wolfgang Kraw;: Der Tod Jesv als Heiligtumnveihe, pp. 21-32; now also
Bailey, ..1esus as the Mercy Seat" (non vidz). Eartier i.nve.sligatlons were undertakeo by
many scholars, wbo are discussed in his book.
u. Oio ChrysostomWl, 01atione& 11:121; Aelius Herodianus, De prosodia catholica
(ed. Len~. vot. .3:1, p. 365); inscriptio.ns ofCos 81 and 347 (ed. Paton/Hicks}; papyru.i
Fayum 337 (ed. Grenfell/Huat, p. 313).
2H See Kraus, Dei' Tod Juu als Heillgtumsweih«, pp. 27-28.
270 Pbilo, De cherubim 25; De vita Moais 2:95.97; D~fogo et i11Ventione 100.101; Quis

rerum divinarum heres sit 166; Testament ofSolomon 21:2. Cf. Kraus, Der Tod Jesu als
He.illgtumsweihe, pp. 26-27.
271 See tbe various comm.entators mentioned in Krau.s, Der Tod Jel'll. als Heiligtums-
weihe, p. 24. note 14.
200 The lmpur:r of Yom Kippu,. on Clvistionity in the Fif'st and Second Centuriu

Ezelciel43 uses i).aat~ptov five times to translate i1"'1TY. The Greek reader
of Ezekiel understood thls as some place in the sanctuary connected to
atonement, most probably the b8$e of the altar upon which the blood was
applied. 272 Josephus reports the erection by Herod of an «atoning me-
morial" to placate the wrath of Ood. 273 This pagan use most probably rests
on the fact that losephus' addressees are mainly pagan. 4Maccabees 17:22
in its present fomt uses i).aatiunov in a general sense, i.e. "tbeir propi-
tiatory death" or "the propitiation of tbeir death" (even if originally Yom
Kippur migbt be envisaged as background).
I find it hard to imagine that Greek~speakin,g Christian Jews, who were
supposedly familiar with the Septuagint, did not immediately make an
association \\<ith the most frequent usage in the Septuagint, especially con-
sidering the mention of blood and sins in the context. There is no doubt
though tbat ancient readers ofthe Bible were more familiar with the Torah
than with Ezekiel43 (a chapter not quoted in the New Testament). This
point is even more valid for the variant reading of the ambiguous passage
in Amos 9.214 The other two passages (4Maccabees and Josephus) cannot
change the fact that Paul (and the tradition adopted by him) is most prob-
ably referring to the use of i~atiunov in the best-known text, i.e. as ·kap-
poret in the Torah. and therefore to the ritual ofYom K.ippur. 275 To give a
parallel: If someone mentions Joshua, few people would immediately make
an association with the high priest in Zechariah rather than with the
people's Ieader in the sixth book of the Bible. Most of them would need
further hints to Zechariah to make an assoeiation with the less prominent
figure. If Paul wanted to refer to the generat meaning of "gift to propitiate
the anger of a God" to an audience acquainted with the Septuagint he
would have used ä.vclet!JO.. &Dpov or sincmtoc; instead the ambivalent
tecbnical term.27'
Having reached this conclusion regarding the cultic meaning of U.ao-c~­
pwv, I can proceed to counte.r the other arguments, raised mainly by Edu-
ard Lohse, agaiost seeing Yom Kippur as background to Romans 3:24-26.
Most of the arguments have already been addressed in Peter Stuhlmacher's
classic article.277 First, Lohse considers the concept that the blood of Jesus
is sprinlded on Iesus bimself (8$ kapporet) an impossible interpretation.

:m Ezek 43:13 (3•].14.17.

m lfntiquitatesjut!Dicae 16:Ja2.
174 Repdlas of wbether lhe translators read 1UI!l:l or zrn!l:l, foc a Greet reader of
Amos 9 thia was simply a referem:e to the i~aat~p,ov near tbe altar, Le. the n'"I10J.
:m Cf. tbe condu.sion in Kraus, Der Tod Ju11 als Heiligtllmsweihe, pp. 3 1-32.
11' Contra Bailey, "Greek Heroes Who Happen to Be Jewish."
-m Stuhlmacher, "Zilf neueren Exegese von Röm 3,24--26." On Stublmacher's dieses
reg~~rding other relevant New Testament passages, see thc other papers in his collection.
 Yo-. Kippurlmagery in rhe Early Christian lmagirtaire 201

However, typology is often limited in its coberence; e.g., in the Epistle to

the Hebrews. the high priest enters the holy of holies carrying his own
blood. Lohse's second argument is tbat the kapporet was concealed,
wbereas Romans exposes Jesus as \Aa.o'tt;pmv. This, however, may weil be
a polemical pun, and the argument becomes stronger for those who prc~
sume that the group behind Romans .3 :24/25-26* fastered an anti-temple
abolition theology. Tb.ird, Lohse points out that ilac:n:ilptov is used without
the article; but this is for grammatical reasons, since it Stands as predica-
tivum.
Finally, Iet us for thc sake of argument accept for a moment Lobse's
suggestion that Romans 3:24/25-26• depends on a concept in 4Macca-
bees 11 according to which the death of martyrs is a vica.rious atoning
death. Kraus• suggestion tbat Leviticus 16 and 4Maccabees a.re not mutu-
ally exclusive alternatives is very tempting.278 As l argued ea.rlier,
4Maccabees 17:2~22 itself may be based on a reinterpretation of Yom
Kippur.279 Yet a direct dependence ofthe pre~Pauline tradition or of Paul
on 4Maccabees is excluded by the current dating of 4Maccabees to the end
of the fJJ'$t century CE - or possibly even later - according to the most
recent suggcstions by Jan Willem van Henten.280
On tbe other band, a cultic interpretation of Romans 3:25-26 may be
supported by further argwncnts. Possibly, the context of Romans 3 con-
tains two further allusions to Yom Kippur. 1n one, God will judge the
secret thoughts of all (Romans 2:16). 1bis might be based on the mention
ofGod's omniscience and of the hidden tbings in the Yom Kippur prayers
from Qumran. 281 In the other. n:iatt~ in Romans 3:21-26 has a function
similar to repentance in the rabbinie and Philonic passages on Yom K.ip~
pur. the performance of vicariously atoning work by someone (the high
priest in the temple/Jesus), which becomes effectivc for everyone wbo
identifies bimself with this wodc. by ~ti.o1:1.qrepentance (cf. also Ro-
mans 2:4-5).
In sum, the allusion to the V.a;cs-c(}pt.ov in the holy of holies according to
the usage in the G:reek Torah must have been clear not only to Paul but to
everybody familiar with the Greek Torah. Sim:e Paul does not distinguish
di:f'&rent levels of biblical a.rgumentation for Gentile and Jewish reader-

1" Kraus, "Der Jom Kippur, der Tod Jesu l1ßd die 'Biblische Theologie';' pp. 157-
ISS.
279 See abovo, pp. 115-117.
210 H.-1. Kl1111Ck, "Hellenistische Rhetorik im Diasporajudeatum. Das Exordium des
vierten Makkabäerbudvs (4Makk 1,1-12)," New Testame11t Studie.s 3.S (1989) 4Sl-46S.
here p. 452; for vaa Renten, sec above, notc l91 on p. 116.
211 See above, pp. 3&--42.
202 The Impact of Yom Kippur on Christianity l11 the First ond Second Centurieö

ships, it can be assumed tbat educated Gentiles, who were associated in

some way with synagogues, also understood Paul•s allusion2S2 to one of
the most central texts ofthe Torah. 283
3. 2 Interpretation of Romans 3:25-26
The most challenging exegesis of this passage in recent research is that
proposed by Wolfgang Kraus.:U4 He suggests understandiog Romans 3:25-
26 and Hebrews not as atonement but exclusively as inauguration of a
sanctuary. He bases bis thesis on the rabbinie view that it is the blood rit-
ual wbich cleanses and reinaugurates the temple, while it is the laying of
hands on the scapegoat and on the bull that has the atoning function. He
concludes that since Romans 3:25 (an<;llikewise Hebrews) mentions only
blood, Paul (and Hebrews) refers · only to the sanctifying aspect of the
ritual.
I have three objections to Klaus' intetpretation.285 First, Kraus cannot
prove that the concept oftwo separate functions ofthe rituals at Yom Kip-
pur, which appears for the firsttime in the Mishnah, was valid in the time
of the Second Temple. Bven if this were the case, it is probably only one of
many interpretations. Did the Mishnah preserve the Sadducean or the Pha-
risean view on this detail? It is perhaps more pertinent to distinguish
between the ritual and its rationale and therefore to perceive the ritual
interpretations in the Misbnah as post-temple understandings. If th.is
assumption holds true then the interpretations of the Mishnah contribute no
more to the historical reconstruction of the way the temple ritual was
interpreted during the Second Temple than do the ioterpretations of
modern exegetes.
Moreover, Kraus presents the evidente of Second Templesources in a
reductive way. In contrast, Josephus does not support the mishnaic inter-
pretation of tbe ritual, whereas bis description of the ritual procedure is
similar tothat in the Misbnah. 236 Jubilees 34:12-19 does not distinguish
between the two goats and thejr functions. 2117 Kraus unjustifiably down-

m This is equally true for the reception of tbe allusion in the tradition before Paul.
w See e.g. Moo, The Epistle 10 tht. Romam, p. 233. This argument would be even
stronger if we mew that alteady in f~rst-century ROllle pel)ple used Sidrei AwJdah, since
in tbat ctiSe the description of the high priest's ritual would be even more deeply rooted
in their thought.
2114 Kraus, Der Tod Jesu als Hei/igtu'lrJSweihe.
w Additional crilique in Knöppler, SiJime im Neuen Testament, pp. 22-24.
»<; Kraus, Der Tod JeSll als Heiligtumsweihe, pp. 72-73.
m As Kraus bimself observes- Der Ted Jesu als Heiligiumsweihe, pp. 71-72, note 1.
 .Yom Ktppur lmagezy in the Early Clrristla11lmagi11aire 203

plays the evidence of 11 QTemple Scroll xxv-xxvii, which contradicts his

interpretation.288
Third, while there is purification terminology in Hebrews, it is missing
in Romans 3, which spea.ks about sins. It is hard therefore to fit the New
Testament texts into the rabbinie scheme. 219
The inauguration of the sanctuary and the atonement are ·not mutually
exclusive. Jesus is inaugurated as ilaotrunov and he atones as such. He
functions as an alternative to the central instrument of atonement in the
biblical ritual of the Day of Atonement. Unlike the cover of the ark of the
First Temple, whi<:h was bidden in the holy of holies, this iAao'tftp•ov is
public (Jrpo-tO&'tO). The focus on the Uao-cftptov demonstrates that, as in the
Epistle to the Hebrews, Romans proposes a sacrificial conception of atone-
ment referring to the biblical foundation and not to the Se<:ond Temple,
which had no U,.o.rnftptov. Yet cultic concepts are much less centrat to Paul
than to Hebrews.
The formula describes an eschatological action ofGod and distinguishes
between the current era of righteousness. in whicll Jesus has been inaugu·
rated by God as l.lao'tftp\ov (cf. Romans 5:6-11), and the previous time of
God's forbearance, in whicb sins werc passed over. i\.voxft refers back to
the time of God's forbearance. in which allsins were set aside in order to
enable all to repent before the final judgment (Romans 2:4-5) and avoid
God's inuninent wrath (Romans 1:18). Although God's wrath is mentioned
in the previous chapter the act does not entail an aspect of propitiation
because God bimself is the actor and could not possibly propitiate himself.
Why did Paul and his Vorlage employ the picture of Yom K.ippur?
Jesus' death ("in his blood") fulfills the same function as the blood
sprinkling rite oo Yom Kippur in the temple. Paul is thc first to put
forward such an interpretation of the U..ao'tiu)lov. Does the idea of an in-
auguration of Jesus as ilao'tl\ptov encompass a simultaneous aboli1ion of
the temple and its priestly cult in the group behlnd tbis tradition? Most in-
terpreters seem to take this for granted, blit it is not necessarily the case.
Romans 3:25-26 is at the very least ambiguous. Paul enumerate.'! the tem-
ple service (q ~a,;pei.a) positively among the God-given gifts (Romans 9:4),
and earlier he states three times that Jesus' inauguration as ilao1:~pLov
serves to demonstrate the righteousness ofGod (3:21.25.26). God's right-
eousness in the eschaton lies in proposing a just way of salvation for both

l'a Kraus states "Die in Lev 16 und der jildisehen Traditionsliteratur festzustellende
Unterscheidung von Heiligtumssllhne und Person[eu]sühne scheint hier keine Rolle m
spielen": Kraus, ikT Tod Jesu als HeiligtutMWelhe, pp. 75-73, here p. 76.
289 See also lhe reviews to Kraus, e.g. by D.P. Bailey, in Journal ofTheological Shldiu

45 (1994) 247-252; and Dunn, The TheQ/ogy o/PaJJI the Apostle, p. 221, note 77.
204 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Chri.stianity in the First and Second Centurie:s

Jews and Gentiles, although this way cannot be the law, which concerns
only Jews. Yet nianc,; is the same for both. Jews and Gentiles continue liv-
ing according to their statutes, i.e. Christian Jews continue observing Yom
Kippur. In Jesus' death God instituted an additional eschatological Yom
Kippur, the spiritual blood rite of which equally affects those Jews and
Gentiles who manifest niotl<;. If Paul bad wanted to express that this
supplement to the temple cult was also a Substitution for it, he could have
formulated his sentence differently, underscoring the substitutive effect. 290
In the end, abolition is what is going to happen and the interpretation of
Jesus as eschatological i1aat1lpwv was one of the preparatory steps on this
path, similar to an Alexandrian Jewish allegoxy. But I doubt that Paul
envisaged this, given bis short-term eschatological perspective.
3.3 Paul's Predecessor: The Pre-Pauline Formula Romans 3:24/25-26a*
The majority of scholars assume that Romans 3 :24/25-26a is based on a
pre-Pauline formula. 291 They base their assumption on the occmrence of a
considerable number of hapaxlegomena and some un- or pre-Pauline con-
cepts.292 The exact Iimits and wording oftbis formula arenot agreed upon.
While I accept the assumption that Paul is using traditional material, I find
that in the modern reconstructions neither the wording of the passage nor
its extent are sound enough to form the basis for any further conclu-
sions.293
Paul's Vorlage belongs to a provenance of Greek-speaking Christian
Jews, since it is vexy difficult to translate the Greek back to Hebrew I
Aramaic. But which Hellenistic Christian Jews? There are crucial differ-

290 Contra Knöppler, Siihne im Neuen Testament, p. 321, who also speaks of Jesus'

death as an eschatological Yom IGppur (p. 320); Merklein, "Der Tod Jesu als stellvertre-
tender Slibnetod," p. 190; U. Wilckens, Der Brief an die Römer (Evangelisch-Katholi-
scher Kommentar 6:1-3; Neukirchen-VIuyn and Zürich, 1978, 1980, 1982), vol. 1,
p. 239.
2111 But see e.g. Moo, The Epist/e to the Romai!S, p. 220, who opts for a Pauline origin.
292 See the commentaries for the details.
293 An example ofa maximalist reconstruction is Fitzmyer, who follows Bultmann and
Käsemann by beginning with verse 24. To the argwnents mentioned above, Käsemann
adds a "rupture" in the strange phrase beginning with a participle.
The following is my retranslation of J.A. Fitzmyer's reconstruction in, Roma"s. A
New Translation with lntroduction and Commentary (The Anchor Bible 33; New York,
1992), p. 342: "being justitied freely through redemption (wbich comes) in Christ Jesus.
wbom God presented as means of expiating sin through bis blood, as a manifestation of
bis uprightness for the pardon of past sins committed in the time of bis forbearance." His
Greek reconstruction ofthe pre-Pauline formula reads: litKato~avot limpaciv litci 'tfl~ cimlu-
tp<llat~~~<; tflc; f:v Xpun:cp lTJo-o-ü· öv npoi9E"Io ö eao~ i>.ao--ritPtov sv tijl u.in-ov ai11u.n .e\c; iv&t~w
Tfl~ litKil\OO"Vvq~ Qtrtcrii liui "t~Y 1tapacnv "tliiV 1tPGYEYOVO"t(l)Y li.J-LO:Pfl]J-La'tmV iv TTJ ci:vox1J 'tcni 8tcni.
 Yom Kippur lmagery in the Early Christian lmaginaire 205

ences among the various pre~Pauline Hellenistic Christian Jewish groups.

We know about Stephen's circle, the group behind Hebrews, and commu-
nities in Antioch, Damascus, Alexandria and Rome. The group behind the
Epistle to the Hebrews is unlikely to have been its author, since Hebrews
leaves precisely the key word U.aa't~ptov without Christological interpre-
tation. Stuhlmacher's suggestion ofRo.mans 3:25 having the same origin as
Mark 10:45 and Stephen was refuted by Kraus. 294 Paul, however, could
have heard an Alexandrian tradition from Apollos or he could even have
repeated a reworked Roman tradition that he heard from Aquila and Prisca
during his time in Antiach or Damascus and adopted it. Unfortunately, the
brevity of the passage precludes taking a more definite position on this
important question.

4. Christ as Atonement (i.A.aaJJ.Ö<;): lJohn

The first Epistle of John from around 95 CE295 twice uses the term il..aaJI.oc;
(Uohn 2:2; 4:10) as an epithet for Christ:
1:7 But if we walk in the light as he hirnself is in the light we have fellowship with
one another, and the b1ood of Jesus bis Son cleanses (.:a8api~El) us from all sin. a If
we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourse1ves, and the truth is not in us. 9 Ifwe
confess (Ö!loloyiilll.ev) our sins, he who is faithful andjust will forgive (ö.q,!)) us our
sins and cleanse (lc:a8up~) us from all unrighteo11sness. 10 lf we say that we have
not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. 2:1 My little children, I
am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone sins, we
have an advocate (mpÖ.d.lJlov) with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; 2 and he
is the atonement (ilaa11ö~) for (upi) o11r sins, and not for ours only but also for the
sins of the whole world.
4:\oIn this is Iove, not that we loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to
be the atonement (cintan:ll11v lOV viciv airtoil i).aa11civ) for (1relli) our sins.
Many scholars view this passage of Hohn against the background of the
Day of Atonement. 296 Yom Kippur as background is supported by the

294 Cf. Kraus, Der Tod Jesu als Heiligtumsweihe, pp. 194-234, especially pp. 194-200.
m Schnelle, Einleitung in d~ Neue Testament, p. S22.
2911 Most of all, R. Brown, The Epistles of John (Anchor Bible 30; Garden City [NY]
1982}, p. 217. J. Ro!off, "Hilasmos," Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament 2
(1990) 186, states: "In the background stands the idea, though it is weakened in
comparison to Rom 3:25, of Good Friday as the great eschatological Day of Atonement."
R. Bultmann, The Johannine Epistles (Hermeneia; Philadelphia, '1978), p. 23, also coo-
nects the tradition to Rom 3:2S but attributes it to the ecclesiastical redactor. J. Lieu, The
Theology oftheJohannine Epi.st/es (New Testament Theology; Cambridge [UK], 1991),
p. 64, prefers to see here a non-sacriticial understanding.
206 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Christlanity in the First and Second Cenllll'ies

mention of purification and coofession in 1:9 and by ilaa116<;. which Philo

sometimes uses to refer to Yom Kippur.297
What part ofthe Yom Kippur ritual is alluded to? The mention ofblood
in 1 :7 leads some scholars to see a saerificial background behind the con-
cept of atonement. However, the immediate context of I lohn 2:2 calling
Jesus a Mp6.d1lt<><; is closer to the notion of an interceding high priest.
Raymond Brown connect.s this concept to the Babylonian Jewish tradition,
according to wbich the high priest is an advocate before God against aca~­
sations by Satan.29' Pbilo, too, portrays the high priest in bis interceding
role.299 But as Georg Streckerpoints out, the second interpretation does not
invalidate the first.l 00
A further connection to Yom Kippur may be perceived in Uohn 4:10 in
the idea of an atoning sending that is reminiscent of the scapegoat t}11olo-
gy of Galatians 3:10-14 and 4:4-6; however. lJohn uses not the peculiar
tl;u7t00t6Um but 0:1toodUm.301
The universal aspect of the atonement is new in comparison to all pas-
sages discussed bitherto (e.g. Barnabas, Matthew, Hebrews and Romans
3:25).302 llohn emphasizes the abilitY of Jesus to intercede for the
(confessed) sins of baptized Christians and clearly refleets a later stagc in
the development of early Cbristian thought than the author of Hebrews,
who does not admit a second opportunity to repent. Hebrews leaves open
the content ofthe high priest's heavenly intercession. Uobn associates the
heavenly intercession explicitly with atonement. Assuming the writer of
Uohn was familiar with the concept of the once~and-for-all atonement of
the heavenly high priest, he adjusted it to his readers, who were in need of
an explanation ofwhat happens to post-baptism.al sins.

5. Yom Kippur as Background to Early Cbristological Hymns?

Two scholars, Ernst Lobmeyer and James Charlesworth, bave suggested
understanding the Christological hymns of Colossians 1: 13-20 and Philip-
pians 2:6-11 against tbe bac.kground of Yom Kippur. The scapegoat as

197 De congressv 6rudiiionis grotia 89.107; Quis reriUJI divillflnlm heres sit 179; De

posteritale Coini 48. ·

m bYoma 20a, cf. Brown, The Epistles ofJohn, p. 217; see above, p. 121.
199 De -vita Mosis 2:26.
:lOII Slze(;k:er, The }()ha"nine Lette.rs. A Commentary on 1. 1, and 3 John (Hem~eneia;

Philadelphia, 1996), p. 39.

301 On tbe typology in Gallltians, sec the discllSSion above, pp. 173-17CS.
302 Howevct, it is not a Cbristian invention, sinc:e it alteady appears in Philo, IAg4tio
ad Gai11111 306.
 Yom Kippur lmClgery in the Early Christion Imaginoire 207

possible background to a third hymn, lPeter 2:22-24, was discussed

ea:rlier.3{)3
5.1 Colossians 1:12-20
Ernst Lohmeyer suggested that Yom Kippur lies behind a Christological
hymn he located in Colossians 1:13-20.304 Today, most scholars consider
1: 15 as the inception of the hymn and 1:12-14 as an introductory phcase
composed by the author of Colossians.305 Many different versions as to
how to structure the hymn compete with one another. 306 I will quote the
passage, including the frame 1:12(-14) and 1:21-23:
12He [who !ives a life worthy ofthe Lord] thanks the Father, who bas qualitied.
you to take part in tbe Iot ofthe saÜ!l\9, (whicb is) in the light.
u He [God) b.as rescued (tppilou.1o} us ftom the power of darlcness
and transferred (jl€1:iCJUl04V) us into tb.e kingdom @nmÄ.Iliav) of bis beloved Son,
1~ in whom we have the redemption (uno).mpoxnv),
the forgiveness (icpeow) of lhe sins.
u He [Christ] is tbe image (tia:.ilv) ofthe invisible God,
the fli'Stbom (RP!MO~OKOt;) of all creation (Klic:rsm.;);
1~ for in (i;v) him all things were created
in heaven and on earth,

300 See p, 178, above.

104 E. Lohmeyer, Der Brief a11 die Kalosser (Kritisch-t!JCegetischer Kommentar über das
Neue Testament; Göttingen, 1961, fll'St edition 1930), pp, 41--68, especially 43-47 and
66-68. For rece.ut Iiterature on Col 1:13-20, see C. Stettler, Der Koiossuhyl11n'IIS.
Untersuchungen Zll Form, traditionsgeschichtlichem Hintergrund und Aussage wm
Ko/1,15-10 (Wissenschaftliche Untersuc:hungen zum Neuen Testament, second series
131; TUbingen, 2000); 0. Hofius, '"Erstgeborener vor aller SchOpfuog'- 'Erstgeborener
aus den Toten.' Erwägungen :zu Struktur und Aussage des Christushymnus Kol 1,15-20,"
in: idem, Paulrmtudien Il (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen z;wn Neuen Testament
143; Tübingen, 2002; pp. 215-233).
JOS Stettfer, Der Kolosserhymnus, pp. 76-94; M. Barth and H. Blanke, Colossians. A
New Trans/(lllon with inrroduclion and Commentary (Anchor Bible 34B; New York,
1994), pp. 193-217; P.T. O'Brien, Colos:tians, Philemon (Word Biblical Commentary
44; Waco [Tex.), 1984), pp. 25 a.nd 31-63, esp. pp. 32-37, with much additional
litecature; I.-N. Aletti, Colassiena 1,/S-20. Genre et uegbe du texte. Fonction de Ia
thilriCltique sapientitl/e (Analccta Biblica 91; Rome, 1981), pp. 1-45; K Schweizer, Der
Brief an die Kolroser (Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testamenl;
Neukirchen-Vluyn and Zllrich, 1976), pp. 44-50.
306 O'Brien, Colossiam, pp. 33-37, gives an overview of various attempts to define
stanz.as; the begillning ofthe hymn v. 13, 14, or 15 is debated. Various pans of the hynm
have been regardc.d as additlons by tbe writer of Coiossians. For discussion of both
questions, soe Hofius, "'Erstgeborener vor aller SchOpfung'," pp. 217-223, wbo regards
''the chun;h" in 1:18 and "through the blood of his UOS$" m 1:20 a.s additions; and
Stettler, Der Mlosserhymnu.r, pp. 94-100, who convinci.ngly argues agaiast n~essarily
seeing any parts ofthe passage as additlorus.
208 The Impact ofY()m Kipp11r on Chrislifl11ity in the Fir:ll and Sec()fld Centlll'iu

things visible md invisible,

wbetber lbro.aes (9p6vo1) or dominions (lCllJl!Onttl':;)
wbether JUlers (~ai) or powers (~•n)-
all tbings bave been created tbrough (1518) him and for (~ bim.
n He bimselfis before all lhings,
and in him all things hold togelher (~1:ev).
" He bimselfis the head ofthe body, the churcb;
he is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead,
so that he might c:ome to have frrst place in everything.
1t For in him all the tullness (lldv"tolfi.'fuxlll,la) was pleased to dwell (K~'Cottc:flGUt),
:o and to rec:oncile (liwo~~:a'Eul.l.ä!;.G<t) tbrough him alllhiugs to itself
by bavingmade peace (s~itoat;) tluough the blood ofhis cross,
wbether with tbe lhings on earth or with those in heaven.
z• And you who were once estranged and bo.stile in mind, doing evil deeds, 22 lle
has now reconciled (anoa:a't'I'IU.0.YIJ'I:&) in llis fleshly body through deat'h, so aa to
present you holy and blameless and i.m:proacbable before bim -v provided tbat
you continue securely established aud steadfast in tb.e faith, withoul shifting &om
the hope promised by the gospel that you hcard, which has been proclaime(! to
every creature under beaven. I, Pau!, became a servant of 1he gospel.
Lohmeyer's starting point is his translation of ci1WKiltllllciooiD with "ver~
söhnete" (to reconcile), Which in Gennan is immediately associated with
"Versöhnungstag," the Day of Atonement. He understands (uxo)~~:a-cuAMlc:r~
aiD as a synonym for (tl;)llcicncoJla.L. As he considers Colossians a Pauline
Ietter, Colossians has to be interpreted against the backgroun.d of the pas-
sages containing either of these words and against the background of the
Day of Atonement.307 For example, the sacrificial goat308 of Yom Kippur
lies bebind the idea of general atonement by the blood of Jesus. Most
interesting certainly is Lohmeyer's observation that the combination of
creation and atonement reflects the central theme of the festival cycle of
Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippw. Moreover, in hls opinion, the hymn
comhines these themes: indwelling ofGod,ldngdom, condemnation ofthe
forces of eviJ, universal forgiveness and redemption -themes counected to
tbe days spanning Rosh Hashanah to Yom Kippurin rabbinie and liturgical
texts.309
Lobmeyer's thesis was modified and expanded by Stanislas Lyonnet.
who investigated the relationship of this hymn to the special additions in

3'" Lohmoyer, Der Brief an die Kolosser, p. 66.

3111 Lohmeyer refcrs to 1he sacdficiallamb! An obvious Japse of a Christian theologiao
used ta Passover terminology and Isa !13. Did somelhing similar happen to the autbor of
the Gospel of 1o1m?
30!1 Lohmeyer, Der Briefon die Kolosser, p. 43-46.
 YOIII Kippurlmagery m the Early Christia" lmaginaire 209

r.1he New Year Amidah, Malfchuyyot, Zikluonot and Shofarot, 310 which in
:;.:~ became c::losely linked with the Yom Kippur liturgy.m Lyonnet,
~;pointed out that p~or to Colossians 1:20 the verb el~t)vono~ appears only
~~~ce, in a Philomc passage on Rosh Hashanah and 1n Proverbs.m
~;:., ~ l.,ohJneyer's thesis did not win wide approval, and Lyonnet is not even
~;quoted in manyrecent.commentaries and studies on C~Jossians.~ 13 Eduard
:-;;-s.chweizer argued agam.st Lohmeyer that the Yom Kippur motJfs appear
~~'bnly in the frame ofthe hymn (1:13-14), not in the text ofwhat cameto be
l?~een in seholarship as the hymn itself (1:15-20). 314 Christian Stettler's
~ more recent. extensive study argues that tb.e textual basis for the con~
~ ~ptual association of creation, atonement and recreation with New Year
~' ..d Yom Kippur, and the relationship of both festivals in Second Temple
0;texts
:-. ~· ' is too slight to serve as evidence.m Accorciing to him, texts about
r:R.osh Hashanah predating the destruction of the temple do not speak about
::; reeonciliation in the sense of forgiveness of sins, and texts about Yom
\~':,kippur hardly at all about creation. 31 ' Moreover, the two festivals should
('notbe regarded as a unit since they are separated by 10 days.
'~';';' Unfortunately, very few data are available on the festival of Rosh
~5Ha!ibanah in the time of the Second Temple.317 Philo emphasizes the

; ''·ste n"1!lW ,:nm-ot .m~'m ("kingdoms," "commemorations.," "trumpe13"). Oa tbe eady

:•:Jnstocy ofthese additionJ to the Amidah, see the literatlll"e given above, p. 49, note 179.
-'2 sn. S. Lyonnet. "L'hymne christologiq_ue de 1'6pitre aux Colossiens et la fete juive du
:''uouvel an," Recherehes de. Science Religieuse 48 (1960) 93-100.
. . JU. Philo, De :specialib11S /egibus 2:188·192; the other passage is Prov 10:.10; cf. also
' Matt 5:9; lhe substantive appears also in Xenopbon, Hellenico 6:3:4. See LyoBDet,
('1-"hymne cbristologit{ue de l'llpilre aux Colossiens," pp. 96-97.
i' }0 Exa:ptiom are Leonhardt, JtMish Wor8hip i1l Philo of A.lezWiilria, p. 42; Aletti.
:>Colossiensl.IS-20, p. 91.
·' ~·,~• Schweizer, Der BriefIJ1I dte J(olosser, p. SS.
), Jl~ See Stettler, Der Kolonerhyrnmu, pp. 6-10 on Lohmeyer, pp. 266-299 on
: '\V!Iß!lbnung und Frilden," and pp. 32G-323 on Rosb Huhauah and Yom Kippar as
: _blckground. He concludes: "Die Textbasis ist ••• zu .schmal, so dass wir kaum davon
::, liuJgehea ktlnnen, dass der Schöpfer des HymDUS besagten Festzyklus (from Rosh
:\Hash1lllah to Yom Kippur] beWilSSt im Auge gehabt hätte, oder auch nur, dass die in
~'imserem Christuspsalm verarbeiteten Tn~ditionen voo Schöpfung, Stlbne und Neli-
r;$cböptimg schon. in jenem jüdischen Festzyklus in einem inneren Zusammenbang
~: ~standen bitten." (pp. 322-323).
~;?14 Stettler, Der Ko/QiserhymmiS, refers to Sir 50:22 as the only text Unlc.ing Yom
?/.<:fGj1pur and creation.
~!:'317 E.g., 1QS Rule of the Commvnity x:6; llQTemple Scroll xxv:l-10. Soru of !be
f~;FiWiYal Prayer fragments may belong to Rosh Hashanab. Philo mentions lhe festival in
~~pe s~ecialibus legibus, 2:138-192. See LeO.Dbardt, JtMish Worship in Phüo of Alu~
~'/prdna, p.41; Pseudo·Philo, Liber Antiquitatum Biblican~m 13:6. In general, see
210 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Chriatitlnity in the First and Secoml Centuries

trumpets and links the festival with the UDiversal significance and blessing
of the lawgiving at Sinai and God as peacemak:er between the powers of
the world and nature. The Liber .Antiquitatum Biblicarum states that on
New Year "I will declare the number ofthose who are to die and who are
born.,'318 Although it does not speak explicitly about judgment it clearly
goes beyond creation, taking up the well-known theme of God deciding on
New Year who istolive and who to die. 319 This calls to mind two Festival
Prayers from Qumran that were probably used on Yom Kippur in and
beyond the Qumran community and refer to creation and the indwelling of
God in the commUDity.320 Moreover, the langnage ofthe "lot ofthe saints
in the light" ( 1: 12) is strongly reminiscent of Qumran texts, and the victocy
over the powers of darkness and evil is a strong theme expressed in
1Enoch 10, llQMelchizedek and Hebrews on Yom Kippur.~1 None of
these elements are univocal markers; they appear also in texts with no
connection to Yom Kippur. Deutero-Isaiab abounds in references coru-
bining creation and atonement. And Acts 26:18 mentions the redemption
ofthe saints ftom the powers of darkness. However, Colossians 1:12-23, in
particular 1:15-20, combines many elements associated with Yom Kippur.
Finally. as Stettler hirnself rem.arks, the fact that the author of Colossians
framed the hymn by taking up the words ''redemption,. ( bo:A.t!tpmat v) and
«forgiveness" (iiqn>otv) of sins in 1:14 and "reconcile,. (<inoxatallcioooo) in
1:21 in the irwnediate context, possibly also reveals the hymn's Sitz im
Leben in this cont.ext of "expiation and reconciliation."322 The last word
might well not have been spoken on this passage.

P. Lenhardt, "Neujahrsfest. Jll. Judentum," Theologische Realenzyldopädie 24 (1994)

322-324.
3 " Liber Antiquitatufll Biblican~fll 13:6, tnmsl. DJ. Harrington, ..Pseudo-Phllo," in:
J. Charlesworth (ed.), The Old TestaMent P3eudepigraplra. Yol. 2. (New York, J9U;
pp. 297-317), here p 321. See also Jacobson, A Com.mentary on Pse11do-Philo's Liber
Antiqultatum Biblicarum, vol. l, pp. 512-S 15.
319 See bRH 16b; ef. tRH 1:13;yRH1:3, 57a.
l2ll 1Q34 3 ii // 4QS09 97+98 i includes the motif of f.rcation, and 4QS08 2 1-6
explieitly mentions God's indwelling in the commUDity. See above pp. 42-43.
m See pp. 85-92 and 185-187, above.
3n Stettler, Der Ko/Q!Iserlrymnus, pp. 102-103. He sees baptism or the Euf.harist as the
most likely candidates. This is obviously a post-Jewish perspective.
 Yom Kippr~r lmagery in the Early Christian /maginaire 211

5.2 Philippians 1:6-1 I

James Charlesworth has suggested Yom K.ippur as a baekground to
Philippians 2:6--11 :323
[Christ Jesus]
6 being in the form of God,
did not regard as robbery (oiplarrpov),
to be equal with God324
1 hut emptied bimself,
taking dte form of a slave,
being bom in human likeness.
And being found in buman fonn,
1 he humbled bimself {"IUU!i- OO.utöv)
md became obedicn( to the poi.ot of death -
[even deatb on a cross. ].W
9 Therefore God also higbly exalted hlm
and gave bim the name
that is above every name,
10 so that at lhe name of Jesus
every lcnee should beud,
in heaven and on cri aod under the earth,
11 and every tonguc should eonfeu (~011~1):
lhe Lord Jesus Christ
to the glory of God the Father.

m J.H. Charlesworth, "A Prolegomenon to a New Study of the Jewish Background of

the Hymns and Prayers in the N~ Testament," Journal ofJewish Studies 33 (1982) 265-
28:5, here p. 279, note 46. The Iiterature on this passage is vast. Recent treatments include
0. Hoflus, Du Christushymnw; Phillppu 2,6-1 l (Wissenschaftliche UnteBuchungeo
zum Neuen Testament 17; Tilbingen. '1991); G.D. Fee, Pm~l's Letter to the Philippians
(New International Commentary to the New Testament; Grand Rapids [Mich.], 1995},
pp. 24-38 and 191-229; M. Boclanuehl, '"The Form ofGod' (Phil. 2:6) Variations on a
Theme of Jewish Mysticism," Jownal ofTheological St.dies 48 (1997) 1-23; S. Vollen-
wcider, "'Der 'Raub' der Gottgleichheit: Bin Religionsgeschicbtlicher Vom:hlag zu
Phil2.6-(ll)," New Tutame11t Sl11diu 45 (1999) 413-433. That the hymnal charaaer is
now hotly debated does not affett the discussion of i&S background See in particolar
R. Bruelcner, 'Christushymnen' oder 'epldeilctische' Pt18sagen? Studien zum Stilwechsel
im Neuen Testament t11td seiner UIJfWelt (FoBchu:ngen zur Religion und Literatur des
Alten und Neueu Testaments 176; G6ttingen, 1997); and G. Kennel, Frlihchristliche
Hymnen? Gathlngskrftlrche Studien :ntr Frage nach den Liedern der frühen Clvistrmheit
(Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament 71; Ne~hen­
Vluyn, 199S). especially, pp. 22-46 on the history of the research.
m For various solutions to trauslating this difticult verse, see N.H. Young, "An
Aristophanic Cantrast to Philippians 2:6-7," New Testament Stu.dles 45 (1999) 153-15:5.
325 This line breaks the rbythm ofthree lines; ifthe song is pre-Pauline, the Une may be
a Pauline addition; see Lohmeyer, Kyrios Jesus, p. 44.
212 The Impact ofYom KipJ111r on Christiontty in the First and Second Centuries

Cbarlesworth did not expound thc basis for bis suggestion, but some mot.ifs
might indeed refer to Yom Kippur. in particular the pronunciation of the
divine name (2:9), the universal prostration (2:10) and the solemn
confession in the last line (2:11). The humbling (2:8) may be connected to
Leviticus 16:29-34. AJthougb God's namewas probably pronounced evcry
day in the temple with people prostrating, a universal prostration matcbes
the image oftheSeder Avodah, where not only those present in the temple
fall on their knees. However, we do not know if a Seder Avodah was al-
ready part of some synagogue liturgies in the time of tbe Second Temple.
The background oould be any solemn pronunciation of tbe divine nam.e. A
oonnection of Philippians 2:6-11 to Yom Kippur's liturgy is possibie but
speculative.

6. Historical Synthesis

Wehave now come to the point ofbaving to put the fmdings ofthe various
investigations into their historical context. Before discussing what can be
leamt from these texts ab<M the various attitudes toward the ritual and
imaginaire of Yom Kippur (6.3), we need to examine who among l:he
Christian Jews in tbe first century were observing Yom K.ippur (6.1) and
who not, and why they wcre not (6.2)?326
It is commonly assumed tbat Yom Kippur - together witb the other
Jewish festivals of autumn - ceascd to be observed from the vcry
beginning of Christianity, except by ..abnormal"' Jewish·Christians. 327 No

n6 For additional thoughts on this topic, see now Daniel Stökl Ben Ezra, "'Christians'
Celebrating 'Jewish' Festivals of Autumn," in: P.1. Tomsoo' and D. Lamben-Petry (c:ds.),
The Image of tlre Judaeo-Christi(I1U in Ancient Jewish 011tl Christion Llterature. Papers
Delh>ered at the Coilaqui11.m ofthe llutit&~tum Iutlaicum, Bruuel618-19 November,1001
(Wissenschaftliche Untersuchwlgen zum Neuen Testament 1SS; TnbiDgen, 2003; pp. 53-
73) {in print].
~ 7 M<mly, Yom Kippur is not even mentio.ned among early ChristiliD- i.e. as being a
Christian Jewish observancc: seo e.g. T. Schramm, ..Fescc. IV. Urchristentum," Religion
in Geschlchu und Gegenwart' 3 (2000) 91-93; H.·D. Wendland, "Feste und Feiern m.
Im Urchristentum.,. Religion ill Geschichte 1111tl Gegenwort3 2 (1958) 917-919. George
Buclumau, one of the few scholars to have addressed thc festival elllendars of Jewish
Cbristians. reveals a Gentile Christian perspecrive when he admits, witb rcluctance, lhe
possibiltty that tbey observcd Yom Kippur; see G.W. Buchanan, "Worship, Feasts and
Ceremonies in tbe Early Jewish-Cbristian Chun:h," New TestDment Sffldie.s 26 (1980)
279-297: "The church fathers accused tbe Jcwish·Christians of observing the feast days
of the Jews. lhis docs not mean that all Jewish-Christians observed all tbe feasts of
popular Judaism or tbat they rejected all the feasts observed by Gentilo-Christiaos. They
observed the Sabbadt and also tbe Lord's Day. They eelebrated Passover on lhe
 Yom KippiiT lmagery in the EIZI'Iy Clll'isti<m lmaginolre 213

less an authority _than Martin Hengel, the nestor of New Testament

scholarship, recently affinned tbat the author of Luke--Acts considered
Yom K.ippur tobe obsolete: "Ich kann mir [nur] ... schwer vorstellen, daß
nach dem Tag auf Golgatha für Lukas wie für die Judencluisten am Jom
Kippur fl1r Israel noch Silbne gewirkt wurde."328 Two arguments are
usually raised to support tbis conclusion. First, theologically, the
typc>logizations of Vom Kippur in Hebrews and in Romans 3:25 are
Ullde:rstood to entail the abolishment of Yom Kippur- the great high priest
-Jesus bad already completed tbis task. Second, the New Testament does
not describe any individual or group observing Yom K.ippur.
6.1 The Observance of Yom Kippur by First-Century Christians
:Let os start with the second argument. I want to emphasize that all the data
about fue ''what" and the "how., of worsbip in earliest Christianity are
essentially circumstantial and relatively scant. To claim from an argu-
mentum e silentio, therefore, that a certain festival was no longer obsen'ed
is a weak argument. Pentecost, for example, seems to have played a
prominent role in Jaying the foundation of the Churcb, yet the evidence for
actual celebration of this festival in the first and second centuries is very
scant. ll9 How then can we be sure that one or more of tbe communities
represeoted by the New Testament writings or some second-century Jewish
Cbristian communities did not observe the central Jewish feasts and fasts?
It is true that neither Jesus nor bis disclples are ever described as ob-
serving Yom Kippur; but neither are they depicted as transgressing its
commandments. Statements in the Gospels about fasting refer to weekly
fasts and to the ascetic Iifestyle of overachievers like lohn the Baptist.
Regarding the temple cult we can infer from the so-called "cleansing" of
$e temple tbat Jesus seems to have regarded the temple primarily as a
place of prayer. But passageil such as Matthew 5:24 provide evidence that

fourteenth of Nisan, but they may also have celebrated the resurrection at Easter. They
may or may not have observed the Jewish Feaat of Wecks instead of, or in addition to,
Pentecost. lt i& uncertain whether they observed New Year~ Doy, the Day qfAJooement,
fl1rd the Feast ofTabernaclu withpopular Judaism in thefall" (p. 297; empblsis added).
Unfurtunatcly, even the laudable Theologische Realenzykloplldle, which for tße most part
hQ excel!ent entries on topies related to Judaism will not have aseparate entry on Vom
Kippur when it is publisbed.
JD M. Hengel, "Der Jude Paulas und sein Volk. Zu einem neoen Acta-Kommentar"
Th11ologische R11nd&chcru 66 {2001) 338-368, here p. 358, rcferring to Luke 22:19-20 and
Acts 8;32-33 and 20:28, discussing whether Luke assigns an atoning function to the doath
of lcsus. Rengel also rcfers to a habilitation of U. Mittmann-R.ichert (2002) {noo vidi).
· -~ G. Rouwhorst, "The Origins and Evolution of Eady Christian Pentecost," Studia
J!atri.dica 3S (2001) 309-322.
214 Tht I111poct ofYom Kippw' on Chri:ftianity in the First aml Second Celtluries

Jesus regarded also the purification and sin offerings in the temple as part
of his conception of Judaism. In the introduction, I mentioned antbro-
pological arguments that turn upside down the common presumption that
Christians immediately ceased observing Jewish festivals: the conserv-
atism of ritual in general and of collective ritual in particular.330 Without
evidence to the contrary, the working assumption sb.ould be that most
Christian Jews, after hearing about Jesus, continued to observe the same
fcstivals 8S they bad done beforc. Philo and Josephus boa.st that many God-
fearers observed Yom K.ippur. 331 Accordingly, there is no reason to assume
that either Jesus or his immediate followers did not observe the abstentions
of Yom Kippur orthat they disregarded the temple ritual.
Unambiguous support for the thesis that at least one Christian commun-
ity, that of Luk:e-Acts, observed Yom Kippur's fast, can be deduced ftom
tbe only New Testament passage explieitly mentioning Yom Kippur.
Aets 27:9: 332

JlO Sec above, pp. 6-7.

331 Philo, De vila .Mosts 2:20-23; Josophus, Contra Apicmem 2;282. A f.unous Amorak
Pale.stiDian legend about Ant.oninus ifnplies that many God-fearers wore inferior shoes
(mn!l ?:Vlll) on Yom Kippur: see yMeg 3:2, 14a;ySanh 10:8, 29e.
332 Some c:onuu.entators have noted that Luke uses the Jewish calendar, albeit without
drawing conclusions regarding the observanee of Yom Kippur by Luke and bis
addressees: see 1.A. Fitzmyer, The Acls of the Apastles. A New Translation wlth lntTo-
dvctlon and Commentary (Anchor Bib1e Commentary 31A; New Yorlc, 1998), p. 715;
B. Witherington. The Act.s of the Apostles. A. Socio-Rhethorical Commentary (Grmd
Rapids (Mic:h.), 1998), p. 762. See also DJ. Williams,Acu (A Good News Commentaty;
San Pnncisco, 1985), p. 432; W. Schmithals, Die Apostelgeschichte des Lvkas (Zillcher
Bibelkommentare, Neues Testament 3,2; Zürich, 1982), p. 236; K. Lake and lU.
CadbUl)', The Begirrnings ofChristianity Plll'tl. The:Acts oftlre Aposrlu. Yol. JY &glüh
Translation and Commetttary (Grmd Rapids (Mich.], 196.5- repr. 1932), p. 328; and,.
way back, H.B. Haclc::ett, A Commentary on lhe Original Tut ofthe Acts ofthe Apoat/e$
(Bosm11, 1367), p. 418. .
However, somc oommentators queslion here whether Paul observed Yom Kippur: see
R.P.C. Haoson, The Acts in the Revised StQttdard Yeriion. With lntrocluction and Com~
me111ary (The New Clarendon Bible; Oxford, 1967), p. 24.5; J.D.G. Dunn, The Acts ofthe
Apo:~tlu (NiUTI.tive Commentaries; Valley Forge [Penn.), 1996), p. 333; H. Conzelmann,
Acts ofihe A.postles (Henneneia; Pblladelpnia, 1987), p. 216; and, much earli.er, E. Jac-
quier, Le.' Actelf des A.potl"es (Etudes bibliques lll; Paris, 1926), p. 726. lbis possibility
that Paul observed Yom Kippw: il; categorically denied by C.K. Barrett, A Critic<~l and
Exeglllical Comm~ntary on the Acts of the Apostles (2 vols; International Ccitical
Commentary 44; Edinburgb, 1994, 1998).
Amoog more recent commentaries, see also R. Pescb, Die Apostelge.schichte.
(Evangelisch Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament S; Zürich, Neuldrchen-
Vluyn, 1986); F.F. Bruce, The Book ofthe Acts (New International Commentary on the
New Testament; Grmd Rapids [Mich.], 1988); J. Jervel~ Die Apostelgeschichte. 0be1'-
setzt vnd erldlJrt (Kritisch·exegetischer Kommentar Ober d\l$ Neue Test.ament 3; Göttin-
 Yom Kippur lrnaguy in th« EIJI'ly Christion /rnaglnaire 21 S

27:~ Siocemuch time had beeo lost and sailiag was now dangerous, because even
the Fast .bad already gone by (5ui. '<Ö .:ai .:ijv -vqon:iav li3tl apclttl.-ueiv~n), Paul
advised them, 10 saying, "Sirs, I can see tbat the voyage will be with danger and
much heavy loss, not only ofthe cargo aod tbe ship, but abo of our lives."'
Luke may have been a God-fearer writing to God-fearers. 333 Wben he
employed 1\ VTJG'ttia as a ehronological reference he apparently presumed
his readers would understand what he was talking about. 334 Commentators
are unanimous in interpreting -.; VIJO'tsia as referring to the fast of Yom
Kippur. The word Vl}O'teia appears with complete neutrality in the context,
without polentical or pejorative accretions. In the same way, a modern Jew
would understand a friend saying in late summer that he will retum ..after
the holidays" as meaning at the end of Sukkot. We can therefore assume
that the attitude ofLuke and his addressees to the fast ofthe Day of Atone-
ment wastothat of a revered and observed festival. Moreover, supporting
this opinion, Luke does not include interpretations of Jesus' death as
atonement and even elimioates them fiom bis source, Mark. 335 Aeoording-
ly, one of the theological reasons to abolish Yom Kippur did not exist for
Luke. Consequently, this reading of Acts 27:9 refutes the second argument
for the thesis tbat Christians immediately stopped observing Yom Kippur -
namely, tbat the New Testament does not describe any individual or group
observing thls festival.
Paul's Episde to the Romans 14:5-{i provides further evidence for
"Christians" observing "Jewish" festivals:

gen. 1998); W. Eckey, Die Apostelgeschichte. Der Weg dtt~ Evangeli11m:s von Jerwalem
nacJr Rom (Neukirclteo-Vluyn, 2000).
:m See J. Tyson, Imoge:s of JrlliQi:sm in Lulce-Act:~ (Columbia, 1992), pp. 19-41; and
idem, "lcws and Judaism ln Luke-At:ts: Read!ng a:1 a Godfearer," New TesttJmeht St11dies
41 (1995) 19-38.
3)4 Again.st lhe argument tbat Luke may have copied a souree without attention (in this

case the "we-sour~:e"), I would polnt to other verses where Luke-Aets betrays a cllliSe
aequaintauce with Jewish tradition: e.g. Aets I: 12 (a Sabbath day' s joumey); and I 8: 18;
21:24 (Nazirite vow); and see 6:1 var. lect. {the :second-first [?] Sabbath). It ls illu-
miDatiDg ro compare commentators on the Lulce-Acts u.se of Passover (Acts 12:4; 20:6;
22:1; ef. 18:21 vor. lect.), Pe.utecost (Acts20:16) or the Sabbath (Luke 4:31-32; 6:6;
13:10; 23:56; Aces !3:14.42.44; 15:13; 17:2; 18:4; 20;7) ar measures oftirne and the
question as to the observan~:e of each of these festivaJs by Luke or Paul.
m What might have boen Luke's opinion regarding the higll-priestly ritual? Luke
connects the proto-ChristJan community vecy closely wilh the Jerusalem temple. They
visit tbe temple daily. Even Paul demonstrates his respec:t for the temple by bringing
offerings. Luke claims !hat a group of priests joiDcd tbe Je$US movement. But the temple
was no Ionger atanding at the time Luke was w:ritiDg the GOiSpei Bild Acts, and his
positive attitude to the temple is therefore rather nostalgic.
216 The Impact ofYom Kipptzr 011 Clrristiarril:y in lhe First and Secon4 Cemu,.it:s .:i
14:s Some jud.&e one day tobe better tban another, whi1e others judge all days to be -~
alilal. Le.t ~II be t\dly convinced in their own minds. 6a Those wbo observe the day;.~
observe tt m houor of the Lord. 336 .·:.

Accordingly, whoever wants either to observe or not observe festivaJs is-,'

free to do so, as lang as he/she is consistent and is doing so on behalf od
God (and not e.g. for social or economic reasons). There is no reason to'5
assume that for some members ofthe community Yom Kippur was not one ;~
of these "days... Paul apparently assumed that part of the Roman commun;. :::
ity observed Jewish festivals, and he gave it the freedom to do so. How~)
ever. this passage reveals a conception that is an important step away froni ·:
regarding the observance offestivaJs as obligatory. 331 ?
Tbc author of Colossians rails against people, perhaps (Christian) Jew~ •·:
ish missionaries,3~' who demand from Christian Gentiles the observan" of•.:!
such Jewish rites as kasbrut, the Sabbathand the New Moon. · •;;
1:16Therefore nobody sha.ll judge (~qn..m.) you with regard to food and drink er)
eoncetniD& a festival, New Moou, or sabbaths. 11 These aTe a shadow (G!Cii) of·':
what was to come, the body (CJiils.uz) of Cbrist. 11 Nobody shall disqualifY yoJ!i ;;
delighting in self·abasemellt and worship of tbe a~~&els, which he has seen opoli. :;~
enteriog, puffed up with~u.t cause by his tleshly mind, 19 aod not holding fast tO\;
the head, ftom whom the whole body, nourished and held together by its joints and , ;
Iigaments. grows with the growth tbat is from God. 339 · .<

Accordingly, these missionaries observed the regular Jewish festivals - ·

almost certainly including Yom Kippur. The author of Colossians regarded · ;
such observance as improper if it was based on tbe cosmologicaJ presup- :-:
positions criticized by him. However. he "is not condemning the use of _:

,,. Rom 14:5-6, NRSV. :

~7 (n Gal4: 10, Paul warns bis readers not to "'observe special days, and months, and ·::
seasons. and ycar.s.," probllbly refi)rring to pagan festivals with an astrological back'- ',
grouttd. Otherwise, it is difficult to explain the refer~ce to "spccial y~" 11gailut Ii -)
Jewish background in the Diaspora, as Sabbath years and Jubilees are valid only in the ..'
land of Israel. Another, less probable but very c::ommon reading is to understand this ·.:
passage as refening to Jewish festivals that Jewish..Chcistian missioDllries tried to impo3e :
on Gentile Christians. similac to the situation pertaining in Colossians. In this case, it is .
almost c:enain lhat these Jewi.sh-Christian missionaries obsel'\led the festivals dleY ;
wanted to impose on others, includillg Yom Kippur. .· .·
331 T.he exact identity of the opponents of the author of Colossians is tl>nlrOVCI."$iaJ .. ;
Barthand Blanke, Colos&ians (pp. 37&-387) assUI)le that the opponents consider them,. S
selves to be Christians and have a strong affinity to the Old Testautent but are outside lhe :)
Colossian community. Stettler, Der Koloaserhymn11s, pp. 58-74, sees Jewish mystics and")
Torab·faithful Jews outside the community as opponents ofthe Epistle. ··
l$9 Col2:16-20, my translation based on the NRSV. On this passage, see O'BrieD,.. ·:
ColossiaM, Phtlemon, pp. 135-1!16; SchweiZer, Der Briefan die Kolosser, pp. 118-130(~
Barthand BlaDke, Colossia118, pp. 336-355. ·:1
 Yom KippJJI'lmagery I• the Eorl, Chriatian ImagiMire 217

;~ days or seasons ~ such; it is ~e wrong moti~~ involved when the

[bbsen'ance of the days 1s bound up wtth the recogrut1on of the eiemental
? . 'irits."340
~-NevilleTidwell suggests that Didache 14:1 attests to an observance of
~(;~ IGppur by this community. 341
f·' 1.t 1 On tbe Lord's Day of the LORD (~~:crcli JNPI«Ja\v öi JeqJiov) gather togethcr and
i.\' _ break bread and give tbanks, having fust confes.sed your sins so lbat your sacrifice
-,.__ -- tll8Y be pUR. 1 But let no one who hu a quam:l with a companion join you uotil
•- · lhey bave been rcconciled, solbat your saerifice may not be detiled. l Fortbis is
:f . the sacrifice conceming which has beeil said by the LOlD (\lrlö lC'UPiov). "In every
::r; ·• place and time offer UJ.e a pure sac:rifice, for I am a great king, says the LoRD
~.' · (Ml'o. ~ and my name is JDan'elous (8o.up.oiROv) among the oations"
~tr (Maladli I : 11.14).342
:~rding to Tidwell, the hapaxlegomenon md lectio difficilior m-ui lCU-
::~~v &t JCUPiou in the Hierosolymitanus of Didache 14:1 is a pleonastic
:~tism imitating 11n:1111 n::1111, one ofthe names ofYom Kippur.343 The use
~fli:UPiov without t.he article corresponds to the Septuagint's translati0118 of
~:.~Pecial superlative found in the Hebrew Bible using the Tetragrammaton:
i-~ÖA the Lord's Day of the LoRD," meaning "the most solem.n day of the
iUnd's days." The Syrian ChristiBn term Kt!pto:dj distinguishes the
l!bristian holiday from the Jewish Sabbath.344 Didache 14:1 is therefore
;~:St ~derstood as equivalent to "Sabbath of Sabbatbs," i.e. Yom Kippur.
the major topic of Didache 14. confession and reconciliation, matches the
:~ement in Mishnah Yoma 8:9 tbat "Yom Kippur atones for transgres"
:$iQns between a man and bis fellow man only after Ire has placated the fel-
_:iöw Jl}811." Furthennore, the marvelous name of the LORD plays an impor"
-~t rote in Didache 14 as weil as during t.he Yom Kippur temple ritual.
/fhe ritual meal alluded to would bave taken place on the eve of Yom
::tGppur.
~~: Tidwall's SUggestion does not convince me. While the confession, the
.feconciliation and the significance assigned to God' s name evoke the as-
j~ciation of Yom Kippur, the sacrificial common meal seems to take place
~~fi~:''tbe Lord's Day of the LoRD" ifjjelf and therefore comes closer to an
~~: .. :.-·.

;~~- O'Brien, Colotsiant, Philemon, p. 139.

:(}'1 .N. Tidwell., "Didache XIV:l (KATA KYPIAKHN &E KYPIOY) revisited," Jligiliae
~fhi'i$tianal1 53 (1999} 197--207.
*;~,. Didache 14:1-3, 1ransl. Holmes adapted to Tidwell's article.
;~\~ Seubove, pp. 16-17.
~~~ · This tenll appears also in cf. Rev 1:10; Ignatius. To th11 Magnuia/'18 9:1; Gospel of
~P~kr 9:35; 12:50; Aposto/ic CoMtitution& 7:30:1- for tbe text and a French translatfon
(,~ee M:. Metzger, Les Constitutions apostoliquu (3 :vols; SC 320, 329, 336; Paris 1985.
~!J&6, 1987), here SC 336, pp. 60-61.
218 Th~ Impact o/YDM Kippur on Christionity in the First ond Second Centvries

anti-ritual against Yom K.ippur similar to the pork barbeque that some
secular Jews hold on the Day of Atonement in our times.145 Furthermore,
though ''the Lord's Day of the LoRD" could be a pun on 11n:n11 n::1t11, the
sentence does not give any date. lt could a.s weil be Easter. If we under-
stand Jeatci 1Cllpta10\v oo K\ll)tOU in a pleonastic sense, as do the majority of
commentators. the meal takes place on a Sunday.346 Moreover, the addition
to the quotation of Malachi "in every place and time••341 supports such an
interpretation much better than does an understandlog of the day as being
Yom Kippu.r. Therefore, if there is any connection to Yom K.ippur in
Didache 14, it seems to me more likely tbat it presents Sunday a.s a sub-
stitut.ion for Yom Kippur-an interpretation that matches other Halakhot in
the Didache on fasting and the Sabbath as distinguishing the community
from (other) Jews.141
If Luke's community, parts of the Roman community and the opponents
of Colossians observed Yom Kippur,349 what about the various Jewish
Christian groups of the second and subsequent centuries? Even here, we
are entirely dependent on hypotheses, since the sources are not explicit
about any festival observed by Jewish Christians. Jam.es, tbe brother of Je-
sus, one of the leaders of the Aramaic-speaking Christian Jewish commun-
ity in Jerusalem until bis lyncbing in 62 ca, is closely assooiated with the
temple. As will become clear below, Hegesippus' depiction of James a.s a
permanently interceding high priest in tbe holy of holies might be under-
stood as polemicizing against the Jewish Cbristian observation of the fast
of Yom K.ippur as a single day of intercession.350 It appears that some Jew-
ish Christians stiU observed the Day of Atonement while others, even some
ciose to Jewish Christianity, considered the day obsolete for Cbristians.

34!1 Was the confession public as portrayed in Didache 4:14'2

3~ See, e.g. K. Nieckrwinuner, Di~ Didoche (Kommentar zu den Apostolischen
Vätern 1; Göltingen, 1993), pp. 234-240,esp. p. 23S; W. RordorfandA. Tuilier,Ladoc-
trine des do11Z1 apdtru (Didacltl). l11troduction, Texte, Traduction, Notu, Appendice lll
Inda (SC 248; Paris, 1978), p. 6~.
,., See R.P. Gordon, "Targumic Parallels lo Acts XIII18 and Didaehe XIV 3,.. Novum
Teslamentum 16 (1974) 285-289, here p. 287 referring to Targum Jonathan Mall:ll.
""' The Dtdache q11otes onlyMall:ll and 1:14, omitting 1:12-13, v~es that are often
used in anti-Jewish polemic:s: see Niederwimmer, Die Didach~, p. 240. However, verses
12 and 13 would not mateh the pr-esent Eucharistie context.
349 Unfornmatt.>ly, it remains unclear to wbich "appointed times and hours" (q,~u;
~~:alp(li; ~~:ai mpa~) lClement 40:1·-S is referring. ar which the Cbri.stian offerings are to bc
performed.
3 ~ See below, pp. 246-2.50.
 Yom Kippur Imagery in the Eorly Christian lmaginflirt 219

6.2 The Abolition of Yom Kippur by First- and Second-Century ChristiariS

At some point after Jesus' death, in different communities at different
times, some followers of Jesus ceased to obscrve Yom Kipp ur. Again. our
data are circumstantial and consist mainly of explicit polemies against
Yom Kippur. Herewe have to distinguish, however, between the negative
attitudes toward the Y om Kippur temple ritual and attitudes toward the rit-
ual of the people. Disregarding the temple ritual does not mean neglecting
the popular abstentions such as the fast. In other words. even if a tex:t con-
siders Christ's death as abolishing or replacing the temple ritual, this says
nothing about the attitude of its author and its readers toward the fast of
Yom K..ippur. Hengel made his above-cited statement in a discussion about
the attitude of Luke to the temple and the sacrificial cult of Yom Kippur
and deduced from this Luke's attitude toward the festival as such.:m How-
ever, even though the author of Luke-Acts polemicized against the sacri-
ficial cult he continued to respect the fast and prayer ofthe people on Yom
Kippur. Moreover, theory and practice do not always conveJ:ge. Even if
Luke rcgarded Chrlst's death as atoning - and this assumption is contro-
versial - he may have continued to observe the communal fast and prayer
of Yom K.ippur- just as other Jews and God~fearers fasted and partici-
pated in the prayer services of the Second Temple perlod when the high
priest was actually effecting atonement on behalf of them in the temple.
Of the first-century texts. only Barnahaa explicitly argues against the
popular participation in the fast, substituting for it the Eucharist:
Deapite the fact that a commandment was wrltten that "whosoever does not keep
the fast shall die the death,''332 tbe Lord coiDIIUUlded this [i.e. to eat], because be
himself w-<11 going to offer the vessel ofthe spirit as a sacrificc for our :.ins •.. you
alone shall eat, while the people fast and mourn in sackeioth and asttes." 3
This substitution may have been part of the proto-typology, i.e. it may
have occWTed very early. Beyond this passage, it is possible that the author
of Colossians is propagating the abolition of all festivals. 354 Nevertheless.
we cannot extrapolate froro these texts an anti-Yom Kippur attitude in
other communities - as shown in Luke and Romans. Only in lhe second
century are more voices raised explicitly against the fast ofYom Kippur.m
The anonymous Epistle to Diognet (second or third century CE) holds
forth:

m See above, p. 213.

s Cf. Lev 23:29.
3 2

m BarnubtJS 7:3.S.
, 54See also above, p. 216, note 337,on Gal4:10.
)5S See my earlier analy.sis of tbe ambiguous pbrase of Tertullian (above, p. 157,
note 40). Justin, notably, does not polcmicize against the "obsolete "fast ofYom Kippur.
220 The i.tllpact uf Yom Kipp~~r on Christianil)l mthe Fir!lt and SecOf'ld Centuri(Q :"·~

;;~!
And um I supposc that you are espec:ially anxious to hear why Christians do aot .:,J
worship in the .same way as the Jews. The Jews indeed, iruofar as they abstain't
from the kind of {pagan] worship described above, rightly clai.:n:l to we~rship tlii •)
one God ofthe universe aod tothink ofbim. a.s Master.... But with regard to tbeir ;~
qualms (voq103u.;) regarding mcats, and the super$tition (ÖiltGlÖO.q.lomv) concem~ -::
the Sabbath, and the false pretension (~~iclv) in cir<:umcision, and the hypo.·:';
crisy (liipmniuv) about the Fast (11\tö vqcrcsia~) aod the New Moon, I do not thinit. j
that you need to learn from me that they are ridiculous and not wonh a word. ,,. :3
.·.'~
Likewise Arlstides {117-161 CE): '·
Nevenheless they [the Jews] too emd from true lcnowledge and in lhe.it ;j
Imagination they think to serve God, wherea.s by their mode of observaoce it is tO .;:
the augels and not to God tbat their service is re.adered - as wben they celebratc . 1
Sabbatbs and New Moons, and feasts of Uoleavened Bread, and the Grea.t Fasr, ;
and Casting and circumcision aud the purification of food -things, however, which ·,;
lhey do oot observe perfectly.357 ' ·:

These are clear-cut polemies against observances regarded as Jewish anif._,;

therefore non-Cbristian, inclnding the fast of Yom Kippur. We do not, ;:
however, have lhe means to cstimatc how many people stood behind the .:
one position or the other in the second century. '
Further evidence in favbr of the abolition of Y om Kippur has been seen '
in the typological interpretations of the temple cult. Certainly, this tllcl>
logical argument has some weight to it as mademanifest by the polem.iGs
in Barnabas. Origen and Chrysostom, too, will use this argument to try to
convince Christians observing Yom Kippur not to do so.3s8 Regarding ~
first-century texts with allegorical and typological interpretations of thc :
Yom Kippur temple ritual, however. we cannot simply read into all o('
them a negative stance toward the Jewish ritual. At this point. I would like ·,;
to recall the list of four possible relationships between a ritual and its inter- ·
pretation, mentioned in the introduction:359 •
a) Interest in and support for the ritual by proposing a new rationale . ·::
b) Nentral disinterest in the realities, sometimes in favor of a. more \
spiritualized Ievel
)
c) Substitution of the ritual for temporary constraints , ~:
d) Substitution ofthe ritual for theological and sociological reasoas

3!f6Dlf1gnet 3:1--4:1, transl. Holmes.

357 Syriac Aristides, Apf1logy, 14:4, my ttanslation after ANF. Cf. the ltalian translation
in C. Alpigiano, Aristide di Atene. Apologia (Biblioteca Patristica 11; Florem:e, 1988),
p. 113; and the German in E. Hennecke, Dte Apologie da Arl8tides (Texte und Untersu"'
cbungeo 4:3; Leipzig, 1893), p. 35.
3"' See below, pp. 265--272 aD.d278-279.
ss' See above, pp. 6-7. ·•
~:} Yom KippKT Jmag~~ry fnthe .Early Clvlrtian lmaginaire 221

~one of the CbJ!stian .Jewish writings invest~gated ~splays the first atti-
~~. as exemphfied Ul 1Enoch, nor the third attitude, favored by the
~t.bbls. Yet Paul. who considered the t~~pl~ ~rvice to be among t~e God-
~S;:vc:n gifts (R~mans 9:4) when allegonzmg It tn Roman~ 3:25 and tn ?ala-
f~tiaDS3:10.13, ISprobably an example ofthe second atbtude, supporting a
~kaore spiritual worship- simila.r to Philo.360 As noted above, Paul does not
~~bolisb the observance of Jewish festivals in Rome. Most of the Christian
~~Wrilings invcstigated in thls chapter belon~ to the f~urth group. We b~ve
~:·8lreadY seen that Barnabas and Tertulhan combmed harsh polem1cs
~~st the temple with criticism of the fast. We ha~e no information ~
~ilud.irlg tbe stance of Hebrews or 1John towar~ Jewtsh ~rayer assembhes
~fo~ide tbe temple or toward the fast, yet therr typolog~es take a clearly
~ti-'temple stand ~ their imaginaires strive to consbuct a substitute foc
~~t."Perllaps. the same lS true for Matthew.

fi:~Prd the following four reasons as responsible for the decline of Yom
~~Kippur io the liturgical calendar of Christianity:
[;;-:;;,; Historically, the destruction of the temple ended the most solemn part
b;ftbe cult, the celebration of the high-priestly ritual. The destruction of the
bi~ple could be used not only as a theological argument, validating the
t:;:;Jttedictions of Jesus Or being interpreted IIS punishment for bis crucifixion.
~·'A:ccording to Luke's portrayal in Acts, the temple was the center ofwor-
r~·:·~bip ·fur many Christian Jews. In the temple. however, tbey bad to follow
:(tbe religious calendar of the establishment, particularly on Yom K.ippur.
: .; : •. Theologically, the vicarious atoning death of Christ decreased the im-
!:;p.ommce of other means of atonement and in tbe eyes of some made them
Fentirely void. At the beginning ofthe seeond century, the myth ofChrist as
(>high priest permanently interceding for bis followers in the heavenly holy
~-·()fbolies had won quite widespread attention and was considered by some
~-iiln appropriate and superior substitution. However, we should not ex.ag-
if~ the weight of the theological argument. A considerable number of
0~1hltd- and fourth-century Christians in Syria-Palestine celebrated Yom
~-)Qppur together with their Jewish neighbors. Origen. Chrysostom and
~:.":!i.'~:·.·

~~·~~~~~ :

~~~ Phllo and 4Moccabees 17 solved tbe question how to achieve atonement in a place
~f:(?hilo) or t~ (4Maccabees), wherc lhc temple is o11t of reach in most in.stances in a
i'j\;~lar way to Paul in Romans 3:25. This was true also for the proto-Christian com.m1111-
. · · I)Utside Palestine and especially for thosc who disregarded the temple. The discus-
. !•. . 'aii to whether "the theology of the cross" led to an mti-temple attitude or an aoti-
~~le attitude led to a theology of the cross narrows the histodcal situation to a theo-
~~ question. But tbere arc DlaSlY more factors - historical, liturgical aod sociological
~~-·I argue below.
222 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Chri:stianity in the First and Second Centuries

Byzantine legal texts provide ample evidence for this. 361 While these texts
demonstrate that the leading theologians considered observation of Yom
Kippur to be anti-Christian, a large part of the population continued to be
attracted to this means of atonement without perceiving the observation to
be theologically problematic. This is true, as weil, for Jewish Christians
who may have regarded the death of Jesus as atoning and yet kept on
observing Yom Kippur.
Liturgically, a fast and intercessionary prayers could be observed on any
given day in the year, prefcrably on a theologically meaningful datesuch
as around the memorial day of Jesus' death. Jesus' intercession in the
heavenly holy of holies was ongoing and could be remernbered at any
place or time, making not only the geographical but also the chronological
anchoring of Yom Kippur u.nnecessary. Fasting and prayer for atonement,
too, were possible throughout the whole year. Consequently, communal
fast could be moved to any other date, preferably one of religious impor-
tance. The phenornenon of a pre-pascbal fast from Frlday to Sunday
moming (the only early Christian complete abstention from fbod and drink
Iasting more than 24 hours)362 probably has to be tmderstood in this way,
as a transformed continuation -of the fast accompanying the atoning service
ofthe Christian high priest in the heavenly holy ofholies.363
Sociologically, Gentiles who became Christians without an intermediate
station as God-fearers via the synagogue reinforced the introduction of
pagan religious behavior unconnected to Jewish festivals. 364 The Iatter
point is important for understanding the difference between Christian
Jewish, Jewish Christian and Gentile ChristiBn communities. The question
of whether to observe the Jewish autumn festivals was one not onJy of
theology but also of collective tradition, otherwise it is difficult to explain

Je< See pp. 273-277, below.

:lQ2 I would lilte to thank Stephane Verbeist for drawing my attention to this point.
363 On the pre-pascbal fast and Yom Kippur, see Tertulliau, On FtL!fting 2:13-14; On

Praysr 18. In general, see Irenaeus apud Eusebius, Hi.ftory of the Chvch 5;24:17tf;
Justin, First Apology 61; Traditio Apostotica 33 ( ed. Botte, SC llbls, pp. 114-115); .Apa-
~tolic_ Con:tfrutions 7:23:4 ( ed. Mel:lger, SC 336, pp. 50-51); Didracalia 21 ( ed. Vööbus.,
CSCO 407, pp. 214:&-217:19 (text]; CSCO 408, pp. 199:1-201:20 [transl.J). A detailed
investigation of Didascalia 21 is included in G.A.M. Rouwhom, Les lrymnes pascalu
d'Ephrem de Nisibe. Analyse thio{ogigue et recherche sur l'ivchllion de Ia fore pa.:cale
a a
chretienne Nisibe et Ede~se et d1111S quelque:t EgliJes voisine:t au quatf·ii:me siecle
(2 vol$; Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 7; Leideu, 1989), vol. l, pp. 157-190. On
the connection to Mark 2:20, see F.G. Crcmer, Die Fastenansage Jesu. Mlc 2,20 und
Parallelen in der Sicht der Patristischen und Scholastischen Exegese (Bonner Biblische
Beiträge 23; Bonn., 1964), pp. 21-40.
364 See abovc; p. 214, note 331, for references in Philo, Josephus and the Palestinian
Talmud on pagan Ood-fearen observing Yom Kippur rituaJs.
 Yom Kippur Imagery in the Early Clvistian Imaginaire 223

the continuation of Yom K.ippur observance in Jewish Christian communit·

ies who conceived of Jesus' death as vicarious atonement in the same way
as Gentile Christians did. Obviously, the argumentations of Paul, Hebrews
and Colossians influenced Christian thought and behavior. Yet the clue as
to why particulady these texts were successfullies not only in the quality
of their argument but also in the soeiological and historical circumstances
of the disparate types of early Christian communities. The theologic:al
arguments were probably more convincing to a Gentile audience in the
Diaspora. especially when the temple no longer exist.
6.3 The History ofTraditions
We can now return to the question of what can be leamt from the early
Christian texts about the different attitudes toward the ritual and imagi-
naire of Yom Kippur in the temple and outside it. Three general theologi-
cal and liteary developments have to be mentioned concemiog Yom K.ip-
pur in Christian Jewish thought in the early decades of the first centw:y, the
thirties and forties. First, some Cbristian Jews conceived of Jesus' death as
vicarious atonement. 36' Second, prophetic passages and motifs from com-
mon legends served some Christian Jews who, in telling tbe story of Jesus'
Passion compensated in their own way for the Iack of detailed historical
knowledge with prophetic passages, or rendered known historical details
theologically meaningful. Third, parts of Second Temple Judaism's ex:pec-
tations of a (high-)priestly Messiah were transferred to Christ.
In the proto-typology of Barnabas, the conceplions of Jesus as sin offer-
ing, scapegoat and an allusioo to bis high priesthood all cluster under the
umbrella of Yom Kippur. It is diffieult to decide ifthe proto-typology was
developed by people in a Semitic or a Greek environment who were
familiar with the details of the ritual; whetber by their priestly profession.
observanc:e or acquaintanc:e with an early form of Seder Awdah. In its
earliest fonn, this typologic:al exegesis of Second Temple ritual regarded
Hala.khah as a divine source of prophecy. an assumption that was tumed
upside down by the heirs of tbe tradition. Probably this did not yet entail
an anti-temple attitude as in Barnabas or Hebrews.

3" Sevcral f&ctors causcd this development, including such cross-cultural Mediterra-
neall concepts as the Noble Death and the Pharmakos, but also more specific Jewish
idell$ such as the death of the righteous and sacrificial understandings of mart)TS' deaths.
To narrow this concept to an intra-Jcwish devclopment completely detached from ils
environmental culture is a rather improbable reduction of the evidente regarding tbe
setting of Second Temple Judaitm as a aeative religion llt the crossroads of many
enltures.
224 The Impact of Yom Kippur on Clrristianity in the First and Second Centuries

If the proto-typology was not originally fonnulated in Greek, it must

have entered a Greek context at some point to be received by Barnabas,
Justin and Tertullian. Possibly it is at this point also that the anti-temple
tendency was added - an influence that could be connected to such groups
as those that emerged around Stephen. It is not clear when the concept of
the Eucharist as anti-type to the fasting on Yom Kippur entered the proto-
typology. It must be assumed that any group holding this opinion conse-
quently did not observe the fast of Yom Kippur - a development more
probable in the second stage of the tradition since the frrst stage rcgarded
post-biblical Halakhah as a cherished source ofprophecy.
Greek-speaking Christian Jcws developed the i).aoti!ptov-typology of
Romans 3:24125-26*. This must have happened at some point before 56 CE
in a community with which Paul had been in contact - i.e. in any city from
Antiach to Corinth. If Paul's source already had an anti-temple attitude,
the setting of the fonnula could be the same as the Greek proto-typology of
Barnabas or Hebrews.
In a second stage, Paul adapted Yom Kippur traditions in two letters
written araund 55 CE. 366 Considering hisrare use oftemple cult metaphors,
this indicates the relatively serious importance attached to Yom Kippur
temple ritual among these typologies.367 This appeal of the Yom Kippur
temple ritual matches Romans 9:4, where Paul reveals how highly he re-
gards the temple service by subsum.ing it under thc God-given gifts.
The cross-cultural phenomenon of Pharma/cos rituals may havc served
as a catalyst for Paul's Christological scapegoat typology in Galatians,
perhaps also for other New Testament passages such as John 1:29 and
IPeter 2:24. lt piobably did so for the reception of the proto-typology of
Barnabas in Justin, Tertullian and Hippolytos and of the scapegoat typoc
logies in Origen.368 Probably for the same reasons of an easily understand-
ab Je rationale, Matthew reformÜlated his Barabbas episode along the lines
ofthe Second Temple scapegoat rituat. 369
In the third stage, Hebrews {60-90 CE) and Barnabas {around 100? CE)
certainly polemicize against the temple, as most probably does lJohn {90-
100 CE). Finally, to the authors all of the discusscd texts - the proto-
typology of Barnabas {and Barnabas itself), Romans 3:24/25-26*, He-
brews, IJohn, Paul and Matthew - attribute a special importance to cultic

366 Rom 3:24-26* and Gal3:10.13.

367 By way ofcomparison: Passover is mentioned only once in lCor 5:7.
368 See pp. 171-173, above.
369 Matthew is usually considered as writing to a Jewish-Christian audience, one that

inc1uded Gentiles, perliaps in Syria around 90 CE. See Schnelle, Einleitung in das Neue
Testame11t, pp. 261-264. Others date Matthew slightly earlier, see ibidem.
 Yom Kippur lmagery in the Early Christion lmaginaire 225.

sacrificial atonement achieved by means of a mediator. However, it would

be wrong to conclude that Yom Kippur outside the temple had no impact
on earliest Christianity. Colossians 1:12-20 may be one such case; the
influence of aSeder Avodah on Barnabas may be another. Ultimately, the
corpus of Second Temple Yom Kippur prayers is too small for a reason-
able degree of certainty to be reached on this point.

Concluding Thoughts

Yom Kippur had a decisive influence on the formulation of the early

Christian myths of the atoning death of Christ and bis permanent interces-
sion in the heavenly holy of holies. Three major typologies depict Jesus as
scapegoat and sin-offering goat (Barnabas), high priest, veil and sacrifice
{Hebrews) and kapporet {Romans). All of them belong to the formative
period and were probably in use already before Paul.370 This threefold
impact of Yom Kipp ur on the formation of the earliest Christian
conceptions of Christ's vicarious atoning death has not received sufficient
emphasis in previous scholarship.
Regarding Barnabas, the age and importance of the proto-typology has
not been acknowledged by earlier investigations of Yom Kippur's impact
on earliest Christianity - those by Norman H. Young, J.P. Scullion or
Wolfgang Kraus, who approached the topic from a canonical viewpoint.
Barnabas' importance for understanding earliest Christology is not less
than that of Hebrews and Romans, even if its impact was smaller. Any
belittling of Barnabas' importance relegates the early Christian use of its
Christological scapegoat typology to an unjustifiably marginal status. On
the other band, despite the direct influence of Barnabas on the Passion nar-
rative in the Gospel of Peter, an influence of the scapegoat rite on all
canonical Passion narratives {Crossan's thesis) is unlikely. Conceming the
Epistle to the Hebrews, I have proposed a new theory ofemergence ofthe
high-priestly Christology, with Yom Kippur as root rather than as late
frame. As for Romans, I have argued for one of the two "classic" interpre-
tations ofRomans 3:25, i.e. the typologization ofthe kapporet. Yet unlike
most others, I see no compelling reasons to assume that Paul wanted to
advocate a Substitution ofthe temple ritual for Yom Kippur. All three of
these texts used earlier Yom Kippur traditions, making Yom Kippur one of
the first cultic imageries to be used in the formation of the Christian
mythology.

370 l.e., the proto-typology behind Barnabas (including the allusion to Jesus' high.

priesthood in Zecb 3) and the sourcc ofPaul, Rom 3:24-2S*.

226 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Ch1'istian.lty in the Fi"tt ond Second Cet~tflriu

lJohn compares Jesus to the atonement, using Yom Kippur imagery.

This interpretation belongs to a 1ater stage in the development of Christian
Judaism, probably the end ofthe first centuzy.
Beyond these texts, further passages include less obvious allusions to
Yom Kippur. Schwartz' argument for a connection ofGalatians 3:10.13 to
the scapegoat ritual is very plausible and may be strengthened by fwther
arguments. I propose a new reading associating also Matthew 27:15-23
with the scapegoat ritual. Other allusions to the scapegoat rationale may be
seen in the Lamb of God (John 1:29) and the Christological application of
the Servant Song in 1Petcr 2:24; but the arguments for this view are much
less compelling. Finally. an influence on the Christological songs of
Philippians and. in particular, Colossians is possible, but such a claim
needs to be strengthened by more evidence.
Sources of Jewish influence on the early Christian imt~ginaite encom-
pass a range of types. Some of the earliest Christian texts on Yom Kippur
(Barnabos, Hebrews, Matthew) betray intimate knowledge of temple rit-
ual. The justiftcation of Jesus' high priesthood with Zechariah 3 probably
reftects Second Temple Judaism's imaginaire ofYom Kippur with its link-
age of Zechariah 3 to Yom K.ippur. Hebrews seems tobe close to apoca-
lyptic traditions of the high-priestly ascent to the presence of God in the
heavenly holy of holies and the cosmological fight against the Ieaders of
the evil powers. No Christian Jewish Wiiting seems to have been influ-
enced by the Bible, alone, detached :from oral or written traditions and
from the rites of the contemporary Yom Kippur.
The main importance of th.e Yom K.ippur passa.ges in the New Testa-
ment lies in their becoming "the canon within the canon." Beginning with
Origen, readers approach Paul primarily vja Hebrews, which until modem
times would be a.ssO<..iated with bis name. Romans 3 is understood as a
summary of the exposc in Hebrews, rendered Paul the theologian of Sub-
stitution and sacrifice- to a far greater extent tban he indeed wa.s.371 Most
important, the rationale of Cbristian ritual is explained mainly on tbe basis
of the conceptions of Hebrews. The celebrant of the Eucharist is a vicar of
the heavenly high priest, the church is the temple, and the Eucharist is
Christ's sacri:fice.312
Two factors may account for this strong impact ofYom Kipput on early
Cbristian myth.ology. First, Yom Kipp ur was of central importance for any
Jew. It was bighly mythologized and connected to eschatological expecta-
tions of a priestly redeemer. lts atoning function could be easily connected
to the rationale of Jesus' death as vicarious atonement. Second, from a

m See pp. 265-266, below.

m See pp. 269-272, below.
 Yom Kippvr /mQgery in the Early Christio" lm"giMire 227

cross-cwtural perspe<:tive, sacri.ficial categories a.re more easily transla-

table than refmed allusions to local mythologies such as those of the Old
Testament. lt is therefore possible that one reason for the spread of the
bigh-priestly Christology and the scapegoat typology was that they were
useful in the Cbristian mission to the pagans. While the frrst factor applies
to the shaping of the mythology, the second explains its aceeptance and
elaboration.
Most Christian Jewish sources- Hebrews, Barnaba.$, lJohn and prob-
ably Matthew- polemicize against the temple ritual of Vom Kippur and
presume its substitution by Christ' s self-sacrifice and by Cbristian wor·
ship. Yet Acts27:9 demonstrates that some Christian communities
continued to observe Vom K.ippur's fast, among them Luke's community,
opponents of the author of Colossians and part of the Roman community
(Romans 14:5-6}. Of all first-century Christian Jewish writings, only
Bornabos betrays opposition to the popular fasL That tbis aversion was
probably expressed also in the proto-typology shows tbat different Chris-
tian Jewisb g:roups could :from the beginning of the Jesus movement until
at least the end ofthe first century hold opposite attitudes to Yom K.ippur's
fast. Paul takes an intermediate position, leaving it up to the individual
foliower of Jesus to decide which festivals to observe. Other individuals
and communitics did not adopt the fast or stopped observing it for any of
various reasons: tbeological (conception of Juus' atoning death and hu
permanent heavenly interce.$sion), historical (the de.$lruction of the tem~
ple), liturgical ifasting is more individual and not bound to a wor.$hip
structure) andlor sociological (increasingly Gentile Church). Nevertheless,
as will be seen in the chapter on Christian autumn festivals, a number of
Christians continued celebrating Vom Kippur, and other Jewish festivals,
'~Aith their Jewish neighbors until at least the fourth century. 313

m See pp. 273-277, below.

 Chapter 5

Y om Kippur Imagery in Gnosticism and in

Early Christian Mysticism

The imagery of the high priest's entrance into the holy of holies Wll!!l
widely used as a mytholegumenon in soteriology, in initiation ri:tuals of
Valentiman Christianity andin Clement ofAlexandria•s mysticism. These
Christian Gnostic and mystic traditions take up the common Jewish image
describing divine visions in apocalypticism and in the Hekhalot literature;
Clement also adopts Philonic Q.oncepts. Jn this chapter, the :first section cx-
amines the use ofthe higb priest's entrance in the Valentiman conception
of the esehatological entcy of Jesus and his followers into the Pleroma. The
second section deals with the application of this mytholegumenon in de~
scriptions of the initiation ritual of the bridal chamber in the Gospel of
Philip. The final section analp..es brietly the mystical vision of God in
Clement of Alexandria. showing its dependence on the entrance of the high
priest in Valentinian soteriology and PhiJonic mysticism.
Two fmdings make tbis investigation an important contribution to the
guiding qucstion of the intlucnce of Yom Kippur on early Cbristianity.
First. the Valentiman Christian authors do not simply adopt the mytho~
legurnenon from their Iewish tradition, rather they return to Leviticus 16
and post-biblical traditions for embellishlng the Yom K.ippur motifs in the
tex.ts, i.e. Yom Kippur remains an important source of inspi.ration. Second,
the initiation ritual of the bridal chamber is the earliest use of Yom K.ippur
imagery in a Christian ritual. Of general interest beyond the impact of
Yom Klppur is the position of Valentinian texts in the history of the
tradition of the proto~mystical heavenly joumey with regatd to the tbree
forms of mysticism: Philo. Hek:halot Iiterature and Clement.
The sources investigated include two Nag Hammadi codiccs - tbe Gos-
pel ofPhilip (NHC 2:3), and tbe Valentinian Exposition (NHC 11 :2) - and
traditions from three different schools of Valentinian Gnostic Christianity
(Theodotus, Marcus and Heracleon) preserved in the polemies of three
"mai.nstream." Christian writers (Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus and Ori-
 Yom Kipptn' Imagery in Gno.stlci.lm andin Early Chri1tian Myntcism 229

gen). 1 The chronological relationship of the Nag Hammadi texts to the

writings quoted by the Church Fathers is unclear. The three teachers-
Tbeodotus, Marcus aod Heracleon, pupils ofValentinus -lived at the be-
ginning of the second half of the second centuty. The Gospel of Philip is
dated to the third century bot is usually understood as being a collection of
earlier sources.

1. The High Priest's Entrance in Valentinian Soteriology

The ear1iest Valentinian texts with the high priest's entrance are found in
two passages in Clement's Excerpts from Theodotus (Excerpta ex Theo-
doto),2 chapters 27 and 38. They describe an eschatological approach to
God in thc picture of the high priest entering tbe holy of holies. Since the
Valentinia.n authorship of Excerpts from Theodolus 21 is disputed and it
may have originated with either Theodotus or Clement, it will be discussed
in the third section, on Clem.eot.3 Here, I will focus on the undoubtedly
Valentiman chapter 38:4
A) A river of f~re goes forth Wider the throne' of Topos md ßows illto the void
(sU; tö n...Ov) of the creation which is Gehenna, 6 and it is never filled, though tbe
fare flows ftom the beginDing ofcreation. And Topos itselfis fiery. 7 Therefon; he

1 I speak ofthree Gnostic teaclms for the sak11 of aimplicit)'. lt is usll&ll)' assumed
that iD Excerpts ft'o• Thcodohl3 Clemeut collec:ted the works of sevcral Valentini«<l
Onostie thlnlcers.
• Theodotus has been preserved only illdirecdy, in &cerpt• ft'om Th~Wdotus by Cle-
ment of Alexandria. Due to the chlll'Kter of the book it is often unclear wbich portions
derive &om Tbeodotu.s (or other Valentiniu 10~m:es) and which belong to Clemellt's
commenUr)'. 1 used the Greek edition and French nanslation by F. Sagnard, Cllment
d'Alcr.antlrie. Extraits de Thiodote. Texte gJ"ec, introductum, trad11ction et notu (SC 23;
Paris, 1948), aud the sometimes less trustworthy English translation by R.P. Casey, The
Excerpta ex Theodoto of Clenrent cf Alexandria. Edited wilh Translation, lntroduction
anti Notes (Studies aad Documents l; I..oodoo, 1934).
3 See pp. 240-243, below.
4 For CIL1I' purposes it is not importaat whether the anonymaus quotation is by Theo-

dotus, as mo.st scholus agree. or by somoone else, as is possible: cf. Sagnard, Climent
d'Aiexandrle. ütraits dtr Thiodote, pp. 140-141.
5 Cf. 1Enoch 14:19 "And ftom undemeath the throne came forth strcams of bluing
fire" wut Dan 7:9-10 "a river offire streamed and came fonh ftom before bim."
' Fo.r a similar pi""ttlre of the fiery stream, the sweat of the m•n flowing &om the
throne to tbe Geheona, see hHag 13b as ex.egesis ofDaa7:9--10. Ioacbim.Jeremias traces
the "void of the creation" to a popular etymology ofthe Gehi:nnom as arn K'l (i.e. "Tal
des Vergeblichen") referred to in Hofiu.s, Der Vorhang vor dttlll Tlll'on Galtes, p. 15,
note 73.
7 Cf. e.g. Deut 4:24 for the depiction of God as fiery.
230 The Impact o/Yo111 Kippw on Chri:tianily in the First and Second Centuria

says (q)l}Ot), he bas a veil (tc«T«:JlS'fGO!J.«) in order that the (spirits] may not be de-
stroyed by the sight [of him}. And only the arehange I e32ters to him {116wx; lii o
~pxO.yyel.O<; tioiPXnllLx",c; 11vt6v).
B) As an image for this, also the high priest entered the holy of holies once
every year (oii 11:111:' ehc6v11 ~:ai ocij)Xlt:pet)o; ia~ ~of.l i:Yl«vtW ~~ Tci iiyw Tti'lv G:ywv
ei<JQc1).t
C) Thence (ivOsv) Iesus, called for help, also sat down with Topos (auve~~:olliollll
1:(9 T611:4p), that the [spirits] migbt remain and not rlse (xpoovo.otiJ) before him, and
that he migbt tarne ( i]J.&1lplila1J) Topos and provide (114pU<IXIJ) the seed with a passage
(öio6ov) into the Pleroma. IO

The scene, w'hich appears in the context of a description of the netherworld

and the destiny of hylics. psychics and pneumatics, can be described as
follows: The demiourgos (Topos) sits on the throne in the holy of holies.
He is covered by a veil to protect the pneumatics. who would be destroyed
by the sight of him. 11 The pneumatics bave to cross this dangcrous zone
(the holy of holies) to reach the Pleroma. This transit is possihle only with
the aid of Jesu.s the high priest and the angel of the Pleroma, who comes
down to placate the demiourgos.
The entrance of the high priest to the holy of holies signi:fies the incar-
nation of Jesus in the psychic Ghrist. 12 The demiourgos is a dangerou.s
deity but not an evil one. given that he will not be annihilated; after the
entraoce of the seeds to the Pleroma, he will stay in the eighth realm and
inherit the place of Sophia. !3
This description has a tripartite structure: an apocalyptic tradition (A), a
reference to the biblical typology (B) and an explanation (C) that incorpo-
rates A and B in the Valentiman mythos. Tbe juxtaposition of the Gnosti-

8 Excerpls from Theodotus 38 is the only Valentinian passage to indude lhe

chronological refereoce to a~ too evUI.vtoü, i.e. the escbatoJogical Yom Kippur, in the
typology. This may be for its dearly eschatological coneept over and. against rnore
ambivalent or dearly non-eschatological concepts in the other Valentinian texts.
9 Cf. Heb 9;7a; c~ U ·niv liruripuv [G!Ctlvitvl ti~ 'toiJevtautoup.(}voc; 6äpz~. Yet

the similarity betweeo the two pas.sages is verj generat Any allusion to the Epistle to the
Hebrews might rather derive from thc epitomizing Clemc:Dt; sce pp. 232, note 17, below.
10 l have made slight changes to Casey's translation, b&sed on Sagnard's edition.
11 Notably, Theodotus does not dtaw upon the ceniral act of the apocalyptic visionary,
who joh•s the heavenly liturgy in Iris prayer.
11 As is stated, for example in Excerpts from Theod0111s :S9:2-3: "And wben he came
into the region of Topos, Iesus found to clothe hirnself in the foretold Christ, whom lhe
Prophetsand tbe Law a1111ounced a.s an image ofthe Savior. But even this psychic Christ
that he put on was invisible, md it was necessary for him when he came into the world to
be seen here, tobe selzed, tobe a citizen, and. to hold on to a sensible body. A body,
therefore, was spun for him out of an invisible psyc:bic substanee and anived in the world
of tbe senses empowered by a divine preparation" (my trao.slation, baso:d on Cascy).
13 Cf. F.xcerptsfrom Theodotus 34.
 Tom Kipp71r lmagery in Gnosticism andin Ear/y Christitm Mystkism 231

cizing interpretation (C) with the apocalyptic tradition (A) modifies the
latter extensively. Its main point bas shifted completely. The scopos is no
Ionger the description of a "mystical" experience or a heavenly joumey to
leam about cosmological secrets, but an eschatological myth. Furthermore,
central features are changed, si:milar to the shift in the biblical creation
myth in Gnostic interpretation. Ood has been downgraded to demiourgos. a
jealous minor deity who is an obstaele to the true aim ofthe ascent; and the
entrance to the throne is perceived as merely a step on the path to salvation
in the Pieroma and to the final unification with God.
One of the sources of Excerpts from Theodotus 38 was a Jewish mysti-
cal text; 14 in Scholem's words: "§§ 37-39 ofthe Excerpta ex Theodoto are
all soaked with Merkabah mysticism." 1' lndeed, the chapter appears tobe
the oldest source for some tenns and conceptions attested only much later
in Jewish literature; E:rcerpts from TheodotJIS 38 therefore manifests an
intermediale state between apocalyptic texts and the mysticism of the
Hekhalot literature. 16

14 Hofius calls Ezcerpts from Theodotvs 38 a (Jewish) non-Onostic te:xt tbat was

in.serted into its ValentiD.ian context; Scholcm and Lueken spealc of Jewish elements or
tradition. Hofius, Der Vorhang vor dem Thron G()ltta, pp. tS-16; S<:holem, Jewish
Gnosticism. Merfcabah M)l3ticism, and Talmudic Tradition, pp. 34-35; Luelcen, Michael,
pp. 96-97.
15 Schalem. Jewllh Gnosticism, Merkabt1h Mysticism, and Ta/mudic Tradition, p. 34,
note 10. It was Hem-i Marrou, who in a review of the second edition af Major Trends in
Jewish Mystkism drew Scholem's attention to this passage: see ReVlie du Moyen Age
Latill S (1949) 166-172, here p. 169. Schalem adds tbat "Jewish elements ••. clearly
represent a deterioration ofthe Jewish tradition ... partly misunderstood or reinterpreted."
Whüe most of dle coocepts appear in the prophetic visions and apocalyptic
beave.nly joumeys (the fiery river, the .fiery God, the throne, the restric&ed aecess), and
1E'ltoch 14 is certainly very c:IO&e to this text, the closest parallel is probably the famous
collection of passages on heavenly asceat in bHag l3a-14a.
16 For e:xample, TopO$ recalls the Hobrew term D1p1.1:1 as a desigoat!on of God,
employed here as a te.rm for the d•miourgos: see Ezcerpts from TheofkJhls 34; J7; 59;2.
See also Scholem, Jewish Gnostici:lm, Merlraboh Mystir:üm. and Talm11dic Tradilio11,
pp. 34-35. The expression o OpOvo<; totlTolWV, however, whieh Scholem linked with lKD::J
D1i'fl ')w and whicb is quoted by Hofius et al. u proof of fil.rther terminologiul proximity,
d.oes not appear in Schlfer's Coneordance, neitber did I fmd it on the Responsa Project
CD-Rom of Bar-llan University (Ver5ion 8). lts abseru:e in early Hebrew Iiterature pomt!
to a certain terminological distance! By far tbe most eommon teTJ.P is 1'T1D HO''·
The emended tenn -cci 1n'E\!jlrna most probably designates those augets who as in
JEnoch 14:21, arenot allowed to approach or look upon God. Tbe ÄPXand.o<; mayrefer
to the tnuiitioo of Michael as the angelic high priest in later texts: See Lueken, Michael,
pp. 96-97; and Scholem. Jewish Gnostlctsm, Merlrabah Mysticism, and Talm!ldic Tradi-
tion, p. 49, note 19. Scholem was apparently not aware of Lueken- otherwise he would
have quoted bim Wtead ofMarrou on p. 34.
232 Thelmpact of Yom Kipp'llr on Christlanity ln the First and Sec011d Centurie.r

The editors argue also for an influence of the Epistle to the Hebrews.
Yet this is by no means cJear. The only possible parallel is: •'the high priest
entered the holy of holies once every year," which is similar to
Hebrews 9:7: "into the second [tent], once a year only the high priest
[entered].t' 17 Yet the exp~ion is quite general; Philo employs a similar
one. 18 Moreover, even if one wants to argue on linguistic grounds, the sen~
tence may derive not from Theodotus bimself but from bis epitomist,
Clement of Alexandria. Other than this vague allusion, &cerpts from
Tlu4odotus 38 does not betray any specific infiuence from the Cbristology
of the Epistle to the Hebrews, and the differences and omissions are nu-
merous. No mention is made of Melchizedek, the sacrifice of bis blood, or
Christ as a veil. Moreover, the contents of the holy of holies are com-
pletely different. Hebrews does not use the term &illOor; to express the pas-
sageway to God. lt is therefore pos.sible that the strong priestly
connotations in the Jewish apocalyptic traditions of the vision of God 19
triggered Theodotus to connect it with a high-priestly ChristoJogy known
to bim independently of Hebrews. In. that case, the Epistle to the Hebrews
as weH as chapter 38 are both independent witnesses to the same Jewish
apocalyptic ttadition. ._

2. The High Priest's Entrance and the Ritual ofthe

Bridal Chamber
The image ofthe high priest's entrance into the holy ofholies is connected
to the Valentinian ritual of the bridal eha:mber as described in the Gospel of
Philip.M The Gospel of Philip's employment of the imagery of the high

FinaUy, I do not Jcnow or any earlier attestation for the protective or conooaling
function ofthe veil in front of ~ divine throne in a visiooary text prior to Excerp/1 from
Theodotus 38. A veil ofthe Dvir appe11n in the Songs ofthe Sabbath Sacriftce 4Q405 15
ii- 16, lines 3 md 5; however, without a concealing function (at teasl in the: preserved
text). On the veil in other early Iewish texts, &ee Hofius, Def' Vorhang vor dem Thron
Gottu.
17 Eixcerpt:s from Theodotus 38: 0 apztll~ rixl&l; 'tOfl ivl4ut01l cic_; tri iiTI~ t&v i.yicov
ticr(ltt. Heb 9:7: Eie_; öE -cl\v 6wtip«v 4,.~ toü ivuunoü jlOvOt; 6 lipxlepEIY,.
ra Legatio ad Gahml 306 tti li8UN ...• dc_; ii cixl&l; ~o1l iv1a.moü o!iSv«~ it:pW:; dainna\
·n.t VIJO'tEi~. ·
ltFor the priestly ccnnocations of the apocalyptlc visioo, see e.g. Himmeltärb, A.scenJ
to Heaven in JewiJh and Christian A.poca/ypse:s, pp. 2~25 and 29--46.
20 The Gospel of Philip. f01111d in Nag Hammadi, i.s eommonly placed in a Valentinian

Gnostic provenance, probably in Syria. See tbe introductioo to the Gospel of Phlilp by
Wesley lsenbeFg in I.M. Robinson, The Nag Rommodi Library in Engli:sh (Leiden,
 Yom Kippur llllagery in Gnostlcism andin Et1rly Chrisliarr My.sticum 233

priest's entrance to the holy of holies addresses the central qu.estion ofthe
impact of Yom Kippur on early Christianity.
Students of Onosticism knew the ritual of the bridal chamber already
before the Gospel of Philip was unearthed in Nag Hammadi) for example
from several passages in Irenaeus• A.dversus Haereses. 21 Yet Irenaeus does
not link the temple images to the bridal c.hamber. Such an association ap-
pears for the first time in the Gospel ofPhilip in a form closely connected
to the traditions of Theodotus.
69 There wcre three buildings spccifically for sacrif.~ee in Jerusalcm. The one fae.
ing the west was called "the holy." Another, facing sooth, was called "the holy of
the hol:y." Tbe third, facing cast, was called "tbe holy of the holies," the plac~
where only the high priest enters. Baptism is ''the holy" boilding. Redcmption is
the "holy of ihe holy." "The holy of the holies" is the bridal cham.ber. Baptism
includes the resurrcction [and the] redemption; the :redemption (takes plaee) in the
bridal chamber. But the btidal chamber is in tbal whieb is superior to [, ..J you (sg.)
will not find [.•.] are those who pray [...] Jerusalem. [ ...] Jerusalem who [...] Jeru-
salem, [...] those calted the "holy of the holies" [... the) veil was .rent, {•.. ] bridal
r...
chamber except the image }170 above. Because of this its vei) was rent from top
to bottom. For it was fittiog for some from below to go upward. Tbc powers do not
see those who are tlothed io ihe perfect light, and consequently arenot able to
detain them. One will clothe hlmselfin this light sacramentllly in the union. n
The Gospel of Philip imagines a Jerusalem with three sanctuaries having
openings to different directions (west, south, east) and ofincreasing sanc-
tity, and associates them wiCh three rituals (baptism, Redemption/Eucharist
and the "bridal cha.mber'''). Most probably, thls triparrite structure imitates
the threefold sacred geography of the Jerusalem temple with devir, zevul
and ulam. Such a threefold partition appears also in a Heracleon23 - if we

•19&8). On the perplexing ritual ofthe bridal ehamber, see De Coninck, "Eotering God's
Presence," cspecially pp. SOS-52l with extensive b!bliograpby. One eould add J.J. Buck-
ley, "A Cult-Myslery io 'The Gospel ofPhilip'," Jour"al of Biblical Literabue 99 (1980)
569-581; and the Valentiniao inscription interpreted by P. Lampe, "Ao Ear1y Cbristian
lnscription in the Musei. Capitolini," Shldia T1reologica. Scandi"CIJ~ian JoNrnal of
711eo/ogy49 (1995) 79-92.
21 See Against the Heruies 1:7:1; 1:13:3-4; 1:21:3. Ireoaeus connects tbe ritual espe-
cially to the figure oftbe Valentinian teacher Martus. On prcvious illterpretations afthe
ritual, see Bucldey, '"A Cult-Mystery in 'Tbe Gospel ofPbilip',~ pp• .575-579.
l2 Goapel of Philip 69:14-70:9, lsenberg's translation. Unfortunately, in tb.is passage
the man1111cript is tona exaetly at the pas&lge significant for undentanding the ritual oftbe
bridal chamber.
23 Heraeleon (ca. 145-180 CE), tbe disclple ofValentinus is koown for having written

the first Cbtistian conunentlll')' and the fust c:ommeotary ät all on a book of the New
Testament. He is preserved in Origen's commcntary on John, a polemical response on
Heracleon. On h!s hermeneutics, sec E.H. 'Pagels, The Johannine Goapel in Gnc.stic Ere-
gu~: Heracleon's Ccnnment1.1ry on John (Society of Blbllcal Literature Monograph
234 The Impact o[Yom Kippur 011 Chrütianity in 1/Je First and St1cond Centurifl.J

can rely on Origen. Heracleon compares the three spheres for pneumatics
psychics, and hylics to the holy of holies,l-4 the forecourt of the templ~
and the rest of the world.26 The ho1y of holies is the Pleroma, which has
been accessed by Jesus the high priest and will be entered by the pneu-
matics.n
What do the holy of hoHes and the high priest's entrance symbolically
represent in the Gospel of Philip? The holy of hoHes is the place of pure
light, the Pleroma. A veil conceals God's creative activ:ity within. 21 This

Series 17; Nashville (Tean.] and New York, 1973), especially chapter 2. See also
Y. Jllll$$eos, ..Heracll!on. Commentaire sur l'Evangile selon saint Jean," Le MIISion 12
(1959) 101-151; 277-299; W. Foerster, Von Valentln Zf4 Herakleon. Untersuchungen
über die Quellen und die Entwicklung der -valentlnianischen Gnosis (Beihefte zur Zeit~
$chrift f!lr die neuresta.mentlicbe Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 7; Gies-
sen, 1928), pp. 9-12; C. Bammel"Heralc:leon," Theologische Realencyclopildie, vol 15
(1986) 54-57, with an extensive bibliography; C. Gianotto, "Heracleon.," Encyclopedill of
the Eorly Chvrch(l992) vol. I, p. 374; on the place oftbis fra:gment inHeracleou's theo-
logy, .see also B. Aland, "Erwlblnngsrbeologie und Menscbenk.lassenlehre. Die Tbt:olo-
gie des Heraldeon als Schlf1ssel zum Verständnis der christlichen Gnosis," in: M. Krause
(ed.), Gnosi3 and Gnostici3m. Pa~1 read at the Seventh International Cofr{ere"" on
Patrl&tic Studie.s (Oxford, September 8th-13th 1975) (Nag Hammadi Studies 8; Leiden,
1977; pp. 148-181), bere pp. 160-164.
24 Or the temple.
~ Or Jerusalem.
26 Origeo states: "(210) But let 11$ also consider Hel'a(:leon's words. He says the ascmt

[to} Jerusa.lem indicates Cbe Lord's ascension from [tbe region ofj material things to the
psychic region (D.tto -.:Qv il]..n:älv ~o:i~ tov 'f'VXLK:Öv 'tÖnov), which i$ an image of Jerusalem.
(211) ADd he thinks the expression, 'He found in the temple (i~),' {Jolm 2:14) and not
'in tbe forecourt of lhe temple (11:poWqi],' is tl.Sed that it might not be thought that lhe
mere calliog (..:l.ijOlv), apart from the Spirit, is aided by the Lord. For he considers the
temple (ni i.EpOv) to be the holy of holies, whicb. the higb priest alone may enter (tU: piv
iyul tcöv D.yi(I)V dvo.l ... ~ a i'OYO!; 0 lipxlepri~ timjllt.). He says, I think, that the
pneumalies (•v111!1~Ltt11:oilo;) advance to that place. The forecourt of ~ temple {npoviou),
where tbe Levites too are found, he considers to be a symbol of tbe psyt:bics (qruxtltciiv)
who attain salvation outside the pleroma... " Orlgen, Commentt~ry 011 John 10:33 (210..
211), Iransialion by R.E. HeiDe, Origen. CommenJDry on the Gospel Accordlng to .lohn.
ßooks 1-10 (The Fathers <>ftbe Ch~b 80; Washington, D.C., 1989); see SC 157 (Q!cile
Btanc 1970}, pp. SOS-510 .forthe Greek.
'rl lt ls not clear wbether the pneumatics attain a high-priestly cbancter (as in Excvpu
from TheodOIKs 37) or enter the Pieroma with the aid of Jesus, the high priest, as in
Excerpt8 from Theodotru. 38.
21 "The mysteries oftruth are revealed, thougb in type and irnage. Tbe bridal chamber,

however, remaim bidden. lt i.s the holy in lhe holy. The veil at first con~;ealed how God
controlled the c.reation, but wben the veil is rent and the things inside arc revea.led, th.is
house will be left desolate, or rather will be [destroyed]. And the whole (inferior) god-
head will tlec [fi-om] here. burnot into the holiu [ofthe) bolies, for it will not be ab!e to
mix witb Cbe WWiixed [ligllt] and the [tlawless] fullness, but will he under the wi.ngs of
 Yom Kippllr Imogery in Gnosticism andin Early Christian MysJicism 235

veil is rent in tbe moment of Cbrist's death.29 The high priest Jesus and
sollle Gnostics. who are called priests, enter. 30 Before that, they have to
conceive the light and be rebom. ••Jf anyone becomes a son of the bridal
cbamber, he will receive the light. lf anyone does not receive it while he is
here, he will not be able to receive it in the other pJace."31 Tbis light helps
the Gnostic to overcome the watehing powers, since "the powers do not
see those who are clothed in the perfect light, and consequently are not
ab!e to detain them:m A Wlion witb the light is achleved in a ritual,
"saeramentally. •o33 Tbe sacramental aspect of the union refers to tbe ritual
of the bridal chamber, which enables tbe Gnostic to enter tbe holy of
holies. "Tbe holies of the holies were revealed, and the bridal chamber
invited us in.'•34
April De Coninck has suggested that tbe bridal chamher was an initi.a-
tion ritual witb an un-erotic (and tberefore godly) sexual union, which was
supposed to restore the divine barmony by overco!lling thc primordial
separation of man and woman. Js

the cross [and under] itS arms. Thi.s atk will be [their] salvation when the flood 1ofwater
surgcs o\'er them. If some belang to tbe order of the priestbood, they will be able to go
witbin the veil with the high priest. Fortbis reason, the veil was notrentat thc top only,
sim:e it would have becn open only to tbose above; nor was it rmt at the bottom only,
since it would have been revealed only to tbose below. But it was rent from top to bot-
~· Those above opened to us the things below, in orderthat ._ may go iD to the secret
oC the truth. Tbis truly is what is held in high regard (and) what is strong! But we shall go
in there by means of lowly types and forms of weakness. They are lowly inder:d when
campered with the perfect glory. There is glory which surpasses glory. There is power
which surpasse.s power. Therefore, the perfect lhings have opened to us, togetherwitb the
hidden things of lroth. The holies of the holies were revealcd. and the bridal chamber
iovited us in." Gospel o/Pirilip 84;:Z0-85;21, lsenberg's translation, bere and henceforth.
· On the aspect of revelation, see VDlentinian Exposition NHC xi,2; 25:30-39. ''[He
is] ... the [truc} High Priest. [tbe one who has) the authority to enter the Holies ofHolies,
revealing the glo.ry ofthe Aeons and brlnging forth the abundanee to 'ftagran"'" (transl.
I.D. Turner).
» GOfpel ofPhi/ip 85:5-10.
10 "Ir some belong to the order of the priesthood, they will be able to go widli.n the
'~eil with the bigb priest" (GO$pel of Phi/ip 85: 1-S).
31 Gospel of Phi/ip 86:1-5.
· 31 GospelofPhilip 70:5-10.
:u "One will clolhe hirnself in tbi.s light sacramentally in tbe unio.o" (GO$pel of
.Philip 70: 1-5)•
.· · 30 Gospel of Phllip SS: 1-21.
· » See De Coninck, "Entering God's Presence," pp. SOS-521.
236 The Impact of Yom Kipp11r on Christianity iPI the Fir1t and Second CentJtries

But the woman is united to her busband in the bridal chamber. Iadeed. those who
have united in the bridal eh8Ulber will no Iongerbe separated. Thus Eve separated
lh>m Adam because it was not in the bridal cbamber that shc united with him.36
At once. the ritual of the bridal chamber pre-enacts the fmal union of the
Gnostic with his or her light Spirit in the eschaton and imitates the union of
the Father and the Mother from which 1esu.s was bom.l"1 Both the ritual and
tbe eschatological event are called "bridal chamber... There is an unre-
solved tension between two traditions referring to the eschatological future
and to the present. similar to that between the eschatological approach to
God in Excerpts from Theodotus 38 and the present mystical vision in Er-
cerpts from Theodotus 21. The veil is said to be rent in the future 38 or tobe
alread.y .r:ent.39 The renting of the vei! connected to the destruction of"the
house," alludes to the Passion and. the destruction of the temple. It signifies
the revelation of the previously bidde.n mysteries of the holy of holies.40
The Gospel ofPhilip explicitly states that there is a difference between the
eschatological event and the present ritual:
Wherea.s in thi.s world the union is one of busband wilh wife - a case of strength
eomplemeated by weakness(?) - in tbe Aeon (ete.m.al sphere), tlae form of the un-
ion i.s different, althougb we r«ftr to them by the same names. ••
The effects ofthe ritual in the present time is an aspect that helps to eluci-
date the place of Yom Kippur imagery in the ritual of the bridal chmnber.
Gnosticism and mysticism both yearn for the same outcome -union with or
vision of God; yet the two are distinct in their conception of this union or
vision. Entering the Pleroma in the bridal chamber means achieving a
vision of God. This entry is not purely eschatological, as in the Epistle to
the Hebrews; it has a ritual pre-ena.cment, wbich means that a mystical
vision of God is achieved during the ritual.
That this vision is described with Yom Kippur imager:y brings us back
to the central question regarding the impact of Yom Kippur on early
Christianity: Why did the Gospel ofPhilip employ the imagery of the high
priest's entrance to the holy of holies? Even if Valentimans received tbe
idea from apocalyptic Jewish traditions, as indicated in the f.ust section of
this chapter, an explanation is still needed as to what caused them to accept

36 Gospel of Philip 70:15-25.

31 Gospe/ofPhi/ip11:1-lS.
31 Gospel of Philip 84:25-30.
l 9 Gospel ofPhilip 85:5-10.
«~ The veil is not a divine embodiment as in the VoleJttilliQ11 &posJtio11, nor does it
have a positive prote<:tive furu:tion as in Ezcerpts from Theotfotus 38; it <:Oaceal5 the true
revelation until it is rent. This probably reftecte Heb 10:19-22.
41 Go.rpel ofPhilip 76:5-10.
 Yom KJppur Jmagery in Gnosticism tmd in EOT/y Chri1titm Mysricüm 23 7

it. I suggest there are four such reasons. First, the authority of Judaism as
the origin of this tradition may have caused reverence for the tradition. A
second reason - or a hint of it - may be found in those traditional elements
reinforced by the Gospel of Philip: The Valentiman re-ritualization of the'
high priest's entry emphasizes the sexual aspects connected to the holy of
holies.42 Third, the ritual aspect of the high-priestly imagery matches well
a ritual context of practical mysticism with induced ascent to a heavenly
temple. Whoever prefe.rs to use Leviticus 16 over other prooftexts for
mystical encounters wilh God - Exodus 3, Genesis 15 or Mark 9 - prob-
ably does so. since tbe ritual connotations of Leviticus 16 match bis own
conceptualization that a vision of God (or the possibility of obtaining eso-
teric knowledge from ooo•s nearest environment) can be achieved ritually.
Fourth, fur the initiated, tbe sec.re<:y of the boly of bolies suitably syznbol-
izes the esoterici$Ill of the revelation. The first reason can be linked to the
Jewish origin of the tradition, revered by the Valentiman Christians; the
otber three reasons are intrinsic to the sexual, ritual and esoteric connota-
tions of the tradition itself, which suited the Gnostic conception and its
ritualization.

3. Philonic and Valentinian Mysticism as Merged in

Clement of Alexandria

Salvatore Lilla claimed that the Philonic and the Valentinian usage of Yom
Kippur imagery in the descriptions ofthe divine vision strongly influenced
Clement of Alexandria's mysticism, especially as formulated in Stro-
maleis 5:6:39:3-40:4- as did Judith Kovacs more recently andin different
tenns.43 This interdependence is relevant for the investigation of Yom Kip·

4l Oe Coninck has assembled the traditional material behind tbis concepti.on (some of
w.hicb was discussed in the introductory chapter, above, p. 126).
41 S. Lilla, Clement o/ A.laondria: A Study ln Cmistian Plt~toni&m and Gno1ticiJm
(Oxford, 1971 ), pp. 173-181; J.L. Kovaes, "Coneealmcnt a.od GIUI$lic Exegesis: Clement
of Alexandria's Interpretation of lhe Tabemacle~" Stt1dia Patristka 31 {1997) 414-437.
See also J.E. Davison, "Structural Similarities and Dissimilarities in the Thought of
Clement of Alexandria and the Valentinians," SecondCenhlry 3 (1983) 201-217. Other
discussions of this passage cao be found in W. Völker, Der wahre Gnostilcer nach Cle-
mens A.lexandrJIJW (Texte nnd Untersuc:hunge.n 57; Berlin, 1952), pp. 403-432; A. Mt!-
hat, Etude SIIT le.s 'Stromates' de CJement d'Alext~ndrie (Paris, 1966), pp. 456-475; A. Le
Boulluec (ed., transl.), C/ement d'Ale.x;andrie. Le.s Stromateis. Stromate V. Tome /I -
commentaire, bibliographie et inde:x (SC 279; Paris, 1981); A. vao den Hoek, Clement of
Alalll'ldrio. and His U.se of Phi/o in the Stromoteis (Supplements to Vigiliae ChriJtianae
3; Leiden, 1988), pp. 116-147.
238 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Christianity in the First and Second Centuries

pur's impact on early Christianity, since it is the high priest's entrance tbat
connects the ascent visions of all three corpora. I discuss first the
Clementine Stromateis 5:6:39:3-40:4, then Excerptsfrom Theod4tus 27, of
ambivalent Clementine or Valentinian authorship.
3.1 Stromateis 5:6:39:3-40:4
Stromateis 5:6:39:3-40:4 describes the ascent of the Gnostic to the vision
of God in tenns ofthe high priest's entrance to the holy ofholies.
':~:~9:3 So the high priest puts off his coosecrated robe {the univene and the crea-
tion in the Wliverse were consecrated by him assenting tbat what was lll4lde, was
good), wasbes bimself and puts on the other tunie (a holy-of-holies one, so to
speak}, which is to accompany him into the adytum. • It 5eems to me tbat he ex-
hibits the Levite and Gnostic a.s the chief of the orber priests. Those other priests
are bathed in water and clothed in faith alone, llnd they expect tbeir own individual
abode.
[The high priest}, however, distinguishes the objec:ts of the intellect !Tom the
sensaal thiogs. He rises abovr: the otber priests and hastens to the eotranee to the
intellec:taal world to wash bimself !Tom the things here below, not in water, as for~
metly one was cleansed on being enrolled in the uibe of Levi, but already by the
Gnostit Word. ,
been
40:1 {Tb.e high priest] has purified in his whole beaJ1 and thoroughly regu-
lated. He has improved that mode of life, received from tbe priest, to the higbest
pitch. Having been sanaified in botb word and life, he puts on the bright array (ya.
vw11a) of glory and receives the ineffable inheritance ofthat spiritual and perfect
man, "whicb eye hath not seen and ear hath not heard and which bath not entered
into the heart of man." Having become son and fricmd, be is now replenisbed with
insatiahle contemplation face to face. ·
For tbere is nothing like hearing the Word llimself. who by meaiiS of the
Scripture inspires filller intelligence. 2 For so it is said, "And hr: shall put off the
linen robe, whicb. he bad put on when be entered into the holy place, and sballlay
it aside tbere and wash his body in wateT in the holy place and put on his robe"
{Leviticus 16:<1).
) But in ooe way, as I think. the Lord puts off and puts on by descending into
the sensual region; and in anothe.r, be who tbrougb Hirn has believed puts off and
puts on, as lbe apostle intimated, the consecrated stole. 4 Thence, aftet thl: image
of the Lord, the wortbiest are chosen from the sa.cred tribe to be high priests, and
those eleeted to rhe ldngly offiee and to prophecy are anointed.44
The passage stands in the context of an allegorical exegesis of Exodus 26-
28 (the tabemacle, the vestments and the high priest) and .is heavily
influenced by Philo, especially Vita Mosis 2:95-135. 4s In the relevant

44 I slightly amended the translation from A. Cleveland Coxe (ANF) according to the
Greek in SC 278.
45 Stromateis S:6:32-40 b&ll been investigated in detail by van den Hoek, Clement of

Alexandria, a1rd His U:" ofPhilo ln th11 Stromateis, pp. 116-~147, see especially her table
 Yom Kippur Imagery in G11osticism and ifl Early Christion Mysticism 239

passage 5:6:39:3--40:4, Clement sV\oi.tches his focus from Exodus 26-28 to

Levitleus 16 and "departs entirely from his Phitonic Vorlage" towa.rd mo-
tifs adopted from Valentiman Gnosticism.46 ·
Clement focuses on the preparations of the high priest, who washes
bimself and changes bis clothes explicitly quoting the relevant passage in
Levitleus 16:4. The historical high priest represents simultaneously 1esus
and the Gnostic Christian. Jesus is mentioned only once, bis entry to the
holy of hoHes signifying bis incamation (40:3). The Gnostic clearly domi-
nates the scene. For the Onostic as high priest, tb.e entrance is not the de-
scent into matter but the mystical ascent to the intellectual world, with the
vision of God as its final goal ( 4_0: 1.4). Only for the Onostic are the details
of the priestly purification rites allegorized. The washing represents a spe-
cial second baptisru- not witb water (as do the Levites) but with the Logos
(39:4}. The donning of a new gannent is explained as puttiug on ''the
bright array of glory.. (40:1). The former is reminiscent ofthe Valentinian
distinction between pneumatic and psycbic Christians.41 The latter almost
certainly refers to the famous garb of light, .which according to the Vale.n-
tinian form of the Jewish tradition was the pw:pose of the nnification ritual
of the bridal chamber. Yet Clement differs from Valentiman soteriology.
While Clement adopts the V alentinian distinction between a reward for the
psychlcs and an even higher reward for the Gnosticslpneumatics, he
changes it from two separate categories to two separate stages. According
to him. the psychic can become a Gnostic. which matches Clement's her-
meneutics toward Valentinian conceptions in Stromateis 5:6. Adapting
many Gnostic conceptions, he tums some of them against tb.eir inventors.48

oo p. 118. See also the apparatus of StihliD's editioA andin SagJWd, Clemenl d'll.la-
andrie. E:ctrails de Theodote, appendix C; and the commentary ofl.e Boulluec, Clhnrmt
r.
d'll.lexandrie. Les Stromatei$. Stromale Tcme II (SC 279; Paris, 1981).
46 Kovacs. ..Ccmcealment aod Gnostic Exegesis," p. 414.

• 7 Kovacs, "Coocealment and Onostic Exegesis," pp. 419 and 427-430.

41 Lilct: Hetacleon, Clement proposes a tripartite sacred geography: the holy of holies,
the holy shrine and the forecourt are connccted to Gnostic Christians, psychic Christians
and pagans, respectively. Yet, while Heracleon associated the holy of holies with tbe
Gnostics. the furecourt is the place of tbe psychics. Moreover, Clement calls the Gnostic
Christians high priests and Levites, which may be a pejorative pwt on the association of
Levites with psychics in Hencleon. See Kovacs, "Concealment and Gnostic Exegesis,"
pp. 428 and 429.
240 The Impact ofYom. Kippur 011 Christianity in the First and Second Centuries

3.2 Excerpts from Theodotus 27

In a picture closely resembling the one in Stromaleis 5:6:39:3-40:4, Ex-
cerpts from Theodotus 27, too, employs the high priest's entrance:
27:1 The priest (i~t:ix;) on entering within the second veil (Eiauilv tv-rö.; -coii 1Ciltll1tß-
t.too; -roü liWtipo11) removed the plate (xitu).ov} at the altar of incense, and
entered in silence (tv a1y~) with the Name engraved upon his heart, indicating the
laying aside of the body ( -roil aol!lcnoo;} which has become pure li.lce the golden
plate and nimble (~:oli<pou) througb purification ... the laying aside as it wete ofthe·
soul's body (toil o:öcnu;p acilp.11too; 1:~ vvzl'lc;) on which was stamped the Iuster of
piety, by which he was recogoized by the Principalities and Powers (-ruic; ÄPXIItc;
~eui tllic; E~oooicno;) as having put araund [him] (11~~:sip.svoo;) the Name. 2 Now he
discards this body, the plate which had become weigbtless (~päo;), within the
second veil, that is, in the rational sphere (i.v tcp vo1JtcP a:oop.qJ) the second complete
veil of the universe. at the altar of incense, that is, with the angels who are the
ministets of prayers carried aloft (11apci -co~ ÄEltOuPT~ Tcilv civucpepollivcov Wtcilv
ÄyyEÄovc;). 3 Now the soul, stripped by the power of him who has knowledge, as if
it had become a body ofthe power passes into the spiritual sphere (eio; -rci nvS"U111l-
u~eii.) and becomes now truly rational.and higb-priestly ().O'Juci) -cciJ ovu~eui ÜPXltpll-
mc1\), so that it might now be animated, so to speak, directly by the Logos, just as
the archangels became the higb;priests (ÜPX\~Ei<;) of the angels, and the First-
Created (oi OpcotoKnatol) the high-priests of the archangels. 4 But how is there
perfection by Scripture and by learning (Iloii lii in ypacp~ Klli 111191ioemc; 1Ca"lop-
801j.la) forthat soul which has become pure, and how is it granted to see God "face
to face" (t~pOCJIIlliOV ltpO<; 1lpOCJOlltOV ewv op«v)? s Thus, having transcended the an-
gelic teaching and the Name taught in Writing, [the soul] comes to the knowledge
and comprehension ofthe facts. lt is no Ionger a bride but has become a Logosand
rests with the bridegroom tagether with the First-Calied and First-Created (Ilplll"to-
nicncov), who are liiends by Iove, sons by instruction and obedience, and brothers
by community of origin. 6 So that it belonged to the dispensation (-cf\c; oi~eovoj.lia<;;)
to put araund (up,uio8cn) the plate and leam towards knowledge, but it belongs
to Powerthat man becomes the bearer ofGod (~o 8eocp6pov), being controlled di-
rectly by the Lord and becoming, as it were, his body. 49

The exact relationship of the passages in the Excerpts and that in the Stro-
maleis is disputed. The crux is whether Excerpts from Theodotus 2 7
reflects Theodotus or is a gloss by Clement of Alexandria. 50 The "Gnostic"

4 ' I have slightly changed the translation of Casey, The Excerpta ez Theodoto of

Clement ofAlexandria. Edited with Translation, Introduction and Notes, according to the
Greek in Sagnard, Clement d'Alexandrie. Extraits de Theodote.
JO The latter position was expressed nearly a century ago by 0. Dibelius, "Studien zur
Geschichte der Valentinianer," Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die
Kunde tkr älteren Kirche 9 (1908) 230-247, 329-340. The main arguroent is lhe
entrance of the soul into the pneumatic sphere. Sagnard, Clement d'Aiexandrie. Extrails
de Theodote, p. II, goes sofaras tostatethat "l'Extrait 27 est tout 1\ fait car~ristique
de Ia mani~re de Clement, et peu de fragments pourraient lui etre attribues avec autant de
sürete." Neither Dibelius nor Sagnard were able to Iake into consideration the texts from
 Yom Kippw Imagery in Gnosticism andin Early Christion Mystici:sm 241

terminology does not provide any clue since the terms appear also else-
where in Clement and since the chronological relationship between the
Stromaleis and the Excerpts from Theodotus is unresolved. 51 Salvatore
Lilla understands Excerpts from Theodotus 27 as quoted from Theodotus
and uses it as evidence for Valentinian influence on Clement. -Judith
Kovacs argues that Clement in this chapter discloses to the reader his most
esoteric thoughts, which he still concealed in the Stromaleis - in which
case, Excerpts from Theodotus 27 is a further development by Clement
himself. 52
Regardless of the authorship of this passage. the ambivalence of its at-
tribution is in itself a good illustration of the proximity of Clement' s
thought to Valentiman theologians like Theodotus. In either case, the close
relationship is obvious. Again, the picture of the high priest entering the
holy of holies is employed to describe the ascent of the Gnostic's soul
through the rational sphere and its guarding powers into the pneumatic
sphere, where he "is granted to see God face to face." Here again, the au-
thor focuses on the changing of clothes, yet he uses an otherwise unknown
tradition that the high priest removed the plate with the divine name only
at the altar of incense on entering the holy of holies. 53 The removal of the
plate with God's nameS4 indicates the soul putting aside the body. 55 The
altar of incense refers to the place of the ministering angels who carry the
prayers to God. The soul is transformed into a Logos. The terminology for

Nag Hammadi; a revision of their arguments is therefore a desideratvm. The remarks in

Procter's dissertation cannot be regarded as adliancing the status quaestionis. See
E. Procter, Christion controversy in Alexandria: Clement's polemic against the Basil-
ideans and Valentinians (American University Studies Series VII, Theology and Religion
172;NewYork, 1995).
51 lf Stromatei.r 5 is earlier than Excerpts from Theodotvs, Clement used "Valentinian"

terminology independently oflbeodotus. Only if Excerpt.rfrom Theodollls is earlier than

Stromaleis 5 may Clement have learned the Valentinian tenninology from lbeodotus.
52 Kovacs, "Concealment and Gnostic Exegesis," p. 433.
53 This motif may reflect acquaintance with priestly traditions: see Bezalel, "Clement
of Alexandria on an Unknown Custom in the Temple Service of the Day of Atone.ment,"
and Wolfson's note in Casey, The Excerpta ex Theodoto of Clement of Alexandria.
Edited with Translation, lntroductlon and Notes.
54 The conception that the control over a name is achieved by not pronouncing it is

paradoxical and contradicts the solemn proclamation ofthe name in Yom Kippur's ritual.
The emphasis is on silence - the name is not uttered but written on the heart.
55 It is unlikely that the material body is intended, since the body is removed in the
spiritual sphere. Lilla, Clement ofAlexandria, p. 178, suggests seeing here a reference to
the lower part of the soul, as in Excerpts from Theodollls 64. This position is accepted
also by Kovacs, "Concealment and Gnostic Exegesis," p. 43S.
242 The Impact o[Yom. Kippvr on Christionlty ln the First and Second Centvries

the metamorphosis of the soul into a Logos evokes the ritual of the bridal
chamber.
27:l Tbus, having transcended the angelie teacbing .and tbe Name taught in Writing,
[the sou.l] comes to tbe knowledge and comprehension of tlle faets. lt is no Ionger
a bride56 but has become a Logos and rests with the bridegroom together witb the
First-Calied. and First-Created, who arc friends by Iove, sons by instruction and
obedienc:e, and brothers by community of origin. 57
What were the sources of tbis passage? As with Excerpt$ from Theodo-
tw 38, chapter 27 also may .have been written without the infiuence ofHe-
brews but in a similar spirit.s11 The author uses some Philonic categories.s9
lt is possible tbat the laying aside of the ttita.Äov at this point of the ritual
and the silence reflect the temple ritual. 60 The cluster of motifs comprising
a removal of gannents and an angeHe metamorphosis is reminiscent of
apocalyptic texts~ wbich employ this cluster in relation to the heavenly
traveler.61 The metamorphosis of the entering person into a superhuman
being appears also in Philo. 61 Probably, human.s have to recover their pri-
mordial status in order to be protected from the guards when seeing God.
This Gefahrdungsmotiv is known from apocalyptic ascent visions,
Hekhalot literature and Onostic texts. 63

56 This fonnulation does not have to be a polemical pun against the Valentinians, as
Kovacs, "Concealment aud Gnostic Exegesis," pp. 436-437, proposes, since every bride
changes her status after baving been united with her bridegroom in tbe bridal chamber
57 Excerptsfrom Theodotus21:S.
511 While the opening fonnulation about the seeond veil calls to mind Hebrews, the
sec:ond vcil is known also apan from Hebrews: see Attridge, The Epistle lo the Hehrews.
The rest of the passage does not betray any relationship to tbe Epistle. In particular, the
central motif of Excerpls from Theodonu 21, the removal of the platc, is c:Ompletely
absent from the New Testament writing.
55 The (material) plate, whicb the high priest removed, rep:resents the body, the place
before tbe holy of holies the rational sphere; and the altar of incense the angels Iifting
prayers aJof\.
60 This rite is attested only here. We cannot be sure if it is based on Christian Gnostic
exegetical speculation, on Iewisb ritual speculation or on tbe practice in tbe temple: see
note 53, above. ·
61 See C.R.A. Morray-Jones, "Transfonnational Mysticism in tbe Apocalyptic-

Merkabah Tradition," Journal of Jewi:sh Studies 43 (1992) 1-31; and cf. M. Mach,
F.ntwicklung.s:stDdien des jidi.sclrrm Engelglallhens in vorrabbini•clrer Zeit (Texte und
Studien zum antlken Judentum 34; Tübingen, 1992), chapter 3.4.4.1.
6 z See above, pp. 110-112.
111 See e.g. A.rcension of Jsaiah 9-10, and Himmelfarb's observations on similar
elements in Hekholot Rabbati and Hekhalot Zutruti in her paper ;'Heavenly Ascent and
the Relationship ofthe Apocalypses and the Heklralot Literature," Hebrew Union Olllege
Annuol S9 (1988) 73-100, bere pp. 82-86.
 Yom KipJNr Imagery in Gmntici&m and ln Early Chrutian Mysticism. 243

Given that Clement wanted to describe the Gnostic's vision of God,

why did he choose to do so with the imagery ofthe high·priestly entrance?
It cannot be a high regard for his Gnostic source. Nor does he hint at a spe-
cific mystic ritual. It may have been the image of a hidden holy of holies
accessible only to the initiated, an image that matches Clement's concept
of different Ievels of Christians.

Conclusions and Implications

Valentiman theologians of the second century, among them Theodotus,

HefllCleon and the writer of the Vale.ntinilin Exposition, adopted the motif
of the high priest's entraoce into the holy of holies from Jewish apocalyptic
ascent visions to describe the eschatological entrance of Christ and the
pneumattes into the Pleroma. The ritual of the bridal cbamber portrayed in
the Gospel of Philip gives in this world a foretaste of the eschatological
entrance. It employs sex:ual connotations of the Jewish imaginaire of the
holy of holies to depict union with the light. Together with Philo, these
Valentinian conceptions and probably also the ritual ofthe bridal chamber
influenced Clement of Alexandria's model of the ascent of the Gnostic' s
soul to the vision of God.
The imagery of Yom Kippur did not become a fixed tradition in the
Onostic Iiterature of the second century. Until Clement, various images
and conccptions associated with Yom Klppur continued to inspire think.ers
and refonn the tradition. The V alentinians reinforced the apocalyptic motif
ofthe change of clothes with the idea ofthe high priest's plate <~•hal.ov).
The Gospel of Philip returns to the sexual eonnotations of the Jewisb
imaginaire. The adoption of these extra-biblical traditions and the con~
tinuing inspiration by the imaginaire of Yom Kippur implies connections
to Jews or Jewish Christians. Clement, who adopted this imagery from
Gnostic sow-ces into his mysticism, does not develop it further. Appar·
ently, Yom Kippur was less important to him than to Christian Jews and
Valentiman Christians.
 Chapter6

Yom Kippurin Jewish Christian Legends

Two Jewish Christian legends are connected to Yom Kippur. 1 First, James,
the brother of Jesus. is described as bebaving every day as if it were a Day
of Atonement. I argue that this legend is understood better against the
background oftensions conceming Jewish Christianity and the observation
of Yom Kippur. Second, Zechariah, the father of lohn the Baptist, is said
to have received the annunciation ofhis son's conception wh.en serving as
high priest in the holy ofholies on a Yom Kippur. This legend was used
for calculating the dates of conception and birth of Christ and John. Fur-
thermore, a holiday celebrating tbis event emerged in the Eastem Church.
As I will show in the chapter on Christian autumn festivals, its readings are
closely related to the Jewish ihd the Christian imaginaires of Yom
Kippur. 2
Jewish Christian traditions from the second century recognize at least
four legendary leaders who are described in high~priestly terms, although
historically they were detinitely not high priests in the temple and some of
them were neither Aaronides nor even Levites. These Ieaders include: (1)
Zechariah. the father of John the Baptist.3 (2) Simeon.4 (3) John, the
Beloved Disciple,s and (4) James, the brother ofCbrist.6

1 Here, I ha11e cllosen the tenn "le&end" instead of"myth" because we do not know to
wbat extent the .fewisb Chrlsti.ao stori(l$ investigated in the eiUTent cbaprer were of
foundational .status {QI' Jewish Chrittians. Zec:bariah's and James' promotion to high
priesthood became part of .mainstream Christian mythology; but tbis ehapter deab with
the Jewish Cbristian provenanee.
z See below, pp. 322-328.
3 On apocrypbal legends linked to Zechariah, see still A. Berendts, Studien iiber
Zacharias-Apolrl'yphrm ltlld Zac:Junlas-Lflgenden (Leipzig, 189.S).
4 On Simeon (Luke 2:25.34), see S. Porter, "Simeon 3," Anchor Bible Dictionary 6
(1992) 26-28.
5 Oll Jobn in genentl, see Jl.A. Culpepper, John, the Son of Zebedee. The. Life of a

Legend (Studies on Personalities ofthe New Testament; Columbia [S.C.], 1994).

' On l&JruiS in general, see J. Painter, Just James. The Brothu ofJesus in History and
Tradition (Studies on Personalities of th.e New Testament; Columbia [S.C.], 1997);
W. Pratscber, Der Herrenbruder Jakobr.rs und die Jalwhvstradition (Forschqeo zur Re-
ligion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 139; Göttinge.o., 1983); and idem,
"'Ialcoblls (Hemnbruder},.. Reallezikonfiir Antilee undCitristentrml 18 (1998) 1227-1243;
 Yam KipprJ.r ln Jewl:th Christian Legends 245

In a Chrlstian context this is a remarkable anomaly, considering that in

the first centuries there were no Christian priests. Priests (i.e. presbyters)
and high priests (i.e. bishops) served in Cbristian churches only from the
third century in the West and probably only from the fowth century in the
East.7 Before this., various offices could be compared to that of priest, but
these comparisons stayed in the realm of metaphor; there was no separate
class of priests. Probably, among the Jewish Christian communities, the
bigh-priestly title served to endow their Ieaders with the traditional termi-
nology of Jewish religious leadership, perhaps '\\ith connotations of excep-
tional powers of intercession and hereditacy authority.
The symbol for these aspects of authority and leadership of the high
priests is the !tt1:o.A.ov (f"l). one of the high-~estly and royal insignia,
wbich is associated with James and with John. Tbe rll was a golden plate
with the inscription "Holy to the Lord," which was wom on the miter. 9
Biblical and rabbinie traditions ascribe expiating and apotropaic qualities
to the r•x.
10 Epiphanius shows knowledge of a tradition related to Jewish
post-temple oonceptions of the plate as baving an oracular function - the
ability to distinguish between sinners and the righteous. 11 Levitleus 8:9
equates the high-priestly T">X with the 1TJ. The uncut hair of the Nazir is
called 1U, too, and this has led some scholars to explain xho.)..ov in this.
context as referring to the Nazirite ttadition.ll In my opinion, the fact that
the 1rl was also one of the royal insignia links it to ruling power and
leadership. 13
If Jewish Christian tradition continued to use the Jewish terminology.
designating their Ieaders as high priests, how did they relate to Yom Kip-
pur, the ritual of the high priest? These traditions can provide us with a

M. Hengel, "Jakobus dec Herrenbrudec- der erste Papst?" in: idem, Pllfl/113 und JaJcobw.a.
Kleine Schriften lll (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen tum Neuen Testament 141;
Tllbingen, 2002; pp. 549-S82).
' B. Kötting, "Die Aufuabme des Begriffs •Hiereus' in den cbrist(ichen Sprachge-
brauch," in: idem, Ecclesia peregrinans. Dos Gouuvolk unterwegs. Gesammelte A:uf-
lliitze (Miblstemche Beilläge zur Theologie 54:1; Mnllster i. W., 1988; pp. 356-364),
pp. 352-353, see also note S2,11tere.
1 Epipbanius, PantuiQif 29:4; Polyerates apad Eusebius, History of Jhe Clnuch

3:31:3; History ofthe Chlll'ch .5:24:3.

9 Exod 28:36ff.
10 Exod 28:38; mPe:sah 7:7; bPesah 77a; mZebah 8: 12; mMenah 3:3; bZebah &8b.
11 Epiphanius, De ,:if gemrnis 2:1; the tradition appears in Protevangeli11m of
James S: 1; bYebQJII 60b; Ttugam Pseado-Jom~than Nmn 31:17-18.
11 Num 6; Jer 7:29.
11 See 0. Maycr "10" in Tlteologlschu WiNterbuch zum Alten Testament .5 (1986)
329-334. ln IQSb Rule of Bles1ings iv:28 the priest wears a 1Tl (cooseaation) for the
holy ofholies. In 4QI61 Pesher baialt 8-10 iii 20 tbe mes.sianic kin,g wears a 1rl.
246 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Chrit~tümity in lhe First and Second Cennuiß

glimpse into Jewish Christian ritual. about which evidence is so scant,

especially conceming Yom Kippur. Of the four figures mentioned, only
Zechariah and Jam.es are described in passages relating to Yom Kippur.
Tbey will be the topics of the two sections that follow. Two other early
Jewish Christian high priests, Sirneon and the apostle John, are briefly
described in an excursus.

l. James. the Permanently Interceding High Priest

Hegesippus' Hypomnemara is the eatliest sourc:;e to describe James, the
brother of Jesus, with strong high-priestly motifs. 14 I suggest it was
Hegesippus who portrayed James behaving every day as if it were Yom
Kippur: he intercedes regularly in the holy of holies, and he observes per-
manently the prohibitions ofYom Kippur. With this, Hegesippus proposes
an alternative to the singularity of Yom Kippur' s afilictions and its high-
priestly service. For James, the Christian high priest, the holy of holies is
always accessible and it is always possible for rum to offer up prayers in
that location, where God is closest. Consequentty, a special Day of
Atonement is unnecessary.
Unfortunately, the original text of Begesippus has been preserved only
indirectly; the relevant passages appear only in Eusebius' Historia Eccle·
siastica and Epiphanius' Panarion. 15 Yet the question of the textual rela~
tionship between Hegesippus, Eusebius and Epiphanius has not been
resolved. Did Epiphanius know of Hegesippus only indirectly, via Euse-
bius, or did he read him directly? Most scholars tend to hold the first
opinion and discard Epiphanius. 1' However. decisive a.rguments have not

14 Moch of this section has been previously published in Stökl Ben Ezra, '"Christlans'
Celebrating 'Jewish' Festivals of Aotumn." On introductory questione to Hegesippus, see
T. Halton. "Hegesipp," Theologj8che &alerrzyklopätlie 14 (l98S) 56D-562. Hegesippus'
Hypomnemtzta are Ullually dated to aro\Dld 180. Eusebius claims he is of Jewish origin,
although stholars have called tbis into question. He may have been a Geotile Christian:
see W. Telfer, "Was Hegesippus a Jew?" Ha,..,ord Theological Rniew 53 (1960) -143-
153; N. Hyldahl, "Hegesippus Hypomnemata,'' Stt.tdid Theologica 14 (1960) 70-113.
Odcd Irshai has demonstratcd that at least the traditions Hegesippus used betray a Jewish
background: 0. Irshai. "Historical Aspects of tbe Christian-Jewjsh Polemic Conceming
the Church of Jeri!Salem in tbe Fourth Century (ln the Light of Patristic and Rabbinie
Literature)" [in Hebrew with English summary} (2 vols; Ph.D. dissertation; The Hebrew
University of Jerusalem, 1993), vol. I, p. 12.
15 Eusebius, History ofthe Church 2:23:4-7; Epiphanius, Panarion 29:4; 78:13-14.
16 Adminedly, Epiphilllius' greater precision and his use of explicü titles are no

arguments for a direct acqoaintance with Hegesippus and may be explained by an attempt
to systematize EllSebius' version.
 Yom Kippu.r in Jewish Christian Legends 247

been put forward. Some motifs in Epiphanius• paraphrases are conspicu-

ously close to Jewish traditions and might refer to a direct relationship to
Hegesippus. 17
The descriptions of James• behavior can be divided into two parts. the
high~priestly aspects and the ascetic aspects. The high-priestly aspeets·
consist of the following motifs: J ames • gannents, his intercession, his pres-
ence in the holy of holies and bis charismatic rairunaking. Epiphanius
explicitly refers to James as a high priest. May that not have been part of
Hegesippus' acoount? That it was not unthinkable in the second century to
address a Christian hero as ••high priest" is proven by the Protevange-
lium 8, whicb explicitly caßs Zechariah a high priest.
First, Eusebius' statement lhat James wears only linen and never woolen
garments recalls the instructions for priests in Ezekiel44:17-18. Linen
garments are used by ordinary priests in the daily service and by the high
priest on hisentering the holy ofholies.
Second, Eusebius relates that James prayed in the sanctuary ('tel ciyux. 6
vooc;) and that he was tbe only one allowed to enter it. The latter fact
makes it certain that Eusebius bad in mind the most restricted area, the
holy of holies. 18 In fact, Rufinus and Jerome, Eusebius' translators into
Latin and Syriac translated the tenn as "holy of holies.•• Zahn has sug-
gested that Eusebius' text might in the fourth century have read ...~ci ciy1.«t
1:rov Q.yi.o:lv." even if no e.xtant manuscript actually preserved this reading. 1 ~
Third, according to Eusebius, James prayed without cessation on behalf
of his people. The discrepancies of Epiphanius' portrayal from Eusebius'
can be explained as ..improvements'' by Epiphanius so that his source
would match better the biblical precepts of Yom Kippur. Epiphanius em-

' 7 T. Zahn, "Brüder tmd Vettern Jesu, .. in: idem, Fo,..,chtmgen 1ntr Geschichte des
nl!t4te.stamentlichen Kanol'll u.'tfd der altkirchlichen Literatur (Leipzig. 1900; vol. 6:2,
pp. 225-372), p. 262; IU. Lawlor, "The Hypo.mnemata of Hegesippus," ia: idem,
Evsebiana - Es11ays on the Ecclesiastical History afEu.sebius (Oxford, 1912, pp. l···97).
Tbat Epiphanius WBS eiependent on Eusebius is defendcd by E. Schwaru:, "Zu Eusebius
Kirchengeschichte," Zeitllchrifl ftir die neutestamentliche W'usel'llchaft und die Kunde
der alteren Kirche 4 (1903) 48-66, here p. SO; J. Munck, "Presbyters and ])isc;iples ofthe
Lord in Papias. Exegetic Comments on Eusebiu.s, Eccles:iastical History, UI, 39,"
Hanard Theological Review 52 (1959) 223-243, here pp. 241-242; Pratseher, Der
Herren.bntderJalwbWJ und die Jakobustradition, pp. 103-104; F.S. Jones, "The Martyr-
dom of James in Hegesippus, Clcment of Alexandria, and Christi~~n Apocryp:ba, Includ-
ing Nag Hammadi: A Study ofTextual Relations;" in: D.J. Lull (ed.), Society of Biblicol
Literatrue 1990 Seminar Papers 29 (Atlanta [Ga.], 1990; pp. 322-33.5).
11 Wbile tti &rtll and o w~ usually refer to the temple, they can also have the specific
meaning of holy ofbolies: seeHeb 9:2 or 9:3, depending on which manuscript is chosen;
losephus, Bell'umjudalcvm 1:152.
" Zahn, "Brüder und Vettern Jesu," p. 230.
248 The Impact uf Yom Kippw on Chl'islianity in the First arui Second CentflTieJ

ploys explicitlythe titles "high priest" and "holy ofholies," and he quotes
Leviticus 16 in relating that James entered the holy of holies only once a
year. Eusebius' unbiblical "unceasing Yom Kippur"' is clearly the lectio
difficiliol'. But if Hegesippus described James as permanent intercessor in
the holy of holies, James behaved every day, as if it were Yom Kippur.
This is the first indication that Hegesippus polemicized against a special
Day of Atonement.
Fourth, the historiola of James as rainmaker in Epiphanius' accouo.t
may point to Jewish traditions about the high priest on Yom Kippur. "And
once, when there was a drought, he raised bis hands to the heaven and
prayed. and immediately the heaven gave water."20 This feature is usually
explained as an exposition on Blijah's prayer for rain in IKings 18:42-45
or James 5:16-18, wbich certainly may have intluenced the choice of
words in Bpiphanius. Yet the context of Yom Kippur is reminiscent of a
Babylonian tradition according to which it was one of the high~priestly
tasks on Yom Kippur to pray for the beneficial amount of rain in the com.-
ing year. 21 The high priest's skills as institutionalized rainmaker were
challenged by charismatic raimnakers. In tbe discussion of the high-
priestly prayer in the Babylonitm Talmud, Rabbi Yosef compares the
power of praycr of a charismatic rainmaker such as Han.ina ben Dosa to
that of a high priest' s prayer and reaches the conclusion tbat thc prayer of
this cbarismatic personage is more effective than that of the high priest. I
suggest understanding Epiphanius• historiola of James, the rainmaker, as
alluding to James' higb-priestly role and simultaneously to his charismatic
function, which implies polemies against the slcills of the historical high
priest on Yom K.ippur. Epiphanius• account starts with a drought. which
Jasted exactly until the moment when James lifted bis hands to heaven. If
the Babylonian coneept was held also in Palestine in Hegesippus' time (the
second century), then the bigh priest was responsible for the drought and
James, the charismatic rainmaker, demonstrated bis superiority.
Not only the high-priestly aspects but also the ascetie practices of James
recall Yom Kippur, and may perhaps point to a conscious association witb
the Day of Atonement, rather than the customary explanations: Naziritell

lO Epipbanill$, Panario" 78: 14.

21 bYomo S3b; bTa 'an 24b.
21 On James as a Nazirite see E. Zucksehwerdt, "Das Naziräat des Herrenbruders
Jakobus uch Hegesipp (Euseb, h.s. Il 23,5~),,. Ze.it1chrf/t for die nefltestomelrlliche
Wis$enschaft wnd die Kwnde der älteren Kirche 68 (1977} 276-87. Of the three Nazirite
abstineaces (alrohol, haircuttiJJg and belng in the presenee of co.pse&, see Num 6:1·-7),
James obseTYed two. Moreover, the. formulation ll:K a:oo.iac; l''ltpöc; uütoil, whkh is em-
ployed regarding S8.lllsOD, clearly tries to turn J8.llles into a Nazirite. Epiphanius reduces
tbe similuity to rhe Nazirite tradition by ski.pping the abstention ftom wine.
 Yom KJppur in JITII'ish Ch,.istian Legends 249

or Rechabite23 traditions. According to Eusebius. James avoided alcohol

from birth. nor did he eat meat; he did not cut bis hair, embalm himself, or
frequent a bathhouse. Epiphanius does not mention the abstention ftom
wine and from anointing, but he adds abstention from sexual interoourse,
from wearing sandals and from wearing a second coat. 24
lf we assume that Busebius and Epiphanius used Hegesippus independ-
ently and adopted different but complemcntary details, we can reconstruct
a Iist of seven prohlbitions: drinkins wine. eating meat, haircutting, bath-
house, anointing, wesring sandals or a seoond ooat, and sexual inter~
oourse.2s I find especially telling that Eusebius, Epiphanius and Mishna.h
Ta'anit agree on the mention of keeping away from public bathhouses, a
prohibition that does not fit tbe Nazirite or the Rechabite txaditions.26 The
last four prohibitions agree with Jewish custom on public mourning days
as described in the Misbnah Ta'anit.21 To abstain from wine and meat is a
rule for the eve of Tish'a be'Av. 28 However, the closest parallel to the
whole list is the six prescriptions for Yom Kippur: eating, drinking, wash-
ing. anointing, wearing sandals and sexual intercourse.29 Ifthe assumption
is oorreet that Epiphanius and Eusebius independently copied directly from
Hegesippus. Hegesippus portrayed not Qnly the high-priestly but also the
aseetic aspects of James' bebavior as a permanent Yom Kippur. Now we
have to take into consideration the religious situation after the destruction
of the temple. The entrance of the most sacred person into the most sacred
place to intercede in God's presence for hwnanity's sins bad been re-
stricted to the m.ost sacred day, Yom Kippur. Fasting and praying were of
major importance, but they happened also on other days. In this context,
Hegesippus portrays James, the leader of the Jewish Christian faction, as
fasting and interceding unceasingly in the most sacred piace as if every
day were Yom Kippur. This portrayal spreads the unique sanctity ofthat

ts O.a ehe Rechabite background see lhe discussion in lrshai, "Historical Aspects ofthe
Christian-Jewish Polemic Conceming ehe Chllrch of Jerusalem in tltc Fourth Century,"
vol. 1, pp. 8·-12 and vol. 2, pp. 13-16, notes 67, 68, 71, 83-86).
~ The latter two may also depend on Matt 10:10; however, many of the motifs of
Matt 10 are missing.
t~ The following abstinem:es arc mentioned by both: meat, b.athhouse, haircutting.
Only Eusebius mentions wine and anointiog, while Epiphanius is the only oue to reter to
sandals, second eoat and sex.
211 mTa'an 1:6.
17 mTa'an 1:6;4:7.

~• mTa'an 4:7.
29 mYoma 8:1, no eating. drinking, wubing. anointiog, sandals or sexual intercourse.
The first two are modified, because total abstinence from food and drinlc. is impossible
ev1111 for permanent asc:etics. There is no prohibilion against using a public bathhouse,
since washing is forbidden altogetlter.
250 Thalrnpoct of Yom Kipflll7 on Christionity in the Firfi and Second Centwiu

day to all days ofthe year. If James, the Jewish Cbristian leader par ex.cel-
lence, could, according to Hegesippus, approach God directly every day, a
special Day of Atonement bad become superfluous for the followers of
James, i.e. Hegesippus' Jewish Christian contemporaries. By the same
token we can conclude (if our thesis is correct) that some Jewish Christian
groups, those against whom Hegesippus drew his portrayal, did observe
YomK.ippur.

2. Zechariah's Revelation on Yom Kippur

Luke l teils the story about Zechariah, the priest, who on offering incense
in the temple is approached by Gabriel. who announces to him the future
birth of Jobn. lf we consider Luke's account as historical, Zechariah's act
was part of the duty of every member of the priestly watches who partici-
pated in the temple service; in this case, Zechariah was most probably of-
fering the daily incense offering in the sanctuary, the ..holy area.. oul~ide
the holy of holies. Suddenly, in the fourth century, simultaneously in man.y
places and in many languages, •a tradition appears about Zechariah, the
high priest, receiving the revelation on entering the holy of holies on Yom
Kippur or Sukkot:30 in Latin in the anonymaus de solstitiis (third or fourth
century?) and Ambrose (d. 397); in Syriac in Ephrem (d. 373); in Greek in
Chrysostom's Christmas Homi/y from 386Y The simultaneaus attestation
is so widely dispersed that the ttadition must be older than the end of the
fourth century.

10 See above, p. 68, notes 239 and 290 for oU.er authors who considered the two festi·

vals as one, or who eonfused SUkkot and Yom Kippur. On the sarne confusion of Silkkot
and Yom Kippurinrelation to Job.o's annunciation or conception, cf. e.g. Cillysostom,
Christma.s Homily 5 (PG 49:3~7 C); Pseudo--Cillysostom, In lfJlJdem co11ceptionis sancti
loannis Baptfstae (PG 50:739 A).
~ 1 /Je solstltiit et aeC{Ilinocliis (ed. Botte, pp. 96-98); Ambrose, Commentary on Luke
1:22 (CCSL 14:17, lines 339-346); Ephrem, Commentary on E'ICodru 12:2-3 (CSCO
152:141); ComiMIItary on the Diate.uaron 1:29 (SC 121:61--62); Homily on the NatMty
5:14, 26:12; 27:3.13 (conceptlon of Jesus on 10 April, six months aft.er lohn); Joho
Chrysostom, Christmas Homily, PG 49:351-62. The traditionalso appears in many other
writings, among them those of the mid-sixth-century traveling businessmau who is
known by the name of Cosmas lndic:opleuStes: Christion Topography 5:9 and 5:37 (SC
1S9:20-23 and 66-69); and an anonymous commentary on Luke from Jerusalem, which
the editor dates to 400-450, fragment 10, publisb.ed in J. Reuss (ed.), Lukas-Kommentare
ou.s der griechischen Kirche. Aus Katenenhand$chriften ge.sDmmelt und herau.sgegeben
(Texte und Untersucbungen 130; Berlin, 191!4), pp. 23-24.
 Yom Kipplll' in Jewi$h Christian Legends 251

Already in the Protevangelium of James, a Jewish Cbristian legend of

the mid-second century,n Zechariah bad been promoted to high priest. Yet
the actual scene of the annunciation is only indirectly alluded to: "About
that time [when Mazy was working on the temple curtain] Zechariah be-
came mute, and Samuel replaced him, unti1 Zechariah spoke" (10:2). Nei-
ther time nor place nor details of the encounter with Gabriet are
specified.33 Elsewhere in the Protevangelium, the holy of holies is a place
of revelation {8); nevertheless, the annunciation does not have to have
happened on Yom Kippur, since in the Protevangelium, tbe holy of holies
can be entered every day (as in Hegesippus). 34 Yet from promoting Zecha-

32 On the Protevangelium, see H. Smid, Protevangeli11m Jacobi. A Commentary

(Apocrypha Novi Testamenti 1: 1; Assen, 1965); E. de Strycker, La forme Ia plus anclen-

ne d11 ProtivU1fgile de JaC</Ues. Recherehes s~~r le Papynm Bodmer j avec une ldition
critique d11 tute grec el une tradflction annotie. En appendice: Les ver1ions arm~nlennes
traduitu en Latin par Hans Quecke (Subsidia Hagiographüea 33; Bnusels, 1961);
0. Cullmann, "The Protevangeliwn of James,.. in: W. Sehneerneicher (ed.), New Te.rta-
ment Apocrypha. Vol /. Gospels and Related Wriling.s (Louisville [Kentucky), 1991;
pp. 421-43&); and now also R.F. Hock {ed.), The /nft~ncy Gospels ofJames und Thomtl$
with lntrothction, Notes, and Original 1'ext foaturing the NEW Scholars Version Tran.s-
laiion (Tb.e Scbolars Bible 2; Santa Rosa (Calif.}, 1994}. J used Tisehendorf's division
into chapters and verses as printed in Cullmanu.
On the Jewisb. Chrlstian provenance, see E. Cothenet, "Prot6vangile de Jacques: orj-
gine, genre et signification d'un premier midrash cbr6tien sur la Nativite de Marie," in:
W. Iiaase and H. Temporini (eds.), A.ufttieg und Niedergang der R(Jmischen Welt 2:2j:6
(Berlin and New Yodc, 1988; pp. 42.52-4269); F. Manns, "Une ancieflll.e tradition sur la
jcllllnesse de Marie," in: idem, Essais .sur le Judio-Christianisme (Studium Biblicum
Franciscauum Analeeta 12; Jerusalem, 1977; pp. 106-114); and S. Lieberman, "The
Temple; lts Lay-Out and Proce:dure," in: idem, Gret~k in Jewish Palestine/Hellenism in
Jewiah Palutine {New York and Jerusalem, l994; pp. 164-179). From time to time I will
refer to Jewish parallels that demonskate: that the ProtD!n'angelium was most probably
written by a Jewish Christian (CQntra Hock, The Infancy Gospe/11 of Jamu, pp. 9-11).
S. Verhelst, "Le JS Aolit, le 9 Av et le Kathism.e," Que.stioi'IS Lihtrgiqutts 82 (2001} 167-
169, 3rgues for a later date ofthe Protevangelium.
33 The inner chronology ofthe Protevangelium is problematic. Josepb is suppo~ 10
bave ·left Mary at age twelve (8:2; 9:3), but on his rerurn she is aheady sixteen. (12:3).
Tbe last point could be a latm addition, as it is unnecessary for the narrative if we assume
that giving binb age 12/13 was considered acceptable in second·ceDtury Cbristianity.
34 For example, Zechariah enterS it 10 receive an orade abollt wbatto do witll Maxy
(8-9). The holy ofholie$ is also the place ofGod's pre:sence. Mary is describtd as having
lived in the holy of holies for nine ycars being nurtured by an angel: ''How c:.ould you
lower your soul? Did you forget ttte Lord, your God, you, who were edueated in the boly
of holies (Ei~ tli iyla. tlilv li.yicov) and received nurtute by the hand of angels? You, who
listened to their hymns and danced before thero, what did you do?" Mary's involvement
in the sanctuary is continued by her pllrticipating in sewing the curtain of the temple ( 10)
during which Gabriel announces the conceptioo of Jesus. This elose assoc:iation ofMaJy
and the teinpl~ probably has two functions. First, the purity ofMary enables her to live in
252 The Impact of Yom Kippw on Christionity in the First and Second Cenhlries

riah to high pricsthood it is only a small conceptual step to placing the an-
nunciation scene in the context of a special ritual of the high priest, i.e.
Yom Kippur. l$ The fourth-century embellishment may well have circulared
alteady in second-oentwy Jewish Christian circles, whose members
regarded Zechariah as a high priest. A hint on this may be manuscript S of
the Old Syriac~ whicb :improves Luke's laconic statement "to offer the in-
cense in the temple of the LOid"' (1:9) to "to bring in the incense"- pre-
suming a movement into a building, which could be the holy of holies or
the sanctuary.36 ·
How is it possible to ex.plain the legendary metamorphosis of Luke' s
simple ae<;ount - a priest offering incense in the sanctuary at an unspeci-
fied time - to the detailed, sophisticated version - a high priest offering in-
cense in the holy of holies on Yom Kippur? I propose two explanations:
First, a story about a high priest who receives a revelation in the most sa-
cred place on the most sacred day is more interesting than a story about
some priest who enters some place on some date. 37 If legend promotes to
high priesthood the priest who enters the sanctuary and receives a revela-
tion during bis incense sacrifice, the likelihood increases that the place and
the ritual will also be promotedt Second, the Jewish imaginaire of Yom
Kippur closely associates the high priest's entrance to the boly of holies
and the incense sacrifi.ce with encounters with angels and with the divine.38
For people accustomed to thinking in the tradition of the Epistle to the
Hebrews. which places the incense altar in· the holy of hoHes, this shi:ft

the holy of holies and; naturally, the holy of holies protccts her purity. Second, tbe pres-
enee of Ood passcs from the holy ofholies to Mary. The tradition influeneed early lsl&IU
and may therefore be Jewish Christiau: see Qur'an, Sura 3:37 (the family of 'Imran). The
tradition of the virgins sew.ing the temple veil .also points to a Jewish Christian proven-
ance, since it appears in 2Barat:h 10:19; m$eqal8:S; Puiqta Robbati26:6: see Lieber-
man, "The Temple: Its Lay-Out and Procedure," pp. 167-169.
3' On the various texts dllting ehe revelation of Zeebariab to Yom Kippur, sec J.F.
Coalcley, ''Typology and the Birthday of Christ on 6 January," Orientolia Chrutiana
Analeeta 236 (1988) 247-256; and A. de Halleux, "Le comput 6phr6mien du cycle de Ia
nativite," in: F. Van Segbroeek, et al. (ed$.), The Fo11r Gf.JSpels 1992. Festschrift Frai'IS
N11irynck (Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologican~m Lovaniensium 3; Leuven, 1992:
pp. 2369-2382).
36 Two Western writers, Irenaeus of Lyon (d. aft.er 178) and Victorinus of Poetovio

{d. 304), statc that Ze<:hariah brougbt a ~ifice: see Iren.eus, Against the Her~t­
.des 3:10:1, cf3:11:8; and Victorinus, Co1111t1entury on the Apoca/ypse 4:4 (SC423:68;
cf. CSEL 49:50-Sl).
n Daniel Sehwartz, in an oral communkation.
" See pp. 79-85, 110-112 and 124-127, above.
 Yom Kipplll' ill Jewish Christitm Lege1rtls 253

becomes even slighter.39 Even ifthe full-fledged tradition appears only in

fourth-century mainstream sources, the Protevangelium strongly suggests
tbat an early fonn existed already in Jewish Christianity.
The simllltaneous surfacing of the tradition at the end of the fourtb
cen.twy in many languages and areas can be explained in light of the pro-
nlotion of the celebration of Cbristmas at that time. For computing Christ' s
birthday, the references in the account of John the Baptist's birth are indis-
pensable, first and foremost being the annunciation to Zechariah. th.e only
event that could be assigned to a specific day - the tenth of Tishri. 40 I will
give my translation of the most interesting and probably earliest passage
on Zechariah and Yom Kippur from the anonymous tract de solslitii:s et
aequinoctiis conceptionis et nativitatis Domini nostri Iesu Christi et Johan-
nis Baptistae, since thc text is not easily available and has not been
trans1ated:
In the times when Zecllariah, the father of Jobll, served in the priesthood of the
Iews according to the dec:ree of the law and the ptophccy of Ionab, whieh pro-
claimed to the Ninevites the destruction of their city after tbru days, the Nincvites
had gained mercy from God's action through penitence.'1 ln memory oftbi.q, now,
the Jews observe every year a last in the morxth of September, whidt they
.solemnly call Booths41 or Tabernacles.40 Tberefore the priest! at that time offered
Rerific:es to God for the sins of the peopl.e in tlt.ose days in the mollth of Septem-
ber according to the law's c:ommandmem; therefore, when Zechariah saerific:ed at
the altar, he immediately professed that he was not a priest nor worthy [to inter-
cede] with prayers for tbe sins ofso wicked a people. But (ZecbariahJ remernbered
that Christ hlmself was going to be tlte only lnle priest, about whom the fllthcr bad
said: You at'e priest in eternity accordi11g to the Ol'der ofMelchizedd; [Ps 110:4],
who alone offers an appeasiog sacrifice for the sins of all to God. Aod Zecharia.b
prayed for His com.ing...."

39 On possible reason.s for Hebrews plac:ing the in~;cose altar in tbe holy of holies, see
Attridge, The Epistle to the Hebrews, pp. 234-236; and cf. lKgs 6:22; 1B111'Uch 6:7.
o10 for example, Epbrem writes "From the tenth day of lhe seventh month, wben
Zec:bariah J"Ceei"ed the announcement oftbe birth of John, until tbe tenth day ofthe first
month, wben Mary rcceiwd the annollllctment of the angel, six months passed... Com.-
mentary on &odru 12:2, transl. by J.P. Amar, E.G. Mathews and K. McVey, St..Ephrem
the Syrian. Selected Prose Work.t. Commentary on Gmesis. Commentary on E:roriJJs.
Homily on """ Lm-d.. Letter to P11.bli11S (Fatbt:rs of the Cburch 91; Washington, D.C.,
1994), pp. 246-247; cf. CSCO 152:141.
41 Tbis is one of the earllest attestations for an association of Jonab with Yom Kippur;

see above, note219, pp. SS-56 and pp. 51-59.

42 Metellitum is a llan.scriptioo of the Aralnaic term ltn'?'ltl1l/ am7oa.
43 Scaen.(Jphegiam is a transcription of the Greek term OICIIVOlUJYi.a.
44 Here follow refereoces 10 the fulfillment ofprayers &om Matt 7:9-11; llobn S: I S.
254 Tlre Impact of Yom Kippur on Christianity in IIre First and Second Centuries

Thus, when Zechariah had prayed for this, the IlDgel Gabriel answered him:
Zechariah, your prayers have been heard Behold, Elizabeth, your wife will bear
you a son, and you willname him John. You will halle juy and gladness, and many
will rejoice at his birth, and he will be great in tlre sight of the Lord. He will not
drink wine or strong drink; soon, even before his birth he will be jilled with the
Holy Spirit. He will turn many of the people of Israel toward the Lord their God
and he will go before him [Luke 1:13-17].
The story happened before the f"Irst year of Tiberius Caesar [14 CE], in the
month of September, on the eighth Calends of October [24 September], on the
eleventh [day of the] waxing moon [II Tishri], when the Jews have to celebrate
the fast ofTabemacles.
Then, indeed, after the ninth year, Tiberius Caesar [23 CE] computed time and
course ofthe moon, and this day, the eighth ofthe Calends ofevery October, hap-
pened to be the equinox, when the night begins to be Ionger than the daylight. For
he must increase, he said, but I must decrease (Jobn 3:30). For the light had
become less than the darkness when the Jews, according to the law and the
prophecy, offer God the sacrifices in which John was conceived, in which they
were also accused by the Lord, as the prophet Isaiah says: What to me is the
multitude ofyour sacrijica? Says the Lord; I halle had enough ofyour burnt
afferings oframs and the fat of calves and goats. [lsaiah 1:11]. For these [offer-
ings] were affered previously for the sins of the people, which already had to
cease when John the Baptist was conceived.
And therefore Zechariah, his father, the priest ofthe Jews, became mute, since
their sacrifices already then had to cease and "become mute," which were affered
for the sins ofthe people. The one and only priest came, who affered a sacrifice to
God for the sins with bis own single spotless lamb. And John showed him to the
Jews: Hel"e is the Lamb ofGodwho bears the sin ofthe warld[John 1:29).45

The "eleventh (day of the) waxing moon," 11 Tishri, could be understood

as the day after Zechariah finished performing the Yom Kippur service,
returned home, bad intercourse with Elizabeth and John was conceived. 46
The high priesthood of Zechariah is explicitly declared to be inferior to the
"only true" high priesthood of Jesus.
The confusion and identification of S ukkot and Yom Kippur occur very
frequently, 47 probably because the two festivals are so close on the calen-
dar and because the construction of booths is more perceptible to the out-
side observer than prayer assemblies taking place inside synagogues. Here
the date (10 Tishri) and the ritual (intercession and sacrifice for atonement,
Jonah, repentance) refer to Yom Kippur. This is not the place to engage in
a discussion ofthe convoluted provenance of de solstitiis, but its acquaint-
ance with Jewish ritual and the use of a transcription metellitum for the

4' De solstitiis et aequinoctiis (ed. Botte, pp. 96-98).

46 I will retum to the computation and the speculations about the astronomical
constellations in the section on the commemoration day ofthe annunciation to Zechariah;
see below, pp. 322-328.
47 See above, p. 68, notes 289 and 290, and p. 2SO, note 30.
 Yom Kippur in Jewi:sh Christion Legends 255

Aramaie Kn':l107.l/Kn':l':lo7.l for booths bespeak an author residing in an area

with Aramaie and Jewish influences but with Latin as the language. The
frequency with which Ephrem refers to the computation, his acquaintance
with traditions of the Pro/evangelium, and the reading of the Old Syriac
point to a generic connection between the Jewish Christian legend and the
Syriac mainstream authors.
The writings of such mainstream authors as Ambrose, Ephrem, Chryso-
stom, Beda and Ishodad, and the institution of a festival, prove that Zecha-
riah's high priesthood and the annunciation in the holy ofholies on Yom
Kippur-Sukkot became "faits hSgendaires." I will retum to this tradition in
the chapter on Christian autumn festivals, where I analyze the festival that
commemorates the annunciation to Zechariah in the Eastem Church and is
closely related to the Jewish and the Christian imaginaires of Yom Kip-
pur.48
Does the Protevangelium betray any attitude toward Yom Kippur? It
seems not. Unlike in Hegesippus, the aspect of permanent intercession in
the holy ofholies is missing, as is the self-affiiction. But as in Hegesippus,
the holy ofholies is always accessible to the Christian Jewish high priest,
who in the end will be murdered in the sanctuary. Remarkably, the annun-
ciation scene, which the later Christian mainstream tradition depicts as
happening on Yom K.ippur, is completely marginalized. If we take into
account the possibility that the Yom Kippur tradition was already circu-
lating in second-century Jewish Christianity, was there a reason to sup-
press it? Suppression would fit the general tendency of the Pro/evangelium
to minimize the position of John the Baptist and replace him with Mary.
Excursus: Sirneon and John as High Priests
Simeon, another figure ftom Luke's nativity narrative, is the beneficiary of two promo-
tions. Luke's accouot provides no evidence that Simeon was a priest or even a Levite.
Y et a few Christian texts call Simeon a priest,49 most probably because of the close asso-
ciation with the temple in Luke's account (2:25-35). The Pro/evangelium promotes

41 See below, pp. 322-328.

49 A search in the TLG 8.0 resulted in, among other sources, Pseudo-Epiphanius, De
prophetarum vita et obitu (recensio prior) {ed. Schell!lan p. 24 line 11); Pseudo-Atha-
nasiU5, Testimonia e scriptura (PG 28:64C); Johannes Damascenus, Sermo in annuntio-
tionem beatae Mariae uirginis (PG 96:652C). The authenticily of the last has been
rejected by I.M. Hoeck, "Stand und Aufgaben der Damaskenos-Forschung," Orientafia
Christiana Periodica 17 (1951) 5-60, here p. 40, note 96. On Sirneon in the Vitae Pro-
phetal"llm, see A. Schwemer, Studien zu den frühjüdischen Propheten/egenden. Vitae
Prophetarum (2 vols; Textsand Studies in Aocieot Judaism 49 and 50; Ttlbingen, 1995,
1996), vol. 2, pp. 326-327. On the Vitae Prophetal"llm as Christian composition, see
D. Satran, Biblical Prophet11 in Byzontine Pa/estine. Reassessing the Lives of the
Prophets (Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha 11; Leiden, 1995).
256 The Impact ofYom KipptU' on Christianity in the First und Secemd Cenwrie$

Simeoo further, to high priesthood (24). He becomes the suc:cessor ofthe murdered Zeeh-
ariab. This did not become part of' generat Christian Iore; the only otb.eT text kDown to m.e
tbat calls Simeon a high priest is the Latin version A of tbe Descent to Hell. A setoAd
Simeon, the son ofClopas is traditionally seen as the suc:cessor of James as bishop of Je-.
rusalem. While I could not find 811Y explitit mention ofSimeon Clopas as (lrigb} priest, i1
is possible that he was not always sharply distinguished from tbe Simeon who held Jesus
as a baby in bis hands. 50 Tradition closely links three Cbristian (high) priestly figures:
Zechariab, Sirneon end James.' 1 This bccomes mostevident through the discovery of
their c:ommon tomb on 1he Mount of Olives in the year 3S 1 by a hermit. Epiphanius.n In
any esse, in tbe plot ofthe ProtBllangelium, having 1wo suc:cessivc Christian Jews in the
high priestbood reinforces tbe Christian claim to tbe temple as 1 place ofOod's presenc:e.
The last of tbe figures to be examined is Joho, the Beloved Disciple. He is differmt,
in that hishigh priesthood did not become a "mit ll!gendaire" as did the high priesthood
of Zecbariab or James or even Simeon. Very few sourees refer to biro in high-priestly
terms." The earliest such SOUJCe is a Ietter by Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus arul femm.t
Ieader ofthe Quartadeciman faction, to Vietor ofRome wrir:ten around 190 CE, preserved
in Eusebius: ..... John, who rec:lined upon the bosom of the Lord, and wbo was a priest
wesring th.e sacerdotal plate (xnalov), was both a wilness and e. teacher..."-"~
While Polycrates uses the term if1PE'ix.; (priest) and not üp;tL~ (high priest), the
xi'talov clearly designates John as a high priest. Coosequently, Rufious traoslate$ the
first passage with sacerdo.s (priest) and the second with summus sacerdo:s (high priest).ss
Tbc only other attestation I have he.-d of, and this only indireetly, is the colophon of a
Paris manusaipt of Hippolytos "Odes on All the Scriptures." mentioned by Robm
Eisler."
How could Joho have become a hi~ priest? There are at least two possibilities: fam-
Hy relations with the "high priests" Jesos and James,51 or bis exceptional rank by virtue
ofbeing the last surviving aposUe. As noted earlier, the xi:talo.ov may weil have been per-
c:eived as a symbol of power ofthe bigbest rank. There tan be no doubt that Polycratea'
reason for including tbis tradition in his Ietter to Victor was to enhance bis own posirion
regarding the celebration ofEaster on 14 Nisan. One eould paraphrasebis argument thu9:
..I observe the same liturgical tustom as Polytarp and as John, who was the bearer of the
!Ct~ul.ov.'' And one eould add: "And be, the chiefpriest, should know wheo to celebrate

50 Possibly. Hegesippus coosidm Simeoo Clopas to bc a high priest. Eusebius writes

that the attempt to san James was undertakcn by a Rechabite priest. lnstead of lhese
conupt Jines, Epiphanius writes Simeon Clopas.
$1 E.g. all ofthem are called "just.''
51 See F.-M. Abel, "'La s6pulture de saiut Jac.ques lc Mineur,'' Rt!liB~ Bibliq11e 16

(1919) 480.-499. But see also S. Vcrhcl.st, "L'apoca1yp$e de Zacharie, Simeoo et Ja~
ques," R~llt Biblique 105 (1998) 81-104.
" See Zahn, "B~~r und Vettern Jesu,,. pp. 209-213.
54 Polycrates aPild Bu.sebius. History oftIu? Church 3:31:3; 5:24:3.
" Jerome quotes Polycratcs usingpontifex (priest): De viris inlustribus 45 (Texte und
Untersuchungen 14:29 [Emest Cushing Richardson, 1896]).
56 "Odes o.n All the Scriptures" in Pari.s Codex Coislin. 195, according to Robert

Eisler, The Enigma ofthe Folll'th Go.spel (London. 1938), p. SS.

57 Actording to one tradition Salome, Jobn's motber, was Mary's sister, and lohn and
Jesus were in fatt cousins: see Zahn, "BrQder und Vettern Jesu,,. pp. 340-341.
 Yom Kippur inJflll'i&h Chrinifllf Legend$ 251

festivala.." Tbe in!ormation ahout Jcihn is, after all, mueh more sk:etchy lhan OID' sources
about ZechariJh and James. aud all eo~N:Ius.ions about bi:s bigb priesthood are su~ect to
tbis sketchiness.

Conclusion

Hegesippus• portrayal that the holy of hoHes was always accessible and
that James practiced aseetie behavior as if every day were Yom Kippur
makes a Day of Atonement obsolete, especially if the temple ritual is no
Ionger performeiL Instead, Hegesippus promotes the practice offasting and
praying every day. Per:baps we have to understand even the mishnaic asser-
tion tbat it is the Day of Yom Kippur that atones as a readion to similar ar-
gutnents. 51 The Mishnah would have countered Hegesippus by maintaining
that Yom Kippor is not obsolete, since it was never the priestly ritual that
achieved the atonement but the special day. At some point between the
second and fourth centuries, ~bariah becomes a high priest entering the
holy ofholies on Yom Kippur for all these reasons: the story•s appeal, the
ttaditional association of the entrance into the holy of holies on Yom Kip-
pur with revelation, and the suitability of Yom Kippur as the date for the
computation of Christmas.
 Part Three

The Impact of Y om Kipp ur

on Early Christianity
from the Third to the Fifth Centories
 Chapter7

Chr~stian Exegesis ofLeviticus and the Polemies against

the Contemporary Yom Kippur

Over the centuries the biblical Yom Kippur imagery from Leviticus ac-
quired increasing importance for Christian sages. In fmt-century Christian
Judaism, it was only for tbe community ofHebrews and some other Chris-
tian Jews that Jesus was a high priest entering the holy of hoHes - by the
tbird century, Jesus is the heavenly high priest for almost every Christian.
Not only Jesus but even a bishop who celebrated the Eucharist could be
described as a high priest upon entering the holy of hoHes of bis cburch.
Moreover, while the New Testamentealls Jesus a scapegoat in allusive
tenns. in fifth-century Christianity the scapegoat has become a common
image explieitly used to explain the atoning function of Christ' s death.
Tbis impactwas mainly "bookish,. or "biblicaln via tbe inclusion ofLeviti-
cus, Hebrews and Romans into the Christian canon. Yet even if tbe main
impact of Yom Kippur derived from its biblical vetsion, we still bave to
ask why it was this imagery that became so attractive.
I claim that Yom Kippur as observed by Jewish contemporaries of the
Church Fathers contributed to the increasing use of the Yom Kippur im-
agery by Christians. To address this point, the chapter opens with abrief
presentation of some aspects of Christian exegeses of Leviticus 16, focus-
ing on the writings of the fust and most int~resting co1nmentator, Origen.
It also reflects on the increase in the use of terms relating to institutions
centralto Yom Kippu.r (holy of holies, high priest, kapporet) in Christi.an
Jiturgical tenninology- what Steven Fine calls "templization" (section 1). 1
The three sections that follow analyze the challenge posed to Christianity
and its cl.aim regarding the exclusivity of Cbrist•s once-and-for-all Day of
Atonement sacrifice by the continuing observance of Yom Kippur. I begin
with a description of the e-ridence for Christian participation in the Jewish
fast, whicb caused considerable tension in Caesarea and Antiocb. I main-
tain that Origen wrote hls exege.!lis ofLeviticus 16 and 23 as an attempt to
keep these Christians from fasting on Yom K.ippur (section 2). I then ana-

1 For the term and its ramitications in Jato antique Judaism, soe Fine, This Holy
PJace,-pp. 41-59, 79-94, 132-1S6.
262 The Impact ofYom KippllT on Christia11ity in the Third to the F;fth Centurie:s

lyze the evidcnce provided by those authors who polemically describe con-
tempotary Yom Kippur rites, some even as firstband witnesses, whlch
testifies against an exclusively ..booldsh" relationship to Yom K.ippur. 'fhat
many of tbese descriptions appear in Cbristian tracts on fasting may be
seen as further evidence for Christian auempts to keep fellow Christians
from joining the ''fast of the Jews" (section 3). Finally, I address the other
side of the coin, discussing Jewish polemies in Yom K.ippur-related tcxts
in opposition to the Cbristian concept of atonement (section 4).

1. Christian Exegesis of Leviticus and

the Templization ofthe Liturgy

Quite surprisingly, Greek and Latin as well as Syriac and Annenian mate-
rial on Leviticus, and specifically on Yom Kippur, abounds. Leviticus, par~
ticularly those chapters dealing with sacrifices, is commonly rcgarded as
the book least known among Christians at all times. Symptomatic oftbis
neglect is the "Biblica" index oftbe (otherwise extremely helpful) C/(lllis
Patrum Graecorum, which lists not a single exegetical tract for Leviticus2
- though there are as many exegetical tr:acts dealing with Leviticus as with
Hebrews, namely seven (originally wriUen in Greek and dating back tobe*
forc 500 CE).3 When counted together with Latin, Syriac and Armenian
works there are many more. The following is to my knowledge the most
complete Iist of early Cbristian exegetes dealing with Leviticus as a whole
book (i.e. without homilies covering single cbapters):
a) Around 240 CI> Origen4 wrote a set ofhornilies preserved in Rufinus•
Latin translation. Homilies 9 and 10 deal with Yom Kippur. 5

2 M. Geerard and F. Glorie (eds.), Clat~is PatTtim Graecorum. Yolum~ll V. Indices, ln-
itüz, Concodantiae (Co.-pus Christianorum Tumhout. 1987), p. 118. This. fact doe$ not
detract ftom the praisewonhiness of this erudite work of seholarship; it merely demoo-
strares tbe Iack of Cbristian interest in Levitieus.
3 Geerard and Glorie, Clavis Potrum Graecorum, vol 5, pp. 146-147, Jists seven

(Origen, Theodore_ofMopsuestia, Severus of Gabala, lohn Cbrysostom, Cyril of Alexan-

dria, Gennadius and Theororet of Cyru.s). Almost all of them are extap.t only in frag-
ments.
• Lived ca. 18!1-254 in Alexandria and Caesarea, writing his homilies from Caesarea.
' W.A. Baehrens, Origenes Werke, :sechster Band: Homilien zum Hexatnch ln Rufins
Uber:setzrmg. Erster Teil: Die Homilien zu Gmesi9, Exodus und Levitlew (GCS 29 {Ori-
genes 6}; Leipzig, 1920); on Yom Kippur, see pp. 417-445. The Freneh translation and
the notes by Mareel Boa-ret in SC 286 and 287 (Paris, 1981) are very helpful. I quote from
the English translation by G.W. Bark.ley, Orlgen. HontiiJI on Le~~iticiiS 1-16 (Tbe Fathen
of the Cburcb 83; Washington D.C., 1990). On Origen and the Jews in gen.eral. see tbe
 Christion Exegesic ofLe~~itiCVI ond tlte PolemiQ Q[l(Jirut Yom Kipp11r 263

b) Eusebius of Emesa (d. ca. 359) wrote a selective comm.entary in

Grc:c:k preserved in an Annenian translation}5 He is the only exegete
ofLeviticus who did not comment on chapters 16 or 23. 7
c) Augustine (354--430) wrote two works on the Heptateuch. Quaestio-
nes and Locutiones. wbich explain difficult passages. Within this
framework he also dealt with Leviticus. 8
d) Cyril of Alexandria (d. 444) wrote the G/aphyra, a selective com-
mentary on the Pentateuch (before 423). Anotber spiritual commen-
tary on Yom Kippur is extant in sections ofhis On the Adoration and
Worship ofGod in Spiritandin Truth (around 415).9
e) A presbyter, Hesychius of Jerusalem, wrote an extensive verse-by-
verse commentary (430-450) translated into Latin by an anonymous
translator (probably of the sixth century). 10 This is the only exegeti-
cal traet covering exclusively Leviticus, and the only extant early
Cbristian commentary on Leviticus verse by verse.
f) Theodoret of Cyrus 11 wrote Questions on the Octateuch (after 453).

elasstc: by N. de Lange, Origen and the Jews (Cambridge [UK], 1975). Nevertheless, de
Lange does not refer to the exegesis of Lev 16.
6 Vahan Hovhannesian, EUJebe d'Emese, 1. Commenlalre de I'Octateuque (Venice,
1980); yet the commentary on Leviticus fills only ten pages, 125-134.
7 B. ter Haar Romeny suggests that Eusebius' opposition to allegory might explain
his Iack of interest in the sac:rificial passages: sec his "Early Antiochene Commentaries
on Exodus," in: E.A. Livingstone (ed.), Sludia .Patristica 30 (Leuven, 1997; pp. 114-
119), hcrep. 117.
· • Augustine, Quaestionum in Heptateuchum liber tertius (CCSL 33:175-233}, here
pp. 211-214; Loe11ticmum in lleptateuchvm liber tertius (CCSL 33:424-431}. here
p. 428.
' Cyril of Alexandria, G/aphyrorum in Levilic11m liber (PG 69:S39-.S90); On the Ad-
oration and Wonhip ofGod in Spiritandin Tnuh (PG 68:133-ll25), here pp. llOS-
1108. On Cyril, bis exegesis and Judaism, see R. Wilken, Judaism and the Early Chris-
tion Mind A Stttdy ofCyril of.Aiuandri(J's F.;zegesis and Theology (New Have:n [Conn.]
and London, 1971). especially pages 39-68. On the Glaphyra and On the Adoration rmd
Worllhip ofGod in Spiritandin Tnlth, sec ibidem, pp. 69-92.
IO Ht$)'Chius, Commentary on Le~~iticus (PO 93:787-1180). SeeS. Tampellini, "Intro-
duzione allo srudio del Commentarius in Levitk:um di Esi~hio di Oerusalemmc," (Ph.D.
dissertation; Bologna, 1998); 811d his preliminary swvey, "L'csegesi del Levitico di Esi-
chio di Oerusalemme. Osservazioni introduttive c sondaggi preliminari,'' Annali di storia
dell'esegesi 13/1 (1996) 201-209. l would like to express my deep gratirude to Stcfano
Tampellini for providing me with a copy ofhis dissertation.
11 Lived ca. 393-466, mainly in Cyrus, a small town close to Antioch. See C.T.

McCollough, "Theodoret of Cyrus as Biblical Interpreu;r and ihc Prcsence of Judaism .in
the Later Roman Empire," Swdia .Patristica 18 (J 983) 327-334. On Theodoret's exege-
sis, see J.-N. Guinot, L'atigese de Theodoret de Cyr (Th6ologie historique, 100; Paris:
Beauchesne 1995), especially pp. 771-75. Greck edition by Fm~ändez Marcos and
Saenz-Badillos, Theodoreti Cyremis Quaestiones in Octatt.uchum.
264 The lmp4ct of Yom KipJIIlT on Christianity in the Third t(J the Flfth Cenhlriu

g) Cyprian, "the Poet" of Gaul (early fift:h century) wrote some lines on
Leviticus 16 in his poetic retelling of tbe Heptateuch. 12
h) A selective commentary in Syriac exists under the name of EpJ.trem.l3
i) Questions on the Old Testament are asc:ribed to Isidore of Seville
(ca. 560-()36). 14
j) Paterius excerpted writings of Gregory the Oreat in his De Exposi-
tio7U! Veteris ac No11i Testamenti. 1s
k) lshodad ofMerv (niuth century) compiled a commentary from previ-
ous exegeses of Leviticus. 16 In his chapter on Leviticus 16 be quotes
Narsai (d. ca. 503), lohn ofBeth Rahban (d. 567). Abraham ofBetb
Rahban (d. after 567), Michael (sixth to seventh centuries) and
Daniel bar Tubanita (seventh century). 17 Of these, John wrote a
commentaty, Michael Questions, and the others most probably
Memre.

~
12 C)oprianus Gallus, Heptateuchos (CSEL 23:1 p. 104-ll.S [R. Peiper 18911)•.
u P. Beued.ictus (ed.), SancJi Patris Nosl1'i Epltraem Syri Opera Omnia quae astant
Graece, Syrtace, LoJine, in S4/S tomo:s di8tributa ad MSS. Codices Vatican03, aliosque
castigata, muftis aucta, interpl'etatiolte, praefationibliS, notis, Yarilllflibus lectiqnibus
illwtrala Nunc primum sub Awpiciis Clemetrlis XII. Pontfficu Maximl e Bibllatheca
Vaticana P7odeunt. Tomut PrimltS Syriace et Lotine (Rome, 1737); on Lev 16, see vol. 1,
pp. 244-245. A further commenlaty, extant i.a Armeniaa, is also attributed to Epbmn:
see E.G. Mathcws (ed., transl.), T1r11 Armenian Commentariu on Exodus·Deutuonomy
Attributed to Ephrem the Syrian (CSCO 587:83-123, 588:67-93; Scriptores Anneniaci
2S-26; Louvain, 1998). The editor dates the translation to around 1100 CE: see idem, The
Armenion Commentary on Gene:t.is Al11'ibuted to Ephrem the Syrian (CSCO 572;
Scriptores Armen.iaci 23; Louvain, 1998), pp. 1-11.
14 P!(?}-Isidore, Qvauiionu de 11eteri el IWUO Testamento. On Levidcus, see PL 83,

pp. 321-340. On Yom Kippur, see Pl, 83:333-334. lts autbentidty has been questioaed
by B. Altancr, ..Der Stand der Jsidorforsc:hung," in: Miscellanea .lsidorlana (Rome, 1936)
(non vidl), cf. E. Dekkers and A. Oaar, Clmis Patrum Lotinorum {CCSL; Steenbrug,
3 1995), pp. 398 and 402, nwnber 1194.

15 On Leviticus, see PL 79:753-762.

16 lshodad of Merv's commentacy on Leviticus bas been edited and tnmslated by

Ceslas Van den Eynde as Commentain d'JJodad de Merv Sfl1' I'Ancien Testamerrt. /1.
E%ode- Deuteronome (Text: CSCO 176 = Scriptores Syri 80; Translation; CSCO 179 -
Seriptores Syri 81; Louvam: Peeters 1958). I would like to express my gratitude to
Clemeus Leonbard for drawi.og my attcation to this important collation of earlier com-
meutaries.
17 On tbe identity of the authors and theiJ period, see thB introduc:tion of van den
Eynde, Commentaire d'l1o'dad de Mf1r'l' sur I'Ancien Testament. 11. &ode-Deuteronome
[translaticm] (CSCO 179, Scriptores Syri 81; Louvain, 1958), pp. vü-xi.
 ·Christlan Exege:sis ofLevitiCIIS and the Pole111ics agalrMI Yom Kipp11r 265

k) Tbeodore bar Koni (end of eightb century) compiled older intezpreta-

tions of Leviticus, too; yet bis Yom Kippur traditions are anony~
mous. 18
Other ancient writings on Leviticus are lost. We know of the following
commentators: 19
J) Victorinus of Pettau (d. ca. 304).
m)Diodorus ofTan:us (d. before 394).
n) Apollinaris ofLaodicea (d. ca. 390).
o) Theodore of Mopsuestia (d. 428) possibly wrote a commentary on
Leviticus.
p) Some fragments oflost Greek commentaries survived in the Catenae,
first assembled by Prooope of Ga7.a (d. 538).
The earliest and most iroportant tracts on Leviticus by Origen and Hesy-
chius were written in Pale.stine and m.any others in Syriac-speaking areas
with large Jewish populations. Many commentaries emerged in the first
half of the fiftb century, the golden era of exegetes among them those by
Cyril of Alexandria, Hesychius, Rufinus (translation of Origen), perhaps
Theodore of Mopsuestia, and shortly afterward also Theodoret.
The interpretations of Leviticus 16 and 23 proceed generally along
Hebrews' high-priestly typology,20 andin general, the status ofhigh priest
became one ofthe Standardattributes ofChrist. 21 Origen, the first Christian
exegete of Leviticus explicitly justifies his exegesis in terms of the

ll Tbeodore bar Koai, Scholia Mimra 3:43. See Hespel and Draguel (CSCO 431, 432;
Scriptores Syri 187, 188), pp 169-173.
19 Campare R. Pevreesse, l.e1 ancümr commentateur.s grec:s de l'Octateuque et des

Roi.~ (Studie Testi 201; Vatic:m City, 1959), passim; aod idem, "Anciens commentatears
grecs dc l'Octateuque," Revue biblique 44-4S (1935-1936) 166-191.201-220,364-384.
~ M.A. Signer, "Fleisch und Geist. Opfer und Versöhnung in den exegetischen Tradi-
tionen von Judeotwn und Christentum,'' in: H. Heinz (ed.), Yersöhmmg in der jfidi.sclten
und clvi.stlichen Liturgie (Freiburg i.Br., Basel and Vienna, 1990; pp. 197-219). On
Christian exegesis of LeviticllS, see also the studies in Ännali di storia dell'uegesi 13/1;
G. Rouwhorst, ..Leviticus 12-IS in Early Christianity," in: M. Poorthuis and J. Scbwartz
(eds.), P11rity alld H()/inus (Sewisb and Christian Penpectives Series 2; Leiden, 2000;
pp. 181-193); Tampellini.. "Jntroduzione allo studio del Commentarius in Leviticum di
Esi<:hw di Oerusalermne"; R. Wilken, "Origen's Ho~ru1y on Leviticvs and Yayikra Rab-
bah," io: G. Doriwl and A. le Boulluec (eds.), Ori~niana Sextll, Origine et Ia Bible I
Origen and the Bible. Actes du Colloquivm Origenianum Se1:tum Chontilly, 30 aoül - J
lleptembre 1993 (Bibliotheca Ephemeridom Theologicanun Lovaniensium 118; Leuven,
1995; pp. 81-91); R.J. Daly, "Sacrificial Soteriology in Origen's Homilies on Leviticus,''
in: E.A. Livingstoue (ed.), Studia Pt:uristica11:2 (Oxford, 1982; pp. 872-878).
21 A monograpb on the high priest in Cbristianity is a deside.ratum. A good overview
of tbt high priest in late antique Christology can be Cound in G, Schöllgen and F.-L.
Hossfeld, ..Hoherpriester," R(I(J/lexi/u)n fiir Antilee und G'hristenlum 16 (1994) 4-SS,
c:olumns 2S-37 (by Sc:böllgen).
266 ~ lmpor:t ofYom Kippur 011 ChriJtianity in the Third lo ihe Fifth Centuries

"Pauline" Epistle to the Hebrews as his henneneutical key to Yom Kip-

pur.22 Origen also uses other New Testamenttexts -·such as Romans 3:25
and Uohn 2:1-2 - as interpreting key texts.:n Among the passages dis~
cussed in cbapter 4 (on th.e Cbristian imaginaire), these two are quite ex-
plicit about their conn.ection to Lc\Jiticus 16. Where no explicit New Testa-
ment typology exists, Origen works analogically to Hebrews, with Christ
as key for interpreting texts typologically. Thus almost all features of
Lcviticus 16 are typologized: not only the high priest, but also the calf, the
ram, both goats, the k4pporet and the "prepared .man" are interpreted
Christologically .24
Origen gives many interpretations of the scapegoat. He connects a
Christological scapegoat typology to the Barabbas episode;2s a second ty-
pology is associated with the two crucified criminals;26 a third, .an allegoxy
ba.qed on Philo, explains the goats as evil versus good thoughts;27 and a
fourth and fifth see in the goats symbols of evildoers versus good people
and sinners versus repentants. 23 All of Origen's interpretations have in
common that they are "bipolar'' - the scapegoat represents something bad.
the sacrificial goat something good. Similar models are found in Augustine
and Pseudo('?)-Isidor. 29 Emperor Julian goes a :step further and explains
that tbe scapegoat is a cbthonic sacrifice betonging to the chthonic dei-
ties.30 Yet the Oreek exegetes of the fifth centmy and the extant Syriac
exegetes strongly oppose this line of exegesis as polytheistic and promote

21 Yet in tbe time ofOrigen, Hebrews still bad a highly c:ontroversial status. Might it

have been the suihlbility of Hebrews in ChristianiziDg the sac:rificial prescriptioM of Le-
vrucus that rostered Origen's use of it? It may be no mere coincidente tbat Origen is the
first to extensively int.eipret Leviticus and use tbe sacrificial statement$ of Hebrcws. A
glance into the Biblia Patrutica reveals that Origen used 1he ninlh cbapter ofHebrews in
works older than the Homi/y on Lniticus, e.g. the Commentary on John, On Prayer and
Exhortati~ to M(ll'tyrdom. The use ot' Heb 9, however, abounds in the ninth and tenth
Homiliu on Leviticu~; and Origen, via his exegesis of Leviticus, may have poomoted
acceptnce oftbe only New Testament writing, with an explieitly sacrificial thcology: see
l. Allenbach et al~ Biblia Potristica. JndeJt du citations et allraions bibliques dam Ia
littiralllre patristique (7 vols; Paris, 1975-).
2S Rom 3:25 and IJobn 2:1-2 appear e.g. in Homlly on Leviticus 9:S:8 (SC :287:94).
24 See e.g. Hesychius, Commentary on L~iticu (PG 93:1001A).
25 Homily on Lniticu~ 10:2:2 (SC 287:134).
201 Homtly on Levitleus 9:5:2 (SC 287:88),
·n Homily 011 Leviticra 9:6:1 (SC 28'1:96).
• Homily on LevltlctAS 9:4:3 (SC 287:84) and 9:3:3 (SC 287:82).
u Augustine, Quaestiomim in Heptateuchum liber lertius 55 {CCSL 33:213, lines
1359-1372); Pseudo(?)·lsidore, Quaestiones inLeviticttm 15 (PL 83:333-334).
30 Julian, AgaiMt the Galileons 299A-305B tiaDs.l. by W.C. Wright. The Work$ of tlre
Emperor Julian. JJ'ith 011 Engli.sh Translation (LCL Julian 3; London and Cambridge
[Mass.], 1961; pp. 319-427), here pp. 404-405.
 Christian Exeguu of Leviticvs and the Polemies against Yom Kippur 267

a Christological interpretation, with each goat representing one of Christ's

Ililtures.ll
The scapegoat became very appealing to Christian theologians. It ap-
pears in almost all works that interpret only selected parts of Leviticus,
such as the Quaestiones on Leviticus. 32 Also, in tracts that do not specific-
ally deal with Leviticus the seapegoat typology appears frequently, a.s in
such authors as Ambrose, Jerome, the anonymaus commentator on Mark,
Cyril of Alexandria and Theodoret.33 Additionally, distinct tracts a:re
dedicated to the scapegoat. among them Jacob of Samg's Homily on the
Scapegoat (d. 521).34
What is the reason for this appeal, considering that the scapegoat is only
irnplicitly typologized in the New Testament? One might have thought that
the exegetes built on the implicit New Testament allusions (Galatians 3:13;
Matthew27:15-23) or on the proto-typology behind Barnabas 7. 35 Ori-
gen•s Christological typology is in fact based on the Barabbas episode., bat
Matthew 27 cannot be his source, since he uses aJl four Gospels and bis
reading is rather an eisegesis than an exegesis. The proto-typology of
Barnahas might have served as a model, especially since Barnabas bad
quasi-canonical status in some circles. Yet despite its use by Justin, Ter-
tollian and Hippolytus, the proto-typology does not appear in later exege-
ses.36 A possible explanation may be the halakhic traditions upon which

31 Cyril of Alexandria, Glaphyr(/'F'fU11 in Leviticum liber (PO 69:580A-589B); Ep. 41

tJd A.cacium Scythopoli (ed. Schwmz, vol. 1:1:4, p. 4o-48; cf. PG 77:20JC-221A); Con-
tra l•lianum IX (PG 76:960A-970A); Homiliu on Luke .53 (cd. Chabot, p. 191; transl.
Touneau [CSCO 140), p. 129). Theodorei:, Eranistes, (ed. G. Ettlillger, 208:2~211:32;
cf. PG 83:2490-2568); Qataestionu in Lniticum 21 (ed. Fernltnde"JZ Man:oa and Säe.n:Z-
Badillos. 172:23-175: 18 [ cf. PG 80:328A-329DJ)~ Hesychius, Commentary on Leviticus
Y {PG 93:989-1 002); and Jacob of Sarug, Homily on the Scapegoat, (ed. Bedjan, vol. 3,
pp. 264-266).
32 B.g. Augustine, Quautionum in Heptmeuchum liber tertius SS (CCSL33, p. 213,
lines llS9-l372), Locu.tionum in Heptateuchum llber terttus 41 (CCSL 33, p. 42&, lines
191-194); Cyril of Alexandria, Glaphporum in Levlticus liber (PG 69:5&0A-589.8);
Theodoret, Quaestiones in Lwiticum 22, ed. Fernände.z Marcos-Säenz·Badillos, 172:23-
175: 18; Pseudo-Ephrem, Commentary on Lwitlcus, ed. Benedictus, vol. 1, p. 244-245.
33 Ambrose, Letter 3;13-14 (CSEL 82:1:25-26); Ierome. Dialogus A.dversus Pela-

gianas 1:35:78-91 (CSEL 80:43-45); Ps-Jeroroe, Commentary on Mark 15:1 1 (CCSL

82:71); Cyril of Alexandria, Homiliu on Luke 53 (ed. Cbabot, p. 191; tran.sl. Tonneau
[CSCO 140], p. 129); and Theodoret, Eranistes, ed. Ettlinger, 208:26-211:32. Amon.g
many other places, see also the .index to tbe letters by Se-veJUS of Gabala in PO.
J4 Ed. Bedjan, vol. 3, pp. 259-282.
:s!lFor an analysis oftbese passages, see pp. 147-179, above.
36 Some traces ofthe proto-typology rnay have survived in Cyril of Alexandria, who

de.scribes: "Two goats, bea\ltiful (~~:lll.oi) and equal in height (iooptyt&eu;) and strength
(im;Autet;) and of tbe same color (op3zpooi)" {roy tnmslation of Glaplryrorum in Le!liti-
268 The Impact of Yom Kippur on Christianity inthe Tlrird to tht Fifth Centwies

the rypology is based. TYPologizing the red ribbon implicitly ascribes

validity to the Jewish Halakhah. Perhaps this is the reason for Jshodad's
polemies against e~egetes who tell of the red ribbon. 37 Jewish exegesis
may be involved in tbe rejection ofthe proto-typology, since Ishodad links
the red ribbon to Isaiah 1: 18, an a.c;sociation that appears in rabbinie
sources but not in Barnabas.3' In sum, the easiest explanation for tbe
emergence and popularity of the scapegoat typology is the necessity to
Christianize Leviticus 16, togetber with the rest of the Old Testament. This
is one reason, but it cannot be the only reason, since the scapegoat
rypology appears also in tex:ts unconnected to Leviticus 16. I have argued
elsewherc, that the scapegoat was particularly well suited to promote to
pagans the idea of Christ's vicarious atonement, since for them, the
rationale of the scapegoat was similar to that of their local pharmalws.39
Nevertheless, the mythologization ofthe Yom Kippur ritual in the story
of Christ's atoning self~sacrifice was insufficient to kcep the new religion
going. People who a.c;cribed an atoning cffect to tbis death by undergoing
baptism continued to sin after Christ's death and thcrefore needed further
frequent means of atone.ment. The need to addn:ss this problern is seen in
passages ofthe Christian exegeses ofLeviticus 16 that speak about the in-
dividual Chrlstian. The individual sinner requ.ires some fonn of connection
from thc saving event of the past to his life in the present, a link providing
the possibility to expiatc bis sins, to propitiate the divine wrath or to avoid
punishment for transgressions. 'fhis can take different forms. Origen sug-
gests atonement via a psychological cleansing, confession of sins, a radical
change toward an ascetic Iifestyle, good deeds, martyrdom and attendance
at Christian rituals. 40 Tbe individual could imitate the high priest by expel-
ling his/her bad 1hougb.ts; he/she oould imitate Chr.ist's se1f-sacrifice in
.martyrdom, wbich for Origen has a vicarious atoning e.ffect for the com-
munity; he/she could give alms 9r fast. In any case, presence was neces-
sary in the worship. 41 Origen equates atteodance at Cbristian commuoaJ

cum liber, PG 69:S88A). Altematively, this mi,ght hint at Cyril's direct eonbu:t with a
Jewisb cxegetieal ~ition. The tradition about the red ribbon appears in lshodad, Co~rr­
mentary on Levitic11s 16 {CSCO 176:104, Hnes 11-JS); andin Pseudo-Ephn:m, Com.-
mentary onLevitiClls 3 (CSCO 587:118-119; 588:89-90). Both texts refer to Mic 7:19, a
passage read in the synagogue on Yom Kippur: see above p. 56.
37 Ishodad, CommenlaJ')' on Levitleus 16 (CSCO 176:104, lines I l-15).
38 See above, pp. 130.--131. Pseudo-Bplrrem mentions also Isa 1:18-19.
39 On the pharmakos, see above pp. 171-173; and more fully St6kl, "The Christian

Exegesis of the Scapegoat between Iews and Pagans."

• Homily on Levitleus 9:8:5 (SC 287:108-t 12); 9:9:4 (SC 287:114-118).
41 For the vicarious atoning efti:ct of martyrd.om, see Origen, ExhoTtation to Mar-
tyrdom 30:16; for attendance at worsh.ip, see Homily on Levitictls 9:5:9 (SC 287:94-96).
 Christian Exeggsia ofLevitiCIIs and the Polemies agairut Yom Xippur 269

prayer with partioipation in the high priest's interoessionary prayer by the

people who wait for bis exit from the holy of holies. 42 While this is not yet
a full-:fledged sacrificial view of the Eucharist, Origen p.rovides the fitSt
hint that Christian worship is beginning to take over tbe atoning function
of Yom K.ippur. In the words of Robert Daly: "lt is true that numerous
texts can be marle good sense of only on tbe supposition that Origen con-
ceived of the Christian liturgy as sacriticial. Be that as it may, the impor-
tant point to remember is that when Origen thought of Cbristian sacrifice,
foremost in bis consciousness was apparently not a litnrgical rite of the
Church, but rather that interior liturgy of the Christian heart and spirit by
whicb a man offered bimself and all bis prayers, works and thought~
through Jesus Christ to God thc Father.H43 Phenomenologically, the fre-
quent partaking of the Eucharist is the exact opposite of a fast observed
once a year.
The substitutive relation of the Eocharist to Yom Kippur can be seen
even more clearly in the long-tenn process of templization. 44 By templiza-
tion I mean ~ use of temple terminology for other institutions, in this
case, for the Christian mass: calling the bishop "(high) priest," the table for
tbe Eucharist '"altar.'' the church «temple," and the special sanctuary in it
"holy of holies." Full-fledged impositions of the temple terminology of
Yom Kippur on the Christian mass can be found in medieval Latin authors
such as Amalar of Metz (d. ca. 850) or Hildebert (d. 1133) and Ivo of
Chartres (d. 1116).4~ Sometimes tbese interpretations even include the

42 Homily on Lwiticr~s 9:5:9 (SC 287:94-96}.

43 R.J. Daly, "Sacrific:e in Origen," Studio Patristica 11 (1972) 12s-129, here 129.
See also tht table on p. xxxv in Theo Hermans, O,igime. Theologie .sacriflcielle rh
.sacerdt:>ce ries chl'ititrzs (Tb6oJogie historlque 102; Paris 1996).
44 See Fine, This Holy Place, pp. 41-S9, 79-94, and 132-156.

ot5 An edited ve~~~ion of Amalar's works appeared in J.M. Hanssens (ed.), Amalarii epi-
.scopi operallturgica omnia (Srudi e Testi 133-140; Vatican City, 1948--J 950). The other
worbarestill only in Migoe: Hildebert, vewa de srry.sterio missae, PL i71:l177-1194
(esp. 1183-1190 on Yom Kippur} and ltbgr fk sacra eucharistia, PL l71:119S-1212
(here esp. 1212); lvo, S~rmo V slve opuscul•m fk convententia veteris er novi sacrijicii,
PL 162, 535-562 (esp. 553-561 on Yom Kippur).
On the autbors and tbeir Y om K.ippur interpretatiom, see l.A. 1UDgmanD, Mwarvm
sollemnia. Eine gmetische Erklarung der römischen Messe (2 vols; Vie.tUUi, FreibiU"g
i. Br., Basel, 51962) vol. l, p. 146; vol. 2, pp. 289-90; R. SUDtrup, Die BetlllUt&!lftl der
liturgischen Gebärden und Be~~regunge~~ in lateinischen und deut!lchen Awlegvngen des
9. bis B. JQhrhundllrl.s (Milllsterische Mittelalter-Schriften 37; MUDich, 1978), p. 459;
and A. Pranz, Die Messe im Deutschen Mittelalter (Dannstadt, 1963, repr. Freiburg.
1902), pp. 429-431. On Amalar, seealso E. Volgger, Die Feier des Karfreitap bei
Amalar von Metz (77j/78f)...JJj0) (Ph.D. dissertation, Vienna, 1993); C. SclmvseJlberg,
Das Jlerhalrnis von Kirche und Theater. Dargestellt an aiJigi!Wtihlten Schriften tkT Kir-
270 The Impact ofYom Kippur 011 Christianity ln the Third to rhe Fifth Centuries

scapegoat rite.46 While the date ofthese texts clearly lies beyond the soope
of this work, these intlllential commentarie.s illustrate the continuous
inspiration ofYom K.ippur's temple rite.s. Yet the templization ofChristian
liturgy began much earlier, becoming visible to a growing extent already in
the fourth century. Not finding a Christian pendant to Fine's study, I
turned to Lampe•s Patristic Greek Lexicon and checked for liturgical use
of tenns belonging to the temple vocabulary, to gain a preliminary
impression on templization. 47 Three tenns of the temple tenninology are
pertinent to. Yom Kippur: "high priest," "holy of hoHes" and "kapporef' -
repre.senting the performer, the place and an instrument ofthe rituaL First,
"high priest" and "high priesthood" are compared to Christian offices,
including bishops, from the beginning of tbe second centmy (lClement);
but this is not yet templization in the strict sense. 48 For the direct use of
"high priest-(hood)" for bishops, priests and celebrants of the Eucbarist.
Lampe cites texts froru the fourth, fifth and sixth centuries, respectively. 49
Georg Schöllgen. cites also cxamples from the third century. so In Latin,
Tertullian, as early a.s the third centuiy, calls the bishop "high priest,''s 1
and Cyprian calls a celebrant of the Eucharist "priest,'' with an explicit
sacrificial interpretation fashioned on an imitation of the high priest Christ.
For, if Christ Jesus, our lord and God, is bimself the high priest of God the father
and tirst offered himself as a sacritice to the falber and commanded tbis to be done
in commemoration of himself" certainly the priest who imitates that which Cbrist
did aDd then offers the true and full sacrifice in the Cburch ofGod the f.tther, ifhe

chenviiler und liturgischen Texten bis auf Amalariw von Metz (Bem, 1981); lind E.T.
Francis, The Euchoristic Theology ofAmalorius oflthtz (Paris, 1977) (non vidr). On thc
Greelc predecessors ofthe Latln "exegetes," see R. Bornen, Lfls commentaires b)l%antins
de Ia divlnt Uturgie du VlbJ au Xfle siec/e (Archives de l'orient chr6t.ien 6; Paris. 1966). I
would like to express my deopest gratitude to Ewald Volgger, who graciously made
available to me a copy of his fas;;inating dissertation on tbe little studied field of medie-
valliturgy exegesis.
411 On tbe scapegoal rite in Ivo's allego.ry of the mass, see PL 162:557C, SS9B.
41 This impression needs to be reinforced. by investigating espeeially the archaeolo-

gical data ftom ioscriptioos. The passages tbat follow reflect mostly Lampe. For further
passages from all periods, see H. Nibley, "Cbristian Envy ofthe Temple.'" Jewish Qucu--
u.rly Rwiew SO (1959/60) 97-123, 227-2Ml. While there is a distinction be~en meta·
phoric usage (tbe bisbop .is like a high priest) and direct usage (the high priest offers the
Eucharist), and both are of interest in our quest. the latt.er bespeaks a more advanced
Stage.
411 On the use of ''high priest" in Christian administration, see SchGI!gen, "Hoher-
priester," espe-;:ially c:olumns 37-49.
49 G. W.H. Lampe (ed.), A Parrutte Greek LexiCOII (Oxford, 1978), p. 239.
so SchOilgen, "Hoherpriester," colu!IJ.QS 39-44.
-' 1 Tertullian, On boptüm 17:1.
 Christion Exegesis ofLeviticru and the Polemies against rom Kippru 271

thus begin$ to offer according to what he sees Christ hiinsclf offcred, perfurms
truly in tbe place of Christ. 51
Second. while several fourth-centu.ry authors use "temple" (va()(;) for
churcb, » the use of "boly of holies" for a Special area in the church
emerged in Jerusalem. Lampe ascribes to Eusebius the frrst use of ''holy of
holies" (Td iiyta. Trov ciyi(I)V) for the tombin the Holy Sepulcher.54
1be revered and most holy witness (pop~ilptov) ofthe resnrrection oftlle Savior
has n:appeared against all bope, ao.d the holy-of-holies grotto ('r:o y( ciytov ~•lv
ciyirov iivtpov) has received a [similar] image of the Savior's revival. ss
Tbis concept appears rou.ghly SO years l.ater in the desaiption of the Holy
Land pilgrimage of Paula and Eustochium in their Ietter to Marcella. pre-
served as Ietter 46 among those of Jerome:
[f J'erusalem. was destroyed, it was that its people migbt he punished; ifthe temple
was overtbrown, it was that its figurative sacrifices might be abolished. As regards
ita stte, Japse of time has but invested it with ~b grandeur. The J'ews of old
revereoced the Holy of Halles, because of the things coutained in it - tlle cberu-
bim, the mm:y-seat, tbe ark of the covenant, the manna. Aaron's rod, and rbe gol-
den altar. Dof!$ the Lord's sepulchril seem Jess wOI'thy u{vi1ner4iion? As often as
we entcr it we see the Saviour in His gravc clothes, and if we linger we see again
the angel sitting at His feet, and the napkin folded at His head. Long befure this
sepulchre was hewn out by Joseph, its glory was foretold in lsaiah's prediction,
"his rest shtdl be glorious," meaning that the place ofthe Lord's burial should be
held in universal honor.•
Paula and Eustochium revere Jesus• grave as a substitute for the original
holy of holies: The tomb is no less wortby of veneration.
A beautiful application of the high priest and bis entry into the holy of
hoHes to a Christian ritual can be found in the report by Gregory of
Nazianz about bis own ordination by Basil in the year 372 modeled on the
Aaronic investiturein Exodus 29.
For you aooint a high priest and put on him the [hlgh-priestly] robe, and crown
him with the turban, arul Iead him to the altar of the spiritual bwnt offering. and
sacrifioe the calf of perfection, and fill bis hands witb the Spirit (•ordinate him],
and Iead him ioto the holy ofholies in order to initiate him, and make him inlo "'a
minister of the true teot that the Lord, and not DJID, has set up" [Heb 8:2]."

~ My translation ofCypriao. Leiter 63:14:4 (CS:EL Jc:410-411).

" Lampe, A PatristicGr11ek.Lexioon, p. 897.
14 Lampe, A Patristic Greelr. Lcicon, p. 19.
55 My translation ofEusebius, Yila Constantini 3:28 (GCS 7:96).
" Jerome, Leuer 46:5; transl. W. Freemantle, NPNF 2:6:62; my emphasis.
57 My translation ofGregory ofNaziaru:., Homily 10:4 (PG 3S:82&D-832A). A Frencb

translation is available in SC 405 (M.·A. Calvet·Sebasti; Gregoire de Ntniaf~Ze. DiscourJ

6-12; Paris 199.5}, here p. 325.
272 Thelmpaa ofYom Ktppur on Chrllliallily ln the Tlzi,.d to the Fijih Centuries

In this implicit typology, Gregory imports the temple tenninology into

Cbristian worship, leaving it open to question whether he is implying a
mystical allegory (Gregory entering into the heavenly sanctuary) or a
typology on the historical church building in which the ordination took
place. By equating the ministers ofthe biblical temple, the heavenly sanc-
tuary and the church building, Oregory most likeJy has both of these inter~
pretative levels in mind Such a triad appears in the catecheses of Theodore ·
of Mopsuestia. 58 The high priest's entry into the holy of holies. Christian-
ized in Hebrews, has been re-ritualized in the Christian liturgy.
Finally. ii..ae~t11ptov may describe a special place in a church, as in the
Typicon of Sabas.59 Other instances are from the end of the fust millen-
nimn. 60 The impetus necessary for the metaphorical use of Uaatl]ptov in
Christian ritual is much smaller. The celebl'lllli ofthe Eucbarist- the Chris-
tian high priest, so to speak- brings the blood into the holy ofholies. Yet
he does not sprink.le it. neither does his 5ource of inspiration, Hebrews,
speak of sprinkling or employ kapporet in Christ's entry to the heavenly
holy ofholies. lt is, therefore, the Yom Kippur typology ofHebrews rather
than Lcviticus 16 itself that influenced tempii;r.ation.
In sum, in the context of €hristian ritual atonement, Yom Kippur'_s
imagery: "high priest(hood}," "entry to the holy of holies" and "scapegoat"
had clearly achieved an important place among some Christians, but with-
out the motif of blood sprinkling on the lcapporet. 61 Did this rise of Yom
Kippw:'s imagery happen only because of the ''bookish" or "biblical" in-
fluence of Leviticus, Hebrews and Romans? The followi:Jig sections argue
1hat while the biblical versions of Yom Kippur must be credited with the
main impact, we cannot fully camprehend the rise of the Yom Kippur im-
agery without assuming an impact on some Christian authors ofthe fast as
celebrated by contemporary Jews.

ss See the short analysis in Bomert, te.' commentaires byzantins de Ia divine lil11,.gie
dfl Ylle au XJ"e siecle, pp. 80-82.
st Kraus, De,. Tod Jesu ah Heiligtumsweihe, pp. 30-32, refening to C. du Cange,
Gl081arfum ad Scriptores Mediae etlnji,.mae Graecitatis (Gnu, 1958; repr. of 1688)
{cotumn .513]. The Typicon is from the fifth century, but lw becn ftcquently reworked.
60 L&mpe. A PalTistic Greek Lexicon, s. v.
". Interesting also is the addition of the Armonian word "lllonement" ~lf'ldi) to ·
some Annenian anaphoras, and tb.e imagery of the high-priestly ritual in the St. James
Anaphora meutioued in Ligier, Peche d'Adam el piche d11 monde. Bibl~t, Kippur,
E11charistie (2 vols; Theologie 411; Paris 1~60, 11161), 2:304-306. See also tb.c appendlx.
 Christum Eregais of Lwiticus alfd the Polemies flgainst Yom Kippur 273

2. Christian Participation in the Jewish Fast

A considerable nwnbet of Christians in third-century Caesarea and late-

fourth-century Antioch observed the Y om Kippur fast together with their
Jewisb neighbors. Above, I argued that Luke's community, the opponents
of the author of Colossians, and some among Rome's Christian Jews ob-
served the fast around 100 CE.62 These Christians did not conceive oftheir
participation in the fast as Contradietory to Christian atonement theology.
Origen and Cbrysostom, however, did, and reacted by attacking the Jewish
fast, pointing out its discrepancies in :relation to the biblical Yom Kippur
a:nd proposing Christian alternatives.
Two passages illustrate Origen's wrath aga.inst members of his own
parishin Caesarea Maritima. who participated in the Jewish fast. Hede-
clares in bis twelftb Homily on Jeremiah:
You, who observe the Jewish ~t (,:flv VlliJ'tl!iav ·n)v lo'UiiaiJCqv) as ifunaware ofthe
Day of Aronemeut that exists since lesus Chrisl, you bave not heard of the hidde:n
ato.t1e.ment, but ouly of lhe apparent. Because, hearing of the hlddest atonemeot is
bearing how God put JesiU forward as atonement (i140'jlov}for our dns,63 and that
lr4! lrirrue{fis an atone~~rerlljor OIIT sins, not only for oun, but also for those oftlre
wlrole world[1Johll2:2}.64
The passage cannot be seen as an attack on Jews, because in that case the
10'00a.1rijv wo1lld be superfluous. Part of Origen's audience apparently fol-
lowed the atoning fast of Yom Kippur, and it is them that he is addressing.
It seems that these people were attracted to Judaism even beyond Yom
Kippur, since Origen complains also about Christian observance of cir-
cumcision and Passover. He is upset about tbese ''dangerous ones in be-
tween." In bis eyes, Cbristianity and Judaism are exclusive alternatives.
Whoever fasts with the Jews has neither understood nor accepted the
atonement inherent in Jesus• death.
The second passage appears in Origen's tenth Homily on Leviticus:
Whence also we must say somelhing now to those who think: 1hat in vinue of tlle
eoiiUIIIIII.dmeut of the Law they :must also practice the fast of the IeW$ (•os. qui
putanl pro fllandato legfs sibi quoque lttdaeorum ieiunium iei11nandum).65

Again, the people fasting ..the fast of the Jews" cannot be Jews, but they
may be either Judaizing Christians o:r Jewish Christians. In third-century

12 See above, l'P· 212-218.

° Cf. Rom 3:25.
44 My lrllll$lation of Origen, H01t1ily on Jeremlalr 12:13 to Jer 13: 17; Greek in
GCS 6:100 (Klostemlann).
65 Origen, Homily on Lwiticus 10:2: 1 (SC 287: 132), lransl. Barldey, p. 204. Latl.n also
in GCS 442:10-ll.
274 The l111pact ojYo111 X.ippur on Christianity in the Third to lhe Fifth Cenlllries

Palestine the distinction between these two groups might not always have
been very clear.66 It is more Jikely though that Origen was disturbed by
dissenters ofhis primary community, Judaizing Christians, rather than by
Cbristianizing Jews. The latter were more likely to upset Jews over their
adherence to the Christian Messiah.
While 1 found no references to Christian participation in the Jewisb fast
in subsequent Palestinian authors (such as Eusebius and Cyril of Jerusa-
lem), two Antiochene sources from the end of the fourth century,
Chcysostom (ca. 347-407) and the Canons of the A.postles, prove that
Christian participation in the fast of Yom Kippur was a continuing
phenomenon in Syria-Palestine, at least in cities with a dense Jewish
population.67 Chl:ysostom states at the beginning of bis first Homily
against the Jews (386), 68 that a buming issue keeps him from continuing
his homilies against the Christological heresy of the "Anomoeans." This
buming issue was the participation of Christians in the Jewish festivals.
(I :4) Another very serious illness calls for any eure my words ean bring, an illness
whicb has become implanted in the body of the Church. We must Iust root lhis
ailment out IIJid then take thougbt for matten outside; we must rmt eure our own
and then be eoncemed for others~who are strangers. (.S) Whal i.s this disease? The

" Some Gentiles wbo became Christian may have earlier been. attracted to Judaism
(before convertiog to Christianity) - wouJd they be Judaiziug Christians or Jewish Oui&-
tians?
41 On Chrysostom and the Jews, see in particular R.L. Wilken, John Chrysostom and
the Jews. Rhethoric and Retlllt)' in the Late Formh Century (Tbe TraDJformation oftbe
Classical Heritage 4; Berkeley, Los Angeles, London, 1983), who builds on the work of
M. Sin1on, "La pol6mique antijuive de Saint lean Chrysostome et le moavement juda-
isant d'Antioche," in: idem, Recherehes d'hlst()ire JudW-Chrltienne (Etudes Juives 6;
Paris, 1962; pp. l40-iS3). See also R. Briindle, "Christen und Juden in Antiochien in den
Jahren 386/387. Ein Beitrag &U.r Geschichte altkirchlicher Judenfeindschaft," Judo.i<;p 43
(1987) 142-168; A.M. Ritter, HErwägungen zum Antisemitismus in der Alten Kirche:
Acht Reden ilber die Juden," in: B. Moeller and G. Ruhbach (eds.), Bleibmdes 1111 Wan-
del der Kirchengeschichte (Tilbingen, 1973; pp. 71-91). On Chrysostom's biograpby, see
J.N.D. Kelty, Golden .Vouth. The Story of John Chrysosto111. .Ascetic, Pr'eacher, Bisbop
(Grand Rapids [Mich.}, i 995); ou. the c011text ofthese sennon, see pp. 62-66. l.bave used
mainly the ttanslations ofP.W. Harkins, Sainr John Chryaostom. Discourses again8t Ju-
daizing Christian:s (The Fathers ofthe Church 68; Washingtoa, D.C., 1979); and Brlndle
and Jegher-Bucher (eds.), Acht Re.den gegen Juden, which includes an excellent com-
mentary. Brändle is also wodting on a new edition in the series SC. The gap in the text of
the second sennon c:an now be tilled by the reeent manuscript found IIJid published by W.
Pradels, R. Bräntlle and M. Heimgartner. "Das bisher vermisste TextstOck in Jobamtes
Chrysoslomus, A.dversu:J JJldaeos, Oratio 2," Zeitschrift fti.r Antike und Christen/tim
(2001) pp. 23-49.
._ Some have suggested calling the sermons ..Against tbe Judaizers," since there is as
much polemies against Judaizers as there is against Jews.
 Christialt Exegesis ofLtNitie~~s anti the Polemies against Yom Kippur 215

festivals of the pitiful and misll!able lews are soon to march upon us one after the
other andin quick suecession: the feast ofTrompets, the feast ofTabemac:les, the
fasts. 119 There are many in our ranks who say they think aa we do. Yet some of
lhese are going to wateh tbe t'estivals and others will joln the Jews in keeping their
feastll and observlng their fasts. I wish to drive this perverse c:uscom from the
Chureh rigbt now. My discourses aga:inst the Anomoeans can be put off to aoother
time, and the postponement would eause no hann. Bur now that the Jewish festi-
vals are close by and at the very door, if l should .fail to c~ those who are siek
with the Judaizing disease, I am afraid that, because of their ill-suited association
and deep ignotanee, some Cbristians may partake in the Jews' ttan$gre11Sioos; once
they have done so, I fear my homilies on these traasgressions will be in vaia. For
if they hear no word tiom me today, they will then join the 3ews in tbeir faats;
once they have conunitted this sin it will be useless forme to appl:y tbe remedy.10
Among the Jewish autumn festivals. it is particularly the fast that arouses
the wrath ofthe venom-spewing "Golden Mouth." It is its atoning purpose,
which is highly inco.mpatible with Cbristian tbeology aod tbrows doubt on
the exclusivity and finality of Christ's atonement- even though, from a
historical point of view, New Year and Sukkot may have been as attractive
to the Christians as the Day of Atonement.
Chrysostom's words show that there were different Ievels of participa-
tion. There were people Wb.o only fasted, and there were those who also
participated in the custom of walking barefoot.
Do you fast with the Jews? Then Iake off your shoes with tbe Jews, and walle bare-
foot in the marketplace, and s.bare with them in their indecency and laupter. But
you would not choose to do this beeause you are ashamed Md apt to l>lush. Are
you ashamed to share wich them in outward appearance but unashamed to share in
their impiefy? What excuse will you have, you who are ouly half a Christian'171
But the last of Cbrysostom's homilies reveals that Golden Mouth bad not
not been very successful with his wamings (8:4).
The third witness to Ch.ristian participation in Yom Kippur's fast is
Canon 70 ofthe Canon.s ofthe Apostles, probably from late-fourth-century
Antioch. 12

69 1 commented earlier on the strange order of the festivals: above, pp. 68-69.
70 AgaiMt the Jews 1: I :4; transl. Harkins, Saint Jo/m Clrrysos.t()m. DisctJIII'ses agDinat
Judahing Christia11J, pp. 3-4.
71 Aga111Jt the Jews 1:4:7; transl. Harkins, Saint Jo/m Cllrysostom. Discourses against
Jvt/(jfzing Christians, p. 16.
12 The Canons ofthe Apostles are the fmal part oftbe Apos.tolic Constituti()71J (8:47: 1-
8!1), assembled in Syria about die end of the fourth <:enrury. Same scholal$ presume An·
liocb to be the place oftbis eompilation. For text and introductory questions, see Mett-
ger. Lu Comtilutions apostoliqvu, SC 320, pp. 13-94; SC 336 pp. 9-12 and 274-309.
276 The Impact of Yom Kippr~r on CltriJtionity in the Third to the Fifth Centuries

lf a bishop or Allother cleric should fast with the Jews or c:elebrate holiday1 witb
them or accept their festive gifts, such as unleavened bread and anyth.ing similar ta
this, he shall be deposed; ifa layman, excomm1111icated.73
This is the earliest legal text referring to Yom .K.ippur. The explicit pro-
hibition of fasting is among the redactional additions of the Canons of the
Apostles to formulae adopted from its source,74 which did not mention
fasting. 75 lt was the situation in the community or communities authoring
the Canons of the .A.postles that caused the inclusion of this prohibition.
Fasting now appears at the top of the list, demonstrating that it was the
problem of greatest concem. The punishment imposed is draconian; it re-
sembles that for entering synagogues with the intention to pray, or contrib-
uting to synagogues or temples.
Is it possible to understand the distinction in the law between laity and
clergy as evidence for participation of clergy in Yom Kippur? If any priest
or bishop defended bis participation in the Jewish fast, such a defense did
not survive in writiog.16 But neither do I know of any statemen1 referring
to biShops deposed or exconununicated for participating in Yom Kippur.
Therefore, no final conclusion can be drawn about possible clerical par-
ticipation in the Jewish fast. Th4 Canons ofthe Apostles remained ahighly
authoritative source in Byzantine legislation.77 Various commentaries re-
mark upon Caoon 70; other texts include a prohibition on participation in
the Iewish fast. 78 Nevertheless, it is difficult to decide if such repetitions of

73 Ei 1\c; iRioltOli:O<; il äAl.o~ ~~;):qpuco<; V110'{6'6!il jitita 'IovSIJ:üov " iloptOil;ct Jlf>T. uml'iiv ii 6€-
X.tlQ;\ am&v ~~~ ti\<; iopTij~ l;iVUl, O{Ov Ö./;tJ)I.Q; ij tt 1:0\0ihOV. Jta8Cl1pito8fD• &i 5i latK~, ~l­
r;eallm. CQif(»>s ofthe Apo!ltles 10, In Linder, The JewJ in the Legal Sources ofthe Early
lttiddle Ages, I# l/3, p. 27. The passage is commented on or included in the foiio\\ing later
collections: Johannes Scholastieus (around !14o-360}, Collection ofConons ln jO Tilles
{Linder. #6/104, soe also #61102); Photius' and Theodoros Balsamon's recensions ofthe
Nomocanon in 14 Titlu (Linder. #7/121, seealso #7/118, #71177, #7/187).
74 Canon 70 is gcnerally regarded as a combination of canons 37 and 38 from the

Co~mc:il of Laodicea, held in Syria aroUnd 380. However, netther passage includes the
tisst.
75 Was it thal Christian participation in the Jewish fast was not considen:d as threaten-
ing their identity?
~ Leo defi:nds the Christi8ft Fast of the Sevenlh Month and distinguishes it from the
Jewish fast.
17 Despite the condemgation of the Apostolic Constitutions in the Trullallum, see Lin-
der, Tlte Jew.r in tlte legal Sources of the Early Middle Ages, p. 26.
71 lohn Cb.rysostom's sermons against Christian participation in the Jewish testivals of
autumn we referred to explicitly by Johannes Zonaras (twelfth ceotury) in his part ofthe
Tripartite Comme~~tary to the Cot~ci/iQJ" Legislolion: sec Linder. The Jews in the Legal
So11rces of the Early Middle Ages, #28/3S3. He and bis contemporaries Theodoros Balsa-
mon and Alexios Aristenos comment also on the prohibition contained in the Canonr of
the. .4.postles: see Linder #l8/3S6, 3S7, 360, 370, 371).
 Christiar~ Exegetit ofL~il.fau and the Polemies agatn&t Yom Kippur 211

a prohibition reflect the acuteoess of the problern or are merely the car-
rying forward ofa traditioo. In the West, the authority ofthe Canons ofthe
.A.postles (k:nown th.rough a sixth-century translation) was much weaker. 79
Origen, Chrysostom and the Canom of the Apostles provide evidence
for the participation of Christians in the Yom Kippur fast in third-century
Caesarea and fourth-century Antioch. All three texts react sharply against
this Judaiziog anempt, which they consider incompatible with Christian-
ity.80 Shlomo Pines has suggested that the strong presence of Jewish Chris-
tians in Antioch might stand behind this phenomenon. 81
In the following section. I will deal with some more general aspects of
the Chrlstian Yom Kippur polemics. Yet polemies can exist witbout a his-
todcal ra.isori d'!tre. Tbe importance ofthe passages on Christian partici-
pation in Yom Kippur lies in their providing prooftbat the Jewish fast was
not an imaginary "opponent," attrac:ted Christians in a very concrete way
a.nd influenced the Christianization of Leviticus in exegesis, thereby con-
tributing to the inclusion of Yom Kippur imagery in the thought of some
authors and in the liturgy.

3. Christian Polemies against the Contemporary Yom Kippur

The contemporary Yom Kippur influenced Origen's attempts to persuade

Christians not to participate in Yom Kippur, resulting in a reinterpretation
of Leviticus 16. How "productive" was the tension that Yom Kippur
caused between Christians and Jews in the work of other aulhors? To what
extent are other Christiao interpretations of Leviticus 16 merely "booki.sh"
Christiaoizations of the Old Testament and to what extent cao they be Wl·
derstood as reactions to a contemporaxy Jewish filst perceived as threat? In
this section, I want to investigate more closely the interconnection between
polemies aod reinterpretation.

'l!lLinder, TJre Jews in the Legal Sources ofthe Early ltliddle Ages, fl\IOS/949 •
.., fioally, is it possible tbat Basil,.too, fought Christians observing Yom Kippur? In
his f1rst Homily on Fasting he ooUDI:ers the claim that Yom Kippur is to be venerated for
being the fust fast eommanded by God with the argwnent that Adam was ordered to fast
long before the Torah was given (Basil, Homily on Fasttng 1:2 (PO 31:165BC). IC bis
argument reflects a simllar one existing in his community, it is possible thal in Basil's
comm.uoity, too, some Christians observed the Jewish fast..
11 S. Pines, ·ne Jewish Christiaas of the Early Centuries of Christianity According to
a New Source," in: G.G. Stroumsa (ed.), The Collectsd Worb ofShlomo Pinu. J'ol. 4.
St.dies in the History ofReligion (Jemsalem, 1996; pp. 211-284), bere pp. 244-245. I
would lite to than1: John Gager for drawing my attention to this point
278 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Chrl.s/iQnity in the Third to the Fifth Centuriu

C.brlstian texts :railing against Yom Kippurmay be polemicizing against

a literal equation of tbe hiblical Yom Kippur with the earthly temple and I
or they may be polemicizing against what they understand as the Jewish
concept of fast and other contemponu:y Yom Kippur rites. Are polemies
against Yom Kippur mostly "paper tiger" reactions against an imaginary
Jewish Institution with no real impact in the com.munity of the writer?
Before classizying the various texts, I want to present the basic lines of the
Christian po1emical IU'gument. Since most of the texts have already been
quoted in the two preceding sections (or in the section on Christian de-
scriptions of Yom Kippur in part 1), I v.1ll not repeat the list here. 82
First, the polemies against literal inte:rpretations of Leviticus 16 are
based mainly on the historical argument that the temple and its institutions
had been destroyed according to the divine plan foretold by Jesus, sho'Wing
clearly tbat they were merely manifestations of heavenly ttuths. This argu-
ment is based on the concept that there are only two ways to inte:rpret the
Bible, either literally or allegoricaliy, 83 which for the polemicists means
Jewish or Christian. Tertium non datur. There is no room for a non-Chris~
tian non-Iiteral reading. Eilher God referred to atonement in the earthly
temple-which is no Ionger stal\ding- or he must have meant another tem-
ple, which can ooly be the Christian one. Origen writes for example:
Therefore, Iet whoever observes these fasts go up "tbree times a year" to Jeru.sa-
lem "to appear before the Temple of the Lord," to offer bimself to the prieat. Let
him seek l:be altar whiclt was twned into dost; Iet him ofl:er sacrifices, with no
high priest standing by. For it is written that, fasting, tbe people will offer "two
hc-goats" in a sac:rifice. Upon tbese they ought to c:ast lots that one of them be·
come "the Iot of the Lord" and be oft'ered as a sacrifice to tbe Lord; but tbe other' .s
lot is tbat it be sent "living into tbe wildeme$s," and to have in bimself t:be sins of
the people. Consequently, all the.se Jhings must be completed by you who want to
observe fasting acc:ording to the precept ofthe Law.114
Cbrysostom objects explicitly to Jewish (and Christian) claims that some
features in the synagogue have taken over temple functions. He observes
that Christians are attracted to synagogues because they deem that the
Torah scrolls bestow a temple·like sanctity on the place; they call the
Torah shrine an "ark," associating it with the ark ofthe covenant.'S Yet an
ark doth not a temple make, and Chrysostom counters the Jewish
templization by pointing to its partiality.

'2 See ahove, pp. 70-77 and 262-277.

0 There are, of c:outse, several Christian interpretatiooalle~ls, but for the sake of the
argument, I c:onsider them all as "allegorical."
84 Homily on Leviticus 10:2:1 (SC 287:132·~134),1ransl. Barldey, Origc11. Homily on

Leviticus 1-16, p. 204.

*1 A.gairr.stth4Jews4;1:6;6:1;l-1.
 Christfan Exegesis ofLevilicus and the Polemies against Yom Kippur 279

W~t.at sort of ark is it that the Jews now lla:ve, where we find no propitiatory, no
tables of the law, no boiy of holies, no veil, no high priest, no incense, no
holo<:aust, no sacrifice, none of the otber thlngs that made ehe arlc of old solemn
and august?110

It might be nG coincidence that Chrysostom lists those items needed

especially for Yom Kippur's temple rite. The propitiatory, the holy of
holies, the veil and high priest and the sacrifices - all are missing in the
synagogue - how then can they provide atonement? Chrysostom
acknowledges that there are priests in the synagogues, but they are not true
priests, lacking proper ordination:
We fmd none of these [rites) today: no sacrifice, no bolocau.s.t, no sprinlding <>f
blood, no anointing with oil, no ten1 of meeting where they must sit for a defmite
number of days. This makes it obvious tbat the priest among thc Jews today is un-
ordained, imclean, under il c~. and profane; he only provokes God's wralb. If a
priest oould not be ordained in any other wa.y than by these rites, and these rites no
Ionger exist. then there is no possible wa.y that their prie.sthood could hav e
C(lntinued to exist.W

Chrysostom mocks Jewish templization, which ignores the elements

crucial to Yom Kippur. lf we read this passage in the context of the paral-
lel templization of church buildings, administration and liturgy, which
focused on just tb.ese items ··- the holy of holies, the veil, the high priest
and sacrifices and later also the propitiatory- Chrysostom's polemic be-
comes even more mockiog. "We," the Cbristians, have the true temple in
heaven and in the Church; "you" do not.
Analyzing the Christian exegesis of Leviticus 16, I found very little
evidence for a familiarity with Jewish exegesis. Almostall paraUels can be
explained with the common biblical source.88 An exception may be a refer-
ence to the deification of the high priest on bis entering the holy of bolies,
which is foWld in Leviticus Rabbah, in Origen andin Philo,89 Cyril's refer-
ence to the twinning of the goats may be dependent on a J ewi:sh tradition; 90
likewise Ishodad•s polemies against the red ribbon. 91 While this does not
preclude explaining some Christian interpretations of Leviticus 16 as
reactions to tbe attraction ofthe contemporary Yom Kippur, their authors'
acquaintaru;e with the oontempora:ry Yom Kippur has firsttobe shown.

16 Against the Jrnv:r 6:7:2; transl. Harkins, SaintJohlt Chrysostam. Discourses against

J"doizing Cluistians, p. l 72.

111 Against the Jrnvs 6:5:9; transl. Harkins, Sailll John Chrysostom. Discornse.s Qgainst
Judaizing Christi<rns, p. 167.
" For example, the interpretation of Az.azel as a demQn.
119 Seeabove,p. 125,note243.
110 See above, note 36, pp. 267-268.
~~ See above, p. 38.
280 The lmpacr ofYom Kippur on Christlanity in the Third to the Fifth Ce/1111ries

Second, those who polemicize against the fast are in a difficult position,
given that fasting is honored among Christians, too. Galatians 4:9-10 is
frequently cited as stating that though Christians may fast evcry day and
should fast frequently, they should not observe any special holy day. Basil,
in his first Homily on Fasting, counters the claim that Yom Kippur is to be
venerated for being the first fast commanded by God with the argument
that Adam was ordered to fast long before the Torah was given. 92 Ifhis ar-
gument reflects a similar one existing in his community, it is possible that
in Basil's community, too, some Christians observed the Jewish fast.
Many Church Fathers denounce the Jews as hypocrites, quoting the
words of Isaiah 58 and Jonah: people fasting demonstratively in sackeioth
and ashes, as opposed to tbe inward fashion of Christians, who anoint the
head and wash the face, as Matthew6:17 enjoins.93 The use of Isaiah 58
andlor Jonah may be a polemical response to their function as Haftarot on
Yom Kippur; yet both religions may have chosen the texlS merely for their
suitability and their place in the common canon. Similarly, the use of
Matthew 6:17 could be based on an awareness of Jewish fasting rites, but
could equally be traditional use of the main New Testament prooftext.
These depictions do not provido. any clue as to whethec the Christian po-
lemics are attacking a real fast or an imaginary one, as long as they do not
specifY other rites confirmed by Jewish sources- as in the case ofTertul-
lian (praying in open places, festal gannents, waiting for evening star),
Ephrem (praying. purification), Chryso~;tom (dancing barefoot on the mar·
ketplace), Leo (walking barefoot) and Theodoret of Cyru.s (laugbing,
playing and dancing):94
He [God} ordered fasting on tbe tcnlh ofthe month. Therefore, be called Ibis day
lhe Day of Atonement. He sald "Humble your souls from tbe evening ofthe niath
ofthe montb"" and ..evcry soul, which wi!l not be humbled on that day, that soul
will be destroyed from your people.''" Yel the Jew~~, who Wldisguisedly light
against tbe law, do not Iook sad o.o. this day, but laugh and play ad daa~ aad
praetiee uodlaste words and decds (r~&Kn x:ot r:o:i.l;oucn lli:oi xopeilooo' ~~;o\ o~~:o>.«v­
totc; PllPIICJL ltO~ 1rPiill!«lll EiXPJJvt~n).97

Theodoret juxtaposes the biblical comm.andment with Jewish practices,

implying that the joyous character of the Jewish fast completely

92 Buil. Homily 011 F~J&ting 1:2 (PG 31: 165BC).

!ll E.g. Justin, Dialogue with Trypho 40:4; Origcn, Homily 011 LevitiCflS 10:2:4 (SC
287:136); Epbrem, Homilies on Fosting 2; I; Basil, On Fasling 1-2; Leo, Sen~ton92:2.
M For these texts, sec above, pp. 73-76.
95 Lev 23:27.32.

96 Lev 23:29.
'Y1 My translation of Quaunones in Ocrat~llclrum, In Le~>ilicum 32 (ed. Fcmhdez
Marcos and Sienz·Badillos, p. 183:12-19).
 Christian Eregesis ofLeviticta and the Pole~nics agaimt Yom Ktpp11r 281

contradicts the precepts of Leviticus, · which speaks of "humbling the

soul.• Dancingmatches Misbnah Ta'anit4:8 and proves that Theodoret
was an "eyewitness." lt is not clear to mc what stands bebind "unchaste
words and deeds." It is probably just unfounded polemics. If Theodoret's
words reflect actual Jewish behavior, thls might be in reference to the
grooming ofthe dancing maidens, as mentioned in Mishnah Ta'anit4:8.
The Christian texts on Yom Ki.ppur can be classified according to the
two categories mentioned above ·-· polemies against a literal reading of
Leviticus 16 or polemies against a hypocritical fasting practice. The
ma.tUler in which an inte.rpretation of Leviticus 16 relates to the contem-
porary Jewish fast can be classified by whieh of these two areas the
authors cover - i.e. whether their authors are "'eyewitnesses" of a contem-
porary Yom Kippur or not. Eyewitnesses are those who describe contem-
porazy Yom Kippur rites that they could not have derived from biblicaJ
exegesis. Fasting, for example, is too common to scrve as a basis; but
daneing and other joyful aetivities, walking barefoot. praying, and the like
point to personal acquaintance (e.g. Barnabas, Tertullian, Theodoret,
Chiysostom, Leo, Ephrem). Authors who betray firstband acquaintance
with Judaism regarding topics other tban Yom Kippur also belong to this
group (e.g.Justin, Origen, Cyril of Alexandria, Jacob ofSarug).
••Eyewitnesses" who polemicize against the contemporary Jewish fa.<tt in
the context ofa reinterpretation ofLeviticus I 6 and 1J provide an example
of the impact of the contemporary Yom Kippur on the development of
Christian thoughL99 To this group belong Barnabas, Justin, Tertullian, 100
Origen, Theodoret and, as we shall see in the next chapter, also Leo. 101
This attitude is similar tothat of an American .rabbi who promotes Hanuk-
kah while simultaneously polemici:zing against Christmas. Evcn if he does
not complain about Jews having a Christmas tree in their house, it is clear
that bis polemies and his promotion of the Jewish festival are related. His

" ExceptionaUy, Theadoret refers to the contemporary Yom Kippur not with ..fast."
but wilh "Day of Atonement," mo5t probably because of bis biblical temma.
119 I.e. tex.ts that juxtapose ao attaek on the Jewish fast with a Christian reading ofthe
high priest or the goats.
ulll In On Fruting, Tertullian refers positively to Iudllism, but only .in th.i& speeific con-
texr, beeause be wants to portray the Jews as more devout tban tbe non-Montanist Chris-
tiaos. This bias becomes apparent from bis Jess syntpathetic refuences in Aguilut Marei-
on andAgainst the Jews. where he denounces those obsenoing the Jewish fast as "fasting
ftom salvation."
101 On Leo, s~ pp. 74-76 above and 312-317, below.
282 The Impact of Yom Kippur on Christianity in the Third to the Fifth Cenlllries -

promotion of Hanukkah is linked to his reactions to the perceived threat of

Christmas. 102
"Eyewitnesses" who polemicize against the contemporary Jewish fast
without giving a Christian reinterpretation of Leviticus 16 or 23 provide
evidence of the ongoing challenge of Yom K.ippur for Christians. Tothis
group belong Ephrem, Chrysostom and perhaps also Eusebius and Basil.
Those authors who give a Christian reinterpretation of Leviticus 16 or
23 without referring to the contemporary Jewish fast - such as Augustine
and Cyprianus Gallus - may be instances of a solely ''bookish" influence
of Yom K.ippur, but this is merely an argumentum e silentio. The example
of Origen, who does not detail contemporary rites though he is clearly an
eyewitness to Christian participation in them, shows that we should not
jurnp to conclusions. Two exegetes ofLeviticus 16, Hesychius and Cyril of
Alexandria, refer to the "fast." 103 Their exegesis does not provide evidence
as to whether the polemies were directed against the Yom K.ippur of their
contemporary Jewish neighbors or against an imagined institution. Stefano
Tampellini has found no conclusive evidence that Hesychius was familiar
with Jewish exegesis. 104 Further investigation might reveal some contact.
His being in Jerusalem suggests that Hesychius was acquainted with living
Jews. Robert Wilken's examination of Cyril's relationship to Judaism
makes it quite reasonable to believe that Cyril knew the Jewish fast di-
rectly.105 Cyril's exegesis of Leviticus 16 in the Glaphyra should therefore
be read together with the references to the true spiritual fast in On the Ado-
ration and Worship of God in Spirit and in Truth as an anti-Jewish
polemic. Cyril, then, probably belongs to the eyewitnesses.
Finally, those authors who mention Yom Kippur but most probably
were not eyewitnesses and have not provided a Christianized version of
Leviticus 16 or 23 merely constitute evidence for Christian awareness of
the existence of Yom K.ippur, biblical or post-biblical. 106
In sum, many texts from all times and geographical zones attest to the
tension Christian theologians feit toward the contemporary Yom Kippur

102 On sorne aspects ofthe impact of Christmas on Arnerican and Gennan Judaism, see

I. Weissman Joselit, '"Merry Chanuka': The Changing Holiday Practices of Arnerican

Jews, 1880-1950," in: J. Werthcimer (ed.), The Uses ofTradition. Jewish Continuity in
the Modern Era (New York and Jerusalern, 1993; pp. 303-325).
103 Hesychius, Commentary on Leviticus 23:27-32, PG 93:10928; Cyril of Alexandria,

On the Adoration and Worship ofGod in Spirit andin Truth (PG 68: II 05BC).
104 Tampellini, "Introduzione allo studio del Cornmentarius in Leviticurn di Esichio di

Gcrusalemme," pp. 229-231.

105 Wilken, Judaism and the Early Christian Mind; cf. pp. 267-268 note 36 above.
106 E.g. the polemical references in Aristides, Apology 14:4 (Syriac); and Diognet 3:1-

4:1. See above, pp. 219..:.220.

 Christiart Eregesi3 of Leviticu3 and the Polemies against Yom Kippur 283

(Barnabas, Justin, Tertullian, Origen, Theodoret, Leo, Ephrem, Chryso-

stom and perbaps also Eusebius, Basil and Cyril of Alexandria). Some of
them provide us with quite conclusive evidence for an impact of contem-
porary Yom Kippur upon some exegetes ofLeviticus 16 (Barnabas, Justin,
Tertullian, Origen and Theodoret) and, as weshall see in the next cbapter,
on the Christian Fast ofthe Seventh Month (Leo). On the otherhand, some
exegetes seem to be influenced merely by the biblical Yom Kippur
(Augustine, Hesychius? and Cyprianus Gallus).

4. Anti-Christian Polemies in Yom KippurTexts

If Yom Kippur was a cballenge for Christian theologians, the Christian

claim of Cbrist's once-and-for-all fulfillment of the Day of Atonement rit-
ual might by the same token have been a challenge for Jewish theologians.
The ideal liturgical Sitz im Leben to express answers to these Cbristian
claims would be the Yom Kippur service. In turn, inclusion of polemies
against the Christian atonement concept in the Yom Kippur liturgy ex-
plains at least some of the Christian concems against participation in Yom
Kippur. To_ show this "other side" of the tension around atonement and
Yom Kippur, I collected some Statements from the Talmud and from Sidrei
Avodah tbat may be understood as polemical reactions against Christian
claims to have inherited the biblical high priesthood, against high-priestly
Christology and against the atoning power of the cross. All of these con-
cepts became more manifest to non-Christians during the Christianization
ofthe Roman Empire (especially ofthe Holy Land), through the develop-
ment of a more public liturgy and through the finding of the True Cross
and the development of its cult.
Two famous passages in the Talmudim divide the Second Temple pe-
riod into three declining epocbs: the 40-year golden age of Sirnon the Just,
the 40-year dark age before the destruction of the temple, and the age in
between. 107 In the golden age, the Iot of God always came up in the right
band, the red ribbon always became white and the western lantem always
bumed. In the intermediate age, this was not always the case. And in the
dark age, the 40 years preceding the destruction of the temple, $s was
never the case. As the text appears now, there is clearly a relation between
the golden age and the dark age, both 40 years long, with the first verging
on ideal conditions, the latter leading to catastrophe. However, the first
passage, wbich deals with the golden age and the intermediate age, and the

107 yYoma 6:3, 43c; bYoma 39ab.

284 The lmpoct o[Yom Kippur on Chrutionity in the Third to the Fifth Centuriel

second passage are separated by an anecdote on Simon the Just. The tradi-
tion about the red ribbon, which no Ionger becam.e white in the 40 years
before the destruction of the temple, appears also on its own. 108 The two
traditions may therefore bave been transmitted independently. joined only
at a later stage, reflected in the Talmudim. 10!1 There may be a second inten-
tion in the passage on the dark age, beyond portraying the high-priestly
Verfallsgeschichte from an anti-Christian stance. About 40 years befo.re
the destructionJ i.e. araund 30 CE, Jesus was crw::i:fied, and according to the
Cbristians, this death effected atonement. The rahbis claimed the opposite:
that ex:actly ftom that time, the red ribbon no Ionger became white, i.e.
atonement was no Ionger effected. 110
Another Baraita from the Tosefta explicitly mentions t:l'l'l:l, heretics.
..They asked Rabbi Aqiva: "What (sball the high priest do)? (Shall he)
switch (tbe Iot) from the left (band) to the right (band)?" He said them:
"Do not give thc heretics an opportunity to oppress you."lll The commen-
tators of tbe Talmud read into Aqiva's warning that tbe sages should not
create tbe impression that they decide halalchic questions arbitrarily. \Vhile
Rashi understands the IJ"l't'l as disciples of Jesus, it is difficult to define the
exact opposition gJOup. ,
I suggested above that the reappraisaJ of the Levitical Pfiesthood, espe-
cially in the piyyutim - in.spired by priestly circles - might have been di-
rected against the rising high-priestly Christology and the Chri.stian use of
the term ..priest" in tbe administration, e.specially after the imperialization
of Christianity bad marle these concepts concrete in the context of the ern-
pire and its cities. According to tbe Christian claim, Christ replaced the
Levitical priesthood with his Melchizedekian priesthood, tbe former being
coaupt and its rituals without power. In tbe fust part of the Sidrei Avodah
on the world's history up to Levi, however, Melchizedek plays no role.
The Sidrei Avodah glorify tbe works of the Levitical high priests, their
power and effectiveness. It is noteworthy that these Sidrei A.vodah evolve
in Palestine during approximately the same period as the high-priestly

1111 bRH31b.
Iot Of coune, the dating of the Baraita is difticult. but its being writtcn in Hebrew may
perhaps point to an earlier time, still in the Tlli!Ilaitic era. However, one ciiUlot be Sllre
about this.
110 I would like to thaak Bpbraim Shoham S!einer tor this reading. Haos Kosmala sug-

gcsted that the passage reflects a Jewish disbelief in the atoning effect of lhe saerifices of
Yom Kipp11r: H. Kosmala, "Jorn Kippur," Judilica 6 (1950) 1-19, here pp. ll-l9.
111 tYoma 2:10: mn7 D':r7.l'? Olp!lllnn ;~~: o:t? 'aK 7'.11.,., '?M7.!117D mu111'11:m K::l'i'S' ., nll ,.,MW
tt:~•,nK. T:his Baraita appears also in bYomo 40b, sligbtly adapted. Due to the eensure the
modern prints read "Sadducees," but all good manuscripu read l'l'tl. See bbbinovic2:,
Diqd11qey Soferim, vol. 4, p. 111.
 Christtan. Ezegesis ofLevitiCf/.8 and the Polemia againsl Yom Kippur 285

Cbristology becomes more visible in the liturgy, especially in the newly

constructed churches in Pa1estine.
In bis receot Pt>etry and Society in Jewish Galilee ofLate Antiquity, Jo-
seph Yahalom dedicated two sections to anti-Cbristian polemies in the piy-
yutim for Rosh Hashanah by Yose ben Yose and Yannai. m If 1hese
paytanim did not hesitate to express their Jewish identity over and against
the Christian environment in liturgica1 compositions for the New Year, it
would be strange not to fmd at least some similar expressions in piyyutim
for Yom Kippur. Most scholars admit to the presence of quit~ strong anti-
Christianpolemics in the Yom K.ippurpi)ryut Ha'Omrim leKhilayShoa•,m
which I, however, leave aside, since the polemics·are not directed specifi-
ca1ly against high-priestly Christology. Yahalom refers to a possibly anti-
Christian passagein a stanza dealing with the Sabbathin what is probably
the earJiest extant poetic &der Avodah- ~ be 'Ein Ko/: 114
Those smearing whitewash on {the Sabbath) do not have rest [on itJ
since the wic:ked (are) withheld ftam its light.
D'liVI"Illl.lZ)l 1")1Rr.l ') Wlp!ll"' tt7 1:l '7!11! 'ntl
These lines are a play on words in Ezekiel 13:11: "Say to those who smear
whitewash on it (that it shall fall)," and Job 38:15: "Light is withheld from
the wicked (and their uplifted arm is broken)," where the same expressions
?!ln 'nl:! and l:lilK C'llll11tllll7.)'l appear. Here, it may be understood as an anti-
Christian polemic comparing to wicked sorcerers those who irnpose
SWlday over the Sabbath, a hot issue in tbe late fourth centucy.

uz Yahalom, Poetry and Sociel)l in Jewish G11lilee uf Late Antiquity, [in Hebrew} (Tel
Aviv, l999). pp. 64-·71 and 72-80.
m Vl171 ry•)7 n•·v.mm (ed. Zulai, p. 339); S. Lieberman, "Haz.onot Yannai" {in Hebrew]
Sinai 4 (1939) 219-2:50, here pp. 224ff. JohaM Maier tried lo refule this view,
suggesting that the po!emical reading is ODly a medieval interpretation: see 1. Maier,
"The Piyyut 'HD'omrim le-.kldlay shoa' and Anti-CIIristian Polemics" [in Hebrew] in:
E. Fleischer an.d J. Peruchowslcy (eds.), St~~.diu in Aggadfl, Tarpms rmd PraytFs of
Israd in Memory of Jmef Beinemann (1erosalem, 1981; pp. 100-110); but Zvi Rabino-
vitz, the recent cditor of Yanuai, rigbdy statcs that Maier's argumcnts are bardly convin-
ci.n.g: see Z.M. R.abinovitz (ed.), The Lihlrgical PoeiiU of Rabbi Yan11ol occordfng to the
17iennial Cycle of the Pentateuch and the Holiduys. Oitical Edition with lntrodllction
and Commeltlary (m Hebrew) (2 vols; Jerusalem, l98S, 1987) vol. 2, pp. 207-227, esp.
pp. 221-222. See also Yahalom, Poetry ond Socidy in Jewish Golilee ojIAte Antiquity,
pp. 73-74. On Yannai, see also N.M. Bronznick, The Litllrgical Poetry ofYannai. Ex·
planotion:r and lllterpretation:r with Srtggutioi'IS for Teztual Eme~~dations and Com-
pletiO"IU of Lacunae (Jei'Wialem, 2000).
114 ~ be'Ein Kol ("Then, when there was .oothing") (ed. Yabalom, p. 88, Iines 214-
215, with .ootes).
286 The lrnpact of Yom Kippur 011 Christionity in tlre Thud to the Fi/th Cmturiu

Other Verses that I collected from the Sidrei Avodah before Yannai
match such a context of Cbristian-Jewish polemics. I have focused on
Statements against the high-priestly Cbristology. Christian claims on the
priesthood and the salvific effect of the wood of the cross. Naturally, the
polemical tendency changes from Seder to Seder and some Sdarim show
more specific anti-Cbristian polemies than others. m
TheSeder Avodah 'Az be 'Ein Kol, includes another two double stanzas
that may refer to Cbrist's atoning death on the cross:
An opening of righteausness, he [the high priest) shall open for bimself
for a criminal (Pvtl!)) cannot lltODC for criminals.116
According to the Christian concept, Christ di~ on the cross, a punishment
for criminals, but is hirnself considered sinless - unlike the Levitical high
priests, who "bad to offer a sin offering before being able to atone for
others." This coneept is tumed on its head by ':Az be 'Ein Kol. lt claims that
the Levitical high priest did a good thing in bringing a sin offering for bis
transgressions and confessing his sins. while that criminal who died on the
cross cannot supposedly atone for others. 117
The famous paytan Yose pen Yose composed many, very different Si-
drei A:vodah and other religious poems. One poem for Yom Kippw: is the
lamenting confession 'Ein Lanu Kohen Gadol. 118 The polemical intent
becomes clear from the third line~
Thc scrvice has ceascd from the House of Service
and bow sball we serve the Pure when the foreignBr (1r) opresses us. 119
The current (Christian) govemment keeps the community from rebuilding
the temple and reinstalling the liturgy .110 The poet :reacts to the Christi an
substitution theology thus:

m E.g. 'A..sapper Gedolot (ed. Mir.~ky, pp. 203-210).

116 'Az he 'Ein Kol (ed. Yahalom, p. 146, line:s 762-763).
117 Regretfully, the extant liagment of ~z bli'Ein Kol ends abruptly in the middle of
the bull being slaughtered. Another early Seder At~odah, which seems to be closely
COPDected to 'Az be'Ei11 Kol, also tontains th~ line "for a criminal (llvn!l) CBilDOt atone for
criminals" (line 382). Yah.alom added the extant futgm.ent in his edition of 'A:r: b~t'Ein
KDI. We cannot be 'ure about the Sttder's title, since the fust lines are missing. Yabalom
suggests seeing bere the lost 'AI'omem Je 'BI t"K7 ozmK) by Yose ben Yose.
118 'f:in Lanu Koben Gadol (We do not bave a high priest) (ed. Mir.lky, pp. 210-216).
119 Ed. Mirsky, p. 210, line 3.
120 The feeling of persecution and oppression is expressed also in tbe following: "The
blood of the sprinkling oft'er has Ieft the House of Offering I and how shall we sprinlde
blood. when our blood is poured out?" (ed. Mirsky, p. 21l,line 8).
 Chrtsl/(111 &eg&is ofLwitictU and the p"/f!mit:4 againat Yom Kippur 287

The contemptible {lsrael], 121 the foreigne111 (i:!'1t) treated her witb contempt
and how will we come to our heritage (i!?nl;), when our hernage belongs to the
foreigners (n'"ll;). 1n
Clearly, ,r refers to the ruling Cbristia.ns, who claimtobe heirs to the he-
ritage betonging to the Jews, wbich may include the ''Old" Testament. the
land oflsrael and the (high) priesthood. Finally comes the line
The woods oftbe order (1,lt '!3') stopped on the altar ofwood (Tl7) 1Zl
and how shall we become pure by the wood (T1r.l), when we failed at the wood
(TD)?I:U
Repeating the key word "fll"' four times is almost certainly a pun on the TY,
i.e. the cross and its (im)potence in achieving purity. This type ofpolemic
against the "wood" of the cross is comprehensible over and against the ris-
ing cult of the cross and the distribution of cross relics after the discovery
of the True Cross around 335.
Yose's most famous Seder Avodah is 'Allah Konanta 'Olam beRov
Hesed, still in use in the custom of tbree northem ltalian cities to this
day. 12s This Seder Avodah contains an ambiguous Une on the Levitical
priesthood:
And the piUagel'$ of lheir [the pries!$'} honor will be swallowed and infected.12'
At first glance, tbis line refers to the past. i.e. Korach and Hezekiah. Yet
the future tense might weil be understood as directing curses against those
who will claim the hooor of the biblical priesthood. i.e. the Christian
priests and their heavenly high priest. This interpretation becomes clearer
in light of two sentences in Yose's Iongest Seder Avodah. 'Atkir Gevurot
'Eloah, 127 which can be understood against Christian conceptions of
priesthood. 128
To the foreigner ("lt) he will not give the heritage oftheir (the priests') honor/
no human being will iuherit the gift oftheir part. 11t

1z1 Cf. Mirsky's commentary to this Une.

1n Ed. Mirsky, p. 212, line 14.
~ZI.- Mirsky refe111 to the altar of wood in Ezek 41:22.
I:MEd. Mirslcy, p. 2JS,line 32.
us 'A.Uah Konanta 'Oiam beRov Hued (lDn :ll1l D'IW ölnlllJ 01mc.) (You establtshed a
world most graciously) (ed; Mirsky, pp. 178-203).
126 Ed. Mirsky, p. 187, line 71: ll1lll'l w?1J.' D11J.J •n::11.
127 'AJ:kil' Gevlll'at 'Eloah. Here (ed. Mirsky, pp. 127-172).
128 Tbe very heginning of 'Azkil' Gevurot 'Eloah emphasizes e.bsolute monotheism in
an almost patripa!Sianisl.ic way and defines Jewish identity over and against e.ll others
(ed. Mirsky, p. 127, lines 1-4). ·
119 Ed. Mirsky, p. 148,li.ne 119.
2S8 The Impact of Yom KipJIIlr on Chri&tiOifily in the Third to the Fifth Centuries

This line is quite similar to the lines of 'Ein Lanu Kohen Gadol, quoted
above. but here the priestly honor is endangered explicitly by the foreign~
ers. the ruling Christians, as in 'Ein Lanu Kohen Gadol. Another balf-line
n1~1l •nu C'vln ,,!f1J can be interpreted in two different ways. either as "the
keepers ofthe laws, thc swift in commandments" or "the Christians ofthe·
'laws' are pillagers of the commandments." The first praises the priests,
the second is an indictment of those who deprived Israel of its command-
ments and yet claim to fulfill them.
The passages cited above may be understood as a rejection of Christian
claims to have inherited the priesthood, to have a sinless high priest and tQ
have an all-atoning cross. The rabbinie texts and the piyyutim counter these
claims by maintaining that strangers cannot inherit the priestbood. The
Christian Pseudo-Messiah died as a cr.iminal on tbe cross and camwt even
atone for himself. That bis death bad no atoning effect is shown by the ces-
sation of the miracle of the red ribbon in the year he died. While these are
polemies on general Christian ideas, they are embedded in liturgical and
halakhlc Yom Kippur texts, showing the JewiSh aspect of the tension be-
tween two religions conceming 1he question of atonement and priesthood,
particularly on tbis special day:

Conclusion
Yom Kippur's temple imagery bad an enormaus impact on early Christian
saorificial theology and the intexpretation of the liturgy. That this impact
was not only the "bookish'• legacy of the adoption of Leviticus, Hebrews
and Romans into the Christian canon and the necessity to explain them, but
also the outcome of Jewish-Christian tensions on the issue of atonement
and the Day of Atonement has been argued on th.e following basis. Tb.e
earliest Christian exegete of LeV:iticus, Origen, who par excellence sets the
stak.es for successive generations. states explicitly tbat he is battling th.e
"problem" of Christians partidpating in the Jewisb fast. He views their
participation as denying the exclusivity of Christ's once-and-for-all aton-
ing death. Statements by Chrysostom and in the Canons of the Apostles
prove that Yom Kippur continued to attract Christians and to disturb theo-
logians. Altbough I found no further explicit examples of Church Fathers
fighting this phenomenon, the numerous Christian authors polemicizing
against Yom Kippur and betraying firstband knowledge of Jewish rites
constitute evidence of the threat these authors felt from Yom K.ippur•s al-
ternative atonement. The Jewish side of this tension is expressed in the
polemical passages inserted in the Yom Kippur liturgy and in halakhic
 Chrutian Exegesis ofLtvitkull and the Polemies against Yom Klppur 289

texts pertaining to the fast. The Jewisb Yom Kippur prayers, then, also de-
veloped partly in rcsponse to Christian atonement theology.
The impact of the contcmporary Yom Kippur on early Cbristianity en~
compasses a ..positive adoption," 130 in the sense that it attracted some
Christians to observe the fast, and a "negative reaction," in the sense that it
pro\loked polemies against and dissociation from the contemporary Yom
Kippur. Yet Cbristianity did not react by rejecting the Yom K.ippur im-
agery altogether. On the cootrary, anotber "positive,. effect regarding Yom
Kippor was the continuing development of a detailed Christian interpreta-
tion of the biblical Yom K.ippur and its intensified use in Christian
theology. It is conspicuous that Origen, the flfSt great Church Father to
interpret Christ's deatb as an atoning sacrifice. is also so deeply engaged in
an exegesis of Leviticus 16 in the sociohistorical context of the challenge
of Christian's participating in Yom Kippur. In the next chapter I will argue
that this tensionalso affected the Christian festival calendar by attempts to
counter. through concurrent feasts, tbe appeal of the Jewish fast.

130 On these tenns, see the inttoduct.ion, on t)-pes of influence. above, pp. 4-6.
 Chapter 8

Y om Kipp ur and the Christian Autumn Festivals

In the late third century, the central Christian festal seasons were spring
and early summer with Easter and Pentecost. During the fourth century,
Christma5 entered most liturgical caleridars and gave the Christian year a
second, winter focal point. Yet the autumn still had no major Christian
festival, in contrast to the intense Jewish festival cycle ofTishri. While Ju-
daism was generally attractive to Christians, the autumn festivals seem to
have been particularly appealing. I suggest seeing two later Christian festi-
vals in autumn as related to the Jewish fall feasts, especially Yom Kippur.
The Encaenia/Exaltation of the Cross ernerged from bookish imagination
but plausibly also to provide a Christian alternative to the Jewish autumn
festivals (section 1). The liturgital traditions of the Roman Fast of the
Seventh Month include customs adopted from the Jewish autumn festivals
as well as polemies against Yom Kippur. Perhaps it is even a Christianized
Yom Kippur (section 2). In addition, the commemoration of the annuncia-
tion to Zechariah developing in the East, possibly in fourth-century Jeru-
salem, reenacts Jewish-Christian legends around Zechariah and Yom
Kippur (section 3). 1

1. The Encaenia, the Exaltation of the Cross and Y om Kippur

The Encaenia are the yearly commemorations of the dedication of the

Church of the Holy Sepulcher- first the Martyrion in 335, later also the
Anastasis. The Exaltation of the Cross celebrates the (alleged) invention of
the True Cross by Helena Augusta. It began as part of the Encaenia and
gradually developed into a separate (estival. A distinct name for it is at-
tested for the first time in the sixth century. Both festivals spread widely
from their Jerusalem origin, sometimes with a slight change in the date.
The Encaenia reached most Eastem Orthodox churches; the Exaltation is
celebrated in the Eastem traditions as well as in the Roman Church.

1 Fora possible additional influence of Yom Kippur on early Cbristian liturgy, sec

above, p. 3, note 10, and the appendix.

 Yom Kippur and the Christion Autumn Festivals 291

These festivals have been frequently investigated, most recently by

Louis van Tongeren in his dissertation on the Exaltation of the Cross. 2
Sources on the early development of these festivals are scarce. Eusebius,
Socrates and Sozomenos describe the actual dedication in 335. 3 Details of
the Iiturgy of the yearly festival can be found in Egeria, 4 in the Armenian

2 L. van Tongeren, &altatio CT'Ilcis. Het feest van KT'Ilisverhejjing en de zingeving

van het lcruis in het Westen tijdens de vroege middeleeuwen: Een liturgie-historische
studie (TFT Silldies 25; Tilburg, 1995); English translation, Exaltation of the CrO!iS.
Towards the Origins of the Fealit of the Cross and the Meaning of the Cross in Early
Medieval Liturgy (Liturgia condenda II; Leuven, 2001). Van Tongeren hus summarized
the fJISt two chapters in a concise article, "Vom Kreuzritus zur Kreuzestheologic. Die
Entstehungsgeschichte des Festes der Kreuzerhöhung und seine erste Ausbreitung im
Westen," Ephemerides Liturgicae 112 (1998) 216-245, on the development until the
seveoth century; see pp. 216-226. Sec also J. Hallit, "La Croix dans le rite byzantin,"
Parole de /'Orient 3 (1972) 262-311, here pp. 288-293; and R.P.F. Mercenier and
F. Paris, La priere des eglilies de rite byzantin. 11. Les fotes. 1. Grandes fotes faeli (Amay-
sur-Mcuse Belgique, 1939), pp. 32-58, on aspects ofthe modern cult (I was not able to
consult the more recent 1953 edition); for the dcscription of the Armenian rite, see;
S. Der Ncrsessian, "La <F6tc de !'Exaltation de Ia Croix>," Annuaire de l'institut de
philologie et d'histoire orientaleli et slaves. DtrtKapDua. Meltlnges Henri Grigoire 10
(1950) 193-198. Usefullexicon articles are R.F. Taft and A. Kazhdan, "Cross, Cult of
the," The Oiford Dictionary of Byzantium 1 {1991) 551-553; and A. Bugnini, "Croce.
VII. La C[roce) nella liturgia," Enciclopedia Cattolica 4 (1950) 96G-963. The classic
book by A. Frolow, La relique de Ia vraie Croix (Paris, 1961), is nothelpful on theritua1
history of the Exaltation.
3 Eusebius, Vita Constantini 4:40-46. Cf. Socrates, History ofthe Church 1:33; Sozo-

menos, History ofthe Church 2:26; A.-J. Fcstugiere, B. Grillet and G. Sabbah (Irans!.),
Sozomene: Histoire Ecc/esiastique. Livreli 1-ll. Texte grec de /'edition J. Bidez (SC 306;
Paris, 1983), pp. 346-349; cf. the Chronikon Paschale §334, ed. L. Dindorf, Chronikon
Paschale (Corpus Scriptorum Historiac Byzantinac; Bonn, 1832), PG 92:67-1028); Eng-
lish translation by Michael and Mary Whitby. Chronicon Paschale 284-618 AD (Trans-
latcd Texts for Historians 7; Liverpool, 1989), p. 19-20; and the pilgrim Theodosius
(ed. P. Geyer, CSEL 39:135-150), here pp. 140-142.
4 "(I) Also, Fcast ofthe Dedication {dies enceniarum) is the name they use for the day

when the Martyrium, the ho1y church on Golgatha, was consecrated to God. (2l Moreover,
thc holy church which is at the Anastasis, at the p1ace, that is, where the Lord rosc after
His Passion, was also consccratcd .to God on the same day. (3) The dedication of these
churches is observed with the most solemn liturgy, since the cross ofthe Lord was foWld
on that day also. (4) This is why it was decreed that whcn the above-mcntioned holy
churches were first consecrated the consecrations wou1d be on the same day as that on
which the cross of the Lord was found, so that these events might be celebrated at the
same time, on the same day and with full liturgy. (S) It was also discovercd from the
ScripEures that this Feast of Dedications would be on the day when the holy ruler Solo-
mon stood and praycd before the altar of God in thc newly completed house of God
which he had built, as it is written in the books ofParalipomenon (2Chr S-1, esp. 7:9-10;
cf. 1Kgs 8]. {6) When this Feast of the Dedications is at band, it is observcd for a period
292 The Impact of Yom KippJU on Christianity in the Third to the Fifth Centurie.s

and Georgian translations of the Jerusalem lectionary (the Old Armenian

Lectionary and the Old Georgian Lectionary)/' and in few other places, 6

of eight days. {7) Maoy days beforehand a crowd of monks and aplltactitae begin gather-
ing together from various provinces, not only from Mesopotamia and Syria, from Egypt
and the Tbebaid, where the monks are numerous, but also from all other plices and
provinces. (II) In ftl.ct, there is no one who would not go to Jerusalem on this day for such
a solemn liturgy and for such a splendid feast. {9) Lay people, both men and women, als()
gather togelber in Jerusalem on these days from aU provinces in tbe spirit of faith and on
account of the feast day. (lO) Though fewer in munber, there axe still more thall forty or
fifty bishops in Jerusalem during these days, and with thern come mtlny of their clergy.
(II} What -can I add? Everyone considen that be has faUen into great sin if he is not pre-
sent on days of such solemnity, unless there be conflicting obügati.ons, such as would
keep a man from fulfillillg a good inte.ntion. tm Ollring th~ Feast of tbe Dedications, tbe
decoration of alt the c:burches is similar to that at Euter and at Epiphl1DY. and 011. each
day tbey asscmble for lhe liturgy in various holy places, Just liS at Easter aad at Eplpb.~
any. (ll} On the first and sec.:,n<l days, everyone goes to the major ehureb., called tb.e
Martyrium; (141 then on the third day to the Eleooo, the church situated on the mOliDtain
ftom which the Lord ascended into heaven afrer His Pauion. Witbin tbe church there is a
grotto, in which the Lord taught Ute appstles on the Mowtt of Olives. (U) Then on tb.e
fourt.h day ... " Egeria, Diary 4&--49 (her diary ends bere); G.E. Gingras (transl.), Egeria:
Diory of o Pilgrimoge. Tran.rlated and AnnQtated (Ancient Cbristian Weiters 38; New
York and Ramsey [N.J.), l970), pp-. 126-128. For the sake of convenience, 1 h.ave nwn-
bered the sentences.
' A very useful introduction to the role of the early lectionat:ies in the history of th.e
Jerusalem liturgy is the study by S. Verhelst. "La Iiturgie de Jecusalem! l'c!poque byzan-
tine. Genese et structures de l'annl!e liturgique'' (Ph.D. dissertalion, Tbe Hebrew Univer-
sity ofJerusalem, 1999). The OldArmenianLectionary bas been edited by A. Renoux,Le
code.x armenien Jbu$alem I 21, Tome J: lntrodvcti(m: Au:c origines de Ia Iiturgie hibo-
sol~mitaine, /umieres nQtlVelles. T6me 2; Edition camparte dlJ tatt: et dt: deux autres
manuscrit.l' (PO 3S: l; 36:2; Tumhout, 1969, 1971}. He also published later (bot still very
early) manuscripts, Ch. ["'A.] Renoux., Le Lectionnaire de Jbusalem en Arminie: Le
Caioc'. I. lntroducliorr et li!Jte de$ mamucrits. 11. Editioh synoptique des pl11s anciens
temoin.r (PO 44:4; 48:2; Tumhout, 1989, 1999). Tbe Old Georglan Lectionary has been
edited and trans!ated by M. Tarchnischvili, Le grand lecilo111faire de Nglite tk Jinaa-
Jem ~-Ylll'-siecle} (CSCO 188, 189, 204, 20S = Iberi 9, 10, 13, 14; Louvain, 1959-
1960). G. Garitte (ed.), Le calendrier pale:rtino-georgien du SinaitiCIIS 34 (X: :siecle)
(Subsidia Hagiographfca 30; Brussels, 1958), bas published a calendar that is based on a
lectionilfY. The Typicon ofConstantinople hiiS been cdited by J. Mateos (ed.), Li! typicon
de Ia grande egiise. Ms. Sainte-Croi:t n" 40, X: siecle. Tome L Le cycle des douze mois.
Tome ll. Le cycle dl!s fltes mobiles (2 vols; OrientaHa Christiana Analeeta 165-166;
Rome, 1962~1963).
• Sozomenos, History of the Church 2:26. Sozomenos wrote between 439 and 450.
"The temple, called the 'Great Martyrium,' which WIIS built in the place ofthe skull at Je-
cusa!em, was completed ab out the tbirtieth year oflhe reign of Constantine; ... the temple
was tberefore consecr:ated .... Since that period the anniversary of the consecration has
been celebrated with great pomp by the chureh of 1erusalem; the festi:val continue$ eight
 Y<tm KipptD' and the Ch"islian .A:utulrln Festivals 293

According to Egeria. who p.robably visited Jerusalem sametime between

381 and 384 CE, the Encaenia last · eight days and commemorate
simultaneously tbree event.s: the invention ofthe cross (3),7 the dedication
ofthe Martyrion (1) and the dedication ofthe Anastasis (2). She leaves no
doubt that it was the invention of the cross that set the date for the two
dedications (4), and that the cross is the reason for an exceptionally
splendid liturgy. Egeria does not yet distinguish between a week for the
churches and a day for the cross, or a first day in the Anastasis and a
second in the Martyrion, as is done in the Old Armenion Lectionary. 8
Apparently, for the pilgrim of the late fourth century, the feast of the
dedication is the invention of the cross, and the Exaltation is the Encaenia.
Egeria (and later Sozomenos) assign a quasi-obligato:ry character to
pilgrimage to the festival (11). The Eneaenia equal in solemnity only two
other festivals, Easter and Epiphany, the two other Christian octaves (12).
Unfortunately, Egeria does not give a date for the festival.' The earllest
source for this is the Old A.rmenian Lectionary, giving 13 to 20 Septem-
ber. U) However, Egeria explicitly compares the dedication of the Holy
Sepulcher with that of the First Temple. According to her, the Encaenia are
celebrated on the same days as the dedication of the first "house of God"
as shown by a passage in "Chronicles." 11

days., initiation by baptism is administercd, and people from every region under the so.n
resort to Jerusalem duri.Dg tbis fustival, 8Jid visit tbc sacred pl~es" (transl. NPNF).
Sec also the homilies under tbe name of Epbrem, pu.blished by S. Hcid, "Zwei an
den Enkainim der Ierusalem.er Grabeskirche gehaltene Predigten des griechischen
Epbr!m... (Hiens Christiamtl 84 (2000) l-22. Heid acccpts tbei.r authenticity and dates
lhem to 35{)-375 CE (p. 2).
Tbere are also homilies by Alexander the Monk, Sopbron.iliS (d. 638) and Andreas
ofCrete (d. ca 740), but tbey go beyond lhe chronologicalscope oflhis investigation. See
SophronillS, Homl/y on rhe Ezaltatio11 ofthe Yenerahle Cross and on the Holy Antt:rtasis
(PG 87/3:3301-3310); Alexaodcr tbe Mook, Onthe Finding ofthe Yenuable a11d Lifo-
giving Cross (PG 87:3:4021--$4); 8Dd Andreas ofCrete, In ualtationem S. Crucis ora--
tiones 1-2 (PG 97:1017-1036, 1035-1046).
7 The numbers in pan:ntheses refi:r to my earlier enumeratioo of the :sentences in
Egeria, Dlary, sec above, note 4.
* For Egeria, tbe stotio for the tlrst rwo days is the same, the Martyrion. This has
been analyzed by Verbelst, "La liturgie de Jetusalern a 1'6poque byzantine," pp. 159-160
and 163.
9 Since in her diary, Egeria destribcs the Eocaenia after lhe Holy Weck and Pentc·

cost, it becomes clear that lhe Encaenia were later in tbe year.
10 On the question oftbe date, see below, p. 296, note 28.
11 I.e. 2Chr 7:8-10. According to this passage, Solomon c:onsecrated tbe temple just

hefore Succot., 8-14 Tishri. This date matches t:bc Encaenia only impreciscly. Why does
Egeria refer to Chronicles and not to Kings- which leaves open tbe exact day ofthe sev-
entb mooth aod lherefare fits !Ietter - wbich in general was better known than Cbroni-
294 The Impact of Yom Kippur on Christianity ;" the Third to rhe Flfth Centuries

Tbe structural similarities between the Encaenia and the two Jewish
temple dedication festivals, Sukkot and Hanukkah, bave led some scholars
to suggest a genetic connection. 1" Tbey point out tbat Egeria calls the
festival dies encenarium, the Latin name for Hanukkah. Tbe Encaenia and
Sukkot take place in the seventh month (the same season), last for eight
days (including Shmini Azeret), commemorate tbe dedication of a place of
worship and are an occasion for pitgrimage to Jerusalem. Several readings
of the Old Armenion Lectionary and the Old Georgian Lectionary,
witnesses to the Jerusalem lectionary, evoke the temple and refer to
Jerusalem and to the cross. 13 Moreover, readings from other old
manuscripts of the Armenian Lectionary, probably from the fifth to

cles? The parallel passage in 1Kgs 8 speak.s of an eight-day dedication (verses 65-«i) in
tbe $cventh month (2) leaving the exact dates open, probably presupposing that the dedi-
cation ofthe temple was celebrated during the festival ofSuccot. !n any case, 8-14 Tishrl
would indude Yom Kippur on 10 Tishri. Interestingly the author of Chronicles, in whose
time the Day of Atonement was defuqtely part of the Jewish ritual calendar, does not
comment on this. See the reference to Jewish traditiOD5 regarding this issue above, page
!23.
12 In affrrmation, see H. Vincent and F.-M. Abcl, Jerusalem: recherches de topogra-
phie, d'archeologie et d'histoire (2 vols; Paris, 1912-26), here vol. t, p. 203; J. Wilkin-
son, "Jewish !nfluenees on the Early Cbristian Rite," Le Museon 92 (1979) 347-3S9; See
also idem, Egeria's Travels to the Holy La:nd(Ierusalem, '-1981), pp. 298-310 (="Jewish
Influenc~ on the Jerusalem Li:turgy''); M.F. Fraser, "Constantine and the E.aeaenia,"
Stildia Patristico 29 (1997) 15-2S; J. Schwartz, "The Encaenia ofthe Cburch ofthe Holy
Sepulchre, the Temple of Solomon and the Jews," Theolog4clre Zeitschrift 43 (1987)
265-284; J. van Goudoever, Biblical Ca/endars (Leiden, 1959). Skeptical are A. Baum-
stark, Comparotive Liturgy (revised by Bernard Botte; English edition by F.L. Cr~;~ss;
London, 1958), here p. 203; E.D. Hunt, "Constantine and Jerusalem," Journal of Ec-
clesiaslical History 48 (1997) 405-424; 0. Irshai, "Consta.ntine and the Jews: The Pro-
hibition agalost Entering Jerusalem- History and Hagiography," [in Hebrew with Eng-
lish srunmary] Tarbi% 60 (1995) 129-178; Verhelst, "La Iiturgie de Urusalem ä l'~poque
byzantine," pp. 1.59-164. A book-length srudy devoted to the festival is a tksiderahl.m.
M. Black, "The Festival ofEncaenia Ecclesiaein the Ancient Churcb with Special Refer-
ence to Palesline and Syria," Journal of EcclesiasJical History 5 (l9S4) 78-85; favor
Hanukkah as background, as does S. Verhebt. I would ]ike to express roy great apprec,ia-
tion to Stephane Verhels.t for mak.ing available to me material~ by now probably in print
- before its publicatioo.
13 Jolm 10:22-42 (Jesus onHanukkah in Jerusalem) on the fust day and !Cor 1:13--24

(the foolishness of the cross) on the second day in all witn~s ofthe aocient JerusaJem
lectionary; Mark Il:l5-18 (the "Cleansing" of the temple) in the Laihai manu:script of
the Old Georglan Lectionary on the fourth day: ~ee Tarclwischvili, Le grand tecti<Hmafre
de l'eg/ise de Jirusalem, N° 1253; aJso John2:12-22 in tbe old Arntenian witnesses V
aod W: see Renoux, Le Lectionnaire de Jerusalem en Armenie, PO 48:2:239.
 Yom Kippur and the Christian Autvmn Festival.r 295

seventh centurics, 14 proscribe verses like "blessed are those who dwell in
your house for ever and ever singing your praise," 1j or "wc ponder your
mercy, 0 God, in the midst of your temple." 16 Considering that the recita.l
took place in .J:erusalem' s new central sanctuary, most people certain1y un-
derstood the Martyrlon to be Solomon's temple, just as did Egeria.. Fifty
years after Egeria, Sozomenos makes the equation explicit: "The temple
( vo.~). called the "Great Martyrium," whlch was built in the place of the
skull at Jerusalem. was completed about the thirtieth year of the reign of
Constantine. " 17 While this terminology was used also for other church
buildings, it is particularly true for the Martytion. 11 Egeria's explicit refer-
ence to tbe dedication of Solomon's temple and the various temple read-
ings of the Old Armenian Lectionary demonstrate that the participants and
the malrers of the liturgy were conscious of this relationship at least in the
last quarter ofthe fourth century. In addition, two other verses ofthe read-
ings may weil bave been chosen as polewical puns against the con-
temporary Sukkot, mocking "those Jews" in their tents: "I would rather
choose to be thrown aside in the house of God than live in the tents of the
sinners"; 19 and "I divide Sichern, and the valley of the tents I distribute.''20
As we know from Chrysostom, such metaphors were used in Christian
anti-Jewish sermons polemicizing against Sukkot.11 Yet Sukkot is not the
only Jewish festival with possible connections to the Encaenia.
The first to soggest an influence of Yom K.ippur on the Encaenia was
Jan van Goudoever. 22 After him., Michel van Esbroeck proposed to see
Yom Kippur as background to a homily, which he suggests to be by
John ll of Jerusalem. on the dedication of the church of Zion on the third
day of the Encaenia.23 More recently, Michael Frasec bas made an exten-

14 On tbe Encaenia, the Exaltation. of the Cross and the manuscripts Vienna 285 (V)
and Vjeruta 3 (W), see Renoux, Le Lectionnaire de Jhvsalem en Arminie, PO 48:2:127-
135.
'' Ps 83:5 LXX, read on Wednesdays: sce Renoux, Le Leeliannaire de Jllrvsalem en
A.rminie, PO 48:2:240.
16 Ps 47:10 LXX., read on Tbursda}'$: see Renoux, Le Lectionnaire lk Jervsalem en
Armenie, PO 48:2:241.
17 History ofthe Clrurch 2:26; transl. NPNF. For the Greek text ofBidez witb. Frcnch

ttanslation, see Festugi~re, Grillet and Sahbah, pp. 346-349.

tc See above, pp. 271-272.
1• Ps 83:llb LXX, read on Wednesday.
20 Ps S9:8b LXX. read on Sunday.

21 Chrysostom, A.gaiiiSt the JW~s 7:1 (PG 48:915).

l'l See van Goudoever, /Jiblicol Calendars, p. 211.
ZJ See M. van Esbroec:k, "Jean II de J6rusalem et les cultes de S. Etienne, de la Sainte·
Sion et de la Croix," A.nalectt~.Bollandia1!fl 102 (1984) 99--134; aad idem, uune homelie
sur l'Eglise attribuee a Jean de Jerusalem." Le Mwion 86 (1973) 283-304.
296 The impoct of.Yom Kippur ofl Clrri1tianily in tlre Third to tlre Fiflh Centllrie.s

sive claim for the influence of Yom K.ippur on the date of the dedication
festival.24
Discerning the latent influences of either Sukkot or Yom Kippur is vezy
difficult. Both festivals take place at the same time of year. In the Second
Temple period. both focused on the temple, and it is the temple dedieation,
not the practice of constructing booths or dancing with lulavim, that
influenced the Encaenia:zs Yet six observations - regarding sacred time.
sacred place, the pw:pose and content ofthe Encaenia/Exaltation rites and
some Jewish reactions - refer specificaJly_ to Yom K.ippur.
First, in the templization of church buildings, the most sacred space in
the church of the Martyrion is the first to be called holy of holies.26 Doing
so evokes the sacred geography of Yom Kippur's ritual. In addition, in
Jeromes's comparison ofthe cave to the holy ofholies, he underscores tbat
like the adytum of the fonner Jewish temple, it is a special place for sup~
plicatory prayers butthat unlike the latter the eave can be freely entered.27
However, the holy ofholies is not used on days other than Yom Kippur.
Second, while any date cJose to Sukkot is also close to Yom Kippur, in
fact, as M. Fraser has ealeulated, the actwd dedication of the Martyrion on
13 September 33528 most probahly coincided with that year's Yom Kip-
pur.l!l Was this a coincidence or deliberate'1! 0 Many scholars prefer to

24 See Fraser, "Constantine and the Encae.nia."

25 Is the rite of raising the cross in !hree {later fo 11r) di.rections taking up a theme ofthe
luiav ritual? Palm Sunday, per:haps also Epiphany, is reminiscent of Sukkot: see Verhelst,
"La Iiturgie de J~rusalem a I' l!poque byzantine," pp. 79 and 225-226.
215 See abovc. p. 271.
27 See Jeromc, Letter46:l3;Letter 108:9.
38 A number of scholars doubt that the dedication took place on 13, 14, 1.5 or 17 Sep-
tember. The last date found in the Chronicon Paschale is most probably a scribal error
(Verbelst, pp. 160-162, however, argues .iD favor ofaecepting it). 15 September is trans-
mittcd by the pilgrim Theodosius. This may be a return to the bibli<:al model of Sukkot.
13 and 14 September are equally well attested • .A detailed discussion ean be found in e.g.
van Tongeren., "Vom Kreuzritus zur Kre112:estbeologie," pp. 222-226.
29 Fraser, "Constantine and the Em:aeoia."
30 Verhelst, "La Iiturgie de Ierusalem ä l'epoque byzantine,"" p. 161, note 17, wbo is
very careful in t"Omputing dates and tends to favor Jewish or Jewish-Chdstian influ.ences,
discards Fraser's calculation as "all!atoire." However, we are on quite reliable ground.
Yom Kippur always falls in a cenain :moon phase between .new moon md full mooa. This
astronomical coostellation fits only 13 September. plus/minus one or two days for
manual observation mistakes. For this date, following close upon Rosb Hashaoah, it is
hardly conceivable that the Jewlsh astronomcrs would so seriowlly have miscalculated
lhe leap year that Rosh Hashanah would bave fallen a whole lunar month either earlier
(15 August) or later (13 October), since this would have seriously confilsed the ritual an.d
agricuitural llfe. For a Yom Kipp11r on 13 October, Rosh Hashanah would have bad to
occur on 3 October. Dershowitz aod Reingold's calendar program gives 27 Septembec as
 Yom Kippur and the. Chris.tian Avtumn Festivals 297

follow lldefons Herwegen's suggestion (publicized by Anton Baumstark)

that Constantine chose the date of the Encaenia over and agamst the ldes
of September and the Iudi Romani, which commemorate the dedication of
the temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus on the Capitol, in order to mani-
fest the Christianization of Aelia Capitolina, the city of the gods of the
Capitol.31 An anti-pagan detennination of the date of the Encaenia is
indeed probable. But does this exclude an anti-Jewish one? Even if one
adopts the view that Constantine did not betray anti-Jewish attitudes, Jeru-
salem,s Church offleials certainly did. 32 Furthennore, the structme of the
Encaenia is molded on the biblical model, not the pagan. It is celebrated
during eight days, not fourteen as in the earlier version of the Iudi or four
as in the later one. 33 Oded Irshai and E.D. Hunt have independently
suggested the interesting hypothesis that the anti-Jewish stance is a later
local, ecclesiastical development veering away from Constantine's
originally anti-pagan directinn. 34 Yet even ifthe typology to Solomon's
temple dedication, preserved in Egeria's report, was introduced only in the
time of C}'l'il of Jerusalem. the length ofthe festival, given as eight days, is
original and points to a conscious typology of the biblical chro:oology at
the outset Furthennore, as noted in the previous paragraph, Eusebius
already called Jesus• tomb "holy of holies,'' a clear allusion to the
substito.tion for the temple. Therefore, also geograpbically, the temple
typology was part of Christian consciousness from the beginning. These
Observations do not contradict the chronological sequence of attitudes

the latest possible date for Rosh Hashanah in the Jullan calendar ofthe third/fourth cen-
tury CE (and 28 August as the earliest possible one). We can th.erefore be quite cefblin
tbat in 335 Yom Kippur fell on 13 September (':1: two days for an observational error), i.e.
it coincided wltb the dedicalion day of the new Christian "temple." Yet thi!l is only a
small poillt in the argumentation, and the observation is valid mainly for the year of in-
ception of the ritual (though, J181urally, Yom Kippur and Sukk:ot are always celebrated
quite close to the Encae.nia a.od the Exaltation of the Cross).
JJ Baumstark, Comparative Liturg;y, p. 203.
32 Irshai, «constmtine and the Jews," p. 172, opts for a primarily anti-pagan orienta·
tion.
u See H.H. Scnllard, Festivals and Cert11flonies of the Roman Republic (Lorulon,
19111), pp. 183-186, 011 the Ludl Romani 5-19 September, and pp. 186-1&7 on the
dedication of the temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus. See also tbe calendar at the end of
K. Latte, Romiachi! Religionsgeschichte (Handbuch der Altertwnswissenscha.ft S/4;
Mun:ich. 1960).
34 lrshai, ''Constantine and lhe Jews," p. 172. Hunt, "Constantine and Jerusal.em,"
p. 422, does not refer to Irshai's paper in Hebrew, published only shortly before Hunt's.
298 The Impact ofYom Kipp11r on Christianity in the Third to the Fifth Centuries

proposed by Irshai and Hunt, but they make the chronological aspect of
their hypothesis less likely.35
Third, a reading of the Old Georgian Lectionary for the third day recalls
a theme related to Yom Kippur, the high-priestly service of Jesus in He-
brews 8:7-9:10. 36 An Armenian Lectionary for the fifth day ofthe Encae-
nia - preserved by one old manuscript, which, according to the editor,
Charles Renoux, reflects Jerusalem's liturgy before the eighth century and
perhaps as early as the fourth37 - picks up the same theme, reading He-
brews 3:1--6 on the fourth day and Hebrews 9:11-16 on the fifth. 38 This
juxtaposition of the Christian interpretation of the Day of Atonement with
the date of Yom Kippur may point to a consciousness on the part of Chris-
tians about the proximity ofthe Jewish fast.
Fourth, the cross, the central object ofthe festival, ist~ Christian sym-
bol for atonement. This fact finds expression in the liturgy in the adoration
and elevation ofthe cross. The earliest explicit source for the ritual adora-
tion of the cross on the second day of the Encaenia is the Old Armenion
Lectionary. Egeria may have known of such a rite. 39 The earliest descrip-
tion of the rite of elevation of the cross in the Old Georgian Lectionary
prescribes an extremely long sequence of 50 Kyrie Eleison by the congre-
gation upon each of the elevations of the cross by the celebrant. 40 Such a
mantra for mercy is conceivable, particularly in view of the special atoning
force ascribed to the True Cross. While it is not certain that the crosswas
part of the Iiturgy in the actual dedication of the Church in 335, it had a

35 In an oral communication, Oded Irshai stated that today he regards an influence of

Sukkot as more feasible than he did in 1995.

36 Tarcbnischvili, Legrand Jectionnaire de l'eglise de Jerusalem, No 1249.
37 See above, p. 295, note14.
38 Renoux, Le Lectionnaire de Jerusalem en Armenie PO 48:2:240. The 0/d Georgian

Lectionary reads Heb 8:7-9:10 on the third day: see Tarcbnischvili, Legrand /ection-
naire de l'iglise de Jirusalem, N° 1247-1250.
39 Egeria describes an adoration of this kind only on Good Friday. Given the pivotal

place Egeria ascribes to the cross in the Encaenia, either she omitted an already existing
adoration rite from her description, or the rite may have been performed on one of the
later days of the Encaenia, which are not part of the extant text of the fragment. In any
case, we cannot be sure that she was unaware of such a rite during the Encaenia.
40 Lathal manuscript: see Tarcbnischvili, Legrand lectionnaire de l'iglise de Jeru:sa-

lem, N° 1240 in the notes. Verhelst, "La Iiturgie de J~rusalem ä 1'6poque by:zantine,"
p. 163, examining the data of the Georgian lectionaries speaks of an earlier layer of three
elevations of the cross and four in the later tradition. According to ms Oxford 30322
(Codex Auct. E. 5.10) from the fourteenth century, the cross is lifted three times in all
four directions. According to ms Oxford 30322, the Kyrie is repeated 100 times, then 80
times and finally 60 times: see Mateos, Le typicon de Ia grande egli:se, vol. 1. p. 41,
note 2.
 Yom Kippur and the Christion Autumn Festivals 299

crucial function as a relic ofatonement from Cyril's time on. 41 Moreover,

there is an ambivalent tension between the cross and Jews in Cbristian and
Jewish texts. In some of the legends of the cross's discovery a Jew plays
the ambivalent role of keeper of the secret tradition of the location of
Christ' s tomb and concealer of it. 42 According to van Esbroeck, the first
staurophylax, Porphyry, appointed in the time of John II of Jerusalem, was
a Jewish Christian.43 In Christian conciousness, the cross became a visible
token of Christianity's Supersession of and superiority to Judaism.44
Polemies against the cross (fl1}, in rabbinie Iiterature and in piyyutim, show
the Jews' awareness of the importance of this artefact and its theological
significance. 45
Fifth, the focus on the concept of atonement and the adoption oftemple
geography are connected in a homily, published by van Esbroeck. 46

41 See Cyril of Jerusalem, Epistula ad Constantium 3 (ed. Bihain p. 287); Cateche-

ses 4:10; 10:19; 13:4. Some scho1ars doubt that the crosswas already there before the
dedication, since Eusebius does not mention it: see Hunt, ''Constantine and Jerusalem,"
pp. 415-416. Hunt bases bis view on the silence of Eusebius and the testimony of the
pilgrim of Bordeaux. However, the discovery may have been made after the pilgrim's
visit in 333 but before 335. Moreover, Ze'ev Rubin has convincingly argued that Euse-
bius had his reasons for passing over Jerusalem's artifact of dtual power. The discovery
was closely connected to Makarius, the competitor for the hegemony of Eusebius'
Caesarea: see Z. Rubin, "The Church ofthe Holy Sepulchre and the Conflict between the
Sees ofCaesarea and Jerusalem," in: L.I. Levine (ed.), The Jerusa/em Cathedra 2 (Jeru-
salem, Detroit, 1982; pp. 79-105). The argument is continued in Z. Rubin, "The Cult of
the Holy Places and Christian Politics in Byzantine Jerusalem," in: L.I. Levine (ed.),
Jerusalem- Its Sanctity and Centrality to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (New York,
1999; pp. 151-162); seealso J.W. Drijvers, He/ena Augusta. The Mother ofConstantine
the Great and the Legend of Her Finding the True Cross (Brill's Studies in Intellectual
History 27; Leiden, 1992), pp. 81-93; and H.A. Drake, "Eusebius on the True Cross,"
Journal of Ecclesiastical History 36 (1985) 1-22. The wide and early distribution of
parts of the relic of the True Cross and the mention already by Cyril of Jerusalem of the
finding of the cross under Constantine make an !nventio Cn~cls after the construction of
the cburches rather unlikely - not to mention the technical difficulties of such excava-
tions at such late a point.
42 Cf. van Tongeren, "Vom Kreuzritus zur Kreuzestheologie," pp. 219-222; Drijvers,
Helena Augusta, part 11, particularly chapter 6.
43 Cf. van Esbroeck, "Jean II de Jerusalem et !es cultes de S. Etienne, de Ia Sainte-

Sion et de Ia Croix," pp. 112-113.

44 Cf. Drijvers, Helena Augusta, p. 187.
45 See e.g. the passage quoted above, p. 285; and Schwartz, "The Encaenia of the

Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the Temple of Solomon and the Jews."
46 He published the Armenian text and a Latin translation in: van Esbroeck, "Une
homelie sur I'Eglise attribuee a Jean de Jerusalem." His more recent article includes a
French trans1ation: see van Esbroeck, "Jean li de Jerusalem et !es cultes de S. Etienne, de
Ia Sainte-Sion et de Ia Croix," pp. 115-125.
300 The /mpael of Yom Kippur on Chrirliallily in IIre ThirJ lo tlre Fifth Centuries

According to him this homily is connected to the dcdication of the new

church on MoUilt Zioo and was delivered by John ß of Jerusalem (386-·
417) on the thiro day of the Encaenia, one day after the Exaltation of the
Cross (15 September 394).47 If van Esbroeck's dating of the dedication is
conect,48 the last day of the week of Encaenia (20 September), coincided
with the eve ofYom Kippur.49 Moreover, the homily focuses on the propi-
tiatory (n1l!l::J), the central object of the Yom Kippllt' sprinkling rite in
Leviticus, Hebrews, Romans and the Mishnah. Indeed. John states his
intention as being ..to nanate worthily with holy woros that mystery oftbis
holy propitiatory (punmpmb.) and that divine dwelling betrothed through
the prayers of all saints...~ Therefore, the homily is best Ullderstood
against the background ofthe Day of Atonemcnt.51
Finally. an Armenian text from about the seventh centUl'}' mention.s a
fast for the festival ofthe cross claiming its origin is Jerusalemite praxis.52

~7 The Clavis Patrum Graecorum eontinues to Iist the hotnily nnder dubia.
,.. For his argumeuts, see van Esbroeck, "Jean ll de Jerusale.m et le$ culte:s deS. Etien-
ne, de Ja Sainte-Sion et de Ia Croix.," pp. 109-112.
..., Aceording to the calendar-cumpu.tation program by Nachwn Dershowitz and Ed-
ward Reingold (http://emr.cs.uiuc.edulhome/reingold/calendar-book/index.shtml).
50 My translation of section 23. For the Armenian text, see van Esbroeck, "Une ltom6-
lie sur l'Eglise altrib~e ä Jean de J&usalem," p. 292. John describes eight spberes (1)
the divine etb.er, (2) heavenly Je.rusalem, (3) the Gardeo of Eden, (4) the arch of Shem
and Noah, (S) Mount Moriab, (6) Mount Sinai, (7) the temple and (8) the Cbun:b. Most
of the sec:tions on eacb sphere end with a statement on the mediating power of tbe holy
propitiatoty (barekhawsout'eamb SDilrb k'avarmtis) (1,2,1,4,7 and 8). The passage on
Mount Moriah (S} ends witb a blessing on the foundation stone ofthe churcb. Tbe pas·
sage on Mount Sinai ends witb the warning nottobring alien fire near, piclcing up the
story ofNadab and Avihu (Lev 10; 16:1): see van Esbroeck, "Jean 11 de J6rosalem et les
cu.ltes deS. Etienne, de Ia Sainte-Sion et de Ia Croix," pp. 121-123.
Sl Van Esbroeck, "Jean Il de J6rusalem et les cu.ltcs de S. Etienne, de Ia Sainte-Sion et
de Ia Croix," pp. lll-112. Van Esbroect also explains two reanarks on. fasting (sec-
non 71) aud penitence (section Sl)as allusious to Yom Kippur; see van Esbroeek, p. 120,
note 88 an.d p. 122, note 96. While tbese remarks conlribute to the atm.o:sphere of atone~
ment, they remain very genend and do not 1.1$e my ofthe biblical Yom Kippur passages.
52 See the texts by Step•aoos Siwnec'i (sixth or seventh century) published by E. Pe-

trosyan in Ejmiaril'l 41 (1984) 44-50 (non vidi), mentioned by R.enoux, Le Lectiannaire

de Jenaait~m en Jtrmtlnle, PO 44:4, p. 434, note 11. However, Renoux rcminds us thllt
lhis pf<IXis is not mentioned in any of the Annenian lectionaries prior to the thirteenth
century. On p. 468, in note 21, he lists five manuscripts &om tbe thirteenth and rour-
teentb ceoturies mentioning five days of fast from Monday to Friday prlor to the Encae-
nia on Saturday and the festival ofthe cross on Sunday. Tbis t'a$t is still an obligation in
tbe modem Greek Church: see Hallit, "La Croix. dans le rite byl.lntin," pp. 290-292;
Mcrcenier and Paris, La. priere du iglises Je rite byrantln, pp. 33-35. Unforttlmltely,
they do not spec:ify when this practicc was inttoduc:ed. I would like to rhank St6phane
Verhefst for drawing my attention to Lhe Amlenian texl
 Yom Kip~r and the Christion A.t#vmn Futillais 301

What ki:n.d of Sukkot/Yom Kippur influenced lhe emergence of the Encae·

nia/Bxaltation of the Cross? The parallel elements in the Christian and
Jewish festivals point to the biblical background with the temple, not to the
contemporaneous way of celebrating Suk:k:ot by building boolhs and
parading with lulavim. The only contemporaneous ritual influence could be
the fast of the Exaltation, blit I do not know wben lhe Christians intro-
duced this fast. We have here, then, a special form of "bookish" in:fluence.
However. the dedication of a church, even as central as the Holy Sepul-
cher, does not in itself explain the establisbment of a yearly festival that
attracted the attention of so many people. How can tbe sudden rise of the
En<:aenia in fourth-century Jerusalem be explained?
I suggest two factors that sparked the emergenu ofthe Encaenia at this
pla<:e and time: the Ortsgeist of the Holy Land and the challenge of con~
tempo:rary Judai.sm's festivals. I consider the main factor to be the Orts-
geist of the Holy Land, the infiuence exerted by the symbolic language of
the Holy Land on its rulers. Accordingly, in the fourth century, the conse-
cration of the new centT:al sanctuary of the rulers of the land of the Bible
followed the mythological consecration ceremo.ny of the land's temple,
Jinked to Solomon, Bezalel and the date of Sukkot.
Tbe cballenge of the festivals of eontemporary Judaism is a possible
second factor. The llomilies on Leviticus by Origen and the polemical pas-
sages in the Sidrei AYodah show the tension over Yom Kippur and atone-
ment between Christians and Jews in the third and fourth centuries,
especially in Palestine. Chrysostom's orations Agaimt the Jew& :from An-
tioch. delivered only fifty years after the dedication of the Holy Scpulcher,
attest to the same friction. He assembles bis flock for an exceptional prayer
service on Yom Kippur to keep Christians from attending thc lewish
service.s3 Furtherm.ore, there are some hints of a Jewish reaetion to the
proximity of the Encaenia to Sukkot. Joshua Schwartz h.as suggested that
the Christian festival caused a transformation of Jewish exegetical tradi-
tions regarding the construction of the Third Temple, the time of which
was postponed from Tishri (the month of the Encaenia) to Heshvan. 54
Therefore. even if the Jewish community of fourth-century Jerusalem a.nd
its environs was very small and probably rather clandestine, ss and most

53 W. Pradels, R. Brllndle and M. Heimgartner, "The Sequence and Dating of John

Chryso.stom's Eigbt Discourses .A.dversusludaetJs," Zeitschriftftir Antike 1md Christen~
tvm 6 (2002) 90-116, bere p. 95.
34 Schwartz, "The Encaenia ofthe Church ofthe Holy Sepulchre, the Temple of Solo-

mon and the Jews."

5S Cf. G. Stemberger, Jews and Clvistians ilf the Hol:y Land. Palestine in the Fourth
Centwy (Edinburgh, 2000), pp. 17---21 and 40-43.
302 The Impact of Yom Kippur on Christianity in the Third to the Fifth Centuries

inhabitants of the city were pagan, Judaism and its rituals remained an
ideological challenge. The same is true of the Jewish Christian commun-
ity.56 Cyril of Jerusalem's wamings not to follow Jewish practices attest
that Jerusalem Christians fett continuously threatened by the attractiveness
of Jewish ritual (even in its traditional baptism catechesis). Moreover,
Galilee, with its dense Jewish population, cannot have failed to have an
impact on Cbristian pilgrims to and inhabitants of Jerusalem. Yet the
tension over the rituals of contemporary Judaism explains only the lo-
cation, not the time of the appearance of the Encaenia. The biblical char-
acter of the Encaenia, which focuses on the temple with its holy of holies
and its atoning function, could be a Christian challenge to the temple-less
Jewish interpretation of the Sukkot commandments emphasizing booths
and lulavim instead ofthe sanctuary.

In sum, the parallels between the Encaenia/Exaltation of the Cross and

Sukkot are impressive. The Encaenia, one ofthree centrat pilgrimage festi-
vals, is celebrated for eight days in the seventh month and commemorates
the dedication of the sanctuary. The sanctuary is called "the temple" and
appropriates various legends originally associated with the Jewish temple.
Six further observations may bespeak an additional influence of Yom
K.ippur: The cave of the Holy Sepulcher was revered as the holy of holies;
13 September 335 probably coincided with 10 Tishri; Hebrews 9, with its
description of Jesus' high-priestly ritual, is read during the Encaenia; the
cross liturgy focuses on atonement; John's dedication homily focuses on
the kapporet; and Christians fast on the festival of the cross, a practice
probably originating from Jerusalem in early times. 57
The main factor underlying the introduction of this dedication festival,
ruodeled on the biblical type, was most probably the new status of the
Bible as an ideological model for reforming the political reality and its ex-
pression in religious symbols by the (now) Christian authorities of fourth-
century Palestine. The Christianizers of Palestine had to follow their myth,
which encompassed both the New Testament and the Old. The symbolical
expression of political power over the earthly Jerusalem could be expres-
sed only in terms of the Old Testament, with its temple, King Solomon,
Sukkot and Yom Kippur.

56 G. Stroumsa, "'Vetus Israel': Les juifs dans Ia litttüature hierosolymitaine d'epo-

que byzantine," Revue de /'hi:stoire des religions 205 (1988) 115-131, includes a nwnber
of very suggestive passages on th.e existence of a Jewish. Christian community. Stem-
berger, Jews undChristians in the Holy Land, pp. 71-81 and 111-114, on the other hand,
is much more hesitant.
57 Fraser mentions the second, fourth and fifth points; van Esbroeck the fifth.
 Yom Kippur and tlre Christian Aulllmn Festivals 303

A second, more marginal factor was the concurrent situation of Pales-

tinian Cbristianity in tbe land of tbe Jews and the appeal of the Jewish rites
to outsiders, pagans, Christians and potential converts.

2. The Fast of the Seventh Month (Ember Day of September)

and Yom Kippur

The Fast of the Seventh Month (Ember Day of September), one of the
major Cbristian liturgical events of fifth-century Rome, has been much
researched. 58 While some scholars have pointed to Yom Kippur as back-
ground,59 the opinio communis regards its influence as biblical at the most.
I will argue that the links between Yom Kippur and the Roman Fast ofthe
Seventh Month are more numerons and closer than was previously
thought. Our understanding of the promotion of the festival by Leo in the
fifth century can be significantly enhanced by taking into consideration not
only the biblical but also the contemporary Yom Kippur. 60

n See G. Morin, "L'origine des Quatre-Temps," Revue Benedictine 14 (1897) 337-

346; L. Fischer, Die kirchlichen Quatember. Ihre Entstehung, Entwicklung und Bedeu-
tung in liturgischer, rechtlicher und kulturhistorischer Hinsicht (Veröffentlichungen aus
dem kirchenhistorischen Seminar MOnehen IV. Reihe Nr. 3; Munich, 1914); K. Holl,
"Die Entstehung der vier Fastenzeiten in der griechischen Kirche," in: Gesammelte Auf-
sätze. Yol. 2. Der Osten (Tilbingen, 1928; pp. JSS-203); 1. Schümmer, Die altchristliche
Fastenpraxis, mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Schriften Tertu/lians (MOnster,
1933); J. Danit!lou, "Les Quatre-Temps de septembre et Ia ~te des Tabemacles," La
Maison-Dieu46 (1956) I 14-136; J. Janini, S. Siricio y los cuatro temporas. una investi-
gacion sobre los fuentes de Ia espiritualidad seglar y del Sacramentorio Leoniano. Lee-
clon inaugural del curso 1958-59 (Valencia, 1958); G.G. Willis, "Ember Days," in:
idem, Essays in Early Roman Liturgy (Aicuin Club Collections 46; London, 1964;
pp. 49-97); A. Chavasse, "Le sermon III de saint Leon et Ia date de Ia ct!lt!bration des
Quatre-Temps de septembre," Revue des sciences religieuses 44 (1970) 71-84; T.J.
Talley, "The Origin of the Ember Days. An lnconclusive Postscript," in: Rituels (Me-
langes P.-M. Gy) (Paris, 1990; pp. 465-472); J.-L. Verstrepen, "Origines et instauration
des Quatre-Temps A Rome," Revue Benedictine 103 (1993) 339-365. For handbook se<:-
tions, see A. Chavasse, "Les Quatre-Temps," in: A.G. Martimort (ed.), L 'Eglise en
a
Priere.lntroduction Ia Liturgie (Paris, Tournai, Rome, New York, 1965; pp. 758-767);
H. Auf der Maur,.Feiern im Rhythmus der Zeit. Herrenfeste in Woche und Jahr (Gottes-
dienst der Kirche. Handbuch der Liturgiewissenschaft 5/l; Regensburg, 1983); A. No-
cent, "Le quattro tempora," in: M. Augt! et al. (eds.), A.namnesis. Vo/6: L 'anno liturgica:
storia teologia e celebrazione (Genoa, 1988; pp. 263-266).
59 In the past century, this thesis has been most prominently defended by Fischer, Die

kirchlichen Quatember, p. 7, and Schommer, Die altchristliche Fastenpraxis.

60 St!!kl Ben Ezra, "Whose Fast Is lt?" was based on a previous version of this chap-
ter.
304 The Impact ofYom K.lppur on Christianity in the Third to the Flfth Centuriu

Th.ree kinds of sources are available for the early understanding of the fast:
The main source is the nine Sermons by Leo the Great (440-461) on the
fast of September.41 They are supplemented by short notes in various
sources. 62 The Codex Verona Bibi. Capit. LXXXV (80), traditionally known
as the Sacramentarium Leonianum or Sacramentarium Veronense preser-
ves prayers predating the seventh century;63 and the Epistolary of Wurz-
burg (seventh to eighth centuries) and the Comes of .A./cuin (eighth
century) give evidence for liturgical readings on the Ember Days in th.e
Roman Church going back: at least that far. 64
2.1 The Origin ofthe Solemn Fasts
Today, the termErnher Days (Latin qvattuor temporum, French Quatre-
Temps, Gennan Quatember) refers to a series of fasts observed after four
holidays: the frrst Sunday in Lent, Pentecost. Holy Cross Day (in Septem-
ber) and St..Lucia (13 December). They include fasts on the Wednesday
and Friday and a night vigil from Saturday to Sunday. 65 However, the late
antique version of the fast is quite different from the modern one. 66 First,

• 1 Tbere are also nine sermons on the fast of Decemher aw:l four on the Pentecostal
fa.\t. I used the edition by A. Chavasse, Sancti Leonis M«gni Romani Pontificu Tractatus
Septeiltet Nonaginta (2 vols; CCSL 138-l38A; Twnhout, 1973); English translation by
Conway and Freeland, St. L#lo the Great: Sermons; French translation by R. Dolle, Leon
le Grand. Sermons (4 vols; SC 22, 49, 74, 200; Paris, 1964, 1969, 1971, 1973).
112 E.g. Tertulüan, On Fasting 14:2-3; PhUaster, Dil>entli'Um He,.ueon Ub#lr 149; as.

weil as tbe anolzylllous Liber Pontificalis and !Je .folstitiis. These soun:es will be dis-
cussed below.
61 Tbe Sacramentarium Yerone111e wa& edited in the seventb century, but lbe p.-ayers
are older. I used L. Eizenhöfcr, P. Siffrili and L.C. Mohlberg (eds.), Sacrammtari11m Ve-
ront~nse (Cod[ex] Bibl[loteca] Capit[olare} Yeron{eruis] LXXXY [80]) (Rerum Ecclesia-
sticarum Documenta, series maior Fomes [Sacramentarium Leonianum} I; Rome, '1978),
pp. 108-114.
64 Tbe data bave been convenieR!ly assembled by A. ChaYli.Sse, Lu l~ctionnairu. ro-

mairu de Ia Mus~ 011 Ylle et Yllle siecles (2 vols; Spieilegii Friburgensis Subsidia 22;
Fribourg. 1993), vol. 2, pp. 11-21 for the Epistle readings and pp. 25-38 for the Gospel
readinp. Cf. the tables in G. Godu, "Bpitres," !Jictlormaire de l'arclriologie chretienne
et Iiturgie Sll (1922) 245-344; and H. Leclerq, "Lectionnaire," Dicti<mnaire de
l'arch~ologie chritienne etliturgie 8:2 (1929) 227G-2306.
~s Aotoioe Cbavasse argues that the Sunday, being the beginning of tbC weck., should
also be understood as being part of the Sole.mn Fasts: sec bis ..Le sermon Jn de saint
Leon et Ia date de la c616bntion des Quatre-Temps de septembre,•· p. 79.
66 On the modem Ember Days, see R.E. McNally, "Ember Days," New Catholic
Encyclopet/ia S ( 1967) 296-298.
 Yom Kippur and the Christian Aurumn Festivals 305

the name changed. 67 I employ the names used by Leo I and Gelasius I to
avoid anachronistic terminology: ieiunium sollemne (Solem.n Fast) for the
series of fasts; or ieiuniUm quatrilseplimildecimi mensis (Fast of the
Fourth/Seventh/Tenth Month) for a single fast." Second. the exact dates of
the fasts were assigned only in the eleventh century. by Pope Gregory VII;
until then. their dates varied greatly. 69 Third, most scholm agree that the
Ember Day of Lent did not belong to the original serie.s of fasts; some
would even exclude the Ember Day after Pentecost. Consequently, schol-
ars- especially those writing in French- often speak of Trois-Temps or
Deu:x-Temps instead of Quatre-Temps. Fourth. the ancient festivalwas far
°
more important than the modern rite suggests.7 Finally, it was practiced in
the beginning solely in the city ofRome and was only gradually adopted in
other countries.

The ex:act time of origin of the Solemn Fasts has been the suhject of nu-
merous books and articles. 71 The universally accepted termillUs ante quo is
the fmt major extant source, the sermons of Leo, in whose time the festi-
valwas already weil established. Three periods are proposed for its origin:

67 The Engllsb name Ember Days is an abbreviation of the German Quaumrber, itself
an abbreviation of the Latin {ieiunia) quattuor tempcrum, which appeared for the fust
time in the cighth century.
Y Fora similar decision. see Verstrepen, ''Origines et instaurationdes Quatre-Temps ä
RQme."In fact, Leo uses tbe termFast ofPentec:osL From Gelasi\1$ on, the termi.nology
becomes unified a.nd the fast after Pentecosl is caUed the Fasl of ihe Fourtlt M<1nth. The
lectionaries use another terrn to refer to the vigil: :~abba/um in duodecim lectione:s, whlch
remained in use until the twelfth century. This name derives from the custom of n:ading
the six Iutions first in Greelc then again in Latin. uw:ler the Greelc domination of Rome
(S50-750). See A. Cbavasse (ed.), Le SacFamentaire gelasien (Yaticun.a Reginensis
316), :sacramentaire pre:~bytiral ~tn usage daru les titra romaim aa Ylle siecle
(Bibliotheque de Theologie, serie 4/1; Tournai, 1958), 107-110.
6t Antoine Chavasse bas shown that tbe date of the "Deux.-Tomps" of September and
December was mucb more variable than previously thought; e.g. the Fast of December
could be celebrated after Christrnas. See Chavasse, "Le sennon IJl de saint Uon e:t Ia
date de Ia ul~bration des Quatre--Temps de septembr-e."
-", In the earliest Sacramentary, the Veronense, the prayers for tbe Fast ofthe Seventh
Month extend over as many pagcs as Cbristmas, and roore pages than Peotecost Its
importance increased even further wheo .it was gradually inlroduced an over Europe.
11 On this question, see Chavasse, ''Le sennon III de saint Uon et Ia date de la

celebration des Quarre-Temps de scptembre"; Danielou, "Les Quatre-Temps de sep-

terobre et Ia retc des Tabemacles"; Fischer. Die kirchUchen Quatember; Janini, S. Slricic
y las: cuatro temporas; Morin. "L'origine des Quatre-Temps"; and most rect:ndy Talley,
"The Origin ofthe Ember Days"; a.nd Verstrepen, "Origines et insllluration des Quatre-
Tcmps ARome."
306 The ImpfJet ofYom Kippur on Clrri:stianity in the Third to the Fijth Centuries

the time of the apostles (fu:st/second century), the late second or early thlrd
century and the late fourth century.
Some scholars, especially from the early modern period, regard the Sol-
emn Fasts as an apostolic continuation of an Old Testament practice, tak-
ing literally some Statements in Leo's sennons. 72 However, Leo's
fonnulations may have meant "traditional" in a wide sense rather than "ap-
ostolic" in a n~ow sense. 73 Furthermore, his statements clearly served a
rhetorical function. With the attribution to the apostles, Leo wanted to
foster the authority and observa.nce oftlle fasts, which are considered a ]u-
daizing practice.
The time of Pope Siricius (384-399) was suggested by Jose Janini
whose theory is favored by some major liturgists, among them Hansjörg
Auf der Maur. 74 Janini based his thesis mainly on Jerome and on Philaster
of Brixen (d. ca. 397). who supposedly polemicized against the Roman
Solemn Fasts. 73 Yet, as Jean-Louis Verstrepen has shown, Janini's reading
of Jerome is quite speculative, and the most relevant polemical passage is
aimed at Jews observing Yom Kippur and against Christians participating
in it in Syria-Palestine {where Jerome lived) rather than being a polemic
against the Roman fasts far from Bethlehem.76 Philaster. who describes a
group that keeps four fasts according to Zeehariah 8:19 and employs the
term quatuor tempora (the first occurrence ofthis tenn), 17 does not support
Janini's thesis. Pb.i.laster;s dates do not match those ofthe Roman Solemn
Fasts, and his term quatuortempora does not refer to the Solemn Fasts.78
Thomas Talley and Jean~Louis Verstrepen revived the traditional theory
of an origin of the Solemn Fasts in the late second or early third century

12 Sqmons 78:1; 79:1-2; 81:1 (Pentecost); 89:1.4; 90:1; 92:1.4; 93:3 (Septeotber);
15:2; 17:1; 20:1 (becembcr).
» See Janini in Verstrepen, "Origines et insta.uration de~J Quatfe-Temps l Rome,,.
pp. 347-349.
74 Janini, S. Siricio y las Cllatro temporas; Au! der Maur, Feiern im RhythmrtJ der

Zeit.
~ Jerome, Commentary 011 Galatlan.s 4:10 (PL 26:377-378); Letter 52:10 (CSEL
54:432-·433); Commerrtary on Zecharioh 8:18-19 (CCSL 76A:820); Philaster, Diversa-
r11m Hereseon Liber 149 (CSEL 38:120-121).
18 Cf. Verstrepen, "Origines et instaurationdes Quatre-Temps ä Rome," PP- 353-357
and the passages discussed tbere, esp. Commentary on Galatian.s 4:10.
71 Diversarum Hereseon Liber 149: absolute praedlcauit. ut mysteria Christianitotis

in ipsis quattuor ieiuniu nunJiata cognosceremus. Nam per annum quattuor ieirmia in ec-
clesia celebrantur, in natale primum deinde in pascha, tertio in ascensione. quarto in
pentecosten (CSEL 38:120:24-121:4 [friedrich Marx 1888]). This textwas written. 385-
391.
" Verstrepen, "Origines et Instauration des Quatre-Temps aRome," pp. 341-343.
 ---------------------

Yom Kippur and th.e Christfan A.utumll Fj1Stivu/s

307

following a statement in the Liber Pontificalis ahout Callistus I, bishop of

Ro:rne in 217-222:
He decreed that on ~aturdays three
wine and oil accordmg to tbe prophecy.
tim;s a Year there should be a fast from com,
While agreeing that the part of the ~iber Pontificali.s dealing with the bis-
tory before Anastasius II (496-498) t~ generaUy legendary,ao Talley tries to
corroborate the Liber with a passage tn Tertullian.'s On Fasting.
Wby do we devote to Stations the fourth ~ sixth days of tbe week, and to fasts
the 'preparation-day'? Anyhow, Y<lU sometunes continue youx- Station even over
the Sabbath, - a day never to ": ~~~ as a flst except at the Passover season, ac-
cording to a reason elsewhere gLven.

Tertullian polemicizes against "Psychics" (ltlost probably to be understood

as Roman non-Montanists), who extend the Wecl:Jy station fasting from
Wednesday and Friday to Saturday. T~ley etnphasizes Tertullian's use of
"sometimes (si quando)." These Psychics do not fast every Saturday, but
on1y during certain weeks -- perhaps the Solellln Fasts? Fasts on Saturdays
are extremely rare. Tertullian refers to the Pfe-pascha} fast as the only ex-
ception acceptable to him. From this passage one ca.n ga.ther that Tertullian
was polemicizing against an early fonn ofthe Roman Solemn Fasts.

79 Translation by R. Oavis, The Book of Pontlfls (Libe,. pontificalis): The Ancient

Biographfes of the First Ninety Roman 81'hops to AD 71 S (Translated Texts for His-
tori IlDs. Latin Series 5; liverpool, 1989), P· 1 · TIIe Latw reads "Hic constituit ieittnium
die sabbati ter in anno fieri, frumenti, vini .et o/ei, secundll1R prophetfam." - L Du-
cbesne, Le libel" prmtificalis. Texte, intrcductton et.commemail"e (reprint of original edi-
tion (1886-92] withaddition ofa third volume; ~· 19S5-19S7), here vol. 1, p. 141. In
the eyes of a 1.ater copyist the Latin Phrase was too llllprecise and be consequently added
~in the fourth, seventb and tenth mollths." .
The "prophel" is usually understood as _refcrnng :0 leeh 8:19. However, Zechariah
explicitly mentions {o11,. tasts. I mggcst seell)g 4 'Peelal tradition of Exod 23: 14-17 a.s
the "'prophet" behilld thi.s ~ge, resemb~mg the_ ~tlttn~ent in de solstitiis: Initittm
mensisfrumentariae et vindem1ae et ole~e er:! domraluc/Q inlaetitilmt et g(llldivm et dies
festos multos: sce De solstitiis. et aequm~tJu (ed Bo~e, pp. 95:34-%:105). Note that
the ttipartite divisio.n of tbe frui~ and th~u harves~ IU't ld:ntical i.n the two texts.
ao In any ease, tbe statement m the L1ber P~ntificalfs IS wilD.ess ta the understanding
of the origin of tbe Ember Days being in the tune of the COillpilation of the ea:rliest part
of the Liber, the sixth century. As in Leo, tbe Solerun F~t has an ancient and honorable
aura. . 1 •
SI On Fasting 14:2-3; translatton by S. The Wallm ANP 4:112. The Latin reads: Cur
stationib~<S quartam et sextam sabbati dicQmus et ieiuntis pal"asceuen? Quamquam uos
etiam sabbatum, si quando, continuatis, numquam ni$i in Pascha leiunandum secundum
rationem alibi redditam CCSI- 1 (Gerlo) p. 1273:3-7.
308 The Impact cf Yom Kippur cn Chrutianity in the Third to the Fifth Centuriu

Another possible reference to the SoleDUl Fasts is the enigmatic tractate

de solstitiis.12 which refers to tbree fusts in the fourth, seventh and tenth
months. 83 Following Lietzmann, Verstrepen places the text in fourth-
century Rome and states that de solstitiis is "un temoignage de J'existence
de trois jeiUles Saisonniers dans l'Eglise Jatine vers Ia moitie du we
siecle." 34 There are several ways to connect the chronological equations in
the tex.t with the Solemn Fasts.as However, a Roman provenance of ck sol-
stitiis is less than certain, which mak.es a conelusive interpretation of the
passage difficult.
In sum: While we can be sure that the introduction ofthe three filsts oc-
curred well before Leo, we do not .know the exact period. Talley has given
new support to the chronological aspect ofthe legend in the Liber Pontift-
calis and the passages in Tertullian~ less ptobably, de solstitiis m.ay refur to
the Solemn Fasts. That the Fast of the Seventh Month was not mentioned
earlier, more often or more explicitly can be quite easily ex.plained. The
fast may have existed in the time ofCallistus and Tertullian without being
important c:nough to be noted more widely and not achieved its signifi~
cance until Leo thc Great. Against those who want to date the fast Iate, we
have to keep in mind that an arJWmentum e silentio, which is usuaiJy weak,
is even weak.er in a field with such sporadic evidence as early Christian lit-
urgy. Yet a decisive argument for the early dating has still not been
brought forward.

n For further background infonnation on this tractale, see the different views in tbe
introduction to Bottc's edition; and H • .Engbcrding, "Der 2.S. Deumber als Tag der Feier
der Geburt des Henn," ArchiY für LiturgiewiJsemchqft 2 (1952) 25-43.
_. "leiuni11m quartr.lm et ~tepllmum e1 decimum e:ril dom11i iuda in laetitiam et gaudi11111
et solemnitates bonas eJ diemjestOJ m11lto.~": see De sobtitiis et aequinoctiis, ed. Botte
p. 9.S:63-6.S.
14 Verstrepen, "Origines e! instauration des Quatre-Temps ! Rome," pp. 346-347,
~~~ .
as The first, suggestcd by Verstrepen. understauds the passage as refeuing to the
Solemn Fasts a&r Pentecost andin September and December. Two other interpretations
consider a second chronological equation, which speaks of lhe three temple pilgrimages
(a•?l,) in Nisan, Sivan (!) and Tishri,- "Quod si ergo ipse ut tnltlum anni, iam lltique
ab ip.fo quartr.lm mensem jvnium numeraremu.r tr.t septimum nptembrtm et decimurn dß-
cembrem, de quibw dominU$ ad Moysen dlcit: 'Tribvs temporihiiS diem fesmm agetis
milli· (Exod 23:14)": see IN solstltii.s et af!lq1ltnoctiis, cd. Botte, p. 95:81-IS - perhaps
referring to. the pre-paschal fast and to the Solemn Fasts after Pentecost cmd in Sep-
tember. However, the author places the three Jewisb festivals in June, September and
December; he was themore probably referring to the three week:-l011g festivals of
Passover, Sukkot and Hanukkah, in Nisan, Tishri and Kisle11. In this case he would refer
to the pre-paschal fast and to the Solemn Fasts of September and December, wh.i()h
would match weil tbe theory of an early ...Deux-Temps."
 Yom Kippur and the Christion AutUIIJtl Festival.t 309

Apart from the date of origin of tbe Solemn Fa.sts, the question of their re-
ligious background and context is of central importance for estimating thc
impact ofYorn Kippur on early Christiaoity, since, according to one ofthe
theories, the Solemn Fasts are transformations of Jewisb fasts, including
Yom K.ippur.
Until recently, most scholars and handbooks tended to accept Morio's
theory (1897) of a pagan origin for the Ember days." Morin refers to tbe
three pagan Romanfestivals ofjeriae sementivae,jeriae messis andferioe
vindemiales tbat were Christianized. Belonging to the class of feriae
conceprivae, tbe da.te of the Christian fasts was not fixed but determined
each year anew. According to Morin the dates fell in the following periods:
the jeriae sementillae - 11 November to 25 December; the feriae measis -
June-August; thejeriae vindemiales ·-19 July to 25 September.87 Morin has
suggested that the Ember days were established in competition with or as a
substitu.te for and sublimation of these tbree feriae, part of "le desir de
faire concurrence a l'une ou l'autre solennite du ferial palen en vigueur a
Rome durant les premiers siecles de l'ere chretienne."118 Morin's hypothesis
was the opinio communis for a hundred years. until recently refuted by
Talley, who showed that Morin, tbe great master ofliturgy, bad based bis
theory on faulty research (by others) of the cla.ssical sources.89 Talley
pointed out that tbe jeriae sementivae took place not in December but
rather at the end of Januaty. Their date, therefore, does not matcb the Fast
oftbe Tentb Month.90 While this suffices to overthrow Morln's hypothesis,

116 See e.g. Chavasse, "Les Quatre-Temps"; and Auf der Maur, Feiern im Rhythmus
derZeit.
11 Morin gives a quite impressive Iist of simila.rities between these pegan RoiD8n

foriae and the Ember Days: Both were originaily restricted to the eity of Rome. These
feriae are tbree in number, es were the original Ember Days. They are "lebrated at the
same times of the year. Tbey a.re not tixed in the calendar but determined by the priests.
They combine an agricultu.ral basis with purific:at.ion, expiation and apotrOpaic aspects.
Among tbe three festivals, the ferioe sementivcu are tbe rnost important. Sirnilarly. the
Saturday of the December Ember Days was more important than the others and with
Simplicius beeame the only ordination day.
" Morin. "L'origlne des Quatre-Ternps," here p. 341.
" Talley, "The Origin of the Ember Days." The long prevalence of Morin's hypo-
tbesis may be an outcome of the increasing specialization ot: .scbola.rs, the l:wk of com-
municatioa among different fields of research and tb.e seminal authority of .Dom Morin in
the field of litu.rgy.
90 The Fast of the Tentb Montb c:ould be observed at the beginning of January or as
latc as the ftrioe sementivae.
310 The Impact of Yom Kippur rm Christianity i'n the Third to the Fiftlt Centuries

there are further serious questions regarding the content of bis argument
and the metbod he used.9 1
Given that the debate about the background of thc festivals has once
again been revived, any new hypothesis should, ideally, propose an answer
to all of the following questions: Is it possible that there were once only
one or two fasts, or is three the original number? When and why were tbey
instituted? Why are they observed only in Rome? Why are they observed
in this season? Why was the exact time of their observation not fixed?
Why are they observed on Wednesday, Friday and Saturday? Why do they
include a vigil? Why an: most readings from the Old Testament? Wbat is
the special character of each fast? How has this character changed? What
is the relationship of the fasts to pagan and to Jewish festivals? Unfortu~
natcly, so bro~ an investigation into the background and development of
the three fasts cannot be undertaken for the present. Here, I will offer only
some reflection on the Fast ofthe Seventh Montb.
Could the Solemn Fasts be an independent Roman Cbristian inven-
tion?92 In this case, the emergence ofthe Fast oftbe Seventh Month and all
its "Jewish" elements have to be explained as "throwbacks" to the Old
Testament by a Iiturgical im:J.ovator intimately familiar with the Bible.
Also, the development of a special fast after Pentecost is comprehensible
in light of the prohibition on fasting during the 50 days after Easter. The
Solemu Fastafter Pellteeost undersoores the beginning of regular station
fasting on Wednesdays and Fridays. The emergence of the Fast of the
Tenth Month, however, is more difficult to explain. Does it pick up ele-
ments of Hanukkah? The central difficulty is to give a reason for tbe
structural similarities of the three fast:s as a group and to rationalize the
need to found seasonal festivals with such strong agricultural elements in a
vast metropolis like tbe city of Rome, and exclusively there.
Talley's early dating opens the door to a "positive,. influence through
Jewish converts in early times (''apostolic influence" or "adoption"). If we
consider the Solemn Fasts as a series. tbe only Jewish series of fasts that

91 See Talley, "The Origin of the Bmber Da.ys." OnLy theferiae semenlivae beloog to
the chronologically undetermioedferiae conceptiPae. There seems tobe no other special
connection between the three foriae. The Bmber days of Pentecost are rarely in June -
never in July or August parallel to the feriae mes$iS. Cltava5se, "Le seJ'Jilon lll de saint
Uon et Ia date de ta celebntion des Quatre-Temps de ~eptembre,.. showed that the
Ember days of September may take plac:e also after the equinox. The conn~tion of ex-
piation, prote1:tiou and apotropaic aspects with barvest festivals is quite co~nmon; we also
find it in the co.oncc:tion ofYom Kippur and Sukkot andin Pbllo's understanding ofYom
Kippur.
n Schalars of comparative religion sometimes forget the option of indigenous reli-
gious treativity and exaggerate tbe dependeuc:e on various other traditions.
 Yom Kippur and the Christfan .4.tttumrr Futillais 311

cor:nes into consideration as a source of influence is the one hased on an

interpretation ofZecbariah 8:19: "The fast ofthe fourth montb, and tbe fast
of the fifth, and tbe fast of the seventh, and tbe fast of the tenth. ••93 The
Misbnah and Talmudim interpret tbis verse as referring to the Jewish fa.sts
in the accompanying list:94
Date in the Jewish Julia11 Date Event
Calendar
A 9"' or 17m Tammuz beginning .June - mid .July Fall of the wall of Je-
rusalem
gcb Av -·
B beginning July - Destruction of the
mid AU&U$t temDle
c 31d Tishti mostly September Death of Gedaliah
D 10•Tevet beginning of December- BegiMing ofthe siege
beginning of Jauuaey of JerusaJcm
··-
The dates of the Jewish fasts A. C and D come quite close to the Christian
Solemn Fasts.95 Can the origin of the Solemn Fasts be an interpretatio
ChrisliaNa of the months given in Zechariah 8:19? The first to connect
Zechariah 8:19 to the Solemn Fasts is Gelasius I in the late fifth century.96
In Roman Cbristian minds ofthe seventh century, Zechariah 8:19 is de:tin-
itely connected to the Solemn Fasts since it is read during the Saturday
vigil of the Fast of the Seventh Month.97 All references to Zechariah 8:19
prior to Gelasius are unconnected to the Solemn Fasts.98 It therefore seem.s
moreplausible that the references to Zechariah 8:19 ftom Gelasius onward
are an attempt to endorse an already existing practice with biblical author-
ity rather than the adoption of a Jewish practice - testifying to biblical

9:1 The Vulgata 1eads: ieiu11i11m q•arti et ieirmium qvinti et ieiunillfll 11eptimi et ieiu-
nium decimi. But of course the Vulgata was not yet the accepted Bible version in the fift;h
century.
" mTa'an 4;yTa'u" 4:5, 20b; bRR 18b.
9S Tbe Iack of a Cbristian equivalent to B can be explained theologi<:ally. A Cb.ristian
filst on the day ofthe deslruction ofthe temple would be a contradiction. in terms. This is
not quite so with Gedallan•s death and the siege of lerusalem and fall ofits -ns.
91 See below, p. 313, Qote 110, for the quotation .
.,., See helow, p. 318, for Iist of the readings.
" Phüastcr uses Zech 8:19 refen-ing to a diffioJrent series of fasts (see above). Wbile
lerome knows the Jewisb fasts, he does not connect the Cbristian Solemn Fasts to
Zech 3:19: sec Commmtary on Zechariah 8:18-19 (CCSL 76A:820), referring to the
17 Tamm.uz, 9Av, 3 Tisbri and lOTevet. He compares the Iewish md Julian calelldars,
starting witb. April as the tirst rnonth and consequent[y reaching July, August, Ocrober
and January as months of the tast. This differenee most lilc:ely reflects the Syriac calen-
dar, wb.iclJ sets NisaQ iB April. Leo does not refer to Zec:b 8:19, nor does his terminology
bettay jofluenc:e of this verse. He uses not ieiunium quorti (mensi:r), the term ll!led in
ZeclJ 8: 19, but Fast ofPentecost.
312 Thelmpact of Yom Kippur on CJ~rutianity in the Third to the Flfth Centuries

influence rather than apostolic influence or the adoption of oontemporary

Jewish ritcs.
Ludwig Fischer and Jean Danielou argued for "apostolic" influenoe
ooly in the case ofthe Jlast of the Seventh Month. Fischer argaed at the be-
ginning ofthe last century that Vom Kippur is lhe background to the Fast
of the Seventh Month.99 In contrast, Danielou promoted a Qwnnmic
version ofSukkot as the origin forthe Fast ofthe Seventh Month. 100 How-
ever, both theories have difficulties in explaining the exclusively Roman
origin of the fast and the similarities among the tbree Solemn Fasts, e.g.
the fact that all ofthem were movable. iOI
In sum, the extant sources are too sca.nt to reach a decisive conclusion
on the question of origin.. 102 In the sections that follow 1 will compare the
Fast ofthe Seventh Month with Vom Kippur and argue for later inßuence
of Vom Kippur- by the adoption of some of its rites and concepts, by the
inspiration from biblical passages and by a polemical reaction against the
contemporary Jewish fast.
2.2 Leo 's Sermons on the Fast ofthe Sevcnth Month and Yom Kippur
The ambivalent attitude of Lee the Great toward the Jewish Day of
Atonement in his Sermons on the Fast ofthe Sevcnth Month demonstrates
that the contemporary Iewish Day of Atonement was an important factor in
the dcvelopment ofthe Christian fast.
Leo's description of the concepts and rites of the Fast of the Seventh
Month is very detailed, and many of them parallel tlte concepts and rites of
Yom Kippur. At the end of each sennon, Leo admonishes his hearers to
observc a fast on Wednesday and Friday and a Saturday to Sunday night
vigil. Christians, he admonishes, should abstain from ..worldly occupa-
tions:• and food coasumption should be reduced; but whoever does not
feel strong enough may eat. 103 The purpose of the Fast of the Seventh

99 Fischer, Die kirchlicherr QrAatember, pp. 10--11. AD.toine Chavasse suggested seeing
in tne cbange of the name of tbe Fast of Pentecost CO Fast of the Fourth Month (in ana-
logy to tbc Fast of the Seventb I Tenth Month) evidenee for the unification of the Solemn
Fasts and the dis.sociation of oacb of them from their individual origins (personal eom-
mun.ication referrcd to by Verstrepen, "Origines et instauration des Quatrr:·Temps a
Rome,"p. 343, note21).
100 Danielou, "Les Quatre-1 emps de septembre el Ja fete des Tabemacles."
191 On Fiscber, see also G. Morin, "Review ou Fiselter 1914," Rev11e Benldictine 31
(1914-1919) 349-Sl.
Joz See Noceut, "Le quattro tempora." who states: "None perciö possibile, alme.oo a
tun'ogi, conoscere con certezza Je origini deUe Quanro Tempon" (p. 264).
103 E.&. Sermon 87:2; 89:1. Similar rulinp for sick:, pregnant, very :young or very old
people exist. of course, in nsbbinie Judaism: see mYoma 8.
 .Yom Kippur anti the Chriatjon .Autumn Feslhlaf.s 313

Month is purification and protection ofthe community. propitiation ofGod

and forgiveness of sins. 104 The placatory function of fasting is expressed
e.g. in Sermon 88:1: "The arousal of divine justice ... could not be placated
except by fasting." and Sennon 94:4: "By the devotion of our fast we may
please the merciful God. " 105 The discipline of the body is strenglhened by
the abstention from food, the soul by the abstention from sin. 106 Here and
there Leo adds sacrificial connotations, mostly speaking of alms as the
"sacrifice of mercy."107 In one passage Leo explicitly juxtaposes fast and
sacrifice with a placatory function: "The God of mercies, pleased by the
sacrifice of the fast, will hear us, through Christ our Lord." 108 Almsgiving
is obJigatory for all, regardless of fasting, and a fast without ahnsgiving is
considered a mere expression of avarice. I® From the time of Oelasius I
(492-496),no the fasts gain yet another dimension by being occasions for
the Ordination of priests and deacons. This practice might even have been
the custom as eatly as the days of Leo. 111 The communal charactcr of the

104 This comesout strongly also in the 'fler~nense, e.g.. 373: ".Adesto, domilte,fideiibus
tJJis, et quos caelutibu.v instituu sacramentis, a terrenls: coNterua periculis. ~ (ed. Eiz.en-
bOfer, Siffrin and Mohlberg, p. 110); and 876: "Omnipotena sempiterne tleus, miseri-
cordlam tuam supplice.f exoramus, 111 hoc lllllm, domille, sacramentum non sit nobis
reatlt:S ad poenam, sed jiat inJercessio salu.tarla ad 11t:niam: sit abolitio peccatorwn, stt
fortitudo fragiliam, ait oontra muiUii pericvla firmamentvm." (ed. EizenhOfer, Siffrin and
Mohlberg, pp. 110-111).
IIEI Cf. also Sermon 93:3 "When our three devotions come togetber into one design,
that is 'praye.r, alms, and fasting,' the grace of God fumishes us wirb a restraint in de-
sires, the granting of our prayen:, and forgiveness of sins.'' On the propitiation by prayer
and almsgiving, seealso Sermon 12:4; 15:1; 20:3 ~a certain power of baptism is set in
almsgiving...
106 E.g. Sermon 86:1--2; 87:1; 88:1-2; 89:3; 92:2; 93:3~ :94:1-2.
107 E.g. Sermon 13;2; 20:2; 8S:S.
118 Deus misericordiarum ieiunil sacrificio placatlls exaudiat per Chrishutl Domillum

nosrrum (Sermon 89:6). Cf. J'eroneme N° 89S, .Accepta libi &int, domi11e, quaesumu.r,
nostri dona leiunii; quae et ~piando nos tua gratia dtgnos efftcierrt, et ad .vempitema
promlssa perdttcant {ed. EizenhGfer, Siffrin aud Mohlberg, p. 112).
109 E.g. Sermon 15 :2; 87:3. The traditional triad- Cast, prayer and almsgiving- reflec:ts
the ~enttal chaptet of the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 6). On Leo and almsgivlng, sec
R. Bolle, "Un docleurde l'aum6ne, S. Uonle Grand," J'ieSplrituelle (19.57)26~287.
110 Gelasius, /Alter 14 (PL S9;138A): ()rdinf)tionlll vero presbyterÖI"URR se11 diocono-
rum 110.11 nisi quarti, septimi, t!l decimi men&iWII jejuniis: sed et ingrwu quadragelimali
r
atque medio, vespere sabbali nowrrit celebrandas. ln rhe eranense, the prayers for ordi-
oation and for the memorial of ordinations of bishops follow the prayers for the fast of
the Sevenrh Month.
111 In fac:t, Leo 1 celcbrau:d bis ordinadon day on the Fast of tb~ Seventh Month in the
yelll' 443: see Chavaue, "Le se.rmon III de saint L6on et la date de Ia Ct!;~bration des
Quatre-Temps de septemhre."ll is possible that his ordioation day, Sunday, 29 Septem-
ber 440 CE, coincided with the e.o.d of the vigil of the September Fast. Uowever, tbi• may
314 The lmpacl ofYom .Kippur on Christianity in the Third to the Fiflh Cenluries

fast is of central importance. For Leo, the communal fast and almsgiving
constitutes an apotropaic protection rite for the whole community, since
they purify the Church as a whole and unify it against the attacks of the
devil. u2
Although ehe watchfultury of the cruel enemy nges and spread.s out hidden anarc~
everywhere, he can take no one, he can wound no one, ifhe tinds everyone armedt
everyone active, everyonc sharil11 in the wor.ks ofmercy.m
Tbis concept recalls the importance of the communal fast on Yom Kippur
and reflects a relatively recent shift in Ecclesiology- Augustine's view of
the Church as a ..school ofsinners. " 114
The fast of the individual does not need appointed days and belongs to
the "voluntary observances . . . dependent on private initiative" (Ser~
mon 88:2); the combination of communal fast and praycr js a more effica-
cious means of puri.fication and remission of all sins than is the individual
fast:
We are all deaased by the daily gift of God from various contaminations. In un-
wary souls, bowever, many gross spots adhere tbat ou!:ht to be wasbed oui with
greater care and clean~ with mo:re effort. Tbe fUIIest remission of sin is obtained
when there is one prayerand on\: confession oftbe whole Church. 115
The Sermons on the fasts of the fourth and tenth months show that tbese
characteristics ate common to all three fasts. 116 Propitiating and purifying
are the general aims of most fasts.
Among the characteristics of the Fast of the Seventh Month that recall
Yom Kippur are: the date. the general idea.s of puritication and of propitia-

have been a coiDcideoce. A similar juxtaposition of atonement with ordination can be

found in tbe rabbinical undentanding ofthe b.igh-priestly preparation week before Yom
Kippur; see Knohl and Naeb, "Müu'im veKippurim."
112 See e.g. Sermon 18:2; 88;2-4; 89:2.
m St!Tmon 88:2.
114 Perbaps, the emergence of another eollective repentance ritual in the fifth ceniUry,
the rogations in Gaul, may retlect this shift in Ecclesiology. The rogations, however,
probably developed out of local pagan rituals: see G. Natban, "'The Rogation Ceremonies
of Late Antique Gaul. Creation, Transmission and the Role of the Bishop,.. Classica et
Media1111olia. Revue danoise de phllology et d'histoire 49 (1998) 27S-304; and
W. Klingshim, Caesarit4 of tlrles. The Making of a Christion Commtmity in Late
Antique. Gaul (Cambridge Srudies in Medieval Life and Thought, Fourth Series 22;
Cambrigde 1994), pp. 177 aud 240. I would like to thank Peter Brown for kindly drawing
my attention to tbese conaec;tions.
m Sermon 18:3.
116 Cf. Sermon 12:4; 78:4 oo purification; 12:4; 15:1; 20:3; 78:4; 81:4 on propitiation

and forgjveness; 19:2; 78:2 ou protection; 13:2; 20;2 on tbe sacrifkial character; 18:2 on
the communal character.
 Yom Kippur and the Chri.rtionAutumn Fe.stivals 315

tion of God through fasting, alms, supplicatory prayers and abstention

from work, the unizying communal cbaracter, the sacrificial connotation
and the association with onlination. Taken singly, none is su:fficiently dis-
tinctive, as cumulative evidence, however, they are noteworthy for point-
ing to a relation between Yom K.ippur and the Fast of the Seventh Month.
But as noted earlier, Leo is careful to emphasize the distinctions from
the paralleJ Jewish fast. While Christians should abstain from "worldly oc-
cupations," they may perform "necessary,. works; and food consumption is
reduced, not completely forbidden, and wboever does not feel strong
enough, may eat. 117 1be close and ambivalent relationship between the
Christian Fast of the Seventh Montb and the Jewish Day of Atonement is
most clearly expressed in Leo's 89th Sermon:
When, therefore, dearly beloved, we eucourage you on to certain matters set out
eveu in tbe Old Testament, we are not suojecting you to the yoke of Jewisb obser-
vance, nor are we suggesting to you the custom of a worldly (carntzlis) peoplo.
Cbristian self-denial surpasses their fasts, and, !f there is aoything in ccmmon be-
tween us and them in chronological drcumstances (temporibus), the customs (mo-
rihus) are different. 1" Let them have their barefoot processions (nudipldallo), and
let tbeir pointless fasts (iei:rlnia) show in the sadness of their faces (in tristitla uul·
tuum). We, however, sbow no cbauge in the respectability of our clotb.es. We do
not reftain from any right and necessary work:. lnstead, we eoutrol our freedom iD
eating by simple frugality, limiting the quantity of our food, but not condellUling
what God has ereated. 119
Unlike Christians, Jews have barefoot processions nudipedalia (l)t their
fast is expressed by sadness (2) and less respectable clothes (3), and they
abstain completely from work (4) and food (5). As noted earlier, Leo's
mention of the barefoot processions makes it almost certain that he is de-
scribing contemporary Yom Kippur rites as an eyewitness and not from a
"bookish" familiarity with the Jewish fast. His Statements are not imagi-
nary polemies against the biblieal Day of Atonement but reflect a real con-
tlict between three parties: bis contemporary Jewish neighbors who
observe their fast, those Christians who observe the Fast of the Seventh
Month and those Christians who apparently attack the Christian fast as a
Jewish observance. Leo admits to similarities. but strongly emphasizes the
distincti()n so as to defend the fast against accusations of Judaiz.iog prac-
tice. Unlike Chrysostom, Leo does not complain about Christians actually

ll'tSermon 88:3; and see the sources given aoove in note 103, p. 312.
11' The t.ranslation of Freeland and Conway ("if there is anytbing in eommon between
us and them in circumstaru:es, there are great differences in our character") mines some
aspects of the eomparisoo. Dolle's French translation goes in the same direction as my
Suggestion. Mores is the head1ine for the five customs that follow.
llt Sermon 89:1 (CCSL 138A: 551). Cf. the discussion on PP- 74-76 a.bove.
316 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Chri.ttianity in the Third to the Fifth Cenlllries

participating in the Jewish festivals and the fast, but he defends bimself
against accusations of Judaizing by explaining thc similaritics as betonging
to the apostolic Jewish herltage. Like the Ten Commandments, the Solemn
Fasts are the valuable part ofthe Old Testament precepts, which bave been
adopted into the new covenant. Judaizing is orthodox - if it is apostolic:
The Apostles distinguished the Old Testament dec:rees, dearly beloved, in such a
way tbat tlley might extract some of them, just as they bad been composed, to
beaefit the teaching of the Gospel. What had for a long time been Jcwish custoJU
could become Christian observance (obser11antiae), for the Apostles understood
!hat the Lord Jesus Christ bad come into the world, •not to destroy the law but to
fulfill it. •1'211
The Chrlstianiud fasts, then, are converted Old Testament precepts.
When,ftom dle teaching of ancient docttine, de~rly beloved, we undertake the fast
of September to purify our souls and bodies, we are not subjecting ourselves lo le-
gal burdens. We are embracing thc good use of self-rtstraint that serves the Gos-
pel of Christ. In 1his too, Christian virtue can 'exceed that of the sa-ibes and
Pharisees,' not by making void the law, but by rejecting wodd!y wisdoiiL Our
fasts ought not to be su<:h as were those about which Isaiah the prophet, witb lhe
Holy Spirit spealting in him, said.111
t
What makes the Jewish practice into a Christian one are mainly its perfor-
mers.
Confidcntly encouraging you with fatherly counsels, dearly beloved, we preach
the fast dedicated in September to the exercises of common devotion, sure that
what was fust the Jewish fast wiU become Christiao by your observaoce. 122
In sum, Leo •s descriptions of the Christian Fast of the Seventh Month dis-
play a great similarity to the rites and concepts connected to Yom Kippur.
Feeling under attack by Christians who are annoyed at the simiJarity be-
tv.-een the Cbristian and Jewish fasts, Leo emphasizes the distinctions and
defends the Christian practice as apostolic legacy. His referenees to the
oontemporaneous Yom Kippur make clear that the tension between th.e
Cbristian and Jewish fasts is not based on an imaginary biblical model but
reflects a. historic proximity. Leo's promotion of the Fast of the Seventh
Montb and his emphasis on its Christian characte.r bave to be understood as
a reaction - on the one band agaiost the attaclcs by fellow Christians and
on the other against the competing presence of the simultaneaus Jewish

120 Sermon 92:1 (CCSL 138A 568:1-6); lransl. by Conway and Fr~~elaud, St. IA.o the
Great: Sermoll$, p. 38:S.
m Sermon 92:2 (CCSL 138A :569:31-39); tJBDsl. by Conway and Freeland, St. Leo the
Great: Sermons, p. 386.
122 Sermon 90:1 {CCSL l38A SS6:l-4); trausl. by Conway and Freehmd, St. Leo the
Great: SermoM, p. 37!1.
 Yom Kipp'ID' and the Chrwian Avtumn Fe1tivals 317

fast. Regarding the remarkable correspondence between the Fast of the

Seventh Month and Yom Kippur, it is likely that some rites were indeed
directly adopted- e.g. via converts or Judaizantes - though it is difficolt to
point to specific instances. Tbis impression is reinforced by analyzing the
parallel.s between the readings of the Fast of the Seventh Month and Yom
K.ippur.
2.3 Tht Readings ofthe Fast ofthe Sevtnth Month and Yom Kippur
Our earliest sources for the biblical readings of the Roman order, the
Comes of Würzburg and the Comes of Alcuin, mention highly interesting
readings for Wednesdays. Fridays and the Saturday vigils. 123 The sheer
number of Lectiones (six) demonstrates the solemnity of the vigil. In the
Roman lectiouary, only the Easter and Pentecost vigils bave six lessons. In -
a sense, the vigils ofthe Solemn Fasts are therefore seasonal repetitions of
the paschal fast and vigil. 124 The choice ofthese readings clearly reveals a
close relation to the Jewish festivals of autumn, especially to Yom Kippur
and tb.e themes related to it (see accompanying table).
There are two possible explanations for the correspondence between the
two reading cycles: (a) through adoption from the Jewish lectionary -
direct "positive" influence; or (b) through the content of the biblical texts
themselves and the liturgical context they suggest- "bookish" influence.
The former was suggested by Ludwig Venetianer and again by Erle Wer-
ner.125 Antoine Chavasse argues for the latter, spealdng of "la perspective
d'un Romain du IV~ siecle qui telirait 1' Ancien Testament pour s'en inspi-
rer dans la reglementation d'Wle celebration desti~ee a prendre place au
cours du 'septieme mois• ! 1126

lll On thc read!ngs, see Chavasse, Le~ lectionnaires ramai1&1 de. Ia MeJse au Ylle et
YI/Ie slecles, vol. 2, p. 19 and p. 42; and the belpful table in Cbavasse, Le Sacramentaire
gllasien (Yaticanus Reginensis J16), .~acromentaire presbytiral en tl.fage dans les titres
romain.f au V/Je ;decle, pp. 110-111; or sec G. Godu, "Evangiles," Dictionnaire de l'ar-
chiologie chretienne etliturgie S/1 (1922) 852-923, espeeially columns 896-923, and
Godu, "Epitres." ·
1 ~ TaJiey, "Tbe Origin of tbe .Ember Days," p. 470.
!2! L. Venetianer, "Ussprung und Bedeutung der Propheten-Lektionen." Zeitschrift der
Deur1cJren Morgenlandischen Geaell.rchaft 63 (1969) 103-170, here pp. 140-141;
E. Wemer, 11te Sacred Bridge. Liturgical Parallels in Synagogue and Early Chwch
(New York, 1959). p. 80. •
J:lili Chavasse, "Le setmou 111 de saint 1..6011 et Ia date de la c616bration des Qtmre-
Temps de septembre," p. 8L The fourth century is probably too early a datiog for the
readiog.s. Of all the Lectiones and Gospel readings.. Leo quotes only Mark 9:29 (Ssr-
mon 87:2). But the &eneral idea is val•d also for the installation and promotion of the
testival in Leo's time and evea before him.
318 The lmp<tct of Yom Kippur on ChrisJianity in the Tllird to the Fifth Centrlrles

Day ofReadinR Lectiones Contenls

Wednesday Amos 9:13-15 Restoralion oflsrael; agricultura!
_ß\fdl) motifs; end of the Book of Amos
(Wd2l Nebemia 8:1-10 Readillg ofthe law on New Year
(WdG) Gos-pel Mark 9:17-29 Exorcism
Friday Hosea 14:2-10 Call for Israel to repent; -agric;ulturaJ
(Frl} motifs· end oflhe Book ofHosea
(FrG) Gospel Luke 5:17-26 Debate over forgiveness of sins and
healing of the lame
Satuzday vigil Levitleus 23:27-32 YomKippur
(Se.l}
(Sala) 127 Jeremiah 30:8-11 Eschatolotrlcal urom ise of salvation
_(_Sa2) Leviticus 23:34-43 Suk.kot
{Sal) Micab 7:14--20 Prayer for protection and forgiveM
ness1 end of the Book of Micah
(Sa4) Zechariah 8:14-19 Eschatological conditions and four-
fold fast
(SaS)
- Exodus 32:11-14 God is propitiated bv Moses
(Sa6) Hebrews 9:2-12 Tbe tabemacle and Christ the bigb
Pli,est perfurming atonement
(SaO} Gospel Luke 13:10-1"7 Releasing (on the Sabbatb) the
woman bound by Satan 12ll
Four texts refer directly to the tbree Jewish festivals of autumn. Most
clearly, (Wd2) Nehemia 8:1-10 relates to New Year, (Sal) Leviti-
cus 23:27-32 to Yom K.ippur. (Sa2) Leviticus 23:34-43 to Sukkot and
(Sa4) Zecbariah 8:19 could be understood as referring also to the fa.rrt of
Gedaliah. The order of texts follows the chronological order of the festi-
vals. The only New Testament Epistle reading am.ong tbe Lectiones, (Sa6)
Hebrews 9:2-12, describes the new Day of Atonement of Jesus Christ. Tbe
langnage of two of the lectures, (Wdl) Amos 9:13-15 and (Frl)
Hosea 14:2-10, is replete with agricultural allusions, fitting the atmospbere
ofSukkot.
Tbe main theologicalline of the readings encompasses sin, repentance,
propitiation, forgiveness and restoration. (Wdl) Amos 9:13-15 and (Frl)
Hosea 14:2-10 speak about the restoration of Israel or about its being
called to repc:ntance, topics reminiscent of Yom Kippur, (Sa4) Zecba-
riah 8:14-19 and (Sa5) Exodus 32:11-14 address God. forgiver of sins,
being placated by fast and interoession. (Salb) Jeremiah 30:8-11 and (Sa3)

127 This text appears ouly in the Come.s of 'Wilrzburg (N° 146), not in the Comes of.4.1-
cuin.
121 Thls exorcism evolc:os a discussion on tbe meaning of tbe Sabbath and is r~:ad on
Se.turday.
 :Yom Kippur and the Christiaw A:uhlmn Futivals 319

Micah 7:14-20il!} speak: of salvation and forgiveness and protection of

Israel agai.nst its enemies. The three Gospel readings talk about healing
exorcisms connected to the forgiveness of sins.
At first glanoe, the cboice of pericopes seems to conflllD. Cbavasse's
tbeory that tbe rites of the Fast of the Seventh Month were shaped by a
Christiall who combed the Old and the New Testament for texts pertaining
to September. There are, however. several problems with this approach.
The ..bookish"' explanation does not account for the unusually large num-
ber of lections for this Cbristian fast. Nor does it explain the preeminence
of Old Testament pericopes among the readings. Indeed, a Cbristian min-
ing the Christian Bible for passages about repentance, propitiation, for-
given.ess and restoration could find more than enough in the New Testa-
ment. Moreover. Chavasse addressed only the content of the passages,
without considering their Jewish liturgical use. lnvestigation of the latter
shows tbat a nurober of lections of the Christian fast betray connections
with Yom Kippur, tbus making it probable that some Christians were ac-
quainted with Jewish liturgical habits. 13°
Five of the Old Testament passages of the Fast of the Seventh Month
are read in some synagogues at about the same time - three on Yom Kip-
pur itself; the other two very close to Yom Kippur. On Yom Kippur itself:
(Sal) Leviticus 23:27-32 and part of {Sa3), Micah 7:18-20, and, in some
Palestiman communities, (Sa5) Exodus 32:11~-14. 131 On Sabbath Shuva be-
tween New Year and Yom Kippur: (Frl) Hosea 14:2-10 (as weil as
Micah 7~ 18-20). 132 On Suk:kot: (Sa2) Leviticus 23:34-43.
Particularly tbe choice oftwo ceadings. (Frl) Hosea 14:2-10 and (Sa3)
Micah 7:14-20, is not easily explained without reference to the Jewisb
reading cycle. Readings from the minor prophets are extremely rare in the
Roman lectionary; Micah is read only here, while Hosea is read on only

ll!l Tbree of tbe lectures are actually the very end of the boolcs of Amos, Hosea aod Mi·
eab (Wdl, Frl, Sa3).
130 Wben comparing the readings of the Fast of the Seventh Momh and Yom KippW',
we have tobe aware that nothing is known about tbe readings in Rome's synagogues in
the fif\b &o sixth centuries. All of the following remarks are valid only if at lea$t part of
tbe readings agreed with the mishnaic, talmudic and post-talmudic readings: sec above,
pp. 54--59. We have to be aware too tbat of alt Epistle and Gospel n:adings, Lco refers
only to Mark 9:29 (Sermon 87;2).
111 See abovc, p. SS. This observation cscaped my attention in Stökl Ben Ezra, "Wbose
:fiast Is lt?,. In some rabbinie ttaditioii.S, Exod 32-34 is linked to Yom Kippur: see y:Yoma
7;3, 44b; Levilicus Rabbah 21:10 (ed. Margulies, pp. 489-490). See also yYoma &:9, 4Sc,
discussing the episode of the golden calf as one of the prooftexts on which to base tbe
confe.ssions.
133 Hos 14 is also the scriptural focns of bYoma 86a-b: see p. 56, ai:Jove.
320 The Impact o[Yom Kipp11r on Christianity in the Third to the Fifth Cenlllries

one other occasion. Second, these specific pericopes - Micah 7 and Ho-
sea 14 - do not seem to have been weil known among Latin authors. 133 In
short, if a Christian reader were to have connected these texts to the fast,
he would have been making an extremely atypical choice. A more plau-
sible explanation is that the choice of Micah 7 and Hosea 14 as readings in
the Christian services was connected to their use in some Synagogues in
September.
Furthermore, the final epistolary reading of the Saturday vigil, (Sa6)
Hebrews 9:2-12, depicts Jesus Christ performing the high priest's ritual
from the Day of Atonement, but includes no reference to September.
Therefore, whoever chose this reading was likely aware of its typological
and polemical connection to Leviticus 16, the main lesson of the Jewish
festival (or theSeder Avodah). By virtue of its position after the Old Tes-
tament readings, Hebrews 9:2-12 is presented as the apex of the whole
reading circle, communicating to the hearer that Christ bimself undertakes
the atoning work of the true Yom Kippur. In light of the competitive
Situation attested by Leo, it is quite plausible that Hebrews 9:2-12 was
chosen as a polemical, supercessionist substitute for Leviticus 16. 134
Direct contact, however, cannot explain all ofthe readings. Some read-
ings of the Fast of the Seventh Month are not connected to the Jewish litur-
gy for the month ofTishri (e.g. Amos 9:13-15; Nehemia 8:1-10; Zechariah
8:14-19). Moreover~ a number oftexts central to Yom Kippur are notread
on the Fast ofthe Seventh Month: Leviticus 16 and 18; Numbers 29:7-11;
Jonah and Isaiah 57:15ff.m Leviticus 18 and Jonah might not have been
read in the majority of synagogues. 136 While Hebrews 9:2-12 can explain
the disregard of Leviticus 16 an.d Numbers 29:7-11, it is difficult to give

113 See Biblia patristica; the index to the trarulated (and therefore incomplete) works

of Augustine by J.W. Siles, A Scripillre IndG to the Works ofSt. A11gustine in English
Translation (Lanham, New York and London, 1995) gives an equally meager use ofthe
minor prophets by Augustine. A single verse, Hos 14:10, is used widely without any
connection to repentance. The crucial verses about repentance, Hos 14:2-3 a)most never
appear in early Cbristian Latin literature. Again the exception proving the rule is the
pseudo-cyprianic Ezhortation to Penitence probably from Spain from about the same
time as Leo, cf. C. Wtmderer, Br11chstücke einer afrikanischen Bibeliibe,.semmg in der
pse~~docyprianischen Sch1"ift Exhortatio de paenitentia (Programm der kgl. Bayer.
Studienanstalt zu Erlangen; Erlangen, 1889), here p. 34 for the ciating.
134 Venetianer, "Ursprung und Bedeutung der Propheten-Lektionen," pp. 140--141,

argues that tbe mishnaic reading Lev 23:27-32 was abandoned as a reaction against its
adoption in the Christian fast. This is overextending the Roman evidence to the rest of
the Jewish world.
13' Neither does Leo quote them or allude to them. For the readings in the early

synagogue service, see above, pp. 54-59.

136 See above, pp. 56-57, especially note 219.
 Yom Kippur and the Christion Autumn Festivals 321

reasons for the neglect of Isaiah 57:15ff (especially Isaiah 58:5ff). But
neither can the "bookish" model explain the absence oflsaiah 57:15ffand
Jonah, since both texts would have matched the themes of the Cbristian
vigil of the Fast of the Seventh Month perfectly. Christians combing the
Old Testament for suitable texts surely encountered these passages, which
are very commonly used in Christian literature, especially as prooftexts for
Gentile groups who claim to fast more piously than Jews do. 137
Different reasons, then, may have influenced the choice of readings.
Some may have been adopted directly via Jewish Christians or Judaizan-
tes,138 some may have been chosen by attentive readers Qf.the Old Testa-
ment, 139 some may have been selected as polemical responses against the
contemporary Jewish fast, 140 and some may have been read without direct
relation to the Jewish fast. 141 Thus we can speak of three kinds of influ-
ence: influence through the adoption of Jewish ritual customs, influence
through polemical reaction to Jewish ritual customs and "bookish" (bibli-
cal) influence. 142
Conclusion
The Fast of the Seventh Month and Yom Kippur are closely related,
though the origin of the Christian fast remains obscure. The biblical Yom
Kippur served as the model for the Christian fast, as did the concepts and
lections connected to it. This is shown by the reading of Leviticus 23:27-
32 and by Leo's explicit reference to the Christian fast as a Christianized
Day of Atonement adopted by the Apostles. Beyond that, the contemporary
Jewish fast also played a role in the promotion of the Christian fast and in-
fluenced some of the rites and concepts connected to it. Christian aware-
ness of the contemporary Yom Kippur becomes clear through Leo's de-

137 Parts oflsa 57:15-58:14 are read during Lent according to the lectionaries in most
churches. Parts of Jonah are usually read during the Easter vigil, again according to most
lectionaries. Tobe sure, reading the whole Book of Jonah or Lev 16 would have made for
an exceptiona11y long reading; but this does not exclude the possibility of selecting some
verses, parspro toto.
138 Notably, those passages that appear in the Jewish reading cycle but show no
intrinsic connection to a fast in autumn, e.g. (Frl) Hos 14:2-10 and (Sa3) Mic 7:14-20.
Of' course, other texts ftom the Jewish reading cycle may have been adopted, too, such as
(Sa1) Lev 23:27-32 and (SaS) Exod 32:11-14.
13' E.g. (Wd2) Neh 8:1-10; (Sa2) Lev 23:34-43; (Sa4) Zech 8:14-19 and perhaps also

(Sa1) Lev 23:27-32.

140 E.g. (Sa6) Heb 9:2-12 and perhaps also (Sal) Lev 23:27-32 and (SaS) Exod 32:11-
14. -
141 E.g. {Wd1) Amos 9:13-15 and the special reading in the Comes of Wiirtburg,
Jer 30:8-11 and the Gospel readings.
14l Even "apostolic,. influence cannot be ruled out.
322 The lmptu;t o[Yom Kippur on Chrlstitmlty in the 11tird to the Fifth CePttttria

scriptions of contemporary Jewish practice (nudipedalia). previously mis-

unde.rstood as references to a pagan practice. Some lections (e.g. Frl.
Hosea 14:2-10 and Sa3. Micah 7:14-20) were probably direct adoptions
from Jewish readings of Tishri. Others {e.g. Sa6. Hebrews 9:2-12) were
chosen as a polemical reaction against the contemporaneous Day of
Atonement in order to make manifest the supersession by the Christian fast
- just as Leo tried to express the superiority of the Christian fast compared
to its Jewish prototype. While he may have perc:eived the fast of bis Jewish
contemporaries a5 threatening the Christian identity. his main tbrust is to
propagate the Christian Fast of the Seventh Month and justify it against
possible accusations of Judaization by fellow Christians. Unlike Chryso-
stom, Leo does not complain about Christians taking part in Jewish festi-
vals. Plausibly, the Roman fast prevented Christians from participating in
Jewish Yom K.ippur services. It would be interesting to kn.ow whether the
institution of the Fast of the Seventb Mon1h was a reaction to a situation
similar to that in Antioch of a mass movement of Judaizing Christians. Un-
fortunately, our limited knowledge of the Jewish and Jewisb Christian
communities in Rome in the third to fifth centuries precludes being more
precise. ~
Notwithstanding the dangers inherent in making statements about psy-
cho-religious constellations 1,500 years ago, it does seem that the Fast of
the Seventh Month answered the same collective psycho-religious needs as
did the Day of Atonement. It is a day of communal purification, propitia-
tion and expulsion of evil Spirits at the time of the harvest, marking the end
of the agricultural cycle of sowing, tending and harvesting. It is a fast in
the midst of an abundance of food. a moment of communal contemplation
of the self in relation to God, in the days of reckoning the human Iabor of a
year dependent on factors beyond human control.

3. Bastern Commemoration ofGabriel's Annunciation to

Zechariah

Early Cbristian tradition elevated Zechariah, the father of Joh."l the Baptist.
to high priesthood, 143 and according to legend, Zechariah received the an-
nuncialion ofthe conception ofhis son in the holy ofholies on Yom K.ip-
put. Two factors gave impetus to the development of this tradition. First.
the myste:ry surrounding the place of the ac:mmciation, the ritual per.fonned
by Zecbariah and his hierarchical position in Luke 1 all provided fertile

143 See above, pp. :25G-2S.S.

 Yom Kippvr Dnd the Chriflian Allhlmn Futwa/3 323

ground for creative speculation. The more famous the hero of a tradition,
tbe more interesting bis story. Second~ some people attempted to give the
birth of Christ - an important event of redemption history - a place in the
liturgical calendar and looked for hints on which to base their calculations.
The scant chronological references in Luke I about tbe visit of Mary to
Elizabeth were tbe only data they could use. And tbese references could
give only relative dates. Christ was born half a year later than John, and in
each case the annunciation and conception had happened nine months
earlier. But when exactly? Explaining tbe ritual perfonned by Zechariah as
being patt of the Yom K.ippur temple service provided a fixed point for the
calculations.
In the Greek and S)'riac East this chronological fixation of tbe legendary
event found liturgical expression in the establishment of a commemoration
day for the annunciation to the high priest Zechariah of the birth of bis son,
John the Baptist. Establishing a liturgical event such as the CQmmemora-
tion day might well be coooected to the finding of Zechariah's relics, to-
gether with tbose of Simeon and James the Just, 144 in Jerusalem. on the
Mount of Olives on 1 December .351. 14s In other words, the location of
Zeebariah in sacred geogl'aphy might well have been the impetus for add-
ing Zechatiahts annunciation into the liturgical calendar, which probably
spread from Jerusatem to other places. The tradition of the discovery of th.e
tomb ofthe three Christian (high) priests - Zeehariah, James and Sirneon-
originally points to a Jewish-Christian provenance, as the Protevangelium
ofJames mentions Zechariah and Sirneon and claims to have been written
by James the Just. Yet in the fourth century, the Profevangelium was al-
ready widely known and independent of Jewish-Christian circles.

Three main traditions mandate for dates for the commemoration day in the
respective liturgical calendar. First, in the Oreek Synaxarion, the annun-
ciation is commemorated on 23 September. The same is true for two West
Syriac calendats,146 which are relatively late and, according to Baumstark

~ On the connectioo between the three figures, see above, pp. 2.SS-2S7. Some
Synaxaria commcmorate thc lhtee figures together, on 23 October.
w The source for this event is a tenth-century Latin text. whicb is a translation of a
lost, most probably Greek, text rmt tramlated by Abel, "La sepulture de saint Jacques le
Miue11r." The legend is conrumed by some lectionaries, which record this event as bcing
on 1 December, and by Theodo$iUS, who lmew of the existcnce of such a tomb in 530,
see CSEL 39:140..142 (cd. P. Geyer).
IoM Ms Paris 146 (seventeenth eentury), Va.tican 69 (sixtcenth century) and Briti~ Mu-
seum Add. 17232 (1210), all published by f". Nau i11 Martyrologe~ et Mertologu orien-
ltna (PO 10; Paris, Freiburg i.Br., 191 S).
324 The Impact of Yom Kipp ur on Chri31icmity il'! the Third 10 the Fifth Centwies

and Engberding, are influenced by the Byzantine calendar. 147 The Coptic
Synaxarion, too. co.m.ro.emorates the annunciation on 26 Thoth. which is
23 September in the Julian calendar. 141
Second, the Old Georgian Lectionary, witness for the Jerusalem tradi-
tion, commemorates the visio Zachariae et mutitatis (eius) on 27 Septem-
ber; 149 and a similar date, 26 September, is confinned by an early Syriac
calendar. 1so Baumstark suggests Palestine as the point of origin for the
commemora:tion days of some biblical figures and events in the Old Geor-
gian Lectionary, among them the anmmciation to Zechariah. 1 ~ 1 Following
Baumstark's suggestion. I will speak of the Jerusalem date (26 I 21 Sep-
tember) as distinct from the Byzantine date (23 September).
The Arab po!ymath Al Biruni gives yet a third date. In a treatise on cal-
endars ca. 1000 CE he writes that on the tenth day of Tishri A (10 Octo-
ber)m the Melkites celebrate the "commemoration of the prophet Zacha-

141 A. Baumstark, Festbrevier und Kirchenjahr der syrischen Jalwhiten. Eine lihlrgie-
ge.schichtliche Yorarbeit auf Gr~md Handschriftlicher Studien in Jerw~alem und Damas-
ku.f, der Syri$Cht!n Handschriftenkmaloge von Berlin, Cambridge, London, Qxjord, Paris
vnd Rom und des unierten Mossuler Festbrevierdruckes (Paderbom, 19'10), p. 274;
H. Bngberding, "Kann Petrus der Iberer mit Dionysius Areopagita identifiziert werden?"
Orien3 Chl-i.rJionw; 38 (1954) 68-95, here pp. 75-76.
1 ~ F. Nau (ed.}, Martyrologi!$ et Menologe.s orientma.. Les Menologe3 de.s ivangeli-

oires copte~-arabes (PO l0/2; Paris, Freiburg i.Br., 1915; pp. 165-244), p. 189. The
manuscripts consulted were written in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.
149 Oaritte, Le. ca/endri.er palestino-gi:orgien du Sinaiticus 34, p. 341; cf. "Visio Zacha-

riae aphonian in Paris Codex Oeorg. 3 and the Latbal manuscript of tbe Old Georgian
Lectionary: see M. Tarchni.schvili, Legrand lectloMaire de I'Jglise de Jerusalem, N°
1257. Garitte also refers to Bototov, wbo claims to have seen a text by Maximus Con-
fessor mentioning 27 September as the day of the annunciation to Zecluuiah. Garitte, Le
calendrier palestino-glorgien du Sinaiticus 34, p. 341. A search for Zaxa in TI..O S.O did
not yield a text speak:ing of Zechariatl, the father of John the Baptist, in the uigitalized
texts of Maximus.
uo British Musewn Add. 14519 (eleventh to twelfth ce.nturies), published by F. Nau in
Martyrologes et Menologes orientaux (PO 10; Paris, Freibmg i.Br., 1915).
1" "Ihre Heimat in Pallistina suchen .möchte man sieb ferner &~Kh bei einigen Gedächt-
nistagen biblischer Gestalten versucht tuhlen (sie!]. die dem huari.zmischen Heiligenka-
lender [the souree of Al Birunil gegenOber dem gemeinby:z.antinischeo Brauche wie ge-
genüber der ge<.lrgischen Ueberlieferung eigentOmlieh sind" cf. A Baumstark, "Ausstrah-
lungen des vorbyzantinischen Heiligenkalenders von Jerusalem,"' Orientalia Chl-istiana
Periodica 2 (1936) 129-144, bere p. 137. Baumstark refers to Zechariah (10.10); Joseph
of Arimathiab (29.12); Elijah (7.8.); Elisha (8.8.); Jeremiah, Zecbariah and Ezekiel
(16.8.); and an prophets (30.8.).
132 The Arabic .reads ..Tishrtn.'' [n Syriac Tishri A is used fur October and Tishri B for

November (Payne Smith, s.v.). That "Tishrtn" is in sny case the same as October can be
leamed front the beginning ofthe preparation fast before Chrislmas, which begins on the
six.teenth day ofTishrin Ir (16 November), 40 days before 2S December.
 Yom Kippr~r and the Christfan A11hlmn F«Stivals 325

rias.""J.S3 "On this day the angels announccd to hlm the birth of bis son
John, as it is mentioned in the Koran, and in greater detail in the Gos-
pel."154 The explicit notation of the date 10 Tishri demonstrates the direct
link to Yom Kippur. This date is adopted also by Bphrem (d. 373) wbo,
bowe""Ver. does not :refer to a festival. us Christian liturgical sources dcscrib-
ing 10 October as the date for the commemoration of Zech.ariah are
unknown to me. 1S6
For the Byzantine and Jerusalem dates, too, there exist explanations
based on 10 Tishri and connecting Zecharlah's revelation to Yom Kippur.
The earliest text known to me (third or fourth century?) giving a raison
d'etre for the Byzantinc date is the Latin tractate de $Olstitiis e t
aequinocriis conceptionis et nativitatis Domini nostri Jesu Christi et Iohan-
nis Baptistae. 1s1 This text is also the earliest to give a Julian date for the
annWlciation to Zecb.ariah. alheit without mentioning a liturgical com-
memoration. It is the main theological idea of de solstitiis to prove the co~
incidence ofbiblieal revelation and divinely ordered nature. John and Jesus
were conceived on tb.e equinox and bom on tbe solstice, the most impor-
tant asttonomical dates of the year. us The "eleventh [day of the] waxins

~» hlamic tradition apprreotly also identifies the prophet Zechariah as tbe tather of
John the Baptist.
1"' Al Biruni, 11ut Chronology of Anciurt NotioM (Sachau, p. 286 [291 ]). The part of
AI Biruni's book relevant for Christian lfturgy was also publisbed by R. Griveau (ed.),
Martyro/oges et Minologu orientDra XYJ-XYJJ/. Lu fltes des Melchites, par A.l-Birouni
(PO 10:4; Parisand Freiburg i.Br., 191S; pp. 289-312).
Highty interesting is AI·Biruni's explanation of the Muslim 'Ashura. (Sachau,
pp. 326-327 [329-330]). Aroong the diffsrent idea& related to 'Ashura in Mustim tradi-
tioo are the following: ..People say that on this day God toolc compassion on Adam, that
tbc ark ofNoah stood still ou tbe mountain AljQdi, that Jesus was bom, that Moses was
saved (from Pharao), and Abraham (from the fire ofNebukadnezar), that the fire around
him (which was to bum bim) bccame cold. Flll'thor, on this day Jacob regaiued his eye-
sight, Joseph was drawn out of the ditch, Solomon was invened with the royal power, the
pW!isbment was taken away from the people of Iona. Hiob was free.d ftom his plague, ehe
prayer of Zechariab was granted and John was gjven to him." (Sachau, p. 326 (329)). On
the 'Asbura, cf. above p. 34, note 100.
155 Ephrelll, Commentary on Exodus 12:2-J; (CSCO 1S2:141); Cummental")' on the

Dfatemrron l :29 (SC 121 :61-'2); HqmJly on the Nalivity 27: 18; see Coak.ley, "Typology
and the Birthday of Cbrist on 6 January"; and de Halleux, "Le comput ~ptuemien du
cycle de Ia nativitl!."
1511 Of course, 23, 26 and 27 September sornetimes eoincide wich 10 Tishri in the
Iewish c:alendar. Al Biruu.i, however, was referring to a Christian S)'Jiac: calendar.
1" De solstitiis et aequinoctlis (ed. Botte, pp. 96-98). Fo:r the t.xt, see above, pp. 253-
2S4.
ua The fJTSt to conncct the equillox to the femvals of Tishri (not Yorn Kippur) was
Pbilo, Dtl specialibr.ts legibu1 1: 186.
326 The Impact ofYom Kipput- on Christianity in the Third to ihe Fifth Centuries

moon" {i.e. 11 Tishri) in de solstitiis sbould probably be understood as tbe

day after Zechariah concluded the Yom Kippur service. retumed home and
bad intercourse with Elisabetb- and John was conceived. Accordingly, the
conception took place at the equinox, 24 September, one day after the an-
nunciation on Yom Kippux, which happened tobe 23 September. De sol-
stitiis does not speak of a commemoration day, but the chronology matches
the Byzantine Synaxarion. Among other early authors explicitly connect-
ing Yom Kippur to the annunciaton to Zechariah on 23 Septemberare
commentaries on Luke by Pseudo-Epiphanius and an anonymous Jerusale-
mite (400--450). 159
The earliest explanation for the Jerusalem date known to me is the
commentary to tbe liturgy that is anonymous but recorded under the name
of George, bishop of the Arabs. edited by R.H. Connolly, usually dated to
the tenth century. 160 In the chronographical introduction to bis explanation
of the liturgy. the autbor includes the following passage:
And Iohn was annun.::iated on the tentb. [day] of the seventh lunar month, i.e.
Tisllri (flrst Tithrin), wbich was on the 26"' day of the sevendt solar month, Sep-
tember (Eiuf), on a Thursday. 1~ 1 Because .in that year the fast of tbe tenth day feil
on a Friday and the Jews do not $,)bserve (a fast o.n) a Friday because of the fear
tbat in the event that one w<Juld die, he would stay unburied and decay, tbey
changed it to the Thnrsday. Afterwards Zechariah stayed until tbe 2~ day of the
lunar [month), 162 an.d then the days ofhis ministry were full.
Iohn was conceived at the beginning of tbe lunar month Marheshvan (later
Tlshrin), or on the 17th day of the solar montb October (jirst Tishrin), on a Friday.
And he s:tayed in the womb during the lunar months. of Mameshvan (later
TisJtrin), Kislev (Kenon), Tevet (Kenon). 3ad Shvat an.d Adar. In the sixtb month,
bowever, the beginning oftbe lunar month of April (Nisan), on the 29<t. day oftbe
solar month March (Adar), Christ our Lord Wall concei.ved. And John was b<>m on

." For Pseudo-Epiphanius, see F.C. Conybeare "The Gospel Commentazy of

Epiphanius" 'Uitschrifl fiir die neidestammtliehe Wissenseht1ft und die Kunde der älteren
Kirche 7 (1906) 318-332; 8 {1907) 221-223, h.ere (1906) p. 325 (folio 73-74). For tbe
;monymous Jerusalemite commentacy on Luke see, fragment 10 in Reuss, Lukas-Kom-
mentare aus der griechischen Kirche, pp. 23-24. Cf. also the spurious correspondence
between Cyril ofJerusalem and Jullus of Rome in PG 96:1436-1449.
Uio R.H. Connolly (ed.), Mo'll)lmi Auctoris Expasitio Ojficiorum Ecclesiae Georgic
Arbelensi Vulgo Adscripta. Tomus I-IV (4 vols; CSCO 64; 72; 76; 71 [ Scriptores Syri 25;
29; 32; 28]; Paris I Leipzig, 1911-1954).
161 Tbis very specific constellation of a Day of Atonement (I 0 Tishri) belng a Tbursday

that falls on 26 September is very rare.

1151 26 Tishri here equals 12 Oc:tober. Sukkot (with Simhat Torah) ends on 22 Tisbri or,
outside the land of Israel, on 23 Tishri.
 Yom K.ippur dnd the Christidn Äut11mn Fesltval8 327

the l81h day of tb.e solar rnonth July (Tammuz), which is the fifdt of tbe lunar
month Av, 011 a_ Wednesd.ay.~<~'
Wbile the proposed chronology is impossible, 164 the theological idea be-
hind it is interesting, since the author apparently tries to establish a mathe-
matical tbundation for the date 26 September as Yom Kippur in the year of
the conception of John the Baptist. Coincidence with the equinox plays no
role. The definitive inspiration for the Syriac author is the Jewish date of
Yom Kippur. Here, the period between annunciation (26 September) and
conception (17 October) is much Ionger than in the Byzantine calendar.
However, tbe author does not use the explicit term "Yom Kippur." nor
does h.e describe Zechariah as a high priest; yet he clearly knows these de-
tails .from the tradition.
Both texts link the annunciation to Zechariah with the Jewish fast. But
whereas for the Byzantine text the coincidence with the astronomical con-
stellation of the equinox is clearly central, the Syriac tex.t concentrates
much more on Yom Kippur and seems tobe fairly weU acquainted with
Jewish calendar regulations.

lt is commonly assurned that the 0/d Georgian Lectionary reflects the lit-
urgy in Jerusalem in the fifth to seventh centuries. 16s The Lathal manu~
script (L) and tbe Paris manuscript (P) of the Old Georgian Lectionary
give the following readings for the visio Zachariae: Psalm 141 (140):1.3;
Proverbs 12:25--13:3; Zechariah 2:13-3:4; Hebrews 8:7-9:10; 166 Psalm
119 (ll8):131; Luke 1:1-20. 167 This is an impressive assembly ofmany of
the texts connected to the Jewish andlor Christian imaginaire. of Yom Kip-
pur. The most significant readings are those of Luke 1:1-20 (the story of
the annunciation to Zechariah), Hebrews 8:7-9:10 (Christ's fulfillment of

163 My translatio11 of tbe Syriac in ed. Connolly, (CSCO 64:40, lines 14-29). I refer to
the lunar months by their Jewish names and bave put the literal translation of the Syriac
month name in ilalicized pareatheses. Connolly's Latin traoslation (CSCO 71:34-35)
makes it ditlicult to distinguish between the Jewish l1111ar months and the Roman solar
months.
löol If the preceding I 0 Tishri fell on 26 September, 29 March callllOt fall on 1 Nisan.
Also, i{ 26 September was a Thursday, 18 July of the following year cannot c:oincide
with 5 Av and has tobe either a Friday or, in the event the following year is a leapyear, a
Thursday.
w Compare Verbelst, "La Iiturgie de J6rusalem i11'6poque byzantine," pp. 12·~16; and
the introduction in Garltte, Le calendrier palestino-georgien du Sinaiticl6 34.
11111 The rnanuscripts refer to 8 September, the birth of Mary, see Ta.rchnischvili, Le
grand leclionnaire de l'eglise de Jerusalem, No 1225. Cf. also the reading of tb.e samc
passage of Hebrews for the dcdicatiOIJ of the (new) Kathisma churcb (p. 27, N° 1145).
On this festival. sec Verhelst, "Le 15 Aoüt,le 9 Av et le K.athisme."
161 See Tarchnischvili, Le grtJnd /ectioi'IJtaire de l'eglise deJi111sale",, No 12S7.
328 The Impact ofYcm Kippur on Christianity in the Third to the Fifth Clmturies

Yom Kippur) and Zechariah 2:13-3:4 (the encounter of the high priest
Jesus, son of Jeho:zadak, with the angel, God and Satan), which were
apparently understood as typologically related to Zecbariah's encounter
with Gabriel. The other readings are related to Zechariah's tevelation:
Psalm 141 (140):1.3 refers to prayer and the request tosend a guardian to
watch the mouth, i.e. to prayer and to silence; Proverbs 12:25-13:3 speak:s
of the just and wise son and the virtue of silence; and even Psalm 119
(118): 131 may be understood against this background. "With open mouth I
pant, because I long for your conunandments." The readings chosen for
this day are clearly a dramatization of the annunciation story set against
the background ofYom Kippur.

In sum, if we speak of a Jewish intluence on the ritual commemorating the

annunciation to Zechariah, jt is mainly of a bookish influence we speak.
The Jewish calendar offe.red a welcome solution to a tecbnical question of
importance for Christian calculators of the Messiah's birth. The festival,
then, is a side result of this solution - in itself of .rather minor importance.
Nevertheless, it is a striking case of the re-ritualization of a Christian
legend that is basedOll an episo,p.e from the New Testa,ment, placed in the
setting of the Jewish festival cycle. It is not the re-ritualization of Yom
Kippur itself; but it commemorates an event that, according to Christian
mythology, took place on Yom Kippur. Unlike tlle Roman Fast of the
Seventh Month, this festival adopts the temple imagery, not the fast. The
inclusion of Hebrews 8:7-9:10 and Zechariah 2:13-3:4 in the readings of
the Old Georgian Lectionary reflects the Christian imaginaire of Yom
Kippur's temple ritual beyond the story of Zechariah in Luke 1:1-20. The
calculations by Ephrem, de solstitiis and Pseudo-George reveal that some
Christian tb.eologians were well aware of the contemporary Yom Kippur
and might have chosen the readings accordingly. Consequently, the annun-
ciation to Zechariah, too, provides evidence for Yom Kippur beiog a con-
tinuous inspiration for Cltristianity. 168 ·

168 The Byzantine Synaxarion and the cal.endar of John Zosimus (ed. Garitte, p. 336)

commemorate thc prophet Jonah on 21 September. The proximity of its d.ate to Vom
Kippur and its significant liturgical place in Y om Kippur servkes from very early on are
conspicuous. However, since neither the Old Armenion LectioMry nor the 0/d Georgian
Lectionary mention Jonah at thls time, it would •ppear to be a rather We adoption.
 General Conclusions

I would like briefly to summarize the m.ain results of my investigations be-

fore launehing into some of their implications as well as suggestions for
further research.
1:-'irst, the temple ritual was widely intexpreted and eonnected to several
myths in the Jewish imaginaires of Yom Kippur, to the reservoirs of mo-
tifs, myths, concepts and sensual impressions regarding Yom Kippurin the
various Jewish groups. Three main interpretations emerge. The entry of the
high priest into the holy ofholies was perceived as an encounter between a
human being and God, and it was seen to mirror the heavenly joumey of
the apocalyptic (JEnoch 14), and the ascent of the mystic's soul to God in
Philo and in Hekhalot mysticism. In eschatologically oriented groups, a
high-priestly redeemer was expected to conquer the Iord of Evil and to
liberate bis good prisoners on the eschatological Day of Atonement
(11QMelchizedek, JEnoch 10). Accordingly, the scapegoat was usually
conceived of as the symbol or embodiment of evil - evil thoughts of men
in Pbilo, even demonized as the Ieader of the evil forces in 1Enoch 10, in
4Q180 and 4Q181, in the A.pocalypse of Abraham, andin some rabbinie
Statements.
Second, the Jewish imaginai.Tes of the Yom Kippur temple ritual exten-
sively influenced the formulation of the Christian Jewish myths and con-
ceptions about the atoning effect of Jesus• death and his ascent to God. I
believe this impact to be greater than proposed in the earlier stU<iies by
Young, Scullion and Kraus nsing a canonical approach.
Third, these Christological mythologizations of the temple ritual did not
always entail an abolition ofthe fast. There is evidence that some Christian
Jews continued to observe the fast of the Day of Atonement at least until
the end of the first century. whiJe others ceased to fast perhaps as early as
the flrst half of the frrst century.
Fourth, after the destruction of the temple, Y om Kipp ur continued to in-
fiuence Christianity in various ways. Beginning with Origen. some theolo-
gians expressed their concem that the continuous participation of Chris-
tians in the Jewish fast stood in contradiction to the Christian typological
myth. Other Christian theologians reacted polemically against the Jewish
fast, tbrough increased propagation of Christian sacrificial atonement
theology, through imense Christianization of the Old Testament texts on
the Day of Atonement, and through the propagation of competing autumn
festivals in Rome and Jerusalem.
330 Geneal Canclvsions

Fifth; the imagery of the high priest's entry into the holy of holies em-
ployed in Jewish apocalyptic and mystic texts influenced Valentinian
Cbristian soteriology and eschatology and the ritual ofthe bridal chamber,
a fonn of induced mysticism. And the Valentinian concepts in turn, influ-
enced the early Christian mysticism of Clement of Alexandria.

The great importance of Yom Kippur for the early Christian Jews left its
traces in Christian Jewish texts throughout frrst century, in the traditions
that were later used by Barnabas, Hebrews and Romans {3Q-6S CE), in
Paul's letters (50-60 CB) and Hebrews (ca. 50-60 cn?), in Matthew (70-
80 CE), and in lJohn and Barnabas (ca. 95 CE?). Hebrews combined the
apocalyptic conception of a hlgh-priestly redeemer appearing on an es-
chatological Yom Kippur with the idea of the atoning self-sacrifice. The
two were present but distinct in otber Second Temple texts such as
11 QMelchir:edek and 2Maccabees. The depiction of Jesus as high priest
was most likely already current before Hebrews, and the high priesthood of
the non-Levite Jesus could be justified tbrough the biblical precedent of a
high priest named Jesus in Zechariah 3. This passage was already con-
nected to Yom Kippurin Jewisil apoc.alyptic thought (Apocalypse ofAbra-
ham). Conceming the scapegoat, tbe Christian Jewish imaginaire of Yom
Kippur differed to some extent from the "mainstream" Jewish imaginaire
and developed rather marginal conceptions. The majority of Jewish texts
associated the scapegoat with demonie powers and evil - e.g. Philo linked
it to evil thoughts and evil people- or even saw it as a sort of Ieader of the
evil angels as in lEnoch. 4Ql80 and the Apocalyp.se of Abraham. Thls
mainstream conception seems to stand behind Matthew's redaction of
Mark's Barabbas episode. For the Christian Jewish conception of the
scapegoat as a positive type (Barnabas, Galatians, lPeter?, John?), there
are only a few parallels - among them Josephus' narrative of Allanus and
the rabbinie statement on Ravya bar Qisi.
An influence of Jewish Yom Kippur prayers on Cbristian Jewish texts
(Colossians, Philippians, Barnabas as Seder Avodah) is possible, yet the
sources are too meager to make a definite determination possible. In a later
period, a Jewish sermon that may have been part of the Yom Kippur ser-
vice, Pseudo-Philo On Jonah. found its way into Christian collections. 1
I assume that most Christian Jews continued to observe the fast ofYom
Klppur. Only gradually did they cease to do what they were accustomed to
observing. Unlike previous investigators, who often deduced from the use
of temple typology in a Christian author bis rejection of the temple service,

1 See the appendix for the possibility tbat some Jewisb. Yom Kippur prayers found

their way into the Christian liturgy.

 General ConcJ~~~tions 331

1 assume such a oonclusion to be only partially valid (definitely so in

Barnabas and Hebrews; perhaps also in Matthew and lJohn). Moreover,
Christian Jews who rejected the temple service might still keep the fast.
We can only be sure a group did not keep the fast ifthey explicitly polemi-
cized against it (Barnabas, Diognet, Aristides). lt is unlikely that Paul's
statements in Romans 3:25-26 and Galatians 3-4, which do not differ
greatly from Pbito•s spiritualization. imply a cessation of observance of
Yom Kippur, sioce Paul praises the temple service and accepts that parts of
the Roman community continue their observation of (Jewish) festivals.
Even more, Luke and bis community can be shown to have observed the
fast, as did the opponents of the writer ofthe Epistle to the Colossian.s and
parts of the Roman community.
Several factors led to the Christian abandonment of Yom Kippur and
the temple ritual as weil as the fast. Historically and liturgically, the de-
struction of the temple, wbich. ended the temple ritual, weakened the oom-
pulsion for a communal fast with prayers on a single special day. Hegesip-
pus portrays James as permanently observing Yom K.ippur. which may
imply transition from 10 Tisbri to any day. Theologically, typological
interpretations of Yom Kippur played some role in tbe abolition of Yom
Kippur by causing some Christians to perceive the Christian myth and the
Jewish ritual as alternatives. Sociologically, Yom Kippur was for Gentile
Christians not so much a custom to be continued as a festival to be newly
adopted - a process possible only where the new custom could be sup-
ported by a Cbristian rationale. Since Christ died in Nisan and not in
Tishri, the main meaningful events of earliest Christianity were connected
to a different month. It speaks strongly in favor ofthe importance ofYom
Kippur in Christian Jewish Ufe that a festival not connected chronologic-
ally to the events around Christ's death- events that forged tlle colleetive
Cbristian identity- conceptually bad so deep an impact on tbeir most pro-
foundmyth.
Yom Kippur continued to influence early Christianity even after the
destruction ofthe temple. The imagery of Yom Kippur's temple ritual be·
came increasingly attractive. Jesus' high priesthood and his identification
with the ko.pporet became topoi in Christian atonement tbeology and in ra-
tionales for the Eucbarist. The Christological scapegoat typology, too, was
widel.y used to illustrate Cbrist's atonement. While ..bookish" influence of
the biblical YOUI.. Kippur may partially explain this increase - Romans 3
and Hebrews Iiad become the "canon within the canon," and many exe-
getes wrote interpretations of Leviticus - I consider tbe Jewish fast ofthat
period tobe also an important factor. Christianity and Judaism oompeted
for the "true,. way of atonement - the Cbristian myth versus the Jewish
ritual, in much simplified tenns. Origen, Chrysostom and the Canons of
332 General ConclllSions

the Apostles provide evidence for the participation of a considerable

nurober of Christians in tbe Jewish fast in Syria-Palestine until at least the
late fourth c:entury. These Christian theologians perc:eived this attraction a.s
threatening tbe distinction ofthe Christian identity from "fleshly" Judaism
by challenging the Christian conc:eption of Christ's atoning death 8lld its
ritua.Is. Christian intellectual leaders reacted manifoldly to this challenge.
Origen's Homilies on Leviticus are the clearest proof of direct
interdependence between the polemies against Christian participation in
tbe Jewish fast and the development of a Christian alternative. The
Homilies expand the Cbristianization of Leviticus 16, starting with the
New Testament passages on Yom Kippur but adding further passages. In
tbis, Origen is the first to strongly promulgate Hebrews' sacrificial
atonement theology.
Several other Christian writers polemicize against the fast: Barnabas,
Justin, Tertullian, Theodoret ofCyrus, Leo ofRome, Ephrem, Chrysostom
and perhaps also Eusebius and Basil. Most of tbese authors seein to be
acquainted with the Yom Kippur oftheir period, a fact tbat suggests Chris-
tian sages in other regions feit similady threatened by the contemporary
Jewish fast and not simply by th& image of the biblical Day of Aionement.
The competition between Judaism and Christianity regardillg the "true"
means of atonement, is apparent in Jewish texts, too. Jewish theologians
responded to the challenge posed by Christian atonement theology by in-
serting polemies against the Christian priesthood and the cross into Yom
K.ippur liturgical poems. Still, these factors cannot explain the inccease in
the use of the scapegoat imagery to explain the ra1ionale behind Christ• s
death. lt is not a development of canonic traditions, sinc:e references in the
New Testamentare strictly implicit and seldom used as prooftexts. Barna·
bas proto--typology ceases to be used after Tertullian and Hippolytus -
probably because of its support for halakbic traditions. And it is not part of
the general Christianization of the Old Testament, since it also appears
apart from exegeses ofLeviticus (e.g. in Origen, Ambrose, Jerome). In my
opinion, the proximity of the rationale of the scapegoat to the rationale of
the widely .known pharmakos rituals endowed an increased use of the
scapegoat imagery with practical value in a pagan enviromnent perhaps
less farniliar with Old Testament stories.
Beyond the impact on the theology, at least three Christian festivals
celebrated closely to 10 Tishri, emerged in response to the impaet ofYom
Kippur on early Christianity: the important Enc:aenia/Exaltation of the
Cross in Jerusalem, the equally important Fast of the Seventh Month in
Rome and the marginal commemoration day of the annunciation to Zecha-
riah in the East. The emergenc:e of the first two festivals can be explained
in part against the background of Christians and Jews c:ompeting for ad-
 Gtmeral Conclwions 333

herents to their concept of atonement. The Encaenia/Exaltation of the

Cross probably emerged as part of the growing impact of Old Testament
imagexy following the Christian assumption ·of political and religious
authority in the land ofthe Bible- an effect I have called the "Ortsge1:rt of
the Holy Land." Conceming the Roman Fast ofthe Seventh Month, direct
«positive" influence, perhaps by converted Jews, plausibly explains the
extraordinary paratleis between the Christian readings and the reading
attested for Yom Kippur. Leo the Oreat and other readings reveal a "neg-
ative" reactive impact ofthe contemporary Jewish fast. Finally, the annun-
ciation to 7...echariah is a re-ritualization of a Jewish-Christian legend using
texts pertaining to Yom Kippur in its Christian imaginaire (such as
Hebrews 9 and Zechariah 3). Its explicit connection to 10 Tisbri in Chris-
tian and Muslim calendrical computations demonstrates once again the
awareness ofnon-Iews oftbis date in the Jewish calendar.

The results of this investigation support the assumption that early Christi-
anity and early Iudaism stood in a competition with each other that caused
a mutual influence. ln the center of this competition stood the "dangerous
ones in between," Christians who eontinued to observe Yom Kippur and
Jews who feit a special affmity to Jesus. They aroused the sc::om of theolo-
gians attempting to define the boundaries of the mainstream identity of
each side. Histories of Christian liturgy have yet to incorporate these ..dan-
gerous ones in between" into their approach to the Christian festal calendar
ofthe first, second, third and even fourth centuries. Ritual and social real-
ity seem to differ considerably from the theological ideals drawn up by the
Church Fathers and the rabbis, whose aim was to develop distinct identi-
ties. The two religions competed for centuries for the aUegiance of these
"dangerous ones in between," proposing mutually ex.clusive inte.rpretations
and re-ritualizations of Yom Kippur's temple rituaJ, which in reality was
no Ionger performed. Yet the two religions shared not only the common (if
different) canon ofthe Old Testament/Hebrew Bible, they also shared the
emphasis on sin and atonement and on the psychological need to regularly
expiate one's sins andlor propitiate God; and both formulated the ritual and
theological answer to this need in terms of Yom Kippur.
In this study, I have tried to scrutinize the Christian sources ofthe first
centuxy as Jewish documents and to read them with "Jewish glasses." Tak-
ing up Marcel Simon's thesis regarding Cbrysostom's reaction to Christia.n
participation in Yom K.ippur, I have attempted to draw a broader picture of
the influence of Yom Kippur on ear1y Cbristianity after the destruction of
the temple. I have also tried to apply Israel Yuval's approach in under-
standing Christianity and Judaism as two religions emerging under a mu-
tual competitive intluence. Much remains to be donet and many of the
334 General Conclusions

conclusions have to be seen as tentative given the wide net cast by this
study.
I bave tried to draw the main lines of the impact of Yom Kippur on
early Cbristianity as a whole; a more differentiating investigation of the
patristic sources might perhaps reveal regional differences (amo.ng, for ex-
ample, Syria-Palestine, Egypt, North Africa and tbe rest of the Latin
West), and especially some sort of correlation between the competition
posed by and the important influeru:e of tbe local Jewish community. At
the start of my investigations, the Syriac sources were the corpus in which
I expected to fmd tbe most interesting texts and the strongest signs of com-
petition between Christians and Jews and of Cbrlstian participation in the
fast. Yet lacking for the most part a comprehensive index for biblical cita-
tions and allusions or the assistance of a digitalized thesawus, I am not
sure if the tex:ts I found or others pointed out to me are representative. The
corpus of Syriac texts undoubtedly wmants further investigation.
A desideratum is an in-depth analysis of the post-biblical history of
Yom Kippur, ideally up to the present. A more meaningful comparison of
the patristic exegesis of Leviticus 16 and 23 with the rabbinie can he
achieved only after a critic~ investigation of all relevant rabbinical
sources, which I was unable to pursue comprehensively given the Jimited
scope of this project. The Christian impact on the Yom IGppur liturgy re-
vealed in this study is very limited. I assume that tbere are many more
statements, omissions (such as the ignoring of Melchizedek in the early
Sidrei Avodah) and ritual developments that can be marshaled as reactions
to Christian atonement theology and ritual. Furthermore, it would be
fascinating to examine the interpretations of the Mass by Amalar,
Hildebert and Ivo, who explain the Eucharist wholly in tenns of Yom
Kippur, including the scapegoat. lt would be interesting to know if their
intensification of the biblical terminology was in some way linked to
Jewish traditions. or if it was purely an intra-Christian development.
Finally, an investigation of non-Jewish descriptions of Jewish festivals
might be another promising project, to reveal not only the level of know-
ledge but also the anthropological perceptions of the other and, via the
other, also ofthe self.
 Appendix: Yom Kippur and Bastern Anaphoras

1. In a series of studies, Louis Ligier argues that Sidrei A vodah influenced

the so-called Clementine liturgy in the Apostolic Constitutions, 1 and tbat
the confession prayers 'Attah Yodea • Razel 'Olam and 'AI Het affected
Bastern Christian anaphoras.2 Before Ligier, Erwin Goodenough and
Wilhelm Bousset also argued for a Jewish origin of the· praefatio of the
Clementine liturgy. 3 They, however. saw the root in the Jewish Yoner
prayer- an unlikely thesis, as David Fiensy has demonstrated.4 Ligier has
the distinction ofbeing the first Christian liturgist to have seriously studied
Sidrei Avodah, such as 'Azkir Gevurot 'Eloah and 'Attah Konanta 'Olam
beRov Hesed.
Ligier's main arguments for the influence of the Sidrei Avodah on the
praefalio of the Clementine liturgy are their parallel liturgical locations

1 Apollolic Cimstitlllions 8:12:1-15:11 (SC 336:176-217) are called the Clementine

liturgy.
2 1.. Ligier, "Autour du sacrifice eucharistique. Arulphores oricntales et uarnnese
juive de Kippur," Nouvslle Revue Thiologique 82 (1960) 40-SS; idem, ..AlUlphores
orientales et pri~res juives," Proehe Orient Chritien 13 (1963) 3-20; idem, "C~I~b,.tion
divine et anamn~se dans Ia premi~re partle de l'Anaphore ou Cuon de Ia Messe Orien-
tale," Grtgorionum 48 (1967) 22.5-252; idem, Peche d'Adam et piche da monde, vol. 2,
pp. 289-307.
1 The praefatio covers 8:12:6-26 (SC 336:180-191). E. Goodeoough, By Light Light
(New Haven, 1935), pp. 320-326; W. Bousset, "Eine jlldische Gebetssauuulwtg im
siebenten Bw:b der Apostolischen Koostitutionen," Nachrichten von der Guelill,haft der
Wissenschaften zu Göttlngen, Philosophilch*ht.norlsche KJusse 1915, pp. 435-489 (here,
pp. 449--464) = Religiomwissenscltaftliche Shldien. Auf:rätze zur ReligiOI'Ugeschichte des
Hellenistischen Zeitalters (ed. by A:F. Verbeule; SupplementstoNovum Testamentunt
SO; Leiden, 1979; pp. 231-285), here, pp. 244-259. Bausset argues for a Jewish baclc:-
ground only of A.postolic Constilutions 8:12:9-20. See also K. Kohler, "The Ori&{n and
Composition of the Highteen Benedictions with a Translation of the COrresponding
Esse1.e Prayers ill the Aposto1ic Coostitutions,,. Hebrew Union CQ/lege A.~m~~all (1924)
387-42S•. who, unlik:e Bousset and Goodenongh, reprd$ the p.-ayers in book 8 a.s
thoroughly Christianized. "so lhat their ffKIIIer relation to the Benedlerions of the Syua-
gogue was entirely lost sight of" (p. 4 I 8), and discusses only prayers in book 7 of the
Apostolic Canstitutions.
4 D. Fieo.sy. Prayen Alleged to Be Jewi:rh. An baminoiitm of th(l Constitutiones
Apostolorum(BrownJudaic Studies 65; Chico [Calif.], 1985), pp. 137-141 and 172-176.
336 Appendix

and similarity ofcontent.s Like the Jewishpiyyut, thepraefatio introduces

the ritual anamnesis of the sacrifice (the A vodah of the high priest I the
Eucharist). And like 1he Jewish piyyut, the praefatio recounts the creation
of the world and man, and continues with the history of sinful humani.ty
and a saving and punishing God- from Adam's sin, curse and restitution
to Joshua, via instances in which God sides with the just (Abel, Seth,
Enosh, Enoch, Noah, Lot, Abraham, Melchizedek, Job, Isaac, Jacob, Josef,
the exodus, Moses, Aaron) but chastises sinners (Adam, Cain, the deluge,
Sodom and the Red Sea). The long and dewlcd account distinguishes this
anapbora from all otbers.6
Ficnsy's arguments against Bousset and Goodenougb are compelling
with regard to Ligier as well. He points out that many tbeological ideas in
the praefatio - providence, creation, man as a rational and cosmopolitan
being, knowledge of God - match ideas of special importance to the
compiler ofthe Apostolic Constitutions and are therefore unlikely to derive
from his Jewish sourcc.7 The spe<:ial emphasis on creation and some ofthe
expressions ofthe praefatio correspond to phrases in Justin Ma:rt)T, Theo-
philus of Antioch and Cyril of Jerusalem conceming Christian worship. as
weil as to later anaphoras. 8 Moreove.r, Ligier himselfhowever remarks on
a number of dissonances. A number of Old Testament figures - Seth,
Enosh, Enoch, Melchizedek., Job, Josef and Joshua ~ do not appear in the
Sidrei Avodah.9 Since various lists of Old Testament figures appear in
other redactional passages of the Apostolic Constitutions and in early
Christian literatute the distant parallel is easier explained ~ incidental. 10
FinaUy, the position of the prayers in the Jewish and Christian liturgies in
fact differs - the Seder Avodah follows the Qedushoh (Sanctus), wbereas
the praefatio precedes the Sanctus .11 In swn: the parallel to the SttJrej
Avodah is imprecise, and the single motifs appear elsewhere in Christian
liturgical context. New arguments are needed to shore up tbis thesis.

5 Ligier, "Autollf du sacrifice euc:haristique," p. 41-4S; ide.m. ..CelChration divine et

anamn~se dans la premiere pertie de I' Anaphore ou Canon de la Messe Orientale,"
pp. 245~247; ide.m, Peche d'Adam er peche du monde, 2:289-307.
6 Ligier, "AirtOur du sacrifii:e eucbaristique," p. 48; ide.m, Pechi d'A.tkrm etp~chl du

monde, 2:29S-297and 301-302.

; Fieosy, Prayer11 Alleged toBe Jewish, pp. 141 and 174-175
1 Fiensy, Prayers A.Jleged toBe Jewish, pp. 138-140.

' Ligier, Piche d'A.tkrm et peche du monde, 2:291, notes 184 and 18!1 and p. 302..
Ligier regards Melchizedek, Job, Josef and Joshu.a as Christian additions. Seth, Enoch
and Henoch appear in Sir 49:14-16.
10 E.g. Aposto/ic Constihltif»>S 2:SS: 1, 5:7:12, 6:12:13, 7:5:5; Hehrews 11; James 5:11

and 5:17; lCiement 1-12: sce Fien.s.y, Prayus A.lleged toBe Jewish, p. 136.
11 Ligier, Nchd d'A.dam et pechL dumo11de, 2:295.
 Appendix 337

2. According to Ligier's second thesis, some Eastem Cbristian anaphoras

were influenced by the confession prayers 'Attah Yodea' Razei 'Olam and
'Al Het, i n that they show the following parallels. 12 First, the specific
enumeration of sins according to their gravity (voluntary or involuntary
sins; sins com.mitted consciously or out of ignorance, in secret or in public,
deliberately or unintentionatly; sins in thought, word or deed;. known or
unknown sins); second, lhe invocation of God as knowing hidden and
secret matters and thoughts (based on Deuteronomy 29:28); third, a corw
respondence in the formula of three verbs for atonement/forgiveness (in
Grcek: av~, älpec;, avyx;mpT)GOv; in Syriac: ~• ......._____.., - ) . and
tbree substantives for kinds of sins to the Hebrew verbs n?o, 'mZl and ,!l.:l
with the nouns xon, l'lV and Yll'!!l; fourth, the position of tbe Christiart
prayer following the sacrifice and connected to the remembrance of God. 13
In a book presently in press. Stephane Verbeist greatly ref'mes and
transforms Ligier• s proposal.14 That I engage simultaneously wiih Ugier
and Verbeist does not imply that their theses are identicaJ. Ligier dates the
adoption of the Jewish prayer to the frrst or second centucy. while V erbeist
prcfers the third. Also, both Ligier and Verhelst argue that thc Christian
and Jewish confession prayers fultill a similar liturgical function at a
similar Iiturgical place. They disagree, however, a.'l to which. For Ligier,
tbe sacrificial interpretation ofthe Eucharist is foremost. whereas Verbeist
emphasizes the Mementos. As I do not have all the necessary material to
check these complicated argumentations, l will await the appearance in
print of Verhelst's interesting deliberations before engaging with this
point.
I have chosen to translate here tbe relevant passages of the two most
interesting of the many anaphoras they discuss, the Syriac St. James
Anaphora and the Syriac Cyril Anaphora. The former reads:
1 The p•ople: Pardon. forgive.
2 The pleat: Pardon(....__....), forgive (,..\..._,a,..), remit ( - ) . God, our lapses
(..._:~o...~a.--..o.}
3 those {eommitted] willingly (111' ..._.....)
4 and tbose unwillingly,
5 those c:ommitted knowingly ( ..-~ • •)

12 L. Ligier, "Penitenee et Eucharistie en Orient Th~ologie sur une interfuenee de

prieres et de rites," Orientalia Christiana Periodica 29 (1963) 5-78, esp. pp. 41Hi2.
13 Ligier, "Ptnitenee et Eucharistie en Orient,... pp. S0-56.
14 S. Verbelst. "Une fonnule dU Y6m K.ippour." In: idem, LeJ traditions judeo-chrl-
tiemtu daM Ia Liturgie de saint Jacqu.ea. (forthcomi.Dg). I would lite to express my
deepest gratitude to St6phaoe Verhelst for scnding me this part of his book prior to its
publication and for discu.ssing it. with me via e-mail.
338 Appendix

6 and those IUiknowingl.y,

7 those committed in word, in deed and in thoug.bt,
8 those coucealed (, ... •)
9 and those revealed (.....----J.o.,..),
10 lhose foreknown to lhe erriD,g,
11 those your holy oame knows. 15
The Syriac Cyril Anaphora reads:
1 The people: Pardon, forgive,
2 The priest: Knower ofthe hidden [things],judge ofthe thoughts.
3 Let pass and erase all our sins,
4 [lhose] known
S and those not known,
6 [those] committed willi.ogly
7 and those unwillingly,
8 [those) hidden
9 and revealed
10 (!hose] ofnow and [thDse] ofprevious time and [those] ofthe future .•. 16
Unfortunately, Ligier was not yet able to use Daniel Goldschmidt•s intro-
duction to and edition of Seder Rav 'Amram Ga 'on. Some of Ligier's keen
philological perceptions are thcrefore based on inoonect textual assump~
tions. Moreover, even if one uses Goldscbmidt a.s Verhelst does, thc text of
the prayers in Seder Rav 'Amram Ga'on is too coiTUpt tobe useful for
reconstructions. The oldest extant reliable version of 'Allah Yodea' RMei
'Olam I 'Al Het is therefore to bc found in Seder Rav Sa 'adia Ga'on:
1 You know die secrct.s ofthe uoiverse ('Allah Yod11a' RO%ei '0/am),
2 and the biddenmost mysteries of all the living.
3 You probe oll imrermo.st chombers1'
4 and see kidneys and heart1 *
S Absolutely nothing is hidden from you and nothing i:; con~aled from your
eyes.
6 May it be your will, GOD, our Qod
7 that you pardon 1I.S (7mbn) for all our iniquities (u•mmll)
8 aod you atone ("l!l:ln) for us for all our willtül sins (1l'llll19)."
9 For sins (' A.l Het) that we sloned before you carelessly (n:uvn)

" My translation of the Syriac lext in 0. Heiming, "Anaphora Sancti lacobi, fratris
Domini." in lf.naphorae Syl'iacae W3 (Rotne, 1953; pp. 107-177), p. 168. Cf. A. Rllckt'.l",
Die syrischen Jalcobosanaphora nach der Rezension du Ja 'qob(li} von Edessa. Mit dem
griechischen PMalleltut heratugflgebtm (Liturgiegeschichtliche Quellen 4; Münster in
Westfalen, 1923), p. 44.
16 My translation of thc Syriac text in A. Raes, "Anaphora Cyrilli Hierosolym.itmi vel
Alexandtini," in A.naphorae Syriacae V3 (Rome, 1944; pp. 323-363), p. 356.
11 Prov 20:27.
11 Jer 11 :20.
19 See y Yoma 8:9, 4Sc, for the text see above. p. 52, note 197.
 339

10 and for sins that we sinoed before you willfillly (Jnrl),

11 for sins that we sinned before you secretly (,no:t)
12 and fur sins that we sinoed before you openly (..,;l:l),
13 and for sins fur which we are obligated tobring an" 'Aseh-saerifice,..
14 and for sins for whkh we are obligat.cd tobring a ..Lo To 'aseh sheNataq
le'A.feh-sacrifiee,"
1:S and for sins for which we incur death at the hauds ofthe Heaven,
16 and for sins for wblch we incur excision,
17 and for sins for which we incur forty lashes by tbe court,
18 and for s.ins for wbich we incur beheading, sl'rlulglillg. buruing and 4!toning,
19 for those that are kDO\W to us
20 and for tbose that are not known to us,
21 those that are revealed to us and tb.ose that arenot lcnown to us are already
knowntoyou
22 as il is said. the com:IIQlttd [things] orefor GOD ond the reveale.d [thirtgsj are
m~rs and ow childrm's forever, thot we may folfdl oll the wordr ofth,.,
Torah.m
23 Sin.ee you are the forgiver of Israel and the pardoner ofthe tribes of Yeshiii'Uil
in every generation, and apart from you we have no king who pardons and
forgives.21
Ligier and Verhelst point out tbat the Christian confession prayers use
three different verbs expressing the idea of forgiveness corresponding to
three kinds of sins, and they see 'Attah Yodea' Razei 'Olam as in Seder
Rav 'Amram Ga'on as model for this expression.22 Verhelst pointsalso to
the confession prayer at the end of Yoma in the Palestiman Talmud and to
· tbe uvelchen additions to the Amidah. In Seder Rav Sa'adia Ga'on, the
oielest and best text of 'Attah Yodea' Razei 'Olam, however, only two
verbs (7mt~l1, 1!l::m) and two substantjves (u•num1, 1l'l7W!l) appear in a sing-
le sentence (lines 7-8). In addition, the oldest witness to the confession in
the Palestinian Talmud, the Leiden manuscript, also reports only two verbs
and two substantives. A later scribe added a third verb and substantive to
the Talmudic passage as well as to the 'Attah Yodea' /Wzei 'Olam in Seder
lW~ 'Amram Ga'on and the modem versions.13 The threefold confession
prayer is app&Ientlya later adaption of Leviticus 16. Equally, the uvekhen
additions to the Amidah, which mention alfthree verbs, are absent from

:Jjj Deut 29:28.

21 My translation ofthe text given in ed. Davidsoo, Asafand Yoel, pp. 2S9-260, wed
on the translation of the modem Asbkenazy rite by Scherman, The Complete ArtSerail
Mochzor Yom Kippur Nusach Ashunaz, pp. 19-25.
ll While the tM:e verb.'l in the Christian texts do not include an exact eqnivalent for
,!I:J, Verbeist refers to a Georgian Version of the pn.yer that u:ses a plausible equivalent of
1~>:1.

:n mYoma 3:8; yYoma 8:9, 4:Sc, cf. the discussion in bYoma 36b and Leviticus Rab-
bah 3:3. These passages have been discussc:d by Verhclst.
340

Sede.r Rav Sa 'adia Ga 'on and fcom almost all Palestiman witnesses to tbe
Yom Kippur liturgy. 24 It seems more conceivable to methat the Christian
authors, too, developed the tbree-partite formula inspired by the biblical
textrather than by Jewish liturgy.
A much stronger argument is that th.e Jewish and Cbristian confcssion
prayers lil>t particular kinds of sins: voluntary or involuntary sins, sins
committed secretly or openly. and hidden or revealed sins. Wbile Ligier
and Verbeist use Seder Rall 'Amram Ga'on, I will list the parallels
aceording to Sede.r Rav Sa 'adia Ga 'on, whose prayer -texts are more
trustworthy:
Syriac James-Anaphara 'A.ttoh Yodeo' Razei Syriac St.
'0/um ('Al Het) in Seder Cyrii-Anaphora
Rav Sa 'adkl Ga 'on
parallel 3 williDgly (... .,....,..) l 0 willi\dly (lno) 6 willingly
types 4 unwülingly 9 carclessJy (llllvr.l) 7 unwilliDgly
ofs!ns s knowingly (<'t'~< ......) 19 known to us 4 known
6 unkn;)wing.ly 20 not known to us S notknown
8
9
concealed (,
revealed f-
-·>
_.1_, s}
II secretly ("Ulo:l)
12 opeoly('l'Jl:l.)
8 hldden
9 revealed
varying 7a in word, ! 13 for which we are 10 ofnow
types 7b indeed obJigated to bring an 11 andof
ofsins 1c and in thought, "' '.A.seh-sacrifice" previou.s
10 foreknown to the erriDg. 14 for which we IR time
II your holy narne lol.ows obligared to bring a 12andofthe
...Lo Ta 'a~eh future
1hdlataq le '.4seh·
saaif~ee"
lS for whleh we incur
death at the hands of
the Heaven
16 for whleh we incur
excision
17 for whlch we inc:ur
forty lashes by the
Court
18 for which we incur
beheading,
slrallgling. burning
and stoninlt
As the table shows, the sins of types 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 in the Syriac James·
Anaphora match the sins 10, 9, 19, 20, 1l, 12 in 'Attah Yodea • Raze;
'0/am aceording toSeder Rav Sa'adia Ga'on. Although the sins do no1
appear in the same exact order and each prayer lists a number of sins not

24 See above, p. SO, note 187.

 .tf.pptmdix 341

given in the other prayers, this can be easily explained. Conceming the
variation in content, Christians would neitb.er feel a need for the two kinds
of sins connected to sacrifices nor to the types of sins related to death
penalties, given in Seder Rav Sa 'adia Ga 'on. The more generat categories
of sins in the two Cbristian anaphoras could therefore be explained as
substitutes for the specific h.alakhlc Jewish types. Regarding the variation
in sequence, one may raise the argument that thc Cbristian anaphoras vary
among themsclves and may have attached little signiticance to the order.
Giving a Iist of possible sins in a confession prayer is not an uncommon
phenomenon. Those wishing to confess want to be sure ~o cover all eventu~
alities. However, the parallels are rather close and 1he differences can be
justified.
Finally, the Cyril Anaphora and 'Attah Yodea' Razei 'Olam invoke God
as knowing secret matters and thoughts. Tbis idea is based on Deuterono-
my 29:28, a verse quoted at tbe end of 'Attah Yodea' Razei 'Oklm (line 22)
and could, therefore, again speak for a parallel adaption of biblical
traditions.25 God's omniscience, bis knowledge of coneealed matten, is
mentioned in many prayers. 26 Ligier emphasizes, however, tbat the com-
bination of this idea with a confession prayer appears only in 'A«ah Yo-
dea' Razei 'Olam and the Cbristian prayers. The present investigation has
shown that we find it also in Qumran, Pseudo-Philo and inscriptions on
steles in Delos, in texts very likely connected with Yom Kippur.27 While
the biblical model may have influenced the Cbristian and Jewish prayers
independently, the cwnulative evidence supports a direct link.
In sum, the similarity between the Jewish and Christi.an prayers is more
likely rooted in a genealogical than in a phenomenological_ relation. A
close reading ofthe pbilological arguments ofLigier and Verbeist reveals
that the parallels may point beyond the common use ofbiblicallanguage to
direct liturgical connections- i.e. adoptionrather than biblical influence. 28
Whether or oot Ligier's and Verhelst's theses are correct, they are among
the best examples of the profound impact of Yom Kippur on eady
Christianity. Ifwe remain skeptical, some Christian liturgies ofthe Eucha-
rist were formulated according to the biblical model of Yom Kippur. Not
only did the celebrant of the Eucharist become the high priest and the

v See above, p. 39, note 130.

26 See for example the rabbinie prayers 7, 1.5, 16, 27, 31,34 and 35 in the Iist given in

HeinemaruJ, Prayer l'n the Period afthe Tanna'im and the Ämora'im, pp. !31-137; and
the prayer in Arall'laicLevi (4Q2l3a J i 10-11) I additions to the Testament ofLevi2:3 in
manuscript Mount Athos.
rt See above, p. 39 and p. 48, note 172.
21 On the types Gfinßuenee, see above, pp. 4-6.
342 Appendix

church building the temple, but Christian confession prayer also became
the confession prayer in thetemple on Yom Kippur.29 Ifwe accept Ligier•s
and Verhelst's observation that the paratleis are too close to derive solely
from biblical influence, some liturgies ofthe Eucharist used contemporary
Jewish liturgies of Yom Kippw-3° as source - via Jewish converts to
Christianity,:H Jewish Cbristians32 or God-fearers.33 K.eeping in mind the
late Jewish influence on the readin.gs ofthe Fast ofthe Seventh Month, the
prayer may have crossed the lines even after tbe thlrd century. Last but not
least. I would like to remind that we shou.ld not deny a priori the
possibility that the influence may have been mutual. The parallel Iist of six
sins is not attested in Second Temple sources and may equally have its
origin in Christian congregations, which in turn influenced '.Attah Yodea'
Razei 'Olom. Verhelses reappraisal and reviewoftbis part of Ligier's the-
ses demonstrates amply that further discoveries may be made in the study
of the relation of early Christian Anaphoras to Jewish liturgy.

3. Along similar lines, one could argue tbat another prayer from the eighth
book ofthe Apostolic Constiturions, included among those defined as Jew-
ish by Bousset and Goodenough".34 may have bee:n part of a Yom KJppur
prayer (the phrases in italic:s have been explained by Goodenough as
Cbristian interpolations):
0 almighty eternal Ood,
Iord ofthe universe
creator and chlef of everything,
who showed forth man as a an omarnent of tbe cosmos (~toOJIOV ltÖOJIOV)
through Christ,
a.nd gave an implanted and written law to him,
so tbat be migbt live lawfully as a rational being.
and gave to the sinner your own goodness,
as a pledge to Iead him to repentance;
look upon those who bave bent the neck of their soul and body to you, hecause
He does not desire the death ofthe sinoer, but his repentanc:e,
so that he might t\lm back from his way of evil, and live! 35
He accepted the repentance of the Ninevita;
he desires all men to_be saved, an.d to eome to a knowledge oftruth;

2!1On this phenomenon oftemplizati.on, see above, pp. 273-277.

JO Or, as Verbeist suggests, tbe confession on Mondays and Thundays.
~~ Ligi.er "P6nitence et Eutbaristie en Orieat." p. 57.
32 Verhelst.
33 A possibility tbat bas alway.s to be taken into coll.Sideration.

M Bousset, "Eine jlldisclle OebeiSSammlung im siebenten Buch der Apostolisc:heo

Konstitutionen." p. 278; Goodenougb, By Light Light, pp. 331-332.
35 Ezek. 33:11.
 Appenaa 343

he <tccepted with fatherly feelings the s011 who had consumed his life '1 1aving3
with loose. /h-ing, bec<nl8e ofhis repentanctl. M
Also now ywrself receive ftom your supplicants their change of mind;
for there is no one who will not sin against yoo!
For, ifyoo, should watch lawlessneu elosely, Lord,
Lord, wbo could stand his ground?
aecause with you ther. is the atooement (ö il.4oll6~)!37
Several elements are reminiscent ofYom Kipput: God's kingsbip, creation
and compassion, the giving of the law, tbe power of repentanee, the
o
Ninevites and l~cs~&:;. The quotation from Ezekiel33:11 appe81S also in
tbe confession prayer of the Ne'ilah in Seder Rav Sa'adia Ga'on.38 Yet
nothing points specifically to Jewish authorsbip. and tbe prayer may be a
Christian plea for divine mercy. 39

4. Finally, almost a eentury ago, Hemi Leclerq argued for an influence of

Yom Kippur piyyutim on the ordo commendationis animae. He compared
the list of Old Testament .figures in the ordo commendationis animae
whose appeals in dangerous situations were heeded by God witb similar
lists in Mishnah Ta'anit and various medievalpiyyutim for public fasts. 40
The lists, however, vary greatly; many of the characters in the ordo do not
appear in the piyyu.tim,41 and vice versa.41 I would rather argue that a com-
mon psychological urge causes the supplicant to call upon previous in-
stances of divine intervention.43

3' Cf. Luke 15:11-32.

37 Apostolle Con•titutions 8:9:3-9 (SC 336:164-··165). I bave adapted the traDslation of
D.R. Damell and D.A. Fiensy, "Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers," in: J. Cbvlesworth (ed.),
The. Old Testament Pse11depigrapha 2 (New Yorlc:, 1985; pp. 671-698}, here p. 689
(number 11).
l:t See Seder RavSa'odia Ga'on (ed. Davidson, Yoeland Asaf, p. 262).
39 See Fiensy, Prayers Alleged to be Jewish, pp. 14~147; Damell and Fiensy,

"Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers," p. 689, :~~.ote llb.

40 mTa'a" 2: l. H. Lecler-q, ..Defunts;'' Dictionnaire d'lUcheologie chretie1111e et de

liNrgie 4 (1921) 427-456, he~ p. 438. I would lik.e to thank Margot Stroumsa-Uzan for ·
drawing my attention to this thesis.
' 1 Enocb, Iob, tot, Susanna and, of course, the Cbristian figures Peter, Paul and
Thscla.
42 Aaron, Pinhas. Joshua, Elisha, He:zekiah and Mordecbai.
43 Interesting also is the addition of tbe equivalent for atonement (J!IILD1Jilll9 to some

Annenian anaphoras (Sahak, Gregory of Naziaoz, Cyril of Alexandria. Athl!DIIsius). I

would lik.e to thank Daniel Findikyan for com:sponding on thi1 point, which awairs
further elaboration.
 Bibliography

1. Primary Sources

1.1 Bible
Bib/ia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. Editic frmditu.r renm>ata. (Edited by K. Eiliger and W.
Rudolpb; Stuttgart, 1967n7).
Biblia Sacra ir.atavulgatam versionem. (Ed. by R. Weber; 2 vols; Stuttgart, '1983).
The Holy Bible containing the Old and New T~taments wilh the Apacryphal I
DeuterOC4nonical Books. New Revised Standard Version. (New Yor.k, 1989).
[NRSV].
Le Levitique. Traduction du te')lte grec de la Septante, introduelion eJ not.es (Edif.ed by D.
Pralon, and P. Harl6; La Bible d' Alexandrie 3; Paris, 1938).
Novum Testamentum Graece. (Edited by E. Nestl~ Er. Nestle, K. and B. Aland, J.
Karavidopoulos, C.M. Martini and B.M. Metzger; Stuttgart, 27 1993).
The Old Testament in Syriac. .According to the Peshirta Yer.tion. (Ed. by the Peshitta
rmtitute Leiden; 4 vol:s; Leiden, 1972-1998).
Samaritan Pentateucll: See below under "Targumim."'
Septuaginta. Id est Yetus TestameJJtum graece ir.ata LXX interpres. (Edited by A. bhlfs;
2 vols; Stuttgart, 'I 96.5).
Septuaginta Yetus Te:;tamtmtum GraeC'IIm Auetoritale Societatu Litterarum Gotringensis
{(}(jftinger Sept11agintaj. Vol. 13: J. Ziegler. Duodecim prcphetae. (GOttingen,
1943). Vol.l:2; 1. W. Wevers. and U. Quast. Leviticus. (Gottinge.n, 1986).
Synopsis Qwattuor Evangeliorum. Locis parallelis evange/iorum apocryphorum et
patrum adhibitis. (Edited by K. and B. Aland; Stuttgart, 1' 1985).

1.2 Jewish Literattue

1.2.1 General Collections
Discoveries in the Judean Desen. (Oxford, 1955ft).
Garda-Martlllez, F. The Dead Sea Scrolis Translated. The Qr.tmran Tuts ln English.
(Leiden, 1995).
Garcia-Martinez, F. and E.l.C. Tigcbelaar. The Dead Se<J Scrolls Study Edition. (2 vols;
Leiden and Grand Rapids {Mich.], 1997, 1998).
Chade.s. R.H. The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the 0/d Testament in English.
(2 vols; Oxford, 19 13). ·
Charlesworth, J.H. The 0/d Testament Pseudepigrapha. (2 vols; Garden City (N.Y.],
1983-198:5).
IOdische Schriften aus hellenistischer und römischer Zeit. (Edited by W.G. Kümmel and
H. Lichtenberger; Gnterslob, I 973ft).
Rupon.aa Project, version 8.0. ofBar-nan University, 2000.
346 Bfbllograph}'

1.2.2 According to Titles

JEnocll
Black, M. TluJ Book of Enoch or I EltOCh. A New Englisll Edition wilh Commentary and
Texlllal Notes. (Studia in vetcris testamenti pseudepigtapha 7; Leiden, 1985).
[English translati.on).
Clwles, R.H. The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch. Translatedfrom the Editor 's Ethiopic Tert.
(Jerusalem, 1973=1912). [&glisb translation].
Knibb, M. The Ethioplc Boot of Enoch. A New Edition in the Light of the Am.r.~~tic I>ead
Sea Fragments. Vol. 1: Text and Apparatus. Vol. 2: Jntroduction. Translation and
Connnentary {in consultation with Edwanl Ullendorff}. (2 vois; Oxford, 1978).
[F.nglish traoslation ofthe Eddopic].
lQM: seeWar Sero//.
lQPesher Habflkkuk
Buri:ows, M. (with the assistaoce of J.C. Trever and W.H. Brownlee). The Dead Sea
Scrolls of SI. Mark'l Mona!Rtery. YolumtS 1. The Jsaioh Manuser/pt alfd th<J.
Habolclcuk Commentory. (New Haven, 1950).
lQS Rule of the Comnunflty
Licht, I. The Rute Scroll. A Scrollftom the Wilderness of.ludaea-JQS, JQ,Sa, JQSb. Text,
Introdltction und Commen/41ry. (Jerusalem. 1957).
1Qs• .Bale of JJiasi11p
Milik, J.T. In: idem and D. Barthelemy. Qumran Ca!le J. (Discoveries in the Judaeq
Desert I; Oxfonl, 1955; pp. llt-130).
lQ Wort& of Mosu (Itp2)
Milik, J.T. ln: idem and D. Barthelemy. Q10111'an Cave I. (Discoveries in the Judaean
Desert 1; Oxford, 1955; pp. 91-97).
2JJor11ch
Dedering, S. Apocalypse of Baruch. (The Old Testament in Syriac acconling to the
Peshitta Version 4:3; Leiden, 1973). [Syriac].
Klijn, A.F. 2 (Syrlac llpocalypse of) BtJJ"Uch. In: J.H. Ch&rle$worth {ed.). The Old
TeslamenJ Pseudepigrapha. VoL 1. {Ganten City [N.Y.], 1983; pp. 615-652).
(English translation].
2/!lltN!If
Andersen, F.l. "2 (Slavonic Apocalypse of) Enoch." ln: J.H. Charlesworth (ed.), The 0/d
Testament Pseutkpigrapha. (New York, 1983; vol. 1, pp. 91-213). [English
translationJ.
4MIICCt11Jees
Anderson, H. "4 Mat(;abees." In: I.H. Charle$worth (ed.), The Old Testamem
Pseu.dfi{Jigrapha. (New York, 1985; vol. 2, pp. 531-564}. [Englisb. translalion].
4Ql80/J81
Allegro,J.M. Qumran Cawt 4.1. (4Q158-4Q/86). (Discoveries in. tbe Judaean Desert of
Jordan 5; Ox.ford, 1969; pp. 77-79).
4Qb-ch....., (4Q10l,l0l, 104)
Milik, J.T. The Boolu of Enoch. Aramaie Fragments of Qumr4n Cave 4 {with th~
collaboratton ofMatthew Black). (Oxford, 1976), pp. 139-217, 340-353.
4QEnoch Gl1mt!l' (4Q103)
Milik, J.T. The Bookl of Enoch. Aramaie Fragm•nts af Qumrdn Cave 4 {widr the
collabaTatio11 o[Matthew Black}. (Oxford, 1976), pp. 310-317.
 Bibliagraphy 347

4QPuherl~•iah (4fll61)
Allegro. I.M. Qwnran Cavei/.L (4Ql58-4QJ86). (Discoveries in the Judaean Desert of
Jordan S; Oxford, 1969; pp. 11-lS).
4QP~slter on Psalms (4fl171)
Allegro, J.M. Qu•r-r.m Cave 4.L (4QJ58-4Ql86). (Discoveriel! jn tbe Judaean Desert of
JordanS; Oxford, 1969; pp. 42-51}.
4QTGI'glllll oflnitiCIIS (4QJ56)
Mililc, J.T. In! ide&n and R.. de Vaux. Qamtran grotle 1/.IL (4QJ18-157). (Dlseoveries in
the Judaean Desert of IordUI 6; Oxford, 1977; pp. S6-89).
4QV!sionsof Amra11l (4QS44)
Mililc, J.T...Mil.ki-sedeq et Milki~rda' dans les anciens ~crits jllif:s el cbr~ens ... Journal
for the Srvdy ofJ11dai:sm in the Persion, Helleni:stic and Roman Period 23 (1972)
9~-144.
5Q13
Kister, M. "5Ql3 and tbe 'Avodah: A Historical Survey and lts Significance." Dead Sea
Dtscoveriu 8 (2001) 136--148. J.T. Milik. Iu: ldem, M. Baillet and R. de Vaux.
Le.s ,Petites Grotles' de Qumrärr. Exploration de lafolaise. Les grouu 1Q. 3Q,
.SQ, 6Q, 7Q a JOQ. Le rtn~le011 de cuillre. (Discoveries in the Judacan Desert of
Jordau3; Oxford, 1962; pp. 181-183).
llQMelcllludek (tlQ13)
Gan:ia-Martinez, F., E.1.C. Tigc:helaar and A.S. Van Der Woude. "ll QMelchizedek."ln:
idtuu (eds.), QJtmran Cave 11. Yol. 11: 11Q2-J8, 11Q20-3J. (Discoveriel! in the
Judaean Deaut 23; Oxford, 1998; pp. 221-241).
llQTemple Scroll {11 Ql !J-10)
Yadin, Y. The Temple Scroll. (3 vols; Jerusalem, 1983).
Asc~U~Sib11 Dflsalilh
Knibb, M. Ma,.tyrdom and Ascension of lsaiah. In: J.H. Charlesworth (ed.). The 0/d
Testament Pse11depigrapha. Vol. 2. (Garden City [N.Y.], 1985; A>· 14~176).
[E.uglish translation].
Apoalypu ofA.lmllr11m
Philonenko-Sayar, B. and M. Philonenko. "L'Apocalypse d'Abralwn.lntroduction, texte
slave, tradu<:tion et notes." SemiJica 31 {1981} 7-ll7. [Siavonic wilh l''rench
translation].
--.Die A.poca/yp:le A.brahoma. (JUdisehe Schriften aus hellenistiscber Ulld ~misch~r
Zeit 5:5; Giltersloh, 1982).[German translation).
Rubinkiewicz, R. L'Apocalypse d'Abraham en viewc slaw~. lntroduction, terttJ critique,
tradrtclion el commerrtaire. (Zrodla i mooografie 129; Lublin, 1987). [Siavonic
wilh Fnnch trau.slation).
----. ''The Apocalypso of Abraham." In: J.H. Charlesworth (ed.). The Old Testament
PafiUdepigrapha. Yol. 1. (New Yorlc, 1983; pp. 6Sl-705). [English trlliSlation).
Apat.fllypse of Eli}«<l
Steindorff. G. Die Apokalypse de& Elia.s, ~ine unbekannte Apokalypse und Brvdutt.ickt.
der Sophonias-Apokalypse. Koptische Tute, Obusetz11ng, Glossar. (T~x.to und
Untersuchungen 17; Leipzig, 1899). [Coptic with German translation].
Wintermute, O.S. "Apocalypse ofEiijah." In: J.H. Charleswonb (ed.}, The Old Testament
P~e11depigrapha. Vol. I. (New York, 1983; pp. 721-753). [English translation].
348 Bibliograph)'

Att~mait: Levl (4Ql13, 4Q214)

Stone, M.E. aad J.C. Greenfield. In: idem arul G. Brooke, .J. Collins, T. Elgvin. P. Flint,
E. Larsou, C. Newsom, E. Puech, L. Schiffman, J. Trebolle Barrera (in
c:onsultation with J. VanderiCam). Qumtan Cave 4. XV/1: Pal'abiblical Tats, Part
3. (Discoveries in the Judaean Desert 22; Oxford, 1996; pp. 1-72).
'Aromem le'EI
Yahalom, J. Priestly Polestinian Poctry. A ND17ative Litwrgy for the Day 4 Atonemel'lt.
{Jerusalem, 1996). {Hebrew].
Atb'kenazy Mabzor
Gokbchmidt. D. M(lhzar fol' the Days of Awe. According to the .r4s1Jcenmy Rite of All
Cwtoms ["cJ"ding thc Westem Asllkenary Rite, the Poli1h Rite, and the Anaent
French Rite. Volvme 2: Yom Kippur. (Jerusalem, 1970). [Hebrew/Aramaic].
Schenuan, N.N. The Comp/Bte ArtScl'oll Machzar Yom Kipptlr Nusach ..Uhkenaz. A new
Irans/ation and anthologi%ed commentary. (ArtScroll Mesorah Series New York,
)986). [Eoglish translation ofthe modern rite}.
'AIIlpper Gedolot: see Yosse ben Yosse.
'Attalr Ko11otrta •o1anr beRov Hesed: see Yosse ben Yosse.
'Aittlh Yuett' Raw.p'Olanr: see Seder RtN Sa'adia Ga 'on.
'ANl/'Anahnuj Hattmu: see Sedu Rav Sa'adia Ga 'on.
'Az be'Ehr Kol
Yahalom, J. Priestly Palestinian Poetry. A Narrative Llturgy for the Day ofAton4!ment.
(Jerusalem, 1996}. [Hebrew]. ~ ·
'tkklt Gev11.rot 'Elo11h: see Yosse ben Yosse.
Ba.bylonlan TaltDild: see Talmud, Babylonian.
Contieies Rdbb•lr
Midrash Rabba haMev11'ar. Shil' haShirim Rabbah. (Edited by the ''Makhon haMidRsh
baMevu'ar"; 2 vols; Jerusalem, 1994, 1995).
Simon, Mauric:e. Midra~h Rabbolr. Song ofSongs. (London, 1939). [English translation).
DullfflCIIS ~11ment
Qimron, E. In: M. Broshi (ed.). The Damascus Document Reconsidered. (Jelll$alem,
1992). .
Dellteronomy R11bbd
Liebermaun, S. Midra~h Debarim Rabbah. Edited for IIre First Time from the Oxford
ms. No. U7 with an lntroduction and Notu. (Jerusalem, ,1974).
Mirkin, A. Midrash Rabbah. Mephurash Pirvrh Mada 'i Hadash beTsiruf '"Ayln
Had08hoh"- Mor'eh MeqOinotlefcJrol Ma'amorei haMidrash. Devarim Rabbah.
(Tel Avi.v, 1967).
Rabbinowitz, I. Midrash RahbalL Deuteronomy. (London, 1939). [English traoslatiO!l].
'Ein Lt1n11 XolJa Gadol: see Yosse ben Yosse.
F.xod11s .Rt1bba1l
Lehrmann, S.M. Midrash Robboh. Lodre;. (London, 1939). (English translat!onJ.
Middn, A. Mtdrasclr Rabbah. Mephurash P/111$/r Mado 'i Hadash beTsiruf "'Ayin
Hadasht:zh"- Mar'8h Meqomot lekhol Ma'omarei haMidl'ah. Shemot Robbah.
(Tel Aviv, 1967). ·
Festival Pr11prs (IQ34, 4Q588, 519 a11d 507)
Baillet, M. Qllmr4n Grotte 4.111. (4Q482-4Q520). (Discoveries in tbe: Judaean Desen i;
Oxford, 1982; pp. 168-170 and. 175-215).
Milik. J.T. "(Q]34. ReclMiil de pri~ IiturgiC)ues." In: idem and D. Barth6lemy (eds.),
Qumran Cave 1. (Discoveries in 1he Iudaeau Desert l; Ox.ford, 19SS; p. 136).
 Bibliograplry 349

- - - . "[Q] 34bis. Recueil de pri~rea liturgiques." in, idem and D. Barthi!lemy (eds.),
Qu111ran Ca11e J. (Discoveries in the Judaean Desert 1; Oxford, 1955; pp. 152-
155).
GeiU!Str llabbtlh
Freedman, H. Mi41'Mh Rabboh. Genu/s. (2 vols; Londoa, 1939). [Bnglish lrwlslation].
Theodor, J. and C. Albeclc. &reschi1 Rr.lbbo mit kritischem AppQI'tlt 11nd Kommentar.
(Reprint of Jerosalem 196S, wbich is a oorre(;ted reprint of Berlio 1912-1936;
3 vols; JeniSalem, 2 1996).
Ho 'Omrim IIK.Irlloy Shot~•: see Yannai.
Heldialot Literature
Schäfer, P., M. Schlllter-, and H.G. von Mutius. Synopse zur Rekhalot-Lite.rar'Mr.
(Ttt'bingen, 1981). [Hebrew).
Helknlftk SjlllllfOftll Prt~.;pen
For the Greek, see Ap(molic CoJUJitutioru under "Christian and Gnostic Literature."
Damell, D.R. aod D.A. Fiensy. "Hr:llenistic Synagogal Prayers.'' In: J.H. Charlellworth
(ed.), The Old Te#Difli!l'll Pseudeplgropha, Yol. 2. (New York, 1985; pp. 671-
698). (Bnglish translation].
Joaephu
Michel, 0. and 0. Baucmfeind. Jostphws, Flm>ius, De be/loJudaico. Der jtid&che Krieg.
Griechisch rmd d1111~ch. Rrsg. und mit einer Einleirllng sowie mit Anmerkungen.
(3 vols; Muaich and Darmstadt, 1962-19611). [Greek teltt and German translalion].
Niese, B. Fla11ii Iosephi Opera. (7 vols; Berlin, 1887-1895 [repr. 19SS]). [Greek].
Thackaray, H., R. Marcus, A. Wikgrea, and L. Feldman (tzaasl.). Josephws (in Nine
YoJ11111es) with an Engll:h Translation. (LCL; Cambridge [Mass.], 1926ff). [Greek
text ao.d English translation}.
Jsbile~
Vanderl<am, J.C. T1t11 Boot of Jubilees. A. CritictJI Tat. (CSCO 87, 88; Leu'ml, 1989).
[Etbiopic: text aod English translationj.
Wintermute, O.S. "Jubilees." lo: J. Charlesworth (ed.), The Old Testament
Psftldepigrapha. YoL 1. (New York, 1985; pp. 35-142). (English translatioo}.
Le•itiCU$ JlJJbblllr
Israelstam, J. aad J.J. Slotki. Midrarh Rr.lbbah. Leviticlls. (London, 1939). [English
lralllilation].
Margulies, M. Midr~h Wayyikra Rabbah. ..4 Critical Edition Basedon MallliiJcriptl and
Gennah Fragments with Yarirm# and Notes. (2 vols; Jerusalem and New York,
'1993).{Hebrew).
Liber Antiqlliltl.tllm Biblk•ntm
Harrington, D.l., J. Cazeaux, C. Perrot and P.·M. Bogaert. Psersdo-Philon. Les Antiq11ites
Bib/iques. (2 vols; SC 229, 230; Paris, 1976).
Harrington, 0.1. ·~Pseudo-Philo." ln: I. Charlesworth (ed.), The Old Testament
Pse~~depigrapha. Yo/.1. (New York, 1985; pp. 297-377). {English too~slation].
Mabzor: see Asllinazy Mahzor, Seder RaY 'Jimram Ga'on and Sedu Rat> Sa'odia
Ga'on.
Mekillll de Rllbbi Yülrmt~.el
Lauterbach, J. Mi!lcilta de-Rabbi lshmael. A Critica/ Edllion on tlle Basis fJ[ the
Manwscripts and Early EdttiQm with an English Trtms/ation, lnrroduclion and
Notes. (3 vols; Philadelpbia 1933, 1933, 1935; repr. 1976).
Horovitz, H.S. and 1. hbin M11chilto d'Rabbi Jsmael cum variis lecticmibus et
adnolatit»tibws. (Jerusalmn "1997). {Hebrew].
350 Blbliography

Mi5bnaiJ
Albeck, Ch. Shisha Sidrei Mishnah. (6 wls; Jerusalem 1952-SS). [Hebrew].
Danby, H. The MisJrnah Tran:rloted from tlre Hebrew with lrttrod11ction and Brief
Lpla~U~tory Notes. (Oxford 1933, repr. 1964).
Meinhold, J. Joma (Der Yer:rolmvngstog). Tat, Obersetzrmg und Erlt:liirung. (Giessen,
1913). [Hebrew text and Gennan translation].
Rosenberg, Y. "Mishna 'Kipurim' (Yorna) - A Critical Edition with Introduction.
Volume 1: Iotroduction. Volume 2: Edition." (ln Hebrew wiQI. English summary)
{2 vols; Ph.D. disserution, The Heblew Univcrsity of Jerusalem, 1995).
Strack, ll. Jomo. Der Mi1chnairaklat 'Versi;hnungstog'. (Schriften des ln$titutum
Jndaicum inBedin 3; Leipzig, 3 1904). [Hebrewtext and Gennan transl.Uon].
Palestioiao Talmud: see Talmud, Palestiniao.
Puiqta Rllt~Kllhllnll
Mandelbaum, B. Pesilao de Rav KIJhanD Accordtng to an Oxford Man'!lscrip. With
Vorfants From Ail Kn<YWn MonllScripts and Genizoth FragmentJ and Pand/el
Pa.nages With C->mm1111tary anti Introduclion. (2 vols; New York, 2 1987).
[Hebrew]
Braude, W.G. and I. Kapstein. Puikta de-Rab Kalla-na. (Pbiladelphia, l97S). (English
translatioo}.
Pe:sitta IUbbatl
Friedmaan, M. Pailcta Rabbati, Midrasch filr Ihn Fest-Cyc/us rmd die avsgezeichMten
Sabbathe. Kritisch bearbeitet, c~mentirt, dUTch neue handschriftliche 1/aggadas
vermehrt. mit Bibel-11nd Persomm-lndicea v~seherr. {Vienna, 1880). (Hebrew].
U!mer, R. Pui<]ta Rabbati. .4 Sy11optic Editiofl ofPaiqta Robbati Based 11pon All Lrant
Manuscripts and the Editio Princeps. Vo/ume I {eh. 1-24). (South Florida Studies
in the History of Judaism 155; Atlanta [Ga.] 1997). [Hebrew).
Philo
Cohn, L. and P. We.ndlaud. l'hiiMis Alo:andrllai opera quae supei'Simt. (J vols; .Berlin,
1986-1930). (GIW.k].
Cohn, L., I. Heinemann, M. Adler, and W. Theiler. Die Werks Philos von A/u:ondria in
thutscher Vber~etzung. (7 vols; Breslau and Berlin, 1909-1964). [German
translation). ·
Colson, F.H., G.H. Whitaker, and R. Marcus. Philo. With an English Translation.
(12 vols; Cambridge [Mass.], 1929ff). [Greek text and English tran.slatio~].
Daniel, S. De specialibus legib11S I et U. (Les Qluvres de Phiion d'Aiexandrie ·24; Paris,
1975).
Pitqe Rt~bbl EIW.er
Friedla.nder, G. Pirke. de Rabbi ElitUer. (London 1916, repr. New York 1981). [English
translation].
Higger, M. "Pirqe Rabbi Elie:zer." Horev 8 (1944) 82-119; 9 (1946-1947) 94-166; 10
(1948) 185~94. (Hebrew].
Pl,1,111ti• aad Prayers: see Ashkenazy Mahzor, Seder Rav 'A.mram Ga 'on, Seder Rav
Sa 'adia Go'on, Samaritttn Lilurgy, Yaunai and Yosse beo Yosse.
Psalms of So/~IIN)n
Wright, R.B ...Psalms of Solomon." In: J.H. Cbarlesworth (ed.), The Old Tutament
PJeudepigropha. Yol. 2. (New Yoik, 1985; pp. 639-670). [English translation}.
Psalm$ R11bbtlh
Braude, W. The Midrash on Psa/ms. (2 vols; New Haven, 1959). [English translation].
Buber, S. Midrash Tehillim. (Wilna, 1892; repr. Jen~salem., 1967). [Hebrew].
 Bibliqgraphy 351

Pseudo-Pililo: seealso Liber A.ntiquitatvm Bihlicarufll.

Pseudo-Philo, 011. J••d
Siegert, F. Drei helle11.istisch-jfldische Predigten. Ps.~Philon, 'Über Jona ', 'Ober Simson'
und 'Ober die Gottuhezeichmmg wohltlltig 11erz«hrendes Fe~~.er'. Yo{. 1:
Olxersetzung alts dem A.rmeni~ch11n und sprachliche .Erllhltenmgen. Vol. 2:
Kommentar nebst Beobachtvngen zur hellenistischen Vorgeschichte der
Bibelhumenllfltik. (2 vols; Wissenschaftliclle Untersuchungen zum Neuen
Testament 20.61; Tllbingen, 1980, 1992). [Gmnan translation].
S~~~Mrlltnt Llturgy
CowJey, A. The Samaritan Liturgy (2 voli!!; Oxfurd, 1909).
Sa",.ritall Pe~ttateuc6: see Targumim.
Seder Ell.JI•It• Zultl
Friedmaun. M. Seder Eliahu rabba und Seder F.Jiahu mta (I'anna debe Eliahu). Nach
einem vaticanischen Manuscripte aus dem Jahre J"'UJ/1 (1073) ediert. kritisch
bearbeileJ 111Jd commentiert. (Vienna, 1902; repr. Jerusalem, 1969). [Hebrew].
Seder Rar~ 'A.mtom Gtl'on
Goldschmidt. D. Seder Rt.N 'Anuam Ga 'on. Edited accOI'ding to MaiUIScript& and Prints
wlth Additions, Yarianl Lections and lntrodltction. {Jemsalem, 1971).
[Hebrew/Anlmaic].
Sedu Rlll' S.'•di• Gtl 'on
Davidson, Y., S. Asaf and Y. Yoel. Siddur R.. Sa'adja Ga'on. (Jen~salem, 1941). [Arabic
text with Hebrew translation].
Slll11'11t Yamim
Elbogen, I. Studien .zur Geschichte du jüdischen Gottesdienstes. (Schriften der
Lebraostltlt fllr die Wissemc:baft des Judenthums 1/l-2; Berlin, 1907). [Hebrew].
SibylliRe fh11f!ltt:1
CoUins, U. "Sibylline Orac:le$." ln~ J. Charleswortb (ed.), The Old Testament
Pseudepigraplra. VoL I (New Yor.k, 19&3; pp. 317---472). [English translation).
Geffcken, 1. Orac11la Sibyllina. (GCS 8; Leipzig 1902). [Greek text}.
Sifttl
FinkeJsteiD. L. Sifra on Ltllf/tiC'/1$ accOI'ding to Jlatican MaRIISCrlpt bsemani 66 with
11arianu .from the other manuscripts, Genizah fragments, early edition:s and
quotatiom by medieWll 01tthoritie11 and with referencu to parallel passages and
commentDI'ie:~~. (4 vols; New York. 1983-1990). [Hebrew}.
Weiss, I.H. Sifra. (Vieona, 1&62, repr. New York 1947).
~/erlm
Higpr, M. Swen Minor "!Teatises. (New York, 1930).
Songs oftlte S.bbt116 Stzcrijice (4Q400-407; 11Ql7)
Newsom, C. S01fl.$ o/the Sabbalh Socrifice: A Crltical Edition. (Harvard Semitic Studies
27; Atlanta [Ga.],1985).
SongJ ofilleSage(4Q510 aad 4Q511)
Baillet, M. Qumran grotte 4.111 (4Q482-4Q520). Discoveries in the Judaean Desert 7;
Oxford, 1982; 215--262).
The Story II/ the Ten Mill'(l-'r.t
Reeg, G. Die Geschichte 11011 den Zelrn Martyrern. (Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaisnt
JO; Tllbingen, 1985). [Hebre-w aud German tranJiation}.
Talmud, BabyJoaiaa ·
Goldschmidt, L. D.r Babylonische Talm11d. (9 vols; Berlin 1897-193S).
[Hebrew/Aramaie and Gennan traD$lation].
352 Bibliography

R.abbinovicz, R. Diqduqey Soferim. Variae Lectiones in Mischnam et in Talmud

Babylonicum quum ex a/iis librls antiquissimls et scriptis et impressi.r 111m e
Codiee Monacensi praestanti.rsimo co/lectae, annotationibus in.rtructae. Pars 4.
Tract. RoschHaschanah etJoma. (Municb, 1871). [Hebrew/Aramaic].
Steinsaltz, A. Talmud Bavli, Massekhet Yoma Menuqad uMevu'ar. (Jerusalem, 1983).
[Hebrew/Aramaic and Hebrew translation). ·
Wilna print, reprint Jerusalem, no date. [Hebrew/Aramaic].
Talmud, Palestinian
Avemarie, F. Yoma - VersiJhnungstag. (Übersetzung des Talmud Yerushalmi 2:4;
Tübingen, 1995). (Gennan translation].
Schäfer, P. and H.-J. Becker. Synop.re zum Talmud Yerv.rhalmi. (Texts and Studies in
Ancient Judaism 31, 33, 35, 47, 67, 82, 83; 7 vols; Tübingen 1991-2001).
[Hebrew/Aramaie].
Venice 1523-24, reprint Jerusa1em, no date. [Hebrew/Aramaic].
Targumim
Clarke, E. G. et al. Targum Pseudo-Jonathan ofthe Pentateuch: Text and Concordance.
(Hoboken [N.J.], 1984). [Aramaic].
Diez Macho, A. et al. Neophyti /. Targum Palestinense MS de Ia Biblioteca Vaticana.
Tomo 111. Levitico. Edleion principe, Introducclon y ver.rion castellana, francesa y
inglesa. (Barcelona, 1971). [Aramaic and Spanish, French and English
translations].
Ginsburger, M. Pseudo--Jonathan (Thargum Jonathan ben Usiel zum Pentateuch). Nach
der Londoner Handschrift (Brit. Mw. add. 27031). (Berlin, 1903). [Aramaic].
Maher, M. "Targum Pseudo-Jonathan: Leviticus. Trans1ated with Notes." In: M.
McNamara (ed.), The Aramaie Bible. Vol. 3. (Edinburgh, 1994). [English
ttans1ation].
McNamara, M. (transl.) The Aramaie Bible. (Edinburgh, 1994). (English translation].
Sperber, A. The Pentateuch according to Targum Onkelos. (The Bible in Aramaie vol. 1;
Leiden, 1959). [Aramaic]. ..
Tal, Abraham. The Samaritan Targum of the Pentateuch. A Critical Edition. [With an
lntroduction]. (3 vols; Tel Aviv, 1980, 1981, 1983). [Aramaic].
Testament of Solomon
McCown, C.C. The Testament ofSolomon. (Leipzig, 1922). [Greek text].
Duling, D.C. "Testament of So1omon." In: J. Cbarlesworth (ed.), The 0/d Testament
Pseudepigrapha. Vol. 1 (New York, 1983; pp. 935-987). [English trans1ation].
Testflmenu of the Twelve Patriarchs
Oe Jonge, M. (in cooperation wilh H.W. Hollander, H.J. de Jonge and T. Korteweg). The
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. A Critical Edition of the Greek Texts.
(Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti Graeci Studia 1:2; Leiden, 1978). [Greek
text).
Kee, H.C. Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. In: J. Charlesworth (ed.), The 0/d
Testament Pseudepigrapha. Vol. 1 (New York, 1983; pp. 775-828). [English
translationJ.
Tosefta
Larsson, <n!ran. Der Toseftatraktat Jom hak-Kippurim. Text, Obersetzung, Kommentar. 1.
Teil, Kapitel 1 und 2. (Lund, 1980). [Hebrew text and Gennan translation ofthe
fii'St chaptersJ.
Liebennan, S. Tosefta Kif.shuta(10 vols; New York, 1955-1988). [Hebrew].
Zuckennandel, M.S. Tosefta. (With supplements by S. Liebennan; Jerusalem, 1937, repr.
1970).
 Bibliography 353

Jlitae Prophetarum
See Pseudo-Epiphanius. under "Christian and Gnostic Literature."
War Scroll (1 QM)
Sukenik, E.L. The Dead Sea Scrolls ofthe Hebrew University. (Jerusalem, 1955).
Yalqut Shim'oni
Hyman, D., D.N. Lerrer and I. Shiloni. Yaltp11 Shim'oni 'al haTorah leRabbenu Shim'on
haDarshan. (9 vols;Jerusalem, 1973-1991). [Hebrew].
Yannai
Rabinovitz, Z.M. The Liturgical Poems ofRabbi Yannai according to the Triennial Cycle
of the Penlateuch and the Holidays. Critical Edition with Jntroduction and
Commentary. (2 vols; Jerusalem, 1985, 1987). [Hebrew].
Zlllai, M. Piyyutey Yannai. {Berlin, 1938). [Hebrew].
Yosse ben Yosse
Mirsky, A. Yosse ben Yosse Poems. Editedwith an lntroduction, Commentary and Notes.
(Jerusalem, '1991, 1977). [Hebrew].

1.3 Christian and Gnostic Literature

1.3.1 General Collections
The Ante-Nicene Fathers: Translations ofthe Writings ofthe Fathers down to A.D. 325;
Grand Rapid.s [Mich.], 1986-1989, repr. ofEdinburgh 1885-1896. [ANF].
CoipnS Christianorum Series Latina; Tumhout, 1954ff. [CCSL].
CoipUS Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium; Paris, Rome and Louvain, 1903ff.
[CSCO}.
CoipUS Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum; Vienna, 1866ff. [CSELJ.
Elliott, J.K. The Apocryphal New Testament. A Collection of Apocryphal Christfan
Literature in an English Translation. {Oxford and New York, 1993).
Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhwtderte; Berlin, 1897f'f.
[GCS].
Hennecke, E. and W. Schneemelcher. Neutestamentliche Apokryphen in deutscher
Übersel%ung. (Tiibingen, 6 1989-1990).
Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series Graeca; 161 vols; Paris, 1857-1866. [PG].
Patro1ogiae Cursus Completus. Series Latina; 221 vols; Paris, 1841-1864. [PL].
Patrologia Orientalis; Turnhout, 1903f'f. [PO].
Robinson, J.M. The Nag Hammadi Library in English. (Leiden, 3 1988).
A Select Library of the Nicene and Post~Nicene Fathers ofthe Christi an Church. First
Series. (14 vols; Grand Rapids [Mich.], Edinburgh, 1988, repr. ofEdinburgh
1886-1890). A Select Library ofthe Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers ofthe
Christian Church. Second Series. (14 vols; Grand Rapids [Mich.}, Edinburgh,
1988, repr. ofEdinburgh 188S-1896). [NPNF]
Sources Cbretiennes; Paris, 194lff. [SC].
Thesaurus Linguae Graecae. Version 8 [TLG].
Wengst, K. Didache (Apostellehre), Barnabasbrief. Zweiter Klemensbrief. Schrift an
Diognet. Eingeleitet, herausgegeben, übertragen und erläutert. (Schriften des
Urchristentums 2; Darmstadt, 1984).

1.3.2 Worlcs according to Author and Title

lClement: See Apostolic Fathers.
Alexander the Monk, On the Finding ofthe Venerable and Life-giving Cross
PG 87:3:4021-84. [Greek and Latin translation].
354 Bibliography

Alexios Aristenos: see Tripartite Commentary to the Conci/iar Legislation.

Amalar
Hanssens, I.M. A.malarii ephcopi opera liturgica omnia. (Studie Testi 13&-140; Vatican
City, 1948···1950). [Latin].
Ambrose, Commentary 011 Lllke
Adriaen, M. Sancti Ambrosii Mediolammsis Opera. Pars IV. &positio Evangelii
secundum Lucam. Fragmenta in Esaiam. (CCSL 14; Tumhout, 1957). [Latin].
Ambrose, Letter&
Faller, 0. &lncli Ambrosii Opera. Pars Decima. Epistulae et Acta. Tom. /. Epistularum
libri I-VI. (CSEL 82:1; Vießlla, 1968). [Latin}.
Aaaphoru: See Cyril of Jerusalem and James.
Andreas of Crete,Jn I'.XaltaJitmem S. Crucis oratftmes l-2
PG 97:1017-1036, 1035-1045. [Greek text aud Latin tran&lationJ.
AnoRymou:s from·Jerusalem, CoiiUifellllli'J o11loke
Reuss, J. Lulcas-KommentaYe aus der griechischm Kirche. Aus Katemmhandschriften
gesammelt und herausgegeben. (Texte und Untersuchungen 130; Berlin, 1984),
pp. 15-53. {Greek}.
Anonymaus, CommeJttary Oll Milrk; s~ Pseudo-Jerome.
Aptmolic Co11stit11tion#
Merzger, M. LI!$ ConsriMions Apostoliquu. (3 vols; SC 320, 329, 336; Paris, 1985,
1986, 1987). [Greek text and French translation).
Apostolic Fatbers ,
Holmes, M.W. The A.pcstolic Fathers. Oreelr. Texts rmd English Translations. (Grand
Rapids [Mich.], 2 1999). [Greek text and English translation].
Aristides, Apology (Syria(:)
Alpigiano, C. Artseide di Atene. Apologia (Biblioteca Patristica II; Florence, 1988).
[Itatian translation].
Henneclte, E. Die Apologie des Aristides. Recension und Rekonstruktion des Textes.
(Texte und Untersuchungen 4:3; Leipzig, 1893).
Atllauaslus, On Sabbaths and Circumcision: Su Pseudo-Athanasius.
Athaoasius, Testimonia e :Jcript11r11.: See Pseudo-Athanasius.
Augustillt, L()r:UJionum in HeptaltllCIIIlm li6a terti11s
Fraipont, I. &lncli Aurelii Augustini Quaes#onum in Heptate~tchum libri YII. Locutionum
in Heplateuchvm libri VII. De octo qv.autionibus a veteri Te:~tame.nto. {CCSL 33;
Tumbout, 1958; pp. 424-431). [Latin].
AugW1ti11e, (/ltll.ertlo~tllm in Hept.akllcltiUfl liber tertiru
Fraipont, I. Sancti Armdii Augvstini QuOBSiiorrum in Heptateuchum libri VIL Locutionum
in Heptateuchum libri YJJ. De octo qt;aestionibus a veteri TeiStamento. (CCSL 33;
Tumhout, 1958; pp. 175-233). [Latin].
BornabllS
Prigent, P. and R.A. Kraft. Epitre de Barnabe. (SC 172; Paris, 1971). [Greek text and
Freneh translation].
Basil, Homily en Fa$/ing l
PG 31:164-184. [Greek text and Latin translation].
Cano11s of th~ Apostl~s
Linder, A. The Jews in the Legal Sources ofthe Early Middle Ages. {Detroit [Mich.} and
Jerusalem, 1997), numbers l/1-4, pp. 26-27 and 104/947-950, pp. 562-563.
Metzger, M. Les Constitutions. A.postoliques. (SC 336; Paris, 19&7). [Greek text and
French translation].
 Bibliography 355

Clm111ikon Put:lltlk
Dindorf, L. Chronikon Paschale. (Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae; Bollfl, 1832
""PG 92:67-1028). [Greek text and Latin translation].
Whitby, Michael and Mary. Chronicon Paschale 284-628 AD. (Translated Texts for
Historians 7; Liverpool, 1989). [English translation].
Cbrysostom, FNg~~renta in Prowrbia (ia c:ateuis)
PG 64:659-740. [Greek and Latin ttanslation}.
Cbryso.stom, In l11.udem cDnceptwnis $tJJJCti IOdtzllis Bt~ptistae: See P5eudo-
Chrysostom.
Clement of Alenadria, Exc.erptsfrom TTteodotuJ
Ca.sey, R.P. The 'bcerpta a Tlteodoto of Clement of Aluandria.. Edited with
Tran.slaJiqn, Introduction and Notes. (Studies and Documents I; London, 1934).
{Eoglish tm!Slation].
Sapard, F. Clement d'Aierandrie. Extraits de Theodote. Tute grec. introduclion.
. : traduction et notes. (SC 23; Paris, l 948). {Greek text and French translation].
ClemeBt of Aluaodria, SUolflll.leis
Clevel.and Coxe, A . .in ANF 2:299-567.{Eoglish translation].
Le Boulluec, A. Climent d'Aluandrie.. Les Stromateu. Stromale V. Tom11 l Intrrxhfction,
texte critique (iraduction] et indu. Tome JL commentaire, bihliographie er index.
(SC 278-279; Paris, 1981). [Greek text with French translation].
Stlhlin, 0., L. Frtkbtel, and U. Treu. Cltmens A.laandrimu, vol. II end 111. (2 vols.;
<JCS S2, 17; Ber1in, 41985; 2 1970). {Greek].
Come1 ofAlcain
Chavasse, A. Le.s fectionnairu romai111 de Ia Messe au Vlle et Vllle sücle:s (2 vols;
Spicilegü Friburgen.sis Subsidia 22; Friboutg, 1993).
Coma of Wilnbltrg
Chava5se, A. Le.J lectwnnairu romai111 de Ia Messe fJJI Ylle et YII/e sieclu (2 vols;
Spi<:ilegii Fribw:ten.sis Subs:idia 22; Fribourg, 1993).
Cosmas lodieop.eG$tes, Cb.ristltm TopngNphJ
Wolslta.Conus, W. Cosmaslndicopleustes. Topogrt~phie Chr~tien~~e. (SC 141, 159, 197;
Paris, 1968, 1970, 1973). {Greek: text and Fren<:b cranslation).
Co••cil ofL11odkefl
Linder, A. The Jews in the Legal Sources o.fthe Early Middle Ages. (De!roit [Mich. I ~d
Jemsalem, 1997), number 66/806-307. pp. 463. [Greek text and English
tnmslation of 1he relevant passage}.
Callllcll of Tr•lla11anr
Linder, A. 1"1111 Jews bl the Legal Soun:es ojthe Early Middte Ages. (Detroit {Mieh.] and
Jerusalem, 1997), nwnber 64/802-80.3, pp. 459-460. [Greelc text and English
translation of the relevant passage].
Cyprlao, Lmen
Clarke, G. W. The Letters of St. Cypria12 o/Carthage. (3 vo1s; Ancient Christian Writers
44,46 and 47; New York, 1984-1989). [English trans!ation].
Dierck:s, G.F. Sancti Cypriani Episcopi Epistularum. (2 vols; CCSL 3b and Je; Tumhout,
1994, 1996). [Latin].
Cyprianus Gallos, HeptiJieuC/to!l
Peiper, R, Cypriani Ga/li Poeta Heptateuchos. (CSEL 23; Vie.nna, 189l). {Latin].
Cyrll of Aleuadrla, Comment11ry illlsflitlll
PG 70:9-1449. (Greek and Latin translation].
Cyril of Aleu•drla, Colftrillaliflllß111
PG 76:503-1002. [Grcek and Latin craoslation].
356 Blbliogrophy

Burguiere, P. md P. Evieux. Cyrille d'Aiexandrie. Contre Julien. lntrtJduction, tezte

crttitp~e, troductiM et note!. (SC 322; Paris, 1985). [Gnlek text aad Fl'llD.ch
ttanslation of the fust books].
Cyril of Alexandria, Ep&tula 41. Ad Acacium EplsCOJ*1'1 Sqtllopolls
McEnerney, J.I. St. Cyril of Alexantil'lo: Letter&. (fathers of the Church 76--77;
Washington 1987}. [English traoslation).
Schwartz, E. Acta Concili0111m OecumenicOTIIm. (1928; vol. 1:1:4, pp. 40-48). [Greelc].
PG 77:201-221. [Greek and Latin trnnslation].
Cyril of Alexa•dria, G/11phyroN1m in Lcvltlctm~ llb"
PG 69:539-590. [Greek.and Lalin translation].
Cyril of Ale:1ndria, Homilies on Luke
Chabot, J.B. S. Cyrl/li A/exandrini Commentarii in Lucam (CSCO, Scriptores Syri Series
Qwut.a, Tomus l; Paris, 1912). [Syriac]. ·
Payae Smith, R. A Comltfentory upon the G08pel occordlng toS. Luh, by S. Cyril
Patriarch ofAlex.andria ntM fvst traMlflled into English from an Ancient Syrlac
Yersion. (2 vols.; Oxford, 1859). [English translation].
Tonaeau, R.M. S. CyriUi A.lexandl'mi Commentarii i1l Lucam. (CSCO 140, Scriptores
Syri 70; Louvain, l!iiS3). [Latin translation].
Cyril ol Alouadria, 01r tlle Adt~l'tltimr 11nd Worslllp rlf GtHI trt Spirit t",tl ilf Tr11tlt
PG 68:133-1125. [Greek. and Latin translation).
Cyril or Jerusalem, Cuteclleses ad illllnrmalldDI
McCauley, L.P. and A.A. Stephenson~ Tl1e Work.s of Saint Cyril ofJerusolem. (2 vols;
Fa!hers ofthe Church 6l, 64; Washington, 1969-1970; vol. l, pp. 91-249; vol. 2,
pp. 4-140). [English translation].
Reisc:hl, W.K. and J. Rupp. Cyrl/11 Hierw;olymorum archiepiscopi opera. (Mu.nich, 1848,
1860 rt967, Hildesheim]). {Greok].
Cyril or Jerasalcm, Eplst11lo. ad Consttlntillm.
a
Bihain, E. "L'epltrt: de Cyrille de I~alem Constau.ce sur Ia vision de la Croix.
TOldition manuscrite et 6dition critiqu.e," Byzantion 43 (1973) 264-296.
Cyril of Jerusalem.: Letten: See Pseu.do-Cyril of lerusalem.
Cyrll An11pho,.. (Syriac)
Raes, A. "Anapbora C)'rilli Hierosolymitani vel Aleundrini." ln: Anaphoroe Syriacae
I/3 (Rom, 1944, pp. 323-363). [Syriae text and Latin traoslationj.
Dc sDlftiJlu n tJqlliltocllls
Botte, B. "De solstitiis et aequinoctiis." In: idem, Les origines de Ja Noil et de
/'Epiphanie. Ehlde htstorique. (Texle:s et ~tudes lirurgiqu.es 1; Louvain, 1932;
pp. 93-105).
Dldt~che: See Apostolic Fathers.
Rordorf, W. and A. Tuilier. lA doctrilftl d~.s dowe t:lp6tru (Dtdache). lntraduction,
Ta:te, Traduction, Notes, Appendia et Index. (SC 248; Paris, 1978). [Greek text
and.French lranslation).
DldtUCtJlifl
VöGbus, A. The Dtdt~sctJiia Apostolorvm in Syriac. (4 vols; CSCO 401, 402, 401, 408,
Scriptores Syri 175, 176, 179, 180; Louvaln, 1979). [Syriac text and Englisb
translationJ.
Dldyau1t, Commentarii ;" Zt~dtaritlm
Doutrcleau, L. Didyme l'A:11eugle. SJir Zacharie.. Introdvctlon. texte critique. trodvctwn et
notes. {3 vols; SC 83-85; Paris, 1962). (Gree.k. text and French traoslatio.n].
 Bibliography 357

DioglrdUs: See Apostolic Fathers.

Egeria, Dlilty
Gingras, G.E. Egeria: Diary of tl Pilgrimage. Translated and Annotated. (Ancie.nt
Cbristian Writers 38; New York and Ramsey [N.J.], 1970). (English tran.,lati.on].
Mo.ravat, P. Egerie. Journal de Voyage (iliniraire). lntrodu.ction, tezte critiqu.e,
traduction, notu, inde;;c et cartes. (SC 296; Paris, 1982). [Latin text and French
translation].
Ephrem, (Armealan) Commentai'JI on Lerltlcw: See Pseudo-Ephrem.
J:pbreDI, (Syriae) Colltlllenlaty tm Leritkus: See Pseudo-Ephrem.
Ephrem, COMmentaty on ExDdMs
Amar, J.P., E.G. Mathews, and K. MeVey. St. Ephrem the Syrian. Selected Prose WDTks.
ConrmentlU)' on Genesis. Commentary on El:odlls. Homily on 0111' Lord. Letter to
Publius. (falhers ofthe Church 91; Washington D.C., 1994). (Eoglish tnmslation].
Tonneau. R.-M. Sancti Eplrraem Syrt in Genesi"m et in El:odJJm Commewtarii.
(CSCO 152-153, Scriptores Syri 71-12; Louvain. 1955). [Syriac tex.t and Latin
translation].
Ephrem, C~tmmatuy oa tlle Dkltel$tlrOif
Leloir, L. Commf.lltaire de I'Evangile Concordant ou Diatessaron. Traduit du syriai}ue et
de l'ormerden, introd~tction, lraduction u not11s. (SC 121; Paris, 1966). [French
tl'lnslation].
MeCartby, C. Saint Ephrem's Commentary on Totlan's Diatusaron: an &glish
7'ranslotlon of Chester Beatty Syriac MS 709 with /ntrDductlon and Note.s.
(Journal ofSemitic Studies Supplement 2; Oxford, 1993). (English translatioo].
Epbrem, Homilles 011 l<luti11g
Beet, E. Des Heiligen Ephraenr des Syrers Hymnen de leiunio. (CCSO 246-247;
Scriptores Syri 106-107; Louvaio, 1964). [Syriac text and German translation].
Epbrem, Homily (,. the Nmwlly
Deck, E. Dt~ll Heiligen Eplrraem des Syrer11 Hymnen De Nativitate. (CSCO 186-187,
Scriptores Syri 82-83; Louvain, 1959). (Syriac text and German translation].
Graffin. F. and F. Cassingena-Tr6vedy. Ephr11m de Nisjbe. Hy~r~nu sur Ia Nativiti.
(SC459; Paris, 2001). {Freoch translation].
McVey, K..E. Ephraem lhe Syrion Hymm. (Classics of Western Spiritualily; New York.
1989; pp. 61-217). [Eaglish translation).
Epbrem, llomily 011 the Exaltutiolf t~fthe Cron
Heid. S. "Zwei an den Enkainicn der Jerusalemer Grabeskirche gehalleo.e Pledigten des
griechischen Ephflnt." Orie111 ChristiQnJ/.S 14 (2000) 1-22. (Greek text and
German translation].
Epipbanius, CommeJtt«ty 011 Lde: See Pseudo-Epiphani\1$.
Epiphaohl$, De prophettJram llittl et obltrt.: See Pseudo-Epiphanius.
Epiphnius, De :xii gemmis
Blake, R.P. a.nd H. de Vries. Epiphonius de Gemmi.s. 1'he Qld Georgian Version and the
Fr11gmtmts of the Armenian Version by R.P. Blake and tlre Coptic-Sahidic
Fragments by H. De 'flis. (Studies and documents 2; London, 1934).
EplphanlllS, Panuri()n
Holl, K. EpiphQllius I.lll. Ancoratvs und Panarion (GCS 2S, 31, 37; Leipzig, 1915,
1922, 1933). [Gceek].
Williams, F. 1'he Po1UJI'ion o[ Eplphanivs of Salonrl:r. (Nag Hammadi and ManichBeau
Studics 35, 36; Leiden, 1987, 1994). [English tniDSiation].
358 Bib/iography

Eusebius of Caesarea, Demonuratio E~angelica

Heikel, I.A. Eusebius Werke Yl. Die Demonstratio evange/ica (GCS 23; Leipzig, 1913).
[Greek].
Eusebius of Caesarea, History of tlle Cllurcll
Schwanz, E. Eu.sebius Werke li, l-3. Die Kirchengeschichte. (GCS 9:1-3; Leipzig,
1903-1909). [Greek).
McGitrert, A.C. in NPNF 2:1, pp. 73-403. {English translation].
Eusebius of Caesarea, Vita Constantini
Heikel, I.A. Eu.sebius Werke I. Uber das Leben Constantins. Constantins Rede an die
heilige Yersamm/unge. Triannatsrede an Constantin. (GCS 7; Leipzig, 1902).
[Greek).
Richardson, E.C. in NPNF 2:1, pp. 405-559. [English translation].
Winkelmann, F. "Über das Leben des Kaisers Konstantin." In: idem, Eu.sebiu.s Werke
1: I. (GCS; Berlin, 1975; pp. 3-151).
Euseblus.of Emesa, Commentuii in Octateucllllm (in Levilicum)
Hovhannesian, V. Eusebe d'Emese, /. Commentaire de I'OcJateuque (Venice, 1980),
pp. 125-134. [Annenian].
Expositio OfficioTum Ecclesiae: See Pseudo-George the Arab.
Gelasian Sac1amentary
Chavasse, A. Le Sacramentaire g~lasien (Yaticanus Reginensis 316), sacramentaire
presbyteral en usage dans les titres romains au Ylle siecle. (BibliotMque de
Th~o1ogie, st!rie 4/1; Tournai, \958). [Latin].
Genoadius, CommentaTll in s. Pauli epütulas
Staab, K. Die Pauluskommentare aus der griechischen Kirche. (Neutestamentliche
Abhandlungen 15; MilDster i.W., 1933; pp. 352-422). [Greek].
George tb.e Arab: Exposilio OfjicioTum Eccleshle: See Pseudo-George the Arab.
Gospel of Pllilip (NHC 11,3)
Isenberg, W.W. ''The Gospel of Philip (II,3)." In: J.M. Robinson. The Nag Hammadi
Library in Eng/ish. (Leiden; 3 1988; pp. 139-160). [English rranslation).
Gregor of Nazianz, Homilies 6-12
Calvet-Sevasti, M.-A. Gregoire de Nazianze. Discours 6-12. (SC 405; Paris, 1995).
[Greek text and French translation].
PG 35:721-849. [Greek text and Latin translation].
Hesychius Luicogrspher
Latte, K. Hesychii Alexandrini lezicon. (2 vols; Copenhagen, 1953, 1966).
Hesycbius of Jerusalem, CommentarillSin Le~ltlcum
PG 93:787-1180. [Latin].
Hildebert, liber lk sac1a er~charütia
PL 171:1195-1212. [Latin].
Hildebert, versllS de mysterio missae
PL 171:1177-1194. (Latin].
Hippolytus, On P,overbs
Richard, M. "Les fragments du commentaire de S. Hippolyte sur les Proverbes de
Salomon." Le Museon 19 (1966) 65-94.
lgoatius, To tlle MagnesÜins: See Apostolic Fathers.
lgoatius, To tlle Plliladelpllians: See Apostolic Fathers.
lrenaeus, Against tlle Heresies
Rousseau, A. and L. Doutreleau./renee de Lyon. Contre les hinisies. 1-111. (SC 263, 264,
293, 294, 210, 211; Paris 1979, 1979, 1982, 1982, 1974, 1974). [French
lranslation}.
 Bibliography 359

Rousseau, A., B. Hemmerdinger, L. Doutreleau, and Ch. Mercier.Jrenee de Lyon. Contre

/es herisies.IV. (SC 100*, 100**; Paris. 1965). [French translation].
Rousseau, A., L. Doutreleau, and Ch. Mercier. lrenee de Lyon. Contre les hiri.ries. V.
(SC 152, 153; Paris, 1969). [French translation].
lsbodad ofMerv, Commentary on Lwiticus
Van den Eynde, C. Commentaire d'lso'dad de Merv :rurl'Ancien Testament. 11. &ode-
Deuteronome (CSCO 176-177, Scriptores Syri So-81; Louvain, 1958). [Syriac
text and Latin trans1ation].
lsidor (Pseudo-lsidor?), Quaestiones de ueteri et nouo Te:stamento (Levitico)
PL 83:321-340. [Latin].
Ivo of Chartres, Sermo V si'l'e opusculum de con!lenientill veterls et nO'I'i sacrjficii
PL 162, 535-562. (Latin]. .
Jacob of Sarug, Homily on the SC11pego11t
Bedjan, P. Homiliae Selectae Mar-Jacobi Sarugensis. (S vols; Leipzig and Paris, 1905-
1910; vol. 3, pp. 259-282). [Syriac].
St. James An11phora (Syriac)
Heiming, 0. "Anaphora Sancti Iacob~ ftatris Domini." In Anaphorae Syriacae 1113
(Rome, 1953; pp. 107-177). (Syriac text and Latin translation].
Rücker, A. Die syrischen Jakabosanaphora nach der Rezension des Ja 'qob(h) 'I'On
Edessa. Mit dem griechischen Paralleltext herausgegeben. (Liturgiegeschichtliche
Quellen 4; Münster in Westfalen, 1923). [Syriac text, Greek retroversion].
Jerome, Ag11lnst Jovirtian11s
PL 23:211-338. [Latin].
Freemantle, W.H. in NPNF 2:6, pp. 346-416. [English trans1ation].
Jerome, Commentary on G11latlans
PL 26:307-438. [Latin].
Jerome, Comment11ry on Mark: See Pseudo-Jerome.
Jerome, Commentary on Zech11rillh
Adriaen, M. S. Hieronymi Presbyteri Opera. Pars I. Opera &egetica 6: Commentarii in
Prophetas Minores (CCSL 76A; Tumbout, 1970; pp. 747-900). [Latin].
Jerome, De 11iris i11lustrlbus
Richardson, E. Hieronymus liber de viri:r inlustribus. Gennadius liber de 'l'iris
inlustribus. (Texte und Untersuchungen 14; Leipzig, 1896). [Latin].
Jerome, Dialogus Adven11s Pelagill"os
Moreschini, C. S. Hieronymi PresiJ)Iteri Opera. Pars IIL Opera Polemica. 1. Dialogus
Ad'l'ersus Pelagianos. (CCSL SO; Tumhout, 1990). [Latin].
Freemantle, W.H. in NPNF 2:6, pp. 447-483. [English translation].
Jerome, Leiters:
Hilberg, I. Sancti Eusebii Hieronymi Epistulae (CSEL 54; 55; 56:1-2; Vienna, 2 1996).
[Latin].
Freemantle, W.H. in NPNF 2:6, pp. 1-295. [English translation ofselected letters].
Jerusa1em Lectionary: see Old Armenion Lectionary and Old Georgian Lectionary.
Jobannes Damascenus: see Pseudo-Johanoes Damascenus.
Johaones Scbolasticus, Collection of Canons in 50 Titles
Linder, A. The Jews in the Legal Sources ofthe Early Middle Ages. (Detroit [Mich.] and
Jerusalem, 1997), nwnber 6/102-107, pp. 59-61. [Greek text and English
translatioo of tbe relevant passage].
Jobannes Zonaras: see Tripartite Commentary to the Conciliar Legislation.
Jobn Cbrysostom, Ag11inst the Jews
PG 48:843-942. [Greek and Latin trans1ation].
360 Bibliograplry

Piadels, W., R. Brlndle, and M. Heimgartner, "Das bisher vermisste Textstück in

1ohannes Chrysostomus., .4dver$1lS Judaew, Oratio 2," Zeitschrift fllr .Antike und
Chri.stelftrtm 5 (200 1) 23-49. [For the recently rediscovered missing part ofhomily
2}.
Harkins, P. W. Saint John Clrtysoslom. Discnune.s t~gaiiut Judaizing ChristtaiU. (Fathers
ofthe Cburcb 68; Wasbiggton, D.C., 1979). [Eaglish translation].
Bn'indle, R. and V. Jegber-Bucher. Acht Reden gegen Jr~de~t. (Bibliothek der griecbisehen
Literarur 41; Stungart, 1995). (German trans!ation and commentary).
Joha Cbrysostom, RomUies Oft Pint Ctttlntllitlas
PG 61:9-382. fGreek and Latin lranslalion].
Cbambers, T.W. in NPNF 1:12, pp. 3-269. [Bnglish translation].
Jobu or Jerusalem (Pseudo-Joha ?), P111re.:ytk#s de IIIIICIII ecclaill domini
van Esbroeck, M. "Une homelie sur l'Eglise attribuee 6 1eau de Ji'!rusalem." Le Musion
86 ( l973) 233-304 [AnneniaD text and Latin translation}.
van Esbroeck, M. "Jean II de l6rusalem et les c:ulces deS. Etienne, de Ia Sainte·Sion et de
Ia Croix." Analeeta Bollamliana 102 (1984) 99-134. [Frencb trau.slatiouJ.
John Zoslmas, C11.le11dtJr
Garitte, G. Le cqferrdrier palutino-georgien d1il Sinaiticus 34 (}( .ti.cla). {Subsidia
Hagiographica 30; Bruxelles, 1958). [Georgian text and Frencb translatioo).
Julius of Rome, Letten: See Pseudo.Cyril of lcrusalem.
Justin, DüJ/JJgue wltll TryphtJ ·
Marcovich, M.lwtini Martyris Dialops cwm Tryphone. (Patristi5che Texte und Studien
47; BcrliD, New York, 1997). [Greek].
Falls, Tb.B. Saint Jwstin Martyr. (Fathers oftbe Cburch; New York, 1948; pp. 139-366).
{English translation].
Justin, Fll'$t Apology
Marcovich, M. l11stini Martyris ApolfJgioe pro Christiat~is. (Patristische Texte und
Studieu 3&; Berlin, New York, 1994). [Gteek].
Falls, Th.B. St~int Ju.ttin Martyr. (Fathers of the Churcb; New York, 1948; pp. 33-lll ).
[English translation}.
Leo the Great, StrtnOJU
Chavasse, A. Sancti Leonis Magni Romt~ni Pontiflci:s Tractatlls Septem et Nonaginta.
(2 vols; CCSL 138, 138A; Tumhout, 1973). [LatinJ. ·
Dolle, R. Leonle Gl'and. Sermons. (SC 22, 49, 74, 200; Paris, 1964, 1969, 1971, 1973).
{Latin text and Frencb translationJ.
Conway, A.J. and J.P. Frecland, St. Leo t~ G.rfiQt: SermoiU (Fathers of lhe Cburch 93;
Washington, D.C., 1996). [English translation].
Libet p011tijlca/i$
Duchosne, L. Le Iiber pontificali:s. Tu:te, introductio11 et commentaire (reprint of original
edition (1886-92] with addition ofthird volume; Paris, 19SS -1951). [Latin].
Davis, R. The Book. of PfJntifft (Liber pomiftc~Jlis): The A.ncient Biographie: afthe First
Ninety Rmnan Bishop1 to A.D 7/5. (Traoslated Texts for Historiaos. Latin Scries .S;
Liverpool, 1989). [Englisb tnmslation).
Martyrdom ef Po/ycatp: See Apostolic: Fathers.
Muldle AI'Meniatt Luti81Ultiu
Renoux, C. Le Lectionnaire de Jen~salem tm A.r111e11ie: Le Caloc'. (PO 44:4; 4&:2;
Tumb.out, 1989, 1999). [Armeuian text IUid Fren(;b translalionJ.
 Bibliography 361

N~>llloctllltlll in u
Tilln
Linder, A. Th~ Jt:ws
in the Lsgal St>~~~ces ofthe Earl)' Middle.Ages. (Dettoit [Mieb.] a.nd
Jeru.salem, 1997), number 7/108-128 (r". Photius) 7/129-187 (rec. Theodoros
Balsamon), pp. 61--89. (Greek text and English lranslation of the relevant
passage].
Old Armmilln Lt.!Ctiollllty
Renoux, A. Le codex amlfinim Jirusalem 121, T6me I: lntroduclion: .AIIX origines de Ia
Iiturgie hiuosolymit<line, lumieres noulutll~:s. Töme 2: Edition comparie du tute
et de dera atres ma1tWcrits. (PO 35:1; 36:2; Tumhout, 1969, 1971). [Annenian
text and French ttanslatioo].
Old GlltJrgill" L«~UJ••ry
Tarchnischvili, M. Le grt:md lectionnaire de l'eglise de Jerusalem (~-VIIr sikle).
(CSCO 188-189, 204-205; ~riptores lberi 9-IO, 13-14; Louvain, 1959-1960).
[Georgian ttlltt and Latin translation].
Oripn, Agtlinlt Celsru
Bonet, H. Ortgene.. Contf'e C~lle. Jntroduction. tute critique, traduction el notfiS. (SC
136, 147, ISO, 227; Paris, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1976). [Greek text and French
translatioa].
Cbadwick, H. Contra Cel.rum. (Cam.bridge, 19S3). [English tnmslation}.
Oria;o, Comtnentary ~,. Jt~hn
Blanc, C. Origene. Commerrtaif'e nr Saint Jean. Textil. grec, avant~propO$, traduction et
notes. (SC 120, 157, 222, 290; Paris, 1966, 1970, 1975, 1982). [Greek text and
French translation).
Heine, R.E. Origen. CommentDry on the Gospel Accordfng to John. (Fathers of the
Churcb 80, 89; Washington, D.C., 1989). [E~isll translatiou].
Preusehen, E. Ortgenes Werke lY. Der Johanneslommmtar. (GCS 10; Leipzig, 1903).
[Greek].
Origen, Exkortatitm to M•rtyrdfNit
Koetscllau, P. Origene.r Werke I. Die Schrift vom Ml11'tyrium. JJuch I-IV gegen Cel!ws.
(GCS 2; Leipzig. 1899; pp. 3-47). (Greek}.
O'Meara, J.I. Prayer. &hortation to Martyrdom. (Ancient Christian Writers 19; New
York., 1954). [Englisb traoslation].
Origen, HM~Uies olt Jeremiolr
Hu.sson, P. and P. Nautin. Origene. Homelie:s sur Jerimie. (SC 232, 238; Paris, 1976,
1977). [Greek tcxt and French translation].
Klosterm:tun, E. Ori'genea Weh 111. Jeremialaomilien, Klageliedt~rlwmmentar,
Erldäntng der Samusl- und Königabücher. (GCS 6; Leipzig. 1901; pp.-1-194).
[Greek:].
Smith, J.C. Homilie.a on JeremiQh. Homily on 1 King.s 28. (The Fathel'$ of the Cburch 97;
Washiß&ton, D.C., 1998). [English translation).
OrigeR, .Homllles on Let'itkru
Baehrens, W.A. Origenu Werke, sechster Band: Homilien .JWIJ He:xatewch in Rufins
Obersetzung. Erste Teil: Die Homilien zu Genesis, 'EvJdus and Levilicus (GCS
29; Leipzig 1920). [G.reek).
Barkley, G.W. Origen. Homilie.a Dn Lin'iticus J-16. (Fathers of tbe Cburcll 83;
Washington, D.C., 1990). [English translation).
Borret, M. Origine. Homelie.a sur le L~itique. (2 voJs; SC 286-'287; Pari$, 1981). (Latin
text and Frcnch translarionJ.
Paterius, De Exp«siUane Veltr& 11c NoPi Tattmrenil, Lnitku•
PL 79:753-762. [Latia].
362 B;b/iography

Pbilllster, Dinr111r11m lleresrtHtliber

Heylen, F. Filu.strii Episc<1pi ßrixlemis. Ditlersorum hereseon lib•r. (CCSL 9; Tumhout,
1957; pp. 207-324). [Latin].
Marx, F. Soncti Filastrii Episcopi Brixumsls. Ditleruuum hereseon über. (CSEL 38;
Vienna, 1888). [Latin].
Pbotius: see Nomocanon in 14 Titlu.
Polyc:arp, To the Philippians: See Apostolie Falben.
Protf!WIIfgelium of James
Cullmann, 0. "The Protevangeliwn of James." In: W. Scbneerneleher (ed.), New
Te11ament A.pocrypha. Voi J. Gospels and Related Writings. (Louisville
[Kentuclcy), 1991; pp. 421-438). {German translation].
De Sttycker, E. La forme Ia piUI attcilmne du Protlvangile deJacquu. RMclrerchesstJT le
Papyrus Bodmer j avec tll'le edi'lion CTÜliiKe du texte grec el une lradltctlon
onnotie. .Eil appendice: Les ve,.sions al'minienrte& traduitu e" Latin par Hans
·Quecke. (Subsidia Hagiograp.biica 33; Brussels, 1961). [Greelc text and French
translationJ.
Elliott,. J.K. Tlre A.pocryphai New Testament. A Collection of Apocryphal Christia:n
Literat~o~re in an English TranslatiQn. (Oxford, New Yo:dc. 1993). {Euglish
tnmslation].
Hock, R.F. The Jnfancy Gospel& of Jamu und Thomas witlr Introdll.ction, Note., and
Original Tm /tal11ring the NEW Schofars Penlon Translation. (The Seholars
Bible 2; Santa Rosa [Calif.], 1994). [Greek text and English translation].
Mara, M.G. Evangile de Pierre: lntroduction, te:cte critique, traduction, (SC 201; Paris
197S). [Greek text and French translation].
Pseudo-Athaaasius, On SabiHitlrs flltd Clrcumdslon
PG 28:133--141. [Greek and Latin translation].
Pseudo-Athaoaslus, TestimfHiill e script11r11
PG 28:29-80. {Greek aod Latin translation).
P.seudG-Cbrysostom,In laudem eoncq:~tloni:l Sllllt.:tllHnnls Baptist11e
PG 50:787-792. [Greek and Latio translation).
P.lie•do-Cyril ol Jerusalem and Pseudo-Julius of Rome, Letters
PG 96:1436-1449. fGreek and Latin translation].
Pseudo-Epbrem, (AriReaiao) C0111111mtt1ry 011 LniticiiS
Mathews, E.G. The Armenion Comrnentariell on &odus·Deflteronomy A.ttribllted to
Ephrem tlre Syrian. (CSCO S87-S88; Scriptores Armelliaci 25-26; Louvain,
1998). {Atmeniao. text IIDd English translation).
Pseudo-Epbrem., (Syriae) CttJIIIfU!IIItf11 011 Lc'lltie~~s
Benedictus, P. Soncli Patris N()lltri Eph,.aem Syri Ope,.a Omnio quae ezstant Gro11ce.
3yriace, Latine, in Ilex tomos tlistributa ad MSS. Codices Yaticanos, oliosque
collt;gata. multis oucta,. interpretlltione, proefationihwt, notis, Jlariontil:!ul
Jeclionibull illu!ftrata Nunc prim11m sub A111lpicii.s Clernenti., XIL Pllntijicill Maximi
e Bibllotheca Yaticano Prodtncnt. TomfiS Primus Syrioce et Latlne (Rome, 1737).
[Syriac text and Latin translation].
Pseudo-Epipbaoius, Commentary 011 Lake
Conybeare, F.C. "The Gospel Commentary of Epiphanius" Zeitsch,.ift ftJr die
nelltestomentliche Wissensch(lft und die Kunde der ältw-en Kirche 7 (1906) 318-
332; 8 (1907) 221-225.
 Jlibliography 363

Pseudo-Epiphaaiu.s, De prop/ldtll'lllft vit• d 9bltu

Samm, D. Biblical Propheü in Byzantine Palatine. Reassessi.ng the Lives af the
Prophets (SIUdia in Vetm.s Tcstamco.li Pseudepigrapha 11; Leiden, 1995),
pp. 121-123. [Englisb translation ofCodex Marchalianus].
Scherman, T. Prophetarum vüaefab~tlosae. (L&i.pzig, 1907). [Greek].
Scbwemer, A. Studien 1:11 den friihjfidischen Prophetenlegenden. Vitae PropbetaJ:11m.
(2 vols; Textsand Studies in Ancient Jndaism 49 and 50; Tiibingen, 1995, 1996),
vol. 2, pp. 3•-76•. [Synopsis ofthc most important Greek manuscripts].
Hare, D.R. "The Lives of the Prophets." In: J. Charleswonh (ed.), The 0/d Testament
Pseudepigrapha. Yol. 2 (New York. 198.5; pp. 379-400). [English ttanslation of
the short rec:ensio.n].
Pseudo-George the Arab. E~qU~sitio 0/Jicilln~m Eccluitle
Connolly, R.H. Anonynti Aueloris !Zpositio 0/ficiorom Eccle.siae Georgio Arhelell.'li
Vulgo Atlscripla. (4 vob:; CSCO 64; 12; 16; 7l; ScriptoTeS Syri 25; 29; 32; 28;
Paris/Leipzig, 1911-1954). [Syriac text and Latin traoslation].
Pseudo·Isldor: see lsidor.
Pseudo..Jerome. Ca~~~~~~at•ry t~n Merk
Cabill, M. Expositio EvDngelii secrmdum Marcu.m. (CCSL 82; Tumhout. 1997). [Latin].
- - . The Fint Commeniary o" Marle: An Annotated Transitli/on (New Yorlt. OxCord,
1998). (English tTansJatioo].
Pseudo-Jobanaes Damascenus.. Sermo in fiiiiiUIItilltimlem bu.ttle Marille lli'Kirtis
PG 96:648-661. [Greek and Latin translation).
StlcrtJmentflrillm VellHielfse
Ei:zenh6fer, L. P. Sifttin and L.C. Moblberg. Sacramentarlum Veronen.se (Cod[ex]
Bibl[ioteca] Capit[olare} Yeron[ensis} I.lXXY [80]). (Rerum Ecclesiastiearum
Do..:umenta, series maior Fontes [Sacramentarium Leanianum] 1; Rome, '1978).
Souates, History oftlle Cll11rc.h
Hansen, G.C. Sokrates. Kirchet~guchichte. Mit Beiträgen von Manja Sirinjan. (GCS,
Neue Folge l; Berlin, 1995).
Zenos, A.C. in NPNF 2:2, pp. l-178. (En,glish translation).
Sopb_rooius. Hollril.Y 1111 tlre Extlltlltion of tlle Vetterdie Cross 1111d on the Holy
ÄlltuiiiSis
PG 87/3:3301-10. {Greelc and Latin translation].
Sozomenos, Hutory oftlle Churcfl
Festugiere, A.-J., B. Grillet, and G. Sabbah. Sozomine: Hütoire Ecclhia11tique. Tut~
grec de Ndition J. Bider (SC 306, 418; Paris, 1983, 1996}. (Greek text and Freucb
translation].
Haruanft, C.D. in NPNF 2;2, pp. 179-427. (English trauslation].
Step•anos Siwaec'i, ReponK 111a Hulltpets d'Alo111111h.
Petrosyan, E. in Ejmlaz;n 41 (1984)44-50.
Syriac Aristides, Apology: Sec Aristides.
Tertullian, A.d nllliones
Holmes in ANF 3:109-1.50. [English translation).
Qllinri Septimi Florenti.s Tenvlliani Opera. Pars I. Opera Catholica. Adver3US
Morcionem (CCSL 1; Turnhout. 1964; pp. 9-7S). [Latin].
Tertulliao, Against Marc/011
Holmes in ANF 3:269-476. [English translation].
Quinti Septimi Florentis Tertulliani Opera. Pars /. Opera CDtholica. Adversw
Marcionem (CCSL I; Tumhout, 1964; pp. 437-726). {Latin].
364 Bibliograplry

1'ertullian, Agabul tlle Jew1

Oerlo, A. Quinti Sept/mi Florentis T~rtrtllitl1fi Opera. Pars Il. Opera Montanistlca.
{CCSL 2; Tumbout, 1964; pp. 1337-1396). [Latin].
Thelwall, S. in ANF 3:151-174. [English b'Uislation.].
Trlnkle, H. Edition de QSF Tertllllianl Aduer.:t~~S llldaeos. (Wiesbaden, 1964}. [Latin}.
Tertußian, Aptlhlgy
Quinti Septimi Floremu Tertlllliani Opera. Pars I. Opera Catholica. tf.dver$11s
MIV'cionem (CCSL 1; Tumbout, 1964; pp. 77-171). [LatiD].
Thelwa11., S. in ANF l: 17--60. [English translation].
Tertulliaa, On Bap&m
Quinti Septl"'i Florenfis Tertlll/iani Opera. Pars I. Opl'ra Catholica. Advers11s
Marcionem (CCSL l; Tumhout, 1964; pp. 275-295}. (Latin].
Thelwall., S. in ANF 3:669-679. (English tnmslation}.
TertulliaD, On Ftlftilrg
Gerlo, A. Q11inti Septimi FIOI'elftis Tertulliani Opera. Pars /1. Opera Monttl1fistka.
(CCSL2; Tumhouc, 1964; pp. 1255-1277). [Latin}.
Thelwall., S. in ANF 4:102-11:5. (Englisb translation].
Tertullian, 01J Prll~,.
Brawt, R.. TertrJllien Contre Marcion. Tome /II (Livre///). (SC 399; PariA, 1994). [Latin
text and Frencb translation]. ·
Quinti Septimi F/orentis Tert11llioni Opera. Pars I. Opera Catho/ica. Advers11s
Marcionem (CCSL 1; Tumhout>t l964; pp. 255-274). [Latin].
Thelwall, S. in ANF 3:6U-691. {English translation].
Theodore bar Koaf, Sclrolifl
Hespel, R. aDd R. Draguet. Thiodore bar Konl. Livre des Scolie.s (recension de Seert). L
Mi",re 1-Y. (CSCO 431-432; Scriptores Syri 187-188; Louvain, 1981-1982).
[Syriac text and French translation].
Tlleodoret, Co1IJIIU!fllury 1111 lscitllr
Guinot, J.-N. Thiodoret dll Cyr. Commentaire STIT Jsare. Texte critique. tradiiCiion et
notes. {SC 276, 295, 315; Paris. 1980, 1982, 1984). {Greek text aud Fnmch
translation].
Tbeodoret, Ert~nlsle.s
Et:tlinger, G. Theodoret ojCynJ:S: Erani&le~ (Oxford. 1975}. [Greek].
Jackson, B. in NPNF 2:3, pp. 160-249. [English translation}.
Tbeodoret, {bt•estiona in Odt~teflcllllm
Femande.z Marcos, N. and A. S~nz-Badillos. Theodoreti Cyrerrsls (Juaestiorra in
Octateuchum {Textos y :Esrudios "Cardenal Cisneros" de Ia Biblia polliglota
matritense 17; Madrid, 1979). [Greek}.
Theodoros Balsamon: see Tripartite Commentary to the Conciliar Legislatlon aod
Nomoctmon in 14 Titles. [Greek. text and Englisb IIanslation of tbe relevant
passage].
Tbeodosius, De situtur•e Mneme
Oeyer, P. lti11era Hiero.folymi:ana. Saeculi Illl-YJJ/. (CSEL 39; Vieuna. 1898; pp. 135-
1SO). [Latin].
Troditw AJWst•lltt~
Botte, B. Hippozyte de Rome. La traditlon ClJW5fOltque d'apr&t /es anciennes version.
Jnrrothlctiorr. tradwction et notes. (SC I Ibis; Paris, 1968). (Latin text and French
trauslation].
Bradshaw, P. M.E. lobnson 1111d L.E. Phillips (edited by H. Attridge). The Apostolic
Tradition. A Cammentary. (Hermeneia; Minneapolis, 2002).{Eoglish translation].
 Bibliography 365

Triptutite ColiUIWitary to tlle Co•cilitl' L#Jgl$/lltiolf

Linder, A. The Jews in the Legal Sourcu. of the Eorly MiJJle Ages. (Detroit (Mich.] and
Jerusalem, 1997), number 28/353-378, pp. 174-197. [Greek text and Englisll
tnnslation ofthc relevant pllSsage].
Typicon •J CoRst•ntlnopl~
Mateos, J. Le typjcon Je lo grantk eglise. Ms. Samte-Croix "., 40, X! siicie. Tome I. Le
cycle des Jouzt. mois. Tome II. u cycle tks fites mobiles. (2 vols; Orientalia
Cbristiana Analeeta 165-166; Rome, 1962-1963). [Greek text and French
translation].
Vt~lentlnlallExpositllln NHC zi,2
Pagels, E.H. (introd.) and J.D. Turner (trausl). "A Valentinian Exposition (XI,.?), wirb O.n
the Anointing. On Baptism A and B, and On the Eucharist A and B." In: J.M.
Robinson. The Nag Hommadi Ltbrary in English. (Leiden; ~1988; pp. 481-489).
IEngtish translation).
Victorblus of Poetovio, Commmtary on tlre Apoc•lyp6e
Dulaey, M. Yictorin de PoetoYio. Sru l'apocalypse. Suivi thfragment chronologique et
de Ia comtraction dal morufe. (SC 423; Paris, 1997). [l.atin text and French
translation].
Vitll PHplletflrUIII: See Pselldo-Epiphanius.

1.4 Pagan Literature

Aelias Herodta•as, De prosodia cal/Joliea
Lentz, A. Orammatici Graeci. Vol. 3:1. Herodlani Technici reliqwioe. (Leipzig, 1867-
1&70). [Oreek text}.
Aesop, Fsf1alatt
Hausrath, A. and H. Hunger. Corpru fabv/DI'Um Ae.ropicarum. (2 vols; Leipzig, 1959,
1970). [Greek mxt].
A&lltbarebides of Caidus
Ster.a, M. Greek and Latin Avthors on Jews tmd Judal;r.m. Edited with lntroductions,
Tram/ations and Commentary. (3 vols; Jerusalem, 1974-·1984), number 30a,
vol. 1, pp. 106-108. [Oreek with English lnDSiation ofrel.evant passage].
Aleua.der of Lycopolis, C011t'a Mlllliclltld Opitliones DI:Jpllllllio
Stem, M. Greek and Llltin A.uthars on Jews and Judai""· Edited with lntrodvctions,
Translations and Commentary. (3 vols; Jerusalem, 1974-1984), numbu 468,
vol. 2, pp. 486-4&7. [Oreek with English rranslation of relevant passaF].
Apollodoru& of Atbeas, Petl Theon
Mnller, K. Fragmenta hisloricorum Grae~XJn~m. {S vols; Paris, 1841-1870; vol. 1,
pp. 428-469). [Greek text].
Dio Chrysostomus, OrlllioiU!S
Coboon, J.W. Dio Chrysostom. With an Engllsh Translatiort. Yol. I. Orations 1-1 I. (LCL
257; Cambridge [Mass.), 1971; repr. from 1932). [Greek wilh English translation].
m
BarpocraCioD, Lukott tlecem ottiiDreJ Altic81
Dindorf, W. H01pocrati01111 lcico11 in Jecem oratoreJ AtticOB. (Oxfonl, 1853; repr.
Groningen, 1969; pp. 1-310}. [Greek text].
H«ateus, A.rgyplk•
Srer.a. M. Greelc and Lattn Authors on Jews tmd Judaism. Edited with lntroductio'IU,
Translatiom andCommentury. (3 vols; Jerusalem, 1974-1984), number II, vol. 1,
pp. 26-35. {Grcek witb Eqlish translation ofrelevant passage].
366 Bibliogrüplt)'

lsocrates, PhilipfJIIS (<mztio S)

Norlia, G. lsocrates L (LCL 209; Cambridge {Mass.] and Lo11don, 1966). [Greek with
English translation].
Julian, lf#•blst tlle GalUeons
Wright, W.C. The Work.s of the Emperor Julian. With an English TranllaJi'on. (LCL,
Julian 3; London and Cambrid~ {Mass.], 1961; pp. 319-427). [Greek with
English translation].
Juveual, Strturoe
.Ralnaay, G. JuYenal and Persius. (LCL; London and New Yorlc, 1928). [Latin·with
EngUsh translation].
Plato, NoMoi
Hülser, K. PlaJon. Nomoi. Griechisch und Deutlich. Sämtlicht!! Werke IX. [Nach der
Oberutz11ng Frledrich &hlt.iermachers ergoff:ZI durch Übersetzungen von Franz
Susemih/]. (Frankfurt am Main aod Leipzig, 1991). {Greek with German
translalionJ.
Pl•tarcb, Quull"ona Cont~iv•l41
Hoffleit, H.B. "Table Talk Books IV-V." Ju: idem and P. Clement. Plutarch's Moralia
VIH. 612 B- 697 C. (LCL Plutarcb 8; Cambridgc [Mass.J aod London, 1969).
[Greek with Englisb ttanslation].
Sueloaius, DiiiiiS A11g11&t11S
Rolre, J.C. Svetonius. Yol. 1. (LCL; Cambridge [Mass.] and Loadon. 19'79). [Latin with
English translationJ- ,
Tacitus, llistorir~.
Moore, C.H...Tacitus. The Histories Books IV-V." [n.: idem and J. Jackson. Tacillls. The
Historie.s. Tlle Annals. (LCI. Tacitu.s 2; Cambridge [Mass.} and London. 194l).
[Latin with English translation].
Tereuce, Phomtio
Sargeaunt, J. Terence. With an English Translation. (2 vols; LCL 22-23; Cambridge,
Mass and Londou, 1983; vol. 2, pp. 1-119. [Latin with English ttanslation].
XenophoB, Hellenic.a
Marchant, E.C. Xell()phontis opertJ omnia. Yol. 1. (Oxford, 1900; repr. 1968). [Greek
ten].

1.5/slamic Literature
Al·Biruai, Tlre ChNnology ofAllelalt N111ünrs
Griveau, R. Martyrologes et Minologes orientaJa Jffl-XY/11. Les fttu des Melchites.
par AI-Biroun;. (PO 10/4; Parisand Freiburg i.:Br., 1915; pp.189-312). (Arabic
witb. French translation].
Sachau, C.E. The Chronology ofAncient Natialfll. A11 English Yersion ofthe Arabic Tut
af Athar-Ul-Balciya qJ Albiruni, or Yestigu ofthe Past. Callecud and Reduced to
Wriling by the Author inA.H. 39(}-1, A.D. 1000. Tra!Uiated illld EdiledwithNotes
and lndu.. {London, 1379}. (English traoslation].
Qur'an
Pick:thall, M.M. The Meanlng ofthe Glorious Qur 'an. (Cairo., Beirut, n. d. ).

1.6lnscriplions and Papyri

Frcy, J.B. CorpllS lnscriptio~mm Judalcan~.m. (3 vuls; New Yorlc, 1936-1952, repr.
1975).
 Bi.bliogroplry 367

Grenfell, B., A. H1111t and D. Hoguth• .Foyum TowiU and Their Papyri. (Egypt
Exploration Fund, Gn!.eco-Roman Branch; London, 1900).
Paton, W.R. and E.L. Hicks. The I1111criptions o[Co11. (Oxford, l89l).
Tcherikover, A. Corp~~s Popyrorum Judaicorvm. (3 vols; Cambridge [~illss.}. 1957-
1964}. [CPJ].

1. 7 Digitalized Databases
TLG 8 - ThuaJUJU Linguae Graecae.
PLD- Chadwyck-Healey (ed.). Potrologia Latino Databose. (Cambridge [UK), nD.}.
Responsa 8- The Rapo1111o Project, Vusion8.0. (Bar-llan Uuiversity, 2000}.

2. Language Dietionaries
Bauer, W. Griechisch-deutschu Worterblich zu Jen Schriftiln da Neu;n Testaments und
der tlbrigen vrch,.istlichen Literatur. (Berlin, 1958).
Bedrossian, Mattbias, New Dicrionary: Amr.enion-EngU&h. (Vtmice,l879).
Blaise, A. and H. Chir11t. Dictionnaire lotin-fr~ais tk11 1111teun chretiens. (Tumhout,
1954).
Georges, K.E. AII.Sfiihrlichu Lateini11ch-Deut1chu HandwiJiferbllch DII.S den Quellen
ßllltimmengetragen und mit buondel'er- Bnugnahme tJII/ Synonymik 1111d
Antiquittften unter Bet'iichichtigung der besten Hilftmittel. (2 vols; Hannover and
Leipzig, 5 1913/1918). .
Gesenius, W. Hebr/Jisches und aramäisches Handwlirt(fl'b•ch iJber das II/te Testament.
(Berlin, 1962 = 17 1917).
Jastrow, M. A Dictionary ofthe TfZI'gumim, the Talmttd Babli and Yerushalmi, and the
Midrashic Litt~ratll.re. (2 vols in one; repr. Jerusalem, n.d. = London and New
York, 1903).
Lampe, G.W.E. A Patril;tic Greek Lexicon. (Oxfurd. 1961).
Levy, J. Neuhebrttil;ches und chalddischu Wtirterbuch uber die TGlm"dim ~~nd
MidrGschim. (4 vols; Berlin and Vienna '1924 [repr. Dannstadll962]).
Lewis, C.T. and C. Short. A Larin Dictiona'Y F~mnded on AndrewJ' Edftfon of Fre11nd':1
.l.Atin Dictiona7"Y. Rtrvised, Enlarged, anti in Gl'eat. Parts Rewrilten. (Oxford,
1969).
Liddell, H.G., R. Scott, and H. Jones, A Greek-Engllsh Luicon. (Oxford, 9 1989).
Payne Smith, R. and J. Margollouth. A Compendiowz Syriac Dictionary, fo'(JIAnded llJ'O"
the The.taurvs l:i'yrioe~~.S of R. Payne Smith. (Oxford, f 903, repr. 1957).
Sokoloff, M. Ä Dictionary ofJewish Paltslinian Aramoic ofthe Byzantine Period (Ba:r-
IIan, 1990).

3 ..Encyclopedias
The Anchor Blble Dictionary. (Edited by D.N. Freedman; 6 vols; New YarJc. 1992).
Dictionnaire d'orcheologie chrltienntl et de litllrgie. {Edited by F. Cabrol end H.
Leclerq; 15 "YOls; Paris, 1907-1953).
Dictionnolre de Ia Bible. Supplement. (Bdlted by L. Plrot, A. Robert, H. Cazelles, and A.
Fenillet; II vols; Paris, 1928ff}.
368 Bibliograph)~

Dictionary of EtU'ly Christian Literalrue. (Bdited by S. OOpp lUid W. Gee:rliogs; New

York, ~1999, traDJl. of Lexikon der antllwl chrisrltchen Litet~lur, Freiburg i.Br.,
Baseland Vienna, 3 1999).
Dlctiomwire de 3plritvaliti ascitique et my.stiqtte, doctrine et histoire. (Edited by M.
Viller, F.D. Cavallera, and J.D. Guibert; 16 vots; Paris, 1937-1995).
Encyclopedia ofthe Early Church. (A. di Berardino; 2 vols; New Yorlc,. 1992).
EncyclopediaJudoica. (16+ vols; Ierusalem, 1971).
The Encyclopedia of Religion. (Edited by M. Eliade; 16 vols; New York and London,
1987).
Handbuch religi()fl$1filse.t13chaftlicher Gnmdbegriffe. (Edited by G. Kehrer, H.G.
Kippenberg, H. Cancilc, B. Gladigow, lUid M. Laubscher; S vols; Stuttga:rt,
1988ff).
The Qxford Dictionary of Byzantivm. (Edited by A. Kazhdau; 3 vols; Ncw Yor.k, 1991).
Pa11ly.s Re.al-Encyclopädie der cla:rsischen A.ltertutn$wissenschqft. (Stllttgart, Munieb~
1394--1978).
Reallaik<ln ftir AJrlike und Chrütenfum. Sachwörterbuch zur .A.u.seinandersetzllng des
Christentvm• mit der antik.en J!Yelt. (Edited by T. KJauser and E. Dassmann;
18+ vols; Stuttgart, 19SOff}.
Die Religlo11 in Geschichte 1111d Gegenwart. (Edited by K. Galliog and H. V.
Cmlpen.hausen; 6 vols; Tilbingen, "1957-1962).
Die Religion ür Geschichte und Gegenwart. Handw(Jrterbvch fliT Theologie 1md
R.eligionswissenschoft. {Edited ey H.D. Setzet al.; S+ vols; TUbingeo, 4 1998ft).
Theologisches Wörterbuch :nun Alten Te.stQIDent. (Edited by GJ. Botterweck, H.-J. Fabry
and H. Ringgren; 10 vols; Stuttgart, l970ff).
Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament. (Edited by G. Kittel and G. Friedrich;
10 vols; Stuttgart, 1932-1979).
Theologische Ret:~lenzyklopädie. (Edited by G. Krause and G. MODer; 34+ vols; Berlin
lUid Ncw York, 1977ff).

4. Concordances, Indices, and Other Auxiliary Literature

Computer-Konkordaru Jvm IIOVIIm Testamenrum Graece von Nutle·Aiand und zum
Greek N- Testament. Ed. by the "Iostitut ftlr Neutestameutlicbe Te:lrtforschwrg"
and the "R.eehenzentrum der Univel'$itllt Milnstcr." (Berlin, ~1980).
Geerard, M. and F. Glorie. Clavis Patrum Graecorum. (S voJs; Corpus Christianorum;
Tumhont, 1974--1987).
Geerard, M. and J. Notet. Clavis Patrum Grllecor~~m. Supplementvm. (Corpus
Christianorum; Tumhout, 1998).
Dekk.ers, E. and A. Gaar. Clavis Patrum Latinorum: qtta in corpw christianorum
edtmdum optima.T qu.QSque scriptorum recensiones a Tertvlliano ad Bedam.
(CCSL; Steenbrug, '199.5).
Hatch, E. and H. Redpath. .4. Concordance to the Septu.agint and the Other Greek
Versiotl3 qf the Old Testament (lncludtng thc Apocryphal Books). (3 vols; Graz,
197.5- Oxford, 1897).
Lisowsky, G. Konkordanz ztlm hefJräischen .A.IttUJ Testament. (Darmstadt, 3 1992).
Mayer, G. Index Philone11S. (Berlin, 1974).
Rengstorf, K.H. .A. Complete Concordance to Flavius J03ephus. (4 voJs; l.eiden. 1973-
1983).
 Bibliograp/ry 369

Scblfer, P. (In <:ollaboratioo with Gottfried Reeg and wida the help ofKlaus Hemnann,
Claudia Robrbacher-Stricker, Guido Weyer and Rina Otterbach). Konkordanz zur
Heklullot-Litt~ratur. (2 vol.s; Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 12 and 13;
TObingen, 1986, 1988).

5. Secondary Literature
AbeJ, F.-M. "La s4pulture de saint Jacques le Miu.eur." R.tw11e Biblique 16 (1919) 48()...
499.
Abrahams, I. ATbe Lost •confession' of Samuel." Hebrew Union College Annual I
(1924) 377--35.
Abi.ISCb, R.. ...Rabbi lshmael's Mirac11lous Conception. Jewish R.odemption History in
Anti-CbristiaD Polernic." ln: All. Beclcer and A. R.eed (eds.), The Wt.IY" tht1t Never
Pa,.ted: Jew.t and ChristitiM in Antlqvity and the Early Middle Ages. (Texts and
Srudies in Ancient Judaism 95; TUbiDgen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003; pp. 307-345).
Acbtemeier, P.l. I Peter. (Hcrmenei.a; Minneapolis, 1996).
Adna. J. "Der (k)ttesknecbt als triumphierender llild interzos.soriseher Messias. Die
Rezeption von Jes 53 im Targum Jonathan untersucht mit besonderere
Bero.cksi.chtigung des Messiasbildes." In: B. Janowski and P. Stuhlmac:her (eds.),
Der leidende Gouesknecht. Jesaja 53 11nd sei11e Wirkungsgeschichte mit einer
Bibliographie :ru Jes 53. (Forschungen zum Ahen Testament 14; TUbingen, 1996;
pp. 129-158).
Aland, B. "Erwahlqstheologie und Menscheoklassealehre. Die Theologie des
Herakleon als SchlOsse! zum Verstiodnis der ehristliehen Gnosis." ln: M. Krause
(ed.), Gno:lis and Gnostici'sm. Papers .Read at ihc Seventh lnternati01ral
Coiiference 011 Palf'ütic Stildies (Oxford, September 8th-13th 1975). (Nag
Hammadi Studies 8; Leide11, 1977; pp. 143-181).
Albeck, H. lnlf'oduclion to 1/te Mishnah. [In Hebrew} (Jerusalem. 1959).
Alett:i, J.-N. Co/Oßiens 1,15--20. Genreet clg~e ~ tate. F011ction de Ia thematique
sapientielle. (Analecta Biblica 91; Rome, 1981).
Alleobach, 1., A. Benoit.. D.A. Bertrand. A. Haoriot-Coustet, E. Junod, P. Maraval, A.
Pautler and P. Prigeat. Biblia Palri:rtica. Index: des citations et allJUion~ bibliques
dam Ja Iitterature patrllliq~~e. (7 vol.s; Paris, 197:5-).
Allison, D.C. and W.D. Davies. .4 Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel
A.ccording to Saint Matthew. Yol. 111 Commentary o1J Matt~ XlX-XXfll/1.
(International Christian Commentary; EdiAburgh, 1997).
Alon, G. "The Halakhah in the Epistle of Beroabas." [lo Hebrew] In: idem, Studi64 in
Jewish History. (2 vols; Tel Aviv, l957; vol. l, pp. 293-312) = Tarbiz 12 {1940)
2:1-28,223.
Altaner, B. "Der Stand der Isidorforschung." In: Miscellanea lsidof'iana (Rome, 1936).
Altaner, B. and A. Stuiber. Patrologie. Leben, Schriften und Lehre der Kirchenväter.
(Freiburg, Baseland Vienoa, 6 1963).
Andcrsen, F.I.: see ~tbove,1Enoch under "Jewish literature."
Anderson, H.: see above, 4Maccabees undcr "Jewish literature."
Ascllim, A. "The Genre of 11QMel<:b.i.zedelc.'' In: F.H. Crycr aod T.L. Tbompson (eds.),
Qrlm,.an between the Old and New Testaments. (Jownal for the Srudy oftbe Old
Testament, Supplement Seriea 290; Sheffield. 1998; pp. 17-31).
370 Bibliovaphy

Assmann, A. aud J. "Mythos." Handbuch religionswisseMchajtlicher Gnmdbegriffo 4

(!998) 179-200.
Attridge, H. W. The Epistle to the H#Jbrews. (Hclllleoeia; Philadephia, 1989).
Auf der Maur, H. Feiern im Rhythmzu der Zeit. Herruifeste in Woche und Jahr.
(Gottesdienst der Kirehe. Handb11ch der Liturgiewissenschaft 511; Regensburg,
1983).
Aune, D.E., Revelation. (Word Biblieal Commentary 52A-C; Nashville {TeliiL}, 1997,
199&, 1998).
Aziza, C. Tertullien et lejudofsme. (Pilblications de Ia Faculte des Leltres et des Seiences
Humaines d.c Nice 16; Nice, 1977).
Baczko, B. Les imoginaires sociau:t. Memoires et espoirs colJectift. (Crltique de la
politique; Paris, 1984).
Baer, Y. "The Service of Sacritice in Sec:ond Temple Times." (ln Hebrew] Zion 40
(1965) 95-153.
Baillet, M.: sec above, Festh>al Prayers under "J'ewish literature."
Bammel, C. "Herakleon" Theologische Realencyclopiidie, vol. 15 (1986) 54---57.
Barrett, C.K. ''The Lamb ofGod." New Tutament SIJ,dies 1 (1954-55) 216-2.18.
- - . "The Eschatology ofthe Epistle to the Hebrews." In: D. Daube and W.D. Davies
(eds.), The Background oft~ New Testament and lt1 Eschatology. FeJtschriftfor
C.H. Dodd. (Cambridge, 1956; pp. 363-393).
- - . Das Evangelium nach Johannes. (Kritisc:h-exegetischer Kommentar llber das
Neue Testament; Göttingen, 1990).
- - . Ä Critical and E:l;egetical Commentary on the Acts of tha Apostles. (2 vols;
lntematiorlll Critical Commentary 44; Edinburgb, 1994, 1998).
Banh M. and H. Blanke. Colosli4ns. A New Translation with lnlroduction and
Commentary. (Anchor Bible J4B; New York, 1994).
Baumgarten, J.M. "Yom Kippur in tbe Qumran Scrolls and Second Temple Sourc:es."
Dead Sea Di&co~Jeries 6 (1999) 184···191.
Baumstark. A. Festbrevi~~r und Kirchei'!Jahr der syri1chen Jakobiten. Eine
liturgiegeschichtltchf Yorarbeit aufGnmd lrt~ndschriftlicher Sludfen in Jerusalenr
und Damaskus, du Syrischen Hcmdschrifterrlr.ataloge von Berlin, Cambridge,
London. Ox:ford, Par# und R(Nfl und des Unierten Mosiuler Futbrevterdrucus.
(Paderbom, 1910).
---·-. Geschichte der syrischen LiteraiWr. (Boon, 1922).
- - . "Ausstrahlungen des vorbyzantinischen Heiligenkalenders von Jernsalem."
Orientalia Christiana P~riodica 2 (1936) 129-144.
- - . Comparatille Liturgy. (Revised by Bemard Botte; EDglisb editioo by F.L. Cross;
I.ondon, 19SS).
B~tiley, D.P. "Review of Der Tod Jesu als Heiligtumsweihe. Eine UntersuchUilß zom
U10feld der Sühnevorstellung in Umer 3,2S-26a, by Wolfgang Kraus." JOflmal of
Theological Studies 45 (1994) 247-252.
- - . ..Jesus as the Mercy Seat~ The Semanlies and Theology of Paul's Use of
Hilasterion in Romans 3:25." (Ph.D. dissertation; University ofCambridge, 1999).
--."[Dissertation summary:] Jesus as the Mercy Seat: The Se.m.antics and Tbeology
of Paul's Use of Hilasterion in Romans 3:25." Tyndale Bulletin Sl (2000) 155-
158.
---···-. ''Greck Heroes Who Happen to Be Jewish: The Meaning of \).ocm'JPtov in
4 Maccabees 17:22" (nnpublished bandout to a paper given on the SBL, Toronto,
23.11.2002).
Bell, C. Ritual. Perapectillll3 ond Dimen1ions. (New York and Oxford, 1997).
 Bihiiography 371

Bell, R.H. "Teshubah: The Idea of R.epentance in Ancient Judaism." The Journo/ of
Progressive Judaism 5 (1995) 22-52.
Berendls, A. Studien iiber Zacharias-Apolayphen und Zacharias-Legenden. (Leipzig,
1895).
Betz, H.D. Galatians. A Commentaty on Paul's Letter to the Churches in Galatia.
(Hermeueia; Philadelphia. 1979).
Beyse, K.-M. "'lVJ.'' Theologisches JYiJrterbuch zum Altiln Testament 8 (1995) 340-342.
Bezalel, N. "Clement of Alexandria on an Unknown Custom in the Temple Service oftho
Day of Atonement." [In Hebrew] Sinai 103 (1919) 177f.
Bigg, Ch. Critical aml Eregetical CommBntary 011 the Epistles qJSt. Pe.ter and St Jude.
(lntematiooal Critical Commentary; New York, 1901).
Black, M. "The Festival of Encaenia Ecclesiae in the Ancient Church with special
reference to Palestine and Syria." Journal of Ecclesiastir:al History S (19:54) 78--
85.
- - . See also above, 1Enoch under ..Jewish lilerature."
Blenkinsopp, J. lsaiah 1..:39. (Anchor Bible 19; New York, 2000).
Bloeher, H. "Zacharie 3. Josm! et Je Grand lour des Expiations.,; Et:Jdu Theologiques et
Re.ligieU$eS S4 (1979)264-270.
Boclcmuehl, M. '"The Form of God' (Phil. 2:6) Variations on a Theme of Jewish
Mysticism." Journal ofTheologiCQl Studie.s 48 (1997) 1-23.
Bolle, R. "Un docteur de l'aumOne, S. Uon le Grand." Yie~"pirltuelle (19S7) 266-287.
Bomert, R. Les commentairu byzantins de Ia ditline Iiturgie du J"lle au XYe :riecl.t.
(Archives dt: l'orient chrl!tien 6; Paris. 1966).
Bousset, W...Eine jüdische Gebetssammlung im siebenten Bueh der Apostolischen
Konstitutionen.~ Nachrichten 1101.1 der Gesellschaft ikr Wissenschaften zu
Göttin.ge~~, Philosophisch-historische Klas:re 1915, pp. 435-489 "..
ReligiOIUwissenschaftliche Studien. Auflätze xur Religio~Uge.schichte des
Hililenistischen Zeitaltera (ed. by A.F. Verbeule; Supplements to Novum
Testamenturn :SO; Leiden, 1979; pp. 231-285).
Bovon, F. Das Evangeltum nach LukM. I. Teilband Lk l,i-9,50. (Evangelisclt-
Katholisch.er Kommentar zum Neuen Testament 3:1; Zllrich and Neukirchen-
VIuyn, 1989}.
Boyarin, D. "Semantic Differeru:es; or; 'Judaism'I'Chtistianity'." In: A. Becker and
A. YO$hikO Reed, The f!Yays Thai Ne.ver Parted. Jews and Christians in Late
Antiquily and the Earl:y Middle Ages. (Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 95;
TUbingen, 2003; pp. 65-86).
Brtndle, .R. "Christen und Juden in Aotiochien in den Jahren 386/387. Ein Beitrag zur
Geschichte allkirchlicher Judenfeindschaft." Judaica 43 ( 1987) 142-168.
BräUdie and Jegher-Bucb.er: see above John Cbrysostorn, A.galnsl the Jews under
"Christian and Gnostic Lirerature."
Bremmer, J. "Scapegoat Rituals in Ancient Greece ... Harval'd St11.dies in Cla:rsical
Philology 87 (1983)29~320.
- · - . "Tbe Atooemem in the Interaction of Oreeb, Jews, and Christians." ln: idem
and F.G. Martinez (eds.), Sacl'ed History and Sacred Texts in .E:arly J11daism. ..4.
Symposium in Honour of A.S. lTQfl der Woude. (Coottibutions to Biblical Exegesis
and Theology 5; Kampen, 1992; pp. 77~3).
Breytenbac:b, C. VeJ'söhn1111g. Eine Studie ZIIT paulinischen Soteriologie.
(Wissenschaftliche Monographien aum Alten wtd Neuen Testament 60;
Neuk.irchen, 1989).
372 Bibliography

---. "Versilhnull8, Stellvertretung und S1Jhne. Semantisehen und

traditionsgeschichtliche Bemerkungen am Beispiel der paulinisc:hen Briefe." New
Testament Studies 39 (1993) 59-79.
Bronmiclc. N.M. The Liturgical Poetry ofYannai. Erplani:UiOIU and Interpretatiom with
SuggeJtions for Textua/ Emendatioru and Completlona of L(H;fl11tJe. (Jerusalem,
2000}.
Brown, R.E. The Gospel According lo John (1-:rii). lntroductio", TraMiatüm, and Noiu.
(Anchor Bible; Garden City [NY], 1966).
- - . The Epistlu ofJohn. (Anchor Bible 30: Garden City [NY], 1982).
-····-. The Death of the Meuiah. From Geth.semane to the Grove. (The Anchor Bible
Reference Library; New York, 1994).
- - . A n Introduction to the New Testament. (New Yort. 1!191).
Brox, N. Der erste Petru.sbrief {Evangelis.ch-Katholischer Kommenlar 21; Zfi.rich,
Einsiedeln, Cologne and Neukirchen-Vluyn, 2 1986).
Bruce, F.F. The Book. of the Acts. (New International Commentary on the New
Testament; Grand Rapids [Mich.], 1988).
Bruckner, R. 'Christuslrymnen' oder 'epliklkltsche • Passagen? St11dien zuM Stilwecluel
im Neutut Te1tament und 1einer Umwelt. (Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur
des Alten und Neuen Testaments 176; Gottingen, 1997).
B!i.Chler, A. Studie& in S/11 ond Atonement. (London, 1928).
Bil.ebsel, f'., and 1. Herrmann. "Hileos, hilaslromai, hilasmos, hilasterion." Theologi11ches
Wörterbuch .rum Neuen Te:stamerrt 3 (1938) 300-324.
Bock:ley, U. "A Cult-Mystecy in •Tbc Gospel ofPI\ilip'." Jo~tmal ofBiblical Literature
99 (1980) 569--581.
Bugnini, A. "Croce. VII. La C[roc:e] nella liturgla." Enciclopedia Cottolica 4 {1950)
960-963.
Bultmann, R. "Mythos und MYthologie IV (inl NT)." Religion in Geschichte uruJ
Gegenwar~ 4 (1960) 1278-1282.
- - . The Johannine Epistle.s. (Henneneia; Philadelphia. 2 1978).
Burney, C.F. The Aramale Ortgin of the Fourth Gospel. (Orlord, 1922).
Cahill, M.: see above, Pseudo-Jero.me, Commentory on Mark under "'Ciui:stiau and
Goostie Literature."
Carleton Paget, J. The Epi1tle ofBDTnabas. Outlook and Background. (Wissenscbaftliche
Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, seoond series 64; Tiibingen, 1994).
- - . "Paul and the Epist)e of Btii'IIObas." Novum Testament11m 33 (1996) 359-381.
Cbarles, R.H.: see above, Genval CoUections and 1Enoch uoder "Jewish literature."
Cbadesworth, J.H. "A Prolegomenon to a New Study ofthe Jewish Badl:ground ofthe
Hymns and Prayers in the New Testament." Joarnal of Jewish Stildies 33 (1982)
265-281.
Chavasse. A. "Les Qu.atre-Temps." In: A.G. Martlmort (ed.), L 'Eglise en Prier.:.
lnlroduction d Ia Liturgie. (Paris, Tournai, Rome and New Yorlr. 1965; pp. 758-
767). .
- - . '"Le sennon Ili de saim Uon et La date de Ia ceJcbration des Quatre-Temps de
septembre." Revue des .science3 reltgleliSes 44 (1970} 77-84.
- - . ~e also above, Leo the Grear, Come.s ofA.lcvin, Comes of Wilrzburg, Ge.lmian
Sacramentary under "Christian and Gnostic Literatnre."
Chazon, E. "Human and Angeli~: Prayer in Light of the Dea.d Sea Scrolls... {Unpublished
lecture given on the fifth Orion International Symposium., 19-23 Jamurry, 2000,
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem).
 Bibliography 373

Coakley, I.F. '"Typology and lbe Birtbday of Christ on 6Ianuary." Orientalia Chri3tlano
Analecra236 (1988) 247-256.
Cody, A. Heavenzy Sanctuory and Liturgy in the Epi3tle to the Hehrew.s. (St. Meinrad,
1960).
Collins, JJ. "Methodological lssues in the Study ofl Enoch: Reflections on the Articles
of P.D. Hanson and G.W. Nickelsburg." Soclel)l of Biblical Lituature Seminar
PtlJHrS (1978) 315-322.
- - . Daniel. (Hermeneia; Minneapolis, 1993).
Coilin.~. J.J.: seealso above, Sibylline Oracles 1111der "Jewish lireratore."
Connolly, R.H: sec above, Pseudo-George the Arab, üpo1itio Officiorum Eccle.siae
undcr "Christian aDd Gnostic Literature."
ConybeaR, F.C: see above, .Pseudo-EpiphaDius, Commentary tm Luu Ullder "Chmtian
and Gnostic Literaturc."
Conzelmann, H. Acts ofthe A.postla. (Hermeneia; Philadelphia, 1987).
Cothenet, E. •Prot6vaugile de Jacques: origine, genre et signification d'un pmnier
midrasb. ehrerlen sur Ia Nativit6 de Marie." In: W. Haase and H. Temporini (eds.),
Aufttieg und NiedergW~g der R(;mischen Welt 1:25:6. (Berlin md New York,
1988; pp. 42.S2-4269).
Cowley. A. Journalfor Egyptian Archeology (1915) 211-212.
- - . See also above, Samaritan.Limrgy under "Iewish literature."
Cremcr, F.G. Die Fastenansage Jesq. Mk 2,20 um/ Parallelen in der Sicht der
Patristischen und Scholastischen Exegese. (Donner Biblische Beitrltge 23; Bonn,
1964).
Cro.ssan, J.D. Four Other Gospels. (Minneapolis, 1985).
- - . "Tbe Cross That Spote. The Earliest Namrtive of the Passion and ReSUJTection ..,
FORUM312 (1987) 3-12.
- -. .The Cro:rs That Spoke. The Origins of the Passi011 Narrative. {San Francisco,
1988).
· - - . The Hi:rtorical Jll!Sils. The Life of a Mediterranean Jewuh Peasant. (San
Fram:isco, 1991 ).
- - . Wlro Killed Jesll:t? üposing the Roots ofA.ntlsemltism in the Gospel Story ofthe
Death ofJuu:;. (San FBncisco, 1995}.
Cullmaon. 0.: see above, Protevangeli11m under "Chris!ian and Gnostic Ltterature."
Culpepper, R.A. John, the Son of Zebedee. The Life of a ügend. (Studies 011
Personalities oftbe New Testament; Columbia [S.C.], 1994}.
Da!y, R.J. "Sacrifice in Origen." Swdia Palristica 11 (1972) 12s.:..129.
- - - . "Sacrificial Soteriology in Origen's Homilies on Leviticus... In: E.A.
Livingstone (ed.), Shldta .Patristica 17:2. (Oxford, 1982; pp. 872-878).
Daniel, S. hcherches sur le vocabttlaire dt.r cultc dans Ia Septante. (Etudes et
commeataires 61; Paris, 1966).
- - . See also above, Pbilo under «Jewish Literature."
Danielou, J. •·Les Quatre-Temps de septembre et la fete des Tabemacles." La Maison-
Diet.~46 (1956} 114-136.
Damcll, D.R. and D.A. Fie.nsy: see above, HellenlsticS,flllgoga/ Prayers under "Iewish
literature."
Davila, I. "Mel~b.izedclc, Michael, md War in Heaven ... lo: Sociel)l ofBiblicoi Literatun
J996Se'1Jtinar .Papers JS (Atlanta (Ga.],l996; pp. 259-272).
Davidson, Y.: see above, Seder RtJII Sa 'odio Go 'on 1111der "Jewisb literature."
Davison. J.E. "Structuml Similarities ud Dissimilarities in the Thoug.bt of Clemem of
Alexaadria aud the Valea!inians." Second Century 3 (1983) 20 l-217.
374 ßibliography

De Coninck, A...Entering God's Presence. Sac:ramentalism in tbe Gospel of Phllip." In:

Society ofBiblical Literature SeminOI" Papers 37:1. {Atlama [Ga.), 1998; pp. 483-
523).
De Halleux, A. "Le comput l!phtemien du c:yc:lo de Ia Dativit4." 1D: F. Van Segbroeck,
C.M. Tuckett, G. Van Belle and I. Verbeyden (eds.), The Fow Gospels 1992.
Festschrift Frans Neirynck. {Bibliotheca Ephemeridum TheologicatUD'I
Lovaniensium 3; Leuven, 1992; pp. 2369-2382).
Oe longe, M.: see also above, The Testaments of the Twelve PatriarchJ Wider "Jewish
literature."
De Ionge, M. and H.W. Hollander. The Testamen~ of the Twelve Patriarchs. A
Commentary. {Studia in veteris testameDti pseudepigrapha 8; Leiden, 1985).
De Lange, N. Qrjgen and theJews, (Cambrldge, 1915).
De Stryclcer, E.: see above, Protetumgelium under "Christian and Gnostic Literature."
Delana, G. "ll Giomo del Kippiu in Filone di Alessandria." In: p; Vattioni (ed.), Sangue
e antropologia. Ritf e culto. Ani della V Settimana Roma, 26 novembre - 1
dicembre 198-1. (Sangue e antropologia 5!2; R.ome, 1987; pp. 891~0S).
- - . II giorna dell'espim:ione: ii kippur nella tradlzione blblica. (Supplementi all
Revista Biblica 30; Bologna, 1994).
Delssmann, A. Licht vom Osten. Das Neue Tes/(Jlflenl IUid die neuentdeckten Texte der
hellenistisch.römischen Welt. (Tübingen, 4 1923).
Denker, J. Die tlreologi~t~chichtliche Stellung du PetrusevangeJiums. (Europälsclle
H~bschulscbriften, 23. Reihe, 3~; Bern, Frankfurt am MaiD, 1975).
Der Nersessian, S. "La <F!te de l'Exaltation de Ia Croix>." Annuaire de l'institut de
phUologie el d'histoire orienta/es et &laves. Ha:yKoptrera. Melanges Henri
Gregoire 10 (1950) 193-198.
Dcrenbourg, I. "Essai do restitution de l'ancienne rl!dac:tion de MQSsechet Kippourim."
ReVJte du ndesjuive., 6 (1882} 41-80.
Desan, P. L 'imaginaire dconomlque de Ia Rsnais&ance. (Paris, 1993).
Devreesse, R. "Aneieus commentueurs grecs de l'Octateuque.u Revue bihlique 44-45
(1935-1936) 166-191,201-220,364-384.
··--.Lu anciens commentateurs gr~tcs de l'Octateuqw et des Roi1 (Studie Testi 201;
Vatican City, 1959).
Dibelius, M. "Die alttestamentlichen Motive in der Leidensgeschiebte des Petrus- und
Johannesevangeliums." Beihefte zur Zeitschrift fir die alttestamentliche
Wisaenschaft 33 (1918) 125-1 SO.
Dibellus, 0. "Studien zur Geschichte der Valentinianer." Zeitschrift for die
nll.utestamemllche Wissenschaft rmd die Kunde der lJ/teren Kirche 9 (1908) 230-
247; 329-340.
Dimant, D. "The Fallen Angels in the Dead Sca Scrolls and the Relall::d Apocryphes aod
Pseudepigrapha." [In Hebrew with English sunllll3lyJ (Pb.D. dissertatiou, The
Hebrew University of lerusalem, 1974).
- - . "I Enoch 6-11: A Methodological Perspective." Society of Bibllcal Literatlire
Seminar Papers (1976) 323-339.
Dodd, C.H. The ImerpretatiOlt ofthe FarJrth Go.,pel. (Cambridge, 1953).
Dolle, R..: see abovc, Leo the Great under "Christian and Gnostic Literacure ...
Doutreleau, L.: see above., Didymus under ''Christian and G11ostic Ute~ture."
Drab, H.A. "Eusebius on the True Cr065." Journal of EcclesiQSt/cal History 36 (1985)
1-22.
 BibUography 375

Drijvers, J.W. Helerw Augusta. Tht1 Mother ofConsttmtine thc Grilat and the Legetui of
Her Finding the True Cross. (Brill's Studies in Intellectual History 27; Leiden,
1992).
Dunn, J.D.G. The Epistle to the Galatifi1U. (Blaclc:'s New Testament Commentary
Peabody [Mass.], 1993).
- - . 1'he Act!l of the Apostles. (Narrative Commeotaries; Valley Forge [Penn.], 1996).
----..-. 711e Theology of Paul the Apostle. (Grand bpids [Mich.} and Cambridge {UK},
1998).
D11r.md, G. Lu structuru amhropologique.f de l'tmoginaire. (Paris, 12 1992- 1959).
Duval, Y.-M. Le Iivre de JontJll dans la Iitterature chretienne grecque et /tltine. $()flrces
el influence du Commentaire :mr JonilJ de saint Jbome. (2 vols; Paris, 1973).
Eckey, W. Die Apostelguchichte. Der Weg des Evangeliums von Jervsalem nach Rom.
(Neukirche11-Vluyn, 2000).
Eizenböfer, L.: see above, Sacrilmentariu.m Veronense under "Christian and Gnostic
UteratUR."
Elbogen, J. Studien . zur Guchichte des jfi~chen Gottesdimates. (Schriften der
Lehranstalt fiir die Wissenschaft des Judenthums lll-~; Berlin, 1907).
- - - . "Die Tefilla für die Festtage:• Monatsschrift for Geschichte und Wissenschaft
des Judentttms 55 {1911) 426--446, 586-599.
- - . Der jildi8che Gottesdienst in seiner geschichtlichen Entwicklung. (Hildesheim,
1967• repr. of'l93l).
Elior, lt "From Earthly Temple ro Heavenly Shrines. Prayer and Sacred Song in the
Helchalot Utcrature aud Its Relation to Temple Traditions." Jewish Sfudies
Quarterly 4 {1997) 217-167.
- - . "The Merka~~ah TraditiOJl and the fmcrgence of Jewish Mysticism." ln: A.
Oppenb.eimer (ed.), Sino-J11daica. Jew1 and Chinese in Historictll Dialope. An
International Colloqui~~~n NQnjing, JJ-19 October 1996. (Tel Aviv, 1999;
pp. 101-158). .
Ellior:t" J.H. I PeJer. A New Translation with Jnrroduction and Commentary. (Ancbor
Bible 378; New Yorlc, 2000).
Eogberding, H. "Der 25. Dezember als Tag der Feier der Geburt des Herrn." Archiv für
Liturgiewissenschaft 2 (l9S2) 2S-43. ·
- - . "Kann l'elnla der Iberer mit Dioaysius Areopagita identifiZiert werden?" Oriens
Chrutianu:s 38 (1954) 68-J)S.
Epstein, Y.N. Prolegomena ad Lillt~rQ.J Tannaiticas. [In Hebrew] (IeiUS8lem, 1957).
Ettlinger, G.: see above, Theodoret, Eranistes under "Christian and Gnostic Literature."
Falk, D.K. Daily, Sabbatlt, and Festlvtll Prayers in the Dead Sea Scrolls. (Studies on the
Texts oft.he Desert of Judah 27; Leiden, 1998).
Fee, G.D. Paul'E Letter lo the Philippiaru. (New International CommentJtry to the New
Testament; Gnmd Rapids [Mich.], 1995).
Femändez Marcos, N. and A. Saeoz-Badillos: see above, Theodoret of Cyrus under
"'Christian and Gnostic Literat:ure."
Fiensy, D.A. Praye,.s AJ/eged to be Jewish. An &amination of the Constitutiones
Apostoloruu1. (Brown Judaic Studies 65; Chico [Calif.], 1985).
Fiensy, D.A. aod D.R. Damell: sce above, Helleninic Synagogal PrQ]IIIT's under "Jewish
literature.,.
Fine, S. This Holy Place. On the Sonctily of the Synagope during the Greco-Roman
Puiod. (Christianity al:ld Judaism in Antiquity Se:ries 11; Notre Dame [lnd.],
199'7).
376 Bihliograpky

Fischer, L. Die kirchlichen Quatember. Jhre EntJiehung, Ent.wi.clclrmg und Bedeutung m

liturgischBr, rechtlich~~r rmd kuihlrhistori.tchBT Himichl. (Veroft'entl~hungen aus
dem kirchenhistorischen Seminar Manchen IV. Reihe Nr. 3; Munich, 1914).
Fitzmyer, I.A. Romaru. A New Trt111slation wüh lntroduction and Commentary. (The
Anchor Bible 33; New Yorlt, 1992).
- - . The Acta of IM Apostles.. A New TrDI'ISlation with Introduction and Commmtary.
(Anchor Bible Conunentary 31A; New York, 1998)•
.Fleist:her, B. El'etz~lsnzel Prayer and Prayer Rihlals at PortrQ)Htd in the Genizo
Documenta. [In Hebrew] (Publications of the Perry Foun.dation in the Hebrew
Univenity of Jerosalem; Jerusalem, 1988).
- - . "Piyyut and Prayer in Mahzor Eretz ltrael." (ln Hebrew] Kiryat Sejer 63 (1990)
207-262.
- - . "Inquiries Conceming the Triennial Reading of the Torah in Am:ient Eretz-
lsrael." {In Hebrew] Hebrew Union College Annual6l (1991) 43-tH.
- - . "Annual and Triennial Reading ofthe Bible in the Old Synagogue." [In Hebrew
witb English summary) Tarbiz 61 (1992) 2S-43.
Foerster. W. Yon Yalfmlln zu Herakleon. Umer~uchrmgen tiber die Qvelfe.n und die
Ent.wickl•ng der valentinianlschen Gnosis. (Beihafte zur Zeilschrift fllr die
neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der llteren Kirche 7; Giessen,
1928).
Francis, E.T. The E11chorislic Theology ofA.malarius ofMetz. (Paris, 1977).
Fr1112, A. Die Mes.w im Deliischen Mitts/alter. (Darmstadr, 1963, repr. Freiburg, 1902).
Fraser, M.F. "Constantine and tbe En~ia." Studia Patriatica 29 (1997) 25-28.
Frey; I. "Die 'tbeologia croc:if'"lxi' des Johanxaesevaugeliwns." In: A. Dettwiler and J.
Zumstein (eds.), Kremestheologie im Neven Te:~tament. (Wissenschaftliche
UntersuchliDgen zum Neuen Testament 151; Ttibingen 2002; pp. Hi9-238).
Fro!ow, A. La relique de Ia vrale Croix. (Paris, 1961).
Fuller, R.H. "Review of: Jolm Dominic Crossan, The Cross that Spoke. The Origin:l of
the Passion Narrative (San Fzancisco: Harper and Row, 1988)." lntfll'pretation 45
(1991) 71-73.
Fung. R. Y.K. Tl" Epist/e to the Galatimr.s. {The New International Commentary 011 the
New Testament; Grand Rapids [Mich.], 1988).
Gager, J.O. "Jews, Chr.ist$:~ and the Dllll&erous Ones in Between." In: Shlomo
Bidennan and Ben· Ami Scharfstein (ed&.), Interpretation in Religions.
(Philosophy and Religion, a Comparative Yearbook 2; Leiden. 1992; pp. 249-
257).
Gagcr, J.G. Curse tabfett and binding spells from the oncienl world (New York. 1992).
Garcia-Martioez, F. "l.as tradiciones sobre Melquisedec en Iot manuscritos c1e Qwnrän."
Biblica 81 (2000) 70-80.
Garitte, G.: see above, Joha Zosimus under "Cbristian and Gnostic Literature."
Gartncr, Y. "The History ofthe kapparot Rite Regarding the Custom ofMarseille." [In
Hebrew) Sinai 114 (1994) 198-·217.
Geerard, M. aud F. Clrwu.s Ptltrflm Graec{}f'11111. Yolumen Y. Indices, lnitia,
Concodantlae. (Corpus Christianorom; Turnhout, 1937).
Geiger, A. "Zu den Apokryphen." Jiidlscht. Zeit:ichrift ftir Wisseruchaft vnd Leben 3
( 1864) 196-204 ..
G•otto, C. "Hcrac:leon" Encyclopedhl ofthe EarlyChW'ch (1992) wl. 1, p. 374.
Gingras, G.E.: sec above: Egeria under "Christian and Gnostic Literature."
Ginzhetg. L. The Legends oftheJ~3. (7 vols; Philadelphia 1909-1938, reprinted 1967-
68).
 Bibliograph)' 377

Girard, R. The Scape.goat. (Baltimore, 1986).

Godu, G. "Epitres." Dictionnaire de l'archeologie chretie.nne er /ittJrgie SII (1922) 245-
344.
- - . •<Bv~giles.• Dictiormaire de l'arc.hlologie chritienne el litrtrgie S/1 (1922)
852-923.
Goitein, S.D. "Ramadan, the Muslim Montb of fasting.." In: idem, Strtdies ;" lslamic
History mtd JmtitMtions. (Leiden, 1966; pp. 90·110).
Goldschmidt, D.: see above, Seder Rav 'Amram Ga 'on and A.shkenazy Mah:ror u.oder
"Jewish Literature ."
Goldsclunidt. L.: sce above, Tahnu.d, Babyioni.an unde.r "Iewlsh Literawre."
Goldstein. N. "Worship at the Temple in Icrusalem - Rabbinie mterpretation and
Influence." [In Hebrew wilh EDgl.ish summary} (Ph.D. dissertalion, The Hebrew
University of Ierusalem, 1917).
Goldstein Cohen, N. "Earliest evidmce of tbe Haftarah cycle for lhe Sab)?aths between
the 17th of Tammuz and S111ckOI:b in PhUo." Jo'llrnal of J-i1h Stvdies 48 (1997)
225-249
Goodmough, E.R. By Light Light (New H:aven, 193S).
--."Litoral Mystery in Hellenistic 1udaism." In: P. Casey, Lakp, S., Lake, A.K.
(ed.), Qu.antvlacumflll•: Studies Presented to K.. Lake by i'Jipia, Colleaguu and
Friends. (London, 1937; pp. 227-241).
Goppelt, L. Der E1"8te Petru:;brief (aditod by Ferdinalld Hahn; Kritisch·elu~getischer
.Kommentar ilber das Neue Testament I 2/J; Göttingen, 1978).
Grabbe. L.L. ''The Sc:apegoat Tradition: A SIUdy in Early Jewish lntelpH'Iation." Jovrnal
{t.Jr IM Study ofJudai.tm 18 (1987) 152-167.
Gradwohl, R. Die Farben im Alten Testament. (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift ftlr die
alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 83; Berlin, 1963).
Gramagli.a, V.A. "V.isceratio: $CJUantic:a euc:aristica in Tertulliano?" In: f'. Vanioni (ed.),
Sangue e Qll/ropologica nell11 teologia. Atti della V/aenimana, Roma 23-28 nov.
1987. (Sangue e antropologia 6/3; Rome, 1989; pp. 1385-1417).
Grlsser, E. An die Hebräer. Yol 1: Hebr 1-6. (Evangelisch-Katholisdler Kommentar
17/1; Neukilchen-Vluynaud ZOrich, 1990).
Green, J.B. "The Gosp11l of Pt~ter: Soutee for a Pm-c:anonical Passion Narrative?"
Zeitschrift ftir die neutestamentliche Wis:;enschqft !lnd die K11nde der dll.eren
Kirche 18 (1987) 293-301.
-·--. The Death of Jura. Tradition and Interpretation in the Pauion Narrative.
(Wi.ssenschaftlicbe Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament" second series 33;
l"llbingeo. 1988).
Greenberg, M. Ezekiel 1-20. A New Translation wfth Jntroductlt:m and Commentary.
(Anchor Bible 22; Gardeli City (New York), 1983).
Grintz, Y.M. ·"A Seder Avodah for Yom .Kippur from Qumran." In: Chapter:; in the
History af ihe Second Temple (peraqim betoledot bayt sheni). [In Hebrew]
(Jerusalem, 1969; pp. l:SS-158).
Griveau, R.: see above, AI·Biruni, The Chronology o/ Anclent NatiQIU mder "lslamic
Literatw:e."
Guinot, J.-N. "L'ex..!gese du bouc ~missai.re chez C)'rille d'Alexandria et TModoret de
Cyr." Augusttnlanum 28 (1988) 603-630.
- - . L 'uigi.se rie Thiodoret de Cyr (Tb6ologie. historiqne 100; Paris, 1995).
- - - . See also above, Theodoret, Commentary on lsaiah mder ''Christian and Gnostie
LiteraiUre."
378 Bibliograplry

Hacbam, N. "Communal Fasts in tbe Jud.ean Desert Scrolls and Associated Literature."
In: D.M. Goodblatt, A. PinDick and D.R. Schwanz (eds.). Historica/ Penrpectives:
From the Hasmoneans to Bor KoJ.hba z'n Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls:
Proccedlngs of the Fourth International Symposium of the Orion Center for the
Study of Dead Sea Scrol/s and A.ssociated Literature, 21-31 January, ·/999.
(Studies on !he Texts of the Desert of Judah 37; Leiden, 200 I; pp. 127-14.S}.
Hac:btt, H.B. A Commentary on lhB Original Text of the Acts of the Apt»tles. (Boston,
1867). .
Hager, D.A. Mmthew U-28. (Word Biblic:al Comm.entary; Dalla.s [Texu], 1995).
Halbwac:hs, M. La topt)graphie legendaire des evangiles en tvre sainte. Etude de
mimolre col/ective. Prej.. de Ferna11d Dumont. (Paris, "1971).
Hallit" J. "La Croix dans le rite byzautin." Parole de /'Orient 3 {1972) 262-3 I 1.
Halton, T. "Hegesipp." Theologische R.ealeruykloptidie t4 (1985) S60-S62.
Hamerton-Kelly, R.G. "Sac:red Violeace and the Cune ofthe Law (GalatiBlls 3.13): The
Death of Christ as a Satrificial Traversy." New Te.stament Shldies 36 (1990) 98_:.
118.
Hanhan, R. Sachurja. (Biblisc:her Kommentar. Altes Testament 14:7; Neukirchen-Vloyn,
I 990ft).
Hanson, P.D. "RebeUion in HeaveJa. Aza7..el, and Euhemeristic Heroes in 1 Enoch 6-Il."
Joum~tl ofBiblical Literahmt96 (1977) 195-233.
Hanson, R.P.C. The Acu in the Revlsed Standard Ver.sion. With lntroductwn and
Commentary. {The New Clarendon Bible; Oxford, 1967).
Hawting, G.R. "The Tawwabun, Atonement and Ashura." Jt~wish Studies in Arabic and
Islam 17 (1994) 166-181.
Heesterman, J.C. The Brolten WQI"/d ofSacriftce. (Chicago, 1993}.
Heid. S. "Zwei an den Enbinien der Jerusalemer Grabeskirehe gehaltene Predigten des
griechischen Ephram." Oriens Christiarws 84 (2000) 1-22.
Heinemann, J. Prayer in lhi!! Perrod ofthB Tanna 'im and the A.mora 'im. lts Nature and Its
Pmtern.s. (In Hebrew. with P.nglish Summary] (Publications of the Pell'}'
Foundation for Biblical Reseatth in tbe Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Jerusalem, 2 1966).
- - . "The Aneient 'Orden of Benedictions' for New Year and Fasts." (In HebrewJ
Tarbi:r; 45 {1976) 253-267.
Heininger, B...SUndenrcinjgung (Hebr 1,3). Christologisehe Amnerkungen :zum
Exordium des Hebrterbriefs." Biblüche üitschrift [N.F.] 41 (1997) 54-68.
Helm, L. Studie" zur typologischen Schriflauslegrmg im zweiten Jahrh1mdert. Bamabas
und Justin. (Heidelberg, 1971).
Helm, R. «Azazel in Early Jewish Tradition.ft Andrttws University Seminary Studies 32
(1994) 217-226:
Hengel, M. "Zur Wirkungsgeschichte von Jes 53 in vorchrist1icher Zeit." In: B. Janowslci
and P. Stuhlmac:her (eds.), Der .leidende Gottednecht. Jesaja 53 und seine
Wirk.ung.rgeschichte mit einer Bibliographie zu Jer 53. (ForscbUIJgen mm Alten
Testament 14; Tüb.in,geD, 1996; pp. 49-91).
- - . "Der Jude Paul\IS und sein Volk. Zu einem ncuen Acta-Kommentar."
Theologuche Rund.schau66 (2001) 338-368.
- - . "Jakobus det Herrenbruder - der erste Papst?'' In: idem, Po.ulus und Jakobu.s.
Kleine Schriften 111. (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testantont
141; TnbiDgen, 2002; pp. 549-582).
Hennans, Th. Orighle, Theologie sacrificiel/11! du so.cerdoce des chretie~~&. (lb6ologie
historique l 02; Pari5 1996}.
 Bibliography 379-

Himmelfarb, M. "Heavenly Ascent and the Relatiooship of tbe Apocalypses and the
HeltJralot Literature." Hebrf!W Union Collere .4.nnual 59 (1988) 73-100.
- - . hcsnt to Heaven in Jewish anti Christion .4.pocalypses. (Oxford, 1993).
Hock, R.F.: see above, Protevangelium uuder "Christiau and Gnostic Literature."
Hoeek. J.M. "Stalld und Aufgaben der Damaskenos-Forschung." Orientalla Chrilliana
Periodfca 11 (1951).
Hoffman, L.A. The Canoni:ation of the Synagogue Service. (University of Notre Dame,
Center for tbe Study of ludaism md Christlanity in ADtiquity 4; Notre Dame (Iod.]
and London, 1979).
Hofius, 0. Der Vorhang vor dem Thron Gottes. Eine exegetisch-religlonsge.schichtliche
Untersuchung zu Hebriier 6, 19f und I 0,19f (Wi5senschaftlicbe Untersu.cbungen
zum Neuen Testament 14; TUbingen, 1972).
----. Der ChrisMltymnus Phitipper 2,6-J 1. (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum
NeJJen Testament 17; Tflbingen, al991).
--.·"Du vierte Gottesknech~lied in den Briefen des Neuen Testamentes." ln: B.
Janowslci and P. Stuhlmacher (eds.), Der leidende GottesknliiCht. Jesajo 5J ~~nd
seine Wfrkung.sguchiclrte mit einer Bibliographie zu Je:r 53. (Forschungen zurn
Alten Testament 14; Tfibingen, 1996; pp. 107-127).
- - . "'Erstgebonner vor aller Schöpfung' - 'Erstgeborener aus den Toten.'
Erwägungen zu Struktur und Aussage des Christushymnus Kol l,lS-20!'1n: idetn.
Paui"IIJ$tudien /1. (Wissensc,baftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 143;
TUbingen, 2002; pp. 21j--233).
HoII, K. "Die Entstehung der vier Fastenzeiten in der griechischen Kin-:he." ln:
Gesammelte .4.'Uf:rtitze. Vol. 2. Der Osten. (Töbingen, 1923; pp. lSS-203).
Holladay, C.R. 'Theias A.ner' in Helleni.rtiv-.llldoi.sm: o CrUique of the U8e of thls
Category in New Testament Christology. (Society of Biblil:al Literature
Dissenation Series 40; Missoula [Mont.}, 1977).
Hollander, H. W. and M. De Ionge: see De Ionge.
Horbury. W. "The Aaronic Priest:bood in tbe Epistle to the Hebrews." Journal for the
SNdy ofthe. New Tastoment 19 (1983) 43-71.
- - . "Jewish-Cbristian Relations in BarnaiHI.r and Justin Martyr." In: J.D.G. DIDlll
(ed.), J~ anti Christians: The Parting of the Ways .4..D. 70 to 135.
(WisseJJSchaftliche Untersuc.:bungen zum Neuen Testament first 15cries vol. 66;
Tübingen,l992; pp. 315-345).
Hruby, K.. "Le Yom Ha-Kippurim ou Jour de l'Expiation." Orient Syrien 10 (1965) 41-
74,161-192,413-442.
Hunt, E.D. "'Consta.ntine and Jerusalem." Jownal "/ Eccltsiastic4l History 4S (1997)
405-424.
Hurst, L.D. The Epistle to the Hebrew:r. lts Backg7ound ofThought. (Socicty for New
Testament Stucties, Monograph Series 6$; Cambridge, 1990).
Hvalvilc, R. The Stngglt for Sc,.iptvre and Cowmant. The Pvrpo.se o/ the Eplstle of
Barnt~ba:r and Jewish-Cir.riJtian Competition in the Second Century.
(Wissenschatl:licbe Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testll!lCP!, second seties 82;
Tübingen, 1996).
Hyldahl, N. "Hegesippus Hypomnemata." Studia Th~tologica 14 (1960) 7G-l13.
lnbai, 0. "Historical Aspect1 of tbe Chtistian-Jewish Polemic Conceming the Clrurch of
Ierusalem in the Folltth Century (In the Light of Patristic and Rabbinie
Literatute)." [Io Hebrew with English summaryl (2 vols; Ph.D. dissertation, The
Hcbrew Uuiversity of Ierusalem, 1993 ).
380 Bibliograph)!

- - - . "Constantine and tlte Jews: the Prohibition agaiost Entering Jerusatem - History
and Hagiopphy." [In Hebrew with Erqpish summary] Tarbiz 60 (1995) 129--178.
lsaacs, M.E. "Hebrews 13.9-16 Revi.'lited." New Tutament Studiu 43 (1997) 268-284.
Jacobson. H. A Commentary on Pseudo--Philo's Llber Antiquitahlm Bibllcarum with Latln
Text and English Translati011. (2 vols; Arbeiten ZW' Geschichte des antiken
Judentums und des Urchristentums 31; Leiden, 19%).
Janini, J. S. Siricio y tu Cllatro temporas. una investigacion sohre las foentu de la
tspiritNalidad seglaf' y del Sacramentario Leoniano. Le.cciOI'I inagural del curso
1958-59. (Valencia, 1958}.
.Janowski, B ...Er trug U11Sere Silnden. Jesaja 53 und die Dramatik der Stellverttetung."
Zeitschriftfiir Theowgie und Kirche 90 (1993) l-24.
- - . "Azazel." in K. van der Toom, B. Becking and P.W. \'811 der Hont (eds.),
Dlctionary Of Deitiu and Demans in the Bible (Leiden, 1995; eol. 240-248).
Janows.ki, B. and P. Stuhhnaeher {eds.). Derleid.nde Gottesknecht. Jesaja 53 und seine
Wirkungsgeschichte mit einer Bibliographie !11 Jes 53. (Forsc;huogen zum Alten
Testament 14; Tnbingeo, 1996).
Janssens., Y. "H6racl6on. Commentaire sur I'Evangile seton saint Jean." Le Museon 72
(1959) 101-151; 277-299.
Jacquier, E. Les Actes des Apötres. (Etudes bibliques 18; Paris, 1926).
Jeremlas, J. "Amnos, aren, arnioo." Theologisches Wiirterbuch '"m Heuen Testament 1
(1933) 342-345.
Jervell, J. Die Apostelgeschichte. ! Obersetzt und erklärt. (Kritisch-exegetisl:her
Kommentar llber das Neue Testament 3; Göttingea, 1991!).
Jones, F.S. "The Martyrdom of James in Hegesippus, Clement of Alexandria, and
Christian Apoerypba, Includiog Nag Hammadi: A Stndy of Textnal Relations." lo:
D.J. Lull (ed.}, Society of Biblical Literature 1990 Semina; Papers. (SBLSP 29;
Atlanta (Ga.], 1990; pp. 322-335).
Jungma!ln, J.A. Missarum sollemnia. Eine genetische Erklänmg der r~mlschen Mu.se.
(2 vols; Vienna, Freiburg i. Br. and Basel, '1962.).
Kll.$emann, E. Da.' wandemde Gottuvolk. Eine Untusuchtmg zum Hebraubritf.
(Forschungen 2:llf Religion nnd Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 55;
GOttingen, '1959).
Kelly, J.N.D. Golden Mouth. The Story ofJohn Chry.soatom. Ascetic, Preocher, Bishop.
(Grand Rapids [Mich.}, 1995).
Keooel, G. Priihchristliehe Hymnen? Gattungslaitische Studien zttr Frage 1101.:h den
Liedern der /rlJ}ren Christenheit. (Wissenschafdiche Monographien zum Alten und
Neuen Testament 71; Neukirchen-Vluyo, 1995).
Kimelman, R. ..Idcntifying Jews and Christians in Roman Syria·Palestine." In: Erle M.
Meyers (ed.), Galilee through the Centuries. Conjluence ofCultures (.Duke Judaic
Studies Sedes I; Winona Lake [Ind.], 1999; pp.301-33S).
Kirk, A. "Examiniug Priorities: Another Look at lhe Gospel ofPeter'.s Relationship to tbe
New Testameot Gospels.,. New Testament Studies 40 ( 1994) 572-595.
K.ister, M. "5Q13 aud the '.A.vodah: A Historical Survey and Its Signiticance... Dead Sea
Discoveries 8 (2001) 136-148.
K.lauck, H.-1. (transl.) 4. Ma/ckabi.ierbuch. (Jildische Sduiften aus henmisti.scher und
rOmischer Zeit 3:6; G8tersloh, 1989).
- - . aHellenimsehe Rhetorik im Diasporajudentum. Das Exordium des vierten
M~erbucbs (4Makk 1,1-12).'' New Testament Studies3S ( 1989} 451-465.
 Bibliography 381

Klingshim, W. Cauari11s of Arie&. The Making of a Christion Comm11nity in Late

Antique Gtn~l (Cambridge Studies jn Medicval Lifc aod Thought, Fourth Series 22;
Cambrigdc 1994). ·
Knibb, M.: sce above, I El'IOch UDder ''Jewish litemture."
Knobl, l., and S. Naeh. "MiUu'irn veKippurim." (In Hebn:w] Tarbiz 62 (1993) 17-44.
Knüppler, Th. Siihne im Nt~lltm Tutame11t. Stvdien :vm vrchristlichen Verständnis der
Heil:sbedtnJtllng des Todes Jesu. (Wßsenscbaftliche Monographien zum Alten und
Neuen Testament 88; Ncukirchen·Vluyn, 2001).
Kobelski, P.J. Melchizedek tmd MelchireJa. (Catbolic Biblical Quarterly, Monograph
Series 10; Washington, D.C., 1981).
Koester, C.R. The Dwelling of God. Tlre Tabernac/11 in tJJe Ofd TestoiJHint,
llftertestamental Jewish Literatlire and th• New Testament. (Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, Monograph Serles 22; Washington, D.C., 1989).
- - . Hebrews. A. New.Trons/ation with lntrod11ction ond Commentary. (Anchor Bible
36; New York, 2001 ).
Koester, H...'Outside the Camp': Hebrews 13:9-14." Harvord 'Ineologir:al Revitw SS
{1962) 299-317.
- - . "Apocrypßal aod Canonical Gospels." Harvard Theologica/ Review 73 (1980)
IOS-130.
--.lntrodur:tion 10 the New Testament. Yolume One: History, Cultvre, and Religion
ofthe Hell6nistic A.ge. Yolume Two: History and Literaillre of Early Christianity.
(Berlin, New York and Philadelphia, 1982).
--·-. Ancient Christion Gospels. Their History and Development. (Philadelphia and
Londo.o, 1990).
- - . Synoptische Oberlieferung bei den · Apostolisr:hen Jläter'n. (Texte und
Untersuchungen 6S; BerliD, 1957).
Kohler, K. "The Origin and Composition of the Bightee.o. Benedictions witb a Translation
of the Corresponding Essene Pmyers in the Apostolic Constitutions." Hehrew
Union College An11ual 1 (1924) 387-425.
Kosmala, H. "lom Kippar." Juda/ca 6 (1950) l-19.
Köster, H. See: Kocster, H.
Kötting, B. "Die Aufnabme des Beyiffs 'Hiereus' in den christlichen Sprachgebrauch."
In: idem, Eccluia peregrinans. Das Gottesvolle unterwttgs. Gt~sflmmelte Allftdtre.
(Miinsterische Beitrage zur Theologie 54:1; Münster i. W., 1988; pp. 356-364).
Kovacs.l.L. '"Concealment and <Jnostic Exegesis: Clement of Alexandria's lnterpretation
ofthe Tabemacle." Stvdia Palristica 31 (l997)414-437.
Kraft, R.A. "The Epistle of Barnabas: lts Quotations and Their Sources." {Ph.D.
dissertation, HarvaTd Univcrsity, 1961).
- - . "The Weighing ofthe Parts. Pivotsand Pitfalls in the Study ofEarly Iudaisms
and their Early Christian Offspring." In: A. Becker and A. Yoshiko R.eed, The
Ways Thot Never Parted. Jews and Chri~tit.'lh$ in Lote Antiquity and the Early
Middle Age.r. (Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 95; TllbingeD, 2003; pp. 87-
94).
Kraus, W. "Der Jom Kippur, der Tod Jesu und die 'Biblische Theologie'. Ein Versuch,
die jOdische Tradition iD die Auslegung von Röm 3, 2Sf einzubeüehen." In: 1.
Baidermann (cd.), Altes Testament 11.11d christlicher Glaube. (Jahrbuch fllr
Biblische Theologie 6; Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1991; pp. 157-172).
- - . Der Tod Jes-u ab; Heiligtvmlfweihe. Eine Untersuchung zum Umfeld der
SühnltW)rstellung in RtJmer 3,1J-26a. (Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum
Alteo und Neuen Testament 66; Neakirchen.Vluyn, 1991).
·382 Bibliography

Krauss, S. Synagogale Altertiimer. (Berlin and Vienna, 1922).

Kulik, A. "Apoc:alypse of Abraham. Towards the Lost Original." (PhD. dissertation, lbe
Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2000).
Lake, K. and HJ. CadbUiy, The Beginnings of Christianity PD1'1 1. The Acts of the
Apostles. Vol. IV English Translation and Commentary. (Grand Rapids [Mich.],
1965 "'repr. 1932).
Lampe, P. "An Early Christian Inscription in the Musei Capitolini." Studia Theo/ogica.
Scandina~>ian Journal ofTheOIOffY 49 (1995) 79-92.
Lane, D.J. The Peshitta of Llil"llitic:ua (Monographs of the Pesbitta Institute Leiden 6;
Leiden, 1994}.
Lane, W.L. HebrlfWs 9-13. (Word Biblic:al Commentary 478; Dallas (Texas), 1991).
Lang. B. "1!ll." Theo/ogbche11 W'6rterbuch zum Alten Testament 4 (1984} 303-318.
Laporte, J. "'Sacri.fic:e and Forgiveness in Pbilo of Alexandria." Stildia Philonica Annual
I (1989) 34-42.
- - . "The High Priest in Philo of A1exandria." Stildia Philonica Aimual3 (1991) 71-
82 (Ea:rle Hi)&ert Festschrift).
Latte, K. Riimische ReligioMguchlchte. (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft 5/4;
Munich, 1960).
Lauterbach, J. "A Significant Controversy Between the Sadducees and the Phari.sees."
Hehrew Union College ÄPf11llal4 (1927) 173-205.
- - . Rubbinic Essays. (Cinc:innati, 1951 ).
- - . "The Ritual for the Kapparot Ceremony." In: idem, Stvdiu in Jewish Law,
Custom and Folklore. (New York, 1970; pp. 133-142).
- - . Studiu in Jewish Law, Custom and Folklore. (Edited by Bemard J. Bamberger;
NewYork, 1970).
- - . See also above, Mckilta ooder "Iewisb literature."
Le Boulluec: see above, Clement of Alexandria under "Christian and Gnostic Literature."
Le D6aut, R.. "Aspeets de l'interc:ession dans le judaisme ancie.u." Jo11.rnal for the Study
ofJvdaism 1 (1970}35--57.
Le Goff, J. L 'imaginaire medir.~al (Paris, 19&5).
Leclerq, H. "Lectionnaire.'' Dictionnaire de /'archeologie chritienne et Iiturgie 8:2
(1929) 2270-2306.
- - . "'D6funts." Dictionnaire d'archeologie chretienne et de Iiturgie 4 (1921) 427-
456.
Lecuyer, J ...J6sus, fils de Josi!dec, et le Sacerdoce du Cbrist.n Recherehes de Science
Religlewe43 (1955) 82-103.
Lebmann, M.R.. '"Yom Kippur' in Qumnm." Revue de Qrlmran 3 (19()111962) J 17-124.
Lenbardt. P. "Neujahrsfest. III. Judentum... Theologische Realenzyklopadie 24 (1994)
322-324.
Leonhard, C.lshodßd ofM~rw's Eztgeais ofthePsalms 119 and 139-147. A StudyofHis
Interpretation in the Ligltt ofthe Syriac 1}Q111J/ation ofTheodore ofMopsutstia's
Commentary. (CSCO 58S; Subsidia 107; Leuven, 2001).
Leonhardt. J. JtJWbh Worship in Phl/o of Ale;tandria (Texts and Studics in Ancicnt
Judaism 84, Ttlbingen, 2001).
L6vy-Strauss, C. "La geste d' Asdiwal." In: idem. Anthropologie slructurale 11, (Paris,
1973; vol. 2, pp. 175-233).
Lewy, H. "PhilologiS':bes 8U$ dem Talmnd." Phllologus 84 (1929) 377-398.
Liebennan, S. "Hazonot Yannai.,. (In Hebrew) Sinal4 (1939) 219-250.
- - . "The Temple: lts Lay-Out and hocedure." In: idem, Greek in Jewish Palestinc I
Hellurism ii!Jt!Wish Palatine. (New Yorkand Jerusalem, 1994; pp. 164-179).
 Bibliography 383

- . S e e also above "Tosefta" under "Rabbinic literature."

Liebreich. L. "Tbe Insertions in tbe Third Benediction ofthe Holy Days." Hebrm Union
College Annlla/35 (1964) 79-1{11.
Lieu, J. The Theology qf the Johannine Epistles. (New Testament Theology; Carnbridge
[UK], 1991 ).
- - . Image and Realiry. The Jews ln the World of the Christians in the Second
Century. (Edinburgh, 1996).
Ligier, L. "Autour du $acrifice eucharistique. Anaphores Orientales et anamnese juive de
K.ippur," Nouvelle RfMie Tneologiqr.e 82 (1960) 40--55.
- - . Nchfl d'Adam et peche du monde. Bi'ble, K.ipp~~r, E,.charistie (2 vols; Theologie
49; Paris 1960. 1961). •
-."Anaphora orientales et prieres juives," Proehe Orient Chritien 13 (1963) 3-
20.
- - · "Penitence et Eucharistie en Orient. Theologie sur une interference de pribres et
de rites." Orientalia Christiana Periodico 29 (1963) S-78
- - . "C6lebration divine et arwnn~e dans la premiere partie de 1' Anaphore ou Canon
de la Messe Orientale," GregorianiUII 48 (l967) 225-252.
LiUa, S. Clwmmt ofA.lerandria: a Study in Christian Platonilm and Gnostici11m. (Oxford,
1971).
Linder, A. The Jews inthe LegDl Sources ofthe Eor/y Middle Age.s. (Detroit [Mich.] <111d
Jerusalem, 1997).
Loader, W.R.G. Sohn und Hoherpriester. (Wissenschaftlic:he Monographien zum Alten
und Neuen Testament 53; Neuklrc:hen-Vluyn, 1981).
Lohmeyer, E. Der Brief an die Kolosser. (Kritisch-exegetischer Kommentar tiber das
Neue Testament; Göttingen, 1961, fust edition 1930).
- - . Kyrios Je:s'IJII. Eine UntemJclnmg zu Phil2,5-ll. {Heidelberg, 2 1961).
Lohse, E. Märtyrer tm.d Gottesknecht. Untersuchungen zur urchristlichen YerlcSindigung
vom SU/rnelod Jesu Chri:Jti. (Forst.-bungen :r.ur Religion und Literatur des Alten und
Neuen Testaments 64; Göttingen, 2 1963).
Longenecker, R.N. Galati11ns. (Word Biblical Commentary4l; Dallas [Texas}, 1990).
Louf, A. "Caper emissarius ut typus Redemptoris apud Patres." Jferbum Domini 38
(1960) 262-277.
Lueken, W. Michael. Eine Darstellung und Vergleichung der jfJdischen rmd der
morgenländisch-christlichen Tradition V!)lll Errengel Michael. (GMingeo, 1891).
Lupieri, E. "Apocalisse, sacerdoz!o e Yom Kippur." Annali di Storia dell' Excges/ 19
(2002) 11-21.
Luz, U. Das Evangelium nach Malthilus (Mt 26--28). (Evangelisch-Katbollscber
Kommentar .lum Neuen Testament l/4; Nellicircllen·Vluyu, 2002).
Lyonnet, S. "L'bymne <:hristologique de l'6pilre aux Colos:liens et 1a tete juive du nouvel
an." Recherehes de Science Re/igier.tse 48 (1960} 93-100.
Maccoby, H.Z. ''Jesus aod Barabbas." New Testament Studies 16 (1969170) SS-60.
Ma<:donald, 1. A Critfca/ Edition of the Text ofthe Samaritan Yom Ha-Kippur(im}
Liturgy, with Tram/ation thereuf and Comparison with the Corresponding Jewish
Liturgies. (Leeds, 1958).
Mach, M. Entwicklvngsstadien des jüdischen Engelglaubens in vorrabbinischer Zeit.
(Texte und Studien zum antiken Judentum 34; Ttlbingen, 1992).
Made. H. "The Souree of the Malkhl{f)IOt Bcnediction." Jewish Stu.dies Quarterly 9
(2002) 205-218.
Maher, M.: see above, Targumim under ''Jewish literatme."
384 Bibliography

Maicr, J. Yom K:u/1118 zur Gno.ris. Bund~lade, Gottesthron und Mllrkabah. (Salz.burg,
1964).
- - . "The Piyyut 'Ha'omrim le-khiltJ)' shoa • llld Anti-Christian Polemics." In: E.
:Fleischer and 1. Petuchowsky (eds.), Studies in Aggada, Targultl$ and Prayers oj
Israel in Memory of Josef Heinemun.n. [In Hebrewl (Jerusalcm, 1981; pp. 100-
llO).
- - . "SUlme 1111d Vergebung iD der jildischen Liturgie.'' Jahrlnlch ftJr Biblische
Theologie 9 (1994) 14S-171.
Malachi, Z. "The 'Avoda' for Vom K.ippur." [In Hebcew] (Ph.D. dissertation; The
Hebrew University of Jerusalem, l974).
Manns, F. "Une ancienne tradition sur Ja jeunoesse dc Marie." In: idem, Essais sur le
Judeo-Chrlstianisme. (Studium Biblicum franciscanum Allaleeta 12; Jerusalern,
1917; pp. 10~114).
Marbacb, E. '"Nudipedalia." Pauli-Wissowa 1711 (1936) 1239-1241.
Ma.rtyn, J.L. Galatians. A New TraM/ation with lnlrodvclion and Commentary. {Ancbor
Bible 33A; New York, 1997). ·
MIWingberd Ford, J. "Vom Kippur and the Matthean Form ofthe PaterNoster." Worship
4l (1967) 609-619.
- - . "The Forgiveness Clause in the Malthean Form of the OUT Father.'' äitschrift
fti.r die neute:rtamentliclre Wlssen~haft und die K11nde der IIIIeren Kirehe S9
(1968) 127-lll.
Mateos: see above, Typicon of COIIStalflinople Wider "Christian and Gnostic Literature."
Matbews, E.G. (ed., traosl.). .The A.rmenian C0111menttuy on Genesis Alt1'ibuted to
Ephrem the Syrian. (CSCO 572-573; ScriptOfCS Acmeniaei 23-24; Louvain,
1998). .
- - . See also above, Pseudo-Ephrem, (Anncnian) Commentary on Leviticus under
"Christian and Gnostic Literature."
Mayer, G...,Tl.. in TJ&eologi,cha Wörlerlnlch .trun Alten TestamentS (1986} 329-334.
McCollough, C.T. "Theodoret of Cyrus as Biblic:a.t Interpreter and the Presence of
Judai$m iD the Later Roman Empire." Stildia Patristica 18 (1983) 327-334.
MeLean, B.H. The Cvr.sed Chrill. Mediterranean Expulsion Rituals and Ptndine
SoteriologJ. (Jolllllal fur tbe Stud.y oftbe New Testament. Supplement Series 126;
Sheffield, 1996).
McNally, R..E. "Embet Days.." New Catholtc Encyc/(}pedia .S (1967) 296-298.
MeNamara.. M. "Mclebizedek: Gen 14,17-20 in the Targums. in Rabbinie aad Ea:rly
Christian Literature." Blblica 81 (2000) 1-31.
Mehat, A. tt'Ude surfe:. 'Stromates· de Clim~mt d'Alexandrie. (Paris, 1966).
Men;enl.er, R.P.F. and F. Paris. La priere des iglJsu de. rite byzantin. 11. Les fltes. 1.
Grandufitufues. (Amay-sur-Meuse Belgiquc, 1939).
Meritt, R..L. "Jesus BaJabbas and !he Paschal Pardon." Journal ofBiblical Literaturtl 104
(1985) 57-68.
Merke!, J. "Die Begnadigung 3111 Passabfeste." Zeitachrift fiir die neututomentliclle
Wissenschaft und die Kllnde du öltuen Kirche 6 (1905) 293-316.
Merklein, H. "Der Tod Jesu als stellvertretender SUbnetod." In: idem, Stvdie.n Z1l J~~Sws
und Poulw. (Wi.ssenschaftlicbe Untersuchungen zwn Neuen Testament 43;
Ti1bingen, 1987;pp. UJ-191).
- -...Die Bedeutung des K.reuustodes Christi ftlr die paulinische Gerechtigkeits- und
Gesetzesthematik." ln: idem, Swdie.n :zu Jesa und Paulu.r. (Wi$8enschaft!iehe
Unttrsuebungenzum Neuen Testament 43; Ttlbinge.n, 1987; pp. 1-106).
 Bibliogrophy 385

--."Der SObn~.~tod Jesu nach dem Ztrug~~is des Neuen Testaments." In: H.P. Heinz
(ed.), Yersöhmtng in der jüdischen und cluütlichen Liturgie. (Quaestiones
DisputalU 124; Freiburg i. Br, 1990; pp. 155-18:3).
Michel, 0. "kokkinos." Th~ologl~che5 Wörterbach zum Neuen Tatawumt 3 (1938) 812-
SlS.
- - . D e r Briltf an die Hebrlier. (Kritisch-exegetischer Kommenrar iiber das Neue
Testament l3; GöttingeB, 1960).
Mi.c;hel, 0. and 0. BauemfeiDd: see above, Josephus uuder "Jewisb literature.n
Milgrom. J. LevitiCIIs l-16. A New Translation with Jmroduction tmd Comm611tary.
(ADdlor Bible 3A; New York, 1994).
Milik, J.T. "Millci-sedeq et Millci-ma' dans les anciens ecrits jui:fs et chretieas." Journal
for the Study ofJudaism in the Penian, HeUeniltic and Roman Period23 (1972)
95-144.
- - . See also above, Fe8lival Pl'tl)lers and 4QEnoch uoder "Jewish literatw"e."
Mirsk.y, A.: see above, Yosse ben Yosse under "Jewish litcrature.n
Molenberg, C. "A Study of the Roles of Sbemihaza and 'Asa'el in 1 Enocb 6-11."
JOUI'nal ojJt!Wi!lh St11dies 3S (1984) 136-146.
MDo, D. The Old Testament in the Gospel Poaslon Narrative&. (Sbeffield, 1983).
- - . The Epistle to the Romans. (New International Commentary to tbe New
TC5tament; Grand R.apids [Mich.}, 15196).
Morgan, M.H. "Greek and Roman Rain-Gods and Rain-Charms." Tranaaction.r and
Proceeding:s ofthe American Phitologica/A.s.rocilllion 32 (1901} 83-109.
Morgenstern, J. "Two Proph~ies ofthe Fourtb Century B.C. and tbe Evolution ofYom
Kippv.r." Hebrew Union College Annual24 (19S2-19.S3) 1-74.
MoriD, G. "L'origine des Quatte-Temps." Re~~ue Benedictine 14 (1897) 337-346.
--."Review on Fisc:her 1914.'' Rtn~ue Benedlctine 31 (1914-1919) 349-51.
Morray--Jones, C.R.A. ''Transfonnational My&ticism in the Apocalyplic-Merkabah
Tradition." Jo11mal ofJewi~h Studi~ra 43 (1992) 1-31.
- - . "Tbe Temple Within. The Embodimeot of lbe Divine Image and lts Worsbip in
the Dead Sea Scrolls md Otber Early Jewish and Christia.n Sources." Society of
Biblical Litwatwre SemimJr Paper:t31:1 (1998) 400-431.
MW!Ck, 1. ''Presbyters and Disciples of the Lord in Papias. Exogetic Commeots on
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, III, 39." Harvard Theologi'col Review 52 (19.S9)
223-243.
Naeh Uld Knohl: see Knobl.
Nathan, G. ''The Rogation Ceremonie5 ofl.are Antique Gaul. Creation, Tfllll.Smission and
the Role of tbe Bis.hop." Classica et MediallWJiia. ReJ.>ve danoise de philoiogp et
d'histoire 49 (1998) 275-304.
Nau, F. (ed.}. Morty,.ologes ei Mi11ologu orillntawc. Le.s Mtinologes du evangeliaires
coptes-arabes. (PO 1012; Paris I Freiburg i.Br., 1915; pp. 165-244}.
Neirynck, F. "Review of: lohn .Domioic Crossan. Who Killed lesus? Exposing tbe Roots
of Anti-Semitism in tbe Gospel Story of tbe Deatb of Jesus. (San Francisco
(Calif.], 1995)." Epltemeride:s Theologicae LovanieMes 71 (1995) 455-457.
Newma.n. H. "Jerome and the lews." [In Hebrew witb. English summary) (Pb.D.
dissertation, Tbe Hebrew University of Jeru.salem, 1997).
Newsom, C. '"Sectually explicit' literature ftom Qumran." Jn: The Hebrew Btble and Itt
Interpreters (1990) 167-187.
--.See also above, Songs ofthe Sabbath Sacrificc under "Jewish literature."
Nibley, H. "Chtistian Envy ofthe Temple." Jewilih Qvorterly Revit!W SO (1959/60) 97-
123, 227-240.
386 Bibliography

Nick:elsburg, G.W.E. "Apocalyptic and Myth in l Enoch 6-11." J()JirnaJ of Bib/ical

Lirratare. 96 (1977) 383-405.
- - . "Review of: Jobn Dominic CrossaD, The Cross that Spoke. Tbc Origins of the
Passion Narrative (San Francisco: HaTper and Row, 1988)." Journal of the.
Ami!ricon A.cademy of.Religion 59 (1991) 159-162.
- - . 1 Enoch I. A Commentary on tlrt~ Book of I Enoch, Chaplen 1-36; 8/-108.
(Henncne[a; Minncapolis, 2001).
Niederwimmer, K. Die Ditlach6. (KommelllaT zu den Apostolischen Vatern 1; GOtti.Dgen,
1993}.
Nikiprowetzlcy, V. "La spiritualisation des sacrifices et le culte sacrificiel au Temple de
J~!'USalem chez Philon d'Alexandrie." Semilica 17 (1967) 97-116.
Ni~. B. Qumran Prayer and ReligioWI Pot1try. (Studies on the Texts of the Desert of
Judah 12; Leiden, 1994)
- - . "Repentance in the Dead Sea Serolls." fo: P.W. Flint and~.C. Vanderkam (eds.),
Tlre Deatl Sea Scrol/s qftu Fifty J'etll's. A Compnhen.sive As.semnent; Yol 2.
(Leiden, 1999; pp. 145-170).
Nocent, A. "Le quattro tempora." ln: M. Augt, A. Nocent, M. Rooaey, I. Scicolone, A.J.
Chupungco and A.M. Triacca (eds.), Antfm1U13is. Yol. 6: L 'anno liturgica: atorla
teologia e ceiebrazione. (Oenoe, 1988; pp. 263-266).
O'Brien, P.T. Colo5sicms, Philemon. (Word Biblica! Commentary 44; Waco [Texas],
l9ll4).
O'Feargbail, F. "Sir. 50:5-21: Yom Kippur or the Daily Wbole Offering." Bih/ica 69
(1978) 301-316.
Offer, Joseph. "The Masoretic Divisions (Sedarim) in the Boob of tbe Prophets and
Hagiographa." [In Hebrew with Englillh summary] Tarbiz 48 (1989) 155-189.
Ormann, 0. Dtu Sfindenht.kf!nnmis dtt11 'f/ersohnungstages, sein Atifbau und :seine
EntwidcliiiJg, in YerbiJidJmg mit Geniza-Texten untersucht. {Frankfurt, 1934).
Oswalt, J.N. The Book ofIsaiah. Chapters 40-66. (New International Commentary to tbe
Old Testament; Grand Rapids [Mich.) and Cambridge [UK], 1998).
Pagels, E.H. The Johannine GrJspel in Gnostic Exegesis: Heracleon 's CommeniÜTJf on
John. (Society ofBiblical Literature Monoyaph Series 17; Nashville [Tenll.} aod
NewYork.1973).
'Painter, J. Just Jami!S. The Brother of Juus in History and Tradition. (Studies on
Personalities ofthe Ncw Testament; Columb[a [S.C.], 1997).
Patlagean, E. "L'bistoire de l'imaginaire." In: J. Le Goff, R. Cb.artier, and J. Revel (eds.)
La Nowelle Histoire (Paris, 1978; pp. 249-269).
Perrot, C. La Lectare de Ia Bible dans Ia Synagogue. Les ancienmm Jectures
palestiniennu du Shabbat et cles fite:r. (Publica!ions de l'institut de rechetehe et
d'histoire des te:x.tcs, section biblique et massor4tique, collection massorab Serie I.
Etudes Classiques et Textes 1; Hildesheiro, l973).
Pescb, R. Die Apostelguchichie. (Evangelisch Katholischer .Kommentar zum Neuen
Testament 5; ZUrich, Neqkirchen-Vluyn, 1986).
Pfann, S.J. "The Essene YearlyRenewa! Ceremony and tbe Baptism ofRepentance." In:
D. W. Pany and E. Plrich (eds.), Tlle Provo International Corl[erflnci! on the Dead
Sea Scrolls. Tt.clmological Innovation&, Nr!W Texts, ancl .ReformJtlatecl lssues.
(Studies on the Texts oftbe Desert of Judah 30; Leideo. 1999; pp. 337-3S2}.
Philonenko-Sayar, B. and M. Philonenko: see above, Apocalypse of Alm::,ham 11nder
"Jewish literature."
 Bibliography 387

Pines, S. "The Jewisb Chri$tians of the Early Centuries of Christianity Acce>rding to a

New Source." In: G.G. Stro\Ul\sa (ed.), The collectud wor/u of Shlomo Pinu.
Yol. 4. Studies in the History of Religion. (Jerusalem, 1996; pp. 211-284). (=
Procetdings o/the Israel Academy ofthe Seiences and Humanitiu 2 [1966] 237-
310).
Porter, S. "Simeon 3 .... Anchol" Bible Dictionary 6 (1992) 26-28.
PJadels, W., R. Brllndle and M. Heimgartner. "The Sequence and Dating of lohn
Cbrysoslom's Eight Discourses Adver.rus ludaeos." Zeitschrift für Antike und
Christentum 6 (2002) 9G-ll6.
-----. see also above, Chrysostom, Against the JI!/Ws under "Cbristian and Gnostic
Literature."
Pralon, D. and P. Harle {transl.). Le Levitique. Troduction du texte grec de Ia Septante,
inJroduction et nOfes. (La Bible d' Alexandrie 3; Paris, 1988).
Pratscber, W. ~r Herrenbruder Jalrobus und die Jakobustradilion. (Forschungen zur
·Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 139; Gllttingen, i983).
- - - . "Jakobus (Herrenbruder)." Realle:rilr.rm for Arttike und Christentum 18 (1998)
1227-1243.
Prigent, P. L8s testimonla dans Je christianisme primitif. L'Epftre de BarnaM 1-XYJ et
sc source&. (Ewde$ Sibliques 47; Paris, 1961).
Procter, E. Christion conlroJJersy in Alexandria: C/ement'.s polemic against the
Basilideans and Yt~lentinians. (A.merican university studies. Series VII, Tbeology
and religion 172; New York, 1995).
Prostmeier, F.R. Der Barnabasbrief Ober.sef%t und erklärt. (K.onunentar zu den
Apostolischen Vätern 8; Göttingen, 1999).
Puech, E. "Notes sur le manuscrit de XlQMellds~deq." Revue de Qumran 12 (1987) 483-
513.
Quasten, J. and A. Di Berardino. Palrology. (3+1 vols; Westminster, [MD], l-III:l9S0-
1960 [reprint 1992], and IV:l986).
Rabbioovicz, R.: see ahove, Talmud, Babylonian under "Jewish literarure."
Rabinovitz, Z.M.: see above, Yannai under "Jewisllliterature."
Reed., A.Y. "From Asael and Semihazah to Uzzah, Azzah, and Azael: 3 Enoch .'i (§§ 7--8)
and Jewish Reeeption·History of 1 EnQCh." Jewish Studies Quartcrly 8 (201H)
105-136.
Reeg, G.: see above, The StOry ofthe Ten Martyrs under "Jewish Jiterature."
Renoux, A: see above, Old Armenian Lectitmary under "Cbristim and Gnostic
Literature."
Renoux, Ch {=R.enoux, A.). "Les premiers systemes de leeture daas l'o;rient chretien,
J~rusa!em, Edesse, Antioche, et Ia Synagogue.u In: A.M. Triacca and A. Pisto!a
(eds.), La Iiturgie interprete de l'Ecriture. 1. Les leclures bibliq'lles pour lu
dimiJnchu et fttes. Conferences Saint-Serge. XLVJJf sem11ine d'etudes
lilurgiques. Paris, 25-28 Juin 2001. (Ephemerides Liturgicae Subsidia 119; Rorae,
2002; pp. 99-·121)
- - - . See also above, Middle A.rmenian Lectionary under "Christian and Gnostic
Literaf:ll.re."
Reuss: see above, anonymaus from Jerusalem, Commentary on Luke under "Cbristian
and Gnostic Literature."
Rlchard., M: see above, Hippolytus under "Christi an and Gnostic Literarure."
Richter, K. "Ostern als Fest der Versöhnung." In: H.P. Heinz (ed.), Yer$ohmmg in der
jfidischen und chrisllichetr Liturgie. (Quaestiones Disputatae 124; Freiburg i. Br,
1990; pp. 56--37).
388 Bibliograplry

Ricoour, P. "Myth and History." Encyclopedia ofReligion JO (1987) 273-282.

Rjgg. H.A. "Barabbas." Journal ofBiblical Literature 66 (1945) 417-4~6.
Rissi, M. Die Theologie des Hebräerbrieft. (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum
Neuen Testament 41; TO.bingen. 1987).
Ritter, A.M. "Erwiguugen zum Antisemitismus in der Alten Kirche: Acht Reden ober die
Juden." In: B. Moeller aod G. Ruhbach (eds.), Bleibendes Im Wandel der
Kirchengeschichte. (TD.bingen, 1973; pp. 71-91).
Robill$011, I.M. 11re Nag Hammadi Library fn Engluh. (Leiden; 2 1988).
Roloff, J. "hilasmos." Exegetfcal Dicti.,nary ofthe New Testamellt2 (1990) 186.
Rordorf, W. a.nd A. Tuilier. La doctrine des dOIBe apotres (Didoche). lntroductlon,
Texte. Traductitm, Notes, Appendice et /ndo:. (SC 248; Paris, 1978).
Rosenberg:: see above. Misbnah ooder "Jewish literature."
Roth, C. "Ecclesiasticus in tbe Synagogue Service." Jo11rnal of Biblical Literature 71
(1952) 171-178.
Rouwhorst, G: Lu lrymnu pa.5calu d'Ephrem de Nuibe. Analyse lheo/ogique et
a a
recherche $18' /'holution de Ia jite puscale chritienrte Nisihe et Edesse et duns
quelque:s Egllse:J voisinu au quatrieme siecle. (2 vols; Supplements to Vigiliae
Christianae 7; Leiden, 1989).
- · - ·...leviticus 12-15 in Early Christiaaity." In: M. Poorthuis and J. Schwartt (eds.),
Purity and Holinus. (Jewish a.nd Cbristia.n Perspectives Series 2; leiden, 2000;
pp. 181-193).
- - . "The Origins and Evoltati(}ll of jiarly Christlall Pentecost." Studia Po.tristica 3 5
(2001) 309-322. '
Rubiu, Z. "11le Churc:h of the Holy Sepulchre and the Contlict bctwec:n the Sees of
Caesarea and Jerusalem." In: L.l. I.evine (ed.), The Jerusalem Cathedro. 2.
(Jerusalem and Dctroit [Mich.], 1982; pp. 79-105).
- - . "The Cuh (}f ihe Holy Places and Cbristia.n Politics in Byzantine Jerusalem." In:
L.l. Levine (ed.), Jvasalem -lt:s Sunctity and Centralit]l tn Judaism, Christionity,
and Islam. (New York, 1999; pp. 151-162).
Rubinkiewicz, R. Die &cht~tologie von Henoch 9-1 1 und dtU Neue Testament.
{Ö$terreichische Biblische Studien 6; Vienna, 1984).
- - . See also above, Apocaly~e ofAbrahom under "Jewish literature."'
Sabourin, L. "Christ made "sin" (2 Cor 5:21): Sacrifiee and redemption in the bistory of
a f.ormula." In: idem and S. Lyonnet, Sin. Redemption and Sacri/ice. A Biblical
emd Patristk Study. (Analec:ta Biblica 48; Rome, 1970; pp. !87-296).
Saftai, S. "On the History of the Service in the Sec:o.nd Temple." [In Hebrew] Mehkore
Eretz Yisrael(I955) 35-41.
- - . "The Service ofYom Kippurin the Second Temple." [In HebtewJ Maharuzyim
49 (1961) 122·-125.
- - . "Der Versobnungstag in Tempel und Synagoge." In: H.-P. Heinz (ed.),
Yersi>lrmmg in der jiiduchen und christlichen Limrgie. (Quaestiones Disputatae
124; Freiburg i.Br., 1990; pp. 12-55).
Samter, E. "Altrl.lmischer Regenzauber." Archiv ftr Religionswissenschaft 21 (1922)
317-339.
Satran, D. Biblical Prophets in Byzantine Palest/ne. Reassessing the Lwes of the
Prophet:s (Studia 1n Veteris Testamenli Pseudepigr.~pha 11; I..eiden, l99S).
Scbarhert, J. "Stellvertretendes Sühneleiden in den Ebed-Jabwe-Uedem und in
altorientalischen Ri~ltexten." Biblische Zeitsc.hrift [N.F.] 2 (19S8) 190-213.
 Biblicgraphy 389

Schol\elowitz, I. Das steJl'vertetende Huhnopfer. Mit besonderer Berucksichtigung des

jüdischen Yolksglallbens. (Religionsgeschicbtlicbe Versuche und Vorarbeiten
14/3; Giessen, 1914).
Schelkle, K..H. Die Petrvsbriefe. Der Judasbrief (Hcrdcm theologiscller .Kommentar zum
Neuen Testament 1312; Freiburg, Basel, Vienna, 1961).
Schennan, N.N.: see above, Ashkenazy Mah:wr under"Jewish literature."
Schiffman, Lawrence H. "The case of the Day of Atonement ritual.'' Biblical
Per.rpectives (1998) l&l-188.
Schlesier, R. ..Apopompe." Handbuch re/igicn.swissenschaftlir:her Grvndbegriffe 2
(1990) 38-41.
Scbmithals, W. Die Apostelgeschichte du Lull.os. (Zilrcher Bibelkommentare: Neues
Testament ;3,2; ZDrich, 1982).
Schmitz, 0. Die Opfuan:chaJluPJg de: späten Judentum$ und die Opferoutsagen de;s
Neuerr Testaments. (Tilbingen, 1910).
Schnackenburg, R. The Go!pel According to SI. John. (4 vols; Herder's Theological
Comroentary on the New Testament l; Kent, 1968).
Schnelle, U. Ein.le.itlmg in das Neue TeJtament. (Göttingen, ~1996).
Schnusenberg, C. Das Yerhtlltflis von Kirche und Theater. Dargestellt an ausgewdhlten
Schriften der KircheiJVäter und liturgischen Texten bis auf Ama/ariru 11011 Metz.
(Bem, 1981).
Scholem, G.G. Jewi&h GI'/Qsticism, Merkt:Jbah Mystfcism, and Talm11dic Tradition. Based
an the: Israel Goldstein Lecture:s, Delivered at the Jewish Tbeological Seminary of
America, New York. {New York, 1960).
Schollgen, G., and F.-L. Hossfeld. "Heherpriester." Reallexikon for Antike und
Christentum 16 (1994) 4-58.
Sehramm, T. "Feste. IV. Urch.tistenrum." Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwan" 3
(2000) 91-93.
Schlimmer, J. Die altchristliche Fastenpraxis, mit b;esonderer BerücksichtigtJTrg der
Schriften Tertulliorrs. (Münster, 1933).
Schwartz, D.R. "Two Pauline A!lusions to the Redemptive Mechanism of the
Crudfixion." Journal ofBiblical Llterahlre 102 (1983) 259-283.
- - . "'Philo's Priestly Descent." In: F.E. Greenspahn, E. Hilgert, and B.L. Mack
(eds.), Nourishtd withPeace (Chico, 1984; pp. 15!5-171).
Schwartz, E. "Zu Eusebius Kirchengeschichte." Zeitschrift fiJr die natestamentliche
Wis~emchaft und di~ Krtndt der iilteren KiJ'che 4 (1903) 48-66.
Schwartz, J. "'The Enca~nia ofthe Churcb ofthe Holy Sepulchre, the Temple ofSolomon
and the Jews." Theologische Zeitschrift 43 (1987) 265-284.
Schweizer, E.. Der Brief an die Kolosser. (Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum
Neuen Testament; Neukirchen-Vluyn li.Dd Zürich, 1976).
Schwemer, A. Studien zu den frühjüdischen Prophetenlegenden. Vitae Prophetarum..
(2 vols; Telds and Stildies in Ancient Judaism 49 and 50; Tübingen, 1995, 1996).
Scullard, H.H. Festivalsand CeremonieJ ofthe R01n(llf Republic. (London, 1981).
Scullion, J.f'. "A Traditio-Historical Srudy of the Day of Atonement." (Ph.D.
dissertation, Washington, D.C., Catholic University, 1990).
Shinan, A. "'Sermons, Targums, and the Reading ftom Scriptures in the Ancient
Synagogue." In: L. Levine (ed.), The Synagogue in Late Antiquity. (A Centennial
PuWicatioo of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America; Philadelphia, 1987~
pp. 97-110).
Siegert, F.: see above, Pseudo-Phiton, On Jonah under "Jewish Uterarure."
390 Bibliography

Signer, M.A. "Fleisch und Geist. Opfer und Versöhnung in den exegetischen Traditionen
von Judentum und Christentum." In: H.-P. Heinz (ed.), Versöhnung in der
judischen und christlichen Liturgie. (Freiburg i.Br., Basel, and Vienna, 1990;
pp. 197-219).
Siles, J.W. A Scripture Index to the Works of St. Augustine in English Translation.
(Lanham, New York and London, 1995).
Silver, D.J. "The Shrine and the Scroll." Journal ofRejormed Judaism 31 (1984) 31-42.
Simon, M. "La pol~mique antijuive de Saint Jean Cluysostome et Je mouvement
judaisant d'Antioche." In: idem, Recherehes d'histoire Judeo-Chretienne. (Etudes
Juives 6; Paris, 1962; pp. 14(H53). .
- - - . "Le Judaisme berb~re dans l'Afrique ancienne." In: idem, Recherehes d'histoire
Judeo-Chretienne. {Etudes Juives 6; Paris, 1962; pp. 30-87).
- - - . Veru.s Israel. A Study ojthe Relations between Christians and Jews in the Roman
Empire AD 135-425. (Littman Library of Jewish Civilization; London, 1996;
French original, Paris 1964).
Sindawi, K. "'Ashura' Day arui Yom Kippur." Ancient Near Eastem Studies 38 (2001)
200-214.
Skarsaune, 0. The Prooffrom Prophecy. (Supplements to Novum Testamentom 56;
Leiden, 1987).
Smid, H. Protevangelium Jacobi. A Commentary. (Apocrypha Novi Testamenti 1:1;
Assen, 1965).
Spicq, C. L 'Epitre DIIX HebreiJX. Yol. I; Introduction. Vol. II: Commentaire. {2 vols;
Etudes Bibliques; Paris, 1952/53). ·
Stemberger, G. Einleitung in Talmudund Midrasch. (Munich, 8 1992).
- - - . Jews and Chri.stians in the Holy Land. Palestine in the Fourth Centwy.
(Edinburgh, 2000).
Sterling, G.E. "Ontology versus Eschatology: Tensions between Author and Community
in Hebrews." Studia Philonica Annua/ 13 (ln the Spirit of Faith. Silldies in Philo
and Early Christianity in Honor oj David Hay) (Leiden, 2001; pp. 190-211) [I
only bad a pre-published version available].
Stern, M. Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism. Edited with Introductions,
Translationsand Commentary. (3 vols; Jerusalem, 197~1984).
Stettler, C. Der Kolosserhymnus. Untersuchungen zu Form, traditionsgeschichdichem
Hintergrund und Aussage von Kol 1,15-20. (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen
zum Neuen Testament, second series 131; T1lbingen, 2000).
Stökl, D. "Yom Kippur in the Apocalyptic lmaginaire and the Roots of Jesus' High
Priesthood. Yom Kippur in Zechariah 3, JEnoch 10, IIQMelkizedeq, Hebrews
and the Apoca1ypse of Abraham 13." In: J. Assmann and G.G. Stroumsa (eds.),
Transformations of the Inner Self in Ancient Religions. (Studies in the History of
Religions 83; Leiden, 1999; pp. 349-366).
- - - . "The Christian Exegesis of the Scapegoat between Jews and Pagans." in A.l.
Baumgarten (ed.), Sacriftce in Religious Experience. (Studies in the History of
Religions 93; Leiden, Boston, and Co1ogne, 2002; pp. 207-232).
Stökl Ben Ezra, D. [= Stökl, D.] "'Christians' Celebrating 'Jewish' Festivals of Autwnn."
In: P.J. Tomsou and D. Lambers-Petry (eds.), The Image ofthe Judaeo..Christians
in Ancient Jewish and Christion Literatllre. Papers Delivered at the Colloqrtium of
the Institrttllm Iudaicum, Brussels 18-19 N011ember, 200I. (Wissenschaftliche
Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 158; Ttlbingen, 2003; pp. 53-73).
 Bibliography 391

- - . "Whose Fast Is lt? The Ember Day and Yom Kippur." In: A.H. Becker and A.
Reed (eds.), The Ways That Never Parted: Jews and Christians in Antiquity and
the Early Middle Ages. (Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 95; Tübingen,
2003; pp. 259-282).
Stone, M.E. "Apocalyptic- Vision or Hallucination?'' Mi/la wa-Milla 14 (1974) 47-56.
- - . ''The Book of Enoch and Judaism in the Third Century B.C.E." Catholic Biblical
Quarterly 40 (1978) 479-492.
Strack, H.: see above, Mishnah under "Jewish literature."
Strand, K.A. "An Overlooked Old-Testament Background to Rev 11:1." Andrews
Unillersity Seminar Studies 22 (1984) 317-325.
Strecker, G. The Johannine Letters. A Commentary on I, 2, and 3 John. (Hermeneia;
Philadelphia [Penn.}, 1996).
Stroumsa, G.G. '"Vetus Israel': Les juifs dans Ia littt6rature hierosolymitaine d'6poque
byzantine." Revue de l'hlstoire des re/igions205 (1988) IIS-131.
- - . "The Early Christian Fish Symbol Reconsidered." In: I. Gruenwald, S. Shaked
and G. Stroumsa (eds.}, Messiah and Christos. Studies in the Jewish Origins of
Christicmity [Festschrift D. Flusser]. (TObingen, 1992; pp. 199-205).
Stuckenbruclc, L.T. The Book of Giants jrom Qumran. Tuts, Translation, and
Commentary. (Texte und Studien zum antilcen Judentum 63; Tübingen, 1997).
Stuhlmacher, P. "Zur neueren Exegese von Röm 3,24-26." In: idem, Versöhnung, Gesett
und Gerechtigkeit. Aufsätze zur biblischen Theologie. (Göttingen, 1981; pp. 117-
135).
- - - . "Das Lamm Gottes- eine Skizze." In: H. Cancik, H. Lichteoberger and P.
Schäfer (eds.), Geschichle- Tradition- Reflexion (FS M Hengel). Vol. 3 Frühes
Christentum. (Tübingen, 1996; pp. 529-542).
- - - . ''Jes 53 in den Evangelien und in der Apostelgeschichte." In: B. Janowski and P.
Stuhlmacher (eds.), Der leidende Gottesknecht. Jesaja 53 und seine
Wirkungsgeschichte mit einer Bibliographie zu Jes 53. (Forschungen zum Alten
Testament 14; Tübingen, 1996; pp. 93-105).
Sulcenilc, E.L. The Ancient Synagogue of Beth Alpha. An Account of the Ezccwations
Conducted on Behalf of the Hebrew Unillersity, Jerusalem. (Jerusalem and
London, 1932).
Suntrup, R. Die Bedeutung der liturgischen Gebärden und Bewegungen in lateinischen
und deutschen Auslegungen des 9. bis 13. Jahrhunderts. (Milnsterische
Mittelalter-Schriften 37; Munich, 1978).
Swartz, M. Mystical Prayer in Ancient Judaism. An Analysis of Ma'aseh Merkavah.
(Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 28; Tübingen, 1992).
- - - . "Ritual about Myth about Ititual: Towards an Understanding of the Avodah in
the Rabbinie Period." Journal ofJewish Thought and Philosoplry 6 (1997) 135-
155.
- - - . "Sage, Priest,· and Poet. Typologies of Religious Leadership in the Ancient
Synagogue." In: S. Fine (ed.), Jews, Christians, and Polytheists in the Ancient
Synagogue. Cultural Interaction during the Greco-Roman Period. (Baltimore
Studies in the History of Judaism; London and New York, 1999; pp. 101-117).
- - - . "The Semiotics of the Priestly Vestments in Ancient Judaism." In A.l.
Baumgarten (ed.), Sacriftce in Religious Experience. (Studies in the History of
Religions 93; Leiden, Boston, and Cologne, 2002; pp. 57-80).
Synge, F.C. Hebrews and the Scriptures. (London, 1959).
Tabory, J. Jewish Festivals in the Time of the Mishnah and Talmud. [In Hebrew}
(Jerosalem, 1995).
392 Bibliograplr.y

Taft, R..F. aud A. Kazhdan. "Cross, Cult of the." The Ozford Dictionary of Byzanttum 1
ss
(1991) 1-553.
Talley, T J. "Thc Origin of the Ember Days . .All lncooelusive Postscript." In: Ritwls
(MeleUJge:~ P.-M. Gy). (Paris, 1990; pp. 465-412).
Tampellini, S. "L'esegesi del Levitico di E$icltio di Gerwalemme. Ossecvazioni
introduttive e sondaggi prelinlin.ari." Annali di stor{Q dell'e:regesi 13/I (1996)
201-209.
- - . "lntroduzione aJlo studio del Commentarius in Leviticum di Esichio di
Gerusalemme." (Ph.D. dissertation; Bologna, 1998).
Telfer, W. "Was Hegesippus a Iew?" Hul"'!ard Theological Rniew S3 (1960) 143-153.
Ter Haar R.omeJW, B ...Early Antiochene Commentaries on Exodus." In: E.A.
Livingstone (ed.), Studia Patri.stica 30. (Louvain, 1997; pp. I 14-119).
Thoissen, G. Tlre Religion of tlre. Barliest Churche.s. C,.eatlr~g u Symbolic World.
(Minneapolis, 1999).
Theodor, 1. and C. Albeck: see above, Genesis Rabbah liDder "Jewish literature."
Tidwell, N. "Didache XIV:l (KATA KYPIAKHN .6E KYPIOY) revisited." Jligiliae
Christianoe 53 (1999) 197-207.
Tigchelaar, E.J.C. Prophen of Old and the. Day of the End: Zechuriah,. the BooA of
Watchers ar.dApocalyptic. (Oudtestamentische Studien 35; Leiden, 1996).
Trlmlde, H.: see above, Tertullian under ..Christian aod Gnostic Litecature."
Treat, J.C. "The Two Manuscript WilDesses to the Gospel ofPeter." In: D.J. Lull (ed.),
Society of Biblicul Literature 199{) Seminar Papers. (Atlanta, 1990; pp. 391-399).
Tyson, J. Images ofJurlafsm in Lulce-Acts (Columbia [S.C.J, 1992).
- -...Jews llld ]udaism in Luke-Acts: Reading as a Godfearer." New Tutoment
Studies 41 (1995) 19-38.
Urbach, E.E. The Sages. Their CoiiCepts and Belieft. {2 vols; Jerusale~m, 1987 >- 2 1979).
Vajda, G. "Jetioe musubnane etjellnejuif." Hebrew Union CollegeAnnua112-l3 (1937-
38) 367-335.
van den Hoelt, A. Clement of ,Cle:ot.~mMa, and His Use of Plrilo in the Stromatei.s.
(Supplements to Vigiliae Christian.ae 3; Leiden, 19&8).
van Esbroeck, M...Une hom61ie sur I'Eglise attribu~ 1\ Jean de Jerusalem." Le M!Aion
86 (1973) 283-304.
- - . "Jean Il de J6rusalem et les cultes de S. Etienne, de la Sainto-Sion et de la
Croix." Analeeta Bollandiana 102 (1984} 99-134,
van Goudoever, l. Biblicol Calmdars. (Leiden, 1959).
van Henten, J.W. "Martyrdom and Per.secution Rovisited: The Case of 4 Maccabcu." In:
W. Ameling (ed.), Märtyr'er und Märtyrualden. (Attertumswi$SC11Sc:haftliches
Kolloquium 6; Stnttgart, 2002; pp. 59-75).
van Tongeren, L. ualtatio crucis. Hetfeest von KruuYerhejjing ende zingningvan het
kntis in het Westen tijdcN tle vroege rniddeleeuwen: Een liturgie-historische
.studle. (TFT Studie$ 2S; Tilburg, 199.5).
- -...Vom Kretmitas zur Kreuzestheologie. Die Entstehun~geschichte des Festes
der Kreuzerhöhung und seine erste Ausbreitung im Westen." Ephemeridu
Liturgicae lli (1998)216-245.
- - . üaltatiOfl of the Cross: Towardlt!r. OrigiN of the .FeilSt of the Cross ond the
Meanmg of the Cross in Eorly Medieval Liturgy. (Liturgia condenda 11; Leuven,
2001).
Vanderkam,. J., C. Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition. (Catholi.c Biblical
Quarterly, Monograph Series 16; Wasblngton, D.C., 1984};
 Bibliogrophy 393

Venetiaaer, L. "Ursprung und Bedeutuog der Propheten-Lektionen.'' ZeitJChrlft der

Deutlehen Morge.nltilu:Jisclren Gesellschaft 63 (1909) 103-170.
Verhelst. S. "La Iiturgie de Jt!rusalem a l'epoquc byzantine. Gen6se et structares de
l'aanc!e liturgique." (Pb.D. disserta!ion, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem,
1999).
- - . "L'apoealypsc de 7..aeharic, Sim~ et Jacques." Re~~N4! Bibliqu~ lOS (1998) 81-
104.
- - . "b .IS Aoil.t,1e 9 Av et 1e Kathisme... QuestiOM Liturgtquea 82 (2001) 161-191.
---."Une fonnule du Yöm ICippour." In: idem, Lu tradilionsjudlo-chr4tiMnes dans
la LihlrgiB de 1aint Jacq11es. (forthcoming).
Versnel, H.S. "Quid Athenis et Hierosolymis." In: 1.W. van Hcnten (ed.), Die Enutehung
der jlldischen Martyriologle. (Leiden, 1989; pp. 162-196).
Verstrepeo, J.-L. "Origines et installJ'ation des Quatre-Temps a R,ome." Re~~ue
BenUictine 103 (1993) 339---365.
Vjnc:ent, H., and F.-M. Abel. Jinlsalem: recherches tk topographie, d'archeologie et
d'hlstoire. (2 Yols; Paris, 1912-26),
Volgger, E. Die Feier des K.arfreitag!l bei Amalar von Metz (77$n8~JO). (Ph.D.
dissertation; Vienna, 1993).
Völker, W. Der wahre Gnostiker nach Clemens .4./uandrimtl. (Texte und
Untersuchungen S7; Berlin, 1952).
Vollenweider, S. "Der 'Raub' der Gottgleic:hheit: Ein R.eligionsgescbichtlicher Voncblag
zu Phi12.6-(ll)." New Testament Studies 45 (1999) 413-433.
Watts, J.D.W.Jsaiah 34-66. (Word Biblical Commentacy 25i Waco [Texas], 1987).
Weinfeld, M. ;'Prayer and Liturgical Practice in the QtllllnUl Sec:t." In: D. Dimant and U.
R.appaport (eds.), The Dead Se.a Scrolls. Forty Years of Rqearch (Studies on the
Texts ofthe Desert ofJudah lO; Leiden, Jerusalem, 1992; pp. 241-258).
Wei.s5, H.~F. Der Brief an die Hebräer. (X.ritiK:h·cxcgeti~her Kommentar über das Neue
Testament 13; G~ttingen, 1991).
Weiss, Z.E., and E. Netzet (eds). Promise und Re.demption. A Synagogtle Mosaicfrom
Sepphoris. (Jerusalem, 1996).
Weissman Jcnelit, J. "'Me.rry CbanukB': The Changing Holiday Practices of American
Jews, 1880-1950." ln: J. Wertheimer {ed.), The Uses of Tradition. Jewish
Contifll4ity in the Modern Ert1. (New York and Jerusalem., 1993; pp. 303-325).
Welldland, H.-D. "Feste und Feiem 111. Im Urchristentum." Religion in Geschichw und
Gegerrware2 (1958) 917-919.
Wengst, K. Tradition 111rd Theologie du Bamabasbriefes. (Berlin and New York, 1971).
Dru Johannesevangelium. (Theologischer Kommentar mm Neuen
Testa..nent 4:1; Stuttgart, Berlin and Cologne, 2000).
- - . See also above, General Collectlons under "Christian and Gnostic Literature."
Wenschk:ewilz,. H. D;e Splrihlalisier~~~rg der Ku/tJUbegriffo. Tempel, Prifl8ltll' fmd Opfer
Im Neaen Testament. (Angelos -Archiv fllr neutestamentliebe 7..eitgeschicbte und
Kulturkunde 4; Leipzig, 1932).
Werline, R..A. PenlterttiaJ Prayer in &cond Temple Judaism. 1'he Developrnent fJf Q
Religiaw lMti/Jition. (Society of Biblieal Literatnre, Early Judaism aad Its
Literature 13; Atlanta (Georgla], 1998).
Werner, E. The Stlcred Bridge. Litu'1Jical Parallels in Synagogue and Early Church.
(New York, 1959).
Wieder, N. The Judean Scrolls and Karaism. (London, 1962).
- - . "The Fonn ofthe Thlrd Benediction of the ·A.",idu on Rmth Hashshana and Yonr
Kippur." [In Hebrew] Tarb~ 34 (1%4) 43-48.
394 .Bibllograplry

Wilckens, U., Der .Brif.[ an die Rö~r~er, (Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar 6:1-3;

Neukirchen·Vluyn and ZOrich, 1978, 1980, 1982).
Wildberger, H. Jesaja. 1. Teilband. Jesajtl 1-11. (Biblischer Kommentar X/I;
Neukircben-Vluyn, 1972).
Wilken, R. Judaism and the Early Christlall Mind. A Study of Cyril of Alexandria 's
&egesi:~ and Theology. (New Haven [CoDD.] and London, 1971).
- - . John Chr)lsoslom and the Jews. Rhetlroric artd Reality in the Late F<nnth
Centvry. (The Transfomation ofthe Classical Heritage 4; Berlc:eley, Los Angeles
and London, 1983).
- - . "Origen's Homilies on Leviticu:r and Yayilt7a Rabbah." In: G. Dorival and A. Le
Boulluee (eds.), Origeniarra Suta. Origene et Ja Bib/e I Origen and the Bible.
Ar:te1 du ColltKplillm Origenia1111m Sexlllm Chantilly, 30 aoVI- 3 septembr« 199J.
(Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologiearum Lovaoiensium 118; Leuven, 1995;
pp. IH-91).
Wilkinson, J. "Jewish Influences on tbe Early Christjan Rite." Le M11seon 92 (1979) 347-
59.
- - . Egeria'sTl"avels to theHolyland. (Jerusalem, al981).
William$, D.J. Act.s. (A Good News Commentary; San Fr.mcisco, 1985).
Willis, G.G...Ember Days." ln: idem, Essays tn Early Roman Lit11rgy. (Aic;uin Club
Col!ections 46; London, 1964; pp. 49-97).
Windisch, H. Die apooto/i&chen Yätu 111. Der Baf'llabasbrief. (Handbuch zwn Neuen
TellttU.nent. Ergänzungsband; Tllbi!.tgen, 1920).
Winston, D. "Philo's Doelrine of Repentance." In~ I.P. Kenney (ed.), The School of
Mosea. Studies irr ~ilo 01ld Helleni:tic Religion in Memory ofHorsi R. Moehring.
(Studia Philoniea Monographs 1.: Brown Judaic Studies 304; Atlanta (Ga.), 1995;
pp. 29-40).
Wintermute, O.S.: see above, Apocal)lpae of Elijoh and Jubi/ees under "Iewish
literarure."
Witherington, B. The Act:1 oj the Apoatles. A Soci~·Rhethoric.:zl Commentary. (Grand
Rapids (Mich.}, 1998).
Wong, C.-K...The Interpretation of Zechariah 3,4 and 6 in the New Te.s.tament and Eady
Christianity!' (Ph.D. dissertation, Westminster Theologjcal Seminary, 1992}.
Wratislaw, A.H. "The Scapegoat-Barrabas." Expooitor)l Times 3 (1891192) 400-403.
Wright, R.B.: sec above, Psolms ofSolomon under ..Jewi.1h Literatnre."
Wrigltt, W.C.: see ilbove, Julian under "Pagan Litexature."
W!!!l.der:er, C. Bruchsliicke einer afrik(JIIischen Bibeliiber~etzu1tg in der
pat:lldocyprianilchen S.clrrift Exhortatio de paenitentia. (Programm der kgl, Bayer.
Studienanstalt zu Erlangen; Erlangen. 1SS9).
Yadin, Y.: see above, llQTempleScrol/under"Jewish Uteratore."
Yabalom, J. Poetry und Society in J~i:Jh Golflee of Late A.ntiquity. (In Hebrew] (Tel
Aviv, 1999).
- - . See also above, 'A.romcm le 'EI and 'Az be 'Ei11 Kol under "Jewish lite.rature,"
Yonng. F. The Us« ofSacrificialldeas in Greek Christiall Writers. (Patristic: Monograph
Series S; Philadelphia, 1979).
Yonng, N.H. "The Impact ofthe Jewisb Day of Atonement upon the Tbought ofthe New
Testament." (Ph.D. dissertation; Manchester, 1973).
- - . "An Aristophanic Conttasl to Philippians 2:6-7." N~ Tutame111 Studies 4S
(1999) 1S3-1S5.
 Bibliogrophy 395

Yuval, I. "Easter and Passover As Early Jewish-Christian Dlalogue.'' In: P. Bradshaw and
L. Hoffinan (eds.), Passever ond Emter. Origin and History to Modern Times.
(2 vols; Two Liturgical Traditions S aad 6; Notre Dame [Ind.], 1999; vol. 2, pp.
98-124).
Zahn, T. "Brllder und Vettem .JeSil." ln: idem, Forschungerr zur Geschichte des
neutestamentlichen K.anoM und der altkirchlichen Literatur. (11 vols; Leipzig,
1900; vol. 612, pp. 225-372).
Zani, A. "'Tracce di un'interessanle, ma sconosciuta. esegesi midrdica giadeo-eristiana
di Lev 16 in un frammento di ippolito." Bibbla e Orirmle 24 (1982) 157-166.
Ziromerli, W. Ezechiel. 1. Teilband: E~echiel 1-24. {Bibli$cher Kommentar XIIUl;
Neukircheu·Vluyn, 1969).
Zuck.schwerdt, E. "Das Nazirlat des Herrenbruders Jakobu.'l nach Hegesipp (Easeb, b.e.
U 23,5-6)." Zeitschrift flJr die neutestamentliche Wissen&clraft 11nd die Kunde der
dlteren Kirche 68 ( 1977} 276-287.
Zulai, M.: see above, Yani:!ai under "Jewish Literanue."
 Index of Sources

Old Testament
Genesis 32-34 319
4:3 123 32:11-14 55, 123, 318,319,
6:1-4 86 321
6:15 199 32:30 122
6:16 199 33:9 89
lS 92,237 34:lff ss. 122-123
17:23-27 123 34:6--7 123
22 129 34:7 89
22:13 61 35-40 95
37:21 96-91 38:5-SLXX lOS
37:31 126
37:31-33 67 Lcviticus
38:30 170
4 113
4:20 104
Exodus 5:5 26
3 237 8 187
15:22-26 47 8:9 24S
16 47 8-9 95
17:1-7 47 10 95, 102,300
18 121-122 14 27, 170 ..
18:13 121 16 (selection) 18, 21.28-33,54-
19:1 122 55, 62, 70-71, 81-
23:14 308 82, S6, 87, 93, 100,
23:14-17 307 117, 146, 171, 173,
24 187 187,262,318-321
25:4 170 16:1 95, 102,300
25:9LXX 183 16:1-28 21
25:17 lOS 16:2-J 106
25:17-22 lOS 16:3 31
2S:40LXX 183 16:4 28,29,102,239
26-28 238,239 16:S 31, 102
26:1 170 16:6 26,29
26:31 170 16:7-10 29
28:36ff 245 16:8 103
28:38 245 16:10 26, 102, 103-104,
29 271 160
30:10 18, 30, 138-189 16:11 26,29
32-33 95 16:12-13 30, 193
398 lnda ofSqurcts

16:13 106 25:10 104

16:14 30
16:15 30, 102, 160
Nambers
16:16 30, 182-UJ
16:17 102, 110, 125, 181 3:4 102
16:17 LXX 110, 125 S:7 26
16:18-19 30 6 24.5
16:18-20 189 6:1-7 248
16:20 Sl, 102-103, 182- 14:18 89
183 14:18-20 56
16:20-22 160 19 170, 187-188
16:21 26, 31, .SI, 88, 89, 29:7 34, 106
96, 102, 123, 175 29:7-11 18; 28,31-32,.54-
16:21-24 169 ss, 32G-321
16:22 88, 94, 102, 117, 29:8 31
177 29:8-10 22,32
16:22-23 88 29:8-11 23
I6:23-24a 31 29:11 32, 150, 160
16:24 29, 31, 81, 102-103
16:24-2.5 32 Deuteronomy
16:26 104
4:24 229
16:27 32, 192 8:3 33, 47,97
16:28 192
U:2 90
16:29 33,106
21:1··9 169
16:29-31 34 21:7-8 169-170
16:29-34 21, 26, 160, 212
21:23 1.54, 164, 173, 175,
16:30 47,53 178-179
16:31 16,33,102
27:26 154, 173, 175
16:33 102
29:28 39,339,341
16:34 !81
3!:16 38
17:7 128
32 44
18 55,99,320
32:2b 44
18:5 173
18:30 55
23 76 Joshua
23:26-32 62 4:19 97
23:27 15, 74, 104, 106
23:27LXX l.S
23:27-32 18, 26, 34, 54-55, I Kings
100, 160,318-321, 6:22 253
334 8 123,291,294
23:28 15, 104 8:65-06 293-294
23:29 74, 106, lSl, 219 13:36ff ss
23:32 74,106 18:42-45 248
23:34-43 318,319,321 22:19 80
23:39 39 22:19-22 82
25:9 15
25:9LXX u· 1Chron
25:9-lO 18, 91, 102-103
25:9-13 90 28:11 LXX 183
 Index ofSoiiJ"ces 399

28:12LXX 183 llO:J 186

28:18LXX 183 110:4 184
28:19LXX 183 119 {118):131 327-328
141 (140):1 327-328
141 (140):3 327-328
2Cbroo
5-1 291
6--7 123 Proverbs
1 123 10:10 209
7:8-10 123,293 12:2.5-13:3 327-328
7:9-10 291 18:3 92.,93
1 ):15 128 20:27 337
30:15-20 177
lsaiah
Ezra 1;11 254
3-S 195 1:13-l4LXX 15,34
9:6 53 1:18 130-131,268
1:18-19 268
Nehemia 6 79,80,82
6:1 80
1:3 92-93 6:2 80
8:1-10 318,310-)21 6:3 80
9:33 43 6:5-7 80
13:21 128
Job 26:11 LXX 186
1:6 80 30:5 92-93
34:14 128
2:1 so 159, 161, 165
33:24 66 50:6
38:15 285 52:7 90
53 116--117, 177-178,
179,208 .
Psahns 53:4 111, 179
7:8-9 90 SJ:S 117, 177, 179
15:3 92-93 .53:6 117
27 S6 53:7 117, 177, 179
32:5LXX 89 53:7--8 117
34:13 70-71 53:8 117, 177
37:11 98 53:9 179
37:19--20 98 53:10 117
47:IOLXX 295 53:10-12 177
S9:8bLXX 295 53:11 117.179
69 (68):22 151, 164 53:12 117, 177, 179
82:1-~ 90 S7:15ff 55,320-321
83:5LXX 295 .57:1S-58:14 5.5,321
83:Jlb LXX 29.5 58 56, 70, 72, 7.5-76,
103 (102):4 93 71, ISS, 156,280
103:14 39 58:1-S 73
106:6 43 58:3-5 34
107;10-21 66 58;4-S 70-71
400 Index of&urces

SS;.Sff 320-321 Obadiah 56

58:6 56, ISS, 156, 160
61:1 56
Jooab 55, 56, 58, 70-72,
61:1-3 90 75-76, 160,253,
280,320-321
Jeremiah 2:7 93
1:29 245 3 34
11:20 338
13:17 273 Micah
30:8-11 318-319,321
7:14--20 318-321,:322
7:18 56
Ezek.iel 7:18-20 56,319
1 80 7:19 267-268
8:11 106
9-10 80 Habaldc:uk
10 80
10:1 2:4 173
80
13:11 285 2:15 98
J3:9LXX 89
33:11 342-343 Haggai
36:25-26 187 1--2 195
42:15 LXX 183-184 2:26 183
43 199-200
43:13 199-200
43:14 199-200 Zechariah 195
43:14--20 105 1:8 80
43:17 199-200 2:13-3:4 327-328
44:17-18 247 3 79, 80-82, 92-94,
95, 101, 160, 165,
180, 194-197, 225,
Daniel 90
333
7:9-10 80, 82, 229, 291 3:1 8Q
9:5 43 3:1-5 163
9:25--26 90 3:2 92
6:1-3 80
Hosea 6:9---15 !95
14 56, 133,319 8:14--19 318-321
14:2-10 8;19 73, 306, 307, 310-
318-321,322
'14:2-3 320 312
14:3 12:10 159, 161, 165
133
14:10 320
Maleal;bi
Alllos 1:11 217,218
1:12-13 218
9 200
9:1 199 1:14 217,218
9:13-1.5 318-321 2:7 12.5
 Inder of&urcQ 401

.New Testament
Matthow 163, 167, 224 2:25-3, 255
5:9 209 2:34 244
5:24 212 4:18-19 56
5:3&-48 179 4:31-32 215
6 72,75-76,170,313 5:17-26 318
6:17 70--71,280 6:6 215
6:16-18 34 13:10 215
7:9-11 253 13:10--17 318
9:9 168 15:11-32 343
10:10 249 22:19-20 213
10:45 205 23:9 179
26:3 168 23:48 152
26:57 168 23:56 215
26:62-63 179
27:12 179 lohn 163,208
27:14 179
1:29 117, 138, 147, 176-
27:15···23 147, 165-171,206,
178, 179,224-225,
226,227,267,330--
226,254
331
2:12-22 294
27:15-26 145, 165
3:30 254
27:16 168
10:22-42 294
27:17 168
19:1 163
27:20 156, 168
19:3 163
27:21 168
27:28 .165,170
19:9 179
19:34 163, 165
27:28-31 163
19:26 177
27:30 163
19:37 163, 165

Mark 167,162
Acts
9 237
1:12 215
9:17-29 318
5:30 179
9:29 317,319
6:1 215
10:45 I:S9
8:32-33 213
11:15-18 294
10:39 179
14:61 179
12:4 215
15:5 }79
13:14 215
tS:9 168
13:29 179
15:11 168
13:42 215
13:44 215
Luke 163,331 15:13 215
1 323-324 17:2 215
1:1-20 327-328 18:4 2lS
1:9 252 18:18 21S
1:13-17 2S4 18:21 215
2:25 244 20:6 215
20:7 215
402 Indu (1j' Sowces

20:16 21S 3:22 175

20:28 213 9:3 17S
21:24 215 12:17 17S
22:1 215
27:9 16, 2JII-21S, 22'7,
Galatians 154
331
1:4 173-174
2:20 173-174
Romans 7 3 173-176
1:18 203 3-4 145,331
2:4-S 201,203 3:10 147, 154, 159, 173-
2:16 201 176, 221, 224,226
3 203,226 3:10-14 206
3:21 203 3:10-13 164
3:21-26 197-198 3:13 117, 147, 154, l.S9,
3:24 204,224-225 171,173-.176, 178,
3:24-25 225 221,224,226,267
3:24-26 145, 224, 197-205, 3:13-14 173-176
330 4:4 174
3:25 lOS, 115, 146,203, 4:4--5 174-175
205,206,221,225, 4:4-6 206
266,272 4:4-7 174
3:25-26 145,197-205,224-' 4:6 174
225,331 4:9-10 280
3:26 203 4:10 216,219
5:6-11 203
8:3 171, 175
Ephesians
8:34 189-190
9:4 203,221,224 6:22 . 175
10:1!> 175
14:5-6 215-216,227 Philippians
JS:24 17S 2:6-11 61, 63,206,211-
212,226,330
1Corinthians 2:8 212
1:17 175 2:9 212
1:18-24 294 2:10 212
4:17 17S 2:11 212
5:7 224 2:19 175
15;25 186 2:23 115
1.5:26 IIRi 2:25 l1S
16:3 175 2:28 175
16:6 175 4:16 17S
!6:11 175
Co! ossians 216,227
2Corinthians 1:12 210
1:16 175 1:12-f" 207
5:21 171, 173 1:12-20 61,63,200,207-
8:18 175 210,225,226,330
1:12-23 210
 Index ofSowces 403

1:13 207 5:7 18~187, 191

1:13-14 209 5:8 184
1:14 207,210 6:19 ISS
1:15 207 6:19-20 183, 191
1:15-20 209,210 6:20 190
1:18 207 7 184
1:20 207,209 7:3 184
I :21 210 7:14 194-195
1:21-23 207 7:16 191
2:16-20 21~217 7:17 184
4:8 175 7:25 181, 185, 189-190,
193
1Thessalonians 7:26 183, 184
7:27 181, 185
3:2 175 8:1 183, 187
3:5 175 8:1-5 183
8:2 182-183, 184, 189,
2ThessaloiJ.ians 271
1:ll 175 8:4 187
8:5 183, 184
8:6 181, 182, U9
2Tiroothy 8:7-9:10 298, 327-328
1:10 186 9 145-146, 193,266,
302,333
9:2 247
Philemon
9:2-12 318-322
12 17:5 9:3 247
9:3-4 189
Hebrew& 180-197, 206, 266 9:4 193
9:7 181,230,232
1:1-4 189
1:3
9:9 187
184, 187
9:9--10 181
1:10 183
9:10 191
1:13 187
9:ll 112-183
2:14 191
9:11-12 182
2:14-IS 116, 185, Ul6, 190,
9:11-16 298
193, 197
9:12 181
2:17 184
9:13 185, 187
2:17-18 194
9:14 184, 18:5
2:18 185, 189-190
3:1 194
9:15-22 187-188
9:111-21 42
3:1-6 298
9:19 18:5, 187
3:2 184
9:19--22 193-194
4:14 183, 185, 193
9:21 185, 187
4:14-16 189-190
9:23 183, 184, 189, 193-
4:15 184
194
4:15-5:10 187
4:16 190
9:23-24 183
9:24 183, 185, 189-190
S:S 184
9:25 185
5:6 184
9:26 181, 185, J86
404 Index of Sources

9:2S 181, 190, 193 1Peter

lO:l 183 1:2 189
10:10 181, ISS 2:4--5 189
10:11-18 185 2:22 179
10:12 182, 187 2:22-24 117,147-148, 178-
10:13 186 179, 206--207
10:19 185, 187 2:24 179,224,226
10:19-20 183 2:25 179
10:19-22 190-191,193,236
10:22 185, 187-190
10:25 181, 191 2Peter 146
10:27. 186
10:32-39 181 Uohn 205-206,. 221,227,
11 336 l30
11:12 183 1:7 206
11:28 177 1:7-2:2 205
12:1-12 181 1:9 206
12:2 187 2:1 189-190
12:22-24 182 2:1·-2 205-206,266
12:24 185, 187 2:2 178, 205, 206,273
12:25 183, 183 4:10 176, 178, 205-206
12:26 183 :5:15 253
12:29 182
13:11-13 159
13:11-14 192 Iude 90
13:13 lSl, 191-192 6 88
13:14 192
Revelation
James 1:10 217
5:11 336 1:13 194, 196
5:16-18 248 11:1 146
~17 336

Qumran
Domascw Documtmt 1QS Rule ofthe Community
vi:l9 16 x:6 209

W'ar Sero!I 45 IQS0 Rule ofBleuings

i:ll-17 185 iv:28 245

I QPesher Ho.bokkuk 1Q22Wordf o/Moses

100 100
xi:2-8 98 iii:9-ll 41, 47,97
xi:<HI 100 iii: 12-iv: 11 rn
xi:7-8 16 iv:l 115
 Index uj'Svttr~s 405

4Ql.S6 Targlllfl of 1Q34 2+16 38

Leviticru 4f.i,S4, 100 IQ342+16-7 38,44,4.5
1Q34 3 i 41,45
4Ql6l Peshu lsaiah 1Q34 3 ii 42-43, 4$, 61, 63,
210
8-10 iü20 24.5 1Q34bis .37

4Q171 Pesher on Psolms 4Q507 37-38

98
ii:9-10 16 4Q.S08 37-38
ii:9-ll 98 4QS08 1 41,45
iii:2-3 16 4Q508 11-3 41
iii:2-.S 98-99 4Q.S0821 39
4Q.S0821-6 38-39,45,48,51,
ss, 210
4Ql80/l81 4Q5082 3 16.16
4Ql80 87, 98, !01. 141, 4QS0824-5 37
329 4QS08 3 43
4Q180 t 7-8 87 4QS087 43
4Ql81 87, 98, 101, 141, 4QS08 22+23 1 38,45
329 4QS08 22·~23 3 39
4Q.S08l0 43
4Q508 39 43
Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice
65, 84-85, 100, 4QS0840 43
140, 191 4Q.S08 41 43
4Q400-407 84 4QS09 37-38,45
4Q401113 91 4Q.S09 3 1-9 38
4Q40l223 91 4QS093 2-9 44
4Q40S 15 ii-162 231-232 4QS095-6 ii 38,45
4Q405 l.S ii-16 s 231~232
4Q509 7 38,4.5
l1Ql7 84 4Q.S09 81 38,45
4Q.S0984 39
4QEnoch Giafltr 81 4QS09 12 i + 13 39-40,45
4Q2037 i6 87 4Q.S09 16 41,4S
4QS09 97+98 I 42-43,45,61,210

4QEnoch-
Songs of the Sage
4Q201 iii 9 86
4Q202 iv 11 88 4QS10 16
4Q204 ii26 86 4QS11 16

Aramaie Levi 83 .SQJ3 44-45, 61, 63

4Q213a I i to-ll 341
11 QMelchuedek 40, 41,46, 79, 86,
90-92, 94, 9S, 98,
Festival Prayers 34,37-46,100,209 lOo-101, 116, 121,
1Q34 37-38,43 141, 185-186, 196-
IQJ42+ll-4 38,44 197,210,329,330
406 Index ofSources

ii 7-8 91 xxv:6 20,30

ii 18 90 xxv:10-12 34
iii7 92 xxv:12-16 31
xxvi:IO 29,30
llQTemple Sero// 46, 100 xxvii:J-4 32
xxv:14-16 22
xxv-xxvii 203
xxv:l-10 209

Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha

Apocalypse of A.braham14, 79, 81, 86, 10:9-10 88
90, 92-94, 196-- 10:10-16 186
197,329,330 10:11-17 89
13-14 93 10:13 185
13:1-14:14 92-93 10:13-14 92
13:6-7 92 10:17 89
13:7 93 10:18-11:2 89
13:10 94 10:20 89, 115
14:5 94 12-16 90
13:1 89
14 79,82-83,89,100,
Apocalypse of Elijah
136, 183,231,329
1:15-21 47-48 14:8-25 82
14:9 82
Ascension oflsaiah 14:10 82
14:14 82
9-10 242
14:14-23 82
14:19 229
2Baruch 14:21 82,231
6:7 189,253 14:24 82
10:19 251-252 15:2-16:4 82

lEnoch 85-90,92,95,100- 2Enoch 84

101, 138, 185 22 84, 136
1-36 79,85-86
6-11 86, 138-139 Jubilees 16, 51, 79, 90, 9.5-
10 7, 40, 79, 8.5-90, 97,99
94, 116, 141, 18.5-
5:17-18 95, 96, 100
186,210,329,330
34 34, 95-96, 100,
10:4 20, 31,88
129, 160
10:4a 87
34:10 96
10:4-8 19,31,88
34:12 96, 129
10:4-10 87
34:12-19 202-203
10:6 88
34:13 34,96
10:7-8 88
34:13a 96,_129
10:8 88
34:18 95, 96, 129
10:8b 87
49:3 177
 Index of Sources 407

Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum (see 49:14-16 336

under Pseudo-Philo) SO:S 190
50:5-10 181
2Maccabees 330 SO:S-21 32-33,60,136
50:12-14 32
2:5 189 50:15 32
50:16 32, 136
4Maccabees 14, 101-102, lOS, 50:17 32, 136
115-116, 118, 198- 50:17-21 60
199 50:18-19 33
6:28-29 50:19 25,36
17 7, 221 50:20 32, 136
17:20--22 11.5, 200--201 50:21 32, 136
17:22 115,200 50:22 209
50:24-28 181
Psalms ofSolomon
'Testaments ofthe Twelve Patriarchs
3:8 34
Testament of Dan
S:I0--11 185
Pseudo-Philo (Latin), Liber
Antiquitatum Biblicarum Testament ofLevi 19, 83-84, 100, 183
2:3 (Ms Mt. Athos) 341
13:5-6 36 2:5-5:7 83
13:6 16,209,210 2:6-7 83
2:10 83
Pseudo-Philo (Annenian), 3 136
OnJonah 51-59,118, 132, 3:4-6 83
330 s 136
1:11 36,58 5:1 183
1:23 58 5:5 137
1:30 57 8 83, 136
1:35 51 8:1-18 83
1:37 57,58 8:2-10 196
1:38 35,57 18 185
1:41 36,57 Testament ofSimon
1:48 57 6:6 ISS
Testament ofZebulon
Sibylline Oracles 118 9:8 185
1:360--75 164
8:285-309 164 Testament ofSolomon
21:2 105, 199
Sirach 32-33
4:14 61 Vltae Prophetarum (see Pseudo-
24:15 106 Epiphanius)
45:10 170
408 Index ofSovrcu

Philo and Josephus

Philo 7, 46-48, 107-114, 1:72 30, 107, 110, 112,
125,132,221,237- 113
239,242-243 1:79-161 107
Decherubim 1:84 107, 112
25 199 1:162-167 107
1:162-256 107
D« cong~r~~ en~di.lionil gratia
1:168 16, 107
89 15,107,206
1:168-193 107
107 15, 114,206
1:186 16,34,46,108,325
107-108 107
1:186-188 107
25 199
1:188 22, 32, 94, 112, 114
De d.rcalogo 32, 150, 160
1:190
159 l6, 107 107
1:194-256
De ebtiiltat4 1:230 109
86 107 1:257-298 107
87 ll3 1:268 188
135-136 107, 110, 112 2:39-222 108
136 109, 110 2:41 16, 107
De foga et iftVentiorre 2;42-SS 108
100 199 2:56--70 108
101 199 2:14~144 108
De giga"tibiiS 2:145-149 108
52 107, llO 2:150-161 108
De plantatiolfe 2:162-175 108
61 IS, 19, 31, 88, 107, 2:176--187 108
112, 113,114 2:188-192 108,209,209
2:193 16
De posleritate Cai'li
48 IS, 107,206
2:193-194 16
2:193-195 108
70-72 48, 51, 107, 112,
2:193-203 107, 108
113, 114
2:194 16
De11omniis
2:195 113
1:213-219 96 2:196 46,49
1:214 28 2:196-199 48
1:21S 109 2:197 16
1:215-216 1()7
2:198-199 41,46
1:220 96 2:200 16
2:188--189 110-111 2:200-202 108
2:189 107, 110 2:203 46, 48, 102-103
2:223-233 lll 2:204-213 108
2:230-231 110
De vita Moail
2:231 107, 110
2:20-23 214
2:232 112
2:23 16
2:233 111
2:23-24 107
Despecio/ibu.r legibu 46,48, 114
2:24
1:66-78 107 206
2:26
2:95 199
 Index ofSovrca 409

2:95-135 109, 238-239 Josephus

2:97 199 A.ntiq11itata jlldaicae.
2:109-110 196 2:312 177
Legalio ad Gai11m 3:246-243 22, 31
306 16, 20, 30, 112, 4:79 1&8
113,206,232 5:166 16
306-307 107, 112 11:134 16
Legum al/egoriae 16:182 200
2:So-S6 112 17:165-166 16, 22,29
2:.52 98, 107, 112, 113 18:94 16,22
2:56 107, 112 Be/lum }11daiC11m
3:174 47,107,114 1:152 247
Qui1 rervm divirrt1Mim here.s sit 4:153 117
82-34 107 4:164 117
84 liO, 111 4:165 117
112 107 5:236 22
166 199 Contra A.pionem
179 tS, 107,206 1:209 . 71-72
179-187 98, 112,113 2:282 22,214
187 107

Rabbinie and Medieval Jewish Literature

Mishnah 9:4 34
mlfbot lriSanh
5:5 22 7:4 120
mBmah mSeb11
5::2 36 1;3-7 127
mMak 1:6 127
120 1:7 26, 127
3:2
mSotah
mMeg
26 7:7 24
2:5
3:3 72 m§eqal
3:7 26,55 8:5 251-252.
mMenoh mSvkk4h 20-2J
3;3 245 mTa'on
9:8 26 I 34
11:7 32, 150, 160 1:6 249
mParah 2:1 34, 56,72,343
3:1 28, 188 2:2·-5 4~
4 311
mPesah 20-21
245
4:1 49,49
7:7
4:7 249,249
mRH 4:8 35-36,51,69,72,
1:1 36 74,281
4:5-ti 49
mTamid
mSabb 7:2 136
9:3 130, 131
410 Index ofSOUI'Ce.r

7:3 32, 136, 8 21,312

mroma 19-28,32, 171 8:1 34, 74,249
1 21 8:8 133
l:3 125 8:8-9 257
1:4-7 22 8:9 217
1:5 23, 125 mZebah
1:6 20,23,125 8:12 24.5
1:6-7 29
1-7 21
2 TO$efta
21
3 21 tBef'
3:3 29 3:6 S2
3:4 24 3:12 49
3:4---S 29 tMeg
3:6 24,29,29 3:7 26,55
3:7 28 3:21-23 72
3:8 24, 26, 29, 51, 339 tRH
3:9 29 1:13 210
4 21 tSabb
4:1 23,29
6:1 131
4:2 19, 24, 26, 29, 51,
7:11 131
130, 159
4:3 tSotah
20,30
4:4 30 13:8 125
s 21 14:9 131
5:1 20, 21, 24, 30,30 tYoma
5:2 21 1:6 125
5:2--4 127 1:7 125
5:3 30 t:a 30,12.5
5:3~ 24 1:12 125
5:4 21,30 2:10 284
5:5 24 3:18 24, 25,33
.5:5-6 30 3:19 23
6 19,21,160 4:2 34
6:1 29, 159 4:6-8 134
6:2 31, 137 4:9 133
6:3 31 4:14 26,.52
6:4 19, 31. 88, 89, 159 4:14-15 52
6:6 19, 29, 31, 130,
159, 160 Palestin.ian (Jerusalem) Talmud
6:7 31
7 21 yAZ
7:1 26, 33, 55,60-61 2:3,41a 16
7:1-3 24,25 yßer
7:2 31,36 4:1, 7b 16
7:3 22, 23,32 4:1, 7c 16, 49, 13.2
7:3--4 32 yMeg
7:4 24, 31, 32, 33, 69, 3:2, 74a 214
l26 3:7, 74b 26,SS
4:5, 7Sb 62
 Jndu qfSot~rces 411

yMQ 13b 229

1:7, &Od 123 bMeg
yPe'ah 29a 71
7:4, 20b 16 31a 26.5.5, 57
8:9, 21b 16 )lb IJJ·
yRH bMenah
I, 56b 123-·124 lOOa 32
1:3, 57a 210 I06b 133
yS1111h 109b 125
10:8, 29c 214 bMQ
yTa'an 9a 123
4:1, 67c 49, 132 bNed
4:5, 20b 311 39b 132
yTer bPe.sah
8:S.45c 16 4a 75
yYoma 54a 132
1:1, 38a···C 123 77a 245
1:1,38.: 125 bRH
1:3,39a 125 10lr-11b 123--124
1:4,39a 125 16a 121
1:5, 39a 125, 126 16b 36,210
1:5, 39a-b 30 18b 311
3:7, 40d 123 21a 88
5:3,42c 125 31b 284
5:4, 42c 126 32b 121
6:1, 43bc 159 35a .53
6:3,43c 126,283 hSabb
6:5, 43d 131 53a 131
7:1,44a 25 bSotah
7:3, 44b 123,125,319 49b 131
7:5,44b 129 bTa'an
7:5,441>-e 126 16b-17a 49
8:6,4Sb 133 24b 248
8;6, 45b-c 134 26b 49
8:9, 4Sc 52, 123, 319, 338, 27b 133
339 30b 42, 122, 122
bTem
Babylooian Talmud 29a 16
bBB bYebrJm
i2la 42 60b 245
bBer bYoma 33
Sb 134 2a-6a 123
17a 53 &b 125
bGit l4b 20,20
68b-70b 131 18a 115
19b 34, JS, 126, 132
bHag
20a 121,206
l3a-14a 2ll 2Ja 125
412 Index ofSm~rces

36b 26,62,123,339 Amoraic and Later Midrashim

39a-b 126 Genesis Robbah
39b 12.5, 283 22:3 123-124
40b 284 3.5:3 123
42a 130 84:31 130
S3a 30
Exod1.1s Rabbah
SJb 64,248
54a
1.5:12 177
126
6la 127 Levlticw Rabboh
67a l3I 3:3 339
67b 128 20:2 129
68a 131 20:12 130, 139
70b 32 21:1 56
74b 35,41,47,97 21:10 123,319
8Sb 17, 133 21;11 llO, 125
86a 129,134 21:12 110, 125
86a-b S6, 133,319 Del.lteronomy Rtrbbah
87b 34, 39, 42, 43, 51, 11:10 128
.52,53 Psalm.s Rabbah
88a 49 On Ps, 86:8 131
bZebah Canticles Rabbah
88b 245 On Cant 4:4 (sign9) 133
Puiqla RabbDti
Smaller T:ractates 26:6 251-252
3.5 53
Scfrim
18:7 34
Pesi4ta Rov Kohana
24:1-12 54
1~:-4 121
19:6 49
24:11 SS-56
24:17-19 S4
Avot ofRIJbbi Natlum (A) 25 56
25 121 25:2 56
26:3 129-130
Tannaitic Midrasbim 26:11 130
Me/cl1ta de--Rabbi Yishmael Pirqe Rabbi Eiiner51
10 SS-56, 58
(ed. Horovitz)
22 128
p.180 122
28 123
p. 196 42, 121-122 30 124
31 124
Slfra 46 34, 35, 121, 122,
Ahar.e Mot 2:1 26 125, 128. 132
Ahore Mot 2:2 32
Aharte Mot 2:8 128
AhareMot3 30 Medieval Literature
AII(Jre Mot 4:4 26 Rov Sheshna 65-61
Ahare Mot 4:.5 l27 Rashi
OubNid61a 121
On b&lbb Slb 66
On Exod 18:3 122
 Jr,du. of Source;s 413

Slrllllt:han 'Arulch 34 Hekhaloi Rabbali 242

r alqut Shim 'oni §108 138
1:44 67, 128 §lll 135
Seder Eliyah11 Zula §§184-U.S 135
25 128 §192 135
The Story ofthe Ten Martyr:r §299 135
§§313-314 136
138-139
Metatron
I 51:2 139
§390 135
r .st:7 139
11133:12 139 He.lchalot Z11lrati 242
VII 31:34 139 §411 135
IX 31:33 139 §424 135, 136
S~tder Rabba deBere'shit
§811 135
Hekttalot Literature 134-139 §§814-816 135
1Enoch 138 Shi'ur Qomah
4-S (Synopsis §§.S-8) §384 135
138 Ma'aseh Merkavalt
5 (Synopsis §§7-8} 13&-139 §547 138
36 (Synopsis §§54) 13S §548 52, 137, 137
39 (Synopsis §57) 135, 135 §§548-549 137
§SSS 135

Targumim
T01'gum On/celos Lev 16:22 88
Genesis 49: 11 170 Lev 16:30 51
Num 31:17-18 245
Ta.rgv.111 Pseudo-Jonatltan
86 Samaritan. Pentateuch
Ocn 37:31 126,130 Ex.od26:35 189
Lcv9:3 67, 12&-130 Exod 26:36 189
Lev 16 SI, 88 Exod 30:1-10 189
Lev 16:10 128
Lev l6:2lb-22 128

Jewish Liturgy
Piyyutim and Prayers (according to lheir title)
'~romem le'EI 60,286
'A.I Het SO
'A.na 'Eioheinu Ya'aleh YeYaiiO 50
414 Index ofSources

'A..sapper Gedolot 49,60,286

ed. Mirsky, line 197 32
'A.shanen 63
'Allah Baharta beYisrael so
'Attah Bahartanu 42, so
'Attah Barata 45
'Attah Konanta '0/am beROY Hesed 49, 60, 63, 97, 287
ed. Mirsky,line 71 287
'Attah Yodea' Ma'amaqei Lev 53
'Attah Yodea 'Omqo shel Lev 53
'Attah Yodea' Razey '0/am 39, 50, SI, 52, 53, 137-138, 139, 336-342
'Atsaltsel 63
'Aval ['Anahnu] Hatanu 43, 50,53
'Az be 'Ein Kol 60,286
ed. Yahalom, lines 214-215 285
ed. Yahalom, line 553 129
ed. Yahalom,lines 762-763 286
'Azkir Gevurot 'E/oah 49,60,287
ed. Mirsky, lines 1-4 287
ed. Mirsky,line 119 '287
ed. Mirsky,line 133 IS
ed. Mirsky, line 160 97
'AzkirSela 63
'Ein Lanu Kohen Gadol 34,286
ed. Mirsky, line 3 286
ed. Mirsky,line II 286
ed. Mirsky,Jine 14 287
ed. Mirsky,line 32 287
'Eleh 'Ezkerah 138-139
'Elohai 'ad shelo Notsarti 53
'Eloheinu ve'Elohei 'Avoteinu Galleh SO
'E/oheinu ve'Eiohei 'Avoteinu Mehol 50
Ha'Omrim leKhilayShoa' 285
HaLo Kol haNistarot vehaNiglot
'Attah Yodea' 39
Ki 'A11onoteinu RJ!bll miLemanot 53
-Mah 'Anu uMah Hayyenu 34
Mah Ne'emar Lefaneikha
Yoshev baMarom so
M alkhllJiol 49,209
MiMa 'amaqei Lev 53
Ribon Ha '0/amim 53
Riboni Hatati uMura' 'A.siti 52
Shiv'at Yamim 60,62-64
 Index ofSou.rces 415

Shofarot 49,209
uvekhen Ten Pahdekha 50,339
ve'Attah Hivdalta 43
veHasi'enu 50
VeHen 'Anu 'Allah keTo'im
ve'Ein Levakesh 40
veTitten Lanu 50
Zekhor Lanu. 42
Zikhronot 42,49,209

(Ashkenazy) Mahzor for the Days ofAwe (ed. Goldschmidt)

2:568-574 139
2:574-576 42

Seder Rav 'Amram Ga'on (ed. Goldschmidt)

49
p. 161 39,340
p. 166 39,56
p. 168 56
p. 168:5-8 63
p. 168:7-8 60, 127

Seder Rav Sa'adia Ga'on (ed. Davidson, Yoel and Asaf)

50
p.258 52,137-138
p.259 52
pp. 259-260 42, 50,340
pp.259-264 50
p.26l 53
p.262 34,43,53,343

Christian and Gnostic Literature

Alexander the Monk Ambrose
Onthe Finding ofthe Venerable and Commentary an Luke
Life-giving Cross 292 1:22 250
Letters
Alexios Aristenos 276 3:13-14 267

Amalar 269,334 Anaphora.s

Cyril (Syriac) 337-342
St. James (Syriac) 337-342
416 Index ofSourcu

St. Jamu (Greek) 272 2-3 149

2-16 149
S-6 149
Andreas of Crete 5:14 163, 163
In ezaltationem 1 129, 146,
S. Crucis orationes 292 148-IS5,
ISO, 157-
Anonymous from Jerusalem ISS, 160,
206,221,
Commentary on Luke 2S0,326 223,225,
267-268,
A.postolic 330-331
Constitutions 27S,276 7:3 16, 151, 152,
2:S5:1 336 159, 164,
5:7:12 336 219
6:12:13 336 7:3-5 150-IS2
7 335 7:4 150, 151-
7:5:5 336 152, 159,
7:23:4 222 160
7:30:1 217 7:4-5 32
8 335 7:5 152, 160,
8:9:8-9 342-343 164,219
8:12:1-15:11 335 7:6 19, 29,153;
8:12:6-26 335 159
8:12:9-20 335 7:6-11 152-155
8:47:1-85 275 7:7 153, 159
7:8 19,29, 31,
89, 153, 159,
Aristides, A.pology (Syriac) 160, 163,
14:4 220,282, 164, 164
331 7:8-9 19
7:9 153, 159,
Augustine 160, 163,
320
194,196
Locutiorrum 7:10 19, 29, 153,
in Heptateuch11m 263 159
CCSL33:428 263,267 7:11 19, 29, 160,
Quaestiomim 164
in Heptateuchum 263 7-8 149, 188
CCSL 33:211-214 263
CCSL 33:213 266,267 Basil
Homiliu on Fasting
Barnabas 61-62, 146, 1-2 76,279
148-150, 1:1 16
157, 162, 1:2 280
164-165, 1:3 15
223-224,
227,281
1-6 149
 Index of Sources 417

Canona of the Comes of Wiirzburg 304,317-

Apostlea 275,331 321
70 275-277
Cosmas lndicop1eustes
Chronikon Paschale 296 Christion Topography
§334 291 5:9 250
5:37 250
Chrysostom (See John Chrysostom)
CoWlcil of Laodicea
Clement ofRome Canon37 276
Canon 38 276
/Clement
1-12 336
36 194 Cyprian of Carthage
40:1-5 218 Leiters
55:1 172 63:14:4 270-271
61:3 194
64" 194
Cyprian the Gaul
Heptateuchos 264
C1ement of Alexandria 229,
237-243
&cerpts from Theodotus 229,241 Cyril of Alexandria
27 30,229,236, Commentary on lsaiuh
238,240-- 1:14 69
243 Contra Iulianum
27:5 242 9 267
34 230,231 Epistulu ad Acacium 267
37 231,234
On the ll.dorution and Worship ofGod
37-39 231
38 229-231, in Spirit andin Truth 263
234,236, 1105-8 263
59:2 231 1105BC 281
59:2-3 230 Glaphyrorum in Leviticum
64 241 liber 263
Stromaleis 580A-589B 267, 267
5 241 588A 20, 29, 267-
5:6 239 268
5:6:32-40 238 Homilies on Luke
5:6:39:3-40:4 237-239 53 267,267
5:6:39:4 239
5:6:40:1 239
Cyril of Jerusalem
5:6:40:3 239
5:6:40:4 239 Catechesea
4:10 299
10:19 299
Comes of Alcuin 304,317-
321 13:4 299
418 Indu ofSources

Ep/:rtwla ad Constantivm Homilies on the NatiPil)l

3 299 5:14 250
26:12 250
27:3 250
De :solstiliis et
aequinoctiis (ed. Botte) 27:13 250
55, 250, 304, 27:18 325
308,325- HomiJies on the Exaltation
326 oftheCross 292
pp.96-98 253--254,
325-326 Epiphanius 246-250,
p. 95:63-6.5 308 256
p. 95:81-85 308
pp. 95:84-96:105 307
De :rii gemmis
2:1 24S
PanQI'ion
Dldache 218 29:4 245,246
4:14 218 78:13-14 246
14:1-3 217 78:14 248

Dida:scalia Eusebius of Caesarea 246,249,

21 222 2.56, 291,
299
Didymus the Blind Damonstratto E11omgelica
1:3:2 15, 16,69
Commentarii in Zaclrariam
History oftlre Clrvrclr
3:32 73
2:23:4-1 246
2:23:5-6 248
Diognet 3:31:3 24.5,256
3:1-4:1 219-220, 5:24:3 245,256
284,331 5:24:17ff 222
Ji'ito Co1Utantini
3:28 271
Egeria, Diary 293-294,
4:40-46 291
298
48-49 291-292
Gelasius 305
Epbrem Lett(lr 14 313

Comtmmtary on Exodus
12:2 253 Gospel of Philip 22S,232-
12:2-3 325,250 237
Comme11tary 011 the Diales:smqn 69:14-70:9 233
1:29 250,325 70:1-5 235
Homilies on Fa:sting 70:5-10 235
1:12 16, 73 70:15-25 236
2 71:1-lS 236
73
2:1 76,280 76:J.-10 236
10 73 84:20-8!!:21 234-235
 Jnd" of Sources 419

84:25-30 236 lgBatius

SS:t-5 235 Ta the MogneslaM
85:1-21 235 9:1 217
85:5-10 235,236
To the PhiladelphianJ
86:1-5 235
9:1 ~~

Gospel of Petu 146, 161-

165 Irenaeus
3:6-9 163 apud Eusebius, History of the Chr~rch
3:7 163 5:24: 11ff 222
3:8 163, 164 Against the Here1ies
3:9 163 1:7:1 233
5:15-16 163-164 1:13:3-4 233
5:16 151, 159, tat~ 233
164 3:10:1 252
7:25-27 152 3:11:8 252
9:35 217
12:50 217
lshodad of Merv
Commel'llary on Leviticu!f 264
Gregory ofNazianz 16 267-268
Homily 23:23-26 69
10:4 271
Isidore of Sevilla {Pseudo?)
Hegesippus 246-250, Quaefftiones de ueteri et nouo
256
Testamento 264
Hypo11f1Jemata 246 Quaestiones in Lwiticum
IS 266
Heracleon 239
Corn.mentary on John 233-234 Ivo of Chartres 269-270,
334

Hcsy~hius of le111Salem
Jaeob ofSarug (ed. Bedjan)
Commentory on Leviticus 263, 266
16 267 Homi/y on the Scapegoat
23 76 vol. 3:259-282 267
23:27-32 281 vot. 3:.2.S9 69
vol. 3:263 69
vol. 3:264-266 267
Hildebert 334 vol. 3:267 69
l.iber de ltiCra eucharislia269 vol. 3:27.S 69
Yer.sus tk myllterio Wlissae 269
Jerome
Hippolytus ttgailtst Jovinianus
On Proverbs lS&-159 1:1~ 7S
Commentary on Galatians
1 75
420 Indo: afSoruces

2:8-9 15 Johannes Dama~cnus

4:10 306 SermD in anmmtiationem beatae Mariae
Commentary 011 Zecharialr tJirglni:r 255
8:18-19 306, 311
De viril inJvstribus
45 256 Johallnes Scholasticus 276
Dialogus Advl!r$u: Pelagia1101
1:35:78-91 267 Jolwlnes ZODUas 276
Letters
46:5 271 Jt&Stin Martyr l.S!i-156
46:13 296
52:10 76,306 Fir.st Apology
J08:9 296 61 222
112:10 15 Dialogue with Trypho
15 15.5, 156
39 1S5
Jobn Chry.ostom 280 40:4-S 16, 19, 29,
Againsillre Je:ws 276,301 31, 76,154,
I (PG 48:ß54B) 16 15.5-lSo,
1:1 69 1.59, 160,
1:1:4-5 274-275 279
1:2 72 41 ISS
1:4 72 42 155
1:4; PG 48:8460 14 46:2 ISS
1:4; PG 48:849C 74 111:1 us
1:4:7 275 116--117 160
1:5 16
1:8 76 Leo the Grc:at 311,312-
2 (page 123a} 69 317,319,
4:7:6 279 320
6:5:9 279
6:7:1-7 278 Sermons 312-317
6:7:2 279 12:4 313, 314
7:·1 (PG 43:91 .5) 29.5 13:2 313,314
8:4 27S IS:l 313,314
Clrrislmar Homily 2SO 1.5:2 306, 313
3.S7BC 69,2:'10 17:1 306
18:2 314
Twelfth Homily on First Corinthians
19:2 314
131 20:1 306
20:2 313,314
John of Jel"U&alem 20:3 313, 314
78:1 306
PanegyriC'U de :soncta ecclesia dt;,mini 78:2 314
299,300 78:4 314
23 300 79:1-2 306
71 300 81:1 306
51 300 81:4 314
86:1-:2 313
 I1Jckz ofSourcu 421

87:1 313 1253 294

87:2 312,317, 12.S7 324
319
87:3 313
O~geo 12S
88:1 313
88:1-2 313 Agairut Ceistls
38:2 314 1:31 172
38:2-4 314 Commentar;y 011 Jolur266
&8:3 314,315 10:33 234
88:5 313 Commentary an Romaru 198
89:1 74-75,306, E:thortation ta Martyrdom266
312,315 30:16 268
89:2 314 Homily on Jeremiah
89:3 313 16,273
12:13
89:4 306
89:6 313 Homily on LeviliCU3 266,301,
90:1 306,316 332
92:1 306,316 9:1:1 335
92:2 76,279,313, 9:3:2 159
316 9:3:3 266
92:4 306 9:4:1 159
93:3 306,313, 9:4:3 266
313 9:5:2 266
94:1-2 313 9:5:3 266
94:4 313 9:5:9 269,268
9:6:1 266
9:8:5 268
Liber Pontijicali:J 304,306- 9:9:4 268
307 273,27&
10:2:1
10:2:2 167,266
Martyrdom ofPolycarp 10:2:4 76,279
14:3 194 ()nPrayer 266

Maximus Confessor 324 Paterius 264

Middle Armenicm Lectionary Philaster 311

295 Diversontm Herueon /.iber
149 304,306
0/d A.rmenian Lectionary 3. 292, 294-
295,327- Photius 276
328

Pilgrim ofBordeaux 299

Old GeOI'glan Lec;ionary 3, 292, 294,
324,327-
328 Polyearp: To the Philippians
122.S 327 12:2 194
1240 293
1247-1250 298
422 Ind~a ofSourcu

Polycrates Pseudo-Epiphanius
apud Eusebius 245,256 De ptophetorum
apud !erome 256 vita et obitu 255
Commentary on Luke 326
i'rottwangdium ofJamu
:zso-25s, Pseudo-George the Arab 326-327
323
S:l 245
8 2.S1 Pseudo(?)-lsisore of Sevilla
&-9 251 (see Isidore of Sevilla)
8:2 251
9:3 251 Pseudo-Jerome 167
10 251
10:2 251 Commentory on Mark
12:3 251 l.S:l I 267
24 256
Seven1s of' Oabala
Pseu<fo..Anastasius ISS Letters 267

Pseudo-Aihanasius Socrates
On Sabbaths and Hfstoryofthe Church
Circumci:ion IS 1:33 291
TeJtimonia e $criphlro 2SS
Sopbronius
Pseudo-Chrysostom I 58 Homily ()II the Exoltfltion ofthe
in ltJ'lldem conceptionis YUI.erahle Cross rmd on· the Holy
Anastasis 292
sancti Ioannis Bapti:toe 250

So:ll>menas
Pseudo-Cyprian
History ofthe Church
Exhortation ro Pemtence 320 291-292,
2:26
295
Pseudo-Cyril of Jeru.salem
Correspondence with Step'anos Siwnec•i 300
Jaliwi ofRome 326
Tertullian 1$2, 1.56-
Pseudo-Epbrem (Annenian) 158, 159
Commentary on Levilicus 264, 267- Againsl Mareion 281
268 3:5-24 1.56
3:7:7-8 19, 29. 31,
12, IS4,
Pseudo-Ephrem (Syriillc) 156-1.58,
Commentary on Leviti=s 264, 267 1.59, 160
 /ndez ofSource.s 423

Ad natione.s Theodoros Balsamon 276

1:13:4 72
Agaimt the Jews 281 Tbeodosius, the Pilgrim 291, 323
14:9 19, 29,31
14:9-10 72, 156-158
Tradirio Apostolica 222
OnBaptism
17:1 270
0f1Fastlng 281 Typicon o/Constantinople
222
292,298
2:13-14
14:2-3 304,307
16 15 Yaientinian Expositio11 (NHC xi,2)
16:6 36,71-72 2S:l0-39 22&, 234,
18 222 236

Theodore bar Koni Sacramentarium Veronense

Sclwlia 26S 304,305,
313
Theodoret ofCyr
873 313
876 313
Commentary on Jsaiah 89S 313
l~4 IS
Erallistes 267
Victorinus
QuaestionllS in Octateuchum
ifl Leviticum 22 267 Commentary on the Apoculypse
in Leviticum 32 36, 73-74, 4:4 252
280

Pagan Literature

Aelius Herodiam1s Augustus 68

D11 prosodia catholica 199
Dio Cbrysostomus
Aesop OrationllS 199
Fab11lae 103
Diodorus Siculw. 109

Agatbarcltides of Cnidus 71-72

Harpocro~tion tb.e Grammarian 103
Aloxander of Lycopolis
Hecateus of Abdera
Contra Manichaei OpinionllS Dlsputatro
172 Aegyptica 68
109
Apollodorus of Athens
Perl Theon 103 Hesychius, tbe Lexic:ographor 103
424 Index ofSo~~rces

Isocrab:S Plutarch
PhilipJIIIS (oratio 5) 103 Quaestiones Crmvivale1 36,
68--·69
Julian
Agalnst the Galileans 266 Suetonius
Divus Augustus
Juvenal 76:2 6&
100:4 1S
Sahu-ae 69-70,
74
Tacitus

Pmonius Historia
5:5:4 71
Satyrico11 7S
Terence
Plato 133 Phorm.io 7S
Nomoi 103
Xenophon
'!-. Hellenica 209

Islamic Literature
Al Diruni 324,325
The Chro110logy qfA.ncie11t Nations (ed. Qur'an
Sadlau) Sum3:J7 251-252
p. 286 [291} 325
p. 326 [329] 32.5
pp.326f(329~ 325

Archaeological Sources
Cotpus Inscriptionum Judaicarum Mosaic in Sepphoris
1:725 39, 47-48, 58 Synagogue 129

Frescoes Gf Dura Europos Synagogue Papyrus Fayum

118 (ed. Grenfeii/Hunt)
337 199
lnscriptions of Cos
(ed. Paton/Hiclcs) Papyn1s Oxyr:byncbu.s
81 199 {ed. Cowley) 6
341 199
 Index ofModem Authors

Abel, F.-M. 256, 294, 323 Baumstark, A. 294,297,324

Abnhams,I. 50,52 Be'k.E. 73
Abosc:b,R. 139 Becker, H.-J. 19
Acbterneicr, P. 179 Bedjan,P. 69,267
Adna,J. 116 Belayche, N. 48
Aland,B. 233-234 Bell, C. l-2,6
Albec:k, H. 20 Bell, R. 132
Aletti, J.-N. 207,209 Berendts, A. 244
Allenbach, ·J. 266 Be.rger, K. 146
Allison, D 166, 167, 168, 170 Betz.H.-D. 173-174
Alon,G. 29, 150, 159 Beyse, K.-M. 170
Alpigiano, C. 220 Bezalel, N. 30,.241
Altaner, B. 264 Bigg,C. 178
Amar,J. 253 Bihain, E. 299
Anderson, H. 115 Billerbeck, P. 13
Asaf, S. 34, 42. 50, 52, 53, Black,M. 82,87,88,174,294
137, 339, 343. Blaise,A. 75
Aschim, A. 90 Blanc,C. 234
Assmlllll, A. 7,264 Blanke,H. 207,216
AssmiDll, J. 7 Blenkinsopp, J. 80
Attridge, H. 181, 182, 183, 184, Blocher,H. 81
185, 186, 187, 188, Bockmuchl, M. 211
189, 191, 194, 242, Bolle, R. 313
253 Bolotov 324
AufderMaur 303,306,309 Bomert,R. 269-270,272
Aune,D. 146, 196 Borret,M. 262
Avemarie, F. 19, 126, 133 Botte, B. 308,325
Azir.a.,C. 71 Bousset, W. 335-339
Bacl.ko, B. 7 Bovon, F. 56
Baehrens, W. 262 Boyarin, 0. l
Baer, Y. 28, 55, 107, 120, Brllndle, R. 74,274,301
125 Br.run, R. 1S7
Bailey,D. 105, 116, 198, 200, Bremmer, J. 171, 172
203 Breytenbach, C. 176
Baillet,M. 37-43 Bronznick 285
Bammel,C. 233-234 Brown,P. 314
Barkley,O. 262,273,278 Brown,R. 146, 149, 161, 162,
Ba:rrett, C. 176-177, 182, 214 163, 164, 166, 177,
Bartb, M. 207,216 205,206
Bauernfeind, 0. 117 Brox,N. 178
BaumgarteD, J. 35, 97, 99, 171 Bruc:e, F. 214
426 Index ofModern Authors

Bruekner, R. 211 Oe Coninck, A. 126,232-2:!3,235,

Buchanan, G. 212-213 237
Btk:hler, A. 120, 132 de Halleux, A. 252,325
Ba.chsel, F. 104, lOS deJonge,M. 83
Bockley, J. 232-233 dcLange, N. 262-'263
Bugnini, A. 291 de Strycker, E. 251
Bultmann, R. 7, 148. 204, 205 Deiana,G. 18, 107, 108
Bumoy,C. 177 Deissmann, A. 48
Buth,R. 54 Dekkers, E. 264
Cadbuty, H. 214 Denker, J. 161
Cahill, M. 167 Der Nersessian, S. 291
Calvet·Sebasti, M.·A. 271 Derenbourg, J. 62
Carleton Paget, J. 148, 150, 151, IS7, Dershowitt, N. 300
158, 164, 196 Desan, P. 9
Casey, R. 229,230,240,241 Devreesse, R. 265
Chabot, 1. 267 Dibellus, M. 161
Charles, R. ss Dibelius, 0. 240
Charlcswortb, I. 211 Dimant,D. 85,87-88,90
Chavasse, A. 75, 303, 304, 305, Dindorf, L. 291
309,310,312, 313.• Dindorf, W. 103
317 Dodd, C. 176
~
Chazon, E. 85 Dolle,R. 304,315
Coakley, J. 252,325 Doutreleau, L. 73
Cody,A. 182 Draguet 265
Collins, J. 80,86 Drake,H. 299
Colson, F. 46, 47, 109, 110, Drijvers, J. 299
lll, 112, 113 duCange,C. 272
Connolly, R. 326,327 Ducbesne, L. 307
Conway, A.I. 15,304,315,316 Dunn, J. 173, 174,176,203,
Conybcare, F. 326 214
Conzelmann, H. 214 Dun.nd,G. 7
Cothenet, E. 251 Duval, Y.-M. 57,58
Cowley,A. 44,62 Eckey, W. 214--215
Cremer, F.G. 222 Eisler, R. 256
Crossan, J. 146, lSO, 157, 161- Eizenhofer, L. 304,313
165, 167 Elbo,gen, I. 24, 26, 3S, 49, 52,
Cullmann, 0. 251 54, 55, 56, 60, 62.
Culpepper, R. 244 63, 120
Daly,R. 265,269 Elior, .R. 134, 13.S
Danby,H. 36 Elliott, J. 119
DI!Diel. S. 102, 108 Engberding, H. ·308, 324
Dani6lou, J. 303,305,312 Ep~in, Y. 20
Damell, D.R. .342-343 Ettlinger, G. 267,267
Davidson, Y. 34, 42, 50, 52, 53, Falle, D. 37-45,97
137,339,343 Fee,G. 211
Davies, W. 166, 167, 163, 170 Femändez Marcos, N. 74, 263, 267, 280
Davila,J. 91 Festugi~re, A.·I. 291,295
Davis, R. 307 Fiensy, D. 335,336,342-343
Davison, J. 237 Fine, S. 7l-72, 261,269
Fischer, L. 303,305,312,312
 Index ofModern Authors 427

Fitzmyer, J_ 204,214 Gulnot, J.-N. 263, 267

.Fleis.eher, E. 42, 44, 49, so, 54, H~ham. N. 16,97
55,56 Hackett, H. 214
Foerster, W _ 233-234 · Hager, D. 166
F~~.E. 269-270 Halbwacbs, M. S
Fnnz, A. 269 Hallit, J. 291,300
Fraser, M. 294, 296, 302 Halton, T. 246
Freoland, J.P. 75,304, 315, 316 Hamerton~JCelly, R.l74
Frcemmtle, W. 271 Hanhart, R. 80, 3l
Frey, J. 176-177 Hansoa,P. 7,85-89
Frey, I.-M. 48 Hanson, R..P.C. 214
Friedlandcr SS Haossens, J. 269
Frolow, A. 291 Harlcins, P. 274, 27S, 279, 279
Fuller, R. 162 Harl6, P. 103, 104
Fq, R. 114 Harrington, D. 210
Gaar,A. 264 Hatc:h, E. 104
Gager, J. l, 48, 277 H.awting, G. 34
Garefa-Mart!n.ez, F. 90,91 Heestennan, J. 2S
Garitte, G. 292,324, 327,328 Heid, S. 192
Gartner, Y. 46 Heimgartner, M. 274, 301
Geerard, M. 262 Heine, R. 234
Geiger, A. 85, 88 Heine:mann,J. 25, 49,341
Gerlo, A. 71, 307 Hcininger, B. 189
Geyer, P. 291,323 Hebn,L. 151
Gianotto, C. 233-234 Helm, .R. 85-86
Gin,gras, 0. 291-292 Heiming, 0. 338
Glnz.berg, L. 124 Hengel, M. 116, 213, 244-245
Girard, R. 165 Henncckc, E. 220
Glorie, f. 262 Hennans, 1'. 269
Godu, G. 304, 317 Hemnann, J. 104, lOS
Goitein, S. 34, 64 Hespel 265
Goldschmi~ D. 39, 40, 49, SO, 52, Hilberg, I. 75
S6, 60, 63, 127, Hinunelfarb, M. 82-84, 90, 114,
139,340 182,232,242
Goldscbmidt, L. 19 Hock,R. 2S1
Goldstein, N. 120, 131 Hoeck,J. 255
Goldstein Cohea, N.S6 Hoffieit,H. 68
Goodenough. E. 110, 335, 341 Hofftoan, L. 49, 52,60
Goppelt, L. l 79 Hof'rus, 0. l16,182, 183,207,
Gordon, R~P. 218 2ll, 229,231-232
Grabbe, L. 85, 87, 88, 90, 91, Holl, K. 303
161 Holladay, C. llO
Gradwohl, R. 170 Hollander, H. 83
Gramaglia, V. 1.57 Holmes, M.W. 217,220
Grbser, E. 185, 186, 187 Horbury, W. 148, 149, 188, 193
Green, J. 149, 162 Hossfeld, F.-L. 265
Greenberg, M. 80 Hovhannesian, V. ;263
Grillet, B. 291,295 Hruby, K. 120
Grintz, Y. 43, 61, 63, 97 Hunt,E. 294,291,299
Griveau, R. 32S Hurst, L. 182, 183, 189
428 Index ofModernAut/wrs

Hvalvik, R 148, 149, 158 Lane,D. 102

Hyldah1, N. 246 Lane, W. 181, 188, 190, 191
Irshai, 0. 246,249,294,297, Lang, B. 127
298 Laporte, J. 107, 109
lsaacs, M. 192 Larsson, G. 19
Isenberg, W. 232-233 Latte, K. 297.
Jacobson, H. 16,210 Lauterbach . 30, 42, 65~7. 106,
Jacquier, E. 214 125-126
Janini, J. 303,306 Lawlor, H. 247
Janowski, B. 87, 116 Le Boulluec, A. 237,238-239
Janssens, Y. 233-234 Le~aut 190
Jegher-Bucher, V. 74,274 Le Goff,J. 7
Jeremias, J. 177,229 Leclerq, H. 304,343
Jervell, J. 214-215 Lecuyer, J. 195-196
Jones,F. 247 Lebmann,M. 44
Jung,C.G. 7 Lenhardt, P. 209-210
Jungmann 269 Leonhard, C. 69,264
Käsemann 185,204 Leonhardt, J. 107,209
Kazhdan, A. 291 Uvy-Strauss, C. 9
Kelly, J. 274 Lewy, Heinrich 68, 70
Kennel,G. 211 Liddell, H. 104
Kimelrnan, R. 1 ~
Liebennan, S. 128,251-252,285
Kirlc, A. 162 Liebennann, S. see Liebennan, S.
Kister, M. 44, 45, 61, 161 Liebreich, L. 49
Klauck, H.-J. 115,201 Lieu, J. 119, 205
Klingshim, W. 314 Ligier, L. 3, 272, 330n, 335-
Klostermann 273 342
Knibb, M. 86-87 Lilla, S. 237,241
Knohl, I. 123, 188, 313-314 Linder, A. 11,276,277
Knöppler, T. 145-146, 197, 202, Loader, W. 182, 184, 185, 190,
204 193-196
Kobelski, P. 91 Lohmeyer, E. 207, 208, 209, 211
Koester, C. 182 Lohse, E. 115, 185, 197
Koester, H. see Köster, H. Longenecker, R. 174
Kahler, K. 335,339 Lauf, A. 157, 167
Kosmala, H. 284 Lueken, W. 91,231
Köster, H. 146, 149, 161, 162, Lupieri, E. 196
163, 164, 170, 192 Luz, U. 166
Klltting, B. 244 Lyonnet, S 209
Kovacs, J. 237,239,241,242 Maccoby, H. 166
Kraft, R. 1, 148, 149, 150, Macdonald, J. 44
151 Mach,M. 242
Kraus, W. 22, 95, 105, 127, Mack,H. 49
146, 197-203, 205, Maher,M. 129
272 Maier,J. 49, 135,285
Krauss, S. 71-72 Malachi,Z. 54, 59, 60, 61
Kulilc, A. 92-94 Manns, F. 251··
Lake,K. 151, 153, 172,214 Mara,M. 161, 163, 164
Lampe, G. 270,271,272 Marbach, E. 34,75
Lampe, P. 232-233 Mare, P. 92
 Indez ofModern A11thors 429

Marcovich, M. 155 Nibley,H. 270

Marrou,H. 231,231 Nickelsburg, G. 82, 86, 87, 89, 162
Martyn, J. 174 Niederwimmer, K. 218
Marx, F. 306 Nilciprowetzky, V. 109
Massingberd Ford, J. 170 Nitzan, B. 37-44, 132
Mateos, J. 292,298 Nocent, A. 303, 312
Mathews, E. 253,264 Norlin, G. 103
Mayer, G. 245 O'Brien, P.T. 207,216,217
McCollough, T. 263 O'Fearghail, F. 32
McLean, B.H. 127, 171, 173, 174, Offer, J. 54
175, 176 Onnann,G. 52
McNally, R. 304 Oswalt, J. 117
McNamara, M. 91 Otto, R. 46
McVey,K. 253 Pagels, E. 233-234
M~hat,A. 237 Painter, J. 244
Meinho1d, J. 19 Paris,F. 291,300
Mercenier, R. 291,300 Patlagean, E. 7
Meritt, R. 167 Payne Smith 324
Merket, J. 166 Peiper, R. 264
Merklein, H. 197,204 Perrot, C. 54, 56,97
Metzger, M. 217,222,275,343 Pesch, R. 214
Michei,O. 117, 170, 182, 185, Pettosyan, E. 300
186 Pfann, S. 132
Milgrom, J. 18, 29, 30, 31, 100, Philonenlco 92,93,94
106, 127 Philonenlco-Sayar, B. 92, 93, 94
Milik, J. 37, 87, 88, 90, 91, Pines, S. 277
97, 115 Porter, S. 244
Mirkin,A. 177. Pradels, W. 274,301
Mirslcy, A. 15, 32, 34, 59, 64, Pralon,D. 103, 104
97,286,287 Pratscher, W. 244,247
Mittmann-Richert, U. 213 Prigent, P. 148, 149, 150, 151,
Mohlberg, L. 304,313 154, 157, 158
Molenberg. C. 88 Procter, E. 240-241
Moo,D. 149, 162, 197, 199, Prostmeier, F. 148, 194, 196
199,202,204 Puech, E. 90,91
Morgan, M.H. 75 Rabbinovicz, R. 19, 31, 52, 53, 59,
Morgenstern, J. 56 284
Marin, G. 303,309,312 Rabinovitz, Z. 59,285
Morray-Jones, C. 85,242 Raes,A. 337
Müller, K. 103 Ramsay, G.G. 69
Munclc, J. 247 Redpath,H. 104
Mutius, H.G. von 52, 134 Reed, A. 138
Naeh, S. 123, 188, 313-314 Reeg, G. 139
Nathan, G. 314 Reingold, E. 300
Nau,F. 323,324 Rengstorf, K. 105
Neirynclc, F. 162 Renoux, Ch. [""A.) 292,294,295,298,
Netzer, E. 129 300
Neusner, J. 20 Reuss, J. 326
Newman,H. 71-72 Richard, M. 158
Newsom,C. 84, 85, 91 Ricoeur, P. 8
430 lndfDI. ofModern AllthorJ

Rigg,H. 166 St!Obaro Steinor, E. 284

Rissi, M. 182 Siegert, F. 35,36,57-58
Rittec,A. 274 Siffrin, P. 304,313
Robinson, 1. 232 Signec,M. 265
Rolfe,l.C. 68 Sitc:s, lo 320
Roloff, J. 205 Silver, DoJ. 27
R.ordorf, W. 213 Simon,M. 1-2,72,274
Rosenberg, Y. 19, 24, 31, 59, 131 Sindawi,K. 35
Roth, C. 32,60 Skarsaune, 0 0 ISO, l.SS, 156, 160,
Rouwhorst, 0. 213,222,265 196
Rubin,Z. 299 Smid,Ho 2Sl
Rubinkiewitz, R. 85, 89, 90, 92, 93, Spicq, C. 182
94 Stahliu, 0. 238-239
Rilck.er, Ao 338 Stemberger, G. 55, 118, 1!9, 120,
Sabbah, (lo 291,295 123, 128, 129, 301,
Sabourin, Lo 173 302
Sltenz-Badillos, A. 74, 263, 267, 2&0 Sterling. G. 183-184
Safrai, S. 20,32,120 Storn,M. 3,68-72.109,172
Sagnud,F. 229, 230, 238-239, Stettlec, C. 207,209,210,216
240 Stökl, D. {=Stökl Beh Ezra, D.) 8, 79,
Samter, E. 15 86, 171-172, 173,
Satran, D. 255 194,195,268
Scbllfer, P. 19, 52, 134, 135, Stökl Ben Ezra, D. 68, 212, 246, 303,
231 319
Scharbcrt, J. 116 Stone,M. 82,84
Schcftolowitz, I. 46 Straclc, H. 62
Schellcle, K. 178 Strand, K. 146
Scberman. N. 40,65,339 Strecker, 0. 206
Schiffinan, L. 98 Stroumsa, 0. 19S, 302
Schlesier, R. 103 Stuckenbruc.k, L. 86-87
Sthltiter, M. 52, 134 Stuhhnacber, P. 116, 176-177, 197,
Sehmithals, W. 214 200
Stbmitz, 0. 107 Sukenik, E. 129
Schnaekenburg.Ro 177-178 Suntrup, R. 269
Schnelle, U. 176, 205, 124 Swartz,M. 52, 59, 63, 64, 97,
Schnusenberg, C. 269-270 137-138
Sc::holem,G. 134,231 Synge,F.C. 195-196
Schöllgen, 0. 265,270 Tabory, J. 34, 49, ss, 106, l20
Schramm, T. 212 Taft, R. 291
Schlimmer, J. 0
303 Talley, T. 303,305,309,310,
Schwart:z., D.R. 30, 107, 112, ! 17, 317
173,174,175,252 Tampellini, S. 263,265,282
Schwartz, E. 247 Tuchlliscbvili, M. 292, 294, 298, 324,
Schw~J. 294, 299, 301 327
Schweizer, E. 207,209,216 Telfer, W. 246
Scbwemer, A. 255 ter Haar Romeny, B. 263
Scott, R. 104 TI.eissen. 0. 1
Scullard, H. 297 Thelwall, S. 71,307
Scullion, JoP. 22, 107 Thoruton 161
Sbillan,A. 54 Tidwell,N. 217
 lt~dt1% of Modern A.uthors 431

Tigchcla.tt, E. 86, 90, 91 Weng.st, K. 148, ISO, 151, 156,

Tischendorf 251 177
ToMeau, R.-M. 267 We.nscl!kewitz, H. 107. 109
Trllnkle, W. 156, 158 Werline, ll 37
Treat, J. 162, 164 Wemer,E. 317
Tuilicr, A. 218 Whitby. M.&:M. 291
Turner, J. 234 Wieder, N. 35,49,97
Tyson,I. 215 Wilckens,. U. 204
Urbac:h, E. 120, 132 Wildberger 80
Vajda, G. 34 Wilken,R. 263,265,274,282
van den Eynde. C. 69,264 Willdnson, J. 294
van den Hoek:, A. 237-238 Winiams,D. 214
van der Woude, A. 90,91 Willis,. G. 303
van Esbroeck. M. 295, 299, 300, 302 Windiscb, H. 148, ISO, J 57
van Goudoever, J. 294, 295 Winston, D. 132
van Renten, J.W. 91, 116,201 Winl.ermute, 0. 48, 84, 96, 129
van Tongeren, L. 291, 296,299 Witberington, B. 214
VanderKam, J. 86 Wolfsou 241
Veltri,G. 131 Wong,C.·K. 195-196
Verwtianer, L. 317, 320 Wratislaw, A.H. 147, 167
Verhelst, S 3, 222, 2:51, 256, Wright, R.B. 34
292, 293, 294, 296, Wri.gbt. W. 266
298,300,327,337- Wunderer, C. 320
342 Yadin, Y. 30
Versnel, H. 172 Yahalom,J. 59,60,63,64, 129,
Verstrepen, J.·L. 303,306, 308,312 285,286
Vinc;ent, H. 294 Yoel, Y. 34, 42. .so. 52, 53,
Volgger, E. 269-270 137,339,343
Völker, W. 237 Youug, N.H. 22, 107, 145, 146,
Vollenweider, S. 21.1 173, 177, 178, 179,
Watts, J. 117 187, 189, 197, 211
Weinfeld, M. 39, 43 Yuval, 1. l
Weiss, H.~F. 183, 193 Zahn,T. 247,256
Weiss, Z. 129 Zaoi,A. 158
Welssman Joselit, J. 282 Zimmerli, W. 80, 187
Wendland, H.-D. 212 Zackscbwerdt, E. 248
Zulai, M. 59,285
 Index ofNames and Subjects
Aaron 44n, 59,63--64, 187-1811,336,
343n
his priestbood 108, 244
his ord.ination 63n. 95, 123, 123-
129,140,188,271-272
h.isrod 271
bis sons 9S, 102n. 123
Abel336
ablutiou {see purification)
Abrab1Dl44n, 111, 32Sn , 336
as higb priest 124n
blessing of 173
eircwncision of 123-[24, 140
bis sacrifice of lsaac 66-fJ7
in the Apoealypse of A. 92-94
abstinence 33--34, 108, 248-249,
from eating and dr:inking 34, 47, 51,
71-72.74-75,312,315
from hair<:uning 248-249
from oiliag 34
ftom sex 34, 51, 249
from sleep 22-23,29,34-35, 57,
132
from washiag 34, 249
from wearing sboes 74,249
from w.ine and meat 248-249
fromwod33,312, 315
(.ree also kuluut, nudipedalia, sex,
vigil)
Adam 59, 236, 280, 336
adoption (see influence)
affiictions 33-36
mouming 33-35,40, 70--71, ?Sn. 96,
99-101, 106, I29n, 1!10-152, 160,
219,249
sorrow 44-45,95, 100
wearirlg sackeioth and ashes 34, S7,
70--71, lC6, 151,219, 280
weeping 34, 40, 45, 96, 100, J29n
wipping ooeself 34n
wounding oneself 34a
(.see als-o abstinence, atonement, .fast,
joy, nudipedalia, tears)
Afdca334
Aggadah (s-ee Midrash)
Alexandria 148n
Cbristian oommunity in 205
Jewish pn~yers in 36-37, 46-48,
Sln, 61, 65, 77
(see aLso Barnabas, Clement, Cyril,
Orlpn, Philo, Pseodi>-Pbilo)
allegory
in Clement 238-243and ritual
implicaJ.ions for ritual 7, 204, 220--
221
in Origen 266-267
in Pbilo 1, 78. 107-114
in polemies 278
almsgiving 134,268,313-31.5
Alltalek 122, 124n
Ambrose 2SO, 255, 261. 332
Amidah 37n, 49-50
additions to 42, 43n, 49n, SOn, S2n, ·
209,339
aod the high-priestly prayer 24-25
angeJs 80--94, 252-256
arc;bangels 89, 230, 240
fallen 86-90,92-94, 100, 121, 140,
330
fasting people ~ompared to 132
Gabriel meeting Zechllriah 325
God surrounded or seJVed by 82-83,
BS, 136,182,23Q-231,240--242
high priest campared to 125, 132,
141. 189,242, 328
bigh priest meeting 110-81, 125,
252-256
Mary niD'tured by an 2.51 n
polemies against worship of216,
220
 Indcc ofName$ Md SltbjectlS
animal sacrifice 28-·33, 6!'1-67
(sH also bumt offering, goats,
lt4pparot, rams)
annuaciation
of Gabriel to Zechariah
250-255,322-328,332-333
Alltiocb 10, 51, lOS, 224, 261, 27l-2Tl,
301,322
apocalypticism 79-101, 329-330
A:zazel in 85-101
and Gnosticism231-232, 236,242-
243,
:md Hebrews liS-186, 194-197
and Hekhalot texts 136
bigb priest ln 79-85, 89-92, 185-
186, 194-197
and Philo 112, llS-116
aod RabbiDie Iiterature 128-130
(see also imaginaire, apocalyptic;
priests)
apos.tolic Gfee inßuenee)
apotropaic 67,130-131,176, 177n, 24.5,
309n, 31 On, 314
Arabic 2, 324
(see also AI-Biruni)
Aramaie 54, &7n, 88n, 92, 122n, 177-
178,204,218,253n,255
Aravit 49 (:um also evening)
Aristides 220, 282n, 331
arkofthecovenant21-22,80,105,198,
203,271,278-279
Armenian 2, 4n, .57-59, 262, 263, 264n,
272n,291,299-300,30ln
~ae!SS-90,92, 138-139
Asbura 34n, 325n
~laminor ll9u, J48n, 16ln,2S6
atonement 2-3, 114, 126-127
and afflictions 47n, 96-97, 101, 114,
134,181.222,253-254,268
and blood sacrifice (lett sacrific:e aad
kopparot)
and c:harity or good deeds 134,268,
313-315
Cbristian in opposition to Jewish
151, 153, 155,273-275, 278-~80,
283
and ~reation 63-64,208-210
and lhc death of the sinner 133-134,
286
and tbe death of a martyr I 02, 115-
433
116, 116-117, 130, 176,268
and the deatb ofJesus 145, 151, 153,
ISS, 171, 20!5-206, 208, 215, 219,
221-222,226,273-274
escbat()logical81-82, 91
expi.ation vs. propitiatio.n 15, 17
and bigh-priestly ganneots 81, 126-
127
and the high-priestly inte.n:e.ssion
190,194,206,253-254
aod bigh-priestly ritual 83-84, 318
and kapparot 6cHS1, 126-127
for mythological sins 96-97, 122-
123
as name ofYom K.ippur 15-17
and popular confessions 113-114,
126,205-206,217,268
and prayer 114, 222, 3 Jln
aad red ribbon 131, 170, 284
and repentaru:e 114, 126, 134, 217, ·
253-254
and sacrifiees lOS, 114, 126, 156,
190,200
aod sc:apegoat 88, 94, 106,113, 116-
117, 127-129, 156
and tbe True Cross 298-302
Ulli\'ersalll3, 133,206,208
vicarious 102, 115-ll6, 116-117,
130,145,205-206,219,221-222,
226,268,286
Augustine 263, 266, 2ö7n, 283, 314,
320n
Allgustus 68u. 70
Azaze19&, 141,160
as Demoo 24.n, 67,79-80, 85-JJS,
98, 121
goat for 24n, 29, 128
and kapparot 61
mythologization of79, 80, 85-95,
141
Babylonian prayers (.ree prayers)
baptism ·us, 193, 206, 210n, 293n, 233,
239,268, 313n
Barabb8$ 147, 16!5-171, 224, 266,267,
330
bibliQI (see influc.nee)
blood
absc.nce of83, 100, 108,279
allcgori.%ed ll2-113
and Joseph 96-97
434 lnda ofNames and Subjects

I!Dimal ilßd human 130 D~r304,305n,306n,308n,

atooing 91, lOS, 115, 126-127, 127, 309,311,323,324n
172,198,205,208 Calendar, Qumran 37
Jesus' 166, 172, 187-193, 19&, 205, Canoni23tion
208 ofChristian texts 3, 146,226,261,
sacrifices 25-32, 65-67, 105, 127- 267,331
130,187-193,205-206 of Jewish prayers 54
in Seder Avodalr 60 of Jubilees 99
(see alro sprinlding) ofMishnah 119
Boeth.u~ians 30, 106, 126n Celsus 172
boolcish (see influence) Christ (1ee Jesus)
Booths (see Suldcot) Christian Jews
Brabm;ms2.5 dermition ofte.tm 10
bridal chamber 3, 85, 126, 228, 232- festival calendar 6, 204, 212n, 213-
237,239,242-243,330 218,273
bumt afferings 2ln, 29n, 31, 32, 129, and high priests 256
152-153,254,271 imaginaire 78, 35, 94-95, 118, 145-
Caesarea 77, 132, 261, 262n, 273, 277, 227,329
299n ilßd the templo 7n, 218, 221
CaJo 336 Christmall 9-10, 253,257, 2&1-282,
Calendar, Babylonian 296-297, 309- 290,30Sn,324n
311,323-327 .. Cbrysostom (see John Clu:ysostom)
Tishri 4, 69, 123-124, 253-254, 290, circumcision 220, 273
293n,301-302,308n,311,320,322, of Abraham 123-124, 140
323,324-327,331-333 Clement of Alexandria JOn, 228, 232,
Marheshvan, Heshvan 301, 326 237-243,330
Kialev 308n, 326 Clement of Rome 172, 194n, 213n, 270
Tevet 311, 326 compassion (.se:e mercy)
Shwt326 compulsion (see iofluence)
Adar326 confession
Nisan 97, 123-124, 213n, 256, 308n, and atonemeut :59--60, 114, 126
3Un, 326, 327n, 3:11 and Jesus 186-187
Sivan308n and thc lrapparot61
Tammuz .56n, 311, 327 and mystical prayer 131
Av249, 31 I, 327 in the Passion narrative 167-170
Elut 136, 326 as prayer (viddllj') 39, 48, SO, Sl-54,
Calen.dar, festal (see festival) 59-60,65,126,127,205-206,212.
Calendar, 1ulian 296-297, 309-311, 217,268,286,314,335-342
323-327 in the temple 2ln, 24-27, 29n, 31,
Januacy 309,311 59-60, 127, 136, 169
March 326, 327n Constantine 295,297, 299n
Aprii2SOn, 311a, 326 Coptic 2, 324
June 308-311 cosmology, cosmological 79, 83, 94,
July 309-311, 327 108-114,132,180,216,226,231
August 296n, 297n, 309-311 Coun.c:il ofLaodicea 276n
September 4, 74, 253-254, 293-303, covenant 42, 44n, 187--188
303-322, 323-327, 328n renewal of 42, 45, 95, 122, 124, 188
October 254, 296n, Jllo, 323-327 crealion
November 309, 324n in Christian pJS.yers 336, 342-343
in Colossians 207-210
 Index ofNames and Svbjects 435

in Hebrews 189 54-59, 101-118, 119,223

in Philo 108, 113 (see al:ro prayers, Philo, Septu.agint)
in Qumran prayers 41, 43, 210n Dio Cluysostomus 199
in rabbinie texts 122, 123 dream. 22, 165, 169
in Seder Av()dah 4Sn, 59, 63-64 Dura Europos 118
in Sirach 209n Euter 4n, 124, 213n, 21&, 256,290,
curse 292n,293,307,317,32ln
andscapegoat 3ln, 10&, 152-154, (aee olao Passover)
157,175 Egypt 45, 95, 111, 172, 292n, 334
of Jesus 154, 164, 173-176 (see alsD Alexandria)
against Jewish priests 279 Elijab SS, 248, 324o
against Cbristian priests 287 Apocolypse of4&
Cypri:an Eli!ba 343n
of Ca.thage 270-271 Ember Days 303-322, 333
ofGaul264,282,283 Encaenia 290-303, 332
Pseudo- 320n Enoch 82---$3, 89, 343n (:ree also
Cyril lEn()Ch)
of Alexandria 4n, 20n. 29n. 69, 77, Entrance (.see high priest aod holy of
262-268, 279--283 holies)
of Jerusalem. 274, 297-299, 302, Ephretn
326a oll Cbrist's birth 255
DamasciiS 205 on Yom Kippur 16n, 73, 76-77,
dance 36,57 280-283,332
Iewish d. in Jewish sources 36, 57 on Zechariah 250, 253n, 325, 328
Jewish d. on Sukkot 296 Pseudo-Epbrem 264, 267n, 268n,
Jewisb d. witnessed by pagans 69- 293JI.
70, 12, 74, 77, 2501:!, 280-282 Epiphanius 245, 246-249, 256n
Muslim d. on Ashura 34n escbatology, eschatological76, 85-.95,
d:angerous ones in between 1, 273, 333 97-100, llS-116, 181-197,203-
(see also Ckristian Jc:ws, God- 204,226-227,318,329-330
fearers, Jewish Christians and atonement91, 181,226-227
Judaizers) high-priestly liberator 90-92, 101,
Daniel bar Tubanita 264 185-186,226-227
Days of Awe 73, 121 in Gnosticism 229-23 I, 236, 243
s.
David 18Jn, 194 in Philo 108, 112
Delos 39, 48, 58 judgment 82
demo.as (3ee Azazel, Shemibaza, devil, Iiberation 95, 98-99, 140, !81, 185-
Satao) 186
demytbo1ogizalion 106 mea11S7
destruction ofthe temple 13, 18-19, 35, purifi<:ation 81, 91, 115
126,135,139,221,227,236,283- victory over evil 41, 85-.90, 94, 9S,
284,311,329,331 98, 115-116, 138, 141, 181, 18:5-
Dionysus68 186
devil (aee Satao) 67, 80-81, 94, 121, esoteric knowledge 23, 84, 130n, 137-
127-130, 136, 180, 185, 193, 206, 139,237, 241 (.!II!B OUo priests,
314, 3 I 8, 328 (see also demO.DS) secret knowledl!:e)
diaspora Essenes (see Qumran)
Babylonian 54-59, 65, 119 Euebarist
Mediterranean 14, 33-34, 45-48, contrasted with fast 72, 151···161,
210n. 219,224
436 Index: ofNf.l.mu and Suhjectr

and templization 226, 233, 261, on Yom Kippw- 34

269-272 pascbal4n, 222n, 307, 308o, 317
and Yom Kippur269-272, 4n, 33.5- Fast of the Seventh Monlh
343 (aee Ember Days).
Eusebius of Caesarea festivals
on YomKippur 15,68-69,274, Chri.stirm panicipation in Jewish 71-
lß:Z-283,332 72,74,77,157,213-223,261,273-
on James 246-249, 277,282,283,288,306,31.5-316,
on the Holy Sepulcher 271,291,297 322,329,331-334
Eusebius ofEmesa 263 Jewish observance of 415, 306
Eve59, 236 pagan obsenation of71-72, 214
evening Jewish iofluence on Christian 290-
of Jacob lamenling 96, 129n 328
star 280 (see alto Hannukah, New Moon,
Tamid29.o.,32 Passover, Rosh Hasbanah, Sabbath
ofYom Kippur 73-74 Shuvah, Sukkot; Christmas, Easter,
(see also Alavit) Ember Days, Eru::aenia. Epiplwly,
Exaltation of lhe Cross 4, 290-303, 332 Exaltation, Lent, Penteca&t, Sunday;
Exegesis of LevitiCU$ Ashura; Ides, Ludi RoiiUini,
Christian 76, 148-149,161-289 Thmgelia)
function ofS, 76-77, 268, 277-283 ' food prohibitions (see fast, Kashrut)
Jewisb 18-19,21, 23, 27, 113, 283- foxgivene$S (see atonement, mercy)
288 Gabrie187-88,250--2S4,322-329
(see also allegory, typology) Gaon.ites SOn, 56, 60, 65-61, 134
expiatlon (see atoneme.nt) garments
fast bells on 155
apotroic :function 314 cliaage of2ß-32, 81,93-94,111-
and the battle with Amalek 122 112,135-136,193,239,241-243
described bynon-JCW!I 68-77,253- festal garments ofpeople 36, 57-58,
254,278-283,315-316,326-327 71-72,77,128,280
on the Exaltation ofthe Cross 300- garb of light 233, 235, 238, 239
302 garmcnt of opinions 112
of Ged.aliah 318 golden gannents 22n, 28-32, 9611,
as means ofatonement 140, 73n, 313 l70n, 196n, 240
as name forYom Kippur 15-17, heavenly gannents 80, 93, 12S, 135-
107, 117 136,239
in the Diaspora 106-107, 114, 117 interpntation of golden garments
in Islam 34n 96-97, 111-112,122-123, 126, ISS,
in Karaism 34n 238
and public fasts 56n, S1-S8, 64, 72n Ioseph's ganncnt 96, 129n
observed by non-Jews 22n, 213-218, linen garments ofhigh prie.st28-32,
227,273-277,330-331,343 58,81-83,122-123,247
polemicized against by Christians linen garments of priests 80, 82-83
219-223,277-283,331 mcssianic 163, 170
purifyiag aspect 48n ofphormakos 171
as punishmcnt 101 ra.sgOO clotbes 74-75, 315
in Qumran 100 white gannents of people 35
iD Samaritanism 34n wbite ß811Dents o.f priests 82, 125
of tbe Sevenlh Monlh (.see Ember (see also sackcloth)
Days)
 lnde% ofNi.!mu and Subj~cls 437

Gentile Christian(s) and bisroricity 19-28

audieni:e 22n, 148n, 176,201-202, and Josepbus 22
22411 anti kapparot 61
definition 10, 274n and Matthew 169
festat calendar 212n, 216,222-223, aud Pbilo 61-62
227,331 and polemies 284, 288
Hegesippus as 246n of post-temple prayers 49-<tS, 340
mission to the 158-159, 173 and Proto-typology 159--160, 175,
salvation for 174-176,203-204 223-224,267-268,332
Georgian 2, 291-293, 339n. and the SeptuaginllOS
g~zera sh~ZV~~ah 26n, 122n of temple ritual28-33
Gnosticism 30n, 79, 134, 140, 18S.n, Hanuklcah 281-282,294, 308n, 310
228-244 Hegeßppus218,246-250,2S4-255,
goats 127-130, 150-161, 165-171, 256.n. 2:", 331
202-203, 266-267 Hekhalot S9n, 79, 118, 125, 134-139,
and Ioseph 67, 95-97 140,228,231,242,329
and kapparot 66--01, 128-130 Hellenistic Judais.m46-48, 101-118.,
lottery between 21n. 29, 98, I 13, 104-205
117, 165, 166-169~ 278 Hezekiah 343n
sacrificial goat 2')..-.32, 60-61, 96.n, bigb prie$t, high-priestly 124-127
138, 152-161, 169-171, 187, 192, be<:oming superhumane ll0-112,
208,279 125, 242, 279
similarity oftwo 29, 152-157, IS9- bishops as 245, 26~272
160,167-170,266 celebration at the end ofYom
third goat 28n, 32, 150-152, 1.57, Kippur33, 126
160-161 Cbristian as 268-269
as two kinds ofhumans 113 confession 2ln, 24·-27, 29n, 31, 51,
(.ree aho scapegoat) .59-60, 127, 136, 169
God COm.JptiOtt 124-126
compassion of39, 4.5, 48n, 9.5, 122-· cmtrance to the boly ofholies 30-31,
123,129, 134,203,2S3,295,313 80, 82-83, 110-1 12,·125, 180, 229-
grace of46 243
judgment by 52, 58, 121. 122-123, interceding 30, 83, 186-187, 189-
201,210 190,206,218,246-249,253-255,
lotof98 269,222,245,269
omniscieace of39, 4&n, .58, 201, 341 James as 246-150
preseo~ of39, 48n, 79, 81, 106, Jesus as 160, 180-197, 206, 213,
126. 135, 180-191,193-194,208, 218,225-226,229-230,233-234,
249,256 253-254,261,265-266,318-320
throne of 80, 82 JobDas 256
vision of79-&5, 100, 107, 110-112, Messiah 90-92, 101, 195-196,223
114,134-139,232,236-243 mystic as 79--&S, 110-112, 134-139,
wrath of200, 203, 279 233-243
(see also name) in polemies 278-279, 284-288
God-fearers 214-215,219,222, 34:2 popul&r imitati.on of 132
golden garments (see garments) popular obsentation of32, 6~1,
Gregory ofNazianz 4.n, 271-272 269
Haftarah 55-59,16, U6, 280 praying 19, 24-2&. 30, 32, 83, I 09,
Halakhah 113, 186-1&7, l89,247-248,2S3-
and Dirladle 218 254,2S6-2S7
438 lnda ofNames and Subjects
reading 24--27,32-33, 55, 58-59,61
sacrificing28-33, 59-64, 187-189,
335-336
Simeon as 255-256
in Valentiniao. Soteriology 228-243
vigil22-23, 29, 132
visions ofGod 79-8S, 110-112,
134-139, 233-243
wise man as 11Q-H2
Zedwiah as 2SQ-255, 322-328
(see also visions of God)
Hippolytus 154, 158--159, 195,224,
256, :B2
boly of holies
in Christian cllurehes 271-272, 296
entered by believers 188, 190-191
entered by Gnostics 230,233-237,
241
entered by hip priest lQ-31, 80,
229-243
entered by James 247-248
entered by Jesus 180-197
entered by mysti~: 79-85, 11 0-1 !2,
134-139,238-243
entered by Zechariah lSO
heavenly 83-85, 110-112
(see also high priest. interc:ession,
sprinlding)
Holy Sepulcher 271, 290, 293,301-302
hymns 206-212
(see also pi;.')IVI, Seder Avodah)
ldes of September 297
Ignatius of Antioch 10, 194n, 217n
imagbraire
definition of 8-10
ofYom Kippur:
Apocalyptic 79-100, 112, 115, 136,
193-197,226
early Chtistian IOl, 145-227,327
.Gnostic 100,228-243
GreekDiaspora 101-118
Jewish 7&-139, 243,252,255
Rabbinie I 18-134
lncense 21n, 24, 28, 30, BOn, 84, 100,
106, 1011, 111-113, 126, 193,250,
252,279
incmse altar 188-189, 193n, 24o-
241,242n,253n
inßuencc
adoption 5-6,243, 288-289, 310-
312,317,328n,321-322,339-l41
apostolic 4, 5, 145-227,243, 306,
JlQ-312,316
bib)jcal 5, 311-312,317,339-341
book:ish S, 57-SB, 261-262, 282,
288,301,31~321,328,331
compulsion S-6
defmitions of types of 4-6
Ortsgeist 5, 301, 333
reaction 5-6, 289, 32011, 321
(see also polemics)
iniquity 39-40, 42, 43n, 51, S3n, 92n,
138, 175,338 (see also sin)
intercession
of animals SB
of Enocb 82-83
of higb priest 30, 83n, 246-249,
253-255,269,222,245,269
of Jaroes 218,221,246-250
of Jesll! 181, 185, 189-190, 193-
194,206,222,253
t ofMoses SS, 318
popular intercession replacing hlgh-
priestly 222, 269, 313n
prophetic 83n
of Zechariah 251-255
(see also high pric&t)
lrenaeus 222n, 228, 233, 252n
Isaac 43, 66-67, 129-130, 151,336
[slaro 34n, 2S2n, 325n, 333
I vo of Chartre.s 269, 270o
Jacob 43. 44o., 95-96, 128-129, 32Sn,
336
Jacob ofSarug 69,267,281
Jaroes the Iust 3, 218.243-250,256-
257,323,331
Jcrome 75n, 76,247,256,267,271,
296,306,311,332
Pseudo·letome 167
Jerusalem
benediction about 24n
Chtistian Jews of192, 215, 218,256
charthfathers ftom 77, 250n, 263,
271,274,282
date for aununc:iation to Zechariah
324-327
daughters of36
findhlg of relics in 323
mountains ofSS
in polemic:.s 155-156,273
 /ndu ofNames Qltt/ Subjects 439

qiblato12n Juliall 266

transition ofpric:ats from 64 Justin Martyr 1.55-156, 157-160,281,
(see also anonymous of Jerusal.em, 283, 332. 336
Cyril, Encaenia, Exaltation, Justinian 6
Hesycbius, temple} Juvenal69-70, 74
Jesus fcappOTOI 65--{11
as atonetnent IS6, 205-206 kapparfit {ilacn'ljp\Ov, m1!ll, ~w.uupw.U)
crucifvdon of 149, 154, 166--167, 30, 80, 104-106, li.S, 127, 187,
187 197-20:5, 261, 266, 270, 212, 299-··
as high priest 180--197 300, 302, 331
identical with Barabbas 167-169 Karaites 34n, 35
as kapporet J 97-205 kashnlt216, 220
Parousia of 154-160, 167, 181, 190, Kingdom ofGod 49n, 135, 136, 138,
193 U9, 153, 1.54, 207, 208, 209n (see
Passion of147, 143--161, 161-165, also "malkhuyot'')
165-171, 180,223,22S,236,291n Lamb ofGod 147, 176--179, 226, 2.54
as s~:apegoat 147-179,206,267- Lections (see reading)
263,270n Lent 304, 30.5, 321n
(.see also atonement., curse, higb Leo the Great 74-17, 281-283, 304-
priest, interc:ession, sc:apegoat) 306,312-317,320--322,332-333
Jewish Christians Levi (Amoraite) S3
community in Jerusalem 301-302 Levi (son ofJacob}44n, 64, 83, 113,
definition 10 J37n, 23!, 284 (aee also Aaron)
fostival calendar 212-213, 21!, 222- Levite 95, 148n, 234n, 238, 239, 244,
223,244,245-246,257,273-274 2SS, 330 (see also Aaron)
and Goostics 243 liturgy (see festi vals, ritual)
inflnenc::e on ..Judaizers" 277, 321- Lot 336, 343n
322,342 Iudi Romani 297
legends 244-2.57 magic 66, 131
(see also Hegesippus, Porphyry) maona 33, 41, 45, 47, 73n, 97, 100,
Job 336, 343n 124n, 271
John Chrysostom. 74-77,221-222. 250, Mardan 156
274-275,278-233,295,315,331- martyrs, manyrdom 78, 115-116, l39n,
333 154, 176, 198--201, 223n, 268
Josef126n, 138-139,336 Mary 251, 255, 2.56n, 323, 327n
Josephus 22-23, 78, lOS, 117, 130, Melchizedek 64,90--92, 98-99, 184,
199-200,202,214,330 191,232,284,334,336
Joshua son Jebotadak 8HI, 9S, 195, memory
200 collective 4, Sn, 14.5
Joshua son ofNun 195, 200, 336, 34Jn and the Passion narrative 149
joy ofthe temple rit11a! 19, 23,27-28,
33-36,69,72-73,77,99,280-281 88, 139
(see also affiictioos; dance; hilb mercy 134, 137, 342-343
priest, c:e1ebration) and afflictions 34n, 4.5, 100, 253
Judaizers 77,273-275, 277,306,315-- alms and 313-314
317,321-322 Christian requests for divine 29S,
judgment 121-122, 163, 165,203, 210 298
Yom Kippur asjudgnlent day 36, 52, and name of Yom Kippur 16,
51, BOn, 82, 8Jn, 87-88,91,94, 124, and repentaDce 9.5,
140
440 /mlez oj'Names am/ Subjecn

and sacrif"u:es 129, 313-314 ueme(s)

spec.ialscason of 45, 95 God's 41, 60, 135-139, 189, 2ll-
mercy seat (see A:Dpporet) 2l2,217,24G-242,338
Merkavah (see Hekhalot) Jesus' 189, 211-212
Metatron l3.S ofYom Kippur 15-17
Michael84n, 89,90-91, 184n, 231n, Nazi.rites 215n. 245, 248-249
29ln Ne'ilah 43n, 49, SOu, 56, 132, 343
Michael Syros 264 New Moo.n 108n, 136,216.220
Minhalt 49, SOn, S.S-56, 60n Noah 43, 44n, 95, 140, 199, 300n, 32Sn,
miRdes 22n, 47, 125,288 336
Mishnab nudipcdalia 3411, 7011, 74-75, 315, 322
attitude towards high priest:I12S observance of Yom IGppur
and historicity 19-28, 136-137, 202 by Christians 213-223, 273-277
Temple ritual28-33, 119-120, 124- by lews 46,71-72
131 by pagans 214n
ritual ofthe people 33-36, 49-6.S, (.ree also God·fearers)
119-120, 133, 202,217, 249 observation of hip priest by people
(:see aLso rabbis) {.see high priest)
mission to the Gentiles (see Gentiles) ordo commendarion.f.s animae 343
Mordecb$i 343n Orige.o 15, 77,HO. 168, 172,220-224,
Mo.ses 47, SS, 73n, lll, 121-·122, 318, 234,261-269,273-283,289,329,
32Sn, 336 331-332
mouming (.see afflictions) Ort:~geist (see influence)
Mysticism Oxyrhynchos 62
Clementine l37-243 Pagans 1,3,8,199-200,220
Hekhalot 134-139 celebrating Yom Kippur 71-72,
Phitonic ll0-ll2, 237-239,242- 214n
243 as converts to eady Christianity
proto-mysticism 79-SS 222-223,227,268,332
Valeotinian 228-243 describmg the Jewish Yom K.ippur
(see also visions) 68-70
myth, mythical, Mythology enculturatioD. of pagan concepts in
defmition 7-8 Judaism 101-106
and Gnostic soteriology 228-232 and the Enc:aenia 297
and the Holy Land 6, 301-302 majority of ~bitants of Jerusalern
and imaginaire 9 301-302
and Passion 145-171, 173-206, origin ofthe EmberDays 309-310,
221--226, 329 322
mytbologic;al events (see also nudipedalia, pharmal~
connected to Yom K.ippur 6H7, Iudi Roman1')
85-95,95-97, 121-124, 128, 140, Palestine 5, 16, 33,
181,328,329 Christbin Jewish com.petitioo in
mythologization 79 273-274,278,283-289,334-343
of~l85-95, 128-129 Jewish pra)'ers 37--46, 49, 50, 52
of high priest 79-85 readings in 54-59
ofJesus 145-171. 173-206,223- (see aLso Apocalyp~e ofAbraham,
226, 268, 329 Encaenia, Exaltation, 1Enoch,
(1ee also demylbologization) Eusebius, Jerusalem, Joscphus,
Nachmanides 67 Jubilees, Origeo, pRyers, Sedu
Nadav and Avihu 95
 Index ofNamu tmd Subjects
ifvodah. temple ritual, Testament o/
LfiiVi, Zechariah)
Palm Sunday 296n
Parou.sia 1.54-161, 181, 190, 193
Participation ofPeople
(see bigh priest· popular
Observation of; observance of Y om
KippW")
Pas.sover, Pascbal2, 41
Aqedah on 123-124
Christian observance of273
circumcision of Abraham on 123-·
124
Lamb 155, 176-177
release of prisoner on 166
(.ree also Easter)
Paul 171,173-176,197-205,208,211-
212, 214n, 215-216,219,221,224--
227,266,330-331,343n
Peace 44, 49n, 65n, 98, 11 J, ll3n, 132,
167,208,210
Pentecost 2, 213, 215a, 290,304, 305n,
308n,310,312n,317
Persia (.see ~:~/so Babylonia)
Peter343n
Pbari.s4!es 30, 99, 113, 126,202,316
pharmokos 147, ISS, 171-173, 176,
223n,224,268,332
Philo 46-48, 107-114, 237-239, 242-
243
Pinbas343n
Plato ilßdPlatonism 103n, 112,114,
182-184
P1Ulan:h 36, 68-69
polemies
anti-Christian 283-289
a.nti-Jewish 72, 148-161, 219-222,
277-289,295,315-317
pagan 68-70
(.ree Dlso intluertce, polemical)
Polycarp 194, 256
Polycrates 245,256
Porpbyry staW"Opbylax 299
prayers 36-65,207-212,284-289,314-
315, 335-343
atoning function 46
Babylonian 49-64
Christian 314-·315, 330,335-343
contimlity of synagogue with temple
18··19, 24-28, 64-65, 136
441
day-long 45, 46, 49, 61
in the Dia.spOTa 46-48
heavenly 82, 85, 135, 135-139,240,
241-242
Hekhalot 137-138, 139
obligatory 49-50, 58
observed by Christians 71-73,76,
77,280-281
Palestinian 37-46, 49, 50, 52
Qumran 37-46
. rabbinie 49-64, 284-288, 335-343
sacrifices and 100, 102, 133
(&~1: also confession, Aravit,
Haftarab. high priest, intercession,
James, Minhah, Ne'ilah, observance
of Yom Kippur. Priesler blessing,
readiflgs. Seder Avodalt, Shaharit,
templi.vdioo, Zechariah)
presence ofOod (see Ood)
priest(s), priestly
and apoca!ypticism 79, 82-Sj, 232
and Bornabos 148n
benediction over 24
blessing49
in Christianity 215n, 245,270-271,
332
eatio,g sin affering 32, 150-152, 157
Josephus as 22
ordination of84n, 123, 187-n8,
313
and Philo 30n, I08-113, 118
and polemics, 7, 82n, 152-156, 184,
278-279,284-288,332
priestly ori,giD of Seder A-.odah 45n,
63~. 284--288
rivaley wilh sages 125
secret priestly knowledge 23, 14,
130n, 135-139,237
Sirneon as 256-257
the wic:lced 98
(see Gnosti<lism. high priest, Seder
A110doh, esoteric knowledge)
propitiation (see atonement)
Proto«Typology 81n, 147-161, 165,
196,219,223-227,267-268-332
purificarion 127
oftlte highpriest29, 8In. 102n,
238-240
amiction as 46, 96
by baptism 193
442 Index ofNames and Suhjects

eschatological 81, 89, 91 59,61

and the Fast of the Seventh Month on Sabbath Shuva 56, 319
309n, 312···316, 322 on the Anuunciation to Zechariah
Greek p. rites 171 244,327-:328
md Isaiah SOn on the Encaenia 294-295, 298
by Jesus 187-1851, 205-206 on the Fast ofthe Seventh Montb 76,
ofthe land 81, 89, 115 304,310,317-322
ofthe mystic 135-136 on Yom Kippur 54-59, 65, 76, 77,
ofpeople 96, 99, 108n, 137-189 99,31~-321,321-322
ofthe sanctuary 106, 182n, 187-189 ritual sratus of 58-59
before Yom K.ippur 29, 73 (see also Haftarah)
Qaraites (see Karaites) Rechabites 249, 2S6n
Quam.decimans 256 Red Heifer 169, 170n, 188n
~an37-46,90-92,97-100 red ribbon 29, 124, 129, 130-131, 159-
Rab:S2 160, 165,268,279,2&3-284
Rabbi 133 redemption 12.1, 123-124, 140, 173-
Rabbi Abbahu 125n, 133n 176,186,189-191,198,207-210,
Rabbi Aqiva 23, 32n, 102n, 136, 139, 233
284 rcenactment
Rabbi Ba bar Bina 52 ofeschatological myth 98, 141
Rabbi Eliezer 23, 32n of Jewi$h Cbristian Iegeiids 322-329
Rabbi Haronuna 53 reciting Bible as !14, 61
Rabbi Meit 12ln, 133 rec;iting thc Mishnah as 28
Rabbi Yehudah 53, 62, 121, IJJn in Second Temple Judaism 33, 45-
Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi 17n, 19 46,61-62,65,114,140, 16ln
Rabbi Yishmaell28n, l30n, 131, 133- in Seder Avodah 33, .50, 5 l, 59-61,
134, 135 127
Rabbi Yohanan 132 renewal of covenant (see covenant)
Rabbi Yooathan 53 repentance
Rabbi Yosef248 of Azazel12S
Rabbi YosefQaN 67 and Christian litwgy 318-319, 320n,
Rabbis 28-33,49-65, 118-134,283- 342-343
284 confession as manifestation of 54
rain 44, 7Sn, 248 creatcd before the world 132
ram in de solatitfia 253-254
and tbe Aqedah 129 golden calfand 124, 129
Christian typologi2ation of266 in Hebrews 186
confused with goets 128 in Hek:halot Iiterature 13 6
in lhc kapparot ritua16tHi7, 130 Joseph' s brothers and 48, .51, 95-96,
mom.eut ofsacrifiee of 23, 31 100, 101, l26n, 132
number of22, 28n, 31, 112n in JU$tin lSS-156, 160
P bllo on the sac:rifice of tbe 108 Noah's95
thc rabbis on thc sacrifice of the J24, in Origen 266
128 in Philo 108, 114, 132
Rashba67 as nio~~~; 201
Rava 53 in Pseudo-Jonah 57
Ravya bar Qisi 117n, 130, 140,330 in Qumran 3&-39, 45, 132
reaction (see iotluence) inrabbioicsources24n.ll9, 121,
readiogs 124, 126, 128, 132-134
high priestly 24-27, 32-33, 55, 58-- and the readings ofthe Fast of
 lndez ofNa11Je& t171d SvbjeCIS 443

~tnd the rogations 314n and name ofYom Kippur 16,69-70,

Sep~berJl&-319 217-2(8
in Romans 201, 203 in pagan texts 68
ofShemihaza 128 in Philo 108n
ten Days of Awe and 121 prayers on 49
vieariou.s Npentance 13 3 prohibition to fast on 307
(see aJso atonement, mercy) rest89, 98n
resurrection 213n, 2.B, 271 as Yom Kippur69-70, 89, 98n, 217-
(.ree also Jesus, Parousia, Passion) 218
revelation Yom Kippur falling on 120
in Gnosticism 236-237 (see olso Sabbatb Sbuva, Songs of
on MoUDt Sinai 9~ tlte Sabbatlt Sacrifice)
naturallaws illld 325 Sabbatb Shuva 56,318-319
and Zechariah 250-2S2, 257, 32S, sac:kcloth and 8$l1es 34, 57, 70, 71n,
328 106, 151, 219,280
rite6-7 sacred space
definition of 6 open space 70-72, 280
(.see also affiietions. animal (.see also synagoguc, temple, ehurch)
sacrifice, baptism, bridal chamber, sacredtime
ein:umcision, Eucharlst, ritual, in Hcbrews 181
scapegoat, spriDkling) in Qumran 97-100
ritual6-7 (see also calendar, eschatotogical,
definition of 6 festivals)
ofrhe people 33-n, 107-109, 132- sacrifice, sac:rificial
134 animal28-33, 65-67, 120, 150
in the temple 28-33, 109-114, 124- human65-66,117,130, 158,171-
132 173, 181, 187
(see also affiictions, animal rabbinie Interpretation of 124-130
sacrifice, bridal cluunber, entrance, spi1it"Ua125, 64-65, 84-85, 108,
Eudlarist, festivals, N&ding, 112--114, 132-133, 180, 181, 186,
reenactment, temp Je rit\1.111) 187-189, 265-272
Rome 70, 74-75,205,214-216, 221, and suffering setvant 116-117
273, 303-322, 329 (see also blood, bumt offeriog, bigh
{see also Clement, Hippolytns, prie$t,pltarmaA:a~, prayer, priest, sm
Justin, Juvenal, Leo) offering, temple)
Rosb Hasbanab Sadducees 30, 106, 113, 126,202, 284n
and creation208-209 Samarkans34n,44,48n, 189n
and Christians 275, 318-319 Satan (see devil)
liSjudgmentday 36n, 38n. 39n, 121, Scapegoat 29, 3 I
210 abused 31, 88-89, 152-159,
mythologlcal events on 123-124 Barabbas as 165-171
prayen 44n, 208-209, 285 as Catalyst 176--179
and Sbofar 76 confessionon 60, 113, 167-170
Sabbatb, Saturday cursed 94, 108, 152-159
anti-Cbrislion polemies aud 2&5 as dcmon 79, 85-95
Cbrisrian polemies against 216,220 human beings as 116--117, 130, 140,
Christian obscrvance of212n, 21Sn 165-171, 330
Christianization of 2 and kapparot 66-61, 128-130
and Ember Days 304-305, 307,310- killed3l,l14, 152-159
312,317-318,320 sending away 31, 89, 94. 96n, 104,
444 Index ofNams.s and Subjects
113, 152-1;54, 158, 159-160, 169,
174-179,206
and suffering servant 116-1 J7
(see al:~o goats, Jesu5, pharmakos,
red ribbon)
SGd,rA.vodah28,59-64
and Christian liturgy 335-336
and polemies 284-288
in the Second Temple period 43-45,
59-62,161,212,223
in Siddurim 50
(see a4o reenactment)
Scptuagint 15-16, 94, 102-106, 110,
113, 117,125,200
Servant ofGod 116-117, 176-178,226
Seth 336
Shaharit 49, .SOn, SS, 60n
Shemihau 86, 89-92, 121, 128.
Shim'on Jsh Mltzpeh 20
Shmuel (Amoraite) 53
Siddur 49-50
(see Dlso Sedu Rav 'Amram Ga'on, ,
Seder Rav Sa 'ad/11 Ga'on)
Sirneon 244, 246, 2SS-256, 323
sin(s)
beginning of 86, 94, 12 I
collcctive 115, 124,314
end of 88, 94 · Yom Kippurritual in 51-65, 127,
heredituy 139
hlstocy of 43, 86, 89
secret39, 58,201,337-341
types ofS9
(.ree also golderl calf, iniquity,
Joseph, trensgression)
sin affering 28a, 29, 32, 61, 128, 152,
191,214,223,286
sinless 108, 178, 184, 286
sleep (see abstinence)
Socrates 291
sorrows (s«e aftlictions)
soull07, 108n, 109-I 14,240-243, 313,
329
Sozomenos 291-293, 29S
Spirit, Holy 42, 152n, 173, 174,219,
254,271,316
spiritualization (ses allegory,
templization, typology)
sprink.ling
apo,alyptic te)[tS on 84
ashes and water 29
blood24, 29-31,81
in Christian worship 272, 300
Hebrews o.n 180, 187-189, 191, 193
Pbilo on 108, 112-113
in polemies 179
Rabbis on 126-127
RomiiiS on t 98, 200, 203
in Sedu AvodDh S9-60, 127
Stepheo. 205, 224
Sukkot 70n, 120n,
in Qwnran prayers 39n, 41,
Chli.stian polemies against 29S
e<~nfused with Yom Kippur 68-69,
250, 253-255,
aad the Encaenia 294-296, 297n.
298n, 301-302
and the Fast of September 312, 318-
319,
and Palm Sunday 296D
and the Temple dedication 123,
and 1..echatiah 326n
Sunday 218, 285, 295n, 300n, 304, 312
{see QUO Palm Swtday)
Susa:ona 343n
synagogue
non-Jews .in 222, 273-277, 277-
mosaics 129
1.S6,212,319-320
and temple ritua124-28, 32, 51, 120
templization 71-72, 278-279
(see also sacred space)
tabema~le 95. 150n, 182, 183n, 193,
238,318
Tabernacles (ree Suldoot)
Tacitus 71n
Tamid 2ln, 29, 32, 177n
Targum
and confessions 51
liturgical use of.S4, 100
on Mekhlzedek 91
in Qumran 46, 54, 100,
translation technique 101, 102, tos.
106
temple
allegorization of 109-114
attitudes to 213-214. 220-223, 223-
225,244-257,286
and c~h (1ee templization}
in 1el1.1Salem 28-33, 82, 88, 99, 135,
 Int.kx ofName.s and Su.hjects 445

141 230,265-266,271-272,320,328
heavenly 79--85, 134-139, 182-184, of kltpporet 191·-205, 225
229-243 ofordination ofLevites 1&7
in polemies 278-279 oframs266
rabbinie interpretation of 124-131 ofR.ed Heifer 187
reenacted in Sedu Avodah 59-64 ofred ribbon 159-l60, l6S, 268
and synagogue (.see templization) ritual implications of21.3, 219-223,
(see alto destruc:tion of the temple, 271-272,329,331
01'tsgei$t) of sacrific:ial goat 148-161,225
temple ritual 28-33 ofscapegoat 98, 138, 147-179,206,
(see also allegory, animal sacrifice, 224,225,266-267,331
high priest, incense, sprink!ing. oftabemacleltemple 180-197, 271-
typology) 172,297,330
templizatioa 71, 261, 269-272,278- ofveil225
279,296,341 (see also allegory, exegesis,
Tertullian templization)
on the rontemporary Yom Kippur Valent.inians 3, 71-79, 84-8S, 118,
36,71-72,76-77,280-283 126n, 137,191,228-243,329-330,
on &sting on Saturdays 307-308 viddll]l (.ree c:onfession)
typologizing Yom K.ippur 156-161, vigil (.see abstinence, affiictions, high
267,332 priest)
Thargelion 171 visions of God
Thecla343n in apocalyptic sou.rces 79-85
Theodotus 228-243 in gnostic soun:es 229-237
Tlberius 61n, 254 in mystic:al texts 110-112, 134-139
Ti*h'a be'Av249, 31ln (1ee a&o dreams, high priest)
Torah war
blessing of24 with Amalek 122, 124n
giving of 42-43, 55, 122, 124, 129, esc:hatological78, 87~8. 186
140,210,342-343 weeping (see affiic:tions)
in temple 11ervice 2.5, 32 white garment.s (s«e garments)
(.tee also exegesis, Haftarah, women, daughter 34n, 35-36, 75n, 9Sn,
reading) 96,128,171, l74,292n,23S-236,
transgression 39-40, 51, 53n, 9ln, 92n, :ns, 343n
95-96,123, )28, 133-134,213,217, Zechariah be11 Qabutar 20
268, 275, 286 (.see al.so sin) Zechariah, father of John 244, 247,
typology 2S0-25S,2S6-257,322-328,332,
of covenant institutioo 187 333
ofhigh-priestly ritual 180-197, 22S,