The Purpose of this paper is to reveal the identity of 4Q246, Daiel Apocryphon through the literary comparison with Daiel 7. and to read the theology of Qumran community transcribed in the scroll, 4Q246. After 4Q246 was presented by J. T. Milik in a lecture given at Harvard University in 1972 and was made known by J. A. Fitzmyer in his study, this scroll has made a big issues for a long time being. The main question of 4Q246(Aramaic Apocalypse) is the identity of the designated "Son of God." We can have two views of that, a positive figure or a negative figure.
J. T. Milik insists that the "Son of God" refers to a Seleucid king, referring Antiochus IV Epiphanes. Florentino Garcia Martinez suggests that it is an angelic savior like Michael, Melchizedek, and the Prince of Light. And other scholars view the figure as a messianic redeemer who will cast God's enemies away and build the kingdom of God's people (Cross, Collins, Hengel, Kuhn). Exceptionally, David Flusser insists that he is the Antichrist, and Martin Hengel insists that he is the Jewish people collectively. E. Puech believes that the Son of the Most High could be either the future Davidic Messiah or a historical Seleucid pretender. Joseph A. Fitzmyer argues that what the Son of God refers is not a messiah, but a coming Jewish ruler, perhaps a member of the Hasmonean dynasty. According to the scholars, therefore, the title "Son of God" would be either a historical character, a heavenly figure or a messianic human being. But, most importantly, it should be noticed that they in fact have not seen the text itself; for example its structure, feature, theme than the vague figure in scroll. With literary criticism and historical view, we have to review the text of this scroll. Through its methodology, we can find the structure, feature, terminolo- gy similar to the book of Daniel, expecially Ch. 7. Martin Hengel suggests that the figure is similar to "the one like a Son of Man" in Daniel 7: 13-14. Furthermore two texts that have same apocalyptic structure and feature seem to say that the author of 4Q246 was influenced by Daniel 7. The two texts reveal such an extensive degree of verbal, thematic, and structural correspondences. Therefore we can conclude that 4Q246 is the Apocryphon of Daniel, but the debate about the identity of son of God in 4Q246 is still valid. And Qumran community wants to read their hope, coming redeemer saving the people, the qumran theology, habits, and beliefs in this scroll.