Ford-Judgment in 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Apocalypse of Abraham FINAL

Home , 2 Baruch, 3 Baruch, Apocalypse of Abraham, Rebecca

Abstract

Judgment in 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Apocalypse of Abraham By: Jason Ford

When the Roman army destroyed Jerusalem’s temple in 70 CE, it altered Jewish imagination and compelled religious and community leaders to devise messages of consolation.

These messages needed to address both the contemporary situation and maintain continuity with

Israel’s religious history. 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Apocalypse of Abraham are three important witnesses to these new messages hope in the face of devastation.

In this dissertation I focus on how these three authors used and explored the important religious theme of judgment. Regarding 4 Ezra, I argue that by focusing our reading on judgment and its role in the text’s message we uncover 4 Ezra’s essential meaning. 4 Ezra’s main character misunderstands the implications of the destroyed Temple and, despite rounds of dialogue with and angelic interlocutor, he only comes to see God’s justice for Israel in light of the end-time judgment God shows him in two visions. Woven deeply into the fabric of his story, the author of

2 Baruch utilizes judgment for different purposes. With the community’s stability and guidance in question, 2 Baruch promises the coming of God’s judgment on the wicked nations, as well as the heavenly reward for Israel itself. In that way, judgment serves a pedagogical purpose in 2

Baruch–to stabilize and inspire the community through its teaching. Of the three texts,

Apocalypse of Abraham explores the meaning of judgment must directly. It also offers the most radical portrayal of judgment. For Apocalypse of Abraham, the violent judgment of Israel's

!1 enemies serves as Israel’s own reward for their faithfulness. Apocalypse of Abraham’s community gets to avenge their own suffering.

Through close textual analysis of judgment in 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Apocalypse of

Abraham, my dissertation offers a more robust understanding of Early Judaism’s theological development in the years after 70 CE.

!2 Acknowledgements

I am grateful to the Rice University Department of Religion for the support I have received over the last several years. I’ve been inspired and encouraged by the faculty and my peers. I am particularly thankful to Dr. Matthias Henze for serving as the chairman of my dissertation committee. I have learned much from him, both inside and outside the classroom. I wouldn’t have made it to where I’m at without his encouragement and support. His incisive comments have helped me at each stage of this project. I’m also thankful for the time and attention of my other committee members, Dr. April DeConick and Dr. Scott McGill.

My family has encouraged and supported my intellectual interests from the beginning. A special thanks to my mom, grandmother, and brother for all the love. Most importantly, thank you to

Hadley, my wife. Your love and belief in me have meant everything.

!3 Contents

Abstract 1 Acknowledgments 3 Contents 4 Introduction 7 The Focus of This Study 7 Defining Judgment 8 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Apocalypse of Abraham 10 Description of the Study 12 Chapter 1: Judgment and Justice: On Reading 4 Ezra 16 Introduction 16 A Narrative Reading of 4 Ezra 18 4 Ezra’s Structure 22 Ezra the Convert: Traditional Readings of 4 Ezra 26 Making Sense of 4 Ezra’s Genre Changes and Ezra’s Character 30 Points of Emphasis: Which View Does 4 Ezra’s Author Privilege? 42 Transformation with a Purpose: Emulation 46 Conclusion 51 Chapter 2: Judgment in 4 Ezra 54 Setting the Stage: Ezra and Uriel in 4 Ezra’s First Episode 54 Judgment Passage 1: 4 Ezra 5.30 55 Judgment Passage 2: 4 Ezra 5.40-42 57 Judgment Passage 3: 4 Ezra 6.1-6 60 Judgment Passage 4: 4 Ezra 6.18-29 62 Judgment Passage 5: 4 Ezra 7.11-25 65 Judgment Passage 6: 4 Ezra 7.27-29 68 Judgment Passage 7: 4 Ezra 7.32-44 70 Judgment Passage 8: 4 Ezra 7.59-61 75 Judgment Passage 9: 4 Ezra 7.64-74 76 Judgment Passage 10: 4 Ezra 7.78-80 80 Judgment Passage 11: 4 Ezra 7.102-104 81 Judgment Passage 12: 4 Ezra 7.113-15 83 Judgment Passage 13: 4 Ezra 8.15-17 84 Judgment Passage 14: 4 Ezra 8.37-39, 45 85 Judgment Passage 15: 4 Ezra 8.59-61 86 Judgment Passage 16: 4 Ezra 11.41-44 88 Judgment Passage 17: 4 Ezra 13.25-28 89

!4 Judgment Passage 18: 4 Ezra 13.48-50 92 Judgment Passage 19: 4 Ezra 13.52-55 93 Judgment Passage 20: 4 Ezra 14.31-35 95 Conclusion 97 Chapter 3: Judgment in 2 Baruch 100 Judgment Passage 1: 2 Baruch 5.2-3 103 Judgment Passage 2: 2 Baruch 13.3-8 106 Judgment Passage 3: 2 Baruch 14.8-19 109 Judgment Passage 4: 2 Baruch 24.1-2, 25.1-4 114 Judgment Passage 5: 2 Baruch 30.1-5 116 Judgment Passage 6: 2 Baruch 39.7, 40.1-3 120 Judgment Passage 7: 2 Baruch 48.17-24 124 Judgment Passage 8: 2 Baruch 48.31-41 127 Judgment Passage 9: 2 Baruch 72.2-73.4 132 Judgment Passage 10: 2 Baruch 85.9-13 135 Conclusion 139 Chapter 4: Judgment in Apocalypse of Abraham 142 Introduction 143 Himmelfarb and Transformation 145 Orlov and Priestly Traditions 147 Henze and Judgment 150 Judgment Passage 1: Apocalypse of Abraham 5 152 Judgment Passage 2: Apocalypse of Abraham 7 154 Judgment Passage 3: Apocalypse of Abraham 13 163 Judgment Passage 4: Apocalypse of Abraham 29 170 Judgment Passage 5: Apocalypse of Abraham 29.14-31 174 Conclusion 178 Conclusion 180 Bibliography 184

!5 !6 Introduction

THE FOCUS OF THIS STUDY

This dissertation is a study of the role that judgment plays in three important texts for understanding Early Judaism. My central argument is that by evaluating the theme of judgment in these texts we better understand their purpose, their community’s interests, and, ultimately, better grasp the innovative theology of Jewish thinkers in the early decades of the 2nd-century

CE. The passages that deal with judgment are deeply nationalistic and frequently violent. Despite this, investigating how and why these thinkers discussed judgment the way that they did provides us with necessary information to fully grasp their purposes and what they valued.

These three authors, in particular, felt a disconnect between their inherited religious traditions and the possibility of living out the tenets of that faith in their contemporary situation. Whether offering intellectual resolution, encouragement for certain practices, or outright vengeance, these authors utilized judgment as a central feature in their discourse. For 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and

Apocalypse of Abraham, judgment was one theme that helped them calm their anxieties within their community and clarify people’s confusion over their unknown future

In one sense, the authors were concerned with how judgment on the human level of history fit with God’s overarching nature and justice. Because this issue holds such vast consequences for authors’ understandings of– and relation to their God, numerous other issues are tied up in the analysis of judgment. Haim Shapira captures this sentiment perfectly: “The relation between human judgment and Divine justice is not a purely theological matter; it has implications for the nature of the judicial process, the perception of the judges’ authority, the

!7 laws of evidence, the degree of judicial discretion, and other matters.”1 In other words, one’s religious conclusion about judgment affects how one views the logic of the theological system, the trust that the community should place in their God, the effectiveness of their religious teachings and the need to adhere to them, as well as the goodness of God in this context.

DEFINING JUDGMENT

The best definition of judgment as it relates to Early Judaism that I’ve encountered comes from Robert Farrar Capon. In a book on the judgment parables of Jesus, Capon describes the theme of judgment as “decisive, history-altering and history-fulfilling action on the part of

God.”2 This definition is notable for several reasons. First, it removes the negative connotation so often loaded into our use of “judgment” in religious contexts. When the Hebrew prophets announce the Day of Judgment, it sounds like a bad thing. And it is for many. But the word is not limited to negative connotations. Second, Capon captures what the word represented in its first- and second-century context. It’s about the actions of God that fundamentally shift the order of the world’s events. Third, and perhaps most importantly, Capon also includes God’s promises to his community in the definition. The actions of God will fulfill history—that is, they make good on what God has told his people that he would do for them through their prophets and teachers.

When discussing judgment, particularly in eschatological contexts, there is lack of precision over the details of what actually constitutes judgment. Because judges and courtrooms and pronouncements of judgments are so clear, we frequently refer to these matters without the

1 Haim Shapira, “‘For the Judgment is God’s’: Human Judgment and Divine Justice in the Hebrew Bible and Jewish Tradition,” Journal of Law and Religion 27.2 (2011-12): 273-328, 273-4. 2 Robert Farrar Capon, Kingdom, Grace, Judgment: Paradox, Outrage, and Vindication in the Parables of Jesus (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 347.

!8 need to clarify.3 But when it comes to the descriptions of eschatological teachings in Early

Jewish texts, we’d benefit from more precision on the matter.

Ultimately, though we hope for more precision, the material we analyze limits our ability to be precise. Early Jewish authors use the language of judgment without clearly defined boundaries on what is and is not judgment in the end times. Kent Yinger captures this with his entry on judgment in Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism. He writes: “No systematic doctrine of judgment existed in early Judaism. Divine judgment is found wherever God, or a representative appointed by God, is involved in some judging activity.”4 He’ll go on to clarify, much like Capon’s definition allowed for above, that judgment encompasses positive assessments by God as much as it does negative. “Most commonly, punitive actions against evildoers are prominent, but judgment is not restricted to negative or forensic matters, since ruling, deciding, and delivering also qualify as acts of divine judgment.” In my analysis below, we’ll see examples of each of these non-negative instances of judgment occur: ruling, deciding, and delivering.

With that said, my guiding definition of judgment is the one quoted above: it is a

“decisive, history-altering and history-fulfilling action on the part of God.”

3 On the English use of judgment, the OED provides these definitions: 1) The action or result of forming or pronouncing an opinion; 2)The formation of an opinion or conclusion concerning something, esp. following careful consideration or deliberation; 3) That which has been formally decided and pronounced to be the case; 4) A divine pronouncement; an eternal law or ordinance; 5) The pronouncing of a deliberate opinion upon a person or a thing, or the opinion pronounced. 4 Kent Yinger, “Judgment,” in J.J. Collins, ed. Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), 853-55, 853.

!9 4 EZRA, 2 BARUCH, AND APOCALYPSE OF ABRAHAM

I must now offer a few words on my selection of texts. 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Apocalypse of Abraham are relatively obscure texts, even within the field of Early Jewish literature.

However, these three texts come from a period of incredible theological and literary creativity.

The conquering of Jerusalem and the destruction its temple in 70 CE challenged Jewish thinkers of its time to come to terms with its tradition and its future. 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Apocalypse of

Abraham provide nuance and diversity in our understanding of that period’s religious developments.

While 2 Baruch and 4 Ezra are frequently analyzed together, I felt it was necessary to put

Apocalypse of Abraham into this conversation as well. Each author approaches the issue of the lost temple in different ways and offers his community different paths forward in their religious life.

The secondary literature lacks substantive investigations of judgment as a theme in my three texts. This does not mean that discussions of judgment are altogether absent, but, when they are present, they are one component in a larger analytical study. Sometimes judgment receives much attention, other times very little. I’ll discuss the important scholarly contributions to judgment as they pertain to material in chapters 2-4. For now, though, let me say a few words on other thematic studies of judgment.

Marius Reiser noticed the lack of discussion in New Testament scholarship on the important theme of judgment. His 1990 study, Die Gerichtspredigt Jesu, bemoaned that many volumes on Jesus, even those specifically about his religious program, failed to adequately

!10 discuss Jesus’s teachings on judgment.5 While scholars of Second Temple Judaism show more of a willingness to discuss the theme of judgment, especially when writing about the eschatological imagination of the authors (i.e. they do not have theological concerns about doing so). Still, focus on the topic is lacking. In Reiser’s reading, Jesus presented parallel notions of judgment to what we find in other Second Temple literature. However, Jesus believed the eschaton was imminent and proclaimed a message of salvation from judgment possible only through acceptance of Jesus and not through Torah observance.

That judgment pervades Second Temple literature should come as no surprise.

Deuteronomy held a high position in the Jewish literature of the period and contained clear references to God’s blessings and judgments based on human actions. Deuteronomy 28-32, in particular, ordered Israel to Torah observance and linked divine blessings with such observance.

The unfaithful were promised curses. When Israel was sinful, as part of God’s covenant with them, God punishes Israel until they repent. Then God restores divine blessings. This pattern of disobedience, judgment, repentance, and blessing proved incredibly rich and persuasive for authors attempting to explain Israel’s present and past crises. In a 2006 article, George

Nickelsburg demonstrates the influence of Deuteronomy 28-32 on many writings from the

Second Temple period.6 We find the Deuteronomic scheme—judgment leading to punishment for disobedience and reward for obedience—present in books of rewritten scripture, historical

5 Marius Reiser, Jesus and Judgment: The Eschatological Proclamation in its Jewish Context, translated by Linda M. Mahoney (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997). 6 George W.E. Nickelsburg, “Torah and the Deuteronomic Scheme in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha: Variations on a Theme and Some Noteworthy Examples of its Absence,” in Das Gesetz im frühen Judentum und im Neuen Testament. Edited by Dieter Sänger and Matthias Konradt. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht/Frigourg: Academic Press, 2006, 222-35.

!11 narratives, psalms, fictions, wisdom texts, and apocalyptic writings (like the three under discussion in this dissertation).7

The following study helps to rectify the omission of studies on judgment by looking at the important 2nd-century texts of 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, Apocalypse of Abraham.

DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY

Chapter 1 looks at the fundamental issue regarding interpretations of 4 Ezra: the development of its narrative. 4 Ezra serves as an important model of the consequences of my project. By closely reading and analyzing 4 Ezra’s passages on judgment, I argue that the interpretive lens through which we read this Early Jewish text becomes clear. Previous scholars have emphasized a transformative development for Ezra, the text’s main character. From this change in Ezra, then, they’ve derived their interpretations of the text as a whole. As I lay out in this chapter, such a reading imposes meaning onto the text which is not present in the narrative itself.

This chapter is essential to this project because it demonstrates the possible consequences of investigating the important theme of judgment that is so central to apocalyptic and eschatological thinking and yet so underemphasized in the secondary literature. Ezra misunderstands God’s judgment at the beginning of the text but pleads for his people to receive

7 Pauline scholars have taken up the issue of Deuteronomy’s influence on the Epistles and their descriptions of judgment and salvation. Richard Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993), argues that Deuteronomy provides the primary background for all of Paul’s theology; James M. Scott, “Paul’s Use of Deuteronomistic Tradition,” JBL 112 (1993): 645-65, argues more specifically that Paul’s understanding of Israel’s history and the redemption of Israel adapted Deuteronomy to Paul’s context. David Lincicum, Paul and the Early Jewish Encounter with Deuteronomy (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2013) emphasizes both Paul’s indebtedness to the Deuteronomic tradition and his unique application of judgment and reward.

!12 God’s mercy nonetheless. Because of his relentless attempt to comprehend the meaning of God’s judgment, God provides Ezra with three visions that reveal the necessary information regarding end-time judgment to clarify the matter for Ezra. Only with a better grasp of the author’s conception of judgment and its role alongside God’s justice do we see the importance of the natural narrative reading of 4 Ezra.

In Chapter 2, “Judgment in 4 Ezra,” I analyze twenty passages that explore the theme of judgment in 4 Ezra The close reading of these passages demonstrates several important conclusions: First, as the work of Chapter 1 shows, judgment is vital to the author of 4 Ezra. It not only dominates his community concerns but provides his narrative with driving force. The debate between Ezra and Uriel in the first three dialogues presents readers with varied aspects related to God’s judgment—from its impact on other nations to its role in the messianic future.

But doling out this information to Ezra piecemeal proves unsuccessful in solving Ezra’s concerns. It is the visions of eschatological judgment that demonstrate to Ezra both Israel’s place in God’s planned future, as well as the punitive judgment God will administer to the wicked nations. This new, revealed information sufficiently clarifies the matter for Ezra and he is able to provide the necessary guidance for his community needs.

With my third chapter, I turn my attention to 2 Baruch. Judgment also pervades 2

Baruch’s thought, and its author takes careful measures to adequately teach his community about

God’s judgment. One result from my analysis is that it reinforces our understanding of 2

Baruch’s purpose. Much more so than the other two texts I discuss in the dissertation, 2 Baruch is interested in offering its community clear teaching on its contemporary situation. Through this analysis of judgment, we see how Baruch explores judgment in order to motivate his audience to

!13 action. As I’ll show, knowledge is so important to Baruch’s way of understanding the world that he crafts a nuanced presentation on judgment that provides his audience with robust knowledge on the subject. From this, he calls them to act in faithfulness and confidence.

In Chapter 4, I explore the theme of judgment in Apocalypse of Abraham. It is with

Apocalypse of Abraham that judgment dominates its author’s theology, providing the means of its future hope. I show how judgment and its symbolic representation, fire, pervade Apocalypse of Abraham’s story and its underlying worldview. In particular, I emphasize that by conceiving of their God as “the judge,” this community found unexpected hope in God’s judgment. For them, the division between people is clear—God loves his chosen ones and vehemently hates all others. Though their contemporary situation does not seem to bear this out, Apocalypse of

Abraham encourages its audience to maintain its trust in God for the day is coming (and soon) where their enemies will be avenged. And not only that, according to the closing chapters of

Apocalypse of Abraham, part of the community’s reward to actively participate in the punitive nature of their enemies judgment.

Once completing my main analysis, I offer a conclusion to this study that brings together the major topics related to judgment in 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Apocalypse of Abraham.

Highlighting recurring themes of judgment and its relation to the nations, the Messiah, the and the author’s community, I show the common ground these authors covered. Additionally, I highlight that despite important similarities, 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Apocalypse of Abraham provide very different outlooks on the world and thus offer distinct theological insights. At the end of the conclusion, I point to the ways that others specializing in Early Jewish and Christian literature can benefit from this study.

!14 !15 Chapter 1: Judgment and Justice: On Reading 4 Ezra

INTRODUCTION

4 Ezra is a Jewish apocalypse from the late first– or early second–century CE.8 Written in response to the destruction of Jerusalem's temple in 70 CE (though fictionally set after the original Temple's destruction in 587 BCE), this apocalypse centers around issues of justice, judgment, faithfulness, and God's plan for history. The author divides his narrative into seven units: three dialogues between Ezra and an angelic guide, Uriel; three visionary episodes where

Ezra learns of Jerusalem's future, the role of the Messiah, and the eschatological transition to the new age; and a narrative conclusion that establishes Ezra's elevated role for his community.

Judgment is at the heart of 4 Ezra's story. The narrative begins with Ezra exhausted and distraught over the Temple's destruction. In response to a lengthy prayer of Ezra concerning

Israel's history, the angel Uriel engages Ezra over his sorrow. The two figures begin a conversation over Israel's current situation and its place in the divine action of history overall.

Though they cover a range of issues during the course of three rounds of continually returns to his central concern: "I do not wish to inquire about the ways above, but about those things that we daily experience—why Israel has been given over to the Gentiles as a reproach; why the

8 The Syriac text comes from R. J. Bidawid, ed. “4 Esdras” Part IV.III of The Old Testament in Syriac According to the Peshitta Version (Leiden: Brill, 1973), i-50. In addition to Syriac, witnesses to 4 Ezra survive in Latin, Greek, Armenian, Slavonic, Georgian, Arabic, Ethiopic, and Coptic. See Bruce Metzger, “The Fourth Book of Ezra,” in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 2 vols., ed. J. Charlesworth (Garden City: Doubleday, 1985), 1.518-9. Following recent trends in 4 Ezra scholarship, I will focus on the Syriac text of 4 Ezra when analyzing the text. For my study: I include translations of the Syriac in the main body of the text, with the Peshitta Syriac included in footnotes. Because of the right-to-left orientation of Syriac, I’ve right-aligned the Syriac text.

!16 people whom you love have been given over to godless tribes" (4.23).9 Ezra seeks clarity over

God's judgment at the hands of its enemies.

Beginning with 4 Ezra's fourth section, Ezra no longer dialogues with the angel but receives three visions and divine interpretations as a reward for his "righteousness" and that he has "grieved over Zion" (10.39).10 The first vision shows the emergence of a glorious new

Jerusalem after its destruction. Ezra's remaining two visions address his concerns over justice and judgment by giving him glimpses of the eschaton. The final narrative section focuses on how the community must adhere to both the teachings of the sacred tradition and new, revelatory teachings that Ezra received.11

Before proceeding, a word on how this chapter discussing readings of 4 Ezra fits in a dissertation on judgment. Based on both the evidence of this chapter, as well as my analysis of the twenty judgment passages in the next, I argue that the 4 Ezra's teaching on judgment is directly linked with how we read its unfolding narrative. The clarity Ezra receives over God's judgment is progressive. The dialogues fail to provide the necessary clarifying information, so

God shows Ezra Israel's future and the unfolding events of judgment. Because the consequences of analyzing 4 Ezra's passages on judgment prove so significant for understanding the text as a whole, I have devoted this first chapter to discussing it in detail.

9 L¥RÍ¥ad LÏµ mWÁÒ‰∫ NÁÒø n$Rı;ød NÁÒ¥a Lø A¬a .LØ¬d aTΔ$rwa Lø lA√ad TÁ∫;x RÁ© A¬ 4.23 .AØÁ√$r AÏ#ı◊¬ bH¥ta T∫\Δad AÂøw A$ÂÂØ¬ bH¥ta 10 10.39: For he has seen your righteousness, that you have mourned greatly for your people and grieved greatly over Zion. KÂø Lø T˙a L∫aTµ Y˝;ßw .KÂø Lø T˙a QØµ Y˝ßd ktwX¥rT¬ RÁ© ;hZΔ 10.39 nW¥hx Lø T˙a L∫aTµ Y˝;ßw 11 On the nature of the secret teachings, see G. H. Box, The Ezra-Apocalypse: Being Chapters 3-14 of the Book Commonly Known as 4 Ezra (or II Esdras): Translated with a Critical Commentary (London: Pitman, 1912), 113; Michael E. Stone, Fourth Ezra: A Commentary on the Book of Fourth Ezra. Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990) 412, 444 n.22.

!17 A NARRATIVE READING OF 4 EZRA

4 Ezra provokes its readers to feelings of respect for its titular character. Ezra is motivated by his unflinching loyalty to and concern over Israel. Ezra is a character wrestling with his faith at the greatest scale. He goes back and forth with God’s angelic emissary, Uriel.12

Ezra patiently listens to the angel’s words, tries to find consolation in them, and yet finds them wanting, even misguided. Here is a character, who through his persistence and faithfulness, is ultimately rewarded with truly life-altering heavenly knowledge in the form of visions. Even then Ezra’s determination and commitment to his people shows through: he insists that God share this same heavenly information with Ezra’s community. Ezra’s persistence pays off. As a result of Ezra's efforts his community receives 94 sacred books of information.

The reading of 4 Ezra just described is not the one readers encounter in the secondary literature. The traditional reading of 4 Ezra suggests that Ezra is not only wrong for his questioning of the angel, but, in the closing chapters of the story, Ezra receives a rebuke for his earlier stubbornness. According to this dominant scholarly reading of 4 Ezra, Ezra undergoes a transformation during the course of the narrative. His transformation moves Ezra from the wrong theological position to the correct one. Scholars suggest that Ezra's position in the dialogues is wrong because it challenged the traditional understanding of God, even in light of the contemporary situation, much like in the book of Job. God’s power overwhelms Ezra through the dissemination of heavenly knowledges.

12 On the tradition of questioning God in Israel’s literature, see J. Crenshaw, “Popular Questioning of the Justice of God in Ancient Israel,” ZAW 82: 380-95.

!18 The major scholars in this field identify a dramatic shift in Ezra’s character over the course of the narrative. Based on his psychological reading of the text, Stone calls it a

“conversion.”13 Najman uses the language of “transformation,” identifying two specific transformations for Ezra.14 Hogan suggests that he "experience[s] something like a conversion in the latter half of the book.”15 Collins also uses the language of “transformation” but pushes this interpretation to its limit, saying, “All commentators recognize that Ezra undergoes a transformation in the course of 4 Ezra.”16

The suggestion that Ezra acquiesces his position and accepts a new teaching does not match the Ezra I encounter on the page. The Ezra of the narrative never wavers. He questions; he wants to understand; but he never changes his position. He is ultimately rewarded with the clarity he seeks. Ezra does not have to choose between different positions, as many scholars suggest;

Ezra receives the reward of the heavenly clarity because of his tenacious questioning in chapters

3-9.

Just reading the 11 chapters of 4 Ezra, it is a narrative that presents a loyal and faithful leader who challenges the traditional understanding of divine teaching, refuses to be bullied into submission by a more knowledgable, more powerful divine actor. Ultimately, he is granted a

13 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 32. 14 Hindy Najman, Losing the Temple and Recovering the Future: An Analysis of Fourth Ezra (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014), 24. 15 Karina Martin Hogan, Theologies in Conflict in 4 Ezra: Wisdom Debate and Apocalyptic Solutions (Leiden: Brill, 2008), 26; cf. 38 and Martin’s discussion of "the gradual transformation." In one sense, my reading of 4 Ezra aligns closely to Hogan's because of her insistence on the essential revelation of the visions. However, she insists that both characters in the dialogues, Ezra and Uriel, represent different wisdom traditions wrestling with their post-70 CE context. These traditions ultimately fail to offer the community consolation and comfort and theological certainty. Thus, Hogan can say, "I do not see the dialogues as contributing to Ezra's conversion, except in a negative way" (38). For Hogan, like for Najman and Stone and others, there is a sharp disconnect between the character of the dialogues and the character that closes the story. 16 John J. Collins, “Enoch and Ezra,” in Fourth Ezra and Second Baruch: Reconstruction after the Fall, eds. M. Henze and G. Boccaccini (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 83-98, 93.

!19 reward for this devotion. Ezra asks for clarification on the connection between God’s judgment and heavenly justice, and he gets it! That’s why 4 Ezra's story is so powerful. For Ezra, it is unjust that Israel suffers judgment while the nations do not right now—even if they might someday receive future judgment. The visions of chapters 10-13 show Ezra that the heart of his understanding of the situation aligns with God's, though Ezra's comprehension is incomplete.

The dialogues with Uriel attempt to– but ultimately fail to help Ezra comprehend. There is more going on in the world than meets the eye, Uriel tells Ezra. God goes on to show Ezra this. The conclusion that Ezra (and 4 Ezra’s reader) reaches at the end of the narrative is that judgment, it turns out, is more complex than the community's traditional Deuteronomic reading.17

One of the reasons scholars have focused on the character development of Ezra is because the flow of the story is not seamless.18 4 Ezra's first three episode are formulaic: a back– and–forth dialogue between Ezra and Uriel preceded by Ezra's mourning and succeeded by a seven–day fast. Just as the reader comes to expect the rhythm of this pattern, the fourth episode breaks from it jarringly. Ezra does not participate in a dialogue but receives a vision. With the appearance of this first vision, the pattern changes for good. Loren Stuckenbruck suggests that “it is possible to argue that the disjuncture between the beginning and the end in 4 Ezra is only apparent.”19 From this, Stuckenbruck concludes that “4 Ezra may invite readers less to look for specific or single theological convictions to latch onto and more to pay attention to developments narrated in the work as a process, which is exemplified by the changes that the seer undergoes in

17 As DiTommaso, 132, remarks, “The first function of the book is to impart to its audience the author’s new insight about God’s saving activity in history.” 18 The structure of 4 Ezra’s narrative is not seamless, in part because “[t]he problems within 4 Ezra are reflected in both form and content, as Loren Stuckenbruck articulates: “Ezra’s Vision of the Lady: The Form and Function of a Turning Point” in Fourth Ezra and Second Baruch, eds. M. Henze and G. Boccaccini (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 137-50, 137, 19 Stuckenbruck, 138.

!20 the text.”20 The continuity we can find in 4 Ezra's narrative need not be in its generic patterns but in its main character. As I argue in the analysis below, Ezra never wavers from his nationalistic concern; everything is always about Israel and its fate in judgment. Though he articulates his appeal by referring to Babylon and other nations, his sole desire is for God to provide him with clarity on God’s plan for Israel. The visions of 4 Ezra 9-13 do not describe a seer undergoing some dramatic change. Instead, they provide Ezra the clarity he has so desperately been seeking.

Ezra recognizes God's justice, it turns out, only by seeing visions of the eschatological judgment for the unfaithful.

Stuckenbruck helpfully emphasizes the importance of understanding the unfolding narrative first, and only then address the text's theological positions or draw any conclusions about the real–life author behind the text. Throughout the narrative Ezra's personality, actions, and character remain consistent. God rewards Ezra's consistency in character with the visions of clarifying details about Israel's suffering, along with clarity on final judgment and God's justice.

My focus is primarily on Ezra, at the exclusion of Uriel. I do this for two reasons. First, Ezra is clearly the main character of the text. It is a story told from his perspective and concerns revelations that occurred to him. Second, whatever Uriel’s purpose is in the text, his comments fail to elucidate Ezra’s primary question about the role of Israel in God’s plan for the world.21

20 Stuckenbruck, 139. 21 His comments reflect the same message as that which Ezra receives in the visions of chapters 9-13. See Collins, “Ezra” 95-6; Lorenzo DiTommaso, “Who is the ‘I’ of 4 Ezra?” in Fourth Ezra and Second Baruch, eds. M. Henze and G. Boccaccini (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 119-33, see 127-29; Matthias Henze, "Review of Karina M. Hogan's Theologies in Conflict in 4 Ezra." SJSJ 130 (2010): 65-66.

!21 4 EZRA’S STRUCTURE

Discussing 4 Ezra’s structure is necessary to get to the text’s purpose.22 As mentioned at the start of the chapter, 4 Ezra is composed from the pseudepigraphal first-person perspective of

Ezra and set in the sixth century BCE. It fairly neatly divides into seven units of material: three dialogues between Ezra and the angel Uriel, three visions Ezra receives, and a concluding scene where Ezra passes on his information to the community.23 I'll begin by identifying the narrative markers of each section before going on to describe how these pieces fit together to reveal the author's purpose.

Each of the first three sections are distinct units and demarcated by similar openings about agitation, ritual mourning, and the passing of seven days.

Episode 1 begins in 3.3: My spirit was greatly agitated, and I began to speak frightening words to the Most High.24

Episode 2 begins: 5.20: And I fasted seven days, although I was mourning and weeping.25

Episode 3 begins: 6.35: And it was after these things I wept and fasted seven days as before, in order to complete the three sabbaths that were said to me.26

In each of these episodes, Ezra begins from a place of anxiety. Ezra complains, recounts Israel’s history and sufferings, asks lots of questions, and engages in arguments with Uriel, an angel working as God’s mouthpiece. In each dialogue, Uriel responds by asking Ezra series of

22 See Philip Esler, “The Social Function of 4 Ezra.” JSNT 53 (1994): 99-123. 23 Note that some refer to all seven units as “visions”: Stone, Fourth Ezra 50; Klaus Koch, “Esras erste Vision: Weltzeiten und Weg des Höchsten,” BZ NF 22: 1978, 46-75. 24 aTÒ$ÁΔd AÒ$µ AÂ¥Rµ tW¬ LÒ;µa T¥R;√w .Y˝ß YΔwr t\R\µdtaw 3.3 25 A;‰∫w T¥;wh J˙tTµ D˚ .NÁ$µW¥ AØı√ T;µx A˙aw 5.20 26 Y¬ n$RÁµad NÁ#ı√ T¬t MÒ;√ad .NÁ$µW¥ AØ#ı√ T;µxw TÁ;‰∫ .\NÁ¬h rT∫ Nµ aw\hw 6.35

Stone, Fourth Ezra, 55, "The reference in 6:35 to "three weeks" of fasting which Ezra was enjoined to observe, however, clearly implies that a fast was considered to have existed before Vision 1." See his introduction 4.3.1-4.3.6. Cf. Breech, "These Fragments," 270.

!22 questions that are impossible to answer, criticizing Ezra for thinking he is better than God, and selectively answering only parts of Ezra’s questions.27

There is no resolution at the end of the third dialogue. Ezra only receives a further set of instructions.

But if you will set aside another seven days—do not fast during them, however, but go into a field of flowers where no house has been built, and eat only of the flowers of the field, and taste no meat and drink no wine. So eat only flowers, and pray to the Most High diligently—then I will come and speak with you.28 4 Ezra 9.23-25

Following the angel’s instructions, once again there is a transitional marker indicating a new unit of text. In addition to Ezra’s anxiety and the passing of seven days that we saw in Episodes 1-3, the narrator adds Ezra’s location (a field) and his sustenance (flowers).29

Episode 4 begins: 9.26 So I went, as he directed me, into the field which is called Arpad. And there I sat among the flowers of the earth and ate of the plants of the field. Its sustenance satisfied me. 9.27 And it came to pass after seven days, I was lying on the grass, my heart was troubled again as it was before.30

Following the introduction to this section, Ezra makes an address to God like he does in the first three Episodes. This time, however, instead of a discussion with the angel, Ezra encounters a woman. She herself is mourning and weeping. This turns out to be a vision, only

27 Hall, 98. “The enlightenment Ezra seeks is too great for human comprehension. Uriel, who in 1 Enoch runs the cosmos, never tires of explaining that the understanding Ezra seeks exceeds his capacity (4.10-12; 5.34-40) and surpasses what is fitting for a human being to know (4.13-21). Yet to the request for understanding Uriel (and God) eventually accedes after much persistence on Ezra’s part, for in the climactic fourth vision Ezra receives that understanding which surpasses knowledge.” 28 nW˙a mwxt bwt A¬ A¬a .NÁ˙RΔa NÁ$µW¥ AØı√ vwRπt na N¥d T˙a 9.23 .MØƒt A¬ aRÍ∫w .dWÔÒ∫ aTØŒπd Aı#∫h Nµ lW˚aw .Y˜∫ta A¬ aTÁ∫d A‰;¥a .Aı#∫hd aTØŒ∏¬ lzw 9.24 aT√t A¬ aRÂΔw KÂø A˙a LÒÂµw ≥ .ktW¬ A˙a at;aw .T¥AÏÁ∏Δ AÂ¥Rµ Nµ YØ∫w dWÔÒ∫ Aı#∫h A¬a 9.25 29 Meredith Warren, “My Heart Poured Forth Understanding: 4 Ezra’s Fiery Cup as Hierophagic Consumption,” Studies in Religion 44.3: 320-33. 30 a$RŒø Nµ TÒ˚;aw .Aørad Aı#∫h Lø Nµt TÚ∫T¥w Dπra A¥RœTµd aTØŒ∏¬ Y˙DŒπd K¥a T¬z;aw 9.26 AØıÍ¬ nwhT¬W˚Aµ Y¬ twhw .aR∫dd YÒø awh V©T◊µ Yı¬ bwt awh yR√w .aRÁÂø Lø T¥;wh A\µr A˙aw .\NÁ$µW¥ AØı√ rT∫ Nµ aw\hw 9.27 .M¥Dœ Nµd K¥a

!23 Ezra does not realize it. Instead, he interacts with the woman, chastising her for mourning over her lost son instead of over the state of Israel. What Ezra does not comprehend at first—only finally grasping it after the angel explains the vision's meaning—is that the woman represents

Israel. She is in fact lamenting over the suffering of Jerusalem, which is represented in the vision by her son.

This vision of the woman is followed by two subsequent visions, each defined as such by the author.

Episode 5 begins: 11.1 And it was on the second night I saw a vision.31

Episode 6 begins: 13.1 After seven days, I saw a vision in the night.32

These two visions detail the events of the end of time. Ezra sees the arrival of the Messiah, the destruction of the wicked nations, the redemption of Israel, and the reward Israel receives for its faithfulness.

The last unit of material, Episode 7, sometimes referred to as 4 Ezra's epilogue, is equally distinguishable. The preceding eleven chapters are composed of three units of dialogue and three units of visions. The genre of the final section is a straightforward narrative. It begins with an appearance of God to Ezra, includes Ezra's instruction to the people and his preparation for their success, and finally Ezra's ascension into heaven. The transition from the previous section to

Episode 7 is as follows.33

31 awZΔ T¥Z;Δ A˜Á˙t AÁÒÒ∫ aw\hw 11.1 32 AÁÒÒ∫ awZΔ T¥Z;Δw \NÁ$µW¥ AØı√ rT∫ Nµ aw\hw 13.1 33 On the Moses typology here, Dale Allison The New Moses: A Matthean Typology (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993) remains the place to start.

!24 Episode 7 begins: 14.1 And it was after these things, on the third day, while I was sitting under an oak, a voice called out of a bush to me and said, "Ezra, Ezra.”34

Based on these signal markers in the text, a seven-fold structure of 4 Ezra is obvious: three dialogues, three visions, and a concluding episode.35 Though the units of 4 Ezra's structure are clear, it is not immediately apparent how the pieces fit together. Or just why the author put the text together this way.36

34 A˜øw .\YÒıœW¬d AÁ˜\ß Nµ \Q∏˙ AÒœ ahw .AƒWÒ∫ TÁΔt T¥;wh b;T¥ A˙aw .\NÁ¬h rT∫ Nµ aw\hw 14.1 .\arZø arZø .Y¬ R\µaw Hindy Najman has written extensively on the Moses reference of ch. 14: “How Should We Contextualize Pseudepigrapha? Imitation and Emulation in 4 Ezra,” in Flores Florentino: Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Early Jewish Studies in Honour of Florentino Garcia Martinez, eds A. Hillhorst et. al. (Leiden: Brill, 2007), 529-36); Past Renewals: Interpretative Authority, Renewed Revelation and the Quest for Perfection in Jewish Antiquity (Leiden: Brill, 2010); “Between Heaven and Earth: liminal Visions in 4 Ezra,” in Other Worlds and Their Relation to This World: Early Jewish and Ancient Christian Traditions, eds. T. Nicklas et. al. (Leiden: Brill, 2010). She reads the arrival in the narrative as the prophet like Moses in significantly different terms than I do. She writes in “Between Heaven and Earth,” 154, that "there is a seemingly unsurpassable gulf between the Ezra of the first three visions and the later Ezra who 'is taken up with ones like him.'" I think Ezra's Moses-like status is the culmination of his reward for the devotion to Israel he's demonstrated throughout the text. On this call motif, see Stone, Fourth Ezra, 410; Michael A. Knibb, “Commentary on 2 Esdras,” in The First and Second Books of Esdras: Commentary on 1 Esdras by R. J. Coggins and Commentary on 2 Esdras by M. A. Knibb (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 273-4. 35 Some, like Box, view this seven-fold structure as the product of a final redactor, not the original intent of the authors. He says, 558, “The Redactor who is responsible for the present form of our Apocalypse has impressed a certain unity on the book.” 36 These issues led an older generation of scholars to pick apart the text, identifying multiple sources and multiple authors and multiple editors. R.H. Charles, The Apocalypse of Baruch: Translated from the Syriac (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1896), 338-9, divided 4 Ezra into four separate units: a Salathiel apocalypse (3.1-31; 4.1-51; 5.13b-6.10; 6.30-7.25; 7.45-8.62; 9.13-10.57; 12.40-48; 14.28-35.), an Ezra apocalypse, the eagle vision, the Son of Man vision. These four units were then combined by a redactor into the final form of the text, our chapters 3-14. Such theories of patchwork composition and a strong editorial hand help to resolve the 4 Ezra's tension that appears with the shift in genre in chapter 9. But while this source-critical reading helps explain how the visions fit with the earlier dialogues, it only further complicates our understanding of the content of these chapters. If 4 Ezra failed to make sense as it stands, then such readings are unavoidable. However, since 4 Ezra makes narrative sense as a single unified narrative, it is best to read it as so. On 4 Ezra’s issue of pseudonymity, see A.P. Hayman, “The Problem of Pseudonymity in the Ezra Apocalypse,” JSJ 6.1 (1975): 47-56.

!25 EZRA THE CONVERT: TRADITIONAL READINGS OF 4 EZRA

Due to the overwhelming dominance of the Transformed Ezra position, the most important feature of 4 Ezra, if you were simply to interact with current secondary literature, is that the main character undergoes a radical transformation. Ezra’s transformation in the 4 Ezra narrative suggests different things to different scholars—from the author’s own theological struggles37 to something that the audience38 is meant to emulate.39 Reading 4 Ezra as a story where its main character switches from his own perspective to another one drastically alters the way we view the text. 4 Ezra is a complex book and some of its formal difficulties have led scholars to this conclusion about Ezra’s transformation.40 The general outline of 4 Ezra, according to this perspective, is that Ezra laments the state of Israel and the world, and he argues with a divine emissary for three sections of text (chs. 3-9). The genres then shift at the end of chapter 9—from dialogue to apocalyptic vision in 9.26. The transformation of Ezra the character in the text corresponds to the formal shift between dialogue and vision.

The problem, however, is that this transformational reading is not the natural way of reading 4 Ezra as a piece of literature. Instead, reading the narrative from beginning to end, the

37 Michael E. Stone, Ancient Judaism: New Visions and Views (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011), 95: “I realized that the book cohered and communicated its central message if I posited at its heart a complex religious experience presented by the agency of the pseduepigraphic author.” 38 On audience, see Philip Esler, “The Social Function of 4 Ezra,” JSNT 53 (1994): 99-123; Bruce Longenecker, “Locating 4 Ezra: A Consideration of its Social Setting and Functions,” JSJ 28.3 (1997): 271-93. 39 Najman, Losing, 24: “This unity [i.e. the text’s] consists in a transformation that the intended reader is supposed to emulate: a passage from confusion and doubt in the wake of destruction to formation as a subject able to receive the Torah anew.” 40 This is primarily related to 4 Ezra’s use of distinct genres and certain behavior from the protagonist in the latter half of the text. 4 Ezra’s composition and the narrative arc of Ezra will be discussed below. Here it is simply worth highlighting that the idea that the author of text wrote his own theological development into the narrative causes us to approach the story from a different perspective. Such a dramatic hermeneutic must be called for from the book itself and not assumed. Part of what this chapter will do is demonstrate that the evidence is insufficient to support such a reading of 4 Ezra in which the author creatively depicted his own religious experience in narrative world of 4 Ezra.

!26 audience encounters a protagonist, Ezra, who repeatedly asks for clarity regarding the theme of judgment and its relationship to God's justice.41 After several failed attempts by an angel to convince Ezra that there is no contradiction between God’s justice and God’s judgment, God offers Ezra a series of visions that demonstrate how God’s justice and judgment work together.

The visions clarify and answer the question that Ezra has repeated all along.

Based on the text of 4 Ezra itself, we are meant to read the apocalyptic visions as the reward for the passion and loyalty to Israel behind Ezra's questioning. Following his vision of

Jerusalem in the fourth episode, Uriel tells Ezra that "the Most High has revealed many secrets to you because he has seen your righteous conduct, that you have sorrowed greatly for your people, and mourned over Zion” (10:39).42 Following Ezra's second vision, where he sees the Messiah's judgment on the wicked rulers and nations, God tells Ezra that "you alone were worthy to learn this secret of the Most High" (12.36).43 After Ezra's final dream, and before he goes on to instruct his community on how to remain faithful in the days and years to come, God again reassures

Ezra and tells why he receives the vision. "And you alone have been enlightened about this because you have forsaken your own ways and have applied yourself to mine. And you have

41 Isolde Andrews, “Being Open to the Vision,” Literature and Theology 12.3 (1998): 231-41, 234: “All Ezra can do is be open to the visions he experiences and to his deepening apprehension of the otherness of God with each vision. This does not mean that he effectively gains no knowledge of God. He gains no knowledge in the sense that one acquires knowledge from enquiries about an object. What he gains is the opening o this imaginative mind to the possibilities of God with each vision. This enables him to perceive the baffling contingencies in which he lives, in the light of wisdom that far exceeds his petty griping about Israel’s current circumstances and what he sees as Israel’s natural rights. By the end of Fourth Ezra, Ezra approaches God without his own agenda. He is open to the vision of God.” 42 aAÁ#˝ß aza$r K¬ A\Ò© AÂ¥Rµd LÏµ .T˙a L;Δdd NÁÒ¥a Lø K¬ AÒ©;aw .K∏¬;aw Y˜ÁØÂ√ 10.38 L∫aTµ Y˝;ßw .KÂø Lø T˙a L∫aTµ Y˝;ßw .KÂø Lø T˙a QØµ Y˝ßd ktwX¥rT¬ RÁ© ;hZΔ 10.39 nW¥hx Lø T˙a 43 HŒ√Wπ W˙;hw .T¥\ZΔd awZΔ W˙h 12.35 AÂ¥Rµd hzar odtd T¥\wT√a K¥dWÔÒ∫ wh T˙aw 12.36

!27 searched out my law. For you have devoted your life to wisdom and called understanding your mother" (13.53-54).44

The Ezra of the end of the book is still the same as the Ezra of the beginning: steadfast in his commitment to Israel, earnest in his desire to understand the consequences of God’s justice.

Ezra’s position does not change but his access to divine knowledge does. The difference is subtle, but significant. It is true that Ezra moves from a position of confusion to one of clarity.

The visions provide Ezra new information (and therefore clarity) by showing God’s entire plan for the eschaton. The comprehensive visions enlighten Ezra about judgment in a way that Uriel's non-comprehensive statements in the dialogues could not.

At the beginning of the story, the reason Ezra is confounded by the state of Israel is because Israel’s cultic center was destroyed, and the people were living under foreign oppression. According to Ezra’s analysis of the situation, God had judged Israel and cast her out.

Thus, Israel no longer held the special status as God’s favored nation. Ezra’s analysis stems from his theological understanding of the Deuteronomic principle.45 What does not add up for Ezra, though, is that the Deuteronomic principle of reward for obedience and judgment for disobedience only applies to Israel. “What about the other nations?” Ezra asks. “They don’t keep

God’s statutes and yet there they are fully rewarded and living with apparent blessing.” Ezra begs and pleads with God for an explanation to this theological problem. If God will just explain

44 kdWÔÒ∫ K¬ ≥NÁ¬h K¬ YÒ©ta A˙h LÏµ .T¥Z\Δd awZΔd HŒ√Wπ W˙h 13.53 TÁ\Ø∫ NÁ˙$a AßWÂ˙dd NÁÒ¥aw .NÁ˙$a NÒ¥dd NÁÒ¥a Lø K¬ LÏ∫taw .NÁ˙$a KÒ¥dd NÁÒ¥a TŒ»ı√d LÏµ 13.54

Cf. 4 Ezra 8:62, speaking of how humans created their own trouble by ignoring God, Ezra is told: “I have not shown this to all men, but only to you and a few like you.” See also 6:32–33. 45 Nickelsburg, “Torah and the Deuteronomic Scheme,” 222-35; Wolfgang Harnisch, Verhängnis und Verheißung der Geschichte: Untersuchungen zum Zeit- und Geschichtsverständnis im 4 Buch Esra und in der syr. Baruchapokalypse (Göttingen: Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, 1969),145-9, speaks of the author's shift from traditional Deuteronomic theology in light of his understanding of the end times.

!28 himself, Ezra and the people will fall in line. But first, they must understand how God has worked out this system of judgment.

As the narrative of 4 Ezra proceeds, Ezra and the angel go back and forth on the issue of justice. Ezra stubbornly refuses to accept the angel’s insistence that Ezra simply needs to trust

God—in other words, that there is in fact a plan. Ezra insists on knowing how God resolves the theological problem of suffering in Israel with his apparent blessing to other nations. Because

Ezra’s readings of Israel’s teachings does not support them. After three rounds of dialogue, God apparently realizes that Ezra will only come to understand when he sees it for himself. God decides to show, not tell.

The visions are meant to clarify Israel’s current state in light of God’s plan for human history. The visions convince Ezra that he did not have the full (divine) picture at the beginning of the story. Through the visions, Ezra better understands how judgment, justice, and Israel’s current state fit into God’s plan for history. At the conclusion of the narrative, with newfound clarity and understanding, Ezra provides instruction to the people so that they, too, may in fact experience God’s blessing (instead of punishment) at the end of time.

Like all good stories, there is a discernible narrative development for Ezra over the course of the text. He moves from uncertainty and confusion to clarity and confidence.46 But this narrative is distinctly not one of transformation, which drastically shifts the text’s meaning. Ezra does not go from the wrong position to the right one. Instead, it describes the protagonist’s

46 This movement is important for the audience, too. Earl Breech, “These Fragments I have Shored Against my Ruins: The Form and Function of 4 Ezra” JBL 92.2 (1973): 267-74, 274, “The author, under the stress of the consciousness that Jerusalem had once again been wasted, took up the broken fragments of the community’s traditions and, drawing upon ancient patterns of consolation, constructed a literary work in a form or a pattern that might dispel the community’s religious confusion.”

!29 stubborn refusal to abandon the idea of Israel’s special status and it depicts a character who is actually rewarded by God at the end of the 12 chapters.47 Ezra does not change. Ezra’s views do not change; his access to revelation does.48

In this chapter I will demonstrate the importance of recognizing the proper narrative emphasis—revelation concerning God’s judgment, not transformation.

MAKING SENSE OF 4 EZRA’S GENRE CHANGES AND EZRA’S

CHARACTER

In Michael Stone’s commentary on 4 Ezra—the most significant and monumental work done on 4 Ezra to date—he argues convincingly for 4 Ezra’s literary integrity.49 While Stone’s overall conclusion regarding the protagonist and the text’s author cannot be supported, his magisterial work remains the place to begin this analysis. Stone suggests that the narrative of 4

Ezra and its switches in genre result from the “psychological” interest of 4 Ezra’s author.

Building on the work of Hermann Gunkel, Stone argues that the author of 4 Ezra had personally struggled over the issue of God’s justice, only to finally accept that God knows better than he.

While initially pushing back against the divine position on justice (mediated through Uriel), Ezra

47 Robert Hall, Revealed Histories: Techniques for Ancient Jewish and Christian Historiography (New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2015), 98, observes that during the dialogues “Ezra’s request to understand God’s dealings with Israel is also consistently denied.” 48 Breech, 269, identifies a similar narrative thrust as I do for 4 Ezra, though he uses different phrasing: “I would suggest that the formal principle which structures 4 Ezra as a literary composition is what may be called the pattern of consolation. The form of the work is constituted by the narrative of Ezra’s (not the author’s) movement from distress to consolation, from distress occasioned by the destruction of Jerusalem to consolation by the Most High himself who reveals to the prophet, in dream visions, his end-time plans.” 49 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 11-23.

!30 ultimately is forced to reject his earlier reasoning and change course, coming to terms with God's version of events.

Ezra's struggle over justice is central to the three dialogues the protagonist has with Uriel.

For Stone, Ezra's questions reflect real, historical questions—ones actually posed by the author of 4 Ezra. Just as Ezra the character is a manifestation of the author's theological doubts, so, too, is Uriel an externalized version of the author. Stone claims that Uriel “represents that part of himself which wishes to accept but is forced to doubt the impact of events of the history of Israel and the world.”50 Taken in this way, the theological debate of chapters 3-9 is deeply personal.

Rocked to his core, the author fictionalizes his own attempts to work towards a satisfactory resolution. “Thus it is in the first three visions. Ezra and the angel are both the author but are

Janus faces of the author’s self.”51 According to Stone, the author’s despair, his struggle and anxiety, finds relief only in a transformational religious experience. Ezra's visionary episode of chapters 9-10 recounts the author’s moment of conversion.

Stone’s reading has its merits—just look at his widespread influence over contemporary scholarship on 4 Ezra. But this psychological reading also has its challenges; challenges that I find insurmountable. Stone’s entire reading of 4 Ezra is governed by what developments take place in the text for Ezra, the protagonist and “hero” of 4 Ezra.52 The question, then, is what happens to Ezra over the course of 4 Ezra’s story?53

50 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 32. 51 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 32. 52 Hero is Stone’s language: Stone, Fourth Ezra, 31. In this case, that often used metaphor, "hero," is technically accurate only if you accept Stone's conclusions about what happens to Ezra. The traditional definition of hero is crystallized in Joseph Campbell's The Hero with a Thousand Faces (New York: New World Library, 2008). There he refers to transformation as an essential part of the mythic hero. 53 I’ll say more about this below, but a convincing analysis of 4 Ezra must begin with what the text describes as happening to Ezra the character, not what we think the supposed author was going through.

!31 According to Stone, what happens to Ezra is that he undergoes a “conversion” in the fourth episode.54 With episode four, the text quickly shifts away from dialogue and contains echoes back to Ezra’s laments at the beginning of chapter three. Whereas with the next two dreams Ezra clearly understands them as dreams, that is not so with his first vision. Ezra prays about the incongruity between God’s promise of the law reaping reward from the people and the fact that people still sin and face judgment.

As a result of his prayer, Ezra’s vision begins, only he does not recognize that it is a vision. “While I was saying these things in my heart, I lifted up my eyes and saw a woman on my right side. She was mourning and weeping” (9.38).55 Ezra interacts with the woman like he did with the angel previously until, completely unexpectedly, she changes before his eyes into a city.56 Ezra cries out to Uriel to make sense of the madness he has seen, still not realizing that it was a vision. Uriel appears when Ezra was “laying on the earth like a dead person and was deprived of knowledge” (4 Ezra 10.30).57 The angel then interprets the vision for Ezra, explaining that God chose to reveal it to him because of his passionate sorrow over Israel (4 Ezra

10.39).

So why do scholars mark this moment as one of radical change for Ezra? It's not merely to explain the text's dramatic shift in genre, though that has been argued. Stone provides several pieces of evidence to suggest that it is in Ezra's interaction with the woman of the vision that he converts/transforms from the character of the dialogues to the recipient seer of the apocalyptic visions.

54 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 32. 55 A˜ÁÂ¥d Aı© Nµ atT˙a T¥;ZΔw Y$˜Áø TÂ¥r;a \YıÒ∫ T¥;wh LÒÂµ NÁ¬h D˚w 9.38 A;µr AÒŒ∫ AÁ‰∫w »twh aDœRµ D˚ 56 4 Ezra 10.25-27. 57 .awh Y˜◊µ YøDµw .aTÁµ K¥a .Aøra Lø A˙a A\µr D˚ Y˙ZΔw 10.30

!32 First and foremost for Stone, the Ezra of the dialogues and the woman of the vision share similar behaviors. Most importantly, "Both [the woman and the Ezra of the dialogues] are promised or receive redemption after 30 years (3:1; 9:43); both fast, mourn, and weep."58 The similarity between Ezra and the woman results from the chronological reference and the actions of both figures. Regarding this similarity, the reference to 30 years certainly seems to be an intentional parallel but it does not suggest that anything notable has changed.

Here are 4 Ezra 3.1 and 9.43.

.Lıı∫ T¥;wh yT;¥a .\arZø yT¥ad L¥aTÒ√ ;A˙a nT˜¥Dµd ;hT¬W∏µd N¥T¬t T˜◊∫ 3.159 .Yı¬ Lø yw$h NŒ$Òß aTı$◊Ôµw .T¥;wh H¥wtw yT¥W√t Lø T¥;wh A\µrw

.NÁ$˜√ N¥T¬t yRı© Mø T¥wh D˚ .;tD;Ò¥ A¬w \kTµa A˙a T¥w;h atRŒø 9.4360

In a text almost entirely devoid of dates, the repeated use of 30 years is surely significant.61 So what to make of the 30 years? One possibility is that it could be a veiled reference to the date of

4 Ezra’s composition, i.e. 100 CE.62 Since the text clearly describes the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, which occurred in 70 CE, it must have been written afterwards.63 The author could be implying that Ezra’s 30 years in the narrative reflect the passage of actual time of the author

58 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 31. 59 "In the thirtieth year after the destruction of our city, I, Salathiel, who is Ezra, was in Babylon.” 60 “Your handmaid was barren and did not bear a child, though I was with my husband 30 years.” 61 See Michael E. Stone, “Lists of Revealed Things in the Apocalyptic Literature,” in Magnalia Dei: The Mighty Acts of God: Essays on the Bible and Archaeology in Memory of G. Ernest Wright, eds. by F. M. Cross, W. E. Lemke, and P. D. Miller, (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1976): 414-52. 62 W. Baldensperger, Das Selbstbewusstsein Jesu im Licht der messianischen Hoffnungen seiner Zeit (Strassburg: Heitz & Mündle, 2903), 52; Box, xxviii-xxxiii; Kabisch, 85; J. Keulers, “Die eschatologische Lehre des vierten Esrabuches,” Biblische Studien 20.2-3 (1922): 1-240, 119; P. Bogaert, L’Apocalypse syriaque de Baruch (Paris: Cerf, 1969), 1.284-86. On a general date see Hermann Gunkel, “Das vierte Buch Esra,” in Die Apokryphen und Pseudepigraphen des alten Testaments, ed. E. Kautzsch (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1900), 352; F. C. Porter, The Messages of the Apocalyptical Writers (New York: Scribner’s, 1905), 334; Stone, Fourth Ezra, 55. 63 Lydia Gore-Jones, “The Unity and Coherence of 4 Ezra,” JSJ 47 (2016): 212-35, reads 4 Ezra as an attempt to re-emphasize the biblical notions of covenant and election into response to Judaism’s post-70 crisis. Cf. Stone, Fourth Ezra, 9-10.

!33 since the temple’s destruction. While that is of course possible, there is nothing else in the text that points in that direction.64 But the reference to 30

A more likely possibility is that the author is making an intentional reference to the opening chapter of Ezekiel. Throughout the narrative of 4 Ezra, the other characters refer to Ezra as a prophet.65 The reference to 30 years at the beginning of 4 Ezra could be seen to signal that

Ezra is a prophet of the exile just like Ezekiel. Ezekiel was the prophet famously weeping along the rivers Chebar over Israel’s displacement (Ezek 3.12-21). He began his book “In the thirtieth year, in the fourth month, on the fifth day of the month, I was among the exiles by the river

Chebar, the heavens were opened, and I saw visions of God.”66 The prophetic Ezra of 4 Ezra, weeping after 30 years of turmoil, certainly nods in that direction of Ezekiel.67

As for the use of 30 years for the woman's suffering in ch. 9, we know its meaning from the text itself. The angel interprets it for Ezra. "And as for her telling you that she was barren for

30 years, it is because there were three thousand years in the world before any offering was offered in it" (10.45). It is possible that the woman’s 30 years could be interpreted along the same lines as Ezra’s above (date of composition, allusion to Ezekiel), in direct conflict with the text’s own interpretation. But it need not be. Even though Stone is trying to make a link between

Ezra and the woman, his commentary on 9.35 acknowledges that there are possibilities for the use of “30 years” native to the woman vision itself (such as it representing the 3,000 years of the

64 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 55, “There are no other examples in the apocalypses of the use of dates with the intent of indicating the precise year of composition by exact correspondence.” 65 12.42 “For of all the prophets you alone are left to us.” \AÁ#ı˙ nwH¬W˚ Nµ N¬ tR\ΔT√a RÁ© wh T˙a 66 h™Dlwø…gAh_JKwáøtVb y¶InSaÅw v®d$OjAl h∞DÚvImSjA;b ‹yIoyIb√r`D;b hGÎnDv My∞Iv ølVvI;b —y∞Ih◊yÅw My`IhølTa twñøa√rAm h™Ra√rRaÎw Mˆy$AmDÚvAh ‹…wjV;tVpˆn r¡DbV;k_rAh◊n_lAo 67 See Christopher Rowland, The Open Heaven: A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early Christianity (Eugune: Wipf & Stock, 2002), 214-49; Christopher Rowland, “The Visions of God in Apocalyptic Literature” JSJ 10.2 (1979): 137-54.

!34 interpretation, or that it is native to the story of the woman which circulated before 4 Ezra's composition).68 So while the 30-years reference might suggest a parallel between the woman and

Ezra, though the text certainly does not require such a reading.69

Stone also finds support for Ezra's transformation in the way that Ezra and Uriel of the dialogues are "replaced" by the woman and Ezra, respectively. In other words, Ezra now acts like

Uriel—comforting, correcting theology, chastising for lack of faith—and the woman now acts like Ezra—whiny, uncomprehending, misguided, mourning.70 Support for these "replacements" is slim. Stone highlights that both "fast, mourn, and weep."71 The woman indeed is said to mourn and weep (no mention of fasting, though): "She was mourning and weeping with a loud voice, and was deeply grieved at heart, and her clothes were rent, and there were ashes on her head" (4

Ezra 9.38). From this, Stone concludes: "her conduct in fasting, mourning, and weeping over her loss is exactly like Ezra's conduct described in the narratives between Vision 1 and 2 and between Visions 2 and 3. Indeed, it may be significant that this conduct is attributed to the woman at a point in the narrative in which Ezra has moved beyond such conduct."72 I propose another possibility. Just as Ezra wept over the nature of Israel’s judgment, so, too, is the woman

68 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 313. On the latter possibility Stone writes, "This period of time belongs to the old level of the tale and is meant to indicate how acute the problem of the woman's infertility was and how tremendous her conception and birth." 69 This does not mean that the author’s use of the 30 years in both cases was not intentional. If you still want to argue for the link between the two figures and the use of 30 years you can do so, in this way: the woman does not represent the Ezra of ch. 3, but that the Ezra of ch. 3 represents who the woman is identified as: Israel. Read in this light, Ezra's suffering parallels the suffering of Israel following the destruction of the temple. This has the benefit of fitting with the angel's overall explanation. We cannot conclude, then, that Ezra has converted away from his earlier position because of a chronological parallel between the 30 years of 3.1 and the woman's 30 years of mourning in 9.43. 70 Harnisch 60-67; E. Brandenburger, Adam und Christus: Exegetisch-religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung zu Röm 5:12–21 (1 Kor 15) (Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag, 1962), 30-35; Stone, Fourth Ezra, 230 argue that Uriel corrects Ezra’s extreme views. 71 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 31. 72 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 312.

!35 doing so here. Perhaps the woman’s weeping justifies, or at least supports, Ezra’s earlier state of anguish. If you recall, the angel was not rebuking Ezra for his weeping. The rebuke was that he was incorrectly challenging God’s justice.

While there is no denying the similar states of mourning for Ezra and the woman, it is not clear that Ezra acts at all like the angel.73 Ezra does chastise the woman, but chastises her for not mourning over Israel’s suffering (though, ironically, she actually is). Uriel chastised Ezra for focusing too much on the suffering of Israel, instead of just trusting God’s process. Stone homes in on 10.5, where Ezra says that in response to the woman's story of suffering he "broke off the reflections with which I was still engaged," and began responding to her. Stone suggests that the repetition of this phrase (used previously in 9.39 when Ezra first asked the woman why she was crying) "serves to reemphasize the change in the seer's orientation."74 Simply breaking off his own thoughts to engage the woman does not suggest a "reversal of Ezra's role."75 Nowhere do we find the angel collecting his own thoughts, pondering God's ways, only to break them off in order to engage Ezra. If Ezra's role has reversed and he is acting the part of the angel, the breaking off of thoughts does not signal this. So, there is still no textual support for reading the replacement of Uriel with Ezra and Ezra with the Woman.

73 The language in the major witnesses does not require a direct parallel between the two figures. When Ezra sees the woman in 9.38 we read: When I said these things in my heart I lifted up my eyes and saw a woman on my right. And she was mourning and weeping with a loud voice, and was deeply grieved at heart, and her clothes were rent, and there were ashes on her head (;H◊¥r Lø awh A\µr aR∏øw .wwh NÁœDÍµ ;HÁ˙$Aµw .Y˝;ß AŒØµw twh AÔ˙tTµ ;H◊∏˜∫w .A;µr AÒŒ∫ AÁ‰∫w »twh aDœRµ D˚). 9.40: Why are you weeping and why is your soul grieving (Y‰◊∏˜∫ yT˙a AŒØµw yT˙a AÁ;‰∫ A˜Â¬); 9.41: She answered and said to me, “Leave me, my lord and I will weep over my soul and add again that I groan because of great bitterness to my soul. I am greatly humbled. ( .A˙a A‰‰Âµ Bƒw .Y◊∏˜¬ ;H¬ aR¥Rµ Y˝;ßd LÏµ \J˙ttad bwt Pßwaw .Y◊∏˙ Lø A‰Ú∫aw yRµ Y˜ÁœWı√ .Y¬ tR\µaw T˙\øw) 74 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 318. 75 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 323.

!36 Stone additionally argues that Ezra accepts Uriel's teaching from the dialogues, thus showing Ezra's transformation. So, not only does Ezra imitate Uriel’s behavior, he also has come to accept his arguments. "In the address at the start of [episode] 1, Ezra cast deep doubt on the justice of God's action; here he holds out God's very justice as a comfort to the woman. He offers wholeheartedly that comfort which he was unable to accept when it was extended to him."76

There is no doubt that Ezra doubts the justness of God's actions in the dialogues. But for Ezra to show he's accepted Uriel’s teachings, there would need to be more in his interaction with the woman. Ezra, for example, would need to suggest that the woman blindly accept Ezra’s claim that God is just. But he does not do this. Instead, he instructs her to shift the focus of her concern

—from her "son" to Israel's loss. By focusing on Israel, Ezra suggests that God will reward the woman. Ezra himself has focused on the state of Israel and it is his belief that God will eventually reward him. This is not evidence for Ezra’s conversion, but, instead, a demonstration of the consistency of his perspective.

The reason that I dwell on this particular matter of interpretation is that Stone's whole reading of the fourth episode—in fact his reading of all of 4 Ezra—is dependent upon Ezra's reversal of roles. "It is extremely important to note the reversal of roles in this section.

Brandenburger observed acutely that in this vision Ezra changes from the one comforted to the giver of comfort."77 The most important piece of evidence for Stone is that Ezra's movement from mourner to comforter negates his previous line of thought. Here I quote Ezra's response to the woman in full. Notice Ezra's words and the extent of comfort they offer.

76 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 31. 77 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 318. Cf. Brandenburger, 81.

!37 10.6 ”You most foolish woman of all women, do you not see our mourning, and what has occurred to us? 7 Behold Zion, the mother of us all, is in great sorrow and is greatly humbled. 8 It is important to mourn now, because we are mourning. You are sorrowing only one son, while w mourn over our mother. 9 But ask the earth and she will tell you that she is the debtor to mourn over a great number who have come upon her. 10 And from the beginning all are from her, and others who will come. Behold, all depart to loss, and a multitude of them to destruction. 11 Who therefore owes more to grieve, this one who lost so great a multitude to perish, or you who are grieving for one? But if you say to me 12 'My grief is not like the earth's sadness, for the fruit of my womb has perished, which I brought forth in pain and in sorrow. 13 But it is with the earth, according to the nature of the earth. The multitude that is now in it goes as it came.' For I say to you, 14 'As you birthed in weariness, so the earth also has the earth given its fruit from the beginning. The human who made it.' 15 Now, therefore, take your suffering inside, and with strength endure the evils that have come to you. 16 For if you acknowledge the decree of Most High’s judgment to be right, you will receive your son back in time, and you will be praised among women. 17 Therefore, go into the city to your husband."78

[After the woman telling Ezra that she will not do what he said] 20 "Do not do that thing, but let yourself be persuaded because of the troubles of Zion, and be consoled because of the sorrow of Jerusalem. 21 For you see that our sanctuary has been laid waste, our altar thrown down, our temple destroyed. 22 Our harp has been laid low, our song has been silenced, and our rejoicing has ended. The light of our lamp stand has been put out, the ark of our covenant has been plundered, our holy things have been polluted, and the name by which we are called has been profaned. Our free men have suffered abuse, our priests have been burned to death, our Levites have gone into captivity, our virgins have been defiled. And our wives have been ravished, our righteous men have been carried off, our little ones have been cast out, our young men have been enslaved, and our strong men made powerless. 23 And, what is more than all, the seal of Zion, for she has now lost the seal of her glory and has given over into the hands of those that hate us. 24 Therefore shake off your 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."79

78 .N√D©d mDÂ¬w NÒ∫A¬ yT˙a A¥Z;Δ A¬ .A$◊˙ N¥H¬W˚ Nµ .atT˙a ytHÁ‰π Bƒ 10.6 .A‰‰Âµ A∫r A‰˚WÂ∫w .atAÁ˝ß aTŒØ∫ ;H¥T¥a NÒ˚d Aµa nW¥hx ahd 10.7 .DΔ aR∫ Lø yT˙a AŒØµ RÁ© T˙a .N˜ÁÒ∫aTµ NÒ˚ .\AØ∫Tµ WÒ∫aTÂ¬ N¥d A√h 10.8 .Nµa Lø AÂÒø HÒ˚ N¥d N˜Δ .;HÁÒø wwhd nW˙a N¥AÁ#˝ßd LÏµ .L∫attd .Aı;ÁΔ y\hd LÏµ .Y‰¬ Rµatw AørA¬ N¥d ;HÁ¬A√ 10.9 .NÁ¬z;a A˙D∫A¬ nwHÒ˚ ah N¥t;ad NÁÒ¥a A˙$RΔaw .;HÁÒø wwhd NÁÒ¥a nwH¬W˚ V¥r Nµw 10.10 .nwhA©Wß aw;h AÒı;Ô¬w DΔ Lød T˙a wa .\ytD∫wa aA©Wß H¬W˚ A˙hd ;y;h L∫aT˙ T¥aR¥T¥d BÁ;Δ LÁ˚h W˜\µ 10.11 Y¬ Rµat N¥d naw .yT˙a AÒ∫aTµ .T;Á∫r A∫$A‰∫w tD;Ò¥ AÒ#ıÔ∫d ;wh .tD∫wa YßR˚d ;H¥$rAπ A˙ad LÏµ .AøraD¬ YÒ¥d YÒ∫a A;µd A¬d 10.12 Y‰¬ A˙a R;µa bwt N¥d A˙aw .a»tad K¥a ;H¬ a»taw .aA©Wß l\za Aørad ;H˜Á˚ K¥a RÁ© Aøra 10.13 hDıød w;H¬ \A◊˙R∫ V¥r Nµ .;H¥$rAπ T∫;H¥ Aøra pa A˜˚h .\ytDÒ¥ atwAÒ∫ yT˙ad A˜;‰¥a 10.14 .Y˚T√D©d aT◊Á∫ yRıÁß AÒÁÔ∫w .Y‰◊Δ Y˚W˝∫ ydWΔa LÁ˚h A√h 10.15 A$◊˜∫ NÁÔ∫T√tw .N∫Z∫ NÁÒıœt Y˚Rı¬ pa .\AÂ¥Rµd H\˜¥d rZ˝¬ yhWÁ˜Áœdzt nad LÏµ 10.16 Y¬ aR;µaw T˜øw .Y˚Rı© tW¬ aT˜¥DÂ¬ LÁ˚h lWø 10.17 79 nW¥hxd aT◊\Áı¬ YÍÁ∏ƒta A¬a .A˙h AÂ©Tπ N¥Dıøt A¬ atT˙a A¬ atT˙a A¬ 10.20 MÒ√rwad ;H∫A˚ LÏµ yAÁ∫taw rtTßad NÒ‰¥hw ≥ .W∏ΔTßad NÁÔ∫$Dµw .W∫\RΔd NÁ√$DŒµ yT¥ZΔ RÁ© ah 10.21 .K\ødd ntR˜µd ;hrhW˙w ≥ .\L∏˙d nrH∫W√w ≥ .T¬\œ»T√ad nTΔWı√tw ≥ .T\Ò\Ï∫d nT◊Â√tw 10.22 .wRØƒxad N¥$rAΔ Y˜#∫w ≥ .B¥Tßad NÁÒø yRœtad AÂ√w .wAÂƒtad NÁ◊¥$Dœw .»T»∏ÏΔtad AœT¥dd atWıœw .W∏ÏΔta NÁ¥$ZΔw ≥ .aRÁÏŒ∫ y$RØƒxa NÁ$◊˙w ≥ .wAÂƒtad nT¬wT#∫w .WÁ∫T√ad NÁ$¥W¬w ≥ .arW˜∫ wD\Œ¥d NÁ˙$H˚w W¥wdta NÁ˙TÒ$ÁΔw .NÁÂÁÒ$ø wDı;øT√aw ≥ .wrD∫ta NÁŒ$¥dw \A√h ;hTΔWı√td AµTΔ LœT√ad .nW¥hxd ;HµTΔ Lø N¥HÒ˚ Nµ N¥d A∫rdw 10.23 .N¬ NÁ˜;ßd NÁÒ¥ad aD\¥A∫ TÂ\¬»T√aw .A˙TÒÁΔ Y‰¬ AørT˙d K¥a .Y‰Á#∫A˚d aA©Wß Y‰˜µ yD√ .\LÁ˚h T˙a 10.24 .Y˚twA¬d A#∫A˚ AÂ¥Rµ Y‰˜µ JÁ˜˙dw

!38 One of reasons interpreters identify a role reversal in this pivotal section is because they see Ezra as comforting the woman.80 But I don't see a comforting figure here. Possibly, you can read 10.24 as a statement of comfort. Ezra tells the woman that she'll find rest when she turns over her sadness to God: "10.24 Therefore shake off your sadness and lay aside your many sorrows, so that the Mighty One might be merciful to you, and the Most High may give you rest from your troubles." After 19 verses of Ezra’s response, if forced to, you could read his final comment to the woman as a comforting statement. The woman needs to “shake off” (yD√) her own suffering (which, again, Ezra misunderstands here) in order to find mercy from God. Ezra rebukes the woman for her lack of empathy over Israel as a people, points out her relative lack of suffering compared to him and his people, and then suggests that if she just turns from her troubles to those of the troubles of God's people that then she will be given mercy and rest. Ezra is not a comforter; he is an evangelist for his cause.81

Even with a generous reading of that response by Ezra, it is difficult to characterize his comments to the woman as "comforting." While it is hard to say that of Ezra, so too, I suppose, you could say of Uriel in Episodes 1-3. The difference, however, is that the angel chastised Ezra for questioning God's goodness, while Ezra chastises the woman for not focusing on the state of

80 Najman, Losing, 140, concurs that Ezra acts like Uriel: [In10.5-11] “Ezra replies to the woman in what he must think is Uriel’s manner.” She continues, 141, “Playing the part of Uriel, Ezra assigns to the woman the part formerly played by himself” (10.12-17). 81 Najman, Losing, 142, 10:18-22: “his words do not reflect an acceptance of God’s justice. They merely seek to refocus mourning on collective rather than individual loss.”

!39 Israel. That is not a 1-to-1 correlation.82 Whereas the angel is interested in getting Ezra to give up his complaints to God, Ezra is interested in getting the woman to shift her focus from her own suffering to the people's suffering (the source of his complaints). Uriel wants Ezra to simply accept that God has a plan for Israel; Ezra wants the woman to acknowledge that Israel has been discarded by God.

Stone rightfully emphasizes the role of mourning in this scene: "Once he accepted all that he was taught, the issue of the few and the many withdrew to the background and the mourning for Zion reasserted itself poignantly."83 But with this comment we see two interpretive moves on

Stone's part. First, Ezra's actions toward the woman demonstrate not only a shift in behavior but also that Ezra has "accepted all that he was taught." Based on my analysis of Ezra's comments to the woman treated above, I certainly cannot accept this conclusion. The second thing Stone is implying is that the prolonged discussion of the few and the many was something that preoccupied Ezra and was at the top of his concerns. In fact, the issue of the few and the many

82 Though she ultimately accepts Stone’s premise, Najman, Losing, 143, recognizes the incongruity between Ezra and Uriel. “What Ezra appears to lack in his attempted imitation of Uriel is the angel’s repeated insistence that the focus of attention should be, not on this world, but the world to come. . . . He has not yet fully internalized Uriel’s message. Not only is his attempted consolation ironically incapable of consoling Zion, but it is also incapable of consoling any human mourner whom he may encounter.” Watson, Paul, 477-8, is more tempered in his reading. “If Ezra becomes more compliant in the final chapters of the book, there is still a total absence of Job-like contrition for having spoken rashly (cf. 40.3-5; 42.1-6).” 83 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 31. Compare with Emil Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1986), who suggests 4 Ezra’s primary question is why are so many perishing, so few saved.

!40 only arises when the angel fails to alleviate adequately Ezra's concerns over justice and judgment.84

The most powerful image in Ezra’s vision of the woman is when she miraculously turns into a city (10.26-27). It is at this moment, when Ezra is terrified, that Stone identifies as the point of Ezra’s full transformation.85 "At this very point (10:25-27), Ezra undergoes a powerful religious experience." Stone elaborates:

It is quite clear therefore that the change in Ezra involves at least two elements, a gradual acceptance of some of the angel's teachings during the course of the first three visions and then, in the fourth vision, a powerful religious experience during which these teachings are internalized. At a deeper level, one might say that in the first three visions the author externalizes his convictions in the figure of the angel, while in the fourth, by a conversion experience, he internalizes those convictions and externalizes his grief and hope in the form of the woman-city. Once this basic dynamic is grasped, the functioning both of the Ezra figure and of the angel becomes quite clear.86

Here Stone shifts his analysis from that of the characters in the story to how those characters represent actual thoughts and beliefs of the author. Hermeneutically, Stone is putting the cart before the horse. He concludes that Ezra’s "conversion" mirrors one that the author himself underwent. Stone then reads this back into Ezra on the narrative level.

Beginning with what happens in the text, instead of the presumed actions of the author, it is difficult to read Episode 4 as a conversion scene for Ezra. The woman transforms in front of him, but the text does not suggest any change in Ezra at all. He was “afraid and cried out with a

84 It should be reiterated that the angel is not necessarily at fault here. He repeatedly tells Ezra that he is providing as much information as he can and that Ezra does not have the full picture. It is not that the angel is being deceptive or naive, it is just that Ezra, until his response to the woman in episode four, is not granted access to certain information. That is why, when Ezra is confounded by the vision and Uriel comes to him, Uriel says that God has found you worthy to receive the full revelation. This revelation, as will be discussed in the section on eschatology, provides God's blueprint for judgment in the world and the purpose of the created order. 85 Different scholars point to different specific points for the conversion. Najman, Losing, 73-75 locates this transformative moment in 4 Ezra 9.32. 86 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 32.

!41 loud voice” that Uriel led him to the field and brought about “overpowering bewilderment,”

“corruption,” and “reproach.”87 Ezra quite clearly does not understand the events of his vision, or even that it is a vision at that point. How is it, then, that he has converted to a new position? He is just as bewildered and anxious as he was at the beginning of 4 Ezra.88 Unlike Isolde Andrews, who says that Ezra learns “that wisdom does not provide direct answers to contingent issues,” I argue that the woman vision shows Ezra that his suffering was legitimate and—once the woman's transformation into a city is interpreted for Ezra—that God has a plan to restore Israel’s glory. 89

Uriel interprets the vision for Ezra, the content of which does not suggest that the audience should pick up on any conversion for Ezra. Stone hasn’t demonstrated that Ezra’s character undergoes a radical transformation over the course of 4 Ezra. Let’s now turn to other scholars and see how they’ve attempted to demonstrate this point.

POINTS OF EMPHASIS: WHICH VIEW DOES 4 EZRA'S AUTHOR

PRIVILEGE?

Karina Martin Hogan attempts to resolve 4 Ezra's genre difficulties in a different way.

Besides Stone's commentary, Hogan has written the most influential and discussed work on 4

87 aDÍÔ¬ ytWØ∫w .AÒıÔ¬ ytRΔ twhw .adh aTøwzd aA©WÍ¬ at;ad Y¬ D»ıø w\hd LÏµ 10.28 88 There is even a nice parallel between the beginning of ch. 3 and 10.29-30, where he is crying out to Uriel. In both cases he was prostrate. When the story begins, Ezra says “I was troubled as I lay on my bed” (3.1 yT¥W√t Lø T¥;wh A\µrw). And in chapter 10: “While I was speaking these words, the angel who had come to me at first came to me. And when he saw me lying there like a corpse (Aøra Lø A˙a A\µr), deprived of my understanding, he grasped my right hand and strengthened me and set me on my feet” (10.29-30). 89 Andrews, 232.

!42 Ezra of the past few decades. While Stone privileged the divine perspective of Uriel (to the denigration of Ezra’s position in the dialogues), Hogan privileges neither Ezra nor Uriel’s comments in the dialogues. She instead finds the solution to the text’s theological difficulties in the apocalyptic visions.90 Hogan’s position comes closest to my own, though, as I’ll show, our opinions diverge quite significantly in our overall assessment of the book’s purpose. Hogan, like

Stone, argues for a transformation in Ezra’s character. Only instead of converting from his own position to that of Uriel’s, Hogan argues that Ezra converts from his own position to that of an

“apocalyptic” position. Instead of two different theological perspectives (1) Ezra’s and 2) Uriel’s/ apocalyptic), Hogan identifies three (1) Ezra, 2) Uriel, and 3) apocalyptic).

The most important contribution that Hogan makes to 4 Ezra studies is that she identifies the information Ezra receives in his visions as the solution to the problems he raises in the first three episodes.91 Hogan recognizes that the message of episodes four, five, and six provide an answer to the issues of God's relationship with the world discussed in the opening dialogues, but she thinks these answers are representative of a new and previously undisclosed position. I argue that the visions do not contrast the arguments of Ezra and Uriel in the dialogues, but rather provide revelatory knowledge (i.e. new heavenly information for Ezra) and supplemental heavenly knowledge (expounding on Uriel’s knowledge of the end by showing the full eschatological picture).

The following quote from Hogan captures the heart of her argument.

90 Hogan follows Hall 98 n. 3. “Stone concludes that 4 Ezra engages in polemics against apocalyptic understanding. i am inclined to draw the opposite conclusion; Uriel’s reluctance stresses the need for apocalyptic answers to Ezra’s questions.” 91 Keeping in mind that the first three episodes, as Box, 555, points out, “never waver in their conviction that God’s love for Israel exceeds all other, and finds in this thought a source of supreme consolation.”

!43 The visions in episodes 4, 5, and 6 emphasize that the divine plan includes the establishment of the heavenly Zion on earth, the defeat of Israel's enemies by the Messiah, and an earthly reward for a remnant of Israel—prior to the universal judgment emphasized so often by Uriel in the dialogues. By focusing his attention on the imminent reversal of the humiliating defeat of Israel and destruction of Zion, the visions give Ezra a new perspective on divine justice that enables him to come to terms with what he learned from Uriel in the dialogues. Without explicitly contradicting any of Uriel's eschatological instructions, the visions communicate a more comprehensive apocalyptic theology that reaffirms Ezra's faltering belief in God's fidelity to his covenant with Israel.92

The visions offer Ezra insights that he's desperately requested from Uriel. God shows him the

"defeat of Israel's enemies by the Messiah" and perhaps more importantly that there is "an earthly reward for a remnant of Israel."93 These ideas are linked in Ezra's thinking and, by seeing them play out from the divine perspective on the eschatological scale, his thinking can finally accommodate both. Hogan says that this is a "new perspective on divine justice" for Ezra. She means that the information of these visions represent a different theological worldview than the one Ezra puts forth in the dialogues.

The flaw in Hogan's Theologies in Conflict is that she constricts the ideas of 4 Ezra into such tight categories.94 Both Ezra and Uriel are representative of different wisdom traditions.

Uriel's theological system most closely relates to that which we find in 4QInstruction, whereas

Ezra's more closely adheres to Ben Sira's, though the evidence for these parallels is scanty. I do think that the information revealed in the visions does offer some sense of a "solution," though not for the reasons Hogan identifies. According to Ezra's questions and motivations in the dialogues, he is desperate to know the information that Uriel holds about God's justice and God's coming judgment. Uriel, for whatever reason, does not provide this information to Ezra. He

92 Hogan, Theologies, 204. 93 Hogan, Theologies, 204. 94 See Henze, “Review of Theologies,” 65-66.

!44 directs Ezra's focus elsewhere; he questions Ezra's ability to comprehend; he challenges Ezra's worthiness to know. Only with the visions of the second half of 4 Ezra does Ezra finally receive the necessary perspective (i.e. the heavenly perspective) to find the answers to his questions.

Thus, I cannot accept Hogan's conclusion that "although the author made an attempt to integrate the eschatology of the dialogues with that of the visions, the visions do not merely reinforce the instruction of Ezra by Uriel in the dialogues."95 Because she feels Ezra and Uriel's theological positions in the dialogues are at odds with each other, Hogan cannot accept the information of the visions as "a logical synthesis of the two wisdom theologies."96

I deviate from Hogan's reading because I feel that the power of the visions in 4 Ezra 9-13 capture the truly remarkable way this text explores the idea of judgment. For Hogan, "the visions undeniably fail to provide intellectually satisfying answers to some of the questions raised in the dialogues."97 This seems to be the exact opposite conclusion that the author wishes for readers to draw. The logical answers aren't obtainable without divine assistance. Only through the heavenly information God shows Ezra in the visions is Ezra able to reconcile Israel's contemporary problems. It's not, as Hogan seems to suggest, that there is no logical answer. Rather, it is that there is no human answer. The information regarding God's justice and God's judgment on the world must come from God himself. This is why Ezra is so adamant about passing on the writing to the community in ch. 14. Because Ezra knows that if his community can read about his visions and see the Messiah's actions and the coming rewards for Israel that they also can come to a place of peace.

95 Hogan, Theologies, 231. 96 Hogan, Theologies, 231. 97 Hogan, Theologies, 231.

!45 According to Hogan, "To look to the visions for the sort of answers Ezra is seeking the dialogues, however, is to miss the point of the shift from the dialogue form to visionary revelation in the middle of the book." The genre shift marks the incompatibility of the theological ideas in 4 Ezra? That's too much. I don't think the genres are meant to determine the conclusions we draw. They dictate the content they contain, sure. But simply because 4 Ezra

9.36-13.58 record Ezra's visions (and their interpretations) does not mean readers cannot expect the details of the visions to address the interests of the characters in the dialogues. Hogan privileged the "religious symbolism" of the visions over "any rational argument for the purpose of restoring faith in God."98 I think that 4 Ezra shows that the only perspective that can be privileged is the heavenly one, and only with knowledge of judgment at the end times can someone make full sense of Israel's current situation.

TRANSFORMATION WITH A PURPOSE: EMULATION

Hindy Najman’s reading of 4 Ezra is nuanced, but she too discusses a “transformation” that Ezra undergoes.99 Najman pushes this transformation one step further than Hogan or

Stone.100 Not only does Ezra transform but his process is one that the audience is meant to follow. “This unity [of 4 Ezra’s sections] consists in a transformation that the intended reader is supposed to emulate: a passage from confusion and doubt in the wake of destruction to formation

98 Hogan, Theologies, 231. 99 Najman, Losing, 24. On distinguishing Hogan’s and Najman’s readings, see Najman, Losing, 127-31. 100 See Najman, Losing, 57-59.

!46 as a subject able to receive the Torah anew.”101 According to this reading, the transformation is even more fundamental in Najman’s reading because it provides readers with the blueprint they most attempt to follow.

Holding Ezra up as a model to be emulated is tied to Najman’s reading of the trauma embedded in 4 Ezra’s story, both for its author and its audience.102 “The self-effacing writer(s), unable to serve as an exemplary figure in his own right, has constructed this portrayal [of a character with traits from Ezekiel, Daniel, Job, Jeremiah, and Moses] in order to guide the reader through a similar transformation: from someone full of despair and paralyzed by questions, into someone who is ready to receive the Torah once more and to renew the covenantal life of

Israel.”103 Najman draws upon a familiar model in biblical literature: the reluctant hero. Ezra’s case in 4 Ezra is different, however. He already had an important leadership position.104 He wavers, or is reluctant, due to the horror of the contemporary situation.

In the call for a return to God Najman sees a “self-effacing” move on the part of the author.

From authorial self-effacement to audience transformation is the narrative progression Najman

101 Najman, Losing, 24. On the role and meaning of "Torah" in 4 Ezra, see Karina Martin Hogan, “The Meaning of tôrâ in 4 Ezra,” JSJ 38 (2007): 530-52. As Gabriele Boccacini, “The Evilness of Human Nature in 1 Enoch, Jubilees, and 4 Ezra,” in Fourth Ezra and Second Baruch, eds. M. Henze and G. Boccaccini (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 63-80), 75, puts it, "In 4 Ezra there is no solution 'apart from the Torah,' on the contrary, the Law itself is 'the answer.'" 102 Najman, Losing, 65, For Najman, part of the reason the author is drawing upon Ezra (and Daniel and Ezekiel) and setting the context of the narrative around the destruction of the first temple is to show that “the first [destruction] had never actually been overcome, and that the covenantal bond had never been renewed.” She continues, “4 Ezra reenacts the first trauma in a way that is supposed to help the reader get past this trauma: by calling upon the precursors to help form a sort of subjecthood that is ripe for renewal of the covenant even in the absence of a Third Temple.” Compare this with Karina Martin Hogan’s attractive hypothesis in “Pseudepigraphy and Periodization of History in Jewish Apocalypses” in Pseudepigraphie und Verfasserfiktion, eds. J. Frey et. al. (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009), 61-84. 103 Najman, Losing, 66. 104 12.42: “For of all the prophets you alone are left to us, like a cluster of grapes from the vintage, and like a lampin a dark place, and like a haven for a ship saved from a storm.”

!47 reads in 4 Ezra.105 “[The author’s] self-effacement, along with the elaborate portrayal of the protagonist’s transformative dialogue with Uriel and his visions, was carried out for the sake of the intended reader’s transformation. The point is to form a subject capable of receiving the renewed Torah in the wake of the Temple’s destruction. This perspective makes it possible to read 4 Ezra, with all its twists and turns, as a unity.”106 It allows us to read 4 Ezra as a unity, but it’s not the only way of doing so. And based on my reading of the narrative it’s not even the most natural.

Najman’s own analysis supports, in some ways, my reading of the situation. She, however, locates the pivot point of the narrative in Ezra’s transformation and not his access to unmediated heavenly knowledge in the visions. Najman helpfully points out that though they take up different causes (Ezra: creation and Israel; Uriel: world to come and humanity in general),107 “neither Ezra nor Uriel denies the other’s position. Uriel affirms that this world was made for Israel (7:11). . . . Ezra speaks of “all humankind” (8:16), but he does so only to pass immediately to an expression of his special concern for Israel.”108 Drawing on humanity as a whole is a rhetorical strategy for Ezra to make his plea for Israel’s justice more convincing.

Additionally, she reinforces the idea that the difference between the two of them is due to a

105 Najman, Losing, 47, “I suggest that pseudepigraphic writers in Jewish antiquity were effacing themselves in order to perfect themselves and their audiences through the imitation or emulation of an authoritative and exemplary figure.” Najman builds her case on the work of Stanley Cavell and Nietzsche. The author of 4 Ezra sacrifices himself by removing himself from the equation. Instead of inserting himself into the story, we have “Ezra”, the idealized figure that serves the role which the audience should emulate. But certainly pseudepigraphy is not necessary for this. The author need not insert himself into the story at all. He simply could speak of the thirtieth year after the destruction of Jerusalem when “he”, Ezra, was in Babylon and go on from there. The choice for pseudepigraphy must be something else. 106 Najman, Losing, 75. On reader’s transformation, cf. 126. 107 It is not uncommon for scholars to link Ezra’s interests with universalist concerns. See, for example, John Barclay, "Constructing a Dialogue: 4 Ezra and Paul on the Mercy of God," in Anthropologie und Ethik im Frühjudentum und im Neuen Testament, eds. M. Konradt, & E. Schläpfer (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014): 3-22. 108 Najman, Losing, 129.

!48 concern (or lack thereof) of those receiving judgment. Though Ezra comes to accept eternal life only for the few (according to Najman), he nonetheless sees value in his pleas of mercy.109 “This last point is of utmost importance, because it seems to represent a significant difference between

Ezra and Uriel, although it is not, in the end, a theological difference.”110 I agree. It is a matter of different points of emphasis, and this results from the fact that Ezra is not working with the full picture that Uriel has.111

Additionally, this reading of 4 Ezra is mistaken for assuming that the audience should emulate Ezra.112 I think that is completely mistaken. The audience is not supposed to reproduce what Ezra goes through. Repeatedly, Ezra is lauded for his unique position among his people. In the end of the book he ascends to heaven in the manner of Enoch and Elijah. He is no stand-in for the goal of the audience.

No matter how you view the issue of whether or not the authorial voice is present in all characters, there is no question that Ezra is signaled out as unique. At the conclusion of the angel’s interpretation of the eagle vision he tells Ezra “you alone were worthy to learn this secret” (12.36).113 Again in the interpretation of Ezra’s Son of Man vision Ezra is told, “And you alone have been enlightened about this, because you have forsaken your own ways and have applied yourself to mine, and have searched out my law; for you have devoted your life to wisdom, and called understanding your mother (13.53-55).114

109 And so, too, does God. Uriel says that Ezra’s visions are a result of his actions of mercy (10.39). See 10:50. 110 Najman, Losing, 130. 111 Najman, Losing, 131, characterizes as “a difference in attitude and pathos.” 112 See Najman, Losing, 57-59. 113 AÂ¥Rµd hzar odtd T¥\wT√a K¥dWÔÒ∫ wh T˙aw 114 kdWÔÒ∫ K¬ ≥NÁ¬h K¬ YÒ©ta A˙h LÏµ .T¥Z\Δd awZΔd HŒ√Wπ W˙h 13.53 NÁÒ¥aw .NÁ˙$a NÒ¥dd NÁÒ¥a Lø K¬ LÏ∫taw .NÁ˙$a KÒ¥dd NÁÒ¥a TŒ»ı√d LÏµ 13.54 TÁ\Ø∫ NÁ˙$a AßWÂ˙dd Yµa T¥\Rœ atW˙T¬W‰Í¬w .t\R∫d aTÂ‰Ô∫ RÁ© KÁ$ÁΔ 13.55

!49 At the end of 4 Ezra, after the 94 books are transcribed, Ezra ascends to heaven. God does not install Ezra as a leader of the people, whom they are meant to follow. No, because his specific task is complete. Ezra’s goal throughout the entire narrative of 4 Ezra is to understand what God has in store for Israel. Through the visions of the destroyed city, of the destroyed nations, and of the judgment on all, Ezra can go in peace. “In the seventh year of the sixth week, five thousand years and three months and twenty-two days after creation. 14.50 At that time,

Ezra was caught up and taken to the place of those who are like him, after he had written these things. And he was called the Scribe of the Knowledge of the Most High forever”115 (14.47).116

He exhorts the people to keep the commands.117

The author highlights Ezra’s distinguished status. He goes to “those who are like him.”

This reiterates God’s promise to Ezra in 14.8-9: “Lay up in your heart the signs that I have shown you, the dreams that you have seen, and the interpretation that you have heard. For You shall be taken up from among men, and henceforth you shall be with my servant and with those who are like you, until the times are ended” (14.8-9).118 Ezra’s privileged status allowed him to receive the visions in chs. 9-13, along with the 94 books. The audience is not expected to emulate Ezra, for that is impossible. Instead, the audience is to “rule over [their] minds and

115 aT¬t AΔ$R¥w .;aT¥R∫d NÁ˜$√ NÁ∏¬$a A◊ÂΔ rT∫ Nµ A¥T¥T√ AøWı◊∫ Oı√ T˜◊∫ A˜˚h tDÚıøw 14.47 Nµ .H¬ NÁ;µdd NÁÒ¥ad artA¬ R∫dtaw arZø PÏΔta nwH∫w .RÍørt aT$µW¥w NÁÂÒø MÒØ¬ AµDø AÂ¥Rµd hTøD¥d aR∏;ß yRœta N¥d w\h .;N¥H¬W˚ NÁ¬h b»T˚d rT∫ 116 The Latin text of 14.47 is divided into four verses, 14.47, 48, 49, and 50. 117 Keep in mind Barclay’s, 12, important observation, “4 Ezra dampens expectations of revenge on Rome or a restoration of Israel’s political fortunes, bidding Jews to focus on the quotidian struggle to keep the law and thus remain faithful to the divine justice that will finally prevail. 4 Ezra’s vision of cosmic order has as its practical demand that the Jewish people stay loyal to the Torah. The moral order of the cosmos is in this way upheld here and now, as representation of the justice that will ultimately prevail in the age to come.” 118 nW˙a A◊ƒw KıÒ∫ nW˙a M\Áß .T\ØÂ√d ≥nwHŒ√Wπw T¥\ZΔd A˙w$ZΔw .kT¥W;Δ Tµ…Dœd atw$t\a 14.8 K¬ NÁ;µdd NÁÒ¥a Møw .yR∫ Mø LÁ‰µ awhtw .A◊$˜Á˜∫ Nµ T˙a LœT◊µ RÁ© T˙a 14.9 A˜#∫z nWÂÒ◊˙d AµDø

!50 discipline [their] hearts” (14.34), which will ensure they will live again following the judgment

(14.35).

CONCLUSION

In this chapter I have set out to show how 4 Ezra presents a consistent narrative that moves from confusion to clarity regarding God's judgment. At the beginning, I discussed my narrative reading of 4 Ezra, focusing on the nature of Ezra's character and carefully tracing the ways that the text refers to him. Despite the efforts that scholars have made to read Ezra’s character as changing or transforming, the text does not bear that out. The narrative reading that

I’ve provided is drawn from the specific references to Ezra’s character throughout the book, giving particular emphasis to God and Uriel’s comments to Ezra about his devotion leading to the visions. Most important for this dissertation is the place from which Ezra starts his inquiry.

He is distraught over the destruction of Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonians, which he interprets as God’s judgment on him, on the city, on Israel. But that kind of judgment does not fit with his understanding of the world or Israel’s relationship with God. So he presses the issue with the angel to release the necessary information that will make the matter clear. Uriel humors

Ezra to a point, though he determines Ezra incapable of fully grasping the heavenly perspective.

And yet Ezra persists. And with the visions of the end of the story, Ezra comprehends God’s sense of justice and what true judgment looks like—not the temporary loss of Jerusalem but the eternal retribution against Israel’s enemies.

!51 Thinking about 4 Ezra as a text, the author intends for his audience to come to the same conclusion that Ezra reaches in the narrative. This differs from Najman’s argument that the text wants its audience to emulate Ezra. Rather, the information contained in 4 Ezra as a teaching—as a document exploring this central issue of judgment and how it pertains to judgment—serves to inform the audience of the heavenly perspective. The audience need not follow in the footsteps of Ezra, for his character is out of their reach. Instead, they must internalize and understand the information on judgment and God’s redeeming work contained in the text. With the next chapter,

I will discuss 4 Ezra’s passages on judgment in detail. By doing this, I will highlight the complexity of the theme of judgment and demonstrate the rewarding information contained in

Ezra’s visions.

!52 !53 Chapter 2: Judgment in 4 Ezra

In chapter 1, I demonstrated Ezra’s commitment to comprehending God’s ways and his singular interest in Israel’s well-being, both in the present and in the future, and how God's revelation about judgment addressed Ezra's concerns.119 In this second chapter on 4 Ezra, I will analyze each passage that makes reference to God’s judgment, so we can understand what the author was doing with this important theme throughout his work. There are twenty such passages dealing with judgment. I will take them up in narrative order.

SETTNG THE STAGE: EZRA AND URIEL IN 4 EZRA'S FIRST EPISODE

Specific references to judgment occur in five of 4 Ezra’s seven episodes. The opening section along with the pivotal fourth episodes are the two exceptions. Through his dialogue with

Uriel in Episode 1, the author lays the groundwork of Ezra’s character. These chapters set the course for each back-and-forth interaction Ezra has with Uriel. Additionally, it is here in Ezra’s bold theological comments that explain why God rewards Ezra with the visions later in the text

(3.28; 3.34; 4.12). An emotional Ezra makes his case for God to restore Israel to the place that he promised it would be, or, at the very least, to clarify the injustice of Israel's situation.

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 1: 4 EZRA 5.30

119 Longenecker, 34, refers to this as 4 Ezra's "ethnographic covenantalism." Longenecker contends that “the covenant . . . take[s] central position” in the formation of Early Judaism and therefore shouldn’t be relegated to the adjectival position when we define the thought of this period (contra Sanders’s covenantal nomism). While I’m not so sure of “covenantalism’s” wider applicability, it works quite nicely as shorthand for the views expressed in 4 Ezra.

!54 5.30 If you really hate your people, the guilty should be punished by your own hands.120

Ezra’s first formal complaint about God’s judgment against the people of Israel comes at the start of his second dialogue with Uriel. Like a dog with a bone, Ezra will refuse to let go of this particular issue. Ezra’s challenge to God is direct and confrontational. At least do the dirty work of mistreating your people yourself, Ezra suggests to God.

Ezra’s interpretation of Israel’s current suffering is that God has placed his judgment upon them. The chief takeaway as readers is that Ezra views Israel’s current status as under

God’s judgment. Like in several instances throughout 4 Ezra's narrative, the reader benefits from knowing the full story. Ezra has a misconception of judgment here.121 For God, judgment is a final and eternal separation of mankind at the end of time. Ezra is not talking about God's final judgment, but the current injustice of Israel's sufferings. Ezra’s phrasing here might be mistaken, but the core of his argument is a direct hit to the heart of the issue. The community that produced

4 Ezra needs a theological resolution to dealing with the destruction of the temple—their current suffering, this unspeakable injustice. Ultimately, the visions of the latter portion of the text will offer these theological resolutions—solutions that are more specific and clear than in Israel’s earlier literature.

In terms of Ezra’s theological system, God is chief actor in this world. If Israel suffers, it’s because God set it up that way. And Israel’s prophets have long since attributed national

120 adrT˙d awh BÁΔ KÒ¥d K¥D$¥A∫ .KÂØ¬ yH¥TÁ˜ß A˜Íµ N¥D˙aw 5.30 121 The expectation for God to punish humans and not leave it to other people groups to do, though, is familiar from Israel’s earlier literature. See 2 Sam 14.14, “We must all die; we are like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be gathered up. But God will not take away a life; he will devise plans so as not to keep an outcast banished for ever from his presence”; and Ben Sira 2.18, “Let us fall into the hands of the Lord, but not into the hands of mortals; for equal to his majesty is his mercy, and equal to his name are his works.”

!55 suffering and enslavement to the judgment of God. What has become too much for 4 Ezra’s author is God’s lack of direct action. According to Deuteronomic theology, God is in charge of all the world’s workings. And yet it is the Romans who are punishing, who are doing God’s dirty work for him. The author’s position, though, as Karina Martin Hogan observes, "sounds either naive or disingenuous from a Deuteronomic perspective, since according to the covenant curses in Deuteronomy 28, enemy nations are supposed to be agents of divine wrath."122 This author is well versed in the sacred texts of Israel.123 It's not that he's either naive or disingenuous. Ezra makes a pointed challenge to the Deuteronomic theology of his background. According to Ezra,

God’s activity in the world needs to more directly correspond to God’s plan for the world.

Because if it does not, then the Deuteronomic position of judgment is in fact flawed.

The other chord that Ezra strikes in 5.30 and will continue to strike throughout his dialogue is perhaps the major flaw of the Deuteronomic system. The people are set up to fail— there are just too many laws. The people strive—and undoubtedly fail—to uphold the ordinances

God established for them. Now that’s how things have always been for Israel. Again, what has become untenable for 4 Ezra's author is the contemporary situation. There is a lack of accountability for the neighboring nations. Ezra documents traveling throughout the heathen lands and finds nothing but reward heaped on reward, while he witness only suffering, destitution for his own people. "For I have traveled widely among the nations and have seen that they abound in wealth, though they are unmindful of your commandments" (3.32).124 Ezra interprets the injustice of Israel's situation to be the manifestation of God's judgment on them.

122 Hogan, Theologies, 106. 123 See Najman, Losing, 65ff. 124 bWŒØ¥ K¥a KÒ¥d AœT¥D∫ NÂ¥h AÏı√ A˜;¥a wa .L¥RÍ¥a Nµ R¥T¥ TøD;¥ A˙RΔa AÂØ¬ wa 3.32

!56 And, if that's the case, then God needs not to allow other (apparently more cared about) nations heap on the punishment. Though God has promised love and blessing for his people, Ezra makes the obvious observation that things would have actually been better if they weren’t held to God’s standard.125 For they aren’t able to fulfill his expectation, thus rendering the promised reward out of reach. So, if damned to a life of misery, a lack of fulfillment of the true way, then why not reap the rewards of the neighboring nations who directly benefit from the situation?

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 2: 4 EZRA 5.40-42

He said to me, “Just as you cannot do one of the things that were mentioned, so you cannot discover my judgment or the goal of the love that I have promised my people.” 5.41 And I said, “Yet behold, O Lord, you promised those who are alive at the end, but what will those do who were before us, or we, or those who come after us?” 5.42 He said to me, “I liken my judgment to a circle; just as for those who are last there is no slowness, so for those who are first there is no haste.”126

During the second dialogue, Ezra tells the angel that his suffering fuels his quest to

"search out part of [God's] judgment" (5.34).127 In response to this, the angel gives Ezra a series of impossible tasks, such as counting all those who will be born in the future.128 These tasks are meant to demonstrate to Ezra that God’s judgment is as unknowable as, say, the number of people that will be born in the future. Ezra willingly accepts his limitations: he understands that

God knows more than he does about the future—whether it be the future number of people born

125 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 132, points out that “the language of ‘love’ and ‘hate’ serves to highlight” the incongruity of Israel’s chosenness and its fate. 126 T˙a ;a\Xµ A¬ A˜˚h .Rµatad NÁ¬h Nµ aDΔ DıØÂ¬ T˙a J‰◊µ A¬d K¥a .Y¬ R\µaw 5.40 T¥dwT√a YÂØ¬d A˜;¥a .A∫WΔd AÂ¬W◊¬ wa Y˜\¥D¬ yhWÁÔ‰√td Nµd NÁÒ¥a nwDıØ˙ A˜µw ≥ nW˙a AÂ¬W◊∫d NÁÒ¥A¬ T¥dw;T√a ah yRµ A¬a .tRµaw 5.41 nrT∫ Nµd NÁÒ¥a wa N˜Δ wa ≥ nW˙a NÁµDœ AÒπa A˜˚h .\a$RΔwW√ A¥$RΔA¬ T¥a A¬d K¥a .Y\˜¥D¬ hTÁµd AÒÁÒ‰¬ .Y¬ R\µaw A˜\øw 5.42 AµdWœ AÁ$µDŒ¬ 127 H\˜¥d Nµ mDµ BŒ;øaw 128 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 146.

!57 or the final judgment. Ezra is also able to recognizes that the final judgment will be rewarding for those that are living at that time (5.41). And yet, Ezra persists: it remains unclear how judgment affects those alive before the end, like 4 Ezra's contemporary audience.129 Ezra refuses to lose the thread of his concern. As Knibb points out about 5.41, “Ezra’s starting-point remains the same.”130 That starting point is asking for help to reconcile Israel’s situation with God’s promises to Israel. Knowledge regarding the final judgment aside, how can God explain Israel’s current despair? From Ezra's perspective, each answer the angel provides must address his starting point. When it does not, Ezra continues to push for clarity on his chief subject without falling victim to the angel’s (intentional or unintentional) obfuscation.

As is typical with the angel’s responses,131 the answer Uriel gives to Ezra’s question about those living before the end appears to be only tangentially related to Ezra's real concern

(5.42).132 He likens judgment to a circle,133 a move which implies that judgment is equally important for those before the end as for those at the end.134 It does not matter who is alive at the time of final judgment just as it does not matter where you start a circle—it goes all the way around.135 If you find this analogy confounding, you are not alone. The angel speaks for God and knows the full divine picture. Ezra, and the reader at this point in the narrative, do not. Therefore,

129 Cf. Dan 12.12; 1 Thessalonians 4.13-17; PssSol 18.5-6. See also Box, 59. 130 Knibb, 142. 131 On the differentiation, if any, between the angel and the divine voice, see Stone, Fourth Ezra, 140. 132 Cf. 1 Thess 4.15, 2 Bar 51.13. 133 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 151, "we prefer the reading "crown" to that of "circle." The operative part of the image is usually taken to be the circularity of the crown, implying that there is no difference between first and last." Cf. Kabisch, 45-46, who labels it the “crown of victory.” 134 Hogan, Theologies, 124, "When he says, "I shall liken my judgment to a circle' (5:42), however, he is referring exclusively to the final judgment, as is clear from Ezra's question in 5:43. Thereafter in the book, 'judgment' generally stands for the final judgment." 135 Hogan, Theologies, 124, "Uriel parallels 'my judgment' with 'the goal of the love that I have promised to my people,' implying a future sense, but without excluding a more general meaning."

!58 Uriel's shorthand references and his depictions of judgment fail to elucidate what that judgment actually looks like for Ezra's contemporaries.

In light of the angel's response, Ezra fails to understand why God just didn't create the order of events to end sooner.136 If there is a certain time set for judgment, God should just judge the world at the current moment. Uriel's reply is, in short, that God "has set the rhythm and pace of events.”137 In another attempt to elaborate, the angel appeals to the analogy of womb (5.46).

The angel has already appealed to the image of a woman giving birth in the first episode. There

(4.40) his point was that at the appointed time the earth will give back the souls it contains and that Ezra need not be concerned about those treasuries.138 The angel’s second appeal to a woman’s womb here in 5.46 is to emphasize the particular order of events.139 God has ordered the world in such a way that judgment follows other prearranged events.140 According to Uriel, judgment must be viewed as one part of a meticulously arranged plan.

One of the issues related to judgment that we see in this passage is a distinction between those living at the end times and those living previously. This is an issue the author of 4 Ezra often references.141 In 5.41, Ezra clearly distinguishes himself and his community from those that will be alive at the end. The reason that these individuals stand out for Ezra is because they will get to witness the justice God will impart on them and the judgment he will mete out on the enemies.

136 The author uses the language of "haste" in 6.34 (bhrTßt) and 4.42 (bhrTßt). 137 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 146. 138 Knibb, 143. 139 See Najman, Losing 134-5. 140 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 146; Harnisch, 229. 141 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 148.

!59 The angel’s point, in part, is that final judgment assists in the understanding of how the world is structured. This is the takeaway point that Uriel wishes to communicate, and that Ezra fails to comprehend. Without the divine knowledge that Uriel possesses, Ezra falsely assumes that the final judgment is meaningful only for those that are present when it takes place. The angel’s point—with the circle metaphor in particular—is that the final judgment affects everything. There is no point on the circle where judgment does not produce effects.

Until Ezra sees his visions of the end in chs. 11-13, Ezra cannot picture how that end- time judgment is relevant to those living prior to it. The angel attempts to tell Ezra that it does in fact matter, but the analogies of the circle and the womb fail to elucidate that for him.

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 3: 4 EZRA 6.1-6 6.1-6 And he said to me, “The beginning is through man and the end is through myself. For before the circle of the earth existed, and before the exits of the world were in place, and before the assembled winds blew, 6.2 and before the rumblings of thunder sounded, and before the flashes of lightning shone, and before the foundations of the garden were laid, 6.3 and before the beautiful flowers were seen, and before the powers of movement were established, and before the innumerable hosts of angels were gathered together, 6.4 and before the heights of the air were lifted up, and before the measures of the firmaments were named, and before the footstool of Zion was established, 6.5 and before the present years were reckoned; and before the imaginations of those who now sin were estranged, and before those who stored up treasures of faith were sealed—6.6 then I planned these things, and they were made through me and not through another.”142

142 awhtd mDœ Nµd RÁ© A˜‰¥a .YÒ¥d yD$¥A∫ N¥d AÂ¬W√ .\A◊˙a R∫ DÁ∫ YµDœ .Y¬ R\µaw A˜\øw 6.1 AΔw$rd N¥hRœW¥ Nı$◊˜˙d mDœ Nµw .AÂÒød yhW˜$Œ∏µ nWµWŒ˙d mDœ Nµw LÁ∫td ;Høra Høra rrT√td mDœ Nµw .Aœ$R∫d nwH$ÁŒÁ¬z nwrH˜˙d mDœ Nµw .AÂø$rd nwHÒœ OµT◊˙d mDœ Nµw 6.2 AÍ¥dRπd nW;◊˜˚T˙d mDœ Nµw .A˜ø$wzd A˜√Wø LÁΔT˙d mDœ Nµw .Aı#∫hd nwhRπW√ aZΔT˙d mDœ Nµw 6.3 A˜Á˜µ nwH¬ TÁ¬d A˚$AÒµd at$WÒÁΔ ;H◊∫W˚ rrT◊˙d mDœ Nµw .AØÁœ$rd nwhTÔ$√Wµ nHµT◊˙d mDœ Nµw .raad nwHµwr M¥rtT˙d mDœ Nµw 6.4 nW¥hxd nWµTΔT˙d mDœ Nµw .A√h AÁÏ$Δd nwht$WÒ‰ß NÒı#©T˙d mDœ Nµw .NÂ$Á;œd NÁ¬h AÁ$˜√ Nı$ŒøT˙d mDœ Nµw 6.5 atW˜Â¥hd aT$ÂÁß nwH¬ W;Âßd NÁÒ¥a A˙RΔa yD$¥A∫ A¬w .dWÔÒ∫ YÒ¥d yD$¥A∫ N¥HÒ˚ NÁ¬h y$whw Tı\◊Δta N¥D;¥h 6.6

!60 4 Ezra 6.1-6 records Uriel’s response to Ezra’s question about the identity of he who

“visits” the earth. It sounds superficial to say that the heavenly perspective more clearly connects all the pieces of human history into one clear narrative. But this is the root tension between Ezra and the angel.143 While this passage is not overly illuminating, Uriel offers two helpful pieces of information pertinent to my discussion of judgment in his response to Ezra in 6.1-6. The first having to do with the contrast of the beginning and end,144 and the second with the emphasis on

God’s plan.

Uriel's reference to the beginning in 6.1 is not to Genesis 1 or further back to the beginning of all things. Instead it is to the beginning that Ezra brought up—Adam’s transgression

(3.21-27). This is the beginning that comes through man. It’s the beginning of death, of pain, of loss, of suffering, and of judgment. Ezra gets caught up in time and fails to realize the meaning of 6.6, that God planned everything with the end in mind.

In terms of the angel’s theological perspective, nothing is unexpected. He tells Ezra that

Ezra’s comprehension lacks the full picture. God planned everything from the beginning, including judgment. No surprise from the lips of Uriel that he highlights that human suffering is humanity’s fault. So, while Ezra is still trying to understand the nature of this judgment, Uriel is content to say simply that humans have no one to blame but themselves. Ezra will continue in his limited view until he is finally rewarded with the visions of the end, which will corroborate

Uriel’s claims and rectify Ezra’s grievances.

143 Note that though I disagree with the majority scholarly position on the symbolic meaning of Ezra and Uriel as characters, scholars are right to highlight the tension between the two individuals. It is the meaning of their tension (i.e. the pursuit of revelation) and the way the author resolves their tension (i.e. by rewarding Ezra with what he wants) that separates my reading. 144 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 155, makes the clarification that the language of “end” here does not mean eschatologically, but it means the “end of [God’s] visitation.”

!61 JUDGMENT PASSAGE 4: 4 EZRA 6.18-29 6.18-29; 6.18 And it said, “Behold, the days are coming, and shall come to pass that when I draw near to visit the inhabitants of the earth, 6.19 and when I require from the doers of iniquity [the penalty] of their iniquity, and when the humiliation of Zion is complete, 6.20 and when the seal will be placed upon the age which is about to pass away, then I shall show these signs: the books shall be opened before the firmament, and all shall see it together. 6.21 Infants a year old shall speak with their voices, and women with child shall give birth to premature children at three and four months, and these shall live and dance. 6.22 Unsown places shall suddenly appear sown, and full storehouses shall suddenly be found to be empty; 6.23 and the trumpet shall sound aloud, and when all hear it, they shall suddenly be terrified. 6.24 And it will come to pass at that time friends shall make war on friends like enemies, and the earth and those who inhabit it shall be terrified, and the springs of the fountains shall stand still, so that for three hours they shall not flow. 6.25 And it shall come to pass that whoever remains after all that I have foretold to you shall himself be saved and shall see my salvation and the end of my world. 6.26 “For evil shall be blotted out, and deceit shall be quenched; 6.28 faithfulness shall flourish, and corruption shall be overcome, and the truth shall be revealed which has been so long without fruit.” 6.29 And it came to pass while he spoke to me, behold, little by little the places where I was standing began to rock to and fro.145

Toward the end of the second dialogue between Ezra and Uriel, Ezra asks for Uriel to show him the signs of the end.146 Ezra is told several of the signs as coming to pass when God visits the inhabitants of earth (6.18). "The term "visit" is taken to mean punitive visitation,"

145 Aørad ;H¥$rWÂØ¬ rWØßad A˙a bR;œd yTµa awH˙w .N¥;ta aT$µW¥ ahd R\µaw 6.18 .nW¥hxd ;H‰˚Wµ M¬;√d yTµaw .A¬$W;ød nwH¥$D¥A∫ dWŒπad A˙a D¥Tød yTµaw 6.19 nWΔTπT˙ a$R∏\ß .A˙a Dı;ø at$wta NÁ¬h ;RıØ˙d D¥Tød A˙h AÂÒø mTΔT˙d D¥Tød yTµaw 6.20 .aDÔ˚a Y\˜¥d nwZÔ˙ nwHÒ˚w .AØÁœr Yπ$a Lø nD¬$A˙ N¥H˜∫Z∫ A¬d aTß$R‰∫ NÒÁ$Œ√d NÁÒ¥aw ≥ nwHÒœ nW¬T˙w .nWÒÒÂ˙ aT˜√ Y$˜∫ adWÒ$¥w 6.21 nwrW◊˙w nWÔ˙w .AØ∫rA¬w NÁΔ$R¥ aT¬T¬ ad$WÒ¥ nWÔ˚T◊˙ AÁÒ√ Nµ NÁ\Òµd a$rxwaw ;nWÔ˚T◊˙ NÁØ¥rz D˚ NÁør;z A¬d NÁÒ¥a atw$rta AÁÒ√ Nµw 6.22 .NÁŒÁ∏ß D˚ nW∫hrT˙w AÁÒ√ Nµ ;H˙WØÂ◊˙ nwHÒ˚d aD;¥a .A;µr AÒŒ∫ aRœt A˙Rœw 6.23 Mø Aøra Hµttd Aı#∫DÒØ∫ K¥a nwHÁÂΔ$r Mø AÂ\Δ$r nW∫RŒ˙ .A˜∫z ;wH∫ awH˙w 6.24 NÁØ$√ T¬t nwdR˙ A¬d nWµWŒ˙ Aø$Wıµd A˜Œ∏$µw .;H¥$rW;Âø .AÂÒød HÂ¬W√w Y˜œrWπ aZÔ˙w AÔ˙ w\h .K¬ tR;µa Tµ…Dœd N¥HÒ˚ NÁ¬h Nµ RΔT◊µd Aµ L˚ awH˙w 6.25 nwHı¬ KπhT˙w nwhtD¬$wt Nµ W\ÂØƒ A¬ atWµd NÁÒ¥a .WÁÒøtad nW˙;h A◊$˜Á˜ı¬ aZÔ˙ N¥D;¥hw 6.26 .A˙RΔa AøDÂ¬ PÒΔT˙w .Aørad ;H¥$rWÂød .AÒ‰˙ Kø…dw aT\◊Á∫ RÁ© AÁØƒTµ 6.27 at$AÁ˝ß AÁ$˜√ a$rAπ A¬d yWœd A˜;¥a .arR√ aZΔTµw .AÒı;Δ A˚dZµw .atW˜Â¥h AΔ;W√w 6.28 .yhWÒø T¥;wh m;Aœw ;wh arta awh \o;az LÁÒœ LÁÒœ ahw YÂø awh LÒÂµ D˚d aw\hw 6.29

146 6.12: “Reveal to me, your servant, the end of these signs” (NÁ¬h atw$tad AÂ¬W√ kD»ıØ¬ Y˜Áødwa)

!62 according to Stone.147 While the Syriac term used here, rWØßad, does not necessarily carry specific meaning of violence or punitive action, the context does seem to suggest clearly that the visitation results in the punishment of the sinful.148 This action of requiring the payment for iniquity is what transitions this world into the next. And, as we have seen elsewhere, this transition is identified as the final judgment in 4 Ezra.

In this speech, God makes a link between the iniquity of the unjust and the humiliation of

Jerusalem. This reference to Jerusalem accomplishes two things. First, "the reference to

Jerusalem is a reminder that the starting-point of the book is the author's concern at the situation of the Jews in the period after the war of A.D. 66-73. In the view of the author the only escape from this situation would be found in the judgment and the ending of this age.”149 Related to this, it affirms that God’s plan for Israel, for the world, is complete. The humiliation of Zion did not catch God by surprise and in fact the humiliation must continue until it is “complete.”150

I must comment on two of the signs Ezra hears about. The first of the signs that Uriel tells Ezra about is the appearance of the books before the firmament and their display for all. In various eschatological scenarios, books are present at the end and are associated with judgment.151 The books, perhaps, contain a record of human deeds and are present to testify for or against individuals.152 Stone makes a different and intriguing suggestion. Appealing to the statement that they are opened before the firmament, he says, “This suggests that they appear in

147 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 155. Cf. 6.18; 9.2. 148 Smith, J. Payne, editor. A Compendious Syriac Dictionary: Founded upon the Thesaurus Syriacus of R. Payne Smith (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1957), 384. Cf. Stone Fourth Ezra, 169. 149 Knibb, 150. 150 nW¥hxd H‰˚Wµ M¬;√d yTµaw 151 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 170. Cf. Dan 7.10; Rev 20.12; 2 Bar 24.1; 1 En 47.3; 81.1-5; 104.7 152 See, for example, Dan 7.10; Rev 20.12; 2 Bar 24.1; 1 En 47.3; 81.1-5; 104.7.

!63 the sky as an omen of the coming judgment.”153 This makes good sense of both the larger context

(“show me, your servant, the end of these signs,” 6.12) and the immediate context (“I will show these signs,” 6.20). The significance of the books as an omen of coming judgment helps support my argument in the previous part of the chapter that Ezra only understands God’s justice fully when he receives the visions of God’s final judgment. Here Ezra is told of the signs that point to judgment, though they do not explain it. Equally problematic as this lack of specificity—and surprising giving the nature of Ezra’s contact with the divine in both the dialogues and the visions—is that none of the content of this information is interpreted for him. Whereas in the closing visions, he receives explanations that clarify, comment on, and interpret the details of the end. Therefore this book of the end is not able to show Ezra how the judgment speaks to Israel’s suffering in the present. With the books in particular, but also with the other signs, Ezra still cannot make the connection between that future time and his own situation.

The other signs associated with the end are reversals of the expected actions: infants speaking, babies born in half the time, babies singing and dancing,154 unsown fields reap fruit, and full storehouses are suddenly empty155 (6.21-22). Uriel also identifies a familiar sign in prophetic and apocalyptic literature: the trumpet.156 In 4 Ezra when the trumpet sounds “all hear it” and are “suddenly be terrified” (6.23). For some reason, Stone disconnects the trumpet blast

153 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 170. Cf. Knibb, 150, who thinks they are opened before a heavenly host and mark the beginning of judgment. 154 Cf. Jubilees 23.25: “The children’s heads will turn white with gray hair. A child who is three weeks of age will look old like one whose years are 100, and their condition will be destroyed through distress and pain.” James VanderKam, translator, The Book of Jubilees (Lovanii: Peeters, 1989). 155 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 171, rightly interprets this as a reversal of the natural order instead of famine. See also 171, n. 39. 156 See, for example, Amos 5.7; Isa 27.12; Matt 24.31; 1 Thess 4.16.

!64 from the announcement of the eschaton.157 While there remain wars and water stoppages after the trumpet blast (6.24), 4 Ezra does not make a sharp distinction between divine woes and the eschaton. These signs, woes they may be, are not divorced from the eschaton, but signals of its presence.158 The following verse makes this clear: “And it will come to pass that whoever remains after all that I have foretold to you will himself be saved and will see my salvation and the end of my world” (6.25).159 The signs, including, that of the trumpet blast are harbingers of the eschaton, the period from which those who “remain” will find salvation.

Along with salvation and the end of the world, those remaining will see those that didn’t die, the changing of humans’ hearts, and the blotting out of evil. Judgment results in a world where evil has been blotted out and deceit no longer prevails. Instead faithfulness and truth “will flourish” (6.28).160

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 5: 4 EZRA 7.11-7.25 7.11 “For I made the world for [Israel’s] sake, and when Adam transgressed my statutes, what had been made was judged. 7.12 And so the entrances of this world were made narrow and sorrowful and toilsome; they are few and evil, full of dangers and involved in great hardships. 7.13 But the entrances of that coming world are broad and safe and yield the fruit of immortality. 7.14 Therefore unless the living pass through the difficult and bad experiences, they can never receive those things that have been reserved for them. 7.15 “But now why are you disturbed, seeing that you are to perish? And why are you moved, seeing that you are mortal? 7.16 “And why have you not considered in your mind what is to come, rather than what is now present?” 7.17 Then I answered and said, “O sovereign Lord, behold, you have ordained in your law that the righteous will inherit these things, but that the ungodly will perish. 7.18 The righteous

157 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 171. Also, Paul Volz, Die Eschatologie der jüdischen Gemeinde im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter: Nach den Quellen der rabbinischen, apokalyptischen und apokryphen Literatur. (Tübingen: Mohr, 1934), 162, makes distinctions between different trumpet blasts. Cf. 2 Bar 70.6. 158 Cf. 1 Enoch 69.17; PssSol 17.19 159 HÂ¬W√w Y˜œrWπ aZÔ˙w AÔ˙ w\h .K¬ tR;µa Tµ…Dœd N¥HÒ˚ NÁ¬h Nµ RΔT◊µd Aµ L˚ awH˙w 6.25 AÂÒød 160 atW˜Â¥h AΔ;W√w

!65 therefore can endure difficult circumstances while hoping for easier ones; but those who have done wickedly have suffered the difficult circumstances and will not see the easier ones.” 7.19 And he said to me, “You are not a better judge than God, or wiser than the Most High. 7.20 Let many perish who are now living, rather than that the law of God which is set before them be disregarded. 7.21 For God strictly commanded those who came into the world, when they came, what they should do to live and what they should observe to avoid punishment. 7.22 Nevertheless they were not obedient, and spoke against him; “they devised for themselves vain thoughts, 7.23 and proposed to themselves wicked frauds; they even declared that the Most High does not exist, and they ignored his ways. 7.24 They scorned his law, and denied his covenants; they have been unfaithful to his statutes, and have not performed his works. 7.25 “Therefore, Ezra, empty things are for the empty, and full things are for the full.”161

Adam and the role he plays in judgment is a familiar subject for Uriel and Ezra, though they address him more explicitly in this passage.162 Ezra made reference to Adam's evil heart in his first argument with Uriel (3.21). There Ezra argued that God set Adam's descendants up for failure by not removing their evil heart.163 Responding to Ezra's contention about the evil heart,

Uriel says "For a grain of evil seed was sown in Adam's heart from the beginning, and how much

161 .Dıøtad mDµ ;wh BÁΔta Y˙D$œWπ mda Rıøa D˚w AÂÒØ¬ htDıø RÁ© nwhTÒÏµ 7.11 AÒÂøw aT$Ô˙t NÁ\Òµw .N¥XÁ¬a A√hd A˙h AÂÒød yhW˜Ò$Øµ nwH¬ wwh A˙h LÏµw 7.12 A$◊Δw A˙h$rW˚ Mø aT∫r atwA¬w .aAÁ˝ß sW˙wD˜Áœw .N¥T;Áµ A¬d a$rAπ N¥Dı;øw .nwH¥T¥a aTπx A¬dw NÁÔ¥w$r .«D¥Tød AÂÒø ;whd N¥d yhW˜Ò$Øµ 7.13 .nwH¬ NÁÂÁßd NÁÒ¥a NÁÔ‰◊µ NÁ¬h aT$◊Áı∫ A˙X¬$wA∫ AÁ$Δ nwRıØ˙ A¬ LÁ˚h na 7.14 atWÁµ D˚ T˙a V©T◊µ A˜Â¬w ≥ T˙a LıΔTµ D˚d .T˙a O¥ztTµ A˜µ Lø N¥d A√h 7.15 .T˙a m;Aœd mDµ A¬a D¥Tød mDµ Kı¬ Lø Tı\Í˙ A¬ A˜µ LÏµw 7.16 .NÁ¬H¬ N¥H¬ N¥tR;¥ wh AŒ$¥dzd .KßWÂ˜∫ T\√Rπ ah A¬a .yRµ A¥Rµ tR;µaw TÁ˜;øw 7.17 .N¥DÚ∫a N¥d AØÁ√$r A˙X¬$wa N¥d AØÁ√$r .aTΔwR¬ nwtA˙d N¥RıÍµd LÏµ .A˙X¬$wa N¥RıÁÍµ RÁ∏√ LÁ˚h AŒ$¥dz 7.18 .N¥;ZΔ A¬ aTΔwrw .\NÁÒÚıß .AÂ¥Rµ Nµ R¥T¥ ntWÒ‰ß A¬w .aH¬a Nµ R¥T¥ T˙a T¥w\h A¬ .Y¬ R\µaw A˜\øw 7.19 .Y˜µ .MÁßtad AßWÂ˙ nwH∫ YÍ∫tad Lø .wtad NÁÒ¥a a$AÁ˝ß LÁ˚h nwD∫A˙ 7.20 nwRÏ˙ A˜µw .nWÔ˙w nwDıØ˙ A˜µd N¥D;¥h wta D˚ .wtad NÁÒ¥A¬ aH¬a D;Œπ RÁ© A˙DœWπ 7.21 .nWŒ˙T◊˙ A¬w .aTŒ¥$Rß aTı◊$Ôµ nwH¬ W˜œtaw .H¬ WØµT√a A¬w wXø N¥d nW˙\h 7.22 WøD¥ A¬w .AÂ¥Rµ wh TÁ¬d .\wR\µa N¥H¬W˚ NÁ¬h Løw .aTÒ∏$µd aT$Ø˙x nwH¬ W∏ßwaw 7.23 .hTΔ$rwa .WÍ∫ yhwD#ı;ø Løw .W˜;Â¥h A¬ yhW˙D$œWπw .wR;‰π yhWÂÁœw .WÏ;√ HßWÂ˜¬w 7.24 .NÁ\Òµd NÁÒ¥A¬ aTÁÒ$µw .AŒ$Á∏Í¬ aT$ŒÁ∏ß .arZø wa A˙h LÏµ 7.25 162 Hogan’s, Theologies, 116, reading of this passage is confusing: "This remark [7.11] challenges Ezra's entirely positive description of Adam as the ancestor of Israel (6:54-59) in his third lament. . . . Uriel never suggests that Adam's sin had any effect on his descendants’ ability to keep the commandments of the Torah. On the contrary, he mentions Adam at the beginning of the speech in which he explains why 'those who live on earth will be tormented' (7:72)." 163 Ezra will repeat this line of argument later in the third dialogue, too. "This is my first and last word, that it would have been better if the earth had not produced Adam, or else, when it had produced him had taught him not to sin" (7.116).

!66 fruit of ungodliness it has produced until now, and will produce until the time of threshing comes" (4.30).164 Uriel disputes Ezra's concern over the wickedness that hasn't been eradicated from earth by telling Ezra that Ezra is concerned about the lack of harvest before the harvest time has come. In short, if Adam was judged, then just wait for the coming judgment of all the evil that has transpired since.165

To clarify this matter for Ezra, Uriel again makes reference to Adam's transgression and

God's judgment of that transgression in 7.11.166 Uriel tells Ezra that the reason the world looks the way it does is that God has already placed judgment over it. So, yes, when Ezra looks around and sees "the entrances of this world"167 as "narrow and sorrowful and toilsome,"168 Ezra is correct (7.12).169 However, instead of getting hung up on this fact—the reality of a world that has already been judged—Ezra needs to "consider in [his] mind what is to come, rather than what is now present" (7.16). From Uriel's heavenly perspective, it should be enough for Ezra to know that he and his fellow Israelites had this world made for them (7.11). It didn't go as planned. Now, Ezra and his fellow Israelites must look forward to what is to come, when this judged world passes away and evildoers here face their final judgment.

For Uriel, Ezra’s confusion is inexplicable. But Uriel does not realize the confusion results from Ezra’s categorization of himself and his community. Based on Ezra's understanding

164 .D¬w;a AØ√wrd a$rAπ AÂ˚w V¥r Nµ .mdad HıÒ∫ ordza aT◊\Á∫d Aørzd aDΔ wh atdRπd LÏµ 4.30 arda atA˙d AµDø D¬A˙w .A√H¬ AµDø 165 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 201, “In general, the wicked are charged not with specific transgressions so much as with overall unfaithfulness in words and action.” Stone continues by noticing the parallels in Uriel’s language to Deuteronomy 30.16-17 but concludes: “the Deuteronomic language had become so widespread by the time of 4 Ezra that it is difficult to build very much on these similarities.” 166 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 198 “The term ‘judgment’ is notable, hinting as it does at a legal aspect of the punishment.”. 167 AÂÒød yhW˜Ò$Øµ 168 AÒÂøw aT$Ô˙t NÁ\Òµw .N¥XÁ¬a 169 God recognizes the difficulties of the present condition, but views them as naturally linked with the coming world. Cf. 2 Baruch 51.16; 1QH 5.34; 6.31; 9.27-28.

!67 of God's ways, he feels he has failed God and therefore, like with Adam, he will be judged as wicked. How do we know that Ezra considers himself among the wrong group? Uriel himself tells us this later in his dialogue with Ezra. "You have often compared yourself to the unrighteous. Never do so!" (8.47).170 Ezra’s low view of himself leads him to "answer and say 'O sovereign Lord, behold, you have ordained in your law that the righteous will inherit these things, but that the ungodly will perish. The righteous therefore can endure difficult circumstances while hoping for easier ones; but those who have done wickedly have suffered the difficult circumstances and will not see easier ones."171 Here is the heart of the issue. Ezra sees no relief for him and his audience because they have acted wickedly. And if the reward is only for a select few, ultimately out of reach based on the demands of God's ways, then what good is it to even attempt to follow it here and now. He's saying that there is no reward for God's people now and there won't be in the future because they won't pass God's final judgment.172

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 6: 4 EZRA 7.27-29 7.26 For behold, the time will come, when the signs which I have foretold to you will come, that the city which now is not seen will appear, and the land which now is hidden will be disclosed. 7.27 And everyone who has been delivered from the evils that I have foretold shall see my wonders. 7.28 For my Messiah shall be revealed with those who are with him, and he shall make rejoice those who remain for four hundred years. 7.29 And after these years my son the Messiah will die, and all who draw human breath.173

170 A¬ .AØÁ√$R¬ ;K◊∏˙ TÁµd Y˝;ß N¥d T˙a .Y˜µ R¥T¥ kT¥\Rı¬ ;HÁıÁΔt J‰√td K¬ RÁÍΔ RÁ© Y˝;ß 8.47 A˜˚h awH˙ 171 N¥d AØÁ√$r .aTΔwR¬ nwtA˙d N¥RıÍµd LÏµ .A˙X¬$wa N¥RıÁÍµ RÁ∏√ LÁ˚h AŒ$¥dz 7.18 N¥;ZΔ A¬ aTΔwrw NÁÒÚıß A˙X¬$wa AÂ¥Rµ Nµ R¥T¥ ntWÒ‰ß A¬w .aH¬a Nµ R¥T¥ T˙a T¥w\h A¬ .Y¬ R\µaw A˜\øw 7.19 172 Uriel's response here shows he misunderstands Ezra at this point. But he is not alone. Modern commentators misunderstand Ezra's comments too. See Najman, Losing, 128, Hogan, Conflicts, 131, 144. 173 ytH$Áµt aZÔ˙ w\h .\M¥Dœ Nµ Rµatad NÁ¬h aT\$◊Á∫ Nµ aXπT˙d N;µ L˚w 7.27 .NÁ˜$√ N¥T¬t .\wRΔT√ad NÁÒ¥A¬ M;Íı˙w .HÂød NÁÒ¥a Mø AÔÁ◊µ yR∫ RÁ© AÒ©T˙ 7.28 .A◊˙R∫d aTÂ◊˙ nwH∫ T¥ad NÁÒ¥a nwHÒ˚w .AÔÁ◊µ yR∫ tWÂ˙ .AÁ$˜√ NÁ¬h rT∫ Nµ awH˙w 7.29

!68 Part of the reason that the city vision represents a change in 4 Ezra’s narrative is that it represents a shift from proclamations about the end times to visual experiences of the end times.

7.26 only offers a description of that new world and its coming appearance. As a part of the new city and new land’s arrival, there will be a series of wonders. God’s wonders, through the promised blessings the faithful will receive, are available only to those that survive judgment.174 “And everyone who has been delivered from the evils that I have foretold shall see my wonders” (7.27).175 The evils (aT\

$◊Á∫) are a part of the end times, most often referred to as the messianic woes, and culminate in the universal judgment.176 So, it is those that are judged and deemed worthy that are able to experience the blessings of the new world. Uriel then unpacks this scenario with more detail. He speaks of the coming

Messiah, so far not mentioned, and then the resurrection and final judgment, which will separate the faithful from the wicked and bestow rewards and punishments on the groups, respectively.

Just as Uriel appealed to Adam as a case to restore Ezra’s trust in God’s justice, so too he appeals to the Messiah’s activities in 7.28-30. This account is bereft of significant details.177 Ezra learns only that the Messiah comes with “those who are with him,” his presence is joyful for the survivors for 30 years, and that his own death will initiate the death of “all who draw human breath” (7.28-29). This death (i.e. the Messiah’s) serves as the point which begins the reversal of the world to its state at the beginning of creation. This information disclosed by Uriel is meant to comfort Ezra. It understandably does not. However, it does show that there is joy that awaits those who suffer. This finally addresses—albeit insufficiently—the heart of Ezra’s concern. He has demanded to know that Israel’s suffering will lead to something that makes it worth it. In

Uriel’s description of the Messiah, Uriel is trying to demonstrate that the coming of the Messiah,

174 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 215. 175 ytH$Áµt aZÔ˙ w\h .\M¥Dœ Nµ Rµatad NÁ¬h aT\$◊Á∫ Nµ aXπT˙d N;µ L˚w 7.27 176 Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, 283-85. 177 See Najman, Losing, 62 n.63, on if we're supposed to make anything of the chronological reference.

!69 and the wonders that result in the aftermath of his activity, are part of how God will reward the faithful he finds in Israel. Just as was the case with a description of a city and land in 7.26, so too here with the Messiah: the description of this future fail to assure Ezra. He will only come to understand when he sees the Messiah’s activity in chapters 11 and 13.

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 7: 4 EZRA 7.32-7.44 7.32 And the earth shall give back those who are asleep in it, and the dust those who rest in it; and the treasuries shall give up the souls which have been committed to them. 7.33 And the Most High shall be revealed upon the seat of judgment, and compassion shall pass away, mercy shall be made distant, and patience shall be withdrawn; 7.34 but only judgment178 shall remain, truth shall stand, and faithfulness shall grow strong. 7.35 And recompense shall follow, and the reward shall be manifested; righteous deeds shall awake, and unrighteous deeds shall not sleep. 7.36 Then the pit of torment shall appear, and opposite it shall be the place of rest; and the furnace of Gehenna shall be disclosed, and opposite it the paradise of delight. 7.37 Then the Most High will say to the nations that have been raised, ‘Look and understand whom you have denied, whom you have not served, whose commandments you have despised. 7.38 Look opposite you: here are delight and rest, and there are fire and torments.’ Thus he will speak to them on the day of judgment. 7.39 The day of judgment will be thus: it has no sun or moon or stars, 7.40 or cloud or lightning or thunder, or wind or water or air, or darkness or evening or morning, 7.41 or summer or spring or harvest, or heat or frost or cold, or hail or rain or dew, 7.42 or noon or night, or dawn, or shining or brightness or light, but only the splendor of the glory of the Most High, by which all shall see what has been determined for them. 7.43 For it will last for about a week of

178 dWÔÒ∫ RΔT◊˙ YÒ¥d N¥d Y\˜¥d. In contrast, see Hogan’s comments, Theologies, 144 n.89 on the Latin: "In this verse it is particularly evident that 'judgment' (indicium) is equivalent to 'justice.'"

!70 years. 7.44 This is my judgment and its prescribed order; and to you alone have I shown these things.”179

Following the reversal of the world back to its primeval state, the new world “will be roused” (AÂÒø w;h RÁøtT˙) (7.31). It is curious that the final judgment does not take place until after the recreation of the world. One of the more understated elements of this new world is that nothing corruptible exists. The souls that are preserved in the ground are distinguished from the corruptible things of the world. When the souls are released, it is all souls.180 Although there might not be anything left that is corruptible, the souls are preserved in treasuries to await the great final (and universal) judgment.181 This is yet another way that the angel is trying to show

Ezra that God’s actions towards all—the judged righteous and the judged wicked—is just and fair.

179 aT$◊∏˙ nW¬T˙ a$rxwaw .H∫ NÁ‰µdd NÁÒ¥A¬ lT˙ aR∏øw .;H∫ NÁıÁ‰√d NÁÒ¥A¬ ltt Aøraw 7.32 nwH∫ MÁßtad AΔwr twRÁ˝˙w QΔR˙ A∏Δwrw AÂ\Δ$r nwRıØ˙w .AÂ¬W√ atA˙w .A\˜¥dd AÁßrW˚ Lø AÂ¥Rµ A\Ò©T˙w 7.33 .V˜˚tt .zwrt atW˜Â¥hw .mWŒ˙ arR√w .dWÔÒ∫ RΔT◊˙ YÒ¥d N¥d Y\˜¥d 7.34 nW‰µD˙ A¬ AØ√w$rw .n$RÁøT˙ atW$Œ¥dzw .oD¥T˙ aR©aw .atA˙ aDı;øw 7.35 A˙H©d arW˙t AÒ©T˙ .AÔÁ˙d arta A˙hd N¥d HÒ∫WŒ¬w .AŒÁ$˜√td A∫Wø aZΔT˙ 7.36 .A$ÂßW∫d AÍ¥dRπ bwt HÒ∫WŒ¬w A¬ W\˜Â¬ w;a ≥nwtR\∏˚ A˜Â∫ wZΔw wrWΔ .N¥RÁøtTµd A$ÂÂø nW˙;h LıœW¬ AÂ¥Rµ N¥D;¥h RµA˙w 7.37 nwTÁ\Òßa W\˜µd yhW˙$DœWπ wa nwTÔ\Òπ AµW¥ w;H∫ nwH¬ \LÒÂ˙ NÁ¬h .AŒÁ˜√tw arW˙ ≥Nµtw .AŒ˙$Wπw AÔ$Á˙ A˚rh ah ≥nW‰ÒıœW¬ LÁ˚h wZΔ 7.38 .A\˜¥dd .Aı$˚W˚ A¬w arHß A¬w .H∫ T¥a A◊Â√ A¬ .yhwT¥a A˜˚h A˜\¥dd AµW¥ RÁ© w;h 7.39 A¬w .\A˚W◊Δ A¬w .raa A¬w .AÁ$µ A¬w .AΔw$r A¬w .AÂø$r A¬w .Aœ$R∫ A¬w A˜$˜ø A¬w 7.40 .aRπx A¬w .A◊µr .adR∫ A¬w A¥Rø A¬w .aDÁÒ© A¬w .AµWΔ A¬w .aT˜√ V¥r A¬w .awTß A¬w .AÏÁœ A¬w 7.41 .aRÏµ A¬w .AÒƒ A¬w arhz A¬w AœH∫ A¬w .aR¥H˙ A¬w .arhW˙ A¬w .AÂÂ¥a A¬w .AÁÒ¬ A¬w .arHƒ A¬w 7.42 NœTµd mDµ N¥Z;Δ ≥nwwH˙d N¥D¥Tø H˜µd .AÂ¥Rµd hTΔWı◊td AŒÁ¬z dWÔÒ∫ na A¬a .AÁ˜$√d aTı√ K¥a H¬ awH˙ N¥d aR©W˙ 7.43 nW˙a Tød\wa K¥dWÔÒ∫ K¬w HßWÂ˙w N¥d W˙h 7.44 180 This universal resurrection finds a parallel in 2 Baruch 30, where the souls of the wicked and the righteous are already distinguished and stored separately, but they face judgment and reward/punishment only once they are resurrected. 181 Nickelsburg, Resurrection, Immortality, and Eternal Life (Cambridge: Harvard Divinity School, 2007), 172.

!71 At first, after the souls are resurrected, God sits on the judgment seat. He does not immediately judge the souls, though.182 According to Uriel in ch. 7, the reason that the Messiah does not perform the judgment is that resurrection of souls and final judgment are possible only after his death.

So, after the death of the Messiah and with the Mighty One on the judgment seat but before judgment, a series of events must occur. Specifically, compassion, mercy, and patience are taken from the world. These three characteristics are listed in opposition to the three characteristics that will persist in the new age: judgment, truth, and faithfulness. With the coming judgment, there is no longer any need for compassion, mercy, or patience. The actions that led to judgment will no longer benefit from God’s scheduled order, for their time has come. Instead, what matters in the new incorruptible world is judgment, which will function according to truth, and faithfulness—these are the rewards of the final judgment (7.34).183

It is from the division of qualities—the ones that no longer are required and the ones that signify the new age—that judgment commences. Here, judgment is the assignment of punishment and blessing depending on the deeds of each soul. To highlight this justice of the dispersal of judgment, the author speaks of the metaphorical waking of the good and the bad. As in, they are not hidden away in the treasuries like the souls, they are present and easily accessible for God on the throne.

182 When comparing the different eschatological scenarios describing judgment seats, there is a variety of figures sitting as judge. In Dan 7, Mark 13. Even sticking only to the book of 4 Ezra we find apparently contradictory information. Here it is the Most High on the judgment seat (A\˜¥dd AÁßrW˚ Lø AÂ¥Rµ A\Ò©T˙w (7.33)), whereas in 12.32-33 it is the Messiah in the judge role. 183 It is not a list of three negative qualities replaced by three positive qualities. Instead, it is three positive qualities of the first age being replaced by three positive qualities of the new age.

!72 With God on the throne and the proper deeds of the souls in his view, the author describes the remainder of the scene. "Then the pit of torment will appear, and opposite it shall be the place of rest. And the furnace of Gehenna will be disclosed and opposite it the paradise of delight” (7.36).184 Just as God appears on the throne—apparently on earth, or at least visible in the new earth—so too do the eternal resting spots appear. Rest and paradise are contrasted with torment and fire/Gehenna. It is striking that the souls of all people are preserved in the earth and dust only to be revealed and judged and then placed back into a container. This imagery is especially true in the "pit" and "furnace" for those with the unrighteous because there, at least, the imagery is self-enclosed and separated from what is around it. The imagery is more open for the righteous souls—a place and a paradise—but still it suggests that there are specific locales for the good and the bad.185

In addition to the souls preserved, God will address the nations. "Then the Most High will say to the nations that have been raised, 'Look and understand whom you have denied, whom you have not served, whose commandments you have despised. 7.38 Look opposite you. Here are delight and rest, and there are fire and torment.' Thus he will speak to them on the day of judgment" (7.37-38).186 The way God addresses the nations makes clear that acknowledgment of and adherence to God’s commandments are expected. Back in ch. 3, Ezra was complaining about how the nations did not keep God’s commandments. Now, God recognizes the problem of their faithlessness and will deal with it accordingly. The appearance of the two permanent resting

184 bwt HÒ∫WŒ¬w .A˙H©d arW˙t AÒ©T˙ .AÔÁ˙d arta A˙hd N¥d HÒ∫WŒ¬w .AŒÁ$˜√td A∫Wø aZΔT˙w 7.36 A$ÂßW∫d AÍ¥dRπ 185 Here there are certainly parallels in other apocalypses, most notably 1 Enoch 14. 186 nwtR\∏˚ A˜Â∫ wZΔw wrWΔ .N¥RÁøtTµd A$ÂÂø nW˙;h LıœW¬ AÂ¥Rµ N¥D;¥h RµA˙w 7.37 nwTÁ\Òßa W\˜µd yhW˙$DœWπ wa nwTÔ\Òπ A¬ W\˜Â¬ w;a AŒÁ˜√tw arW˙ ≥Nµtw .AŒ˙$Wπw AÔ$Á˙ A˚rh ah ≥nW‰ÒıœW¬ LÁ˚h wZΔ 7.38 A\˜¥dd AµW¥ w;H∫ nwH¬ \LÒÂ˙ NÁ¬h

!73 spots reinforces the nations’ mistakes. One of Ezra’s concerns is addressed here explicitly: the nations that have oppressed Israel will undergo punishment at the end of times. But they do not receive punishment for what Ezra expected. “Here, in spite of the fact that 4 Ezra is a lengthy lament over the destruction of Jerusalem, the judgment is not related to the persecution of the righteous or suffering of the Jewish people in general. The wicked and the righteous are not judged on the way they have treated other people, or the way themselves have been treated. They receive reward or punishment for their obedience or disobedience to God’s law.”187 In the end, whether from a different nation or an Israelite, what matters is the obedience to God’s law.

The day of judgment is described as a cosmic ordeal, one which totally cancels the expected natural phenomena. "The day of judgment will be thus: it has no sun or moon or stars,

7.40 or cloud or lightning or thunder, or wind or water or air, or darkness or cold, or hail or rain or dew, 7.41 or noon or night, or dawn, or shining or brightness or light, but only the splendor of the glory of the Most High, by which all shall see what has been determined for them" (7.39-41).

As for the specifics of the judgment, of the order of events, of the actions that result after God sentences the souls. Nothing.

The conclusion of Uriel's description of the judgment is abrupt and, understandably, leaves Ezra confused. "For it [the day of judgment] will last for about a week of years. 7.44 This my judgment and its prescribed order; and to you alone have I shown these things" (7.33-34).188

However, the information in this passage will help flesh out the details of judgment for the reader

187 Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 173. 188 QΔR˙ A∏Δwrw AÂ\Δ$r nwRıØ˙w .AÂ¬W√ atA˙w .A\˜¥dd AÁßrW˚ Lø AÂ¥Rµ A\Ò©T˙w 7.33 V˜˚tt AΔwr twRÁ˝˙w zwrt atW˜Â¥hw mWŒ˙ arR√w .dWÔÒ∫ RΔT◊˙ YÒ¥d N¥d Y\˜¥d 7.34

!74 of the text once they’ve completed the story, just as this information turns out to help supplement

Ezra’s view of judgment in chs. 12-13.

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 8: 4 EZRA 7.59-7.61 7.59 For he who has what is hard to get rejoices more than he who has what is plentiful. 7.60 So also will be the judgment which I have promised; for I will rejoice over the few who will be saved, because it is they who have made my glory to prevail now, and through them my name has now been honored. 7.61 And I will not grieve over the multitude of those who perish; for it is they who are now like a mist, and are similar to a flame and smoke—they are set on fire and burn hotly and are extinguished.189

While the angel did provide Ezra with some important information regarding judgment,

Ezra worries that there will be so few that have kept God’s commandments thoroughly enough to actually matter. He grasps the goodness of reward for faithful obedience to the commandments.

But those people, the undeniably faithful, have never been his concern. His concern, instead, are those like himself that he fears are considered to have violated God’s commandments at one point or another. “Blessed are those who are alive and keep your commandment. But what of those concerning whom I asked? For who among the living is there that has not sinned, or who among men that has not transgressed your covenant?” (7.45-46).190

Uriel still sidesteps the question. His response is more or less that yes, many will perish but this makes the reward all the greater for those that are righteous (7.50-58). Speaking of

Uriel’s response here, R. H. Charles comments, “God has, according to this writer, no love for

189 .wh LÁÒœ H¬ T¥ad L˚d lWÏµ .TÁørtad mDµ K◊∏˜∫ T˙a LÁ˚h M;Ôπ .Y¬ R\µaw A˜\øw 7.59 .at$AÁ˝ß H¬ T¥ad w;h Nµ R¥T¥ H∫ aD;Δ rWøzd nW˙\hd LÏµ .NÁÁΔd a$rWøZ∫ A˙a MÍ∫Tµw RÁ© A˙a aDΔ .H\˜¥dd H˜‰¬Wµ yhwT¥a A˜˚h 7.60 .A√h J∫T√a YÂ√ nwhTÒÏµd NÁÒ¥aw .N¥rR◊µ yTΔWı√t A√hd NÁÒ¥a nW˙a .AÒ∫H¬ WÁµdta A√hd NÁ¬h RÁ© nW˙a nW˙\h .N¥DÚ∫ad NÁÒ¥ad nwhA©Wß Lø A˙a QÁøtTµ A¬w 7.61 W‰ødw ;WŒ¬dd WÂÔπta aTÁ∫HÒ√ K¥aw .Wı◊Δta nW˙\h A˜˙t K¥aw 190 K˜µ NÁÂÁßTµd NÁÒ¥a A˙D$œWπ w\RÏ˙w wtad NÁÒ¥a L‰¬ nwHÁ∫Wƒd 7.45 W\˜µ wa .WÏΔ A¬d wtad NÁÒ¥a Nµ RÁ© W˜\µ ≥nwHÁÒø ytWØ∫d NÁÒ¥a Lø A¬a 7.46 K˙DœWπ R»ıø A¬d aD$ÁÒ¥ Nµ

!75 man as man, but only for man as righteous.”191 The emphasis is clearly on the righteous, and

Uriel repeatedly attempts to explain to Ezra how the world is set up to benefit the righteous. But the assurance of the faithful’s salvation is not really Ezra’s problem. He is worried that many

Israelites will not qualify as the righteous because of how strict the dividing line is that Uriel describes. This is why Ezra and Uriel’s conversation is so belabored in 4 Ezra 3-9, and especially so here in ch. 7, when they are dealing with the root of Ezra’s issues.

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 9: 4 EZRA 7.64-73 7.64 But now the mind grows with us, and therefore we are tormented, because we perish and know it. 7.65 Let the human race lament, but let the beasts of the field be glad; let all who have been born lament, but let the four-footed beasts and the flocks rejoice! 7.66 For it is much better with them than with us; for they do not look for a judgment, nor do they know of any torment or life promised to them after death. 7.67 For what does it profit us that we shall be preserved alive but cruelly tormented? 7.68 For all who have been born are involved in iniquities, and are full of sins and burdened with transgressions. 7.69 And if we were not to come into judgment after death, perhaps it would have been better for us.” 7.70 He answered and said, “When the Most High made the world and Adam and all who have come from him, he first prepared the judgment and the things that pertain to the judgment. 7.71 And now understand from your own words, for you have said that the mind grows with us. 7.72 For this reason, therefore, whose who dwell on earth shall be tormented, because though they had understanding they committed iniquity, and though they received the commandments they did not keep them, and though they obtained the law, they dealt unfaithfully with what they received. 7.73 What then will they have to say in judgment, or how will they answer in the last times? 7.74 For how long the time is that the Most

191 Charles, 348. “This writer” meaning author of Shealthiel apocalypse.

!76 High has been patient with those who inhabit the world, and not for their sake, but because of the times which he has foreordained.”192

The big picture, according to Uriel, is that there will be righteous ones on the day of judgment, and that God takes such joy in them because they have shown him to the world. God does not grieve over those that perish because of their transience (7.61). Far from being comforted by this pronouncement, Ezra remains in pain.193 In fact, he interprets his own situation as worse now that he is aware of how little God cares for the wicked. He is placing himself, along with the majority of Israel, in that group. He curses his mind because it causes him greater angst with this information from Uriel (7.64). Ezra then looks to the animals and is envious that they have it better than his people do. Instead of comforting Ezra, this information abut judgment has tragically dejected him to the point that he deems a bestial existence preferable to his own human, Jewish existence.

Ezra takes this torment out even further. If life is futile and leads only to punishment, then what is the point of life? How can Ezra find comfort in knowing that God does so little to assist those who are unfaithful? If real life comes only in the second world, then there is little profit to life itself, Ezra concludes (7.50). Ezra is basically saying “we’re all going to be damned anyway,

192 N˜¥DÚ∫a N˜Δ NÁø…D¥ D˚d LÏµ .N˜Δ NÁŒ˙T◊µ A˙h LÏµw .AÚ∫r NÂø AøDµ N¥d A√h 7.64 nWÂÍ∫T˙ A˜øw N¥d aRÁØ∫ .aD\$ÁÒ¥ nwH¬W˚ nW¬A˙ .aDΔt aR∫dd N¥d atW$ÁΔ .A◊˜$Á˜∫d nwhT∫$R√ NÒ∫$aT 7.65 AÁ$Δ A¬ pa .AŒÁ˜√t NÁø…D¥ A¬ pa .A˜¥D¬ NÁ‰Íµ A¬d LÏµ .N˜µ Bƒ Y˝;ß J;Œπ nwH¬d 7.66 .nwH¬ W‰Òµta atWµ rT∫ Nµ .N˜Δ NÁŒ˙T◊µ WŒ˙T◊µ A¬a .N˜Δ NÁÁ;Δ AÔµd N˜¥r;T¥ A˜µ RÁ© N˜Δ 7.67 nwhTÒ∏$µ nwHÁÒø n$RÁŒ¥w A¬\Wø nW˙a NÁ\Òµw .a$HÏÔ∫ nW˙a NÁÒ∏ÒπTµ a$DÁÒ¥ RÁ© nwHÒ˚ 7.68 N¬ awh J;Œπ Y˝;ß A\˜¥D¬ .N¥w;h N¥;ta A¬ atWµ rT∫ Nµ W¬aw 7.69 NÁÒ¥a lW‰¬w mdA¬w .AÂÒØ¬ H¬ awh D∫;ø DıØµ AÂ¥Rµ D˚w .Y¬ R\µaw A\˜øw 7.70 .NÁ˙$a A˜\¥dd NÁÒ¥aw .A\˜¥d dTø mDœW¬ H˜µ wwhd .A∫r NÂø AøDµd tR\µad L˚Tßa KÁÒ$µ Nµ A√hw 7.71 WÒ»ıœw .W¬Wøa AøDµ nwH∫ T¥a D˚d .NÁŒ˙T◊µ wh adh LÏµ \Aørad LÁ˚h ;H¥$rWÂø 7.72 .yhWÂÒƒ nwH¬ MÁßttad AßWÂ˜¬ pa ≥ nW˙a w\RÏ˙ A¬w A˙D$œWπ nWÒÒÂ˙w .nwHµWπ nWΔT∏˙ A˜;‰¥a wa .A˜\¥D∫ nwRµA˙d nwH¬ awh T¥a A˜µ pa 7.73 .A¥RΔa A˜∫Z∫ .nwHÒ¥d nwhTÒÏµ awh A¬w .AÂÒød yhw$rWÂØ¬ AÂ¥Rµ HΔwr R©a A˜∫z RÁ© AÂ˚ 7.74 \NÁÂ\Áßd A˜$∫z LÏµ A¬a 193 On the analogous relationship of Ezra's laments to Job's see Najman, Losing, 82-84.

!77 so what’s the point.”194 Ezra sees this as cruel and unusual punishment because it makes the game of life seem rigged.

Ezra looks back to the angel’s own description of the world in 7.11. That is where Uriel says that Adam failed to keep God’s commandments and the world was judged as a result. The world sets everyone up for failure. “For all who have been born are involved in iniquities, and are full of sins and burdened with transgressions” (7.68).195 Ezra’s conclusion: it would have been better not to have been born. What he is looking for from the angel is reassurance.

Reassurance that God’s chosen people, despite living in a world filled with the perishable, despite living in a world that makes sin and iniquity and transgression unavoidable, know that there is redemption for them. For what Uriel has told Ezra so far has not made that clear. And if there is no salvation to come, even for those of God’s beloved people, then it would have been better that none of them live. Life with certain judgment is worse than no life at all.

The angel does not let Ezra’s reference to the world post-Adam go unqualified. Uriel says that judgment preceded Adam and the creation of the world. “When the Most High made the world and Adam and all who have come from him, he first prepared the judgment and the things that pertain to judgment” (7.70).196 R.H. Charles gives voice to why this answer remains problematic for Ezra.

This subordination of all things to judgment, and that a judgment at once final and all but universally damnatory, makes it, we repeat, difficult to apprehend what this writer

194 To reiterate, Ezra is concerned not about humanity in general. He fears that the vast majority of Israelites will fall into the category of the wicked (for they have not kept the commandments perfectly) and will, therefore, not receive entrance into the new, better world. 195 nwhTÒ∏$µ nwHÁÒø n$RÁŒ¥w A¬\Wø nW˙a NÁ\Òµw a$HÏÔ∫ nW˙a NÁÒ∏ÒπTµ a$DÁÒ¥ RÁ© nwHÒ˚ 7.68 196 wwhd NÁÒ¥a lW‰¬w mdA¬w .AÂÒØ¬ H¬ awh D∫;ø DıØµ AÂ¥Rµ D˚w .Y¬ R\µaw A\˜øw 7.70 NÁ˙$a A˜\¥dd NÁÒ¥aw .A\˜¥d dTø mDœW¬ H˜µ Hogan, Theologies, 117, takes Uriel's comments to mean that "sin is not inevitable, but results from a willful refusal to benefit from the divine gifts of "understanding" and the Torah."

!78 conceived God’s objective to be in making the world. In three different passages, indeed, he declares categorically that the world was created on account of Israel, but, since only a handful even of Israel are saved, we must conclude that, according to this writer, God regards these few as worth a whole eternity of pain on the part of all the rest of humanity.197

So, the problem is that Uriel’s response here only serves to exacerbate Ezra’s lament in 7.68. As

Charles picks up on, there is still “only a handful even of Israel [that] are saved.” While Uriel does not clarify who qualifies as the worthy in Israel, he does explain why awareness of judgment is not the problem Ezra thinks it is. For if you understand the coming judgment, you understand when you commit iniquity, when you fail to keep the commandments, and when you are unfaithful to the law (7.72). Knowledge of the coming judgment makes it so that everyone is accountable on the day of judgment in the last times (7.73). There is no defense for knowingly choosing to disobey the commandments.198

4 Ezra 7.74 describes something that will become even more clear when I discuss the eagle vision of ch. 12: God privileges his plan for the world over everything else. In 7.74 Uriel says, “For how long is the time that the Most High has been patient with those who inhabit the world, and not for their sake, but because of the times which he set.”199 His concern for what is foreordained is greater than that of the people he created. This is especially true because the people directly referenced in 7.74 are the unfaithful (cf. 7.72-73). Uriel is again speaking generally when Ezra wants him to speak specifically about Israel. This is part of the reason that the dialogues ultimately fail to provide answers that satisfy Ezra, whereas the visions do. The

197 Charles, 349. 198 We see this later, too, in 8.60-61, where God does not want to destroy his people but do so because they chose it. 199 nwHÒ¥d nwhTÒÏµ awh A¬w .AÂÒød yhw$rWÂØ¬ AÂ¥Rµ HΔwr R©a A˜∫z RÁ© AÂ˚ 7.74 \NÁÂ\Áßd A˜$∫z LÏµ A¬a

!79 visions show what happens to Israel along with what happens to people generally; in contrast, when Uriel is talking about humanity he does not provide the impact for Israel.

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 10: 4 EZRA 7.78-80 7.78 Now, concerning death, the teaching is this: When the decisive decree has gone forth from the Most High that a man will die, as the spirit leaves the body to return again to him who gave it, first of all it adores the glory of the Most High. 7.79 And if it is one of those who have shown scorn and have not kept the ways of the Most High,200 and who have hated those who fear God, 7.80 those souls will not enter into treasuries, but will immediately wander about in torments, ever grieving and sad in seven ways.201

When discussing what happens to the dead, Uriel begins by describing the fate of each soul when it departs the body.202 Each life is kept in existence by God, who, at the time of his choosing, will command the life to cease and the soul return to God. Each soul will "adore the glory of the God" (7.78).203 In some ways, this helps alleviate the tensions in the text surrounding predestination. Each soul is meant to adore God, and on its own, it would. But, because each soul exists within a person, and that person makes their own decisions about following God's ways, humans truly have the choice to determine their fate. So, once the soul has acknowledged God, then the soul goes on to its proper resting place.

200 The Syriac omits the following: “and who have despised his law.” See Hogan, “tora.” 201 .tWÂ˙d A◊˙R∫ Lø AÂ¥Rµ tW¬ Nµ A\˜¥d rZ©d aXœ qW∏˙d yTµa .aTÒµ yh adh N¥d atWµ Lø 7.78 .aH¬ad hTΔWı√T¬ aD˝;ß AµDŒ∫ ;H∫H¥d w;h tW¬ rdT√td .aR˝π Nµ aTÂ◊˙ A√RπTµd Aµ nW˙a W˜ßd NÁÒ¥a Nµ wa .AÂ¥Rµd hTΔ$rwa w\RÏ˙ A¬d NÁÒ¥a Nµ wa A$µWÒƒ Nµ ;H¥T¥a N¥d naw 7.79 .aH¬ad yhWÒ$ΔD¬ .NΔ$rwa Oı◊∫ NŒÁøt$Tµw NÔ˙t$Tµw .AŒÁ˜√T∫ \N¥w$h A√h Nµ A¬a .NÒ$ø A¬ a$rxwA¬ aT$◊∏˙ NÁ¬h 7.80 202 For a similar exploration of the fate of the bodies and spirits of the dead read the fragmentary 4QInstruction. 203 aH¬ad hTΔWı√T¬ aD˝;ß

!80 JUDGMENT PASSAGE 11: 4 EZRA 7.102-104 7.102 I answered and said, “If I have found favor in your sight, show further to me, your servant, whether on the day of judgment the righteous will be able to intercede for the ungodly or to entreat the Most High for them, 7.103 fathers for sons or sons for fathers, brothers for brothers, relatives for their kinsmen, or friends for friends.” 7.104 He answered and said to me, “Since you have found favor in my sight, I will show you this also. The day of judgment is decisive and displays to all the seal of truth.”204

Ezra's concern over the fate of his people continues in 7.102-115 where he and Uriel discuss the role of intercession during the time of judgment.205 Uriel's response is clear and straightforward, "The day of judgment is decisive and displays to all the seal of truth. . . . For then everyone will bear his own righteousness and unrighteousness" (7.104, 5). Ezra finds this unacceptable and questions why it was that Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Samuel, David, Solomon,

Elijah, and Hezekiah prayed on behalf of the people. Ezra wants his people to have to the experience God’s rewards.

Daniel Boyarin suggests that this interchange between Ezra and Uriel reflects a contemporary issue over the nature of liturgical prayers.206 He concludes, “It would seem not unlikely that the Apocalyptist had in his mind’s eye as he composed this entire section a liturgical model from which he drew freely and to great effect.”207 Boyarin’s attentive reading of 4 Ezra’s comments on prayer offer us two important conclusions. First and most importantly, for the

204 A\˜¥dd AµWÁ∫ nad .adh pa bwt kD»ı;Ø¬ Y˜Áødwa \KÁ˜Á$Ø∫ AÂΔ$r TÔ‰√a na .tRµ;aw TÁ˜;øw 7.102 .AÂ¥Rµ Nµ nwHÁÒø nWØı˙d wa .AØÁ√$R¬ nW˙a nW¬A◊˙d AŒ$¥dz NÁÔ‰◊µ nwHÁ$Δa PÒΔ A$Δa wa ≥nwH¥$H∫a PÒΔ AÁ$˜∫ wa ≥nwH$Á˜∫ PÒΔ a$H∫a wa 7.103 nwHÁÂΔ$r PÒΔ AÂ;Δ$r wa ≥nwHÁ˜Á$Δa PÒΔ A˜Á$Δa wa wh AµW¥ .\A\˜¥dd HµW¥ .Kødwa adh Lø pa .\Y$˜Áø mDœ A\ÂΔ$r TÔ‰√ad LÏµ .Y¬ R\µaw A\˜øw 7.104 .yhW∫A¬ aR∫ wa .hRı¬ A∫a rD◊µ A¬ A√hd RÁ© A˜‰;¥a .arR√d AµTΔ ≥aWÔµ L‰¬w .aR¥Z© AßaT˙d wa lW˚A˙d wa KµD˙d wa .hR˚T˙ yhW∏ÒΔd .HıÁıÔ¬ AÂ;Δr wa .hD»ıØ¬ aRµ wa 205 Daniel Boyarin, “Penitential Liturgy in 4 Ezra,” JSJ 3 (1972), 30-34, identifies in 4 Ezra 7.102-8.36 a reflection on the Jewish penitential liturgy. 206 Boyarin, “Penitential Liturgy in 4 Ezra,” JSJ 3 (1972), 30-34. 207 Boyarin, “Penitential,” 34.

!81 author of 4 Ezra, all matters of theological debate, of confusion, of interest, are ultimately determined by their place at the final judgment. For this author, the divine judge offers his strike of the gavel on the day of judgment, with no chance of appeal. Whereas Joshua, Solomon, and

Hezekiah offered their prayers for the people in the Israelites in their current situations, Ezra requests that the faithful Israelites should be able to petition for their less faithful brothers and sisters for all time. The second conclusion we can draw from reading this section in light of

Jewish liturgy is that 4 Ezra’s author is surprisingly witty. For a text that so often describes its morose protagonist and considers such heavy topics as the fate of all Jews and the justness of

God, it’s surprisingly refreshing to see that its author can sprinkle some humorous irony into the mix too. The nature of 4 Ezra’s first seven chapters (chs. 3-9) depict an Ezra who is doing the very pleading for his people that he previously admired in Israel’s previous heroes. Ezra is too fixated on his own misery and his people’s lostness and Uriel’s comments to realize this, though.

While Boyarin is interested in the early first century parallels between the Mishnah and 4

Ezra,208 the liturgical influence on 4 Ezra 7.102-104 reminds us that at the end of the day, 4

Ezra’s conclusions on theological matters are governed by their place after God’s final judgment.

Additionally, the author cleverly and humorously adds Ezra to the short list of great Israelite leaders—those most concerned with their people’s fates.209

208 See Najman’s comments, Losing, 85, “Thus, as Boyarin points out, Ezra continues pleading for the people in what resembles the rabbinic formula for confession.” 209 Again, Najman, Losing, 23, pushes this point to perhaps its breaking point. She argues that the author appeals to these figures to not only appeal to their authority to guide readers into a similar type of role as Ezra serves in the text. “4 Ezra portrays a protagonist who is identified primarily as Ezra, but whose depiction also draws on other scriptural figures, including Ezekiel, Daniel, Job, and Moses. Why is the protagonist formed in this way? I will argue that the point is both to appeal to the authority of these figures and to renew that authority in a time of crisis. Effacing his (or their) identity, the writer(s) of 4 Ezra hopes to guide the reader through a transformation similar to that undergone by the protagonist: from someone full of despair and paralyzed by questions, into someone who is ready to receive the Torah once more and to renew the covenantal life of Israel.”

!82 JUDGMENT PASSAGE 12: 4 EZRA 7.113-15 7.113 But the day of judgment will be the end of this world and the beginning of the immortal world to come, in which corruption has passed away, 7.114 sinful indulgence has come to an end, unbelief has been cut off, and righteousness has increased and truth has appeared. 7.115 Therefore no one will then be able to have mercy on him who has been condemned in judgment or to harm him who is victorious.210

Like other literature of the period, according to Uriel's comment, the day of final judgment will divide the former age from the eternal age.211 Uriel reveals this information to

Ezra to highlight that the things Ezra asks about are irrelevant for the big picture. Whereas present concerns cannot be disentangled from future realities for Ezra, for Uriel there is only one thing of concern: the future age. Ezra’s question about praying for the wicked prompts Uriel’s response. What Ezra fails to understand is that from the divine perspective from which Uriel sees, Ezra’s concern is trivial. In a variety of ways he attempts to share with Ezra certain details about the future that will alleviate his concerns and reorientate his perspective from the age of the world to the eternal age. God's judgment, in particular the Day of Judgment, separates these ages once and for all. It is "the end of this world and the beginning of the immortal world to come" (7.113).212

One of Uriel’s points of emphasis is that God’s judgment is the last word on an individual. It is final. That is why Ezra’s earlier requests for post-mortem penitential prayers was so quickly dismissed. Ezra is too caught up in the contemporary situation, which for him is the end–all, be–all. He lacks perspective. And therefore he conflates Israel’s present sufferings with

210 AÒÚıΔ Rı;ø H∫d t;Aµ A¬d w;h D¥Tød AÂÒød H◊¥rw .\AÂÒø A˙hd wh HÂ¬W√ A\˜¥dd N¥d HµW¥ 7.113 .arR√ J;˙dw .atWŒ¥dz AÁÚ∫rw .atwrW∏˚ AÒÏ∫Tµw .atWÔ¥R√ A¥rT◊µw 7.114 A\˜¥D∫ A\˚zd A˜;¥A¬ vAı˙d AÒπa .A˜\¥D∫ Y˚dzad A˜;¥a Lø MΔR˙d V˙a J‰◊µ A¬ LÁ˚h N¥D;¥h 7.115 211 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 252, “The day of judgment here forms a division point between the two worlds or ages, and that decisive turning point is signified by the word ‘end.’” 212 AÒÚıΔ Rı;ø H∫d t;Aµ A¬d w;h D¥Tød AÂÒød H◊¥rw \AÂÒø A˙hd wh HÂ¬W√ A\˜¥dd N¥d HµW¥ 7.113

!83 God’s last say on their behalf. Uriel in this third dialogue addresses the finality of the day of judgment to come, not the finality of Israel’s current troubles.

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 13: 4 EZRA 8.15-17 8.15 About all mankind you know best. But I will speak about your people, for whom I am grieved, 8.16 and about your inheritance, for whom I lament, and about Israel, for whom I am sad, and about the seed of Jacob, for whom I am troubled. 8.17 Therefore I will pray before you for myself and them, for I see the failings of us who dwell on the earth, 8.18 and I have heard the judgment that is to come.213

This passage might give us the clearest sense of who Ezra really is. Despite all that Uriel has said to him, trying to convince him of Ezra’s inability to comprehend God’s overarching vision, Ezra says—simply, plainly—that he’s troubled about his people.214 Humanity as a whole is only tangentially related to Ezra’s interest in the fate of his fellow Jews.215 This concern drove

Ezra to cry out in despair at the beginning of the apocalypse (3.1-2). It drove him to compare

Babylon’s fate to Israel’s and suggest that if tangible rewards reflect God’s chosenness then perhaps Israel really is not God’s beloved (3.28-32). His nationalistic concern even takes priority over learning specifics about heavenly matters (“about the ways above”) because there are too

213 .A˙a v;AΔ wh KÂø Lød .»T˙a o…D¥ T˙a .\N¥d T¥aR¥T¥ .V˙a lW˚ Lø tR;µa RµAµ A√h pa 8.15 yhWÒød bWŒØ¥d Hørz Løw .Y¬ A¥\R˚ yhWÒød L¥RÍ¥a Løw .A˙a L∫aTµ ;HÁÒød ktwtR¥ Løw 8.16 .A˙a O¥zTµ nTø$rW√ A˙a aZ;Δ ahd LÏµ ≥nwHÁÒøw YÒø KÁµDœ P◊˚taw AØÚ∫ad aR;√a ah adh LÏµ 8.17 AÂÒØ∫ N¥R;Âød NÁÒ¥ad .D¥Tød A\˜¥dd hrZ© T\ØÂ√ A√h pa A¬a 8.18 214 Hogan, Theologies, 39, "Since Ezra is concerned primarily with the fate of Israel and only secondarily with that of sinful humanity as a whole (8:15-16), it is hardly surprising that he should be comforted by the biblical imagery of the visions and not by Uriel's individualistic universalism." 215 Stone reads this differently. He acknowledges that Ezra’s concern is Israel in particular. However, he reads this as an argumentative strategy on Ezra’s part. He could have argued about humanity in general but knew his case would be stronger by focusing on Israel’s in particular. Thus Stone, Fourth Ezra, 267, “On exegetical grounds, moreover, the sense ‘we humans’ is what is demanded. The whole point of the disclaimer in 8:15 is that, although the question could be put about all mankind, Ezra is putting it only about Israel in order to strengthen his argument.” Nothing in Ezra’s behavior warrants such a conclusion, however. See Najman, Losing, 129, who says that Ezra only references all mankind in 8.15 “only to pass immediately to an expression of his special concern for Israel.”

!84 many problems with the “things that we daily experience” (4.23).216 In 8.15-17 he returns to the question he’s previously raised in 5.27-28 and his sadness that Israel does not seem to be privileged at all, even after “I have heard the judgment that is to come” (8.18).217 At Ezra’s core is a man deeply concerned with the fate of his people and seriously wrestling and attempting to understand their place in God’s world.218

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 14: 4 EZRA 8.37-39, 45 8.37 He answered me and said, “Some things you have spoken rightly, and it will come to pass according to your words. 8.38 For indeed, I will not concern myself about the fashioning of those who have sinned, or about their death, their judgment, or their destruction; 8.39 but I will rejoice over the creation of the righteous over their pilgrimage also, and their life, and their receiving their reward. . . . 8.45 No, O Lord who is over us. But spare your people and have mercy on your inheritance, for you have mercy on your own creation.219

Notice the emphasis of the perspective. For the angel, the concern is not for those that fail

—the ones that incur death and judgment and the consequences of sin.220 This angel focuses on the “creation of the righteous.” Uriel emphasizes God as creator. The angel is saying, well, Ezra,

216 L¥RÍ¥ad LÏµ mWÁÒ‰∫ NÁÒø n$Rı;ød NÁÒ¥a Lø A¬a LØ¬d aTΔ$rwa Lø lA√ad TÁ∫;x RÁ© A¬ 4.23 A◊¥Dœ AßWÂ˙w .AØÁ√$r AÏ#ı◊¬ bH¥ta T∫\Δad AÂøw .A$ÂÂØ¬ bH¥ta N¥H¥T¥a A¬ bT˚tad SœT$¥dw .H¬ LÏ∫;ta nt$H∫ad 217 D¥Tød A\˜¥dd hrZ© T\ØÂ√ A√h pa A¬a 8.18 218 Part of the reason my literary reading of Ezra in Chapter 1 is so important is that it shows the consistent motivation for Ezra. When analyzing 4 Ezra, scholars have tended to let their interpretive conclusions guide their reading of the material, instead of the other way around. For example, see Hogan’s comments, Theologies, on 109-110 which miss the point that Ezra appeals to Babylon/all of mankind occasionally to contextualize Israel’s unique place: "Despite Uriel's repeated efforts to convince Ezra that he is one of the righteous few and should therefore rejoice over his own salvation (7:59, 76-77, 8:47-62, 9:13), Ezra continues to lament the loss of the mass of humanity right up to the end of the third dialogue (9:14-16).” As covered elsewhere, she argues that both Ezra and Uriel are misguided in their theology and therefore she attempts to distinguishes their two wrongful concerns in these passages. 219 nwH˜¥d Lø wa ≥nwhtWµ Lø wa .A¬;W$ød nwhTÒÁı© Lø A˙a B◊ΔTµ A¬ T¥aR¥R√d LÏµ 8.38 nwH˙D∫a Lø wa nwhR©ad H˜ørWπ Løw nwH$ÁÁΔ Løw .AŒ$¥dzd nwhTÒÁı©d aT¥tAµ Lø A˙a MÍ∫Tµ A¬a 8.39 kT¥$R∫ Lø .ktwtR¥ Lø MΔrtaw .KÂø Lø sWΔ .\yRµ A¥Rµ K˜µ A˙a A;Ø∫ A¬ 8.45 T˙a MΔrTµ KÒ¥d RÁ© w;h 220 Hogan, Theologies, 145-46. Drawing on this passage in parallel to 7.61, Najman, Losing, 130, takes this one step further: "God is not concerned about the death of the wicked who are like smoke."

!85 who cares about those that don’t make the cut. For God has created some who are righteous, and this is a wondrous thing.

Again Ezra refuses to lose the thread of his argument. While it’s all fine and good for

God to be pleased over the righteous, the issue for Ezra in the moment is that it seems that no one qualifies. Who is righteous among his community? Surely none have kept all of the ways of the Most High, himself included. And so it is nothing but judgment for God’s people. The angel keeps referring to the plan, and to the way things were created to be. This fails to convince Ezra for the simple reason that it does not correspond to his reality. God needs to address Israel’s current situation, one of despondency and suffering. The fact that there might have been some group of righteous before or after Ezra’s time is of little consolation to them. There is a self- centeredness to this, which is natural, and human, and defensible. Because the heavenly perspective is one that has different priorities, they take consolation in different matters. Ezra says you need to take account of our interests.

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 15: 4 EZRA 8.59-61 8.59 For just as the things which have been predicted await you, so the thirst and torment which are prepared [await them]. For the Most High did not intend that men should be destroyed; 8.60 But they themselves who were created have defiled the name of him who made them, and have been ungrateful to him who prepared life for them. 8.61 Therefore my judgment is now drawing near; 8.62 I have not shown this to all men, but only to you and a few like you.221

221 AŒÁ˜√t ah\x nW˙;H¬ pa A˜˚h .M¥Dœ Nµ Rµatad NÁ¬h nW‰¬ NÁ‰Íµd K¥a A˙h LÏµ 8.59 AÚ∫x RÁ© A¬ .D¥Tød td»Tød .;Y¬ W¥dwa A¬w wR∏˚ atWıÁÏ∫w .nwhdWı;ød HÂ√ wTø;x W¥R∫tad nW;˙h A¬a 8.60 .A$ÁΔ nwH¬ H¬ b\Rœ Y˜\¥d A˙h LÏµ 8.61 K¬ NÁ;µdd NÁÒ¥a a$rWøZ¬w K¬ na A¬a .aAÁ#˝Í¬ Tødwa A¬d ;wh 8.62

!86 Whereas Ezra is incapable of getting past the near impossibility of keeping all of God’s commandments, so Uriel reiterates God’s judgment corresponds directly to the actions of individuals. The fact that God didn’t intend for people to be destroyed is meant to reinforce

Ezra’s trust that God is not out to get people. God does not pleasure in people’s failure to adhere to the life he designed for them. That is not what he “intended.” However, since “they themselves” were “ungrateful” and “defiled [God’s] name,” their punishment is just. Implicit in

Uriel’s argument here is the way that human status is determined before God. Ezra thinks (not totally unwarrantedly) that if a person fails to keep one of the 613 commandments then that person is ostracized from God and the relationship is broken. This is so worrisome for without a standing temple how can the people reestablish that pure standing before God? Uriel’s comments strongly imply that the matter has more to do with motivation and intention than individual shortcomings. Ezra and his people need to strive to honor “the name of him who made them.”

They need to be grateful to “him who prepared life for them.” And that by doing so they will receive the rewards which Ezra has discussed and Uriel has confirmed. But for the others, those with no intention of keeping God’s commandments, judgment will be swift and irreversible.

It is with Uriel’s revelation that “my judgment is now drawing near” that he again singles

Ezra out as unique amongst his contemporaries (8.61). As discussed in the previous chapter, Ezra the character receives the reward of heavenly knowledge due to his unwavering commitment to

Israel’s cause.222 Though I don’t think this passage is meant to inspire the audience to model themselves after Ezra, I do think Uriel’s comment in 8.62 serves a purpose for 4 Ezra’s audience.

The information they receive from this text was reserved for the select few in years past.

222 I’ve previously referred (26, 46 aboved) to this verse to argue against Najman’s notion that Ezra is meant to serve as a model for the audience of 4 Ezra to emulate.

!87 Whereas the audience does not need to reproduce Ezra’s own journey, they do need to adhere to and take comfort in the information disclosed to Ezra, for they are lucky enough to have it shared with them through the production of the text.

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 16: 4 EZRA 11.41-44 11.41 And you have judged the earth, but not with truth; 11.42 for you have afflicted the meek and injured the peaceable; you have hated those who tell the truth, and have loved liars; you have destroyed the fortifications of those who brought forth fruit, and have laid low the walls of those who did you no harm. 11.43 And so your insolence has come up before the Most High, and your pride to the Mighty One. 11.44 And the Most High has looked upon his times, and behold, they are ended, and his ages are completed.223

With Ezra’s second visions in 4 Ezra 11-12, he finally sees how judgment will take place on the cosmic scale. His vision initially confounds: there is an eagle with 12 wings and three heads (11.1) that rules over the world. During Ezra’s vision, new wings appear and battle other wings, all while a divine voice signals the end (11.15). Ultimately, the rebellious wings disappear and one head in particular takes over. This ruler is particularly evil, ruling with much oppression

(11.32). The point of the vision, though, comes in 11.37 when a lion appears, who rebukes the eagle for ruling the world wrongly (the substance of the above Passage 16). God not only offers

Ezra a vision, but an interpretation. The eagle comes from the four–kingdom schema of Daniel

(12.11). The lion is the Messiah (12.31), who reproves the wicked ruler (12.31), denounces his actions (12.32), and destroys him (12.33). In response to Ezra’s main concern, this vision shows that Israel’s enemies will suffer a fate worse that Ezra’s contemporaries.

223 aT√WŒ∫ A¬d AørA¬ ;hT˙dw 11.41 A˜$ÍΔ T∏\Ôßw .AÒ#©D¬ TÂ\Δrw .aX¥$rT¬ TÁ˜ßw .A‰Á$‰Â¬ T√\A∫aw .a$R¥R√w A¥W$˜Ø¬ T»∏ÏΔw RÁ© tZ∫ 11.42 kwrha A¬d NÁÒ¥ad a$rW√ T‰\‰µw .NÁ˜¥H˚d NÁÒ¥ad A˙TÒÁΔ tW¬w .AÂ¥Rµ tW¬ kRøx QÒ\ßw 11.43 WÂ\Ò√ ahw yhW˜#∫Z∫ AÂ¥Rµ RΔw 11.44

!88 By nature, discussions of contrasts help to refine and clarify our understanding of each of the different elements involved: so, darkness helps us better understand light, wickedness helps us understand goodness, etc. With Ezra’s vision in the fifth episode, we discover a set of contrasts regarding judgment. For the Messiah figure is chastising and rebuking the earthly ruler.224 Like with so much in Ancient Jewish thought, the opponent, the improper ruler, has bastardized the ways of God. According to the vision, he, too, has attempted to offer a judgment on the earth. His judgment, however, is corrupted with an overvaluing of power. He privileges selfishness and violence. In part, his punishment from the messianic figure is due to the neglect of his position and his inability to properly highlight the qualities and people that God so values.

Despite Ezra’s suggestions to the contrary, God’s final judgment is governed by correction—correcting untruthfulness, violence, pride, and injustice. This last reason, the injustice of the ruler, rings true for Ezra. God has seen that those ruling over the Jews “have laid low the walls of those who did you no harm.” God insights that he will act. Such “insolence,” in fact, triggers God’s intervention into history’s natural unfolding. It signals the “ages are completed” and the Messiah will judge the earthly ruler, and all others will face the test of God’s final judgment.

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 17: 4 EZRA13.25-28 13.25 “As for you seeing a man come up from the heart of the sea, 13.26 this is he whom the Most High has been keeping for many ages, through whom he will deliver his creation; and he will direct those who are left. 13.27 And as for your seeing a breath of fire and a storm out of his mouth, 13.28 and as for his not holding a spear or a weapon of war, yet destroying the onrushing multitude which came to conquer him, this is the pronouncement. 13.29 Behold, the days are

224 On the nature and identity of this ruler see Andre Lacocque, “The Vision of the Eagle in 4 Esdras, a Rereading of Daniel 7 in the first century C.E.” SBLSP 20 (1981): 237-58.

!89 coming when the Most High will deliver those who are on the earth. 13.30 And bewilderment of mind will come over those who dwell on the earth. 13.31 And they will plan to make war against one another, city against city, place against place, people against people, and kingdom against kingdom. 13.32 And when these things come to pass and the signs occur which I showed you before, then my son will be revealed, whom you saw as a man coming up. 13.33 And when all the nations hear his voice, every man shall leave his own land and the warfare that they have against one another. 13.34 And an innumerable multitude will be gathered together, as you saw, desiring to come and conquer him. 13.35 But he will stand on the top of Mount Zion. 13.36 And Zion will come and be made manifest to everybody, prepared and built, as you saw the mountain carved out with hands. 13.37 And he, my son, will reprove the assembled nations for their ungodliness (this was symbolized by the storm), 13.38 and will reproach them to their face with their evil deeds and the torments with which they are to be tortured (which were symbolized by the flames), and will destroy them without toil by the law, which was symbolized by the fire.”225

Ezra’s final vision is of the Son of Man rising from the heart of the sea (13.3). This figure arrives in full judgment mode: his gaze causes wicked ones to tremble (13.3) and, worse, his voice causes them to melt. Reacting to this messianic appearance, the wicked nations gather together to fight back (13.5, 9), but cannot offer any resistance to the messiah, who speaks fire and burns them up (13.10-11). The interpretation of this (more straightforward vision is quoted above).

225 .AÂ¥d Hı¬ Nµ QÒ;ßd aRı© T¥\ZΔd LÏµ ._.W˙h kwZΔd N¥d HŒ√Wπ 13.25 .wRΔT√ad NÁÒ¥A¬ RıØ˙ w\hw .hT¥Rı¬ ;HÁœR∏˙ hD¥A∫d w;h .a$AÁ˝ß A$˜∫Z¬ AÂ¥Rµ RÏ;˙d w;h W¥\wh 13.26 .AÒØÒødw arW˙d AΔwr twh A;Œ∏˙ HµWπ Nµd T¥Z\Δdw 13.27 A◊˜˚ ;whd hT¥Tµd aA©WÍ¬ Lı;Δw .A∫Rœd A˙Aµ A¬w AÔµwr hD\¥A∫ awh DÁΔa N¥d A¬d 13.28 aTÒµ yh adh .A∫Rœ HÂø DıØ˙d at;ad .Aøra Lød NÁÒ¥A¬ qwR∏˙d AÂ¥Rµ DıØ˙d yTµa .N¥t;a aT$µW¥ ah 13.29 .Aørad ;H¥$rWÂø Lø atAÁ˝ß athwt atat 13.30 .AÂø Mø AÂøw .ar Mø artaw .aT˜¥Dµd Mø aT˜¥Dµ .DΔ Mø DΔ nW∫RŒ˙d nWı◊ΔT˙w 13.31 .atW‰Òµ Mø atW;‰Òµw aRı© K¥a T¥\ZΔd ;wh yR∫ AÒ©T˙ N¥D;¥h .K¬ tR;µa T;µDœd at$wta NÁ¬h N¥$wH˙ D˚ awH˙w 13.32 QÒ;ßd hrta nwH˜µ V˙a L˚ nWŒı◊˙ HÒœ nwHÒ˚ A$ÂÂø nWØÂ◊˙ D˚w 13.33 nwhT˜Á∫d A∫Rœw Mø A∫Rœ nwDıØ˙w nwtA˙d NÁ∫;xd T¥Z\Δd K¥a .A˜Á˜µ H¬ TÁ¬d A◊˜˚ aDÔ˚a nW◊˜˚T˙w 13.34 .w;h aRı© .nW¥hxd ar\Wƒ V¥r Lø mWŒ˙ N¥d w\h 13.35 .N¥$D¥A∫ A¬d rZ©tad ar\Wƒ T¥Z\Δd K¥a .AÁ\˜∫w adTØµ D˚ lW‰¬ AÒ©ttw .atat N¥d nW¥hxw 13.36 nwHÁµDœ rwDÍ˙w .AÒØÒØ¬ WÁµdtad nW˙;h .nwHØ√wr Lø wtad NÁ¬h AÂ$ÂØ¬ S‰˙ .\yR∫ N¥d w\h 13.37 .nWŒ˙T◊˙d N¥D¥Tød w;h AŒÁ˜√tw .A$◊\Á∫ nwH¥D#ı;ø .arW˜¬ Yµdtad w;hd HßWÂ˜∫ .AÒÂø A¬d nW˙a D∫W˙ .\aTÁ∫HÒ◊¬ Yµdtad w;h N¥d N˚rT∫ Nµ 13.38

!90 God reveals that the Messiah will “deliver his creation” (13.26). As Stone points out, this is “quite a regular function of the Messiah.”226 He goes on to observe that “Less usual is the remark that [the Messiah] will ‘direct’ those who are left. The vision contains no hint of this function.”227 While Stone is concerned with the extent to which God’s interpretation of the vision matches the details of the vision itself, there is a natural and clear reason God brings up the

Messiah’s direction of those left. It’s because God provides Ezra with the specific information he has requested.

In addition to learning about the role of God’s Messiah and the impact the Messiah’s arrival will have on all people, Ezra, too, learns of Israel’s status relative to the other nations.

“Zion will come and be made manifest to everybody” (13.36). The nature of this city and its heavenly status illuminates for Ezra that not only is Israel’s unprivileged status in his contemporary situation temporary, the nature of their arrival as chief among nations will be restored once and for all at the eschaton.

With regards to the other nations, Ezra has demonstrated his concern over the extensiveness of worldly blessings relative to Israel’s. Putting aside personal and national grievances and priorities, the host of nations will band together at the Messiah’s arrival. “An innumerable multitude will be gathered together, as you saw, desiring to come and conquer him” (13.34). This biblical motif is here developed to demonstrate that God’s ways are

226 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 401. 227 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 401.

!91 insurmountable.228 To put down such foes, the Messiah need only his voice of fire. No other weapon is needed.

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 18: 4 EZRA 13.48-50 13.48 But those who are left of your people who are found within my holy borders, shall be saved. 13.49 And it will be when he destroys the multitude of the nations that are gathered together, he will defend the people who remain. 13.50 And then he will show them very many wonders.229

Stone remarks that with the information in 13.48 God's brings up an issue that is off-topic to the revelation itself. While this may be true with regards to the vision Ezra previously recounted, it necessarily belongs in our discussion. Ezra specifically asked what would happen to

Israel's people at the end. In Stone's commentary, he is most interested in the ways that God's interpretation of the Son of Man vision match the details of the vision itself. For example, he provides lengthy commentary on the two aspects of the interpretation that either stray entirely from the vision (the lost tribes of Israel) or that the interpretation is repeated multiple times (the explication of the man rising from the water). This interest in the likely composite nature of the vision and its interpretation shouldn't prevent a discussion of the central issues of 13.48-50.

Ezra's concern has been the state of Israel. More than this, though, because Ezra wants to comprehend why it's better to be the people of Israel. The Israelites who have already died will receive a reward. But that does not help Ezra and his people. Ezra can pass along his newly

228 For this motif in biblical literature, see Deut 28.49; Ps 2.1-2, Joel 2.1-10, Zech 14.2, and Ezek 38-39. Other Second Temple texts utilize this motif as well: Sib Or. 3.663-65; Testament of Joseph 19.8; 1 Enoch 65.5-7; Revelation 20.7-10. 229 .A◊$¥Dœ YµW$ΔT∫ NÁÔ˚T◊µd NÁÒ¥a ≥nWΔA˙ KÂø Nµ wRΔT√ad NÁÒ¥a pa A¬a 13.48 .RΔT√ad AÂø Lø N˝˙ \W◊˜˚tad A$ÂÂød aA©Wß D∫W˙ D˚d N¥d awH˙w 13.49 ≥ .at$R¥T¥ at$Rµdt nW˙a aWÔ˙ N¥D;¥hw 13.50

!92 acquired revelatory information to this generation of people. But what about their descendants?

In other words, who really benefits?

At the start of ch. 13, Ezra asks for the interpretation of the Son of Man vision (13.14).

He needs God to clarify the vision because from his own assessment both those living through the end times and those not making it to the end times suffer horribly (13.16-20). As a result of this, Ezra receives the interpretation of the vision of the man destroying the gathered nations and offering salvation to the people of Israel. From Ezra's perspective the people of Israel have been damned at each stage along the way. And here he needs clarity on the benefit God has planned for the Israelites of the future. They will receive protection from God's son (13.49), which is pretty good. Better, though, is the fact that he will show them many wonders.230

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 19: 4 EZRA 13.52-55 13.52 He said to me, “Just as no one can explore or know what is in the depths of the sea, so no one on earth can see my son or those who are with him, except in the time of his day. This is the interpretation of the dream which you saw. And you alone have been enlightened about this, 13.54 because you have forsaken your own ways and have applied yourself to mine, and have searched out my law; 13.55 for you have devoted your life to wisdom, and called understanding your mother.231

One of 4 Ezra's refrains is that Ezra alone among his people is worthy of heavenly disclosure. Before preparing Ezra for his heavenly ascension, he hears this one more time. In this

230 Like the role of "law" in 4 Ezra, the language of "wonders" is nuanced and rich. 231 yhWŒ$µWØ∫d mDµ oD˙ wa J‰◊˙w aXı˙d V˙a aX\µ A¬d A˜‰;¥a .Y¬ R\µaw A˜\øw 13.52 ;wH∫ na A¬a .;HÂød NÁÒ¥A¬ wa yRı¬ yhW¥ZÔ˙d Aøra Lød NÁÒ¥a Nµ V˙a J‰◊µ A¬ A˜˚h .\AÂ¥d .HµWÁ∫ A˜∫z kdWÔÒ∫ K¬ ≥NÁ¬h K¬ YÒ©ta A˙h LÏµ .T¥Z\Δd awZΔd HŒ√Wπ W˙h 13.53 TÁ\Ø∫ NÁ˙$a AßWÂ˙dd NÁÒ¥aw .NÁ˙$a NÒ¥dd NÁÒ¥a Lø K¬ LÏ∫taw .NÁ˙$a KÒ¥dd NÁÒ¥a TŒ»ı√d LÏµ 13.54 .Yµa T¥\Rœ atW˙T¬W‰Í¬w .t\R∫d aTÂ‰Ô∫ RÁ© KÁ$ÁΔ 13.55

!93 case, God identifies three qualifications that distinguish Ezra from his peers. I'll address these in turn.

Stone's translation that Ezra has "forsaken his ways" is more colloquial than in the Latin and Syriac versions of the text. While this phrasing of forsaking his own ways offers readability, it also obscures the reward language God offers Ezra here. God takes pride in Ezra's devotion to the ways of God, even at the sacrifice of Ezra's own self-interests. This is the difference between a national understanding and a selfish, personal understanding. This devotion to God's ways, as

I've emphasized especially in Chapter 1, is his calling on God to clarify Israel's position in God's created order. Ezra, in light of his contemporary situation, feels that is the only way he can continue to serve and lead God's people.

Another aspect of Ezra's character, though one that takes place off stage, is his devotion to God's law. As Stone and others have shown, the discussion of law in 4 Ezra is one that is all- encompassing. In its early second-century CE context, and especially after the fall of the Temple, legal language was not limited to actual ordinances for the people. This is a way for God to reinforce his point from earlier in this proclamation, namely that Ezra was a figure so consumed with God's ways that he pursued nothing else. Ezra's fixation from the dialogues, at least according to God's explanation in the visionary episodes, is the cause of his special status.

God describes Ezra as devoting his life to wisdom and being nurtured by understanding.

One way of reading 4 Ezra's characterization of Ezra is by thinking about him as the amalgamation of previous biblical heroes.232 Or perhaps more apt: he exemplifies the traits that made previous heroes from Israel's tradition noteworthy. In his relentless questions he reminds us

232 See especially Najman, Losing, 66ff. and Collins, “Ezra.”

!94 of Job. In the texts final scene the author provides a direct link to Moses. With Ezra's commitment to wisdom and understanding we're reminded of David and his Psalms, as well as

Solomon and his character-defining request for wisdom.

God rewards the faithful. It's an old story in Israel. And it takes on a new twist with Ezra's story. The faithful ones receive heavenly knowledge about the eschaton and the privileged status

Israel holds.

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 20: 4 EZRA 14.31-35 14.31 Then land was given to you for a possession in the land of Zion; but you and your fathers committed iniquity and did not keep the ways which the Most High commanded you. 14.32 And because he is a righteous judge, he took from you what he had given in due time. 14.33 And now you are here, and your brethren are farther in the interior. 14.34 If you, then, will rule over your minds and discipline your hearts, you shall be kept alive, and after death you shall obtain mercy. 14.35 For after death the judgment will come, when we shall live again; and the names of the righteous will become manifest, and the deeds of the ungodly will be disclosed.233

Through Ezra's visions, particularly his third vision about the Son of Man in chapter 13, he has seen the full extent of God's ordered system. God has ordered the world to follow a clear, calculated order of events. Specific situations have prearranged consequences. With this divine perspective in mind, Ezra is able offer the exhortation to his community. He tells them that they

"committed iniquity" (14.31). Ezra well knew this failure on his people's part, as we discussed above. He had considered himself a part of this iniquitous group until God offered him the

233 ;nwT¬Wøa nW‰¥$H∫aw N¥d nwT˙aw ≥nW¥hxd HørA∫ .atwtRÁ¬ Aøra nW‰¬ T»∫\H¥taw 14.31 A¥Rµd hD»ıø A√Wµ nW˚DŒπd aTΔ$rwa nwtRÏ˙ A¬w nW‰¬ bH¥ta A˜∫Z¬d mDµ nW‰˜µ M¥ra aT√Wœd A˜;¥d yhwT¥ad N¥d AÂ¥Rµ 14.32 atRΔa AørA∫ nW‰˜µ W˝¬ nW‰Á$Δaw A˙X¬wA∫ A˚rh nW‰¥T¥a nwT˙a A√hw 14.33 A\ÂΔ$r nW‰ÁÒø nwwH˙ atWµ rT∫ Nµw ≥nwRÏ˙tt nW‰Á$ÁÔ∫ nW‰ı¬ nwdrtw nW‰◊∏˙ nwtrat LÁ˚h na 14.34 AÒ©T˙ A$Œ¥dzd AÂ√ N¥D;¥hw .N˜Δ NÁÁΔ bwtd yTµa atWµ rT∫ Nµ at;a RÁ© A˜\¥d 14.35 nwZΔT˙ AØÁ√$rd nwH¥$Dı;øw

!95 visions. But now he's able to discern the extent of God's actions. The people of Israel suffered the consequence of the destroyed temple because they "did not keep the ways which the Most High commanded you" (14.31). But Ezra has learned that they can come back from this isolated judgment, this conditional judgment. This passage is one of the examples where “the terms

‘judge’ and ‘judgment’ sometimes refer to God’s historical actions towards humans,” not their status before God forever.234 Ezra now sees that the righteousness of God is that he can hold his people accountable and still offer a final judgment that destroys the wicked heathen peoples. This is the nature of God as "righteous judge" (14.31).

Knowing the temporary nature of Israel's present suffering, Ezra offers the people a path forward. Ezra calls the people to rule their minds and discipline their hearts in order to return to their rightful place as God's elect (14.34).235 He has pleaded with both Uriel and God on the people's behalf.236 He has suffered personally and expressed that suffering to God. Here at the end of the story, Ezra is able to offer his people his long-fought reward: assurance. Even after the visions he had to plead with God (14.21-22) to provide the community with the lost Torah and the sage teachings of the secret books (14.44-47).

The goal of Ezra's sermon to the people is twofold. Ezra equips the people with the proper practices to "obtain mercy" from God (14.34). The mind and the heart, faithfulness and the avoidance of sin, these are the steps the community must take. With the delivered books of

God's revelation, the people can ensure that they do everything on their part to maintain their

234 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 435. 235 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 435, “This is an exhortation to the people to act in a way that will ensure their well-being and eventual bliss. It is formulated as an ‘if’ clause. Behind this statement lie assumptions about the nature of humans, of the evil inclination, and of human abilities to overcome it.” 236 See Hogan, Theologies, 103 n. 9, on the Job-like nature of this task on behalf of the community.

!96 direct connection to God. Ezra's closing speech also contextualizes the community's current situation. The suffering has a specific cause and has a specific remedy. Not only this, but the present only functions as one facet of God's larger plan for history. "The names of the righteous will become manifest, and the deeds of the ungodly will be disclosed" (14.35).237

Take notice, Ezra tells the people.

CONCLUSION

The close reading of 4 Ezra’s 20 passages on judgment demonstrates how seriously the author took matters of judgment. Equally, the depth and range of 4 Ezra’s discussion on judgment demonstrates the complexity of this theme. It’s not simply that God casts off those apart from Israel and provides an eternal abundance of rewards for Israel, though perhaps the author of this text wishes that was the case. This chapter demonstrates how an understanding of judgment inform numerous other important theological principles, such as the Messiah’s role in the eschatological scene and the impact of judgment on the dead from the previous hundreds of years.

As I discussed in Chapter 1, Ezra’s fundamental motivation is his concern over the community. Stemming from God’s apparent judgment on Jerusalem, Ezra attacks Uriel with questions over God’s goodness and the inner logic of God’s justice. From Ezra’s questions and

237 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 436, “In 7.104 we find the idea that there will be a full disclosure on the day of judgment. This is usually said to be disclosure of reward and punishment, but here it refers to disclosure of the true nature of human actions.” Stone helpfully continues on the continuity/discontinuity of 4 Ezra to Moses: “This passage has, naturally, related reward and punishment to judgment and therefore to human conduct. This is, in basic terms, comparable to dominant biblical ideas. Similarities and differences are highlighted by a verse like Deut 5:33: “You shall walk in all the ways which the Lord your God has commanded you, that you may live, and that it may go well with you.” Differences are in the nature of the historical perspective—4 Ezra’s is eschatological, while that of Deuteronomy is explicit in the end of this verse “and that you may live long in the land which you shall possess.”

!97 Uriel’s answers the author provides some details about judgment: it only punishes the unworthy; faithful people like Ezra are fine; etc. Because these details are insufficient, the author records

Ezra’s heavenly visions and their divine interpretations in order to clarify the matter for both

Ezra and audience. All the comments in judgment are meant to serve this underlying goal. Each of the 20 passages I discussed help the reader come to clearer conclusions about judgment.

Analyzing 4 Ezra’s use of judgment helps interpreters to better understand the text as a whole. Whereas 2 Baruch’s use of judgment underlines the pedagogical goal of his text, 4 Ezra attempts to resolve theological difficulties. 4 Ezra shows that Israel’s previous teachings do not become irrelevant in light of the contemporary context. But that does not mean they are entirely sufficient either. 4 Ezra adds to the earlier teachings in order to provide a theological program that retains its link to Israel’s tradition and remains practical in the present. For the author of 4

Ezra, to understand judgment means to understand your relationship with God and your place in the world. Its importance cannot be overstated.

!98 !99 Chapter 3: Judgment in 2 Baruch

The structure of 2 Baruch provides the natural starting place for understanding any theme present in this apocalypse. A long text, 2 Baruch moves seamlessly between genres to offer an apocalyptic vision meant to comfort to its audience concerning the destruction of Jerusalem.238

Often compared to 4 Ezra, the division of 2 Baruch’s sections proves more fraught than the neat, seven-part structure of 4 Ezra, which, helpfully for the interpreter, includes clear section-marking comments. A previous generation of scholars attempted to group 2 Baruch's chapters in a similar seven-fold manner.239 Whether they used this pattern to make parallels to 4 Ezra more explicit or to simplify their readings of 2 Baruch, the seven-fold organizational structure has got to go, as

Henze has conclusively shown.240 This is not to say, however, that 2 Baruch does not proceed according to its own careful outline. Here I follow Henze's outline of the text:

• Narrative Prologue: 1-9.1 • Baruch's Lament: 10-12.5 • First Dialogue between Baruch and God: 13.1-20.6 • Baruch's Prayer: 21-26 • Second Dialogue between Baruch and God: 22-30.5 • Baruch's First Public Address: 31-34.1

238 It’s hard to overemphasize how important the events of 66-70 CE were for early Jewish thinkers. The literature of this period is dominated by this event in many ways. To begin to explore the historical situation, see Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, 263-99. As for 2 Baruch, Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 15, writes, “2Bar is not a dissident document. It is a document written about three decades after the Roman destruction of Jerusalem by an intellectual who hoped that this Torah-centered, apocalyptic program for post-70 Judaism would prevail for the whole Jewish community.” 239 For example, R. H. Charles, The Apocalypse of Baruch: Translated from the Syriac (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1896), drawing on Kabisch and De Faye, finds a composite authorship for 2 Baruch which creates an idealogical “impassable gulf” (liii). The “vigorous optimism” of Israel’s future reward and the establishment of the Messianic age, and the destruction of Israel’s oppressors does not fit with the “hopeless pessimism” that leads to “a bottomless despair” that Charles reads in 2 Baruch’s accounts of the community’s laments (liv). For more on Charles’s reading of 2 Baruch’s composition, which reaches near- Bultmannian levels of complexity, see his introduction. 240 Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 37-41.

!100 • Baruch's Lament: 35 • Baruch's Vision of the Forest: 36-43.3 • Baruch’s Second Public Address: 44-47 • Baruch's Prayer: 48 • Third Dialogue between Baruch and God: 48.26-52.8 • Baruch's Vision of the Waters: 53-76.5 • Baruch's Third Public Address: 77.1-17 • Narrative Epilogue (77.18-26) • Epistle of Baruch: 78-87241

More directly than contemporary apocalypses, 2 Baruch attempted to fit Israel's theological worldview into a post-70 CE eschatological setting.242 The author of 2 Baruch offers a complex and robust theological response to the destruction of the temple. This author makes use of various genres to tell that story and, ultimately, to impart his apocalyptic message of hope.

Narratives, dialogues, prayers, visions, and laments are interwoven and offer the reader a hopeful interpretation of God’s plan for Israel.

Comprising visions and dream interpretations, public addresses and private laments, the heart of 2 Baruch is the record of dialogues between Baruch, acting as apocalyptic prophet,243 and God. “The dialogue sections between God and Baruch are the literary skeleton of the book that holds the entire composition together. The thoughts they express are rather contentious in

241 Henze and Stone, 15-16. 242 2 Baruch is an interesting conversation partner with the New Testament writings for a variety of reasons, this issue included. Interestingly, Rivka Nir's The Destruction of Jerusalem and the Idea of Redemption in the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch (Leiden: Brill, 2003) makes the case that 2 Baruch is an early Christian document. Though, readers are cautioned with Nir's polarizing text, which has numerous problematic issues. For a damning critique of Nir’s work and its relationship to the wider Jewish and Christian second-century context, see Gary Anderson’s review. Despite that he finds that “its central argument is untenable” (148), Henze offers a more generous interaction with Nir and praises its value for how she highlights 2 Baruch’s participation in the theological Jewish conversations of its day. 243 On the historical Baruch, known to us from Jeremiah, see Nahman Avigad’s article “Baruch the Scribe and Jerahmeel the King’s Son,” Israel Exploration Journal 28 (1978): 52-56, where he discusses a Bulla from the 7th-century BCE that refers to Jerahmeel’s, the king’s son, scribe Baruch. Walter Bruggemann’s reading of Jeremiah 43 may help explain the unusual selection of Baruch as the text’s pseudepigraphical author: “The ‘Baruch Connection’: Reflections on Jer 43.1-7,” JBL 113 (1994): 405-20. Interested in the finalized “shape of the Masoretic Text,” Bruggemann thinks that Baruch’s “role may suggest something of the intention” behind Jeremiah’s formation. (407).

!101 nature, much more than what we find in most other sections of the book. Here the author deals with the theological problems imposed by his time, questions of pivotal importance about justice and morality of God.”244 The dialogues provide a comfortable narrative setting for the author to explore these “contentious” issues without compromising the author’s authoritative position in the community. God and Baruch interact intimately in these sections. And the conclusions of these dialogues inform the author’s overall message to his audience.

So how do these comments on structure relate to the topic of judgment? A couple thoughts. As Henze identifies, the issues of God’s justice and judgment are central to these conversations.245 But more than that, the dialogues give way to helping us as readers see that the author thinks dialogically. Truth and consolation are arrived at through the presentation of difference. The two sides of the conversation contribute to a full, robust understanding of the theological principles at hand. And so, too, do we only arrive at a complete understanding of judgment when we investigate it throughout all of 2 Baruch’s text. Thus, “the coexistence of diverse literary genres is not a sign of compositional fragmentation or editorial clumsiness.

Rather, the genres in 2Bar need to be interpreted as pieces in the larger mosaic of a coherent literary work that make targeted and meaningful contributions to the overall apocalyptic program developed in the book.”246 To some extent Henze’s comments are offered as a corrective to

244 Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 35. 245 Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 35. 246 Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 35.

!102 earlier readings of 2 Baruch.247 What they’ve demonstrated to me is that we cannot think of the material from different sections of the text in isolation from 2 Baruch’s project as a whole. To understand judgment, we must put 2 Baruch's comments on the subject in conversation with each other to tease out the takeaways that the author wants from his readers.

My approach to analyzing 2 Baruch’s use of judgment follows accordingly. Only by discussing the different ways 2 Baruch presents judgment in relation to each other will 2

Baruch’s full stance on the matter become evident.

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 1: 2 BARUCH 5.2-3

5.2 And the Lord said to me, “My name and my praise are to eternity. For my judgment reserves its right in its time. 5.3 And you will see with your eyes that the enemies are not demolishing Zion and they they are not burning down Jerusalem but that they are serving the judge for a time.248

2 Baruch begins Israel's story by describing the imminent arrival of the Babylonians, the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple, and the exile of the Israelites. God tells Baruch that God is turning over the city to the foreign nations. With God bringing “evil upon the city” of

247 In addition to 2 Baruch’s dexterity with formulaic genres, he also shows a mastery of wide-ranging eschatological vocabulary. Henze, 291, notes that Henze notes that “there is no single event, no decisive moment in the sequence of events, that is the focal point of 2 Bar’s end-time speculation” (291). This marks a significant departure from the line of thinking we see in 4 Ezra and Apocalypse of Abraham. There, like in 2 Baruch, is a certain ambiguity regarding the specifics of “the end” and its referent. However, in both those apocalypses the final judgment issued by the messiah is pinpointed. The justice served to the faithful and sinful at that particular moment, regardless of when it will actually happen in time (soon, though), is decisive and serves as a focal point for those authors. For this reason alone, 2 Baruch’s presentation of judgment more specifically and eschatology more generally deserves our full attention. 248 Hœdz RÏ;˙ H˜∫Z∫ N¥d Y\˜¥d nwH¬ T¥a MÒØ¬d AÂÒø yTΔWı√tw YÂ√ .A¥Rµ Y¬ R;µaw 5.2 NÁ◊Â◊µ A˜;¥D¬ A¬a .MÒ√rwA¬ N¥DœWµ A¬w nW¥hX¬ NÁ∏Ô;ß Aı#∫DÒØ∫ awh A¬d .KÁ$˜ÁØ∫ aZΔt T˙a 5.3 A˜∫Z¬

!103 Jerusalem (1.4), Baruch reacts and expresses anxiety and consternation over his new role in the city (4.1), for he will be left behind. Unlike the rest of Jerusalem's inhabitants, Baruch is in the select group that are to "go away from this city" and escape Babylonian captivity (2.1). Even though God tells Baruch that part of the reason for this is so that he may protect the city with his prayers (2.2), he worries over his culpability "on account of Zion" (5.1).249

When Baruch gives voice to his concerns, God responds and provides us with 2 Baruch’s working definition of judgment. First, though,—and this is important for Baruch’s worldview—

God immediately dismisses Baruch's suggestion that God is abandoning his people. "My name and my praise—they are to eternity," God reminds Baruch (5.2).250 From the starting point of

God's fidelity to his people, God then provides clarity as to what exactly is going on with the city. "For my judgment reserves its right in its time. And you will see with your eyes that the enemies are not demolishing Zion and that they are not burning down Jerusalem but that they are serving the judge for a time" (5.2-3). Drawing on a familiar motif, the author frames this act of judgment in communal terms. The waywardness of the city leads God to lean on the neighboring

Babylonians and use them to strike.

According to the divine action plan, the judgment on the city occurs according to its own time.251 Built into the fabric of human history and the unfolding of events is God's judgment. In 2

Baruch, judgment holds a place of honor in the divine realm (alongside Torah and Truth).252 The

249 nW¥hX∫ BÁΔ awh;ad LÁ˚h A˙a The language here is interesting. Baruch is worried that by letting the Babylonians plunder and destroy the Jerusalem Temple that he will bear communal consequences for this inaction. 250 nwH¬ T¥a MÒØ¬d AÂÒø yTΔWı√tw YÂ√ 251 Tricky matters of predestination are familiar to scholars of both early Judaism and Christianity. God’s orchestration of time and its events creates must be presented in a way that does not violate or prevent individual responsibility. The “predetermination of history” in 2 Baruch “should not be overinterpreted,” Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 280, warns. 252 2 Baruch 48.27 and 85.9. See relevant comments below.

!104 judgment's central position is essential to Baruch's theological understanding. So here, in the text's first mention of judgment, God highlights that judgment both has a "right" to certain courses of action and that the enactment of this right has a prearranged time.253 We might be surprised to read that judgment itself has autonomy. The judgment reserves. It acts. And judgment does so, in order to fulfill its own sense of purpose.

Though related to final judgment by both its name and the initiation of the eschatological scene in 2 Baruch, the judgment of 5.2 serves as a stand in for the consequences of Israel's

"evils" (1.2). The judgment on Jerusalem described in 5.2 is the enactment of punitive action on

God's part. And because it's distributed to his people—his name and praise—it lasts only for a time before the people are restored. The judgment in ch. 5, then, helps inform our reading of judgment in 2 Baruch, but by nature it is not exhaustive. It’s helpful to think of this judgment on

Zion as a temporary judgment.254 It does not contain the eternal consequences that other references to judgment do. God brings “evil” (1.4)255 upon the city in response to its “evil acts” (1.2).256 This is so that God’s “people will be chastised” (1.4), and the city “ will be removed from [God] for a time” (1.4), before God restores it. 2 Baruch 5.2 introduces the

253 The pre-arranged time for eternal judgment was set from the beginning of time. Already with Moses, it was included in his special revelation. God showed Moses “the greatness of Paradise, and the consummation of the ages, and the beginning of the day of judgment” (59.8). Baruch is disquieted from God’s revelatory statements about judgment. He comments on the justness of the wicked receiving punishment—”Justly do they perish” (54.14)—but nonetheless struggles to wrap his mind around it. Remiel encourages Baruch not to be so “disturb[ed]” (55.4) and not to be “so moved merely from hearing about the judgment” (55.5). Might this show some doubt about Baruch’s belief in the community’s ability to heed his teaching and return to the ways of God? 254 John F. Hobbins, “The Summing up of History in 2 Baruch,” JQR 89 (1998): 45-79, 56 n. 24: “[2 Baruch’s] assumption is that divine judgment on the temple is provisional.” Thus, like Ezekiel before him, Baruch’s purpose is to provide the community with a way back, reinstalling traditional values and offering insights on new ones. 255 aT˜¥Dµ Lø aT◊Á∫ A˙a aTÁµ ah 256 wD»ıød aT$◊Á∫

!105 audience to its understanding of judgment with reference to Israel’s temporary judgment—a move certainly to reinforce the seriousness of this matter.

Similar to 4 Ezra, there is a conflation of ideas under the catch-all term "judgment." As we'll see in later passages, 2 Baruch most frequently uses judgment to mean two things: 1) the dividing of humanity as the world transitions from this current age to the next one; and 2) the distribution of eternal consequences for the actions of communities and individuals during their lifetimes—a positive judgment and evaluation for those who faithfully attempted to keep the law, and, alternatively, the destruction of those who actively worked against the ways and people of

God.

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 2: 2 BARUCH 13.3-8

13.3 Because you have been amazed about what has befallen Zion, therefore you will surely be preserved until the consummation of the times, so that you will be a testimony, 13.4 so that, should these prosperous cities ever say, ‘Why has God, the Mighty One, brought upon us this retribution?’ 13.5 Say to them, you and those who are like you, you who have seen this evil and the retributions that are coming upon you and upon your people in its time, “The nations will be thoroughly chastised.’ 13.6 And then they will wait. 13.7 And if they will say at that time, ‘When?’ 13.8 You will say to them, ‘You who have drunk strained wine, drink also from its dregs.’ For [this is] the judgment of the Most High, who shows no partiality.257

As God and Baruch engage each other in their first dialogue, Baruch issues questions regarding what God has revealed to him in the narrative prologue. Baruch recognizes the severity

257 RÏ˙t;t wRÏ˙Tµ A˙h LÏµ ≥ nW¥hX¬ ;H√D©d mDµ Lø tRµdtad LÏµ 13.3 atwdH;Í¬ awhtd .A˜#∫zd nwHÂ¬W◊¬ A˙h A˜ørWπ A˙TÒÁΔ aH¬a NÁÒø yT¥a AÂ¬d NÔ¬X$µd NÁÒ¥a aT˜$¥Dµ mwTÂµ n$RµA˙ nad 13.4 A˜ø$rW»πw adh aT◊\Á∫ nwT¥ZΔd NÁÒ¥a .K¬ NÁ$µdd NÁÒ¥aw T˙a N¥H¬ R\µa 13.5 \AÂÂø nwdrT˙ T¥aRÁÂ©d H˜∫Z∫ .NÁ‰\Âø Løw NÁ‰ÁÒø N¥t;ad nwW;Œ˙ N¥D¥;hw 13.6 yTµad A˜∫z ;wH∫ n$RµA˙ naw 13.7 hRƒt Nµ pa NÁ¥T√a .\AÒ¬Xµ aR\Â;Δ N¥T¥T√ad N¥t;˙a N¥H¬ R\µat 13.8 wh Aπ$A∫ BÍµ A¬d Aµrd RÁ© H\˜¥d

!106 of the subject matter and is worried for his city. He asks, "Who will be the judge over these

[matters], or to whom shall we appeal about what has befallen us?" (11.3).258 Baruch's reaction to

God's judgment against Israel and Jerusalem is one of deep, personal mourning. He offers a moving lament (10.1-12.5), where he weeps over the city and calls out for his fellow Israelites to join in. As Baruch struggles to comprehend God’s actions, God discusses the community's fate with Baruch, slowly revealing further specific details as needed (13-20.6). God also clarifies the nature of his judgment beyond the present moment, especially for those that have utterly failed him: the wicked nations.259 So, on the one hand, God punishes Israel for its unfaithfulness. That is meant as a corrective. They should return to the ways of their God. Baruch and the others like him, are the instructors and leaders who will help the community do so. Education and reform are the goal. On the other hand, though, God offers a lasting and severe "retribution" for the nations that will serve as their chastisement.

God instructs Baruch that one of the messages he will deliver to his audience concerns these wicked nations that came in and plundered Israel’s holy city. Just as Baruch’s community needs encouragement, so does Baruch himself. Encouraging his apocalyptic prophet, God says that that Baruch “will be a testimony” of Israel’s goodness in the wake of contemporary events

(13.3). Baruch’s message about the imminent rebuke for the pompous nations—that they “will be thoroughly chastised”—does not solve Israel’s problems in the meantime. However, it does

258 tR»ıÁß A˜;‰¥a A¥Rµ wa .N√D©d mDµ Lø lWıŒ˙ W˜\Â¬ wa .NÁ¬h Lø A˜;¥d awH˙ W\˜µ 11.3 259 Henze’s reading of 2 Baruch’s predetermination (he’s very careful to contrast this with individual predestination) is ultimately guided by what he frequently refers to as the books “paraenetic purpose” (280). Since the goal of 2 Baruch is “to lead the remnant community back to the Mosaic covenant” its author can not ascribe the individual fates of its community members to eternal categories. That would undermine the effect of the teaching. It should be noted, however, that Baruch does not follow the same line of thinking with the fates of individuals in the wicked nations. They are unequivocally categorized among the wicked. At the advent of the Messiah, those evil souls “will waste away all the more” and, resignedly, know that “their ruin has come” (30.4-5).

!107 offer assurance that God has Israel’s best interest at heart. Like a loving parent, sometimes the wayward child needs the tough love. And, according to 2 Baruch, that’s the demolition of the city. God also assures them that he will take care of those wicked nations, too.260

In a sense, God weaponizes knowledge. If the pompous nations question their eschatological judgment, God instructs Baruch only to reiterate that they will be “thoroughly chastised” (13.5).261 They must deal with this knowledge of their coming doom and do the only thing they can do nothing about it: “wait” (13.6).262 Unlike in chapter 5, where judgment functions almost anthropomorphically, with its own actions and its own time of action, the language of judgment in 2 Baruch 13 is more traditionally eschatological. Present success does not lead to future reward. Gloating nations with their plunder from Jerusalem have a bad thing coming. The conquering nations will learn that lesson the hard way.

With typical chronological vagueness, when the nations will ask Baruch about the time of their punishment, God instructs Baruch to respond enigmatically. “You have drunk strained wine, drink also from its dregs” (13.8).263 While we can fairly easily tease out the meaning of this saying, it is less clear how this answers the question of the time of the nations’ chastisement.

God’s view on the nations is that they have reaped unwarranted benefits because of his own people’s shortcomings. And in God’s well-structured and ordered universe, the balances ultimately level out.

260 Expecting “humiliation” for the oppressing peoples “who triumphed at [Israel’s] expense,” Baruch requires more information on this promised judgment and the apparent reversals of fortunes. As Hobbins, 46-47, says, “A reckoning among the nations in the future will not exact retribution on those generations responsible for the wrongdoing.” Someone needs to be held accountable now. Things need to be placed in order, now. 261 AÂÂø nwdrT˙ T¥aRÁÂ©d H˜∫Z∫ 262 nwW;Œ˙ N¥D¥;hw 263 hRƒt Nµ pa NÁ¥T√a .\AÒ¬Xµ aR\Â;Δ N¥T¥T√ad N¥t;˙a N¥H¬ R\µat

!108 So what have we learned about judgment at the beginning of Baruch and God's dialogue?

First, God tells Baruch that though he's judged their city, he fully expects for his people to return to him. Additionally, God teaches Baruch about the nations' coming denouncement, and wants

Baruch to pass that message on to both his community and foreign nations. The beginning of

Baruch's dialogue with God reminds him that divine assessment has lasting consequences. This is “the judgment of the Most High, who shows no partiality” (13.8).264

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 3: 2 BARUCH 14.8-19

14.8 But who, O Lord, my Lord, comprehends your judgment? Or who seeks out the depth of your way? Or who thinks about the weight of your path? 14.9 Or who is able to think about your incomprehensible mind? Or who of those who have been born has ever found the beginning or the end of your wisdom? 14.10 For all of us have become like a breath. 14.11 For just as the death rises unawares, turns back, and vanishes, so is the nature of human beings, who depart not according to their own will. And what will happen to them in the end they do not know. 14.12 For the righteous wait rightly for the end and without fear depart from this life, because they possess with you the power of the deeds that are kept in reservoirs. 14.13 For this reason, also, they leave this world [or: age] behind without fear, and trusting with gladness they are waiting to receive the world [or: age] that you have promised them. 14.14 But as for us, woe unto us who even now suffer insult and at that time wait for evils. 14.15 You, however, know exactly what you have made of your servants, because we are not able to understand what is good like you, our creator. 14.16 Furthermore, then, I will speak before you, O Lord, my Lord. 14.17 When formerly there was no world with its inhabitants, you deliberated and spoke with a word, and immediately the works of your creation stood before you. 14.18 And you said that you would

264 wh Aπ$A∫ BÍµ A¬d Aµrd RÁ© H\˜¥d

!109 make for your world the human steward over your works, so that it be known that he was not made for the world but the world for him.265

According to the author, the whole of 2 Baruch's account—of the destruction of the temple, of his prayers, laments, and dialogues with God, of his visions, of his communal teachings—serves as a "testimony" to its contemporary audience (84.7). They're never far from his mind. With 2 Baruch 14 and its description of judgment, the author's interest in the effect of his teachings on judgment comes to the foreground.

As Baruch wrestles with the harshness of some of the revelatory information and his inability to “comprehend [God’s] judgment”266 (14.8), he returns to that which helps him

265 B◊ΔTµ W\˜µ wa .KΔrwad ;HŒµWø BŒØµ W\˜µ wa .K˜\¥D¬ H¬ krDµ yRµ A¥Rµ W\˜µ A¬a 14.8 KÒÁı√d hRœW¥ Lø aDÁ¬$¥a Nµ mwTÂµ W\˜µ wa .A˚rdTµ A¬d kTÁørt Lø B◊ΔTµ J‰◊µ W\˜µ wa 14.9 kTÂ‰Δd AÂ¬W√ wa A◊¥r J‰√a AÒ∫H¬ NÁµdta RÁ© N¬W˚ 14.10 .A◊˙a Y$˜∫d nwH˜Á˚ wh A˜˚h .\K;ød Kπ;hw Aı¬ Nµ A¬d QÒ;ß AÒ∫hd RÁ© A˜‰;¥a 14.11 NÁø…D¥ A¬ AÂ¬W◊∫ nwH¬ a;wh A˜µw .NÁ¬z;a nwH˜Á∫X∫ A¬d lWÏµ .NÁ¬;za aRµWø A˙h Nµ aTÒΔd A¬dw .AÂ¬W◊¬ NÁ‰Íµ RÁ∏\√ RÁ© A$Œ¥dz 14.12 a$rxwA∫ RÁÏ˙d aD#ı;ød AÒÁΔ ;ktW¬ nwH¬ T¥ad atwDÔ∫ NÁÒÁ˚t D˚w .A˙h AÂÒØ¬ H¬ NÁŒÚı√ aTÒΔd A¬d nW\˙h pa A˙h LÏµ 14.13 .nwH¬ T‰Ò;µd AÂÒø nWÒıŒ˙d NÁ‰Íµ .aT$◊\Áı¬ N˜Á‰Í;µ A˜∫z w;H∫w .\N˜¥RØƒXµ A√h pad NÁÒ¥A¬ y;w N¥d N¬ 14.14 N˜ÁÔ˚;◊µ A¬ N˜Δd LÏµ .K¥D\#ıø Nµ tD»ıø A˜µ T¥aX¥rt T˙a o…D¥ N¥d T˙a 14.15 .N¬Wı© T˙ad A˜;‰¥a .Bƒd mDµd L˚TÍ˙d .yRµ A¥Rµ KÁµDœ LÒµa N¥d bwt 14.16 .aTÒÂ∫ tR;µaw Tı◊;Δta .yhw$rWÂø Mø M¥Dœ Nµ AÂÒø awh yhwT¥a A¬ D˚ 14.17 .KÁµDœ Mœ aT¥$R»∫d N¥H¥$Dıø hTØ√ R∫w w\h awh A¬d oD¥T˙d .K¥D#ı;Ø¬ A˜Í˙R∏µ A◊˙R∫ \KÂÒØ¬ Dıøtd tR\µaw 14.18 .hTÒÏµ AÂÒø A¬a \AÂÒø LÏµ Dıøta 266 K˜\¥D¬ H¬ krDµ

!110 navigate his feelings: his concerns for his community.267 In the narrative context, God has pronounced his judgment “without sparing his own sons”268 and instead, because of their sinfulness, “torturing them like those who hate him”(13.9).269 The focus in chapter 13 is on the rebuke (and retribution) that God offers to the guilty nations. In his confusion, Baruch wonders about the nature of this judgment and, significantly, the lasting consequences the information he’s received has on those in his own community.

For Baruch, judgment is just one topic among many that prompts painful self-reflection.

Doubting his own abilities to comprehend judgment, he labors and asks “Who seeks out the depth of your way? Or who thinks about the weight of your path? Or who is able to think about your incomprehensible mind? Or who of those who have been born has ever found the beginning or the end of your wisdom?” (14.8-9). I find this clustering of questions fascinating. As mentioned in the previous paragraph, the context from which they spring is revealed information about God’s judgment.270 Baruch gets at the multi-layered nature of God’s final judgment with

267 One of the reasons judgment turns out to be an important theological principle for 2 Baruch’s author has to do with his interest in the future state of the people of Israel. According to Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 283, 2 Baruch shows “less interest in the new order and its essence, about which the reader learns comparatively little, than in the people who will inherit it.” This point is fundamental to 2 Baruch’s worldview. The author is looking to solve the problem of correct teaching and the call to action for his audience than he is of speculative (or exact) descriptions and terrain and metaphysics of the world to come. All that’s fine. He touches on what it will look like: “everything that is corruptible will pass by, and everything that is mortal goes away” (44.9); “gladness will walk about the entire earth” (73.2); “Animals will come from the forest and serve humans” (73.6). So, if it’s about the people inheriting the new world, what distinguishes those people from the rest? This is what Baruch is demanding from his audience. It’s not complicated, though it does require commitment and investment: “But only prepare your hearts” (46.5). In other words, make the effort to adhere to God’s calling. Once the audience has orientated their hearts to God this allows them “to obey the Torah” (46.5). While there is an individual element to this—you must prepare your heart—Baruch emphasizes that this means adhering to certain community standards and the traditions God has already taught his people. They must “subject [themselves] to those who in fear are wise and understanding,” for otherwise they will be at a loss for “withdrawing from [them]” (46.6). 268 SΔ A¬ mDœW¬ yh$W˜∫ Lø A˙h LÏ 269 WÏΔd LÏµ .yhw$A˜Í∫d K¥a \nwH∫ D˙T√a A¬a 270 Bogaert, 40, clearly seems right to suggest that this is the moral weight that individuals bear to follow God’s ways. “Il s’agit sans doute d’un poids moral.”

!111 his five questions. For Baruch, especially at the beginning of his encounters with God, he compares God's judgment and the revealed information to the incomprehensibleness of getting

"to the end of [God's] wisdom" (14.9).

Despite his questions, Baruch draws a two-fold conclusion to God's teaching on judgment. The first is existential; the second, practical. When thinking about the thoroughness and complexity of God’s plan, Baruch recognizes his—and all of humanity’s—transience.271

“For all of us have become like a breath” (14.10).272 In the grand scheme of things, specific individuals hold minuscule roles. This, in part, is due to the lack of control that individuals have over their own origins and their own ends. “Human beings depart not according to their own will” (14.11).273 It is this lack of control that problematizes the impending judgment. Because

God’s ways are too deep and the weight traveling his path too burdensome, there is no apparent assurance even for God’s chosen ones about the final judgment. “What will happen to them in the end they do not know” (14.11).274 Baruch’s reaction to God revealing his judgment is to say

“Ok, but how does this help us?” Information, especially this dispiriting eschatological information, must have relevance for actual people.

So Baruch’s immediate response to God’s revelation of judgment is one of communal concern. Nowhere else in 2 Baruch does Baruch echo the title character in 4 Ezra as strongly as he does at the beginning of the first dialogue.275 In 4 Ezra, Ezra repeatedly reiterates his concern

271 See Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 279. Though offering limited comfort to Baruch and his community, Baruch acknowledges God’s sovereignty over time as an attempt to assuage concerns over human life’s transitory nature and the anxieties related to that. 272 aÒ∫H¬ NÁµdta RÁ© N¬W˚ 273 NÁ¬z;a nwH˜Á∫X∫ A¬d .A◊˙a Y$˜∫d nwH˜Á˚ wh A˜˚h .\K;ød Kπ;hw Aı¬ Nµ A¬d QÒ;ß AÒ∫hd RÁ© A˜‰;¥a 274 NÁø…D¥ A¬ AÂ¬W◊∫ nwH¬ a;wh A˜µw 275 Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 149-59; Bogaert, 1.26-27; Charles, Baruch, lxvii-lxxvi; Collins, Apocalyptic Imagination, 224; Klijn, 620; Metzger, 522.

!112 for his own people. “About all mankind you know best; but [I will speak] about your people, for whom I am grieved, and about your inheritance, for whom I lament, and about Israel, for whom I am sad, and about the seed of Jacob for whom I am troubled” (4 Ezra 8.15-16).276 Ezra requests that God provide the relevant information for his community—how is God relating to them?

Both Ezra and Baruch admit that information regarding other nations matters to God, and matters to them in so far as it affects their community, but their real interest, their real concern is the people of Israel. In 2 Baruch 14, Baruch is not concerned with those who clearly are considered the righteous. Why would he be? They “wait rightly for the end and without fear depart from this life”277 and will “receive the world that [God] has promise them”278 (14.12-13). It’s the all- important others that consume Baruch’s thinking (just as they did Ezra’s). “But as for us, woe unto us who even now suffer insult and at that time wait for evils” (14.15, emphasis supplied).279

Baruch finds a second part of the judgment God describes in 2 Baruch 13 troubling. It has serious consequences for his understanding of God’s justice. He pointedly says, “You know exactly what you have made of your servants because we are not able to understand what is good like you, our creator” (14.15).280 Baruch ends his comment with the deferential “our creator”281 but he issues the comment as a challenge to God. God set things up this way. And apparently

God desires (or is indifferent toward) the suffering of his own people. Bubbling under the surface, for Baruch, is his disappointment over God’s treatment of his people.

276 A˙a v;AΔ wh KÂø Lød .\»T˙a o…D¥ T˙a .\N¥d T¥aR¥T¥ .V˙a lW˚ Lø tR;µa RµAµ A√h pa 8.15 Løw .Y¬ A¥\R˚ yhWÒød L¥RÍ¥a Løw .A˙a L∫aTµ ;HÁÒød ktwtR¥ Løw 8.16 A˙a O¥zTµ yhWÒød bWŒØ¥d Hørz 277 NÁ¬;za aRµWø A˙h Nµ aTÒΔd A¬dw .AÂ¬W◊¬ NÁ‰Íµ RÁ∏\√ RÁ© A$Œ¥dz 278 A˙h AÂÒØ¬ H¬ NÁŒÚı√ aTÒΔd A¬d nW\˙h pa A˙h LÏµ 279 aT$◊\Áı¬ N˜Á‰Í;µ A˜∫z w;H∫w .\N˜¥RØƒXµ A√h pad NÁÒ¥A¬ y;w N¥d N¬ 280 Bƒd mDµd L˚TÍ˙d N˜ÁÔ˚;◊µ A¬ N˜Δd LÏµ .K¥D\#ıø Nµ tD»ıø A˜µ T¥aX¥rt T˙a o…D¥ N¥d T˙a .N¬Wı© T˙ad A˜;‰¥a 281 N¬Wı© T˙ad A˜;‰¥a

!113 JUDGMENT PASSAGE 4: 2 BARUCH 24.1-2, 25-1-4

24.1 “For, see, days are coming and books will be opened in which are written the sins of all who have sinned, and furthermore also the reservoirs in which the righteousness is gathered of all who have been found righteous in creation. 24.2 At that time, you and the many who are with you will see the long-suffering of the Most High that is throughout all generations, who has been long-suffering for the sake of all who are born, both sinners and righteous.” . . . 25.1 He answered and said to me: “You, too, will be preserved until that time, until that sign which the Most High will make for the inhabitants of the earth at the end of days. 25.2 This, therefore, will be the sign: 25.3 When astonishment will seize the inhabitants of the earth, and they will fall into many tribulations, and, furthermore, they will fall into great tortures. 25.4 And when they will say in their thoughts because of their many tribulations, ‘The Might One does no longer remember the earth!’ And lose hope, then the time will awake.”282

As God and Baruch engage each other for their second dialogue (22-30), God reveals important information about what will take place at final judgment, in addition to who will be present. Issues related to judgment are present throughout this dialogue. For purposes of clarity, though, I've divided my comments on judgment in the second dialogue into two passages: 1)

24.1-2, 25.1-4 (excluding the non-essential questions of 24.3-4); and 2) 30.1-5. In the first passage, God explains and describes the eschatological events that usher this age into the next one (24-25). The second includes descriptions of judgment alongside certain enigmatic details about the role of the Messiah in that end-time scenario.283

282 pa bwtw .WÏΔd NÁÒ¥a nwH¬W˚d a$HÏΔ NÁı¥T˚d A‰;¥a .a$R∏ß nWÒ©T˙w N¥;ta aT$µW¥ RÁ© ah 24.1 aT¥R\ı∫ Wœddzad NÁÒ¥a nwHÒ˚d nwhtWŒ¥dzd A‰;¥a a$rxwa Aµrd HΔwr twRÁ˝˙ KÂød a$AÁ˝ßw T˙a aZΔt .\A˜∫z w;H∫ N¥d awH˙ 24.2 NÁœddZµw NÁÏ;Δd aD$ÁÒ¥ nwHÒ˚ Lø HΔwr awh R˝µd .rdw rd L‰∫d ;yh ;H¥$rWÂØ¬ DıØ˙d AÂ¥Rµ D¥Tød y;h a;tA¬ .A˜∫z w;H¬ AµDø RÏ˙tt T˙a pa .Y¬ R\µaw A\˜øw 25.1 aT$µW¥d atRÔ¬ .Aørad A¥;wh a;ta LÁ˚h adh 25.2 A∫rw$r aD$˙W◊∫ nWÒ∏˙ bwtw .a$AÁ˝ß A˙$X¬wA∫ nWÒ∏˙w .Aørad ;H¥$rWÂØ¬ athwt dWΔat D˚ 25.3 R˚dTµ A¬ .aAÁ˝ß nwH˙X¬wa Nµ nwhTı$◊ÔÂ∫ nwRµA˙ D˚ awH˙w 25.4 A˜∫z RÁøtT˙ N¥D;¥h .\aRıß nWŒÍ∏˙ D˚d awH˙w .AørA¬ A˙TÒÁΔ bwt 283 Bogaert, 1.415, says "it is not an easy task" to define the messiah if limited just to 2 Baruch's information.

!114 In 2 Baruch 24, God describes opening the books “in which are written the sins of all who have sinned” (24.1).284 Additionally, God also will open “the reservoirs in which righteousness is gathered of all who have been found righteous in creation” (24.1).285 A curious combination of openings. Though the phrasing is unusual, I think we can pull out Baruch’s meaning, even if the author’s description of the eschatological scene is not totally consistent. At the transition time between ages, God will call upon the account of wickedness contained in the books, as well as call forward actual righteousness that he has been keeping separately in the reservoirs.

Baruch says that he more or less grasps the reality of his—and Israel’s—own situation286 but does not know “what will happen to those who hate [Israel]” (24.4).287 This confusion despite God's seemingly clear comments in 2 Baruch 13.5-12, discussed just above. God offers

Baruch a patient response, however, and in it we find another traditional eschatological motif: the sign of the end times. “That sign which the Most High will make for the inhabitants of the earth at the end of days” (25.1).288 This clearly occurs before the messianic appearance and the actual judgment because God goes on to say that it is only “after what will happen in those parts

[outside Israel]” that “the Messiah will begin to be revealed” (29.3).289

The eschatological sign, the harbinger of all the actions/events with eternal significance, is the arrival of the “many tribulations”290 and “great tortures” (25.3).291 Perhaps, not the most

284 WÏΔd NÁÒ¥a nwH¬W˚d a$HÏΔ NÁı¥T˚d A‰;¥a .a$R∏ß nWÒ©T˙w N¥;ta aT$µW¥ RÁ© ah A familiar eschatological symbol: Dan 7.10; Rev 20.12; 4 Ezra 6.20; 1 En 47.3; 81.2. 285 T◊˜\˚»ta aT¥R\ı∫ Wœddzad NÁÒ¥a nwHÒ˚d nwhtWŒ¥dzd A‰;¥a a$rxwa 286 This is especially interesting when compared to Ezra’s near total misreading of his own situation in 4 Ezra. 287 A˙a o…D¥ A¬ N¥A$˜Í¬ awH˙ D¥Tød N¥d mDµ 288 aT$µW¥d atRÔ¬ .Aørad ;H¥$rWÂØ¬ DıØ˙d AÂ¥Rµ D¥Tød y;h a;tA¬ 289 AÔÁ◊µ AÒ©T˙d aR;◊˙ N¥D;¥h at$W˜µ NÁ¬H∫ awH˙d D¥Tød mDµ MÒ;√d rT∫ Nµ awH˙w 29.3 290 a$AÁ˝ß A˙$X¬wA∫ 291 A∫rw$r aD$˙W◊∫

!115 helpful of signs.292 But, linked with these tribulations and tortures is a 12-part end-time pattern, where God announces the "Messianic woes."293 According to Baruch, the horrors that will occur worldwide, especially for those that hate Israel (24.4). 2 Baruch speaks of the cosmic manifestations of times (27.2, 6, 7, 10), the extreme violence (27.3, 4, 5, 9), and characteristics of human response (27.12, 13).

In light of the sign of the end in 2 Baruch 25.1, Baruch's use of judgment encompasses the tribulations and tortures of 2 Baruch 25-27. Judgment, according to Baruch, stands for corrective action (2 Baruch 5), the restoration of Israel's rightful place and the corresponding destruction of the wicked (2 Baruch 13), as well as the scenes of the end-time scenario, especially the eschatological sign of the "general collapse of the social, and to a lesser degree, of the natural order."294 With Baruch's second dialogue with God, the audience learns of the cosmic significance to God's judgment.

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 5: 2 BARUCH 30.1-5

30.1 “And after these, when the time of the advent of the Messiah will be fulfilled and he will return in glory, then all those who have fallen asleep in hope of him will rise. 30.2 At that time, those reservoirs will be opened in which the number of the souls of the righteous have been preserved, and they will come out, and the abundance of the souls will appear together in one assembly, of one mind. The first will rejoice, and the last will not be saddened, 30.3 for they know that the time has arrived of which is said that it is the consummation of times. 30.4 But the

292 Cf. 25.1-4; 48.31-41; 70.2-71.3. 293 Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, 283-85. 294 Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 281 n. 78.

!116 souls of the wicked, while seeing all of these, will then waste away all the more, 30.5 for they know that their torment has arrived and their ruin has come.”295

2 Baruch first makes mention of the Messiah's role in the unfolding eschatological events in the text's second dialogue section. A concise and enigmatic portrayal of the Messiah’s comings and goings, it is worthwhile to unpack the role the Messiah plays in judgment in its larger messianic context. Baruch describes the events as something “befalling/occurring”296 over all the earth. It is with this Messianic occurrence that those judged wicked receive their “torment”297 and “ruin.”298

As is frequently observed, there are two messianic phases in 2 Baruch 29-30.299 In the first phase we learn no specific information abut the Messiah. We read that all the earth bears witness to the “beginning of his revelation.”300 This is a tricky phrase.301 To what extent is the

Messiah’s arrival a process of unveiling and not simply a fully-realized appearance? According to 2 Baruch 29, the Messiah does not act during the first part of the his arrival. So while passive, his presence does offer God’s protection for “those who are found in those days in this land” (29.2).302 In addition to those who receive protection, the land itself reaps incredible

295 kWπH˙w .AÔÁ◊µd hT¥tAµd A˜∫z AÒµT˙d yTµa NÁ¬h rT∫ Nµ awH˙w 30.1 NÁ;ÂÁœ hRıÍ∫ W\‰µdd NÁÒ¥a nwH¬W˚ N¥D¥;h .\aTΔWı√T∫ .N$Œ∏˙w AŒ$¥dzd aT$◊∏˙d A˜Á˜µ RÏ˙ta nwH∫d nW˙;h a$rxwa nWΔTπT˙ .\A˜∫z w;H∫ awH˙w 30.2 NŒÁ$øtT˙ A¬ aT¥$RΔaw .\aT$ÁµDœ N¥D$Ô˙w aTÁørt aDΔd .;A◊˜˚ DÔ∫ aDÔ˚a aT$◊∏˙d N¥h$A©Wß aZΔT˙w A˜#∫zd nwHÂ¬W√d .;yhWÒø RÁµad .A˜∫z A\Ïµd RÁ© o;D¥ 30.3 NΔW$◊˙ T¥aR¥T¥ N¥D;¥h .\NÁ¬h N¥HÒ˚ N¥Z$Ô˙ D˚ AØÁ√$rd N¥d nwh$T◊∏˙ 30.4 nwH˙D∫a at\aw nwHŒÁ˜√t AÏ\µd RÁ© Nø$D¥ 30.5 296 v…D©d mDµ 297 nwHŒÁ˜√t 298 nwH˙D∫a 299 Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 293-302; Bogaert, 2.65. 300 AÔÁ◊µ AÒ©T˙d aR;◊˙ N¥D;¥h 301 And one that Bogaert, 63, describes as an “aramaïsm” in order to help undo the phrase’s burden. Though, it's worth emphasizing that Bogaert cautions that we shouldn’t make too much from an isolated phrase. 302 NÁÔ˚T◊µd NÁÒ¥a Lø dWÔÒ∫ A˙a N˝µ

!117 messianic reward (“the earth will yield its fruits ten-thousand fold” 29.5).303 Baruch describes that moment as the “consummation of time”304 when the “advent of the Messiah will be fulfilled”305 (29.8, 30.1).306

With 2 Baruch 30, then, we have the second appearance of the Messiah when he “will return in glory” (30.1).307 God ushers in the eschatological scene with the Messiah’s second appearance, which results in eternal judgment for all humankind.308 Resurrection posed a theological problem for thinkers of the period.309 For those alive at the “consummation of time”

303 W∫$R∫ DΔ .;H¥$rAπ ltt Aøra pa See Walter Brueggemann, The Land: Place as Gift, Promise and Challenge in Biblical Faith (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977); W. Janzen, "Land," ADB 4.146-50. 304 A˜∫zd HÂ¬W◊¬ WÁÏµd nW˙a 305 AÔÁ◊µd hT¥tAµd A˜∫z AÒµT˙d yTµa 306 When discussing the difference between the present world and the world to come at the consummation of times, Baruch repeatedly shows interest in the material difference between the two worlds: the wicked present age which he describes as “the age of corruption” (40.3) and the coming world “that does not return those to corruption who walk into its beginning” (44.12). Similarly, he accentuates the different bodies in the Messianic age, ones no longer characterized by disease and transience. Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 282, recognizes the Urzeit/Endzeit motif behind such interest different material realities of the present age and the one to come. Drawing on 28.5 which references God as “He who is incorruptible,” Henze makes the notable observation that because God’s essence is incorruptible humans in the new age “also will enjoy an incorruptible life.” One way of thinking about this with regards to judgment is that God is restoring the things of the beginning. It’s not a new world different and other than ours. 307 \ aTΔWı√T∫ kWπH˙w Bogaert reads this as a returning to heaven, not the type of second coming familiar to us from early Christian thinking. He, 65, says, “A la fin du règne messianique, le roi Messie s'en retourne auprès de Dieu.” 308 Koch’s reading of the Israel-only first appearance of the Messiah contrasts what happens for God’s people—the Messiah “will shield the remnant of Israel in Palestine” (260, translation Henze)—with evil happenings continue the world round. Koch points out that while the Messiah’s first appearance “is accompanied by all kinds of miracles” (260), these are of a highly focused nature. The reward and, ultimately, comfort of the first arrival is for those who have waited in vain. Those who have suffered. Those for whom Baruch wept when the city was destroyed by the Babylonians. 2 Baruch 30 and the reference to the Messiah “having returned in glory” (30.1, \aTΔWı√T∫ kWπH˙w) marks the global Messianic effects. Koch refers to this as “the real turning-point in time” (260). Resurrection and judgment follow. Now the Messiah sits with his weights and measures. 309 See George W.E. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, Immortality, and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism and Early Christianity (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006); Pheme Perkins, Resurrection: New Testament Witness and Contemporary Reflection (Garden City: Doubleday, 1984); N.T. Wright, Resurrection and the Son of God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003); A.J. Avery Peck and Jacob Neusner, editors, Judaism in Late Antiquity, Part 4. Death, Life-after-death, Resurrection and the World-to-come in the Judaisms of Antiquity (Leiden: Brill, 2000); Jon D. Levenson, Resurrection and the Restoration of Israel: The Ultimate Victory of the God of Life (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008).

!118 the rewards and curses make sense. Perhaps they even seem inevitable. But what of all the people that have come before? The resurrection accounts must offer an explanation for those people as well. 2 Baruch’s language for the previous collection of individuals is “reservoir,” which in Baruch’s imagination is the container that holds the dead souls until the moment of resurrection. All this to say, the final judgment puts the Messiah's powers on full, cosmic display, with sweeping consequences for all humans across time.

One of the unique features of 2 Baruch’s judgment scene in 30.1-5 is its emphasis on knowledge. In ch. 4 on Apocalypse of Abraham, I’ll detail how that author highlights his community’s specific participation in God’s eschatological judgment scene. 2 Baruch, by contrast, describes an end-time judgment scene where knowledge and awareness are the crucial factors. To begin with, the reservoirs of souls “gather together in one assembly, of one mind” (30.2). When the Messiah draws out all humanity before him, they are assembled, grouped communally, and, most importantly, have awareness of their present circumstance. Held together before the bearer of capital-T Truth, all the souls are in fact on the same page. More than just resurrection, the emphasis is on knowledge, awareness, and understanding equally illustrate

2 Baruch’s values.

With God’s interest in revealing details about the messianic appearances, it's noteworthy that judgment does not receive explicit definition. The author instead focuses on the people’s reactions to the Messiah’s presence. As expected, the wicked and the righteous react to the judgment in opposite ways—one with retreat, the other with joy. Another notable feature of this

!119 judgment scene is the way that the righteous are described as “the first” and “the last” (30.2)310

They know, or should know, the reward they will find in that moment. This reflects one of

Baruch’s stated concerns back 2 Baruch 14. The community of Israel needs to trust in– and adhere to the promises they’ve received, for things will be that way in the end time. The judgment scenario, though, does not require any pre-knowledge. For the wicked ones also realize what’s coming to them.

In contrast to the judgment scene in Apocalypse of Abraham, the righteous in 2 Baruch receive their reward first. And it’s part of the wicked’s curse that they must witness the blessing of the righteous ones. “While seeing all of these”311—that is, the rejoicing, the absence of sadness—the wicked will waste away. There’s no depiction of torment here, nor is there explicit condemnation. The presence of the Messiah is enough to reinforce the status of the souls before

God, even though there is not the explicit depiction of the torment they will face it. It is the awareness of the imminent infliction of destruction that causes them to waste away.

2 BARUCH PASSAGE 6: 2 BARUCH 39.7, 40.1-3

39.7 And when the time of its consummation has drawn near that it should fall, then the beginning of my Messiah will be revealed, which is like the fountain and the vine. And when it is revealed, it will uproot the abundance of its host. 40.1 The last ruler, who will then be left alive

310 NŒÁ$øtT˙ A¬ aT¥$RΔaw .\aT$ÁµDœ N¥D$Ô˙w Bogaert, 66, points out that whereas her in ch. 30 we might read the first and the last as the collective whole, when comparing the comments in 2 Baruch 51.13 there’s the possibility of two distinct categories of the elected (plutôt deux catégories d’élus). The transformation discussed in 2 Bar 51.1-13 creates interpretive issues related both to the nature of 2 Baruch’s anthropology and its understanding space. Lied “What Happened to Heaven” in Construction of Space III: Biblical Spatiality and the Sacred (ed. J. C. de Vos, J. Økland, and K. Wenell): (London, T&T Clark, 2016). While the destruction of the temple inaugurates the eschatological age, the Messiah appears to restore order, and the end of the current world describes transformational “effect[s] on time,” Baruch envisions the equally important spatial transformations as well. Lied cleverly concludes from this that “the transformation of heavenly spaces renders possible the final redemption for which 2 Baruch aims.” 311 \NÁ¬h N¥HÒ˚ N¥Z$Ô˙ D˚

!120 when the multitude of his host will be destroyed, will be bound and they will take him up unto Mount Zion. And my Messiah will reprove him on account of all his evil deeds, and he will assemble and set before him all the deeds of his host. 40.2 And after this, he will kill him. And he will protect the rest of my people, those found in the place that I have chosen. 40.3 His rule will stand forever, until the world of corruption is completed and until the aforementioned times will be fulfilled.312

The author of 2 Baruch explores the nature of sin and how it's linked with God's judgment in Baruch's first vision (recorded in 2 Baruch 36-43). In response to a lament from

Baruch, the vision Baruch sees provides him with a symbolic dream meant to alleviate some of his anxieties. A vine grows towards a forest and is accompanied with a huge body of water that destroys the forest, leaving a single cedar tree (36.5). The vine rebukes the cedar, which had ruled unjustly over the forest, and tells the cedar that his time of destruction has come, too (36.9).

Uncomprehending, Baruch requests a divine interpretation of the dream, which God willingly obliges.313 God's interpretive comments fall into two parts: a description of the four-kingdom schema of Daniel reapplied to Baruch's context (39.1-40.4) and the importance of how people end their lives (42.1-43.3).314

For my analysis, I'll focus on the interpretative information about the Messiah and his role in overthrowing the last great ruler. In eschatological literature there is a strong emphasis placed on the last ruler in history before God ushers in the new age.315 Frequently, he serves as

312 y;h YÔÁ◊µd hTÁ◊¥r AÒ©tt N¥D;¥h Lπtd ;HÂ¬;W√d A˜∫z bR\œd Aµ awH˙w 39.7 H◊˜˚d aA©Wß rWŒøt T\Á\Ò©tad Aµw .aT∏˝¬w AøWıÂ¬ TÁµdd ;HÁ$◊˜˚d aA©Wß nW∫RΔT˙ D˚ DΔ D˚ RΔT◊˙ N¥D¥hd A¥RΔa A˙R∫Dµ 40.1 yhWØ√w$r nwH¬W˚ Lø H¬ S‰µ ;YÔÁ◊µw ≥ nW¥hxd ar\Wƒ Lø yHÁ˙W;ŒÍ˙w R‰πT˙w yhW◊˜˚d nwH¥D#ı;ø nwHÒ˚ yhWµDœ MÁÍ˙w V;˜‰˙w TÁıÚ©d artA∫ J˚T◊µd w;h YÂød H˚R√ Lø N˝˙w .yhWÒÏŒ˙ N˚ rT∫ Nµw 40.2 N¥RÁµa NÁµDŒµd A˜#∫z nWÒµT˙d AµDøw .AÒı;Δd AÂÒø MÒ\;◊˙d AµDø .MÒØ¬ A;ÂÁœ hTÁ√r awhtw 40.3 313 On how the interpretation corresponds to the vision, see Charles, Baruch, lii-lxv and Bogaert 1.85-6. 314 For more, see Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 264-5. 315 Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 299: According to Baruch 40.1-3, with the defeat of the fourth kingdom’s ruler there is an “eschatological transferal of power from the mundane to the celestial governance”

!121 an adversary for the Messiah to defeat, allowing the Messiah to successfully initiate God's eternal kingdom.

God tells Baruch that "when the time of its consummation has drawn near that it should fall, then the beginning of my Messiah will be revealed, which is like the fountain and the vine" (39.7). This is the second section of 2 Baruch’s text that deals with the Messiah. Here the focus of both the Messiah and the interpretation of the dream itself is on the “tall cedar” (39.8) of

Baruch’s vision. The judgment for his wicked followers takes place off stage, but God describes the wicked ruler’s judgment clearly. The Messiah binds him and takes him to Mount Zion. The punishment is specific and substantial. The Messiah “assembles and sets before him all his deeds” and “reproves him” (40.1).316

According to Henze, 40.1-3 reflects only the beginning of the Messiah’s judicial work.

He is not “a cosmic judge yet,” instead he only serves as a judge “who overthrows the Roman

Empire.”317 Part of the reason that Henze reads it this way is that he places this messianic overthrow during the first messianic visit. Cautioning interpreters against confusing 2 Baruch’s more coherent message, Henze describes the actions of 40.1-3 as from “the initial phase of [the

Messiah’s] sovereignty, a period that is still part of this world” (300). Continuing, Henze offers this conclusive comment: “The transition to the kingdom of God has not yet happened” (300).

As always, the eschatological timeline is not rigorously/strictly defined.318 But I’m not sure if we’re meant to divorce the messianic actions against the last ruler from the global,

316 .yhW◊˜˚d nwH¥D#ı;ø nwHÒ˚ yhWµDœ MÁÍ˙w V;˜‰˙w .yhWØ√w$r nwH¬W˚ Lø H¬ S‰µ ;YÔÁ◊µw 317 Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 300. 318 Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 318, cautions: "There is no fixed eschatological timetable, no precise calendar of the end time, buried deep in the apocalypse or hidden in its vocabulary. Mathematical calculations will not help us understand this text. We should refrain from forcing 2Bar's eschatology into an overly rigid eschatological scheme."

!122 eschatological judge described in 2 Baruch 72.319 So while Henze sees this violent kingdom upheaval as distinct from the Messiah's subsequent pronouncements over humanity’s fate, I don’t think we can both call this a judgment scene (“The Messiah acts as a judge”) and divorce it from the rest of his judicial responsibilities. Either he’s a judge here and elsewhere, or we cannot refer to his behavior as a judgment. I think 2 Baruch makes his point clear in this regard. He lists the ruler’s crimes: the “Messiah convicts him of all his wicked acts” and, additionally, ascribes him responsibility for “all the [wicked] deeds committed by those around him” (40.1).320 The consequence of the ruler’s sins is that the Messiah “will kill him,” which is done for very 4-Ezra- like reasons: to “protect the rest of [God’s] people” (40.2). 321

The details Baruch's first vision provide are as important for Baruch's audience as are the comments about their own temporary judgment in 2 Baruch 5 and the information they find out about the nations in other sections. In addition to adding necessary details about the messianic rule in its political context, 2 Baruch 40.1 details how the Messiah "reproves" and issues judgment against the wicked ruler of 2 Baruch's day.322 From this, then, will come the judgment of all humanity (see comments on 2 Baruch 72 below).

319 Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 293-305, discusses different judicial roles come in his discussion of 2 Baruch's overall messianic message. Henze is interested in delineating the specifics of how we can and cannot define the Messiah according to Baruch's teachings. Perhaps my reading of 2 Baruch 40 and the judgment against the cedar does not ultimately conflict with Henze's cautious description of the messianic role. However, I just want it to be clear that 2 Baruch 39.7-40.1 is every bit as much of a judgment as the invasion of Jerusalem described back in 2 Baruch 5. 320 yhW◊˜˚d nwH¥D#ı;ø nwHÒ˚ yhWµDœ MÁÍ˙w V;˜‰˙w 321 YÂød H˚R√ Lø N˝˙w 322 Charles, Baruch, 64-65; John J. Collins, The Scepter and the Star (New York: Anchor Bible, 1995), 191-214.

!123 JUDGMENT PASSAGE 7: 2 BARUCH 48.17-24

48.17 “What, therefore, is our strength that we should bear your anger, or what are we that we should endure your judgment? 48.18 Protect us in your mercy, and in your compassion help us. 48.19 Look at the little ones who have subjected themselves to you, and redeem all those who draw near to you. Do not cut off the hope of our people, and do not cut short the times of our help. 48.20 For this is the people you have chosen, and these are the people of whom you have found no equal. 48.21 But I will speak before you now and will say as my heart thinks. 48.22 In you we trust, for see, your Torah is with us. And we know that we will not fall as long as we hold on to your statutes. 48.23 At all time we are blessed, also because of this, that we have not intermingled with the nations. 48.24 For we all are one renowned people who received one Torah from the One. And that Torah that is among us will help us.”323

After speaking with his community for the second time (2 Baruch 44-47), Baruch turns his thoughts to God in prayer (48.1-25). Troubled and concerned, Baruch pleads with God on

Israel’s behalf. “What, therefore, is our strength that we should bear your anger? Or what are we that we should endure your judgment?” (48.17).324 Baruch wants to make sure that his people are okay, and, in light of what God has revealed to him about the coming separation of times and judgment of humanity, Baruch does not know how they’ll fare.

Notably, 2 Baruch does not put the blame on God in this section. Instead, he emphasizes the people's responsibility. He questions the “strength”325 of the people of Israel to withstand

God’s judgment of them, of others. Where Ezra in 4 Ezra fights and challenges God, Baruch

323 K˜\¥d RıÁÍ˙d N˜Δ A˜µ wa .kZ©wr NØÏ˙d NÒÁΔ LÁ˚h wh A˜µ 48.17 NÁØÁß K˜˜Ô∫w .\KÁÂΔ$R∫ NÁÒø N©a T˙a 48.18 NÂød hRıß qWÍπt A¬w K¬ NÁ∫RœTµd NÁÒ¥a L‰¬ qwRπw .K¬ wDıøT√ad a$rWøZ∫ rWΔ 48.19 N˙rdWød A˜#∫z oWÏœt A¬w htW˚a TÔ‰◊µ A¬d AÂø nW˙a NÁ¬hw .TÁ»ı©d AµDø RÁ© W˙h 48.20 Yı¬ B◊ΔTµd K¥a R;µaw .A√h KÁµDœ LÒµa A¬a 48.21 N˜Δ N¥DÁΔa KÁÂ$Áœd AÂ˚ N˜ÁÒÚ∏˙ A¬d N˜Áø…D¥w .nt\W¬ KßWÂ˙ ahd N˜ÁÒÁ;˚t KÁÒø 48.22 A$ÂÂØ∫ NÏÒ$Δta A¬d adH∫ Nπa .NÁ∫Wƒ N∫ZÒ‰∫ 48.23 w;hw .DΔ Nµ AßWÂ˙ DΔ NıÍ;˙d aHÂ◊µ AÂø DΔ N¥T;¥a RÁ© NÒ˚ 48.24 NØÁßt N∫ T¥ad atrTÁµ aTÂ‰Δw .N¬ rDØµ ;nT˜Á∫d AßWÂ˙ 324 K˜\¥d RıÁÍ˙d N˜Δ A˜µ wa .kZ©wr NØÏ˙d NÒÁΔ LÁ˚h wh A˜µ 48.17 325 NÒÁΔ

!124 acquiesces before him.326 The judgment is coming and it may not be great for all Israelites. Even still, Baruch puts the emphasis and the onus on his people. They must gather their strength and

“trust”327 that God’s Torah will guide them (48.22). Knowing their special status before God— the people who “have not intermingled with other nations”328 (48.23)—motivates them to return to the Torah and, more importantly to the “One”329 who gave it to them (48.24).

Despite all that Israel must do, Baruch pleads with God to assist them in their commitment. The power of this prayer from Baruch comes from his recognition that despite the coming time of judgment there remains hope. Baruch still defines God according to his characteristics of “mercy” and “compassion” (48.18).330 God is still the One who offers

“protect[ion]”331 and “help,”332 and thus Baruch relies on God to come through for them (48.18).

Israel needs God in the present moment more than ever. The specific need, according to Baruch, comes from their current sufferings, yes, but also over the knowledge of the impending judgment.

This particular text is driven so much by its interest in knowledge. 2 Baruch believes that knowledge drives action, that this text can serve pedagogically and paraenetically.333

Baruch’s rhetorical move in his request for help is subtle, perhaps even manipulative. His people are the “little ones”334 in need of the Great One’s help (48.19). These people have

326 Charles, Baruch, lxxi, goes so far as to say that, when compared to 2 Baruch’s traditional Jewish theology, 4 Ezra “constitutes . . . a confession of the failure of Judaism.” 327 N˜ÁÒÁ;˚t 328 A$ÂÂØ∫ NÏÒ$Δta A¬d adH∫ Nπa 329 DΔ Nµ 330 K˜˜Ô∫w .\KÁÂΔ$R∫ 331 N©a 332 NÁØÁß 333 Henze uses the language of a "paraenetic" focus for Baruch's three public address in particular, e.g. Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 143. I think this helpful term also works when discussing the whole apocalypse's purpose. 334 a$rWøZ∫

!125 “subjected themselves”335 to their God, doing their best in other words (48.19). Frame us in your mind this way, Baruch suggests to God. The people, “the people you have chosen”336 and “of whom you have found no equal,”337 should be taken care of (48.19). Here a familiar saying from a character in Mark’s gospel comes to mind: “I believe. Help my unbelief” (Mark 9.24). Baruch’s prayer follows a similar logic: God, your people are doing their best; help them, though, for their best is not enough.

Part of the reason that Israel needs God's help is the way that anger serves to enhance the act of judgment. When speaking of Israel’s strength, Baruch's concern is that it might waver in light of God’s “anger” (48.17).338 This “anger” corresponds with the reference to God’s

“judgment” in the second half of the verse (48.17). It is with Baruch's troubling prayer over his fear of God's anger that we see the real complexity of the issue of judgment. Theologically, even though Baruch can account for the people's sins and God's sense of justice, judgment remains a problematic theological tenet, even if it is absolutely necessary to the theological system (as it is to 2 Baruch's). Baruch pleads to God in prayer because there are elements of God's judgment that are still problematic for him and he wants to ensure that his people will be okay. It is with the next passage, 2 Baruch 48.27-41, that God will offer information to Baruch that should help alleviate these tensions and the concerns he raises in his prayer of 2 Baruch 48.17-24.

335 K¬ wDıøT√ad 336 TÁ»ı©d AµDø RÁ© W˙h 337 htW˚a TÔ‰◊µ A¬d AÂø nW˙a NÁ¬hw 338 kZ©wr

!126 JUDGMENT PASSAGE 8: 2 BARUCH 48.31-41

48.31 “But my judgment will demand its own, and my Torah will demand its right. 48.31 that time which brings tribulation will arise. Indeed, it will come and pass with acute force, and when it comes it will be agitated with heated vehemence. 48.32 In those days, all the inhabitants of the earth will be at rest with one another because they do not know that my judgment has come near, 48.33 for not many sages will be found at that time, and the intelligent will be few. Moreover, even those who know will be increasingly silent. 48.34 There will be many rumors and not a few reports. The workings of apparitions will become visible, and not a few promises will be made, some of them empty and some of them will be confirmed. 48.35 Honor will turn into disgrace, and hardness will be humiliated into contempt, and steadfastness will be dissolved, and loveliness will be despised. 48.36 Many will say to many at that time: ‘Where has the abundance of intelligence hidden itself, and where has the abundance of wisdom retreated?’ 48.37 And when they are thinking about these [things], then jealousy will rise among those who do not have hope regarding these. Pain will seize the one who was at peace, and many will be stirred by anger and will injure many, they will arouse armies to shed blood, and together with them they will perish in the end. 48.38 At that time, a change of times will appear openly to everybody, because during all those times they defiled themselves and caused oppression and everybody walked in his own works, and the Torah of the Might One they did not remember. 48.39 Therefore fire will consume their thoughts, and the musings of their kidneys will be tried in the flame. For the judge will come and not delay. 48.40 Because everyone of the inhabitants of the earth knew when he acted unjustly, but they did not know my Torah because of their pride. 48.41 For then many will weep sincerely, more so over the living than over the dead.339

339 .Hœdz OÚ∫t YßWÂ˙w .HÒ¥d oÚ∫t Y\˜¥d A¬a 48.27 aTÂÔ∫ a;ta D˚ J¬dT˙w .A∏¥RΔ AπAÔ∫ RıØ˙w RÁ© atA˙ .X¬;ad A˜∫z w;h mWŒ˙w 48.31 .atW∏Áøzd A¬d LÏµ .DΔ Lø DΔ Aørad ;H¥$rWÂø nwH¬W˚ nWÔÁ˙tT˙ .aT$µW¥ nW˙;H∫ awH˙w 48.32 .Y\˜¥d bRœd NÁø…D¥ .nwwH˙ A˙D$ΔDΔ A˙T¬W$‰ßw .A˜∫z w;H∫ NÁÔ˚T◊µ A$ÂÁ‰Δ a$AÁ˝ß RÁ© awh A¬ 48.33 nWœT◊˙ T¥aR¥T¥ \NÁø…D¥d NÁÒ¥a pa A¬a nW˙tT˙w nwWΔT˙ AÁÍÏ$˜πd aD#ı;øw .N¥rWøz A¬d A#ıƒw aAÁ˝$ß AØ$Â√ nwwH˙w 48.34 nwrrT◊˙ nwH˜µw NÁŒ¥Rß nwH˜µ .N¥rWøz A¬ A˜‰¬$Wµ .atW˜œt arT√tw .atWÏÁ◊¬ A˜√Wø K‰µT˙w .aRøX¬ aRŒ¥a kWπH˙w 48.35 .atWÁÍı¬ awht atwRÁ∏√w aA©Wß ;H¬ T\Á\Í˚ta A‰;¥a A˜∫z w;H∫ .aAÁ#˝Í¬ aAÁ#˝ß nwRµA˙w 48.36 .aTÂ‰Δd aA©Wß ;H¬ T\Á\˜√ A‰;¥A¬w .atW˙T¬;W‰ßd nwHÁÒø wwh N¥RÚıß A¬d NÁÒ¥A∫ A˜˜ƒ J˙D N¥D;¥h .\NÁ¬h NÁı◊ΔTµ nW˙\h D˚w 48.37 nwRÁØ˙w .a$AÁ˝Í¬ nW‰˙d aZ©wR∫ aAÁ#˝ß nWØ¥ztT˙w .awh A\Ò√d A˜;¥A¬ dWΔA˙ A◊Δw nwD∫A˙ aDÔ˚a atRÔ¬ nwHÂøw .Aµd nwD√A˙d atWÒ$ÁÔ¬ A$˜∫z NÁ¬h wH¬W‰∫d PÒΔ .A$˜∫zd nwH∏¬WΔ V˜Ò‰¬ T¥AÁÒ© aZΔT˙ .A˜∫z w;H∫ H∫ awH˙w 48.38 .wwh N¥R;˚dTµ A¬ A˙TÒÁΔd HßWÂ˙w .yhwd$ı;Ø∫ V˙a V˙a wwh NÁ¬z;aw .NÁıÒ;øw wwh NÁ∏˜ƒTµ nwhTÁ¬$W˚d N¥hTÁ˙$Rµ n$RÔ∫T˙ aTÁ∫HÒ◊∫w .AÒ˚a nwhT#ı◊Ôµ arW˙ A˙h LÏµ 48.39 .RΔwT◊˙ A¬w A˜;¥d RÁ© atA˙ .WøD¥ A¬ \YßWÂ˙w .lWØµ D˚ awh o…D¥ Aørad ;H¥$rWÂø Nµ DΔ DΔ L˚d LÏµ 48.40 .nwhtW\µr LÏµ .aT$Áµ Lød R¥T¥ N¥d AÁ$Δ Lø .T¥aR¥R√ nW‰ı˙ N¥D;¥h N¥d a$AÁ˝ß 48.41

!127 At the start of the third dialogue section, God’s comments to Baruch in 48.27-41 reveal several details central to this author’s view of how this world transitions into the next. With surprisingly specific detail, God lays out the order of the coming time (48.30). We read, tellingly, about the ways people grasp and respond to the Messiah’s judgment (48.39-40). Additionally, due to how God frames this revelatory information, we see the elevated role judgment plays in the divine imagination.

I’ll start with that last point because it will help tether together the comments in this section. 2 Baruch returns to its dialogical format (48.26-52.8) and God issues a response to

Baruch’s prayer (48.1-25). God encourages and affirms Baruch’s position, acknowledging that

Baruch’s “prayer has been straight”340 and, respectfully, acknowledging that “all of [his] words have been heard” (48.26).341 As God begins his revelatory message to Baruch, God utilizes poetic parallelism: “But my judgment will demand its own, and my Torah will demand its right” (48.27).342 The references to God and what’s important to God in this section are of three kinds: 1) Torah (48.27, 38, 40); 2) the Mighty One (48.38); and 3) judgment (48.27, 32, 39).

Significantly, God’s ultimate judgment is not depicted as one action among many. Rather, it carries the weight of references to Torah itself and God’s self-reference as the Mighty One.343

Like elsewhere in 2 Baruch, the author describes judgment with near-autonomous language. The judgment “demands its own” (48.27).344 The Syriac here, oÚ∫t, is aggressive, with

340 kwR∫ wa TÁ\¬x T¥AÏÁ◊π T˙a 341 KÁÒ$µ N¥H¬W˚ OµT√aw 342 .Hœdz OÚ∫t YßWÂ˙w .HÒ¥d oÚ∫t Y\˜¥d A¬a 343 A term that takes on greater importance in the final half of the book. See 2 Baruch 44.3, 6; 46.4; 48.38; 55.6; 59.3; 61.6; 63.8, 10; 64.3; 66.5; 70.5; 77.26; 84.7. 344 HÒ¥d oÚ∫t Y\˜¥d

!128 possible hints of violence.345 It’s not simply that judgment does its duty by claiming those that belong to it. Judgment acts swiftly, driven by its own motivation, while the Torah seeks out its due/right (Hœdz). The Torah is determined to receive its own. The language here suggests a more tempered Torah, which calls for and tracks down those things that reflect the Torah’s sacredness, its worthiness.

Regarding God’s comments to Baruch in the rest of 2 Baruch 48.27-41, I will highlight the description of end-time events and their unfolding logic. From this, it will become clear that knowledge remains one of the author's chief concerns.

According to ch. 48.31-33, the great sign that marks the messianic arrival and the division of humanity is tranquility. The quiet before the storm. Though, ultimately, it will “come and pass with acute force”346 (48.31), earth’s population will experience a peace before it does so. Again with the aggressive imagery for judgment, it comes quickly and lethally, but the people are ultimately unaware. They’re ignorant that “my judgment has come near”347 (48.32), which is catastrophic for them because the judgment is “agitated with heated vehemence” (48.31).348

Their ignorance is compounded because during that time God will not appoint “many sages” (48.33).349 Those few intelligent ones that are present “will be increasingly silent” (48.33).350 Even those equipped with the skills to determine the peaceful/quiet state offer no help for the wicked ones.

345 Payne Smith, 603, gives possible translations as: 1) seek, demand desire, beg; 2) require, claim, exact, avenge. Though his examples don’t parallel 2 Baruch’s use directly (lacking the Ò¥d), the forcefulness of the term comes through. 346 A∏¥RΔ AπAÔ∫ RıØ˙w RÁ© atA˙ 347 Y\˜¥d bRœd 348 atW∏Áøzd aTÂÔ∫ a;ta D˚ 349 A$ÂÁ‰Δ a$AÁ˝ß RÁ© awh A¬ 350 nWœT◊˙ T¥aR¥T¥ \NÁø…D¥d NÁÒ¥a pa

!129 The next stage in “that time which brings tribulation”351 (48.31) is one of confusion.

Without the proper leadership, without those that can decipher what is truly going on,

“rumors,”352 misleading accounts, and false expectations will become pervasive (48.34). The result of this is one of the traditional eschatological motifs, the reversal of things. “Honor will turn into disgrace, and hardness will be humiliated into contempt, and steadfastness will be dissolved, and loveliness will be despised” (48.35).353 The good that’s left fades away.

The troubles of this final age escalate after the reversals. From “jealousy,” “pain,” and

“anger,” the people will fight and slaughter one another (48.37). It is this, the cataclysmic battle between nations that presently delivers the “change of times” (48.38).354 The judgment and tribulation finally arrive in full, after the period of peace, the state of ignorance, the misleading rumors, the reversal of good qualities, the stirring of action, and, finally, the battle between peoples.

With the judgment comes its symbolic representation: fire.355 “Fire will consume their thoughts, and the musings of their kidneys will be tried in the flame” (48.39).356 In incredibly powerful terms here, the first action of judgment affects the interiors of the people. They are not gathered and corralled; they aren’t chastised or attacked. It’s their thoughts and hearts that are consumed with the recognition of how “they defiled themselves and caused oppression” (48.38).

Most importantly—for Baruch, for Israel, for God—“the Torah of the Mighty One they did not

351 X¬;ad A˜∫z w;h mWŒ˙w 352 A#ıƒw aAÁ˝$ß 353 atWÁÍı¬ awht atwRÁ∏√w .atW˜œt arT√tw atWÏÁ◊¬ A˜√Wø K‰µT˙w .aRøX¬ aRŒ¥a kWπH˙w 354 A$˜∫zd nwH∏¬WΔ Cf. 4 Ezra 12 and the battle before the Messiah. 355 See, too, 85.13 where “the decree of judgment” is paralleled with “the way of fire.” 356 nwhTÁ¬$W˚d N¥hTÁ˙$Rµ n$RÔ∫T˙ aTÁ∫HÒ◊∫w .AÒ˚a nwhT#ı◊Ôµ arW˙ A˙h LÏµ 48.39

!130 remember” (48.38).357 Their own corruption, their own awareness of their corruption, shields

Baruch and his fellow Israelites from any sympathy for this judgment.358 But this recognition of culpability and the arrival of the judge (48.39) leaves the guilty distraught (48.41).359

Baruch’s emphasis on intelligence, knowledge, and realization is the most important takeaway from the dialogue in 2 Baruch 48-52.360 During the time preceding the judgment, knowledge dictates the people’s actions and expectations. The nations are at peace “because they

357 wwh N¥R;˚dTµ A¬ A˙TÒÁΔd HßWÂ˙w 358 The consequences of Baruch’s teachings here are significant. Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 283, writes, “The ethical implications of this division are grave. The final segregation of saints and sinners shows little empathy for the complex nature of human life and inevitably runs the risk of encouraging theological self-righteousness. To the modern reader, who is immediately suspicious that such social dualism fosters moral dualism, the crass worldview of apocalyptic thought seems exaggerated, overly facile, if grotesque, and presents an open affront to our ethical sensitivities about equality and justice for all.” 359 According to VanLandingham, 283, there are “two distinct judgments” in 2 Baruch. “The first judgment is equivalent of the prophetic Day of Yahweh. This event delivers Israel from its Gentile overlords and then punishes the Gentiles for their treatment of Israel.” VanLandingham locates the description of this judgment in the interpretations Baruch receives for his vine vision (38-40) and his waters visions (70-73). Regarding the final judgment, VanLandingham locates its description in 26-30 and 48-51, where it “follows the Day of Yahweh and the messianic age.” Cf. Tom Willett, Eschatology in the Theodicies of 2 Baruch and 4 Ezra (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2003), 112-18. 360 Regarding 2 Baruch’s comments on final judgment, especially the passages dealing with eternal punishment of the unfaithful, Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 283, suggests we read 2 Baruch somewhat generously by keeping the author’s motivational teaching in mind. “The purpose of these narrations is not to exclude or to condemn, nor to vilify and to reject, as a surface reading of the text might suggest but, to the contrary, to encourage the faithful.” I have no trouble accepting Henze’s larger point. Certainly, Baruch’s aims with these passages are not meant to either “encourag[e] theological self-righteousness” or to “discourage his audience with a fatalistic view of history.”. Baruch very clearly expects the audience to respond to his teachings with actions, just look at his imperatives in his community addresses. But I think part of Baruch’s call to action includes the condemnation and exclusion and vilification of the wicked, both Israelite and non-Israelite. This is part of Baruch’s message. It is not merely a “surface reading” to conclude so. Referring explicitly to the judgment of the sinful, Baruch, in his prayer of ch. 54, says, “Now turn to desolation, you evildoers of now, because you will be visited quickly, for the time you rejected the understanding of the Most High” (54.17). Baruch gives them no pass. They too are called to action. It is just that they have not been responded to either God’s “works” or his “craftsmanship of creation” (54.18). Baruch’s comments here work at at least two levels. There is an acknowledgement of individual responsibility—respond to God’s requirements or don’t, but you’ll be dealt with accordingly. Additionally, these comments, too, serve as paraenetic comments for the faithful (and the members of the Israel who might have slipped away). His prayer reminds the audience that the other side of this judgment is reward: “[God] will praise the faithful according to their faith” (54.22). And Baruch continues, offering encouragement for the audience’s proper response to God by articulating God’s hands-on role “for those who are among [God’s] own” (54.22).

!131 do not know that my judgment has come near” (48.32).361 Though there remain a few sages and intelligent ones—that is, those in the know like Baruch’s audience—they’re not tasked with enlightening the wicked ones. God leaves the wicked to their own ways. The lack of knowing in the lead up to the new age is balanced with true knowledge when the messianic judge appears. At the turn of the age, the people become fully cognizant of their own shortcomings, especially their disobedience to God’s laws.362 “Their thoughts” and “the musings of their kidneys” are overcome with the presence of God’s judgment, manifest symbolically with presence of fire.

In this account from God, in direct response to Baruch’s concerns over the details of final judgment, God does not describe punishment or destruction. God emphasizes the role of knowledge. Characteristic of the wicked ones before the new age is ignorance. At the arrival of the judge, though, they’re enlightened. This enlightenment serves as an initial act of judgment for they realize their own wickedness, their own shortcomings, and their imminent destruction.

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 9: 2 BARUCH 72.2-73.4

72.2 After the signs have come which you were told before, when the nations will be agitated, the time of my Messiah will come, and he will call al of the nations, some of whom he will spare and some of whom he will kill. 72.3 These, then, are coming upon those nations that will be spared by him. 72.4 Every nation that has not known Israel and has not trodden down the seed of Jacob will be spared. 72.5 This is because some of all the nations will be subjected to your people. 72.6 But all those who have ruled over you or have known you, they, all of them, will be delivered up to the sword. 73.1 And after he has humiliated everything that is in the world and has sat in peace forever on the throne of his kingdom, then he will be revealed in joy, and rest

361 .Y\˜¥d bRœd NÁø…D¥ A¬d LÏ 362Hobbins, 46-47, identifies the complicated nature of 2 Baruch’s historical division between human history and the eschatological age. In his reading, 2 Baruch combines “cosmological and historical points of view” in order to present a New Creation in the flow of history and, ultimately, “the salvation of history, not its breaking off” (emphasis removed).

!132 will appear. 73.2 Then healing will be descending in the dew, and disease will vanish, and concern and sorry and groans will pass from among humans, and gladness will walk about the entire earth. 73.3 And no one will again die untimely, nor will any peril suddenly befall. 73.4 And judgments and blame and schisms and vengeance and blood and covetousness and envy and hatred and all those that are like these will go into condemnation when they will be removed.363

With Baruch's second vision (53-76.5), God shows Baruch, in part, how the actions of judgment will actually unfold. The heavenly interpreter Remiel comes to Baruch after his second vision to unpack the meanings of his dream. As a part of this interpretation, in 2 Baruch 72, the author offers some clarity on the unfolding eschatological scene. Whereas 2 Baruch's previous mentions364 of the Messiah left ambiguity over the nature of his appearance(s) and its global impact, here God makes explicit reference to the global scene. This is the decisive moment of

God's activity at the transition from human history to the coming new age.

Judgment, it turns out, is a worldwide event. "[The Messiah] will call all of the nations" (72.2) to him.365 No one escapes direct contact from the Messiah during "the time of the

Messiah" (72.2).366 Based solely on his own discretion and interpretation of individuals' hearts,

363 A$ÂÂø nW◊©T◊˙ D˚ .M¥Dœ Nµ K¬ Rµatad at$wta N¥t$ad rT∫ Nµ 72.2 lWÏŒ˙ nwH˜µw AΔA˙ nwH˜µw .A$ÂÂø nwHÒ‰¬ bRŒ˙w .YÔÁ◊µd H˜∫z atA˙w ;H˜µ nWÔ˙d N¥D¥Tød NÁÒ¥a AÂ$Âø Lø N¥t$a LÁ˚h NÁ¬h 72.3 AÔ˙d A¥w\h »bWŒØ¥d HørZ¬ vd A¬dw .L¥RÍ¥A¬ o…D¥ A¬d AÂø L˚ 72.4 KÂØ¬ NÁÂ$Âø lW˚ Nµ nwDıøT◊˙d lWÏµ adhw 72.5 nWÂ¬T◊˙ A∫RÔ¬ nwH¬W˚ NÁ¬h .nW‰øD¥d wa nW‰ÁÒø WÏ¬T√ad N¥d NÁÒ¥a lW˚ 72.6 Lø MÒØ¬ A;ÂÒ◊∫ b;T¥w .AÂÒØ∫ T¥ad lW‰¬ K‰Âµd rT∫ Nµ awH˙w 73.1 aZΔT˙ AÔÁ˙w AÂßWı∫ AÒ©T˙ N¥D;¥h .htW‰Òµd sW˙rt aTŒøw aTπxw .QΔrT˙ A˙hrW˚w .AÒÒÏ∫ aT;Ô˙ awht atWÁßa N¥D;¥hw 73.2 Aøra ;HÒ‰∫ atwDΔ K¬htw .A$◊˜Á˜∫ Nµ n$RıØ˙ aT$Ô˙atw mDµ AÒ∫WŒß vD˝˙ AÁÒ√ Nµ A¬w .H˜∫Z∫ A¬d tWÂ˙ A¬ bwtw 73.3 atA˜ßw AÂÍΔw .aT˝Á©$rw Aµdw aTØ#∫tw A˜¥$RΔw atW√$Rµw A˜¥$dw 73.4 NÒœ$T◊˙ D˚ N¬z$A˙ Aı¥WÔ¬ .NÁ$µd NÁ¬H¬d NÁÒ¥a L˚w 364 This is 2 Baruch’s third and final account of the Messiah. Regarding the Messiah’s first appearance described in 2 Baruch 29, Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism, 295, says “There is nothing in the text to suggest that the presence of the Messiah will be felt outside of Israel.” Henze’s observation here complicates our understanding of this end-time scene. The passage in question, occurring at the end of a lengthy dialogue between Baruch and God about end-time events, offers little by way of concrete expression. 365 A$ÂÂø nwHÒ‰¬ bRŒ˙w 366 YÔÁ◊µd H˜∫z atA˙w

!133 he assigns people and nations their fate. In dichotomous categories familiar to us from scenes like Matthew 25 and the separation of sheep and goats,367 the Messiah divides nations into those who he “will spare" and those "whom he will kill" (72.2).368 Again, it is worth noting that the

Messiah is responsible for all of the action. He calls. He divides. He kills. This is the judge of 2

Baruch 44. But 2 Baruch 72 elaborates. The Messiah is judge as well as the executioner.369

Beyond its comments on the Messiah's function, 2 Baruch 72 offers some of the most important details regarding the final judgment. A systematic thinker, Baruch thinks in categories.

You have the people of Israel: troubled, at times lost and disloyal, though ultimately God's beloved. For them God has prepared eternal reward. Regarding "the others," the vast majority of humanity, Baruch also thinks precisely. The wider non-Israel population is further subdivided into two groups. Here he draws the boundary between the two quite simply. You are either from a nation that knew Israel or did not. Regarding the latter group, God demonstrates his vast generosity.370 If you are in the former group, though, watch out. The full weight of God's wrath will come. "Wrath" does not quite capture Baruch's presentation of God's action, however. The inevitability of the fate of their eternal judgment does not stem from a place of anger as much as it does from a place justice. The ones who have “ruled over [Israel] or have known [it], they, all of them, will be delivered up to the sword” (72.6).371 This description is clinical, detached. The

367 On this see, Ulrich Lutz, Matthew 21-28: A Commentary (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005). 368 l\WÏŒ˙ nwH˜µw AΔA˙ nwH˜µw 369 David E. Aune with Eric Stewart, “From the Idealized Past to the Imaginary Future: Eschatological Restoration in Jewish Apocalyptic Literature” in Restoration: Old Testament, Jewish, and Christian Perspectives, ed. James Scott, (Leiden: Brill, 2001), 147-77 158, summarize his multi-layered role "as a military leader and judge who defeats and punishes the enemies of God's people and a king who reigns 'forever' until he returns to heaving, bringing the temporary messianic kingdom to an end." 370 With this declaration God’s benevolence is on display. Not quite going so far as theological universalism, 2 Baruch recognizes the theological conundrum of people from other parts of the world that had no opportunity to know Israel’s God, nor to follow his ways. This may be 2 Baruch’s most mature position. 371 nWÂ¬T◊˙ A∫RÔ¬ nwH¬W˚ NÁ¬h .nW‰øD¥d wa nW‰ÁÒø WÏ¬T√ad N¥d NÁÒ¥a lW˚ 72.6

!134 judgment of the nations is not fueled by God’s fiery rage, but by his cool sense of justice. Those nations have wronged God’s people and haven’t yet received their punishment for doing so. They will.

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 10: 2 BARUCH 85.9-13

9 Therefore, before his judgment will claim its own and truth what is rightfully its due, let us prepare ourselves, so that we will possess and not be possessed, and that we will hope and not be put to shame, and that we will rest with our fathers and not be tormented with those who hate us. 10 For the youth of th world has passed, and the strength of cration is already consumed. The advent of the times is very near, and they have passed. The pitcher is near to the cistern, the boat to the harbor, the journey of the road to the city, and life to consummation. 85.11 Again, then, prepare yourselves s2o that, when you have traveled and ascend from the boat, you will have rest and not be condemned when you depart. 85.12 See, then, the Most High brings to pass all of these. There will not be there again a place for penitence, nor a limit to the times, nor a duration for the seasons, nor a change in the road, nor a place for petition, nor the sending of requests, nor the receiving of knowledge, nor the giving of love, nor a place of repentance, nor supplications for transgressions, nor intercessions of the fathers, nor a prayer of the prophets, nor the help of the righteous. 85.13 Then there is there the decree for the judgment of corruption, for the way of fire, and the path that leads to annihilations. 85.14 Therefore, there is one, through one Torah, one world, and an end for all who are in it. 85.15 Then he lets those live whom he finds and forgives them, and at the same time, he will destroy those who are polluted with sins.

Much as knowledge was central to God's description of judgment in 2 Baruch 48, knowledge plays a similar role in Baruch's discussion of judgment at the end of his

!135 apocalypse.372 The concluding section of 2 Baruch records a letter from Baruch to the exiled tribes of Israel. Delivering an exhortation for them to obey Torah, he once again identifies judgment’s active role in their lives. It’s not just “that their current exile is an act of God’s judgment”373 but that judgment, ultimately, “will claim its own” (85.9).374 In the context of the letter, this serves as an encouragement from Baruch, advising the audience to adhere to his teachings so that they may be found worthy before God.

Also like in 2 Baruch 48, judgment is paired with another chief attribute of the divine. In this case: truth. At the end of times both judgment and truth take what is theirs, just as God told

Baruch that judgment and Torah take their own in 2 Baruch 48. Knowledge, for Baruch, is meant to spark action. And with this understanding about truth and judgment the audience has some responsibility to act. Including himself in with the people, Baruch says they must “prepare ourselves”375 in order to receive a series of blessings from God: possession, hope, and rest without torment (85.9).

With Baruch’s pseudepigraphical frame—writing from the first Babylonian invasion in

587 BCE—the urgency is all the more intense for its actual contemporary audience in the early

372 A¬w BÍ˙d N◊∏˙ BÁÏ˙ .q…dz H¬d mDµd arR√w .HÒ¥d H\˜¥d O∫T˙d LÁ˚h mDœ Nµ 85.9 .N¥A$˜ß Mø Q˙T◊˙d A¬w ≥ nt$H∫a Mø JÁ˙tT˙dw .tHı˙d A¬w RıÍ˙dw .BÍ˙T˙d nwhT¥tAµw .H¬ MÒ√ wD˚ Nµ aT¥R»∫d ;hzWøw .tRıø AÂÒød RÁ© htWÂÁÒø 85.10 ;hT¥dRµw .A˙AÂÒ¬ A∏¬aw .A∫W˝¬ aT¬Wœ yh Aı¥Rœw nwH¬ wR»ıøw LÁÒœ R¥X∫ A˜#∫zd .AÂ¬W◊¬ AÁ$Δw .aT˜¥DÂ¬ AΔrwad nwT¬\zad Aµd A¬w nWÔÁ˙tt A∏¬a Nµ nwTŒÒ\ßw nwT¥drd Aµd nW˚T$◊∏˙ WıÁ;ƒ N¥d bwt 85.11 nWıÁΔtt AµWΔt A¬w .atWı¥T¬ arta bwt TÁ¬ Nµt .\N¥HÒ˚ NÁ¬h AÂ¥Rµ aTÁ˙ RÁ© ah 85.12 atW˙rD◊µ A¬w .atWØı¬ arta A¬w .aTΔwrA¬ A∏¬WΔ A¬w .A˙$DØ¬ aR©W˙ A¬w .A˜#∫Z¬ aT$ÍÁπ A¬w .A◊∏˙ twT¬ arta A¬w .;A∫WΔd AÚ∫H¥ A¬w .aTøD¥ BÍÂ¬ A¬w .aT¬$A√d .AŒ$¥dzd A˙rdWø A¬w .AÁ#ı˙d atW¬x A¬w .aH#∫ad at$WØ∫ A¬w .atWÒ$‰ß Lø .a$RµW˝¬ bRŒµd AÒÁı√w arW˙d AΔrwad AÒı;Ô¬ A\˜¥dd arZ© N¥d Nµt T¥a 85.13 .nwHÒ‰¬ A‰ß H∫ T¥ad NÁÒ¥A¬w .AÂÒø DΔ AßWÂ˙ DΔ DÁ∫ DΔ A˙h LÏµ 85.14 a$HÏÔ∫ NÁÒ∏Ò∏µd NÁÒ¥A¬ D∫W˙ aDÔ˚aw nwHÁÒø AÍÔ˙w J‰◊µd NÁÒ¥A¬ AÔ˙ N¥D;¥h 85.15

373 Henze and Stone, 16. 374 .HÒ¥d H\˜¥d O∫T˙d 375 N◊∏˙ BÁÏ˙

!136 second century CE.376 Baruch calls them to action because “the advent of the times is very near, and they have passed” (85.10).377 The reason the audience must act immediately is that in addition to the imminent arrival of the “judgment” for “its own” (85.9), everything must be settled by that arrival.378 Baruch spells out as thoroughly as he can that with the arrival of new age, there is no room for last ditch efforts to get right with God. “There will not be there again a place for penitence, . . . nor a place for petition, nor the sending of requests, nor the receiving of knowledge, nor the giving of love, nor a place of repentance, nor supplications for transgressions, nor intercessions of the fathers, nor a prayer of the prophets, nor the help of the righteous” (85.12).379 This concern for a final chance to correct one’s standing before God (either during life or postmortem) seems to have been a contemporary concern. 4 Ezra, too, expresses interest in verifying that God will be generous with those who haven’t had the same set of chances to correct their evil ways.380 2 Baruch's message on this, though, is clear. The people need to get their affairs in order now and return to the ways of God.

376 Daniel M. Gurtner, “The ‘Twenty-Fifth Year of Jeconiah’ and the Date of 2 Baruch,” JSP 18 (2008): 23-32, dates 2 Baruch to 95 CE. Working with other textual references and related mathematical formulas, see N. Roddy’s “Two Parts, Weeks of Seven Weeks’: The End of the Age as Terminus and Quem for 2 Baruch, JSP 14 (1996) 3-14 for a compositional date of 99 CE. On how this relates to an imagined (and imminent) eschatological arrival, see Antti Laato’s “The Apocalypse of the Syriac of Baruch and the Date of the End” JSP 18 (1998): 39-46. 377 nwH¬ wR»ıøw LÁÒœ R¥X∫ A˜#∫zd nwhT¥tAµw

Sometimes in our readings of these serious texts we lose sight of the human touch, the human element embedded in the writings. The remainder of 85.10 serves as a good example. Baruch continues, “The pitcher is near to the cistern, the boat to the harbor, the journey of the road to the city, and life to consummation.” Baruch grasps every metaphor his mind can get a hold of to express his thought. It’s a pitcher; it’s a boat; it’s a journey; it’s a life. Just listen, you can imagine Baruch pleading. 378 Aune and Stewart, 161-2, "In spite of their enormous losses, the author comforts his audience with the expectation that what they lost was corruptible, but what they will receive in its place is incorruptible." 379 .aTΔwrA¬ A∏¬WΔ A¬w A˙$DØ¬ aR©W˙ A¬w .A˜#∫Z¬ AµWΔt A¬w atWı¥T¬ arta bwt TÁ¬ Nµt 85.12 A¬w ;A∫WΔd AÚ∫H¥ A¬w .aTøD¥ BÍÂ¬ A¬w .aT¬$A√d atW˙rD◊µ A¬w .atWØı¬ arta A¬w atW¬x A¬w .aH#∫ad at$WØ∫ A¬w .atWÒ$‰ß Lø aT$ÍÁπ A¬w .A◊∏˙ twT¬ arta AŒ$¥dzd A˙rdWø A¬w .AÁ#ı˙d 380 4 Ezra 7.78ff.

!137 Baruch’s closing thoughts in 85.9-13 return to the idea of judgment’s association with

God’s anger.381 With the arrival of the Most High’s new age (85.12), judgment exhaustively eradicates all that does not belong in the new age. The “decree for the judgment,” presumably from the mouth of the Most High or, perhaps, from the judge himself, dictates the final moments of the present age. Judgment blazes its path,382 eliminating those things that characterized the old age: corruption383 and paths of burning coals.384

According to God’s plan, judgment serves a purpose that goes beyond adhering to justice.

Baruch’s words to his audience in 85.9-15 reveal judgment clears the path of the wicked ones and of corruption in order to establish a unified existence. If Baruch demonstrates the Urzeit–

Endzeit theological thinking, it is most clearly spelled out here at the end of his epistle.385 While the author does not say that “the end should recapitulate the beginning,”386 he does call to mind the singularity of existence found in tales of human origins: one law and one world.387 To keep this oneness, God “lets those live whom he finds and forgives them, and at the same time, he will destroy those who are polluted with sins” (85.15).388 2 Baruch 85 tries to reinforce for the audience the two matters for which they should be centrally concerned: knowledge and action.

God's judgment provides them with knowledge and prompts their action.

381 See above on 2 Baruch 48.17. 382 arW˙d AΔrwad 383 AÒı;Ô¬ 384 a$RµW˝¬ bRŒµd AÒÁı√w 385 See, for example, Aune with Stewart, 147. 386 Aune with Stewart, 147, capitalization removed. 387 AÂÒø DΔ AßWÂ˙ DΔ DÁ∫ DΔ A˙h LÏµ 388 a$HÏÔ∫ NÁÒ∏Ò∏µd NÁÒ¥A¬ D∫W˙ aDÔ˚aw nwHÁÒø AÍÔ˙w J‰◊µd NÁÒ¥A¬ AÔ˙ N¥D;¥h

!138 CONCLUSION

By looking at the ten 2 Baruch passages discussed above, we get a sense of how this author envisions judgment and how he employs judgment for the purposes of his community. We learn of the corrective nature of judgment at the start of the apocalypse, where God, not even sparing his own from the consequences of their sins, reinforces the idea that eternal standing before God is most important. In 2 Baruch's first and second dialogue sections, the author provides the audience with assurance for Israel's own restoration and assurance that God won't uncritically relate to other nations. Additionally, especially in the second dialogue, Baruch highlights the cosmic significance of God's judgment. On par with Torah in divine significance,

God's judgment affects everything. Then, toward the end of Baruch's text, he clarifies the role of the Messiah as cosmic judge, which emphasizes God's unwavering generosity (to those who've never had the opportunity to know him) and God's resolute justice for those who tormented his people.

All of 2 Baruch's comments concerning judgment have one thing in common. They attempt to provide something for the audience. Whether that be assurance of their own privileged state (once they repent) or the Messiah's judgment on wicked political rulers, 2 Baruch wants its audience to get something from its discussion.

The issue of judgment provides 2 Baruch's interpreters with a helpful lens through which to examine the book's central purpose and its core teachings. Over the course of this chapter, I have discussed Baruch's prayers, his dialogues and visions, and his direct teachings for the community. From this, I offer several important takeaways. First, judgment in 2 Baruch encompasses multiple elements. It describes the punishment of Israel in 70 CE and attempts to

!139 get the people back on track. Judgment includes both the singular judgment of the end-time

Roman ruler of ch. 48, as well as division and allotment of rewards/curses for all humanity from ch. 30. Second, knowledge and instruction are two of 2 Baruch's key concepts. They motivate his writing and are threaded through all of the content this author records. The awareness of judgment should lead to action for 2 Baruch’s audience. So central was this idea, that the judgment scene described in God and Baruch's third dialogue punished the wicked with their knowledge of judgment, affecting their inner thoughts and inner hearts. Third, and obviously related, 2 Baruch's understand of knowledge is meant to clarify Israel's place in the world and the worldview that it can hold. Baruch admits that some of the book's information remains too ambiguous, and yet he believes that it can help supplement the community's understanding of their required actions. And ultimately, whether or not they have the community leaders that they desire, they have the teachings of their special prophet, Baruch, and alongside Torah it will guide them to the rewards of God's eternal judgment.

!140

!141 Chapter 4: Judgment in Apocalypse of Abraham

Even for students accustomed to the strange style and content of Jewish apocalyptic literature, Apocalypse of Abraham is notable for what we read in its pages.389 In this text, the patriarch finds himself in multiple unusual confrontations—one with a wooden idol, one with a bird of prey—he travels from this world to heaven on the back of a flaming dove, and finds there

(among other things) a heavenly copy of the world that is interactive (in contemporary culture think of an iPad screen that can zoom in and enhance a picture). Adding to its unusual nature,

Apocalypse of Abraham offers an extreme view of violent eschatological judgment and its role in the Jewish faithful’s future.

Apocalypse of Abraham's governing theme is judgment. Many sections deal with idolatry and monotheistic fidelity, but even these discussions are filtered through the author's conception of judgment. The author’s use of this essential theological principle falls into two categories: judgment for the individual and collective judgment in the sense of eternal punishment/reward at the end of time. While this distinction between individual and collective judgment is well-known in Early Jewish literature, here in Apocalypse of Abraham it takes on a more severe and sinister twist.

389 For an English translation see Alexander Kulik, Retroverting Slavonic Psedepigrapha: Toward the Original of the Apocalypse of Abraham (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2004). For an excellent introduction read Daniel Harlow, “Apocalypse of Abraham” in The Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism, eds. John J. Collins and Daniel C. Harlow (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2010), 295-298. Critical Editions: B. Philonenko-Sayar and M. Philonenko, “L’Apocalypse d’Abraham. Introduction, texte slave, traduction et notes,” Semitica 31 (1981). R. Rubinkiewicz, L’Apocalypse d’Abraham en vieux slave. Introduction, texte critique, traduction et commentaire (´Zródla I Monografie, 129; Lublin: Towarzystwo Naukowe Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1987.

!142 INTRODUCTION

The Apocalypse of Abraham is a Jewish apocalypse written in response to the destruction of Israel's temple in 70 CE.390 The apocalypse is divided neatly into two parts: an extended narrative introduction (1-8),391 followed by the apocalypse (9-31), which includes a heavenly journey by the patriarch Abraham,392 a review of history, and a glimpse into the eschatological future.393

Judgment, the text's dominant theme, has largely been overlooked by scholars. The author emphasizes this essential theme throughout the two sections of his work: the early chapters when describing the distinction between idolatry and monotheistic belief;394 in the latter chapters through explanations of Abraham's vision of human history. My own interest in this text comes from the language God uses to explain the eschatological judgment. In an attempt to comfort

Abraham (and Apocalypse of Abraham's audience), God promises that the community will participate in the judgment of heathen nations (chs. 29-31). At the heart of their heavenly reward

390 On dating this apocalypse see Collins, Apocalyptic Imagination, 225; Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, 288; and Daniel C. Harlow “Idolatry and Alterity: Israel and the Nations in the Apocalypse of Abraham,” in The “Other” in Second Temple Judaism. Essays in Honor of John J. Collins, eds. Daniel C. Harlow, Karina Martin Hogan, Matthew Goff, and Joel S. Kaminsky (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2011), 302-330; Jacob Licht, “Apocalypse of Abraham,” Encyclopedia Judaica, vol.1, 288-89. Witold Witakowski, “Apocalypse of Abraham,” Encyclopedia of Ancient History, New York: Blackwell, 2013. 391 On chapters 1-8 as Haggada see K. Kohler “The Pre-Talmudic Haggada,” JQR 7.4 (1895): 581-606. See Bel and the Dragon 14 for different parody of idol worship; Collins, 226. 392 Heavenly journeys, the structure of heaven, and participation in heavenly worship are familiar to us from a series of texts: 1 Enoch 14; 2 Enoch 20; 3 Enoch 1.11-13; Ascension of Isaiah 9; Apocalypse of Zephaniah 8.2-4; 3 Baruch 11; Testament of Levi 2&3; Hekhalot Rabbati 24.1; Songs of Sabbath Sacrifice. 393 All translations of the Apocalypse of Abraham and its chapter references are Kulik, Retroverting. 394 On idolatry in general, see Naomi Janowitz, "Good Jews Don't: Historical and Philosophical Constructions of Idolatry," HR 47 (2007): 239-52; Stephen C. Barton, ed., Idolatry: False Worship in the Bible, Early Judaism, and Christianity (London: T&T Clark, 2007); Johannes Tromp, "Critique of Idolatry in the Context of Jewish Monotheism," in Aspects of Religious Contact and Conflict in the Ancient World, ed. P.W. van der Horst (Uttrecht: Falculteit der Godgeleerdheid, 1995), 105-120.

!143 is the opportunity to pay back their enemies. The reward for fidelity to God is to punish those who hate you!395

Rich and nuanced, Apocalypse of Abraham provides many fruitful avenues for analysis and critical interpretation. Because of this, other notable themes have received meaningful treatment that has advanced our understanding of this important early second century text.396

However, the lack of scholarly treatment of judgment in Apocalypse of Abraham needs to be rectified. To situate my discussion of judgment in Apocalypse of Abraham, I will mention two major contributions to the field of Apocalypse of Abraham studies, which influenced my own reading of the text: 1) Martha Himmelfarb’s argument for the priestly ascent of Abraham into heaven, which she contrasts with that of Azazel in chs. 12-17;397 2) The priestly reading of

Andrei Orlov, whose work on the Apocalypse of Abraham is extensive and who makes the case that Apocalypse of Abraham is an eschatological reimagining of the Yom Kippur tradition.398

Orlov's output on Apocalypse of Abraham is massive and, naturally, not all of it is directly relevant. I will focus on the more recent phase of his Apocalypse of Abraham scholarship, which

395 The bloodlust of this eschatological promise is reminiscent of the War Scroll (1QM) from Qumran where there is a vivid, imaginative payback for the community’s enemies. K. Davis, K.S. Baek, P.W. Flint, & D. Peters, eds. The War Scroll, Violence, War and Peace in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Literature (Leiden: Brill, 2015); Raija Sollamo, "War and Violence in the Ideology of the Qumran Community," Studia Orientalia 99 (2004): 341-52. 396 Preserved by Christians of the Slavonic tradition. For an introduction to its transmission history, see, Harlow, “Abraham, Apocalypse of,” 297. 397 Martha Himmelfarb, Ascent to Heaven (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993). Daniel C. Harlow has gone on to elaborate on the anti-idolatry stance of Apocalypse of Abraham and its relationship to priestly roles. 398 Andrei Orlov, Heavenly Priesthood in the Apocalypse of Abraham (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013); “Praxis of the Voice: The Divine Name Traditions in the Apocalypse of Abraham,” JBL 127 (2008): 53-70; “‘The Gods of My Father Terah’: Abraham the Iconoclast and the Polemics with the Divine Body Traditions in the Apocalypse of Abraham,” JSP 18 (2008): 33-53; “The Pteromorphic Angelology of the Apocalypse of Abraham,” CBQ 71 (2009): 830-42.

!144 centers on the notion of priesthood and the mirroring of heavenly and earthly/wicked phenomena.

HIMMELFARB AND TRANSFORMATION

In chapter 3 of Himmelfarb’s classic Ascent to Heaven, she investigates heavenly journeys in her chapter “Transformation and the Righteous Dead.”399 Regarding Apocalypse of

Abraham, she looks at the high priestly clothing of Abraham, its heavenly nature, and the priestly language used to describe Yahoel. Working from the priestly descriptions of Exodus 28,

Himmelfarb concludes that Yahoel's headwear and his garments are intentionally presented in high priestly language. With the heavenly priest as his guide, Abraham prepares the sacrifice that will grant him access to heaven. For Himmelfarb, this scene in Apocalypse of Abraham 10-17 is the natural “culmination of the story of his rejection of idolatry.”400 Abraham moves away from the false idols of his family to apprentice under the heavenly priest Yahoel.401

After Abraham's confrontation with Azazel in chapters 13 and 14, Yahoel assists him in ascending to heaven. Abraham recounts, "And we ascended like great winds to the heaven which was fixed on the expanses” (15.4). The arrival of Abraham, a living human being, into heaven causes much confusion and antagonism between him and the angelic beings (18.8-12). Reading these heavenly scenes as influenced by the temple traditions of Exodus 28 and elsewhere,

Himmelfarb identifies the violent response along the lines of impropriety—if not downright

399 Himmelfarb, Ascent, 47-71. 400 Himmelfarb, Ascent, 62. 401 Himmelfarb, Ascent, 62.

!145 impurity.402 The ritual practices of the temple were organized, specific, and required certain cleansing and clothing. Abraham’s is lacking and his presence creates disorder. Himmelfarb explains this irregularity by saying that Abraham is not serving at a priest yet, for his time on earth has not ceased. “Although Abraham is never actually provided with a garment [in

Apocalypse of Abraham], he has been promised one.”403 This promise of the garment and

Yahoel's presence as a guide allows Abraham to participate in the heavenly liturgy despite his inferior cultic status.404 Apocalypse of Abraham depiction of Abraham’s experience worshipping with the heavenly liturgical community shows the faithful that to overcome the dangerous practice of idolatry through liturgical practice, both in this world and the next.405 To ensure a heavenly reward, the audience need only to adhere to the instructions God prescribed for them and avoid the temptation of idolatry.

Himmelfarb's important work in Ascent to Heaven clarifies the nature of the heavenly realm and Abraham’s status within it. By linking Apocalypse of Abraham's description of the heavenly realm with cultic practices of the earthly temple, Himmelfarb helps to elucidate the community’s special concerns in a post-70 CE world.406

402 Himmelfarb, Ascent, 66, “The heaven of the Apocalypse of Abraham is clearly a temple.” She continues, “The prominence of the heavenly liturgy lends importance to the liturgy of words on earth, which at the time of the apocalypse provided a substitute for sacrifice, a substitute that in the apocalypse’s view was to be temporary.” On heavenly temples, see Rachel Elior, The Three Temples (New York: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2004). See, too, Mary Douglas, Purity and Danger (New York: Routeledge, 2002); Jonathan Klawans, Impurity and Sin in Ancient Judaism (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004). 403 Himmelfarb, Ascent, 64. 404 Himmelfarb, Ascent, 64. 405 On the mirroring of heaven and earth, see Andrei Orlov, The Greatest Mirror: Heavenly Counterparts in the Jewish Pseudepigrapha (Albany: SUNY Press, 2017). 406 See also James Mueller, “The Apocalypse of Abraham and the Destruction of the Second Jewish Temple.” SBLSP 21 (1982), 341-49.

!146 ORLOV AND PRIESTLY TRADITIONS

Despite the different formal qualities of Apocalypse of Abraham 1-8 and 9-31, one reason scholars argue for the text's unified structure is the space both parts of the text devote to denouncing idolatry. Daniel Harlow has argued that idolatry is the root issue about which this author is concerned and that it is the thread that holds the text together.407 God’s harsh judgment of the idolatrous in chs. 29-30 make this point evident. According to Abraham's vision, idolatry triggers God’s eschatological involvement in history.

Though the impetus for the eschatological judgment, idolatrous practices were hardly new in Israel. Idolatry was a persistent problem throughout Israel's history. False sacrifices and the worshiping of idols became so prevalent—and angered God so severely—that God turned over the temple to the Babylonians, allowing them to plunder and destroy it.408 Though depicted in a more humorous manner, Apocalypse of Abraham's denouncement of idolatry in chapters 1-8 comes with equal destructive force. Abraham's father and his household are judged by God and incinerated in front of the patriarch as a direct result of their refusal to give up idolatry.

Andrei Orlov builds on and extends this argument regarding Apocalypse of Abraham’s monotheistic theology by combining the strands of Himmelfarb’s and Harlow’s interpretations.

He argues that the issue is not merely the distinction between idolatry and proper worship, but that the text presents different manifestations of these two opposing forms of worship—one

407 Harlow, "Idolatry and Alterity.” 408 See especially God’s comments in 25.1-2 and 27.1-3.

!147 heavenly, one earthly. Orlov claims that the text is about priestly roles expanded onto the cosmic scale.409

Orlov’s reading of Apocalypse of Abraham according to these dichotomous priesthoods is fraught with problems. Henze points this out, humorously, when observing, “In the story of

Abraham the iconoclast in chapters 1-8 one looks in vain for any description of Abraham the priest.”410 Much of Orlov’s recent scholarly work has been on how early Jewish texts describe the parallels between heaven and earth. This overarching interest points Orlov down an interpretive path with regards to Apocalypse of Abraham that the text just does not back up. Like

Henze says, the opening eight chapters don’t recount any actions from Abraham or his family that can be called “priestly.” The closest thing to priestly actions in the first eight chapters is

Terah’s exclamation after Abraham mockingly describes the idol Bar-Eshath’s contribution to warming their dinner, when really Bar-Eshath was just incinerated because it was placed too close to the fire. Terah exlaims, “Great is the power of Bar-Eshath” (5.17). Though this is not so much an act of Terah as priest, as his continuing thought shows. “I shall make another [Bar-

Eshath] today, and tomorrow he will make my food” (5.17). Missing from these scenes are depictions of priestly clothing, priestly rituals, or even the measurements of a temple found in chs. 9-31. So, whereas idolatry is discussed by the characters and lambasted by the author, chapters 1-8 don't describe a false, earthly priesthood.

Though this earthly priesthood is lacking from Apocalypse of Abraham 1-8, these chapters do clearly distinguish and reprove idolatrous practices. But the point of emphasis for the

409 Orlov, Priesthood, 3-7. 410 Henze, "Apocalypse," 545.

!148 author is on the latter part of that construction. This reproval of idolatrous practices actually fits under the dominant theme in the Apocalypse of Abraham: God’s judgment. Though the issue of false religious practice identified by Orlov and Harlow is essential to any reading of Apocalypse of Abraham, it must not obscure our recognition of the larger role that judgment plays in the author’s theology. Judgment informs every part of the author’s theological agenda, from his description of the punishment of the wicked and the promised reward for God’s people to the author’s understanding of world history and the role of his community within it.

It was in fact Andrei Orlov who sparked my own reading of Apocalypse of Abraham and the central role judgment plays in the text. He says,

Recall that in the apocalypse the theophanic manifestations of the Deity are repeatedly portrayed as appearing in the midst of flames. Therefore, it is no small matter that the presence of Azazel is also conveyed through similar imagery. Fire is often envisioned as the substance that tests the authenticity and lasting status of things. Apocalypse of Abraham 7.2 relates, "the fire mocks with its flames the things that perish easily." Both animate and inanimate characters of the story, including the infamous idols and their blasphemous makers, are depicted in the text as undergoing fiery probes—ominous tests often leading to a fatal catastrophe. It is by means of fire, for example, that the young Abraham "tests" the wooden statue of his father, the idol Bar-Eshath, and the flames turn it into a pile of ashes. The craftsmen of the idolatrous figures themselves are not exempted from trials by fire. The first, haggadic, section of the text concludes with a scene in which the workshop of Terah is set ablaze as a judgment by God. Later, in the second, apocalyptic section of the work, the patriarch Abraham himself undergoes multiple fiery tests as he progresses into the upper heaven. There is significance in who survives and who perishes in these fiery tests.411

For Orlov, these comments point to the text's central concern of idolatry vs monotheistic practice.

The "significance" is in what distinguishes the ones who passes the test from those who don't.

Orlov rightly points out that fire "tests" the different characters, from Bar-Eshath to Abraham

411 Orlov, Priesthood, 82-3.

!149 himself. For me, though, the Apocalypse of Abraham’s significance lies in this testing. These fiery tests judge individuals.412 And it is the judgment that ultimately matters. Apocalypse of

Abraham’s author uses the fire symbolically to describe the instrument of God’s judgment. So it is applied to Bar-Eshath, Azazel, Abraham, and the people of Israel alike. Whether you pass the judgment or not has to do with the kind of worship each person devoted him/herself to during life. God judges the idols, he judges the patriarch and his family, he judges Israel, and he judges

Israel's enemies. In short, this text communicates: “All will be facing judgment.”413 And because of this, the audience must make sure it does not lose its fidelity to God.

HENZE AND JUDGMENT

Recently, scholars began addressing the role judgment plays in Apocalypse of Abraham's narrative. Henze’s essay in Sybils, Scriptures, and Scrolls begins the conversation.414 Henze reminds us that judgment is essential to the larger Jewish eschatological imagination and therefore warrants closer examination.415 With first-century readers' interest in the topic, it shouldn't surprise us that it is so prevalent in Apocalypse of Abraham.416 What is surprising, though, is the extent to which this theme has been overlooked by scholars of Apocalypse of

Abraham. In recent years, most of the scholarly discussion on this apocalypse has centered on

412 See Andre Orlov, “Arboreal Metaphors and the Divine Body Traditions in the Apocalypse of Abraham” HTR 102.4 (2009), 439-51, Orlov says, "The divine body traditions, and especially their peculiar use of the fire test as the adjudication between true and false representations of the Deity, appear to be present in both the Apocalypse of Abraham and the Ezekelien oracles." 413 Henze, “Apocalypse” 549. 414 See note 21. 415 Though essential to the larger Jewish eschatological imagination, as a subject it is still largely understudied. See, for example, Marius Reiser on judgment in the New Testament. 416 Henze, "Apocalypse," 546.

!150 the priestly components of the text, as evidenced by Harlow and Orlov’s work. Henze notes that while priestly concerns do interest the author of our text, a priestly reading cannot be the primary lens through which we read the entire book. For when this exegetical concern dominates our reading, we miss other significant theological concerns and their greater implications.417

Henze's essay discusses the role judgment plays in four areas of the text: the idolatry of

Abraham's family;418 the followers of Azazel;419 the separation of the faithful;420 and eschatological judgment.421 Henze’s work achieves three significant developments for

Apocalypse of Abraham studies: 1) judgment is the red line that connects the composite parts of

Apocalypse of Abraham, which helps us better understand many facets of this text—from its composition to its sociological interests to the way different themes fit together; 2) the text is certainly interested in faithful practice vs. wicked/idolatrous practice, though the author's emphasis is on what these lead to: judgment, for each and every individual—either for reward and blessing or for punishment and damnation; 3) the extent to which Apocalypse of Abraham fits into the larger eschatological context of Second Temple/Post-Second Temple Judaism.

It is my argument that judgment is the lens through which the author of the Apocalypse of

Abraham views all of Israel’s history, and thus he transforms the promise of eschatological judgment on Israel's enemies into the promised blessing they will receive. I will now turn to the specific scenes in Apocalypse of Abraham that demonstrate the centrality of judgment for the author's theology.

417 Henze, "Apocalypse," 543-6. 418 Henze, "Apocalypse," 547-8. 419 Henze, "Apocalypse," 549-50. 420 Henze, "Apocalypse," 550-4. 421 Henze, "Apocalypse," 554-6.

!151 JUDGMENT PASSAGE 1: APOCALYPSE OF ABRAHAM 5

The opening chapters of Apocalypse of Abraham provide the reader with the first major interpretative decision: how to handle the humorous scenes where Abraham discovers the falsehood of idols. Are they isolated stories that should be read independent of Abraham's heavenly journey in chs. 9-31? By and large, commentators read all of the chapters of

Apocalypse of Abraham as a single narrative.422 I, likewise, find continuity between the opening section of the apocalypse and the more theologically interested account of Abraham’s heavenly journey. The first eight chapters of Apocalypse of Abraham set out to introduce the text's dominant theme. The author does so in a clever and satirical way, poking fun at idolatrous practices but also showing its very real and severe consequences.

Over the course of multiple scenes, Abraham discovers that idols are nothing other than artistic creations of his father, lacking the significance that his family assigns them. Abraham's interaction with a god called Bar-Eshath423 is the most important.424 On first reading, Abraham's interaction with the god Bar-Eshath is a comedic episode that shows the irrationality of pagan

422 Orlov, Priesthood, 11-12, for example, reads 1-8 through a "sacerdotal" lens, one that he sees throughout the entire apocalypse. He writes, "priestly concerns permeate not only the second, apocalyptic section of the work, the patriarch's transition into the heavenly real, but the fabric of the entire pseudepigraphon." 423 On the Semitic background of this figure see L. Ginzberg, "Abraham, Apocalypse of," Jewish Encyclopedia, ed. I. Singer, New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1906), 1.91-2; Alexander Kulik, "The God's of Nahor," JJS 54 (2003): 228-32. 424 Orlov, Priesthood, 24, highlights that Abraham's conflict with Bar-Eshath stands at the center of Apocalypse of Abraham's opening chapters. Harlow, “Idolatry,” 306, places the Bar-Eshath episode in the middle of a chiastic structure dealing with false worship in chapters 1-8: A. Fall of Mar-Umath and the five idols (chaps. 1-2) B. Reflections on the powerlessness of idols (chaps. 3-4) C. Fall of Bar-Eshath and reflections thereon (chap. 5) B`. Reflections on gods, natural elements, and luminaries (chaps. 6-7) A`. Abraham’s departure and the fall of Terah’s temple (chap. 8).

!152 idol worship. Apocalypse of Abraham's author, though, goes beyond the surface-level in his intricately plotted opening section. Abraham's interaction with the Bar-Eshath statue proves instrumental in his burgeoning quest to find the one true God.

Fire is the central element in Bar-Eshath's story. Alexander Kulik traces the origins of the name to the use of fire in the Hebrew Bible.425 Abraham discovers the wooden god when his father commands him to clean up the splinters in his workroom and cook him a meal (5.4). He places Bar-Eshath as a "look out" for the cooking fire (5.7), which ultimately consumes Bar-

Eshath (5.11). As later scenes in Apocalypse of Abraham make clear, God's presence is represented in this text as fire (cf. ch. 18). And, because God's self-identity is as "the judge," the judgment God delivers in this text is also tied up in the symbol of fire (31.12).426

Bar-Eshath's existence is meant to take focus away from reflections that will lead to the true God. With the symbolic reading of fire and Bar-Eshath in mind, we can draw larger conclusions related to idolatrous practice and the author's analysis of it. The god Bar-Eshath exists solely within the context of God's judgment: he comes from fire; he encompasses fire; he loses 'his life' to fire. This existence within the sphere of God's judgment—the certainty that it will come and destroy—parallels the author's later reflections on the nature of pre-destination and God's ultimate judgment on humanity. The Bar-Eshath story sets up what is to follow. With

425 Kulik, Retroverting, 63, discusses the Aramaic origin of the idol’s name which literally translates as “son of fire.” 426 The intertwined symbols of judgment, fire, idolatry, and salvation for God's people is an old motif the biblical and post-biblical writers often invoked. In Moses's speech against idolatry in Deut 4 he warns against the temptation of idolatry: "Take care and watch yourselves closely, so that you do not act corruptly by making an idol for yourselves in the form of any figure" (Deut 4.15-16). Moses's charge is based on the fact that God has rescued the Israelites from the fires of Egypt: But the LORD has taken you and brought you out of the iron-smelter, out of Egypt, to become his very own possession" (Deut 4.20). Moshe Weinfeld, Deuteronomy 1-11. Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 1991), 207, uses the language of "iron blast furnance," and draws parallels to similar fire-related imagery in Ben Sira 38:28 and Isa 48.10. See, too, Second Isaiah's denouncement of idol worship in Isa 44.9-20.

!153 idolatry one can expect to undergo God's judgment. In chapters 7-9 Terah refuses to take

Abraham's observations about idolatry seriously and will meet an end that parallels Bar

Eshath.427

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 2: APOCALYPSE OF ABRAHAM 7

Abraham ultimately leaves his father's household after vocally rebuking Terah's unwavering fidelity to such obvious falsehood. He instead proclaims his intentions to to pursue the one true God. "7.11 I shall seek in your presence the God who created all the gods which we consider! 7.12 For who is it, or which one is it who colored heaven and made the sun golden, who has given light to the moon and the stars with it, who has dried the earth in the midst of many waters, who set you yourself among the elements, and who now has chosen me in the distraction of my mind?—he will reveal himself to us?—He is the God” (7.11-12). Obstinate and resolute, Abraham severs the tie between him and the rest of his family. It is this moment,

427 Orlov has written extensively on the subject of Apocalypse of Abraham and offered numerous important advancements to the field. Some of his interpretive decisions, though, are forced and eisegetical, rather than exegetical. His reading of Bar-Eshath is one example of this. While most of his work has focused on what he calls the sacerdotal aspects of the text, he also identifies an anti-corporeal mystical agenda in Apocalypse of Abraham (see Orlov, "Pteromorphic"). Commenting on the Bar-Eshath episode, Orlov, 25: "Several details in this ironic account of the destroyed anthropomorphic figure that fails the test of the blazing furnace seem to point not only to a stance against idolatry but also to subtle polemics with the divine body ideologies." While notable, Apocalypse of Abraham's depiction of the empty heavenly throne (18.13) and its use of a divine voice (instead of a divine body) is certainly not unique in Jewish literature. Orlov attempts to show that depictions of divine bodies are bad. But that's not the point of the Bar-Eshath's scene. Though his body burns up, this is hardly the emphasis of the scene. Abraham reinforces this point when talking to his father: "6.10 But Bar-Eshath, your god, before he was made had been rooted in the ground. 6.11 Being great and wondrous, with branches, flowers and various beauties. 6.12 And you cut him with an ax, and by your skill the god was made. 6.13 And behold, he has dried up, and his sap is gone. 6.14 He fell from heights to the ground, and he went from greatness to insignificance." The scene serves to underscore the illogic that drives Terah's beliefs. Reading this as a critique on idolatry, as Harlow does, makes some sense. Reading it as a critique on divine body traditions obfuscates its primary concern. God judges idols. God judges idolatry. God judges those who aren't passionately pursuing the one true god (7.12; 26.3).

!154 according to the author of Apocalypse of Abraham, that marks the beginning of Israel's journey and of his father's destruction.428

Apocalypse of Abraham's playful introductory chapters demonstrate the irrationality— and ultimately the dangers—of idolatrous practice.429 Readers of the biblical Abraham story have long been fascinated and confounded over Abraham's selection by God as the man through whom to create God's own people. Genesis begins Abraham's story in media res. "12.1 Now the

Lord said to Abram, "Go from your country and your kindred and your father's house to the land that I will show you. 12.2 I will make you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing" (Gen 12.1-2). With little to work with, early interpreters speculated about what would warrant Abraham's selection by God. The thinking goes, surely God didn't pick Abraham randomly, so what can we make of his selection?

Joshua 24 and Jubilees 12 offer two early creative additions to the story.430 With the inclusion of additional materials to the Genesis text, we can identify certain theological agendas present in the new Abraham stories. For Joshua, this was God's intervening work to forge a people who practiced monotheism. As Joshua leads Israel's tribes to renew their covenant with

428 On monotheistic practice see the comments by Larry Hurtado, "Monotheism," in The Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), 961: "Scholars recognize that in the preexilic period an exclusive devotion to YHWH was not widely or consistently embraced in Israel and Judah, and that their worship included other deities as well." Cf. Mark S. Smith, The Originis of Biblical Monotheism: Israel's Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001); Larry Hurtado, One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998). 429 Alexander Kulik, “The Gods of Nahor: A Note on the Pantehon of the Apocalypse of Abraham,” JJS 54 (2003): 228-32. 430 Other early Abraham traditions regarding idolatry are found in Jubilees 12.1-8 and Judith 5.6-9. James L. Kugel, Traditions of the Bible: A Guide to the Bible As It Was at the Start of the Common Era (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998), 245-57. See E.E. Urbach, “The Rabbinical Laws of Idolatry in the Second and Third Century in Light of Archaeological and Historical Facts,” Israel Exploration Journal, 9.3 (1959) 149-65, 162-65. On the role of scriptural interpretation as a lens through which to understand Apocalypse of Abraham, see the illuminating work of Steven Weitzman, “The Song of Abraham,” HUCA 65 (1994), 21-33.

!155 God, he proclaims the centrality of monotheism to Israel's existence. "Thus says the Lord, the

God of Israel: Long ago your ancestors—Terah and his sons Abraham and Nahor—lived beyond the Euphrates and served other gods. Then I took your father Abraham from beyond the River and led him through all the land of Canaan and made his offspring many" (Joshua 24.2-3).

Relevant for Joshua's audience—and telling about his theological agenda—Joshua's author marks a divine act of separation from past behavior (idolatry) to current chosen status.431 We still don't get why God singled out Abraham. Certainly many (all?) families practiced polytheism in the land beyond the Euphrates. So while divine election is emphasized in Joshua, important interpretive questions about the Abraham narrative persist.

Jubilees 12 offers a more robust account of Abraham's confrontation with idolatry and his challenge to Terah.

1 Abram said to his father Terah, My father." He said, "Yes, my son?" 2 He said, "What help and advantage do we get from these idols before which you worship and prostrate yourself? 3 For there is no spirit in them because they are dumb. They are an error of the mind. Do not worship them. 4 Worship the God of heaven who makes the rain and dew fall on the earth and makes everything from his presence. 5 Why do you worship those things that have no spirit in them? For they are made by by hands and you carry them on your shoulders. You receive no help from them, but instead they are a great shame for those who make them an an error of the mind for those who worship them. Do not worship them."432 6 Then he said to him, "I, too, know (this), my son. What shall I do with the people who have ordered me to serve in their presence? 7 If I tell them what is right, they will kill me because they themselves are attached to them so that they worship and praise them. Be quiet, my son, so that they do not kill you." 8 When he told these things to his two brothers and they became angry at him, he remained silent.433

Jubilees is interested in highlighting Abraham's noteworthy faithfulness and pursuit of God. He's gone from discovering the truthfulness of monotheism to "advocating" for this truth with Terah

431 Matthias Henze, “The Chosenness of Israel in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha,” in The Call of Abraham, eds. G.A. Anderson and J.S. Kaminsky, (Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press, 2013): 170-98. 432 VanderKam, Jubilees, 445, makes the interesting observation that "Abram's last verb in the verse (Do not worship), though spoken to Terah, is plural in form, as if he is talking to a wider audience." 433 Translation from James C. VanderKam, Jubilees 1: A Commentary on the Book of Jubilees 1-21, edited by Sidnie White Crawford (Minneapolis: Fortress Press 2018).

!156 and his brothers.434 Jubilees takes a different tack regarding Terah's service of idols than the author of Apocalypse of Abraham will present. Like Abraham, he realizes the futility of worshiping them and yet, due to some sort of "social pressure," cannot help but to serve them.435

Whereas Apocalypse of Abraham highlights Terah's obstinacy by refusing to hear Abraham's points, Jubilees offers a more generous reading of Terah's culpability.436 This divergence in

Terah's presentation is quite significant for my reading of Apocalypse of Abraham. By refusing to grant any truth in Abraham's critique of idolatry, Terah gives grounds for God's judgment.

More so, the judgment that obstinacy in the face of monotheism receives the perishing flames of judgment creates a direct parallel for the non-faithful at the end of the apocalypse.

The Apocalypse of Abraham sets out to clearly spell out Abraham's path of discovery, as well as denounce the foolishness of idolatry in the process.437 Taking the developments of the

Joshua and Jubilees traditions, Abraham confronts his family's idolatrous traditions first. He is then selected by God second. In the text, God explicitly identifies Abraham's monotheistic search as the impetus for God's selection of Abraham to father God's people on earth. "In the wisdom of your heart you are searching for the God of gods and the Creator. I am he" (8.3-4). This selection leads to Abraham's choice. God calls him to leave his father's house. Will he? The choices individuals make when presented with the opportunity for monotheism determines their divine fate in the face of individual judgment.

434 The language of advocacy comes from VanderKam, Jubilees, 444. 435 Vanderkam, Jubilees, 446. 436 Vanderkam, Jubilees, 446: "Terah, though he was a worshiper of idols according to Josh 24:2, did so only under compulsion, not because he thought that the images really were gods." 437 Box and Landsman, Apocalypse of Abraham, xxiv, suggest that the entire apocalypse helps flesh out the Genesis narrative: "the apocalyptic part of the book is based upon the story of Abraham's sacrifices and trance as described in Gen. v." See, too, 2 Bar 4.2-4; 4 Ezra 3.15; Pseudeo-Philo's Jewish Antiquities 23.6-7; Targum Neofiti Gen 15.7; Targum Pseudo Jonathan Gen 15.7.

!157 Terah's judgment by God receives short, impersonal treatment in Apocalypse of

Abraham. "And I went out. And it came to pass as I was going out, that I had not even gotten as far as going beyond the doors of the courtyard when the sound of thunder came forth and burned

[Terah] and his house and everything in the house, down to the ground [to a distance of] forty cubits" (8.5-6). Equally succinct, Orlov interprets this scene thus: ”The workshop of Terah is set ablaze as a judgment by God."438 The swiftness of God's action to destroy Terah might initially prompt us to think that God offered Terah no opportunity to repent. But one of the points of

Abraham's discussion with his father about the foolishness of idolatry—aside from Abraham coming to his own self-realization—is that Terah had the opportunity to learn from his son and reject idolatry. Terah's anger, instead, "was kindled against [Abraham], since [he] had spoken harsh words against his gods" (4.5). When confronted with the statement of God's singular existence, what will each individual do? Follow Terah and put his/her head in the sand, continuing with wickedness? Or does the audience member go the way of Abraham, trusting God to guide his/her way?

Both paths receive God’s judgment. The difference is in the result of the judgment. When

God finds an individual unworthy, like Terah, fire serves as destruction. When God’s testing fire finds an individual worthy, like with Abraham, fire refines and grants the individual his reward.439

The severity of God's judgment here is not lost on commentators. Henze concludes that for Abraham's family the story "comes to a grizzly end with a judgment scene in which

438 Orlov, Priesthood, 83. 439 Cf. Henze, "Judge," 548.

!158 Abraham's father is severely punished: Terah is burned, together with his house and his idols, and only Abraham escapes."440 The severity of God’s judgment for the unfaithful is a distinguishing characteristic of this author's narrative and theology, which we’ll explore further below when discussing the revealed information God gives Abraham during Abraham’s heavenly journey.

Though Terah's guilt is seemingly clear from the narrative itself, the author of Apocalypse of Abraham leaves no chance for misinterpretation. The author explicitly addresses Terah's stubborn refusal to relinquish his connection to idolatry. We read: "Why did your father Terah not listen to your voice and abandon the demonic idolatry until he perished and all his house with him?" (26.3). Abraham's response is telling: "because he did not will to listen to me" (26.4).

Twice Abraham confronted Terah about the foolishness of idolatry (5.14-17; 6.1-7.12). Both times Terah refused to accept Abraham's observations. Despite a temptation to read God's actions through the lens of pre-determinism, Apocalypse of Abraham insists that individuals are responsible for their own actions.441 Abraham fought against his family’s business and sought the

God of the gods; Terah refused to turn away from his idols, even after his son had shown their futility multiple times.

While later parts of Apocalypse of Abraham focus on communal judgment and its role in

God's eschatological plan, these early chapters of the apocalypse highlight the judgment that comes for everyone individually. Like Terah, Abraham faces God's judgment in the form of

440 Henze, "Apocalypse," 7, emphasis added. 441 For example, we also see this in the Garden of Eden scene where God refers to those like Adam and Eve that follow the path of Azazel as “those who desire evil” (23.13).

!159 fire.442 Once he leaves his father's household, Abraham offers a sacrifice443 to God and through the assistance444 of the heavenly intermediary445 Yahoel446 he ascends447 to heaven in the midst of fire.448 Abraham must pass through God’s presence—God’s fire and judgment—in order to reach the heavenly plane. Abraham is unscathed. By passing through—thus passing—God’s fiery test, God will show Abraham all of human history from the divine perspective.449

442 Orlov, Priesthood, 30, suggests that behind Terah's destruction is the fiery test of Daniel 3 and Shadrach, Mashach, and Abednego. In Apocalypse of Abraham, the "members of Abraham's family, unlike Shadrach, Mashach and Abednego, share the same destiny as idolatrous anthrompomorphic figures that God also turns into piles of ashes.” 443 As Begg “Animal Rite” 44 points out, Apocalypse of Abraham also elaborates on the animal rite narrative of Genesis by providing clarifying details. Begg indentifies three: 1) locating the animals; 2) addition of angels to alleviate the need for an altar; 3) makes the fire phenomena of Gen 15.17 become “the medium in which Abraham and the angel ascend.” 444 Since Gershom Scholem, Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, and Talmudic Tradition (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1965), 23, scholars have often linked the role of Yahoel and the song he teaches Abraham in ch. 17 with Merkabah Mysticism. Collins, 228-29; Orlov, Heavenly Priesthood, 45-46; Steven Weitzman, “The Song of Abraham,” HUCA 56 (1994): 21-33. Cf. Adela Yarbro Collins, Cosmology and Eschatology in Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 34-36; April DeConick, “Heavenly Temple Traditions and Valentinan Worship,” in The Jewish Roots of Christological Mysticism, eds. C.C. Newman, J.R. Davila, & G.S. Lewish (Leiden: Brill, 1999); Ithamar Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism (Leiden: Brill, 1980), 51-57; Michael Stone, “Apocalyptic Literature,” in Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, ed. Michael E. Stone (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984) 416-18. 445 On heavenly intermediaries, see Charles Geischen, Angelomorphic Christology (Leiden: Brill, 1998). 446 On the nature of Yahoel’s name, see Segal, “Heavenly Ascent,” 1362; Orlov, Priesthood, 58-59; Gruenwald, Apocalyptic, 52; Fossum, Name, 318-20. Rowland, “The Visions of God,” 153, says this is part of later Jewish apocalyptic traditions to fill in the theological gaps left by earlier traditions. With Ezekiel 1 and 1 Enoch 14 in mind, Rowland argues that Yahoel and his divine attributes complete the image of God’s form on the divine throne. On the possibility of Leviathan serving as a backdrop for Yahoel, see William Whitney, Two Strange Beasts (Cambridge: HUP, 1992). 447 On Abraham’s ascent to heaven see Martha Himmelfarb, Ascent to Heaven in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 61-66; Gershom Scholem, Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, and Talmudic Tradition (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1960). On the layout of heaven see John C. Poirier, “The Ouranology of the Apocalypse of Abraham,” JSJ 35.4 (2004): 391-408. 448 On the influence of Ezekiel traditions on the Apocalypse of Abraham see Collins, 227-32; Ithmar Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism (Leiden: Brill, 1980), 56-7; Christopher, Rowland, The Open Heaven: A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early Christianity (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 1982), 86-7. 449 On the nature of God’s heavenly revelation, see Scholem, Trends, 72.

!160 Abraham's judgment scene, then, is less explicit than Terah’s.450 But the detail that

Abraham travels to heaven through the fire helps readers better unpack the complexity of God's judgment. As Orlov has demonstrated, fire serves symbolically in Apocalypse of Abraham to represent God's judgment.451 "[Fire] serves as the ultimate test for distinguishing inauthentic and idolatrous representations of the Deity from the true counterparts."452 In the text of Apocalypse of

Abraham fire is the tool through which God separates. God separates and God judges those that are and are not worthy. God's fire burns to identify, distinguish, and properly dole out consequences for the "inauthentic and idolatrous" and the "true" expressions of faith. So while

450 On the mirroring of good and evil in the Apocalypse of Abraham see Andrei Orlov, “‘The Likeness of Heaven’: Kavod of Azazel in the Apocalypse of Abraham” in idem. Dark Mirrors: Azazel and Satanael in Early Jewish Demonology, 11-26 (Albany: SUNY Press, 2011). Orlov, Atoning Dyad, 131, refers to Abraham as a "sacrificial offering to the Lord," emphasizing his cultic role instead of highlighting his status as "judged" as I do. 451 Orlov, "Arboreal," 449. See below. 452 Orlov, Priesthood, 83. Cf. Orlov, Priesthood, 51-53; Halperin, The Faces of the Chariot, 109-110. Orlov, Preisthood, 30, correctly identifies the continuity of this fire expression with earlier biblical traditions: "The symbolism of fire, so prominent in the biblical theophanies, was not completely abandoned by the authors of the Apocalypse of Abraham, who repeatedly choose to portray the divine presence through the imagery of the Voice coming in a stream of fire." Orlov uses this observation to help develop his argument for the Deuternomic tradition's that preferred divine-voice representations over any physical representations of the divine. While that particular matter is beyond my interest in this chapter, I remain indebted to Orlov's work that traces the background of the symbolic way this apocalypse utilizes fire for divine representation and judgment. John Poirier, Ouranology, 394, also shows that Apocalypse of Abraham's author makes a theological point about God's heavenly presence when fire sits on the throne in ch. 18. I'll return to this idea below when I look at God's final words in Apocalypse of Abraham. God says that he is the judge. Since fire stands in for God in the heavenly realm, and God is the judge, then fire as the tool of God's judgment makes perfect symbolic sense throughout Apocalypse of Abraham as a whole.

!161 Terah's fiery examination leads to destruction, Abraham's fiery test453 leads to heavenly reward.454

Andrei Orlov has investigated divine body traditions and found support for Jewish authors using fire as a test of judgment between true and false representations of God. He writes:

The divine body traditions, especially their peculiar use of the fire test in the adjudication between true and false representations of the Deity, appear to be present in both the Apocalypse of Abraham and Ezekielian oracles, since the anointed cherub is first depicted as passing the firery test (“in the midst of the stones of fire you walked”) and then failing it (“I brought forth fire from the midst of you; it consumed you, and I turned you to ashes”).455

Orlov is speaking specifically about Bar-Esath and his status as an idol. The author of

Apocalypse of Abraham pushes this distinction between the false and the true one step further.

God’s fiery tests are not only between true and false representations of God, they also distinguish between those who follow and fail to follow God’s ways.456 The author of Apocalypse of

Abraham takes this fiery test quite literally. God presents the fire of judgment to Terah, who is consumed because he is unfaithful. Likewise, God presents the fire of judgment to Abraham,

453 Orlov, Priesthood, 56-7, reads Abraham’s judgment and his ascension as an “aural theophanic manifestation of the Deity.” His reading is guided too strongly by his argument for an corporeal polemic in the text. The emphasis rightly belongs on Abraham’s privileged status for passing God’s judgment to enter heaven and explore its heavenly contents—as Orlov himself notes elsewhere (Priesthood, 82-3). 454 In its typically strange fashion, Abraham’s ascension in the apocalypse has one peculiar detail: he travels to heaven on the wing of one of the birds he’s gathered for the sacrifice (15). On the ascension, see Mary Dean-Otting, Heavenly Journeys: A Study of the Motif in Hellenistic Jewish Literature (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1984): 248-55; John C. Poirier, “On a Wing and a Prayer: The Soteriology of the Apocalypse of Abraham,” in This World and the World to Come, ed. Daniel Gurtner (London: T & T Clark, 2011), 87-97. 455 Orlov, Atoning Dyad, 150 n. 400. Orlov, Atoning Dyad, 150 n. 401 identifies the traditions that interpreted Abraham as surviving God's fiery test based on the etymology of Ur, the land from which he came. Cf. Geza Vermes, Scripture and Tradition in Judaism (Leiden: Brill, 1973), 88. 456 In Judith 8.25-27 we find a parallel understanding of God’s fiery tests: "In spite of everything let us give thanks to the Lord our God, who is putting us to the test as he did our ancestors. Remember what he did with Abraham, and how he tested Isaac, and what happened in Syrian Mesopotamia, while he was tending the sheep of Laban, his mother's brother. For he has not tried us with fire, as he did them, to search their hearts, nor has he taken vengeance on us; but the Lord scourges those who are close to him in order to admonish them."

!162 who is guided by Yahoel "to the edge of the fiery flame" (15.3). Judged to be worthy, Abraham along with Yahoel "ascended like great winds to the heaven which was fixed on the expanses" (15.5).

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 3: APOCALYPSE OF ABRAHAM 13

When Abraham is in the process of organizing his sacrifice to God before his ascension,

"an impure bird flew down on the carcasses, and I drove it away" (13.3). Yahoel identifies the bird as Azazel, a figure based on the scapegoat tradition of Leviticus 16 and familiar from

Second Temple Jewish literature.457 The representation and function of Azazel in the Apocalypse of Abraham is complicated. He is the antagonist of the apocalyptic section (9-31) and attempts to thwart Abraham’s access to heaven (13.1-14.14). Though Yahoel offers a rebuke of Azazel in chapter 13, he ultimately proves integral to God’s plan for Abraham’s seed in history and receives no eternal rebuke from God (20.1-7).

In chapter 13, though, Azazel serves as as foil character to both Yahoel and Abraham.458

With Abraham and Yahoel's purposes aligned, Azazel visits and attempts to prevent Abraham's heavenly journey. This preventative attempt is a motif common in literature concerning heavenly travels. Joseph Schultz points out that there are two lines of thought in Early Jewish literature concerning a human’s access to the divine world.459 The first depicts angelic figures assisting

457 The figure of Azazel is found in Leviticus 16.8-10 and later expanded in various traditions (4Q180; 1 Enoch 6.7; 10.4-8; 13.1-2).On Azazel see Robert Helm, “Azazel in Early Jewish Tradition,” AUSS 32.3 (1994): 217-26; William Shea, “Azazel in the Pseudepigrapha,” JATS 13 (2002): 1-9. 458 It is in this role as a foil character that Himmelfarb and Orlov make their comments about the heavenly priesthood and its evil/earthly counterparts. 459 Joseph Schultz, “Angelic Opposition to the Ascension of Moses and the Revelation of Law” JQR 61 (1970-710), 282-307, 287-290.

!163 seers on their journey (3 Enoch, Ascension of Isaiah), while others describe the way heavenly beings actively try to thwart heavenly access (Gedullat Mosheh, Hagigah 15b). According to

Schultz, Apocalypse of Abraham falls into the latter category because “Abraham is warned to keep away from the celestial heights lest he be destroyed.”460

Azazel’s attempt to prevent Abraham's heavenly access backfires and leads to a judgment scene for Azazel.

Building on the scapegoat tradition of Leviticus 16,461 Apocalypse of Abraham has

Abraham curse Azazel. Abraham says, “14.5 May you be the fire brand of the furnace of the earth! Go, Azazel, into the untrodden parts of the earth. 14.6 Since your inheritance are those who are with you, with men born with the stars and clouds. And their portion is you, and they come into being through your being. 14.7 And justice is your enmity. Therefore through your own destruction vanish from before me” (14.5-7). Built right into God's creation is moral division. Segal observes that the differentiation in Apocalypse of Abraham (comparing Terah and

Abraham, comparing Azazel and Abraham) gives “the basic order of the universe . . . a moral coding.”462 With Azazel’s lot463 on earth and Abraham’s in heaven, a demand is made on the righteous to avoid sin, for even angels find heaven inaccessible if they aren’t faithful.464 And,

460 Schultz, 288. 461 Grabbe, "The Scapegoat Tradition"; Stökl Ben Ezra, The Impact of Yom Kippur on Early Christianity; 1 Enoch 10.4-7; 4Q180 1.1-10; 4Q181; Calum Carmichal, “The Origin of the Scapegoat Ritual,” VT 50:2 (2000): 167-82; Jacqueline C.R. de Roo, “Was the Goat for Azazel Destined for the Wrath of God?” Biblica 81.2 (2000): 233-42); Lester Grabbe, “The Scapegoat Tradition,” JSJ 18.2 (1987): 152-167.. On Abraham as a heavenly scapegoat figure, see Orlov, Atoning Dyad. 462 Segal, Heavenly Ascent, 1363. 463 On the issue of eschatological lots see Orlov, Priesthood, 109-113. For the biblical background, see Levitcus 16.8-10. 464 Stone, Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, CRINT 2.2: 418; Collins, Apocalyptic Imagination, 229; Box and Landsman, The Apocalypse of Abraham, xxi.

!164 with everything in Apocalypse of Abraham, judgment is integral to this division of the faithful from the wicked.

Abraham’s curse in chapter 14 serves as a type of judgment scene for Azazel.465 As previously discussed, fire repeatedly throughout Apocalypse of Abraham serves as a dividing test between the faithful and the unfaithful.466 Azazel has already been judged. He can no longer reside in heaven and instead must wander and lead the wicked of earth (14.5). Thus, in

Abraham's curse of him, this judged status is highlighted: "May you be the fire brand of the furnace of the earth" (14.5). May Azazel exist as the judged one on earth. The wicked will follow him. Azazel has no one to blame: "through your own destruction vanish from before me" (14.7).

His actions placed him at odds with God. With his lot on earth, he will serve as the contrast to the people of faith, for "justice is your enmity" (14.6). Unlike Yahoel who is linked with the divine through name and action, Azazel is linked with the wrath of the divine through his lot on the earth and his status as firebrand.

Before turning to several judgment scenes Abraham encounters in his heavenly journey, I must first deal with the means by which God reveals the content of history to Abraham. For it is from this mode of revelation that we can see the centrality of judgment to the way God has ordered all of creation. John Collins points out that “The Apocalypse of Abraham is exceptional among the Jewish apocalypses in combining the motif of the heavenly journey with the review

465 4Q180 1.5-10 offers a parallel that connects Azazel with judgment. "[And] interpretation concerning Azaz'el and the angels wh[o came to the daughters of man] [and s]ired themselves giants. And concerning Azaz'el [is written . . .] [to love] injustice and to let him inherit evil for all [his] ag[e . . .] (of the) judgments and the judgment of the council of [. . .]. Florentino Garcia Martinez and Eibert Tigchelaar, The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 1.371-3. 466 Reading Abraham as one of the cultic animals of Leviticus, Orlov, Atoning Dyad, 148, "One important motif that further supports this supposition is Abraham's testing by fire. . . . We have already noted that one significant aspect of the immolated goat ritual was the destruction of the sacrificial animal's body by fire." More relevant for my interests, Orlov, Atoning Dyad, 150 n. 400 & 401

!165 and periodization of history, characteristic of the historical apocalypses.”467 Over the last 50 years, scholars have attempted to categorize, delineate, and group the plethora of Israel’s writings from the Babylonian Exile to the Rabbinic period.468 One way of doing so for apocalyptic literature is to delineate the texts which break history into a clear, standardized pattern from those which are more interested in the heavenly landscape—what it looks like, who’s there, etc.469 Apocalypse of Abraham is a notable exception. Not only because of its combination of these two revelatory interests, as Collins points out, but also because this text’s hero directly interacts with the historicization—in image form—while in heaven. God does not merely reveal information. God offers an interactive experience.

In this apocalypse, Abraham’s heavenly journey is meant to provide him the opportunity to experience the historical periods of the world from God’s perspective. In the style of the authors of biblical narratives, the action of the Apocalypse of Abraham moves swiftly and covers expansive ground. Once in heaven, Abraham is granted access to the “picture” of God’s plan for

467 Collins, Imagination, 225. 468 In recent years, the boundary between "biblical texts" and the "extra-biblical texts" has become even more blurred. See the publications of Eva Mroczek, "The Hegemony of the Biblical in the Study of Second Temple Literature," JAJ 6.1 (2015): 2-35; Richard Bauckham, James R. Davila, and Alexander Panayotov, eds. Old Testament Pseudepigrapha: More Noncanonical Scriptures (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2013); Gabriele Boccaccini, "Is Biblical Literature Still a Useful Term in Scholarship?" in What is Bible?, eds. Finsterbusch and Lange (Leuven: Peeters, 2012), 41-52. 469 See Collins, Apocalyptic Imagination; Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature between the Bible and the Mishna. Second edition (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2011); John J. Collins, "Apocalypse," in Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), 341-5.

!166 history.470 The narrator highlights a small but telling sampling of his sweeping historical account.471 Abraham’s picture of human history consists of the following: Adam, Eve, and

Azazel in the Garden of Eden (23.1-13)472; sins of the wicked and of Israel (24.1-25.6); the destruction of the temple (27.1-29.3)473; the appearance of a false messiah (29.4-13); and judgement and salvation at the close of the age (29.14-21). The revelation of these five historical units to Abraham comprise the bulk of Abraham’s visionary experience.

I’m particularly interested in this created plan for history. Abraham will see several notable aspects of divine judgment. And each will be corroborated because they exist in this picture of history—the one viewed from the divine perspective—and the one that dictates the earthly outcomes. The author says:

470 Orlov, Priesthood, 154-179, connects this picture with the pargod tradition. See, too, Scholem, Major Trends, 72, "Among the most important objects which Metatron describes to Rabbi Ishmael is the cosmic veil or curtain before the throne, which conceals the glory of God form the host of angels. The idea of such a veil appears to be very old; references to it are to be found already in Aggadic passages from the second century. The existence of veils in the resplendent sphere of the aeons is also mentioned in a Coptic writing belonging to the Gnostic school, the Pistis Sophia. Now, this cosmic curtain, as it is described in the Book of Enoch, contains the images of all things which since the day of creation have their pre- existing reality, as it were, in the heavenly sphere. All generations and all their lives and actions are woven into this curtain; he who sees it penetrates at the same time into the secret of Messianic redemption, for like the course of history, the final struggle and the deeds of the Messiah are already pre- existentially real and visible. As we have seen, this combination of knowledge relating to the Merkabah and the Hekhalot with a vision of the Messianic end—the inclusion, that is to say, of apocalyptic and eschatological knowledge—is very old. It dominates the Apocalypse of Abraham and the Book of Enoch no less than the various Hekhalot tracts four or eight centuries later.” 471 Orlov, Priesthood, 177, "Another important conceptual point that brings the depictions found in the Apocalypse of Abraham very close to the Pargod tradition is that the visionary sees not just a revelation, but a revelation depicted on a physical medium." 472 See J. van Ruiten, “Eden and the Temple: The Rewriting of Genesis 2:4-3.24 in the Book of Jubilees,” in Paradise Interpreted, ed. G.P. Luttikhuizen, Leiden: Brill, 1999. 473 On Apocalypse of Abraham adapting Israel's cultic practices after the destruction of the temple, see Orlov, Atoning Dyad. An example of Orlov's peculiar reading, 83, “The Apocalypse of Abraham makes a similar conceptual move in the absence of the earthly temple: it attempts to channel the familiar realities of the atoning ritual into its new eschatological and celestial framework. It does this by portraying the main characters in the apocalypse as emblematic sacerdotal agents. As we have already mentioned, Abraham and Azazel are both eschatologically refashioned into the cultic "animals" of the atoning rite."

!167 22.1 “And I said, ‘Eternal Mighty One! What is this picture of creation?’ 22.2 And he said to me, ‘This is my will for existence in design, and it was pleasing to me. And then, afterward, I gave them a command by my word and they came into being. And whatever I had determined to be had already been previously depicted and stood before me in this, as you have seen, before they were created” (22.1-2).

God shows Abraham the blueprint for the world’s design. While this may not seem notable to us, it is absolutely extraordinary. Here, Israel’s father, Abraham, is granted full access to all of God’s plans for human history. Abraham’s interaction with God’s blueprint comes immediately following the author’s quotation of Genesis 15.474 But our author again keeps judgment central to the revelation. Abraham does not just see that his seed will be as numerous as the stars, but so too the numerous descendants will be the ones “set apart for me in my lot with Azazel” (20.5).

The people in God’s blueprint, the people in God’s world are clearly demarcated from those whose judgment will result in destruction. By expanding the details of the Genesis 15 account, the author has the opportunity to discuss the presence of evil in the world, a central concern for the post-70 apocalypses in general.The blueprint includes the problematic presence of evil during periods of Israel’s history right alongside of God’s final judgment:

22.4 These who are on the left side are a multitude of tribes who were before and who are destined to be after you: some for judgment and justice, and others for revenge and perdition at the end of the age. 22.5 Those on the right side of the picture are the people set apart for me of the people that are with Azazel. These are the ones I have destined to be born of you and to be called my people.

The comfort to Abraham, and by extension the text’s audience, comes from the way that this picture corroborates God’s promise to them. Abraham casts his eyes (from the heavenly

474 Genesis 15.5: “Look towards heaven and count the stars, if you are able to count them.’ Then he said to him, ‘So shall your descendants be.” ÔK`Ro√rÅz h™RyVhˆy hñO;k w$øl rRmaâø¥yÅw M¡DtOa râOÚpVsIl l™Ak…w;t_MIa My$IbDkwâø;kAh ‹rOpVs…w hDm◊y#AmDÚvAh a∞Dn_fR;bAh ‹rRma‹ø¥yÅw hDx…w#jAh w%øtOa a°Exwø¥yÅw

On the influence of Genesis 15 on the Apocalypse of Abraham see Christopher Begg, “Rereading of the ‘Animal Rite’ of Genesis 15 in Early Jewish Narratives,” CBQ 50 (1988): 36-46.

!168 perspective) onto the picture that comprises all of human history. He can look this way and see the Garden of Eden—the creation account (23.4);475 he can look the other way and see the destruction of the temple—the contemporary context from which the story is written (ch. 27).476

The interpretation of the people on the left side of the heavenly picture gives us our first reference to revenge in the text. The issue of revenge proves to be directly related to the severity

Apocalypse of Abraham’s view of justice and judgment that I discussed above. Some from the left side of the picture will be judged and receive justice. Others, though, and here we are to think of Israel's enemies, will be judged unworthy, thus receiving "revenge and perdition" (22.4). As will become more clear in the final revelation (chapter 29), this revenge is one that Abraham's community participates in. They partner with God to exact revenge on the wicked.

Here, though, we can conclude the following about what Abraham learns about judgment.

Judgment is already (in the heavenly blueprint) and not yet (on the earthly scene). As to which group individuals fall in, God provides some clarity. Those who partner with Azazel, those who willingly or unwillingly refuse the way of God for the way of Azazel face a certain judgment.

God refers to those people as "desir[ing] evil" and those "whom I have hated" (23.13). Here we

475 Looking upon the garden of Eden Abraham observes, “behind the tree was standing, as it were, a serpent in form . . . and he was holding in his hands the grapes of the tree and feeding the two whom I saw entwined with each other” (23.7-8). From this point of view, historical distance is no distance at all. For background on Tree of Life imagery and how it factors into this scene, see Veronika Bachman, “Rooted in Paradise? The Meaning of the ‘Tree of Life’ in 1 Enoch 24-25 Reconsidered,” JSOP 19.2 (2009): 83-107. On Eve’s role in this scene see Megan DeFranza, “Transformation of Deception,” Priscilla Papers 23.2 (2009): 21-28. On Adamic traditions and later interpretations of the Tree of Life as Divine manifestation see Orlov, Priesthood, 86-92. 476 On the role of the temple and God’s created order, see G.K. Beale, The Temple and the Church’s Mission, (Downers Grove: Apollos, 2004); M. Barker, Creation, (London: T&T Clark, 2010); J. van Seters, “Solomon’s Temple: Fact and Ideology in Biblical and Near Easter Historiography,” CBQ 59 (1997): 45-57.

!169 have familiar biblical phrasing but one that takes on greater significance within this author’s vengeful theology.

Throughout the apocalypse, God is disgusted by those that have persecuted the Jewish community. And God's revenge, the community's revenge, will send them off to perdition.

Abraham's line, those "called to be my people" can rest assured that God grants them their privileged status (22.5). Though, the lesson of Terah remains firmly planted in the audiences brain. The temptation of idolatry is strong—either for professional reasons, like Terah and

Abraham’s brother Nahor, or for theological reasons.477 The audience must heed God’s threats to the idolatrous.

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 4: APOCALYPSE OF ABRAHAM 29

One of the traditional eschatological features of final judgment is the role of the Messiah.478 The

Apocalypse of Abraham takes this expected feature and inverts it, showing the ways that messianic expectation can lead people astray, by either intentionally or inadvertently causing them participate in idolatrous worship. The messianic passage is difficult for interpreters and we must unpack it, but there is a strong case that the author of Apocalypse of Abraham includes a contemporary argument about theology and different messianic groups.

At the end of Abraham’s vision of history we find this description:

477 This temptation of idolatry is old indeed. Cf. n. 39 above. Commenting on Second Isaiah's satire on idol worship, Joseph Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40-55. Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 2000), 241, comments, "the prohibition of making and offering cult to images is a key feature of what we may call Deuteronomic orthodoxy and orthopraxy and, as such, is enshrined in the Decalogue (Exod 20:4-6; Deut 5:8-10; also, Exod 34:17; Deut 4:15-18; 27:15; Lev 19:4; 26:1." 478 For a helpful list of eschatological traditions in the Apocalypse of Abraham see Gregory C. Jenks, The Origins and Early Development of the Antichrist Myth (New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1991), 285.

!170 29.4 And I looked and saw a man going out from the left side of the heathen. Men and women and children, great crowds, went out from the side of the heathen and they worshiped him. 29.5 And while I was still looking, those on the right side went out, and some shamed this man, and some struck him, and some worshiped him. 29.6 And I saw that as they worshiped him, Azazel ran and worshiped, and having kissed his face he turned and stood behind him. 29.7 And I said, “Eternal Might One! Who is this shamed and struck man, worshiped by the heathen with Azazel?” 29.8 And he answered and said, “Hear, Abraham, the man whom you saw shamed and struck and again worshiped is the laxity of the heathen for the people who will come from you in the last days, in this twelfth hour of the age of impiety. 29.9 And in the [same] twelfth period of the close of my age I shall set up the man from your seed which you saw. 29.10 Everyone from my people will [finally] admit him, while the sayings of him who was as if called by me will be neglected in their minds. 29.11 And that you saw going out from the left side of the picture and those worshiping him, this [means that] many of the heathen will hope in him. 29.12 And those of your seed you saw on the right side, some shaming and some striking him, and some worshiping him, many of them will be misled on his account. 29.13 And he will tempt those of your seed who have worshiped him. (29.4-13)

The striking resemblance of the man from the left to the description of Jesus’s passion in the gospels has not been lost on interpreters.479 Rather, they have most often used this passage to challenge the integrity of Apocalypse of Abraham and, consequentially, confused its theological message.

The first interpretive issue with this passage has to do with the layer of composition that produced this scene. If this is a reference to Jesus—and a positive reference—then it is a later addition to the original body of text. Or at least, so the reasoning goes.480 Traditionally this layer was attributed to a much later editorial hand, one from the group of the Bogomils (10th c. CE).

“This passage must be taken as a reference to Christ, although the suggestion that he is

479 Ryszard Rubinkiewicz, “The Apocalypse of Abraham,’ OTP 1: 681-705, 684; J. Licht, “Abraham, Apocalypse of,” EJ, 2:126-7; Michael E. Stone, “Apocalyptic Literature,” in Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984), 415-6; Robert G. Hall, “The ‘Christian Interpolation’ in the Apocalypse of Abraham,” JBL 107.1 (1988): 107-12; J. Licht, “Abraham, Apocalypse of” in Encylopedia Judaica 2 (Jerusalem: Thomson Gale, 2007): 1:288-89. 480 See Harlow, “Anti-Christian,” 170-75 for a review of the literature on this passage.

!171 worshiped by Azazel is unorthodox and reflects a sectarian, Bogomil viewpoint.”481 By reading

29.4-13 as a late addition, there are serious question to the tradition history of Apocalypse of

Abraham. Most importantly, does its theology reflect an early Jewish author at all?

This seems to be putting the cart before the horse. The portrayal of the figure in ch. 29 is hardly positive: he comes from the group on the left side of the picture (29.4), he misleads

Abraham’s seed (29.12), he receives veneration482 (29.12), and he is a temptation for the group on the right (29.13).483 Whoever this person is, he is not someone the author portrays in a complimentary manner. God tells Abraham that God divided history into twelve periods. After them, God will initiate the eschatological age. "I set twelve periods for this impious age to rule over the heathens and over your seed, and what you have seen will be until the end of time" (29.2). The messianic figure is tied to the twelfth hour of the impious age. This figure's role in the impious age, along with the negative description of him, has led more recent scholars to abandon reading the figure of ch.29 in light of Jesus.

Daniel Harlow, however, has called on scholars to revisit the issue and has argued persuasively that not only is 29.4-13 about Jesus, but that it is integral to the original narrative of

Apocalypse of Abraham.484 Harlow concludes that the figure in ch. 29 “bears an uncanny

481 Collins, Imagination, 230. The opposing perspective is presented in Kulik, Retroverting, 51. 482 Orlov, Atoning Dyad, 122, "Azazel's sudden appearance in the eschatological narrative in chapter 29 is also distinctive and may indicate that the messianic tradition in the Apocalypse of Abraham is closely connected to the Yom Kippur rite. This possibility is further strengthened by the messianic character's reception by Azazel, which is again surrounded by distinctive cultic elements." 483 The reference to Azazel worshipping the figure is not in and of itself problematic. For, after all, the biblical accounts do attribute the recognition of Jesus’s divine status by demons (e.g. Mark 1.24) and describe Satan entering and working through Judas to bring about Jesus’s arrest (Luke 22.3; John 13.27). It is not a far step from there to say that Azazel, the Satan figure in this apocalypse, not only recognized Jesus’s status but worshipped him too. 484 Harlow, “Anti-Christian.”

!172 resemblance to Jesus of Nazareth.”485 According to Harlow, he does so for three reasons: “first, his being shamed and struck recall Jesus’ passion, in particular his being flogged and humiliated by Roman soldiers and then being mocked at the foot of the cross; second, his being worshipped by the heathen and by some of Abraham’s seed evokes veneration of Jesus by both Jews and non-Jews in the decades after his death; third, his being kissed by Azazel echoes not only Judas

Iscariot’s betrayal of Jesus with a kiss, known in all three of the Synoptic Gospels, but also the tradition known from the Gospels of Luke and John that Judas was possess by Satan, who entered him and inspired him to hand Jesus over to the authorities.”486

Harlow reads the passage in light of his overall understanding of the text, namely that author is chiefly concerned with the distinction between idolatry and true worship. For this reason, the Jesus figure of ch. 29 is viewed problematically because he accepts worship—false worship—and leads people astray. Even some of Abraham's seed. A true Messiah, unlike Jesus, will inspire the worship of the one true God. He will most surely not accept false worship himself. For the kind of worship this Jesus figure represents in ch. 29, this kind of idolatry in the author's mind, results in judgment.

Harlow’s conclusion that Apocalypse of Abraham “is a deliberate distortion of traditions known from the New Testament” is persuasive.487

485 Harlow, 175. 486 Harlow, 175-6. 487 Harlow, 177. Harlow goes on to show why objections to his reading fail to convince. In particular, he discuss the fact that person in ch. 29 appears to be a savior figure, but neatly and concisely demonstrates the range of possibility behind the language of this figure in Slavonic. Second, he correctly emphasizes that though the man in ch. 29 came from the side of the heathen, we are not required to see this person as ethnically Gentile instead of ethnically Jewish. The success of the Jesus movement among Gentiles can surely support this.

!173 Like other apocalyptic literature, the author of the Apocalypse of Abraham retains the notion that a chosen figure, a savior figure, will be sent by God at the end of time to restore

Israel’s fortunes and usher in eschatological judgment. The true chosen one appears in this text only briefly. “Then I shall sound the trumpet from the sky, and I shall send my chosen one, having in him one measure of all power, and he will summon my people blamed among the heathen” (31.1). This messiah will come immediately prior God’s final judgment (31.2) and invite the faithful among God’s people, that is Apocalypse of Abraham’s audience, to participate in the acts of inflicting punishment on those not worthy to survive God’s judgment. Speaking of

God’s chosen one identified in ch. 31, Harlow summarizes the author’s perspective on messiahship: “What makes this figure a true messiah is not simply that he comes from

Abraham’s line but that he neither invites nor accepts worship.”488

While many might be worshiping the false messiah, even some from Abraham’s seed, the revelation to Abraham makes clear that this is a distraction from God’s message and the judgment that will come imminently on the heals of the contemporary period (29.9-13, 14). The revelation Abraham receives about the false messiah ch. 29 is meant to refocus the audience on the proper point of importance: God’s judgment.

JUDGMENT PASSAGE 5: APOCALYPSE OF ABRAHAM 29-31

The final part of the plan that God shows Abraham is the eschatological final judgment, where not only individuals are judged but all of humanity. God tells Abraham, “In the close of the twelfth hour, in the ceasing of the age of impiety, before the age of justice will start to grow,

488 Harlow, “Anti-Christian,” 175.

!174 my judgment will come upon the heathen who have acted wickedly through the people of your seed who have been set apart for me” (29.14).The distinction between these two mirrored sides is highlighted throughout the text.489 The new age, the age of justice, will replace the age of impiety

(29.14). The age of human history is the age of impiety and the coming age of justice is the age where all will be set right for Abraham’s seed (29.14). The split between the two periods is crystal clear, since it will be the period of God’s active communal eschatological judgment that separates the two: “before the age of justice will start to grow, my judgment will come upon the heathen who have acted wickedly” (29.14).

That judgment is the turning point between ages is not special in and of itself.490 But the

Apocalypse of Abraham’s combination of the devalued messianic role, the centrality of the judgment scene as the dividing point between the two ages, and the reward that righteous receive following judgment is noteworthy. Abraham’s seed, the righteous ones “kept by me by number, hastening in the glory of my name to the place prepared beforehand” (29.17), receive as their reward a participatory role in the punishment enacted against those judged to be wicked.

29.19 And they will rejoice over me forever, and they will destroy those who have destroyed them, and they will rebuke those who have rebuked them by mockery, and those who spit in their faces will be rebuked by me, 29.20 when they will see me joyfully rejoicing with my people and receiving those who return to me in repentance. (29.19-20)

While there is no resurrection in the Apocalypse of Abraham, like eschatological rewards in other texts, the faithful from Abraham’s seed will find a resting spot with God, full of

489 Apocalypse of Abraham 22.4: “Those who are on the left side are a multitude of tribes who were before and who are destined to be after you: some for judgment and justice, and others for revenge and perdition.” Cf. Henze, “Apocalypse," 550-4. 490 We see this, for example, in both 2 Baruch 50.1-51.16 and 4 Ezra 13.25-39.

!175 rejoicing.491 The rejoicing in Apocalypse of Abraham, though, comes not simply from being in the divine presence, but because the faithful get to participate in the rebuke and destruction of those that mistreated them. Judgment is so central to Apocalypse of Abraham because, in part, it is intricately related to the reward the author imagines for the faithful. Being with God, yes, is what will sustain the people in the age of justice (29.18), but the real reward that makes their present suffering sustainable and their fight to adhere strictly to monotheistic practices worth it is that they themselves will punish their enemies: “they will destroy those who have destroyed them, and they will rebuke those who have rebuked them by mockery” (29.19).

It is with this promise of reward and punishment that Abraham’s vision of creation ends and he finds himself back on earth (30.1). Lacking clarity about the eschatological judgment,

Abraham asks for an interpretation. God responds by explicating the exact nature of the ten plagues that characterize the period of judgment (30.3-8). Then God further clarifies the importance of this final judgment. The brutality of this description deserves to be quoted in full.

31.2 And I shall burn with fire those who mocked them ruling over them in this age and I shall commit those who have covered me with mockery to the reproach of the coming age. 31.3 Since I have destined them to be food for the fire of hell, and ceaseless soaring in the air of the underground depths, the contents of a worm’s belly. 31.4 For those who do justice, who have chosen my will and clearly kept my commandments, will see them. And they will rejoice with joy at the destruction of the abandoned. 31.5 And those who followed after the idols and after their murders will rot in the womb of the Evil One—the belly of Azazel, and they will be burned by the fire of Azazel’s tongue. 31.6 Since I waited until they came to me, and they did not want it. 31.7 And they glorified an alien. 31.8 And they joined one to whom they had not been allotted, and they abandoned the prevailing Lord. 31.9 Therefore hear, Abraham, and see! Behold, your seventh generation will go with you. 31.10 And they will go out into an alien land. 31.11 And they will be

491 Collins, 231, comments on the nature of the hope beyond this world: “There is no reference to resurrection, but the mockers will be food for the fire of Hades, and the righteous had been seen in the Garden of Eden in chapter 21. The eschatological scenario remains elliptic, but it is apparent that both individual retribution after death and the future restoration of the nation are envisaged. The hope of humanity lies beyond the present world, or beyond the present age.”

!176 enslaved and distressed for about one hour of the impious age. 31.12 And of the people whom they will serve—I am the judge. (31.2-12).

There are three essential conclusions to draw from this quotation. First, the judgment about which Abraham is confused is described in graphic detail. Those that mocked God’s people, thereby mocking God, will be burned with fire (31.2). They will suffer God’s judgment. They will not pass the fiery test. Moreover, the wicked will be the food for the fires of hell itself

(31.3). God offered them a chance to return after Azazel led them astray but they did not return

(31.5-6). The description of the punishment for those judged as wicked is the description of a vengeful God getting back those that harmed his people and causing them severe torment.

The second takeaway from this passage is that God again emphasizes that part of the reward for the righteous who cheer on the punishment of the wicked. Echoing God’s comments in 29.18-20, God tells Abraham, “For those who do justice, who have chosen my will and clearly kept my commandments, will see [the wicked]. And they will rejoice with joy at the destruction of the abandoned” (31.4). There is a voyeuristic blood lust here. In Apocalypse of Abraham

29.19-20 we read about how the faithful among Abraham’s seed will take part in the acts of destruction and rebuke. Now, going further in with this line of thinking, the righteous will rejoice over the wicked’s violent destruction.

The third thing to note about this last revelation to Abraham is how God closes the speech. Abraham, back on earth, receives his final explication of the blueprint for creation that he saw, the final comment on what final judgment will look like, and he is told by God that God’s role is that of judge. Not that God will be with Abraham’s seed (though God promised this in

20.1-5), not that God will offer eternal reward for those that remain loyal (29.18; 31.4), but that

!177 God is the judge of all. This apocalypse, one with judgment as its primary theme, closes with a reminder to the audience of exactly who their God is. Their God is the Judge. Judgment is coming. Be prepared.

CONCLUSION

This analysis of judgment in Apocalypse of Abraham leads to a couple conclusions for our study of this text. First, and most importantly, my analysis of these five major passages in the apocalypse show the pervasive nature judgment plays in the author’s conception of the world.

Related to this, because the author defines his God as a the cosmic judge, judgment is the central lens through which the author presents all of Apocalypse of Abraham’s theology. And his theological presentation demands a certain kind of response from the audience. Someone can foolishly follow the ways of idolators who worship wooden toys like Bar-Eshath, though those figures are judged already. It’s possible to ignore the truth of God’s monotheistic rule even when it is presented to you boldly and directly. Again, God’s judgment is swift and unmistakeable for those like Terah. Some might fall victim to the sooth-sayings of messianic figures claiming to offer new access to God and a break from Israel’s theological system. Those, too, will be separated from the righteous and then issued their punitive consequences for such infidelity.

Second, the author envisions a reward and punishment system that offers God’s faithful the chance of retributive action. Israel’s history is a painful one, with frequent periods of turmoil and foreign oppression. Apocalypse of Abraham’s author is living through just such a time period after the Romans destroyed Jerusalem. And so this author, creatively and problematically, tells of

!178 a future revenge. And not only do the loyal Jews get to witness God’s vengeance on their enemies, but they also get to help destroy them once and for all.

!179 Conclusion

4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Apocalypse of Abraham bear witness to an important moment in the history of Jewish thought. As Jewish thinkers were wrestling with how to develop and continue their religious tradition, these authors offer glimpses into the issues central to these communities. In particular, the way that the authors of 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Apocalypse of

Abraham utilize the theme of judgment provides readers with a lens through which to understand their values. Though my work is not comparative in nature, I will draw some overall conclusions based on my analysis.

Each of these thinkers includes teachings on messianic expectations. Consistent with what we know from both Jewish and Christian literature of the period, the messiah was viewed as a core figure in eschatological expectation. In this way, 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch serve to show that while apocalyptic thinkers included messianic activities in their descriptions of the end times, for neither author is the messiah of sole or even central interest. The messiah does serve as judge in both texts, but 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch limit their descriptions of him and his activities to just several lines. Apocalypse of Abraham adds an important voice to this messianic discussion.

While 2 Baruch and 4 Ezra contribute to the diversity of our understanding of Early Jewish messianic belief, Apocalypse of Abraham shows other possible engagements with this concept.

For him, the messianic activity of the Early Christian movement threatened his community. So concerned with idolatry and false worship, the teachings of Jesus as messiah proved persuasive enough for this author that he feels the need to attack that message. With much of the scholarly debate around early Jewish messianism gravitated towards the Jesus stories of this period, 4

Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Apocalypse of Abraham serve as important witnesses both to Jewish

!180 thoughts of the period, as well as demonstrating the clustering of certain elements into eschatological speculation.

The division between the faithful community—either Israel as a whole or a select group within the people of Israel—proves to be central to all three of these texts. Ezra laments the apparent blessing of the other nations and the judgment of his own, only to come to see

(literally) the eternal distribution of divine judgment. Baruch also finds Israel’s contemporary state a result of God’s judgment, though he determines this is less problematic than does Ezra.

For 2 Baruch, the wicked nations serve only as instruments for God’s primary concern: rehabilitating his relationship with his people. They will face eternal punishment, as they should, and God has ordered everything accordingly. 2 Baruch treats this complex issue of judgment and its effect on differing nations with nuance. Only those who worked against Israel suffer torment and punishment. All the other nations God considers naive and does not hold their lack of Torah observance against them. Again, Apocalypse of Abraham is the outlier. For that text is fixated on other nations. Like 4 Ezra, it reacts to a sense of injustice about apparent blessings for opposing nations. Only, instead of trying to find a theological solution that prioritizes Israel’s relationship with God, it offers a theological outlook that prioritizes retribution.

Given the length of 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Apocalypse of Abraham, it is also worth considering how they function as written products for their communities. Judgment, I’ve shown through the analysis in this dissertation, helps us crystallize the purposes of these written accounts. I’ll start with Apocalypse of Abraham, for it is least amongst my three texts regarding the call for audience activity. Strongly monotheistic, Apocalypse of Abraham’s lone call on the audience is solely to follow God alone. We don’t find a call back to Moses (as we do in 2

!181 Baruch), we don’t read of new expectations for the community (as we do in 4 Ezra). Instead,

Apocalypse of Abraham only cares whether or not the people remain loyal exclusively to the

God of Israel. Beyond that, little is expected. The promises of God’s redemptive work on their part is enough. By contrast, the structure of 4 Ezra seems built to help the community wrestle with specific theological issues pertaining to judgment and justice. Additionally, the author calls on the audience to follow not only the teachings of their ancestors with the re-delivered Torah but also to follow Ezra’s new teachings and the wisdom contained therein. 2 Baruch proves to be even more committed to teaching the community certain principles than the other two texts. In the narrative itself, Baruch addresses his community three times, offers a distillation of his divine encounter into practical actions on the people’s part. They need to heed his teachings and correct their actions. Too lax and too wayward in their behavior, 2 Baruch calls on its community to return to Torah-centered action.

Throughout my analysis of these three texts, I have demonstrated how judgment in 4

Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Apocalypse of Abraham help us better conceive how thinkers of their period attempted to address the necessary issues of their day. Tied up in these discussions of judgment are matters salvation, chosenness, nationalism, and faithful praxis. By looking at judgment in 4

Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Apocalypse of Abraham we better understand their texts, their interests, and their world. Scholars interested in Early Jewish and Christian traditions will equally benefit when looking at their texts through the lens of judgment.

!182 !183 Bibliography

Allison, Dale. The New Moses: A Matthean Typology. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993. Alter, Robert. The Art of Biblical Narrative. New York: Basic Books, 2011. Anderson, Gary A. Review of Rivka Nir, The Destruction of Jerusalem and the Idea of Redemption in the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch. Journal of Religion 85 (2005): 155-57. Andrews, Isolade. “Being Open to the Vision.” Literature and Theology 12.3 (1998): 231-41. Angel, Joseph L. Otherworldly and Eschatological Priesthood in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Arnal, William E. “The Rhetoric of Marginality: Apocalypticism, Gnosticism, and Sayings Gospels.” HTR 88 (1995): 471-94. Aune, David E. Prophecy in Early Christianity and the Ancient Mediterranean World. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983. . “The Apocalypse of John and Palestinian Jewish Apocalyptic.” Pages 169-92 in The Pseudepigrapha and Christian Origins: Essays from the Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas. Edited by Gerbern S. Oegema and James H. Charlesworth. New York: T&T Clark, 2008. Aune, David E. with Eric Steward. “From the Idealized Past to the Imaginary Future: Eschatological Restoration in Jewish Apocalyptic Literature. In Restoration: Old Testament, Jewish, and Christian Perspectives, edited by James M. Scott, 147-77. Leiden: Brill, 2001. John Barclay, "Constructing a Dialogue: 4 Ezra and Paul on the Mercy of God." In Anthropologie und Ethik im Frühjudentum und im Neuen Testament, eds. M. Konradt, & E. Schläpfer, 3-22. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014. Barr, James. Biblical Words for Time. Naperville: Allenson, 1962. Bautch, Kelley Coblentz. “Spatiality and Apocalyptic Literature.” Hebrew Bible and Ancient Israel 5 (2016): 273-288. Begg, Christopher. “Rereading of the ‘Animal Rite’ of Genesis 15 in Early Jewish Narratives.” CBQ 50 (1988): 36-46. Bergen, Theodore A. "Ezra and Nehemiah Square off in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha,” In Biblical Figures Outside the Bible, edited by Michael E. Stone, 340-65. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1998. Bidawid, R.J., editor. “4 Esdras.” Part IV.III of The Old Testament in Syriac According to the Peshitta Version. Leiden: Brill, 1973, i-50. Blenkinsopp, Joseph. Sage, Priest, Prophet: Religious and Intellectual Leadership in Ancient Israel. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1995. Boccaccini, Gabriele. “The Three Paths to Salvation of Paul the Jew.” In Paul the Jew: Rereading the Apostle as a Figure of Second Temple Judaism, edited by Gabriele Boccaccini and Carlos A. Segovia, 1-32. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2016.

!184 Bogaert, Pierre Maurice. L’Apocalypse syriaque de Baruch: Introduction, traduction du syriaque et commentaire. Sources Chrétiennes 144–45. Paris: Cerf, 1969. . “La ruine de Jérusalem et les apocalypses Juives après 70.: Pages 123-41 in Apocalypses et théologie de l’espérance: Association catholique française pour l’étude de la Bible, Congrès de Toulouse 1975. Edited by Louis Monloubou. Paris: Cerf, 1977. Box, G. H. The Ezra-Apocalypse: Being Chapters 3-14 of the Book Commonly Known as 4 Ezra (or II Esdras): Translated with a Critical Commentary. London: Pitman, 1912. .“4 Ezra.” In Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament. Edited by R. H. Charles, 2:542-624. Oxford: Clarendon, 1913. . The Apocalypse of Abraham. Edited, with a Translation from the Slavonic Text and Notes. With the Assistance of J.I. Landsman. New york: The Macmillan Company, 1918 Boyarin, Daniel. “Penitential Liturgy in 4 Ezra.” Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman Periods 3 (1972): 30-34. Brandenburger, Egon. Die Verborgenheit Gottes im Weltgeschehen: das literarische und theologische Problem des 4. Esrabuches. Zürich: Theologischer Verlag, 1981. Breech, Earl. "These Fragments I have Shored Against My Ruins: The Form and Function of 4 Ezra." JBL 92.2 (1973): 267-74. Brettler, Marc Z. “Predestination in Deuteronomy 30.1-10.” In Those Elusive Deuteronomists: The Phenomenon of Pan-Deuteronomism. Edited by Linda S. Schearing and Steven L. McKenzie, 171-88. JSOTSup 268. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999. Brooke, George J. "Patterns of Priesthood, Priestliness, and Priestly Functions in Some Second Temple Period Texts." Judaïsme Ancien 4 (2016): 1-21. Brueggemann,Walter. “The ‘Baruch Connection’: Reflections on Jer 43.1-7.” JBL 113 (1994): 405-20. Burkes, Shannon. “‘Life’ Redefined: Wisdom and Law in Fourth Ezra and Second Baruch.” CBQ 63 (2001): 55-71. Campbell, Joseph. The Hero with a Thousand Faces. New York: New World Library, 2008. Capon, Robert Farrar. Kingdom, Grace, Judgment: Paradox, Outrage, and Vindication in the Parables of Jesus. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002. Charles, R. H. The Apocalypse of Baruch: Translated from the Syriac. London: Adam and Charles Black, 1896. . A Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life. 2nd ed. London: A & C Black, 1913. Charlesworth, James H., ed. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha: Two Volumes. New York: Doubleday: 1983-85. Coggins, R. J. and Michael A. Knibb. “The Second Book of Esdras.” In The First and Second Books of Esdras, 76-305. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979. Cohen, Shaye J.D. The Beginnins of Jewishness. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999. . “The Significance of Yavneh: Pharisees, Rabbis, and the End of Jewish Sectarianism.” HUCA 55 (1984): 27-54. Collins, Adela Yarbro and John J. Collins. King and Messiah as Son of God: Divine, Human, and Angelic Messianic Figures in Biblical and Related Litearture. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008.

!185 Collins, John. J., ed. Apocalypse: The Morphology of a Genre. Semeia 14. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1979. . Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls. New York: Routledge, 1998. . “The Idea of Election in 4 Ezra.” JSQ 16 (2009): 83-96. . The Invention of Judaism: Torah and Jewish Identity from Deuteronomy to Paul. Oakland: University of California Press, 2017. . Scripture and Sectarianism: Essays on the Dead Sea Scrolls. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014. . "The Angelic Life." In Metamorphoses: Resurrection, Body, and Transformative Practices in Early Christianity, 291-310. Edited by T.K. Sim and J. Økland. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2009. . The Invention of Judaism: Torah and Jewish Identity from Deuteronomy to Paul. Oakland: University of California Press, 2017. . "The Transformation of the Torah in Second Temple Judaism." JSJ 43 (2012): 455-74. Collins, John J. and George W.E. Nickelsburg, eds. Ideal Figures in Ancient Judaism: Profiles and Paradigms. Ann Arbor: Scholars Press, 1990. Collins, Adela Yarbro. Cosmology and Eschatology in Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism. Leiden: Brill, 1996. Crenshaw, J. “Popular Questioning of the Justice of God in Ancient Israel.” ZAW 82: 380-95. Cross, Frank Moore. Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973. Daschke, Dereck M. City of Ruins: Mourning the Destruction of Jerusalem through Jewish Apocalypses. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Davila, James R. “The Macrocosmic Temple, Scriptual Exegesis, and the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice.” DSD 9/1 (2002): 1-19. . The Provenance of the Pseudepigrapha: Jewish, Christian, or Other? Leiden: Brill, 2005. . "The Dead Sea Scrolls and Merkavah Mysticism." Pages 249-64 in The Dead Sea Scrolls in their Historical Context, edited by T.H. Lim. New York: T&T Clark, 2000. DeConick, April. “Heavenly Temple Traditions and Valentinian Worship: A Case for First- Century Christology in the Second Century.” Pages 308-41 in The Jewish Roots of Christological Monotheism. Edited by C.C. Newman, J.R. Davila, and G.S. Lewish. JSJSup 63. Leiden: Brill, 1999. . Voices of the Mystics: Early Christian Discourse in the Gospels of John and Thomas and Other Ancient Christian Literature. JSNTSup 157. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001. . “Who is Hiding in the Gospel of John? Reconceptualizing Johannine Theology and the Roots of Gnosticism.” Pages 13-29 in Histories of the Hidden God: Concealment and Revelation in Western Gnostic, Esoteric, and Mystical Traditions. Edited by April DeConick and Grant Adamson. Durham: Acumen, 2013. . “Why are the Heavens Closed? The Johannine Revelation of the Father in the Catholic- Gnostic Debate.” Pages 147-179 in John’s Gospel and Intimations of Apocalyptic. Edited by Catrin H. Williams and Christopher Rowland. London: T&T Clark, 2013.

!186 . “What is Early Jewish and Christian Mysticism?” Pages 1-26 in Paradise Now: Essays on Early Jewish and Christian Mysticism. Edited by April DeConick. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006. . "Jesus Revealed: The Dynamics of Early Christian Mysticism." Pages 299-324 in With Letters of Light: Studies in the Dead Sea Scrolls, Early Jewish Apocalypticism, Magic, and Mysticism. Editd by D.V. Arbel and A. Orlov. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2010. . The Gnostic New Age: How a Countercultural Spirituality Revolutionized Religion from Antiquity to Today. New York: Columbia University Press, 2016. Dimant, Devorah. “The Testament as a Literary Form in Early Jewish Pseudepigraphical Literature.” World Congress of Jewish Studies 8 (1982): 79-83. DiTommaso, Lorenzo. “Dating the Eagle Vision of 4 Ezra: A New Look at an Old Theory. JSP 20 (1999): 3-38. . "Who is the 'I' of 4 Ezra?" Pages 119-33 in Fourth Ezra and Second Baruch. Edited by Matthias Henze, Gabriele Boccaccini, and Jason Zurawski. Leiden: Brill 2013. Doering, Lutz. “The Epistle of Baruch and its Role in 2 Baruch.” In Fourth Ezra and Second Baruch: Reconstructions after the Fall, edited by Matthias Henze and Gabriele Boccaccini, with Jason Zurawski, 151-73. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Doody, Terrance. Confession and Community in the Novel. Baton Rouge: LSU Press, 1980. . Among Other Things: A Description of the Novel. Baton Rouge: LSU Press, 1998. Esler, Philip F. “The Social Function of 4 Ezra.” JSNT 53 (1994): 99-123. Foucault, Michel. “What is an Author?” In Aesthetics, Method, and Epistemology, edited by J. D. Faubion, 205-22. New York: The New Press, 1998. Fraade, Steven D. From to Commentary: Torah and Its Interpretation in the Midrash Sifre to Deuteronomy. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1991. Frankfurter, David. “Introduction and Annotations to the Revelation of John.” In The Jewish Annotated New Testament, edited by Amy-Jill Levine and Mar Zvi Brettler, 463-98. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011. Goff, Matthew. “Heavenly Mysteries and Otherworldly Journeys: Interpreting 1 and 2 Corinthians in Relation to Jewish Apocalypticism.” In Paul the Jew: Rereading the Apostle as a Figure of Second Temple Judaism, edited by Gabriele Boccaccini and Carlos A. Segovia, 133-150. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2016. Gore-Jones, Lydia. “The Unity and Coherence of 4 Ezra.” JSJ 47 (2016): 212-35. Grabbe, Lester L. "Chronography in 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch." SBLSP 20 (1981): 49-63. . “The Social Setting of Early Jewish Apocalypticism.” JSP 4 (1989): 27-47. Gruenwald, Ithamar. Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism. Second, Revised Edition. Leiden: Brill, 2014. Gry, Léon. “La date de la fin des temps, selon les révélations ou les calculs du Pseudo-Philon et de Baruch (Apocalypse syriaque).” Revue biblique 48 (1939(: 337-56. Gunkel, Hermann. “Das vierte Buch Esra.” In Die Apokryphen und Pseudepigraphen des alten Testaments, edited by E. Kautzsch, 231-402. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1900. Gurtner, Daniel M. Second Baruch: A Critical Edition of the Syriac Text. New York: T&T Clark, 2009.

!187 . “The ‘Twenty-Fifth Year of Jeconiah’ and the Date of 2 Baruch.” JSP 18 (2008): 23-32. Hadot, Jean. “Le problème de l’Apocalypse syriaque de Baruch d’après un ouvrage recent.” Semitica 20 (1970): 59-76. Hall, Robert. Revealed Histories: Techniques for Ancient Jewish and Christian Historiography. New York: 2015. Hallbäck, Geert. “The Fall of Zion and the Revelation of the Law: An Interpretation of 4 Ezra.” Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament 6 (1992): 263-92. Hamilton, Alastair. The Apocryphal Apocalypse: The Reception of the Second Book of Esdras (4 Ezra) from the Renaissance to the Enlightenment. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1999. Harlow, Daniel C. “Idolatry and Alterity: Israel and the Nations in the Apocalypse of Abraham. Pages 302-330 in The ‘Other’ In Second Temple Judaism: Essays in Honor of John J. Collins. Edited by Daniel C. Harlow, Karina M. Hogan, Matthew Goff, and J. S. Kaminsky. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001. . “Anti-Christian Polemic in the Apocalypse of Abraham: Jesus as a Pseudo-Messiah in Apoc. Ab. 29.3-14.” JSP 22 (2013): 167-83. Harnisch, Wolfgang. Verhängnis und Verheißung der Geschichte: Untersuchungen zum Zeit und Geschichtsverständnis im 4 Buch Esra und in der syr. Baruchapokalypse. Göttingen: Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, 1969. . “Der Prophet als Widerpart und Zeuge der Offenbarung: Erwägungen zur Interdependenz von Form und Sache im IV. Buch Ezra.” In Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East, edited by David Hellholm, 461-93. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1983. Hayman, A.P. “The Problem of Pseudonymity in the Ezra Apocalypse.” JSJ 6 (1975): 47-56. Hayward, C.T.R. “The Vine and its Products as Theological Symbols in First Century Palestinian Judaism.” Durham University Journal 82 (1990): 9-18. Hengel, Martin. Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period. 2 volumes. London: SCM Press, 1974. Henze, Matthias. “The Apocalypse of Weeks and the Architecture of the End Time.” Pages 207-209 in Enoch and Qumran Origins: New Light on a Forgotten Connection. Edited by Gabriele Boccaccini. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005. , ed. Biblical Interpretation at Qumran. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005. . “From Jeremiah to Baruch: Pseudepigraphy in the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch.” Pages 157-77 in Biblical Traditions in Transmission: Essays in Honour of Micahel A. Knibb. Edited by Charlotte Hempel and Judith Lieu. Leiden Brill, 2006. . “Qoheleth and the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch.” VT 58 (2008): 28-43. . “Torah and Eschatology in the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch.” Pages 201-15 in The Significance of Sinai: Traditions about Sinai and Divine Revelation in Judaism and Christianity. Edited by George J. Brooke, Hindy Najman, and Loren T. Stuckenbruck. Leiden: Brill, 2008. . Jewish Apocalypticism in Late First Century Israel: Reading Second Baruch in Context. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011.

!188 , ed. A Companion to Biblical Interpretation in Early Judaism. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012. . “4 Ezra and 2 Baruch: Literary Composition and Oral Performance in First Century Apocalyptic Literature.” JBL 131 (2012): 181-200. . “The Chosennes of Israel in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha.” Pages 170-98 in The Call of Abraham: Essays on the Election of Israel in Honor of Jon D. Levenson. Edited by Gary A. Anderson and Joel S. Kaminsky. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2013. . “Apocalypse and Torah in Ancient Jewish Literature.” Pages 312-25 in Oxford Handbook of Apocalyptic Literature. Edited by John J. Collins. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014. . “‘Then the Messiah Will Begin to be Revealed’: Resurrection and the Apocalyptic Drama in 1 Corinthians 15 and Second Baruch 29-30, 49-51.” Pages 441-62 in Anthropologie und Ethik im Frühjudentum und im Neuen Testament. Edited by Matthias Konradt and Esther Schläpfer. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014. . “‘I am the Judge’: Judgment in the Apocalypse of Abraham.” In Siblys, Scriptures, and Scrolls: John Collins at Sevinty, eds. J. Baden, H. Najman, and E.J.C. Tigchelaar, 542-57. Leiden: Brill, 2017. and Gabriele Boccaccini, with the collaboration of Jason M. Zurawski. Fourth Ezra and Second Baruch: Reconstruction After the Fall. JSJSup 164. Leiden: Brill, 2013. and Michael Stone. 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch: Translations, Introductions, and Notes. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2013. Hillers, Delbert R. Treaty Curses and the O.T. Prophets. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1964. Himmelfarb, Martha. Ascent to Heaven in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993. Hobbins, John F. “The Summing up of History in 2 Baruch.” JQR 89 (1998): 45-79. Hogan, Karina Martin. Theologies in Conflict in 4 Ezra: Wisdom Debate and Apocalyptic Solutions. JSJSup 130. Leiden: Brill, 2008. . “The Preservation of 4 Ezra in the Vulgate: Thanks to Ambrose, Not Jerome.” In Fourth Ezra and Second Baruch: Reconstruction After the Fall, edited by Matthias Henze and Gabriele Bocciccini, with Jason Zurwaski, 381-402. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Kee, Howard C. “The Man in Fourth Ezra: Growth of a Tradition.” SBLSP (1981): 199-208. Kermode, Frank. The Sense of an Ending: Studies in the Theory of Fiction with a New Epilogue. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Klawans, Jonathan. Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supercessionism. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006. Klijn, A.F.J. Der Lateinische Text Der Apokalypse Des Esra. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1983. Knibb, Michael A. “The Exile in the Literature of the Intertestamental Period.” HeyJ 17 (1976): 253-67. . “Commentary on 2 Esdras.” The First and Second Books of Esdras: Commentary on 1 Esdras by R. J. Coggins and Commentary on 2 Esdras by M. A. Knibb. Cambridge:

!189 Cambridge University Press, 1979. . “Apocalyptic and Wisdom in 4 Ezra.” JSJ 13 (1982): 271-88. Klausner, Joseph. The Messianic Idea in Israel: From Its Beginning to the Completion of Mish nah. New York: The MacMillan Company, 1955. Klawans, Jonathan. Purity, Sacrifice, and the Temple: Symbolism and Supercessionism in the Study of Ancient Judaism. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006. Klijin, A.F.J. "2 (Syriac Apocalypse of) Baruch." Pages 615-52 in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Volume 1: Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments. Edited by James C. Charlesworth. New York: Doubleday, 1983. Koch, Klaus. The Rediscovery of Apocalyptic: A Polemical Work on a Neglected Area of Biblical Studies and Its Damaging Effects on Theology and Philosophy. Translated by Margaret Kohl. Naperville, Ill: Allenson, 1972. Kraft, Robert A. “‘Ezra’ Materials in Judaism and Christianity.” In Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, edited by H. Temporini and W. Haase, 119-36. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1979. Kugel, James. A Walk Through Jubilees: Studies in the Book of Jubilees and the World of its Creation. Leiden: Brill, 1998. . Traditions of the Bible: A Guide to the Bible as it Was at the Start of the Common Era. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998. Kulik, Alexander. Retroverting Slavonic Pseudepigrapha: Toward the Original of the Apocalypse of Abraham. Atlanta: SBL, 2004. Laato, Antti. “The Apocalypse of the Syriac Baruch and the Date of the End.” JSP 18 (1998): 39-46. . A Star if Rising: The Historical Development of the Old Testament Royal Ideology and the Rise of the Jewish Messianic Expectations. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1998. Lacocque, Andre. “The Vision of the Eagle in 4 Esdras, a Rereading of Daniel 7 in the First Century C.E.” SBLSP 20 (1981): 237-58. Levenson, Jon D. “The Sources of Torah: Psalm 119 and the Modes of Revelation in Second Temple Judaism.” Pages 559-74 in Ancient Israelite Religion: Essays in Honor of Frank Moore Cross. Edited by Patrick D. Miller, Paul D. Hanson, and S. Dean McBride. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987. . Creation and the Persistence of Evil: The Jewish Drama of Divine Omnipotence. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988. Lied, Liv Ingeborg. The Other Lands: Imaginations of the Land in 2 Baruch. JSPSup 129. Leiden: Brill, 2008. . “Those Who Know and Those Who Don’t: Mystery, Instruction and Knowledge in 2 Baruch.” Pages 427-446 in Mystery and Secrecy in the Nag Hammadi Collection and Other Ancient Literature: Ideas and Practices. Edited by Christian H. Bull, Liv I. Lied, and John D. Turner. NHMS 76. Leiden: Brill, 2012. . “Recent Scholarship on 2 Baruch: 2000-2009.” CBR 9 (2011): 238-76. Lincicum, David. Paul and the Early Jewish Encounter with Deuteronomy. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2013. Longenecker, Bruce. Eschatology and the Covenant: A Comparison of 4 Ezra and Romans 1-11. New York: Bloomsday Academic, 2015.

!190 Lutz, Ulrich. Matthew 21-28: A Commentary. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005. Martinez, Florentino Garcia, ed. Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Biblical Tradition. Leuven: Peeters, 2003. Matlock, R. Barry. Unveiling the Apocalyptic Paul: Paul’s Interpreters and the Rhetoric of Criticism. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996. McCarthy, Dennis J. Treaty and Covenant. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1963. McGill, Scott. Plagiarism in Latin Literature. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Metzger, Bruce M. “The Fourth Book of Ezra.” In Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, edited by James H. Charlesworth, 1: 516-59. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983. Morray-Jones, Christopher R.A. "The Temple Within: The Embodied Divine Image and Its Worship in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Jewish and Christian Sources." SBLSP 37 (1998): 400-31. Mueller, James R. “The Apocalypse of Abraham and the Destruction of the Second Temple.” SBLSP 21 (1982): 341-49. Murphy, Frederick. The Structure and Meaning of Second Baruch. SBLDS 78. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985. Myers, J. M. 1 and 2 Esdras. Anchor Bible 42. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1974. Najman, Hindy. Seconding Sinai: The Development of Mosaic Discourse in Second Temple Judaism. Leiden: Brill, 2003. . “How Should We Contextualize Pseudepigrapha? Imitation and Emulation in 4 Ezra.” Pages 529-36 in Flores Florentino: Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Early Jewish Studies in Honour of Florentino Garcia Martinez. Edited by Anthony Hilhorst, Émile Puech, and Eibert Tigchelaar. Leiden: Brill, 2007. . Past Renewals: Interpretive Authority, Renewed Revelation and the Quest for Perfection. Leiden: Brill, 2010. . Losing the Temple and Recovering the Future: An Analysis of 4 Ezra. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. Newsom, Carol. "He has Established for Himself Priests: Human and Angelic Priesthood in the Qumran Sabbath Shirot." Pages 101-20 in Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls: The New York University Conference in Memory of Yigael Yadin. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1990. . Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice: A Critical Edition. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985. Nickelsburg, George W. Jewish Literature Between the Bible and the Mishnah: A Historical and Literary Introduction. 2nd Edition. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005. . “Torah and the Deuteronomic Scheme in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha: Variations on a Theme and Some Noteworthy Examples of Its Absence.” Pages 222-35 in Das Gesetz im frühen Judentum und im Neuen Testament. Edited by Dieter Sänger and Matthias Konradt. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht/Frigourg: Academic Press, 2006. Nickelsburg, George W.E. and James C. VanderKam. 1 Enoch: A New Translation. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2004. Nir, Rivka. The Destruction of Jerusalem and the Idea of Redemption in the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003.

!191 Noth, Martin. The Deuteronomistic History. JSOTSup 15. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1981. Oegema, Gerbern. S. The Anointed and His People: Messianic Expectations from the Maccabees to Bar Kochba. JSPSup 27. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998. Orlov. Andrei. Selected Studies in the Slavonic Pseudepigrapha. Leiden: Brill, 2009. . Dark Mirrors: Azazel and Satanael in Early Jewish Demonology. Albany: SUNY Press, 2011. . Heavenly Priesthood in the Apocalypse of Abraham. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. . Divine Scapegoats: Demonic Mimesis in Early Jewish Mysticism. Albany: SUNY Press, 2015. . The Atoning Dyad: The Two Goats of Yom Kippur in the Apocalypse of Abraham. Albany: SUNY Press, 2016. Otzen, Benedikt. “The Paradise Trees in Jewish Apocalyptic.” In Apocryphon Severini. Presented to Søren Giverson, edited by P. Bilde, H.J. Nielsen, and J.P. Sørensen, 140-54. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press, 1993. Poirier, John C. “On a Wing and a Prayer: The Soteriology of the Apocalypse of Abraham.” Pages 87-97 in This World and the World to Come: Soteriology in Early Judaism. Edited by Daniel M. Gurtner. London: T&T Clark, 2011. Portier-Young, Anathea E. Apocalypse Against Empire: Theologies of Resistance in Early Ju daism. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2011. . “Jewish Apocalyptic Literature as Resistance Literature.” Pages 145-62 in Oxford Handbook of Apocalyptic Literature. Edited by John J. Collins. New York: Oxford Uni versity Press, 2014. Rad, Gerhard von. Wisdom in Israel. Translated by James D. Martin. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1978 Rowland, Christopher. The Open Heaven: A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early Christianity. Eugene: Wipf and Stock, 2002. Rowley, Harold H. The Relevance of Apocalyptic: A Study of Jewish and Christian Apocalypses from Daniel to the Revelation. London: Lutterworth, 1963. Rubinwiekicz, Ryszard. “The Apocalypse of Abraham.” In OTP 1, 681-705. Garden City: Doubleday, 1983. Russel, David S. The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic, 200BC-AD 100. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1964. Scholem, Gershom. Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, and Talmudic Tradition. New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1965. Scott, James M. “Paul’s Use of Deuteronomistic Tradition.” JBL 112: 645-65. Segal, Alan. Rebecca's Children, Judaism, and Christianity in the Roman World. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986. Segovia, Carlos A. “Discussing/Subverting Paul. Polemical Rereadings and Competing Supersessionist Misreadings of Pauline Inclusivism in Late Antiquity: A Case Study on the Apocalypse of Abraham, Justin Martyr, and the Qur’an.” In Paul the Jew: Rereading

!192 the Apostle as a Figure of Second Temple Judaism, edited by Gabriele Boccaccini and Carlos A. Segovia, 341-362. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2016. Shapira, Haim. “‘For the Judgment is God’s: Human Judgment and Divine Justice in the Hebrew Bible and Jewish Tradition.” Journal of Law and Religion 27.2 (2011-12): 273-328. Sheinfeld, Shayna. “Who is the Righteous Remnant in Romans 9-11? The Concept of Remnant in Early Jewish Literature and Paul’s Letter to the Romans.” In Paul the Jew: Rereading the Apostle as a Figure of Second Temple Judaism, edited by Gabriele Boccaccini and Carlos A. Segovia, 33-50. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2016. . “The Euphrates as Temporal Marker in 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch.” JSJ 47 (2016):1-15. . Crises of Leadership in the Post-Destruction Apocalypse of 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch. Ph.D. dissertation. McGill University, 2015. Smith, J. Payne, editor. A Compendious Syriac Dictionary: Founded upon the Thesaurus Syriacus of R. Payne Smith. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1957. Stone, Michael E. “Lists of Revealed Things in the Apocalyptic Literature.” Pages 414-52 in Magnalia Dei: The Mighty Acts of God: Essays on the Bible and Archaeology in Memory of G. Ernest Wright. Edited by Frank M. Cross, Werner E. Lemke, and Patrick D. Miller. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1976. . “Reactions to Destructions of the Second Temple: Theology, Perception, and Conversion.” JSJ 12 (1981): 195-294. . “Coherence and Inconsistency in the Apocalypses: The Case of ‘The End’ in 4 Ezra.” JBL 102 (1983): 229-43 . “The Question of the Messiah in 4 Ezra.” Pages 209-24 in Judaisms and Their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era. Edited by Jacob Neusner, William S. Green, and Ernest S. Frerichs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. . “The Way of the Most High and the Injustice of God in 4 Ezra.” In Knowledge of God in the Graeco-Roman World, edited by R. van den Broek, T. Baarda, and J. Mansfeld, 132-42. Leiden: Brill, 1988. . Features of Eschatology of IV Ezra. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989. . Fourth Ezra: A Commentary on the Book of Fourth Ezra. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990. . Ancient Judaism: New Visions and Views. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011. Stuckenbruck, Loren T. “Messianic Ideas in the Apocalyptic and Related Literature of Early Judaism.” Pages 90-113 in The Messiah in the Old and New Testaments. Edited by Stanley E. Porter. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007. . Angel Veneration and Christology: A Study in Early Judaism and the Christology of the Apocalypse of John. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1995. . “Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha.” Pages 143-62 in The Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism. Edited by John J. Collins and Daniel C. Harlow. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010. . The Myth of Rebellious Angels. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014. Thompson, A. L. Responsibility for Evil in the Theodicy of IV Ezra. SBLDS 29. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1977. Vanderkam, James C. “Exile in Jewish Apocalyptic Literature.” Pages 89-109 in Exile: Old

!193 Testament, Jewish, and Christian Conceptions. Edited by James L. Scott. JSJSup 56. Leiden: Brill, 1997. ______. The Book of Jubilees. Lovanii: Peeters, 1989. . An Introduction to Early Judaism. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001. . From Revelation to Canon. Leiden: Brill, 2002. . From Joshua to Caiaphas: High Priests after the Exile. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2004. VanLandingham, Chris. Judgment and Justification in Early Judaism and the Apostle Paul. Boston: Hendrickson, 2006. Violet, Bruno. Die Esra-Apocalypse (IV Esra): Die Überlieferung. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1910. . Die Apokalypsen des Esra und des Baruch in deutscher Gestalt. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1924. Warren, Meredith. “My Heart Poured Forth Understanding: 4 Ezra’s Fiery Cup as Hierophagic Consumption.” SR (2015): 1-14. Weinfeld, Moshe. Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School. Oxford. Clarendon Press, 1972. Whitters, Mark F. The Epistle of Second Baruch: A Study in Form and Messasge. JSPSup 42. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2003. Willet, Tom. Eschatology in the Theodicies of 2 Baruch and 4 Ezra. JSPSup. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1989. Wisdom, Jeffrey R. Blessing for the Nations and the Curse of the Law: Paul’s Citations of Gene sis and Deuteronomy in Gal 3:8-10. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007. Wright, J. Edward. Baruch ben Neriah: From Biblical Scribe to Apocalyptic Seer. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2003. Yinger, Kent L. “Judgment.” Pages 853-55 in The Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism. Edited by John J. Collins and Daniel C. Harlow. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010.

!194