Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch: International Studies 9780567659262, 9780567442314, 9780567407672

Citation preview

LIBRARY OF SECOND TEMPLE STUDIES

87 Formerly Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Supplement Series

Editor Lester L. Grabbe

Editorial Board Randall D. Chesnutt, Philip R. Davies, Jan Willem van Henten, Judith M. Lieu, Steven Mason, James R. Mueller, Loren T. Stuckenbruck, James C. VanderKam

Founding Editor James H. Charlesworth

INTERPRETING 4 EZRA AND 2 BARUCH

International Studies

Edited by

Gabriele Boccaccini Jason M. Zurawski

Bloomsbury T&T Clark An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc I • RNKE •WN YOR LONLON DON DON • OX F• ONREDW• DE NEL WHYO E W DKE L• HSY I •DN SYEY DN EY

Bloomsbury T&T Clark An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc Bloomsbury T&T Clark 50 Bedford Square 1385 Broadway An imprint Plc London of Bloomsbury Publishing New York WC1B 3DP NY 10018 Imprint previously known as T&T Clark UK USA 50 Bedford Square 1385 Broadway London New York WC1B 3DP www.bloomsbury.com NY 10018 USAPublishing plc Bloomsbury isUK a registered trade mark of Bloomsbury www.bloomsbury.com First published 2014 BLOOMSBURY, T&T CLARK and the Diana logo are trademarks of © Gabriele Boccaccini, Jason M. Zurawski, and contributors, 2014 Bloomsbury Publishing Plc Gabriele Boccaccini, Jason M. Zurawski, and contributors First published 2014 have asserted their rights under the Copyright, Designs and Patents edition Act, 1988, be identi¿ed Paperback firstto published 2015as Authors of this work. © Gabriele M. Zurawski, and contributors, 2014 in any All rights reserved. NoBoccaccini, part of this Jason publication may be reproduced or transmitted form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any Gabriele Boccaccini, M. Zurawski, contributors have asserted their rights under information storageJason or retrieval system,and without prior permission in writing from the the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as publishers. Authors of this work. No for No losspart caused to any individual orbe organization on or refraining Allresponsibility rights reserved. of this publication may reproducedacting or transmitted in any from action a result of the materialorinmechanical, this publication can be accepted by Bloomsbury form or byasany means, electronic including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in Academic or the authors. writing from the publishers. No responsibility for Library loss caused to any individual or organization British Cataloguing-in-Publication Data acting on or refraining from action as a result of the material in this publication can be accepted by A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Bloomsbury or the author. ISBN: HB: 978-0-56744-231-4 Data British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication ePDF: A catalogue record for this book is 978-0-56740-767-2 available from the British Library. ISBN: HB: 978-0-56744-231-4 PB: 978-0-56766-528-7 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data ePDF: 978-0-56740-767-2 Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch / Gabriele Boccaccini, Jason M. Zurawski p.cm Includes bibliographic references and index. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data 978-0-5674-4231-4 (hardcover) A catalog record ISBN for this book is available from the Library of Congress. Typeset Typeset by by Forthcoming Forthcoming Publications Publications Ltd Ltd (www.forthpub.com) (www.forthpub.com) Printed and and bound bound in in Great Great Britain Britain Printed

CONTENTS Abbreviations

vii

INTRODUCTION: PERSPECTIVES ON 4 EZRA AND 2 BARUCH FROM THE SIXTH ENOCH SEMINAR Gabriele Boccaccini and Jason M. Zurawski

ix

Part I 4 EZRA IN THE APOCALYPTIC TRADITION MORE THAN THE PRESENT: PERSPECTIVES ON WORLD HISTORY IN 4 EZRA AND THE BOOK OF THE WATCHERS Veronika Bachmann

3

APOCALYPTIC IDEAS IN 4 EZRA IN COMPARISON WITH THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS Bilhah Nitzan

22

THE “MEANING OF HISTORY” IN THE FIFTH VISION OF 4 EZRA Laura Bizzarro

32

Part II 4 EZRA, 2 BARUCH, AND EARLY CHRISTIAN LITERATURE THE WOMAN WHO ANOINTS JESUS FOR HIS BURIAL (MARK 14) AND THE WOMAN WHO LAMENTS HER DEAD SON (4 EZRA 9–10): TWICE THE SAME PERSON? Andreas Bedenbender

41

DAYS OF CREATION IN 4 EZRA 6:38–59 AND JOHN 1–5 Calum Carmichael

50

2 BARUCH, 4 EZRA, AND THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS: THREE APPROACHES TO THE INTERPRETATION OF PSALM 104:4 Eric F. Mason

61

vi

Contents

“GOOD TIDINGS” OF BARUCH TO THE CHRISTIAN FAITHFUL (THE EPISTLE OF 2 BARUCH 78–87) Rivka Nir

72

Part III CLOSE READINGS OF 4 EZRA AND 2 BARUCH THE TWO WORLDS AND ADAM’S SIN: THE PROBLEM OF 4 EZRA 7:10–14 Jason M. Zurawski

97

ESCHATOLOGICAL REWARDS FOR THE RIGHTEOUS IN 2 BARUCH Daniel M. Gurtner

107

DEATH AND THE AFTERLIFE IN 2 BARUCH Jared Ludlow

116

THE CALENDAR IMPLIED IN 2 BARUCH AND 4 EZRA: TWO MODIFICATIONS OF THE ONE SCHEME Basil Lourié

124

THE FATE OF JERUSALEM IN 2 BARUCH AND 4 EZRA: FROM EARTH TO HEAVEN AND BACK? Carla Sulzbach

138

Part IV 4 EZRA AND 2 BARUCH IN THEIR SOCIAL AND HISTORICAL SETTINGS 4 EZRA AND 2 BARUCH: ARCHAEOLOGY AND ELUSIVE ANSWERS TO OUR PERENNIAL QUESTIONS James Hamilton Charlesworth

155

THE USE OF CRYPTOGRAPHIC AND ESOTERIC SCRIPTS IN SECOND TEMPLE JUDAISM AND THE SURROUNDING CULTURES Stephen Pfann

173

APOCALYPTIC AS DELUSION: A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH J. Harold Ellens

197

Index of Ancient Sources Index of Authors

210 222

ABBREVIATIONS AB AOTC APAT APOT Bib BR BZ BZAW CBQ CBQMS CBR CC CRINT CSCO CSEL DJD DSD FRLANT HTS ICC IOS JBL JCTC JHS JJS JQR JSJ JSJSup JSNTSup JSOTSup JSP JSPSup

Anchor Bible Abington Old Testament Commentary Die Apokryphen und pseudepigraphen des Alten Testaments. Edited by E. Kautzsch. New ed. 2 vols. Tübingen, 1900 The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament. Edited by R. H. Charles. 2 vols. Oxford, 1913 Biblica Biblical Research Biblische Zeitschrift Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Catholic Biblical Quarterly Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series Currents in Biblical Research Continental Commentaries Compendia rerum iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum Corpus scriptorum christianorum orientalium. Edited by I. B. Chabot et al. Paris, 1903– Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum latinorum Discoveries in the Judaean Desert Dead Sea Discoveries Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments Harvard Theological Studies International Critical Commentary Series Israel Oriental Society Journal of Biblical Literature Jewish and Christian Texts in Contexts and Related Studies Journal of Hellenic Studies Journal of Jewish Studies Jewish Quarterly Review Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman Periods Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman Periods: Supplement Series Journal for the Study of the New Testament: Supplement Series Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha: Supplement Series

viii LNTS LSJ LSTS LXX MT NAB

NICNT NIGTC NRSV

NT NTA NTOA NTS OTL OTP OtSt RBib RevQ SBL SBLDS SBLMS SBLSP SBLSymS SC SR STDJ Str-B SVTP TBN TDNT TSAJ TU VTSup WBC WMANT WUNT ZAW

1

Abbreviations Library of New Testament Studies Liddell, H. G., R. Scott, H. S. Jones, A Greek–English Lexicon. 9th ed. with revised supplement. Oxford, 1996 Library of Second Temple Studies Septuagint Masoretic Text New American Bible New International Commentary on the New Testament New International Greek Testament Commentary New Revised Standard Version New Testament Neutestamentliche Abhandlungen Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus New Testament Studies Old Testament Library Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Edited by J. H. Charlesworth. 2 vols. New York, 1983 Oudtestamentische Studiën Revue Biblique Revue de Qumran Society of Biblical Literature Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers Society for Biblical Literature Symposium Series Sources chrétiennes. Paris: Cerf, 1943– Studies in Religion Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah Strack, H. L., and P. Billerbeck. Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch. 6 vols. Munich, 1922–1961 Studia in Veteris Testamenti pseudepigraphica Themes in Biblical Narrative Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by G. Kittel and G. Friedrich. Translated by G. W. Bromiley. 10 vols. Grand Rapids, 1964–1976 Texte und Studien zum antiken Judentum Texte und Untersuchungen Supplements to Vetus Testamentum Word Biblical Commentary Series Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

INTRODUCTION: PERSPECTIVES ON 4 EZRA AND 2 BARUCH FROM THE SIXTH ENOCH SEMINAR Gabriele Boccaccini and Jason M. Zurawski

4 Ezra and 2 Baruch are classic, perhaps even de¿ning examples of both Jewish apocalyptic and pseudepigraphy. These texts—the ¿rst preserved in the larger Latin work of 2 Esdras, the other surviving, as a whole, only in the Syriac Bible found in the Ambrosianus Library in Milan—are set in the aftermath of the destruction of the ¿rst temple in 586 B.C.E. Two great scribes—one the bringer of the Torah post-return, the other the secretary of the prophet Jeremiah—lament the fate of their city and their exiled people. Both haggle and argue with God or God’s messenger as to why this terrible thing should have happened to God’s own people. And both are given symbolic visions, which, when explained, depict, on the one hand, the universal history of a people disobedient and oppressed, and, on the other, the eschatological redemption of the people, the destruction of its enemies, and the glorious world to come, the destiny of the righteous, those who have remained faithful to the Torah despite the dif¿culties in doing so. In reality, both texts were written not in the sixth century B.C.E., but instead at the end of the ¿rst century C.E., the authors responding to the destruction of the second temple, not the ¿rst, the Babylonian exile used merely as a tool to describe an incident which may still be too fresh. Contemporary scholars have come to recognize the importance of 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch to the understanding of ¿rst-century Israel and the development of Judaism and early Christianity. The strides in the past century in the scholarship of the Second Temple period have been immense, especially in the recognition of the great diversity of the period, and in these Jewish apocalypses we can begin to see marked shifts in ideologies or theologies which had to cope with the loss of the temple and the dif¿culty of now remaining faithful to one’s ancestral traditions.

x

Introduction

The growing interest in the history and literature of Second Temple Judaism in the past 60 years has not only brought to light the importance of texts like 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch, but it has also made possible the success of an organization like the Enoch Seminar, which is focused speci¿cally on this period so neglected in earlier scholarship. The Enoch Seminar was founded in 2001 by an international team of specialists in Second Temple Judaism, who were seeking recognition and autonomy for the study of this period so crucial for both Christian and Rabbinic origins by fostering a better, more thorough understanding of its literature and thought. The goal was to tear down the misleading walls of separation that still divide this ¿eld of research, recovering the unity and integrity of the period. Enoch was chosen as the symbol of this intercanonical and inter-disciplinary effort, as he is present in each and all of the canons that anachronistically divide the sources from the period: Old Testament, Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, Dead Sea Scrolls, JewishHellenistic literature, New Testament, Apostolic Fathers, etc. The ¿rst ¿ve Seminars were more speci¿cally devoted to the study of Enoch and the literature related to that mysterious patriarch. The First Enoch Seminar (Florence, 2001) was on “The Origins of Enochic Judaism”; the Second (Venice, 2003), “Enoch and Qumran Origins”; the Third (Camaldoli, 2005), “Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man”; the Fourth (Camaldoli, 2007), “Enoch and the Mosaic Torah: The Evidence of Jubilees”; and the Fifth (Naples, 2009), “Enoch, Adam, Melchisedek: Mediatorial Figures in 2 Enoch and Second Temple Judaism.” The Sixth Seminar, “Second Baruch and Fourth Ezra: Jewish Apocalypticism in Late First Century Israel,” was chaired by Matthias Henze and focused on two of the most important Jewish documents written shortly after the destruction of the second temple. The Sixth Seminar, which took place just outside of Milan, June 26– 30, 2011, was dedicated to the memory of the great archaeologist and scholar Hanan Eshel +"$. Hanan was one of the founding members of the Enoch Seminar, and he played an integral role in the growth of the organization. His absence was deeply felt. As usual, participation in the Sixth Enoch Seminar was by invitation only and was restricted to university professors and specialists in the ¿eld. Professors Henze and Boccaccini assembled in the small village of Gazzada, Italy a group of experts from around the world. Over 80 scholars from the United States, Canada, South America, Europe, Israel, and Ethiopia took over the Villa Cagnola for ¿ve days of intensive study and discussion on these extremely important Jewish apocalyptic texts. After Professor Henze opened the Seminar with his talk on the status quaestionis of the texts, the focus turned to the twelve major papers,

Introduction

xi

ranging in topic from the texts’ relationship to Jewish and Christian materials to their reception history. Papers are never read at the Enoch Seminar, but instead are all circulated in advance, allowing the majority of time to be dedicated to discussion. At the Sixth Seminar, each major paper was discussed in both plenary sessions and smaller sessions led by two respondents. The conference generated a lively debate among the participants, which went far beyond the assigned papers, now collected in the proceedings volume, published by Brill.1 Participants were encouraged to submit additional short papers on various aspects related to the study of 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch. These short papers also were circulated in advance so that most of the time in Gazzada could be devoted to more in-depth discussion. After the conference the authors were invite to revise their work in light of the new elements and challenges given by ¿ve days of hard work and intellectual camaraderie. The fruit of these discussions is found in this volume, here subdivided into four parts. In Part I, “4 Ezra in the Apocalyptic Tradition,” the authors situate this example of Jewish apocalyptic within the wider tradition found in texts such as 1 Enoch, Daniel, and various Dead Sea Scrolls. Veronika Bachmann compares the depiction of history and the meaning given to it in the book of 4 Ezra with that found in the Enochic Book of the Watchers. According to Bachmann, the author of 4 Ezra’s confrontation with the destruction of the second temple led to his borrowing of the Enochic author’s historical “apocalyptic technique,” transposing the frame of reference from the present to a more universal cosmic history, even if the very different circumstances of the authors allowed for unique sketches and applications of this history. Based in traditional sapiential and prophetic discourses, the Book of the Watchers, Bachmann shows, initiated this new form of re-reading history. Bilhah Nitzan, instead, compares the apocalyptic concepts found in 4 Ezra with those in the Dead Sea Scrolls in order to better understand how the destruction of the second temple inÀuenced Jewish apocalyptic ideas. Like Bachmann, Laura Bizzarro is also interested in the author of 4 Ezra’s reading of history, particularly the depiction of the destruction of the second temple in the ¿fth episode, and its relationship to Dan 7 and the Dead Sea Scrolls pesharim, in an attempt to better comprehend the meaning of history in Jewish apocalyptic texts and whether or not there was a particular apocalyptic reading of history. 1. Fourth Ezra and Second Baruch: Reconstruction after the Fall (ed. Matthias Henze and Gabriele Boccaccini, with the collaboration of Jason M. Zurawski; JSJSup 164; Leiden: Brill, 2013)

xii

Introduction

Part II, “4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Early Christian Literature,” offers further proof that we must read the earliest Christian materials as part of the wider phenomenon of Second Temple Judaism. Andreas Bedenbender gives an innovative reading of Mark 14’s anointing of Jesus in Bethany in light of 4 Ezra’s transformative fourth episode. Both texts, Bedenbender argues, depict an allegorical representation of Zion. Bedenbender’s reading shows us how fruitful and necessary it is to read texts like the gospels within their Second Temple Jewish framework. Calum Carmichael also reads 4 Ezra together with a gospel, this time looking at the depictions of the days of creation in 4 Ezra 6:38–59 and John 1–5, arguing that the gospel author, through allegory, is retelling the Genesis creation narrative through the incidents of Jesus’ life. Carmichael shows that, despite the very different directions each author takes, both 4 Ezra and John share a common pool of traditions concerning the Genesis creation story. Eric Mason compares how 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and the Epistle to the Hebrews interpret and utilize Ps 104:4. While there was a dominant exegetical tradition in Second Temple Judaism of reading the Psalm as a description of the origins of angels from ¿re and wind, the interpretation of the passage in both 4 Ezra and Hebrews, Mason argues, proves that not all ancient authors read the Psalm in that vein. Rivka Nir argues that the ¿nal section of the book of 2 Baruch, the Epistle, should be read, against the current scholarly consensus, as an early Christian document, a gospel imbued with speci¿cally Christian symbols, destined for a Christian audience. For Part III, “Close Readings of 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch,” the authors each focus on particular problems or issues within the texts in an attempt to offer more nuanced readings. Jason Zurawski looks closely at 4 Ezra 7:10–14, a particularly dif¿cult and ambiguous passage concerning the nature of Adam’s sin and its effect on future generations. Long taken as a prooftext that the author of 4 Ezra imagined a sort of original sin that affected the rest of humanity, this text appears to be at odds with the idea espoused throughout the rest of the text that God had foreordained the world to come and all the eschatological materials. Zurawski, therefore, offers a new reading of the text which better makes sense of the grammatical ambiguities in light of the rest of the document. Daniel Gurtner examines the views of the eschaton and the world to come found in the book of 2 Baruch, particularly the blessings acquired in the next age by the righteous who maintain their adherence to the Law in the present despite the dif¿culties of this world. In his paper, Jared Ludlow explores 2 Baruch’s views on death, the ¿nal judgment, and the state of souls in the afterlife, revealing a text which exhorts one to good works, a general, Jewish ethical lifestyle. Following the work of Jan Van Goudoever and

Introduction

xiii

Pierre Bogaert, Basil Lourié seeks to reconstruct the implied calendars used by the authors of 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch. The calendaric details show, among other things, that the Epistle of 2 Baruch was part of the original recension of the text. Carla Sulzbach compares the differing narrative perspectives in 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch in order to see how they affect the portrayal of Jerusalem, speci¿cally looking at how the texts present the changing face of Jerusalem’s urban space, reconstructing the city from the collective memory. Finally, Part IV, “4 Ezra and 2 Baruch in their Social and Historical Settings,” attempts to situate these documents within their appropriate Sitz im Leben, whether archaeologically, paleographically, or psychologically. James Charlesworth looks closely at some recent archaeological discoveries in and around Jerusalem in order to show that the longstanding scholarly assumption that neither 4 Ezra nor 2 Baruch could have been written in Jerusalem between 70 and 132 C.E. is not necessarily true. The archaeological data from Shu!afat and other sites show clear evidence of Jewish life and literary activity near Jerusalem. Next, Charlesworth contends that 2 Baruch must be a response either to ideas similar to those found in 4 Ezra or to 4 Ezra itself, seeking to resolve the pessimistic, unsatisfactory position and response to the crisis of the destruction in 70 found in that text. In his paper, Stephen Pfann looks behind 4 Ezra 14:42 and the idea that Ezra’s scribes wrote in “characters which they did not know,” by exploring the history and use of Jewish cryptographic and esoteric scripts in the Second Temple period, looking primarily at examples from the Dead Sea Scrolls. Harold Ellens takes a psychological look at the phenomenon of apocalyptic thought in texts like the Parables of Enoch, 11QMelchizedek, 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and early Christian literature, as well as the general apocalyptic air during the late Second Temple period. According to Ellens, the apocalyptic worldview exhibits all of the traits of psychological delusion according to modern psychiatric standards. This delusion often led to catastrophic consequences, from the messianic fervor of the ¿rst century C.E. to contemporary phenomena of collective psychotic delusions. These papers, along with those found in the companion volume of the Proceedings, reÀect well the Enoch Seminar’s goal of fostering a greater understanding of Second Temple Judaism en toto—a goal that is pursued through a variety of activities, from the biennial meetings of the Enoch Seminar and the Enoch Graduate Seminar, to the newly created Nangeroni Meetings, the Online Encyclopedia of Second Temple Judaism (www.4enoch.org), and the online journal (www.enochseminar.org).

Part I

4 EZRA IN THE APOCALYPTIC TRADITION

1

MORE THAN THE PRESENT: PERSPECTIVES ON WORLD HISTORY IN 4 EZRA AND THE BOOK OF THE WATCHERS Veronika Bachmann

From 4 Ezra… Fourth Ezra confronts its readers with numerous references to time: not only does it indicate when the protagonist, Ezra, received the revelations it contains (in the thirtieth year after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians; 4 Ezra 3:1), but Ezra and his heavenly dialogue partner, Uriel, also mention historical episodes reaching back to creation in their ¿rst three dialogues (3:4–7, 21; 7:11–13, 50, 70, 118; referring to the time before creation: 6:1–6). Divinely authorized indications of future events are prevalent throughout the book. As a result, 4 Ezra provides its readers with an overarching view of the course and meaning of history, a view that not incidentally supports the apparent message of the entire book and in essence answers the protagonist’s main concern, uttered in the ¿rst episode. Confronted on the narrative level with the destruction of Jerusalem and life in exile in Babylon, Ezra gravely questions what he perceives as a world out of order: Why must Israel suffer when God endures and spares other nations (3:1–2, 28–36)? The discourse on the course of history leads to an understanding of this situation and offers the confused wise man a perspective for action. Composed at the end of the ¿rst century C.E., in the aftermath of the Roman destruction of Jerusalem’s temple in 70 C.E., 4 Ezra is of course not the ¿rst work to impart a speci¿c meaning for the present to its Jewish addressees by referring particularly to the horizon of world history. The so-called historical apocalypses, such as the visions of Daniel (Dan 7–12), Enoch’s second Dream Vision (1 En. 85–90), the Apocalypse of Weeks (1 En. 93:1–10; 91:11–17), and the book of Jubilees (for its eschatological perspective, see esp. Jub. 23) ¿gure among its predecessors. In a somewhat extended manner, John Collins refers to this

4

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

common trait by outlining what he calls “apocalyptic technique.”1 He proposes that it is less the message than the method that apocalypses share. Using the idea that apocalypses generally deal with the experience of crisis in reality and refer to a transcendent realm (temporal and spatial), Collins describes this technique as transposing the frame of reference from experienced realities to this revealed transcendent world.2 … to The Book of the Watchers The earliest known pseudepigraphic work that applies the strategy of embedding the readers’ present into a speci¿c picture of an overall world history reaching from creation to a distant future is The Book of the Watchers (hereafter BW; 1 En. 1–36; third century B.C.E.).3 Although Collins treats the BW as an apocalypse in his article,4 determining the BW’s genre is a challenging if not impossible task, due to the fact that the text displays many innovative traits, in comparison to both older and contemporary works.5 Nevertheless, a discussion of its form and content, on the one hand, allows a recognition of its strong links with older literary traditions.6 On the other hand, a look at its innovative traits raises the question of the extent to which the BW became a formative work in relation to later literature. At which points and in what manner did later 1. John J. Collins, “The Apocalyptic Technique: Setting and Function in the Book of Watchers,” CBQ 44 (1982): 91–111. 2. Ibid., 111; for a current contribution building on a similar idea, see, for instance, Michael E. Stone, Ancient Judaism: New Visions and Views (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011), 83. 3. For a helpful differentiation concerning the understanding of “present” when dealing with literary works, see Loren T. Stuckenbruck, “‘Reading the Present’ in the Animal Apocalypse (1 Enoch 85–90),” in Reading the Present in the Qumran Library: The Perception of the Contemporary by Means of Scriptural Interpretations (ed. Kristin de Troyer and Armin Lange; SBLSymS 30; Atlanta: SBL, 2005), 91– 102. 4. The BW actually serves as his test case. In his introduction to Jewish apocalyptic literature, he reiterates: “By evoking a sense of awe and instilling conviction in its revelation of the transcendent world and the coming judgment, the apocalypse enables the faithful to cope with the crises of the present and so creates the preconditions for righteous action in the face of adversity” (John J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature [2d ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998], 59.) 5. For a summary and evaluation of the discussions, see Veronika Bachmann, Die Welt im Ausnahmezustand: Eine Untersuchung zu Aussagegehalt und Theologie des Wächterbuches (1 Hen 1–36) (BZAW 409; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2009), 47–62. 6. Cf. ibid., esp. 56–62.

BACHMANN More Than the Present

5

authors further pursue and transform characteristics of the BW? Hitherto, such discussions have mainly focused on issues such as the development of early Jewish apocalyptic (be it on the level of a genre, a worldview, or a mode),7 the reception of the motif of the fallen angels,8 or the ¿gure of Enoch.9 This paper limits its focus to the use of the BW’s strategy of depicting a speci¿c course of world history and its practical effects, comparing it with the use of the same strategy in 4 Ezra. Fourth Ezra originated “two crises later” than the BW in the history of Second Temple Judaism (i.e., after the incidents under Antiochus IV and the destruction of the temple in 70 C.E.). As I will show, the confrontation with such a drastic event as the destruction of the temple led scribes, in this case the composer(s) of 4 Ezra, to ¿nd their own ways of applying the BW’s strategy or—borrowing Collins’s term—technique.10 Times and Their Imperatives In an essay entitled “Die Weisheit der Paradiese,” Max Küchler explores two models for how conceptualizations of ideal eras of world history are intertwined with the notion of wisdom in early Jewish society.11 In his eyes, the notion of either a lost paradise in the beginning or a paradise to be attained at the end became decisive in certain intellectual streams. On the one hand, Küchler points to the idealized type of the “wise,” who assumed a primordial lost paradise (cf. Gen 2–3) and understood themselves as the preservers of knowledge within broken realities. From such a vantage point, he concludes, (sapiential) wisdom was perceived as 7. Cf. Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar, Prophets of Old and the Day of the End: Zechariah, the Book of Watchers and Apocalyptic (OtSt 35; Leiden: Brill, 1996). 8. Cf. Annette Y. Reed, Fallen Angels and the History of Judaism and Christianity: The Reception of Enochic Literature (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005) and Claudia Losekam, Die Sünde der Engel: Die Engelfalltradition in frühjüdischen und gnostischen Texten (Texte und Arbeiten zum neutestamentlichen Zeitalter 41; Tübingen: Francke, 2010). 9. Cf. James C. VanderKam, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition (CBQMS 16; Washington: The Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1984). 10. My original plan to include 2 Baruch has been abandoned due to limited space. For a monograph dedicated to time issues and focusing both on 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch, cf. Wolfgang Harnisch, Verhängnis und Verheißung der Geschichte: Untersuchungen zum Zeit- und Geschichtsverständnis im 4. Buch Esra und in der syr. Baruchapokalypse (FRLANT 97; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1969). 11. Max Küchler, “Die Weisheit der Paradiese. Ein Essay,” in Die Weisheit – Ursprünge und Rezeption. Festschrift für Karl Löning zum 65. Geburtstag (ed. Martin Fassnacht et al.; NTA 44; Münster: Aschendorff, 2003), 5–15.

6

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

“saved wisdom,” and wisdom rules emerged as the “Regulative, welche die gebrochene Weltwirklichkeit dem Paradies annähern”12—by adhering to them, one could bridge the gap between paradise and current reality to some extent. On the other hand, Küchler distinguishes a tendency to focus on a future paradise, which in his view carries other implications and another understanding of wisdom. He states that “[d]iese Weisheit träumt nicht mehr dem Garten Eden nach, sondern sie seufzt dem himmlischen Jerusalem entgegen.”13 Since the present time was perceived not simply as a broken reality but as a completely crushed and corrupt era, wisdom in such terms (apocalyptic wisdom) turned into “saving wisdom,” preventing the elect from absolute destruction. Küchler’s contribution shows that a belief in ideal, utopian times requires the assumption of contrasting, imperfect times. Furthermore, he emphasizes that the manner of depicting such contrasting eras allows for corroborating speci¿c indicatives and imperatives (as well as prohibitives). Such aspects will also be considered in light of 4 Ezra and the BW. Beside this, Küchler’s essay also invites the question of whether each of the two works favors one wisdom stream or the other. Küchler himself emphasizes the ideal character type of these streams and— closing his essay—points to Jesus of Nazareth as an early Jewish wise man who offered an ingenious synthesis. We will see that the BW already offered its audience a picture of world history that explained present realities as being broken and perverted and built on the idea of a return to the “lost good times.” In contrast, 4 Ezra indeed tends to abandon the very idea of a primordial paradise as part of inner-worldly history—and beyond that to dissociate the presumed future paradise from certain basic inner-worldly realities by marking them as symptoms of a corrupt era. Current Troubles Put into Perspective (4 Ezra) Fourth Ezra (chs. 3–14) presents itself as a report of Ezra, son of Salathiel. The book recounts a series of revelations that he received in Babylon in the thirtieth year after the destruction of Jerusalem (see 3:1). The reference to the destruction of Jerusalem and the ¿rst temple by the Babylonians is the ¿rst of two meaningful, nonlinear historical references on which 4 Ezra builds. This setting suggests that Ezra’s means of coping with the destruction of 587 B.C.E. is supposed to be the paradigmatic means to cope with the destruction of 70 C.E. The reference to the ¿gure of Ezra, who is anachronistically turned into a leading ¿gure under 12. Ibid., 6. 13. Ibid., 11.

BACHMANN More Than the Present

7

Babylonian rule, forms the second such reference.14 By choosing Ezra as the protagonist, the author reveals a concern with focusing on the law as the means of orientation for right conduct (cf. Neh 8). By focusing on “classics” such as the law and the ¿gure of Ezra, who is also strongly associated with Moses in ch. 14 (see below), the author succeeds in claiming continuity between an era of temple-centered community and an era in which the community has lost its cultic center, requiring a new constitution of communal identity. The nature of the revelations and of Ezra’s own involvement differs throughout the sections of the work. After engaging in a dialogue with God’s angelic messenger, Uriel (see 4:1), in the beginning of the book (¿rst through third sections) and again after his encounter with a mourning woman, the personi¿cation of Zion (fourth section), Ezra has two dream visions (sections ¿ve and six), which are explained to him by a voice, either the angel’s or God’s (12:10; 13:20).15 The ¿nal, seventh section recalls Exod 3:4 and the call of Moses, with God’s voice issuing from a bush. Ezra, who is now apparently restrengthened to serve God, is committed to preparing his people, Israel, and the wise among them (14:13) and to providing anew the written law burnt in the course of the destruction of the temple (14:21–26). In the last verse of 4 Ezra, the protagonist is carried away “to the place of those who are like him”16 (14:50), as announced in 14:9. Within a broader context, and as indicated above, the revelations are a reaction to Ezra’s initial inability to understand the current situation: Why does God destroy his own people while preserving their enemies (3:28–36)? Ezra’s incomprehension turns into comprehension when God reveals to him the “bigger picture.” Accordingly, Ezra’s understanding of history (cf. 3:4–27), which is fed by traditional sources and ideas,17 is rather enlarged than revised in 4 Ezra. The protagonist’s perception of an

14. Unlike 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch does not conÀate the events by skipping the Persian and Hellenistic eras; cf. 2 Bar. 32:2–3 and 58:1–8, drawing a historical line from the destruction of the ¿rst temple to the destruction of the second temple. 15. The fact that Ezra addresses him in 13:51 as “sovereign Lord” does not clarify the identity of the speaker, since Ezra uses this or a similar appellation also in conversation with Uriel (cf. 4:38; 5:38; 6:11; 7:58, 75). Michael E. Stone, Fourth Ezra: A Commentary on the Book of Fourth Ezra (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 360, 366, 394, opts for the angel’s voice in both cases. 16. Quotations of 4 Ezra in this paper follow the translation offered by Stone, Fourth Ezra. 17. Cf. the many references to text passages of the Torah and the Ketubim mentioned in ibid., 67–75.

8

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

“Aporie der Verheißung” (as Wolfgang Harnisch terms it),18 which let him adopt a fatalistic attitude (see 5:35; 7:46–48, 62–69, 116–126), is put into perspective by offering him more information about the course and sense of history.19 Ezra’s “healing from fatalism” becomes manifest at the end of the sixth section, where he reports that he started to walk around and praise God “because of his wonders, which he did from time to time, and because he governs the times and whatever things come to pass in their seasons” (13:57–58).20 On a practical level, the narrator’s ¿nal note about Ezra’s translation into other spheres not only glamorizes Ezra’s exceptional character but also underlines his exemplary move from a desperate, confused wise man prone to a fatalistic view to a wise man newly trusting his sources (cf. the fact that Ezra himself initiates the rewriting of the law in 14:21–22). The text indicates that only the latter is able to strengthen the people and to “set the house in order” (14:13), that is, to be the people’s real guide and “help”/:š ’$4˜ .21 Given such a pragmatic impulse, it seems adequate to conclude that 4 Ezra addresses a restricted audience—the wise instructors of the people—with the primary purpose of guiding these instructors.22 18. Cf. Harnisch, Verhängnis und Verheißung, esp. 19–60. 19. In this sense, I do not think that the heavenly voice refuses a theological stance, as often proposed (cf. Harnisch, Verhängnis und Verheißung, 65–67, among others); such a view is vigorously opposed, for instance, by Klaus Koch, “Esras erste Vision: Weltzeiten und Weg des Höchsten,” BZ NF 22 (1978): 46–75, here 55–56. Although Karina M. Hogan’s recent contribution on 4 Ezra (Theologies in ConÀict in 4 Ezra: Wisdom Debate and Apocalyptic Solution [JSJSup 130; Leiden: Brill, 2008]) offers many insights and convincing observations, her “dissection” of 4 Ezra into different, more or less coherent theologies tends to perpetuate such interpretation; cf. the critical remarks in Jonathan A. Moo, Creation, Nature and Hope in 4 Ezra (FRLANT 237; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011), 32–33. 20. Cf. Stone, Fourth Ezra, 409, and also Stone’s observations on the protagonist’s more subtle development through the different revelation sections (24–28). He rightly concludes that “Ezra’s development, unlike that in a Platonic dialogue, does not start at a certain point and progress regularly step by step from beginning to end. It starts, advances, regresses, advances some more, returns to earlier issues, and so forth” (28). Cf. in a similar direction Koch, “Esras erste Vision,” 56: “Das Gespräch schreitet…sinnvoll fort, und das nicht in Form ständiger Kollision. Esra läßt sich fortlaufend eines Besseren belehren und greift die Antworten des Engels in seinen Erwiderungen auf.” 21. 4 Ezra obviously plays with the multivalent meaning of the protagonist’s name throughout the writing. By ¿guring as an example for the wise, Ezra is at the same time their help. Cf. Collins, Apocalyptic Imagination, 211, who in this sense accurately refers to 4 Ezra as a “guide to the perplexed.” 22. The text itself addresses the question of its addressees at 12:38. For a discussion of different scholarly views about the intended audience and the purpose

BACHMANN More Than the Present

9

In light of these rather general observations and the directive character of the work, a more speci¿c question arises: What are the primary characteristics of the revealed “bigger picture” that—at least from the protagonist’s perspective—succeed in securing the value of the traditions and changing Ezra’s (and maybe also the reader’s) attitude? In my view, the following points are crucial: 1. Ezra’s negative views about the quality of the present era and about human nature are not rejected but rendered more precisely. Taking up Ezra’s discourse about the evil of the human heart (see 3:20), the heavenly messenger agrees on humanity’s susceptibility to sin since Adam, the ¿rst human being, transgressed God’s commandment. However, whereas Ezra perceives the failure of the expected connection between deeds and consequences only in the current situation of the Babylonian exile (see his understanding of the destruction of Jerusalem as the consequence of Israel’s transgressions in 3:25–27), Uriel confronts him with the fact that this world generally “will not be able to bring the things that have been promised to the righteous,… because this world is full of sadness and in¿rmities… For a grain of evil seed was sown in Adam’s heart from the beginning” (4:27–30; cf. 7:11–12). As a result, 4 Ezra depicts the world as being in a corrupt state, although there may be better and worse eras in world history. 2. Concerning the further dynamics of this world’s eras, an increase of evils (5:1–12; 14:17) and the end of the world are predicted. By explicitly linking 4 Ezra to Daniel traditions (see 4 Ezra 12:11), the future evils are strongly tied to reigns of terror, whereby a messianic counter-reign heralds the end. Such indications help Ezra recognize that other nations may well be mightier than Israel but that such a situation does not necessarily indicate that God is no longer committed to Israel. 3. The revelations of future events beyond the cycle of decay af¿rm God’s remaining commitment. Ezra learns that the current reality will end and that there will be a radical transformation implying recti¿cation: everybody (every soul, that is) will be confronted with God’s mighty judgment (see 7:39–42). The revelations assure Ezra that whereas the judgment marks the of the writing, see Hogan, Theologies in ConÀict, 222–31. I mentioned above that I do not follow Hogan’s conclusion that the instruction is presented in the form of a wisdom debate, although she rightly emphasizes that the primary purpose is not to comfort the people (227).

10

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

end of all those who scorned God and “the ways of the Most High,” it offers a new beginning for all those who kept these ways despite numerous dif¿culties. This time, however, transgressions and their negative effects will no longer be possible, since in the course of the transformation, “the heart of the earth’s inhabitants shall be changed and converted to a different spirit” (6:26). The reference to a second world that was prepared from the beginning (7:50) and that must only be woken up for this new beginning (7:31) illustrates that God, the sovereign universal ruler, with great foresight created a perfect cosmos, that is, one able to eradicate human transgression and the resulting corruption of the human realm.23 In what sense does such an enlarged frame of reference help the reader to perceive the present situation in a different light? As with Israel’s failing on a political level, individual suffering no longer needs to be understood as self-inÀicted but can be explained by the corrupt quality of the current world. Perseverance and the con¿dence that God is ultimately still on one’s side become important. For those who embrace the salvi¿c perspective and keep the ways of God, the dif¿culties of life must be endured in order to receive a positive inheritance later on (see 7:3–16).24 Taking up a metaphor used by Uriel, bearing the current life is a contest one must win (7:127–128).25 The few who emerge victorious are presented as the precious treasure of God (7:52–61). From a human perspective, then, there is a perceptible dynamic of human development, which may be called “from preparation to ful¿llment.” Whether the stable life of humans after God’s judgment should be called a second historical era or whether it would be more appropriate to speak of an arrival at a posthistorical era is debatable and, in my view, 23. From this perspective, not only the second but also the ¿rst world is a wellcreated world, perfectly absorbing the turmoil caused by human transgressions; cf. furthermore 4 Ezra’s statement about the provision of “the things that pertain to the judgment” in 7:70. 24. Cf. 2 Bar. 52:6, which goes as far as summoning the righteous: “Rejoice in the suffering which you now suffer.” (The quotations of 2 Baruch follow the translation presented by Daniel M. Gurtner, Second Baruch: A Critical Edition of the Syriac Text with Greek and Latin Fragments, English Translation, Introduction, and Concordances [Jewish and Christian Texts in Contexts and Related Studies 5; New York: T&T Clark, 2009].) For a listing of further early Jewish texts speaking about the joy of suffering, cf. Albertus Frederik J. Klijn, “2 (Syriac Apocalypse of) Baruch: A New Translation and Introduction,” OTP 1:615–652 (1:639). 25. Cf. 2 Bar. 15:8, speaking about the future as a “crown with great glory.”

BACHMANN More Than the Present

11

basically a question of de¿nition.26 From a cosmic perspective, the ¿rst attempt at human worldly life appears to be an obstacle to establishing the entire cosmos according to God’s perfect plans (cf. 6:1–6). But it becomes clear that it can in no way impede the ultimate realization of these plans. At this point, however, we arrive at the next question, concerning how 4 Ezra characterizes the ideal world and contrasts it with the current, negative era. Pausing here to summarize the most important characteristics, the following picture emerges: x x

x x x x

Currently experienced world will soon come to an end human beings are born with an evil heart ĺ God’s law is known but despised by many (there are only a few righteous people) righteous people suffer mortality city and land are destroyed times can change for the better or the worse

World promised to the righteous27 x everlasting world x the human heart will be changed ĺ only righteous people exist x x x x

no more suffering immortality city and land will appear28 stability

Among other things, this picture shows that Ezra and Uriel share the anthropological view that mortality results from human transgression (see 3:7; 7:11–13)29 and therefore does not count as an essential part of human nature.30 If this also means that procreation is a mere symptom of an unsaved creation, then we can understand the imagery of the current world as an aging, birth-giving woman (5:45–55) as an additional means

26. Cf. Harnisch, Verhängnis und Verheißung, esp. 240–47, who underlines the posthistorical character of that era (cf. in this direction Rudolf Bultmann, History and Eschatology: The Gifford Lectures 1955 [Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1957], 30). 27. Cf. Uriel’s descriptions of this world in 7:113–114 and 8:52–54. 28. Depending on the interpretation of 7:26–27, the disclosure of the city and the land can also be understood as an overlapping motif of messianic kingdom and second world; for such a reading, see Moo, Creation, 126–28. 29. The polysemy of Gen 2–3 indeed allows such an understanding; cf. the overview of the different readings in Beate Ego, “Adam und Eva im Judentum,” in Adam und Eva in Judentum, Christentum und Islam (ed. Christfried Böttrich et al.; Judentum, Christentum und Islam; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011), 11–78 (25–29). The idea is developed in several early Jewish and Christian writings. 30. Cf. on this Hermann Gunkel, “Das vierte Buch Esra,” APAT 2:331–401 (365).

12

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

to mark the era of experienced history as a corrupt one: neither a woman nor—in an imagined way—the world should be subjected to any procreational suffering in ideal times.31 As with mortality and procreation, 4 Ezra links the notion of history as a sequel, to both better and worse times, to the current world. From such a perspective, the coming era can indeed be labeled posthistorical. In that time, good forces will no longer have to compete with bad ones; the coming world will provide stability. Although 4 Ezra dissociates the ideal future from many of the current human realities, it is notable that it by no means directs its readers to an attitude of escapism. The imperative (and prohibitive) implied by the work’s worldview, which is clearly and repeatedly stated, calls for an attitude af¿rming this world’s realities. The readers are again and again confronted with the emphasis placed on keeping God’s ways even in dif¿cult circumstances. These dif¿cult circumstances, they learn, need to be accepted and handled as the symptoms of a corrupt state of the world. Humans must reject not the realities but the causes of this corruption. The af¿rmation of this world’s realities is illustrated by certain statements of Ezra. Fourth Ezra 8:9–12, for instance, points to Ezra’s awareness of the relevance of education—every child must learn anew about God’s law in this world—combined with his positive appraisal of “human basics” such as breast-feeding. Addressing God, Ezra states: And when the [mother’s] womb gives up again what has been created in it, thou hast commanded that from the members [the Latin version adds: that is, from the breast] milk should be supplied which is the fruit of the breasts, so that what has been fashioned may be nourished for a time; and afterward thou wilt guide him [the child] in thy mercy. Thou hast nourished him in thy righteousness, and instructed him in thy law, and taught him in thy righteousness, and instructed him in thy wisdom.

That 4 Ezra places great importance on the present world has already been noted by Harnisch. Speaking about the present’s dialectic character, he states that in a negative sense, it remains part of the “unheilsträchtige Zeit dieses Äons,”32 whereas in a positive one it turns out to be a relevant era, namely, the “begrenzte Zeit der Entscheidung,”33 for any individual. Interestingly, it takes quite an effort on Uriel’s part to win Ezra over to the idea that any individual is free either to keep or to scorn God’s 31. For an overall discussion of the “mother earth” topic manifest in 4 Ezra and for further biographical references, see Karina M. Hogan, “Mother Earth as a Conceptual Metaphor in 4 Ezra,” CBQ 73 (2011): 72–91. 32. Harnisch, Verhängnis und Verheißung, 247 n. 3. 33. Ibid.

BACHMANN More Than the Present

13

commandments. Ezra asks fatalistically, “Who among the living is there that has not sinned, or who among men that has not transgressed thy covenant?” (7:46; cf. 7:68; 8:35). Uriel insists that there are a few who are able to live righteously (including Ezra; see 7:76–77). Additionally, he stresses that any wrongdoer could have known better (7:21–22, 72; 8:56–58). The twofold optimism expressed here (i.e., the claim that God’s law is known to all and that people have a chance to turn back from a wrong way of life) perhaps required particular argumentative care, not only because historical events raised serious questions about what had hitherto been normative but also because people might be exposed to alternative views about human nature. Specious Prosperity Unmasked (The Book of the Watchers) The BW (1 En. 1–36) presents itself as a blessing-speech of Enoch, one of the forefathers of humanity (see Gen 5), addressing a distant generation. In chs. 1–5, Enoch announces a great judgment and contrasts the future destiny of the righteous with the destiny of the wicked sinners. Whereas a joyful and peaceful life is promised to the former, the text announces that the latter will have no peace. From ch. 6 onward, the condemnation of the wicked is linked to the story of a group of so-called Watcher angels who took for themselves human wives, fathered voracious giants, and spread different kinds of knowledge among humans. The story culminates in the depiction of a great afÀiction (7:3–8:4). According to the BW, all this happened “in the years of Jared”34 (6:6), that is, in antediluvian times. Two resolutions (chs. 9–11 and 12–36) reassure the reader that the Watcher angels’ actions were wrong and that God and his mighty angels are willing and able to prosecute the evildoers.35 The BW offers clear indications as to why the Watchers’ deeds are considered wrong. The introductory chapters (chs. 2–5) contrast those who transgress with the heavenly luminaries or the trees on earth, 34. The quotations follow the translation offered by George W. E. Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch 1: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, Chapters 1–36; 81–108 (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001). 35. The following reading of the BW is elaborated in more detail in my Welt im Ausnahmezustand. I do not interpret the book against the background of a particular “movement of dissent” in the third century B.C.E., as other scholars do. Cf. particularly on this topic Veronika Bachmann, “The Book of The Watchers (1 Enoch 1–36): An Anti-Mosaic, Non-Mosaic, or Even Pro-Mosaic Writing?,” JHS 11 (2011): 1–23.

14

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

praising these as steadily accomplishing the tasks ascribed to them by God. They are all presented as contributing to a perfect order. The wicked ones, in contrast, are addressed as the “hard of heart” (5:4) who proudly went astray. The subsequent story of the Watcher angels illustrates that such transgression negatively affects the overall order (7:3– 8:4). The resolutions of the story of the Watchers further specify the angels’ wrongdoing. Concerning their mingling with women, the BW explains that procreation is con¿ned to mortal, earthly beings, “that nothing fail them upon the earth” (15:5). Therefore, no women were created for the angels, who are heavenly, immortal spiritual beings. As a result, the Watcher angels are presented as having ignored this wise order. Less is said about the knowledge the angels spread among humans (see 13:2; 16:3). However, it is obvious that this transfer of knowledge was done without authorization as well. The matters taught to humans, listed in chs. 7–8, alert the reader to the possibility that the transferred knowledge might have aroused in people the desire for more than God intended for them.36 In this sense, the angels passed their own proud desire on to humanity. The latter aspect highlights what several scholars have already noted: the Watchers and their actions play a paradigmatic and etiological role.37 The BW insinuates that since the angels’ descent to earth, humans run a particular risk of emulating the Watchers in acting proudly and neglecting God’s order. If they are not careful to refrain from imitating them and from using the knowledge introduced by them, they might end among the condemned wicked, as have the Watchers.38 The paradigmatic character of the story makes clear that the BW speaks about human beings in general39 not only as victims of the Watchers’ deeds but also as possible accomplices.

36. Since the taught matters (cf. 7:1; 8:1, 3) mainly encompass mantic practices, metallurgical techniques for the production of weapons and jewelry, and knowledge about the production of cosmetics, their effects can be summarized as rousing the desire for knowing more, owning more, and becoming more beautiful. Cf. Bachmann, Welt im Ausnahmezustand, 68–69. 37. Cf. Reed, Fallen Angels, 37, esp. n. 31, emphasizing that the two roles or functions should not be played off against each other. 38. Cf. the statement about the wicked in the introductory part: by using the second person plural when addressing the wicked (5:4), the text effectively confronts its human readers with their possible wrong attitude and calls for a reaction (be it a defense or an acknowledgment). 39. Being aware of the BW’s general notions about humanity helps prevent, for instance, the widespread allegorical reading suggesting that the Watchers represent a

BACHMANN More Than the Present

15

Turning to the etiological character in more detail entails paying attention to the BW’s bigger picture of history. The descent of the Watchers marks a clear turning point in human history. Their deeds cause trouble on earth that will lead to its destruction unless someone intervenes. Given that the introductory chapters announce a future judgment, the present of the readers must be situated somewhere between the times of great afÀiction right after the descent of the angels and this future judgment. Such a rough outline raises the question of whether the book’s resolutions provide further indications of the quality of the present era. Is it still an era of great afÀiction? Which marks—if any— did past troubles leave? The ¿rst resolution (chs. 9–11) reveals God’s plan of action. As a ¿rst step, the main transgressors, the Watchers, will be bound and their voracious children sent “against one another in a war of destruction” (10:9). As a second step, a great judgment will then restore order and defeat the transgressors (10:6, 12–14). Similar to the disclosures in the introductory chapters (see 1:8; 5:7–9), the times following the judgment are depicted as an era full of blessings on earth (10:18–19). As a result, the understanding of the present is indeed re¿ned: the present times are located between the ¿rst and the second step of God’s action plan. Hence, the world is no longer in imminent danger. However, since the emergency steps do not curb the spread of the angels’ teachings among humans, the world still has to deal with this unauthorized knowledge, the implied temptations, and their disturbing effects. The second resolution, which mainly serves to con¿rm God’s aim to prosecute any transgression of the perfect order he established as the great creator and ruler of the universe, raises a second point. In this part of the BW, Enoch appears as the messenger mediating between the Watchers and God. After sending Enoch before God with a petition in their favor (13:4–6), the Watchers are confronted with a clear rejection (13:8; 14–36). At one point within the lengthy recitation of God’s response, Enoch cites God’s statement about the Watchers’ offspring (15:8–12). In this passage, the BW depicts the present era as one in which people still have to deal with the angels’ children. Although these children were sent against each other in a war of destruction as part of the ¿rst step, the text implies that they are still present, because of the immortal, spiritual nature they have inherited from their fathers, and they continue to attack men and women as evil spirits.

group of (human) priests. Cf. the discussion of such a reading in Bachmann, Welt im Ausnahmezustand, 131–48.

16

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

In sum, the BW presents its readers with a picture of world history consisting of four eras. The ¿rst era lasts from creation to the descent of the angels. The text suggests that this has been a good era, if only implicitly.40 The angels’ deeds dramatically disturbed this world. The result is a short second era curtailed by some emergency ¿rst steps. The present is depicted as embedded in the succeeding era: this is no longer an era of great afÀiction. However, there are still problems that humans cannot control. Even if a person strictly refuses the angels’ tempting knowledge and focuses on following God’s orders, no blessed life is guaranteed. This will be different in future times, after the great judgment. Then, the world order will be restored by the ¿nal condemnation and destruction of the transgressors, be they spiritual beings or not. The righteous will have their chance to live a long and blessed life thereafter, and “truth and peace will be united together…for all the generations of men” (11:2). As in the case of 4 Ezra, the enlarged frame of reference thus illustrates that current well-being and success do not necessarily imply that someone has chosen the right way of life. Likewise, the present becomes a time for making the crucial decision either to follow the Watchers’ example or to stay with God’s orders (or to return to them).41 Although the two works come very close at these points, virtually sharing the imperative to observe God’s commands, they nevertheless differ considerably on the practical level. Whereas, as we have seen, 4 Ezra ¿ghts against a fatalistic attitude that jeopardizes con¿dence in tradition and tries to offer explanations for a situation in which all explanations have broken away, the BW rather seems to address a deliberate turning away from a traditional way of life. This ¿ts well in the historical context of Palestine under Ptolemaic rule in the third century B.C.E., a time when many Judeans, men and women, were exposed in a particular way to innovations on cultural, economic, and technological levels.42 By linking the present of its readers to the story of the Watchers, the BW found a way to unmask anything that could 40. 1 En. 25:6 is one of the few passages that explicitly refers to this era’s good quality. The text states that human beings lived a long (Greek version: longer) life in those times, as they will again in future times. 41. Both 4 Ezra and the BW do not generally condemn people who have taken the wrong track but try to function as an eye-opener for recognizing the importance of following God’s commands. Though 4 Ezra explicitly points to the opportunity for repentance in one’s lifetime in 9:11, the BW implies that people have such an option by contrasting humans, who are depicted as the victims of the angels, with the Watchers, the main culprits, whose plea for forgiveness is rejected. 42. Cf. Bachmann, Welt im Ausnahmezustand, 259–62.

BACHMANN More Than the Present

17

distract from a traditional way of life as traces of the angels’ transgressions. In other words, the BW reveals the hidden corruption of the present era to readers who—in the view of the group behind the work— mistakenly think that they are on the right track. By confronting readers with the angels as paradigmatic evildoers, the BW rather focuses on a prohibitive (“do not follow their example”) than on an imperative. The resulting vagueness about the imperative, in my view, points to the fact that the BW, as with 4 Ezra later, supposes that knowledge of God’s rules is available to its readers. Whereas 4 Ezra explicitly points to the “rewritten law” as the authoritative source of this traditional knowledge (ch. 14), the BW forces us to imagine for ourselves the means and sources with which religious authorities instructed people in third-century Palestine. Surely they offered statements about the right way of life, and these seem to be what the BW implicitly refers to.43 Beside the optimistic view that crucial knowledge is available, the BW and 4 Ezra share the view that humans are able to live in a righteous way. Nevertheless, they greatly differ over what they consider to be normal (and therefore good) anthropological conditions. According to the BW, God created humans as earthly beings, Àesh and blood, who die and perish (see 1 En. 15). Mortality is not per se judged negatively and thus is not viewed as a symptom of perverted realities as it is in 4 Ezra. The BW’s depiction of the ideal future indicates that the symptoms of perversion here are understood as being more subtle: they include the too-short life spans of the righteous (see 5:9: in future times, “the number of the days of their life they will complete”) and a life that is not as peaceful as it should be (5:9; 11:2; 25:6). As 1 En. 25:6 emphasizes, the coming judgment is a step not toward a re¿nement of humanity but toward its restoration, a return to the “good old times”; the righteous will be able to live a “life upon the earth, such as your fathers lived also in their days.” According to this picture, the world is not a woman who will die but rather one who accuses her transgressors and is heard (ch. 7–9). Humans and the other earthly species were well created as mortal beings, and the world remains these procreating creatures’ perfect, everlasting home.

43. For a discussion of alternative views, see Bachmann, “Book of the Watchers.” The fact that 4 Ezra provides more detail about the authoritative sources than the BW does, and explicitly pushes the authority of the Scriptures, might indicate that the situation of the religious establishment itself has become fragile after the destruction of the temple. The BW does not indicate any such signs of crisis.

18

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

Concluding Remarks The comparison between 4 Ezra and the BW illustrates that although the books share the technique of transposing their frames of reference beyond the present of the addressee to the larger picture of world or even cosmic history, the two maintain their own pragmatics, respond to different situations, and comprise different literary (sub-)genres and forms. It is clear that we cannot easily determine the reasons why a work such as the BW starts applying this technique in the third century B.C.E. Given the broad range of literary traditions that had developed by this time, it is perhaps not surprising that “the wise of Israel” started to link traditions about beginnings (e.g., the book of Genesis) to traditions addressing the future (cf. the prophetic books and especially the universal character of such future perspectives in later prophetic writings). “The wise” of that time were also well acquainted with prophetic interpretations of Israel’s history as a sequence of good and bad times, and they knew from the deuteronomistic view that there was no guarantee that good eras would outweigh bad ones, which could imply collective responsibility for the consequences of bad deeds.44 They were thus well aware, too, of the practical potential in the message “there is more than the present!”45 44. Concerning the prophetic pattern of history (characterized by the three-part structure “good–bad–back to good”), cf. Klaus Koch, Die Profeten I: Assyrische Zeit (3d ed.; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1995), 247–48; concerning the deuteronomistic view, see, for instance, the terminological discussion provided by Konrad Schmid, “The Deuteronomistic Image of History as Interpretive Device in the Second Temple Period: Towards a Long-term Interpretation of ‘Deuteronomism,’” in Congress Volume Helsinki 2010 (ed. Martti Nissinen; VTSup 148; Leiden: Brill, 2012), 369–88. Schmid calls to mind Odil H. Steck’s dissertation on the topic (Israel und das gewaltsame Geschick der Propheten. Untersuchungen zur Überlieferung des deuteronomistischen Geschichtsbildes im Alten Testament, Spätjudentum und Urchristentum [WMANT 23; Neukirchen–Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1967], esp. 110–264). 45. Concerning the range of practical options, the prophetic writings are of particular interest. By uncovering deplorable social, cultic, economic, or political circumstances or general corruption in society, they highlight the fact that the same realities and era can be assessed differently by different individuals or groups. For on one hand, those who misbehave (be it a certain social group or an entire people, e.g., Israel, Judah, or other nations), according to a prophet, might not share this negative judgment. On the other hand, the announcement of a future turning point (cf. the notion of the “Day of Yahweh”) does not just ful¿ll the widespread expectation that bad deeds imply bad consequences (which in some cases might induce addressees under criticism to change their view about what should or should not be

BACHMANN More Than the Present

19

The examination of our two texts shows that the rich collection of traditions offered more than one way for authors to sketch a larger picture of world or cosmic history. It allowed them to accentuate what in their view made the most sense in the current situation and for their addressees. For instance, in the case of the BW, placing the negative turning point in “the days of Jared,” when the angels transgressed God’s order, offered a way to relieve God and humanity.46 In this picture, God remained the creator of a great world, and human beings were the victims of the angels’ deeds who could be called back to the right way even if they started to follow the angels’ example—a chance denied the Watchers as the chief culprits (see 1 En. 12–36, the second resolution, which recounts at length the refusal of the angels’ petition). In contrast, 4 Ezra completely neglects the literary traditions of the Watchers.47 It locates the negative turning point (or in this case, the point of failure) at the very beginning of human history: Adam, the ¿rst human being, burdened with an evil heart, transgressed (cf. 4 Ezra 3:21). Although done). Especially in later prophetic texts, it can also imply a comforting perspective for those who consider themselves to be wrongfully suffering under the present circumstances. The punishment of some provides a salvi¿c meaning for others. 46. Reed, Fallen Angels, 52–53, points to the important fact that in a thirdcentury B.C.E. context, the story about Adam and Eve did not yet have the “normative aura” for explaining human sinfulness that it gained later on. The BW itself refers twice to the paradise story, in 1 En. 20:7 and in 1 En. 32. Both references emphasize God’s sanctioning power (cf. Bachmann, Welt im Ausnahmezustand, 83–84, 98–102). Against the view that the paradise story is referred to by the tree mentioned in 1 En. 24–25, cf. Veronika Bachmann, “Rooted in Paradise? The Meaning of the ‘Tree of Life’ in 1 Enoch 24–25 Reconsidered,” JSP 19 (2009): 83– 107. 47. Other than 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch refers to this tradition (cf. 56:10–14). Since 2 Baruch generally builds upon the same “bigger picture” as 4 Ezra, the point made by the BW got lost: instead of being the chief culprits, the angels became the victims of humanity and copied their behavior (cf. on this turn also Ego, “Adam und Eva,” 44). Whereas 2 Baruch refrains from explicitly accusing the women of seducing the angels, other writings, such as Tg. Ps.-J. to Gen 6:2 and T. Reu. 5, clearly state such particular guilt (cf. also 1 Cor 11:10, probably expressing such a view; see Max Küchler, Schweigen, Schmuck und Schleier: Drei neutestamentliche Vorschriften zur Verdrängung der Frauen auf dem Hintergrund einer frauenfeindlichen Exegese des Alten Testaments im antiken Judentum [NTOA 1; Freiburg: Editions Universitaires, 1986]). Interestingly, it seems that such reinterpretation was even inserted into the BW itself; cf. 1 En. 8:1 in the version of G. Synkellos and 19:2. Concerning 4 Ezra’s attitude toward women related to Gen 2–3, see, for instance, Hogan, Theologies in ConÀict, 113. She notes that Adam and not Eve is blamed for the transgression and rightly concludes that “blaming Eve would have undercut Ezra’s argument that Adam sinned because he was created with an ‘evil heart’” (113 n. 24).

20

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

such a picture raises the question of theodicy in a more drastic way (why are human beings burdened with an evil heart?),48 it offers a way to explain human mortality as a symptom of an unsaved creation, a theologoumenon with which the addressees of 4 Ezra must have been acquainted at the end of the ¿rst century C.E.49 Since God’s role as the creator of a perfect cosmos is crucial in 4 Ezra, too (as probably in every text applying the technique of an enlarged frame of reference), God is depicted as one who in a wise way has created not only one but two worlds. Neither innovation of 4 Ezra as compared to the BW—its anthropological shift from mortal to immortal humans and the idea of a second world replacing a ¿rst one—is just a free invention of 4 Ezra’s author. Both are rooted in traditional writing and thinking, in sapiential (especially the reasoning about mortality and death) and in prophetic discourses (e.g., Second and Third Isaiah’s development of the idea of a new creation of the world). Seen from this angle, we can conclude that the BW, by providing its addressees with an enlarged historical frame of reference reaching from creation to future times and rooted in traditional knowledge, initiated a kind of new wave of innovative re-reading and rethinking of the traditional. Given the broad available range of practical and formal options, it may be dif¿cult to speak of the emergence of a new literary genre. If we understand 4 Ezra and the BW as representing such a literary trend, though, then their similarities, despite all the differences, are less surprising: (1) Both works belong to a group of revelatory texts assigned no longer to classical prophetic ¿gures but to other ¿gures within the history of Israel, such as forefathers or leading ¿gures who appeared to be trustworthy enough to testify to the message that there is more than the present. (2) Both texts emphasize the sovereignty of God by pointing to God’s role as the creator of a perfect cosmos, which goes along with a strong universalistic and individualistic belief that any person, Israelite or not, is called to decide whether to recognize or to scorn the right order.50 (3) Taking up Küchler’s essay, we 48. Cf. on this in more detail Stone, Fourth Ezra, 63–67, and, among others, Hogan, Theologies in ConÀict, 115. 49. Matthias Henze, “4 Ezra and 2 Baruch: Literary Composition and Oral Performance in First-Century Apocalyptic Literature,” JBL 131 (2012): 181–200, (191); n. 28 mentions Christian writings such as Rom 5:12–14 and 1 Cor 15:21–22 as examples reÀecting such a notion. 50. On the question about how far the BW already anticipates the integration of concepts of natural law, cf. Bachmann, Welt im Ausnahmezustand, 196–203. For a work combining the focus on God as the creator of a perfect cosmos with an exclusivist stance, see the book of Jubilees.

BACHMANN More Than the Present

21

may indeed say that the BW, by adhering to a “good beginning,” stays closer to the category of “sapiential wisdom” and 4 Ezra, by promising the righteous access to an other-worldly Jerusalem, closer to what he calls “apocalyptic wisdom.” Nevertheless, the above examination also highlights the fact that both works link the right order to the order (the law or the commandments) familiar to humanity and especially to Israel. Accordingly, in either case the old “saved wisdom” is at the same time considered to be the “saving wisdom.” Revealed knowledge about the future restoration or paradise redirects to this “saved wisdom”—which shows that in both texts the present, placed somewhere in between the past and the great future, is what really matters.

APOCALYPTIC IDEAS IN 4 EZRA IN COMPARISON WITH THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS Bilhah Nitzan

There is no direct historical af¿nity between the Fourth Book of Ezra, which was written thirty years after the destruction of the second temple (ca. 100 C.E.), and which focuses on the traumatic problems of the people of Israel, and the Qumran texts, which were written prior to this historical catastrophe.1 Nevertheless, this book continues apocalyptic traditions known from the apocryphal and pseudepigraphal works and the Qumran scrolls. Thus, the investigation of ideas dealt with in 4 Ezra in comparison with those of Qumran or other apocalyptic texts written during the Second Temple period is based upon the fact that the book of 4 Ezra deals with traditional apocalyptic concepts. Such investigation may clarify whether and in what way the destruction of the second temple inÀuenced Jewish traditional apocalyptic ideas and hopes.2 Considering this historical turning point, our investigation will deal with the expressions of the following issues in the theology of 4 Ezra, as compared to the Qumran writings: 1. Con¿dence in the deterministic historical concept; 2. The origin of evil; 3. Justi¿cation of God’s ways (theodicy); 4. Resurrection of the dead; 5. Consolation through messianic hope. 1. Con¿dence in the Deterministic Historical Concept The deterministic historical concept plays a central role in apocalyptic theology. This concept deals with the existence of wickedness throughout 1. See Michael E. Stone, Jewish Writing of the Second Temple Period (CRINT 2; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984), 414; Stone, “The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Pseudepigrapha,” DSD 3, no. 3 (1996): 293. 2. George H. Box wrote that the main theme of this book is “the discussion of the religious problems involved in the fall and destruction of Jerusalem.” See “IV Ezra,” APOT, 558.

NITZAN Apocalyptic Ideas in 4 Ezra

23

history by viewing history as a deterministic, periodical struggle between good and evil whose ultimate end is the annihilation of wickedness and the establishment of everlasting justice. Its literal expression is found in several apocalypses, such as that of the cycle of ten “weeks” from the creation until the End of days described in 1 En. 93:1–10 and 91:12–17, the apocalypse of the four kingdoms in Dan 2 and 7; and elsewhere.3 Some apocalypses were ways of coping with historical crises: the apocalypse of the four kingdoms in Dan 2:31–45; 7 reÀected the disappointment resulting from the delay in realizing Jeremiah’s eschatological prophecy of seventy years of subjugation of Israel by Babylon (Jer 25:12; 29:10) due to the four historical kingdoms which subjugated Israel during the Second Temple period. Daniel thus revised the prophecy of the seventy years of subjugation into seventy weeks of years, i.e., 490 years (Dan 9:24), thereby renewing hope for Israel’s redemption. The Qumran community, which considered its era as the last historical generation before the eschaton,4 needed to deal with disappointment when the revised apocalyptic calculation of Daniel, adopted by the Qumran theology,5 was not realized during the expansion of Roman imperialistic rule into Judea. They nevertheless continued to be con¿dent in the deterministic historical concept, albeit they realized that “the last end-time will be prolonged, and it will be greater than anything of which the prophets spoke, for the mysteries of God are awesome” (1QpHab 7.7–8).6 They took encouragement from the apocalyptic approach that “all of God’s end-times will come according to their ¿xed order, as he decreed” (1QpHab 7.13).

3. See Jacob Licht, “Time and Eschatology in Apocalyptic Literature and in Qumran,” JJS 16 (1966): 177–82; Licht, “The Attitude of Past Events in the Bible and Apocalyptic Literature,” Tarbiz 60 (1990): 1–18 [Hebrew]; David Flusser, “The Four Empires in the Fourth Sibyl and in the Book of Daniel,” IOS 2 (1972): 148–75. 4. 1QpHab 2.7; 7.12; CD 1.12; 1QpMic frg. 17–18.5. See Bilhah Nitzan, Pesher Habakkuk: A Scroll from the Wilderness of Judaea (1QpHab) (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1986), 23–24, 154 [Hebrew]. 5. “11QMelchizedek” (11Q13), 2.6–8. See Florentino García Martínez et al., eds., Qumran Cave 11 ii (DJD 23; Oxford: Clarendon, 1998), 222, 225, 231. “The Apocryphon of Jeremiah” (4Q387 2 ii 3–4; 4Q388a 4.2; 4Q390 1.2, 7–8; 2 i 4–6). See Devorah Dimant, ed., Qumran Cave 4. XXI. Parabiblical Texts, Part 4: Pseudo Prophetic Texts (DJD 30; Oxford: Clarendon, 2001), 109, 179, 182, 206, 237, 239, 245, 247. 6. The English translation of the Pesher Habakkuk text follows that of Maurya P. Horgan, Pesharim: Qumran interpretations of Biblical Books (CBQMS 8; Washington, D.C.: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1979).

24

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

Notwithstanding the apocalyptic hopes based upon the deterministic concept of time known to the seer of 4 Ezra (3:14, 23), he fell into despair and shame in light of the defeat in the Jewish war against Rome that led to the destruction of the second temple and exacerbated the suffering of the Jewish nation without understanding “the way of the Most High” (4:11–12; 7:63–68). In his dialogue with the angel regarding this situation, the angel responded with an apocalyptic concept of time similar to that of the aforementioned Qumranic opinion: He has weighed the age in the balance. and measured the times by measure, and numbered the times by number; and he will not move them until that measure is ful¿lled. (4:36–38)7

But the seer was not satis¿ed with this revelation, expressing his doubt as to the credibility of the apocalyptic concept of times, worried as to whether there would be consolation for that which was lost and correction to the suffering, not just in the national aspect, but also in the human aspect of individuals.8 Troubled by these two aspects of theodicy, the dialogue between the seer and the angel continued with the tidings of the angel regarding the turnabout at the End of Days, when “the origin of evil of the earth’s inhabitants shall be changed to a different spirit, and evil shall be blotted out” (6:26–27). 2. The Origin of Evil There is no hint in 4 Ezra of the concept that evil is originated outside of human beings by demonic entities who lead them astray to evil, as was accepted in the books of Enoch, Jubilees, and the Qumran sectarian writings.9 The seer in 4 Ezra accepted the biblical concept that “the inclination of human heart is evil from youth” (Gen 8:21), and designated the origin of the evil done by human beings as “the evil heart.” According to the seer’s survey of biblical history from the creation of Adam until the Sinai event (3:4–22), it would appear that he apprehended the “evil heart” as a permanent aspect of human nature that caused persons to fall into transgression. He claimed:

7. The English translation of 4 Ezra follows that of Bruce M. Metzger in OTP 1:517–59. 8. See Jacob Licht, The Book of Ezra’s Vision (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1965), 10 [Hebrew]. 9. See 1 En. 15:12–16:1; Jub. 10:1–14; 1QS 3.23; 4Q510 1.4–7; 4Q511 10.1–3.

NITZAN Apocalyptic Ideas in 4 Ezra

25

Yet you did not take away from them the evil heart, so that your Law might bring forth fruit in them. For the ¿rst Adam, burdened with an evil heart, transgressed and was overcome, so were also all who were descended from him. Thus the disease became permanent, the law was in the people’s heart along with the evil root, but what was good departed, and the evil remained. (3:20–22)

This claim demonstrates that the seer could not accept the biblical and Pharisaic concept that education to righteous behavior by good laws and by being warned of the principle of retribution for good or evil behavior could change the evil nature of human beings.10 Thus, this view of the “evil heart” directs the seer to cope with the issue of God’s justi¿cation regarding the decree of punishment to people who sinned.11 3. Justi¿cation of God’s Ways (Theodicy) The aforementioned claim that God “did not take away the evil heart” from human beings or their inclination to evil became permanent in a deterministic manner, might have dulled the personal responsibility of those guilty of transgressing.12 Thus the seer claimed that the heavy punishment of the citizens of Jerusalem was not justi¿ed, as “they also inherited the evil heart” (3:25–27). In line with this reasoning, he will later ask forgiveness for human beings in general (see 7:45–48, 102– 111). The seer’s claim as to the unjusti¿ed nature of the punishment of Israel related to another aspect: the severity of God’s treatment of Israel’s behavior in comparison to that of other nations. The seer claimed: Are the deeds of Babylon better than those of Zion?13 Or has another nation known you besides Israel? Or what tribes have believed your covenants as these tribes of Jacob? (3:31–36, cf. 5:28–30; 6:56–58)

10. This concept was accepted by the Pharisees. See Josephus, Ant. 13.172; 18.14; and the rabbinic concept in m. Abot 3.15–16; b. Ber. 33b. 11. This concept is dealt with later in the book in another context (see the dialogue in 7:62–69). 12. Ben Sira 15:11–17 rejected such an excuse claimed by the wicked. 13. The mentioning of Babylon instead of Rome is a pseudonymic technique. See A. Peter Hayman, “The Problem of Pseudonymity in the Ezra Apocalypse,” JSJ 6 (1975): 47–56.

26

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

As the angel did not explain in this context the reasons for punishing Israel through subjugation by evil nations, the seer repeated his claim: Why has Israel been given over to the Gentiles as a reproach? Why are the people whom you loved been given to godless tribes? (4:23)

Regarding this point it is interesting to mention the somewhat similar complaint of the prophet Habakkuk when the threat of the evil Chaldeans to conquer Judea was understood as the Lord’s initiative to punish its citizens for their moral guilt (Hab 1:6–11). The prophet complains: O Lord, you have marked them for judgment; and you, O rock, have established them for punishment. Your eyes are too pure to behold evil, and you cannot look on wrongdoing. (Hab 1:12–13a)14

This prophetic claim was actualized in the Qumranic pesher regarding the threat of military occupation by the Romans of Judea and other countries during the Second Temple period, by describing the evil deeds of the Roman army (1QpHab 2.10–4.14; 5.12–6.12). However, the situation described by the seer differs from that of Habakkuk and of the Qumranic pesher. Both the prophetic and the Qumranic claims against the Lord’s justi¿cation did not directly relate to the punishment of Israel for their moral sins,15 but to the cruelty, injustice, and thievery of the gentiles.16 In contrast, the seer’s claim in this context emphasized Israel’s faithfulness to the Law (see 3:32, 35–36), and thus the unjusti¿ed nature of their punishment.17 Another difference between 4 Ezra and the Qumranic pesher relates to their reaction to the punishment of Israel by evil gentiles. Whereas the aforementioned unjusti¿ed manner of punishing Israel, without any reasonable answer for it, caused the seer deep despair (4:12), the Qumranic pesher on the prophetic claim is hopeful. Its author homiletically interpreted the claim that God’s eyes were too pure to look upon evil as referring to the purity of God’s chosen people who have kept his commandments, that into their hand “God will give the judgment of all

14. The English translation of biblical verses follows that of the NRSV. 15. See Hab 1:1–4; 2:9–12; 1QpHab 1.1–15; 8.3–13; 9.12–10.1; 12.9–10. 16. See Hab 1:6–11, 14–17; 1QpHab 2.16–4.13; 5.12–6.12. Cf. 1 En. 90:17 about the unjusti¿ed cruelty of the gentile kings appointed by God to punish Israel. 17. According to Box, in the incompatible discussion regarding the relation to the Law of individuals and that of the nation, the redactor’s source R “has much greater con¿dence in the Law as such as protective power to the Jew”; see his “IV Ezra,” 559.

NITZAN Apocalyptic Ideas in 4 Ezra

27

the nations, and by means of their rebuke all the wicked ones of his people will be convicted” (1QpHab 5.3–5).18 Even though this was a sectarian hope, according to the War Scroll it might have been considered as a national hope. The assembly of eschatological “Sons of Light” who will do battle against the “Sons of Darkness” (1QM 1.10–11) will include the ¿ghters of all Israel, which will be organized as in ancient Israel (see the Rule of the Congregation [1QSa] cols. 1–2.3; and cf. 1QM 4.1–4).19 This issue will be discussed in more detail below. In 4 Ezra the angel tried to comfort the seer who was frustrated by present events by telling him about the world to come in the End of Days, when “evil shall be blotted out, and deceit shall be quenched; faithfulness shall Àourish, and corruption shall be overcome, and the truth, which has been so long without fruit, shall be revealed” (6:27–28). Then God’s justi¿ed judgment alone shall remain according to the principle of reward for the righteous and punishment to the wicked, not just to those living, but also by the resurrection of the dead (7:32–35). 4. The Resurrection of the Dead Messages regarding the eschatological resurrection of the dead are already found in the Hebrew Bible, in Isa 26:19, Ezek 37, and Dan 12:2– 3. Daniel distinguished between the fate of those who will awake, “some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt” (12:2). Nevertheless, the seer was not satis¿ed with the angel’s message about doomsday, on which even the dead will be judged according to the principle of retribution (7:35–36, 75–99), and initiated a profound discussion regarding this issue. He claimed: I see that the world to come will be delight to few, but torments to many. For an evil heart has grown up in us, which has alienated us from God, and has brought us into corruption and the ways of death. (7:47–48)

By this claim, the seer returned to the human aspect of unjusti¿ed suffering of individuals, even after death. This attitude towards the eschatological resurrection differs from the vision of resurrection in Ezek 37: 18. See Nitzan, Pesher Habakkuk, 164–65; William H. Brownlee, The Midrash Pesher of Habakkuk (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1979), 84–90. 19. See Jacob Licht, “The Plant Eternal and the People of Divine Deliverance,” in Essays on the Dead Sea Scrolls (ed. Chaim Rabin and Yigael Yadin; Jerusalem: Hekhal Ha-Sefer, 1961), 70–75 [Hebrew]; Lawrence H. Schiffman, The Eschatological Community of the Dead Sea Scrolls (SBLMS 38; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989), 68–71.

28

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

“these bones are the whole house of Israel. They say: ‘Our bones are dried up, and our hope is lost, we are cut off completely’” (Ezek 37:11). This vision was widely understood as a symbolic resurrection of Israel from the despair of eternal destruction.20 Indeed, apocalyptic writings from the Second Temple period reÀect faith in the eschatological resurrection of individuals, the righteous ones as in Dan 12:2–3; 1 En. 22; 51:1–2; 102–103; 2 Macc 7:9, 23, 29; 14:46,21 and some non-sectarian texts from Qumran which deal with the eschatological resurrection. Thus, 4Q Pseudo-Ezekiel (4Q383; 4Q385– 391)22 disregards the symbolic national interpretation of Ezekiel’s vision of the dried bones, and instead emphasizes the aspect of resurrection of the individual righteous (4Q385 2.2–3.6; parallels 4Q386 1 i; 4Q388 7.2–7), as stated in Ezekiel’s call to the Lord: [And I said: ‘O Lord] I have seen many (men) from Israel who have loved your Name and have walked in the ways of [your heart. And th]ese things, when will they come to be and how will they be recompensed for their piety? (4Q385 2.2–3)

And also in the additional description of the ful¿llment of the resurrection: And a large crowd of people came [to li]fe and blessed the Lord Sebaoth wh[o had given them life]” (4Q385 2.8–9).23

The resurrection of individuals is also stated in 4Q521: “He (God) shall revive the dead” (2 ii 12); and “the One who revives [rai]ses the death of His people… And He shall open [graves]” (7 + 5 ii 5–6, 8).24

20. For the symbolic interpretation of Ezekiel’s vision see e.g. Walther Eichrodt, Ezekiel (OTL; London: SCM, 1970), 509–10; Walther Zimmerli, Ezekiel (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983), 2:256–57; Moshe Greenberg, Ezekiel 31–37 (AB 22a; New York: Doubleday, 1997), 747–49. 21. For suggestions of resurrection in other texts from the Second Temple period, see George W. E. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, Immortality and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism and Early Christianity (2d ed.; HTS 56; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2006), 163–78. 22. According to Dimant, Qumran Cave 4, 16, 4QPseudo-Ezekiel was written at the latest possible date during the second half of the ¿rst century B.C.E., and according to its content, which mentions the reign of Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 B.C.E.), it would ¿t with the context of mid-second century B.C.E. 23. The English translation of these statements follows that of Dimant, Qumran Cave 4, 30, 24. Dimant found that this phrase alludes to Isa 26:19. See ibid., 35.

NITZAN Apocalyptic Ideas in 4 Ezra

29

However, in the sectarian writings the term “eternal life” does not refer to the resurrection of the dead, but rather to the “eternal existence” of the community of the righteous (1QS 4.7; CD 3.12–14, 20; 1QHa 12.22–23[4.21–22]), in contrast to the eternal destruction of the wicked, all of whom shall perish (see 1QS 4.12–13; 1QHa 12.21 [4.20]).25 Thus, we may ascribe great importance to the fact that the aforementioned nonsectarian Qumran texts, 4QPseudo-Ezekiel and 4Q521, are part of the Qumran library. These texts demonstrate that faith in the resurrection of individuals, the righteous ones, was widely accepted during the Second Temple period, not only by the Pharisees (see Josephus, Bell. 2.163), but also by the apocalyptic stream of which the Qumran community, probably the Essenes, were a part (cf. Josephus, Ant. 18.18). This is so even without considering the difference between their opinions regarding the kind of resurrection involved: the immortality of the soul (the Essenes)26 or that of the body (the Pharisees)27—an issue which we cannot discuss in the present context. In light of this wide acceptance of faith in the resurrection of the righteous, the seer’s aforementioned claim against the prevention of resurrection from those who strayed during their life because of the “evil heart” given to them (7:47–48) was unique. All of the seer’s efforts to change the decree preventing resurrection of those who had sinned because of their “evil heart” (7:103; 106–111; 132–139) were pushed aside by the angel’s explanation regarding the responsibility of each person for his behavior during his life (7:72–73; 8:55–61). The consolation of the seer, awaking new hopes for the future, was given by the messianic hope imagined in the following visions. 24. The English translation follows that of Michael Wise, Martin Abegg, Edward Cook, and N. Gordon in Additional Genres and Unclassi¿ed Texts (ed. Donald W. Parry and Emanuel Tov; Leiden: Brill, 2005). For the content, see Émile Puech, “Une apocalypse messianique (4Q521),” RevQ 15 (1991–92): 475–522. 25. See Jacob Licht’s interpretation of 1QS 4.7, in The Rule Scroll: A Scroll from the Wilderness of Judaea (Jerusalem: The Bialik Institute, 1965 [Hebrew]), 92. The phrases about those “who lie in the dust” and “worms of the dead” in 1QHa 14.37[6.34], in context are metaphors for human weakness and do not relate to resurrection. See Jacob Licht, The Thanksgiving Scroll: A Scroll from the Wilderness of Judaea (Jerusalem: The Bialik Institute, 1957), 119 [Hebrew]. The references in the square brackets are according to Licht’s edition, following the Sukenik edition. 26. See Josephus, Ant. 18.18: “They decide for the souls eternal life,” but only the souls of the righteous. Émile Puech suggests that this view of the Essenes by Josephus was inÀuenced by the neo-Pythagorean viewpoint. See “Immortality,” 520. 27. On the faith of the Pharisees in the resurrection of the body, see Josephus, Bell. 2.163: “Every soul, they maintain, is imperishable, but the soul of the good alone passes into another body.” cf. Ant. 18.14.

30

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

5. Consolation Through Messianic Hope In the forth to seventh visions of 4 Ezra, the author instilled new hopes with which to comfort the seer, and through him Israel, from the deep despair of the destruction (12:46–47). The importance of instilling new hope was also mentioned by the author of 2 Baruch, who relates Baruch’s groan that “If only this life exists which everyone possesses here, nothing could be more bitter than this” (2 Bar. 21:13–17).28 The hopes apprised by these visions are the rebuilding of Zion (10:44, 55) and the collapse of Rome, ¿rst by internal struggles (12:10–30) and afterwards by the Messiah. The eschatological Messiah “will denounce them (the Romans) for their ungodliness and for their wickedness” (12:32) and, after reproving them in his judgment, he will destroy them (12:33; cf. 13:27, 37–38; cf. 2 Bar. 40),29 and thus will mercifully deliver the remnant of the people of Israel, who will be saved in the borders of the subjugated countries, including those left in the land of Israel (12:34; cf. 7:28; 13:26, 48). The hope for the collapse of Rome was written in the Qumran Scrolls already during the ¿rst century B.C.E., when its imperialistic expansion threatened Judea. This empire was designated Kittim, thereby symbolizing the last enemy of Israel (cf. Num 24:24).30 As was stated above, the expected war against the Kittim is imagined in the scrolls to be performed, not by means of messianic rebuke and war, but rather by God’s chosen congregation, who have kept his commandments. Into their hands “God will give the judgment of all the nations; and by means of their rebuke all the wicked ones of his people will be convicted” (1QpHab 5.4–5). The messianic prophecy of Isa 11 will thus be ful¿lled, not by a single messianic ¿gure, but by the chosen messianic congregation. According to the War Scroll, “the congregation of divine beings and the assembly of men of the ‘Sons of Light’ which will include the eschatological Israel, shall ¿ght against the lot of darkness” (1QM 1.10–11). According to the scrolls, the appointed eschatological war against the

28. See Jacob Licht, “An Analysis of Baruch’s Prayer (Syr. Bar. 21),” JJS 33 (1982): 327–31 (330–31). 29. The wording of this message expresses the tradition of ful¿llment in the prophecy of Isa 11:4. See Michael E. Stone, “The Concept of the Messiah in IV Ezra,” in Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha and Armenian Studies (Leuven: Peeters, 2006), 1:321–38. 30. See Yigael Yadin, The Scroll of the War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962), 21–27; Nitzan, Pesher Habakkuk, 123–28.

NITZAN Apocalyptic Ideas in 4 Ezra

31

wicked nations, of whom the Kittim were the main enemy, was considered the appointed war against wickedness, whose humiliation by the corps of the Sons of Light will enable the everlasting redemption of Israel (1QM 1.12; 17.5–8; and 19.5–8).31 Thus, whereas the apocalyptic writings of the Second Temple period and those written after the second destruction imagined that the humiliation of wickedness would be accomplished by a miraculous messianic war, the Qumran community prepared an operative plan of the eschatological war for the humiliation of wickedness, and was organized towards this mission (see the Rule of the Congregation [1QSa 1.25–2.3]).32 6. Conclusion The traditional apocalyptic concepts known in the Second Temple literature are examined in 4 Ezra in light of the catastrophe of the destruction of Jerusalem and of the temple. While the disappointed seer doubts their steadiness, the author still maintains these concepts through the angel’s responses to the seer’s claims. Thus, these concepts could be examined vis-à-vis Qumran apocalyptic ideology. The texts from Qumran faithfully express the deterministic historical concept, even during historical crisis, hoping to see the ful¿llment of the eschatological promises. According to their dualistic concept, present historical events are part of the process of elimination of wickedness and the establishment of everlasting eschatological justice.

31. For the message of 1QM 19.5–8, see Isa 66:10–14 and Dan 7:14. 32. See Licht, The Rule Scroll, 242, 248–49, 261. According to this projected war, the Messiah of Israel, titled “The Prince of the Congregation,” one of the two messiahs whom the Qumran Community hoped would lead the eschatological Israel together with the Aaronide Messiah (1QS 9.11; 1QSa 2.12–17; CD 7.20–21), will ful¿ll the messianic prophecy of Isa 11 by killing the king of the Kittim, i.e., the emperor of Rome (4QSefer ha–Milhamah = 4Q285 frg. 7).

THE “MEANING OF HISTORY” IN THE FIFTH VISION OF 4 EZRA Laura Bizzarro

1. Introduction This work will only take into account Ezra’s ¿fth vision, “the Eagle and the Lion” (4 Ezra 11:1–12:51). We are especially interested in the global vision and the interpretation the author offered about the meaning of history and how it is related to Dan 7 and some pesharim in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The apocalyptic circle responsible for the text was closely related to the tradition of wisdom that was being developed during the Second Temple period. From our analysis we intend to ¿nd out whether the question of the eschaton in the wisdom tradition was important, because, according to Gerhard von Rad’s analysis, only from its consideration can the speci¿c element of the apocalyptic vision of history appear: the idea of the unity of history.1 By means of the hermeneutic method, our analysis of the vision of “the Eagle and the Lion” will follow this scheme: 1. The Eagle: Who was it? Whom did it represent? What did it symbolize? What relationship did it have with the Kittim in the Dead Sea Scrolls? And the wings: Historically speaking, to whom did they make reference? And what did they symbolize? 2. The Lion: Whom did it represent? With whom could we identify it? What was its speci¿c function? Did its appearance, as an aim in itself, ful¿ll the eschaton that will put an end to history? 3. What are the interpretations, teachings, and meanings of history derived from the vision of “the Eagle and the Lion”?

1. Gerhard von Rad, Teología del Antiguo Testamento (Salamanca: Sígueme, 1984), 2:398.

BIZZARRO The “Meaning of History”

33

2. The Eagle and the Wings From the reading and analysis of the ¿fth vision, we are interested in deepening the interpretation about the eagle, in order to establish its parallels, similarities, and differences with previous studies, aiming speci¿cally at ¿nding out whether from such interpretations we can establish what the meaning of history was for the apocalyptic circle in which this passage of 4 Ezra was elaborated. According to 4 Ezra 11:5–19: 5

And I looked and behold, the eagle Àew with his wings to reign over the earth and over those who dwell in it. 6And I saw how all things under heaven were subjected to him, and no one spoke against him, not even one of the creatures that was on the earth. And I looked, and behold, the eagle rose upon his talons, and uttered a cry to his wings saying: 8 “Do not all watch at the same time; let each sleep in his own place and watch in his turn; 9 but let the heads be reserved for the last”… 15And behold, a voice sounded saying to it: 16 “Hear me, you who have ruled the earth all this time; I announce this to you before you disappear. 17 After you no one shall rule as long as you, or even half as long.” 18Then the third wing raised itself up, and held the rule like the former ones and it also disappeared. 19 And so it went with all the wings; they wielded power one after another and then were never seen again… Then I heard a voice saying to me, “Look before you and consider what you see.”2

When the eagle is described going out of the sea, the author’s intention is to complete and explain the vision of Dan 7. The seer reaf¿rms that his explanation would complete Daniel’s vision of the fourth beast (12:11). The ¿gure of the eagle, as the symbol of the Romans, is related to other Second Temple Jewish apocalyptic literature, including the pesharim of the Dead Sea Scrolls. In several pesharim, the Kittim, the main hostile strong nation, are identi¿ed with the Romans. If the author’s intention was to complete the vision of Dan 7, the following texts would show the ¿rst prophetic-apocalyptic descriptions which mention the defeat of the hostile nations by Israel: the vision of the destruction of the Gog and Magog kingdom of Ezek 38:19–21, the description of the wicked king of Dan 11, and the pesharim of 1QpHabakkuk: Col. III 1 and they will advance over the plain, to destroy and pillage the cities of the country. 2 For this is what he has said: Hab 1:6 “To take possession of dwellings not theirs”. Hab 1:7 It is dreadful 3 and terrible; his judgment and his exaltation arise from himself. [Blank] 4 Its interpretation concerns the Kittim, the fear and dread of whom are on all 5 /the 2. Michael Stone, Fourth Ezra: A Commentary on the Book of Fourth Ezra (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 343–44.

34

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch peoples/; all their thoughts are premeditated to do evil, and with cunning and treachery 6 they behave towards all the nations. Hab 1:8 Their horses are swifter than panthers; they are keener 7 than wolves at night. [Blank] Their war-horses paw the ground, gallop, from afar 8 they come Àying like an eagle, hastening to eat. Hab 1:9 All of them come to use violence; the breath of 9 their faces is like the East wind. [Blank] Its inter[pretation] concerns the Kittim, who 10 trample the land with [their] horse[s] and their animals 11 and come from far off, from the islands of the sea, to devour all the nations, like an eagle, 12 insatiable. With fury they are he[ated, and with] burning wrath and livid 13 faces they will speak to all [the nations. Fo]r this is what 14 he has said: Hab 1:9 The brea[th of their faces is like the East wind. And he gathers] captives [like sa]nd. 15 Its [interpreta]tion […] 16 […] 17 [… Hab 1:10a At kings]. (1QpHab Col. III, 1–16)3

Together with the eagle, the wings, which are part of his body, are described. In 4 Ezra we can identify the various wings with the Roman princeps of the Julius-Claudius dynasty,4 which reigned in the ¿rst century C.E. In the text we ¿nd a description of Octavian-Augustus, ¿rst princeps of the dynasty and the most important head of the eagle. Referring to the end of the Claudian Dynasty and the institutional crisis that followed Nero’s death (68 C.E.), the description of the “smaller wings” (11:20–29) is a reference to the year of the three emperors (Galba, Otho, and Vitelius), and it is used to give a picture of the politicalinstitutional change in Rome, when the emperors began to be appointed by the Roman legions. The text goes on to say that a second head will appear (Vespasianus). Then, the third and the fourth heads are described, that is to say his children and successors. The references to the dynasty of the Flavians are clear in 11:28–33. According to the text, the representatives of the empire are no longer wings, but the heads of the eagle, and it is emphasized that the power passes to another “big head,” Vespasianus (11:31). Furthermore, the text adds that “the head turned with those that were with it and it devoured the two little wings which were planning to reign. Moreover this head gained control of the whole earth, and the wings that had gone before” (11:32–33).5 These verses emphasize that the second head receives the universal power with more force than the ¿rst, Augustus.

3. Florentino García Martínez and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar, The Dead Sea Scrolls: Study Edition (Leiden: Brill, 1999). 4. The wings are: Julius Caesar, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudio, Nero, and the generals Glaba, Otho, and Vitelius; and the heads are Octavianus-Augustus, Vespasianus, Titus Flavius, and Domitian. 5. All translations of 4 Ezra are from Stone, Fourth Ezra.

BIZZARRO The “Meaning of History”

35

3. The Lion (11:37–44) The description of the “creature like a lion” symbolizes the appearance of the Messiah, which implies the destruction of the eagle. The text says: 37

And I looked, and behold, a creature like a lion was aroused out of the forest, roaring; and I heard how he uttered a man’s voice to the eagle, and spoke, saying “Listen and I will speak to you. The Most High says to you. 39 ‘Are you not the one that remains of the four beasts which I had made to reign in my world, so that the end of the times might come through them?’ 40 You, the fourth that has come, have conquered all the beasts that have gone before; and you have held sway over the world with much terror, and over all the earth with grievous oppression; and for so long you have dwelt on the earth with deceit. 41 And you have judged the earth but not with truth; 42 for you have afÀicted the meek and injured the peaceable; you have hated those who tell the truth, and have loved liars; you have destroyed the forti¿cations of those who brought forth fruit, and have laid low the walls of those who did you no harm. 43 And so your insolence has come up before the Most High, and your pride to the Mighty One. 44 And the Most High has looked upon his times, and behold they are ended, and his ages are completed!” (11:37–44)

The lion represents the Messiah, whose main function, according to the text, is to defeat and annihilate the eagle. So this vision suggested the end of the Roman Empire and the end of history, the total destruction of Rome and the annihilation of the fourth beast. The meaning of history would be expressed in the realization of the eschaton already announced in Dan 7:23–25 and 11:30–45, whose prophecy from about the middle of the second century B.C.E. warned about the end of Seleucid rule and the fourth beast, Antiochus IV Epiphanes, whose description is the archetype of the “wicked king” in the Jewish-Palestinian apocalypse.6 4. Interpretation, Teachings, and Meaning of History Derived from the Vision of “the Eagle and the Lion” From the integral analysis of the ¿fth vision, we ¿nd that the meaning of history would be given in: x The defeat of the hostile strong nations, Rome/the eagle, which implied the establishment of the messianic kingdom with a Davidic monarchy, a subject that is dealt with in the sixth vision, “the Man on the Sea.” 6. See my paper presented at the Actas del II Simposio Internacional Helenismo Cristianismo (II SIHC), 2010, “Hellenistic InÀuences in the Conception of the Wicked King, Daniel 11.2–45.” Online: http://www.sihc.com.ar/pdf/Bizzarro%20 Laura.pdf.

36

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

x x

The reconstruction of Jerusalem after the year 70, which appears related to the vision of the woman who represents Zion (fourth vision) and the sixth vision. The association of the eagle and his wings with the fourth beast in Dan 7:23–25, which makes special reference to their poor performance and government in the fourth reign. The eagle symbolizes wicked kings. The heads are defeated by the lion, who represents the Messiah, as an eschatological ¿gure. He must perform speci¿c functions: the trial of the wicked king, mercy for Israel, and the punishment of the wings and the three heads, governors of the hostile nations (a similar theory appears in several manuscripts of the Dead Sea Scrolls). Such topics were central in Jewish-Palestinian apocalypticism of the Second Temple period.

From all the conceptions, ideas, and contents in the ¿fth vision of 4 Ezra, we think that it responds to Jewish circumstances, because: x It follows the same line of Jewish apocalyptic traditions related to Dan 7, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Jewish writings of the end of the ¿rst century B.C.E. (cf. Wis 17 and 18, 1QM, 1Q33, 4Q285, and Sibylline Oracles 3 and 4). x The concept of time is linear, with an absolute end. Our analysis of the ¿fth vision indicates that history has an end; it begins with creation in the book of Genesis, it receives meanings and contents in the prophetic times, and ¿nishes with the development of the apocalypse. During that long and continuous process, emphasis is placed on the fact that: x Human history has an end. It ¿nishes. Its terminology means the full realization of the eschaton. x It is different from the Greco-Roman concept of history which is cyclic, determined by the gods (see Homer, Herodotus, Hesiod, and Virgil7) in which humanity cannot change its destiny. x Prophecies are ful¿lled, since they announced how the end would be developed, with the trial and punishment of the hostile nations carried out by Israel and the coming of the eschatological messianic ¿gure. 7. Cf. my analysis of the passages in Hesiod’s Works and Days and Herodotus’s Histories, book nine, in Laura Bizzarro, “La teoría de los Cuatro Imperios como elemento opositor al Helenismo y a Roma,” Revista Antíteses 3, no. 5 (January–June 2010). Online: http://www.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/antiteses/article/view/3493/ 4917.

BIZZARRO The “Meaning of History”

x

37

The Persian-Jewish prophecy is expressed with respect to the defeat of the West by the East, which should be ful¿lled. Such a theory projected a vindication of the eastern peoples over Greeks and Romans, especially over the Greeks, who after the Medic Wars, which added the inÀuence of Hellenistic culture after the conquests of Alexander the Great, are present in the Syrian-Palestinian and Egyptian areas, starting the long process of the Hellenization of the Eastern Mediterranean, which was highly resisted by several peoples (e.g., the uprising of the Maccabees and the revolutions of Egypt against the Ptolemaic Pharaohs).

We notice that there is a change in the prophecy of Dan 7 in the ¿fth vision of 4 Ezra. What produced it? The change was likely due to the necessity of the author’s apocalyptic circle to accommodate Daniel’s prophecy to their current circumstances. The conception of the eschaton is stressed; the end of history is imminent. In the explanation of the ¿fth vision (12:10–40), when the lion annihilates and defeats the eagle, the end of the fourth kingdom is announced. Even if the prophecy of Dan 7 is post-eventu, it made reference to the Hellenistic kingdom of Antiochus IV Epiphanes; in 4 Ezra the Hellenistic kingdom is replaced by the eagle and the Roman wings, and the historic events have not yet come to pass. Such a change of ¿gures and scene keeps the traditional Jewish scheme of the fourth kingdom and the defeat of the fourth beast intact. In apocalyptic Jewish circles, following the opinion of David Flusser: It should be noted that the Jews did not abandon the scheme of four empires, having Roma as the fourth and last monarchy; in the Jewish source this concept was more or less explicitly anti-Roman. The sources learned of course the theory of four monarchies from Daniel. As they identi¿ed the fourth kingdom with Roma, the Greek empire became third, and Media had to be united with Persia in one kingdom. So a new antiRoman list of four empires came to existence, namely: Babylonia, Media, Greece and Rome, and in this light Daniel was interpreted.8

5. Conclusion From our analysis we conclude: x The author of the vision had full knowledge of the events of Roman history from the ¿rst century B.C.E. to the ¿rst century C. E . 8. David Flusser, “The Four Empires in the Fourth Sibyl and in the Book of Daniel,” IOS 2 (1972): 148–75 (157–58).

38

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

x

x

The eagle imagery he uses to describe the fourth kingdom of Daniel is in agreement with the eschaton of Jewish-Palestinian apocalypticism, and it tends to complete the vision of Dan 7. This author draws on Dan 7, Ezek 38, and the pesharim of the Dead Sea Scrolls, where the Kittim/Romans begin to be associated to the fourth beast and in which the idea of defeating the hostile nations has a complete eschatological sense. The purpose of the text was to announce the end of history, the arrival of the Messiah, represented by the lion, and the annihilation of the hostile nations, Rome, the eagle, and the fourth beast. For the author of the vision, the end of history is imminent. He writes with the hope that this eschaton will begin in his generation. We can also infer that he wants to transmit to his contemporaries an idea of hope and political religious justi¿cation for the war of Israel against the hostile nations, typical of the apocalyptic message.

Unlike the prophecy of Dan 7 that is post-eventu, the ¿fth vision of 4 Ezra is an actual prophecy, compared to the characteristics of the prophetic announcements of the Hebrew Bible. It has not taken place yet, but it will have to be ful¿lled in the not-too-distant future. Even if it informs and retells partial events of Roman history, it contains all the elements typical of apocalyptic Jewish eschatology.

Part II

4 EZRA, 2 BARUCH, AND EARLY CHRISTIAN LITERATURE

1

THE WOMAN WHO ANOINTS JESUS FOR HIS BURIAL (MARK 14) AND THE WOMAN WHO LAMENTS HER DEAD SON (4 EZRA 9–10): TWICE THE SAME PERSON? Andreas Bedenbender

1. Introduction The present study argues that the woman who anoints Jesus in Bethany should be understood as an allegorical representation of Zion—no less than the woman in 4 Ezra 9–10. In other words, 4 Ezra helps in establishing a hitherto unusual interpretation of the Markan anointment story. This essay is intended to show how fruitful it can be to read a text like the Gospel of Mark within the framework of early Jewish literature, especially within the framework of texts reacting to the destruction of the second temple. 2. English Translation of Mark 14:1–11 The Plot to Kill Jesus 14:1

It was two days before the Passover and the festival of Unleavened Bread. The chief priests and the scribes were looking for a way to arrest Jesus by stealth and kill him; 2 for they said, “Not during the festival, or there may be a riot among the people.”

The Anointing at Bethany 3

While he was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, as he sat at the table, a woman came with an alabaster jar (alabastros) of very costly ointment of nard (myron nardou), and she broke open (syntribein) the jar and poured the ointment on his head. 4 But some were there who said to one another in anger, “Why was the ointment wasted in this way (eis ti hƝ apǀleia hautƝ tou myrou gegonen)? 5 For this ointment could have been sold for more than three hundred denarii, and the money given to the

42

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch poor.” And they scolded her. 6 But Jesus said, “Let her alone; why do you trouble her? She has performed a good service for me. 7 For you always have the poor with you, and you can show kindness to them whenever you wish; but you will not always have me. 8 She has done what she could; she has anointed my body beforehand for its burial. 9 Truly I tell you, wherever the good news is proclaimed in the whole world, what she has done will be told in remembrance of her.”

Judas Agrees to Betray Jesus 10

Then Judas Iscariot, who was one of the twelve, went to the chief priests in order to betray him to them. 11 When they heard it, they were greatly pleased, and promised to give him money. So he began to look for an opportunity to betray him.1

3. Two Points of Departure i) One of the characteristic features of the text is a strange tension: While Jesus speaks about the anointment of his body, the woman, in fact, anointed his head. This difference is by no means a meaningless variation. Jesus connects the deed of the woman to his own burial, an interpretation which is in accordance with the dominant storyline (see vv. 1–2, 10–11). But as far as we know, neither in ancient Israel nor in early Judaism was an anointment, especially of the head, part of the burial customs. According to Israelite tradition, the anointment of a head may belong to different contexts, but they are all joyful events.2 What the woman does and what Jesus says do not ¿t together. ii) Given the fact that the story is about the tender act of an anointment, some of its elements sound remarkably destructive. Soon after the beginning, we hear of the breaking of the alabaster jar, and later on, the deed of the woman is interpreted by some nameless people as apǀleia of the ointment. The NRSV translation, which has been given above—“Why was the ointment wasted in this way?”—is not wrong, but is probably too tame. Joel Marcus gives an illuminating comment on apǀleia: “Although this is a word for ‘waste’ or ‘loss’ from Aristotle on, it is much more commonly employed in the NT for death and eschatological destruction, …and the cognate apollymi is used in Mark 3:6; 11:18 for the Jewish 1. Translation is from the NRSV. 2. The classical instances are of the anointment of a king, a priest, or a prophet. Another possibility is the anointment for a feast. See also Ps 22:5 LXX (= 23:5 MT). For more references see Adela Yarbro Collins, Mark (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2007), 642.

BEDENBENDER The Woman Who Anoints Jesus for His Burial

43

leaders’ plot against Jesus’ life. Already in 14:4, then, the narrator foreshadows the linkage made in 14:8 between the ‘waste’ of the perfume and the loss of Jesus’ life.”3 In fact, the fate of the oil is sealed exactly at the moment when the woman breaks, or rather destroys4 the vessel. This allows us to stress the connection between the oil and Jesus by translating: “Why was the ointment destroyed in this way?” It could be objected that such a translation is a hyperbole. Of course it is, but hyperboles are not unusual in Mark. In other places in the Gospel, both Mark’s Jesus and Mark himself employ hyperboles in order to clarify matters.5 From the point of view of realia, it seems at least doubtful whether it was necessary to break an alabastros in order to get access to its content.6 But even if this should have been the case, why is the text providing us with such a detail? It should be noted that no other text from either the Hebrew Bible or the New Testament dealing with an anointment mentions the breaking of the vessel. (This holds true even for the parallel stories in Matthew and John.) And as a rule, Mark does not bother his readers with unimportant minutiae. 4. The Breaking of the Alabastros: A Reference Both to the Death of Jesus and to the Destruction of Jerusalem/the Temple? Just as the oil which was poured out by the woman can be connected to the death of Jesus, so too can the breaking of the alabastros. At the last supper, told by Mark only some verses later, the text mentions in 14:22, within the context of the coming death of Jesus, the “breaking of the bread.” There is no parallel in wording (v. 3: syntribein; v. 22: klaiein), but a parallel in matter: a destruction which is necessary in order to gain some good.

3. Joel Marcus, Mark 8–16: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (The Anchor Yale Bible; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009), 935. See also the spectrum of meaning which LSJ offers for apǀleia: “destruction,” “loss,” “perdition,” “thing lost.” The Vulgate renders apǀleia in Mark 14:3 as perditio, the Peshitta as avdƗnƗý. 4. According to LSJ, syntribein, when used in the sense of destruction (alternatively, it can mean also “rub together”), has the basic meaning “shatter, shiver to atoms.” 5. See, e.g., 11:27 (the temple as a robbers’ den), 12:40 (the scribes who are eating up the houses of widows), or 12:41 (the people throwing money into the treasury of the temple). 6. See Yarbro Collins, Mark, 641; Marcus, Mark 8–16, 934.

44

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

But how exactly are we to imagine this connection? The theory that in the time of Jesus the breaking of the oil jar was typical for the anointment of deceased persons7 seems to be a speculation which has been derived exactly from Mark 14. At least, I did not ¿nd any proof for this kind of background in the commentaries on Mark. And besides, such an assumption leads, again, to the question, why the woman, after having broken the vessel, concentrates the anointing on the head of Jesus. These considerations lead to another possibility which should be taken into account: In early Jewish literature, the breaking of a vessel is a wellestablished metaphor meaning a divine judgment/punishment. This metaphor is used especially with respect to the destruction of Jerusalem (see, e.g., Jer 19:10–11).8 Even today, Jewish tradition preserves the symbolic connection between the breaking of a vessel and the destruction of Jerusalem. Here, we have the background for the glass which is broken by the bridegroom during the wedding ceremony.9 As Mark 14 is overshadowed by the imminent death of Jesus, so it is by the expected destruction of the temple (see Mark 13:2). Since for Mark the destruction of the temple is in some way connected to the death of Jesus,10 this is all but surprising. The idea that Mark 14:3–9 is dealing poetically with the threatening destruction of Jerusalem and the temple is supported by the use of the word “alabastros”—“vessel of alabaster.” In early Jewish/early Christian literature, the word alabastros is extremely rare. It never occurs in Philo or Josephus, and—but for the anointment stories of the three synoptic Gospels (see also Matt 26:7; Luke 7:37)— 7. Cf. David Daube, The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1956), 315, 317. 8. Just as in Mark 14:3, in Jer 19:10f. LXX syntribein is employed. Another famous text is Rom 9:23, where Paul, after having compared God to a potter, speaks of persons like the Pharaoh as “vessels of wrath that are made for destruction (apǀleia)”. 9. See Israel M. Lau, Wie Juden leben (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlag, 1978), 330. After the destruction of Jerusalem, so the underlying idea, perfect happiness, cannot exist in the world. And as a consequence, even at the moment of the greatest joy the mourning for Jerusalem has to be included—albeit in a strongly shaded way. Of course, such kinds of symbolic action developed a long time after the Gospel of Mark. In b. Ber. 31a, we hear a story of a precious cup which was intentionally broken during a wedding. The reason was that the excessive joy should be moderated by sorrow for the highly prized cup. Obviously, the story bears no connection to the destruction of Jerusalem. Nevertheless, the modern rite demonstrates how easily a way of thinking which follows ancient patterns can connect the destruction of a vessel to the destruction of Jerusalem. 10. See Mark 15:37–38: the death of Jesus is paralleled to the tearing of the temple veil.

BEDENBENDER The Woman Who Anoints Jesus for His Burial

45

never in the NT. In the LXX, it is a hapax legomenon: In 4 Kgdms 21:13 (= 2 Kgs 21:13 MT), God announces a coming punishment: “I will wipe Jerusalem as one wipes a dish (alabastros), wiping it and turning it upside down” (NRSV). Does this prove that alabastros in Mark 14 refers to the impending destruction of Jerusalem? Of course not. In any case, the alabastros in 4 Kgdms 21:13 is not broken but wiped. So, it seems possible that alabastros in Mark 14 has only the meaning “expensive jar.” But on the other hand, we are confronted with a kind of cumulative evidence: We are able to understand both the mentioning of the alabastros and the mentioning of its breaking coherently, in light of the fact that Mark 13:2 speaks explicitly of the destruction of the temple, or, more precisely, of the “breaking” of the stones of the temple.11 This may be the ultimate reason for the lament about the “destruction” of the oil: The apǀleia in v. 4 is an echo of the inaudible topic which dominates and structures the Markan anointment story, the destruction of the holy city of Jerusalem. 5. The Woman: Both a Sign Prophet and an Impersonation of Zion Following the present line of interpretation, it is possible to resolve the tension between the deed of the woman as portrayed by Mark and the interpretation given by Jesus, that is, between the anointment of the head and the anointment of the body. In the story, the woman acts as a kind of sign prophet.12 By breaking the alabastros, she indicates—like Jeremiah in Jer 19—the danger of the coming destruction of Jerusalem, and in anointing Jesus, she appeals to the only human being who still might offer a helping hand: If you really are the messiah, then act now and save the city from destruction!

11. Again, the parallel is in matter, not in wording. Instead of syntribein or apollynai, Mark 13:2 offers katalyein. 12. Usually, a sign prophet acts by doing a sign and by giving an explanation. In Mark 14, the woman explains nothing; she does not utter a single word. But the pattern of sign prophecy allows for some variations. In reaction to a people which is unwilling to accept admonitions, Ezekiel has to become dumb (see Ezek 3:26). The text does not mention that Ezekiel ever explained the symbolic meaning of his temporary dumbness. And at least, he could not do so immediately. Likewise, the muteness of the woman in Mark 14 may be interpreted as part of her prophetic intervention. In Jer 25:10, God illustrates the coming destruction of Jerusalem by adding: “I will banish from them…the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride” (NRSV). As will we argue below, for Mark 14 the bride/bridegroom imagery is of enormous importance.

46

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

Jesus, in Mark 14, refuses. He does so by re-interpreting the act of the woman. Instead of taking up the idea of being anointed as Messiah (anointment of the head), he speaks of the anointment of his body—for burial. Instead of saving Jerusalem, he takes up the way to the cross. Indeed, he will be united with Jerusalem—but in death, not in life. Nevertheless, the role of the woman is not limited to being a sign prophet; she also bears features of Zion herself. This brings us to the myron nardou, the ointment of nard. Nardos has no special connection to the anointment of the Messiah. In LXX, nardos is to be found solely in the Song of Songs, in the songs of the bride and of the bridegroom.13 To use myron nardou for the anointment of Jesus is a deed of intimate love. In early Christianity, the idea of Jesus as a bridegroom (or loving husband) was widespread, but the question about the bride’s identity was answered differently. In Eph 5:32, Gen 2:24 is applied to Christ and the ecclesia, while in Rev 21:2 the position of the bride is given to the heavenly Jerusalem. In Mark 2:19–20, Jesus depicts himself metaphorically as a bridegroom, with the identity of the bride not being disclosed. Taking all of this together, I propose that Mark 14:3–9 deals at the same time with the death of Jesus—symbolically connected to the destruction of Jerusalem—and with the loving union between Jesus and Zion (a kind of spiritual doppelganger of the earthly Jerusalem). This peculiar combination is deeply rooted in ancient Jewish tradition. Dealing with either the coming destruction or with the later rebuilding of Jerusalem, the texts repeatedly use the bride/bridegroom imagery.14 6. Mark 14 and 4 Ezra 9–10 Nevertheless, up to this point the whole argument must sound highly speculative. In order to accept it, one has to suppose that in the Gospel of Mark, Zion, as an allegorical ¿gure, is able to interact with nonallegorical ¿gures—and this in a way that (aside from Jesus) no other person in the text realizes Zion’s true identity. This objection can be weakened slightly by referring to Luke 23:28, where Jesus on the way to Golgotha addresses some women who are lamenting for him: “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me, but 13. See Song 1:12; 4:13–14. It may be added that myron is to be found ¿ve or six times in the Song of Songs (for the details, see Yarbro Collins, Mark, 642), and only twelve times in the rest of the LXX. 14. See Isa 62:5; Jer 7:34; 25:10; 33:10–11. See further the exclamation of Jesus ben Ananias, as reported by Josephus (Bell. 6.301). See also (with respect to Babylon/Rome) Rev 18:23.

BEDENBENDER The Woman Who Anoints Jesus for His Burial

47

weep for yourselves and for your children” (NRSV). In this scene, we clearly have some allegorical overtones. The “daughters of Jerusalem” are to be understood as real women. But at the same time, they are representatives of the “daughter Jerusalem.” As for Mark, an invocation of Zion must have been conceivable for him, too. When he wrote about Jesus’ entrance into Jerusalem—riding on a donkey, according to Zech 9:9b—he surely had in mind also Zech 9:9a: “Rejoice greatly, O daughter Zion! Shout aloud, O daughter Jerusalem!” (NRSV). But still, the gap between what may be seen as a rhetorical invocation of Zion and her appearance in person is considerable. For this reason, the existence of 4 Ezra 9–10 is of enormous importance. Before explaining this importance, some of the basic features of the text are presented below: “In the thirtieth year of the destruction of our city (Jerusalem)” (3:1), and after having lamented excessively the sad condition of humankind, Ezra suddenly has a strange encounter with a mourning woman. Ezra asks her the reason for her grief, and she tells her story: As the wife of a husband, she had been barren for thirty years. After this time, spent in unceasing prayer, God heard her, and she had a son. Joined in happiness with her husband and the people of her city, she raised her son with much care. Finally, she took a wife for him (9:38–47). At this point, her narration goes on with the following words: 10:1

But it happened that when my son entered his wedding chamber, he fell down and died. 2 Then we put out our lamps, and my townsfolk attempted to console me; and I remained quiet until evening of the second day. 3 But when they all had stopped consoling me, that I might be quiet, I got up in the night and Àed, and came to this ¿eld, as you see. 4 And now I intend not to return to the city, but to stay here, and I will neither eat nor drink, but without ceasing mourn and fast until I die.15

Ezra, who had listened quietly during this speech, now suddenly bursts out in anger. He accuses the woman of being extremely sel¿sh: 10:6

You most foolish of women, do you not see our mourning, and what has happened to us? 7 For Zion, the mother of us all, is in deep grief and great afÀiction. 8 It is most appropriate to mourn now, for we are all mourning, and to be sorrowful, because we are all sorrowing; you, however are sorrowing for one son. 9 Now ask the earth, and she will tell you that it is she who ought to mourn over so many who have come into being upon her… 15 Now, therefore, keep your sorrow to yourself, and bear bravely the troubles that have come upon you. 16 For if you acknowledge 15. Translations of 4 Ezra are from Michael Stone, Fourth Ezra (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1990).

48

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch the decree of God to be just, you will receive your son back in due time, and will be praised among women. 17 Therefore go into the city to your husband.

The woman refuses to do so and states again her intention to die (10:18). But Ezra does not give up. He tries to persuade her with another argument. In many vivid details he describes the destruction of Jerusalem and its consequences (10:20–23). He concludes: “Therefore shake off your great sadness and lay aside your many sorrows, so that the Mighty One may be merciful to you, and the Most High may give you rest from your troubles” (v. 24). Now, in no way expected by Ezra, the woman suddenly transforms, her face starts to shine, thus resembling lightening. Then uttering a loud cry, she instantly disappears. Instead of her, Ezra sees an “established city,” and a place of an enormous size (10:25–27). At ¿rst Ezra is at a loss, but soon the angel Uriel provides him with an explanation: “This woman whom You saw, whom you now behold as an established city, is Zion” (10:44). Uriel goes on in correlating, one by one, the details of the story told by the woman with the fate of Jerusalem. He ¿nishes with the words: 10:48

And as for her saying to you, “When my son entered his wedding chamber he died,” and that misfortune had overtaken her, that was the destruction which befell Jerusalem. 49 And behold, you saw her likeness, how she mourned for her son, and you began to console her for what had happened. 50 For now the Most High, seeing that you are sincerely grieved and profoundly distressed for her, has shown you the brilliance of her glory and the loveliness of her beauty.

For our purpose, the following points should be noted: First of all, the woman in 4 Ezra is Zion in disguise, acting like an ordinary woman. Ezra is unable to see her true identity—and if after 10:24 all the rest of 4 Ezra would have been lost, hardly any exegete of today would identify the woman with Zion. Second, within the story told by the woman, we have a highly dramatic turning point. The bridegroom dies exactly on the wedding night—this resembles the turning point in Mark 14, as interpreted above: Jesus speaks of his death exactly at the moment of the highest expectation, when he is, with the nard oil of Song of Songs, anointed by Zion, his bride, as Messiah.16 16. Another parallel, still closer to 4 Ezra 9:47–10:2, is to be found in Mark 2:19f.: “The wedding-guests cannot fast while the bridegroom is with them, can they? As long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast. 20 The days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast on that day” (NRSV).

BEDENBENDER The Woman Who Anoints Jesus for His Burial

49

Finally, like other Jewish texts written in the aftermath of 70 (2 Baruch, 4 Baruch) and like some rabbinic texts, 4 Ezra deals with the destruction of the second temple without ever mentioning it. The texts pretend to be focused on a catastrophe that took place more than 600 years before, not because the destruction of 70 was not important enough, but, according to all probability, because it was too fresh and too painful. Moreover, the story of the woman in 4 Ezra 9–10 speaks of the destruction in poetic disguise: A single child, a young bridegroom, dying on his wedding night. This is much less than what happened to the city (so far, Ezra is perfectly right), but in this form the story of the fate of Jerusalem can be told at least. As I suppose, not only the beginning of Mark 14 but the Gospel of Mark as a whole can be read similarly: Never mentioning explicitly the destruction of Jerusalem,17 the text is focused in its last part on a single cruci¿xion and manages, nevertheless, to deal at the same time, and implicitly, with the fate of the city.18 To read the Gospel of Mark in this way is highly unusual, primarily because we tend to interpret Mark as a Christian text, within a framework provided by other Christian texts. But it seems that we can get a new understanding of Mark by comparing it to Jewish texts stemming from the same era, like 4 Ezra. And we may hope that, thanks to newly interpreted Christian texts, in the end it will also be possible to understand those non-Christian texts in a better way.

17. Even in Mark 13:2 we hear only, and in rather evasive language, about the future end of the temple. 18. For a much more detailed explanation of this line of interpretation, see my Frohe Botschaft am Abgrund: Das Markusevangelium und der Jüdische Krieg (Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2013).

DAYS OF CREATION IN 4 EZRA 6:38–59 AND JOHN 1–5 Calum Carmichael

Within the con¿nes of the present study I compare the days of creation in 4 Ezra with the much more extended treatment of them in that most sophisticated and complicated of writings, John’s Gospel. Material in each, it is generally agreed, belongs to the same period of time. Linking the ¿gure of Jesus to the words of Scripture, John interprets the life of Jesus as the Word become Àesh: “Had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me [Jesus]: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?” (John 5:46–47). To read the words of Moses is, bewildering to any outsider, to read about Jesus and, conversely, reading what John writes about Jesus leads one to comprehend the writings of Moses. Allegory is the key to this mode of revelation. A speci¿c variety of parable, allegory—the word means the other utterance in public different from the one in private—diverges from the wider category in that its meaning is for a select group only, unlike a parable that can be understood by someone not initiated into its meaning. Those who resort to reading the texts allegorically believe that the (Hebrew) Bible has a supernatural origin. For John and rabbinic interpreters the Bible enshrines God’s wisdom and contains various layers of meaning. Words might possess ordinary senses but reveal allegorical ones at the same time. A statement can be both a record of a past event and a prediction of a future one. The verse, “Then sang Moses,” in Exod 15:1 can also be translated “Then Moses will sing,” and for the author of the Mekhilta on Exod 15:1 the latter translation/interpretation constitutes a prediction of the resurrection of the dead.1 The author of 4 Ezra also reads Scripture allegorically; for instance, the birthright story in Gen 25:19–23 refers to the corrupt age in the person of Esau and a coming glorious age in the person of Jacob (6:7–10). 1. See David Daube, “Alexandrian Methods of Interpretation and the Rabbis,” in Collected Works of David Daube. Vol. 1. Talmudic Law (ed. Calum Carmichael; Studies in Comparative Legal History; Berkeley: Robbins Collection, 1992), 369.

CARMICHAEL Days of Creation

51

Taking up the outstanding work of George H. Box, Michael Stone argues that the Esau–Jacob passage of 4 Ezra 6:7–10 (along with 6:59), about Israel possessing the future world, informs the entire section about the days of creation in 4 Ezra 6:38–59. Stone is also struck by the passage’s stress on creation through divine speech and views the emphasis as a major anomaly of 4 Ezra. He is not able to say much about its anomalous character.2 One might note in this regard that the hallmark of John’s account of creation in John 1–5 is, in fact, the notion that Jesus is the embodiment of the divine speech at creation. John identi¿es this speech in Gen 1 with Jesus as the Logos or Word. For John, a preexistent heavenly Jesus created the world and in his lifetime on earth creates it anew. I argue that successive incidents in the life of Jesus retell, in allegorical terms, the Genesis creation story. Like the author of 4 Ezra but especially akin to Philo’s corpus of writings, John pursues in great detail deeper meanings beyond what we might think of as the plain readings of the Genesis text. Also like the author of 4 Ezra (4 Ezra 12:37–38; 14:19–22), John reworks Scripture in ways that can only be understood by those initiated into his interpretations. As to John’s select circle, a highly literate Hellenistic Jewish audience is the likeliest target. John assumes that the members of the audience he addresses are reading the biblical text, instead of hearing it (John 5:46–47). Day One The seer in 4 Ezra 6:38 writes: “O Lord God, of a truth thou didst speak at the beginning of the creation upon the ¿rst day saying, Let heaven and earth be made! And thy word perfected the work.” The author of the fourth gospel greatly expands the view of creation that is compacted in the verse in 4 Ezra. John has Jesus identi¿ed with the divine word: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made” (John 1:1–3). John writes to address the problem that the creation might have been perfect when ¿rst brought into being but is no longer so and requires renewal. John depicts Jesus as engaged in this process of re-creation by acts that in the most precise way correspond to those in Gen 1.3 2. On the Esau–Jacob passage of 4 Ezra 6:7–10, see Michael Stone, Fourth Ezra, (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 181, and George H. Box, The Ezra Apocalypse (London: Pitman, 1912), 83; and on Stone’s puzzlement about creation through divine speech in 4 Ezra, see Stone, Fourth Ezra, 183. 3. The despair of the seer in 4 Ezra 4:12 has him declare that “It would have been better that we had never been created.” On the grim view of the created order in

52

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

The author of 4 Ezra 6:59 anticipates the renewal of creation as the climax to Israel’s inheritance of the world. As already indicated, Box and Stone view this verse as the crucial perspective for 4 Ezra’s account of the days of creation in the preceding verses leading up to it in 6:38–58. Despite the many differences between the authors of 4 Ezra and the fourth gospel, it is still of interest to compare how each presents the story of creation. On the ¿rst day in 4 Ezra there was darkness and silence and, what is not found in Genesis, a reference to how the sound of man’s voice had not yet been heard (6:39). A ray of light issued forth at God’s command so that the works of creation might become visible. On John’s ¿rst day of creation, a voice is heard, that of the Baptist’s in the wilderness. He is “A man sent from God…to bear witness of the Light… He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light” (1:6–8). Sound comes before light. John rewrites day one of creation allegorically such that, overlapping with 4 Ezra but going further, the Baptist represents the change at the beginning of the world from the darkness and silence referred to in 4 Ezra 6:39 to the sound of man’s voice. It is a stage beyond that in 4 Ezra when man’s voice had not yet been heard. In both, and in keeping with Genesis, the appearance of light is the central focus. In the fourth gospel, before the introduction of any action or words of Jesus, attention is given to the Baptist’s insigni¿cant mode of being. The situation allegorically replicates the process of the ¿rst day of creation when formlessness prevailed to be followed by orderly activity. The transition in John 1 occurs when Jesus approaches the place of the Baptist’s activity and the spirit descends from heaven like a dove and rests on Jesus. The move from the Baptist’s blank existence in the wilderness—he is not the Christ, not Elijah (as in the synoptic gospels), and not the promised end-time prophet—to the descent of the spirit corresponds to what occurs on day one of creation. Nothing signi¿cant in Genesis happened until the spirit of God moved, it is implied, like a bird

4 Ezra, see Box’s discussion in Robert H. Charles, APOT, 2:554–57, 561–65; also Stone, Fourth Ezra, 92. The view in Gen 6 that God repented for creating the world because of its violence lies behind the rabbinic debate lasting two-and-a-half years between Shammaites and Hillelites that man would be better off not existing (b. Erub. 13b). Rabbi Samuel ben Nahman notes that the expression, “And it came to pass,” is used of the days of creation in Genesis. He argues that these days were not occasions for joy because they lacked completion. Contrariwise, the phrase, “And it shall come to pass,” as in Zech 14:8 (“And it shall come to pass in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem”), denotes proof of the future, completed order of creation when there will be joy (Gen. Rab. 42:3).

CARMICHAEL Days of Creation

53

hovering (rkhp) over water, and God said, “Let there be light: and there was light.” The Baptist’s role with the water of baptism was to bear witness to the light coming into the world, that is, to Jesus as the primordial light of Gen 1:3.4 Day Two 4 Ezra does not mention the role of the spirit on Genesis’ ¿rst day of creation but does introduce on the second day, what is not found in Genesis, a spirit of the ¿rmament whom God then commands. Thus 4 Ezra 6:41 reads: “Again, upon the second day, thou [God] didst create the spirit of the ¿rmament and didst command him to make a division between the waters, that one part might move upward and the other part remain beneath.” The emphasis is on this heavenly animated being dividing the waters above the ¿rmament from the waters below it. In the time of 4 Ezra and John these elevated waters betoken special knowledge (1 En. 17:4; Philo, Leg. 3.163). Part of the inspiration for the metaphor is the notion that one thirsts for spiritual knowledge in the way one thirsts for water (Isa 55:1; John 4:13–14; 6:35; 7:37). John’s equivalent second day of creation is when Nathanael seeks precisely this knowledge. In a search also often compared to the drinking of water (Prov 4:22, 23; Siphre on Deut 11:22), Nathanael seeks knowledge of Scripture under a ¿g tree. A new follower of Jesus, Philip, approaches him and informs him: “We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph” (John 1:45). We might note the focus on an earthly location, Nazareth, and on an earthly parent–son relationship. The upshot is that Nathanael leaves his earthly place of study and approaches Jesus who tells him that he will see the heaven open and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man. The switch from studying Scripture under a ¿g tree in a speci¿c setting below the ¿rmament to learning of the world of the upper ¿rmament signi¿es initiation into heavenly knowledge. The elaborate description in John of ascending and descending angels who impart this special knowledge contrasts with the much briefer description of the primeval spirit of the ¿rmament in

4. For the many other detailed links between John’s scheme of the seven day creation and the Genesis account, see Calum Carmichael, The Story of Creation: Its Origin and Its Interpretation in Philo and the Fourth Gospel (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996), 67–78. I con¿ne my observations in the present study to those that might illuminate the common features of 4 Ezra and the fourth gospel.

54

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

4 Ezra 6:41. Indeed, there is a sharp contrast between 4 Ezra’s stance and the one in John’s gospel. Conversing with the angel Uriel, the seer in 4 Ezra 4:12–21 protests about the grimness of the created order. Uriel replies by telling him that God’s ways are inscrutable and that because man belongs to the earth it makes no sense for him to seek out heavenly mysteries: “Those who dwell upon the earth can understand only what is on the earth, and he who is above the heavens can understand what is above the height of the heavens” (4 Ezra 4:21).5 The fourth gospel has Nathanael promised the means of bridging earth and heaven whereas 4 Ezra seems less hopeful than John that followers could achieve heavenly understanding. Day Three The third day of creation in 4 Ezra conveys a sense of immediacy, how “as soon as thy word went forth the work was done” (6:43). Introducing a detail to the Genesis account about the gathering of the waters into one place, 4 Ezra 6:42 has the water gathered into a seventh part of the whole with the remaining six parts becoming land for plowing and sowing. Without intervening processes, the ¿rst products of the earth appear instantaneously, therefore miraculously. 4 Ezra further expands the Genesis account by mentioning the scent and taste of the resulting fruit, Àowers, and trees. The division of the water into measurable parts of land and sea is, according to Stone, an idea unique to 4 Ezra.6 But the division does also show up on John’s third day of creation when Jesus miraculously turns the water in six pots into wine at a village wedding. With water in them the six earthen stone pots symbolize the coming together of water and earth on the third day of creation. (Ps 33:7 has God at the creation of the world gather the waters of the sea as if forming a pile or heap of water [nƝd].) The six pots of water then metamorphose into quantities of wine—from the fruit of the earth—out of all proportion to the needs of a village wedding at which the guests have already drunk. We have here an imaginative equivalent of the miraculous superabundance associated with the third day of creation. The notion is expressed in 4 Ezra when six parts of water became fruit-bearing land without the prior processes of plowing and sowing. As in 4 Ezra, not only does the water in John 5. For a fuller discussion of this dialogue, see Box, APOT, 2:561; also Stone, Fourth Ezra, 25. 6. Stone, Fourth Ezra, 185. He also states that there is no “other exactly similar use of Genesis 1,” but John’s treatment of Gen 1 can be compared.

CARMICHAEL Days of Creation

55

acquire the taste of the fruit of the vine without intervening processes but the miracle comes about by Jesus’ word alone, which is spoken at a wedding. It is the same Word that was active at the original creation, performing the ¿rst miracle of turning water instantaneously into abundant, fruitful land. The ¿rst example ever of a union between water, often represented as male, and the earth, commonly represented as female, that resulted in fertility occurred at the creation of the world. 4 Ezra provides no equivalent but John does by allegorizing the union in a story about a wedding at Cana.7 He pays no attention to the marrying couple except for the question to the bridegroom about the source of the surpassingly good, new wine. The focus on how the bridegroom obtained this new wine points allegorically to Jesus as a bridegroom—he is spoken of as a bridegroom in John 3:29—and his disciples as the bride. The disciples mystically unite with him because they take in the knowledge conveyed by the sign that is the miracle of the water turned into wine. Jesus for John is the true vine and his disciples are its branches who will prove to be fruitful: “Herein is my father glori¿ed, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples” (John 15:8). In the incident of the Cana wedding we are to understand that marriage between a man and a woman belongs to the old order of creation and that the union between Jesus and his disciples belongs to a new, higher order, which will indeed bear them the fruit of new believers in due time. The bride at the wedding receives no mention at all but one woman is cited, the unnamed mother of Jesus. Why is she mentioned? The focus on fertility is again the key. That is why the emphasis is on her motherhood. She tells her son that the wine has run out. He responds with the words, “Woman, what have you to do with me? Mine hour is not yet come” (John 2:4). The strange reply becomes intelligible when we recall that the hour of a man is the hour of his earthly birth (John 16:21). As a mother she had everything to do with him when she brought him into the world but paradoxically he denies this event and points to his future birth, to his forthcoming passage from death to new life by way of his resurrection. That new birth and life will in turn result in many disciples and will not require a physical mother.

7. On the gender of earth and water, see Opif. 38, 39; Plant. 15; Gen. Rab. 13:13, 14; y. Taan. 64b. In 4 Ezra 5:48, we have the earth as both mother and womb, “He [God] said to me [the seer], ‘Thus have I also made the earth a womb.’”

56

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

Day Four The fourth day for 4 Ezra has God command the brightness of the sun, the light of the moon, and the order of the stars to serve humankind, providing in line with Gen 1:14 the means of determining distinctions in time: days, months, years, signs, and seasons, by which festivals and the like can be arranged and predictions made. John’s corresponding fourth day concerns Passover, a festival that recalls the Israelites Àeeing Egypt at night and also combines sign (lamb and unleavened bread) and season (spring). A feature of John’s Passover is the discussion between Jesus and his antagonists about the sign they ask him to provide after his acts of violence in the temple. He answers by reference to further violence, which will be that sign: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (John 2:19). In characteristic fashion John switches from the literal temple to its allegorical signi¿cance, Jesus’ body as the temple, a truth not known to those uninitiated outsiders. The response of his opponents is to refer to the forty-six years it had taken to build the physical sanctuary. They focus their discussion on the location of the building in Jerusalem whereas Jesus directs his interlocutors’ attention to the ideal temple, himself in his resurrected state. The Jerusalem temple is but a sign pointing to its heavenly form. For John as for the author of 4 Ezra the actual destruction of the building in Jerusalem will have been a matter of much moment: “the desecration or destruction of the Temple formed a central theme for much of the literature of the Second Temple period.”8 For the author of 4 Ezra, “the brightness of the sun” and “the light of the moon” are features of the fourth day, and in 4 Ezra 6:46 the sun and the moon are to serve man “who was about to be formed.” The latter phrase anticipates the birth of man, a topic associated, for example, by Philo with the appointed times of the fourth day because birth requires a time span of nine months. Philo comments on how the stars of day four provide opportune signs of coming events, and how the appointed seasons of Gen 1:14 refer to times of achievement such as the birth and growth of creatures (Opif. 59). The sun’s brightness, the moon’s light, and the topic of birth in 4 Ezra play a corresponding allegorical role in the next incident in the fourth gospel. The encounter between a certain Nicodemus and Jesus immediately follows the contretemps about the temple in John 2:13–25 and continues the allegorization of the fourth day of creation. The distinction between the fourth day’s lesser light that rules the night and the greater light that 8. Stone, Fourth Ezra, 324, and 214 for the position in 4 Ezra.

CARMICHAEL Days of Creation

57

rules the day comes into play. Nicodemus, a ruler of the supposedly unenlightened among the Jews, comes by night to Jesus (John 3:1–7). The implication is that he is the lesser light associated with the moon and Jesus the greater light associated with the sun.9 The discussion between them centers on the topic of birth. Nicodemus cannot move beyond a literal understanding because he is tied to the old, lower order of creation concerned with physical birth. Jesus counters with the notion of rebirth, a new, higher order of being. The climax of the encounter is a peroration about Jesus as the light that has come into the world (John 3:19–21). This light corresponds not only to the primordial light of the ¿rst day of creation but also to the brightness of the sun, equivalent to the primary light of the fourth day of 4 Ezra 6:45. Day Five The ¿fth days in John and 4 Ezra both allude to the end-time. 4 Ezra refers to how the lifeless water gave rise to all kinds of creatures so that the nations of the world could declare God’s wondrous works. Included among them are the sea monsters Behemoth and Leviathan. Behemoth emerged onto the land where a thousand mountains stood and Leviathan remained in the water. The two monsters are preserved until the end of time to provide food for the saved elect (explicitly so in 2 Bar. 29:4). The time of the Messiah and his banquet appear to be anticipated.10 In John’s more extensive treatment of the ¿fth day of creation involving the coming forth of water creatures, the Baptist produces new beings through baptism by water at a place called “Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there” (3:23). The baptized person undergoes a passage from death to life and hence becomes new-born: “begotten again,” “a newborn babe,” “a new man,” “a new creation” (b. Yeb. 22a; 48b; 1 Pet 1:3; 2:2; Col 3:10; 2 Cor 5:17). The language comes from proselyte baptism.11 John is called “the Baptist” or “Baptizer” precisely because, surprisingly and hence the nickname, he applies proselyte baptism to people who are already Jewish. Repentance, 9. On the importance of the symbolical meanings attributed to time references in the fourth gospel, see J. Edgar Bruns, “The Use of Time in the Fourth Gospel,” NTS 13 (1966): 285–90. Judah is the moon and Levi the sun in the T. Naph. 5:3–5 and Moses is the sun and Aaron the moon in Mekh. on Exod 18:27. 10. See Box, APOT, 2:579. 11. See David Daube, “A Baptismal Catechism,” in Collected Works of David Daube. Vol. 2, New Testament Judaism (ed. Calum Carmichael; Studies in Comparative Legal History; Berkeley: Robbins Collection, 2000), 525.

58

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

for which he calls, is like conversion, a movement from the death of one’s old life to a new one. Anticipating the end-time, the Baptist speaks of the appearance of the Messiah and how he himself is but the friend of the bridegroom. He means Jesus who on the equivalent of the sixth day of creation will forge unions that lead to reproduction at a higher level of being in keeping with the creation of the man and the woman on that day. That is why, allegorically, Jesus as bridegroom-becoming-husbandbecoming-father “must increase, but I [the Baptist] must decrease” (3:30). The particular reference is to Jesus’ forthcoming spiritual marriage to the Samaritan woman and their reproducing, which takes the form of making converts of her fellow Samaritans. It is the typical Johannine switch from literal to metaphorical meaning. The Baptist’s new-born water creatures are on a level lower than the new-born beings Jesus will bring forth because Jesus’ activity corresponds to his activity as the Logos at creation. Day Six Unlike the Johannine version, the sixth day in 4 Ezra is curiously brief. It describes the coming forth of the land animals, and how Adam was placed “as ruler over all the works which thou hast made previously” (6:54). We are then told that “from him [Adam] we have all come, the people [Israel] whom thou hast chosen.” It seems odd that, as Stone stresses, Israel should be brought into this discourse on the nature of the universal order.12 The sixth day in John’s Gospel also mixes the universal with the particular role of Israel and is a much expanded version of the corresponding day in Genesis with its focus on the creation of animals and humans. John recounts an incident unique to the fourth gospel. Jesus meets a woman of Samaria at Jacob’s well where Jacob had watered his animals—John explicitly refers to them (John 4:12)—and met his future wife Rachel (Gen 29:7). The well is near the parcel of ground that Jacob gave to Joseph, the ancestor of the Samaritans.13 At this same well Jesus meets the Samaritan woman with whom he is alone. John writes up the meeting in line with the male–female motif of the sixth day of creation.

12. “Something of a mystery surrounds the precise conceptual connection between creation of the world and election of Israel,” Stone, Fourth Ezra, 182. 13. For Joseph as the ancestor of the Samaritans, see Pss 77:15; 78:67; Amos 5:6, 15; Zech 10:6–10; T. Naph. in Hebrew additions in Charles, APOT, 1:361–63; 4Q372 frg. 1.10b–15a; Ant. 9.291.

CARMICHAEL Days of Creation

59

When Jesus converses with the woman about drinking water, he uses ¿gurative language proverbially associated with female sexuality (Prov 5:15, 18; 9:17). In his role as the divine Logos, however, Jesus’ intent is to re-create the woman by making her “a well of living water,” a bride ¿t for a bridegroom (Cant 4:12). The episode reÀects the sixth day when God’s Word made man in his image, “male and female he created them” (Gen 1:27). The inauguration of the ¿rst Samaritans was when Jacob/ Israel met a woman at a well and the inauguration of the Samaritans who are about to be reborn is when Jesus meets a woman at this same well. In line with the blessing to be fruitful and multiply in Gen 1:28, Jesus and the woman produce offspring when she returns to her people and persuades the other Samaritans to believe in him and become his followers. After inquiring if Jesus is “greater than our father Jacob” (4:12), the Samaritan woman identi¿es Jesus as a prophet. It is John’s characteristic way of interpreting Jesus by quarrying Scripture, in this instance evoking the prophet Jeremiah who had spoken of God’s relationship with Israel— Samaria in the time referred to in Jeremiah—in terms of a bridegroom with a bride (Jer 2:2). Israel became a harlot, however, unable to restrain her thirst for lovers, and forsook her fountain of living waters, God, the true source of her sexuality (Jer 2:13, 20–25). Speaking the Word of God and hence, for John, speaking about Jesus, Jeremiah seeks to restore Israel (Samaria) to her original pristine state (Jer 3). Strikingly, just as Jeremiah depicts God as both bridegroom and creator, so John similarly depicts Jesus in his transforming encounter with the Samaritan woman. Thus Jesus as a bridegroom couches a spiritual union with her in earthly sexual terms and, because of her previously unsatisfactory love life, seeks to make her a well of living water in line with his original function as creator of the universe. John has searched Scripture, which testi¿es of Jesus as the Logos or Word (John 5:39) and, explaining Jesus in line with Jeremiah’s hopes of future restoration, shaped the narrative about the Samaritan woman. In John there is a return to the original, universal order of creation of the male and the female, but there is also a nationalist bias similar to 4 Ezra. After Jesus miraculously reveals that he knows about the Samaritan woman’s marital history, she declares him to be a prophet. He then tells her that “salvation is from the Jews” (4:22). The reference to Israel in 4 Ezra has end-time overtones (“How long will this [Israel’s broken down state] be so?” in 4 Ezra 6:59), and that same period is also the focus in John because Jesus says to the woman: “Believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain [Gerizim], nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the father…but the hour cometh, and now is,

60

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth” (4:21, 23). Old-order Samaritans and Jews are consigned to the past and replaced by the community of new believers in Jesus.14 Day Seven Corresponding to the seventh day in Gen 2:2–3, John’s seventh day describes how Jesus heals a crippled man on the Sabbath (John 5). His activity arouses hostility and Jesus justi¿es it by arguing—such is the defective nature of the creation—that both he and his father (God) must work on the Sabbath (John 5:17). In light of this statement, the Sabbath in John’s creation account is in effect non-existent and it cannot yet be said that “God ended his work which he had made” (Gen 2:2). By simply choosing not to comment on the Sabbath at all, 4 Ezra eliminates the notion of cessation from work. In its place, there is instead bitter complaint about the broken down state of Israel, referred to as God’s ¿rstborn, his only begotten (6:58, cp. John 1:18), and how this close kin is denied his inheritance of the world, that is, the renewed created order of the seven-day scheme in Gen 1. In spite of the shared meaning between John and 4 Ezra, it is most unlikely that the apocalyptic pessimism of 4 Ezra is a negative counterstatement to the con¿dent, triumphant claims of John’s Gospel.15 To all appearances two Jewish circles committed to Scriptural interpretation have gone their own independent ways but shared nonetheless a common pool of ideas about the created order of Gen 1. Fastening onto the historical or legendary or mythical life of Jesus, John has, however, transformed the grim view of the world so prominent in Second Temple Judaism and spiritualized its prevailing cosmology by relating it to the life of Jesus.

14. In their antagonism to the Jerusalem temple, the Qumran community saw itself as living out the story of the ¿rst Samaritan, Joseph. See Robert A. Kugler, “Joseph at Qumran: The Importance of 4Q372FRG. 1 in Extending a Tradition,” in Studies in the Hebrew Bible, Qumran, and the Septuagint Presented to Eugene Ulrich (ed. Peter Flint, Emanuel Tov, and James VanderKam; VTSup 101; Leiden: Brill, 2006), 272–77. 15. 4 Ezra 6:6 might be anti-Johannine: “Even then had I [God] these things [before the events of Gen 1] in mind; and through me alone and none other were they created; as also the end [shall come] through me alone and none other.” 4 Ezra 3:4 may be similarly opposed: “O Lord, who bearest rule, thou spakest at the beginning, when thou didst plant the earth, and that thyself alone, and commandest the people.” See Stone, Fourth Ezra, 67, 158–59.

2 BARUCH, 4 EZRA, AND THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS: THREE APPROACHES TO THE INTERPRETATION OF PSALM 104:4 Eric F. Mason

This short article considers how three texts from the late ¿rst/early second centuries C.E.—2 Baruch, 4 Ezra, and the Epistle to the Hebrews—interpret Ps 104:4. First, however, it is appropriate to preface this study with a few words about the broader context for this investigation. I have argued elsewhere that the author of Hebrews understood Melchizedek as a heavenly ¿gure—most likely angelic—as in three texts found at Qumran (Visions of Amram, Songs of the Sabbath Sacri¿ce, and especially 11QMelchizedek). This interpretation is demanded by the language of Heb 7:3 and the subsequent comparison the author makes about the eternal, non-Levitical priesthood held by Melchizedek and Jesus later in the chapter.1 One objection has been that Melchizedek cannot be understood as angelic or eternal on the basis of Heb 7:3 because earlier the author of Hebrews asserts that angels (as created beings) are contrasted with Jesus in Heb 1:5–14.2 The author quotes Ps 1. See my ‘You Are a Priest Forever’: Second Temple Jewish Messianism and the Priestly Christology of the Epistle to the Hebrews (STDJ 74; Leiden: Brill, 2008), which incorporating arguments from my earlier article, “Hebrews 7:3 and the Relationship Between Melchizedek and Jesus,” BR 50 (2005): 41–62. 2. Gareth Lee Cockerill, “Melchizedek Without Speculation: Hebrews 7.1–25 and Genesis 14.17–24,” in A Cloud of Witnesses: The Theology of Hebrews in Its Ancient Contexts (ed. R. Bauckham, D. Driver, T. Hart, and N. Macdonald; LNTS 387; London: T&T Clark, 2008), 128–44, esp. 132. Cockerill responds to my conference paper (from the meeting titled “Hebrews and Christian Theology,” hosted by the University of St. Andrews, Scotland, July 2006) rather than the BR article, but this is not consequential. Both there and in his recent commentary on Hebrews (The Epistle to the Hebrews [NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012], 298–99 n. 14), Cockerill’s argument hinges in part on his denial of the existence of heavenly

62

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

104 (LXX 103):4 in Heb 1:7. Use of this particular quotation has sometimes been assumed to imply that the Son created angels, as numerous interpreters in Second Temple Judaism use Ps 104:4 that way. Also, some scholars have found additional support for this reading through proposals for how best to understand the relationship between the af¿rmations about the Son in Heb 1:1–4 and the series of biblical citations in 1:5–14. John P. Meier articulated this idea in a pair of very inÀuential articles, arguing that the sequence of af¿rmations in 1:1–4 is paralleled and supported successively by the themes of the quotations in 1:5–14.3 Though elsewhere in his articles Meier stops short of demanding a oneto-one correlation between the themes and citations, he does explicitly link the theme of creation in 1:2c (“through whom he also created the worlds”) with the citation of Ps 104:4 in Heb 1:7 (normally translated as “he makes his angels winds, and his servants Àames of ¿re” or similar).4 Melchizedek traditions completely, even at Qumran. This forces him to reject the dominant, mainstream interpretations among Qumran scholars of all three scroll texts mentioned above in favor of a proposal that the word “Melchizedek” normally was understood in the Qumran texts as the title “King of Righteousness” (as it was later rendered etymologically in Greek texts including Philo, Josephus, and Hebrews). His argument is further hindered by his insistence that the orthographic form 98 ')+/ demands interpretation as a title rather than a personal name—despite differing from the MT in both Gen 14 and Ps 110 only by the lack of a maqqƝph— because it is written as two words. In contrast, Cockerill argues, writers at Qumran wrote 98')+/ for the ¿gure who met Abram, and he cites the Genesis Apocryphon (unfortunately called the Genesis Apocalypse in his commentary) as the sole example for this claim. This is problematic, however, because Cockerill apparently assumes that the Genesis Apocryphon is a sectarian document composed at Qumran. Instead, Daniel A. Machiela notes that “a large majority of scholars,” following Joseph A. Fitzmyer, assert that this document was composed outside the Qumran community and shows no evidence of distinctive Qumran beliefs or practices. Also, Machiela observes that “all Qumran writings of certain Essene origin were penned in Hebrew,” whereas the Genesis Apocryphon was written in Aramaic. See Machiela, The Dead Sea Genesis Apocryphon: A New Text and Translation with Introduction and Special Treatment of Columns 13–17 (STDJ 79; Leiden: Brill, 2009), 7–8. 3. John P. Meier, “Structure and Theology in Heb 1,1–14,” Bib 66 (1985): 168– 89; and “Symmetry and Theology in the Old Testament Citations of Heb 1,5–14,” Bib 66 (1985): 504–33. 4. See Meier, “Symmetry,” 511–13, 523. A key factor that Meier cites in support of this connection is use of the verb ÈÇÀšÑ in both Heb 1:2 and 1:7, but it should be noted that the author of Hebrews uses this word sixteen times elsewhere in the book with a variety of meanings. (Unless otherwise noted, biblical translations here and elsewhere are from the NSRV.) Compare the translation of Heb 1:7 (“He is the one who makes his angels spirits and his ministers a Àame of ¿re”) in Craig R. Koester,

MASON 2 Baruch, 4 Ezra, and the Epistle to the Hebrews

63

It is common for other scholars, including those who do not follow Meier’s schema, to assert that Heb 1:7 af¿rms the creation of angels.5 I ¿nd both assertions problematic—the correlation of Heb 1:7 with Heb 1:2c, and the assumption that the author of Hebrews must be using Ps 104:4 in the same way most of his contemporaries do. While Meier’s articles are extremely insightful and my own approach to reading Heb 1 is highly inÀuenced by his arguments, I propose (and develop the argument much more fully elsewhere) that the relationship between the af¿rmations and quotations should be read in a chiastic, not successive, order.6 Thus the creation language of Heb 1:2c is better paired with the citation of Ps 102:25–27 (LXX 101:26–28) in Heb 1:10–12 (“In the beginning, Lord, you founded the earth”). Likewise, the quotation of Ps 104:4 in Heb 1:7 is better read in tandem with Heb 1:3b (“he sustains all things by his powerful word”), expressing the dominion of the Son. Furthermore, I question whether the quotation of Ps 104:4 in Hebrews has anything to do with the origins of angels. Discussion of the origins of angels in the Hebrew Bible is ambiguous.7 Certainly there is a substantial exegetical tradition in Second Temple Judaism for reading Ps 104:4 to explain angelic origins, but it is not unanimous, as consideration of the use of this psalm in 2 Baruch and 4 Ezra will demonstrate.8 Attention turns ¿rst to the psalm itself in Hebrew and Greek translation, followed

Hebrews (AB 36; New York: Doubleday, 2001), 190, which is intended to emphasize the related usage of Ps 104:4 here and in Heb 1:14 (“Are they not all ministering spirits…?). See also the discussion of this below. 5. Recent examples include David L. Allen, Hebrews (New American Commentary; Nashville: B&H, 2010), 176–77; Cockerill, Hebrews, 108; Paul Ellingworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 120; presumably Luke Timothy Johnson, Hebrews: A Commentary (New Testament Library; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2006), 80; William L. Lane, Hebrews (WBC, 47A–B; 2 vols.; Dallas: Word, 1991), 1:29; and Peter T. O’Brien, The Letter to the Hebrews (Pillar New Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), 72. 6. This is the thesis of a paper I presented at the 2011 Society of Biblical Literature International Meeting (London), titled “A Chiastic Approach to the Af¿rmations about the Son in Heb 1:1–4 and the Biblical Quotations of Heb 1:5– 14.” My chiastic approach differs from the proposed by Victor (Sung Yul) Rhee, “The Role of Chiasm for Understanding Christology in Hebrews 1:1–14,” JBL 131 (2012): 341–62. 7. I address this in a paper presently being prepared for publication in another venue. 8. Surprisingly, use of Ps 104 receives very minimal attention in Michael Mach, Entwicklungsstadien des jüdischen Engelglaubens in vorrabbinischer Zeit (TSAJ 34; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1992).

64

Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch

by a survey of its dominant interpretation in the Second Temple period as exempli¿ed in 2 Baruch and other texts, and ¿nally to a consideration of use of the psalm in 4 Ezra. The paper concludes with brief comments about the similar approaches in 4 Ezra and Hebrews. Psalm 104:4 In the Hebrew Bible, Psalm 104 is a lengthy psalm of 35 verses, one in which God is praised for the creative work that allows for great bounty for all creatures.9 Overall the psalm is marked by ample use of theophoric language, with God described as harnessing various aspects of nature for service. The ¿rst four verses are most important for our purposes: 1 2 3 4

Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, you are very great. You are clothed with honor and majesty, wrapped in light as with a garment. You stretch out the heavens like a tent, you set the beams of your chambers on the waters, you make the clouds your chariot, you ride on the wings of the wind, you make the winds your messengers, ¿re and Àame your ministers [&!+