Emil Schürer.

A history of the Jewish people in the time of Jesus Christ .. (Volume 2 pt.3) online

. (page 10 of 51)
Online LibraryEmil SchürerA history of the Jewish people in the time of Jesus Christ .. (Volume 2 pt.3) → online text (page 10 of 51)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

similar one addressed to the other two and a half tribes. And
from chap. Ixxvi. it is to be presumed that the book would
proceed to tell how Baruch was shown all the countries of the
world from the top of a mountain and was thereafter taken
away from the earth.

As regards the date of the composition of our apocalypse
this much at least may be affirmed with certainty, that it was
not written till after the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus.
For in chap, xxxii. 2-4, Baruch announces to the assembled
people that (after its first destruction by Nebuchadnezzar)
Jerusalem is to be rebuilt again. ' £ut that this hiiildinfj
ivill not continue to stand, hut that it will in like matiner be
destroyed again. And then the city will lie waste for a long
period, until the glorious time when it will be rebuilt and
crowned for ever. • But, with the exception of this passage,
there is not another that throws any light upon the date of the
composition of our book. For nothing bearing upon this is to
be gathered from the obscure passage in which we are informed
that the time of tribulation is to last " two parts, weeks of
seven weeks " (xxviii. 2 : duae partes hebdomades septem
hebdomadarum), for tlie meaning of these words is as uncer-


tain as it is obscure. Consequently the calculations wliicli
Ewald, Hilgenfeld, Wieseler, and Dillmann above all have tried
to found upon this passage have no certain basis on which to
rest. Possibly one would be much more likely to find some
clue to the date in question in the affinity which thisioorlc hears
to the Fourth Booh of Ezra. For the points of contact between
both those books in regard to thought and expression alike
are (as Langen has pointed out, pp. 6-8) so numerous that we
must of necessity assume either that they were written by one
and the same author, or that the one borrowed from the other.
It is now almost universally believed that it may be proved
with a greater or less degree of certainty that our book has
drawn upon the Fourth Book of Ezra* (so Ewald, Langen,
Hilgenfeld, Hausrath, Stahelin, Eenan, Drummond, Dillmann).
It appears to me however that as yet no decisive arguments
liave been advanced in support of this view. In the case of
Langen, who was the first to go thoroughly into this question,
and who has done much to influence subsequent opinion on
the matter, his main argument was that the Book of Baruch
corrected, as he supposed, the somewhat crude notions of
Ezra respecting the doctrine of original sin. In order that
the reader may be in a more favourable position for estimating
the value of this argument, we will here subjoin in parallel
columns what each of the two books says on this point : —


iii. 7 : Et liuic (Adamo) mandasti
diligere viamtuam, et praeteriviteam ;
et statini instituisti in eum mortem
et in nationibus ejus.

iii. 21-22 : Cor enim maligniim .
bajulans primus, Adam transgressus
et victusest; sed et omnes, qui de eo
nati sunt. Et facta est permanens

iv. 30 : Quoniam granum semiiiis
mali seminatum est in corde Adam
ab initio, et quantum impietatis gene-
ravit usque nunc, et generat usque
diun veniat area!


xvii. 3 : (Adam) mortem attulit et
abscidit annos eorum, qui ab eo
geniti fuerunt.

xxiii. 4: Quando peccavit Adam et
decreta fuit mors contra ecjs, qui
gignereutur, etc.

xlviii. 42 : quid fecisti Adam
omnibus, qui a te geniti sunt!

liv. 15, 19 • Si enim Adam prior
peccavit, et attulit mortem super
omnes immaturam; sed etiam illi qui
ex eo nati sunt, unusquisque ex eis
praeparavit aniniae suae tormentura
futurum : et iterum unusquisque ex



vii. 48 : tu quid fecisti Adam ?
Si cnim tu peccasti, non est factua
Bolius tuus casus, sed et nostrum, qui
ex te advenimus.

eifl elegit sibi gloriam futuram . . .
Non est ergo Adam causa, nisi aninuie
suae tantum ; nos vero unusquisque
fuit animae suae Adam.

Now Laiigen supposes that the last of the passages quoted
from Baruch (liv. 19 : Non est ergo Adam causa, nisi animae
suae tantum ; nos vero unusquisque fuit animae suae Adam)
is above all intended to modify the somewhat harsh view of
Ezra. But one can easily see that the utterances of Baruch
on other occasions are quite as blunt as those of Ezra.
And, on the other hand, there are passages to be met with in
Ezra in which the author emphasizes quite as strongly as
Baruch liv. 19, though in different terms, the thought that
every man is to blame for his own ruin. To take only a single
example, compare viii. 55—61. Here then we have not even
an actual difference of view, far less a correction of the one
writer on the part of the other. Further, such other reasons
as have been advanced in favour of the priority of Ezra and
the dependent character of Baruch are merely considerations
of an extremely general kind which may be met with,
considerations equally well calculated to prove quite the
reverse. Some are inclined to think that in the case of the
author of the Fourth Book of Ezra " there is more of a des-
pairing frame of mind, that his striving after light and his
desire to have his apprehensions quieted are deeper, more
urgent, and of a more overmastering character, that, because
the impressions produced by the dreadful events are rather
iresher in his mind, his narrative is also, for this very reason
and in spite of its verbosity, the more impressive of the two,
and so on " (so Uillmann). j\Iy own opinion is that it is quite
the converse of this, and that it would be nearer the truth to
say that it is precisely in the case of Baruch that this problem
is uppermost, viz. How is the calamity of Israel and the
impunity of its oppressors possible and conceivable ? while in
the case of Ezra, tliough this problem concerns him too, still
there is a question that almost lies yet nearer his heart, viz.


Why is it that so many perish and so few are saved ? The
subordination of the former of these questions to the other,
which is a purely theological one, appears to me rather to
indicate that Ezra is of a later date than Baruch. Not
only so, but it is decidedly of a more finished character, and
is distinguished by greater maturity of thought and a greater
degree of lucidity than the last-mentioned book. But this is
a point in regard to which it is scarcely possible to arrive at
a definite conclusion. And hence we are equally unable to
say whether our book was written shortly after the destruction
of Jerusalem (so Hilgenfeld, Fritzsche, Drummond), or during
the reign of Domitian (so Ewald), or in the time of Trajan
(so Langen, Wieseler, Eenan, Diilmann). Undoubtedly the
most probable supposition of all is that it was composed not
long after the destruction of the holy city, when the question
" How could God permit such a disaster ? " was still a burning
one. It is older at all events than the time of Papias, whose
chimerical fancies about the millennial kingdom (Irenaeus,
v. 33. 3) are borrowed from our Apocalypse (xxix. 5).^* The
existing Syrian text has been taken from the Greek (see
Langen, p. 8 sq. ; Kneucker, p. 192 sq. ; Diilmann, p. 358).

With the exception of the passage in Papias just mentioned, no certain
trace of the use of our hook in the Christian Church is anywhere to be met
with. There is every reason to believe that it had been pushed into the back-
ground by the kindred Ezra-apocalypse. Still the fact of its findiug a place
in the Peshito manuscript of Milan serves to show that it was still in use at
a later period at least ia the Syrian Church. In the lists of the apocrypha
given in the Stichometry of Nicephorus and the "Synopsis Athanasii" (in
Credner, Zur Gescliichte des Kanons, pp. 121, 145) there are added at the
close: Baoovji, 'A/3;3ct;co!)j£«, 'E^sx/i^X xasi Aotvi'/iK ^iv^iTtypct-CPce.. But it is

2* In his edition of Irenaeus (ii. 417), Harvey attempts to show that the
text of Papias presupposes a Syrian original on which it is based, for he
thinks that a certain anomaly occurring in his text may be most easily
accounted for by the hypothesis of such an original. If this were correct,
it would be of considerable interest as regards the matter now in hand.
The anomaly in question admits however of being otherwise explained.
See Gebhardt and Harnack's edition of the Epistle of Baraalas ("Jud ed.
1878), p. 87.


extremely uncertain -whether, by the first-mentioned book, it is our apoca-
lypse that is meant, for besides the Baruch of the Greek Bible, and which
in the lists just referred to is included amont^ the canonical buoks, there
•were also other apocryphal writinrfs hearing this name. (1) There are con-
siderable fragments of a gnostic Book of Baruch given in the Philosophmnena
V. 26-27 (comp. v. 24). (2) A Christian Book of Baruch, which is akiu to
our apocalypse and has borrowed largely from it, has been published in
Ethiopic by Dillmann under the title " Reliqua verborum Baruchi" (in
Dillmann's Ckrcstomafhia aetlnopica. Lips. 186C), as it had been previously
in Greek in a Greek Mcnanis (Veneliis 1C09), and recently again by
Ceriaui under the title " Paralipomena Jeremiae" (^Monumenta sacra et
profana, vol. v. 1, Mediol. 1868), and finally in a German version by
Pratorius (Zeitsclir. fiir icissf^nsch. Theol. 1872, pp. 230-247), and by Kcinig
{Stud. u. Krit. 1877, pp. 318-338). On this book comp. also Ewald, Gescli.
des Volkes Israel, vii. 183. Fritzsche, LUiri apocr. prolegom. p. 32.
Sachsse, Zeifschr. fiir wissensch. Tlieol. 1874, p. 268 sq. Kneucker, Das
Buck Baruch, p. 196 sq. , Dillmann in Herzog's Real-Enc. 2nd ed. xii.
358 sq. (3) In the Allercatio Simonis Jiidaei et Theophili Christiani, lately
published by Harnack, there occurs the following passage from a Book of
Baruch (Gebhardt and Harnack, Texte nnd Tlntcrsuchungcn, vol. i. part 3,
1883, p. 25) : Prope finem libri sui de nativitate ejus [scil. Cliristi] et de
habitu vestis et de passione ejus et de resuirectione ejus prophetavit dicens :
Hie unctus meus, electus mens, vidvae incontamiuatae jaculatns, natus et
passus dicitur. Judging from the Christology implied in this passage,
the Baruch here in question can only have been composed at the soonest
in the fourth century of our era (see Harnack, p. 46). Further, in
Cyprian's Testim. iii. 29, we find that in one manuscriiJt there has been
inserted a quotation from some Book of Baruch or other, wliich quotj\tiou,
however, we Itave no means of verifying. (4) Tichonrawow contemplates
editing an Apocalypse of Baruch in the old Slavonic version (see Theol.
Literaturzlg. 1877, p. 658). AVhether it has as yet appeared, and what its
relati(m to other Books of Baruch with which we are already acquainted,
1 am unable to say.

The epistle to the nine and a half tribes in the captivity, which forms
the conclusion of our apocalypse, has been already printed in the Paris
Polyglot, vol. ix., in the London Polyglot, vol. iv., in Lagardc's etlition of the
Syrian version of the apocrypha {Lihri Vet. Test, apocryphi syriace, ed,
de Lagarde, Lips. 18(;i), also in Latin in Fabricius, Codex psciuUpigr. Vet.
Test. ii. 145-155, Also in an Engli.sh and French version; see Fiitzsche's
Exegct. HandJiuch zu den Apokryphcn, i. 175 sq., and Lihri Apocr. p. xxxi,
Kneucker, Das Buch Baruch, p. 190 sq.

Ceriani's Latin version of our apocalypse appeared in the Monwnenta
sacra et pro/ana, vol, i, fasc, 2 (Mediol, 1866), pp, 73-98, For this see
also Fritzsche, Libri apocryphi Vet. Test, graece (Lips, 1871), pp. 654-699.
The Syrian text was edited by Ceriani in the Monumenta .sacra et pro/ana,
vol. v. fasc. 2 (Mediol, 1871), pp, 113-180, This latter was also included
in tlie photo-litiiographed fac-simile of the wliole manuscript, publi.shed
under the title Travslatio Syra Pcscitto Vcteris Tc.^tamcnii ex codice


Amhrosiano sec. fere VI. photoIitlwgrapMce ediia cnrante ct adnatante Antonin
Maria Ceriani, 2 vols, iu 4 parts, Milaa 1876-1883 (the Apocalypse of
Baruch being in the last part). Comp. Theol. Liter aturzeitung, 1876,
p. 329 ; 1878, p. 228; 1881, col. 4 ; 1884, col. 27.

Critical inquiries: Langen, De apocalypsi Baruch anno superiori primum
edita commentatio, Friburgi in Brisgovia, 1SG7 (xxiy. p. 4). Evvald, Gottinger
gel. Anzeigen, 1867, p. 1706 sqq. Idem, Gesch. des Voiles Israel, vii. 83-87.
Ililgenfeld, Zeitschr. fur wissensch. Theol. 1869, pp. 437-440. Idem, Messias
Judaeorum, p. Ixiii. sq. Wieseler, TJicol. Stud. u. Krit. 1870, p. 288 (in his
article on the Fourth Book of Ezra). Fritzsche, Lihri apocr. Prolegom.
pp. 30-32. Hausrath, Ncutcstamentl. Zdtgesch. 2ud ed. iv. 88 sq. (1st ed.
iii. 290). Stalielin, Jahrbb. fur deutsche Tlieol. 1874, p. 211 sqq. Renan,
" L'Apocalypse de Baruch" {Journal des Savants, April 1877, pp. 222-231).
Idem, Les evangiles, 1877, pp. 517-530. Drumniond, The Jewish
Messiah, 1877, pp. 117-132. Kneucker, Das Buch Baruch, 1879,
pp. 190-198. Kaulen iu Wctzer and Welte's Kirchenkx. 2nd ed. i. 1058 sq.
(art. " Apokryphcn-Literatur "). Dillmaun in Herzog's Rcal-Enc. 2ud ed.
xii. 356-358 (art. " Pseudepigraphen "). Deane, "The Apocalypse of
Baruch," i. {Monthly Interpreter, April 1885, pp. 451-461).

5. The Fourth Book of Ezra.

Of all the Jewish apocalypses none has been so widely
circulated in the early Church and in the Church of the Middle
Ages as the so-called Fourth Book of Ezra. By Greek and Latin
Fathers it is used as a genuine prophetical work (see below).
The fact of there being Syrian, Ethiopic, Arabic, and Armenian
versions of the book is evidence of the extent to which it was
circulated in the East. Then the circumstance that a Latin ver-
sion has come down to us in a large number of Bible manscripts
is calculated to show the favour with which, in like manner, it
was still regarded by the Church of Eome in the Middle Ages.
It was for this reason no doubt that it was also added as an
appendix to the authorized Eoman Vulgate. Not only so, it
even found its way into German versions of the Protestant
Bible (see more below). The whole of the five versions which
we possess are taken, some of them directly, others indirectly,
from a Greek text (now no longer extant), which, moreover,
is to be regarded as the original one.

The text of the Latin Vulgate consists of sixteen chapters.
But, as is generally admitted, the two first and the two last of


these, wliich do not appear in the Oriental versions, are later
additions by a Christian hand. Accordingly in its original
form the book would only embrace the portion between chaps,
iii. and xiv. inclusive. The contents of the original work are
divided into seven visions, with which, as he himself informs
us, Ezra had been favoured. First vision (iii. 1-v. 20):
In the thirtieth year after the destruction of the city (Jeru-
salem) Ezra is in Babylon, and in his prayer to God he com-
jjlains of the calamities of Israel on the one hand, and of the
prosperity of the Gentile nations on the other (iii. 1-.36).
The angel Uriel comes, and, in the first place, reproves him
for his complaints (iv. 1-21), and then proceeds to remind him
that wickedness has its appointed time (iv. 22-32), just as
the dead have an appointed time during which they require
to stay in the nether world (iv. 33-43). But the most of the
distress is already past, and its end will be announced by
means of definite signs (iv. 44-v. 13). Ezra is so exhausted
by the revelation that has been imparted to liim that he
requires to be strengthened by the angel. By fasting for
seven days he prepares himself for a new revelation (v. 14-20).
Second vision (v. 21-vi. 34): Ezra renews his complaints,
and is once more rebuked by the angel (v. 21-40). This
latter points out to him that in the history of mankind one
thing must come after another, and that the beginning and
the end cannot come at one and the same time. Ezra is
reminded, however, that he may nevertheless see that the
end is already approaching. It will be brought about by
God Himself, the Creator of the world (v. 41-vi. G). The
signs of the end are more fully enumerated than in the
previous vision (vi. 7-29). Uriel here takes leave of Ezra,
with the promise of further revelations (vi. 30-34). Third
vision (vi. 35-ix. 25): Ezra complains again, and is again
rebuked by the angel (vi. 35-vii. 25). Upon this he is
favoured with the following revelation : — Whenever the signs
(enumerated in the preceding vision.s) begin to appear, then
those delivered from the calamities in question will see won-


derful tilings : For my Son, the Anointed One, will appear
with His retinue, and He will diffuse joy among those that
are spared, and that for four hundred years. And at the
expiry of those years, my Son, the Anointed One, will die. He
and all who have the breath of life. For the space of seven
days, corresponding to the seven creative days, there will not
he a single human being upon the earth. Then the dead will
rise ; and the Most High will come and sit upon the judg-
ment-seat, and proceed with the judgment (vii. 26-35).^^
And the place of torment will be revealed, and over against
it the place of rest. And the length of the day of judgment
will be a year- week (vi, 1-17 = Bensly, vv. 36-44). Only
a few men will be saved. The majority'will be consigned to
perdition (vi. 18-48 = Bensly, vv. 45-74). Moreover, the
ungodly do not enter at death into habitations of rest, but
when they die are at once consigned to sevenfold torment, of
which this also forms a part, that they find it no longer pos-
sible to repent, and that they foresee their future condemnation.
But the righteous, on the other hand, enter into rest, and
experience sevenfold joy, of which, among other things, this
forms a part, that they foresee their ultimate blessedness
(vi. 49-76 = Bensly, 75-101). But on the day of judgment
eacli receives what he has deserved ; and no one, by interced-
ing for him, can alter the fate of another (vi. 77-83 = Bensly,
102-105).^^ Ezra's ol^jection, that surely tlie Scriptures
speak of the righteous having often interceded in behalf of tlie
ungodly, is dismissed with the remark on the part of the angel,
that what might avail for this world will not do so for eternity

^^ AV'^hat follows (vi. 1-83) is not found in the majority of the manuscripts
of the Latin version, and can only have been borrowed at some former period
from the Oriental manuscripts and inserted here. Fritzsche gives the frag-
ment according to the Syriac version, though retaining the numbering of
the chapters and verses usually followed in the Ethiopic one. Since 1875
and 1877 we have been made acquainted with the Latin text through two
Hianuscripts (see below). I give above both the numbering of the verses
adopted by Fritzsche and that followed by Een.sly in his edition of the
Latin text.

^" At this point the Latin Vulgate text comes in again.


as well (vii. 3G-45). When Ezra is deploring that the whole
ruin of the human race has been brought about by Adam, the
angel refers him to the impiety of men through which they
have become the authors of their own ruin (vii. 46—69). Then
follow further explanations, having reference to the circum-
stance that of the many that are created so very few are
saved (viii. 1-62). Finally, the signs of the last time are
unfolded to Ezra anew (viii. 63-ix. 13), and his anxiety at
the thought of so many being lost is once more set at rest
(ix. 14-25). Fourth vision (ix. 26-x. 60): While Ezra is
again indulging his complaints, he sees a woman on his right
hand weeping, and who, in answer to his questions, tells him
that after thirty years of barrenness she gave birth to a son,
brought him up with great difficulty, and then procured a wife
for him, but that just as he was entering the bride-chamber he
fell and was killed (ix. 26— x. 4). Ezra chides her for bewail-
ing the mere loss of a son, when she ought rather to be
weeping over the destruction of Jerusalem and the ruin of so
many men (x. 5-24). Then all at once her face is lifted up,
she utters a cry, the earth quakes, and instead of the woman
there appears a strongly built oity. At this sight Ezra is so
perplexed that he cries to the angel Uriel, who at once
appears and gives him the following explanation of what he
had just seen : The w^oman is Zion. The thirty years of
barrenness are the 3000 years during which no sacrifices had
as yet been offered on Zion. The birth of the son represents
the building of the temple by Solomon, and the instituting of
sacrificial worship on Zion. The death of the son refers to
the destruction of Jerusalem. But the newly built city was
shown to Ezra in the vision with the view of comforting him,
and of saving him from despair (x. 25-60). Fifth vision
(xi. 1-xii. 51) : In a dream Ezra sees an eagle rise out of
tlie sea, having twelve wings and three heads. And out of the
wings grew eight suhordinate wings, which became small and
feeble winglets. But the heads were resting, and the centre
one was larger than the others. And the eagle flew and


ruled over the land. And from witliin its body there issued
a voice which ordered the wings to rule one after another.
And the twelve wings ruled, one after the other (the second
more than twice as long as any of the others, xi. 17), and
then vanished, and similarly two of the winglets, so that at
last only the three heads and the six winglets were left.
Two of those winglets separated themselves from the vest,
and placed themselves under the head on the right-hand side.
The other four wanted to rule, but two of them soon vanished
and the two were consumed by the heads. And the middle
head ruled over the whole earth and then vanished. And
the two other heads also ruled. But the one on the right-
hand side devoured the one on the left (xi. 1-35). Then
Ezra sees a lion, and hears how, with a human voice, it
describes the eagle just referred to as being the fourth of
those animals to which God has in succession committed the
empire of the world. And the lion announces to the eagle
its impending destruction (xi. 36-46). Thereupon the only
remaining head also vanished. And the two winglets which
had joined themselves to it began to rule.^'^ But their rule
was of a feeble character. And the whole body of the eagle
was consumed with fire (xii. 1-3). The meaning of the vision
wliich Ezra rehearses is as follows. The eagle represents the
last of Daniel's kingdoms. The twelve wings are twelve kings
who are to rule over it, one after another. The second will
begin to reign, and will reign longer than the others. The
voice which issues from the body of the eagle means that in the
course of the duration of that kingdom (inter tempus rcgni
illius, as we ought to read with the Syriac and the other
Oriental versions) evil disorders will arise; and it will be involved
in great trouble, only it will not fall, but regain its power.
But the eight subordinate wings represent eight kings, whose
respective times will be of short duration. Two of these will

^^ Here the correct text is that presented by the Oriental versions. See
Hilgenfeld and Fritzsche (in answer to Volkmar, who adheres to the cor-
rupt LA. of tlie Latin version). ,

Div. II. VOL. in. a


perish when the intermediate time approaches {apjjrojmi-
quante tempore medio, i.e. that interregnum to which reference
had just been made). Four of them will be reserved for the
time when the end is approaching, and two for the time of
the end itself. But the meaning of the three heads is as
follows. At the time of the end the Most High will raise up
three kings/^ who will rule over the earth. And they will
cause impiety to reach a climax, and will bring about the end.
The one (=:tlie middle head) will die in his bed, but in the
midst of torment. Of the remaining two one will be cut off
by the sword of the other, while the latter will liimself fall by
the sword at the time of the end. Finally, the two subordinate
wings, which joined the head on the right, represent the two
remaining kings of the closing period, whose reign will be
feeble and full of disorder (xii. 4-30). But the lion which
announces to the eagle its impending destruction represents the
Messiah, whom the Most High has reserved for the end. He

Online LibraryEmil SchürerA history of the Jewish people in the time of Jesus Christ .. (Volume 2 pt.3) → online text (page 10 of 51)