Peter's Ancient History and Religion Pages

Peter's Index Peter's Index  Pilate Pilate  Ancient History Home Ancient History Home  YBZakkai YBZakkai



Ancient History and Religion with Peter Eyland


4 Ezra & 2 Baruch

How far do 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch offer a practical response to the failure of the first revolt?

The pseudonymous apocalypses of 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch were a literary response to the military defeat of the Jews in 70 CE.  They were probably composed around three decades after the war [1], and presented the Jews of the time with new revelatory content.

This essay will first briefly examine the use of pseudonymity and the choice of apocalypse as a literary genre.  Then the individual writings will be discussed in terms of a being a response which would persuade Jews that the destruction of the Temple, priests, Sanhedrin, Jerusalem etc did not mean the defeat of God, or that God could not vindicate those who remained faithful to him [2].  It will show that the writings were oriented towards creating attitudes and activities which would relieve despair and prevent apostasy.

Koch wrote "a text is pseudonymous when the author is deliberately identified by a name other than his own" [3] .  Meade wrote that “inherent in the idea of pseudonymity is the use of deception”[4] but he also reported H.H. Rowley’s view that pseudonymity was just a transparent literary fiction, not intended to deceive anyone [5] . This latter view is probably the more correct as many Greek Philosophical schools had developed literary critical methods for detecting and rejecting literary forgeries [6]. Using another person’s name deceptively has been known for millenia.  Speyer [7] has argued that the idea of forgery in the modern sense depends on the idea of intellectual property (geistiges Eigentum) and this idea had already developed in Greek culture as early as the sixth century BCE.  In contrast to this, Hengel [8] argued that in Jewish and Christian circles the idea of intellectual property was “underdeveloped” when compared to the Graeco-Roman ethos, however this flies in face of the pervasiveness of Graeco-Roman culture.  Clearly New Testament authors were aware of the possibility of forgery [9].

Thus, despite awareness of forgery and the availability of literary critical methods, the use of pseudonymous literature in Jewish circles was a reasonably common practice in the late BCE and early CE centuries [10] .  It was probably not seen as deceptive, but an acceptable way to claim identity with prophetic traditions and then re-interpret them for new situations.  Re-interpretation [11] meant that the prophetic “word of God” was a living tradition which was adaptable to new forms of expression and not just a static deposit.

Pseudonymity then was a way of identifying with the prophetic living tradition.  This being so, Meade’s conclusion was apt when he wrote that pseudonymity was not deceptive because content and not authorship was the important criterion for Jewish (and later Christian) communities. [12] . Hayman noted that the problem with pseudonymity was not in using Ezra’s name, but the use he makes of him [13].

It was also the character of their contents that probably led the authors of 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch to choose the “apocalypse” genre.  The apocalypse genre was distinguished and established by Friedrich Lücke [14] in his 1832 study.  In a more recent study, Collins has a succinct definition.  It was "a genre of revelatory literature with a narrative framework, in which a revelation is mediated by an otherworldly being to a human recipient, disclosing a transcendental reality which is both temporal, insofar as it envisages eschatological salvation, and spatial insofar as it involves another, supernatural world" [15] .  Collins also has two subtypes that were distinguished by cosmological travels or historical summaries [16] .

Since both 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch were concerned to present a new conceptual framework which saw the real world as "wholly other" [17] , and the perceptible world as subject to a plan which would soon be completed (i.e. both spatial and temporal information) the apocalyptic genre was an appropriate choice.

A proposed addition to the definition of the apocalypse genre by Hellholm [18] , asserted that it was "intended for a group in crisis with the purpose of exhortation and/or consolation by means of divine authority”.  Collins has accepted the “divine authority” part of this addition (as obvious) [19] , but not the part that suggested that it was the prerogative of clandestine groups to identify with the genre [20] .  Longenecker’s work on the social setting of 4 Ezra also gave three good reasons against sectarian origin [21] , but saw it as a work for scholars rather than for the general public [22] .

There was a crisis that produced 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch, but it was a mainstream crisis. It threatened what Esler [23] (also working with social function) called “cognitive dissonance”.  This is the same idea as that of “religious chaos” which Gould [24] wrote about in terms of Greek myth but clearly also applies in a context of Jewish myth.  Gould did not use “chaos” in the modern Physics sense of “deterministic unpredictability”, but in Geertz’s sense of “a tumult of events which lack not just interpretations but interpretability [25] ”.  This lack of interpretability refers to consequences that baffled or stretched human endurance and produced ethical contradictions [26] .  The destruction of the Jewish Temple, priests, Sanhedrin and the city of Jerusalem baffled, stretched and puzzled the Jews of the time.  4 Ezra and 2 Baruch were new “mythic interpretations” to adapt to changed circumstances and also to create new cultic activities to replace those that were lost.

Thus, pseudonymity was used to identify with the living prophetic tradition, and the apocalyptic genre was used to convey new revelatory content on the nature of reality.  4 Ezra and 2 Baruch were both attempts to combat the threat of religious chaos and they are now discussed individually.

4 Ezra (= 2 Esdras 3-14)

Collins ranks 4 Ezra as “the most engaging, profound, and problematic" apocalypse [27] . This was no doubt due to the intensity of feeling involved in Ezra’s criticisms of the continuing presence of evil and injustice in the world, and his unashamed initial scepticism towards conventional answers (though Uriel, generally, does not refute but rather distracts [28] ).

It was also probably due to the psychological questions that arise from having two main characters in dialogue and the transformation in attitude that seems to have taken place in chapter 10.

These are the kinds of criticisms that Ezra made.

• Ezra criticised God for the failure of humanity. 

He wrote “you did not take [Adam’s descendants] evil heart from them so that your law might produce fruit in them" [29] .  Thus he clearly conceived that it was possible to repair the fault and God chose not to fix it.

• Ezra criticised God for not treating his chosen people properly. 

He asked “are the deeds of those who inhabit Babylon any better? … I have seen how you endure those who sin, and have spared those who act wickedly, and have destroyed your people, and protected your enemies" [30] .  He then challenged God with his certainty that the good deeds of national Israel far outweigh any other nations and affirmed that Israel deserved to be rewarded with wealth [31] .  (Stone drew attention to a very interesting contrast with the prophetic stream of revelation.  The prophets were not concerned with the moral qualities of those who destroyed Zion [32] .)

• Ezra criticised God for not loving his chosen people enough to punish them himself.

He wrote “From all the ... peoples you have got for yourself one people … whom you have loved … [and] given the law that is approved by all [33] … if you really hate your people, they should be punished at your own hands. [34] .  Ezra thought that the humiliation of being punished by arrogant Gentiles was much greater than some kind of “natural” disaster.

• Ezra criticised God for creating the world for Israel and then not giving it to them.

He wrote “you have said that it was for us that you created this world, as for the other nations … you have said that they are nothing … are like spittle … and now O Lord, these nations … domineer over us, … but we your people … have been given into their hands.  If the world has indeed been created for us. Why do we not possess the world as an inheritance?" [35] .  He calls for immediate action on God’s part.

• Ezra criticised God for maximum wastage and suffering.

 He wrote “that [if] the world to come will bring delight to few but torments to many [36] then “what good is it to all that they live in sorrow now and expect punishment after death?" [37]  The immense scale of human suffering both in the present life and a future one to find a few (possibly none) made God’s economy nonsensical.

• Finally, Ezra lamented that it was better to be an animal than a human because God treated them better. 

He wrote “it is much better with them than with us; for they do not look for a judgment … after death" [38] .  Stone cites Box on Gunkel [39] that this was “startling and revolutionary” and threatened to subvert a worldview of man as lord of creation.

Uriel basically replied to the criticisms that (1) providence was mysterious, and (2) evil had to peak before good appeared in the future.

However, Ezra’s criticisms were not abstract philosophical debate, but were the very articulation of cognitive dissonance and religious chaos.  Longenecker [40] saw the expression of these sentiments as a necessary prelude to healing.  He wrote that Ezra personified the disillusionment, perplexity, grief and remorse of the Jews.  Longenecker continued, by interpreting Ezra to the effect that, the Jews' restoration to health as a people would not come about by silencing confusion and bewilderment.  Neither pain nor sorrow should be repressed but fully expressed, so that it might be managed, healed and transcended.  Longenecker then pointed out that Ezra’s message also contained the warning (through Ezra’s initial treatment of the grieving woman of Chapter 10) that care should be taken to keep grief under control so that it does not undermine confidence in God.  This then is a very practical answer, work through grief and then get on with life.  It should be noted that Rabbi Joshua who was a student of Yohannan ben Zakkai has also expressed the view that sorrow needs to be expressed but kept in check [41] .

The dialogues generate a significant question.  Did the author of Ezra speak to the reader through Ezra’s questions, Uriel’s answers or both?  There are various answers.

Gunkel [42] (dismissing the ideas of Kabisch [43] , Box [44] and Charles [45] ) wrote that the dialogue structure mirrored the author’s personality, by being split between man and angel, scepticism and faith [46] .  He saw a psychological development as the angel eventually disappeared at the end of chapter 10 and God spoke directly with Ezra (2 Esdras 11:38).  The message then was found in the giving of a practical example: that if there was a resolution to one person’s dilemmas, then it could happen to the reader.

Harnisch [47] and Brandenburger [48] saw the angel as the one who spoke the mind of the author.  They argue that by the time of the fourth vision [49] Ezra has taken up Uriel’s viewpoint (“acknowledge the decree of God” [50] ) and expressed them clearly at the end (“the Most high … is a righteous judge … rule your minds and discipline your hearts … and after death you will find mercy" [51] ), so Uriel has won in the end.  4 Ezra is then a Auseinandersetzung [52] : a kind of apologetic work propagating conventional views.

Stone [53] has an unusual psychological proposition.  He surmised that visions one to three were actual mental experiences that Ezra had.  Ezra, from within the form of his own internalised grief, entered into dialogues with his own externalised convictions, (which appear in the form of an angel).  He partially integrated his convictions in visions one to three.  Then, in the fourth vision, he externalised his own grief into the form of a woman and completed the internalisation of his convictions (making the angel disappear), thus producing an altered state “conversion” experience.  The thread that bound the book together was the real life Odyssey of Ezra’s soul.

Stone supported his position with Merkur's [54] “psychologisings” on Freud and the unconscious.  Merkur also treats Ezra’s conversion as being due to an altered state of consciousness which was allegedly unknown to the “ancients”.  The only virtue in Stone’s argument is the possibility that there may have been some psychedelic mushrooms among the "flowers" that Ezra ate at the beginning of vision four [55] .

Considering the social setting may be a better approach than psychology.  Longenecker [56] , Alon [57] and Grabbe [58] have argued for a “Rabbinic” social setting at Yavneh after 70 CE, and that the author of 4 Ezra may have been a scribe there.  In support of this, a similarity with Rabbi Joshua’s view on grief was noted above. Also, Knibb [59] wrote that in 2 Esdras 14:37 the five men that Ezra took with him may allude to the five scribes that were around Yohannan ben Zakkai.  Esler noted that 4 Ezra showed clear connections with rabbinic circles in some exegetical and theological areas [60] .

Two further aspects of Longenecker’s argument should be commented on.  These are that Ezra was represented as a second Moses (the voice from the bush [61] ) who gave the law a second time (the dictation for 40 days [62] ). The 24 books (presumably the Tanakh) are for all, but there are 70 books for the “wise”.  Since the public speech of Ezra does not mention eschatology but counsels the people to follow the law.  They are to “rule over [their] minds and discipline [their] hearts" [63] , presumably so that the nation could have a second chance at keeping the law and be saved.

Also, the Messiah is simply "revealed" after the signs [64] .  There is no gathering of the army of the faithful for a cosmic battle.  This contrasts with popular expectations as found in the apocalypse of Abraham, 1 Enoch and the literature of the Qumran sectarians [65] .

Although Ezra seems adverse to calculations about the timing of the end, Esler [66] performed some calculations on 9 1/2 twelfths of 5000 years [67] giving some 660 years from 100 CE to the end.  He agreed that the general reader of those times might not be able to do a detailed calculation [68] but nevertheless it gave a rough indication that the end was not imminent.

Longenecker [69] seems to have the best perspective on 4 Ezra.  He concluded that 4 Ezra was not so much a general tractate but a leadership manual because it was concerned with three practical issues.

Firstly, there was the emphasis on grief management through proper expression.

Secondly, it emphasised that there was a second chance offered for the nation to keep of the law and so gain salvation after death, in the resurrection to judgment.

Thirdly, it discouraged people from active insurrection, because the Messiah was not a military figure. 

 

2 Baruch

A strong determinism pervades 2 Baruch.  The opening narrative is set before the fall of Jerusalem.  It starts with a prediction that Jerusalem “shall be removed … for a time, and [God] will scatter [the] people among the Gentiles … and [his] people … chastened [70] ”.  This suggests that Baruch will not have the "anguished questioning" [71] of Ezra because he has been conditioned to accept it as part of God’s plan. 

Nevertheless Baruch does record intense sorrow.  He wrote (2 Baruch 10:6ff)

10:6 “Blessed is he who was not born, or he, who having been born, has died.

10:7 … how unhappy we are, because we see the afflictions of Zion, …

10:12 why should light rise again where the light of Zion is darkened? …

10:13 women, pray not that you may bear 10:15 for why should they bear in pain, only to bury in grief?”

 

His sorrow merits a comparison with the prophet Jeremiah, as shown by the following.

2 Baruch 2:1 “bid Jeremiah and all those that are like you … (5:5) So I … took Jeremiah … and all the honorable men … and I narrated to them ... (5:6) … and they all wept … (9:1) I … and Jeremiah … (9:2) … rent our garments, we wept and mourned and fasted.”  2 Baruch 33:1 “… your companion Jeremiah the prophet, … (35:1), I … sat down upon the ruins and wept, and said (35:2), ‘Oh that my eyes were springs and my eyelids a fountain of tears’.”  The last sentence has a close parallel with Jeremiah 9:1 [72] .  Thus by analogy, Baruch may perhaps be characterised as the “weeping apocalypsist”.

Like Jeremiah, Baruch saw the covenant broken by some of his people, but saw it as renewable (even by the 9 1/2 “lost” tribes) rather than completely new.  For example, he recalls the covenant ceremony of Deuteronomy 30 [73] in 2 Baruch 19:1 “He … said to me: ‘… at that time [Moses] appointed for them a covenant and said “I have placed before you life and death” ’, and he called heaven and earth to witness against them”.

Later he mused on apostates and proselytes, as follows from 2 Baruch (41:3) “many of Your people … have withdrawn from Your covenant, and cast from them the yoke of Your law. (41:4) But others again I have seen who have forsaken their vanity, and fled for refuge beneath Your wings. (41:5) What will happen to them? How will the last time receive them? (41:6) or perhaps the time of these will assuredly be weighed, and as the beam inclines will they be judged accordingly?”

His last words were to the 9 1/2 tribes, as follows from 2 Baruch (84:6) “after you have suffered … if you obey … you will receive … (84:48) … remember the law … and the covenant.”

E.P. Sanders coined the description "covenantal nomism" [74] and this can be used to describe the central message of 2 Baruch.  God is firmly in control and through God’s mercy those, who are within the covenant and are obedient to it, will be saved.  Jews who do not keep the law will be excluded and faithful proselytes will be included [75] .  Salvation is individual and is not spatially in this world but temporally in the world to come.  2 Baruch is then in the mainstream of Rabbinic Judaism as also affirmed by Collins [76] and Toy & Ginzberg [77] .

Conclusion

4 Ezra and 2 Baruch used pseudonymity to identify with the living prophetic tradition and the apocalyptic genre to convey new revelatory content on the nature of reality.  They were writing to deal with problem of religious chaos that arose from the destruction of the Temple and the city.

4 Ezra was a kind of leadership manual that endorsed the proper expression of grief, offered a second chance for people to find salvation through keeping the law, and discouraged people from active rebellion.

2 Baruch was in mainstream Rabbinic thought and attempted to lay a foundation of trust in God and obedience to the law.

They both went a long way towards offering a practical response to the failure of the first revolt.

Bibliography

Primary Sources

2 Esdras, in The Apocryphal Old Testament, ed., Sparkes, H.F.D., Clarendon, Oxford, 1984, and Holy Bible, New Revised Standard Version, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, 1993

2 Baruch, in The Apocryphal Old Testament, ed., Sparkes, H.F.D., Clarendon, Oxford, 1984

Secondary Sources

b. Baba Batra , Hebrew-English edition of the Babylonian Talmud, Vol. 1, Soncino Press, London, 1976

Bloch, J., “The Ezra-Apokalypse. Was it Written in Hebrew, Greek or Aramaic?”, Jewish Quarterly Review,  48, 1957/58

Box, G.H., The Ezra-Apocalypse, Pitman Press, London, 1912

Brandenburger, E., Adam und Christ, Neukirchener Verlag, Neukirchener-Vluyn, 1962

 ____________, Die Verborgenheit Gottes im Weltgeschehen, Theologischer Verlag, Zurich, 1981

Breech, E., "These Fragments I Have Shored Against My Ruins: The Form and Function of 4 Ezra." Journal of Biblical Literature 92, 1973

Collins, J.J., ed., Apocalypse: The Morphology of a Genre, in Semeia 14, Scholars Press, Missoula, 1979

________, The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature, W.B. Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, second Edition 1998

Esler, P.F., “The Social Function of Ezra”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 53, 1994, JSOT Press, Sheffield

Geertz, C.,  “Religion as a Cultural system”, in Banton, M., ed. Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion, London, 1996

Gould, J., Myth, Ritual, Memory, and Exchange. Essays in Greek Literature and Culture, Oxford, 2001

Grabbe, L.L., “Chronography in 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch”, in SBL Seminar Papers, 1981, ed. Richards, K.H., Scholars Press, Chico, 1982

Gunkel, H., “Review of Kabisch”, in Theologische Literaturzeitung, Vol.16 No.1

Harnisch, W., Verhängnis und Verheissung de Geschichte, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen, 1969

Hayman, A.P., “The Problem of Pseudonymity in the Ezra Apocalypse”, Journal for the Study of Judaism, Vol 6, No.1, 1970

Hellholm, D., “The Problem of Apocalyptic Genre and the Apocalypse of John”, in Yabro Collins, A., ed., Early Christian Apocalypticism; Genre and Social Setting, in Semeia 36, Scholars Press, Decateur, 1986

Hengel, M., "Anonymität, Pseudepigraphie und 'Literarische Fälschung' in der jüdisch‑hellenistischer Literatur", in K. von Fritz (Edit.), Pseudepigrapha 1,

Jagersma, H., A History of Israel to Bar Kochba, Part II, trans. Bowden, J., SCM, London, 1985

Kabisch, R., Das vierte Buch Esra auf seine Quellen untersucht, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen, 1889

Koch, K., "Pseudonymous Writing", Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, 4 Vols., Buttrick, G.A., et al, eds., Abingdon, 1962, Supp. 1976

Knibb, M.A.,”Apocalyptic and Wisdom in 4 Ezra”, in Journal for the Study of Judaism, Vol 13, No.1-2., 1982

Lieu, J. “Module 9 The consequences of the revolt” in Lecture Notes for ECJS843: The Jews of Palestine from the Maccabees to Bar Kochba, Macquarie University, 1997

Longenecker, B.W., “Eschatology and the Covenant: A Comparison of 4 Ezra and Romans 1-11, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, JSNTSup 57, Sheffield, 1991

_______________, 2 Esdras, Sheffield Academic Press, Melksham, 1995

_______________, “Locating 4 Ezra: A consideration of its social setting and functions”, Journal for the Study of Judaism,  28, 1997

Lücke, F., Versuch einer vollständigen Einleitung in die Offenbarung Johannis und in die gesamte apokalyptische Literature, Weber, Bonn, 1832

Meade, D.G., Pseudonymity and Canon, an investigation into the relationship of authorship and authority in Jewish and earliest Christian tradition, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1986

Merkur, D., "The Visionary Practices of Jewish Apocalyptists." in The Psychoanalytic Study of Society vol. 14 Essays in Honor of Paul Parin, Ed. Boyer, L.B., and Grolnick, S.A., Analytic, Hillsdale, 1989

Metzger, B.M., An Introduction to the Apocrypha, Oxford University Press, New York, 1957

Otto, R., The Idea of the Holy, Pelican, Woking and London, 1959

Russell, D.S., Between the Testaments, SCM, London, 1960

Sanders, E.P., “The Covenant as a Soteriological Category and the Nature of Salvation in Palestinian and helenistic Judaism,” in Hamerton-Kelly, R., and Scroggs, R., eds., Jews, Greeks , and Christians: Studies in Honor of W.D.Davies, Brill, Leiden, 1976

Speyer, W., Die literarische Fälschung im Altertum C.H. Beek, München, 1971

Snyder, H.G., Teachers and Texts in the Ancient World: Philosophers, Jews, and Christians, Routledge, London & New York, 2000

Stone, M.E., "On Reading an Apocalypse" in Mysteries and Revelations: Apocalyptic Studies since the Uppsala Colloquium, Ed. Collins, J.J., and Charlesworth, J.H., JSOT, JSPSup 9, Sheffield, 1991

________, Fourth Ezra, A Commentary on the Book of Fourth Ezra, Fortress Press, Minneapolis, 1990

_________, "Apocalyptic - Vision or Hallucination?" in Selected Studies in Pseudepigrapha and Apocrypha with Special Reference to the Armenian Tradition, SVTP 9, Brill, Leiden, 1991

Toy C.H., & Ginzberg, L., “Apocalyse of Baruch”, in The Jewish Encyclopedia, 1901-1906, p.552 (found on line at http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/index.jsp)

Yabro Collins, A., “Introduction: Early Christian Apocalypticism” in Yabro Collins, A., ed., Early Christian Apocalypticism; Genre and Social Setting, in Semeia 36, Scholars Press, Decateur, 1986

______________, ed., Early Christian Apocalypticism; Genre and Social Setting, in Semeia 36, Scholars Press, Decateur, 1986


Appendix 1: The versions and structure of 4 Ezra

Versions of 4 Ezra have been discovered in Latin, Armenian, Arabic, Syrian and Georgian and also some fragments [78] .  The consensus is that it originally came from Palestine and was composed in Hebrew [79] .  There are seven natural sections.

3:1 – 5:19

1st prayer of complaint (Adam to Babylon)

Dialogue 1 (Uriel’s 3 questions, the Forest and the Sea, the new age will come, the Flame and Cloud, the sign of nature changed)

5:20 – 6:34

Fast for 7 days

2nd prayer of complaint (Zion)

Dialogue 2 (love, successive generations, signs of the end)

6:35 – 9:25

Fast for 7 days

3rd prayer of complaint (creation)

Dialogue 3 (testing, the temporary Messiah, only a few saved, the dead, appeals and prayer for mercy, signs of the end)

9:26 – 10:59

Eat flowers for 7 days

Prayer (the law)

Vision (consoling the woman) and Uriel’s interpretation

10:60 – 12:51

Sleep 1 night

Vision (the eagle) and its interpretation

Eat flowers for 7 days

13:1 – 58

Vision (the man from the sea) and its interpretation

Wait three days

14:1- 48

Audition (the voice from the bush)

1 day intermission

Ezra and the 94 books in 40 days

Appendix 2:The versions and structure of 2 Baruch

2 Baruch has a close but literary indefinable relationship to 4 Ezra [80] .  2 Baruch was found in a Syriac version that was translated from a Greek version, but probably had a Hebrew original [81] .  There is some interdependence between 2 Baruch and 4 Ezra [82] . It also can be divided into seven sections.

1:1 – 9:2

1:1-5 advance warning on God’s planned destruction

4:1-6 the destruction is temporary – the real Temple is in heaven

6:4-10 an angel hides the Temple vessels – 4 angels (not the Gentiles) break the walls

9:1-2, 1st 7 day fast

10:1 – 12:5

A lament of profound grief

12:5, 2nd 7 day fast

13:1 – 20:6

Dialogue: Baruch is an eschatological witness – Israel is chastised to be ultimately saved

Q1: future judgement does not provide retrospective retribution

Q2: Zion should have been pardoned because of her righteous

A1: salvation and judgement are beyond death in the new age

A2: Zion’s destruction speeds things up

21:1 – 34:1

21:1, 3rd 7 day fast

21:2–26 Baruch prays for God’s justice to be revealed quickly

22:1-24:3 a fixed number of people must be born

27:1-29:8 eschatalogical prophecy of 12 woes

30:1-5 the Messiah temporarily revealed

31:1–34:1 1st address to the people

   32:2-3, the temple built after the exile would be destroyed

    and remain desolate for a while and then restored

    the future troubles will be worse than the present

35:1 – 47:2

35:1-5 Lamentation by Baruch

36:1-37:1

Allegorical vision of the forest and the vine

42:1-8 Those judged worthy will not be ethnic Jews but those who observe the law (includes proselytes)

44:1-46 2nd address to the people

47:1-2, 4th 7 day fast

48:1 – 77:26

48:1-24 Prayer for mercy

48:26–41 Mercy applies to those who convert and obey

question on the afterlife

allegorical/historical vision of clouds and waters

54:19 “Adam was responsible for himself only: each of us is his own Adam”

Interpretation by Ramiel – history is planned, the end is near

77:1-26 3rd address to the people: observe the law and be protected

78:1-87:1

Letter epilogue

The power of the Gentiles will disperse like vapour, the end is near



[1] According to Jagersma, H., A History of Israel to Bar Kochba, Part II, trans. Bowden, J., SCM, London, 1985, p.153, 4 Ezra was written c 95 CE.  Russell, D.S., Between the Testaments, SCM, London, 1960, p.71 has both 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch written about 90 CE.

[2] Using the language of Lieu, J. “Module 9 The consequences of the revolt” in Lecture Notes for ECJS843: The Jews of Palestine from the Maccabees to Bar Kochba, Macquarie University, 1997, p.49

[3] Koch, K., "Pseudonymous Writing", Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, 4 Vols., Buttrick, G.A., et al, eds., Abingdon, 1962, Supp. 1976, p.712, also cited by Meade, D.G., Pseudonymity and Canon, an investigation into the relationship of authorship and authority in Jewish and earliest Christian tradition, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1986, p.1

[4] Meade, op cit, p.2

[5] Meade, op cit, p.1

[6] Snyder, H.G., Teachers and Texts in the Ancient World: Philosophers, Jews, and Christians, Routledge, London & New York, 2000, p.69ff  “Aristotelians of the first and second centuries CE never explicitly stated a set of philological criteria for judgments about pseudepigraphic texts; at least, no such remarks survive.  But arguments for and against the authenticity of certain texts reveal five basic criteria for such judgments … So when it came to determining whether a work derived from its putative author, it appears that Aristotelians share several critical methods with members of other philosophical schools."

[7] Speyer, W., Die literarische Fälschung im Altertum C.H. Beek, München, 1971, p.150, cited in Meade, op cit, p.4

[8] Hengel, M., "Anonymität, Pseudepigraphie und 'Literarische Fälschung' in der jüdisch‑hellenistischer Literatur", in K. von Fritz (Edit.), Pseudepigrapha 1, p.283 cited in Meade, op sit, p.4

[9] 2 Thessalonians 2:2 urged the addressees not to be alarmed “by letter, as though from [Paul]” and Revelation 22: 18-19 has dire warnings on altering text.  The Muratorian fragment also says some letters were rejected because they were forged.

[10] As seen by, 1 Enoch, 2,3 Baruch, 4,5,6 Ezra, Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Jubilees, Apocalypse of Zephaniah, Testament of Job, Testament of Moses, More Psalms of David, etc

[11] German Vergegenwärtigung, the recurring actualisation of tradition

[12] Meade, op sit, p.42

[13] Hayman, A.P., “The Problem of Pseudonymity in the Ezra Apocalypse”, Journal for the Study of Judaism, Vol 6, No.1, 1970, p.47. This is expanded below.

[14] Lücke, F., Versuch einer vollständigen Einleitung in die Offenbarung Johannis und in die gesamte apokalyptische Literature, Weber, Bonn, 1832, cited by Collins, J.J., The Apocalyptic Imagination An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature, W.B. Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, second Edition 1998, pp.2-3

[15] Collins, J.J., ed., Apocalypse: The Morphology of a Genre in Semeia 14, Scholars Press, Missoula, 1979, cited in Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, p.5

[16] See the table in Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, p.7

[17] Using Rudolph Otto’s expression in Otto, R., The Idea of the Holy, Pelican, Woking and London, 1959, p.40

[18]   Hellholm, D., “The Problem of Apocalyptic Genre and the Apocalypse of John”, in Yabro Collins, A., ed., Early Christian Apocalypticism; Genre and Social Setting, in Semeia 36, Scholars Press, Decateur, 1986, p.27, cited in Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, p.41

[19] He seems to have accepted an emendation by Yabro Collins which emphasised imagination and divine authority (Yabro Collins, A., “Introduction: Early Christian Apocalypticism” in Yabro Collins, A., ed., Early Christian Apocalypticism; Genre and Social Setting, in Semeia 36, Scholars Press, Decateur, 1986, p.7, cited in Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, p.42)

[20] Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, p.41 has “it is perhaps too suggestive of the conventicle theory of apocalypticism”. 

[21] 1. Sectarianism is not evident in the narrative.  2. There is only an assumption that apocalypses arise from disenfranchised communities.  3. Second Baruch is mainstream Judaism and there is some kind of literary relationship with 4 Ezra.  See Longenecker, B.W.: “Locating 4 Ezra: A consideration of its social setting and functions”, Journal for the Study of Judaism,  28, 1997, 271-275

[22] Longenecker, B.W., “Locating 4 Ezra”, p.284

[23] Esler, P.F., “The Social Function of Ezra”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 53, 1994, JSOT Press, Sheffield, p.108

[24] Gould, J., Myth, Ritual, Memory, and Exchange. Essays in Greek Literature and Culture, Oxford, 2001, p.211

[25] Gould, op cit, p.207, citing Geertz, C.,  “Religion as a Cultural system”, in Banton, M., ed. Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion, London, 1996, p.14.

[26] Gould, op cit, p.207, using his language in a different context

[27] Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, p.195

[28] Hayman, A.P., op cit, p.47

[29] 2 Esdras 3:20

[30] 2 Esdras 3:28-30

[31] 2 Esdras 3:34-35

[32] Stone, Fourth Ezra, p.75, citing Isaiah 10:5-8, Jeremiah 25:8-14, 50:17-18 and 50:33-34

[33] This remarkable statement goes beyond Deuteronomy 4:8 and 2 Baruch 77:3.  See Collins, J.J., Fourth Ezra, A commentary on the Book of Fourth Ezra, Fortress Press, Minneapolis, 1990, p.131, (who also remarked that this reading of the text is not quite certain but supported by the versions.

[34] 2 Esdras 5:27-30

[35] 2 Esdras 6:55-59

[36] 2 Esdras 7:47

[37] 2 Esdras 7:47 or 118

[38] 2 Esdras 7:65-67

[39] Collins, Fourth Ezra, p.233, cited Box p.137 note b, but did not specify which particular book of Box’s.

[40] Longenecker, “Locating 4 Ezra”, pp.286-7

[41] b. Baba Batra, Hebrew-English edition of the Babylonian Talmud, Soncino Press, London, 1976, Vol. 1, p.60, side b,

[42] Gunkel, H., “Review of Kabisch”, in Theologische Literaturzeitung, Vol.16 No.1, pp.5-11

[43] Kabisch, R., Das vierte Buch Esra auf seine Quellen untersucht, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen, 1889, cited in Longenecker, 2 Esdras, p.22

[44] Box, G.H., The Ezra-Apocalypse, Pitman Press, London, 1912, cited in Longenecker, 2 Esdras, p.22

[45] Mentioned in Hayman, op cit, p.48

[46] Longenecker, B.W., 2 Esdras, Sheffield Academic Press, Melksham, 1995, pp.27, 24

[47] Harnisch, W., Verhängnis und Verheissung de Geschichte, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen, 1969, cited in Longenecker, 2 Esdras, p.27

[48] Brandenburger, E., Adam und Christ, Neukirchener Verlag, Neukirchener-Vluyn, 1962, and Die Verborgenheit Gottes im Weltgeschehen, Theologischer Verlag, Zurich, 1981, cited in Longenecker, 2 Esdras, p.27

[49] See the structural table in Appendix 1

[50] 2 Esdras 10:15-16

[51] 2 Esdras 14:28-36, is what Stone, (Fourth Ezra, p.16) called an Abschiedsrede or valedictory address

[52] using Stone’s word, in Fourth Ezra, p.32

[53] Stone, Fourth Ezra, p.32 and  "Apocalyptic - Vision or Hallucination?" in Selected Studies in Pseudepigrapha and Apocrypha with Special Reference to the Armenian Tradition, SVTP 9, Brill, Leiden, 1991, pp.419-28, and "On Reading an Apocalypse" in Mysteries and Revelations: Apocalyptic Studies since the Uppsala Colloquium, Ed. Collins, J.J., and Charlesworth, J.H., JSOT, JSPSup 9, Sheffield, 1991, pp.65-78.

[54] Merkur, D., "The Visionary Practices of Jewish Apocalyptists." in The Psychoanalytic Study of Society vol. 14 Essays in Honor of Paul Parin, Ed. Boyer, L.B., and Grolnick, S.A., Analytic, Hillsdale, 1989, pp.119-48, cited in Stone, Fourth Ezra, p.33

[55] see Appendix 1 for the structure

[56] Longenecker, “Locating 4 Ezra”, p.277-9

[57] Alon, G., Jews in the Land, p.52, cited in Longenecker, “Locating 4 Ezra”, p.278

[58] Grabbe, L.L., “Chronography in 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch”, in SBL Seminar Papers, 1981, ed. Richards, K.H., Scholars Press, Chico, 1982, p.49-63, 58-62

[59] Knibb, M.A.,”Apocalyptic and Wisdom in 4 Ezra”, in Journal for the Study of Judaism, Vol 13, No.1-2, 1982, p.72

[60] Esler, op cit, p.121

[61] 2 Esdras 14:1

[62] 2 Esdras 14:41-44

[63] 2 Esdras 14:34

[64] 2 Esdras 7:28

[65] Longenecker, “Locating 4 Ezra”, p.289

[66] Esler, op cit, p.117

[67] 2 Esdras 14:10-12

[68]   ezra1 as a png

 

[69] Longenecker, “Locating 4 Ezra”, p.293

[70] 2 Baruch 1:4

[71] Collins, Apocalyptic Imagination, p.216

[72] “Oh that my head were waters and mine eyes a fountain of tears”. Jeremiah also weeps in Jeremiah 9:18, 13:17 and 14:17

[73] as in Deuteronomy 30:19 “I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse: therefore choose life, that you may live.”

[74] Sanders, E.P., “The Covenant as a Soteriological Category and the Nature of Salvation in Palestinian and helenistic Judaism,” in Hamerton-Kelly, R., and Scroggs, R., eds., Jews, Greeks , and Christians: Studies in Honor of W.D.Davies, Brill, Leiden, 1976, pp.11-44, cited in Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, p.221

[75] Salvation is only for the Jews. See the awareness of ethnic superiority described by Longenecker in “Eschatology and the Covenant: A Comparison of 4 Ezra and Romans 1-11, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, JSNTSup 57, Sheffield, 1991, p27-31

[76] Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, p.222

[77] “Many parallels exist between the Apocalypse and rabbinical literature”, Toy C.H., & Ginzberg, L., “Apocalyse of Baruch”, in The Jewish Encyclopedia, 1901-1906, p.552 (found on line at http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/index.jsp)

[78] There is a fragment of chapter 15 in the Greek papyrus pOxy 1010.

[79] Bloch, J., “The Ezra-Apokalypse. Was it Written in Hebrew, Greek or Aramaic?”, in Jewish Quarterly Review,  48, 1957/58, pp.293-94 and Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, p.195, however note that Metzger wrote that it was in Aramaic (Metzger, B.M., An Introduction to the Apocrypha, Oxford University Press, New York, 1957, p.22)

[80] Collins, Apocalyptic Imagination, p.212

[81] Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, p.212

[82] Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, p.212

 


Peter's Index Peter's Index  Pilate Pilate  top of page top of page  Yoh b Zakkai YBZakkai

email Write me a note if you found this useful