{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02351313969571231, 'fraction_numerical': 0.019363762102351315, 'mean_word_length': 5.581818181818182, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Problem of Characterizing the 4QReworked Pentateuch Manuscripts: Bible, Rewritten Bible, or None of the Above?

This article engages the problem of whether the five manuscripts classified as 4QReworked Pentateuch (4Q158, 4Q364–367) should be considered extrabiblical compositions or simply expansive copies of the Pentateuch. Since similar methods of reworking scripture appear in both types of text, focusing on the ways scripture is reworked in the 4QRP manuscripts cannot solve the problem. Other criteria such as the literary voice, scope, and coverage of a work are more promising. The fragmentary state of the texts, however, precludes a definitive solution and requires that multiple possibilities be considered.